{"collection":"myth-cosmogony","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_22885/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_22885","id":"gutenberg_22885","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/22885","summary":null,"tags":["Category: History - Religious","Category: Mythology, Legends & Folklore","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Hindu mythology","Hinduism"],"text":"Produced by Thierry Alberto, Sankar Viswanathan, and the\nOnline Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n                    The Wisdom of the East Series\n\n                              EDITED BY\n\n                           L. CRANMER-BYNG\n\n                          Dr. S. A. KAPADIA\n\n\n\n\n                          WISDOM OF THE EAST\n\n\n                            HINDU GODS AND\n\n                                HEROES\n\n                      STUDIES IN THE HISTORY OF\n                        THE RELIGION OF INDIA\n\n\n\n                                  BY\n\n                    LIONEL D. BARNETT, M.A., LITT\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE\n\n\nThe following pages are taken from the Forlong Bequest lectures which\nI delivered in March last at the School of Oriental Studies. Owing to\nexigencies of space, much of what I then said has been omitted here,\nespecially with regard to the worship of Siva; but enough remains to\nmake clear my general view, which is that the religion of the Aryans\nof India was essentially a worship of spirits--sometimes spirits of\nreal persons, sometimes imaginary spirits--and that, although in early\ndays it provisionally found room for personifications of natural\nforces, it could not digest them into Great Gods, and therefore they\nhave either disappeared or, if surviving, remain as mere Struldbrugs.\nThus I am a heretic in relation to both the Solar Theory and the\nVegetation Theory, as everyone must be who takes the trouble to study\nHindu nature without prejudice.\n\nL. D. B.\n\n_May 29, 1922._\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\n\nI. THE VEDIC AGE:\n\nPopular Religion, p. 9--Rig-veda and priestly religion, p.\n11--Dyaus-Zeus, p. 14--Ushas, p. 18--Surya, p. 19--Savita, p.\n19--Mitra and Varuna, p. 19--Agni, p. 22--Soma, p. 23--Indra, p.\n25--The Asvins, p. 35--Vishnu, p. 37--Rudra-Siva, p. 42--Summary, p.\n42.\n\n\nII. THE AGE OF THE BRAHMANAS:\n\nGrowth of Brahman influence in expanding Aryan society, p. 45--System\nof priestly doctrine: theory of Sacrifice and mechanical control of\nnature thereby, p. 48--Its antinomianism: partly corrected by the\ngrowing cult of Rudra-Siva, p. 53--The Upanishads: their relation to\nthe Brahmanas, p. 59--Brahma the Absolute, p. 60--Karma-Samsara, p.\n63--Results: Saiva Theism, p. 65--Krishna: early history and legends,\np. 66--Teachings, p. 68.\n\n\nIII. THE EPICS, AND LATER:\n\nI. The Great War and the Pandavas, p. 70--Vishnu-Krishna, p.\n74--Narayana, p. 76--Bhagavad-gita and Narayaniya, p. 77--Growth of\nchurch of Vishnu-Krishna, p. 79--Worship of Pandavas, p. 92--New\nerotic and romantic Krishnaism, p. 94.\n\nII. Rama: legend of Rama and constitution of Ramayana, p. 98.\n\nIII. Some later Preachers, p. 103--Religions of Vishnu-Krishna and\nSiva in Southern India, p. 103--Samkara Acharya, p. 105--Ramanuja, p.\n107--Nimbarka, Madhva, Vallabha, p. 108--Jnanadeva, p. 109--Nama-deva,\np. 109--Tukaram, p. 109--Ramananda, p. 110--Tulsi Das, p. 110--Kabir,\np. 110--Nanak, p. 110--Chaitanya, p. 110.\n\nIV. Brahma and the Trimurti, p. 111--Dattatreya, p. 114.\n\nV. Two Modern Instances, p. 116.\n\n\nCONCLUSION.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\n\n\nEDITORIAL NOTE\n\n\nThe object of the Editors of this series is a very definite one. They\ndesire above all things that, in their humble way, these books shall\nbe the ambassadors of goodwill and understanding between East and\nWest--the old world of Thought and the new of Action. In this\nendeavour, and in their own sphere, they are but followers of the\nhighest example in the land. They are confident that a deeper\nknowledge of the great ideals and lofty philosophy of Oriental thought\nmay help to a revival of that true spirit of Charity which neither\ndespises nor fears the nations of another creed and colour.\n\nL. CRANMER-BYNG.\n\nS. A. KAPADIA.\n\nNORTHBROOK SOCIETY,\n\n21 CROMWELL ROAD,\n\nKENSINGTON, S. W.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\n\n\nHINDU GODS AND HEROES\n\nCHAPTER I\n\nTHE VEDIC AGE\n\n\nLet us imagine we are in a village of an Aryan tribe in the Eastern\nPanjab something more than thirty centuries ago. It is made up of a\nfew large huts, round which cluster smaller ones, all of them rudely\nbuilt, mostly of bamboo; in the other larger ones dwell the heads of\nfamilies, while the smaller ones shelter their kinsfolk and followers,\nfor this is a patriarchal world, and the housefather gives the law to\nhis household. The people are mostly a comely folk, tall and\nclean-limbed, and rather fair of skin, with well-cut features and\nstraight noses; but among them are not a few squat and ugly men and\nwomen, flat-nosed and nearly black in colour, who were once the free\ndwellers in this land, and now have become slaves or serfs to their\nAryan conquerors. Around the village are fields where bullocks are\ndragging rough ploughs; and beyond these are woods and moors in which\nlurk wild men, and beyond these are the lands of other Aryan tribes.\nLife in the village is simple and rude, but not uneventful, for the\nvillage is part of a tribe, and tribes are constantly fighting with\none another, as well as with the dark-skinned men who often try to\ndrive back the Aryans, sometimes in small forays and sometimes in\nmassed hordes. But the world in which the village is interested is a\nsmall one, and hardly extends beyond the bounds of the land where its\ntribe dwells. It knows something of the land of the Five Rivers, in\none corner of which it lives, and something even of the lands to the\nnorth of it, and to the west as far as the mountains and deserts,\nwhere live men of its own kind and tongue; but beyond these limits it\nhas no knowledge. Only a few bold spirits have travelled eastward\nacross the high slope that divides the land of the Five Rivers from\nthe strange and mysterious countries around the great rivers Ganga and\nYamuna, the unknown land of deep forests and swarming dark-skinned\nmen.\n\nIn the matter of religion these Aryans care a good deal about charms\nand spells, black and white magic, for preventing or curing all kinds\nof diseases or mishaps, for winning success in love and war and trade\nand husbandry, for bringing harm upon enemies or rivals--charms which\na few centuries later will be dressed up in Rigvedic style, stuffed\nout with imitations of Rigvedic hymns, and published under the name of\nAtharva veda, \"the lore of the Atharvans,\" by wizards who claim to\nbelong to the old priestly clans of Atharvan and Angiras. But we have\nnot yet come so far, and as yet all that these people can tell us is a\ngreat deal about their black and white magic, in which they are hugely\ninterested, and a fair amount about certain valiant men of olden times\nwho are now worshipped by them as helpful spirits, and a little about\nsome vague spirits who are in the sun and the air and the fire and\nother places, and are very high and great, but are not interesting at\nall.\n\nThis popular religion seems to be a hopeless one, without ideals and\nsymbols of love and hope. Is there nothing better to be found in this\nplace? Yes, there is a priestly religion also; and if we would know\nsomething about it we must listen to the chanting of the priests, the\n_brahmans_ or men of the \"holy spirit,\" as they are called, who are\nholding a sacrifice now on behalf of the rich lord who lives in the\nlargest house in the village--a service for which they expect to be\npaid with a handsome fee of oxen and gold. They are priests by\nheredity, wise in the knowledge of the ways of the gods; some of them\nunderstand how to compose _riks_, or hymns, in the fine speech dear to\ntheir order, hymns which are almost sure to win the gods' favour, and\nall of them know how the sacrifices shall be performed with perfect\nexactness so that no slip or imperfection may mar their efficacy.\nTheir psalms are called _Rig-veda_, \"lore of the verses,\" and they set\nthemselves to find grace in the ears of the many gods whom these\npriests worship, sometimes by open praise and sometimes by riddling\ndescription of the exploits and nature of the gods. Often they are\nvery fine; but always they are the work of priests, artists in ritual.\nAnd if you look heedfully into it you will also mark that these\npriests are inclined to think that the act of sacrifice, the offering\nof, say, certain oblations in a particular manner with particular\nwords accompanying them, is in itself potent, quite apart from the\npsalms which they sing over it, that it has a magic power of its own\nover the machinery of nature.[1] Really this is no new idea of our\nVedic priests; ten thousand years before them their remote forefathers\nbelieved it and acted upon it, and if for example they wanted rain\nthey would sprinkle drops of water and utter magic words. Our Vedic\npriests have now a different kind of symbols, but all the same they\nstill have the notion that ceremony, _rita_ as they call it, has a\nmagic potency of its own. Let us mark this well, for we shall see much\nissuing from it.\n\n[Footnote 1: Cf. e.g. RV. III. xxxii. 12.]\n\nWho are the gods to whom these priests offer their prayers and psalms?\nThey are many, and of various kinds. Most of them are taken from the\nreligion of the people, and dressed in new garb according to the\nimagination of the priest; and a few are priestly inventions\naltogether. There is Dyaush-pita, the Sky-father, with Prithivi Mata,\nthe Earth-mother; there are Vayu the Wind-spirit, Parjanya the\nRain-god, Surya the Sun-god, and other spirits of the sky such as\nSavita; there is the Dawn-goddess, Ushas. All these are or were\noriginally deified powers of nature: the people, though their\nimagination created them, have never felt any deep interest in them,\nand the priests who have taken them into their charge, though they\ntreat them very courteously and sing to them elegant hymns full of\nfigures of speech, have not been able to cover them with the flesh and\nblood of living personality. Then we have Agni the Fire-god, and Soma\nthe spirit of the intoxicating juice of the soma-plant, which is used\nto inspire the pious to drunken raptures in certain ceremonies; both\nof these have acquired a peculiar importance through their association\nwith priestly worship, especially Agni, because he, as bearing to the\ngods the sacrifices cast into his flames, has become the ideal Priest\nand divine Paraclete of Heaven. Nevertheless all this hieratic\nimportance has not made them gods in the deeper sense, reigning in the\nhearts of men. Then we find powers of doubtful origin, Mitra and\nVaruna and Vishnu and Rudra, and figures of heroic legend, like the\nwarrior Indra and the twin charioteers called Asvinaa and Nasatya. All\nthese, with many others, have their worship in the Rig-veda: the\npriests sing their praises lustily, and often speak now of one deity,\nnow of another, as being the highest divinity, without the least\nconsistency.\n\nSome savage races believe in a highest god or first divine Being in\nwhom they feel little personal interest. They seldom speak of him, and\nhardly ever worship him. So it seems to be with Dyaush-pita. The\npriests speak of him and to him, but only in connexion with other\ngods; he has not a single whole hymn in his honour, and the only\ndefinite attribute that attaches to him is that of fatherhood. Yet he\nhas become a great god among other races akin in speech to the Aryans\nof India: Dyaush-pita is phonetically the same as the Greek [Greek:\nZeus pater] and the Latin _Iuppiter_. How comes it then that he is\nnot, and apparently never was, a god in the true sense among the\nIndian Aryans? Because, I think, his name has always betrayed him. To\ncall a deity \"Sky-father\" is to label him as a mere abstraction. No\nmystery, no possibility of human personality, can gather round those\ntwo plain prose words. So long as a deity is known by the name of the\nphysical agency that he represents, so long will he be unable to grow\ninto a personal God in India. The priests may sing vociferous psalms\nto Vayu the Wind-spirit and Surya the Sun-spirit, and even to their\nbeloved Agni the Fire-god; but sing as much as they will, they never\ncan make the people in general take them to their hearts.\n\nObserve what a different history is that of Zeus among the\nGreeks--Zeus, Father of Gods and Men, the ideal of kingly majesty and\nwisdom and goodness. The reason is patent. Ages and ages before the\ndays when the Homeric poets sang, the Greeks had forgotten that Zeus\noriginally meant \"sky\": it had become to them a personal name of a\ngreat spiritual power, which they were free to invest with the noblest\nideal of personality. But very likely there is also another reason: I\nbelieve that the Olympian Zeus, as modelled by Homer and accepted by\nfollowing generations, was not the original [Greek: _Zeus pater_] at\nall, but a usurper who had robbed the old Sky-father of his throne and\nof his title as well, that he was at the outset a hero-king who some\ntime after his death was raised to the seat and dignity of the old\nSky-father and received likewise his name. This theory explains the\nold hero-sagas which are connected with Zeus and the strange fact that\nthe Cretans pointed to a spot in their island where they believed Zeus\nwas buried. It explains why legends persistently averred that Zeus\nexpelled his father Kronos from the throne and suppressed the Titan\ndynasty: on my view, Kronos was the original Father Zeus, and his name\nof Zeus and rank as chief god were appropriated by a deified hero.\nHow natural such a process was in those days may be seen from the\nliturgy of Unas on the pyramids at Sakkarah in Egypt.[2] Here Unas\nis described as rising in heaven after his death as a supreme god,\ndevouring his fathers and mothers, slaughtering the gods, eating their\n\"magical powers,\" and swallowing their \"spirit-souls,\" so that he thus\nbecomes \"the first-born of the first-born gods,\" omniscient,\nomnipotent, and eternal, identified with the Osiris, the highest god.\nNow this Unas was a real historical man; he was the last king of the\nFifth Dynasty, and was deified after death, just like any other king\nof Egypt. The early Egyptians, like many savage tribes, regarded all\ntheir kings as gods on earth and paid them formal worship after their\ndeath; the later Egyptians, going a step further, worshipped them even\nin their lifetime as embodiments of the gods.[3] What is said in the\nliturgy for the deification of Unas is much the same as was said of\nother kings. The dead king in early Egypt becomes a god, even the\ngreatest of the gods, and he assumes the name of that god[4]; he\novercomes the other gods by brute force, he kills and devours them.\nThis is very like what I think was the case with Zeus; the main\ndifference is that in Egypt the _character_ of the deified king was\nmerged in that of the old god, and men continued to regard the latter\nin exactly the same light as before; but among the forefathers of the\nGreeks the reverse happened in at least one case, that of Zeus, where\nthe character of a hero who had peculiarly fascinated popular\nimagination partly eclipsed that of the old god whose name and rank he\nusurped. The reason for this, I suppose, is that even the early\nEgyptians had already a conservative religion with fixed traditions\nand a priesthood that forgot nothing,[5] whereas among the forefathers\nof the Greeks, who were wandering savages, social order and religion\nwere in a very fluid state. However that may be, a deified hero might\noust an older god and reign under his name; and this theory explains\nmany difficulties in the legends of Zeus.\n\n[Footnote 2: Sir E. A. W. Budge, _Literature of the Ancient\nEgyptians_, p. 21 ff., and _Gods of the Egyptians_, i, pp. 32 f., 43.]\n\n[Footnote 3: Erman, _Handbook of Egyptian Religion_, p. 37 f.]\n\n[Footnote 4: Budge, _Lit. of the Egyptians_, p. 21; Erman, _ut supra_,\np. 37 f.]\n\n[Footnote 5: It is even possible that in one case, that of Osiris, a\nhero in Egypt may have eclipsed by his personality the god whom he\nousted. See Sir J. W. Frazer's _Adonis, Attis, Osiris_, ii, p. 200,\nand Sir W. Ridgeway's _Dramas and Dramatic Dances, etc._, p. 94 ff.]\n\nAs to the Roman Iuppiter, I need not say much about him. Like all the\ngenuine gods of Latium, he never was much more than an abstraction\nuntil the Greeks came with their literature and dressed him in the\nwardrobe of their Zeus.\n\nComing now to Ushas, the Lady of the Dawn, and looking at her name\nfrom the standpoint of comparative philosophy, we see that the word\n_ushas_ is closely connected with the Greek [Greek: heos] and the\nLatin _aurora_. But when we read the literature, we are astonished to\nfind that while the Greek Dawn-lady has remained almost always a mere\nabstraction, the Indian spirit is a lovely, living woman instinct with\nthe richest sensuous charms of the East. Some twenty hymns are\naddressed to her, and for the most part they are alive with real\npoetry, with a sense of beauty and gladness and sometimes withal an\nunder-note of sadness for the brief joys of life. But when we look\ncarefully into it we notice a curious thing: all this hymn-singing to\nUshas is purely literary and artistic, and there is practically no\nreligion at all at the back of it. A few stories are told of her, but\nthey seem to convince no one, and she certainly has no ritual worship\napart from these hymns, which are really poetical essays more than\nanything else. The priestly poets are thrilled with sincere emotion at\nthe sight of the dawn, and are inspired by it to stately and lively\ndescriptions of its beauties and to touching reflections upon the\npassing of time and mortal life; but in this scene Ushas herself is\nhardly more than a model from an artist's studio, in a very Bohemian\nquarter. More than once on account of her free display of her charms\nshe is compared to a dancing girl, or even a common harlot! Here the\nimagination is at work which in course of time will populate the Hindu\nParadise with a celestial _corps de ballet_, the fair and frail\nApsarasas. Our Vedic Ushas is a forerunner of that gay company. A\ncharming person, indeed; but certainly no genuine goddess.\n\nAs his name shows, Surya is the spirit of the sun. We hear a good deal\nabout him in the Rig-veda, but the whole of it is merely description\nof the power of the sun in the order of nature, partly allegorical,\nand partly literal. He is only a nature-power, not a personal god. The\ncase is not quite so clear with Savita, whose name seems to mean\nliterally \"stimulator,\" \"one who stirs up.\" On the whole it seems most\nlikely that he represents the sun, as the vivifying power in nature,\nthough some[6] think that he was originally an abstraction of the\nvivifying forces in the world and later became connected with the sun.\nHowever this may be, Savita is and remains an impersonal spirit with\nno human element in his character.\n\n[Footnote 6: See Oldenberg, _Religion des Veda_, p. 64 f.]\n\nStill more perplexing are the two deities Mitra and Varuna, who are\nvery often associated with one another, and apparently are related.