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

VEDIC MYTHS—THE CAPTIVE WATERS. 279 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 corrobo- rated by the statement in the Avesta, that it was during winter that the waters, and with them the sun, ceased to move on- wards. Vṛitra's 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 Tishtrya's fight with Apaosha is described as varying from one to a hundred nights in the Tîr 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 Indra's 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 Indra's conflict with Vṛitra, though the true bearing of the passage has yet remained unexplained owing to the absence

280 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS. of the real key to its meaning. In II, 12, 11, we read, "Indra found Shambara dwelling on the mountains (in) chatvâriṅshyâm sharadi.'"* Now chatvâriṅshyâm 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 chatvâriṅshyâm sharadi is, therefore, capable of two interpretations or constructions, though the words are simple in themselves. Chatvâriṅshyâm literally means 'in the fortieth,' and sharadi 'in autumn.' If we now take chatvâriṅshyâm (in the fortieth) as an adjective qualify- ing sharadi (in autumn), the meaning of the phrase would be "in the fortieth autumn" ; while if the two words are taken separa- tely 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 Vasanta (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 chatvâriṅshyâm 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 Indra was engaged in searching out the demon for 40 years, and it was only at the end of this long period that the enemy was, at last, found dwelling on the mountains? If so, Indra's conflict with Shambara cannot be daily or yearly, but must be supposed to have taken place only once in 40 years, an inference, which is

• Ṛig. II, 12, 11,— यः शंबरं पर्वतेषु क्षियंतं चत्वारिंश्यां शरदन्वविं- दत् । ओजायमानं यो अहिं जघान दानुं शयानं स जनास इंद्रः ॥

VEDIC MYTHS—THE CAPTIVE WATERS. 281 directly opposed to the statement (X, 62, 2) that "Vala was killed at the end of the year (parivatsare)." Some scholars try to get out of the difficulty by suggesting that the passage may be taken as referring to a famine or drought that occurred after 40 years, or that it may represent a forty years' war between the Aryans protected by Indra, and Shambara, the chief of the aboriginal races dwelling on the mountains! But both these explanations are too far-fetched and imaginary to deserve any serious attention or refutation. The story of Shambara is men- tioned in a number of places in the Ṛig-Veda, and everywhere it represents Indra's conflict with Vṛitra.* It is, therefore, prepos- terous to hold that a forty years' war with the aboriginies. 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-pakshe, trayodashyâm," meaning "in the month of Kârttika, in the bright half, on the thirteenth (tithi or day)." The feminine ordinal numerals, like chaturthî, ekâ- dashî, trayodashî, are always used, without any noun, to de- note 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 dvâ- dashyâm 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.

• See the Nivids, quoted supra (p. 246). Shambara-hatya or the fight with Shambara, and go-ishṭi or the struggle for cows are declared to be the one and the same in these nivids

282 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS. 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 “In- dra found Shambara dwelling on the mountains on the for- tieth (scil. tithi or day) in autumn.” Now Sharad is the fourth season of the year, and the forti- eth 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 Indra's fight with Shambara, 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, 155, 6, Vishṇu, 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 Sha- rad would still mean the 10th day of the eighth month of the year. The passage thus gives the very date of Indra's annual fight with Vṛitra; and if it had been correctly understood, much useless speculation about the nature of Vṛitra's 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, the 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 Indra's fight with Vṛitra as the fortieth day in Sharad, or the 10th day of the eighth month, we arrive

VEDIC MYTHS—THE CAPTIVE WATERS. 283 at the same conclusion. The legend of Aditi and the date of the commencement of Indra's 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 ety- mological meaning of the word further supports the same view.. For Sharad is derived from shṛî, 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 lustres or powers of the sun ; one in Vasanta, that is, in the morning ; one in Grîshma or the mid-day ; and one in Sharad or the evening."* 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, † quoted by Shabara in his commentary on Jaimini Suttras VI, 7, 40, says, "The sun is all the seasons; when it is morning (uditi), it is Vasanta; when the milking time (saṅgava), it is Grîshma;. *Taitt. Saṁ. II, 1, 2, 5,--त्रीणि वा आदित्यस्य तेजांसि वसंतः प्रातः ग्रीष्मे मध्यंदिने शरद्यपराह्ने । यावंत्येव तेजांसि तान्येवावरुंधे । Also compare Taitt. Saṁ. II 1, 4, 2. † Shabara or Jaimini VI, 7, 40, quotes, आदित्यो वा सर्व ऋतवः स यदैवोदित्यथ वसंतो यदा संगवोऽथ ग्रीष्मो यदा मध्यंदिनोऽथ वर्षा यदाऽपरा- ह्नोऽथ शरद् यदास्तमेत्यथ हेंमंतशिशिरौ । 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.

