HANDBOOKS ON THE HISTORY OF RELIGIONS

EDITED BY MORRIS JASTROW, JR. , PH. D. 

_Professor of Semitic Languagesin the University of Pennsylvania_

VOLUME I

HANDBOOKS ON THE HISTORY OF RELIGIONS

THE

RELIGIONS OF INDIA

BY

EDWARD WASHBURN HOPKINS

Ph. D. (LEIPSIC)

PROFESSOR OF SANSKRIT AND COMPARATIVE PHILOLOGY IN BRYN MAWR COLLEGE

 _"This holy mystery I declare unto you: There is nothing nobler than humanity. "_

 THE MAH[=A]BH[=A]RATA. 

LONDON

EDWARD ARNOLD

37 BEDFORD STREET, STRAND

PUBLISHER TO THE INDIA OFFICE

1896

_(All rights reserved)_

COPYRIGHT, 1895, BY

EDWARD WASHBURN HOPKINS

TO THE MEMORY OF

WILLIAM DWIGHT WHITNEY

THIS VOLUME

IS AFFECTIONATELY DEDICATED

BY THE AUTHOR

PREFATORY NOTE

BY THE EDITOR. 

The growing interest both in this country and abroad in the historicalstudy of religions is one of the noticeable features in theintellectual phases of the past decades. The more general indicationsof this interest may be seen in such foundations as the Hibbert andGifford Lectureships in England, and the recent organization of anAmerican committee to arrange in various cities for lectures on thehistory of religions, in the establishment of a special department forthe subject at the University of Paris, in the organization of theMusée Guimet at Paris, in the publication of a journal--the _Revue del'Histoire des Religions_--under the auspices of this Museum, and inthe creation of chairs at the Collège de France, at the Universitiesof Holland, and in this country at Cornell University and theUniversity of Chicago, [1] with the prospect of others to follow in thenear future. For the more special indications we must turn to thesplendid labors of a large array of scholars toiling in the variousdepartments of ancient culture--India, Babylonia, Assyria, Egypt, Palestine, Arabia, Phoenicia, China, Greece, and Rome--with the resultof securing a firm basis for the study of the religions flourishing inthose countries--a result due mainly to the discovery of fresh sourcesand to the increase of the latter brought about by exploration andincessant research. The detailed study of the facts of religioneverywhere, both in primitive society and in advancing civilization, and the emphasis laid upon gathering and understanding these factsprior to making one's deductions, has succeeded in setting aside thespeculations and generalizations that until the beginning of thiscentury paraded under the name of "Philosophy of Religion. "

Such has been the scholarly activity displayed and the fertilityresulting, that it seems both desirable and timely to focus, as itwere, the array of facts connected with the religions of the ancientworld in such a manner that the summary resulting may serve as thepoint of departure for further investigations. 

This has been the leading thought which has suggested the series ofHandbooks on the History of Religions. The treatment of the religionsincluded in the series differs from previous attempts in the aim tobring together the ascertained results of scholarship rather than tomake an additional contribution, though the character of the scholarswhose coöperation has beep secured justifies the hope that theirproductions will also mark an advance in the interpretation of thesubject assigned to each. In accord with this general aim, merediscussion has been limited to a minimum, while the chief stress hasbeen laid upon the clear and full presentation of the data connectedwith each religion. 

A uniform plan has been drawn up by the editor for the order oftreatment in the various volumes, by following which it is hoped thatthe continuous character of the series will be secured. 

In this plan the needs of the general reader, as well as those of thestudent, for whom, in the first place, the series is designed, havebeen kept in view. After the introduction, which in the case of eachvolume is to be devoted to a setting forth of the sources and themethod of study, a chapter follows on the land and the people, presenting those ethnographical and geographical considerations, together with a brief historical sketch of the people in question, soessential to an understanding of intellectual and religious lifeeverywhere. 

In the third section, which may be denominated the kernel of the book, the subdivisions and order of presentation necessarily vary, thedivision into periods being best adapted to one religion, thegeographical order for another, the grouping of themes in a logicalsequence for a third; but in every case, the range covered will be thesame, namely, the beliefs, including the pantheon, the relation to thegods, views of life and death, the rites--both the official ones andthe popular customs--the religious literature and architecture. Afourth section will furnish a general estimate of the religion, itshistory, and the relation it bears to others. Each volume willconclude with a full bibliography, index, and necessary maps, withillustrations introduced into the text as called for. The Editor hasbeen fortunate in securing the services of distinguished specialistswhose past labors and thorough understanding of the plan and purposeof the series furnish a guarantee for the successful execution oftheir task. 

It is the hope of the Editor to produce in this way a series ofmanuals that may serve as text-books for the historical study ofreligions in our universities and seminaries. In addition to supplyingthis want, the arrangement of the manuals will, it is expected, meetthe requirements of reliable reference-books for ascertaining thepresent status of our knowledge of the religions of antiquity, whilethe popular manner of presentation, which it will be the aim of thewriters to carry out, justifies the hope that the general reader willfind the volumes no less attractive and interesting. 

 UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA. 

 * * * * *

 FOOTNOTES:

 [Footnote 1: In an article by the writer published in the _Biblical World_ (University of Chicago Press) for January, 1893, there will be found an account of the present status of the Historical Study of Religions in this country. ]

 * * * * *

CHAPTER I. --INTRODUCTION. 

SOURCES. --DATES. --METHODS OF INTERPRETATION. --DIVISIONS OF SUBJECT. 

SOURCES. 

India always has been a land of religions. In the earliest Vedicliterature are found not only hymns in praise of the accepted gods, but also doubts in regard to the worth of these gods; the beginningsof a new religion incorporated into the earliest records of the old. And later, when, about 300 B. C, Megasthenes was in India, thedescendants of those first theosophists are still discussing, albeitin more modern fashion, the questions that lie at the root of allreligion. "Of the philosophers, those that are most estimable he termsBrahmans ([Greek: _brachmanas_]). These discuss with many wordsconcerning death. For they regard death as being, for the wise, abirth into real life--into the happy life. And in many things theyhold the same opinions with the Greeks: saying that the universe wasbegotten and will be destroyed, and that the world is a sphere, whichthe god who made and owns it pervades throughout; that there aredifferent beginnings of all things, but water is the beginning ofworld-making, while, in addition to the four elements, there is, asfifth, a kind of nature, whence came the sky and the stars. . . . Andconcerning the seed of things and the soul they have much to say also, whereby they weave in myths, just as does Plato, in regard to thesoul's immortality, judgment in hell, and such things. "[1]

And as India conspicuously is a country of creeds, so is itsliterature preëminently priestly and religious. From the first Veda tothe last Pur[=a]na, religion forms either the subject-matter of themost important works, or, as in the case of the epics, [2] the basis ofdidactic excursions and sectarian interpolations, which impart toworldly themes a tone peculiarly theological. History and oratory areunknown in Indian literature. The early poetry consists of hymns andreligious poems; the early prose, of liturgies, linguistics, "law, "theology, sacred legends and other works, all of which are intended tosupplement the knowledge of the Veda, to explain ceremonies, or toinculcate religious principles. At a later date, formal grammar andsystems of philosophy, fables and commentaries are added to the prose;epics, secular lyric, drama, the Pur[=a]nas and such writings to thepoetry. But in all this great mass, till that time which Müller hascalled the Renaissance--that is to say, till after the Hindus werecome into close contact with foreign nations, notably the Greek, fromwhich has been borrowed, perhaps, the classical Hindu drama, [3]--thereis no real literature that was not religious originally, or, at least, so apt for priestly use as to become chiefly moral and theosophic;while the most popular works of modern times are sectarian tracts, Pur[=]nas, Tantras and remodelled worldly poetry. The sources, then, from which is to be drawn the knowledge of Hindu religions are thebest possible--the original texts. The information furnished byforeigners, from the times of Ktesias and Megasthenes to that ofMandelslo, is considerable; but one is warranted in assuming that whatlittle in it is novel is inaccurate, since otherwise the informationwould have been furnished by the Hindus themselves; and that, conversely, an outsider's statements, although presumably correct, often may give an inexact impression through lack of completeness; aswhen--to take an example that one can control--Ktesias tells half thetruth in regard to ordeals. His account is true, but he gives nonotion of the number or elaborate character of these interestingceremonies. 

The sources to which we shall have occasion to refer will be, then, the two most important collections of Vedic hymns--the Rig Veda andthe Atharva Veda; the Brahmanic literature, with the supplementaryUpanishads, and the S[=u]tras or mnemonic abridgments of religious andceremonial rules; the legal texts, and the religious and theologicalportions of the epic; and the later sectarian writings, calledPur[=a]nas. The great heresies, again, have their own specialwritings. Thus far we shall draw on the native literature. Only forsome of the modern sects, and for the religions of the wild tribeswhich have no literature, shall we have to depend on the accounts ofEuropean writers. 

DATES. 

For none of the native religious works has one a certain date. Nor isthere for any one of the earlier compositions the certainty that itbelongs, as a whole, to any one time. The Rig Veda was composed bysuccessive generations; the Atharvan represents different ages; eachBr[=a]hmana appears to belong in part to one era, in part to another;the earliest S[=u]tras (manuals of law, etc. ) have been interpolated;the earliest metrical code is a composite; the great epic is the workof centuries; and not only do the Upanishads and Pur[=a]nas representcollectively many different periods, but exactly to which period eachindividually is to be assigned remains always doubtful. Only in thecase of the Buddhistic writings is there a satisfactorily approximateterminus a quo, and even here approximate means merely within thelimit of centuries. 

Nevertheless, criteria fortunately are not lacking to enable one toassign the general bulk of any one work to a certain period in theliterary development; and as these periods are, if not sharply, yetplainly distinguishable, one is not in so desperate a case as he mighthave expected to be, considering that it is impossible to date withcertainty any Hindu book or writer before the Christian era. For, first, there exists a difference in language, demarcating the mostimportant periods; and, secondly, the development of the literaturehas been upon such lines that it is easy to say, from content andmethod of treatment, whether a given class of writings is a product ofthe Vedic, early Brahmanic, or late Brahmanic epochs. Usually, indeed, one is unable to tell whether a later Upanishad was made first in theearly or late Brahmanic period, but it is known that the Upanishads, as a whole, _i. E. _, the literary form and philosophical material whichcharacterize Upanishads, were earlier than the latest Brahmanic periodand subsequent to the early Brahmanic period; that they arose at theclose of the latter and before the rise of the former. So theBr[=a]hmanas, as a whole, are subsequent to the Vedic age, althoughsome of the Vedic hymns appear to have been made up in the same periodwith that of the early Br[=a]hmanas. Again, the Pur[=a]nas can beplaced with safety after the late Brahmanic age; and, consequently, subsequent to the Upanishads, although it is probable that manyUpanishads were written after the first Pur[=a]nas. The generalcompass of this enormous literature is from an indefinite antiquity toabout 1500 A. D. A liberal margin of possible error must be allowed inthe assumption of any specific dates. The received opinion is thatthe Rig Veda goes back to about 2000 B. C. , yet are some scholarsinclined rather to accept 3000 B. C. As the time that represents thisera. Weber, in his _Lectures on Sanskrit Literature_ (p. 7), rightlysays that to seek for an exact date is fruitless labor; while Whitneycompares Hindu dates to ninepins--set up only to be bowled down again. Schroeder, in his _Indiens Literatur und Cultur_, suggests that theprior limit may be "a few centuries earlier than 1500, " agreeing withWeber's preferred reckoning; but Whitney, Grassmann, and Benfeyprovisionally assume 2000 B. C. As the starting point of Hinduliterature. The lowest possible limit for this event Müller now placesat about 1500, which is recognized as a very cautious view; mostscholars thinking that Müller's estimate gives too little time for thedevelopment of the literary periods, which, in their opinion, require, linguistically and otherwise, a greater number of years. Brunnhofermore recently has suggested 2800 B. C. As the terminus; while the lastwriters on the subject (Tilak and Jacobi) claim to have discoveredthat the period from 3500 to 2500 represents the Vedic age. Theirconclusions, however, are not very convincing, and have been disputedvigorously. [4] Without the hope of persuading such scholars as arewedded to a terminus of three or four thousand years ago that we areright, we add, in all deference to others, our own opinion on thisvexed question. Buddhism gives the first semblance of a date in Hinduliterature. Buddha lived in the sixth century, and died probably about480, possibly (Westergaard's extreme opinion) as late as 368. [5]Before this time arise the S[=u]tras, back of which lie the earliestUpanishads, the bulk of the Br[=a]hmanas, and all the Vedic poems. Nowit is probable that the Brahmanic literature itself extends to thetime of Buddha and perhaps beyond it. For the rest of pre-Buddhisticliterature it seems to us incredible that it is necessary to require, either from the point of view of linguistic or of social and religiousdevelopment, the enormous period of two thousand years. There are noother grounds on which to base a reckoning except those of Jacobi andhis Hindu rival, who build on Vedic data results that hardly supportthe superstructure they have erected. Jacobi's starting-point is froma mock-serious hymn, which appears to be late and does not establish, to whatever date it be assigned, the point of departure from whichproceeds his whole argument, as Whitney has shown very well. One isdriven back to the needs of a literature in respect of time sufficientfor it to mature. What changes take place in language, even with awritten literature, in the space of a few centuries, may be seen inPersian, Greek, Latin, and German. No two thousand years are requiredto bridge the linguistic extremes of the Vedic and classical Sanskritlanguage. [6] But in content it will be seen that the flower of thelater literature is budding already in the Vedic age. We are unable toadmit that either in language or social development, or in literary orreligious growth, more than a few centuries are necessary to accountfor the whole development of Hindu literature (meaning therebycompositions, whether written or not) up to the time of Buddha. Moreover, if one compare the period at which arise the earliest formsof literature among other Aryan peoples, it will seem very strangethat, whereas in the case of the Romans, Greeks, and Persians, onethousand years B. C. Is the extreme limit of such literary activity ashas produced durable works, the Hindus two or three thousand yearsB. C. Were creating poetry so finished, so refined, and, from ametaphysical point of view, so advanced as is that of the Rig Veda. If, as is generally assumed, the (prospective) Hindus and Persianswere last to leave the common Aryan habitat, and came together to thesouth-east, the difficulty is increased; especially in the light ofmodern opinion in regard to the fictitious antiquity of Persian(Iranian) literature. For if Darmesteter be correct in holding thetime of the latter to be at most a century before our era, theincongruity between that oldest date of Persian literature and the"two or three thousand years before Christ, " which are claimed in thecase of the Rig Veda, becomes so great as to make the latterassumption more dubious than ever. 

We think in a word, without wishing to be dogmatic, that the date ofthe Rig Veda is about on a par, historically, with that of 'Homer, 'that is to say, the Collection[7] represents a long period, which wascompleted perhaps two hundred years after 1000 B. C, while again itsearliest beginnings precede that date possibly by five centuries; butwe would assign the bulk of the Rig Veda to about 1000 B. C. Withconscious imitation of older speech a good deal of archaic linguisticeffect doubtless was produced by the latest poets, who really belongto the Brahmanic age. The Brahmanic age in turn ends, as we opine, about 500 B. C. , overlapping the S[=u]tra period as well as that of thefirst Upanishads. The former class of writings (after 500 B. C. One maytalk of writings) is represented by dates that reach from circa600-500 B. C. Nearly to our era. Buddhism's _floruit_ is from 500 B. C. To 500 A. D. , and epic Hinduism covers nearly the same centuries. From500 to 1000 Buddhism is in a state of decadence; and through this timeextend the dramatic and older Puranic writings; while other Pur[=a]nasare as late as 1500, at which time arises the great modern reformingsect of the Sikhs. In the matter of the earlier termini a century maybe added or subtracted here and there, but these convenient divisionsof five hundreds will be found on the whole to be sufficientlyaccurate. [8]

METHODS OF INTERPRETATION. 

At the outset of his undertaking a double problem presents itself toone that would give, even in compact form, a view of Hindu religions. This problem consists in explaining, and, in so far as is possible, reconciling opposed opinions in regard not only to the nature of thesereligions but also to the method of interpreting the Vedic hymns. 

That the Vedic religion was naturalistic and mytho-poetic is doubtedby few. The Vedic hymns laud the powers of nature and naturalphenomena as personified gods, or even as impersonal phenomena. Theypraise also as distinct powers the departed fathers. In the Rig VedaI. 168, occur some verses in honor of the storm-gods called Maruts:"Self-yoked are they come lightly from the sky. The immortals urgethemselves on with the goad. Dustless, born of power, with shiningspears the Maruts overthrow the strongholds. Who is it, O Maruts, yethat have lightning-spears, that impels you within? . . . The streamsroar from the tires, when they send out their cloud-voices, " etc. Nothing would seem more justifiable, in view of this hymn and of manylike it, than to assume with Müller and other Indologians, that theMarut-gods are personifications of natural phenomena. As clearly doIndra and the Dawn appear to be natural phenomena. But no less anauthority than Herbert Spencer has attacked this view: "Facts implythat the conception of the dawn as a person results from the giving ofdawn as a birth-name. "[9] And again: "If, then, Dawn [in New Zealandand elsewhere] is an actual name for a person, if where there prevailsthis mode of distinguishing children, it has probably often been givento those born early in the morning; the traditions concerning one ofsuch who became noted, would, in the mind of the uncritical savage . . . Lead to identification with the dawn. "[10] In another passage: "Theprimitive god is the superior man . . . Propitiated during his life andstill more after his death. "[11] Summing up, Spencer thus concludes:"Instead of seeing in the common character of so-called myths, thatthey describe combats of beings using weapons, evidence that theyarose out of human transactions; mythologists assume that the order ofNature presents itself to the undeveloped mind in terms of victoriesand defeats. "[12] Moreover (_a posteriori_), "It is not true that theprimitive man looks at the powers of Nature with awe. It is not truethat he speculates about their characters and causes. "[13] If Spencerhad not included in his criticism the mythologists that have writtenon Vedic religion, there would be no occasion to take his opinion intoconsideration. But since he claims by the light of his comparativestudies to have shown that in the Rig Veda the "so-called naturegods, "[14] were not the oldest, and explains Dawn here exactly as hedoes in New Zealand, it becomes necessary to point out, that apartfrom the question of the origin of religions in general, Spencer hasmade a fatal error in assuming that he is dealing in the Rig Veda withprimitive religion, uncritical savages, and undeveloped minds. Andfurthermore, as the poet of the Rig Veda is not primitive, or savage, or undeveloped, so when he worships _Dyaus pitar_ [Greek: Zeùs patáer]as the 'sky-father, ' he not only makes it evident to every reader thathe really is worshipping the visible sky above; but in hisdescriptions of gods such as Indra, the Dawn, and some other new godshe invents from time to time, long after he has passed the savage, primitive, and undeveloped state, he makes it no less clear that heworships phenomena as they stand before him (rain, cloud, lightning, etc. ), so that by analogy with what is apparent in the case of laterdivinities, one is led inevitably to predicate the same origin astheirs in the case of the older gods. 

But it is unnecessary to spend time on this point. It is impossiblefor any sober scholar to read the Rig Veda and believe that the Vedicpoets are not worshipping natural phenomena; or that the phenomena soworshipped were not the original forms of these gods. Whether at amore remote time there was ever a period when the pre-historic Hindu, or his pre-Indic ancestor, worshipped the Manes exclusively is anotherquestion, and one with which at present we have nothing to do. Thehistory of Hindu religions begins with the Rig Veda, and in thisperiod the worship of Manes and that of natural phenomena weredistinct, nor are there any indications that the latter was everdeveloped from the former. It is not denied that the Hindus made godsof departed men. They did this long after the Vedic period. But thereis no proof that all the Vedic gods, as claims Spencer, were theworshipped souls of the dead. No _argumentum a fero_ can show in aVedic dawn-hymn anything other than a hymn to personified Dawn, ormake it probable that this dawn was ever a mortal's name. 

In respect of that which precedes all tradition we, whose task is notto speculate in regard to primitive religious conceptions, but to givethe history of one people's religious progress, may be pardoned forexpressing no opinion. But without abandoning history (i. E. , tradition) we would revert for a moment to the pre-Indian period andpoint out that Zarathustra's rejection of the _daevas_ which must bethe same _devas_ that are worshipped in India, proves that_deva_-worship is the immediate predecessor of the Hindu religion. Asfar back as one can scrutinize the Aryan past he finds, as theearliest known objects of reverence, 'sun' and 'sky, ' besides andbeside the blessed Manes. A word here regarding the priority ofmonotheism or of polytheism. The tradition is in favor of the latter, while on _a priori_ grounds whoever thinks that the more primitive therace the more apt it is for monotheism will postulate, with some ofthe older scholars, an assumed monotheism as the pre-historic religionof the Hindus; while whosoever opines that man has gradually risenfrom a less intellectual stage will see in the early gods of theHindus only another illustration of one universal fact, and posit evenAryan polytheism as an advance on the religion which it is probablethat the remoter ancestors of the Aryans once acknowledged. 

A word perhaps should be said, also, in order to a betterunderstanding between the ethnologists as represented by Andrew Lang, and the unfortunate philologists whom it delights him to pommel. Lang's clever attacks on the myth-makers, whom he persistentlydescribes as the philologists--and they do indeed form part of thatcamp--have had the effect of bringing 'philological theories' into saddisrepute with sciolists and 'common-sense' people. But the sun-mythsand dawn-myths that the myth-makers discover in Cinderella and RedRiding Hood, ought not to be fathered upon all philologists. On theother hand, who will deny that in India certain mythological figuresare eoian or solar in origin? Can any one question that Vivasvant the'wide gleaming' is sun or bright sky, as he is represented in theAvesta and Rig Veda? Yet is a very anthropomorphic, nay, earthlyfigure, made out of this god. Or is Mr. Lang ignorant that the godYima became Jemshid, and that Feridun is only the god Trita? Itundoubtedly is correct to illuminate the past with other light thanthat of sun or dawn, yet that these lights have shone and have beenquenched in certain personalities may be granted without doingviolence to scientific principles. All purely etymological mythologyis precarious, but one may recognize sun-myths without building asystem on the basis of a Dawn-Helen, and without referring Ilium tothe Vedic _bila_. Again, myths about gods, heroes, and fairies are tobe segregated. Even in India, which teems with it, there is little, ifany, folklore that can be traced to solar or dawn-born myths. Mr. Langrepresents a healthy reaction against too much sun-myth, but we thinkthat there are sun-myths still, and that despite his protests allreligion is not grown from one seed. 

There remains the consideration of the second part of the doubleproblem which was formulated above--the method of interpretation. Thenative method is to believe the scholiasts' explanations, which oftenare fanciful and, in all important points, totally unreliable; sincethe Hindu commentators lived so long after the period of theliterature they expound that the tradition they follow is useful onlyin petty details. From a modern point of view the question ofinterpretation depends mainly on whether one regard the Rig Veda asbut an Indic growth, the product of the Hindu mind alone, or as a workthat still retains from an older age ideas which, having once beencommon to Hindu and Iranian, should be compared with those in thePersian Avesta and be illustrated by them. Again, if this latterhypothesis be correct, how is one to interpret an apparent likeness, here and there, between Indic and foreign notions, --is it possiblethat the hymns were composed, in part, before the advent of theauthors into India, and is it for this reason that in the Rig Veda arecontained certain names, ideas, and legends, which do not seem to benative to India? On the other hand, if one adopt the theory that theRig Veda is wholly a native work, in how far is he to suppose that itis separable from Brahmanic formalism? Were the hymns madeindependently of any ritual, as their own excuse for being, or werethey composed expressly for the sacrifice, as part of a formal cult?

Here are views diverse enough, but each has its advocate or advocates. According to the earlier European writers the Vedic poets arefountains of primitive thought, streams unsullied by any tributaries, and in reading them one quaffs a fresh draught, the gush ofunsophisticated herdsmen, in whose religion there is to be seen achildlike belief in natural phenomena as divine forces, over whichforces stands the Heaven-god as the highest power. So in 1869Pfleiderer speaks of the "primeval childlike naïve prayer" of Rig Vedavi. 51. 5 ("Father sky, mother earth, " etc. );[15] while Pictet, in hiswork _Les Origines Indo-Européennes_, maintains that the Aryans had aprimitive monotheism, although it was vague and rudimentary; for heregards both Iranian dualism and Hindu polytheism as beingdevelopments of one earlier monism (claiming that Iranian dualism isreally monotheistic). Pictet's argument is that the human mind musthave advanced from the simple to the complex! Even Roth believes in anoriginally "supreme deity" of the Aryans. [16] Opposed to this, the'naïve' school of such older scholars as Roth, Müller, [17] andGrassmann, who see in the Rig Veda an ingenuous expression of'primitive' ideas, stand the theories of Bergaigne, who interpretseverything allegorically; and of Pischel and Geldner, realists, whosegeneral opinions may thus be formulated: The poets of the Rig Veda arenot childlike and naïve; they represent a comparatively late period ofculture, a society not only civilized, but even sophisticated; a modeof thought philosophical and sceptical a religion not only ceremoniousbut absolutely stereotyped. In regard to the Aryanhood of the hymns, the stand taken by these latter critics, who renounce even Bergaigne'sslight hold on mythology, is that the Rig Veda is thoroughly Indic. Itis to be explained by the light of the formal Hindu ritualism, andeven by epic worldliness, its fresh factors being lewd gods, harlots, and race-horses. Bloomfield, who does not go so far as this, claimsthat the 'Vedic' age really is a Brahmanic age; that Vedic religion issaturated with Brahmanic ideas and Brahmanic formalism, so that theRig Veda ought to be looked upon as made for the ritual, not theritual regarded as ancillary to the Rig Veda[18]. This scholarmaintains that there is scarcely any chronological distinction betweenthe hymns of the Rig Veda and the Br[=a]hmana, both forms havingprobably existed together "from earliest times"; and that not a singleVedic hymn "was ever composed without reference to ritualapplication"; nay, all the hymns were "liturgical from the verystart"[19]. This is a plain advance even on Bergaigne's opinion, whofinally regarded all the family-books of the Rig Veda as composed tosubserve the _soma_-cult. [20]

In the Rig Veda occur hymns of an entirely worldly character, thelament of a gambler, a humorous description of frogs croaking likepriests, a funny picture of contemporary morals [describing how everyone lusts after wealth], and so forth. From these alone it becomesevident that the ritualistic view must be regarded as one somewhatexaggerated. But if the liturgical extremist appears to have stepped alittle beyond the boundary of probability, he yet in daring remainsfar behind Bergaigne's disciple Regnaud, who has a mystical 'system, 'which is, indeed, the outcome of Bergaigne's great work, though it isvery improbable that the latter would have looked with favor upon hisfollower's results. In _Le Rig Veda_ [Paris, 1892] Paul Regnaud, emphasizing again the connection between the liturgy and the hymns, refers every word of the Rig Veda to the sacrifice in its simplestform, the oblation. According to this author the Hindus had forgottenthe meaning of their commonest words, or consistently employed them intheir hymns in a meaning different to that in ordinary use. The veryword for god, _deva_ [deus], no longer means the 'shining one' [thegod], but the 'burning oblation'; the common word for mountain, _giri_ also means oblation, and so on. This is Bergaigne's allegoricalmysticism run mad. 

At such perversion of reasonable criticism is the exegesis of the Vedaarrived in one direction. But in another it is gone astray no less, asmisdirected by its clever German leader. In three volumes[21]Brunnhofer has endeavored to prove that far from being a Brahmanicproduct, the Rig Veda is not even the work of Hindus; that it wascomposed near the Caspian Sea long before the Aryans descended intoIndia. Brunnhofer's books are a mine of ingenious conjectures, assuggestive in detail as on the whole they are unconvincing. Hisfundamental error is the fancy that names and ideas which might beIranian or Turanian would prove, if such they really could be shown tobe, that the work in which they are contained must be Iranian orTuranian. He relies in great measure on passages that always have beenthought to be late, either whole late hymns or tags added to oldhymns, and on the most daring changes in the text, changes which hemakes in order to prove his hypothesis, although there is no necessityfor making them. The truth that underlies Brunnhofer's extravagance isthat there are foreign names in the Rig Veda, and this is all that hehas proved thus far. 

In regard to the relation between the Veda and the Avesta thedifference of views is too individual to have formed systems ofinterpretation on that basis alone. Every competent scholar recognizesa close affinity between the Iranian Yima and the Hindu Yama, betweenthe _soma_-cult and the _haoma_-cult, but in how far the thoughts andforms that have clustered about one development are to be comparedwith those of the other there is no general agreement and there can benone. The usual practice, however, is to call the Iranian _Yima, haoma_, etc. , to one's aid if they subserve one's own view of _Yama, soma, _ and other Hindu parallels, and to discard analogous features asan independent growth if they do not. This procedure is based as wellon the conditions of the problem as on the conditions of humanjudgment, and must not be criticized too severely; for in fact the tworeligions here and there touch each other so nearly that to deny arelation between them is impossible, while in detail they diverge sowidely that it is always questionable whether a coincidence of ritualor belief be accidental or imply historical connection. 

It is scarcely advisable in a concise review of several religions toenter upon detailed criticism of the methods of interpretation thataffect for the most part only the earliest of them. But on one point, the reciprocal relations between the Vedic and Brahmanic periods, itis necessary to say a few words. Why is it that well-informed Vedicscholars differ so widely in regard to the ritualistic share in themaking of the Veda? Because the extremists on either side informulating the principles of their system forget a fact that probablyno one of them if questioned would fail to acknowledge. The Rig Vedais not a homogeneous whole. It is a work which successive generationshave produced, and in which are represented different views, of localor sectarian origin; while the hymns from a literary point of view areof varying value. The latter is a fact which has been ignoredfrequently, but it is more important than any other. For one hasalmost no criteria, with which to discover whether the hymns precedeor follow the ritual, other than the linguistic posteriority of theritualistic literature, and the knowledge that there were priests witha ritual when some of the hymns were composed. The bare fact thathymns are found rubricated in the later literature is surely no reasonfor believing that such hymns were made for the ritual. Now while itcan be shown that a large number of hymns are formal, conventional, and mechanical in expression, and while it may be argued withplausibility that these were composed to serve the purpose of anestablished cult, this is very far from being the case with manywhich, on other grounds, may be supposed to belong severally to theolder and later part of the Rig Veda. Yet does the new school, inestimating the hymns, never admit this. The poems always are spoken ofas 'sacerdotal', ritualistic, without the slightest attempt to seewhether this be true of all or of some alone. We claim that it is nothistorical, it is not judicious from a literary point of view, tofling indiscriminately together the hymns that are evidentlyritualistic and those of other value; for, finally, it is a soberliterary judgment that is the court of appeals in regard to whetherpoetry be poetry or not. Now let one take a hymn containing, to makeit an unexceptionable example, nothing very profound or verybeautiful. It is this well-known

 HYMN TO THE SUN (_Rig Veda_, I. 50). 

 Aloft this all-wise[22] shining god His beams of light are bearing now, That every one the sun may see. 

 Apart, as were they thieves, yon stars, Together with the night[23], withdraw Before the sun, who seeth all. 

 His beams of light have been beheld Afar, among [all] creatures; rays Splendid as were they [blazing] fires, Impetuous-swift, beheld of all, Of light the maker, thou, O Sun, Thou all the gleaming [sky] illum'st. 

 Before the folk of shining gods Thou risest up, and men before, 'Fore all--to be as light beheld;

 [To be] thine eye, O pure bright Heaven, Wherewith amid [all] creatures born Thou gazest down on busy [man]. 

 Thou goest across the sky's broad place, Meting with rays, O Sun, the days, And watching generations pass. 

 The steeds are seven that at thy car Bear up the god whose hair is flame O shining god, O Sun far-seen!

 Yoked hath he now his seven fair steeds, The daughters of the sun-god's car, Yoked but by him[24]; with these he comes. 

For some thousands of years these verses have been the daily prayer ofthe Hindu. They have been incorporated into the ritual in this form. They are rubricated, and the nine stanzas form part of a prescribedservice. But, surely, it were a literary hysteron-proteron to concludefor this reason that they were made only to fill a part in anestablished ceremony. 

The praise is neither perfunctory nor lacking in a really religioustone. It has a directness and a simplicity, without affectation, whichwould incline one to believe that it was not made mechanically, butcomposed with a devotional spirit that gave voice to genuine feeling. 

We will now translate another poem (carefully preserving all thetautological phraseology), a hymn

 To DAWN _(Rig Veda_ VI. 64). 

 Aloft the lights of Dawn, for beauty gleaming, Have risen resplendent, like to waves of water; She makes fair paths, (makes) all accessible; And good is she, munificent and kindly. 

 Thou lovely lookest, through wide spaces shin'st thou, Up fly thy fiery shining beams to heaven; Thy bosom thou reveals't, thyself adorning, Aurora, goddess gleaming bright in greatness. 

 The ruddy kine (the clouds) resplendent bear her, The blessed One, who far and wide extendeth. As routs his foes a hero armed with arrows, As driver swift, so she compels the darkness. 

 Thy ways are fair; thy paths, upon the mountains; In calm, self-shining one, thou cross'st the waters. O thou whose paths are wide, to us, thou lofty Daughter of Heaven, bring wealth for our subsistence. 

 Bring (wealth), thou Dawn, who, with the kine, untroubled Dost bring us good commensurate with pleasure, Daughter of Heaven, who, though thou art a goddess, Didst aye at morning-call come bright and early. 

 Aloft the birds fly ever from their dwelling, And men, who seek for food, at thy clear dawning. E'en though a mortal stay at home and serve thee, Much joy to him, Dawn, goddess (bright), thou bringest. 

The "morning call" might, indeed, suggest the ritual, but it provesonly a morning prayer or offering. Is this poem of a "singularlyrefined character, " or "preëminently sacerdotal" in appearance? Oneother example (in still a different metre) may be examined, to see ifit bear on its face evidence of having been made with "reference toritual application, " or of being "liturgical from the very start. "

 To INDRA _(Rig Veda_, I. 11). 

 'Tis Indra all (our) songs extol, Him huge as ocean in extent; Of warriors chiefest warrior he, Lord, truest lord for booty's gain. 

 In friendship, Indra, strong as thine Naught will we fear, O lord of strength; To thee we our laudations sing, The conqueror unconquered. [25]

 The gifts of Indra many are, And inexhaustible his help Whene'er to them that praise he gives The gift of booty rich in kine. 

 A fortress-render, youthful, wise, Immeasurably strong was born Indra, the doer of every deed, The lightning-holder, far renowned. 

 'Twas thou, Bolt-holder, rent'st the cave Of Val, who held the (heavenly) kine;[26] Thee helped the (shining) gods, when roused (To courage) by the fearless one. [27]

 Indra, who lords it by his strength, Our praises now have loud proclaimed; His generous gifts a thousand are, Aye, even more than this are they. 

This is poetry. Not great poetry perhaps, but certainly not ground outto order, as some of the hymns appear to have been. Yet, it may besaid, why could not a poetic hymn have been written in a ritualisticenvironment? But it is on the hymns themselves that one is forced todepend for the belief in the existence of ritualism, and we claim thatsuch hymns as these, which we have translated as literally aspossible, show rather that they were composed without reference toritual application. It must not be forgotten that the ritual, as it isknown in the Br[=a]hmanas, without the slightest doubt, from the pointof view of language, social conditions, and theology, represents anage that is very different to that illustrated by the mass of thehymns. Such hymns, therefore, and only such as can be proved to have aritualistic setting can be referred to a ritualistic age. There is noconvincing reason why one should not take the fully justified viewthat some of the hymns represent a freer and more natural (lesspriest-bound) age, as they represent a spirit freer and lessmechanical than that of other hymns. As to the question which hymns, early or late, be due to poetic feeling, and which to ritualisticmechanism or servile imitation, this can indeed be decided by ajudgment based only on the literary quality, never on the accident ofsubsequent rubrication. 

We hold, therefore, in this regard, that the new school, valuable andsuggestive as its work has been, is gone already farther than isjudicious. The Rig Veda in part is synchronous with an advancedritualism, subjected to it, and in some cases derived from it; but inpart the hymns are "made for their own sake and not for the sake ofany sacrificial performance, " as said Muller of the whole; going inthis too far, but not into greater error than are gone they thatconfuse the natural with the artificial, the poetical with themechanical, gold with dross. It may be true that the books of the RigVeda are chiefly family-books for the _soma_-cult, but even were ittrue it would in no wise impugn the poetic character of some of thehymns contained in these books. The drag-net has scooped up old andnew, good and bad, together. The Rig Veda is not of one period or ofone sort. It is a 'Collection, ' as says its name. It is essentiallyimpossible that any sweeping statement in regard to its charactershould be true if that character be regarded as uniform. To say thatthe Rig Veda represents an age of childlike thought, a period beforethe priestly ritual began its spiritual blight, is incorrect. But noless incorrect is it to assert that the Rig Veda represents a periodwhen hymns are made only for rubrication by priests that sing only forbaksheesh. Scholars are too prone to-day to speak of the Rig Veda inthe same way as the Greeks spoke of Homer. It is to be hoped that thetime may soon come when critics will no longer talk about theCollection as if it were all made in the same circumstances and at thesame time; above all is it desirable that the literary quality of thehymns may receive due attention, and that there may be less of thoseuniversal asseverations which treat the productions of generations ofpoets as if they were the work of a single author. 

In respect of the method of reading into the Rig Veda what is found inparallel passages in the Atharva Veda and Br[=a]hmanas, a practicemuch favored by Ludwig and others, the results of its application havebeen singularly futile in passages of importance. Often a variedreading will make clearer a doubtful verse, but it by no means followsthat the better reading is the truer. There always remains the lurkingsuspicion that the reason the variant is more intelligible is that itsinventor did not understand the original. As to real elucidation ofother sort by the later texts, in the minutiae of the outer world, indetails of priestcraft, one may trust early tradition tentatively, just as one does late commentators, but in respect of ideas traditionis as apt to mislead as to lead well. The cleft between the theologyof the Rig Veda and that of the Br[=a]hmanas, even from the point ofview of the mass of hymns that comprise the former, is too great toallow us with any content to explain the conceptions of the one bythose of the other. A tradition always is useful when nothing elseoffers itself, but traditional beliefs are so apt to take the color ofnew eras that they should be employed only in the last emergency, andthen with the understanding that they are of very hypothetical value. 

In conclusion a practical question remains to be answered. In the fewcases where the physical basis of a Rig Vedic deity is matter ofdoubt, it is advisable to present such a deity in the form in which hestands in the text or to endeavor historically to elucidate the figureby searching for his physical prototype? We have chosen the formeralternative, partly because we think the latter method unsuitable to ahandbook, since it involves many critical discussions of theories ofdoubtful value. But this is not the chief reason. Granted that theobject of study is simply to know the Rig Veda, rightly to grasp theviews held by the poets, and so to place oneself upon their plane ofthought, it becomes obvious that the farther the student gets fromtheir point of view the less he understands them. Nay, more, every bitof information, real as well as fancied, which in regard to the poets'own divinities furnishes one with more than the poets themselves knewor imagined, is prejudicial to a true knowledge of Vedic beliefs. Hereif anywhere is applicable that test of desirable knowledge formulatedas _das Erkennen des Erkannten_. To set oneself in the mental sphereof the Vedic seers, as far as possible to think their thoughts, tolove, fear, and admire with them--this is the necessary beginning ofintimacy, which precedes the appreciation that gives understanding. 

DIVISIONS OF THE SUBJECT. 

After the next chapter, which deals with the people and land, we shallbegin the examination of Hindu religions with the study of the beliefsand religious notions to be found in the Rig Veda. Next to the RigVeda in time stands the Atharva Veda, which represents a growingdemonology in contrast with _soma_-worship and theology; sufficientlyso at least to deserve a special chapter. These two Vedic Collectionsnaturally form the first period of Hindu religion. 

The Vedic period is followed by what is usually termed Brahmanism, thereligion that is inculcated in the rituals called Br[=a]hmana and itslater development in the Upanishads. These two classes of works, together with the Yajur Veda, will make the next divisions of thewhole subject. The formal religion of Brahmanism, as laid down forpopular use and instruction in the law-books, is a side of Brahmanicreligion that scarcely has been noticed, but it seems to deserve allthe space allotted to it in the chapter on 'The Popular BrahmanicFaith. ' We shall then review Jainism and Buddhism, the two chiefheresies. Brahmanism penetrates the great epic poem which, however, inits present form is sectarian in tendency, and should be separated asa growth of Hinduism from the literature of pure Brahmanism. Nevertheless, so intricate and perplexing would be the task ofunraveling the theologic threads that together make the yarn of theepic, and in many cases it would be so doubtful whether any one threadled to Brahmanism or to the wider and more catholic religion calledHinduism, that we should have preferred to give up the latter namealtogether, as one that was for the most part idle, and in some degreemisleading. Feeling, however, that a mere manual should not take theinitiative in coining titles, we have admitted this unsatisfactoryword 'Hinduism' as the title of a chapter which undertakes to give acomprehensive view of the religions endorsed by the many-centuriedepic, and to explain their mutual relations. As in the case of the'Popular Faith, ' we have had here no models to go upon, and the massof matter which it was necessary to handle--the great epic is abouteight times as long as the Iliad and Odyssey put together--must be ourexcuse for many imperfections of treatment in this part of the work. The reader will gain at least a view of the religious development asit is exhibited in the literature, and therefore, as, far as possible, in chronological order. The modern sects and the religions of the hilltribes of India form almost a necessary supplement to these noblerreligions of the classical literature; the former because they are thelogical as well as historical continuation of the great Hindusectarian schisms, the latter because they give the solution of someproblems connected with Çivaism, and, on the other hand, offer usefulun-Aryan parallels to a few traits which have been preserved in theearliest period of the Aryans. [28]

 * * * * *

 FOOTNOTES:

 [Footnote 1: Megasthenes, Fr. XLI, ed. Schwanbeck. ]

 [Footnote 2: Epic literature springs from lower castes than that of the priest, but it has been worked over by sacerdotal revisers till there is more theology than epic poetry in it. ]

 [Footnote 3: See Weber, _Sanskrit Literature_, p. 224; Windisch, _Greek Influence on Indian Drama_; and Lévi, _Le théâtre indien_. The date of the Renaissance is given as "from the first century B. C. To at least the third century A. D. " (_India_, p. 281). Extant Hindu drama dates only from the fifth century A. D. We exclude, of course, from "real literature" all technical hand-books and commentaries. ]

 [Footnote 4: Jacobi, in Roth's _Festgruss_, pp. 72, 73 (1893); Whitney, _Proceed. A. O. S. _, 1894, p. Lxxii; Perry, _P[=u]shan, _ in the _Drisler Memorial_; Weber, _Vedische Beiträge. _]

 [Footnote 5: Westergaard, _Ueber Buddha's Todesjahr_. The prevalent opinion is that Buddha died in 477 or 480 B. C. ]

 [Footnote 6: It must not be forgotten in estimating the _broad_ mass of Br[=a]hmanas and S[=u]tras that each as a school represents almost the whole length of its period, and hence one school alone should measure the time from end to end, which reduces to very moderate dimensions the literature to be accounted for in time. ]

 [Footnote 7: _'Rig Veda Collection'_ is the native name for that which in the Occident is called Rig Veda, the latter term embracing, to the Hindu, all the works (Br[=a]hmanas, S[=u]tras, etc. ) that go to explain the 'Collection' (of hymns). ]

 [Footnote 8: Schroeder, _Indiens Literatur und Cultur, _ p. 291, gives: Rig-Veda, 2000-1000 B. C. ; older Br[=a]hmanas, 1000-800; later Br[=a]hmanas and Upanishads, 800-600; S[=u]tras, 600-400 or 300. ]

 [Footnote 9: _Principles of Sociology_, I. P. 448 (Appleton, 1882). ]

 [Footnote 10: Ib. P. 398. ]

 [Footnote 11: Ib. P. 427. ]

 [Footnote 12: Ib. P. 824. ]

 [Footnote 13: Ib. ]

 [Footnote 14: Ib. P. 821. ]

 [Footnote 15: Compare Muir, _Original Sanskrit Texts_, V. P. 412 ff. , where are given the opinions of Pfleiderer, Pictet, Roth, Scherer, and others. ]

 [Footnote 16: ZDMG. , vi. 77: "Ein alter gemeinsam arischer [indo-iranic], ja vielleicht gemeinsam indo-germanischer oberster Gott, Varuna-Ormuzd-Uranos. "]

 [Footnote 17: In his _Science of Language_, Müller speaks of the early poets who "strove in their childish way to pierce beyond the limits of this finite world. " Approvingly cited, SBE. Xxxii. P. 243 (1891). ]

 [Footnote 18: The over view may be seen in Müller's _Lecture on the Vedas_ (Chips, I. P. 9): "A collection made for its own sake, and not for the sake of any sacrificial performance. " For Pischel's view compare _Vedische Studien_, I. Preface. ]

 [Footnote 19: Bloomfield, JAOS xv. P. 144. ]

 [Footnote 20: Compare Barth (Preface): "A literature preeminently sacerdotal. . . . The poetry . . . Of a singularly refined character, . . . Full of . . . Pretensions to mysticism, " etc. ]

 [Footnote 21: _Iran und Turan_, 1889; _Vom Pontus bis zum Indus_, 1890; _Vom Aral bis zur Gang[=a]_ 1892. ]

 [Footnote 22: Or "all-possessing" [Whitney]. The metre of the translation retains the number of feet in the original. Four [later added] stanzas are here omitted. ]

 [Footnote 23: So P. W. Possibly "by reason of [the sun's] rays"; _i. E. _, the stars fear the sun as thieves fear light. For 'Heaven, ' here and below, see the third chapter. ]

 [Footnote 24: Yoked only by him; literally "self-yoked. " Seven is used in the Rig Veda in the general sense of "many, " as in Shakespeare's "a vile thief this seven years. "]

 [Footnote 25: _jet[=a]ram [=a]par[=a]jitam_. ]

 [Footnote 26: The rain, see next note. ]

 [Footnote 27: After this stanza two interpolated stanzas are here omitted. Grassman and Ludwig give the epithet "fearless" to the gods and to Vala, respectively. But compare I. 6. 7, where the same word is used of Indra. For the oft-mentioned act of cleaving the cave, where the dragon Val or Vritra (the restrainer or envelopper) had coralled the kine(i. E. Without metaphor, for the act of freeing the clouds and letting loose the rain), compare I. 32. 2, where of Indra it is said: "He slew the snake that lay upon the mountains . . . Like bellowing kine the waters, swiftly flowing, descended to the sea"; and verse 11: "Watched by the snake the waters stood . . . The waters' covered cave he opened wide, what time he Vritra slew. "]

 [Footnote 28: Aryan, Sanskrit _aryà, árya_, Avestan _airya_, appears to mean the loyal or the good, and may be the original national designation, just as the Medes were long called [Greek: _Arioi_]. In late Sanskrit _[=a]rya_ is simply 'noble. ' The word survives, perhaps, in [Greek: _aristos_], and is found in proper names, Persian Ariobarzanes, Teutonic Ariovistus; as well as in the names of people and countries, Vedic [=A]ryas, [=I]ran, Iranian; (doubtful) Airem, Erin, Ireland. Compare Zimmer, BB. Iii. P. 137; Kaegi, _Der Rig Veda_, p. 144 (Arrowsmith's translation, p. 109). In the Rig Veda there is a god Aryaman, 'the true, ' who forms with Mitra and Varuna a triad (see below). Windisch questions the propriety of identifying [=I]ran with Erin, and Schrader (p. 584^2) doubts whether the Indo-Europeans as a body ever called themselves Aryans. We employ the latter name because it is short. ]

 * * * * *

CHAPTER II. 

