Bharatiya Vidya Series Vol. 16 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA (ITS NATURE, INFLUENCE, ORIGIN AND GROWTH) qsffgti si I { Rv. IX.73.0 ) By K. R. POTDAR, m.a. Bhau Daji Prizeman ; Bhugwandas Purshottamdas Sanskrit Scholar; Sujna Gocul Zala Vedanta Prizeman ; V. N. Mandlik Gold Medalist and Prizeman; Tapiben Munshi Gold Medalist ( B.V.B .) HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT OF SANSKRIT, ISMAIL YUSUF COLLEGE, JOGESHYVARI, 1953 BHARATIYA VIDYA BHAVAN CHOWPATTY ROAD, BOMBAY 7 All right* reeerved lft Edition, October 1953 GENERAL EDITORS : ACHARYA JINAVIJAYAJI MUNI PROF. H. D. VELANKAR PROF. JAYANTAKRISHNA H- DAVE DR A. D. PUSALKAR Printed by P. H. Raman at the Associated Advertisers ft Printers Ltd., SOS Arthur Head. Tardeo, Bombay 7 and published by Prof. J. H. Dave, M.A., LL.B., Hon. Re(latrar, Bharatiya Vldya Bhavan, Chowpetty Road, Bombay 7. FOREWORD We have great pleasure in publishing as Vol. 16 of the Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan’s Bharatiya Vidya Series, the valuable research work of Prof. K. R. Potdar on “Sacrifice in the Rgveda (Its nature, influence, origin and growth).” It is based on a minute analysis of the hymns of the Rgveda and deals with the problem of the Sacrifice in an entirely original way. It deals with the 'Sacrifice’ in pre- brahmanic stage and its influence on the evolution of the Aryan Civilization. Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, S. Y. 2009. Vijayadasami, Bombay 7. J. H. DAVE Hon. Registrar. PREFACE ‘ 3TM ’ STf(TT^^ ‘ It injsnTTfasTci i ( t^o hi. 28 ) While trying to understand a simile in the seventh mantfala (VII. 2-Scd), 1 in the course of teaching the mantfala to the M.A. students in 1942, I had to take up the consideration of the ‘devlh dvarah’ in the Apr! hymns, which further led to the study of the Apri hymns as a group. The outcome of that study (1943) was pub¬ lished in the form of a paper in the Journal of the University of Bombay 1945-46, with a portion of it contributed earlier as a paper to the All India Oriental Conference at Benares. It is this study that opened up the question of the sacrifice in the Rgveda, some remarks about which I had got to make in the course of that study. Though I was urged to undertake the study in all its aspects by some scholars, I could not do so till 1951, except writing a few papers concerning the topic as follows: (1) Apri hymn in the Atharvaveda, 2 (2) Agni and the sacrifice in the Rgveda, 3 (3) Sacrificial setting of the philosophical hymns in the Rgveda, 4 (4) Rbhus in the Itgvedic sacrifice. 5 The problem however was shaping more clearly in my mind and hence I decided to work it out in full. The results obtained have been incorporated in the present work. It may not be out of place to note here that ever since I was initiated into the study of the Rgveda by my Guru Prof. H. D. Velankar (then of the Wilson College) in 1930, I have continuously been in touch with the study of the Rgveda and though I could not have the good fortune of receiving his guidance, being out of Bom¬ bay on account of the service conditions, I have no hesitation in plac¬ ing on record the inspiration for the Rgvedic studies, I have derived from him. It need not be added that for the shortcomings that may have crept into my work, I am entirely responsible. As a keen student of the Vedanta, I have watched the efforts of the veteran Acharyas Badarayana and Sankara, to explain every 1. Vide AHR (appendix), B.U.J. 1946. 2. PAIOC (Nagpur 1946) published in 1951. 3. Paper read at the AIOC, Bombay 1946. 4. Paper contributed to the Sanskrit Visva Pari$ad at Somnath and published in Bharatiya Vidya 1952. 5. Paper for AIOC at Lucknow 1951, published B.UJ. 1952. SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA ▼ i point of philosophical importance on the basis of the Upani$ads and that has obviously influenced me in undertaking studies in various fields. Thus besides the paper on the Apr! hymns, referred to above, in two other papers written earlier (1) Contemporary life as revealed in the works of Bana 6 and (2) The role of the Gita in life, 7 I have followed the same method of understanding a work primarily on the basis of the internal evidence and making every remark on the basis of the statements available in the work concerned. It is thus that the caption ‘namulam likhyate kincit’ (Mallinatha) was signi¬ ficantly chosen for the paper on Bana, which is equally applicable to the present work as well. It will be seen that all the inferences regarding the sacrifice have been drawn on the basis of the hymns of the Rgveda, though there can be a difference of opinion regarding some of them. Though some of the conclusions thus arrived at may not appear to be quite definite, this line of investigation has its own merits. It may further be noted that in drawing the inferences from the statements in a work, sympathetic imagination has always got a role to play. It will be for scholars to judge how far I have been able to employ it successfully in my work. After a close contact with the study of the Rgveda for the pur¬ poses of teaching or otherwise for more than twenty years, I have a feeing that I know something about the spirit of the Rgveda and it is mainly under that inspiration that I have been prompted to under¬ take this study. I have had a very clear conscience of having under¬ taken and executed my job with perfect sincerity and honesty of purpose. Self-satisfaction is however no satisfaction as indicated by Kalidasa in introducing the Sakuntala (v.2 ‘a parito$ad vidu$am na sadhu manye. .. .) and hence in the words of the Kavikulaguru himself, I may place these results before the world of scholars, viz., ‘tam santah srotumarhanti sadasadvyakti-hetavah’ (Raghu, I. 10). I have to perform a very pleasant duty of placing on record my sincere thanks to various individuals and institutions who have been of help to me directly or indirectly in the course of the progress of my work, right upto its publication. The work is seeing the light of the day so early because of the fact that the Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan has undertaken its publication. My sincere thanks are due to the Bhavan and particularly its Hon. Registrar Prof. J. H. Dave, who has shown very keen interest in the results achieved herein and consequently taken an initiative in undertaking its publication. 8. Awarded the V. N. Mandlik Gold Medal and Prize by the Bombay University 1939; published in the B.U.J. 1942-44. 7. Awarded the T. Munshi Gold Medal by the Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan in 1948; published in the Bharatiya Vidya, Vol. X, 1949. PREFACE vii My thanks are also due to all the scholars whose works I have had the privilege of referring to and who have enlightened me and occasionally spurred me on in my work. All the scholar friends whom I had an occasion to talk to about the plan of the present work, have shown very keen interest in it and this has also helped me in pursuing my work enthusiastically. For going through a portion of the Mss., I have to thank (1) Prof. H. D. Velankar, Joint Director, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, (2) Prof. R. P. Kangle, Professor of Sankrit, Elphinstone College and (3) Prof. K. R. Mahishi, my colleague at the Ismail College. Dr. Balse of the Elphinstone College has been kind enough to translate a portion from Prof. Renou’s book, which was kindly lent by Dr. S. M. Katre, Director, Deccan College Post- Graduate and Research Institute, Poona. Four of my students at the Karnatak College, Dharwar have been of some help to me in one way or the other in the course of the publication of this work. My best wishes go to them as they have done their bit out of a sense of duty. They are (1) Miss T. S. Kulkarni, M.A., (2) B. R. Modak, M.A., (3) Shri N. G. Kulkarni, B.A., (Hons.) and (4) Shri S. H. Ritti, M.A. Shri Ritti has helped me in reading through the Mss., attending the press, correcting the proofs and if it were not for his vigilant eye that many a slip would have crept into the work. The compilation of indices has been mainly his work. I have done most of my work in the inspiring atmosphere of the Bombay University Library, whose authorities and staff I have to thank for extending to me all facilities required for my work. I should also thank the management and the staff of the Asso¬ ciated Advertisers and Printers, Ltd. for the excellent cooperation extended by them in getting the work ready in time. D/5, Sharadashram, Bombay 28. Vijayadasami, 17th October 1953. K. R. POTDAR. CONTENTS Page List of Abbreviations x Chapter I. Dik§a—Initiatory remarks .. . . .. 1 II. Hymns and the Sacrifice . . 18 III. Gods and the Sacrifice . . . . .. . . 89 IV. The Scene of the Sacrifice .. .. . . 63 V. Offerings in the Sacrifice . . 95 VI. The Types of the Rgvedic Sacrifice 123 VII. The Role of the Priests in the Sacrifice . . . . 138 VIII. Contribution of the Patrons to the Growth of the Sacrifice .. ^. .. .. .. .. 169 IX. Reactions to the Growth of the Sacrifice 194 X. Mystical Element in the Rgvedic Sacrifice .. 207 XI. Predominantly Sacrificial Hymns . . . . 222 XII. Sacrificial Similes . . . . . . 248 XIII. Influence of the Sacrifice on the Social Organism and Ideas about Religion, Ethics and Philosophy . . 269 XIV. Origin and Growth of the Conception of the Sacrifice .. . . . . 279 XV. Avabhj-tha—Concluding Remarks . . . . 291 Index of Important Passages . . 293 General Index .. .. . . . . 296 Bibliography .. . . . . 299 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AB — Aitareya Brahmana. ABI — Aitareya Brahmana Introduction. ABORI — Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute. AHR — Aprl Hymns in the Rgveda: a study and a theory. AlOC — All India Oriental Conference. Anuk. — Sarvanukramani of the Rgveda. ASL — Ancient Sanskrit Literature. Ath. — Atharvaveda. B.U.J. —- Bombay University Journal. Bphad — Brhaddevata. B.V. — Bharatiya Vidya. ERE — Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics. ERP — Essays on the Religion of the Parsis. HIL — History of Indian Literature. HRG — Hymns of the Rgveda (Translation) by Griffith. HSL — History of Sanskrit Literature—Vedic Period. JBBRAS — Journal of the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society. T.F. V — Les Ecoles Vediques et La formation du Veda. Ni — Nirukta of Yaska. PAIOC — Proceedings of the All India Orieital Conference. Raghu — Raghuvamsa. RBV — Rgvedantila BhaktimSrga. RGL — Role of the Gita in life. Rgveda — Der Rgveda. RIH — Religions of India—Hopkins. RLH — Rituall Litteratur—Hillebrandt. RPV — Religion and Philosophy of the Veda. RRB — Rgveda Repetitions—Bloomfield. RRG — The Religion of the Rgveda—Griswold. Rv — Rgveda-Samhita. RVB — The Religion of the Veda—Bloomfield. RVL — Religion in Vedic Literature. RVO — Religion des Veda—Oldenberg. LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS S. — Sakuntala. Sam — Samaveda sarhhita. Say — Sayanacarya. SRL — Sanskrit Reader—Lanmann. U. R. —- Uttararamacarita. V. H. — Vedic Hymns—S. B. E. Series. V.I. — Vedic Index. Ved. Stu. — Vedische Studien. Vel. — Indra Hymns (translated) Velankar. VMH — Vedische Mythologie—Hillebrandt. VMM — Vedic Mythology—Maedonell. Vs — Vajasaneyi Samhita. Wort — Worierbuch zum Rgveda. Chapter One DlKSA—INITIATORY REMARKS WZJ ^4 ITJ-TT^P^T I (HV. Vt. 75-19) i (uv. x. 134-7) SYNOPSIS :— Circumstances characterizing the beginning and evolution of sacrifice cannot be fully known for want of the necessary evidence—sacrifice in the Brahmanas and the Srauta literature in its advanced stage—-later growth in theoretical aspect—differ¬ ence in the relationship between the Brahmanas and the Srauta literature, as well as, between the Rgveda and the Brahmana literature—reason—a broad analogy— impossibility of filling up the chronological gap, which must have affected the growth of the idea—gap even in the stratas of the hymns in the Rgveda indicated—chrono¬ logical fallacy to judge the Rgvedic sacrifice from the Brahmana literature— emphasis on mythology while writing about religion—relation between the mytho¬ logical and sacrificial ideas indicated--mythology and sacrifice, two aspects of religion—Views of scholars—Max Muller granting historical and literary character of the Rgveda and the chronological gap but applying Brahmana ritual to Apr! hymns—Dr. M. Haug considering RV. collection to be more mythological in charac¬ ter--attempting to show the ritual to be the same as in the Brahmanas or remain¬ ing unchanged for more than two thousand years—Bloomfield’s view—Prof. A. A. Macdonell—magic character of Rgvedic sacrifice—for want of evidence believes the ritual to be the same as that in the Brahmanas—C. V. Vaidya agreeing with Macdonell—Griswold making some superficial observations—Dr. Keith accepting in part Macdonell’s view'—Ritual similarities with Avesta indicated as not very signi¬ ficant for the same reason—Keith disagreeing with Haug regarding the animal sacrifice—believes the ritual of the Rgveda to be considerably elaborate—Dr. P. S. Deshmukh criticising the magical basis of the Rgvedic religion—agrees with Macdonell and Keith regarding the developed form of the ritual for want of sufficient evidence— Prof. Renou’s view about the ritualistic version of the Rksamhila—views of Oldenberg, Bergaigne and Hillebrandt indicated—similarities in ritual possibly due to adaptation—in general, considers the ritual of the Sutras to be different from that of the Rgveda—reference to the view of Barth regarding the Apri hymns— Points of vital importance for the consideration of tiie present problem indi¬ cated—two reasons for the divergence of the views of different scholars—vague idea about the continuity of the ritual—pointed as incorrect—hymns characterized by a freshness—Bloomfield's view regarding the hymns being meant for sacrifice criticized—basic idea in hymns to propitiate the divinity—simplicity of ritual at an earlier stage accepted—gradual growth not generally appreciated—mechanical per¬ formance and genuine poetry incompatible with each other—genuine poetry made to serve the cause of sacrifice—relative position indicated by a metaphor—for want of other contemporary evidence, the hymns, the only reliable evidence—method indicated—analysis of all the data regarding the sacrifice—an inherent shortcoming —still the validity of the present evidence indicated—restriction of scope to the hymns of the Rgveda—its advantage—comparison with later lilerature for later development—topics under which the present problem is discussed. s.it 2 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA The circumstances that characterized the beginning of the institution of sacrifice in the ancient Aryan society and the forces that combined to evolve it through well-marked stages must, to some extent, remain a secret, that cannot be completely probed into for want of all the necessary evidence, which for obvious reasons, can never become available to us. The available evidence is recorded in the literary monuments of the earliest period viz., the so-called Sruti and its accessory literature. The sacrifice elaborately discussed in the Brahmana literature, finds further elaboration and supplemen¬ tation in the Srauta and the grhya literature. This, combined with the bias of theoretical discussion, attained its climax in the evolution of a system of thought, popularly known as the Purva-Mimamsa system. Thus it is in the light of the theory and practice of sacrifice as found in this vast literature that different scholars have described the so-called vedic sacrifice. It is true that the system of sacrifice attained such rigidity in its practical aspect in the days of the Brahmanas, that it was not likely to undergo any further change in the centuries that followed. It was so for the obvious reason that its fruitfulness was linked up with its rigid performance and it was mainly for this reason that the system has developed in its theoretical aspect in the later days. But what is true of the relationship of the Brahmana literature on the one hand and the later Srauta literature on the other, cannot necessarily be true about the hymns of the Rgveda on the one hand and the Brahmana literature on the other. Because, the divine origin of the Mantra and Brahmana literature is a later conception, which compelled the later writers to abide by every single syllable of the Srutis, while the authors of the Brahmanas were not so bound by the wording of the Rgveda. As far as the Rgveda is concerned, the authors talk of ‘carving out’ the hymns (1.61.4, 1.171.2, V.2.11, etc.). Hence, though we can draw fairly valid inferences about the sacrifices in the days of the Brahmanas from the material preserved in the later Srauta literature, the same cannot be held true about the sacri¬ fices in the days of the hymns of the Rgveda from the material preserved in the Brahmana literature, which was apparently sepa¬ rated from the date of the composition of the Rgvedic hymns by several centuries. This is because the sacrifice can be noticed to be undergoing evolution in the hymns of the Rgveda, while it has attained its full growth in the days of the Brahmanas. This can be further inferred from the description of different sacrificial rites in the different Brahmana works, a comparative study of which will reveal the fact that the varying traditions are sought to be brought in a line, with differences ironed out and the whole presented as a smoothened and polished fabric. 1 Employing a broad analogy, it 1. Cf. V.M.H. Vol. Ill, pp. 211, 297, 322, where he is trying to point out how the Srauta literature came to be codified and forwards his theory (p. 298) viz. DlK§A—INITIATORY REMARKS 3 can be said that what Panini’s Grammar (Asfadhyayi) did for the Sanskrit language, the Brahmana literature has done for the sacrifice in the Rgveda. Continuing the analogy, it will be true to say that just as Panini’s grammar takes into account the language as it was known in his days, so also does the Brahmana literature discuss the sacrifice as it was known in its days. Even granting some scope for a broad tradition, it will have to be admitted that the Brahmanas are chronologically so much separated from the hymns of the Rgveda, that the sacrifice cannot be believed to have remained at a standstill during the long period that elapsed between the earliest compositions of the hymns and the earliest Brahmana literature describing the sacrifice. This chronological gap cannot be filled by any stretch of imagination to whatever extent one may attempt to do so. Even the composition and collection of hymns have spread over such a long stretch of time, that the hymns have started becoming unintelli¬ gible at places, even to those people, who have grown in that tradition. Thus the author of X.71, saying that a number of people cannot perceive the meaning (v.4 uta tvah pasyanna dadarsa vacam, uta tvah srnvanna Srnotyenam), refers to a limited few, who could under¬ stand the same (uta tvasmai tanvam visasre). They appear to be the persons, who were actively connected with the sacrifice as suggested at x. 71-3 (yajiiena vacah padaviyamayan). The statement is interesting inasmuch as it refers to a stage, where the hymns could be understood only through association with the sacrificial performances, whereas in the early stages, the sacrifice must have grown with the help of these hymns (cf. Chapter II). Thus, when the stretch of time is so long, it can be realised that the ideas in general must have been undergoing a change, consequent upon the change in the social structure, ushered in by the course of time in addition to various other factors. As the hymns have passed through various stages 2 in the course of their composition and compilation, the same inference about the sacrifice so intimately associated with them, becomes quite inevitable. In fact, it must be said with special emphasis that it will be a ‘chronological fallacy’ to draw inferences about the Rgvedic sacrifice from the evidence of the Brahmana literature. When ideas about social relationship, religion and philosophy have to be understood as growing through the different periods of the Rgveda and the Brahmana literature, it cannot be justifiably said that the ideas about Srauta ritual is a compromise, an artificial product of a number of usages previously existing. 2. This can be evident from the arrangement of the hymns in the family Mandates in the descending order, breach of the descending order at the end of the group, the family R§i hymns occuring in the other Mandalas (see chapter VII), their non-inclusion in the family mandalas, separation of Soma hymns in the 9th Mandate and still the occurrence of some ‘Soma’ hymns in the other Mandalas, symmetrically exact number of hymns in the first and the tenth Mandalas and the literary principle underlying the collection. 4, SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA sacrifice have remained the same without undergoing any change whatsoever during the days of the hymns as well as after. A large number of scholars have written about the religious and mythological conceptions of the Aryans as revealed in the hymns of the Rgveda. Mythological and religious speculations have natu¬ rally become a fascinating study on account of the evolution of the science of Comparative Mythology and Religion, which attracted various scholars to write about the allied topics of Mythology and Religion. It is true that the religious ideas were dominated by mythological speculations and as such have come to be discussed with right emphasis. But sacrifice—the connecting link between the two—has not received the attention it deserved. It can be realised that sacrifice must have influenced the growth of the mytho¬ logical and religious speculations of the time. The idea and practice of sacrifice cannot be understood as evolving in an isolated sphere, disconnected from the field of mythological and religious ideas. In a way the mythology of the Rgveda can be said to be the theoretical aspect of the Rgvedic religion, while sacrifice to be the practical aspect of the same. Therefore a correct evaluation of the religious ideas cannot possibly be arrived at unless adequate consideration is given to both the theoretical and practical aspects—the mythology and the sacrifice. 3 Without proper appreciation of the sacrifice in the Rgveda, the exposition of the religion of the Rgveda can only be a half-truth. That is precisely what we come across in the majority of works on the subject, which contain mainly the treatment of mythology with some scrappy remarks about the sacrifice. Even among the scholars, who have written in some detail on the subject of sacrifice, one comes across a wide divergence of opinions, caused by a bewildering variety of reasons. Thus Max-Muller, discussing some of the sacrificial hymns and the mention of the names of priests in the Rgveda 4 remarks (p. 259), “Passages like these do not necessitate, the admission of a full-grown ceremonial, they only point to its natural beginnings.” Writing about III.28 he says, “it would hardly have been written except by some pious priests, brought up under the system of Brahmanic ceremonial” (p. 260). In a general way he admits the chronological gap between the Rgveda Samhita and the Brahmana literature (p. 243). “It belongs to a period previous to the complete ascendancy of the Brahmanas; it was finished before the threefold ceremonial had been worked out in all its details.” 5 About a large majority of 3. ERE, Vol. XII, p. 601. Macdonell “Religion means on the one hand the beliefs entertained by men regarding the divine or supernatural powers and on the other, that sense of dependence on those powers which is expressed . by act in the form of ritual and sacrifice”; RVL—Deshmukh p. 18. 4. ASL, pp. 246-262 5. Cf. also p. 252. “We may therefore . not completely enslaved by a system of mere formalities.” DiK?A—INITIATORY REMARKS 5 hymns in the Rgvedic collection, he says, (p. 247) “Not only is the order of the hymns completely independent of the order of the sacri¬ fices, but there are numerous hymns in our collection, which could never have been used at any sacrifice” and “The Rgveda is not a Veda for the Hotr priest, in the same sense, in which the Saman and the Yajurvedas are for the Udgatr and the Adhvaryu priests.” Writing about the AprI hymns however, he prefers to agree with their employment according to the Brahmanas and say that, (p. 245) “AprI hymn is a hymn, which had to be recited by the Hotr priest, previous to the immolation of certain victims,” 6 without assigning any convincing reason for doing so. Dr. M. Haug 7 remarks, “It took, no doubt, many centuries before the endless number of rites and ceremonies and their bewilder¬ ing complications could form themselves into such a system of sacrificial rules as we find already exhibited in the Brahmanas”, but maintains that even in the days of the Rgveda, “not only the whole of ‘Kalpa’ was settled, save some minor points, but even the symbo¬ lical and mystical meanings of the majority of rites”. Thus accord¬ ing to him the Brahmanical sacrifices were already developed and almost complete at the time of the composition of the hymns of the Rgveda and that the hymns “presuppose a settled ritual” (p. 9). 8 On the analogy of the Avesta 9 apparently, he has presumed that the number of the priests in the beginning must have been two and that the earlier performance was of a simple animal or soma sacrifice (p. 13). This appears to have been necessitated by his other assump¬ tion that the Asvamedha hymn (I. 162) belongs to the early period of sacrifice (p. 23). His attempt to prove it is based on the specious ground that, “we find religious poetry precede the profane songs in the history of poetry” (p. 29). All sacrificial hymns may not be late hymns as he contends but that does not necessarily justify his inference about the very early character of the Asvamedha hymn nor about the ritual of the Brahmanas being ‘settled’ at the time of the Rgveda. It is interesting to observe him say that “the first sacrifices were no doubt very simple” (p. 30) and that “at the most ancient times, it appears that all the sacrificial formulas were spoken by the Hotr alone” (p. 31) but at the same time maintain (p. 31) that “the ritual which appears to have been in force for the last three thousand years without undergoing any considerable change” and that (p. 36) “the ritual of the Brahmanas in its main features was almost com- 6. Cf. Potdar—“AprI hymns”, (B.U.J. 1945). 7. ABI 1863. p. 7. 8. The same point is differently stated at pp. 11, 12, 47. 9. ERP—Haug. pp. 267-86. 6 SACRIFICE IN THE FtGVEDA plete at the time when the principle Il$is such as the Kanva .... lived”. 10 This presumption has led him to postulate that “There can hardly be any doubt that the oldest hymns we possess are purely sacrificial and made only for sacrificial purposes” and that “those which express more general ideas or philosophical thoughts .... are comparatively late” (p. 39). Wrong premises regarding the relationship between the Rgvedic hymns and the Brahmanical sacrifice have seriously jeopardised the validity of his conclusions in spite of all the elaborate and scholarly discussions which clearly bear the stamp of his deep study. Bloomfield 11 has made some significant statements about the sacrifice in the Rgveda in a very general way without adducing much evidence for the same. Thus he remarks (p. 182) “Sacrifice with its ceremonial formalities is the epidermis of the Vedic Reli¬ gion.” At another place (p. 65), he says, “Sacrifice is the dominant note of Vedic life”; or (p. 31) “The Rgveda presupposes a tolerably elaborate and not uninteresting ritual.” He thinks that the ritual of the Rgveda is different from that of the other Vedas and the Brahmanas (p. 75). “The Rgveda begins with a form of worship, neither as extensive nor as formal and rigid as the technical ritual of the Yajurveda and the Brahmanas.” Writing about the Apr! hymns he says, “If we had before us the ritual prac¬ tices, which accompanied the Rgvedic hymns at the time of their composition, the Rgveda would lose much of obscurity.” 12 He discusses some of the verbal similarities with the Avesta and, in general, recognises the importance of dealing with the sacri¬ fice in the discussion of religion. But as he believes the Rgvedic collection to be largely mythological in character, 13 it appears that he does not expect the Rgvedic hymns to give much information regarding the sacrifice and hence has emphasized the ‘mythology’ aspect of religion in his book, though recognising the importance of the sacrifice for the discussion of religion. Macdonell has written at length on the topic of the Sacrifice in the Rgveda. 14 Assuming the Itgveda ritual to be the same as the Brahmana ritual, he says, “The ritual which the hymns of the Itgveda were intended to accompany and which is fully described in the other Vedic texts, is, though carried out by sacrificial priests, from beginning to end saturated with magical observances.” (p. 312). 10. Cf. also p. 47. “The whole ritual . complete”. 11. The Re ligion of the Veda 1908. 12. Rgveda Repetitions, Vol. I, p. 18. 13. Introduction p. iv and 81. “In its essence, the Rgveda is not liturgy, but mythology.” 14. ERE, Vol VIII, pp. 311-321. Vol. XII, pp. 610-612. For discussion of his views on magic cf. Chapter X below. DiKSA—INITIATORY REMARKS 7 His view regarding the Vedic sacrifice being magical in character is apparently based on some of the tendencies displayed in the Brah¬ manas. What Dr. Deshmukh 15 says of Oldenberg is also true of Macdonell, viz., that he fails to make a clear distinction between the period of the Rgveda Sarhhita and that of the other Samhitas and the Brahmanas. This would be obvious from what he says at (ERE XII p. 613), “Our knowledge of the recurrent sacrifices is derived from the ritual literature, for there are only few and obscure traces of them in the hymns of the Rgveda, which is almost exclusively concerned with the soma sacrifice. It is however probable that they were performed at least in their main features during the earliest Vedic period.” Thus he believes that the Rgvedic hymns cannot give any idea of the sacrifice and as such feels that the later sacrificial literature gives almost correctly the idea of the sacrifice in the Rgveda. Among those, who agree with Macdonell in holding tnis view can be mentioned C. V. Vaidya 16 and Griswold 17 who says, “The ritual of the Brahmanas was clearly continuous with that of the Rgveda” (p. 336). M. Winternitz refers 18 to the two extreme views in this regard, Kaegi 19 holding that the Rgvedic hymns are mainly poetical and Oldenberg 20 holding that they are ritualistic in character. Keith 21 accepts the latter point in Macdonell’s view as he remarks, “The imperfection of the record of the Rgveda renders it necessary in any account of the Vedic ritual, to. deal with the ritual, as it stands in the later Samhitas and the Brahmanas.” He discusses similarities in the ritual terms of the Itgveda and the Avesta 22 and regarding the nature of the ritual in the Rgveda, concludes, “The question of the primitive sacrifice is clearly insoluble since among certain similarities, there are great differences of view” Ip. 40). It is true in a great measure that inferences about the ritual practices in the Rgveda cannot be drawn on the evidence of Avesta to any reliable extent, for the same reason as the Brahmanas cannot become adequate guides for the Rgvedic ritual viz. the chronological gap that separates the two and the possibility of the consequent changes in the ritual performances. He however appears to realise in a general way, what Roth and Max Muller have referred to as historical character of the Rgveda collection. It presumes, as Max Muller has pointed out, the chronological priority of the Rgveda Sarhhita cf. (p. 15). “We find, indeed, once more that only as a 15. RVL, p. 57. 16. HSL, I, p. 144. 17. RRG, p. 336, 337. 18. HIL, Vol I, p. 72 19. Rgveda—Kaegi. 20. RVO, p. 3. 21. RPV, p. 256. 22. P. 34-35. 8 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA historical rather than a liturgical collection is the condition of the iRgveda logically explicable.” Unlike Haug, he thinks that the animal sacrifice must have been later and that it is not at all prominent in the Rgvedic collection cf. (p. 13): “The collectors of the hymns in the main were inte¬ rested in the Soma ritual and the great majority of the hymns deal with some form or the other of that rite; the animal sacrifice is hardly noticed, save in the case of the most important and rare Asvamedha sacrifice.” Thus even though he believes the earlier sacrifice to be a simpler one, the mention of a number of priests at places, has led him to conclude (p. 16) “Already in the Rgveda, there are signs of considerable elaboration of ritual and of the employment of a num¬ ber of priests at the sacrifice.” Dr. P. S. Deshmukh 23 has discussed in detail the question of the basis of the Rgvedic religion in general. Regarding the nature of sacrifice in the Rgveda, 24 he appears to agree with Prof. Macdonell when he remarks, (p. 339) “The Rgveda itself supplies us with scanty information of the actual forms of sacrifice current in that period. It is however very probable that the various forms of the Soma sacrifices of the later times, together with the production and the establishing of fires (Agnyadhana) .... were known.” After referring to various words and places where points of sacrificial importance are mentioned, he arrives at the conclusion of a developed form of sacrifice in the days of the Rgveda, agreeing with Keith, whom he quotes (p. 341) “The specialisation of the ritual is as old as the Indo-Iranian period.” His discussion about the basis of the religion in general including the ritual practices is quite significant. Referring to the view of Oldenberg, 25 regarding the existence of magic in the Indian tradition as India cannot be an exception, he says that it is “an anthropological fallacy” to say so and points out the one great drawback of Olden¬ berg: (pp. 57-58) “Oldenberg fails to make a clear distinction between the period of the Rgveda and the later Samhitas and the Brahmanas. If the distinction is not made, it may be true to say that the Vedic ritual is overgrown with magical practices.” Thus he appears to have realised that the non-appreciation of the chrono¬ logical gap between the Rgveda Samhita, the Brahmana and the other Srauta works is apt to lead to wrong conclusions regarding the nature of the idea of religion in the Rgveda; still, he does not appear to be indicating the necessity of applying the same principle to determine the nature of the sacrifice in the Rgveda. 23. Religion in Vedic Literature 1933. 24. Op. cit. 339-343. 25. Die Religion des Veda p. 476 IT. DIK§A—INITIATORY REMARKS 9 He does not apparently agree with the view of Keith who believes that we need not make much of the chronological distinc¬ tion, 20 as in a general way “the literature of the Vedic period, shows emphatically no break of any kind in culture” (p. 12); still he accepts the view of Keith regarding the developed nature of sacrifice as seen above. 27 It is clear therefore that mainly because of the want of sufficient data, regarding the nature of the sacrifice in the Rgveda, he has adopted the general conclusions regarding the nature of sacrifice as stated by Dr. Keith. His conclusions, regarding the basic facts about the Rgvedic religion, are quite significant. 28 Professor L. Renou, discussing the possibility of the existence of the ritualistic version of the Rksarhhita 29 as contemporaneous if not anterior to the present Samhita, makes the following observations: (pp. 3-4) “When the Rksainhita was collected or at least when its elements were formed, there neither existed the Yajus nor the Sama collections. This collection, which appears at first sight, an anthology of hymns, without definite value, was in itself its own Samaveda and in some measure, its own Yajurveda (cf. for similar remarks, Oldenberg; ZDMG XXXVIII p. 441). He further refers to the views of Bergaigne fp. 6), who “developing some ideas of Ludwig, thought that one would be able to explain vast groups of hymns as a function of some subsequent ritual.” Oldenberg had also started to do so simultaneously (ZDMG XLII). However the more recent researches of Oldenberg (Noten III-26, 28,52; ZDMG LXXI p. 323) and Geldner have preserved only a part of these concordances. Bergaigne (J. as 1889; p. 15) has referred to some Sastras in Gayatri in the Rgveda. Prof. Renou however does not agree with this view as he remarks (p. 4) “The Rksamhita is in no way reducible to Yajurvedic literature, if for nothing else, than by the total absence of Yajus and of related forms. In other words, with its historical or literary character, it could not lend itself directly to the practice of the worship unless we admit religious habits, quite different from those, which distinguish Vedism.” He criticizes the view by pointing out (p. 5) “It is clear in fact that the sequence of the nuptial or funeral prayers is partly arbitrary and that the modifications, introduced in it by the treatises are justified by the experience of the ceremonial. But it has not at all followed from that, that these treatises, have in some way before them, a samhita, arranged for the completion of the ceremonies in the same manner as the Yajus Samhita .... What was possible 26. RPV, pp. 252-56. 27 For his view regarding some hymns being non-ritualistic. Cf. RVL, p. 332 and Chapter XI below. 28. RVL, p. 45; for quite the contrary view, cf. Macdonell: ERE, Vol. VIII, p. 313. 29. Les Ecoles Vediques—Renou. 10 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA in the tradition of the Yajus, in which one had to deal with the disconnected formulae, was not at all necessary in the Rksamhita, where the hymns, with strong structures prevailed. If it had accredited itself to a ritual recension, what need one would have had, for maintaining parallely a literary Samhita? And why should the former have disappeared when the liturgic collection (viz. the Brahmana literature) has been faithfully preserved? In short, there might have been an oral cadre of those hymns, sometimes strongly differentiated, but no recension. It is not by chance that the applications are particularly precise for the tenth Mandala, for the Appendix and the Khila hymns. It is the sign of a kind of ritual intrusion, a new anxiety for paring which was very far from the thought of the Rsis.” Then further pointing out that the question is connected with the ritual contemporaneous with the Rksamhita, he refers to the view of Bergaigne, who tried to explain the hymns of the Rgveda as exponent of the subsequent ritual, that of Hillebrandt, who ex¬ pounds the notion of the “Lost ritual” 30 (“Ritual Perdu”), as also of Barth (OEuvres I. p. 367), who says, “The liturgy of the ritual works is no longer the liturgy of the hymns. This is a great fact that dominates all the resemblances of details.” Then proceeding to explain some ritual similarities between the Rgvedic hymns and the Brahmanical rites, which have been considered to be grounds for proving the agreement between the Brahmanic and Rgvedic ritual by a number of scholars like Haug, Hillebrandt 31 and Oldenberg, he remarks, “The agreement between the formula and the rite is placed at a very high value by the Vedic authors (cf. A.B. I. 1. 4. 9). However we observe that this agreement can result from an adaptation. It has been admitted for the Sautra- mani rite (RV Noten-III. 26 Oldenberg) and even in those cases, where the hymns exactly adhere to the rite, this adhesion has been able to replace another quite different as Hertel 32 has tried to demonstrate for disputable purposes, it is true with regard to the Apri hymns, which the classical theory comprehends with doubtful legitimacy in the Prayajas of the animal sacrifice. As Barth writes, (II. p. 12n) “It is extremely doubtful whether the verses of such and such an ancient hymn have been composed to serve as the Yajyas and the Anuvakyas to the Agnisomiya Pasu, which later on is an integral part of every Soma sacrifice.” 30. RLH. p. 11. “A satisfactory solution of the oldest ritual cannot yet be given. This is so as the words like sunvat, pacat etc. descriptive of the priestly func¬ tions are there-and in general a developed ritual_” Cf. also VMH, Vol. I, p. 469, Vol. II, p. 201. RPV, p. 252. 31. Vol. I, p. 259, where he points out how the order of deities in Rv. I. 2, 3, 23, 135-36, II. 41 is the same as the one in which offerings are made to them in the later ritual. 32. Neujahrsopfer, p, 42. DiK$A—INITIATORY REMARKS 11 The link between the formulae and the rite is of a variable nature. It is precise in the magic traditions, even in those cases where it appears absurd to us 33 and in the Gfhya tradition allied to it. It is less so in the solemn worship, where the magical motives do not intervene consciously, if the Yajus is sufficiently visibly con¬ structed for a precise act, the Mantra so called, whatever be its origin, has often with the act, only a loose and naively formal link.” Agreeing substantially with the views referred to, Prof. Renou broadly generalises, (p. 7) “It is in fact a question of principle. It is impossible to imagine to take for basis the theory of the Sutra, a ritual which coincides with the Samhita. Besides the fact that this latter is concerned mainly with the soma sacrifice in its elemen¬ tary aspects, nothing resembles less the disorderly fragmentation of the formulae attested by a descriptive prose, than the majority of the hymns, unity of which is marked by a system of metrical and phonetic signs. Everything happens as if the hymns had been com¬ posed to serve as oratorical introductions to a ceremony at which they presided without forming part of them. 34 Recited in course of literary conceptions, they are connected with a worship, by the environment in which they are placed, rather than by the technical application to which they give rise. It is from this point of view that one can say without any paradox that the Rgveda is external to the Vedic worship.” Thus even though broadly recognising the inherent difference between the ritual of the Rgvedic hymns and that of the Brahmanas, Prof. Renou prefers to make a safe statement, “The ritual that we possess has been, if not conceived, at least written out at a posterior date.” (p. 35). It will thus be observed that there is considerable divergence of opinion regarding the following points connected with the present problem of the Sacrifice in the Rgveda. (1) Importance of realising the existence of the chronological gap between the Rgveda Sarhhita and the later ritual literature and the consequential difference in the ritual of the two; the relation between the two stages of the ritual. (2) Simplicity of the early ritual and the extent of its growth in the Rgvedic period. (3) Existence of stages in the growth of the sacrifice during the period of the composition of the hymns of the Rgveda. (4) Connection between the flgvedic hymns and the Sacrifice. (5) Basic idea underlying the sacrifice. 33. Edgerton: Volume to Prof. Thomas p. 78. 34. Ved. Stu. Vol. II, p. 152. Geldner. 12 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA (6) Material for deductions regarding the nature and influence of the sacrifice in the days of the Rgveda. While pointing out this variety of views above, it is indicated that this divergence is the outcome partly, of the fact that in a general way, one likes to believe that as the Brahmanas employ the hymns of the Rgveda in their ritual, they must have been referring to the ritual, which must have been known to them by tradition right from the days of the Rgveda. This inference is supported to some extent by the fact that the Sutra literature, continues to discuss and sup¬ plement the ritual of the Brahmanas according to the traditions of the schools to which they belong. It is however necessary to appre¬ ciate the fallacy underlying this presumption. As indicated above, the divine origin and the consequent authoritativeness of the Mantra and the Brahmana literature was the one point common to all schools of Vedic study that developed in course of time. It was however not so in the case of the Brahmanas, the authors of which, were not conscious of any such privileged position, enjoyed by the hymns of the Rgveda. There was therefore not the least likelihood of their scrupulously following everything laid down in the hymns of the Rgveda. On the contrary, the very haphazard and arbitrary employ¬ ment of the Rgvedic hymns and their portions in the ritual of the Brahmanas would give an impression that the authors were looking upon the hymns as meant more for their convenience than for any traditions represented by them. It is out of this tendency ultimately, that the school of thought represented by Kautsa 35 as referred to by Yaska came into existence, which even went to the length of believing that the Mantras were meaningless. Thus on account of this essential point of difference in the relationship between the two pairs, (1) the Rgveda and the Brahma¬ nas and (2) the Brahmanas and the Sutras, it cannot be legitimately concluded that the Brahmanas ought to represent the ritual of the Rgvedic hymns. There is also another point of vital difference between the two pairs. It is known that the Sutras were meant for discussions of sacrificial character as are the Brahmanas to which they are looking for guidance. The hymns of the Rgveda however are not known to be essentially sacrificial in their origin. In fact, it is generally believed that a large number of hymns cannot be considered to have anything to do with the sacrifice, 36 though Bloomfield 37 has made some effort to indicate that “it is largely a collection of the hymns composed by various priest-families for this important sacrifice” (Soma-sacrifice). 38 35. Ni Vol. I, p. 5. Nirarthaka Mantrah. 36. ASL, p. 247. 37. R.V.B., p. 75. 38. Op. cit. pp. 77-8. DIKSA—INITIATORY REMARKS 13 As it will be observed in the following chapter, the available data about the relation of the hymns with the sacrifice, reveals the fact that the compositions have maintained a freshness about them, as they were not very rigidly tagged on to the mechanical practice of the sacrifice. In the compositions of the hymns, the dominant idea in the mind of the poet does not appear to be the employment at a particular sacrificial rite but rather the propitiation of the divinity. It is with this end in view, he employs all his emotion and poetical skill to express his feelings towards the divinity to win over its favourable disposition. In some of the hymns, the idea of their sacrificial employment may be quite obvious; in others, it may be transparent; in some others, it may not be present at all. In the majority of the hymns, however, the thought of propitiation appears to be quite predominant. With this background of the relationship of the hymns and the sacrifice in view, it can be said in a general way that though the hymns have helped the growth of the sacrifice, they were not necessarily and entirely meant for the sacrifice. 39 It should not however be forgotten that as the hymns and the sacrifice have been growing in the hands, practically of the same group of people, one is bound to be, in a general way, reflected in the other, as we do find to be the case. It is thus that the hymns reflect the practical approach of the sacrifice, as the sacrifice must have reflected in it the emotions and the feelings of the hymns. It is however only by a stretch of imagination that Bloomfield writes, 40 “. . . . It is sacrifice to gods, treated poetically. In other words, the poems are incidental to sacrifice.” At the same time, realising that a number of them could not be, with any reasonable stretch of imagi¬ nation be construed with sacrifice, he has to add, 41 “Even the Rgveda begins to show most of them in the state of a sort of supernumeraries on the stage of sacrifice,” and to argue that “we must acknowledge that never has sacrifice had such genuine poetry to serve it.” It can be realised that this is putting together two incompatible ideas. The mechanical performance of a sacrificial rite cannot evoke genuine poetry. The genuine character of poetry can be preserved so long as the freshness of approach to divinity and the emotions charac¬ terizing it prevail. Once the form gets the upper hand, genuine poetry pales into insignificance. 42 In the mechanism of sacrifice, the hymns have quite a secondary role to play; because therein it is not the perfection of poetical expression that counts but the per¬ fection in the observance. 43 If we see the phenomenon of ‘genuine poetry serving the cause of sacrifice’ in the Brahmanas, as Bloomfield has put it, the truth of the matter is that the poetry ‘is made’ to 39. Cf. L.E.V.—Renou p. 8. “.Rgveda est exterieur an culte vedique”. 40. R.V.B., p. 64. 41. Ibid. 42. Cf. R.V.L., p. 338. 43 ‘Karmasamrddhi’. A.B. 14 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA serve the cause of sacrifice by the authors of the Brahmanas. In the days of the Rgveda, the poetry has served the purpose of the propitiation of the divinity even as the sacrifice has done. Using a metaphor, it can be said that in the days of the Rgveda, the hymns and the sacrifice were the two horses, drawing the chariot of the propitiation of the divinities. In the days of the Brahmanas, with the shifting of the emphasis, the performance of a sacrificial rite has become a chariot to be drawn by the hymns and the divinities. Thus though in a sense, it is true to say that the ritual of the Brahmanas has grown out of the ritual of the Rgveda, it need not make us presume any large measure of similarity between the two and that, as indicated above, there is bound to exist a gulf separating the two rituals, particularly in view of the chronological gap . 44 Another reason, which appears to have led the scholars to hold such divergent views, is the fact that just as there is ample data available for describing the sacrifice in the Brahmanas and the Srauta literature, there is no data available for describing the sacrifice in the Rgveda. Thus Macdonell has referred to the fact about the insufficient data, followed by Keith and Deshmukh. Keith 45 was thus led to argue that for the same reason, sacrifice was to be con¬ sidered as ‘continuous like culture’. To some extent, the idea of Vedic schools, which came into existence at a subsequent date and which have helped immensely in the preservation of the texts and their systematic study over a long stretch of time, have helped the idea of the continuity and similarity of the rituals to gather strength. It is therefore necessary to view this point in its proper perspective to determine how far, the jump from insufficient data to general perception of similarity is an easy one. There should be no difficulty in realizing that unless the circum¬ stances were the same, the two rituals could not be alike. But whereas the Brahmana literature presupposes a pretty stabilised society, the hymns of the Rgveda do not do so. If the civilization is evolving as can be noticed from the evidence of the hymns, the sacrifice also must be expected to evolve in the same way. It cannot be treated as an isolated phenomenon, whose nature can be deter¬ mined by any vague and arbitrary criterion, unlike other aspects of civilization. The history of all social institutions indicates their growth from simple to complex states and sacrifice can be no exception to it. As it is recognised by various scholars, some hymns of the Rgveda apparently indicate a very simple ritual with one priest and it has 44. Cf V.M.H., Vol. II, Introduction p. 8. “.separates the two periods practically to the same extent as the denouncing of the Devas separates the Avesta from the Rgveda.” At the same time writing about the ritual (Vol. I. p. 202) that it would be like that of the Brahmanas. 45. R.P.V. p. 12. DiKSA—INITIATORY REMARKS 15 grown pretty complicated in the days of the Brahmanas, indicating its growth like that of all other social institutions in the course of time. That sacrifice is a social institution of an ancient origin and wide influence is indicated even in the Gita . 46 It is for the same reason that the growth of the sacrifice in different stages has not been perceptibly stressed by scholars, though it may have been implied by some. Another thing which also appears to have escaped the notice of the scholars is the fact that the sacrifice in the Rgveda is the ritual that was contemporaneous with the com¬ position of the Rgveda hymns. During the period of their compila¬ tion into a Samhita, the ritual must have been growing and in fact, it can be imagined that it is during this period that the mechanical aspect of the sacrifice began to grow rapidly, till it reached its very rigid form, in the days of the Brahmanas. It need not be presumed, as it may be done, that the sacrifice had long been in existence before the hymns of the Rgveda came to be written, in order to be able to conclude that the hymns describe an advanced ritual. In this connection, it may be noted that the conclusion would have been valid if the order of the collection had reflected the employment for ritual purposes faithfully as found in the Brahmanas. It is however not so in the case of the present col¬ lection (samhita), which is apparently, non-ritualistic in its origin. Thus it will be observed that insufficient data and vague ideas have led to over-statements regarding the nature of the Rgvedic sacrifice. It is therefore desirable to fall back on the hymns of the Rgveda themselves to yield whatever information they can regarding the nature of the Rgvedic sacrifice as that alone can constitute some reasonable evidence to base our conclusions upon. This evidence, as we have indicated above, has got its own limitations, particularly as all the hymns were not composed for sacrificial employment and even those which were so composed would not necessarily describe the full details of that performance. Even so, there is a possibility of references to certain details of performance occurring in some of the hymns, where the poets would be looking upon the sacrifice along with their hymns as a joint means of propitiating the divinity. The fact of the authors of the hymns, figuring predominantly in the carrying out of the performances of the ritual, referred to above, also cannot be lost sight of in this context. Thus when the sacrifice is growing under the eyes of the composers of the hymns, some reflection of the same is bound to be seen in their compositions. Just as the hymns of the Rgveda are the sole guide for having an idea about the social conditions prevailing at the time, so also they should be in the case of the sacrifice. 46. ‘Sahayajnah prajah Srstva’ etc. Ill, 10; ‘evam pravartitarii cakram’ III, 16. 16 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA Hence it is proposed to analyse the hymns of the Rgveda as thoroughly as possible to yield all possible information regarding the Sacrifice in the Rgveda. All words of ritual significance would be analysed and discussed in their proper context. Expression of ideas in terms of sacrifice would also play its part in yielding some informa¬ tion. It is thus that the analysis of the sacrificial epithets and similes would be undertaken. There is also to be encountered the problem of the relative chronology of the hymns of the Rgveda which cannot be resolved with a reasonable amount of certainty. In arriving at conclusions regarding stages of the growth, therefore, we can arrive at only approximate truths; but, as certain ideological developments can be marked easily, the problem need not present any insuperable obstacle in the way. Since, chronologically, hymns of the Rgveda, as distinguished from the remaining Vedic literature constitute one unit and since it is intended to determine the stage of sacrifice during the period of the composition of the Rgvedic hymns herein, it is proposed to restrict the scope of the present work to a full analysis of the material from the hymns of the Rgveda only. There is no contemporary evidence, which can be found to support the inferences from the Rgvedic hymns. It is therefore advantageous in a way to determine as clearly as possible, the stage of sacrifice reached during the period of the composition of the Rgvedic hymns. We have the authority of a Rgvedic poet to fix up the Rgvedic hymns as the right basis to do so. X. 134. 7 Na kirdeva mimmasi nakira yopayamasi, Mantra srutyam caramasi |. atrabhi sarhrabhamahe | 47 Thus it is strictly the evidence presented by the hymns themselves that we shall abide by and there would be no deviation therefrom. As it will be observed in due course, the hymns of the Rgveda have offered sufficient material to draw relevant conclusions therefrom. With a metaphor, in the words of another Rgvedic poet, we can say that the hymns themselves can act as an armour to guard the safety of the conclusions that they themselves indicate (VI. 75. 19 Brahma Varma mamantaram [}. Thus we shall discuss the relationship of the hymns with and their approach to the sacrifice in the second chapter. Consideration of the hymns with specific sacrificial importance will be left over to a subsequent chapter (chapter eleven). Then the relationship of the gods with the sacrifice and the way in which the people deve¬ loped their idea of gods to play their role in the sacrifice will be 47. Velankar (B.U.J. 1953)“ None of us, oh gods, violates (the dictates of the mantras); none of us has frustrated (them); We practise the dictates of the mantras. We cling to you. just here by your sides (and) by your armpits.” DiK§A—INITIATORY REMARKS 17 taken into account. In the fourth chapter, the region where the sacrifices were performed and the scene at the place of sacrifice with a variety of implements will be described. The fifth chapter will describe the various offerings that were employed in the per¬ formances and the sixth will describe the types of performances, referred to in the Rgveda. The seventh and the eighth chapters will describe the part played by the priests and the patrons in the development of the sacrifice. The categories of people who tried to oppose the sacrifice as a growing idea and the nature of their opposition will be indicated in the ninth chapter. The tenth chapter will discuss whether magic was the basis of the idea of sacrifice and indicate the prevalence of a mystical element in the development of the same. The analysis and classification of sacrificial similes in the twelfth chapter will indicate how the sacrifice dominated the thought of the Aryans and also how some light can be thrown on the nature of the sacrifice thereby. The thirteenth chapter will point out the influence of the sacrifice on the social structure of the time, as also on the idea of religion and philosophy. The fourteenth chapter will attempt the determination of stages, by which the sacri¬ fice has probably grown and the stage to which it has reached during the period of the composition of the hymns. The last chapter will take stock of the situation presented and indicate the lines on which further work, concerning the topic can proceed. S.H. —‘J Chapter Two HYMNS AND THE SACRIFICE t (Rv. viii-2G-i5) irw *tpt Fr? ^ irpjr: i (rv-x-os-s) SYNOPSIS:— Inextricably connected like the Bija and the Ahkura—Yaska’s classification cannot suggest much in this regard—two schools of thought—sacrificial hymns separately discussed—remarks scattered in the Rgveda about this relationship—to be collected, classified and presented here with comments regarding their significance—essential as the ritual was growing under the eyes of the poets—view of a poet regarding the priority of the hymns to the sacrifice— Standard regarding the compositions for sacrificial purposes laid down—for the acceptance by the divinities—path for the hymns to be prepared by the divinity— efficacy of the sacrifice through the hymns aRo stressed—sometimes the deity coaxed—even the power which comes to the gods through sacrifices, is due to the hymns—hymns occupying a place of pride in the sacrificial set-up— Sacrifice is well performed only if associated with good hymns—gods do not like sacrifice without hymns—unrivalled hymns to different deities referred to— in fact the burden of the sacrifice said to be borne by the hymns—hymns raising the standard of the sacrifice—certain hymns said to be surpassing certain others in ritual efficacy—certain poets on the strength of their hymns, said to be dearer to the gods—performances with certain hymns said to be better than the others—Indra asked to compose a new hymn—what the hymns can achieve—all-availing hymn— even cosmological function attributed to the hymns—leading to the idea of the Gita in ‘evarh pravartitam cakrarhl etc— Hymns of sacrificial importance composed on the background of some incidents —Danastutis—Soma hymns separately collected on account of the predominance of soma-sacrifice—emphasis on the connection of soma with hymns and sacrifice— mystically intimate relationship between soma ar.d hymns—hymns receiving tone under the influence of soma—the reason of it—hymns as garments of soma—to satisfy the two requirements of the time viz. the hymns must be acceptable to the deities and that they must have a certain standard or tone—special categories of hymns came to be recognised and designated—some of them discussed—some deriving their names from the metres in which they were written—brhatl, tristubh, gayatra, sakvari gatha and gatha—Gathas and Soma taken by Avesta along with the soma-ritual— “Hotra” said to be particularly acceptable in a sacrifice—some hymns of sacri¬ ficial importance designated without any special nomenclature—mystical significance from the point of view of sacrificial efficacy associated with certain hymns— AstapadI, on the basis of the number of syllables—yajus, mantra and sama—associa¬ tion of this type with Ahgirasas emphasized—mode of. singing saman hymns referred to—priests given specific names on the basis of hymns—certain saman hymns of specific potency mentioned—perhaps the most important type of the sacrificial hymns—the NIVIDs—different views—Dr. M. Haug on Nivids—were nivids of brahmanical significance in existence in the days of the Rgvedic hymns?—nivids HYMNS AND THE SACRIFICE 19 cannot stand for short formulas as accepted by scholars—passages describing nivids discussed and explained as suggesting hymns of that name—Brahmanas not explaining ritual with all the above types, indicating vast difference between the ritual set-up —hence Haug’s view not acceptable—some general observances. Sacrifice and hymns are almost as vitally and inextricably connected with each other and can also be fittingly said to be evolving out of each other like the renowned ‘Bija and Ahkura’ of the Vedanta doctrine. In fact it is almost futile to discuss and practically impossi¬ ble to decide as to which of the two was earlier and which was later. If we could somehow know exactly the circumstances, under which the first hymn came to be written, it would help us to unravel the mystery of the first sacrifice. In a general way, we come across the idea that the hymns give rise to sacrifice (VIII.69.1c); or conversely that the sacrifice is an incentive for new hymns (IV.20.10 navye desne saste asmin ta ukthe prabravama vayamindra etc.). But beyond suggesting their insepa¬ rable mutual relationship, it does not throw much light on the earlier origin of the one or trie other. Yaska, who was the first to study the Rgveda in a systematic, scientific and critical way, has attempted an analysis of the hymns of the Rgveda in the seventh chapter of his Nirukta. He has also discussed the problem of the ‘anadista-devata-mantras’. In the mention of the “yajna-daivata- mantra” view, he has rightly stressed the intimate relation between the hymns and the sacrifice; but his statements do not throw any light on the priority of the one or the other. The principle of the person who speaks out the hymn being the deity thereof, is more or less a literary criterion and as such cannot make clear the point whether sacrificial association for these hymns existed or did not exist. Thus the “adhyatmikyah” cannot be said to have a sacrificial background; but at the same time, there is no ground to assert with any positive emphasis that all those different categories had necessari¬ ly got a clear sacrificial association. The fact that the Brahmanas have fixed up verses or portions of verses from different hymns at random in their rituals merely confirms the inference that a pretty large majority of hymns of the Rgveda were neither necessarily composed for a particular ritual or rituals nor had they got any rigid tradi¬ tional association with any sacrificial ritual as such. Dr. M. Winter- nitz 1 has referred to two divergent schools of thought in this connec¬ tion; some scholars like Kaegi saying that a very large majority of hymns were poetical and natural in their origin, while others like Prof. H. Oldenberg 2 holding that “such poetry could have arisen only in the exclusive circles of the priestly sacrificial experts”. The first view is apparently based on a literary appreciation of the hymns 1. H.I.L.. Vol I, p. 72. 2. RVO, p. :j. 20 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA of the Rgveda; but it should be remembered that, some of those hymns of literary beauty do have a sacrificial basis. The second view is untenable on the face of it, as there is no evidence whatso¬ ever in support of it. In fact, the course of the growth of the ritual in the later days in all its variety, clearly necessitates the inference that the ritual cannot and need not be imagined to be so developed in those early days. Some of those hymns of the Rgveda are obviously sacrificial in character; e.g. the Apri hymns. 3 They have been separately dis¬ cussed in a different chapter. 