\nMitra certainly is an old god: if we go over the mountains to the west\nand north-west of the country of our Indian Aryans, we shall find\ntheir kinsmen in Persia and Bactria worshipping him as a power that\nmaintains the laws of righteousness and guards the sanctity of oaths\nand engagements, who by means of his watchmen keeps mankind under his\nobservation and with his terrible weapons crushes evil powers. The\nIndian Aryans tell almost exactly the same tale of their Mitra and his\ncompanion Varuna, who perhaps is simply a doublet of Mitra with a\ndifferent name, which perhaps is due to a variety of worship. But they\nhave more to say of Varuna than of Mitra. In Varuna we have the\nhighest ideal of spirituality that Hindu religion will reach for many\ncenturies. Not only is he described as supreme controller of the order\nof nature--that is an attribute which these priestly poets ascribe\nwith generous inconsistency to many others of their deities--but he is\nlikewise the omniscient guardian of the moral law and the rule of\nreligion, sternly punishing sin and falsehood with his dreaded noose,\nbut showing mercy to the penitent and graciously communing with the\nsage who has found favour in his eyes.\n\nBut Mitra and Varuna will not enjoy this exalted rank for long. Soon\nthe priests will declare that Mitra rules over the day and Varuna over\nthe night (TS. II. i. 7, 4; VI. iv. 8, 3), and then Varuna will begin\nto sink in honour. The \"noose of Varuna\" will come to mean merely the\ndisease of dropsy. His connection with the darkness of the night will\ncause men to think of him with fear; and in their dread they will\nforget his ancient attributes of universal righteousness, justice, and\nmercy, and remember him chiefly as an avenger of guilt. They will\nbanish him to the distant seas, whose rivers he now guides over the\nearth in his gracious government of nature; and there he will dwell in\nexile for ever, remembered only to be feared. And Mitra will become\nmerely another name for the sun.\n\nWhat is the origin of this singular couple? And why are they destined\nto this fall? Neither of these questions can be answered by anything\nbut conjectures. There is no evidence either from Indian or from\nIranian religion that Mitra or his double Varuna grew out of the\nworship of the sun or the sky, although in their worship they were\nsometimes connected with the sun and the sky. However far backwards we\nlook, we still find them essentially spirits of natural order and\nmoral law, gods in the higher sense of the word. But their character,\nand especially the character of Varuna, it seems to me, is rather too\nhigh to survive the competition of rival cults, such as that of the\npopular hero Indra and the priests' darling Agni, which tend to\nengross the interest of worshippers lay and cleric, and to blunt their\nrelish for more spiritual ideals. So Mitra and Varuna become stunted\nin their growth; and at last comes the fatal time when they are\nidentified with the sky by day and night. This is the final blow. No\ndeity that is plainly limited to any one phase or form of nature in\nIndia can be or become a great god; and speedily all their real\ndivinity fades away from Mitra and Varuna, and they shrivel into\ninsignificance.\n\nNext we turn to a spirit of a very different sort, the Fire-god, Agni.\nThe word _agni_ is identical with the Latin _ignis_; it means \"fire,\"\nand nothing else but fire, and this fact is quite sufficient to\nprevent Agni from becoming a great god. The priests indeed do their\nbest, by fertile fancy and endless repetition of his praises, to lift\nhim to that rank; but even they cannot do it. From the days of the\nearliest generations of men Fire was a spirit; and the household fire,\nwhich cooks the food of the family and receives its simple oblations\nof clarified butter, is a kindly genius of the home. But with all his\nusefulness and elfish mystery Fire simply remains fire, and there's an\nend of it, for the ordinary man. But the priests will not have it so.\nThe chief concern of their lives is with sacrifice, and their deepest\ninterest is in the spirit of the sacrificial fire. All the riches of\ntheir imagination and their vocabulary are lavished upon him, his\nforms and his activities. They have devoted to him about 200 hymns and\nmany occasional verses, in which they dwell with constant delight and\ningenious metaphor upon his splendour, his power, his birth from\nwood, from the two firesticks, from trees of the forest, from stones,\nor as lightning from the clouds, his kinship with the sun, his\ndwelling in three abodes (viz. as a rule on earth, in the clouds as\nlightning, and in the upper heavens as the sun), his place in the\nhomes of men as a holy guest, a friend and a kinsman, his protection\nof worshippers against evil spirits and malignant sorcerers, and\nespecially his function of conveying the oblation poured into his\nflames up to the gods. Thus they are led to represent him as the\ndivine Priest, the ideal hierophant, in whom are united the functions\nof the three chief classes of Rigvedic sacrificial priests, the\n_hota_, _adhvaryu_, and _brahman_, and hence as an all-knowing sage\nand seer. If infinite zeal and ingenuity in singing Agni's praises and\nglorifying his activities can avail to raise him to the rank of a\ngreat god, we may expect to find him very near the top. But it is not\nto be. The priests cannot convince the plain man of Agni's\nsuper-godhead, and soon they will fail to convince even themselves.\nThe time will shortly come when they will regard all these gods as\nlittle more than puppets whose strings are pulled by the mysterious\nspirit of the sacrifice.\n\nThe priests have another pet deity, Soma. For the sacred rites include\nthe pressing and drinking of the fermented yellow juice of the\nsoma-plant, an acid draught with intoxicating powers, which when mixed\nwith milk and drunk in the priestly rites inspires religious ecstasy.\nThis drinking of the soma-juice is already an ancient and important\nfeature in the worship of our Aryans, as it is also among their\nkinsmen in Iran; so it is no wonder that the spirit of the sacred\nplant has been made by the priests into an important deity and\ncelebrated with endless abundance of praise and prayer. As with Agni,\nSoma's appearance and properties are described with inexhaustible\nwealth of epithets and metaphors. The poets love to dwell on the\nmystic powers of this wonderful potion, which can heal sickness of\nsoul and body and inspire gods and men to mighty deeds and holy\necstasy. Most often they tell how the god Indra drank huge potions of\nit to strengthen himself for his great fight with the dragon Vritra.\nMost of this worship is of priestly invention; voluminous as its\nrhetoric is, it makes no great impression on the laity, nor perhaps on\nthe clergy either. Some of the more ingenious of the priests are\nalready beginning to trace an affinity between Soma and the moon. The\nyellow soma-stalks swell in the water of the pressing-vat, as the\nyellow moon waxes in the sky; the _soma_ has a magical power of\nstimulation, and the moon sends forth a mystic liquid influence over\nthe vegetation of the earth, and especially over magic plants; the\nsoma is an ambrosia drunk by gods and heroes to inspire them to mighty\ndeeds, and the moon is a bowl of ambrosia which is periodically drunk\nby the gods and therefore wanes month by month. The next step will\nsoon be taken, and the priests will say that Soma _is_ the moon; and\nliterature will then obediently accept this statement, and, gradually\nforgetting nearly everything that Soma meant to the Rigvedic priests,\nwill use the name Soma merely as a secondary name for Chandra, the\nmoon and its god. A very illuminating process, which shows how a god\nmay utterly change his nature. Now we turn to the hero-gods.\n\nIndra and the Asvina at the beginning came to be worshipped because\nthey were heroes, men who were supposed to have wrought marvellously\nnoble and valiant deeds in dim far-off days, saviours of the\nafflicted, champions of the right, and who for this reason were\nworshipped after death, perhaps even before death, as divine beings,\nand gradually became associated in their legends and the forms of\ntheir worship with all kinds of other gods. Times change, gods grow\nold and fade away, but the remembrance of great deeds lives on in\nstrange wild legends, which, however much they may borrow from other\nworships and however much they may be obscured by the phantom lights\nof false fancy, still throw a glimmer of true light back through the\ndarkness of the ages into an immeasurably distant past.\n\nIndra is a mighty giant, tawny of hair and beard and tawny of aspect.\nThe poets tell us that he bears up or stretches out earth and sky,\neven that he has created heaven and earth. He is a monarch supreme\namong the gods, the lord of all beings, immeasurable and irresistible\nof power. He rides in a golden chariot drawn by two tawny horses, or\nmany horses, even as many as eleven hundred, and he bears as his chief\nweapon the _vajra_, or thunderbolt, sometimes also a bow with arrows,\na hook, or a net. Of all drinkers of soma he is the lustiest; he\nswills many lakes of it, and he eats mightily of the flesh of bulls\nand buffaloes. To his worshippers he gives abundance of wealth and\nhappiness, and he leads them to victory over hostile tribes of Aryans\nand the still more dreaded hordes of dark-skins, the Dasas and Dasyus.\nHe guided the princes Yadu and Turvasa across the rivers, he aided\nDivodasa Atithigva to discomfit the dark-skinned Sambara, he gave to\nDivodasa's son Sudas the victory over the armies of the ten allied\nkings beside the river Parushni. Many are the names of the devils and\ndemons that have fallen before him; but most glorious of all his deeds\nis the conquest of Vritra, the dragon dwelling in a mountain fastness\namidst the waters, where Indra, accompanied by the troop of Maruts, or\nstorm-gods, slew the monster with his bolt and set free the waters, or\nrecovered the hidden kine. Our poets sing endless variations on this\ntheme, and sometimes speak of Indra repeating the exploit for the\nbenefit of his worshippers, which is as much as to say that they, or\nat least some of them, think it an allegory.\n\nIn all this maze of savage fancy and priestly invention and wild\nexaggeration there are some points that stand out clearly. Indra is a\ngod of the people, particularly of the fighting man, a glorified type\nof the fair-haired, hard-fighting, hard-drinking forefathers of the\nIndian Aryans and their distant cousins the Hellenes; and therefore he\nis the champion of their armies in battles. He is not a fiction of\nhieratic imagination, whom priests regale with hyperbolic flattery\nqualified only by the lukewarmness of their belief in their own words.\nHe is a living personality in the faith of the people; the priests\nonly invent words to express the people's faith, and perhaps add to\nthe old legends some riddling fancies of their own. Many times they\ntell us that after conquering Vritra and setting free the waters or\nthe kine Indra created the light, the dawn, or the sun; or they say\nthat he produced them without mentioning any fight with Vritra;\nsometimes they speak of him as setting free \"the kine of the Morning,\"\nwhich means that they understood the cows to signify the light of\nmorning, and it would seem also that they thought that the waters\nmentioned in the story signified the rain. But why do they speak of\nthese acts as heroic deeds, exploits of a mighty warrior, in the same\ntone and with the same epic fire as when they sing of Indra's battles\nin times near to their own, real battles in which their own\nforefathers, strong in their faith in the god, shattered the armies of\nhostile Aryan tribes or the fortresses of dark-skinned natives? The\npersonality of Indra and the spirit in which his deeds are recounted\nremind us of hero-sagas; the allegories which the poets read into them\nare on the other hand quite in the style of the priest. How can we\nexplain the presence of these two voices? Besides, why should the\nsetting free of the rain or the daylight be a peculiarly heroic\nattribute of Indra? Other gods are said to do the same things as part\nof their regular duties: Parjanya, Mitra and Varuna, Dyaus, dispense\nthe rain, others the light.\n\nThe explanation is simple. Indra, it seems to me, is a god of just the\nsame sort as Zeus, whose nature and history I have already explained\naccording to my lights. In the far-away past Indra was simply a hero:\nvery likely he was once a chieftain on earth. The story of his great\ndeeds so fascinated the imagination of men that they worshipped his\nmemory and at last raised him to the rank of a chief god. Now they had\npreviously worshipped two very high gods; one of these was\nDyaush-pita, the Sky-father, of whom I have spoken before, and another\nwas Tvashta, the All-creator. So some of them, as the Rig-veda\nproves, declared that Dyaus was the father of Indra, and others appear\nto have given this honour to Tvashta, while others regarded Tvashta as\nIndra's grandfather; and some even said that in order to obtain the\nsoma to inspire him to divine deeds Indra killed his father, which of\ncourse is just an imaginative way of saying that Indra was made into a\ngod and worshipped in place of the elder god.\n\nThe puzzle now is solved. Indra has remained down to the time of the\nRig-veda true to his early nature, an epic hero and typical warrior;\nbut he has also borrowed from the old Sky-father the chief attributes\nof a sky-spirit, especially the giving of rain and the making of\nlight, which the priests of the Rig-veda riddlingly describe as\nsetting free the waters and the cows. He bears the thunderbolt, as\ndoes also Zeus; like Zeus, he has got it from the Sky-father, who had\nlikewise a thunderbolt, according to some Rigvedic poets, though\nothers say it was forged for him by Tvashta, his other father. I even\nventure to think that there is a kernel of heroic legend in the story\nof the slaying of Vritra; that at bottom it is a tale relating how\nIndra with a band of brave fellows stormed a mountain hold surrounded\nby water in which dwelt a wicked chieftain who had carried away the\ncattle of his people, and that when Indra had risen to the rank of a\ngreat god of the sky men added to this plain tale much mythical\ndecoration appropriate to his new quality, turning the comrades of\nIndra into the storm-gods and interpreting the waters and cows to mean\nrain and daylight. Since most of us are agreed that stories such as\nthat of Indra defeating Sambara for the benefit of Divodasa refer to\nreal events, it seems unnatural to suppose that the Vritra-legend is a\npurely imaginary myth. We can thus explain why the ideas of Indra\nsetting free the rain and the light fit in so awkwardly with the\nheroic element in the legend: for they are merely secondary\nattributes, borrowed from the myths of other gods and mechanically\nattached to Indra on his elevation in the pantheon. But we can explain\nmuch more. There is a regular cycle of hero-saga connected with Indra\nwhich is visible or half-visible at the back of some of the Vedic\nhymns and of the priestly literature which is destined to follow them.\n\nThe truth is that the priests of the Rig-veda on the whole have not\nquite made up their minds about Indra's merits, and we shall find them\na few generations hence equally uncertain. They praise his heroic\ndeeds lustily and admire his power immensely; but they are keenly\naware that he is a god with a past, and sometimes they dwell on that.\nTheir favourite method is to relate some of his former questionable\ndeeds in the form of a reproach, and then to turn the story to his\ncredit in some way or another; but as time goes on and the priests\nthink less and less of most of their gods, Indra's character will\nsteadily sink, and in the end we shall find him playing a subordinate\npart, a debauched king in a sensuous paradise, popularly worshipped as\na giver of rain. But this is to anticipate. As yet Indra is to the\nRigvedic priests a very great god; but how did he become so? If we\nread carefully the hymn RV. IV. xviii.[7] we see at the back of it a\nstory somewhat like this. Before he was born, Tvashta, Indra's\ngrandfather, knew that Indra would dispossess him of his sovereignty\nover the gods, and therefore did his best to prevent his birth (cf.\nRV. III. xlviii.); but the baby Indra would not be denied, and he\nforced his way into the light of day through the side of his mother\nAditi, who seems to be the same as Mother Earth (cf. _Ved. Stud._, ii,\np. 86), killed his father, and drank Tvashta's soma, by which he\nobtained divine powers. In v. 12 of this hymn Indra excuses himself by\nsaying that he was in great straits, and that then the soma was\nbrought to him by an eagle. What these straits were is indicated in\nanother hymn (IV. xxvii.), which tells us that he was imprisoned, and\nescaped on the back of the eagle, which he compelled to carry him; the\nwatchman Krisanu shot an arrow at the bird, but it passed harmlessly\nthrough its feathers. Evidently in the story Indra had a hard struggle\nwith rival gods. One poet says (RV. IV. xxx. 3): \"Not even all the\ngods, O Indra, defeated thee, when thou didst lengthen days into\nnights,\" which apparently refers also to some miracle like that\nascribed to Joshua. Another tradition (MS. I. vi. 12) relates that\nwhile Indra and his brother Vivasvan were still unborn they declared\ntheir resolve to oust the Adityas, the elder sons of their mother\nAditi; so the Adityas tried to kill them when born, and actually slew\nVivasvan, but Indra escaped. Another version (TS. II. iv. 13) says\nthat the gods, being afraid of Indra, bound him with fetters before he\nwas born; and at the same time Indra is identified with the Rajanya,\nor warrior class, as its type and representative.[8] This last point\nis immensely important, for it really clinches the matter. Not once,\nbut repeatedly, the priestly literature of the generations that will\nfollow immediately after that of the Rig-veda will be found to treat\nIndra as the type of the warrior order.[9] They will describe an\nimaginary coronation-ceremony of Indra, ending with these words:\n\"Anointed with this great anointment Indra won all victories, found\nall the worlds, attained the superiority, pre-eminence, and supremacy\nover all the gods, and having won the overlordship, the paramount\nrule, the self rule, the sovereignty, the supreme authority, the\nkingship, the great kingship, the suzerainty in this world,\nself-existing, self-ruling, immortal, in yonder world of heaven,\nhaving attained all desires he became immortal.\"[10] Thus we see that\namidst the maze of obscure legends about Indra there are three points\nwhich stand out with perfect clearness. They are, firstly, that Indra\nwas a usurper; secondly, that the older gods fought hard but vainly to\nkeep him from supreme divinity, and that in his struggle he killed his\nfather; and thirdly, that he was identified with the warrior class, as\nopposed to the priestly order, or Brahmans. This antagonism to the\nBrahmans is brought out very clearly in some versions of the tales of\nhis exploits. More than once the poets of the Rig-veda hint that his\nslaying of Vritra involved some guilt, the guilt of _brahma-hatya_, or\nslaughter of a being in whom the _brahma_, or holy spirit, was\nembodied[11]; and this is explained clearly in a priestly tale (TS.\nII. v. 2, 1 ff.; cf. SB. I. i. 3, 4, vi. 3, 8), according to which\nIndra from jealousy killed Tvashta's son Visvarupa, who was chaplain\nof the gods, and thus he incurred the guilt of _brahma-hatya_. Then\nTvashta held a soma-sacrifice; Indra, being excluded from it, broke up\nthe ceremony and himself drank the soma. The soma that was left over\nTvashta cast into one of the sacred fires and produced thereby from it\nthe giant Vritra, by whom the whole universe, including Agni and Soma,\nwas enveloped (cf. the later version in Mahabharata, V. viii. f.). By\nslaying him Indra again became guilty of _brahma-hatya_; and some\nRigvedic poets hint that it was the consciousness of this sin which\nmade him flee away after the deed was done.\n\n[Footnote 7: I follow in the interpretation of this hymn E. Sieg, _Die\nSagenstoffe des Rgveda_, i. p. 76 ff. Cf. on the subject _Ved. Stud._,\ni. p. 211, ii. pp. 42-54. Charpentier, _Die Suparnasage_, takes a\nsomewhat different view of RV. IV. xxvi.-xxvii., which, however, does\nnot convince me; I rather suspect that RV. IV. xxvi. 1 and 4, with\ntheir mention of Manu, to whom the soma was brought, are echoes of an\nancient and true tradition that Indra was once a mortal.]