PEOPLE AND LAND. 

The Aryan Hindus, whose religions we describe in this volume[1], formed one of the Aryan or so-called Indo-European peoples. To theother peoples of this stock, Persians, Armenians, Greeks, Italians, Kelts, Teutons, Slavs, the Hindus were related closely by language, but very remotely from the point of view of their primitive religion. Into India the Aryans brought little that was retained in theirreligious systems. A few waning gods, the worship of ancestors, andsome simple rites are common to them and their western relations; butwith the exception of the Iranians (Persians), their religiousconnection with cis-Indic peoples is of the slightest. With theIranians, the Hindus (that were to be) appear to have lived longest incommon after the other members of the Aryan host were dispersed towest and south[2]. They stand in closer religious touch with these, their nearest neighbors, and in the time of the Rig Veda (the Hindus'earliest literature) there are traces of a connection comparativelyrecent between the pantheons of the two nations. 

According to their own, rather uncertain, testimony, the Aryans of theRig Veda appear to have consisted of five tribal groups[3]. Thesegroups, _janas_, Latin gens, are subdivided into _viças_, Latin vicus, and these, again, into _gr[=a]mas_. The names, however, are notemployed with strictness, and _jana_, etymologically gens butpolitically tribus, sometimes is used as a synonym of _gr[=a]ma_. [4]Of the ten books of the Rig-Veda seven are ascribed to variouspriestly families. In the main, these books are rituals of song asinculcated for the same rites by different family priests and theirdescendants. Besides these there are books which are ascribed to nofamily, and consist, in part, of more general material. Thedistinction of priestly family-books was one, possibly, coextensivewith political demarcation. Each of the family-books represents apriestly family, but it may represent, also, a political family. In atleast one case it represents a political body. [5]

These great political groups, which, perhaps, are represented byfamily rituals, were essentially alike in language, custom andreligion (although minor ritualistic differences probably obtained, aswell as tribal preference for particular cults); while in all theserespects, as well as in color and other racial peculiarities, theAryans were distinguished from the dark-skinned aborigines, with whom, until the end of the Rig Vedic period, they were perpetually at war. At the close of this period the immigrant Aryans had reduced toslavery many of their unbelieving and barbarian enemies, and formallyincorporated them into the state organization, where, as captives, slaves, or sons of slaves, the latter formed the "fourth caste. " Butwhile admitting these slaves into the body politic, the priestlyAryans debarred them from the religious congregation. Between theAryans themselves there is in this period a loosely defineddistinction of classes, but no system of caste is known before theclose of the first Vedic Collection. Nevertheless, the emphasis inthis statement lies strongly upon system, and it may not be quite idleto say at the outset that the general caste-distinctions not only areas old as the Indo-Iranian unity (among the Persians the same divisionof priest, warrior and husbandman obtains), but, in all probability, they are much older. For so long as there is a cult, even if it be ofspirits and devils, there are priests; and if there are chieftainsthere is a nobility, such as one finds among the Teutons, nay, evenamong the American Indians, where also is known the inevitabledivision into priests, chiefs and commons, sometimes hereditary, sometimes not. There must have been, then, from the beginning ofkingship and religious service, a division among the Aryans intoroyalty, priests, and people, i. E. , whoever were not acting as priestsor chieftains. When the people becomes agricultural, the differencetends to become permanent, and a caste system begins. Now, the VedicAryans appear in history at just the period when they are on the movesouthwards into India; but they are no irrupting host. The battles ledthe warriors on, but the folk, as a folk, moved slowly, not allabandoning the country which they had gained, but settling there, andsending onwards only a part of the people. There was no fixed line ofdemarcation between the classes. The king or another might act as hisown priest--yet were there priestly families. The cow-boys mightfight--yet were there those of the people that were especially'kingsmen, ' _r[=a]janyas_, and these were, already, practically aclass, if not a caste[6]. These natural and necessary socialdivisions, which in early times were anything but rigid, soon formedinviolable groups, and then the caste system was complete. In theperfected legal scheme what was usage becomes duty. The warrior maynot be a public priest; the priest may not serve as warrior orhusbandman. The farmer 'people' were the result of eliminating firstthe priestly, and then the fighting factors from the whole bodypolitic. But these castes were all Aryans, and as such distinguishedmost sharply, from a religious point of view, from the "fourth caste";whereas among themselves they were, in religion, equals. But they werepractically divided by interests that strongly affected thedevelopment of their original litanies. For both priest and warriorlooked down on the 'people, ' but priest and warrior feared andrespected each other. To these the third estate was necessary as abase of supplies, and together they guarded it from foes divine andmortal. But to each other they were necessary for wealth and glory, respectively. So it was that even in the earliest period the religiouslitany, to a great extent, is the book of worship of a warrior-classas prepared for it by the priest. Priest and king--these are the mainfactors in the making of the hymns of the Rig Veda, and the godslauded are chiefly the gods patronized by these classes. The thirdestate had its favorite gods, but these were little regarded, and werein a state of decadence. The slaves, too, may have had their own gods, but of these nothing is known, and one can only surmise that here andthere in certain traits, which seem to be un-Aryan, may lie anunacknowledged loan from the aborigines. 

Between the Rig Veda and the formation or completion of the next Veda, called the Atharvan, the interval appears to have been considerable, and the inherent value of the religion inculcated in the latter can beestimated aright only when this is weighed together with the fact, that, as is learned from the Atharvan's own statements, the Aryanswere now advanced further southwards and eastwards, had discovered anew land, made new gods, and were now more permanently established, the last a factor of some moment in the religious development. Indications of the difference in time may be seen in the geographicaland physical limitations of the older period as compared with those ofthe later Atharvan. When first the Aryans are found in India, at thetime of the Rig Veda, they are located, for the most part, near theUpper Indus (Sindhu). The Ganges, mentioned but twice, is barelyknown. On the west the Aryans lingered in East Kabulistan (possibly inKashmeer in the north); and even Kandahar appears, at least, to beknown as Aryan. That is to say, the 'Hindus' were still inAfghanistan, although the greater mass of the people had alreadycrossed the Indus and were progressed some distance to the east of thePunj[=a]b. That the race was still migrating may be seen from thehymns of the Rig Veda itself. [7] Their journey was to the south-east, and both before and after they reached the Indus they leftsettlements, chiefly about the Indus and in the Punj[=a]b (apost-Vedic group), not in the southern but in the northern part ofthis district. [8]

The Vedic Aryans of this first period were acquainted with the Indus, Sutlej (Çutudri), Beas (Vip[=a]ç, [Greek: Yphtsis]), Ravi (Parushni orIr[=a]vat[=i]); the pair of rivers that unite and flow into the Indus, viz. : Jhelum (Vitast[=a], Behat), and Chin[=a]b (Asikni, [9] Akesines);and knew the remoter Kubh[=a] ([Greek: Kôphhên], Kabul) and thenorthern Suv[=a]stu (Swat); while they appear to have had a legendaryremembrance of the Ras[=a], Avestan Ra[. N]ha (Rangha), supposed bysome to be identical with the Araxes or Yaxartes, but probably (seebelow) only a vague 'stream, ' the old name travelling with them ontheir wanderings; for one would err if he regarded similarity or evenidentity of appellation as a proof of real identity. [10] West of theIndus the Kurum and Gomal appear to be known also. Many rivers arementioned of which the names are given, but their location is notestablished. It is from the district west of the Indus that the mostfamous Sanskrit grammarian comes, and long after the Vedas an Indicpeople are known in the Kandahar district, while Kashmeer was a latehome of culture. The Sarasvati river, the name of which is transferredat least once in historical times, may have been originally one withthe Arghand[=a]b (on which is Kandahar), for the Persian name of thisriver (_s_ becomes _h_) is Harahvati (Arachotos, Arachosia), and it ispossible that it was really this river, and not the Indus which wasfirst lauded as the Sarasvat[=i]. In that case there would be aperfect parallel to what has probably happened in the case of theRas[=a], the name--in both cases meaning only 'the stream' (likeRhine, Arno, etc. )--being transferred to a new river. But since theIranian Harahvati fixes the first river of this name, there is here astronger proof of Indo-Iranian community than is furnished by otherexamples. [11]

These facts or suggestive parallels of names are of exceedingimportance. They indicate between the Vedic Aryans and the Iranians aconnection much closer than usually has been assumed. The bearings ofsuch a connection on the religious ideas of the two peoples areself-evident, and will often have to be touched upon in the course ofthis history. It is of less importance, from the present point ofview, to say how the Aryans entered India, but since this question isalso connected with that of the religious environment of the firstHindu poets, it will be well to state that, although, as some scholarsmaintain, and as we believe, the Hindus may have come with theIranians through the open pass of Herat (Haraiva, Haroyu), it ispossible that they parted from the latter south of the Hindukush[12](descending through the Kohistan passes from the north), and that thetwo peoples thence diverged south-east and south-west respectively. Neither assumption would prevent the country lying between theHarahvati and Vitast[=a][13] from being, for generations, a commoncamping-ground for both peoples, who were united still, but graduallydiverging. This seems, at least, to be the most reasonable explanationof the fact that these two rivers are to each people their farthestknown western and eastern limits respectively. With the exception ofthe vague and uncertain Ras[=a], the Vedic Hindu's geographicalknowledge is limited by Kandahar in the west, as is the Iranian's inthe east by the Vitast[=a]. [14] North of the Vitast[=a] Mount Tricota(Trikakud, 'three peaks') is venerated, and this together with a MountM[=u]javat, of which the situation is probably in the north, is theextent of modern knowledge in respect of the natural boundaries of theVedic people. One hears, to be sure, at a later time, of 'northernKurus, ' whose felicity is proverbial; and it is very tempting to findin this name a connection with the Iranian Kur, but the Kurus, likethe Ras[=a] and Sarasvat[=i], are re-located once (near Delhi), and nosimilarity of name can assure one of a true connection. If notcoincidences, such likenesses are too vague to be valuablehistorically. [15]

Another much disputed point must be spoken of in connection with thissubject. In the Veda and in the Avesta there is mentioned the land ofthe 'seven rivers. ' Now seven rivers are often spoken of in the RigVeda, but only once does this term mean the country, while in the'Hymn to the Rivers' no less than twenty-one streams are enumerated(RV. X. 75). In order to make out the 'seven rivers' scholars havemade different combinations, that most in favor being Müller's, thefive rivers of the Punj[=a]b together with the Kabul and (Swat or)Sarasvat[=i]. But in point of fact 'seven' quite as often means many, as it does an exact number, and this, the older use, may well beapplied here. It is quite impossible to identify the seven, and it isprobable that no Vedic poet ever imagined them to be a group of thisprecise number. It would be far easier to select a group of sevenconspicuous rivers, if anywhere, on the west of the Indus. A verynatural group from the Iranian side would be the Her[=i]r[=u]d, Hilmund, Arghand[=a]b, Kurum, Kabul, Indus, and Vitast[=a]. Againstthis, however, can be urged that the term 'seven rivers' may beBactrian, older than the Vedic period; and that, in particular, theAvesta distinguishes Vaikerta, Urva, and other districts from the'seven rivers. ' It is best to remain uncertain in so doubtful amatter, bearing in mind that even Kurukshetra, the 'holy land, ' issaid to-day to be watered by 'seven streams, ' although some say nine;apropos of which fact Cunningham remarks, giving modern examples, that"the Hindus invariably assign seven branches to all their rivers. "[16]

Within the Punj[=a]b, the Vedic Aryans, now at last really 'Hindus, 'having extended themselves to the Çutudri (Çatadru, Sutlej), aformidable barrier, and eventually having crossed even this, the lasttributary's of the Indus, descended to the jumna (Yamun[=a]), over thelittle stream called 'the Rocky' (Drishadvat[=i]) and the lesserSarasvat[=i], southeast from Lahore and near Delhi, in the regionKurukshetra, afterwards famed as the seat of the great epic war, andalways regarded as holy in the highest degree. 

Not till the time of the Atharva Veda do the Aryans appear as far eastas Benares (V[=a]r[=a]nas[=i], on the 'Varan[=a]vat[=i]'), though theSarayu is mentioned in the Rik. But this scarcely is the tributary ofthe Ganges, Gogra, for the name seems to refer to a more westernstream, since it is associated with the Gomat[=i] (Gomal). One maysurmise that in the time of the Rig Veda the Aryans knew only by namethe country east of Lucknow. It is in the Punj[=a]b and a little tothe west and east of it (how far it is impossible to state withaccuracy) where lies the real theatre of activity of the Rig Vedicpeople. 

Some scholars believe that this people had already heard of the twooceans. This point again is doubtful in the extreme. No descriptionsimply a knowledge of ocean, and the word for ocean means merely a'confluence' of waters, or in general a great oceanic body of waterlike the air. As the Indus is too wide to be seen across, the name mayapply in most cases to this river. An allusion to 'eastern and westernfloods, '[17] which is held by some to be conclusive evidence for aknowledge of the two seas, is taken by others to apply to theair-oceans. The expression may apply simply to rivers, for it is saidthat the Vip[=a]ç and Çutudr[=i] empty into the 'ocean', i. E. , theIndus or the Çutudr[=i]'s continuation. [18] One late verse alonespeaks of the Sarasvat[=i] pouring into the ocean, and this wouldindicate the Arabian Sea. [19] Whether the Bay of Bengal was known, even by hearsay and in the latest time of this period, remainsuncertain. As a body the Aryans of the Rig Veda were certainly notacquainted with either ocean. Some straggling adventurers probablypushed down the Indus, but Zimmer doubtless is correct in assertingthat the popular emigration did not extend further south than thejunction of the Indus and the Pa[=n]canada (the united fiverivers). [20] The extreme south-eastern geographical limit of the RigVedic people may be reckoned (not, however, in Oldenberg's opinion, with any great certainty) as being in Northern Beh[=a]r (M[=a]gadha). The great desert, Marusthala, formed an impassable southern obstaclefor the first immigrants. [21]

On the other hand, the two oceans are well known to the Atharva Veda, while the geographical (and hence chronological) difference betweenthe Rik and the Atharvan is furthermore illustrated by the followingfacts: in the Rig Veda wolf and lion are the most formidable beasts;the tiger is unknown and the elephant seldom alluded to; while in theAtharvan the tiger has taken the lion's place and the elephant is amore familiar figure. Now the tiger has his domicile in the swampyland about Benares, to which point is come the Atharvan Aryan, but notthe Rig Vedic people. Here too, in the Atharvan, the panther is firstmentioned, and for the first time silver and iron are certainlyreferred to. In the Rig Veda the metals are bronze and gold, silverand iron being unknown. [22] Not less significant are the trees. Theficus religiosa, the tree later called the 'tree of the gods'(_deva-sadana, açvattha_), under which are fabled to sit thedivinities in heaven, is scarcely known in the Rig Veda, but is wellknown in the Atharvan; while India's grandest tree, the _nyagrodha_, ficus indica, is known to the Atharvan and Brahmanic period, but isutterly foreign to the Rig Veda. Zimmer deems it no less significantthat fishes are spoken of in the Atharvan and are mentioned only oncein the Rig Veda, but this may indicate a geographical difference lessthan one of custom. In only one doubtful passage is the north-eastmonsoon alluded to. The storm so vividly described in the Rig Veda isthe south-west monsoon which is felt in the northern Punj[=a]b. Thenorth-east monsoon is felt to the southeast of the Punj[=a]b, possiblyanother indication of geographical extension, withal within the limitsof the Rig Veda itself. 

The seat of culture shifts in the Brahmanic period, which follows thatof the Vedic poems, and is found partly in the 'holy land' of thewest, and partly in the east (Beh[=a]r, Tirhut). [23] The literature ofthis period comes from Aryans that have passed out of the Punj[=a]b. Probably, as we have said, settlements were left all along the line ofprogress. Even before the wider knowledge of the post-Alexandrineimperial age (at which time there was a north-western militaryretrogression), and, from the Vedic point of view, as late as the endof the Brahmanic period, in the time of the Upanishads, the northwestseems still to have been familiarly known. [24]

 * * * * *

 FOOTNOTES:

 [Footnote 1: We take this opportunity of stating that by the religions of the Aryan Hindus we mean the religions of a people who, undoubtedly, were full-blooded Aryans at first, however much their blood may have been diluted later by un-Aryan admixture. Till the time of Buddhism the religious literature is fairly Aryan. In the period of "Hinduism" neither people nor religion can claim to be quite Aryan. ]

 [Footnote 2: If, as thinks Schrader, the Aryans' original seat was on the Volga, then one must imagine the Indo-Iranians to have kept together in a south-eastern emigration. ]

 [Footnote 3: That is to say, frequent reference is made to 'five tribes. ' Some scholars deny that the tribes are Aryan alone, and claim that 'five, ' like seven, means 'many. ']

 [Footnote 4: RV. III. 33. 11; 53. 12. Zimmer, _Altindisches Leben_, p. 160, incorrectly identifies _viç_ with tribus (Leist, _Rechtsgeschichte_, p. 105). ]

 [Footnote 5: Viçv[=a]mitra. A few of the hymns are not ascribed to priests at all (some were made by women; some by 'royal-seers, ' _i. E. _ kings, or, at least, not priests). ]

 [Footnote 6: Caste, at first, means 'pure, ' and signifies that there is a moral barrier between the caste and outcast. The word now practically means class, even impure class. The native word means 'color, ' and the first formal distinction was national, (white) Aryan and 'black-man. ' The precedent class-distinctions among the Aryans themselves became fixed in course of time, and the lines between Aryans, in some regards, were drawn almost as sharply as between Aryan and slave. ]

 [Footnote 7: Compare RV. Iii. 33, and in I. 131. 5, the words: 'God Indra, thou didst help thy suppliants; one river after another they gained who pursued glory. ']

 [Footnote 8: Thomas, _Rivers of the Vedas_ (JRAS. Xv. 357 ff. ; Zimmer, loc. Cit. Cap. 1). ]

 [Footnote 9: Later called the Candrabh[=a]ga. For the Jumna and Sarayu see below. ]

 [Footnote 10: This is the error into which falls Brunnhofer, whose theory that the Vedic Aryans were still settled near the Caspian has been criticised above (p. 15). ]

 [Footnote 11: Compare Geiger, _Ostiranische Cultur_, p. 81. See also Muir, OST. Ii. P. 355. ]

 [Footnote 12: Lassen, I. P. 616, decided in favor of the western passes of the Hindukush. ]

 [Footnote 13: From Kandahar in Afghanistan to a point a little west of Lahore. In the former district, according to the Avesta, the dead are buried (an early Indian custom, not Iranian). ]

 [Footnote 14: Geiger identifies the Vita[=g]uhaiti or Vitanghvati with the Oxus, but this is improbable. It lies in the extreme east and forms the boundary between the true believers and the 'demon-worshippers' (Yasht, 5, 77; Geiger, _loc. Cit. _ p. 131, note 5). The Persian name is the same with Vitast[=a], which is located in the Punj[=a]b. ]

 [Footnote 15: On the Kurus compare Zimmer (loc. Cit. ), who thinks Kashmeer is meant, and Geiger, loc. Cit. P. 39. Other geographical reminiscences may lie in Vedic and Brahmanic allusions to Bactria, Balkh (AV. ); to the Derbiker (around Meru? RV. ), and to Manu's mountain, whence he descended after the flood (Naubandhana): _Çatapatha Br[=a]hmana_, I. 8. 1, 6, 'Manu's descent'. ]

 [Footnote 16: _Arch. Survey_, xiv. P. 89; Thomas, loc. Cit. P. 363. ]

 [Footnote 17: RV. X. 136. 5. ]

 [Footnote 18: RV. Iii. 33. 2. ]

 [Footnote 19: RV. Vii. 95. 2. Here the Sarasvat[=i] can be only the Indus. ]

 [Footnote 20: Pa[=n]ca-nada, Punjnud, Persian 'Punj[=a]b, ' the five streams, Vitas[=a], Asikn[=i], Ir[=a]vat[=i], Vip[=a]ç, Çutudr[=i]. The Punjnud point is slowly moving up stream; Vyse, JRAS. X. 323. The Sarayu may be the Her[=i]r[=u]d, Geiger, loc. Cit. P. 72. ]

 [Footnote 21: Muir, OST. Ii. 351; Zimmer, loc. Cit. P. 51 identifies the _K[=i]katas_ of RV. Iii. 53. 14 with the inhabitants of Northern Beh[=a]r. Marusthala is called simply 'the desert. ']

 [Footnote 22: The earlier _áyas_, Latin _aes_, means bronze not iron, as Zimmer has shown, loc. Cit. P. 51. Pischel, _Vedische Studien_, I, shows that elephants are mentioned more often than was supposed (but rarely in family-books). ]

 [Footnote 23: Weber, _Indische Studien, _ I. P. 228; Oldenberg, _Buddha_, pp. 399 ff. , 410. ]

 [Footnote 24: Very lately (1893) Franke has sought to show that the P[=a]li dialect of India is in part referable to the western districts (Kandahar), and has made out an interesting case for his novel theory (ZDMG. Xlvii. P. 595). ]

 * * * * *

CHAPTER III. 

THE RIG VEDA. THE UPPER GODS. 

The hymns of the Rig Veda may be divided into three classes, those inwhich are especially lauded the older divinities, those in whichappear as most prominent the sacrificial gods, and those in which along-weakened polytheism is giving place to the light of a clearerpantheism. In each category there are hymns of different age andquality, for neither did the more ancient with the growth of newdivinities cease to be revered, nor did pantheism inhibit the formalacknowledgment of the primitive pantheon. The cult once establishedpersisted, and even when, at a later time, all the gods had beenreduced to nominal fractions of the All-god, their ritualisticindividuality still was preserved. The chief reason for this lies inthe nature of these gods and in the attitude of the worshipper. Nomatter how much the cult of later gods might prevail, the other gods, who represented the daily phenomena of nature, were still visible, awe-inspiring, divine. The firmest pantheist questioned not theadvisability of propitiating the sun-god, however much he might regardthis god as but a part of one that was greater. Belief in India wasnever so philosophical that the believer did not dread the lightning, and seek to avert it by praying to the special god that wielded it. But active veneration in later times was extended in fact only to thestrong Powers, while the more passive divinities, although they werekept as a matter of form in the ceremonial, yet had in reality onlytongue-worshippers. 

With some few exceptions, however, it will be found impossible to saywhether any one deity belonged to the first pantheon. 

The best one can do is to separate the mass of gods from those thatbecome the popular gods, and endeavor to learn what was the characterof each, and what were the conceptions of the poets in regard both tohis nature, and to his relations with man. A different grouping of thegods (that indicated below) will be followed, therefore, in ourexposition. 

After what has been said in the introductory chapter concerning thenecessity of distinguishing between good and bad poetry, it may beregarded as incumbent upon us to seek to make such a division of thehymns as shall illustrate our words. But we shall not attempt to dothis here, because the distinction between late mechanical and poetichymns is either very evident, and it would be superfluous to burdenthe pages with the trash contained in the former, [1] or thedistinction is one liable to reversion at the hands of those criticswhose judgment differs from ours, for there are of course some hymnsthat to one may seem poetical and to another, artificial. Moreover, weadmit that hymns of true feeling may be composed late as well asearly, while as to beauty of style the chances are that the bestliterary production will be found among the latest rather than amongthe earliest hymns. 

It would, indeed, be admissible, if one had any certainty in regard tothe age of the different parts of the Rig Veda, simply to divide thehymns into early, middle, and late, as they are sometimes divided inphilological works, but here one rests on the weakest of all supportsfor historical judgment, a linguistic and metrical basis, when one isignorant alike of what may have been accomplished by imitation, and ofthe work of those later priests who remade the poems of theirancestors. 

Best then, because least hazardous, appears to be the method which wehave followed, namely, to take up group by group the most importantdeities arranged in the order of their relative importance, and bystudying each to arrive at a fair understanding of the pantheon as awhole. The Hindus themselves divided their gods into highest, middle, and lowest, or those of the upper sky, the atmosphere, and the earth. This division, from the point of view of one who would enter into thespirit of the seers and at the same time keep in mind the changes towhich that spirit gradually was subjected, is an excellent one. For, as will be seen, although the earlier order of regard may have beenfrom below upwards, this order does not apply to the literarymonuments. These show on the contrary a worship which steadily tendsfrom above earthwards; and the three periods into which may be dividedall Vedic theology are first that of the special worship of sky-gods, when less attention is paid to others; then that of the atmosphericand meteorological divinities; and finally that of terrestrial powers, each later group absorbing, so to speak, the earlier, and therewithpreparing the developing Hindu intelligence for the reception of theuniversal god with whom closes the series. 

Other factors than those of an inward development undoubtedly were atwork in the formation of this growth. Especially prominent is theamalgamation of the gods of the lower classes with those of thepriest-hood. Climatic environment, too, conditioned theologicalevolution, if not spiritual advance. The cult of the mid-sphere god, Indra, was partly the result of the changing atmospheric surroundingsof the Hindus as they advanced into India. The storms and the sun werenot those of old. The tempests were more terrific, the display ofdivine power was more concentrated in the rage of the elements; whileappreciation of the goodness of the sun became tinged withapprehension of evil, and he became a deadly power as well as onebeneficent. Then the relief of rain after drought gave to Indra thecharacter of a benign god as well as of a fearful one. Nor werelacking in the social condition certain alterations which workedtogether with climatic changes. The segregated mass of the originalpeople, the braves that hung about the king, a warrior-class rapidlybecoming a caste, and politically the most important caste, took thegod of thunder and lightning for their god of battle. The fightingrace naturally exalted to the highest the fighting god. Then came intoprominence the priestly caste, which gradually taught the warrior thatmind was stronger than muscle. But this caste was one of thinkers. Their divinity was the product of reflection. Indra remained, butyielded to a higher power, and the god thought out by the priestsbecame God. Yet it must not be supposed that the cogitative energy ofthe Brahman descended upon the people's gods and suddenly produced areligious revolution. In India no intellectual advance is madesuddenly. The older divinities show one by one the transformation thatthey suffered at the hands of theosophic thinkers. Before theestablishment of a general Father-god, and long before that of thepantheistic All-god, the philosophical leaven was actively at work. Itwill be seen operative at once in the case of the sun-god, and, indeed, there were few of the older divinities that were untouched byit. It worked silently and at first esoterically. One reads of thegods' 'secret names, ' of secrets in theology, which 'are not to berevealed, ' till at last the disguise is withdrawn, and it isdiscovered that all the mystery of former generations has been leadingup to the declaration now made public: 'all these gods are but namesof the One. '

THE SUN-GOD. 

The hymn which was translated in the first chapter gives an epitome ofthe simpler conceptions voiced in the few whole hymns to the sun. Butthere is a lower and a higher view of this god. He is the shining god_par excellence_, the _deva, s[=u]rya_, [2] the red ball in the sky. But he is also an active force, the power that wakens, rouses, enlivens, and as such it is he that gives all good things to mortalsand to gods. As the god that gives life he (with others)[3] is theauthor of birth, and is prayed to for children. From above he looksdown upon earth, and as with his one or many steeds he drives over thefirmament he observes all that is passing below. He has these, thephysical side and the spiritual side, under two names, the glowingone, S[=u]rya, and the enlivener, Savitar;[4] but he is also the goodgod who bestows benefits, and as such he was known, probably locally, by the name of Bhaga. Again, as a herdsman's god, possibly at firstalso a local deity, he is P[=u]shan (the meaning is almost the samewith that of Savitar). As the 'mighty one' he is Vishnu, who measuresheaven in three strides. In general, the conception of the sun as aphysical phenomenon will be found voiced chiefly in the family-books:"The sightly form rises on the slope of the sky as the swift-goingsteed carries him . . . Seven sister steeds carry him. "[5] This is theprevailing utterance. Sometimes the sun is depicted under a medley ofmetaphors: "A bull, a flood, a red bird, he has entered his father'splace; a variegated stone he is set in the midst of the sky; he hasadvanced and guards the two ends of space. "[6] One after the other thegod appears to the poets as a bull, a bird, [7] a steed, a stone, ajewel, a flood, a torch-holder, [8] or as a gleaming car set in heaven. Nor is the sun independent. As in the last image of a chariot, [9] so, without symbolism, the poet speaks of the sun as made to rise byVaruna and Mitra: "On their wonted path go Varuna and Mitra when inthe sky they cause to rise Surya, whom they made to avert darkness";where, also, the sun, under another image, is the "support of thesky. "[10] Nay, in this simpler view, the sun is no more than the "eyeof Mitra Varuna, "[11] a conception formally retained even when the sunin the same breath is spoken of as pursuing Dawn like a lover, and asbeing the 'soul of the universe' (I. 115. 1-2). In the older passagesthe later moral element is almost lacking, nor is there maintained thesame physical relation between Sun and Dawn. In the earlier hymns theDawn is the Sun's mother, from whom he proceeds. [12] It is the "Dawnsproduced the Sun, " in still more natural language;[13] whereas, theidea of the lover-Sun following the Dawn scarcely occurs in thefamily-books. [14] Distinctly late, also, is the identification of thesun with the all-spirit _([=a]tm[=a], _ I. 115. 1), and the followingprayer: "Remove, O sun, all weakness, illness, and bad dreams. " Inthis hymn, X. 37. 14, S[=u]rya is the son of the sky, but he isevidently one with Savitar, who in V. 82. 4, removes bad dreams, as inX. 100. 8, he removes sickness. Men are rendered 'sinless' by the sun(IV. 54. 3; X. 37. 9) exactly as they are by the other gods, Indra, Varuna, etc. In a passage that refers to the important triad of sun, wind and fire, X. 158. I ff. , the sun is invoked to 'save from thesky, ' _i. E. _ from all evils that may come from the upper regions;while in the same book the sun, like Indra, is represented as theslayer of demons _(asuras)_ and dragons; as the slayer, also, of thepoet's rivals; as giving long life to the worshipper, and as himselfdrinking sweet _soma_. This is one of the poems that seem to be atonce late and of a forced and artificial character (X. 170). 

Although S[=u]rya is differentiated explicitly from Savitar (V. 81. 4, "Savitar, thou joyest in S[=u]a's rays"), yet do many of the hymnsmake no distinction between them. The Enlivener is naturally extolledin fitting phrase, to tally with his title: "The shining-god, theEnlivener, is ascended to enliven the world"; "He gives protection, wealth and children" (II. 38. 1; IV. 53. 6-7). The later hymns seem, asone might expect, to show greater confusion between the attributes ofthe physical and spiritual sun. But what higher power under eithername is ascribed to the sun in the later hymns is not due to a higheror more developed homage of the sun as such. On the contrary, as withmany other deities, the more the praise the less the individualworship. It is as something more than the sun that the god laterreceives more fulsome devotion. And, in fact, paradoxical as it seems, it is a decline in sun-worship proper that is here registered. Thealtar-fire becomes more important, and is revered in the sun, whosehymns, at most, are few, and in part mechanical. 

Bergaigne in his great work, _La Religion Védique_, has laid muchstress on sexual antithesis as an element in Vedic worship. It seemsto us that this has been much exaggerated. The sun is masculine; thedawn, feminine. But there is no indication of a primitive antithesisof male and female in their relations. What occurs appears to be ofadventitious character. For though sun and dawn are often connected, the latter is represented first as his mother and afterwards as his'wife' or mistress. Even in the later hymns, where the maritalrelation is recognized, it is not insisted upon. But Bergaigne[15] isright in saying that in the Rig Veda the sun does not play the part ofan evil power, and it is a good illustration of the difference betweenRik and Atharvan, when Ehni cites, to prove that the sun is likedeath, only passages from the Atharvan and the later Brahmanicliterature. [16]

When, later, the Hindus got into a region where the sun was deadly, they said, "Yon burning sun-god is death, " but in the Rig Veda' theysaid, "Yon sun is the source of life, "[17] and no other conception ofthe sun is to be found in the Rig Veda. 

There are about a dozen hymns to S[=u]rya, and as many to Savitar, inthe Rig Veda. [18] It is noteworthy that in the family-books the hymnsto Savitar largely prevail, while those to S[=u]rya are chiefly latein position or content. Thus, in the family-books, where are foundeight or nine of the dozen hymns to Savitar, there are to S[=u]rya butthree or four, and of these the first is really to Savitar and theAçvins; the second is an imitation of the first; the third appears tobe late; and the fourth is a fragment of somewhat doubtful antiquity. The first runs as follows: "The altar-fire has seen well-pleased thedawns' beginning and the offering to the gleaming ones; come, O yehorsemen (Açvins), to the house of the pious man; the sun (S[=u]rya), the shining-god, rises with light. The shining-god Savitar haselevated his beams, swinging his banner like a good (hero) raiding forcattle. According to rule go Varuna and Mitra when they make rise inthe sky the sun (S[=u]rya) whom they have created to dissipatedarkness, being (gods) sure of their habitation and unswerving inintent. Seven yellow swift-steeds bear this S[=u]rya, the seer of allthat moves. Thou comest with swiftest steeds unspinning the web, separating, O shining-god, the black robe. The rays of S[=u]ryaswinging (his banner) have laid darkness like a skin in the waters. Unconnected, unsupported, downward extending, why does not this (god)fall down? With what nature goes he, who knows (literally, 'who hasseen')? As a support he touches and guards the vault of the sky" (IV. 13). 

There is here, no more than in the early hymn from the first book, translated in the first chapter, any worship of material phenomena. S[=u]rya is worshipped as Savitar, either expressly so called, or withall the attributes of the spiritual. The hymn that follows this[19] isa bald imitation. In V. 47 there are more or less certain signs oflateness, _e. G. , _ in the fourth stanza ("four carry him, . . . And tengive the child to drink that he may go, " etc. ) there is the jugglingwith unexplained numbers, which is the delight of the laterpriesthood. Moreover, this hymn is addressed formally to Mitra-Varunaand Agni, and not to the sun-god, who is mentioned only in metaphor;while the final words _námo divé_, 'obeisance to heaven, ' show thatthe sun is only indirectly addressed. One cannot regard hymnsaddressed to Mitra-Varuna and S[=u]rya (with other gods) as primarilyintended for S[=u]rya, who in these hymns is looked upon as thesubject of Mitra and Varuna, as in VII. 62; or as the "eye" of the twoother gods, and 'like Savitar' in VII. 63. So in VII. 66. 14-16, amere fragment of a hymn is devoted exclusively to S[=u]rya as "lord ofall that stands and goes. " But in these hymns there are some veryinteresting touches. Thus in VII. 60. 1, the sun does not makesinless, but he announces to Mitra and Varuna that the mortal issinless. There are no other hymns than these addressed to S[=u]rya, save those in the first and tenth books, of which nine stanzas of I. 50 (see above) may be reckoned early, while I. 115, where the sun isthe soul of the universe, and at the same time the eye ofMitra-Varuna, is probably late; and I. 163 is certainly so, whereinthe sun is identified with Yama, Trita, etc. ; is 'like Varuna'; and ishimself a steed, described as having three connections in the sky, three in the waters, three in the sea. In one of the hymns in thetenth book, also a mystical song, the sun is the 'bird' of the sky, ametaphor which soon gives another figure to the pantheon in the formof Garutman, the sun-bird, of whose exploits are told strange tales inthe epic, where he survives as Garuda. In other hymns S[=u]rya avertscarelessness at the sacrifice, guards the worshipper, and slaysdemons. A mechanical little hymn describes him as measuring the'thirty stations. ' Not one of these hymns has literary freshness orbeauty of any kind. They all belong to the class of stereotypedproductions, which differ in origin and content from the hymns firstmentioned. [20]

SAVITAR. 

Turning to Savitar one finds, of course, many of the same descriptivetraits as in the praise of S[=u]rya, his more material self. But withthe increased spirituality come new features. Savitar is not alone thesun that rises; he is also the sun that sets; and is extolled as such. There are other indications that most of the hymns composed for himare to accompany the sacrifice, either of the morning or of theevening. In II. 38, an evening song to Savitar, there are inner signsthat the hymn was made for rubrication, but here some fine versesoccur: "The god extends his vast hand, his arms above there--and allhere obeys him; to his command the waters move, and even the winds'blowing ceases on all sides. " Again: "Neither Indra, Varuna, Mitra, Aryaman, Rudra, nor the demons, impair his law" We call attention hereto the fact that the Rig Veda contains a strong(stong in the original)current of demonology, much stronger than has been pointed out byscholars intent on proving the primitive loftiness of the Vedicreligion. 

In III. 62. 7-9 there are some verses to P[=u]shan, following which isthe most holy couplet of the Rig Veda, to repeat which is essentiallyto repeat the Veda. It is the famous G[=a]yatr[=i] or S[=a]vitr[=i]hymnlet (10-12):

 Of Savitar, the heavenly, that longed-for glory may we win, And may himself inspire our prayers. [21]

Whitney (loc. Cit. ) says of this hymn that it is not remarkable in anyway and that no good reason has ever been given for its fame. The goodreason for this fame, in our opinion, is that the longed-for glory wasinterpreted later as a revealed indication of primitive pantheism, andthe verses were understood to express the desire of absorption intothe sun, which, as will be seen, was one of the first divine bodies tobe accepted as the type of the All-god. This is also the intent of thestanzas added to I. 50 (above, p. 17), where S[=u]rya is "the highestlight, the god among gods, " mystic words, taken by later philosophers, and quite rightly, to be an expression of pantheism. The esotericmeaning of the G[=a]yatr[=i] presumably made it popular among theenlightened. Exoterically the sun was only the goal of the soul, or, in pure pantheism, of the sight. In the following[22] thesin-forgiving side of Savitar is developed, whereby he comes intoconnection with Varuna:

 God Savitar deserveth now a song from us; To-day, with guiding word, let men direct him here. He who distributes gifts unto the sons of men, Shall here on us bestow whatever thing is best; For thou, O Savitar, dost first upon the gods Who sacrifice deserve, lay immortality, The highest gift, and then to mortals dost extend As their apportionment a long enduring life. Whatever thoughtless thing against the race of gods We do in foolishness and human insolence, Do thou from that, O Savitar, mid gods and men Make us here sinless, etc. 

But if this song smacks of the sacrifice, still more so does V. 81, where Savitar is the 'priest's priest, ' the 'arranger of sacrifice, 'and is one with P[=u]shan. He is here the swift horse (see above) andmore famous as the divider of time than anything else. In fact thiswas the first ritualistic glory of Savitar, that he divides the timefor sacrifice. But he receives more in the light of being the type ofother luminous divinities. In the next hymn, another late effort (V. 82; see the dream in vs. 4), there may be an imitation of theG[=a]yatr[=i]. Savitar is here the All-god and true lord, and freesfrom sin. There is nothing new or striking in the hymns VI. 71; VII. 38 and 45. The same golden hands, and references to the sacrificeoccur here. Allusions to the Dragon of the Deep, who is called uponwith Savitar (VII. 38. 5), and the identification of Savitar withBhaga (ib. 6) are the most important items to be gleaned from theserather stupid hymns. In other hymns not in the family-books(II. -VIII. ), there is a fragment, X. 139. 1-3, and another, I. 22. 5-8. In the latter, Agni's (Fire's) title, 'son of waters, ' is givento Savitar, who is virtually identified with Agni in the last part ofthe Rig Veda; and in the former hymn there is an interestingdiscrimination made between Savitar and P[=u]shan, who obeys him. Thelast hymn in the collection to Savitar, X. 149, although late andplainly intended for the sacrifice (vs. 5), is interesting as showinghow the philosophical speculation worked about Savitar as a centre. 'He alone, he the son of the waters, knows the origin of water, whencearose the world. ' This is one of the early speculations which recur sofrequently in the Brahmanic period, wherein the origin of 'all this'(the universe) is referred to water. A hymn to Savitar in the firstbook contains as excellent a song as is given to the sun under thisname. It is neither a morning nor an evening song in its originalstate, but mentions all the god's functions, without the later moraltraits so prominent elsewhere, and with the old threefold divisioninstead of thrice-three heavens. 

 TO SAVITAR (I. 35). 

 I call on Agni first (the god of fire) for weal; I call on Mitra-Varuna to aid me here; I call upon the Night, who quiets all that moves; On Savitar, the shining god, I call for help. 

After this introductory invocation begins the real song in a differentmetre. 

 Through space of darkness wending comes he hither, Who puts to rest th' immortal and the mortal, On golden car existent things beholding, The god that rouses, Savitar, the shining; Comes he, the shining one, comes forward, upward, Comes with two yellow steeds, the god revered, Comes shining Savitar from out the distance, All difficulties far away compelling. His pearl-adorned, high, variegated chariot, Of which the pole is golden, he, revered, Hath mounted, Savitar, whose beams are brilliant, Against the darksome spaces strength assuming. Among the people gaze the brown white-footed (Steeds) that the chariot drag whose pole is golden. All peoples stand, and all things made, forever, Within the lap of Savitar, the heavenly. 

 [There are three heavens of Savitar, two low ones, [23] One, men-restraining, in the realm of Yama. As on (his) chariot-pole[24] stand all immortals, Let him declare it who has understood it!]

 Across air-spaces gazes he, the eagle, Who moves in secret, th' Asura, [25] well-guiding, Where is (bright) S[=u]rya now? who understands it? And through which sky is now his ray extending?

 He looks across the earth's eight elevations, [26] The desert stations three, and the seven rivers, The gold-eyed shining god is come, th' Arouser, To him that worships giving wealth and blessings. 

 The golden-handed Savitar, the active one, Goes earth and heaven between, compels demoniac powers, To S[=u]rya gives assistance, and through darksome space Extends to heaven, etc. [27]

P[=U]SHAN AND BHAGA AS SUN-GODS. 

With P[=u]shan, the 'bestower of prosperity, ' appears an ancient sideof sun-worship. While under his other names the sun has lost, to agreat extent, the attributes of a bucolic solar deity, in the case ofP[=u]shan he appears still as a god whose characteristics are bucolic, war-like, and priestly, that is to say, even as he is venerated by thethree masses of the folk. It will not do, of course, to distinguishtoo sharply between the first two divisions, but one can very wellcompare P[=u]shan in these rôles with Helios guiding his herds, andApollo swaying armed hosts. It is customary to regard P[=u]shan as toobucolic a deity, but this is only one side of him. He apparently isthe sun, as herdsmen look upon him, and in this figure is the objectof ridicule with the warrior-class who, especially in one family ortribe, take a more exalted view of him. Consequently, as in the caseof Varuna, one need not read into the hymns more than they offer tosee that, not to speak of the priestly view, there are at least twoP[=u]shans, in the Rig Veda itself. [28]

As the god 'with braided hair, ' and as the 'guardian of cattle, 'P[=u]shan offers, perhaps, in these particulars, the original ofRudra's characteristics, who, in the Vedic period, and later asRudra-Çiva, is also a 'guardian of cattle' and has the 'braided hair. '

Bergaigne identifies P[=u]shan with Soma, with whom the poets were aptto identify many other deities, but there seems to be littlesimilarity originally. [29] It is only in the wider circles of eachgod's activity that the two approach each other. Both gods, it istrue, wed S[=u]rya (the female sun-power), and Soma, like P[=u]shan, finds lost cattle. But it must be recognized once for all thatidentical attributes are not enough to identify Vedic gods. Who giveswealth? Indra, Soma, Agni, Heaven and Earth, Wind, Sun, the Maruts, etc. Who forgives sins? Agni, Varuna, Indra, the Sun, etc. Who helpsin war? Agni, P[=u]shan, Indra, Soma, etc. Who sends rain? Indra, Parjanya, Soma, the Maruts, P[=u]shan, etc. Who weds Dawn? The Açvins, the Sun, etc. The attributes must be functional or the identificationis left incomplete. 

