वेदों की प्राचीनता एवं काल-निर्णय / ओरायन (लोकमान्य बाल गंगाधर तिलक - खगोलीय वैदिक शोध)

86 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS. 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 ex- plicit 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 yat samayâ bhavâti yâ vyûṣhur yâsh cha nûnaṁ vyuchhân । Anu pûrvâḥ kṛipate vâvashânâ pradîdhyânâ joṣham anyâbhir eti ॥ The first quarter of the verse is rather difficult. The words are kiyâti â yat samayâ bhavâti, and Sâyaṇa, whom Wilson follows, understands samayâ to mean 'near'. Prof. Max Muller translates samayâ (Gr. Omos, Lat. Simul,) by 'together', 'at once'; while Roth, Grassmann and Aufrecht take samayâ bhavâti as one ex- pression meaning 'that which intervenes between the two.'† This has given rise to three different translations of the verse:— WILSON, (following Sâyaṇa):--For how long a period is it that the dawns have arisen? For how long a period will they rise? Still desirous to bring us light, Uṣhas pursues the functions of those that have gone before, and, shining brightly, proceeds with the others (that are to follow). GRIFFITH, (following Max Muller):--How long a time, and they shall be together,—Dawns that have shone and Dawns to shine hereafter? She yearns for former Dawns with eager longing, and goes forth gladly shining with the others.

• Ṛig. I, 113, 10—कियात्या यत्समया भवाति या व्यूषुर्याश्च नूनं व्युच्छान् । अनु पूर्वाः कृपते वावशाना प्रदीध्याना जोषमन्याभिरेति ॥ † See Petersberg Lexicon, and Grassmann's Worterbuch, s. v. Samayâ; and Muir's O. S. Texts, Vol. V., p. 189.

THE VEDIC DAWNS. 87 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 these 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 Wilson's and Griffith's 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 Aufrecht's translation, a long period appears to have interve- ned 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 com- menced 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 Sâyaṇa's or Max Muller's view. A number of dawns is spoken

88 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS. 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 Aufrecht's 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 splendour, 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:— Tâni it ahâni bahulâni âsan Those verily days many were yâ prâchînam ud-itâ sûryasya । which aforetime on the uprising of the sun Yataḥ pari jâre-iva â-charantî from which after towards a lover, like moving on Ushaḥ dadṛikshe na punaḥ yatî-iva ॥ O Dawn! wast seen not again forsaking (woman), like I have followed Sâyaṇa in splitting jâra-iva of Saṁhitâ text into jâre+iva, and not jâraḥ+iva as Shâkala —* Ṛig. VII, 76, 3,—तानीदहानि बहुलान्यसन् य्रा प्राचीनमुदिता सू- र्यस्य । यतः परि जार इवाचरत्युषो ददृक्षे न पुनर्यतीव ॥

THE VEDIC DAWNS. 89 has done in the Pada text ; for jāre+iva makes the simile more appropriate than if we were to compare uṣhas with jāraḥ. Liter- ally 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 dadṛikshe, and Griffith renders yataḥ by 'since.' But these constructions do not materi- ally alter the meaning of the second half of the verse, though taking pari with yataḥ enables us to take the second line as an adjectival clause, rendering the meaning more plain. In IV, 52, 1, the Dawn is said to shine after her sister (svasuḥ pari), and pari, with an ablative, does not necessarily denote 'from' in every case, but is used in various senses, as, for instance, in III, 5, 10, where the phrase Bhṛigubhyaḥ pari occurs, and is rendered by Grassmann as equivalent to 'for the sake of Bhṛi- gus,' while Sâyaṇa paraphrases pari by paritaḥ 'round about.' In the verse under consideration we can, therefore, take pari with yataḥ, and understand the expression as meaning 'after, about or around which (days).' It must also be borne in mind that there must be an expression to correspond with jāre in the simile, and this we get only if we construe yataḥ pari in the way proposed above. If we now analyse the verse it will be found to be made up of three clauses, one principal and two adjectival. The principal statement asserts that those days were many. The demonstrative 'those' (tāni) is then fol- lowed by two relative clauses, yā prāchīnam &c., and yataḥ pari &c. The first of these states that the days referred to in the principal clause were those that 'preceded the rising of the sun.' But if the days preceded the rising of the sun,