\n\n[Footnote 8: The other legend in MS. II. i. 12, that Aditi bound the\nunborn Indra with an iron fetter, with which he was born, and of which\nhe was able to rid himself by means of a sacrifice, is probably\nlater.]\n\n[Footnote 9: E.g. AB. VII. xxxi., VIII. xii. Cf. BA. Up. I. iv.\n11-13.]\n\n[Footnote 10: AB. VIII. xiv. (Keith's translation).]\n\n[Footnote 11: Cf. Sayana on RV. I. xciii. 5.]\n\nThese bits of saga prove, as effectually as is possible in a case like\nthis, that Indra was originally a warrior-king or chieftain who was\ndeified, perhaps by the priestly tribe of the Angirasas, who claim in\nsome of the hymns to have aided him in his fight with Vritra, and that\nhe thus rose to the first rank in the pantheon, gathering round\nhimself a great cycle of heroic legend based upon those traditions,\nand only secondarily and by artificial invention becoming associated\nwith the control of the rain and the daylight.\n\nThe name Asvina means \"The Two Horsemen\"; what their other name,\nNasatya, signifies nobody has satisfactorily explained. But even with\nthe name Asvina there is a difficulty. They are described usually as\nriding together in a chariot which is sometimes said to be drawn by\nhorses, and this would suit their name; but more often the poets say\nthat their chariot is drawn by birds, such as eagles or swans, and\nsometimes even by a buffalo or buffaloes, or by an ass. I do not see\nhow we can escape from this difficulty except by supposing that\npopular imagination in regard to this matter varied from very early\ntimes, but preferred to think of them as having horses. At any rate\nthey are very ancient gods, for the people of Iran also have\ntraditions about them, and in the far-away land of the Mitanni, in the\nnorth of Mesopotamia, they are invoked together with Indra, Mitra, and\nVaruna to sanction treaties. In India the Aryans keep them very busy,\nfor they are more than anything else gods of help. Thrice every day\nand thrice every night they sally forth on their patrols through earth\nand heaven, in order to aid the distressed[12]: and the poets tell us\nthe names of many persons whom they have relieved, such as old\nChyavana, whom they restored to youth and love, Bhujyu, whom they\nrescued from drowning in the ocean, Atri, whom they saved from a fiery\npit, Vispala, to whom when her leg had been cut off they gave one of\niron, and Ghosha, to whom they brought a husband. Many other helpful\nacts are ascribed to them, and it is very likely that at least some of\nthese stories are more or less true. Another legend relates that they\njointly wedded Surya, the daughter of the Sun-god, who chose them from\namongst the other gods.[13]\n\n[Footnote 12: Cf. _Ved. Studien_, ii. p. 31, RV. I. xxxiv. 2.]\n\n[Footnote 13: Cf. _Ved. Studien_, i. p. 14 ff.]\n\nAmidst the medley of saga and facts and poetical imagination which\nsurrounds the Asvina, can we see the outlines of their original\ncharacter? It is hard to say: opinions must differ. The Aryans of\nIndia are inclined to say that they are simply divine kings active in\ngood works; but the priests are perhaps beginning to fancy that they\nmay be embodiments of powers of nature--they are not sure which--and\nin course of time they will have various theories, partly connected\nwith their rituals. But really all that is certain in the Vedic age\nabout the Asvins is that they are an ancient pair of saviour-gods who\nride about in a chariot and render constant services to mankind. We\nare tempted however to see a likeness between them and the [Greek:\nDios koro] of the distant Hellenes, the heroes Kastor and Polydeukes,\nCastor and Pollux, the twin Horsemen who are saviours of afflicted\nmankind by land and sea. There are difficulties in the way of this\ntheory; but they are not unsurmountable, and I believe that the\nAsvina of India have the same origin as the Twin Horsemen of Greece.\nAt any rate both the pairs are hero-gods, whose divinity has been\ncreated by mankind's need for help and admiration for valour. Whether\nthere was any human history at the back of this process we cannot say.\n\nNow we may leave the heroes and consider a god of a very different\nkind, Vishnu.\n\nThe Rig-veda has not very much to say about Vishnu, and what it says\nis puzzling. The poets figure him as a beneficent young giant, of\nunknown parentage, with two characteristic attributes: the first of\nthese is his three mystic strides, the second his close association\nwith Indra. Very often they refer to these three strides, sometimes\nusing the verb _vi-kram_, \"to step out,\" sometimes the adjectives\n_uru-krama_, \"widely-stepping,\" and _uru-gaya_, \"wide-going.\" The\nthree steps carry Vishnu across the three divisions of the universe,\nin the highest of which is his home, which apparently he shares with\nIndra (RV. I. xxxii. 20, cliv. 5-6, III. lv. 10; cf. AB. I. i., etc.).\nSome of them are beginning to imagine that these steps symbolise the\npassage of the sun through the three divisions of the world, the\nearth, sky, and upper heaven; certainly this idea will be held by many\nlater scholars, though a few will maintain that it denotes the sun at\nits rising, at midday, and at its setting. Before long we shall find\nsome priests harping on the same notion in another form, saying that\nVishnu's head was cut off by accident and became the sun; and later on\nwe shall see Vishnu bearing as one of his weapons a chakra, or discus,\nwhich looks like a figure of the sun. But really all this is an\nafterthought: in the Veda, and the priestly literature that follows\ndirectly upon the Veda, Vishnu is _not_ the sun. Nor do we learn what\nhe is very readily from his second leading attribute in the Rig-veda,\nhis association with Indra. Yet it is a very clearly marked trait in\nhis character. Not only do the poets often couple the two gods in\nprayer and praise, but they often tell us that the one performed his\ncharacteristic deeds by the help of the other. They say that Vishnu\nmade his three strides by the power of Indra (VIII. xii. 27), or for\nthe sake of Indra (Val. iv. 3), and even that Indra strode along with\nVishnu (VI. lxix. 5, VII. xcix. 6), and on the other hand they tell us\noften that it was by the aid of Vishnu that Indra overcame Vritra and\nother malignant foes. \"Friend Vishnu, stride out lustily,\" cries Indra\nbefore he can strike down Vritra (IV. xviii. 11).[14] The answer to\nthis riddle I find in the Brahmanas, the priestly literature which is\nabout to follow immediately after the Veda. In plain unequivocal words\nthe Brahmanas tell us again and again that _Vishnu is the\nsacrifice_.[15] Evidently when they repeat this they are repeating an\nold hieratic tradition; and it is one which perfectly explains the\nfacts of the case. Vishnu, I conceive, was originally nothing more or\nless than the embodied spirit of the sacrificial rites. His name seems\nto be derived from the root _vish_, meaning stimulation or\ninspiration; and this is exactly what the sacrifice is supposed in\npriestly theory to do. The sacrifice, accompanied by prayer and\npraise, is imagined to have a magic power of its own, by which the\ngods worshipped in it are strengthened to perform their divine\nfunctions. One poet says to Indra: \"When thy two wandering Bays thou\ndravest hither, thy praiser laid within thine arms the thunder\" (RV.\nI. lxiii. 2); and still more boldly another says: \"Sacrifice, Indra,\nmade thee wax so mighty ... worship helped thy bolt when slaying the\ndragon\" (III. xxxii. 12). So it would be very natural for the priests\nto conceive this spirit of the sacrificial rites as a personal deity;\nand this deity, the Brahmanas assure us, is Vishnu. Then the idea of\nthe three strides and the association with Indra would easily grow up\nin the priestly imagination. The inspiring power of the sacrifice is\nsupposed to pervade the three realms of the universe, earth, sky, and\nupper heavens; this idea is expressed in the common ritual formula\n_bhur bhuvas svah_, and is symbolised by three steps taken by the\npriest in certain ceremonies, which are translated into the language\nof myth as the three strides of Vishnu.[16] Observe that in the\nRig-veda the upper heaven is not the dwelling-place of Vishnu only;\nAgni the Fire-god, Indra and Soma have their home in it also (RV. I.\ncliv. 6, IV. xxvi. 6, xxvii. 3-4, V. iii. 3, VIII. lxxxix. 8, IX.\nlxiii. 27, lxvi. 30, lxviii. 6, lxxvii. 2, lxxxvi. 24, X. i. 3, xi. 4,\nxcix. 8, cxliv. 4). Later, however, when their adventitious divinity\nbegins to fade away from Agni and Soma, and Indra is allotted a\nspecial paradise of his own, this \"highest step\" will be regarded as\npeculiar to Vishnu, _Vishnoh paramam padam_.\n\n[Footnote 14: A later and distorted version of this myth appears in\nAB. VI. xv.]\n\n[Footnote 15: E.g. MS. 1. iv. 14, SB. I. i. 1, 2, 13, TB. I. ii. 5, 1,\nAB. I. xv., KB. IV. ii., XVIII. viii., xiv.]\n\n[Footnote 16: SB. I. ix. 3, 8-11. Cf. the three steps of the\nAmesha-spentas from the earth to the sun, imitated in the Avestic\nritual (Avesta, transl. Darmesteter, I. 401).]\n\nAs soon as this spirit of sacrifice was thus personified, he at once\nattached himself to Indra; for Indra is pre-eminently the god of\naction, and for his activities he needs to be stimulated by sacrifice\nand praise. As the priests will tell us in plain unvarnished words,\n\"he to whom the Sacrifice comes as portion slays Indra\" (AB. I. iv.).\nTherefore we are told that Vishnu aids Indra in his heroic exploits,\nthat Vishnu takes his strides and presses Soma in order that Indra may\nbe strengthened for his tasks. Now we can see the full meaning of\nIndra's cry before striking Vritra, \"Friend Vishnu, stride out\nlustily!\"; for until the sacrifice has put forth its mystic energy the\ngod cannot strike his blow. We are told also that Vishnu cooks\nbuffaloes and boils milk for Indra,[17] for buffaloes were no doubt\nanciently offered to Indra. The vivid reality of Indra's character has\nclothed Vishnu with some of its own flesh and blood; originally a\npriestly abstraction, he has become through association with Indra a\nliving being, a real god. The blood which has thus been poured into\nhis veins will enable him to live through a critical period of his\nlife, until by combination with another deity he will rise to new and\nsupreme sovereignty. But of that more anon. Meanwhile let us note the\nsignificance of this union of Vishnu and Indra in the Veda. Vishnu,\nthe spirit of Sacrifice, is in a sense representative of the Brahman\npriesthood, and Indra, as I have shown, is commonly regarded as\ntypical of the warrior order. In the Rig-veda Indra is powerless\nwithout Vishnu's mystic service, and Vishnu labours to aid Indra in\nhis heroic works for the welfare of men and gods. Surely this is an\nallegory, though the priests may so far be only dimly conscious of its\nfull meaning--an allegory bodying forth the priestly ideal of the\nreign of righteousness, in which the King is strong by the mystic\npower of the Priest, and the Priest lives for the service of the King.\n\n[Footnote 17: RV. VI. xvii. 11, VIII. lxvi. 10; the myth in RV. I.\nlxi. 7, VIII. lxvi. 10, and TS. VI. ii. 4, 2-3 is expanded from this\noriginal idea. Cf. Macdonell, _Vedic Myth._, p. 41.]\n\nThere is another god who is destined to become in future ages Vishnu's\nchief rival--Rudra, \"The Tawny,\" or Siva, \"The Gracious.\" He belongs\nto the realm of popular superstition, a spiteful demon ever ready to\nsmite men and cattle with disease, but likewise dispensing healing\nbalms and medicines to those that win his favour. The Rigvedic priests\nas yet do not take much interest in him, and for the most part they\nleave him to their somewhat despised kinsmen the Atharvans, who do a\nthriving trade in hymns and spells to secure the common folk against\nhis wrath.\n\nThere are many more gods, godlings, and spirits in the Vedic religion;\nbut we must pass over them. We have seen enough, I hope, to give us a\nfair idea of the nature and value of that religion in general. What\nthen is its value?\n\nThe Rigveda is essentially a priestly book; but it is not entirely a\npriestly book. Much of the thought to which it gives utterance is\npopular in origin and sentiment, and is by no means of the lowest\norder. On this groundwork the priests have built up a system of\nhieratic thought and ritual of their own, in which there is much that\ndeserves a certain respect. There is a good deal of fine poetry in\nit. There is also in it some idea of a law of righteousness: in spite\nof much wild and unmoral myth and fancy, its gods for the most part\nare not capricious demons but spirits who act in accordance with\nestablished laws, majestic and wise beings in whom are embodied the\nhighest ideals to which men have risen as yet. Moreover, the priests\nin the later books have given us some mystic hymns containing vigorous\nand pregnant speculations on the deepest questions of existence,\nspeculations which are indeed fanciful and unscientific, but which\nnevertheless have in them the germs of the powerful idealism that is\ndestined to arise in centuries to come. On the other hand, the priests\nhave cast their system in the mould of ritualism. Ritual, ceremony,\nsacrifice, professional benefit--these are their predominant\ninterests. The priestly ceremonies are conceived to possess a magical\npower of their own; and the fixed laws of ritual by which these\nceremonies are regulated tend to eclipse, and finally even to swallow\nup, the laws of moral righteousness under which the gods live. A few\ngenerations more, and the priesthood will frankly announce its ritual\nto be the supreme law of the universe. Meanwhile they are becoming\nmore and more indifferent to the personalities of the gods, when they\nhave preserved any; they are quite ready to ascribe attributes of one\ndeity to another, even attributes of nominal supremacy, with\nunscrupulous inconsistency and dubious sincerity; for the\npersonalities of the different gods are beginning to fade away in\ntheir eyes, and in their mind is arising the conception of a single\nuniversal Godhead.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II\n\nTHE AGE OF THE BRAHMANAS AND UPANISHADS\n\n\nCenturies have passed since the hymns of the Rig-veda were composed.\nThe Aryans have now crossed the fateful ridge on the east of their\nformer settlements, and have spread themselves over the lands of\nNorthern Hindostan around the upper basins of the Ganges and Jamna,\nreaching eastward as far as Bihar and southward down to the Vindhya\nMountains, and in the course of their growth they have absorbed not a\nlittle of the blood of the dark-skinned natives. The old organisation\nof society by tribes has come to an end, though the names of many\nancient tribes are still heard; the Aryans are now divided laterally\nby the principle of what we call \"caste,\" which is based upon a\ncombination of religious and professional distinctions, and vertically\nby the rule of kings, while a few oligarchic governments still survive\nto remind them of Vedic days. In these kingdoms the old tribes are\nbeginning to be fused together; from these combinations new States are\narising, warring with one another, constantly waxing and waning.\nSociety is ruled politically by kings, spiritually by Brahmans. With\nthe rise of the kingdom an Established Church has come into existence,\nand the Brahman priesthood works out its principles to the bitterest\nend of logic.\n\nThe Brahmans are now, more than they ever were before, a close\ncorporation of race, religion, and profession, a religious fraternity\nin the strict sense of the words. While other classes of the Aryans\nhave mixed their blood to a greater or less degree with that of the\nnatives, the Brahmans have preserved much of the pure Aryan strain.\nThey, moreover, have maintained the knowledge of the ancient Vedic\nlanguage in which the sacred hymns of their forefathers were composed,\nof the traditions associated with them, and of the priestly lore of\nVedic ritual. Proud of this heritage and resolved to maintain it\nundiminished, they have knitted themselves into a close spiritual and\nintellectual aristocracy, which stands fast like a lighthouse amidst\nthe darkness and storms of political changes. They employ all the arts\nof the priest, the thinker, the statesman, and even the magician to\npreserve their primacy; and around them the manifold variety of the\nother castes, in all their divisions and subdivisions, groups itself\nto make up the multi-coloured web of Indian life.\n\nIn course of time this priesthood will spread out octopus-like\ntentacles over the whole of India. Becoming all things to all men, it\nwill find a place in its pantheon for all gods and all ideas,\nbaptising them by orthodox names or justifying them by ingenious\nfictions. It will send forth apostles and colonies even to the\nfurthermost regions of the distant South, which, alien in blood and in\ntradition, will nevertheless accept them and surrender its best\nintellect to their control. It will even admit into the lower ranks of\nits own body men of foreign birth by means of legal fictions, in order\nto maintain its control of religion. Though itself splitting up into\nscores of divisions varying in purity of blood and tradition, it will\nstill as a whole maintain its position as against all other classes of\nsociety. That the Brahman is the Deity on earth, and other classes\nshall accept this dogma and agree to take their rank in accordance\nwith it, will become the principle holding together a vast\nagglomeration of utterly diverse elements within the elastic bounds of\nCatholic Brahmanism.\n\nBut as yet this condition of things has not arrived. The Brahmans are\nstill comparatively pure in blood and homogeneous in doctrine, and\nthey have as yet sent forth no colonies south of the Vindhya. They are\nestablished in the lands of the Ganges and Jamna as far to the east as\nBenares, and they look with some contempt on their kinsmen in the\nwestern country that they have left behind. They are busily employed\nin working out to logical conclusions the ideas and principles of\ntheir Rigvedic forefathers. They have now three Vedas; for to the old\nRig-veda they have added a Yajur-veda for the use of the sacrificant\norders of priests and a Sama-veda or hymnal containing Rigvedic hymns\narranged for the chanting of choristers. The result of these labours\nis that they have created a vast and intricate system of sacrificial\nritual, perhaps the most colossal of its kind that the world has ever\nseen or ever will see. What is still more remarkable, the logical\nresult of this immense development of ritualism is that the priesthood\nin theory is practically atheistic, while on the other hand a certain\nnumber of its members have arrived at a philosophy of complete\nidealism which is beginning to turn its back upon ritualism.\n\nThe atheist is not so much the man who denies the existence of any god\nas the man to whom God is not God, who looks upon the Deity as\nsubordinate to powers void of holiness and nobility, the man who will\nnot see in God the highest force in the world of nature and in the\nrealm of the spirit. In this sense the Brahmans are thorough atheists.\nAccording to them, the universe with all that is in it--gods, men, and\nlower things--is created and governed by an iron law of soulless\nnatural necessity. It has arisen by emanation from a cosmic Principle,\nPrajapati, \"the Lord of Creatures,\" an impersonal being who shows no\ntrace of moral purpose in his activity. Prajapati himself is not\nabsolutely the first in the course of nature. The Brahmanas, the\npriestly books composed in this period to expound the rules and mystic\nsignificance of the Brahmanic ceremonies, give us varying accounts of\nhis origin, some of them saying that he arose through one or more\nintermediate stages from non-existence (TB. II. ii. 9, 1-10, SB. VI.\ni. 1, 1-5), others deriving him indirectly from the primitive waters\n(SB. XI. i. 6, 1), others tracing his origin back to the still more\nimpersonal and abstract Brahma (Samav. B. I. 1-3, Gop. B. I. i. 4).