The great disparity in descriptions of P[=u]shan may be illustrated bysetting VI. 48. 19 beside X. 92. 13. The former passage merelydeclares that P[=u]shan is a war-leader "over mortals, and like thegods in glory"; the latter, that he is "distinguished by all divineattributes"; that is to say, what has happened in the case of Savitarhas happened here also. The individuality of P[=u]shan dies out, butthe vaguer he becomes the more grandiloquently is he praised andassociated with other powers; while for lack of definite laudationgeneral glory is ascribed to him. The true position of P[=u]shan inthe eyes of the warrior is given unintentionally by one who says, [30]"I do not scorn thee, O P[=u]shan, " _i. E. , _ as do most people, onaccount of thy ridiculous attributes. For P[=u]shan does not drink_soma_ like Indra, but eats mush. So another devout believer says:"P[=u]shan is not described by them that call him an eater ofmush. "[31] The fact that he was so called speaks louder than the piousprotest. Again, P[=u]shan is simply bucolic. He uses the goad, which, however, according to Bergaigne, is the thunderbolt! So, too, the cowsthat P[=u]shan is described as guiding have been interpreted as cloudsor 'dawns. ' But they may be taken without 'interpretation' asreal cows. [32] P[=u]shan drives the cows, he is armed with a goad, andeats mush; bucolic throughout, yet a sun-god. It is on these linesthat his finding-qualities are to be interpreted. He finds lostcattle, [33] a proper business for such a god; but Bergaigne will seein this a transfer from P[=u]shan's finding of rain and of _soma_. [34]P[=u]shan, too, directs the furrow[35]

Together with Vishnu and Bhaga this god is invoked at sacrifices, (afact that says little against or for his original sun-ship), [36] andhe is intimately connected with Indra. His sister is his mistress, andhis mother is his wife (Dawn and Night?) according to the meagreaccounts given in VI. 55. 4-5. [37] As a god of increase he is invokedin the marriage-rite, X. 85. 37. 

As Savitar and all sun-gods are at once luminous and dark, soP[=u]shan has a clear and again a revered (terrible) appearance; he islike day and night, like Dyaus (the sky); at one time bright, atanother, plunged in darkness, VI. 58. 1. Quite like Savitar he is theshining god who "looks upon all beings and sees them all together"; heis the "lord of the path, " the god of travellers; he is invoked todrive away evil spirits, thieves, footpads, and all workers of evil;he makes paths for the winning of wealth; he herds the stars anddirects all with _soma_. He carries a golden axe or sword, and isborne through air and water on golden ships; and it is he that letsdown the sun's golden wheel. These simpler attributes appear for themost part in the early hymns. In what seem to be later hymns, he isthe mighty one who "carries the thoughts of all"; he islike _soma_ (the drink), and attends to the filter; he is "lord of thepure"; the "one born of old, " and is especially called upon to helpthe poets' hymns. [38] It is here, in the last part of the Rig Veda, that he appears as [Greek: psuchopompós], who "goes and returns, "escorting the souls of the dead to heaven. He is the sun's messenger, and is differentiated from Savitar in X. 139. 1. [39] Apparently he wasa god affected most by the Bharadv[=a]ja family (to which is ascribedthe sixth book of the Rig Veda) where his worship was extended morebroadly. He seems to have become the special war-god of this family, and is consequently invoked with Indra and the Maruts (though this mayhave been merely in his rôte as sun). The goats, his steeds, are alsoan attribute of the Scandinavian war-god Thor (Kaegi, _Rig Veda_, note210), so that his bucolic character rests more in his goad, food, andplough. 

Bhaga is recognized as an [=A]ditya (luminous deity) and was perhaps asun-god of some class, possibly of all, as the name in Slavic is stillkept in the meaning 'god, ' literally 'giver. ' In the Rig Veda the wordmeans, also, simply god, as in _bhágabhakta_, 'given by gods'; but asa name it is well known, and when thus called Bhaga is still thegiver, 'the bestower' _(vidhart[=á])_. As _bhaga_ is also an epithetof Savitar, the name may not stand for an originally distinctpersonality. Bhaga has but one hymn. [40] There is in fact no reasonwhy Bhaga should be regarded as a sun-god, except for the formalidentification of him as an [=A]dityà, that is as the son of Aditi(Boundlessness, see below); but neither S[=u]rya nor Savitar isoriginally an [=A]dityà, and in Iranic _bagha_ is only an epithet ofOrmuzd. 

 HYMNS TO P[=U]SHAN AND BHAGA. 

 To P[=U]SHAN (vi. 56). 

 The man who P[=u]shan designates With words like these, 'mush-eater he, ' By him the god is not described. 

 With P[=u]shan joined in unison That best of warriors, truest lord, Indra, the evil demons slays. 

 'T is he, the best of warriors, drives The golden chariot of the sun Among the speckled kine (the clouds). 

 Whate'er we ask of thee to-day, O wonder-worker, praised and wise, Accomplish thou for us that prayer. 

 And this our band, which hunts for kine, [41] Successful make for booty's gain; Afar, O P[=u]shan, art thou praised. 

 We seek of thee success, which far From ill, and near to wealth shall be; For full prosperity to-day; And full prosperity the morn. [42]

 To BHAGA (vii. 41). 

 Early on Agni call we, early Indra call; Early call Mitra, Varuna, the Horsemen twain; Early, too, Bhaga, P[=u]shan, and the Lord of Strength; And early Soma will we call, and Rudra too. 

This stanza has been prefixed to the hymn by virtue of the catch-word'early' (in the morning), with which really begins this prosaic poem(in different metre):

 The early-conquering mighty Bhaga call we, The son of Boundlessness, the gift-bestower, [43] Whom weak and strong, and e'en the king, regarding, Cry _bhágam bhakshi_, 'give to me the giver. '[44]

 O Bhaga, leader Bhaga, true bestower, O Bhaga, help this prayer, to us give (riches), O Bhaga, make us grow in kine and horses, O Bhaga, eke in men, men-wealthy be we!

 And now may we be rich, be _bhaga_-holders, [45] Both at the (day's) approach, and eke at midday, And at the sun's departure, generous giver. The favor of the gods may we abide in. 

 O gods, (to us) be Bhaga really _bhaga_, [46] By means of him may we be _bhaga_-holders. As such an one do all, O Bhaga, call thee, As such, O Bhaga, be to-day our leader. 

 May dawns approach the sacrifice, the holy Place, like to Dadhikr[=a], [47] like horses active, Which bring a chariot near; so, leading Bhaga, Who finds good things, may they approach, and bring him. 

As this is the only hymn addressed to Bhaga, and as it proves itselfto have been made for altar service (in style as well as in specialmention of the ceremony), it is evident that Bhaga, although calledAditi's son, is but a god of wealth and (like Ança, the Apportioner)very remotely connected with physical functions. But the hymn appearsto be so late that it cannot throw much light on the originalconception of the deity. We rather incline to doubt whether Bhaga wasever, strictly speaking, a sun-god, and think that he was made somerely because the sun (Savitar) was called _bhaga_. A (Greek: Zehys)Bagaios was worshipped by the Phrygians, while in the Avesta and as aSlavic god Bhaga has no especial connection with the sun. It must beacknowledged, however, that every form of the sun-god is especiallylauded for generosity. 

VISHNU. 

In the person of Vishnu the sun is extolled under another name, whichin the period of the Rig Veda was still in the dawn of its glory. Thehymns to Vishnu are few; his fame rests chiefly on the three strideswith which he crosses heaven, on his making fast the earth, and on hismunificence. [48] He, too, leads in battle and is revered under thetitle Çipivishta, [49] of unknown significance, but meaning literally'bald. ' Like Savitar he has three spaces, two called earthly, and one, the highest, known only to himself. His greatness is inconceivable, and he is especially praised with Indra, the two being looked upon asmasters of the world. [50] His highest place is the realm of thedeparted spirits. [51] The hymns to him appear to be late (thus I. 155. 6, where, as the year, he has four seasons of ninety days each). LikeP[=u]shan (his neighbor in many lauds) he is associated in a late hymnwith the Maruts (V. 87). His later popularity lies in the importanceof his 'highest place' (or step) being the home of the departedspirits, where he himself dwells, inscrutable. This led to thespirit's union with the sun, which, as we have said, is one of thefirst phases of the pantheistic doctrine. In the family-books Vishnugets but two hymns, both in the same collection, and shares one morewith Indra (VII. 99-100; VI. 69). In some of the family-collections, notably in that of the Visvamitras, he is, if not unknown, almostignored. As Indra's friend he is most popular with the Kanva family, but even here he has no special hymn. 

 None born, God Vishnu, and none born hereafter E'er reaches to the limit of thy greatness; Twas thou establish'st yon high vault of heaven, Thou madest fast the earth's extremest mountain. (VII. 99. 2. )

 Three steps he made, the herdsman sure, Vishnu, and stepped across (the world). (I. 22. I8. )

 The mighty deeds will I proclaim of Vishnu, Who measured out the earth's extremest spaces, And fastened firm the highest habitation, Thrice stepping out with step all-powerful. 

 O would that I might reach his path beloved, Where joy the men who hold the gods in honor. (I. 154. 1, 5. )

Under all these names and images the sun is worshipped. And it isnecessary to review them all to see how deeply the worship isingrained. The sun is one of the most venerable as he is the mostenduring of India's nature-gods. [52] In no early passage is the sun amalignant god. He comes "as kine to the village, as a hero to hissteed, as a calf to the cow, as a husband to his wife. "[53] He is the'giver, ' the 'generous one, ' and as such he is Mitra, 'the friend, 'who with Varuna, the encompassing heaven, is, indeed, in the Rig Veda, a personality subordinated to his greater comrade; yet is this, perhaps, the sun's oldest name of those that are not descriptive ofpurely physical characteristics. For Mithra in Persian keeps theproof that this title was given to the Indo-Iranic god before theseparation of the two peoples. It is therefore (perhaps with Bhaga?)one of the most ancient personal designations of the sun, --one, perhaps, developed from a mere name into a separate deity. 

HEAVEN AND EARTH. 

Not only as identical with the chief god of the Greeks, but also froma native Indic point of view, it might have been expected that Dyaus(Zeus), the 'shining sky, ' would play an important rôle in the Hindupantheon. But such is not the case. There is not a single hymnaddressed independently to Dyaus, nor is there any hint of especialpreeminence of Dyaus in the half-dozen hymns that are sung to Heavenand Earth together. The word _dyaus_ is used hundreds of times, butgenerally in the meaning sky (without personification). There is, tobe sure, a formal acknowledgment of the fatherhood of Dyaus (amonggods he is father particularly of Dawn, the Açvins, and Indra), asthere is of the motherhood of Earth, but there is no furtherexaltation. No exaggeration--the sign of Hindu enthusiasm--isdisplayed in the laudation, and the epithet 'father' is given to halfa dozen Vedic gods, as in Rome Ma(r)spiter stands beside Jup(p)iter. Certain functions are ascribed to Heaven and Earth, but they are ofsecondary origin. Thus they bring to the god he sacrifice, [54] as doesAgni, and one whole hymn may thus be epitomized: 'By the ordinance ofVaruna made firm, O Heaven and Earth, give us blessings. Blest withchildren and wealth is he that adores you twain. Give us sweet food, glory and strength of heroes, ye who are our father and mother. '[55]

The praise is vague and the benevolence is the usual 'bestowal ofblessings' expected of all the gods in return for praise. Other hymnsadd to this something, from which one sees that these deities are notregarded as self-created; for the seers of old, or, according to onepoet some wonderful divine artisan, "most wondrous worker of thewonder-working gods, " created them. Their chief office is to exercisebenign protection and bestow wealth. Once they are invited to come tothe sacrifice "with the gods, " but this, of course, is not meant toexclude them from the list of gods[56]. 

The antithesis of male and female, to Bergaigne's insistence on whichreference was made above (p. 43), even here in this most obvious offorms, common to so many religions, shows itself so faintly that itfails utterly to support that basis of sexual dualism on which theFrench scholar lays so much stress. Dyaus does, indeed, occasionallytake the place of Indra, and as a bellowing bull impregnate earth, butthis is wholly incidental and not found at all in the hymns directlylauding Heaven and Earth. Moreover, instead of "father and mother"Heaven and Earth often are spoken of as "the two mothers, " thesignificance of which cannot be nullified by the explanation that tothe Hindu 'two mothers' meant two parents, and of two parents one mustbe male, --Bergaigne's explanation. For not only is Dyaus one of the'two mothers, ' but when independently used the word Dyaus is male orfemale indifferently. Thus in X. 93. I: "O Heaven and Earth be wideoutstretched for us, (be) like two young women. " The position ofHeaven and Earth in relation to other divinities varies with the fancyof the poet that extols them. They are either created, or they creategods, as well as create men. In accordance with the physical reach ofthese deities they are exhorted to give strength whereby theworshipper shall "over-reach all peoples"; and, as parents, to be the"nearest of the gods, " to be "like father and mother in kindness. " (I. 159; 160. 2, 5. )

One more attribute remains to be noticed, which connects Dyaus morallyas well as physically with Savitar and Varuna. The verse in which thisattribute is spoken of is also not without interest from asociological point of view: "Whatsoever sin we have committed againstthe gods, or against a friend, or against the chief of the clan(family)[57] may this hymn to Heaven and Earth avert it. " It was shownabove that Savitar removes sin. Here, as in later times, it is thehymn that does this. The mystery of these gods' origin puzzles theseer: "Which was first and which came later, how were they begotten, who knows, O ye wise seers? Whatever exists, that they carry. "[58] Butall that they do they do under the command of Mitra. [59]

The most significant fact in connection with the hymns to Heaven andEarth is that most of them are expressly for sacrificial intent. "Withsacrifices I praise Heaven and Earth" (I. 159. 1); "For the sake ofthe sacrifice are ye come down (to us)" (IV. 56. 7). In VI. 70 theyare addressed in sacrificial metaphors; in VII. 53. 1 the poet says:"I invoke Heaven and Earth with sacrifices, " etc. The passivity of thetwo gods makes them yield in importance to their son, the activeSavitar, who goes between the two parents. None of these hymns bearsthe impress of active religious feeling or has poetic value. They allseem to be reflective, studied, more or less mechanical, and to belongto a period of theological philosophy. To Earth alone without Heavenare addressed one uninspired hymn and a fragment of the samecharacter: "O Earth be kindly to us, full of dwellings and painless, and give us protection. "[60] In the burial service the dead areexhorted to "go into kindly mother earth" who will be "wool-soft, likea maiden. "[61] The one hymn to Earth should perhaps be placedparallel with similar meditative and perfunctory laudations in theHomeric hymns:

 To EARTH (V. 84). 

 In truth, O broad extended earth, Thou bear'st the render of the hills, [62] Thou who, O mighty mountainous one, Quickenest created things with might. Thee praise, O thou that wander'st far, The hymns which light accompany, Thee who, O shining one, dost send Like eager steeds the gushing rain. Thou mighty art, who holdest up With strength on earth the forest trees, When rain the rains that from thy clouds And Dyaus' far-gleaming lightning come. [62]

On the bearing of these facts, especially in regard to the secondarygreatness of Dyaus, we shall touch below. He is a god exalted more bymodern writers than by the Hindus!

VARUNA. 

Varuna has been referred already in connection with the sun-god andwith Heaven and Earth. It is by Varuna's power that they stand firm. He has established the sun 'like a tree, ' i. E. , like a support, and'made a path for it. '[63] He has a thousand remedies for ills; to hisrealm not even the birds can ascend, nor wind or swift waters attain. It is in accordance with the changeless order[64] of Varuna that thestars and the moon go their regular course; he gives long life andreleases from harm, from wrong, and from sin. [65]

Varuna is the most exalted of those gods whose origin is physical. Hisrealm is all above us; the sun and stars are his eyes; he sits aboveupon his golden throne and sees all that passes below, even thethoughts of men. He is, above all, the moral controller of theuniverse. 

 To VARUNA (i. 25). 

 Howe'er we, who thy people are, O Varuna, thou shining god, Thy order injure, day by day, Yet give us over nor to death, Nor to the blow of angry (foe), Nor to the wrath of (foe) incensed. [66] Thy mind for mercy we release-- As charioteer, a fast-bound steed-- By means of song, O Varuna. 

 * * * * *

 ('Tis Varuna) who knows the track Of birds that fly within the air, And knows the ships upon the flood;[67] Knows, too, the (god) of order firm, The twelve months with their progeny, And e'en which month is later born;[68] Knows, too, the pathway of the wind, The wide, the high, the mighty (wind), And knows who sit above (the wind). 

 (God) of firm order, Varuna His place hath ta'en within (his) home For lordship, he, the very strong. [69] Thence all the things that are concealed He looks upon, considering Whate'er is done and to be done. May he, the Son of Boundlessness, The very strong, through every day Make good our paths, prolong our life. 

 Bearing a garment all of gold, In jewels clothed, is Varuna, And round about him sit his spies; A god whom injurers injure not, Nor cheaters cheat among the folk, Nor any plotters plot against; Who for himself 'mid (other) men Glory unequalled gained, and gains (Such glory) also 'mid ourselves. 

 Far go my thoughts (to him), as go The eager cows that meadows seek, Desiring (him), the wide-eyed (god). Together let us talk again, Since now the offering sweet I bring, By thee beloved, and like a priest Thou eat'st. 

 I see the wide-eyed (god): I see his chariot on the earth, My song with joy hath he received. 

 Hear this my call, O Varuna, Be merciful to me today, For thee, desiring help, I yearn. 

 Thou, wise one, art of everything, The sky and earth alike, the king; As such upon thy way give ear, And loose from us the (threefold) bond; The upper bond, the middle, break, The lower, too, that we may live. 

In the portrait of such a god as this one comes very near tomonotheism. The conception of an almost solitary deity, recognized aswatcher of wrong, guardian of right, and primitive creator, approachesmore closely to unitarianism than does the idea of any physical powerin the Rig Veda. 

To the poet of the Rig Veda Varuna is the enveloping heaven;[70] thatis, in distinction from Dyaus, from whom hediffers _toto caelo_, so to speak, the invisible world, which embracesthe visible sky. His home is there where lives the Unborn, whose placeis unique, above the highest heaven. [71]

But it is exactly this loftiness of character that should make one shyof interpreting Varuna as being originally the god that is presentedhere. Can this god, 'most august of Vedic deities, ' as Bergaigne andothers have called him, have belonged as such to the earliest stratumof Aryan belief?

There are some twelve hymns in the Rig Veda in Varuna's honor. Ofthese, one in the tenth book celebrates Indra as opposed to Varuna, and generally it is considered late, in virtue of its content. Of thehymns in the eighth book the second appears to be a later imitation ofthe first, and the first appears, from several indications, to be ofcomparatively recent origin. [72] In the seventh book (vii. 86-89) theshort final hymn contains a distinctly late trait in invoking Varunato cure dropsy; the one preceding this is _in majorem gloriam_ of thepoet Vasistha, fitly following the one that appears to be as new, where not only the mysticism but the juggling with "thrice-seven, "shows the character of the hymn to be recent. [73] In the first hymn ofthis book the late doctrine of inherited sin stands prominently forth(vii. 86. 5) as an indication of the time in which it was composed. The fourth and sixth books have no separate hymns to Varuna. In thefifth book the position of the one hymn to Varuna is one favorable tospurious additions, but the hymn is not otherwise obnoxious to thecriticism of lateness. Of the two hymns in the second book, the firstis addressed only indirectly to Varuna, nor is he here very prominent;the second (ii. 28) is the only song which stands on a par with thehymn already translated. There remain the hymns cited above from thefirst, not a family-book. It is, moreover, noteworthy that in ii. 28, apart from the ascription of general greatness, almost all that issaid of Varuna is that he is a priest, that he causes rivers to flow, and loosens the bond of sin. [74] The finest hymn to Varuna, from aliterary point of view, is the one translated above, and it is mainlyon the basis of this hymn that the lofty character of Varuna has beeninterpreted by occidental writers. To our mind this hymn belongs tothe close of the first epoch of the three which the hymns represent. That it cannot be very early is evident from the mention of theintercalated month, not to speak of the image of Varuna eating thesweet oblation 'like a priest. ' Its elevated language is in sharpcontrast to that of almost all the other Varuna hymns. As these areall the hymns where Varuna is praised alone by himself, it becomes ofchief importance to study him here, and not where, as in iii. 62, iv. 41, vi. 51, 67, 68, and elsewhere, he is lauded as part of acombination of gods (Mitra or Indra united with Varuna). In the lastbook of the Rig Veda there is no hymn to Varuna, [75] a time whenpantheistic monotheism was changing into pantheism, so that, in thelast stage of the Rig Veda, Varuna is descended from the height. Thereafter he is god and husband of waters, and punisher of secret sin(as in ii. 28). Important in contrast to the hymn translated above isv. 85. 

TO VARUNA. 

"I will sing forth unto the universal king a high deep prayer, dear torenowned Varuna, who, as a butcher a hide, has struck earth apart(from the sky) for the sun. Varuna has extended air in trees, strengthin horses, milk in cows, and has laid wisdom in hearts; fire in water;the sun in the sky; _soma_ in the stone. Varuna has inverted hiswater-barrel and let the two worlds with the space between flow (withrain). With this (heavenly water-barrel) he, the king of every createdthing, wets the whole world, as a rain does a meadow. He wets theworld, both earth and heaven, when he, Varuna, chooses to milk out(rain)--and then do the mountains clothe themselves with cloud, andeven the strongest men grow weak. Yet another great and marvellouspower of the renowned spirit (Asura) will I proclaim, this, thatstanding in mid-air he has measured earth with the sun, as if with ameasuring rod. (It is due to) the marvellous power of the wisest god, which none ever resisted, that into the one confluence run the rivers, and pour into it, and fill it not. O Varuna, loosen whatever sin wehave committed to bosom-friend, comrade, or brother; to our own house, or to the stranger; what (we) have sinned like gamblers at play, real(sin), or what we have not known. Make loose, as it were, all thesethings, O god Varuna, and may we be dear to thee hereafter. "

In this hymn Varuna is a water-god, who stands in mid-air and directsthe rain; who, after the rain, reinstates the sun; who releases fromsin (as water does from dirt?). According to this conception it wouldseem that Varuna were the 'coverer' rather than the 'encompasser. ' Itmight seem probable even that Varuna first stood to Dyaus as cloud andrain and night to shining day, and that his counterpart, (Greek:Hohyranhos), stood in the same relation to (Greek: Zehys); that wereconnecte(Greek: Hohyranhos)d with (Greek: hyrheô) and Varuna with_vari_, river, _v[=a]ri_, water. [76]

It is possible, but it is not provable. But no interpretation ofVaruna that ignores his rainy side can be correct. And this is fullyrecognized by Hillebrandt. On account of his "thousand spies, " _i. E. , _eyes, he has been looked upon by some as exclusively a night-god. Butthis is too one-sided an interpretation, and passes over theall-important, fact that it is only in conjunction with the sun(Mitra), where there is a strong antithesis, that the night-side ofthe god is exclusively displayed. Wholly a day-god he cannot be, because he rules night and rain. He is _par excellence_ the Asura, and, like Ahura Mazdao, has the sun for an eye, _i. E. , _ he is heaven. But there is no Varuna in Iranian worship and Ahura is a sectarianspecialization. Without this name may one ascribe to India what isfound in Iran?[77] It has been suggested by Bergaigne that Varuna andVritra, the rain-holding demon, were developments from the same idea, one revered as a god, the other, a demon; and that the word means'restrainer, ' rather than 'encompasser. '

From all this it will be evident that to claim an original monotheismas still surviving in the person of Varuna, is impossible; and this isthe one point we would make. Every one must admire the fine hymn inwhich he is praised, but what there is in it does not make it seemvery old, and the intercalated month is decisive evidence, for herealone in the Rig Veda is mentioned this month, which implies thefive-year cyclus, but this belongs to the Brahmanic period (Weber, _Vedische Beiträge_, p. 38). Every explanation of the original natureof Varuna must take into consideration that he is a rain-god, aday-god, and a night-god in turn, and that where he is praised in themost elevated language the rain-side disappears, although it wasfundamental, as may be seen by comparing many passages, where Varunais exhorted to give rain, where his title is 'lord of streams, ' hisposition that of 'lord of waters. ' The decrease of Varuna worship infavor of Indra results partly from the more peaceful god of rainappearing less admirable than the monsoon-god, who overpowers withstorm and lightning, as well as 'wets the earth. '

The most valuable contribution to the study of Varuna is Hillebrandt's'Varuna and Mitra. ' This author has succeeded in completelyoverthrowing the old error that Varuna is exclusively a night-god. [78]Quite as definitively he proves that Varuna is not exclusively aday-god. 

Bergaigne, on the other hand, claims an especially tenebrous characterfor Varuna. [79] Much has been written on luminous deities by scholarsthat fail to recognize the fact that the Hindus regard the night bothas light and as dark. But to the Vedic poet the night, star-illumined, was bright. Even Hillebrandt speaks of "the bright heaven" of day as"opposed to the dark night-heaven in which Varuna also showshimself. "[80]

In the Rig Veda, as it stands, with all the different views of Varunaside by side, Varuna is a universal encompasser, moral as well asphysical. As such his physical side is almost gone. But the conceptionof him as a moral watcher and sole lord of the universe is in so sharpcontrast to the figure of the rain-god, who, like Parjanya, stands inmid-air and upsets a water-barrel, that one must discriminate evenbetween the Vedic views in regard to him. [81]

It is Varuna who lets rivers flow; with Indra he is besought not tolet his weapons fall on the sinner; wind is his breath. [82]

On the other hand he is practically identified with the sun. [83] Howill this last agrees with the image of a god who 'lives by the springof rivers, ' 'covers earth as with a garment, ' and 'rises like a secretsea (in fog) to heaven'![84] Even when invoked with the sun, Mitra, Varuna still gives rain: "To whomsoever ye two are kindly disposedcomes sweet rain from heaven; we beseech you for rain . . . You, thethunderers who go through earth and heaven" (v. 63), --a strange prayerto be addressed to a monotheistic god of light: "Ye make the lightningflash, ye send the rain; ye hide the sky in cloud and rain" (_ib_. ). In the hymn preceding we read: "Ye make firm heaven and earth, ye givegrowth to plants, milk to cows; O ye that give rain, pour down rain!"In the same group another short hymn declares: "They are universalkings, who have _ghee_ (rain) in their laps; they are lords of therain" (v. 68). In the next hymn: "Your clouds (cows) give nourishment, your streams are sweet. " Thus the twain keep the order of the seasons(i. 2. 7-8) and protect men by the regular return of the rainy season. Their weapons are always lightning (above, i. 152. 2, and elsewhere). A short invocation in a family-book gives this prayer: "OMitra-Varuna, wet our meadows with _ghee_; wet all places with thesweet drink" (iii. 62. 16). 

The interpretation given above of the office of Varuna as regards thesun's path, is supported by a verse where is made an allusion to thetime "when they release the sun's horses, " _i. E_. , when after two orthree months of rain the sun shines again (v. 62. 1). In another verseone reads: "Ye direct the waters, sustenance of earth and heaven, richly let come your rains" (viii. 25. 6). 

Now there is nothing startling in this view. In opposition to theunsatisfactory attempts of modern scholars, it is the traditionalinterpretation of Mitra and Varuna that Mitra was god of day (_i. E. , _the sun), and Varuna the god of night (_i. E. , _ covering), [85] whilenative belief regularly attributes to him the lordship of water[86]. The 'thousand eyes' of Varuna are the result of this view. The otherlight-side of Varuna as special lord of day (excluding the all-heavenidea with the sun as his 'eye') is elsewhere scarcely referred to, save in late hymns and VIII. 41. [87] In conjunction with thestorm-god, Indra, the wrath-side of Varuna is further developed. Theprayer for release is from 'long darkness, ' _i. E. _, from death; inother words, may the light of life be restored (II. 27. 14-15; II. 28. 7). Grassmann, who believes that in Varuna there is an earlymonotheistic deity, enumerates all his offices and omits the giving ofrain from the list;[88] while Ludwig derives his name from _var_ (=velle) and defines him as the lofty god who wills!

Varuna's highest development ushers in the middle period of the RigVeda; before the rise of the later All-father, and even before thegreat elevation of Indra. But when S[=u]rya and Dawn were chief, thenVaruna was chiefest. There is no monotheism in the worship of a godwho is regularly associated as one of a pair with another god. Nor isthere in Varuna any religious grandeur which, so far as it exceedsthat of other divinities, is not evolved from his old physical side. One cannot personify heaven and write a descriptive poem about himwithout becoming elevated in style, as compared with the tone of onethat praises a rain-cloud or even the more confined personality of thesun. There is a stylistic but not a metaphysical descent from thisearlier period in the 'lords of the atmosphere, ' for, as we shallshow, the elevation of Indra and Agni denotes a philosophicalconception yet more advanced than the almost monotheistic greatnessattained by Varuna. But one must find the background to this earlierperiod; and in it Varuna is not monotheistic. He is the covering skyunited with the sun, or he whose covering is rain and dew. Indratreats Varuna as Savitar treats Mitra, supplants him; and for the samereason, because each represents the same priestly philosophy. 

In the one extant hymn to Mitra (who is Indo-Iranian) it is Mitra that'watches men, ' and 'bears earth and heaven. ' He is here (iii. 59) thekindly sun, his name (Mitra, 'friend') being frequently punned upon. 

The point of view taken by Barth deserves comment. He says:[89] "Ithas sometimes been maintained that the Varuna of the hymns is a god ina state of decadence. In this view we can by no means concur; . . . Anappeal to these few hymns is enough to prove that in the consciousnessof their authors the divinity of Varuna stood still intact. " If, instead of 'still intact, ' the author had said, 'on the increase, tillundermined by still later philosophical speculation, ' the trueposition, in our opinion, would have been given. But a distinctionmust be made between decadence of greatness and decadence ofpopularity. It has happened in the case of some of the Vedic inheritedgods that exactly in proportion as their popularity decreased theirgreatness increased; that is to say, as they became more vague andless individual to the folk they were expanded into wider circles ofrelationship by the theosophist, and absorbed other gods' majesty. [89]Varuna is no longer a popular god in the Rig Veda. He is already a godof speculation, only the speculation did not go far enough to suit thelater seers of Indra-Savitar-hood. Most certainly his worship, whencompared in popularity with that of Agni and Indra, is unequal. Butthis is because he is too remote to be popular. 

What made the popular gods was a union of near physical force toplease the vulgar, with philosophical mysticism to please the priest, and Indra and Agni fulfilled the conditions, while awful, but distant, Varuna did not. 

In stating that the great hymn to Varuna is not typical of theearliest stage of religious belief among the Vedic Aryans, we shouldadd one word in explanation. Varuna's traits, as shown in other partsof the Rig Veda, are so persistent that they must be characteristic ofhis original function. It does not follow, however, that any one hymnin which he is lauded is necessarily older than the hymn cited fromthe first book. The earliest stage of religious development precedesthe entrance into the Punj[=a]b. It may even be admitted that at thetime when the Vedic Aryans became Hindus, that is, when they settledabout the Indus, Varuna was the great god we see him in the great hymnto his honor. But while the relation of the [=A]dityas to the spiritsof Ahura in Zoroaster's system points to this, yet it is absurd toassume this epoch as the starting point of Vedic belief. Back of thisperiod lies one in which Varuna was by no means a monotheistic deity, nor even the greatest divinity among the gods. The fact, noticed byHillebrandt, that the Vasishtha family are the chief praisers ofVaruna, may also indicate that his special elevation was due to thetheological conceptions of one clan, rather than of the whole people, since in the other family books he is worshipped more as one of apair, Varuna and Mitra, heaven and sun. 

ADITI. 

The mother of Varuna and the luminous gods is the 'mother of kings, 'Boundlessness (_aditi_)[90] a product of priestly theosophy. Aditimakes, perhaps, the first approach to formal pantheism in India, forall gods, men, and things are identified with her (i. 89. 10). Sevenchildren of Aditi are mentioned, to whom is added an eighth (in onehymn). [91] The chief of these, who is, _par excellence_ the [=A]ditya(son of Aditi), is Varuna. Most of the others are divinities of thesun (x. 72). With Varuna stands Mitra, and besides this pair are found'the true friend' Aryaman, Savitar, Bhaga, and, later, Indra, as sun(?). Daksha and Ança are also reckoned as [=A]dityas, and S[=u]rya isenumerated among them as a divinity distinct from Savitar. But theword _aditi, _ 'unbound, ' is often a mere epithet, of Fire, Sky, etc. Moreover, in one passage, at least, _aditi_ simply means 'freedom' (i. 24. 1), less boundlessness than 'un-bondage'; so, probably, in i. 185. 3, 'the gift of freedom. ' Ança seems to have much the same meaningwith Bhaga, _viz. , _ the sharer, giver. Daksha may, perhaps, be the'clever, ' 'strong' one ([Greek: dexios]), abstract Strength; asanother name of the sun (?). Aditi herself (according to Müller, Infinity; according to Hillebrandt, Eternity) is an abstraction thatis born later than her chief sons, Sun and Varuna. [92] Zarathustra(Zoroaster, not earlier than the close of the first Vedic period) tookthe seven [=A]dityas and reformed them into one monotheistic(dualistic) Spirit (Ahura), with a circle of six moral attendants, thereby dynamically destroying every physical conception of them. 

DAWN. 

We have devoted considerable space to Varuna because of thetheological importance with which is invested his personality. If oneadmit that a monotheistic Varuna is the _ur_-Varuna, if one see in hima sign that the Hindus originally worshipped one universally greatsuperior god, whose image effaced that of all the others, [93] then theattempt to trace any orderly development in Hindu theology may as wellbe renounced; and one must imagine that this peculiar people, startingwith monotheism descended to polytheism, and then leapt again into theconception of that Father-god whose form, in the end of the Rig Vedicperiod, out-varunas Varuna as encompasser and lord of all. If, on theother hand, one see in Varuna a god who, from the 'covering, ' heavenand cloud and rain, from earliest time has been associated with thesun as a pair, and recognize in Varuna's loftier form the product ofthat gradual elevation to which were liable all the gods at the handsof the Hindu priests; if one see in him at this stage the highest godwhich a theology, based on the worship of natural phenomena, was ableto evolve; then, for the reception of those gods who overthrew himfrom his supremacy, because of their greater freedom from physicalrestraints, there is opened a logical and historical path--until thatgod comes who in turn follows these half-embodied ones, and stands asthe first immaterial author of the universe--and so one may walkstraight from the physical beginning of the Rig Vedic religion to itsspiritual Brahmanic end. 

We turn now to one or two phenomena-deities that were never muchtampered with by priestly speculation; their forms being still asbright and clear as when the first Vedic worshipper, waiting to salutethe rising sun, beheld in all her beauty, and thus praised

THE DAWN. [94]

 As comes a bride hath she approached us, gleaming; All things that live she rouses now to action. A fire is born that shines for human beings; Light hath she made, and driven away the darkness. 

 Wide-reaching hath she risen, to all approaching, And shone forth clothed in garments white and glistening, Of gold her color, fair to see her look is, Mother of kine, [95] leader of days she gleameth. 

 Bearing the gods' eye, she, the gracious maiden, --Leading along the white and sightly charger[96] --Aurora, now is seen, revealed in glory, With shining guerdons unto all appearing. 

 O near and dear one, light far off our foes, and Make safe to us our kines' wide pasture-places. Keep from us hatred; what is good, that bring us, And send the singer wealth, O generous maiden. 

 With thy best beams for us do thou beam widely, Aurora, goddess bright, our life extending; And food bestow, O thou all goods possessing, Wealth, too, bestowing, kine and steeds and war-cars

 Thou whom Vasistha's[97] sons extol with praises, Fair-born Aurora, daughter of Dyaus, the bright one, On us bestow thou riches high and mighty, --O all ye gods with weal forever guard us. 

In the laudation of Varuna the fancy of the poet exhausts itself inlofty imagery, and reaches the topmost height of Vedic religiouslyric. In the praise of Dawn it descends not lower than to interweavebeauty with dignity of utterance. Nothing in religious poetry moregraceful or delicate than the Vedic Dawn-hymns has ever been written. In the daily vision of Dawn following her sister Night the poet seeshis fairest goddess, and in his worship of her there is love andadmiration, such as is evoked by the sight of no other deity. "Shecomes like a fair young maiden, awakening all to labor, with anhundred chariots comes she, and brings the shining light; gleam forth, O Dawn, and give us thy blessing this day; for in thee is the life ofevery living creature. Even as thou hast rewarded the singers of old, so now reward our song" (I. 48). 

The kine of Dawn are the bright clouds that, like red cattle, wanderin droves upon the horizon. Sometimes the rays of light, which stretchacross the heaven, are intended by this image, for the cattle-herdingpoets employed their flocks as figures for various ends. 

The inevitable selfish pessimism of unripe reflection is also woveninto the later Dawn-hymns: "How long will it be ere this Dawn, too, shall join the Dawns departed? Vanished are now the men that saw theDawns of old; we here see her now; there will follow others who willsee her hereafter; but, O Dawn, beam here thy fairest; rich inblessings, true art thou to friend and right. Bring hither (to themorning sacrifice) the gods" (I. 113). 

Since the metre (here ignored) of the following hymn is not all of onemodel, it is probable that after the fourth verse a new hymn began, which was distinct from the first; but the argument from metre isunconvincing, and in any event both songs are worth citing, since theyshow how varied were the images and fancies of the poets: "The Dawnsare like heroes with golden weapons; like red kine of the morning onthe field of heaven; shining they weave their webs of light, likewomen active at work; food they bring to the pious worshipper. Like adancing girl is the Dawn adorned, and opens freely her bosom; as a cowgives milk, as a cow comes forth from its stall, so opens she herbreast, so comes she out of the darkness (verses 1-4) . . . She is theever new, born again and again, adorned always with the same color. Asa player conceals the dice, so keeps she concealed the days of a man;daughter of Heaven she wakes and drives away her sister (Night). Likekine, like the waves of a flood, with sunbeams she appears. O richDawn, bring us wealth; harness thy red horses, and bring to ussuccess" (I. 92). The homage to Dawn is naturally divided at timeswith that to the sun: "Fair shines the light of morning; the sunawakens us to toil; along the path of order goes Dawn arrayed inlight. She extendeth herself in the east, and gleameth till she fillsthe sky and earth"; and again: "Dawn is the great work of Varuna andMitra; through the sun is she awakened" (I. 124; III. 61. 6-7). In theritualistic period Dawn is still mechanically lauded, and her beams"rise in the east like pillars of sacrifice" (IV. 51. 2); butotherwise the imagery of the selections given above is that which isusually employed. The 'three dawns' occasionally referred to are, aswe have shown elsewhere, [98] the three dawn-lights, white, red, andyellow, as they are seen by both the Vedic poet and the Florentine. 

Dawn becomes common and trite after awhile, as do all the gods, and isinvoked more to give than to please. 'Wake us, ' cries a later poet, 'Wake us to wealth, O Dawn; give to us, give to us; wake up, lest thesun burn thee with his light'--a passage (V. 79) which has caused muchlearned nonsense to be written on the inimical relations of Sun andDawn as portrayed here. The dull idea is that Dawn is lazy, and hadbetter get up before S[=u]rya catches her asleep. The poet is not inthe least worried because his image does not express a suitablerelationship between the dawn and the sun, nor need others bedisturbed at it. The hymn is late, and only important in showing thenew carelessness as regards the old gods. [99] Some other traits appearin VII. 75. 1 ff. , where Dawn is 'queen of the world, ' and banishesthe _druhs_, or evil spirit. She here is daughter of Heaven, and wifeof the sun (4, 5); _ib_. 76. 1, she is the eye of the world; and _ib_81. 4, she is invoked as 'mother. '

There is, at times, so close a resemblance between Dawn-hymns andSun-hymns that the imagery employed in one is used in the other. Thusthe hymn VI. 64 begins: "The beams of Dawn have arisen, shining asshine the waters' gleaming waves. She makes good paths, . . . Shebanishes darkness as a warrior drives away a foe (so of the sun, IV. 13. 2; X. 37. 4; 170. 2). Beautiful are thy paths upon the mountains, and across the waters thou shinest, self-gleaming" (also of the sun). With the last expression may be compared that in VI. 65. 5: "Dawn, whose seat is upon the hills. "

Dawn is intimately connected not only with Agni but with the TwinHorsemen, the Açvins (equites)--if not so intimately connected as isHelen with the Dioskouroi, who, _pace_ Pischel, are the Açvins ofHellas. This relationship is more emphasized in the hymns to thelatter gods, but occasionally occurs in Dawn-hymns, of which anotheris here translated in full. 

 TO DAWN (IV. 52). 

 The Daughter of Heaven, this beauteous maid, Resplendent leaves her sister (Night), And now before (our sight) appears. 

 Red glows she like a shining mare, Mother of kine, who timely comes-- The Horsemen's friend Aurora is. 

 Both friend art thou of the Horsemen twain, And mother art thou of the kine, And thou, Aurora, rulest wealth. 

 We wake thee with our praise as one Who foes removes; such thought is ours, O thou that art possesst of joy. 

 Thy radiant beams beneficent Like herds of cattle now appear; Aurora fills the wide expanse. 

 With light hast thou the dark removed, Filling (the world), O brilliant one. Aurora, help us as thou us'st. 

 With rays thou stretchest through the heaven And through the fair wide space between, O Dawn, with thy refulgent light. 

It was seen that Savitar (P[=u]shan) is the rising and setting sun. So, antithetic to Dawn, stands the Abendroth with her sister, Night. This last, generally, as in the hymn just translated, is lauded onlyin connection with Dawn, and for herself alone gets but one hymn, andthat is not in a family-book. She is to be regarded, therefore, lessas a goddess of the pantheon than as a quasi-goddess, the result of apoet's meditative imagination, rather than one of the folk's primitiveobjects of adoration; somewhat as the English poets personify "Yeclouds, that far above me float and pause, ye ocean-waves . . . Yewoods, that listen to the night-bird's singing, O ye loud waves, and Oye forests high, and O ye clouds that far above me soared; thou risingsun, thou blue rejoicing sky!"--and as in Greek poetry, that whichbefore has been conceived of vaguely as divine suddenly is investedwith a divine personality. The later poet exalts these aspects ofnature, and endows those that were before only half recognized with alittle special praise. So, whereas Night was divine at first merely asthe sister of divine Dawn, in the tenth book one poet thus gives herpraise:

 HYMN TO NIGHT (X. 127). 

 Night, shining goddess, comes, who now Looks out afar with many eyes, And putteth all her beauties on. 

 Immortal shining goddess, she The depths and heights alike hath filled, And drives with light the dark away. 

 To me she comes, adorned well, A darkness black now sightly made; Pay then thy debt, O Dawn, and go. [100]

 The bright one coming put aside Her sister Dawn (the sunset light), And lo! the darkness hastes away. 

 So (kind art thou) to us; at whose Appearing we retire to rest, As birds fly homeward to the tree. 

 To rest are come the throngs of men; To rest, the beasts; to rest, the birds; And e'en the greedy eagles rest. 

 Keep off the she-wolf and the wolf, Keep off the thief, O billowy Night, Be thou to us a saviour now. 

 To thee, O Night, as 'twere an herd, To a conqueror (brought), bring I an hymn Daughter of Heaven, accept (the gift). [101]

THE AÇVINS. 

The Açvins who are, as was said above, the 'Horsemen, ' parallel to theGreek Dioskouroi, are twins, sons of Dyaus, husbands, perhaps brothersof the Dawn. They have been variously 'interpreted, ' yet in point offact one knows no more now what was the original conception of thetwain than was known before Occidental scholars began to studythem. [102] Even the ancients made mere guesses: the Açvins came beforethe Dawn, and are so-called because they ride on horses _(açva, equos)_ they represent either Heaven and Earth, or Day and Night, orSun and Moon, or two earthly kings--such is the unsatisfactoryinformation given by the Hindus themselves. [103]

Much the same language with that in the Dawn-hymns is naturallyemployed in praising the Twin Brothers. They, like the Dioskouroi, aresaid to have been incorporated gradually into the pantheon, on anequality with the other gods, [104] not because they were at firsthuman beings, but because they, like Night, were adjuncts of Dawn, andgot their divinity through her as leader. [105] In the last book of theRig Veda they are the sons of Sarany[=u] and Vivasvant, but it is notcertain whether Sarany[=u] means dawn or not; in the first book theyare born of the flood (in the sky). [106] They are sons of Dyaus, butthis, too, only in the last and first books, while in the latter theyare separated once, so that only one is called the Son of theSky. [107] They follow Dawn 'like men' (VIII. 5. 2) and are inBrahmanic literature the 'youngest of the gods. '[108]

The twin gods are the physicians of heaven, while to men they bringall medicines and help in times of danger. They were apparently atfirst only 'wonder-workers, ' for the original legends seem to havebeen few. Yet the striking similarity in these aspects with thebrothers of Helen must offset the fact that so much in connection withthem seems to have been added in books one and ten. They restore theblind and decrepit, impart strength and speed, and give the power andseed of life; even causing waters to flow, fire to burn, and trees togrow. As such they assist lovers and aid in producing offspring. 

The Açvins are brilliantly described, Their bird-drawn chariot and allits appurtenances are of gold; they are swift as thought, agile, young, and beautiful. Thrice they come to the sacrifice, morning, noon, and eve; at the yoking of their car, the dawn is born. When the'banner before dawn' appears, the invocation to the Açvins begins;they 'accompany dawn. ' Some variation of fancy is naturally to belooked for. Thus, though, as said above, Dawn is born at the Açvinsyoking, yet Dawn is herself invoked to wake the Açvins; while againthe sun starts their chariot before Dawn; and as sons of Zeus they areinvoked "when darkness still stands among the shining clouds(cows). "[109]

Husbands or brothers or children of Dawn, the Horsemen are alsoS[=u]ry[=a]'s husbands, and she is the sun's daughter (Dawn?) or thesun as female. But this myth is not without contradictions, forS[=u]ry[=a] elsewhere weds Soma, and the Açvins are the bridegroom'sfriends; whom P[=u]shan chose on this occasion as his parents; he who(unless one with Soma) was the prior bridegroom of the samemuch-married damsel. [110]

The current explanation of the Açvins is that they represent twoperiods between darkness and dawn, the darker period being nearernight, the other nearer day. But they probably, as inseparable twins, are the twinlights or twilight, before dawn, half dark and halfbright. In this light it may well be said of them that one alone isthe son of bright Dyaus, that both wed Dawn, or are her brothers. Theyalways come together. Their duality represents, then, not successivestages but one stage in day's approach, when light is dark and dark islight. In comparing the Açvins to other pairs[111] this dual nature isfrequently referred to; but no less is there a triality in connectionwith them which often in describing them has been ignored. This isthat threefold light which opens day; and, as in many cases they joinwith Dawn, so their color is inseparable. Strictly speaking, the breakof red is the dawn and the white and yellow lights precede this[112]. Thus in V. 73. 5: "Red birds flew round you as S[=u]ry[=a] steppedupon your chariot"; so that it is quite impossible, in accordance withthe poets themselves, to limit the Açvins to the twilight. They are avariegated growth from a black and white seed. The chief function ofthe Açvins, as originally conceived, was the finding and restoring ofvanished light. Hence they are invoked as finders and aid-gods ingeneral (the myths are given in Myriantheus). 