4 They can only give us an idea of the stage or stages of the development of the ritual in those days. But regarding the relation of the hymns with the sacrifice, a number of observations have been made occasionally by the Vedic poets and it is proposed to discuss here passages containing such observations and see what light they throw on the nature of the sacrifice in the Rgveda. This evidence is obviously important, more important than the views of persons, who commented upon them centuries after those hymns were composed, because of the fact that the ritual in the days of the Rgveda, was shaping and growing under the eyes of the Rgvedic poets and hence, their observations, though casually stated, carry a good deal of weight in this regard. Even though, for all practical purposes, it is true that the question of the priority of the hymns or the sacrifices cannot be definitely decided either way, one of the poets, who is probably looking back on the growth of the hymns and the sacrifices, remarks that the hymns came to be written first and then the sacrifice came into existence, (suktavakarh prathamamadidagnimadiddhavirajana- yanta devah | sa esarh yajno abhavat tanupah X.88.8). This solitary reference cannot prove much; but it is certainly worthy of note as an opinion of one, who, though he may have been relatively late in the tradition of the hymns and the sacrifices, was certainly much nearer to them than the later speculators in the field of the inter¬ pretation of the Rgveda and hence, it is not altogether improbable that his statement may be containing precious grains of truth in it. Another poet appears to be hinting at the fact that all the hymns were certainly not being composed for the sacrifice nor were they considered to be of a particular standard for the sacrifice. (Rv.VII. 29.3. Ka te asti arariikrtih suktaih, Kada nunaih te maghavan dasema|Visva matlratatane tvaya, adha me indra srnavo havema). All the hymns might have been composed in honour of certain deities but only some of them were considered as “competent” (aramkrtih) for the sacrificial performance. It was only when a particular hymn 3. B.U.J., 1945-6, AHR. 4. Vide Chapter eleven. HYMNS AND THE SACRIFICE 21 was admitted as competent that the offering was considered as acceptable to the divinity and hence could be given in the sacrifice as indicated by “kada nunam maghavan dasema”. Thus it appears that hymns for sacrificial purposes were required to have a certain standard in their composition. The same is also indicated at 1.120.1 (Ka radhad hotra asvina vam .... katha vidhati apracetah), where it is said that a certain type of hymn (here called ‘hotra’) is required for undertaking the performance of a sacrifice; because otherwise the Asvina would not be pleased. Persons ignorant about this (apracetah), could not offer the sacrifice. The high standard of construction and gracefulness, expected in a hymn to be employed at the sacrifice is also referred to at VII.32.13 (mantramakharvaih sudhitam supesasam dadhata yajniyesu a), where it is said such a hymn should be free from defects, should be well-constructed, and in general graceful (possibly with a number of figures of speech, etc.). It is for this reason that another poet prays to the divinity con¬ cerned, that his hymn may be accepted at heart by the divinity, so that the offerings which can win their objective can be made. (1.73.10 eta ta agne ucathani vedho, jusfani santu manase hrde ca | sakema rayah sudhuro yamaih te adhi sravo devabhaktam dadhanahj j). As both the mind and the heart of the divinity are to approve of the hymn, a good amount of skill in the composition thereof would certainly be required. At the same time, the poet being conscious of the fact that the acceptance of the divinity can come through the help of the divinity only, is invoking the help of the divinity to grant him the necessary help. (IX.82.4c. antar vanLsu pracara—sujivase). Soma, when pressed, is expected to find a path for the hymn (Rv.IX.96.10) and Vaisvanara is requested to find the path for the hymn, (VII.13.3 Vaisvanara brahmane vinda gatum). It may be noted that the path for the hymn is naturally through a sacrificial performance and in this way, the vital role of the hymns in the sacrifice is amply made clear. This consciousness too had further, the consciousness of the efficacy of the sacrifice in persuading the divinity to do the favour, as its basis. Sometime the divinity would be coaxed by promises to show the favour; at times, the hymns plainly would be referred to as bringing the wealth, of course, through the sacrifices offered to the divinity. Thus, Indra is asked to give the liberal gift that he would give to a liberal sacrificer and in return he is promised the glorifica¬ tion of the same in a new hymn, (IV.20.10. a bhara daddhi tannah j pra dasuse datave bhuri yat te | navye de$ne sasta asmin. ta ukthe 22 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA prabravama vayamindra |[). Thoughtful prayers are said to be going to Agni, with devotion to gods, begging for wealth (VII.10.3 accha giro matayo devayantih, agnirii yanti dravinaih bhiksamanah). Some¬ times, new hymns are said to be composed as attractions for the divinity. (VII.26.led, tasma uktham janaye yajjujosat nrvanaviyah srnavadyatha nah ). Even an offering of soma in the sacrifice is said to be growing on account of the hymns (IX.17.4, a kalasesu dhavati pavitre pari sicyate | ukthairyajnesu vardhate j). Thus are the hymns described as incentives to the divinity for accepting a particular sacrifice. At times the poets would go a step further by saying that that the power, that the gods exercise, of course after the sacrifices have been offered to them through the assistance of the priests, is also due to those hymns sung at the sacrifices. (Rv.VII.33.3, dasarajne sudasam pravadindro brahmana vo vasisthah and VII.33.4, yacchakvarlsu brhata ravena indre susmamadadhata vasisthah [), where the source of the power of Indra is said to be the hymns of the Vasisthas. At VIII.62.1, performances of soma-sacrifices are said to be augmenting the strength of Indra (ukthairindrasya mahinam vayo vardhanti sominahj). Soma juice is also said to be flowing across the obstacles on account of the hymns (IX.3.2. e§a deva vipa krto ati hvaramsi dhavati). Soma plant is said to be yielding the soma juice only on account of the prayers (IX.97.1, asya presa hemana devah devebhih samaprkta rasam). Mortals too are said to be receiving their enjoyments through the hymns (X.7.2, yada te marto anu bhogamanat, vaso dadhano matibhih sujata). Even though the enjoyments are obtained only by the performances of the sacrifices, (yada te vaso—bhogamanat), the emphasis, it should be noted is laid on the role of the hymns. In a number of passages, the inseparable connection between the hymns and sacrifices is stressed clearly, by pointing out that the sacrifices can be fruitful only through the hymns or even suggesting that the sacrifices could not be imagined without the hymns (Rv.VII.16.2, subrahma yajnah susami vasunarh devarii radho jananam: the sacrifice with good hymns becomes well-performed and then brings the gifts—devarh radhah). At VII.26.1, it is said that Indra is not delighted by sacrifice (offering of soma) without the hymns (nabrahmano maghavanam sutasah— mamaduh); and X.105.8, says that Indra is not easily pleased with hymnless sacrifices (nabrahma yajnah rdhag josati tve). At times the hymn is plainly said to be winning or successfully accomplishing the sacrifice (VII.66.8, matiriyam vipra medhasataye). This is expressed more clearly at VIII.26.15 (visudruheva yajnam uhathur- gira), where Asvins are said to be bearing the burden of the sacri¬ fices with the help of the hymns. At times, even the hymns are said to be bearing the burden of the sacrifices by themselves (cf. VIII. 26.16, vahistho vam havanam stomo dutah). HYMNS AND THE SACRIFICE 23 In order that the hymns should be able to do this, it was neces¬ sary that they should be appropriate ones for the deities concerned. It is to be noted that the various divinities had their own place of importance in the system of sacrifice, some of them quite naturally being considered as more important than the others. The standard of invocation would differ according to the status of the divinity. Particularly when a group like Visve-Devas was to be offered a sacrifice, it was necessary to bear in mind the relative importance of the various divinities, as offerings were to be made to them either individually, one after the other, or at times in a collective manner. This fact was borne in mind while composing the hymns for certain sacrificial performances, as is made clear by a poet at VII.43.1, (Pra vo yajnesu devayanto arcan dyava namobhih prthivi isadhyai | yesaih brahmani asamani vipra visvag viyanti vanino na sakhah 11). In a poetic way, the hymns are compared with the branches of a tree. That the hymns referred to were composed specifically for purposes of the sacrifice, so that they might urge on the divinities, is made clear in ab (yajnesu.arehan.isadhyai). In a very fine simile, they are compared with the branches (sakhah) in cd. The common points stated are quite significant. ‘Asamani’ suggests very happily that just as the branches of the trees are ‘unequal’, (asama), 5 so are the hymns, obviously according to the status of the divinities. With ‘slesa’, the word also indicates that the hymns are ‘unequalled’ or ‘unrivalled’. The hymns, with their verses addressed to various deities and thus going to them are very aptly compared with the branches of the tree, spreading in various directions. If a hymn is particularly powerful, it is even said to be raising the standard of the sacrificial performance from human to divine plane, (cf. X.93.8, dustarani yasya sama cit, rdhag yajno na manusah). Hardly can a poetical expression be more explicit in pointing out the vital role of the hymns, as it had come to be established in the days of the Rgveda. When the hymns had such control over the sacrifices, it is quite natural that the hymns of certain singers are said to surpass those of the others in winning over the divinity. Thus it is said at VIII.1.4, (Vi tarturyante maghavan.aryo vipo jananam) that the songs of the wise surpass those of the others or at VIII.26.16 that a certain hymn is the best of the lot as far as the sacrificial performances to the deity are concerned. Some poets appear to be considered as nearer to the gods, on account of the hymns they were composing for sacrifices (VIII.64.9, Ukthe ka u svidantamah). Even in com¬ parison with other materials of the sacrifice, the hymn is said to be the most agreeable one (VIII.24.20.dasmyam vacah. .. . ghrtat 5. For ‘Sama’ in the sense of ‘equal’ cf. X. 119.9 ‘Samau hastau’; for an 'unrivalled hymn’ Cf. X.SD.2, Irrahma’ and 1.54.8 ‘asama manlsa’. 24 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA svadiyo madhunasca.). Anyway, merely an attractive offering even like ‘soma’ could never be imagined in the absence of the hymn. Indra is said to be delighted with a just combination of the two, however dear ‘soma’ may be to him. It is so indicated at VII.26.2 (Ukthe ukthe soma Indram mamada | nithe nithe maghavanam sutasah). When a fresh occasion for composition arose, the poet would compose a ‘doubly’ powerful hymn, so that it might be found attrac¬ tive by the divinity and bring blessings to friends and singers (gathered at the sacrificial performance), cf. VII.8.6, idam vacah satasah sam sahasram | Udagnaye janislsta dvibarhah.sam yat stotrbhya apaye bhavati | ). In a negative way it is pointed out how a hymn sustains the sacrifice at V. 44.9 (na rLjyati savanam yasmlnnayata.agrima.matih), where it is remarked that a soma-pressing, associated with a striking hymn does not suffer (i.e. becomes successful). The sacrificial performance that is associated with a particularly potent hymn is said to be surpassing similar performances by others at VII.1.14 (sedagniratyastu anyanj yatra tanayah.sahasra- patha aksara sameti |). In order to indicate the same inviolable relation between the hymns and sacrifices, in a very striking way a poet asks Indra to create a new hymn with or in the sacrifices, a deed which remains undone by him. (cf. VI.18.15, anu dyavaprthivi tatta ojo amartya jihata Indra devah j Krsva krtno akrtarh yatta astyuktham navlyo janayasva yajnaih 6 ]]). The importance of the role of the hymns in the sacrifices is further indicated by a number of passages, where the efficacy of the hymns in various fields is being pointed out, of course through their association with the sacrifices. Thus at 1.75.1 (jusasva sapra- thastamam vaco. havya juvhana asani), Agni has been asked to accept the offerings, associated with a hymn and then in the following verse, the hymn is referred to as all-availing (sanasi), apparently through the sacrifice. Indra is said to be the winner of light through the hymns at 1.131.6. Gods can be brought to the sacrifice through the hymns (1.135.5, a vam—(Indra and Vayu)— dhiyo vavrtyuh adhvaran). The sacrificial session is said to be effective and the Angirasas are said to have been enabled to penetrate the darkness through the mediation of the hymns only. (VI.65.5, vyarkena bibhidurbrahmana ca satya nrnamabhavad devahutih |). Gods are said to be giving gifts through the sacrifices, associated with the 6. Sayana construes yajnaih as equivalent to yajne$u. It should however be preferrably construed in the instrumental sense, as Prof. Velankar does (B.U.J. Vol. X, 1941, p. 90), indicating the twofold role of Indra, in the performances as well as in compositions. HYMNS AND THE SACRIFICE 25 hymns at VII.16.2 (Subrahma yajnah susami.devam radho jananam). One of the poets even claims the power, enabling him to kill the great (demons) through the hymns. IV.4.11a (maho rujami bandhuta vacobhih |), adding that it came to him through ancestral tradition (b tanma piturgotamadanviyaya). A very great compli¬ ment is paid to those poets, who compose hymns for sacrifices, as surpassing all others in glory, (cf. VII.7.6, ete dyumnebhirvisvama- tiranta, mantram ye varam narya ataksan j Pra ye visastiranta sro§amana, a ca ye me asya didhayannrtasya |1). Even the cosmological function of the creation of the people is said to be attributable to Agni on account of a particularly powerful hymn, that is offered to him (1.96.2, Sa purvaya nivida kavyatayorima praja ajanayanmanunam |). Even though we cannot precisely know the circumstances under which the hymns of the Rgveda came to be written, occasionally we do come across evidence about the raison d’etre of some of them. Thus the Danastutis and some other sacrificial hymns indicate their setting. It appears customary to glorify certain deeds in sacrificial sessions (cf. 1.162.Id, pravaksyamo vidathe viryani). This was appa¬ rently done to give publicity to those incidents, which were com¬ paratively unknown to the general public of the time. On some of these occasions, possibly, it was customary to pro¬ claim in chorus a particular point in the sacrifice, as is suggested at 1.74.3, where Agni’s ‘rise’ is said to be proclaimed by the people (uta bruvantu jantavo yadagnirajani.). It also appears to be customary to sing hymns loudly at times as indicated at 1.75.1 (vacah saprathastamam), where a song is said to be sung loudest and at VII.33.4 (yacchakvarisu brhata ravena indre susmamadadhata Vasi$thah), where the ‘sakvari’ hymns are said to be sung loudly. Occasionally the priests appear to approach fire gradually singing songs (cf. 1.74.1, adhvaramupaprayantah agnaye mantram vocema j). The fact that soma hymns have been collected separately in a Mandala (the nineth) apparently indicates the predominance of soma- sacrifice in the sacrificial system. It is for this reason that we find the relation of ‘soma’ with the hymns emphasized in a number of places. At IX.6.9 (eva punana indrayurmadam madi§tha vitaye | guha ciddadhise girah. |j) a poet is indicating the very intimate relation¬ ship between the soma and the hymns in a mystical tone. It should be noted that in the preceding stanza, the poet has emphasized the 26 SAUK1F1UE UN lilt; KUVtiUA role of ‘soma’ in the sacrifice by referring to him as “the soul of sacrifice” (IX.6.8, atma yajnasya.susvanah pavate sutah |). When this ‘soul of sacrifice’ is assigning a place of secret importance to hymns, the importance of the hymns in the sacrifice can be realised easily. This is expressed poetically at IX.95.3 (aparnivedurmayastar- turanah pra manisa irate somamaccha | namasyantirupa ca yanti saria ca ca visantyusatirusantam |[), where the poet is describing the eagerness of the hymns in going to ‘soma’ in ab. They are further said to be approaching him devoutly, entering him and pervading him. This eagerness is mutual as indicated by ‘soma’ too being refer¬ red to as ‘usan’, and hence the poet wants to suggest that ‘soma’ and the hymns cannot be imagined in the absence of one another. The close association of soma with hymns in winning the ‘Sun’ is des¬ cribed at IX. 94.1 (adhi yadasmin vajinlva subhah spardhante dliiyah surye na visahj); by reference to the songs which are said to be ‘struggling’, the process of preparing soma juice is indicated. Soma is said to be entering the hymns (IX.20.5, girah soma vivesitha). He is said to have been urged on by the hymns (IX.106.11, IX.25.2, 107-24) and also purified by them (IX.64.10; IX.113.5). He is also referred to as increasing on account of the hymns (IX.26.6, gira- vrdham) or decorated by them (IX.40.1, 43.2, 43.3, 86.24). Sometimes the hymns are said to be going to soma (IX.34.6 giro arsanti). Soma juice is said to be sitting in the place of the hymns (IX.25.6; 50.4, arkasya yonimasadarh) or sitting around the hymns (IX.73.3). For the idea of hymns praising and licking the soma, cf. IX.86.31, 46; 95.4; 97.34. On association with the hymn, soma is said to be becoming as strong as the thunderbolt (IX.47.3, at soma. vajrah sahasrasa bhuvat | Uktham yadasya jayate|j). Soma in its turn also is said to be urging on the hymns (IX.64.25; 96.7) or increasing them (IX.40.5; 97.36, vardhaya vacam), or purify¬ ing them even as he is purified by them (IX.86.33). He is referred to as the controller of the hymns (IX.73.6, slokayantra) or leader of the hymns (IX.103.4, neta matlnam) or producer of the hymns (IX.67.13 vaco jantuh and IX.96.5 janita matinam). On account of such very close association between the hymns and soma, hymns are described as garments of soma or as clothing him with a garment (IX.35.5; 43.1; 71.Id). In this way, the special importance of the hymns in the sacrifi¬ cial performances has been recognised and emphasized. Even though this may have been done in an exaggerated fashion at places, the idea that they must have certain standard and should find accept¬ ance of the divinity, never appears to have been lost sight of. It is thus that some special categories of hymns, particularly effica- HYMNS AND THE SACRIFICE 27 cious 7 from sacrificial point of view, came to be distinguished and specially designated. One such hymn, which could bring Indra to a sacrificial performance has been qualified as ‘visvapsu’ 8 at VI.35.3 (karhl svit.visvapsu brahma krnavah savistha j.kada gomagha havanani gacchah jj) where Indra’s attendance at the invo¬ cation (d) is associated with the ‘visvapsu’ hymn. Of all the hymns, those composed for sacrificial purposes appear to be referred to as ‘Rtasya dhenah’ at 1.141.1. and ‘Rtavaka’ at IX. 113.2 (Rtavakena satyena sradahaya tapasa sutah), where soma is said to be pressed by a truthful sacrificial hymn. At 1.147.1, the gods are said to be delighted by a ‘Saraan’ hymn of sacrifice (Rtasya saman ranayanta devah). In a similar way certain verses or hymns of known sacrificial efficacy are referred to as ‘rtasya brhatih’ at VIII.52.9 (astavi rnanma purvyarh brahmendraya vocata j purvir rtasya brhatiranusata stoturmedha asrksata ||), where the poet is referring to verses or hymns popularly known in his days for their sacrificial significance. The reference to ‘intelligence’ in that con¬ nection in d, possibly indicates that such hymns were the out¬ come of some intelligent thinking on the part of the poet. It is for this reason, it appears, that the poet of VIII.52 is composing his hymn in the ‘barhata pragatha’. 9 Certain other names of metres also appear to be applied to the hymns with some sacrificial association or significance. Thus the poet of IX.97, writing in ‘tristubh’ metre, is referring to certain songs, associated with soma as ‘tristubhah (v.35, Some arkah tristubhah samnavante j). It appears that certain ‘somia’ hymns composed in the metre had come to be designated as ‘tristubhah’. It should be noted that the word occurs five times in the Rgveda, out of which at two places, it refers to the metre of the name, which is specially associated with the worship of Indra or Yama. Thus cf. X.14.16 (Tristubgayatrl chandaihsi sarva ta yama ahitaj); at X.130.5 (indrasya tristubiha bhago ahnah), the metre tristubh is said to be particularly delightful to Indra, as Jagati is to Visvedevas and Virat to Mitravaruna. At two other places, it appears to be used in the sense of ‘offering’, (cf. ‘tristubham isam, VIII.7.1 and VIII.69.1.). This offering to Maruts and Indra must be of ‘Soma’ only as indicated by X. 14.16ab where though the word ‘tristubh’ is used in the sense of the metre (see above) of the name, the offer¬ ings are said to be of the soma juice, (cf. trikadrukebhih pati.). 7. Hymns with indications of some sacrificial employment will be discussed in Chapter XI. 8. Grassmann (Wort.) derives from HIH and interprets “having many forms”. Say. and Ludwig etc. derive from C HT and interpret “ail-nourishing”. 9. Combination of odd verses in ‘brhati’ and even verses in ‘satobrhatl’ metre. 28 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA That, this offering is meant for the successful accomplishment of the sacrifice, is indicated at VIII.69.1c (dhiya vo medhasataye). Thus as the offerings of sacrificial importance appear to have come to be designated as ‘tri§tubh’ and as X. 130.5 indicates the sacrificial im¬ portance of Tristubh metre (see above), the ‘tri$tubhah arkah’ at X.97.35d apparently are significant as the hymns of sacrificial im¬ portance of those days. At VIII.38.10, (a vam sarasvativatorindragnyoravo vrne j yabhyarh gayatraiii rcyate |j), ‘Gayatram’ appears to be a hymn in gayatri metre 10 , with its importance for sacrificial purposes indi¬ cated by association with Saraswati. 11 The same indication is given by IX.60.1 (pra gayatrena gayata. j indum sahasracaksasam j j), where the hymn of the name ‘gayatra’ is associated with the Soma. Indragni are associated with ‘gayatra’ also at 1.21.2. It may be noted that the word ‘gayatra’ is used in the sense of a ‘hymn’ at about twenty places in the Rgveda (1.27.4, 38.14, etc.); in a few places however its sacrificial association is clearly indicated. Thus at VIII.1.7, and 8, Indra is said to be going to Kanvas on account of the ‘gayatra’ hymns, though his mind may have been attracted towards a number of other places (purutra ciddhi te manah.pra gayatra agasisuh.and (v.8).yabhih kanvasya upa barhirasadam). In 1.120 (a hymn composed in gayatri metre), the poet, after refer¬ ring to some other hymns of known efficacy, wants to emphasize that his ‘gayatra’ hymn also has similar efficacy (1.120.6, srutam gayatram takavanasyaham cid hi rirebha asvina). A similar sacrificial associa¬ tion is indicated at 1.164.25 (gayatrasya samidhastisra ahuh), where a ‘gayatra’ hymn is associated with three sariidhs. The name ‘gayatra’ appears to have been so intimately associated with a sacri¬ ficial hymn that, even a hymn in ‘sakvari’ metre is referred to as ‘gayatra’ (X.71.11, gayatram vo gayati sakvarLsu). It is considered to be a ‘saman’ by Sayana, as it is associated with the ‘udgatr’ priest. Though ‘sakvari’ refers to the metre of that name at X.71.11, it appears to be a hymn or hymns of that name in VII.33.4, where sakvari hymns are said to have instilled strength in Indra. (Yaccha- kvarisu brhata ravena indre su$mamadadhata Vaslsthah). As the hymn is apparently sacrificial in character, 12 the sacrificial import¬ ance of ‘sakvari’ hymns, becomes evident, as Vasistha must have achieved his feat by a sacrificial performance only. Gatha and Gatha similarly appear to be referred to as hymns in those metres having some sacrificial significance. The word ‘Gatha’ is used twice in the Rgveda. At 1.167.6, its association with 10. Cf. above I. 130.4 the Gayatri metre as particularly associated with Agni (agner gayatryabhavat); Cf. also I. 79.7 and I. 188.11. 11. Cf. ‘SaraswatT in Chapter IV. 12. Cf. Chapter XI. HYMNS AND THE SACRIFICE 29 a sacrificial performance is made clear by referring to its being sung by one who has pressed out the soma juice and is desirous of offering worship (gayad gatham sutasomo duvasyan). At IX.11.4, Gatha is said to be sung in honour of Soma (Somaya gathamarcata). The word Gatha is used five times in the Rgveda. At VIII.32.1, Kanvas are exhorted to sing gathas in honour of Indra, under the influence of soma (Kanvah.gathaya.Indrasya krtani made somasya pravocata). At VIII.71.14 (Agnim gathabhirllisva), Agni is said to be adored by gathas. At VIII.98.9, Gatha is said to be instrumental in yoking the horses of Indra (yunjanti hari isirasya gathaya). At IX.99.4 (tam gathaya puranya punanam. ...), the very ancient asso¬ ciation of the gathas with soma is referred to. X.85.6 (Raibhyasldanudeyl, narasamsl nyocani | Suryaya bhadra- midvaso gathayeti pariskrtam ||), refers to three types of hymns of obvious ritualistic importance. The poet is apparently associating some mystical significance with those different types of hymns in their relationship with the various points of description in the marriage of Surya. It is not clear how Griffith (Vol.II.p.501,F.N.)' distinguishes between the meanings as (1) ritualistic verse (2) eulo¬ gistic hymn and (3) non-Vedic songs. It should be noted that all the three categories appear to have some sacrificial significance and not only the first. Sayana interprets ‘Raibhyah’ as ‘some verses’ and quotes Ait. Bra. VI.32. Besides these occurrences of the word ‘gatha’, the epithet ‘gatha- pati’ is applied to Rudra side by side with ‘medhapati’, indicating the relation between the ‘gathas’ and the sacrifice. In the same way Indra appears to be called ‘gatha-sravas’ at VIII.2.38 and Agni ‘Rjugatha’ at V. 44.5. It appears that the ‘gatha’ and the ‘gatha’ were hymns (though the word ‘gatha’ appears to be employed in the sense of a verse at VIII.71.14), which were in use from very ancient times for their sacrificial importance (IX.99.4) and efficacy (VIII.98.9). There does not appear to be anything ‘non-Vedic’ about them as suggested by some scholars, apparently on the basis of their association with the Avesta. If it were so, Indra, Agni and Rudra could not have been applied epithets based on ‘gatha’ (at 1.43.4, V.44.5 and VIII.2.38) and the poets would not have been referred to proudly as ‘gathinah’, as is done at 1.7.1. Whether the ‘gathins’ were singing ‘brhat saman" as stated by Say. (Bhasya on 1.7.1) or not, it has to be noted that almost in all the passages in the Rgveda, where ‘gathas’ are referred to, they are associated with ‘Soma’. It is therefore probable that the ‘gatha’ and the ‘gathas’ were hymns of particular importance at the Soma sacrifices, though a number of other hymns too were associated with them. It is on account of this ritual significance 30 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA that just like the Apr! 13 hymns, Avesta has continued the tradition of ‘gatha’ and the Soma. ‘Hotra’ at places appears to be a category of hymns of sacrificial importance. Though its association with the Hotr priest is nowhere categorically referred to, it appears to be so designated on account of its relation with the priest even as the offering ‘Hotra’. 14 Derived from the root hu to ‘invoke’ it may be referring to a hymn, efficacious in invocation of the divinity and it is thus that a poet is inquiring about the ‘Hotra’ that would be acceptable to the Asvins (1.120.1 Ka radhad hotra Asvina vain ). Its influence, as also the intelligence required in its composition arc indicated at VII.104.6 (Indrasoma pari vam bhutu visvata iyai'n matih kaksyasveva vajina j yam varh hotram pari hinomi medhaya.), where it is compared with a strap tying the two horses together. Asvins are said to be further¬ ing it at VIII.101.8. Its general efficacy is indicated at VIII.53.7"'; it is said to be winning all desirable things at X.64.15 (vi sa hotra visvamasnoti varyam) end its relation with the soma sacrifice is indicated at X. 64.15 ccl (yatra grava madh.u.suducyate brhat). Some hymns, though not specifically designated, are described as having some intimate sacrificial association and are qualified by certain peculiarities associated with them. Thus, ‘Sapta-vani’ at III.7.1, IX.103.3 and 104.4; ‘Sapta dhiti’ at IX.62.17 and ‘Sapta-sirsni dhih’ at. X.67.1 apparently refer to the same or similar hymn. HI.7.1, IX.82.7, 103.3 and 104.4 refer to its association with the Soma-ncr:fine. At X.67.1, ancestral tradition associated with it, is referred to. Even though some hymns are written in different metres, it does not appear that the hymns written exactly in seven different metres are intended to be referred to by these ‘Sapta vanlh’. Nor is there any particular point in saying that they indicate hymns to be sung in seven different tunes. In the case of ‘Sapta yavhlh’ 'III. 1.4 etc.) or ‘Sapta Ilotra’ (X.17.11) or ‘Sapta Hotrani’ till.4.5) and a number of ether things associated with the number seven, it appears that seme mystical significance is attached to the figure ‘seven’ and it is with this mystical signifi¬ cance in their relation with the ritual in view that the hymns are qualified by the figure ‘seven’. Similar appeal's to be the case with ‘Aksara’ (VII.1.14) or ‘Aksara sahasrinf (VII.15.9 upa iva sod aye naro vipraso yanti dhitibhih | Upa’ ksara sahasrini), where the poets are said to be approaching Agni for attainment (of course through sacrifice) with the help of the- hymn, which is capable of ‘winning a thousand’. It is said to be 13. Which arc carried on as 'afrinpr.ns’ in the Avesta, though with chances cf. AHR in B.U.J. 1945-4G. 14. Cf. Chapter V. HYMNS AND THE SACRIFICE 81 ‘sahasrapatha’ at VII.1.14 and to be instrumental in surpassing other sacrificial performances (sedagniragnin atyastu anyan). ‘Astapadi’ is the designation given to his hymn by the poet of vni.76 (cf. v 12 vacamastapadlmaham navasraktimrtasprsarh I indrat pari tanvam mame | ). Describing the peculiarity of his com¬ position as a hymn containing eight syllables in every pada, and having nine such padas in every triplet (nava sraktlh), the poet refers to its sacrificial efficacy by saying that it is ‘rtasprs’.' 5 At II.7.5 ftvaih no asi bharatagne vasabhiruksabhih | astapadibhirahutah ^ also, a similar hymn appears to be referred to. 1fi As in the above case, this hymn also has stanzas containing eight syllables in every pada. Therefore it appears that the name ‘astapadi’ was given to a hymn of specific form of composition with its sacrificial association in view and a poet intending to have similar association, would speci¬ fically refer to his hymn as ‘astapadi’ as is done by the poet of VIII.76. u '* The word ‘Yajus’ is referred to in the sense of a hymn thrice in the Rgveda. (cf. V.62.5, barhiriva yajusa raksamana (mitra- varuna); X.181.3 and VIII.41.8 (ni yadasu yajurdadhe). At X.181, it is referred to side by side with the Saman hymns called ‘brhat’ (v.2) and ‘Rathantara’ (.v.l) and appears to indicate a hymn with clear sacrificial significance as the other two. The specific purposes for which the three were employed also appear to be referred to. Thus the Rathantara Saman appears to be used for some offering as indicated at X.181.l h (Anustubhasya haviso haviryat) and the Brhat Saman, for sacrificial performance in general as indicated at X.181.2 al * (avindan te atihitaih yadasld yajnasya dhama paramam guha yat. .) and the yajus hymn for offering the “gharma” (cf. chapter V) as indicated at X.181. 3 d (a suryadabharan gharmamete j). Us efficacy in invoking the gods is indicated by its being referred to as ‘prathamaih dc-vayanam’—the first to go to the gods. This assign¬ ment of efficacy in different spheres, however appears to have merely the idea of attaching some mystical significance that the poet alone would be conscious of. We have no means to ascertain it exactly. It appears that when sacrificial importance of the hymns was recog¬ nised and emphasized, yajus nowhere refers to a formulae, surpassing in importance the other hymns as it does in the later days. The word Mantra is used in the sense of a hymn at sixteen places in the Rgveda. Its connection with the sacrifice is also indi¬ cated at 1.74.1 (upa prayanto adhvaraih mantram vocema j), 1.31.13, etc. It is also indicated that the poets used to devote great attention to the composition of the hymns. (1.67.2, hrda yat tastan mantran 15. The hymn contains twelve stanzas divided into four triplets (tres). 16. Cf. Wort—Grassmann. Say.—explains the word as a 'garbhinl' cow. Hla. Vide Chapter XI under VIII.7G. 32 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA asamsan). A poet is anxiously inquiring at II.35.2 (hrda a sutastam mantram vocema kuvidasya vedat|), whether his hymn would be acceptable to the god. The labour, skill and intelligence required to compose such a hymn, are indicated at (VII.7.6, mantram ye varam narya atak^an) and VII.32.13 (mantramakharvarn sudhitam supesa- sam etc.). From the point of view of the sacrifice, there is no further specific significance attached to the ‘mantras’. The word ‘Saman’ is used in the sense of a hymn in general as well as a hymn of sacrificial importance. That it was to be sung mainly, is indicated at 1.173.1, 11.43.2, etc. But at certain places, its peculiar significance for sacrifice seems to be predominant in the mind of the poet. Angirasas, who are closely associated with the sacrificial tradition of the Rgveda 17 have been associated with the composition of certain Saman hymns (cf. 1.107.2, deva angirasam samabhih stuyamanah; X.78.5, Visvarupa angiraso na samabhih). At 11.43.1 (ubhau vachau vadati samaga iva j) the reference to ‘samaga’ persons can have sense only in the sacrificial traditions. At II.43.2 (udgateva sakune sama gayasi), the specific role of the Udgatr priest in the sacrificial performance viz. to sing sama hymns, is clearly referred to. At V.44.14 and 15 (yo jagara tamrcah kamayante, yo jagara tamu samani yanti j), the alertness required in the per¬ formance is emphasized. At VIII.81.5 (pra stosat upa gasisat sravat sama glyamanam | abhi radhasa jugurat), the idea that a divinity gives gifts as a result of singing a song in a particular fashion appears to have been indicated. For Saman hymns of a particular efficacy in the sacrifice, very handsome gifts appear to be offered to the priest. Thus at VIII.6.47 (trini satanyarvatam sahasra dasa gonam | dadu§- pajraya samne|), the gift of three hundred horses and ten thousand cows to Pajra, 18 is referred to. An effective Saman hymn of the poet is also referred to at VIII.4.17, where the poet is jealously refer¬ ring to the Saman hymn of Pajra, indicating its importance, (na tasya vemyaranam hi tadvaso stuse pajraya samne ). Some of the saman hymns appear to be considered as more efficacious than the others as is indicated at VIII.29.10 (arcanta eke mahi sama manvata tena suryamarocayan), where a mighty saman hymn is said to be instrumental in winning the Sun. Some such hymns came to be specifically designated, though the names do not appear to be clearly used in that sense in the Rgveda. In a general way such saman hymns of sacrificial importance are referred to at 1.147.1 (rtasya saman ranayanta devah), where the gods are said to be delighted therein. According to Say. 19 on 1.7.1 (Indramid gathino brhad.Indram vaniranu§ata |) the ‘brhat’, said to be 17. Vide Chapter VII. 18. Vide Chapter VII. 19. ‘tvamiddhi havamahe’ (Rv, VI. 46.1) ityasyamrci utpannena brhannamakena Samna | HYMNS AND THE SACRIFICE .1 O O sung by the ‘Gathins’ is the ‘brhat saman’ of the later days. At X.181.2, Bharadvaja is said to have composed it (Bharadvajo brhada- cakre Agneh|). The verse referred to by Sayana (VI.46.1) appears to be designated as ‘brhat saman’ mainly on account of the hymn being composed in the Brhati metre. It may be noted that the said hymn (VI.46) is composed by a junior member of the Bharadvaja family (Samyuh Barhaspatya) according to the tradition of the Anuk. and as such may have been late in its origin. Another variety of saman referred to in the later Samhitas 20 is the 'Rathantara Saman’. 21 The word Rathantara is used twice in the Rgveda. At 1.164.25 (Rathantare suryam paryapasyat) the saman is said to be associated with the finding of Surya. At X.181.1 (prathasca yasya saprathasca nama anustubhasya haviso haviryat : Dhaturdyutanat savitusca visno rathantaramajabhara vasisthah '), the Saman is said to be brought by Vasistha. Whatever the exact meaning of ab, some offering of importance is apparently referred to therein and this lends support to the idea about the sacrificial efficacy 22 of the Rathan¬ tara Saman. It may be nofed that VII.32 is also known to be a com¬ paratively later hymn in the Vasistha group and hence this saman too appears to be late in origin like the ‘Brhat Saman’. Another saman of sacrificial importance appears to be the ‘prstha saman’, referred to at IV.5.6 (manma) brhaddadhata.yavharh prstham prayasa saptadhatu), where it is associated with sevenfold food (parayasa saptadhatu). An efficacious Saman hymn of the Pajra family 23 is referred to at VIII.6.47 and VIII.4.17. Indra is said to be particularly pleased with the ukthas and the nithas (VII.26.2, Uktha ukthe soma indram mamada, nithe nithe maghavanarh sutasah |). At IV.3.16 (eta visva viduse tubhyarh vedho nithanyagne ninya vacamsi | Nivacana kavaye kavyani asamsi§arh matibhir vipra ukthaih) certain ‘nithas’ are referred to as secret speeches or words, may be on account of the low tone in which they were to be sung at the sacrifices or on account of some mystical significance that had come to be associated with them. They are described as ‘nivacanas’, possibly on account of their decisive character (cf. also I. 189.8; IX.97.2; X.113.10.) Perhaps the most significant from the point of view of the sacrifices were the ‘Nivids’, 21 which got a peculiar restricted sense in the later Samhitas and the Brahmanas. The opinions of scholars are sharply divided on the question of their nature in the Rgveda, some holding that the ‘Nivids’ have the same technical sense even 20. VS. 10.10; Sam. II. i-1.11. 21. The verses referred to are RV VII-32.22-23. 22. ‘Say.’ on VII. 32. 22-23 Rathararhhahsadhanam sama tad rathantararh. 23. Cf. Chapter VH. 24. V. I. Vol. n p. 452. S. R.—a 34 SACRIFICE IN THE FtGVEDA in the Rgveda itself 25 and others opposing it. 26 Oldenberg 27 feels that they are referred to in the technical sense only at 1.96.2. Dr. Haug has dealt with the question of Nigada and Nivid formulae at some length 28 and pointed out some correspondence with certain formula in the Avesta ritual. 29 They are obviously preserved as “Nivaedayemi” in Avesta, though their form cannot be regarded as identical in any sense. Therefore they are certainly not the fabrica¬ tions of the Brahmanas though the latter may have introduced certain changes in their form. According to the Brahmanas they are an address either to a single deity or a class of deities, inviting them to enjoy the soma libation. They generally contain enumeration and qualities of the respective deities. Their proper place is only the Madhyandina and the Sayantana savanas. All the Nivids are given in Saiikhayana Srauta Sutra, 8.16-23. They have no regular metre but a kind of rhythm. 30 Though we may accept Haug’s view that all the sacrificial hymns are not necessarily late hymns, we cannot agree with his view that the Nivids were in existence in their technical form right in the days of the Rgveda. Their sacrificial association is quite evident; but there is no evidence to prove that they existed in their technical form in the days of the Rgveda. It should be noted that the other sacrificial formulae ‘Nigada’, associated by the Brahmana literature with the Nivid, is not known to the Rgveda at all. The omission is certainly significant. It may further be noted that the Rgvedic hymns do not refer to any verbal form from the root vid with ni, from which apparently the word Nivid is derived. In fact, there is nothing in the Rgveda to indicate that the ‘Nivid’ refers to a short formulae as said by the later litera¬ ture. The word rather appears to be used in the sense of a hymn at 1.175.6 (yatha purvebhyo jaritrbhya Indra. tarn anu tva nividarh johavimi) where the poet refers to his hymn as a ‘nivid’ just like one of the ancient singers. ‘Tain’ in c may indicate a parti¬ cular Nivid hymn that an earlier poet has employed with apparent sacrificial importance. The sacrificial efficacy of an ancient ‘Nivid’ is also referred to at 1.89.3 (tan purvaya nivida humahe vayam). At 1.96.2, the creation of human beings is attributed to the instru¬ mentality of a Nivid (sa purvaya nivida kavyatayoh imah praja aja- nayanmanunam ]). This indicates the sacrificial setting of the Nivid, which appears to be composed by ‘Ayu’ in the ancient days. This Nivid hymn, possibly contained some instructions of a sacrificial 25. Orion--TiIak p. 206. 26. Weber p. 265 and 355. 27. V. H. p. 119, 122. 28. ABI Vol. I. p. 36-40 and Vol. II. p. 142, F.N. 2 and p. 189, F.N. 25. 29. For a summary of the same cf. HSL, Vol. II, p. 99. 30. A.B. Vol. II, p. 142, F.N. 2; RPV, Keith I. p. 253, 295; RVO, p. 387, n. 2; VMH, III, 2094. HYMNS AND THE SACRIFICE 35 nature as can become evident from II.36.6 (ju?etham yajnam bodha- tam havasya me | satto hota nividah purvya anu), where the poet expects the god to listen to his call and accept his sacrifice, when the priest is seated in accordance with some ancient Nivids, which certainly do not appear to have been short formula. At IV.18.7 (kimusvidasmai nivido bhananta, indrasyavadyam didhi§anta apah), it is being argued that nivids would not have been addressed to Indra, if the guilt (of killing Vrtra) would have been with him. At VI.67.10 vi yad vacam klstaso bharante j samsanti kecinnivido mananah), the Nivids are referred to as sung by some thoughtful persons indicating their authoritative character since ancient days. Thus it appears that the Nivids that the Rgvedic poets have in view are hymns of a forceful character, composed intelligently for some sacrificial attainment and associated with the idea of sacrificial efficacy from old days. 31 It will thus be realised that out of a large number of different types of hymns of sacrificial efficacy referred to in the Rgveda, some like Brhatl derive their names from the metres in which they are written, some like Hotra derive their name from the priest with whom they were associated, some like Gathas as they were positively of the nature of to be sung, while in the case of some like the Nivids, the exact point which led to their designation as such cannot be understood. It is possible that the poets who employed these designations had got some ritual in view, which they have attempted to describe and suggest through those hymns. When we remember that the Brahmanas have not tried to explain the sacrificial peculiarity of all those different types of hymns referred to above, and to associate them with their ritual, it can be very easily realised that this is due to the vast difference between the ritual of the Rgveda and that of the Brahmanas. We cannot therefore agree with the view of Dr. M. Haug that the ritual of the Brahmanas was pretty much the same even when the hymns of the Rgveda were being composed. 32 Howsoever may the hymns and the sacrifice have grown in their relationship, it was emphasized that both of them were adding to each other’s glory. Just as the hymns are said to be making the sacrifice divine at X.93.8, 33 it is also stated that the hymns shone at the place of sacrifice only (X. 111.2, ftasya hi sadasah dhltih adyaut [). The hymns in their basic aspect of speech in its divine form (X.177.2ab, patango vacam manasa bibharti, tarn gandharvo avadat garbhe antah), are said to be guarded in the place of sacrifice by the 31. Cf. Macdonell V.I. 1-452. “The word is hardly used in the technical sense of the Brahmanas.” 32. ABI, p. 31. 33. Quoted above. 36 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA poets (cd. tarn dyotamanam svaryam manl$amrtasya pade kavayo ni panti |). Having thus observed the connection of the hymns with the sacrifice in its various aspects, it remains to be seen how far the hymns in general were written specifically for the purposes of the sacrifice and in which way they were ordinarily employed in the ritual of the time. It may be noted that this consideration implies the idea of sub¬ servience of the hymns to the sacrifice, which however, is not supported by the above discussion of their manifold relationship. Admitting the literary character of the hymns, particularly the freshness and emotional outlook, displayed by a very large number of them, it should be evident that they were meant as an instrument of propitiation of the divinity even as the sacrifice itself. They thus stand on a footing of equality with the sacrifice and never appear to be subservient to it. Some of the hymns appear to be composed for the sake of sacrifice (vide chapter XI) and we can get some broad indication regarding their employment in the ritual. But this is true only of a very few of them. It will be seen in the case of a majority of them that as they serve the purpose of the propitiation of the divinity along with the sacrifice, definite usages regarding their employment do not appear to have come into existence. Some broad usages however appear to be evolving along with the evolution of the sacrifice during the period of the Rgveda hymns. Some of these as can be inferred from the hymns, will be indicated in the course of discussion in some later chapters. 34 It may, however, be noted that even in the case of the Apr! hymns, which indicate a fairly stereotyped ritual, quite a wide choice appears to be exercised in the course of its employment and we may safely infer that beyond their recitation at the time of the performance, very rigid rules in this regard do not appear to be in force. Occasionally however, different families appear to be trying to introduce certain innovations in this connection. The ritual retained a kind of freshness and simplicity about it as long as the hymns preserved their freshness and emotional charac¬ ter. It can be said that fresh compositions appear to be discouraged when the sacrifice attained a rigid and mechanical form. At an earlier stage, a fresh hymn was said to constitute the requirement of a sacrificial performance. Later on, the requirement came to be restricted to the mechanical performance in a particular fashion, for describing which the Brahmana texts came into existence. Thus it would appear that at least during the period of the composition of the majority of the Rgvedic hymns, which are charac- 34. Of. Chapters V, VI and XI. HYMNS AND THE SACRIFICE 37 terized by freshness in composition and emotional appeal, sacrifice cannot be imagined to have attained a mechanical and rigid character. Thus an analysis of the various passages concerning the relation¬ ship of the hymns with the sacrifice, yields some information regard¬ ing the idea of the Rgvedic poets about the sacrifice. It appears that the poet of X.88.8 (quoted earlier) is looking back upon the sacrifice as it has developed by his time and is referring to the tradi¬ tional view about the origin of the sacrifice or is stating his opinion about the phenomenon. Either way, it is suggestive enough that the art of composition is given a prior place in comparison with the sacrifice. To put it in a general way, thought always precedes the action and so it is quite in the fitness of things that the hymns should precede the action evolved out of them, viz., the sacrifice. This order of evolution has also a significant bearing on the growth of the cultural conceptions of the Rgvedic Aryans. The thinkers of the time, who were developing their idea of divinity through the hymns in the beginning, must have found the sacrifice to be an effective instrument to give it a definite shape. Intellectual development of a pretty high order can be witnessed in the composition of the hymns and along with the sacrifice which has grown on association with them, we get ample evidence of a very high stature of the people from intellectual and cultural points of view. All the hymns therefore need not be imagined to have a sacrificial setting, though that must have started becoming more and more defined with the growth of the idea and practice of sacrifice. It is for this reason that even the Brahmanas could not pick up all of them for their purposes and Yaska too, when he attempted a critical study of the Rgvedic hymns could not apply the criterion of sacrifice in their classification. Between the two, the balance has turned neither in favour of the predominance of the hymns nor that of the sacrifice, though occasionally, one appears to be stressed as more important than the other. It should be noted that the decisive importance attached to the sacrifice in the Brahmana literature is conspicuous by its absence in the hymns of the Rgvcda. It is from this point of view that the ‘Bijankura drstanta’, referred to above is quite significant. Just as between the Bija and the Ankura, each one has its unique role, so that none can dispense with the existence of the other, so too is the case with the mutual relationship between the hymns and the sacrifice. The poets, who are all the while conscious of their art of com¬ position, have not failed to emphasize the importance of the hymns in the sacrificial set-up as at V.44.9 or in a general way by saying that the hymns give certain ‘tone’ to the sacrifice or bear the burden 38 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA of sacrifice or raise its level from the human to celestial plane or at times even ascribing the divine function of creation of subjects to them. It is here that we come across the beginning of the idea of “the wheel of sacrifice” (yajna-cakra), propounded in a masterly fashion by the author of the Gita, 35 by pointing out the interdepend¬ ence of the various entries in the evolution of the universe. The collection of Soma hymns separately in a Mandala (No. IX) is significant of the emphasis on the soma ritual in the days of the Rgveda and hence the relation of hymns with soma has been referred to at some length above. As the hymns came to be increasingly associated with the sacrificial set-up, it was inevitable that certain hymns came to be designated specifically on the basis of their dis¬ tinctive sacrificial character. Among them ‘Gathas’ deserve special notice as they have been picked up in the later literature of the Aryans as well as in the Avesta along with the soma ritual. As a result of some of these characteristically designated sacrificial hymns, the priests also appear to be given certain distinctive designations on account of their association with either the composition of such hymns or the ritual connected therewith. Thus III.12.5 mentions ‘Ukthinah’ and ‘Nlthavidah’. At 1.7.1, ‘Gathins’ are said to have sung the ‘brhat saman’. Thus when this fact of the ritual that is growing with the com¬ position of the hymns of varying sacrificial importance is lost sight of, scholars are led to mix up the ritual of the Rgveda with that of the Brahmanas. 30 Macdonell even goes to the length of saying 37 “It is doubtful, whether even in the earliest period, much room was left, owing to the highly ritual type of worship, for independent prayer.” Such views have to be discarded as not borne out by the evidence of the analysis given above. We may therefore reasonably conclude that the relationship of the hymns and the sacrifice suggests the fact that the ritual has been evolving in certain stages, though all of them cannot be very pre¬ cisely determined for want of any clear-cut data regarding the chronological priority or otherwise of the hymns. 35. in. 14-16. 36. ABI, (quoted above) and RVB (quoted above). 37. EBE, Vol. XII, p. 610 Chapter Three GODS AND THE SACRIFICE 3R I (Hv.I. 181.1) qsft i (Rv.i. 107.1) SYNOPSIS:— Mutual dependence of the gods and the sacrifice—not mechanical—freshness of the approach to the idea of divinity and sacrifice—closer scrutiny of their rela¬ tionship necessary—relation explained by Sankara’s illustration—idea of divinity through various stages—sacrifice and hymns prospered with freshness in approach —Dominant position in sacrifice to gods—substantiated by the variety of ways in which the relationship is explained—the gods know, lay down, accept, enjoy and even receive entire credit for the performance of sacrifices—sacrifice prospering under attention of gods—sacrifice influences gods—their predominance never under¬ mined—sacrifice said to be created by the gods— The number of hymns in honour of a deity—criterion for relative importance in the sacrificial set-up—peculiar position of Agni in the sacrifice—Agni’s import¬ ance never minimised—sacrifice associated with Agni in all stages—sacrificial epithets of Agni indicating his predominant position—comparison with some epithets of Indra and Soma to illustrate their relative position in the system of sacrifice— Indra hymns—characteristic contribution to the growth of sacrifice—Indra as the inspiring spirit of the sacrifice—Indra and sacrifice, growing in popular esteem— his two great deeds—driving away the Dasyus and stabilising the sacrifice—sacrificial epithets of Indra and their indication—strong likes and dislikes of Irdra—majority of epithets based on soma juice—frequency of the performances in honour of Indra —purity of heart in worship referred to— ‘Soma’ as a divinity—circumstances—relation with sacrifice—some characteristic sacrificial epithets—Asvins—association with soma-ritual—similarity with the work of the Rbhus—associated with ‘soma’-chant of mystical significance—their associa¬ tion with the non-Aryans—spread of Asvin worship—Relation with Tva?tr and Rbhus —Tvastr’s help in sacrifice— Varuna—Rta and sacrifice—association with ‘soma’-ritual—reasons for compara¬ tively lower place of Varuna in the system of sacrifice—U$as, Maruts and others— Visvedevas introduced later for sacrifice—clash of ideas regarding divinity and mode of worship, sought to be resolved by introducing Visvedevas—frequent stress on agreement—Indra retaining his prominence even in the group worship—the worship centred round Agni—different types of Visvedeva hymns—epithets in common with other divinities—spread of the cult of sacrific—influence summed up in X.65.11. Gods and the sacrifice appear to be considered as dependent on each other right from very ancient days even as indicated in the Gita . 1 It does not appear to be, however, a mechanical dependence, as it has not led to a stagnation of their growth. The enthusiasm with which the Rgvedic Aryans are evolving their idea of the divinity 1. III.ll Devan bhavayatanena te deva bhavayantu vah | 40 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA both in its qualitative and quantitative aspects, can give us an indi¬ cation of the freshness of their approach to the problem of the divi¬ nity and the divine worship. As indicated in the first chapter, mytho¬ logy and sacrifice are the two aspects—theoretical and practical— of the Aryan religion. The relationship between the gods and the sacrifice, in a sense, can be said to be exponent of this twofold aspect of the religious thought of the Rgvedic Aryans. This mutual rela¬ tionship therefore requires closer scrutiny, as it is likely to reveal a fresh and important corner of the Aryan mind, which appears to have attempted to evolve intelligently and systematically the conception of the interdependence between the gods and the sacrifice. If the relation between the hymns and the sacrifice can be described by the well-known vedantic illustration of the Bija and the Ankura, the relation between the hymns and the sacrifice on the one hand and the gods on the other, can be described by the well-known illustration of the veteran vedantin Sri Sankara (Isvarastu parjanyavad dra?tavyah, S. Bha on II.i.26) viz., as the relation between the rain on the one hand and the seed (Bija) and the sprout (Arikura) on the other. The illustration can be stretched further by taking the scene of sacrifice (chapter IV below) as the land, where the seed could be planted or the rain could shower on. Hymns and the sacrifice are as much dependent on the gods as are the seed and the sprout on the rain. The similarity, however, cannot be strained further, to extend to the idea of divine unity worshipped in the sacrifice, for all the stages of its evolution. The idea of divinity has passed through various stages in the Rgveda, viz., as independent individual divinities, as joint divinities, all divinities or some of them together constituting a single group, as one or more creator divinities, as one concrete principle under¬ lying the divinities or finally as an abstract principle, underlying the whole phenomenon of existence. As we shall see below, 2 the idea of sacrifice has influenced to a certain extent, the idea of divi¬ nity and hence it cannot be said that the sacrifice has visualized one single divinity as intended for its purpose. In fact, it can be said that as long as the poets were trying to evolve their idea of divinity, and as long as there was enthusiasm and freshness about the same, new hymns came to be written. With the idea of divinity, the hymns too prospered, sacrifice receiving its proportionate share along with the hymns. But once the mechanisation of the idea of sacrifice set in, the composition of new hymns ceased and divinities deteriorated merely to the position of a wheel or wheels in the mechanism of the sacrifice. In the hymns of the Rgveda, it can be very easily seen that the dominant position in the system of sacrifice is occupied by the gods. 2. Chapters XIII and XIV. GODS AND THE SACRIFICE 41 It is the hymn that is to find the favourable acceptance of the gods (1.141.11, Devanam saihsamrta a ca; 1.107.1, yajno devanarh pratyeti sumnam). Sacrifice is said to be in the heart of the gods (VIII.18.19, yajno hilo vo antarah); or the sacrifice itself is said to be the glorifi¬ cation of the gods (1.181.1. ayaih vo yajno akrta prasastirh j). Gods are said to have attached this much importance to the sacrifice, as they wanted the offerings, which could come to them only through the sacrifices. Thus even as Indra is eager to drink the soma-juice (III.35.9, vavasanah somam; IV.24.6, somam usan), the gods in general are said to be eager for sacrifice (III.20.1, adhvaram vavasanah). As the gods are said to have raised the sacrifice to such a high level of importance, the poets want to establish relationship with the gods through the sacrifice (VIII.18.19, yusme idvo api smasi sajatye j). This idea of the upper hand of the gods in the system of sacrifice can be substantiated by observing the variety of ways in which the relationship of the gods with the sacrifice is described in the hymns of the Rgveda. This relationship is expressed variously so as to indicate how the sacrifice, in its early stages, was considered necessarily as depend¬ ent on the gods. In quite a large number of passages, the gods are said to be approaching the sacrifice on request. Thus at 1.112.2, the Asvins are requested to come with their protections (tabhirutibhi- ragatarn). They would be coming for the enjoyment of the oblations that are offered; (1.135.3, adhvaramupa yahi vitaye | tavayam bhaga rtviyah | cf. also IV.47.1,3; 48.1,4; VI.68.10; VIII.20.10,16); and as they would like the same, they would come willingly (1.171.2, upa ima yata manasa jusana). The divinities would thus come to the sacrifice because they would be knowing the sacrifice as well as the offerings offered therein, as indicated at III.11.1 (veda yajnamanusak). Agni is said to be knowing the sacrifice (IV.3.4, rtasya bodhi rtacit svadhih) and the oblations (V.60.6, Agne vittad haviso yadyajama). It is thus that the divinity is said to be desiring the sacrifice (1.3.10). Thus even though the gods are eager for the sacrifice, being attracted by the offerings given therein, their superior status is never lost sight of and they are very frequently requested to accept the sacrifice that is offered. This idea throws a good deal of light on the relationship between the divinity and the worshipper. Sacrifice has been found as a means of approaching the gods; but the means never appears to have transgressed the limit and super¬ seded in importance the end in view, viz., the gods. The poets appear to be trying to propitiate the divinity by stressing the attractiveness of their offerings and the idea of the favour of acceptance lying with the gods, which is the underlying tone of the doctrine of devo¬ tion, always appears to be present in the mind of the poets. It is 42 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA thus that the divinities are asked to accept the sacrifice (1.139.11, yajnamimam ju$adhvarh, III.22.4, puri$yaso agnayo yajnam jnjan- tam and also III.24.2, IV.2.10; 9.7, V.4.8, 55.10; 72.3, 78.3; VI.47.28; 52.11; 69.1; VII.42.5; VIII.35.4, 38.4, 57.2; X.15.4, 81.6, 150.2). They are requested to enjoy it (1.151.3,7, adhvararh vlthah; III.40.4; 53.1; V.II.4, Agnirno yajnamupavetu sadhuya). The gods are described as delighted at the sacrifices as the cows at the pasture (V.53.16, stuvato asya yamani ranan gavo na yavase | cf. also VII.82.7, IX.12.7, X.61.4). The idea of acceptance is negatively expressed at VI.41.1 (ahelamana upayahi yajnam). At V.41.7, U§asanakta are said to be bringing the sacrifice for the mortals. Agni, acting as the messenger, is often asked to bring the gods to the sacrifice. (III.35.2, upemarii yajnamavahatendram; V.26.2, VII.16.4, devan a vitaye vaha; V.1.11 and 4.4, devan haviradyaya vaksi; VI.11.1; 50.9 and X.51.7). The gods are said to be leading or are requested to lead the sacrifice obviously as they are so vitally interested in the perform¬ ances of those rites. (1.40.3, deva yajnam nayantu nah; 1.41.5 yam yajnam nayatha; VI.15.16 yajnam naya yajamanaya sadhu; VIII.44.8, agne yajnam naya; X.66.12b, prancam no yajnam pranayata sadhuya; Sacrifice is said to be meant for the sake of the gods (II.5.8, tve yajnam cakrma vayam; IV.17.18, vayam hya te cakrma sabadhah samlbhih; IV.34.3, ayam vo yajnah akari). The credit of assisting, or adorning the sacrifice is given to the gods, further confirming the superior status, enjoyed by them. (Thus 1.93.12, krnutam no adhvararh srustimantarii; V.13.4; VI.10.1; 62.2; VII. 2.7, urdhvarh no adhvararh krtarh; VII.84.3, krtam no yajnam vidathesu carurh; X.110.2, devatra nah adhvararh krnuta). The gods, apparently by their presence or by some activity are said to be sweetening the sacrifice or sprinkling it over with mead. 1.22.13, imam yajnam mimiksatam; 1.34.3, yajnam madhuna mimik§tam; 1.47.4; 1.142.3; VIII.10.2, yadva yajnam manave sammimiksuh). Even the credit of the entire performance is given to the gods, parti¬ cularly to Agni. Thus X.110.11, sadyo jato vyamimita yajnam; VIII. 92.21, devaso yajnamatnata. The idea is expressed by yajnam yaja or yajnam yakja at a number of places, cf. 1.142.8; 11.3.1,3; III.4.1, 17.3, 29.8, 12; V.21.1; VI. 11.4, 16.9, 49.9; VII.42.3; VIII.46.17; IX. 1.6, 7.6, etc.; X.52.6, 81.5, 110.7, etc. In these places, ordinarily Agni is said to be sacrificing to the other gods or the gods are said to be performing the sacrifice; but when the offering is meant for Agni only, a poet refers to it as a sacrifice offered by Agni to his own self. cf. VI.11.2, ‘pavakaya juvha vahnirasa, agne yajasva tanvam tava svam’)- The gods are said to be sitting round the sacrifice, in¬ dicating their interest in the sacrificial performance. Cf. II.2.5, visvarh paribhutu adhvaram; IV.56.7, pari yajnam ni sedathuh. As they are so interested, they are described as protecting the sacrifice. Cf. GODS AND THE SACRIFICE 43 III. 9.6, visvan yadyajnannabhi pasi manuka, tava Iqratva yavisthya |; IV. 33.3, te no yajnamavantu; V.5.5, 5.9, 52.10; VI.40.5, ato no yaj- namavase pahi; X.128.7. Sacrifice is thus not only going on under the attention of the gods, but it is also said to be prospering on account of the assistance of the gods. (1.10.4, yajnam ca vardhaya; III.17.2, 40.3, yajnam pratiremamadya; X.36.6, divisprsam yajnam krnuta; X.141.6; 188.3). On account of this very intimate relationship between the gods and the sacrifice, the sacrifice is said to be going to the gods (V.22.2, 26.8, pra yajna etu anu$ak). When Agni, as a messenger has done the work of carrying the sacrifice to the gods, the sacrifice can very well be said to have been laid down by him or even by the divinities in general. Cf. 1.3.11, Sarasvati yajnam dadhe; III.17.5 atha no dha adhvaram devavitau; III.29.8, sadaya yajnam sukrtasya yonau; IV.34.2; V.77.1, VI.11.5; 51.1, yajnam dadhatu. At VII.99.4, (urum yajnaya cakrathuru lokam), the gods are said to be facilitating the sacrificial performances, which would indicate the expansion of the cult over a wide area. Just as the gods are said to have influenced the sacrifice, the sacrifice is also said to have influenced the gods occasionally. Thus the sacrifice is said to have prospered the gods (1.173.11 yajno hi sma kascidindrarh rndhan; II.2.1, yajnena vardhata jatavedasam; III.32.12, yajno hi te indra vardhano bhut; VI.38.4, vardhadayam yajna.indram; VI.40.4, VIII.14.5; X.20.6.) Even the human beings are said to be making the gods stronger by the sacrifices. (VIII.20.6, yajnairye indre dadhate duvamsi). Rta, the supporting principle of all human activity, with which the gods are very intimately related, is said to be associated with the sacrifice quite naturally, as the sacrifice has moulded the ideas of the Rgvedic Aryans in all walks of life. Rta is a principle, that is higher than the gods as the latter are said to be born in the Rta (Rtajata 1.144.7, III.20.2, etc.). The greatness of the gods is said to be significant on account of the Rta (II.27.8, ptenaditya mahi vo mahitvam). When they come to be described as protectors of the Rta (Rtapah VII.20.6, etc.), it becomes clear that the gods were associated with a system that promoted the cause of the Rta. At 1.159.1, it is indicated that this system is the sacrifice. It is through the system of the sacrifice, that the gods were considered as playing their role in the promotion of the cause of the Rta (pra dyava yajnaih prthivi rtavrdha). In these few passages, it is the import¬ ance of the sacrifice that is sought to be emphasized and not the predominance of the gods sought to be undermined. Besides the numerous passages, indicating the predominant position of the gods referred to above, it may be noted that the gods are said to be 44 SACRIFICE IN THE ?GVEDA making the sacrifice perfect (VI.10.1, VII.17.3.4, svadhvara karati.... cf. also VIII.12.19). Sacrifices are said to centre round Agni (V.9.2, sam yajnasascaranti yam). Indra is said to be making the sacrifice mighty (IV.23.1, katha mahamavrdhat kasya hoturyajnam jusano ....). It is the gods again, who are said to give strength even for the performances of sacrifices (1.111.2, yajnaya tak$ata rbhumadvayah). Sacrifices are said to depend upon the gods (VIII.10.4, yayoradhi pra yajnah). Indra is said to be giving impetus to the sacrifice by his guidance (VIII.6.22, tavendra pranltisu yajno vitantasayyah). X.65.7, is more significant in this context, as therein the sacrifice is said to have been created by the gods, (divak§aso agnijivha rtavrdha rtasya yonim vimrsanta asate [ dyam skabhitvi apa cakrurojasa, yajnam janitvi tanvi ni mamrjuh jj). In this passage, the gods, who are the promoters of the Rta, and who are said to be pondering over the source of the Rta (b), are said to have created the sacrifice, through the assistance of Agni (as Agni is said to be their tongue), after they had supported the Heaven, Earth and the Waters. This suggests that the sacrifice was considered to be a system of cosmic importance, as it concerns the whole universe. Its creation is in line with that of the Heaven, Earth and the Waters, which symbolise the living world. With the metaphor of the horse in view, the gods are also said to have beautified it. (d). Thus it will be realised that the superior status of the gods, in the origin as well as the growth of the sacrifice never appears to have been lost sight of by the Rgvedic poets. Very rarely the expression of the mutual relationship between the gods and the sacrifice would appear to take the form of just a matter of mutual obligation or benefit as put in a more generalised manner very aptly by the Gita (devan bhavayatanena te deva bhavayantu vah III.ll). We come across it, at RV.I.73.5 (sanema vajarir samithesu aryo bhagam devesu sravase dadhanah |), where the poet offers legitimate share to the gods from whatever has been won in the battles. Beyond these general expressions about the relation of the gods in general with sacrifices, there are others which indicate some specific sacrificial association of some individual divinities. These, along with the specific sacrificial epithets, can be almost sure guides to determine the relative importance of the gods in the system of sacrifice. As the hymns in general are meant for the propitiation of the divinities and as this was apparently sought to be done through the sacrificial performances, even the number of hymns written in honour of a particular divinity can be an indication of the general import¬ ance of that divinity in the sacrificial set-up of the time. What is GODS AND THE SACRIFICE 45 true of the number of hymns, is more so in the case of the sacrificial associations and epithets of the gods, which can give us a fairly correct picture of the general nature of the sacrificial system and the specific role of the divinity therein. The reasons for it are quite obvious. The poets have been composing the hymns in a particular atmosphere, which is characte¬ rized by a set of ideas regarding the nature of the divinity and the way of propitiating it. Just as the riddle hymns like VIII.29 refer to certain general characteristic epithets and associations of some divinities so too we come across in the hymns certain sacrificial epithets and associations of the divinities. As the sacrifice has been growing under the eyes of the poets, their ideas and expressions are bound to be influenced by the sacrificial associations of the gods. AGNI: Thus, when we try to see the position of Agni in the Rgvedie sacrifice, we cannot fail to notice an outstanding feature of his role. Though as divinity, Agni was the end in view of the sacrifice, he was also looked upon as a means of performing the sacrifice. His former aspect entitled him to secure a place of equality along with the other gods. The latter aspect, as a means of sacrifice, could have however dragged him down to a position of subordination to the other gods. But, throughout the whole of the Rgveda, we do not come across any expression, which can be said to undermine the importance of Agni in his relation with the other deities. The large number of hymns in the Rgvedie collection, written in honour of Agni 3 also indicates the fact that throughout the whole period of the growth of sacrifice, whatever the vicissitudes of the other gods, the importance of Agni never decreased, not even when the soma-cult and the Indra-worship attained prominence. In a number of ways, the very intimate relationship of Agni with the sacrifice is expressed by the poets. As the sacrifice could be performed only with the help of Agni and as the gods depended entirely on Agni, to receive their share in the sacrifice, the gods are referred to as ‘agnijivhah’ (1.44.14, 89.7; III.54.10; VI.21.11, 50.2, 52.13; VII.66.10; X.65.7). This is stated more specifically at (1.94.3, and II.1.13, tve deva haviradanti ahutarh) that the gods receive the oblations through him. Agni is also said to be bringing the gods for receiving the oblations in the sacrifices V.1.11 (a ca devan haviradyaya vaksi; cf. also VI.50.9 and VII.11.5). This dependence of the gods on Agni may give an impression of their weak position. To remove it, they are said to have established Agni for the sake of sacrifice (cf. II.4.3; III.29.7; VIII.19.2, agnim deva dadhanvire 3. Nearly 200 out of 1028. 