\nAll these are attempts to express in the form of myth the idea of an\nimpersonal Principle of Creation as arising from a still more abstract\nfirst principle. We have seen the poets of the Rig-veda gradually\nmoving towards the idea of a unity of godhead; in Prajapati this goal\nis attained, but unfortunately it is attained by sacrificing almost\nall that is truly divine in godhead. The conception of Prajapati that\nwe find in the Brahmanas is also expressed in some of the latest hymns\nof the Rig-veda. Among these is the famous Purusha-sukta (RV. X. 90),\nwhich throws a peculiar light on the character of Prajapati. It is in\npraise of a primitive Purusha or Man, who is, of course, the same as\nPrajapati; in some mysterious manner this Purusha is sacrificed, and\nfrom the various parts of his body arise the various parts of the\nworld. The idea conveyed by this is that the universe came into\nexistence by the operation of the mystic laws revealed in the\nBrahmanic rituals, and is maintained in its natural order by the same\nmeans. The Brahmanas do not indeed often assert on their own authority\nthat Prajapati was himself sacrificed in order to produce the world,\nand in fact they usually give other accounts of the creation; but as\ntheir authors live in a rarefied atmosphere of mystical allegory in\nwhich fact and fancy are completely confused with one another and\nconsistency ceases to have any meaning, none of them would have\ndifficulty in accepting the Rigvedic statement that he was sacrificed.\nHence they tell us on the one hand that Prajapati has created the\nworld from a blind will for generation or increase, producing from\neach of his limbs some class of beings corresponding to it (e.g. MS.\nIV. vi. 3), or copulating with the earth, atmosphere, sky, and speech\n(SB. VI. i. 2, 1), or that he brought it into existence indirectly by\nentering with the Triple Science or mystic lore of the three Vedas\ninto the primeval waters and thence forming an egg from which was\nhatched the personal Demiurge Brahma, who actually created the world\n(SB. VI. i. 1, 10); and on the other hand they relate that he created\nsacrifice and performed it, making of himself a victim in order that\nthe gods, his offspring, might perform the rites for their own\nbenefit, forming an image of himself to be the sacrifice, by which he\nredeemed himself from the gods (SB. XI. i. 8, 2-4; cf. AB. VII. 19,\nKB. XIII. 1, SB. III. ii. 1, 11), and that after creation he ascended\nto heaven (SB. X. ii. 2, 1). The thought that lies underneath these\nbewildering flights of fancy is one of mystic pantheism: all created\nexistence has arisen by emanation from the one Creative Principle,\nPrajapati, and in essence is one with Prajapati; Prajapati is an\nimpersonal being, a creative force, in which are embodied the laws of\nBrahmanic ritual, which acts only in these laws, and which is above\nthe moral influences that affect humanity; and the whole of created\nnature, animate and inanimate, is controlled in every process of its\nbeing by these laws, and by the priest who possesses the knowledge of\nthem. Thus there lies a profound significance in the title of \"gods on\nearth\" which the Brahmans have assumed.\n\nWhen we speak of sacrifice in India, we must clear our minds of the\nideas which we have formed from reading the Bible. The Mosaic\nconception of sacrifice was that of a religious ceremony denoting a\nmoral relation between a personal God and His worshippers: in the\nsin-offerings and trespass-offerings was symbolised a reconciliation\nbetween man and his God who was angered by man's conscious or\nunconscious breach of the laws which had been imposed upon him for\nhis spiritual welfare, while meat-offerings and peace-offerings\ntypified the worshipper's sense of gratitude for the Divine love and\nwisdom that guarded him. Of such relations there is to be found in the\nBrahmanas no trace. If we may use a modern figure of speech, they\nconceive the universe of gods, men, and lower creatures as a single\nimmense electric battery, and the sacrifice as a process of charging\nthis battery with ever fresh electricity. The sacrifice is a process,\nat once material and mystic, which preserves the order of nature as\nestablished by the prototypic sacrifice performed by Prajapati. The\ngods became divine and immortal through sacrifice (TS. VI. iii. 4, 7,\nVI. iii. 10, 2, VII. iv. 2, 1, SB. I. vi. 2, 1, MS. III. ix. 4, AB.\nVI. i. 1, etc.); and they live on the gifts of earth, as mankind lives\non the gifts of heaven (TS. III. ii. 9, 7, SB. I. ii. 5, 24). The\nsacrifice is thus the life-principle, the soul, of all gods and all\nbeings (SB. VIII. vi. 1, 10, IX. iii. 2, 7, XIV. iii. 2, 1); or, what\namounts to the same thing, the Triple Science or the knowledge of the\nceremonies of the Three Vedas is their essence (SB. X. iv. 2, 21). As\nPrajapati created the primeval sacrifice, and as the gods by following\nthis rule obtained their divinity, so man should seek to follow their\nexample and by means of sacrifice rise to godhead and immortality. As\none Brahmana puts it, the sacrifice leads the way to heaven; it is\nfollowed by the _dakshina_, or fee paid by the sacrificer to the\nsacrificant priests, which of course materially strengthens the\nefficacy of the sacrifice; and third comes the sacrificer, holding\nfast to the _dakshina_. This ascent of heaven is symbolised in the\nceremony called _durohana_, or \"hard mounting\" (AB. IV. 20, 21, KB.\nXXV. 7), and it is ensured by the rite of _diksha_, or consecration,\nin which the sacrificer is symbolically represented as passing through\na new conception, gestation, and birth, by which he is supposed to\nobtain two bodies. One of these bodies is immortal and spiritual; the\nother is mortal and material, and is assigned as a victim to all the\ngods. He then ransoms his material body from the obligation of being\nsacrificed, as did Prajapati, and thus ranks literally as a \"god on\nearth,\" with the certainty of becoming in due course a god in heaven.\n\nWhen the student on reading the Brahmanas finds them full of\ninterminable ceremonial rules with equally interminable commentaries\ninterpreting them by wildest analogies as symbolical of details of\nmyths or of laws of nature and hence as conferring mystic powers,\nbesides all kinds of myths, some forcibly dragged into the\ninterpretation of the ritual because of some imaginary point of\nresemblance, others invented or recast on purpose to justify some\ndetail of ceremony, and when moreover he observes that many of these\nmyths and some of the rites are brutally and filthily obscene, and\nthat hardly any of them show the least moral feeling, he may be\nexcused for thinking the Brahmanas to be the work of madmen. But there\nis some method in their madness. However strangely they may express\nthem, they have definite and strictly logical ideas about the\nsacrificial ritual and its cosmic function. It is more difficult to\ndefend them against the charge of want of morality. It must be\nadmitted that their supreme Being, Prajapati, is in the main lines of\nhis character utterly impersonal, and where incidentally he shows any\nhuman feelings they are as a rule far from creditable to him. He\ncreated the universe from mechanical instinct or blind desire, and\ncommitted or tried to commit incest with his daughter (the accounts\nare various). He has begotten both the gods and the demons, _devas_\nand _asuras_, who are constantly at war with one another. The gods,\nwho are embodiments of \"truth\" (that is to say, correct knowledge of\nthe law of ritual), have been often in great danger of being\noverwhelmed by the demons, who embody \"untruth,\" and they have been\nsaved by Prajapati; but he has done this not from any sense of right,\nbut merely from blind will or favour, for he can hardly distinguish\none party from the other. The gods themselves, in spite of being of\n\"truth,\" are sadly frail. Dozens of myths charge them with falsehood,\nhatred, lust, greed, and jealousy, and only the stress of the danger\nthreatening them from their adversaries the demons has induced them to\norganise themselves into an ordered kingdom under the sovereignty of\nIndra, who has been anointed by Prajapati. True, many of the offensive\nfeatures in this mythology and ritual are survivals from a very\nancient past, a pre-historic time in which morals were conspicuously\nabsent from religion; the priesthood has forgotten very little, and as\na rule has only added new rituals and new interpretations to this\nlegacy from the days of old. Nevertheless it must be confessed that\nthere is a tone of ritualistic professionalism in the Brahmanas that\nis unpleasing; the priesthood are consciously superior to nature, God,\nand morals by virtue of their \"Triple Science,\" and they constantly\nemphasise this claim. It is difficult for us to realise that these are\nthe same men who have created the Brahmanic culture of India, which,\nhowever we may criticise it from the Western point of view, is\nessentially a gentle life, a field in which moral feeling and\nintellectual effort have born abundance of goodly fruit. Yet if we\nlook more closely we shall see that even these ritualists, besotted as\nthey may seem to be with their orgies of priestcraft, are not wholly\nuntouched by the better spirit of their race. Extremes of sanctity,\nwhether it be ritualistic or anti-ritualistic sanctity, always tend in\nIndia--and in other countries as well--to produce supermen. And if\nour priesthood in the Brahmanas feel themselves in the pride of\nspiritual power lifted above the rules of moral law, they are not in\npractice indifferent to it. Their lives are for the most part gentle\nand good. Though \"truth\" in the Brahmanas usually means only\naccordance with the ritual and mystic teachings of the Triple Science,\nit sometimes signifies even there veracity and honesty also.\nTruthfulness in speech is the hall-mark of the Brahman, says\nHaridrumata Gautama to Satyakama Jabala (Chhand. Up. IV. iv. 5); and\neven in the Brahmanas a lie is sometimes a sin. If conservatism\ncompels the priests to keep obscene old practices in their rituals,\nthey are not always satisfied with them, and voices begin to be heard\npleading that these rites are really obsolete. In short, a moral sense\nis beginning to arise among them.\n\nNow the moral law, in order that it may be feared, needs to be\nembodied in the personality of a god. Most of their gods inspire no\nfear at all in the souls of the Brahmans; but there is one of whom\nthey have a dread, which is all the greater for being illogical.\nPrajapati is a vast impersonality, too remote and abstract to inspire\nthe soul with either fear or love. The other gods--Indra, Agni, Soma,\nVaruna, Vishnu, and the rest--are his offspring, and are moved like\npuppets by the machinery of the ritual of sacrifice created by him.\nHowever much they may seem to differ one from another in their\nattributes and personalities, they are in essence one and negligible\nin the eyes of the master of the ritual lore. In the beginning, say\nthe Brahmanas, all the gods (except Prajapati, of course) were alike,\nand all were mortal; then they performed sacrifices and thereby became\nimmortal, each with his peculiar attributes of divinity.[18] Thus at\nbottom they are all the same thing, merely phases of the universal\ngodhead, waves stirred up by the current of the cosmic sacrifice. They\nhave no terrors for the priesthood. But there is one deity who\nobstinately refuses to accommodate himself to this convenient point of\nview, and that is Rudra, or Siva. By rights and logically he ought to\nfall into rank with the rest of the gods; but there is a crossgrained\nelement in his nature which keeps him out. As we have seen, he comes\nfrom a different source: in origin he was a demon, a power of terror,\nwhose realm of worship lay apart from that of the gods of higher\nclass, and now, although it has extended into the domains of orthodox\nreligion, an atmosphere of dread still broods over it.[19] Rudra\nwields all his ancient terrors over a much widened area. The priests\nhave assigned him a regular place in their liturgies, and fully\nrecognise him in his several phases as Bhava, Sarva, Ugra, Maha-deva\nor the Great God, Rudra, Isana or the Lord, and Asani or the\nThunderbolt (KB. VI. 2-9). Armed with his terrors, he is fit to be\nemployed in the service of conscience. Hence a myth has arisen that in\norder to punish Prajapati for his incest with his daughter the gods\ncreated Bhuta-pati (who is Pasu-pati or Rudra under a new name), who\nstabbed him. The rest of the myth is as immaterial to our purpose as\nit is unsavoury; what is important is that the conscience of the\nBrahmans was beginning to feel slight qualms at the uncleanness of\nsome of their old myths and to look towards Rudra as in some degree an\navenger of sin. In this is implied an immense moral advance.\nHenceforth there will be a gradual ennoblement of one of the phases of\nthe god's character. Many of the best minds among the Brahmans will\nfind their imaginations stirred and their consciences moved by\ncontemplation of him. To them he will be no more a mere demon of the\nmountain and the wild. His destructive wrath they will interpret as\nsymbolising the everlasting process of death-in-life which is the\nkeynote of nature; in his wild dances they will see imaged forth the\neverlasting throb of cosmic existence; to his terrors they will find a\nreverse of infinite love and grace. The horrors of Rudra the deadly\nare the mantle of Siva the gracious. Thus, while the god's character\nin its lower phases remains the same as before, claiming the worship\nof the basest classes of mankind, and nowise rising to a higher level,\nit develops powerfully and fruitfully in one aspect which attracts\ngrave and earnest imaginations. The Muni, the contemplative ascetic,\npenetrates in meditation through the terrors of Siva's outward form to\nthe god's inward love and wisdom, and beholds in him his own divine\nprototype. And so Siva comes to be figured in this nobler aspect as\nthe divine Muni, the supreme saint and sage.\n\n[Footnote 18: For the original mortality of the gods see TS. VII. iv.\n2, 1, SB. X. iv. 33 f., XI. i. 2, 12, ii. 3, 6; for their primitive\nnon-differentiation, TS. VI. vi. 8, 2, SB. IV. v. 4, 1-4.]\n\n[Footnote 19: Cf. e.g. KB. III. 4 & 6, VI. 2-9, and Ap. SS. VI. xiv.\n11-13.]\n\nWhile the worship of Siva is slowly making its way into the heart of\nBrahmanic ritualism, another movement is at work which is gradually\ndrawing many of the keenest intellects among the Brahmans away from\nthe study of ritual towards an idealistic philosophy which views all\nritual with indifference. Its literature is the Upanishads.\n\nThe passing of the Rigvedic age has left to the Brahmans a doctrinal\nlegacy, which may be thus restated: a single divine principle through\na prototypic sacrifice has given birth to the universe, and all the\nprocesses of cosmic nature are controlled by sacrifices founded upon\nthat primeval sacrifice. In short, the ritual symbolises and in a\nsense actually _is_ the whole cosmic process. The ritual implies both\nthe knowledge of the law of sacrifice and the proper practice of that\nlaw, _both understanding and works_. This is the standpoint of the\northodox ritualist. But there has also arisen a new school among the\nBrahmans, that of the Aupanishadas, which has laid down for its first\ndoctrine that _works are for the sake of understanding_, that the\npractice of ritual is of value only as a help to the mystic knowledge\nof the All. But here they have not halted; they have gone a further\nstep, and declared that _knowledge once attained, works become\nneedless_. Some even venture to hint that perhaps the highest\nknowledge is not to be reached through works at all. And the knowledge\nthat the Aupanishadas seek is of Brahma, and _is_ Brahma.\n\nThe word _brahma_ is a neuter noun, and in the Rig-veda it means\nsomething that can only be fully translated by a long circumlocution.\nIt may be rendered as \"the power of ritual devotion\"; that is to say,\nit denotes the mystic or magic force which is put forth by the\npoet-priest of the Rig-veda when he performs the rites of sacrifice\nwith appropriate chanting of hymns--in short, ritual magic. This\nmystic force the Rigvedic poets have represented in personal form as\nthe god Brihaspati, in much the same way as they embodied the spirit\nof the sacrifice in Vishnu. Their successors, the orthodox ritualists\nof the Brahmanas, have not made much use of this term; but sometimes\nthey speak of Brahma as an abstract first principle, the highest and\nultimate source of all being, even of Prajapati (Samav. B. I. 1, Gop.\nB. I. i. 4); and when they speak of Brahma they think of him not as a\npower connected with religious ceremony but as a supremely\ntranscendent and absolutely unqualified and impersonal First\nExistence. But the school of the Aupanishadas has gone further.\nSeeking through works mystic knowledge as the highest reality, they\nsee in Brahma the perfect knowledge. To them the absolute First\nExistence is also transcendently full and unqualified Thought. As\nknowledge is power, the perfect Power is perfect Knowledge.\n\nBrahma then is absolute knowledge; and all that exists is really\nBrahma, one and indivisible in essence, but presenting itself\nillusively to the finite consciousness as a world of plurality, of\nmost manifold subjects and objects of thought. The highest wisdom, the\ngreatest of all secrets, is to know this truth, to realise with full\nconsciousness that there exists only the One, Brahma, the infinite\nIdea; and the sage of the Upanishads is he who has attained this\nknowledge, understanding that he himself, as individual subject of\nthought, is really identical with the universal Brahma. He has\nrealised that he is one with the Infinite Thought, he has raised\nhimself to the mystic heights of transcendental Being and Knowledge,\nimmeasurably far above nature and the gods. He knows all things at\ntheir fountain-head, and life can nevermore bring harm to him; in his\nknowledge he has salvation, and death will lead him to complete union\nwith Brahma.\n\nThe Aupanishadas have thus advanced from the pantheism of the orthodox\nritualists to a transcendental idealism. The process has been gradual.\nIt was only by degrees that they reached the idea of salvation in\nknowledge, the knowledge that is union with Brahma; and it was\nlikewise only through slow stages that they were able to conceive of\nBrahma in itself. Many passages in the Upanishads are full of\nstruggles to represent Brahma by symbols or forms perceptible to the\nsense, such as ether, breath, the sun, etc. Priests endeavoured to\nadvance through ritual works to the ideas which these works are\nsupposed to symbolise: the ritual is the training-ground for the\nhigher knowledge, the leading-strings for infant philosophy. Gradually\nmen become capable of thinking without the help of these symbols:\nphilosophy grows to manhood, and looks with a certain contempt upon\nthose supports of its infancy.\n\nThe nature of Brahma as conceived in the Upanishads is a subject on\nwhich endless controversies have raged, and we need not add to them.\nBesides, the Upanishads themselves are not strictly consistent on this\npoint, or on others, for that matter; for they are not a single\nhomogeneous system of philosophy, but a number of speculations, from\noften varying standpoints, and they are frequently inconsistent. But\nthere are some ideas which are more or less present in all of them.\nThey regard Brahma as absolute and infinite Thought and Being at once,\nand as such it is one with the consciousness, soul or self, of the\nindividual when the latter rids himself of the illusion of a manifold\nuniverse and realises his unity with Brahma. Moreover, Brahma is\nbliss--the joy of wholly perfect and self-satisfied thought and being.\nSince Brahma as universal Soul is really identical with each\nindividual soul or _atma_, and vice versa, it follows that each\nindividual soul contains within itself, _qua_ Brahma, the whole of\nexistence, nature, gods, mankind, and all other beings; it creates\nthem all, and all depend upon it. Our Aupanishadas are thoroughgoing\nidealists.