THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE
VEDAS
Being Also a New Key
to the Interpretation of
Many Vedic Texts and Legends
By
Lokamanya Bâl
Gangâdhar Tilak
The proprietor of the Kesari and the Mahratta newspapers,
The author of the Orion or Researches into the Antiquity of the Vedas,
The Gita Rahasya (a Book on Hindu Philosophy) etc., etc.
Publishers
Messrs. TILAK BROS
Gaikwar Wada
1903
Balawant
Gaṅgādhar Ṭiḷak (July 23,
1856 - August 1,
1920), was an Indian nationalist, social reformer and freedom fighter
who was the first popular leader of the Indian Independence Movement and is known
as "Father of the Indian unrest." Tilak sparked the fire for complete
independence in Indian consciousness, and is considered the father of Hindu nationalism
as well.
Self
Rule is our birthright, and We shall have it!
This famous quote of his is very
popular and well-remembered in India even today. Reverently addressed as Lokmanya (meaning "Beloved of the
people" or "Revered by the world"), Tilak was a scholar of Indian history,
Sanskrit,
Hinduism,
mathematics
and astronomy.
He was born on in a village chikhali,
near Ratnagiri,
Maharashtra,
into a middle class Chitpavan Brahmin family. Tilak had a divisive philosphy. He
was among India's first generation of youth to receive a modern, college
education. After graduation, Tilak began teaching mathematics in a private
school in Pune
and later became a journalist. He became a strong critic of the Western
education system, feeling it demeaning to Indian students and disrespectful to
India's heritage. He organized the Deccan Education Society to improve the
quality of education for India's youth. He taught Mathematics
at Fergusson College in Pune. Tilak founded the Marathi
daily Kesari (Lion) which fast became a popular reading for the common
people of India.
Tilak strongly criticized the government for its brutality in suppression of
free expression, especially in face of protests against the division of Bengal in 1905, and
for denigrating India's culture, its people and heritage. He demanded the
British immediately give the right to self-government to India's people.
Tilak joined the Indian National Congress in the 1890s, but soon
fell into opposition of its liberal-moderate attitude towards the fight for
self-government.In 1891 Tilak opposed the Age of Consent bill introduced after
the death of a child bride from sexual injuries. The act raised the
marriageable age of a child bride from 10 to 12 which was already 16 in Britain
since 1885. This was one of the first significant reforms introduced by the
British since Indian rebellion of 1857. The Congress and
other liberals whole-heartedly supported it but Tilak raised a battle-cry
terming it as 'Interference in Hindu Religion'. Since then he was seen as a
hard-core Hindu nationalist. When in 1897 bubonic plague spread from Bombay to
Pune the Government became jittery and Assistant Collector of Pune, Mr. Rand
and his associates, employed extremely severe and brutal methods to stop the
spread of the disease by destroying even 'clean homes'. Even people who were
not infected were carried away and in some cases, the carriers even looted
property of the affected people. When the authorities turned a blind eye to all
these excesses, furious Tilak took up people's cause by publishing inflammatory
articles in his paper Kesari, quoting Hindu Scripture Bhagwat Gita that no
blame could be attached to anyone who killed an oppressor without any thought of
reward. Following this, on 27 June, Rand and his assistant were killed. Tilak
was charged with incitement to murder and sentenced to 18 months imprisonment.
When he emerged from prison he had become a national hero and adopted a new
slogan 'Swaraj(Self-Rule)is my birth right and I will have it'.
Tilak opposed the moderate views of Gopal Krishna Gokhale, and was supported by
fellow Indian nationalists Bipin Chandra Pal
in Bengal
and Lala Lajpat Rai in Punjab.
They were referred to as the Lal-Bal-Pal triumvirate. In 1907,the annual session of the
Congress Party was held at Surat(Gujrat). Trouble broke out between the
moderate and the extremist factions of the party over the selection of the new
president of the Congress and the party split into the Garam Dal
(Extremists), led by Tilak, Pal and Lajpat Rai, and the Naram Dal
(Moderates). Tilak as well as Gopal Krishna Gokhale regarded this as a
'catastrophe' for the national movement and Tilak did his best to avoid it. But
it was too late and older moderates were glad get rid of the troublemakers(extremists).
H.A.Wadya, one of the closest associate of Sir Pherozshah Mehta, wrote ' The
union of these men with the Congress is the union of a diseased limb to a
healthy body and the only remedy is surgical severence '.
On 30 April 1908 two Bengali youths,
Prafulla Chaki and Kudiram Bose, threw a bomb on a carriage at Muzzafurpur in
order to kill a District Judge Douglass Kenford but erroneously killed some
women travelling in it. While Chaki committed suicide when caught, Bose was
tried and hanged. British papers screamed for vengeance and their shrill cries
became even more insistent when Police raided and found a cache of arms at
Calcutta. But Tilak in his paper Kesari defended the revolutionaries and called
for immediate Swaraj or Self-rule. The Government swiftly arrested him for
sedition. He asked a young Muhammad Ali Jinnah to represent him. But the
British judge convicted him and he was imprisoned from 1908 to 1914 in Mandalay,
Burma.
Upon his release, Tilak re-united with
his fellow nationalists and re-joined the Indian National Congress in 1916. He
also helped found the All India Home Rule League in 1916-18 with
Annie Besant
and Muhammad Ali Jinnah.
Tilak, who started his political life
as a Maratha Protagonist, during his later part of life progressed into a fine
nationalist after his close association with Bengal nationalists following the
partition of Bengal. When asked in Calcutta whether he envisioned a Maratha
type of government for Free India, Tilak replied that the Maratha dominated
Governments of 16th and 17th centuries were outmoded in 20th century and he
wanted a genuine federal system for Free India where every religion and race
were equal partners. Only such a form of Government would be able to safe-guard
India's freedom he added
Tilak was a critic of Mahatma Gandhi's
strategy of non-violent, civil disobedience. Although once considered an
extremist revolutionary, in his later years Tilak had considerably mellowed. He
favored political dialogue and discussions as a more effective way to obtain
political freedom for India. His writings on Indian culture, history and Hinduism
spread a sense of heritage and pride amongst Indians for India's ancient
civilization and glory as a nation. Some consider Tilak as the spiritual and
political leader of Mahatma Gandhi. But Gandhi himself considered Gopal Krishna Gokhale, a contemporary of Tilak,
as his political mentor. When Tilak died in 1920, Gandhi paid his respects at
his cremation in Bombay,
along with 200,000 people. Gandhi called Tilak "The Maker of Modern
India". Tilak is also today considered the father of Hindu Nationalism.
He was the idol of Indian revolutionary Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, who penned the
political doctrine of Hindutva.
Later, in 1903, he wrote the much more
speculative Arctic Home in the Vedas. In it he argued that the Vedas could only have been
composed in the Arctics, and the Aryan
bards brought them south after the onset of the last Ice age.
Tilak also authored 'Geetarahasya' -
the analysis of 'Karmayoga' in the Bhagavadgita,
which is known to be gist of the Vedas
and the Upanishads.
Other collections of his writings
include:
- The Hindu
philosophy of life, ethics and religion (published in 1887).
- Vedic
chronology and vedanga jyotisha.
- Letters of
Lokamanya Tilak, edited by M. D. Vidwans.
- Selected
documents of Lokamanya Bal Gangadhar Tilak, 1880-1920, edited by Ravindra
Kumar.
- Trial of
Tilak.
PREFACE
The present volume is a sequel to my
Orion or Researches into the Antiquity of
the Vedas, published in 1893. The estimate of Vedic antiquity then
generally current amongst Vedic scholars was based on the assignment of
arbitrary period of time to the different strata into which the Vedic
literature is divided; and it was believed that the oldest of these strata
could not, at the best, be older than 2400 B.C. In my Orion, however, I tried to show that all such estimates, besides
being too modest, were vague and uncertain, and that the astronomical
statements found in the Vedic literature supplied us with far more reliable
data for correctly ascertaining the ages of the different periods of Vedic
literature. These astronomical statements, it was further shown, unmistakably
pointed out that the Vernal equinox was in the constellation of Mṛiga or Orion (about 4500 B.C.)
during the period of the Vedic hymns, and that it had receded to the
constellation ofthe Kṛittikâs, or the Pleiades (about 2500 B.C.) in the days of
the Brâhmaṇas. Naturally enough these results were, at first, received
by scholars in a skeptical spirit. But my position was strengthened when it was
found that Dr. Jacobi, of Bonn, had independently arrived at the same
conclusion, and, soon after, scholars like Prof. Bloomfield, M. Barth, the late
Dr. Bulher and others, more or less freely, acknowledged the force of my
arguments. Dr. Thibaut, the late Dr. Whitney and a few others were, however, of
opinion that the evidence adduced by me was not conclusive. But the subsequent
discovery, by my friend the late Mr. S. B. Dixit, of a passage in the
Shatapatha Brâhmaṇa, plainly stating that the Kṛittikâs never swerved, in those
days, from the due east i.e., the
Vernal equinox, has served to dispel all lingering doubts regarding the age of
the Brâhmaṇas; while another Indian astronomer, Mr. V. B. Ketkar, in a
recent number of the Journal of the
Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, has mathematically worked out the
statement in the Taittirîya Brâhmaṇa (III, 1, 1, 5), that Bṛihaspati, or the planet Jupiter, was
first discovered when confronting or nearly occulting the star Tiṣhya, and shown that the observation
was possible only at about 4650 B.C., thereby remarkably confirming my estimate
of the oldest period of Vedic literature. After this, the high antiquity of the
oldest Vedic period may, I think, be now taken as fairly established.
But if the age of the oldest Vedic
period was thus carried back to 4500 B.C., one was still tempted to ask whether
we had, in that limit, reached the Ultima
Thule of the Aryan antiquity. For, as stated by Prof. Bloomfield, while
noticing my Orion in his address on
the occasion of the eighteenth anniversary of John Hopkins University, the
language and literature of the Vedas is, by no means, so primitive as to place
with it the real beginnings of Aryan life. These in all probability and in
all due moderation, he rightly observed, reach back several thousands of
years more, and it was, he said, therefore needless to point out that this
curtain, which seems to shut off our vision at 4500 B.C., may prove in the end
a veil of thin gauze. I myself held the same view, and much of my spare time
during the last ten years has been devoted to the search of evidence which
would lift up this curtain and reveal to us the long vista of primitive Aryan
antiquity. How I first worked on the lines followed up in Orion, how in the light of latest researches in geology and.
archeology bearing on the primitive history of man, I was gradually led to a
different line of search, and finally how the conclusion, that the ancestors of
the Vedic Ṛiṣhis lived in an Arctic home in inter-Glacial times, was
forced on me by the slowly accumulating mass of Vedic and Avestic evidence, is
fully narrated in the book, and need not, therefore, be repeated in this place.
I desire, however, to take this opportunity of gratefully acknowledging the
generous sympathy shown to me at a critical time by that venerable scholar
Prof. F. Max Müller, whose recent death was mourned as a personal loss by his
numerous admirers throughout India. This is not the place where we may, with
propriety, discuss the merits of the policy adopted by the Bombay Government in
1897 Suffice it to say that in order to put down certain public excitement,
caused by its own famine and plague policy, the Government of the day deemed it
prudent to prosecute some Vernacular papers in the province, and prominently
amongst them the Kesari, edited by
me, for writings which were held to be seditious, and I was awarded eighteen
months rigorous imprisonment. But political offenders in India are not treated
better than ordinary convicts, and had it not been for the sympathy and
interest taken by Prof. Max Müller, who knew me only as the author of Orion, and other friends, I should have
been deprived of the pleasure, then the only pleasure, of following up my
studies in these days. Prof. Max Müller was kind enough to send me a copy of
his second edition of the Ṛig-Veda, and the Government was
pleased to allow me the use of these and other books, and also of light to read
for a few hours at night. Some of the passages from the Ṛig-Veda, quoted in support, of the
Arctic theory in the following pages, were collected during such leisure as I
could get in these times. It was mainly through the efforts of Prof. Max Müller,
backed by the whole. Indian press, that I was released after twelve months; and
in the very first letter I wrote to Prof. Max Müller after my release, I
thanked him sincerely for his disinterested kindness, and also gave him a brief
summary of my new theory regarding the primitive Aryan home as disclosed by
Vedic evidence. It was, of course, not to be expected that a scholar, who had
worked all his life on a different line, would accept the new view at once, and
that too on reading a bare outline off the evidence in its support. Still it
was encouraging to hear from him that though the interpretations of Vedic
passages proposed by me were probable, yet my theory appeared to be in conflict
with the established geological facts. I wrote in reply that I had already
examined the question from that stand-point, and expected soon to place before
him the whole evidence in support of my view. But, unfortunately I have been deprived of this pleasure by his
deeply mourned death which occurred soon after.
The first manuscript of the book was written at the end of
1898, and since then I have had the advantage of discussing the question with
many scholars in
People are hardly aware of the
benefit which every branch of science derives from the free and generous
exchange of ideas, particularly in our Universities, where every body may avail
himself of the advise and help of his colleagues, whether they warn him against
yet impossible theories, or call his attention to a book or an article, where
the very point, that interests him, has been fully worked out and settled once
for all. But alas! It is not given to us to move in an atmosphere like this,
and small wonder if Indian students are not found to go beyond the stage of
passing the examinations. There is not a single institution in India, nor,
despite the University Commission, can we hope to have any before long, where
one can get all up-to-date information on any
desired subject, so easily obtainable at a seat of learning in the West; and in
its absence the only course open to a person, investigating a particular
subject, is, in the words of the same learned scholar, to step boldly out of
his own domain, and take an independent survey of the preserves of his
neighbors, even at the risk of being called an interloper, an ignoramus, a
mere dilettante, for, whatever accidents he may meet with himself, the
subject itself is sure to be benefited. Working under such disadvantages, I
was, therefore, glad, when, on turning the pages of the first volume of the
tenth edition of the Encyclopćdia Britannica, recently received, I found that
Prof. Geikie, in his article on geology, took the same view of Dr. Crolls
calculations, as summarized at the end of the second chapter of this book.
After stating that Crolls doctrine did not make way amongst physicists and
astronomers, the eminent geologist says that more recently (1895) it has been critically
examined by Mr. E. P. Culverwell, who regards it as a vague speculation,
clothed indeed with delusive semblance of severe numerical accuracy, but having
no foundation in physical fact, and built up of parts which do not dovetail one
into the other. If Dr. Crolls calculations are disposed of in this way, there
remains nothing to prevent us from accepting the view of the American
geologists that the commencement of the post-Glacial period cannot be placed at
a date earlier than 8000 B.C.
It has been already stated that the
beginnings of Aryan civilization must be supposed to date back several thousand
years before the oldest Vedic period; and when the commencement of the
post-Glacial epoch is brought down to 8000 B.C., it is not at all surprising if
the date of primitive Aryan life is found to go back to it from 4500 B.C., the
age of the oldest Vedic period. In fact, it is the main point sought to be
established in the present volume. There are many passages in the Ṛig-Veda, which, though hitherto
looked upon as obscure and unintelligible, do, when interpreted in the light of
recent scientific researches, plainly disclose the Polar attributes of the
Vedic deities, or the traces of an ancient Arctic calendar; while the Avesta
expressly tells us that the happy land of Airyana Vaęjo, or the Aryan Paradise,
was located in a region where the sun shone but once a year, and that it was
destroyed by the invasion of snow and ice, which rendered its climate inclement
and necessitated a migration southward. These are plain and simple statements,
and when we put them side by side with what we know of the Glacial and the
post-Glacial epoch from the latest geological researches, we cannot avoid the
conclusion that the primitive Aryan home was both Arctic and inter-Glacial. I
have often asked myself, why the real bearing of these plain and simple
statements should have so long remained undiscovered; and let me assure the
reader that it was not until I was convinced that the discovery was due solely
to the recent progress in our knowledge regarding the primitive history of the
human race and the planet it inhabits that I ventured to publish the present
volume. Some Zend scholars have narrowly missed the truth, simply because 40 or
50 years ago they were unable to understand how a happy home could be located in the ice-bound regions near the North
Pole. The progress of geological science in the latter half of the last century
has, however, now solved the difficulty by proving that the climate at the Pole
during the inter-Glacial times was mild, and consequently not unsuited for
human habitation. There is, therefore, nothing extraordinary, if it be left to
us to find out the real import of these passages in the Veda and Avesta. It is
true that if the theory of an Arctic and inter-Glacial primitive Aryan home is
proved, many a chapter in Vedic exegetics, comparative mythology, or primitive
Aryan history, will have to be revised or rewritten, and in the last chapter of
this book I have myself discussed a few important points which will be affected
by the new theory. But as remarked by me at the end of the book, considerations
like these, howsoever useful they may be in inducing caution in our
investigations, ought not to deter us from accepting the results of an inquiry
conducted on strictly scientific lines. It is very hard, I know, to give up
theories upon which one has worked all his life. But, as Mr. Andrew Lang has
put it, it should always be borne in mind that Our little systems have their
day, or their hour: as knowledge advances they pass into the history of the
efforts of pioneers. Nor is the theory of the
In conclusion,
I desire to express my obligations to my friend and old teacher Prof. S. G.
Jinsivâle, M.A., who carefully went through the whole manuscript, except the
last chapter which was subsequently written, verified all references, pointed
out a few inaccuracies, and made some valuable suggestions. I have also to
acknowledge with thanks the ready assistance rendered to me by Dr. Râmkṛishṇa Gopal Bhâṇḍârkar, C.I.E., and Khân Bahâdur Dr.
Dastur Hoshang Jamâspji the High Priest of the Parsis in the
humble remembrance of the same, I conclude in the words of
the well-known consecratory formula,
Publishers Note
On the
occasion of the birth centenary of Lok. B. G. TILAK, we have the proud
privilege to offer to the discriminating readers this 2nd reprint of his famous
work The Arctic Home In The Vedas, published by the Author in 1903 and
reprinted in 1925.
J. S. TILAK
THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE
VEDAS
CHAPTER I
PREHISTORIC TIMES
The Historic Period Preceded by myths and traditions The
Science of Mythology Fresh impulse given to it by Comparative Philology
Unity of Aryan races and languages The system of interpreting myths, and the
theory of Asiatic Home Recent discoveries in Geology and Archaeology
Requiring revision of old theories The Vedas still partially unintelligible
New key to their interpretation supplied by recent discoveries The Ages of
Iron, Bronze and Stone Represent different stages of civilization in
Prehistoric times The Ages not necessarily synchronous in different countries
Distinction between Neolithic and Paleolithic or new and old Stone Age The
Geological eras and periods Their correlation with the three Ages of Iron,
Bronze and Stone Paleolithic Age probably inter-glacial Man in Quaternary
and Tertiary eras Date of the Neolithic Age 5000 B.C. from lake dwellings
Peat-mosses of Denmark Ages of Beech, Oak and Fir Date of the Paleolithic
or the commencement of the Post-Glacial period Different estimates of European
and American geologists Freshness of fossil deposits in Siberia Favors
American estimate of 8000 years Neolithic races Dolicho-cephalic and
Brachy-cephalic Modern European races descended from them Controversy as to
which of these represent the Primitive Aryans in Europe Different views of
German and French writers Social condition of the Neolithic races and the
primitive Aryans Dr. Schraders view Neolithic Aryan race in Europe cannot
be regarded as autochthonous Nor descended from the Paleolithic man The
question of the original Aryan home still unsettled.
If we trace
the history of any nation backwards into the past, we come at last to a period
of myths and traditions which eventually fade away into impenetrable darkness.
In some cases, as in that of
It was perceived that
the languages of the principal European nations ancient and modern bore a
close resemblance to the languages spoken by the Brahmans of India and the
followers of Zoroaster; and from this affinity of the Indo-Germanic languages
it followed inevitably that all these languages must be the off-shoots or
dialects of a single primitive tongue, and the assumption of such a primitive
language further implied the existence of a primitive Aryan people. The study
of Vedic literature and classical Sanskrit by Western scholars thus gradually
effected a revolution in their ideas regarding the history and culture of man
in ancient times. Dr. Schrader in his work on the Prehistoric Antiquities of the Aryan Peoples gives an exhaustive
summary of the conclusions arrived at by the methods of comparative philology
regarding the primitive culture of the Aryan people, and those that desire to
have further information on the subject must refer to that interesting book.
For our present purpose it is sufficient to state that comparative mythologists
and philologists were in the sole possession of this field, until the
researches of the latter half of the nineteenth century placed within our reach
new materials for study of man not only in prehistoric times but in such remote
ages that compared with them the prehistoric period appeared to be quite
recent.
The
mythologists carried on their researches at a time when man was believed to be
post-glacial and when the physical and geographical surroundings of the ancient
man were assumed not to have been
materially different from those of the present day. All ancient myths were,
therefore, interpreted on the assumption that they were formed and developed in
countries, the climatic or other conditions of which varied very little, if at
all from those by which we are now surrounded. Thus every Vedic myth or legend
was explained either on the Storm or the Dawn theory, though in some cases it
was felt that the explanation was not at all satisfactory.
But whilst
the conclusions of the philologists and mythologists are thus being revised in
the light of new scientific discoveries, an equally important work yet remains
to be done. It has been stated above that the discovery of the Vedic literature
imparted a fresh impulse to the study of myths and legends. But the Vedas
themselves, which admittedly form the oldest records of the Aryan race, are as
yet imperfectly understood. They had already grown unintelligible to a certain
extent even in the days of the Brâhmaṇas several centuries before Christ,
and had it not been for the labors of Indian Etymologists and Grammarians, they
would have remained a sealed book up to the present time. The Western Scholars
have indeed developed, to a certain extent, these Native methods of
interpretation with the aid of facts brought to light by comparative philology
and mythology. But no etymological or philological analysis can help us in
thoroughly understanding a passage which contains ideas and sentiments foreign
or unfamiliar to us. This is one of the principal difficulties of Vedic
interpretation. The Storm or the Dawn theory may help us in understanding some
of the legends in this ancient book. But there axe passages, which, in spite of
their simple diction, are quite unintelligible on any of these theories, and in
such cases Native scholars, like Sâyaṇa, are either content with simply
paraphrasing the words, or have recourse to distortion of words and phrases in
order to make the passages yield a sense intelligible to them; while some of
the Western scholars are apt to regard such texts as corrupt or imperfect. In
either case, however, it is an undoubted fact that some Vedic texts are yet
unintelligible, and, therefore, untranslatable. Prof. Max Müller was fully
alive to these difficulties. A translation of the Ṛig-Veda, he observes in his
introduction to the translation of the Vedic hymns in the Sacred Books of the
East series, is a task for the next century,* (* See S. B. E. Series, Vol.
XXXII, p. xi. )
and the only duty of the present scholars is to reduce the
untranslatable portion to a narrower and narrower limit, as has been done by
Yâska and other Native scholars. But if the scientific discoveries of the last
century have thrown a new light on the history and culture of man in primitive
times, we may as well expect to find in them a new key to the interpretation of
the Vedic myths and passages, which admittedly preserve for us the oldest
belief of the Aryan race. If man existed before the last Glacial period and
witnessed the gigantic changes which brought on the Ice Age, it is not
unnatural to expect that a reference, howsoever concealed and distant, to these
events would be found in the oldest traditionary beliefs and memories of
mankind; Dr. Warren in his interesting and highly suggestive work the Paradise Found or the Cradle of the Human
Race at the North Pole has attempted to interpret ancient myths and legends
in the light of modern scientific discoveries, and has come to the conclusion
that the original home of the whole human
race must be sought for in regions near the North Pole. My object is not so
comprehensive. I intend to confine myself only to the Vedic literature and show
that if we read some of the passages in the Vedas, which have hitherto been
considered incomprehensible, in the light of the new scientific discoveries we
are forced to the conclusion that the home of the ancestors of the Vedic people
was somewhere near the North Pole before the last Glacial epoch. The task is
not an easy one, considering the fact that the Vedic passages, on which I rely,
had to be and have been, hitherto either ignored or explained away somehow, or
misinterpreted one way or another by Native and European scholars alike. But I
hope to show that these interpretations, though they have been provisionally
accepted, are not satisfactory and that new discoveries in archaeology, and
geology provide us with a better key for the interpretation of these passages.
Thus if some of the conclusions of the mythologist and the philologist are
overthrown by these discoveries, they have rendered a still greater service by
furnishing us with a better key for the interpretation of the most ancient
Aryan legends and the results obtained by using the new key cannot, in their
turn, fail to throw further light on the primitive history of the Aryan race
and thus supplement, or modify the conclusion now arrived at by the
archaeologist and the geologist.
But before
proceeding to discuss the Vedic texts which point out to a Polar home, it is
necessary to briefly state the results of recent discoveries in archaeology,
geology and paleontology. My summary must necessarily be very short, for I
propose to note down only such facts as will establish the probability of my
theory from the geological and paleontological point of view and for this
purpose I have freely drawn upon the works of such well-known writers as Lyell,
Geikie, Evans, Lubbock, Croll, Taylor and others. I have also utilized the
excellent popular summary of the latest results of these researches in Samuel
Laings Human Origins and other
works. The belief, that man is post-glacial and that the Polar regions were
never suited for human habitation, still lingers in some quarters and to those
who still hold this view any theory regarding the Polar home of the Aryan race
may naturally seem to be a priori impossible. It is better,
therefore, to begin with a short statement of the latest scientific conclusions
on these points.
Human races
of earlier times have left ample evidence of their existence on the surface of
this globe; but like the records of the historic period this evidence does not
consist of stately tombs and pyramids, or inscriptions and documents. It is of
a humbler kind and consists of hundreds and thousands of rude or polished
instruments of stone and metal recently dug out from old camps, fortifications,
burial grounds (tumuli), temples, lake-dwellings &c. of early times spread
over the whole of Europe; and in the hands of the archaeologist these have been
found to give the same results as the hieroglyphics in the hands of the
Egyptologist. These early implements of stone and metals were not previously
unknown, but they had not attracted the notice of scientific experts till
recently and the peasants in Asia and Europe, when they found them in their
fields, could hardly make any better use of them than that of worshipping the
implements so found as thunderbolts or fairy arrows shot down from the sky. But
now after a careful study of these remains, archaeologists have come to the
conclusion that these implements, whose human origin is now undoubtedly
established can be classified into those of Stone (including horn, wood or
bone), those of Bronze and those of Iron, representing three different stages
of civilization in the progress of man in prehistoric times. Thus the implements
of stone, wood or bone, such as chisels, scrapers, arrow-heads, hatches,
daggers, etc. were used when the use of metal was yet unknown and they were
gradually supplanted first by the implements of bronze and then of iron, when
the ancient man discovered the use of these metals. It is not to be supposed,
however, that these three different periods of early human civilization were
divided by any hard and fast line of division. They represent only a tough
classification, the passage from one period into another being slow and
gradual. Thus the implements of stone must have continued to be used for a long
time after the use of bronze became known to the ancient man, and the same
thing must have occurred as he passed from the Bronze to the Iron age. The age
of bronze, which is a compound of copper and tin in a definite proportion,
requires an antecedent age of copper; but sufficient evidence is not yet found
to prove the separate existence of copper and tin ages, and hence it is
considered probable that the art of making bronze was not invented in Europe,
but was introduced there from other countries either by commerce or by the
Indo-European race going there from outside.* (*
Another fact which requires to be noted in connection with
these ages is that the Stone or the Bronze age in one country was not
necessarily synchronous with the same age in another country. Thus we find a
high state of civilization in
Of these
three different ages the oldest or the Stone age is further divided into the
Paleolithic and the Neolithic period, or the old and the new Stone age. The
distinction is based upon the fact that the stone implements of the Paleolithic
age are found to be very rudely fashioned, being merely chipped into shape and
never ground or polished as is the case with the implements of the new Stone
age. Another characteristic of the Paleolithic period is that the implements of
the period are found in places which plainly show a much greater antiquity than
can be assigned to the remains of the Neolithic age, the relics of the two ages
being hardly, if ever, found together. The third distinction between the
Paleolithic and the Neolithic age is that the remains of the Paleolithic man
are found associated with those of many great mammals, such as the cave bear,
the mammoth and wooly-haired rhinoceros that became either locally or wholly
extinct before the appearance of the Neolithic man on the stage. In short,
there is a kind of hiatus or break between the Paleolithic and Neolithic man
requiring a separate classification and treatment for each. It may also be
noted that the climatic conditions and the distribution of land and water in
the Paleolithic period were different from those in the Neolithic period; while
from beginning of the Neolithic period the modern conditions, both geographical
and climatic, have prevailed almost unaltered up to the present time.
To
understand the relation of these three ages within the geological periods into
which the history of the earth is divided we must briefly consider the geological
classification. The geologist takes up the history of the earth at the point
where the archaeologist leaves it, and carries it further back into remote
antiquity. His classification is based upon an examination of the whole system
of stratified rocks and not on mere relics found in the surface strata. These
stratified rocks have been divided into five principal classes according to the
character of the fossils found in them, and they represent five different
periods in the history of our planet. These geological eras like the three ages
of Stone, Bronze and Iron, cannot be separated very sharply from each other.
But taken as a whole we can clearly distinguish one era from another by its
characteristic fossil remains. Each of these geological ages or eras is again
subdivided into a number of different periods. The order of these Eras and
Periods, beginning with the newest, is as follows:
|
Eras |
Periods |
|
Post-Tertiary or Quaternary |
Recent (Post-Glacial) Pleistocene (Glacial) |
|
Tertiary or Cainozoic |
Pliocene Miocene Oligocene Eocene |
|
Secondary or Mesozoic |
Cretaceon Jurassic Triassic |
|
Primary or Paleozoic |
Permian Carboniferous. Devonian, and Old Red Sandstone Silurian Cambrian |
|
Archćan or Eozoic |
Fundamental Gneiss |
Thus the oldest of the stratified rocks at present known is
the Archćan or Eozoic. Next in chronological order come the Primary or the
Paleozoic, the Secondary or the Mesozoic the Tertiary or Cainozoic, and last
the Quaternary.
The Quaternary era, with which alone we are here concerned,
is sub-divided into the Pleistocene or the Glacial, and the Recent or the
Post-Glacial period, the close of the first and the beginning of the second
being marked by the last Glacial epoch, or the Ice Age, during which the
greater portion of northern Europe and America was covered with an ice-cap
several thousand feet in thickness. The Iron age, the Bronze age, and the
Neolithic age come under the Recent or the Post-Glacial period, while the
Paleolithic age is supposed to fall in the Pleistocene period, though some of
the Paleolithic remains are post-glacial, showing that the Paleolithic man must
have survived the Ice Age for some time. Latest discoveries and researches
enable us to carry the antiquity of man still further by establishing the fact
that men existed even in the Tertiary era. But apart from it, there is, now, at
any rate, overwhelming evidence to conclusively prove the wide-spread existence
of man throughout the Quaternary era, even before the last Glacial period.
Various
estimates have been made regarding the time of the commencement of the
Neolithic age, but the oldest date assigned does not exceed 3000 B.C., a time
when flourishing empires existed in
But when we
pass from the Neolithic too the Paleolithic period the difficulty of
ascertaining the commencement of the latter becomes still greater. In fact we
have here to ascertain the time when the Post-Glacial period commenced. The
Paleolithic man must have occupied parts of
Other American geologists from similar observations at
various other places have arrived at the conclusion that not more than about
8000 years have elapsed since the close of the Glacial period. This estimate
agrees very well with the approximate date of the Neolithic period ascertained
from the amount of silt in some of the lakes in
There are
other reasons which go to support the same view. All the evidence regarding the
existence of the Glacial period comes from the North of Europe and
These and other equally indisputable facts clearly indicate
the existence in
supposed to be removed from the present by several thousands
of years. Again in North Africa and Syria we find in dry regions wide-spread
fluviatile accumulations which are believed to be indications of rainy seasons,
contemporaneous with the Glacial period of Europe.* (* See Geikies Fragments
of Earth Lore, p. 252.)
If this contemporaneity can be
established, the high estimate of time for the commencement of the Post-Glacial
period in
As regards
the races which inhabited
Another
method of determining which of these four races represented the primitive
Aryans in Europe is to compare the grades of civilization attained by the
undivided Aryans, as ascertained from linguistic paleontology, with those
attained by the Neolithic races as disclosed by the remains found in their
dwellings. As for the Paleolithic man his social condition appears to have been
far below that of the undivided Aryans; and Dr. Schrader considers it as
indubitably either non-Indo-European or pre-Indo-European in character. The
Paleolithic man used stone hatchets and bone needles, and had attained some
proficiency in the art of sculpture and drawing, as exhibited by outlines of
various animals carved bones &c.; but he was clearly unacquainted with the
potters art and the use of metals. It is only in the Neolithic period that we
meet with pottery in the piled villages of lake-dwellers in
But though
recent discoveries have brought to light these facts about the human races
inhabiting Europe in pre-historic times, and though we may, in accordance with
them, assume that one of the four early Neolithic races represented the
primitive Aryans in Europe, the question whether the latter were autochthonous,
or went there from some other place and then succeeded in Aryanising the
European races by their superior culture and civilization, cannot be regarded
as settled by these discoveries. The date assigned to the Neolithic period as
represented by Swiss lake-dwellers is not later than 5000 B.C., a time when
Asiatic Aryans were probably settled on the Jaxartes, and it is admitted that
the primitive Aryans in
But this is merely a conjecture, and it does not answer the
question how the Indo-Iranians with their civilization are found settled in
CHAPTER II
THE GLACIAL PERIOD
Geological climate Uniform and gentle in early ages Due
to different distribution of land and water Climatic changes in the
Quaternary era The Glacial epoch Its existence undoubtedly proved Extent
of glaciation At least two Glacial periods Accompanied by the elevation and
depression of land Mild and genial Interglacial climate even in the Arctic
regions Various theories regarding the cause of the Ice Age stated Lyells
theory of geographical changes Showing long duration of the Glacial period
Crolls theory Effect of the procession of the equinoxes on the duration and intensity
of seasons The cycle of 21,000 years The effect enhanced by the
eccentricity of earths orbit Maximum difference of 33 days between the
duration of summer and winter Sir Robert Balls calculations regarding the
average heat received by each hemisphere in summer and winter Short and warm
summers and long and cold winters, giving rise to a Glacial epoch Dr. Crolls
extraordinary estimate regarding the duration of the Glacial epoch Based on
the maximum value of the eccentricity of the earths orbit Questioned by
astronomers and geologists Sir Robert Balls and Newcombs view Crolls
estimates inconsistent with geological evidence Opinions of Prof. Geikie and
Mr. Hudleston Long duration of the Glacial period Summary of results.
The climate
of our globe at the present day is characterized by a succession of seasons,
spring, summer, autumn, and winter, caused by the inclination of the earths
axis to the plane of the ecliptic. When the North Pole of the earth is turned
away from the sun in its annual course round that luminary, we have winter in
the northern and summer in the southern hemisphere, and vice versa when the North Pole is turned towards the sun. The cause of the rotation of seasons in the
different hemispheres is thus very simple, and from the permanence of this
cause one-may be led to think that in the distant geological ages the climate
of our planet must have been characterized by similar rotations of hot and cold
seasons. But such a supposition is directly contradicted by geological
evidence. The inclination of the earths axis to the plane of ecliptic, or what
is technically called the obliquity of the ecliptic, is not the sole cause of
climatic variations on the surface of the globe. High altitude and the existence
of oceanic and aerial currents, carrying and diffusing the heat of the
equatorial region to the other parts of the globe, have been found to produce
different climates in countries having the same latitude. The
It was in
the Quaternary or the Pleistocene period that the mild climate of these regions
underwent sudden alterations producing what is called the Glacial period. The
limits of this Glacial period may not so exactly coincide with those of the
Pleistocene as to enable us to say that they were mathematically co-extensive,
but, still, in a rough sense we may take these two periods as coinciding with
each other. It is impossible within the limits of a short chapter to give even
a summary of the evidence proving the existence of one or more Glacial epochs
in the Pleistocene period. We may, however, briefly indicate its nature and see
what the geologists and the physicists have to say as regards the causes that
brought about such extensive changes of climate in the Quaternary era. The
existence of the Glacial period is no longer a matter of doubt though
scientific men are not agreed as to the causes which produced it. Ice-sheets
have not totally disappeared from the surface of the earth and we can still
watch the action of ice as glaciers in the valleys of the Alps or in the lands
near the Pole, like Greenland which is still covered with a sheet of ice so
thick as to make it unfit for the growth of plants or the habitation of
animals. Studying the effects of glacial action in these places geologists have
discovered abundant traces of similar action of ice in former times over the
whole of
A
succession of cold and warm climates must have characterized these Glacial and
Inter-Glacial periods which were also accompanied by extensive movements of
depression and elevation of land, the depression taking place after the land
was weighed down with the enormous mass of ice. Thus a period of glaciation was
marked by elevation, extreme cold and the invasion of the ice-caps over regions
of the present
It will thus be seen that in point of climate the
Pleistocene period, or the early Quaternary era, was intermediate between the
early geological ages when uniform genial climate prevailed over the globe, and
the modern period when it is differentiated into zones. It was, so to speak, a
transitional period marked by violent changes in the climate, that was mild and
genial in the Inter-Glacial, and severe and inclement during the Glacial
period. It was at the beginning of the Post-Glacial or the Recent period that
modern climatic conditions were established. Prof. Geikie is, however, of
opinion that even the beginning of the Post-Glacial period was marked, at least
in North-Western Europe, by two alternations of genial and rainy-cold climate
before the present climatic conditions became established. (Prehistoric
But though
the fact of the Ice Age and the existence of a milder climate within the Arctic
regions in the Inter-Glacial time is indubitably proved yet scientific men have
not been as yet able to trace satisfactorily the causes of this great
catastrophe. Such immense mass of ice as covered the whole of Northern Europe
and America during this period could not, like anything else, come out of
nothing., There must be heat enough in certain parts of the globe to create by
evaporation sufficient vapor and aerial currents are required to transfer it to
the colder regions of the globe, there to be precipitated in the form of ice.
Any theory regarding the cause of the Ice Age which fails to take this fact
into account is not only inadequate but worthless. A succession of Glacial
periods, or at any rate, the occurrence of two Glacial periods, must again be
accounted for by the theory that may be proposed to explain these changes; and
if we test the different theories advanced in this way, many of them will be at
once found to be untenable. It was, for instance, once urged that the
Thus out of
the various theories advanced to account for the vicissitudes of climate in the
Pleistocene period only two have now remained in the field, the first that of
Lyell which explains the changes by assuming different distribution of land and
water combined with sudden elevation and submergence of large landed areas and
the second that of Croll which traces the glaciation to the precession of the
equinoxes combined with the high value of the eccentricity of the earths
orbit. Lyells theory has been worked out by Wallace who shows that such
geographical changes are by themselves sufficient to produce heat and cold
required to bring on the Glacial and Inter-Glacial periods. We have seen that
in earlier geological ages a pleasant and equable climate prevailed over the
whole surface of the globe owing mainly to different distribution of land and water and the theory
advanced by Lyell to account for the Glacial epoch is practically the same.
Great elevation and depression of extensive areas can be effected only in
thousands of years, and those who support Lyells theory are of opinion that
the duration of the Glacial epoch must be taken to be about 200,000 years in
order to account for all the geographical and geological changes, which
according to them, were the principal causes of the Glacial period. But there
are other geologists, of the same school, who hold that the Glacial period may
not have lasted longer than about 20 to 25 thousand years. The difference
between the two estimates is enormous; but in the present state of geological
evidence it is difficult to decide in favor of any one of these views. All that
we can safely say is that the duration of the Pleistocene period, which
included at least two Glacial and one Inter-Glacial epoch, must have been very
much longer than the period of time which has elapsed since the commencement of
the Post-Glacial period.
According
to Sir Robert Ball the whole difficulty of finding out the causes of the
Glacial period vanishes when the solution of the problem is sought for in
astronomy rather than in geography. Changes which seem to be so gigantic on the
globe are, it is said, but daily wrought by cosmical forces with which we are
familiar in astronomy, and one of the chief merits of Crolls theory is
supposed to consist in the fact that it satisfactorily accounts for a
succession of Glacial and Inter-Glacial epochs during the Pleistocene period.
Dr. Croll in his Climate and Time and
Climate and Cosmology has tried to
explain and establish his theory by elaborate calculations, showing that the
changes in the values of the variable elements in the motion of the earth round
the sun can adequately account for the climatic changes in the Pleistocene
period. We shall first briefly state Dr. Crolls theory and then give the
opinions of experts as regards its probability.
Let PQ'AQ represent the orbit of the earth
round the sun. This orbit is an ellipse, and the sun, instead of being in the
centre C, is in one of the focii S or s.
Let the sun be at S.
Then the distance of the sun from the earth when the latter
is at P would be the shortest, while,
when the earth is at A it will be the
longest. These points P and A are respectively called perihelion and
aphelion. The seasons are caused, as stated above, by the axis of the earth
being inclined to the plane of its orbit. Thus when the earth is at P and the axis turned away from the sun,
it will produce winter in the northern hemisphere; while when the earth is at A, the axis, retaining its direction,
will be now turned towards the sun, and there will be summer in the northern
hemisphere. If the axis of the earth had no motion of its own, the seasons will
always occur at the same points in the orbit of the earth, as, for instance,
the winter in the 
northern hemisphere at P and the summer at A. But this axis describes a small circle round the pole of the
ecliptic in a cycle of 25,868 years, giving rise to what is called the
precession of the equinoxes, and consequently the indication of the earths
axis to the plane of its orbit is not always the same at any given point in its
orbit during this period. This causes the seasons to occur at different points
in the earths orbit during this great cycle. Thus if the winter in the
northern hemisphere occurred when the earth was at P at one time, some time
after it will occur at and the succeeding points in the orbit until the end of
the cycle, when it will again occur at P.
The same will be the case in regard to summer at the point A and equinoxes at Q and Q'. In the diagram the dotted line qq' and pa represent the new positions which the line QQ' and PA will assume if
they revolve in the way stated above. It must also be noted that though the
winter in the northern hemisphere may occur when the earth is at p instead of at P, owing to the aforesaid motion of its axis, yet the orbit of the earth
and the points of perihelion and aphelion are relatively fixed and
unchangeable. Therefore, if the winter is the northern hemisphere occurs at p, the earths distance from the sun at
the point will be greater than when the earth was at P. Similarly, in the course of the cycle above mentioned, the
winter in the northern hemisphere will once occur at A, and the distance of the earth from the sun will then be the
longest. Now there is a vast difference between a winter occurring when the
earth is at P and a winter occurring
when it is at A. In the first case,
the point P being nearest to the sun,
the severity of the winter will be greatly, modified by the nearness of the
sun. But at A the sun is farthest
removed from the earth, and the winter, when the earth is at A, will be naturally very severe; and
during the cycle the winter must once occur at A. The length of the cycle is 25,868 years, and ordinarily speaking
half of this period must elapse before the occurrence of winter is transferred
from the earths position at P to its
position at A. But it is found that
the points P and A have a small motion of their own in the direction opposite to
that in which the line of equinoxes QQ'
or the winter point p moves along the
orbit. The above cycle of 25,868 years is, therefore, reduced to 20,984, or, in
round number 21,000 years. Thus if the winter in one hemisphere occurs when the
earth is at P, the point nearest to
the sun in the orbit, it will occur in the same hemisphere at A after a lapse of 10,500 years. It may
be here mentioned that in about 1250 A.D., the winter in the northern
hemisphere occurred when the earth in its orbit was at P, and that in about 11,750 A.D. the earth will be again at A, that is, at its longest distance from
the sun at the winter time, giving rise to a severe winter. Calculating
backwards it may be seen that the last severe winter at A must have occurred in the year 9,250 B.C. ( See Herschels
Outlines of Astronomy, Ed. 1883, Arts. 368, 369.)
It need not be mentioned that the
winter in one hemisphere corresponds with the summer in the other, and that
what is said about winter in the northern hemisphere applies mutatis mutandis to seasonal changes in
the southern hemisphere.
There is
another consideration which we must take into account in estimating the
severity of winter or the mildness of summer in any hemisphere. If the summer
be defined to be the period of time required by the earth to travel from one
equinoctial point Q' to another
equinoctial point Q, this interval
cannot always be constant for we have seen that the winter and summer points (P and A), and with them the equinoctial
points (Q and Q') are not stationary, but revolve along the orbit once in 21,000
years. Had the orbit been a circle, the lines qq' and pa will have
always divided it in equal parts. But the orbit being an ellipse these two
sections are unequal. For instance, suppose that the winter occurs when the
earth is at P, then the duration of
the summer will be represented by Q'AQ,
but when the winter occurs at A the
summer time will be represented by QPQ',
a segment of the ellipse necessarily smaller than Q'AQ. This inequality is due to the ellipticity of the orbit, and
the more elongated or elliptic the orbit is the greater will be the difference
between the durations of summer and winter in a hemisphere. Now the ellipticity
of the orbit is measured by the difference between the mean and the greatest
distance of the earth from the sun, and is called in astronomy the eccentricity
of the earths orbit. This eccentricity of the earths orbit is not a constant
quantity but varies, though slowly, in course of time, making the orbit more
and more elliptical until it reaches a maximum value, when it again begins to
reduce until the original value is reached. The duration of summer and winter
in a hemisphere, therefore, varies as the value of the eccentricity of the earths
orbit at that time; and it has been stated above that the difference between
the duration of summer and winter also depends on the position of the
equinoctial line or of the points in the earths orbit at which the winter and
the summer in a hemisphere occur. As the joint result of these two variations,
the difference between the durations of summer and winter would be the longest,
when the eccentricity of the earth is at its maximum and according as the
winter and summer occur at the points of perihelion or aphelion. It has been
found that this difference is equal to 33 days at the highest, and that at the
present day it is about 7˝ days. Thus if the winter in the northern hemisphere
occurs when the earth is at P in its
orbit and the eccentricity is at its maximum, the winter will be shorter by 33
days than the summer of the time. But this position will be altered after
10,500 years when the winter, occurring at A,
will, in its turn, be longer than the corresponding summer by the same length
of time, viz. 33 days.
Now, since
the earth describes equal areas in equal times in its orbit, Herschel supposed
that in spite of the difference between the duration of summer and winter
noticed above, the whole earth received equal amount of heat while passing from
one equinox to another, the inequality in the intensities of solar radiation
in the two intervals being precisely compensated by the opposite inequality in
the duration of the intervals themselves. Accepting this statement Dr. Croll
understated his ease to a certain extent. But Sir Robert Ball, formerly the
Astronomer Royal of Ireland, in his recent work On the Cause of an Ice Age has demonstrated, by mathematical
calculation, that the above supposition is erroneous, and that the total amount
of heat received from the sun by each hemisphere in summer and winter varies as
the obliquity of the earth or the inclination of its axis to the ecliptic, but
is practically independent of the eccentricity of the earths orbit. Taking the
total sun-heat received in a year by each hemisphere to be 365 units, or on an
average one unit a day, and taking the obliquity to be 23° 27', Sir Robert Ball
has calculated that each hemisphere would receive 229 of these heat-units
during summer and only 136 during winter, whatever the eccentricity of the
earth may be. But though these figures are not affected by the eccentricity of
the orbit, yet we have seen that the duration of the summer or winter does vary
as the eccentricity.
Supposing, therefore, that we have
the longest winter in the northern hemisphere, we shall have to distribute 229
heat-units over 166 days of a short summer, and 136 heat-units over 199 days of
a long winter of the same period. In other words, the difference between the
daily average heat in summer and winter will, in such a case, be the greatest,
producing shorter but warmer summers and longer and colder winters, and ice and
snow accumulated in the long winter will not be melted or removed by the heat
of the sun in the short summer, giving rise, thereby, to what is known as the
Glacial period in the northern hemisphere. From what has been stated above, it
may be seen that the southern hemisphere during this period will have long and
cool summers and short and warm winters, a condition precisely reverse to that
in the northern hemisphere. In short the Glacial and Inter-Glacial periods in
the two hemispheres will alternate with each other every 10,500 years, if the
eccentricity of the earth be sufficiently great to make a perceptibly large
difference between the winters and the summers in each hemisphere.
If Dr.
Croll had gone only so far, his position would have been unassailable, for the
cause enumerated above, is sufficiently potent to produce the climatic changes
attributed to it. At any rate, if this was not the sole cause of a succession
of Glacial and Inter-Glacial periods, their could be no doubt that it must have
been an important contributory cause in bringing about these changes. But
taking the value of the eccentricity of the earths orbit from the tables of
Leverrier, Dr. Croll calculated that during the last three million years there
were three periods of maximum eccentricity, the first of 170,000, the second of
260,000, and the third of 160,000 years; and that 80,000 years have elapsed
since the close of the third or the last period. According to Dr. Croll the
Glacial epoch in the Pleistocene period must, therefore, have begun 240,000
years ago, and ended, followed by the Post-Glacial period, about 80,000 years
ago. During this long period of 160,000 years, there must have been several alternations
of mild and severe climates, according as the winter in a hemisphere occurred
when the earth was at perihelion or aphelion in its orbit, which happened every
10,500 years during the period. But as the cold epoch can be at its maximum
only during the early part of each period, according to Dr. Crolls theory, the
last epoch of maximum glaciation must be placed 200,000 years ago, or about
40,000 years after the commencement of the last period of maximum eccentricity.
The
reliability of these elaborate calculations has, however, been questioned by
astronomers and geologists alike. Sir Robert Ball, who supports Croll in every
other respect, has himself refrained from making any astronomical calculations
regarding the maximum value of the eccentricity of the earths orbit, or the
time when the last Glacial epoch should have occurred, or when the next would
take place. I cannot say, he observes, when the last (Glacial epoch) took
place, nor when the next may be expected. No one who is competent to deal with
mathematical formulae would venture on such predictions in the present state of
our knowledge. Prof. Newcomb of New York, another astronomer of repute, in his
review of Dr. Crolls Climate and Time,
has also pointed out how in the present state of astronomical knowledge it is
impossible to place any reliance on the values of eccentricity computed for
epoches, distant by millions of years, as the value of this eccentricity
depends upon elements, many of which are uncertain, and this is especially the
case when one has to deal with long geological eras. The only reply made by Dr.
Croll to this criticism is that his figures were correctly worked up from the
values of the eccentricity according to the latest correction of Mr. Stockwell.
(* On the Cause of an Ice Age, p. 152. Climate and Cosmology, p. 39.)
This, however, is hardly a satisfactory reply, inasmuch as
Prof. Newcombs objection refers not to the correctness of the mathematical
work, but to the impossibility of
correctly ascertaining the very data from which the values of the eccentricity
were obtained.
It was once supposed that the
duration of each of Dr. Crolls different periods admirably fitted in with the
geological evidence, and fully corroborated the estimates of time supposed to
be required for the extensive geographical changes which accompanied the
Glacial and Inter-Glacial periods. But geologists have now begun to take a more
sober view of this extravagant figures and calculations. According to Crolls
calculation there were three periods of maximum eccentricity during the last
three million years, and there should, therefore, be three periods of
glaciation corresponding to these, each including several Glacial and
Inter-Glacial epochs. But there is no geological evidence of the existence of
such Glacial epochs in early geological eras, except, perhaps, in the Permian
and Carboniferous periods of the Paleozoic or the Primary age. An attempt is
made to meet this objection by replying that though the eccentricity was
greatest at one period in the early geological eras, yet, as the geographical
distribution of land and water was then essentially different from what it was
in the Quaternary era the high value of the eccentricity did not then produce
the climatic changes it did in the Pleistocene period. This reply practically
concedes that the high eccentricity of the earths orbit, combined with the
occurrence of winter when the earth is at aphelion, is not by itself sufficient
to bring about a Glacial period; and it may, therefore, be well urged that a
Glacial epoch may occur even when the eccentricity is not at its maximum.
Another point in which Dr. Crolls theory conflicts with the geological
evidence is the date of the close of the last Glacial epoch, as ascertained, by
the American geologists, from estimates based on the erosion of valleys since
the close of the last Glacial period. It is pointed out in the last chapter
that these estimates do not carry the beginning of the Post-Glacial period much
further than about 10,000 years ago at the best; while Dr. Crolls calculation
would carry it back to 80 or 100 thousand years. This is a serious difference
and even Prof. Geikie, who does not entirely accept the American view, is
obliged to admit that though Dr. Crolls theory is the only theory that
accounts for the succession of Glacial epochs and therefore, the only correct
theory, yet the formula employed by him to calculate the values of the
eccentricity of the earths orbit may be incorrect and that we may thus account
for the wide discrepancy between his inference and the conclusions based upon
hard geological facts, which cannot be lightly set aside.( Fragments of Earth
Lore, p. 287.)
The judgment recently pronounced by Mr.
Hudleston is still more severe. In his opening address, as President of the
geological section of the meeting of the British Association in 1898, he is
reported to have remarked, There is probably nothing more extraordinary in the
history of modern investigation than the extent to which geologists of an
earlier date permitted themselves to be led away by the fascinating theories of
Croll. The astronomical explanation of the Will-o-the-wisp, the cause of the
great Ice Age, is at present greatly discredited and we begin to estimate at
their true value those elaborate calculations which were made to account for
events, which, in all probability, never occurred. Extravagance begets
extravagance and the unreasonable speculations of men like Belt and Croll have
caused some of our recent students to suffer from the nightmare. (See The
Nature,
This criticism appears to be rather
severe; fox though Dr. Crolls elaborate calculations may be extravagant, yet
we must give him the credit for not merely suggesting but working out, the
effect of a cosmical cause which under certain circumstances is powerful enough
to produce extensive changes in the climate of the globe.
But in
spite of these remarks, it cannot be doubted that the duration of the Glacial
period, comprising at least two Glacial and one Inter-Glacial epoch, must have
been very much longer thin that of the Post-Glacial period. For, independently of
the eccentricity of the earths orbit, the occurrence of winter at aphelion is
by itself sure to contribute to the production of the Ice Age, if other causes
and circumstances, either those suggested by Lyell; or others, are favorable
and 21,000 years must elapse between two successive occurrences of winter at
aphelion. For two Glacial epochs with an intervening Inter-Glacial period, we
must, therefore, allow a period longer than 21,000 years, even if the question
of the eccentricity of the earths orbit be kept aside while, if, with Prof.
Geikie, we suppose that there were five Glacial (four in the Pleistocene and
one at the close of the Pliocene period) and four Inter-Glacial epochs the
duration must be extended to something like 80,000 years.
It is
unnecessary to go further into these scientific and geological discussions. I
have already stated before that my object is to trace from positive evidence
contained in the Vedic literature the home of the Vedic and, therefore, also of
the other Aryan races, long before they settled in Europe or on the banks of
the Oxus, the Jaxartes, or the Indus; and so far as this purpose is concerned,
the results of the latest scientific researches, discussed in this and the
previous chapter, may now be summed up as follows:
(1) In the
very beginning of the Neolithic age Europe is found to be inhabited by races,,
from whom the present races of Europe speaking Aryan languages are descended.
(2) But
though the existence of an Aryan race in Europe in early Neolithic times is
thus established, and, therefore, the theory of migrations from an Asiatic home
in Post-Glacial times is untenable, it does not prove that the Aryan race was
autochthonous in Europe, and the question of its original home cannot,
therefore, be regarded as finally settled.
(3) There
are good reasons for supposing that the metal age was introduced into
(4) The
different ages of Stone, Bronze and Iron were not synchronous in different
countries, and the high state of civilization in
(5)
According to the latest geological evidence, which cannot be lightly set aside,
the last Glacial period must have closed and the Post-Glacial commenced at about
10,000 years ago, or 8,000 B.C. at the best, and the freshness of the Siberian
fossil-deposits favors this view.
(6) Man is
not merely Post-Glacial as he was believed to be some years ago, and there is
conclusive geological evidence to prove his wide-spread existence in the
Quaternary, if not also in Tertiary, era.
(7) There
were at least two Glacial and one Inter-Glacial period, and the geographical
distribution of land and water on the earth during the Inter-Glacial period was
quite different from what it is at present.
(8) There
were great vicissitudes of climate in the Pleistocene period, it being cold and
inclement during the Glacial, and mild and temperate in the Inter-Glacial
period, even as far as the
(9) There
is enough evidence to show that the Arctic regions, both in Asia and Europe,
were characterized in the Inter-Glacial period by cool summers and warm winters
a sort of, what Herschel calls, a perpetual
spring; and that places like
Spitzbergen, where the sun goes below the horizon from November till March,
were once the seat of luxuriant vegetation, that grows, at present, only in the
temperate or the tropical climate.
(10) It was
the coming on of the Glacial age that destroyed this genial climate, and
rendered the regions unsuited for the habitation of tropical plants and
animals.
(11) There
are various estimates regarding the duration of the Glacial period, but in the
present state of our knowledge it is safer to rely on geology than on astronomy
in this respect, though as regards the causes of the Ice Age the astronomical
explanation appears to be more probable.
(12)
According to Prof. Geikie there is evidence to hold that there were, in all,
five Glacial and four Inter-Glacial epochs, and that even the beginning of the
Post-Glacial
period was marked by two successions of cold and genial
climate, at least in the North-West of Europe.
(13)
Several eminent scientific men have already advanced the theory that the cradle
of the human race must be sought for in the Arctic regions and that the plant
and animal life also originated in the same place.
It will
thus be seen that if the Vedic evidence points to an
CHAPTER III
THE ARCTIC REGIONS
Existence of a Circumpolar continent in early times
Probable also in the Inter-Glacial period Milder climate at the time
Necessity of examining Vedic Myths Difference between Polar and Circumpolar
characteristics The precession of the equinoxes used as chronometer in Vedic
chronology Characteristics of the North Pole The horizontal motion of the
celestial hemisphere Spinning round of the stars without rising or setting
The Sun rising in the South A day and a night of six months each Aurora
Borealis Continuous fortnightly moonlight, and long morning and evening
twilights Dawn lasting from 45 to 60 days The Polar year The darkness of
the Polar night reduced only to two, or two and a half, months Dr. Warrens
description of the Polar Dawn with its revolving splendors Characteristics of
regions to the South of the North Pole Stars moving obliquely and a few
rising and setting as in the tropical zone The Southernly direction of the
Sun A long day and a long night, but of less than six months duration
Supplemented by the alternations of ordinary days and nights for some time
during the year Long dawn but of shorter duration than at the Pole
Comparison with the features of the year in the tropics Summary of Polar and
Circumpolar characteristics.
We have
seen that in the Pleistocene period there was great elevation and submergence
of land accompanied by violent changes in the climate, over the whole surface
of the globe. Naturally enough the severity of the Glacial period must have
been very intense within the Arctic circle, and we shall be perfectly justified
in supposing that geographical changes like the elevation and depression of
land occurred on a far more extensive scale in regions round about the Pole
than anywhere else. This leads us to infer that the distribution of land and water
about the Pole during the Inter-Glacial period must have been different from
what it is at present. Dr. Warren, in his Paradise
Found, quotes a number of authorities to show that within a comparatively
recent geological period a wide stretch of Arctic land, of which Novaia Zemlia
and Spitzbergen formed a part, had been submerged; and one of the conclusions
he draws from these authorities is that the present islands of the Arctic
Ocean, such as the two mentioned above are simply mountain-tops still remaining
above the surface of the sea which has come in and covered up the primeval
continent to which they belonged. That an extensive circum-polar continent
existed in Miocene times seems to have been conceded by all geologists, and
though we cannot predicate its existence in its entirety during the Pleistocene
period, yet there are good reasons to hold that a different configuration of
land and water prevailed about the North Pole during the Inter-Glacial period,
and that as observed by Prof. Geikie, the Paleolithic man, along with other
Quaternary animals, freely ranged over the whole of the Arctic regions in those
times. Even now there is a considerable tract of land to the north of the
As regards
climate, we have seen that during the Inter-Glacial period there were cool
summers and warm winters even within the
inclement climate of the Arctic regions dates from the
Post-Glacial period, and we must leave it out of consideration in dealing with
earlier ages.
But
supposing that an Arctic continent, with an equable and pleasant climate,
existed during the Inter-Glacial period, and that the Paleolithic man ranged
freely over it, it does not follow that the ancestors of the Aryan race lived
in the Arctic regions during those days, though it may render such a hypothesis
highly probable. For that purpose, we must either wait until the existence of
the Aryan race, within the Arctic region in Inter-Glacial times, is proved by
new archaeological discoveries, or failing them, try to examine the ancient
traditions and beliefs of the race, incorporated in such admittedly oldest
Aryan books, as the Vedas and the Avesta, and see if they justify us in
predicating the inter-glacial existence of the Aryan people. It is admitted
that many of the present explanations of these traditions and legends are
unsatisfactory, and as our knowledge of the ancient man is increased, or
becomes more definite, by new discoveries in archaeology, geology or
anthropology, these explanations will have to be revised from time to time and
any defects in them, due to our imperfect understanding of the sentiments, the
habits and even the surroundings of the ancient man, corrected. That human
races have preserved their ancient traditions is undoubted, though some or many
of them may have become distorted in course of time, and it is for us to see if
they do or do not accord with what we know of the ancient man from latest
scientific researches. In the case of the Vedic traditions, myths and beliefs,
we have the further advantage that they were collected thousands of years ago,
and handed down unchanged from that remote time. It is, therefore, not unlikely
that we may find traces of the primeval Polar home in these oldest books. If
the Aryan man did live within the
It has been
a fashion to speak of the
The
terrestrial Poles are the termini of the axis of the earth, and we have seen
that there is no evidence to show that this axis ever changed its position,
relatively to the earth, even in the earliest geological eras. The terrestrial
poles and the circum-polar regions were, therefore, the same in early cases as
they are at present, though the past and present climatic condition of these
places may be totally different. But the axis of the earth has a small motion
round the pole of the ecliptic, giving rise to what is known as the precession
of the equinoxes, and causing a change only in the celestial, and not in the
terrestrial, poles. Thus the polar star 7,000 years ago was different from what
it is at present but the terristrial pole has always remained the same. This
motion of the earths axis, producing the precession of the equinoxes, is
important from an antiquarian point of view, inasmuch as it causes a change in
the times when different seasons of the year begin; and it was mainly by
utilizing this chronometer that I showed in my Orion or Researches in the Antiquity of the Vedas that the vernal
equinox was in Orion when some of the Rig-Vedic traditions were formed, and
that the Vedic literature contained enough clear evidence of the successive
changes of the position of the vernal equinox up to the present time. Thus the
vernal equinox was in Kṛittikâs in the time of the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ and Brâhmaṇa and the express text stating that
The Kṛittikâs never swerve from the due east; all other Nakṣhatras do (Shat. Brâ. II. 1, 2, 3),
recently published by the late Mr. S. B. Dixit, serves to remove whatever
doubts there might be regarding the interpretation of other passages. (See The
Indian Antiquary, Vol. XXIV, (August, 1895), p. 245. )
This record of the early position of the Kṛittikâs, or the Pleiades, is as
important for the determination of the Vedic chronology as the orientation of
pyramids and temples has been shown to be in the case of the Egyptian, by Sir
Norman Lockyer in his Dawn of Ancient
Astronomy. But the chronometer, which I now mean to employ, is a different
one. The North Pole and the Arctic regions possess certain astronomical
characteristics which are peculiar to them, and if a reference to these can be
discovered in the Vedas, it follows, in the light of modern researches, that
the ancestors of the Vedic Ṛiṣhis must have become acquainted with
these characteristics, when they lived in those regions, which was possible
only in the inter-glacial times. We shall, therefore, now examine these
characteristics, dividing them in the two-fold way stated above.
If an
observer is stationed at the North Pole, the first thing that will strike him
is the motion of the celestial sphere above his head. Living in the temperate
and tropical zones we see all heavenly objects rise in the east and set in the
west, some passing over our head, other traveling obliquely. But to the man at
the Pole, the heavenly dome above will seem to revolve round him, from left to
right, somewhat like the motion of a hat or umbrella turned over ones head.
The stars will not rise and set, but will move round and round, in horizontal
planes, turning like a potters wheel, and starting on a second round when the
first is finished, and so on, during the long night of six months. The sun,
when he is above the horizon for 6 months, would also appear to revolve in the
same way. The centre of the celestial dome over the head of
the observer will be the celestial North Pole, and naturally enough his north
will be over-head, while the invisible regions below the horizon would be in
the south. As regards the eastern and western points of the compass, the daily
rotation of the earth round its axis will make them revolve round the observer
from right to left, thereby causing the celestial objects in the east to daily
revolve round and. round along the horizon from left to right, and not rise in
the east, pass over-head, and set every day in the west, as with us, in the
temperate or the tropical zone. In fact, to an observer stationed at the North
Pole, the northern celestial hemisphere will alone be visible spinning round
and round over his head, and the southern half, with all the stars in it, will
always remain invisible, while the celestial equator, dividing the two, will be
his celestial horizon. To such a man the sun going into the northern hemisphere
in his annual course will appear as coming up from the south, and he will
express the idea by saying that the sun has risen in the south, howsoever
strange the expression may seem to us. After the sun has risen in this way in
the south, and the sun will rise there only once a year, he will be
constantly visible for 6 months, during which time he will attain a height of
about 23˝° above the horizon, and then begin to lower down until he drops into
the south below the horizon. It will be a long and continuous sunshine of 6
months, but, as the celestial dome over the head of the observer will complete
one revolution in 24 hours, the sun also will make one horizontal circuit round
the observer in every 24 hours and to the observer at the North Pole the completion
of one such circuit, whether of the sun or of the stars, will serve as a
measure of ordinary days, or periods of 24 hours, during the long sunshine or
night of six months. When about 180 such rounds, (the exact number will depend
upon the difference in the durations of summer and winter noticed in the last
chapter), are completed, the sun will again go down below the horizon, and the
stars in the northern hemisphere, which had disappeared inhis light, will
become visible all at once, and not rise one after the other as with us. The
light of the sun had, so to say, eclipsed them, though they were over the head
of the observer; but as soon as this obstruction is removed the whole northern
starry hemisphere will again appear to spin round the observer for the
remaining period of six months. The horizontal motion of the celestial
hemisphere, only one long continuous morning and evening in the year, and one
day and one night of six months each, are thus the chief special features of
the calendar at the North Pole.
We have
stated that to an observer at the North Pole, there will be a night of 6
months, and one is likely to infer therefrom that there will be total darkness
at the Pole for one half the portion of the year. Indeed one is likely to
contemplate with horror, the perils and difficulties of a long night o. six
months, during which not only the light but the warmth of the sun has to be
artificially supplied. As a matter of fact, such a supposition is found to be
erroneous. First of all, there will be the electric discharges, known as Aurora
Borealis, filling the polar night with their charming glories, and relieving
its darkness to a great extent. Then we have the moon, which, in her monthly
revolution, will be above the polar horizon for a continuous fortnight,
displaying her changing phases, without intermission, to the polar observer.
But the chief cause, which alleviates the darkness of the polar night, is the
twilight before the rising and after the setting of the sun. With us in the
tropical or the temperate zone, this twilight, whether of morning or evening,
lasts only for an hour or two; but at the Pole this state of things is
completely altered, and the twilight of the annual morning and evening is each
visible for several days. The exact duration of this morning or evening
twilight is, however, still a matter of uncertainty. Some authorities fix the
period at 45 days, while others make it last for full two months. In the
tropical zone, we see the first beams of the dawn, when the sun is about 16°
below the horizon. But it is said that in higher latitudes the light of the sun
is discernible when he is from 18° to 20° below the horizon. probably this
latter limit may prove to be the correct one for the North Pole, and in that
case the dawn there will last continuously for two months. Captain Pim, quoted
by Dr. Warren, thus describes the Polar year:
On the
16th of March the sun rises, preceded by a long dawn of forty-seven days,
namely, from the 29th January, when the first glimmer of light appears. On the
25th of September the sun sets, and after a twilight of forty-eight days,
namely, on the 13th November, darkness reigns supreme, so far as the sun is
concerned, for seventy-six days followed by one long period of light, the sun
remaining above the horizon one hundred and ninety-four days. The year,
therefore, is thus divided at the Pole: 194 days sun; 76 darkness; 47 days
dawn; 48 twilight. (See
But other
authorities assign a longer duration to the morning and evening twilight, and
reduce the period of total darkness from 76 to 60 days, or only to two months.
Which, of these calculations is correct can be settled only by actual
observation at the North Pole. It has been ascertained that this duration depends
upon the powers of refraction and reflection of the atmosphere, and these are
found to vary according to the temperature and other circumstances of the
place. The Polar climate is at present extremely cold; but in the Inter-glacial
epoch it was different, and this, by itself, would alter the duration of the
Polar dawn in inter-glacial times. But whatever the cause may be, so much is
beyond doubt that at the Pole the twilight of the yearly morning and evening
lingers on for several days. For even taking the lowest limit of 16°, the sun,
in his course through the ecliptic, would take more than a month to reach the
horizon from this point; and during all this time a perpetual twilight will
prevail at the Pole. Long dawn and long evening twilight are, therefore, the
principal factors in shortening the darkness of the Polar night and if we
deduct these days from the duration of the night, the period of darkness is
reduced from six to two,or at the most, to two-and-half-months. It is,
therefore, erroneous to suppose that the half yearly Polar night is such a
continuous period of darkness as will make the
The dawn in
the tropical or the temperate zone is but brief and evanescent, and it recurs
after every 24 hours. But still it has formed the subject of poetical
descriptions in different countries. If so, how much more the spectacle of a
splendid long dawn, after a darkness of two months, would delight the heart of
a Polar observer, and how he will yearn for the first appearance of the light
on the horizon, can be better imagined than described. I quote the following
description of this long Polar dawn from Dr. Warrens Paradise Found, and invite special attention to it, inasmuch as it
forms one of the principal characteristics of the North Pole. Premising that
the splendors of the Polar dawn are indescribable, Dr. Warren proceeds:
First of
all appears low in the horizon of the night-sky a scarcely visible flush of
light. At first it only makes a few stars light seem a trifle fainter, but
after a little it is seen to be increasing, and to be moving laterally along
the yet dark horizon. Twenty-four hours later it has made a complete circuit
around the observer, and is causing a larger number of stars to pale. Soon the
widening light glows with the luster of Orient pearl. Onward it moves in its
stately rounds, until the pearly whiteness burns into ruddy rose-light, fringed
with purple and gold. Day after day, as we measure days, this splendid panorama
circles on, and, according as atmospheric conditions and, clouds present more
or less favorable conditions of reflection, kindles and fades, kindles and
fades, fades only to kindle next time yet more brightly as the still hidden
sun comes nearer and nearer his point of emergence. At length, when for two
long months such prophetic displays have been filling the whole heavens with
these increscent and revolving splendors, the sun begins to emerge from his
long retirement, and to display himself once more to human vision. After one or
two circuits, during which his dazzling upper limb grows to a full-orbed disk,
he clears all hill-tops of the distant horizon, and for six full months circles
around and around the worlds great axis in full view, suffering no night to fall
upon his favored home-land at the Pole. Even when at last he sinks again from
view he covers his retreat with a repetition of the deepening and fading
splendors which filled his long dawning, as if in these pulses of more and more
distant light he were signaling back to the forsaken world the promises and
prophecies of an early return.(See
A
phenomenon like this cannot fail to be permanently impressed on the memory of a
Polar observer, and it will be found later on that the oldest traditions of the
Aryan race have preserved the recollection of a period, when its ancestors
witnessed such wonderful phenomenon, a long and continuous dawn of several
days, with its lights laterally revolving on the horizon, in their original
home.
Such are
the distinguishing characteristics of the North Pole, that is, the point where
the axis of the earth terminates in the north. But as a Polar home means
practically a home in the regions round about the North Pole, and not merely
the Polar point, we must now see what modifications are necessary to be made in
the above characteristics owing to the observer being stationed a little to the
south of the North Pole. We have seen that at the Pole the northern hemisphere
is seen spinning round the observer and all the stars move with it in
horizontal planes without rising or setting; while the other celestial
hemisphere is always invisible. But when the observer is shifted downwards, his
zenith will no longer correspond with the Pole Star, nor his horizon with the
celestial equator. For instance let Z,
in the annexed figure, be the zenith of the observer and P the celestial North Pole. When the observer was stationed at the
terrestrial North Pole, his zenith coincided with P, and his horizon with the celestial equator, with the result that
all the stars in the dome Q'PQ
revolved round him in horizontal planes. But when the zenith is shifted to Z, this state of things is at once
altered, as the heavens will revolve, as before, round the line POP', and not round the zenith line ZOZ'. When the observer was stationed at
the North Pole these two lines coincided and hence the circles of revolution
described by the stars round the celestial Pole were also described round the
zenith-line. But when the zenith Z is
different from P, as in the figure,
the celestial horizon of the observer will be H'H, and the stars will now appear to move in circles inclined to
his horizon, as shown in the figure by the black lines AA', BR' and CC'. Some of the stars, viz., those that are situated in the
part of the celestial dome represented by H'PB,
will be visible throughout the night, as their circles of revolution will be
above the horizon B'C'D'H. But all
the stars, whose Polar distance is greater than PB or PH, will in their
daily revolution, be partly above and partly below the horizon. For instance,
the stars at C and D will describe circles, some portions
of which will be below the horizon H'H.
In other words, the appearance of the visible celestial hemisphere to a person,
whose zenith is at Z, will be
different from the appearance presented by the heavens to an observer at the
North Pole. The stars will not now revolve in horizontal planes, but obliquely.
A great number of them would be circumpolar and visible during the whole night,
but the remaining will rise and set as with us in the tropics, moving in
oblique circles. When Z is very near P, only a few stars will rise and set in this way and
the difference will not be a marked one; but as Z is removed further south, the change will become more and more
apparent.
Similar
modifications will be introduced in the duration of day and night, when the
observers position is shifted to the south of the terrestrial North Pole. This
will be clear by a reference to the figure on the next page. Let P be the celestial North Pole and Q'Q the celestial equator. Then since
the sun moves in the ecliptic E'E,
which is inclined at an angle of about 23˝° (23° 28') to the equator, the
circles T'E and E'T will correspond with the terrestrial circles of latitude called
the Tropics and the circle AC with the 
along the ecliptic E'E will be above his horizon, at least
for some portion of day, during the whole year. But as the observer passes into
the
We have
seen that a long dawn of two months is a special and important characteristic
of the North Pole. As we descend southward, the splendor and the duration of
the dawn will be witnessed on a less and less magnificent scale. But the dawn,
occurring at the end of the long night of two, three or more months, will still
be unusually long, often of several days duration. As stated above, at first,
only a pale flush of light will appear and it will continue visible on the
horizon, revolving round and round, if the observer is sufficiently near the
Pole, for some days, when at last the orb of the sun will emerge, and start the
alternation of day and night described above, to be eventually terminated into
a long day. The splendors of the Aurora Borealis would also be less marked and
conspicuous in the southern latitudes than at the North Pole.
But if the
characteristics of the Arctic regions are different There is a peculiarity at
the place, where the latitude is greater than 66° N. Whenever the northern
declination of the sun exceeds the complement of the latitude, there will be
perpetual day, for such time is that excess continues. Similarly when the
southern (declination exceeds), there will be perpetual night. On Meru,
therefore there is equal half-yearly perpetual day and night. Thus if the
latitude of a place be 70°, its complement will be 90 70 = 20°; and as the
suns heights above the celestial equator (that is, his declination) is never
greater than 23° 28' there will be a continuous day at the place, so long as
the declination is greater than 20° and less 23° 28', and there will be a
similar continuous night when the sun is in the Southern hemisphere. Paul Du
Chaillu mentions that at Nordkyn or North Cape (N. lat. 71° 6'50'') the
northernmost place on the continent of Europe, the long night commences on 18th
November, and ends on 24th January, lasting in all, for 67 days of twenty-four
hours each from those of the North Pole, they are no less different from the
features of the year with which we are familiar in the temperate or the
tropical zone. With us the sun is above the horizon, at least for some time
every day, during all the twelve months of the year; but to persons within the
Arctic circle, he is below the horizon and therefore, continuously invisible
for a number of days. If this period of continuous night be excluded from our
reckoning, we might say that within the Arctic regions the year, or the period
marked by sunshine, only lasts from six to eleven months. Again the dawn in the
temperate and the tropical zone is necessarily short-lived, for a day and a
night together do not exceed twenty-four hours and the dawn which comes between
them can last only for a few hours; but the annual dawn at the Pole and the
dawn at the end of the long night in the Arctic regions will each be a dawn of
several days duration. As for the seasons, we have our winters and summers;
but the winter in the Arctic regions will be marked by the long continuous
night, while the summer will make the night longer than the day, but within the
limit of twenty four hours, until the day is developed into a long, continuous
sunshine of several days. The climate of the
It will be
seen from the foregoing discussion that we have two distinct sets of
characteristics, or differentić; one for
an observer stationed exactly at the
terrestrial North Pole and the other for an observer located in the
Circum-Polar regions or tracts of land between the North Pole and the Arctic
circle. For brevitys sake, we shall designate these two sets of differentić, as Polar and Circum-Polar
and sum them up as follows:
I. The Polar
Characteristics
(1) The sun rises in the south.
(2) The
stars do not rise and set; but revolve,
or spin round and round, in horizontal
planes, completing one round in 24 hours. The northern celestial hemisphere
is alone overhead and visible during the whole year and the southern or the
lower celestial world is always invisible.
(3) The
year consists only of one long day and
one long night of six months each.
(4) There
is only one morning and one evening, or the sun rises and sets
only once a year. But the twilight,
whether of the morning or of the evening, lasts
continuously for about two months,
or 60 periods of 24 hours each. The ruddy light of the morn, or the evening
twilight, is not again confined to a particular part of the horizon (eastern or
western) as with us; but moves, like
the stars at the place, round and round
along the horizon, like a potters
wheel, completing one round in every 24 hours. These rounds of the morning
light continue to take place, until the orb of the sun comes above the horizon;
and then the sun follows the same course for six months, that is, moves,
without setting, round and round the observer, completing one round every 24
hours.
II. Circum-Polar Characteristic
(1) The sun will always
be to the south of the zenith of the observer; but as this happens even in
the case of an observer stationed in the temperate zone, it cannot be regarded
as a special characteristic.
(2) A large
number of stars are circum-polar,
that, is, they are above the horizon during the entire period of their
revolution and hence always visible. The remaining stars
rise and set, as in the temperate zone, but revolve in more oblique circles.
(3) The
year is made up of three parts: (i) one
long continuous night, occurring at the time of the winter solstice, and
lasting for a period, greater than 24 hours and less than six months, according
to the latitude of the place; (ii) one
long continuous day to match, occurring at the time of the summer solstice;
and (iii) a succession of ordinary days
and nights during the rest of the year, a nycthemeron, or a day and a night
together, never exceeding a period of 24 hours. The day, after the long
continuous night, is at first shorter than the night, but, it goes on
increasing until it develops into the long continuous day. At the end of the
long day, the night is, at first, shorter than the day, but, in its turn, it
begins to gain over the day, until the commencement of the long continuous
night, with which the year ends.
(4) The
dawn, at the close of the long continuous night, lasts for several days, but
its duration and magnificence is proportionally less than at the North Pole,
according to the latitude of the place. For places, within a few degrees of the
North Pole, the phenomenon of revolving morning lights will still be observable
during the greater part of the duration of the dawn. The other dawns, viz. those between ordinary days and
nights, will, like the dawns in the temperate zone, only last for a few hours.
The sun, when he is above the horizon during the continuous day, will be seen
revolving, without setting, round the observer, as at the Pole, but in oblique
and not horizontal circles, and during the long night he will be entirely below
the horizon; while during the rest of the year he will rise and set, remaining
above the horizon for a part of 24 hours, varying according to the position of
the sun in the ecliptic.
Here we
have two distinct sets of diferentić,
or special characteristics, of the Polar and Circum-Polar regions,
characteristics which are not found anywhere else on the surface of the globe.
Again as the Poles of the earth are the same today as they were millions of
years ago, the above astronomical characteristics will hold good for, all
times, though the Polar climate may have undergone violent changes in the
Pleistocene period. In short, we can take these differentić as our unerring guides in the examination of the Vedic
evidence bearing on the point at issue. If a Vedic description or tradition
discloses any of the characteristics mentioned above, we may safely infer that
the tradition is Polar or Circum-Polar in origin, and the phenomenon, if not
actually witnessed by the poet, was at least known to him by tradition
faithfully handed down from generation to generation. Fortunately there are
many such passages or references in the Vedic literature, and, for convenience,
these may be divided into two parts; the first
comprising those passages which directly describe or refer to the long night,
or the long dawn; and the second
consisting of myths and legends which corroborate and indirectly support the
first. The evidence in the first part being direct, is, of course, more
convincing; and we shall, therefore, begin with it in the next chapter,
reserving the consideration of the Vedic myths and legends to the latter part
of the book.
CHAPTER IV
THE NIGHT OF THE GODS
Vedic sacrifices, regulated by the luni-solar calendar A
year of six seasons and twelve months, with an intercalary month in the
Taittirîya Saṁhitâ The same in the Ṛig-Veda Present results of the
Vedic mythology All presuppose a home in the temperate or the tropical zone
But further research still necessary The special character of the Ṛig-Veda explained Polar tests
found in the Ṛig-Veda Indra supporting the heavens with a pole, and
moving them like a wheel A day and a night of six months, in the form of the
half yearly day and night of the Gods Found in the Sűrya Siddhânta and older
astronomical Saṁhitâs Bhâskarâchâryas error explained Gods day and
night mentioned by Manu and referred to by Yâska The description of Meru or
the North Pole in the Mahâbhârata In the Taittirîya Araṇyaka The passage in the Taittirîya
Brâhmaṇa about the year long day of the Gods Improbability of
explaining it except as founded on the observation of nature Parallel passage
in the Vendidad Its Polar character clearly established by the context The
Vara of Yima in the Airyana Vaęjo The sun rising and setting there only once
a year The Devayâna and the Pitṛiyâna in the Ṛig-Veda Probably represent the
oldest division of the year, like the day and the night of the Gods The path
of Mazda in the Parsi scriptures Death during Pitṛiyâna regarded inauspicious
Bâdarâyanas view Probable explanation suggested Death during winter or Pitṛiyâna in the Parsi scriptures
Probably indicates a period of total darkness Similar Greek traditions
Norse Twilight of the Gods The idea of half-yearly day and night of the Gods
thus proved to be not only Indo-Iranian, but Indo-Germanic A sure indication
of an original Polar home.
At the
threshold of the Vedic literature, we meet with an elaborately organized
sacrificial system so well regulated by the luni-solar calendar as to show that
the Vedic bards had, by that time, attained considerable proficiency in
practical astronomy. There were daily, fortnightly, monthly, quarterly,
half-yearly and yearly sacrifices, which, as I have elsewhere shown, also
served as chronometers in those days. (See The Orion or the Antiquity of the
Vedas, Chap. II. )
The Taittirîya Saṁhitâ
and the Brâhmaṇas distinctly mention a lunar month of thirty
days and a year of twelve such months, to which an intercalary month was now
and then added, to make the lunar and the solar year correspond with each
other. The ecliptic, or the belt of the zodiac, was divided into 27 of 28
divisions, called the Nakṣhatras, which, were used as mile-stones to
mark the annual passage of the sun, or the monthly revolution of the moon round
the earth. The two solstitial and the two equinoctial points, as well as the
passage of the sun into the northern and the southern hemisphere, were clearly
distinguished, and the year was divided into six seasons, the festivals in each
month or the year being accurately fixed and ascertained. The stars rising and
setting with the sun were also systematically observed and the eastern and
western points of the compass determined as accurately as the astronomical
observations of the day could permit. In my Orion
or the Antiquity of the Vedas, I have shown how the changes in the position
of the equinoxes were also marked in these days, and how they enable us to
classify the periods of Vedic antiquity. According to this classification the
Taittirîya Saṁhitâ comes under the Kṛittikâ
period (2500 B.C.), and some may, therefore, think that the details of the
Vedic calendar given above are peculiar only to the later Vedic literature. A
cursory study of the Ṛig-Veda will, however, show that such is not
the case. A year of 360 days, with an intercalary month occasionally added, or
a year of twelve lunar months, with twelve intercalary days inserted at the end
of each year was familiar to the poets of the Ṛig-Veda
and is often mentioned in the hymns.