46 SACRIFICE IN THE ftGVEDA adhvaraya). The idea is expressed more clearly by pointing out the advantageous position of Agni at VII.11.4 (agnirise brhato adhvarasya, agnirvisvasya havisah krtasya | kratum hi asya vasavo jusanta, atha deva dadhire havyavaham ]|), where the gods are said to have ascertained the advantages of Agni’s position and his ability and thereafter, to have established him as the carrier of oblations. His epithet as the priest of the sacrifice (Hota yajnasya) is apparently suggested by the similarity in function with that of the mortal priest. As such, he is said to be knowing the sacrifice (III.11.1, sa vedo yajnamanusak cf. also III.10.2, 11.1). But as Agni carries the oblations straight to the gods, he is said to be sacrificing to the gods earlier than the mortal priest (II.3.3, devan yaksi manusat purvo adya) or in general, offering the sacrifice to the gods (II.3.3; III.9.7; V.21.1; VI.11.1; X.53.1). It is Agni who is said to be instru¬ mental in successfully terminating the sacrifice and thus bringing the fruits of the sacrifice (IV.2.5 goman aviman, asvl.yajnah). It is thus that he is said to be protecting the sacrifice (III.9.6, visvan yadyajnan abhi pasi manuka and X.87.9.raksa yajriam). Sacri¬ fice is said to be possible on account of him (V.13.4, tvaya yajnam vitanvate |). Sacrifice is said to be made perfect on account of Agni (VI.10.1; VII.17.3,4). Agni is said to be assisting both at the begin¬ ning as well as the end of the sacrifice (VI.15.11, yajnasya va nisitirh voditirh va tamit prnaksi ....). Agni is asked to play a glorious role in the sacrifice (VI.16.2, adhvare. . . .yaja. . . .mahah) or raise the status of sacrifice (VII.2.7, urdhvarh no adhvaram krtarh havesu) among others. He is said to be the best sacrificer (VII.3.1, yajistha) and hence made the chief at the sacrifice (VII.7.4, sadyo adhvare rathirarh jananta [). His relationship in sacrifice, on one side with the gods and on the other with the human beings is vividly described at VII.9.1 (dadhati ketumubhayasya jantoh j havya devesu dravi- nam sukrtsu). His place in sacrifice is quite unique. He is the first among the gods as far as the sacrifice is concerned (VIII.23.18, devah prathamo yajhiyo bhuvah) even though he is employed as a messen¬ ger by the gods (op.cit., visve hi tva sajo§asah devaso dutamakrata j). To make clear this point about Agni receiving the foremost oblation in the sacrifice apart from the other gods, a poet requests Agni to offer sacrifice to his self (VI.11.2d, agne yajasva tanvarh svayaih svam j). There are a number of epithets to indicate that the sacrifice started with Agni. In two exclusive epithets (X.140.5, adhvarasya i§karta) and (IV.7.3, adhvarasya haskarta), it is indicated that Agni being the originator, was the regulator of the scrifice (cf. also ‘yajfianam yanta’ III.13.3, and ‘yajnanam pita’, III.3.4). Manu is said to have laid him as the priest even like the gods (VI.16.9 hota manur- hitah). To indicate his association with the sacrifice right from its GODS AND THE SACRIFICE 47 beginning, he is said to be the first priest (1.94.6, purvyah hota; VII. 11.1, prathamah hota; X.88.4, prathamah devajusto hota; VIII. 11.10, hota sanat). Similarly compare 1.1.1, yajnasya rtvik; yajnesu purohitah 1.44.10. It may be noted here that when the epithets are exclusively used of Agni and when the poets employ the words ‘iskarta’ ‘yanta’ and ‘pita’ to describe Indra, 4 the word ‘adhvarasya’ is dropped, indicating the peculiar connection of Agni with the sacrifice, which Indra could never form. As the sacrifice originated with Agni, he naturally came to be designated as the leader of the sacrifice. Thus he gets the epithets, ‘adhvarasya praneta’ (III.23.1), ‘yajnasya neta’ (II.5.2; III.15.4), ‘adhvaranam rathih (1.44.2), ‘yajnarh visiksuh’ (II.1.10), ‘yajna-nih’ (1.15.12), ‘adhvaranam samrat (1.27.1), ‘adhvaranam abhisrih’ (VIII. 44.7). His role in taking the sacrifice to the gods gave him the epithet ‘Hota’ and he came to be referred to as ‘hota prathamah devajustah’ and ‘pratnah hota’ (II.7.6), ‘ilah prathamah hota’ (III.4.3), ‘rtasya adhruk hota’ (X.61.14), ‘purohitah’, ‘puroyava’, pota (VII.16.12). As the kindling of fire came to symbolize the sacrificial performance, he came to be called ‘adhvaranam anikah (X.2.6), ‘yajnasya ketuh’ (X.1.5, VIII.44.10, etc.), ‘adhvaranam ketuh (III.10.4), ’adhvarasya praketah (VII. 11.1). As no sacrifice could be performed without Agni, he is said to be ‘hota visvesarh yajnanarh (VI.16.11). This indicates that even with the predominance of Indra worship, the importance of Agni had not decreased. That the sacrificial perform¬ ance could not be completed without Agni, is indicated by the deno¬ minative form ‘adhvarlyasi’ exclusively used with Agni at II. 1.2. His beneficent help in the sacrifices gives him the epithets 'adhvarasya santamah’ (1.77.2) or ‘yajnanarh abhisasti-pava (1.76.3), or ‘yajna- sadhah’ (1.96.3), ‘adhvaresu sadhuh (V.1.7), ‘yajna-bandhuh’ (IV.1.9). With long tradition of sacrifice in view, he came to be referred to as ‘sanat hota’ (VIII.11.10), ‘yuge yuge havyavahah (VI.15.8). His association with a number of oblations, has given him the epithets like ‘ghrtannah’ (VII.3.1), ‘ghrtakesah’ (VIII.60.2), ‘sarpir- annah’ (X.27.18), ‘ghrta-yonih’ (III.4.2, V.8.6), ‘ghrtasnuh’ (V.26.2), ‘soma-gopah’ (X.45.5) and in general ‘visvasya havi§ah varenyah hota (X.91.1). Occasional animal sacrifice is indicated by his epithets like ‘uksanna’, ‘vasanna’ (VIII.43.11). It will be noted that the majority of epithets, based on ‘ghrta’ indicate that it was ‘ghrta’ that was actually offered in large quantities in fire. Soma, even though it was employed in sacrifices, was not actually poured in large quantities in fire 5 and hence the paucity of epithets based on ‘soma’. As he figured prominently in sacrifices where gifts were given by patrons, he came to be called ‘Bharatah’ (Agni of the Bharatas) at 4. Iskarta at VIII.I.2, 99.8; Yanta X.22.5; Pita III 31.12 etc. 5. Cf. Chapter V below. 43 SACRIFICE IN THE FtGVEDA II.7.1, ‘Daivodasah’ at VIII.103.2. His association with the priestly families gives him epithets like ‘ahgirastamah’ (1.31.2) ‘kanvatamah’ and ‘kanvasakha’ (X.115.5). Even though Agni is usually said to be going to the gods, they are also said to be coming to him in order to emphasize the import¬ ance of Agni (X.20.6, sa hi ksemo haviryajnah srustidasya gatureti j Agnim deva vasimantam). Sacrifice had come to be conceived as being essential for the good of the society. This is indicated at 11.35.12 (asmai bahunarh avamaya yajnaih vidhema), where Agni is said to be worshipped with sacrifices for the good of all. This is made clear at a number of other places, emphasizing the role of Agni in those performances. Thus at II.2.1 (dyuksam hotaram vrjanesu dhursadaifi), Agni’s pre¬ dominance in sacrifice is referred to. At X.2.3 (so adhvaran kalpa- yati), Agni is said to be fashioning the sacrifices. In general sacrifices are said to be centring round him (V.9.2, sam yajhasah caranti yam). Indispensability of Agni in sacrifices is indicated at X.91.8 (tamin- mahe vrnate nanyarh tvat). At X.4.1 (dhanvanniva prapa asi tvama- gne iyak§ave purave), Agni is said to be the ‘oasis’ in the desert for the sacrificing people, indicating the gratefulness of the poet for the existence of Agni that is making the sacrificial performances possible. It is this unique position of Agni in the sacrificial system as expounded above, that has maintained his importance in all the stages of the evolution of the sacrifice. INDRA : The number of hymns written in honour of Indra in the Rgveda, n is indicative of his general importance in the midst of the Vedic pantheon, in the same way as of his importance in the system of sacrifice. Though he is so vitally associated with the growth of the sacrifice, all the hymns in his honour cannot be said to have been composed for the purposes of fresh sacrificial performances. In the case of some of the hymns like the Danastutis, which are written specifically on the occasion of sacrificial performances in honour of Indra and some other divinities, as also of some other hymns (vide Chapter XI), the sacrificial association is quite obvious. But in the case of a large number of them, it cannot be said with any reasonable certainty how far they were meant for the sacrifice. At places, the poets refer to theirs as fresh compositions in honour of the divinity (cf. VIII.26.1, uktham navlyah). 7 After the composition of new hymns, we do not know how often they were employed for the sacrificial performances. The ‘soma’ hymns in the ninth Mandala would indicate very possibly that those hymns were composed for 6. Nearly one-fourth of the total number. 7. For the idea of Indra being asked to compose a hymn, cf. VI.18.15 and Chapter II. GODS AND THE SACRIFICE 49 fresh performances as they very often repeat the same ideas about the process of pressing out the soma juice. As the ‘soma’ hymns are mainly associated with Indra, his pre¬ dominant position in the growth of the sacrifice can be easily realised. At whichever stage, Indra and Soma may have come to be associated with the sacrifice, the latter has grown in importance rapidly on association with them. This popularity of Indra worship indicates the fact that the god’s help was solicited frequently on account of the prevalence of pretty unsettled condition of life, necessitating almost constant warfare, wherein the help of the warlike god was essential. Thus, in the hymns of the Rgveda, we find the sacrifice appearing dominant on account of its relation with Indra but when life had settled down and the help of Indra was not required to the same extent, the importance of Indra steadily decreased, sacrifice retaining its importance for quite different reasons. In a general way, we can say that the sacrifice was growing with the idea of divinity in the Rgveda. The emphasis was however shifted in the days of the Brahmanas and hence the god came to be relegated to a secondary position in the system of sacrifice during that period. In the days of the Rgvedic hymns however, the importance of Indra among the gods of the Rgvedic pantheon as well as in the system of sacrifice can be noticed obviously. It appears to have been confirmed by the opposition that the Indra-cult had to face. The efforts of the opponents of the Indra worship and the sacrifice 3 appear to have worked towards its stabilisation by the sthupa-nikhanana nyaya. 0 The intimate association of Indra with the sacrifice is indicated by significant epithets and expressions, next in profusion only to those going with Agni. The popularity of Indra and the sacrifice appear to have grown side by side. The simplicity of the approach to the warrior god, reflects the simplicity of the mode of worshipping him or the simpli¬ city of the sacrifice. Even though the most impressive of the sacrificial performances appear to be those in honour of Indra and though the profusion of the offering of the rich soma-juice is said to be delightful to him, the soma-juice does not appear to be indispensable for approaching him. Among the rival patrons, he may be preferring the oblations of the more liberal soma-presser but he does not appear to be dis¬ tinguishing between his worshippers in general. This aspect of the relationship between the worshippers and Indra, has been rightly 8. Vide Chapter IX below. 9. The maxim of shaking the post to make it firm in the pit. S. a.- i 50 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA expounded as the ‘devotion’ of the later days. 10 Thus it is said at 1.101.6 (yah surebhirhavyo yasca bhirubhiryo dhavadbhirhuyate yasca jigyubhih j) that Indra can be worshipped by people of all abilities and temperaments. X.105.4 (sacayorindrascarkr$a an upa- nasah saparyan) describes him as accepting the oblations as soon as he would come across a worshipper. If Indra’s popularity were not known, this would give an impression that Indra-worship was not popular, but this merely appears to indicate the simplicity and the loving nature of the god. It is indicated in a number of places as to how the popularity of sacrifice has grown by the influence and assistance of Indra. Thus, Indra is said to have helped the sacrificial performances (III.10.15b, yajnaya sik?a grnate sakhibhyah) or prospered them (III.40.3, yajnam .pratira). At the same time, the sacrifice is also said to have helped Indra (III.32.12, yajno hi te Indra vardhano bhut; VI.38.4, vardhat yam Indram yajnah; cf. also VI.40.4, VIII.12.20, 13.17, etc.), or his thunderbolt (III.32.12d, yajnaste vajram ahihatye avat). Indra is said to be making the sacrifice mighty (IV.23.1, maham avrdhat hoturyajnam). Indra’s help to the sacrificer is referred to at VI.28.2 (Indro yajvane prnate ca siksati uped dadati na svarh musayati | bhuyo bhuyo rayimasya vardhayan), where a touch of his genuine affection for the worshipper is to be seen. Indra is said to be very frequently praised in the sacrifices (VI.34.2, ekah puru- praiasto asti yajnaih I). Sacrifice is said to be delighting him (VIII. 13.11 (yajnah) samiddhi te). He is said to be foremost among the gods to come and receive offerings in the sacrifices at VI.41.1cd (gavo na vajrin svamoko accha Indra agahi prathamo yajniyanam), where his eagerness for the offerings and affection for the worshippers are conveyed by his comparison with the cows returning homeward. Indra’s feat in eliminating the non-Aryans is comparable only with his another feat in giving significant impetus to the sacrifice, cf. III. 53.2 (Hatvl dasyuh praryarh varnamavat), where he is said to have protected the Aryans by striking down the Dasyus and VIII.6.22 (tavendra pranitisu . yajno vitantasayyah) and VIII.68.11 (yasya te svadu sakhyarh svadvl pranitiradrivah j yajno vitanta¬ sayyah), where in almost identical terms, different poets are refer¬ ring to the leadership of Indra which led to continuous sacrificial performances and his agreeable friendship therefore. The sacrificial epithets of Indra indicate his relationship with the sacrifice in general and the soma in particular. It is interesting to note how their epithets based on the association with the Angiras family indicate the distinctive roles of Indra and Agni in the sacrificial performances. Thus, with the function of Agni, similar to that of 10. RBV (Marathi) 1952. GODS AND THE SACRIFICE 51 the priest of the sacrifice in view, Agni is identified with the Angirasas. He is called ‘Ahgirah’ (1.31.17, 74.5, IV.3.15, etc.) or ‘Angirah r$ih prathamah (1.31.1) or ‘Angirasam jyesthah’ (1.127.2) or ‘Ahgirasta- mah’ (1.75.2, etc.). While, though Indra is said to be ‘Angirastamah’ at two places (1.100.4 and 130.3), very possibly because of his associa¬ tion with Agni (cf. Indra is called Agni at V.34.9), his position as the deity of the sacrifice, as one who is meant to receive the oblations and praises in the sacrifice appears to be always foremost in the mind of the poet. Thus, because of the constant association of the Angiras family with the Indra-soma ritual, he is said to be ‘Angiras- van’ (11.11.20, VI.17.6). But unlike Agni his separate existence from the family as one who is to favour them on account of their worship, is clearly referred to. Thus he is said to be sung by the Angirasas (‘Aiigirobhih gj-nanah’ II.15.8; IV.16.8; X.111.4) and as one who accepts the prayers of the Angirasas (‘Angirasam ucatha jujusvan II.20.5). In a general way, he is said to be the protector of the singers or sacrifices (avita karudhayah, VI.44.15; avita vidhantarii, VIII.2. 36; avita sunvatah vrktabarhisah, VIII.36.1). Agni is however said to be merely a protector in general (III.19.5, X.7.7) or the protector of sacrifice (III.21.3). Indra appears to be a god with strong likes and dislikes as far as sacrifice is concerned. Thus he is said to be eager for people, who offer soma-juice (‘sutasomam iechan’, V.30.1, VII.98.1; ‘sakha sunvatah’, 1.4.10, VIII.32.13) as he is eager for soma-juice (‘usan somam’, IV.24.6, VII.98.2; ‘sute?u ranita, VIII.96.19) and prosper them (sunvatah vrdhah’, V.34.6, VIII.98.5) by accepting their soma¬ pressing (‘ju§anah savanam, III.32.5, X.160.2). But he hates the people who do not press the soma juice (V.34.6, ‘asunvato visunah). He is said to know the sacrifice (adhvarasya praketah, X. 104.6) or to be the bearer of sacrifices (yajnavahah, VIII.12.20). He is said to be growing on account of sacrifice (‘yajnavrddhah’, VI.21.2 or ‘somavrddhah’, VII.39.7, VI.19.5) or accepting the sacrifice (jusapah hotuh yajnarh, IV.23.1). In this way, whereas Agni could be looked upon as a part of the sacrifice, though occupying a unique position therein, Indra appears to be considered as the guiding spirit of the sacrifice. In fact, it can be said that if Agni is the body of the sacrifice, Indra is it.* voul. Sacrifice could not have originated if Agni would not have been there. But after origination, it could not have prospered if Indra would not have been there. The source of Indra’s inspiration was the soma-juice and hence the majority of his epithets are based on his association with the soma juice. As drinker of soma juice, he is said to be ‘papih somam’ 52 SACRIFICE IN THE flGVEDA (VI.23.4), ‘papivan sutasya’ (V.29.2), ‘paprih andhasah’ (1.52.3), ‘pata sutam’ (VI.23.3) or ‘pata somanam (VI. 93.3), ‘sutapah’ (IV.25. 7), ‘sutapavan’ (VI.24.9, VIII.2.7), ‘somapah’ (1.10.3, etc.), ‘soma- patamah’ (VI.42.2, etc.). With very intimate association with soma in view, he is called ‘somya’ (IV.25.2) and is even referred to as ‘soma’ (VIII.78.8). He is said to be possessed of ‘soma’ (‘somin’, VIII.62.1) or eager for soma (‘soma-kamah’, II. 14.2; ‘vavasanah somam, III.35.9) and is naturally the lord of soma (‘somapatih’ III. 32.1, V.40.1, VIII.21.3; ‘patih somanam VIII.93.33; ‘raja pradivah sutanam’ III.47.1. cf. also VI.37.2, VI.20.3). With the general over¬ lordship of Indra in view, he is said to be the lord of soma, even before it is pressed, (cf. VIII.64.3, tvamisi§e sutanam tvamasutanam |). His continuous association with the sacrifice, indicative of frequent sacrificial performances in his honour by different people, is responsible for giving him the epithet “puruhuta”. 11 For the same reason, at III.35.7, ‘Barhis’ (the sacrificial grass) is said to be his abode. Here the poet describes the preparations made for Indra and his horses (stirnam barhih suta Indra somah \ krta dhana attave te haribhyam) and thus with the sacred grass as his abode, Indra is said to be offered the oblations (tadokase purusakaya vrsne, marutvate tubhyam rata havlrhi$i |). Unlike other gods, he was invoked in all the ‘savanas’ (soma-pressings) 12 and hence he is said to be foremost among all who receive the sacrificial offerings (X.50.4, yajhiyah visve$u savane§u and hence VIII.96.4, yajniyanam yajhiyah). The popularity of sacrifice in honour of Indra and the charm that his name exercised are indicated at V.30.5 (srutyam nama bibhrat) and VI.18.8, where he is referred to as ‘sumantunama’. The ample soma juice offered to Indra in continuous perform¬ ances gives him the epithet ‘a vessel for placing the soma-juice’ (VI.69.6, Kalasah somadhanah). Indravayu are also similarly refer¬ red to (VI.69.2, kalasa somadhana), apparently for the same reason. Indra is said to be growing on account of incessant sacrificial per¬ formances (VIII.24.18, aprayubhiryajhebhih vavrdhenyam |). The idea of simplicity of approach or devotion towards the divinity has been stressed as required in the sacrificial performance and not merely the fact of his being an Aryan or a non-Aryan. Thus at X.86.19 (ayamemi vicakasad vicinvan dasamaryam ] pibami pakasutvanah), Indra is said to be distinguishing between the Dasas and the Aryas but choosing the performance of a simple minded person only. Thus it will have been observed that in the approach to the divinity, there is no emphasis on the mechanism of performance but rather on the sentiment. It is this aspect of the Indra-worship, which 11. Employed about sixty times in the Rgveda. 12. Cf. Chapter V for ‘Savana’. GODS AND THE SACRIFICE 53 must have appealed to the minds of the majority of the people and won them over towards the worship, in turn increasing the popula¬ rity of the sacrifice in general. SOMA : In a broad way, it can be said that the two-fold aspect of soma, viz., as the material of the sacrifice as well as the divinity are almost inseparably mixed up. We cannot very clearly mark out any hymns or portions thereof as being in description of the one or the other aspect. It appears that as the material of sacrifice, which captured the imagination of the Aryans, who took more and more to sacrificial performances therewith, soma attained a special degree of import¬ ance, which no other material could hope to attain and it is for this reason that it came to be associated with divinity at an early stage of the sacrifice. In a way, Agni and soma can be compared in respect of their position in the sacrifice. Both of them have a very significant place in the material set-up of the sacrifice but at the same time, they have divinity associated with them. The process of churning fire from the Aranis as well as the pressing of the soma juice from the plant have been described in detail very frequently in the hymns. Both of them are also described as instrumental in bringing the gods to the sacrifice. But their points of difference are also quite obvious. Agni’s divinity is natural, while soma has come to be ascribed divinity due to the peculiar circumstances under which the soma-ritual grew in import¬ ance in the days of the Egveda. Even regarding their role in the sacrifice, Agni’s speciality lies in going to the gods either to invite them or to carry offerings to them; while soma has to remain at the place of sacrifice and attract the divinities towards the sacrificial performance. This influence of soma however has grown to such an extent that it has come to occupy a place in the fancy of the Rgvedic poets, next in importance only to Agni as is also indicated by the number of hymns in his honour. 13 Thus too, the number of hymns becomes an indication of the importance of a divinity in the sacrifi¬ cial system. The epithets and expressions connected with soma as the divi¬ nity or the material of the sacrifice are quite mixed up, though some of them have significance only when soma is considered as the divi¬ nity. Thus like Agni and Indra, Soma is called ‘Angirastama’ (IX. 107.6), indicating the association of the Angiras family with the soma-ritual, perhaps as the originators of the same. 14 Some epithets 13. Nearly 120 as compared with 200 in honour of Agni. 14. For Ahgirasas cf. Chapter VII below. SACRIFICE IN THE FtGVEDA at indicate the unique place of ‘soma’ in the sacrifice, cf. IX.2.10, 6.8, Atma yajnasya purvyah’; IX.7.3, ‘Agriyah’; IX.86.45 ‘Agregah’; etc. 16 They can be construed with both the aspects of‘soma’. Some of them however can be significant only with the divinity of ‘soma’ in view. cf. IX.48.4, ‘rtasya gopah’; IX.96.13, ‘j-tava’; IX.42.5, ‘fta- vrdhah’; IX.86.10, 87.2, ‘devanam janlta’; IX.86.10, 109.4, ‘devanam pita’; IX.96.6, ‘devanam brahma’. ASVINS : Like Indra and soma, they are referred to as ‘Ahgirasvanta’ (VIII.35.14), indicating the association of Asvins with the soma-ritual. Their worship by the Jamadagni family is also referred to (VIII.101. 8, ‘gpnana jamadagnina). Like Indra and Agni, they are said to be knowing the sacrifice and bearing the burden of the sacrifice (VIII. 10.4, ‘pracetasa adhvarasya yajnasya’ and 1.15.11, yajnavahasa). Popularity of their worship is indicated by their being called ‘puru- huta’ like Indra (VI.63.1) 16 and ‘asmayu’ (VII.74.4) along with Indra and Soma. Their association with the Rbhus 17 gives them the epithet ‘rbhumanta’ (VIII.35.15). They are said to be going to the sacrifice (VI.62.2, cakramana yajnam a), brightening the sacrifices (VIII.8.18, adhvaranam rajantau) and prove to listen to the invoca¬ tions (V.75.5, VIII.8.7, ‘havana-sruta’). Their association with the soma-ritual gives them a number of epithets. (1.46.12, ‘pipratau made somyasya’) delighting in the soma-juice; (III.58.7, ‘ju$ana tiro- anhyam), accepting the overnight-kept soma-juice. Their drink of soma or honey gives them the epithets, ‘madhuyuva’ (V.73.8, 74.9), ‘madhupau’ (1.119.9); as a result of it, they are also said to be of the colour of soma or honey, ‘madhuvarnau’ (VIII.26.6). Their chariot is said to be inspired by the pressing-stones on account of their asso¬ ciation with the soma-pressing (III.39.8, ‘adrijuta’) or proceeding along the path of ghee, (VII.69.1, ‘ghrtavartanih; V.77.3, ‘ghrtasnuh’). The epithet ‘sindhumatara’ (1.46.2) very possibly signifies the river Sindhu being the place of origin of their worship. It may be noted that the epithet “sindhumatar’ is used of Soma, Maruts and Saraswati and the association with soma-ritual is indicated at IX.61.7 (m^janti tam dasa ksipo....). At X.78.6 and VII.36.6, the word ‘sindhu’ appears to be used in the sense of the river of that name. As the river Saraswati is known for sacrificial association, 18 and as Maruts are associated with Indra and thereby with the soma-ritual, the epithet concerned has apparently got the sacrificial association in view. 15. For details cf. Chapter V under ‘Soma’. 16. Their chariot is also called ‘puruhuta’ at X.41.2. 17. Rbhus fashioning a chariot for Asvins 1.20.3‘ b . 18. Cf. Saraswati in Chapter IV. GODS AND THE SACRIFICE The reference to the help rendered by Asvins to Atharvana Dadhyac (cf. 1.80.16, 116.12, 139.9; VI.16.14; IX.108.4), in order to know the secret of the chant known to him also indicates the exist¬ ence of the soma-chant of mystical significance in connection with the soma-ritual, with which they were associated. It may be noted that the association of Dadhyac with soma is referred to at IX.108.4 iyena navagva dadhynnapornute). At VI.16.14 Dadhyac is referred to as the son of Atharvan, who has clear association with the growth of Rgvedic ritual. 13 At 1.139.9, Dadhyac is mentioned along with Atri, Kanva, Priyamedha and Angirasas — all of them connected with the ritual of the time. At 1.80.16, the sacrificial rite and hymn with which Dadhyac is associated is referred to (yamatharva manus- pita dadhyah dhiyamatnata .... tasmin brahmani. . . .). Some epithets used of the chariot and the horses of Asvins also indicate their association with sacrifice. Thus, their chariot is said to be ‘madhuvahanah’ (1.34.2, 157.3), ‘madhunah drtih’ (IV.45.1), etc. and the horses are said to be ‘rtayujah’ and ‘madhumantah’ (VII.71.3). Asvins appear to be mainly associated with the morning sacrifice as their epithet ‘prataryavana’ (V.77.1, II.39.2), repeated in the case of their horses as ‘usarbudhah’ (1.92.18; IV.45.4) and the chariot as ‘prataryava’ (X.40.1) ‘prataryuj’ (X.41.2), would indicate. They are said to have inspired worship among people from very ancient times and it appears to have extended over a wide region as indicated at VIII.7.21 (na hi sma yaddha vah pura stomebhir vrktabarhi§ah ! sardhan rtasya jlhvatha). In the preceding stanza (v.20), the poet has raised the point of their possible detention else¬ where (kva nu madathah), indicating that it was worship offered elsewhere (brahma ko vah saparyati); he continues by remarking in v.21 that, it was possibly on account of the people, whom they had inspired to sacrifice in old days. The reference to ‘brahma’ may indicate that the worship originated with the Aryans though it is known to be associated with the non-Aryans too from very old days. The association of Asvins with the non-Aryan worshippers is indicated elsewhere. 20 As Asvins are said to be going to far-off places (cf. VIII.5.31) to accept the gifts of the Dasa worshippers and staying there, it appears that the worship has spread to those places. This appears to have become possible mainly because of the essential nature of the Asvins as the helpers or the healers. There are all sorts of people among their proteges. As Indra is known for his manly deeds (paumsya or Indriya), Asvins are known for their helping deeds. 21 19. Vide ‘Atharvan’, Chapter VII. 20. Cf. 1.47.7 and VIII.5.31 discussed in Chapter VIII. 21. Cf. 1.112 where the ‘Utis’ are stressed. na SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA Though the individual existence of the two .Asvins is not as clearly referred to as in the case of the three Rbhu brothers, they are known to be different (cf. 1.181.4, iheha jata samavavasitamare- pasa tanva namabhih svaih j jisnurvamanyah sumakhasya surirdivo anyah subhagah putra uhe ii) where they are said to have their own bodies and names. Their distinction is made clearer in cd, where one of them is said to be connected with the sacrifice and the other as the son of the Heaven. This would indicate that they were almost considered to have divine origin and their distinction was not such as could be distinctly specified. It is possible therefore, that they have also attained divinity in a similar way as the Rbhus. It is significant that the epithet ‘nara’, which is used with Indra (indi¬ cating his manly strength) and Indragnl about twenty times and with Maruts for the same reason about 18 times, is used of Aivins about sixty times in the Rgveda. Remembering the fact that Asvins are not known for their manly strength and that they have helped people from all strata of society, it is possible that the epithet signifies their human origin and that they have been deified on account of their miraculous deeds in general and sacrificial service in particular, which perhaps proved to be a precedent for ascribing divinity to the Rbhus. Out of all the deeds of the Asvins, the one that appears to have vital connection with the evolution of the sacrifice was the one, where they are said to have secured the secret of the soma-chant through Dadhyac (1.116.12). Their association with the soma-ritual is also indicated by reference to the Janhavi praja, offering them (savanas) thrice a day (1.116.19, trirahno bhagarh dadhatim. . . .). Regarding the ‘madhu’ or the soma-chant, it is referred to as a secret of Tvastr (1.117.22, sa vam madhu pra vocadrtayan, tva?tram yadda- sravapikak§yarh vam). This reference brings the story nearer to that of the Rbhus. 22 The deeds of the Rbhus and Asvins are almost similar in point of miraculousness. In fact, Rbhus may appear to be associates of Asvins as is suggested by their fashioning a chariot for them (1.20.3). The most significant deed of the Itbhus } s to make the cup of Tvastr into four, while Asvins are said to have taken away a secret of sacrificial importance from Tvastr. Both these references indicate the importance of Tvastr in the evolution of the soma-ritual, which appears to have been amended by Asvins and the Rbhus to a certain extent. Thus ASvins appear to have played a significant role in the evolution of the soma-sacrifice and as such continue to be associated with the soma-ritual (cf. 1.34.3, 47.4, madhva yajnam mimik$atam). They are associated with the soma-sacrifice of the Kapva and Pajra 22. Cf. my paper on Rbhus (B.U.J. Vol. XXI September 1952). GODS AND THE SACRIFICE 57 families (1.47.2, 10; 1.117.10). A simile employed at 1.116.24 (somamiva sruvena) would also suggest the same fact. TVA$TR AND RBHUS : Rbhus are said to have fashioned the sacrifice in association with Pusan (III.54.12cd, Pusanvanta rbhavo madayadhvamurdhva- gravano adhvaramatasta). That the Rbhus were human beings, who came to be associated with divinity on account of their significant service to the evolution of soma-ritual by fashioning four cups in place of the earlier one by Tvastr, has been amply stressed in the Rbhu hymns. 23 Tvastr’s role in the evolution of the sacrifice at an earlier stage has been indicated above and it is possible that Tva§tr also had come to be associated with divinity like the Rbhus at the time. VARUNA: The influence of Varuna in the sphere of individual as well as social morality is quite well known. It is through him that the ideas about religion and ethics came to be co-ordinated in the con¬ ception of Rta, which was predominantly associated with him. It is possible that the Rta dwindled down in importance along with Varuna. At one stage, Rta must have influenced the idea of divinity as well as of the sacrifice. The gods are said to be born in Rta (rtejah), protectors of Rta (rtapah), growing on account of Rta (rtavrdhah) etc. and as the idea of gods was developing along with the idea of sacrifice, the influence of Rta on the idea of sacrifice can be self- evident. But with the change in the emphasis on the nature of the ultimate reality, shifting gradually in the direction of the divinities, this abstract idea of Rta could not culminate into a unique reality as it would have done otherwise. The transition from the idea of individual divinity to joint-divinities, to all-divinities-as-one (viive- devas) idea, to a creator divinity or divinities (Prajapati or Visva- karman), to concrete unitary principles like Puru?a and Hiranya- garbha, indicates the gradual change in the emphasis from the initial idea of divinity. This must have gradually detracted the attention of the thinkers from the Rta and by the time the more searching investigation was directed towards the abstract principle in the Nasadiya Sukta (X.129), the idea of Rta seems to have already lost its enviable place in the thought-world of the Aryans. Varuna has no doubt been associated with the soma ritual (1.24.11, tadasaste yajamano havirbhih), where the sacrificers are said to be 23 ' ai< ! 20; I; 110 e ll 1: J' 161; l 11 ' 60; IV - 33 ' 34 • 35, 36, 37; VII. 48. For a detailed Vo^ xXI 1 e F ym T Cf ; pap , er "^ bhus in th e Rgvedic sacrifice” (B.UJ. Vol. XXI 1952). For Tvastr also cf. Chapter IV under ‘camasa’ 58 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA offering oblations to him or (1.24.17, yato me madhvabhj-tam hoteva k$adase), where ‘soma’ is said to be offered to him. As the creative principle, he is said to have deposited ‘soma’ on the mountain (V.85.2, adadhat somamadrau). Some chant of mystical significance is asso¬ ciated with him at (VII.87.4, uvaca me varuno medhiraya, etc.) which is said to have remained an exclusive secret with him. In association with Mitra, he is said to be receiving offerings of ghrta. Thus Mitra- varuna are said to be ‘ghrtayoni’ at V.68.2, ‘ghrtasnu’ at 1.153.1, ‘ghrtacim dhiyam sadhanta’ at 1.2.7, ‘ghptannau’ at VI.67.8 and ‘ghrtasuti’ at 1.136.1 and 11.41.5. These few references however do not indicate any great import¬ ance attached to him in the sacrificial set-up. It is quite possible to imagine that Varuna was an older divinity, associated with sacri¬ fice at an earlier stage because the idea of the divinity existed from very ancient times. This ancient character of Varuna is apparently indicated by references to Indra, Agni and Aivins as younger gods. Thus whereas Varuna is said to have planted the soma-plant on the mountain (V. 85.2, see above), Indra is said to be drinking soma- juice as soon as he was born (1.61.7, III.32.9, 10; 48.2, 3; VII.98.3). As an ancient divinity, sacrifice came to be associated with Varuna with the earlier offering of ghrta 24 as is indicated above; but the sphere of his activity being different, he could never attain a significant place in the growing ritual. His association with Rta must have influenced the idea of sacrifice and provided a theoretical basis for it. But as the sacrifice began to grow more in its practical outlook than was associated with Varuna and the Rta, Varuna does not appear to have caught the popular fancy as did the warlike god Indra. The popularity of soma-juice as an offering in the sacrifice must have brought Indra into prominence. Though soma has been associated with Varuna, it does not appear to have been a popular offering with him partly because of the old association of ghrta and partly because of the intoxicating character of the drink, which could not quite fit in his association with Rta. And thus it appears that with the growing popularity of Indra and the soma-ritual, Varuna and the idea of Rta faded into insignificance. U$AS : With their worship of Indra and Aivins, Angirasas appear to have promoted the worship of U§as too, as she is designated ‘Angi- rastama’ (VII.79.3). With the morning sacrifices in view, she is said to be the first in the invocations (1.123.2, purvahutau prathama) or leading the sacrifice (VI.65.2, nayanti j-tasya agram) and therefore she is said to be ‘the banner of sacrifice’ (1.113.19, ketuh yajnasya). 24. Vide ‘ghrta’ in Chapter V. GODS AND THE SACRIFICE .59 But beyond these few references, she does not appear to have been instrumental in any significant way in the growth of sacrifice in the days of the Rgveda. 26 MARUTS: Maruts are associated with a number of sacrificial epithets, very possibly on account of their association with Agni and Indra, though their place in the Rgvedic pantheon as well as the sacrifice appears to be one of secondary importance. They are said to be going to the sacrifices (III.26.6, yajnam gantarah), associated with the sacri¬ fices (11.36.2, yajnaih sammislah) or as bearing the burden of the sacrifices (1.86.2, yajnavahasah) and therefore being the glory of the sacrifices (adhvarasriyah, X.78.7). Their association with Agni and the sacrifice wins them the epithets ‘agnisriyah’ at III.26.5 and ghrtapru?ah’ at X.78.4. They are referred to as saerificers, indicating their subordinate role (1.39. 9, VIII.7.33, ‘prayajyuh’; 1.86.7, V.55.1; 87.1; VI.48.20, ‘prayajyavah’, ‘subarhi$ah’ at VIII.20.25, ‘vrktabarhisah’ at 1.38.1, VIII.7.20 and ‘yatasrucah’ at 11.34.11. Their association with a priestly family gives them an exclusive epithet ‘sobhartyavah’. Poetically, they are said to be worshipping in the heaven (V.54.1, diva a prsthayajvane marutaya. .. .). Their worship in the sacrifices, where they are said to be assuming sacrificial names 20 is referred to at 1.72.3, 87.5, ‘namani cid dadhire yajniyanf; VI.48.21, tvesarh savo dadhire nama yajniyam. A number of other divinities were also apparently worshipped in the sacrifices but none of them appears to have promoted the sacrifice in a very marked way to evoke any significant epithets. They are given epithets, already used of other divinities. Thus Rudra is said to be ‘medhapati’ (1.43.4), ‘yajriasadhah’ (1.114.4), ‘hota’ (IV.3.1). Pusan is said to be ‘rtasya rathlh (VI.55.1), Vi$nu is said to be ‘ghrtasutih’ (1.3 56.1). Aditya is said to be ‘prathamah purohitah’ (X.66.13) and Adityas are said to be ‘agnijivhah’ (III.54. 10) and adribarhah’ (X.63.3). Though none of these gods individually appears to have played any significant role in the sacrifice, the group of Visvedevas appears to mark an important stage in the growth of the religious as well as the sacrificial system. VISVEDEVAS : In general, it is recognised that the conception of Visvedevas has been introduced for the purposes of the sacrifice. 27 But it does 25. RVB pp. 69-74, where lie tries (o see sacrificial association with the epithets of U§as. Cf. also ‘Daksina’ in Chapter V below and RVL pp. 332 F N 3 26. Cf. Chapter X. 27. VMM p. 130; RIH p. 137; ASL pp 281-82; RVL p. 298. fiO SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA not appear to have been realised that it was a purposeful innovation introduced by the thinkers of the time to serve the cause of sacrifice in particular. As Max Muller believes, 28 the idea of Visvedevas was apparently later in origin. It appears to have been necessitated by the stress of circumstances. It can be understood that when the worship of individual gods was developing, some ideas about their relative importance must be occurring to the minds of the worshippers. It was quite natural that the different worshippers would consider their divinities as greater. As a result, there must have arisen a clash of ideas, affecting the course of sacrificial performances. In a way, this ideological clash must have given an impetus to the idea of sacrifice, which the votaries must have started pursuing more vehemently. But the thinkers of the time must have realised this tendency to be harmful to the general progress of the sacrifice. Though it cannot be said with any precision, the idea of the joint divinities like Indragni, Mitra-Varuna, etc., appears to be earlier in origin than that of the Visvedevas. In the field of the growth of religious and philosophical thought, it led the way to the growth of the idea of one divinity and that of unity. 29 In the field of sacrifice, it removed all the causes of friction and smoothened the course of sacrifices. It can thus be realised as to how sacrifice has influenced the growth of the religious as well as the philosophical thought of the time. Of all the gods in the Visvedeva group, Agni appears to have retained his place of importance, being indispensable for sacrificial performances. But the form of worship as it was associated with one divinity or the other was changing as is indicated at 1.105.4 (yajnarh ppcchami avamarh sa tadduto vivocati | kva rtam purvyam gatam, kastad bibharti nutanah), where the poet is referring to the disappearance of older form of worship and the existence of the newer one. In a following verse also, the poet appears to be indi¬ cating the difficulties in the way of a person concerned with the sacrifice, (cf. v.7, aham so asmi yah pura sute vadami kani cit j tarn mam vyanti adhyah vrko na trsnajarii mrgarhi;), where the poet indicates his knowledge of the past ritual but expresses his anxieties about the growing ritual, which he does not appear to appreciate fully. 30 An attempt to regulate the mode of worship can be observed at VI.52.1 (ni hiyatamatiyajasya yasta), where a person overstepping the usual limits in the mode of performance (atiyaja) is censured. The common mode of worship of the various divinities in the Viivedeva group must have been of a pretty liberal type, where 28. ASL p. 281. 29. RVL p. 297. 30. Cf. also III. 55.3. GODS AND THE SACRIFICE fil all the gods would be attached equal importance and thus would be expected to give equal gifts. Among the various epithets employed about the Visvedevas, their common agreement and ability to give equal gifts appear to be the most significant. Thus with perfect accord, they are said to be kindling the (sacrificial) fire (cf. X.101.1, udbudhyadhvarh samanasah sakhayah samagnimindhvam bahavah sanllah |). Their agreement was a pre-condition of their common worship and hence it is empha¬ sized at VIII.27.10 (asti hi vah sajatyam risadaso devaso astyapyarii j) where their kinship and friendship have been referred to. (cf. simi¬ larly ‘sajo$asah’ at X. 126.1). At III.8.8, with common agreement, they are said to be protecting the sacrifice and raising it up (cf. sajo?aso yajnamavantu deva urdhvam krnvantvadhvarasya ketum). This common agreement was apprently essential on account of some clash about their relative greatness. It appears that the growth of the Indra ritual had eclipsed com¬ pletely other rituals for some time; and therefore there was some opposition to his worship inspite of his greatness. 31 With the growth of the Visvedeva group, some must have liked to worship him along with others. But with Maruts as his associates (whose leader he is represented to be, cf. ‘Indra-jyesthah marudganah’ 1.23.8, 11.41.15), he seems to have swept the field of sacrifice. This must have created some heart-burning among the votaries of other gods, who must have sponsored the idea of equal status for all the gods. As the volume of general opinion must have been growing in favour of the idea of Visvedevas, it was necessary to allow Indra to be included in the Visvedeva group. With his sweeping influence, however, his equality with all other gods could not be emphasized. At least it does not appear to have been conceded by some, who wanted a dis¬ tinctive status for Indra on account of his towering greatness. It is possibly thus that Indra has come to be represented as the head of the Visvedeva group at a number of places, (cf. IV.54.5, VI.51.15, VII.11.5, VIII.63.12, 83.9, X. 66.1, 70.4). Visvedevas are said to be inspired by Indra at V.66.2 (Indraprasutah). Indra may have retained his general importance later but Indra- worship must not have risen to greater heights after the rise of the Visvedeva group in the field of religion and sacrifice. Thus has the emphasis changed from the greatness of Indra to the greatness of all the gods in general, as is indicated by a characteristic hymn in the Rgveda (III.55), where the refrain (cf. Mahaddevanamasuratva- mekam) emphasizes the greatness of all the gods. All the gods are said to be equally great without any distinction whatsoever at VIII. 30.1 (cf. na hi vo astyarbhako devaso na kumarakah visve sato mahanta it |). 31. Cf. the view of 'anindras’ referred to in Chapter IX. 62 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA This Visvedeva worship was centred round Agni as can be inferred from the description in X.52, where Visvedevas are said to have established Agni (V.l, auksan ghrtairastpnan barhirasma adid hotaram nyasadayanta) and wherein Agni explains as to how he was chosen as the priest. It is also supported by VIII.58.1 (yamrtvijo bahudha kalpayantah sacetaso yajnamimam vahanti |), where the noets are said to be carrying on with the scrifice by looking upon Agni even as they do upon other gods. This would clearly indicate how the conception of Visvedevas was considered quite essential for the purposes of the sacrifice. It is for this reason that the Visvedevas are asked to lead on the sacrifice to progress (X.66.12; 101.2, praneam no yajriam pranayata sadhuya). The Visvedeva hymns fall in three categories according to the need of the time and place where they came to be composed for the worship of some or all the divinities together. I Where Visvedevas only are mentioned without specifically mentioning any particular divinity or divinities. II Where some gods only are specifically mentioned. Ill Where all the gods along with even the minor deities as well as the implements of sacrifice would find a mention. 1.89, 90; III.20; VII.35 may be considered as characteristic hymns belonging to the third category, where even the pressing stones and the svarus 32 are referred to. Like other gods, they are said to be ‘agni-jivhah’ (1.89.7, VI.50, 2, etc.) as being eager for the sacrifice (III.20.1, adhvaram vavasanah), as knowing the sacrifice (X.66.1, adhvarasya pracetasah), as being the glory of the sacrifice (X.66.8, adhvaranam abhisriyah). Their assumption of names for sacrificial purposes is referred to at X. 63.2. They are said to be praised by ‘sama hymns’ (1.107.2, samabhih stuya- manah) and to be arranging the sacrifice (X.66.8, yajna-niskrtah). Their significant contribution to the growth of the sacrifice and through it to the prosperity of the Aryan society and all that the Aryans considered as good and great, is referred to at X.65.11 (arya vrata visj-jantah), where the Visvedevas are said to be spreading the gospel of the Aryan religion. Thus it will be realised that the ideas about divinity have given positive impetus to the cult of sacrifice and at the same time the sacrifice, as it was evolving, has influenced the ideas about religion in general 33 and the divinity in particular. 32. Svarus: Cf. Chapter IV. 33. For more discussion of the point Cf. Chapter XIII. Chapter Four THE SCENE OF THE SACRIFICE m T'JPTrT ^T: I (lV.7.7) rt sT^rfar armPr ^ (vi. oi.u). SYNOPSIS:— Relationship with the hymns and the divinities—absence of big cities as centres of sacrificial activity—performances on the banks of the rivers—the Nadl- sukta—various rivers associated with sacrificial performances— The place of performance—generally the household—epithets based on the •Rta’—ideas underlying the epithets analysed—occasional disturbances—their causes —prayer for accord in assemblies— VedI—its importance—association with the Rta—Barhis as seat of the gods— Yupa—word not always in the sacrificial sense—Sthurayupa—Svarus in III.8. planted in a line at the place of sacrifice—idhma and samidh— Ladles—juhu—upasecanl—darvi—sruc—sruva—ghrtaci—gharma as the vessel— relative position of the fire and soma-ritual— —Pressing stones—the upper and lower—the words—‘gravan’ and ‘adri’— ulukhala—vanaspati—the ox-hide and the strainer—various vessels of soma-juice at different stages—amatra—avabhrtha—asvattha—ahava, etc.—camasa—the relation of the Rbhus with Tva?tr and Asvins—hotra, potra, etc.—vessels for the worship of different divinities—caru—indications of the scene for a broad idea of sacrifice —the scene of sacrifice as a nucleus for all cultural activity— The scene of sacrifice occupies a very vital place in its relation¬ ship with the growth of the hymns on the one hand and that of the divinities on the other. Both have attained importance and grown in stature due to the central agency of the place of sacrifice, where they could flourish. Thus we find the mention of certain regions where sacrifice has flourished and also get a broad idea about the situation wherein it was performed. It is noteworthy that there is practically no mention of a parti¬ cular place as such where the sacrificial sessions were held frequent¬ ly. 1 Very probably, 2 big cities as capitals of a number of Chiefs had not attained any definite shape where the growth of cultural life could get momentum, though the existence of some fortified settle¬ ments cannot be lost sight of. This would also give an indication that though the sacrifice had grown, it could not be imagined to have attained a stage of regulated, orderly mechanical performance as envisaged by the Brahmana texts. It would be so, for the very 1. Except perhaps Arjika VIII.7.29 which is described as ‘pastyavat’. It may indi¬ cate people as Macdonell imagines (V. I-II p. 62). 2. See Vedic Index II p. 254 etc. 64 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA obvious reason that the foothold required for its systematic growth was not available. The impetus that regular construction of a stage must have given to a systematic development of dramatic perform¬ ances, was given by regular places of sacrificial performances to the orderly and mechanical growth of the sacrifice in the days of the Brahmanas. For want of such a stage, the performances of sacrifices in the days of the Rgveda could not naturally attain any mechanical character as in the later days. Thus we find the sacrificial performances being held only on the banks of certain rivers. Even the more important of them which gave rise to the Danastutis appear to have been held on the banks of the rivers. It is possible to surmise in fact, that the settlements of the Aryans were mostly situated on the banks of the bigger rivers and their tributaries and hence all events of social and political importance have been associated with the names of certain rivers. The hymn to “The Rivers” is noteworthy in this connection (RV. X.75). It has been written by a poet belonging to the Priya- medha family 3 called Sindhuksit perhaps significantly as he was residing on the banks of the river Sindhu. The name also may signify the fact that the persons were known not by the names of any cities or provinces but by the names of the rivers indicating also the fact of the Aryan settlements on the banks of the important rivers. He has naturally mentioned the river Sindhu predominantly (w.l, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9) either independently or along with the other rivers. In all, twenty-one rivers are mentioned by the poet and as the poet has intended to glorify them as divinities he has referred to them as travelling in the chariot like gods (X.75.9, sukham ratham yuyuje — v.6, saratham yabhirlyase) and as being possessed of prosperity (v.8, svasva sindhuh suratha, suvasa, hiranyayl; ). Though we do not find any mention of their association with the sacrifice, some of the river-s have apparently played a significant role in the growth of sacrifice in those days as can be seen below. But even the fact of their glorification in a hymn cannot be entirely devoid of significance. Very possibly the important part played by them in the growth of sacrifice on their banks has prompted the poet to immortalise them in a hymn of this type. ARJIK1YA 4 The river is mentioned only once at X.75.5, but the mention of Arjlka at VIII.7.2a where Maruts are said to be going (yayur nicakraya narah [ ), at IX.113.2 (A pavasva disam pata arjikat soma 3. Vedie Index II. p. 52 and 53 for Priyamedha and Praiyamedha. 4. Arjiklya—Vedic Index I. p. 62-3. THE SCENE OF THE SACRIFICE 65 .), at IX.65.23 and at VIII.64.11 [Ayam te (Indra!) priyah] arjlklye madintamah], where soma-juice and Indra-worship are associated with Arjikas, it would appear that the settlement of the people on the banks of the Arjikxya 5 was taking active part in the development of the soma-sacrifice. GOMATI (3) Besides its mention in the Nadisukta (X.75), Gomati 6 as a river which was the scene of some soma-sacrifices, appears to be referred to at two places, at V.61.19 7 (Esa kseti rathavitir maghava gomati- ranu | parvatesu apasritah || ) where Rathaviti, who is described as ‘sutasoma’ in the previous stanza is stated to be residing and at VIII.24.30 8 where too in a characteristic Danastuti, the residing place of the patron is described as Gomati. From both these references it would seem that the stream of the river Gomati flowing in the mountains has been a scene of some active soma-worship. DRSADVATI AND APAYA At III.23.4, the rivers Drsadvati 9 and Apaya 10 are mentioned as places, where Agni-cult was common (Dr§advatyarh manusa apayayam sarasvatyam revad agne didlhi | ). They appear to be rivers flowing in the vicinity of Sarasvati, and as such forming a region of enthusiastic sacrificial activity, under the patronage of the two Bharata princes Devasravas and Devavata, 11 who are mentioned in III.23.2, (Amanthistha bharata revadagnim Devasrava Devavatah sudaksam ] ). PARUSNI Parusni 12 is mentioned in neraly half a dozen passages in the RV., besides its mention in the Nadl-sukta (X.75.5b). It appears to be a pretty big river (VII.18.8, Aditi—unbound and MahenadI VIII.74.15a) and particularly as a large number of the enemies of Sudas were drowned therein, as described at VII.18.8-9. At IV.22.2 13 , the meta¬ phor of his wearing the river as a covering or the reference to the friendship with the river, only indicate the close association of Indra i.e., sacrificial sessions on the banks of the river in honour of Indra. In a similar way, Maruts, who are closely associated with Indra are 5. This will be another instance where the name of the people is given by the residence on the banks of the river. 6. Vedie Index I. p. 238. 7. As it is a Danastuti and there is reference to his dwelling among Parvatas the word Gomati would preferably be taken in the sense of the streams of the river. 8. See Narya in Chapter VIII. 9. Vedic Index I. p. 374. 10. Vedic Index I. p. 58. 11. See Chapter VIII. 12. Parusni—Vedic Index I. p. 499-500. 13. (sriye parusnimusamana urnam, yasyah parvani sakhyaya vivye). S.B,—5 66 SACRIFICE IN THE IJGVEDA also associated with the river Parusnl at V.52.9 (Uta sma te paru§nya- murna vasata sundhyuvah | ) and their association with sacrifice is referred to in the following verse V.52.10 (Etebhirmahyam namabhih yajnam vistara ohate | ), where they are said to be supporting the sacrifice of the mortals. The river is more significantly mentioned in a Danastuti at VIII.74.15, Satyamit tva mahenadi paru$nyava dedisam ] Nemapo asvadatarah savis^hadasti martyah J] where the gifts of Srutarvan Arksa and savistha are praised 14 . They are said to be keen worshippers of Agni and of whom Srutarvan possibly belongs to the family of Anu, 16 whose fire is referred to in this hymn (VII.74.4, Aganma vrtrahantamam jyestham agni- manavam). YAMUNA: Yamuna 16 is referred to in three places. At X.75.5, the river is mentioned along with Ganga, Sarasvatl, etc. At V.52.17, Yamuna is associated with Maruts even as Paru§ni at V.52.9 and as the gift is being referred to here, (9b, Ekameka sat a daduh j Yamunayam adhi srutam ud radho gavyam mrje, ni radho a£vyam mrje | ), sacrificial performances on its banks can easily be inferred. This is made clearer at VII.18.19, where Yamuna along with Trtsus is said to have protected Indra (Avadindram Yamuna Trtsavasca j) apparently by the performances of soma-sacrifices in his honour. VIPAT : The close connection of Vipat 17 with Indra is indicated at two places (III.33.1 18 and IV.30.11 19 ) which may imply some sacrificial activity on the banks of the river. It is not mentioned in the Nadi- sukta. SUTUDRI: Sutudri 20 is mentioned along with Vipat at III.33.1 and at X.75.5. Perhaps there was not much habitation in the mountainous part of its flow and hence no specific mention of sacrificial activity occurs, though at its confluence with Vipat, it comes to occupy some importance on account of some activity of political as well as sacrifi¬ cial nature, as indicated in III.33. 14. Cf. Chapter VIII. 15. Cf. Chapter VIII. 16. Yamuna—Vedic Index II p. 301. 17. Vipat—Vedic Index II. p. 301. 18. Where she is said to be flowing under orders of Indra. 19. Where the car of Usas is said to be broken on the river Vipas by Indra, gO, AutudrI V.I. II. p. 385, THE SCENE OF THE SACRIFICE Cl SARASVATI: The river Sarasvati, 21 out of all the rivers mentioned in the Nadl-sukta (X.75), has been glorified in three independent hymns (VI.61; VII.95 and 96). Out of all the places in the RV., where she is referred to, 22 her association with other gods and goddesses is indicated in nearly two-thirds of the passages. This would indirectly suggest that most of the major divinities as well as the minor ones like Raka, Sinivall, etc., have grown on the banks of the river, which could thus appear to have been an active witness of the evolution and growth of the divinities through the medium of the sacrifice. It is therefore natural that she should be styled as Naditama, Arhbi- tama and Devitama at 11.41.16. Whoever came to be styled as Pancajanas and who have played an active part in the growth of the sacrifice, 23 are said to have been helped to grow by Sarasvati (VI.61.12, pancha jata vardhayanti | ), also indicating the sacrificial activity going on steadily on its banks. Thus Sarasvati is requested to listen to the call in the sacrifice (VII.95.4, upasravat subhaga yajne’smin )) or is said to be worshipped in sacrifice (X.17.7-9, yajnamabhi naksamana havante; asmin barhisi madayasva — adhvare tayamane havante etc.). The soma-sacrifice is associated with the river Sarasvati when it is said that Indra is refreshed by her when he drinks the soma-juice (X.131.5, yat suramam vyapibah saclbhih Sarasvati tva Maghavannabhisnak ). At VII.96.2, where she is asked to inspire gifts of patrons (coda radho maghonam) in a very general way, it is obvious that a number of sacrifices were usually performed on the banks of the river. Like Gomati, the river Sarasvati is refer¬ red to in the Danastuti of Citra, 24 (VIII.21.17-18). The gift of the patron is praised in a very characteristic way by saying that the gift can be given only by Indra, Sarasvati or Citra (V.17, Indro va ghediyan magharh Sarasvati va subhaga dadirvasu | tvam va Citra dasuse). This would indicate that though a number of soma-sacrifices were going on on the banks of the river Sarasvati, where Indra must be giving gifts liberally, the gift of Citra was particularly considered as liberal. Citra alone, therefore, in comparison with all others residing on the banks, is said to be the king, others being merely kinglings, (V.18, Citra id raja rajaka id anyake j yake Sarasvatlm- anu ! ), further indicating how a number of small kings too residing on the banks of the river Sarasvati were performing sacrifices. Thus because the sacrificial activity was so common on the banks of the river Sarasvati, the poet is praying to Sarasvati that 21. V.I. II. pp. 434-37. 22. I. 89.3; I. 164.49; II. 30 8, 32.8. 41.16; III. 54.13; V. 42.12,43.11, 46 2; VI. 49.7, 50.12, 52.6. 61.2, 61.12. 14: VII. 9.5, 36.6, 39,5, 40.3, 95.4, 96.2; Vm. 21.17, 18; 54.4; X. 17.7, 30.12, 131.5, 184.2. 23. See Chapter VIII. 24. See Chapter VIII for Citra. 68 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA they should not be required to go to other regions (VI.61.14, Ma tvat k§etrani aranani ganma | ). SINDHU : The word Sindhu 25 is used in the sense of a stream in general at a number of places. In the special sense of a river it is used at about a dozen places, 20 out of which at one place only a patron called Svanaya Bhavya 27 is said to be performing soma-sacrifice on the banks of this river (amandan tsoman prabhare manlsa sindhavadhi ksiyato bhavyasya j yo me sahasramamimlta savanaturto raja srava icchamanah j|). This may indicate that it was not as im¬ portant a scene of sacrificial activity as Sarasvati was. It was a poet residing on the banks of this big river who wrote the Nadi-sukta (X.75) as his name Sindhu-ksit would indicate. He has glorified the greatness of the river when he says that all the rivers join the Sindhu (X.75.4, Abhi tva Sindho siiumin na mataro vasra ar$anti payaseva dhenavah | yadasamagram pravataminaksasi), which alone has apparently inspired the poet to place the river at the top of all the rivers. SUVASTU: The river Suvastu 28 is mentioned in the Danastuti of Syava at VIII.19.37 29 indicating the place of sacrifice where the gift was given to the poet. About twenty other rivers have also been mentioned in the Rgveda 30 but their sacrificial association is not referred to, possibly suggesting that their banks had not attained the place of importance as strongholds of the Aryan civilization symbolised by the sacrifice. PLACE OF PERFORMANCE : The place where the sacrifice was actually performed, has been variously referred to, indicative of the ideas with which sacrifice was looked at by the poets, apparently interested in its growth. Even though the measurement of the altar and the situation of three fires, etc., are referred to, we do not come across any clear reference to sacrificial halls specially erected for that purpose for permanent use. The reference in general to the place of performance and also the mention of the banks of a number of rivers, appear to indicate that bigger sacrificial sessions were held on the open spaces near 25. Vedic Index II. p. 450. 26. I. 122.6, 126.1; IV. 54.6, 55.3; V. 53.9; VII. 95.1; VIII. 12.3, 25.14, 20.25, 26.18; X. 64.9. 27. Svanaya Bhavya residing on Sindhu (I. 126.1). cf. Chapter VIII. 28. Vedic Index II. p. 460. 29. Chapter VIII. 30. Asikni. Urnavafi. Kuhha, Krumu, Gaiiga, Tr?tama, Marudvrdha, Mehatnu, Rasa, Vitasta, Viball, Sipha, Svetya, Sadanira, Sarayu, Silamavati, Su^oma, Susarju, Hariyupiya. THE SCEHE OF THE SACRIFICE the banks of the rivers, may be with temporary shelters erected for the purpose 31 while a number of ordinary sacrifices were performed in the house, where temporary arrangements appear to be made for the purpose. Thus in a very general way, we find reference to “The house of the liberal patron” dasuso grham VII.74.4; VIII.13.10; VIII.22.3, etc. or dasuso duronam III.25.4. At times, it is referred to merely as a house (1.74.4, ksaye vesi havyani j VII.24.1, yonisfa Indra sadane akari i also VII.70.2, VIII.76.2, etc.) With the skill of the sacrincer in view, it was called ‘sukrtah duronam’ (IV.13.1, 1.117.2, 1.183.1). With the purity of the place of worship in view, it was called ‘a pure place’ (VII.41.6, sucaye padaya). With the soma-pressing of the sacrificer in view, it was called ‘sutavato niskrtarh’ (III.58.9). Because the people used to pay their homage to the divinities at the place, it came to be designated ‘namasaspada’ at VIII.23.9 [upo enam (Agnirii) jujusur namasaspade]. As gods would be delighted at the place by receiving the offerings, the place was called ‘devanam upamadam’ (III.5.5d). “The place of the fathers” at VIII.9.21 (Pituryona nisldathah) may refer to the place of sacrifice as well as the altar where also the gods are said to be sitting (cf. ‘Hotr-sadana’ below). The word Vidatha 32 is also used in the sense of the place of sacrifice at times IV.36.5 (vidathesu pravacyah), VII.84.3 (krtam no yajnam vidathesu carum j ), VIII.11.2 (Tvamasi prasasyo vida¬ thesu). By far the largest number of epithets employed to signify the place of sacrifice are based on Rta. Thus ‘Rtasya Dhaman’ indicates the place of sacrifice at 1.43.9 and at VII.36.5 (yajante asya sakhyam vayasca namasvinah sva rtasya dhaman ! ). It is referred to as ‘rtasya sadana’ or ‘rtasya sadana’ at 1.84.4 (sukrasya tva abhyaksaran dhara rtasya sadane ; ) and VIII.9.10; II.34.13b (Rudra rtasya sadanesu vavrdhuhj); as ‘rtasya sadma’ at III.5514 (rtasya sadma vicarami vidvan j ), as ‘rtasya pada’ 33 at IV.5.9 (rtasya pade didyanamagnim); as ‘rtasya panthah’ at VI.44.8 (rtasya pathi vedha apayi), when Indra is said to drink soma in the place of sacrifice; as ‘rtasya durona’ at VII.60.5 (ime rtasya vavrdhuh durone. .. .aditeh putrah), where gods are said to be increasing in the place of sacrifice. At about half a dozen places, 34 the word ‘vivasvatah sadana’ is used and it appears that, though it may refer sometimes to the altar (III.51.3 and X.12.7), it indicates the place of sacrifice in 31. See below (V. 62.R). 32. Max Muller S.B.E. Vol. 46 p. 26; Geldner V.S. I. 147; Bloomefield J.A.O.S. 19.12: Vedic Index II. pp. 296-7. 33. See below under 'altar’, where it is also construed as ‘Vedi’. Some words are vague and may mean either. 34. I. 53.1; III. 34.7, 51.3; X. 12.7; 75.1. 