of Babylon and the papyri of Egypt, we should have to admit that some
of these documents are more ancient than any date we dare as yet
assign to the hymns collected in the ten books of the Rig-Veda.]
[Footnote 128: A na_h_ bhara vya_ng_anam gam a_s_vam abhya_ng_anam
Sa_k_a mana hira_n_yaya.]
[Footnote 129: Grassman translates, "Zugleich mit goldenem Geraeth;"
Ludwig, "Zusammt mit goldenem Zierrath;" Zimmer, "Und eine Mana gold."
The Petersburg Dictionary explains mana by "ein bestimmtes Geraeth oder
Gewicht" (Gold).]
[Footnote 130: According to Dr. Haupt, Die Sumerisch-akkadische
Sprache, p. 272, mana is an Akkadian word.]
[Footnote 131: According to the weights of the lions and ducks
preserved in the British Museum, an Assyrian mina was = 7747 grains.
The same difference is still preserved to the present day, as the
_man_ of Shiraz and Bagdad is just double that of Tabraz and Bushir,
the average of the former being 14.0 and that of the latter only
6.985. See Cunningham, "Journal of the Asiatic Society," Calcutta,
1881, p. 163.]
[Footnote 132: Preface to the fourth volume of my edition of the
Rig-Veda, p. li.]
[Footnote 133: Vai_s_vadevam on the full-moon of Phalguna,
Varu_n_apraghasa_h_ on the full-moon of Asha_dh_a, Sakamedha_h_ on the
full-moon of K_ri_ttika, see Boehtlingk, Dictionary, s. v.]
[Footnote 134: See Vish_n_u-sm_ri_ti, ed. Jolly LIX. 4; Aryabha_t_a,
Introduction.]
[Footnote 135: See Preface to vol. iv. of Rig-Veda, p. li. (1862).]
[Footnote 136: See Zimmer, Altindisches Leben, pp. 352-357.]
[Footnote 137: L. c. p. lxx.]
[Footnote 138: See Zimmer, Altindisches Leben, p. xlvii.]
[Footnote 139: In the Mahabharata and elsewhere the _K_inas are
mentioned among the Dasyus or non-Aryan races in the north and in the
east of India. King Bhagadatta is said to have had an army of _K_inas
and Kiratas,(B1) and the Pa_nd_avas are said to reach the town of the
King of the Kulindas, after having passed through the countries of
_K_inas, Tukharas, and Daradas. All this is as vague as ethnological
indications generally are in the late epic poetry of India. The only
possibly real element is that Kirata and _K_ina soldiers are called
ka_nk_ana, gold or yellow colored,(B2) and compared to a forest of
Kar_n_ikaras, which were trees with yellow flowers.(B3) In Mahabh. VI.
9, v. 373, vol. ii., p. 344, the _K_inas occur in company with
Kambo_g_as and Yavanas, which again conveys nothing definite.
B1: Lassen, i. p. 1029; Mahabh. III. 117, v. 12,350; vol. i. p. 619.
B2: Mahabh. V. 18, v. 584; vol. ii. p. 106.
B3: See Va_k_aspatya s. v.; Ka_sk_it Kar_n_ikaragaura_h_.
Chinese scholars tell us that the name of China is of modern origin,
and only dates from the Thsin dynasty or from the famous Emperor Shi
hoang-ti, 247 B.C. But the name itself, though in a more restricted
sense, occurs in earlier documents, and may, as Lassen thinks,(B4)
have become known to the Western neighbors of China. It is certainly
strange that the _Sinim_ too, mentioned in Isaiah xlix. 12, have been
taken by the old commentators for people of China, visiting Babylon as
merchants and travellers.
B4: Lassen, vol. i. p. 1029, n. 2.]
[Footnote 140: I prefer now the reading of the Ka_n_va-_s_akha,
abhidudrava, instead of atidudrava or adhidudrava of the other MSS.
See Weber, Ind. Streifen, i. p. 11.]
[Footnote 141: It is not necessary to establish literary borrowing;
for on the theory of Bible inspiration and trustworthiness we must
assume that the Aryans as well as the Semites were saved in the ark.
The story of _a_ flood supports the story of _the_ flood to a certain
extent.--AM. PUBS.]