90 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS. one might think that they were pervaded with darkness. The poet, therefore, further adds, in the second relative clause, that though these days were anterior to the rising of the sun, yet they were such that 'the Dawn was seen to move after or about them as after a lover, and not like a woman who for- sakes.' In short, the verse states in unmistakable terms (1) that many days (bahulâni ahâni) passed between the appearance of the first morning beams and sunrise, and (2) that these days were faithfully attended by the Dawn, meaning that the whole period was one of continuous Dawn which never vanished during the time. The words as they stand convey no other meaning but this, and we have now to see how far it is intelli- gible to us. 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 the 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 'splendour.' Ahan is derived from the root ah (or philologically dah), 'to burn,' or 'shine,' and Ahanâ meaning 'dawn' is derived from the same root.

• उषःप्रकाशयुक्तस्यैव कालस्याहःशब्दव्यवहारात ।

THE VEDIC DAWNS. 91 Etymologically ahâni may, therefore, mean splendours ; but the question is whether it is so used anywhere, and why we should here give up the ordinary meaning of the word. Sâyaṇa's 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 sun- set. 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 pe- riod 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 Sâyaṇa's view and interprets the verse to mean that the splendours 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 Grass- mann 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 sun's 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 * Ṛig. VI. 9, 1,—अहश्च कृष्णमहरर्जुनं च वि वर्तेते रजसी वेद्याभिः Also cf. T. S. III, 3, 4, 1,—एतद्वा अहो रूपं यद्रात्रिः । Similarly in T. S. VI, 3, 9, 1, the phrase शमहॊभ्याम् ( 1, 3, 9, 1 ) is thus explained:— शमहोभ्यामिति निनयत्यहोरात्राभ्यामेव ।

92 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS. what he understands by the expression, “a number of mornings which were aforetime at the sun’s uprising.” The case , is, therefore, reduced to this. The word ahan, of which ahâni (days) is a plural form, can be ordinarily interpre- ted 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 ‘splen- dours’ 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 sun’s 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 Ṛig-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

THE VEDIC DAWNS. 93 inhabitants of the place. In the first chapter of the Old Testa- ment 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 sun- rise. We need not, therefore, affect a hypercritical spirit in exa- mining the Vedic expression in question. If Sâyaṇa did it, it was because he did not know as much about the Polar regions as we now do. We have no such excuse, and must, therefore, accept the meaning which follows from the natural construction and reading of the sentence. 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 interpreta- tion 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:—

94 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS. Para ṛiṇâ sâvîr adha mat-kṛitâni mâ aham râjan anya-kṛitena bhojam । Avyushṭâ in nu bhûyasîr ushâsa â no jîvân Varuṇa tâsu shadhi ॥ 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 bhûyasîh ushâsaḥ avyushṭâḥ in the third quarter of the verse. The first two words present no difficulty. They mean 'many dawns.' Now avyushṭa is a negative participle from vyushṭa, which again is derived from ushṭa with vi prefixed. I have refer- red to the distinction between ushas and vyushṭi suggested by the three-fold or the five-fold division of the dawn. Vyushṭi, according to the Taittirîya Brâhmaṇa, means 'day,' or rather 'the flashing forth of the dawn into sunrise' ; and the word a+vi+ushṭa, therefore, means "not-fully-flashed-forth into sunrise." But Sâyaṇa and others do not seem to have kept in view this distinc- tion between the meanings of ushas and vyushṭi ; 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 sun's orb appeared on the horizon. The expression, bhûyasîh ushâsaḥ avyushṭâḥ, which literally means "many dawns have not dawned, or fully flashed forth," was, therefore, a riddle to these com- mentators. Every dawn, they saw, was followed by sunrise; and

• Ṛig. II, 28, 9,—पर ऋणा सावीरध मत्कृतानि माहं राजन्नन्यकृतेन भोजम् । अव्युष्टा इन्नु भूयसीरुषास आ नो जीवान्वरुण तासु शाधि ॥

THE VEDIC DAWNS. 95 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 avyushṭa 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, mean- ing many day-long portions of time during which the dawn last- ed, have passed, yet it is not vyushṭa, that is the sun's 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 bhūy- asīḥ in the above passage, we have the adjective pūrvīḥ (many) used in IV, 19, 8 and VI, 28, 1, to denote the number of the dawns, evidently shewing that numerically more than one dawn is intended. The dawns are again not unfrequently 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 (etāḥ) are those (tyāḥ) dawns (ushasaḥ), which have made their appearance on the horizon,” and the same ex- pression again occurs in VII, 78, 3. Yâska explains the plural number ushasaḥ by considering it to be used only honori- fically (Nirukta XII, 7); while Sâyaṇa interprets it as re- ferring to the number of divinities that preside over the.