70 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA general. Thus at 1.53.1 (bharamahe girah Indraya vivasvatah sadane | ), Indra is said to be offered hymns in the place of sacrifice; also III.34.7 (vivasvatah sadane asya tani vipra ukthebhih kavayo grnanti | ) or at X.75.1, the singer is said to be praising the greatness of the rivers in the place of sacrifice (pra su va apo mahimanamutta- maih karurvocami sadane vivasvatah j ). With the presence of Agni, the gods are said to be placing themselves in the ‘house of vivasvat’ (X.12.7, yasmin deva vidathe madayante, vivasvatah sadane dhara- yante | ) where the term may indicate the place in general or the altar in particular as also at III.51.3, where Indra is said to be finding delight (vivasvatah sadane a hi pipriye | ). It is interesting to analyse the idea which prompted the poets to employ these epithets. When ordinary words like k$aya, gaya, durona are employed, it was obviously done because of the usual sacrifice, that they were used to perform in the house, without any specific place earmarked for the purpose like Agni-sarana of the later days. Agni-dhana is referred to in a late hymn of the Rgveda (X.165.3, Nastryam padam krnute agni-dhane j ); but very possibly the word merely refers to the actual place of kindling fire and not the sacrificial chamber in general. The epithet ‘vivasvatah sadana’, emphasizes the importance of Agni in the sacrifice. It signifies the fact that the place of sacrifice could be considered as the place of Agni, as Agni had the lion’s share in the sacrificial performance. The epithets based on Rta are more significant. It is well-known that the Rgveda conceives Rta as a principle which lies at the root of human as well as divine activity and as such becomes the basis of ideas, religious, ethical and philo¬ sophical. When the place of sacrifice in general or the altar in parti¬ cular is designated on the basis of the Rta emphasizing it as the seat of Ftta, it should become clear as to what type of importance the thinkers were attaching to the sacrifice in the life of the Aryans at the time. In general, the progress of the society in all walks of life had come to be measured in terms of sacrifice as it was almost the sole means of social emancipation in all these fields. Difference in humble and rich places of sacrifice, very possibly according to the amount of soma-juice pressed and offered has been referred to at 1.101.8 (yad va marutvah parame sadhasthe yad va’vame vrjane madayase j ). This may refer to the contrast between the sacrificial offerings of individuals and those of rich patrons or groups, or it may be the one between the offerings of minor patrons (who appear to be coming together in certain sacrificial sessions) and those of the more illustrious ones. The cultural level of the people assembling for sacrificial per¬ formances is hinted at VII.1.4 (yatra narah samasate sujatah) and THE SCENE OF THE SACRIFICE 71 at VII.1.15 (sujStasah paricaranti vlrah), where such nobly born persons are said to be participating in the sacrificial performances. Some of the sacrificial sessions appear to be attended by a large number of people as suggested at 1.65.2 (Rtasya deva anu vrata guh bhuvat paristirdyaurna bhuma | ) where a sacrificial gathering vast like the heaven, is referred to. Ample space was apparently required for some sacrifices at least, which is said to be provided by the divinities at 1.96.6 (Agnl-soma brahmana vavrdhana urum yajnaya cakrathuh u lokam |). At V.62.6, apparently such a specially erected spacious structure is referred to — Akravihasta sukrte paraspa yam trasathe varune tasvantalj [ Rajana ksatramahrniyamana sahasrasthunam bibhrthah saha dvau || Here Mitra and Varuna are said to be supporting a structure of a thousand pillars for protecting a person while offering oblations (Ilasu). It was aparently erected for the purposes of a sacrificial performance. It is interesting to note that the divinities are referred to as Akravihasta 35 on this occasion, which apparently means “whose hands are free from flesh or blood”. This may indicate that (1) animal sacrifices were not offered to Mitra and Varuna or (2) they were not required to kill any obstructors and as such their hands were free from blood. This would be so because of the powerful influence of Mitra and Varuna which would keep away the disturbing element. 30 The place of sacrifice had thus come to be considered as free from violation due to the influence of the divinities. A kind of jubilation, characterizing the sacrificial gatherings with people rising up and joining in, is referred to at IX.88.2 (Adlm visva nahusyani jata svar^ata vana urdhva navanta |). The bright appearance of the sacrificial gathering, possibly due to the presence of a number of rich patrons is referred to at X.31.5. (Iyam sa bhuya ujasam iva ksa yaddha k^umantah savasa samayan | Asya stutim jaritur bhik$amana a nah sagmasa upayantu vajah |j) where the sacrificial assembly is said to be like the residing place of the Dawns with the coming together of the patrons. They are said to be on the look-out for the hymn of the poet (asya stutim jaritur bhik$amanah), though they themselves have brought gifts of food (ksumantah). This would indicate that the hymns were con- 35. The word ‘Ktavis’ is used at 1.162.9 & 10 (Asvasya kravi^ah and Amasya kraviso gandhah) in the sense of ‘flesh’. 36. Even as in S. III.l. Ka katha bana-sandhane .... Huhkarenaiva dhanu?ah sa hi vighanan apohati) SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA sidered more important than the rich offerings that could be given by patrons. As a variety of people would be participating in some big sacri¬ ficial assemblies, complete accord of all of them was essential for a smooth performance. We have not got any positive proof of the disturbances in the sacrificial assemblies, but it can be imagined that they could take place. It is a well-known fact that different sections among people must have fostered the worship of different divinities, though they may not have been exactly antagonistic towards each other. The reference to a section of people who could doubt the existence of Indra or his influence 3 7 or the necessity felt by a poet to emphasize to the people in general, the nature of Indra (sa janasa Indrah 11.12) appear to indicate that certain sections had come to entertain some staunch feelings either for or against some divinities. When this would happen, counteraction was inevitable and that would lead to some disturbances in the sacrificial assemblies while the performance would be in progress. At X.141.4 (Indra-vayu Brhaspatim suhaveha havamahe | Yatha nah sarva ijjanah sahgatyam sumana asat |j ), Vayu and Brhaspati are said to be invoked in the sacrificial assembly (sahgatyam) so that all people could be well-disposed towards the performance. This would suggest that, for securing the accord, certain joint sacrifices in honour of different deities, who could form a group as Indra, Vayu and Brhaspati do, used to be performed. This appears to be an attempt in a smaller sphere, where deities having some affinity with each other, are concerned. But when deities like Indra and Varuna come to be joined together, there would appear to be some definite idea behind it and it would be of such an accord among people of different sets of thought and affinities, that the poet is talking of. In fact, it seems that the introduction of the group of Visvedevas was a bold step in the direction of achieving social amity, which became increasingly necessary with the growth of deities and sacrifice, which must have brought in some jealousies. 38 This clash due to differences of opinion regarding the import¬ ance of deities, or the type of offering to be given to the divinities, or the hymns to be recited at a particular sacrifice, seems to have prompted the author of X.191 to give a directive to the people who have gathered at a place of sacrifice (as indicated by the kindling of fire—ilaspade samidhyase [ at X. 191.1), to move and talk with one accord and appreciate each other’s mind or views (v.2, samga- cchadhvarh sarh vadadhvam sam vo manamsi janatam )) and as if to 37. Chapter IX. 38. Cf. ‘Visvedevas’ in Chapter III. THE SCENE OF THE SACRIFICE 73 alleviate all suspicions in their mind, add that gods are of perfect ac¬ cord in accepting the gifts (v.2, deva bhagam yatha purve sanjanana upasate j). It appears that with the discord caused previously in view, the poet adds that similar hymns would be recited in their honour (samanam mantramabhi mantraye vah), similar offerings would be offered to them (samanena vo havisa juhomi), and that there would be perfect accord in the assembly (samitih samanl). ALTAR : 3 9 At the place of sacrifice, the most conspicuous part would be the altar. This is also suggested by its being referred to as the centre of sacrifice (VIII.12.32, yad asya dhamani priye samicinaso asvaran | nabha yajnasya dohana||; also VIII. 13.29, nabha yajnasya sam- dadhuh), where ample soma-juices are referred to as being poured on it. The same fact is also referred to at X.61.2, where Turvayana’s offer of ample soma-juice has been mentioned. (Turvayanah. k$odo no reta itauti sineat j ). In this very passage Cyavana is said to have measured the ‘vedi’ and made all elaborate preparations, but with no sincerity at heart (sa id danaya dabhyaya vanvancyavanah sudairamimita vedim | ). Thus it is suggested here that all the pre¬ parations with technical perfection would be of no avail against good songs and soma-juice. In fact, it appears that the technical and mechanical aspect of the sacrifice is not attached so much import¬ ance in comparison with the sentimental and what may be termed quantitative aspect of it. Thus even the comparatively later Rgvedic sacrifice appears to have come to the stage of having its efficacy judged on quantitative grounds rather than mechanical ones. At X.114.3, the quadrangular altar is referred to (catu?kaparda yuvatih supesa ghftapratika vayunani vaste.yatra deva dadhire bhaga- dheyam J ). ‘Vayunani vaste’ suggests that the mode of shaping or decorating, etc., of the vedi was supposed to be changing from time to time or may be from region to region. As the altar occupied a very important place in the sacrificial per¬ formance and as the sacrificial performance had a significant bearing on the idea of Rta, the vedi has come to be designated as the centre of Rta (IX.74.4, X.13.3, Rtasya nabhih) or the place of Rta (IV.5.9, Rtasya pade) or as the source of Rta (Rtasya yonih, 1.65.4, III.62.18, .etc., X.8.3). Possibly with the importance of sacrifice on Earth in view, it is called the centre of Earth (Prthivyah nabha, X.1.6, IX.82.3, etc.) With its raised position in view, as also its association with gods residing high up in heaven, it is called the ‘summit of heaven’ (Prthivyah sanu’, IX.63.27 or Ppthivyah varsman III.5.8, 9). With the offerings put in the fire on the altar in view, it is called ‘ilah pada’ (VI.1.2, Adha hota nyasido yajiyan ilah pade J 39. VMH I. p. 179. 74 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA and 1.128.1; III.10.1, 23.4, etc.). With the oblations in view, it is called ‘ghrtavan yonih’ (III.5.7, A yonimagnir ghrtavantamasthat). The above epithets appear to have become so common in course of time that the altar could be referred to merely as Nabhi. (IV.10.8) or Yoni (III.9.3, IV.3.2, X.110.6, etc.). The word ‘Dhi^ana’ possibly refers to the altar as suggested by Hillebrandt 40 at 1.109.3,4; III.2.1, 49.4; IV.34.1; V.41.8; VI.11.3; X.17.12, particularly as the stones are said to be situated in its lap (1.109.3, Ta hyadri dhi§anaya upasthe [ ) whereas V.31.12 says that the lower pressing stone rests on the altar (see below). At one place in the Rgveda the word ‘dhisnya’ appears to refer to the place, where fire is kindled (IV.3.6, kad dhisnyasu vrdhasano agne ....). The plural indicates the three fires referred to sometimes (II.3.7 ‘adhi sanusu trisu.devan yajantah samanjatah’ | ; 11.36.4, ‘uian hotar nisada yoni$u trisu j ). The same appears to be indicated by the epithet ‘trisadhastha’ (situated in three places), applied to ‘Agni’ at V.4.8; (sahasah suno tri§adhastha), cf. also VI.8.7, 12.2. These three places in which Agni came to be worshipped may be indicative of the three aspects of Agni but they appear to be taken as a unit with perhaps the unity of fire in view (V.11.2, Agnirh narah trisadhasthe samldhire | ), where fire is said to be kindled in the ‘trisadhastha’. With these three altars in view, the sacred grass which is spread on them is also refer¬ red to as ‘trisadhastha’ at 1.74.4 (Trisadhasthe barhisi yajnaiii mimiksatam | ) and with the fact of the gods coming to the altar to receive the offerings in mind, a number of other deities are also referred to as ‘trisadhastha’. 41 At times it would appear that different altars were erected for different divinities and thus at X.8.4, seven places are referred to (rtaya sapta dadhise padani | ). As the seat of Agni, it is referred to as ‘Hotrsadana’ II.9.1 (ni hota hotrsadane. .. .asadat) and Agni is called ‘vedisad hota’ at IV. 4.50 or merely as ‘vedisad’ at 1.140.1 (vedisade agnaye;). Agni-sacrifice winning wealth is said to be possible by keeping ready the altar, the oblations and the soma-juice. (VIII.19.18). Sacred grass is said to be spread on the altar (11.34, barhih stlrnam vedyasyam J ), fuel and obla¬ tions offered thereon (VI.1.10, vidhema. . . .samidhota havyaih vedi .... |). The purity of the place was sought to be maintained scrupu¬ lously as suggested at VII.GO.9, where the revilers are expected to be kept away for the purpose, (ava vedim hotrabhir yajeta ripah kasci s I varunadhrutah sah j). Because of the importance of the vedi in the sacrifice, vedi has been deified in a Visve-deva hymn, in the same manner as the ‘Barhis’ (VII.35.7, samu astu vedih). Though the mea¬ suring of the vedi is referred to (X.61.2), no particular measurements appear to be enforced. It however seems to be a fairly big and strong 40. V.I. pp.399-400 for different views. 41. Sarasvatl VI. G1.2. Soma VIII. 83.5. Brhasnati IV. 50.L Vianu I. 156.5 THE SCENE OF THE SACRIFICE 75 enclosure as indicated by V.31.12 (vadan grava ava vedim bhriyiite), where the upper pressing stone is said to be brought down (on the lower stone which apparently was placed) on the altar. With the vital role of the Altar in the sacrifice as the place where gods come and receive their oblations, the Altar is called the farthest extremity of the Earth (1.164.35a iyam vedih paro antah prthivyah | ), because that spot marks the beginning of the region of the gods. BARHIH : Next in importance to the vedi at the place of sacrifice would of course be the sacred grass (Barhih), which was meant as a seat for the gods. All the gods are said to be occupying the seat on the Barhis grass, when they approach the sacrifice for receiving oblations. As in the case of sacrifice to Visve-devah where all the gods are ex¬ pected to come and attend the sacrificial performance, the seat of Barhis grass should be very extensive as indicated at 1.85.6c (sidata barhir uru vah sadaskrtam j ). It also appears to be spread on the path by which the gods were expected to come and as such is referred to as “easy to move along” (pra vavrje supraya barhiresam, VII.39.2a). As a seat for the divinities it has got to be very cosy and so it is referred to as urnamrad (V.5.4, urnamrada vi prathasva i ) 42 and as the gods frequently attend the sacrificial performances, the place is dear to them (1.85.7, sldan adhi barhisi priye; VIII.13.24, ni barhisi priye and IX.55.2). The grass is also said to be spreading for the sake of the gods (devavyacah, III.4.4) and as fit for the complete sacrificial performance (strnita barhih adhvaraya sadhu, VII.43.2). For this purpose it is said to be spread on the altar (II.3.4, stirparn subharam vedi asyam j) and the vedi is called urnavat, characterised by wool — at VI.53.16 (urnavantam prathamah sida yonirh I ) and with the path referred to above in view, it is said to be spread facing the east as that would be the direction from which the gods would be expected to come (1.188.4, prachinam barhir ojasa . . . .astrnan | ). The gods are therefore requested to come, to sit upon it and enjoy the oblations (III.41.3, A barhih sida vlhi purolasam j ). Indra is said to be sitting upon it like a king (X.43.2, Rajeva dasma nisado’dhi barhisi | ) and from such a seat of other patrons and poets he is once referred to as coming to Vasisthas being attracted by their soma- offerings (VII.33.1, Uttisthan voce pari barhiso nrn, na me durada- vitave Vasi?thah | ). As this grass was exclusively meant for the use of the divinities, 43 we do not come across any references to its being spread as seat of the human beings even in the sacrifice. Those things however which were meant for the gods were honoured by 42. For the description of Barhis in Anri hymns—see my paper. AHR. B.U.J. 1945-6. 43. Barhisad (II. 3.3 etc.) and Barhistha (III. 13.1) are exclusively used as epithets of gods and at all passages gods only are said to be sitting ( nisad, asad, asa etc). 7<> SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA being placed on the ‘barhis’ grass. Thus the oblations to be offered are said to be placed on the ‘barhis’ grass (1.117.1, barhi§matl ratih). It is said to be sprinkled over with ghee before the gods sit upon it (ghrtenaktam vasavah sldatedarh, II.3.4). The epithet ‘ghrtaprstha’ which is otherwise applied to Agni is used about ‘barhis’ at 1.13.5 (stfmta barhiranu$ak.ghrtaprstharh). Soma-juice is said to be placed on ‘barhis’ (1.52.3, IX.68.1, indavah.barhisadah, and IX.87.4). Even the soma-plant is said to be placed on the ‘barhis’ grass at IX.87.1, asvarh na tva vajinarh marjayanto’ccha barhih rasanabhir nayanti I ). In the ‘Divi§fi’ sacrifice, 44 the soma is said to be pressed on the ‘barhis’ grass (1.86.4, asya virasya barhisi sutah somah divistisu [ ). As the pressing was taking place on a layer of ‘barhis’ grass, soma is said to be thunder¬ ing on it (vr$a.stanayannadhi barhisi, IX.19.3). The beast of the sacrifice was also made to stand on the ‘barhis’ grass at the time of sprinkling water (X.90.7, barhisi prauk§an purusam.). As the priests would be going to the sacrifice with ‘barhis’ grass they were called ‘barhismatah’ (1.51.8; 1.53.6, etc.). As they would be cutting the grass for the purposes of the sacrifice, they came to be called ‘vrktabarhisah’ (1.14.5, kanvasah, priyamedhasah at VIII. 69.18, etc.). As spreading the ‘barhis’ grass would be come across in the sacrifices, they came to be called ‘stirnabarhi^ah’ (X.21.1, stirnabarhi^e yajnaya) and the person who spreads it is also so called (V.37.2, samiddhagnih stirnabarhih yuktagrava sutasomo jarate j ). Its importance at the place of sacrifice is best illustrated by its being identified with sacrifice at VII.75.8 (ma no barhih purusata nide kah | ), where the Dawn is requested to maintain the reputation of the singer’s sacrifice among the people. By the side of the vedi, and the grass scattered over, on some occasions would be found the ‘Yupa’. YUPA : 45 The word ‘yupa’ is referred to in the Rgveda only thrice. 46 Out of these passages, only at V.2.7 (sunasciccheparh niditam sahasrad yupad amunco asami?ta hi sah), the sacrificial post is meant. At the two other places the word merely refers to ordinary posts. Thus 1.51.14 (Indro asrayi sudhyo nireke pajre§u stomo duryo na yupah | ) refers to Indra who is said to be firm like a post to which the panel of the door is attached and IV.33.3 (punar ye cakruh pitara yuvana 44. Cf. Chapter VI tor ‘Divisti’. 45. Vedic Index Vol. II. p. 194. 46. 1.51.14; IV. 33.3; V.2.7. THE SCENE OF THE SACRIFICE 77 sana yupeva jarana sayana) 47 appears to refer to merely some logs of wood lying down on the earth. The Asva hymn (1.162) seems to refer to Yupa in its sacrificial sense (1.162.6) (Yupavraska uta ye yupavahasea$alam ye asvayupaya taksati I ). Here the help of those people who help in the preparation of the Horse-sacrifice, is being referred to and hence the Yupa is called specifically ‘aivayupa’ and the people are described as Yupa-vraska (who carve the post) and who carry the post (to the place of sacrifice, Yupavahah I ). A poet called ‘Sthurayupa’ is referred to at VIII.23.24 (Nunamarca vihayase stomebhih sthurayupa vat), where the poet Vaiyasva is asked to sing like Sthurayupa to Agni. The name may be significant as referring to a poet who has perhaps employed a conspicuously big post in his sacrificial performance and attained fame thereby. Even in the Sunhsepa hymns (1.24-30), though Sunahsepa’s being tied up to a sacrificial post is referred to, the word Yupa is not used. cf. (1.24.13, Sunahsepo hyavhad grbhitastrisu adityam drupadesu baddhah). It will thus be noticed that the word Yupa though it has got currency in the sacrificial sense sometime, it has not been confined to that sense in the Rgveda. This conjecture finds confirmation in the fact that in the hymn written in glorification of the sacrificial post (III.8), 46 the post is not referred to as Yupa but merely by the general term vanaspati (III.8.1, 3). In verses 6 to 10, many posts are referred to as ‘svarus’. It will be perhaps nearer the truth to say that the word ‘svaru’ 10 was more popularly known than ‘yupa’ 50 in the sense of the sacrificial post, to which the beast is tied (see III.8.9 below). In respect of brightness, Usas is compared with ‘svaru’ at 1.92.5 (svarum na peso vidathesu anjan citram divo duhita bhanum- asret. 51 The tying of the beast to the post and its anointing are referred to at IV.6.3 (udu svarurnavaja nakrah pasvo anakti sudhitah sumekah j ). Other sacrificial associations are referred to along with ‘svaru’ at VIII.45.2 (brhannid idhma esam bhurisastam prthuh svaruh yesam indro yuva sakha), where Indra is said to be glorifying the sacrificial performances of those who are favoured by him by getting their fuel praised and their sacrificial post (considered as) big. Just as ‘idhma’ is small sticks considered big being taken collectively, ‘svaru’ also may refer to the small posts referred to collectively here. In respect of firmness the dawns are compared with sacrificial posts at IV.51.2 (asthuru citra usasah purastan mita iva svaravo adhvaresu j ). In all the three passages of its reference in the famous Yupa hymn III.8. (viz., III.8.6, 9 and 10), the word is used in the 47. Cf. my paper on Rbhus— B.U.J. 1952. 48. Cf. Chapter XI. 49. V.I. p. 494. In the Brahmana literature the word appears to be fixed in the sense of “splinters” as pointed by Macdonel! (p. 494 F.N. 3). 50. I. 92.5; III. 6, 9, 10; IV. 6.3, 51.2; VIII. 35.7; VIII. 45.2. 51. See Chapter XII. 78 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA plural as distinguished from ‘vanaspati’, that is addressed (III.8.6, Yan va naro devayanto nimimyurvanaspate svadhitir va tatak^a | te devasah svaravastasthivamsah |). They appear to be painted white and as such are compared with swans at III.8.9 (Hamsa iva sreniso yatanah sukra vasanah svaravo na aguh) and become standard of comparison for Usas at 1.92.5 (see above). With knobs or rings on their tops, they are compared with animals possessed of horns (III.8.10, srngaijlvecchrhginam sarh dadrsre casalavantah svaravah prthivyarii I). Thus it can be seen that they are chopped off with an axe and made to have a particular size and shape, possibly a uniform one as suggested by comparison with the swans and the dawns. They are to be planted deep at the place of sacrifice by the sacrificing people (III.8.6a, naro devayanto nimimyuh), are quite firm (tasthivariisah) and painted white. They are referred to as divine at III.8.6 (te devasah and III.8.9d, deva devanam etc.) and at VII.35.7, where they are sought to be propitiated along with the other gods and some other accessories of sacrifice which are thought of as divinities for the purpose, (sarh nah svarunam mitayo bhavantu ;). Their comparison with the swans going in lines (III.8.9a, Hamsa iva sreniso yatanah) and dawns appearing in front (IV.51.2, see above) would give the impression that they were planted in the place of sacrifice at regular intervals. At III.8, they are distinguished from Vanaspati which is said to be ‘satavalsa’ (having hundred branches) at III.8.11. It may possibly mean that the ‘vanaspati’ is a big tree, 52 that used to be brought at the place of sacrifice and then with the help of the axe the various branches of a certain size were cut off for the purposes of the sacrifice and they are referred to as the ‘svarus’. It is not clear, however, as to what purpose was served by those pillars in the sacrifice. If we are to believe that so many beasts would be tied to them, we shall have to imagine that so many beasts used to be sacrificed then at a time. This inference, however, is not justified as it is not substantiated by evidence at any other place. 53 On the contrary, when a reference to the tying of the beast occurs the post and the beast are both referred to in the singular (cf. 1.92.5; IV.6.3 and VIII.45.2). At V.44.5 (samjarbhuranastarubhih sutegrbham vayakinam cittagarbhasu susvaruh), Agni is qualified as ‘susvaruh’ which perhaps may indicate that those svarus were arranged round about the place, where the fire was kindled at the place of the sacri¬ fice. Sayana takes the word to mean ‘sobhanagamanah’ and is fol¬ lowed by others (moving beauteously—Griffith). From the descrip¬ tion of the ‘svarus’ given above, however, it will be more appropriate to take the word as connected with the ‘svarus’, that were to be found in the place of sacrifice arranged round about the sacrificial fire or fires. 52. Cf. III. 8.3 ucchrr.yasva vanaspate varsman prthivya adhi | 53. Cf. ‘animal offering’ in Chapter V and ‘animal sacrifice’ in Chapter VI. THE SCENE OF THE SACRIFICE 79 It would be perhaps nearer the mark to say that the posts of regular size, painted white and arranged in lines would be planted to mark the boundaries of the place of sacrifice or some particular portion thereof, which was perhaps to be marked off from the rest of the place. Thus the words ‘Yupa’ and ‘svaru’ at times and ‘vanaspati’ in a limited sense at III.8, refer to the main sacrificial post while the word ‘svaru’ in plural, having great importance in the place of sacrifice, refers to the other posts which are erected with artistic regularity there roundabout the place where sacrificial fire or fires were kindled. IDHMA AND SAMIDH : The word Idhma in all its occurrences in the RV. is used in the sense of sacrificial fuel, 54 which is to be kept ready for the purposes of a sacrificial performance. No specific information about the type of wood chosen for the purpose is forthcoming from any of the Rgvedic passages but it becomes clear that it was a very laborious task to collect fuel for the sacrificial purposes as indicated at IV.12.2 (idhmam yas te jabharat sasramanah) and IV.2.6a (yas ta idhmam jabharat sisvidanah) where the person is said to be sweating while collecting the fuel. The fuel appears to consist of small sticks, which are required to be kept ready before the beginning of the sacrificial performance (1.94.4, III.18.3, VIII.45.2, X.61.9). They were apparent¬ ly dried sticks as suggested by the metaphor in the Puru?a-sukta (X.90.6, Grlsma idhma), where it is identified with the hot season. A person keeping such fuel ready at the sacrifices is qualified as ‘Idhma-bhrti’ at VI.20.3 (dabhltir idhmabhrtih pakthyarkaih | ). SAMIDHS : Thus while the word ‘idhma’ appears to be used in the sense of fuel kept ready for sacrifice, the words ‘samidh’ or ‘samidhs’ seem to be used when the fuel is employed to kindle fire. Thus offering a stick, the poet requests Agni to accept it (II.6.1, imam me agne samidharh imam upasadarh vaneh | ); when dried sticks are added to fire in succession, how the fire burns brightly is graphi¬ cally described in the Visvamitra Apri Hymn (III.4.1, samit samit sumana bodhi asme). It is with this idea in mind that ‘idhma’ and ‘samidhah’ are separately mentioned in the well-known metaphor of Purusa-sukta where ‘idhma’ is identified with ‘grlsma’ and ‘samidh’ are said to be twenty-one (X.90.15, trih sapta samidhah. .. .). That the samidhs used to be arranged in some groups for the purposes of sacrifice can be clear also from III.2.9 (tisro yavhasya samidhab parijmano) or 1.164.25 (gayatrasya samidhastisra ahuh | ) and III.1.2, 54. 1,94.4; III. 28.3; IV. 2.6, 12.2; VIII.45.2; X.61.9, 90.6. 80 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA VI.16.11, and VIII.43.12 (agne samidhbhirimahe) where Agni is said to be propitiated and requested with some arrangement of the samidhs. LADLE (JUHU) : The word Juhu is used strictly in the sense of a ladle only in four places in the Rgveda; at 1.145.3 (tamidgacchanti juvhah), where ladles are said to be going towards Agni, at VIII.43.10 (udagne tava tad ghrtadarci rocata ahutarh | nimsanam juvho mukhe), where Agni’s rising flame is said to be kissing the ladle that is pouring the ghee; at VIII.44.5 (upa tva juvho mama ghrtaclryantu) and at X.21.3 (tve dharmana asate juhubhih sincatiriva | ), where Agni’s possession of eternal laws is said to be as outstanding as the sprinkling (of the ghee) by the ladles. At other places in the Rgveda, the poets appear to refer to ‘Juhu’ metaphorically, the metaphor apparently based on the frequent and enthusiastic proceeding of the ladles in the sacri¬ fices. Thus the human tongue singing the hymn is said to be ‘juhu’ (cf. 1.58.7, 61.5, 11.27.1; IV.4.2) and the flame of Agni is also referred to as ‘juhu’ (1.76.5; VI.11.2). UPASECAN! : DARVI: The word ‘upasecani’ is used in the sense of a ‘ladle’ twice in the Rgveda : X.21.2 and X.105.10. In the latter passage it is distin¬ guished from ‘Darvi’, possibly on account of the distinction in the workmanship. Thus while the ‘upasecani’ is said to be variegated in appearance, the ‘darvi’ is said to be stainless, possibly due to its polished surface so that ghee would not cling to it (cf. sriye te prsnirupasecanl bh€it sriye darvirarepah). At times ghee appears to be offered simultaneously as indicated at V.6.9, (ubhe suscandra sarpiso darvi srini?a asani |), where Agni is said to be giving place to both the ladles (darvi) in his mouth. The two names have a derivative significance; ‘Darvi’ signifying its being fashioned from the wood (dru) and ‘upasecani’ signifying the action of sprinkling ghee from near the fire (upa sic). Thus the soma-cup where the pressed soma-juice was stored is also referred to as ‘upasecana’, apparently because soma-juice was poured from it in the fire. (cf. X.76.7, duhanti udhar upasecanaya). SRUC 55 : SRUVA : The word ‘sruc’ is used in the sense of ladle for various purposes more than a dozen times in the Rgveda. It was mainly used for 55. VMH. II. 87, THE SCENE OF THE SACRIFICE 81 offering ghee but also appears to be used for offering the soma-juice as indicated at V.41.12 (pari sruco babrhanasya adreh), where it is mentioned along with the pressing stone; at X.17.13 (yaste drapsah skannah parah sruca) and 1.116.24 (unninyathuh somamiva sruvena), it is associated with the soma juice. Its close association with fire is indicated at a number of places (1.84.18, VIII.23.22, 60.2, X.91.15). It is qualified as ‘havismati’ at VIII.23.22. The idea that the ladle releases everything in fire as indicated at X.105.10 (quoted above), also seems to be indicated at 1.162.17 (sruceva ta havi$o adhvaresu sarva ta te.) where all the afflictions of the sacrificial horse are said to be removed just like the ‘offering’ from the ladles. Its place in a fire-ritual is indicated at 1.84.18, where ‘sruc’ is said to be required along with the offering and ghee for worshipping Agni (ko agnimitte havi§a ghrtena. .. . sruca.). A certain amount of workmanship appears to be required for fashioning this ladle as indicated at VI.11.5, where it is qualified as ‘suvrkti’. The offering of ghee with ‘sruc’ appears to be considered as a skilful act as indicated at 1.110.6 (a manisamantarik§asya rq-bhyah sruceva ghrtarh juhavama vidmana), where the composition of hymn is com¬ pared with the offering of the ghee by a ladle. The movement of the ladle from left to right in the process of offering is referred to at 1.144.1, where the ladle is qualified as ‘dak$inavrt’. Besides at 1.116.24 (see above) the word ‘sruva’ is also used at 1.121.6, where the offering is said to be sprinkled by ‘sruva’ on the place, where the fire is kindled (cf. sruvena sincanjaranabhidhama j ). GHRTACi : Like upasecanl, the word ghrtacl though used as an adjective of ‘Juhu’ at VIII.44.5 (upa tva juvho mama ghrtaciryantu. .. .), is used as a substantive at a number of places, indicating the association of ladles with ghee predominantly. Its employment in offerings of different kinds is also indicated at III.19.2, IV.6.3, where it is qualified as ‘ratini’ and ‘HavirbharantI’ and at V.2.8 (Havi^a ghrtacl praci eti). Its lifting up for the purposes of offering ghee is indicated at VII.43.2 and its movement from left to right at III.6.1, where it is qualified as ‘Daksinavat’. At VII.4.2, a number of ladles are referred to as employed at the same time. As in the case of the two ‘darvis’ (V.6.9 above), it appears to be customary to offer ghee simultaneously in fire by a number of priests and with this action in view, the ladlesi are qualified as ‘samanasah’. VII.84.1 refers to the ladle in both the hands (pra varh ghrtacl bahvordadhana pari tmana.jigati). It is not referred to as being heavy even metaphorically, and hence the action appears to refer to a reverential gesture at a performance, s.n.— e 82 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA GHARMA: The word is used in the sense of a pot used for heating milk 56 as well as the offering of such milk. 67 It is referred to as made of gold at V.30.15 (gharmascit taptah pravrje ya asit ayasmayah). The heating of the pot is referred to at VII.70.2 (atapi gharmo manuso durone). The pots while hot appear to be emptied for the offering as indicated at VII.103.9 (sarhvatsare pravrsi agatayam tapta gharma asnuvate visargarh). How red-hot the pot was heated is indicated at V.19.3 (gharmo na vajajatharah) where Agni is compared with such a pot.* The length of time, apparently, for which the pot used to be kept on fire is indicated at V.43.7,* where it is compared with the son on the lap of the father. Soma-sacrifice was naturally more elaborate than the ordinary fire-ritual, where milk, ghee, etc. were being offered; and as it attained greater popularity in course of time, implements required for it came to be described more frequently. As it has already been remarked, separate compilation of the soma hymns apparently indi¬ cates predominant place of soma-sacrifice in the general ritual of the Rgvedic hymns. As suggested in the previous chapter, very possibly the sacrifice originated with a fire-ritual predominantly in honour of Varuna. It may be noted in this context that like the other gods, Varuna is never referred to as young or born. The laws of Varuna are ancient and to transgress them is due to ignorance (acitti yattava dharma yuyopima VII.86.5). It is also quite significant that soma is never mentioned as quite conspicuously associated with Varuna, while in Indra-hymns, the god’s association with soma is referred to every now and then. Thus it appears that with the arrival of Indra, soma- ritual dominated the scene and this domination changed the older form of ritual altogether. As soma-ritual and Indra grew in pro¬ minence, Varuna and the earlier fire-ritual fell into background. During the days of the Rgvedic hymns, soma-ritual has retained its domination and hence we find very frequent mention of the imple¬ ments of soma-sacrifice. We come across even the phenomenon of separate hymns written for the pressing-stones (X.76; 94; 175). 58 GRAVANAH : (Pressing-stones) :— It is interesting to note that the pressing-stones, though referred to in dual sometimes, are praised in plural in all the three hymns (X.76, 94, 175), whereas there is not a single independent hymn for the Vedi, which is rightly styled as the centre of sacrifice. 56. I. 164.26, III. 53.14. V. 30.15, V. 43.7, V. 76.1, VII. 103.9. 57. Vide Chapter V. *for the simile cf. Chapter XII. 58. Vide Chapter XI. THE SCENE OF THE SACRIFICE 83 The word ‘gravan’ is used in singular at about twenty places. 69 At a number of places, it is referred to as producing the sound (1.83.6, 135.7, grava yatra vadati; V.31.12, vadan grava ava, etc., V.36.4, graveva jarita vacarh iyarti; VII.34.2, vadan grava. . . .somi ghosena . .. .; X.64.15, 100.8, ‘grava yatra madhusud ucyate brhad | ). At 1.28.1, the ‘gravan’ is said to be ‘prthu-budhnah’ indicating the reference to the lower stone, which must be pretty big. It was placed occasionally on the or by the side of the altar as indicated at V.31.12 (see above). For the purposes of the sacrifice, it is the lower stone that is referred to as kept ready (cf. X.70.7, 100.9). Its significant place in the midst of the implements becomes obvious when it is said to persuade the divinity to come to the sacrifice (1.84.3). The strength of the soma-juice is said to be dependent on the strength of the pressing-stone at V.40.2, VIII.13.32, (Vr?a grava vr$a madah). Even when the poet is singing a hymn, his influence exercised on the soma-juice is said to be dependent on the lower pressing-stone (IX.113.6, chhandasyam vacam vadan, gravna somo mahiyate). It is referred to as ‘upara’ at 1.79.3, X.94.3, X.175.3, very possibly on account of its situation, very close to the altar. The ox-hide is said to be spread on it (1.79.3, tvacarh prncanti uparasya yonau). The upper stones are said to be going to the lower one (X.94.5, nyan niyanti uparasya niskrtam), which would also indicate that the place of the lower stone was fixed up in the place of the sacrifice. The word ‘gravan’ is used in dual only once (II.39.1, gravaneva tadidartham jarethe), where Asvins are compared with them. It may also be noted here that the word ‘adri’ is used at three places to indicate the two pressing-stones (1.109.3, VII.39.1, 42.1). The word ‘gravan’ is used in plural in about two dozen places in the Rgveda. The keeping ready of the pressing-stones for the performance of a sacrifice, is referred to at X.35.9 (gravnam yoge) at VIII.27.1, X.92.15 (gravano urdhva abhi cak§uradhvaram); at III.30.2 (yukta gravano samidhane agnau). Like Maruts, they are said to be singers having the river Sindhu as their mother (X.78.6, gravano na surayah sindhumatarah), possibly because they were drawn from the stream of the river for the purposes of the sacrifice. They are mentioned in the Visvedeva group and are deified along with other objects (cf. V.31.5, VII.35.7, 104.17). ADRI : The word ‘Adri’ is also used at times in the sense of the pressing- stones. The word is used in all the three numbers like ‘gravan’. At 59. 1.28.1, 83.6, 64.3; VII. 33.14; VIII. 26.24 etc. 84 SACRIFICE EN THE RGVEDA three place? (see above) it is used in dual. At 1.109.3 (ta hi adri dhi§anaya upasthe), Indragni are said to be the pressing-stones on the lap of the altar. At VII.39.1 and 42.1 (yujyatam adri adhvarasya pe£ah), the two pressing-stones are said to be kept ready for the sacrifice. The upper stone is said to be held in both the hands for pressing the soma-juice (VII.22.1, yamadrih su$ava soturbahubhyam). It will have been noticed that very rarely the words indicative of the pressing-stone are used in dual to signify the two pressing- stones. In the majority of the passages, the words are used in the pluyal. The employment of the word ‘gravan’ or ‘adri’ in singular has indicated a reference to the lower pressing-stone, which has got an important status in the place of the sacrifice. But when the lower ond and the upper ones are mentioned together, it would appear that the poets are visualising the employment of a number of upper pressing stones on the single lower stone, cf. X.94.5 (sajosasah). They appear to be operating together as indicated in the following stanza (‘ugra iva pravahanta samayayuh’ and ‘sakarh yukta vrsano bibhrato dhurah). cf. also X. 175.3 (gravano upare?va mahiyante sajo$asah), where the upper pressing stones (gravano) are said to be operating together on the lower one. It is possible to imagine therefore that there was a big pressing stone, kept below either on or by the side of the altar. Soma-plant was placed on it as indicated at VIII.26.24 (gravanarh na asvapr?fharh), \yhere Vayu is compared with the lower pressing-stone, which carries the soma-plant on it. And then a number of persons must be starting pounding it in a systematic way. This is supported by IX.11.5 (‘hastacyutebhih adribhih sutam somam punitana), where stones operated by the hands are said to be pressing the soma-juice. The skill in pounding depended on the proper grasp and movement of the two hands and hence the frequent reference to ten fingers. 60 For the idea of a number of men and pressing stones, pressing out the juice, cf. IX.71.3, 79.4 (adrayastva bapsati goradhi tvaci | apsu tva hastairduduhurmanlsinah |l ); 86.34 (nrbhiradribhih sutah); III.3.4.3 (sunvanti adribhih); IX.80.4 (gravabhih sutah); IX.86.23, 101.11, 107.1, 109.18, etc. With soma-juice sticking to the pressing-stones, they are refer¬ red to as ‘soma-prsfhaso adrayah (VIII.63.2). With the same thing in view, they are said to be drinking the soma-juice even before the priests (X.94.2, hotuscit purve haviradyamasata j ). They are said to be the decoration of the sacrifice at VII.42.1 (yujyatamadrl adhva- $0 IX. 6.3, 8.4, 15.8, 38.3, 61.7, S9.4, 97.57 etc. THE SCENE OF THE SACRIFICE 85 rasya pesah), indicating the predominant position enjoyed by sofna- sacrifice in comparison with the other types of ritual. It is possible that the words in dual refer to smaller sacrifices, where a small quantity of soma-juice used to suffice. ULUKHALA : G1 The word is used as ‘ulukhala’ or ‘ulukhalaka’ in a solitary hymn of the Hgveda in the first Man^ala (1.28.1-6). It is mentioned side by side with the pressing-stone in v.l (yatra grava prthubudhnal? urdhvo bhavati sotave j ulukhalasutanam.). Apparently the word refers to the mortar, which was used along with the pestle, in place of the pressing-stones, for pressing out the soma-juice. Asso¬ ciated with it were the two wooden planks, one covering the other, through which the soma-juice was to flow and hence referred to as ‘adhisavanya’ 62 (v.2, yatra dvaviva jaghana’dhi§avanya krta) and further in v.8, as ‘vanaspatl’. The soma-plant was pounded by a pestle called ‘vanaspati’ (v.6, vanaspate.sunu. .. .ulukhala). The systematic pounding is metaphorically described in v.3 (yatra nari apacyavam upaeyavarh ca siksate j ). The mortar is said to be employed in every house (v.5, grhe grhe.yujyase). A churning pole 63 (mantha, v.4.) is also referred but it is not clear how it was used for the soma-pressing. The wooden planks referred to as ‘adhisavanya (1.28.2), also appear to be referred to differently elsewhere, cf. IX.1.2. (druna sadhasthamasadat) or IX.65.6 (druna sadhasthamasnuse) where soma juice is said to be going to its place through the wood (dru, i.e., the plank). The same planks are also referred to as Oni at IX.16.1, 65.11 and X.101.14. GOH TV AC : At 1.28.9, the remains of the soma-plant, after the juice has been pressed out, are said to be placed on the ox-hide (Ucchi^fam .ni dhehi goradhi tvaci). But the hide is generally said to be placed on the lower pressing stone, cf. IX.79.4 (adrayastva bapsati goradhi tvaci j); also IX.65.25, 66.29. Soma-juice extracted by pounding was made to pass through a strainer, which is referred to very frequently. 61. VMH. I. p. 158. 62. It may be noted that in the A.B. VII. 32.4, the ox-hide is referred to as ‘adhisavana carma’ ; while in the Rgveda the slightly different word ‘adhi¬ savanya’ is used in quite a different sense. 63. VMH I. p. 160. 86 SACRIFICE IN THE IjtGVEDA PAVITRA : 64 IX.67.19 (gravna tunno abhistutah pavitram soma gacchasi) describes the stage at which the juice is made to go across the strainer, cf. also IX.6.3, 37.1, etc. The sound produced by the flow is referred to at IX.96.6, 17, 21, 106.14, 107.22. The strainer is refer¬ red to as made of sheep’s wool (avyo varah, IX.6.1, 7.6, etc. me?yah varah, IX.8.5, 107.11, etc.) It is said to be rather coarse as it should prevent the dregs from choking it up (IX.15.6, eva.parusa yayivan ati). The dregs are described as left behind (IX.69.9, sutah pavitram ati yanti avyayam hitvi vavrirh), while the juice flows forth, cf. also IX.78.1 (grbhnati ripramavih asya tanva.). As soma passes through it, the strainer is said to be his cloak (IX.70.7, nirnigavyayi). The strainer is said to be made of thousands of woolen fibres (IX.91.3, sahasrarh anvam. vi yati). White- coloured wool appears to be preferred for straining as indicated at KX.107.13 (arjune atke avyata) and at IX.91.3 (pathibhih. adhvasmabhih. .. .anvam vi yati.) Various kinds of vessels are mentioned in connection with the soma-ritual. 65 Out of the vessels mentioned in the Aiteraya Brah- mana 66 Putabhrt Adhavaniya, Sthali andUdancana 67 , are not referred to in the Rgveda at all. The word ‘dronakalasa’ too does not occur, but ‘drona’ and ‘kalasa’ are separately mentioned (see below). The word ‘amatra’, which is used in the sense of a vessel for sprinkling the soma-juice in the Rgveda, is not referred to in the Brahmana literature, indicatng that it has gone out of vogue by the time of the Brahmanas, though it was so popular in the days of the Rgveda so as to give an epithet ‘amatrin’ (VI.24.9) to Indra. AMATRA : 68 At II.14.1, adhvaryus are asked to sprinkle soma juice with ‘amatra’s (amatrebhih sincata madyamandhah). cf. also V.51.4 (amatre parisicyate); VI.42.2 (....amatrebhih rjl$inarh); X.29.7 (asincannamatram indraya). All these references indicate the close association of amatra vessels in the soma-sacrifice in honour of Indra. AVABHRTHA: The word is not used in its well-known sense of the ‘purifica¬ tory bath’ in the Rgveda but as a vessel of soma juice as we shall see below. Macdonell believes that both the ‘Dlksa’ and ‘Avabhj-tha’ were known to the Rgveda, 69 without specifying any passages in the 64. VMH I. 203, 308. 65. Cf. Geldner—Vol. III. pp. 6-8; ABH. Vol. II. pp. 488-89 F.N. PRV. p. 255. 66. VII. 32.4. 67. At V. 44.13 the word is used in its derivative sense ‘lifting up’. 68. V. I. Vol. I. p. 30. 69. ERE. XXI 614b. THE SCENE OF THE SACRIFICE 87 Rgveda which would make his inference possible. Dr. Deshmukh agrees with him. 70 It should however be noted that Dlksa is not referred to in the Rgveda at all and there does not appear to be any indication what¬ soever to believe that such a rite was known as a part of the Rgvedic sacrifice as the scholars would have us believe. We come across references to the sacrificers, performing the rites after choosing their priests; but we do not come across any rite afterwards meant for the purification of the sacrificer, which is apparently a later innova¬ tion. Avabhrtha is referred to only once in the Rgveda at VIII.93.23 (ista hotra asrksatendram vrdhaso adhvare | acchavabhrthamojasa jj ). Sayana understands the word as ‘the final day of the sacrifice (antya- divasa). Grassmann 71 and Geldner 72 construe it as ‘the purificatory bath’. Griffith 73 construes it in the sense of ‘cleansing bath’, adding that the word apparently refers to bath or the vessel in which the soma-plants were rinsed and purified. Prof. Velanker 74 renders the word as ‘Avabhrtha’, adding that the technical sense of ‘final bath’ may have been meant. It may be noted that the word denotes something at the place of sacrifice towards which the delightful offerings (i$ta hotra i.e., the soma-juices) are said to be flowing with force (ojasa). ‘Avabhrtha’ therefore very possibly refers to the vessel (of that name like Aivattha or saihvarana below), towards which the soma-juices flow. The sequence of verses 23 and 24 which cannot be otherwise understood as Geldner 75 has pointed out, can be followed only with this mean¬ ing, which is also supported by its derivation from ‘bhr with ava’, indicating the place towards which the soma-juice flows. It may also be noted that ‘ojasa’ also is best understood only this way. For the idea of soma flowing down, cf. IX.88.6 (vrtha samudram sindhavo na nicih sutaso abhi kalasan asrgran 4 , 70 where soma-juices are said to be flowing towards the vessels like the rivers to the sea. cf. also IX.67.14. For the idea of force with which it flows, we find the word ‘ojasa’ used at IX.65.14 and IX.106.7 is more specific, describing the point in the same way as our passage does. (cf. Pavasva devavitaye indo dharabhirojasa j a kalasam.). ASVATTHA: At 1.135.8 (atraha tad vahethe madhva ahutam | yamaivattham upa tisthanti jayavah || ), the word ‘aivattha’ is used in the sense of 70. RVL p. 340. 71. Wort. 72. Dor Rgveda Vol. II. p. 418. but expresses uncertainty about the meaning (F.N.). 73. HRG'Vol. II p. 241 F.N. 74. Vel. B.U.J. XVI Part 2, 1947. p. 11. 75. Ibid. 76. Note the same root is also used in our passage. 88 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA a vessel of the name in which soma-juice was placed and which is said to be attended to by the priests. AHAVA: The word is used in the sense of a vessel where soma was stored after pressing. (1.34.8, VI.7.2, X.101.5, 112.6). At 1.34.8, three such vessels are associated with Asvins (traya ahavah). At VI.7.2, Agni is said to be a big ‘ahava’ (Mahamahavam abhi sarh navanta), as he receives ample soma-juices. At X.101.5, the large vessels are expected to be kept ready at the time of the soma-pressing (niraha- van kj-notana). At X.112.6 (purna ahavo madirasya madhvo yam visva idabhiharyanti devah), it is referred to as a big vessel full of soma from which all the gods are given offerings. It appears to be made of wood as indicated at X.101.7 (dronahavam). KALASA : 77 The ‘kalasas’ appear to be vessels commonly used in the sacrifice as they are mentioned very frequently. Soma-juice is said to be flowing towards them (IX.17.4, 67.14) noisily (IX.18.7, 75.3, 85.5, 96.24). The cow’s milk is said to be mixed with soma-juice in the kalasas as in the camus (IV.27.5, IX.8.6, 72.1, 74.8, etc.). As other ‘kalasas’ were known, those used for carrying the soma were dis¬ tinguished as ‘soma-dhana’ (IX.97.33). They are merely referred to as ‘soma-dhana’ at IX.108.16. Indra and Visnu are metaphorically referred to as ‘somadhana kalasa’ at VI.69.6 as ample soma-juice was offered to them. Even the priests are said to have drunk ‘kalasas’ in the sacrifices (X.167.3, tavahamadya maghavannupastutau . .. . kalasan abhak§ayam ]). They appear to be a number of small vessels of a particular size, filled separately and possibly earmarked for a divinity at the place of sacrifice. Thus cf. III.32.15 (apfirno asya kalasah svaha | ). This i9 also indicated at IX.86.16 (somah kalase.satayamna patha), Where sorrta*juice is said to be flowing in a hundred-fold way towards the kalasas. KOSA : Kosa appears to be used in the sense of a large vessel for storing the soma-juice (II.16.5, VI.54.3, IX.23.4, 36.2, 86.1, 87.1, 107.12, etc.). It is said to be made of gold at IX.75.3. GRAHA: At X.114.5, twelve small cups of soma-juice are referred to (grahan somasya mimate dvadasa). For the idea of a number of 77. VMH. 1.167, 83 ff. fHE SCENE OF THE SACRIFICE 89 small vessels, see ‘kalasa’ above. Grahas thus appear to be similar to the kalaias, so called perhaps as they were specifically meant for certain divinities at a later stage of the ritual. CAMASA : The word has a special importance on account of the interesting reference to the ‘camasa’ of Tva$tr said to be made into four by the Rbhus, which act particularly is said to have given them a place in the midst of the divinities. Derived from the root ‘cam’ like ‘chalnu’, It has the sense of a drinking vessel, used in a sacrifice. A new cup of Tva$(r is referred to at 1.20.6 (uta tyarn camasam navam tva$turdevasya ni?krtam). As compared with ‘chamus’, which are broader vessels, chamasas perhaps were smaller ones as many such vessels are said to be meant for Indra at 1.54.9 (tubhyedete bahuta adridUgdha.... camasa indrapanah). This is also supported by their being referred to as ‘devapana’ (1.161.5, IV.35.5, X.16.18). ‘Camasa’ is said to be very dear to the gods (priyo devanam). It was made of wood as indicated at 1.161.1 (na nindima camasam yo mahakulo bhraturdruna id bhutimudima) where the Rbhus are assuring Agni that it was not an insult to the camasa but glory to the tree that it was made into four. The same fact is indi¬ cated also at X.68.8 (ni$tajjabhara camasam na vrksat | ). In describing the precautions necessary for a soma-sacrifice by the metaphor of fighting, the poet warns the sacrifices to see that the vessels are not leaking and are fortified properly at X.101.8 (m3 vah susroccamaso drmhata tarn j ). The innovation introduced by the Rbhus in the old camasa of Tvas(r was apparently of great sacrificial importance as it has given a place of honour in the sacrifice to the Rbhus. 78 Tvastr also appears to have occupied a significant place in the ritual before the Rbhus came on the scene, as is indicated at 1.161 (quoted above), where they are giving a defence of their action and at 1.161.5 (camasam ye devapanam anindisuh), where Tvastr is said to be charging them fts having desecrated the drinking vessel of the gods. The same fact about Tva$tr is also indicated at X.76.3 (go arnasi tvastre asvanirnlji premadhVaresU adhvaran asisrayuh), where some mixture of soma and milk seems to have been associated with Tvastr as an innovation introduced by him. Dadhyac is said to have revealed the ‘madhu’ to AiVinS, which is said to be a secret of Tvastr (1.117.22, sa vara madhu pra vocadytayan tvastram yad dasravapikaksyam varhj). Tvasfr’s skill as an artisan who fashioned certain vessels for the offering of soma-juice to the gods, is referred to explicitly at X.53.9 78. Cf. my paper on the Rbhus in B.U.J. XXI 1952. 90 SACRIFICE IN THE ?GVEDA (tvasta maya vedapasamapastamo bibhratpatra devapanani santama j). He is also said to have fashioned an axe for Brahmanaspati (X.53.9cd). Tva§tr’s mighty work is said to be supported by Agni at III.7.4 (mahitvastram urjayantirajuryam stabhuyamanam.), which apparently is the one, cancerning the sacrifice. It is this intimate association with sacrifice that makes a poet invoke him for protec¬ tion in all the sacrifices (V.5.9, yajne yajne na udava | ). Thus it would be clear that Tvastr was occupying a place of importance in the sacrificial world by his manifold service to the cause of sacrifice. It is for this reason that the work of the Rbhus came to be criticized for some time. It should be noted that the old vessel of Tvastr is said to be ‘made’ into four and not broken into four (cf. 1.161.2, IV.35.4), thus indicating that the Rbhus substituted the old vessel by four new handy vessels. The interesting description at IV.33.5 (jyestha aha camasa dva kareti kanlyan trin krnavametyaha | kanistha aha caturaskareti | ), possibly indicates the fact that after some discus¬ sion the old vessel was decided to be made into four. The idea seems to have originated with the necessity of replacing the old vessel, which for some reason or the other was found unsuitable for the purposes of the sacrificial performance. It appears however that the employment of a ‘camasa’ did not form part of an ordinary sacrificial performance; otherwise along with drona, kalasa, etc., it would have been mentioned in the ninth mandala. The vessel of Tvastr also does not find any reference in that mandala and hence it is possible that both the vessel of Tvastr and the four vessels of the Rbhus that substituted it, were employed in some specialised performance, as would also be suggested by 1.117.22 (quoted above), where a secret of Tvastr is referred to. CAMU : 79 They are referred to very frequently as two broad and hollow- in-the-middle vessels, in which soma-juice was made to flow after purification, before being taken up in other vessels. The word ‘camusu’ is used in almost an equal number of passages as the word ‘camu’ is used. At VIII.2.8, three ‘camus’ are said to be full of soma- juice (tisrah camvah supurnah). Their shape has made their com¬ parison with the heaven and earth possible (cf. 1.64.33; III.55.20). It is not clear whether they were meant to be kept one over the other as the earlier comparison would imply so as to form an enclosure as indicated at IX.107.10 (jano no puri camvorvisad harih). The two vessels were possibly used for the mixing of milk with the soma- 79. Cf. VMH. Vol. I. p. 164. THE SCENE OF THE SACRIFICE 91 juice as indicated at IX.86.47 (camvoh a samajyase gobhih) and at IX.93.3 (murdhanam gavah payasa camu§u abhisrinanti j ). After purification soma-juice is said to be going to the camus (IX.103.4, ‘somah punanah camvorvisad harih, 97.2, camvoh puyamanah’; also IX. 97.48, 107.10.) and as such, is also referred to as pressed out in the camus (VI.57.2, IV.18.3, VIII.82.7, 8; X.24.1), or sitting in the camus (IX.62.16, 72.5, etc.). TRIKADRUKA : a ° The word is used in plural in the Rgveda at 1.32.3, 11.11.17, 15.1, 22.1; X.14.16. Sayana explains the word as a type of sacrifice. As the word ‘kadru’ is used in the sense of a vessel for storing soma- juice at VIII.45.26 (apibat kadruvah sutasya), where Indra is said to have drunk the juice from the vessel of that name, the word may indicate a group of three vessels or even a kind of performance where the three vessels were used for keeping the soma-juice. DRONA: The word is used in the sense of ‘wood’ at VI.2.8 and at other places, indicates a vessel made of wood. In almost all the passages VI.37.22, 44.20; IX.28.4, 30.4, 33.2, 37.6, 65.19, 98.2), the soma-juice is said to be flowing towards the ‘Drona’ vessels. Soma is thus refer¬ red to as ‘dronyah pasuh’ at V.50.4. Cow’s milk is not referred to in ‘drona’ as in the camus. At IX.96.13, soma is said to be occupying the drona vessels where ghee was already placed before (ava dronani ghrtavanti sida) which may indicate that soma-juice was mixed with ‘ghrta’ in these vessels. In a general way, perhaps these different vessels were specifically employed for mixing up different things with the soma-juice. DHISANA .-s 1 At 1.96.1, IX.59.2 and X.17.2, the word is used in the sense of a vessel for soma-juice. NISKRTA : The word appears to be used at places in the sense of a vessel towards which the soma juice ultimately flows. The idea of the employment of the word has apparently come from the general sense of the word ‘niskrta’ as a place of residence or the place intended to be reached. The vessel being the place, towards which the soma had ultimately to go, came to be styled accordingly. Thus ‘soma’ is said to be flowing towards the ‘niskrta’ of the gods (IX.78.1, 86.7, 80. V. I Vol. I. p. 329. 81. V. I. I. 399-400. 92 SACRIFICE IN THE fcGVEBA suddho devanamupayati niskrtam) or towards the ‘m$krta’ of Indra. (IX.64.15, Indrasya yahi ni?krtam; IX.101.6, . .. . vrsS. .. .indrasya- bhyeti nskrtam). This may indicate that vessels were earmarked for certain gods occasionally. 82 PATRA: In a general sense as a ‘vessel’ or ‘vessels’ used for soma-juice, the word ‘patra’ is used at 1.175.1, X.53.9 (see quoted above) where Tva?tr is said to have fashioned vessels for the drinking of the gods (devapanani), at X.105.10 83 (yaya sve patre sincase) and at X.44.5 anadhpsya tava patrani dharmana). At X.44.5 and 105.10, the patras are said to belong to Indra. cf. also VI.44.16 (idam tyat patram indra- panarh). This also indicates as in the case of ‘ni§krta’ the idea of earmarking certain vessels for certain gods in a sacrificial perform¬ ance. 6ADA : At IX.15.6 (ava sadesu gacchati), the word appears to be used in the sense of a vessel or vessels which are referred to as ‘Drona’ in the following stanza. SAMVARANA: At IX.107.9, the word indicates the vessels to which soma-juice flows after it is mixed with milk, curds, etc (cf. anupe goman gobhi- raksah somo dugdhabhirak$ah samudram na samvarananyagman. .). It denotes an enclosure derivatively. Agni is said to be coming out of enclosure. (VII.3.2, mahah samvaranadasthat.) As Agni and Soma are frequently compared with a horse, soma too can be asso¬ ciated with an enclosure. The simile is particularly apt as describing how the different things mixed with soma-juice in the vessels become identified with it even as different rivers with the ocean. HOTRA: The words Hotra, Potra, Nestra, Brahmana ate used in the sense of vessels through which the soma is said to be offered to different divinities. 84 Thus cf. 11.37.1-4, where ‘Dravipodas’ is said to be drinking soma. At 1.15.9 also Dravlnodas is said to be offered ‘soma’ in the ‘nestra’ vessel. At II.36.1, Indra is said to be offered ‘soma’ in the ‘hotra’. Maruts are said to be drinking soma from the ‘potra’ at II.36.2d and 1.15.2. Indra is said to be offered soma in the ‘Brahmana’ at 1.15.5 and II.36.5. 82. Cf. ‘camasa’ above; ‘pStra’ below. 83. See ‘darvi’ above. 84. It may be noted that the words do not signify the vessels always but also as the duties of the respective priests, indicating that such names were coined occasionally. Thus ‘Nestra’ at II. 1.2, X. 91.10; ‘Potra’ at I. 76.4, II. 1.2, X. 22 , 91.10; ‘Hotra’ at 1.76.4, II.1.2 etc. THE SCENE OF THE SACRIFICE 93 This association of different divinities with different vessels very possibly indicates the association of the priests mainly with the worship of the divinities concerned. ‘Hotriya’ referred to at 1.83.2 (apo na devirupayanti hotriyaih, avah pasyanti vitatam yatha rajah) where the ‘devih apah’ are said to be ‘not’ approaching the Hotriya vessel, appears to be the same as ‘hotra’. ‘CARU’: The word is used in the sense of a cauldron which appears to be heated in fire as indicated at VII.104.2 (caruragnivan iva), which is said to be possessed of a lid or cover as indicated at 1.162.13 (apidhana carunam), which used to be stirred as indicated at IX.52.3 (carurna yas tamihkhaye), and which used to be opened at the time of making the offering as indicated at 1.7.6 (sa no vrsannamurii carum satradavannapavrdhi). It is not clear as to for what purpose it was used in the Rgvedic ritual. It may perhaps indicate the ‘gharma’ vessel which was used for heating the milk or for cooking an offering and hence the neces¬ sity of the lid for it. 85 A glance at the scene of sacrifice described above can give us some broad indications of the general character and the growth of the sacrifice in the days of the Rgveda. The implements most commonly used indicate a simple fire and soma ritual that was per¬ formed ordinarily in the household without much of mechanical rigidity as can be seen even in the case of the fairly stereotyped ritual of the AprI hymns. 86 The reference to the peculiar imple¬ ments used in the Asvamedha as also the various vessels associated with the soma-juice indicate the fact that the ritual was growing. The variety of the vessels with different names shows that different families were experimenting with the ritual and appear to be quite at a liberty to do it as the form of the ritual was not fixed. Words like ‘samvarana’, ‘niskrta’, etc., appear to be metaphorical expressions for certain soma vessels. The reference to the sacrifices being performed in the vicinities of certain rivers and the absence of regular places of those perform¬ ances also indicate the wide choice enjoyed by the people in the form of those performances. Ordinary performances appear to be held in the households and the bigger ones associated with some patrons, on the banks of certain rivers as indicated at V.62.6, though the latter appear to be rather as an exception than the rule. 85. There are certain implements and vessels exclusively used in the Asvamedha hymn (I. 162) like ‘ukha’ ‘yusmanya’ etc., for which see Chapter XI. 86. AHR B.U.J. 1945-6 and Chapter XI. 94 SACRIFICE IN THE FtGVEDA The stage of experimentation is also indicated in the substitu¬ tion of certain implements by others as can be seen in the case of the ‘camasa’. The reference to the service of Tvastr and the ftbhus indicates the enthusiastic response of the people to the cause of the sacrifice, increasing with a very healthy spirit of rivalry among them. The variety in the names of the implements like the ladles and the vessels, may indicate the influence of different regions and the different priestly families. The association of the altar, which was the centre of sacrificial performance, with the idea of Itta indcates how the sacrifice was sought to be widened in its sphere of activity so as to include the idea of an all-round progressive life within its purview. And as such the place of sacrifice, it appears, was becoming the centre of all cultural activity, a nucleus, which was providing all the vitalising energy that was necessary for the growth of a highly cultural and civilized social organism. Chapter Five OFFERINGS IN THE SACRIFICE ffWt fqWTPPT I (UV. IX. 63.5) ferret ar^rr i (uv. ix. 12.7) SYNOPSIS : Offerings and the course of sacrifice — as expressions of human sentiments — their significance for the sacrifice — gods distinguished on the basis of offerings — variety in offerings indicative of stages of development — circumstances deter¬ mining the popularity of offerings — relative importance — Ghrta — consequent importance of the cov.'S — Sabardugha — A"ni and the offering—Mitravaruna — ghrta mixed with other offerings — ghrta and the Vedi, — like Agni, importance of ghrta never diminished in sacrifice — Soma influencing the sacrifice — con¬ sidered to be the best of offerings—comparatively later —first drink of soma.— sacrifice the cause of its divinity —the epithets with a bearing on the sacrifice — the soma-pressing — mixing with various substances — Triprstha — quantity in which it was offered — Tiro’ahnya — The Savanas -— Pratah-savana — Madhyan- dina savana — Trtlya savana — Apupa — ajya — ahuti — Ila — Karamba — gharma — dhar.ah — paktih — payah — purolasa — Prksa — Prayah — Sarpih — Madhu — Havih — gods and the offerings — Svaha, Vasat - animal offerings in the Rgveda-hymns — Daksina — gods and the offerings — offerings and the mantras. The conception of sacrifice is based on the offerings to be given to the divinity for its propitiation and hence offerings can be fitfully said to be co-existent with the sacrifice. They have thus played a vital role in the origination of the institution of the sacrifice and have apparently continued to influence it in the later stages of its growth. Offerings can be said to be symbolic of what the people think about themselves and their divinities and the changing moods of the social organism can be seen to be reflected in their ideas about the offerings in the sacrifice. The hymns, while praising the gods for their great¬ ness and glory, also serve the purpose of recommending the offerings for their acceptance. In fact the acceptance of the sacrifice by the gods is the acceptance of the offerings, offered therein. As it will be observed later, the Rgvedic Aryans distinguished the gods according to the offerings they liked most and hence it can be realised how the popularity of the offering would change with the change in the popularity of the worship of the divinity concerned. It is in this way that the sacrifice would be instrumental in moulding the ideas about religion in both its theoretical and practical aspects. 96 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA The predominance of the soma-offering in the hymns of the Rgveda, which has almost shadowed into insignificance other types of offerings and which is also indicated by the separate collection of the soma hymns in the ninth Mandala, has led various scholars to propound different views about the Rgvedic collection. 1 The separate collection of soma-hymns, it may be noted, does not appear to have been prompted by any necessity of a sacrificial character, though the hymns visualise a sacrificial offering during the entire course of their composition. Their compilation in two groups of (1-60) and (61-114) also appears to have a literary principle in view. The arrangement in the descending order of the hymns has been scrupulously observed in the first group of (1-60) hymns. Thus though the hymns have not been compiled with a definite ritual in view, they have apparently helped the advancement of the soma- ritual in general in the days of the Rgveda. There is a variety of other offerings which is occasionally indi¬ cative of the popularity of the worship of a deity during a certain period and in general of the growth of the idea and practice of the sacrifice. The popularity of a particular material as offering or offerings in the Rgvedic sacrifice seems to have been determined by three different factors, viz., availability of the material, the idea of divinity to which the material was to be offered and the condition under which the offering could be given. It is for this reason that the relative importance of the various materials employed in the Rgvedic sacrifice has to be noted clearly, so that some idea about the way in which the sacrifice has advanced can be obtained. GHRTA: The offering of ‘ghrta’ appears to be the commonest of all the offerings, inasmuch as it seems to have been offered both indepen¬ dently as well as along with some other offerings. The reason for this vogue is quite obvious. The sacrifice has originated and grown on account of the peculiar role of Agni, who is said to be conveying the oblations and sacrificial performances to the gods. The offering of ghee would keep the fire blazing and would facilitate the offerings of other oblations as well. Besides it was an offering which could be easily accessible to all. It is this easy accessibility of the offering which must have made people saerificially minded at the early stages of the sacrifice and as such can be surmised to be the earliest of the offerings. 