[Footnote 142: VII. 1, 5, 1 seq.; Muir, i. p. 52; Colebrooke, Essays,
i. 75.]
[Footnote 143: VII. 5, 1, 5; Muir, "Original Sanskrit Texts," i. p.
54.]
[Footnote 144: Weber, "Indische Streifen," i. p. 11.]
[Footnote 145: See Lecture V. p. 172.]
[Footnote 146: More accurately Ramanu, the Vul or storm-god of George
Smith; and the god of the Mind and higher intellect at Babylon. His
arcane name is said to have been Yav, [Hebrew: YHWH] or [Greek:
Iao].--A. W.]
[Footnote 147: See Haupt, "Der Keilinschriftliche Sintfluthbericht,
1881," p. 10.]
[Footnote 148: See M. M., "Genesis and Avesta" (German translation),
i. p. 148.]
[Footnote 149: No one is more competent than the learned author to
give a verdict on all the evidence which has been gathered; but we are
only at the beginning of research into the intercourse of mankind in
remote times, and much that was once thought home-grown has already
been traced to distant points. It is in the general line of progress
in research that more evidence may be expected to connect Vedic
thought with other cultures.--AM. PUBS.]
LECTURE V.
THE LESSONS OF THE VEDA.
Although there is hardly any department of learning which has not
received new light and new life from the ancient literature of India,
yet nowhere is the light that comes to us from India so important, so
novel, and so rich as in the study of religion and mythology. It is to
this subject therefore that I mean to devote the remaining lectures of
this course. I do so, partly because I feel myself most at home in
that ancient world of Vedic literature in which the germs of Aryan
religion have to be studied, partly because I believe that for a
proper understanding of the deepest convictions, or, if you like, the
strongest prejudices of the modern Hindus, nothing is so useful as a
knowledge of the Veda. It is perfectly true that nothing would give a
falser impression of the actual Brahmanical religion than the ancient
Vedic literature, supposing we were to imagine that three thousand
years could have passed over India without producing any change. Such
a mistake would be nearly as absurd as to deny any difference between
the Vedic Sanskrit and the spoken Bengali. But no one will gain a
scholarlike knowledge or a true insight into the secret springs of
Bengali who is ignorant of the grammar of Sanskrit; and no one will
ever understand the present religious, philosophical, legal, and
social opinions of the Hindus who is unable to trace them back to
their true sources in the Veda.
I still remember how, many years ago, when I began to publish for the
first time the text and the commentary of the Rig-Veda, it was argued
by a certain, perhaps not quite disinterested party, that the Veda was
perfectly useless; that no man in India, however learned, could read
it, and that it was of no use either for missionaries or for any one
else who wished to study and to influence the native mind. It was said
that we ought to study the later Sanskrit, the Laws of Manu, the epic
poems, and, more particularly, the Pura_n_as. The Veda might do very
well for German students, but not for Englishmen.
There was no excuse for such ignorant assertions even thirty years
ago, for in these very books, in the Laws of Manu, in the Mahabharata,
and in the Pura_n_as, the Veda is everywhere proclaimed as the highest
authority in all matters of religion.[150] "A Brahman," says Manu,
"unlearned in holy writ, is extinguished in an instant like dry grass
on fire." "A twice-born man (that is, a Brahma_n_a, a Kshatriya, and a
Vai_s_ya) not having studied the Veda, soon falls, even when living,
to the condition of a _S_udra, and his descendants after him."
How far this license of ignorant assertion may be carried is shown by
the same authorities who denied the importance of the Veda for a
historical study of Indian thought, boldly charging those wily
priests, the Brahmans, with having withheld their sacred literature
from any but their own caste. Now, so far from withholding it, the
Brahmans have always been striving, and often striving in vain, to
make the study of their sacred literature obligatory on all castes
except the _S_udras, and the passages just quoted from Manu show what
penalties were threatened if children of the second and third castes,
the Kshatriyas and Vai_s_yas, were not instructed in the sacred
literature of the Brahmans.
At present the Brahmans themselves have spoken, and the reception they
have accorded to my edition of the Rig-Veda[151] and its native
commentary, the zeal with which they have themselves taken up the
study of Vedic literature, and the earnestness with which different
sects are still discussing the proper use that should be made of their
ancient religious writings, show abundantly that a Sanskrit scholar
ignorant of, or, I should rather say, determined to ignore the Veda,
would be not much better than a Hebrew scholar ignorant of the Old
Testament.