Some very amusing and some silly legends have been collected and toldby the Vedic poets in regard to the preservation and resuscitatingpower of the Açvins--how an old man was rejuvenated by them (this isalso done by the three Ribhus, master-workmen of the gods); how bridesare provided by them; how they rescued Bhujyu and others from thedangers of the deep (as in the classical legends); how they replaced awoman's leg with an iron one; restored a saint's eye-sight; drew aseer out of a well, etc, etc. Many scholars follow Bergaigne inimagining all these miracles to be anthropomorphized forms of solarphenomena, the healing of the blind representing the bringing out ofthe sun from darkness, etc. To us such interpretation often seemsfatuous. No less unconvincing is the claim that one of the Açvinsrepresents the fire of heaven and the other the fire of the altar. TheTwins are called _n[=a]saty[=a], _ the 'savers' (or 'not untrueones[113]'); explained by some as meaning 'gods with good noses[114]. '

HYMN TO THE HORSEMEN. 

Whether ye rest on far-extended earth, or on the sea in house upon itmade, 'come hither thence, O ye that ride the steeds. If ever for manye mix the sacrifice, then notice now the Kanva [poet who sings]. Icall upon the gods [Indra, Vishnu[115]] and the swift-goingHorsemen[116]. These Horsemen I call now that they work wonders, toseize the works (of sacrifice), whose friendship is preëminently ours, and relationship among all the gods; in reference to whom arisesacrifices . . . If, to-day, O Horsemen, West or East ye stand, ye ofgood steeds, whether at Druhyu's, Anu's, Turvaça's, or Yadu's, I callye; come to me. If ye fly in the air, O givers of great joy; or ifthrough the two worlds; or if, according to your pleasure, ye mountthe car, --thence come hither, O Horsemen. 

From the hymn preceding this, the following verses[117]:

 Whatever manliness is in the aether, in the sky, and among the five peoples, grant us that, O Horsemen . . . This hot _soma_-drink of yours with laudation is poured out; this _soma_ sweet through which ye discovered Vritra . . . Ascend the swift-rolling chariot, O Horsemen; hither let these my praises bring ye, like a cloud . . . Come as guardians of homes; guardians of our bodies. Come to the house for (to give) children and offspring. Whether ye ride on the same car with Indra, or be in the same house with the Wind; whether united with the Sons of Boundlessness or the Ribhus, or stand on Vishnu's wide steps (come to us). This is the best help of the horsemen, if to-day I should entice them to get booty, or call them as my strength to conquer in battle. . . . Whatever medicine (ye have) far or near, with this now, O wise ones, grant protection. . . . Awake, O Dawn, the Horsemen, goddess, kind and great. . . . When, O Dawn, thou goest in light and shinest with the Sun, then hither comes the Horsemen's chariot, to the house men have to protect. When the swollen _soma_-stalks are milked like cows with udders, and when the choric songs are sung, then they that adore the Horsemen are preëminent. . . . 

Here the Açvins are associated with Indra, and even find the evildemon; but, probably, at this stage Indra is more than god of storms. 

Some of the expanded myths and legends of the Açvins may be found ini. 118, 119, 158; x. 40. Here follows one with legends in moderatenumber (vii. 71):

 Before the Dawn her sister, Night, withdraweth; The black one leaves the ruddy one a pathway. Ye that have kine and horses, you invoke we; By day, at night, keep far from us your arrow. 

 Come hither, now, and meet the pious mortal, And on your car, O Horsemen, bring him good things; Keep off from us the dry destroying sickness, By day, at night, O sweetest pair, protect us. 

 Your chariot may the joy-desiring chargers, The virile stallions, bring at Dawn's first coming; That car whose reins are rays, and wealth upon it; Come with the steeds that keep the season's order. 

 Upon the car, three-seated, full of riches, The helping car, that has a path all golden, On this approach, O lords of heroes, true ones, Let this food-bringing car of yours approach us. 

 Ye freed from his old age the man Cyav[=a]na; Ye brought and gave the charger swift to Pedu; Ye two from darkness' anguish rescued Atri; Ye set J[a=]husha down, released from fetters. [118]

 This prayer, O Horsemen, and this song is uttered; Accept the skilful[sic] poem, manly heroes. These prayers, to you belonging, have ascended, O all ye gods protect us aye with blessings![119]

The sweets which the Açvins bring are either on their chariot, or, asis often related, in a bag; or they burst forth from the hoof of theirsteed. Pegasus' spring in Helicon has been compared with this. Theirvehicles are variously pictured as birds, horses, ships, etc. It is tobe noticed that in no one of their attributes are the Açvins unique. Other gods bring sweets, help, protect, give offspring, give healingmedicines, and, in short, do all that the Açvins do. But, as Bergaignepoints out, they do all this pacifically, while Indra, who performssome of their wonders, does so by storm. He protects by not injuring, and helps by destroying foes. Yet is this again true only in general, and the lines between warlike, peaceful, and 'sovereign' gods areoften crossed. 

 * * * * *

 FOOTNOTES:

 [Footnote 1: Such for instance as the hymn to the Açvins, RV. Ii. 39. Compare verses 3-4: 'Come (ye pair of Açvins) like two horns; like two hoofs; like two geese; like two wheels; like two ships; like two spans'; etc. This is the content of the whole hymn. ]

 [Footnote 2: _Deva_ is 'shining' (deus), and _S[=u]rya_ (sol, [Greek: áelios]) means the same. ]

 [Footnote 3: Let the reader note at the outset that there is scarcely an activity considered as divine which does not belong to several gods (see below). ]

 [Footnote 4: From _su, sav_, enliven, beget, etc. In RV. Iv. 53. 6 and vii, 63. 2, _pra-savitar_. ]

 [Footnote 5: RV. VII. 66. 14-15; compare X. 178. 1. In the notes immediately following the numbers all refer to the Rig Veda. ]

 [Footnote 6: V. 47, 3; compare vs. 7, and X. 189. 1-2. ]

 [Footnote 7: Compare X. 177. 1. ]

 [Footnote 8: X. 37. 9. ]

 [Footnote 9: V. 63. 7. Varuna and Mitra set the sun's car in heaven. ]

 [Footnote 10: 1 IV. 13. 2-5; X. 37, 4; 85, 1. But _ib_. 149. 1. Savitar holds the sky 'without support. ']

 [Footnote 11: VII 63. 1; I. 115. 11; X. 37. 1. ]

 [Footnote 12: III. 61. 4; VII. 63. 3. ]

 [Footnote 13: VII 78. 3. ]

 [Footnote 14: I. 56, 4; IX. 84. 2; Compare I. 92. 11; 115, 2; 123. 10-12. V. 44. 7, and perhaps 47. 6, are late. VII. 75. 5, is an exception (or late). ]

 [Footnote 15: _La Religion Védique_, I. 6; II. 2. ]

 [Footnote 16: Ehni, _Yama, _ p. 134. ]

 [Footnote 17: RV. , IV. 54. 2. Here the sun gives life even to the gods. ]

 [Footnote 18: Ten hundred and twenty-eight hymns are contained in the 'Rig Veda Collection. ']

 [Footnote 19: IV. 14. ]

 [Footnote 20: X. 37; 158; 170; 177; 189. Each has its own mark of lateness. In 37, the dream; in 158, the triad; in 170, the sun as _asurah[=a]_; in 177, the mystic tone and the bird-sun (compare Garutman, I. 164; X. 149); in 189, the thirty stations. ]

 [Footnote 21: See Whitney in _Colebrooke's Essays_, revised edition, ii. P. 111. ]

 [Footnote 22: iv. 54]

 [Footnote 23: Two 'laps' below, besides that above, the word meaning 'middle' but also 'under-place. ' The explanation of this much-disputed passage will be found by comparing I. 154. 5 and VII. 99. 1. The sun's three places are where he appears on both horizons and in the zenith. The last is the abode of the dead where Yama reigns. Compare IV. 53. The bracketed verses are probably a late puzzle attached to the word 'lap' of the preceding verse. ]

 [Footnote 24: Doubtful. ]

 [Footnote 25: The Spirit, later of evil spirits, demons (as above, the _asurah[=á]_). Compare Ahura. ]

 [Footnote 26: A numerical conception not paralleled in the Rig Veda, though mountains are called protuberances ('elevations') in other places. ]

 [Footnote 27: The last stanza is in the metre of the first; two more follow without significant additions. ]

 [Footnote 28: The texts are translated by Muir, OST, V. P. 171 ff. ]

 [Footnote 29: _La Religion Védique_, II. P. 428. Compare Hillebrandt, _Soma_ p. 456. ]

 [Footnote 30: I. 138. 4. ]

 [Footnote 31: VI. 56. 1. ]

 [Footnote 32: In I. 23. 13-15 P[=u]shan is said to bring king _(soma), _ "whom he found like a lost herd of cattle. " The fragment is late if, as is probable, the 'six' of vs. 15 are the six seasons. Compare VI. 54. 5, "may P[=u]shan go after our kine. "]

 [Footnote 33: Compare VI. 54. ]

 [Footnote 34: He is the 'son of freeing, ' from darkness? VI. 55. 1. ]

 [Footnote 35: IV. 57. 7. ]

 [Footnote 36: VI. 17. 11; 48. 11 ff. ; IV. 30. 24 ff. He is called like a war-god with the Maruts in VI. 48. ]

 [Footnote 37: So, too, Bhaga is Dawn's brother, I. 123. 5. P[=u]shan is Indra's brother in VI. 55. 5. Gubernatis interprets P[=u]shan as 'the setting sun. ']

 [Footnote 38: Contrast I. 42, and X. 26 (with 1. 138. 1). In the first hymn P[=u]shan leads the way and drives away danger, wolves, thieves, and helps to booty and pasturage. In the last he is a war-god, who helps in battle, a 'far-ruler, ' embracing the thoughts of all (as in III. 62. 9). ]

 [Footnote 39: For the traits just cited compare IV. 57. 7; VI. 17. 11; 48. 15; 53; 55; 56. I-3; 57. 3-4; 58. 2-4; II. 40; X. 17. 3 ff. ; 26. 3-8; I. 23. 14; all of I. 42, and 138; VIII. 4. 15-18; III. 57. 2. In X. 17. 4, Savitar, too, guides the souls of the dead. ]

 [Footnote 40: That is to say, one hymn is addressed to Bhaga with various other gods, VII. 41. Here he seems to be personified good-luck ("of whom even the king says, ' I would have thee, '" vs. 2). In Ihe Br[=a]hmanas 'Bhaga is blind, ' which applies better to Fortune than to the Sun. ]

 [Footnote 41: The hymn is sung before setting out on a forray for cattle. Let one observe how unsupported is the assumption of the ritualists as applied to this hymn, that it must have been "composed for rubrication. "]

 [Footnote 42: After Muir, V. P. 178. The clouds and cattle are both called _gàs_ 'wanderers, ' which helped in the poetic identification of the two. ]

 [Footnote 43: Compare IX. 97. 55, "Thou art Bhaga, giver of gifts. "]

 [Footnote 44: _Bhágam bhakshi_! Compare baksheesh. The word as 'god' is both Avestan, _bagha_, and Slavic, _bogu_ (also meaning 'rich'). It may be an epithet of other gods also, and here it means only luck. ]

 [Footnote 45: Literally 'possessed of _bhaga, ' i. E_. , wealth. ]

 [Footnote 46: May Bhaga be _bhágav[=a]n, i. E_. , a true _bhaga_-holder. Here and below a pun on the name (as above). ]

 [Footnote 47: Mythical being, possibly the sun-horse. According to Pischel a real earthly racer. ]

 [Footnote 48: I. 22. 17, etc; 154 ff. ; VII. Too. ]

 [Footnote 49: VII. 100. 5-6. Vishnu (may be the epithet of Indra in I. 61. 7) means winner (?), ]

 [Footnote 50: VI. 69; VII. 99. But Vishnu is ordered about by Indra (IV. 18. 11; VIII. 89. 12). ]

 [Footnote 51: I. 154. 5. In II. 1. 3, Vishnu is one with Fire (Agni). ]

 [Footnote 52: Thus, for example, Vishnu in the Hindu trinity, the separate worship of the sun in modern sects, and in the cult of the hill-men. ]

 [Footnote 53: X. 149. ]

 [Footnote 54: II. 41. 20. ]

 [Footnote 55: vi. 70. ]

 [Footnote 56: I. 160. 4; IV. 56. 1-3; VII. 53. 2. ]

 [Footnote 57: I. 185. 8. _(J[=a]spati). _ The expiatory power of the hymn occurs again in I. 159. ]

 [Footnote 58: I. 185. 1. ]

 [Footnote 59: IV. 56. 7. ]

 [Footnote 60: I. 22. 15. ]

 [Footnote 61: X. 18. 10 (or: "like a wool-soft maiden"). ]

 [Footnote 62: The lightning. In I. 31. 4, 10 "(Father) Fire makes Dyaus bellow" like "a bull" (v. 36. 5). Dyaus "roars" in vi. 72. 3. Nowhere else is he a thunderer. ]

 [Footnote 63: 1. 24. 7-8. The change in metaphor is not unusual. ]

 [Footnote 64: This word means either order or orders (law); literally the 'way' or 'course. ']

 [Footnote 65: 1. 24 (epitomized). ]

 [Footnote 66: Perhaps better with Ludwig "of (thee) in anger, of (thee) incensed. "]

 [Footnote 67: Or: "Being (himself) in the (heavenly) flood he knows the ships. " (Ludwig. )]

 [Footnote 68: An intercalated month is meant (not the primitive 'twelve days'). ]

 [Footnote 69: Or 'very wise, ' of mental strength. ]

 [Footnote 70: VIII. 41. 7; VII. 82. 6 (Bergaigne); X. 132. 4. ]

 [Footnote 71: Compare Bergaigne, _La Religion Védique_, iii. Pp. 116-118. ]

 [Footnote 72: The insistence on the holy seven, the 'secret names' of dawn, the confusion of Varuna with Trita. Compare, also, the refrain, viii. 39-42. For X. 124, see below. ]

 [Footnote 73: Compare Hillebrandt's Varuna and Mitra, p. 5; and see our essay on the Holy Numbers of the Rig Veda (in the _Oriental Studies_). ]

 [Footnote 74: Varuna's forgiving of sins may be explained as a washing out of sin, just as fire burns it out, and so loosens therewith the imagined bond, V. 2. 7. Thus, quite apart from Varuna in a hymn addressed to the 'Waters, ' is found the prayer, "O waters, carry off whatever sin is in me . . . And untruth, " I. 23. 22. ]

 [Footnote 75: But as in iv. 42, so in x. 124 he shares glory with Indra. ]

 [Footnote 76: Later, Varuna's water-office is his only physical side. Compare [=A]it. [=A]r. II. I. 7. 7, 'water and Varuna, children of mind. ' Compare with _v[=a]ri, oùrá_ = _v[=a]ra_, and _var[=i]_, an old word for rivers, _var[s. ]_ (= _var_ + _s_), 'rain. ' The etymology is very doubtful on account of the number of _var_-roots. Perhaps dew _(ersa)_ and rain first as 'coverer. ' Even _var = vas_ 'shine, ' has been suggested (ZDMG. XXII. 603). ]

 [Footnote 77: The old comparison of _Varena cathrugaosha_ turns out to be "the town of Varna with four gates"!]

 [Footnote 78: In _India: What Can it Teach us_, pp. 197, 200, Müller tacitly recognizes in the physical Varuna only the 'starry' night-side. ]

 [Footnote 79: _Loc. Cit. _, III. 119. Bergaigne admits Varuna as god of waters, but sees in him identity with Vritra a 'restrainer of waters. ' He thinks the 'luminous side' of Varuna to be antique also (III. 117-119). Varuna's cord, according to Bergaigne, comes from 'tying up' the waters; 'night's fetters, ' according to Hillebrandt. ]

 [Footnote 80: _Loc. Cit. _, p. 13. ]

 [Footnote 81: One of the chief objections to Bergaigne's conception of Varuna as restrainer is that it does not explain the antique union with Mitra. ]

 [Footnote 82: II. 28. 4, 7; VII. 82. 1, 2; 87. 2]

 [Footnote 83: vii. 87. 6; 88. 2. ]

 [Footnote 84: viii. 41. 2, 7, 8. So Varuna gives _soma_, rain. As a rain-god he surpasses Dyaus, who, ultimately, is also a rain-god (above), as in Greece. ]

 [Footnote 85: Compare Çat. Br. V. 2. 5. 17, "whatever is dark is Varuna's. "]

 [Footnote 86: In II. 38. 8 _varuna_ means 'fish, ' and 'water in I. 184. 3. ]

 [Footnote 87: V. 62. I, 8; 64. 7; 61. 5; 65. 2; 67. 2; 69. 1; VI. 51. 1; 67. 5. In VIII. 47. 11 the [=A]dityas are themselves spies. ]

 [Footnote 88: Introduction to Grassmann, II. 27; VI. 42. Lex. S. V. ]

 [Footnote 89: _Religions of India, _ p. 17. ]

 [Footnote 90: The Rik knows, also, a Diti, but merely as antithesls to Aditi--the 'confined and unconfined. ' Aditi is prayed to (for protection and to remove sin) in sporadic verses of several hymns addressed to other gods, but she has no hymn. ]

 [Footnote 91: Müller (_loc. Cit. _, below) thinks that the 'sons of Aditi' were first eight and were then reduced to seven, in which opinion as in his whole interpretation of Aditi as a primitive dawn-infinity we regret that we cannot agree with him. ]

 [Footnote 92: See Hillebrandt, _Die Göttin Aditi_; and Müller, SBE, xxxii. , p. 241, 252. ]

 [Footnote 93: That is to say, if one believe that the 'primitive Aryans' were inoculated with Zoroaster's teaching. This is the sort of Varuna that Koth believes to have existed among the aboriginal Aryan tribes (above, p. 13, note 2). ]

 [Footnote 94: VII. 77. ]

 [Footnote 95: Clouds. ]

 [Footnote 96: The sun. ]

 [Footnote 97: The priest to whom, and to whose family, is ascribed the seventh book. ]

 [Footnote 98: JAOS. , XV. 270. ]

 [Footnote 99: Much theosophy, and even history (!), has been read into II. 15, and IV. 30, where poets speak of Indra slaying Dawn; but there is nothing remarkable in these passages. Poetry is not creed. The monsoon (here Indra) does away with dawns for a time, and that is what the poet says in his own way. ]

 [Footnote 100: Transferred by Roth from the penultimate position where it stands in the original. Dawn here pays Night for the latter's malutinal withdrawing by withdrawing herself. Strictly speaking, the Dawn is, of course, the sunset light conceived of as identical with that preceding the sunrise ([Greek: usas, hêôs], 'east' as 'glow'). ]

 [Footnote 101: Late as seems this hymn to be, it is interesting in revealing the fact that wolves (not tigers or panthers) are the poet's most dreaded foes of night. It must, therefore have been composed in the northlands, where wolves are the herdsman's worst enemies. ]

 [Footnote 102: Myriantheus, _Die Açvins_; Muir, OST. V. P. 234; Bergaigne, _Religion Védique, _ II. P. 431; Müller, _Lectures_, 2d series, p. 508; Weber, _Ind. St_. V. P. 234. S[=a]yana on I. 180. 2, interprets the 'sister of the Açvins' as Dawn. ]

 [Footnote 103: Muir, _loc. Cit_. Weber regards them as the (stars) Gemini. ]

 [Footnote 104: Weber, however, thinks that Dawn and Açvins are equally old divinities, the oldest Hindu divinities in his estimation. ]

 [Footnote 105: In the Epic (see below) they are called the lowest caste of gods (Ç[=u]dras). ]

 [Footnote 106: X. 17. 2; I. 46. 2. ]

 [Footnote 107: I. 181. 4 (Roth, ZDMG. IV. 425). ]

 [Footnote 108: T[=a]itt. S. VII. 2. 7. 2; Muir, _loc. Cit_. P. 235. ]

 [Footnote 109: vii. 67. 2; viii. 5. 2; x. 39. 12; viii. 9. 17; i. 34. 10; x. 61. 4. Muir, _loc. Cit. _ 238-9. Compare _ib_. 234, 256. ]

 [Footnote 110: Muir, _loc. Cit_. P. 237. RV. Vi. 58. 4; x. 85. 9ff. ]

 [Footnote 111: They are compared to two ships, two birds, etc. ]

 [Footnote 112: In _Çat. Br_. V. 5. 4. It to the Açvins a red-white goat is sacrificed, because 'Açvins are red-white. ']

 [Footnote 113: Perhaps best with Brannhofer, 'the savers' from _nas_ as in _nasjan_ (AG. P. 99). ]

 [Footnote 114: _La Religion Védique_, II. P. 434. That _n[=a]snya_ means 'with good noses' is an epic notion, _n[=a]satyadasr[=a]u sunas[=a]u, _ Mbh[=a]. I. 3. 58, and for this reason, if for no other (though idea is older), the etymology is probably false! The epithet is also Iranian. Twinned and especially paired gods are characteristic of the Rig Veda. Thus Yama and Yam[=i] are twins; and of pairs Indra-Agni, Indra-V[=a]yu, besides the older Mitra-Varuna, Heaven-Earth, are common. ]

 [Footnote 115: Perhaps to be omitted. ]

 [Footnote 116: _Pischel_, Ved. St. I. P. 48. As swift-going gods they are called 'Indra-like. ']

 [Footnote 117: VIII. 9 and 10. ]

 [Footnote 118: Doubtful]

 [Footnote 119: The last verse is not peculiar to this hymn, but is the sign of the book (family) in which it was composed. ]

 * * * * *

CHAPTER IV. 

THE RIG VEDA (CONTINUED). --THE MIDDLE GODS. 

Only one of the great atmospheric deities, the gods that preëminentlygovern the middle sphere between sky and earth, can claim an Aryanlineage. One of the minor gods of the same sphere, the ancientrain-god, also has this antique dignity, but in his case the dignityalready is impaired by the strength of a new and greater rival. In thecase of the wind-god, on the other hand, there is preserved a deitywho was one of the primitive pantheon, belonging, perhaps, not only tothe Iranians, but to the Teutons, for V[=a]ta, Wind, may be theScandinavian Woden. The later mythologists on Indian soil make adistinction between V[=a]ta, wind, and V[=a]yu (from the same root; asin German _wehen_) and in this distinction one discovers that the oldV[=a]ta, who must have been once _the_ wind-god, is now reduced tophysical (though sentient) wind, while the newer name represents thehigher side of wind as a power lying back of phenomena; and it is thislatter conception alone that is utilized in the formation of the Vedictriad of wind, fire, and sun. In short, in the use and application ofthe two names, there is an exact parallel to the double terminologyemployed to designate the sun as S[=u]rya and Savitar. Just asS[=u]rya is the older [Greek: hêlios] and sol (acknowledged as a god, yet palpably the physical red body in the sky) contrasted with theinterpretation which, by a newer name (Savitar), seeks todifferentiate the (sentient) physical from the spiritual, so isV[=a]ta, Woden, replaced and lowered by the loftier conception ofV[=a]yu. But, again, just as, when the conception of Savitar isformed, the spiritualizing tendency reverts to S[=u]rya, and makes ofhim, too, a figure reclothed in the more modern garb of speech, whichis invented for Savitar alone; so the retroactive theosophic fancy, after creating V[=a]yu as a divine power underlying phenomenalV[=a]ta, reinvests V[=a]ta also with the garments of V[=a]yu. Thus, finally, the two, who are the result of intellectual differentiation, are again united from a new point of view, and S[=u]rya or Savitar, V[=a]yu or V[=a]ta, are indifferently used to express respectively thewhole completed interpretation of the divinity, which is now visibleand invisible, sun and sun-god, wind and wind-god. In these pairsthere is, as it were, a perspective of Hindu theosophy, and one cantrace the god, as a spiritual entity including the physical, back tothe physical prototype that once was worshipped as such alone. 

In the Rig Veda there are three complete hymns to Wind, none of thesebeing in the family books. In x. 186, the poet calls on Wind to bringhealth to the worshipper, and to prolong his life. He addresses Windas 'father and brother and friend, ' asking the power that blows tobring him ambrosia, of which Wind has a store. These are rather prettyverses without special theological intent, addressed more to Wind assuch than to a spiritual power. The other hymn from the same book isdirected to V[=a]ta also, not to V[=a]yu, and though it is loftier intone and even speaks of V[=a]ta as the soul of the gods, yet is itevident that no consistent mythology has worked upon the purely poeticphraseology, which is occupied merely with describing the rushing of amighty wind (x. 168). Nevertheless, V[=a]ta is worshipped, as isV[=a]yu, with oblations. 

 HYMN TO WIND (V[=a]ta). 

 Now V[=a]ta's chariot's greatness! Breaking goes it, And thundering is its noise; to heaven it touches, Goes o'er the earth, cloud[1] making, dust up-rearing; Then rush together all the forms of V[=a]ta; To him they come as women to a meeting. With them conjoint, on the same chariot going, Is born the god, the king of all creation. Ne'er sleepeth he when, on his pathway wandering, He goes through air. The friend is he of waters; First-born and holy, --where was he created, And whence arose he? Spirit of gods is V[=a]ta, Source of creation, goeth where he listeth; Whose sound is heard, but not his form. This V[=a]ta Let us with our oblations duly honor. 

In times later than the Rig Veda, V[=a]yu interchanges with Indra asrepresentative of the middle sphere; and in the Rig Veda all the hymnsof the family books associate him with Indra (vii. 90-92; iv. 47-48). In the first book he is associated thus in the second hymn; while, ib. 134, he has the only remaining complete hymn, though fragments ofsongs occasionally are found. All of these hymns except the first twosimply invite V[=a]yu to come with Indra to the sacrifice, It isV[=a]yu who with Indra obtains the first drink of soma (i. 134. 6). Heis spoken of as the artificer's, Tvashtar's, son-in-law, but theallusion is unexplained (viii. 26. 22); he in turn begets thestorm-gods (i. 134. 4). 

With V[=a]yu is joined Indra, one of the popular gods. Thesedivinities, which are partly of the middle and partly of the lowersphere, may be called the popular gods, yet were the title 'new gods'neither wholly amiss nor quite correct. For, though the populardeities in general, when compared with many for whom a greaterantiquity may be claimed, such as the Sun, Varuna, Dyaus, etc. , are ofmore recent growth in dignity, yet there remains a considerable numberof divinities, the hymns in whose honor, dating from the latestperiod, seem to show that the power they celebrate had been but latelyadmitted into the category of those gods that deserved specialworship. Consequently new gods would be a misleading term, as it should be applied to the plainer products of theologicalspeculation and abstraction rather than to Indra and his peers, not tospeak of those newest pantheistic gods, as yet unknown. Thedesignation popular must be understood, then, to apply to the godsmost frequently, most enthusiastically revered (for in a strictersense the sun was also a popular god); and reference is had in usingthis word to the greater power and influence of these gods, which isindicated by the fact that the hymns to Agni and Indra precede allothers in the family books, while the Soma-hymns are collected for themost part into one whole book by themselves. 

But there is another factor that necessitates a division between thedivinities of sun and heaven and the atmospheric and earthly godswhich are honored so greatly; and this factor is explanatory of thepopularity of these gods. In the case of the older divinities it isthe spiritualization of a sole material appearance that is revered; inthe case of the popular gods, the material phenomenon is reduced to aminimum, the spirituality behind the phenomenon is exalted, and thatspirituality stands not in and for itself, but as a part of a union ofspiritualities. Applying this test to the earlier gods the union willbe found to be lacking. The sun's spiritual power is united withIndra's, but the sun is as much a physical phenomenon as aspirituality, and always remains so. On the other hand, the equationof Varunic power with Indraic never amalgamated the two; and these arethe best instances that can be chosen of the older gods. For in thecase of others it is self-evident. Dyaus and Dawn are but materialphenomena, slightly spiritualized, but not joined with thespirit-power of others. 

Many have been the vain attempts to go behind the returns of Vedichymnology and reduce Indra, Agni, and Soma to terms of a purelynaturalistic religion. It cannot be done. Indra is neither sun, lightning, nor storm; Agni is neither hearth-fire nor celestial fire;Soma is neither planet nor moon. 

Each is the transient manifestation of a spirituality lying behind andextending beyond this manifestation. Here alone is the latch-key ofthe newer, more popular religion. Not merely because Indra was a'warrior god, ' but because Indra and Fire were one; because of themystery, not because of the appearance, was he made great at the handsof the priests. It is true, as has been said above, that the idol ofthe warriors was magnified because he was such; but the true cause ofthe greatness ascribed to him in the hymns lay in the secret of hisnature, as it was lauded by the priest, not in his form, as it wasseen by the multitude. Neither came first, both worked together; buthad it not been for the esoteric wisdom held by the priests inconnection with his nature, Indra would have gone the way of othermeteorological gods; whereas he became chiefest of the gods, and, aslord of strength, for a time came nearest to the supreme power. 

INDRA. 

Indra has been identified with 'storm, ' with the 'sky, ' with the'year'; also with 'sun' and with 'fire' in general. [2] But if he betaken as he is found in the hymns, it will be noticed at once that heis too stormy to be the sun; too luminous to be the storm; too near tothe phenomena of the monsoon to be the year or the sky; too rainy tobe fire; too alien from every one thing to be any one thing. He is toocelestial to be wholly atmospheric; too atmospheric to be celestial;too earthly to be either. A most tempting solution is that offered byBergaigne, who sees in Indra sun or lightning. Yet does thisexplanation not explain all, and it is more satisfactory than othersonly because it is broader; while it is not yet broad enough. Indra, in Bergaigne's opinion, stands, however, nearer to fire than tosun. [3] But the savant does not rest content with his own explanation:"Indra est peut-être, de tous les dieux védiques, celui qui résiste leplus longtemps à un genre d'analyse qui, appliqué à la plupart desautres, les résout plus ou moins vite en des personnifications deséléments, soit des phénomènes naturels, soit du culte" (ibid. P. 167). 

Dyaus' son, Indra, who rides upon the storm and hurls the lightningswith his hands; who 'crashes down from heaven' and 'destroys thestrongholds' of heaven and earth; whose greatness 'fills heaven andearth'; whose 'steeds are of red and gold'; who 'speaks in thunder, 'and 'is born of waters and cloud'; behind whom ride the storm-gods;with whom Agni (fire) is inseparably connected; who 'frees the watersof heaven from the demon, ' and 'gives rain-blessings and wealth' toman--such a god, granted the necessity of a naturalisticinterpretation, may well be thought to have been lightning itselforiginally, which the hymns now represent the god as carrying. But inidentifying Indra with the sun there is more difficulty. In none ofthe early hymns is this suggested, and the texts on which Bergaignerelies besides being late are not always conclusive. "Indra clotheshimself with the glory of the sun"; he "sees with the eye of thesun"--such texts prove little when one remembers that the sun is theeye of all the gods, and that to clothe ones' self with solar glory isfar from being one with the sun. In one other, albeit a late verse, the expression 'Indra, a sun, ' is used; and, relying on such texts, Bergaigne claims that Indra is the sun. But it is evident that this isbut one of many passages where Indra by implication is compared to thesun; and comparisons do not indicate allotropy. So, in ii. II. 20, which Bergaigne gives as a parallel, the words say expressly "Indra[did so and so] _like a sun_. "[4] To rest a building so important on abasis so frail is fortunately rare with Bergaigne. It happens herebecause he is arguing from the assumption that Indra primitively was ageneral luminary. Hence, instead of building up Indra from earlytexts, he claims a few late phrases as precious confirmation of histheory. [5] What was Indra may be seen by comparing a few citationssuch as might easily be amplified from every book in the Rig Veda. 

According to the varying fancies of the poets, Indra is armed withstones, clubs, arrows, or the thunderbolt (made for him by theartificer, Tvashtar), of brass or of gold, with many edges and points. Upon a golden chariot he rides to battle, driving two or many red oryellow steeds; he is like the sun in brilliancy, and like the dawn inbeauty; he is multiform, and cannot really be described; his divinename is secret; in appearance he is vigorous, huge; he is wise andtrue and kind; all treasures are his, and he is a wealth-holder, vastas four seas; neither his greatness nor his generosity can becomprehended; mightiest of gods is he, filling the universe; theheavens rest upon his head; earth cannot hold him; earth and heaventremble at his breath; he is king of all; the mountains are to him asvalleys; he goes forth a bull, raging, and rushes through the air, whirling up the dust; he breaks open the rain-containing clouds, andlets the rain pour down; as the Açvins restore the light, so herestores the rain; he is (like) fire born in three places; as thegiver of rain which feeds, he creates the plants; he restores orbegets Sun and Dawn (after the storm has passed);[6] he creates (inthe same way) all things, even heaven and earth; he is associated withVishnu and P[=u]shan (the sun-gods), with the Açvins, with the Maruts(storm-gods) as his especial followers, and with the artisan Ribhus. With Varuna he is an Adityá, but he is also associated with anothergroup of gods, the Vasus (x. 66. 3), as Vasupati, or 'lord of theVasus. ' He goes with many forms (vi. 47. 18). [7]

The luminous character[8] of Indra, which has caused him to beidentified with light-gods, can be understood only when one remembersthat in India the rainy season is ushered in by such displays oflightning that the heavens are often illuminated in every direction atonce; and not with a succession of flashes, but with contemporaneousubiquitous sheets of light, so that it appears as if on all sides ofthe sky there was one lining of united dazzling flame. When it is saidthat Indra 'placed light in light, ' one is not to understand, withBergaigne, that Indra is identical with the sun, but that in day(light) Indra puts lightning (x. 54. 6; Bergaigne ii. P. 187). 

Since Indra's lightning[9] is a form of fire, there is found in thisunion the first mystic dualism of two distinct gods as one. This comesout more in Agni-worship than in Indra-worship, and will be treatedbelow. The snake or dragon killed by Indra is Vritra, the restrainer, who catches and keeps in the clouds the rain that is falling to earth. He often is called simply the snake, and as the Budhnya Snake, orsnake of the cloud-depths, is possibly the Python (=Budh-nya). [10]There is here a touch of primitive belief in an old enemy of man--theserpent! But the Budhnya Snake has been developed in opposite ways, and has contradictory functions. [11]

Indra, however, is no more the lightning than he is the sun. One poetsays that he is like the sun;[12] another, that he is like thelightning (viii. 93. 9), which he carries in his arms (viii. 12. 7);another, that he is like the light of dawn (x. 89. 12). So various arethe activities, so many the phenomena, that with him first the seer isobliged to look back of all these phenomena and find in them oneperson; and thus he is the most anthropomorphized of the Vedic gods. He is born of heaven or born of clouds (iv. 18), but that his motheris Aditi is not certain. As the most powerful god Indra is againregarded as the All-god (viii. 98. 1-2). With this final supremacy, that distinction between battle-gods and gods sovereign, whichBergaigne insists upon--the sovereign gods belonging to _uneconception unitaire de l'ordre du monde_ (iii. P. 3; ii. P. 167)--fades away. As Varuna became gradually greatest, so did Indra inturn. But Varuna was a philosopher's god, not a warrior's; and Varunawas not double and mystical. So even the priest (Agni) leaves Varuna, and with the warrior takes more pleasure in his twin Indra; of himmaking an All-god, a greatest god. Varuna is passive; Indra isenergetic; but Indra does not struggle for his lordship. Inspired by_soma_, he smites, triumphs, punishes. Victor already, he descendsupon his enemies and with a blow destroys them. It is rarely that hefeels the effect of battle; he never doubts its issue. 

There is evidence that this supremacy was not gained withoutcontradiction, and the novelty of the last extravagant Indra-worshipmay be deduced, perhaps, from such passages as viii. 96. 15; and 100. 3, where are expressed doubts in regard to the existence of a realIndra. How late is the worship of the popular Indra, and that it isnot originality that causes his hymns to be placed early in eachcollection, may be judged from the fact that only of Indra (and Agni?)are there idols: viii. 1. 5; iv. 24. 10: "Who gives ten cows for myIndra? When he has slain his foe let (the purchaser) give him to meagain. "[13] Thus it happens that one rarely finds such poems to Indraas to Dawn and to other earlier deities, but almost always stereotypeddescriptions of prowess, and mechanical invitations to come to thealtar and reward the hymn-maker. There are few of Indra's many hymnsthat do not smack of _soma_ and sacrifice. He is a warrior's godexploited by priests; as popularly conceived, a sensual giant, friend, brother, helper of man. One example of poetry, instead of ritualisticverse-making to Indra, has been translated in the introductorychapter. Another, which, if not very inspiring, is at least free fromobvious _soma_-worship--which results in Indra being invoked chieflyto come and drink--is as follows (vi. 30):

 Great hath he grown, Indra, for deeds heroic; Ageless is he alone, alone gives riches; Beyond the heaven and earth hath Indra stretched him, The half of him against both worlds together! So high and great I deem his godly nature; What he hath stablished there is none impairs it. Day after day a sun is he conspicuous, And, wisely strong, divides the wide dominions. To-day and now (thou makest) the work of rivers, In that, O Indra, thou hast hewn them pathway. The hills have bowed them down as were they comrades; By thee, O wisely strong, are spaces fastened. 'Tis true, like thee, O Indra, is no other, Nor god nor mortal is more venerable. Thou slew'st the dragon that the flood encompassed, Thou didst let out the waters to the ocean. Thou didst the waters free, the doors wide opening, Thou, Indra, brak'st the stronghold of the mountains, Becamest king of all that goes and moveth, Begetting sun and heaven and dawn together. 

THE MARUTS. 

These gods, the constant followers of Indra, from the present point ofview are not of great importance, except as showing an unadulteratedtype of nature-gods, worshipped without much esoteric wisdom (althoughthere is a certain amount of mystery in connection with their birth). There is something of the same pleasure in singing to them as isdiscernible in the hymns to Dawn. They are the real storm-gods, following Rudra, their father, and accompanying the greatstorm-bringer, Indra. Their mother is the variegated cow Priçni, themother cloud. Their name means the shining, gleaming ones. 

 HYMN TO THE MARUTS (vii. 56. 1-10). 

 Who, sooth, are the gleaming related heroes, the glory of Rudra, on beauteous chargers? For of them the birthplace no man hath witnessed; they only know it, their mutual birthplace. With wings expanded they sweep each other, [14] and strive together, the wind-loud falcons. Wise he that knoweth this secret knowledge, that Priçni the great one to them was mother. [15] This folk the Maruts shall make heroic, victorious ever, increased in manhood; In speed the swiftest, in light the lightest, with grace united and fierce in power-- Your power fierce is; your strength, enduring; and hence with the Maruts this folk is mighty. Your fury fair is, your hearts are wrothful, like maniacs wild is your band courageous. From us keep wholly the gleaming lightning; let not your anger come here to meet us. Your names of strong ones endeared invoke I, that these delighted may joy, O Maruts. 

What little reflection or moral significance is in the Marut hymns isillustrated by i. 38. 1-9, thus translated by Müller:

 What then now? When will ye take us as a dear father takes his son by both hands, O ye gods, for whom the sacred grass has been trimmed?

 Where now? On what errand of yours are you going, in heaven, not on earth? Where are your cows sporting? Where are your newest favors, O Maruts? Where are blessings? Where all delights? If you, sons of Priçni, were mortals and your praiser an immortal, then never should your praiser be unwelcome, like a deer in pasture grass, nor should he go on the path of Yama. [16] Let not one sin after another, difficult to be conquered, overcome us; may it depart, together with greed. Truly they are terrible and powerful; even to the desert the Rudriyas bring rain that is never dried up. The lightning lows like a cow, it follows as a mother follows after her young, when the shower has been let loose. Even by day the Maruts create darkness with the water-bearing cloud, when they drench the earth, etc. 

The number of the Maruts was originally seven, afterwards raised tothrice seven, and then given variously, [17] sometimes as high asthrice sixty. They are the servants, the bulls of Dyaus, the glory ofRudra (or perhaps the 'boys of Rudra'), divine, bright as suns, blameless and pure. They cover themselves with shining adornment, chains of gold, gems, and turbans. On their heads are helmets of gold, and in their hands gleam arrows and daggers. Like heroes rushing tobattle, they stream onward. They are fair as deer; their roar is likethat of lions. The mountains bow before them, thinking themselves tobe valleys, and the hills bow down. Good warriors and good steeds aretheir gifts. They smite, they kill, they rend the rocks, they stripthe trees like caterpillars; they rise together, and, like spokes in awheel, are united in strength. Their female companion is Rodas[=i](lightning, from the same root as _rudra_, the 'red'). They are likewild boars, and (like the sun) they have metallic jaws. On theirchariots are speckled hides; like birds they spread their wings; theystrive in flight with each other. Before them the earth sways like aship. They dance upon their path. Upon their chests for beauty's sakethey bind gold armor. From the heavenly udder they milk down rain. "Through whose wisdom, through whose design do they come?" cries thepoet. They have no real adversary. The kings of the forest they tearasunder, and make tremble even the rocks. Their music is heard onevery side. [18]

RUDRA. 

The father of the Maruts, Rudra, is 'the ruddy one, ' _par excellence_and so to him is ascribed paternity of the 'ruddy ones. ' But whileIndra has a plurality of hymns, Rudra has but few, and these it is notof special importance to cite. The features in each case are the same. The Maruts remain as gods whose function causes them to be invokedchiefly that they may spare from the fury of the tempest. This idea isin Rudra's case carried out further, and he is specially called on toavert (not only 'cow-slaying' and 'man-slaying' by lightning, [19] butalso) disease, pestilence, etc. Hence is he preeminently, on the onehand, the kindly god who averts disease, and, on the other, ofdestruction in every form. From him Father Manu got wealth and health, and he is the fairest of beings, but, more, he is the strongest god(ii. 33. 3, 10). From such a prototype comes the later god of healingand woe--Rudra, who becomes Çiva. [20]

RAIN-GODS. 

There is one rather mechanical hymn directed to the Waters themselvesas goddesses, where Indra is the god who gives them passage. But inthe unique hymn to the Rivers it is Varuna who, as general god ofwater, is represented as their patron. In the first hymn therain-water is meant. [21] A description in somewhat jovial vein of thejoy produced by the rain after long drought forms the subject matterof another lyric (less an hymn than a poem), which serves toillustrate the position of the priests at the end of this Vediccollection. The frogs are jocosely compared to priests that havefulfilled their vow of silence; and their quacking is likened to thenoise of students learning the Veda. Parjanya is the god that, indistinction from Indra as the first cause, actually pours down therain-drops. 

 THE FROGS. [22]

 As priests that have their vows fulfilled, Reposing for a year complete, The frogs have now begun to talk, -- Parjanya has their voice aroused. 

 When down the heavenly waters come upon him, Who like a dry bag lay within the river, Then, like the cows' loud lowing (cows that calves have), The vocal sound of frogs comes all together. 

 When on the longing, thirsty ones it raineth, (The rainy season having come upon them), Then _akkala_![23] they cry; and one the other Greets with his speech, as sons address a father. 

 The one the other welcomes, and together They both rejoice at falling of the waters; The spotted frog hops when the rain has wet him, And with his yellow comrade joins his utterance. 

 When one of these the other's voice repeateth, Just as a student imitates his teacher, Then like united members with fair voices, They all together sing among the waters. 

 One like an ox doth bellow, goat-like one bleats; Spotted is one, and one of them is yellow; Alike in name, but in appearance different, In many ways the voice they, speaking, vary. 

 As priests about th' intoxicating[24] _soma_ Talk as they stand before the well-filled vessel, So stand ye round about this day once yearly, On which, O frogs, the time of rain approaches. 

 (Like) priests who _soma_ have, they raise their voices, And pray the prayer that once a year is uttered; (Like) heated priests who sweat at sacrifices, They all come out, concealed of them is no one. 

 The sacred order of the (year) twelve-membered, These heroes guard, and never do neglect it; When every year, the rainy season coming, The burning heat receiveth its dismission. [25]

In one hymn no less than four gods are especially invoked forrain--Agni, Brihaspati, Indra, and Parjanya. The two first aresacrificially potent; Brihaspati, especially, gives to the priest thesong that has power to bring rain; he comes either 'as Mitra-Varuna orP[=u]shan, ' and 'lets Parjanya rain'; while in the same breath Indrais exhorted to send a flood of rain, --rains which are here kept backby the gods, [26]--and Agni is immediately afterwards asked to performthe same favor, apparently as an analogue to the streams of oblationwhich the priest pours on the fire. Of these gods, the pluvius isParjanya:

 Parjanya loud extol in song, The fructifying son of heaven; May he provide us pasturage! He who the fruitful seed of plants, Of cows and mares and women forms, He is the god Parjanya. For him the melted butter pour In (Agni's) mouth, --a honeyed sweet, -- And may he constant food bestow![27]

This god is the rain-cloud personified, [28] but he is scarcely to bedistinguished, in other places, from Indra; although the latter, asthe greater, newer god, is represented rather as causing the rain toflow, while Parjanya pours it down. Like Varuna, Parjanya also upsetsa water-barrel, and wets the earth. He is identical with the SlavicPerkuna. 