1. VMH Vol. I. p. 202 where he propounds the view about the RV. Samhita being a ‘Hotr—purohita-samhita’. MaxMiiller (ASL p. 247) thinks that the RV. Samhita is not a ‘hotr-samhita’ (for quotation of the view cf. Chapter I p. 5 above). For discussion of the view of the ritualistic version of the RV. Sam¬ hita cf. (chapter I pp. 9-11 above and LEV. Renou pp, 3-7.) OFFERINGS IN THE SACRIFICE U7 It is this offering which made the cow, from whose milk it was prepared, occupy an important place in the social life of the people. Cows came to be considered as indispensable and their service to the cause of the sacrifice came to be glorified in different places. Such a cow came to be known as “Sabardugha”. Such cows are referred to in a Visve-deva hymn along with the other gods. cf. III. 55.16 (a dhenavo dhunayantamasisvih sabardughah sasaya apra- dugdhah. . . .). Rbhus are credited with the fashioning of this sacrificial cow at 1.20.3 (taksan dhenuih sabardugharh). cf. also VI. 48.11, X.61.11, etc. It is said to belong to Agni at X.69.8. Indra is metaphorically said to be such a cow at VIII.1.10 and Dyavaprthivi at III.6.4. The cows in general therefore are referred to as guarded by Indra and are said to be recovered by him along with Brhaspati when they were stolen away by the Panis. The interest that Indra has shown along with Angirasas, 2 perhaps the originators of the idea of sacrifice, in winning back the cows indicates how the cows were indispensable for the sacrifice and how the mischief of the Panis was thus directed towards creating obstacles in the way of the sacrifices. 3 The importance of the ghrta in the sacrifice is clear as the sacrifice is called ‘ghrtavan’ (1.142.2). It is said to be kept ready for the purposes of the sacrifice along with the soma-juice at 1.135.7. The sacred grass used to be sprinkled over with ghee (II.3.4, ghrtenaktarii barhih). It appears to be offered before any other offering in the sacrifice as indicated at III.21.1 (ghrtasya hotah prasana prathamo ni^adya). With the same idea in view, Naraiaiiisa is said to be anointing the gods, his mind dripping with ghee (II.3.2, ghrtapru^a manasa havyamundan murdhan yajnasya samanaklu devan). It appears to be heated before employment in the sacrifice with the idea of purifying it. (cf. IV.1.6, suci ghrtam na taptamaghnyayah; IV. 10.6, ghrtam na putam). Its purity is indicated by Agni’s body being compared with it (IV.10.6); the hymn of sacrifice also is com¬ pared similarly (VIII. 12.4, imam stomam ghrtam na putam; VIII. 39.3, manmani. . ..ghrtam na). The ghee was primarily meant for Agni as he is said to be anointed with ghee at X.118.6 and worshipped with it cf. also III.1.7, 8; (II.7.4). It is said to be offered in the fire with a sruc (cf. 1.110.6; V.14.3; VI.11.5, ‘ghrtavati sruc’). The ladle being mainly associated with ghee, came to be referred to as ‘ghrtaci’ (cf. chapter IV). Unlike other gods, Agni gets a variety of epithets based on ‘ghrta’, indicating the predominance of ghee in the Agni-ritual. This 2. Vide chapter VII for ‘Angirasas’. 3. For attitude of the Panis towards the sacrifice, cf. chapter IX. 98 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA large variety of epithets makes it clear that even when Indra and the other gods came to be worshipped with Agni as the intermediary, the emphasis on the worship of Agni as an independent individual divinity was never abandoned. Thus ghee is said to be the food of Agni (VII.3.1, ‘ghrtanna’). With ample offering of ghee in view, he is said to be dripping with ghee (V.26.2, ‘ghrtasnu’), along with his chariot (V.17.3) and horses (IV.6.9). Ghee is said to be his glory (1.128.4, V.8.3, ‘ghrtasrih’). In fact ghee appears to be considered as pervading the whole existence of Agni, as indicated by epithets like ‘ghrtayoni’ (V.8.6), ‘ghpta- prasatta’ (V.15.1), ‘ghrtapratika’ (1.143.7), ‘ghrtakesa’ (VIII.60.2), ‘ghrtanirnik’ (X.122.2). It is thus that the idea of the close association of Agni with ‘ghrta’ is conveyed in a variety of ways. Among other deities asso¬ ciated with the fire-ritual with ghrta as the principle offering, Mitravaruna appear to be quite predominant. Thus they are said to be ‘ghrtasutl’ (1.136.1; 11.41.6) and to indicate the offering of ghrta to them as directly as to Agni, they are also referred to as ‘ghrtayoni’ (V.68.2). This ghrta is said to be offered to them in every sacrifice (1.136.1, yajne yajne upastuta). This indicates the fact that ghrta was the earlier offering when Mitra and Varuna had a place of importance in the sacrifice and that the importance of the Mitra-Varuna worship decreased with the appearance of soma in the field, which brought Indra worship into prominence. 4 As alreay observed, Agni retained his importance however, on account of his indispensability for the purposes of the sacrifice. The ghrta, being an offering by itself, was also employed in association with other offerings. Thus ‘soma’ is said to be mixed with ghee (IX.82.1, ghrtavan somah; X.29.6) and with ‘apupa’ (X.45.9). Oblations in general are also mixed with ghee (X.14.14, ghrtavad havih; VIII.8.15 ghrtascyut urj; ‘ghrtascyutah isah VIII.8.16). The personified sacrificial food is also associated with ghrta (VII.16.8, ila ghrtahasta; X.70.8, ila devi ghrtapadi). The altar, on account of the kindling of fire wherein the ghee was offered, is referred to as ‘ghrtapratika’ even like Agni himself 4. At VIII.2.6 (gobhiryadimanya asman mrgarh na vra mrgayante I abhitsaranti dhenubhih), people who intended to attract Indra by the offering of milk as against the some-juice, are referred to. In the early stages, some-juice was not well-prepared as indicated at VIII.2.5 na yam sukro na durasir na trpra uruvyacasam | apa sprnvate suhardarh [| ); but even still Indra is said to have preferred it to the offering of milk, indicating how the soma—offering has been associated with Indra right from the beginning. For Prof. Velankar’s interpretation of the passage, cf. Vel. B.U.J. Vol. XIV 1945, p. 8 F.N. OFFERINGS IN THE SACRIFICE Of) (X. 114.3). The sacrificers offering ghrta prominently are referred to as ‘ghrtascyutah’ and ‘ghrtaprayasah’ (III.43.3). 5 6 Thus it can be said that whatever happened to the popularity of the other offerings on account of the changing ideas regarding the mode of performance, the place of ghrta remained constant even as the place of Agni among the divinities. SOMA ;6 Never perhaps has an offering influenced the course of the sacrifice, as ‘soma’ appears to have done in the case of the Rgvedic sacrifice. It would be no exaggeration to say that the Rgvedic sacri¬ fice is what it is mainly on account of the soma-offering. Once it came to be employed, it appears to have caught the fancy of the sacrifices to such an extent that it threw into background all other offerings and came to be recognised as “the offering among the offerings” (IX.7.2, havirhavi$su vandyah). For the same reason it is said to be the best or the dearest or the sweetest of the offerings (IX.67.28, uttamam havih; IX.34.5, caru priyatamam havih; 1.84.4, jyestham amartyam madarir, VII.91.5, madhvo agram). The influence of the soma juice on the gods becomes further evident by the fact that a group of gods, who are specially supposed to be entitled to receive soma-juice are specifically referred to as belonging to “the soma-group” or “the brotherhood of soma”. (X.92.10, ‘somajamayah). This grouping of the gods on the basis of the offering of soma, makes it clear that there were other gods, who were believed to be not belonging to the group or were receiving some other offering prominently. This appears to be the offering of milk as suggested by a simile at VIII.2.6, (quoted above), or of ghrta as indicated at X.69.2 (referred to above). Thus it is possible to infer that milk and its products were being offered as oblations in the early stages of the sacrifice and ‘soma’ came to be introduced later. Perhaps as a compromise with the earlier custom of offering milk and ghee, that soma came to be mixed with them. (cf. below). This fact of the later introduction of soma as an offering in the sacrifice, also appears to be indicated by the observation of a poet in the tenth mandala, who appears to have the evolution of sacrifice before his mind (cf. X.11.4, adha tyaih drapsarh vibhvam vicak$anam virabharat isitah syeno adhvare I yadi viso vrnate dasmamarya agnirh 5. For a characteristic ghrta offering of Vadhryasva cf. X.69.2 (under ‘Vadhr¬ yasva’ in chapter VIII). 6. Der Rgveda: Geidner Vol. Ill (pp. 1-9). 100 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA hotararh adha dhirajayataThus it is said that Agni was chosen as the hotr first, which indicates the employment of Agni for the purposes of the sacrifice and then comes the production of the hymn for the same purpose (d); it is afterwards that soma is said to have been brought for the perfection of the sacrifice (adhvare in b). As far as the relative position of Indra and soma in the sacrifice is concerned, it would appear that the soma-offering was in existence even before Indra came to be introduced in the Rgvedic sacrifice. This is indicated by a number of passages where Indra is said to be drinking soma as soon as he was born. cf. VII.98.3 (Jajnanah somam sahase papatha); and also III.32.9, 10; 48.1. Indra’s mother is said to have given him ‘soma’ as soon as he was born. cf. 1.61.7; III.48.2 (yjjayathastadaharasya kamemioh piyusamapibo giristharii I tam te mata pari yosa janitri mahah piturdama asineadagre i]). It is then that soma seems to have attained greater importance along with Indra in the Rgvedic sacrifice, at which stage the conflict between the soma and milk offerings must have occurred (cf. VIII.2.6, f.n. p. 98 above). Numerically, the sacrificial epithets of soma are second in im¬ portance only to those of Agni. It may be noted that a comparison of some of these epithets will give an indication of the relative position of Indra, Agni and Soma in the system of sacrifice. It will be noted that the importance of Soma for the sacrificial performance has been clearly stressed, while his position as the material of the sacrifice never appears to have been lost sight of. Thus it is signifi¬ cant that he is never referred to as enjoying the sacrifice as Indra and Agni are said to be doing. And hence it can be said that soma in the Rgveda is mainly the soma-juice, glorified on account of its importance in the sacrifice, even to the extent of its being considered as a divinity (vide Chapter III). Thus he is said to be the banner and lustre of the sacrifice (IX. 86.7, yajnasya ketuh; IX.86.10, jyotih yajnasya). He is said to be making the sacrifice perfect and charming (IX.3.8, 86.7; IX.44.4, 9, cakranascarumadhvaram). In fact he is said to be the soul or self of the sacrifice (IX.2.10, 6.8, purvya atma yajnasya). His indispen¬ sability for the sacrificial performance as well as the place of central importance are indicated by the epithets ‘Rtasya nabhih’ (IX.74.4); ‘Rtasya tantuh’ (IX.73.9); ‘Rtasya garbhah’ (IX.68.5); with a very significant epithet, he is said to be ‘the tongue of the sacrifice (Rtasya jivha, IX.75.2). Unlike other gods his instrumentality in the sacrifi¬ cial performance is indicated by the epithets, ‘yajnasadhanah’ (IX. 72.4) and ‘vitaye sadhanarh’ (IX.105.3). With a greater emphasis he is said to be the chief means of the sacrifice (IX.62.29, agram sadhanam). OFFERINGS IN THE SACRIFICE 101 The same fact about soma being mainly the soma-juice appears to be indicated by the reference to ‘soma’ as the drink of Indra and also by the details of the pressing of the soma-juice which are so frequently referred to in the soma hymns of the ninth mandala. Thus soma is said to be going exclusively to Indra (IX.69.6d, nendradrte pavate dhama kimcana); all the soma-pressings are said to be meant for Indra (1.131.1, indraya visva savanani manuka). Even the gods are said to have proclaimed it accordingly (IX.101.5, indurindraya pavata iti devaso abruvan). In practically all the hymns of the ninth mandala, the fact of soma juice flowing for Indra has been referred to (IX.1.1, 4.4., 6.7.107.17, 110.11, etc.). Some poets, in their enthusiasm even refer to soma-juice as going directly to the belly of Indra (IX.70.10; 76.3, 81.1; 80.3, 109.18, pra soma yahi indrasya kuksam). Indra is said to be drinking soma in such quantities that the heart of Indra has become a reservoir of soma, towards which soma is asked to flow. (IX.70.9, indrasya hardi somadhanamavisa |). All the powerful deeds of Indra are said to be done under the influence of the soma-juice (cf. IX.23.7, 85.2, 113.1, etc.). In a typical hymn (11.15), various deeds of Indra have been described and every stanza has a refrain (somasya ta made indrasca- kara [), saying that Indra did all of them under the influence of soma. This relationship between the two is emphasized by a number of other epithets, cf. ‘Indrasya priyah’ (IX.98.6); ‘Indrasya sakha’ (IX.96.2, 101.2; X.25.9); ‘Indrasya sakhyarh jusanah (IX.97.11, VIII. 48.2); as being the drink of Indra. ‘Indrapltah’ (IX.8.9); ‘Indra- panah’ (IX.96.3); ‘Indrapatamah’ (IX.99.3). The cosmological func¬ tion of entire creation along with that of Indra is ascribed to him (IX.96.5), with his divinity in view. The details of pressing that are given practically in all the hymns also indicate that the poets have in view the soma-juice. The epithets describe the various stages of the pressing. With the pressing by the stones in view, soma is called ‘adridugdhah’ (IX.54.9, 97.11); ‘adrisutah’ (IX.72.4); ‘adrisamhatah’ (IX.98.6); ‘adrau duduhanah’ (IX.96.10); ‘gravna tunnah’ (IX.67.19); sutah gravabhih (IX.80.4); with the washing of the plant in water in view, he is called ‘apo vasanah’ (IX.16.2); ‘srlnannapah’ (IX.109.22, 23); ‘mrjanah apsu’ (IX.96.10); ‘uk?tah aparh urmau (IX.72.7). With the pounding of the plant with both the hands in view, he is called ‘eoditah nrbahubhyam’ (IX.72.5); ‘mrjyamanah sukarmabhih daiabhih (IX.70.4); ‘hinvano goradhi tvaci’ (IX.65.25). When the juice is flowing on the strainer, he is said to be ‘ahitah pavitre antah’ (IX. 12.5); ‘pavitram abhyundan (IX.61.4); ‘pavitre vitatah’ (IX.73.9), ‘punanah vararh’ (IX.82.1). 102 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA With the flow across the planks in view, it is referred to as ‘sutah camvoh’ (IX.108.10); ‘camu sutah’ (IX.46.3). When the juice has reached the vessels, it is described as ‘ahitah kalase^u’ (IX.12.5); ‘kalasam avisan’ (IX.62.19); ‘karsman svetam kalasam (IX.74.8). On account of its mixture with various substances, like curds, ghee, milk, soma is referred to as ‘dadhyasirah’ (IX.23.3, 101.12); ‘unnitadadhna’ (IX.81.1); ‘ghrtarh vasanah’ (IX. 82.2); ghrtascyut (IX.77.1); ‘ghrtasnu’ (IX.86.45); ‘pariskrtah gobhih’ (IX.61.13); ‘avftah gobhih’ (IX.86.27). With his place on the sacred grass at the time of offering in view, he is referred to as ‘barhisi priyah’ IIX.72.4, 107.15, etc.); ‘barhisman’ (IX.44.4). 4 Cleanliness, required before the starting of the pressing, is referred to at IV.45.5 (yo niktahastah.somarh susava). The carrying of the soma plant with the twigs tied referred to at IX. 24.2 and 27.3 (nrbhiryatah vinlyase). Considerable importance is attached to the dipping in water of the soma plant as it is referred to almost as frequently as the passage of the juice across the strainer (IX.2.3, 3.6, 31.3, etc.). It would appear that the twigs were held with both the hands by some and others would be pouring water over them as indicated at IX.65.6 (yadadbhih pari$icyase mrjyamano gabhastyoh). Soma is said to be resting on the ox-hide along with the pressing- stones (IX.66.29, esa somo adhi tvaci gavam krilati adhribhih; IX. 101.16 ‘gavye adhi tvaci’) indicating the placing of the plant on the hide. Soma is described as pounded by a number of pressing-stones IX.11.5, etc. (cf. Chapter IV) with both the hands (IX.14.7; 20.6, 36.4, etc.). While the pounding would proceed, the noise is poetically described as the roaring of the bull or the lion (IX.28.4, 30.2, 33.4). At IX.80.4 (adrayastva bapsati goradhi tvaci), the pressing of the soma-juice is referred to as taking place, while the plant was on the ox-hide. In later days the custom has changed as remarked by Sayana 7 and he had to explain how there was no contradiction between the Rgvedic passage and the custom in his time. Thus it will be noted that just as in the case of some implements 8 , the usage regarding the performance too has changed from the days of the Rgvedic sacrifice. 7. Sayana’s bhasya (V.S.M. Edition p. 149). ‘Yadyapi idanlntanah krsnajine'bhi- sunvanti na gocarmani tathapi tasmin somo miyate Krayarthm j tatha ca sati yasminmimite tasyadhisavanacarma iti sutrat mana-sadhanasyaiva gocar- manah adhisavana-carmatvabhidhanadavirodhah. 8. Cf. chapter IV. p. 86. OFFERINGS IN THE SACRIFICE 103 After the pressing and straining of the juice, it was mixed with various substances. It was more oftener mixed with milk as des¬ cribed poetically in a number of places. Thus it is said to be clothed in a stainlessly white garment at IX.69.5 (amrktena rusata vasasa harih nirnijanah); cf. also IX.2.4, 8.5, 42.1, 66.13, 95.1. It is said to be mixed with milk at IX.46.4, 50.5, etc., IX.64.28, ‘somah gavasirah’; also IX.84.3, etc. It is said to be made tasteful with milk (IX.62.5; VIII.2.3 ‘Svadumakarma gobhih’). The milk is said to be added in the kalasas (IX.72.1). 9 At times milk also appears to be added before straining as indicated at IX.97.45; 107.22; IX.103.2 ‘pari varanya- vyaya gobhiranjano arsati’. Ghee also appears to be similarly added (cf. IX.82.2 ghrtarh vasanah pariyasi nirnijam). The pure soma-juice apparently was not bright in appearance as indicated by the reference to its being made white with milk, cf. IX.104.4 ‘gobhih te varnam abhi vasayamasi’, IX. 105-4 ‘Sucim te varnarii adhi go$u didharaih’. It appears that mixing with milk was optional as unmixed soma-juice also could be offered in the sacrifice (cf. VIII. 101-10 adha niyutva ubhayasya nah piba, Sucirh somam gavasirarh). For its mixture with ghee, cf. IX.88.2, 86.45, 77.1; VII.47.1 while offering to Indra, soma is said to be mixed with curds cf. IX.11.6; 22.3, 81.1, 101.12; V.51.7, VII.32.4. When Indra was offered the soma-juice along with the other gods, it appears to be mixed with other oblations, dear to those gods. Thus at III.52.7 and VIII.91.2, ‘karambha’, ‘dhana’ and ‘apupa’ are so referred to 10 . At VI.29.4, ‘pakti’ and ‘dhana’ are so referred to. It is also referred to as mixed with ‘yava’ (cf. III.42.7 and IX.68.4). At V. 27.5 (asvamedhasya danah soma iva tryasirah), soma is said to be mixed with three substances. The same thing appears to be indicated when soma is referred to as ‘tridhatu’ (IX.86.46), ‘tritantu’ (IX.30.9) and ‘triprstha’ (VII.37.1, IX.62.17, 71.7, 75.3, 90.2, 106.11). The word ‘triprstha’ is interpreted differently. 11 It however appears to refer to the mixture of soma with three sub¬ stances. In other similar compounds, ‘asvaprgtha’ (VIII.26.24), ‘ghrtaprstha’ (1.13.5), the idea of back physically or metaphorically is always present, indicating something in close association with it. 9. Cf. under ‘Kalasa’ (chapter IV). p. 88. 10. For the offerings see below. 11. Sayana on XI.71.7 as ‘three savanas’ and on 90.2 as ‘three prstha hymns or places of vessels or savanas’. Ludwig: ‘working in heaven, firmament and earth’. Geldner, Grassmann “having three backs.” lot SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA Those three things may be ‘karambha, apupa and dhana’ referred to at III.52.1 and VIII.91.2 or ‘milk’, ‘curds’ and ‘ghee’ which are referred to above as usually mixed with soma. 12 When ‘soma’ was thus ready, it was employed as an offering to various gods. Its later association with the sacrifice is only relatively so. The poets of the Rgveda already know it as a very ancient offering, indicating possibly the extent of the chronological strata over which the composition of the hymns has spread. Thus it is remarked at IX.96.11 (tvaya hi nah pitarah soma purve karmani cakruh), where sacrificial performances of old are said to have proceeded with soma. Very frequently the soma-juice appears to be pressed in very large quantities, particularly when it was to be offered to Indra. Thus he is said to be bathed 13 in soma-juice at 1.30.1 (a va indram krivirh yatha... sinca). The soma-juice are said to be flowing as if on a sloping region (V.2 nimnam na riyate) to Indra. Thus Indra is said to be almost an ocean to contain ample quantities of soma- juice. (V.3 Samudro na vyaco dadhe). The same thing is also re¬ ferred to at III.46.4 (indram somasah pradivi sutasah samudram na sravata avisanti). Peculiar measures of soma-juice are referred to at IV.32.17 (Satim somasya kharyah). It is for this reason that soma is frequently said to be flowing in a hundred (IX.96.14) or thousand streams (IX.13.1, 73.4, 89.1, 110.10 etc.). It is possibly indicated at IX.63.14 (ete dhamani arya sukra rtasya dharaya. . . .aksaram) that the soma-juice was an Aryan tradition and hence the juices are said to be flowing towards the Aryan regions. When the soma-sacrifice exercised a wider influence on the Aryan life in general, the soma offering came to be referred to as ‘urging on the human generations’ (hinvano manu?a yuga 1X.12.7) or ennobling or aryanising the whole human habitation (‘krnvanto Visvam aryam’ IX.63.5). Regarding the quality of the juice, Indra is said to be offered the strong soma-juice. As pointed above, both the varieties of soma, pure and mixed are referred to at VIII.101.10. The pure soma appears to be the stronger and hence is said to be intoxicating, (cf. V..37.4 ‘tlvram somam’, VIII.62.5, ‘tivraih somaih 14 saparyata’, VIII. 82.2 ‘tivrah soma madayisnavah; also X.42.8, 160.1). It is therefore possible that milk was added to dilute it or make it more pleasant in appearance. At VI.28.8, some efficacious mixture of soma and milk with some magical effect is referred to (upedamu- paparcanam). 12. At V.27.5, Sayana thinks them to be dadhi, saktu, payah. 13. Cf. Vel. B.U.J. XVII. 1948 p. 8. F.N. 14. ‘Sharp-tasting’ Vel. B.U.J. XV. 1946 p. 19; VMH. Vol. I. p. 231. OFFERINGS IN THE SACRIFICE 105 TIRO-ANHYA : ; This variety is referred to as particularly liked by the Asvins, who are associated with it at 1.47.1 (asvina tarn pibata); III.58.7; VIII.35.19.21. At 1.45.10 all the gods and at III.28.3, 6, Agni are associated with it, indicating that the association is of secondary importance. This variety appears to be different from the ‘tivra’ variety of soma liked by Indra, which was strong even when it was fresh. It is not quite clear why Asvins should be offered this type of soma when fresh strong juices were available. It cannot be ima¬ gined that it was done for the purposes of intoxication because, whereas Indra is described as intoxicated even with the fresh soma- juice, Asvins are never said to be so intoxicated by the fermented soma. It is possibly indicative of the association of the Asvins with their non-Aryan worshippers who might be employing such variety of soma-juice in their ritual. It appears that it was customary to offer certain peculiar varieties of soma-juice to certain gods. Thus just like the ‘trio-ahnya’ to Asvins, Vayu appears to be offered the pure soma-juice (cf. X.100.2 Vayave sucipe). It is for this reason that the first drink of soma is said to go to Vayu (cf. 1.134.6 somanarh prathamah pitimarhasi; 11.11.14 pra vayavah pantyagranitim; 1.135.4). So it would be, that the soma-juice, after pressing, was first offered to Vayu before mixing it with the milk. ‘PANCADASA’ : At X.27.2 (pacani te. . . .tivrarh sutarh pancadasam ni$incan). It was a strong variety of juice but we get no more infor¬ mation about it. Whether we accept Sayana’s interpretation 16 or not, it is obvious that different types were being tried in the soma¬ offering in order to make it more effective. This idea of experi¬ mentation indicates that the sacrifice was evolving with changes in the mode of performance and hence the performance had not attained any mechanical character. THE SAVANAS :’ 7 Whenever soma may have come to be introduced in the RgVedic sacrifice, the idea of a specialised rite as a ‘Savana’ appears to have been introduced with the prominence of the Indra-worship. 15. VMH. Vol. I p. 237. 16. Sayana: ‘Pratiprabhrti pancadasasarhkhyakasu tithisu suklapakse ekottara vrddhya parnani jayante ! Krsnapakse tu tadvannihiyante | evarhbhutatvat pancadasah soma ucyate | Yadva trivrt-pancadasa stomopetam madhyandina- savanakamityarthah | The alternative explanations of Sayana indicate that his interpretation is a conjectural one. 17. VMH. I. p. 256-262. 106 SACRIFICE IN THE FGVEDA It is clear that ‘savana’ is conceived as quite distinct from an ordi¬ nary soma-pressing. Whereas soma-offerings are associated with all the deities, ‘Savanas’ are restricted to the worship of a limited number of divinities. The idea of ‘Savana’ appears to have originated with the idea of distinguishing between the soma offered to Indra from that offered to the other divinities, as the ‘soma’ must have come to be offered to all the divinities when it came to be introduced as an offering. The distinction appears to have been drawn on the basis of the quantity of soma-juice pressed out and the continued soma¬ pressing to have been designated as the ‘Savana’. This would also be necessary on account of the large quantity of soma required to be offered to Indra. (cf. under ‘soma’ above). This association of Indra with the ‘Savana’ is also indicated by the mention of his presence even when the ‘Savanas’ are said to be offered to some other divinities. It would thus appear that though the ‘Savana’ was introduced for the sake of Indra, some other divi¬ nities also were sought to be associated with the soma-ritual as it had grown in its association with Indra. Thus it is remarked by a poet that Indra alone is associated equally with all the savanas. (1.131.2 Visveju hi tva savane$u tunjate samanamekam;) He is said to be worshipped in all the savanas (X.50.4 Visve$u savanesu yajniyahl cf. also 1.173.8; X.111.5). The majority of the savanas are said to be going to Indra (VII.22.6 bhuri hi te savana; X.89.16 puruni tva savana; also VI.47.14, 96.6). Thus it will be observed that it was out of the idea of assigning certain amount of prominence to the divinity, that a particular aspect of sacrifice was being evolved, supporting our view about the evolution of the idea of divinity through the medium of sacrifice in gradual stages, which are dependent on the worship of the divi¬ nities either individually or jointly. All the three savanas do not appear to have been in existence when the idea of savana originated. This has been inferred even on the basis of the complicated ritual associated with the third savana by Dr. M. Haug 18 and may possibly be indicated by the con¬ tinuation of the two pressings in the Avesta ritual. The introduction of the third savana appears to have been prompted by the idea of bringing the savanas in line with the three stations of the Surya (IV.54.4 ye te trirahan savitah savaso dive dive soubhagamasuvanti; cf. also VIII. 1.29 where Indra is said to be offered hymns thrice a day). The work of the Rbhus in connection with the soma-vessel associated with the ritual and their consequent accommodation in 18. ABI p. 35.“that we must ascribe to it quite a different origin than to the two other libations.” OFFERINGS IN THE SACRIFICE lOT the third savana, as also the reference to the residence of the Ifohus with the god Savitr (1.161.13, 1.110.3; IV.33.7) are worthy of note in this context as they indicate how the new aspects of sacrifice were being evolved in association with the divinities. PRATAHSAVA: At III.28.1 (jusasva no havih purolasam jatavedah | pratahsave ],), Agni is asked to enjoy a ‘purodasa’ in the morning libation. In the course of the hymn (v.4 purolasm. . . tava bhagadheyam and v.5 purolasamahutam), it is said to be a special offering to Agni, though the soma was pressed (and reserved for some other divinity or divi¬ nities). As a side-offering, it also seems to be offered to Indra in all the three savanas as indicated at (III.52-4-6). In the morning libation, when soma was given to a number of deities, the first offer¬ ing appears to be made to Agni. (X.112.1 pratahsavah tava hi purvapltih |) When Asvins were offered a soma-pressing, it appears to be the one in the morning as indicated by their epithet ‘prataryavana (II.39.2, V.77.1) and by that of their chariot, ‘prataryavan (X.40.1, 41.2) or ‘prataryuj’ (1.22.1, X.41.2). It should however be noted that as hard and fast rules in this regard were not made to prevail, Asvins are also said to be associated with the other ‘Savanas’ as well. This association with the one or the other savana seems to be dependent on the popularity of the god in the cadre of the gods. MADHYANDINA SAVANA: The mid-day soma-pressing is said to be exclusively reserved for Indra. Thus it is said at IV.35.7 (pratah sutamapibah haryasva, madhyandinam savanarh kevalam tei), that though Indra may have been offered soma in the morning rite, the mid-day pressing was entirely his own. Indra is said to enjoy it (V.40.4 madhyandine savane matsadindrah and VI.47.6). This fact of the mid-day savana belonging to Indra is more emphatically stated at VIII.37.1-6, where the statement (madhyandinasya savanasya vrtrahannanedya piba somasya vajrin ,) forms the refrain of the hymn. At this savana, along with a ‘purodasa ‘to Indra (III.28.4), the fried grains (dhana) are said to be offered to the horses of Indra (III.52.5). Some people appear to be mixing curds with soma at this offering as indicated at X.179.3 (madhyandinasya savanasya dadhnah piba |) . At III.32.3, he is said to be drinking along with his troop of the Maruts. At times, a special pressing appears to be held in honour of Indra as indicated at X.96.13 (apah purvesaih harivah sutanam atho idam 1(>S SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA savanarh kevalarh te j ). In a general way, Indra appears to be associated with the first two pressings as indicated at VIII.13.13 (have tva sure udite have madhyandine divah |). TRTIYA SAVANA : Though it appears to be offered in the evening, it is merely referred to as ‘the third savana’ as against the time—specifying designations of the two other savanas. It is very intimately asso¬ ciated with the Rbhus 19 , though in a solitary passage, Asvins are also said to be drinking at it. (VIII.57.1 nasatya trtiyam savanam pibathahj). It would appear that the third savana was introduced to accommodate the Rbhus, as they are said to have made it by their skill (X.35.9, yattrtiyam savanam ratnadheyam akrnudhvam svapasya suhastahj). They are referred to as invited for it on ac¬ count of their skilful work in fashioning a chariot for the Asvins (IV. 36.2 tan u nvasya savanasya pitaye.... rbhavo Vedayamasi |). They are said to have been offered the third savana (IV.34.4 pibata vaja rbhavo dade vo mahi trtiyam savanarh madaya|), and they are requested to give glory after receiving soma in the third Savana at IV.35.6. Thus it can be observed that though ‘soma’ was offered to all the divinities, ‘savana’ was a sort of specialised rite which was asso¬ ciated with a limited number of divinities, for whose specific worship, the rite appears to have been devised. We can now proceed to a consideration of some minor offerings as well as offerings in general, either comprising of some major offerings referred to above or an aggregate of some of the major and the minor offerings. APfJPA : 20 It appears to be a special preparation meant mainly for the Maruts but offered to Indra as well on account of the latter’s asso¬ ciation with them. (III.52.7 apupamaddhi sagano marudbhih j). When it was offered to Indra, it appears to be mixed with the soma- juice (III.52.1, VIII.91.2 ‘dhanavantarh kararhbhinam. . . .apupa- vantarh ju?asva’|). When offered to Agni, it is said to be mixed with ghee (X.45.9 apuparh deva ghrtavantarh agne |). AJYA : The word is used only in the tenth Mandala. 21 It is mentioned as distinct from the ‘ghrta’ at X.79.5 (....ajyaih ghrtaih. . . . 19. Cf. my paper on Rbhus in the B.U.J. Vol. XXI 1952. 20. V.I. I. p. 26. 21. X.53.2, 79.5, 88 . 4 , 90.6, 122.7, 130.3. OFFERINGS IN THE SACRIFICE 10!) pu$yati). Unlike ‘ghrta’ it is used exclusively in the sense of a sacrificial offering. Thus the word refers to an offering in the meta¬ phorical sacrifice at X.90.6 (vasanto asyasldajyarh) and at X.130.3 (ajyarh kimasit). It is said to be purified for sacrificial purposes (X. 122.7 ajyamagne nimrjanto adhvare). It is therefore possible that the word was coined at a late stage of the sacrifice to signify the material with which the fire was anointed in the sacrificial perfor¬ mances. This seems to be indicated at X.88.4 (yo hotasit prathamo devaju$to yam samanjannajyenavrnanah) where the gods are said to have anointed fire, while choosing him as their hotr priest. AHUTI : The word is used in the sense of an offering in general to all the gods (1.105.5, X.52.2) or to some gods mentioned specifically, Agni being more prominent among them (1.31.5; VI.1.9, 2.5, etc.), as he was to carry the oblations in general to the gods. IS, ID, IDA, IRA : All these words are used in the sense of sacrificial offering in general at some places. The word ‘ira’ when associated with ‘Parjanya’ (V.83.4 and 63.6) apparently refers to food in general; but when associated with Asvins (VII.40.5, 67.10, 69.8, at all of which they are said to be going to a house possessed of ‘ira’ — iravad vartih) and when Agni (IV.2.5 ilavan) and the pressing stones (X.94.10, ilavantah gravanah) are said to be possessed of ila, the word can only refer to the sacrificial food. The word appears to be used not only in the sense of sacrificial food offered to the gods, (III.54.20, 59.3; IV.50.8; VII.3.7; X.27.9), but also in the sense of food given by gods to the human beings, cf. (1.40.4; III.1.23, ilamagne havamanaya sadha; III.22.5; VI.10.7; VII.102.3). As the offerings are offered in the fire on the vedi, both the fire and the altar come to be described in terms of Ida. Thus Agni is called ‘ilah hota’ at III.4.3 and the vedi is called ‘the place of ida’ (III.23.4, ilayaspade; 29.4, ‘ilaspade’ at 1.128.1; VI.1.2; X.70.1, 191.1). When the materials of sacrifice came to have their importance stressed, as can be seen in the case of the pressing stones, the sacri¬ ficial offering also came to be personified first, which became a stepping stone to its deification later. Thus we see in the case of Ila that the sacrificial offering has been personified (cf. 1.188.8; II.1.11, 31.4; VII.16.8, ye?amila ghrtahasta durone api prata nisidati). It is partly in a metaphorical way and partly with the idea of deification that Agni is called the son of Ila (III.29.3). As Agni is kindled out of the offerings in a way, he is said to be kindled by Ila (III.24.2, ila samidhyase). With the no SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA vessel containing the material of offering placed on the sacred grass in view, it is said at VII.44.2 (‘ilam devim barhisi sadayantah’ j) that the goddess Ila is seated on the grass. With the importance of Ila in the sacrificial performance in view, Ila is said to have been created by the gods for the guidance of the human beings. (1.31.11, deva akpyvan nahu$asya vispatirii ! ilamakrnvan manusasya sasanlm ||) The word ‘Is’ similarly refers to the food offered to the gods at 1.111.2, 53.4, 47.8; VII.64.3. It refers to the food given by the gods as a result of the sacri¬ ficial performances: 1.12.11, 30.17, 88.1 (a yata varsisthaya is?.). ORJ : At some places the word is used in the sense of strengthening drink or food offered to the gods. Thus Agni is said to be not getting exhausted because of the food offered. (1.128.2, ‘sa na urjamupa- bhrtyaya krpa na juryati’; II.11.1, ‘ima hi tva urjo vardhayanti’). As such he is referred to as “urjo napat” (1.58.8; II.6.2; V.17.5, etc.). Just as strength is to be given to the gods through the offerings, so is strength to be obtained from them and hence like ‘is’, the word is used in both the senses. Soma is said to be the pillar of strength (X.44.4, urjah skambham). So it is possible that the word originally referred to the sacrificial food and drink and later came to be used in the sense of strength by ‘laksapa’ as it was instrumental in giving strength both to the gods as well as men. It can also be seen that the mutually beneficiary nature of the sacrifice is indicated hereby. KARAMBHA : 22 ;I ^ ^ The offering of ‘karambha’ seems to be given to the god Pusan (VI.57.2, karambhamanya icchati), who is specifically referred to as ‘karambhat’ (the eater of karambha) at VI.56.1. Along with other offerings, it is referred to at 1.187.10. It was also offered to Indra in association with Pusan being the characteristic offering of the latter (cf. III.52.7, Pusanyate te cakrma karambharh); but when offered to Indra, it appears to be mixed with the soma-juice (III.52.1; VIII.91.2, karambhinaih.somam), GHARMA : 22 The offering of hot milk is referred to at a few places and as suggested above, 24 it appears to be given particularly to Asvins along with the soma-juice (cf. VIII.9.7; 25 VIII.9.4, ayarh vam gharmo 22. V.I. Vol. I p. 138. : 23. Cf. ‘gharma’ chapter IV. p. 82. 24. Ibid. 25. Cf. ‘a somarh.gharmarfi sincat..cf. also VIII.87.2 pibatam gharmam madhu-mantamasvina | . OFFERINGS IN THE SACRIFICE III asvina stomena pari sicyatc). There is mentioned an offering called ‘ajasra gharma’ at III.26.7 (ajasro gharmo havirasmi nama). As indicated in Chapter IV, extreme heating for the purposes of the offering is referred to at V.19.4. It is not clear why this custom of offering hot milk in the sacri¬ fice came into existence, nor why it should be so closely associated with the Asvins. There appears to be some ceremonial connected with the offering of hot milk as it is referred to at V.30.15 (gharma- scit taptah pravrje ya asit) as ‘Pravrj’. It appears to be similar to the Pravargya 26 of the later days as the offering of hot milk is common to both. It is therefore possible to surmise that gharma offering came to be introduced along with the worship of Asvins and as the worship of the deities had a comparatively limited support, the offering of ‘gharma’ has not occupied a prominent place in the Rgvcdie sacrifice. DHANAH : 27 The word is used in the sense of grains used as a secondary sacrificial offering along with some main offering. Thus they are said to be dipped in ghee at 1.16.2 (ima dhana ghrtasnuvah). It appears that grains of similar size and quality were specifically used for this purpose (III.35.3, dive dive sadvsiraddhi 2d dhanah; cf. also III.52.7, 8). They are also expected to be offered to the horses of Indra, who were also to be fed when Indra was supposed to be engaged in receiving the sacrificial soma-juice (III.35.7, krta dhana attave te haribhyam.tadokase). 20 They are said to be mixed with the soma-juice which is offered to Indra in the mid-day and evening libations at III.52.5 (madhyandinasya savanasya dhanah) and III.52.6 (trtiye dhanah savane). The soma is referred to as ‘dhanavat’ (III.52.1; VIII.91.2). When they were thus to be mixed with the soma-juice .they appear to be roasted earlier (IV.24.7, ya Indraya sunavat somamadya pacat paktlruta bhrjjati dhanah; VI.29.4, sa soma amislatamah suto’bhut' yasmin paktih pacyate santi dhanah ). Indra is said to be eating the grains and drinking the soma-juice (X.28.1, jakslyat dhana uta sornam paplyatj). It should be noted that this particular offering appears to be exclusively employed in the soma-sacrifice to Indra. Thus at III.43.4 the ‘savana’ to Indra is qualified as ‘dhanavat’ (dhanavadindrah savanam jusanah ). India’s close association with those grains which are very frequently offered to him is referred to in a simile at VIII.70.12 (tvarh na indrasaiii haste savi$tha davane j dhananam 26. Cf. Pravrj—chapter VI. p. 131. 27. V.I. Vol. I. p. 398; VMH I. p. 230. 28. Vcl. B.U.J. Vol. III.1935 ‘of the same fhieh) quality’. 29. Indra is referred to as ‘tadokas’ at VII.29.1; Cf. also IV.49.6. 112 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA na samgj-bhaya ij), where Indra is said to have a grasp over the cows even as over the grains. PAKTIH : 30 The word is used in the sense of a preparation which accom¬ panies the soma-juice and seems to be exclusively employed in the Indra-worship. Thus at IV.25.6, susveh paktim krnute kevalendrah) and at IV.25.7 (vi susvaye paktaye kevalo bhut), Indra is said to be exclusively favourable to the persons, who offer the soma-juice accompanied by the cooked preparation. It was possibly a liquid preparation which used to follow the offering of the Purodasa (IV.24.5, adit paktih purolasarn riricyat). VI.29.4 (yasmin paktih pacyate) may indicate that it was cooked in the soma-juice; but the grains which are already roasted previously and later mixed with soma-juice are also referred to (yasmin santi dhanah). This appears clear even from IV.24.7 (pacat paktiruta bhrjjati dhanah), V.29.11 (paean paktih) and VII.32.8 (pacata paktih), where the preparation is said to be cooked, while the ‘dhanas’ are said to be roasted. PA YAH : 31 The word which is generally used in the Rgveda in the sense of ‘milk’ or ‘water’, is specifically used in the sense of milk offered in the sacrifice at a few places. It should be noted that though milk was very often used for mixing with soma-juice in the Indra-worship, it never appears to be offered in its pure form to Indra. At X.100.2 Vayu is said to like the drink of milk (gaurasya yah payasah pltimanase). At 1.153.4, Mitra and Varuna are said to receive the drink of milk and at 1.121.5 and VI.52.10, the Visvedevas are said to be offered milk. At the latter place (visve deva. . . .jusantam yujyam payah), the offering is said to be suitable, possibly referring to its being given in a particular form. From its employment only in the worship of Mitra, Varuna and Visvedevas, it is possible to surmise that this offering, which was current at an earlier stage, fell into insignificance with the advance¬ ment of Indra-worship and the soma-cult and was later revived when the idea of Visvedevas was introduced for ensuring general amity in the sacrificial worship. PITU : In the hymn 1.187, Pitu is glorified as a general name for the offering in the Rgevdic sacrifice as sacrificial gifts are said to follow from it (V. 11, tam tva vayam pito vacobhirgavo na havya susudima j) 30. V.I. I. p. 463. 31. V.I. Vol. I. p. 400. OFFERINGS IN THE SACRIFICE 113 PUROLASA ;32 It appears to be a preparation, cooked and dressed in a particular manner as indicated at III.28.2 (purola agne pacatastubhyam va gha pariskrtah). It is said to be acceptable to Agni (III.28.1, 3.6) and Indra (III.41.3, 52.2, 3, 8; IV.32.16; VI.23.7, etc.). In the specialised Indra-worship, it is said to be offered in all the three ‘savanas’. (III.52.4-6). At IV.24.5, it is said to precede the offering of ‘pakti’. It was apparently offered before the offering of soma-juice as indi¬ cated at VI.23.7 (purojasam raranah. .. .piba somam). Purolasa seems to be particularly employed with the soma- ritual as indicated by the large majority of the above passages, where it is said to be enjoyed by Indra along with the soma-juice and the ‘dhanas’. PRK$AH : The word is used in the sense of food offered to the gods, or brought by the gods as a result of their propitiation in the sacrifice. In the latter sense, the word is used at 1.73.5; II.1.6 (food brought by Agni), at VI.35.4 and VII.36.5 (by Indra). With Asvins and their chariot, however, the word is used very frequently (cf. 1.34.4, 47.6; V.77.3; VI.62.4, 63.7; VII.74.5; X.106.1). With the offerings in the morning in view, the dawns arc said to be “prksa-prayajah” at III. 7.10. The word is used as offering to Agni (at 1.71.7, 127.5, 141.2, 178.4, II.1.15; VIII.23.3) and to Maruts (at II.34.3). When referring to the offerings to Asvins, the word is qualified as ‘pakvah’ (cf. V. 73.8, 74.10, 75.4). With Mitravaruna at VII.60.4 and Asvins at IV.45.2, the food is referred to as mixed with honey, (madhumantah). Three¬ fold food is said to be carried in the chariot of the Asvins at IV.45.1 (prksaso.trayah). PRABHRTI : 33 The offering as nourishment to gods (from the root bhp) is indi¬ cated by the word. 34 At II. 24.1, the word refers to the offering to Brahmanaspati and at III.36.1 to Indra. It is specifically referred to as an offering in the sacrifice at VII.38.2 (prabhrtau rtasya). PRAY AH : 35 The word is used in the sense of sacrificial food in general in addition to the soma-juice. It appears to be arranged in a particular way round the fire before the gods are invoked to receive the offer- 32. VMH. I. p. 228. 33. VMH. I. p. 155. 34. The word does not refer to offering at V.32.7. 35. VMH. I. p. 212. S.it.—8 114 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA ings. Thus a hymn is said to be sevenfold on account of ‘prayas’ at IV.5.6 (manma. .. .prayasa sapta-dhatu), indicating a particular arrangement. In a general way, the ‘prayas’ is said to be placed side by side with the soma-juice (cf. III.30.1, sunvanti somam dadhati prayamsi; also X.91.9). The sacrificer or sacrificers, who keep ready the food are referred to. (cf. ‘prayasvan, III.59.2, VII.73.2, etc.; ‘prayasvantah’ 1.60.3, III.52.6, etc.). At VIII.64.6, they are referred to as ‘sutavantah’ and ‘prayasvantah’ indicating that soma is not included in ‘prayas’. At a number of places, ‘prayas’ is said to be well-arranged (‘sudihta’, 1.135.4, VI.15.15, VIII.60.4). X.53.2 (aradhi hota ni?ada yajiyan abhi prayamsi sudhitani hi khyat) indicates that the food was arranged round about the place of fire, as in that case alone, the fire could see it. The same fact is stated in a very interest¬ ing simile at 1.169.3 (agnisciddhi smatase susukvan apo na dvlparh dadhati prayamsi) where ‘prayas’ is said to be surrounding Agni as the waters surround an island. SARPIH : It is said to have been yielded by Sarasvati along with ‘milk’ and ‘honey’ at IX.67.32‘ d , indicating that the ceremonies with the offerings used to be held on the banks of the river. It is associated mostly with Agni. It is said to be offered to Agni in a ladle (V.6.9). Agni is given epithets with it; ‘sarpirasutih’ (II.7.6, V.7.9, X.69.2) or ‘sarpirannah’ (X.27.18). Besides Agni, the epithet is applied only to Mitra at VIII.74.2. This indicates that the word was used in the sense of ‘ghee’ in a prominently Agni ritual. 30 MADHU : 37 The word is mostly used in the sense of ‘soma’ when it is meant to be an offering in the sacrifice (1.19.9, II.19.2, IV.3.3, X.64.15, 100.8, etc.). It is not quite certain however whether it may not refer to honey, when it is used with the Asvins. It is true that the Asvins are said to be drinking soma but they cannot be imagined as sur¬ passing Indra, who is the soma-drinker par excellence. Madhu is once associated with Indra (VI.20.3) where the word refers to ‘soma’. With Asvins, however, the word is associated significantly. The epithets like ‘madhvl’, ‘madhu-yuva’ and ‘madhu-patama’ used exclusively of Asvins, the epithets ‘madhuvarna’ and ‘madhuva'nana’ used of the chariot of Asvins (vide Chapter III) and the characteristic mention of ‘madhu’ with them at IV.43.5a, IV.45.3, X.24.6, indicate that honey was particularly offered to them. It is significant that they are even compared with bees in respect of their intimate asso¬ ciation with honey (cf. X.106.10, arangareva madhverayethe 36. For its association with Mitra and Varuna cf. chapter III, p. 58 and p. 98 above. 37. VMH. I. p. 241. V.I. II pp. 123-24. OFFERINGS IN THE SACRIFICE 115 saragheva.), where ‘arangara’ is apparently a species of bees. For association of saragha bees with honey, cf. VIII.4.8. It appears that the region, where the Asvina worship originated, abounded in honey and as such it had come to be offered to them and it was comparatively later that they came to be admitted to the regular Rgvedic pantheon and offered soma. But honey continued to be offered as a remnant of its previous association with the Asvina worship. HAVIH AND HAVYA : 38 The words are used in the sense of offerings in general in the hymns of the Rgveda. ‘Havirvat’ (1.72.7), ‘havyavat’ (1.12.6, V.6.5) and ‘havyavahana’ (1.44.2, etc.) are exclusively used as epithets of Agni with his peculiar role in the sacrifice in view. Even his tongue (X.8.6) and his lustres (X.188.3, rucah havyavahinih) are said to be carriers of oblations. Only once are the priests referred to as such (III.43.1, tvamime havyavaho havante). With the emphasis on the ownership of the oblations in view, the sacrificer is once referred to as the lord of oblations (1.12.8, havispati). The words ‘havislqrtah’ and ‘havirda’ are exclusively associated with the sacrificers (cf. 1.153.3, IV.3.7, VII.68.6, VIII.60.15, X.66.6; cf. also 1.13.3, 166.2, VIII.102.13). The words ‘haviradah’ and ‘havispah’ (X.15.10) are exclusively used of the Pitrs. Among those who would put obstacles in the way of the sacri¬ ficial performances, appear to be the sorcerers as well as some, who would attempt to spoil the oblations prepared for the sacrifice (cf. VII.104.21, indro yatunamabhavat parasaro | havirmathinam). In a solitary place, the horse is referred to as an oblation going to the gods (1.162.4, havi^yamrtuso devayanam). An oblation instru¬ mental in bringing long life is referred to at X.161.3 (satayu?a havi?a). At two places, certain names of the offerings have been men¬ tioned, (cf. ‘pratha’ and ‘sapratha’ at X.181.1 and ‘gharma’ or ‘ajasra gharma’ at III.26.7, ajasro gharmo havirasmi nama). At X.91.15, ‘havis’ appears to refer to solid offering as contrasted with soma and ghrta (vide Chapter IV). In this way, though the oblations in general were so referred to, a distinction appears to be drawn in favour of soma, which apparently came to be considered as the oblation par excellence and as such is referred to in glorifying terms at IX.7.2 (havirhavihsu vandyah). 38. V.I. II. p. 501. 116 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA HOTRA: At a few places (1.18.8, 36.7, VIII.93.23, etc.), the word appears to be used in the sense of offerings possibly made by the hotr priest. It may be noted that there is no other case of the offering being known by the name of the priest, though the hymns 39 and vessels 40 are so referred to. It may be noted that a preparation of ‘yava’ cooked in cow’s milk is referred to at 1.135.8, indicating the wide choice exercised in the employment of offerings, and consequently the elasticity of the ritual in general. After the discussion of the offerings in all their variety, it will be desirable to take into account the exclamations like ‘svaha’ and ‘vasat’ as they were employed in the sacrifice along with the offer¬ ings and the idea of ‘dak?ina’, as it appears to have originated out of the conception of offerings in the sacrifice and also because it was offered in the course of the sacrificial performance. SVAHA AND VASAT : 41 These exclamatory remarks are found to have been employed in connection with the offerings in the sacrifice, possibly with the idea of recommending them to or facilitating their acceptance by the divinities. Out of these, ‘svaha’ appears to be earlier in origin than ‘vasat’ as indicated by its more frequent mention in the hymns and parti¬ cularly its mention in the Apr! hymns, which indicate a form of generalised sacrificial performance. 42 It is also significant that the ‘va§atkrti’ is mentioned in the fairly late hymns in the Rgvedic collection. At 1.31.5, it is mentioned side by side with the offering (ya ahutim pariveda vasatkrtim |). This utterance va?at is said to give some striking touch to the hymns, 43 indicating the mystical significance sought to be associated with the utterance along with the utterance Svaha. Svaha appears to be uttered when the offering was ready to be offered as indicated at III.32.15 (apurno asya kalasah svaha) and X.2.2 (svaha vayam krnavama havlmsi) 44 cf. also 1.110.1, 11.35.1, 50.1, VII.3.7, 59.6, VIII.8.5, 34.10, 35.24. Between the two, vasat appears to be uttered earlier as indicated at 11.36.1 (pibendra svaha prahutam va?atkrtam) and thus it would be that the final touch was supposed to be given by the utterance of ‘Svaha’. 39. Vide chapter II and chapter VII under ‘Hotr’. 40. Vide chapter IV. 41. VMH II. 182, 187. 42. AHR.B.U.J. 1945-46. 43. Vide Va?at in chapter X; ABI p. 17. 44. Cf. also last verses of the Apr! hymns I. 13, 142, 188 etc. OFFERINGS IN THE SACRIFICE nr Three more such utterances are referred to in a solitary hymn of the Rgveda (1.162) viz. ‘i$ta’, ‘vita’ and ‘abhigurta’. This would indicate that new appendages to the offerings were being invented with the evolution of the mode of sacrificial performance. It is not quite clear how the words ‘svaha’ and ‘va$at’ came to be invented for the association with the sacrificial offering. But we can see how the word ‘abhigurta’ came to be employed at a later stage. The root ‘gr’ with ‘abhi’ is used in a general sense ‘to receive joyously’ both with the patrons as well as the divinities. Thus the patrons, welcoming the hymns of the poets, are said to be receiving them well with gifts to the poets (1.54.7, uktha yo va abhigmati radhasa). Sacrifice is said to be well received by Tva§tr at 1.15.3. The offering is said to be similarly received at II.37.3. It is after¬ wards that in its technical sense it came to be employed at 1.162.6, 12, 15. “Astu srausat” is a peculiar formula used once in the Rgveda (1.139.1). The hymn concerned belongs to the ‘Parucchepa group’, known for the artificiality of its composition. 4 ^ ANIMAL OFFERINGS : The existence of a common animal sacrifice cannot be said to have been conclusively established.'^ It may be noted that the sacrificial beast is very rarely referred to and the details of animal offering are not available to the same extent as those of the offerings of ghrta and soma. It can be understood that when the sacrificial performances came to be introduced, eating of animal flesh must have been prevalent and consequently the idea of offering the same as well to the divinity must have occurred to some persons. But this can neither be imagined to have been done right from the very early stages of the sacrifice nor have been prevalent on a large scale. Merely on the basis of the Asvamedha hymn (1.162), inference cannot be drawn about the common prevalence of the animal sacri¬ fice in the days of the Rgveda. The variety of epithets that Agni receives on account of his association with ‘soma’ and ‘ghrta’ 47 like ‘soma-gopah’ (X.45.5), ‘soma-pr§tha’ (VIII.43.11, X.91.4), ‘ghrta-snu’ (V.26.2) ‘ghrtapratika’ (III.1.18) etc., can be considered to be indicative of the oblations commonly offered. Very few indications of the animal-offerings are to be come across in the hymns of the Rgveda. Thus at VI.1.3 Agni is referred 45. Cf. chapter XI. 46. Cf. Animal sacrifice in chapter VI. 47. Cf. chapter III. 118 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA to as ‘vapavan’ and V.43.7 refers to a vessel which is heated in Agni with marrow in it (vapavantam na agnina tapantah). At VIII.43.11 (uk$annaya vasannaya somappsthaya vedhase), Agni is referred to as having the bulls and cows as his food. At III.22.4 (jusantam. . . . anamlva iso mahih), 48 the acceptance of the undiseased (anamivah) food by fires very possibly indicates the animal offering. Pressing- stones are said to be associated with the cooked flesh at X.94.3 (nyunkhayanta adhi pakva amisi). III.21 also refers to the drops of animal fat as offering (cf. IV.2.5). Goat 49 is mentioned specifically at 1.162.3 and X.164.5. At 1.162.3 (e?a chagah puro asvena vajina pu$no bhago nlyate visva- devyah), a goat is mentioned as meant for Pu?an. At X. 16.4, 5, a goat is said to be offered in Agni and Agni is requested to carry it to the Pitrs. (avasrja punaragne pitrbhyah. . . .). The sacrificial post is referred to at a few places. 50 These few references do not give an impression of the animal offerings being prevalent commonly. The poets observing the sacri¬ ficial performances going on round about and deriving inspiration from them for fresh compositions, would certainly have referred to the animal offerings more frequently if they were in vogue. It appears that the idea of animal offering must have come into existence at a later date, the offerings being more complicated in the process of their preparation. 51 The idea of offering a horse for political sovereignty apparently presupposes the existence of the growth of political units, which can be imagined to have come into existence at a fairly late stage in the composition of the Rgvedic hymns. As in the case of the other offerings, we do not come across any clear reference about the animal offering being dear to any parti¬ cular god, as the offering is mentioned only indirectly with Agni as the intermediary. The reference to the Pitrs at X.164.5, may suggest that the custom of offering flesh to the Pitrs was in existence earlier and then it came to be introduced in the ordinary sacrifice. Thus the idea of animal offerings in the Rgvedic sacrifice very possibly came to be introduced after the introduction of the idea of the ‘pitryajna’. 52 48. The fires referred to here are said to be kindled with cow-dung (purI$yaso agnayah), indicating perhaps the custom of such kindling for the purposes of the animal offering. 49. It should be noted that the word ‘chaga’ is used only once in the hymn 1.162. The word ‘aja’ is used not exclusively in the sense of ‘goat’. Thus, cf. (1.67.3, II. 31.6), where it is used in the sense of ‘unborn’; (III.45.2) whore it is used in the sense of ‘a driver’. It is used in the sense of a goat not meant for sacrificial purposes at X.134.6. Soma is referred to as a ‘pasu’ at IX.86.43 and as ‘Dronyah pasuh’ at V.50.4. Nowhere do we come across a proud mention of the animal as an offering as in the case of the soma-juice. 50. Vide chapter TV under ‘yupa’. 51. Cf. 111,28 in chapter XI. 52. For ‘pitryajna’ cf. chapter. VI. OFFERINGS IN THE SACRIFICE 119 DAKSINA : 53 The word ‘dak§ina’ is used a number of times in the Rgveda and at a number of places, it carries the sense of ‘the gift given to the priest in the sacrifice’; but it also appears that the sense of the word is evolved out of certain associations with the sacrifice. The word is used occasionally in a metaphorical sense of the ‘oblations given to the gods’ or ‘gifts given by the gods’. We can understand the process by which the ideas associated with the divinity come to be associated with the human beings with a view to elevate them in importance; thus the meaning of the word ‘dak§ina’, if associated with the divinity at an earlier stage can be understood as associated with the human beings later on. But if it is to be understood the other way, the process of deterioration with its possible causes will have to be explained and accounted for. Bloomfield, who has discussed the point at some length 54 in con¬ nection with the meaning of the word ‘daksina’ as an epithet of U$as, tries to fit in the meaning (as he prefers to call it) ‘baksheesh’ because he is attempting to point out that all the U$as hymns, which are believed to be particularly poetical by a number of scholars, 5 5 are really sacrificial in character. He ultimately wants to prove (p. 77) : “In fact, the body of the Rgveda hymns presupposes the ordinary form of the soma-sacrifice.” He has started with the idea (p. 65) “It requires at times pretty sharp sight to see and a clear head to remem¬ ber that this poetry hugs the sacrifice closely.” In between, he tries to fix up the meaning of the word ‘daksina’ as applied to U§as, saying about her (p. 69) “Ushas is the patroness of sacrifice; she is herself the sacrificial fee, because she ushers in or heralds the sacrificial day.” He does not approve of the approximate meaning as an hono¬ rific adjective of U§as as imagined by Max Muller (p. 71) nor that of A. Bergaigne, who says, “the Dawn is the gift of heaven bestowed upon pious men as recompense for their piety”, because he believes it to be, “round-about, unnecessary and un-vedic” and because he feels that A. Bergaigne “transports too many of the events in the earthly life of the Vedic Aryans to heaven.” (p. 72). It will thus be clear that his interpretation is prompted by the overall view of the Rgvedic hymns regarding their sacrificial nature that he has taken. It is therefore that he has been required to strain the meaning of the word to such an extent. If ‘daksina’ meant earlier “the baksheesh”, where would be the point in referring to the oblations as ‘daksina’ as is done at V.1.3 50 53. VMH II. 31, 99, 196. 54. RVB. pp. 69-74. 55. Among them Oldenberg (RVO p. 237) quoted on p, 72. 56. Cf. also VIII.39.5 where Agni is described as surrounded by “daksirias” (i.e. oblations—‘daksinabhirabhlvrtah’. 120 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA (ad daksina yujyate vajayanti uttanamurdhvo adhayajjuhubhih), where Agni is said to be licking the ‘daksina’ with his flames? Cer¬ tainly no one would believe that the Rgvedic poets conceived ob¬ lations also as ‘baksheesh’ to the gods. The use of the word ‘vajayanti’ (strength-giving) as adjective of ‘daksina’ is also significant. It must therefore be admitted that the original meaning of the word was not what Bloomfield imagines it to be. As the word ‘daksina’ means ‘right’, ‘daksina’ would, in the first instance, refer to ‘the right hand side’ as at 11.27.11 and X.17.9. The ladles are referred to as circling towards the right-hand side (dak- §inavrtah) at 1.144.1. A ladle is referred to as ‘daksinavat’ for the same reason at III.6.1. Whatever was thus given by the right hand, was considered as a liberal gift and so ‘daksina’ appears to have come to mean either ‘the liberal gift’ of the gods or their liberality in general. It is the rich liberality of Indra that has come to be referred to as ‘daksina maghonl’ at a number of places (11.11.21, 15.10, 16.9, 17.9, 18.9, 19.9, 20.9). The liberality of Indra is said to give many covetable gifts to the worship¬ pers at VII.27.4 (anuna asya daksina pipaya vamarh nrbhyah) or is said to yield glory at II. 18.8 (asya dak$ina duhlta). It is thus that Indra is said to be ‘daksinavan’ at III.39.6 and VI.29.3. Thus when the word came to mean liberality in general, it appears to have come to be applied to the sacrificial gift because it was also given liberally. This liberality in sacrificial gifts, apart from being referred to in a number of ‘danastutis’, is referred to in a general way at I. 168.7 (bhadra vo ratih prnato na daksina) and 1.169.4 (tvarh tu na indra tam rayirh da ojisthaya daksinayeva ratim), by a poet, where the gift of the gods is compared with the gift of the patron in respect of liberality. Indra is said to be inspiring the patrons to give rich gifts at VI.37.4 (varisfho asya dak$inamiyarti). At VI.27.8, the gift of a patron is said to be unique (dunasa). The sacrificer in general is referred to as ‘dak§inavan’ at 1.125.6, VIII.97.2, IX.98.10, X.69.8, etc. For the typical gifts of Savarnya 57 cf. X.62.9 and that of Narya, cf. VIII.24.29. On account of this idea of liberality, the resting place of the horses of Indra is also described as ‘daksinavat’ at III.53.6 (vimocanam vajino daksinavat). It is this liberality which is associated with Usas, when she is referred to ‘dak§ina’ at 1.123.1, III.58.1, VI.64.1. The rich gifts would naturally be shining gifts as indicated at VIII.24.21 and X.62.11 suryenasya yatamanaitu daksina). It is thereafter that ‘daksina’ appears to be personified and its position in the sacrifice glorified as in the case of the pressing-stones. Thus at 1.18.5, ‘daksina’ is expected to grant protection along with 57. Vide chapter VIII and chapter XII. OFFERINGS IN THE SACRIFICE 121 Soma, Indra, etc. At X.103.8, it is classed along with Indra and Soma. It is personified at III.62.3 and an entire hymn (X.107) 50 is written in glorification of ‘daksina’. At IX.71.1 (a daksina srjyate susmi asadarii veti), the daksina is said to be given first and then the soma-juice is said to be going to its place. This may indicate that sometimes the daksina was given even before the pressing of the soma-juice. It is however also possible that this just refers to some sacrificial offerings (which also are refer¬ red to as daksina as we have seen above) that are given before the pressing of the soma-juice. In this evolution of the meaning of the word daksina, we can see the evolution of the idea of sacrifice in a broad way. Regarding the way in which the offerings were received by the gods, we come across references where the gods are said to be receiv¬ ing them through Agni as well as independently. Thus Indra is said to be drinking the soma through Agni 59 , cf. III.22.1, 35.9 (agneh piba jivhaya somamindra). At V.51.2 (agneh pibata jivhaya), all the gods are said to be doing so. An intermediate stage is referred to at III.35.10 (indra piba svadhaya cit sutasyagnerva pahi jivhaya) where Indra is said to be drinking it either way. At a number of places, however, Indra is said to be drinking it independently, cf. III.40.5, III.43.5; VI.41.2 (ya te kakut sukrta ya vari$tha yaya sasvat pibasi madhva urmiih), where Indra is said to be drinking by his palate. At IX.72.2 (indrasya somam jathare yada- duhuh) and VIII.92.24, soma is said to be poured into the belly of Indra. It is said to be poured so as to spread in the body of Indra at VIII.17.5 (a te sincami kuksyoranu gatra vidhavatu). This appears to indicate only the emphasis on the anthropomor¬ phic aspect of the gods as can also be seen at 1.34.10, where Asvins are said to be drinking by their mouths and at II.1.14 (asa deva haviradanti ahutam), where all the gods are said to be drinking by their mouths. It serves the purpose of glorifying the gods concerned as being capable of independently enjoying the oblations and need not be taken to indicate any other way of offering the sacrifice except through the medium of Agni. It may be noted that if any other way of giving the offerings to the gods were held possible, the importance of Agni in the sacrifice would have dwindled down; but as that has not happened (vide 58. Vide chapter XI. 59. It may be noted that the Soma-juice must have been offered only nominally in the fire. Very possibly it is this fact which gave rise to the idea that Indra was drinking soma independently, as the huge quantities required by Indra could not be poured into the fire. 122 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA Chapter III), these references about the gods independently receiving the offerings have to be understood as metaphorical in character. It is clear that the hymns used to be recited while the sacrifice would go on. G0 As it will also be seen in a later chapter, 61 offerings ap¬ pear to be given with the recital of refrains in certain hymns (e.g. VIII. 37). The idea of reciting different portions of the hymns for different stages of the offerings, does not appear to be indicated anywhere. As indicated, however, at IX.86.32 (nayannrtasya prasljo naviyasih, etc.), soma is given the credit of giving rise to new customs; this would show that the mode of offering was being evolved. The offerings are described as inspiring the human society in different periods (IX.12.7, hinvano manusa yuga) and doing everything that is noble in character (IX.63.5, kpnvanto visvamaryam). This has apparently been said with reference to the importance of offerings in the sacrifice in view. Thus it will have been observed that the variety in the offerings indicates changes in the social sphere with varying customs of the Aryan society in different regions and times and reveals how the Aryans were gradually evolving their ideas about the sacrifice and moulding their notions regarding the different aspects of life in its relationship with the higher reality. 