\n\nAnother new idea also appears for the first time in the early\nUpanishads, and one that henceforth will wield enormous influence in\nall Indian thought. This is the theory of _karma_ and _samsara_,\nrebirth of the soul in accordance with the nature of its previous\nworks. Before the Upanishads we find no evidence of this doctrine: the\nnearest approach to it is in some passages of the Brahmanas which\nspeak of sinful men dying again in the next world as a punishment for\ntheir guilt. But in the Upanishads the doctrine appears full-fledged,\nand it is fraught with consequences of immense importance. Samsara\nmeans literally a \"wandering to and fro,\" that is, the cycle of births\nthrough which each soul must everlastingly pass from infinite time,\nand Karma means the \"acts\" of each soul. Each work or act performed by\na living being is of a certain degree of righteousness or\nunrighteousness, and it is requited by a future experience of\ncorresponding pleasure or pain. So every birth and ultimately every\nexperience of a soul is determined by the righteousness of its\nprevious acts; and there is no release for the soul from this endless\nchain of causes and effects unless it can find some supernatural way\nof deliverance. The Aupanishadas point to what they believe to be the\nonly way: it is the Brahma-knowledge of the enlightened sage, which\nreleases his soul from the chain of natural causation and raises him\nto everlasting union with Brahma.\n\nThe teaching of the Upanishads has had two very different practical\nresults. On the one hand, it has moved many earnest thinkers to cast\noff the ties of the world and to wander about as homeless beggars,\nliving on alms and meditating and discoursing upon the teachings of\nthe Upanishads, while they await the coming of death to release their\nsouls from the prison of the flesh and bring it to complete and\neternal union with Brahma. These wandering ascetics--_sannyasis_,\n_bhikshus_, or _parivrajakas_ they are called--form a class by\nthemselves, which is destined to have an immense influence in\nmoulding the future thought of India. The teaching of Brahmanism is\nbeginning to recognise them, too. It has already divided the life of\nthe orthodox man into three stages, or _asramas_, studentship, the\ncondition of the married householder, and thirdly the life of the\nhermit, or _vanaprastha_, to which the householder should retire after\nhe has left a son to maintain his household; and now it is beginning\nto add to these as fourth stage the life of the homeless ascetic\nawaiting death and release. But this arrangement is for the most part\na fiction, devised in order to keep the beggar-philosophers within the\nscheme of Brahmanic life; in reality they themselves recognise no such\nlaw.\n\nThe other current among the Aupanishadas is flowing in a very\ndifferent direction. We have seen how the worship of Rudra-Siva has\ngrown since the old Rigvedic days, and how some souls have been able\nto see amidst the terrors of the god a power of love and wisdom that\nsatisfies their deepest hopes and longings, as none of the orthodox\nrituals can do. A new feeling, the spirit of religious devotion,\n_bhakti_ as it is called, is arising among them. To them--and they\nnumber many Brahmans as well as men of other orders--Siva has thus\nbecome the highest object of worship, Isvara or \"the Lord\"; and having\nthus enthroned him as supreme in their hearts, they are endeavouring\nto find for him a corresponding place in their intellects. To this end\nthey claim that Siva as Isvara is the highest of all forms of\nexistence; and this doctrine is growing and finding much favour. Among\nthe Aupanishadas there are many who reconcile it with the teaching of\nthe Upanishads by identifying Siva with Brahma. Thus a new light\nbegins to flicker here and there in the Upanishads as the conception\nof Siva, a personal god wielding free grace, colours the pale\nwhiteness of the impersonal Brahma; and at last in the Svetasvatara,\nwhich though rather late in date is not the least important of the\nUpanishads, this theistic movement boldly proclaims itself: the\nsupreme Brahma, identified with Siva, is definitely contrasted with\nthe individual soul as divine to human, giver of grace to receiver of\ngrace. Later Upanishads will take up this strain, in honour of Siva\nand other gods, and finally they will end as mere tracts of this or\nthat theistic church.\n\nYet another current is now beginning to stir men's minds, and it is\none that is also destined to a great future. It starts from Krishna.\n\nThe teaching of the Upanishads, that all being is the One Brahma and\nthat Brahma is the same as the individual soul, has busied many men,\nnot only Brahmans but also Kshatriyas, noblemen of the warrior order.\nSome even say that it arose among the Kshatriyas; and at any rate it\nis likely that they, being less obsessed with the forms of ritual than\nthe Brahmans and therefore able to think more directly and clearly,\nhave helped the Brahmans in their discussions to clear their minds of\nritual symbolism, and to realise more definitely the philosophic ideas\nwhich hitherto they had seen only dimly typified in their ceremonies.\n\nKrishna was one of these Kshatriyas. He belonged to the Satvata or\nVrishni tribe, living in or near the ancient city of Mathura.\nSometimes in early writings he is styled Krishna Devakiputra, Krishna\nDevaki's son, because his mother's name was Devaki; sometimes again he\nis called Krishna Vasudeva, or simply Vasudeva, which is a patronymic\nsaid to be derived from the name of his father Vasudeva. In later\ntimes we shall find a whole cycle of legend gathering round him, in\nwhich doubtless there is a kernel of fact. Omitting the miraculous\nelements in these tales, we may say that the outline of the\nKrishna-legend is as follows: Krishna's father Vasudeva and his mother\nDevaki were grievously wronged by Devaki's cousin Kamsa, who usurped\nthe royal power in Mathura and endeavoured to slay Krishna in his\ninfancy; but the child escaped, and on growing to manhood killed\nKamsa. But Kamsa had made alliance with Jarasandha king of Magadha,\nwho now threatened Krishna; so Krishna prudently retired from Mathura\nand led a colony of his tribesmen to Dvaraka, on the western coast in\nKathiawar, where he founded a new State. There seems to be no valid\nreason for doubting these statements. Sober history does not reject a\ntale because it is embroidered with myth and fiction.\n\nNow this man Krishna in the midst of his stirring life of war and\ngovernment found time and taste also for the things that are of the\nspirit. He talked with men learned in the Upanishads about Brahma and\nthe soul and the worship of God; and apparently he set up a little\nEstablished Church of his own, in which was combined something of the\nidealism of the Upanishads with the worship of a supreme God of grace\nand perhaps too a kind of religious discipline, about which we shall\nsay more later on. It must be confessed that we know sadly little\nabout his actual doctrine from first hand. All that we hear about it\nis a short chapter in the Chhandogya Upanishad (iii. 17), where the\nBrahman Ghora Angirasa gives a sermon to Krishna, in which he compares\nthe phases of human life to stages in the _diksha_ or ceremony of\nconsecration, and the moral virtues that should accompany them to the\n_dakshina_ or honorarium paid to the officiating priests, and he\nconcludes by exhorting his hearer to realise that the Brahma is\nimperishable, unfailing, and spiritual, and quoting two verses from\nthe Rig-veda speaking of the Sun as typifying the supreme bliss to\nwhich the enlightened soul arises. This does not tell us very much,\nand moreover we should remember that here our author, being an\nAupanishada, is more interested in what Ghora preached to Krishna than\nin what Krishna accepted from Ghora's teaching. But we shall find\ncenturies later in the Bhagavad-gita, the greatest textbook of the\nreligion of Krishna, some distant echoes of this paragraph of the\nChhandogya.\n\nThe beginnings of the religion of Krishna are thus very uncertain. But\nas we travel down the ages we find it growing and spreading. We see\nKrishna himself regarded as a half-divine hero and teacher, and\nworshipped under the name of _Bhagavan_, \"the Lord,\" in association\nwith other half-divine heroes. We see him becoming identified with old\ngods, and finally rising to the rank of the Supreme Deity whose\nworship he had himself taught in his lifetime, the Brahma of the\nphilosophers and the Most High God of the theists. As has happened\nmany a time, the teacher has become the God of his Church.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III\n\nTHE EPICS, AND LATER\n\nI. VISHNU-KRISHNA\n\n\nWe now enter upon an age in which the old gods, Indra and Brahma,\nretire to the background, while Vishnu and Siva stand in the forefront\nof the stage.\n\nThe Hindus are of the same opinion as the Latin poet: _ferrea nunc\naetas agitur_. We are now living in an Iron Age, according to them;\nand it began in the year 3102 B.C., shortly after the great war\ndescribed in the Mahabharata. The date 3102, I need hardly remark, is\nof no historical value, being based merely upon the theories of\ncomparatively late astronomers; but the statement as a whole is\nimportant. The Great War marks an epoch. It came at the end of what\nmay be called the pre-historic period, and was followed by a new age.\nTo be strictly correct, we must say that the age which followed the\nGreat War was not new in the sense that it introduced any startling\nnovelties that had been unknown previously; but it was new in the\nsense that after the Great War India speedily became the India that we\nknow from historical records. A certain fusion of different races,\ncultures, and ideals had to take place in order that the peculiar\ncivilisation of India might unfold itself; and this fusion was\naccomplished about the time of the Great War, and partly no doubt by\nmeans of the Great War, some ten centuries before the Christian era.\n\nThe story of the Great War is told with a wild profusion of mythical\nand legendary colouring in the Mahabharata, an epic the name of which\nmeans literally \"The Great Tale of the Bharata Clan.\" It relates how\nthe blind old King Dhritarashtra of Hastinapura had a hundred sons,\nknown as the Kuru or Kaurava princes, the eldest of whom was\nDuryodhana, and Dhritarashtra's brother Pandu had five sons, the\nPandava brethren; how the Pandavas were ousted by the Kauravas from\nthe kingdom, the eldest Pandava prince Yudhishthira having been\ninduced to stake the fortunes of himself and his brethren on a game of\ndice, in which he was defeated; how the five Pandavas, with their\ncommon wife Draupadi (observe this curious and ugly feature of\npolyandry, which is quite opposed to standard Hindu morals, but is by\nno means unparalleled in early Indian literature[20]) retired into\nexile for thirteen years, and then came back with a great army of\nallies, and after fierce and bloody battles with the Kauravas and\ntheir supporters in the plain of Kurukshetra at last gained the\nvictory, slew the Kauravas, and established Yudhishthira as king in\nHastinapura. Among the Pandavas the leading part is played by the\neldest, Yudhishthira, and the third, Arjuna; of the others, Bhima, the\nsecond, is a Hercules notable only for his strength, courage, and\nfidelity, while the twins Nakula and Sahadeva are colourless figures.\nKrishna plays an important part in the story; for on the return of\nthe Pandavas to fight the Kauravas he accompanies Arjuna as his\ncharioteer, and on the eve of the first battle delivers to him a\ndiscourse on his religion, the Bhagavad-gita, or Lord's Song, which\nhas become one of the most famous and powerful of all the sacred books\nof India.\n\n[Footnote 20: See H. Raychaudhuri, _Materials for the Study of the\nEarly History of the Vaishnava Sect, p. 27_.]\n\nNow if the Mahabharata were as homogeneous even as the Iliad and\nOdyssey, which give us a fairly consistent and truthful picture of a\nsingle age, we should be in a very happy position. Unfortunately this\nis not the case. Our epic began as a Bharata, or Tale of the Bharata\nClan, probably of very moderate bulk, not later than 600 B.C., and\nperhaps considerably earlier; and from that time onward it went on\ngrowing bigger and bigger for over a thousand years, as editors\nstuffed in new episodes and still longer discourses on nearly all the\nreligious and philosophic doctrines admitted within the four walls of\nHinduism, until it grew to its present immense bulk, which it claims\nto amount to 100,000 verses. Thus it pictures the thought not of one\ncentury but of more than ten, and we cannot feel sure of the date of\nany particular statement in it. Nevertheless we can distinguish in a\ngeneral way between the old skeleton of the story, in which the theme\nis treated in simple epic fashion, society is far freer than in later\ndays and no one objects to eating beef, from the additional matter, in\nwhich the tale is recast in a far more grandiose vein and is padded\nout with enormous quantities of moral, religious, and philosophic\nsermons. The religion too is different in the different parts. In the\nolder portions the gods who are most popular are Indra, Agni, and\nBrahma--not the neuter abstract Brahma, but the masculine Brahma, the\nDemiurge, who corresponds more or less to Prajapati of the Brahmanas\nand is represented in classical art as a four-headed old man reciting\nthe Vedas--and Krishna seems to figure only as a hero or at best as a\ndemigod; but the later parts with fine impartiality claim the\nsupremacy of heaven variously for Siva, Brahma, and Vishnu; and\nVishnu, as we have seen, is sometimes identified with Krishna, notably\nin the chapters known as the Bhagavad-gita.\n\nThe gods have changed somewhat since earlier days. Indra has settled\ndown in the constitutional monarchy of Paradise assigned to him by\nthe Brahmanas; he now figures as the prototype of earthly kings,\nleading the armies of the gods to war against the demons when occasion\nrequires, and passing the leisure of peace in the enjoyment of\ncelestial dissipation. His morals have not improved: he is a debonair\ndebauchee. Brahma the Creator, a more popular version of Prajapati, is\nstill too impersonal to have much hold on the popular imagination; the\nsame is the case with Agni the Fire-god. Plainly there was a vacancy\nfor a supreme deity whose character was powerful enough to move men's\nsouls, either through awe or love; and for this vacancy there were two\nstrong candidates, Vishnu and Siva, who in course of time succeeded to\nthe post and divided the supremacy between them.\n\nVishnu has altered immensely since last we met him. First, after an\nextraordinary change in his own character, he has been identified with\nNarayana, and then both of them have been equated with Krishna. The\ndevelopment is so portentous that it calls for a little study.\n\nWe have seen that in the Vedas Vishnu appears to be, and in the\nBrahmanas certainly is, the embodied Spirit of the Sacrifice, and that\nritual mysticism has invented for him a supreme home in the highest\nheaven. But in the Epics he has developed into a radiant and gracious\nfigure of ideal divinity, an almighty saviour with a long record of\nholy works for the salvation of mankind, a god who delights in moral\ngoodness as well as in ritual propriety, and who from time to time\nincarnates himself in human or animal form so as to maintain the order\nof righteousness. Symbolism has further endowed him with a consort,\nthe goddess Sri or Lakshmi, typifying fortune; sometimes also he is\nrepresented with another wife, the Earth-goddess. The divine hawk or\nkite Garuda, who seems to have been originally the same as the eagle\nwho in the Rigvedic legend carried off the soma for Indra, has been\npressed into his service; he now rides on Garuda, and bears his figure\nupon his banner. I have already suggested a possible explanation of\nthis evolution (above, p. 41): owing to his close association with\nIndra, the most truly popular of Rigvedic deities, the laic\nimagination transfused some of the live blood of Indra into the veins\nof the priestly abstraction Vishnu. To the plain man Indra was very\nreal; and as he frequently heard tales of Indra being aided in his\nexploits by Vishnu, he came to regard Vishnu as a very present helper\nin trouble. The friend of Indra became the friend of mankind. The post\nof Indra had already been fixed for him by the theologians; but the\nfunctions of Vishnu, outside the rituals, were still somewhat vaguely\ndefined, and were capable of considerable expansion. Here was a great\nopportunity for those souls who were seeking for a supreme god of\ngrace, and were not satisfied to find him in Siva; and they made full\nuse of it, and wholly transformed the personality of Vishnu.\n\nOne of the stages in this transformation was the absorption of\nNarayana in Vishnu. Narayana was originally a god of a different kind.\nThe earliest reference to him is in a Brahmana which calls him Purusha\nNarayana, which means that it regards him as being the same as the\nUniversal Spirit which creates from itself the cosmos; it relates that\nPurusha Narayana pervaded the whole of nature (SB. XII. iii. 4, 1),\nand that he made himself omnipresent and supreme over all beings by\nperforming a _pancha-ratra sattra_, or series of sacrifices lasting\nover five days (ib. XIII. vi. 1, 1). Somewhat later we find prayers\naddressed to Narayana, Vasudeva, and Vishnu as three phases of the\nsame god (Taitt. Aran. X. i. 6). But was Narayana in origin merely a\nvariety of the Vedic Purusha or our old acquaintance Prajapati? His\nname must give us pause. The most simple explanation of it is that it\nis a family name: as Karshnayana means a member of the Krishna-family\nand Ranayana a man belonging to the family of Rana, so Narayana would\nnaturally denote a person of the family of Nara. But Nara itself\nsignifies a _man_: is the etymology therefore reduced to absurdity?\nNot at all: Nara is also used as a proper name, as we shall see.[21]\nProbably the name really means what naturally it would seem to mean,\n\"a man of the Nara family\"; that Narayana was originally a divine or\ndeified saint, a _rishi_, as the Hindus would call him; and that\nsomehow he became identified with Vishnu and the Universal Spirit.\n\n[Footnote 21: It must be admitted that ancient writers give different\netymologies of the name: thus, a poet in the Mahabharata (III.\nclxxxix. 3) derives it from _narah_, \"waters,\" and _ayanam_, \"going,\"\nunderstanding it to mean \"one who has the waters for his\nresting-place\"; Manu (I. 10, with Medhatithi's commentary), accepting\nthe same etymology, interprets it as \"the dwelling-place of all the\nNaras\"; and in the Mahabharata XII. cccxli. 39, it is also explained\nas \"the dwelling-place of mankind.\" But these interpretations are\nplainly artificial concoctions.]\n\nThis theory really is not by any means as wild as at first sight it\nmay seem to be. Divine saints are sometimes mentioned in the Rig-veda\nand Brahmanas as being the creators of the universe[22]; and they\nappear again and again in legend as equals of the gods, attaining\ndivine powers by their mystic insight into the sacrificial lore. But\nthere is more direct evidence than this.\n\n[Footnote 22: RV. X. cxxix. 5, SB. VI. i. 1, 1-5. Cf. Charpentier,\n_Suparnasage_, p. 387.]\n\nIn the Mahabharata there are incorporated two documents of first-rate\nimportance for the doctrines of the churches that worshipped Vishnu.\nOne of these is the Bhagavad-gita, or Lord's Song (VI. xxv.-xlii.);\nthe other is the Narayaniya, or Account of Narayana (XII.\ncccxxxvi.-cccliii.). Their teachings are not the same in details,\nthough on most main points they agree; for they belong to different\nsections of the one religious body. Leaving aside the Bhagavad-gita\nfor the moment, we note that the Narayaniya relates a story that there\nwere born four sons of Dharma, or Righteousness, viz. Nara, Narayana,\nHari or Vishnu, and Krishna. In other places (I. ccxxx. 