For natural expression, vividness, energy, and beauty, the followinghymn is unsurpassed. As a god unjustly driven out of the pantheon, itis, perhaps, only just that he should be exhibited, in contrast tothe tone of the sacrificial hymnlet above, in his true light. Occasionally he is paired with Wind; and in the curious tendency ofthe poets to dualize their divinities, the two become a compound, _Parjanyav[=a]t[=a]_ ("Parjanya and V[=a]ta"). There is, also, vii. 101, one mystic hymn to Parjanya. The following, v. 83, breathes quitea different spirit:[29]

 Greet him, the mighty one, with these laudations, Parjanya praise, and call him humbly hither; With roar and rattle pours the bull his waters, And lays his seed in all the plants, a foetus. 

 He smites the trees, and smites the evil demons, too; While every creature fears before his mighty blow, E'en he that hath not sinned, from this strong god retreats, When smites Parjanya, thundering, those that evil do. As when a charioteer with whip his horses strikes, So drives he to the fore his messengers of rain; Afar a lion's roar is raised abroad, whene'er Parjanya doth create the rain-containing cloud. Now forward rush the winds, now gleaming lightnings fall; Up spring the plants, and thick becomes the shining sky. For every living thing refreshment is begot, Whene'er Parjanya's seed makes quick the womb of earth. 

 Beneath whose course the earth hath bent and bowed her, Beneath whose course the (kine) behoofed bestir them, Beneath whose course the plants stand multifarious, He--thou, Parjanya--grant us great protection! Bestow Dyaus' rain upon us, O ye Maruts! Make thick the stream that comes from that strong stallion! With this thy thunder come thou onward, hither, Thy waters pouring, a spirit and our father. [30] Roar forth and thunder! Give the seed of increase! Drive with thy chariot full of water round us; The water-bag drag forward, loosed, turned downward; Let hills and valleys equal be before thee! Up with the mighty keg! then pour it under! Let all the loosened streams flow swiftly forward; Wet heaven and earth with this thy holy fluid;[31] And fair drink may it be for all our cattle!

 When thou with rattle and with roar, Parjanya, thundering, sinners slayest, Then all before thee do rejoice, Whatever creatures live on earth. 

 Rain hast thou rained, and now do thou restrain it; The desert, too, hast thou made fit for travel; The plants hast thou begotten for enjoyment; And wisdom hast thou found for thy descendants. 

The different meters may point to a collection of small hymns. It isto be observed that Parjanya is here the fathergod (of men); he is theAsura, the Spirit; and rain comes from the Shining Sky (Dyaus). Howlike Varuna!

The rain, to the poet, descends from the sky, and is liable to becaught by the demon, Vritra, whose rain-swollen belly Indra opens witha stroke, and lets fall the rain; or, in the older view justpresented, Parjanya makes the cloud that gives the rain--a view unitedwith the descent of rain from the sky (Dyaus). With Parjanya as anAryan rain-god may be mentioned Trita, who, apparently, was awater-god, [=A]ptya, in general; and some of whose functions Indra hastaken. He appears to be the same with the Persian Thraetaona[=A]thwya; but in the Rig Veda he is interesting mainly as a dimsurvival of the past. [32] The washing out of sins, which appears to bethe original conception of Varuna's sin-forgiving, [33] finds ananalogue in the fact that sins are cast off upon the innocent watersand upon Trita--also a water-god, and once identified with Varuna(viii. 41. 6). But this notion is so unique and late (only in viii. 47) that Bloomfield is perhaps right in imputing it to the [later]moralizing age of the Br[=a]hmanas, with which the third period of theRig Veda is quite in touch. 

 * * * * *

 FOOTNOTES:

 [Footnote 1: Compare I. 134. 3. ]

 [Footnote 2: For the different views, see Perry, JAOS. Xi. P. 119; Muir, OST. V. P. 77. ]

 [Footnote 3: _La Religion Védique_, ii. Pp. 159, 161, 166, 187. ]

 [Footnote 4: The chief texts are ii. 30. 1; iv. 26. 1; vii. 98. 6; viii. 93. 1, 4; x. 89. 2; x. 112. 3. ]

 [Footnote 5: Other citations given by Bergaigne in connection with this point are all of the simile class. Only as All-god is Indra the sun. ]

 [Footnote 6: i. 51. 4: "After slaying Vritra, thou did'st make the sun climb in the sky. "]

 [Footnote 7: [=A]dityá, only vii. 85. 4; V[=a]l. 4. 7. For other references, see Perry (loc. Cit. ). ]

 [Footnote 8: Bergaigne, ii. 160. 187. ]

 [Footnote 9: Indra finds and begets Agni, iii. 31. 25. ]

 [Footnote 10: Unless the Python be, rather, the Demon of Putrefaction, as in Iranian belief. ]

 [Footnote 11: Demons of every sort oppose Indra; Vala, Vritra, the 'holding' snake (_áhi_=[Greek: echis]), Çushna ('drought'), etc. ]

 [Footnote 12: So he finds and directs the sun and causes it to shine, as explained above (viii. 3. 6; iii. 44. 4; i. 56. 4; iii. 30. 12). He is praised with Vishnu (vi. 69) in one hymn, as distinct from him. ]

 [Footnote 13: Bollensen would see an allusion to idols in i. 145. 4-5 (to Agni), but this is very doubtful (ZDMG. Xlvii. P. 586). Agni, however, is on a par with Indra, so that the exception would have no significance. See Kaegi, Rig Veda, note 79a. ]

 [Footnote 14: Or 'pluck with beaks, ' as Müller translates, SBE. Xxxii. P. 373. ]

 [Footnote 15: "Bore them" (gave an udder). In v. 52. 16 Rudra is father and Priçni, mother. Compare viii. 94. 1: "The cow . . . The mother of the Maruts, sends milk (rain). " In x. 78. 6 the Maruts are sons of Sindhu (Indus). ]

 [Footnote 16: I. E. , die. ]

 [Footnote 17: The number is not twenty-seven, as Muir accidentally states, OST. V. P. 147. ]

 [Footnote 18: v. 58. 4, 5; I. 88. 1; 88. 5; v. 54. 11; viii. 7. 25; i. 166. 10; i. 39. 1; 64. 2-8; v. 54. 6; i. 85. 8; viii. 7. 34; v. 59. 2. ]

 [Footnote 19: He carries lightnings and medicines together in vii. 46. 3. ]

 [Footnote 20: Çiva is later identified with Rudra. For the latter in RV. Compare i. 43; 114, 1-5, 10; ii. 33. 2-13. ]

 [Footnote 21: vii. 47, and x. 75. ]

 [Footnote 22: vii. 103. ]

 [Footnote 23: _Akhkhala_ is like Latin _eccere_ shout of joy and wonder(_Am. J. Phil. _ XIV. P. 11). ]

 [Footnote 24: Literally, 'that has stood over-night, ' i. E. , fermented. ]

 [Footnote 25: To this hymn is added, in imitation of the laudations of generous benefactors, which are sometimes suffixed to an older hymn, words ascribing gifts to the frogs. Bergaigne regards the frogs as meteorological phenomena! It is from this hymn as a starting-point proceed the latter-day arguments of Jacobi, who would prove the 'period of the Rig Veda' to have begun about 3500 B. C. One might as well date Homer by an appeal to the Batrachomyomachia. ]

 [Footnote 26: x. 98. 6. ]

 [Footnote 27: vii. 102. ]

 [Footnote 28: Compare Bühler, _Orient and Occident_, I. P. 222. ]

 [Footnote 29: This hymn is another of those that contradict the first assumption of the ritualists. From internal evidence it is not likely that it was made for baksheesh. ]

 [Footnote 30: _[A]suras, pit[=a] nas_. ]

 [Footnote 31: Literally, 'with _ghee_'; the rain is like the _ghee_, or sacrificial oil (melted butter). ]

 [Footnote 32: Some suppose even Indra to be one with the Avestan _A[. N]dra_, a demon, which is possible. ]

 [Footnote 33: Otherwise it is the 'bonds of sin' which are broken or loosed, as in the last verse of the first Varuna hymn, translated above. But the two views may be of equal antiquity (above, p. 69, note). On Trita compare JRAS. 1893, p. 419; PAOS. 1894 (Bloomfield). ]

 * * * * *

CHAPTER V. 

THE RIG VEDA (CONTINUED). --THE LOWER GODS. 

AGNI. 

Great are the heavenly gods, but greater is Indra, god of theatmosphere. Greatest are Agni and Soma, the gods of earth. 

Agni is the altar-fire. Originally fire, Agni, in distinction from sunand lightning, is the fire of sacrifice; and as such is he great. Onereads in v. 3. 1-2, that this Agni is Varuna, Indra; that in him areall the gods. This is, indeed, formally a late view, and can beparalleled only by a few passages of a comparatively recent period. Thus, in the late hymn i. 164. 46: "Indra, Mitra, Varuna, Agni, theysay; he is the sun (the bird in the sky); that which is but one theycall variously, " etc. So x. 114. 5 and the late passage iii. 38. 7, have reference to various forms of Agni. 

Indra had a twofold nature in producing the union of lightning andAgni; and this made him mysteriously great. But in Agni is found thefirst triality, which, philosophically, is interpreted as a trinity. The fire of the altar is one with the lightning, and, again, one withthe sun. This is Agni's threefold birth; and all the holy character ofthree is exhausted in application where he is concerned. It is thehighest mystery until the very end of the Vedic age. This Agni it isthat is the real Agni of the Rig Veda--the new Agni; for there wasprobably an Agni cult (as simple fire) long before the _soma_ cult. Indra and Agni are one, and both are called the slayers of thedemons[1]. They are both united as an indissoluble pair (iii. 12, etc. ). Agni, with, perhaps, the exception of Soma, is the mostimportant god in the Rig Veda; and it is no chance that gives him thefirst place in each family hymn-book; for in him are found, only inmore fortunate circumstances, exactly the same conditions as obtain inthe case of Indra. He appealed to man as the best friend among divinebeings; he was not far off, to be wondered at; if terrible, to bepropitiated. He was near and kind to friends. And as he seemed to thevulgar so he appealed to the theosophy which permeates the spirit ofthe poets; for he is mysterious; a mediator between god and man (incarrying to heaven the offerings); a threefold unity, typical ofearth, atmosphere, and heaven. From this point of view, as in the caseof Indra, so in the case of Agni, only to a greater extent, it becomesimpossible to interpret Agni as one element, one phenomenon. There is, when a distinction is made, an _agni_ which is single, the altar-fire, separate from other fires; but it is seldom that Agni is not felt asthe threefold one. 

And now for the interpretation of the modern ritualists. The Hinduritual had 'the three fires, ' which every orthodox believer was taughtto keep up. The later literature of the Hindus themselves verycorrectly took these three fires as types of the three forms of Agniknown in the Rig Veda. But to the ritualists the historical precedenceis inverted, and they would show that the whole Vedic mythologicalview of an Agni triad is the result of identifying Agni with the threefires of the ritual. From this crass method of interpretation it wouldresult that all Vedic mythology was the child of the liturgy[2]. 

As earthly fire Agni is first ignis:[3] "Driven by the wind, hehastens through the forest with roaring tongues. . . . Black is thy path, O bright immortal!" "He mows down, as no herd can do, the greenfields; bright his tooth, and golden his beard. " "He devours like asteer that one has tied up. " This is common fire, divine, but not ofthe altar. The latter Agni is of every hymn. For instance, the firststanza of the Rig Veda: "Agni, the family priest, I worship; thedivine priest of sacrifice; the oblation priest, who bestows riches, "where he is invoked under the names of different priests. But Agni iseven more than this; he is the fire (heat) that causes production andreproduction, visibly manifest in the sun. This dual Agni, it is to benoticed, is at times the only Agni recognized. The third form is thenadded, lightning, and therewith Agni is begotten of Indra, and is, therefore, one with Indra: "There is only one fire lighted in manyplaces" (V[=a]l. 10. 2). As a poetical expression, Agni in the lastform is the 'Son of Waters, ' an epithet not without significance inphilosophical speculation; for water, through all periods, wasregarded as the material origin of the universe. 

Agni is one with the sun, with lightning (and thunder), and descendsinto the plants. [4] To man he is house-priest and friend. It is hethat has "grouped men in dwelling-places" (iii. 1. 17) likePrometheus, in whose dialectic name, Promantheus, lingers still thefire-creator, the twirling (_math_) sticks which make fire in thewood. He is man's guest and best friend (Mitra, iv. 1. 9; above). 

An hymn or two entire will show what was Agni to the Vedic poet. Inthe following, the Rig Veda's first hymn, he is addressed, in theopening stanza, under the names of house-priest, the chief sacrificialpriest, and the priest that pours oblations. In the second stanza heis extolled as the messenger who brings the gods to the sacrifice, himself rising up in sacrificial flames, and forming a link betweenearth and heaven. In a later stanza he is called the Messenger(Angiras =[Greek: aggelos]), --one of his ordinary titles:

 To AGNI (i. 1). 

 I worship Agni; house-priest, he, And priest divine of sacrifice, Th' oblation priest, who giveth wealth. 

 Agni, by seers of old adored, To be adored by those to-day-- May he the gods bring here to us. 

 Through Agni can one wealth acquire, Prosperity from day to day, And fame of heroes excellent. 

 O, Agni! whatsoe'er the rite That thou surround'st on every side, That sacrifice attains the gods. 

 May Agni, who oblation gives-- The wisest, true, most famous priest-- This god with (all) the gods approach I

 Thou doest good to every man That serves thee, Agni; even this Is thy true virtue, Angiras. 

 To thee, O Agni, day by day, Do we with prayer at eve and dawn, Come, bringing lowly reverence;

 To thee, the lord of sacrifice, And shining guardian of the rite, [5] In thine own dwelling magnified. 

 As if a father to his son, Be easy of access to us, And lead us onward to our weal. 

This is mechanical enough to have been made for an established ritual, as doubtless it was. But it is significant that the ritualistic godsare such that to give their true character hymns of this sort must becited. Such is not the case with the older gods of the pantheon. Ritualistic as it is, however, it is simple. Over against it may beset the following (vi. 8): "Now will I praise the strength of thevariegated red bull (Agni), the feasts of the Knower-of-beings[6](Agni); to Agni, the friend of all men, is poured out a new song, sweet to him as clear _soma_. As soon as he was born in highestheaven, Agni began to protect laws, for he is a guardian of law (ororder). Great in strength, he, the friend of all men, measured out thespace between heaven and earth, and in greatness touched the zenith;he, the marvellous friend, placed apart heaven and earth; with lightremoved darkness; separated the two worlds like skins. Friend of allmen, he took all might to himself. . . . In the waters' lap the mightyones (gods) took him, and people established him king. M[=a]tariçvan, messenger of the all-shining one, bore him from afar, friend of allmen. Age by age, O Agni, give to poets new glorious wealth for feasts. O ever-youthful king, as if with a ploughshare, rend the sinner;destroy him with thy flame, like a tree! But among our lords bring, OAgni, power unbent, endless strength of heroes; and may we, throughthy assistance, conquer wealth an hundredfold, a thousandfold, O Agni, thou friend of all; with thy sure protection protect our royal lords, O helper, thou who hast three habitations; guard for us the host ofthem that have been generous, and let them live on, friend of all, nowthat thou art lauded. "

Aryan, as Kuhn[7] has shown, is at least the conception if not theparticular form of the legend alluded to in this hymn, of fire broughtfrom the sky to earth, which Promethean act is attributed elsewhere tothe fire-priest. [8] Agni is here Mitra, the friend, as sun-god, and assuch takes all the celestials' activities on himself. Like Indra healso gives personal strength: "Fair is thy face, O Agni, to the mortalthat desires strength;--they whom thou dost assist overcome theirenemies all their lives" (vi. 16. 25, 27). Agni is drawn down to earthby means of the twirling-sticks, one the father, one the mother[9]. "The bountiful wood bore the fair variegated son of waters andplants;[10] the gods united in mind, and payed homage to the gloriousmighty child when he was born" (iii. 1. 13). As the son of waters, Agni loves wood but retreats to water, and he is so identified withIndra that he 'thunders' and 'gives rain' (as lightning; ii. 6. 5;iii. 9. 2). 

The deeper significance of Agni-worship is found not alone in the factthat he is the god in whom are the other gods, nor in that he is thesun alone, but that "I am Agni, immortality is in my mouth; threefoldmy light, eternal fire, my name the oblation (fire), " iii. 26. 7. Heis felt as a mysterious trinity. As a sun he lights earth; and giveslife, sustenance, children, and wealth (iii. 3. 7); as lightning hedestroys, as fire he befriends; like Indra he gives victory (iii. 16. 1); like Varuna he releases the bonds of sin; he is Varuna's brother(v. 2. 7; vi. 3. 1; iv. 1. 2); his 'many names' are often alluded to(iii. 20. 3, and above). The ritualistic interpretation of the priestis that the sun is only a sacrificial fire above lighted by the godsas soon as the corresponding fire is lighted on earth by men (vi. 2. 3). He is all threefold; three his tongues, his births, his places;thrice led about the sacrifice given thrice a day (iii. 2. 9; 17. 1;20. 2; iv, 15. 2; 1. 7; 12. 1). He is the upholder of the religiousorder, the guest of mortals, found by the gods in the heavenly waters;he is near and dear; but he also becomes dreadful to the foe (iii. 1. 3-6; 6. 5; vi. 7. 1; 8. 2; iii. 1. 23; 22. 5; vi. 3. 7; iii. 18. 1;iv. 4. 4; 1. 6). 

It is easy to see that in such a conception of a triune god, who isfearful yet kind, whose real name is unknown, while his visiblemanifestations are in earth, air, and heaven, whose being contains allthe gods, there is an idea destined to overthrow, as it surpasses, thesimpler conceptions of the naturalism that precedes it. Agni as theone divine power of creation is in fact the origin of the human race:"From thee come singers and heroes" (vi. 7. 3). The less weight is, therefore, to be laid on Bergaigne's 'fire origin of man'; it is notas simple fire, but as universal creator that Agni creates man; it isnot the 'fire-principle'[11] philosophically elicited from connectionof fire and water, but as god-principle, all-creative, that Agni getsthis praise. 

Several hymns are dedicated to _Indr[=a]gni_, Indra united with Agni;and the latter even is identified with Dyaus (iv. 1. 10), thisobsolescent god reviving merely to be absorbed into Agni. As waterpurifies from dirt and sin (Varuna), so fire purifies (iv. 12. 4). Ithas been suggested on account of v. 12. 5: 'Those that were yours havespoken lies and left thee, ' that there is a decrease in Agni worship. As this never really happened, and as the words are merely those of apenitent who has lied and seeks forgiveness at the hands of the god oftruth, the suggestion is not very acceptable. Agni comprehends notonly all naturalistic gods, but such later femininities as Reverence, Mercy, and other abstractions, including Boundlessness. 

Of how great importance was the triune god Agni may be seen bycomparing his three lights with the later sectarian trinity, whereVishnu, originally the sun, and (Rudra) Çiva, the lightning, are thepreserver and destroyer. 

We fear the reader may have thought that we were developing rather asystem of mythology than a history of religion. With the close of theVedic period we shall have less to say from a mythological point ofview, but we think that it will have become patent now for whatpurpose was intended the mythological basis of our study. Without thisit would have been impossible to trace the gradual growth in thehigher metaphysical interpretation of nature which goes hand in handwith the deeper religious sense. With this object we have proceededfrom the simpler to the more complex divinities. We have now to takeup a side of religion which lies more apart from speculation, but itis concerned very closely with man's religious instincts--the worshipof Bacchic character, the reverence for and fear of the death-god, andthe eschatological fancies of the poets, together with those firstattempts at creating a new theosophy which close the period of the RigVeda. 

SOMA. 

Inseparably connected with the worship of Indra and Agni is that ofthe 'moon-plant, ' _soma_, the intoxicating personified drink to whosedeification must be assigned a date earlier than that of the Vedasthemselves. For the _soma_ of the Hindus is etymologically identifiedwith the _haoma_ of the Persians (the [Greek: omomi] of Plutarch[12]), and the cultus at least was begun before the separation of the twonations, since in each the plant is regarded as a god. The inspiringeffect of intoxication seemed to be due to the inherent divinity ofthe plant that produced it; the plant was, therefore, regarded asdivine, and the preparation of the draught was looked upon as a sacredceremony[13]. 

This offering of the juice of the _soma_-plant in India was performedthrice daily. It is said in the Rig Veda that _soma_ grows upon themountain M[=u]javat, that its or his father is Parjanya, the rain-god, and that the waters are his sisters[14]. From this mountain, or fromthe sky, accounts differ, _soma_ was brought by a hawk[15]. He ishimself represented in other places as a bird; and as a divinity heshares in the praise given to Indra, "who helped Indra to slayVritra, " the demon that keeps back the rain. Indra, intoxicated by_soma_, does his great deeds, and indeed all the gods depend on _soma_for immortality. Divine, a weapon-bearing god, he often simply takesthe place of Indra and other gods in Vedic eulogy. It is the god Somahimself who slays Vritra, Soma who overthrows cities, Soma who begetsthe gods, creates the sun, upholds the sky, prolongs life, sees allthings, and is the one best friend of god and man, the divine drop(_índu_), the friend of Indra[16]. 

As a god he is associated not only with Indra, but also with Agni, Rudra, and P[=u]shan. A few passages in the later portion of the RigVeda show that _soma_ already was identified with the moon before theend of this period. After this the lunar yellow god regularly wasregarded as the visible and divine Soma of heaven, represented onearth by the plant[17]. 

From the fact that Soma is the moon in later literature, andundoubtedly is recognized as such in a small number of the latestpassages of the Rig Veda, the not unnatural inference has been drawnby some Vedic scholars that Soma, in hymns still earlier, means themoon; wherever, in fact, epithets hitherto supposed to refer to theplant may be looked upon as not incompatible with a description of themoon, there these epithets are to be referred directly to Soma as themoon-god, not to _soma_, the mere plant. Thus, with Rig Veda, X. 85 (alate hymn, which speaks of Soma as the moon "in the lap of the stars, "and as "the days' banner") is to be compared VI. 39. 3, where it issaid that the drop (_soma_) lights up the dark nights, and is theday's banner. Although this expression, at first view, would seem torefer to the moon alone, yet it may possibly be regarded as on a parwith the extravagant praise given elsewhere to the _soma_-plant, andnot be so significant of the moon as it appears to be. Thus, inanother passage of the same book, the _soma_, in similar language, issaid to "lay light in the sun, " a phrase scarcely compatible with themoon's sphere of activity[18]. 

The decision in regard to this question of interpretation is not to bereached so easily as one might suppose, considering that a whole book, the ninth, of the Rig Veda is dedicated to Soma, and that in additionto this there are many hymns addressed to him in the other books. Forin the greater number of passages which may be cited for and againstthis theory the objector may argue that the generally extravagantpraise bestowed upon Soma through the Veda is in any one casemerely particularized, and that it is not incongruous to say of thedivine _soma_-plant, "he lights the dark nights, " when one reads ingeneral that he creates all things, including the gods. On the otherhand, the advocate of the theory may reply that everything which doesnot apply to the moon-god Soma may be used metaphorically of him. Thus, where it is said, "Soma goes through the purifying sieve, " byanalogy with the drink of the plant _soma_ passing through the sievethe poet may be supposed to imagine the moon passing through thesieve-like clouds; and even when this sieve is expressly called the'sheep's-tail sieve' and 'wool-sieve, ' this may still be, metaphorically, the cloud-sieve (as, without the analogy, one speaksto-day of woolly clouds and the 'mare's tail'). 

So it happens that, with an hundred hymns addressed to Soma, itremains still a matter of discussion whether the _soma_ addressed bethe plant or the moon. Alfred Hillebrandt, to whom is due the problemin its present form, declares that everywhere[19] in the Rig Veda Somameans the moon. No better hymn can be found to illustrate thedifficulty under which labors the _soma_-exegete than IX. 15, fromwhich Hillebrandt takes the fourth verse as conclusive evidence thatby _soma_ only the moon is meant. In that case, as will be seen fromthe 'pails, ' it must be supposed that the poet leaps from Soma to_soma_ without warning. Hillebrandt does not include the mention ofthe pails in his citation; but in this, as in other doubtful cases, itseems to us better to give a whole passage than to argue on one or twoverses torn from their proper position:

 HYMN TO SOMA (IX. 15). 

 QUERY: Is the hymn addressed to the plant as it is pressed out into the pails, or to the moon?

 1. This one, by means of prayer (or intelligence), comes through the fine (sieve), the hero, with swift car, going to the meeting with Indra. 

 2. This one thinks much for the sublime assembly of gods, where sit immortals. 

 3. This one is despatched and led upon a shining path, when the active ones urge (him). [20]

 4. This one, shaking his horns, sharpens (them), the bull of the herd, doing heroic deeds forcibly. 

 5. This one hastens, the strong steed, with bright golden beams, becoming of streams the lord. 

 6. This one, pressing surely through the knotty (sieve?) to good things, comes down into the vessels. 

 7. This one, fit to be prepared, the active ones prepare in the pails, as he creates great food. 

 8. Him, this one, who has good weapons, who is most intoxicating, ten fingers and seven (or many) prayers prepare. 

Here, as in IX. 70, Hillebrandt assumes that the poet turns suddenlyfrom the moon to the plant. Against this might be urged the use of thesame pronoun throughout the hymn. It must be confessed that at firstsight it is almost as difficult to have the plant, undoubtedly meantin verses 7 and 8, represented by the moon in the preceding verses, asit is not to see the moon in the expression 'shaking his horns. ' Thisphrase occurs in another hymn, where Hillebrandt, with the samecertainty as he does here, claims it for the moon, though the firstpart of this hymn as plainly refers to the plant, IX. 70. 1, 4. Herethe plant is a steer roaring like the noise of the Maruts (5-6), andthen (as above, after the term steer is applied to the plant), it issaid that he 'sharpens his horns, ' and is 'sightly, ' and further, 'hesits down in the fair place . . . On the wooly back, ' etc. , which bringone to still another hymn where are to be found like expressions, used, evidently, not of the moon, but of the plant, _viz. _ to IX. 37, a hymn not cited by Hillebrandt:

 This strong (virile) _soma_, pressed for drink, flows into the purifying vessel; this sightly (as above, where Hillebrandt says it is epithet of the moon), yellow, fiery one, is flowing into the purifying vessel; roaring into its own place (as above). This strong one, clear, shining (or purifying itself), runs through the shining places of the sky, slaying evil demons, through the sheep-hair-sieve. On the back of Trita this one shining (or purifying itself) made bright the sun with (his) sisters. [21] This one, slaying Vritra, strong, pressed out, finding good things (as above), uninjured, _soma_, went as if for booty. This god, sent forth by seers, runs into the vessels, the drop (_indu_) for Indra, quickly (or willingly). 

So far as we can judge, after comparing these and the other passagesthat are cited by Hillebrandt as decisive for a lunar interpretationof _soma_, it seems quite as probable that the epithets andexpressions used are employed of the plant metaphorically as that thepoet leaps thus lightly from plant to moon. And there is a number ofcases which plainly enough are indicative of the plant alone to makeit improbable that Hillebrandt is correct in taking Soma as the moon'everywhere in the Rig Veda. ' It may be that the moon-cult is somewhatolder than has been supposed, and that the language is consciouslyveiled in the ninth book to cover the worship of a deity as yet onlypartly acknowledged as such. But it is almost inconceivable that anhundred hymns should praise the moon; and all the native commentators, bred as they were in the belief of their day that _soma_ and the moonwere one, should not know that _soma_ in the Rig Veda (as well aslater) means the lunar deity. It seems, therefore, safer to abide bythe belief that _soma_ usually means what it was understood to mean, and what the general descriptions in the _soma_-hymns more or lessclearly indicate, _viz. _, the intoxicating plant, conceived of asitself divine, stimulating Indra, and, therefore, the _causa movens_of the demon's death, Indra being the _causa efficiens_. Even theallusions to _soma_ being in the sky is not incompatible with this. For he is carried thence from the place of sacrifice. Thus too in 83. 1-2: "O lord of prayer[22], thy purifier (the sieve) is extended. Prevailing thou enterest its limbs on all sides. Raw (_soma_), thathas not been cooked (with milk) does not enter into it. Only thecooked (_soma_), going through, enters it. The sieve of the hot drinkis extended in the place of the sky. Its gleaming threads extend onall sides. This (_soma_'s) swift (streams) preserve the man thatpurifies them, and wisely ascend to the back of the sky. " In this, asin many hymns, the drink _soma_ is clearly addressed; yet expressionsare used which, if detached, easily might be thought to imply the moon(or the sun, as with Bergaigne)--a fact that should make one employother expressions of the same sort with great circumspection. 

Or, let one compare, with the preparation by the ten fingers, 85. 7:"Ten fingers rub clean (prepare) the steed in the vessels; uprise thesongs of the priests. The intoxicating drops, as they purifythemselves, meet the song of praise and enter Indra. " Exactly the sameimages as are found above may be noted in IX. 87, where not the moon, but the plant, is conspicuously the subject of the hymn: "Run into thepail, purified by men go unto booty. They lead thee like a swift horsewith reins to the sacrificial straw, preparing (or rubbing) thee. Withgood weapons shines the divine (shining) drop (_Indu_), slayingevil-doers, guarding the assembly; the father of the gods, the cleverbegetter, the support of the sky, the holder of earth. . . . This one, the _soma_ (plant) on being pressed out, ran swiftly into the purifierlike a stream let out, sharpening his two sharp horns like a buffalo;like a true hero hunting for cows; he is come from the highestpress-stone, " etc. It is the noise of _soma_ dropping that is comparedwith 'roaring. ' The strength given by (him) the drink, makeshim appear as the 'virile one, ' of which force is the activity, andthe bull the type. Given, therefore, the image of the bull, the restfollows easily to elaborate the metaphor. If one add that _soma_ isluminous (yellow), and that all luminous divinities are 'hornedbulls[23], ' then it will be unnecessary to see the crescent moon in_soma_. Moreover, if _soma_ be the same with Brihaspati, as thinksHillebrandt, why are there three horns in V. 43. 13? Again, that theexpression 'sharpening his horns' does not refer necessarily to themoon may be concluded from x. 86. 15, where it is stated expresslythat the _drink_ is a sharp-horned steer: "Like a sharp-horned steeris thy brewed drink, O Indra, " probably referring to the taste. Thesun, Agni, and Indra are all, to the Vedic poet, 'sharp-hornedsteers[24], ' and the _soma_ plant, being luminous and strong(bull-like), gets the same epithet. 

The identity is rather with Indra than with the moon, if one becontent to give up brilliant theorizing, and simply follow the poets:"The one that purifies himself yoked the sun's swift steed over manthat he might go through the atmosphere, and these ten steeds of thesun he yoked to go, saying Indra is the drop (_Indu_). " When had everthe moon the power to start the sun? What part in the pantheon isplayed by the moon when it is called by its natural name (not by thepriestly name, _soma_)? Is _m[=a]s_ or _candramas_ (moon) a power ofstrength, a great god? The words scarcely occur, except in late hymns, and the moon, by his own folk-name, is hardly praised except inmechanical conjunction with the sun. The floods of which _soma_ islord are explained in IX. 86. 24-25: "The hawk (or eagle) brought theefrom the sky, O drop (_Indu_[25]), . . . Seven milk-streams sing to theyellow one as he purifies himself with the wave in the sieve ofsheep's wool. The active strong ones have sent forth the wise seer inthe lap of the waters. " If one wishes to clear his mind in respect ofwhat the Hindu attributes to the divine drink (expressly drink, andnot moon), let him read IX. 104, where he will find that "the twicepowerful god-rejoicing intoxicating drink" finds goods, finds a pathfor his friends, puts away every harmful spirit and every devouringspirit, averts the false godless one and all oppression; and read alsoix. 21. I-4: "These _soma_-drops for Indra flow rejoicing, maddening, light-(or heaven-) finding, averting attackers, finding desirablethings for the presser, making life for the singer. Like waves thedrops flow into one vessel, playing as they will. These _soma_-drops, let out like steeds (attached) to a car, as they purify themselves, attain all desirable things. " According to IX. 97. 41^2 and _ib. _ 37. 4 (and other like passages, too lightly explained, p. 387, byHillebrandt), it is _soma_ that "produced the light in the sun" and"makes the sun rise, " statements incompatible with the (lunar) Soma'sfunctions, but quite in accordance with the magic power which thepoets attribute to the divine drink. Soma is 'king over treasure. 'Soma is brought by the eagle that all may "see light" (IX. 48. 3-4). He traverses the sky, and guards order--but not necessarily is he herethe moon, for _soma_, the drink, as a "galloping steed, " "a brilliantsteer, " a "stream of pressed _soma_, " "a dear sweet, " "a helper ofgods, " is here poured forth; after him "flow great water-floods"; andhe "purifies himself in the sieve, he the supporter, holder of thesky"; he "shines with the sun, " "roars, " and "looks like Mitra"; beinghere both "the intoxicating draught, " and at the same time "the giverof kine, giver of men, giver of horses, giver of strength, the soul ofsacrifice" (IX. 2). 

Soma is even older than the Vedic Indra as slayer of Vritra andsnakes. Several Indo-Iranian epithets survive (of _soma_ and _haoma_, respectively), and among those of Iran is the title 'Vritra-slayer, 'applied to _haoma_, the others being 'strong' and 'heaven-winning, 'just as in the Veda[26]. All three of them are contained in one of themost lunar-like of the hymns to Soma, which, for this reason, andbecause it is one of the few to this deity that seem to be notentirely mechanical, is given here nearly in full, with the originalshift of metre in the middle of the hymn (which may possibly indicatethat two hymns have been united). 

 To SOMA (I. 91). 

 Thou, Soma, wisest art in understanding; Thou guidest (us) along the straightest pathway; 'Tis through thy guidance that our pious[27] fathers Among the gods got happiness, O Indu. 

 Thou, Soma, didst become in wisdom wisest; In skill[28] most skilful, thou, obtaining all things. A bull in virile strength, thou, and in greatness; In splendor wast thou splendid, man-beholder. 

 Thine, now, the laws of kingly Varuna[29]; Both high and deep the place of thee, O Soma. Thou brilliant art as Mitra, the belovèd[30], Like Aryaman, deserving service, art thou. 

 Whate'er thy places be in earth or heaven, Whate'er in mountains, or in plants and waters, In all of these, well-minded, not injurious, King Soma, our oblations meeting, take thou. 

 Thou, Soma, art the real lord, Thou king and Vritra-slayer, too; Thou art the strength that gives success. 

 And, Soma, let it be thy will For us to live, nor let us die[31]; Thou lord of plants[32], who lovest praise. 

 Thou, Soma, bliss upon the old, And on the young and pious man Ability to live, bestowest. 

 Do thou, O Soma, on all sides Protect us, king, from him that sins, No harm touch friend of such as thou. 

 Whatever the enjoyments be Thou hast, to help thy worshipper, With these our benefactor be. 

 This sacrifice, this song, do thou, Well-pleased, accept; come unto us; Make for our weal, O Soma, thou. 

 In songs we, conversant with words, O Soma, thee do magnify; Be merciful and come to us. 

 * * *[33]

 All saps unite in thee and all strong powers, All virile force that overcomes detraction; Filled full, for immortality, O Soma, Take to thyself the highest praise in heaven. The sacrifice shall all embrace--whatever Places thou hast, revered with poured oblations. Home-aider, Soma, furtherer with good heroes, Not hurting heroes, to our houses come thou. Soma the cow gives; Soma, the swift charger; Soma, the hero that can much accomplish (Useful at home, in feast, and in assembly His father's glory)--gives, to him that worships. 

 In war unharmed; in battle still a saviour; Winner of heaven and waters, town-defender, Born mid loud joy, and fair of home and glory, A conqueror, thou; in thee may we be happy. Thou hast, O Soma, every plant begotten; The waters, thou; and thou, the cows; and thou hast Woven the wide space 'twixt the earth and heaven; Thou hast with light put far away the darkness. With mind divine, O Soma, thou divine[34] one, A share of riches win for us, O hero; Let none restrain thee, thou art lord of valor; Show thyself foremost to both sides in battle[35]. 

Of more popular songs, Hillebrandt cites as sung to Soma (!) VIII. 69. 8-10:

 Sing loud to him, sing loud to him; Priyamedhas, oh, sing to him, And sing to him the children, too; Extol him as a sure defence. . . . To _Indra_ is the prayer up-raised. 

The three daily _soma_-oblations are made chiefly to Indra andV[=a]yu; to Indra at mid-day; to the Ribhus, artisans of the gods, atevening; and to Agni in the morning. 

Unmistakable references to Soma as the moon, as, for instance, in X. 85. 3: "No one eats of that _soma_ which the priests know, " seemrather to indicate that the identification of moon and Soma wassomething esoteric and new rather than the received belief ofpre-Vedic times, as will Hillebrandt. This moon-_soma_ isdistinguished from the "_soma_-plant which they crush. "

The floods of _soma_ are likened to, or, rather, identified with, therain-floods which the lightning frees, and, as it were, brings toearth with him. A whole series of myths depending on this naturalphenomenon has been evolved, wherein the lightning-fireas an eagle brings down _soma_ to man, that is, the heavenly drink. Since Agni is threefold and the G[=a]yatri metre is threefold, theyinterchange, and in the legends it is again the metre which brings the_soma_, or an archer, as is stated in one doubtful passage[36]. 

What stands out most clearly in _soma_-laudations is that the_soma_-hymns are not only quite mechanical, but that they presuppose avery complete and elaborate ritual, with the employment of a number ofpriests, of whom the _hotars_ (one of the various sets of priests)alone number five in the early and seven in the late books; with acomplicated service; with certain divinities honored at certain hours;and other paraphernalia of sacerdotal ceremony; while Indra, mosthonored with Soma, and Agni, most closely connected with the executionof sacrifice, not only receive the most hymns, but these hymns are, for the most part, palpably made for ritualistic purposes. It is thistruth that the ritualists have seized upon and too sweepingly applied. For in every family book, besides this baksheesh verse, occur theolder, purer hymns that have been retained after the worship for whichthey were composed had become changed into a trite making of phrases. 

Hillebrandt has failed to show that the Iranian _haoma_ is the moon, so that as a starting-point there still is plant and drink-worship, not moon-worship. At what precise time, therefore, the _soma_ wasreferred to the moon is not so important. Since drink-worship standsat one end of the series, and moon-worship at the other, it isantecedently probable that here and there there may be a doubt as towhich of the two was intended. Some of the examples cited byHillebrandt may indeed be referable to the latter end of the seriesrather than to the former; but that the author, despite the learningand ingenuity of his work, has proved his point definitively, we arefar from believing. It is just like the later Hindu speculation tothink out a subtle connection between moon and _soma_-plant becauseeach was yellow, and swelled, and went through a sieve (cloud), etc. But there is a further connecting link in that the divinity ascribedto the intoxicant led to a supposition that it was brought from thesky, the home of the gods; above all, of the luminous gods, which theyellow _soma_ resembled. Such was the Hindu belief, and from this as astarting-point appears to have come the gradual identification of_soma_ with the moon, now called Soma. For the moon, even under thename of Gandharva, is not the object of especial worship. 

The question so ably discussed by Hillebrandt is, however, one ofconsiderable importance from the point of view of the religiousdevelopment. If _soma_ from the beginning was the moon, then there isonly one more god of nature to add to the pantheon. But if, as webelieve in the light of the Avesta and Veda itself, _soma_ like_haoma_, was originally the drink-plant (the root _su_ press, fromwhich comes _soma_, implies the plant), then two important factsfollow. First, in the identification of yellow _soma_-plant withyellow moon in the latter stage of the Rig Veda (which coincides withthe beginning of the Brahmanic period) there is a strikingillustration of the gradual mystical elevation of religion at thehands of the priests, to whom it appeared indecent that mere drinkshould be exalted thus; and secondly, there is the significant factthat in the Indic and Iranian cult there was a direct worship ofdeified liquor, analogous to Dionysiac rites, a worship which is notunparalleled in other communities. Again, the surprising identity ofworship in Avesta and Veda, and the fact that hymns to the earlierdeities, Dawn, Parjanya, etc, are frequently devoid of any relation tothe _soma_-cult not only show that Bergaigne's opinion that the wholeRig Veda is but a collection of hymns for _soma_-worship as handeddown in different families must be modified; but also that, as we haveexplained _apropos_ of Varuna, the Iranian cult must have branched offfrom the Vedic cult (whether, as Haug thought, on account of areligious schism or not); that the hymns to the less popular deities(as we have defined the word) make the first period of Vedic cult; andthat the special liquor-cult, common to Iran and India, arose afterthe first period of Vedic worship, when, for example, Wind, Parjanya, and Varuna were at their height, and before the priests had exaltedmystically Agni or Soma, and even Indra was as yet undeveloped. 

 * * * * *

 FOOTNOTES:

 [Footnote 1: viii. 38. 4; i. 108. 3; Bergaigne, ii. 293. ]

 [Footnote 2: On this point Bergaigne deprecates the application of the ritualistic method, and says in words that cannot be too emphasized: "Mais qui ne voit que de telles exptications n'expliquent rien, ou plutôt que le détail du rituel ne peut trouver son explication que dans le mythe, bien loin de pouvoir servir lui-mêmes à expliquer le mythe?. . . Ni le ciel seul ni la terre seule, mais la terre et le ciel étroitement unis et presque confondus, voilà le vrai domaine de la mythologie védique, mythologie dont le rituel n'est que la reproduction" (i. P. 24). ]

 [Footnote 3: i. 58. 4; v. 7. 7; vi. 3. 4. ]

 [Footnote 4: iii. 14. 4; i. 71. 9; vi. 3. 7; 6. 2; iv. 1. 9. ]

 [Footnote 5: Or of time or order. ]

 [Footnote 6: Or 'Finder-of-beings. ']

 [Footnote 7: _Herabkunft des Feuers und des Göttertrankes_. ]

 [Footnote 8: RV. Vi. 16. 13: "Thee, Agni, from out the sky Atharvan twirled, " _nir amanthata_ (cf. Promantheus). In x. 462 the Bhrigus, [Greek: phleghyai], discover fire. ]

 [Footnote 9: Compare v. 2. 1. Sometimes Agni is "born with the fingers, " which twirl the sticks (iii. 26. 3; iv. 6. 8). ]

 [Footnote 10: Compare ii. 1: "born in flame from water, cloud, and plants . . . Thou art the creator. "]

 [Footnote 11: Bergaigne, i. P. 32 ff. The question of priestly names (loc. Cit. Pp. 47-50), should start with Bharata as [Greek: purphoros], a common title of Agni (ii. 7; vi. 16. 19-21). So Bhrigu is the 'shining' one; and Vasishtha is the 'most shining' (compare Vasus, not good but shining gods). The priests got their names from their god, like Jesuits. Compare Gritsamada in the Bhrigu family (book ii. ); Viçv[=a]-mitra, 'friend of all, ' in the Bharata family (book iii. ); Gautama V[=a]madeva belonging to Angirasas (book iv. ); Atri 'Eater, ' epithet of Agni in RV. (book v. ); Bharadv[=a]ja 'bearing food' (book vi. ); Vasishtha (book vii. ); and besides these Jamadagni and Kaçyapa, black-toothed (Agni). ']

 [Footnote 12: De Isid. Et Osir. 46. Compare Windischmann, _Ueber den Somacultus der Arier_ (1846), and Muir, _Original Sanskrit Texts_, vol. Ii. P. 471. Hillebrandt, _Vedische Mythologie_, i. P. 450, believes _haoma_ to mean the moon, as does _soma_ in some hymns of the Rig Veda (see below). ]

 [Footnote 13: Compare Kuhn, _Herabkunft des Feuers und des Göttertrankes_ (1859); Bergaigne, _La Religion Védique_, i. 148 ff. ; Haug's _[=A]itareya Br[=a]hmana_, Introduction, p. 62; Whitney in _Jour. Am. Or. Soc_. III. 299; Muir, _Original Sanskrit Texts_, vol. V. P. 258 ff. , where other literature is cited. ]

 [Footnote 14: RV. X. 34. 1; IX. 98. 9; 82. 3. The Vedic plant is unknown (not the _sarcostemma viminale_). ]

 [Footnote 15: RV. III. 43. 7; IV. 26. 6 (other references in Muir, _loc. Cit. _ p. 262. ) Perhaps rain as _soma_ released by lightning as a hawk (Bloomfield). ]

 [Footnote 16: See the passages cited in Muir, _loc. Cit_. ]

 [Footnote 17: A complete account of _soma_ was given by the Vedic texts will be found in Hillebrandt's _Vedische Mythologie_, vol. I. , where are described the different ways of fermenting the juice of the plant. ]

 [Footnote 18: Although so interpreted by Hillebrandt, _loc. Cit. _ p. 312. The passage is found in RV. VI. 44. 23. ]

 [Footnote 19: _Loc. Cit. _ pp. 340, 450. ]

 [Footnote 20: Compare IX. 79. 5, where the same verb is used of striking, urging out the _soma_-juice, _r[=a]sa_. ]

 [Footnote 21: Compare IX. 32. 2, where "Trita's maidens urge on the golden steed with the press-stones, _índu_ as a drink for Indra. "]

 [Footnote 22: On account of the position and content of this hymn, Hillebrandt regards it as addressed to Soma-Brihaspati. ]

 [Footnote 23: So the sun in I. 163. 9, II. 'Sharpening his horns' is used of fire in i. 140. 6; v. 2. 9. ]

 [Footnote 24: VI. 16. 39; vii. 19. I; VIII. 60. 13. ]

 [Footnote 25 3: IX. 63. 8-9; 5. 9. Soma is identified with lightning in ix. 47. 3. ]

 [Footnote 26: _Hukhratus, verethrajao, hvaresa_. ]

 [Footnote 27: Or: wise. ]

 [Footnote 28 3: Or: strength. Above, 'shared riches, ' perhaps, for 'got happiness. ']

 [Footnote 29: Or: thine, indeed, are the laws of King Varuna. ]

 [Footnote 30: Or: brilliant and beloved as Mitra (Mitra means friend); Aryaman is translated 'bosom-friend'--both are [=A]dityas. ]

 [Footnote 31: Or: an thou willest for us to live we shall not die. ]

 [Footnote 32: Or: lordly plant, but not the moon. ]

 [Footnote 33: Some unessential verses in the above metre are here omitted. ]

 [Footnote 34: Or: shining. ]

 [Footnote 35: The same ideas are prominent in viii. 48, where Soma is invoked as '_soma_ that has been drunk, ' _i. E. , _ the juice of the ('three days fermented') plant. ]

 [Footnote 36: In the fourth book, iv. 27. 3. On this myth, with its reasonable explanation as deduced from the ritual, see Bloomfield, JAOS. Xvi. I ff. Compare also Muir and Hillebrandt, loc. Cit. ]

 * * * * *

CHAPTER VI. 