60. Cf. chapter II. 61. Vide chapter XI. Chapter Six THE TYPES OF THE RGVEDIC SACRIFICE SrftPTT I {RV. IX. 86.32) SYNOPSIS :— Understanding of the types rather for convenience—evolution of traditions with the sacrifice—various scholars regarding the types—Macdonell on DIk$a and Avabhrtha—types of later ritual not in existence—idea of classification belongs to an advanced stage—basis for such classification—three pre-requisites of the Rgvedic sacrifice—indications of the change in the ritual—due to offerings, other materials and mode of performance—soma, the cause of some significant innovations—other offerings and the ritual—advancing ritual— Common types performed twice or thrice a day—some small details referred to—some individual rites—Atiratra--Grhamedhiya, possibly a small rite in honour of the Maruts—Divisfi not an ordinary daily sacrifice—possibly a sort of composite sacrifice of a developed nature characterized by sumptuous gifts therein—Pitryajna— different forms or aspects thereof—designed on the pattern of the sacrifice to gods— separate fire employed for the purpose—origination on the bank of Saraswati—idea of Pitryajna—possibly the cause of the introduction of animal-offerings in the sacrifice—Purvahuti—Prayaja and Anuyaja—Pravrj— Brahmasava—Satra—Samana- bharman—Savana—Sahasrasava—Somaparva—some other rites referred to without specific designations—1.80.9—Apr! type—sacrifice of a longer duration—the animal sacrifice—arguments to indicate its late origin—conclusion. It should be noted at the outset that it is more for the convenience of understanding that we are referring to the types of the Rgvedic sacrifice in the course of this chapter. We cannot expect to come across in the hymns of the Rgveda all the elaborate classification and description of the soma and other sacrifices as in the later days, not only because the hymns were not meant for such purposes, 1 but, as indicated elsewhere, they do not appear to be earmarked specifically for any such classified celebration. But at the same time, when the system of sacrifice was evolving gradually, some traditions of per¬ formances must have come to be recognised as different from the rest by some distinctive characteristics, as can be reasonably imagined. Max Miiller, 2 commenting upon Rv.I.94.4, believes it to be a reference to the ‘darsapurnamasa’, adding “Passages like this do not necessitate the admission of a full-grown ceremonial, they only point to its natural beginnings”. Prof. Macdonell 3 and Dr. Keith, 4 followed 1. VMH. I. p. 202 2. ASL p. 259. 1 ‘J.’i 3. ERE XII. p. 610. 4. RPV. p. 312. 124 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA by Dr. Deshmukh 5 believe the ritual to be of a fairly specialized type even in the Rgveda itself. It is even believed to have degenerated to the stage of exercising compulsion on the gods in the days of the Rgveda itself by Prof. Macdonell, 0 with whom Dr. Deshmukh' apparently agrees. It may be noted that these presumptions imply the existence of a large variety of the sacrifices, which however have not been sub¬ stantiated by references from the hymns, except an attempt in the direction in a few places. 8 It is true that merely from the non-mention of the later types with their names, we cannot justifiably infer their non-existence altogether. But taking into account the general tenden¬ cies, we shall be justified in inferring that they did not exist as such and such as known to the later ritual. 9 It may be noted that the idea of classifying the ritual perform¬ ances into types belongs to a fairly advanced stage of the ritual. The classification depends upon the employment of the hymns and the offerings, the conception of the divinity and also the purpose with which the offering is made to the divinity. It also depends upon the essential view about the sacrifice, viz., whether the sacrifice is being conceived as a means towards an end or practically an end in itself. At VII.70.6 (yo vam yajno, nasatya havi?man j krtabrahma samar- yo bhavati j j ), the necessary pre-requisites of a sacrificial performance are said to be (1) the offering, (2) the hymn, and (3) the sacrificer. It is interesting to note that the sacrificing priests, though they have played an obviously significant part in the evolution of the sacrifice, are not prominently mentioned here, indicating that they had not shadowed the sacrificers by the emphasis on their own importance. If the word ‘samarya’ is understood as including the sacrificing priests along with their patrons, it would indicate the conception of joint responsibility in the sacrifice, which can be considered as a very healthy idea for the promotion of sacrifice as an institution of social importance. An indication of the change in the ritual that has been taking place from time to time, has been given in the hymns of the Rgveda (1.105.4, 7 and III.55.3). 10 In the beginning, this may be characterized by some alteration in the offerings or other materials of sacrifice or in the mode of performance. The variety of sacrificial implements, and the offerings are apparently indicative of changes that have been taking place in the ritual. 5. RVL, pp. 339-43. 6. Ibid, p. 6I4b. 7. Ibid, p. 340. cf. also DIksa and Avabhrtha in Chapter IV. pp. 86-87. 8. VMH, I. p. 259; II. 61. 9. VMH, II. p. 203, indicates difference between the earlier and later Rudra ritual. 10. cf. Chapter III under ‘V'ivedevas’. pp. 59-62. THE TYPES OF THE RGVEDIC SACRIFICE 125 Out of all the offerings, soma appears to have been instrumental in introducing new vogues in the performance as indicated at IX.86. 32 (. . . . tantum tanvanstrivrtam yatha vide ; nayannrtasya prasi§o navlyaslh. ... [j), where soma, while being employed in a threefold sacrifice (indicating the three savanas), is said to be leading to the new rules or traditions in the sacrifice. This can be realised by the growth of the idea of ‘savanas’. When soma came to be employed in a sacrificial performance, it must have been offered whenever the performance would take place, without any specification of time. It is thereafter that the idea of specific soma-pressings in honour of certain divinities came to be introduced. While the first two savanas came to be known by the time of the day they were offered, 11 the third came to be known merely as the ‘trtiya savana’, indicating the previous existence of the two savanas for a pretty long time. It will thus be observed that the ceremonial or the ritual was advancing mainly with the relationship of the offerings with the divinities in view. From the contribution of the Ftbhus to the cause of sacrifice, 12 it would be clear that the technique of performance used to change even with the change in the vessels in which the soma-juice was kept or through which it was offered. It is in this light that the epithet ‘rtasya didhitim” 3 (IX.102.1, 8) of soma appears to be quite signi¬ ficant. Sometimes, some peculiar ritual appears to have been centred round some divinity with some offering, offered consistently as indi¬ cated at 1.72.3 (tisro yadagne saradastvamit sucim ghrtena sucayah saparyan namani cid dadhire yajniyuni asudayanta tanvah sujatah|j), where Maruts, according to Sayana are said to have attained divinity by the performance of a particular type of fire-ritual for three seasons with the offering of ghrta. Thus, the prevailing idea appears to be that divinity could be attained by the continuous performance of a ritual or rendering some significant service to the cause of the sacrifice as in the case of the Rbhus. As fire helped the advancement of the system of sacrifice, it appears that a certain mode of kindling fire, resorted to in earlier days, came to be hallowed with certain significance, though in later days, apparently other modes of kindling fire had come to be em¬ ployed. It is thus that Agni is said to be kindled according to the earlier rites at III.17.1 (prathama dharma anu samidhyamanah) and the rest of the ritual is also said to be proceeded with similarly along the line of the ancient rules, so that it may become acceptable to the 11. Pratahsava and Madhyandina savana (cf. Chapter V). 12. Vide Bharatiya Vidya, Vol. XII, 1951 (pp. 163-171); also Chapter III, p. 57. 13. meaning ‘one who urges on the thought of sacrifice’. 12fi SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA gods (cf. III.17.5, tasyanu dharma prayaja cikitvo’tha no dha adhvaram devavitau). The advancement of the sacrifice, the prosperity it brought, the popularity it enjoyed and its progressive nature that could not be followed by some, who had to lag behind are referred to at X.44.6 (prthak prayan prathama devahutayo’krnvata sravasyani dustara| na ye sekuryajniyarh navamaruhamirmaiva te nyavisanta kepayah ji), where metaphorically such people are said to be incapable of mount¬ ing the boat of sacrifice and consequently sitting or sinking down. Common types of sacrificial performances appear to be those, that are referred to as performed twice or thrice a day. They are not always connected with the soma offerings and so their origin seems to be the same as that of the savanas, viz., the typical positions of the sun during the day-time. This is made clear at VII.41.4 (uta prapitve uta madhye anhamutodita maghavan suryasya). Thus Agni is said to be kindled in the morning and the evening for the purposes of the sacrifice, as he is referred to as ‘svadhvara’ at II.2.8 (sa idhana usaso ramya anu. . . .svadhvarah; cf. also IV.2.8, 12.2; VII.3.5, 15.8; VIII.25.21; X. 39.1, 40.4, 5). The morning rite alone is referred to at V.64.7. Morning libation to Asvins is indicated at V.75.9, where the fire is said to be kindled at the break of the dawn for their worship. At times, three daily sacrificial rites are referred to. They appear to be different from the savanas and mainly associated with Agni. Thus at II. 18.2 (sasma aram prathamam sa dvitiyamuto tftlyam manusah sa hota), where the offerings put in fire are referred to. In the Apri ritual, the threefold rite is referred to at III.4.2. cf. IV. 12.1, 15.2 (yati agni rathlriva), where the predominance of Agni is indicated by his comparison with a charioteer; and also VII.11.3, VIII.27.19-21, 72.9; IX.86.18. It is thus with a particular type of sacrificial rite in view that the poet of VIII.84.5 asks ‘dasema kasya manasa yajnasya sahaso yaho | kadu voca idam namah ||\ It appears that certain broad details of a performance were in the view of the person and he was free to add others of his own so as to make it more efficacious. Thus this may indicate a stage where certain rituals had come to be distinguished without all the details regarding the hymn to be em¬ ployed and hence the poet could use his new hymn as indicated in c. Certain performances appear to have been associated with efficacy and hence are sought to be performed repeatedly for the purpose as indicated at VIII.13.14 (tantum tanusva purvyam yatha vide) and at 1.110.1 (tatam me apastadu tayate punah). A few details in the course of the performances have been refer¬ red to occasionally. Thus the priests are said to be invoking the THE TYPES OF THE RGVEDIC SACRIFICE 127 divinities with bent knees at (III.59.3; VI.1.6, 32.3; VII.82.4, 95.4, ‘mitajnubhirnamasyaih iyana). Similarly the priests are said to be drinking the soma juice. This does not appear to be the soma juice remaining after its being offered in the sacrifice, as at no place, it is referred to as such. On the contrary, it is said that the hymns are composed or the gods are invoked under the inspiration of soma. Thus the Kanvas are said to be so composing their hymns at VIII. 32.1 and 33.4 (made somasya vocata); a poet is said to be so invoking the divinities (1.119.9, made somasya ausijo huvanyati). The priest is said to be first drinking in quiet (X.83.7. . . .upamsu prathama pibava). It was drunk in ample quantities as indicated at X.167.3 (kalasan abhaksayam) and is said to be making the drinker look brighter (VIII.48.6, agnim na marh mathitarh sandidlpah j). It is this soma juice that is drunk, that has been referred to as addressed for welfare. (1.179.5, somam. .. .hrtsu pitam upabruve; VIII.48.4, sarh no bhava hrda apita indo; 48.5; and 96.21, where Indra is compared with the soma so drunk — ‘somo na plto havyah’) 14 Besides these general ritual performances once, twice or thrice a day as referred to above, there appear to be some specifically designated performances, some of which are associated with certain divinities though we do not get much information about their ritual character, ATIRATRA : 16 It is mentioned only once in the Rgveda and is apparently a type of soma-sacrifice, though we cannot exactly say how far it was the same as the later variety of that name discussed in the Brahmanas. The frogs are compared with the brahmins at the ‘atiratra’ sacrifice (cf. VII.103.7, 16 brahmanaso atiratre na some saro no purnamabhito vadantah). The comparison indicates that during the rite the soma vessel was kept full of the juice and the brahmins used to recite mantras sitting round it during the night. The soma offered here, does not appear to have any connection with the tiroanhya variety (vide Chapter V), though that would explain the name of the rite. The rite appears to be performed very rarely, possibly once a year, as the frogs are said to be sitting accordingly on that unique day of the year (VII.103.7cd, samvatsarasya tadahah paristha yanmandu- kah pravrslnarh babhuva i). It appears to be customary to compose a hymn specifically for the occasion as indicated at VII.103.8b (brahma krnvantah parivatsannam). 14. cf. Vel. B.U.J., Vol. XVI, p. 14, 1947. 15. VMH, Vol. II, 233; Vol. Ill, 216, 298, 395. 16. cf. also the comments on hymn in Chapter XI. 128 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA GRHAMEDHIYA : 17 It is referred to only once in the Rgveda at VII.56.14 (sahasri- yam damyarii bhagametam grhamedhlyam maruto jusadhvam), where the Maruts are asked to accept the grhamedhiya. It is said to be a household (damyam) and thousandth (sahasriyam) part, indicating perhaps the existence of a bigger rite of that name. As the word “medha” indicates sacrifice (cf. 1.77.3, 177.4; VIII.50.10, etc.), ‘grhamedhiya’ appears to refer to a sacrificial rite, associated with the Maruts as they are referred to as ‘grhamedhasah’ at VII. 59.10. It is possible however that the word may stand for a peculiar offering of that name given to the Maruts. DIVISTI: It has been construed as a general ordinary daily sacrifice by Max Muller. 18 The word occurs nearly a dozen times in the Rgveda. It should be noted that the word has been always used in the plural and particularly the form ‘divistisu’ occurs at all the places except one (VII.74.1) where the form ‘divi§tayah’ is used. At 1.45.7, 141.6 and IV.9.3 (‘sa sadma pariniyate hota mandro divistisu), Agni is said to be chosen or acting as the ‘hotr’ priest at the divisti rites. Usas is said to be shining at the divistis at 1.48.9 (vyucchantl divistisu). Chariot-steeds of Asvins are said to be yoked at the divistis (1.139.4). Divi§tis are said to be invoking Asvins at VII.74.1. At a number of places, soma is said to be offered at the divistis (1.86.4, sutah somo divistisu; IV.46.1, 47.1; VIII.76.9). If they are ordinary sacrifices, why should they be said to be invoking Asvins as at VII.74.1? Besides yajna is distinguished from the divistis at VIII.87.3 (vartir- yatamupa vrktabarhiso ju§tarh yajnam divistsu), where Asvins are said to be coming to the sacrifice among the ‘divistis’. Divisti there¬ fore may have been a sort of composite sacrifice of the Visvedeva type (Chapters III and XI), where offerings were given to different divinities like Asvins, Indra and Vayu. The choice of a specific hotr priest for the purpose, the pressing of the soma juice and sacrifice forming a part of it, all indicate that the word stands for some longer performance consisting of smaller rites. This is further supported by the fact that specific attractive gifts are said to be given at the divistis. cf. VIII.4.19 (. . . . sthurarh radhah satasvam), where the king Kurunga is said to have given a sumptuous gift of a hundred horses at the divistis. This can in no way be construed with the daily ordinary sacrifices. PITRYAJftA : Some different rites, distinguished on the basis of the offerings as also the classes of the Pitrs to whom the offerings are made, have 17. Geldner: Vol. II, p. 231, F.N. 18. SBE XXXII; Grassmann: ‘devotion or prayer’; Geldner, ‘Morgen opfern. THE TYPES OF THE RGVEDIC SACRIFICE 129 been referred to at X. 154.1 (soma ekebhyah pavate, gh^tameka upSsate | yebhyo madhu pradhavati tansciddevapi gacchatat ||). It appears from this passage that the idea of the Pitr-worship was prompted by that of the divinity-worship and hence followed its pattern. Thus the three classes among the Pitrs 19 appear to be arrived at on the basis of the corresponding classes 20 among the gods, Indra, Varuna and Asvina, who appear to be characteristically associated with the offerings of soma, ghrta and madhu respectively. It is on the basis of such a distinction, that, separate seats are said to be earmarked for the Pitrs, where they are expected to sit in the Pitryajna. Thus at X.15.11 (agni$vattah pitara eha gacchata sadahsadah sadata supranitayah), the Pitrs 21 are invoked to come and occupy their respective seats. To distinguish the Pitryajna from an ordinary divinity-worship, it appears that a certain fire that is to be employed for the special offerings is referred to at X.16.10, (yo agnih kravyat pravivesa vo grham, imam pasyannitaram jatavedasaih j tarn harami pitryajnaya jj), where the usual fire is separately marked (itararh. . . .). This fire for the Pitryajna is sought to be sublimated by the offerings of the gods also being placed in it (v.ll, devebhyah pitrbhya a). Agni is said to be knowing all the Pitrs whether known to the worshipper or not (X.15.3, aham pitrn suvidatran avitsi), just in the same way as he knows the gods (yatha devanarii janimani veda). This Pitj'-worship appears to have originated on the banks of the river Saraswati, where the divinity-worship too has prospered as can be noticed from the reference to the river 22 particularly in the Apri hymns. Just as the ordinary sacrifices invoke Saraswati (X.17.7, saraswatim devayanto havante), Pitrs are said to be invoking her (X.17.9, saraswatim yam pitaro havante). On account of the previous association of the Aryans with the river Saraswati, during their lifetime they come to be associated with the river even after their departure, when their worship came to be introduced in that region. It is thus that Saraswati is said to be delighted in the com¬ pany of the Pitrs (X.17.8, devi pitrbhirmadanti). It would be interesting to note how the idea of Pitryajna origi¬ nated, though it came to be fashioned after the pattern of the divinity-worship. While thinking of the various patterns of the sacrifice, some persons must have been naturally attracted to think of the pheno- 19. cf. Sayana on the passage: ‘esam gotrajah samani brahma yajnasamaye’dhiyate, esarh putradayo yajurhsi brahmayajnakale’dhiyate, ya atharvanan mantran brahmayajnarthamadhiyate 20. vide Chapter III. 21. name of a class very possibly as Sayana suggests. 22. cf. Saraswati in Chap IV and AHR. s.n.—o 130 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA menon of death just in the same way as they were led to think about the problem of life, 23 the two being as inseparable from each other as the night and the day. Both the problems appear to have come to be looked upon from the point of view of sacrifice. It appears, however, that some old ideas and impressions did prevail in the minds of the people as against the new thought in terms of sacrifice. Thus in the funeral hymns of the tenth Mandala (X.14-18), we find a mixture of the old impressions of fear and the new outlook of sacrifice brought to bear upon the problem of death. It is thus that the idea of Pitryajna referred to in X.16.10, appears to have origi¬ nated. The old idea of death as caused by some dreadful agency, which was to be guarded against, is sought to be squared with the new idea of death almost as a sacrifice, performed by the human beings. Thus talking about the first of the departed beings — Yama — who has been given a place among the gods and consequently a worship of the same pattern (cf. X.14.13-16, association with soma ghrta, yajna and havis), it is said that he was the first to offer his body to death. It is almost said to be an offering in the sacrifice that he undertook to perform in the interests of the people at X.13.4 (priyam yamastanvam prarirecit), as he is said to have preferred death to immortality (X.13.4ab, devebhyah kamavrnita mrtyum prajayai kamamrtam navrnita) and as if to show the agreement between the precept and practice, subjected himself to be the first to undergo that ordeal. The death is thus being looked upon almost as a sacrifice and in this idealised and glorified category, the departed souls are being thought of. 24 It was then natural that the pitrs should come to be looked upon as almost the divine beings, being nearer to Yama. It is then, with a desire to offer them worship, that the idea of the Pitryajna was introduced. A goat is referred to in connection with the fire kindled for the pitr-worship (X.16.4, ajo bhagastapasa tam tapasva). As we have observed above, 25 excepting the Asvamedha hymn, a goat is men¬ tioned as an offering only here. As people must have been flesh- eaters, offering of the flesh was considered desirable for the worship of the departed ones, who were accustomed to eat it. It is possibly thereafter that the animal offerings came to be introduced in the sacrifices as well. This will reasonably explain the absence of the mention of the animal-offerings in the worship of the other divinities in the hymns of the Rgveda generally. 23. vide my article on “the sacrificial setting of the philosophical hymns in the Rgveda (BV. XII, 1952). 24. cf. X. 135, where corresponding to the hymns and the dak$ma in the sacrifice, the hymns (v.7, glrbhih pariskrtah) and the gifts (v.6, anudeyi) are referred to in the Pitr worship. 25. vide Chapter V under ‘animal offerings’. THE 'TYPES OF THE RGVEDIC SACRIFICE 131 PURVAHUTI : It appears to be a rite performed in honour of Usas in the beginning, as the goddess is characteristically associated with it. Thus at VI.64.5 (tvam divo duhitaryaha devi purvahutau manhana darsata bhuh), Usas and because of her, Usasanakta at 1.122.2 and VII.39.2, are associated with the rite. It is interesting to note that with other worshippers, their desired divinities came to be associated with the rite as indicated at X.113.7 (indro manha purvahutavapat- yata), where Indra is said to have lorded the rite by his strength. It is for this reason that the worshippers of Usas are referring to her as the first among the other gods in the Purvahuti (1.123.2, ucca vyakhyad yuvatih punarbhurosa agan prathama purvahutau). It is perhaps on account of such a conflict that the rite appears to have been made common to all the divinities as indicated at VII.35.5, where all the gods are associated with the rite. PRAYAJA AND ANUYAJA : In the two hymns, 26 where the Prayajas and the Anuyajas are referred to, they appear to be the offerings or the rites characterizing the offerings. Thus they are said to be the powerful portions of the oblations (urjasvanto havisah santu bhagah, v.9) or rites at X.132.2, (narasamso no avatu prayaje sarh no astvanuyajo have$u) where they are said to be a part of the invocation. They are associated with fire in both the passages. At X.51.8 (prayajanme anuyajansca kevala- nurjasvanto havi?o datta bhagam) where Agni is supposed to have demanded them, the offering referred to as required is said to be ‘ghrta’ (X.51.8c). In fact, X.51.9, continuing to say that after the Prayaja and Anuyaja are offered to Agni, the whole sacrifice will belong to Agni (tavagne yajnoyamastu sarvah) seems to indicate that the Prayaja and Anuyaja were just the former and the latter portions of the sacrifice, they together helping the completion of the sacrificial performance. There is no trace of the association of the rites with the soma sacrifice, much less an animal sacrifice as indi¬ cated by the Brahmanas. 27 PRAVRJ : 23 The word is used only once in the Rgveda in the sense of a sacrificial rite, performed in the course of another performance indi¬ cated by a Danastuti (V.30.15, gharmascittaptah 29 pravrje ya asidayasmayastamu adaya viprah). In this rite, the vessel of milk was heated and it would seem that the vessel was given as a gift to 26. X. 51.8, 9; X. 182.2. 27. AHR. 1946 and comments on “Aprl group” of hymns in Chapter XI. 28. Geldner, Vol. II. p. 28. 29. For gharma as a vessel, cf. Chapter IV; and gharma as offering—cf. Chapter V. 132 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA the priest. As remarked above, this ‘pravrj’ may be similar to the ‘pravargya’ of the later days in respect of the offering of the heated mill?. The word appears to be used with derivative sense in view as would be indicated by two other words which are derived from the root pra+vrj. cf. VIII.4.6 ‘putram pravargarh krnute’; VIII.22.18, ‘supravargam suviryarh susthu varyamanadhr$tam raksasvina j. In both these words ‘pravarga’ and supravarga’, the idea of scattering (of rivals) is present. It is therefore possible that in the Pravrj rite, it was customary to scatter the heated milk during the course of offering. It however appears that the name Pravrj was not commonly known in the days of the Rgveda. Because, whereas the gharma offering and the gharma vessel are referred to pretty frequently, the name pravrj is not associated with them. As remarked in Chapter V, the gharma offering appears to be given predominantly to Asvins and possibly with the scattering of this offering in view, even the hymns are said to be scattered like the barhis grass or more significantly like clouds scattered by the wind (1.116.1, nasatyabhyarh barhiriva pravrnje stoman iyarmyabhriyeva vatah [). The same is indicated also at VII. 103.9d (tapta gharma asnuvate visargarh). It may be noted that the sequence of the mention of ‘pravrj’ in v.30 (in the last verse of the hymn), would indicate that in the days of the Rgveda, it was not performed in the beginning of the bigger ritual of which it formed a part. BRAHMA-SAVA : The word is used at IX.67.24 (yatte pavitramarcivadagne tena punihi nah | brahmasavaih punlhi nah ||). In the previous stanza (v.23) ‘brahma’ is said to be purified. So the word ‘brahma-sava’ may refer to certain offerings or preferably rites accompanied by those purified hymns. SATRA: The word is used only once in the Rgveda (VII.33.13) in the sense of a particular soma-sacrifice as indicated by v.14, where the priest with the pressing-stone is referred to (gravanarh bibhrat). It is not clear whether it necessarily refers to a long sacrificial session as Geldner 30 believes even though it occurs in a hymn known to be late in its origin. SAMANA BHARMAN: It is referred to at VIII.2.8 (trayah kosasascotanti tisrascamvalj supurnah | samane adhi bharman). As Geldner and Prof. Ve lank ar 30. Der Rgveda, Vol. Ill, p. 56. THE TYPES OF THE RGVEDIC SACRIFICE 133 say, 31 it is different from the savanas. It appears however to be a rite, so designated on account of the same number of ‘kosas’ and ‘camus’ used in it. The propriety of using three kosas is indicated in v.9 (sucirasi purunihsthah ksirairmadhyata asirtah j dadhna mandisthah surasya ij), where they are said to be required for storing (1) the pure soma-juice, (2) the juice mixed with milk, (3) and that mixed with curds. It may be noted that the word ‘kosa’ is used in a number of places in the Rgveda (1.112.11.etc., vide Chapter IV) in the sense of a vessel for storing the soma-juice. In the plural, the word is used with Maruts at 1.87.2. Soma is said to be flowing to the kosas at IX.86.20; 88.6. Three kosas are referred to with Parjanya at VII.101.4. The word camu (vide Chapter IV) is used in plural almost as frequently as in dual but is qualified by ‘tisrah’ (three) only here. It is also noteworthy that three kosas and three camus together have been mentioned only here, indicating that such an association is quite unusual. It is therefore possible to imagine that the word refers to a rite of that name. SAVANA: For ‘savanas’ as special rites performed in honour of certain divinities only cf. Chapter V. SAHASRASAVA : 32 The word is used twice 33 in the Rgveda. Sayana construes the word as ‘the Aivamedha’ at III.53.7 and as ‘the rainy season’ at VII.103.10. As the word ‘sava’ is used in the sense of ‘the pressed soma-juice’ at X.49.7 (yanma savo manusa aha), where Indra is indi¬ cating how he responds to the soma-pressing of men promptly, the word cannot mean what Sayana takes it to be. It is interesting to note that the word is used almost in identical passage in the Visvami- tra and the Vasi?tha mandalas. The phenomenon of the repetition of w.7-11 in the Apri hymns of the two mandalas is more interesting and very possibly is attributable to the association of the two families with the Bharatas. 34 It is possible therefore that ‘the sahasrasava’ is a peculiar soma- rite, that both the families officiated at, as the family-priests of the Bharatas. 35 31. Geldner, Vol. II, p. 282 and Velankar (B.U.J. XIV) 1945, p. 10, F.N., 'the self-same offering’ as distinguished from Savanas. 32. Velankar B.U.J. 1935. Geldner, Vol. I, p. 393 and II, p. 273. 33. III.53.7; VII.103.10. 34. Vide AHR, B.U.J., 1946. 35. Vide Chapter XI on VII..103 and ‘somaparva’ below. 134 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA SOMA-PARVAN : 36 Soma-parvans are referred to only once in the Rgveda (cf. 1.9.1, ‘indra ehi matsyandhaso visvebhih soma-parvabhih’)- At all the ‘soma- parvans’, Indra is said to be receiving the soma-juice. This would indicate that it was a special rite with soma-juice, exclusively in honour of Indra like the ‘madhyandina savana’ (vide Chapter V). Similarly the ‘parvans’ of Agni worship have been referred to at 1.94.4 (bharamedhmam krnavama havimsi te, citayantah parvana parvana vayam), where, according to Max Muller, 37 the Darsapurna- masa sacrifice is referred to. ‘Parvan’ must have indicated a portion of time as indicated by the various scholars, referred to above. How¬ ever as soma was pressed almost daily, there would not be much point in taking the word to refer to merely the ‘days’; it would rather refer to the ‘rites’ performed on those days. Very possibly ‘parvan’ indicates the idea of a part of a longer sacrifice, where a number of such ‘parvans’ would complete a longer sacrificial per¬ formance 38 like the Sahasrasava. It is also possible that the ‘parva’ refers to the different portions of the day, when specifically soma rites associated with the Indra-worship are referred to as ‘soma- parvans’. Thus it would appear that the idea of periodical rites in honour of some specific divinities had already come into existence. Besides these specifically designated rites, there appear to be some others without designations which had some special ritual associated with them. (1) Thus, one such rite appears to be referred to at I.80.9 39 (sahasram sakamarcata, paristobhata vimsatih | satamenamanvano- navuh—indraya brahma udyatam||). It was perhaps a form of group worship, where a thousand people would participate; twenty of them would stand around and praise, with a hundred persons repeating what they recited. Such a loudly uttered praise appears to rise (more easily) to Indra. For the idea of the hymns spoken loudly so that they may be accepted, cf. 1.75.1 (vacah saprathas- tamarh). (2) AprI Type: 40 The Apri hymns appear to have in view a sort of family-ritual centred round Agni, where all the deities were used to be worshipped. As the same order of references is followed in all the Apri hymns (though with sufficient freedom of expression) and as the families appear to be very particular about an Apri hymn of their own, the 36. Geldner, Grassmann and Velankar (B.U.J. XVII 1948) construe as ‘festive days when soma is offered.’ 37. ASL, p. 259. 38. cf. VII 103.5 ‘sarvam tadesam samrdheva parva, yat suvaco vadathana adhyapsu’ where the idea of the completion of a whole by parts is indicated. 39. B.U.J. Vol. XVIII 1949: Prof. Velankar understands them to be the hymns. 40. For details cf. AHR, B.U.J. 1946, Section XIII, pp. 49-51. THE TYPES OF THE RGVEDIC SACRIFICE 10.5 ritual association is quite obvious. The hymns were apparently composed for a type of family rite though the name is nowhere referred to in the hymns of the Rgveda. ;i (3) At V. 45.7, (archan yena dasamaso navagvah) and V.45.11 (yayataran dasa maso navagvah), the navagvas are said to have worshipped for ten months. It appears to be a longer soma-ritual indicated by a reference to a pressing-stone. 4? It would appear that when soma had become quite a common offering, so that in small quantities, it was pressed every day (cf. IX.75.4, madhordhara pinvamana dive dive, also IX.101.6, 107.19), some people must have thought of offering soma continuously, result¬ ing in such longer sacrifices. It should however be noted that, it has not come to be given a specific name, because the ritual asso¬ ciated with it, had not apparently become complicated. (4) It can be understood that when such continuous offerings were undertaken, some people must have occasionally failed in the performances on account of certain difficulties. Such people then would come to be ridiculed by others and hence a poet, in the very beginning of his composition, is giving an assurance that he would not abandon the performance once undertaken (cf. V.46.1, hayo na vidvan ayuji svayam dhuri tam vahami prataranimavasyuvam j nasya vasmi vimucam navrtarh punarvidvan pathah pura eta rju nesati jj), where by means of a metaphor, the poet indicates how he has volun¬ tarily got himself yoked to the chariot of sacrifice, from which he neither wants to turn back nor to be released. In the remaining portion of the hymn, more than thirty divinities have been referred to. This would indicate that the ritual of the hymn was centred round the Visvadevas 43 and hence had become somewhat difficult to carry out. It is quite possible that when the conception of all the gods to be worshipped together, was introduced in the growing system of sacrifice, the ritual adopted for the purpose must have been one which could be acceptable to all the divinities and their devotees. So by a combination of some select details from other modes of worship, the Viivedeva ritual must have been framed and as such it must have become a type by itself. ANIMAL SACRIFICE : Varying views regarding the prevalence of the animal sacrifice in the Rgveda have been referred to. 44 No satisfactory explanation has been given about its prevalence at an earlier date. 41. cf. Chapters XI and XIV below and AHR B.U.J. 1945-46 42. Vide Navagvas and Dasagvas in Chapter VII. 43. cf. Visvedeva type in Chapter XI. 44. Chapter I. pp. 5-8: Chapter V; ERE XII. p. 610; RPV, p. 13; ABI. SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA 186 As suggested above, 45 very possibly the idea of offering the animal flesh as an offering came into existence after the introduction of the Pitr-yajna. This conjecture appears to be supported on various other grounds as well. (a) We have noted in Chapter IV, how references to the ‘tying post’ in the sacrificial set-up, are pretty rare. When other equip¬ ment of the sacrificial set-up, has been more frequently referred to (vide Chapter IV), there is no reason why the ‘post was not so refer¬ red to, if it was commonly associated with the place and mode of the sacrifice. (b) In the hymns, composed for the propitiation of the divinity, the offerings of ghrta and soma are very conspicuously referred to as brought or offered by the sacrificers. We do not however come across any such reference to the ‘pasu’ or the beast of the sacrifice, 46 which should have occurred if the beasts were so commonly offered in the sacrifice. (c) As the Apri hymns have been forcibly employed in the Prayaja offerings of an animal sacrifice 47 by the Brahmanas, it becomes clear that the Brahmanas could not find any other hymns which were traditionally associated with an animal-sacrifice. Thus it would be clear that when even the Brahmanas have no tradition of association of hymns with an animal-sacrifice, it is not possible to infer that the animal-sacrifice was widely prevalent in the days of the Rgveda. (d) Even if the process of preparation of the different obla¬ tions is taken into account, it can be realised that the process of preparing an animal offering would be a much more complicated and elaborate one. Just as the preparation of soma is described in details and also referred to in the similes (vide Chapter XII), no such reference to the animal-offering occurs in the hymns of the Rgveda. (e) In Chapter III, we have observed how the gods come to be given epithets on the basis of offerings made to them frequently. If the animal sacrifice were prevalent, corresponding epithets would have occurred pretty frequently in the same manner. (f) Purity in sacrifice, with cleanliness of materials and purity of offerings have been occasionally stressed and hence animal sacri¬ fice cannot be imagined to have been in existence at least when the essential conceptions regarding the sacrifice came to be evolved. 45. Chapter V. p. 118. 46. Ibid. 47. AHR B.U.J. 1945-46. THE TYPES OF THE RGVEDIC SACRIFICE 18? (g) The association of soma and the animal-sacrifice in the Br&hmanas appears to have led various scholars to believe in the existence of animal sacrifice in the Rgveda as the soma-offering was common. If there was any such association in the days of the Rgveda, it would have been referred to at least occasionally in the soma hymns of the ninth mandala. It is further supported by its non¬ mention in III.28 (vide comments in Chapter XI), where it would certainly have been referred to if it were in existence. Thus it will be observed that though some forms of performance have come to be distinguished from others, it appears to be more or less a distinction in the traditions at different places and times. Even when longer performances are referred to, they do not appear to be either characterized or distinguished from each other by any elaborate ritual. Chapter Seven THE ROLE OF THE PRIESTS IN THE SACRIFICE 3TTOr ^ffcT qTT: qpr amrTHJIT: I (RV IV. 2.14) stt^ q-jf wim tmnr: i (rv x. 101.2) cl ^mr # TOPT^T Riff: I (RV X. 148.3) SYNOPSIS :— Poets as thinkers—shaping the sacrifice through hymns—balance in the relative position of gods, patrons and the priests—mention of vipra-rajya discussed —also VIII.6.3—cause of sacrifice the aim of their life—intelligent service—the words brahmana and ksatriya— Evolution of the class in general—priests not a class of magicians—not shaping the ritual for their predominance—words indicating priests—family tradition giving impetus to sacrifice—tradition of the worship of certain divinities—no unbroken tradition even about the authorship—families and individual members described —duties of different priests not clearly mentioned—view about professional priests— officiating priests with their duties—Hotr—offerings mentioned after him—his duties—choice of adhvaryu—transition to the two-priests-stage—soma sacrfice, the reason for his introduction—udgatr—different designations indicating later in¬ troduction in the sacrifice—brahman—purohita—idea underlying—potr, prasastr etc. —stages through which the different offices developed— The poets of the Rgvedic hymns were essentially the thinkers 1 of the time, who attempted to evolve ideas of social, religious and philosophical importance for the well-being, growth and emanci¬ pation of the Aryan society in general. Hymns became the means of the expression of these ideas, a practical application of which was sought to be worked out by the system of sacrifice. Howsoever the sacrifice may have originated, it was found to be a good means of experimenting with ideas of a varied nature. If the sacrifice was meant for the propitiation of the gods, 2 the hymns were looked upon as an important means for such propitiation and as such, it was entirely in the hands of the priests to tone up the hymns and through them to shape the sacrifice as they desired. An indication of this aspect of their role is given in X.78.1, (vipraso na manmabhih svadhyah), where Maruts are compared with them for their well- thought-out hymns. When the priest-poets thus started evolving the idea and practice of the sacrifice, they had to define their position in relation 1. cf. "xtUT 2. ‘Yajno devanam pratyeti sumnam’ etc. in Chapter III. 138 THE ROLE OF THE PRIESTS IN THE SACRIFICE 189 to the divinities towards whom the sacrifices were directed, the patrons who supported their sacrificial activities and also the actual performances that they would undertake. As long as a proper balance in this triple relationship was maintained, the system of sacrifice developed on proper lines, in its turn, helping the cause of general social progress. It is for this reason that we find the social structure standing well-balanced with proper importance attached to all the prevalent sections. With the mechanisation of the idea of sacrifice however, the balance was disturbed and conse¬ quently the form of social structure also changed. We have therefore got to appreciate the way in which the authors of the Rgvedic hymns looked upon and cultivated the notions of this threefold relationship, as the same will indicate the nature of the sacrifice they were trying to evolve. The discussion in Chapter III, has indicated the w'ay in which, they have attempted to evolve their ideas about the divinity and the divine worship. Though the divinities were conceived mainly for the purposes of rendering help to human beings and the sacrifice, for the sake of divine propitiation, both the ideas were being pro¬ gressively evolved. The divinities have not deteriorated merely into agencies for rendering help nor has sacrifice attained the form of merely a means of ensuring or buying the divine assistance. This has been achieved mainly by the way in which they developed the idea of their relationship with the divinities. An illustration would clarify the point. Among the divinities, Agni has got functions very much akin to those of the human priests and hence gets epithets like hotr, purohita, etc. It is hence that the priests could have glorified themselves to the position of Agni or brought down Agni to their level as far as the sacrifice was concerned. But we find that, in the hymns of the Rgveda, the importance of Agni as a divinity has never dwindled; nor have the priests been glorified beyond any reasonable proportions. At VIII.3.4 (satyah so asya mahima grne savo yajnesu vipra-rajye [), sacrifices are referred to as the kingdom of the priests. It merely seems to have been done with a view to emphasize the importance of the sacrifice that the priests are under¬ taking for the sake of their patrons, whom they are praising in the hymn. It may also be due to the idea of emphasizing their supe¬ riority over other priests. But the general tone of VIII.3, which stresses the importance of Indra on the one hand and the patrons on the other also indicates that the Kanva poet, howsoever self- conscious he may be, is not seeking to subordinate the gods and the patrons as far as the sacrificial performances are concerned. This may possibly have been a family-trait of the Kanvas, as the author of VIII.6 has expressed the notion of Indra being the means of sacrifice (v.3, kanva indram yadakrata stomairyajnasya sadhanam). 140 SACRIFICE IN THE FtGVEDA This also does not appear to be meant to be taken literally as the same poet refers further on to the fact that it is Indra, who has promoted the sacrifice under his leadership fVIII.6.22, tavedindra pranitisu yajno vitantasayyah |). Thus it may be noted that while the priest-poets have become progressively conscious of their significant contribution to the cause of sacrifice, they have not been blind to the importance of the other agencies instrumental in the growth of the sacrifice and hence have maintained their role of the followers of the system, which they aspired to develop. Thus a poet observes at VII.61.6 (samu varh yajnarn mahayam namobhih)) that he desired to exalt the sacrifice meant for the divinities. The priests appear to be glad at the thought that they could render priestly service in the sacrifice (VII.60.12. .. . purohitiryuvabhyam yajnesu mitravaruna akari|) and that the gods accepted their service (VII.83.7, satya nrnamadmasadamupastutir deva esamabhavan devahuti§u I). They consider the service as almost an aim of their life as indicated at X.28.12 (ete samibhih susami abhiivan, ye hinvire tanvah soma ukthaih) and at IV.2.19 (akarma te svapaso abhuma), where the poet refers to the act of sacrifice as giving the credit of a good deed done to those who participated in the performance. The poets appear to be delighted that they were following the path of sacrifice (X.66.13, rtasya panthamanvemi sadhuya). Some of them even aspired to convert the hostile sections to the cause of sacrifice (VII.64.3, bravad yatha na adarih sudase | i§a madema saha devagopah jj). At IV.2.14 (ratham na kranto apasa bhurijorrtarh yemuh sudhya asu?anah j), their work is com¬ pared with the carving of a chariot and for which they have been complimented as intelligent (sudhyah). It is this intelligent service that came to be emulated and made a poet express a desire that he should be one of those who offered the soma-worship, (X. 148.3, te syama ye ranayanta somaih j). Regarding their attitude towards the patrons, it will be pointed out in Chapter VIII as to how the patrons looked upon the priests as indispensable for the purposes of sacrifice. Just as the priests came to be compared with Agni in respect of the similarity of certain functions in the sacrifice, (cf. the epithets purohita and hotr), so too the patrons came to be compared with Indra in respect of his liberal gifts (cf. maghavan) and glory (cf. suri) in the sacrifice. It is for this reason that the author of 11.27, prayed that he should never be in want of a liberal patron (vide Chapter VIII). It is well known that those who composed the hymns and offi¬ ciated at the sacrificial performances developed into a class of brahmins at the end of the Rgveda period (X.90.12). In the Rgveda, the word ‘brahmana’ appears to be used in the sense of a composer THE ROLE OF THE PRIESTS IN THE SACRIFICE 141 of the hymns (1.164.45, catvari vak parimita padani tani vidurbrah- maija ye mani§inah |) or one who officiates at the rites (1.15.5; II.36.5; VI.75.10; VII.103.1, 7, 8, where the words ‘sominah’ and ‘vratacarinah’ indicate it; VIII.58.1, ‘yo anucano brahmano yukta asit, kasvit tatra yajamanasya samvit, where the choice of a ‘brahmana’ for a rite is referred to; cf. also X.71.8, 9, 88.19, etc.). The association with ‘yajamana’ at VIII.58.1 would indicate that the relationship has grown out of the functions at the sacrificial rite. It should be noted in this connection that the word ‘k$atriya’ is used in the general sense of ruler over a certain region and not in the sense of a caste as such. (cf. IV. 12.3, 42.1; V.69.1; X.109.3). For the same reason, the gods are referred to as ‘ksatriyas’ at VII. 64.2; VIII.25.8 (mitravaruna); VIII.67.1 (adityas) and X.66.8. It is to be noted that, when the classes as such came to be distinguished, the term ‘rajanya’ came to be employed (X.90.12). The word ‘rajanya’ is not used elsewhere in the Rgveda, though the word ‘rajan’ is used in contradistinction to ‘brahman’ at 1.108.7 (yad brahmani rajani va), indicating that the class-distinction was not still prominent in the days of the Rgveda. It appears that the reference to one of the brothers being the ruler and another officiating at the rite (X.98) can be best explained by assuming that one could take up a profession according to one’s choice and aptitude. It is true that we see the phenomenon of the priestly work being carried by family tradition but that is no sure or safe ground for presuming the establishment of caste distinction. In fact, it can be said that as long as the sacrifice was not well- developed, the class-distinction did not become so rigid. It is there¬ fore we find that the sacrifice, which gave rise to these classes had fostered healthy relations between the classes during the early period of its development, when both of them were conscious of evolving it as a healthy social institution. It is during this period that mutual help characterized their work as it becomes evident from the way in which they pray to the gods for prosperity (vide Chapter VIII). Varying views have been held regarding the origin and the growth of the class of the priests. It appears that they have been based on the general idea about sacrifice that came to be held. Thus Prof. Macdonell, who believed the sacrifice to be saturated with magic, observes 3 “Even in the period of the Rgveda, there already existed a priestly class, qualified by special knowledge and magical qualities to act for others in difficult and dangerous inter¬ course of men with gods and spirits.” 3. ERE Vol. XII p. 610; also ERE X pp. 311-13; ABI, pp. 17-22 RVL pp. 153-58 and 341-42 RPV pp. 253; 291-99. 142 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA It should, however, be noted that the class of priests was not a class of magicians as Macdonell has surmised for the obvious reason that the Pgvedic sacrifice was not magical in character. 4 The same thing is indicated by the discussion above (Chapter III), regarding the way, in which they have evolved the idea of divinity and their mode of approach to them. Dr. Deshmukh has discussed the point at length and arrived at the conclusion, “(p.157) since magic never prevailed among the I.E.s to a great extent, before, at any rate, the rise of religion in the form of belief in and worship of heavenly gods, there did not have to exist a separate class of hereditary magicians.” There is no evidence to say that right from the beginning, the class of the priests started to shape the sacrifice in a way favourable to their predominance because the class of the singer-priests was in a pretty mobile condition in the early stages. If the families of both the singers and patrons have developed, it is natural on account of the strong influence of heredity. But when the thinker poets, in collaboration with their liberal patrons began to develop the institution of sacrifice, the class of the priests began to develop and attain a form. Thus the evolution of the class of the priests is essen¬ tially based on the evolution of the idea and practice of sacrifice and it is from this point of view that the introduction of the different categories of priests has to be noted with interest. There are a number of words conveying the idea of the people, who used to officiate at the sacrificial performances. The composers of the hymns, the singers at the rite and others helping in the carry¬ ing out of the sacrificial ritual are all considered as identical and terms like ‘usij’ or ‘jaritr’ are employed in the general sense of the officiating priests. This would indicate that the same persons used to perform all these functions for a long time in the growth of the tradition of the sacrifice. Gradually, however, according to the rough specification of the duties, the persons came to be separately styled; but this process also does not appear to have become so well- defined as to indicate different teams working with their specialised duties in view. In whichever stages this may have taken place, it is clear that the family tradition has come into existence at a pretty early stage of the Itgvedic sacrifice. It is this family tradition that has apparent¬ ly given impetus to the sacrifices on the one hand and the composi¬ tion of the hymns on the other. The phenomenon of hymns in honour of Agni, Indra, Visvedevas, etc., composed systematically in different families and later on also 4. Vide Chapters X and XIV below. SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA 113 arranged accordingly can only indicate the eagerness to maintain certain traditions uniformly in all these famalies: Total | Family Agni Indra | Visvedeva Other divinities specially 43 Grtsamada 10 12 5 Brahmanaspati 4. 62 Visvamitra 29 23 5 58 Vamadeva 15 17 i gbhus 5. 87 Atri 28 12 ii Maruts 10; Mitravaruna 11; Asvins 6; 75 Bharadvaja 16 30 7 Pusan 6. 104 Vasistha 17 16 17 Mitravaruna 6; Asvins 8; Usas 7; Varuna 4; Indra-varuna 4. 87 Kanva 7 34 26 Soma 8; Asvins 8; Maruts 4. 19 Bhrgus 1 2 1 Soma 12; Maruts 2. 92 i Angirasas 11 28 Soma 23; Rbhus 2; Asvins 3. From the tabular statement above, it will be observed that besides the general worship of Agni, Indra and the Visvedevas, some families devoted special attention to certain individual divi¬ nities. Thus Maruts and Mitravarupa appear to be specially wor¬ shipped in the Atri family. Mitravaruna worship similarly appears to be promoted by the Vasistha family. Pusan worship appears to be characteristic of the Bharadvaja family and Rbhu worship, of the Vamadeva family. Even though we do not get any evidence to say anything regarding the origin of the worship of the individual divi¬ nities in the familes, it is clear that the families have promoted the cause of sacrifice by the specialised forms of worship. Sacrifice has thus grown with the growth of divinities in some family traditions. It is further interesting to note that even the forty-three hymns of the Grtsmadas have been grouped in a separate mandala, while both the Kanva and Angirasas families with eighty-seven and ninety- two hymns respectively to their credit according to the tradition of the AnukramanI have not been assigned separate mandalas. In the ninth mandala, the authors of the family mandalas are not so well represented. Thus Visvamitra has four, 5 Atri has one, 6 Bhara¬ dvaja has four, 7 and Vasistha has one 8 . Kanvas, Bhrgus and Angi- rasas have seven, eleven and twenty-three hymns respectively to their credit. The maximum number of soma-hymns (thirty-five) however goes to the credit of the poet of the Kasyapa family accord- 5. Nos. 1, 3, 70, 71. 6. No. 32. 7. Nos. 80, 81, 82, 98. 8. No. 90. 144 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA ing to the Anukramanl. It is not clear whether the authors men¬ tioned by the Anukramanl originally belonged to one or the other of the ancient families referred to above. It may however be noted that the authorship of certain hymns of the tenth man^ala as refer¬ red to by the Anukramanl appears to be quite conjectural, being drawn from the prominent point of description in the hymns (note particularly X.83, 84, 90, 108, 121, 129, etc.). This will confirm the futility of believing in any unbroken tradition about the sacrificial performances as even the tradition about the authorship of the hymns has not continued upto the days of Katyayana. Thus for our purposes, the only relevant information would be what can be culled out from the hymns themselves. AflGIRASAS : 9 Macdonell believes them to be mythical beings only, in the Pgveda. But the Rgvedic poets appear to be quite conscious of their real existence as they are referred to as ancient sages along with Atri, etc., at 1.45.3 (atrivat. .. .angirasvad. . . .srudhi havam; also 1.78.3) with some reputation in Agni worship. Along with the Bhrgus they are referred to at VIII.43.13. Agni is referred to as ‘ahgirastama’ at VIII.43.27. Their skill in composition is referred to at 1.62.1; II.17.1; VIII.40.12. In the sacrifice, a poet of the Angiras family is said to be singing a very sweet song at VI.11.3 (vepi$tho angirasam yaddha vipro madhucchando bhavati rebha istau). Per¬ haps this gave rise to the name ‘Madhucchandas’, the reputed poet of RV. I, 1-10, who thus might have been an ‘Angirasa’. Their sacri¬ ficial service is referred to as a standard of comparison at III.31.19 (angirasvannamasa saparyan); cf. also 1.107.2; VI.49.11. They are associated with an efficacious form of ritual at 1.71.3. Some sama hymns are characteristically associated with them at X.78.5 (cf. Chapter XII under D). Some persons belonging to the family are referred to in the hymns. The author of VIII.85 refers to his name as Kr§na (vv.3, 4). Similarly Visvaka is referred to at VIII.86.1, 2 and Vi?papu 10 in v. 3. ‘Hiranya-stupa’ is referred to as a well-known worshipper at X.149.5. They appear to be on very cordial terms with the family of Jamadagni as indicated at IX.62.24, where the poet is referring to himself as Jamadagni, praying for soma for or from the Angirasas at IX.62.9. Their Indra-worship is referred to at X.111.4. Their mythical character referred to at X.62.5, where they are said to be the sons of Agni or when Indra is said to have opened the 9 VMH Vol. II, pp. 155-169; V.I. Vol. I, p. VMM pp. 142-143, 10. cf. V.I Vol. II, p. 315; RV 1.116.23, 117.7, X.65.12. THE ROLE OF THE PRIESTS IN THE SACRIFICE 145 stalls of cows for them (cf. 1.132.4, IV.2.15, IX.86.23, X.108.10), would only indicate the ancient tradition with which the family was known and as such hallowed with some wonderful associations. At V.11.6, they are referred to as having found Agni indicating their connection with the fire-ritual at the early stages of the Rgvedic sacrifice. Their association with the soma-ritual is indicated by their authorship of twenty-three soma hymns next in number only to Kasyapas, AGASTYA : 11 Along with other poets of old like Kanva, Priyamedha and Atri, Agastya styled as ‘Manya’ is mentioned at VIII.5.26. The poets of X.60 refer to themselves as related to Agastya (v.6). For his mythi¬ cal origin cf. VII.33.14. He is said to be the elder brother of Vasistha (VII.33.10) and appears to be well-known for his good compositions (1.165.14, 15, 184.4 etc.). In three hymns of the Rgveda (1.165, 170, 171), Agastya is supposed to be attempting to propitiate Indra as he had incurred the latter’s wrath (1.170.2, 3), on account of his wor¬ shipping Maruts without Indra. The hymns do not make the point clear; but the idea in propitiating Indra who is angry with Maruts (1.170.2, kim na indra jigharhsasi bhrataro marutastava), would appear to be connected with their worship. Whatever might be the nature of the offence of the poet, it would appear that different poets were trying to popularise the worship of different divinities as their special predilection. Agastya is credited with the authorship of an Apr! hymn, 1.188. ATRI : 12 The family is credited with the authorship of the fifth mandala. 13 At V.2.6 (vasarh rajanam vasatim jananam aratayo nidadhurmartye§u brahmani atrerava tarn srjantu ninditaro nindyaso bhavantu |j), the hymns of Atri are said to have released Agni and laid him down, indicating that he had rendered some significant contribution to Agni worship which had come into disrepute (possibly at the hands of the worshippers of the other deities or the non-sacrificers). The same thing is indicated by Atri being referred to as the standard of comparison for Agni-worship. (V.4.9, agne atrivannamasa grnanah; also V.7.8). It is further substantiated by the fact that the family has as many as twenty-eight Agni hymns to their credit (cf. the tabular statement above). This worship has led them to prosperity as indicated at V.15.5. They have also furthered the soma ritual as indicated at V.40.8, in which respect they are said to be incom¬ parable (V.40.9, nahi anye asaknuvan). Atri is mentioned along 11. V.I. pp. 6-7; Ved. Stu. 2, 138, 143. 12. VMH Vol. Ill, p. 310; V.I. Vol. I, p. 17; VMM, 145. 13. cf. especially V.22.4, 39.5, 67.5. s. R.-io 146 SACRIFICE IN THE flGVEDA with Priyamedha and Upastuta at V.25.5; with Kanva at 1.118.7; with Gotama at 1.183.5 and with Kaksivats at X.143.1. Atris appear to have specially sponsored the worship of Maruts, Asvins and Mitra- varuna (vide tabular statement above). A number of persons belonging to the family have been individually mentioned. Apala at VIII.91.7; EvaySmarut at V.87.1; Gavisthira at V.1.12 and X.150.5 Gauraviti at V.29.11; Tryaruna at V.27.13; Dyumna at V.23.1; Paura at V.74.4; Babhru at V.30.14; Ratahavya at V.66.3; Vavri at V.19.1; Visvasaman at V.22.1; (For Syavasva see below); Samvarana at V. 33.10; Sasa at V.20.4; and Satyasravas at V.79.3. ATHARVAN : 14 Like Angirasas, Atharvan also appears to be a very old family, 16 and as such is associated with some powers of a superhuman charac¬ ter at X.87.12, where they are said to be possessed of the power of burning, cf. also X.120.8, 9. Some characteristic hymn of his com¬ position is referred to at 1.80.16. The founder of the family is said to be the first to lay down the path of sacrifice (1.83.5, yajnairatharva prathamah pathastate; X.92.10, yajnairatharva prathamo vi dhara- yat). 16 Atharvan is credited with the churning of the fire at VI.16.13; cf. also X.21.5. Dadhyac, 17 his son is also said to be continuing the tradition of Agni worship at VI.16.14 and hence they have become the standard of comparison as far as churning of fire is concerned (VI.15.17, atharvavadagnim manthanti vedhasah). As Prof. Mac- donell notes, some persons of the family, who have received gifts are referred to at VI.47.24. The Atharvans appear to have a specific way of mixing milk with soma-juice as referred to at IX.11.2, (abhi te madhuna payo’tharvano asisrayuh). The poet of X.120 refers to himself as the great Atharvan (v.9). APNAVANA : 18 See under Bhrgus. UPASTUTA : 18 He is mentioned along with the wellknown sacrificing priests like Kanvas, Atri, etc. at 1.36.10, VIII.5.25,26. As Sobhari belonging to Kanva family is referring to them in plural at VIII.103.8, it appears to be a group of people associated in worship with the Kanva family. 14. VMH Vol. II, pp. 174; VMM 141; V.I. Vol. I, pp. 17-18. 15. They are included among the Pitrs along with Angirasas, Navagvas and Bhrgus at X.14.6. 16. cf. also Bhrgus below. 17. cf. 1.111.12; 1.84.13 and under Navagvas below. 18. V.I. Vol. I, p. 26. 19. V.I. Vol. I, p. 97. THE ROLE OF THE PRIESTS IN THE SACRIFICE 14? USANAS : ao Like the ancient sages Angirasas and Bhrgus, he is credited with the establishment of fire for the purposes of sacrifice at VIII.23.17. The author of IV.16 belonging to the Vamadeva family refers to his composition as being like that of Usanas (IV.16.2), indicating the traditional reputation of the poet in the composition of hymns. AUSIJA : 21 Kaksivan the famous author of a number of hymns (1.116-126) is referred to as an Ausija at 1.18.1. But their separate individuality is referred to at 1.112.11, indicating that possibly Ausija was the name of an ancient family like Usanas. 22 Ausija family was known for the soma ritual, at which Ausija is said to have drunk the soma- juice (cf. 1.19.9, made somasya ausijo huvanyati j). Rjisva perhaps is another member of the family (X.99.11, ausijo rjisva), associated with the Indra-worship. KAK§IVAN : 23 He is referred to as Ausija at 1.18.1. He is referred to along with Vyasva as the worshipper of Asvins at 1.116.7, 117.6, VIII.9.10 and along with Angirasas at 1.51.3. He is said to be a Pajriya at 1.116.7 (see Pajra below) and Pajras are said to be Kakslvantalj at 1.126.4. He celebrates the receipt of the gift from Svanaya Bhavya 24 in 1.126. KANVAS : 25 As it has been observed above, the Kapva family has been ascribed the authorship of nearly ninety hymns in different mandalas. The family is not represented in the tenth mandala. Out of the hymns they have composed, nearly thirty-five are in honour of Indra, indicating their special contribution to Indra-worship. It may be noted that none of the other families has got so many Indra hymns to its credit. The chief of the family is referred to at 1.48.4 (kanva esam kanvatamah) and emulated as an ideal at VIII.6.11 and 52.8. The family is mentioned along with Atri and others at V.25.5. They are referred to as having pressed out soma-juice at 1.44.8 (suta- somasah). It appears that they were keen sacrificers some time as indicated at VIII.2.22. They also appear to have been considered as good poets as their hymns are characteristically mentioned at VIII.2.43, 7.19; 32.1. They appear to have fallen in estimate after¬ wards for some reason or other 26 and hence come to be considered 20. V.I. Vol. I, p. 103; he is referred to along with the Atharvan at 1.83.5. 21. V.I. Vol. I, p. 130. 22. For some miraculous association, cf. VI.4.6. 23. Brhad. IV.ll; V.I. Vol. I, p. 131. 24. Vide Chapter VIII. 25. V.I. Vol. I, p. 134. 26. VMH. Vol. Ill, 285. 148 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA as an unimportant family. The same fact, it may be noted, is also indicated by their non-representation in the tenth mandala which is considered to be the latest of the mandalas. But in their time, they came to be considered as a great family as even the Bhrgus are compared with them (VIII.3.16, kanva iva bhrgavah). As keen devotees of Indra, they very often invoke the god to leave others and go to them. 27 It is as a result of this intimacy that they have referred to Indra as the instrument of sacrifice 28 at VIII.6.3 and as being increased by their sacrifices at VIII.6.21. They have eight Asvin hymns to their credit and hence appear to have taken to Asvin worship keenly (cf. VIII.8.3, 4, 8, for ‘savana’ to Asvins). It appears that the Kanvas were not on friendly terms with the Pajras as indicated at VIII.4.17, 29 where the poet of Kanva family expresses his reluctance to sing a saman hymn of the Pajra family (though it may have been very efficacious). It appears that as indicated in the case of the AprI hymns, hymns of some sacrificial efficacy were borrowed by a family from the other occasionally. The saman hymn of the Pajra family appears to be one such hymn. But the categorical statement of the poet of VIII.4 that he would not recite it, would indicate that priestly rival¬ ries were developing. 30 A few persons belonging to the family have been mentioned. (1) Narsada Kanva is referred to as a protege of the Asvins at 1.117.8. 31 (2) Medhatithi is credited with the authorship of an Apr! hymn (1.13). He is referred to at VIII.8.20 and appears to be identical with Medhyatithi. 32 Medhyatithi appears to be an older member of the family of the Kanvas, as his sacrificial fire is referred to by another poet of the family at 1.36.10, 11, 17. His ability as a com¬ poser is emphasized at VIII.1.30, 2.40. His soma-juice is referred to at IX.43.3. He is said to be protected by Indra at VIII.33.4 and 49.9. (3) Nipatithi is referred to along with Medhyatithi at VIII.49.9, 51.1. and is also possibly a member of the Kanva family. According to Anuk, he is the author of VIII.34. (4) Praskanva 33 is said to have been helped by Agni at 1.44.6. He appears to be older than Medhya¬ tithi as the latter refers to the help already received by Praskanva earlier (cf. VIII.3.9). He is also referred to in connection with Indra worship at 1.45.3, VIII.51.2, 54.8. (5) Vatsa, another rather self- 27. cf. VIII.4.2, 5.13, 32.22, 33.14, 49.7, 65.1, 66.12, 82.1. 28. discussed above in this Chapter. 29. ‘na tasya vemyaranam hi tadvaso stuse pajraya samne'j cf. Chapter II, p. 33. 30. cf. VMH. Vol. I, on II.18.3; cf. also V.2.6 (quoted above) where the ‘ninditarah’ (slanderers) of Atris are referred to. 31. At X.31.11 he is merely said to be called a Kanva. 'Uta Kanvam nr?adah putramahuh’. 32. V.I. Vol. ii, p. 178. 