284 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS. when mid-day (madhyan-dina), it is Varsha; when evening (aparâhna), 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 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 chatvâriṅshyâm sharadi cannot, therefore, be inter- preted to mean "On the 40th (day) in Sharad." The objec- tion 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 (raño) Vâsiṭhîputa, the illustrious lord (sâmi-siri) [Puḷumâyi] in the year seventh (7), of Grîshma the fifth (5) fortnight, and first (1) day." Upon this Dr. Burgess remarks that "the mention of the 5th fortnight of Grîshma shows that the year was not divided into six seasons (ṛitu) but into three, namely, Grîshma, Varshâ 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 Vâsi- ṭhîputa, the illustrious Puḷimâvi, in the third (3) fort- night of the winter (hemanta) months, on the second (2)

VEDIC MYTHS—THE CAPTIVE WATERS. 285 day"; and another is said to be inscribed "On the tenth day, in the sixth fortnight of Grîshma, in the eighth year of king Mâḍhariputta, the lord Sirisena."* Dr. Bhâṇḍârkar, in his Early History of the Deccan, has ascertained that Mâ- ḍhariputta reigned in the Mahârâshṭra from about A. D. 190 to 197, and Puḷumâyi was on the throne of the Mahârâshṭra about 60 years earlier, that is, from A. D. 130 to 154. All the inscriptions noted above, therefore, belong to the 2nd cen- tury of the Christian era, that is, a long time before the date of Ârya Bhaṭṭa or Varâhamihira, whose works seem to 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 of 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 Âfrîgân Gâhanbâr (I, 7-12), as written in some manuscripts mentioned by Westergaard in his notes on the Âfrîgân, there is a statement of the

• Inscription No. 14 of Kârle inscriptions runs thus :—रञो वासिठिपुतस सामिसिरि पुळुमाविस सवछरे सतमे ७ गिम्हपंखे पचमे ५ दिवसे पधमे १; (or in Sanskrit — राज्ञो वासिष्ठीपुत्रस्य स्वामिश्री पुळुमाविनः संवत्सरे सप्तमे ७, ग्रीष्मपक्षे पंचमे ५, दिवसे प्रथमे १ ). Inscription No. 20 of the same section runs thus :—सिधं रञो वासिठिपुतस सिरिपुळिमाविस सवछरे चतुविसे २४ हेमतान पंखे ततिये ३ दिवसे बितिये २; (or in Sanskrit— सिद्धम् । राज्ञो वासिष्ठीपुत्रस्य श्रीपुळिमावेः संवत्सरे चतुर्विंशे २४, हेमंतानां पक्षे तृतीये ३, दिवसे द्वितीये २). An inscription from the Kânheri cave (p. 60) is as follows :—सिधं रञो माढरीपुतस स्वामिसिरिसनेस सवछरे ८ गिप ५ दिव १०; (or in Sanskrit— सिद्धम् । राज्ञो माठरिपुत्रस्य स्वामिश्रीसेनस्य संवत्सरे ८, ग्री. प. ५, दिव. १०).

286 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS. different rewards which a Mazdayasnian receives in the next life for what he gives as present in this to the Ratu (re- ligious 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 months and days are later interpola- tions, made at a time when the older method was superseded by the latter.* 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 in- terpreting 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 com- mencement of Indra's fight with Shambara, but in the absence of the true key to its meaning the passage has been so long un- fortunately misunderstood and misinterpreted both by Eastern and Western scholars. The grammatical possibility of connect- ing chatvâriṁshyâm, as an adjective, with sharadi helped on

• See his essay on "The Zoroastrian months and years with their divisions in the Avestic age" in the Cama Memorial Volume, pp. 251–

VEDIC MYTHS—THE CAPTIVE WATERS. 287 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 40th 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 chatvâriṁ- shyâm 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 Sham- bara 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