THE RIG VEDA (CONCLUDED). --YAMA AND OTHER GODS, VEDIC PANTHEISM, ESCHATOLOGY. 

In the last chapter we have traced the character of two great gods ofearth, the altar-fire and the personified kind of beer which was theVedic poets' chief drink till the end of this period. With thediscovery of _sur[=a], humor ex hordeo_ (oryzaque; Weber, _V[=a]japeya_, p. 19), and the difficulty of obtaining the original_soma_-plant (for the plant used later for _soma_, the _asclepiasacida_, or _sarcostemma viminale_, does not grow in the Punj[=a]bregion, and cannot have been the original _soma_), the status of_soma_ became changed. While _sur[=a]_ became the drink of the people, _soma_, despite the fact that it was not now so agreeable a liquor, became reserved, from its old associations, as the priests' (gods')drink, a sacrosanct beverage, not for the vulgar, and not esteemed bythe priest, except as it kept up the rite. 

It has been shown that these gods, earthly in habitation, absorbed thepowers of the older and physically higher divinities. The ideas thatclustered about the latter were transferred to the former. Thealtar-fire, Agni, is at once earth-fire, lightning, and sun. The drink_soma_ is identified with the heavenly drink that refreshes the earth, and from its color is taken at last to be the terrestrial form of itsaqueous prototype, the moon, which is not only yellow, but even goesthrough cloud-meshes just as _soma_ goes through the sieve, with allthe other points of comparison that priestly ingenuity can devise. 

Of different sort altogether from these gods is the ancientIndo-Iranian figure that now claims attention. The older religion hadat least one object of devotion very difficult to reduce to terms of anature-religion. 

YAMA

Exactly as the Hindu had a half-divine ancestor, Manu, who by thelater priests is regarded as of solar origin, while more probably heis only the abstract Adam (man), the progenitor of the race; so inYama the Hindu saw the primitive "first of mortals. " While, however, Mitra, Dyaus, and other older nature-gods, pass into a state ofnegative or almost forgotten activity, Yama, even in the later epicperiod, still remains a potent sovereign--the king of the dead. 

In the Avesta Yima is the son of the 'wide-gleaming' Vivanghvant, thesun, and here it is the sun that first prepares the _soma (haoma)_ forman. And so, too, in the Rig Veda it is Yama the son of Vivasvant (X. 58. 1; 60. 10) who first "extends the web" of (_soma_) sacrifice (VII. 33. 9, 12). The Vedic poet, not influenced by later methods ofinterpretation, saw in Yama neither sun nor moon, nor any othernatural phenomenon, for thus he sings, differentiating Yama from themall: "I praise with a song Agni, P[=u]shan, Sun and Moon, Yama inheaven, Trita, Wind, Dawn, the Ray of Light, the Twin Horsemen" (X. 64. 3); and again: "Deserving of laudation are Heaven and Earth, thefour-limbed Agni, Yama, Aditi, " etc. (X. 92. 11). 

Yama is regarded as a god, although in the Rig Veda he is called only'king' (X. 14. 1, 11); but later he is expressly a god, and this isimplied, as Ehni shows, even in the Rig Veda: 'a god found Agni' and'Yama found Agni' (X. 51. 1 ff. ). His primitive nature was that of the'first mortal that died, ' in the words of the Atharva Veda. It istrue, indeed, that at a later period even gods are spoken of asoriginally 'mortal, '[1] but this is a conception alien from the earlynotions of the Veda, where 'mortal' signifies no more than 'man. ' Yamawas the first mortal, and he lives in the sky, in the home that "holdsheroes, " _i. E. _, his abode is where dead heroes congregate (I. 35. 6;X. 64. 3)[2]. The fathers that died of old are cared for by him as hesits drinking with the gods beneath a fair tree (X. 135. 1-7). Thefire that devours the corpse is invoked to depart thither (X. 16. 9). This place is not very definitely located, but since, according to oneprevalent view, the saints guard the sun, and since Yama's abode inthe sky is comparable with the sun in one or two passages, it isprobable that the general idea was that the departed entered the sunand there Yama received him (I. 105. 9, 'my home is there where arethe sun's rays'; X. 154. 4-5, 'the dead shall go, O Yama, to thefathers, the seers that guard the sun'). 'Yama's abode' is the samewith 'sky' (X. 123. 6); and when it is said, 'may the fathers hold upthe pillar (in the grave), and may Yama build a seat for thee there'(X. 18. 13), this refers, not to the grave, but to heaven. And it issaid that 'Yama's seat is what is called the gods' home' (X. 135. 7)[3]. But Yama does not remain in the sky. He comes, as do otherPowers, to the sacrifice, and is invited to seat himself 'withAngirasas and the fathers' at the feast, where he rejoices with them(X. 14. 3-4; 15. 8). And either because Agni devours corpses for Yama, or because of Agni's part in the sacrifice which Yama so joyfullyattends, therefore Agni is especially mentioned as Yama's friend (X. 21. 5), or even his priest (_ib_. 52. 3). Yama stands in his relationto the dead so near to death that 'to go on Yama's path' is to go onthe path of death; and battle is called 'Yama's strife. ' It is evenpossible that in one passage Yama is directly identified with death(X. 165. 4, 'to Yama be reverence, to death'; I. 38. 5; _ib_. 116. 2)[4]. There is always a close connection between Varuna and Yama, andperhaps it is owing to this that parallel to 'Varuna's fetters' isfound also 'Yama's fetter, ' i. E. , death (x. 97. 16). 

As Yama was the first to die, so was he the first to teach man theroad to immortality, which lies through sacrifice, whereby man attainsto heaven and to immortality. Hence the poet says, 'we revere theimmortality born of Yama' (i. 83. 5). This, too, is the meaning of themystic verse which speaks of the sun as the heavenly courser 'given byYama, ' for, in giving the way to immortality, Yama gives also thesun-abode to them that become immortal. In the same hymn the sun isidentified with Yama as he is with Trita (i. 163. 3). This particularidentification is due, however, rather to the developed pantheisticidea which obtains in the later hymns. A parallel is found in the nexthymn: "They speak of Indra, Mitra, Varuna, Agni . . . That which is one, the priests speak of in many ways, and call him Agni, Yama, Fire" (orWind, i. 164. 46). 

Despite the fact that one Vedic poet speaks of Yama's name as 'easy tounderstand' (x. 12. 6), no little ingenuity has been spent on it, aswell as on the primitive conception underlying his personality. Etymologically, his name means Twin, and this is probably the realmeaning, for his twin sister Yami is also a Vedic personage. The laterage, regarding Yama as a restrainer and punisher of the wicked, derived the name from _yam_ the restrainer or punisher, but such anidea is quite out of place in the province of Vedic thought. TheIranian Yima also has a sister of like name, although she does notappear till late in the literature. 

That Yama's father is the sun, Vivasvant (Savitar, 'the artificer, 'Tvashtar, x. 10. 4-5), [5] is clearly enough stated in theRik; and that he was the first mortal, in the Atharvan. Men come fromYama, and Yama comes from the sun as 'creator, ' just as men elsewherecome from Adam and Adam comes from the Creator. But instead of anHebraic Adam and Eve there are in India a Yama and Yam[=i], brotherand sister (wife), who, in the one hymn in which the latter isintroduced _(loc. Cit. ), _ indulge in a moral conversation on thepropriety of wedlock between brother and sister. This hymn isevidently a protest against a union that was unobjectionable to anolder generation. In the Yajur Veda Yami is wife and sister both. Butsometimes, in the varying fancies of the Vedic poets, the artificerTvashtar is differentiated from Vivasvant, the sun; as he is inanother passage, where Tvashtar gives to Vivasvant his daughter, andshe is the mother of Yama[6]. 

That men are the children of Yama is seen in X. 13. 4, where it issaid, 'Yama averted death for the gods; he did not avert death for(his) posterity. ' In the Brahmanic tradition men derive from the sun(T[=a]itt. S. VI. 5. 6. 2[7]) So, in the Iranian belief, Yima islooked upon, according to some scholars, as the first man. The funeralhymn to Yama is as follows:

 Him who once went over the great mountains[8] and spied out a path for many, the son of Vivasvant, who collects men, King Yama, revere ye with oblations. Yama the first found us a way . . . There where our old fathers are departed. . . . Yama is magnified with the Angirasas. . . . Sit here, O Yama, with the Angirasas and with the fathers. . . . Rejoice, O king, in this oblation. Come, O Yama, with the venerable Angirasas. I call thy father, Vivasvant, sit down at this sacrifice. 

And then, turning to the departed soul:

 Go forth, go forth on the old paths where are gone our old fathers; thou shalt see both joyous kings, Yama and God Varuna. Unite with the fathers, with Yama, with the satisfaction of desires, in highest heaven. . . . Yama will give a resting place to this spirit. Run past, on a good path, the two dogs of Saram[=a], the four-eyed, spotted ones; go unto the fathers who rejoice with Yama. 

Several things are here noteworthy. In the first place, the AtharvaVeda reads, "who first of mortals died[9], " and this is the meaning ofthe Rig Veda version, although, as was said above, the mere fact thatVaruna is called a god and Yama a king proves nothing[10]. But it isclearly implied here that he who crossed the mountains and 'collectedmen, ' as does Yima in the Iranian legend, is an ancient king, as it isalso implied that he led the way to heaven. The dogs of Yama aredescribed in such a way as to remind one of the dogs that guard thepath the dead have to pass in the Iranian legend, and of Kerberus, with whose very name the adjective 'spotted' has been compared[11]. The dogs are elsewhere described as white and brown and as barking(VII. 55. 2), and in further verses of the hymn just quoted (X. 14)they are called "thy guardian dogs, O Yama, the four-eyed ones whoguard the path, who look on men . . . Broad-nosed, dark messengers ofYama, who run among the people. "

These dogs are due to the same fantasy that creates a Kerberus, theIranian dogs[12], or other guardians of the road that leads to heaven. The description is too minute to make it probable that the Vedic poetunderstood them to be 'sun and moon, ' as the later Brahmanicalingenuity explains them, and as they have been explained by modernscholarship. It is not possible that the poet, had he had in mind anyconnection between the dogs and the sun and moon (or 'night and day'), would have described them as 'barking' or as 'broad-nosed and dark';and all interpretation of Yama's dogs must rest on the interpretationof Yama himself[13]. 

Yama is not mentioned elsewhere[14] in the Rig Veda, except in thestatement that 'metres rest on Yama, ' and in the closing verses of theburial hymn: "For Yama press the _soma_, for Yama pour oblation; thesacrifice goes to Yama; he shall extend for us a long life among thegods, " where the pun on Yama (_yamad á_), in the sense of 'stretchout, ' shows that as yet no thought of 'restrainer' was in the poet'smind, although the sense of 'twin' is lost from the name. 

In recent years Hillebrandt argues that because the Manes areconnected with Soma (as the moon), and because Yama was the first todie, therefore Yama was the moon. Ehni, on the other hand, togetherwith Bergaigne and some other scholars, takes Yama to be the sun. Müller calls him the 'setting-sun[15]. ' The argument from the Manesapplies better to the sun than to the moon, but it is not conclusive. The Hindus in the Vedic age, as later, thought of the Manes living instars, moon, sun, and air; and, if they were not good Manes but deadsinners, in the outer edge of the universe or under ground. In short, they are located in every conceivable place[17]. 

The Yama, 'who collects people, ' has been rightly compared with theYima, who 'made a gathering of the people, ' but it is doubtful whetherone should see in this an Aryan trait; for [Greek: Aidaes Agaesilaos]is not early and popular, but late (Aeschylean), and the expressionmay easily have arisen independently in the mind of the Greek poet. From a comparative point of view, in the reconstruction of Yama thereis no conclusive evidence which will permit one to identify hisoriginal character either with sun or moon. Much rather he appears tobe as he is in the Rig Veda, a primitive king, not historically so, but poetically, the first man, fathered of the sun, to whom hereturns, and in whose abode he collects his offspring after theirinevitable death on earth. In fact, in Yama there is the ideal side ofancestor-worship. He is a poetic image, the first of all fathers, andhence their type and king. Yama's name is unknown outside of theIndo-Iranian circle, and though Ehni seeks to find traces of him inGreece and elsewhere, [18] this scholar's identifications fail, becausehe fails to note that similar ideas in myths are no proof of theircommon origin. 

It has been suggested that in the paradise of Yama over the mountainsthere is a companion-piece to the hyperboreans, whose felicity isdescribed by Pindar. The nations that came from the north still keptin legend a recollection of the land from whence they came. Thissuggestion cannot, of course, be proved, but it is the most probableexplanation yet given of the first paradise to which the dead revert. In the late Vedic period, when the souls of the dead were not supposedto linger on earth with such pleasure as in the sky, Yama's abode israised to heaven. Later still, when to the Hindu the south was theland of death, Yama's hall of judgment is again brought down to earthand transferred to the 'southern district. '

The careful investigation of Scherman[19] leads essentially to thesame conception of Yama as that we have advocated. Scherman believesthat Yama was first a human figure, and was then elevated to, if notidentified with, the sun. Scherman's only error is in disputing thegenerally-received opinion, one that is on the whole correct, thatYama in the early period is a kindly sovereign, and in later timesbecomes the dread king of horrible hells. Despite some testimony tothe contrary, part of which is late interpolation in the epic, this isthe antithesis which exists in the works of the respective periods. 

The most important gods of the era of the Rig Veda we now havereviewed. But before passing on to the next period it should benoticed that no small number of beings remains who are of the air, devilish, or of the earth, earthy. Like the demons that injure man byrestraining the rain in the clouds, so there are _bh[=u]ts_, ghosts, spooks, and other lower powers, some malevolent, some good-natured, who inhabit earth; whence demonology. There is, furthermore, a certainchrematheism, as we have elsewhere[20] ventured to call it, whichpervades the Rig Veda, the worship of more or less personified things, differing from pantheism in this, [21] that whereas pantheism assumes alike divinity in all things, this kind of theism assumes thateverything (or anything) has a separate divinity, usually that whichis useful to the worshipper, as, the plough, the furrow, etc. In laterhymns these objects are generally of sacrificial nature, and thestones with which _soma_ is pressed are divine like the plant. Yetoften there is no sacrificial observance to cause this veneration. Hymns are addressed to weapons, to the war-car, as to divine beings. Sorcery and incantation is not looked upon favorably, but neverthelessit is found. 

Another class of divinities includes abstractions, generally female, such as Infinity, Piety, Abundance, with the barely-mentionedGung[=u], R[=a]k[=a], etc. (which may be moon-phases). Themost important of these abstractions[22] is 'the lord of strength, ' apriestly interpretation of Indra, interpreted as religious strength orprayer, to whom are accredited all of Indra's special acts. Hillebrandt interprets this god, Brahmanaspati or Brihaspati, as themoon; Müller, somewhat doubtfully, as fire; while Roth will not allowthat Brihaspati has anything to do with natural phenomena, butconsiders him to have been from the beginning 'lord of prayer. ' Withthis view we partly concur, but we would make the importantmodification that the god was lord of prayer only as priestlyabstraction Indra in his higher development. It is from this god iscome probably the head of the later trinity, Brahm[=a], throughpersonified _brahma_, power; prayer, with its philosophicaldevelopment into the Absolute. Noteworthy is the fact that some of theVedic Aryans, despite his high pretensions, do not quite likeBrihaspati, and look on him as a suspicious novelty. If one studyBrihaspati in the hymns, it will be difficult not to see in him simplya sacerdotal Indra. He breaks the demon's power; crushes the foes ofman; consumes the demons with a sharp bolt; disperses darkness; drivesforth the 'cows'; gives offspring and riches; helps in battle;discovers Dawn and Agni; has a band (like Maruts) singing about him;he is red and golden, and is identified with fire. Although 'father ofgods, ' he is begotten of Tvashtar, the artificer. [23]

Weber has suggested (V[=a]japeya Sacrifice, p. 15), that Brihaspatitakes Indra's place, and this seems to be the true solution, Indra asinterpreted mystically by priests. In RV. I. 190, Brihaspati is lookedupon by 'sinners' as a new god of little value. Other minor deitiescan be mentioned only briefly, chiefly that the extent of the pantheonmay be seen. For the history of religion they are of only collectiveimportance. The All-gods play an important part in the sacrifice, agroup of 'all the gods, ' a priestly manufacture to the end that no godmay be omitted in laudations that would embrace all the gods. Thelater priests attempt to identify these gods with the clans, 'theAll-gods are the clans' (_Çat. Br. _ v. 5. 1. 10), on the basis of atheological _pun_, the clans, _viças_, being equated with the word forall, _viçve_. Some modern scholars follow these later priests, butwithout reason. Had these been special clan-gods, they would have hadspecial names, and would not have appeared in a group alone. 

The later epic has a good deal to say about some lovely nymphs calledthe Apsarasas, of whom it mentions six as chief (Urvaç[=i], Menak[=a], etc. ). [24] They fall somewhat in the epic from their Vedic estate, butthey are never more than secondary figures, love-goddesses, beloved ofthe Gandharvas who later are the singing guardians of the moon, and, like the lunar stations, twenty-seven in number. The Rik knows atfirst but one Gandharva (an inferior genius, mentioned in but onefamily-book), who guards Soma's path, and, when Soma becomes the moon, is identified with him, ix. 86. 36. As in the Avesta, Gandharva is(the moon as) an evil spirit also; but always as a second-rate power, to whom are ascribed magic (and madness, later). He has virtually nocult except in _soma_-hymns, and shows clearly the first Aryanconception of the moon as a demoniac power, potent over women, andassociated with waters. 

Mountains, and especially rivers, are holy, and of course are deified. Primitive belief generally deifies rivers. But in the great river-hymnin the Rig Veda there is probably as much pure poetry as prayer. TheVedic poet half believed in the rivers' divinity, and sings how they'rush forth like armies, ' but it will not do to inquire too strictlyin regard to his belief. 

He was a poet, and did not expect to be catechized. Of femaledivinities there are several of which the nature is doubtful. As Dawnor Storm have been interpreted Saram[=a] and Sarany[=u], both meaning'runner. ' The former is Indra's dog, and her litter is the dogs ofYama. One little poem, rather than hymn, celebrates the 'wood-goddess'in pretty verses of playful and descriptive character. 

Long before there was any formal recognition of the dogma that allgods are one, various gods had been identified by the Vedic poets. Especially, as most naturally, was this the case when diverse godshaving different names were similar in any way, such as Indra andAgni, whose glory is fire; or Varuna and Mitra, whose seat is the sky. From this casual union of like pairs comes the peculiar custom ofinvoking two gods as one. But even in the case of gods not soradically connected, if their functions were mutually approximate, each in turn became credited with his neighbor's acts. If the traitswere similar which characterized each, if the circles of activityoverlapped at all, then those divinities that originally were tangentto each other gradually became concentric, and eventually were united. And so the lines between the gods were wiped out, as it were, by theirconceptions crowding upon one another. There was another factor, however, in the development of this unconscious, or, at least, unacknowledged, pantheism. Aided by the likeness or identity ofattributes in Indra, Savitar, Agni, Mitra, and other gods, many ofwhich were virtually the same under a different designation, thepriests, ever prone to extravagance of word, soon began to attribute, regardless of strict propriety, every power to every god. With theexception of some of the older divinities, whose forms, as they areless complex, retain throughout the simplicity of their primitivecharacter, few gods escaped this adoration, which tended to make themall universally supreme, each being endowed with all the attributes ofgodhead. One might think that no better fate could happen to a godthan thus to be magnified. But when each god in the pantheon wasequally glorified, the effect on the whole was disastrous. In fact, itwas the death of the gods whom it was the intention of the seers toexalt. And the reason is plain. From this universal praise it resultedthat the individuality of each god became less distinct; every god wasbecome, so to speak, any god, so far as his peculiar attributes madehim a god at all, so that out of the very praise that was given to himand his confreres alike there arose the idea of the abstract godhead, the god who was all the gods, the one god. As a pure abstraction onefinds thus Aditi, as equivalent to 'all the gods, '[25] and then themore personal idea of the god that is father of all, which soonbecomes the purely personal All-god. It is at this stage where beginsconscious premeditated pantheism, which in its first beginnings ismore like monotheism, although in India there is no monotheism whichdoes not include devout polytheism, as will be seen in the review ofthe formal philosophical systems of religion. 

It is thus that we have attempted elsewhere[26] to explain that phaseof Hindu religion which Müller calls henotheism. 

Müller, indeed, would make of henotheism a new religion, but this, theworshipping of each divinity in turn as if it were the greatest andeven the only god recognized, is rather the result of the generaltendency to exaltation, united with pantheistic beginnings. Grantingthat pure polytheism is found in a few hymns, one may yet say thatthis polytheism, with an accompaniment of half-acknowledgedchrematheism, passed soon into the belief that several divinities wereultimately and essentially but one, which may be described ashomoiotheism; and that the poets of the Rig Veda were unquestionablyesoterically unitarians to a much greater extent and in an earlierperiod than has generally been acknowledged. Most of the hymns of theRig Veda were composed under the influence of that unification ofdeities and tendency to a quasi-monotheism, which eventually resultsboth in philosophical pantheism, and in the recognition at the sametime of a personal first cause. To express the difference betweenHellenic polytheism and the polytheism of the Rig Veda the lattershould be called, if by any new term, rather by a name likepantheistic polytheism, than by the somewhat misleading wordhenotheism. What is novel in it is that it represents the fading ofpure polytheism and the engrafting, upon a polytheistic stock, of aspeculative homoiousian tendency soon to bud out as philosophicpantheism. 

The admission that other gods exist does not nullify the attitude oftentative monotheism. "Who is like unto thee, O Lord, among the gods?"asks Moses, and his father-in-law, when converted to the new belief, says: "Now I know that the Lord is greater than all gods. "[27] Butthis is not the quasi-monotheism of the Hindu, to whom the other godswere real and potent factors, individually distinct from the onesupreme god, who represents the All-god, but is at once abstract andconcrete. 

Pantheism in the Rig Veda comes out clearly only in one or twopassages: "The priests represent in many ways the (sun) bird that isone"; and (cited above) "They speak of him as Indra, Mitra, Varuna, Agni, . . . That which is but one they call variously. " So, too, in theAtharvan it is said that Varuna (here a pantheistic god) is "in thelittle drop of water, "[28] as in the Rik the spark of material fire isidentified with the sun. 

The new belief is voiced chiefly in that portion of the Rig Veda whichappears to be latest and most Brahmanic in tone. 

Here a supreme god is described under the name of "Lord of Beings, "the "All-maker, " "The Golden Germ, " the "God over gods, the spirit oftheir being" (x. 121). The last, a famous hymn, Müller entitles "Tothe Unknown God. " It may have been intended, as has been suggested, for a theological puzzle, [29] but its language evinces that inwhatever form it is couched--each verse ends with the refrain, 'Towhat god shall we offer sacrifice?' till the last verse answers thequestion, saying, 'the Lord of beings'--it is meant to raise thequestion of a supreme deity and leave it unanswered in terms of anature-religion, though the germ is at bottom fire: "In the beginningarose the Golden Germ; as soon as born he became the Lord of All. Heestablished earth and heaven--to what god shall we offer sacrifice? Hewho gives breath, strength, whose command the shining gods obey; whoseshadow is life and death. . . . When the great waters went everywhereholding the germ and generating light, then arose from them the onespirit (breath) of the gods. . . . May he not hurt us, he the begetter ofearth, the holy one who begot heaven . . . Lord of beings, thou aloneembracest all things . . . "

In this closing period of the Rig Veda--a period which in many ways, the sudden completeness of caste, the recognition of several Vedas, etc. , is much farther removed from the beginning of the work than itis from the period of Brahmanic speculation--philosophy is hard atwork upon the problems of the origin of gods and of being. As in thelast hymn, water is the origin of all things; out of this springsfire, and the wind which is the breath of god. So in the great hymn ofcreation: "There was then neither not-being nor being; there was noatmosphere, no sky. What hid (it)? Where and in the protection ofwhat? Was it water, deep darkness? There was no death nor immortality. There was no difference between night and day. That One breathed . . . Nothing other than this or above it existed. Darkness was concealed indarkness in the beginning. Undifferentiated water was all this(universe). " Creation is then declared to have arisen by virtue ofdesire, which, in the beginning was the origin of mind;[30] and "thegods, " it is said further, "were created after this. " Whether entitysprings from non-entity or vice versa is discussed in another hymn ofthe same book. [31] The most celebrated of the pantheistic hymns isthat in which the universe is regarded as portions of the deityconceived as the primal Person: "Purusha (the Male Person) is thisall, what has been and will be . . . All created things are a fourth ofhim; that which is immortal in the sky is three-fourths of him. " Thehymn is too well known to be quoted entire. All the castes, all gods, all animals, and the three (or four) Vedas are parts of him. [32]

Such is the mental height to which the seers have raised themselvesbefore the end of the Rig Veda. The figure of the Father-god, Praj[=a]pati, 'lord of beings, ' begins here; at first an epithet ofSavitar, and finally the type of the head of a pantheon, such as onefinds him to be in the Br[=a]hmanas. In one hymn only (x. 121) isPraj[=a]pati found as the personal Father-god and All-god. At a timewhen philosophy created the one Universal Male Person, the popularreligion, keeping pace, as far as it could, with philosophy, inventedthe more anthropomorphized, more human, Father-god--whose name isultimately interpreted as an interrogation, God Who? This trait lastsfrom now on through all speculation. The philosopher conceived of afirst source. The vulgar made it a personal god. 

One of the most remarkable hymns of this epoch is that on V[=a]c, Speech, or The Word. Weber has sought in this the prototype of theLogos doctrine (below). The Word, V[=a]c (feminine) is introduced asspeaking (x. 125):

 I wander with the Rudras, with the Vasus, [33] with the [=A]dityas, and with all the gods; I support Mitra, Va['r]una, Indra-Agni, and the twin Açvins . . . I give wealth to him that gives sacrifice, to him that presses the _soma_. I am the queen, the best of those worthy of sacrifice . . . The gods have put me in many places . . . I am that through which one eats, breathes, sees, and hears . . . Him that I love I make strong, to be a priest, a seer, a wise man. 'Tis I bend Rudra's bow to hit the unbeliever; I prepare war for the people; I am entered into heaven and earth. I beget the father of this (all) on the height; my place is in the waters, the sea; thence I extend myself among all creatures and touch heaven with my crown. Even I blow like the wind, encompassing all creatures. Above heaven and above earth, so great am I grown in majesty. 

This is almost Vedantic pantheism with the Vishnuite doctrine of'special grace' included. 

The moral tone of this period--if period it may be called--may best beexamined after one has studied the idea which the Vedic Hindu hasformed of the life hereafter. The happiness of heaven will be typicalof what he regards as best here. Bliss beyond the grave depends inturn upon the existence of the spirit after death, and, that thereader may understand this, we must say a few words in regard to theManes, or fathers dead. "Father Manu, " as he is called, [34] was thefirst 'Man. ' Subsequently he is the secondary parent as a kind ofNoah; but Yama, in later tradition his brother, has taken his place asnorm of the departed fathers, Pitaras. 

These Fathers (Manes), although of different sort than the gods, areyet divine and have many godly powers, granting prayers and lendingaid, as may be seen from this invocation: "O Fathers, may thesky-people grant us life; may we follow the course of the living" (x. 57. 5). One whole hymn is addressed to these quasi-divinities (x. 15):

 Arise may the lowest, the highest, the middlemost Fathers, those worthy of the _soma_, who without harm have entered into the spirit (-world); may these Fathers, knowing the seasons, aid us at our call. This reverence be to-day to the Fathers, who of old and afterwards departed; those who have settled in an earthly sphere, [35] or among peoples living in fair places (the gods?). I have found the gracious Fathers, the descendant(s) and the wide-step[36] of Vishnu; those who, sitting on the sacrificial straw, willingly partake of the pressed drink, these are most apt to come hither. . . . Come hither with blessings, O Fathers; may they come hither, hear us, address and bless us. . . . May ye not injure us for whatever impiety we have as men committed. . . . With those who are our former Fathers, those worthy of _soma_, who are come to the _soma_ drink, the best (fathers), may Yama rejoicing, willingly with them that are willing, eat the oblations as much as is agreeable (to them). Come running, O Agni, with these (fathers), who thirsted among the gods and hastened hither, finding oblations and praised with songs. These gracious ones, the real poets, the Fathers that seat themselves at the sacrificial heat; who are real eaters of oblation; drinkers of oblation; and are set together on one chariot with Indra and the gods. Come, O Agni, with these, a thousand, honored like gods, the ancient, the original Fathers who seat themselves at the sacrificial heat. . . . Thou, Agni, didst give the oblations to the Fathers, that eat according to their custom; do thou (too) eat, O god, the oblation offered (to thee). Thou knowest, O thou knower (or finder) of beings, how many are the Fathers--those who are here, and who are not here, of whom we know, and of whom we know not. According to custom eat thou the well-made sacrifice. With those who, burned in fire or not burned, (now) enjoy themselves according to custom in the middle of the sky, do thou, being the lord, form (for us) a spirit life, a body according to (our) wishes. [37]

Often the Fathers are invoked in similar language in the hymn to the"All-gods" mentioned above, and occasionally no distinction is to benoticed between the powers and attributes of the Fathers and those ofthe gods. The Fathers, like the luminous gods, "give light" (x. 107. 1). Exactly like the gods, they are called upon to aid the living, andeven 'not to harm' (iii. 55. 2; x. 15. 6). According to one verse, theFathers have not attained the greatness of the gods, who impartstrength only to the gods. [38]

The Fathers are kept distinct from the gods. When the laudationsbestowed upon the former are of unequivocal character there is noconfusion between the two. [39]

The good dead, to get to the paradise awaiting them, pass over water(X. 63. 10), and a bridge (ix. 41. 2). Here, by the gift of the gods, not by inherent capacity, they obtain immortality. He that believes onAgni, sings: "Thou puttest the mortal in highest immortality, O Agni";and, accordingly, there is no suggestion that heavenly joys may cease;nor is there in this age any notion of a _Götterdämmerung_. Immortality is described as "continuing life in the highest sky, "another proof that when formulated the doctrine was that the soul ofthe dead lives in heaven or in the sun. [40]

Other cases of immortality granted by different gods are recorded byMuir and Zimmer. Yet in one passage the words, "two paths I have heardof the Fathers (exist), of the gods and of mortals, " may mean that theFathers go the way of mortals or that of gods, rather than, as is theusual interpretation, that mortals have two paths, one of the Fathersand one of the gods, [41] for the dead may live on earth or in the airas well as in heaven. When a good man dies his breath, it is said, goes to the wind, his eye to the sun, etc. [42]--each part to itsappropriate prototype--while the "unborn part" is carried"to the world of the righteous, " after having been burned and heatedby the funeral fire. All these parts are restored to the soul, however, and Agni and Soma return to it what has been injured. Withthis Muir compares a passage in the Atharva Veda where it is said thatthe Manes in heaven rejoice with all their limbs. [43] We dissent, therefore, wholly from Barth, who declares that the dead are conceivedof as "resting forever in the tomb, the narrow house of clay. " Theonly passage cited to prove this is X. 18. 10-13, where are the words(addressed to the dead man at the burial): "Go now to mother earth . . . She shall guard thee from destruction's lap . . . Open wide, O earth, beeasy of access; as a mother her son cover this man, O earth, " etc. Ending with the verse quoted above: "May the Fathers hold the pillarand Yama there build thee a seat. "[44] The following is also found inthe Rig Veda bearing on this point: the prayer that one may meet hisparents after death; the statement that a generous man goes to thegods; and a suggestion of the later belief that one wins immortalityby means of a son. [45]

The joys of paradise are those of earth; and heaven is thus described, albeit in a late hymn:[46] "Where is light inexhaustible; in the worldwhere is placed the shining sky; set me in this immortal, unendingworld, O thou that purifiest thyself (Soma); where is king (Yama), theson of Vivasvant, and the paradise of the sky;[47] where are theflowing waters; there make me immortal. Where one can go as he will;in the third heaven, the third vault of the sky; where are worlds fullof light, there make me immortal; where are wishes and desiresand the red (sun)'s highest place; where one can follow his own habits[48] and have satisfaction; there make me immortal; where existdelight, joy, rejoicing, and joyance; where wishes are obtained, theremake me immortal. "[49] Here, as above, the saints join the Fathers, 'who guard the sun. '

There is a 'bottomless darkness' occasionally referred to as a placewhere evil spirits are to be sent by the gods; and a 'deep place' ismentioned as the portion of 'evil, false, untruthful men'; while Somacasts into 'a hole' (abyss) those that are irreligious. [50]

As darkness is hell to the Hindu, and as in all later time the demonsare spirits of darkness, it is rather forced not to see in theseallusions a misty hell, without torture indeed, but a place for thebad either 'far away, ' as it is sometimes said _(par[=a]váti)_, or'deep down, ' 'under three earths, ' exactly as the Greek has a hellbelow and one on the edge of the earth. Ordinarily, however, the godsare requested simply to annihilate offenders. It is plain, as Zimmersays, from the office of Yama's dogs, that they kept out of paradiseunworthy souls; so that the annihilation cannot have been imagined tobe purely corporeal. But heaven is not often described, and hellnever, in this period. Yet, when the paradise desired is described, itis a place where earthly joys are prolonged and intensified. Zimmerargues that a race which believes in good for the good hereafter mustlogically believe in punishment for the wicked, and Scherman, strangely enough, agrees with this pedantic opinion. [51] If either ofthese scholars had looked away from India to the western Indians hewould have seen that, whereas almost all American Indians believe in ahappy hereafter for good warriors, only a very few tribes have anybelief in punishment for the bad. At most a Niflheim awaits thecoward. Weber thinks the Aryans already believed in a personalimmortality, and we agree with him. Whitney's belief that hell was notknown before the Upanishad period (in his translations of the _KathaUpanishad_) is correct only if by hell torture is meant, and if theAtharvan is later than this Upanishad, which is improbable. 

The good dead in the Rig Veda return with Yama to the sacrifice toenjoy the _soma_ and viands prepared for them by their descendants. Hence the whole belief in the necessity of a son in order to theobtaining of a joyful hereafter. What the rite of burial was to theGreek, a son was to the Hindu, a means of bliss in heaven. Rothapparently thinks that the Rig Veda's heaven is one that can best bedescribed in Dr. Watt's hymn:

 There is a land of pure delight Where saints immortal reign, Eternal day excludes the night, And pleasures banish pain;

and that especial stress should be laid on the word 'pure. ' But thereis very little teaching of personal purity in the Veda, and the poetwho hopes for a heaven where he is to find 'longing women, ' 'desireand its fulfillment' has in mind, in all probability, purely impuredelights. It is not to be assumed that the earlier morality surpassedthat of the later day, when, even in the epic, the hero's reallydesired heaven is one of drunkenness and women _ad libitum_. Of the'good man' in the Rig Veda are demanded piety toward gods and manesand liberality to priests; truthfulness and courage; and in the end ofthe work there is a suggestion of ascetic 'goodness' by means of_tapas_, austerity. [52] Grassman cites one hymn as dedicated to

'Mercy. ' It is really (not a hymn and) not on mercy, but a poempraising generosity. This generosity, however (and in general this istrue of the whole people), is not general generosity, but liberalityto the priests. [53] The blessings asked for are wealth (cattle, horses, gold, etc. ), virile power, male children ('heroic offspring')and immortality, with its accompanying joys. Once there is a tiradeagainst the friend that is false to his friend (truth in act as wellas in word);[54] once only, a poem on concord, which seems to partakeof the nature of an incantation. 

Incantations are rare in the Rig Veda, and appear to be looked upon asobjectionable. So in VII. 104 the charge of a 'magician' is furiouslyrepudiated; yet do an incantation against a rival wife, a mocking hymnof exultation after subduing rivals, and a few other hymns of likesort show that magical practices were well known. [55]

The sacrifice occupies a high place in the religion of the Rig Veda, but it is not all-important, as it is later. Nevertheless, the samepresumptuous assumption that the gods depend on earthly sacrifice isoften made; the result of which, even before the collection wascomplete (IV. 50), was to teach that gods and men depended on the willof the wise men who knew how properly to conduct a sacrifice, thekey-note of religious pride in the Brahmanic period. 

Indra depends on the sacrificial _soma_ to accomplish his great works. The gods first got power through the sacrificial fire and _soma_. [56]That images of the gods were supposed to be powerful may be inferredfrom the late verses, "who buys this Indra, " etc. (above), butallusions to idolatry are elsewhere extremely doubtful. [57]

 * * * * *

 FOOTNOTES:

 [Footnote 1: Compare T[=a]itt. S. VII. 4. 2. 1. The gods win immortality by means of 'sacrifice' in this later priest-ridden period. ]

 [Footnote 2: Ludwig (IV. P. 134) wrongly understands a hell here. ]

 [Footnote 3: 'Yama's seat' is here what it is in the epic, not a chapel (Pischel), but a home. ]

 [Footnote 4: This may mean 'to Yama (and) to death. ' In the Atharva Veda, V. 24. 13-14, it is said that Death is the lord of men; Yama, of the Manes. ]

 [Footnote 5: It is here said, also, that the 'Gandharva in the waters and the water-woman' are the ties of consanguinity between Yama and Yam[=i], which means, apparently, that their parents were Moon and Water; a late idea, as in viii. 48. 13 (unique). ]

 [Footnote 6: The passage, X. 17, 1-2, is perhaps meant as a riddle, as Bloomfield suggests (JAOS. XV. P. 172). At any rate, it is still a dubious passage. Compare Hillebrandt, _Vedische Mythologie_, I. P. 503. ]

 [Footnote 7: Cited by Scherman, _Visionslitteratur_, p. 147. ]

 [Footnote 8: Possibly, 'streams. ']

 [Footnote 9: AV. XVIII. 3. 13. ]

 [Footnote 10: Compare AV. VI. 88. 2: "King Varuna and God Brihaspati, " where both are gods. ]

 [Footnote 11: [Greek: Kerberos](=Çabala)=_Ç[=a]rvara_. Saram[=a] is storm or dawn, or something else that means 'runner. ']

 [Footnote 12: Here the fiend is expelled by a four-eyed dog or a white one which has yellow ears. See the _Sacred Books of the East_, IV. P. IXXXVII. ]

 [Footnote 13: Scherman proposes an easy solution, namely to cut the description in two, and make only part of it refer to the dogs! (_loc. Cit_. P. 130). ]

 [Footnote 14: The dogs may be meant in I. 29. 3, but compare II. 31. 5. Doubtful is I. 66. 8, according to Bergaigne, applied to Yama as fire. ]

 [Footnote 15: _India_, p. 224. ]

 [Footnote 17: Barth, p. 23, cites I. 123. 6; X. 107. 2; 82. 2, to prove that stars are souls of dead men. These passages do not prove the point, but it may be inferred from X. 68. 11. Later on it is a received belief. A moon-heaven is found only in VIII. 48. ]

 [Footnote 18: Especially with Ymir in Scandinavian mythology. ]

 [Footnote 19: _Visionslitteratur_, 1892. ]

 [Footnote 20: _Henotheism in the Rig Veda_, p. 81. ]

 [Footnote 21: This religious phase is often confounded loosely with pantheism, but the distinction should be observed. Parkman speaks of (American) Indian 'pantheism'; and Barth speaks of ritualistic 'pantheism, ' meaning thereby the deification of different objects used in sacrifice (p. 37, note). But chrematheism is as distinct from pantheism as it is from fetishism. ]

 [Footnote 22: Some seem to be old; thus Aramati, piety, has an Iranian representative, [=A]rma[=i]t[=i]. As masculine abstractions are to be added Anger, Death, etc. ]

 [Footnote 23: Compare iv. 50; ii. 23 and 24; v. 43. 12; x. 68. 9; ii. 26. 3; 23. 17; x. 97. 15. For interpretation compare Hillebrandt, _Ved. Myth. _ i. 409-420; Bergaigne, _La Rel, Vèd. _ i. 304; Muir, OST, v. 272 ff. (with previous literature). ]

 [Footnote 24: _Mbh[=a]_. I. 74. 68. Compare Holtzmann, ZDMG. Xxxiii. 631 ff. ]

 [Footnote 25: i. 89. 10: "Aditi is all the gods and men; Aditi is whatever has been born; Aditi is whatever will be born. "]

 [Footnote 26: _Henotheism in the Rig Veda_ (Drisler Memorial). ]

 [Footnote 27: Ex. Xv. 11; xviii. 11. ]

 [Footnote 28: RV. X. 114. 5; i. 164. 46; AV. Iv. 16. 3. ]

 [Footnote 29: Bloomfield, JAOS. Xv. 184. ]

 [Footnote 30: "Desire, the primal seed of mind, " x. 129. 4. ]

 [Footnote 31: x. 72 (contains also the origin of the gods from Aditi). ]

 [Footnote 32: x. 90, Here _chand[=a][. M]si_, carmina, is probably the Atharvan. ]

 [Footnote 33: Rudras, Vasus, and [=A]dityas, the three famous groups of gods. The Vasus are in Indra's train, the 'shining, ' or, perhaps, 'good' gods. ]

 [Footnote 34: ii. 33. 13; x. 100. 5, etc. If the idea of manus=bonus be rejected, the Latin _manes_ may be referred to _m[=a]navas_, the children of Manu. ]

 [Footnote 35: Or: "in an earthly place, in the atmosphere, or, " etc. ]

 [Footnote 36: That is where the Fathers live. This is the only place where the Fathers are said to be _náp[=a]t_ (descendants) of Vishnu, and here the sense may be "I have discovered _Náp[=a]t_ (fire?)" But in i. 154. 5 Vishnu's worshippers rejoice in his home. ]

 [Footnote 37: Or: "form as thou wilt this body (of a corpse) to spirit life. "]

 [Footnote 38: x. 56. 4; otherwise, Grassmann. ]

 [Footnote 39: vi. 73. 9 refers to ancestors on earth, not in heaven. ]

 [Footnote 40: Compare Muir, OST. V. 285, where i. 125. 5 is compared with x. 107. 2: "The gift-giver becomes immortal; the gift-giver lives in the sky; he that gives horses lives in the sun. " Compare Zimmer, _Altind. Leben_ p. 409; Geiger, _Ostiran. Cultur_, p. 290. ]

 [Footnote 41: x. 88. 15, word for word: "two paths heard of the Fathers I, of the gods and of mortals. " Cited as a mystery, Brih. [=A]ran. Up. Vi. 2. 2. ]

 [Footnote 42: x. 16. 3: "if thou wilt go to the waters or to the plants, " is added after this (in addressing the soul of the dead man). Plant-souls occur again in x. 58. 7. ]

 [Footnote 43: A V. XVIII. 4. 64; Muir, Av. _loc. Cit. _ p. 298. A passage of the Atharvan suggests that the dead may have been exposed as in Iran, but there is no trace of this in the Rig Veda (Zimmer, _loc. Cit. _ p. 402). ]

 [Footnote 44: Barth, _Vedic Religions_, p. 23; _ib. _, the narrow 'house of clay, ' RV. VII. 89. 1. ]

 [Footnote 45: I. 24. 1; I. 125. 6; VII. 56. 24; cited by Müller, _Chips_, I. P. 45. ]

 [Footnote 46: IX. 113. 7 ff. ]

 [Footnote 47: _Avar[=o]dhana[. M] divás_, 'enclosure of the sky. ']

 [Footnote 48: Literally, 'where custom' (obtains), _i. E. _, where the old usages still hold. ]

 [Footnote 49: The last words are to be understood as of sensual pleasures (Muir, _loc. Cit. _ p. 307, notes 462, 463). ]

 [Footnote 50: RV. II. 29. 6; VII. 104. 3, 17; IV. 5. 5; IX. 73. 8. Compare Mulr, _loc. Cit_. Pp. 311-312; and Zimmer, _loc. Cit. _ pp. 408, 418. Yama's 'hero-holding abode' is not a hell, as Ludwig thinks, but, as usual, the top vault of heaven. ]

 [Footnote 51: _loc. Cit. _ p. 123. ]

 [Footnote 52: X. 154. 2; 107. 2. Compare the mad ascetic, _múni_, VIII. 17. 14. ]

 [Footnote 53: X. 117. This is clearly seen in the seventh verse, where is praised the 'Brahman who talks, ' _i. E. _, can speak in behalf of the giver to the gods (compare verse three). ]

 [Footnote 54: X. 71. 6. ]

 [Footnote 55: Compare X. 145; 159. In X. 184 there is a prayer addressed to the goddesses Sin[=i]v[=a]l[=i] and Sarasvat[=i] (in conjunction with Vishnu, Tvashtar, the Creator, Praj[=a]pati, and the Horsemen) to make a woman fruitful. ]

 [Footnote 56: II. 15. 2; X. 6. 7 (Barth, _loc. Cit. _ p. 36). The sacrifice of animals, cattle, horses, goats, is customary; that of man, legendary; but it is implied in X. 18. 8 (Hillebrandt, ZDMG. Xl p. 708), and is ritualized in the next period (below). ]

 [Footnote 57: Phallic worship may be alluded to in that of the 'tail-gods, ' as Garbe thinks, but it is deprecated. One verse, however, which seems to have crept in by mistake, is apparently due to phallic influence (VIII. 1. 34), though such a cult was not openly acknowledged till Çiva-worship began, and is no part of Brahmanism. ]

 * * * * *

CHAPTER VII. 