33. V.I. Vol. II, p. 43. THE ROLE OF THE PRIESTS IN THE SACRIFICE 149 conscious member of the Kanva family has been referred to as con¬ nected with the worship of Agni, Asvins and Indra. At VIII.6.1 and 8.8, he is said to be increasing Indra by his hymns. At VIII.9.1, he invokes help from Asvins. At VIII. 11.7, the poet indicates his hold over the Agni worship (a te vatso mano yamat |). (6) Sobhari 34 is credited with the authorship of VIII.19.22 and VIII.103. He appears to have been considered to be an important member of the Kanva family and hence some of his descendents refer to themselves as ‘Sobharis’, (cf. VIII. 19.32;20.8) and the first person of that name as the ‘pita sobhari’ at VIII.22.15. He is mentioned along with Kanva, Atri and Priyamedha at VIII.5.26. Sobharis appear to have specialised in the worship of Maruts and through them of Indra. Thus Maruts are referred to as ‘sobhariyavah’ at VIII.20.2 KA6YAPA : 3 5 It may be noted that according to the Anuk, the largest number of soma hymns in the ninth mandala, ascribed to a single family, are claimed by Kasyapas. They therefore appear to have specialised in the soma-ritual almost exclusively unlike others. A poet who refers to himself as Bhutamsa (X.106.11, bhutamso asvinoh kamama- prah) is associated with Asvin worship, which also was a soma- ritual essentially. KU6IKA : 33 See under Visvamitra. GAYA : He is the son of Plti and author of X.63. and 64 37 referring to himself at X.63.17, 64.17, as a singer who has satisfied the divini¬ ties by his hymns (X.64.16). GRTSAMADA : 38 Grtsamadas are credited with the authorship of the second mandala. They appear to have specialised in the Brhaspati or Brahmanaspati worship. 39 They are said to be skilled in the com¬ position of hymns (II.19.8, 39.8). Their hymn to Saraswati is refer¬ red to at 11.41.17, 18. As Sunahotras, their soma-juice is referred to at 11.41.14 and II.18.6. No individual member nor the head of the family is referred to as we find in the case of the other families. This may be due to the very ancient character of the family. It may 34. V.I. Vol. II, p. 474. 35. V.I. Vol. I, p. 145. 36. V.I. Vol. I, pp. 173-4. 37. which appear to be composed with a set purpose and pattern; both the hymns are in honour of the Visvedevas and contain seventeen stanzas each. 38. V.I. Vo!, I, pp. 228-9; VMH Vol. Ill, 287. 39. Vide tabular statement above. 150 SACRIFICE IN THE PtGVEDA be noted that the family has got a separate Apri hymn (II.3) of their own, indicating some strong family ritual associations. GOTAMA : 40 Excepting at two places (1.116.9, 183.5), where Gotama is refer¬ red to as a protege of the Asvins, the word used in singular or in plural, is associated with the composition of some hymns. Thus hymns are said to be composed by them (1.61.6, 63.9). Hymns belonging to them (gotamaso girah) are referred to at 1.78.1; IV.32.9. Vamadeva, the author of IV.4 refers to Gotama as his father (v.ll, tanma piturgotamadanviyaya |), from whom he has inherited, tradi¬ tion of some efficacious compositions (vacobhih). The same is indicated also by Nodhas, also a Gotama, composing a fresh hymn for Indra (1.62.13, navyamataksad brahma |). The Gotamas are referred to as composers of hymns at 1.88.4 and as bearers of hymns at IV.32.12 (stomavahasah). They are referred to as ‘Rahugapa’ 41 at 1.78.5, where too their hymns to Agni specifically have been referred to. JAMADAGNI : 42 Visvamitra and Jamadagni are jointly the authors of X.167 and are referred to in v.4 of the hymn. In the Rgveda, he does not appear to be a rival of Vasistha as he is referred to in a hymn of the Vasistha mandala as an ideal poet. At VII.96.3 (grnana jamadagnivat stuvana ca vasisthavat |), Jamadagni appears to be considered to be as great a singer poet as Vasistha and his contribution as such is referred to at IX.97.51 (arseyam jamadagnivat). His interest in soma-rites is indicated at IX.62.24; 65.25. He is associated with the worship of Mitravaruna (III.62.18) and Asvina (VIII.181.8) as well. For his relation with the Bhrgus and the Angirasas, refer to notes under the words. DASAGVA : 43 He is said to be the best of the Angirasas at X.62.6 (dasagvo angirastamah). The Dasagvas are said to have originated the sacri¬ fice at 11.34.12 (te dasagvah prathama yajnamuhire I). They are said to have pressed out the soma-juice at V.29.12. They have been closely associated with the Navagvas. The names very possibly indicate that they initiated some longer ritualistic performances like the ‘sahasrasava’ (vide Chapter VI). Perhaps the names indicate the groups of nine or ten persons, which initiated a particular type of ritual as would be indicated by the horses of Indra being referred 40. V.I. Vol. I, p. 234; cf. ‘Vamadevas’ below. 41. V.I. Vol. II, p. 209. 42. V.I. Vol. I, p. 276. 43. V.I. Vol. I, p. 341; VMM 144, 170. .HE ROLE OF THE PRIESTS IN THE SACRIFICE 151 to as ten-fold or hundredfold, etc., at VIII.1.9 (ye te santi dasagvinah satino ye sahasrinah. . . .asvasah) 44 DIRGHA-TAMAS : 46 He is referred to as ‘Aucathya’ at 1.158.1, 4 and as a ‘Mamateya’ at 1.158.6. At VIII.9.10, he appears as a worshipper of Asvins along with Kakslvan and Vyasva. At 1.147.3 and IV.4.13, Mamateya, who is blind is referred to as protected by Agni. 46 His association with sacrificial performances is indicated at 1.152.6. He is credited with the authorship of an Apr! hymn 1.142. DURMITRA : 47 He is referred to as a poet who has praised Indra in a characte¬ ristic way at X.105.11. He appears to be different from Sumitra related with the family of Vadhryasva (vide Chapter VIII), though X.105.11 would give an impression about their being identical (vide Sumitra below p. 159). NABHAKA AND NABHAKA : A descendant of Nabhaka is referring to him at VIII.40.4, 5, as known for his good compositions. The hymns of Nabhaka are also similarly referred to at VIII.41.2. According to Anuk, he is a Kanva but Ludwig 48 believes him to be an Ahgirasa. 49 NAVAGVAS : 50 Like Dasagvas, they are either intimately connected with the Ahgirasa family or are a group of that family itself, (cf. X.108.8, angiraso navagvah). Along with Dasagvas they are referred to as Angirasas at X.62.6. They are said to be soma-pressers at V.29.12. They are referred to as ancient members of the family by a poet of the Bharadvaja family (VI.22.1, nah purve pitaro navagvah). At X.14.6, they are ranked along with Angirasas, Atharvans and Bhrgus as Pitrs, who deserve worship with soma. Their ancient character, connection with Angirasas and Agni worship makes possible their reference as ‘flames of fire’ at VI.6.3 (agne bhamasah sucayascaranti . .. .divyah navagvah |). At X.61.10, (rtam vadanta rtayuktimagman), their connection with a rite and appropriate recitals thereat is refer¬ red to. A soma ritual lasting for ten months is associated with them at V.45.7. 61 Dadhyan is mentioned as belonging to the Navagva group 44. Vide Navagvas below. 45. V.I. Vol. I, p. 367; ‘mamateya’ op. cit. Vol. II, p. 154. and Gledner Vol. II, p. 202 F.N. 46. a whole verse ‘ye payavo . debhuh’ is repeated in two hymns (1.147.3) by Dirghtamas and IV.4.13 by Vamadeva Gotama. 47. V.I. Vol. II, p. 457. 48. cf. 3, 107. 49. V.I. Vol. I, pp. 441-442. 50. V.I. Vol. I, p. 437; VMM. 144, 170. 152 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA and his significant soma-ritual is referred to at IX.108.4a (yena navagvo dadhynnapornute). 62 It appears to be the same as referred to at 1.118.12 (dadhyn ha yanmadhvatharvano vamasvasya slrsna pra yadimuvaca |), who has joined the Navagva group. Their service to Indra is distinguished from that rendered by the Dasagvas at 1.62.4. NABHANEDISTHA (MANAVA) : 53 Ahgirasas are praised to favour the author of the hymn at X.62.1-4. He is referred to as Nabhanedistha at X.61.18, the epithet perhaps being explained by the fact that as a keen sacrificer he was always nearest the altar (fiabhi, cf. Chap. IV for epithets of altar). PAJRA : The name of the family appears to be of a derivative signifi¬ cance similar to that of the Vasistha family, being derived from the root ‘paj’ (from which pajas is derived). With this derivative sense in view, the word appears to be used at 1.158.3, VIII.4.17, 54 VIII.6.47 and X.106.7. The family seems to have been known for their Indra and Asvina worship. At 1.117.10, they are said to be invoking Asvins and the Asvins are compared with them in an obscure simile at X.106.7. Indra is referred to as ‘pajra’ at VIII.63.12 and he is said to be firm among the pajras like a door-post at 1.51.14. Kaksivan is said to be a ‘pajriya’ at 1.116.7 and at 1.126.4, 5, kaksi- vantah are referred to along with ‘pajras’. The gift of Srutaratha and Priyaratha to Pajra family is referred to at 1.122.7, 8. For their relation with the Kanvas, see under Kanvas above. PA YU : 55 He is mentioned at VI.47.24 as receiving a gift from Prastoka, indicating his priestly service. PU$TIGU 66 AND SRUSTIGU : 57 They are mentioned along with Medhyatithi and Nipatithi at VIII.51.1, as connected with soma performance and may be the names of priests, 58 so called because of the possession of cows received from the patrons. It is not improbable however that they are the rich patrons as the names may indicate. 51. Vide Chapter VI. 52. V.I. Vol. I, p. 442. 53. V.I. Vol. I, p. 466; Ved. Stu. 1.97.98; and ‘Srutaratha’ in Chapter VIII. 54. for their sama, see above. 55. V.I. Vol. I, p. 518. 56. V.I. Vol. II, p. 10. 57. V.I. Vol. II, p. 403. 58. Similarly ‘Satyagu’ (X.47.6) may also be a priest. V.I. Vol. II. p. 424. THE ROLE OF THE PRIESTS IN THE SACRIFICE 153 PRIYAMEDHA : t9 It is the name of an individual priest as well as of the family, specialised in Indra and Asvina worship. They are mentioned along with Kanvas and Atris as receiving help from Asvins at VIII.5.25, 26; with Kanvas and Bhrgus at VIII.3.16 and in an invocation to Indra at 1.45.3. At VIII.2.37 and 69.8, the members of the family are exhorted to worship Indra. They are referred to as worshipping Indra at X.73.11 and horses of Indra at VIII.6.45. Along with Kanvas, they are referred to as receiving magnificent gift from Kurunga 60 at VIII.4.20. Their association with sacrificial perform¬ ances is said to be very ancient at VIII.69.18 (anu pratnasyaukasah priyamedhasa esam purvamanu prayatirh vrktabarhiso hitaprayasa asata |), where ancient tradition of cutting grass and arranging sacrificial offering is referred to. BABHRU :® 1 He is said to be offering a soma-sacrifice for the king Rnamcaya at V.30.11 and receiving a sumptuous gift for the same. 62 BRHADUKTHA He appears to have performed a soma sacrifice for his patron Svaitreya 64 at V.19.3 and received the gift of a necklace. He is credited with the authorship of X.54-56 and is said to belong to Vamadeva family according to Anuk. He refers to his hymn for Indra as a powerful one (X.54.6). His help to his family is refer¬ red to at X.56.7. BHARADVAJA i 66 Bharadvaja family is credited with the authorship of the sixth mandala, four hymns from the ninth mandala and three hymns in the tenth mandala (Nos. 87, 152, 155). The family has the credit of composing the maximum number of Indra hymns (thirty) in the family group and next only to Kanvas who claim about thirty-five hymns in the first and the eighth mandalas taken together. The head of the family is apparently referred to at VI.65.6 (bharadvaja- vadvidhate maghoni. ...) and VI.31.4, where Indra is said to have given gifts to the praising Bharadvaja. A descendant of the family is referring to the secret of sacrifice known to the Bharadvaja family (X.181.2 avindante atihitarh yadasid yajnasya dhama paramam guha yat). Bharadvaja is referred to as a hotr. He is mentioned along with Atri, Kanva and Vasistha at X.150.5. The association 59. V.I. Vol. II, p. 52. 60. Vide Chapter VIII and XI. 61. V.I. Vol. II, p. 60. 62. Vide Chapters VIII under Rusamas and XI. 63. V.I. Vol. II, p. 71. 64. Vide Chapter VIIII. 65. V.I. Vol. II, pp. 97-98. 15 * SACRIFICE IN THE ?GVEDA of Bharadvaja family with Asvins is referred to at 1.112.13, 116.18; VI.63.10. Agni-worship and Agni’s gifts are referred to at 1.59.7; VI.10.6, 15.3, 16.5, 48.7; X.181.2. They are said to have received a gift of Sarnjaya at VI.47.25. 66 BHUTAM6A: See under Kasyapa. BHRGU : B7 In a number of passages, the connection of the Bhrgus with Agni and Matarisvan is referred to and it has led Prof. Macdonell to believe that ‘Bhj-gu’ as a historical family name occurs only at four places in the Rgveda (VII. 18.6; VIII.3.9, 6.18 and 102.4). The family of Bhj-gus appears to be a very ancient family, older than the Kanvas, who are compared with them at VIII.3.16. They are referred to as ideal priests along with Angirasas and Atharvans at VIII.43.13 and X.14.6. Atharvan is perhaps older than Bhrgu as indicated at 1.83.5 and X.92.10 (see Atharvan above). Atharvan is also connected with fire like the Bhrgus and it appears to indicate that the discovery of fire has given great impetus to the idea of divine worship. It is Bhrgus who appear to have made Agni worship more popular so that they are referred to as having given Agni to men (1.58.6). The idea is also expressed by saying that Matarasvan has brought Agni for the Bhrgus (1.60.1; III.5.10; X.46.9). They are said to have found the fire skilfully (II.4.2; X.46.1) or laid down the fire (II.4.2; VI.15.2) or impelled the fire (1.143.4). Agni is also referred to as a gift of Bhrgus to men (III.2.4) and on account of such close associa¬ tion, comes to be referred to as ‘Bhrgavana’ at 1.71.4, IV.7.4. The skill of the Bhrgus in the composition of hymns is referred to at IV. 16.20 and X.39.14. They are referred to as initiating Agni-worship by the kindling of fire and the composition of hymns (X.122.5, tvarh stomebhirbhrgavo virurucuh). They are said to have praised Indra 63 (VIII.6.18) and received Indra’s help to win over the prizes (VIII.3.9). But they appear to have suffered a heavy blow at the hands of Indra, when they officiated for the enemies of Sudas—may be Druhyus, 69 — who are said to have perished along with them (VII.18.6, srustiih cakrurbhrgavo druhyavasca). Ghosa 70 may have belonged to the family of Bhrgus as he is referred to as ‘bhrgavana’ at 1.120.5 in connection with Agni-worship. From the way in which Apnavana is referred to at IV.7.1 66. Vide Chapter VIII, under ‘Srnjayas’. 67. V.I. Vol. II, p. 109; VMM 51; VMH Vol. II, 169-73. 68. Bhrgus are credited with the authorship of evelen soma hymns in the nineth mandala. 69. Vide Chapter VIII. 70. V.I. Vol. I, p. 251. THE ROLE OF THE PRIESTS IN THE SACRIFICE 155 (yamapnavano bhrgavo virurucuh), it would appear that he belonged to the Bhrgu family. This is further supported by VIII. 102.4, where Agni is said to be invoked in the same manner as was done by Aurva Bhrgu and Apnavana (aurvabhrguvaccucimapnavanavada huve... .agnim). According to Anuk, the author of VIII.102, is a person of the Bhrgu family and he would naturally be supposed to refer to two of his illustrious ancestors, known for their Agni worship. According to Anuk, Jamadagni, the author of an Apr! hymn X.110, was a member of the Bhrgu family. He is closely associated with Angirasas (vide under Angirasas above). But we do not get any clear evidence from the hymns of the Rgveda to say whether the families of Bhrgus and Angirasas were on intimate terms, though both have played a significant part in the growth of the sacrifice. VASA : 71 At 1.112.10, 116.21; VIII.8.20 and X.40.7, he is said to be pro¬ tected by Asvins. At VIII.24.14 he is said to be praying to Indra and at VIII.50.9 is referred to as protected by Indra. At VIII.46.21, 33, he is said to have received magnificent gifts from Prthusravas Kanita. 72 VASISTHA : 73 Vasi§tha and his family are credited with the authorship of the seventh mandala and a few hymns in the ninth and the tenth man^lalas. The reference in singular does not necessarily refer to the head of the family (e.g. VII.9.6, 22.3, 42.6, 73.3 etc.). At some places however, the head of the family is obviously referred to (e.g. VII.18.4, 21; 33.10, 11). VII.33 indicates the halo created round the name of the chief of the family even in those ancient days. VII.18 is obviously descriptive of a real event, indicating the nature of help rendered by the Vasistha to Sudas against pretty heavy odds (VII.83.8a, dasarajne pariyattaya visvatah; VII.33.6). The reference to Parasara and Satayatu of his family who have also helped him in the Indra-worship (VII.18.21) indicates how the chief priest used to enlist the services of other members of his family in the priestly service, undertaken by him. The majority of the references to the family are indicative of their skill in poetic compositions addressed to various divinities (cf. VII.18.4, 23.6, 26.5, 70.6, 73.6, 76.6, 80.1, 90.7). They appear to be conscious of the service they were rendering to the divinities 71. V.I. Vol. II, p. 273. 72. Vide Chapter VIII. 73. V.I. Vol. II, pp. 274-77. 156 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA and hence the reference to their increasing the divinities (VII.12.3, 77.6). Saraswati worship was perhaps initiated by Vasistha in colla¬ boration with Jamadagni as indicated at VII.96.3 (grnana jamadagni- vat stuvana ca vasisthavat). The reference may perhaps be to the two independent hymns in honour of the divinity by Vasistha (VII. 95, 96). He is associated in Agni worship as indicated at VII.7.7, 8.7, 9.6, 42.6; X.122.8. As related with Mitra and Varuna (vide VII.33), the family of Vasistha has naturally played its part in the furtherance of the Mitravaruna worship with six independent hymns. Their worship of a large variety of deities indicates the balance they had maintained in the general scheme of the sacrifice and it is this fact which has made their contribution to the cause of sacrifice quite significant. The reverence with which the later members of the family looked upon the founder of the family can be seen in a proud refer¬ ence at X.66.14 (vasisfhasah pitrvad vacamakrata). In a later passage (X.150.5), Vasistha is referred to as a ‘purohita’ in his invocation to Agni and at X.181.1, Vasistha is credited with the composition of the famous ‘rathantara’ saman. 74 His protestation against the allegation of the use of the ‘yatu’ by him at VII.104.15-16 and his emphasis on the truth at VII.104.12 indicates that he was in favour of a system of sacrifice that was completely free from blemish. It may also indicate that both the tendencies of magic and religion prevailed at places and the emphasis by Vasistha on the sacrifice to all the divinities and his emphatic denunciation of the black magic appears to have paved the way for the spread of the purer practice of sacrifice and through it a more refined view of religion. Excepting Parasara and Satayatu (VII.18.21), no other mem¬ bers 75 of the family have been individually referred to in the hymns of the Rgveda. VIMADA : 7G It appears to be a later family of the poets, which seeks to distinguish its composition by a play on their name as indicated at X.21.1-8; 24.1-3; (vi vo made). At X.20.10, Vimada is said to have composed a hymn in honour of Agni. At X.23.7 his friendship with Indra is referred to. At X.23.6, a striking hymn is said to have been composed by the members of the Vimada family (stomam ta indra vimada ajijanan apurvyarh. . . .). At X.24.4 Asvins are said to have been adored by Vimada. In the light of this reference to his connection with Asvins, this Vimada need not be different from the 74. cf. Chapter II. p. 33. 75. For Sakti cf. V.I. Vol. II, p. 348; RV VII.32.26, (Say). 76. V.I Vol. II, p. 303. THE ROLE OF THE PRIESTS IN THE SACRIFICE 157 Vimada referred to at 1.51.3, 112.9; X.39.7, 65.12,’ 7 as Macdonell imagines. 78 VIROPA : 79 He appears to be a priest of good reputation, known to Praskanva as the latter mentions him along with Atri, Angirasas, etc., known for the efficacy of their invocations. He is said to be offering a good hymn to Agni at VIII.75.6. VI&VAMANAS : 80 His hymn to Agni is referred to at VIII.23.2 and to Indra at VIII.24.7. At VIII.24.23 and 26.11, he is referred to as a son of Vyasva (see below). VISVAMITRA : 81 Visvamitra and his family are ascribed the entire collection of hymns from the third mandala and also a few hymns in the ninth and the tenth mandalas. It may be noted that excepting in III.33 and 53, the reference is always to the family in plural. At III.33.5, the poet is pointedly referring to himself as the son of Kusika ibrhati manisa avasyuravhe kusikasya sunuh). The self conscious¬ ness discernible here is more perceptibly seen at III.53.9 (visvamitro yadavahat sudasamapriyayata kusikebhirindrah), where he is em¬ phasizing the fact of Indra becoming favourable to Sudas on account of his help. In a general way, he emphatically states that it was his hymn that was protecting the Bharata clan (111.53.12, visva- mitrasya raksati brahmedam bharatarh janam). These remarks indicate that they are made by a highly self-conscious priest with his characteristic achievement in view. Visvamitra is very proud of his being the son of Kusika (vide III.33.5 above) and the refer¬ ences to the family of ‘Kusikas’ are pretty frequent (cf. III.26.1, 29.15, 30.20 etc.). This would indicate that the family has an older tradition of priestly service. If Vasistha and Visvamitra were con¬ temporaries, the priestly tradition for Visvamitra will have to be considered as a longer one. It appears that the Kusika family was known for brilliant compositions (III.29.15, dyumnavad brahma kusikasa erire. cf. also III.53.13). Soma-sacrifice and the consequent drinking of soma- juice are also referred to at III.53.10. But it seems that the regime of Visvamitra has become so striking in the history of priestly 77. as a protege of Asvins. 78. V.I. Vol. II, p. 304. 79. V.I. Vol. II, p. 304. 80. V.I. Vol. II, p. 309. 81. V.I. Vol. II, pp. 301-12. 82. On ‘sasarparl’—cf. V.I. Vol. II, p. 441; Vel. B.U.J. 1935 p 41 f.n. 158 SACRIFICE IN THE PIGVEDA service that some later poets have started referring to the family as that of the Visvamitra (vide III.1.21, 18.4; X.89.17). For the association of Visvamitra with Jamadagni, cx. X.167.4 (see above) and III.53.15-16, where Jamadagni is said to have given ‘sasarpari’ to him. 82 It my be noted that no member of the family has been referred to in the hymns of the Rgveda. VYASVA : 83 He is referred to as a protege of the Asvins at 1.112.15. The family of Vyasva, to which Visvamanas (see above) is said to have belonged is referred to at VIII.24.28. The founder of the family, who seems to have sponsored Asvin worship is referred to along with other Asvin worshippers, Prthi, 84 Kaksivan etc., at VIII.9.10 and as an ideal to be emulated at VIII.26.9. Though his compositions are not known, the Rgvedic poets refer to them. Thus the hymns to Agni are referred to at VIII.23.23 (abhirvidhemagnaye jye?thabhir- vyasvavat), hymn or hymns to Asvins at VIII.26.9, to Inclra at VIII. 24.22 and to soma at IX.65.7. S ARY AT A : 88 He is said to be a ‘manava’ like Nabhavedistha by Anuk, though not referred to as such in the Rgveda. His priestly service is refer¬ red to at 1.51.12 (saryatasya prabhrta yesu mandase), where Indra is said to be delighted in his sacrificial food. His well-known soma- pressing is also referred to at III.51.7 (indra marutva iha pahi somam yatha saryate apibah sutasya). SINJARA : 8s He is merely referred to as a protege of the Asvins at X.40.7 and at VIII.5.25, he is mentioned along with poets like Atri, Kanva etc., who are well-known as poets and priests. SYAVASVA : 87 He has a number of hymns to his credit according to Anuk. He is mentioned by name half a dozen times and from the epithet ‘sunvatah’, appears to be connected with soma-ritual prominently (cf. VIII.35.19-21, 88 36.7, 38.8). He emulates his ancestor Atri in his poetic compositions (VHI.35.19, 20; 37.7) and sacrificial perform¬ ances (VIII.35.21). His name is associated with various gods, 83. V.I. Vol. II, p. 336. 84. V.I. Vol. II, p. 16. 85. V.I. Vol. II, p. 375. 86. V.I. Vol. II, p. 378. 87. V.I. Vol. II, p. 400; V.H. I; S.B.E. 32 p. 359; Brhad V.49. 88. Where he is said to have offered the ‘tiroahnya’ soma. THE ROLE OF THE PRIESTS IN THE SACRIFICE 159 Indragni (VIII.38.8), Savitp (V.81.5), Asvins (VIII.35.19-21) and Maruts (V.52.1). He praises his patron ‘Taranta’ at V.61.5 and refers to the gift of ‘Rathaviti’, to whom he is said to be attached on account of the soma-ritual (V.61.5) (vide Chapter VIII). SAMVARANA : 89 Ascribed the authorship of V.33, the poet is referring to himself as having received gifts from Dhvanya at V.33 (vide Chapter VIII). SATYASRAVAS : 90 At V.79.1, he is mentioned along with others in the U$as wor¬ ship. In the two following stanzas as well he is referred to as ‘vayya’. SUMITRA : 91 He is different from Durmitra, who is alternately referred to as Sumitra at X.105.11. Sumitra and his family appear to be connected with Vadhryasva and to have helped him in the Agni worship, sought to be promoted by him (cf. X.69.1, 7, 8). He is credited with the composition of an Apri hymn (X.70). STHURAYUPA: At VIII.23.24, the poet VLsvamanas is said to be worshipping Agni like Vyasva (his ancestor) and Sthurayupa and as such the latter appears to have specialised in Agni ritual. Thus it can be seen that the growth of the sacrifice was due, to a large extent, to the efforts of the various priests, who were also the poets of the hymns they were composing for the propitiation of the divinities. It is not quite clear as to what type of duties these singer poets were discharging in the sacrificial performances. If the duties would have been so clearly demarcated and the duties of different priests so rigidly fixed, we could have come across some references to that effect in the hymns themselves. As all the priests were not poets and apparently they were not —the various priests referred to can be imagined to be professionals as Hillebrandt 92 has done. He tries to see references to them in 1.125.1-4 and IV.24.10. 93 The family tradition indicated above would show that a large number of people had apparently taken to sacri- 89. V I. Vol. II, p. 413. 90. op. cit. p. 420. 91. V.I. Vo!. II, p. 457. 92. VMH. Vol. I, p. 146; V.I. Vol. II, p. 77. 93. For interpretation about the sale of Indra cf. Velankar B.TJ.J. 1938 (p. 52 f.n.). cf. also VIII. 1.5 mahe ca na para sulkaya deyarh, which can rightly be construed as an expression of devotion towards the divinity, cf. also RBV. 100 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA ficial performances, but we do not come across any references to specific duties being assigned and carried out by certain groups of persons, who could thus be designated as professionals. At II.20.3 (yah samsantam yah sasamanamuti pacantam stuvantarh ca pranesat), Hillebrandt sees reference to well-marked duties 94 of different cate¬ gories of priests and as such infers the Rgvedic ritual to be a ‘deve¬ loped ritual’. It should be noted however that the distinctive nature of the activities is not quite clear here. The references to Daksina (Chapter V) would also indicate that the idea of specific remuneration for the performance of certain duties connected with the sacrifice did not exist at the time. The gifts varied according to the ability of the patrons and were not dependent on the type of performance. In a strict sense therefore the priests could not be said to be profssionals in the field of sacrifice. The idea of professionalism is linked up with the developed form of ritual. If the latter is taken for granted, it would lead to the inference about the former. Hillebrandt had an idea of a developed form of ritual in his mind as it becomes clear by his attempt to explain some of the hymns in the light of the later ritual 95 and his view about the purchase of soma. 96 He is aware of the fact that it is not referred to in the Rgveda; but its wide prevalence in the later ritual has made him remark “the silence can be explained by the fact that the hymns are composed for a sacramental purpose and there was no possibility to think of a worldly transaction.” It can be seen that this is hardly convincing. We come across the mention of a number of categories of priests and this has led most of the scholars to imagine that the sacrifice must have become elaborate even in the days of the Rgveda. It should however be remembered that this need not be so unless we presume all the duties of those priests in the later ritual to have existed even in the early hymns. Even taking the case of the ‘hotr’ priest, we cannot say that he did all the duties ascribed to him in the later ritual right from the beginning. His duties have come to be evolved in course of time and so too it must have happened in the case of the other priests, mentioned in the hymns of the Rgveda. If we could have got a correct picture about the evolution of the various classes of priests in the Rgveda, we would have got full material to determine the various stages of the growth of the sacrifice. It is for this reason therefore that we ought to take into account the growth of the different categories of priests as referred to in the hymns of the Rgveda. 94. VMH Vol. I, p. 11. 95. VMH Vol. I, p. 259; cf. Chapter I above. 96. Op. cit. p. 69. THE ROLE OF THE PRIESTS IN THE SACRIFICE 161 RTVIJ : 97 Derived from rtu-fyaj, the word appears to be used in the sense of the priest offering worship at stated intervals, at a fairly late stage of the Rgvedie sacrifice as is indicated by reference to him in only about seventeen passages in the Rgveda. The word appears to have originated with Agni in the sacrifice kindled at fixed intervals, to whom also it is applied in most of the passages, where he is referred to as the ‘rtvij’ of the sacrifice’. (I. 1.1, 44.11; X.7.5, 21.7). He is also referred to as ‘hotr’ at 1.1.1, 45.7, VIII.44.6) and as such is said to be laid down in a sacrifice (V.22.2, 28.7). With the priesthood of Agni in view, Indragni are also referred to as ‘rtvija’ at VIII.38.1. Agni is said to be the ‘eighth rtvij’ (X.114.9) in addition to the seven priests of the later ritual (IX.114.3). HOTR : 98 Hotr is apparently the oldest of the priests. It was he who used to invoke the gods by reciting the hymns and make offerings to them. In fact we can imagine the earliest stage of the sacrifice, when he was the only priest of the sacrifice. Being the earliest one, he came to occupy an important place in the system of sacrifice. He thus could be considered to be the best of them (ayajistha at X.2.1). It was through him that the gods could be propitiated and as a similar part was played by Agni, be also came to be called a ‘hotr’. The two came to be linked up together in the Apri hymns and came to be designated as ‘the Divine Hotrs’ 99 like rtvij. The term ‘hotr’ is also used in the sense of a priest in general, particularly when the priests are said to be five (11.34.14) 100 or seven (X.35.10; 61.1, etc.). 101 Offerings which were given to the gods by the hotrs were placed in fire and hence such offerings appear to have come to be known as ‘hotra’ (1.36.7, 122.9 etc.). 102 Certain hymns as they used to be recited in the beginning by the ‘hotr’ came to be designated as ‘hotra (vide Chapter II. p. 30). As Agni knows the offerings as well as the hymns, he comes to be called ‘hotravid’ (V.8.3) and ‘hotravah (V.26.7). At two places the names of the seven priests have been specified (II.1.2; X.91.10) as ‘hotr’, ‘potr’, nestr’, ‘agnidh’, ‘prasastr’, ‘adhvaryu’ and ‘brahman’. It will be noticed that the Udgatr of the later days is absent from the list. It is therefore not correct to identify the duties of some of these priests with those of his name¬ sake in the later days. The names of these priests apparently signify 97. V.I. Vol. I, p. 112. 98. V.I. Vol. II, p. 508. 99. AITR. B.U.J. 1945-6; cf. also X.65.10. . 100. Perhaps they are hotr, potr, agnTdhra, brahman and prasastr referred to in 11.36. 101. V.H. Vol. I, S.B.E. 32 p. 252. 102. At X.15.9 Pitrs are said to be ‘hotravidah’. S.R.—11 162 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA some broad duties and not their relative position in the sacrifice as in the later days. Just as the Udgatr came to be associated with the worship later but came to occupy an important position with the rise in importance of the Samaveda and the introduction of the ritual based on the three Vedas and the three priests, so too the relative position and the nature of the duty of the priest must have undergone changes in the course of the evolution of the ritual. 103 It appears to have become customary at a later stage to choose the hotr priest for the sacrifice and establish him ceremoniously at the place of sacrifice (X.21.1). At X.176.3, he is referred to as taken to the place of sacrifice, tcf. also IV.15.1) and established there. Devapi is thus said to be taking his place as ‘hotr’ (X.98.5). For the idea of hotr priest to be established, cf. III.9.9, 19.5; V.4.3; VII.73.2; X.7.5, etc. It is indicated at X.11.3 (yadlmusantamusatamanu kratum) that both the parties must be willing for such an assign¬ ment. The ceremony with which the gods are said to have esta¬ blished Agni as hotr at X.52.6, is possibly indicative of a similar ceremony with which the mortal hotr was also established. Very possibly a seat was earmarked for him at the place of sacrifice as indicated at II.9.1 (hotrsadana). He is however referred to as moving about the sacrificial fire for the discharge of his duties (cf. VII.1.16, 23, pari yameti adhvaresu hota, 1.173.3). It is indicated at III.14.5, that he would put the offerings in fire with his hands raised. Agni’s request to Visvedevas at X.52.1 to give him instructions regarding his duties would indicate that after his election (hota vrtah) and his taking the seat (nisadya), the hotr priest could receive certain suggestions regarding some of the aspects of the procedure. As indicated at X.52.2, he would choose the Adhvaryu priest and instruct him. At X.52.3, an objection 104 raised against the choice of the hotr priest by the gods is answered by pointing out the grounds for his choice. This would indicate that certain criterion used to be followed regarding the choice of the hotr priest. It would be his previous experience as indicated here. His place of importance in the system of sacrifice can be said to have been immortalised by the association of the word hotr with Agni. In later days however the place of importance went to ‘Brahman’, though the latter had not much actual work in the beginning. It is possible that sometime the duty of the ‘Brahman’ was done by the ‘hotr’ himself and at times he used to act as Puro- hita, another office which came to be introduced in course of time. 103. cf. II.20.3 referred to above. 104. The hotrship of Agni is objected on the ground of his relation with yama (ayarh yo hota kila so yamasya) and the oblations to Pitrs that he carries. The reply indicates how he is also connected with the sacrifice of the gods (ahar ahar jayate masi masi ; atha deva dadhire havyavaham). THE ROLE OF THE PRIESTS IN THE SACRIFICE 163 It was not anyway distinction in duty but the place of honour that marks the difference between the hotr, the brahman and the purohita. In the beginning, his duty apparently was to look after the entire performance but afterwards he appears to have come to be associated with the ‘adhvaryu’ whose office was introduced to look after mainly the actual performance. This transition to the two- priests-stage is indicated at III.35.10 (adhvaryorva prayatam sakra hastat, hoturva yajham havi§o jusasva), where alternation is refer¬ red to and at III.53.3 (sarhsavadhvaryo prati me grnihindraya vanah krnavava justam), where the worship is said to be jointly offered by the two. This would indicate how there was no idea of supe¬ riority in the status of the one or the other. ADHVARYU : 105 As the derivation indicates 106 the office appears to be introduced to look after the details of the performance in association with the hotr priest. As pointed out by Haug, 107 these two priests have continued in the Avesta ritual as Zaotr and Rathwi and it can be inferred that the Avesta ritual parted company with the Rgveda ritual at this stage. The reference to Agni —jwho has been chosen as hotr (X.52.2) — asking Asvins to work as Adhvaryus (op. cit.) probably indicates that the Adhvaryus at some stage, were chosen by the hotrs. Adhvaryus are said to be scattering the barhis grass and pour¬ ing certain oblations in fire (VII.2.4). In most of the passages, however, they are associated with the pressing and offering of soma, possibly indicating that it was mainly for the purposes of a soma- ritual 108 that the office of Adhvaryu came to be introduced. That is perhaps the reason why the Adhvaryus are referred to as many, the number of the persons assisting depending upon the amount of soma-juice to be pressed. Five Adhvaryus 109 referred to at III.7.7 may indicate the number of those priests moving about in the place of sacrifice. They are said to be working for the preparation of the soma- juice in general (VI.44.3; VIII.4.11, 13; X.30.15, ‘adhvaryavah sunuta indraya somam’). At V.31.12, they are referred to as operating the pressing stone for the purpose. For their skill, they are referred to as ‘suhasta’ at IX.97.37, X.30.2, 41.3. They are also said to be pouring the soma-juice, pressed out by the stones, on the strainer 105. V.I. Vol. I, p. 21; ASL p. 258; VMH Vol. Ill, 423; ABI pp. 13-18. 106. from a + dhvar ‘to be defective’—so one who ensures the perfection in the performance. 107. ABI p. 13. 108. cf. also potr, gravagrabh below. 109. VMH Vol. ill, p. 423. 104 SACRIFICE IN THE JtGVEDA and purifying it (IX.51.1, adribhih sutam somam pavitra asrja). After it is ready, they are said to be offering it to the gods (VI.42.4; VII.92.2; 98.1, dugdhamamsum juhotana; VIII.24.16; 32.24). For their multiple relationship with soma, they have come to be desig¬ nated as ‘madhupani’ (X.41.3). For this important role in the actual work, they are given a leading place in the sacrificial performance and as such are referred to as ‘rathirasah’ (IX.97.37). UDGATR: The word is referred to only once in the Rgveda and signifies a priest singing the saman hymn (II.43.2, udgateva sakune sama gayasi). The solitary mention of the term is significant and indi¬ cates that the office came to be introduced pretty late and that the priest was not known by the name in the beginning. The list of seven priests at II.1.2 and X.91.10, does not include the ‘udgatr’ priest. Though the reference to ‘saman’ hymns is frequent, 110 the name of the udgatr is not associated with them except at II.43.2, indicating that the singing of the saman hymns was done by some other priest or that the person doing it was known by some other name. Thus ‘samabhrt’ is referred to at VII.33.14 and at V.54.14, ‘samavipra’ is said to be protected by Maruts, they also being singers. BRAHMAN i 111 The priest brahman referred to in the Rgvedic hymns does not appear to have acquired the position of the superintending priest, which he did in the later ritual. Oldenberg thinks that the brahman priest is not referred to in the Rgveda at all, the word signifying merely a ‘priest’. It however appears that the office of the priest had come to be introduced in the Rgvedic sacrifice, perhaps merely with a view to do some honour to a person. Occasionally he is said to be singing (1.80.1, 164.34; II.2.6; VI.45.7), but that does not appear to be either a strenuous or regular duty in a sacrificial performance. A sacrificial vessel is referred to as ‘brahmana’ at 1.15.5 and II.36.5, from which Indra is said to be drinking the soma-juice. As the ritual has not become very much complicated nor rigid, Brahma does not appear to have much work in the sacrifice and hence his idleness is referred to at VIII.92.30 (mo su brahmeva tandrayurbhuvah), where Indra is asked to enjoy the soma-juice and not be merely lazy like the brahman priest. The reference at IV.58.2 (upa brahma srunavacchasyamanam) may indicate that some time, brahma was merely to listen to a hymn being sung (and watch whether it was rightly done). There is no reason why he should be 110. Vide Chapter II, p. 32. 111. ASL p. 260; RPV p. 253; ABI pp. 20-21; V.I. Vol. II, p. 77; RVO 396, 7. THE ROLE OF THE PRIESTS IN THE SACRIFICE 165 considered as identical with brahmanacchamisin of the later ritual as Macdonell, Keith and Dr. Deshmukh do. 112 PUROHITA ;i 13 Like .hotr, ‘purohita’ is mentioned very frequently and the epithet is being associated with Agni as being the foremost in the sacrifice, fcf. V.11.2; X.150.4, ‘prathamah purohitah’ at at 1.102.8 even as ‘janusa purohitah’). The priestly service in general has come to be referred to as ‘purohitih’ at a few places (VII.60.12, 61.7, 83.4; X.70.7). As Agni is referred to as ‘hotr’ and ‘purohita’ simul¬ taneously (cf. 1.1.1; III.3.2; V.11.2), it appears that the hotr, with his important place in the sacrifice could be considered as a ‘purohita’. The idea of having the office of a purohita must be comparatively later. At VI.47.24, a Bharadvaja poet is referring to separate gifts obtained for the Atharvan priests and Payu, who had apparently helped him in the sacrifice. Thus the performance of a joint sacrifice by different patrons, where a number of priests would be officiating and one of them would be chosen as the leader, seems to have given rise to the idea of a ‘purohita’ among those priests. Even in the same family the chief would be the leader, followed by his family members as his assistants as indicated by the ‘purohiti’ of the Vasisthas referred to above. Thus the office of the ‘purohita’ seems to have been introduced to facilitate the performances of quantita¬ tively bigger rites and not the qualitatively bigger (or complicated) rites. This is also recognised by Max Muller who writes (p. 258) “The original institution of a purohita as a spiritual adviser of a king or a chief need not be regarded as the sign of a far advanced hierarchical system.” Oldenberg’s opinion 114 regarding the office of the purohita, not being the creator of the power of priesthood, appears to be quite understandable in this context, particularly as the convenience of the performance was the dominating idea in the introduction thereof. In the Rgveda, only Devapi (at X.98.7) and Vasistha (at X.150.5) are referred to as ‘purohita’. At X.98.7 (yaddevapih santanave purohito hotraya vrtah), Devapi is said to be chosen as purohita to do the duties of the hotr, indicating that the origin of the office had no idea of distinction in duty as its basis. The same is indicated by Agni and other gods like Surya being referred to as ‘purohita' (VIII.101.12), as they stand foremost among their groups as purohita among the priests. 112. Vide RVL p. 342. 113. V I. Vol. II, pp. 5-8; ASL pp. 256-258; RVL p. 156; RVO pp. 380-83. 114. cf. op. cit. p. 156. Dr. Deshmukh agrees with him. 166 SACRIFICE IN THE ftGVEDA POTFi : 115 As Macdonell imagines, the duty of the priest was to purify the soma juice. With his purifying ability in view, Agni’s duty is said to be that of the potr priest (tava potram at 1.76.4, II.1.2, X.2.2, 91.10). With the same point in view, Agni is referred to as ‘pota’ (at 1.94.6, II.5.2, IV.9.3, VIII.16.5) and soma at IX.67.22. As Adhvaryu used to do the duty of purifying the soma juice (see above) the office seems to be introduced to relieve him of a part of his duty. The vessel in which soma-juice was specifically offered to Maruts and Dravinodas is referred to as ‘potra’ at 1.15.2, II.36.2, 37.2, 4). PRASASTR : 116 Agni is referred to as ‘prasastr’ at 1.94.6, II.5.4 and the duty of the priest is said to belong to Agni at II.1.2 and X.91.10. He appears to be associated with the soma ritual as his vessel is referred to at II.36.6 (prasastra), from which Mitravaruna are to drink the soma juice. At 11.36.4, Agni is requested to drink soma from the cup of ‘Agnidh’, Indra, from the cup of ‘brahman’ and ‘rajana’ (i.e., Mitra- varuna) from the cup of ‘prasastr’. Thus the duties of different priests appear to be to give offerings to different divinities in a joint sacrifice. Haug identifies him with Maitravarupa of the later days. The transition from the one to the other however presupposes a process of elaboration of duties in course of time. AVAYAJ : A priest mentioned in the Asvamedha sacrifice (1.162.5). Haug 117 identifies him with ‘pratiprasthatr’ of the later ritual without any reasons. The evidence from the Rgveda does not sub¬ stantiate the conjecture. AGNIMINDH : 118 Like Avayaj, he is referred to at 1.162.5 only. No details are known about his duty though it is apparently to kindle the fire as indicated at X.41.3, where as ‘agnidh’, he is said to be ‘dhrtadaksa’, indicating the possession of strength required for kindling the fire from the Aranis. From a vessel named after him (agnldhra), Agni is said to be offered the soma-juice. He appears to be the same as ‘agnidh’ referred to at II.1.2 and X.91.10, with whom fire is identified. 115. V.I. Vol. II, p. 24. 116. V.I. Vol. II, p. 41; ABI p. 16. 117. ABI pp. 13-14. 118. ABI pp. 15-16. THE ROLE OF THE PRIESTS IN THE SACRIFICE 167 GRAVAGRABH:" 3 He also is mentioned at 1.162.5 only. He was apparently meant to help actively in operating the pressing stones, a duty done by Adhvaryus in the beginning. It is only in the later ritual that the pressing-stone operator came to be specifically so designated. NE$TR : 120 Agni is referred to as ‘nestr’ at 1.15.3 and II.5.5. His duty is identified with that of Agni at II.1.2 and X.91.10. A vessel assigned to him (called ne$tra), through which Dravinodas is offered soma- juice is referred to at 1.15.9, II.37.3, 4. UPAVAKTR: Derived from the root upa+vae, the word appears to signify a person, who would offer praises from near (the altar). Thus Agni is said to be ‘upavakya’ (fit to be prayed) at X.69.12. Indra is said to be ‘upavacya’ at 1.132.2 and Savitr at IV.54.1. Bhrgus are said to have offered worship with homage at 1.127.7. The duty implied is apparently the same as performed by the hotr priest as is clear from V.49.4 (upa yad voce adhvarasya hota). The noun ‘upavaka’ appears to be used in the sense of worship in general (1.164.8, namasvanta upavakamlyuh). Thus ‘upavakta’ appears to be the priest in charge of the per¬ formance in general, who was in a position to direct the sacrificial activity. It is for this reason that Agni is said to be ‘upavakta’ at IV.9.5 (adhvariyatamupavakta jananarh). At VI.71.5, 121 Savitr is compared with ‘upavaktr’ in respect of his hands raised up for direct¬ ing the activity and the utterance of the orders is referred to at IX.95.5 (isyan vacamupavakteva hotuh). In the latter passage, he is referred to as distinct from the ‘hotr’. Geldner 122 takes the word to refer to ‘prasastr’, the assistant of the hotr in later days. Mac- donell 123 identifies him with Maitravaruna of later days. Anyway, the word indicates that the designations of posts with duties were not finally fixed and the duty assigned to ‘upavaktr’ roughly indicates a transition to the stage of a priest like brahman or ‘purohita’. Thus it will be observed that the class of the priests was in a process of formation as the sacrifice was gradually growing. The priests, by virtue of their position as the brains behind and the operators of the sacrifice have had a unique role to play in the origin and the growth of the sacrifice. 119. op. cit. 120. V.I. Vol. p. 459; V.H. Part II. S.B.E. Vol. 46. p. 208. 121. Vide Chapter XII, D. 122. Der Rigveda Vol. I, p 430, 11.174. and III. p. 91 123. ERE XII p. 611. 168 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA We can observe some broad stages by which the class of the priests lias evolved. Thus, in the beginning of the sacrifice, there must have been only one priest, doing all that was required for a simple performance. Another stage is marked by the introduction of Adhvaryu, possibly for the purpose of a soma-sacrifice as indi¬ cated above. Still at this stage the idea of the superiority of the position of the one or the other does not seem to have come into existence as indicated by II.16.5, where both of them are referred to as ‘vrsana adhvaryu’. It may be noted that in the Apri hymns also only the hotr and the adhvaryu have been referred to. 124 The third stage seems to have been indicated by the introduction of other priests, whose designations have not been fixed. The assignment of separate designations may have been necessitated partly by the growing duties in the performances and partly by the requirement of the joint performances as indicated above. This quantitative growth of the performance appears to have necessitated the intro¬ duction of a head priest like the ‘brahma’ or ‘purohita’. The pheno¬ menon of Visvamitra and Vasistha having been the official priests of the Bharatas indicates that the point was decided on merit, the princes still having the control of the sacrifice in their hands by having the right of choice. The introduction of offices like those of upavaktr, prasastr, brahma and purohita would mark the fourth stage, when the control of the priests over the sacrificial performance appears to have come be gradually defined. Thus the over-all picture about the evolution of the class of the priests leaves the impression about the process of growth of the idea and practice of sacrifice still going on and not having attained its end. 124. it is therefore that in the Avesta, where the Apri ritual has been carried (Afringans), only two corresponding priests are referred to. This further supports the conjecture above that Avesta ritual appears to have parted company with the Rgveda ritual at the two-priest stage. Chapter Eight CONTRIBUTION OF THE PATRONS TO THE GROWTH OF THE SACRIFICE =tt fwfetWi'r i II (RV VIII. 5.0) PT snft 1 ?: ^sIciTO: I (iiV I. 125.7) SYNOPSIS : Prayer for liberal patrons, indicating their importance—respectful attitude of the poets—intelligent experiment of mutual co-operation in the sphere of social behaviour—connecting link, sacrifice—classes on the principle of division of labour —class consciousness with understanding of limitations—gifts asked for patrons as well as themselves—employment of the words maghavan and suri—Aryan and non-Aryan patrons—maghavan and suri distinguished—sacrifice as measuring rod of progressiveness—growth helped by individuals and groups— Groups—particular tribes—Jahnus, worshippers of Asvins—Bharata s support for Agni ritual—a number of generations of Bharata’s—Vadhryasva, possibly the originator of Agni-cult—Divodasa, a keen soma-sacrificer—stimulating the cult— Sudas—some outstanding performances— Pancajanas—their connection with Agni and Indra—a general reference to sacrificing peeple though referring to certain tribes in the beginning—Five tribes mentioned at 1.108.8 considered—yadus—their descendants—Indra-worship— Turvasas—enthusiasm about sacrifice—their overthrow—Druhyus—along with Anus and Turvasas worshippers of Asvins—Anus, members of the family—Purus—a powerful race—their family tradition regarding sacrifice—some individuals opposing —their residence—Purukutsa, Trasadasyu etc.—smaller clans—Srnjayas—their family—Rusamas with Rnancaya—other individual sacrificers—some petty chiefs undertaking joint performances—Kuruhga and divisji—Citra, Cyavatana etc.— sacrifice stressed as standard of Aryan way of life— Sacrificers variously referred to—Aryan sacrificers contrasted with non-Aryan non-sacrificers—soma sacrifice, a variety of epithets—liberality of patrons—patrons glorified with respectful admiration, gratitude and affection—well-balanced classes —co-operation, leading to prosperity— In a characteristic prayer, a poet belonging to the Grtsamada family is praying that he should not come across the want of a good liberal patron (11.2811, maham maghono varuna priasya bhuridavna avidam sunamapeh I). 1 Though the prayer may indicate the desire of the poet to be in possession of ample wealth always (c, ma rayo rajan tsuyamadava stham j), it points out the importance attached to 1. The line is repeated in the hymns II. 27, 28, 29. though the hymns 27 and 29 are addressed to Adityas and Visvcdevas respectively, indicating that the three hymns are a character'stic comuosition of a poet from the Grtsamada family. For the moaning of the word suna cf. VII.1.11 (ma sune agne ni?adama nrnam). 170 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA the class of patrons in the sacrifice. The sacrifice has grown to its later proportions, principally on account of the support it received from rich and liberal patrons. It is true that the patrons too stood to gain by the sacrifice; still the poets appear to be stressing the importance of the patrons during the different stages of sacrifice in the Rgveda. In fact, the system of sacrifice marks the early stages of the co-operative experiment that had been set up by the intelli- gentia in the social structure of the time, though co-operation on a smaller scale and in a limited sphere of activity must have been known earlier. It is for this reason that the poets are pretty frequently wishing prosperity both for themselves, as well as their patrons jointly (cf. 1.136.7,... .tadasyamo maghavana vayam cal) cf. also I. 140.12; II.2.11; V.65.6; VI.10.5, 46.9; VII.3.8, 8.7; IX.20.4, 98.12; X.115.5. Even as the sacrifice formed the connecting link of mutual obligation between the human beings on the one hand and the gods on the other as indicated in the Gita (III. 11), so too it became the connecting link between the patrons on the one hand and the priests on the other. In a slightly different sense, however, the sacrifice can be looked upon as the wedge that came to separate the two classes from each other in the course of time. The idea of ‘classes’ in the social orga¬ nism apparently came to be introduced with the early growth of the sacrifice based on the sound principle of the division of labour in social undertaking. As the sacrifice grew in importance, the two classes became more and more defined in their individualistic exist¬ ence and status. It is true that in any society, when the duties of different people become more and more well-defined, the introduc¬ tion of a class-system becomes inevitable. In the days of the Rgveda, the sacrifice has merely become instrumental in bringing into existence these two classes, which apparently have continued in a fairly mobile state of existence for a pretty long time. It would appear that the two classes continued to feel their interests inter¬ linked for a pretty long time, with necessary appreciation of individual limitations, as the above passages would amply indicate. 2 A majority of the passages indicate an attitude of humility towards the patrons, not only because their gifts depended upon them but also because they appreciated the hazards of the situation faced by the patrons in fighting the battles, necessary for winning the prosperity they desired. In course of time however, when there was greater stability in the social structure and more of peaceful life, the performances of sacrifice became more elaborate and the scale of importance turned in favour of the class of the priests. In 2. cf. also 1.141.13 for an indication of the desirability of co-operative effort, ami ca ye maghavano vayam ca miham na suro ati ni^tatanyuh I). CONTRIBUTION OF THE PATRONS 171 the days of the Rgveda however, the social structure has remained less complicated, the sacrifice also has not grown in its extent of elaboration to its later proportions. Thus we find the poets asking gifts for their patrons from the divinities and expecting gifts from their patrons. At places only the gifts are directly expected from the divinities but there too the underlying idea being that they can come through the sacrifices which are being performed under the patronage of the sacrificers. Thus the divinities are asked to give food to the patrons (1.73.5; VII.8.7; VIII.24.6); wealth (1.77.4, 124.10, VI.10.5, VII.5.9, 16.9, IX.20.4); shelter, protection and fame (II.2.12, VI.46.9, VII.32.7, VII.74.5, VIII.13.12, 60.6, X.22.15, 115.5, etc.); vital power (1.93.12; VII.58.3); royal glory (V.10.6, VI.8.6; VII.95.3). They are requested to shine upon the patrons and prosper (1.140.10, 141.13; VII.18.21); to keep them away from injuries (II.33.4); to love them and grant long life (1.73.5, 73.9, 125.7; VII.67.10, X.147.3). The words ‘maghavan’ and ‘suri’ are ordinarily used in the sense of liberal patrons. Sometimes the word ‘maghavan’ is used as an adjective of the Suris (II.6.4, sa bodhi surirmaghava; X.81.6). At VIII.10.4, it is indicated that there were some non-Aryan wor¬ shippers of the Asvina (yayoradhi pra yajna asure santi surayah). 3 At VIII.5.31, Asvins are said to be coming to the Aryans from their non-Aryan worshippers (a vahethe parakat purvih asnantau asvina | iso dasiramartya). This may indicate that some of the non-Aryans were converted to Aryan mode of worship or that some of the divi¬ nities were common to the worship of both the Aryans and non- Aryans. At two or three places however, some sort of distinction is sought to be drawn between them by their separate mention. Thus at 1.73.5 (vi prkso agne maghavano aiyur vi surayo dadato visva- mayuh |), where the repetition of the preposition ‘vi’ clearly indi¬ cates maghavans and suris as separate categories. It may be noted that in the passages where food is expected, the word ‘maghavan’ is used; and where long life is expected (1.73.9, 125.7; VII.67.10, 69.8), the word ‘suri’ is used. It may be pure accident but about the separate character of the two, there can be no doubt. At VII. 16.7 (tve agne svahuta priyasah santu surayah | yantaro ye maghavano jananamurvan dayanta gonarh i') the independent character is not so obvious. At X.61.22, however, (raksa ca no maghonah pahi surin), the use of two independent synonymous words to convey the idea of protection leaves no doubt about their independent character, though 3. Vide Chapter VIII; Say. explains ‘asure' as ‘stotrrahite’. The word is used only once in the RV. At V.32.6, ‘asurya’ is adjective of tamas’ and ‘asure’ appears to refer to non-Aryans (cf. ‘Kr^nam tvacam’ at 1.130.8 and dasarii varnam II.12.4). 172 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA it is not clear what the distinction exacly is. Derivatively, ‘suris’ from svar) may be predominantly said to be characterised by their power or glory and maghavans (magha—mahh) by their outstanding generosity. Regarding the gifts which are received from the patrons, some¬ times, they are said to be inspired by the divinties (1.48.2, VII.96.2, IX.1.3). Occasionally the credit is given to the will of the patrons (II.2.13, VII.67.9). Some of these outstanding gifts have come to be specifically mentioned and glorified in hymns. 4 It will thus be realised that the interests of both the sections, that were gradually emerging into existence were intimately con¬ nected with the sacrifice and as such the sacrifice was also gathering strength day by day. Whatever may be the idea of progressive spirit that the Aryans had in their mind in designating themselves as ‘arya’ as contrasted with the others whom they styled as ‘anarya’, it becomes clear that in the course of time, the sacrifice became the measuring rod for the progressiveness of spirit as conceived by them. Thus the Dasas, the dasyus and the Panis are to be struck down to the lowliest depth because they were non-sacrificers. It is for this reason that, while pointing out the characteristic deeds of Indra, the poet of 11.12 refers to him as having extended protection to the sacrificers (v.6, yuktagravpo yo avita sutasomasya; v.15, sunvate pacate dudhra a cit; v.14, yah sunvantamavati) and having subdued the Dasas (v.4b, yo dasam varnamadharam guha kah). The con¬ trast between the Aryans and the Dasas is made clearer at 1.51.8 (vijanihi aryan ye ca dasyavah—barhismate randhayavratan—saki bhava yajamanasya codita), where Indra is requested to be a staunch inspirer of the sacrificing Aryans against the non-sacrificing Dasyus. Panis are also referred to as struck down because of their non-sacri¬ ficing attitude (VII.6.3, panlnrasraddhah.ayajnan.purvas- cakara aparan ayajyun). 5 In this way, when sacrifice was gaining in importance, a number of groups or sections among the people appear to have taken them¬ selves enthusiastically to the cult and given it a great impetus. There is a general mention of this section of the society at a number of places. Thus Agni is said to belong to them at 1.36.1 (yavham... . visam devayatinam). The Aryan tribe is said to be attending upon Agni for sacrifice at 1.77.3 ,tam medhesu prathamarh devayantirvisa upa bruvate dasmamarlh ')• Asvins are said to be going to them at VII.69.2 (viso yena gacchatho devayantih... ,). 6 The tribe of Jahnus appears to have similarly distinguished itself particularly in the Asvina worship as at both the places, they 4. Vide—Danastutis in Chapter XI; cf. also Chapter IV. 5. Vide ‘non-sacrificers’ in Chapter IX. 6. cf. also 11.63, X.11.4, 41.3. CONTRIBUTION OF THE PATRONS 173 are referred to, they are associated with Asvins only (cf. III.58.6, ‘puranamokah sakhyam sivam vam, yuvornara dravinam janha- vyam’, indicates the association with a long tradition; and 1.116.19, ‘a janhavim samanasopavajaistriranho bhagarh dadhatimayataih’, indicates the charcteristic (savana) offerings of the tribe thrice a day.) 7 This may further indicate how certain sections and groups in the society had come to specialise in a particular mode of worship of a particular divinity. BHARATAS : 8 Bharatas appear to have played a significant role in the evolu¬ tion of the sacrifice. Their connection with Agni worship appears to be so intimate that Agni is said to be shining brightly for them (V.ll.l, dyumad vibhati bharatebhyah sucih). Agni is said to belong to them (VII.8.4, pra pra ayarh bharatasya agnih). ‘Bharata’ has become an epithet of Agni (II.7.1, 5; IV.25.4, VI.16.19, 45). Bharatl possibly indicates the chief family deity of the Bharatas on account of some distinctive mode of worship evolved by them as illustrated in the Apr! hymns. 9 At III.33.il, 12, Visvamitra is referred to as helping them in crossing the confluence of Vipat and Sutudri, when they were out on an expedition (atarisurbharata gavyavah). The importance of the tribe in the sacrifice, which they helped to grow on account of their association with Visvamitra has been described in a characte¬ ristically proud expression on his part (III.53.12, visvamitrasya raksati brahmedam bharatam janam). 10 Later on when Vasi^tha became their priest, they had possibly grown weaker in their politi¬ cal power as suggested at VII.33.6 (dan$a ived go’janasa asan paricchinna bharata arbhakasah). The priestly service of Vasistha however is said to have changed the situation and helped them to be restored to glory (op.cit. abhavacca pura eta vasistha adittrtsunam viso a prathanta; cf. also VII.83.4). Like the Purus, the Bharatas are also said to be residing on the banks of the river Saraswati (III.23.4, saraswatyam revadagne didlhi). Though some of the Puru kings are referred to as being on inimical terms with some of the Bharatas, 1.63.7, VII.18.13, Indra is referred as having helped both of them indicating how both the clans were observing Indra worship enthusiastically. Both the families were associated with the Visvamitra and Vasistha. Generations of the Bharatas, mentioned in the Rgveda appear to have consistently carried on the cult of sacrifice, whatever their 7. cf. under ‘savana’ Chapter V, pp. 105-8. 8. V.I. Vol. II. 94-97; Ved. Stu. 11.136; VMH Vol. 1.111. 9. AHR. B.U.J. 1946 pp. 32-33. 10. Vide Chapter VII under ‘Visvamitra’. 174 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA political status. At VI.61.1, Saraswati is said to have given Divod&sa (as a son) to Vadhryasva. It may be on account of this incident that the later generations took to the cult of the sacrifice more enthusiasti¬ cally. This Vadhryasva is also mentioned at X.69, where too his close association with sacrifice is indicated. Perhaps it was he who introduced the tradition of sacrifice in the family as indicated by the reference to his kindling the fire first at X.69.4 and by reference to Agni as a child in his lap at X.69.10. He is said to have done it in ancient days (X.69.12,. . . .sanakat preddhah). It is for this reason that Agni is said to belong to him and his leadership in that regard praised (X.69.1, bhadra agnervadhryasvasya samdrso, vami pranitih ....). His characteristic ghrta offering is indicated at X.69.2, which is said to have led to prosperity (vardhanam). Like his father, Divodasa was also a keen follower of the fire- ritual. Thus fire is said to belong to him (VIII.103.2, daivodaso agnih) and to Bharatas through him at VI.16.19 (agniragami bhara- tah... divodasasya satpatih). That he was a soma-sacrificer is made clear at VI.16.5 (divodasaya sunvate) and by reference to his having received help from Indra on account of soma offered by him (1.53.10, II.14.7, VI.18.13, VI.31.4, VI.47.22, VII.19.8, VIII.53.2). His con¬ nection with Indra, Agni and Maruts is referred to at VII.18.25 (divodasam na pitaram sudasafi), though no Danastuti appears in his honour. His close association with Bharadvajas is indicated at a number of places, where the help he received along with them from the Asvins is referred to (1.112.13, 14, 116.18). He appears to have stimulated the cult of Indra-worship among his followers, who are referred to by his name at 1.130.10 (divodasebhih stavana indrah), though he is referred to as a Bharata (VI.16.4). SUDAS : 11 Though the father of Sudas (Pijavana, VII.18.22, 23, 25), may have continued the tradition of sacrifice, nothing is known about him. Sudas has the unique position of being associated with two great priestly families of high sacrificial traditions. Thus at III. 53.9-11, 12 , Indra is said to be helping Sudas on account of the priestly help of Visvamitra (visvamitro yadavahat sudasamapriya- yata. . . .), which consisted of a soma-sacrifice as indicated at III.53.10 (. . . .adhvare sute saca). In an equally emphatic statement, Indra is said to have helped him on account of the help of Vasi$thah (VII. 33.3, evennu dasarajne sudasam pravadindro brahmana vo vasisthah; cf. also VII.18.17, VII.19.3, VII.20.2, 60.9, 83.1.4, etc.)’. This triumph of Vasistha family is being described in a reminiscent mood by a later poet, who also describes how the family’s invocation has brought 11. V.I. Vol. II, p. 454; VMH 1.107. 12. cf. Vel. B.U.J. Vol. Ill, Part VI, pp. 38-43. CONTRIBUTION OF THE PATRONS 175 Indra in preference to the sacrifices of other persons (VII.33.2, where ‘Pasadyumna’ 13 is mentioned). The soma-sacrifice also associates Sudas with Asvins, who are supposed to have given him his wife Sudevi (1.112.19). His worship of Mitravaruna, where the priestly help is expected to be appreciated even by his enemies is referred to at VII.64.3 (mitrastanno varuno devo aryah pra sadhisthebhih pathi- bhirnayantu | bravad yatha na adarih sudasa isa madema saha devagopahj |), indicating how the outstanding results of certain per¬ formances used to convert people towards the cult of sacrifice. A general mention of the help he received from Vasisfhas will be found at VII.20.2, 25.3, 32.10. It is however the Dasarajna battle and the victory he gained therein as a result of the priestly service of Vasistha, that seems to have brought him as well as Vasi^ha to great prominence. Two Bharata chiefs are mentioned as connected intimately with the fire-ritual (III.23.2, amanthi$tham bharata revadagnim devasrava devavatah. .. .) on the banks of the rivers, Dr$advati, Apaya and Saraswatl (III.23.4). Another Bharata is referred to as kindling fire for sacrifice at VI.16.4, where it is indicated how he was a keen sacrificer and stimulated the interest of his followers in sacrifice as well. PANCAJANAS : Like the Bharatas, the Paneajanas also figure prominently in the evolution of the sacrifice in the days of the Rgveda. In a general way the ‘panca krstis’ or pancacarsanis’ or ‘pancaksitis’ or panca- manusas’ have been mentioned as associated with the ritual and the consequential prosperity. Thus at IX.66.20 (agnih rsih pavamanah pancajanyah purohitah) and at 1.100.12 (. . . .pancajanyo marutvanno bhavatvindra utl), their association with Indra and soma worship is indicated. At V. 32.11, Indra is said to be the good lord of ‘panca- janas’ and as such worshipped by them twice a day. cf. also VIII. 63.7 (pancajanyaya visa indre ghosa asrksata). As such Indra is said to belong to them (1.7.9, indrah pancaksitlnam). Indra is said to be the source of strength and prosperity to them (III.37.9, 1.176.3). Being connected with sacrifices in general, their association with Agni is quite apparent (X.45.6, jana yadagnimayajanta panca and VI.11.4cd.). It is for the same reason that Usas is said to be awaken¬ ing them (VII.75.4, pancaksitirbodhayantl). The word pahcajana’ 13 may have been associated with five tribey only in the beginning, though later on it came to refer to all 13 ' ^l; r vld kn Stu n 2 t °130, V I39 artiCipated ^ the Da ^ ar ^na battle. cfTV.I. Vol. I 14. VMH Vol. I, p. 105; V.I. II,' pp. 341-2. 