The northern and the
southern passage of the sun from equinox to equinox, the Devayâna and the Pitṛiyâna,
together with the yearly sattras,
have also been referred to in several places, clearly showing that the
Rig-Vedic calendar differed, if at all, very little from the one in use at the
time of the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ or the Brâhmaṇas.
A calendar of twelve months and six seasons is peculiar only to the temperate
or the tropical zone, and if we were to judge only from the facts stated above,
it follows that the people who used such a calendar, must have lived in places
where the sun was above the horizon during all the days of the year. The
science of Vedic mythology, so far as it is developed at present, also supports
the same view. Vṛitra is said to be a demon
of drought or darkness and several myths are explained. on the theory that they
represent a daily struggle between the powers of light and the powers of
darkness, or of eventual triumph of summer over winter, or of day over night,
or of Indra over watertight clouds. Mr. Nârâyaṇa Aiyangâr of
Such are the results of the latest researches in Vedic
philology, mythology or calendar, regarding the ancient home of the Vedic
people and the origin and the antiquity of their mythology. But to a man who is
working in the same field, the question whether we have reached the utmost
limit of our researches naturally occurs. It is a mistake to suppose that all
the traditions and myths, and even the deities, mentioned in the Ṛig-Veda
were the creation of one period. To adopt a geological phrase, the Ṛig-Veda,
or we might even say the whole Vedic literature, is not arranged into different
strata according to their chronological order, so that we can go on from once
stratum to another and examine each separately. The Ṛig-Veda
is a book in which old things of different periods are so mixed up that we have
to work long and patiently before we are able to separate and classify its
contents in chronological order. I have stated before how owing to our
imperfect knowledge of the ancient man and his surroundings this task is
rendered difficult, or even impossible in some cases. But, as observed by Prof.
Max Müller, it is the duty of each generation of Vedic scholars to reduce as
much as possible the unintelligible portion of the Ṛig-Veda,
so that with the advance of scientific knowledge each succeeding generation
may, in this matter, naturally be in a better position than its predecessors.
The Vedic calendar, so far as we know or the Vedic mythology may not have, as
yet, disclosed any indication of an Arctic home, but underneath the materials
that have been examined, or even by their side, we may still find facts, which,
though hitherto neglected, may, in the new light of scientific discoveries,
lead to important conclusions. The mention of the luni-solar calendar in the Ṛig-Veda
ought not, therefore, to detain us from further pursuing our investigation by
examining the texts and legends which have not yet been satisfactorily
explained, and ascertaining how far such texts and legends indicate the
existence of a Polar or Circum-Polar home in early times. The distinguishing
characteristics of these regions have been already discussed and stated in the
previous chapter, and all that we have now to do is to apply these tests, and
decide if they are satisfied or fulfilled by the texts and legends under
consideration.
The spinning round of the heavenly dome over the head is
one of the special characteristics of the North Pole, and the phenomenon is so
peculiar that one may expect to find traces of it in the early traditions of a
people, if they, or their ancestors ever lived near the North Pole. Applying
this test to the Vedic literature, we do find passages which compare the motion
of the heavens to that of wheel, and state that the celestial vault is
supported as if on an axis. Thus in Ṛig. X, 89, 4, Indra is said
to separately uphold up by his power heaven and earth as the two wheels of a
chariot are held by the axle.*
Prof. Ludwig thinks that
this refers to the axis of the earth, and the explanation is very probable. The
same idea occurs in other places, and some times the sky is described as being
supported even without a pole, testifying thereby to the great power or might
of Indra (II, 15, 2; IV, 56, 3).
In X, 80, 2, Indra is
identified with Sűrya and he is described as turning the widest expanse like
the wheels of a chariot.
The word for expanse is varâṁsi, which Sâyaṇa
understands to mean lights, or stars. But whichever meaning we adopt, it is
clear that the verse in question refers to the revolution of the sky, and
compares to the motion of a chariot wheel. Now the heavens in the temperate and
the tropical regions may be described as moving like a wheel, from east to west
and then back again to the east, though the latter half of this circuit is not
visible to the observer. But we cannot certainly speak of the tropical sky as
being supported on a pole, for the simple reason that the North Pole, which
must be the point of support in, such a case, will not be sufficiently near the
zenith in the tropical or the temperate zone. If we, therefore, combine the two
statements, that the heavens are supported as on a pole and that they move like
a wheel, we may safely infer that the motion referred to is such a motion of
the celestial hemisphere as can be witnessed only by an observer at the North
Pole. In the Ṛig-Veda§ I, 24, 10 the constellation of Ursa
Major (Ṛikṣhaḥ)
is described as being placed high (uchhâh),
and, as this can refer only to the altitude of the constellation, it follows
that it must then have been over the head of the observer, which is possible
only in the Circum-Polar regions.
Unfortunately there are few
other passages in the Ṛig-Veda which describe the motion of the
celestial hemisphere or of the stars therein, and we must, therefore, take up
another characteristic of the Polar regions, namely, a day and a night of six
months each, and see if the Vedic literature contains any references to this
singular feature of the Polar regions.
The idea that the day and the night of the Gods are each
of six months duration is so widespread in the Indian literature, that we
examine it here at some length, and, for that purpose, commence with the
Post-Vedic literature and trace it back to the most ancient books. It is found
not only in the Purâṇas, but also in astronomical works, and as
the latter state it in a more definite form we shall begin with the later
Siddhântas.
But,
as shown by me elsewhere, Bhâskarâchârya has here fallen into an error by
attributing to the word Uttarâyaṇa, a sense which it did not bear in old times,
or at least in the passages embodying this tradition. The old meaning of Uttarâyaṇa, literally, the
northern passage of the sun, was the period of time required by the sun to
travel from the vernal to the autumnal equinox, or the portion of the ecliptic
in the northern hemisphere; and if we understand the word in this sense, the
statement that the Uttarâyaṇa is a day of the Devas is
at once plain and intelligible. Bhâskarâchâryas reference to oldest
astronomical Saṁhitâs clearly shows that the tradition was
handed down from the oldest times. It is suggested that in these passages Gods
may mean the apotheosized ancestors of the human race. But I do not think that
we need any such explanation. If the ancestors of the human race ever lived at
the North Pole, so must have their Gods; and I shall show in a subsequent
chapter that the Vedic deities are, as a matter of fact clothed with
attributes, which are distinctly Polar in origin. It makes, therefore, no
difference for our purpose, if a striking feature of the primitive home is
traditionally preserved and remembered as a characteristic of the Gods, or of
the apotheosized ancestors of the race. We are concerned with the tradition
itself, and our object is pained if its existence is clearly established.
The next authority for the statement is Manu, I, 67.
While describing the divisions of time it says, A year (human) is a day and a
night of the Gods; thus are the two divided, the northern passage of the sun is
the day and the southern the night. ( Manu, I, 67.)
The
day and the night of the Gods are then taken as a unit for measuring longer
periods of time as the Kalpas and so
on, and Yâskas Nirukta, XIV, 4, probably contains the same reference. Muir, in
the first Volume of his Original Sanskrit
Texts, gives some of these passages so far as they bear on the yuga-system found in the Purâṇas.
But we are not concerned with the later development of the idea that the day
and the night of the Gods each lasted for six months. What is important, from
our point of view, is the persistent prevalence of this tradition in the Vedic
and the Post-Vedic literature, which can only be explained on the hypothesis
that originally it must have been the result of actual observation. We shall,
therefore, next quote the Mahâbhârata, which gives such a clear description of
Mount Meru, the lord of the mountains, as to leave no doubt its being the North
Pole, or possessing the Polar characteristics. In chapters 163 and 164 of the
Vanaparvan, Arjunas visit to the Mount is described in detail and we are
therein told, at Meru the sun and the moon go round from left to right (Pradakṣhiṇam) every day and so
do all the stars. Later on the writer informs us: The mountain, by its
lustre, so overcomes the darkness of night, that the night can hardly be
distinguished from the day. A few verses further, and we find, The day and
the night are together equal to a year to the residents of the place.*
* The verses (Calcutta Ed.) are as
follows: Vana-parvan, Chap. 163, vv. 37, 38. Ibid, Chap. 164, vv. 11, 13.
night and day of the Gods persistently
mentioned, but the
These
quotations are quite sufficient to convince any one that at the time when the
great epic was composed Indian writers had a tolerably accurate knowledge of
the meteorological and astronomical characteristics of the North Pole, and this
knowledge cannot be supposed to have been acquired by mere mathematical
calculations. The reference to the lustre
of the mountain is specially interesting, inasmuch as, in all probability,
it is a description of the splendors of the Aurora Borealis visible at the
North Pole. So far as the Post-Vedic literature is concerned, we have,
therefore, not only the tradition of the half-year-long
Passing on, therefore, to the Vedic literature, we find
Mount Meru described as the seat of seven Âdityas in the Taittirîya Âraṇyaka
I, 7, 1, while the eighth Âditya, called Kashyapa is said never to leave the
great Meru or Mahâmeru. Kashyapa is further described as communicating light to
the seven Âdityas, and himself perpetually illumining the great mountain. It
is, however, in the Taittirîya Brâhmaṇa (III, 9, 22, 1), that we
meet with a passage which clearly says, That which is a year is but a single
day of the Gods. The statement is so clear that there can be no doubt whatever
about its meaning. A year of the mortals is said to be but a day of the Gods;
but, at one time, I considered it extremely hazardous* to base any theory even
upon such a clear statement, inasmuch as it then appeared p me to be but
solitary in the Vedic literature. (Taitt. Br. III, 9, 22, 1. See Orion, p. 30
note. (Ed. 1955). )
I
could not then find anything to match it in the Saṁhitâs
and especially in the Ṛig-Veda and I was inclined to hold that
Uttarâyaṇa and Dakṣhiṇâyana
were, in all probability, described in this way as day and night with a
qualifying word to mark their special nature. Later researches have however forced on me the conclusion that the
tradition, represented by this passage, indicates the existence of a Polar home
in old days, and I have set forth in the sequel the evidence on which I have
come to the above conclusion. There are several theories on which the above
statement in the Taittirîya Brâhmaṇa can be explained. We may
regard it as the outcome of pure imagination, or of a metaphor expressing in
figurative language a
fact quite different from the one denoted by the words used, or it may be the
result of actual observation by the writer himself or by persons from whom he
traditionally derived his information. It may also be considered as based on
astronomical calculations made in later days, what was originally an
astronomical inference being subsequently converted into a real observed fact.
The last of these suppositions would have appeared probable, if the tradition
had been confined only to the Post-Vedic literature, or merely to the
astronomical works. But we cannot suppose that during the times of the Brâhmaṇas the astronomical knowledge was so
far advanced as to make it possible to fabricate a fact by mathematical
calculation, even supposing that the Vedic poets were capable of making such a
fabrication. Even in the days of Herodotus the statement that there existed a
people who slept for six months was regarded incredible (IV, 24); and we
must, therefore, give up the idea, that several centuries before Herodotus, a
statement regarding the day or the night of the Gods could have been fabricated
in the way stated above. But all doubts on the point are set at rest by the
occurrence of an almost identical statement in the sacred books of the Parsis.
In the Vendidad, Fargard II, para 40, (or, according to Spiegel, para 133), we
find the sentence, Tae cha ayara
mainyaente yat yare, meaning They regard, as a day, what is a year. This
is but a paraphrase of the statement, in the Taittirîya Brâhmaṇa, and the context in the Parsi
scriptures removes all possible doubts regarding the Polar character of the
statement. The latter part of the second Fargard, wherein this passage occurs,
contains a discourse between Ahura Mazda and Yima.* Ahura Mazda warns Yima, the
first king of men, of the approach of a dire winter, which is to destroy every
living creature by covering the land with a thick sheet of ice, and advises
Yima to build a Vara, or an enclosure, to preserve the seeds of every kind of
animals and plants. ( See Sacred Books of the East Series, Vol. IV, pp. 15-31. )
The meeting is said to have taken
place in the Airyana Vaęjo,or the paradise of the Iranians. The Vara, or the
enclosure, advised by Ahura Mazda, is accordingly prepared, and Yima asked
Ahura Mazda, O Maker of the material world, thou Holy One! What lights are
there to give light in the Vara which Yima made? Ahura Mazda answered, There
are uncreated lights and created lights. There the stars, the moon and the sun
are only once (a year) seen to rise and set,
and a year seems only as a day. I
have taken Darmesteters rendering but Spiegels is substantially the same.
This passage is important from various standpoints. First of all it tells us,
that the Airyana Vaęjo, or the original home of the Iranians, was a place which
was rendered uninhabitable by glaciation; and secondly that in this original
home the sun rose and set only once in
the year, and that the year was like
a day to the inhabitants of the place. The bearing of the passage in regard
to glaciation will be discussed latter on. For the present, it is enough to
point out how completely it corroborates and elucidates the statement in the
Taittirîya Brâhmaṇa stated and discussed above. The yearly rising and setting
of the sun is possible only at the North Pole and the mention of this
characteristic leaves no room for doubting that the Vara and the Airyana Vaęjo
were both located in the
It is true,
that the statement, or anything similar to it, is not found in the Ṛig-Veda; but it will be shown later
on that there are many other passages in the Ṛig-Veda which go to corroborate this
statement in a remarkable way by referring to other Polar characteristics. I
may, however, mention here the fact that the oldest Vedic year appears to have
been divided only into two portions, the Devayâna
and the Pitṛiyâna, which originally corresponded with the Uttârayaṇa and the Dâkṣhiṇayana, or the day and the night of
the Gods. The word Devayâna occurs
several times in the Ṛig-Veda Saṁhitâ, and denotes the path of the Gods. Thus in the Ṛig-Veda, I, 72, 7, Agni is said to
be cognizant of the Devayâna road,
and in Ṛig. I, 183, 6, and 184, 6, the poet says, We have, O
Ashvins! reached the end of darkness;
now come to us by the Devayâna road.
In VII, 76, 2, we again read, The Devayâna
path has become visible to me... The banner of the Dawn has appeared in the
east. Passages like these clearly indicate that the road of the Devayâna
commenced at the rise of the Dawn, or after the end of darkness; and that it
was the road by which Agni, Ashvins, Uṣhas, Sűrya and other matutinal
deities traveled during their heavenly course. The path of the Pitṛis, or the Pitṛiyâna, is, on the other hand,
described in X, 18, 1, as the reverse of Devayâna, or the path of Death. In,
the Ṛig-Veda, X, 88, 15, the poet says that he has, heard only
of two roads, one of the Devas and the other of the Pitṛis. If the Devayâna, therefore,
commenced with the Dawn, we must suppose that the Pitṛiyâna, commenced with the advent of
darkness. Sâyaṇa is, therefore, correct in interpreting V, 77, 2, as
stating that the evening is not for the Gods (devayâḥ). Now if the Devayâna and the Pitṛiyâna were only synonymous with
ordinary day and night, there was obviously no propriety in stating that these
were the only two paths or roads known to the ancient Ṛiṣhis, and they could not have been
described as consisting of three seasons each, beginning with the spring, (Shat.
Brâ. II, 1, 3, 1-3).*
It seems, therefore, very probable that the Devayâna and the
Pitṛiyâna
originally represented a two-fold division of the year, one of continuous light
and the other of continuous darkness as at the North Pole; and that though it
was not suited to the later home of the Vedic people it was retained, because
it was an established and recognized fact in the language, like the seven suns,
or the seven horses of a single sun. The evidence in support of this view will
be stated in subsequent chapters. It is sufficient to observe in this place,
that if we interpret the twofold division of the Devayâna and the Pitṛiyâna in this way, it fully
corroborates the statement in the Taittirîya Brâhmaṇa that a year was but a day of the
Gods. We may also note in this connection that the expression path of the
Gods occurs even in the Parsi scriptures. Thus in the Farvardîn Yasht, paras
56, 57, the Fravashis, which correspond with the Pitṛis in the Vedic literature, are said
to have shown to the sun and the moon the path made by Mazda, the way made by
the Gods, along which the Fravashis themselves are described as growing. The
sun and the moon are, again, said to have stood for a long time in the same
place, without moving forwards through the oppression of the Dćvas (Vedic Asuras, or the demons of darkness),
before the Fravashis showed the path of Mazda, to these two luminaries.(See
Sacred Books of the East Series, Vol. XXIII, pp. 193-194. )
This shows that the path of Mazda
commenced, like the Devayâna road, when the sun was set free from the clutches
of the demons of darkness. In other words, it represented the period of the
year when the sun was above the horizon at the place where the ancestors of the
Indo-Iranian lived in ancient days. We have seen that the Devayâna, or the path
of the Gods, is the way along which Sűrya, Agni and other matutinal deities are
said to travel in the Ṛig-Veda; and the Parsi scriptures supplement this
information by telling us that the sun stood still before the Fravashis showed
to him the path of Mazda, evidently meaning that the Devayâna, or the path
of Mazda, was the portion of the year when the sun was above the horizon after
being confined for some time by the powers of darkness.
But the
correspondence between the Indian and the Parsi scriptures does not stop here.
There is a strong prejudice, connected with the Pitṛiyâna, found in the later Indian
literature, and even this has its parallel in the Parsi scriptures. The Hindus
consider it inauspicious for a man to die during the Pitṛiyâna, and the great Mahâbhârata
warrior, Bhiṣhma, is said to have waited on his death-bed until the sun
passed through the winter solstice, as the Dâkṣhiṇayana, which is synonymous with the
Pitṛiyâna,
was then understood to mean the time required by the sun to travel from the
summer to the winter solstice. A number of passages scattered over the whole
Upanishad literature support the same view, by describing the course of the
soul of a man according as he dies during the Devayâna or the Pitṛiyâna, and exhibiting a marked
preference for the fate of the soul of a man dying during the path of the Gods,
or the Devayâna. All these passages will be found collected in Shankarâchâryas
Bhâṣhya on
Brahma-Sűtras, IV, 2, 18-21, wherein Bâdarâyaṇa, anxious to reconcile all these
passages with the practical difficulty sure to be experienced if death during
the night of the Gods were held to be absolutely unmeritorious from a religious
point of view, has recorded his opinion that we must not interpret these texts as predicating an uncomfortable future
life for every man dying during the Dâkṣhiṇayana or the night of the Gods. (
For the text and discussion thereon, see Orion, p. 38. (Ed. 1955) See also
Orion, pp. 24-26. (Ed. 1955) )
As an alternative Bâdarâyaṇa, therefore, adds that these
passages may be taken to refer to the Yogins who desire to attain to a
particular kind of heaven after death. Whatever we may think of this view, we
can, in this attempt of Bâdarâyaṇa, clearly see a distinct
consciousness of the existence of a tradition, which, if it did not put an
absolute ban on death during the night of the Gods, did, at any rate, clearly
disapprove of such occurrences from a religious point of view. If the Pitṛiyâna originally represented, as
stated above, a period of continuous darkness the tradition can be easily and
rationally explained; for as the Pitṛiyâna then meant an uninterrupted
night, the funeral ceremonies of any one dying during the period were deferred
till the break of the dawn at the end of the Pitṛiyâna, or the commencement of the
Devayâna. Even now death during night is considered inauspicious, and the
funeral generally takes place after daybreak.
The Parsi
scriptures are still more explicit. In the Vendidad, Fargards V, 10, and VIII,
4, a question is raised how the worshipper of Mazda should act, when a death
takes place in a house when the summer has passed and the winter has come; and
Ahura Mazda answers, In such cases a Kata
(ditch) should be made in every house and there the lifeless body should be
allowed to lie for two nights, or for three nights, or for a month long, until
the birds begin to fly, the plants to grow, the floods to flow, and the wind to
dry up the water from off the earth. Considering the fact that the dead body
of a worshipper of Mazda is required to be ex posed to the sun before it is
consigned to birds, the only reason for keeping the dead body in the house for
one month seems to be that it was a month of darkness. The description of birds
beginning to fly, and the floods to flow, &c., reminds one of the
description of the dawn in the Ṛig-Veda, and it is quite probable
that the expressions here denote the same phenomenon as in the Ṛig-Veda, In fact they indicate a
winter of total darkness during which the corpse is directed to be kept in the
house, to be exposed to the sun on the first breaking of the dawn after the
long night. (See infra Chapter IX. )
It will, however, be more convenient to discuss these
passages, after examining the whole of the Vedic evidence in favor of the
The same
traditions are also found in the literature of other branches of the Aryan
race, besides the Hindus and the Parsis. For instance, Dr. Warren quotes Greek
traditions similar to those we have discussed above. Regarding the primitive
revolution of the sky, Anaximenes, we are told, likened the motions of the
heaven in early days to the rotating of a mans hat on his head. (See
Another Greek writer
is quoted to show that at first the Pole-star always appeared in the zenith.
It is also stated, on the authority of Anton, Krichenbauer, that in the Iliad
and Odyssey two kinds of days are continually referred to one of a years
duration, especially when describing the life and exploits of the Gods, and the
other twenty-four hours. The night of the Gods has its parallel also in the
Norse mythology, which mentions the Twilight of the Gods, denoting by that
phrase the time when the reign of Odin and the Ćsir, or Gods, would come to an
end, not forever, but to be again revived; for we are told that from the dead
sun springs a daughter more beautiful than her sire, and mankind starts afresh
from the life-raiser and his bride-life. (See Coxs Mythology of the Aryan
Nations, p. 41, quoting Browns Religion and Mythology of the Aryans of the
North of Europe, Arts, 15-1. )
If these traditions and statements
are correct, they show that the idea of half-yearly night and day of the Gods
is not only Indo-Iranian, but Indo-Germanic, and that it must therefore, have
originated in. the original home of the Aryans.
Comparative mythology, it will be
shown in a subsequent chapter, fully supports the view of an original Arctic
home of the Aryan races, and there is nothing surprising if the traditions
about a day and a night of six months are found not only in the Vedic and the
Iranian, but also in the Greek and the Norse literature. It seems to have been
an idea traditionally inherited by all the branches of the Aryan race, and, as
it is distinctly Polar in character, it is alone enough to establish the existence
of an
CHAPTER V
THE VEDIC DAWNS
Dawn-hymns
the most beautiful in the Ṛig-Veda The Deity fully described,
unobscured by personification First hints about the long duration of dawn
Recitation of a thousand verses, or even the whole Ṛig-Veda, while the dawn lasts Three
or five-fold division of the dawn Both imply a long dawn The same inferred
from the two words Uṣhas and Vyuṣhṭî Three Ṛig-Vedic passages about long dawns,
hitherto misunderstood, discussed Long interval of several days between the
first appearance of light and sunrise Expressly mentioned in the Ṛig-Veda, VII, 76, 3 Sâyaṇas explanation artificial and
unsatisfactory Existence of many dawns before sunrise Reason why dawn is
addressed in the plural in the Ṛig-Veda The plural address not honorific
Nor denotes dawns of consecutive days Proves a team of continuous dawns
The last view confirmed by the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ, IV, 3, 11 Dawns as 30
sisters Direct authority from the Taittirîya Brâhmaṇa for holding that they were
continuous or unseparated Sâyaṇas explanation of 30 dawns examined
Thirty dawns described as thirty steps of a single dawn Rotatory motion of
the dawn, like a wheel, directly mentioned in the Ṛig-Veda Their reaching the same
appointed place day by day All indicate a team of thirty closely-gathered
dawns Results summed up Establish the Polar character of the Vedic dawns
Possible variation in the duration of the Vedic dawn The legend of Indra
shattering the Dawns car explained Direct passages showing that the dawns so
described were the events of a former age The Vedic Dawns Polar in character.
The Ṛig-Veda, we have seen, does not
contain distinct references to a day and a night of six months duration though
the deficiency is more than made up by parallel passages from the Iranian
scriptures. But in the case of the dawn, the long continuous dawn with its
revolving splendors, which is the special characteristic of the North Pole,
there is fortunately no such difficulty. Uṣhas, or the Goddess of Dawn, is an
important and favorite Vedic deity and is celebrated in about twenty hymns of
the Ṛig-Veda and mentioned more than three hundred times,
sometimes in the singular and sometimes in the plural. These hymns, according to
Muir, are amongst the most beautiful, if not the most beautiful, in the
entire collection; and the deity, to which they are addressed, is considered by
Macdonell to be the most graceful creation of Vedic poetry, there being no more
charming figure in the descriptive religious lyrics of any other literature. (See
Muirs Original Sanskrit Texts, Vol. V. p. 181; and Macdonells Vedic Mythology,
p. 46. )
In
short, Uṣhas, or the Goddess of Dawn, is described in the Ṛig-Veda hymns with more than usual
fullness and what is still more important for our purpose is that the physical
character of the deity is not, in the least, obscured by the description or the
personification in the hymns. Here, therefore, we have a fine opportunity of
proving the validity of our theory, by showing, if possible, that the oldest
description of the dawn is really Polar in character. A priori it does
not look probable that the Vedic poets could have gone into such raptures over
the short-lived dawn of the tropical or the temperate zone, or that so much
anxiety about the coming dawn should have been evinced, simply because the
Vedic bards had no electric light or candles to use during the short night of
less than 24 hours. But the dawn-hymns have not, as yet, been examined from
this stand-point. It seems to have been tacitly assumed by all interpreters of
the Vedas, Eastern and Western, that the Uṣhas of the Ṛig-Veda can be no other than the
dawn with which we are familiar in the tropical or the temperate zone. That
Yâska and Sâyaṇa thought so is natural enough, but even the Western
scholars have taken the same view, probably under the influence of the theory
that the plateau of Central
The first hint, regarding the long
duration of the Vedic dawn, is obtained from the Aitareya Brâhmaṇa, IV, 7. Before commencing the Gavâm-ayana
sacrifice, there is a long recitation of not less than a thousand verses, to be
recited by the Hotṛi priest. This Ashvina-shastra, as it is called, is
addressed to Agni, Uṣhas and Ashvins, which deities rule at the end of the night
and the commencement of the day. It is the longest recitation to be recited by
the Hotṛi and the time for reciting it is after
The same period of time is referred to also in the Ṛig-Veda, VII, 67, 2 and 3. The shastra
is so long, that the Hotṛi, who has to recite it, is directed to refresh himself by
drinking beforehand melted butter after sacrificing thrice a little of it (Ait.
Br. IV, 7; Ashv. Shr. Sűtra; VI, 5, 3). He ought to eat ghee, observes the
Aitareya Brâhmaṇa, before he commences repeating. Just as in this world a
cart or a carriage goes well if smeared (with oil), thus his repeating
proceeds well if he be smeared with ghee (by eating it). (See Haugs Translation off Ait. Br., p. 270. )
It is evident that if such a recitation has to be
finished before the rising of the sun, either the Hotṛi must commence his task soon after
midnight when it is dark, or the duration of the dawn must then have been
sufficiently long to enable the priest to finish the recitation in time after
commencing to recite it on the first appearance of light on the horizon as
directed. The first supposition is out of the question, as it is expressly laid
down that the shastra, is not to be recited until the darkness of the
night is relieved by light. So between the first appearance of light and the
rise of the sun, there must have been, in those days, time enough to recite the
long laudatory song of not lees than a thousand
verses. Nay, in the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ (II, 1, 10, 3) we are told that
sometimes the recitation of the shastra though commenced at the proper
time, ended long before sunrise, and in that case, the Saṁhitâ requires that a certain animal
sacrifice should be performed. Ashvalâyana directs that in such a case the
recitation should be continued up to sunrise by reciting other hymns (Ashv.
S.S. VI, 5, 8); while Âpastamba (S.S. XIV, 1 and 2), after mentioning the
sacrifice referred to in the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ, adds that all the ten Maṇḍalas of the Ṛig-Veda may be recited, if
necessary, in such a case. (Ashv. S. S. VI, 5, 8. Âpastamba XIV, I & 2. The
first of these two Sűtras is the reproduction of T. S. II, 1, 10, 3. )
It is evident from this that the actual rising of the
sun above the horizon was a phenomenon often delayed beyond expectation, in
those days and in several places in the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ, (II, 1, 2, 4 Cf. also T. S. II, 1, 4, 1) we are told that
the Devas had to perform a prâyaschitta because the sun did not shine as
expected.
Another indication of the long
duration of the dawn is furnished by the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ, VIII 2. 20.
Seven
oblations are here mentioned, one to Uṣhas one to Vyuṣhṭi one to Udeṣhyat, one to Udyat, one to Uditâ
one to Suvarga and one to Loka. Five of these are evidently
intended for the dawn in its five forms. The Taittirîya Brâhmaṇa (III, 8, 16, 4) explains the first
two, viz., to Uṣhas and Vyuṣhṭi, as referring to dawn and sunrise, or rather to
night and day, for according to the Brâhmaṇa Uṣhas is night, and Vyuṣhṭi is day. Tait. Br. III, 8, 16, 4.
But even though we may accept this as correct and we
take Uṣhas and Vyuṣhṭi to be the representatives of night and day because
the former signalizes the end of the night and the latter the beginning of the
day, still we have to account for three oblations, viz. one to the dawn
about to rise (Udeṣhyat,) one to the rising dawn (Udyat),
and one to the dawn that has risen (Uditâ) the first two of which are
according to the Taittirîya Brâhmaṇa, to be offered before the rising
of the sun. Now the dawn in the tropical zone is so short that the three-fold
distinction between the dawn that is about to rise, the dawn that is rising,
and one that has risen or that is full-blown (vi-uṣhṭi) is a distinction without a difference. We must,
therefore, hold that the dawn which admitted such manifold division for the
practical purpose of sacrifice, was a long dawn.
The three-fold division of the dawn
does not seem to be unknown to the poets of the Ṛig-Veda. For, in VIII, 41, 3, Varuṇas dear ones are said to have
prospered the three dawns for him,* and by the phrase tisraḥ dânuchitrâḥ in I, 174, 7, three dew-lighted
dawns appear to be referred to. There are other passages in the Ṛig-Veda where the dawn is asked not
to delay, or tarry long, lest it might be scorched liked a thief by the sun (V,
79, 9); and in II, 15, 6, the steeds of the dawn are said to be (slow) (ajavasaḥ), showing that the people were
sometimes tired to see the dawn lingering long on the horizon. But a still more
remarkable statement is found in I, 113, 13, where the poet distinctly asserts,
the Goddess Uṣhas dawned continually or perpetually (shasvat) in
former days (purâ); and the adjective shashvat-tamâ (the
most lasting) is applied to the dawn in I, 118, 11.
Again
the very existence and use of two such words as uṣhas and vi-uṣhṭi is, by itself, a proof of the long duration of the
dawn; for, if the dawn was brief, there was no practical necessity of speaking
of the full-blown state (vi+uṣhṭi) of the dawn as has been done several times in the Ṛig-Veda. The expression, uṣhasah vi-uṣhṭau, occurs very often in the Ṛig-Veda and it has been translated
by the phrase, on the flashing forth of the dawn. But no one seems to have
raised the question why two separate words, one of which is derived from the
other simply by prefixing the preposition vi, should be used in this
connection. Words are made to denote ideas and if uṣhas and vi-uṣhṭi were not required to denote two distinct phenomena,
no one, especially in those early days, would have cared to use a phrase,
which, for all ordinary purposes, was superfluously cumbrous. But these facts,
howsoever suggestive, may not be regarded as conclusive and we shall, therefore,
now turn to the more explicit passages in the hymns regarding the duration of
the Vedic dawn.
The first verse I would quote in
this connection is Ṛig-Veda I, 113, 10: *
Kiyâti â yât samayâ
bhavâti
yâ vyűṣhuryâshcha nunam vyuchhân
Anu pűrvâḥ kṛipate vâvashâna
pradidhyânâ joṣham anyâbhir eti
The
first quarter of the verse is rather difficult. The words are kiyâti ā yat samayâ bhavâti, and Sâyaṇa, whom
This
has given rise to three different translations of the verse:
MUIR, (following Aufrecht): How
great is the interval that lies between the Dawns which have arisen and those
which are yet to rise? Uṣhas yearns longingly after the former Dawns, and gladly goes
on shining with the others (that are to come).
But in spite of those different
renderings, the meaning of the verse, so far as the question before us is
concerned, can be easily gathered. There are two sets of dawns, one of, those
that have past, and the other of those that are yet to shine. If we adopt
Wilsons and Griffiths translations, the meaning is that these two classes of
dawns, taken together, occupy such a long period of time as to raise the
question, How long they will be together? In other words, the two classes of
dawns, taken together, were of such a long duration that men began to question
as to when they would terminate, or pass away. If, on the other hand, we adopt
Aufrechts translation, a, long period appears to have intervened between the
past and the coming dawns; or, in other words, there was a long break or hiatus
in the regular sequence of these dawns. In the first case, the description is
only possible if we suppose that the duration of the dawns was very long, much
longer than what we see in the temperate or the tropical zone; while in the
second, a long interval between the past and the present dawns must be taken to
refer to a long pause, or night, occurring immediately before the second set of
dawns commenced their new course, a phenomenon which is possible only in the
Arctic regions. Thus whichever interpretation we adopt a long dawn, or a long
night between the two sets of dawns, the description is intelligible, only if
we take it to refer to the Polar conditions previously mentioned. The Vedic
passages, discussed hereafter, seem, however, to support Sâyaṇas or Max Müllers view. A number
of dawns is spoken of, some past and some yet to come: and the two groups are
said to occupy a very long interval. That seems to be the real meaning of the
verse. But without laying much stress on any particular meaning for the
present, it is enough for our purpose to show that, even adopting Aufrechts
rendering, we cannot escape from the necessity of making the description refer
to the Polar conditions. The verse in question is the tenth in the hymn, and it
may be noticed that in the 13th verse of the same hymn we are told that in
former days, perpetually shashvat did the Goddess Uṣhas shine, clearly indicating that
the Dawn, in early days, lasted for a long time.
The following verse is, however,
still more explicit, and decisive on the point. The seventh Maṇḍala of the Ṛig-Veda contains a number of
dawn-hymns. In one of these (VII, 76), the poet, after stating in the first two
verses that the Dawns have raised their banner on the horizon with their usual
splendor, expressly tells us, (verse 3), that a period of several days
elapsed between the first appearance of the dawn on the horizon and the actual
rising of the sun that followed it. As the verse* is very important for our
purpose, I give below the Pada text with an interlineal word for word
translation:
Taniitahânibahulâneâsan
Thoseverilydaysmanywere
Yâprâchînamud-itâsuryasya |
whichaforetimeon
the uprisingof the sun
Yataḥparijâre-ivaâ-charanti
from
whichaftertowards a loverlike, moving on
Uṣhâḥ,dadṛikṣhenapunaḥyatî-îva ||
O
Dawnwast seennotagain forsaking(woman), like
I have followed Sâyaṇa in splitting jâra-iva of Saṁhitâ text into jâre+iva, and not jâraḥ+iva as Shâkala has done in the Pada
text; for jâre+iva makes the simile more appropriate than if we were to
compare usḥas
with jârah. Literally rendered the verse, therefore, means, Verily,
many were those days which were aforetime at the uprising of the sun,
and about which, O Dawn! thou wast seen moving on, as towards a lover, and not
like one (woman) who forsakes. I take pari with yataḥ, meaning that the dawn goes after
the days. Yataḥ pari, thus construed, means after which, or about which. Sâyaṇa takes pari with dadṛikṣhe and
To the commentators the verse is a
perfect puzzle. Thus Sâyaṇa does not understand how the word days (ahâni) can
be applied to a period of time anterior to sunrise; for, says he, The word day
(ahaḥ) is used only to denote such a period of time as is
invested with light of the Dawn. Then, again he is obviously at a loss to
understand how a number of days can be said to have elapsed between the first
beams of the dawn and sunrise. These were serious difficulties for Sâyaṇa and the only way to get over them
was to force an unnatural sense upon the words, and make them yield some
intelligible meaning. This was no difficult task for Sâyaṇa. The word ahâni, which
means days, was the only stumbling block in his way, and instead of taking it
in the sense in which it is ordinarily used, without exception, everywhere in
the Ṛig-Veda, he went back to its root-meaning, and interpreted
it as equivalent to light or splendor. Ahan is derived from the root
ah (or philologically dah), to burn, or shine, and Ahanâ
meaning dawn is derived from the same root. Etymologically ahâni may,
therefore, mean splendors; but the question is whether it is so used anywhere,
and why we should here give up the ordinary meaning of the word. Sâyaṇas answer is given above. It is
because the word day (ahan) can, according to him, be applied only to
a period after sunrise and before sunset. But this reasoning is not sound,
because in the Ṛig-Veda VI, 9, 1, ahaḥ is applied to the dark as well as
to the bright period of time, for the verse says, there is a dark day (ahaḥ) and a bright day (ahaḥ). This shows that the Vedic poets
were in the habit of using the word ahaḥ (day) to denote a period of time
devoid of the light of the sun.*
Sâyaṇa knew this, and in his commentary
on I, 185, 4, he expressly says that the word ahaḥ may include night. His real
difficulty was different, viz., the impossibility of supposing that a
period of several days could have elapsed between the first appearance of light
and sunrise, and this difficulty seems to have been experienced even by Western
scholars. Thus Prof. Ludwig materially adopts Sâyaṇas view and interprets the verse to
mean that the splendors of the dawn were numerous, and that they appear either
before sunrise, or, if prâchînam be differently interpreted in the
east at the rising of the sun. Roth and Grassman seem to interpret prâchînam
in the same way. Griffith translates ahâni by mornings and prâchînam
by aforetime. His rendering of the verse runs thus: Great is, in truth,
the number of the mornings, which were aforetime at the suns uprising; since
thou, O Dawn, hast been beheld repairing as to thy love, as one no more to
leave him. But Griffith does not explain what he understands by the expression,
a number of mornings which were aforetime at the suns uprising.
The case is, therefore, reduced to
this. The word ahan, of which ahâni (days) is a plural form, can
be ordinarily interpreted to mean (1) a period of time between sunrise and sunset;
(2) a nycthemeron, as when we speak of 360 days of the year; or (3) a measure
of time to mark a period of 24 hours, irrespective of the fact whether the sun
is above or below the horizon, as when we speak of the long Arctic night of 30
days. Are we then to abandon all these meanings, and understand ahâni to
mean splendors in the verse under consideration? The only difficulty is to
account for the interval of many days between the appearance of the banner of
the Dawn on the horizon and the emergence of the suns orb over it; and this
difficulty vanishes if the description be taken to refer to the dawn in the
Polar or Circum-Polar regions. That is the real key to the meaning of this and
similar other passages which will be noted hereafter; and in its absence a
number of artificial devices have been made use of to make these passages
somehow intelligible to us. But now nothing of the kind is necessary. As
regards the word days it has been observed that we often speak a night of
several days, or a night of several months when describing the Polar
phenomena. In expressions like these the word day or month simply denotes a
measure of time equivalent to twenty-four hours, or thirty days; and there
is nothing unusual in the exclamation of the Rig-Vedic poet that many were the
days between the first beams of the dawn and actual sunrise. We have also seen
that, at the Pole, it is quite possible to mark the periods of twenty-four
hours by the rotations of the celestial sphere or the circum-polar stars, and
these could be or rather must have been termed days by the inhabitants of the
place. In the first chapter of the Old Testament we were told that God created
the heaven and the earth and also light on the first day, while the sun was
created on the fourth to divide the day from the night and to rule the day.
Here the word day is used to denote a period of time even before the sun was
created; and a fortiori, there can be no impropriety in using it to
denote a period of time before sunrise. We need not, therefore, affect a
hypercritical spirit in examining the Vedic expression in question. If Sâyaṇa did it, it was because he did not
know as much about the
It is therefore clear that the verse
in question (VII, 76, 3) expressly describes a dawn continuously lasting for
many days, which is possible only in the Arctic regions. I have discussed the
passage at so much length because the history of its interpretation clearly
shows how certain passages in the Ṛig-Veda, which are unintelligible to
us in spite of their simple diction, have been treated by commentators, who
know not what to make of them if read in a natural way. But to proceed with the
subject in hand, we have seen that the Polar dawn could be divided into periods
of 24 hours owing to the circuits it makes round the horizon. In such a case we
can very well speak of these divisions as so many day-long dawns of 24 hours
each and state that so many of them are past and so many are yet to come, as has
been done in the verse (I, 113, 10) discussed above. We may also say that so
many day-long dawns have passed and yet the sun has not risen, as in II, 28, 9,
a verse addressed to Varuṇa wherein the poet asks for the following boon from the deity:
mâ aham râjan anya-kṛitena bhojam |
Avyuṣhṭâ in nu bhűyasîr uṣhâsa
â no jîvân Varuṇa tâsu shâdhi ||
Literally translated this means
Remove far the debts (sins) incurred by me. May I not, O King! be affected by
others doings. Verily, many dawns (have) not fully (vi) flashed forth.
O Varuṇa! direct that we may be alive during them.*
The
first part of this verse contains a prayer usually addressed to Gods, and we
have nothing to say with respect to it, so far as the subject in hand is
concerned. The only expression necessary to be discussed is bhűyasîḥ uṣhâsaḥ avyuṣhṭâḥ in third quarter of the verse. The
first two words present no difficulty. They mean many dawns. Now avyuṣhṭa is a negative participle from vyuṣhṭa, which again is derived from uṣhta with vi prefixed. I have
referred to the distinction between uṣhas and vyuṣhṭi suggested by the threefold or the five-fold division
of the dawn. Vyuṣhṭi, according to the Taittirîya Brâhmaṇa, means day, or rather the
flashing forth of the dawn into sunrise and the word a+vi+uṣhṭa, therefore, means not-fully-flashed-forth into
sunrise. But Sâyaṇa and others do not seem to have kept in view this distinction
between the meanings of uṣhas and vyuṣhṭi; or if they did, they did not know or had not in
their mind the phenomenon of the long continuous dawn in the Arctic regions, a
dawn, that lasted for several day-long periods of time before the suns orb
appeared on the horizon. The expression, bhűyasîḥ uṣhâsaḥ avyuṣhṭâḥ, which literally means many dawns
have not dawned, or fully flashed forth, was therefore a riddle to these
commentators. Every dawn, they saw, was followed by sunrise; and they could not,
therefore, understand how many dawns could be described as
not-fully-flashed-forth. An explanation was thus felt to be a necessity and
this was obtained by converting, in sense, the past passive participle avyuṣhṭa into a future participle; and the expression in
question was translated as meaning, during the dawns (or days) that have not yet dawned or, in other words, in
days to come. But the interpretation is on the face of it strained and
artificial. If future days were intended, the idea could have been more easily
and briefly expressed. The poet is evidently speaking of things present, and,
taking vi-ushṭa
to denote what it literally signifies, we can easily and naturally interpret
the expression to mean that though many dawns, meaning many
day-long portions of time during which the dawn lasted, have passed, yet it is
not vyuṣhṭa, that is the suns orb has not yet emerged from
below the horizon and that Varuṇa should protect the worshipper
under the circumstances.
There are many other expressions in
the Ṛig-Veda which further strengthen the same view. Thus
corresponding to bhűyasîḥ in the above passage, we have the
adjective pűrvîḥ (many) used in IV, 19, 8 and VI, 28, 1, to denote the
number of dawns, evidently showing that numerically more than one dawn is intended. The dawns are again
not un-frequently addressed in the plural number in the Ṛig-Veda, and the fact is well-known
to all Vedic scholars. Thus in I, 92, which is a dawn-hymn, the bard opens his
song with the characteristically emphatic exclamation these (etâḥ) are those (tyâḥ) dawns (uṣhasaḥ), which have made their appearance
on the horizon, and the same expression again occurs in VII, 78, 3. Yâska
explains the plural number uṣhasaḥ by considering it to be used only
honorifically (Nirukta XII, 7); while Sâyaṇa interprets it as referring to the
number of divinities that preside over the morn. The Western scholars have not
made any improvement on these explanations and Prof. Max Müller is simply
content with observing that the Vedic bards, when speaking of the dawn, did
sometimes use the plural just as we would use the singular number! But a little
reflection will show that neither of these explanations is satisfactory. If the
plural is honorific why is it changed into singular only a few lines after in
the same hymn? Surely the poet does not mean to address the Dawn respectfully
only at the outset and then change his manner of address and assume a familiar
tone. This is not however, the only objection to Yâskas explanation. Various
similes are used by the Vedic poets to describe the appearance of the dawns on
the horizon and an examination of these similes will convince any one that the
plural number, used in reference to the Dawn, cannot be merely honorific. Thus
in the second line of I, 92, 1, the Dawns are compared to a number of
warriors (dhṛiṣhṇavâḥ) and in the third verse of the same
hymn they are likened to women (nârîḥ) active in their occupations. They
are said to appear on the horizon like waves of waters (apâm na
urmayaḥ) in VI, 64, 1, or like pillars planted at a sacrifice (adhvareṣhu svaravaḥ) in IV, 51, 2. We are again told
that they work like men arrayed (visho na yuktaḥ), or advance like troops of
cattle (gavam na sargâḥ) in VII, 79, 2, and IV, 51, 8,
respectively. They are described as all alike (sadṛishiḥ) and are said to be of one mind (sańjânante),
or acting harmoniously IV, 51, 6, and
VII, 76, 5. In the last verse the poet again informs us that they do not
strive against each other (mithaḥ na yatante), though they live jointly in the
same enclosure (samâne urve). Finally in X, 88, 18, the poet
distinctly asks the question, How many fires, how many suns and how many dawns
(uṣhâsaḥ) are there? If the Dawn were
addressed in plural simply out of respect for the deity, where was the
necessity of informing us that they do not quarrel though collected in the same
place? The expressions waves of waters, or men arrayed &c., are again
too definite to be explained away as honorific. Sâyaṇa seems to have perceived this
difficulty and has, probably for the same reason, proposed an explanation
slightly different from that of Yâska. But, unfortunately, Sâyaṇas explanation does not solve the
difficulty, as the question still remains why the deities presiding over the
dawn should be more than one in number. The only other explanation put forward,
so far as I know, is that the plural number refers to the dawns on successive
days during the year, as we perceive them in the temperate or the tropical
zone. On this theory there would be 360 dawns in a year, each followed by the
rising of the sun every day. This explanation may appear plausible at the first
sight. But on a closer examination t will be found that the expressions used in
the hymns cannot be made to reconcile with this theory. For, if 360 dawns, all
separated by intervals of 24 hours, were intended by the plural number used in
the Vedic verses, no poet, with any propriety, would speak of them as he does
in I, 92, 1, by using the double pronoun etâḥ and tyâḥ as if he was pointing out to a
physical phenomenon before him; nor can we understand how 360 dawns, spread
over the whole year, can be described as advancing like men arrayed for
battle. It is again absurd to describe the 360 dawns of the year as being
collected in the same enclosure and not striving against or quarrelling with
each other. We are thus forced to the conclusion that the Ṛig-Veda speaks of a team or a group
of dawns, unbroken or uninterrupted by sunlight, so that if we be so minded, we
can regard them as constituting a single
long continuous dawn. This is in perfect accord with the statement discussed
above, viz., that many days passed between the first appearance of light on the
horizon and the uprising of the sun (VII, 76, 3). We cannot, therefore, accept
the explanation of consecutive dawns, nor that of Yâska, nor of Sâyaṇa regarding the use of the plural
number in this case. The fact is that the Vedic dawn represents one long
physical phenomenon which can be spoken of in plural by supposing it to be
split up into smaller day-long portions. It is thus that we find Uṣhas addressed sometimes in the
plural and sometimes in the singular number. There is no other explanation on
which we can account for and explain the various descriptions of the dawn found
in the different hymns.
But to clinch the matter, the
Taittirîya Saṁhitâ, IV, 3, 11, expressly states that the dawns are thirty
sisters, or, in other words, they are thirty in number and that they go round
and round in five groups, reaching the same appointed place and having the same
banner for all. The whole of this Anuvâka may be said to be practically
a dawn-hymn of 15 verses, which are used as Mantras for the laying down of
certain emblematical bricks called the dawn-bricks on the sacrificial altar.
There are sixteen such bricks to be placed on the altar, and the Anuvâka
in question gives 15 Mantras, or verses, to be used on the occasion, the 16th
being recorded elsewhere. These 15 verses, together with their Brâhmaṇa (T.S.V, 3, 4, 7), are so important
for our purpose, that I have appended to this chapter the original passages,
with their translation, comparing the version in the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ with that of the Atharva-Veda,
in the case of those verses which are found in the latter. The first verse of
the section or the Anuvâka, is used for laying down the first dawn-brick
and it speaks only of a single dawn first appearing on the horizon. In the
second verse we have, however, a couple of dawns mentioned as dwelling in the
same abode. A third dawn is, spoken in the third verse, followed by the fourth
and the fifth dawn. The five dawns are then said to have five sisters each,
exclusive of themselves, thus raising the total number of dawns to thirty.
These thirty sisters (triṁhshat svasâraḥ) are then described as going
round (pari yanti) in groups of six each, keeping up to the same goal (niṣhkṛitam). Two verses later on, the
worshipper asks that he and his follower should be blessed with the same
concord as is observed amongst these dawns. We are then told that one of these
five principal dawns is the child of Rita, the second upholds the greatness of
Waters the third moves in the region of Sűrya, the fourth in that of Fire or
Gharma, and the fifth is ruled by Savitṛi, evidently showing that the dawns
are not the dawns of consecutive days. The last verse of the Anuvâka
sums up the description by stating that the dawn, though it shines forth in
various forms, is but one in reality. Throughout the whole Anuvâka
there is no mention of the rising of the sun or the appearance of sunlight, and
the Brâhmaṇa
makes the point clear by stating, There was a time, when all this was neither
day nor night, being in an undistinguishable state. It was then that the
Gods perceived these dawns and laid them down, then there was light;
therefore, it brightens to him and destroys his darkness for whom these
(dawn-bricks) are placed. The object of this passage is to explain how and why
the dawn-bricks came to be laid down with these Mantras, and it gives the
ancient story of thirty dawns being perceived by the Gods, not on consecutive
days, but during the period of time when it was neither night nor day. This,
joined with the express statement at the end of the Anuvâka that in
reality it is but one dawn, is sufficient to prove that the thirty dawns
mentioned in the Anuvâka were continuous and not consecutive. But, if a
still more explicit authority be needed it will be found in the Taittirîya
Brâhmaṇa, II, 5, 6, 5. This is an old Mantra, and not a portion of
the explanatory Brâhmaṇa, and is, therefore, as good an authority as, any of
the verses quoted above. It is addressed to the dawns and means, These very
Dawns are those that first shone forth, the Goddesses make five forms; eternal
(shashvatîḥ), (they) are not separated (na avapṛijyanti), nor do (they) terminate (na gamanti
antam).* The five forms here referred to correspond with the division of
30 dawns into 5 groups of 6 each, made in the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ, after the manner of
sacrificial ṣhaḷ-ahas, or groups of six days; and we are
expressly told that the dawns, which make these 5 forms, are continuous,
unseparated, or uninterrupted. In the Ṛig-Veda I, 152, 4, the garment of
the lover of the dawns (lit. the maidens, kanînâm jâram) is
described as inseparable and wide (an-avapṛigṇa and vitata), and reading this in the light of
the aforesaid Mantra from the Taittirîya Brâhmaṇa we are led to conclude that in the
Ṛig-Veda
itself the dawny garment of the sun, or the garment, which the dawns, as
mothers, weave for him (cf. V, 47, 6 ), is considered as wide and continuous.
Translated into common language this means that the dawn described in the Ṛig-Veda was a long and continuous
phenomenon. In the Atharva-Veda (VII, 22, 2) the dawns are described as sachetasaḥ and samîchîḥ, which means that they are
harmonious and walk together and not separately. The first expression is
found in the Ṛig-Veda, but not the second, though it could be easily
inferred, from the fact that the dawns are there described as collected in the
same enclosure.
Here
all the adjectives of the dawns clearly indicate a group of undivided dawns
acting harmoniously; and yet strange to say
It
is interesting to examine how Sâyaṇa explains the existence of as many
as thirty dawns, before we proceed to other authorities. In his commentary on
the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ IV, 3, 11, he tells us that the first dawn spoken of in
the first verse in the Anuvâka, is the dawn at the beginning of the
creation, when everything was undistinguishable according to the Brâhmaṇa. The second dawn in the second verse is said to be
the ordinary dawn that we see every day. So far it was all right; but the
number of dawns soon outgrew the number of the kinds of dawn known to Sâyaṇa. The third, fourth and fifth
verses of the Anuvâka describe three more dawns, and Sâyaṇa was at last forced to explain that
though the dawn was one yet by its Yogic or occult powers it assumed these
various shapes! But the five dawns multiplied into thirty sisters in the next
verse, and Sâyaṇa finally adopted the explanation that thirty separate dawns
represented the thirty consecutive dawns of one month. But why only thirty
dawns of one month out of 360 dawns of a year should thus be selected in these
Mantras is nowhere explained. The explanations, besides being mutually
inconsistent, again conflict with the last verse in the Anuvâka with the
Brâhmaṇa
or the explanation given in the Saṁhitâ itself, and with the passage
from the Taittirîya Brâhmaṇa quoted above. But Sâyaṇa was writing under a firm belief
that the Vedic dawn was the same as he and other Vedic scholars like Yâska
perceived it in the tropical zone; and the wonder is, not that he has given us
so many contradictory explanations, but that he has been able to suggest so
many apparently plausible explanations as the exigencies of the different
Mantras required. In the light of advancing knowledge about the nature of the
dawn at the North Pole, and the existence of man on earth before the last
Glacial epoch We should, therefore, have no hesitation in accepting more
intelligible and rationalistic view of the different passages descriptive of
the dawns in the Vedic literature. We are sure Sâyaṇa himself would have welcomed a
theory more comprehensive and reasonable than any advanced by him, if the same
could have been suggested to him in his own day. Jyotish or astronomy has
always been considered to be the eye of the Veda, (Cf. Shikṣhâ, 41-42.)
and as with the aid of the telescope this eye
now commands a wider range than previously, it will be our own fault if we fail
to utilize the knowledge so gained to elucidate those portions of our sacred
books which are still unintelligible.
But to proceed with the subject, it
may be urged that it is only the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ that gives us the number of the
dawns, and that it would not be proper to mix up these statements with the
statements contained in the hymns of the Ṛig-Veda, and draw a conclusion from
both taken together. The Taittirîya Saṁhitâ treats of sacrificial rites and
the Mantras relating to the dawn-bricks may not be regarded as being originally
connected. The fact that only some-of these are found in the Atharva-Veda Saṁhitâ, might lend some support to
this view. But a critical study of the Anuvâka, will remove all these
doubts. The thirty sisters are not mentioned one by one, leaving it to the
hearer, or the reader, to make up the total, and ascertain the final number for
himself. The sixth verse in the Anuvâka expressly mentions the thirty
sisters and is, by itself, sufficient to prove that in ancient days the number
of dawns was considered to be thirty. But if an authority from the Ṛig-Veda be still needed, we have it
in VI, 59, 6, where Dawn is described as having traversed thirty steps (triṁshat padâni akramît).
This statement has, as yet, remained unexplained. A
single dawn traversing thirty steps is but a paraphrase of the statement that
dawns are thirty sisters, keeping to the same goal in their circuits. Another
verse which has not yet been satisfactorily explained is the Ṛig-Veda I, 123, 8. It says The
dawns, alike today and alike tomorrow, dwell long in the abode of Varuṇa. Blameless, they forthwith go
round (pari yanti) thirty yojanas; each its destined course (kratum).*
The first half of the verse presents no difficulty.
In the second we are told that the dawns go round thirty yojanas, each following its own plan, which is the meaning of kratu, according to the Petersberg
Lexicon. But the phrase thirty yojanas
has not been as yet satisfactorily explained.
In V, 54, 5, the Maruts are said to have extended
their greatness as far as the sun extends his daily course, and the word in
the original for daily course is yojanum.
Accepting this meaning, we can interpret the expression the dawns forth with
go round (pari yanti) thirty yojanas to mean that the dawns complete
thirty daily rounds as at the North Pole. That circular motion is here intended
is further evident from 111, 61, 3, which says, in distinct terms, Wending
towards the same goal (samânam artham),
O Newly-born (Dawn)! turn on like a wheel (ckakramiva
â vavṛitsva).*
Although the word navyasi
(newly-born) is here in the vocative case, yet the meaning is that the dawn,
ever anew or becoming new every day, revolves like a wheel. Now a wheel may
either move in a perpendicular plane, like the wheel of a chariot, or in a
horizontal plane like the potters wheel. But the first of these two motions
cannot be predicated of the dawn anywhere on the surface of the earth. The
light of the morning is, everywhere, confined to the horizon, as described in
the Ṛig-Veda, VII, 80, 1, which speaks of the dawns as unrolling
the two rajasî, which border on each
other (samante), and revealing all
things.
No dawn, whether in the rigid, the temperate, or the
tropical zone can, therefore, be seen traveling, like the sun, from east to
west, over the head of the observer in a perpendicular plane. The only possible
wheel-like motion is, therefore, along the horizon and this can be witnessed
only in regions near the Pole. A dawn in the temperate or the tropical zone is visible
only for a short time on the eastern horizon and is swallowed up, in the same
place by the rays of the rising sun. It is only in the
There are a
number of other passages where the dawn is spoken of in the plural, especially
in the case of matutinal deities, who are said to follow or come after not a
single dawn but dawns in the plural (I, 6, 3; I, 180, 1; V, 76, 1; VII, 9, 1;
VII, 63, 3). These passages have been hitherto understood as describing the appearance
of the deities after the consecutive dawns of the year. But now a new light is
thrown upon them by the conclusion established above from the examination of
the different passages about the dawn in the Ṛig-Veda, the Taittirîya and the
Atharva Veda Saṁhitâ. It may, however, be mentioned that I do not mean to
say that in the whole of the Ṛig-Veda not a single reference can
be found to the dawn of the tropical or the temperate zone. The Veda which
mentions a year of 360 days is sure to mention the evanescent dawn which
accompanies these days in regions to the south of the
It will be
seen from foregoing discussion that if the dawn-hymns in the Ṛig-Veda be read and studied in the
light of modern scientific discoveries and with the aid of passages in the
Atharva Veda and the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ and Brâhmaṇa they clearly establish the
following results:
(1) The
Rig-Vedic dawn was so long that several
days elapsed between the first appearance of light on the horizon and the
sunrise which followed it, (VII, 76, 3); or, as described in 11, 28, 9, many
dawns appeared one after another before they ripened into sunrise.
(2) The
Dawn was addressed in the plural number not honorifically, nor as representing
the consecutive dawns of the Year, but because it was made up of thirty parts (I; 123, 8; VI, 59, 6;
T.S., IV, 3, 11, 6).
(3) Many dawns
lived in the same place, acted
harmoniously and never quarreled
with each other, IV, 51, 7-9; VII, 76, 5; A.V. VII, 22, 2).
(4) The thirty parts of the dawn were continuous and inseparable, forming a closely gathered band, or a group of
dawns, (I, 152, 4; T. Br. II, 5, 6, 5; A.V. VII, 22, 2).
(5) These
thirty dawns, or thirty parts of one dawn revolved
round and round like a wheel, reaching the same goal every day, each dawn
or part following its own destined course, (I, 123, 8, 9; III, 61, 3; T.S. IV,
3, 11, 6).
These
characteristics it is needless to say are possessed only by the dawn at or near
the Pole. The last or the fifth especially is to be found only in lands very
near the North Pole and not everywhere in the Arctic regions. We may, therefore,
safely conclude that the Vedic Goddess of Dawn is Polar in origin. But it may
be urged that while the Polar-dawn lasts from 45 to 60 days, the Vedic dawn is
described only as made up of thirty day-long parts, and that the discrepancy
must be accounted for before we accept the conclusion that the Vedic dawn is
Polar in character. The discrepancy is not, however, a serious one. We have
seen that the duration of the dawn depends upon the powers of refraction and
reflection of the atmosphere; and that these again vary according to the
temperature of the place, or other meteorological conditions. It is, therefore,
not unlikely that the duration of the dawn at the Pole, when the climate there
was mild and genial, might be somewhat shorter than what we may expect it to be
at present when the climate is severely cold. It is more probable, however,
that the dawn described in the Ṛig-Veda is not exactly such a dawn
as may be seen by an observer stationed precisely at the North Pole. As
observed previously, the North Pole is a point, and if men lived near the Pole
in early days, they must have lived somewhat to the south of this point. Within
this tract it is quite possible to have 30 day-long dawns revolving, like a
wheel, after the long Arctic night of four or five months; and, so far as
astronomy is concerned, there is, therefore, nothing improbable in the
description of the Dawn found in the Vedic literature. We must also bear in
mind that the Vedic Dawn often tarried longer on the horizon, and the worshippers
asked her not to delay lest the sun might search her like an enemy (V, 79, 9).
This shows that though 30 days was the usual duration of the Dawn it was
sometimes exceeded, and people grew impatient to see the light of the sun. It
was in cases likes these, that Indra, the God who created the dawns and was
their friend, was obliged to break the car of the dawn and bring the sun above
the horizon (II, 15, 6; X, 73, 6).*
There are other places in which the
same legend is referred to (IV, 30, 8), and the obscuration of the Dawn by a
thunderstorm is, at present, supposed to be the basis of this myth. But the
explanation, like others of its kind, is on the face of it unsatisfactory. That
a thunderstorm should occur just at the time of the dawn would be a mere accident,
and it is improbable that it could have been made the basis of a legend. Again,
it is not the obscuration, but the delaying of the Dawn, or its tarrying longer
on the horizon than usual, that is referred to in the legend, and we can better
account for it on the Polar theory, because the duration of dawn, though
usually of 30 days, might have varied at different places according to latitude
and climatic conditions, and Indras bolt was thus needed to check these freaks
of the Dawn and make way for the rising sun. There are other legends connected
with the Dawn and the matutinal deities on which the Polar theory throws quite
a new light; but these will be taken up in the chapter on Vedic myths, after
the whole direct evidence in support of the theory is examined.
But if the
Vedic dawn is Polar in origin, the ancestors of the Vedic bards must have
witnessed it, not in. the Post-Glacial, but in the Pre-Glacial era; and it may
be finally asked why a reference to this early age is not found in the hymns before
us? Fortunately the hymns do preserve a few indications of the time when these
long dawns appeared. Thus, in I, 113, 13, we are told that the Goddess Dawn
shone perpetually in former days (purâ) and here the word purâ does not mean the foregone days of
this kalpa, but rather refers to a
by-gone age, or purâ kalpa as in the
passage from the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ (I, 5, 7, 5 ), quoted and
discussed in the next chapter. The word prathamâ,
in the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ, IV, 3, 11, 1 and the Taittirîya Brâhmaṇa, II, 5, 6, 5, does not again mean
simply first in order, but refers to ancient times, as when Indras first
or oldest exploits are mentioned in 1, 32, 1, or when certain practices are
said to be first or old in X, 90, 16. It is probable that it was this
import of the word prathamâ that led
Sâyaṇa to propose that the first dawn, mentioned in the
Taittirîya Saṁhitâ IV, 3, 11, represented the dawn at the beginning of the
creation. The Vedic poets could not but have been conscious that the Mantras
they used to lay down the dawn-bricks were inapplicable to the dawn as they saw
it, and the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ (V, 3, 4, 7), which explains the Mantras, clearly
states that this story or the description of the dawns is a tradition of old
times when the Gods perceived the thirty dawns. It is not, therefore, correct
to say that there are no references in the Vedic hymns to the time when these
long dawns were visible. We shall revert to the point later on, when further
evidence on the subject will be noticed and discussed. The object of the
present chapter was to examine the duration
of the Vedic dawn, the Goddess of the morning, the subject of so many beautiful
hymns in the Ṛig-Veda, and to show that the deity is invested with Polar
characteristics. The evidence in support of this view has been fully discussed;
and we shall, therefore, now take up the other Polar and Circum-Polar tests
previously mentioned, anti see whether we can find out further evidence from
the Ṛig-Veda to strengthen our conclusions.
APPENDIX TO CHAPTER V
THE THIRTY DAWNS
The
following are the passages from the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ referred to on page 90:
TAITTIRÎYA SAṂHITÂ, KÂNDA IV, PRAPÂTHAKA 3,
ANUVÂKA, 11
VERSE 1,
This verse, with slight modifications, occurs twice in the Atharva-Veda Saṁhitâ (III, 10, 4; VIII, 9, 11). It
runs thus:
VERSES 2, 3
and 4, The Atharva-Veda reading (VIII, 9, 112-14) is slightly different:
VERSE 8, This verse is also found
in the Atharva-Veda (III, 10 12); but the reading of the second half is as
follows:
VERSE 11, Compare A.V. VIII, 9,
15. For समानमू :
A. V. reads
ता एकमू :। The rest is the same in both.
VERSE
13, Compare A.V. III, 10, 1. For या थमा यौछत् A.V. reads थमा ह युवास । And for घुव A.V. has दुहाम् । Compare also Ṛig. IV, 57, 7, where the second line
is found as in A.V.
TAITTIRÎYA SAṂHITÂ KÂNDA V, PRAPÂTHAKA 3,
ANUVÂKA 4, SECTION 7
TRANSLATION AND NOTES
Taitt. Saṁhitâ IV. 3, 11
1. This verily, is She that dawned first; (she) moves entered into her (i.e. above the horizon). The bride, the
new-come mother, is born. The three great ones follow her.
She that dawned first: evidently meaning the first of a series of
thirty dawns, mentioned in the following verses. In verse 13 we are told that
it is the dawn which commences the year. The thirty dawns are, therefore, the
dawns at the beginning of the year, and the first of them is mentioned in the
first verse. Sâyaṇa, however, says that the dawn at the beginning of the
creation is here intended. But the explanation does not suit the context, and
Sâyaṇa has himself given different explanations afterwards.
Entered into her: according to Sâyaṇa asyâm (into her) means into the earth; compare Ṛig. III, 61, 7, where the sun, the
speeder of the dawns, is said to have entered into the mighty earth and
heaven. According to A.V. reading the meaning, would be entered into the
other (dawns), showing that the first dawn is a member of a larger group.
The three great ones: Sűrya, Vâyu and
Agni according to Sâyaṇa. The three typical deities or Devatâs mentioned by Yâska
(VII, 5) are Agni, Vâyu or Indra, and Sűrya. In Rig VII, 33, 7, the three
Gharmas (fires) are said to attend the dawn, (trayo Gharmâsa ushasam sachante); and in VII, 7, 8, 3, the dawns
are said to have created Sűrya, Yajńa (Sacrifice) and Agni. Also compare A. V.
IX, 1, 8, and Bloomfields note thereon in S. B. E. Series, Vol. XLII, p. 590.
Though the three may be variously named, the reference is evidently to the rise
of the sun and the commencement of sacrifices or the kindling of sacrificial
fires after the first dawn (Cf. Ṛig. I, 113, 9).
2.
Possessed of song, decorating (themselves), and moving together in a common
abode, the Two Dawns, the (two wives of the sun, unwasting, rich in seed, move
about displaying their banner and knowing well (their way).
Possessed of songs: Sâyaṇa thus interprets chchandas-vatî;
but the Pet. Lex. translates the word by lovely. I have followed Sâyaṇa because the A.V. reading chchandas-pakṣhe, having chchandas
for the two wings, supports Sâyaṇas meaning. That the morning
atmosphere resounded with the recitation of hymns and songs may be seen,
amongst others, from Ṛig. III, 61, 1 and 6. The phrase madye-chchandasaḥ in verse 6 below, denotes the same
idea. But the word chchandas may
perhaps be understood to mean shine in all these places; Cf. Ṛig. VIII, 7, 36, where the phrase, chchando na sűro archiṣhâ is
translated by Max Müller to mean like the shine by the splendor of the sun,
(See S. B. E. Series, Vol. XXXII, pp. 393, 399)
Decorating, moving together-in the same
place, gives of the sun, un-wasting etc.: These and others are the usual
epithets of the Dawn found in the Ṛig-Veda, Cf. Ṛig. I, 92, 4; VII, 76, 5; IV, 5, 13;
I, 113, 13.
The Two Dawns: Uṣhasâ does
not here mean Uṣhâsâ-naktâ
or Day and Night, as supposed by Mr. Griffith, but denotes two dawns as such,
the third, the fourth &c. being mentioned in the following verses. Sâyaṇa says that the first dawn is the
dawn which appeared at the beginning of the creation and the second the diurnal
one, as we see it. But Sâyaṇa had to abandon this explanation
later on. The couple of Dawns obviously includes the first Dawn mentioned in
the first verse, which, with its successor, now forms a couple. Since groups of two, three, five or thirty
dawns are mentioned as moving together,
they cannot be the dawns of consecutive days, that is, separated by sunlight,
as with us in the tropical or the temperate zone.
3. The
Three Maidens have come along the path of Rita; the three fires (Gharmas) with light, have followed. One
(of these maidens) protects the progeny, one the vigor, and one the ordinance
of the pious.
The Three Maidens: the number of Dawns is now increased to three;
but Sâyaṇa gives no explanation of the number.
4. The Fourth: Sâyaṇa now says that the single Deity of
Dawn appears as many different dawns through yogic powers!
4. That, which (was) the Fourth, acting as Ṛiṣhis, the two wings of the sacrifice,
has become the four-fold Stoma (Chatu-ṣhṭoma). Using
Gâyatri, Triṣhṭup, Jagatî, Anuṣhṭup the great song, they brought this
light
Acting as Ṛiṣhis ... four fold stoma: The group of four Dawns appears to
be here compared to the Chatu-ṣhṭoma or the
four-fold song. (For a description of the four-fold Stoma see Ait. Br. III, 42,
Haugs Trans. p. 237). Gâyatrî &c
are the metres used. The light brought on by the Dawns is the reward of this
stoma. Sâyaṇa interprets suvas
to mean heaven but compare Ṛig. III, 61, 4, where the adjective,
svear jananâ, creating light, is
applied to the Dawn.
Did it with the Five: after the number of
Dawns was increased to five, the creation proceeded by fives; compare verse 11
below.
Their five courses: I construe tâsâm pańcha kratavaḥ prayaveṅa yanti.
Sâyaṇa understands kratavaḥ to mean sacrificial rites performed
on the appearance of the dawn; but compare Ṛig. I, 123, 8 which says The
blameless Dawns (plu.) go round thirty yojanas
each her own kratu (destined
course), (supra p. 103) kratavaḥ in
the present verse must be similarly interpreted.
In combination: We have thirty Dawns
divided into five groups of six each; compare Taitt. Br. II, 5, 6, 5 quoted
above (p. 100), which says tâ devyaḥ kurvate paṇcha rűpâ
the Goddesses (Dawns) make five forms. Five groups of thirty Dawns, each
group having its own destined course are here described; but as each group is
made of six Dawns, the five courses are again said to assume different forms,
meaning that the members of each group have again their own courses Within the
larger course chalked out for the groups.
5. The creator did it with the Five, that he created
five-and-five sisters to them (each). Their five courses (kratavaḥ), assuming various forms, move on
in combination (prayavena)
6. The Thirty
Sisters, bearing the same banner, move on to the appointed place (niṣh-kṛitam). They, the wise, create the
seasons. Refulgent, knowing (their way), they go round (pari yanti) amidst-songs (madhye-chchandasaḥ).
Thirty Sisters: Sâyaṇa in his commentary on the preceding
verse says that the thirty Dawns mentioned are the thirty dawns of a month. But
Sâyaṇa does not explain why one month out of twelve, or only 30
out of 360 dawns should be thus selected. The explanation is again unsuited to
the context, (See supra p. 101 and
T.S.V. 3, 4, 7, quoted below.) The Dawns are called sisters also in the Ṛig-Veda, (Cf. I, 124, 8 and 9).
Appointed place: niṣh kṛitam (Nir.
XII, 7), used in reference to the course of the Dawns also in Ṛig. I, 123, 9. It is appropriate
only if the Dawns returned to the same point in their daily rounds, (See supra p. 106).
Go round amidst-songs: pari yanti, go
round is also the phrase used in Ṛig. I, 123, 8 Madhye chchandasaḥ is interpreted by Sâyaṇa to mean about the sun, which is
always surrounded by songs. But we need not go so far, for Madhye chchandasaḥ may be more simply taken to mean
amidst-songs that are usually sung at the dawn (Ṛig. VII, 80, 1).
7. Through
the sky, the illumined Goddess of Night accepts the ordinances of the sun. The
cattle, of various forms, (begin to) look up as they rise on the lap of the
mother.
Through the sky: I take nabhas as an accusative of space. Sâyaṇa appears to take it as an adjective
equivalent to nabhasthasya and
qualifying sűryasya. In either case
the meaning is the same, viz. that
the night was gradually changing into day-light.
The cattle: morning rays or splendors
usually spoken of as cows. In Ṛig. I, 92, 12, the Dawn is described
as spreading cattle (pashűn) before
her; and in I, 124, 5, we are told that she fills the lap of both parents
heaven and earth. I construe, with Sâyaṇa, nânâ-rűpa pashavaḥ vi pashyanti,
taking vi pashyanti intransitively, and nânâ-rűpa
as an adjective. The same phrase is found used in reference to a womans
children in the Atharva Veda, XIV, 2, 25. For the intransitative use of vi pushyanti,
See Ṛig. X, 725, 4.
8. The Ekâṣhṭakâ, glowing with holy fervor (tapas), gave birth to a child, the great
Indra. Through him the Gods have subdued their enemies; by his powers (he) has
become the slayer of the Asuras.
The Ekâṣhṭaka: The birth of Indra is evidently
the birth of the sun after the expiry of thirty dawns. Sâyaṇa, quoting Âpasthamba Gṛihya Sutra (VIII, 21, 10),
interprets Ekâṣhṭakâ to mean the 8th day of the dark half of the month of
Mâgha (January-February); and in the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ, VII, 4, 8, quoted and
explained by me in Chapter III of Orion,
it seems to have same meaning, (See Orion
p. 45), Ekâṣhṭakâ was the first day, or the consort, of the Year, when the
sun turned towards the north from the winter solstice; and the commencement of
all annual sattras is therefore,
directed to be made on the Ekâṣhṭakâ day. This meaning was, however,
settled when the vernal equinox had receded from the asterism of Mṛiga (Orion) to that of the Kṛittikâs (Pleiades). But in earlier
days Ekâṣhṭakâ seems to have meant the last of the dawns which preceded
the rise of the sun after the long darkness, andthus commenced the year, which
began with the period of sunshine; the word eka
in Ekâṣhṭakâ perhaps denotes the first
month, the last dawn probably falling on the 8th day of the first lunar month
of the year.
9. You have
made a companion (lit. the
after-born) for me, who was (before) without a companion. Truth-teller (as thou
art), I desire this, that I may have his good will, just as you do not
transgress each the other.
A companion for me: that is, Indra or the sun, whose
birth is mentioned in the previous verse; and the poet now prays that his new
friend, the after-born follower or companion, should be favorable to him. It
should be noted that the birth of the sun is described after the lapse of
thirty dawns, during which the poet had no companion.
Truth-teller: Sâyaṇa seems to take satyam vadantî as a vocative plural; but it is not in strict
accordance with grammar. In the pada
text, it is evidently a feminine form of nom. sing., and I have translated
accordingly, though not without some difficulty. In Ṛig. III, 61, 2, the dawn is called sűnṛitâ îrayantî which expresses the same idea.
Just as you do not transgress each the other:
compare the Ṛig-Veda VII, 76, 5, where we are told that the Dawns, though
collected in the same place, do not strive against or quarrel with each other.
10. The
All-knowing has my good will, has got a hold (on it), has secured a place
(therein). May I have his good will just as you do not transgress each the
other.
The All-knowing: Sâyaṇa takes Vishva-Vedâḥ to mean the Dawn; but it obviously
refers to the companion (anujâm)
mentioned in the preceding verse. The worshipper asks for a reciprocity of good
will. The All-knowing (Indra) has his good will; let him, he prays, have now
the All-knowings good will. The adjective vishva
vedâḥ is applied in the Ṛig-Veda to Indra or Agni several
times, Cf. Ṛig. VI, 47, 12; I, 147, 3.
11. Five
milkings answer to the five dawns; the five seasons to the five-named cow. The
five sky-regions, made by the fifteen, have a common head, directed to one
world.
Five milkings: Sâyaṇa refers to Taitt. Brâh. II, 2, 9,
6-9, where darkness, light, the two twilights, and day are said to be the five
milkings (dohâḥ) of Prajâpati. The idea seems to be
that all the five-fold groups in the creation proceeded from the five-fold
dawn-groups.
Five-caned Cow: the earth, according to
Sâyaṇa, who says that the earth has five different names in the
five seasons, e. g. pushpa-vati
(blossomy) in Vasanta (spring), tâpa-vatî
(heated) in Grîṣhma (Summer), vṛiṣhṭi-vatî
(showery) in Varṣhâ (Rains), jala-prasâda-vatî
(clear-watered) in Sharad (Autumn), and shaitya-vatî
(cold) in Hemanta-Shishira (Winter). The seasons are taken as five by combining
Hemanta and Shishira into one.
The fifteen: The fifteen-fold Stoma,
called pańcha-dasha, (See Haugs
Trans. Ait. Br. p. 238
12. The
first dawn (is) the child Rita, one upholds the greatness of Waters, one moves
in the regions of Sűrya, one (in those) of Gharma (fire), and Savitṛi rules one.
13. That,
which dawned first, has become a cow in Yamas realm. Rich in milk, may she
milk for us each succeeding year.
Each succeeding year: This shows that the dawn here
described is the first dawn of the year. In Ṛig. I, 33, 10, light (cows) is said
to be milked from darkness
14. The
chief of the bright, the omniform, the brindled, the fire-bannered has come,
with light, in the sky. Working well towards a common goal, bearing (signs of)
old age, (yet) O unwasting! O Dawn! thou hast come.
Working-well towards a
common goal:
compare Ṛig. III, 61, 3, where, the Dawn wending to one and the same
goal is asked to turn on like a wheel.
Bearing (signs of) old age: I construe jarâm bibhratî and yet ajare. Sâyaṇa takes svapasya-rnânâ (working well) as an independent adjective; and
connects bibhratî with artham, and jarâm with âgâḥ. The meaning would then be Working
well, having a common end, O unwasting Dawn! thou least reached old age. But
it does not make any appreciable change in the general sense of the verse.
15. The
wife of the seasons, this first has come, the leader of days, the mother of
children. Though one, O Dawn! thou shinest manifoldly; though unwasting, thou
causest all the rest to grow old (decay).
Though one ... shinest
manyfoldly: shows
that only one continuous dawn, though made up of many parts, is described in
this hymn.
Leader of days, mother of children the
epithets ahnâm netrî and gavâm mâtâ are also found used in the Ṛig-Veda, VII, 77, 2.
Taitt. Saṁhitâ V, 3, 4, 7.
It was un-distinguished,*
neither day nor night. The Gods perceived these dawn-bricks (for the laying of
which the 15 verses given above are to be used). They laid them. Then it shone forth. Therefore for whom
these are laid, it shines forth to him, destroys (his) darkness.
* It was undistinguished: This
paragraph, which is found later on in the Saṁhitâ, explains how the dawn-bricks
came to be laid with the fifteen verses given above. The portions of the
Taittirîya Saṁhitâ, which contain such explanations are called Brâhmaṇa
Then it shone forth: This
shows that aid the thirty Dawns were understood to have preceded the rise of
the sun, I have already quoted (supra
p. 100) a passage from Taitt. Brâh. (II, 5, 6, 5) which says that these dawns
were continuous and unseparated.
REMARKS
It has been previously mentioned that the fifteen
verses, quoted above, are used or recited as Mantras at the time of laying down
certain emblematical bricks, called Vyuṣhtî-iṣhṭakâs or
dawn-bricks, on the sacrificial altar. But as the Mantras, or verses, used for
sacrificial purposes are often taken from different Vedic hymns, these verses
are likely to be regarded as unconnected with each other. The account of the
thirty dawns, contained therein, however, shows that these verses must have
originally formed an entire or one homogeneous hymn. Again if the Mantras had
been selected from different hymns, one for each dawn-brick, there would
naturally be 16 verses in all, as 16 dawn-bricks are to be laid on the altar.
The very fact, that the Anuvâka
contains only 15 verses (leaving the sacrificer to select the 16th from
elsewhere), therefore, further supports the same view. It is true that some of
these verses are found in the Atharva-Veda, either detached or in connection
with other subjects. But that does not prevent us from treating the passage in
the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ, as containing a connected account of thirty dawns
divided into five groups of six each. The question is not, however, very
material, inasmuch as verses 5 and 6, whether they formed part of an entire
hymn or not, are by themselves sufficient to prove the point at issue, viz., that the Vedic Goddess of Dawn
constituted a group of thirty sisters. The Ṛig-Veda speaks of thirty steps
traversed by the Dawn, (VI, 59, 6), or of Dawns going round thirty yojanas (I, 123, 8); but both these
statements have, as yet, remained totally unexplained, or have been but
imperfectly explained by Indian and Western scholars alike. But now that we
know that the Vedic Dawns were thirty in number, both the aforesaid statements
become at once easily comprehensible. The only other point necessary to be
decided, so far as the subject in hand is concerned, is whether these thirty
dawns were the dawns of thirty consecutive days, or whether they formed a
closely-gathered band of thirty continuous dawns; and on reading the two
aforesaid passages from the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ, the one from the Taittirîya
Brâhmaṇa, II, 5, 6, 5, and other authorities cited in the foregoing
chapter, I do not think, there can be any doubt that the Goddess of Dawn,
worshipped by the Vedic bards, was originally a group of thirty continuous
dawns. It is not contended that the ancestors of the Vedic bards were unacquainted
with ordinary dawns, for, even in the circumpolar regions there are, during
certain parts of the year, successions of ordinary days and nights and with
them of ordinary dawns. But so far as the Vedic Goddess of morning is
concerned, there is enough evidence to show that it was no other than the
continuous and revolving Dawn at the end of the long night in those regions,
the Dawn that lasted for thirty periods of 24 hours each, which is possible
only within a few degrees round about the North Pole
.
.
CHAPTER VI
LONG DAY AND LONG
NIGHT
Independent evidence about the long night Vṛitra living in long darkness
Expressions denoting long darkness or long night Anxiety to reach the end of
darkness Prayers to reach safely the other end of night A night, the other
boundary of which was not known according to the Atharva Veda The Taittirîya
Saṁhitâ
explains that these prayers were due to fears entertained by the ancient
priests that the night would not dawn Not caused by long winter nights as
supposed by Sâyaṇa Description of days and nights in the Ṛig-Veda Divided into two typical
pairs One described as bright, dark and virűpe
Virűpe means of varying lengths
and not of various colors Second pair, Ahanî,
different from the first Durations of days and nights on the globe examined
Ahanî can only be a couple of the
long Arctic day and night Described as forming the right and left, or
opposite, sides of the Year in the Taittirîya Âraṇyaka The sun is described in the Ṛig-Veda as unyoking his car in the
midst of the sky And thereby retaliating Dâsas
mischief Represents the long day and the long night Summary of evidence
regarding long day and long night Uṣhas and Sűrya as Dakshinâ and Dakṣhinâs son
Probably imply the southerly course of both.
When a long
continuous dawn of thirty days, or a closely-gathered band of thirty dawns, is
shown to have been expressly referred to in the Vedic literature, the long
night preceding such a dawn follows as a matter of course; and where a long
night prevails, it must have a long day to match it during the year. The
remaining portion of the year, after deducting the period of the long night,
the long day and the long morning and evening twilights, would also be
characterized by a succession of ordinary days and nights, a day and night
together never exceeding twenty-four hours, though, within the limit, the day
may gradually gain over the night at one time and the night over the day at another,
producing a variety of ordinary days and nights of different lengths. All these
phenomena are so connected astronomically that if one of them is established,
the others follow as a matter of scientific inference. Therefore, if the long
duration of the Vedic dawn is once demonstrated, it is, astronomically
speaking, unnecessary to search for further evidence regarding the existence of
long days and nights in the Ṛig-Veda. But as we are dealing with
a state of things which existed several thousand years ago, and with evidence,
which, though traditionally handed down, has not yet been interpreted in the
way we have done, it is safer to treat, in practice, the aforesaid astronomical
phenomena as disconnected facts, and separately collect evidence bearing on
each, keeping the astronomical connection in reserve till we come to consider
the cumulative effect of the whole evidence in support of the several facts
mentioned above. I do not mean to imply that there is any uncertainty in the
relation of sequence between the above astronomical facts. On the contrary,
nothing can be more certain than such a sequence. But in collecting and
examining the evidence bearing on facts like those under consideration, it is
always advisable in practice to collect as much evidence and from as many
different points of view as possible. In this and the following two chapters,
we, therefore, propose to examine separately the evidence that can be found in
the Vedic literature about the long day, the long night, the number of months
of sunshine and of darkness, and the character of the year, and see if it
discloses characteristics found only at, or around, the North Pole.