• A similar phrase is found also in the Atharva Veda (XII, 3, 34 and 41). The hymn describes the preparation of Brahmaudana, 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, (shashṭyâm sharatsu nidhîyâ abhîchhât)." 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 shashṭyâm as the loca- tive of shashṭî (feminine form, in long î, of shashṭa) meaning "the 60th"; and interpret the original phrase to mean "On the 60th (tithi) in autumns". "The word shashṭa 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 Whitney's Grammar, § 487). Even in the post-Vedic literature we meet with such ordinal forms as shashṭa ashîta, &c. Thus the colophon of the 60th chapter of the Sabhâ and the Udyoga-parvan of the Mahâbhârata (Roy's Cal. Ed.) reads thus:--Iti...shashṭaḥ.adhyâyaḥ, shewing that shashṭa was used at the time as an ordinal numeral, (See Pet Lex. s. v. shashṭa). The Brahmaudana is, according to this interpretation, to be cooked on the 60th day in autumns, i. e., at the end of Sharad every year.

288 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS. strengthen the same view. The disappearance of the sun below the horizon in the-beginning of the 8th month in autumn, follow- ed 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. There is one more incident in the Vṛitra legend which re- quires to be considered before we close its examination. We have seen that water and light are described as having been simultane- ously 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 udañcha (II, 15, 6), and are said to be seven in number (I, 32, 12; II, 12, 12). ‘The theory of the cosmic cir- culation 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 the Panjaub 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 refer- red to the Ṛig-Veda X, 75, and to the phrase hapta-hindu oc- curring in Fargard I of the Vendidad, where it is said to denote

VEDIC MYTHS—THE CAPTIVE WATERS. 289 the Panjaub 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 (udañcha) 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.* The term pañcha- nada 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 Indus were included in the group by the Vedic bards, when they spoke of seven rivers. In the Ṛig-Veda (X, 75), about fifteen different rivers are mentioned, including the Gaṅgâ, the Yamunâ, the Kubhâ, the Krumu, the Gomatî, the Rasâ, and the five rivers of the Panjaub; but nowhere do we find what specific rivers were included in the group of seven rivers. This has given rise to a difference of opinion amongst scholars. Thus Sâyaṇa includes the Ganges and the Jamuna in the group, which, according to Prof. Max Muller, is made up by adding the Indus and the Sarasvatî to the five rivers of the Panjaub. On the other hand, Lassen and Ludwig hold that the Kubhâ must be included in the group at the cost of the Sarasvati. This shows that we are not on a safe ground in supposing that the expression "seven rivers" once meant what is, by nature, "the land of five rivers." The expression sapta sindhavaḥ occurs in about a dozen places in the Ṛig-Veda, and in five of these it distinctly denotes the seven rivers set free by

• See Vâj. Saṁ. XXXIV, 11,— पंच नद्यः सरस्वतीमपि यंति सस्रोत- तसः। सरस्वती तु पंचधा सो देशेऽभवत् सरित्॥ Here सो is equal to सा+अटः. 19

290 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS. Indra along with the release of cows or the recovery of dawn (I, 32, 12 ; II, 12, 3 and 12 ; IV, 28, 1, &c.); and for reasons given above, we cannot suppose that they represent any terrestrial rivers in these passages. In the remaining cases, there is not a single instance where the expression may be said to decisively denote only the terrestrial rivers; nay, it is more likely that celestial rivers are referred to everywhere by the expression of sapta sindhavaḥ. I do not mean to say that sapta sindhavaḥ, sapta pravataḥ, or sapta sravataḥ can in no case denote any terrestrial rivers. For there are three groups of seven rivers mentioned in the Ṛig-Veda,—the celestial, the terrestrial and the infernal. Thus in X, 64, 8, “thrice three wandering rivers” are mentioned ; while the waters are said “to flow forward triply, seven and seven” in X, 75, 1. It is, therefore, clear that like the Ganges in the Purâṇas, the Vedic bards conceived a group of seven rivers in the heaven, another on the earth, and a third in the nether world, somewhat after the manner of the eleven gods in the heaven, eleven on the earth, and eleven in the waters (I, 139, 11 ; I, 34, 11 ; X, 65, 9). If so, we cannot say that a seven-fold division of the terrestrial rivers was not known to the Vedic bards. But, for reasons given above, we cannot hold that this seven-fold division was suggested by the rivers of the Panjaub ; and then extended to the upper and the lower celestial hemishhere. The Panjaub, as remarked above, is a land of five rivers and not seven ; and though we might raise the number to seven by adding to the group any two insignificant tributaries according to our fancy, yet the artificial character of the device is too apparent to justify us in holding that the expression sapta sindhavaḥ was originally suggested by the rivers of the Panjaub. We must again bear in mind that the seven-fold division of waters does not stand by itself in the Ṛig-Veda; but is only a particular case of a general principle of division adopted therein. Thus we have seven earthly abodes (I, 22, 16), seven mountains (VIII, 96, 2),