I shall now proceed to give you some characteristic specimens of the
religion and poetry of the Rig-Veda. They can only be few, and as
there is nothing like system or unity of plan in that collection of
1017 hymns, which we call the Sa_m_hita of the Rig-Veda, I cannot
promise that they will give you a complete panoramic view of that
intellectual world in which our Vedic ancestors passed their life on
earth.
I could not even answer the question, if you were to ask it whether
the religion of the Veda was _polytheistic_ or _monotheistic_.
Monotheistic, in the usual sense of that word, it is decidedly not,
though there are hymns that assert the unity of the Divine as
fearlessly as any passage of the Old Testament, or the New Testament,
or the Koran. Thus one poet says (Rig-Veda I. 164, 46): "That which is
_one_, sages name it in various ways--they call it Agni, Yama,
Matari_s_van."
Another poet says: "The wise poets represent by their words Him who is
one with beautiful wings, in many ways."[152]
And again we hear of a being called Hira_n_yagarbha, the golden germ
(whatever the original of that name may have been), of whom the poet
says:[153] "In the beginning there arose Hira_n_yagarbha; he was the one
born lord of all this. He established the earth and this sky. Who is the
god to whom we shall offer our sacrifice?" That Hira_n_yagarbha, the poet
says, "is alone God above all gods" (ya_h_ deveshu adhi deva_h_ eka_h_
asit)--an assertion of the unity of the Divine which could hardly be
exceeded in strength by any passage from the Old Testament.
But by the side of such passages, which are few in number, there are
thousands in which ever so many divine beings are praised and prayed
to. Even their number is sometimes given as "thrice eleven"[154] or
thirty-three, and one poet assigns eleven gods to the sky, eleven to
the earth, and eleven to the waters,[155] the waters here intended
being those of the atmosphere and the clouds. These thirty-three gods
have even wives apportioned to them,[156] though few of these only
have as yet attained to the honor of a name.[157]
These thirty-three gods, however, by no means include all the Vedic
gods, for such important deities as Agni, the fire, Soma, the rain,
the Maruts or Storm-gods, the A_s_vins, the gods of Morning and
Evening, the Waters, the Dawn, the Sun are mentioned separately; and
there are not wanting passages in which the poet is carried away into
exaggerations, till he proclaims the number of his gods to be, not
only thirty-three, but three thousand three hundred and
thirty-nine.[158]
If therefore there must be a name for the religion of the Rig-Veda,
polytheism would seem at first sight the most appropriate. Polytheism,
however, has assumed with us a meaning which renders it totally
inapplicable to the Vedic religion.
Our ideas of polytheism being chiefly derived from Greece and Rome, we
understand by it a certain more or less organized system of gods,
different in power and rank, and all subordinate to a supreme God, a
Zeus or Jupiter. The Vedic polytheism differs from the Greek and Roman
polytheism, and, I may add, likewise from the polytheism of the
Ural-Altaic, the Polynesian, the American, and most of the African
races, in the same manner as a confederacy of village communities
differs from a monarchy. There are traces of an earlier stage of
village-community life to be discovered in the later republican and
monarchical constitutions, and in the same manner nothing can be
clearer, particularly in Greece, than that the monarchy of Zeus was
preceded by what may be called the septarchy of several of the great
gods of Greece. The same remark applies to the mythology of the
Teutonic nations also.[159] In the Veda, however, the gods worshipped
as supreme by each sept stand still side by side. No one is first
always, no one is last always. Even gods of a decidedly inferior and
limited character assume occasionally in the eyes of a devoted poet a
supreme place above all other gods.[160] It was necessary, therefore,
for the purpose of accurate reasoning, to have a name, different from
_polytheism_, to signify this worship of single gods, each occupying
for a time a supreme position, and I proposed for it the name of
_Kathenotheism_, that is, a worship of one god after another, or of
_Henotheism_, the worship of single gods. This shorter name of
_Henotheism_ has found more general acceptance, as conveying more
definitely the opposition between _Monotheism_, the worship of one
only God, and _Henotheism_, the worship of single gods; and, if but
properly defined, it will answer its purpose very well. However, in
researches of this kind we cannot be too much on our guard against
technical terms. They are inevitable, I know; but they are almost
always misleading. There is, for instance, a hymn addressed to the
_Indus_ and the rivers that fall into it, of which I hope to read you
a translation, because it determines very accurately the geographical
scene on which the poets of the Veda passed their life. Now native
scholars call these rivers d e v a t a s or deities, and European
translators too speak of them as gods and goddesses. But in the
language used by the poet with regard to the Indus and the other
rivers, there is nothing to justify us in saying that he considered
these rivers as _gods_ and _goddesses_, unless we mean by _gods_ and
_goddesses_ something very different from what the Greeks called
River-gods and River-goddesses, Nymphs, Najades, or even Muses.