And first
regarding the long night, a night of several days duration, such as makes
the northern latitudes too cold or uncomfortable for human habitation at
present, but which, in inter-glacial times, appeared to have caused no further
inconvenience than what might result from darkness, long and continuous
darkness for a number of days, though, by itself, it was not a desirable state
of things, and the end of which must have been eagerly looked for by men who
had to undergo such experience. There are many passages in the Ṛig-Veda that speak of long and
ghastly darkness, in one form or another, which sheltered the enemies of Indra,
and to destroy which Indra had to fight with the demons or the Dâsas, whose strongholds are all said to
be concealed in this darkness. Thus in I,
32, 10, Vṛitra, the traditional enemy of Indra, is said to be engulfed
in long darkness (dîrgham tamaḥ âshayad Indrashatruḥ), and in V, 32, 5, Indra is
described as having placed Shuṣhṇa who was anxious to fight, in the
darkness, of the pit (tamasi harmye),
while the next verse speaks of asűrye
tamasi (lit. sunless darkness),
which Max Müller renders by ghastly darkness. ( See S. B. E. series, Vol.
XXXII, p. 218) In spite of these passages the fight between Vṛitra and Indra is considered to be a
daily and not a yearly struggle, a theory the validity of which will be
examined when we come to the discussion of Vedic myths. For the present it is
sufficient to note that the above expressions lose all their propriety, if the
darkness, in which the various enemies of Indra are said to have flourished, be
taken to be the ordinary darkness of twelve, or, at best, of twenty-four hours
duration. It was, in reality, a long
and a ghastly or sunless, darkness,
which taxed all the powers of Indra and his associate Gods to overcome.
But apart
from this legendary struggle, there are other verses in the Ṛig-Veda which plainly indicate the
existence of a night longer than the longest cis-Arctic night. In the first
place the Vedic bards are seen frequently invoking their deities to release
them from darkness. Thus in II, 27, 14, the poet says, Aditi, Mitra and also
Varuṇa forgive if we have committed any sin against you! May I
obtain the wide fearless light, O Indra! May not the long darkness comeover
us. The expression in the original for long darkness is dîrghâḥ tamisrâḥ, and means rather an uninterrupted
succession of dark nights (tamisrâḥ) than simply long darkness. But
even adopting Max Müllers rendering given above (Hibbert Lectures, p. 231) the
anxiety here manifested for the disappearance of the long darkness is
unmeaning, if the darkness never lasted for more than twenty-four hours. In I,
46, 6, the Ashvins are asked to vouchsafe such strength to the worshipper as
may carry him through darkness; and in VII, 67 a the poet exclaims: The fire
has commenced to burn, the ends of darkness have been seen, and the banner of
the Dawn has appeared in the cast!*
The expression ends of darkness (tamasaḥ antâḥ) is very peculiar, and it would be
a violation of idiom to take this and other expressions indicating long
darkness to mean nothing more than long winter nights, as we have them in the
temperate or the tropical zone. As stated previously the longest winter night
in these zones must be, at best, a little short of twenty-four hours, and even
then these long nights prevail only for a fortnight or so. It is, therefore,
very unlikely that Vedic bards perpetuated the memory of these long nights by
making it a grievance of such importance as to require the aid of their deities
to relieve them from it. There are other passages where the same longing for
the end of darkness or for the appearance of light is expressed, and these
cannot be accounted for on the theory that to the, old Vedic bards night was as
death, since they had no means which a civilized person in the twentieth
century possesses, of dispelling the darkness of night by artificial
illumination. Even the modern savages are not reported to be in the habit of
exhibiting such impatience for the morning light as we find in the utterances
of the Vedic bards; and yet the latter were so much advanced in civilization as
to know the use of metals and carriages. Again not only men, but Gods, are said
to have lived in long darkness. Thus, in X, 124, I, Agni is told that he has
stayed too long in the long darkness, the phrase used being jyog eva dîrgham tama âshayiṣhṭâh. This
double phrase jyog (long) dîrgham is still more inappropriate, if
the duration of darkness never exceeded that
of the longest winter-night. In II, 2, 2, the same deity, Agni, is said to
shine during continuous nights, which, according to Max Müller, is the
meaning of the word kṣhapaḥ in the original.*( * See S. B. E.
Series, Vol. XLVI, p. 195.) The translation is no doubt correct, but Prof. Max Müller
does not explain to us what he means by the phrase continuous nights. Does it
signify a succession of nights uninterrupted by sun-light? or, is it only an
elegant rendering, meaning nothing more than a number of nights? The learned
translator seems to have narrowly missed the true import of the phrase employed
by him.
But we need
not depend on stray passages like the above to prove that the long night was
known in early days. In the tenth Maṇḍala of the Ṛig-Veda we have a hymn (127)
addressed to the Goddess of night and in the 6th verse of this hymn Night is invoked
to become easily fordable to the worshipper (nah sutarâ bhava). In the Parishiṣhṭa, which follows this hymn in the Ṛig-Veda and which is known as Râtri-sűkta or Durgâ-stava, the worshipper asks the Night to be favorable to him,
exclaiming May we reach the other side in safety! May we reach the: other side
in safety!( The 4th verse in the Râtri-Sűkta. The Atharva-Veda, XIX, 47, 2.
Ibid, XIX, 50, 3.) In the Atharva-Veda,
XIX, 47, which is a reproduction, with some variations, of the above Parishiṣhṭa, the second verse runs thus. Each
moving thing finds rest in her (Night), whose
yonder boundary is not seen, nor that which keeps her separate. O spacious,
darksome night! May we, uninjured, reach the end of thee, reach, O thou blessed
one, thine end! And in the third verse of the 50th hymn of the same book the
worshippers ask that they may pass uninjured in their body, through each
succeeding night, (râtrim râtrim).
Now a question is naturally raised why should every one be so anxious about
safely reaching the other end of the night? And why should the poet exclaim
that its yonder boundary is nor seen, nor what keeps it separate? Was it
because it was an ordinary winter night, or, was it because it was the long
Arctic night? Fortunately, the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ preserves for us the oldest
traditional reply to these questions and we need not, therefore, depend upon
the speculations of modern commentators. In the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ I, 5, 5, 4,* (Taitt Sam. I, 5,
5, 4; Taitt, Sam. I, 5, 7, 5)we have a similar Mantra or prayer addressed to
Night in these words: O Chitrâvasu! let me safely reach thy end.. A little
further (I, 5, 7, 5), the Saṁhitâ itself explains this Mantra, or
prayer thus: Chitrâvasu is (means) the night; in old times (purâ), the Brâhmaṇs (priests) were afraid that it
(night) would not dawn. Here we have an express Vedic statement, that in old
times, the priests or the people, felt apprehensions regarding the time when
the night would end. What does it signify? If the night was not unusually long,
where was the necessity for entertaining any misgivings about the coming dawn?
Sâyaṇa, in commenting on the above passage, has again put forward
his usual explanation, that nights in the winter were long and they made the
priest apprehensive in regard to the coming dawn. But here we can quote Sâyaṇa against himself, and show that he
has dealt with this important passage in an off hand manner. It is well-known
that the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ often explains the Mantras, and this portion of the Saṁhitâ is called Brâmaṇa, the whole of the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ being made up in this way of
Mantras and the Brâhmaṇa, or prayers and their explanations or commentary mixed up
together. The statement regarding the apprehensions of the priests about the
coming dawn, therefore, falls under the Brâhmaṇa portion of the Saṁhitâ. Now the contents of the Brâhmaṇas are usually classified by Indian
divines under the ten following heads (1) Hetu
or reason; (2) Nirvachana, or
etymological explanation; (3) Nindâ,
or censure; (4) Prashaṁsâ, or
praise; (5) Saṁshaya, or
doubt; (6) Vidhi, or the rule; (7) Parakriyâ, or others doings; (8) Purâ-kalpa, or ancient rite or
tradition; (9) Vyavadhârana-kalpanâ
or determining the limitations; (10) Upamâna,
an apt comparison or simile. Sâyaṇa in his introduction to the
commentary on the Ṛig-Veda mentions the first nine of these, and as an
illustration of the eighth, Purâ-kalpa,
quotes the explanatory passage from the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ, I, 5, 7, 5, referred to above.
According to Sâyaṇa the statement, In former times the priests were afraid
that it would not dawn, therefore, comes under Purâ-kalpa, or ancient traditional history found in the Brâmaṇas. It is no Arthavâda, that is, speculation or explanation put forth by the
Brâhmaṇa itself. This is evident from the word purâ which occurs in the Saṁhitâ text, and which shows that some
piece of ancient traditional information is here recorded. Now if this view is
correct; a question naturally arises why should ordinary long winter nights
have caused such apprehensions in the minds of the priests only in former
times, and why should the long darkness cease to inspire the same fears in the
minds of the present generation. The long winter nights in the tropical and the
temperate zone are as long to-day as they were thousands of years ago, and yet
none of us, not even the most ignorant, feels any misgiving about the dawn
which puts an end to the darkness of these long nights. It may, perhaps, be
urged that in ancient times the bards had not acquired the knowledge necessary
to predict the certain appearance of the dawn after a lapse of some hours in
such cases. But the lameness of this excuse becomes at once evident when we see
that the Vedic calendar was, at this time, so much advanced that even the
question of the equation of the solar and the lunar year was solved with
sufficient accuracy Sâyaṇas explanation of winter nights causing misgivings about
the coming dawn must, therefore, be rejected as unsatisfactory. It was not the
long winter-night that the Vedic bards were afraid of in former ages. It was
something else, something very long, so long that, though you knew it would not
last permanently, yet, by its very length, it tired your patience and made you
long for, eagerly long for, the coming dawn. In short, it was the long night of
the Arctic region, and the word purâ
shows that it was a story of former ages, which the Vedic bards knew by
tradition, I have shown elsewhere that the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ must be assigned to the Kṛittikâ period. We may, therefore,
safely conclude that at about 2500 B.C., there was a tradition current amongst
the Vedic people to the effect that in former times, or rather in the former
age, the priests grew so impatient of the length of the night, the yonder
boundary of which was not known, that they fervently prayed to their deities to
guide them safely to the other end of that tiresome darkness. This description
of the night is inappropriate unless we take it to refer to the long and
continuous Arctic night.
Let us now
see if the Ṛig-Veda contains any direct reference to the long day, the
long night, or to the Circumpolar calendar, besides the expressions about long
darkness or the difficulty of reaching the other boundary of the endless night
noticed above. We have seen before that the Rig-Vedic calendar is a calendar of
360 days, with an intercalary month, which can neither be Polar nor Circumpolar.
But side by side with it the Ṛig-Veda preserves the descriptions
of days and nights, which are not applicable to the cis-Arctic days, unless we
put an artificial construction upon the passages containing these descriptions.
Day and night is spoken of as a couple in the Vedic literature, and is denoted
by a compound word in the dual number. Thus we have Uṣhâsa-naktâ
(I, 122, 2), Dawn and Night; Naktoṣhâsâ (I,
142, 7), Night and Dawn; or simply Uṣhâsau (I,
188, 6) the two Dawns; all meaning a couple of Day and Night. The word Aho-ratre also means Day and Night; but
it does not occur in the Ṛig-Veda, though Aitareya Brâhmaṇa (II, 4) treats it as synonymous
with Uṣhâsâ-naktâ. Sometimes this pair of Day and
Night is spoken of as two sisters or twins; but whatever the form in which they
are addressed, the reference is usually unambiguous. Now one of the verses
which describes this couple of Day and Night is III, 55, 11.*
The deity of the verse is Aho-ratre, and it is admitted on all hands that it contains a
description of Day and Night. It runs thus:
Nânâ chakrâte yamyâ vapűṁṣhi
tayor anyad rochate kṛiṣhṇam anyat |
Shyâvî cha yad aruṣhî cha swasârau
mahad devânâm asuratvam
ekam ||
The first three quarters or feet of this verse
contain the principal statements, while the fourth is the refrain of the song
or the hymn. Literally translated it means: The twin pair (females) make many
forms; of the two one shines, the other (is) dark; two sisters (are) they, the
dark (shyâvî), and the bright (aruṣhi). The great divinity of the Gods is one (unique). The verse looks simple
enough at the first sight, and simple it is, so far as the words are concerned.
But it has been misunderstood in two important points. We shall take the first
half of the verse first. It says the twin pair make many forms; of the two one
shines and the other is dark. The twin pair are Day and Night, and one of them
is bright and the other dark. So far, therefore, there is no difficulty. But
the phrase make many forms does not seem to have been properly examined or
interpreted. The words used in the original verse are nânâ chakrâte vapűṁṣhi, and they
literally mean make many bodies or forms. We have thus a two-fold description
of the couple; it is called the shining and the dark and also described as
possessed of many forms. In I, 123, 7, the couple of Day and Night is said to
be viṣhurűpe; while in other places the
adjective: virűpe is used in the same
sense. It is evident, therefore, that the bodies or forms intended to be
denoted by these words must be different from the two-fold character of the
couple as shining and dark and if so, the phrases viṣhurűpe virűpe
or nânâ vapűṁṣhi used in
connection with the couple of Day and Night must be taken to mean something
different from bright and dark, if these expressions are not to be considered
as superfluous or tautological. Sâyaṇa interprets these phrases as
referring to different colors (rűpa),
like black, white, &c., and some
of the Western scholars seem to have adopted this interpretation. But I cannot
see the propriety of assigning different colors to Day and Night. Are we to
suppose that we may have sometimes green- violet, yellow or blue days and
nights? Again though the word rűpa
lends itself to this construction, yet vapűṁṣhi cannot
ordinarily be so understood. The question does not, however, seem to have
attracted the serious attention of the commentators; so that even
But though
the first half may be thus interpreted, another difficulty arises, as soon as
we take up the third quarter of the verse. It says, Two sisters are they, the
dark (shyâvî) and the bright (arűṣhî). Now the question is whether the two sisters (svasârau) here mentioned are the same
as,, or different from, the twin pair (yamyâ)
mentioned in the first half of the verse. If we take them as identical, the
third pâda or quarter of the verse
becomes at once superfluous. If we take them as different, we must explain how
and where the two pairs differ. The commentators have not been able to solve
the difficulty, and they have, therefore, adopted the course of regarding the
twins (yamyâ) and the sisters (svasârau) as identical, even at the risk
of tautology. It will surely be admitted that this is not a satisfactory
course, and that we ought to find a better explanation, if we can. This is not
again the only place where two distinct couples of Day and Night are mentioned.
There is another word in the Ṛig-Veda which denotes a pair of Day
and Night. It is Ahanî, which does
not mean two days but Day and Night, for, in VI, 9, 1, we are expressly told
that there is a dark ahaḥ (day) and a bright ahaḥ
(day). Ahanî, therefore, means a
couple of Day and Night, and we have seen that Usḥâsâ-naktâ
also means a couple of Day and Night. Are the two couples same or different? If
Ahanî be regarded as synonymous with Uṣhâsâ-naktâ or Aho-râtre, then the two couples would be identical; otherwise
different. Fortunately, Ṛig. IV, 55, 3, furnishes us with the means of solving this
difficulty. There Usḥâsâ-naktâ
and Ahanî are separately invoked to
grant protection to the worshipper and the separate invocation clearly proves
that the two couples are two separate dual deities, though each of them
represents a couple of Day and Night.*
, 
Prof. Max Müller has noticed this
difference between Usḥâsâ-naktâ
and Ahanî or the two Ahans but he does not seem to have
pushed it to its logical conclusion. If all the 360 days and nights of the year
were of the same class as with us, there was no necessity of dividing them into
two representative couples as Usḥâsâ-naktâ
and Ahanî. The general description
dark, bright and of various lengths, would have been quite sufficient to
denote all the days and nights of the year. Therefore, if the distinction
between Usḥâsâ-naktâ and Ahanî, made in IV, 55, 3, is not to be ignored, we must find out an
explanation of this distinction; and looking to the character of days and
nights at different places on the surface of the earth from the Pole to the
Equator the only possible explanation that can be suggested is that the year
spoken of in these passages was a circum-Polar year, made up of one long day
and one long night, forming one pair, and a number of ordinary days and nights
of various lengths, which, taking a single day and night as the type can be
described as the second couple, bright, dark and. of varying lengths. There
is no other place on the surface of the earth where the description holds good.
At the Equator, we have only equal days and nights throughout the year and they
can be represented by a single couple dark and bright, but always of the same
length. In fact, instead of virűpe
the pair would be sarűpe. Between the
Equator and the Arctic Circle, a day and night together never exceed
twenty-four hours, though there may be a day of 23 hours and a night of one
hour and vice versa, as we approach
the Arctic Circle. In this case, the days of the year will have to be
represented by a typical couple, dark and night, but of various lengths, virűpe. But as soon as we cross the
Arctic Circle and go into The Land of the Long Night, the above description
requires to be amended by adding to the first couple, another couple of the
long day and the long night, the lengths of which would vary according to
latitude. This second couple of the long day and the long night, which match
each other, will have also to be designated as virűpe, with this difference, however, that while the length of days
and nights in the temperate zone would vary at the same place, the length of
the long night and the long day would not vary at one and the same place but
only at different latitudes. Taking a couple of Day and Night, as representing
the days and nights of the year, we shall have, therefore, to divide the
different kinds of diurnal changes over the globe into three classes:
(i) At the
Equator, A single couple; dark and
bright but always of the same form,
or length (sarűpe).
(ii)
Between the Equator and the
(iii)
Between the
At the
Pole, there is only one day and one night of six months each. Now if we have an
express passage in the Ṛig-Veda (IV, 55, 3) indicating two different couples of Day
and. Night Ushâsâ-naktâ and Ahanî, it is evident that the ahorâtre represented by them are the
days and nights of the Circum-Polar regions, and of those alone. In the light
of IV, 55, 3, we must, therefore, interpret III, 55, 11, quoted above, as
describing two couples, one of the twin pair and the other of two sisters. The
verse must, therefore, be translated:
The twin pair (the first couple) make many forms (lengths);
of the two one shines and the other is dark. Two sisters are they the shyâvî or the, dark and aruṣhî or the bright (the second couple). No part of the
verse is thus rendered superfluous, and the whole becomes far more
comprehensible than otherwise.
We have
seen that days and nights are represented by two distinct typical couples in
the Ṛig-Veda Uṣhasâ-naktâ
and Ahanî; and that if the
distinction is not unmeaning we must take this to be the description of the
days and nights within the
Lastly, we
have express passage in the Ṛig-Veda where a long day is
described. In V, 54, 5, an extended daily course (dirgham yojanam) of the sun is mentioned and the Maruts are said to
have extended their strength and greatness in a similar way.
But the most explicit statement about the long day is found
in X, 138, 3. This hymn celebrates the exploits of Indra, all of which are
performed in aerial or heavenly regions. In the first verse the killing of Vṛitra and the releasing of the dawns
and the waters are mentioned; and in the second the sun is said to have been
made to shine by the same process. The third verse* is as follows:
Vi
sűryo madhye amuchad ratham divo
vidad dâsâya pratimânam
âryaḥ |
Dṛiḍhâni Pipror asurasya mâyinaḥ
Indro vyâsyach chakṛivâṁ Ṛijishvanâ ||
The fourth,
fifth and the sixth verses all refer to the destruction of Vṛitras forts, the chastisement of Uṣhas and placing of the moons in the
heaven. But the third verse quoted above is alone important for our purpose.
The words are simple and easy and the verse may be thus translated The sun
unyoked his car in the midst of heaven; the Ârya found a counter-measure (pratimânam) for the Dâsa. Indra, acting
with Ṛijishvan, overthrew the solid forts of Pipru, the conjuring
Asura. It is the first half of the verse that is relevant to our purpose. The
sun is said to have unyoked his car, not at sunset, or on the horizon, but in
the midst of heaven, there to rest for some time. There is no uncertainty about
it, for the words are so clear; and the commentators have found it difficult to
explain this extraordinary conduct of the sun in the midway of the heavens. Mr.
Griffith says that it is, perhaps an allusion to an eclipse, or to the
detention of the sun to enable the Aryans to complete the overthrow of their
enemies. Both of these suggestions are, however, not satisfactory. During a
solar eclipse the sun being temporarily hidden by the moon is invisible wholly
or partially and is not besides stationary. The description that the sun
unyoked his car in the mid-heaven cannot, therefore, apply to the eclipsed sun.
As regards the other suggestion, viz.,
that the sun remained stationary for a while to allow his favorite race, the
Aryans, to overthrow their enemies, it seems to have had its origin in the
Biblical passage (Joshua, X, 12, 13), where the sun is said to have stood
still, at the word of Joshua, until the people had avenged themselves upon
their enemies. But there is no authority for importing this Biblical idea into
the Ṛig-Veda. Indras exploits are described in a number of hymns
in the Ṛig-Veda, but in no other hymn he is said to have made the
sun stand still for the Aryans. We must, therefore, reject both the
explanations suggested by
We thus-see
that the Ṛig-Veda speaks of two different couples of Day and Night,
one alone of which represents the ordinary days and nights in the year and the
second, the Ahanî, is a distinct
couple by itself, forming, according to the Taittirîya Âraṇyaka, the right and the left hand
side of the Year, indicating the long Arctic day and night. The Taittirîya Saṁhitâ again gives us in clear terms a
tradition that in the former age the night was so long that men were afraid it
would not dawn. We have also a number of expressions in the Ṛig-Veda denoting long nights or
long and ghastly darkness and also the long journey of the sun. Prayers are
also offered to Vedic deities to enable the worshipper to reach safely the end
of the night, the other boundary of which is not known. Finally we have an
express text declaring that the sun halted in the midst of the sky and thereby
retaliated the mischief brought on by Dâsas causing the long night. Thus we
have not only the long day and the long night mentioned in the Ṛig-Veda, but the idea that the two
match, each other is also found therein, while the Taittirîya Âraṇyaka tells us that they form the
opposite sides of Year-God. Besides the passages proving the long duration of
the dawn, we have, therefore, sufficient independent evidence to hold that the
long night in the Arctic regions and its counterpart the long day were both
known to the poets of the Ṛig-Veda and the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ distinctly informs us that it
was a phenomenon of the former (purâ)
age.
I shall
close this chapter with a short discussion of another Circum-Polar
characteristic, I mean the southern course of the sun. It is previously stated,
that the sun can never appear overhead at any station in the temperate or the
frigid zone and that an observer stationed within these zones in the northern
hemisphere will see the sun to his right hand or towards the south, while at
the North Pole the sun will seem to rise from the south. Now the word dakṣhiṇâ in Vedic Sanskrit denotes both the right hand and
the south as it does in other Aryan languages; for, as observed by Prof.
Sayce, these people had to face the rising sun with their right hands to the
south, in addressing their gods and hence Sanskrit dakṣhiṇâ, Welsh dehau and Old Irish des all mean at once right hand and south.* (See Sayces
Introduction to the Science of Language, Vol. II, p. 130.)With this explanation
before us, we can now understand how in a number of passages in the Ṛig-Veda Western scholars translate dakṣhiṇâ by right side, where Indian scholars take the word
to mean the southern direction. There is a third meaning of dakṣhiṇa, viz.,
largess or guerdon, and in some places the claims of rich largesses seem to
have been pushed too far. Thus when the suns are said to be only for dakṣhiṇâvats in I, 125, 6, it looks very
probable that originally the expression had some reference to the southern
direction rather than to the gifts given at sacrifices. In III, 58, I, Sűrya is
called the son of Dakṣhiṇâ and even
if Dakṣhiṇâ be here taken to mean the Dawn, yet the question why
the Dawn was called Dakṣhiṇâ remains,
and the only explanation at present suggested is that Dakṣhiṇâ means
skilful or expert. A better way to explain these phrases is to make them
refer to the southerly direction; and after what has been said above such an
explanation will seem to be highly probable. It is, of course, necessary to be
critical in the interpretation of the Vedic hymns, but I think that we shall be
carrying our critical spirit too far, if we say that in no passage in the Ṛig-Veda dakṣhiṇâ or its
derivatives are used to denote the southerly direction (I, 95, 6; II, 42, 3).
Herodotus informs us (IV, 42) that certain Phoenician mariners were commanded
by Pharaoh Neco, king of
CHAPTER VII
MONTHS AND SEASONS
Evidence of rejected calendar generally preserved in
sacrificial rites by conservative priests Varying number of the months of
sunshine in the Arctic region Its effect on sacrificial sessions considered
Sevenfold character of the sun in the Vedas The legend of Aditi She
presents her seven sons to the gods and casts away the eighth Various
explanations of the legend in Brâhmaṇas and the Taittirîya Âraṇyaka Twelve suns understood to be
the twelve month-gods in later literature By analogy seven suns must have
once indicated seven months of sunshine Different suns were believed to be
necessary to produce different seasons Aditis legend belongs to the former
age, or pűrvyam-yugam Evidence from
sacrificial literature The families of sacrificers in primeval times Called
our ancient fathers in the Ṛig-Veda Atharvan and Aṅgiras traced to Indo-European period
Navagvas and Dashagvas, the principal species of the Aṅgirases Helped Indra in his fight
with Vala They finished their sacrificial session in ten months The sun
dwelling in darkness Ten months sacrifices indicate the only ten months of
sunshine, followed by the long night Etymology of Navagvas and Dashagvas
According to Sâyaṇa the words denote persons sacrificing for nine or ten
months Prof. Lignanas explanation improbable The adjectives Virűpas applied to the Aṅgirases Indicates other varieties
of these sacrificers Saptagu, or seven Hotṛis or Vipras Legend of Dîrghatamas
As narrated in the Mahâbhârata A protégé of Ashvins in the Ṛig-Veda Growing old in the tenth yuga Meaning of yuga discussed Mânuṣhâ yugâ
means human ages, and not always human tribes in the Ṛig-Veda Two passages in proof
thereof Interpretations of Western scholars examined and rejected Mânuṣhâ yuga denoted months after the long dawn
and before the long night Dîrghatamas represents the sun setting in the tenth
month Mânuṣhâ yuga and
continuous nights The five seasons
in ancient times A Ṛig-Veda passage bearing on it discussed The year of five
seasons described as residing in waters Indicates darkness of the long night
Not made up by combining any two consecutive seasons out of six The
explanation in the Brâhmaṇas improbable Summary.
Starting
with the tradition about the half yearly night of the Gods found everywhere in
Sanskrit literature, and also in the Avesta, we have found direct references in
Ṛig-Veda
to a long continuous dawn of thirty days, the long day and the long night, when
the sun remained above the horizon or went below it for a number of 24 hours;
and we have also seen that the Ṛig-Vedic texts describe these things
as events of a bye-gone age. The next question, therefore, is Do we meet in
the Vedas with similar traces of the Arctic condition of seasons months or
years? It is stated previously that the calendar current at the time of the
Vedic Saṁhitâs was different from the Arctic calendar. But if the
ancestors of the Vedic people ever lived near the North Pole, we may, as
observed by Sir Norman Lockyer with reference to the older Egyptian calendar,
always reckon upon the conservatism of the priests of the temples retaining
the tradition of the old rejected year in every case. Sir Norman Lockyer first
points out how the ancient Egyptian year of 360 days was afterwards replaced by
a year of 365 days; and then gives two instances of the traditional practice by
which the memory of the old year was preserved. Thus even at Philć in later
times, says he in the
In the Saṁhitâs and Brâhmaṇas, the annual sattras, or yearly sacrificial sessions, are said to extend over
twelve months. But this was impossible within the Arctic region where the sun
goes below the horizon for a number of days or months during the year, thereby
producing the long night. The oldest duration of the annual sattras, if such sattras were ever performed within the
A dawn of
thirty days, as we measure days, implies a position so near the North Pole,
that the period of sunshine at the place could not have been longer than about
seven months, comprising, of course, a long day of four or five months, and a
succession of regular days and nights during the remaining period; and we find
that the Ṛig-Veda does preserve for us the memory of such months of
sunshine. We refer first to the legend of Aditi, or the seven Âdityas (suns),
which is obviously based on some natural phenomenon. This legend expressly
tells us that the oldest number of Âdityas or suns was seven, and the same idea
is independently found in many other places in the Ṛig-Veda. Thus in IX, 114, 3, seven
Âdityas and seven priests are
mentioned together, though the
names of the different suns are not given therein. In II, 27
1, Mitra, Aryaman, Bhaga, Varuṇa, Dakṣha and Aṁsha are mentioned by name as so many
different Âdityas but the seventh is not named. This omission does not, however,
mean much, as the septenary character of the sun is quite patent from the fact
that he is called saptâshva
(seven-horsed, in V, 45, 9, and his seven-wheeled chariot is said to be drawn
by seven bay steeds (I, 50, 8 ), or by a single horse with seven names in
I, 164, 2. The Atharva Veda also speaks of the seven bright rays of the sun
(VII, 107, 1); and the epithet Âditya,
as applied to the sun in the Ṛig-Veda, is rendered more clearly by
Aditeḥ putrah (Aditis son) in A.V. XIII, 2, 9.
Sâyaṇa, following Yâska, derives this sevenfold character of the
sun from his seven rays, but why solar rays were taken to be seven still remain
unexplained, unless we hold that the Vedic bards had anticipated the discovery
of seven prismatic rays or colors, which were unknown even to Yâska or Sâyaṇa. Again though the existence of
seven suns may be explained on this hypothesis, yet it fails to account for the
death of the eighth sun, for the legend of Aditi (Ṛig. X, 72, 8-9) tells us, Of the
eight sons of Aditi, who were born from her body, she approached the gods with
seven and cast out Mârtâṇḍa. With seven sons Aditi approached (the gods) in the former
age (pűrvyam yugam); she brought
thither Mârtâṇḍa again for birth and death.*
The story is discussed in various places in the Vedic
literature and many other attempts, unfortunately all unsatisfactory, have been
made to explain it in a rational and intelligent way. Thus in the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ, VI, 5, 61 . the story of
Aditi cooking a Brahmaudana oblation
for the gods, the Sâdhyas, is narrated. The remnant of the oblation was given
to her by the gods, and four Âdityas were born to her from it. She then cooked
a second oblation and ate it herself first; but the Âditya born from it was an
imperfect egg. She cooked a third time and the Âditya Vivasvat, the progenitor
of man, was born. But the Saṁhitâ does not give the number and
names of the eight Âdityas and this omission is supplied, by the Taittirîya
Brâhmaṇa (I, 1, 9, 1). The Brâhmaṇa tells us that Aditi cooked the
oblation four times and each time the gods gave her the remnant of the
oblation. Four pairs of sons were thus born to her; the first pair was Dhâtṛi and Aryaman, the second Mitra and
Varuṇa, the third Aṁsha and Bhag and the fourth Indra
and Vivasvat. But the Brâhmaṇa does not explain why the eighth
son was called Mârtâṇḍa and cast away. The Taittirîya Araṇyaka, I, 13, 2-3, (cited by Sâyaṇa in his gloss on Ṛig. II, 27, 1, and X, 72, 8) first
quotes the two verses from the Ṛig-Veda (X, 72, 8 and 9 which give
the legend of Aditi but with a slightly different reading for the second line
of the second verse. Thus instead, of tvat
punaḥ Mârtâṇḍam â abharat
(she brought again Mârtâṇḍa thither for birth and death), the
Araṇyaka
reads tat parâ Mârtâṇḍam â abharat
(she set aside Mârtâṇḍa for birth and death). The Araṇyaka then proceeds to give the names
of the eight sons, as Mitra, Varuṇa, Dhâtṛi, Aryaman, Aṁsha, Bhaga, Indra and Vivasvat. But
no further explanation is added, nor are we told which of these eight sons
represented Mârtâṇḍa. There is, however, another passage in the Âraṇaka (I, 7, 1-6) which throws some
light on the nature of these Âdityas.* (See Taittirîya Araṇyaka, I, 7. ) The names of the suns
here given are different. They are: Aroga, Bhrâja, Patara, Patanga, Svarṇara, Jyotiṣhîmat, Vibhâsa and Kashyapa; the
last of which is said to remain, constantly at the great
We have
here referred to, or quoted, the texts and passages bearing on Aditis legend.
or the number of Âdityas at some length, in order to show how we are apt to run
into wild speculations about the meaning of a simple legend when the key to it
is lost: That the twelve Âdityas are understood to represent the twelve
month-gods in later Vedic literature is evident from the passage in the
Shatapatha Brâhmaṇa (XI, 6, 3, 8 = Bṛih. Ârṇ. Up. III, 9, 5) which says, There
are twelve months of the year; these are the Âdityas. With this explanation
before us, and the belief that different seasonal changes could be explained
only by assuming the existence of different suns, it required no very great
stretch of imagination to infer that if twelve Âdityas now represent the twelve
months of the year, the seven Âdityas must have once (pűrvyam yugam) represented the seven months of the year. But this
explanation, reasonable though it was, did not commend itself, or we might even
say, occur to Vedic scholars, who believed that the home of the Aryans lay
somewhere in Central Asia. It is, therefore, satisfactory to find that the idea
of different suns producing different months is recognized so expressly in the
Taittirîya Araṇyaka, which quotes a Vedic text, not now available, in
support thereof and finally pronounces in favor of the theory, which regards
the seven suns as presiding over seven different heavenly regions and thereby
producing different seasons, in spite of the objection that it would lead to
the assumption of thousands of suns an objection, which the Araṇyaka disposes of summarily by
observing that eight is a settled number and that we have no right to change
it. That this explanation is the most probable of all is further evident from Ṛig. IX, 114, 3, which says There
are seven sky-regions (sapta dishaḥ), with their different suns (nânâ sűryâḥ),
there are seven Hotṛis as priests, those who are the seven gods, the Âdityas,
with them. O Soma! protect us. Here nânâ
sűryâḥ is an adjective which qualifies dishaḥ (sapta), and the correlation between
seven regions and seven suns is thus expressly recognized. Therefore, the
simplest explanation of Aditis legend is that she presented to the gods, that
is, brought forth into heavens, her seven sons, the Âdityas, to form the seven
months of sunshine in the place. She had an eighth son, but he was born in an
undeveloped state, or, was, what we may call, stillborn; evidently meaning that
the eighth month was not a month of sunshine, or that the period of darkness at
the place commenced with the eighth month. All this occurred not in this age,
but in the previous age and the words pűrvyam
yugam in X, 72, 9, are very important from this point of view. The word yuga is evidently used to denote a
period of time in the first and second verses of the hymn, which refer to the
former age of the gods (devânâm pűrvye
yuge) and also of later age (uttare
yuge). Western scholars are accustomed to interpret yuga to mean a generation of men almost in every place where the
phrase is met with; and we shall have to consider the correctness of this
interpretation later on. For the purpose of this legend it is enough to state
that the phrase pűrvyam yugam occurs
twice in the hymn and that where it first occurs (in verse 2), it clearly denotes
an early age or some division of time. Naturally enough we must, therefore,
interpret it in the same way where it occurs again in the same hymn, viz. in the verse describing the legend
of Aditis seven sons. The sun having seven rays, or seven horses, also implies
the same idea differently expressed. The seven months of sunshine, with their
different temperatures, are represented by seven suns producing these different
results by being differently located, or as having different kinds of rays, or
as having different chariots, or horses, or different wheels to the same
chariot. It is one and the same idea in different forms, or as the Ṛig-Veda puts it, one horse with
seven names (I, 164, 2). A long dawn of thirty days indicates a period of
sunshine for seven months, and we now see that the legend of Aditi is
intelligible only if we interpret it as a relic of a time when there were seven
flourishing month-gods, and the eighth was either still-born, or cast away. Mârtâṇḍa is etymologically derived from mârta meaning dead or undeveloped, (being connected with mṛita, the past participle of mṛi to die) and âṇḍa, an egg or
a bird; and it denotes a dead sun, or a sun that has sunk below the horizon,
for in Ṛig. X, 55, 5, we find the word mamâra (died) used to denote the setting of the daily sun. The sun
is also represented as a bird in many places in the Ṛig-Veda (V, 47, 3; X, 55, 6; X, 177,
1; X, 189, 3). A cast away bird (Mârtâṇḍa) is,
therefore, the sun that has set or sunk below the horizon, and whole legend is
obviously a reminiscence of the place where the sun shone above the horizon for
seven months and went below it in the beginning of the eighth. If this nature
of the sun-god is once impressed on the memory, it cannot be easily forgotten
by any people simply by their being obliged to change their residence; and thus
the sevenfold character of the sun-god must have been handed down as an old
tradition, though the Vedic people lived later on in places presided over by
the twelve Âdityas. That is how ancient traditions are preserved everywhere,
as, for instance, those relating to the older year in the Egyptian literature,
previously referred to.
We have
seen above that the peculiar characteristic of the Arctic region is the varying number of the months of sunshine
in that place. It is not, therefore, enough to say that traces of a period of
seven months sunshine are alone found in the Ṛig-Veda. If our theory is correct,
we ought to find references to periods of eight, nine or ten months sunshine
along with that of seven months either in the shape of traditions, or in some
other form; and fortunately there are such references in the Ṛig-Veda, only if we know where to
look for them. We have seen that the suns chariot is said to be drawn by seven
horses, and that this seven-fold character of the sun has reference to the
seven suns conceived as seven different month-gods. There are many other
legends based on this seven-fold division, but as they do not refer to the
subject under discussion, we must reserve their consideration for another
occasion. The only fact necessary to be mentioned in this place is that the
number of the suns horses is said to be not only seven (I, 50, 8), but also ten in IX, 63, 9; and if the first be
taken to represent seven months, the other must be understood to stand for ten
months as well. We need not, however, depend upon such extension of the legend
of seven Âdityas to prove that the existence of nine or ten months of sunshine
was known to the poets of the Ṛig-Veda. The evidence, which I am
now going to cite, comes from another source, I mean, the sacrificial
literature, which is quite independent of the legend of the seven Âdityas. The Ṛig-Veda mentions a number of ancient
sacrificers styled our fathers (II, 33, 13; VI, 22, 2), who instituted the
sacrifice in ancient times and laid down, for the guidance of man, the path
which he should, in future, follow. Thus the sacrifice offered by Manu, is
taken as the type and other sacrifices are compared with it in I, 76, 5. But
Manu was not alone to offer this ancient sacrifice to the gods. In X, 63, 7, he
is said to have made the first offerings to the gods along with the seven Hotṛis; while Aṅgiras and Yayâti are mentioned with
him as ancient sacrificers in I, 31, 17, Bhṛigu and Aṅgiras in VIII, 43, 13, Atharvan and
Dadhyańch in I, 80, 16 and Dadhyańch, Aṅgiras, Atri and Kaṇva in I, 139, 9. Atharvan by his
sacrifices is elsewhere described, as having first extended the paths,
whereupon the sun was born (I, 83, 5), and the Atharvans, in the plural, are
styled our fathers (naḥ pitaraḥ) along with Aṅgirases, Navagvas and Bhṛgus in X, 14, 6. In II, 34, 12,
Dashagvas are said to have been the first to offer a sacrifice; while in X, 92,
10 Atharvan is spoken of, as having established order by sacrifices, when the
Bhṛigus
showed themselves as gods by their skill. Philologically the name of Atharvan
appears as Athravan, meaning a fire-priest, in the Avesta, and the word Aṅgiras is said to be etymologically
connected with the Greek Aggilos, a
messenger and the Persian
Now so far
as my researches go, I have not been able to find any Vedic evidence regarding
the duration of the sacrifices performed by Manu, Atharvan, Bhṛigu, or any other ancient
sacrificers, except he Aṅgirases. There is an annual sattra described in the Shrauta Sűtras, which is called the Aṅgirasâm-ayanam, and is said to be a modification
of the Gavâm ayanam, the type of all
yearly sattras. But we do not find
therein any mention of the duration of the sattra
of the Aṅgirases. The duration of the Gavâm ayanam is, however, given in the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ, and will be discussed in the
next chapter. For the present, we confine ourselves to sattra of the Aṅgirases, and have to see if we can find out other means for
determining its duration. Such a means is, fortunately, furnished by the Ṛig-Veda itself. There are two chief species of the Aṅgirases (Aṅgiras-tama),
called the Navagvas and the Dashagvas, mentioned in the Ṛig-Veda (X, 62, 5 and 6). These two
classes of ancient sacrificers are generally mentioned together, and the facts
attributed to the Aṅgirases are also attributed to them. Thus, the Navagvas are
spoken of as our ancient fathers, in VI. 22, 2, and as our fathers along
with Aṅgirases and Bhṛigu in X, 14, 6. Like the Aṅgirases, the Navagvas are also
connected with the myth of Indra overthrowing Vala, and of Sarmâ and Paṇis (I, 62, 3 and 4; V, 29, 12; V,
45, 7; X, 108, 8). In one of these Indra if described as having taken their
assistance when he rent the rock and Vala (I, 62, 4); and in V, 29, 12, the
Navagvas are said to have praised Indra with songs and broken open the firmly
closed stall of the cows. But there are only two verses in which the duration
of their sacrificial session is mentioned. Thus V, 45, 7 says, Here, urged by
hands, hath loudly rung the press-stone, with which the Navagvas sang
(sacrificed) for ten months; and in
the eleventh verse of the same hymn the poet says, I place upon (offer to) the
waters your light-winning prayers wherewith the Navagvas completed their ten months.* In II, 34, 12, we again read, They, the
Dashagvas brought out (offered) sacrifice first of all. May they favor us at
the flashing forth of the dawn: while in IV, 51, 4, the Dawns are said to
have dawned richly on the Navagva Aṅgira, and on the seven-mouthed
Dashagva, evidently showing that their sacrifice was connected with the break
of the Dawn and lasted only for ten
months.
What the Navagvas or the Dashagvas accomplished by means of
their sacrifices is further described in V, 29, 12, which says, The Navagvas
and the Dashagvas, who, had offered libations of Soma, praised Indra with
songs; laboring (at it) the men laid open the stall of kine though firmly
closed; while in III, 39, 5, we read Where the friend (Indra), with the
friendly energetic Navagvas, followed up the cows on his knees, there verily
with ten Dashagvas did Indra find the sun dwelling in darkness (tamasi kṣhiyantam).*
In X, 62, 2 and 3,
the Aṅgirases, of whom the Dashagvas and Navagvas were the
principle species (Aṅgiras-tama, X, 62, 6), are however, said to
have themselves performed the feat of vanquishing Vala, rescuing the cows and
bringing out the sun, at the end of the year (pari vatsare Valam abhindan); but it obviously means that they
helped Indra in achieving it at the end of the year. Combining all these
statements we can easily deduce (1) that the Navagvas and the Dashavgas
completed their sacrifices in ten months,
(2) that these sacrifices were connected with the early flush of the Dawn; (3)
that the sacrificers helped Indra in the rescue of the cows from Vala at the end of the year; and (4) that at the
place where Indra wept in search for the cows, he discovered the sun dwelling
in darkness.
Now we must
examine a little more closely the meaning of these four important statements
regarding the Navagvas and the Dashagvas. The first question that arises in
this connection is What is meant by their sacrifices being completed in ten
months, and why did they not continue sacrificing for the whole year of twelve
months? The expression for ten months in the original is dasha mâsâḥ, and the wards are so plain that
there can be no doubt about their import. We have seen that the Navagvas used
to help Indra in releasing the cows from the grasp of Vala, and in X, 62, 2 and
3, the Aṅgirases are said to have defeated Vala at the end of the year, and raised the sun to heaven. This exploit
of Indra, the Aṅgirases, the Navagvas and the Dashagvas, therefore, clearly
refers to the yearly rescue of the
sun, or the cows of the morning, from the dark prison into which they are
thrown by Vala; and the expression Indra found the sun, dwelling in darkness,
mentioned above further supports this view. In I, 117, 5, the Ashvins are said
to have rescued Vandana, like some bright buried gold, like one asleep in the
lap of Nir-ṛiti (death), like the sun dwelling in darkness (tamasi kṣhiyantam). This shows that the expression
dwelling in darkness, as applied to the sun, means that the sun was hidden or
concealed below the horizon so as not to be seen by man. We must, therefore,
hold that Indra killed or defeated Vala at the end of the year, in a place of
darkness, and that the Dashagvas helped Indra by their songs at the time. This
might lead any one to suppose that the Soma libations offered by the Navagvas
and the Dashagvas for ten months, were offered during the time when war with
Vala was waging. But the Vedic idea is entirely different. For instance the
morning prayers are recited before the rise of the sun, and so the sacrifices
to help Indra against Vala had to be performed before the war. Darkness or a dark period, of ten months is again
astronomically impossible anywhere on the globe, and as there cannot be ten
months of darkness the only other alternative admissible is that the Dashagvas
and the Navagvas carried on their ten months sacrifice during the period of
sunshine. Now if this period of sunshine had extended to twelve months, there
was no reason for the Dashagvas to curtail their sacrifices and complete them
in ten months. Consequently the only inference we can draw from the story of the
Navagvas and the Dashagvas is that they carried on their sacrifices during ten
months of sunshine and after that period the sun went to dwell in darkness or
sank below the horizon, and Indra, invigorated by the Soma libations of the
Dashagvas, then entered into the cave of Vala, rent it open, released the cows
of the morning and brought out the sun at the end of the old and the beginning
of the new year, when the Dashagvas again commenced their sacrifices after the
long dawn or dawns. In short, the Dashagvas and the Navagvas, and with them all
the ancient sacrificers of the race, live in a region where the sun was above
the horizon for ten months, and then went down producing a long yearly night of
two months duration. These ten months, therefore, formed the annual sacrificial session, or the
calendar year, of the oldest sacrificers of the Aryan race and we shall see in
the next chapter that independently of the legend of the Dashagvas this view is
fully supported by direct references to such a session in the Vedic sacrificial
literature.
The
etymology of the words Navagva and Dashagva leads us to the same conclusion.
The words are formed by prefixing nava
and dasha to gva. So far there is no difference of opinion. But Yâska (XI, 19)
takes nava in navagva to mean either new or charming, interpreting the word
to mean those who have charming or new career (gva, from gam to go).
This explanation of Yâska is, however, unsatisfactory, inasmuch as the Navagvas
and the Dashagvas are usually mentioned together in the Ṛig-Veda, and this close and frequent
association of their names makes it necessary for us to find out such an
etymological explanation of the words as would make Navagva bear the same
relation to nava as Dashagva may have
to dasha. But dasha or rather dashan,
is a numeral signifying ten and cannot be taken in any other sense therefore,
as observed by Prof. Lignana,* nava
or rather navan must be taken to mean
nine. (* See his Essay on The Navagvas and the Dashagvas of the Ṛig-Veda in the Proceedings of the
7th International Congress of Orientalists, 1886, pp. 59-68. The essay is in
Italian and I am indebted to the kindness of Mr. Shrinivâs Iyengar B.A., B.L.,
High Court Pleader,
The meaning of gva
(gu+a) is, however, yet to be ascertained. Some derive it from go, a cow, and others from gam, to go. In the first case the
meaning would be of nine cows or of ten cows; while in the second case the
words would signify going in nine or going in ten, and the fact that the
Dashagvas, are said to be ten in III, 39, 5, lends support to the latter view.
But the use of the words Navagva and Dashagva, sometimes even in the singular
number as an adjective qualifying a singular noun, shows that a group or a company
of nine or ten men, is not, at any rate, always intended. Thus in VI, 6, 3, the
rays of Agni are said to be navagvas,
while Adhrigu is said to be dashagva
in VIII, 12, 2, and Dadhyańch navagva
in IX, 108, 4. We must, therefore, assign to these epithets some other meaning,
and the only other possible explanation of the numerals nine and ten is
that given by Sâyaṇa, who says (Comm. on Ṛig. I, 62, 4), The Aṅgirases are of two kinds, the
Navagvas or those who rose after completing sattra
in nine months, and the Dashagvas or those who rose after finishing the sattra in ten months.We have seen that
in the Ṛig-Veda V, 45, 7 and 11, the Navagvas are said to have
completed their sacrifices in ten months. Sâyaṇas explanation is therefore, fully
warranted by these texts, and very probably it is based on some traditional
information about the Dashagvas. Prof. Lignana of Rome,*( * See his Essay in
the Proceedings of the 7th international Congress of the Orientalists, pp.
59-68.) suggests that the numerals navan
and dashan in these names should be
taken as referring to the period of gestation, as the words nava-mâhya and dasha-mâhya occur in the Vendidad, V, 45, (136), in the same sense.
Thus interpreted Navagva would mean born of nine months, and Dashagva born
of ten months. But this explanation is highly improbable, inasmuch as we
cannot first suppose that a number of persons were born prematurely in early
times, and secondly that it was specially such persons that attained almost
divine honors. The usual period of gestation is 280 days or ten lunar months
(V, 78, 9), and those that were born a month earlier cannot be ordinarily
expected to live long or to perform feats which would secure them divine
honors. The reference to the Vendidad proves nothing, for there the case of a
still-born child after a gestation of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 or 10 months is
under consideration, and Ahura Mazda enjoins that the house where such as a
still-born child is brought forth should be cleaned and sanctified in a special
way. Prof. Lignanas explanation again conflicts with the Vedic texts which say
that the Dashagvas were ten in number (III, 39, 5), or that the Navagvas
sacrificed only for ten months (V, 47, 5) Sâyaṇas explanation is, therefore, the
only one entitled to our acceptance. I may here mention that the Ṛig-Veda (V, 47, 7 and 11) speaks of
ten months sacrifice only in connection with the Navagvas, and does not
mention any sacrifice of nine months.
But the etymology of the names now helps us in assigning the ten months
sacrifice to the Dashagvas and the nine months to the Navagvas. For navan in Navagva is only a numerical
variation for dashan in Dashagva, and
it follows, therefore, that what the Dashagvas did by tens, the Navagvas did by
nines.
There is
another circumstance connected with the Aṅgirases which further strengthens
our conclusion, and which must, therefore, be stated in this place. The Aṅgirases are sometimes styled the Virűpas. Thus in III, 53, 7, the Aṅgirases are described as Virűpas, and sons of heaven; and the
name Virűpa once occurs by itself as that of a single being who sings the
praises of Agni, in a stanza (VIII, 75, 6) immediately following one in which Aṅgiras is invoked, showing that Virűpa
is here used as a synonym for Aṅgiras. But the most explicit of these references is X, 62, 5
and 6. The first of these verses states that the Aṅgirases are Virűpas, and they are the sons of Agni; while the second describes
them along with the Navagva and the Dashagva in the following terms, And which
Virűpas were born from Agni and from the sky; the Navagva or the Dashagva, as
the best of the Aṅgirases (Aṅgiras-tama), prospers in the assemblage of the
gods.*
Now Virűpas
literally means of various forms and in the above verses it seems to have
been used as an adjective qualifying Aṅgirases to denote that there are
many species of them. We are further told that the Navagvas and the Dashagvas
were the most important (Aṅgiras-tamaḥ) of these species. In the last chapter I have
discussed the meaning of the adjective Virűpa
as applied to a couple of Day and Night and have shown, on the authority of
Mâdhava, that the word, as applied to days and Nights, denotes their duration,
or the period of time over which they extend. Virűpas in the present instance appears to be used precisely in the
same sense. The Navagvas and the Dashagvas were no doubt the most important of
the early sacrificers, but these too were not their only species. In other
words they were not merely nine-going, and ten-going, but various-going (virűpas), meaning that the duration of
their sacrifices was sometimes shorter than nine and sometimes longer than ten
months. In fact a Sapta-gu
(seven-going) is mentioned in X, 47, 6, along with Bṛihaspati, the son of Aṅgiras, and it seems to be used there
as an adjective qualifying Bṛihaspati; for Bṛihaspati is described in another
place (IV, 50, 4) as saptâsya
(seven-mouthed), while the Atharva-Veda IV, 6, 1, describes the first Brâhmaṇa, Bṛihaspati, as dashâsya or
ten-mouthed. We have also seen that in IV, 51, 4, the Dashagva is also called
seven-mouthed. All these expressions can be satisfactorily explained only by
supposing that the Aṅgirases were not merely nine-going or ten-going, but virűpas or various going, and that
they completed their sacrifices within the number of months for which the sun
was above the horizon at the place where these sacrifices were performed. It
follows, therefore, that in, ancient times the sacrificial session lasted from
seven to ten months; and the number of sacrificers (Hotṛis) corresponded
with the number of the months, each doing his duty by rotation somewhat after
the manner of the Egyptian priests previously referred to. These sacrifices
were over when the long night commenced, during which Indra fought with Vala
and vanquished him by the end of the year (parivatsare,
X, 62, 2). The word parivatsare (at
the end of the year) is very suggestive and shows that the year closed with the
long night.
Another
reference to a period of ten months sunshine is found in the legend of Dîrghatamas
whom the Ashvins are said to have saved or rescued from a pit, into which he
was thrown, after being made blind and infirm. I have devoted a separate
chapter later on to the discussion of Vedic legends. But I take up here the
legend of Dîrghatamas because we have therein an express statement as to the
life of Dîrghatamas, which remarkably corroborates the conclusion we have
arrived at from the consideration of the story of the Dashagvas. The story of
Dîrghatamas is narrated in the Mahâbhârata, Âdiparvan, Chap. 104. He is said to
be the son of Mamatâ by Utathya, and born blind through the curse of Bṛihaspati his uncle. He was, however,
married and had several sons by Pradveṣhî. The wife and the sons eventually
became tired of feeding the blind Dîrghatamas (so called because he was born
blind), and the sons abandoned him afloat on a worn-out raft in the
The
statement in the myth or legend, which is most important for our purpose, is
contained in I, 158, 6. The verse may be literally translated as follows:
Dîrghatamas, the son of Mamatâ, having grown decrepit in the tenth yuga, becomes a Brahman charioteer of
the waters wending to their goal.*
The only expressions which require elucidation in this verse
are in the tenth yuga, and waters
wending to their goal. Otherwise the story is plain enough. Dîrghatamas grows
old in the tenth yuga, and riding on
waters, as the Mahâbhârat story has it, goes along with them to the place which
is the goal of these waters. But scholars are not agreed as to what yuga means. Some take it to mean a cycle
of years, presumably five as in the Vedânga-Jyotiṣha, and invest Dîrghatamas with
infirmity at the age of fifty. The Petersburg Lexicon would interpret yuga, wherever it occurs in the Ṛig-Veda, to mean not, a period of
time, but a generation, or the relation of descent from a common stock;
and it is followed by Grassmann in this respect. According to these scholars
the phrase in the tenth yuga in the
above verse would, therefore, signify in the tenth generation whatever that
may mean. Indeed, there seems to be a kind of prejudice against interpreting yuga as meaning a period of time in
the Ṛig-Veda, and it is therefore, necessary to examine the point
at some length in this place. That the word yuga
by itself means a period of time or that, at any rate, it is one of its
meanings goes without saying. Even the Petersburg Lexicon assigns this meaning
to yuga in the Atharva Veda VIII, 2,
21; but so far as the Ṛig-Veda is concerned yuga
according to it, must mean descent, or generation, or something like it,
but never a period of time. This is especially the case, with the phrase Mânuṣhâ yugâ, or Mânuṣhyâ yugâni,
which occurs several times in the Ṛig-Veda. Western scholars would
everywhere translate it to mean generations of men, while native scholars,
like Sâyaṇa and Mahîdhara; take it to refer to mortal ages in a
majority of places. In some cases (I, 124, 2; I, 144, 4) Sâyaṇa, however, suggests as an
alternative, that the phrase may be understood to mean conjunction or
couples (yuga) of men; and this has
probably given rise to the interpretation put upon the phrase by Western scholars.
Etymologically the word yuga may mean
conjunction or a couple denoting either (1) a couple of day and night, or
(2) a couple of months i.e. a
season, or (3) a couple of fortnights or the time of the conjunction of the
moon and the sun, i.e. a month.
Thus at the beginning of the Kali-Yuga the planets and the sun were, it is
supposed, in conjunction and hence it is said to be called a yuga. It is also possible that the word
may mean a conjunction, or a couple, or even a generation of men. Etymology,
therefore, does not help us in determining which of these meanings should be
assigned to the word yuga or the
phrase, Mânuṣhâ yugâ in the Ṛig-Veda, and we must find out some
other means for determining it. The prejudice we have referred to above,
appears to be mainly due to the disinclination of the Western scholars to
import the later Yuga theory into the Ṛig-Veda. But it seems to me that the
caution has been carried too far, so far as almost to amount to a sort of
prejudice.
Turning to
the hymns of the Ṛig-Veda, we find as remarked by Muir, the phrase yuge yuge
used at least in half a dozen places (III, 26, 3; VI, 15, 8; X, 94, 12,
&c.), and it is interpreted by Sâyaṇa to mean a period of time. In III,
33, 8, and X, 10, we have uttara yugâni
later age, and in X, 72, 1, we read uttare
yuge in a later age; whilst in the next two verses we have the phrases Devânâm pűrve yuge and Devânâm prathame yuge clearly referring
to the later and earlier ages of the gods. The word Devânâm is in the plural and yuga
is in the singular, and it is not therefore possible to take the phrase to mean
generations of gods. The context again clearly shows that a reference to time
is intended, for the hymn speaks of the creation and the birth of the gods in
early primeval times. Now if we interpret Devânâm
yugam to mean an age of gods, why should mânuṣhyâ yugâni
or mânuṣhâ yugâ be not interpreted to mean human
ages, is more than I can understand. There are again express passages in the Ṛig-Veda where mânuṣhâ yugâ cannot
be taken to mean generations of men. Thus in V, 52, 4, which is a hymn to
Maruts, we read Vishve ye mânuṣhâ yugâ pânti
martyam riṣhaḥ. Here the verb pânti (protect), the nominative vishve
ye (all those), and the object is martyam
(the mortal man), while riṣhaḥ (from injury), in the ablative,
denotes the object against which the protection is sought. So far the sentence,
therefore, means All those who protect man from injury; and now the question
is, what does mânuṣhâ yugâ mean? If we take it to mean
generations of men in the objective case it becomes superfluous, for martyam (man) is already the object of pânti (protect). It is, therefore,
necessary to assign to mânuṣhâ yugâ the only other meaning we know of, viz., human ages and take the phrase
as an accusative of time. Thus the interpreted the whole sentence means All
those, who protect man from injury during human ages. No other construction is
more natural or reasonable than this; but still Prof. Max Müller translates the
verse to mean All those who protect the generations of men, who protect the
mortal from injury,* (See S. B. E. Series, Vol. XXXII, p. 312.)in spite of the
fact that this is tautological and that there is no conjunctive particle in the
texts (like cha) to join what according
to him are the two objects of the verb protect. Mr. Griffith seems to have
perceived this difficulty, and has translated, Who all, through ages of
mankind, guard mortal man from injury. Another passage which is equally
decisive on this point, is X, 140, 6. The verse* is addressed to Agni, and
people are said to have put him in front to secure his blessings. It is as
follows:
Ṛitâvânam mahiṣhaṁ vishva-darshatam
agniṁ sumnâya dadhire puro
janâḥ |
Shrut-karṇaṁ saprathas-taman
tvâ girâ daivyam mânuṣhâ yugâ ||
Here ṛitâvânam (righteous), mahiṣhaṁ (strong), vishva-darshatam (visible to all), agniṁ (Agni, fire), shrut-karṇaṁ (attentive eared), saprathas-taman (most widely-reaching), tvâ (thee) and daivyam (divine)
are all in the accusative case governed by dadhire
(placed), and describe the qualities of Agni. Janâḥ (people) is
the nominative and dadhire (placed)
is the only verb in the text. Sumnâya (for
the welfare) denotes the purpose for which the people placed Agni in front (puro) and girâ (by praises) is the means by which the favor of Agni, is to be
secured. If we, therefore, leave out the various adjectives of Agni, the verse
means, The people have placed Agni (as described) in front for their welfare,
with praises. The only expression that remains is mânuṣhâ yugâ, and
it can go in with the other words in a natural way only as an accusative of
time. The verse would then mean The people have placed Agni (as described), in
front for their welfare, with praises, during human ages. But
But if mânuṣhâ yugâ means human ages and not human
generations, we have still to determine the exact duration of these ages. In
the Atharva-Veda, VIII, 2, 21, which says, We allot to thee, a hundred, ten
thousand years, two, three or four yugas,
the word yuga obviously stands for a
period of time, not shorter than ten thousand years. But there are grounds to
hold that in the early days of the Ṛig-Veda yuga must have denoted a shorter period of time, or, at least, that
was one of its meanings in early days. The Ṛig-Veda often speaks of the first
(prathamâ) dawn, or the first of the coming (âyatînâm prathamâ) dawns (Ṛig. I, 113, 8; 123, 2; VII, 76, 6;
X, 35, 4); while the last (avamâ)
dawn is mentioned in VII, 71, 3, and the dawn is said to have the knowledge of
the first day in I, 123, 9. Now,
independently of what I have said before about the Vedic dawns, the ordinal
numeral first as applied to the dawn is intelligible only if we suppose it to
refer to the first dawn of the year, or the dawn on the first day of the year,
somewhat like the phrase first night (prathamâ
râtriḥ) used in the Brâhmaṇas (see Orion p. 69). The first (prathamâ)
and the last (avamâ) dawn must,
therefore, be taken to signify the beginning and the end of the year in those
days; and in the light of what has been said about the nature of the Vedic dawns
in the fifth chapter, we may safely conclude that the first of the dawns was
no other than the first of a set or group of dawns that appeared at the close
of the long night and commenced the year. Now this first dawn is described as
wearing out human ages (praminatî manuṣhyâ yugâni) in I, 124, 2, and I, 92, 11; while
in I, 115, 2, we are told that the pious or godly men extend the yugas, on the appearance of the dawn (yatrâ naro devayanto yugâni vitanvate).
European scholars interpret yuga in
the above passages to mean generations of men. But apart from the fact that
the phrase mânuṣha yugâ must be understood to mean human
ages in at least two passages discussed above, the context in I, 124, 2 and I,
92, 11 is obviously in favor of interpreting the word yuga, occurring therein, as equivalent to a period of time. The
dawn is here described as commencing a new course of heavenly ordinances, or
holy sacrifices (daivyani vratâni),
and setting in motion the manuṣhyâ yugâni, obviously implying that with the
first dawn came the sacrifices, as well as the cycle of time known as human
ages or that the human ages were reckoned from the first dawn. This
association, of mânuṣha yugâ, or human ages, with the first
dawn at once enables us to definitely determine the length or duration of
human ages; for if these ages (yugas)
commenced with the first dawn of the year, they must have ended on the last (avamâ) dawn of the year. In other words mânuṣha yugâ collectively denoted the whole
period of time between the first and the last dawn of the year, while a single yuga denoted a shorter division of this
period.
Apart from
the legend of Dîrghatamas, we have, therefore, sufficient evidence in the Ṛig-Veda to hold that the world, yuga was used to denote a period of
time, shorter than one year, and that the phrase mânuṣha yugâ
meant human ages or the period of time between the first and the last dawn
of year and not human generations. The statement that Dîrghatamas grew old
in the tenth yuga is now not only easy to understand, but it enables us to
determine, still more definitely, the meaning of yuga in the days of the Ṛig-Veda. For, if yuga was a part of mânuṣha yugâ,
that is, of the period between the first and the last dawn of the year, and the
legend of Dîrghatamas a solar legend, the statement that Dîrghatamas grew old
in the tenth yuga can only mean that
the sun grew old in the tenth month.
In other words, ten yugas were
supposed to intervene between the first and the last dawn, or the two termini,
of the year; and as ten days or ten fortnights would be too short, and ten
seasons too long a period of time to lie between these limits, the word yuga in the phrase dashame yuge, must be
interpreted to mean a month and nothing else. In short, Dîrghatamas was the
sun that grew old in the tenth month, and riding on the aerial waters was borne
by them to their goal, that is, to the ocean (VII, 49, 2) below the horizon.
The waters here referred to are, in fact, the same over which the king Varuṇa is said to rule, or which flow by
his commands, or for which he is said to have dug out a channel (VII, 49, 1-4;
II, 28 4; VII, 87, 1) and so cut out a path for Sűrya, and which being released
by Indra from the grass of Vṛitra, bring on the sun (I, 51, 4). Prof. Max Müller, in his Contributions to the Science of Mythology
(Vol. II, pp. 583-598), has .shown that most of the achievements of the Ashvins
can be rationally explained by taking them as referring to the decaying sun.
The legend of Dîrghatamas is thus only a mythical representation of the Arctic
sun, who ascends above the bright ocean (VII, 60, 4,), becomes visible for mânuṣha yugâ or ten months, and then drops again
into the nether waters. What these waters are and how their nature has been
long misunderstood will be further explained in a subsequent chapter, when we
come to the discussion of Vedic myths. Suffice it to say for the present that
the legend of Dîrghatamas, interpreted as above, is in full accord with the legend
of the Dashagvas who are described as holding their sacrificial session only
for ten months.
I have
discussed here the meaning of yugâ
and mânuṣha yugâ at some length, because the phrases
have been much misunderstood, in spite of clear passages showing that a period
of time was intended to be denoted by them. These passages (V, 52, 4; X, 140,
6) establish the fact that mânuṣha yugâ denoted human ages, and the
association of these ages with the first dawn (I, 124, 2; I, 115, 2) further
shows that the length of a yuga was
regarded to be shorter than a year. The mention of the tenth yuga finally settles the meaning of yuga as one month. That is how I have
arrived at the meaning of these phrases, and I am glad to find that I have been
anticipated in my conclusions by Prof. Raṅgâchârya of
There are
many other passages in the Ṛig-Veda which support the same view. But mânuṣha yugâ being everywhere interpreted by
Western scholars to mean human generations or tribes, the real meaning of
these passages has become obscure and unintelligible. Thus in VIII, 46, 12, we
have. All (sacrificers), with ladles lifted, invoke that mighty Indra for mânuṣha yugâ; and the meaning evidently is that
Soma libations were offered to Indra during the period of human ages. But
taking mânuṣha yugâ; to denote human tribes,
An
independent corroboration of the conclusion we have drawn from the legends of
the Dashagvas and Dîrghatamas is furnished by the number of seasons mentioned
in certain Vedic texts. A period of sunshine of ten months followed by along
night of two months can well be described as five seasons of two months each,
followed by the sinking of the sun into the waters below the horizon; and as a
matter of fact we find the year so described in I, 164, 12, a verse which
occurs also in the Atharva Veda (IX, 9, 12) with a slight variation and in the
Prashnopaniṣhad I, 11. It may be literally translated as follows: The
five-footed (pańcha-pâdam) Father of
twelve forms, they say, is full of watery vapors (purṣîhiṇam) in the
farther half (pare ardhe) of the
heaven. These others again say (that) He the far-seeing (vichakṣhaṇam) is
placed on the six-spoked (ṣhaḍ-are) and
seven-wheeled (car), in the nearer (upare
scil. ardhe) half of the heaven.*
The adjective far-seeing is made to qualify seven-wheeled
instead of He in the Atharva Veda, (vichakṣhaṇe) being in the locative case while
Shaṇkarâchârya
in his commentary on the Prashnopaniṣhad splits upare into two words u
and pare taking u as an expletive. But these readings do not materially alter the
meaning of the verse. The context everywhere clearly indicates that the
year-god of twelve months (âkṛiti X, 85, 5) is here described. The
previous verse in the hymn (Ṛig. I, 164) mentions
The twelve-spoked wheel, in which 720 sons of Agni are
established, a clear reference to a year of twelve months with Tao days and
nights. There is, therefore, no doubt that the passage contains the description
of the year and the two halves of the verse, which are introduced by the
phrases they say and others say, give us two opinions about the nature of
the year-god of twelve forms. Let us now see what these opinions are. Some say
that the year-god is five-footed (pańcha-pâdam),
that is divided into five seasons; and the others say that he has a six-spoked
car, or six seasons. It is clear from this that the number of seasons was held
to be five by some and six by others in early days. Why should there be this
difference of opinion? The Aitareya Brâhmaṇa I, 1, (and the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ I, 6, 2, 3) explains that the
two seasons of Hemanta and Shishir together made a joint season,
thereby reducing the number of seasons from six to five. But this explanation
seems to be an afterthought, for in the Shatapatha Brâhmaṇa, XIII, 6, 1, 10, Varṣhâ and Sharad
are compounded for this purpose instead of Hemanta
and Shishir. This shows that in the
days of the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ and the Brâhmaṇas it was not definitely known or
settled which two seasons out of six should be compounded to reduce the number
to five; but as five seasons were sometimes mentioned in the Vedas, some
explanation was felt to be necessary to account for the smaller number and such
explanation was devised by taking together any
two consecutive seasons out of six and regarding them as one joint season
of four months. But the explanation is too vague to be true; and we cannot
believe that the system of compounding airy two seasons according to ones
choice was ever followed in practice. We must, therefore, give up the
explanation as unsatisfactory and see if the verse from the Ṛig-Veda, quoted above, enables us to
find out a better explanation of the fact that the seasons were once held to be
five. Now the first half of this verse describes the five-footed father as full
of watery vapors in the farther part of heaven, while the year of six-spoked
car is said to be far-seeing. In short, purîṣhiṇam (full of, or dwelling in waters) in
the first line appears to be a counterpart of vichakṣhaṇam
(far-seeing) in the second line. This is made clear by the verses which follow.
Thus the 13th verse in the hymn speaks of the five-spoked wheel as remaining
entire and unbroken though ancient; and the next or the 14th verse says that
the unwasting wheel with its felly revolves; the ten draw (it) yoked over the
expanse. The suns eye goes covered with rajas (aerial vapor); all worlds are
dependent on him.*
Comparing this with the 11th verse first quoted, it may be
easily seen that purîṣhiṇam (full of watery vapors) and rajasâ âvṛitam (covered with rajas) are almost
synonymous phrases and the only inference we can draw from them is that the
five-footed year-god or the sun event to dwell in watery vapors i.e., became invisible, or covered with
darkness and (rajas), for some time in the farther part of the heaven. The
expression that The ten, yoked, draw his carriage, (also cf. Ṛig. IX, 63, 9) further shows that
the five seasons were not made by combining any two consecutive seasons out of
six as explained in the Brâhmaṇas (for in that case the number of horses could not be
called ten), but that a real year of five seasons or ten months was here
intended. When the number of seasons became increased to six, the year-god
ceased to be purîṣhin (full of waters) and became vichakṣhaṇam or far-seeing. We have seen that the sun, as
represented by Dîrghatamas, grew old in the tenth month and riding on aerial
waters went into the ocean. The same .idea is expressed in the present verse
which describes two different views about the nature of the year, one of five
and the other of six seasons and contrasts their leading features with each
other. Thus pare ardhe is contrasted
with upare ardhe in the second line, pańcha-pâdam
(compare pacńhâre in the next verse, i.e. Ṛig-Veda I. 164, 13) with ṣhaḍ-are, and purîṣhinam with vichakṣhaṇam. In short, the verse under consideration describes
the year either (1) as five-footed, and lying in waters in the farther part of
heaven, or (2) as mounted on a six-spoked car and far-seeing in the nearer part
of the heaven. These two descriptions cannot evidently apply to seasons in one
and the same place, and the artifice of combining two consecutive seasons
cannot be accepted as a solution of the question. Five seasons and ten months
followed by the watery residence of the sun or dark nights, is what is
precisely described in the first half of this passage (I, 164, 12), and, from
what has been said hitherto, it will be easily seen that it is the Arctic year
of ten months that is here described. The verse, and especially the contrast
between purîṣhinam and vichakṣhaṇam, does not appear to have attracted the attention it
deserves. Bu in the light of the Arctic theory the description is now as
intelligible as any. The Vedic bards have here preserved for us the memory of a
year of five seasons or ten months, although their year had long been changed
into one of twelve months. The explanation given in the Brâhmaṇas are all so many post-facto devices to account for the
mention of five seasons in the Ṛig-Veda, and I do not think we are
bound to accept them when the fact of five seasons can be better accounted for.
I have remarked before that in searching for evidence of ancient traditions we
must expect to find later traditions associated with them, and Ṛig. I, 164, 12, discussed above, is
a good illustration of this remark. The first line of the verse, though it
speaks of five seasons, describes the year as twelve-formed; while the second
line, which deals with a year of six seasons or twelve months, speaks of it as
seven-wheeled, that is made up of seven months or seven suns, or seven rays
of the sun. This may appear rather inconsistent at the first sight; but the
history of words in any language will show that old expressions are preserved
in the language long after they have ceased to denote the ideas primarily
expressed by them. Thus we now use coins for exchange, yet the word pecuniary
which is derived from pecus = cattle,
is still retained in the language; and similarly, we still speak of the rising
of the sun, though we now know that it is not the luminary that rises, but the
earth, by rotating round its axis, makes the sun visible to us. Very much in
the same way and by the same process, expressions like saptâshva (seven horsed) or sapta-chakra
(seven-wheeled), as applied to the year or the sun, must have become recognized
and established as current phrases in the language before the hymns assumed
their present form, and the Vedic bards could not have discarded them even when
they knew that they were not applicable to the state of things before them. On
the contrary, as we find in the Brâhmaṇas every artifice, that ingenuity
could suggest, was tried to make these old phrases harmonize with the state of
things then in, vogue, and from the religious or the sacrificial point of view
it was quite necessary to do so. But when we have to examine the question from
a historical stand-point, it is our duty to separate the relics of the older
period from facts or incidents of the later period with which the former are
sometimes inevitably mixed up; and if we analyze the verse in question (I, 164,
12) in this way we shall clearly see in it the traces of a year of ten months
and five seasons. The same principle is also applicable in other cases, as, for
instance, when we find the Navagvas mentioned together with the seven vîpras in VI, 22, 2. The bards, who gave
us the present version of the hymns, knew of the older or primeval state of
things only by traditions, and it is no wonder if these traditions are
occasionally mixed up with later events. On the contrary the preservation of so
many traditions of the primeval home is itself a wonder, and it is this fact,
which invests the oldest Veda with such peculiar importance from the religious
as well as the historical point of view.
To sum up
there are clear traditions preserved in the Ṛig-Veda, which show that the year
once consisted of seven months or seven suns, as in the legend of Aditis sons,
or that there were ten months of the year as in the legend of the Dashagvas or
Dîrghatamas; and these cannot be accounted for except on the Arctic theory.
These ten months formed the sacrificial session of the primeval sacrificers of
the Aryan race and the period was denominated as mânuṣha yugâ or
human ages, an expression much misunderstood by Western scholars. The sun went
below the horizon in the tenth of these yugas
and Indra fought with Vala in the period of darkness which followed and at the
end of the year, again brought back the sun dwelling in darkness during the
period. The whole year of twelve months was thus made up of mânuṣha yugâ and continuous nights, and, in
spite of the fact that the Vedic bards lived later on in places where the sun
was above the horizon for twelve months, the expression mânuṣha yugâ and kṣhapaḥ (nights) is still found in the Ṛig-Veda. It is true that the
evidence discussed in this chapter is mostly legendary; but that does not
lessen its importance in any way, for it will be seen later on that some of
these traditions are Indo-European in character. The tradition that the year
was regarded by some to have been made up only of five seasons, or that only ten horses were yoked to the chariot of
the sun, is again in full accord with the meaning of these legends; and it will
be shown in the next chapter that in the Vedic literature there are express
statements about a sacrificial session of ten months, which are quite
independent of these traditions, and which, therefore, independently prove and
strengthen the conclusions deduced from the legends discussed in this chapter.
CHAPTER VIII
THE COWS WALK
The Pravargya ceremony Symbolizes the revival of the
yearly sacrifice Milk representing seed heated in Gharma or Mahâvîra
Mantras used on the occasion of pouring milk into it The two creating the
five, and the ten of Vivasvat Indicate the death of the year after five
seasons or ten months The tradition about the sun falling beyond the sky
Annual Sattras Their type, the Gavâm-ayanam or the Cows walk Lasted
for 10 or 12 months according to the Aitareya Brâhmaṇa Two passages from the Taittirîya
Saṁhitâ describing the Gavâm-ayanam
Mention to months duration of the Sattra,
but give no reason except that it was an ancient practice Plainly indicates
an ancient sacrificial year of ten months-Comparison with the old Roman year of
ten months or 304 days How the rest of 360 days were disposed of by the
Romans not yet known They represented a long period of darkness according to
the legend of the Dashagvas Thus leading to the Arctic theory Prof. Max Müller
on the threefold nature of cows in the Vedas Cows as animals, rain and dawns
or days in the Ṛig-Veda Ten months Cows walk thus means the ten
months duration of ordinary days and nights 350 oxen of Helios Implies a
night of ten days The stealing of Apollons oxen by Hermes Cows stolen by Vṛitra in the Vedas Represent the
stealing of day-cows thereby causing the long night Further sacrificial
evidence from the Vedas Classification of the Soma-sacrifices Difference
between Ekâha and Ahîna A hundred nightly sacrifices
Annual Sattras like the Gavâm-ayanam Model outline or scheme
of ceremonies therein Other modifications of the same All at present based
upon a civil year But lasted for ten months in ancient times
Night-sacrifices now included amongst day-sacrifices The reason why the
former extend only over 100 nights is yet unexplained Appropriately accounted
for on the Arctic theory Soma juice extracted at night in the Atirâtra, or the trans nocturnal
sacrifice even now The analogy applied to other night-sacrifices Râtrî Sattras were the sacrifices of the long night in ancient times
Their object Soma libations exclusively offered to Indra to help him in his
fight against Vala Shata-râtra
represented the maximum duration of the long night Corroborated by Aditis
legend of seven months sunshine Explains why India was called Shata-kratu in the Purâṇas The epithet misunderstood by
Western scholars Similarity between Soma and Ashvamedha sacrifices The
epithet Shata-kratu unlike other
epithets, never paraphrased in the Vedas Implies that it was peculiar or
proper to Indra Dr. Haugs view that kratu
means a sacrifice in the Vedas Hundred forts or puraḥ (cities) of Vṛitra Explained as hundred seats of
darkness or nights Legend of Tishtryas fight with Apaosha in the Avesta
Only a reproduction of Indras fight with Vṛitra Tishtryas fight described as
lasting from one to a hundred nights in the Avesta Forms an independent
corroboration of hundred nightly Soma sacrifices The phrase Sato-karahe found in the Avesta The
meaning of the nature of Ati-râtra
discussed Means a trans-nocturnal Soma sacrifice at either end of the long
night Production of the cycle of day and night therefrom Hence a fitting
introduction to the annual Sattras
Marked the close of the long night and the beginning of the period of sunshine
Sattra Ati-râtra, night sacrifices and Ati-râtra
again thus formed the yearly round of sacrifices in ancient times Clearly
indicate the existence of a long darkness of 100 nights in the ancient year
Ancient sacrificial system thus corresponded with the ancient year Adaptation
of both to the new home effected by the Brâhmaṇas, like Numas reform in the old
Roman Calendar The importance of the results of sacrificial evidence.
The legend
of the Dashagvas, who completed their sacrifices during ten months, is not the
only relic of the ancient year preserved in the sacrificial literature. The
Pravargya ceremony, which is described in the Aitareya Brâhmaṇa (I, 18-12), furnishes us with
another instance, where a reference to the old year seems to be clearly
indicated. Dr. Haug, in his translation of the Aitareya Brâhmaṇa, has fully described this ceremony
in a note to I, 18. It lasts for three days and precedes the animal and the
Soma sacrifice, as no one is allowed to take part in the Soma feast without
having undergone this ceremony. The whole ceremony symbolizes the revival of
the sun or the sacrificial ceremony (yajńa),
which, for the time being, is preserved as seed in order that it may grow again
in due time (Ait.
6. And now
that mighty and great chariot of his with horses (as well as) the line of his
chariot is seen.
7. The
seven milk the one, and the two create the five, on the oceans loud-sounding
bank.
8. With
the ten of Vivasvat, Indra by his three-fold hammer, caused the heavens bucket
to drop down.*
Here, first of all, we are told that his (suns) chariot,
the great chariot with horses has become visible, evidently meaning that the
dawn has made its appearance on the horizon. Then the seven, probably the seven
Hotṛis, or seven rivers, are said to milk this dawn and
produce the two. This milking is a familiar process in the Ṛig-Veda and in one place the cows of
the morning are said to be milked from darkness (I, 33, 10). The two evidently
mean day and night and as soon as they are milked, they give rise to the five
seasons. The day and the night are said to be the two mothers of Sűrya in III,
55, 6, and here they are the mothers of the five seasons. What becomes after
the expiry of the seasons is, described in the eighth verse. It says that with
the ten of Vivasvat, or with the lapse of ten months, Indra with his three-fold
hammer shook down the heavenly jar. This means that the three storing places of
the aerial waters (VII, 101, 4) were all emptied into the ocean at this time
and along with it the sun also went to the lower world, for sunlight is
described to be three-fold in (VII, 101, 2 and Sâyaṇa there quotes the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ (II, 1, 2, 5), which says that
the sun has three lights; the morning light being the Vasanta, the midday the Grîṣhma, and the
evening the Sharad. The verse,
therefore, obviously refers to the three-fold courses of waters in the heaven
and the three-fold light of the sun and all this is. said to come to an end
with the ten of Vivasvat The sun and the sacrifice are then preserved as seed
to be re-generated some time after, a process symbolized in the Pravargya
ceremony. The idea of the sun dropping from heaven is very common in the
sacrificial literature. Thus in the Aitareya Brâhmaṇa (IV, 18) we read, The gods, being
afraid of his (suns) falling beyond
them being turned upside down, supported him by placing above him the highest
worlds;* Ait. Brâh. VI, 18 and the same idea is met with in the Tâṇḍya Brâhmaṇa (IV, 5, 9, 11). The words falling
beyond (parâchas atipâtât) are very
important, inasmuch as they show that the sun dropped into regions that were en
the yonder side. One of the Ashvins protégé is also called Chyavâna, which
word Prof. Max Müller derives from chyu
to drop. The Ashvins are said to have restored him to youth, which, being
divested of its legendary form, means the rehabilitation of the sun that had
dropped into the nether world. The Pravargya ceremony, which preserves serves
the seed of the sacrifice, is, therefore, only one phase of the story of the
dropping sun in the sacrificial literature and the verses employed in this
ceremony, if interpreted in the spirit of that ceremony, appear, as stated
above, to indicate an older year of five seasons and ten months.
But the
Mantras used in the Pravargya ceremony are not so explicit as one might expect
such kind of evidence to be. Therefore, instead of attempting to give more
evidence of the same kind, and there are many such facts in the Vedic
sacrificial literature, I proceed to give the direct statements about the
duration of the annual Sattras from
the well-known Vedic works. These statements have nothing of the legendary
character about them and are, therefore, absolutely certain and reliable. It
has been stated before that institution of sacrifice is an old one, and found
amongst both the Asiatic and the European branches of the Aryan race. It was,
in fact the main ritual of the religion of these people and naturally enough
every detail concerning the sacrifices was closely watched, or accurately
determined by the priests, who had the charge of these ceremonies. It is true
that in giving reasons for the prevalence of a particular practice, these
priests sometimes indulged in speculation; but the details of the sacrifice
were facts that were settled in strict accordance with custom, and tradition,
whatever explanations might be given in regard to their origin. But sometimes
the facts were found to be so stubborn as to, defy any explanation, and the
priests had to content themselves with barely recording the practice, and
adding that such is the practice from times immemorial. It is with such
evidence that we have now to deal in investigating the duration of the annual Sattras in ancient times.