THE RELIGION OF THE ATHARVA VEDA. 

The hymns of the Rig Veda inextricably confused; the deities of anearlier era confounded, and again merged together in a pantheism nowcomplete; the introduction of strange gods; recognition of a hell oftorture; instead of many divinities the One that represents all thegods, and nature as well; incantations for evil purposes and charmsfor a worthy purpose; formulae of malediction to be directed against'those whom I hate and who hate me'; magical verses to obtainchildren, to prolong life, to dispel 'evil magic, ' to guard againstpoison and other ills; the paralyzing extreme of ritualistic reverenceindicated by the exaltation to godhead of the 'remnant' of sacrifice;hymns to snakes, to diseases, to sleep, time, and the stars; curses onthe 'priest-plaguer'--such, in general outline, is the impressionproduced by a perusal of the Atharvan after that of the Rig Veda. Howmuch of this is new?

The Rig Veda is not lacking in incantations, in witchcraft practices, in hymns to inanimate things, in indications of pantheism. But thegeneral impression is produced, both by the tone of such hymns asthese and by their place in the collection, that they are an additionto the original work. On the other hand, in reading the Atharvan hymnsthe collective impression is decidedly this, that what to the Rig isadventitious is essential to the Atharvan. 

It has often been pointed out, however, that not only the practicesinvolved, but the hymns themselves, in the Atharvan, may have existedlong before they were collected, and that, while the Atharvancollection, as a whole, takes historical place after the Rig Veda, there yet may be comprised in the former much which is as old as anypart of the latter work. It is also customary to assume that suchhymns as betoken a lower worship (incantations, magical formulae, etc. ) were omitted purposely from the Rig Veda to be collected in theAtharvan. That which eventually can neither be proved nor disprovedis, perhaps, best left undiscussed, and it is vain to seek scientificproof where only historic probabilities are obtainable. Yet, if acloser approach to truth be attractive, even a greater probabilitywill be a gain, and it becomes worth while to consider the problem alittle with only this hope in view. 

Those portions of the Rig Veda which seem to be Atharvan-like are, ingeneral, to be found in the later books (or places) of the collection. But it would be presumptuous to conclude that a work, although almostentirely given up to what in the Rig Veda appears to be late, shoulditself be late in origin. By analogy, in a nature-religion such as wasthat of India, the practice of demonology, witchcraft, etc. , must havebeen an early factor. But, while this is true, it is clearlyimpossible to postulate therefrom that the hymns recording all thisarray of cursing, deviltry, and witchcraft are themselves early. Thefurther forward one advances into the labyrinth of Hindu religions themore superstitions, the more devils, demons, magic, witchcraft, anduncanny things generally, does he find. Hence, while any onesuperstitious practice may be antique, there is small probability forassuming a contemporaneous origin of the hymns of the two collections. The many verses cited, apparently pell-mell, from the Rig Veda, might, it is true, revert to a version older than that in which they arefound in the Rig Veda, but there is nothing to show that they were nottaken from the Rig Veda, and re-dressed in a form that rendered themin many cases more intelligible; so that often what is respectfullyspoken of as a 'better varied reading' of the Atharvan may be better, as we have said in the introductory chapter, only in lucidity; and thelucidity be due to tampering with a text old and unintelligible. Classical examples abound in illustrations. 

Nevertheless, although an antiquity equal to that of the whole RigVeda can by no means be claimed for the Atharvan collection (which, atleast in its tone, belongs to the Brahmanic period), yet is the massrepresented by the latter, if not contemporaneous, at any rate sovenerable, that it safely may be assigned to a period as old as thatin which were composed the later hymns of the Rik itself. But indistinction from the hymns themselves the weird religion theyrepresent is doubtless as old, if not older, than that of the RigVeda. For, while the Rig Vedic _soma-_cult is Indo-Iranian, theoriginal Atharvan (fire) cult is even more primitive, and the basis ofthe work, from this point of view, may have preceded the compositionof Rik hymns. This Atharvan religion--if it may be called so--is, therefore, of exceeding importance. It opens wide the door which theRik puts ajar, and shows a world of religious and mystical ideas whichwithout it could scarcely have been suspected. Here magic eclipsesSoma and reigns supreme. The wizard is greater than the gods; hisherbs and amulets are sovereign remedies. Religion is seen on itslowest side. It is true that there is 'bad magic' and 'good magic'(the existence of the former is substantiated by the maledictionsagainst it), but what has been received into the collection isapparently the best. To heal the sick and procure desirable things isthe object of most of the charms and incantations--but some of thedesirable things are disease and death of one's foes. On the higherside of religion, from a metaphysical point of view, the Atharvan ispantheistic. It knows also the importance of the 'breaths, '[1] thevital forces; it puts side by side the different gods and says thateach 'is lord. ' It does not lack philosophical speculation which, although most of it is puerile, sometimes raises questions of widerscope, as when the sage inquires who made the body with its wonderfulparts--implying, but not stating the argument, from design, in itsoldest form. [2]

Of magical verses there are many, but the content is seldom more than"do thou, O plant, preserve from harm, " etc. Harmless enough, ifsomewhat weak, are also many other hymns calculated to procureblessings:

 Blessings blow to us the wind, Blessings glow to us the sun, Blessings be to us the day, Blest to us the night appear, Blest to us the dawn shall shine, is a fair specimen of this innocuous sort of verse. [3] Another examplemay be seen in this hymn to a king: "Firm is the sky; firm is theearth; firm, all creation; firm, these hills; firm the king of thepeople (shall be), " etc. [4] In another hymn there is an incantation torelease from possible ill coming from a foe and from inherited ill orsin. [5] A free spirit of doubt and atheism, already foreshadowed inthe Rig Veda, is implied in the prayer that the god will be mercifulto the cattle of that man "whose creed is 'Gods exist. '"[6]Serpent-worship is not only known, but prevalent. [7] The old godsstill hold, as always, their nominal places, albeit the system ispantheistic, so that Varuna is god of waters; and Mitra with Varuna, gods of rain. [8] As a starting-point of philosophy the dictum of theRig Veda is repeated: 'Desire is the seed of mind, ' and 'love, _i. E. _, desire, was born first. ' Here Aditi is defined anew as the one inwhose lap is the wide atmosphere-- she is parent and child, gods andmen, all in all--'may she extend to us a triple shelter. ' As anexample of curse against curse may be compared II. 7:

 The sin-hated, god-born plant, that frees from the curse as waters (wash out) the spot, has washed away all curses, the curse of my rival and of my sister; (that) which the Brahman in anger cursed, all this lies under my feet . . . With this plant protect this (wife), protect my child, protect our property . . . May the curse return to the curser . . . We smite even the ribs of the foe with the evil (_mantra_) eye. 

A love-charm in the same book (II. 30) will remind the classicalstudent of Theocritus' second idyl: 'As the wind twirls around grassupon the ground, so I twirl thy mind about, that thou mayst becomeloving, that thou mayst not depart from me, ' etc. In the followingverses the Horsemen gods are invoked to unite the lovers. Characteristic among bucolic passages is the cow-song in II. 26, thewhole intent of which is to ensure a safe return to the cows on theirwanderings: 'Hither may they come, the cattle that have wandered faraway, ' etc. 

The view that there are different conditions of Manes is clearlytaught in XVIII. 2. 48-49, where it is said that there are threeheavens, in the highest of which reside the Manes; while a distinctionis made at the same time between 'fathers' and 'grandfathers, ' thefathers' fathers, 'who have entered air, who inhabit earth andheaven. ' Here appears nascent the doctrine of 'elevating the Fathers, 'which is expressly taught in the next era. The performance of rites inhonor of the Manes causes them to ascend from a low state to a higherone. In fact, if the offerings are not given at all, the spirits donot go to heaven. In general the older generations of Manes go uphighest and are happiest. The personal offering is only to theimmediate fathers. 

If, as was shown in the introductory chapter, the Atharvan representsa geographical advance on the part of the Vedic Aryans, this factcannot be ignored in estimating the primitiveness of the collection. Geographical advance, acquaintance with other flora and fauna thanthose of the Rig Veda, means--although the argument of silence mustnot be exaggerated--a temporal advance also. And not less significantare the points of view to which one is led in the useful little workof Scherman on the philosophical hymns of the Atharvan. Schermanwishes to show the connection between the Upanishads and Vedas. Butthe bearing of his collection is toward a closer union of the twobodies of works, and especially of the Atharvan, not to the greatergain in age of the Upanishads so much as to the depreciation invenerableness of the former. If the Atharvan has much more in commonwith the Br[=a]hmanas and Upanishads than has the Rig Veda, it isbecause the Atharvan stands, in many respects, midway in time betweenthe era of Vedic hymnology and the thought of the philosophicalperiod. The terminology is that of the Br[=a]hmanas, rather than thatof the Rig Veda. The latter knows the great person; the Atharvan, andthe former know the original great person, _i. E. _. , the _tausa movens_under the _causa efficiens_, etc. In the Atharvan appears first theworship of Time, Love, 'Support' (Skambha), and the 'highest _brahma_. The cult of the holy cow is fully recognized (XII. 4 and 5). The lateritualistic terms, as well as linguistic evidence, confirm the factindicated by the geographical advance. The country is known fromwestern Balkh to eastern Beh[=a]r, the latter familiarly. [9] In aword, one may conclude that on its higher side the Atharvan is laterthan the Rig Veda, while on its lower side of demonology one mayrecognize the religion of the lower classes as compared with that ofthe two upper classes--for the latter the Rig Veda, for thesuperstitious people at large the Atharvan, a collectionof which the origin agrees with its application. For, if it at firstwas devoted to the unholy side of fire-cult, and if the fire-cult isolder than the _soma_-cult, then this is the cult that one wouldexpect to see most affected by the conservative vulgar, who in Indiahold fast to what the cultured have long dropped as superstition, or, at least, pretended to drop; though the house-ritual keeps some magicin its fire-cult. 

In that case, it may be asked, why not begin the history of Hindureligion with the Atharvan, rather than with the Rig Veda? Because theAtharvan, as a whole, in its language, social conditions, geography, 'remnant' worship, etc. , shows that this literary collection isposterior to the Rik collection. As to individual hymns, especiallythose imbued with the tone of fetishism and witchcraft, any one ofthem, either in its present or original form, may outrank the wholeRik in antiquity, as do its superstitions the religion of the Rik--ifit is right to make a distinction between superstition and religion, meaning by the former a lower, and by the latter a more elevated formof belief in the supernatural. 

The difference between the Rik-worshipper and Atharvan-worshipper issomewhat like that which existed at a later age between thephilosophical Çivaite and Durg[=a]ite. The former revered Çiva, butdid not deny the power of a host of lesser mights, whom he was ashamedto worship too much; the latter granted the all-god-head of Çiva, butpaid attention almost exclusively to some demoniac divinity. Superstition, perhaps, always precedes theology; but as surely doessuperstition outlive any one form of its protean rival. And the simplereason is that a theology is the real belief of few, and varies withtheir changing intellectual point of view; while superstition is thebelief unacknowledged of the few and acknowledged of the many, nordoes it materially change from age to age. The rites employed amongthe clam-diggers on the New York coast, the witch-charms they use, theincantations, cutting of flesh, fire-oblations, meaningless formulae, united with sacrosanct expressions of the church, are all on a parwith the religion of the lower classes as depicted in Theocritus andthe Atharvan. If these mummeries and this hocus-pocus were collectedinto a volume, and set out with elegant extracts from the Bible, therewould be a nineteenth century Atharva Veda. What are the necessaryequipment of a Long Island witch? First, "a good hot fire, " and thenformulae such as this:[10]

 "If a man is attacked by wicked people and how to banish them:

 "Bedgoblin and all ye evil spirits, I, N. N. , forbid you my bedstead, my couch; I, N. N. , forbid you in the name of God my house and home; I forbid you in the name of the Holy Trinity my blood and flesh, my body and soul; I forbid you all the nail-holes in my house and home, till you have travelled over every hill, waded through every water, have counted all the leaves of every tree, and counted all the stars in the sky, until the day arrives when the mother of God shall bare her second son. "

If this formula be repeated three times, with the baptismal name ofthe person, it will succeed!

 "To make one's self invisible:

 "Obtain the ear of a black cat, boil it in the milk of a black cow, wear it on the thumb, and no one will see you. "

This is the Atharvan, or fire-and witch-craft of to-day--not differingmuch from the ancient. It is the unchanging foundation of the manylofty buildings of faith that are erected, removed, and rebuilt uponit--the belief in the supernatural at its lowest, a belief which, inits higher stages, is always level with the general intellect of thosethat abide in it. 

The latest book of the Atharvan is especially for the warrior-caste, but the mass of it is for the folk at large. It was long before it wasrecognized as a legitimate Veda. It never stands, in the older periodof Brahmanism, on a par with the S[=a]man and Rik. In the epic periodgood and bad magic are carefully differentiated, and even to-day theAtharvan is repudiated by southern Br[=a]hmans. But there is no doubtthat _sub rosa_, the silliest practices inculcated and formulated inthe Atharvan were the stronghold of a certain class of priests, orthat such priests were feared and employed by the laity, openly by thelow classes, secretly by the intelligent. 

In respect of the name the magical cult was referred, historicallywith justice, to the fire-priests, Atharvan and Angiras, though littleapplication to fire, other than in _soma_-worship, is apparent. Yetwas this undoubtedly the source of the cult (the fire-cult is stilldistinctly associated with the Atharva Veda in the epic), and the nameis due neither to accident nor to a desire to invoke the names ofgreat seers, as will Weber. [11] The other name of Brahmaveda may haveconnection with the 'false science of Brihaspati, ' alluded to in aUpanishad. [12] This seer is not over-orthodox, and later he is thepatron of the unorthodox C[=a]rv[=a]kas. It was seen above that thegod Brihaspati is also a novelty not altogether relished by the VedicAryans. 

From an Aryan point of view how much weight is to be placed oncomparisons of the formulae in the Atharvan of India with those ofother Aryan nations? Kuhn has compared[13] an old German magic formulaof healing with one in the Atharvan, and because each says 'limb tolimb' he thinks that they are of the same origin, particularly sincethe formula is found in Russian. The comparison is interesting, but itis far from convincing. Such formulae spring up independently all overthe earth. 

Finally, it is to be observed that in this Veda first occurs theimplication of the story of the flood (xix. 39. 8), and the saving ofFather Manu, who, however, is known by this title in the Rik. Thesupposition that the story of the flood is derived from Babylon, seems, therefore, to be an unnecessary (although a permissible)hypothesis, as the tale is old enough in India to warrant a belief inits indigenous origin. [14]

 * * * * *

 FOOTNOTES:

 [Footnote 1: XV. 15. ]

 [Footnote 2: X. 2. ]

 [Footnote 3: VII. 69. Compare RV. VII. 35, and the epic (below). ]

 [Footnote 4: X. 173. ]

 [Footnote 5: V. 30. ]

 [Footnote 6: XI. 2. 28. ]

 [Footnote 7: XI. 9; VIII. 6 and 7, with tree-worship. ]

 [Footnote 8: V. 24. 4-5. On 'the one god' compare X. 8. 28; XIII. 4. 15. Indra as S[=u]rya, in VII. 11; cf. Xiii. 4; XVII. 1. 24. Pantheism in X. 7. 14. 25. Of charms, compare ii. 9, to restore life; III. 6, a curse against 'whom I hate'; III. 23, to obtain offspring. On the stars and night, see hymn at XIX. 8 and 47. In V. 13, a guard against poison; _ib. _ a hymn to a drum; _ib. _ 31, a charm to dispel evil magic; VI. 133, magic to produce long life; V. 23, against worms, etc. , etc. Aditi, VII. 6. 1-4 (partly Rik). ]

 [Footnote 9: Compare Muir, OST. II. 447 ff. ]

 [Footnote 10: This old charm is still used among the clam-diggers of Canarsie, N. Y. ]

 [Footnote 11: _Ind. Lit_^2 p. 164. ]

 [Footnote 12: _M[=a]it. Up. _. Vii. 9. He is 'the gods' Brahm[=a]' (Rik. )]

 [Footnote 13: _Indische und germanische Segenssprüche_; KZ. Xiii. 49. ]

 [Footnote 14: One long hymn, xii. 1, of the Atharvan is to earth and fire (19-20). In the Rik, _átharvan_ is fire-priest and bringer of fire from heaven; while once the word may mean fire itself (viii. 9, 7). The name Brahmaveda is perhaps best referred to _brahma_ as fire (whence 'fervor, ' 'prayer, ' and again 'energy, ' 'force'). In distinction from the great _soma_-sacrifices, the fire-cult always remains the chief thing in the domestic ritual. The present Atharvan formulae have for the most part no visible application to fire, but the name still shows the original connection. ]

 * * * * *

CHAPTER VIII. 

EARLY HINDU DIVINITIES COMPARED WITH THOSE OF OTHER ARYANS. 

Nothing is more usual than to attempt a reconstruction of Aryan ideasin manners, customs, laws, and religious conceptions, by placing sideby side similar traits of individual Aryan nations, and stating orinsinuating that the result of the comparison shows that one ishandling primitive characteristics of the whole Aryan body. It is ofspecial importance, therefore, to see in how far the views andpractices of peoples not Aryan may be found to be identical with thoseof Aryans. The division of the army into clans, as in the Iliad andthe Veda; the love of gambling, as shown by Greeks, Teutons, andHindus; the separation of captains and princes, as is illustrated byTeuton and Hindu; the belief in a flood, common to Iranian, Greek, andHindu; in the place of departed spirits, with the journey over a river(Iranian, Hindu, Scandinavian, Greek); in the after-felicity ofwarriors who die on the field of battle (Scandinavian, Greek, andHindu); in the reverence paid to the wind-god (Hindu, Iranian, andTeutonic, V[=a]ta-Wotan); these and many other traits at differenttimes, by various writers, have been united and compared to illustrateprimitive Aryan belief and religion. 

The traits of the Five Nations of the Veda for this reason may becompared very advantageously with the traits of the Five Nations ofthe Iroquois Indians, the most united and intelligent of Americannative tribes. Their institutions are not yet extinct, and they havebeen described by missionaries of the 17th century and by some modernwriters, to whom can be imputed no hankering after Aryan primitiveideas. [1] It is but a few years back since the last _avat[=a]r_ of theIroquois' incarnate god lived in Onondaga, N. Y. 

First, as an illustration of the extraordinary development of memoryamong rhapsodes, Vedic students, and other Aryans; among the Iroquois"memory was tasked to the utmost, and developed to an extraordinarydegree, " says Parkman, who adds that they could repeat point by pointwith precision any address made to them. [2] Murder was compromised forby _Wehrgeld_, as among the Vedic, Iranic, and Teutonic peoples. TheIroquois, like all Indians, was a great gambler, staking all hisproperty[3] (like the Teutons and Hindus). In religion "A mysteriousand inexplicable power resides in inanimate things . . . Lakes, rivers, and waterfalls [as conspicuously in India] are sometimes thedwelling-place of spirits; but more frequently they are themselvesliving beings, to be propitiated by prayers and offerings. "[4] Thegreatest spirit among the Algonquins is the descendant of the moon, and son of the west-wind (personified). After the deluge (thus theHindus, etc. ) this great spirit (Manabozho, _mana_ is Manu?) restoredthe world; some asserting that he created the world out of water. Butothers say that the supreme spirit is the sun (Le Jeune, Relation, 1633). The Algonquins, besides a belief in a good spirit (_manitou_), had also a belief in a malignant _manitou_, in whom the missionariesrecognized the devil (why not Ormuzd and Ahriman?). One tribe invokesthe 'Maker of Heaven, ' the 'god of waters, ' and also the 'sevenspirits of the wind' (so, too, seven is a holy number in the Veda, etc. ). 

The Iroquois, like the Hindu (later), believe that the earth rests onthe back of a turtle or tortoise[5], and that this is ruled over bythe sun and moon, the first being a good spirit; the second, malignant. The good spirit interposes between the malice of the moonand mankind, and it is he who makes rivers; for when the earth wasparched, all the water being held back from earth under the armpit ofa monster frog, he pierced the armpit and let out the water (exactlyas Indra lets out the water held back by the demon). According tosome, this great spirit created mankind, but in the third generation adeluge destroyed his posterity[6]. The good spirit among the Iroquoisis the one that gives good luck (perhaps Bhaga). These Indians believein the immortality of the soul. Skillful hunters, brave warriors, go, after death, to the happy hunting-grounds (as in India andScandinavia); the cowardly and weak are doomed to live in drearyregions of mist and darkness (compare Niflheim and the Iranianeschatology?). To pass over other religious correspondences, thesacrifice of animals, use of amulets, love-charms, magic, and sorcery, which are all like those of Aryans (to compare, also, are the buryingor exposing of the dead and the Hurons' funeral games), let one takethis as a good illustration of the value of 'comparative Aryanmythology':

According to the Aryan belief the soul of the dead passes over astream, across a bridge, past a dog or two, which guard the gate ofparadise. The Hindu, Iranian, Greek, and Scandinavian, all have thedog, and much emphasis has been laid on the 'Aryan' character of thiscreed. The native Iroquois Indians believed that "the spirits on theirjourney (to heaven) were beset with difficulties and perils. There wasa swift river to be crossed on a log that shook beneath the feet, while a ferocious dog opposed their passage[7]. " Here is the Persians'narrow bridge, and even Kerberos himself!

It is also interesting to note that, as the Hindus identify with thesun so many of their great gods, so the Iroquois "sacrifices to somesuperior spirit, or to the sun, with which the superior spirits wereconstantly confounded by the primitive Indian[8]. "

Weber holds that because Greek and Hindu gave the name 'bear' to aconstellation, therefore this is the "primitive Indo-Germanic name ofthe star[9]. " But the Massachusetts Indians "gave their own name forbear to the Ursa major" (Williams' 'Key, ' cited Palfrey, I. P. 36; soLafitau, further west). 

Again, three, seven, and even 'thrice-seven, ' are holy not only inIndia but in America. 

In this new world are found, to go further, the analogues of Varuna inthe monotheistic god Viracocha of the Peruvians, to whom is addressedthis prayer: "Cause of all things! ever present, helper, creator, evernear, ever fortunate one! Thou incorporeal one above the sun, infinite, and beneficent[10]"; of the Vedic Snake of the Deep, in theMexican Cloud-serpent; of the Vedic Lightning-bird, who brings firefrom heaven, in the Indian Thunder-bird, who brings fire fromheaven[11]; of the preservation of one individual from a flood (in theepic, Manu's 'Seven Seers') in the same American myth, even includingthe holy mountain, which is still shown[12]; of the belief that thesun is the home of departed spirits, in the same belief all overAmerica;[13] of the belief that stars are the souls of the dead, inthe same belief held by the Pampas;[14] and even of the late Brahmaniccustom of sacrificing the widow (suttee), in the practice of theNatchez Indians, and in Guatemala, of burning the widow on the pyre ofthe dead husband. [15] The storm wind (Odin) as highest god is foundamong the Choctaws; while 'Master of Breath' is the Creeks' name forthis divinity. Huraka (hurricane, ouragon, ourage) is the chief god inHayti. [16] An exact parallel to the vague idea of hell at the close ofthe Vedic period, with the gradual increase of the idea, alternatingwith a theory of reincarnation, may be found in the fact that, ingeneral, there is no notion of punishment after death among theIndians of the New World; but that, while the good are assisted andcared for after death by the 'Master of Breath, ' the Creeks believethat the liar, the coward, and the niggard (Vedic sinners _parexcellence!_) are left to shift for themselves in darkness; whereasthe Aztecs believed in a hell surrounded by the water called 'NineRivers, ' guarded by a dog and a dragon; and the great Eastern Americantribes believe that after the soul has been for a while in heaven itcan, if it chooses, return to earth and be born again as a man, utilizing its old bones (which are, therefore, carefully preserved bythe surviving members of the family) as a basis for a new body. [17]

To turn to another foreign religion, how tempting would it be to seein Nutar the 'abstract power' of the Egyptian, an analogue of _brahma_and the other 'power' abstractions of India; to recognize Brahm[=a] inEl; and in Nu, sky, and expanse of waters, to see Varuna; especiallywhen one compares the boat-journey of the Vedic seer with R[=a]'s boatin Egypt. Or, again, in the twin children of R[=a] to see the Açvins;and to associate the mundane egg of the Egyptians with that of theBrahmans. [18] Certainly, had the Egyptians been one of the Aryanfamilies, all these conceptions had been referred long ago to thecategory of 'primitive Aryan ideas. ' But how primitive is a certainreligious idea will not be shown by simple comparison of Aryanparallels. It will appear more often that it is not 'primitive, ' but, so to speak, per-primitive, aboriginal with no one race, but with therace of man. When we come to describe the religions of the wild tribesof India it will be seen that among them also are found traits common, on the one hand, to the Hindu, and on the other to the wild tribes ofAmerica. With this warning in mind one may inquire at last in how fara conservative judgment can find among the Aryans themselves anidentity of original conception in the different forms of divinitiesand religious rites. Foremost stand the universal chrematheism, worship of inanimate objects regarded as usefully divine, and the cultof the departed dead. This latter is almost universal, perhapspan-Aryan, and Weber is probably right in assuming that the primitiveAryans believed in a future life. But Benfey's identification ofTartaras with the Sanskrit Tal[=a]tala, the name of a special hell invery late systems of cosmogony, is decidedly without the bearing hewould put upon it. The Sanskrit word may be taken directly from theGreek, but of an Aryan source for both there is not the remotesthistorical probability. 

When, however, one comes to the Lord of the Dead he finds himselfalready in a narrower circle. Yama is the Persian Yima, and the nameof Kerberos may have been once an adjective applied to the dog thatguarded the path to paradise; but other particular conceptions thatgather about each god point only to a period of Indo-Iranian unity. 

Of the great nature-gods the sun is more than Aryan, but doubtless wasAryan, for S[=u]rya is Helios, but Savitar is a development especiallyIndian. Dy[=a]ús-pitar is Zeús-pater, Jupiter. [19] Trita, scarcelyTriton, is the Persian Thraetaona who conquers Vritra, as does Indrain India. The last, on the other hand, is to be referred onlyhesitatingly to the demon A[=n]dra of the Avesta. Varuna, despitephonetic difficulties, probably is Ouranos; but Asura (Asen?) is atitle of many gods in India's first period, while the correspondingAhura is restricted to the good spirit, [Greek: kat hexochên]. Theseven [=A]dityas are reflected in the _Amesha Çpentas_ of ZoroastrianPuritanism, but these are mere imitations, spiritualized and moralizedinto abstractions. Bhaga is Slavic Bogu and Persian Bagha; Mitra isPersian Mithra. The Açvins are all but in name the Greek godsDioskouroi, and correspond closely in detail (riding on horses, healing and helping, originally twins of twilight). Tacitus gives aparallel Teutonic pair (Germ. 43). Ushas, on the other hand, whileetymologically corresponding to Aurora, Eos, is a specially Indiandevelopment, as Eos has no cult. V[=a]ta, Wind, is an aboriginal god, and may perhaps be Wotan, Odin. [20] Parjanya, the rain-god, as Bühlerhas shown, is one with Lithuanian Perkúna, and with the northernFiögyu. The 'fashioner, ' Tvashtar (sun) is only Indo-Iranian;Thw[=a]sha probably being the same word. 

Of lesser mights, Angiras, name of fire, may be Persian _angaros_, 'fire-messenger' (compare [Greek: haggelos]), perhaps originally onewith Sk. _ang[=a]ra_, 'coal. '[21] Hebe has been identified with_yavy[=a]_, young woman, but this word is enough to show that Hebe hasnaught to do with the Indian pantheon. The Gandharva, moon, iscertainly one with the Persian Gandarewa, but can hardly be identicalwith the Centaur. Saram[=a] seems to have, together with S[=a]rameya, a Grecian parallel development in Helena (a goddess in Sparta), Selene, Hermes; and Sarany[=u] may be the same with Erinnys, but theseare not Aryan figures in the form of their respective developments, though they appear to be so in origin. It is scarcely possible thatEarth is an Aryan deity with a cult, though different Aryan (andun-Aryan) nations regarded her as divine. The Maruts are especiallyIndian and have no primitive identity as gods with Mars, though thenames may be radically connected. The fire-priests, Bhrigus, aresupposed to be one with the [Greek: phlegixu]. The fact that the fateof each in later myth is to visit hell would presuppose, however, anAryan notion of a torture-hell, of which the Rig Veda has noconception. The Aryan identity of the two myths is thereby madeuncertain, if not implausible. The special development in India of thefire-priest that brings down fire from heaven, when compared with thepersonification of the 'twirler' (Promantheus) in Greece, shows thatno detailed myth was current in primitive times. [22] The name of thefire-priest, _brahman_ = fla(g)men(?), is an indication of theprimitive fire-cult in antithesis to the _soma_-cult, which latterbelongs to the narrower circle of the Hindus and Persians. Here, however, in the identity of names for sacrifice (_yajna, yaçna_) andof _barhis_, the sacrificial straw, of _soma = haoma_, together withmany other liturgical similarities, as in the case of the metres, onemust recognize a fully developed _soma_-cult prior to the separationof the Hindus and Iranians. 

Of demigods of evil type the _Y[=a]tus_ are both Hindu and Iranian, but the priest-names of the one religion are evil names in the other, as the _devas_, gods, of one are the _daevas_, demons, of theother. [23] There are no other identifications that seem atall certain in the strict province of religion, although in myth theform of Manus, who is the Hindu Noah, has been associated withTeutonic Mannus, and Greek Minos, noted in Thucydides for hissea-faring. He is to Yama (later regarded as his brother) as is Noahto Adam. 

We do not lay stress on lack of equation in proper names, but, asSchrader shows (p. 596 ff. ), very few comparisons on this line have asolid phonetic foundation. Minos, Manu; Ouranos, Varuna; Wotan, V[=a]ta, are dubious; and some equate flamen with blôtan, sacrifice. 

Other wider or narrower comparisons, such as Neptunus from _náp[=a]tap[=a]m, _ seem to us too daring to be believed. Apollo (_sapary_), Aphrodite (Apsaras), Artamis (non-existent _[r. ]tam[=a]l_), P[=a]n(_pavana_), have been cleverly compared, but the identity of forms hasscarcely been proved. Nor is it important for the comparativemythologist that Okeanus is 'lying around' (_[=a]çáy[=a]na_). Morethan that is necessary to connect Ocean mythologically with the demonthat surrounds (swallows) the waters of the sky. The Vedic parallel israther Ras[=a], the far-off great 'stream. ' It is rarely that onefinds Aryan equivalents in the land of fairies and fays. Yet are theHindu clever artizan Ribhus[24] our 'elves, ' who, even to this day, are distinct from fairies in their dexterity and cleverness, as everywise child knows. 

But animism, as simple spiritism, fetishism, perhaps ancestor-worship, and polytheism, with the polydaemonism that may be calledchrematheism, exists from the beginning of the religious history, undisturbed by the proximity of theism, pantheism, or atheism; exactlyas to-day in the Occident, beside theism and atheism, exist spiritismand fetishism (with their inherent magic), and even ancestor-worship, as implied by the reputed after-effect of parental curses. 

When the circle is narrowed to that of the Indo-Iranian connection thesimilarity in religion between the Veda and Avesta becomes much morestriking than in any other group, as has been shown. It is here thatthe greatest discrepancy in opinion obtains among modern scholars. Some are inclined to refer all that smacks of Persia to a remoteperiod of Indo-Iranian unity, and, in consequence, to connect alltokens of contact with the west with far-away regions out of India. Itis scarcely possible that such can be the case. But, on the otherhand, it is unhistorical to connect, as do some scholars, the worshipof _soma_ and Varuna with a remote period of unity, and then with ajump to admit a close connection between Veda and Avesta in the Vedicperiod. The Vedic Aryans appear to have lived, so to speak, hand inglove with the Iranians for a period long enough for the latter toshare in that advance of Varuna-worship from polytheism toquasi-monotheism which is seen in the Rig Veda. This worship of Varunaas a superior god, with his former equals ranged under him in a group, chiefly obtains in that family (be it of priest or tribe, or be thetwo essentially one from a religious point of view) which has least todo with pure _soma_-worship, the inherited Indo-Iranian cult; and thePersian Ahura, with the six spiritualized equivalents of the old Vedic[=A]dityas, can have come into existence only as a directtransformation of the latter cult, which in turn is later than thecult that developed in one direction as chief of gods a Zeus; inanother, a Bhaga; in a third, an Odin. On the other hand, in thegradual change in India of Iranic gods to devils, _asuras_, there isan exact counterpart to the Iranian change of meaning from _deva_ to_daeva_. But if this be the connection, it is impossible to assume along break between India and the west, and then such a sudden tie asis indicated by the allusions in the Rig Veda to the Persians andother western lands. The most reasonable view, therefore, appears tobe that the Vedic and Iranian Aryans were for a long time in contact, that the contact began to cease as the two peoples separated to eastand west, but that after the two peoples separated communication wassporadically kept up between them by individuals in the way of tradeor otherwise. This explains the still surviving relationship as it isfound in later hymns and in thank-offerings apparently involvingIranian personages. 

They that believe in a monotheistic Varuna-cult preceding the Vedicpolytheism must then ignore the following facts: The Slavic equivalentof Bhaga and the Teutonic equivalent of V[=a]ta are to theserespective peoples their highest gods. They had no Varuna. Moreover, there is not the slightest proof that Ouranos in Greece[25] was ever agod worshipped as a great god before Zeus, nor is there anyprobability that to the Hindu Dyaus Pitar was ever a great god, in thesense that he ever had a special cult as supreme deity. He isphysically great, and physically he is father, as is Earth mother, buthe is religiously great only in the Hellenic-Italic circle, whereexists no Uranos-cult[26]. Rather is it apparent that the Greek raisedZeus, as did the Slav Bhaga, to his first head of the pantheon. Nowwhen one sees that in the Vedic period Varuna is the type of[=A]dityas, to which belong Bhaga and Mitra as distinctly lessimportant personages, it is plain that this can mean only that Varunahas gradually been exalted to his position at the expense of the othergods. Nor is there perfect uniformity between Persian and Hinduconceptions. Asura in the Veda is not applied to Varuna alone. But inthe Avesta, Ahura is the one great spirit, and his six spirits areplainly a protestant copy and modification of Varuna and his sixunderlings. This, then, can mean--which stands in concordance with theother parallels between the two religions--only that Zarathustraborrows the Ahura idea from the Vedic Aryans at a time when Varuna wasbecome superior to the other gods, and when the Vedic cult isestablished in its second phase[27]. To this fact points also theevidence that shows how near together geographically were once theHindus and Persians. Whether one puts the place of separation at theKabul or further to the north-west is a matter of indifference. ThePersians borrow the idea of Varuna Asura, whose eye is the sun. Theyspiritualize this, and create an Asura unknown to other nations. 

Of von Bradke's attempt to prove an original Dyaus Asura we have saidnothing, because the attempt has failed signally. He imagines that theepithet Asura was given to Dyaus in the Indo-Iranian period, and thatfrom a Dyaus Pitar Asura the Iranians made an abstract Asura, whilethe Hindus raised the other gods and depressed Dyaus Pitar Asura;whereas it is quite certain that Varuna (Asura) grew up, out, and overthe other Asuras, his former equals. 

And yet it is almost a pity to spend time to demonstrate thatVaruna-worship was not monotheistic originally. We gladly admit that, even if not a primitive monotheistic deity, Varuna yet is a god thatbelongs to a very old period of Hindu literature. And, for a worshipso antique, how noble is the idea, how exalted is the completedconception of him! Truly, the Hindus and Persians alone of Aryansmount nearest to the high level of Hebraic thought. For Varuna besidethe loftiest figure in the Hellenic pantheon stands like a god besidea man. The Greeks had, indeed, a surpassing aesthetic taste, but ingrandeur of religious ideas even the daring of Aeschylus becomes buthesitating bravado when compared with the serene boldness of the Vedicseers, who, first of their race, out of many gods imagined God. 

In regard to eschatology, as in regard to myths, it has been shownthat the utmost caution in identification is called for. It may besurmised that such or such a belief or legend is in origin one with alike faith or tale of other peoples. But the question whether it beone in historical origin or in universal mythopoetic fancy, and thislatter be the only common origin, must remain in almost every caseunanswered[28]. This is by far not so entertaining, nor so picturesquea solution as is the explanation of a common historical basis for anytwo legends, with its inspiring 'open sesame' to the door of thelocked past. But which is truer? Which accords more with the facts asthey are collected from a wider field? As man in the process ofdevelopment, in whatever quarter of earth he be located, makes forhimself independently clothes, language, and gods, so he makes mythsthat are more or less like those of other peoples, and it is only whennames coincide and traits that are unknown elsewhere are strikinglysimilar in any two mythologies that one has a right to argue aprobable community of origin. 

But even if the legend of the flood were Babylonian, and the Asuras asdevils were due to Iranian influence--which can neither be proved nordisproved--the fact remains that the Indian religion in its mainfeatures is of a purely native character. 

As the most prominent features of the Vedic religion must be regardedthe worship of _soma_ of nature-gods that are in part already morethan this, of spirits, and of the Manes; the acknowledgment of a morallaw and a belief in a life hereafter. There is also a vaguer nascentbelief in a creator apart from any natural phenomenon, but the creedfor the most part is poetically, indefinitely, stated: 'Mostwonder-working of the wonder-working gods, who made heaven andearth'(as above). The corresponding Power is Cerus in Cerus-Creator(Kronos?), although when a name is given, the Maker, Dh[=a]tar, isemployed; while Tvashtar, the artificer, is more an epithet of the sunthan of the unknown creator. The personification of Dh[=a]tar ascreator of the sun, etc. , belongs to later Vedic times, and forerunsthe Father-god of the last Vedic period. Not till the classical age(below) is found a formal identification of the Vedic nature-gods withthe departed Fathers (Manes). Indra, for example, is invoked in theRig Veda to 'be a friend, be a father, be more fatherly than thefathers';[29] but this implies no patristic side in Indra, who iscalled in the same hymn (vs. 4) the son of Dyaus (his father); andDyaus Pitar no more implies, as say some sciolists, that Dyaus wasregarded as a human ancestor than does 'Mother Earth' imply a beliefthat Earth is the ghost of a dead woman. 

In the Veda there is a nature-religion and an ancestor-religion. Theseapproach, but do not unite; they are felt as sundered beliefs. Sun-myths, though by some denied _in toto_, appear plainly in theVedic hymns. Dead heroes may be gods, but gods, too, are naturalphenomena, and, again, they are abstractions. He that denies any oneof these sources of godhead is ignorant of India. 

Müller, in his _Ancient Sanskrit Literature_, has divided Vedicliterature into four periods, that of _chandas_, songs; _mantras_, texts; _br[=a]hmanas;_ and _s[=u]tras_. The _mantras_ are indistinction from _chandas_, the later hymns to the earlier gods. [30]The latter distinction can, however, be established only on subjectivegrounds, and, though generally unimpeachable, is sometimes liable toreversion. Thus, Müller looks upon RV. VIII. 30 as 'simple andprimitive, ' while others see in this hymn a late _mantra_. Between theRig Veda and the Br[=a]hmanas, which are in prose, lies a periodfilled out in part by the present form of the Atharva Veda, which, ashas been shown, is a Veda of the low cult that is almost ignored bythe Rig Veda, while it contains at the same time much that is laterthan the Rig Veda, and consists of old and new together in a mannerentirely conformable to the state of every other Hindu work of earlytimes. After this epoch there is found in the liturgical period, intowhich extend the later portions of the Rig Veda (noticeably parts ofthe first, fourth, eighth, and tenth books), a religion which, inspiritual tone, in metaphysical speculation, and even in theinterpretation of some of the natural divinities, differs not morefrom the bulk of the Rig Veda than does the social status of the timefrom that of the earlier text. Religion has become, in so far as thegods are concerned, a ritual. But, except in the building up of aFather-god, theology is at bottom not much altered, and theeschatological conceptions remain about as they were, despite apreliminary sign of the doctrine of metempsychosis. In the AtharvaVeda, for the first time, hell is known by its later name (xii. 4. 36), and perhaps its tortures; but the idea of future punishmentappears plainly first in the Brahmanic period. Both the doctrine ofre-birth and that of hell appear in the earliest S[=u]tras, andconsequently the assumption that these dogmas come from Buddhism doesnot appear to be well founded; for it is to be presumed whateverreligious belief is established in legal literature will have precededthat literature by a considerable period, certainly by a greaterlength of time than that which divides the first Brahmanic law fromBuddhism. 

 * * * * *

 FOOTNOTES:

 [Footnote 1: Compare the accounts of Lafitau; of the native Iroquois, baptized as Morgan; and the works of Schoolcraft and Parkman. ]

 [Footnote 2: _Jesuits in North America_, Introduction, p. Lxi. ]

 [Footnote 3: "Like other Indians, the Hurons were desperate gamblers, staking their all, --ornaments, clothing, canoes, pipes, weapons, and wives, " _loc. Cit. _ p. Xxxvi. Compare Palfrey, of Massachusetts Indians. The same is true of all savages. ]

 [Footnote 4: _Ib. _ p. Lxvii. ]

 [Footnote 5: Compare _Çat. Br_. VI. 1. 1, 12; VII. 5. 1, 2 _sq_. , for the Hindu tortoise in its first form. The totem-form of the tortoise is well known in America. (Brinton, _Myths of the New World_, p. 85. )]

 [Footnote 6: Charlevoix ap. Parkman. ]

 [Footnote 7: Parkman, _loc. Cit_. P. LXXII; Brinton, _Myths of the New World_, p. 248. A good instance of bad comparison in eschatology will be found in Geiger, _Ostir. Cult_. Pp. 274-275. ]

 [Footnote 8: Parkman, _loc. Cit_. P. LXXXVI. ]

 [Footnote 9: _Sits. Berl. Akad_. 1891, p. 15. ]

 [Footnote 10: Brinton, _American Hero Myths_, p. 174. The first worship was Sun-worship, then Viracocha-worship arose, which kept Sun-worship while it predicated a 'power beyond. ]

 [Footnote 11: Brinton, _Myths of the New World_, pp. 85, 203. ]

 [Footnote 12: _Ib_. Pp. 86, 202. ]

 [Footnote 13: Brinton, _Myths of the New World_, p. 243. The American Indians "uniformly regard the sun as heaven, the soul goes to the sun. "]

 [Footnote 14: _Ib. _ p. 245. ]

 [Footnote 15: _Ib. _ p. 239-40. ]

 [Footnote 16: _Ib. _ p. 50, 51. ]

 [Footnote 17: _Ib. _ pp. 242, 248, 255; Schoolcraft, III. 229. ]

 [Footnote 18: Renouf, _Religion of Ancient Egypt_; pp. 103, 113 ff. ]

 [Footnote 19: Teutonic Tuisco is doubtful, as the identity with Dyaus has lately been contested on phonetic grounds. ]

 [Footnote 20: V[=a]ta, ventus, does not agree very well with Wotan. ]

 [Footnote 21: _[=A]it. Br. _ III, 34. [Greek: haggaron pur] is really tautological, but beacon fires gave way to couriers and [Greek: haggaros] lost the sense of fire, as did [Greek: haggelos]. ]

 [Footnote 22: But the general belief that fire (Agni, Ignis, Slavic ogni) was first brought to earth from heaven by a half-divine personality is (at least) Aryan, as Kuhn has shown. ]

 [Footnote 23: Compare the _kavis_ and _ugijs_ (poets and priests) of the Veda with the evil spirits of the same names in the Avesta, like _daeva_ = _deva_. Compare, besides, the Indo-Iranian feasts, _medha_, that accompany this Bacchanalian liquor-worship. ]

 [Footnote 24: Ludwig interprets the three Ribhus as the three seasons personified. Etymologically connected is Orpheus, perhaps. ]

 [Footnote 25: [Greek: o de chalkeos asphales aien edos menei ouranos], Pind. N. Vi. 5; compare Preller[4], p. 40. ]

 [Footnote 26: Wahrscheinlich sind Uranos und Kronos erst aus dem Culte des Zeus abstrahirt worden. Preller[4], p. 43. ]

 [Footnote 27: When Aryan deities are decadent, Trita, Mitra, etc. ]

 [Footnote 28: Spiegel holds that the whole idea of future punishment is derived from Persia (_Eranische Altherthumskunde_, I. P. 458), but his point of view is naturally prejudiced. The allusion to the supposed Babylonian coin, _man[=a]_, in RV. VIII. 78. 2, would indicate that the relation with Babylon is one of trade, as with Aegypt. The account of the flood may be drawn thence, so may the story of Deucalion, but both Hindu and Hellenic versions may be as native as is that of the American redskins. ]

 [Footnote 29: IV. 17. 17. ]

 [Footnote 30: _loc. Cit. _ pp. 70, 480. ]

 * * * * *

CHAPTER IX. 

BRAHMANISM. 