176 SACRIFICE IN THE ftGVEDA the people who followed the cult of sacrifice as would be clear from the references above. At IX.14.2 (gira yadi sabandhavah pancavrata apasyavah | pariskrnvantiit appears that the com¬ mon ties which brought together the five tribes, appear to be referred to. Their employment of hymns (gira) and their dressing of soma juice are said to have brought them together (sabandhavah), indi¬ cating that it was some common tradition regarding the sacrificial performances which made them form a compact group of the name. It is such association regarding soma-sacrifice that appears to have prompted the collection of soma hymns in a separate mandala. At 1.108.8, five tribes have been mentioned individually as associated with Agni and Indra worship from very ancient days (yudindragni yadusu turvasesu yad druhyu^u anusu puru§u sthah j atah pari vpsanava hi yatamatha somasya pibatam sutasya). From the tone of vv.7-12 of the hymn, where the poet is requesting the divinities to come from all places (cf. v.7, brahmani. .. .rajani va; v.10, avamasyam, madhyamasyam, para- masyam ....), it appears that the poet is referring to five sacrificing tribes from all the directions. There is however no convincing evidence to support the view that those five only were known as ‘pancajanas’. It may be a pure accident that the peoples mentioned here are five in number. It appears to be purely for political reasons that they fought with Sudas in the famous Dasarajna battle. As it will be observed below all of them were followers of the cult of the sacrifice as it was in prevalence at the time. The role of the Bharatas in the evolution of the sacrifice and their tradition in that regard was so prominent that they would come to be included in any list of the five tribes on the criterion of the sacrifice, which appears to be associated with them. The employment of the words indicating five tribes in the seventh mandala, 15 which refers to the triumph of Sudas over kings including the five mentioned at 1.108, would indicate that they could not be in view of the poets of VII.15, 75 and-79, where ‘pancajanas’ are referred to as favoured by the divinities. So it would appear that even if the word ‘pancajana’ referred to the five tribes, referred to at 1.108 sometime, that association had come to be forgotten in course of time and the word had come to mean ‘the sacrificing Aryans’ in general. YADUS : 16 Out of nearly a dozen passages, where yadu or yadus are men¬ tioned in the Rgveda, their connection with sacrifice is suggested at VIII.10.5, where the divinities are said to be residing with them; 15. VII.15.2, 72.5, 75.4, 79.1. 16. V.I. Vol. II, p. 185. CONTRIBUTION OF THE PATRONS 177 at 1.174.9, V.31.8, VI.20.12, VIII.7.18, where yadu is said to have been helped by the divinities. At X.62.10, a yadu prince is praised in a danastuti for a gift of two dasas. At VIII.9.14, the association with soma-sacrifice is clearly referred to. The descendants of the yadus (yadvas) 17 are glorified in a danastuti at VIII.6.47 (trini satanyarvatam sahasra dasa gonam ! dadu§pajraya samne), where they are said to have given very sump¬ tuous gifts for a saman hymn of the Pajra family. 18 Another yadava prince is said to have suffered along with Turvasa at the hands of Indra (VII.19.8) on account of wrong political alliance. At VIII.6.46-48, Tirindara 19 and Parsu, 20 appear to be referred to as belonging to the yadva group (satamaham tirindare sahasram parsava dade 1 radhamsi yadvanam), which is said to be well known (for their sacrificial gifts) (v.48, sravasa yadvarh janam). TURVASAS : 21 In about ten passages, Indra’s help to them has been referred to. At VI.27.7, a Turvasa prince is said to be defeated by Indra in favour of Srnjaya and at VII.18.6, another Turvasa, who allied with others to form a group of ten (dasa rajanah samitah ayajyavah VII.83.7), is said to have been thrown down in favour of Sudas. The irony in the description (purola itturvso yaksurasit) very possibly is significant, indicating his enthusiasm for sacrificial performances. At VIII.4.19 and X.62.10, gifts given by Turvasa have been referred to, indicating the sacrificial performances of the family. At VIII. 10.5, their association in Asvin worship is referred to. Turvlti 22 referred to at 1.61.11, 11.13.12, V.19.6, possibly belonged to the Turvasa family as Macdonell imagines. At 1.112.23 he is said to be helped by Asvins. Say. takes him to be a son of Vayya. 23 DRUHYUS : 24 At 1.108 and VIII.10.5, their association with sacrifice has been referred to along with others. Their strength is referred to at VI. 46.8. The clan of Druhyus thus appears to have prospered for some time and helped the growth of sacrifice; but in their association with others against Sudas in the Dasarajna battle, they appear to be almost completely wiped off as indicated at VII.18.14 (ni gavyavo anavo druhyavasca $astih sata susupuh satsahasra j $a$thirv!raso adhi §ad 17. V.I. I, p. 190. 18. Vide Chapter VII, p. 152. 19. V.I. Vol. I, p. 310. 20. V.I. Vol. I, p. 504. 21. V.I. Vol. I, p. 314. 22. V.I. Vol. I, p. 317. 23. V.I. II. p. 244. 24. V.I. Vol. I, p. 385. 178 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA duvoyu), where they are said to have been destroyed in large num¬ bers along with their chief (VII.18.12, anu druhyum ni Vpiag vajrabahuh). ANUS : 2S At V.31.4, 26 they are said to be preparing the chariot of Indra along with Tvastr who fashioned his bow. At VIII.4.1, Indra is said to be residing with Anus and Turvasa. Agni is said to belong to Anus at VIII.74.4. Along with Druhyus (VII. 18.14), they have suffered heavily in the Dasarajna battle. At VIII.74.2 Srutarvan, 27 is said to be worshipping the fire of the Anus. He is said to be ‘arksa’. Thus Rksa, Arksa, Srutarvan and Asvamedha, 28 may be all persons belonging to the family of the Anus, confirming their sacrificial traditions. PURUS : 29 The race of the Purus apparently was known as a powerful race as its strength is particularly requested by a poet at VI.46.8 (yad va trksau maghavan druhyava jane yat purau kacca vrsnyam | asmabhyam tad rirlhi 11). Whether it was due to sacrificial traditions or not, the close association with sacrifice is, as in the case of Turvasa, 30 ironically indicated at VII.18.13 (jesma purum vidathe mrdhravacam), where the poet is emphasizing how the sacrificial invocations of Purus would be futile in comparison with those of Vasistha. It is thus that his priestly service would be fruitful as against that of the priest of the Purus (VII.83.4, satya... .puro- hitih). This sacrificial association of the Purus is amply substantiated by references to a number of persons of that family, though some of them are described as having suffered on account of wrong poli¬ tical alliances. For their connection with some form of fire-ritual cf. 1.59.6, V.17.1, VII.5.3 and X.4.1. They are associated with Indra worship as well, as indicated at 1.131.4, IV.21.10, VI.20.10, X.48.5. They are said to be residing on the banks of Saraswatl, well- known for sacrificial activity (VII.96.2). On the strength of VIII. 64.10-11, they are believed to be residing on the Saryanavat, 31 which again is imagined to be a portion of Saraswatl. 32 25. V .1. Vol. I, p. 22. 26. Say. takes them to be ‘Rbhus’; but they have fashioned the chariot of Asvins (Vide my paper in B.U.J. 1952). 27. See below. 28. said to be arksa at VIII.68.16. 29. V.I. Vol. II p. 'll. 30. VII.18.6 see above. 31. V.I. Vol. II, p. 12; for various views see V.I. Vol. II, p. 364. 32. For Oldenberg’s view regarding the merger of Purus with Kurus, cf. ‘Buddha’ —404 THE ROLE OF THE PRIESTS IN THE SACRIFICE 179 Two generations of Purus, 33 sacrificing to Indra have been referred to. Thus Purukutsa is said to be receiving help from Indra at 1.63.7, 174.2 and VI.20.10. Asvins are said to be helping him (1.112.7, 14). His son Trasadasyu is associated with the worship of Dyavaprthivi (IV.38.1), Indra (VII.19.3), Asvins (VIII.8.21, 36.7). His mother is said to have received him as her son on account of Indra-worship (IV.42.9). He appears to be a very keen sacrificer from the mention of Agni as ‘Trasadasyava samrat’ (VIII.19.32) and from a Danastuti in his honour at V.33.8, 9 by a member of Atri family. Another one in his honour by Sobhari of the Kanva family is referred to at VIII.19.36, where he is described as the most liberal (manhistha) person. In course of time Trasadasyu appears to have become a family name as Tryaruna is referred to accordingly at V.27.3. Tryarupa, possibly a son of Trivrsna (led.) is being praised for a sacrificial gift at V.27.1-3, where he is said to be receiving Agni’s favour for the ninth time (v.3ab, eva ta agne sumatim cakano navi^thaya navamam trasadasyuh). Trksi 34 belonging to Trasadasyu’s family is referred to as winning gifts from Asvins, indicating the continuation of the sacri¬ ficial tradition (VIII.22.7.tj-k?im.trasadasyavam. jinvathafi). Kurusravana 35 is referred to as belonging to the family of Trasadasyu (X.33.4). He is said to be ‘manhistha’ like Trasadasyu at VIII.19.36. His gifts are referred to at X.32.9. It is not quite clear how Tpk^i and Kurusravana were related together as well as with Trasadasyu. The vague mention may indicate that they were very much later than him. Upamairavas 36 is mentioned as the son of Kurusravana (X.33.6) and the grandson of Mitratithi (X.33.7). Still another king in the Puru family carrying on the sacrificial traditions is referred to at VIII.50.5 as Paura. 37 Indra is said to be having a fancy for the invocation of Paura in a soma sacrifice (some svadhvare. ...paure chandayase havam). He is similarly associated with Asvin worship at V.74.4. The reference to ‘Paurasah’ at VIII. 54.1) carrying on Indra worship possibly indicates how the later members came to be recognised by his name, his having been an illustrious member of the family. SISTAS : 3S It appears to be a small clan which had distinguished itself in 33. For two other possible ancestors, cf. V.I. I p. 327. 34. V.I. I, p. 319. 35. V.I. I. p. 170; Brhad VIII. 35-6. 36. V.I. I p. 93. 37. V.I. II p. 26. 38. V.I. II p. 383. 180 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA soma sacrifices (VIII.53.4). 39 CEDIS : 40 This small clan along with their chief Kasu 41 has been referred to at VIII.5.37-39. They are referred to as a powerful people, who subdued the ten kings 42 (v.38). They are said to be unique in their ways (makirena patha gad yeneme yanti cedayah |). Their liberal gift is also referred to (satamustranarh dadat sahasra dasa gonam). SRRJAYAS : 43 This is another ancient family with a sacrificial tradition. At IV. 15.4 (ayam yah srnjaye puro daivavate samidhyate), where Daivavata of the Srnjaya family is said to have kindled sacrificial fire in old days. It is possible that he was a son of Devavata of the Bharata family (see above) who was known for his Agni worship. His name seems to be Srnjaya which later on came to be known as the name of the family (cf. Trasadasyu above). Kumara Saha- devya, 44 who is mentioned in a danastuti in the same hymn (IV. 15.7.10) almost certainly belongs to that family. Daivavata is also referred to in a danastuti at VI.27.7, where Indra is said to have helped him against Turvasa and Vrcivats. 45 Another king of the same family Prastoka 46 is praised in a danastuti at VI.47.22-25 (prastoka it.. ;.bharadvajan sarnjayo abhyaya§ta). According to Hillebrandt 47 Vltahavya mentioned at VI.15.2, 3; VII.19.3 is also a member of the Srnjaya family. RUSAMA : This is the name of another sacrificing family referred to in a danastuti at V.30.12-15, 48 where they are said to be offering strong soma juice to Indra (v.13). Their king Rnamcaya 49 is referred to (v.12, 14, rnamcaye rajani rusamanam). The word ‘rusama’ is used in singular at VIII.3.12, 4.2, 51.9, indicating either the founder of the family or the family itself. At VIII.3.12, Indra is said to be helping him. At VIII.4.2 (indra madayase), their soma-sacrifice is referred to. Their family priest was Babhru (V.30.11). 50 39. Sisfesu citte madiraso amsavo yatra somasya trrhpasi. 40. V.I. I p. 263. 41. V.I. I p. 144. 42. They are apparently different from those of the famous Dasarajfia battle. Possibly the opponents were similarly confederated against Kasu. 43. V.I. II. 469-71; Buddha-405. 44. V.I. II. p. 479. 45. See Abhyavarti below. 46. V.I. II p. 43. 47. VMH I p. 105; V.I. II.316-7. 48. Vide Chapter XI. 49. V.I. I p. 110. 50. Vide Chapter VII, p. 146. CONTRIBUTION OF THE PATRONS 181 NAHU$AS : 61 The tribe is mentioned along with the ‘panca ksitis’ at VI.46.7, indicating its ancient tradition. Agni is said to be kindled for him at 1.31.11 and adored by the tribe (X.80.6). Their association with Saraswati is indicated at VII.95.2 and with soma and sacrifice at IX.88.2, 91.2; VIII.46.27. Besides these families occasional mention is made of a number of other individuals who have rendered some conspicuous service to the cause of the sacrifice. ATITHIGVA : 52 He is referred to as giving gifts in a sacrifice along with his son Indrota (VIII.68.15, 17). According to Say. on VIII.68.14, they are giving gifts being inspired to do so when they attended the sacrificial session of Rk§a and Asvamedha. ABHYAVARTI CYAYAMANA : 53 At VI.27.5, 8, he is said to be helped by Indra and is referred to in a danastuti of Daivavata of the Srnjaya family, with whom possibly he is identical. ASVATHA : 54 He is said to have given a gift to Payu at VI.47.24. He need not be considered as identical with Divodasa and Prastoka as Griffith 55 imagines. ASVAMEDHA : 5e He is referred to at V.27.4.6 in a danastuti in his honour, where he is said to have performed a soma-sacrifice in honour of Indra and Agni (vv.5, 6) cf. Rk?a, Arksa and Putakratu below. ASAMATI : 67 He is probably a king of Rathaprostha family, said to have been helped by Indra against Bhajeratha (X.60.2), to gain political power (k$atra X.60.5), though Macdonell construes the word merely as an adjective. INDROTA: See Atithigva above. 51. V.I. I p. 438. 52. V.I. I p. 15; Vel. B.U.J. XV 1948 p. 25 f.n. and Vol. XXI, 1952 p. 18 f.n. 53. V.I. 1.29; 260. 54. V.I. I p. 44. 55. HRG Vol. I p. 611 f.n. 58. V.I. I pp. 44, 69; Anuk, considers him as a member of the Bharata family. 57. V.I. I pp. 46-7. 182 SACRIFICE IN THE FtGVEDA UK$ANYAYANA : 68 At VIII.25.22-25, he is mentioned as giving a gift along with Su$aman and Harayana, who need not be considered as identical merely by the fact of their reference in a ‘danastuti’. Thus in v.22, Uk$anyayana is said to have given a bay horse, Harayana, a white horse and Su$aman, a chariot. And then in the following two verses, the horses with a chariot are glorified. The word ‘vipra’ (v.24) need not be considered as used with an irony as Griffith 59 imagines but as referring to two attendants. It may be noted that the chariot is referred to as ‘yukta’ (v.22). Thus the three need not be considered as identical particularly as they are mentioned separately with different gifts. The phenomenon of different persons giving gifts in the same sacrifice is a pretty common one (cf. VIII.68.14-19). It appears to be due to the fact that certain victories were won jointly and hence the sacrificial performance would also be a joint one. It is also possible that some petty patrons would be coming together for a bigger performance which would be possible by their joint effort. 0RJANYA :<3° As Say. construes, this is possibly the name of a sacrificing prince at V.41.20 though it is construed as an adjective by Roth. RK$A AND ARK§A : 51 Along with the gifts of other patrons, the son of Rksa (VIII. 68.15), is said to have given gifts of horses. At VIII.68.16 Asvamedha is referred to as Ark§a possibly indicating that he is identical with the son of Rksa, referred to in v.15. In that case he may be different from a person of the name referred to at V.27.4-6 (see above). At VIII.74.13 Srutarvan is also referred to as Arksa, indicating that he is perhaps the brother of Asvamedha referred to at VIII.68.16 or perhaps by the time the name of Rksa had come to be associated with a family and all subsequent persons were referring to them¬ selves of ‘Ark$a’. Srutarvan Arksa appears to be residing on the banks of Parusni (cf. VIII.74.15). For their possible connection with the family of Anus, see above (under ‘Anus’). RJI$VAN : 62 At IV.16.13 and V.29.11, he is referred to as a descendant of Vidathin. He is said to be a liberal sacrificer at VI.20.7. He is mentioned along with a number of persons who gained at the hands of Indra, among whom Trasadasyu is one (VIII.49.10) and as such 5fT V.I. p. 83. 59. HRG Vol. p. 161 f.n. 60. V.I. I p. 105. 61. VJ. I p. 107. 62. VJ. Vol. I, p. 108; for Vaidathina, Vol. II, p. 329. CONTRIBUTION OF THE PATRONS 183 appears to be known as a soma-sacrificer. This is confirmed by V.29.11 (a avamrji$va sakhyaya cakre pacanpaktirapibah somam- asya,), where he is said to have offered oblations and pressed out the soma-juice. KUNDAPAYYA : G3 At VIII.17.13 it may be the name of ancient soma-sacrificer as indicated by the pressing of the soma-juice, referred to in v.12. KURUNGA : 64 He is said to have given an attractive gift in divi§ti sacrifices 35 at VIII.4.19, which is said to be characteristic even in comparison with that of the Turvasas. (turvasesu amanmahi). KRPA : 6G Along with Ruma, Ru£ama Syavaka, he is mentioned as offer¬ ing sacrifice to Indra at VIII.4.2 and as such requests help from him (IV.3.12, sagdhi krpam). CITRA : 67 It is not clear how Brhad has arrived at the story of Citra being the king of rats. The description at VIII.21.17-18 appears to be quite a normal one as that of a prince as far as the Rgveda is con¬ cerned. It is a danastuti in his honour. Indra-worship has helped him in gaining a victory and he appears to be celebrating it on the banks of the river Saraswatl as indicated at VIII.21.17 (indro va ghediyanmagham saraswati va subhaga dadirvasu j tvarh va citra dasuse) where the gift is referred to as capable of being given by Indra, Saraswati or Citra. The gift is almost a shower of wealth (parjanya it tatanad hi vrstya) as he gave in thousands (sahasra- mayuta dadat). On account of such an outstanding gift, other princes are said to be appearing quite dimunitive in comparison with him (v.18, citra id raja rajaka idanyake yake saraswatimanu j). CYAVATANA : e8 At V.33.9, the sacrificial gift of Cyavatana is referred to as indi¬ cated by reference to that of Marutasva earlier as ‘vidathasya rati’ (33.9b). Perhaps he may be identical with the latter as Macdonell suggests. He is mentioned in the hymn along with Trasadasyu and Dhvanya with their separate gifts. 63. V.I. I p. 161; Say. does not consider the word to be the name of a sacrificer. 64. V.I. I p. 170. 65. cf. Chapter VI p. 128. 66. V.I. I p. 179. 67. V.I. 1.261; Brhad. VI.61. 68. V.I. I p. 264. 184 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA TARANTA ; 69 At V.61.10, as a son of Vidadasva (Vaidadasvin), 70 he is said to have given a gift of a hundred cows. TARUKfpA : 71 He is mentioned along with Dasa Balbutha in a danastuti at VIII.46.32. Perhaps he was also a Dasa and as such a convert to the cult of the sacrifice. TIRINDARA 72 AND PAR6U : 73 See Yadus above and the danastuti at VIII.6.46-48 in Chapter XI. TURVAYANA : 74 At 1.53.10 and VI.18.13, Indra is said to have helped him. At X.61.1 (parsat pakthe), the Pakthas are said to have been helped and at v.2, Turvayana is said to have offered ample soma-juice. Cyavana, 75 the priest of another patron had fairly advanced prepa¬ rations for sacrifice to Indra (v.2, cyavanah sudairamimita vedim). Indra however is said to have driven away the priests (v.l, ahanna sapta hotrn), as the offering of Cyavana was deceptive (v.2, sa id danaya dabhyaya vanvan). This indicates how mere show was not tolerated for sacrifices and the success of the performance was determined on quantitative grounds as indicated by almost a shower of soma-juice on the part of Cyavana. TRNASKANDA : 76 He is said to be helped by Maruts, along with his subjects at 1.172.3. DABHITI : 77 He is said to have received help from Indra against Dasyus and Dasas (II.13.9; IV.30.21), apparently by sacrificial performances referred to at VI.20.13 (. . . . somebhih sunvan dabhitiridhmabhrtih pakthyarkaih), with soma-juice and cooked food. He need not be considered to be a priest by a reference to hymns at VI.20.13. If there was a patron, the occasion required his mention and so the conjecture does not appear to be justified. 69. V.l. I p. 300. 70. V.l. II p. 329. 71. V.l. I p. 300. 72. V.l. p. 310. 73. op. cit. p. 504. 74. op. cit. p. 319. 75. V.l. I pp. 264-5. 76. op. cit. p. 320. 77. op. cit. pp. 339-40. CONTRIBUTION OF THE PATRONS 185 DASYAVE \HFtKA : 78 As a patron of sacrifice, he is said to have given sumptuous gifts to a member of the Kanva family in VIII.55 and 56. At VIII. 51.2, the name refers to a priest who won a thousand cows apparent¬ ly as a gift from his patron. It appears that the name Dasyavevfka ( a wolf to dasyus) was coined for a patron and later his priest-poet also came to be designated accordingly. This appears to have happened as in the case of ‘Tj-tsus’, where the word is applied to both the Vasi$thas as well as their patrons in the Rgveda. 79 DUHSIMA : so He is referred to in a danastuti at X.93.14-15, along with Pj-thavana, Vena and Mayava Rama about whom nothing is known except that they declare their gift jointly. This is another illustra¬ tion of a joint sacrifice by a number of petty chiefs. DHVANYA : 8 ' Along with Trasadasyu and Cyavatana, Dhvanya, the son of Lak$mana is said to be separately giving his gifts at V.33.10, with Samvarana as their priest. 82 DHVASRA : 88 Along with Puru$anti (see below) he is referred to as giving gifts to the poet of IX.58 and his family. NARYA : 84 He is said to be a soma-sacrificer and glorified in a danastuti at VIII.24.29-30. He is said to have given gifts to Vyasvas 05 for their priestly service. He is said to have flourished on the banks of the river Gomati 86 at VIII.24.30. PAKASTHAMAN : 87 He has been praised in a danastuti at VIII.3.21-24. He was the son of Kuruyana (v.21). His liberality is praised in an interest¬ ing metaphor. 88 It was apparently a soma-sacrifice that he performed in honour of Indra. But no other details are available. 78. V.I. I p. 346; Geldner II p. 373; 377-8; Vide Chapter XI under ‘danastutis’. 79. Thus the word refers to Vasisfhas at VII.83.4 satya trtsunamabhavat purohitih; the word refers to Bharatas at VII.33.5, 6 and VII.83.6. For various views regarding Trtsus—Cf. V.I. I pp. 320-23. 80. V.I. I p. 371. 81. op. cit. p. 406. 82. Vide Chapter VII. p. 159. 83. V.I. I p. 407. 84. V.I. I p. 447. 85. Vide Chapter VII. p. 158. 88. Vide Chapter IV. p. 65. 87. V.I. I p. 514. 88. For explanation, cf. Chapter XI ‘danastutis’. 186 SACRIFICE IN THE ItGVEDA PARAVATA ; 89 At VIII.34.18 the gifts of Paravata (rati$u dravaccakre§u asu$u) are referred to. The word may refer to a person of the name or even a group of people (VIII. 100.6). At VI.61.2, they are said to be punished by Saraswati. PURAYAH : 90 He is mentioned as a liberal donor at VI.63.9-10 along with the following, about none of whom any information is available elsewhere. (1) Purupantha 91 (2) Peruka 92 (3) Sanda 93 (4) Sumilha 94 PURUMILHA : 95 At V. 61.9-10 he appears as a patron along with Taranta, who has given gifts to Syavasva of the Atri family. He is said to be a soma-sacrificer at 1.151.2 (sominah). At 1.183.5, he is mentioned along with Gotama and Atri and hence construed as a priest. 96 It should however be noted that he may be mentioned along with the two priestly families as their patron. The nyaya applied to consider him a priest is ‘samdarhsa-nyaya’; it should rather be ‘dehalldipa- nyaya’, indicating his patronage to both the families. His liberality is indicated at VIII.71.14 (agnim raye purumilha srutarh naro’gnim suditaye cchardih) where he is said to be addressed along with Agni and other men for wealth. PURUSANTI : 97 Along with Dhvasra, he is said to have given sacrificial gifts at IX.58.3. At 1.112.23, he is mentioned as protected by .Asvins and hence like a number of others, who are said to be worshipping Indra and Asvins, he too appears to be a soma-sacrificer. POTAKRATU : 98 He is said to have given gifts and is referred to in a d&nastuti at VIII.68.17 along with Indrota and Ark?a. PRTHAVANA At X.93.14, he is mentioned along with Duhsima, Vena and Rama, cf. Duhsima above. 89. V.I. I p. 518; VMH Vol. I 97; Vel. B.U.J. XV 1946; VMH I. 97. cf. also Vasurocis below. 90. V.I. I p. 540. 91. op. cit. p. 543. 92. V.I. Vol. II, p. 22. 93. op. cit. p. 371. 94. op. cit. p. 457. 95. V.I. Vol. Vol. I, p. 543. 96. HRG I. 247. 97. V.I. II p. 2. 98. op. cit. p. 10; ‘Asvamedha’ above. 99. op. cit. p. 15. CONTRIBUTION OF THE PATRONS 187 PRTHU6RAVAS KANITA : 10C The poet Vasa Asvya is said to have received a gift from Ppthusravas at 1.116.21 in an Asvin worship and at VIII.46.21 in an Indra worship. As referred to at both the places (1.116.21, ekasya vastoravatarh, . . .and VIII.46.21. .. . asya vyu$yadade), the gifts were received in the morning, indicating perhaps a convention of holding such rites in the morning. His liberality is referred to at VIII.46.24. PRDAKUSANU : 101 At VIII.17.15, he is said to be superior to many (abhi bhuyasah) though alone (ekah san) and asked to bring Indra for a drink of soma (somasya pltaye) indicating his soma-sacrifices. PRATARDANI : 1G2 At VI.26.8, a descendant of Pratardana is associated with a sacrificial invocation for royal glory (asyam dyumnahutau. kjatrasrirastu j). PRIYARATHA : 1G3 See Srutaratha below. RATHAVlTI DARBHYA He is glorified by the poet Syavasva of the Atri family at V. 61.17-19. He appears to be a leader of a tribe, residing in far-off regions in the mountain (v.19, parvate§u apasritah). The poet is so very attached to him (v.8, na kamo apa veti me) because of the soma sacrifices that he has undertaken (v,18b). RAMA : 13G See Duhsima above. VASUROCIS :’ 0G He appears to be a person belonging to Paravata family, v/ho has made some gifts in a sacrifice (VIII.34.16). Taking into considera¬ tion the fact that Paravatas were possibly obstacles in the way of sacrifice, as Saraswati is said to have struck them down (VI.61.2, ‘paravataghnirh’), this would be an illustration of an individual from a non-sacrificing tribe converted to the cult of sacrifice. 100. op. cit. p. 17. 101. V.I. II p. 18; Vel. B.U.J. XIV 1945 p. 23 contrues the word as equivalent to Agni. 102. V.I. II p. 49. 103. op. cit. p. 52. 104. V.I. II p. 206; Say. quoting Brhad; V.H. Part I S.B.E. 32. pp. 359. 362. 105. V.I. II p. 222. 106. op. cit. p. 277; and Paravata above. 188 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA VENA : : 07 He is referred to in a danastuti (X.93.14). cf. Duhsima above. SATRI : 108 From the way he is glorified at V.34.9 (sahasrasamagnivesim gpni$e satrimagna uparnam ketumaryah ] tasma apah sarhyatah pipayanta tasmin ksatramamavat tvesamastu j), he appears to be a very keen sacrificer. It appears that by the time, political power was associated with encouragement to sacrifice as it was attained with the help of sacrifice and hence the request of the poet for a bright and powerful dominion for him (tvesamamavat ksatram). Satri belonged to Agnivesa family and apparently for his gifts in sacrifices, he is being referred to as ‘aryah ketu’. The glorifying epithet is significant inasmuch as the performance of sacrifices has come to be considered as the standard for Aryan behaviour indi¬ cating the influence of sacrifice on social ideals of the time. SARA : 1Q 9 He is referred to as a liberal patron (bhojah surih) in a danastuti at VIII.70.13-15. Macdonell along with Pischel considers this to be an ironical danastuti inasmuch as one calf is said to be given to three priests. It appears however that a little misunderstanding of the meaning has caused this impression. Ordinarily we cannot expect an ironical reference in a danastuti. Danastutis 110 were apparently written at the time of celebrating a victory attained by the help of the divinity. Very possibly the gift was made known after the hymn was composed for the occasion and hence ordinarily the ; stuti’ occurs at the end. If under such circumstances, Sara belonging to Suradeva’s family has given his gift, it cannot be as miserable as it is made out to be, because in that case the poet would not have been as enthu¬ siastic in his description of the patron as he appears to be at VIII. 70.13 (sakhayah kratumicchata katha radhama sarasya j upastutim bhojah suriryo ahrayah j|), where he says that he cannot adequately praise his patron’s liberality and prowess. In the following stanza (14ab, bhuribhih samaha j-sibhirbarhismadbhih samidhyase), he is said to be praised by a number of sacrificing priests, which would not be possible if the person was so miserly. He is said to give the gift of a number of calves (14cd, yaditthamekamekamicchara vatsan parada- dahj) at the rate of one to each, the idea being that the patron himself was handing over the calves one by one. The same fact is graphi- 107. V.I. II p. 325. 108. op. cit. p. 352. 109. V.I. II p. 357, Ved. Stu. 1.5-7; Vel. B.UJ. 1946 p. 28 f.n. 110. Vide remarks in Chapter XI under ‘DSnastuti’. CONTRIBUTION OF THE PATRONS 180 cally described in v.15 (karnagrhya maghava sauradevyo vat.sarh nastribhya anayat). The word ‘vatsa’ in the singular need not be made much of in view of the plural ‘vatsan’ in v.14. The significance of ‘karnagrhya’ appears to be that the patron himself was doing honour to the priest by picking up the calf or calves in the same manner for these three priests. It is the sentiment that the poet is appre¬ ciating though the gift may not be so sumptuous as some other gifts. It may be noted that it is in this strain that even the gift of four horses is referred to as a ‘unique gift’ at VIII.74.15 (cf. nemapo asvadatarah savisfhadasti martyah). &YAVA: 111 He is referred to in a danastuti at VIII.19.37 as sacrificer on the banks of the river Suvastu. He may be the same as Syavaka who is referred to along with Krpa (see above) etc. (VIII.3.12; 4.2). 112 SRUTARVAN 13 Indra is said to have helped him in defeating his opponent Mrgaya at X. 49.5. He is mentioned for his association with Agni ritual at VIII.74.4 (yasya srutarva. . . .anika edhate) and is praised for a gift at VIII.74.13. Savistha referred to at VIII.74.14, 15 may be understood as identical with Srutarvan, particularly as the gift of Savi?tha as well as of Srutarvan (1.13, sir$a caturnam; v.14 catvara asavah) is of four horses only. He is said to be a unique donor (v.15, quoted under Sara). SRUTARATHA : 114 At V.36.6, he is praised in a danastuti as a youthful king, fit to be bowed down to (ksitayo namantam) by the people. At 1.122.7, he is mentioned along with Priyaratha as a patron of the priestly family of the Pajras, giving them all nourishment. 6VAITREYA : 115 At 1.33.14, Indra is said to have helped him for a glorious victory. He may be identical with Svitra mentioned in the following stanza. At V.19.3, he is referred to as prospering along with his people obviously on account of the performances of soma sacrifices for them by Brhaduktha of the Atri family. He appears to have given 111. V.I. II p. 399. 112. Ayava and Syavasva cf. 1.117.21, V.61.9, X. 65.2 appear to be different. 113. op cit. p. 403; cf. also ‘Anus', 'Arksa' and ‘Asvamedha’ above. 114. V.I. Vol. II p. 402. 115. op. cit, p. 410. 190 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA gifts of a golden necklace to the priest as the epithet ‘ni§kagriva’ would indicate, apparently for his sacrificial service. SAVARNI OR SAVARNYA: 116 In glorifying the gift of this almost a mythical being at X.62.9 (savarpyasya dak^ina vi sindhuriva paprathe) and 62.11 (sahasrada gramanirma ri§anmanuh suryenasya yatamanaitu daksina), it seems that the poet is either visualising him as a sacrificer or is seeking to glorify the importance of the sacrifice by his imaginative state¬ ment, indicating thereby also the very ancient origin of the system of sacrifice. SUNITHA — SAUCADRATHA : 117 Along with a number of other worshippers of U?as, he is refer¬ red to at V.79.2. SUSAMAN 18 He is mentioned in a danastuti along with Uksanyayana and Harayana at VIII.25.22 (see above). At VIII.60.18 (ketena sarman sacate susamani), the reference may be to the same person as Macdonell thinks or even it may have been used just in a derivative sense. At VIII.23.28, 24.28, 26.2, the word ‘varo’ precedes it as a separate word. Padapatha shows it separately and Say. construes it as vocative of Varu, which he considers to be the name of the king at two of these places. At VIII.23.28, he construes it as an epithet of Agni. Sayana’s explanation is apparently a conjectural one, particularly not fitting at VIII.26.2, where Varu and Asvina will have to be construed as addressed in the same stanza. Against the evidence of Padapatha, Ludwig considers it to be one word indicating the same ‘Su^aman’. It is possible that they are identical particularly as they are referred to in the hymns of the same poet Visvamanas and nothing is known about Varu from elsewhere. SVANAYA BHAVYA : 119 At 1.126.1, the king Bhavya is known as residing on the banks of the river Sindhu and executing the performance of a thousand ‘savas’ 120 (amandan tsoman pra bhave manisa sindhavadhi ksiyato bhavyasya J yo me sahasramamimita savanaturto raja srava iccha- manah). From the statement that he was desirous of fame, it would appear that such longer performances were thought of as giving 116. V.I. II. p. 448. 117. op. cit. pp. 395, 455. 118. op. cit. p. 460: HRG Vol. II, p. 156; Say. construes the word as a name only at VIII 24.28; 26.2. 119. Ni. IX.10; V.I. II. p. 103. 120. cf. ‘Sahasrasava’ in Chapter VI. The rite referred to here appears to be a similar one. CONTRIBUTION OF THE PATRONS 191 fame. He is referred to as ‘Svanaya’ at 1.126.3 and also praised for a gift in 1.125. This gift is said to be given in the morning (prata ratnam prataritva dadhati) indicating that such performances were held in the morning (see above). SVARNARA : 121 He is mentioned along with Rusama etc. at VIII.3.12 as helped by Indra. At VIII.12.2 also the same person appears to be referred to. At a number of other passages, however, the word is apparently used in a different sense. 122 Geldner takes it to mean a lake, the region whereof was associated with soma-pressing. At V.18.5, a gift is praised by a poet of Atri family; it may be that of this Svarnara. It is interesting to note the ways in which the poets refer to their patrons very frequently even without the idea of praising them in view. As the sacriftcers were moving under close observation of the poets of the various hymns, they come to be associated with certain functions connected with the sacrifice. Thus with the general performance in view, they are referred to as ‘yajamana’ (1.127.2, etc.); ‘Ijana’ (1.125.4), ‘yaksyamana’ (I. 125.4), ‘yajvan’ (II.26.1), ‘prayak$an’ (1.132.5), ‘yajyu’ (1.55.6), ‘prayajyu’ (1.180.2), ‘yastu’ (1.13.6) etc. Gods are said to be helpful to them (VI.28.2) and prospering them (X.26.8, VIII.12.18). Earlier sacrifices are said to be dearer to the gods (V.77.2, purvah purvo yajamano vaniyan). Aryan sacrifices are sharply contrasted with non-Aryan non-sacrifices at 1.130.8 (indrah samatsu yajamana- maryarh pravad viivesu satamutiraji?u svarmilhesvavajisu j manave sasadavratan tvacam krsnamarandhayat | ! ) where Indra is said to have crushed the non-sacrificers, in helping the noble sacrifices. Usas is said to be awakening the sacrifices (1.113.9, yak$yamanah ajlgah j). For purposes of sacrifices, the sacrifices used to work hard. This is indicated by their being called ‘sasamana’ (1.85.12, IV.2.13 etc). For undertaking the sacrificial performance, they are called ‘rtam yat’ (IX.69.3, 74.3, etc.). With preparation for sacrifice in view, a sacrificer is called ‘subarhis’ (1.74.5). For carrying it through per¬ fectly, ‘svadhvara’ (VIII.5.33). With the gifts to gods in general in the sacrifices and those to the priests for the performances in view, he is variously referred to as ‘prayasvat’ (IV.41.2), ‘suprayas’ (IV.41.3), ‘dasvat’ (II.4.3), ‘dasvas’ (1.35.8), ‘dadasvas’ (1.166.3). With preparations of the offerings in view, he is called ‘pacat (V.29.11) 121. V.I. II p. 495. 122. IV.21.3, V.18.4, VIII.6.39 etc. 192 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA ‘sunvat’ etc.; with the equipment in the place of sacrifice in view, he is called ‘havismat’ (VIII.6.27); with the offerings that have been offered in view, he is said to be ‘ratahavya’ (VII. 19.6), ‘ratahavih’ (II.34.8), ‘havirda’ (1.153.3). Soma being the most popular of all the offerings has given a good many epithets to gods (vide Chapter III) as also the sacrificers. Thus with the arrangement of the pressing stones in view, the sacri- ficer is called ‘yuktagravan’ (11.12.6); with the actual pressing in view, he is called ‘somasutva’ (1.113.18), sunvat (VIII.97.2), sunvana (VIII.80.3); with the pressing process completed in view, ‘sutavan’ (VIII.97.4) or ‘sutasoma’ (1.142.1, X.28.2). With the custom of drink¬ ing the soma-juice in view, he is called ‘sutapah’ (1.155.2). With the general soma-sacrifice in view, he is called ‘somin’ (1.49.1, X.44.5). His liberality in both undertaking the sacrifices and executing them efficiently found expression by his being designated as ‘prayata- daksina’ (1.31.5), ‘bhoja yajvan’ (1.151.2, 3, etc.). It appears that patrons used to vie with each other in giving gifts to the priests and in general celebrating the performance on a generous scale, as that came to be considered to be the measure of reputation at the time (cf. VII. 16.10, ye radhamsi dadatyasvya magha kamena sravaso mahah |). It is this liberality which makes both the patrons as well as Indra get the epithet ‘maghavat’. It is thus that the ‘daksina’ given by the patrons, comes to be associated with Indra in a glorified form (VII.27.4, anuna yasya daksina pipaya vamam nrbhyo abhivlta sakhibhyah) and Indra comes to be referred to as ‘daksinavan’ (III.39.6, IX.98.10). The generosity of the patrons in helping the sacrificial performances was glorified in such a way that it should be helpful in general to the growth of the sacrifice (VIII.5.6, ta sudevaya dasuse sumedhamavitarinlm | ghrtairgavyuti- muksatam), where the poet is asking for a wide pasture-land for the patron, which would lead to the performances of more sacrifices (indicated by ‘sumedha’). Gods are also said to be treating them in a reciprocatingly con¬ siderate manner and being extremely generous to them. Thus Indra is said to be a liberal giver to those liberal patrons at VIII.88.6 (nakih paristirmaghavan maghasya te yaddasuse dasasyasi) and at X.42.8 (naha damanarh maghava niyamsanni sunvate vahati bhuri vamam), where Indra is said to be giving without any restriction on himself. Patrons are in this way not only helpful to the priests with the prosperity attained through the sacrifices but also to the gods CONTRIBUTION OF THE PATRONS 193 through whose favour the prosperity is attained. This conception of mutual helpfulness between the divinity and the human beings through the sacrifices can thus be perceived to be the underlying idea of the institution of the sacrifice as it was being developed in the Aryan society. It has thus been emphasized by the author of the Gita as leading towards social emancipation (III.11, ‘devan bhavayata. . . .sreyah paramavapsyatha). It is explicitly stated in a number of passages in the Rgveda. Thus Indra expresses his desire to help the sacrificers at X.27.1 (asat su me jaritah sabhivego yat sunvate yajamanaya iiksam j) and at X.49.1c (aham bhuvam yajamanasya codita). It is thus that he is said to be contracting friendship with the sacrificer and avoiding that with the non-sacrificer at X.42.4 (atra yujam krnute yo havisman, nasunvata sakhyarii vasti surah ■). In this way, we can visualize the very significant part played by the patrons in the growth of the Rgvedic sacrifice. The general tone of mutual co-operation, obligation and the consequent quest for prosperity is too obvious to remain unnoticed. Whatever the complications that developed in the social relationship in the later days, they are conspicuous by their absence in the days of the Rgvedic sacrifice, where a general feeling of amity and accommodation is clearly perceptible in the expression of the priests about their patrons, towards whom their attitude is one of respectful affection occasionally interspersed with admiration and gratitude. It is this well-balanced class-consciousness that developed a healthy spirit of mutual co-operation which in its turn paved the way for general prosperity and carried on the system of sacrifice from strength to strength. s. R.—13 Chapter Nine REACTIONS TO THE GROWTH OF THE SACRIFICE a mar ? ^T^TRT'T fprfc i (rv v. 42 . 9 ) t n^5TT <ffr55TT ff JT^T I (RV X. 2.5) SYNOPSIS :— Opposition countenanced by the growing sacrifice both in physical and ideological spheres—among the former, Panis and Dasyus prominent—Panis opposed almost en bloc—the reason—their systematic efforts—Brbu, a convert—opponents contrasted with sacrificing Aryans—‘anyavarta’, suggestive of some different form of worship—V.20.2—other sections following a different mode of worship-'apavrata’ —V.42.9—some obstructions referred to—practices to undermine established ritual— counteraction through sacrifices— Challenge to the authority of the divinities—anti-Indra feeling denounced— certain sections against Mitravaruna cult—‘ayajnasacah’ at VI.67.9—significance explained—interesting points raised—Analysis of the attitude by the poet of X.2.— Association of sacrifice with truth, indicating vital importance in the life of the Aryans—word conveying the ideas about non-sacrifices—‘ayajyu’, ‘ayajna’.... etc.—some other non-sacrificers with certain practices without designations— Muradevas etc. opposed to the Rgvedic ritual—summing up the indications— Like all social institutions of importance, sacrifice too had to countenance a good deal of opposition, particularly as it was evolving a new ideology and a set of practices. It was both in physical as well as ideological spheres. Among those who raised physical obstacles in the way of sacri¬ ficial performances, the Panis and the Dasyus in general appear to be quite prominent. Whatever their vocation or profession, the Panis 1 appear to be opposed to the sacrifice as symbolic of the Aryan way of life, as is indicated at a number of places in the Rgveda. Thus the Panis are expected to be kept asleep as against the sacri¬ ficing patrons (1.124.10, prabodhaya usah prnato maghoni abudhya- manah panayah sasantu; also IV.51.3). Indra is said to be keeping aloof even from the richest of the Panis as they would not press out the soma juice (IV.25.7, na revata panina sakhyamindro’sunvata sutapah sarhgrnite). The sacrificers and the Panis are sharply con¬ trasted at VIII.97.2. At X.60.6 (panin nyakramlrabhi viivan rajan- naradhasah), it is indicated how the Panis were almost en bloc opposed to the sacrifice. Indra is said to be great, particularly as he vanquished them (VIII.64.2). Panis are referred to as fools, 1. V.I. Vol. I. p. 460, REACTIONS OF THE GROWTH 195 braggarts, etc., as they had no faith in the sacrifice and as such were opposed to it at VII.6.3 (nyakratun grathino mrdhravacah panihrasraddhan avrdhan ayajnanj). The attempt of the Panis to steal away the cows of the gods appears to be a very systematic effort to put obstacles in the way of the sacrificial performances. It is however said to have been frustrated with the help of soma sacrifices at 1.93.4 and at X.108.11, where Ahgirasas are referred to. It is also indicated at VI.51.14 (gravanah soma no hi kam sakhi- tvanaya vavasuh | jahi yantrinarh panim vrko hi §ah), where Soma is asked to put down the wolf-like Panis. It is interesting to note that Brbu is praised as a liberal donor at VI.45.33 (brburh sahasradatamarh surim sahasrasatamam) and in v.31, he is referred to as the best of the Papis (adhi brbuh paninam varsisthe murdhanyasthat). This would indicate that the growing cult of sacrifice had converted some of the non-sacrificers to it. It is further supported by the mention of a Dasa chief called Balbutha who is referred to in a Danastuti at VIII.46.32. Another important Pani to be mentioned is Brsaya (1.93.4; VI.61.3), who appears to have a number of followers (brsayasya £e$ah). Saraswati, very closely associated with the Rgvedic sacrifice has been asked to put down Brsaya and his followers as they were opposed to the Aryan mode of worship as is indicated at VI.61.3 (Saraswati devanido ni barhaya prajam brsayasya mayinah). Dasyus 2 3 appear to be an obstacle in the way of the general progress of the Aryans. In the field of the sacrifice too, they appear to have played their role of opposition. Thus they are contrasted with the Aryans, who scatter the barhis grass in the sacrifice (1.51.8, vijanihi aryan ye ca dasyavah | barhismate randhaya sasadavratan ||). Aryans are said to be getting the better of the Dasyus because of their sacrificial rites (VI.14.3 and IX.41.2). How far a dasyu is away from the sacrificial cult of the Aryans is indicated at VIII. 70.11 (anyavratamamanusamay a j vanamadevayum j), where he has been referred to as ‘anyavrata’ and hence ‘amanusa’ (inhuman). This is further supported by another passage (X.22.8, akarma dasyuh abhi no amantuh anyvrato amanusah) where too a different cult of the Dasyus appears to be indicated. His dissociation from the Aryan form of worship is indicated by the word ‘akarma . This mode of worship is against the Agni worship of the Aryans as is made clear at V.20.2, possibly with a different set of deities to be worshipped as indicated by the epithet ‘adevayu’ and hence the Dasyus are 2. See Taruk^a.Chapter VIII. 3. cf. RRG p. 37; V.I. I, p. 347. 196 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA expected to be put down (tvam tasya vadharjambhaya) as non¬ sacrificing people (VIII.70.11, ayajvan; VII.6.3, ayajyu). It was however not only the Dasyus, who had some different observances, but there were some others as well who are referred to as ‘apavratas’. Thus, pleading for help to a sacrificer, a poet is emphasizing his point by drawing out contrast between certain pairs at 1.51.8 (vijanihyaryan ye ca dasyavo barhismate randhaya sasada- vratan j saki bhava yajamanasya coditajj), where a sacrificer with barhis grass is contrasted with ‘avratas’. Similarly in v.9ab (anu- vrataya randhayannapavratanabhubhirindrah snathayannanabhuvah|) the ‘anuvratas’ are contrasted with the ‘apavratas’, who are apparently engaged in different types of worship. At V.40.6, ‘apavrata’ is used as an adjective of ‘tamas’ which has concealed the Sun (gulham suryam tamasapavratena turiyena brahmanavindadatrih I), who is said to be gained by a hymn associated with a soma sacrifice as indicated in V.40.8 (gravno yuyujanah). ‘Tamas’ would thus appear to refer to some magical practices as against the sacrificial rites of the Aryans. At V.42.9 (apavratan prasave vavrdhanan brahma- dvisah suryadyavayasva !;), it is indicated how the ‘apavratas’ are against the hymns of the Aryans (brahmadvisah), though obviously enjoying prosperity on account of certain performances of their own (prasave vavrdhanan). At V.42.10 (ya ohate raksaso devavitau acakrebhistam maruto ni yata | yo vah samim sasamanasya nindat tucchyan kaman karate sisvidanah ||), certain persons who would defile the Aryan rites by bringing in the names of demons therein are referred to. They would be toiling in performances of some rites of theirs (sisvidanah), though they would revile the efforts of the Aryan worshippers. The very trifling aims that such persons had in view are indicated by ‘tucchyan kaman karate’, suggesting how the Aryan sacrificers had nobler motives in their type of worship. It is with these varying objections to the current ritual in view that Visvamitra is expecting the favour of Agni against enmities (III.18.1, purudruho hi k$itayo jananam | bhava no agne sumana upetau I). It is also possible that he has in view certain other Aryan worshippers, who were opposed to his experimentation with new modes of worship. In general, manifold opposition from varying sources, encoun¬ tered by the protagonists of the cult of sacrifice is referred to as necessary to be overcome with the divine help at III.24.1 (du?tarasta- rannaratirvarco dha yajnavahase). 4 4. It is adjective of gods at four places IV.47.3; VII.12.20; 1.862; 1.15.11; only here and at III.8.3, it is used with yajamana, indicating their importance in the sacrifice REACTIONS OF THE GROWTH 197 Some of these non-sacrificers appear to be challenging the authority of particular divinities or some specific modes of offering worship to them. An interesting way of reviling the divinity was resorted to possibly by some non-Aryans, who would prepare the oblations and then swallow them by themselves, (cf. VII.18.16, ardharii virasya srtapamanindram J. .. .para sardhantarh nunude etc). Such persons are further referred to as ‘bahuksadah’ 5 6 at X.27.6 (darsannvatra srtapah anindran bahuksadah sarave patyamanan )). A more audacious form of such open ridiculing and reviling of the Aryan deities is referred to at 1.51.5 (tvam mayabhirapa mayino’ dhamah svadhabhirye adhi suptavajuhvata |), where those persons are said to be invoking Indra and then placing the oblation in their own mouths. This open defiance of certain divinities may be due to mere audacity on the part of the non-sacrificers. 6 The poet of V. 2, remarking that he has already enlisted the help of Agni by offering him unmixed soma-juice talks defiantly about those anti- Indra workers (v.3, dadano asmal amrtam viprkvat kim mamanindrah krnavannanukthah; also X.48.7, kirn ma nindanti satravo’nindrah j), suggesting that their position was weaker as they were not possessed of powerful hymns (anukthah). This anti-Indra tendency is expected to be put down by fostering Indra worship as indicated at 1.133.1; IV.23.7. Certain Aryans are also referred to as being against the Indra- worship at X.38.3 (yo na dasa aryo va purustuta | adeva indra yudhaye ciketati). Godlessness in general is said to be opposition to sacrifice at VII.98.5 (yada idadevirasahista mayah athabhavat kevalah somo asya; cf. also VIII.70.7). Certain other persons, who are disposed against the worship of Mitravaruna, are referred to along with similar other persons at VI. 67.9 (Pra yadvaih mitravaruna spurdhan priya dhama yuvadhita minanti | na ye devasa ohasa na martah ayajnasaco apyo na putrahji). those persons are said to be working against Mitravaruna and violating their laws. Apparently the non-Aryans are not intended by the poet here, as they would never be expected to follow the laws of Mitravaruna. So some Aryan worshippers, who were against the Mitravaruna worship have been referred to as indicating their stand. It is not clear as to what shape this violation of laws would take but obviously it would be violation of an aspect or aspects of sacrifice associated with them as would be indicated by their des¬ cription as ‘ayajnasacah’. The word is used only here and as such 5. cf. ‘mean offerers’—Griffith II p 417; Vel. B.U.J. XXI 1952 p. 6 ‘those (strong enough )to dig with their arms;’ Say.—'who cut the (worshippers) to pieces with their hands”. 6. whose boastfulness (vagvana) is referred to at X.132.2; cf. ‘aradhasah’ below. 198 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA appears to be specially coined by the poet for the purposes of con¬ veying his particular notion about them. If they were non-Aryans or Aryans who merely opposed the sacrifice, they could have been dismissed as audacious very easily. But it could not be so easily done. They were not quite ordinary mortals (na martah) and at the same time the poet is reluctant to give them the place of divinity (na ye devasah ohasa). So in all probability, they were persons who had rendered some signal service to the sacrifice like the Rbhus and were demanding a place among the divinities side by side with Mitravaruna but as it was not forth¬ coming, 7 they were opposing the claims of Mitravaruna. Such persons however were not exceptions as indicated in d, where apyah putrah’ 8 are similarly said to be ‘ayajnasacah’. Such opposition used to arise mainly on account of the claims of certain worshippers that their desired divinities were greater than the others as indicated at VI.67.10 (ad vam bravama satyan- yuktha na kirdevebhiryatatho mahitva j). These rivalries must have given some impetus to the idea of sacrifice but in certain instances like these they must also have been putting obstacles in the way of its growth by raising the number of opponents. Some of these non-believers in the sacrifice of the Aryan concep¬ tion appear to raise objections regarding the appearance of the divi¬ nity to receive the oblations in the sacrifice. Thus the poet of X.39.5 (purana vam virya pra brava jane) indicates how the non-believers used to consider the descriptions of the poets as fancies of the by¬ gone days and hence to convince them, requests the divinities to appear so that the objectors may believe (ta vam nu navyavavase karamahe | ayam nasatya srad ariryatha dadhatjj). The poet of X.2, analysing the attitude of such non-believers, attributes it to a defect in their power of understanding things. Thus he remarks in v.5 (yat pakatra manasa dinadak^a na yajnasya manvate martasah | agni?tad hota kratuvid vijanan yajistho devan rtuso yajati |j) that mortals do not take to the sacrifice on account of the weakness of their mind and understanding (pakatra manasa and dlnadak$ah). Agni is however said to be the best sacrificer (yaj?tho), as he is not subject to these human limitations (cf. X.2.1, ‘hotrnama- yajisthah). The poet is therefore expecting guidance by following 7. possibly because the service was not considered worthwhile to gain divinity as in the case of the Rbhus. 8. Say. renders ‘apyah’ = ‘Karmavantah’ and na putrah z= ‘na prnantah, which appears farfetched; Ludwig takes Api to be the name of a lady, who is not referred to elsewhere. REACTIONS OF THE GROWTH 199 the path of the gods (v.3, a devanamapi panthamaganma yacchakna- vama tadanu pravolhurh) particularly as Agni can make good certain defects being an expert hotr (v.4, agnistad visvamaprnati vidvan). The non-sacrificers are referred to by various epithets and in general they are expected to be punished for the sake of the sacrificers, showing how the Rgvedic poets considered them to be a hindrance in the way of the progress of the cult of the sacrifice which they had come to identify with the progress of the Aryan society in general. Thus Indra is said to be remarking at X.27.1 (asat su me jaritah sabhivego, yatsunvate yajamanaya siksam | anasirdamah- amasmi prahanta satyadhvftam vrjinayantamabhum |j) that he helps the sacrificer against the non-sacrificer, who is said to be the violator of truth (satyadhvrt), indicating that sacrifice had come to be identi¬ fied with truth. AYAJYU : The word is used at five places in the Rgveda, where the non- sacrificers are said to be thrown down by the divinity or as weaker in comparison with the sacrificers. cf. 1.121.13 (api kartamavartayah ayajyun); 1.131.4 (sasastamindra martyamayajyum); II.26.1 (yajva idayajyoh vibhajati bhojanam); VII.6.3 (quoted above); VII.83.7 (dasa raj an ah samita ayajyavah sudasam na yuyudhuh) where the ten kings are said to have proved incompetent in the presence of Sudas because of the effective sacrificial performances of Vasisthas (7c, satya nrnamadmasadamupastutih |). AYAJVAN : The word is used seven times in the Rgveda, where generally non-sacrificers are said to be losing in general to the sacrificers, mainly at the hands of Indra. cf. 1.33.4 (ayajvanah sanakah preti- mlyuh), where the ‘sanakas’ 9 are said to be suffering having been non-sacrificers. At 1.33.5 (para cicchirsa vavrjusta indrayajvano yajvabhih spardhamanah). The non-sacrificers are said to have clashed with the sacrificers and in course of time, to have been scattered away by the intervention of Indra. At 1.103.6 (ya adrtya paripanthiva surah ayajvano vibhajanneti vedah ]). Indra is said to be forcibly depriving the non-sacrificer of his wealth even like a highway robber. At VII.61.4 (ayanmasa ayajvanamavirah pra yajnamanma vrjanam tirate), sacrifice is indi- 9. Vel. B.U.J. XVII 1948 p. 11 considers them to be ‘early prototypes of the Partis’; they are perhaps persons who are opposed to the sacrifice from very old days. 200 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA cated as an incentive for the stabilisation of the household and the non-sacrifieers are said to be remaining without hero-sons. At VIII. 31.15-18 (devanam ya inmano yajamana iyaksatyabhldayajvano bhuvat), as a refrain of four verses in different metres, it appears to be emphatically stated how sacrificers surpass the non-sacrificers. At VIII.70.11 (quoted above), it is indicated how an ‘anyavrata’ can be as good as a non-sacrifieer. At X.49.1 (aham bhuvam yajama- nasya coditayajvanah saksi visvasminbhare), Vaikuntha Indra is said to emphasize how he defeats the non-sacrificers in battles, indicating how Indra worship gave a great impetus to the cause of the sacrifice. AYAJftA : The word is used twice in the Rgveda, where Indra and Agni are said to have thrown down the non-sacrificers. At VII.6.3 (quoted above), Panis are referred to as ‘ayajna’ as they did not believe in the Aryan mode of worship (asraddha). At X.138.6 (eta tya te srutyani kevala yadeka ekamakrnoh ayajnam), the credit of over¬ throwing the non-sacrificer is given solely to Indra, indicating how with the predominance of Indra worship in the tradition of the sacrifice, the non-sacrificing element was practically eliminated. ANAHUTI : The word is referred to once in the Rgveda in the sense of ‘absence of sacrificial performances’ which is mentioned as a social calamity side by side with diseases at X.63.12 (apamivamapa viiva- manahutimaparatim durvidatramaghayatah j are deva dveso asma- dyuyotamoru nah sarma yacchata svastaye jj) and which is expected to be removed for the social good (svasti). AHAVIH : The word is used only once in the Rgveda at 1.182.3 (kimatra dasrah kmuthah kimasathe, jano yah kascidahavir mahiyate ] atikramistam juratam panerasum |[), indicating how there were some persons who were glorified though they would not offer oblations and hence Asvins are incited not to accept the worship of those people. APRNAT: The word is used thrice in the Rgveda to indicate persons who do not offer gifts either to the gods or the priests in the sacrifices. Thus at V.7.10, they are said to be overcome by Atri, a sacrificer. At V.42.9ab (visarmanam krnuhi vittamesam ye bhunjate aprnanto na ukthaih), an interesting section of people, who wanted to derive the benefits of sacrifice without adequately compensating the priests for their labours, is referred to. At V.44.1 also the word appears to REACTIONS OF THE GROWTH 201 be used in the same sense, where they are indicated to be as bad as the non-soma-pressers (jahi asusvin pravrha aprnatah). ASUSVIH : Indra is said to be severing all connection with them as they would not press out the soma juice so that they would have almost no social standing as indicated at IV.25.6 (nasusverapirna sakha na jamih). Soma is said to be segregating them from the soma-sacrificers at IV.24.5. Indra is asked to strike them down at VI.44.1 (see above). ASUNVAN: The opposition faced by Indra-worship even in open assemblies is indicated at VIII.14.15 (asunvamindra samsadam visucim vyana- sayah ■ somapa uttaro bhavan), where the super soma-drinker Indra is said to have disintegrated a group isamsad) of non-soma-pressers. ASUNVAT: The word is used eight times in the Rgveda in the above sense, some of whom are said to be quite powerful but ultimately put down by Indra. Thus at 1.101.4 (vlloscidindro yo asunvato vadhah), Indra is said to be killing even the mighty non-soma-presser. At 1.110.7 (yusmakarii deva avasahani priye’bhi tisthema prtsutirasun- vatam), Rbhus, who also were connected with a soma sacrifice, 10 are requested to afford protection against such persons. At IV.25.7 (qoted above), V.34.5 and X.42.4, Indra is said to be dissociating himself from such persons. At 1.176.4, V.34.6, Indra is described as scattering away such persons and prospering the sacrificers. ADAMAN: Out of the two passages, 11 only once, the word is used in the sense of those who do not give gifts at the sacrifices (cf. VI.44.12, ma tvadamanah adabhan maghonah) where Indra is warned against some rich persons who do not give gifts (in sacrifices). ARARIVAS : The word is used nine times in the Rgveda in the sense of persons who do not give gifts either to the gods or the priests. At I. 18.3, as a sacrificer the poet expects to be kept away from such a person. At 1.147.4, such a person is said to be indulging in double¬ dealing (marcayati dvayena) and as such is expected to come to grief by his own words (anumrkslsta tanvam duruktaih). At 1.150.2, such a person is said to be rich and still never bringing offerings to the 10. Vide my paper on Rbhus: B.U.J. 1952. II. VI.24.4; VI.44.12. 202 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA gods (vyaninasya dhaninah prahose cidararusah). At III.18.2, VII. 1.13, VII.56.19, 94.8, the ill-will (‘karhsa’; ‘dhurti’; ‘dvesah’) of such a person is referred to and is expected to be kept away. He is said to be ‘greedy’ at V.77.1 (grdhradararusah). ADA6U: At 1.174.6, the word is used in the sense of those, who oppose the friends of Indra i.e., the sacrificers. ADASURIH : It is used once in the Rgveda at VIII.45.15, where the person is referred to as a rich person, who even slights Indra and as such is ex¬ pected to be punished. It may merely indicate that such persons were niggardly and would not feel like spending their wealth in the sacrifices. This shows how the protagonists of the Rgvedic sacrifice believed in a noble ideal underlying the sacrifice even as it is indi¬ cated by the denunciation of such persons in the Gita (III.13, bhunjate te tvagharh papa ye pacantyatmakaranat |). ADASVAS: The word is used four times in the Rgveda indicating the non¬ givers (of offerings in the sacrifice), whose wealth is expected to be given to the sacrificer at 1.81.9, VII.19.1, VIII.81.7, IX.23.3. ARAVAN: The word is used in the sense of non-givers like Ararivas and they are expected to be struck down (VII.31.5, randhih; IX.13.9, apaghnantah; IX.61.23, etc.). They are said to be mortals as well as demons (VIII.28.4, arava martyah; VIII.60.10, pahi visvasmad rak^aso aravnah). The ill-will of those persons as in the case of ‘ararivas’ is referred to at 1.36.15 (pahi dhurteh aravnah). cf. also X.37.12 (arava yo no abhi ducchunayate). ARADHAS: The word is used six times in the Rgveda, where those persons who do not give gifts are contrasted with the sacrificers. At 1.84.8, Indra is asked to trample under his feet the non-sacrificers like weed. At V.61.6 and X.60.6, Panis are so referred to (see above). At IX.101.13 (pra sunvanasyandhaso marto na vrta tadvacah | apa svanamaradhasam hata makhaih na bhrgavah), such a person is denounced as a dog (apa svanam hata). The poet expresses the desire that such a mortal may not be able to suppress the voice of the soma juice (ab). At X.32.2 (ye tva vahanti muhuradhvaran upa te su vanvantu vagvanan aradhasah), the bragging non-sacrificers REACTIONS OF THE GROWTH 203 are referred to indicating how they must be boasting of their way of life and reviling the prevalent mode of worship. AVRATA: The word ‘vrata’ is used in a wider sense of the ordinances of the gods. ‘Avrata’ appears to be used in the sense of those who are opposed to the cult of divine worship in general. It is thus that the dasyus are referred to as ‘avrata’ at 1.101.2, 1.175.3, IX.41.2. Indra is said to have taken a very firm stand against them and wiped them off (1.33.5, yaddivo. . . . niravratan adhamo rodasyoh; cf. also 1.130.8, 175.3, VIII.97.3). At VI.14.3 (turvanto dasyumayavo vrataih siksanto avratam), the ‘avrata’ is sought to be overcome by ‘vrata’ indicating his non-sacrificing character. The contrast between the ‘avratas’ and the sacrificers is obviously stressed at 1.130.8 (indrah samatsu yajamanamaryam pravad.manave sasadavratan). The opposition of ‘avrata’ to soma-sacrifice is indicated at 1.132.4 (sunvadbhyo randhaya kamcidavratarh). Dasyus are so referred to at 1.51.8 (quoted above). ADEVAYU: The word is used only once at 11.26.1 (see under ‘ayajyu’ above). ADEVATRA: It is used only at V.61.6 (see under Panis above). ADEVAYU: The word is used in the sense of people who were opposed to Indra worship at VII.93,5 (adevayum vidathe devayubhih satra hatam somasuta janena ), where Indragni .are requested to strike down the ‘adevayu’ and stand by the soma-pressers. They are referred to as opposed to Indra worship at X.27.2, 3. Soma is asked to drive them away at IX.63.24. They are mentioned along with other non-sacrificers (e.g., with ‘ararivas’ at 1.150.2; with ‘ayajvan’ and ‘anyavrata’ at VIII.70.11; with ‘avrata’ at VIII.97.3), indicating their opposition to Rgvedic sacrifice in general. ADEVA: The word 12 is used in singular in the sense of one who opposes the gods in general and placing obstacles in the way of the sacrificial performances in general. He is referred to as opponent of Indra, who was chosen as the leader of the gods (cf. VI. 17.8, adha tva visve pura indra deva ekam tavasarh dadhire bharaya j adevo yadabhyau- h4ta devan). The mentality of persons who are opposed to the 12. It is used as adjective of Vrtra at III32.6 and of ‘asuras’ at VI1I.96.9, where they are expected to be scattered by Indra. 204 SACRIFICE IN THE RGVEDA followers of the sacrifice is referred to as ‘adeva’ at 11.23.12. They were expected to be putting obstacles in the way of the arrival of the gods at VI.18.11 and X.37.3 (na te adevah pradivo nivasate) and offerings at VIII.70.7 (na simadeva apadisam dlrghayo martyah). They appear to be considered as very mischievous as they are said to be carrying away the gifts given by the divinities and hence protection is expected from the divinity (cf. VIII.71.8, agne makiste devasya ratimadevo yuyota). They are referred to as ‘dasa’ or ‘arya’ at X.38.3 (yo no dasa aryo va purustuta adevah indra yudhaye ciketati |), indicating that even among the Aryans there was a section opposed to the worship of the divinity which was however put down as the Indra-worship triumphed. ADEVIH : The word is used as an attribute of a group of people or then- power, which appear to be instrumental in creating certain obstacles in the sacrificial performances. Such groups and tendencies are expected to be destroyed by Indra and other gods. Thus establish¬ ments and groups of the non-sacrificers are referred to by the word at 1.174.8 (bhinat puro na bhido adevlh); V.2.10; VI.25.9; VIII.96.15. The powers and missiles of this section are said to be obstructing either the divinity or the worshipper at V.2.9; VII.1.10; VIII.61.16. These godless tendencies, being removed are said to be paving the way for sacrificial performances. Thus it is said at VII.98.5 (yadedadevlrasahista mayah | athabhavat kevalah somo asya jj), that Indra received the soma juice after he had put them down. It is also indicated how the idea of sacrifice was growing with the idea of divinity. BRAHMADVISAH : The word is used about a dozen times in the Rgveda in the general sense of those who are opposed to the hymns, to the divini¬ ties and their worship in general. As hymns were widely associated with the sacrificial performances, opposition to hymns meant opposi¬ tion to the sacrifice as well. Thus the gods have been asked to strike down such persons at II.23.4; III.30.17; V.42.9; VI.22.8; 52.2, 3; VII.104.2; VIII.45.23; 64.; X.36.9. At X.160.4, they are contrasted with the soma-pressers and their role as non-sacrificers is clearly indicated. The ‘anrcah’ are similarly expected to be overcome with the help of hymns (and sacrifices) at X.105.8. Some of the non-sacrificers are referred to as opposed to certain aspects of the sacrificial performances merely in contrast with REACTIONS OF THE GROWTH 205 others who perform the sacrifices. Thus after describing some of