18, III. xii.\n45, xlvii. 10, V. xlviii. 15, etc.) we are plainly told that Nara is a\nprevious incarnation of Arjuna the Pandava prince, and Narayana is, of\ncourse, the supreme Deity, who in the time of Arjuna was born on earth\nas Krishna Vasudeva, and that in his earlier birth Nara and Narayana\nwere both ascetic saints. This tradition is very important, for it\nenables us to see something of the early character of Narayana. He was\nan ancient saint of legend, who was connected with a hero Nara, just\nas Krishna was associated with Arjuna; and the atmosphere of\nsaintliness clings to him obstinately. Tradition alleges that he was\nthe _rishi_, or inspired seer, who composed the Purusha-sukta of the\nRig-veda (X. 90), and represents him by choice as lying in a\n_yoga-nidra_, or mystic sleep, upon the body of the giant serpent\nSesha in the midst of the Ocean of Milk. Thus the worship of Vishnu,\nlike the worship of Siva, has owed much to the influence of live yogis\nidealised as divine saints; though it must be admitted that the yogis\nof the Vaishnava orders have usually been more agreeable and less\nambiguous than those of the Saiva community.\n\nWe must briefly consider now the religious teachings of the\nBhagavad-gita and the Narayaniya, and then turn to the inscriptions\nand contemporary literature to see whether we can find any sidelights\nin them. We begin with the Bhagavad-gita, or The Lord's Song.\n\nThe Bhagavad-gita purports to be a dialogue between the Pandava prince\nArjuna and Krishna, who was serving him as his charioteer, on the eve\nof the great battle. In order to invent a leading motive for his\nteaching, the poet represents Arjuna as suddenly stricken with\noverwhelming remorse at the prospect of the fratricidal strife which\nhe is about to begin. \"I will not fight,\" he cries in anguish. Then\nKrishna begins a long series of arguments to stimulate him for the\ncoming battle. He points out, with quotations from the Upanishads,\nthat killing men in battle does not destroy their souls; for the soul\nis indestructible, migrating from body to body according to its own\ndeserts. The duty of the man born in the Warrior-caste is to fight;\nfighting is his caste-duty, his _dharma_, and as such it can entail\nupon him no guilt if it be performed in the right spirit. But how is\nthis to be done? The answer is the leading motive of Krishna's\nteaching. For the maintenance of the world it is necessary that men\nshould do the works of their respective castes, and these works do not\noperate as _karma_ to the detriment of the future life of their souls\nif they perform them not from selfish motives but as offerings made in\nperfect unselfishness to the Lord. This is the doctrine of\n_Karma-yoga_, discipline of works, which is declared to lead the soul\nof the worshipper to salvation in the Lord as effectually as the\nancient intellectualism preached in the Upanishads and the Samkhya\nphilosophy. But there is also a third way to salvation, the way\nthrough loving devotion, or _bhakti_, which is as efficacious as\neither of the other two; the worshippers of Siva had already preached\nthis for their own church in the Svetasvatara Upanishad. Besides\ntreating without much consistency or method of many incidental\nquestions of religious theory and practice, Krishna reveals himself\nfor a few instants to Arjuna in his form as Viraj, the universal being\nin which all beings are comprehended and consumed. Finally Arjuna is\ncomforted, and laying the burden of all his works upon Krishna, he\nprepares in quiet faith for the coming day of battle.\n\nThere are four main points to notice in this teaching. (1) The Supreme\nGod, superior to Brahma, he who rules by grace and comprehends in his\nuniversal person the whole of existence, is Vishnu, or Hari,\nrepresented on earth for the time being by Krishna Vasudeva. The\nauthor makes no attempt to reconcile the fatalism implied in the old\ntheory of _karma-samsara_ with his new doctrine of special and general\ngrace: he allows the two principles to stand side by side, and leaves\nfor future generations of theologians the delicate task of harmonising\nthem. (2) Three roads to salvation are recognised in principle, the\nintellectual gnosis of the old Upanishads and the Samkhya, the \"way of\nworks\" or performance of necessary social duties in a spirit of\nperfect surrender to God, and the \"way of devotion,\" continuous loving\nworship and contemplation of God. In practice the first method is\nignored as being too severe for average men; the second and third are\nrecommended, as being suitable for all classes. (3) The way of\nsalvation is thus thrown open directly to men and women of all castes\nand conditions. The Bhagavad-gita fully approves of the orthodox\ndivision of society into castes; but by its doctrine that the\nperformance of caste-duties in a spirit of sacrifice leads to\nsalvation it makes caste an avenue to salvation, not a barrier. (4)\nThe Bhagavad-gita has nothing to say for the animal-sacrifices of the\nBrahmans. It recognises only offerings of flowers, fruits, and the\nlike. The doctrine of _ahimsa_, \"thou shalt do no hurt,\" was making\nmuch headway at the time, and the wholesale animal-sacrifices of the\nBrahmans roused general disgust, of which the Buddhists and Jains\ntook advantage for the propagation of their teachings.\n\nI have previously spoken of the solitary passage in the Chhandogya\nUpanishad in which Krishna's name is mentioned, as receiving the\nteachings of Ghora Angirasa, and it will now be fitting to see how far\nthese teachings are reflected in the Bhagavad-gita. Ghora compares the\nfunctions of life to the ceremonies of the _diksha_ (see above, p.68):\nand this is at bottom the same idea as the doctrine of _karma-yoga_\npreached again and again in the Bhagavad-gita. \"Whatever be thy work,\nthine eating, thy sacrifice, thy gift, thy mortification, make of it\nan offering to me,\" says Krishna (IX. 27); all life should be regarded\nas a sacrifice freely offered. Then Ghora continues: \"In the hour of\ndeath one should take refuge in these three thoughts: 'Thou art the\nIndestructible, Thou art the Unfailing, Thou art instinct with\nSpirit.' On this there are these two verses of the Rig-veda:\n\n    Thus upward from the primal seed\n    From out the darkness all around\n    We, looking on the higher light,\n    Yea, looking on the higher heaven,\n    Have come to Surya, god midst gods,\n    To him that is the highest light, the highest light.\"\n\nIn the Bhagavad-gita (IV. 1 ff.) Krishna announces that he preached\nhis doctrine to Vivasvan the Sun-god, who passed it on to his son the\npatriarch Manu; elsewhere in the Mahabharata (XII. cccv. 19) the\nSatvata teaching is said to have been announced by the Sun. Ghora in\nhis list of moral virtues enumerates \"mortification, charity,\nuprightness, harmlessness, truthfulness\"; exactly the same attributes,\nwith a few more, are said in the Bhagavad-gita to characterise the man\nwho is born to the gods' estate (XVI. 1-3). Ghora's exhortation to\nthink of the nature of the Supreme in the hour of death is balanced by\nKrishna's words: \"He who at his last hour, when he casts off the body,\ngoes hence remembering me, goes assuredly into my being\" (VIII. 5; cf.\n10). These parallels are indeed not very close; but collectively they\nare significant, and when we bear in mind that the author of the\nBhagavad-gita is eager to associate his doctrine with those of the\nUpanishads, and thus to make it a new and catholic Upanishad for all\nclasses, we are led to conclude that its fundamental ideas,\nsanctification of works (_karma-yoga_), worship of a Supreme God of\nGrace (_bhakti_) by all classes, and rejection of animal sacrifices\n(_ahimsa_) arose among the orthodox Kshatriyas, who found means to\npersuade their Brahmanic preceptors to bring it into connection with\ntheir Upanishads and embellish it with appropriate texts from those\nsources. Very likely Krishna Vasudeva, if not the first inventor of\nthese doctrines, was their most vigorous propagator.\n\nNow what are the teachings of the Narayaniya? It appears to contain\ntwo accounts. In the first we have the story of king Vasu Uparichara,\nwho is said to have worshipped the Supreme God Hari (Vishnu) in\ndevotion without any animal-sacrifices, in accordance with doctrines\nascribed to the Aranyakas, i.e. the later sections of the Brahmanas,\nincluding the older Upanishads. This fully agrees with the standpoint\nof the Bhagavad-gita. The second account gives the story of a visit\npaid by the divine saint Narada to a mysterious \"White Island,\"\nSveta-dvipa, inhabited by holy worshippers of God who are, strangely\nenough, described as having heads shaped like umbrellas and feet like\nlotus-leaves and as making a sound like that of thunder-clouds[23];\nthey are radiant like the moon, have no physical senses, eat nothing,\nand concentrate their whole soul on rapturous adoration of the spirit\nof God, which shines there in dazzling brightness to the eye of\nperfect faith. Narayana there reveals himself to Narada, and sets\nforth to him the doctrine of Vasudeva. According to this, Narayana has\nfour forms, called _murtis_ or _vyuhas_. The first of these is\nVasudeva, who is the highest soul and creator and inwardly controls\nall individual souls. From him arose Samkarshana, who corresponds to\nthe individual soul; from Samkarshana issued Pradyumna, to whom\ncorresponds the organ of mind, and from Pradyumna came forth\nAniruddha, representing the element of self-consciousness. Observe in\npassing that these are all names of heroes of legend: Samkarshana is\nVasudeva's brother Bala-rama, Pradyumna was the son and Aniruddha the\ngrandson of Vasudeva. Narayana then goes on to speak of the creation\nof all things from himself and their dissolution into himself, and of\nhis incarnations in the form of the Boar who lifted up on his tusk the\nearth when submerged under the ocean, Narasimha the Man-lion who\ndestroyed the tyrant Hiranya-kasipu, the Dwarf who overthrew Bali,\nRama Bhargava who destroyed the Kshatriyas, Rama Dasarathi, of whom we\nshall have something to say later. Krishna Vasudeva the slayer of\nKamsa of Mathura, the Tortoise, the Fish, and Kalki. Then follow some\nfurther details, among them a statement that this doctrine was\nrevealed to Arjuna at the beginning of the Great War--a clear\nreference to the Bhagavad-gita--that at the beginning of every age it\nwas promulgated by Narayana, that it requires activity in pious works,\nthat at the commencement of the present age it passed from him to\nBrahma, from him to Vivasvan the Sun-god, from him to the patriarch\nManu, etc., that it does not allow the sacrifice of animals, and that\nfor salvation the co-operative grace of Narayana is necessary. Most of\nthis doctrine is already in the Bhagavad-gita; what is not found in\nthe latter is the account of the mysterious White Island, the theory\nof _vyuhas_ or emanations, which represents Vasudeva as issuing from\nNarayana and so forth, and the details of Narayana's incarnations. It\nis therefore a distinct textbook of the Satvata or Pancharatra church,\nnot much later than the Bhagavad-gita. According to it, the Supreme\nBeing is Narayana, the Almighty God who reveals himself as highest\nteacher and saintly sage, whose legendary performance of a five-days'\nsacrifice (above, p. 76) has gained for his doctrine the title of\nPancharatra. Next in order of divinity is Krishna Vasudeva, whose\ntribal name of Satvata has furnished the other name of this church;\nthen follow in due order Samkarshana, Pradyumna, and Aniruddha, all of\nhis family; and with Vasudeva is closely associated the epic hero\nArjuna, a prototype for this mortal pair being discovered in the\nlegendary Nara and Narayana.\n\n[Footnote 23: It is obvious that this island lies in a latitude\nsomewhere between that of Lilliput and Brobdingnag, and that the\nprofessors who have endeavoured to locate it on the map of Asia have\nwasted their time.]\n\nComparing then the Bhagavad-gita with the Narayaniya, we see that in\nall essentials they agree, but in two points they differ. Both preach\na doctrine of activity in pious works, _pravritti_, in conscious\nopposition to the inactivity of the Aupanishadas and Samkhyas; but\nthe Narayaniya does not dwell much on this topic, and limits activity\nto strictly religious duties, while the Bhagavad-gita develops the\nidea so as to include everything, thus sketching out a bold system for\nthe sanctification of all sides of life, which enables it to open the\ndoor of salvation directly to all classes of mankind. Secondly, the\nBhagavad-gita says nothing about the theory of emanations or _vyuhas_\nin connection with Vasudeva; probably its author knew the legends of\nSamkarshana, Pradyumna, and Aniruddha, but he apparently did not know\nor at least did not accept the view that these persons were related as\nsuccessive emanations from Vasudeva. We must therefore look round for\nsidelights which may clear up the obscurities in the history of this\nchurch.\n\nOur first sidelight glimmers in the famous grammar of Panini, who\nprobably lived in the fifth century B.C., or perhaps early in the\nfourth century. Panini informs us (IV. iii. 98) that from the names of\nVasudeva and Arjuna the derivative nouns _Vasudevaka_ and _Arjunaka_\nare formed to denote persons who worship respectively Vasudeva and\nArjuna. Plainly then in the fifth century Krishna Vasudeva and Arjuna\nwere worshipped by some, probably in the same connection as is shown\nin the Mahabharata. Perhaps Vasudeva had not yet been raised to the\nrank of the Almighty; it is more likely that he was still a deified\nhero and teacher, and Arjuna his noblest disciple. But both of them\nwere receiving divine honours; they had been men, and were now gods,\nwith bands of adorers.\n\nOur next evidence is an inscription found not long ago on the base of\na stone column at Besnagar near Bhilsa, in the south of Gwalior\nState,[24] and must have been engraved soon after 200 B.C. It reads as\nfollows: \"This Garuda-column of Vasudeva the god of gods was erected\nhere by Heliodorus, a worshipper of the Lord [_bhagavata_], the son of\nDiya [Greek _Dion_] and an inhabitant of Taxila, who came as\nambassador of the Greeks from the Great King Amtalikita [Greek\n_Antialcidas_] to King Kasiputra Bhagabhadra the Saviour, who was\nflourishing in the fourteenth year of his reign\"; and below this are\ntwo lines in some kind of verse, which announce that \"three immortal\nsteps ... when practised lead to heaven--self-control, charity, and\ndiligence.\" Here, then, in the centre of a thriving kingdom probably\nforming part of the Sunga empire, Vasudeva is worshipped not as a\nminor hero or teacher, but as the god of gods, _deva-deva_; and he is\nworshipped by the Greek Heliodorus, visiting the place as an\nambassador from Antialcidas, a Hellenic king of the lineage of\nEucratides, who was reigning in the North-West of India. Doubtless the\nact of Heliodorus was a diplomatic courtesy, in order to please King\nKasiputra Bhagabhadra. But observe the nature of his act. He caused to\nbe erected a Garuda-column, that is, a pillar engraved with the figure\nof Garuda, the sacred bird of Vishnu; and he added a verse about\n\"three immortal steps\" (_trini amutapadani_), as leading to heaven,\nwhich sounds suspiciously like an attempt to moralise the old mythical\nfeature of the three Steps of Vishnu. Plainly Vasudeva had now risen\nin this part of the country from being the teacher of a church of\nVishnu-Narayana to the rank of its chief god, with which he had become\nfully identified.\n\n[Footnote 24: See Rapson, _Ancient India_, p. 156 ff., _Cambridge\nHist. India_, i, pp. 521, 558, 625, H. Ray Chaudhuri, _Materials for\nthe Study of the Early History of the Vaishnava Sect_, p. 59, and\nRamaprasad Chanda, _Archaeology and Vaishnava Tradition_ in _Memoirs of\nthe Archaeological Survey of India_, No. 5, p. 151 ff., etc.]\n\nAnother inscription, a few years later in date, has been found in\nBesnagar. It is a mere fragment, but it supplements the other; for it\nstates that a certain _bhagavata_, or \"worshipper of the Lord,\" named\nGotama-puta (Gautama-putra in Sanskrit) erected a Garuda-column for\nthe Lord's temple in the twelfth year from the coronation of King\nBhagavata. This king is perhaps the same as the person of that name\nwho appears in some genealogical lists as the last but one of the\nSunga Kings.[25]\n\n[Footnote 25: See R. Chanda, _ut supra_, p. 152 f.]\n\nNext in date is an inscription on a stone slab found at Ghasundi,\nabout four miles north-east of Nagari, in Udaipur State. It was\nengraved about 150 B.C., and records that a certain _bhagavata_, or\n\"worshipper of the Lord,\" named Gajayana, son of Parasari, caused to\nbe erected in the Narayana-vata, or park of Narayana, a stone chapel\nfor the worship of the Lords Samkarshana and Vasudeva.[26] Here their\nworship is associated with that of Narayana.\n\n[Footnote 26: It is noteworthy that Samkarshana is here mentioned\nfirst, as is also the case in the Nanaghat inscription of about 100\nB.C., which mentions them as descendants of the Moon in a list of\nvarious deities. This order may possibly be due to the fact that in\nancient legend Samkarshana, or Bala-bhadra, is the elder brother of\nKrishna Vasudeva, and it does not entitle us to draw the inference\nthat he ever received equal honour with Vasudeva. Special devotees of\nSamkarshana are mentioned in the Kautiliya, the famous treatise on\npolity ascribed to Chanakya, the minister of Chandra-gupta Maurya, who\ncame to the throne about 320 B.C. (Engl. transl. 1st edn., p. 485). I\nsuspect that in its present form the Kautiliya is considerably later\nthan 320 B.C.; but in any case the existence of special votaries of\nSamkarshana is no proof that he ever ranked as equal to Vasudeva, just\nas the presence of special worshippers of Arjuna is no proof that\nArjuna was ever considered a peer of Vasudeva. On the Ghasundi\ninscription see R. Chanda, _ut supra_, p. 163 ff., etc.; for the\nNanaghat inscription, _ibidem_ and _Memoirs of the Arch. Survey of\nIndia_, No. 1, with H. Raychaudhuri's _Materials, etc._, p. 68 ff.]\n\nPassing over an inscription at Mathura which records the building of a\npart of a sanctuary to the Lord Vasudeva about 15 B.C. by the great\nSatrap Sodasa,[27] we note that the grammarian Patanjali, who wrote his\ncommentary the Mahabhashya upon Panini's grammar about 150 B.C., has\nsomething to say about Krishna Vasudeva, whom he recognises as a divine\nbeing (on IV. iii. 98). He quotes some verses referring to him. The\nfirst (on II. ii. 23) is to the following effect: \"May the might of\nKrishna accompanied by Samkarshana increase!\" Another (on VI. iii. 6)\nspeaks of \"Janardana with himself as fourth,\" that is to say, Krishna\nwith three companions: the three may be Samkarshana, Pradyumna, and\nAniruddha, or they may not. Another verse (on II. ii. 34) speaks of\nmusical instruments being played at meetings in the temples of Rama and\nKesava. Rama is Bala-rama or Bala-bhadra, who is the same as\nSamkarshana, and Kesava is a title of Krishna, which was applied also to\nVishnu or Narayana according to the Bodhayana-dharma-sutra, which may be\nassigned to the second century B.C. The Ovavai, or Aupapatika-sutra, a\nJain scripture which may perhaps belong to the same period, mentions (Sec.\n76) _Kanha-parivvaya_, wandering friars who worshipped Krishna. Thus\nliterature as well as inscriptions shows that Krishna Vasudeva and his\nbrother Samkarshana were in many places worshipped as saints of a church\nof Vishnu-Narayana about 150 B.C., and that in some parts Vasudeva was\nrecognised as the Almighty himself about 200 B.C.\n\n[Footnote 27: R. Chanda, _ut supra_, p. 169 f.]\n\nIn another passage (on III. i, 26) Patanjali describes dramatic and\nmimetic performances representing the killing of Kamsa by Vasudeva.