96 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS. morn. The Western scholars have not made any improve- ment on these explanations; and Prof. Max Muller 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 Yâska's 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' (dhṛishṇavah), and in the third verse of the same hymn they are likened to 'women (nārīḥ) active in their occupations.' They are said to appear on the horizon like 'waves of waters' (apām na urmayha) in VI, 64, 1; or like 'pillars planted at a sacrifice' (adhvareshu svaravaḥ) in IV, 51, 2. We are again told that they work like 'men arrayed' (visho na yuktāḥ), or advance like 'troops of cattle' (gavām na sargāḥ), in VII, 79, 2, and IV, 51, 8, respectively. They are described as all 'alike' (sadṛiśhīḥ); and are said to be of 'one mind' (sañjānanāse), or 'acting harmoniously' in IV, 51, 6, and VII, 76, 5. In the last verse the poet again informs us that they 'do not strive against each other' (mithah na yatante), though they live jointly in the 'same enclosure' (samāne urve). Finally in X, 88, 18, the poet distinctly asks the question, "How many fires, how many suns and how many dawns (ushāsaḥ) are there?" If the Dawn were addressed in plural simply

THE VEDIC DAWNS. 97 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 expresssions '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, Sâyaṇa's explanation does not solve the difficulty, as the question still remains, why the deities pre- siding 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 it 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., 13

98 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS. 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 suppo- sing it to be split up into smaller day-long portions. It is thus that we find Uṣhas addressed sometimes in the plural, and some- times 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 Man- tras 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

THE VEDIC DAWNS. 99 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’ (triṁshat svasâraḥ) are then described as ‘going round’ (parî yanti) in groups of six each, keep- ing up to the same goal (nishkṛitam). 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 Ṛita, the second upholds the greatness of Waters, the third moves in the region of Sûrya, 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 sun-light, 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

100 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS. 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 address- ed 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 shaḷ-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, kanînâṁ 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." Griffith renders samîchîḥ by 'a closely gathered band' and translates the verse thus :—"The Bright one hath

• Taitt. Br. II, 5, 6, 5,—इमा एव ता उषसो या प्रथमा व्यौच्छन् । ता देव्यः कुर्वते पंच रूपा । शश्वतीर्नावपृज्यंति न गमन्त्यन्तम् ॥

THE VEDIC DAWNS. 101 sent forth the Dawns, a closely gathered band, immaculate, unanimous, brightly refulgent in their homes." * Here all the adjectives of the dawns clearly indicate a group of undivided dawns acting harmoniously; and yet, strange to say, Griffith, who translates correctly, misses the spirit altogether. We have thus sufficient direct authority for holding that it is a 'team,' or in Griffith's words, 'a closely gathered band' of thirty continuous dawns that is described in the Vedic hymns, and not the evane- scent dawn of the temperate or the tropical zone, either single or as a series of consecutive dawns. 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 every thing was undistinguishable according to the Brâh- maṇa. 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 repre- sented 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,

• Ath. Veda, VII, 22, 2,—प्रत्नः समीचीरुषसः समैरयन् । अरेपसः सचेतसः स्वसरे मन्दुमत्तमाश्रिते गोः ॥

102 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS. 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 explana- tions 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,’ * and as with the aid of the telescope this eye now com- mands a wider range than previously it will be our own fault if we fail to utilise 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

• Cf. Shikshâ, 41-42,—छंदः पादौ तु वेदस्य हस्तौ कल्पोऽथ पठ्यते । ज्योतिषामयनं चक्षुर्निंरुक्तं श्रोत्रमुच्यते ॥ शिक्षा घ्राणं तु वेदस्य मुखं व्याकरणं स्मृतम् । तस्मात् सांगमधीत्यैव ब्रह्मलोके महीयते ॥