There are
many annual Sattras like Âdityânâm-ayanam, Aṅgirasâm-ayanam, Gavâm-ayanam, &c. mentioned in the Brâhmaṇas and the Shrauta Sűtras; and, as
observed by Dr. Haug, they seem to have been originally established in
imitation of the suns yearly course. They are the oldest of the Vedic
sacrifices and their duration and other details have been all very minutely and
carefully noted down in the sacrificial works. All these annual Sattras are not, however, essentially
different from each other, being so many different varieties or modifications,
according to circumstances, of a common model or type, and the Gavâm-ayanam is said to be this type; (vide, com. on Âshv. S.S. II, 7, 1). Thus
in the Aitareya Brâhmaṇa (IV, 17) we are told that They hold the Gavâm-ayanam, that is, the sacrificial
session called the Cows walk. The cows are the Âdityas (gods of the months).
By holding the session called the Cows walk they also hold the Âdityânâm-ayanam (the walk of the Âdityas).*
(See Dr. Haugs Ait. Brâh. Vol. II, p. 287) If we, (therefore, ascertain the
duration of the Gavâm-ayanam, the
same rule would apply to all other annual Sattras
and we need not examine the latter separately. This Gavâm-ayanam, or the Cows walk, is fully described in three
places. Once in the Aitareya Brâhmaṇa and twice in the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ. We begin with the Aitareya
Brâhmaṇa (IV, 17), which describes the origin and duration of the Sattra as follows:
The cows,
being desirous of obtaining hoofs and horns, held (once) a sacrificial session.
In the tenth month (of their sacrifice) they obtained hoofs and horns. They
said, We have obtained fulfillment of that wish for which we underwent the
initiation into the sacrificial rites. Let us rise (the sacrifice being
finished). Those that arose, are these, who have horns. Of those, who,
however, sat (continued the session) saying, Let us finish the year, the
horns went off on account of their distrust. It is they, who are hornless (tűparâḥ). They (continuing their sacrificial session) produced vigor (űrjam). Thence after (having been
sacrificing for twelve months and) having secured all the seasons, they rose
(again) at the end. For they had produced the vigor (to reproduce horns, hoofs,
&c. when decaying). Thus the cows made themselves beloved by all (the whole
world), and are beautified (decorated) by all.* (See Dr. Haugs Ait. Brâh.
Trans. Vol. II, p. 287.)
Here it is
distinctly mentioned that the cows first obtained the fulfillment of their
desire in ten months, and a number of them left off sacrificing further. Those,
that remained and sacrificed for two months more, are called distrustful, and
they had to suffer for their distrust by forfeiting the horns they had
obtained. It is, therefore, clear, that this yearly Sattra, which in the Saṁhitâs and Brâhmaṇas is a Sattra of twelve months in imitation of the suns yearly course,
was once completed in ten months. Why should it be so? Why was a Sattra, which is annual in its very
nature and which now lasts for twelve months, once completed in ten months? How
did the sacrificers obtain all the religious merit of a twelve months
sacrifice by sacrificing for ten months only? These are very important
questions; but the Aitareya Brâhmaṇa neither raises them, nor gives us
any clue to their solution. If we, however, go back to the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ, the oldest and most
authoritative work on the sacrificial ceremonies, we find the questions
distinctly raised. The Saṁhitâ expressly states that the Gavâm-ayanam can be completed in ten or twelve months,
according to the choice of the sacrificer; but it plainly acknowledges its
inability to assign any reason how a Sattra
of twelve months could be completed in ten, except the fact that it is an old practice
sanctioned by immemorial usage. These passages are very important for our
purpose, and I give below a close translation of each. The first occurs in the
Taittirîya Saṁhitâ (VII. 5, 1, 1-2),* and may be rendered as follows:
The cows
held this sacrificial session, desiring that being hornless let horns grow
unto us. Their session lasted (for) ten months. Then when the horns grew (up)
they rose saying, We have gained. But those, whose (horns) were not grown,
they rose after completing the year, saying We have gained. Those, that had
their horns grown, and those that had not, both rose saying We have gained.
Cows session is thus the year (year session). Those, who know this, reach the
year and prosper verily. Therefore, the hornless (cow) moves (grazes) pleased
during the two rainy months. This is what the Sattra has achieved for her. Therefore, whatever is done in the
house of one performing the yearly Sattra
is successfully, timely and properly done.
This
account slightly differs from that given in the Aitareya Brâhmaṇa. In the Saṁhitâ the cows whose session lasted
for twelve months, are said to be still hornless; but instead of getting vigor
(űrjam), they are said to have
obtained as a reward for their additional sitting, the pleasure of comfortable
grazing in the two rainy months, during which as the commentator observes, the
horned cows find their horns an impediment to graze freely in the field, where
new grass has grown up. But the statement regarding the duration of the Sattra viz., that it lasted for ten
or twelve months, is the same both in
the Saṁhitâ and in the Brâhmaṇa. The Saṁhitâ again takes up the question in
the next Anuvâka (Taitt. Sam. VII, 5,
2, 1-2), and further describes the cows session as follows:
The cows
held this sacrificial session, being hornless (and) desiring to obtain horns.
Their session lasted (for) ten months; then when the horns grew (up), they
said, We have gained, let us rise, we have obtained the desire for which we
sat (commenced the session). Half, or as many, of them as said, We shall
certainly sit for the two twelfth (two last) months, and rise after completing
the year, (some of them had horns in the twelfth month by trust, (while) by
distrust those that (are seen) hornless (remained so). Both, that is, those who
got horns, and those who obtained vigor (űrjam),
thus attained their object. One who knows this, prospers, whether rising (from
the sacrifice) in the tenth month or in the twelfth. They indeed go by the path
(padena); he going by the path indeed
attains (the end). This is that successful ayanam
(session). Therefore, it is go-sani
(beneficial to the cows).
This
passage, in its first part repeats the story given in the previous anuvâka of the Saṁhitâ and in the Aitareya Brâhmaṇa with slight variations. But the
latter part contains two important statements: firstly that whether we complete
the sacrifice within ten months or twelve months the religious merit or fruit
obtained is the same in either case, for both are said to prosper equally; and
secondly this is said, to be the case because it is the path or as Sâyaṇa explains an immemorial custom.
The Saṁhitâ is, in fact, silent as to the reason why an annual sattra which ought to, and as a matter
of fact does, now last for twelve months could be completed in ten months;and
this reticence is very remarkable, considering how the Saṁhitâ sometimes indulges in
speculations about the origin of sacrificial rites. Any how we have two facts
clearly established, (1) that at the time of the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ the Gavâm-ayanam the type of all annual Sattras could be completed in ten months; and (2) that no reasons
was known at the time, as to why a Sattra
of twelve months could be thus finished in ten, except that it was an
immemorial custom. The Tâṇdya Brâhmaṇa IV, 1, has a similar discussion
about Gavâm-ayanam, and clearly
recognizes its two-fold characters so far as its duration is concerned. Sâyaṇa and Bhaṭṭ Bhâskara, in their commentaries on
the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ, cannot therefore, be said to have invented any
new theory of their own as regards the double duration of the annual Sattra. We shall discuss later on what
is denoted by cows in the above passages. At present we are concerned with
the duration of the Sattra; and if we
compare the above matter-of-fact statements in the Saṁhitâ about the double duration of
the annual Sattra with the legend of
the Dashagvas sacrificing for ten months, the conclusion, that in ancient times
the ancestors of the Vedic Aryas completed their annual sacrificial session in ten
months, becomes irresistible. This duration of the Sattra must have been changed and all such Sattras made to last for twelve months when the Vedic people came
to live in regions where such an annual session was impossible. But
conservatism in such matters is so strong that the old practice must have
outlived the change in the calendar, and it had
to be recognized as an alternative period of duration for this Sattra in the Saṁhitâs. The Taittirîya Saṁhitâ has thus to record the
alternative period, stating that it is an ancient practice, and I think it
settles the question, so far as the duration of these Sattras in ancient times is concerned. Whatever reasons we may
assign for it, it is beyond all doubt that the oldest annual Sattras lasted only for ten months.
But the
Taittirîya Saṁhitâ is not alone in being thus unable to assign any reason for this
relic of the ancient calendar, or the duration of the annual Sattra. We still designate the twelfth
month of the European solar year as December
which word etymologically denotes the tenth month, (Latin decem, Sans. dashan, ten;
and ber Sans. vâra, time or period), and we all know that Numa added two months
to the ancient Roman year and made it of twelve months. Plutarch, in his life
of Numa records another version of the story, viz., that Numa according to some, did not add the two months but
simply transferred them from the end to the beginning of the year. But the
names of the months clearly show that this could not have been the case, for
the enumeration of the months by words indicating their order as the fifth or Quintilis (old name for July), the sixth
or Sixtilis, (old name for August),
the seventh or September and so on
the rest in their order, cannot, after, it is once begun, be regarded to have
abruptly stopped at December,
allowing only the last two months to be differently named. Plutarch has,
therefore, rightly observed that we have a proof in the name of the last (month)
that the Roman year contained, at first ten months only and not twelve.* (See
Plutarchs Lives, translated into English by the Rev. John and William
Langhorne (Ward, Lock & Co.), p. 54, .) But if there was any doubt on the
point, it is now removed by the analogy of the Gavâm-ayanam and the legends of the Dashagvas and Dîrghatamas.
Macrobius (Saturnal Lib. I. Chap. 12) confirms the story of
Numas adding and not simply transposing, two months to the ancient year of ten
months. What the Avesta has to say on this subject we shall see later on where
traditions about the ancient year amongst the other Aryan races will also be
considered. Suffice it to say for the present that, according to tradition, the
ancient Roman year consisted only of ten months, and like the duration of the Gavâm-ayanam, it was subsequently
changed into a year of twelve months; and yet, so far as I know, no reason has
yet been discovered, why the Roman year in ancient times was considered to be
shorter by two months. On the contrary, the tendency is either to explain away
the tradition some how as inconvenient, or to ignore it altogether as
incredible. But so long as the word December is before us and we know how it is
derived, the tradition cannot be so lightly set side. The Encyclopćdia Britannica
(s.v. calendar) records the ancient
tradition that the oldest Roman year of
The
Taittirîya Saṁhitâ and the Aitareya Brâhmaṇa speak of the Gavâm-ayanam as being really held by the cows. Was it really a
session of these animals? Or was it something else? The Aitareya Brâhmaṇa, we have seen, throws out a
suggestion that the cows are the Âdityas, that is the month-gods, and the
Cows session is really the session of the monthly sun-gods.*( See Aitareya
Brâh. IV, 17, quoted supra)
Comparative mythology now fully bears out the truth of this remarkable
suggestion put forward by the Brâhmaṇa. Cows, such as we meet them in the
mythological legends, represent days and nights of the year, not only in the
Vedic but also in the Greek mythology; any we can, therefore, now give a better
account of the origin of this sacrificial session than that it was a session of
bovine animals for the purpose of obtaining horns. Speaking of cows in the
Aryan mythology, Prof. Max Müller in his Contributions
to the Science of Mythology (Vol. II. p. 761) writes as follows:
There were
thus three kinds of cows, the real cows, the cows in the dark cloud (rain =
milk), and the cows stepping forth from the dark stable of the night (the rays
of the morning). These three are not always easy to distinguish in the Veda;
nay, while we naturally try to distinguish between them, the poets themselves
seem to delight in mixing them up. In the passage quoted above (I, 32, 11), we
saw how the captive waters were compared to cows that had been stolen by Paṇi (niruddhâḥ âpaḥ Pâṇînâ iva gâvaḥ), but what is once compared in the
Veda is soon identified. As to the Dawn, she is not only compared to a cow, she
is called the cow straight out. Thus when we read, R.V. I. 92, 1. These dawns
have made a light on the eastern half of the sky, they brighten their splendor,
the bright cows approach, the mothers, the cows, gâvaḥ, can only be the dawns themselves,
the plural of dawn being constantly in the Veda used where we should use the
singular. In R.V. 1, 93, 4, we read that Agnîshomau deprived Paṇi of his cows and found light for
many. Here again the cows are the dawns kept by Paṇi in the dark stable or cave of the
night, discovered by Saramâ and delivered every morning by the gods of light.
We read in
R.V. I, 62, 3, that Bṛihaspati split the rock and found the cows.
Of Indra
it is said, II, 19, 3, that he produced the sun and found the cows; of Bṛihaspati, II, 24, 3, that he drove
out the cows, that he split the cave by his word, that he hid the darkness, and
lighted up the sky. What can be clearer? The Maruts also, II, 34, 1, are said
to uncover the cows and Agni. V, 14, 4, is praised for killing the friends, for
having overcome darkness by light, and having found the cows, water and the
sun.
In all
these passages we find no iva or na, which would indicate that the word
cow was used metaphorically. The dawns or days as they proceed from the dark
stable, or are rescued from evil spirits, are spoken of directly as the cows.
If they, are spoken of in the plural, we find the same in the case of the Dawn
(uṣhas) who is often conceived as many, as
in II, 28, 2, upâyane uṣhasâm gomatînâm, at the approach of the dawns with their cows. From that it required
but a small step to speak of the one Dawn as the mother of the cows, IV, 52, 2,
mâtâ gavâm.
Kuhn
thought that these cows should be understood as the red clouds of the morning.
But clouds are not always present at sunrise, nor can it well be said that they
are carried off and kept in prison during the night by the powers of darkness.
But what
is important and settles the point is the fact that these cows or oxen of the
dawn or of the rising sun occur in other mythologies also and are there clearly
meant for days. They are numbered as 12 × 30, that is, the thirty days of the
12 lunar months. If Helios has 350 oxen and 350 sheep, that can only refer to
the days and to the nights of the year, and would prove the knowledge of a year
of 350 days before the Aryan separation.
Thus the
cows in mythology are the days and nights, or dawns, that are imprisoned by Paṇi, and not real living cows with
horns. Adopting this explanation and substituting these metaphorical cows for gâvaḥ in the Gavâm-ayanam, it is
not difficult to see that underneath the strange story of cows holding a
sacrificial session for getting horns, there lies concealed the remarkable
phenomenon, that, released from the clutches of Paṇi, these cows of days and nights
walked on for ten months, the oldest duration of the session known as Cows,
walk. In plain language this means, if it means anything, that the oldest Aryan
year was one of ten months followed by the long night, during which the cows
were again carried away by the powers of darkness. We have seen that the oldest
Roman year was of ten months, and the Avesta, as will be shown later on, also speaks
of ten months summer prevailing in the Airyana Vaęjo before the home :was
invaded by the evil spirit, who brought on ice and severe winter in that place.
A year of ten months with a long night of two months may thus be taken to be
known before the Aryan separation, and the references to it in the Vedic
literature are neither isolated nor imaginary. They are the relics of ancient
history, which have been faithfully preserved in the sacrificial literature of
But as
stated in the previous chapter, a year in the circum-polar region will always
have a varying number of the months or sunshine according to latitude.
Although, therefore, there is sufficient evidence to establish the existence
of, a year of ten months, we cannot hold that it was the only year known in
ancient times. In fact we have seen that the legend of Aditi indicates the
existence of the seven months of sunshine; and a band of thirty continuous
dawns supports the same conclusion. But it seems that a year of ten months of
sunshine was more prevalent, or was selected as the mean of the different
varying years. The former view is rendered probable by the fact that of the Aṅgirases of various forms (virűpas) the Navagvas and the Dashagvas
are said to be the principal or the most important in the Ṛig-Veda (X, 62, 6), But whichever
view we adopt, the existence of a year of seven, eight, nine, ten or eleven
months of sunshine follows as a matter of course, if the ancient Aryan home was
within the Arctic circle. Prof. Max Müller, in his passage quoted above, points
out that the old Greek year probably consisted of 350 days, the 350 oxen of
Helios representing the days, and 350 sheep representing the nights. He also
notices that in German mythology 700 gold rings of Wieland, the smith, are
spoken of, and comparing the number with 720 sons of Agni mentioned in I, 164,
11, he draws from it the conclusion that a year of 350 days is also represented
in the German mythology. This year is shorter by ten days than the civil year
of 360 days, or falls short of the full solar year by 15 days. It is,
therefore, clear that if a year of 350 days existed before the Aryan
separation, it must have been followed by a continuous night of ten days; while
where the year was of 300 days, the long night extended over 60 days of 24
hours each. We shall thus have different kinds of long nights; and it is
necessary to see if we can collect evidence to indicate the longest duration of
the night known before the Aryan separation. Speaking of the cows or oxen of
Helios, as stated in the passage quoted above, Prof. Max Müller goes on to
observe:
The cows
or oxen of Hęlios thus receive their background from the Veda, but what is told
of them by Homer is by no means clear. When it is said that the companions of
Odysseus consumed the oxen of Helios, and that they thus forfeited their return
home, we can hardly take this in the modern sense of consuming or wasting their
days, thought it may be difficult to assign any other definite meaning to it.
Equally puzzling is the fable alluded to in the Homeric hymn that Hermes stole
the oxen of Apollon and killed two of them. The number of Apollons oxen is
given as fifty (others give the number as 100 cows, twelve oxen and one bull),
Which looks like the number of weeks in the lunar year, but why Hermes should
be represented as carrying off the whole herd and then killing to, is difficult
to guess, unless we refer it to the two additional months in a cycle of four
years.
In the
light of the Arctic theory the puzzle here referred to is solved without any
difficulty. The stealing away or the carrying off of the cows need not now he
taken to mean simple wasting of the days in the modern sense of the word; nor
need we attribute such stories to the fancy of ancient bards and story
tellers. The legend or the tradition of stealing consuming, or carrying off
the cows or oxen is but another form of stating that so many days were lost,
being swallowed up in the long night that occurred at the end of the year and
lasted, according to latitude, for varying period of time. So long as
everything was to be explained on the theory of a daily struggle between light
and darkness, these legends were unintelligible. But as soon as we adopt the
Arctic theory the whole difficulty vanishes and what was confused and puzzling
before becomes at once plain and comprehensible. In the Vedic mythology cows
are similarly said to be stolen by Vṛitra or Vala, but their number is
nowhere given, unless we regard the story of Ṛijrâshva (the Red-horse)
slaughtering 100 or 101 sheep and giving them to a she-wolf to devour (I, 116,
16; 117, 18), as a modification of the story of stealing the cows. The Vedic
sacrificial literature does, however, preserve for us an important relic;
besides the one above noted, of the older calendar and especially the long
night. But in this case the relic is so deeply buried under the weight of later
explanations, adaptations and emendations, that we must here examine at some
length the history of the Soma sacrifices in order to discover the original
meaning of the rites which are included under that general name. That the Some
sacrifice is an ancient institution is amply proved by parallel rites in the
Parsi scriptures; and whatever doubt we may have regarding the knowledge of
Soma in the Indo. European period, as the word is not found in the European
languages, the system of sacrifices can be clearly traced back to the primeval
age. Of this sacrificial system the Soma sacrifice may, at any rate, be safely
taken as the oldest
representative, since it forms the main feature of the
ritual of the Ṛig-Veda and a whole Maṇḍala of 114 hymns in the Ṛig-Veda is dedicated to the praise
of Soma. A careful analysis of the Soma sacrifice may, therefore, be expected
to disclose at least partially, the nature of the oldest sacrificial system of
the Aryan race; and we, therefore, proceed to examine the same.
The chief
characteristic of the Soma sacrifice, as distinguished from other sacrifices,
is, as the name indicates, the extraction of the Soma juice and the offering
thereof to gods before drinking it. There are three libations of Soma in a day,
one in the morning, one in mid-day and the last in the evening, and all these
are accompanied by the chanting of hymns during the sacrifice. These Soma
sacrifices, if classed according to their duration, fall under three heads; (1)
those that are performed in a single day, called Ekâhas, (2) those that are performed in more than one and less than
thirteen days called Ahînas, and (3)
those that take thirteen or more than 13 days and may last even for one
thousand years, called Sattras. Under
the first head we have the Agniṣhṭoma, fully described in the Aitareya
Brâhmaṇa (III, 39-44), as the key or the type of all the sacrifices that fall
under this class. There are six modifications of Agniṣhṭoma, viz., Ati-agniṣhṭoma, Ukthya, Shoḍashî, Vâjapeya, Atirâtra and
Aptoryâma, which together with Agniṣhṭoma, form the seven parts, kinds or
modifications of the Jyotiṣhṭoma, sacrifice, (Ashv. S.S. VI, 11,
1). The modification chiefly consists in the number of hymns to be recited at
the libations, or the manner of recitation, or the number of the Grahvas or Soma-cups used on the
occasion. But with these we are not at present concerned. Of the second class
of Soma sacrifices, the Dvâdashâḥa or twelve
days sacrifice is celebrated both as Ahîna
and Sattra and is considered to be
very important. It is made up of three tryahas
(or three days performances, called respectively Jyotis, Go, and Ayus), the tenth day and the two
Atirâtras (Ait. Br. IV, 23-4). The nine days performance (three tryahas) is called Nava-râtra. Side by side with this, there are, under this head, a
number of Soma sacrifices extending over two nights or three nights, four
nights, up to twelve nights, called dvi-râtra,
tri-râtra and so on (Tait. Saṁ. VII, 1, 4; VII, 3, 2. Ashv. Shr.
Sut. X and XI; Tân. Brâ. 20, 11, 24, 19). In the third class we have the annual
Sattras and of these the Gavâm-ayanam is the type. Some Sattras which come under this class are
described as extending over 1,000 years and a discussion is found in
sacrificial works as to whether the phrase one thousand years signifies 1,000
real years, or whether it stands for 1,000 days. But we may pass it over as
unnecessary for our purpose. The annual Sattras
are the only important Sattras of
this class, and to understand their nature we must see what a ṣhaḷaha means.
The word literally denotes a group of six days (ṣhaṭ + ahan) and is used to denote
six days performance in the sacrificial literature. It is employed as a unit
to measure a month in the same way as we now use a week, a month being made up
of five ṣhaḷahas. The ṣhaḷaha, in its
turn, consists of the daily sacrifices called Jyotis, Go, Âyus and the same three taken in the
reverse order as Âyus, Go and Jyotis. Every ṣhaḷaha,
therefore, begins and ends with a Jyotiṣhṭoma (Ait. Br. IV, 15). The ṣhaḷaha is
further distinguished into Abhiplava
and Pṛishṭhya, according to the arrangement of
the stomas or songs sung at the Soma libations. An annual Sattra is in the main, made up of a number of ṣhaḷahas joined
with certain special rites at the beginning, the middle and the close of the Sattra. The central day of the Sattra is called Vihuvân, and stands by itself, dividing the Sattra into two equal halves like the wings of a house (Tait.
|
|
Parts |
Days |
|
1. |
The introductory
Atirâtra
.......... |
1 |
|
2. |
The
Chaturviṁsha day, otherwise called the Ârambhaniya (Aît. Br. IV, 12), or the
Prâyaṇîya (Tâṇḍ. Br. IV. 2), the real beginning
of the Sattra
............................ |
1 |
|
3. |
Four Abhiplava,
followed by one Pṛiṣhṭhya ṣhaḷaha each month; continued in this
way for five months .............................. |
150 |
|
4. |
Three
Abhiplava and one Pṛiṣhṭhya ṣhaḷaha
... |
24 |
|
5. |
The
Abhijit day
............ |
1 |
|
6. |
The Three
Svara-Sâman days
.......... |
3 |
|
7. |
Vishnuvân or the Central day which stands by itself i.e., not counted in the total of the Sattra days |
|
|
8. |
The three
Svara-Sâman days
....... |
3 |
|
9. |
The Vishvajit
day
................ |
1 |
|
10. |
One Pṛiṣhṭhya and three Abhiplava ṣhaḷahas
..... |
24 |
|
11. |
One Pṛiṣhṭhya and four Abhiplava ṣhaḷahas each month continued in this
way for four months
...... |
120 |
|
12. |
Three
Abhiplava ṣhaḷahas, one Go-ṣhṭoma, one Âyu-ṣhṭoma, and one Dasharâtra (the ten
days of Dvâdashâha), making up one month
............. |
30 |
|
13. |
The
Mahâvrata day, corresponding to the Chaturviṁsha day at the beginning
........... |
1 |
|
14. |
The concluding
Atirâtra
............ |
1 |
|
|
Total days: |
360 |
It will be
seen from the above scheme that there are really a few sacrificial rites which
are absolutely fixed and unchangeable in the yearly Sattra. The two Atirâtras, the introductory and the concluding, the
Chaturviṁsha and the Mahâvrata day, the Abhijit and the Vishvajit, the three
Svara-Sâman days on either side of Viṣhuvân, the Viṣhuvân itself, and the ten days of
Dvâdashâha, making up 22 days in all exclusive of Viṣhuvân, are the only parts that have
any specialty about them. The rest of the days are all made up by Abhiplava and Pṛiṣhṭhya ṣhaḷahas which therefore constitute what
may be called the elastic or the variable part of the yearly Sattra. Thus if we want a Gavâm-ayanam of ten months, we have only
to strike off five ṣhaḷahas from
the parts marked 3 and 11 in the above scheme. The Adityânâṁ-ayanam is
another modification of the above scheme in which amongst other changes, the ṣhaḷahas are all
Abhiplava, instead of being a
combination of Abhiplava and Priṣhṭhya; while if all the ṣhaḷahas are Priṣhṭhya, along with some other changes, it
becomes the Aṅgirasâm-ayanam.
All these modifications do not however, touch the total number of 360 days. But
there were sacrificers, who adopted the lunar year of 354 days and therefore, omitted
6 days from the above scheme and their Sattra
is called the Utsarginâm-ayanam
(Tait. Sam. VII, 5, 7, 1, Tâṇḍya Brâh. V, 10). In short, the
object was to make the Sattra
correspond with the year adopted, civil or lunar, as closely as possible. But
these points are not relevant to our purpose. The Brâhmaṇas and the Shrauta Sűtras give
further details about the various rites to be performed on the Viṣhuvân, the Abhijit and the Vishvajit
or the Svara-Sâman day. The Aitareya Araṇyaka describes the Mahâvrata
ceremony; while the Atirâtra and the Chaturviṁsha are described in the fourth book
of the Aitareya Brâhmaṇa. The Chaturviṁsha is so called because the stoma to be chanted on that day is
twenty-four-fold. It is the real beginning of the Sattra as the Mahâvrata is its end. The Aitareya Brâhmaṇa (IV, 14) says, The Hotṛi pours forth the seed. Thus he
makes the seed (which is poured forth) by means of the Mahâvrata day produce off-spring.
For seed if effused every year is productive. This explanation shows that like
the Pravargya ceremony, the Mahâvrata was intended to preserve the seed of the
sacrifice in order that it might germinate or grow at the proper time. It was a
sort of link between the dying and the coming year and appropriately concluded
the annual Sattra. It will be further
seen that every annual Sattra had an
Ati-râtra at each of its ends and that the Dvâdashâha, or rather the ten days
thereof, formed an important concluding part of the Sattra.
The above
is only a brief description, a mere outline of the scheme of the annual Sattras mentioned in sacrificial works,
but it is sufficient for our purpose. We can see from it that a civil year of
360 days formed their basis, and the position of the Viṣhuvân was of great importance
inasmuch as the ceremonies after it were performed in the reverse order. I have
shown elsewhere what important inferences can be drawn from the position of the
Viṣhuvân regarding the calendar in use at the time when the scheme was
settled. But we have now to consider of times which preceded the settlement of
this scheme, and for that purpose we must describe another set of Soma
sacrifices included under the general class of Sattras. It has been stated above that side by side with the
Dvâdashâha, there are Ahîna
sacrifices of two nights, three nights, etc. up to twelve nights. But these
sacrifices do not stop with the twelve nights performance. There are thirteen
nights, fourteen nights, fifteen nights, and so on up to one hundred nights
sacrifice called Trayodasha-râtra, Chaturdasha-râtra and so on up to Shata-râtra. But since the Ahîna has been defined to be a sacrifice
extending over not more than twelve or less than thirteen days, all the
night-sacrifices extending over a period longer than twelve-nights are included
in the third class, viz., the Sattras. If we, however, disregard this
artificial division, it will be found that along with the Ekâha, the Dvâdashâha and
the annual Sattras, there is a series
of, what are termed, the night-sacrifices or sattras extending over a period of time from two to one hundred nights, but not further. These
night-sacrifices or Ratri-sattras are
mentioned in the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ, the Brâhmaṇas and the Shrauta Sűtras in clear
terms and there is no ambiguity about their nature, number, or duration. The
Taittirîya Saṁhitâ in describing them often uses the word Râtriḥ (nights) in the plural, stating,
that so and so was the first to institute or to perceive so many nights meaning
so many nights sacrifice, (viṁshatim râtriḥ, VII. 3, 9, 1; dvâtriṁshatam râtriḥ VII, 4, 4,
1). According to the principle of division noted above all night-sacrifices of
less than thirteen nights duration will be called Ahîna, while those extending over longer time up to one hundred
nights will come under Sattras; but
this is, as remarked above, evidently an artificial division, and one, who
reads carefully the description of these sacrifices, cannot fail to be struck
by the fact that we have here a series of night-sacrifices from two to a
hundred nights, or if we include the Ati-râtra
in this series, we have practically a set of hundred nightly Soma sacrifices,
though, according to the principle of division adopted, some may fall under the
head of Ahîna and some under that of Sattras.
Now an
important question in connection with these Sattras
is why they alone should be designated night-sacrifices
(râtri-kratus), or night-sessions (râtri-sattras)? and why their number should be one hundred? or, in
other words, why there are no night-sattras
of longer duration than one hundred nights? The Mîmâṁsakas answer the first part of the
question by asking us to believe that the word night (râtriḥ) is really used to denote a day in
the denomination of these sacrifices (Shabara on Jaimini VIII, 1, 17). The word
dvi-râtra according to this theory
means two days sacrifice, and shata-râtra
a hundred days sacrifice. This, explanation appears very good at the first
sight, and as a matter of fact it has been accepted by all writers on the
sacrificial ceremonies. In support of it, we may also cite the fact that as the
moon was the measurer of time in ancient days, the night was then naturally
more marked then the day, and instead of saying so many days men often spoke
of so many nights, much in the same way as we now use the word fort-night.
This is no doubt good so far as it goes; but the question is why should there
be no Soma sacrifices of a longer duration than one hundred nights? and, why a
gap, a serious gap, is left in the series of Soma sacrifices after one hundred
nights Sattra until we come to the
annual Sattra of 360 days? Admitting
that night means day, we have Soma sacrifices lasting from
It seems to
me that if the word râtri in Atî-râtra is still understood to mean
night, and that if the Ati-râtra
sacrifice is even now performed during the night, there is no reason why we
should not similarly interpret the same word in Dvi-râtra, Tri-râtra
&c. up to Shata-râtra. The
objection, that the Soma juice is not extracted during the night, is more
imaginary than real; for as a matter of fact Soma libations are made in the
usual way, during the Ati-râtra
sacrifice. The Ati-râtra sacrifice is
performed at the beginning and the end of every Sattra; and all the three libations of Soma are always offered
during the three turns, or paryâyas,
of the night. The Aitareya Brâhmaṇa (IV, 5), in explaining the origin
of this sacrifice, tells us that the Asuras had taken shelter with the night
and the Devas, who had taken shelter with the day, wanted to expel them from
the dark region. But amongst the Devas, Indra alone was found ready and willing
to undertake this task; and entering into darkness, he with the assistance of
Metres, turned the Asuras out of the first part of the night by the first Soma
libation, while by means of the middle turn (paryâya) of passing the Soma-cup, the Asuras were turned out of the
middle part and by the third turn out of the third or the last part of the
night. The three Soma libations, here spoken of, are all made during the night
and the Brâhmaṇa further observes that there is no other deity save Indra and the Metres to whom they are offered
(Cf. Apas. Sh. Su. XIV, 3, 12). The next section of the Brâhmaṇa (IV, 6) distinctly raises the
question, How are the Pavamâna Stotras to be chanted for the purification of
the Soma juice provided for the night, whereas such Sutras refer only to the
day but not to the night? and answers it by stating that the Stotras are the
same for the day and the night. It is clear from this that Soma juice was
extracted and purified at night during Ati-râtra
sacrifice and Indra was the only
deity to whom the libations were offered in order to help him in his fight with
the Asuras, who had taken shelter with the darkness of the night. That the Ati-râtra is an ancient sacrifice is
further proved by the occurrence of a similar ceremony in the Parsi scriptures.
The word Ati-râtra does not occur in
the Avesta, but in the Vendibad, XVIII, 18, (43)-22 (48), we are told that
there are three parts of the night and that in the first of these parts (trishvai), Fire, the son of Ahura Mazda,
calls upon the master of the house to arise and put on his girdle and to fetch
clean wood in order that he may burn bright; for, says the Fire, Here comes Azi (Sans. Ahi) made by the Daęvas (Vedic Asuras),
who is about to strive against me and wants
to put out my life. And the asme request is made during the second and
the third part of the night. The close resemblance between this and the three paryâyas of the Ati-râtra sacrifice does not seem to have been yet noticed; but
whether noticed or not it shows that the Ati-râtra
is an ancient rite performed during the night for the purpose of helping Indra,
or the deity that fought with the powers of darkness, and that such sacrificial
acts as putting on the girdle (kosti)
or squeezing the Soma, were performed during this period of darkness.
Now what
applies to the sacrifice of a single night may well be extended to cases where
sacrifices had to be performed for two, three or more continuous nights. I have
already shown before that the ancient sacrificers completed their sacrificial
sessions in ten months and a long night followed the completion of these
sacrifices. What did the sacrificers do during this long night? They could not
have slept all the time; and as a matter of fact we know that the people in the
extreme north of
There are
other considerations which point out to the same conclusion. In the post-Vedic
literature we have a persistent tradition that Indra alone of all gods is the
master of a hundred sacrifices (shata-kratu),
and that as this attribute formed, so to say, the very essence of Indraship, he
always jealously watched all possible encroachments against it. But European
scholars relying upon the fact that even Sâyaṇa prefers, except in a few places
(III, 51, 2) to interpret shata-kratu,
as applied to Indra in the Ṛig-Veda, as meaning, not the master
of a hundred sacrifices, but the lord of a hundred mights or powers, have
not only put aside the Purâṇic tradition, but declined to
interpret the word kratu in the Ṛig-Veda except in the sense of
power, energy, skill, wisdom, or generally speaking, the power of body or
mind. But if the above explanation of the origin of the night sacrifices is
correct, we must retrace our steps and acknowledge that the Purâṇic tradition or legend is, fater
all, not built upon a pure misunderstanding of the original meaning of the
epithet shata-kratu as applied to
Indra in the Vedic-literature. I am aware of the fact that traditions in the
post-Vedic literature are often found to have but a slender basis in the Vedas,
but in the present case we have something more reliable and tangible to go
upon. We have a group, an isolated group of a hundred nightly Soma sacrifices
and as long as it stands unexplained in the Vedic sacrificial literature it
would be unreasonable to decline to connect it with the Purâṇic tradition of Indras sole
mastership of hundred sacrifices, especially when in the light of the Arctic
theory the two can be so well and intelligibly connected. The hundred
sacrifices, which are regarded as constituting the essence of Indraship in the Purâṇas, are there said to be the
Ashvamedha sacrifices and it may, at the outset, be urged that the shata-râtra sacrifice mentioned in the
sacrificial works is not an Ashvamedha sacrifice. But the distinction is
neither important, nor material. The Ashvamedha sacrifice is a Soma sacrifice
and is described in the sacrificial works along with the night-sacrifices. In
the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ ( VII, 2, 11) a hundred offerings of food to be
made in the Ashvamedha sacrifice are mentioned, and the Taittirîya Brâhmaṇa (III, 8, 15, 1) states that
Prajâpati obtained these offerings during the night, and consequently they
are called Râtri-homas. The duration
of the Ashvamedha sacrifice is again not fixed, inasmuch as it depends upon the
return of the horse and in the Ṛig-Veda (I, 163, 1) the sacrificial
horse is identified with the sun moving in waters. The return of the
sacrificial horse may, therefore, be taken to symbolize the return of the sun
after the long night and a close resemblance between the Ashvamedha and the
night-sacrifices, which were performed to enable Indra to fight with Vala and
rescue the dawn and the sun from his clutches, may thus be taken as
established. At any rate, we need not be surprised if the Shata-râtra Soma sacrifice appears in the form of a hundred
Ashvamedha sacrifices in the Purâṇas. The tradition is substantially
the same in either case and when it can be so easily and naturally explained on
the Arctic theory, it would not be reasonable to set it aside and hold that the
writers of the Purâṇas created it by misinterpreting the word Shata-kratu occurring in the Vedas.
We have
seen that shata-kratu as applied to
Indra is interpreted by Western scholars and in many places even by Sâyaṇa himself, as meaning the lord of a
hundred powers. Sâyaṇa now and then (III, 51, 2; X, 103, 7) suggests or
gives an alternative explanation and makes Indra the master of a hundred
sacrifices; but Western scholars have gone further and discarded all other
explanations except the one noted above. It is, therefore, necessary to examine
the meaning of this epithet, as used in the Ṛig-Veda, a little more closely in
this place. If the word kratu in shata-kratu be interpreted to mean
might or power, the numeral shata,
which strictly denotes a hundred, will have to be taken as equivalent to
many or numerous inasmuch as no definite set of a hundred powers can be
pointed out as specially belonging to Indra. That the word shata may be so interpreted is evident from the fact that
adjectives like shata-nîtha (I, 100,
12) and shatam-űti (I, 102, 6; 130, 8), as applied to
* See Dr. Haugs Ait.
. In fact, it
refers to the Ati-râtra sacrifice and
the Aitareya Brâhmaṇa (IV, 10) quotes and interprets it in the same way.
Sâyaṇa in his commentary on the Aitareya Brâhmaṇa though not in the Ṛig-Veda Bhâṣhya, also takes the same view; and
as the Ati-râtra sacrifice is
referred to expressly by its name in the Ṛig-Veda (VII, 103, 7) it is not at
all unlikely that a verse referring to this Soma sacrifice should occur in
other hymns. Hence if there are passages where kratu can be taken to mean a sacrifice there is no reason why the
epithet shata-kratu be not understood
to mean the master of a hundred sacrifices as suggested by the Purâṇic tradition.
Another fact which favors this interpretation, is that in
the Ṛig-Veda Indra is described as destroying 90, 99 or 100 fortresses or
cities (puraḥ) of his enemies (I, 130, 7; II, 19,
6; VI, 31, 4; II, 14, 6). Now deva-purâḥ, which means the fortresses of the
gods, has been interpreted to mean days in the description of the dash râtra
sacrifice in the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ VII, 2, 5, 3-4; and if deva-purâḥ means days, the purâḥ (cities,
fortresses) of Shambara may well be taken to mean nights. This view is
confirmed by the statement in the Aitareya Brâhmaṇa previously quoted, which says that
the Asuras found shelter with the night, or in other words, the darkness of the
night was, so to say, their fortress. Indras destroying a hundred forts of
Shambara is, therefore, equivalent to his fighting with the enemy for a hundred
continuous nights, a period during which the ancient sacrificers offered him
Sonia libations in order that he may be better prepared for the struggle with
Vala. The destruction of 99 or 100 forts of the enemy, a group of a hundred
nightly sacrifices, the nine and ninety rivers (sravantîḥ) which Indra is described as
crossing during his fight with Ahi (I, 32, 14), and a hundred leather straps
with which Kutsa is said to have bound down Indra to his sacrifice in the Tâṇdya Brâhmaṇa IX, 2, 22, and from which he is
invoked to free himself in Ṛig. X, 38, 5, are but so many
different kaleidoscopic views of the same idea which makes Indra and Indra
alone the lord of a hundred sacrifices; and if we take all these together they
undoubtedly point out to the existence of a hundred continuous nights in the
ancient home of the ancestors of the Vedic people. In V, 48, 3, a hundred, moving in the abode of Indra
are said to turn on and turn off the course of ordinary days when
Indra strikes Vṛitra with his bolt;* and I think we have here a
distinct allusion either to a hundred sacrifices performed or to a hundred
continuous nights required for securing a complete victory over the powers of
darkness in the nether world, and which nights (or rather one long night of
hundred days) may well be described as breaking
off and bringing back the
succession of ordinary days and nights, inasmuch as the long night immediately
follows and precedes the period of sunshine in the Arctic regions.
But a far more striking
corroboration of the above view is furnished by certain passages in the Avesta
which describe the fight of Tishtrya with the demon of draught called Apa osha
or the burner in the Parsi scriptures. In the Ṛig-Veda the fight of Indra with Vṛitra (Vṛitra-tűrya)
is often represented as a struggle for waters (up-tűrya), or as the striving for cows (go-iṣhṭi), or the
striving for day (div-iṣhṭi) and Indra
is said to have released the cows or waters, and brought on the dawn or the sun
by killing Vṛitra (I, 51, 4; II, 19, 3). Now
As Tishtrya appears before man after
his battle with Apaosha, the phrase appointed time signifies the time during
which the battle is fought and at the termination of which Tishtrya comes to
the faithful; and the passage, therefore, means (1) that the appointed time,
when Tishtrya was to appear before man after fighting with Apaosha, varied from
one night to a hundred nights and (2) that Tishtrya required to be strengthened
during the period by Haoma sacrifices in which he was to be invoked by his own
name. We have seen above that a hundred nightly Soma sacrifices were offered to
Indra by the ancient Vedic sacrificers to enable him to secure a victory over Vṛitra and that Indra was the only
deity to whom the libations were offered in these sacrifices. The legend of
Tishtrya and Apaosha is, therefore, an exact reproduction of Indras fight with
Vṛitra or Vala; and with his correspondence before us, we should feel no
hesitation in accepting the view stated above regarding the origin of the Shata-râtra sacrifice. Neither
Darmesteter nor Spiegel explains why the appointed time for the appearance of
Tishtrya is described as one night, or two nights, or fifty or a hundred
nights, though both translate the original in the same way. The legend also
forms the subject of chapter VII of the Bundahish, but there, too, we find no
explanation as to why the appointed time is described as varying from one to a
hundred nights. It is, however, suggested by some that the appointed time may
refer to the season of rains. But rains cannot be said to come after one
night, two nights, or fifty, or a hundred nights, and the latter expression
would therefore, be utterly inappropriate in their case; nor, as stated above,
does Tishtryas fight with Apaosha represent only a struggle for rain, since we
know that it is a struggle for light as well. We have also seen that the
existence of night-sacrifices in the Vedic literature, extending over one, two,
three, or ten, or a hundred nights, indicates the long darkness during which
Indra fought with Vala; and the coincidence between this fact and the
appointed time, of Tishtrya cannot be regarded as accidental. The legends are
undoubted in identical character, and taking the one to illustrate the other,
the only conclusion deducible from them is that, a hundred nights was regarded
to be the maximum duration of the fight between Indra and Vala, or Tishtrya and
Apaosha, so far as the ancestors of the Indo-Iranian people were concerned, and
that the sea Vouru-Kasha, or the ocean encompassed with darkness, as the Ṛig-Veda has it (II, 23, 18), was the
scene of this battle between the powers of light and darkness. We also learn
from them that the hero of the battle, whether he was Indra or Tishtrya, stood
in need of help, derived from the performance of the sacrifices specially offered to him during the
period; and that as a matter of fact such sacrifices were performed in ancient
times. The word shata-kratu does not
occur in the Avesta, but in the Ashi Yasht (Yt. XVII, 56) a ram of
hundred-fold energy (maeshahe satokarahe)
is spoken of; and considering the fact that in the Bahram Yasht (Yt. XIV, 23)
a beautiful ram, with horns bent round is said to be one of the incarnations
of Vere-thraghna, and that Indra is also described as appearing in the form of
a ram in the Ṛig-Veda (VIII, 2, 40), it is very probable that the phrase sato-karahe maeshahe refers to
Vere-thraghna in the Ashi Yasht, and like the epithet shata-kratu, the adjective sato-karahe
means not possessed of hundred powers, but the master of a hundred deeds or
sacrifices. There is thus a very close correspondence between the Vedic and
the Avestic ideas on this subject, and this strengthens the conclusion that the
night sacrifices in the Vedic literature had their origin in the existence of a
long continuous night of varying durations in the original home of the Vedic
people. We can now also satisfactorily explain why Tishtrya is described (Yt.
VIII, 36, vide Spiegels Trans.) as
bringing hither the circling years of men. It is the Avestic parallel of the
Vedic story of the Dawn setting in motion the ages of men, or mânuṣhâ yugâ, discussed in the last chapter,
and stews that when Tishtryas fight with Apaosha, or Indias war with Vala,
was over, the new year commenced with the long dawn, followed by the months of
sunshine varying from
* The passage about Tishtryas connection with the year is noticed by
Mr. Meherjibhai Nosherwanji Kuka, M.A., in his essay On the order of Parsi
months, published in the Cama Memorial
Volume (p. 58), and of which he was kind enough to send me a separate copy.
In the
light of what has been stated above, we can now better understand the original
nature and meaning of the Ati-râtra
sacrifice. It is a nightly sacrifice, performed during the night, even at
present, and the Mîmâṁsakas have not succeeded in converting it into a
day-sacrifice. So far it is all right; but the question is why should the
sacrifice be called Ati-râtra? The prefix ati
(corresponding with Latin trans)
ordinarily denotes something beyond something on the other side, or at the
other end, and not something pervading, extending, or spreading the whole
extent of anything. Even Sâyaṇa in his commentary on VII, 103, 7,
the only place where the word Ati-râtra
occurs in the Ṛig-Veda, explains it to mean that which is the past
or beyond the night (râtrim atîtya
vartate iti ati-râtraḥ), and Rudradatta in his commentary
on the Âpasthamba Shrauta Sűtra (XIV, 1, 1), gives the same explanation. The Ati-râtra therefore, denotes a trans nocturnal sacrifice that is,
performed at either end of the night. Now according to the Aitareya Brâhmaṇa (IV, 5),
But whatever the difficulties of interpretation may be, one
thing seems to be quite clear from this passage, viz., that Tishtrya was the
star by which the year was reckoned. In the Tir Yasht § 5, springs of water are
said to flow at the rising of Tishtrya, who in § 16 is described as mingling
his shape with light, or moving in light, § 46. All these incidents can be
satisfactorily explained if we suppose that, after Tishtryas fight with
Apaosha, lasting for 100 nights at the longest; the aerial waters, which
communicated motion to the sun and other heavenly bodies (see Faravardin Yasht
53-58) and which lay still or stagnant during the time, were set free to move
again along the path made by Mazda, bringing on with them the light of the sun
and thus commencing the new year after the long winter night in the Arctic
region. The simultaneous character of the motion of waters, the commencement of
the new year, and the winning of light after Tishtryas fight with Apaosha, can
be explained only in this way, and not by making the legend refer to the rainy
season (see the discussion about waters in the next chapter). The Pairika Duz-yairya, or the Bad Year, which
Tishtrya is said to break asunder, is on this theory, the wearisome dark Arctic
night.
The passage
is in the Tir Yasht, § 36: Tishtrîm
stârem raevantem kharenanghuantem yazamaide, yim yâre-chareṣho maṣhyehe Ahuracha khratu-gűto aurunacha gairiṣhâcho sizdaracha ravascharâto uziyoirentem hisposentem huyâiryâicha
danghve uzjasentem duzyâiryâicha, kata Airyâo danghâvo huyâiryâo bavâonti. Spiegel translates it thus, We
praise the star Tishtrya, the shining, the majestic, who brings here the
circling years of men. Darmesteter takes yâre-chareṣho &c.,
with the words following, viz., uziyoirentem hisposentem, and
translates, We praise Tishtrya &c., whose rising is watched by men, who
live on the fruits of the year. According to Dastur Erachji Mleherjirana (see
his Yasht bâ mâeni), the meaning of
the whole paragraph, in which this passage occurs, is: We praise Tishtrya,
&c, who maketh the year revolve in accordance with the notions of the
mountaineers and the nomads. He riseth and is visible towards the regions where
there is no correct calculation of the year.
the Ati-râtra sacrifice is performed for the
purpose of driving out the Asuras from the darkness of night; and the Tâṇḍya Brâhmaṇa (IV, 1, 4-5) tells us that
Prajâpati, who first perceived the sacrifice, created from it the twin of day
and night (aho-râtre). It follows
from this that the Ati-râtra was
performed at the close of such night as give rise-to the ordinary days and
nights, or, in other words, the regular succession of days and nights followed
its performance. This can only be the case if we suppose that the Ati-râtra was performed at the end of a
long continuous night in regions where such night occurred. With us in the
temperate or the tropical zone, ordinary days and nights regularly succeed each
other throughout the year without any break, and it is meaningless, if not
absurd, to speak of the cycle of day and night as produced from a particular
night in the year. Again, on the theory of a daily struggle between light and
darkness the Asuras must be turned out of darkness every night, and strictly
speaking the performance of the Ati-râtra
is necessary on every one of the 360 nights of the Sattra. But as a matter of fact the Ati-râtra is performed only at the beginning and the end of the Sattra; and even then the regular Sattra is said to commence on the
Chaturviṁsha and close on the Mahavrata day, and not on the concluding
Atirâtra day. It seems, therefore, that the performance of the Ati-râtra was not originally intended to
drive away the Asuras from only the first of 360 nights over which the Sattra now extends. For in that case
there is no reason why the Asuras were not required to be expelled from
everyone of the 360 nights. It follows, therefore, that the Ati-râtra or the
traps-nocturnal sacrifice refers to some night not included in the regular nights
of the Gavâm-ayanam. It is true that
the Ati-râtra is performed at the
beginning and the end of every Sattra
and in one sense it is therefore, a trans-sattra
or ati-sattra sacrifice. But that
does not account for the name Ati-râtra
as the Sattra is not held during
night. We must, therefore hold that the two Ati-râtras
were originally performed not at the beginning and the end of a Sattra but at the beginning and the end
of a night which occurred or intervened between the last and the first day of
the Sattra. When this night ended
with an Ati-râtra the usual Sattra began and as the sun was above
the horizon during the period producing the regular succession of days and
nights no Ati-râtra was needed during
the Sattra, for as stated in the
Taṇḍya Brâhmaṇa the object of the Ati-râtra was gained. But the Sattra
closed with the long night and the Ati-râtra
had therefore again to be performed at the end of the Sattra to drive the Asuras from this night. I have shown before
that we have direct and reliable authority in the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ to
hold that the Gavâm-ayanam was once
completed in ten months or 300 days and it was therefore appropriately closed
with and introduced by an Ati-râtra.
The word Ati-râtra is thus rationally
explained, for the sacrifice was performed at the beginning and the close of
the long night and, was therefore, adequately called a trans-nocturnal
sacrifice. Between these two Ati-râtras
came all the night-sacrifices mentioned above, offered exclusively to Indra.
The old Gavâm-ayanam of ten or less
than ten months, the Ati-râtra or the
trans-nocturnal, the Râtri-kratus and
Râtri-sattras, or nightly Soma
sacrifices of two, three, &c., up to a hundred continuous nights
duration,and lastly the Ati-râtra, to
be again followed by the Gavâm-ayanam,
thus formed the complete yearly round of sacrifices performed by the primeval
ancestors of the. Vedic people; and each of these sacrifices had originally the
same place in the yearly round as is indicated by the root-meaning of its name.*
* The time here assigned to the Râtri-sattras
appears to have been known to the Shrauta Sűtras, or in the Lâṭyâyana
Shrauta Sűtra VIII, 2, 16, we have passage meaning that After the year (annual
sacrificial session) is over, the Soma should be purchased during the Râtri-sattras, evidently showing that
the Râtri-sattras came at the end of
the yearly Sattras.
But when the year of
ten months was converted into one of twelve to suit the altered conditions of
the new home, the Gavâm-ayanam
expanded into a performance of 360 days, and the elastic nature of the greater
portion of the performance, as pointed out above, permitted the change to be
easily carried out. But though the annual Sattra
expanded in this way, encroaching upon the night-sacrifices of the long night,
which were no longer needed, the Ati-râtra
was retained as an introductory sacrifice and was incorporated in the
ceremonies of the Sattra itself. Thus
the two Ati-râtra sacrifices, which
were originally performed, as shown by the etymology, at the two termini of the
long night, came to be converted into the introductory and concluding
sacrifices of the annual Sattra; and
if the word Ati-râtra had not been
retained, we could not have got any clue to reveal to us the-story of its
changing fortune. But the night-sacrifices, the Râtri-kratus or Râtri-sattras,
which were performed during the long night between the two Ati-râtras, were no longer needed and. their nature came to be soon
misunderstood, until at last the Mîmâṁsakas finally made room for them in
the class of daily Soma sacrifices, partly under Ahînas and partly under Sattras,
by means of the equation that râtri
(night) is equal to aho-râtre (day
and night) in the sacrificial literature. How this change was carried out is a
question beyond the scope of this book; but I may- here state that, in my
opinion, it was the authors of Brâhmaṇas,or the Brahmavâdins who preceded
them, that had to perform the difficult task of adapting the ancient
sacrificial calendar to the changed conditions of their new home, somewhat
after the manner of Numas reform of the ancient Roman calendar. The sacrifice
was the main ritual of the Vedic religion, and naturally enough the priests
must have tried to preserve as much of the old sacrificial system as they
possibly could in adapting it to the new conditions. The task was by no means
an easy one, and those that find fault with the Brâhmaṇas as full of
fanciful speculations must bear in mind the fact that an ancient and sacred
system of sacrifices had to be adapted to new conditions, by assigning
plausible reasons for the same, at a time when the true origin of the system
was almost forgotten. The Brâhmaṇas could not have indulged in free
speculations about the origin of the rites and ceremonies mentioned by them,
had the latter originated in their own time, or in days so near to them that
the real traditions about the origin of these ceremonies could be preserved
intact. But so long as these traditions were fresh, no explanation was probably
needed; and when they became dim, their place had to be supplied by plausible
reasons based on such traditions as were known at the time. This throws quite a
new light on the nature and composition of the Brâhmaṇas: but as the
discussion is not pertinent to the subject in hand, we cannot enter into it
more fully in this place.
We have now
reviewed the leading features of the system of Soma sacrifices as described in
the Vedic literature, so far as our purpose is concerned, and seen that by the
aid of the Arctic theory, some hard facts therein, which have been hitherto
incomprehensible, can be easily and naturally explained. A history of the whole
sacrificial system from the point of view indicated above is a work quite
outside the pale of this book; but so far as we have examined the subject and
especially the question about the isolated group of a hundred nightly Soma
sacrifices, I think, we have sufficient evidence therein to warrant us in
holding that these sacrifices are a relic of the ancient times when the
ancestors of the Vedic Ṛiṣhis performed them with the object of
helping Indra to fight with the powers of darkness. It has been already shown
in the first part of this chapter that the Gavâm-ayanam
or the Cows walk like the Roman year, once lasted only for ten months; and a
series of suitable night-sacrifices is a natural supplement to such sessions.
Both are relics of ancient times, and taken along with the evidence regarding
the existence of a long dawn of thirty days and of the long day and night
discussed in previous chapters, they conclusively establish the existence of an
ancient home of the ancestors of the Vedic people in the circum-polar region.
The sacrificial sessions of the Navagvas and the Dashagvas, the legend of
Dîrghatamas growing old in the tenth month, the tradition about the ancient
year of five seasons, or the yoking of seven or ten horses to the chariot of
the sun, all go to strengthen the same view; and the Avestic passages regarding
the duration of Tishtryas fight with Apaosha, the Purâṇic tradition
about Indras being the master of a hundred sacrifices or the destroyer of a
hundred cities, the existence of a series of one hundred nightly Soma
sacrifices, which, though obsolete long since, could not have found place in
the sacrificial works as Râtri-sattras,
unless they were ancient sacrifices performed, as their name indicates, during
night, these and many other minor facts noticed before, further corroborate,
if corroboration be needed, our theory regarding the original home of the Aryans
near the North Pole. It must, however, be stated here that I do not wish to
imply in any way that the numerous sacrificial details found in the later Vedic
literature were in vogue or were known in these ancient times. On the contrary
I am prepared to believe that in all probability these ancient sacrifices were
very simple in character. I he ancient priests probably went on sacrificing
from day today and afterwards from night to night, without any idea that the
system was capable of giving rise to various rigid annual Sattras. The sacrifice was the only ritual of their religion; and
howsoever simple such sacrifices might have been in ancient times, it was
almost a matter of duty, at least with the priests, to perform them every day.
It was also a means, as remarked by me elsewhere, to keep up the calendar in
ancient times, as the yearly round of sacrifices closely followed the course of
the sun. It is from this latter point of view that the ancient sacrificial
system is important for historical or antiquarian purposes, and I have examined
it above in the same light. This examination, it will be seen, has resulted in
the discovery of a number of facts which lead us directly to, and can be
satisfactorily explained only by the theory of the original Arctic home; and
when our conclusions are thus supported by the hymns of the Ṛig-Veda on
the one hand, and the sacrificial literature on the other, I think, we need
have no doubt about their correctness.
CHAPTER IX
VEDIC MYTHS THE
CAPTIVE WATERS
Direct evidence for the Arctic theory summed up Different
nature of the mythological evidence Schools of mythological interpretation
The naturalistic or the Nairukta school Its theories The Dawn theory and
the myths explained by it The Storm theory, Indra and Vṛitra The
Vernal theory, the Ashvins exploits Vṛitras legend usually explained
by the Storm theory Simultaneous effects of Indras conquest over
Vṛitra The release of waters, the release, of cows, the recovery of the
dawn and the production of the sun Vedic authorities in support of their
simultaneous character Passages relating to the place and time of the
conflict The simultaneous nature left unexplained by the Dawn or the Storm
theory Battle not fought in the atmosphere above, as implied by the Stormy
theory Nor in the rainy season Misinterpretation of words like parvata, giri, adri, &c. The
Storm theory inadequate in every respect New explanation necessary The real
nature of waters explained They are aerial or celestial waters, and not the
waters of rain Vedic bards knew of a region below the three earths The
contrary view of Wallis refuted The real meaning of rajas, Nir-riti, ardhau and samudram explained Cosmic circulation of aerial waters Neither
world, the home of aerial waters Avestic passages describing the circulation
of waters cited and explained Sarasvati and Ardvi Sűra Anâhita are celestial
rivers The source of all plants and rain The real nature of Vṛitras
fight Simultaneous release of waters and light is intelligible, if both have
the same source Both stopped by Vṛitras encompassing the waters in the
lower world The closing of the apertures in the mountains (parvatas) on the horizon The movement
of the waters and the sun co-related Express passages from the Avesta to that
effect The sun stopping for a long time in waters Avestic passages in
support thereof Its effect on disposal of corpses Darkness synchronous with
the cessation of the flow of waters in winter Its long duration Cosmic
circulation of waters in other mythologies Express texts showing that the
fight with Vṛitra was annual and fought in winter Inexplicable except
on the Arctic theory The exact date of Indras fight with Vṛitra
preserved in the Ṛig-Veda The real meaning of chatvârimshyâm sharadi explained Shambara found on the 40th day
of Sharad Denotes the commencement
of the long night Vedic passages showing Sharad
to be the last season of sunshine Paleographical evidence for reckoning time
by seasons-Similar reckoning time by seasons Similar reckoning in the Avesta
100 autumnal forts of Vṛitra and the killing of the watery demon with ice
explained The seven rivers released by Indra Cannot be terrestrial, nor the
rivers of the Panjaub The interpretation of western scholars examined and
rejected The connection between the seven rivers and the seven sons pointed
out The origin of the phrase Hapta-hindu
in the Avesta Probably a transference of an old mythological name to a place
in the new home Vṛitras legend Arctic in origin Captive waters
represent the yearly struggle between light and the darkness in the ancient
Arctic home.
We have now
examined most of the Vedic passages, which directly show that the Polar or the
Circum-Polar characteristics, determined in the third chapter, were known by
tradition to the Vedic bards. We started with the tradition about the night of
the gods, or a day and a night of six months each, and found that it could be
traced back to the Indo-Iranian, if not to the Indo-Germanic, period. A close
examination of the dawn-hymns in the Ṛig-Veda next disclosed the fact
that Uṣhas, or the deity presiding over the dawn, is often addressed in
the plural number in the Vedic hymns, and that this could be accounted for only
on the supposition that the Vedic dawns were a closely connected band of many
dawns-a supposition, which was found to be fully borne out by express passages
in the Vedic literature, stating, in unambiguous terms, that the Vedic dawns
were 30 in number and that in ancient times a period of several days elapsed
between the first appearance of light on the horizon and the rising of the sun.
We have also found that the dawn is expressly described in the Ṛig-Veda
as moving round like a wheel, a characteristic, which is the true only in the
case of the Polar dawn. These facts sufficiently prove the acquaintance of the
Vedic bards with the physical phenomena, witnessible only in the Arctic
regions. But to make the matter more certain, I have, in the last three
chapters, quoted and discussed Vedic passages, which go to prove that the long
Arctic nights and the corresponding long days of varying duration, as well as a
year of ten months or five seasons, were equally known to the poets of the Ṛig-Veda.
An examination of the ancient sacrificial system and especially of the annual Sattras and night-sacrifices, further
showed that in old times yearly sacrificial sessions did not last for twelve
months; as at present, but were completed in nine or ten months; and the
hundred night-sacrifices were, at that time, really performed as their name
indicates, during the darkness of the long night. The legends of Dîrghatamas
and Aditis sons, and the tradition about the sacrificial sessions of the
Navagvas and the Dashagvas also pointed to the same conclusion. Our case does
not therefore, depend on an isolated fact here and an isolated fact there. We
have seen that the half-year long day and night, the long dawn with its
revolving splendors, the long continuous night matched by the corresponding
long day and associated with a succession of ordinary days and nights of
varying lengths and the total annual period of sunshine of less than twelve
months are the principal peculiar characteristics of the Polar or the
Circum-Polar calendar; and when express passages are found in the Vedas, the
oldest record of early Aryan thoughts and sentiments, showing that each and
every one of these characteristics was known to the Vedic bards, who themselves
lived in. a region where the year was made up of three hundred and sixty or
three hundred and sixty five days, one is irresistibly led to the conclusion
that the poets of the Ṛig-Veda must have known these facts by tradition
and that their ancestors must have lived in regions where such phenomena were
possible. It is not to be expected that the evidence on each and every one of
these points will be equally conclusive, especially as we are dealing with
facts which existed thousands of years ago. But if we bear in mind that the facts
are astronomically connected in such a way that if one of them is firmly
established all the others follow from it as a matter of course, the cumulative
effect of the evidence discussed in the previous chapters cannot fail to be
convincing. It is true that many of the passages, quoted in support of the
Arctic theory, are interpreted, in the way I have done, for the first time; but
I have already pointed out that this is due to the fact that the real key to
the interpretation of thesepassages was-discovered only during the last 30 or
40 years. Yâska and Sâyaṇa knew nothing definite about the circum-polar
or the Arctic regions and when a Vedic passage was found not to yield a sense
intelligible to them, they either contented themselves with barely explaining
the verbal texture of the passage, or distorted it to suit their own ideas.
Western scholars have corrected some of these mistakes, but as the possibility
of an Arctic home in pre-glacial times was not admitted 30 or 40 years back,
the most explicit references, whether in the Avesta or the Ṛig-Veda, to a
primeval home in the extreme north, have been either altogether ignored, or,
somehow or other explained away, even by Western scholars. Many of the passages
cited by me fall under this class; but I trust that if my interpretations are
examined without any bias and in the, light of the latest scientific
researches, they will be found to be far more natural and simple than those in
vogue at present. In some cases no new interpretations were, however,
necessary. The passages have been correctly interpreted; but in the absence of
the true key to their meaning, their real import was either altogether missed,
or but imperfectly understood. In such cases I have had to exhibit the passages
in their true light or colors, giving in each case, my reasons for doing the same.
This has sometimes rendered, it necessary to introduce certain topics not
directly relevant to the question in hand; but on the whole, I think, it will
be found that I have, as far as possible, tried to confine myself to the
discussion of the direct evidence bearing on the points in issue and have
examined it according to the strict method of historic or scientific
investigation. I did not start with any preconceived notion in favor of the
Arctic theory, nay, I, regarded it as highly improbable at first; but the
accumulating evidence in its support eventually forced me to accept it, and in
all probability, the evidence cited in the previous chapters, will, I think,
produce the same impression on the readers mind.
But the
evidence, which I am now going to cite in support of the Arctic theory, is of a
different character. If theancestors of the Vedic bards ever lived near the
North Pole the cosmical or the meteorological conditions of the place could not
have failed to influence the mythology of these people; and if our theory is
true, a careful examination of the Vedic myths ought to disclose facts which
cannot be accounted for by any other theory. The probative value of such
evidence will manifestly be inferior to that of the direct evidence previously cited,
for myths and legends are variously explained by different scholars. Thus Yâska
mentions three or four different schools of interpretation, each of which tries
to explain the nature and character of the Vedic deities in a different way.
One of these schools would have us believe that many of the deities were real
historical personages, who were subsequently apotheosized for their
supernatural virtues or exploits. Other theologians divide the deities into Karma devatâs or those that have been
raised to the divine rank by their own deeds and Âjâna devatâs or those that were divine by birth while the
Nairuktas (or the etymologists) maintain Vedic deities represent certain
cosmical and physical phenomena such as the appearance of the dawn or the
breaking up of the storm-clouds by the lightening. The Adhyâtmikâs, on the
other hand, try to explain certain Vedic passages in their own philosophical
way; and there are others who endeavor to explain Vedic myths in other
different ways. But this is not the place where the relative merits of these
different schools can be discussed or examined. I only wish to point out that
those, who explain the Vedic myths on the supposition that they represent,
directly or allegorically, ethical, historical, or philosophical facts are not
likely to accept any inference based upon the theory which interprets the Vedic
myths as referring to certain cosmical and physical phenomena. It was for this
reason that I reserved the discussion of the mythological evidence for
consideration in a separate chapter, after all the evidence directly bearing on
the subject has been examined. The evidence, which proves the existence of a
long continuous dawn, or a long continuous day or night, is not affected by the
different theories regarding the interpretation ofthe Vedic myths, and may
therefore, be termed what the lawyers call direct; but in the case of
mythological evidence only those who accept the Nairukta method of
interpretation, will admit the validity of any inference based upon the consideration
of these myths. It is true that the Nairukta school of interpretation dates
from ancient times, and that modern scholars have accepted the method almost
without reserve, though they might differ from the ancient Nairuktas, like
Yâska, in the details of the explanation suggested by them. But still when a
new theory is to be established, I thought it safer to separate the
mythological from the direct evidence bearing upon the points at issue, even
when the two lines of investigation seemed to converge towards the same point.
Now it has
been recorded by Yâska that the Nairuktas explain most of the Vedic legends on
the theory that they represent either the daily triumph of light over darkness,
or the conquest of the storm-god over the dark clouds that imprison the
fertilizing waters and the light of the sun. Thus when the Ashvins are said to
have rescued a quail (Vartikâ) from
the jaws of a wolf, Yâska interprets the legend to mean the release and
bringing out of the dawn or light from the darkness of the night (Nir. V, 21).
His explanation of the character of Vṛitra is another instance in point.
Speaking of the nature of the demon, he thus refers (Nir. II, 16) to the
opinions of the different schools, Who was Vṛitra? A cloud, say the
Nairuktas; an Asura, son of Tvaṣhṭṛi, say the Aitihâsikas.
The fall of rain arises from the mingling of the waters and of light. This is
figuratively depicted as a conflict. The hymns and the Brâhmaṇas describe
Vṛitra as a serpent. By the expansion of his body, he blocked up the
streams. When he was destroyed the waters flowed forth.(Nir. II, 16. Cf.
Muirs O. S. T. Vol. II, p. 175).
The Storm and the Dawn theories thus
formed the basis of the Nairukta school of interpretation, and though Western
scholars have improved upon it, yet the credit of suggesting this method of
interpretation will always rest with the ancient Nairuktas, who, as observed by
Prof. Max Müller, had carefully thought out the true character of the Vedic
gods several centuries before the Christian era. Thus the legend of Prajâpati
loving his own daughter is explained in the Aitareya Brâhmaṇa as
referring to the sun running after the dawn or the heaven above (Ait. Br. III,
33); while Kumârila extends this theory to the case of Indra and Ahilyâ, which according
to him represent the sun and the night. But though the Nairuktas fully accepted
the theory, which explained the Vedic myths as representing cosmical and
physical phenomena, yet as their knowledge of the physical world was very
limited in those days, they were not able to explain every Vedic myth or legend
by this method. For example, out of the various legends about the Ashvins
Yâska could explain only one by the Dawn theory, namely, that of the quail
being rescued from the jaws of the wolf. This defect has now been partially
removed by Western scholars, who, living in the more northern regions are
familiar with the decay in the power of the sun during the cold season, or the
eventual triumph of spring over winter or the restoration of the decayed powers
of the sun in summer. This phenomena has, therefore, been used by them to
explain the origin of certain Vedic myths, which have been left unexplained
either by the Dawn or the Storm theory. Up to now, we have, thus, three
theories for explaining the Vedic myths according to the Nairukta school of
interpretation; and it is necessary to describe them briefly before we proceed
to show how they fail to account for all the incidents in the myths and legends
to which they are applied.
According
to the Dawn theory, the whole theogony and philosophy of the ancient world is
centered in the Dawn, the mother of the bright gods, of the sun in his various
aspects, of the morn, the day, the spring; herself the brilliant image and visage
of immortality. Prof. Max Müller, in his Lectures
on the Science of Language, further remarks* (See Lectures on the Science
of Language, Vol. II, p. 545, . )that the dawn, which to us is a merely
beautiful sight, was to the early gazers and thinkers the problem of all the
problems. It was the unknown land from whence rose every day those bright
emblems of divine powers, which, left in the mind of man the first impression
and intimation of another world, of power above, of order and wisdom. What we
simply call the sun-rise, brought before their eyes every day the riddle of all
riddles, the riddle of existence. The days of their life sprang from that dark
abyss, which every morning seemed instinct with light and life. And again a
new life flashed up every morning before their eyes and the fresh breezes of
the dawn reached them like greetings wafted across the golden threshold of the
sky from the distant lands beyond the mountains, beyond the clouds, beyond the
dawn, beyond the immortal sea which brought us hither. The dawn seemed to them
to open golden gates for the sun to pass in triumph and while those gates were
open their eyes and their minds strove in their childish way to pierce beyond
the finite world. That silent aspect awakened in the human mind the conception
of the Infinite, the Immortal, the Divine, and the names of dawn became
naturally the names of higher powers. This is manifestly more poetic than
real. But the learned Professor explains many Vedic myths on the theory that
they are all Dawn-stories in different garbs. Thus if Saraṇyu, who had
twins from Vivasvat, ran off from him in the form of a mare, and he followed
her in the form of a horse, it is nothing but a story of the Dawn disappearing
at the approach of the sun and producing the pair of day and night. The legend
of Suryâs marriage with Soma, and of Vṛiṣhâkapâyî, whose oxen (the
morning vapors) were swallowed by Indra, or of Aditi giving birth to the
Âdityas are again said to be the stories of the Dawn under different aspects.
Saramâ, crossing the waters to find out the cows stolen by Paṇis, is
similarly the Dawn bringing with her the rays of the morning, and when Urvashi
says that she is gone away and Purűravas calls himself Vasiṣhṭha or
the brightest, it is the same Dawn flying away from the embrace of the rising
sun. In short, the Dawn is supposed to have been everything to the ancient
people, and a number of legends are explained in this way, until at last the
monotonous character of these stories led the learned professor to ask to
himself the question, Is everything the Dawn? Is everything the Sun? a
question, which he answers by informing us that so far as his researches were
concerned they had led him again and again to the Dawn and the Sun as the chief
burden of the myths of the Aryan race. The dawn here referred to is the daily dawn as we see it in the tropical
or the temperate zone, or, in other words, it is the daily conquest of light over darkness that is here represented as
filling the minds of the ancient bards with such awe and fear as to give rise
to a variety of myths. It may be easily perceived how this theory will be
affected by the discovery that Uṣhas, or the goddess of the dawn in the
Ṛig-Veda, does not represent the evanescent dawn of the tropics, but is
really the long continuous dawn of the Polar or the Circum-Polar regions. If
the Arctic theory is once established many of these mythological explanations
will have to be entirely re-written. But the task cannot be undertaken in a
work which is devoted solely to the examination of the evidence in support of
that theory.
The Storm
theory was originally put forward by the Indian Nairuktas as a supplement to
the Dawn theory, in order to account for myths to which the latter was
obviously inapplicable. The chief legend explained on this theory is that of
Indra and Vṛitra, and the explanation has been accepted almost without
reserve by all Western scholars. The word Indra is said to be derived from the
same root which yielded indu, that
is, the rain drop; and Vṛitra is one, who covers or encompasses (vṛi, to cover) the waters of the
rain-cloud. The two names being thus explained, everything else was made to
harmonize with the Storm theory by distorting the phrases, if the same could
not be naturally interpreted in confirmity therewith. Thus when Indra strikes parvata (i.e. a mountain) and delivers the rivers therefrom, the Nairuktas
understood parvata to be a storm
cloud and the rivers to be the streams of rain. Indras wielding the
thunderbolt has been similarly interpreted to mean that he was the god of the
thunderstorm, and thunderstorm implied rain as a matter of course. If the
Maruts helped Indra in the battle, it was easily explained by the Storm theory
because a thunderstorm or rain was always accompanied by stormy weather. But a
more difficult point in the legend, which required explanation, was the hemming
in or the captivating of the waters by Vṛitra or Ahi. In the case of
waters in the clouds it was easy to imagine that they were kept captive in the
cloud by the demon of drought. But the Ṛig-Veda often speaks of sindhus or streams being released by the
slaughter of Vṛitra; and if the streams or rivers really represented, as
conceived by the advocates of this theory, the rivers of the Punjab, it was
rather difficult to understand how they could be described as being hemmed in
or kept captive by Vṛitra. But the ingenuity of Vedic scholars was quite
equal to the occasion, and it was suggested that, as the rivers in
The third
theory, like the first, is solar in origin, and attempts to explain certain
Vedic myths on the supposition that they represent the triumph of spring over
snow and winter. Yâska and other Indian Nairuktas lived in regions where the
contrast between spring and winter was not so marked as in the countries still
further north; and it was probably for this reason that the Vernal theory was
not put forward by them to explain the Vedic myths. Prof. Max Müller has tried
to explain most of the exploits of the Ashvins by this theory.( Contributions
to the Science of Mythology, Vol. II, pp. 579-605.) If the Ashvins restored
Chyavâna to youth, if they protected Atri from the heat and darkness, if they
rescued Vandana from a pit where he was buried alive, or if they replaced the
leg of Vishpalâ, which she had lost in battle, or restored Ṛijrâshva his
eye sight, it was simply the Sun-god restored to his former glory after the
decay of his powers in winter. In short the birth of the vernal Sun, his fight
against the army of winter, and his final victory at the beginning of the
spring is, on this theory, the true key to the explanation of many myths where
the Sun-god is represented as dying, decaying or undergoing some other
affliction. As contrasted with the Dawn theory the physical phenomena, here
referred to, are annual. But both are solar theories, and as such may be
contrasted with the Storm theory which is meteorological in origin.
Besides
these three theories, the Dawn, the Storm and the Vernal, Mr. Nârâyaṇa
Aiyangâr of
The
struggle between Indra and Vṛitra is represented in the Vedas as being
four-fold in character. First, it is a struggle between Indra and Vṛitra,
the latter of whom appears also under thee names of Namuchi,
Shuṣhṇa, Shambara, Vala, Pipru, Kuyava and others. This is Vṛitra-tűrya, or the fight or
struggle with Vṛitra. Secondly, it is a fight for the waters, which
either in the form of sindhus
(rivers) or as âpaḥ (simple
floods), are often described as released or liberated by the slaughter of
Vṛitra. This is ap-tűrya or the
struggle for waters; and Indra is called apsu-jit
or conquering in the waters, while Vṛitra is described as encompassing
them (âpaḥ pari-shayânam).
Thirdly, it is a struggle to regain the cows (go-iṣhṭi); and there are several passages in the
Ṛig-Veda where the cows are said to have been released by
* The exploits of Indra are very pithily summed up in the Nivids or short Sűtras or sentences used
in offering oblations to the gods. These will be found collected in a separate
chapter amongst the Pari-shiṣhtas
or supplements to the Ṛig-Veda Saṁhitâ text published in
The following extracts from Macdonells Vedic Mythology give the requisite authorities from the
Ṛig-Veda for this four-fold character of the struggle between Indra and
Vṛitra. Speaking of the terrible conflict, he thus sums up the principal
incidents thereof as mentioned in the Ṛig-Veda:
Heaven and
earth trembled with fear when
Thus conquering in the waters (apsu-jit) is his exclusive attribute (VIII, 36, 1).* (See
Macdonells Vedic Mythology, in Grundriss der Indo-Arischen Philologie and
Altertumskunde, § 22 (Indra), pp. 58-61.)
As regards
the abode of Vṛitra, we have (§ 68, A):
Vṛitra
has a hidden (niṇya) abode,
whence the waters, when released by Indra, escape, overflowing the demon (I,
32, 10). Vṛitra lies on the waters (I, 121, 11; II, 11, 9), or enveloped
by the waters, at the bottom (budhna)
of the rajas or aerial space (I, 52,
6). He is also described as lying on a summit (sânu), when Indra made the waters to flow (I, 80, 5). Vṛitra
has fortresses, which Indra shatters when he slays him (X, 89, 7), and which
are ninety-nine in number (VIII, 93, 2; VII, 19, 5). He is called nadî-vṛît, or encompasser of rivers (I, 52, 2), and in one passage parvata or cloud is described as being
within his belly (I, 54, 10).
There are
again passages (V, 32, 5 & 6) where
We have
seen that the release of cows and the bringing up of the dawn and the sun are
the simultaneous effects of Indras conquest of Vṛitra. The following
extract from Macdonells Vedic Mythology
(p. 61) give the necessary authorities on the point:
With the
liberation of waters is connected the winning of light, sun and dawn. Indra won
light and the divine waters (III, 34, 8), the god is invoked to slay
Vṛitra and win the light, (VIII, 89, 4). When Indra had slain the dragon
Vṛitra with his metallic bolt releasing the waters for man, he placed the
sun visibly in the heavens (I, 51, 4; 52, 8). Indra, the dragon-slayer, set in
motion the flood of waters of
the seat generated the sun and found the cows (II, 19, 3). He gained the sun
and the waters after slaying the demon (III, 33, 8-9) When Indra slew the chief
of the dragons and released the waters from the mountain, he generated the sung
the sky and the dawn (I, 32, 4; VI, 30, 5). The cows are also mentioned along
with the sun and the dawn, (I, 62, 5; II, 12, 7; VI, 17, 5), or with the sun
alone (I, 7, 3; II, 19, 3; X, 138, 2), as being found, delivered or won by
Indra.
Indra is
described in other passages as having released the streams pent up by the
dragon (II, 11, 2), and he is said to have won the cows and made the seven
rivers flow (I, 32, 12; II, 12, 12). In II, 15, 6, the streams released by him
have been described as flowing upwards
(udańcham). It may be further noticed
that in all these passages the clouds are not referred to under their ordinary
name abhra; but the words used are parvata, giri, adri, (which
primarily mean a mountain), or űdhas
(udder), utsa (spring) kabandha (cask) or kosha (pail). All these words have been interpreted by the
Nairuktas as meaning a cloud, and this interpretation has been accepted by
Western scholars. The word go, which
generally means cow, is also interpreted in some cases to mean the waters
released by Indra. Thus when Indra is said to have released the cows, which
were fast within the stone (VI, 43, 3), or when he is said to have moved the
rock, which encompassed the cows, from its place (VI, 17, 5), it is understood
that the reference is to a cloud-rock, which imprisons the rain-waters. Maruts
are the usual companions of Indra in this, fight; but Viṣhṇu, Agni,
and Bṛihaspati are also spoken of as assisting him in the rescue of the
cows from the grip of Vala. Bṛihaspatis conquest of Vala who had taken
shelter in a rock, is thus taken to be a paraphrase of Indras conquest over Vṛitra.
In X, 62, 2 and 3, the Aṅgirases are also described as driving out the
cows, piercing Vala and causing the sun to mount the sky, exploits, which are
usually attributed to Indra. There are other versions of the same story to be
found in Ṛig-Veda, but for the purpose in hand, we need not go beyond
what has been stated above.
Now
whosoever reads this description of Indras fight with Vṛitra cannot fail
to be struck with the fact that there are four
simultaneous effects (Sâkam, in VI, 30, 5), said to have been produced by
the conquest of Indra over Vṛitra, namely, (1) the release of the cows,
(2) the release of the waters, (3) the production of the dawn and (4) the
production of the sun. Let us now see if the Storm theory satisfactorily
explains the simultaneous production
of these results from the destruction of Vṛitra. Vṛitra is a cloud,
a storm-cloud, or a rain-cloud, hovering in the sky, and by smiting it with his
thunder-bolt Indra may well be described as realizing the waters imprisoned
therein. But where are the cows which are said to be released along with the
waters? The Nairuktas interpret cows to mean waters; but in that cage, the
release of the waters and the release of the cows cannot be regarded as two
distinct effects. The recovery of the dawn and the sun, along with the release
of waters, is, however, still more difficult to explain by the Storm theory,
or, we might even say, that it cannot be explained at all. Rain-clouds may
temporarily obscure the sun, but the phenomenon is not one which occurs
regularly, and it is not possible to speak of the production of the light of
the sun as resulting from the breaking up of the clouds, which may only
occasionally obscure the sun. The recovery of the dawn, as a prize of the
conflict between Indra and Vṛitra simultaneously with the release of
waters, is, similarly, quite inexplicable by the Storm theory. The rain-clouds
usually move in the heavens, and though we may occasionally find them on the
horizon, it is absurd to say that by striking the clouds Indra brought out the
dawn. I know of no attempt made by any scholar to explain the four simultaneous
effects of Indras fight with Vṛitra by any other theory. The
Storm-theory appears to have been suggested by the Nairuktas, because the
release of waters was supposed to be the principal effect of the conquest, and
waters were naturally understood to mean the waters, which we see every day.
But in spite of the efforts of the Nairuktas and Western scholars, the
simultaneous winning of light and waters still remains unexplained. Macdonell (Ved. Myth. p. 61) referring to this
difficulty observes, There appears to be a confusion between the notion of the
restoration of the sun after the darkness of the thunderstorm, and the recovery
of the sun from the darkness of the night at dawn. The latter trait in the
Indra myth is most probably only an extension of the former. If this means
anything, it is only a confession of the inability of Vedic scholars to explain
the four simultaneous effects of Indras conquest over Vṛitra by the
storm theory; and, strange to say, they seem to attribute their failure, not to
their own ignorance or inability, but to the alleged confusion of ideas on the
part of the Vedic bards.
These are
not, however, the only points, in which the Storm-theory fails to explain the
legend of Indra and Vṛitra. It has been pointed out above that
Vṛitra was killed in distant regions, in which ghastly darkness reigned,
and which abounded in waters; while in X, 73, 7, Indra by killing Namuchi, alias Vṛitra, is said to have
cleared the gates of the Devayâna path, evidently meaning that Vṛitra was
killed at the gates of the path leading to the region of the gods. Even in the
Avesta, the fight between Apaosha and Tishtrya is said to have taken place in
the sea of Vouru-Kasha, and Tishtrya is described as moving along the path made
by Mazda after his fight with Apaosha. Vṛitras abode is similarly
described as hidden and enveloped by water at the bottom of rajas (I, 52, 6). None of these
conditions is satisfied by making the storm-cloud, the scene of the battle
between Indra and Vṛitra; for a cloud cannot be said to be the ocean of
waters, nor can it be described as lying in a distant (parâvat) region, or at the threshold of the Devayâna or the path of
the gods. In the Ṛig-Veda parâvat
is usually contrasted with arâvat,
and it means a distant region on the other side, as contrasted with the region
on this or the nearer side. The Devayâna is similarly contrasted with the
Pitṛiyâna, and means the northern celestial hemisphere. The clouds over
the head of the observer cannot be said to be either in the distant region, or
at the gate of the Devayâna; nor can we speak of them as enveloped by sun-less
darkness. It is, therefore, highly improbable that the rain-clouds could have
been the scene of battle between Indra and Vṛitra. It was the sea on the
other side, the dark ocean as contrasted with the bright ocean (shukram arṇaḥ) which the sun
mounts in the morning, where the battle was fought according to the passages
referred to above; and the description is appropriate only in the case of the nether
world, the celestial hemisphere that lies underneath, and not in the case of
clouds moving in the sky above. I do not mean to say that Indra may not have
been the god of rain or thunderstorm, but as Vṛitrahan, or the killer of Vṛitra, it is impossible to
identify him with the god of rain, if the description of the fight found in the
Vedic passages is not to be ignored or set aside.