\nAltogether his references show that the legend and worship of Vasudeva\nbulked largely in the popular mind at this time in India north of the\nVindhya mountains. Vasudeva was adored as the great teacher and\nhero-king, in whom the gods Vishnu and Narayana were incarnated; and\nhe was associated with two great cycles of legend, the one that\nrelated his birth at Mathura, his victory over the tyrant Kamsa, his\nestablishment of the colony at Dvaraka, and his adventures until his\ndeath and translation to heaven, and the other telling of his share in\nthe Great War as ally of the five Pandava brethren. Both cycles\nrepresented him as supported by princely heroes. The Mathura-Dvaraka\nlegend gave him his brother Bala-bhadra or Samkarshana, his son\nPradyumna, and his grandson Aniruddha, whom theologians about the\nbeginning of the Christian era fitted into their philosophical schemes\nby representing them as successive emanations from him; and the\nMahabharata furnished him with the Pandavas, whose heroic tale soon\ncreated for them a worship everywhere. As we have seen, there were\nadorers of Arjuna already in the fifth century B.C.; and in the first\ncentury B.C. there seems to be evidence for a worship of all the five\ntogether with Vasudeva, for an inscription has been found at Mora\nwhich apparently mentions a son of the great Satrap Rajuvula,\nprobably the well-known Satrap Sodasa, and an image of the \"Lord\nVrishni,\" probably Vasudeva, and of the \"Five Warriors.\"[28] Already\nthe poets of the Mahabharata have taken the first step towards the\ndeification of the Pandavas by finding divine fathers for each of\nthem, making Yudhishthira the son of Dharma or Yama, the god of the\nnether world, Arjuna son of Indra, Bhima son of Vayu the Wind-god, and\nNakula and Sahadeva offspring of the Asvins. Hundreds of caverns\nthroughout India are declared by popular legend to have been their\ndwellings during their wanderings; and a noble monument to their\nmemory has been raised by one of the great Pallava kings of Conjevaram\nwho in the seventh century A.D. carved out of the solid rock on the\nseashore at Mamallapuram the fine chapels that bear their names.\nDoubtless all these heroes from both cycles were once worshipped in\nthe usual manner, with offerings of food, incense, lights, flowers,\netc., and singing of hymns on their exploits--chiefly in connection\nwith Vasudeva; but all this worship is now utterly forgotten, except\nwhere echoes of it linger in popular legend.\n\n[Footnote 28: R. Chandra, _ut supra_, p. 165 f.]\n\nOur survey of the religion of Vasudeva has brought us down to a date\nwhich cannot indeed be exactly fixed, but which may be placed\napproximately in the second century of our era. This religion, as we\nhave seen, arose and grew great in the fertile soil of the spiritual\nneeds and experiences of India. It began by moulding a personal God\nout of ancient figures of myth and legend, and it surrounded him with\na hierarchy of godly heroes. Though its doctrines were often\nphilosophically incongruous and incoherent, its foundation was a true\nreligious feeling; it gave scope to the mystic raptures of the ascetic\nand the simple righteousness of the laic; and it claimed for its\nheroes, Vasudeva and his kindred and his friends the Pandava brethren,\na grave and dignified hero-worship. In short, it is a serious Indian\nreligion with an epic setting.\n\nAnd now suddenly and most unexpectedly an utterly new spirit begins to\nbreathe in it. To the old teachings and legends are added new ones of\na wholly different cast. The old epic spirit of grave and manly\nchivalry and godly wisdom is overshadowed by a new passion--adoration\nof tender babyhood and wanton childhood, amorous ecstasies, a hectic\nfire of erotic romance.\n\nOf this new spirit there is no trace in the epic, except in one or two\nlate interpolations. But the Hari-vamsa, which was added as an\nappendix to the Mahabharata not very long before the fourth century\nA.D., is already instinct with it. It adds to the epic story of\nKrishna a fluent verse account of his miraculous preservation from\nKamsa at his birth, his childhood among the herdsmen and herdswomen\nof Vraja (the Doab near Mathura) with its marvellous freaks and\nwonderful exploits, his amorous sports with the herdswomen, in fact\nall the sensuous emotionalism on which the later church of Krishna has\never since battened. About the same time appeared the Vishnu-purana,\nwhich includes most of the same matter as the Hari-vamsa; and some\ncenturies later, probably about the tenth century, there was written a\nstill more remarkable book, the Bhagavata-purana, of which a great\npart is taken up with the romance of Krishna's babyhood and childhood,\nand especially his amorous sports. In the Bhagavata the later worship\nof Krishna found its classic expression. In the Hari-vamsa and\nVishnu-purana religious emotion is still held under a certain\nrestraint; but in the Bhagavata it has broken loose and runs riot. It\nis a romance of ecstatic love for Krishna, who is no longer, as in the\nVishnu-purana, the incarnation of a portion of the Supreme Vishnu, but\nvery God become man, wholly and utterly divine in his humanity. It\ndwells in a rapture of tenderness upon the God-babe, and upon the\nwanton play of the lovely child who is delightful in his naughtiness\nand marvellous in his occasional displays of superhuman power; it\nfigures him as an ideal of boyish beauty, decked with jewels and\ncrested with peacock's feathers, wandering through the flowering\nforests of Vraja, dancing and playing on his flute melodies that fill\nthe souls of all that hear them with an irresistible passion of love\nand delight; it revels in tales of how the precocious boy made wanton\nsport with the herdswomen of Vraja, and how the magic of his fluting\ndrew them to the dance in which they were united to him in a rapture\nof love. The book thrills with amorous, sensuous ecstasy; the thought\nof Krishna stirs the worshipper to a passion of love in which tears\ngush forth in the midst of laughter, the speech halts, and often the\nsenses fail and leave him in long trances. Erotic emotionalism can go\nno further.\n\nWhere did this new spirit come from? Some have laboured to prove that\nit had its source in Christianity; others have argued that it was\nChristianity that was the debtor to India in this respect. Both\ntheories are in the main impossible. This cult of the child Krishna\narose in India, and, with the possible exception of a few obscure\ntales, it never spread outside the circle of Indian religion. But how\nand where did it arise? That is a question hard to answer; there is no\ndirect evidence, and we can only balance probabilities. Now what are\nthe probabilities?\n\nThe worship of Krishna as a babe, a boy, and a young man among the\nherdsfolk of Vraja seems to have no relation with the older form of\nthe religion as set forth in the epic textbooks. It is a new element,\nimported from without. The most natural conclusion then is that it\ncame from the people who are described in it, some tribe that pastured\ntheir herds in the woodlands near Mathura. Perhaps these herdsfolk\nwere Abhiras, ancestors of the modern Ahir tribes. If so, it would be\nnatural that their cult should attract attention; for sometimes\nAbhiras counted for something in society, and we even find a\nshort-lived dynasty of Abhira kings reigning in Nasik in the third\ncentury A.D.[29] Be this as it may, it seems very likely that some\npastoral tribe had a cult of a divine child blue or black of hue, and\nperhaps actually called by them Krishna or Kanha, \"Black-man\" (observe\nthat henceforth Krishna is regularly represented with a blue skin), a\ncult in which gross rustic fantasy had free play; that it came in some\ncircles to be linked on to the epic cycle of Krishna Vasudeva; and\nthat some Bhagavatas, seeing in it latent possibilities, gave it\npolished literary expression and thereby established it as a part of\nthe Vasudeva legend. It quickly seized upon the popular imagination\nand spread like wild-fire over India. For it satisfied many needs. The\ntenderness of the father and still more of the mother for the little\nbabe, their delight in the sports of childhood, the amorist's pleasure\nin erotic adventure, and, not by any means least, the joy in the\nromantic scenery of the haunted woodlands--all these instincts found\nfull play in it, and were sanctified by religion.\n\n[Footnote 29: Rapson, _Catal. of the Coins of the Andhra Dynasty,\netc._, pp. xliv, lxii, lxix, cxxxiii-cxxxvi, clxii; _Indian Antiq._,\nxlvii, p. 85, etc.]\n\n\nII. RAMA\n\nRama is the hero of the Ramayana, the great epic ascribed to Valmiki,\na poet who in course of time has passed from the realm of history into\nthat of myth, like many other Hindus. The poem, as it has come down to\nus, contains seven books, which relate the following tale. Dasa-ratha,\nKing of Ayodhya (now Ajodhya, near Faizabad), of the dynasty which\nclaimed descent from the Sun-god, had no son, and therefore held the\ngreat _Asva-medha_, or horse-sacrifice, as a result of which he\nobtained four sons, Rama by his queen Kausalya, Bharata by Kaikeyi,\nand Lakshmana and Satrughna by Sumitra. Rama, the eldest, was also\npre-eminent for strength, bravery, and noble qualities of soul.\nVisiting in his early youth the court of Janaka, king of Videha, Rama\nwas able to shoot an arrow from Janaka's bow, which no other man could\nbend, and as a reward he received as wife the princess Sita, whom\nJanaka had found in a furrow of his fields and brought up as his own\ndaughter. So far the first book, or Bala-kanda. The second book, or\nAyodhya-kanda, relates how Queen Kaikeyi induced Dasa-ratha, sorely\nagainst his will, to banish Rama to the forests in order that her son\nBharata might succeed to the throne; and the Aranya-kanda then\ndescribes how Rama, accompanied by his wife Sita and his faithful\nbrother Lakshmana, dwelt in the forest for a time, until the demon\nKing Ravana of Lanka, by means of a trick, carried off Sita to his\ncity. The Kishkindha-kanda tells of Rama's pursuit of Ravana and his\ncoming to Kishkindha, the city of Sugriva, the king of the apes, who\njoined him as an ally in his expedition; and the Sundara-kanda\ndescribes the march of their armies to Lanka, which is identified with\nCeylon, and their crossing over the straits. Then comes the\nYuddha-kanda, which narrates the war with Ravana, his death in battle,\nthe restoration of Sita, the return of Rama and Sita to Ayodhya, and\nthe crowning of Rama in place of Dasa-ratha, who had died of grief\nduring his exile. Finally comes the Uttara-kanda, which relates that\nRama, hearing some of the people of Ayodhya spitefully casting\naspersions on the virtue of Sita during her imprisonment in the palace\nof Ravana, gave way to foolish jealousy and banished her to the\nhermitage of Valmiki, where she gave birth to twin sons, Kusa and\nLava; when these boys had grown up, Valmiki taught them the Ramayana\nand sent them to sing it at the court of Rama, who on hearing it sent\nfor Sita, who came to him accompanied by Valmiki, who assured him of\nher purity; and then Sita swore to it on oath, calling upon her mother\nthe Earth-goddess to bear witness; and the Earth-goddess received her\nback into her bosom, leaving Rama bereaved, until after many days he\nwas translated to heaven.\n\nSuch is the tale of Rama as told in the Valmiki-ramayana--a clean,\nwholesome story of chivalry, love, and adventure. But clearly the\nValmiki-ramayana is not the work of a single hand. We can trace in it\nat least two strata. Books II.-VI. contain the older stratum; the rest\nis the addition of a later poet or series of poets, who have also\ninserted some padding into the earlier books. This older stratum, the\nnucleus of the epic, gives us a picture of heroic society in India at\na very early date, probably not very long after the age of the\nUpanishads; perhaps we shall not be far wrong if we say it was\ncomposed some time before the fourth century B.C. In it Rama is simply\na hero, miraculous in strength and goodness, but nevertheless wholly\nhuman; but in the later stratum--Books I. and VII. and the occasional\ninsertions in the other books--conditions are changed, and Rama\nappears as a god on earth, a partial incarnation of Vishnu, exactly as\nin the Bhagavad-gita and other later parts of the Mahabharata the hero\nKrishna has become an incarnation of Vishnu also. The parallel may\neven be traced further. Krishna stands to Arjuna in very much the same\nrelation as Rama to his brother Lakshmana--a greater and a lesser\nhero, growing into an incarnate god and his chief follower. This is\nthoroughly in harmony with Hindu ideas, which regularly conceive the\nteacher as accompanied by his disciple and abhor the notion of a voice\ncrying in the wilderness; indeed we may almost venture to suspect that\nthis symmetry in the epics is not altogether uninfluenced by this\nideal. This, however, is a detail: the main point to observe is that\nRama was originally a local hero of the Solar dynasty, a legendary\nking of Ayodhya, and as the Puranas give him a full pedigree, there is\nno good reason to doubt that he really existed \"once upon a time.\" But\nthe story with which he is associated in the Ramayana is puzzling. Is\nit a pure romance? Or is it a glorified version of some real\nadventures? Or can it be an old tale, perhaps dating from the early\ndawn of human history, readapted and fitted on to the person of an\nhistorical Rama? The first of these hypotheses seems unlikely, though\nby no means impossible. The second suggestion has found much favour.\nMany have believed that the story of the expedition of Rama and his\narmy of apes to Lanka represents a movement of the Aryan invaders from\nthe North towards the South; and this is supported to some extent by\nIndian tradition, which has located most of the places mentioned in\nthe Ramayana, and in particular has identified Lanka with Ceylon. In\nsupport of this one may point to the Iliad of Homer, which has a\nsomewhat similar theme, the rape and recovery of Helen by the armies\nof the Achaeans, the basis of which is the historical fact of an\nexpedition against Troy and the destruction of that city. But there\nare serious difficulties in the way of accepting this analogy, the\nmost serious of all being the indubitable fact that there is not a\ntittle of evidence to show that such an expedition was ever made by\nthe Aryans. True, there were waves of emigration from Aryan centres\nsouthward in early times; but those that travelled as far as Ceylon\nwent by sea, either from the coasts of Bengal or Orissa or Bombay.\nBesides, the expedition of Rama is obviously fabulous, for his army\nwas composed not of Aryans but of apes. All things considered, there\nseems to be most plausibility in the third hypothesis[30]. Certainly\nRama was a local hero of Ayodhya, and probably he was once a real\nking; so it is likely enough that an old saga (or sagas) attached\nitself early to his memory. And as his fame spread abroad, principally\non the wings of Valmiki's poem, the honours of semi-divinity began to\nbe paid to him in many places beyond his native land, and about the\nbeginning of our era he was recognised as an incarnation of Vishnu\nsent to establish a reign of righteousness in the world. In Southern\nIndia this cult of Rama, like that of Krishna, has for the most part\nremained subordinate to the worship of Vishnu, though the Vaishnava\nchurch there has from early times recognised the divinity of both of\nthem as embodiments of the Almighty. But its great home is the North,\nwhere millions worship Rama with passionate and all-absorbing love.\n\n[Footnote 30: I regret that I cannot accept the ingenious hypothesis\nlately put forward by Rai Saheb Dineshchandra Sen in his _Bengali\nRamayanas_. The story of the Dasaratha-jataka seems to me to be a\ngarbled and bowdlerised snippet cut off from a possibly pre-Valmikian\nversion of the old Rama-saga; the rest of the theory appears to be\nquite mistaken.]\n\n\nIII. SOME LATER PREACHERS\n\nWith all its attractions and success, the new Krishnaism did not\neverywhere overgrow the older stock upon which it had been engrafted.\nThere were many places in which the early worship of Vishnu and\nVasudeva remained almost unchanged. The new legends of Krishna's\nchildhood might indeed be accepted in these centres of conservatism,\nbut they made little difference in the spirit and form of the worship,\nwhich continued to follow the ancient order. In some of them the\nBhagavad-gita, Narayaniya, and other epic doctrinals still remained\nthe standard texts, which theologians connected with the ancient\nUpanishads and the Brahma-sutra summarising the latter; in other\ncentres there arose, beginning perhaps about the seventh century A.D.,\na series of Samhitas, or manuals of doctrine and practice for the\nPancharatra[31] sect, which, though in essentials agreeing with the\nNarayaniya, taught a different theory of cosmogony and introduced the\nworship of the goddess Sri or Lakshmi, the consort of Vishnu, as the\nagency or energy through which the Supreme Being becomes active in\nfinite existence; and in yet other places other texts were followed,\nsuch as those of the Vaikhanasa school. This worship of\nVishnu-Vasudeva on the ancient lines was peculiarly vigorous among the\nrepresentatives of Aryan culture in the South, who had introduced the\ncults of Vishnu and Siva with the rest of the Aryan pantheon into the\nmidst of Dravidian animism. Hinduism, transplanted into the Dravidian\narea, has there remained more conservative than anywhere else, and has\nclung firmly to its ancient traditions. There is nothing of Dravidian\norigin in the South Indian worship of Vishnu and Siva; they are\nentirely Aryan importations. But they have become thoroughly\nassimilated in their southern home, and each of them has produced a\nhuge mass of fine devotional literature in the vernaculars. In the\nTamil country the church of Vishnu boasts of the Nal-ayira-prabandham,\na collection of Tamil psalms numbering about 4,000 stanzas composed by\ntwelve poets called Alvars, which were collected about 1000 A.D.;\nand the worship of 'Siva is equally well expressed in the Tiru-murai,\ncompiled about the twelfth century, of which one section, the Devaram,\nwas put together about the same time as the Nal-ayira-prabandham. Both\nthe Tiru-murai and the Nal-ayira-prabandham breathe the same spirit of\necstatic devotion as the Bhagavata-purana; they are the utterances of\nwandering votaries who travelled from temple to temple and poured\nforth the passionate raptures of their souls in lyrical praise of\ntheir deities. Through these three main channels the stream of\ndevotion spread far and wide through the land. Like most currents of\nwhat we call \"revivalism,\" it usually had an erotic side; and the\nlarger temples frequently have attached to them female staffs of\nattendant votaries and _corps de ballet_ of very easy virtue. But this\naspect was far more marked in neo-Krishnaism, which often tends to\nintense pruriency, than in the other two cults. The Alvars pay\nlittle regard to the legends of Krishna, and concentrate their\nenergies upon the worship of Vishnu as he is represented in the great\ntemples of Srirangam, Conjevaram, Tirupati, and similar sanctuaries.\n\n[Footnote 31: On this name see above, p. 86.]\n\nAbout the beginning of the ninth century the peaceful course of\nVaishnava religion was rudely disturbed by the preaching of Samkara\nAcharya. Samkara, one of the greatest intellects that India has ever\nproduced, was a Brahman of Malabar, and was born about the year 788.\nTaking his stand upon the Upanishads, Brahma-sutra, and Bhagavad-gita,\nupon which he wrote commentaries, he interpreted them as teaching the\ndoctrine of Advaita, thorough monistic idealism, teaching that the\nuniversal Soul, Brahma, is absolutely identical with the individual\nSoul, the _atma_ or Self, that all being is only one, that salvation\nconsists in the identification of these two, and is attained by\nknowledge, the intuition of their identity, and that the phenomenal\nuniverse or manifold of experience is simply an illusion (_maya_)\nconjured up in Brahma by his congenital nature, but really alien to\nhim--in fact, a kind of disease in Brahma. This was not new: it had\nbeen taught by some ancient schools of Aupanishadas, and was very like\nthe doctrine of some of the Buddhist idealists; but the vigour and\nskill with which Samkara propagated his doctrines threatened ruin to\northodox Vaishnava theologians, and roused them to counter-campaigns.