THE VEDIC DAWNS. 103 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 mention- ed 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 unex- plained. ‘A single dawn traversing thirty steps’ is but a para- phrase 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 to-day and alike to-morrow, 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 follow- ing 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. Griffith following M. Bergaigne understands it to mean thirty regions or spaces,

• Ṛig. VI, 59, 6,—इंद्राग्नी अपादियं पूर्वागात्पदतीभ्यः । हित्वी शिरो जिह्वया वावदच्चरत्त्रिंशत्पदान्यक्रमीत् ॥ Ṛig. X, 189, 3, which speaks of thirty realms (triṁshat dhâma), refers very probably to the same fact. † Ṛig. I, 123, 8,—सदृशीरद्य सदृशीरिदु श्वो दीर्घं सचंते वरुणस्य धाम १ अनवद्यास्त्रिंशतं योजनान्येकैका क्रतुं परि यंति सद्यः ॥

104 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS. indicating the whole universe ; but there is no authority for this meaning. Sâyaṇa, whom Wilson follows, gives an elaborate astronomical explanation. He says that the sun's rays precede his rising and are visible when the sun is below the horizon by thirty yojanas, or, in other words, the dawn is in advance of the sun by that distance. When dawns are, therefore, said to traverse thirty yojanas, Sâyaṇa understands by it the astrono- mical phenomenon of the dawn illumining a space of thirty yojanas in advance of the sun, and, that when the dawn, at one place, is over, it is to be found in another place, occupying a space of thirty yojanas in that place. The explanation is very ingenious ; and Sâyaṇa also adds that the dawns are spoken of in the plural number in the verse under consideration, because the dawns at different places on the surface of the earth, brought on by the daily motion of the sun, are intended. But unfortunately the explanation cannot stand scientific scrutiny. Sâyaṇa says that the sun travels 5,059 yojanas round the Meru in 24 hours ; and as Meru means the earth and the circumference of the earth is now known to be about 24,877 miles, a yojana would be about 4.9, or in round number, about 5 miles. Thirty such yojanas will, therefore, be 150 miles ; while the first beams of the dawn greet us on the horizon when the sun is not less than 16° below the horizon. Taking one degree equal to 60 miles, 16° would mean 960 miles, a distance far in excess of the thirty yojanas of Sâyaṇa. Another objection to Sâyaṇa's explanation is that the Vedic bard is evidently speaking of a phenomenon pre- sent before him, and not mentally following the astronomical dawns at different places produced by the daily rotation of the earth on its axis. The explanation is again inapplicable to "thirty steps (padâni)' of the dawn expressly mentioned in VI, 59, 6. Therefore, the only alternative left is to take

the phrases 'thirty yojanas,' 'thirty sisters,' and 'thirty steps' as different versions of one and the same fact, viz., the circuits of the dawn along the Polar horizon. The phrase 'each its destined course' also becomes intelligible in this case, for though thirty dawns complete thirty rounds, each may well be described as following its own definite course. The words pari yanti in the text literally apply to a circular (pari) motion, (cf. the words pari-ukshaņam, pari-staraņam, &c.); and the same term is used in the Taittirîya Samhitâ with reference to 'thirty sisters'. The word yojana primarily means 'a chariot' (VIII, 72, 6), and then it came to denote 'distance to be accomplished without unharnes- sing the horses', or what we, in the vernacular, call a 'ṭappâ.' Now this ṭappâ, or 'the journey to be accomplished without unharnessing the horses', may be a day's journey, and Prof. Max Muller has in one place interpreted the yojana in this way.* 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 forthwith 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 III, 61, 3, which says, in distinct terms, "Wending towards the same goal (samânam artham), O Newly-born (Dawn)! turn on like a wheel (chakramiva 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

• See S. B. E. Series, Vol. XXXII, pp. 177 and 325. † Ṛig. III, 61, 3,—उषः प्रतीची भुवनानि विश्वोध्वा॑ तिष्ठस्य॒मृत॑स्य केतुः। स॒मानमर्थं॑ चरणीयमाना च॒क्रमिव॒ नव्य॒स्या व॑वृत्स्व ॥