The third
objection to the current interpretation of the Vṛitra myth, is that it
does not satisfactorily explain the passages, which give the time of Indras
fight with the demon. On the Storm theory, the fight must be placed in the
rainy season or Varṣhâ; but the
forts of Vṛitra, which Indra is said to have destroyed and thus acquired
the epithet purabhid or purandara, are described in the
Ṛig-Veda as autumnal or shâradîḥ
i.e., belonging or pertaining to Sharad, the season which follows Varṣhâ. The discrepancy may be
accounted for, by supposing that Varṣhâ
and Sharad, were once included under
one season which was named not Varṣhâ
but Sharad. But the explanation is
opposed to another passage in the Ṛig-Veda (X, 62, 2) which says that
Vala was killed at the end of the year (parivatsare),
unless we again suppose that the year commenced with Sharad in those days. Nor can we explain how Arbuda is said to be
killed with hima (ice) by Indra.
Again as previously stated, the dawn could not be considered as a prize of the
conflict, nor could the fight be said to have been fought in darkness, if we
choose the rainy season as the time for the battle of
The fourth
objection against the Storm theory, as applied to the story of Vṛitra, is
that many words like parâvat, giri, or adri, which do not signify a cloud, either primarily on
secondarily, have to be interpreted as referring figuratively to the
rain-cloud. This sounds harsh in many a passage where Indra or Bṛihaspati
is described as piercing a mountain or breaking open a stone-cave and liberating the waters or the cows confined therein.
In the absence of any other theory, we had to interpret these passages by the
Storm theory, as the Nairuktas have done, by assigning to any and every word,
used to denote the prison-house of waters or the cows, the meaning of a
rain-cloud moving in the sky. But though we could thus temporarily get over the
difficulty, the fact, that we had to strain the words used, or to assign
unnatural meanings to them, was always a drawback, which detracted from the
value of our interpretation. It was probably for this reason that Prof.
Oldenberg was led to suggest that Indras piercing the mountain and liberating
the waters therefrom should be understood to refer not to the rain-cloud, but
to the actual striking of the mountains with the thunder-bolt and making the
rivers flow forth from them. But, as observed by Max Müller, the rivers do not
gush out of rocks even when they have been struck by lighting; and so Prof.
Oldenbergs explanation, though it gets us out of one difficulty, lands us on
another, which, to say the least, is equally puzzling. If we, therefore, cannot
suggest a better explanation, we might as well accept the device of the
Nairuktas and interpret parvata or
whatever other word or words may be found used to denote the place of the
confinement of the waters, as meaning a cloud, and explain the legend of
Vṛitra by the Storm theory as best as we can.
It will be
found from the foregoing discussion regarding the Storm theory as applied to
the legend of Indra and Vṛitra, that it explains neither the simultaneous
effects of Indras conquest over Vṛitra, nor the statements regarding the
seat of the battle between them, nor those regarding the time when it took
place, nor again does it allow us to take the words, used in certain Vedic
passages, in their natural sense; and yet we find that the theory has been
accepted as the basis of the legend from the times of the Nairuktas up to the
present. Why should it be so? is a question, which would naturally occur to
any one, who examines the subject. It is true that the Storm theory fully
explains the release of waters as a result of the fight; but the release of
waters is not the only consequence, which we have to account for. There are
four simultaneous effects of the war, the release of the waters, the release of
the cows, the recovery of the dawn and the production of the sun. The Storm
theory ex-plains the first two and the Dawn theory the last two of these; but
the whole set of four is explained by neither, nor could the theories be so
combined as to explain all the four effects, unless, like Prof. Macdonell, we
suppose that the Vedic bards have confused the two entirely different ideas,
viz., the restoration of the sunlight after thunderstorm and the recovery of
light from the darkness of night. Of the two theories, the Storm and the Dawn,
the ancient Nairuktas, therefore, seem to have adopted that which adequately
accounted for the release of the waters and which suited better with their
notion of Indra as a thunder-god, on the principle that half a loaf is better
than none, and have ignored the remaining incidents in the legend as
inexplicable, unimportant, or immaterial. The same theory has also been adopted
by Western scholars, and it is the only theory in the field at present. But it
is so manifestly inadequate that if a better theory could be found which will
explain most of, if not all, the incidents in the legend, no one would hesitate
to abandon the Storm theory in favor of the latter.
It is, in
my opinion, a mistake to suppose that the struggle between Indra and Vṛitra
originally represented the conflict
between the thunder-god and the rain-cloud. It is really a struggle between the
powers of light and darkness and we find traces of it in the Aitareya Brâhmaṇa (IV, 15.), where Indra alone of all gods is described as having
under taken the task of driving out Asuras from the darkness of the night. That
Indra is the god of light is also evident from many other passages in the
Ṛig-Veda, where, without any reference to the Vṛitra fight, Indra
is said to have found the light (III, 34, 4; VIII, 15, 5; X, 43, 4) in the
darkness (I, 100, 8; IV, 16, 4), or to have produced the dawn as well as the
sun (II, 12, 7; 21, 4; III, 31, 15), or opened the darkness with the dawn and
the sun (I, 62, 5). It was he, who made the sun to shine (VIII, 3, 6), and
mount in the sky (I, 7, 1), or prepared a path for the sun (X, 111, 3), or
found the sun in the darkness in which he resided (III, 39, 5). It is evident
from these passages that Indra is the winner of light and the sun and this character
of his was well understood by scholars, for Indra as apavaryan, or the recoverer (fr. apa-vṛi) of light, is compared by Max Müller with Apollon in
the Greek mythology. But scholars have found it difficult to explain why this
character of Indra should be mentioned in conjunction with other exploits, such
as the conquest of Vṛitra and the liberation of the waters. In fact that
is the real difficulty in the explanation of the legend either by the Storm or
by the Dawn theory. Indra liberated the waters and brought about the dawn by
killing Vṛitra, is undoubtedly the burden of the whole story; but no
explanation has yet been found by which the simultaneous recovery of light and
waters could satisfactorily be accounted for. We have seen that by the Storm theory
we can account for they release of waters, but not the recovery of the dawn;
while if the legend is taken to represent a struggle between light and
darkness, as implied by the Dawn theory, we can account for the recovery of the
dawn and the sun, but not for the release of waters. Under these circumstances
it is necessary to examine the nature and character of waters as described in
the Vedas, before we accept or reject either or both of the above-mentioned
theories.
It has been
noticed above that the passages, where waters are said to be released by Indra
after killing Vṛitra do not refer expressly to the rain-cloud. The words parvata, giri and the like are used to denote the place where the waters
were confined, and âpaḥ or sindhus, to denote the waters
themselves. Now âpaḥ, or waters
generally, are mentioned in a number of places in the Ṛig-Veda, and the
word in many places denotes the celestial or aerial waters. Thus we are told
that they follow the path of the gods, and are to be found beside the sun, who
is with them (I, 23, 17). In VII, 49, 2, we have an express statement that
there are waters, which are celestial (divyâḥ
âpaḥ), and also those that flow in earthlychannels (khanitrimâḥ, thus clearly
distinguishing between terrestrial and celestial waters. In the same verse they
are said to have the sea or the ocean for the goal; and in VIII, 69, 12, the
seven rivers are said to flow into the jaws of Varuṇa as into a surging
abyss. Varuṇa again is described as the god, who, like Indra, makes the
rivers flow (II, 28, 4); and we have seen that the sage Dîrghatamas is said to
have been borne on the waters wending to their goal (I, 158, 6). But it is
needless to cite more authorities on this point, for scholars are agreed that
both celestial and terrestrial waters are mentioned in the Ṛig-Veda. The
nature, the character, or the movements of celestial waters appear, however, to
be very imperfectly understood; and this is the sole reason why scholars have
not yet been able to connect the release of the waters with the recovery of the
dawn in the Vṛitra legend. It seems to have been supposed that when the
Ṛig-Veda speaks of the celestial waters (dîvyâḥ âpaḥ) only the rain-waters are intended. But
this is a mistake; for, in passages which speak of the creation of the world
(X, 82, 6; 129, 3), the world is said to have once consisted of nothing but
undifferentiated waters. In short, the Ṛig-Veda, like the Hebrew
Testament, expressly states that the world was originally full of waters, and
that there were the waters in the firmament above and waters below. The
Shatapatha Brâhmaṇa (XI, 1, 6, 1), the Aitareya Upaniṣhad (I, 1)
and Manu (I, 9), all say that the world was created from watery vapors. There
can, there fore, be no doubt that the idea of celestial waters was well-known
to the ancestors of the Vedic bards in early days; and as the celestial waters
were conceived to be the material out of which the universe was created, it is
probable that the Vedic bards understood by that phrase what the modern
scientist now understand by ether or the nebulous mass of matter that fills
all-the space in the universe. We need not, however, go so far. It is enough
for our purpose to know that the celestial waters (divyâḥ âpaḥ), or the watery vapors (puriṣham), are mentioned in the
Ṛig-Veda and that the Vedic bards considered the space or the region
above, below and around them to be full of these celestial vapors which are
said to be coeval with the world in X, 30, 10.
It is,
however, alleged by Wallis in his Cosmology
of the Ṛig-Veda (p. 115) that the Vedic bards were not acquainted
with the regions below the earth, and that every thing, which is described in
the Vedas as occurring in the atmosphere, including the movements of the sun
during night and day, must, be placed in the regions of the sky, which were
over the head of these bards. This view appears to be adopted by Macdonell in
his Vedic Mythology; and if it be
correct, we shall have to place all the waters in the upper heaven. But I do
not think that Wallis has correctly interpreted the passages quoted by Prof.
Zimmer in support of his theory that a rajas
(region) exists below the earth; and we cannot, therefore accept Wallis
conclusions, which are evidently based upon prepossessions derived most
probably from the Homeric controversy. Prof. Zimmer refers to three passages
(VI, 9, 1; VII, 80, 1; V, 81, 4) to prove that a rajas beneath the earth was known to the Vedic people. The first of
these passages is the well-known verse regarding the bright and the dark day.
It says, the bright day and the dark day, both roll the two rajas by the
well-known paths. Here the two rajas
are evidently the upper and the lower celestial hemisphere; but Wallis asks us
to compare this verse with I, 185, 1, where day and night are said to revolve
like two wheels, that is, to circle round from east to west, the one rising as
the other goes down, and observes that We are in no way obliged to consider
that the progress of either is continued below the earth. I am unable to
understand how we can draw such an inference from these passages. In VI, 9, 1,
quoted by Zimmer, two rajas or
atmospheres are men tinned, and the bright and the dark day are said to roll
along both these rajas or regions. But if we hold with Wallis that the progress
of either begins in the east and stops in the west, without going below the
earth, the whole movement becomes confined to one rajas or region and does not extend over the two. Zimmers
interpretation is, therefore, not only more probable, but the only one that
explains the use of rajasî (in the
dual), or the two regions, in the verse. The next passage (VII, 80, 1) is also
misunderstood by Wallis. It describes the dawn as unrolling the two regions (rajasî), which border on each other (samante), revealing all things. Now; the
dawn always appears on the horizon and the two rajas, which it unrolls and which are said to border on each other,
must meet on this horizon. They can therefore only represent the lower and the
upper celestial sphere. But Wallis would have us believe that both these rajasî are above the earth, and that
narrowing down together towards east and west they meet on the horizon like two
arched curves over ones head! The artificial character of this explanation is
self-evident, and I see no reason why we should adopt it in preference to the
simple and natural explanation of Zimmer, unless we start with a preconceived
notion that references to the regions below the earth ought not to be and
cannot be found in the Ṛig-Veda. The third passage pointed out by Zimmer
is V, 81, 4, which says O Savitṛi! Thou goest round (parîyase) the night, on both sides (ubhayataḥ). Here Wallis proposes
to translate parîyase by
encompassest; but parîyase ordinarily
means goest round, and there is no reason why the idea of motion usually
implied by it should be here abandoned. It will thus be seen that the
conclusion of Wallis is based upon the distortion of passages which Zimmer
interprets in a simpler and a more natural way: and that Zimmers view is more
in accordance with the natural meaning of these texts. But if an express
passage be still needed to prove conclusively that the region below the earth
was known to the Vedic bards, we refer to VII, 104, 11, where the bard prays
for the destruction of his enemies and says, Let him (enemy) go down below the three earths (tisraḥ pṛîthiviḥ
adhaḥ). Here the region below the three earths is expressly
mentioned; and since the enemy is to be condemned to it, it must be a region of
torment and pain like the Hades. In X, 152, 4, we read, One who injures ms,
let him be sent to the: nether darkness (adharam
tamaḥ), and, comparing this with the last passage, it is evident
that the region below the earth was conceived as dark. In III, 73, 21, we have,
Let him, who hates us, fall downwards (adharaḥ),
and in 11, 12, 4, the brood of the Dasyu, whom
Mr. Wallis
seems to think that since rajas is
said to be divided three-fold, like the earth, and since the highest rajas is mentioned as the seat of
waters, there is no scope in the Vedic division of rajas for a region beneath the earth; for the three rajas are
exhausted by taking them as the rajas of the earth (pârthivam), the rajas of the sky (divo rajaḥ) and the highest (paramam) rajas, the seat
of waters. But this objection is quite untenable, inasmuch as six different rajas are also mentioned in the
Ṛig-Veda (I, 164, 6). We can, therefore, suppose that there were three rajas above the earth and three below
it, and so meet the apparent difficulty pointed out by Wallis. The three rajas can in some places be also
interpreted to mean the earthly rajas,
the one above the earth and the one below it, (X, 82, 4). In I, 35, 2, the
Savitṛi is described as moving through the dark rajas (kṛiṣhṇena
rajasâ), and in the next verse we are told that he comes from the distant (parâvat) region, which shows that the
dark rajas and the parâvat region are synonymous;, and that
the sun ascends the sky after passing through the dark rajas. Again the use of the word ascend (ud-yan or ud-âcharat, I,
163, 1; VII, 55, 7), to describe the rising of the sun in the morning from the
ocean, shows,, by contrast, that the ocean which the sun is said to enter at
the time of setting (X, 114, 4) is really an ocean underneath the earth. In I,
117, 5, the sun is described as sleeping in the lap of Nir-ṛiti, and dwelling in dark ness; while in 1, 164, 32
and 33, the sun is said to have traveled in the interior of heaven and earth
and finally gone into Nir-ṛiti,
or as Prof. Max Müller renders it, the exodus in the west. Now, in X, 114, 2,
there are three Nir-ṛitis
mentioned, evidently corresponding to the three earths and three heavens; and
in X, 161, 2, the lap of Nir-ṛiti
is identified with the region of death. Pururavas is again said (X, 95, 14) to
have gone to the distant region (param
parâvatam) and there made his bed on the lap of Nir-ṛiti; while the Maruts are described as mounting up to the firmament from the
bottomless Nir-ṛiti in VII, 58,
1. All these passages taken together show that Nir-ṛiti, or the land of dissolution and death, commenced in
the west, that the sun lying in darkness traveled through the distant region (parâvat) and eventually rose in the east
from the lap of Nir-ṛiti, and
that the whole of this movement was placed not in the upper heaven, but on the
other side of the vault through which the sun traveled before he entered into Nir-ṛiti. In other words, the Nir-ṛitis extended below the earth
from west to east; and since the region below the three earths is expressly
mentioned in the Ṛig-Veda, the three Nir-ṛitis
must be understood to mean the three regions below-the earth corresponding to
the threefold division of the earth or of the heaven above it. Zimmer is,
therefore, correct in stating that the sun moved through the rajas below the
earth during night and that the Vedic poets knew of this nether rajas.
There are
other passages in the Ṛig-Veda which fully support the same view. Thus
corresponding to the rajasî, or the
two rajas, we have another expression
in the dual, namely, ubhau ardhau,
which literally denotes the two halves, and when applied to heaven, the two
celestial hemispheres. The expression ardhau
occurs in II, 27, 15, and the two halves are there asked to be propitious to
the sacrificer. Wallis, however, interprets ubhau
ardhau to mean heaven and earth.
But this is a mistake for there is a passage in the Ṛig-Veda where we
have the phrases pare ardhe (in the
farther half) and upare ardhe (in the
nearer half) of heaven (divaḥ),
showing that the heaven alone (and not heaven and earth) was conceived as
divided into two halves (I, 164, 12). A few verses later on (I, 164, 17), the
cow with her calf (the dawn with the sun) is described as having appeared below
the upper and above the lower realm, i.e.,
between heaven and earth and a question is then asked To what half (ardham) has she departed? which again
shows that the (ardham) here referred
to is quite distinct from heaven and earth. In the Atharva Veda, X, 8, 7 and
13, the two halves are referred to, and the poet asks, Prajâpati with one
half (ardham) engendered all
creation; what sign is there to tell us of the other half? Here the other half
cannot mean the earth; and
With these
passages before us, we cannot reasonably hold that the Vedic bards were
ignorant of the lower celestial hemisphere, as supposed by Wallis, and some
other scholars. Nor is the hypothesis a priori
probable, for I have shown elsewhere that the Vedic bards knew enough of
astronomy to calculate the movements of the sun and the moon tolerably correct
for all practical purposes; and the people, who could do this, could not be
supposed to be so ignorant as to believe that the sky was nailed down to the
earth at the celestial horizon, and that when the sun was not seen during the
night, he must be taken to have disappeared somewhere in the upper regions of
the heaven. The passage from the Aitareya Brâhmaṇa (III, 44) which is
quoted by Wallis, and which tells us that the sun, having reached the end of
the day, turns round as it were, and makes night where there was day before and
day on the other side, and vice versa,
is very vague and does not prove that the sun was believed to return by night through
a region, which is somewhere in the upper heaven. The words used in the
original are avastât and parastât; and Dr. Haug correctly
translates parastât by what is on
the other side. Muir and others, however, interpret parastât to mean upper, thus giving rise to the hypothesis that
the sun returns during night by a passage through the upper region of the
heaven. But in the face of the express passages in which regions below and
above all the three earths are unmistakably mentioned, we cannot accept a
hypothesis based upon a doubtful translation of a single word. It is a
hypothesis that has its origin either in the preconceived notion regarding the
primitive man, or in a desire to import into the Vedas the speculations of the
Homeric cosmography. The knowledge of the Vedic bards regarding the nether
world may not have been as exact as that of the modern astronomers, and we,
therefore, meet with such questions in the Ṛig-Veda (I, 35, 7) as Where
is Sűrya now (after sunset) and which celestial region his rays now illumine?
But there is enough explicit evidence to prove that the Vedic people knew of
the existence of a region below the earth, and if some of their notions
aboutthis underworld were not very distinct, that does not, in the least,
affect the value of this evidence.
If we,
therefore, dismiss from our mind the idea that the lower world was not known to
the Vedic people, an assumption, which is quite gratuitous, the movements and
character of the celestial waters become at once plain and intelligible. The
ancient Aryans, like the old Hebrews, believed that the subtle matter, which
filled the whole space in the universe, was nothing but watery vapors; and
secondly that the movements of the sun, the moon and other heavenly bodies were
caused by these vapors which kept on constantly circulating from the nether to
the upper and from the upper to the lower celestial hemisphere. That is the
real key to the explanation of many a Vedic myth; and unless we grasp it
thoroughly, we cannot rightly understand some of the utterances of the Vedic
poets. These waters were sometimes conceived as rivers or streams, moving in
the heaven, and eventually falling into the mouth of Varuṇa or the nether
ocean (VII, 49, 2; VIII, 69, 12). The nether world was, so to say, the seat or
the home of these waters, called yahvatîḥ
or the eternal (IX, 113, 8) and they formed the kingdom of Varuṇa and
Yama, as well as the hidden (niṇya)
abode of Vṛitra. This movement of waters is very clearly expressed in the
Parsi scriptures. In the Vendidad, XXI, 4-5 (15-23), the waters are described
as follows, As the sea Vouru-Kasha is the gathering place of waters, rise
up, go up the aerial way and go down on the earth; go down on the earth and go
up the aerial way. Rise up and roll along! thou in whose rising and growing
Ahura Mazda made the aerial way. Up! rise up and roll along! thou swift-horsed
sun, above Hara Berezaiti, and produce light for the world, and mayest thou
rise up there, if thou art to abide in Garo-nmânem, along the path made by
Mazda, along the way made by the gods, the watery way they opened. Here the
aerial waters are said to start from their gathering place, the sea
Vouru-Kasha, go up into heaven and come back again to the sea to be purified
before starting on a second round. Prof. Darmesteter in a note on this passage observes
that waters and light are believed to flow from the same spring and in the
same bed, and quotes Bundahish, XX, 4, which says, just as the light comes in
through Albűrz (Hara Berezaiti, the mountain by which the earth is surrounded)
and goes out through Albűrz, the water also comes out through Albűrz and goes
away through Albűrz. Now waters are described in the Ṛig-Veda as
following the path of the gods (VII, 47, 3), much in the same way as the waters
in the Avesta are said to follow the path made by Mazda or the way made by the
gods. Like the Avestic waters, the waters in the Ṛig-Veda have also the
sea for their goal, and going by the aerial way eventually fall into the mouth
of Varuṇa. But the Avesta supplies us with the key which establishes the
connection of waters and light in unambiguous terms, for, as remarked by Prof.
Darmesteter, it states clearly that both of them have the same source, and, in
the passage quoted above, the swift-horsed sun is accordingly asked to go along
the watery way in the skies above. In the Aban Yasht (V, 3), the river Ardvi
Sűra Anâhita is described as running powerfully from the height Hukairya down
to the sea Vouru-Kasha, like the river Sarasvati, which is described in the
Ṛig-Veda as tearing the peaks of mountains, and is invoked to descend
from the great mountain in the sky to the sacrifice (V, 43, 11). Both are
aerial rivers, but by coming down upon the earth they are said to fill up all
the terrestrial streams. The terrestrial waters, nay, all things of a liquid
nature on the earth, e.g., the
plant-sap, the blood, &c., were
thus supposed to be produced from the aerial waters above by the agency of
clouds and rain. The Parsi scriptures further tell us that between the earth
and the region of infinite light (the parame
vyoman of the Ṛig-Veda), there
are three intermediate regions, the star region, which has the seeds of waters
and plants, the moon region, and the sun region, the last being the highest
(Yt. XII, 29-32). When the Ṛig-Veda, therefore, speaks of the highest rajas as being the seat of waters, it is
not to be understood, as supposed by Wallis, that there are no nether waters,
for it is the nether waters that come up from the lower world and moving in the
uppermost region of the heaven produce terrestrial waters by giving rise to
rain and clouds. Thus Ardvi Sűra Anâhita is said to run through the starry
region (cf. Yt. VII, 47), and has to be worshipped with sacrifice in order that
her waters may not all run up into the region of the sun, thereby producing a
drought on the surface of the earth (Yt. V, 85 and 90). In the Ṛig-Veda,
the Sarasvatî is similarly described as filling the earthly region and the wide
atmospheric space (VI, 61, 11) and is besought to come swelling with streams,
and along with the waters. But the most striking resemblance between Ardvi Sűra
Anâhita and Sarasvatî is that while the latter is described as
Vṛitra-slayer or Vṛitra-ghnî
in Ṛig. VI, 61, 7, Ardvi Sűra Anâhita is described in the Aban Yasht (V,
33 and 34) as granting to Thrâetaona, the heir of the valiant Athwya clan
(Vedic Trita Âptya) who offered up a sacrifice to her, a boon that he would be
able to overcome Azi Dahâk, the three-mouthed; three-headed and six-eyed
monster. This is virtually the same story which is found in the Ṛig-Veda
X, 8, 8, where Trîta Âptya, knowing his paternal weapons and urged by Indra, is
said to have fought against and slew the three-headed son of Tvaṣhtṛi
and released the cows. This clearly establishes the connection between waters,
as represented by Ardvi Sűra Anâhita or Sarasvati, and the slaughter of
Vṛitra. Many Vedic scholars have tried to identify Sarasvati with the
river of that name in the
It is
impossible to grasp the real meaning of the Vṛitra legend, without first
realizing the true nature and importance of the movements of the aerial waters
as conceived by the ancestors of the Indo-Iranian people. As observed by
Dramesteter, celestial waters and light were believed to flow from the same
spring or source, and they both ran a parallel course. It was these aerial
waters that made the heavenly bodies move in the sky, just as a boat or any
other object is carried down by the current of a stream or river. If the waters
therefore, ceased to flow, the consequences were serious; for the sun, the
moon, the stars, would then all cease to rise, and world would be plunged in
darkness. We can now fully understand the magnitude of the mischief worked by Vṛitra
by stopping the flow of these waters. In his hidden home, at the bottom of rajas, that is, in the lower hemisphere,
he encompassed the waters in such a way as to stop their flow upwards through the mountain, and
Indras victory over Vṛitra meant that he released these waters from the
clutches of Vṛitra and made them flow up again. When the waters were thus
released, they naturally brought with them, the dawn, the sun and the cows, i.e. either days or the rays of the
morning; and the victory was thus naturally described as four-fold in
character. Now we can also understand the part played by parvatas, or mountains, in the legend. It was the mountain Albűrz,
or Hara Berezaiti; and as Vṛitra, by stretching his body across, closed
all the apertures in his mountainous range, through which the sun and the
waters came up, Indra had to uncover or open these passages by killing
Vṛitra. Thus the Bundahish (V, 5) mentions 180 apertures in the east and
180 in the west through Albűrz; and the sun is said to come and go through them
every day, and all the movements of the moon, the constellations and the
planets are also said to be closely connected with these apertures. The same
idea is also expressed in the later Sanskrit literature when the sun is said to
rise above the mountain in the east and set below the mountain in the west. The
mountain on which Indra is said to have found Shambara (II, 12, 11), and the
rock of Vala wherein the cows were said to have been imprisoned by the demon
(IV, 3, 11; I, 71, 2) and which was burst open by Aṅgirases, also
represent the same mountainous range, which separated the upper from the lower
celestial hemisphere, or the bright from the dark ocean. This explanation of
the Vṛitra legend may sound strange to many scholars, but it should be
borne in mind that the co-relation between the flow of water and the rising of
the dawn and the sun, here described, is not speculative. If the Vedic works do
not express it in unambiguous terms, the deficiency is fully made up by the
Parsi scriptures. Thus in Khorshed Yasht (VI, 2 and 3,) we are told that When
the sun rises up, then the earth becomes clean, the running waters become clean....
Should the sun not rise up, then the Daevas would destroy all the things that
are in the seven Karshvares. The passages in the Farvardin Yasht are still
more explicit. This Yasht is devoted to the praise of the Fravashis, which
correspondto the Pitṛis of the Ṛig-Veda. These ancient fathers are
often described, even in the Ṛig-Veda, as taking part, along with the
gods, in the production of the cosmical phenomena. Thus the Pitṛis are
said to have adorned the sky with stars, and placed darkness in the night and
light in the day (X, 68, 11), or to have found the hidden light and generated
the dawn (VII, 76, 4; X, 107, 1). The Fravashis in the Parsi scriptures are
said to have achieved the same or similar exploits. They are described (Yt.
XIII, 53 and 54) as having shown the beautiful paths to the waters, which had
stood, before for a long time in the same place, without flowing; and the
waters are then said to have commenced to flow along the path made by Mazda,
along the way made by the gods, the watery way appointed to them. Immediately
after (Yt. XIII, 57), the Fravashis are said to have similarly showed the paths
to the stars, the moon, the sun and the endless lights, that had stood before,
for a long time, in the same place, without moving forward, through the
oppression of the Daevas and the assaults of the Daevas. Here we have the
co-relation between the flowing of waters and the moving forward of the sun
distinctly enunciated. It was the Fravashis, who caused to move onwards the
waters and the sun, both of which had stood still for a long time in the same
place. Prof. Darmesteter adds a note saying that it was in winter that this
cessation of motion occurred, (Cf. Vend. V, 10-12; VIII, 4-10 cited and
discussed (infra). The Fravashis are
further described (Yt. XIII, 78) as destroying the malice of the fiend Angra
Mainyu (the Avestic representative of Vṛitra), so that the waters did not
stop flowing, nor did the plants stop growing. In Yasna LXV (Sp. LXIV), 6, the
Fravashis, who had borne the waters up
stream from the nearest ones, are invoked to come to the worshipper; and a
little further on the waters are asked to rest still within their places while
the Zaota (Sans. Hotâ) shall offer,
evidently meaning that it is the sacrifice offered by the invoking priest that
eventually secures the release or the flow of waters. There are other
references to the flowing of waters (Yt. X, 61)in the Parsi scriptures, but
those cited above are sufficient to prove our point. The main difficulty in the
rational explanation of the Vṛitra legend was to connect the flow of
waters with the rising of the dawn, and the passages from the Farvardin Yasht
quoted above furnish us with a clue by which this connection can be
satisfactorily established.
There are
two passages in the Vendidad, which give us the period during which these
aerial waters ceased to flow, and it is necessary to quote them here, inasmuch
as they throw further light on the circulation of aerial waters. It has been
stated above that according to Prof. Darmesteter these waters ceased to flow
during winter, but the point is made perfectly clear in Fargards V and VIII of
the Vendidad, where Ahura Mazda declares how the corpse of a person dying
during winter is to be dealt with, until it is finally disposed of according to
the usual rites at the end of the season. Thus in Fargard V, 10 (34), Ahura
Mazda is asked, If the summer is passed and the winter has come, what shall the worshipper of Mazda do? To
which Ahura Mazda answers, In every house, in every borough they shall raise three
Katas for the dead, large enough not
to strike the skull, or the feet or the hands of the man; ...and they shall let
the lifeless body lie there for two
nights, three nights or a month long,
until the birds begin to fly, the plants to grow, the floods to flow, and the
wind to dry up the waters from off the earth. And as soon as the birds begin to
fly, and the plants to grow, and the floods to flow, and the wind to dry up the
waters from off the earth, then the worshipper of Mazda shall lay down the dead
(on the Dakhma), his eyes towards the sun. I have referred to this passage
previously, but as the theory of the circulation of aerial waters was not then
explained, the discussion of the passage had to be postponed. We now clearly
see what is meant by the phrases like floods to flow and plants to grow.
They are the same phrases which are used in the Farvardîn Yasht and are there
connected with the shoving forward of the sun and the moon, that had stood still,
or without moving, in the same place for a long time. In other words, the
waters, as well as the sun, ceased to move during winter; and the worshipper of
Mazda is ordered not to dispose of the corpse until the floods began to flow
and the sun to move, be it for two
nights, three nights, or a month long.
The: Mazda-worshippers believed that the corpse was cleansed by its exposure to
the sun, and dead bodies could not, therefore, be disposed of during night. The
passage from the Vendidad, above referred to, therefore, clearly indicates that
the season of winter was once marked by long darkness extending over two
nights, three nights, or a month; and that during the period, the floods ceased
to flow and the plants to grow. It was during such a winter that the difficulty
of disposing the corpse arose; and Ahura Mazda is asked what the faithful
should do in such cases. The question has no meaning otherwise, for, if in the
ancient home of the Mazdayasnians the sun shone every day during winter, as he
does with us in the tropical regions, there would have been no difficulty in
the disposal of the corpse by exposing it to the sun the next morning; and it
would be absurd to ask the faithful to keep the uncleanly dead body in his
house for two nights, three nights, or a month long, until the winter passed
away. The passage from Fargard V quoted, above makes. no mention of darkness,
though it can be easily inferred from the statement that the body is, at last,
to be taken out and laid down on the Dakhma with its eyes towards the sun,
evidently meaning that this ceremony was impossible to be performed during the
time the dead body was, kept up in the house. But Fargard VIII, 4 (11), where
the same subject is again taken up, mentions darkness distinctly. Thus Ahura Mazda
is asked If in the house of the worshipper of Mazda a dog or a man happens to
die, and it is raining, or snowing, or blowing, or the darkness is coming on,
when the flocks and the men lose their way, what shall the worshipper of Mazda
do? To this Ahura Mazda gives the same reply as in Fargard V. The faithful is
directed, VIII, 9 (21), to dig a grave in the house, and therelet the
lifeless, body lie for two nights, three nights, or a months, long, until the
birds begin to fly, the plants to grow, the floods to flow, and the wind to dry
up the waters from off the earth. Here in the question asked to Ahura Mazda
darkness is distinctly mentioned along with snowing and blowing; and in the
Farvardin Yasht we have seen that the flowing of waters and the moving of the
sun are described as taking place at the same time. The passage from Tir Yasht,
where the appointed time for the appearance of Tishtrya after conquering
Apaosha in the watery regions is described as one night, two nights, fifty, or
one hundred nights has already been referred to in the last chapter. From all
these passages taken together lit inevitably follows that it was during winter
that the water ceased to flow, and the sun to move, and that the period of
stagnation lasted from one night to a hundred nights. It was a period of long
darkness, when the sun was not seen above the horizon; and if a man died during
the period, his corpse had to be kept in the house until the waters again
commenced to flow, and the sun appeared on the horizon along with them. I have
pointed out previously how the Hindu belief that it is inauspicious to die in
the Dakṣhiṇâyana must be traced to this primeval practice of
keeping the dead body undisposed of during the long Arctic night. The word Kâṭa which is used for grave in
the Parsi scriptures occurs once in the Ṛig-Veda, I, 106, 6, where the
sage Kutsa, lying in Kâṭa is
described as invoking the Vṛitra-slaying Indra for his protection; and I
think that we have here, at least, an indirect reference to the practice of
keeping dead bodies in a Kâṭa,
until Vṛitra was killed, and the waters and the sun made free to run
their usual course. We are, however, concerned here only with the circulation
of the celestial waters; and from the Avestic passages quoted above, it is clear
that the aerial waters ceased to flow during winter for several days or rather
nights, and that, since light sprang from the same source as waters, the sun
also ceased to move during the period and stood still in the watery regions,
until the Fravashis, who helped the gods in their struggle for waters or in
their conflict with powers of darkness, made the waters and the sun move
onwards to take their usual course in the upper celestial hemisphere. We can
now understand why Indra is described as moving by his might the stream upwards
(udańcha) in II, 15, 6, and how the
rivers are said to be set free to move on (sartave)
by killing Vṛitra (I, 32, 12), or how in I, 80, 5, Indra is said to have
made the lights of heaven shine forth without obstruction and set the waters (apaḥ) free to flow (sarmâya). There are many other passages
in the Ṛig-Veda where the flowing of waters and the appearance of the sun
or the dawn are spoken of as taking place simultaneously, as may be seen from
the quotations from Macdonells Vedic
Mythology given above, All these passages become intelligible only when
interpreted on the theory of the cosmic circulation of aerial waters through
the upper and the lower celestial hemispheres. But as the theory was little
understood or studied in this connection, the Vedic scholars, ancient and
modern, have hitherto failed to interpret the Vṛitra legend in a rational
and intelligible way, especially the four simultaneous effects of the conquest
of Indra over Vṛitra mentioned therein.
The cosmic
circulation of aerial waters described above, is not peculiar to the
Indo-Iranian mythology. Dr. Warren, in his Paradise
Found, states that a similar circulation of aerial waters is mentioned in
the works of Homer. Homer describes the sun as returning to the flowing of the
ocean, or sinking into it, and again rising from it and mounting the sky. All
rivers and every sea and all fountains and even deep wells are again said to
arise from the deep flowing ocean which was believed to encircle the earth.(
See Dr. Warrens Paradise Found, 10th Edition (1893) Part V, Chap. V, pp.
250-260) Helios or the sun is further described as sailing from west to east in
a golden boat or cup, evidently meaning that the underworld was supposed to be
full of waters. But Homeric scholars seem to have raised unnecessary,
difficulties in the proper interpretation of these passages by assuming that
Homer conceived the earth to be flat and that as the Hades was a region of
complete darkness, the sun could not be said to go there even after his
setting. Dr. Warren has, however, shown that the assumption is entirely
groundless, and that Homers earth was really a sphere and that the underworld
was full of aerial waters. We have seen above, how some Vedic scholars have
raised similar difficulties in the interpretation of the Vṛitra myth by
supposing that the lower celestial hemisphere was unknown to the Vedic bards.
This is probably a reflection of the Homeric controversy, but as pointed out by
Dr. Warren,*( Paradise Found, p. 333.) these baseless assumptions are clue
mainly to a prejudice with which many scholars approach the question of the
interpretation of ancient myths. It is assumed that the early man could not
possibly have known anything about the world, beyond what the rudest savages
know at present; and plain and explicit statements are sometimes put aside,
distorted, or ignored by scholars, who, had they not been blinded by prejudice,
would certainly have interpreted them in a different way. It is impossible to
do justice to the subject in this place, and I would refer to reader for
further details to Dr. Warrens instructive work on the subject. Dr. Warren
also states that Euripides, like Homer, held the view that there was one
fountain of all the worlds water, and that the same conception is expressed by
Hesiod in his Theogony, where all
rivers as sons, and all fountains and brooks as daughters, are traced back to
Okeanos. Then we have the constant descending movement of all waters until they
reach the world-surrounding Ocean-river at the equator, beyond which is the
underworld, similar to the movements of aerial waters described in the Avesta.
Aristotle in his Meteors, is said also to have mentioned a river in the air
constantly flowing betwixt the heaven and the earth and made by the ascending
and the descending vapors.( Paradise Found, p. 51, and 256, notes) It is
again pointed by Grill that the ancient Germans had a similar world-river, and
the descending Ukkos stream and the ascending Animas stream in the Finnish
mythology are similarly believed to be the traces of a like cosmic
water-circulation. We read of a golden boat also in the Lettish mythology; and
Prof. Max Müller, referring to it, says, What the golden boat is that sinks
into the sea and is mourned for by the daughter of the sky, however, doubtful
it may be elsewhere, is not to be mistaken in the mythology of the Lets. It is
the setting sun, which in the Veda has to be saved by the Ashvins; it is the
golden beat in which Hęlios and Hęracles sail from west to east. Sometimes it
is the Sun-daughter herself that is drowned like Chyavâna in the Veda, and as
Chyavâna and similar heroes had to be saved in the Veda by the Ashvins, the
Lets also call upon the Godsons to row in a boat and save the Sun-daughter.(
See Max Müllers Contributions to the Science of Mythology, Vol. II, p. 433) In
connection with this, it may be here observed that the Ashvins are described in
the Ṛig-Veda as saving their protégés in boats (I, 116, 3; I, 182, 6),
and that though Ashvins boats are not described as golden, their chariot is
said to be hiraṇayayî or golden
in VIII, 5, 29; while the boats of Pűṣhan, in which he crosses the aerial
ocean (samudra) are actually said to
be golden in VI, 58, 3. In I, 46, 7, the Ashvins are again spoken of as having
both a chariot and a boat, as a sort of double equipment; and their chariot is
said to be samâna yojana, or
traversing, without distinction, both the heaven and the watery regions in I,
30, 18. The word samâna is
meaningless unless there is some difficulty in traversing over one part of the
celestial sphere as distinguished from the other. The Vedic gods used these
boats especially, in crossing the lower world, the home and seat of aerial
waters; and when they appeared above the horizon, they are described as
traversing the upper sphere by means of their chariots. But sometimes the
waters are said to carry them even across the sky above, just as the chariot is
described as going over the lower world. For instance in the legend of Dîrghatamas
discussed previously, he is said to be borne on waters for ten months and then
growing old was about to die or reach the ocean, to which the waters were
speeding. In other words, this means that the sun, who was borne on waters for
ten months, was about to go into the lower watery regions as explained in the
chapter VI. But to proceed with the subject in hand, the idea of the cosmic
circulation of aerial waters, is not confined to the Indian, the Iranian or the
Greek mythology. In the Egyptian mythology, Nut, the goddess of the sky, is
sometimes represented by a figure in which the band of stars is accompanied by
a band of water; and Sir Norman Lockyer tells us that not only the Sun-gods,
but the stars, were also supposed to travel in boats across the firmament from
one horizon to the other.* (See Lockyers Dawn of Astronomy, p. 35.) The
Jewish idea of the firmament in the midst of waters, the waters above being
after wards separated from the waters below the firmament, is already referred
to above. There is, therefore, nothing strange or surprising if we find in the
Vedas and in the Avesta more or less clear references to the circulation of
aerial waters through the upper and the lower celestial hemispheres of the
universe. It is an idea which is found in the ancient mythology of every other
nation, and nothing but false prejudice can deter us from interpreting the
simultaneous movements or the liberation of waters and light, described in the
Vedic hymns, on the theory of the cosmic circulation of aerial waters.
But even
after accepting the theory of the cosmic circulation of celestial waters and
the simultaneous release of waters and dawn, it may be asked how the Arctic
theory comes in, or is in any way required, to explain the Vṛitra legend.
We may admit that the waters imprisoned by Vṛitra by shutting up the
passages through the rocky walls that surround them, may be taken to mean the
celestial waters in the world below the three earths; but still, the struggle
between Indra and Vṛitra may, for aught we know, represent the daily
fight between light and darkness, and it may be urged, that there is no
necessity whatever, for bringing in the Arctic theory to explain the legend. A
little reflection will, however, show that all the incidents in the legend
cannot be explained on the theory of a daily struggle between light and
darkness. In X, 62, 2, the Aṅgirases, who are the assistants of Indra in
his conquest of cows, are said to have defeated Vala at the end of the year (parivatsare). This shows that the
struggle was annual and did not take place every day. Then we have the passage
(VIII, 32, 26), where Arbuda, the watery demon, is said to have been killed by
Indra with ice (hima), and not with a
thunderbolt as usual. In addition to the fact that the struggle was an yearly
one, we must, therefore, hold that the conflict took place during winter, the
season of ice and snow; and this is corroborated by the statement in the
Avesta, that it was during winter that the waters, and with them the sun,
ceased to move onwards. Vṛitras forts are again described as autumnal or
shâradîḥ showing that the fight
must have commenced at the end of sharad
(autumn) and continued during winter. We have further seen that there are a
hundred night-sacrifices, and the duration of Tishtryas fight with Apaosha is
described as varying from one to a hundred nights in the Tir Yasht. All these
incidents can be explained only by the Arctic theory, or by the theory of the
long autumnal night, and not on the hypothesis of a daily struggle between
light and darkness.
We have
come to the conclusion that Indras fight with Vṛitra must have commenced
in Sharad, and lasted till the end of
Shishira in the watery regions of the
nether world. Fortunately for us this conclusion is remarkably borne out by an
important passage preserved in the Ṛig-Veda, which gives us, what may be
called, the very date of the commencement of Indras conflict with
Vṛitra, though the true bearing of the passage has yet remained
unexplained owing to the absence of the real key to its meaning. In II, 12, 11,
we read, Indra found Shambara dwelling on the mountains (in) chatvâriṁshyâm sharadi.*
Now chatvâriṁshyâm is an ordinal
numeral in the feminine gender and in the locative case, and similarly sharadi is the locative of sharad (autumn), which also is a word of
feminine gender in Sanskrit. The phrase chatvâriṁshyâm
sharadi is, therefore, capable of two interpretations or constructions,
though the words are simple in themselves. Chatvâriṁshyâm
literally means in the fortieth, and sharadi
in autumn. If we now take chatvâriṁshyâm
(in the fortieth) as an adjective qualifying sharadi (in autumn), the meaning of the phrase would be in the
fortieth autumn); while if the two words are taken separately the meaning
would be on the fortieth, in autumn. Sâyaṇa and Western scholars have
adopted the first construction, and understand the passage to mean, Indra
found Shambara dwelling on the mountains in
the fortieth autumn, that is, in the fortieth year; for the words
indicating seasons, like Vasant
(spring), Sharad (autumn), or Hemanta (winter), are understood to
denote a year, especially when used with a numeral adjective meaning more than
one. This construction is grammatically correct, for chatvâriṁshyâm and sharadi
being both in the feminine gender and in the locative case, the two words can
be taken together, and understood to mean in the fortieth autumn or year. But
what are we to understand by the statement, that Shambara was found in the
fortieth year by Indra? Are we to suppose that
It is, therefore, preposterous to
hold that a forty years war with the aborigines is referred to in this single
passage, especially when the passage is capable of being interpreted
differently without straining the words used. It is the most ordinary Sanskrit
idiom to use the locative case in mentioning the month, the day, the season or
the year, when a particular incident is said to have taken place. Thus, even
now, we say, Kârttike,
shukla-pakṣhe, trayodashyâm, meaning in the month of Kârttika, in
the bright half, on the thirteenth (tithi
or day). The feminine ordinal numerals, like chaturthî, ekâdashi, trayodashi, are always used, without any
noun, to denote the tithi or the day
of the month, or the fortnight, as the case may be. Thus in the Taittirîya
Brâhmaṇa (I, 1, 9, 10), we have the expression yadi saṁvatsare na âdadhyât dvâdashyâm purastât âdadhyât,
meaning that, if the sacrificial fire is not consecrated at the end of the
year (saṁvatsare), it should be
consecrated on the twelfth (dvâdashyâm)
afterwards. Here dvâdashyâm is a
feminine ordinal in the locative case used by itself, and means on the twelfth
tithi or day after the end of the
year mentioned in the preceding sentence. Chatvâriṁshyâm,
in the Vedic passage under discussion, may be similarly taken to denote the fortieth tithi or day, and sharadi
the season at the time, the two words being taken as independent locatives. The
passage would then mean Indra found Shambara dwelling on the mountains on the fortieth (scil. tithi) in autumn.
Now Sharad is the fourth season of the year,
and the fortieth day of Sharad would
mean seven months and ten days, or 220 days, after the first day of Vasanta or the spring, which commenced
the year in old times. In short, the passage means that Indras fight with
Shambera, or the annual conflict between light and darkness, commenced on the
tenth day of the eighth month of the year, or on the 10th of October, if we
take the year to have then commenced with March, the first month in the old
Roman calendar. In I, 165, 6, Viṣhṇu, like a rounded wheel, is said
to have set in swift motion his ninety racing steeds together with the four,
and the reference is evidently to a year of four seasons of ninety days each.
If we accept this division, each season would be of three months duration, and
Sharad being the third (cf, X, 90,
6), the fortieth day of Sharad would
still mean the 10th day of the eighth month of the year. The passage thus gives
the very date of Indras annual fight with Vṛitra; and if it had been
correctly understood, much useless speculation about the nature of
Vṛitras legend would have been avoided. We have seen previously that the
seven Âdityas, or monthly Sun-gods, the sons of Aditi, were presented by her to
the gods in a former yuga, and that
she cast away the eighth, Mârtâṇḍa, because he was born in an
undeveloped state. In other words, the Sun-god of the eighth month is here said
to have died soon after he was born, evidently meaning, that the Sun went below
the horizon in the beginning of the eighth month; and by fixing the date of the
commencement of Indras fight with Vṛitra as the fortieth day in Sharad, or the 10th day of the eighth
month, we arrive at the same conclusion. The legend of Aditi and the date of
the commencement of Indras fight with Shambara, as given in II, 12, 11, thus
corroborate each other in a remarkable way; and as the current interpretation
of the passage does not yield any intelligible sense, there is no course left
for us but to accept the only other possible interpretation.
According
to this interpretation Sharad becomes
the last season of sunshine, and it may be here remarked that the etymological meaning
of the word further supports the same view. For Sharad is derived from shṛi,
to wither or waste away (Uṇâdi 127), and the word thus primarily
signifies the season of decay or withering; and the decay here referred to is
evidently the-decay of the power of the sun, and not the withering of grass, as
suggested by Sâyaṇa in his commentary on III, 32, 9. Thus we find in the
Taittirîya Saṁhitâ, II, 1, 2, 5, that There are three lusters or powers
of the sun; one in Vasanta, that is,
in the morning; one in Grîṣhma
or the mid. day; and one in Sharad or
the evening.* (Taitt. Sam. II, 1, 2, 5. Also compare Taitt. Sam. II, 1, 4, 2.)
We cannot suppose that the words, morning, mid-day and evening, are here used
in their primary sense. The three stages of the day represented by them are
predicated of the yearly sun, and Sharad
is said to be the evening, i.e., the
time of decline in his yearly course. It follows, therefore, that after Sharad there was no period of sunshine
in ancient times; and a Vedic passage,( Shabara or Jaimini VI, 7, 40. I have not
been able to trace the passage; but it clearly states that the last two seasons
formed the night of the yearly sun.) quoted by Shabara in his commentary on
Jaimini Sutras VI, 7, 40, says, The sun is all the seasons; when it is morning
(uditi), it is Vasanta: when the milking time (saṇgava)
it is Grîṣhma; when mid-day (madhyan-dina), it is Varṣhâ; when evening (aparâhṇa), it is Sharad; when it sets (astam eti), it is the dual season of Hemanta and Shishira. If this passage has any meaning, it shows that the
powers of the sun declined in Sharad,
and the end of Sharad (autumn)
therefore, represented his annual succumbing to the powers of the darkness; or,
in short, to dual season of Hemanta and
Shishira represented the long night
when the sun went below the horizon. It may also be mentioned that the word himyâ (lit. wintry) is used in the Ṛig-Veda for night (I, 34, 1),
implying that the wintry season was the season of special darkness
But it may
be urged that we have no authority for holding that, in ancient days, time was
reckoned simply by seasons and days; and chatvâriṁshyâm
sharadi cannot, therefore, be
interpreted to mean On the 40th (day) in Sharad.
The objection is not, however, well-founded; for in ancient inscriptions we
find many instances where dates of events are recorded only by reference to
seasons. Thus in the book on the Inscriptions
from the Cave-Temples of Western India, by Dr. Burgess and Pandit
Bhagwânlâl Indrâji, published by the Government of Bombay in 1881, the date of
inscription No. 14 is given as follows: Of king (rano) Vâsiṭhîputa, the illustrious lord (sâmi-siri) [Pulumâyi] in the year seventh (7), of Grîṣhma the fifth (5) fortnight,
and first (1) day. Upon this Dr. Burgess remarks that the mention of the 5th
fortnight of Grîṣhma shows that
the year was not divided into six seasons (ṛitu)
but into three, namely, Grîṣhma,
Varṣhâ and Hemanta. But what is important for our purpose in this inscription
is the method of giving the date by seasons, fortnights and days, without any
reference to the month. This inscription is followed in the same book by
others, one of which (No. 20) is thus dated: In the twenty-fourth year (24)
of the king Vâsithîputa, the illustrious Puḷumâyi, in the third (3)
fortnight of the winter (Hemanta)
months, on the second (2) day; and another is said to be inscribed On the
tenth day, in the sixth fortnight of Grîṣhma,
in the eighth year of king Mâḍhariputta, the lord Sîrisena. Dr.
Bhâṇḍârkar, in his Early
History of the Deecan, has ascertained that Mâḍhariputta reigned in
the Mahârâṣhtṛa from about A.D. 190 to 197, and Puḷumâyi was
on the throne of the Mahârâṣhtṛa about 60 years earlier, that is,
from A.D. 130 to 154. All the inscriptions noted above, therefore, belong to
the 2nd century of the Christian era, that is, a long time before the date of
Ârya Bhaṭṭa or Varâhamihira, whose works seem so have established,
if not introduced, the present system of measuring time by seasons, months,
fortnights and days. It is, therefore, clear that eighteen hundred years ago,
dates or events were recorded and ascertained by mentioning only the season,
the fortnight and the day of the fortnight, without any reference to the month
of the year; and we might very well suppose that several centuries before this
period these dates were given by a still more simple method, namely, by
mentioning only the season and the day of that season. And, as a matter of
fact, we do find this method of measuring time, viz., by seasons and days, adopted in the Avesta to mark the
particular days of the year. Thus in the Âfrigân Gâhanbâr (I, 7-12), as written
in some manuscripts mentioned by Westergaard in his notes ort the Âfrigân,
there is a statement of the different rewards which a Mazdayasnian receives in
the next life for what he gives as present in this to the Ratu (religious
head); and we have therein such expressions as On the 45th (day) of
Maidhyô-Zaremya, i.e., on (the day)
Dae of (the month) Ardibehest; or On the 60th (day) of Maidhyôshma, i.e., on (the day) Dae of (the month)
Tîr; and so on. Here each date is given in two different ways: first by mentioning the Gâhanbâr or the
season (the year being divided into six Gâhanbârs), and the day of that season;
and secondly, by mentioning the month
and the day of that month. Strictly speaking there is no necessity to adopt
this double method of marking the days of the year, for either of them is
enough to accurately define the day required. It is, therefore, highly
probable, as remarked by Mr. Ervad Jamshedji Dadabhai Nadershah, that the
method of counting by seasons and days is the older of the two, and the phrases
containing the names of the months and days are later interpolations, made at a
time when the older method was superseded by the latter.* (See his essay on
The Zoroastrian months and years with their divisions in the Avestic age in
the Cama Memorial Volume, pp.
251-254.) But even supposing that the double phrases were used originally, we
can, so far as our present purpose is concerned, safely infer from these
passages that the method of marking the days of the year by mentioning the
season and the day thereof was in vogue at the time when the Âfrigân was
written: and if the method is so old, it fully warrants us in interpreting chatvâriṁshyâm sharadi to mean On
the 40th (day) in Sharad (autumn).
There can be little doubt that the Vedic bards have recorded in this passage
the exact date of the commencement of Indras fight with Shambara, but in the
absence of the true key to its meaning the passage has been so long
unfortunately misunderstood and misinterpreted both by Eastern and Western
scholars. The grammatical possibility of connecting chatvâriṁshyâm, as an adjective, with sharadi helped on this misconception; and though Vedic scholars
were unable to explain why Shambara, according to their interpretation, should
be described as having been found in the 4oth year, yet they seemed to have
accepted the interpretation, because no other meaning appeared possible to
them. The alternative construction proposed by me above is very simple.
Instead-of taking chatvâriṁshyâm
as an adjective qualifying sharadi I
take the two words as independent locatives, but the change in the meaning
caused thereby is very striking and important and so long as the Arctic: theory
was unknown, the attention of scholars was not likely to be drawn to this
alternative construction. But now we can very well understand why Indra is
said to have found Shambara on the 40th (day) of Sharad and why the forts, which gave shelter to the demon, are
described as shâradîḥ, as well
as why Arbuda or the watery demon is said to be killed by ice (hima). I have stated before that the
forts (puraḥ) of Shambara must
be understood to mean days, and the adjective shâradîḥ only serves to strengthen the same view. The disappearance
of the sun below the horizon in the beginning of the 8th month in autumn,
followed by a long twilight, a continuous dark night of about 100 days, and a
long dawn of 30 days in the Arctic regions, is the basis of the legend, and
every incident therein can be naturally and intelligibly explained only on this
theory.
A similar phrase is found also in the Atharva Veda (XII, 3, 34 and
41). The hymn describes the preparation of Brahraudana,
or the porridge given as a fee to the Brâhmans, and in the 34th verse it is
stated that The treasurer shall fetch it in sixty autumns (ṣhaṣhtyâm sharatsu nidhipâ
abhîhhât). But, as remarked by Prof. Bloomfield (vide his translation of A.V. with notes in S. B. E. Series, Vol.
XLII, p. 651), the meaning of the phrase sixty autumns is obscure; and the
only other alternative possible is to take ṣhaṣhtyâm
as the locative of ṣhaṣhṭî
(feminine form, in long î of ṣhaṣhṭa) meaning the
60th; and interpret the original phrase to mean On the 60th (tithi) in autumns. The word ṣhaṣhṭa cannot be used
in classical Sanskrit as an ordinal numeral according to Pâṇini (V. 2,
58); but the rule does not seem to hold strictly in Vedic Sanskrit (See
Whitneys Grammar, §487). Even in the post-Vedic literature we meet with such
ordinal forms as ṣhaṣhṭa
aṣhita, &c. Thus the
colophon of the 60th chapter of the Sabhâ and the Udyogaparvan of the
Mahâbhârata (
There is
one more incident in the Vṛitra legend which requires to be considered
before we close its examination. We have seen that water and light are
described as having been simultaneously liberated by Indra after slaughtering
Vṛitra. These waters are sometimes spoken of as streams or rivers (II,
15, 3; II, 2), which flow upwards or udańcha (II, 15, 6) and are said to be seven in number (I, 32, 12; II, 12, 12).
The theory of the cosmic circulation of aerial waters explains why these waters
are described as flowing upwards
simultaneously with the dawn, for as the sun was believed to be carried in the
sky by aerial currents, the light of the sun appeared above the horizon when
the aerial rivers began to flow up from the nether world where they had been
blocked before by Vṛitra.
The waters or the rivers were,
therefore, aptly described as flowing upwards and bringing the light of the sun
with them. But we have still to answer the question why the rivers or waters
are described as seven in number, and
it is alleged that the Storm theory supplies us with a satisfactory reply to
this question. Thus it has been suggested by Western scholars that the seven
rivers, here referred to, are the seven rivers of the Panjaub which are flooded
during the rainy season by waters released by Indra from the clutches of the
demon who confines them in the storm-cloud. The rivers of Punjaub may
therefore, it is urged be well described as being set free to flow (sartave) by Indra himself, and in
support of this explanation we are referred to the Ṛig-Veda X, 75, and to
the phrase hapta hindu occurring in
Fargard I of the Vendidad, where it is said to denote the Punjaub or India. But
the hypothesis, howsoever tempting it may seem at the first sight, is quite
inadequate to explain the seven-fold division of waters in a satisfactory way.
It has been pointed out above that the simultaneous release of waters and light
can be accounted for only on the theory of the cosmic circulation of aerial
waters; and if this is correct, we cannot identify the seven rivers, set free
to flow upwards (udańcha) by Indra, with any terrestrial rivers whether in the Panjaub
or elsewhere. The Panjaub is, again, as its name indicates, a land of five and not of seven rivers; and it is
so described in the Vâjasaneyî Saṁhitâ.*( Vâj Saṁ, XXXIV, 11) The
term pańchanada is, therefore, more
appropriate in the case of the Panjaub, than sapta sindhavaḥ or the Hapta-hindu
of the Avesta. But we might get over the difficulty by supposing that Kubhâ and
Sarasvatî, or any other two tributaries of the
The true key to the solution of the
question will be found in the simultaneous release of waters and light effected
by Indra after conquering Vṛitra. In II, 12, 12, Indra, who caused the
seven rivers to flow, is described as sapta-rashmiḥ,
or seven-rayed, suggesting that seven rays and seven rivers must have, in some
way, been connected. We have also seen that the waters and the sun are said to
move at the same time in the Parsi scriptures. If so, what can be more natural
than to suppose that the seven suns required seven horses or seven aerial
rivers to carry them over the sky, much in the same way as Dîrghatamas is said
to have been borne upon waters in I, 158, 6? Again according to the legend of
Aditi, there were seven suns or month-gods located in seven different regions
and producing seven months of sun-shine of different temperatures. But how
could the seven suns move in seven different parts of heaven except by the
agency of seven different aerial rivers coming up from the nether world, each
with its own sun? In short, when the close connection between waters and light
is once established, it is not difficult to perceive why the waters and the
light are each said to be seven-fold. The seven celestial rivers are expressly
mentioned in the Ṛig-Veda (IX, 54, 2), and the flowing forth of the
rivers and the appearance of the dawn on the horizon are described as
simultaneous in many passages, some of which have been already referred to
above. Neither the Storm theory nor the geography of the Panjaub,
satisfactorily accounts for the simultaneous happening of these events; and so
long as this difficulty is not solved, except by the Arctic theory and the
cosmic circulation of aerial waters, we cannot accept the hypothesis of Western
scholars referred to above, howsoever eloquently expounded it may be. As
regards the origin of the phrase Hapta-hindu,
which is believed to denote India in the Avesta, I think, we can explain it by
supposing that the expression sapta
sindhavaḥ was an old one, carried by the Aryans with them to their
new home, and there applied to new places or countries, just as the British
colonists now carry the old names of their mother country to their new places
of settlement. Hapta-hindu is not the
only expression which occurs in the Avesta in the enumeration of the Aryan
countries. We have, Vârena, Haętumant, Rangha and Harahvaiti in the list, which
are the Zend equivalents of Varuṇa, Setumat, Rasâ and Sarasvatî.*
* Darmesteter, in his introduction to Fargard I of the Vendidad,
observes that names, originally belonging to mythical lands, are often, in
later times, attached to real ones. If this is true of Varena, Rangha, (Rasâ),
and other names, there is no reason why Hapta-hindu
should not be similarly explained, especially when it is now clear that the
phrase sapta sindhavaḥ denotes
celestial rivers in the Vedas.
But it is never argued from it that the Vedic
deity, Varuṇa, was so named from the country called Varena by the
worshippers of Mazda; and the same may be said of Rasâ and Sarasvatî. Rasâ and
Sarasvatî sometimes denote the terrestrial rivers even in the Ṛig-Veda.
But there is ample evidence to show that they were originally the aerial
rivers. It is, therefore, more natural to hold that all these were ancient
mythological names brought with them by the Aryan settlers to their new home
and there applied to new places or objects. There are places in
It will be
seen from the foregoing discussion that the true nature and movements of waters
released by Indra from the grasp of Vṛitra has been misunderstood from
the days of the most ancient Nairuktas, or, we might say, even from the days of
the Brâhmaṇas. There are passages in the Ṛig-Veda where Pűshan is
said to cross the upper celestial hemisphere in boats; but the Ashvins and
Sűrya are generally described as traversing the heaven in their chariots. This
led the ancient Nairuktas to believe that the upper celestial hemisphere was
not a seat of aerial waters, and that when Indra was described as releasing
waters by slaughtering Vṛitra, the waters referred to could not but be
the waters imprisoned in the rain-clouds, the seven rivers set free to flow by
killing Vṛitra were similarly understood to be the rivers of India, like
the Ganges, the Jamuna, &c., while the piercing of the mountains was
explained away by distorting or straining the meaning of such words as, parvata, giri, &c., as stated above. It was at this stage that the
subject was taken in hand by Western scholars who, taking their cue from the Hapta-hindu of the Avesta eloquently
advanced the theory that the seven rivers, set free by Indra, were the rivers
of the Panjaub. This explanation, when first started, was regarded as an
important historical discovery; and so it would have been, if it had been a
real fact. But, as pointed out above, the Panjaub is, by nature, a land of five
rivers and not seven; and it is so described in the Vâjasaneyî Saṁhitâ.
It is also evident that as the seven rivers set free to flow by Indra, were
released simultaneously with the dawn, they could not be the rivers of the
Panjaub. We do not mean to say that the Panjaub was not an Aryan settlement at
the time when the Vedic hymns were sung, for the rivers of the Panjaub are
expressly mentioned in the Ṛig-Veda. But the rivers of the Panjaub were
not the seven rivers mentioned in the Vedas; and if so, a new explanation of
the Vṛitra legend becomes necessary, and such an explanation is furnished
only by the theory of the cosmic circulation of aerial waters or rivers through
the lower and the upper world, carrying along with them the sun, the moon and
the other heavenly bodies. We can now very well explain how Vṛitra, by
stretching his body across, closed the passages in the mountainous ranges (parvatas), which, on the analogy of
mountains usually seen on the horizon, were believed to lie between the upper
and the lower world; and how the waters, and with them the sun and the dawn,
were prevented from coming up from the nether world for a long time in the
Arctic home of the ancestors of the Vedic bards. Another point elucidated by
the present theory is the four-fold character of the effects of Indras
conquest over Vṛitra a point which has been entirely neglected by ancient
and modern Nairuktas, not because it was unknown but because they were unable
to give any satisfactory explanation of the same, except on the hypothesis that
different effects have been confounded with one other by the poets of the
Ṛig-Veda. But the theory of the cosmic circulation of aerial waters, a
theory which is also found in the mythology of many other nations, now clears
up the whole mystery. If Indra is described as the leader or the releaser of
waters (apâm netâ, or apâm sraṣhtâ), the waters do not
mean the waters in the clouds, but the waters or the watery vapors: which fill
the universe, and formed the material out of which the latter was created. In
other words, the conquest over waters was something grander, something far more
marvelous and cosmic in character than the mere breaking up of the clouds in
the rainy season; and under these circumstances it was naturally considered to
be the greatest of Indras exploits, when, invigorated by a hundred nightly
Soma sacrifices, he slew with ice the watery demon of darkness, shattered his
hundred autumnal forts, released the waters or the seven rivers upstream to go
along their aerial way and brought cut the sun and the dawn, or the cows, from
their place of confinement inside the rocky caves, where they had stood still
since the date of the war, which, according to a Vedic passage, hitherto
misread and misunderstood, commenced in higher latitudes every year on the 40th
day of Sharad or autumn and lasted
till the end of winter. It is not contended that Indra had never been the god
of rain. There are a few passages in the Ṛig-Veda (IV, 26, 2; VIII, 6,
1), where he is expressly mentioned as sending down rain, or is compared to a
rain-god. But as Vṛitra-han or the killer of Vṛitra and the
releaser of waters and the dawn, it is impossible to identify him with the god
of rain. The story; of the release of captive waters is an ancient story for
Vṛitra appears as Orthros in the Greek mythology, and Vṛitra-han,
as Verethraghna, is the god of victory in the Parsi scriptures. Now this
Vṛitra-han may not have been originally the same as Indra, for the word Indra does not occur in European Aryan
languages, and it has, therefore, been suggested by some comparative
mythologians that the conquest of waters, which was originally the exploit of
some other Aryan deity, was probably ascribed to Indra in the Vedic mythology,
when Indra became the principal deity in the Vedic pantheon. The fact that
Tishtrya, and not Verethraghna, is said to be the releaser of waters and light
in the Avesta, lends some support to this theory. But whichever view we adopt,
it does not affect the conclusion we have come to above regarding the true
explanation of the Vṛitra legend. Clouds and rain cannot constitute the
physical basis of the legend, which is evidently based on the simple phenomenon
of bringing light to the people who had anxiously waited for it during the
darkness of the long night in the Arctic regions; and it is a pity that any
misconception regarding Vedic cosmography, or the nature of waters and their
cosmic movements should have, for sometime at least, stood in the way of the
true interpretation of this important legend. Indra may have become a storm-god
afterwards; or the conquest over Vṛitra, originally achieved by some
other deity, may have come to be ascribed to Indra, the rain-god in later
times. But whether the exploits of Vṛitra-han
were subsequently ascribed to Indra, or whether Indra, as the releaser of
captive waters, was afterwards mistaken for the god of rain, like Tishtrya in
the Avesta, one fact stands out boldly amidst all details, viz., that captive waters were the aerial waters in the nether
world, and that their captivity represented the annual struggle between light
and darkness in the original home of the Aryans in the Arctic region; and if
this fact was not hitherto discovered, it was because our knowledge of the
ancient man was too meager to enable us to perceive it properly.
CHAPTER X
VEDIC MYTHS THE
MATUTINAL DEITIES
Vernal
theory and the legends of the Ashvins The part played by the Ashvins in the
struggle for waters and light Intelligible only on the Arctic theory Their
exploits and legends Saving or rejuvenating, rescuing from the ocean, or restoring
the eye-sight or light, to Chyavâna, Rebha, Bhujyu, Atri, Vandana &c. All
explained at present as referring to the rescue of the daily dawn or the vernal
restoration of the powers of the winter sun But the theory fails to explain
references to blindness or darkness in several legends Nor does it account
for the duration of the distress of the Ashvins protégés Nor for the
character of the place of distress from which the protégés were saved
Bottomless and dark ocean really means the nether world A bowl with bottom up
and mouth downwards indicates the inverted hemisphere of the Hades Legend of Ṛijrâshva
The slaughter of a hundred sheep represents the conversion of a hundred days
into so many nights The story of Saptavadhri or the seven eunuchs, praying
for safe delivery after ten months of gestation Remains unexplained up to the
present The interior of heaven and earth is conceived in the Veda as the womb
in which the sun moves when above the horizon Ten months gestation thus
represents the ten months when the Sun is above the horizon Prayer for safe
delivery indicates the perils of the long night Riddle or paradox of a child
becoming invisible as soon as born The story of the hidden Agni refers to the
same phenomenon Probable origin of the Purâṇic story of Kumâra or
Kârttikeya Superiority of the Arctic over the vernal theory in explaining the
legends of the Ashvins The legend of Indras stealing Sűryas wheel The
meaning of dasha-prapitve discussed
Indicates darkness on the completion of ten months Viṣhṇus three
strides Different opinions about their nature quoted Viṣhṇus
strides represent the yearly course of the sun-And his third invisible-step
represents the nether world Viṣhṇus opprobrious name,
Shipivishta Represents the dark or the diseased sun during the long Arctic
night The three abodes of Savitri, Agni and the Ashvins compared to
Viṣhṇus third step The legend of Trita Aptya Trita, or the
third, represents the third part of the year The Indo-Germanic origin of the
legend The Âpas Their character and nature described Seven-fold and
ten-fold division of things in the Vedic literature Various instances of
seven-fold and ten-fold division collected This two-fold division probably
due to the seven and ten months period ofsunshine in the Arctic region The
Dâsharâjna fight Represents struggle with the ten-fold division of darkness
Brihaspati and his lost wife in the Ṛig-Veda The ten non-sacrificing
kings and Râvaṇa compared Mythical element in the Râmâyaṇa
probably derived from the Vedic mythology Hanumân and Vrishâkapi Was
Râmâyaṇa copied from Homer Both may have a common source Conclusion.
The inadequacy
of the Storm theory to explain the legend of Indra and Vṛitra has been
fully set forth in the last chapter; and we have seen how a number of points
therein, hitherto unintelligible, can be explained by the Arctic theory,
combined with the true conception of the circulation of aerial waters in the
upper and the nether world. We shall now take up the legends that are usually
explained on the Vernal theory, and show how, like the Storm theory, it fails
to account satisfactorily for the different features of these legends. Such
legends are to be found amongst the achievements of the Ashvins, the physicians
of the gods. These achievements are summed up, as it were, in certain hymns of
the Ṛig-Veda (I, 112; 116; 117; 118), each of which briefly refers to the
important exploits of these twin gods. As in the case of Vṛitra, the
character of the Ashvins and their exploits are explained by different schools
of interpreters in different ways. Thus Yâska (Nir. XII, 1) informs us that the
two Ashvins are regarded by some as representing Heaven and Earth, by others as
Day and Night, or as Sun and Moon; while the Aitihâsikas take them to be two
ancient kings, the performers of holy acts. But as before, we propose to
examine the legends connected with the Ashvins only according to the
naturalistic or the Nairukta school of interpretation. Even in this school
there are, however, a number of different views held regarding the nature and
the character of these two gods. Some believe that the natural basis of the
Ashvins must be the morning star, that being the only morning-light visible
before fire, dawn and sun; while others think that the two stars in the
constellation of Gemini were the original representatives of the twin gods. The
achievements of these gods are, however, generally explained as referring to
the restoration of the powers of the sun
VṚITRA TRIUMPHANT
(WATERS AND THE SUN CONFINED)
1. Varuṇas tree2. Waters
VṚITRA SLAIN
(WATERS AND THE SUN SET FREE TO
MOVE)
3. Vṛitra as a Serpent4. The
Sun278
decayed-in winter; and an elaborate discussion of the
Ashvinss exploits on this theory will be found in the Contributions to the Science of Mythology (Vol. II, pp. 583-605) by
Prof, Max Müller, published a few years ago. It is beyond the scope of this
work to examine each one of the different legends connected with the Ashvins,
as Prof. Max Müller has done. We are concerned only with those points in the
legends which the Vernal or the Dawn theory fails to explain and which can be
well accounted for only by the Arctic theory; and these we now proceed to
notice.
Now, in the
first place, we must refer to the part played by the Ashvins in the great
struggle or fight for waters and light, which has been discussed in the
previous chapter. The Ashvins are distinctly mentioned in the sacrificial
literature as one of the deities connected with the Dawn (Ait. Br. II, 15); and
we have seen that a long laudatory song recited by the Hotṛi before
sunrise is specially devoted to them. The daughter of Sűrya is also described
as having ascended their car (I, 116, 17; 119, 5), and the Aitareya
Brâhmaṇa (IV, 7-9), describes a race run by the gods for obtaining the Âshvina-shastra as a prize; and the
Ashvins, driving in a carriage drawn by donkeys, are said to have won it in
close competition with Agni, Uṣhas and Indra, who are represented as
making way for the Ashvins, on the understanding that after winning the race
the Ashvins would assign to them a share in the prize. The kindling of the sacrificial
fire, the break of dawn, and rise of the sun are again spoken of as occurring
simultaneously with the appearance of the Ashvins (I, 157, 1; VII, 72, 4);
while in X, 61, 4, the time of their appearance is said to be the early dawn
when darkness still stands amongst the ruddy cows. Their connection with the
dawn and their appearance in the interval between dawn and sunrise are thus
taken to be clearly established; and whatever theory we may adopt to explain
the character of the Ashvins on a physical basis, we cannot lose sight of the
fact that they are matutinal deities, bringing on the dawn or the light of the
morning along with them. The two epithets which are peculiar to Indra, viz. Vṛitrahan
and Shata-kratű are applied to them (Vṛtrahantamâ, VIII, 8, 22; Shata-kratű I, 112, 23) and in I, 182,
2, they are expressly said to possess strongly the qualities of Indra (Indra-tamâ), and of the Maruts (Marut-tamâ) the associates of Indra in his
struggle with Vṛitra. Nay, they are said to have protected Indra in his
achievements against Namuchi in X, 131, 4. This leaves no doubt about their
share in the Vṛitra-fight; and equally clear is their connection with the
waters of the ocean. In I, 46, 2, they are called sindhu-mâtarâ, or having the ocean for their mother and their car
is described as turning up from the ocean in IV, 43, 5; while in I, 112, 13,
the Ashvins in their car are said to go round the sun in the distant region (parâvati). We also read that the Ashvins
moved the most sweet sindhu, or
ocean, evidently meaning that they made the waters of the ocean flow forward
(I, 112, 9) and they are said to have made Rasâ, a celestial river, swell full
with water-floods, urging to victory the car without the horse (I, 112, 12).
They are also the protectors of the great Atithigva and Divodâsa against
Shambara; and Kutsa, the favorite of Indra, is also said Co have been helped by
them (I, 112, 14, and 23). In Verse 18 of the same hymn, the Ashvins are
addressed as Aṅgirases, and said to have triumphed in their hearts and
went onwards to liberate the flood of milk; while in VIII, 26, 17, we read that
they abide in the sea of heaven (divo
arṇave). Taking all these facts together, we can easily see that the
Ashvins were the helpers of Indra in his struggle for waters and light; and we
now know what that struggle means. It is the struggle between the powers of
light and darkness, and the Ashvins, in their character as divine, physicians,
were naturally the first to help the gods in this distress or affliction. It is
true that Indra was the principal actor or hero in this fight; but the Ashvins
appear to have stood by him, rendering help whenever necessary, and leading the
van in the march of the matutinal deities after the conquest. This character of
the Ashvins is hardly explained by the Vernal theory; nor can it be accounted
for on the theory of a daily strugglebetween light and darkness, for we have
seen that the dawn, during which the Âshvina-shastra
is recited, is not the evanescent dawn of the tropics. The Arctic theory alone
can satisfactorily interpret the facts stated above; and when they are
interpreted in this way, it is easy to perceive how the Ashvins are described
as having rejuvenated, cured, or rescued a number of decrepit, blind, lame or
distressed protégés of theirs in the various legends ascribed to them.
The
important achievements of the Ashvins have been summed up by Macdonell in his Vedic Mythology (§ 21) as follows:
The sage
Chyavâna, grown old and deserted, they released from his decrepit body;
prolonged his life, restored him to youth, rendered him desirable to his wife
and made him the husband of maidens (I, 116, 10 &c.). They also renewed the
youth of the aged Kali, and befriended him when he had taken a wife (X, 39, 8;
I, 112, 15). They brought, on a car, to the youthful Vimada wives or a wife
named Kamadyű (X, 65, 12,) who seems to have been the beautiful spouse of
Purumitra (I, 117, 20). They restored Viṣhṇâpű like a lost animal,
to the sight of their worshipper Vishvaka, son of Kṛiṣhṇa (I,
116, 23; X, 65, 12). But the story most often referred to is that of the rescue
of Bhujyu, son of Tugra, who was abandoned in the midst of ocean (samudre), or in the water-clouds (udameghe), and who, tossed about in
darkness, invoked the aid of the youthful heroes. In the ocean which is without
support (anârambhaṇe) they took
him home in a hundred-oared (shatâritrâm)
ship (I, 116, 5). They rescued him with animated water-tight ships, which
traversed the air (antarikṣha),
with four ships, with an animated winged boat with three flying cars having a
hundred feet and six horses. In one passage Bhujyu is described as clinging to
a log in the midst of water (arṇaso
madhye I, 182, 7). The sage Rebha stabbed, bound, hidden by the malignant,
overwhelmed in waters for ten nights and nine days, abandoned as dead, was by
the Ashvins revived and drawn out as Soma juice is raised with a ladle (I, 116,
24; I, 112, 5). They delivered Vandanafrom his calamity and restored him to the
light of the sun. In I, 117, 5, they are also said to have dug up for Vandana
some bright buried gold of new splendor like one asleep in the lap of Nir-ṛiti
or like the sun dwelling in darkness. They succoured the sage Atri
Sapta-Vadhri, who was plunged in a burning pit by the wiles of a demon, and
delivered him from darkness (I, 116, 8; VI, 50, 10). They rescued from the jaws
of a wolf a quail (vartikâ) who
invoked their aid (I, 112, 8). To Ṛijrâshva, who had been blinded by his
cruel father for killing one hundred and one sheep and giving them to a
she-wolf to devour, they restored his eyesight at the prayer of the she-wolf
(I, 116, 16; 117, 17); and cured Parâvṛij of blindness and lameness (I,
112, 8). When Vishpalâs leg had been cut off in the battle like the wing of a
bird, the Ashvins gave her an iron one instead (I, 116, 15). They befriended
Ghoṣhâ when she was growing old in her fathers house by giving her a
husband (I, 117, 7; X, 39, 3). To the wife of a eunuch (Vadhrimatî) they gave a
son called Hiraṇya-hasta (I, 116, 13; VI, 62, 7). The cow of Shayu which
had left off bearing they caused to give milk (I, 116, 22); and to Pedu they
gave a strong swift dragon-slaying steed impelled by Indra which won him
unbounded spoils (I, 116, 6).
Besides
these there are many other exploits mentioned in I, 112, 116-119; and the
Ashvins are described as having saved, helped, or cured a number of other persons.
But the above summary is sufficient for our purpose. It will be seen from it
that the Ashvins bear the general character of helping the lame, the blind, the
distressed, or the afflicted; and in some places a reference to the decayed
powers of the sun is discernible on the face of the legends. Taking their clue
from this indication, many scholars, and among them Prof. Max Müller, have
interpreted all the above legends as referring to the sun in winter and the
restoration of his power in spring or summer. Thug, Prof. Max Müller tells us
that Chyavâna is nothing but the falling sun (chyu, to fall), of which it might well be said that he had sunk in
the fiery or dark abyss from which the Ashhvins are themselves said to come up
in III, 39, 3.
The Vedic Ṛiṣhis are
again said to have betrayed the secret of the myth of Vandana by comparing the
treasure dug for him by the Ashvins to the sun dwelling in darkness. Kali is
similarly taken to represent the waning moon, and Vishpalâs iron leg, we are
told, is the first quarter or pâda of
the new moon, called iron on account of his darkness as compared with the
golden color of the full moon. The blindness of Ṛijrâshva is explained on
this theory as meaning the blindness of night or winter; and the blind and the
lame Parâvṛij is taken to be the sun after sunset or near the winter
solstice. The setting sun thrown out of a boat into waters is similarly
understood to be the basis of the legend Bhujyu or Rebha. Vadhrimati, the wife
of the eunuch, to whom Hiraṇya-hasta or the gold-hand is said to be
restored, is, we are further told, nothing but the dawn under a different name.
She is called the wife of the eunuch because she was separated from thee sun
during the night. The cow of Shayu (derived from shî, to lie down) is again said to be the light of the morning sun,
who may well be described as sleeping in the darkness from which he was brought
forth by the Ashvins for the sake of Vandana. In short, each and every legend
is said to be a story of the sun or the moon in distress. The Ashvins were the
saviors of the morning-light, or of the annual sun in his exile and distress at
the time of winter solstice; and when the sun becomes bright and brisk in the
morning every day, or vigorous and triumphant in the spring, the miracle, we
are told, was naturally attributed to the physicians of the gods.
This
explanation of the different legends connected with the Ashvins is no doubt an
advance on that of Yâska, who has explained only one of these legends, viz., that of the quail, on the Dawn
theory. But still I do not think that all the facts and incidents in these
legends are explained by the Vernal theory as it is at present understood. Thus
we cannot explain why the protégés of the Ashvins are described as being
delivered from darkness on the theory
that every affliction or distress mentioned in the legend refers to mere
decrease of the power of the sun in winter. Darkness is distinctly referred to
whenthe treasure dug up for Vandana is compared to the sun dwelling in darkness
(I, 117, 5), or when Bhujyu is said to have been plunged in waters and sunk in
bottomless darkness (anârambhaṇe
tamasi), or when Atri is said to have been delivered from darkness (tamas) in VI, 50, 10. The powers of the
sun are no doubt decayed in winter, and one can easily understand why the sun
in winter should be called lame, old, or distressed. But blindness naturally
means darkness or (tamas) (I, 117,
17); and when express references to darkness (tamas) are found in several passages, we cannot legitimately hold
that the story of curing the blind refers to the restoration of the decayed
powers of the winter sun. The darkness referred to is obviously the real
darkness of the night; and on the theory of the daily struggle between light
and darkness we shall have to suppose that these wonders were achieved every
day. But as a matter of fact they are not said to be performed every day, and
Vedic scholars have, therefore, tried to explain the legends on the theory of
the yearly exile of the sun in winter. But we now see that in the latter case
references to blindness or darkness remain unintelligible; and as the darkness
is often said to be of several days duration, we are obliged to infer that the
legends refer to the long yearly darkness, or, in other words, they have for
their physical basis the disappearance of the sun below the horizon during the
long night of the Arctic region.
The Vernal
theory cannot again explain the different periods of time during which the
distress experienced by the Ashvins protégés is said to have lasted. Thus
Rebha, who was overwhelmed in waters, is said to have remained there for ten
nights and nine days (I, 116, 24) while Bhujyu, another worshipper of theirs,
is described as having been saved from being drowned in the bottomless sea or
darkness, where he: lay for three days and three nights (I, 116, 4). In VIII,
5, 8, the Ashvins are again described as having been in the parâvat or distant region for three days
and three nights. Prof. Max Müller, agreeing with Benfey, takes this period,
whether of ten or three days, as representing the time when the sun at the
winter solstice seems bound and to stand still (hence called solstice), till he jumps up and turns
back. But ten days is too long a period for the sun to stand still at the
winter solstice, and even Prof. Max Müller seems to have felt the difficulty,
for immediately after the above explanation he remarks that whether this time
lasted for ten or twelve nights would have been difficult to settle even for
more experienced astronomers than the Vedic Ṛiṣhis. But even
supposing that the period of ten days may be thus accounted for, the
explanation entirely fails in the case of the legend of Dîrghatamas who is said
to have grown old in the tenth yuga
and rescued by the Ashvins from the torment to which he was subjected by his
enemies. I have shown previously that yuga
here means a month; and if this is correct we shall have to suppose that Dîrghatamas,
representing the annual course of the sun, stood still at the winter solstice
for two months! The whole difficulty, however, vanishes when we explain the
legends on the Arctic theory, for the sun may then be supposed to be below the
horizon for any period varying from one to a hundred nights or even for six
months.
The third
point, left unexplained by the Vernal theory is the place of distress or
suffering from which the protégés are said to have been rescued by the Ashvins.