VEDIC MYTHS—THE CAPTIVE WATERS. 291 seven rays or horses of the sun (I, 164, 3), seven hotṛis (VIII, 60, 16), seven regions (dishaḥ) and seven Âdityas (IX, 114, 3), seven dhîtis or devotions (IX, 8, 4), seven sisters or maryâdâḥ, (X, 5, 5-6), and possibly seven and seven gods (X, 55, 3), in the Ṛig-Veda; while in the later Sanskrit literature we have the seven heavens, seven earths, seven mountains, seven oceans and seven nether worlds. This seven-fold division is also found in other Aryan mythologies, as, for instance, in the Avesta, where the earth is said to be divided into seven Kar- shavares (Yt. X, 16 and 64), and in the Greek mythology, which speaks of the seven layers of heaven over one another. It follows, therefore, that the seven-fold division must be traced back almost to the Indo-European period; and if so, we cannot maintain that the seven-fold division of waters, which is only a particular case of the general principle, was suggested by the rivers of the Panjaub, for, in that case, we shall have to make the Panjaub the home of the Aryans before they separ- ated. But if the rivers set free to flow up by Indra are not terrestrial, and if the expression sapta sindhavaḥ was not ori- ginally suggested by the rivers of the Panjaub, it may be asked how we account for the number of rivers and the origin of the phrase Hapta-hindu occurring in the Avesta. 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

292 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS. 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 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 seven 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, howso- ever 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 coun- tries. We have, Vârena, Haêtumant, Rangha and Harahvaiti in the list, which are the Zend equivalents of Varuṇa, Se- tumat, Rasâ and Sarasvatî.* But it is never argued from it

• 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.

VEDIC MYTHS—THE CAPTIVE WATERS. 293 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 they Aryan settlers to their new home and there applied to new places or objects. There are places in Burma which are named Ayodhya, Mithila, &c., and this is explained on the ground that they were so named by the Indian settlers in Burma after the well-known places in their native land. There is no reason why the same theory should not be applied in the case of Hapta-hindu, especially when we see that the rivers set free by Indra by slaughtering Vṛitra cannot but be celestial. 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 Pûshan is said to cross the upper celestial hemisphere in boats; but the Ashvins and Sûrya are generally described as travers- ing the heaven in their chariots. This led the ancient Nairuk- tas 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 simi- larly understood to be the rivers of India, like the Ganges, the Jamuna, &c., while the piercing of the mountains was ex- plained 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,

294 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS. 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 settle- ment 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, carry- ing along with them the sun, the moon and the other heav- enly bodies. We can now very well explain how Vṛitra, by stretching his body across, closed the passages in the mountain- ous 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 oint elucidated by the present theory is the four-fold character of the effects of Indra's 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 differ- ent effects have been confounded with one other by the poets of the Ṛig-Veda. But the theory of the cosmic circulation of

VEDIC MYTHS—THE CAPTIVE WATERS. 295 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 srashtâ), the waters do not mean the waters in the clouds, but the waters or the watery vapours 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 marvellous 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 Indra's exploits, when, in- vigorated 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 up- stream to go along their aerial way and brought out 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 mytho- logy, and Vṛitra-han, as Verethragna, 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 con- quest of waters, which was originally the exploit of some other

296 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS. Aryan deity, was probably ascribed to Indra in the Vedic my- thology, when Indra become 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 inter- pretation of this important legend. Indra may have be- come 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 ascrib- ed 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 meagre to enable us to perceive it properly.

This image is completely blank and contains no text to transcribe.

VṚITRA TRIUMPHANT. ( WATERS AND THE SUN CONFINED. )

1. Varuṇa's tree. 2. Waters.