And what applies to these rivers applies more or less to all the
objects of Vedic worship. They all are still oscillating between what
is seen by the senses, what is created by fancy, and what is
postulated by the understanding; they are things, persons, causes,
according to the varying disposition of the poets; and if we call them
gods or goddesses, we must remember the remark of an ancient native
theologian, who reminds us that by d e v a t a or deity he means no more
than the object celebrated in a hymn, while _R i_ s h i or seer means no
more than the subject or the author of a hymn.
It is difficult to treat of the so-called gods celebrated in the Veda
according to any system, for the simple reason that the concepts of
these gods and the hymns addressed to them sprang up spontaneously and
without any pre-established plan. It is best perhaps for our purpose
to follow an ancient Brahmanical writer, who is supposed to have lived
about 400 B.C. He tells us of students of the Veda, before his time,
who admitted three deities only, viz., A g n i or fire, whose place is on
the earth; V a y u or I n d r a, the wind and the god of the thunderstorm,
whose place is in the air; and S u r y a, the sun, whose place is in the
sky. These deities, they maintained, received severally many
appellations, in consequence of their greatness, or of the diversity
of their functions, just as a priest, according to the functions which
he performs at various sacrifices, receives various names.
This is _one_ view of the Vedic gods, and, though too narrow, it
cannot be denied that there is some truth in it. A very useful
division of the Vedic gods might be made, and has been made by Yaska,
into _terrestrial_, _aerial_, and _celestial_, and if the old Hindu
theologians meant no more than that all the manifestations of divine
power in nature might be traced back to three centres of force, one in
the sky, one in the air, and one on the earth, he deserves great
credit for his sagacity.
But he himself perceived evidently that this generalization was not
quite applicable to all the gods, and he goes on to say: "Or, it may
be, these gods are all distinct beings, for the praises addressed to
them are distinct, and their appellations also." This is quite right.
It is the very object of most of these divine names to impart distinct
individuality to the manifestations of the powers of nature; and
though the philosopher or the inspired poet might perceive that these
numerous names were but names, while that which was named was _one_
and _one_ only, this was certainly not the idea of most of the Vedic
_Ri_shis themselves, still less of the people who listened to their
songs at fairs and festivals. It is the peculiar character of that
phase of religious thought which we have to study in the Veda, that in
it the Divine is conceived and represented as manifold, and that many
functions are shared in common by various gods, no attempt having yet
been made at organizing the whole body of the gods, sharply
separating one from the other, and subordinating all of them to
several or, in the end, to one supreme head.
Availing ourselves of the division of the Vedic gods into terrestrial,
aerial, and celestial, as proposed by some of the earliest Indian
theologians, we should have to begin with the gods connected with the
earth.
Before we examine them, however, we have first to consider one of the
earliest objects of worship and adoration, namely _Earth and Heaven_,
or _Heaven and Earth_, conceived as a divine couple. Not only in
India, but among many other nations, both savage, half-savage, or
civilized, we meet with Heaven and Earth as one of the earliest
objects, pondered on, transfigured, and animated by the early poets,
and more or less clearly conceived by early philosophers. It is
surprising that it should be so, for the conception of the Earth as an
independent being, and of Heaven as an independent being, and then of
both together as a divine couple embracing the whole universe,
requires a considerable effort of abstraction, far more than the
concepts of other divine powers, such as the Fire, the Rain, the
Lightning, or the Sun.