Bhujyu was saved not on land, but in the watery region (apsu) without support (anârambhaṇe)
and unillumined (tamasi) by the rays
of the sun (I, 182, 6). If we compare this description with that of the ocean
said to have been encompassed by Vṛitra or of the dark ocean which
Bṛihaspati is said to have hurled down in II, 23, 18, we can at once
recognize then as identical. Both represent the nether world which we have seen
is the home of aerial waters, and which has to be crossed in boats by the
drowned sun in the Ṛig-Veda or by Hęlios in the Greek mythology. It
cannot, therefore, be the place where the sun goes in winter; and unless we
adopt the Arctic theory, we cannot explain how the protégés of the Ashvins are
said to have been saved from being drowned in adark and bottomless ocean. In
VIII, 40, 5, Indra is said to have uncovered the seven-bottomed ocean having a
side opening (jimha-bâram), evidently
referring to the fight for waters in the nether world. The same expression (jimha-bâram) is used again in I, 116, 9,
where the Ashvins are described as having lifted up a well with bottom up and
opening in the side ordownwards, and in and in I, 85, 11, a well lying
obliquely (jimha) is said to have
been pushed up by the Ashvins for satisfying the thirst of Gotama. These words
and phrases are not properly explained by the commentators, most of whom take
them as, referring to the clouds. But it seems to me that these phrases more
appropriately describe the antepodal region, where every thing is believed to
be upside down in relation to the things of this world. Dr. Warren tells us
that the Greeks and the Egyptians conceived their Hades, or things therein, as
turned upside down, and he has even tried to show that the Vedic conception of
the nether world corresponds exactly with that of the Greeks and the Egyptians.
The same idea is also found underlying the Hades conception of many other
races, and I think Dr. Warren has correctly represented the ancient idea of the
antepodal under-world. It was conceived by the ancients as an inverted tub or
hemisphere of darkness, full of waters, and the Ashvins had to make an opening
in its side and push the waters up so that after ascending the sky they may
eventually come down in the form of rain to satisfy the thirst of Gotama. The
same feat is attributed to the Maruts in I, 85, 10 and 11 and there too we must
interpret it in the same way. The epithets uchchâ-budhna
(with the bottom up) and jimha-bâra
(with, its mouth downwards or sidewards), as applied to a well (avata), completely show that something
extraordinary, or the reverse of what we usually see, is here intended; and we
cannot take them as referring to the clouds, for the well is said to be pushed up (űrdhvam
nunudre) in order to make the waters flow from it hitherward.
It may also be observed that in I,
24, 7, the king Varuṇa of hallowed might is said to sustain erect the
Trees stem in the bottomless (abudhna)
region, and its rays which ire hidden from us have, we are told, their bottom
up and flow downwards (nîchînâḥ).
This description of the region of Varuṇa exactly corresponds with the
conception of the Hades in which every thing is turned upside down. Being
regarded as an inverted hemisphere, it is rightly described, from the point of
view of persons in this world, as a support. less region with bottom up and
mouth downwards; and it was this bottomless darkness (I, 182, 6), or the
bottomless and supportless ocean, in which Bhujyu was plunged, and which he
crossed without distress by means of the boats graciously provided by the
Ashvins. In the Atharva Veda X, 8, 9, a bowl with mouth inclined or downwards (tiryag-bilaḥ), and bottom upwards
(űrdhva-budhnaḥ) is said to
hold within it every form of glory; and there seven Ṛiṣhis, who
have been this Mighty Ones protectors, are described as sitting together. The
verse occurs also in the Bṛih. Arṇ. Up. II, 3, 3, with the variant arvâg-bilaḥ (with its mouth
downwards) for tiryag-bilaḥ
(with its mouth inclined) of the Atharva Veda. Yâska (Nir. XII, 38) quotes the
verse and gives two interpretations of the same, in one of which the seven
Ṛiṣhis are taken to represent the seven rays of the sun, and the
bowl the vault above; while in the second the bowl is said to represent the
human head with its concave cup-like palate in the mouth. But it seems to me
more probable that the description refers to the nether world rather than to the
vault above or to the concave human palate. The glory referred to is the same
as the Hvarenô of the Parsi scriptures. In the Zamyâd Yasht, this Hvareno or
Glory is said to have thrice departed from Yima and was restored to him once by
Mithra, once by Thraętaona who smote Azi Dahâka, and finally by Keresâspa and
Atar, who defeated Azi Dahâka.
The fight took place in the sea
Vouru-Kasha in the bottom of the deep river, and we have seen that this must be
taken to mean the world-surrounding Okeanos. The Hvarenô (Sans. swar) or Glory is properly the light,
and one who possessed it reigned supreme and one who lost it fell down. Thus
when Yima lost his Glory he perished and Azi Dahâka reigned; as when light
disappears, the fiend rules supreme.*( See S. B. E. Series, Vol. IV, Introd.,
p. lxiii.) It may also be noticed that amongst the persons to whom the glory
belonged in ancient days are mentioned the seven Amesha Spentas, all of-one
thought, one speech and one deed. We have thus a very close resemblance between
the glory said to have been placed in a bowl with bottom up and guarded by the
seven Ṛiṣhis in the Vedas and the Hvareno or the glory mentioned in
the Avesta, which once belonged to the seven Amesha Spentas and which thrice
went away from Yima and had to be restored to him by fighting with Azi Dahâka,
the Avestic representative of the Ahi Vṭitra, in the sea Vouru-Kasha; and
this strengthens our view that the bowl with the bottom up and the mouth
downwards is the inverted hemisphere of the nether world, the seat of darkness
and the home of aerial waters. It was this region wherein Bhujyu was plunged
and had to be saved by the intervention of the Ashvins.
Now if
Bhujyu was plunged in this bottomless darkness and ocean for three nights and
three days (I, 116, 4) or Rebha was there for ten nights and nine days (I, 116,
24), it is clear that the period represents a continuous darkness of so many
days and nights as stated above; and I think, the story of Ṛijrâshva, or
the Red-horse, also refers to the same incident, viz. the continuous darkness of the Arctic region. Ṛijrâshva,
that is, the Red-horse, is said to have slaughtered 100 or 101 sheep and gave
them to the Vṛiki, or the she-wolf and his own father being angry on that
account is said to have deprived him of his sight. But the Ashvins at the
prayer of the she-wolf restored to Ṛijrâshva his eye-sight and thus cured
him of his blindness. Prof. Max Müller thinks that the sheep may here mean the
stars, which may be said to have been slaughtered by the rising sun. But we
have seen that the 350 sheep of Helios are taken to represent 350 nights, while
the corresponding 350 days are said to be represented by his 350 oxen. In
short, the Greek legend refers to a year of 350 days and a continuous night of
ten days; and the period of 10 nights mentioned in the legend of Rebha well
accords with this conception of the ancient Aryan year, inferred from the story
of Helios. This resemblance between the two stories naturally leads us to
inquire if any clue cannot be found to the interpretation of the legend of
Ṛijrâshva in the story of Helios; and when we examine the subject from
this point of view, it is not difficult to discover the similarity between the
slaughter of sheep by Ṛijrâshva and the consuming of the oxen of Helios
by the companion of Odysseus. The wolf, as observed by Prof. Max Müller, is
generally understood in the Vedic literature to be a representative of darkness
and mischief rather than of light and therefore the slaughter of 100 sheep for
him naturally means the conversion of hundred days into nights, producing
thereby a continuous darkness for a hundred nights, of 24 hours each.
Ṛijrâshva or the Red-sun may well be spoken of as becoming blind during these
hundred continuous nights and eventually cured of his blindness by the Ashvins,
the harbingers of light and dawn. The only objection that may be urged against
this interpretation is that hundred days should have been described as oxen or
cows and not as sheep. But I think that such nice distinctions cannot be looked
for in every myth and that if hundred days were really converted into so many
nights we can well speak of them as sheep. The slaughter of 100 or 101 sheep
can thus be easily and naturally explained on the theory of long continuous
darkness, the maximum length of which, as stated in the previous chapter, was
one hundred days, or a hundred periods of 34 hours. In short, the legends of
the Ashvins furnish us with evidence of three, ten, or a hundred continuous
nights in ancient times and the incidents which lead us to this inference, are,
at best, but feebly explained by the Vernal or the Dawn theory as at present
understood.
But the
most important of the Ashvins legends, for our purpose is the story of Atri
Saptavadhri. He is described as having been thrown into a burning abyss and
extricated from this perilous position by the Ashvins, who are also said to
have delivered him from darkness (tamasaḥ)
in VI, 50, 10. In I, 117, 24, the Ashvins are represented as giving a son
called Hiraṇya-hasta, or the Gold-hand, to Vadhrimati or the wife of a
eunuch; while in V, 78, a hymn, whose seer is Saptavadhri himself, the latter
is represented as being shut up in a wooden case, from which he was delivered
by the Ashvins. Upon this Prof. Max Müller observes, If this tree or this
wooden case is mean for the night, then, by being kept shut up in it he
(Saptavadhri) was separated from his wife, he was to her like a Vadhri (eunuch)
and in the morning only when delivered by the Ashvins he became once more the
husband of the dawn. But the learned Professor is at a loss to explain why
Atri, in his character of the nocturnal sun, should be called not only a Vadhri
but Saptavadhri, or a seven-eunuch. Vadhri, as a feminine word, denotes a
leather strap and as pointed out by Prof. Max Müller, Sâyaṇa is of
opinion that the word can be used also in the masculine gender (X, 102, 12).
The word Saptavadhri may, therefore, denote the sun caught in a net of seven
leather straps. But the different incidents in the legend clearly point out
that a seven-eunuch and not a person caught in seven leather straps is meant by
the epithet Saptavadhri as applied to Atri in this legend.
It is
stated above that a whole hymn (78) of nine verses in the 5th Maṇḍala
of the Ṛig-Veda is ascribed to Atri Saptavadhri. The deities addressed in
this hymn are the Ashvins whom the poet invokes for assistance in his miserable
plight. The first six verses of the hymn are simple and intelligible. In the
first three, the Ashvins are invoked to come to the sacrifice like two swans;
and in the forth, Atri, thrown into a pit, is said to have called on then, like
a wailing woman, for assistance. The 5th and the 6th verses narrate the story
of Saptavadhri, shut up in a tree or a wooden case, whose sides are asked to
tear asunder like the side of her who bringeth forth a child. After these six
verses come the last three (the hymn containing only nine verses), which
describe the delivery of a child, that was in the womb for 10 months; and Vedic
scholars have not as yet been able to explain what rational connection these
three verses could possibly have with the preceding six verses of the hymn.
According to Sâyaṇa, these three verses constitute what is called the
Garbhasrâviṇî-upaniṣhad or the liturgy of child-birth; while Ludwig
tries to explain the concluding stanzas as referring to the delivery of a
child, a subject suggested by the simile of a wailing woman in the 4th verse,
or by the comparison of the side of the tree with the side of a parturient
woman. It seems, however, extraordinary, if not worse, that a subject, not
relevant except as a simile or by way of comparison, should be described at
such length at the close of the hymn. We must, therefore, try to find some
other explanation, or hold with Sâyaṇa that an irrelevant matter, viz., the liturgy of child-birth, is
here inserted with no other object but to make up the number of verses in the
hymn. These verses may be literally translated as follows:
7. Just as
the wind shakes a pool of lotuses on all sides, so may your embryo (garbha) move (in your womb), and come
out after being developed for ten months (dasha-mâsyaḥ).
8. Just as
the wind, just as the forest, just as the sea moves, so O ten-monthed (embryo)!
come out with the outer cover (jarâyu).
9. May the
child (kumâra), lying in the mothers
(womb) for ten months, cone out alive and unhurt, alive for the living mother.
These three
verses, as observed above, immediately follow the verses where the wooden case is
said to be shut and opened for Saptavadhri, and naturally they must be taken to
refer to, or rather as forming a part of the same legend. But neither the
Vernal nor the Dawn theory supplies us with any clue whatsoever to the right
interpretation of these verses. The words used present no difficulty. A child
full-grown in the womb for ten months is evidently intended, and its safe
delivery is prayed for. But what could this child be? The wife of the eunuch
Vadhrimati is already said to have got a child Hiraṇya-hasta through the
favor of the Ashvins. We cannot, therefore, suppose that she prayed for the
safe delivery of a child, nor can Saptavadhri be said to have prayed for the
safe delivery of his wife, who never bore a child to him. The verses, or rather
their connection with the story of Saptavadhri told in the first six verses of
the hymn, have, therefore, remained unexplained up-to the present day, the only
explanations hitherto offered being, as observed above, either utterly
unsatisfactory or rather no explanations at all.
The whole
mystery is, however, cleared up by the light thrown upon the legend by the
Arctic theory. The dawn is sometimes spoken of in the Ṛig-Veda as
producing the sun (I, 113, 1; VII, 78, 3). But this dawn cannot be said to have
borne the child for ten months; nor can we suppose that the word dasha-mâsyaḥ (of ten months),
which is found in the 7th and the 8th and the phrase dasha mâsân found in the 9th verse of the hymn were used without
any specific meaning or intention. We must, therefore, look for some other
explanation, and this is supplied by the fact that the sun is said to be
pre-eminently the son of Dyâvâ pṛithivi, or simply of Dyu in the
Ṛig-Veda. Thus in X, 37, 1, the sun is called divas-putra or the son of Dyu, and in I, 164, 33, we read, Dyu is
the father, who begot us, our origin is there; this great Earth is our parent
mother. The father laid the daughters embryo (garbham) within the womb of the two wide bowls (uttânayoḥ chamvoḥ). In the
proceeding verse, we have, He (the sun) yet enveloped in his mothers womb,
having various off-springs, has gone into the (region of) Nir-ṛiti; and
further that he, who had made him, does not know of him; surely is he hidden
from those who saw him. In I, 160, 1, we similarly find that These Heaven and
Earth, bestowers of prosperity and all, the wide sustainers of the regions, the
two bowls of noble birth, the holy ones; between these two goddesses, the
rafulgent sun-god travels by fixed decrees. These passages clearly show (1)
that the sun was conceived as a child of the two bowls, Heaven and Earth, (2)
that the sun moved like an embryo in the womb, i.e., the interior of heaven and earth, and (3) that after moving
in this way in this womb of the mother for some time, and producing various
off-springs, the sun sank into the land of desolation (Nir-ṛiti), and became hidden to those that saw him before.
Once the annual course of the sun was conceived in this way, it did not require
any great stretch of imagination to represent the dropping of the sun into Nir-ṛiti as an exit from the womb
of his mother. But what are we to understand by the phrase that he moved in
the womb for ten months? The Arctic theory explains this point satisfactorily.
We have seen that Dîrghatamas was borne on waters for ten months, and the
Dashagvas are said to have completed their sacrificial session during the same
period. The sun can, therefore, be very well described, while above the horizon
for ten months, as moving in the womb of his mother, or between heaven and
earth for ten months. After this period, the sun was lost, or went out of the
womb into the land of desolation, there to be shut up as in a wooden case for
two months. The sage Atri, therefore, rightly invokes the Ashvins for his
deliverance from the box and also for the safe delivery of the child i.e. himself, from of his mother after
ten months. In the Atharva Veda XI, 5, 1, the sun as a Brahmachârin, is said to
move between heaven and earth, and in the 12th verse of the same hymn we are
told that Shouting forth, thundering, red, white he carries a great penis (bṛîhach-chhepas) along the earth.
If the sun moving between heaven and earth is called bṛîhach-chhepas he may well be called Vadri (eunuch), when
sunk into the land of Nir-ṛiti.
But Prof. Max Müller asks us, why he should be called Saptavadhri or a seven-eunuch?
The explanation is simple enough. The heaven, the earth and the lower regions
are all conceived as divided seven-fold in the Ṛig-Veda, and when the
ocean or the waters are described as seven-fold (sapta-budhnam aṛnavam, VIII, 40, 5; sapta âpaḥ, X, 104, 8), or when we have seven Dânus or
demons, mentioned in X, 120, 6, or when Indra is called sapta-han or the seven-slayer (X, 49, 8), or Vṛitra is said
to have seven forts (I, 63, 7) or when the cowstead (vraja), which the two Ashvins are said to have opened in X, 40, 8,
is described as saptâsya the sun who
is bṛîhach-chhepas and seven
rayed or seven-horsed (V, 45, 9) while moving between heaven and earth, may
very well be described as Saptavadhri or seven-eunuch when sunk into the land
of Nir-ṛiti or the nether world
of bottomless darkness from which he is eventually released by the Ashvins. The
last three verses of V, 78, can thus be logically connected with the story of
Saptavadhri mentioned in the immediately preceding verses, if the period of ten
months, during which the child moves in the mothers womb, is taken to
represent the period of ten months sunshine followed by the long night of two
months, the existence of which we have established by independent Vedic
evidence. The point has long remained unexplained, and it is only by the Arctic
theory that it can be now satisfactorily accounted for.
In
connection with this subject it is necessary to refer to a riddle or a paradox,
which arises out of it. The sun was supposed to move in the womb of his mother
for ten months and then to drop into the nether world. In other words, as soon
as he came out of the womb, he was invisible; while in ordinary cases a child
becomes visible as soon as it is brought into the world after ten months of
gestation. Here, was art idea, or rather an apparent contradiction between two
ideas, which the Vedic poets were not slow to seize upon and evolve a riddle
out of it. Thus we have seen above (I, 164, 32) that the sun is described as
being invisible to one who made him evidently meaning his mother. In V, 2, 1,
we again meet with the same riddle; for it says, Young mother carries in
secret the boy confined; she does not yield him to the father. People do not
see before them his fading face, laid down with the Arâti.( Oldenbergs Vedic
Hymns, S. B. E. Series, Vol. XLVI, pp. 366-68.) In I, 72, 2, we further read, All the clever
immortals did not find the calf though sojourning round about us. The attentive
(gods) wearing themselves, following his foot-steps, stood at the highest
beautiful standing place of Agni; and the same idea is expressed in I, 95, 4,
which says, Who amongst you has understood this secret? The calf has by itself
given birth to its mother. The germ of many, the great seer moving by his own
strength comes forward from the lap of the active one (apasâm). It is the story of the hidden Agni who is described in X,
124, 1, as having long (jyok) resided
in the long darkness (dirgham tamaḥ),
and who eventually comes out as the child of waters (apâm napât, I, 143, 1). The epithet apâm napât as applied to Agni is usually explained as referring to
the lightening produced from the clouds, but-this explanation does not account
for the fact of his long residence in darkness. The puzzle or the riddle is,
however, satisfactorily solved by the Arctic theory, combined with the cosmic
circulation of aerial waters. The sun, who moves in the interior of heaven and
earth for ten months, as in the womb of his mother, naturally suggested to the
Vedic poets the parallel idea of the period of ten months gestation; but the
wonder was that while a child is visible to all as soon as it is born, the sun
became invisible just at the time when he came out of the womb. Where did he
go? Was he locked up in a wooden chest or bound down with leather straps in the
region of waters? Why did the mother not present him to the father after he was
safely delivered? Was he safely delivered? These questions naturally arise out
of the story, and the Vedic poets appear to take delight in reverting again and
again to the same paradox in different places. And what applies to Sűrya or the
sun applies to Agni as well; for there are many passages in the Ṛig-Veda
where Agni is identified with the sun. Thus Agni is said to be the light of
heaven in the bright sky, waking at dawn, the head of heaven (III, 2, 14), and
he is described as having been born on the other side of the air in X, 187, 5.
In the Aitareya Brâhmaṇa (VIII, 28), we are further told that the sun,
when setting, enters into Agni and is reproduced from the latter; and the same
identification appears to be alluded to in the passages from the
Ṛig-Veda, where Agni is said to unite with the light of the sun or to
shine in heaven (VIII, 44, 29). The story of concealing the child after ten
months of gestation whether applied to Agni or to Sűrya is thus only a
different version of the story of the disappearance of the sun from the upper
hemisphere after ten months of sunshine. But what became of the child (Kumâra) which disappeared in this way?
Was he lost for ever or again restored to his parents? How did the father or
even the mother obtain the child so lost? Some one must bring the child to
them, and this task seems to have been entrusted to the Ṛibhus or the
Ashvins in the Ṛig-Veda. Thus in I, 110, 8, the Ṛibhus are said to
have united the mother with the calf, and in I, 116, 13, the Ashvins are
described as giving to Vadhrimati a child called Hiraṇya-hasta. The story
of restoring Viṣhṇâpu to Vishvaka (I, 117, 7) and of giving milk to
Shayus cow probably refer to the same phenomenon of bringing back the morning
sun to the parents; and from this it is but a small step to the story of Kumâra
(lit., a child), one of the names of
Kârttikeya in the Purâṇas. It was this Kumâra, or the once hidden (guha), or dropped (skanda) Chili, rising along with the seven rivers or mothers (VIII,
96, 1) in the morning, that led the army of gods or light and walked
victoriously along the Devayâna path. He was the leader of days, or the army of
gods; and as Maruts were the allies of Indra in his conflict with Vṛitra,
Kumara or the Child, meaning the morning sun, may, by a turn of the
mythological kaleidoscope, be very well called a son of Rudra, the later
representative of the Maruts; or said to be born of Agni, who dwelt in waters;
or described as the son of seven or six Kṛittikâs. As the morning sun has
to pierce his way up through the apertures of Albűrz, temporarily closed by Vṛitra,
this Kumâra can again be well termed Krauńcha-dâraṇa, or the piercer of
the Krauńcha mountain, an epithet applied to him in the Purâṇas.*
* For a further development of the idea see Mr. Nârâyan Aiyangârs
Essays on Indo-Aryan Mythology, Part I, pp. 57-80. In the light of the Arctic
theory we may have to modify some of Mr. Aiyangârs views. Thus out of the
seven rivers or mothers, which bring on the light of the sun, one may be
regarded as his real mother and the other six as stepmothers.
But we are not here concerned with
the growth which Kumâra, or the child of the morning, attained in later
mythology. We took up the legends of the Ashvins with a view to see if there
were any incidents in them which became intelligible only on the Arctic theory,
and the foregoing examination of the legends shows that we have not searched in
vain. The expression dasha-mâsya in
the legend of Sapta-vadhri and dashame
yuge in that of Dîrghatamas directly
indicate a period of ten months sunshine, and we have seen that three, ten,
or a hundred continuous nights are also referred to directly or metaphorically
in some of these legends. We have again such expressions as the sun sleeping
in darkness or in the lap of Nir-ṛiti, which show that actual and not
metaphorical darkness was intended. In short, the sun, sunk in the nether world
of waters and darkness, and not merely a winter sun, is the burden of all these
legends, and the achievements of the Ashvins refer to the rescue of the sun
from the dark pit of the nether world or from the bottomless ocean or darkness.
The Vernal and
The Sűryas Wheel
We have
already discussed the legends of the seven Âdityas with their still-born
brother, and shown that it represents seven months of sunshine in the ancient
Aryan home. But this is not the only period of sunshine in the Arctic region,
where, according too latitude, the sun is above the horizon from
Tvam Kutsena abhi
Shuṣhṇam Indra
Ashuṣhaiṁ yudhya Kuyavam
gaviṣhṭau
Dasha prapitve adha
Sűryasya
muṣhâyas chakram avive rapâṁsi
The first half of the verse presents no difficulty.
It means O Indra! in the striving for the cows, do you, with Kutsa, fight
against Shuṣhṇa, the Ashuṣha and the Kuyava.* Here
Ashuṣha, and Kuyava are used as adjectives to Shuṣhṇa
and mean the voracious Shuṣhṇa, the bane of the
crops. The second hemistich, however, is not so simple. The last phrase avive-rapâṁsi is split in the Pada text as aviveḥ and rapâṁsi,
which means destroy calamities or mischiefs (rapâṁsi). But Prof. Oldenberg proposes to divide the phrase
as aviveḥ and apâṁsi, in conformity with IV, 19,
10, and translates, Thou hast manifested thy manly works (apâṁsi).( Oldenbergs Vedic Hymns, S. B. E. Series, Vol.
XLVI, p. 69.) It is not, however, necessary for our present purpose to examine
the relative merits of these two interpretations; and we may, therefore, adopt
the older of the two, which translates the phrase as meaning, Thou hast
destroyed calamities or mischiefs (rapâṁsi).
Omitting the first two words, viz., dasha and prapitve, the second hemistich may, therefore, be rendered, Thou
hast stolen the wheel of Sűrya and hast destroyed calamities. We have now to
ascertain the meaning of dash prapitve.
Sâyaṇa takes dasha as
equivalent to adashaḥ (lit., bittest, from daṁsh, to bite), and prapitve
to mean in the battle and translates, Thou bittest him in the battle. But
this is evidently a forced meaning and one that does not harmonize with other
passages, where the same legend is described. Thus in IV, 16, 12, we are told
that Shuṣhṇa was killed at ahnaḥ
prapitve, and the last phrase evidently denotes the time when
Shuṣhṇa was defeated, while in V, 31, 7, Indra is described as
having checked the wiles of Shuṣhṇa by reaching prapitvam. By the side of the expression
dasha prapitve, we thus have two more
passages in the Ṛig-Veda, referring to the same legend, and in one of
which Shuṣhṇa is said to be killed at the prapitva of the day (ahnaḥ
prapitve), while in the other, the wiles of the demon are said to be
checked by Indra on reaching prapitvam.
The three expressions, dasha prapitve,
ahnaḥ prapitve and prapitvam yan, must, therefore, be taken
to be synonymous and whatever meaning we assign to prapitve, it must be applicable to all the three cases. The word prapitve is used several times in the
Ṛig-Veda, but scholars are not agreed as to its meaning.
Thus Grassmann gives two meanings of
prapitva. The first denoting
advance, and the second the beginning of the day. According to him ahnaḥ prapitve means in the
morning (IV, 16, 12). But he would render prapitvam
yan simply by advancing. In VI, 31, 3, he would also take prapitve as meaning in the morning.
The word prapitve also occurs in I,
189, 7, and there Prof. Oldenberg translates it by at the time of advancing
day, and quotes Geldner in support thereof. Sâyaṇa in VIII, 4, 3,
translates âpitve by friendship and
prapitve by having acquired, (cf.
Nir. III, 20). Under these circumstances it is I think, safer to ascertain the
meaning of prapitve direct from these
Vedic passages where it occurs in contrast with other words. Thus in VII, 41, 4
(Vâj. Sam. XXXIV, 37) and VIII, 1, 29, we find prapitve very distinctly contrasted with madhye (the middle) and uditâ
(the beginning) of the day; and in both these places prapitve can mean nothing but the decline or the end of the day.*
Mahîdhara, on Vâj. Sam. XXXIV, 37,
explains prapitve as equivalent to prapatane or astamaye, meaning the decline fall, or end of the day. Adopting
this meaning, the phrase ahnaḥ
prapitve ni barhîḥ, in IV, 16, 12, would then mean that
Shuṣhṇa was killed when the day had declined. Now if
Shuṣhṇa was killed when the day had declined the phrase dasha prapitve ought to be, by analogy,
interpreted in the same way. But it is difficult to do so, so long as dasha is separated from prapitve, as is done in the Pada text. I propose therefore, that dasha-prapitve be taken as one word, and
interpreted to mean at the decline of the ten, meaning that
Shuṣhṇa was killed at the end or completion of ten (months). In I,
141, 2, the phrase dasha-pramatim is
taken as a compound word in the Pada
text, but Oldenberg, following the Petersberg Lexicon, splits it into dasha and pramatim. I propose to deal exactly in the reverse way with the
phrase dasha prapitve in the passage under consideration and translate the verse
thus O Indra! in the striving for cows do thou, with Kutsa, fight against
Shuṣhṇa, the Ashuṣha and Kuyava ... On the decline (or the
completion) of the ten (scil.
months), thou stolest the wheel of Sűrya and didst destroy calamities (or,
according to Oldenberg, manifest manly works). The passage thus becomes
intelligible, and we are not required to invent a new meaning for dasha and make Indra bite his enemy on
the battle-field. If we compare the phrase dasha-prapitve
with ahnaḥ-prapitve occurring
in IV, 16, 12, and bear in mind the fact that both are used in connection with
the legendary fight with Shuṣhṇa we are naturally led to suppose
that dasha-prapitve denotes, in all
probability, the time of the contest, as anhaḥ-prapitve
does in the other passage, and that dasha-prapitve
must be taken as equivalent to dashânam
prapitve and translated to mean On the completion of the ten, which can
be done by taking dasha-prapitve as a
compound word. The grammatical construction being thus determined, the only
question that remains is to decide whether dasha
(ten) means ten days or ten months. A comparison with ahnaḥ prapitve may suggest days, but the fight with
Shuṣhṇa cannot be regarded to have been fought every ten days. It
is either annual or daily; and we are thus led to interpret dasha in the compound dasha-prapitve (or dashânâm when the compound is dissolved) as equivalent to ten
months in the same way as the numeral dvâdashasya
is interpreted to mean of the twelfth month, or dvâdashasya mâsasya in VII, 103, 9, The passage thus denotes the
exact time when the wheel of the sun, or the solar orb, was stolen by Indra and
utilized as a weapon of attack to demolish the demons of darkness. This was
done at the end of ten months, or at the end of the Roman year, or at the close
of the sacrificial session of the Dashagvas who with
Vishnus Three Strides
There are a
few more Vedic legends which indicate or suggest the Arctic conditions of
climate or calendar, and I propose to briefly examine them in this chapter. One
of these legends relates to Viṣhṇu and his three long strides,
which are distinctly mentioned in several places in the Ṛig-Veda (I, 22,
17, 18; I, 154, 2). Yâska (Nir. XII, 19) quotes the opinion of two older
writers regarding the character of these three steps. One of these, viz. Shâkapűṇi holds that the
three steps must be placed on the earth, in the atmosphere and in the sky;
while Aurṇavâbha thinks that the three steps must be located, one on the
hill where the sun rises (samârohaṇa),
another on the meridian sky (Viṣhṇu-pada),
and the third on the hill of setting (gaya-shiras).
Prof. Max Müller thinks that this three-fold stepping of Viṣhṇu is
emblematic of the rising, the culminating and the setting of the sun; and Muir
quotes a passage from the Râmâyaṇa (IV, 40, 64), which mentions udaya parvata, or the mountain of
sun-rise, and says that on the top of it is the peak Saumanasa, the place where
Viṣhṇus first step was planted. We are then told that his second
step was placed on the summit of Meru; and that when the sun had circled round
Jambudvîpa by the north, he is mostly visible on that lofty peak. It seems,
therefore, that according to the Râmâyaṇa the third step of
Viṣhṇu was round Jambudvîpa, and was planted after sunset, whatever
that may mean. In the Purâṇic literature, Viṣhṇus three
steps appear as the three steps of Vâmana, the fifth incarnation of
Viṣhṇu.
But apart
from the sleep of Viṣhṇu which is Purâṇic, we have a Vedic
legend which has the same meaning. In the Ṛig-Veda (VII, 100, 6),
Viṣhṇu is represented as having a bad name, viz., shipiviṣhṭa.
Thus the poet says, O Viṣhṇu! what was there to be blamed in thee
when thou declaredest I am shipiviṣhṭa?
Yâska records (Nir. V, 7-9) an old tradition that according to Aupamanyava,
Viṣhṇu has two names Shipiviṣhṭa and
Viṣhṇu, of which the former has a bad sense (kutsitârthîyam); and then quotes the aforesaid verse which he
explains in two ways. The first of these two interpretations accords with that
of Aupamanyava; and shipiviṣhṭa
is there explained by Yâska, to mean shepaḥ
iva nirveṣhṭitaḥ, or enveloped like the private parts,
or with rays obscured (apratipanna-rashmiḥ).
Yâska, however, suggests an alternative interpretation and observes that shipiviṣhṭa may be taken as
a laudatory appellation, meaning one whose rays (shipayaḥ) are displayed (âviṣhṭâḥ).
It is inferred by some scholars from this passage that the meaning of the word shipiviṣhṭa had already become
uncertain in the days of Yâska; but I do not think it probable, for even in
later literature shipiviṣhṭa
is an opprobrious appellation meaning either one whose hair has fallen off,
or one who is afflicted with an incurable skin disease. The exact nature of
the affliction may be uncertain; but there can be no doubt that shipiviṣhṭa has a bad
meaning even in later Sanskrit literature. But in days when the origin of this
phrase, as applied to Viṣhṇu, was forgotten, theologians and
scholars naturally tried to divest the phrase of its opprobrious import by
proposing alternative meanings; and Yâska was probably the first Nairukta to
formulate a good meaning for shipiviṣhṭa
by suggesting that shipi may be taken
to mean rays. That is why the passage from the Mahâbhârata (Shânti-Parvan,
Chap. 342, vv. 69-71), quoted by Muir, tells us that Yâska was the first to
apply the epithet to Viṣhṇu; and it is unreasonable to infer from
it, as Muir has done, that the writer of the Mahâbhârata was not a particularly
good Vedic scholar. In the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ, we are told that
Viṣhṇu was worshipped as Shipiviṣhṭa
(II, 2, 12, 4 and 5), and that shipi
means cattle or pashavaḥ (II,
5, 5, 2; Tân. Br. XVIII, 16, 26). Shipiviṣhṭa
is thus explained as a laudatory appellation by taking shipi equal to cattle, sacrifice or rays. But these
etymological devices have failed to invest the word with a good sense in
Sanskrit literature; and this fact by itself is sufficient to show that the
word shipiviṣhṭa
originally was, and has always been, a term of reproach indicating some bodily
affliction, though the nature of it was not exactly known. The theological
scholars, it is true, have tried to explain the word in a different sense; but
this is due to their unwillingness to give opprobrious names to their gods,
rather than to any uncertainty about the real meaning of the word. It was thus
that the word shipiviṣhṭa,
which is originally a bad name (kutsitârthiyam)
according to Aupamanyava, was converted into a. mysterious (guhya) name for the deity. But this
transition of meaning is confined only to the theological literature, and did
not pass over into the non-theological works, for the obvious reason that in.,
ordinary language the bad meaning of the word was sufficiently familiar to the
people. There can, therefore, be little doubt that, in VII, 100, 5 and 6, shipiviṣhṭa is used in a bad
sense as, stated by Aupamanyava. These verses have been translated by Muir as
follows: I, a devoted worshipper, who know the sacred rites, today celebrate
this thy name shipiviṣhṭa,
I, who am weak, laud thee who art-strong and dwellest beyond this lower world (kṣhayantam asya rajasaḥ parâke).
What, Viṣhṇu, hast thou to blame, that thou declaredest, I am Shipiviṣhṭa. Do not conceal
from us this form (varpas) since thou
didst assume another shape in the battle. The phrase dwelling in the lower
world (rajasaḥ parâke), or
beyond this world, furnishes us with a clue to the real meaning of the
passage. It was in the nether world that Viṣhṇu bore this bad name.
And what was the bad name after all? Shipiviṣhṭa,
or enveloped like shepa, meaning
that his rays were obscured, or that he was temporarily concealed in a dark
cover. The poet, therefore, asks Viṣhṇu not to be ashamed of the
epithet, because, says he, the form indicated by the bad name is only
temporarily assumed, as a dark armor, for the purpose of fighting with the
Asuras, and as it was no longer needed, Viṣhṇu is invoked to reveal
his true form (varpas) to the
worshipper. That is the real meaning of the verses quoted above, and in spite
of the attempt of Yâska and other scholars to convert the bad name of
Viṣhṇu into a good one by the help of etymological speculations, it
is plain that shipiviṣhṭa
was a bad name, and that it signified the dark outer appearance of
Viṣhṇu in his fight with the demons in the nether world. If the sun
is called bṛihach-chhepas when
moving in regions above the horizon, he can be very well described as shipiviṣhṭa or enveloped
like shepa, when moving in the
nether world and there is hardly anything therein of which the deity or his
worshippers should be ashamed. Later Purâṇic tradition represents
Viṣhṇu as sleeping during this period; but whether we take it as
sleep or disease it means one and the same thing. It is the story of
Viṣhṇu going down to the nether world, dark or diseased, to plant
his third step on the head of the Asuras, or in a dark armor to help Indra in
his struggle for waters and light, a struggle, which, we have seen, lasted for
a long time and resulted in the flowing of waters, the recovery of the dawn and
the coming out of the sun in a bright armor after a long and continuous
darkness.
A
comparison with the abodes of other Vedic deities, who are said to traverse the
whole universe like Viṣhṇu confirms the same view. One of these
deities is Savitri, who in V, 81, 3, is described as measuring the world (rajâṁsi) and in I, 35, 6, we are
told There are three heavens (dyâvaḥ)
of Savitri, two of them are near and the third, bearing the brave, is in the
world of Yama. This means that two of Savitṛis three abodes are in the
upper heaven and one in the nether world or the
Trita Âptya
It has been
stated above that the year divided into three parts of 4 months each represents
the three steps of Viṣhṇu; and that the first two parts were said
to be visible as contrasted with the third which was hidden, because in the
ancient home of the Aryan people the sun was above the horizon only for about 8
months. If we personify these three parts of the year, we get a legend of three
brothers, the first two of whom may be described as arranging to throw the third
into a pit of darkness. This is exactly the story of Trita Âptya in the
Ṛig-Veda or of Thrâetaona in the Avesta. Thus Sâyaṇa, in his
commentary on I, 105, quotes a passage from the Taittirîya Brâhmaṇa (III,
2, 8, 10-11) and also a story of the Shâṭyâyanins giving the legend of
three brothers called Ekata, Dvita and Trita, or the first, the second and the
third, the former two of whom threw the last or Trita into a well from which he
was taken out by Bṛihaspati. But in the Ṛig-Veda Ekata is not
mentioned anywhere; while Dvita, which grammatically means the second, is met
with in two places (V, 18, 2; VIII, 47, 16). Dvita is the seer of the 18th hymn
in the fifth Maṇḍala, and in the second verse of the hymn he is
said to receive maimed offerings; while in VIII, 47, 16, the dawn is asked to
bear away the evil dream to Dvita and Trita. Grammatical analogy points out
that Trita must mean the third, and in VI, 44, 23, the word triteṣhu is used as a numeral
adjective to rochaneṣhu meaning
in the third region. As a Vedic deity Trita is called Âptya, meaning born of
or residing in waters (Sây. on VIII, 47, 15); and he is referred to in several
places, being associated with the Maruts and Indra in slaying the demon or the
powers of darkness like Vṛitra. Thus in X, 8, 8, Trita, urged by Indra,
is said to have fought against and slain the three-headed (tri-shiras) son of Tvaṣhṭṛi and released the
cows; while in X, 99, 6, we read that Indra subdued the loud-roaring six-eyed
demon and Trita strengthened by the same draught, slew the boar (varâha) with his iron-pointed bolt. But
the most important incident in the story of Trita is mentioned in 1, 105. In
this hymn Trita is described as having fallen into a kűpa or well, which is also called vavra or a pit in X, 8, 7. Trita then invoked the gods for help and
Bṛihaspati hearing his prayers released him from his distress (I, 105,
17). Some of the verses in the hymn are very suggestive; for instance in verse
9, Trita tells us about his kinship with the seven rays in the heaven. Trita
Âptya knows it and he speaks for kinship. The ruddy Vṛika, or the wolf
of darkness, is again described in verse 18 as having perceived Trita going by
the way. These references show that Trita was related to the powers of light,
but had the misfortune of being thrown into darkness. In IX, 102, 2, Tritas
abode is said to be hidden or secret, a description similar to that of the
third step of Viṣhṇu. The same story is found in the Avesta. There
Thrâetaona, who bears the patronymic epithet Âthwya (Sans. Âptya), is described as slaying the fiendish serpent Azi
Dahâka, who is said to be three-mouthed and six-eyed (Yt. XIX, 36.39; V,
33-34). But what is still more remarkable in the Avestic legend is that
Thrâetaona in his expedition against the demon is said to have been accompanied
by his two brothers who sought to slay him on the way.*( See Spiegel, Die
Arische Periode, p. 271, quoted by Macdonell in his Vedic Mythology, § 23. Also
compare S. B. E. Series, Vol. XXXIII, p. 222, note 2. ) The Avestic legend thus
fully corroborates the story of the Shâṭyâyanins quoted by Sâyaṇa
and when the two accounts agree so well we cannot lightly set aside the story
in the Brâhmaṇa, or hold that it was woven out of stray references in the
Ṛig-Veda. But in the absence of the Arctic theory, or the theory of long
darkness extending over nearly four months or a third part of the year,
European Scholars have been at a loss to understand why the deity should have
been named the Third; and various ingenious theories have been started to
explain how Trita, which ordinarily means the third, came to denote the deity
that was thrown into a pit or well in a distant land. Thus Prof. Max Müller
thinks that the name of the deity was originally Tṛita (तृत)
and not Trita (ञित) and he derives the former from root tṛî (तृ) to cross.
Tṛita (तृत) which, by-the-by, is not a regular
grammatical form though found in the Âtharva Veda VI, 113, I and 3, would thus
mean the sun crossing the ocean, being in this respect comparable to taraṇi which means the sun in
the later Sanskrit literature. In short, according to Prof. Max Müller,
Tṛita (तृत) means the set sun; and the story of Trita
(ञित) is, therefore, only a different version of the daily
struggle between light and darkness. But Prof. Max Müllers theory requires us
to assume that this misconception or the corruption of Tṛita (तृत)
into Trita (ञित) took place before the Aryan separation,
inasmuch as in Old Irish we have the word triath
which means the sea, and which is phonetically equivalent to Greek triton, Sanskrit trita and Zend thrita.
Prof. Max Müller himself admits the validity of this objection, and points out
that the Old Norse Thridi, a name of
Odin, as the mate of Har and Jasnhar, can be accounted for only or, the
supposition that tṛita (तृत)
was changed by a misapprehension into trita
(ञित) long before the Aryan separation. This shows to what
straits scholars are reduced in explaining certain myths in the absence of the
true key to their meaning. We assume, without the slightest authority, that a
misapprehension must have taken place before the Aryan separation, because we
cannot explain why a deity was called the Third, and why triath in Old Irish was used to denote the sea. But the whole
legend can be now very easily and naturally explained by the Arctic theory. The
personified third part of the year, called Trita or the Third, is naturally
described as going into darkness, or a well or pit, or into the waters of the
nether world, for the sun went below the horizon during that period in the home
of the ancestors of the Vedic people. The connection of Trita with darkness and
waters, or his part in the Vṛitra fight, or the use of the word triath to denote the sea in Old Irish
now becomes perfectly plain and intelligible. The nether world is the home of
aerial waters and Bṛihaspati, who is said to have released the cows from
their place of confinement in a cave in the nether world, is naturally spoken
of as rescuing Trita, when he was sunk in the well of waters. Speaking of the
abode of Trita, Prof. Max Müller observes that the hiding place of Trita, the vavra, is really the same anârambhaṇam tamas, the endless darkness, from which light and some of its
legendary representatives, such as Atri, Vandana and others emerged every day.
I subscribe to every word of this sentence except the last two. It shows how
the learned Professor saw, but narrowly missed grasping the truth having
nothing else to guide him except the Dawn and the Vernal theory. He had
perceived that Tritas hiding place was in the endless darkness and that the
sun rose out of the same dark region; and from this to the Arctic theory was
but a small step. Butwhatever the reason may be, the Professor did not venture
to go further, and the result is that an otherwise correct conception of the
mythological incidents in Tritas legend is marred by two ominous words viz., every day, at the end of the
sentence quoted above. Strike off the last two words, put a full point after
emerged, and in the light of the Arctic theory we have a correct explanation
or the legend of Trita as well as of the origin of the name, Trita or the
Third.
APAḤ
The nature
and movement of aerial or celestial waters have been discussed at length in the
last chapter and practically there is very little that remains to be said on
this point. We have also seen how the nether world or the world of waters was
conceived like an inverted hemisphere or tub, so that anyone going there was
said to go to the region of endless darkness or bottomless waters. A
mountainous range was again believed to extend over the borders of this ocean,
forming a stony wall as it were between the upper and the lower world; and when
the waters were to be freed to flow upwards, it was necessary to pierce through
the mountainous range and clear the apertures which were closed by Vṛitra
by stretching his body across them. In one place the well or avata, which Brahmaṇaspati opened,
is said to be closed at its mouth with stones (ashmâsyam, II, 24, 4), and in X, 67, 3, the stony barriers (ashmanmayâni nahanâ) of the prison
wherein the cows were confined are expressly mentioned. A mountain, parvata; is also said to exist in the
belly of Vṛitra (1, 54, 10), and Shambara is described as dwelling on the
mountains. We have seen how the word parvata
occurring in this connection has been misunderstood ever since the days of the
Nairuktas, who, though they did a yeomans service to the cause of Vedic
interpretation, seem to have sometimes carried their etymological method too
far. The connection of the nether world of waters with mountains and darkness
may thus be taken as established, and the legends of Vṛitra, Bhujyu,
Saptavadhri, Tṛita, &c.,
further show that the nether waters formed not only the home of the evil
spirits and the scene of fights with them, but that it was the place which
Sűrya, Agni, Viṣhṇu, the Ashvins and Trita had all to visit during
a portion of the year. It was the place where Viṣhṇu slept, or hid
himself, when afflicted with a kind of skin-disease, and where the sacrificial
horse, which represented the sun, was harnessed by Trita and first bestrode by
Indra (I, 163, 2). It was the place from which the seven aerial rivers rose up
with the seven suns to illumine the ancient home of the Aryan race for seven
months, and into which they again dropped with the sun after that period. It
was the same waters that formed the source of earthly waters by producing rain
by their circulation through the upper regions of heaven. These waters were
believed to stretch from west to east underneath the three earths, thus forming
at once the place of desolation and the place of the birth of the sun and other
matutinal deities mentioned in the Ṛig-Veda. It was the place where
Vṛitra concealed the cows in a stony stable and where Varuṇa and
Yama reigned supreme and the fathers (Pitṛis) lived in comfort and
delight. As regards the division of this watery region, we might say that the
Vedic bards conceived the nether world as divided in the same way as the earth
and the heaven. Thus there were three, seven or ten lower worlds to match with
the threefold or ten-fold division of the heaven and the earth. It will thus be
seen that a right conception of the nether waters and their movement is quite
necessary for understanding the real meaning of many a Vedic and we might even
say, the Purâṇic legends, for the latter are generally based either upon
the Vedic legends or some one or other incident mentioned in them. If this
universal and comprehensive character of the waters be not properly understood
many legends will appear dark, confused or mysterious; and I have therefore,
summed up in this place the leading characteristics of the goddesses of water
as conceived by the Vedic poets and discussed in the foregoing pages. In the
post-Vedic literature many of these characteristics are predicated of the sea
of salt water on the surface of the earth, much in the same way as the Greek Okeanos, which has been shown to be
phonetically identical with the Sanskrit word âshayâna or enveloping, came to denote the ocean or the sea in
European languages. Thus Bhartṛihari in his Vairâgya-Shataka (v. 76)
says: Oh! how extensive, grand and patient is the body of the ocean! For here
sleeps Keshava (Viṣhṇu) here the clan of his enemies (Vṛitra
and other demons of darkness); here lie also the host of mountains (the parvata of the Vedas) in search of
shelter; and here too (lies) the Mares fire (submarine fire) with all the
Saṁvartakas (clouds). This is intended to be a summary of the
Purâṇic legends regarding the ocean, but it can be easily seen that every
one of them is based upon the Vedic conception of the nature and movements of
aerial waters, which formed the very material out of which the world was
believed to be created. After this it is needless to explain why Apaḥ occupied such an important
place in the Vedic pantheon.
Seven-fold Nine-fold and Ten-fold
It is
stated above that the nether waters are divided after the manner of the heaven
and the earth, either into three, seven or ten divisions. We have also seen
that the ancient sacrificers completed their sacrificial session in seven, nine
or ten months; and that the Navagvas and the Dashagvas are, therefore,
sometimes mentioned together, sometimes separately and sometimes along with the
seven sages or vipras. I have also
briefly referred to the seven-fold division, which generally obtains not only
in the Vedic, but also in other Aryan mythologies. But the subject deserves a
fuller consideration, and I propose here to collect certain facts bearing upon
it, which seem to have hitherto attracted but little attention. All that Yâska
and Sâyaṇa tell us about the seven-fold division is that there are seven
horses of the sun and seven tongues or flames of Agni, because the rays of the
sun are seven in number; and the late Mr. S. P. Pandit goes so far as to assert
that the seven rays here referredto may be the prismatic colors with which we
are familiar in the Science of optics, or the seven colors of the rainbow. All
this appears to be very satisfactory at the first sight, but our complacency is
disturbed as soon as we are told that along with the seven rays and horses of the sun, the Ṛig-Veda speaks of ten horses or ten rays of the same luminary. Yâska and Sâyaṇa get over the
difficulty either by ignoring or by explaining away, in a tortuous manner, all
references to the ten-fold division of this kind. But the places where it is
mentioned are too many to allow us to lightly set aside the ten-fold division,
which occurs along with the seven-fold one in the Ṛig-Veda; and we must find
out why this double division is recorded in the Ṛig-Veda But before
inquiring into it, we shall collect all the facts and see how far this double
division extends in the Vedic literature..
We begin
with the sun. He is described as seven-horsed (saptâshva) in V, 45, 9, and his chariot is described as seven
wheeled, or yoked with seven horses, or one seven-named horse in I, 164, 3. The
seven bay steeds (haritaḥ) are
also mentioned as drawing the carriage of the sun in I, 50, 8. But in IX, 63,
9, the sun is said to have yoked ten horses to his carriage; and the wheel of
the year-god is said to be carried by ten horses in I, 164, 14. In the Atharva
Veda XI, 4, 22, the suns carriage is, however, said to be eight-wheeled (ashtâ-chakra).
Indra is
called sapta-rashmi in II, 12, 12,
and his chariot, is also said to be seven-rayed in VI, 44, 24. But in V, 33, 8,
ten white horses are said to bear him; while in VIII, 24, 23, Indra is said to
be the tenth new (dashamam navam). In the Taittirîya Âraṇyaka
III, 11, 1, Indras self is said to be going about ten-fold (Indrasya âtmânam dashadhâ charantam);
and corresponding to it, it may be here noticed, we have in. the Bahrâm Yasht,
in the Avesta, ten incarnations of Vere-thraghna (Sans. Vṛitrahan) specifically mentioned. Amongst the protégés
of Indra we again have one called Dasha-dyu, or one shining ten-fold (I, 33,
14; VI, 26, 4); while Dashoṇi, a being with ten arms or helpers, and
Dasha-mâya, or a ten-wiled person, are mentioned amongst those whom Indra
forced to submit to Dyotana in VI, 20, 8. Dashoṇya and Dashashipra are
also mentioned to have been by the side of Indra when he drank Soma with
Syűmarashmi in VIII, 52, 2.
The chariot
of Soma and Pűshan is described as five-rayed and seven-wheeled in II, 40, 3.
But Soma is said to have ten rays (rashmayaḥ)
in IX, 97, 23.
Agni is
described as sapta-rashmi or
seven-rayed in I, 146, 1, and his rays are expressly said to be seven in II, 5,
2. His horses are similarly described as seven-tongued in III, 6, 2. But in I,
141, 2, Agni is said to be dasha-pramati, and his ten secret dwellings
are mentioned in X, 51, 3. The adjective navamam
or the ninth is also applied to the youngest (naviṣhṭhâya) Agni in V, 27, 3, much in the same way as dashamam is applied to the new (nava) Indra in VIII, 24, 23.
Seven dhîtis, prayers or devotions of
sacrificial priests, are mentioned in IX, 8, 4. But in I, 144, 5, their number
is said to be ten.
Foods are
said to be seven in III, 4, 7. But in I, 122, 13, the food is described as
divided ten-fold. In the Shatapatha Brâhmaṇa I, 8, 1, 34, haviḥ, or sacrificial oblation,
is, however described as made in ten ways.
Seven vipras (III, 7, 7), or seven sacrificers
(hotâraḥ), are mentioned in
several places (III, 10, 4; IV, 2, 15; X, 63, 7). But in III, 39, 5, the number
of the Dashagvas is expressly stated to be ten. Ten sacrificers (hotâraḥ) are also mentioned in the
Taittirîya Brâhmaṇa II, 2, 1, 1, and II, 2, 4, 1.
Bṛihaspati,
the first-born sacrificer, is described as seven-mouthed or saptâsya in IV, 50, 4, and the same
verse occurs in the Atharva Veda (XX, 88, 4). But in the Atharva Veda IV, 6, I
the first Brâhmaṇa Bṛihaspati is said to be dashâsya, or ten-mouthed, and dasha-shirsha
or ten-headed. Seven heads of the Brâhmaṇa are not expressly mentioned in
the Ṛig-Veda, but in X, 67, 1, our-father, meaning the father of the
Aṅgirases, is said to have acquired seven-headed (sapta-shîrṣhṇî) devotion or intelligence (dhî).
Seven
divisions of the earth are mentioned in I, 22, 16.
But the
earths are said to be ten (dashâvani)
in X, 94, 7, (also cf. I, 52, 11).
The cows
stable which the Ashvins opened is said to be saptâsya or seven-mouthed in X, 40, 8. But a ten-fold cows stable
(dashavraja) is mentioned in VIII, 8,
20; 49, 10; 50, 9.
In X, 93,
4, Aryaman, Mitra, Varuṇa Rudra, Maruts, Pűṣhan and Bhaga are
mentioned as seven kings. But ten god-like (hiraṇyasaṇdṛisha)
kings are referred to in VIII, 5, 38, and ten non-sacrificing (avajyavaḥ) kings are mentioned in
VII, 83, 7. The Atharva Veda, XI, 8, 10, further tells us that there were only
ten ancient gods.
These
references will make it clear that if the horses of the sun are mentioned as
seven in one place, they are said to be ten in another; and so there are seven
devotions and ten devotions; seven earths and ten earths; seven cowpens and ten
cowpens, and so on. This double division may not be equally explicit in all
cases; but, on the whole, there can be no doubt that the several objects
mentioned in the above passages are conceived as divided in a double manner,
once as seven-fold and once as ten-fold. To this double division may be added
the three-fold division of the heaven, the earth and the nether world or
Nir-ṛiti; and the eleven-fold division of gods in the heaven, the earth
and waters mentioned previously. In the Atharva Veda XI, 7, 14, nine earths,
nine oceans and nine skies are also mentioned, and the same division again
occurs in the Atharvashiras Upanishad, 6. Now it is, evident that the theory
started by Yâska cannot explain all these different methods of division. We:
might say that the three-fold division was suggested by the heaven, the earth
and the lower world. But how are we to account far all kinds of division from
seven to eleven? So far as I am aware there is no attempt made to explain the
principle of division underlying these different classifications. But now the
analogy of the seven priests, the Navagvas and the Dashagvas, suggests to us
the probable reason of the different methods of division noticed above. The
fact that the horses of the sun are once said to be seven and once ten, seems
naturally to refer to seven months and ten months period of sunshine
previously described; and if so, this helps us in understanding the real
meaning of the different divisions. The seven-fold, nine-fold or ten-fold
division of things is thus merely a different phase of the division of
sacrificers into the seven Hotris, the Navagvas and the Dashagvas. Both seem to
be the effects of the same cause. The mother-land of the Aryan race in, ancient
times, lying between the North Pole and the Arctic circle, was probably divided
into different zones according to the number of months for which the sun was
seen above the horizon in each; and the facts, that the Navagvas and the
Dashagvas are said to be the chief or the most prominent of the
Aṅgirases, that saptâshva was
the principal designation of Sűrya, and that the sons of Aditi who were
presented to the gods were only seven in number, further show that in the
ancient Arctic home a year of seven, nine, or ten months sunshine must have
been more prevalent than a year of 8 or 11 months. It may, however, be noticed
that just as the Aṅgirases are said to be virűpas, Aryaman is described in X, 64, 5, as having a great
chariot, and amidst his births of various forms (viṣhu-rűpeṣhu) he is said to be a seven-fold sacrificer
(sapta-hotṛi), showing that
though-the seven-fold character of Aryaman was the chief or the principal one,
yet there were various other forms of the deity. In X, 27, 15, seven, eight,
nine and ten Vîras or warriors are
said to rise from below, behind, in the front, or on the back, or, in other
words, all round. This verse is differently interpreted by different scholars;
but it seems to me to refer to the seven-fold, eight-fold, or nine-fold
division of the sacrificers, or the Aṅgirases, who are actually described
in III, 53, 7, as the Vîras or
warriors of the Asura. It is, therefore, quite probable that the same Vîras are referred to in X, 27, 15. In
VIII, 4, 1, Indra is said to be worshipped by people in the front (east),
behind (west), up (north), and down (south), meaning that his worshippers were
to be found everywhere; and if the adjectives below, behind &c in X, 27, 15, be similarly
interpreted the verse would mean that the seven-fold, eight-fold, nine-fold, or
ten-fold division of sacrificers was to be met with in places all round. In
other words, the different places in the Arctic region had each a group of
sacrificers of its own, corresponding to the months of sunshine in the place.
On no other theory can we account for the different divisions satisfactorily as
on the Arctic theory, and in the absence of a better explanation we may, I
think, accept the one stated above.
The Ten Kings and Ṛâvaṇa
It has been
noticed above that ten gold-like kings (VIII, 3, 38), and ten non-sacrificing
kings (VII, 83, 7), are mentioned in the Ṛig-Veda. But there is an
important incident connected with the ten non-sacrificing kings which deserves
more than a passing notice in this place. Sudâs, the son of Divodâsa Atithigva,
is described as engaged in a fight with the ten non-worshipping (ayajyavaḥ) kings, and is said to have received help from Indra and Varuṇa
(VII, 33, 3-5; 83, 6-8). It is known as the Dasharâjńa
fight, and Vasiṣhṭha, as the priest of Sudâs, is said to have
secured the assistance of Indra for him. On this slender basis some scholars
have erected a stately edifice of the fight of the Aryan races with the ten
non-Aryan or non-worshipping kings. But it seems to me that the Dasharâjńa fight can be more simply and
naturally explained by taking it to be a different version of Indras fight
with the seven Dânus or demons (X, 120, 6). In X, 49, 8, Indra is called the
seven-slayer (sapta-han) with
reference either to the seven Dânus or demons (X, 120, 6) or to the seven
cities of Vṛitra (I, 174, 2), in the seven-bottomed ocean (VIII, 40, 5).
Now if Indra is sapta-han on the
seven-fold, division, he may be easily conceived as dasha-han, or the ten-slayer, on the ten-fold method of division.
The word dasha-han does not occur in
the Ṛig-Veda, but the fight with the ten kings (ayajyavaḥ dasha râjânah) practically amounts to the same
thing. It has been stated above that amongst Indras enemies we have persons
like Dasha-mâya and Dashoṇi, who are obviously connected in some way with
the number ten. The ten gold-like kings mentioned above again seem to represent
the ten monthly sun-gods, and the fact that they are said to be given to the
sacrificers further strengthens this view. One of Indras protégés is, we
further know, described as Dasha-dyu, or shining ten-fold. If all these facts
are put together, we are naturally led to the conclusion that like the seven
Dânus or demons, the powers of darkness were sometime conceived as ten-fold,
and Indras helping Sudâs in his fight with the ten non-worshipping kings is
nothing more than the old story of the annual fight between light and darkness
as conceived by the inhabitants of a place where a summer of ten months was
followed by a long winter night of two months, or, in other words which formed
the land of the Dashagvas.
But our
interest in this remarkable fight does not come to an end with this
explanation. For when we remember the fact that the word king was not confined
to the warrior class in the Ṛig-Veda, and that in one place (I, 139, 7)
it seems to be actually applied to the Aṅgirases, the expressions ten
golden kings and ten sacrificers or ten-fold Aṅgirases, or the ten
Dashagvas sacrificing for ten months become synonymous phrases. Now Bṛihaspati
was the chief of the Aṅgirases, and as such may naturally be considered
to be the representative of them all; and we have seen that he is represented
once as seven-mouthed and seven headed, and once as ten-mouthed and ten-headed
(Ṛig. IV, 50, 4; A.V. IV, 6, 1). This Bṛihaspati is connected with
the story of Saramâ and Paṇis, and is said to have helped Indra in
recovering the cows, or is sometimes described as having performed the feat
himself (I, 83, 4; X, 108, 6-11). Bṛihaspati is also represented in X, 109,
as having lost his wife, who was restored to him by the gods. This is obviously
the story of the restoration of the dawn to man, as represented by the chief
sacrificer Bṛihaspati. In the Taittirîya Âraṇyaka I, 12, 3-4, Indra
is described as the lover of Ahalyâ (Ahalyâyai
jâraḥ), and the myth has been explained as referring to the dawn and
the sun, by an old orthodox scholar like Kumârila. Ahalyâ in the later
literature is the wife of the Ṛiṣhi Gotama (lit. rich in cows); but it is not difficult to perceive that the
story of Ahalyâ (which Prof. Max. Müller derives from ahan, a day), was originally a dawn-story, or a different version
of the legend of Brahma-jâyâ narrated in X, 109.
These facts
are very suggestive and call to mind some of the incidents in the story of the
Râmâyaṇa. It is quite outside the scope of this book to fully enter into
the question of the historical basis of this well-known Indian epic. We are
concerned with Vedic myths and Vedic mythology, and if we refer to the
Râmâyaṇa we do so simply to point out such resemblances as are too
striking to be left unnoticed. The main story in the Râmâyaṇa is narrated
in such detail that, on the face of it, it bears the stamp of a historic
origin. But even then we have to explain why Râmas adversary was conceived as
a ten-headed monster or an unnatural being, and why Râmas father was called
Dasharatha or ten-carred. A ten-headed monster cannot ordinarily be regarded as
a historical fact, and it seems not unlikely that some of the incidents of
Vedic myths may have been skillfully interwoven with the main story of the epic
by its author. We have seen above that some of the Indras enemies are
described as Dashoṇi or Dashamâya, and that in the Dâsharâjńa fight there were ten non-sacrificing or demoniac kings
opposed to Sudâs. These ten non-sacrificing kings may well be conceived as a
single king with ten heads and spoken of as a ten-headed monster, much in the
same way as Bṛihaspaṭi, the chief of the ten Aṅgirases, is
said to be ten-headed or ten-mouthed. The fact that the brother of this
ten-headed monster slept continuously for six months in a year also indicates
his Arctic origin. Prof. Rhys, in his Hibbert
Lectures, quotes Plutarch to the effect that the Paphlagonians regarded
their gods as shut up in a prison during winter and let loose in summer, and
interprets the legend as indicating the temporary ascendancy of the powers of
darkness over those of light during the continuous night of the Arctic region.
If we adopt this view, we can easily explain how all the gods were said to be
thrown into prison by Ṛâvaṇa until they were released by Râma.
Another fact in the Râmâyaṇa which is supposed to require explanation is
the conception of the monkey-god Hanűmân. The
Ṛig-Veda mentions a monkey (kapi), who, as Vṛiṣhâkapi, has been elsewhere shown to
represent the sun at the autumnal equinox, or according to the Arctic theory
discussed in this book, at the time of going down below the horizon into the
long darkness of the nether world. It is Dr. Pischel, who first threw out the
hint that this Vṛiṣhâkapi may probably be the ancestor of the
Purâṇic Hanűmân; and the fact that Hanűmân was born at a time when the
sun we said to be eclipsed goes to corroborate the view to a certain extent.
Mr. Nârâyan Aiyangâr, in his Essays on Indo-Aryan mythology, further points out
that Sîtâ, the wife of Râma, may be traced to the Ṛig-Vedic Sîtâ, meaning a ploughed furrow which
is invoked to bestow wealth upon the worshipper in IV, 57, 6 and 7; and so far
as the birth of Sîtâ from the earth and her final disappearance into it are
concerned the explanation appears very probable. It seems, therefore, very
likely that the mythical element in the Râmâyaṇa was derived from the
story of the restoration of the dawn or Brahmajâya to man as represented by the
first sacrificer Bṛihspati, or the fight of Indra with Vṛitra for
the recovery of light. Whether we can go further than this cannot be decided
without further research. Prof. Max Müller, in his Lectures on the Science of
Language, has shown that many names in the Iliad can be traced back to the
Vedas. For instance he derives Helen from Saramâ, Paris from Paṇis, and
Briesis from Brisaya. But even then all the personages mentioned in the Iliad
cannot be explained in this way. One thing, however, seems certain, that the
story of the restoration of the Dawn-wife to her husband was an ancient
inheritance both with the Greeks and the Indians; and we need not, therefore,
be surprised if we discover a few striking coincidences between the Iliad on
the one hand and the Râmâyaṇa on the other; for a common mythical element
appears to have been interwoven with the main story, of course with a different
local coloring, in each case. The question whether the Râmâyaṇa was
copied from Homer is, therefore, entirely meaningless. The fact seems to be
that both Homer and Vâlmîki have utilized a common mythological stock, and any
resemblances between their work only go to prove the theory of their common
origin, It has been pointed out by Prof. Weber that in the Buddhistic
Dasharatha Jâtaka, Sîtâ is represented as the sister and not as the wife of Râma,
and the learned Professor tells us that this must be an ancient version of the
story, for a marriage with ones sister must be considered to be as primeval as
Adam himself. The late Mr. Telang was of opinion that the Buddhists must have
deliberately misrepresented the story of the Brahmanical epic, and such a
perversion is not improbable. But on the theory that certain features of the
Vedic dawn-myths were probably interwoven with the main historic story of the
epic, we may explain the Buddhistic account by supposing that it was the
out-come of an unsuccessful attempt made in pre-Buddhistic time to identify
Râma with Sűrya in the Ṛig-Veda, the latter of whom is described both as
the brother and the lover of the Dawn (VII, 75, 5; VI, 55, 4 and 5; X, 3, 3) I
have already stated that the subject is too vast to be treated here at any
length. My object was to point out a few resemblances between the story of the
Râmâyaṇa and the Vedic myths as they occurred to me. But the question,
howsoever interesting, is not relevant to the subject in hand, and I must give
up the temptation of going into it more fully in this place. The question of
ten incarnations is also similarly connected with the ten golden kings, or the
ten gods mentioned in the Atharva Veda, or the ten incarnations of Verethreghna
in the Avesta. The ten incarnations in the Avesta (Yt. XIV) are a wind, a bull,
a horse, a camel, a boar, a youth, a raven, a ram, a buck and a man; and four
of them, viz., a horse, a boar, a
youth and a man, seem to correspond with Kalki, Varâha, Vâmana and Râma amongst
the ten Avatâras mentioned in the Purâṇic literature. This shows that the
conception of the ten Avatâras was, at any rate, Indo-Iranian in origin, and it
is no doubt interesting to follow it up and trace its development on the Indian
soil. The Matsya, the Kűrma, the Varaha, the Nârasiṁha, the Vâmana and,
as we have now seen, the Râma Avatâra can be more or less traced to the
Ṛig-Veda. But it would require much patient research to thoroughly
investigate these matters, and I cannot do more than to throw out such hints as
have occurred to me, and ask the reader to take them for what they are worth.
If the Arctic theory is established, it will throw a good deal of new light not
only on the Vedic but also on the Purâṇic mythology, and it will then be
necessary to revise, in some cases entirely recast, the current explanations of
both. But the work as stated previously cannot be undertaken in a book which is
mainly devoted to the examination of evidence in support of the new theory.
We have now
discussed most of the Vedic legends likely to throw any light on the main point
of our inquiry. There are many other incidents, which can be better explained
on the Arctic theory than at present. For instance, we can now well understand
why Mitra and Varuṇa were originally conceived as two correlated deities;
for according to our theory they would represent half-year-long light and
darkness in the
CHAPTER XI
THE AVESTIC EVIDENCE
Nature of Avestic evidence stated Different views of
scholars regarding its character Necessity of re-examining the subject An
abstract of the first Fargard of the Vendidad Sixteen lands created by Ahura
Mazda with their modern equivalents &c. Airyana Vaęjo, the first created
land represents the Paradise of the Iranians Different views regarding its
position Darmesteter, Spiegel and others locate it in the east; Haug and
Bunsen in the far north Darmesteters argument examined Airyana Vaęjo cannot
be determined from the position of Vanguhi Identification of Rangha with the
Caspian Sea or the westernmost river doubtful Rangha is probably the same as
Rasâ in the Ṛig-Veda X, 75, 6 Unsoundness of Darmesteters reasoning The
position of the Airyana Vaęjo must be determined from its special
characteristics found in the Avesta The passage where ten months winter is
said to be such a characteristic cited Ten months winter first introduced
into the happy land by Angra Mainyu Indicates that before the fiends
invasion there must have been ten months summer and two months winter in the
land Sudden change in the Polar climate fully confirmed by latest geological
researches Two months winter necessarily synchronous with long Arctic night
The tradition about seven months summer and five months winter also refers to
the original climate in the Airyana Vaęjo Mentioned in the Bundahish Not
inconsistent with the tradition of ten months summer recorded in the original
passage Both possible in the Arctic regions Similar statements in the Ṛig-Veda
Coincidence between seven months summer, the legend of Aditi, and the date of
Indras fight with Shambara, pointed out Summary of the second Fargard Yimas
Vara in the Airyana Vaęjo Annual sunrise and a year-long day therein Shows
that the Airyana Vaęjo must be located near the North Pole and not to the east
of Iran The account too graphic to be imaginary or mythical Represents the
advent of the Glacial epoch in the land It is the oldest human testimony to
the advent of the Ice-age, destroying the Arctic home Special importance of
the Avestic evidence pointed out Fully corroborated by scientific evidence Migration
from Airyana Vaęjo rendered necessary by glaciation Sixteen lands in the
first Fargard therefore represent successive stages of migration to Central
Asia Establishes the historical character of the first Fargard The legend
of deluge in the Shatapatha Brâhmaṇa Probably refers to the same event
as the Avestic legends Other Vedic passages indicating the northern origin of
Indian Aryas Conclusion to be drawn from the Vedic and Avestic evidence
combined.
In dealing
with the Vedic evidence, both direct and circumstantial, we have by way of
comparison quoted or referred to some Avestic legends or myths in the foregoing
chapters. But the Avesta contains some important passages directly bearing upon
the question of the original Aryan home in the far north, and migrations
therefrom to the regions watered by the Oxus, the Jaxartes or the Indus; and it
is necessary to discuss these passages in a separate chapter, because they not
only confirm and supplement the conclusions we have previously arrived at by
the examination of the Vedic evidence but constitute, what may be called,
independent evidence pointing out to the same result. As regards the antiquity
of the Avesta, it is superfluous to adduce any proofs in this place; for it is
admitted by scholars that the Vedas and the Avesta are but two branches of the
same parent stream, though the latter may not be as well preserved as the
former. To use a Vedic phrase, the sacred books of the Brâhmans and the Parsis
are the twin books of the Aryan race; and they can, therefore, be safely taken
to supplement each other whenever it is necessary and possible to do so. This
character of the two books is well exhibited with regard to the subject in
hand. We have seen that while there are a number of passages in the Vedic
literature, which speak of long dawns, continuous darkness, or a sacrificial
session of ten months, we have no text or legend which directly refers to the
home in the far north or to the cause or causes which forced the ancient Aryans
to abandon their primeval home and migrate southwards. But fortunately for us,
the Avesta, though not generally as well preserved as the Vedas, contains a
passage which supplies the omission in a remarkable way; and we mean to discuss
this passage at some length in this chapter. The Avestic legends and traditions
quoted in the foregoing chapters show that a day and a night of six months each
were known to the ancestors of the Iranians, and that the appointed time for
the appearance of Tishtrya before the worshipper, after his fight with Apaosha,
varied from one to a hundred nights, thus indicating that a long darkness extending
over a hundred nights was also known to the forefathers of the worshippers of
Mazda. The stoppage of the flow of waters and of the movement of the sun in
winter, as described in the Farvardîn Yasht, have also been referred to; and it
is shown that the custom of keeping a dead body in the house for two nights,
three nights or a month long in winter, until the floods begin to flow, must be
ascribed to the absence of sunlight during the period when the floods as well
as light were shut up in the nether world by the demons of darkness. All these
traditions have their counterparts in the Vedic literature. But the Avestic
tradition regarding the original home in the far north and its destruction by
snow and ice stands by itself, though in the light of the Vedic evidence
discussed in the previous chapters, we can now clearly show that it has
historical basis and that it preserves for us a distinct reminiscence,
howsoever fragmentary, of the ancient Aryan home. This tradition is contained
in the first two Fargards or chapters of the Vendidad, or the law book of the
Mazda-yasnians. They have no connection with the subsequent chapters of the
book and appear to be incorporated into it simply as a relic of old historical
or traditional literature. These two Fargards have not failed to attract the
attention of Zend scholars ever since the discovery of the Avesta by Anquetil;
and many attempts have been made not only to identify the places mentioned
therein, but to draw historical conclusions therefrom. Thus Heeren, Rhode,
Lassen, Pictel, Bunsen, Haug and others have recognized in these accounts of
the Vendidad, a half historical half mythical reminiscence of the primeval home
and the countries known to the followers of the Avesta, when these Fargards
were composed. Professor Spiegel at first took the same view as Rhode, but has
latterly retracted his opinion. On the other hand, Kiepert, Breal, Darmesteter
and others have shown that no historical conclusion can be drawn from the
description contained in the first two chapters of the Vendidad; and this view
seems to be now mainly accepted. But it must be borne in mind that this view
was formulated at a time when the Vedic evidence in support of the Arctic
theory, set forth in the previous chapters, was entirely unknown, and when the
existence of an Arctic home in ancient times was not regarded as probable even
on geological grounds, man being believed to be post-Glacial and the Arctic
regions always unsuited for human habitation. The recent discoveries in Geology
and Archaeology have, however, thrown-a flood of new light on the subject; and
if the interpretation of the Vedic traditions noticed in the previous chapters
is correct, it will, I think, be readily admitted that a reconsideration of the
Avestic tradition from the new standpoint is a necessity and that we should not
be deterred from undertaking the task by the recent verdict of Zend scholars
against the views of Bunsen and Haug regarding the historical character of the
first two Fargards of the Vendidad.
The first
Fargard of the Vendidad is devoted to the enumeration of sixteen lands created
by Ahura Mazda, the Supreme God of the Iranians. As soon as each land was
created Angra Mainyu, the evil spirit of the Avesta, created different evils
and plagues to invade the land and. made it unfit for human habitation. There
were thus sixteen creations of Ahura Mazda, and sixteen counter-creations of
Angra Mainyu; and the first Fargard of the Vendidad contains a description of
all these creations, and counter-creations, stating in detail how each good
land was created by Ahura Mazda and how Angra Mainyu rendered it unfit for
human residence by creating some evil or plague therein. The Fargard is too
long to be quoted here in full; and I, therefore, borrow Muirs abstract of the
same prepared from the versions of Spiegel and Haug, inserting in some places
Darmesteters renderings with the aid of his translation of the Vendidad in the
Sacred Books of the East Series. The paragraphs are marked first according to
Darmesteter, and then according to Spiegel by figures within brackets.
1, 2 (1-4):
Ahura Mazda spake to the holy Zarathustra: I formed into an agreeable
region that which before was nowhere habitable. Had I not done this, all living
things would have poured forth after Airyana Vaęjo.
3, 4,
(5-9): I, Ahura Mazda, created as the first best region, Airyana Vaęjo, of
the good creation (or, according to Darmesteter, by the good river Dâitya).
Then Angra Mainyu, the destroyer, formed in opposition to it, a great serpent
and winter [or snow], the creation of the Daęvas. There are these ten months of
winter, and two of summer.
5, (13,
14): I, Ahura Mazda, created as the second best region, Gaű (plains), in
which Sughdha is situated. Thereupon in opposition to it, Angra Mainyu, the
death-dealing, created a wasp which is death to cattle and fields.
6, (17, 18):
I, etc., created as the third best region, Môuru, the mighty, the holy.
[Here, and
in most of the following cases the counter-creations of Angra Mainyu are
omitted.]
7, (21, 22):
I, etc., created as the fourth best region, the fortunate Bâkhdhi, with the
lofty banner.
8, (25, 26):
I, etc., created as the fifth best region, Nisaya [situated between Môuru
and Bâkhdhi].
9, (29, 30):
I, etc., created as the sixth best region, Haroyu, abounding in the houses [or
water].
10,
(33-36): I, etc., created as the seventh best region, Vaękereta where Dujak
is situated (or, according to Darmesteter, of evil shadows). In opposition to
it, Angra Mainyu, the destroyer, created the Pairika Khnathaiti, who clung to
Keresâspa.
11, (37,
38): I, etc., created as the eighth best region, Urva, full of pastures.
12, (41,
42): I, etc., created as the ninth best region. Khnenta (a river) in Vehrkâna.
13, (45,
46): I, etc., created as the tenth best region, the fortunate Harahvaiti.
14, (49,
50): I, etc., created as the eleventh best region, Haętumaṇt, the rich
and shining.
16, (59,
60): I, etc., created as the twelfth best region, Ragha, with three
fortresses [or races].
17, (63,
64): I, etc., created as the thirteenth best region, Chakhra, the strong.
18, (67,
68): I, etc., created as the fourteenth best region, Varena, with four
corners; to which was born Thraętaona, who slew Azi Dahâka.
19, (72,
73): I, etc., created as the fifteenth best country, Hapta Heṇdu [from
the eastern to the western Heṇdu]. In opposition, Angra Mainyu created
untimely evils, and pernicious heat [or fever].
20, (76,
77): I, etc., created as the sixteenth and best, the people who live without
a head on the floods of Rangha (or according to Haug on the seashore).
21, (81):
There are besides, other countries, fortunate, renowned, lofty, prosperous and
splendid.
Spiegel,
Haug and other scholars have tried to identify the sixteen lands mentioned in
this description, and the following tabular statement sums up the results of
the investigations of these scholars in this direction. The letters S, H, and
D, stand for Spiegel, Haug and Darmesteter.
|
|
Zend Name |
Old Persian |
Greek |
Modern |
Angra Mainyus evils therein |
|
1 |
Airyana Vaęjo |
|
|
|
Severe winter and snow |
|
2 |
Sughda |
Suguda |
Sogdiana |
|
Cattle wasp and fly |
|
3 |
Môuru |
Margu |
Margiana |
Merv |
Sinful Lust |
|
4 |
Bâkhdi |
Bâkhtri |
|
Balhk |
Devouring ants or beast |
|
5 |
Nisâya |
|
Nisća |
|
Unbelief |
|
6 |
Harôyu (Sans. Sharayu) |
Haraiva |
Areia |
Heart (the basin of Hari river) |
Mosquito, Poverty |
|
7 |
Vaęreketa |
|
|
Cabul (S) Segeston (H) |
Pairikâs ( |
|
8 |
Urva |
|
|
Cabul (H) Land around Ispahan (D) |
Evil defilement Pride, or Tyranny. |
|
9 |
Khneṇta, in Verkhâna |
Varkâna |
Hyrcania |
Gurjân (S) |
Unnatural sin |
|
10 |
Harahvaiti (Sans. Sarasvatî) |
Harauvati |
Arakhosia |
Harűt |
Burial of the dead |
|
11 |
Haętumaṇt (Sans. Setumat) |
|
Etumandros |
Helmend |
Wizards, Locusts |
|
12 |
Ragha |
Raga |
Ragai |
Rai |
Unbelief, Hereticism |
|
13 |
Chakra (Sans. Chakra) |
|
|
A Town in Khorasan (?) |
Cremation of the dead |
|
14 |
Varena (Sans. Varuṇa) |
|
|
Ghilan (H)? |
Despotic foreign rule |
|
15 |
Hapta Heṇdu (Sans. Sapta Sindhu) |
Hiṇdavas |
Indoi |
Panjaub |
Excessive heat |
|
16 |
Rangha (Sans. Rasâ) |
|
|
(H). Arvast- ân-i-Rűm or (D) |
Winter, earthquake |
The old
Persian and Greek names in the above table are taken from the inscriptions of
the Achćmenian kings and the works of Greek writers after the overthrow of the
Achćmenian dynasty by Alexander the Great. They show that at least 10 out of 16
lands can be still identified with certainty; and if so, we can safely say that
the account in the first Fargard is real and not mythical. But with regard to
the land mentioned first in the list, there has been a difference of opinion
amongst Zend scholars. The Airyana Vaęjo is the first created happy land, and
the name signifies that it was the birth-land (Vaęjo = seed, sans. bîja) of the Aryans (Iranians), or the
It may be
observed at the outset that the river Vanguhi is not mentioned in their Fargard
along with the Airyana Vaęjo. The original verse speaks only of the good dâîtya of Airyana Vaęjo, but it is doubtful
if dâîtya denotes a river in this
place. The Zend phrase Airyanem Vaęjô
vanghuyâô dâityayô, which Darmesteter translates as the Airyana Vaęjo, by
the good (vanghuhi) river Dâitya, is
understood by Spiegel to mean the Airyana Vaęjo of the good creation, while
Haug takes it as equivalent to the Airyana Vaęjo of good capability. It is,
therefore, doubtful if the Dâitya river is mentioned along with the Airyana Vaęjo
in this passage.*
* See Dr. Wests dote on Bundahish XX, 13. The original passage mentions
the Dâîtîk river coming out from Aîrân vęj; but Dr. Nest observes that this may
not be a river though the phrase (in the Avesta) has, no doubt, led to locating
the river Dâîtîk in Aîrân vęj.
But even supposing that Darmesteters
rendering is correct, he gives us no authority for identifying Dâitya with
Vanguhi. The Bundahish (XX, 7 and 13) mentions Vęh (Vanguhi) and Dâitîk (Dâitya)
as two distinct rivers, though both
seem to be located in the Airân-vęj (Airyana Vaęjo). We cannot again lose sight
of the fact that it is not the Vanguhi (Vęh) alone that flows through the
Airyana Vaęjo, but that the Rangha (Arag) has the same source and flows through
the same land, viz., the Airyana Vaęjo.
Thus in the very beginning of Chapter XX of the Bundahish, we read that the
Arag and the Vęh are the chief of the eighteen rivers, and that they flow
forth from the north, part from Albűrz and
part from the Albűrz of Auhar-mazd; one towards the west, that is the Arag; and
one towards the east, that is the Vęh river. The Bundahish (VII, 15) further
informs us that the Vęh river flows out from the same source as the drag river,
and Dr. West in a footnote observes that both these rivers flow out from the
north side of the Arędvîvsűr (Ardvi Sűra Anâhita) fountain of the sea, which is
said to be on the lofty Hűgar (Hukairya), a portion of Albűrz. Even according
to Bundahish, the Vanguhi is, therefore, the eastern and the Rangha the western
river, in the northern part of Albűrz; or, in other words, they represent two
rivers in a country, situated in the north, one flowing towards the east, and
one to the west, in that region. It would, therefore, be, to say the least,
unsafe to infer from this that the Airyana Vaęjo represents the eastern-most
country, because the name Vęh or Vanguhi was in later times attached to the
easternmost river in
It is again
a question why Rangha should be identified with the
in the far north, at a great distance beyond the Jaxartes;
and it would be unreasonable to ignore this description which is characteristic
only of the Arctic regions, and, relying on doubtful guesses, hold that the
Airyana Vaęjo was the easternmost boundary of the ancient
VENDIDAD, FARGARD I.
|
Darmesteter |
Spiegel |
Haug and Bunsen |
|
3. The
first of the good lands and countries, which I, Ahura Mazda, created, was the
Airyana Vaęjo, by the good river Dâitya. Thereupon
came Angra Mainyu, who is all death, and he counter-created by his witchcraft
the serpent in the river and winter, a work of the Daęvas. 4. There
are ten winter months there, two summer months;* and those are cold for the
waters, cold for the earth, cold for the trees. Winter falls there, with the
worst of its plagues. * N.B.