\nAmong the Vaishnava Brahmans of the South who won laurels in this\nfield was Yamunacharya, who lived about 1050, and was the grandson of\nNatha Muni, who collected the hymns of the Alvars in the\nNal-ayira-prabandham and founded the great school of Vaishnava\ntheology at Srirangam. In opposition to Samkara's monism, Yamunacharya\npropounded the doctrine of his school, the so-called Visishtadvaita,\nwhich was preached with still greater skill and success by his famous\nsuccessor Ramanuja, who died in 1137. Ramanuja's greatest works are\nhis commentaries on the Brahma-sutra and Bhagavad-gita. In them he\nexpounds with great ability the principles of his school, namely, that\nGod, sentient beings or souls, and insentient matter form three\nessentially distinct classes of being; that God, who is the same as\nBrahma, Vishnu, Narayana, or Krishna, is omnipotent, omnipresent, and\npossessed of all good qualities; that matter forms the body of souls,\nand souls form the body of God; that the soul attains salvation as a\nresult of devout and loving meditation upon God, worship of him, and\nstudy of the scriptures; and that salvation consists in eternal union\nof the soul with God, but not in identity with him, as Samkara taught.\nThe scriptures on which Ramanuja took his stand were mainly the\nUpanishads, Brahma-sutra, and Bhagavad-gita; but he also acknowledged\nas authoritative the Pancharatra Samhitas, in spite of their\ndivergences in details of doctrine, and it is from them that his\nchurch has derived the worship of Sri or Lakshmi as consort of Vishnu,\nwhich is a very marked feature of their community and has gained for\nthem the title of Sri-vaishnavas. But Ramanuja was much more than a\nscholar and a writer of books; he was also a man of action, a\n\"practical mystic.\" Like Samkara, he organised a body of _sannyasis_\nor ascetic votaries, into which, however, he admitted only Brahmans,\nwhereas Samkara opened some of the sections of his devotees to\nnon-Brahmans; but on the other hand he was far more liberal than\nSamkara in the choice of his congregations, for he endeavoured to\nbring men of the lowest castes, Sudras and even Pariahs, within the\ninfluence of his church, though he kept up the social barrier between\nthem and the higher castes, and he firmly upheld the principle of the\nBhagavad-gita that it is by the performance of religious and social\nduties of caste, and not by knowledge alone, that salvation is most\nsurely to be won. He established schools and monasteries, reorganised\nthe worship of the temples, usually in accordance with the Pancharatra\nrules, and thus placed his church in a position of such strength in\nSouthern India that its only serious rival is the church of Siva.\n\nNimbarka, who probably flourished about the first half of the twelfth\ncentury, preached for the cult of Krishna a doctrine combining monism\nwith dualism, which is followed by a small sect in Northern India.\nAnanda-tirtha or Madhva, in the first three quarters of the thirteenth\ncentury, propounded for the same church a theory of thorough dualism,\nwhich has found many admirers, chiefly in the Dekkan. Vallabhacharya,\nborn in 1479, founded a school of Krishna-worshippers which claims a\n\"pure monism\" without the aid of the theory of _maya_, or illusion,\nwhich is a characteristic of Samkara's monism. This community has\nbecome very influential, chiefly in Bombay Presidency; but in recent\ntimes it has been under a cloud owing to the scandals arising from a\ntendency to practise immoral orgies and from the claims of its\npriesthood, as representing the god, to enjoy the persons and property\nof their congregations.\n\nBesides these and other schools which were founded on a basis of\nSanskrit scholastic philosophy, there have been many popular religious\nmovements, which from the first appealed directly to the heart of the\npeople in their own tongues.\n\nThe first place in which we see this current in movement is the\nMaratha country. Here, about 1290, Jnanesvara or Jnanadeva, popularly\nknown as Jnanoba, composed his Jnanesvari, a paraphrase of the\nBhagavad-gita in about 10,000 Marathi verses, as well as a number of\nhymns to Krishna and a poem on the worship of Siva. To the same period\nbelonged Namadeva, who was born at Pandharpur, according to some in\n1270 and according to others about a century later. Then came\nEkanatha, who is said to have died in 1608, and composed some hymns\nand Marathi verse-translations from the Bhagavata. The greatest of all\nwas Tukaram, who was born about 1608.[32] In the verses of these\npoets the worship of Krishna is raised to a level of high\nspirituality. Ramananda, who apparently lived between 1400 and 1470\nand was somehow connected with the school of Ramanuja, preached\nsalvation through Rama to all castes and classes of Northern India,\nwith immense and enduring success. To his spiritual lineage belongs\nTulsi Das (1532-1623), whose Rama-charita-manasa, a poem in Eastern\nHindi on the story of Valmiki's Ramayana, has become the Bible of the\nNorth. The same influences are visible in the poems of Kabir, a Moslem\nby birth, who combined Hindu and Muhammadan doctrines into an eclectic\nmonotheism, and is worshipped as an incarnation of God by his sect. He\ndied in 1518. A kindred spirit was Nanak, the founder of the Sikh\nchurch (1469-1538).[33]\n\n[Footnote 32: The student may refer to Sir R. G. Bhandarkar's\n_Vaisnavas and Saivas_ (in Buehler's _Grundriss_, p. 74 ff.,) J. N.\nFarquhar's _Outline of the Relig. Liter. of India_, p. 234 f., 298\nff., and my _Heart of India_, p. 60 ff., for some details on these\npoets.]\n\n[Footnote 33: See Farquhar, _ut supra_, p. 323 ff.; _Heart of India_,\np. 49 f., etc.]\n\nBy the side of these upward movements there have been many which have\nremained on the older level of the Bhagavata. The most important is\nthat of Visvambhara Misra, who is better known by his titles of\nChaitanya and Gauranga (1485-1533); he carried on a \"revival\" of\nvolcanic intensity in Bengal and Orissa, and the church founded by\nhim is still powerful, and worships him as an incarnation of Krishna.\n\n\nIV. BRAHMA AND THE TRIMURTI\n\n_Brahma_, the Creator, a masculine noun, must be carefully\ndistinguished from the neuter _Brahma_, the abstract First Being. The\nlatter comes first in the scale of existence, while the former appears\nat some distance further on as the creator of the material world (see\nabove, p. 60 f.). In modern days Brahma has been completely eclipsed\nby Vishnu and Siva and even by some minor deities, and has now only\nfour temples dedicated to his exclusive worship.[34] But there was a\ntime when he was a great god. In the older parts of the Mahabharata\nand Ramayana he figures as one of the greater deities, perhaps the\ngreatest. But in the later portions of the epic he has shrunk into\ncomparative insignificance as compared to Vishnu and Siva, and\nespecially to Vishnu. This change faithfully reflects historical\nfacts. During the last four or five centuries of the millennium which\nended with the Christian era the orthodox Vedic religion of the\nBrahmans had steadily lost ground, and the sects worshipping Vishnu\nand Siva had correspondingly grown in power and finally had come to\nbe recognised as themselves orthodox. Brahma, as his name implies, is\nthe ideal Brahman sage, and typifies Vedic orthodoxy. He is\nrepresented as everlastingly chanting the four Vedas from his four\nmouths (for he has four heads), and he bears the water-pot and rosary\nof eleocarpus berries, the symbols of the Brahman ascetic. But Vedic\northodoxy had to make way for more fascinating cults, and the Vedic\nBrahman typified in the god Brahma sank into comparative unimportance\nbeside the sectarian ascetics. Still the old god, though shorn of much\nof his glory, was by no means driven from the field. The new churches\nlooked with reverence upon his Vedas, and often claimed them as divine\nauthority for their doctrines; and though each of them asserted that\nits particular god, Siva or Vishnu, was the Supreme Being, and\nultimately the only being, both of them allowed Brahma to retain his\nold office of creator, it being of course understood that he held it\nas a subordinate of the Supreme, Siva or Vishnu as the case might be.\nMeanwhile, at any rate between the third and the sixth centuries,\nthere existed a small fraternity who regarded Brahma as the Supreme,\nand therefore as identical with the abstract Brahma; but although they\nhave left a record of their doctrines in the Markandeya-purana and the\nPadma-purana, they have had little influence on Indian religion in\ngeneral.\n\n[Footnote 34: Those are at Pushkar in Rajputana, Dudahi in\nBundelkhand, Khed Brahma in Idar State, and Kodakkal in Malabar.]\n\nA love of system--unfortunately not always effectual--is a notable\nfeature of the Hindu mind in dealing with most subjects, from grammar\nto _Ars Amoris_; and this instinct inspired some unknown theologian\nwith the idea of harmonising the three gods into a unity by\nrepresenting in one compound form or _Trimurti_ Brahma as creator,\nVishnu as the sustaining power in the universe, and Siva as the force\nof dissolution which periodically brings the cosmos to an end and\nnecessitates in due course new cycles of being.[35] This ingenious\nplan has the advantage that it is without prejudice to the religion of\nany of the gods concerned, for all the three members of this trinity\nare subordinate to the Supreme Being, or Param Brahma, whom the\nVaishnavas identify with Vishnu in his highest phase, Para-Vasudeva,\nand distinguish from his lower phase, the Vishnu of this compound,\nwhile the Saivas draw a corresponding distinction between Parama-Siva,\nthe god in his transcendent nature, and the Siva who figures in the\nTrimurti. So the most orthodox Vaishnava and the most bigoted Saiva\ncan adore this three-headed image of the Trimurti side by side with\neasy consciences.\n\n[Footnote 35: This idea in germ is already suggested in Maitr. Upan.,\nIV. 5 f., and V. 2.]\n\nThis idea of the three gods in one, though it is embodied in some\nimportant works of sculpture such as the famous Trimurti in the Caves\nof Elephanta, has not had much practical effect upon Hindu religion.\nBut it has given birth to at any rate one interesting little sect, the\nworshippers of Dattatreya, who are to be found mainly in the Maratha\ncountry. The legend of the saint Dattatreya, which is already found in\nthe Mahabharata and Puranas and is repeated with some modifications\nand amplifications in modern works of the sect,[36] relates that when\nthe holy Rishi Atri subjected himself to terrific austerities in order\nto obtain worthy progeny, the gods Brahma, Vishnu, and Siva visited\nhim and promised him the desired boon; accordingly his wife Anasuya\ngave birth to three sons, of whom the first was the Moon, an\nincarnation of Brahma, the second Dattatreya, an incarnation of\nVishnu, and the third the holy but irascible saint Durvasas,\nrepresenting Siva. Dattatreya dwelt in a hermitage in the Dekkan: he\nindulged in marriage and wine-drinking, which however were not\ndetrimental to his miraculous sanctity and wisdom, and he became\nfamous as a benefactor to humanity. He is said to have lived in the\ntime of Kartavirya Arjuna, the Haihaya king, and to have counselled\nthe latter to remain on his throne when he wished to resign it. In\nolder works of plastic art he is sometimes represented by the simple\nexpedient of placing the three gods side by side, sometimes by\nfiguring him as Vishnu in the guise of a Yogi with some of the\nattributes of the other two; but in modern times he usually appears as\na single figure with three heads, one for each of the great gods, and\nfour or six arms bearing their several attributes (usually the rosary\nand water-pot of Brahma, the conch and discus of Vishnu, and the\ntrident and drum of Siva), while he is accompanied by four dogs of\ndifferent colours, supposed to represent the four Vedas, and a\nbull.[37] Observe that in all these types Dattatreya is conceived as\nan embodiment of the three gods, which is comparatively a later idea,\nfor in the oldest version of the legend he was simply an incarnation\nof Vishnu; but as Vishnu was regarded not only as a member of the\nTrinity but also the Supreme Being over and above it, Dattatreya as\nhis representative has come to include in his personality the nature\nof all the trio. There is, moreover, something curious in his\ncharacter. His love of wine and woman is a singular trait, and is\nquite incompatible with the nature of an ideal saint. It smells of\nreality, and strongly suggests that he was not a figment of the\nreligious imagination but an actual man; and this is supported by the\ntradition of his association with Kartavirya Arjuna, who, in spite of\nall the mythical tales that are related of him, really seems to have\nbeen a king of flesh and blood. Thus we may venture to see in him yet\nanother example of the metamorphosis so common in India from a saint\nto an incarnation of the god worshipped by him.\n\n[Footnote 36: See Vasudevananda Sarasvati's _Datta-purana_ and Ganesa\nNarayana Karve's _Dattatreya-sarvasva_.]\n\n[Footnote 37: On these figures see Gopinatha Rau, _Elements of Hindu\nIconography_, i. p. 252 ff. The dogs seem to be connected with the\nVedic Sarama, on whom see Charpentier, _Die Suparnasage_, p. 91.]\n\n\nV. TWO MODERN INSTANCES\n\nIn Northern India, and especially in Bengal, you will often find\nHindus worshipping a god whom they call Satya-narayana and believe to\nbe an embodiment of Vishnu himself. The observance of this ritual is\nbelieved to bring wealth and all kinds of good fortune; a Sanskrit\nsacred legend in illustration of this belief has been created, and you\nmay buy badly lithographed copies of it in most of the bazaars if you\nlike, besides which you will find elegant accounts of the god's career\non earth written by quite a number of distinguished Bengali poets of\nthe last three centuries. But curiously enough this \"god,\" though\nquite real, was not a Hindu at all; he was a Bengali Moslem, a fakir,\nand the Muhammadans of Bengal, among whom he is known as Satya Pir,\nhave their own versions of his career, which seem to be much nearer\nthe truth than those of the Hindus. In their stories he figures simply\nas a saint, who busied himself in performing miracles for the benefit\nof pious Moslems in distress; and as one legend says that he was the\nson of a daughter of [H.]usain Shah, the Emperor of Gaur, and another\nbrings him into contact with Man Singh, it is evident that tradition\nascribed him to the sixteenth century, which is probably quite near\nenough to the truth.[38]\n\n[Footnote 38: See Dineshchandra Sen, _Folk-literature of Bengal_, p.\n99 ff.]\n\nThe next instance belongs to the twentieth century. A few years ago\nthere died in the village of Eral, in Tinnevelly District, a local\ngentleman of the Shanar caste named Arunachala Nadar. There was\nnothing remarkable about his career: he had lived a highly respectable\nlife, scrupulously fulfilled his religious duties, and served with\ncredit as chairman of the municipal board in his native village. If he\nhad done something prodigiously wicked, one might have expected him to\nbecome a local god at once, in accordance with Dravidian precedent;\nbut he being what he was, his post-mortem career is rather curious.\nFor a legend gradually arose that his kindly spirit haunted a certain\nplace, and little by little it has grown until now there is a regular\nworship of him in Eral, and pilgrims travel thither to receive his\nblessings, stimulated by a lively literary propaganda. He is\nworshipped under the name of \"The Chairman God,\" in affectionate\nmemory of his municipal career, and as Jagadisa, or \"Lord of the\nUniverse,\" a phase of the god Siva.\n\n\n\n\nCONCLUSION\n\n\nCan we trace any uniform principle running through the bewildering\nvariety of changes that we have observed?\n\nConsider the changes through which Vishnu has passed. At the beginning\na spirit of vaguely defined personality, he appears successively as a\nsaviour-god, as the mystic saint Narayana, as the epic warriors\nKrishna and Rama, as a wanton blue-skinned herd-boy fluting and\ndancing amidst a crowd of wildly amorous women, and as the noble ideal\nof God preached by the great Maratha and Ramanandi votaries, not to\nmention the many other incarnations that have delighted the Hindu\nimagination. What does all this mean? It means that the history of a\ngod is mainly moulded by two great factors, the growth of the people's\nspiritual experience and the character of its religious teachers. As\nthe stream of history rolls on, it fills men's souls with deeper and\nwider understanding of life. Old conceptions are pondered upon,\nexplored, tested, sometimes rejected, sometimes accepted with a new\nand profounder content, and thus enlarged they are applied to the old\nideals of godhead. When Indian society had organised itself out of\ntribal chaos and settled down under an established monarchical\ngovernment, it made Indra the king of the gods, ruling with the same\nforms and under the same conditions as a human sovereign. When men of\nfiner cast realised that the kingdom of the spirit is higher than\nearthly royalty, they turned away from Indra and set their souls upon\ngreater conceptions, ideals of vaster spiritual forces, mystic\ninfinitudes. Attracted thus to worships such as those of Siva and\nVishnu, they filled them with their own visions and imparted to these\ngods the ideals of their own strivings, making them into Yogisvaras,\nSupreme Mystics. And so the sequence of change has gone on through the\ngenerations. Most potently it has been effected by the characters of\nthe preachers and teachers of religion. Almost every teacher who has a\npersonality of his own, whose soul contains thoughts other than those\nof the common sort, stamps something of his own type upon the ideal of\nhis god which he imparts to his followers, and which may thereby come\nto be authoritatively recognised as a canonical character of the god.\nIndia is peculiarly liable to this transference of personality from\nthe guru to the god whom the guru preaches, because from immemorial\ntimes India has regarded the guru as representative of the god, and\noften deifies him as a permanent phase of the deity. Saivas declare\nthat in the guru who teaches the way of salvation Siva himself is\nmanifested: Vaishnavas tell the same tale, and find a short road to\nsalvation by surrendering their souls to him. We have seen cases of\napotheosis of the guru in modern and medieval times; reasoning from\nthe known to the unknown, we may be sure that it took place no less\nregularly in ancient ages, and brought about most of the surprising\nchanges in the character of gods which we have noticed. Sometimes the\ngurus have only preached some new features in the characters of their\ngods; sometimes, as is the Hindu fashion, they have also exhibited in\ntheir own persons, their dress and equipment, their original ideas of\ndivinity, as, for example, Lakulisa with his club; and their sanctity\nand apotheosis have ratified their innovations in theology and\niconology, which have spread abroad as their congregations have grown.\nThus the gurus and their congregations have made the history of their\ndeities, recasting the gods ever anew in the mould of man's hopes and\nstrivings and ideals. There is much truth in the saying of the\nBrahmanas: \"In the beginning the gods were mortal.\"\n\n       *       *       *       *       *","title":"Hindu gods and heroes : $b studies in the history of the religion of India","tradition":"myth-cosmogony","translated_text":null,"word_count":27392}