Still so it is, and as it may help us to understand the ideas about
Heaven and Earth, as we find them in the Veda, and show us at the same
time the strong contrast between the mythology of the Aryans and that
of real savages (a contrast of great importance, though I admit very
difficult to explain), I shall read you first some extracts from a
book, published by a friend of mine, the Rev. William Wyatt Gill, for
many years an active and most successful missionary in Mangaia, one of
those Polynesian islands that form a girdle round one quarter of our
globe,[161] and all share in the same language, the same religion,
the same mythology, and the same customs. The book is called "Myths
and Songs from the South Pacific,"[162] and it is full of interest to
the student of mythology and religion.
The story, as told him by the natives of Mangaia, runs as
follows:[163]
"The sky is built of solid blue stone. At one time it almost
touched the earth; resting upon the stout broad leaves of the
t e v e (which attains the height of about six feet) and the
delicate indigenous arrow-root (whose slender stem rarely
exceeds three feet).... In this narrow space between earth
and sky the inhabitants of this world were pent up. Ru, whose
usual residence was in Avaiki, or the shades, had come up for
a time to this world of ours. Pitying the wretched confined
residence of the inhabitants, he employed himself in
endeavoring to raise the sky a little. For this purpose he
cut a number of strong stakes of different kinds of trees,
and firmly planted them in the ground at Rangimotia, the
centre of the island, and with him the centre of the world.
This was a considerable improvement, as mortals were thereby
enabled to stand erect and to walk about without
inconvenience. Hence Ru was named 'The sky-supporter.'
Wherefore Teka sings (1794):
'Force up the sky, O Ru,
And let the space be clear!'
"One day when the old man was surveying his work, his
graceless son Maui contemptuously asked him what he was doing
there. Ru replied: 'Who told youngsters to talk? Take care of
yourself, or I will hurl you out of existence.'
"'Do it, then,' shouted Maui.
"Ru was as good as his word, and forthwith seized Maui, who
was small of stature, and threw him to a great height. In
falling Maui assumed the form of a bird, and lightly touched
the ground, perfectly unharmed. Maui, now thirsting for
revenge, in a moment resumed his natural form, but
exaggerated to gigantic proportions, and ran to his father,
saying:
'Ru, who supportest the many heavens,
The third, even to the highest, ascend!'
"Inserting his head between the old man's legs, he exerted all
his prodigious strength, and hurled poor Ru, sky and all, to
a tremendous height--so high, indeed, that the blue sky could
never get back again. Unluckily, however, for the
sky-supporting Ru, his head and shoulders got entangled among
the stars. He struggled hard, but fruitlessly, to extricate
himself. Maui walked off well pleased with having raised the
sky to its present height, but left half his father's body
and both his legs ingloriously suspended between heaven and
earth. Thus perished Ru. His body rotted away, and his bones
came tumbling down from time to time, and were shivered on
the earth into countless fragments. These shivered bones of
Ru are scattered over every hill and valley of Mangaia, to
the very edge of the sea."
What the natives call "the bones of Ru" (t e i v i o R u) are pieces of
pumice-stone.
Now let us consider, first of all, whether this story, which with
slight variations is told all over the Polynesian islands,[164] is
pure nonsense, or whether there was originally some sense in it. My
conviction is that nonsense is everywhere the child of sense, only
that unfortunately many children, like that youngster Maui, consider
themselves much wiser than their fathers, and occasionally succeed in
hurling them out of existence.
It is a peculiarity of many of the ancient myths that they represent
events which happen every day, or every year, as having happened once
upon a time.[165] The daily battle between day and night, the yearly
battle between winter and spring, are represented almost like
historical events, and some of the episodes and touches belonging
originally to these constant battles of nature, have certainly been
transferred into and mixed up with battles that took place at a
certain time, such as, for instance, the siege of Troy. When
historical recollections failed, legendary accounts of the ancient
battles between Night and Morning, Winter and Spring, were always at
hand; and, as in modern times we constantly hear "good stories," which
we have known from our childhood, told again and again of any man whom
they seem to fit, in the same manner, in ancient times, any act of
prowess, or daring, or mischief, originally told of the sun, "the
orient Conqueror of gloomy Night," was readily transferred to and
believed of any local hero who might seem to be a second Jupiter, or
Mars, or Hercules.