Darmesteter states in a note |
5. The
first and best of regions and places have I created, I who am Ahura Mazda; 6. The
Airyana Vaęjo of the good creation. 7. Then
Angra Mainyus, who is full of death, created an opposition to the same; 8. A
great serpent and Winter, which the Daęvas have created. 9. Ten
winter months are there, two summer months. 10. And
these are cold as to the water, cold as to the earth, cold as to the trees. 11. After
this to the middle of the earth then to the heart of the earth. 12. Comes
the winter; |
3. As the
first best of regions and countries I, who am, Ahura Mazda, created Airyana
Vaęjo of good capability; thereupon in opposition, to him Angra Mainyus, the
death-dealing, created a mighty serpent and snow, the work, of the Daęvas. 4. Ten
months of winter are there, two months of summer. [Seven
months of summer are there; five months of winter there were; the latter are
cold as to water, cold as to earth, cold as to trees, there (is) midwinter,
the heart of winter; there all around falls deep |
|
Darmesteter |
Spiegel |
Haug and Bunsen |
|
that
after summer months the Vendidad Sâdah adds, It is known that [in the
ordinary course of nature] there are seven months of summer and five of
winter. |
then
comes the most evil. |
snow;
there is the direst of plagues.] N.B.
According to Haug the whole of the passage within brackets is a later
addition. |
It will be
seen from the above translations that they all agree in the main points, viz., (1) that the Airyana Vaęjo was the
first good land created by Ahura Mazda, (2) that severe winter and snow were
first introduced into it by Angra Mainyu, and (3) that after the invasion of
Angra Mainyu there were ten winter months and two summer months in that land.
The only difference between the three versions is that while Darmesteter and
Spiegel regard the last sentence And these are cold for the waters, etc., as
a part of the original text Haug regards it as a subsequent addition. All the
translators again agree in holding that the statement Seven months of summer
are there and five months of winter is a later insertion. But we shall take up
this question afterwards. For the present we are concerned with the statement
that Ten months of winter are there, two
months of summer, and it will be seen that there is no difference on this
point in the three renderings given above. Another important fact mentioned in
the passage is that the prolonged duration of winter was the result of Angra
Mainyus counter-action, meaning thereby that before the invasion of Angra Mainyu
different climatic conditions prevailed in that region. This view is further
strengthened by the consideration that the Iranians could never have placed
their
We have
stated above that the passage in question indicates a sudden change in the
climate of the Airyana Vaęjo, converting ten months summer and two months
winter into ten months severe winter and two months cold summer. Thirty or
forty years ago such a statement or proposition would have been regarded not
only bold, but impossible or almost insane, for the geological knowledge of the
time was not, sufficiently advanced to establish the existence of a mild
climate round about the North pole in ancient times. It was probably this
difficulty which stared Zend scholars in the face when they declined to place
the Airyana Vaęjo in the far north, in spite of the plain description clearly
indicating its northernmost position. Happily the recent discoveries in Geology
and Archaeology have not only removed this difficulty by establishing, on
scientific grounds, the existence of a warm and genial climate near the North
Pole in inter-glacial times, but have proved that the Polar regions were
invaded, at least twice, by glaciation which destroyed their genial climate.
Thus it is now a settled scientific fact that the Arctic regions were once characterized
by warm and short winters, and genial and long summers, a sort of perpetual
spring, and that this condition of things was totally upset or reversed by the
advent of the Glacial period which made winters long and severe and summers
short and cold. The description of the climatic changes introduced by Angra
Mainyu into the Airyana Vaęjo is, therefore, just what a modern geologist would
ascribe to the Glacial epoch; and when the description is so remarkably and
unexpectedly corroborated by the latest scientific researches, I fail to see on
what ground we can lightly set it aside as mythical or imaginary.. If some Zend
scholars have done so in the past, it was because geological knowledge was not
then sufficiently advanced to establish the probability of the description
contained in the Avesta. But with new materials before us which go to confirm
the Avestic description of the Airyana Vaęjo in every detail, we shall be
acting unwisely if we decline to revise the conclusions of Zend scholars
arrived at some years ago on insufficient materials. When we look at the
question from this point of view, we have to place the site of the Airyana Vaęjo
in the Arctic regions, where alone we can have a winter of ten months at the present day. We can escape from
such a conclusion only by denying the possibility that the passage in question
contains any traditional account of the ancient home of the Iranians; and this
course seems to have been adopted by some Zend scholars of the day. But with
the Vedic evidence, set forth and discussed in the previous chapters, before
us, we need not have any of those apprehensions which have hitherto led many
Zend scholars to err on the side of caution and moderation. We have seen that
there are strong grounds for holding that the ancient Indo-European year was a
year of ten months followed by a long night of two months, in other words, it
was a year of ten summer months and two winter months, that is, exactly of the
same kind as the one which prevailed in the Airyana Vaęjo before the happy land
was invaded by the evil spirit. The word for summer in Zend is
There is
one more point which deserves to be noticed in this connection. We have seen
that to the description of the Airyana Vaęjo quoted above, the old Zend
commentators have added what is believed to be an inconsistent statement, viz., that There are seven months of
summer and five of winter therein. Dr. Haug thinks that the paragraph The
latter are cold as to water etc is also a later addition, and must, therefore,
be taken with the five months of winter. But both Spiegel and Darmesteter, as
well as the commentator, are of opinion that the phrases And these are cold as
to the water etc. form a part of the original text, and must, therefore, be
taken to refer to the two summer months; and this view seems to be more
reasonable, for a later insertion, if any, is more likely to be a short one
than otherwise. The only addition to the original text thus seems to be the
statement, It is known that there are seven months of summer and five of
winter, and this must be taken as referring to the climatic conditions which
obtained in the Airyana Vaęjo before the invasion of Angra Mainyu, for the
latter reduced the duration of summer only to two months, which again were cold
to the water, the earth and the trees. It has been shown above that as the
Airyana Vaęjo was originally a happy land, we must suppose that the first
climatic conditions therein were exactly the reverse of those which were introduced
into it by Angra Mainyu; or, in other words, a summer of ten months and a
winter of two months must be said to have originally prevailed in this happy
land. But the Zend commentators have stated that there were seven months of
summer and five of winter therein; and this tradition appears to have been
equally old, for we read in the Bundahish (XXV, 10-14) that on the day Aűharmazd
(first day) of Âvân the winter acquires strength and enters into the world, ...
and on the auspicious day Âtarô of the month Dîn (the ninth day of the tenth
month) the winter arrives, with much cold, at Aîrân-vęj, and until the end, in
the auspicious month Spendarmad, winter advances through the whole world; on
this account they kindle a fire everywhere on the day Âtarô of the month Dîn,
and it forms an indication that the winter has
come. Here the five months of winter in the Airyana Vaęjo are expressly
mentioned to be Âvân, Âtarô, Dîn, Vohűman and Spendarmad; and we are told that
Rapîtvîn Gâh is not celebrated during this period as Rapîtvîn goes under-ground
during winter and comes up from below the ground in summer. The seven months of
summer are similarly described in the same book as extending from the
auspicious day Aűharmazd (first) of the month Farvarḍîn to the auspicious
day Anirân (last) of the month Mitrô (XXV, 7). It seems from this account that
the tradition of seven months summer and five months winter in the Airyana Vaęjo
was an old tradition, and the Bundahish, in recording it, gives us the climatic
conditions in the ancient home and not, as supposed by some, those which the
writer saw in his own day. For in the twentieth paragraph of the same chapter
twelve months and four seasons are enumerated, and the season of winter is
there said to comprise only the last three months of the year, viz., Dîn, Vohűman and Spendarmad. I
have shown elsewhere that the order of months in the ancient Iranian calendar
was different from the one given in the Bundahish. But whatever the order may
be, the fact of the prevalence of seven months summer and five months winter in
the Airyana Vaęjo seems to have been traditionally preserved in these passages;
and the old Zend commentators on the Vendidad appear to have incorporated it
into the original text, by way of, what may be called, a marginal note, in
their anxiety to preserve an old tradition. We have thus two different
statements regarding the climatic conditions of the Airyana Vaęjo before it was
invaded by Angra Mainyu: one, that these were ten months of summer and two of
winter, the reverse of the conditions introduced by Angra Mainyu; and the
other, traditionally preserved by the commentators, viz., that there were seven summer months and five winter months
therein. It is supposed that the two statements are contradictory; and
contradictory they undoubtedly are so long as, we do not possess the true key
to their interpretation. They are inconsistent, if we make the Airyana Vaęjo
the easternmost boundary of the ancient Iran; but if the paradise is placed in,
the circumpolar regions in the far north the inconsistency at once disappears,
for then we can have seven months summer and ten months summer at the same time
in the different parts of the original home of the Iranians. We have seen in
the discussion of the Vedic evidence that the legend of Aditi indicates seven
months summer or sun-shine, and the legend of the Dashagvas a sacrificial
session, or a period of sun-shine of ten months. It has also been pointed out
that between the North Pole and the
We have so
far discussed the passage in the first Fargard which describes the climate of
the Airyana Vaęjo. The passage, even when taken by itself, is quite intelligible
on, the Arctic theory; but in ascertaining the original climate of the Airyana Vaęjo
we supposed that it was the reverse of the one introduced by the invasion of
Angra Mainyu. The second Fargard of the Vendidad, which is similar in character
to the first, contains, however, a passage, which does away with the necessity
of such assumption, by giving us a graphic description of the actual advent of
ice and snow which ruined the ancient Iranian Paradise. This Fargard is really
a supplement to the first and contains a more detailed account of the Airyana Vaęjo
and a description of the paradisiacal life enjoyed there before Angra Mainyu
afflicted it with the plague of winter and snow. This is evident from the fact
that the coming of the severe winter is foretold in this Fargard and Yima is
warned to prepare against it; while in the first Fargard the happy land is
described as actually ruined by Angra Mainyus invasion. Darmesteter divides
this Fargard into two parts the first comprising the first twenty (or according
to Spiegel forty-one) paragraphs, and the second the remaining portion of the Fargard.
In the first part Ahura Mazda is said to have asked king Yima the ruler of the
Airyana Vaęjo, who is called Sruto Airyęnę
vaęjahę, famous in Airyana Vaęjo, to receive the law from Mazda; but Yima
refused to become the bearer of the law and he was, therefore, directed by
Ahura Mazda to keep his people happy and make them increase. Yima is
accordingly represented as making his men thrive and in. crease by keeping away
death and disease from them, and by thrice enlarging the boundaries of the
country which had become too narrow for its inhabitants. Whether this fact
represents a gradual expansion of the oldest Aryan settlements in the
Yimas Vara
here described is something like Noahs ark. But there is this difference between
the two that while the Biblical deluge is of water and rain, the Avestic deluge
is of snow and ice; and the latter not only does not conflict with geological
evidence but is, on the contrary, fully and unexpectedly confirmed by it.
Secondly, the description that a year seemed only as a day to the inhabitants
of this Vara, and that the sun and stars rose only once a year therein, serves,
in an unmistakable manner, to fix the geographical position of this Vara in the
region round about the North Pole; for nowhere on the surface of the earth can
we have a year long day-and-night except at the Pole. Once the position of Yimas
Vara is thus fixed the position of the Airyana Vaęjo is at once determined; for
Yimas Vara, as stated in the Mainyô-i-khard, must obviously be located in the
Airyana Vaęjo. Here is, therefore, another argument for locating the Airyana Vaęjo
in the extreme north and not to the west of the ancient
But the
most important part of the second Fargard is the warning conveyed by Ahura
Mazda to Yima that fatal winters were going to fall on the land ruled over by
the latter, and the description of glaciation by which the happy land was to be
ruined. The warning is in the form of a prophecy, but any one who reads the two
Fargards carefully can see that the passage really gives us a description of
the Glacial epoch witnessed by the ancestors of the Iranians. We give below the
translation of the passage both by Darmesteter and Spiegel.
VENDIDAD, FARGARD II.
|
Darmesteter |
Spiegel |
|
22. And Ahura Mazda spake unto Yima, saying, O fair Yima,
son of Vîvanghat! Upon the material world the fatal winters are going to
fall, that shall bring the fierce, foul frost; upon the material world the
fatal winters are going to fall, that shall make snowflakes fall thick, even
an aredvî deep on the highest tops
of mountains. 23. And all the three sorts of beasts shall perish, those
that live in the wilderness, and those that live on the tops of the
mountains, and those that live in the bosom of the dale, under the shelter of
stables. 24. Before that winter, those fields would bear plenty of
grass for cattle: now with floods that stream, with snows |
46. Then spake Ahura Mazda to Yima: Yima the fair, the
son of Vivaṅhâo, 47. Upon the corporeal world will the evil of winter come: 48. Wherefore a vehement, destroying frost will arise. 49. Upon the corporeal world will the evil of winter come: 50. Wherefore snow will fall in great abundance, 51. On the summits of the mountains, on the breadth of the
heights. 52. From three (places), O Yima, let the cattle depart. 53. If they are in the most fearful places, 54. If they are on the tops of the mountains, 55. If they are in the depths of the valleys, 56. To secure dwelling places. 57. Before this winter the fields would bear plenty of
country produced pasture; grass for cattle now with. 58. Before flow waters, behind floods that stream, with
snows is the melting of the snow. |
|
Darmesteter |
Spiegel |
|
that melt, it will seem a happy land in the world, the
land wherein footprints even of sheep may still be seen. 25. Therefore make thee a Vara, long as a riding-ground,
on every side of the square, and thither bring the seeds of sheep and oxen,
of men, of dogs, of birds, and of red blazing fires. |
59. Clouds, O Yima, will come over the inhabitated
regions, 60. Which now behold the feet of the greater and smaller
cattle: 61. Therefore make thou a circle of the length of a
race-ground to all four corners. 62. Thither bring thou the seed of the cattle, of the
beasts of burden, and of men, of dogs, of birds, and of the red burning
fires. |
Can
anything, we ask, be more clear and distinct than the above description of the
advent of the Glacial epoch in the happy land over which Yima ruled, and where
a year was equivalent to a single day? There is no reference to Angra Mainyu in
this passage which describes in the form of a prophecy the evils of glaciation,
must in the same manner as a modern geologist would describe the progress of the
ice-cap during the Glacial period. Ahura Mazda tells Yima that fierce and foul
frost will fall on the material world, and even the tops of the highest
mountains will be covered with or rather buried in snow which will destroy all
living beings whether on the tops of the mountains or in the valleys below. The
snow, it is said, would fall aredvî
deep, which Spiegel translates by the phrase in great abundance, while
Darmesteter, quoting from the commentary, explains in a footnote that even
where it (the snow) is least, it will be one Vîtasti two fingers, that is,
fourteen fingers deep. A cubit of snow, at the lowest, covering the highest
tops of the mountains and the lowest depths of the valleys alike cannot but
destroy all animal life; and I do not think that the beginning of the Ice-age
can be more vividly described. With this express passage before us ascribing
the ruin of the happy land to the invasion of ice and winter, we should have no
difficulty whatsoever in rightly interpreting the meaning of the invasion of
Angra Mainyu described in the beginning of the first Fargard. It is no longer a
matter of inference that the original genial climate of the Airyana Vaęjo was
rendered inclement by the invasion of winter and snow, afterwards introduced
into the land. The above passage says so in distinct terms, and the description
is so graphic that we cannot regard it as mythical or imaginary. Add to it the
fact that the recent geological discoveries have established the existence of
at least two Glacial periods, the last of which closed and the post-Glacial
period commenced, according to American geologists, not later than about 8000
B.C. When the Avestic traditions regarding the destruction of the primeval
Arctic home by glaciation is thus found to be in complete harmony with the
latest geological researches, there is no reason, except prejudice, why we
should not regard the Avestic account as a correct reminiscence of an old real
historical fact. The author of the Fargards in question cannot be supposed to have
given us by imagination such a graphic account of a phenomenon, which is
brought to light or discovered by the scientists only during the last forty or
fifty years. Darmesteter in his translation of the Fargards observes in a
foot-note that the account of glaciation is the result of a mythical
misunderstanding by which winter war thought to be the counter-creation of Irân
Vęj. This passed off very well twenty years ago, but the phenomenon of
glaciation in the Ice-age is now better understood, and we cannot accept
guesses and conjectures of scholars regarding the meaning of a passage in the
Avesta which describes the glaciation of the Iranian paradise. It only proves
how the ancient records, howsoever express and distinct they may be, are apt to
be misunderstood and misinterpreted owing to our imperfect knowledge of the
climatic or other conditions or surroundings amongst which the ancestors of our
race lived in remote ages. But for such a misunderstanding, it was not
difficult to perceive that the Airyana Vaęjo, or the original home of the Aryan
race, was situated near the North Pole, and that the ancestors of our race
abandoned it not out of irresistible impulse, or overcrowding, but simply
because it was ruined by the invasion of snow and ice brought on by the Glacial
epoch. In short, the Avestic tradition, as recorded in this Fargard, is the
oldest documentary evidence of the great climatic convulsion, which took place
several hundreds of years ago, and the scientific evidence of which was
discovered only during the last forty or fifty years. It is, therefore, a
matter of regret that the importance of this tradition should have been so long
misunderstood or overlooked.
It will be
seen from the foregoing discussion that the traditional evidence preserved in
the first two Fargards of the Vendidad is especially important for our purpose.
The Dawn-hymns in the Ṛig-Veda supply us with the evidence of a long
continuous dawn of thirty days in the ancient home, and there are passages in
the Vedas which speak of a long continuous night of six months or of shorter duration,
and a year of seven or ten months. It can also be shown that several Vedic
myths and deities bear an unmistakable stamp of their Arctic origin. But, as
stated before, in the whole Vedic literature there is no passage which will
enable us to determine the time when the
This story
of the destruction of the original home by ice may well be compared with the
story of deluge found in the Indian literature. The oldest of these accounts is
contained in the Shatapatha Brâhmaṇa (I, 8, 1, 1-10), and the same story
is found, with modifications and additions, in the Mahâbhârata (
* The story of the deluge is found also in other Aryan mythologies. The
following extract from Grotes History of Greece (Vol. I, Chap. 5) gives the
Greek version of the story and some of the incidents therein bear striking
resemblance to the incidents in the story of Manu: The enormous iniquity with
which earth was contaminated as Apollodôrus says, by the then existing brazen
race, or as others say, by the fifty monstrous sons of Lykaôn provoked Zeus
to send a general deluge. An unremitting and terrible rain laid the whole of
The Avestic account is, however, more specific than that in
the Shatapatha Brâhmaṇa, and as it is corroborated, almost in every
detail, by the scientific evidence regarding the advent of the Glacial epoch in
early times, it follows that the tradition preserved in the two Fargards of the
Vendidad is older than that in the Shatapatha
Brâhmaṇa. Dr. Haug has arrived at a similar conclusion
on linguistic grounds. Speaking about the passage in the Vendidad he says the
original document is certainly of high antiquity and is undoubtedly one of the
oldest of the pieces which compose the existing Vendidad. The mention of Hapta
Heṇdu, a name not preserved even in the later Vedic literature, is said
also to point to the same conclusion.
We may here
refer to certain passages cited by Muir in his Original Sanskrit Texts (3rd Ed. Vol. II. pp. 322-329) to show that
the reminiscences of the northern home have been preserved in the Indian
literature. He first refers to the expression shatam himâḥ, or a hundred winters, occurring in several
places in the Ṛig-Veda (I, 64, 14; II, 33, 2; V, 54, 15; VI, 48, 8), and
remarks that though the expression sharadaḥ
shatam, or a hundred autumns, also occurs in the Ṛig-Veda (II, 27, 10;
VII, 66, 16), yet shatam himâḥ
may be regarded as a relic of the period when the recollection of the colder
regions from which the Vedic Aryans migrated had not yet been entirely
forgotten. The second passage quoted by him is from the Aitareya Brâhmaṇa
(VIII, 14) which says wherefore in this northern region all the people who
dwell beyond the Himavat, (called) the Uttara Kurus and the Uttara Madras are
consecrated to the glorious rule (Vairâjyam). The Uttara Kurus are again
described in the same Brâhmaṇa (VIII, 23) as the land of gods which no
mortal may conquer, showing that the country had come to be regarded as the
domain of mythology. The Uttara Kurus are also mentioned in the Râmâyaṇa
(IV, 43, 38) as the abode of those who performed the meritorious works, and in
the Mahâbhârata (Sabhâ-Parvan, Ch. 28) Arjuna is told Here are the Uttara
Kurus whom no one attempts to combat. That the Uttara Kurus were not a
fabulous land is shown by the fact that a mountain, a people and a city called
Ottorocorra is mentioned by Ptolemy, and Lassen thinks that Megasthenes had the
Uttara Kurus in view when he referred to the Hyperboreans. Muir concludes this
section with a passage from the Sâṅkhyâyana or the Kauṣhitakî Brâhmaṇa
(VII, 6) where Pathyâ Svasti, or the goddess of speech, is said to know the
northern region (udîchîm disham), and
we are told that Hence in the northern region speech is better known and
better spoken, and it is to the north that men go to learn speech. Muir thinks
that some faint reminiscence of an early connection with the north may be
traced in these passages. But none of them are conclusive, nor have we any
indication therein of the original home being in the Arctic regions, as we have
in the case of the Vedic passages discussed previously which speak of the long,
continuous dawn and night, or a year of ten months. We may, however, take the
passages cited by Muir as corroborative evidence and they have been referred to
here in the same light. It is upon the Vedic passages and legends examined in
the previous chapters and the Avestic evidence discussed above that we mainly
rely for establishing the existence of the primeval Aryan home in the Arctic
regions; and when both these are taken together we get direct traditional
testimony for holding that the original home of the Aryan races was situated
near the North Pole and not in Central Asia, that it was destroyed by the
advent of the Glacial epoch, and that the Indo-Iranians, who were compelled to
leave the country, migrated southwards, and passing through several provinces
of Central Asia eventually settled in the valleys of the Oxus, the Indus, the
Kubhâ, and the Rasâ, from which region we see them again migrating, the Indians
to the east and the Persians to the west at the early dawn of the later
traditional history.
CHAPTER XII
COMPARATIVE MYTHOLOGY
The value of Comparative Mythology as corroborative evidence
Its use in the present case The ancient calendars of the European Aryan
races The plurality of Dawns in the Lettish, the Greek and the Celtic
mythology The ancient Roman year of ten months and Numas reform thereof Plutarchs
view Improbability of Lignanas theory pointed out The ancient Celtic year
Closed with the last day of October and marked the commencement of winter and
darkness The winter feast celebrated on the day The mid-summer feast of
Lugnassad on the first of August The commencement of summer on the first of
May The date of the battle of Moytura Similar duration of the Old Norse
year Comparison with the ancient Greek calendar All indicate six months
light and six months darkness Corroboration derived from comparative
philology Two divisions of the year in primeval times The Maid of Nine
Forms in the Celtic mythology The Nine paces of Thor in the Norse legend Compared
with the Vedic Navagvas and Vifra Navaza in the Avesta Balders home in the
heavens Indicates the long Arctic day The Slavonic story of Ivan and his
two brothers Continuous night in Ivans home Comparison with the Vedic
legend of Trita The Slavonic winter demon The story of Dawn and Gloaming in
the Finnish mythology Indicates a long day of four weeks Celtic and
Teutonic legends representing the Sun-gods annual struggle with darkness Baldur
and Hodur, Cuchulainn and Fomori Temporary sickness and indisposition of gods
and heroes Prof. Rhys views thereon The affliction indicates winter darkness
Celtic and Teutonic myths indicating long continuous day and night All
point to a primeval home in the Arctic region Recent ethnological researches
in favor of European home referred to Indicate northern Germany or
Scandinavia The necessity of going still farther North Prof. Rhys suggests
Finland or White Sea Not inconsistent with the theory which seeks to make the
North Pole the home of the whole
human race Prof. Rhys method and conclusion Primeval Arctic home
established alike by the traditions of the eastern and western Aryas Its
relation with the general theory about the cradle of the human race at the
North Pole explained.
We propose
in this chapter to examine whether and how far the conclusions we have deduced
from the Vedic and the Avestic evidence are corroborated by the myths and
traditions of the European branches of the Aryan race. It is true that the
evidence, collected in the foregoing chapters, is so general in character that
it will have to be taken into account, even if the traditions of other races
are found to conflict with it in any way. In other words, it has nothing
specially Asiatic in it and without further corroboration we can, therefore,
safely say that the original home of the Indo-Iranians, before the last Glacial
epoch, must also be the home of the other Aryan people in those remote times.
But still we may usefully examine the traditions of other Aryan races, and see
if the latter have preserved any reminiscences of the original home, either in
their ancient calendar or in their other ancient myths or legends. Of course
the evidence cannot be expected to be as reliable as that found in the Veda or
the Avesta, but still it has its own value for corroborative purposes. The
History of comparative mythology and philology shows that when Vedic literature
and language became accessible to European scholars, quite a new light was
thrown thereby on the Greek and the Roman mythology; and it is not unlikely
that the discovery of the Vedic and the Avestic evidence, in favor of the
Arctic home may similarly serve to elucidate some points in the legendary
literature of the Aryan races in Europe. But the subject is so vast that it
cannot be treated in a single chapter of this book, nor do I possess the necessary
means to undertake the task. I shall, therefore, content myself with a
statement of such facts as plainly indicate the reminiscence of an ancient
Arctic home in the traditional literature of the Greek, Roman, Celtic, Teutonic
and Slavonic branches of the Aryan race; and I may here state that I am greatly
indebted for this purpose to that learned and masterly work, The Hibbert lectures, by Prof. Rhys. On the origin and growth of religion as
illustrated by Celtic Heathendom.
Following
the order adopted in the discussion of the Vedic evidence, we shall first take
up the question of the ancient calendar, and see if the traditions preserved by
the western Aryan races about the ancient year point out to any Arctic
characteristics, such as the long dawn; the long day, the long night, or an
annual period of sunshine of less than twelve months duration. We have seen
that the Dawn is very often spoken of in the plural in the Ṛig-Veda and
that a group of thirty Dawn-Sisters is actually described as moving round and
round with one mind and in the same enclosure without being separated from each
other, a phenomenon which is peculiar only to the Arctic regions. This Vedic
account of the Dawn does not stand by itself. Thus in the Lettish mythology,
the Dawn is called diewo dukte, or the
sky-daughter or the god-daughter, much in the same way as the Uṣhas is
called divo duhitâ in the Ṛig-Veda;
and the poets of the Lets speak likewise of many beautiful sky-daughters, or
goddaughters diewo dukruzeles.* (Max
Müllers Contributions to the Science of Mythology, p. 432. )Prof. Max Müller;
further informs us that in the Greek mythology we can easily find among the
wives of Hęrakles, significant names, such as Auge (sun-light), Xanthis (yellow),
Chrysęis (golden), Iole (violet), Aglaia (resplendent), and Eône, which cannot
be separated from Eos, dawn.( Max
Müllers Contributions to the Science of Mythology, p. 722) The same story
appears again in the Celtic mythology where Cuchulainn, the Sun-hero, is
described as having a wife, who is variously named as Emer, Ethne Ingubai. Upon
this Prof. Rhys observes that it may be that the myth pictured the dawn not as
one but as many to all of whom the Sun-god made love in the course of the three
hundred and more days of the year.( Rhys Hibbert Lectures p. 458.) It has
been shown previously that the description of the Vedic dawns, as a closely
united band, precludes us from regarding them as three hundred and more dawns
of the year; and that the only inference we can draw from a closely united
group of dawns is that it represents the long and continuous Arctic dawn
divided into a number of parts of twenty-four hours each for convenience. The
description of the dawn in the Lettish mythology does not seem to be so full as
that in the Vedas and by itself it may not be sufficient to indicate the Polar
dawn; but considering the fact that the dawn is described as sky-daughter and
spoken of in the plural by the poets of the Lets and the poets of the
Ṛig-Veda alike, we may safely extend to the Lettish mythology the
conclusion we have drawn from the more detailed description of the Dawn in the
Ṛig-Veda, and the same may be said of the Celtic and the Greek stories of
the dawn given above.
In treating of the Gavâm-ayanam
and the corresponding legend of the Dashagvas, a reference has already been
made to the Greek legend of Hęlios, who is described as having 350 oxen and as
many sheep, obviously representing a year of 350 days and nights, and to the
Roman tradition about December being
the tenth and the last month of the year as denoted by its etymology. Prof.
Lignana in his essay on The Navagvas and
the Dashagvas of the Ṛig-Veda, published in the proceedings of the
seventh International Congress of the Orientalists, 1886, however, remarks that
the passage of Plutarch in the life of Numa, where this tradition is mentioned,
does not support the view that the Romans originally counted not more than ten
months. It is true that Plutarch mentions an alternative story of Numas
altering the order of months making March the third which was the first,
January first which was the eleventh of
The
evidence regarding the ancient year of Celts, Teutons and Greeks is not however
so definite, though it may be clearly shown that in each case the year was
marked by a certain period of cold and darkness, indicating the
As regards
the ancient Greek calendar, Prof. Rhys has shown that the old year ended with
the festival of Apaturia and the new one began with the Chalceia, an ancient
feast in honor of Hephćstus and Athene, the exact date being the čnu kai nea of the month of Pyanepsion,
that is, approximately the last day of October. Prof. Rhys then compares the
Celtic feast of the Lugnassad with the Greek festival named Panathenća, and the
feast on the Calends of May with the Athenian Thargelia, and concludes his comparison
of the Celtic and the Greek calendar by observing that a year which was common
to Celts with Greeks is not unlikely to have once been common to them with some
or all other branches of the Aryan family. (Rhys Hibbert Lectures, p. 521)
This shows
that the ancient Aryan races of
In
discussing the legend of the Navagvas and the Dashagvas we have shown that the
numerals incorporated in their names must be interpreted as referring to the
number of months during which they completed their annual sacrifices, and that
Prof. Lignanas view that they refer to the months of pregnancy is not only
improbable but opposed to the express Vedic texts which tell us that the
Navagvas and the Dashagvas completed their sacrifices in ten months. Let us now
see if there are corresponding personages in other Aryan mythologies. Prof.
Lignana has pointed out the resemblance between the Navagvas and the Novemsides
of the Romans. The comparison is no doubt happy, but there is nothing in the
cult of the Novemsides which gives us a clue to the original meaning of the
word. We know nothing beyond the fact that Novemsides (also spelt Novemsiles)
were, certain Latin gods, who according to the double etymology (novam, nine or novus, new) were taken for nine Muses, or for gods newly introduced,
as after the conquest of a place in contrast with the old gods of the country.
But the Celtic tradition of the Maid of Nine Forms is much more explicit,
inasmuch as it is distinctly connected with the sun-hero Cuchulainn. The story
is thus narrated by Rhys: Conchobar had a passing fair daughter called Fedelm
of the nine forms, for she had so many fair aspects, each of which was more
beautiful, as we are told, than the others; and when Cuchulainn had, at the
news of the approach of the enemy from the west, advanced with his father to
the frontier of the realm, he suddenly hastened away in the evening to a place
of secret meeting, where he knew Fedelm to have a bath got ready for him, in
order to prepare him for the morrow and his first encounter with the invading
army.* (Rhys Hibbert Lectures, pp. 630-1) This reminds us of the assistance
rendered by the Navagvas and the Dashagvas to Indra by means of Sonia
sacrifices performed by them and which sacrifices are said to have invigorated
Indra and prepared him for his fight with the powers of darkness, represented
by Vṛitra, Vala, Shambara and other demons.
The Maid of Nine Forms is therefore
a Celtic paraphrase of the Nine-going sacrifices in the Ṛig-Veda. Prof.
Rhys considers Fedelm to be a sort of Athene with nine forms of beauty, and
refers to the story of Athene weaving a peplos for her favorite Hęrakles, or
causing springs of warm water to gush forth from the ground, to supply him at
the end of the day with a refreshing bath.* (Rhys Hibbert Lectures, pp.
378-9.) But this comparison does not explain why there should be nine forms of
beauty in either case. The mystery is, however, cleared up, if we suppose these
legends to refer to the nine months of sunshine at the end of which the setting
sun-god is refreshed or invigorated for his struggle with the demons of
darkness by the acts of or services of the Nine-going sacrificers or the Maid
of Nine Forms. In the Norse literature we are told that Thor, the son of Earth,
slays the World-dragon, walks nine paces and dies of the venom of the Serpent.(
Rhys Hibbert Lectures, pp. 616) If the slaying of the dragon be understood, as
remarked by Prof. Rhys, to mean the conquest of the Sun-hero over the powers of
darkness and the death of Thor be taken to represent the sinking of the
summer-sun below the horizon, we have here a clear statement that Thor, the
Sun-hero, walked nine paces during the time that intervened between the end of
winter and the end of summer. These nine paces could not be nine days or nine years;
and there is therefore no alternative but to hold that the legend refers to the
nine months life of the Sun-god before he succumbed to the powers of darkness.
The Avestic story of Vafra, or, according to Spiegel, Vifra Navâza (Yt. V, 61)
belongs, I think, to the same class. He is said to have been flung up in the
air, in the shape of a bird by Thraętaona and was flying for three days and
three nights towards his own house, but could not turn down. At the end of the
third night when the beneficent dawn came dawning up, lie prayed unto Ardvi Sűra
Anâhita to help him, promising to offer Haomas and meat by the drink of the
river Rangha. Ardvi Sűra Anâhita listening to his prayer is. then said to have
brought him to his house safe and unhurt. Vifra Navâza in this legend is very
likely Vipra Navagva of the Ṛig-Veda. We have seen that the Navagvas and
seven vipras are mentioned together
in the Ṛig-Veda (VI, 22, 2) and that the Ashvins, who are called vipra-vâhasâ in (V, 74, 7), are said to
have resided for three nights in the distant region. It is not unlikely,
therefore, that the story of the Navagvas, who go to help Indra in the world of
darkness after completing their sacrificial session of nine months, may have
been combined with the story of the Ashvins in the Avestic legend of Vifra
Navâza, Sanskrit Vipra being changed
into Avestic Vifra and Navagva into
Navâza
The above
legends from the Greek, Celtic and Norse literatures show that a long
winter-darkness was not unknown to the ancestors of the Aryan races in Europe,
who have preserved distinct reminiscences of a year of ten or six months
sun-shine, and that the Navagvas and the Dashagvas of the Ṛig-Veda have
again their parallels in the mythology of other Aryan races, though the
resemblance may not be as obvious in the one as in the other case. A year of
six months or ten months sunshine necessarily implies a long continuous day
and a long continuous night, and distinct references to these Arctic
characteristics of day and night are found in Norse and Slavonic legends. Thus
the Norse Sun-god Balder is said to have dwelt in a place in heaven called
Breidablik or Broadgleam, the most blessed of all lands, where nought unclean
or accursed could abide. Upon this Prof. Rhys observes, It is remarkable that Balder
had a dwelling place in the heavens, and this seems to refer to the Arctic
summer when the sun prolongs his stay above the horizon. The pendant to the
picture would naturally be his staying as long in the nether world. This
corresponds exactly with the Vedic description of the suns unyoking his
carriage and making a halt in the mid of the heaven, discussed in the sixth
chapter. The story of three brothers in the Slavonic literature also points out
to the same conclusion. We are told that Once there was an old couple who had
three sons. Two of them had their wits about them, but the third, Ivan, was a
simpleton. Now in the land in which Ivan lived, there was never any day but always night.
This was a snakes doing. Well, Ivan undertook to kill that
snake. Then came a third snake with twelve heads, Ivan killed it and destroyed
the heads and immediately there was light throughout the whole land.*( Poors
Comparative Mythology, p. 390) This reminds one of the story of Trita in the Ṛig-Veda
previously described. Tritas abode is said to be in the distant region, and we
have interpreted it to mean the nether world of darkness, an interpretation
which amongst others is fully borne out by the story of Ivan and his two
brothers. But the dark power takes a distinctive Russian appearance in the
awful figure of Koshchei, the deathless, a fleshless skeleton who squeezes
heroes to death in his bony arms. He carries off a princess; after seven years
the hero reaches his under-ground palace and is hidden; but is discovered by
Koshchei who typifies winter in this case. All these legends clearly indicate a
dark winter of some months duration, or the long winter-night of the Arctic regions.
There are other stories in which the Sun-hero is said to have been detained in
a place of darkness; but it is not necessary to refer to them in this place.
For comparison I shall only refer briefly to a legend in the Finnish mythology,
which, though not Aryan in origin, may yet serve to throw some light on the
subject under consideration. In the mythology of the Finns, the Dawn is called
Koi and Koi, the Dawn (masc.), and Ammarik, the Gloaming (fem.), are said to
have been entrusted by Vanna-issa, the Old Father, with lighting and
extinguishing every morning and evening the torch of the day. As a reward for
their faithful services Vanna-issa would allow them to get married. But they
preferred to remain bride and bride-groom, and Vanna-issa had nothing more to say.
He allowed them, however, to meet at
From the
legends mentioned, or referred to, or described above, it may be easily seen
that many traces of the Arctic calendar are still discernible in the mythology
of the western Aryan races like Celts, Teutons, Lets, Slavs, Greeks and Romans.
Long dawns or a number of dawns, long days, long nights, dark winters, are all
alluded to more or less explicitly in these myths, though none of these legends
refers directly to the position of the primeval home and the cause of its
destruction. But this omission or defect is removed by the evidence contained
in the Veda and the Avesta; and when the European legends are viewed in the
light of the Indo-Iranian traditions they clearly point to the existence of a
primeval home near the North Pole. There are a number of other legends in the
Celtic and Teutonic literatures which describe the victory of sun-hero over the
demons of darkness every year, similar in character to the victory of Indra over
Vṛitra, or to the achievements of the Ashvins, the physicians of the
gods. Thus in the Norse mythology, Hodur, the blind god of winter, is
represented as killing Balder or Baldur, or the god of summer, and Vali the son
of Odin and Rind is said to have avenged his brothers death afterwards. The
encounters of Cuchulainn, the Celtic Sun-god, with his enemies, the Fomori or
the Fir Bolg, the Irish representatives of the powers of darkness, are of the
same character. It may also be remarked that according to Prof. Rhys the world
of waters and the world of darkness and the dead are identical in Celtic myths,
in the same way as the world of water, the abode of Vṛitra and the world
of darkness are shown to be in the Vedic mythology. The strange custom of couvade, by which the whole population
of Ireland is described as being laid up in confinement or indisposed so as to
be unable to defend their country against the invasion of Ailill and Medle with
their Fig Bolg, excepting Cuchulainn and his father, again indicates, according
to Prof. Rhys, a sort of decline in the power of gods like that witnessed in
the case of the winter-sun; in other words, it was an indisposition or
inactivity of the same sort which amounts in the Norse Edda to nothing less
than actual death of the Anses at the hands of the powers of evil. This
temporary affliction or the indisposition of the gods forms the subject of many
other legends. But we have no space to narrate all of them, and shall,
therefore, only quote here the conclusion, which Prof. Rhys has been forced to
adopt, regarding the meaning of these myths after a critical examination of the
different Celtic and Teutonic legends. Speaking of Gods, Demons and Heroes, in
the last lecture of his learned work, he thus sums up his views regarding the
myths describing the encounters between Gods or Sun-heroes and the powers of
darkness:
All that
we have thus far found with regard to the contest of the gods and their allies
against the powers of evil and theirs, would seem to indicate that they were
originally regarded as yearly struggles. This appears to be the meaning of the
fore-knowledge as to the final battle of Moytura, and as to the exact date of
the engagement on the Plain of Fidga in which Cuchulainn assists Labraid of the
Swift Hand on the sword, a kind of Celtic Zeus, or Mars-Jupiter, as the ruler
of an Elysium in the other world. It was for a similar reason that the northern
Sibyl could predict that, after the Anses had been slain by Swart, aided by the
evil brood, Balder would come to reign, when all would be healed, and the Anses
would meet again in the Field of Ida. Nor can the case have been materially
different with the Greek gods, as proved by the allusion to the prophecy about
the issue of the war with the giants. And this was not all; for we are told
that the Cretans represented Zeus as born and bred and also buried in their
island, a view sometimes formally regarded as confirming the character ascribed
to them for lying; but that deserves no serious consideration, and the Cretans
in their mysteries are supposed to have represented the god going through the
stages of his history every year. A little beyond the limits of the Greek world
a similar idea assumed a still more remarkable form, namely, among the
Phrygians, who are said by Plutarch to have believed their god (like the Purâṇic
Viṣhṇu) to sleep during the winter and resume his activity during
summer. The same author also states that the Paphlagonians were of opinion that
the gods were shut up in a prison during winter and let loose in summer. Of
these peoples, the Phrygians at least appear to have been Aryan, and related by
no means distantly to the Greek; but nothing could resemble the Irish couvade of the Ultonion heroes more
closely than the notion of the Phrygian god hibernating. This, in its turn, is
not to be severed from the drastic account of the Zeus of the Greek Olympus
reduced by Typho to a sinewless mass and thrown for a time into a cave in a
state of utter helplessness. Thus we seem to be directed to the north as the
original home of the Aryan nations; and there are other indications to the same
effect, such as Wodens gold ring Draupnir, which I have taken to be symbolic
of the ancient eight-day week: he places it on Balders pile, and with him it
disappears for a while into the nether world, which would seem to mean the
cessation for a time of the vicissitude of day and night, as happens in
midwinter within the Arctic Circle. This might be claimed as exclusively
Icelandic, but not if one can show traces, as I have attempted, of the same
myth in
Prof. Rhys
then goes on to briefly describe how the views of mythologists and philologists
regarding the primeval home of the Aryan race have been modified by the recent
discoveries in Geology, Archeology and Craniology, and how the site of that
home has been shifted from the plains of Central Asia to the northern parts of
Germany or even to Scandinavia not only on ethnological but also on philological
grounds. As we have discussed the subject previously, we omit this portion of
Prof. Rhys remarks and quote the concluding paragraph which runs as follows:
Thus the
voice of recent research is raised very decidedly in favor of Europe, though
there is no complete unanimity as to the exact portion of Europe, to regard as
the early home of the Aryans; but the competition tends to lie between North
Germany and Scandinavia, especially the south of Sweden. This last would
probably do well enough as the country in which the Aryans may have
consolidated and organized themselves before beginning to send forth their
excess of population to conquer the other lands now possessed by nations
speaking Aryan languages. Nor can one forget that all the great states of
modern Europe, except that of the sick man, trace their history back to the
conquest of the Norsemen who set out from the Scandinavian land, which Jordanis
proudly calls officina gentium and vagina nationum. But I
doubt whether the teachings of evolution
may not force us to trace them still further towards the North: in any
case, the mythological indications to which your attention has been called,
point, if I am not mistaken, to some spot
within the Arctic Circle, such, for example, as the region where Norse
legend placed the Land of Immortality, somewhere in the north of Finland and
the neighborhood of the White Sea. There would, perhaps, be no difficulty in
the way of supposing them to have thence in due time descended into
Scandinavia, settling, among other places, at Upsala, which has all the
appearance of being a most ancient site, lying as it does on a plain dotted
with innumerable burial mounds of unknown antiquity. This, you will bear in
mind, has to do only with the origin of the early Aryans, and not with that of
the human race generally; but it would be no fatal objection to the view here
suggested, if it should be urged that the mythology of nations beside the
Aryans, such as that of the Paphlagonians, in case of their not being Aryan,
point likewise to the north; for it is not contended that the Aryans may be the
only people of northern origin. Indeed, I may add that a theory was, not long
ago, propounded by a distinguished French savant, to the effect that the entire
human race originated on the shores of the Polar Sea at a time when the rest of
the northern hemisphere was too hot to be inhabited by man. M. de Saporta, for
that is the learned writers name, explains himself in clear and forcible terms;
but how far his hypothesis may satisfy the other students of this fascinating
subject I cannot say. It may, however, be observed in passing that it need not
disconcert even the most orthodox of men, for it supposes all the races of
mankind traceable to a single non-simian origin, and the Bible leaves it an
open question where exactly and when the Garden of Eden flourished. (Rhys
Hibbert Lectures, pp. 636-7.)
I have very
little to add to the views expressed in the above passages; in fact Prof. Rhys
has left us little to be done so far as Celtic and Teutonic myths are
concerned.
The way in which he proceeds to
analyze the legends and show that they all point to a primeval home in the
Arctic regions is at once interesting and instructive. He first clears the
ground by ascribing the different prophecies occurring in the legends not to
any fore-knowledge on the part of the poet, but to the simple fact that the
events spoken of were of annual occurrence, and as they were known to recur
regularly it was not difficult to adopt the language of prophecy and predict
the happening of these events in future. He then collects a number of facts which
go to prove that gods and heroes were afflicted with some disability of distress
at certain intervals of time, which rendered them incapable to carry on the
annual struggle with the powers of evil and darkness. The only physical
phenomena corresponding to such distress of the solar hero, or the sun, are his
daily setting, the decay of his powers in winter and his disappearing below the
horizon for some months in the
CHAPTER XIII
THE BEARING OF OUR
RESULTS ON
THE HISTORY OF
PRIMITIVE ARYAN
CULTURE AND RELIGION
Proofs of the theory of the Arctic home summed up They
clearly indicate a Polar home, but the exact spot in the Arctic regions, that
is, north of Europe or Asia, still undeterminable An Arctic home possible
only in inter-Glacial times according to geology Ancient Vedic chronology and
calendar examined The interval between the commencement of the Post-Glacial
era and the Orion period cannot, according to it, be so great as 80,000 years
Supported by the moderate estimate of the American geologists Purâṇic
chronology of yugas, manvantaras and kalpas Rangâchâryas and Aiyers views thereon Later Purâṇic
system evolved out of an original cycle of four yugas of 10,000 years, since
the last deluge The theory of divine
years unknown to Manu and Vyâsa Adopted by later writers who could not believe
that they lived in the Kṛita age The original tradition of 10,000 years
since the last deluge fully in accord with Vedic chronology And also with the
American estimate of 8,000 B.C. for the beginning of the Post-Glacial period All
prove the existence of a Polar Aryan home before 8,000 B.C. Trustworthiness
of the ancient traditions and the method of preserving them The theory of the
Polar origin of the whole human race not inconsistent with the theory of the
Arctic Aryan home Current views regarding primitive Aryan culture and
religion examined Primitive Aryan man and his civilization cannot now be
treated as Post-Glacial Certain destruction of the primeval civilization and
culture by the Ice Age Short-comings or defects in the civilization of the
Neolithic Aryan races in Europe must, therefore, be ascribed to a postdiluvian
relapse into barbarism Life and calendar in the inter-Glacial Arctic home Devayâna and Pitriyâna and the deities worshipped during the period The
ancient sacrifices of the Aryan race The degree of civilization reached by
the undivided Aryans in their Arctic home The results of Comparative
Philology stated The civilization disclosed by them must be taken to be the minimum or the lowest, that can be predicated of the undivided Aryans The
culture of the undivided Aryans higher than the culture of the Stone or the
Metal age Use of metal coins among them highly probable Beginnings of the
Aryan language, or the differentiation of human races according to color or
language still untraceable The origin of Aryan man and religion lost in
geological antiquity Theological views regarding the origin and character of
the Vedas summarized Differently supported by writers on the different schools
of philosophy Patanjalis and Vyâsas view that the Vedas were lost in the
last deluge and repromulgated in substance,
if not in form, at the beginning of
the new age The four periods into which the Post-Glacial era may be divided
on astronomical grounds Compared with the characteristics of the four yugas
given in the Aitareya Brâhmaṇa Theological and historical views
regarding the origin &c. of the Vedas stated in parallel columns and
compared Vedic texts, showing that the subject
matter of the hymns is ancient though the language may be new, cited Vedic deities and their exploits all
said to be ancient Improbability of Dr. Muirs suggested reconciliation Vedas,
or rather Vedic religion, shown to be inter-Glacial in substance though post-Glacial in form Concluding remarks.
We have now
completed our investigation of the question of the original home of the
ancestors of the Vedic Aryans from different stand-points of view. Our
arguments, it will be seen, are not based on the history of culture, or on facts
disclosed by linguistic paleontology. The evidence, cited in the foregoing
chapters, mainly consists of direct passages from the Vedas and the Avesta,
proving unmistakably that the poets of the Ṛig-Veda were acquainted with
the climatic conditions witnessible only in the Arctic regions. and that the
principal Vedic deities, such as the revolving Dawn, the Waters captivated by Vṛitra,
the Ashvins the rescuers of the afflicted gods and Sűrya, Indra the deity of a
hundred sacrifices, Vishnu the vast-strider, Varuṇa the lord of night and
the ocean, the Âditya brothers or the seven monthly sun-gods, Tṛita or
the Third, and others, are clothed with attributes which clearly betray their
Arctic origin. In other words, all the differential,
mentioned in the third chapter as characteristic of the Polar and Circum-Polar
regions, are met with in the Ṛig-Veda in such a way as to leave no doubt
regarding the conclusion to be drawn from them. A day or a night of six months,
and a long continuous dawn of several days duration with its revolving splendors,
not to mention the unusually long Arctic day and night or a year of less than
twelve months sunshine, were all known to the Vedic bards, and have been
described by them not mythologically or metaphorically but directly in plain
and simple words, which, though misinterpreted so long, can, in the light
thrown upon the question by recent scientific researches, be now rightly read
and understood. In fact the task, which I set to myself, was to find out such passages,
and show how in the absence of the true key to their meaning, they have been
subjected to forced construction, or ignored and neglected, by Vedic scholars
both Indian and foreign, ancient and modern. I do not mean, however, to
underrate, on that account, the value or the importance of the labors of Indian
Nairuktas like Yâska, or commentators like Sâyaṇa. Without their aid we
should have, it is readily admitted, been able to do little in the field of the
Vedic interpretation; and I am fully aware of the service they have rendered to
this cause. There is no question that they have done their best in elucidating
the meaning of our sacred books; and their claims on the grateful remembrance
of their services by future generations of scholars will ever remain unchallenged.
But if the Vedas are really the oldest records of our race, who can deny that
in the light of the advancing knowledge regarding primitive humanity, we may
still discover in these ancient records facts and statements which may have
escaped the attention of older scholars owing to the imperfect nature, in their
days, of those sciences which are calculated to throw further light on the
habits and environments of the oldest ancestors of our race? There is,
therefore, nothing strange if some of the passages in the Ṛig-Veda and
the Avesta disclose to us ideas which the ancient commentators could not and
did not perceive in them; and I would request the reader to bear this in mind
in comparing the interpretations and explanations proposed by me in the foregoing
chapters with the current interpretations of these passages by eastern or
western Vedic scholars.
But our
conclusions do not rest merely on the interpretation of passages which, if
rightly construed, disclose climatic characteristics peculiar to the Arctic
regions; though this evidence is, by itself, sufficient to prove our
hypothesis. We have seen that in the sacrificial literature of the Vedic people
as well as in their mythology there are many indications which point to the
same conclusion; and these are fully corroborated by the ancient traditions and
legends in the Avesta and also by the mythologies of the European branches of
the Aryan race. A sacrificial session of ten months held by the Dashagvas, or
an annual sattra of the same
duration, compared with the oldest Roman year ending in December or the tenth month,
are the principal instances on the point; and they have been fully discussed in
the foregoing chapters. I have also shown that the knowledge of the
half-year-long day or night is not confined to the traditions of the eastern
Aryas, but is common also to the European branches of the Aryan race. The
tradition preserved in the Vendidad about the ancient Iranian Paradise in the
far north, so that a year was equal to a day to the inhabitants thereof, and
its destruction by snow and ice burying the land under a thick ice-cap, again
affords the most striking and cogent proof of the theory we have endeavored to
prove in these pages. Thus if the traditions of the western Aryas point out,
according to Prof. Rhys, to Finland or the White Sea as the original home of
the Aryan people, the Vedic and the Avestic traditions carry us still farther
to the north; for a continuous dawn of thirty days is possible only within a
few degrees of the North Pole. But though the latitude of the original home can
be thus ascertained more or less definitely, yet there is unfortunately nothing
in these traditions which will enable us to determine the longitude of the
place, or, in other words, whether the original home of the Aryan race was to
the north of
We commenced
the book with a summary of the results of the latest geological and
archeological researches regarding the history of primitive humanity and the
invasion of northern
But
according to some geologists 20,000 or even 80,000 years have passed since the
close of the last Glacial epoch; and as the oldest date assigned to the Vedic
hymns does not go beyond 4500 B.C., it may be contended that the traditions of
the Ice Age, or of the inter-Glacial home, cannot be supposed to have been
accurately preserved by oral transmission for thousands of years that elapsed
between the commencement of the post-Glacial era and the oldest date of the
Vedic hymns. It is, therefore, necessary to examine the point a little more
closely in this place. In my Orion or
Researches into the antiquity of the Vedas, I have shown that while the Taittirîya
Saṁhitâ and the Brâhmaṇas begin the Nakṣhatras with the Kṛittikâs
or the Pleiades, showing that the vernal equinox then coincided with the
aforesaid asterism (2500 B.C.), the Vedic literature contains traces of Mṛiga
or Orion being once the first of the Nakṣhatras and the hymns of the Ṛig-Veda,
or at least many of them, which are undoubtedly older than the Taittirîya
Saṁhitâ, contain reference to this period, that is, about 4500 B.C.
approximately It is also pointed out that there are faint traces of the same
equinox being once in the constellation of Punarvasű, presided over by Aditi,
which was possible in about 6,000 B.C. I have in my later researches tried to
push back this limit by searching for the older zodiacal positions of the
vernal equinox in the Vedic literature, but I have not found any evidence of
the same. My attention was, however, directed more and more to passages containing
traces of an Arctic calendar and an Arctic home, and I have been gradually led
to infer therefrom that at about 5000 or 6000 B.C., the Vedic Aryas had settled
on the plains of Central Asia, and that at the time the raditions about the
existence of the Arctic hone and its destruction by snow and ice, as well as
about the Arctic origin of the Vedic deities, were definitely known to the
bards of these races. In short, researches in Vedic chronology and calendar do
not warrant us in placing the advent of the last Glacial epoch, which destroyed
the ancient Aryan home, at a time several thousands of years previous to the
Orion period; and from what has been stated in the first two chapters of the
book, it will be seen that this estimate well agrees with the conclusions of
American geologists, who, from an examination of the erosion of valleys and
similar other well-ascertained facts, assign to the close of the last Glacial
epoch a date not older than about 8000 B.C. We might even go further and say
that ancient Vedic chronology and calendar furnish an independent corroboration
of the moderate view of the American geologists; and when two independent lines
of research unexpectedly lead us to the same result, we may very well reject,
at least in the present state of our knowledge, the extravagant speculations of
Croll and his followers, and, for all practical purposes, adopt the view that
the last Glacial epoch closed and the post-Glacial period commenced at about 8000
B.C. From this to the Orion period is an interval of about 3000 years, and it
is not at all improbable that the traditions of the ancient home should have
been remembered and incorporated into hymns whose origin can be clearly traced
to that period. In short, the Vedic traditions, far from being contradictory to
the scientific evidence, only serve to check the extravagant estimates
regarding the age of the last Glacial epoch; and if the sober view of American
geologists be adopted, both geology and the traditions recorded in the ancient
books of the Aryan race will be found alike to point out to a period not much
older than 8000 B.C. for the commencement of the post-Glacial era and the
compulsory migration of the Aryan races from their Arctic home.
And not
only Vedic but also Purâṇic chronology, properly understood, leads us to
the same conclusion. According to the Purâṇas the earth and the whole
universe are occasionally subjected to destruction at long intervals of time,
the earth by a small and the universe by a grand deluge. Thus we are told that
when the god Brahmâ is awake during his
day the creation exists; but when at the end of the day he goes to sleep, the
world is destroyed by a deluge, and is re-created when he awakes from his sleep
and resumes his activity the next morning. Brahmâs evening and morning are
thus synonymous with the destruction and the re-creation of the earth. A day
and a night of Brahmâ are each equal to a period of time called a Kalpa, and a Kalpa is taken for a unit in measuring higher periods of time. Two Kalpas constitute a nycthemeron (day and
night) of Brahmâ, and 360 × 2 = 720 Kalpas
make his year, while a hundred such years constitute his life-time, at the end
of which a grand deluge overtakes the whole universe including Brahmâ. Now
according to the Code of Manu and the Mahâbhârata the four yugas of Kṛita,
Tretâ, Dvâpara and Kali form a yuga of gods, and a thousand such yugas make a
Kalpa or a day of Brahmâ of 12,000,000 years, at the end of which a deluge
destroys the world. The Purâṇas, however, have adopted a different method
of computation. The four yugas of Kṛita, Tretâ, Dvâpara and Kali are
there said to constitute a Mahâ-yuga; 71 such Mahâ-yugas constitute a
Manvantara, and 14 Manvantaras make a Kalpa,
which, according to this method of counting, contains 4,320,000,000 years. The
difference between the durations of a Kalpa
according to these two methods is due to the fact that the years making up the
four yugas of Kṛita, Tretâ, Dvâpara and Kali are considered to be divine in the latter, while they are
obviously human in Manu and the Mahâbhârata. For further details the reader is
referred to the late Mr. S. B. Dixits History
of Indian Astronomy in Marâthi, Prof. Raṅgâchâryas essay on Yugas, and Mr. Aiyers Chronology of Ancient India, a book, in
which the question of yugas and especially that of the beginning of the Kali
yuga, is subjected to a searching and exhaustive examination. The Hindu writers
on astronomy seem to have adopted the same system, except Âryabhaṭṭa,
who holds that 72, and not 71, Mahâyugas make a Manvantara, and that a Mâhayuga
is divided into four equal parts which are termed Kṛita, Tretâ, Dvâpara
and Kali. According to this chronological system, we are, at present, in the
5003rd year (elapsed) of the Kali yuga of the 28th Mahâ-yuga of the 7th
(Vaivasvata) Manvantara of the current Kalpa; or, 1,972,949,003 years have, in
other words, elapsed since the deluge which occurred at the beginning of the
present or the Shveta-vârâha Kalpa. This estimate is, as observed by Prof. Raṅgâchârya,
quite beyond the limit admitted by modern geology; and it is not unlikely that
Hindu astronomers, who held the view that the sun, the moon, and all the
planets were in a line at the beginning of the Kalpa, arrived at this figure by
mathematically calculating the period during which the sun, the moon and all
the planets made an integral number of complete revolutions round the earth. We
need not, however, go into these details, which howsoever interesting are not
relevant to the subject in hand. A cycle of the four yugas, viz., Kṛita, Tretâ, Dvâpara and
Kali, is, it will be seen, the basis of this chronological system, and we have
therefore to examine more critically what this collection of four yugas,
otherwise termed a Mahâ-yuga, really signifies and whether the period of time
originally denoted by it was the same as it is said to be at present.
Prof. Raṅgâchârya
and especially Mr. Aiyer have ably treated this subject in their essays, and I
agree in the main with them in their conclusions. I use the words in the main
deliberately, for though my researches have independently led me to reject the
hypothesis of divine years, yet
there are certain points which cannot, in my opinion, be definitely settled
without further research. I have shown previously that the word yuga is used in the Ṛig-Veda to
denote a period of time, and that in the phrase mânuṣhâ yugâ it cannot but be taken to denote a month. Yuga is, however, evidently used to
denote a longer period of time in such expressions as Devânâm prathame yuge in the Ṛig-Veda, X, 72, 3; while in the
Atharva Veda VIII, 2, 21, which says We allot to thee a hundred, ten thousand
years, two, three, (or) four yugas,
a yuga evidently means a period of
not less than 10,000 years;*( Atharva Veda, VIII, 2, 21.) and Mr. Aiyer is
right in pointing out that the omission of the word one in the above verse is
not accidental. According to this view a yuga
may be taken to have, at the longest, denoted a period of 10,000 years in the
days of the Atharva Veda Saṁhitâ. Now it is found that Manu and the Mahâbhârata
both assign 1000, 2000, 3000 and 4000 years to the four yugas of Kali, Dvâpara,
Tretâ and Kṛita respectively. In other words, the durations of Dvâpara, Tretâ
and Kṛita are obtained by doubling, trebling and quadrupling the duration
of Kali; and taking into consideration that Kṛita (which Mr. Aiyer
compares with Latin quatuor) means four
in Sanskrit literature, the names of the yugas may perhaps be derived from this
fact. We are, however, concerned with the duration of the four yugas, and
adding up the numbers given above, we obtain 10,000 years for a cycle of four
yugas, or a Mahâ-yuga according to
the terminology explained above. Manu and Vyâsa, however, add to this 10,000
another period of 2,000 years, said to represent the Sandhyâ or the Sandhyâmsha
periods intervening between the different yugas.
Thus the Kṛita age does not pass suddenly into Tretâ, but has a period of
400 years interposed at each of its ends, while the Tretâ is protected from the
contact of the preceding and the succeeding yuga by two periods of 300 years
each, the Dvâpara of 200 and the Kali of 100 years. The word Sandhyâ denotes the time of the dawn in
ordinary literature; and Mr. Aiyer points out that as the period of the dawn
and the gloaming, or the morning and the evening twilight, is each found to
extend over three out of thirty ghatis
of a day, so one-tenth of the period of each yuga is assigned to its Sandhyâ or the period of transition into
another yuga: and that these supplementary periods were subsequent amendments.
The period of 10,000 years for a cycle of the four yugas is thus increased to 12,000,
if the Sandhyâ periods are included
in it, making Kṛita comprise 4800, Tretâ 3600, Dvâpara 2400 and Kali 1200
years. Now at the time of the Mahabharata or the Code of Manu, the Kali yuga
had already set in; and if the yuga contained no more than 1000, or, including
the Sandhyâs, 1200 ordinary years, it
would have terminated about the beginning of the Christian era.* (Compare Manu,
I, 69-71. In the Mahâbhârata the subject is treated in two places, once in the
Shânti-Parvan, Chap. 231, and once in the Vana-Parvan, Chap. 188, V. 21-28,
(Cal. Ed.). Cf. Muir O. S. T., Vol. I, 45-48.)The writers of the Purâṇas,
many of which appear to have been written during the first few centuries of the
Christian, era, were naturally unwilling to believe that the Kali yuga had
passed away, and that they lived in the Kṛita yuga of a new Mahâ-yuga;
for the Kṛita yuga meant according to them a golden age, while the times in
which they lived showed signs of degeneration on all sides. An attempt was,
therefore, made to extend the duration of the Kali yuga by converting 1000 (or
1200) ordinary human years thereof into as many divine years, a single divine
year, or a year of the gods, being equal to 360 human years. A Vedic authority
for such an interpretation was found in the text from the Taittirîya
Brâhmaṇa, which, we have quoted and discussed previously, viz., That which is a year is a day of
the gods. Manu and Vyâsa simply assign 1000 years to the Kali yuga. But as
Manu, immediately after recording the duration of the yugas and their Sandhyâs,
observes that this period of 12,000 years is called the yuga of the gods, the
device of converting the ordinary years of the different yugas into as many
divine years was, thereby, at once rendered plausible; and as people were
unwilling to believe that they could be in a yuga other than the Kali, this
solution of the difficulty was universally adopted, and a Kali of 1200 ordinary
years was at once changed, by this ingenious artifice, into a magnificent cycle
of as many divine, or 360 × 1200 = 432,000 ordinary years. The same device
converted, at one stroke, the 12,000 ordinary years of a Mahâ-yuga, into as
many divine, or 360 × 12,000 = 4,320,000 ordinary years, affecting in a similar
way the higher cycles of time like Manvantaras and Kalpas. How the beginning of
the Kali yuga was thrown back, by astronomical calculations, to 3102 B.C., when
this hypothesis of divine years was adopted is a separate question by itself;
but not being pertinent to the subject in hand we need not go into it in this
place. Suffice it to say that where chronology is invested with semi-religious
character, artifices or devices, like the one noticed above, are not unlikely
to be used to suit the exigencies of the time; and those who have to
investigate the subject from a historical and antiquarian point of view must be
prepared to undertake the task of carefully sifting the data furnished by such
chronology, as Prof. Raṅgâchârya and Mr. Aiyer have done in their essays
referred to above.
From a
consideration of the facts stated above it will be seen that so far as the Code
of Manu and the Mahâbhârata are concerned, they preserve for us a reminiscence
of a cycle of 10,000 years comprising the four yugas, the Kṛita, the Tretâ,
the Dvâpara and the Kali; and that the Kali yuga of one thousand years had been
already set in. In other words, Manu and Vyâsa obviously speak only of a period
of 10,000, or, including the Sandhyâs, of 12,000 ordinary or human (not divine)
years, from the beginning of the Kṛita to the end of the Kali yuga; and
it is remarkable that in the Atharva Veda we should find a period of 10,000
years apparently assigned to one yuga. It is not, therefore, unlikely that the
Atharva Veda takes the Kṛita, the Tretâ, the Dvâpara and the Kali together,
and uses the word yuga to denote the
combined duration of all these in the passage referred to above. Now considering
the fact that the Kṛita age is said to commence after a pralaya or the deluge, Manu and Vyâsa
must be understood to have preserved herein an old tradition that about 10,000
years before their time (supposing them to have lived at the beginning of the
Kali age of 1200 years), the new order of things commenced with the Kṛita
age; or, in other words, the deluge which destroyed the old order of things
occurred about 10,000 years before their time. The tradition has been very much
distorted owing to devices adopted in later times to make the traditional
chronology suit the circumstances of the day. But still it is not difficult to
ascertain the original character of the tradition; and when we do so, we are
led to conclude that the beginning of the new order of things, or, to put it
more scientifically, the commencement of the current post-Glacial era was,
according to this tradition, not assigned to a period older than 10,000 years
before the Christian era. We have shown that researches in Vedic chronology do
not allow us to carry back the date of the post-Glacial era beyond this
estimate, for traditions of the Arctic home appear to have been well understood
by the bards of the Ṛig-Veda in the Orion period. It is, therefore,
almost certain that the invasion of the Arctic Aryan home by the last Glacial
epoch did not take place at a time older than 10,000 B.C. The American
geologists, we have seen, have arrived at the same conclusion on independent
scientific grounds; and when the Vedic and the Purâṇic chronology
indicate nearly the same time, a difference of one or two thousand years, in
such cases, does not matter much, we may safely reject the extravagant
estimates of 20,000 or 80,000 years and adopt, for all practical purposes, the
view that the last Glacial epoch closed and the post-Glacial period commenced
at about 8,000, or, at best, about 10,000 B.C.
We have now
to consider how the tradition about the existence of the original home at the
North Pole and its destruction by snow and ice of the Glacial epoch, and other
cognate reminiscences were preserved until they were incorporated into the
law-book of the Mazdayasnians and the hymns of the Ṛig-Veda. That a real
tradition is preserved in these books is undoubted, for we have seen that an
examination of the traditionspreserved by the European branches of the Aryan
rage have led Prof. Rhys to the same conclusion; and those who know the history
of the preservation of our sacred books will see nothing improbable herein. In
these days of writing and printing, we have no need to depend upon memory, and
consequently we fail to realize what memory, kept under the strictest
discipline, is capable of achieving. The whole of the Ṛig-Veda, nay, the
Veda and its nine supplementary books, have been preserved by the Brahmins of
India, letter for letter and accent for accent, for the last 3000 or 4000 years
at least; and priests who have done so in recent times may well be credited
with having faithfully preserved the traditions of the ancient home, until they
were incorporated into the sacred books. These achievements of disciplined
memory may appear marvelous to us at present; but, as stated above, they were
looked upon as ordinary feats when memory was trusted better than books, and
trained and cultivated with such special care as to be a faithful instrument for
transmitting along many generations whatever men were most anxious to have
remembered. It has been a fashion to cry down the class of priests who make it
their sole profession to cultivate their memory by keeping it under strict
discipline and transmit by its means our sacred writings without the loss of a
single accent from generation to generation. They have been described, even by
scholars like Yâska, as the carriers of burden, and compared by others to
parrots who repeat words without understanding their meaning. But the service,
which this class has rendered to the cause of ancient history and religion by
preserving the oldest traditions of the race, is invaluable; and looking to the
fact that a specially disciplined memory was needed for such preservation, we
cannot but gratefully remember the services of those whose hereditary devotion
to the task, we might say, the sacred religious task, rendered it possible for
so many traditions to be preserved for thousands of years. Paṇḍits
might analyze and explain the Vedic hymns more or less elaborately or correctly;
but for that reason, we cannot forget that the very basis of their labors would
have been lost long ago, had the institution of priests who made disciplined
memory their exclusive business in life not been in existence. If the
institution has outlived its necessity, which is doubtful, for the art of
writing or printing can hardly be trusted to the same extent as disciplined
memory in such matters, we must remember that religious institutions are the
hardest to die in any country in the world.
We may,
therefore, safely assert that Vedic and Avestic traditions, which have been
faithfully preserved by disciplined memory, and whose trustworthiness is proved
by Comparative Mythology, as well as by the latest researches in Geology and
Archaeology, fully establish the existence of an Arctic home of the Aryan
people in inter-glacial times; and that after the destruction of this home by
the last Glacial epoch the Aryan people had to migrate southwards and settle at
first in the northern parts of Europe or on the plains of Central Asia at the
beginning of the post-Glacial period, that is about 8000 B.C. The antiquity of
the Aryan race is thus carried back to inter-glacial times, and its oldest home
to regions round about the North Pole, where alone a long dawn of thirty days
is possible. Whether other human races, beside the Aryan, lived with them in
the circumpolar country is a question which does not fall within the purview of
this book. Dr. Warren, in his Paradise
Found, has cited Egyptian, Akkadian, Assyrian, Babylonian, Chinese and even
Japanese traditions indicating the existence of an Arctic home of these races
in ancient times; and from a consideration of all these he arrives at the
conclusion that the cradle of the whole
human race must be placed in the circum-polar regions, a conclusion in
which he is also supported by other scholars. But, as observed by Prof. Rhys,
it is no fatal objection to the view we have endeavored to prove in these
pages, that the mythologies of nations, beside the Aryan, also point to the
North Pole as their original home; for it is not contended that the Aryans may
be the only people of northern origin. On the contrary, there are grounds to
believe that the five races of men (pańcha
janâḥ) often mentioned in the Ṛig-Veda may have been the races
which lived with the Aryans in their original home, for we cannot suppose that
the Vedic Aryas after their dispersion from the original home met only with
five races in their migrations, or were divided only into five branches. But
the question is one which can be finally decided only after a good deal of further
research; and as it is not necessary to mix it up with the question of the
original home of the Aryans, we may leave it out for the present. If the North
Pole is conclusively shown to be the cradle of the human race hereafter, it
would not affect in the least the conclusion we have drawn in these pages from
a number of definite Vedic and Avestic traditions, but if the existence of the
Aryan home near the North Pole is proved, as we have endeavored to do in the
foregoing pages, by independent testimony, it is sure to strengthen the
probability of the northern home of the whole human race; and as the traditions
of the Aryan people are admittedly better preserved in the Veda and the Avesta
than those of any other race, it is safer and even desirable to treat the
question of the primeval Aryan home independently of the general problem taken
up by Dr. Warren and other scholars. That the Veda and the Avesta are the
oldest books of the Aryan race is now conceded by all, and we have seen that it
is not difficult to ascertain, from traditions contained therein, the site of
the Aryan Paradise, now that we begin to search for it in the light thrown upon
the subject by modern scientific researches.
But if the
fact of an early Aryan home in the far north is once established by
indisputable traditional evidence, it is sure to revolutionize the existing
views regarding the primitive history or religion of the Aryan races.
Comparative philologists and Sanskritists, who looked for the primeval home somewhere
in
All such
guesses and speculations about the origin of the Aryan race and its
civilization will have now to be revised in the new light thrown upon the
subject by the theory of the
It has been
shown previously that the climate of the Arctic regions in the inter-Glacial
period was so mild and temperate as to be almost an approach to a perpetual
spring, and that there was then a continent of land round about the Pole, the
same being submerged during the glacial epoch. The primitive Aryans residing in
such regions must, therefore, have lived a happy life. The only inconvenience
experienced by them was the long Arctic night; and we have seen how this
phenomenon has served to give rise to various myths or legends describing the
struggle between the powers of light and darkness. The occurrence of the Arctic
night, its tiresome length, and the long expected morning light on the horizon
after some months were, naturally enough, the most important facts which
attracted the attention of our primeval forefathers, and it is no wonder if
they believed it to be the greatest exploit of their gods when the beneficent
dawn came dawning up, after several months of darkness, from the nether world
of aerial waters, inaugurating a new yearly round of sacrifices, festivals, or
other religious or social ceremonies. It was the beginning of the Devayâna,
when the powers of light celebrated their victory over the demons of darkness,
and the Child of the Morning, the Kumâra, the leader of the army of gods,
walked victoriously along the Devayâna path commencing the cycle of human ages,
or mânuṣhâ yugâ, as mentioned
in the Ṛig-Veda. The Pitṛiyâna, or the walk of the Manes,
corresponded with the dark winter, the duration of which extended in the
original home from two to six months. This was the period of rest or repose
during which, as observed previously, people refrained even from disposing the
bodies of the dead owing to the absence of sunshine. All social and religious
ceremonies of feasts were also suspended during this period as the powers of
darkness were believed to be in the ascendant. In short, the oldest Aryan
calendar was, as remarked by Dr. Schrader, divided into two parts, a summer of
seven or ten months and a corresponding winter of five or two months. But it
seems to have been an ancient practice to reckon the year by counting the
recurrence of summers or winters rather than by combining the two seasons. It
is thus that we can account for a year of seven or ten months in old times, or
annual sacrificial sattras extending
over the same period. This calendar is obviously unsuited to places to the
south of the
A people,
who had come to worship the powers of Nature as manifestations of divine will
and energy, who had a well-developed language of their own, and who had already
evolved a legendary literature out of the Arctic conditions of the year in their
congenial home near the North Pole, may well be expected to have made a good
advance in civilization. But we have at present very few means by which we can
ascertain the exact degree of civilization attained by the undivided Aryans in
their primitive home. Comparative Philology tells us that primitive Aryans were
familiar with the art of spinning and weaving, knew and worked in metals,
constructed boats and chariots, founded and lived in cities, carried on buying
and selling, and had made considerable progress in agriculture. We also know
that important social or political institutions or organizations, as, for
instance marriage or the laws of property, prevailed amongst the forefathers of
our race in those early days; and linguistic paleontology furnishes us with a
long list of the fauna and the flora known to the undivided Aryans. These are
important linguistic discoveries, and taking them as they are, they evidently
disclose a state of civilization higher than that of the savages of the
Neolithic age. But in the light of the Arctic theory we are naturally led to
inquire if the culture of the primitive Aryans was confined only to the level
disclosed by Comparative Philology, or whether it was of a higher type than the
one we can predicate of them simply on linguistic grounds. We have seen above
that in the case of the mythological deities and theirworship the Polar
character of many of the deities at once enables us to assign them to the
primitive period even when their names are not found in all the Aryan
languages; and the results of Comparative Philology regarding primitive Aryan
culture will have to be checked and revised in the same way. The very fact that
after compulsory dispersion from their mother-land the surviving Aryans,
despite the fragmentary civilization they carried with them, were able to
establish their supremacy over the races they came across in their migrations
from the original home at the beginning of the post-Glacial period, and that
they succeeded, by conquest or assimilation, in Aryanising the latter in
language, thought and religion under circumstances which could not be expected
to be favorable to them, is enough to prove that the original Aryan civilization
must have been of a type far higher than that of the non-Aryan races, or than
the one found among the Aryan races that migrated southward after the
destruction of their home by the Ice Age. So long as the Aryan races inhabiting
the northern parts of
But though the Vedic or Aryan people and their religion and
culture can thus be traced to the last inter-Glacial period, and though we know
that the degree of culture attained by the primitive Aryans was of a higher
type than some scholars seem to be willing to assign to them, yet there are
many points in the primitive Aryan history which still remain unsolved. For
instance, when and where the Aryan race was differentiated from other human
races, or how and where the Aryan speech was developed, are important questions
fromthe anthropological point of view, but we have, at present, no, means to
answer the same satisfactorily. It is quite possible that other human races
might have lived with the Aryans in their home at this time; but the Vedic
evidence is silent on this point. The existence of the human race is traced by
geologists to the Tertiary era; and it is now geologically certain that the
gigantic changes wrought on this globe by glacial epochs were witnessed by man.
But anthropology does not supply us with any data from which we can ascertain when,
where, or how the human race came to be differentiated according to color or
language. On the contrary, it is now proved that at the earliest date at which
human remains. have been found, the race was already divided into several,
sharply distinguished types; and this, as observed by Laing, leaves the
question of mans ultimate origin completely open to speculation, and enables
both monogenists and polygenists, to contend for their respective views with
plausible arguments and without fear of being refuted by facts.* (* Laings
Human Origins, pp. 404-5.)
The evidence, set forth in the
foregoing pages, does not enable us to solve any of these questions regarding
the ultimate origin of the human race or even of the Aryan people or their
language and religion. We have nothing in this evidence for ascertaining how
far the existence of the Aryan race can be traced back to pre-Glacial, as
distinguished from inter-Glacial times; or whether the race was descended from
a single pair (monogeny) or plurality of pairs (polygeny) in the remotest ages.
The traditional evidence collected by us only warrants us in. taking back the
Aryan people and their civilization from the Temperate zone in post-Glacial to
the Arctic regions in inter-Glacial times. It is true that Aryans and their
culture or religion cannot be supposed to have developed all of a sudden at the
close of the last inter-Glacial period, and the ultimate origin of both must,
therefore, be placed in remote geological times. But it is useless to speculate
on this question without further evidence, and in the present state of our
knowledge we must rest content with the result that though Aryan race or
religion can be traced to the last inter-Glacial-period yet the ultimate origin
of both is still lost in geological antiquity.
I cannot
conclude this chapter without briefly examining the bearing of our results on
the views entertained by Hindu theological scholars regarding the origin,
character and authority of the Vedas. It is a question which has been discussed
with more or less acuteness, subtlety, or learning ever since the days of the Brâhmaṇas;
and frond a purely theological point of view I do not think there remains
anything to be now said upon it. Again, for the purposes of scientific
investigation, it is necessary to keep the theological and the antiquarian
aspect of the question quite distinct from each other. Yet when our
investigation, conducted on strict scientific lines, is completed, we may
usefully compare our conclusions with the theological views and see how far
they harmonize or clash with each other. In fact no Hindu who reads a book like
the present, can avoid making such a comparison; and we shall be lightening his
task by inserting in this place a few remarks on this subject. According to the
view held by Hindu theologians, the Vedas are eternal (nitya), without a beginning (anâdi),
and also not created by a human author (a-pauruṣheya);
and we are told that these attributes have been predicated of our sacred books
from the most ancient times known to our divines or philosophers. The whole of
the third Volume of Dr. Muirs Original
Sanskrit Texts is devoted to the discussion of this subject, a number of
original passages and arguments bearing on which are there collected, including
Sâyaṇas lucid summary in the introduction to his commentary on the Ṛig-Veda;
and more recently the late Mahâmahopâdhyâya Râjârâma Shâstri Bodas, the editor
of the Bombay edition of the Ṛig-Veda, has done the same in a Sanskrit
pamphlet, the second edition of which is now published by his son, Mr. M. R.
Bodas, of the Bombay High Court Bar. I shall, therefore, give in this place
only a summary of the different views of Hindu theologians, without entering
into the details of the controversy which can be studied from the above books.
The question before us is whether the Vedic hymns, that is, not only the words
of the hymns but also the religious system found or referred to therein, are
the compositions of the Ṛiṣhis to whom they are assigned in the
Anukramaṇikâs, or the ancient Indexes of the Veda, in the sense in which
the Shâkuntala is a composition of Kâlidâsa; or whether these hymns existed
from times immemorial, in other words, whether they are eternal and without a
beginning. The hymns themselves are naturally the best evidence on the point.
But, as shown by Dr. Muir in the second chapter (pp. 218-86) of the Volume
above mentioned, the utterances of the Vedic Ṛiṣhis on this point
are not unanimous. Thus side by side with passages in which the Vedic bards
have expressed their emotions, hopes or fears, or prayed for worldly comforts
and victory over their enemies, condemning evil practices like gambling with
dice (X, 34), or have described events, which on their face seem to be the
events of the day; side by side with passages where the poet says that ho has
made (kṛî) generated (jan), or fabricated (takṣh) a new (navyasî or apűrvya) hymn,
much in the same way as a carpenter fashions a chariot (I, 47, 2; 62, 13; II,
19, 8; IV, 16, 20; VIII, 95, 5; X, 23, 6; 39, 14; 54, 6; 160, 5; &c.); or
with hymns in which we are plainly told that they are composed by so and so,
the son of so and so, (I, 60, 5; X, 63, 17; 67, 1; &c.), there are to be
found in the Ṛig-Veda itself an equally large number of hymns where the Ṛiṣhis
state in unmistakable terms that the hymns sung by them were the results of
inspiration from Indra, Varuṇa, Soma, Aditi, or some other deity; or that
the Vedic verses (ṛichaḥ)
directly emanated from the Supreme Puruṣha, or some other divine source;
or that they were given by gods (devatta),
or generated by them and only seen or perceived (pashyât) by the poets in later times, (I, 37, 4; II, 23, 2; VII,
66, 11; VIII, 59, 6; X, 72, 1; 88, 8; 93, 9; &c.). We are told that Vâch
(Speech) is nityâ or eternal (VIII,
75, 6, also cf. X, 125); or that the gods generated the divine Vâch and also
the hymns (VIII, 100, 11; 101, 16; X, 88, 8). The evidence of the Vedic hymns
does not, therefore, enable us to decide the
question one way or the other; but if the composition of the
hymns is once ascribed to human effort, and one to divine inspiration or to the
gods directly, it is clear that at least some of these old Ṛiṣhis believed
the hymns to have been sung under inspiration or generated directly by the
goddess of speech or other deities. We may reconcile the former of these views
with the passages where the hymns are said to be made by human effort, on the
supposition that the poets who sang the hymns believed themselves to be acting
under divine inspiration. But the explanation fails to account for the
statement that the Ṛik, the Yajus, and the Sâman, all emanated from the
Supreme Puruṣha or the gods; and we must, therefore, conclude that the
tradition about the eternity of the Vedas, or their divine origin is as old as
the Veda itself. Accordingly, when we come to the Brâhmaṇas and the Upaniṣhads,
we naturally find the same view prevailing. They tell us that the Ṛig-Veda
proceeded from Agni (fire), the Yajur-Veda from Vâyu (wind), and the Sâma-Veda
from Sűrya (the sun), and that these three deities got their warmth from Prajâpati
who practiced lapas for the purpose (Shat. Brâh, XI, 5, 8, 1 ; Ait. Brâh. V,
32-34; Chhân. Up. IV, 17, 1); or that the Vedas are the breathings of the
Supreme Being (Bṛih. Up. II, 4, 10); or that Prajâpati by means of the
eternal Vâch created the Vedas and everything else in this world; and the same
view is met with in the Smṛitis like those of Manu (I, 21-23) and others,
or in the Purâṇas, several extracts from which are given by Dr. Muir in
the volume above referred to. It is admitted that the Vedas, with other things,
are destroyed, at the end of a Kalpa, by the deluge (pralaya) which overtakes: the world at the time. But we are told
that this does not affect the question of the eternity of the new Kalpa by
Brahmâ himself after the grand deluge, and by the Ṛiṣhis, who
survive, after minor deluges. The authority generally quoted in support of this
view is a verse from the Mahâbhârata (Shânti-Parvan, Chap. 210, v. 19) which
says, The great Ṛiṣhis, empowered by Svayambhű (the self-born),
formerly obtained, through tapas
(religious austerity), the Vedas and the Itihâsas, which haddisappeared at the
end of the (preceding) Yuga.* (Bhavabhűti,
Utt., I, 15. Also Cf. Ṛig. VIII, 59, 6, quoted infra )The Ṛiṣhis are, therefore, called the seers and not the makers of the Vedic hymns; and the personal designation of some Shâkhâs,
branches or recessions of Vedas, as Taittirîya, Kâṭhaka, &c., as well
as the statements in the Vedic hymns, which say that so and so has made or generated such and such a hymn, are understood to mean that the
particular Shâkhâ or hymn was perceived, and only perceived, by the particular Ṛiṣhi or poet. It is
not, however, till we come to the works of the authors and expositors of the
different schools of Hindu philosophy (darshanas)
that we find the doctrine of the eternity of the Vedas subjected to a searching
examination; and, as remarked by Dr. Muir, one who reads the discussions of
these writers cannot fail to be struck with the acuteness of their reasoning,
the logical precision with which their arguments are presented, and the
occasional liveliness and ingenuity of their illustrations.( Muir, O. S. T.,
Vol. III, p. 58.) They all bear witness to the fact that so far as tradition
went, an unbroken tradition of great antiquity, there was no remembrance of
the Vedas having been ever composed by or ascribed to any human author; and
taking into consideration the, learning and the piety of these scholars, their
testimony must be regarded as an unimpeachable proof of the existence of such a
tradition, which was considered ancient several centuries before the Christian
era. But though a tradition whose high antiquity can be so well established
deserves to be seriously considered in our investigations regarding the
character of the Vedas, yet it is, after all, a negative proof, showing, it may
be urged, nothing more than no human author of the Veda has been known
from times beyond the memory of all these ancient scholars.
Jaimini, the author of Mîmâṁsâ Sutras, therefore,
further deduces (I, 1, 5) the eternity of the Vedas from the relation or
connection between words and their meanings, which he holds to be eternal (autpattika) and not conventional. A word
is defined to be an aggregate of letters in a particular order, and its sense
is said to be conveyed by these letters following each other in a definite
succession. But Grammarians are not satisfied with this view, and maintain that
the sense of a word is not expressed by the aggregate of its constituent
letters which are transient, but by a certain super-sensuous entity, called sphoṭa (i.e., manifester, from sphuṭ),
which supervenes the aggregate of the letters as soon as they are pronounced,
and reveals their meaning. Jaimini denies that there are words in the Vedas
which denote any transient objects, and as the Vedic words and their sense are
eternal, it follows, according to him, that the Vedas are self-demonstrative,
or that they shine, like the sun, by their own light, and are, therefore, perfect
and infallible. If particular parts of the Vedas are designated after some Ṛiṣhis,
it does not, we are told, prove those sages to have been their authors, but
merely the teachers who studied and handed them down. Bâdarâyaṇa, as
interpreted by Shaṅkarâchârya (I, 31, 26-33), the great leader of the Vedânta
School, accepts the doctrine of the eternity of sound or words, but adds that
it is the species to which the word belongs, and not the word itself, that is
eternal or indestructible, and, there fore, though the names of deities, like
Indra and others, which are all created and hence liable to destruction, are
mentioned in the Veda, it does not affect the question of its eternity as the
species to which Indra and others are said to belong is still eternal. In
short, Vedic names and forms of species are eternal, and it is by remembering
these that the world is created by Brahmâ at the beginning of each Kalpa
(Maitr. Up., VI, 22). The Veda is, therefore, the original WORD the source from
which every thing else in the world emanated, and as such it cannot but be
eternal; and it is interesting, as pointed out by Prof. Max Müller in his Lectures on Vedanta Philosophy, to
compare this doctrine with that of Divine Logas
of the Alexandrian Schools in the West. The Naiyâyikas, on the other hand, deny
the doctrine of the eternity of sound or word, but hold that the authority of
the Vedas is established by the fact of their having emanated from competent (âpta) persons who had an intuitive
perception of duty (sâkṣhâtkṛita
dharmâṇaḥ, as Yâska puts it), and whose competence is fully
proved by the efficacy of such of the Vedic injunctions as relate to mundane
matters, and can, therefore, be tested by experience; while the author of the
Vaisheṣhika Sűtras clearly refers (I, 1, 3) the Veda to Îshvara or God as
its framer. The Sâṅkhyas (Sâṇkhya Sűtras, V, 40-51) agree with the
Naiyâyikas in rejecting the doctrine of the eternity of the connection of a
word with its meaning; and though they regard the Veda as pauruṣheya in the sense that it emanated from the Primeval
Puruṣha, yet they maintain that it was not the result of a conscious
effort on the part of this Puruṣha, but only an unconscious emanation
from him like his breathing. According to this view the Veda cannot be called
eternal in the same sense as the Mîmâṁsakas have done, and, therefore,
the texts which assert the eternity of the Vedas, are said to refer merely to the
unbroken continuity of the stream of homogeneous succession, (Veda-nityatâ-vâkyâni cha sajâtîyâ-nupűrvî-pravâhânuchcheda-parâṇi).*
(Cf. Vedântaparibhâṣhâ Âgama-parichcheda, p. 55, quoted in
Mahâmahopâdhyâya Jhalkikars Nyâya-kosha, 2nd Ed. p. 736. s.v.)Patanjali, the great grammarian, in his gloss on Pâṇini IV,
3, 101, solves the question by making a distinction between the language (the succession of words or
letters, varṇânupűrvî, as we
find it in the present texts) of the Vedas and their contents (artha), and
observing that the question of the eternity of the Vedas refers to their sense
which is eternal or permanent (artho nityaḥ), and not to the order of
their letters, which has not always remained the same (varṇânupűrvî anityâ), and that it is through this difference
in the latter respect that we have the different versions of Kaṭhas, Kalâpas,
Mudakas, Pippalâdas and so on. This view is opposed to that of the Mîmâṁsakas
who hold both sense and order of words to be eternal. But Patanjali is led to reject
the doctrine of the eternity of the order of words, because in that case we
cannot account for the different versions or Shâkhâs of the same Veda, all of
which are considered to be equally authoritative though their verbal readings
are sometimes different. Patanjali, as explained by his commentators Kaiyyaṭa
and Nâgoji Bhaṭṭa, ascribes this difference in the different
versions of the Veda to the loss of the Vedic text in the pralayas or deluges which occasionally overtake the world and their
reproduction or repromulgation, at the beginning of each new age, by the sages,
who survived, according to their remembrance. (See Muir O. S. T., Vol. III, pp.
96-97) Each manvantara or age has
thus a Veda of its own which differs only in expression and not in sense from
the ante-diluvian Veda, and that different recessions of co-ordinate authority
of the same Veda are due to the difference in the remembrance of the Ṛiṣhis
whose names are associated with the different Shâkhâs, and who repromulgate, at
the beginning of the new age, the knowledge inherited by them, as a sacred
trust, from their forefathers in the preceding Kalpa. This view substantially
accords with that of Vyâsa as recorded in the verse from the Mahâbhârata quoted
above. The later expositors of the different schools of philosophy have further
developed these views of the Sutra-writers and criticized or defended the
doctrine of the self-demonstrated authority of the scriptural texts (shabda-pramâṇa) in various ways.
But we cannot go into their elaborate discussions in this place; nor is it
necessary to do so, for eventually we have to fall back upon the view of Vyâsa
and Patanjali, mentioned above, if the destruction of the Vedas during each pralaya, and its repromulgation at the
commencement of the new age is admitted.
Such, in
brief, are the views entertained by Hindu orthodox theologians, scholars and
philosophers in regard to the origin, character and authority of the Vedas; and
on comparing them with the results of our investigation, it will be found that
Patanjalis and Vyâsas view about the antiquity and the eternity of the Vedas
derives material support from the theory of the Arctic home which we have endeavored
to prove in the foregoing pages on strict scientific and historical grounds. It
has been shown that Vedic religion and worship are both inter-Glacial; and that
though we cannot trace their ultimate origin, yet the Arctic character of the
Vedic deities fully proves that the powers of Nature represented by them had
been already clothed with divine attributes by the primitive Aryans in their
original home round about the North Pole, or the Meru of the Purâṇas.
When the Polar home was destroyed by glaciation, the Aryan people that survived
the catastrophe carried with them as much of their religion and worship as it
was possible to do under the circumstances; and the relic, thus saved from the
general wreck, was the basis of the Aryan religion in the post-Glacial age. The
whole period from the commencement of the post-Glacial era to the birth of
Buddha may, on this theory, be approximately divided into four parts:
1000 or 8000
B.C. The destruction of the original
80005000
B.C. The age of migration from the original home. The Survivors of the Aryan
race roamed over the northern parts of
50003000
B.C. The Orion Period, when the vernal equinox was in Orion. Many Vedic hymns
can be traced to the early part of this period and the bards of the race, seem
to have not yet forgotten the real import or significance of the traditions of
the
30001400
B.C. The Kṛittikâ Period, when the vernal equinox was in Pleiades. The Taittirîya
Saṁhitâ and the Brâhmaṇas, which begin the series of nakṣhatras
with the Kṛittikâs, are evidently the productions of this period. The
compilation of the hymns into Saṁhitâs also appears, to be a work of the
early part of this period. The traditions about the original Arctic home had
grown dim by this time and very often misunderstood, making the Vedic hymns
more and more unintelligible. The sacrificial system and the numerous details
thereof found in the Brâhmaṇas seem to have been developed during this,
time. It was at the end of this Period that the Vedâṅga-jyotiṣha
was originally composed, or at any rate the position of the equinoxes mentioned
therein observed and ascertained.
1400500 B.C.
The Pre-Buddhistic Period, when the Sűtras and the Philosophical systems made
their appearance.
These
periods differ slightly from those mentioned by me in Orion; but the change is needed in consequence of the theory of the
Arctic home which carries back the beginning of the Pre-Orion or the Aditi
Period to the commencement of the present post-Glacial era. In the language of
the Purâṇas the first period after the close of the Ice Age (80005000 B.C.)
may be called the Kṛita Yuga or the age of wandering, as the Aitareya Brâhmaṇa
(VII, 15) describes it to be. It was the period when the Aryan races,
expatriated from their motherland, roamed over the northern parts of
The hymns cannot, therefore, be supposed to promulgate a new
religion consciously or unconsciously evolved on the plains of
|
Theological view |
|
Historical view |
|
1. The Vedas are eternal (nitya), beginning-less (anâdi) and not made by man (a-pauruṣheya). 2. The Vedas were destroyed in the deluge, at the end of
the last Kalpa. 3. At the beginning of the present Kalpa, the
Ṛiṣhis, through tapas,
reproduced in substance, if not in form, the ante-diluvian Vedas, which they
carried in their memory by the favor of god. |
|
1. The Vedic or the Aryan religion can be proved to be nter-Glacial; but its ultimate origin is still lost in
geological antiquity.
2. Aryan religion and culture were destroyed during the
last Glacial period that invaded the Arctic Aryan home.
3. The Vedic hymns were sung in post-Glacial times by
poets, who had inherited the knowledge or contents thereof in an unbroken
tradition from their ante-diluvian forefathers. |
On a
comparison of the two columns it will be found that the tradition about the
destruction and the reproduction of the Vedas, recorded by Vyâsa in the Mahâbhârata
verse referred to above, must be taken to have been founded substantially on a
historical fact. It is true that according to the Pűraṇic chronology the
beginning of the current Kalpa is placed several thousands of years before the
present time; but if, according to the estimates of some modern geologists, the
post-Glacial period is, even now, said to have commenced some 80,000 years ago,
if not earlier, we need not be much surprised at the Pűraṇic estimate,
especially when, as stated above, it is found to disclose a real tradition of 10,000
years assigned to a cycle of the four yugas, the first of which began with the
new Kalpa, or, in the language of geology, with the present post-Glacial
period. Another point wherein the two views may be said to differ is the
beginninglessness (anâditva) of the
Vedas. It is impossible to demonstrate historically or scientifically that
Vedic religion and worship is absolutely without a beginning. All that we can
say is that its beginning is lost in geological antiquity, or that the Vedic
religion is as old as the Aryan language or the Aryan man himself. If
theologians are not satisfied with the support which this scientific view
accords to their theory about the eternity of the Vedas, the scientific and the
theological views must stand, as they are, distinct from each other, for the
two methods of investigation are essentially different. It is for this reason
that I have stated the views in parallel columns for comparison without mixing
them up. Whether the world was produced from the original WORD, or the Divine
Logos, is a question which does not fall within the pale of historical
investigation; and any conclusions based upon it or similar other doctrines cannot,
therefore, be treated in this place. We may, however, still assert that for all
practical purposes the Vedic religion can be shown to be beginningless even on
strict scientific grounds.
A careful
examination of the Rig-Vedic hymns will show that the Vedic Ṛiṣhis
were themselves conscious of the fact that the subject-matter of the hymns sung
by them was ancient or ante-deluvian in character, though the expressions used
were their own productions. We have already referred before to the two sets of
Vedic passages, the first expressly saying that the hymns were made, generated or fashioned
like a chariot by the Ṛiṣhis to whom they are ascribed, and the
other stating in equally unmistakable terms that the hymns were inspired, given or generated by
gods. Dr. Muir attempts to reconcile these two contradictory views by
suggesting that the different Ṛiṣhis probably held different views;
or that when both of them can be traced to the same author, he may have
expressed the one at the time when it was uppermost in his mind, and the other
at another; or that the Vedic Ṛiṣhisor poets had no very clearly
defined ideas of inspiration, and thought that the divine assistance of which
they were conscious did not render their hymns the less truly the production of
their own mind.* (See Muir O. S. T. Vol. III, pp. 274-5) In short, the
existence of a human is not supposed to be incompatible with that of the
super-human element in the composition of these hymns. But it will be seen that
the above reconciliation is at once weak and unsatisfactory. A better way to
reconcile the conflicting utterances of the Ṛiṣhis would be to make
a distinction between the expression,
language, or form on the one hand, and the contents, substance or the
subject-matter of the hymns on the other; and to hold that while the expression was human, the subject matter
was believed to be ancient or superhuman. There are numerous passages in the Ṛig-Veda
where the bards speak of ancient poets (pűrve
ṛiṣhayaḥ), or ancient hymns (I, 1, 2; VI, 44, 13; VII,
29, 4; VIII, 40, 12; X, 14, 15; &c.); and Western scholars understand by
these phrases the poets or hymns of the past generations of Vedic bards, but
not anterior to the post-Glacial times. But there are clear indications in the hymns
themselves which go to refute this view. It is true that the Vedic bards speak
of ancient and modern hymns; but they often tell us that though the hymn is new
(navyasî), yet the god or the deity
to whom it is addressed is old (pratna),
or ancient (VI, 22, 7; 62, 4; X, 91, 13; &c.). This shows that the deities
whose exploits were sung in the hymns ware considered to be ancient deities.
Nay, we have express passages where not only the deities but their exploits are
said. to be ancient, evidently meaning that the achievement spoken of in the
hymns were traditional and not witnessed by the poet-himself; thus, in I, 32,
I, the poet opens his song with a clear statement that he is going to sing
those exploits of Indra which were achieved at first (prathamâni) or in early times, and the adjective pűrvyâṇî and pűrvîḥ are applied to Indras exploits in I, 11, 3, and I, 61
13. The achievements of the Ashvins are similarly said to be pűrvyâṇî in I, 117, 25; and the
long list of the exploits given in this hymn clearly shows that the poet is
here rather summarizing the exploits traditionally known to him than
enumerating events witnessed by himself or by his forefathers in the near past.
This is also evident from the fact that the ancient Ṛiṣhis mentioned
in the hymns, like the Aṅgirases or Vasiṣhṭha, are believed
to have been invested with supernatural powers (VII, 33, 7-13), or to have
lived and conversed with (I, 179, 2), or shared in the enjoyments of the gods (Devânâm sadhamâdaḥ VIII, 76, 4).
They are also said to be the earliest guides (pathikṛit, X, 14, 15)for future generations. It is impossible
to suppose that Vedic poets could have ascribed such superhuman character to
their ancestors in the near past; and we are, therefore, led to the conclusion
that the ancestors here spoken of were the ante-diluvian ancestors (naḥpűrve pitaraḥ) who
completed their sacrifices in the Arctic year of 7 or 10 months. And what is
true of the ancestors applies as well to the ancient deities mentioned in the
hymns. I have pointed out previously that the legend of Aditi and her sons is
expressly stated to be a legend of the past age (pűrvyam yugam); and the same thing may be predicated of the legends
of Indra, the Ashvins or the other deities whose exploits are described in the Ṛig-Veda
as pűrvyâṇi or prathamâni, that is, old or ancient. In
short, the ancient hymns, poets, or deities, mentioned in the Ṛig-Veda
must be referred to a by-gone age and not to post-Glacial times. The Arctic
character of these deities, it may be further observed, is intelligible only on
this view. The Vedic bards may well be credited with having composed, or
fashioned, new songs or hymns; but the question still remains whether the
subject-matter of these hymns was of their own creation, and the fact that the deities.
have been called ancient in contradistinction with the songs offered to them
(VI, 62, 4), and are clothed with Polar attributes, at once enables us to solve
the question by answering that though the wording of the hymns was new, their
subject-matter was old, that is, traditionally handed down to the poet from
remote ages. Thus in a hymn of the tenth Maṇḍala (X, 72, 1-2), the
poet desiring to celebrate the births or the origin of gods, thus begins his
hymn, Let us, from the love of praise, celebrate, in recited hymns, the births
of gods, any one of us who in this later age may see them, (yaḥ pashyâd
uttare yuge). Here we have a distinct contrast between the births of gods
on the one hand and the poet who may see the hymn in the later age on the
other, evidently meaning that the subject-matter of the hymn is an occurrence
of the former age (yuga), and that
the poet celebrates as he perceives
or sees it in the later age. The view that the Vedic hymns, or rather their
contents, were perceived and not made by the Ṛiṣhis, derives
material support from this statement. A similar expression is also found in
VIII, 59, 6, which says Indra and Varuṇa! I have seen (abhi apashyam);
through tapas that which ye formerly gave to the Ṛiṣhis,
wisdom, understanding of speech, sacred lore (shrutam) and all the places which the sages created when performing
sacrifices.*
The notion
about the perception of the subject-matter of the Vedic hymns is here referred
to almost in the same terms in which it is expressed by Vyâsa in the Mahâbhârata
verse quoted above; and with such express texts before us, the only way to
reconcile the conflicting statements about the human and the superhuman origin
of the hymns is to refer them to the form
and the matter of the hymns
respectively, as suggested by Patanjali and other scholars. Dr. Muir notices a
passage (VIII, 95, 4-5) where the poet is said to have generated (ajîjanat) for Indra the newest exhilarating hymn (navîyasîm mandrâm giram), springing from
an intelligent mind, an ancient mental product (dhiyam pratnâm), full of sacred truth.( See Muir O. S. T., Vol.
III, p. 239) Here one and the same hymn is said to be both new and old at the
same time; and Dr. Muir quotes Aufrecht to show that gir, that is, expression
or wording, is here contrasted with dhî or thought, obviously showing that an old thought (pratnâ dhîḥ) has been couched in
new language (navîyasî gîḥ), by
the bard to whom the hymn is ascribed. In other words, the hymn is ancient in
substance though new in expression, a conclusion to which we have been
already led on different grounds. We may also cite in this connection the fact
that amongst the different heads into which the contents of the Brâhmaṇas
have been classified by Indian divines, we find one which is termed Purâ-kalpa or the rites or traditions of
a by-gone age, showing that even the Brâhmaṇas are believed to contain
ante-diluvian stories or traditions.
The statement in the Taittirîya
Saṁhitâ that The priests, in old times, were afraid that the dawn would
not terminate or ripen into sunshine, is quoted by Sâyaṇa as an example
of Purâ-kalpa, and we have seen
before that this can be explained only by supposing it to refer to the Arctic
dawn, an incident witnessible by man only in the inter-Glacial times. If the Brâhmaṇas
can be thus shown to contain or refer to the facts of a by-gone age, a fortiori the Vedas may, very well, be
said to do the same. Thus from whatever side we approach the question, we are
irresistibly led, by internal as well as external evidence, to the conclusion
that the subject-matter of the Vedic hymns is ancient and inter-Glacial, and
that it was incorporated into the Vedic hymns in post-Glacial times by Ṛiṣhis
who inherited the same in the shape of continuous traditions from their
inter-Glacial forefathers.
There
are many other points in Vedic interpretation, or in Vedic and Purâṇic
mythology, which are elucidated, or we may even say, intelligently and
rationally explained for the first time, by the theory of the
But we think we have shown that there are grounds to hold
that the inter-Glacial Aryan civilization and culture must have been of a
higher type than what it is usually supposed to be: and that there is no reason
why the primitive Aryan should not be placed on an equal footing with the
pre-historic inhabitants of Egypt in point of culture and civilization. The
vitality and superiority of the Aryan races, as disclosed by their conquest, by
extermination or assimilation, of the non-Aryan races with whom they came in contact
in their migrations in search of new lands from the North Pole to the Equator,
if not to the farther south, is intelligible only on the assumption of a high
degree of civilization in their original Arctic home; and when the Vedas come
to be further examined in the light of the Arctic theory, we many certainly
expect to discover therein many other facts, which will further support this
view, but which are still hidden from us owing to our imperfect knowledge of
the physical and social surroundings amidst which the ancestors of the Vedic Ṛiṣhis
lived near the North Pole in times before the Glacial epoch. The exploration of
the Arctic regions which is being carried on at present, may also help us hereafter
in our investigation of the beginnings of the Aryan civilization. But all these
things must be left to be done by future investigators when the theory of the
INDEX
Abhiplava,
a kind of ṣhaḷaha, 191, 193.
Adhyâtmikas,
their
Aditi, and
her Aditya sons, the legend of, 139-146; said to have occurred in a former yuga, 145, 428.
Âdityas,
seven with an eighth stillborn brother, represent the seven monthly sun-gods in
the Arctic region, 143-146, 262.
Âdityânâm-ayanam,
an yearly sacrificial session, 177, 193.
Adri, a
mountain, meaning of, in the Ṛig-Veda, 231, 234.
Ćsir, gods,
the reign of, 72.
Ages,
archeological, of Stone, Bronze and Iron, 3; distinction between Neolithic and
Paleolithic, 9; their co-relation with
the geological, 10; of Beech, Oak and Fir, 11.
Geological and their subdivisions, 10; climate and distribution of land and
water in, 19-23.
Human and
divine in the Ṛig-Veda, 159 .
Purâṇic, Kṛita, Tretâ, Dvâpara, and Kali; their real duration,
391-397; their characteristics, 423.
Aggilos,
phonetic equivalent of Aṅgiras, 147.
Agni, fire,
a Vedic matutinal deity, 68; living in long darkness, 116;
Aiyangâr,
Mr., Nârâyaṇa, on the interpretation of Vedic myths on the Astral theory,
59, 227; on the nature of Kumâra, Kârrtikeya, 295; on the nature of Sitâ, 324.
Aiyer, Mr.,
on the yuga-system in the
Purâṇas, 393-396.
Âjânadevatâs,
220.
Alburz, a
mountain, separating the upper from the lower world in the Avesta, 247;
apertures in, for the sun to pass through, 250, 296.
Altitude,
high, its effect on climate, 20.
Amma, the
ascending stream of, in the Finnish mythology, 256.
Ammarik,
the gloaming, in the Finnish mythology, 376.
Anaximenes,
on the overhead rotation of the sky, 72.
Aṅgirasâm-ayanam, the yearly sacrificial session of
Aṅgirases 148, 177, 193.
Aṅgirases,
ancient sacrificers of the Aryan race, 147; probably Indo-European in origin,
148; different species of, the Navagvas and the Dashagvas, 149; ten months
sacrifical session of the latter, 150; helping Indra in the rescue of the end
of each year, 150; found the cows at the sun dwelling in darkness, 150;
described as Virűpas, that is, of
various forms, 154.
Angra
Mainyu, the evil spirit in the Avesta, destroys Airyana Vaęjo by introducing
severe winter therein, 334; explained as a glacial invasion, 343.
Anquetil,
discovery of the Avesta by, 330
countries,
8; transition from one into another gradual and not sudden, 8; distinction
between New and Old stone age, 9; ages of Beech, Oak and Fir, 11; the date of
the commencement of the Neolithic age in, 12; latest researches in, effect of,
on primitive history, 3; on Vedic interpretation, 6; summary of the latest researches
in, 35, 36.
Arctic
regions, characterized by mild climate suitable for human habitation in
inter-glacial times, 22, 35, 389; a wide continent before the glacial epoch,
39; appearance of the heavens in, 48, 52; duration of day and night in, 51, 52;
dawn in, 52, 53; distinguishing characteristics of, summed up, 54-55.
Ardhau, the two celestial hemispheres in
the Ṛig-Veda, 244.
Ardvi Sűra
Anâhita, Avestic celestial river, like the Vedic Sarasvatî, 246, 248; grants a
boon to Thraętaona, 247, 374.
Aristotle,
mentions an aerial river, 256; his belief in the reality of the deluge, 361,
Arya, Indra, dealing measure for measure
to Dâsa or Vṛitra, 128, 131.
Âryabhaṭṭa,
392.
Aryan, race
and people, their unity in primitive times, 2; controversy regarding the original
type of, 15; Vedic, settled in central Asia in the Orion period, 391;
primitive, interglacial and not post-glacial in origin, 402; European
Neolithic, not progressive but retrogressive savages, 408; origin of and
differentiation from his hidden home in waters and darkness, 294; as child of
waters, 294; traversing the universe, 309; his secret third station, 309; seven
rays or tongues, and ten secret dwellings of, 318.
Agniṣhṭoma,
a Soma-sacrifice, 190
Ahalyâ, the
legend of, 327.
Ahanî, Day and Night, distinguished from Uṣhâsâ-naktâ, 124; right and left
side of the Year-god, 126-127.
Ahîna, a
Soma-sacrifice of less than thirteen days, 190.
Ahura
Mazda, warning Yima about the coming winter in Airyana Vaęjo, 67, 330.
Airyana
Vaęjo, the original Paradise of the Iranians or the Aryan race, Yimas Vara in,
67; description of, in the Vendidad, 332-334; wrongly identified with countries
to the east of Iran, 335-337; change in the climate of, caused by Angra Mainyu,
341; proves its invasion by ice during the last Glacial epoch, 343; ten winter
months therein, 341-343; also seven summer months, 345 ; annual rise of sun,
moon and stars, and a year-long day at the place, 66, 67, 350; possible only if
it be located in the Arctic regions, and not to the east of Iran, 352;
description of the glaciation of, 355.
Aitihâsikas,
their
Âpaḥ,
waters, distinguished as terrestrial and celestial in the Ṛig-Veda, 237;
celestial or aerial ridden for ten months by the sun, 163, 170; ruled over by
Varuṇa, 163; coeval with the world, 239; captivated by Vṛitra and
released to flow upwards by Indra, cannot but be celestial, 255, 273, 274; in
the seven rivers must be celestial, 267-272; cosmic circulation of the aerial,
in the Avesta, 252; cessation of their flow in winter, 252-254; cosmic
circulation of, in other mythologies, 255-258; their nature and characteristics
as a Vedic deity summed up, 315; the same compared the Purâṇic legends,
316.
Apaosha,
the demon conquered by Tishtrya, an Avestic proto-type of Shuṣhṇa
in the Ṛig-Veda, 205, 206; fight with, lasting for a hundred nights, 207.
Apaturia,
ancient Greek feast, 371.
Apollon,
oxen of, stolen by Hermes, 188; derived from Sanskrit apavaryan, 237.
Apsu-jit, conqueror in waters, an epithet of
Indra, 228-229.
Aptoryâma,
a Soma-sacrifice, 190.
Ap-tűrya, the fight for waters by Indra,
228.
Âptya, See Trita.
Arag, See Rangha.
Archaeology,
prehistoric, ages of Iron, Bronze and stone in, 3, 8; characterized by
instruments of metals and stone discovered in the recent strata of the earth,
7; ages not synchronous in different other human races, lost in geological
antiquity, 414.
Home,
primitive, cannot be located in Central Asia, 17; nor in North Germany or
Scandinavia, 380; must be located in the Arctic regions, 215, 275, 363, 380,
387-389; destroyed during the last Glacial epoch, 354, 355 migration therefrom
at the beginning of the post-glacial period, 399.
Culture
and religion, primitive, Schraders view of, 2; in their Arctic Home, 405-408;
higher than the Neolithic European, 408-412.
Languages, unity of, 2; not developed from the Finnic, 17; not of Neolithic
origin, 408; origin of, lost in geological antiquity, 414.
Âshvina-shastra,
a prize, in the race of matutinal deities, 76, 77, 278.
Ashvins, a
dual matutinal deity in the Veda, their path, 68; time of singing the hymn or
prayer of, 76; rescuers of Dîrghatamas, 156-157; physicians of gods, explained
by Max Müller as restorers of the winter sun, 226, 278; their double equipment,
boat and golden chariot, 257; help Indra in his fight with Vṛitra,
277-278; their exploits and character, 280-282; save their protégés from
bottomless darkness, 282-283; inexplainable by the vernal theory, 283-289;
safely deliver Saptavadhri from ten months confinement in the womb of his
mother, 290-293; satisfactorily explained by the Arctic theory, 297; there
three stations, the third hidden, explained, 309-310; their achievements said
to be ancient, that is, inter-Glacial, 427.
Astral,
theory, to explain Vedic myths, 227.
Astronomers,
Hindu, locate Meru at the North Pole, 62; chronology of, 392.
Atharvan,
an ancient sacrificer, 147-148.
Ati-agniṣhṭoma,
a Soma-sacrifice, 190, Ati-râtra, a Soma-sacrifice, 190; introduces and
concludes a sattra, 192, 212; one of
the night-sacrifices, 196-197, 299, extraction and purification of Soma juice
therein at night, 196-197; an Avestic parallel, 197; meaning of ati in, 209; production of a cycle of
day and night therefrom, 209; position of, in the annual round of sacrifices in
ancient times, 212-213.
Atri, an
ancient sacrificer, 147-148.
Atri
Saptavadhri, See Ashvins, and
Saptavadhri.
Aufrecht,
Prof., 80, 82, 429.
Aurora
Borealis, 44, 64.
Aupamanyava,
a Nairukta, correctness of his interpretation of shipi-viṣhṭa, 306, 307, 308.
Aurṇavâbha,
303.
Autumnal,
hundred forts of Vṛitra, meaning of, 204, 230, 234, 267.
Autumns, a
hundred, 362.
Avesta,
passages in, See Index of Avestic
passages. Traditions about the Polar home in, 18, 329-363; method of counting
by seasons in, 265; See Airyana
Vaęjo.
Âyus, a
Soma-sacrifice, 190.
Azi-Dahâk,
248, 286, 287.
BÂDARÂYANA,
on the inauspiciousness of dying in the Dakṣhiṇâyana,
70; on the eternity of the Vedas, 428.
Balder, or
Baldur, the Norse summer god, his dwelling place in the heavens, 375; killed by
Hodur, the winter-god, 377.
Ball, Sir
Robert, supports Crolls theory, 25; but refrains from adopting Crolls
calculations, 32.
Beech age,
11; See Ages.
Bhâṇdârkar,
Dr., on the date of Mâdhariputta and Puḷumâyi, 264.
Bhartṛihari,
316.
Bhâskara,
Bhaṭṭa, 182, 204.
Bhâskarâchârya,
on perpetual day and night, 52; his erroneous view about Uttarâyaṇa, 62.
Bhîṣhma,
a Mahabharata warrior waiting to die in the Uttarâyaṇa,
70.
Bhṛigu,
an ancient sacrificer, 148, 249.
Bhujyu, a
protégé of the Ashvins who rescued him from bottomless darkness, 280, 282, 283,
284-287.
Bloomfield,
Prof., 105, 267.
Bodas,
Râjârâma Shâstri, and M. R. 414.
Brahma-chârin, the sun in the Atharva-Veda, 293.
Brahma-jâyâ,
the Brahmins lost wife, restoration of, 323.
Brâhmaṇas,
the Vedic works, the Vedas partially unintelligible at the time of their
composition, 5; classification of the contents of, 119; their probable aim and
nature, 119-120; on the eternity of the Vedas, 416.
Bṛihaspati,
the son of Angiras, said to be seven-mouthed, 155; his conquest of cows, 186;
helps Indra in the rescue of cows, from Vala, 231; savior of Trita from
distress, 311; seven-mouthed, and ten-headed, 318; connected with the story of
Sarmâ and Paṇis, 322; restoration of his lost wife, 322.
Bronze,
age, See Ages.
Bundahish,
referred to or quoted, 207, 247, 250, 336-338, 348.
Bunsen,
330, 340, 342.
CACUS, a
Greek monster like the Vedic Vala, 184.
Calendar,
Vedic, in the Taittiriya Saṁhitâ, of 12 months and six seasons, 58;
ancient sacrificial, of ten months, 212, 214, 215; Ancient Roman, of ten
months, 283, 213, 368: ancient Celtic and Norse, 370-371; ancient Greek, 371;
primitive Aryan, Arctic, 40, 406.
Calends, of
May and of Winter, 368, 369.
Caspian,
sea, wrongly identified with Rangha, 338.
Celts, the
yearly feasts of, 369; their gods and heroes, 378.
Chailu,
Paul Du. on the long night at Nordkyn, 53; his Lana of the long night referred to 198.
Chalceia,
an ancient Greek yearly feast, 371.
Chaturvirṁsha,
a sacrificial day 192, 193,
Chatvâriṁshayâm sharadi, on the fortieth in autumn, the
meaning of (in Rig. II, 12, 11) 260.
Chavee, on
the original type of the Aryan race, 15.
Chronology,
Purâṇic, of Kalpa Manvantaras, and Maha-yugas 391; length of a Kalpa, and
a Yuga in 392; Raṇgâchâryas and Aiyers views thereon, 393-396 in Manu
and Mahâbhârata, 396, 397.
Vedic,
391, 421, 422.
Chyavâna
the failing (sun), a protégé of the Ashvins who restored him to youth, 156,
226, 280-281.
Circum-polar,
regions, distinguished from the Polar, 40; characteristics of, described and
summed up, 51-56.
Civilization,
Paleolithic and Neolithic, 15, 16; primitive as deduced from comparative
philology, 401; original Vedic or Aryan, inter-glacial, 408-412.
Climate,
geological, equable and uniform over the whole earth till the end of the
Pliocene period, 20; sudden change in, during the Pleistocene, 21; cold in the
glacial, and mild in the interglacial period, 22, 23.
Coins,
bronze, in use amongst undivided Aryans, 411.
Comparative,
Mythology and Philology, q.v.
Couvade the
Irish custom of 306, 317, 379
Corpses,
the custom of not disposing of during winter, 67-71, 252-255
Cows, the
three fold meaning of in the Vedas, 185, 186; the sacrificial session of
lasting for ten months 178-182; its nature explained, 185 .
Cow-stable,
seven-fold and ten-fold 319
Cows Walk,
See Gavam ayanam.
Croll, Dr.,
his theory about the cause of the Glacial period, 25-29; his three periods of
the maximum eccentricity of the earths orbit, 30 his estimate of the duration
and commencement of the Glacial period, 31 questioned by Ball and Newcomb, 31
by Geikie and Huddlestone, 33.
Cuchulainn,
the Celtic Sun-hero making love to a number of Dawns, 371, 373; his encounters
with the Fomori or the Fir Bolg, 397; unaffected by couvade, 378; fighting without rest for several days, 378, 379.
Culture,
primitive, See Civilization.
Currents,
oceanic and aerial, effects of, on climate, 20.
DAITYA, the
meaning of, in the Vendidad, 332, 337; a river in the Bundahish, otherwise
called Dâitik, 337, 333
Darkness,
of the Polar night nature of, 44; ghastly and sunless, as Vṛitras
stronghold, in the Ṛig-Veda, 115, 229; long, too long, the end of, 115;
Agni living long in, 116, 295; Indra driving the Asuras from, 197; Arctic,
synchronous with winter, 253-259; daily and annual struggle between it and
light, 224, 215, 378; protégés of the Ashvins condemned to, 282, 283; the sun
dwelling in, 298, 299.
Dakshinâ, the mother of the sun, 132.
Dakṣhiṇâyana,
or Pitṛiyâna, night of gods, 63; death during, inauspicious, 70;
Bâdarâyaṇas view of, 70; parallel tradition in the Avesta, 71.
Darmesteter,
Prof., the translator of Vendidad and Yasht, his rendering of the Vendidad I
and II, 67; on the nature of the legend of Tishtrya, 206; does not explain why
the appointed time of Tishtrya varies from one to a hundred nights, 207; his
rendering of Tîr Yasht, para 36, 209; his view of the same single source of
waters and light, 209; on the cessation of the flow of waters in winter, 252;
on the transference of the name Hapta
hindu to a new settlement, 272; on the meaning of Dâitya in Vend. I, 337; his identification of the Airyana Vaęjo
examined and rejected, 335-340
Dâsa, Vṛitra, 128, 131.
Dashadyu, a
protégé of Indra, 317, 322.
Dashagvas,
a species of the Aṅgirases, 318-320; See
Navagvas.
Dashamâya,
an enemy of Indra, 317, 321
Dashame yuge, meaning of (in Ṛig. I, 158,
6), 157.
Dasha prapitve, meaning of (in Ṛig Veda VI.,
31, 3), 299-303.
Dâsharâjńa,
Indras fight with ten kings, 321.
Dasharatha,
323,
Dashashipra,
an enemy of Indra, 318.
Dashoṇi,
an enemy of Indra, 317, 321.
Dawn, two
months duration of, at the pole, 44, 45; revolving splendors of, 46, 47; why
styled Dakṣhiṇâ, 133; the
first; commencing the mânushâ-yugâ, 163;
why addressed in the plural number in the Vedas, 88; in the Lettish, Greek and
Celtic mythologies, 366; the dying torch of, in the Finnish mythology, 376; as
a Vedic Deity, See Uṣhas.
Dawn-theory,
3; its scope and application, 222-224.
Day, longer
than 24 hours in the Arctic regions, 51; six-monthly, in the Tâittiriya
Brâhmaṇa, 65; in the Avesta, 66; in Manu and Mahâbhârata, 63, 64;
originally a real observation, 68; of the gods, See Night of the gods.
Day and
Night, a dual deity in the Vedas, 120; two such dual deities 124; diurnal
changes in, over the globe stated, 125; the existence of two dual deities
explainable only on the Arctic theory, 125, 126.
Death,
inauspiciousness of, in the Dakṣhiṇâyana, 70; in winter in the
Parsi scriptures, 252-253.
Debris,
glacial, its action and extent, 22.
December,
the tenth and the last month in the ancient Raman year, its reason explained,
183, 367; denotes an ancient Arctic year of ten months, 184.
Deities,
Vedic, pre-glacial in origin and character, 403,
Deluge, the
Avestic account of, 353; the story of, in the Shatapatha Brâhmaṇa, 358;
said to be of water and not ice, 360; Greek account of, 361; compared with the
Avestic, account 362; See Glacial
period.
Demeter,
the mother-earth rejoicing for six months in the presence of Proserpine, 370,
Deukaliôn,
saved from the deluge in Greek mythology, 361.
Devayâna and Pitriyana originally representing the two-fold division of the year
at the Pole, 67, 68; the path of the gods, same as the path of Mazda in the
Avesta, 69; Vṛitra killed on the borders of, 233
Dhîtis, prayers, seven-fold and ten-fold,
318.
Dîrghatamas,
the legend of, in the Mahâbhârata, 156; in the Ṛig-Veda, id; saved by Ashvins, 156; becoming
decrepit in the tenth yuga, 157;
means the sun disappearing after riding on aerial waters for ten months, 163; a
solar legend of Arctic origin, 163, 214, 238, 284, 296, 326.
Divine,
years, the theory of, 393-397; See
year.
Diviṣhṭi, striving for the day, 228.
Divodâsa,
the father of Sudâs, 321.
Dixit, the
late Mr. S. B., on the equinox in the Kṛittikâs, 42, 392.
Durga, a
commentator on Yâska, 123.
Dvâdashâha,
a twelve days sacrifice, how made up, 192.
Dvâpara,
the third yuga in Puraṇic
mythology, duration and nature of, 392-396.
Dvita, the
Second, a brother of Tṛita, 311.
Dyotana, an
enemy of Indra, 318.
EARTH,
classification of stratified rocks on the surface of, 10; climate on, in early
geological times, 20; obliquity of its axis producing seasons, id., change in the position of axis
improbable, 23-24; diminishing heat of, 24; eccentricity of its orbit producing
glacial periods, according to Dr. Croll, 26, 27; Dr. Balls estimate of the
average heat received by each of its hemispheres, 32; maximum value of the
eccentricity of its orbit, 67; three-fold in the Vedas and the Avesta, 242;
seven-fold, nine-fold and ten-fold, 318.
Edda, a
Norse epic poem, death of Anses in 378.
Ekâha, a
Soma-sacrifice for a single day, 190.
Ekâṣhṭakâ,
the mother, 108.
Ekata, the
First, Tṛita, 311.
Eleven-fold,
division of gods in Vedas, 269, 319.
Equinoxes,
precision of, 26; cycle of, 27; used as a Vedic chronometer, 41.
Eras,
geological, climate 20; See Ages.
Euripides,
on the fountain of the worlds waters, 256.
Evans, 7.
FATHERS,
our ancient, in the Vedas, 147.
Fauna, and
Flora, fossil, distinguish different geological eras, 10; indicate warm climate
early times, 20.
Fedelm, of
nine forms, in Celtic mythology, 373
Finns, not
the originators of the Aryan speech, 17, 19; the circulation of cosmic waters
in the mythology of, 257.
Fir-age,
archaeological, xi.
Fir-Bolg, See Fomori.
Fish, the,
saved by Manu and in turn the savior of Manu, 358;
Five,
milkings, 109; seasons, 167.
Floods,
during deluges, probably glacial in origin, 359.
Fomori, the
Irish representatives of darkness, 377.
Foods,
seven and ten, 318.
Forseti,
Baldurs son, his long sittings at the court, 380.
Fravashis,
showing the path of Mazda to the sun, 69-70; correspond to Vedic Pitṛis,
254; said to have shown the way to the waters and the sun in the Avesta, 254.
GAVÂM-AYANAM,
a ten-months yearly sacrifice, or the Cows Walk, 149; of ten months in the
Aitareya Brâhmaṇa, 179; in the Tâittirîya Saṁhitâ, 180, 181; its
ten months duration said to be an immemorial custom, 182; represents the
ancient Arctic year, 184; compared with the old Roman year of ten months, 184;
meaning of cows (gavâm) in, 185-187;
the type of yearly sacrifices, 192; an outline scheme of, 192; supplemented by
night-sacrifices, 199, 211, 214, 367.
Geikie,
Prof., 7; on the commencement of the post-Glacial period, 13; five glacial and
four inter-Glacial periods according to, 22, 33 35; on the Glacial and
inter-Glacial climate in the Arctic regions, 22-23; on Dr. Crolls theory, 32.
Geldner,
Prof., 301.
Geology,
eras and periods in, enumerated and described, 10, 11, co-relation of
geological and archaeological ages, 10; Iron-Bronze and Neolithic included in
the post-Glacial period and Paleolithic in the Pleistocene or the Glacial, 10;
the date of the commencement of the post-Glacial period in, 11; evidence and
extent of glaciation in the Glacial period, 12, 22; climate in the early ages
of, 20-23; causes of a succession of Glacial periods in, 23; Dr. Crolls view
26-31; estimate of the duration of the Glacial period, 34; latest researches
in, summary of, 34, 35, 36; supports the Avestic account of the deluge of snow
and ice, 355-356; See Archaeology,
Climate, Glacial period.
Gharma, a sacrificial pot, 174-175.
Ghoṣhâ,
a protégé of the Ashvins, 281.
Gilbert,
Mr., his view regarding the commencement of the post-Glacial period, 12.
Giri, a mountain, misinterpretation of, See Parvata.
Glacial,
epoch or period, discovery of its evidence, 4; nature of the evidence of, 21;
existence of two, with an intervening inter-Glacial, conclusively established,
22; extent of Glaciation in Europe and America, 21; climate cold in Glacial,
warm in inter-Glacial, 22; various theories regarding the cause of, 23; Lyells
theory and estimate about its duration, 24; Crolls theory and estimate about
its duration, 25-31; long duration of, 34; Avestic evidence in proof of 353 .
Glaciation,
in northern
Go, a
Soma-sacrifice, 191.
Gods, the
six-monthly night of, in astronomical works, 62; in Manu and Mahâbhârata,
63-64; in the Taittirîya Brâhmaṇa, 65; in the Ṛig-Veda, 67-70; in
other Aryan mythologies, 72; eleven-fold division of, in the, Vedas, 269, 319;
temporary sickness or affliction of in ancient mythology, 378-380.
Go-iṣhṭi, the meaning of, 228.
Gotama, a
Vedic sage, 322.
Grassmann,
Prof., 157, 301.
Griffith,
Mr., his interpretation of Ṛig-Vedic verses stated and examined, 80, 82,
84, 92, 106, 122, 128, 129, 160, 165.
Grill, on
the German world-river, 256.
Grote, his
account of deluge in the Greek mythology, 361.
Gulf-stream,
its effect on climate, 20, 23.
Gwin, and
Gwythur, fighting for the same damsel and having her in turn, 370.
HADES,
conceived as turned upside down, 285.
Hanűmân, a
Purâṇic deity, traced to Vriṣhâkapi, 324.
Hapta-Hindu,
Avestic name for Sapta Sinndhavaḥ, its origin and meaning explained,
267-272; See Sapta Sindhavaḥ.
Hara-Berezaiti,
a mountain in the Avesta; See Alburz.
Haug, Dr.,
138, 330, 423.
Heavens,
spinning round of, in the Ṛig-Veda, 60.
Hebrews,
their belief in the existence of celestial waters, 238, 246.
Heeren,
Prof., 330.
Hęlios, the
sun, his 350 oxen and sheep, 186, 288, 367; sailing from west to east in a
golden boat, 255.
Hemispheres,
the two celestial, upper and lower, referred to and mentioned in the
Ṛig-Veda, 243-244.
Hemanta,
with Shishira, the dual season, 168; represented the yearly sunset, 263.
Hęrakles, names
of the wives of, representing dawns, 366.
Hercules,
the pillars of, 133; the cows of, carried off, by Cacus, 184.
Hermes,
stealing the oxen of Apollon 188.
Herodotus,
mentions people sleeping for six months, 66; his account of the Phoenician
mariners sailing round
Herschel,
Sir, on seasons, 27; error in his view regarding the heat received by each
hemisphere in summer and winter, 29; on the perpetual spring in inter-Glacial
times, 35.
Hesiod, on
the source of earthly rivers, 266.
Himâlayas,
the, upheaved in later geological ages, 20.
Hiraṇya-hasta,
the gold hand, given by the Ashvins, 281, 289.
Historic
period, in
Hodur, the
blind Norse god of winter, killing Baldur, the god of summer, 377.
Home, the
primeval Aryan, not in Central Asia, 17, 380; nor in Finland or Scandinavia,
380-381; but in the Arctic-regions, north of Siberia, in pre-Glacial times,
388, 390; See Airyana Vaęjo.
Homer,
Iliad and Odyssey, 72; his legend of cow-stealing, 188; on the shape of the
earth, 255, on the circulation of aerial waters, 256; draw from the same
mythological source as Vâlmîki, 324; mentions Khalkos or bronze coins, 411.
Horses, of
the sun, sevenfold and tenfold, 169, 317.
Hudleston,
Mr., on the extravagance of Dr. Crolls calculations, 33.
Hukairya,
mountain in the Avesta, 247.
Hundred,
night-sacrifices, 195-200 fortresses or cities destroyed by Indra, leather
straps of Kutsa, 204; inoving in the abode of Indra, and turning on and off the
course of ordinary days, 204.
Hvarenô,
the, Glory in the Avesta, 286.
Hymns,
Vedic, inter-Glacial in substance, post-Glacial in form, 427-430.
ICE, of the
Glacial period, its action, 22; invading Airyana Vaęjo, 353-354; its connection
with the deluge in Indian mythology, 360.
Iliad, the
nature of day in, 72, mythical element in, traceable to primitive Aryan times,
324; mentions bronze coins, 411.
Incarnations,
ten of Indra in the Avesta and of Viṣhṇu in the Purâṇas, 317,
325.
Indra, the
principal Vedic deity, revolving the heavens as on a pole, 60-61; breaking the
car of the dawn, 101; fights with his enemies in darkness, 115, 197; retaliates
Dâsas mischief by producing the long Arctic day, 128-131; assisted by Navagvas
and Dashagvas, 149; his war with Vala at the end of the year, 150, 151, 259;
the only deity worshipped in the Atirâtra sacrifice, 197; master of a hundred
sacrifices, 200-205; his conquest over Vṛitra and release of captive
waters, the sun and the dawn, 227-259; as Vṛitra-han, 234, 275; finds
Shambara on the fortieth of Sharad, 259-261; stealing the solar orb, on the
completion of ten (months), 298-303; assisted by Viṣhṇu in his
fight with Vṛitra, 305, tenfold or ten incarnations of, 317,
seven-killer, and possibly ten-killer, 322; lover of Ahalyâ, 322; exploits of,
said to be ancient or inter-Glacial, 427, 101; See Âpas, Dashagvas, Vala, Vṛitra.
Inter-Glacial,
period, See Glacial.
Irân Veg, See Airyana Vaęjo.
Iranians,
their original home, 331, could not but be Arctic, 342; destroyed during the
glacial period, 357, See Airyana
Vaęjo.
Iron, age, See Ages.
Ivan, the
story of, 376.
JAIMINI,
his view about the eternity of the Vedas, 417-418.
Jaxartes,
the, and the
Jews, See Hebrews.
Jhalkikar,
Mahâmahopâdhyaya, 419.
Jimha-bâra, with mouth downwards, applied to
the nether world, 284, 285.
Jyotish, or
Jyotishṭoma, a Soma-sacrifice, 190-193.
KALI, a
protégé of the Ashvins, 280-281.
Kali-Yuga,
commencement, duration and nature of, 392-397; the age of final settlements,
423.
Kalidasa,
134.
Kalpa, a
higher unit of time in the Purâṇic chronology, 392, 393; repromulgation
of the Vedas at the beginning of each, 420, 425.
Kamadyu, a
protégé of the Ashvins, 280.
Kânheri, an
inscription of, 265.
Kaṇva,
an ancient sacrificer, 747.
Kârle,
inscriptions of, method of counting time in, 264.
Karma-devatas,
220.
Kârttikeya,
See Kumara.
Kashyapa,
the eighth Aditya at Meru, 65.
Kata, a
ditch to keep a dead body in, during winter, 71; Kutsa lying in, 254.
Khalkos, a
bronze coin, phonetically identical with Shulka,
411.
Kings,
seven and three, 319.
Koi, the
dawn, in the Finnish mythology, 376.
Koshchei,
the Russian winter-demon carrying off a princess, 376; legend of, 376.
Kratu, means a destined course, 95, 107;
also denotes a sacrificial performance, 203.
Krichenbauer,
Anton, on the two-fold nature of day in the Iliad and the Odyssey, 72.
Kṛita,
Yuga, commencement and duration of, 392-396; the age of migration, 423.
Kṛittikâs,
or the Pleiades, the period of the vernal equinox being in, 42, 58, 120, 390, 422.
Kubhâ, the
Kuhn,
Prof., 186; on the storm theory, 225.
Kuka, Mr.
M. N., on Tishtryas connection with the year, 209.
Kumâra, the
Child, not surrendered by the mother to the father, the story of, 294; basis of
the Purâṇic story of Kârttikeya, 296.
Kumârila,
his interpretation of the legend of Ahalyâ, 222, 322.
Kutsa,
lying in a kata or a winter grave, 254.
LABRAID of
the Swift Hand on the Sword; King of the Irish Hades, 371.
Laing, Mr.
Samuel, 7; on mans ultimate origin, 413.
Lake-dwellers,
in
Land and
water, distribution of, in early geological ages, 20-22; depression and
elevation of, causing the Ice-age, 25.
Lands,
countries, sixteen, mentioned in the Vendidad, 332-334; represent successive
historical migrations and not merely geographical divisions, 357.
Lapps, how
they count time during long night, 198.
Lassen,
Prof., 269, 330, 362.
Lets,
cosmic circulation of waters in the mythology of, 257; dawn addressed in the
plural in the same, 367.
Leverrier,
M., his tables of the eccentricity of earths orbit, 30; Stockwells
corrections therein, 31.
Lignana,
Prof., his view about the Navagvas and Dashagvas stated and examined, 152-154;
on Numas reform, 367; on Navagvas and Novemsides, 373.
Lockyer,
Sir Norman, ors the orientation of the pyramids, 42; on the ancient Egyptian
calendar, 137; on the cosmic circulation of aerial waters in: the Egpytian
mythology, 258.
Logos, the
Word, 418-419, 426.
Lubbock,
Sir John, 7.
Ludwig,
Prof., on the axis of the earth in the Ṛig-Veda, 61; on the meaning of Ahâni, 84; on the seven rivers, 269.
Lugnassad,
the Celtic summer feast, 369.
Lybia,
Lyell, Sir
Charles, 7; his theory of the cause of the Glacial period, and estimate of its
duration, 24, on the origin of the tradition of the half-yearly day, 67.
MACDONNELL,
Prof., on the nature of the dawn-hymns, 75; extracts from his Vedic mythology
quoted, 28, 230, 280; his view on the double character of Indra discussed, 231,
236; on the brothers of Thrâetaona, 312.
Macrobius,
on Numas reform in the Roman Calendar, 183, 368.
Mâdhava, a
commentator on the Sâma Veda, on the meaning of virűpe, 122, 123.
Mahâvrata,
a Soma-sacrifice, symbolic nature of, 192, 193.
Mahâbhârata,
the, 64, 70, 156, 157, 307, 358, 359, 362, 392, 395, 396, 416.
Mahavira, a
sacrificial pot, 175.
Mahayuga, a
collection of Yugas, its duration discussed, 394.
Mahîdhara,
a commentator on the Vajasaneyî Saṁhita, 161, 301.
Maid, the,
of nine forms, 374.
Mainvô-i-Khard,
357.
Mallinâth,
734.
Mamata, the
mother of Dîrghatamas, 156-157.
Man, his
existence in the quaternary and the tertiary eras, 4, 11, 35.
Mann, a
Smṛiti writer quoted, 63, 64, 238, 407, progenitor of the human race,
saved in the deluge, 358-360; an ancient Vedic sacrificer, 147-148.
Mânuṣhâ yugâ, means human ages and not always
human generations, 158-162; commenced with the first dawn, used to denote the
whole year, 166.
Mârtâṇda,
the still-born Aditya, the derivation and meaning of, 145; See Aditi, Âditya.
Mâtsya-Purâṇa,
account of the deluge in, 358.
Matutinal,
deities, traveling by the Devayâna path, 68-69; following the dawns, 98; the
story of the Ashvins leading the van in the march of, 277, 280.
Max Müller,
Prof. F., on the importance of the discovery of relationship between Sanskrit
and Zend, 2; on the untranslatable portion of the Vedas, 5; on the meaning of Samayâ 79, his explanation of dawns in
the plural number unsatisfactory, 88; on the meaning of yojana, 96; of chhandas,
106, of kshapaḥ, 117, on the
difference between Uṣhâsânaktâ and Ahanî, 124; his explanation of eight
Âdityas improbable, 143; on the meaning of mânuhâ
yugâ, 159; on continuous nights, 166; on the threefold meaning of cows in
the Ṛig-Veda, 185-186; on the stealing of cows inn the Greek mythology
and on the ancient Greek year, 188-189; on the dawn theory, 223-224; on the
Vernal theory, 226; on the derivation of; Apollon, 237; on seven rivers, 269,
his explanation of the Ashvins exploits, 163, 278; his derivation of Trita
improbable, 312; on the resemblance of names in the Iliad with Vedic names,
324; on progressive savages, 412; on Logos, 418.
May, the
calends of, 370, 371.
Mazda, the
path of, 69; followed by waters and the sun, 246.
Meru, or
the North Pole, six months day at, in the Saṁhitâs, 52; seat of the gods,
and six monthly night and day at, 62, 458, 421; in the Taittirîya
Âraṇyaka, 6; permanently illumined by Kaṣhyapa, 142.
Merv, the
Avestic Mouru, 334.
Migrations,
of the Iranian race in succession from Airyana Vaęjo, 335-358; the age of, 421,
423.
Milkings,
five, 109.
Mîmaṁsakas,
their interpretation of Râtri in Râtri-Sattras shown to be incorrect, 195; their view of the eternity of
the Vedas, 417-418.
Mitra, the
representative of half-year long light, 326.
Monogeny,
the theory of, regarding human origin, 413.
Months, of
sunshine, less than twelve in the Arctic regions, 53, 138; sacrificial session
of ten, 176, 132; Avestic, of winter and summer, 345-348; See Dashame yuge, Gavâm ayanam, Seasons Year and Yuga.
Moon,
description of her appearance at the pole, 44.
Mortillet,
M. De., on the type of the primitive Aryans, 15.
Moytura,
the battle of, in the Celtic mythology, fought on the eve of November, 371.
Much, with vi, meaning of, when applied to horses, 129.
Muir, Dr.,
on the yuga system, 63, on the nature
of dawn-hymns, 75; on Aditis legend, 143, 158; on the meaning of parastât, 245; his summary of Fargard I
of the Vendidad, 332, 333; on the deluge, 353-360; on the northern Aryan home,
362, 363; on the eternity of the Vedas, 414, 416, 417, 426, 429.
Myths,
Vedic, necessity of re-examining the explanations of, 39 various theories about
the explanations of, 222 ; disclose an arctic origin, 326, 327.
Mythology,
science of, effect of recent geological discovery on, 3, 4; Vedic, current
interpretation of, 49; theories for the explanation of, 222, comparative,
supports the theory of the
NADERSHAHA,
Mr. E. J. D., on the method of counting time by seasons in the Avesta, 266.
Nâgoji
Bhatt, on Patańjalis view on the eternity of the Vedas, 420.
Nairukta, a
school of Vedic interpreters, 221, 222.
Naiyyâyikas,
their views about the eternity of Vedas, 419.
Navagvas, a
species of the Angirases, generally associated with the Dashagvas, 148, their
sacrificial session of ten months, 149; commenced with the dawn, id., helped Indra in the rescue of the
cows from Vala, 150-151; the root meaning of, 152; Yâskas, Sayaṇas and
Prof. Lignanas view thereon, 152, 153; primarily denote sacrificers for nine
or ten months, 153; compared to Roman Novemsides, Celtic Maid of nine Forms,
and the nine steps of Thor in the Norse mythology, 373, See Angirases, Dashagvas.
Nava-prabhrainshana,
the gliding of the ship on the
Navarâtra,
a nine days sacrifice, 190.
Nau-bandhana,
a peak of the
Nebulous,
matter, in the universe described as watery vapor in the Vedas, 238.
Neco,
Pharoah, king of
Neolithic,
the new Stone age, distinguished from the Paleolithic age, 9; its probable
commencement from 5000 B. C., 11.
Aryan
races in
Nether,
regions, or regions below the earth, known to Vedic bards, 241; conceived as
dark, bottomless, or like an inverted tub in the Vedas, 284-287
Newcomb,
Prof., on the extravagance of Crolls calculations, 31.
Night,
Polar, light and darkness, 229; rivers, 204, in, 44; shorter than six months,
but longer than twenty-four hours, 51; of the gods in the Vedas and the Avesta,
153, 159; long, safely reaching the other end of 117; apprehensions regarding
its end, 118; continuous, 166.
Night-sacrifices, See
Râtri-sattras and Atirâtra.
Nine,
Forms, Maid of, 374.
Nine-fold,
earth, ocean and sky, 319; See
Sevenfold.
Ninety-nine,
forts of Vṛitra, 204, crossed by Indra, 204.
Nir-riti,
the region below the earth, 243.
Nivids,
about Indra, quoted, 228.
Non-Aryan,
races, may be
Nordkyn, or
the
North Pole,
Dr. Warrens book on the origin of the human race at, 6, 384, 399.
Novaia
Zemlia, remnant of an old Polar continent, 37.
November,
the eve of commencement of the ancient Celtic year, 368, 369.
Novemsides,
new or nine Roman-gods, 373.
Numa, his
addition of two months to the ancient Roman year of ten months, 183, 367.
Nu-t, the
Egyptian goddess of the sky, 258.
OAK-AGE,
11; See Archaeology, Ages,
Odin, the
reign of, 72.
Odyssey,
the, nature of day in, 72,
Odysseus,
consuming the oxen of Hęlios, 188.
Okeanos,
the world-surrounding ocean in the Greek mythology, 256; phonetically identical
with Ashayâna, 316.
Oldenburg,
Prof., on continuous nights, 166; on the meaning of div-iṣhṭi 228, his view regarding Indras producing
waters from the mountains, 235, 300.
Orion; the
constellation of, the period of vernal equinox being in, 390, 422.
Ottoro-corra,
the Uttara-Kurus, as mentioned by Ptolemy, 362.
PADA-TEXT,
of the Ṛig-Veda, amendments in, suggested, 86, 300, 301, 303.
Palaeolithic
or the old Stone age, distinguished from the Neolithic, 9; generally
inter-glacial, 11.
Man,
inter-Glacial, 12-13; his culture, 15; proof of his existence in the
interglacial period, 22, 23.
Pańcha-janâh, the five races of men, probably
interglacial, 399.
Pandit, the
late Mr. S. P., on the seven-fold division of Solar rays, 316.
Panjaub,
the land of five rivers and not of seven, 268: rivers in, not denoted by Sapta-Sindhavaḥ, 269; See, Seven rivers.
Parâvat, the nether region, 243.
Parvata, a mountain, misinterpreted into a
cloud in the Vedas, 231, 235.
Parâvrij, a
protégé of the Ashvins, 281.
Patańjali,
his view about the eternity of the Vedas, 421.
Pathyâ
Svasti, the goddess of speech in the northern region, 362.
Peat-mosses,
of
Perpetual,
spring, 38; day and night, 52.
Persephone,
daughter of Zeus, carried by Pluto for six months, 370.
Penka, 4;
his view on the type of the primitive Aryans in
Philology,
comparative, on the division of the year, 372, conclusions regarding the
primitive Aryan culture, deduced therefrom, 408; necessity of modifying the
same, 408-412.
Phoenician,
mariners rounding
Pictel,
Dr., 330.
Pim, Capt.,
his description of the Polar year, 45.
Pipru, an
enemy of Indra, 128.
Pischel,
Dr., on the nature of Vṛishâkapi,
324.
Pitṛiyana,
See Devayâna.
Pleiades, See Kṛittikâs.
Pleistocene,
or the Giacial period 10; changes of climate in, 21, 22.
Plutarch,
on the ancient Roman year, of ten months, 183, 367; on the sleep of the
Phrygian god, 306, 379; on the imprisonment of the Paphagonian gods, 323, 379.
Pole,
north, temperate climate at, in interglacial times 21, 39; existence of a
continent at, in interglacial times, 38; regions round, distinguished from
circumpolar or Arctic regions, 40; star, change in the position of, 41; special
features of the calendar at, 43; characteristics or differential of Polar
regions summed up, 54.
Polygeny,
theory of, 413.
Posehe, 4;
his view regarding the type of the primitive Aryans in
Post-glacial,
period, its commencement about 50 or 60 thousand years ago according to English
geologists, and 7 or 8 thousand according to American geologists, 12; See Glacial period.
Prajâpati,
the creator of the Vedas, 416.
Pralaya,
the deluge, destruction of the Vedas in, 416.
Prâleya, ice, an indication of the glacial
nature of the deluge, 360.
Prapitva, advancing time, the meaning of, in
the Veda, 301.
Pravargya,
a sacrificial ceremony, represents the revival of the sun, 174.
Prehistoric
times, effect of the discovery of comparative philology on the study of, 2; See Archeology, Geology.
Pre-Orion,
period, its commencement, 390; consistent with geological evidence, 391.
Priṣhṭhya,
a kind of Shalâha, 191-193.
Ptolemy,
362.
Pűṣhan,
the sun, the golden boat of, 257, seven-wheeled and ten-rayed, 318.
Purâ, the former or the interglacial
age, 102.
Puraḥ, meaning of, 204.
Purâ-kalpa,
ancient rites and traditions, 119, 429.
Purűravas,
224.
QUARTERNARY,
era, existence of man in, 4, 23; sudden changes of climate in, 21; comprises at
least two, if not more, glacial periods, 22.
Raj s
(singular), meaning of, 242; (dual), the two Rajas, meaning the two hemispheres, 244.
Râma,, the
hero of the Râmâyana, 323, 324; and incarnation of Viṣhṇu, 32,
traceable to the Ṛig-Veda, id.
Râmâyana,
on the three steps of Viṣhṇu, 304; mythical element in, probably
derived from Vedic mythology, 324; the Râmâyana and the Iliad had probably a
common source, 324.
Rangâchârya,
Prof., on the meaning of yuga, 163,
164; on the Kaliyuga, 392, 393.
Rangha, a
mythical river to the west of Alburz in the Avesta, 338; wrongly identified
with the
Ratri-sattras,
the nightly Soma-sacrifices, their nature and classification, 194; the meaning
of Râtri in the appellation, 195; hundred in number, from one to hundred
nights, 195; must have been originally performed (luring night, 198; the reason
of the number of, 199-209.
Râtri-Sűkta,
a hymn to the night, 117.
Râvaṇa,
the ten-mouthed enemy of Râma, 323; throwing gods into prison, 323, probably
suggested by the ten non-sacrificing kings in the Vedas, 323.
Rays, of
the sun, seven and ten, 317,
Rebha, a
protégé of the Ashvins 280, 281, 283.
Religion,
Vedic, pre-glacial in origin, 406, 407.
Rhode, Dr.,
330.
Rhys,
Prof., on the nature of the ancient Teutonic year, 184; his Hibbert lectures,
referred to, 306, 366-384; on the affliction of gods or sun-heroes in the
Celtic mythology, 378-379; on the primeval Aryan home in the Arctic region,
380.
Ṛijishvan,
a friend of Indra, 128.
Ṛijrâshva,
a protégé of the Ashvins slaughtering a hundred sheep, 189, 226, 281, 287, 288.
Ṛikṣhas,
or the seven bears, See Ursâ Major.
Ṛiṣhis,
Vedic, their view about the origin of Vedic hymns, 426-432; distinguished into
older and later, 428; older interglacial, later post, glacial, 430.
Roth,
Prof., on the nature of Saraṇyu, 226.
Rudra-datta,
on the meaning of Atiratra, 209.
SACRIFICE,
or the year, its preservation and revival, 175; annual; an outline of the
scheme of, 192, an yearly cycle of, in ancient times, 212.
Sacrificers,
ancient, 147.
Samudrau, the two oceans, meaning the upper
and lower celestial hemispheres, 244.
Sandhyâ, or
links between the yugas, duration of,
395.
Sânkhyas,
their view about the eternity of the Vedas, 419.
Saporta, M.
de, on the Arctic origin of the human race, 381.
Sapta-vadhri,
the seven-eunuch, a protégé of the Ashvins, 289; praying for safe delivery
after ten months gestation, explained, 291.
Saramâ,
223.
Saraṇyu,
223.
Sarasvatî,
a celestial river in the Veda, 247; described as slaying Vṛitra, 248;
compared to the Avestic Ardvi Sűra Anâhita, 248.
Sato-karahe, of hundred deeds, an adjective of
Verethraghna in the Avesta, 208.
Sattras,
annual, in imitation of the yearly course of the sun, 138; Gavâm-ayanam, the type of the annual, 178; sacrificial sessions,
division of, 190.
Satyavrata,
Pandit, 122.
Savitṛi,
the sun, traversing the universe, 309; his third heaven in Yamas regions, 309.
Sâyaṇa,
his method of explaining difficult Vedic passages, 5, 85, 94, 131, 387;
referred to, 61, 68, 75, 82, 83, 84; on the use of dawns in the plural number,
88, 90; his explanation of thirty dawns, 93, 94, 106; on the thirty yojanas traversed by the dawn, 95; on
the fears about endless nights 119-120; on meaning of virűpe, 122; on much with
vi, 129-131; on the seven rays of
sun, 140; on the existence of the different suns in different quarters, 142; on
the meaning of Navagvas and Dashagvas, 154; on mânushâ yugâ, 158; on kṣhapaḥ,
166; on the meaning of padena, 181;
on the duration of Gavâm-ayanam, 182; on night-sacrifices, 196,
on the meaning of shatakratu, 202; on
Ati-râtra, 203; on chatvârimshyâm sharadi, 260; on the meaning of vadhri,
259, 290; on prapitve, 301, 303; on
the ten-fold division, 316.
Schrader,
Dr., his work on prehistoric antiquities, 2; on neolithic, paleolithic culture,
15, 16; on the ancient division of the year, 372; on primitive Aryan culture
and civilization, 401; on primitive Aryan religion, 406, 407; on the use of
metals in primitive times, 411.
Seasons, of
the year, five in older times, 167; reason of, 168; denotes an Arctic year of
ten months, 170; method of counting time by, in Paleography, 265; in the Avesta,
266.
Separation,
Aryan, caused by the glacial epoch, and not by overcrowding or irresistible
impulse, 366.
Seven,
milking the one, 175.
Seven,
rivers, or Sapta-sindhavah, flowing upwards, 268; cannot be the rivers of the
Panjaub, 268; three-fold, celestial, terrestrial and infernal, 269; associated
with the seven rays or seven suns, 270; released by Indra, cannot but be
celestial, 271.
Sevenfold,
146, 270; and tenfold division of things in Vedas explained on the Arctic
theory, 316, 321.
Shabara, a
commentator on Jaimini, 195, 263.
Shaḷaha, a group of six days, a sacrificial
unit of time, 192.
Shambara,
killed by Indra on the fortieth day of autumn, 261.
Shankarâchârya,
70, 167; on the eternity of Vedas, 418
Sharad, autumn, the last season of
sunshine in the ancient home, 259-261; explained etymologically, 262.
Shatakratu,
an epithet of Indra, 200; means the lord of a hundred sacrifices and not of
hundred powers, 202, 203; purâṇic tradition based on, 201.
Shatapatha-Brâhmaṇa,
an account of deluge in, 358.
Shatarâtra,
a hundred nights sacrifice, denotes the long Arctic night, 201.
Shâtyâyanins,
on the legend of Trita, 312.
Shayu, a
protégé of the Ashvins, 281, 282.
Shikshâ by
Panini quoted, 94.
Shipi-vishṭa, an opprobrious name of
Viṣhṇu, explained by the Arctic theory, 307, 309.
Shoḍashî,
a Soma-sacrifice, 190.
Shulka, a primitive Aryan coin, 411.
Shuṣhṇa,
Indras fight with, on the completion of ten, 299-303
the north
of 388.
Siddhânta-Shiromaṇi,
perpetual day and night in, 52.
Sita, the
wife of Râma, 324 represented as his sister and wife in Buddhistic Jâtakas,
325; probable explanation of, 325.
Soma,
seven-wheeled and ten-rayed, 318.
Soma-sacrifices,
their classification and nature, 190; See
Gâvam-ayanam, and Râtri-sattras.
South, the
sun rising in, 43.
Sphoṭa,
the doctrine of, 418.
Spiegel,
Prof., 66, 207, 209, 330, 332, 352, 354; his identification of Airyana Vaęjo
questioned, 336.
Spring,
perpetual, 35, 38.
Spitzbergen,
warm climate in, be fore the glacial period, 20; remnant of an old Polar
continent, 37.
Stars,
spinning round and round and the Pole 42, 43; motion of, in circum-polar
region, 48, 49.
Stone-age See Ages, Neolithic, Paleolithic.
Storm-theory,
224, 226; its inadequacy to explain the legend of Indra and Vṛitra,
231-235.
Strić,
scratches, glacial, 21.
Sudâs,
engaged in fight with the ten non-sacrificing kings, 321.
Summer,
long and cool in inter-Glacial time, 30, 3
Sun, or
Sűrya, shining and disappearing for six months at the Pole, 44; rising in the
south, 44; a matutinal Vedic deity, 68, southern course of, in Polar regions,
49; described in the Veda as unyoking his car and halting in the midst of
heaven, 128; standing still in the Bible, 129; rocking like a gold swing in the
heaven, 130; different suns for different seasons, 142, 143; dwelling in
darkness, 150, 151, 299; his eye covered with aerial vapor, 169; falling beyond
the heaven, 178; conceived as the son of Dyu and Earth, 291; described as
moving in the mothers womb, while above the horizon, 292; his exit from the
womb after ten months explained, 292; a paradox arising therefrom, 293-294; his
wheel or orb, 297; his chariot a mono-cycle, 299; stolen by Indra, 301; on the
completion of ten, meaning of, 300-301; See,
Horses, Prapitva, Rays.
Sunshine,
of less than twelve months duration at the Pole, 139.
Sűrya, her
marriage with Soma, 223.
Sűrya-siddhânta,
on six-monthly day and night, 62.
Svara-sâman,
days, 192, 193.
TAYLOR,
Canon, his views on the effects of recent scientific discoveries on Mythology,
4; on primitive Aryan races in Europe, 15; on the origin of the Aryan tongue,
17; on the Neolithic origin of the Aryan race, 402.
Telang, the
late Mr., on the description of Râma in the Dasharatha jâtaka, 325.
Ten, kings,
opponents of Sudâs, 321.
Ten-fold, See, Seven-fold.
Tertiary,
era, existence of man in, 4; climate in, 20.
Till, or
boulder clay, 22.
Tishtrya,
his fight with Apaosha in the Avesta, 205; a reproduction of Indras fight with
Vṛitra, 205; lasted for one hundred days, 207; special sacrifices
required to be performed at the time, 208; described as bringing circling years
of men, 208-209.
Thor, the
Norse sun-hero, walking nine paces before being killed by the Serpent, 374.
Thraętaona,
Avestic deity, corresponding to Trita Âptya, 248; restores glory to Yima, 268;
slays Azi-Dahâk, 312; accompanied by his two brothers in the Avesta, 312;
throws up Vifra-Navâza, 375.
Three-fold,
division of the Earth in the Veda and the Avesta, 241.
Thridi, old
Norse name of Odin, same as Trita, 313.
Tongue,
Aryan, not developed from the Finnic, 17; its origin lost in geological
antiquity, 413.
Tradition,
Pre-glacial, how preserved in the Vedas, 398-399; in the Avesta, 18, 354-356.
Traitan,
the tormenter of Dîrghatamas, 156.
Tree of
Varuṇa, with bottom up, 286.
Treta, the
second Puraṇic era, duration of, 393-396; nature of 423.
Triath, an
old Irish word for sea, phonetically same as Trita, 313.
Trita
Aptya, a Vedic deity assisting Indra in his fight with Vṛitra, 248; Avestic
Thraętaona, 310, urges Indra to fight, 311; falls into a well, 311; derivation
of his name, 312; Prof. Max Müllers view untenable, 312; denotes the third
part of the year 311, 313; explained on the Arctic theory, 313; compared to
Ivan in the Slavonic mythology, 375.
Triton,
Greek, phonetically equivalent to Vedic Trita, 313.
Twilight,
duration of, at the Pole, 58; of the gods in the Norse mythology, 72.
Two,
creating the five, 175.
UCHATHYA,
the father of Dirghatamas in the Ṛig-Veda, 156.
Uchchâ-budhna, with the bottom up, applied to the
nether world, 285.
Ukko, the
descending stream of, in the Finnish Mythology, 256.
Ukthya, a
Soma-sacrifice, 190.
Upsala, an
ancient Aryan site, 381.
Ursâ Major,
the constellation of the Great Bear, high altitude of, in Ṛig-Veda, 61;
above the path of the sun, 134.
Urvashî,
224.
Uṣhas,
the Vedic goddesses of morn, the most beautiful of Vedic deities, 75; its
physical character unobscured, id;
lasted long enough to allow the recitation of the whole Ṛig-Veda,
77; or to
admit of a five-fold or three-fold division, 78; said to shine perpetually in
old times, 78; difference between it and vi-uṣhṭi,
id.; three Vedic texts proving that
it lasted continuously for several days, 79, 366; addressed in plural as well
as singular 88; not honorifically as supposed by Yâska, 88; nor owing to the
number of presiding deities, 89; nor by reference to the consecutive daily
dawns, go; the plural represents one long continuous dawn divided into many
day-long portions, go; thirty dawns or dawn-sisters in the Taittirîya
Saṁhitâ, 90, 103-112; in the Ṛig-Veda, 94; a continuous team of
thirty dawns in the Taittirîya Brâhmaṇa, 97-98; all moving round and
round in the same plane, 95; their circular motion in the Ṛig-Veda, 97;
the characteristics of Vedic dawns summed up, 99-100; variation in the duration
of, illustrated by the story of Indras shattering its car, 101; all prove its
Polar character, 102.
Utathya,
the father of Dirghatamas in the Mahâbhârata, 156.
Utsarginam avajsam, a sacrificial session lasting for
a lunar year, 193.
Uttara, the north, why so called, 134.
Uttarâyana,
originally equinoctial, misunderstood by Bhâskara, 52-53.
Uttarakuras,
362.
VACH, the
speech, eternity of, 415.
Vadhrimati,
a protégé of the Ashvins, 282, 289.
Vâjapeya, a
Some-sacrifice, 190.
Vala,
Indras enemy, vanquished with the assistance of Navagvas at the end of the
year, 149, 150, 151, 155, 199, 231, 259, 260; his cave split by the word of
Bṛihaspati, 186.
Vâlmîki,
drew probably from the same mythological source as Homer, 324.
Vâmana, the
fifth incarnation of Viṣhṇu, 304.
Vandana,
rescued by the Ashvins, 150, 226, 280, 282.
Vunguhi, a
river in the Airyana Vaęjo but not mentioned in the Vendidad, 337.
Vanna-issa,
the old father in the Finnish Mythology, 376
Vara, of
Yima, the annual sunrise and year-long day in, 67, 350
Vartikâ,
rescued by the Ashvins, Yâskas view about, 221.
Varuṇa,
ruler of the waters, 163, 238; his tree and region turned upside down, 286;
representative of long Arctic darkness, and hence described as embracing the
nights, 326.
Vedas,
still imperfectly understood, 5, 39; new key to their interpretation supplied
by the latest geological researches, 6; strata of, not necessarily in
chronological order, 42; how preserved, 398, 399; eternity of, discussed, 414,
430; Manus and Vyâsas view on the eternity of, 416; Jaiminis view, 417;
grammarians, Badârâyaṇas, Naiyyâyikas view, 418, Sâṅkhyasview,
419; Patańjails view, 420; theological and historical views compared, 424,
425; the view of Vedic Ṛiṣhis themselves, 426, 429; lost in the
deluge and repromulgated afterwards by the Ṛiṣhis, 416; practically
eternal in substance though not in form, 420.
Veh, See Vanguhi.
Verethraghna,
the Avestic form of Vṛitrahan, 205 ten incarnations 325.
Vernal, theory,
227; its inadequacy to explain the legends of the Ashvins, 283, 287.
Vifra
Navâza, compared with the Navagvas, 374.
Vigfusson,
Dr. on the ancient Norse year commencing in October, 371.
Vimada, a
protégé of the Ashivins, 280.
Vipras, or sacrificers seven and ten, 318.
Vîras, or warriors, seven, nine and ten,
320 321.
Virűpas, an
epithet of the Aṅgirases, 155.
Virűpe, means unlike in length and not
unlike in hue, 122.
Viṣhnâpű,
a protégé of the Ashvins, 280.
Viṣhṇu,
as a Vedic deity, nature of his three strides, 303, 304; helped Indra in the
Vṛitra-fight, 305, his third step identical with the nether world, 306
his sleep for four months on his serpent-bed, id, why called Shipivishta,
306, 309; meaning of Shipivishta 307,
308; indicates the long disappearance of the sun below the horizon in the
Arctic region 309.
Viṣhpalâ,
Ashvins protégé, 226, 281.
Viṣhuvan,
the central day in the Soma-sacrifice, 192.
Vishvaka,
relieved by the Ashvins, 280.
Vivasvat,
the ten of, 176; the father of Manu, 361.
Vouru-Kasha,
the gathering place of waters in the Avesta, 206, 246; the scene of Tishtryas
fight with Apaosha, 206.
Vṛiṣhâkapâyî,
223.
Vṛiṣhâkapi,
the probable Vedic ancestor of Hanűmân, 324.
Vṛitra,
the traditional enemy of Indra, engulfed in long darkness, 115; Yâskas view
about the nature of, 221; believed to imprison the waters in the rain-cloud,
224; four-fold character or effect of his fight with Indra, 227, 228; his dark
and hidden watery abode 229; simultaneous release of light and water by the
killing of Vṛitra, 231- 237; utterly inexplicable on the Storm theory,
232, 237; explained by the theory of the cosmic circulation of aerial waters,
723, 240, 255; and by the Arctic theory, 258; the date of Indras fight with,
259, 267; See Apaḥ Indra,
Shambara, Seven rivers, Vala.
Vṛitṛahan, the killer of Vṛitra, an
ancient Arctic deity, 274, 275.
Vṛitra-tűrya,
fight with Vṛitra, 227.
Vyâsa, his
view about the eternity of the Vedas, 416, 420.
WALLACE,
supports Lyells theory of the Glacial period, 24.
Wallis,
Mr., his erroneous view that the nether world was unknown to the Vedic bards,
239, 242.
Warren,
Dr., on the original home of the human race at the North Pole, 6;
on the
existence of a Polar continent in primitive times, 37; his description of the
Polar dawn with its revolving splendors 46, 47; on Greek traditions
of
six-monthly day, 72; on the cosmic circulation of aerial waters, 255; on the
conception of anti-podal underworld as an inverted tub, 285; on the cradle of
the human race, 383-384.
Waters,
captivated by Vṛitra, 227, 228; divided into terrestrial and celestial,
237, 238; nature of the celestial, id.;
movement of the celestial or aerial in the Avesta, 247, 248; moving upwards,
249; cessation of the movements of, in winter, 253, cosmic circulation of, in
other mythologies, 255, 256; See
Apaḥ.
Weber,
Prof., on the Iliad and the Râmâyana, 325.
West, Dr.,
on the meaning of Dâîtîk in the Vendidad, 337.
Wheel, of
the sun, stolen by Indra, 297; See
sun.
Wieland,
the German smith, 188.
Winter, at
perihelion and aphelion difference between, 27; succession of these after
21,000 years, 27; short and warm in the interglacial, and long and cold in the
glacial times, 28, 29; longer or shorter than summer by 33 days, 29; death in,
regarded as inauspicious, 70; cessation of the flow of waters in, 252; of ten
months id., the Airyana Vaęjo, 341;
one hundred winters, 366.
Calends,
the night of, in Celtic mythology, 368.
Nights,
the Norse feast of, 371.
Woden, the
disappearance of the gold ring of, 379.
Word, the
final source of every thing, 418; compared to Logos, 418-426.
YASKA, his
method of interpreting difficult Vedic passages, 6, 63, 75, 79, 319, 387; on
the use of dawns in the plural number, 88, 90, 93, on the seven rays of the
sun, 140; on the etymology of Navagvas, 152; silent on Ati-râtra, 196; on the schools of Vedic interpretation, 219; on
Vṛitra, 221; on the cup with the mouth downwards 282, on the Pada text, 303; on Viṣhṇus
three steps, 303; on shipivishta,
307; on the seven rays of the sun, 316.
Yama, the
agents of, 148.
Year,
Polar, distribution of light and darkness during, 45; circumpolar described,
51; ancient Vedic of 360 days and 6 seasons, 58-59; old Egyptian, traces of,
how preserved, 137; sacrificial, how preserved and revived, 175, ancient Roman,
of ten months, 183, compared to annual sacrificial sattra of ten months 183; ancient Celtic, closed with the last day
of October, 369; old Norse, 371; divine, or of the gods, the theory of 393; how
originated, 395; Arctic, before Aryan separation in inter-glacial times,
404-405.
Year-god,
five-footed and resting on watery vapors, 169.
Yima, the
Avestic Yama, his Vara or enclosure, 350; annual sun, rise therein 350; proves
its Polar position, 351; prophecy of its destruction, 353.
Yuga,
meaning of, in the Ṛig-Veda 158; of two kinds, divine and human, 159;
both denote a period of time and not a generation of men 159, 161, denote a
period of the year, 162, singly it denoted one month, 163, Raṅgâchâryas
view, thereon 164.
Pűrvyam yugam, the former age, meaning
time before the present Kalpa, 145.
Purâṇic, cycle of four equal to 10,000 years, duration and character of,
392-399; Raṇgâchâryas and Aiyers view on the duration of, 393; See, Ages, Dashameyuge, Kali,
Tṛita, &c.
ZEUS, born
bred and buried according to Cretan tradition, 406, reduced to a sinewless mass
by Typho, 407.
Zimmer,
Prof., his view that the nether regions were known to the Vedic bards
supported, 239-240.