Besides the Rig Veda and the Atharva Veda there are two others, calledrespectively the S[=a]ma Veda and the Yajur Veda. [1] The formerconsists of a small collection of verses, which are taken chiefly fromthe eighth and ninth books of the Rig Veda, and are arranged forsinging. It has a few more verses than are contained in thecorresponding parts of the Rik, but the whole is of no addedimportance from the present point of view. It is of course madeentirely for the ritual. Also made for the ritual is the Yajur Veda, the Veda of sacrificial formulae. But this Veda is far more important. With it one is brought into a new land, and into a world of ideas thatare strange to the Rik. The period represented by it is a sort ofbridge between the Rik and the Br[=a]hmanas. The Yajus is later thanRik or Atharvan, belonging in its entirety more to the age of theliturgy than to the older Vedic era. With the Br[=a]hmanas not only isthe tone changed from that of the Rig Veda; the whole moral atmosphereis now surcharged with hocus-pocus, mysticism, religiosity, instead ofthe cheerful, real religion which, however formal, is the soul of theRik. In the Br[=a]hmanas there is no freshness, no poetry. There is insome regards a more scrupulous outward morality, but for the restthere is only cynicism, bigotry, and dullness. It is true that each ofthese traits may be found in certain parts of the Rig Veda, but it isnot true that they represent there the spirit of the age, as they doin the Brahmanic period. Of this Brahmanic stoa, to which we now turn, the Yajur Veda forms the fitting entrance. Here the priest is as muchlord as he is in the Br[=a]hmanas. Here the sacrifice is only the act, the sacrificial forms (_yajus_), without the spirit. 

In distinction from the verse-Veda (the Rik), the Yajur Veda containsthe special formulae which the priest that attends to the erection ofthe altar has to speak, with explanatory remarks added thereto. Thisof course stamps the collection as mechanical; but the wonder is thatthis collection, with the similar Br[=a]hmana scriptures that followit, should be the only new literature which centuries have to show. [2]As explanatory of the sacrifice there is found, indeed, a good deal oflegendary stuff, which sometimes has a literary character. But nothingis for itself; everything is for the correct performance of thesacrifice. [3]

The geographical centre is now changed, and instead of the Punj[=a]b, the 'middle district' becomes the seat of culture. Nor is there muchdifference between the district to which can be referred the rise ofthe Yajur Veda and that of the Br[=a]hmanas. No less altered is thereligion. All is now symbolical, and the gods, though in general theyare the gods of the Rig Veda, are not the same as of old. The priestshave become gods. The old appellation of 'spirit, ' _asura_, isconfined to evil spirits. There is no longer any such 'henotheism' asthat of the Rig Veda. The Father-god, 'lord of beings, ' or simply 'thefather, ' is the chief god. The last thought of the Rig Veda is thefirst thought of the Yajur Veda. Other changes have taken place. Thedemigods of the older period, the water-nymphs of the Rik, here becomeseductive goddesses, whose increase of power in this art agrees withthe decline of the warrior spirit that is shown too in the whole modeof thinking. Most important is the gradual rise of Vishnu and thefirst appearance of Çiva. Here _brahma_, which in the Rik has themeaning 'prayer' alone, is no longer mere prayer, but, as in laterliterature, holiness. In short, before the Br[=a]hmanas are reachedthey are perceptible in the near distance, in the Veda of Formulae, the Yajus;[4] for between the Yajur Veda and the Br[=a]hmanas there isno essential difference. The latter consist of explanations of thesacrificial liturgy, interspersed with legends, bits of history, philosophical explanations, and other matter more or less related tothe subject. They are completed by the Forest Books, [=A]ranyakas, which contain the speculations of the later theosophy, the Upanishads(below). It is with the Yajur Veda and its nearly related literature, the Br[=a]hmanas, that Brahmanism really begins. Of these latter themost important in age and content are the Br[=a]hmanas (of the RigVeda and Yajur Veda), called [=A]itareya and Çata-patha, the formerrepresenting the western district, the latter, in great part, a moreeastern region. 

Although the 'Northerners' are still respectfully referred to, yet, aswe have just said, the people among whom arose the Br[=a]hmanas arenot settled in the Punj[=a]b, but in the country called the 'middledistrict, ' round about the modern Delhi. For the most part thePunj[=a]b is abandoned; or rather, the literature of this period doesnot emanate from the Aryans that remained in the Punj[=a]b, but fromthe still emigrating descendants of the old Vedic people that used tolive there. Some stay behind and keep the older practices, not in allregards looked upon as orthodox by their more advanced brethren, whohave pushed east and now live in the country called the land of theKurus and Pa[. N]c[=a]las. [5] They are spread farther east, along thebanks of the Jumna and Ganges, south of Nep[=a]l; while some are stillabout and south of the holy Kurukshetra or 'plain of Kurus. ' East ofthe middle district the Kosalas and Videhas form, in opposition to theKurus and Pa[. N]c[=a]las, the second great tribe (Tirh[=u]t). Thereare now two sets of 'Seven Rivers, ' and the holiness of the westerngroup is perceptibly lessened. Here for the first time are found the_Vr[=a]tya_-hymns, intended to initiate into the Brahmanic orderAryans who have not conformed to it, and speak a dialecticlanguage. [6] From the point of view of language and geography, no lessthan from that of the social and spiritual conditions, it is evidentthat quite a period has elapsed since the body of the Rig Veda wascomposed. The revealed texts are now ancient storehouses of wisdom. Religion has apparently become a form; in some regards it is a farce. 

"There are two kinds of gods; for the gods are gods, and priests thatare learned in the Veda and teach it are human gods. " This sentence, from one of the most important Hindu prose works, [7] is the key to thereligion of the period which it represents; and it is fitly followedby the further statement, that like sacrifice to the gods are the feespaid to the human gods the priests. [8] Yet with this dictum, soimportant for the understanding of the religion of the age, must bejoined another, if one would do that age full justice: 'The sacrificeis like a ship sailing heavenward; if there be a sinful priest in it, that one priest would make it sink' (_Çat. Br_. IV. 2. 5. 10). Foralthough the time is one in which ritualism had, indeed, become moreimportant than religion, and the priest more important than the gods, yet is there no lack of reverential feeling, nor is morality regardedas unimportant. The first impression, however, which is gained fromthe literature of this period is that the sacrifice is all in all;that the endless details of its course, and the petty questions inregard to its arrangement, are not only the principal objects of careand of chief moment, but even of so cardinal importance that the wholereligious spirit swings upon them. But such is not altogether thecase. It is the truth, yet is it not the whole truth, that in theseBr[=a]hmanas religion is an appearance, not a reality. The sacrificeis indeed represented to be the only door to prosperity on earth andto future bliss; but there is a quiet yet persistent belief that atbottom a moral and religious life is quite as essential as are theritualistic observances with which worship is accompanied. 

To describe Brahmanism as implying a religion that is purely one ofceremonies, one composed entirely of observances, is therefore notaltogether correct. In reading a liturgical work it must not beforgotten for what the work was intended. If its object be simply toinculcate a special rite, one cannot demand that it should showbreadth of view or elevation of sentiment. Composed of observancesevery work must be of which the aim is to explain observances. Inpoint of fact, religion (faith and moral behavior) is here assumed, and so entirely is it taken for granted that a statement emphasizingthe necessity of godliness is seldom found. 

Nevertheless, having called attention to the religious spirit thatlies latent in the pedantic Br[=a]hmanas, we are willing toadmit that the age is overcast, not only with a thick cloud ofritualism, but also with an unpleasant mask of phariseeism. Therecannot have been quite so much attention paid to the outside of theplatter without neglect of the inside. And it is true that the priestsof this period strive more for the completion of their rites than forthe perfection of themselves. It is true, also, that occasionallythere is a revolting contempt for those people who are not of especialservice to the priest. There are now two godlike aristocrats, thepriest and the noble. The 'people' are regarded as only fit to be the"food of the nobility. " In the symbolical language of the time thebricks of the altar, which are consecrated, are the warrior caste; thefillings, in the space between the bricks, are not consecrated; andthese "fillers of space" are "the people" (_Çat. Br_. VI. 1. 2. 25). Yet is religion in these books not dead, but sleeping; to wake againin the Upanishads with a fuller spiritual life than is found in anyother pre-Christian system. Although the subject matter of theBr[=a]hmanas is the cult, yet are there found in them numerouslegends, moral teachings, philosophical fancies, historical items, etymologies and other adventitious matter, all of which are helpful ingiving a better understanding of the intelligence of the people towhom is due all the extant literature of the period. Long citationsfrom these ritualistic productions would have a certain value, inshowing in native form the character of the works, but they would makeunendurable reading; and we have thought it better to arrange themultifarious contents of the chief Br[=a]hmanas in a sort of order, although it is difficult always to decide where theology ends andmoral teachings begin, the two are here so interwoven. 

BRAHMANIC THEOLOGY AND THE SACRIFICE. 

While in general the pantheon of the Rig Veda and Atharva Veda is thatof the Br[=a]hmanas, some of the older gods are now reduced inimportance, and, on the other hand, as in the Yajur Veda, some godsare seen to be growing in importance. 'Time, ' deified in the Atharvan, is a great god, but beside him still stand the old rustic divinities;and chrematheism, which antedates even the Rig Veda, is stillrecognized. To the 'ploughshare' and the 'plough' the Rig Veda has anhymn (IV. 57. 5-8), and so the ritual gives them a cake at thesacrifice (_Çun[=a]ç[=i]rya, Çat. Br. _ II. 6. 3. 5). The number of thegods, in the Rig Veda estimated as thirty-three, or, at the end ofthis period, as thousands, remains as doubtful as ever; but, ingeneral, all groups of deities become greater in number. Thus, in TS. I. 4. 11. 1, the Rudras alone are counted as thirty-three instead ofeleven; and, _ib. _ V. 5. 2. 5, the eight Vasus become three hundredand thirty-three; but it is elsewhere hinted that the number of thegods stands in the same relation to that of men as that in which menstand to the beasts; that is, there are not quite so many gods as men(_Çat. Br. _ II. 3. 2. 18). 

Of more importance than the addition of new deities is the subdivisionof the old. As one finds in Greece a [Greek: Zeus katachthonios]beside a [Greek: Zeus xenios], so in the Yajur Veda and Br[=a]hmanasare found (an extreme instance) hail 'to K[=a]ya, ' and hail 'toKasm[=a]i, ' that is, the god Ka is differentiated into two divinities, according as he is declined as a noun or as a pronoun; for this is thegod "Who?" as the dull Br[=a]hmanas interpreted that verse of the RigVeda which asks 'to whom (which, as) god shall we offer sacrifice?'(M[=a]it. S. III. 12. 5. ) But ordinarily one divinity like Agni issubdivided, according to his functions, as 'lord of food, ' 'lord ofprayer, ' etc. [9]

In the Br[=a]hmanas different names are given to the chief god, but heis most often called the Father-god (Praj[=a]pati, 'lord ofcreatures, ' or the Father, _pit[=a]_). His earlier Vedic type isBrihaspati, the lord of strength, and, from another point ofview, the All-god. [10] The other gods fall into various groups, themost significant being the triad of Fire, Wind, and Sun. [11] Not muchweight is to be laid on the theological speculations of the time asindicative of primitive conceptions, although they may occasionallyhit true. For out of the number of inane fancies it is reasonable tosuppose that some might coincide with historic facts. Thus theAll-gods of the Rig Veda, by implication, are of later origin than theother gods, and this, very likely, was the case; but it is a mereguess on the part of the priest. The _Çatapatha_, III. 6. 1. 28, speaks of the All-gods as gods that gained immortality on a certainoccasion, _i. E. _, became immortal like other gods. So the [=A]dityasgo to heaven before the Angirasas (_[=A][=i]t. Br_. IV. 17), but thishas no such historical importance as some scholars are inclined tothink. The lesser gods are in part carefully grouped and numbered, ina manner somewhat contradictory to what must have been the earlierbelief. Thus the 'three kinds of gods' are now Vasus, of earth, Rudras, of air, and [=A]dityas, of sky, and the daily offerings aredivided between them; the morning offering belonging only to theVasus, the mid-day one only to (Indra and) the Rudras, the third tothe [=A]dityas with the Vasus and Rudras together. [12] Again, themorning and mid-day pressing belong to the gods alone, and strict ruleis observed in distinguishing their portion from that of the Manes(_Çat. Br_. IV. 4. 22). The difference of sex is quite ignored, sothat the 'universal Agni' is identified with (mother) earth; as isalso, once or twice, P[=u]shan (_ib. _ III. 8. 5. 4; 2. 4. 19; II. 5. 4. 7). As the 'progenitor, ' Agni facilitates connubial union, and iscalled "the head god, the progenitor among gods, the lord of beings"(_ib. _ III. 4. 3. 4; III. 9. 1. 6). P[=u]shan is interpreted to meancattle, and Brihaspati is the priestly caste (_ib_. III. 9. 1. 10ff. ). The base of comparison is usually easy to find. 'The earthnourishes, ' and 'P[=u]shan nourishes, ' hence Pushan is the earth; or'the earth belongs to all' and Agni is called 'belonging to all'(universal), hence the two are identified. The All-gods, merely onaccount of their name, are now the All; Aditi is the 'unbounded' earth(_ib_. III. 9. 1. 13; IV. 1. 1. 23; i. 1. 4. 5; III. 2. 3. 6). Agnirepresents all the gods, and he is the dearest, the closest, and thesurest of all the gods (_ib_. I. 6. 2. 8 ff. ). It is said that man onearth fathers the fire (that is, protects it), and when he dies thefire that he has made his son on earth becomes his father, causing himto be reborn in heaven (_ib_. II. 3. 3. 3-5; VI. 1. 2. 26). 

The wives of the gods _(dev[=a]n[=a]m patn[=i]r yajati)_, occasionallymentioned in the Rig Veda, have now an established place and cultapart from that of the gods (_ib_. I. 9. 2. 11). The fire on thehearth is god Agni in person, and is not a divine or mystic type; buthe is prayed to as a heavenly friend. Some of these traits are old, but they are exaggerated as compared with the more ancient theology. When one goes on a journey or returns from one, 'even if a king werein his house' he should not greet him till he makes homage to hishearth-fires, either with spoken words or with silent obeisance. ForAgni and Praj[=a]pati are one, they are son and father (_ib_. II. 4. 1. 3, 10; VI. 1. 2. 26). The gods have mystic names, and these 'whowill dare to speak?' Thus, Indra's mystic name is Arjuna (_ib_. II. 1. 2. 11). In the early period of the Rig Veda the priest dares to speak. The pantheism of the end of the Rig Veda is here decided andplain-spoken, as it is in the Atharvan. As it burns brightly or notthe fire is in turn identified with different gods, Rudra, Varuna, Indra, and Mitra (_ib_. II. 3. 2. 9 ff. ). Agni is all the gods and thegods are in men (_ib_. III. 1. 3. 1; 4. 1. 19; II. 3. 2. 1: Indra andKing Yama dwell in men). And, again, the Father (Praj[=a]pati) is theAll; he is the year of twelve months and five seasons(_ib_. I. 3. 5. 10). Then follows a characteristic bit. Seventeen verses are to berecited to correspond to the 'seventeenfold' Praj[=a]pati. But 'somesay' twenty-one verses; and he may recite twenty-one, for if 'thethree worlds' are added to the above seventeen one gets twenty, andthe sun (_ya esa tapati_) makes the twenty-first! As to the number ofworlds, it is said (_ib_. I. 2. 4. 11, 20-21) that there are threeworlds, and possibly a fourth. 

Soma is now the moon, but as being one half of Vritra, the evil demon. The other half became the belly of creatures (_ib_. I. 6. 3. 17). Slightly different is the statement that Soma was Vritra, IV. 2. 5. 15. In _[=A]it. Br. _ I. 27, King Soma is bought of the Gandharvas byV[=a]c, 'speech, ' as a cow. [13] With phases of the moon Indra and Agniare identified. One is the deity of the new; the other, of the fullmoon; while Mitra is the waning, and Varuna the waxing moon (_Çat. Br. _ II. 4. 4. 17-18). This opposition of deities is more fullyexpressed in the attempt to make antithetic the relations of the godsand the Manes, thus: 'The gods are represented by spring, summer, andrains; the Fathers, by autumn, winter, and the dewy season; the gods, by the waxing; the Fathers, by the waning moon; the gods, by day; theFathers, by night; the gods, by morning; the Fathers, by afternoon'(_Çat. Br. _ II. 1. -31; _ib_. II. 4. 2. 1. Ff. : 'The sun is the lightof the gods; the moon, of the Fathers; fire, of men'). Between morningand afternoon, as representative of gods and Manes respectively, stands midday, which, according to the same authority (II. 4. 2. 8), represents men. The passage first cited continues thus: 'The seasonsare gods and Fathers; gods are immortal; the Fathers are mortal. ' Inregard to the relation between spring and the other seasons, the fifthsection of this passage may be compared: 'Spring is the priesthood;summer, the warrior-caste; the rains are the (_viç_) people. '[14]

Among the conspicuous divine forms of this period is the Queen ofSerpents, whose verses are chanted over fire; but she is the earth, according to some passages (_[=A]it. Br. _. V. 23; _Çat. Br. _ II. 1. 4. 30; IV. 6. 9. 17). In their divine origin there is, indeed, accordingto the theology now current, no difference between the powers of lightand of darkness, between the gods and the 'spirits, ' _asuras, i. E. _, evil spirits. Many tales begin with the formula: 'The gods and evilspirits, both born of the Father-god' (_Çat. Br. _ I. 2. 4. 8). Weberthinks that this implies close acquaintance with Persian worship, asort of tit-for-tat; for the Hindu would in that case call the holyspirit, _ahura_, of the Persian a devil, just as the Persian makes anevil spirit, _daeva_, out of the Hindu god, _deva_. But the relationsbetween Hindu and Persian in this period are still very uncertain. Itis interesting to follow out some of the Brahmanic legends, if only tosee what was the conception of the evil spirits. In one suchtheological legend the gods and the (evil) spirits, both being sons ofthe Father-god, inherited from him, respectively, mind and speech;hence the gods got the sacrifice and heaven, while the evil spiritsgot this earth. Again, the two entered on the inheritance of theirfather in time, and so the gods have the waxing moon, and the evilspirits, the waning moon (_ib. _ III 2. 1. 18; I. 7. 2. 22). 

But what these Asuras or (evil) spirits really are may be read easilyfrom the texts. The gods are the spirits of light; the Asuras are thespirits of darkness. Therewith is indissolubly connected the idea thatsin and darkness are of the same nature. So one reads that when thesun rises it frees itself 'from darkness, from sin, ' as a snake fromits slough (_ib. _ II. 3. I. 6). And in another passage it is said thatdarkness and illusion were given to the Asuras as their portion by theFather-god _(ib. _ II. 4. 2. 5). With this may be compared also thefrequent grouping of The Asuras or Rakshas with darkness (_e. G. , ib. _III. 8. 2. 15; IV. 3. 4. 21). As to the nature of the gods theevidence is contradictóry. Both gods and evil spirits were originallysoulless and mortal. Agni (Fire) alone was immortal, and it was onlythrough him that the others continued to live. They became immortal byputting in their inmost being the holy (immortal) fire (_ib. _ II. 2. 2. 8). On the other hand, it is said that Agni was originally withoutbrightness; and Indra, identified with the sun, was originally dark(_ib. _ IV. 5. 4. 3; III. 4. 2. 15). The belief in an originally humancondition of the gods (even the Father-god was originally mortal) isexemplified in a further passage, where it is said that the gods usedto live on earth, but they grew tired of man's endless petitions andfled; also in another place, where it is stated that the gods used todrink together with men visibly, but now they do so invisibly (_ib_. II. 3. 4. 4; III. 6. 2. 26). How did such gods obtain their supremacy?The answer is simple, 'by sacrifice' (_Çat. Br_. III. 1. 4. 3;_[=A]it. Br_. II. I. I). So now they live by sacrifice: 'The sun wouldnot rise if the priest did not make sacrifice' (_Çat. Br_. II. 3. 1. 5). Even the order of things would change if the order of ceremonialwere varied: Night would be eternal if the priests did so and so; themonths would not pass, one following the other, if the priests walkedout or entered together, etc. (_ib. _ IV. 3. 1. 9-10). It is by aknowledge of the Vedas that one conquers all things, and the sacrificeis part and application of this knowledge, which in one passage isthus reconditely subdivided: 'Threefold is knowledge, the Rig Veda, the Yajur Veda, and the S[=a]ma Veda. [15] The Rig Veda, _i. E_. , theverses sung, are the earth; the Yajus is air; the S[=a]man is the sky. He conquers earth, air, and sky respectively by these three Vedas. TheRik and S[=a]man are Indra and are speech; the Yajus is Vishnu andmind' (_ib. _ IV. 6. 7. 1 ff. ). An item follows that touches on amodern philosophical question. Apropos of speech and mind: 'Wherespeech (alone) existed everything was accomplished and known; butwhere mind (alone) existed nothing was accomplished or known' (_ib. _I. 4. 4. 3-4, 7). Mind and speech are male and female, and asyoke-fellows bear sacrificed to the gods; to be compared is theinteresting dispute between mind and speech (_ib. _ 5. 8). As dependentas is man on what is given by the gods, so dependent are the gods onwhat is offered to them by men (_T[=a]itt. Br. _ II. 2. 7. 3; _Çat. Br. _ I. 2. 5. 24). Even the gods are now not native to heaven. Theywin heaven by sacrifice, by metres, etc. (_Çat. Br. _ IV. 3. 2. 5). 

What, then, is the sacrifice? A means to enter into the godhead of thegods, and even to control the gods; a ceremony where every word waspregnant with consequences;[16] every movement momentous. There areindications, however, that the priests themselves understood that muchin the ceremonial was pure hocus-pocus, and not of such importance asit was reputed to be. But such faint traces as survive of a freerspirit objecting to ceremonial absurdities only mark more clearly thelevel plain of unintelligent superstition which was the feeding-groundof the ordinary priests. 

Some of the cases of revolted common-sense are worth citing. Conspicuous as an authority on the sacrifice, and at the same time asa somewhat recalcitrant priest, is Y[=a]j[. N]avalkya, author andcritic, one of the greatest names in Hindu ecclesiastical history. Itwas he who, apropos of the new rule in ethics, so strongly insistedupon after the Vedic age and already beginning to obtain, the rulethat no one should eat the flesh of the (sacred) cow ('Let no one eatbeef. . . . Whoever eats it would be reborn (on earth) as a man of illfame') said bluntly: 'As for me I eat (beef) if it is good (firm). [17]It certainly required courage to say this, with the especial warningagainst beef, the meat of an animal peculiarly holy (_Çat. Br. _ III. I. 2. 21). It was, again, Y[=a]jñavalkya (_Çat. Br_. , I. 3. I. 26), who protested against the priests' new demand that the benefit of thesacrifice should accrue in part to the priest; whereas it hadpreviously been understood that not the sacrificial priest but thesacrificer (the worshipper, the man who hired the priest and paid theexpenses) got all the benefit of the ceremony. Against the priests'novel and unjustifiable claim Y[=a]jñavalkya exclaims: 'How can peoplehave faith in this? Whatever be the blessing for which the priestspray, this blessing is for the worshipper (sacrificer) alone. [18] Itwas Y[=a]jñavalkya, too, who rebutted some new superstition involvingthe sacrificer's wife, with the sneer, 'who cares whether the wife, 'etc. (_kas tad [=a]driyeta, ib. _ 21). These protestations are naïvelyrecorded, though it is once suggested that in some of his utterancesY[=a]jñavalkya was not in earnest (_ib. _ IV. 2. 1. 7). The high mindof this great priest is contrasted with the mundane views of hiscontemporaries in the prayers of himself and of another priest; for itis recorded that whereas Y[=a]jñavalkya's prayer to the Sun was 'giveme light' (or 'glory, ' _varco me dehi_), that of [=A]upoditeya was'give me cows' (_ib_. I. 9. 3. 16). The chronicler adds, after citingthese prayers, that one obtains whatever he prays for, eitherillumination or wealth. [19] Y[=a]jñavalkya, however, is not the onlyprotestant. In another passage, _ib_. Ii. 6. 3. 14-17, the sacrificeris told to shave his head all around, so as to be like the sun; thiswill ensure his being able to 'consume (his foes) on all sides likethe sun, ' and it is added: But [=A]suri said, 'What on earth has it todo with his head? Let him not shave. '[20]

'Eternal holiness' is won by him that offers the sacrifice of theseasons. Characteristic is the explanation, 'for such an one wins theyear, and a year is a complete whole, and a complete whole isindestructible (eternal); hence his holiness is indestructible, and hethereby becomes a part of a year and goes to the gods; but as there isno destruction in the gods, his holiness is therefore indestructible'(_ib. _ ii. 6. 3. 1). 

Not only a man's self but also his Manes are benefited by means ofsacrifice. [21] He gives the Manes pleasure with his offering, but healso raises their estate, and sends them up to live in a higherworld. [22] The cosmological position of the Manes are the_av[=a]ntaradiças_, that is, between the four quarters; though, according to some, there are three kinds of them, _soma_-Manes, sacrifice-Manes (Manes of the sacrificial straw), and the burnt, _i. E_. , the spirits of those that have been consumed in fire. Theyare, again, identified with the seasons, and are expressly mentionedas the guardians of houses, so that the Brahmanic Manes are at oncePenates, Lares, and Manes. [23]

The sacrifice is by no means meant as an aid to the acquirement ofheavenly bliss alone. Many of the great sacrifices are for the gainingof good things on earth. In one passage there is described a ceremony, the result of which is to be that the warrior, who is the sacrificer, may say to a man of the people "fetch out and give me your store"(_ib. _ i. 3. 2. 15; iv. 3. 3. 10). Everybody sacrifices, even thebeasts erect altars and fires![24] That one should sacrifice withoutthe ulterior motive of gain is unknown. Brahmanic India knows nothank-offering. Ordinarily the gain is represented as a compensatinggift from the divinity, whom the sacrificer pleases with hissacrifice. Very plainly is this expressed. "He offers the sacrifice tothe god with this text: 'Do thou give to me (and) I (will) give tothee; do thou bestow on me (and) I (will) bestow on thee'" (_V[=a]j. S. _ iii. 50; _Çat. Br_. Ii. 5. 3. 19). But other ends areaccomplished. By the sacrifice he may injure his enemy, but inoffering it, if he leaves too much over, that part accrues to the goodof his foe (_Çat. Br_. I. 2. 1. 7; 9. 1. 18). 

The sacrifice is throughout symbolical. The sacrificial strawrepresents the world; the metre used represents all living creatures, etc. , --a symbolism frequently suggested by a mere pun, but often asridiculously expounded without such aid. The altar's measure is themeasure of metres. The cord of regeneration (badge of the twice-born, the holy cord of the high castes) is triple, because food isthreefold, or because the father and mother with the child make three(_Çat. Br. _ iii. 5. 1. 7 ff. ; 2. 1. 12); the _jagati_ metre containsthe living world, because this is called _jagat_ (_ib. _ i. 8. 2. 11). 

Out of the varied mass of rules, speculations, and fancies, a few ofgeneral character may find place here, that the reader may gain acollective impression of the religious literature of the time. 

The fee for the sacrifice is mentioned in one place as one thousandcows. These must be presented in groups of three hundred andthirty-three each, three times, with an odd one of three colors. Thisis on account of the holy character of the numeral three. 'But[=A]suri (apparently fearful that this rule would limit the fee) said"he may give more"' (_Çat. Br. _ iv. 5. 8. 14). As to the fee, therules are precise and their propounders are unblushing. The priestperforms the sacrifice for the fee alone, and it must consist ofvaluable garments, kine, horses, [25] or gold--when each is to be givenis carefully stated. Gold is coveted most, for this is 'immortality, ''the seed of Agni, ' and therefore peculiarly agreeable to the piouspriest. [26] For his greed, which goes so far that he proclaims that hewho gives a thousand kine obtains all things of heaven (_ib. _ iv. 5. 1. 11), the priest has good precept to cite, for the gods of heaven, in all the tales told of them, ever demand a reward from each otherwhen they help their neighbor-gods. Nay, even the gods require awitness and a vow, lest they injure each other. Discord arose amongthem when once they performed the guest-offering; they divided intodifferent parties, Agni with the Vasus, Soma with the Rudras, Varunawith the [=A]dityas, and Indra with the Maruts. But with discord cameweakness, and the evil spirits got the better of them. So they made acovenant with each other, and took Wind as witness that they would notdeceive each other. This famous covenant of the gods is the prototypeof that significant covenant made by the priest, that he would not, while pretending to beseech } good for the sacrificer, [27] secretly dohim harm (as he could by altering the ceremonial). [28] The theory ofthe fee, in so far as it affects the sacrifices, is that the gods, theManes, and men all exist by what is sacrificed. Even the gods seekrewards; hence the priests do the same. [29] The sacrificer sacrificesto get a place in _devaloka_ (the world of the gods). The sacrificegoes up to the world of gods, and after it goes the fee which thesacrificer (the patron) gives; the sacrificer follows by catching holdof the fee given to the priests (_ib. _. I. 9. 3. 1). It is to benoted, moreover, that sacrificing for a fee is recognized as aprofession. The work (sacrifice is work, 'work is sacrifice, ' it issomewhere said) is regarded as a matter of business. There are threemeans of livelihood occasionally referred to, telling stories, singingsongs, and reciting the Veda at a sacrifice (_Çat. Br_. Iii. 2. 4. 16). 

As an example of the absurdities given as 'the ways of knowledge'(absurdities which are necessary to know in order to a fullunderstanding of the mental state under consideration) may be cited_Çat. Br_. Iv. 5. 8. 11, where it is said that if the sacrificial cowgoes east the sacrificer wins a good world hereafter; if north, hebecomes more glorious on earth; if west, rich in people and crops; ifsouth, he dies; 'such are the ways of knowledge. ' In the same spiritit is said that the sun rises east because the priest repeats certainverses _([=A]it. Br_. I. 7. 4). No little stress is laid ongeographical position. The east is the quarter of the gods; the north, of men; the south, of the dead (Manes; _Çat. Br_. I. 2. 5. 17); whilethe west is the region of snakes, according to _ib_. Iii. 1. 1. 7. Onaccount of the godly nature of the east ("from the east came the godswestward to men, " _ib_. Ii. 6. 1. 11) the sacrificial building, likeoccidental churches, is built east and west, not north and south. Thecardinal points are elsewhere given to certain gods; thus the north isRudra's. [30]

It has been said that the theological ideas are not clear. This wasinevitable, owing to the tendency to identify various divinities. Especially noticeable is the identification of new or local gods withothers better accredited, Rudra and Agni, etc. Rudra is the god ofcattle, and when the other gods went to heaven by means of sacrificehe remained on earth; his local names are Çarva, Bhava, 'Beast-lord, 'Rudra, Agni (_Çat. Br_. I. 7. 3. 8; M[=a]it. S. I. 6. 6). Indra is theVasu of the gods. The gods are occasionally thirty-four in number, eight Vasus, eleven Rudras, twelve [=A]dityas, heaven and earth, andPraj[=a]pati as the thirty-fourth; but this Praj[=a]pati is the Alland Everything (_Çat. Br_. I. 6. 4. 2; iv. 5. 7. 2 ff. ). Of thesegods, who at first were all alike and good, three became superior, Agni, Indra, and S[=u]rya. But, again, the Sun is death, and Agni ishead of all the gods. Moreover, the Sun is now Indra; the Manes arethe seasons, and Varuna, too, is the seasons, as being the year (_Çat. Br. _ iv. 5. 4. 1; i. 6. 4. 18; iv. 4. 5. 18). Aditi, as we have said, is the Earth; the fee for an offering to her is a cow. Why? BecauseEarth is a cow and Aditi is Earth; Earth is a mother and a cow is amother. Hence the fee is a cow. [31]

The tales of the gods, for the most part, are foolish. But they showwell what conception the priests had of their divinities. 

Man's original skin was put by the gods upon the cow; hence a cow runsaway from a man because she thinks he is trying to get back his skin. The gods cluster about at an oblation, each crying out 'My name, '_i. E. _, each is anxious to get it. The gods, with the evilspirits--'both sons of the Father'--attract to themselves the plants;Varuna gets the barley by a pun. They build castles to defendthemselves from the evil spirits. Five gods are picked out as worthyof offerings: Aditi, Speech, Agni, Soma, the Sun (five, because theseasons are five and the regions are five). Indra and Wind have adispute of possession; Praj[=a]pati, the Father, decides it. Theheavenly singers, called the Gandharvas, recited the Veda to entice(the divine female) Speech to come to them; while the gods, for thesame purpose, created the lute, and sang and played to her. She cameto the gods; hence the weakness of women in regard to such things. Indra is the god of sacrifice; the stake of the sacrifice is Vishnu's;V[=a]yu (Wind) is the leader of beasts; Bhaga is blind;[32] P[=u]shan(because he eats mush) is toothless. The gods run a race to see whoshall get first to the sacrifice, and Indra and Agni win; they are thewarrior-caste among the gods, and the All-gods are the people (_viçve, viç. _). Yet, again, the Maruts are the people, and Varuna is thewarrior-caste; and, again, Soma is the warrior-caste. The Father-godfirst created birds, then reptiles and snakes. As these all died hecreated mammalia; these survived because they had food in themselves;hence the Vedic poet says 'three generations have passed away. '[33]

Varuna is now quite the god of night and god of purification, as awater-god. Water is the 'essence (sap) of immortality, ' and the bathof purification at the end of the sacrifice (_avabh[r. ]tha_) stands indirect relation to Varuna. The formula to be repeated is: "With thegods' help may I wash out sin against the gods; with the help of menthe sin against men" (_Çat. Br_. Iv. 4. 3. 15; ii. 5. 2. 47). Mitraand Varuna are, respectively, intelligence and will, priest andwarrior; and while the former may exist without the latter, the lattercannot live without the former, 'but they are perfect only when theycoöperate' (_ib_. Iv. 1. 4. 1). 

Of the divine legends some are old, some new. One speaks of thesacrifice as having been at first human, subsequently changing tobeast sacrifice, eventually to a rice offering, which last nowrepresents the original sacrificial animal, man. [34] Famous, too, isthe legend of the flood and Father Manu's escape from it (_Çat. Br_. I. 8. 1. 1 ff. ). Again, the Vedic myth is retold, recounting the rapeof _soma_ by the metrical equivalent of fire (_T[=a]itt. Br_. I. 1. 3. 10; _Çat. Br_. I. 8. 2. 10). Another tale takes up anew the old storyof Cupid and Psyche (Pur[=u]ravas and Urvaç[=i]); and another that ofthe Hindu Prometheus story, wherein M[=a]tariçvan fetches fire fromheaven, and gives it to mortals (_T[=a]itt. Br_. Iii. 2. 3. 2; _Çat. Br_. Xi. 5. 1. 1; i. 7. 1. 11). [35]

Interesting, also, is the tale of Vishnu having been a dwarf, and thetortoise _avatar_, not of Vishnu, but of Praj[=a]pati; also theattempt of the evil spirits to climb to heaven, and the trick withwhich Indra outwitted them. [36] For it is noticeable that the evilspirits are as strong by nature as are the gods, and it is only bycraft that the latter prevail. [37]

Seldom are the tales of the gods indecent. The story of Praj[=a]pati'sincest with his daughter is a remnant of nature worship whichsurvives, in more or less anthropomorphic form, from the time of theRig Veda (x. 61. ) to that of mediaeval literature, [38] and is found infull in the epic, as in the Brahmanic period; but the story alwaysends with the horror of the gods at the act. [39]

Old legends are varied. The victory over Vritra is now expounded thus:Indra, who slays Vritra, is the sun. Vritra is the moon, who swimsinto the sun's mouth on the night of the new moon. The sun rises afterswallowing him, and the moon is invisible because he is swallowed ("hewho knows this swallows his foes"). The sun vomits out the moon, andthe latter is then seen in the west, and increases again, to serve thesun as food. In another passage it is said that when the moon isinvisible he is hiding in plants and waters (_Çat. Br. _ i. 6. 3. 17;4. 18-20). 

BRAHMANIC RELIGION. 

When the sacrifice is completed the priest returns, as it were, toearth, and becomes human. He formally puts off his sacrificial vow, and rehabilitates himself with humanity, saying, "I am even he that Iam. "[40] As such a man, through service to the gods become a divineoffering, and no longer human, was doubtless considered the creaturethat first served as the sacrificial animal. Despite protestantlegends such as that just recorded, despite formal disclaimers, humansacrifice existed long after the period of the Rig Veda, where it isalluded to; a period when even old men are exposed to die. [41] The_anaddh[=a]purusha_ is not a fiction; for that, on certain occasions, instead of this 'man of straw' a real victim was offered, is shown bythe ritual manuals and by Brahmanic texts. [42] Thus, in _Çat. Br_. Vi. 2. 1. 18: "He kills a man first. . . . The cord that holds the man is thelongest. " It is noteworthy that also among the American Indians thedeath of a human victim by fire was regarded as a religious ceremony, and that, just as in India the man to be sacrificed was allowed almostall his desires for a year, so the victim of the Indian was firstgreeted as brother and presented with gifts, even with a wife. [43]

But this, the terrible barbaric side of religious worship, is nowdistinctly yielding to a more humane religion. The 'barley ewe'[44] istaking the place of a bloodier offering. It has been urged that thehumanity[45] and the accompanying silliness of the Brahmanic period ascompared with the more robust character of the earlier age are due tothe weakening and softening effects of the climate. But we doubtwhether the climate of the Punj[=a]b differs as much from that ofDelhi and Patna as does the character of the Rig Veda from that of theBr[=a]hmanas. We shall protest again when we come to the subject ofBuddhism against the too great influence which has been claimed forclimate. Politics and society, in our opinion, had more to do withaltering the religions of India than had a higher temperature andmiasma. As a result of ease and sloth--for the Brahmans are now thedivine pampered servants of established kings, not the energetic peersof a changing population of warriors--the priests had lost theinspiration that came from action; they now made no new hymns; theyonly formulated new rules of sacrifice. They became intellectuallydebauched and altogether weakened in character. Synchronous with thisuniversal degradation and lack of fibre, is found the occasionalsubstitution of barley and rice sacrifices for those of blood; and itmay be that a sort of selfish charity was at work here, and the priestsaved the beast to spare himself. But there is no very early evidenceof a humane view of sacrifice influencing the priests. 

The Brahman is no Jain. One must read far to hear a note of theapproaching _ahims[=a]_ doctrine of 'non-injury. ' At most one finds acontemptuous allusion, as in a pitying strain, to the poor plants andanimals that follow after man in reaping some sacrificial benefit froma ceremony. [46] It does not seem to us that a recognized respect foranimal life or kindness to dumb creatures lies at the root of proxysacrifice, though it doubtless came in play. But still less does itappear probable that, as is often said, aversion to beast-sacrifice isdue to the doctrine of _karma_, and re-birth in animal form. The_karma_ notion begins to appear in the Brahmanas, but not in the_sams[=a]ra_ shape of transmigration. It was surely not because theHindu was afraid of eating his deceased grandmother that he firstabstained from meat. For, long after the doctrine of _karma_ and_sams[=a]ra_[47] is established, animal sacrifices are not onlypermitted but enjoined; and the epic characters shoot deer and eveneat cows. We think, in short, that the change began as a sumptuarymeasure only. In the case of human sacrifice there is doubtless acivilized repugnance to the act, which is clearly seen in manypassages where the slaughter of man is made purely symbolical. Theonly wonder is that it should have obtained so long after the age ofthe Rig Veda. But like the stone knife of sacrifice among the Romansit is received custom, and hard to do away with, for priests areconservative. Human sacrifice must have been peculiarly horrible fromthe fact that the sacrificer not only had to kill the man but to eathim, as is attested by the formal statement of the liturgicalworks. [48] But in the case of other animals (there are fivesacrificial animals, of which man is first) we think it was a questionof expense on the part of the laity. When the _soma_ became rare andexpensive, substitutes were permitted and enjoined. So with the greatsacrifices. The priests had built up a great complex of forms, whereat every turn fees were demanded. The whole expense, falling on theone individual to whose benefit accrued the sacrifice, must have beenenormous; in the case of ordinary people impossible. But the prieststhen permitted the sacrifice of substitutes, for their fees stillremained; and even in the case of human sacrifice some such cautionmay have worked, for ordinarily it cost 'one thousand cattle' to buy aman to be sacrificed. A proof of this lies in the fact that animalsacrifices were not forbidden at any time, only smaller (cheaper)animals took the place of cattle. In the completed Brahmanic code therule is that animals ought not to be killed except at sacrifice, andpractically the smaller creatures were substituted for cattle, just asthe latter had gradually taken the place of the old horse (and man)sacrifice. 

If advancing civilization results in an agreeable change of moralityin many regards, it is yet accompanied with wretched traits in others. The whole silliness of superstition exceeds belief. BecauseBh[=a]llabheya once broke his arm on changing the metre of certainformulae, it is evident to the priest that it is wrong to trifle withreceived metres, and hence "let no one do this hereafter. " There is acompensation on reading such trash in the thought that all thissuperstition has kept for us a carefully preserved text, but that isan accident of priestly foolishness, and the priest can be creditedonly with the folly. Why is 'horse-grass' used in the sacrifice?Because the sacrifice once ran away and "became a horse. " Again one isthankful for the historical side-light on the horse-sacrifice; but thewitlessness of the unconscious historian can but bring him intocontempt. [49] Charms that are said against one are of course cast outby other charms. If one is not prosperous with one name he takesanother. If the cart creaks at the sacrifice it is the voice of evilspirits; and a formula must avert the omen. _Soma_-husks are liable toturn into snakes; a formula must avert this catastrophe. Everythingdone at the sacrifice is godly; _ergo_, everything human is to be donein an inhuman manner, and, since in human practice one cuts his leftfinger-nails first and combs the left side of the beard first, at thesacrifice he must cut nails and beard first on the other side, for"whatever is human at a sacrifice is useless" (_vy[r. ]ddhain v[=a]itad yajñasya yad m[=a]nu[s. ]am_). Of religious puns we have giveninstances already. Agni says: "prop me on the propper for that isproper" (_hita_), etc, etc. [50] One of these examples of depravedsuperstition is of a more dangerous nature. The effect of thesacrifice is covert as well as overt. 

The word is as potent as the act. Consequently if the sacrificerduring the sacrifice merely mutter the words "let such an one die, " hemust die; for the sacrifice is holy, godly; the words are divine, andcannot be frustrated (_Çat. Br_. Iii. 1. 4. 1; iv. 1. 1. 26). 

All this superstition would be pardonable if it were primitive. Butthat it comes long after the Vedic poets have sung reveals acontinuance of stupidity which is marvellous. Doubtless those samepoets were just as superstitious, but one would think that with allthe great literature behind them, and the thoughts of the philosophersjust rising among them, these later priests might show a higher levelof intelligence. But in this regard they are to India what were themonks of mediaeval times to Europe. 

We turn now to the ethical side of religion. But, before leaving thesacrifice, one point should be explained clearly. The Hindu sacrificecan be performed only by the priest, and he must be of the highestcaste. No other might or could perform it. For he alone understood theancient texts, which to the laity were already only half intelligible. Again, as Barth has pointed out, the Hindu sacrifice is performed onlyfor one individual or his family. It was an expensive rite (for thegaining of one object), addressed to many gods for the benefit of oneman. To offset this, however, one must remember that there werepopular fêtes and sacrifices of a more general nature, to which manywere invited and in which even the lower castes took part; and thesewere also of remote antiquity. 

Already current in the Br[=a]hmanas is the phrase 'man's debts. 'Either three or four of such moral obligations were recognized, debtsto the gods, to the seers, to the Manes, and to men. Whoever paysthese debts, it is said, has discharged all his duties, and by him allis obtained, all is won. And what are these duties? To the gods heowes sacrifices; to the seers, study of the Vedas; to the Manes, offspring; to man, hospitality (_Çat. Br_. I. 7. 2. 1 ff. ; in_T[=a]itt. Br_. Vi. 3. 10. 5, the last fails). Translated into modernequivalents this means that man must have faith and good works. Butmore really is demanded than is stated here. First and foremost is theduty of truthfulness. Agni is the lord of vows among the gods (RV. Viii. 11. 1; _Çat. Br_. Iii. 2. 2. 24), and speech is a divinity(Sarasvat[=i] is personified speech, _Çat. Br_. Iii. 1. 4. 9, etc). Truth is a religious as well as moral duty. "This (All) is two-fold, there is no third; all is either truth or untruth; now truth alone isthe gods (_satyam eva dev[=a]s_) and untruth is man. "[51] Moreover, "one law the gods observe, truth" (_Çat. Br_. I. 1. 1. 4; iii. 3. 2. 2;4. 2. 8). There is another passage upon this subject: "To serve thesacred fire means truth; he who speaks truth feeds the fire; he whospeaks lies pours water on it; in the one case he strengthens hisvital (spiritual) energy, and becomes better; in the other he weakensit and becomes worse" (_ib_. Ii. 2. 2. 19). The second sin, expresslynamed and reprobated as such, is adultery. This is a sin againstVaruna. [52] In connection with this there is an interesting passageimplying a priestly confessional. At the sacrifice the sacrificer'swife is formally asked by the priest whether she is faithful to herhusband. She is asked this that she may not sacrifice with guilt onher soul, for "when confessed the guilt becomes less. "[53] If it isasked what other moral virtues are especially inculcated besides truthand purity the answer is that the acts commonly cited asself-evidently sins are murder, theft, and abortion; incidentally, gluttony, anger, and procrastination. [54]

As to the moral virtue of observing days, certain times are allowedand certain times are not allowed for worldly acts. But every day isin part a holy-day to the Hindu. The list of virtues is about thesame, therefore, as that of the decalogue--the worship of the rightdivinity; the observance of certain seasons for prayer and sacrifice;honor to the parents; abstinence from theft, murder, adultery. Envyalone is omitted. [55]

What eschatological conceptions are strewn through the literature ofthis era are vague and often contradictory. The souls of the departedare at one time spoken of as the stars (_T[=a]itt. S_. V. 4. 1. 3. ); atanother, as uniting with gods and living in the world of the gods_(Çal. Br. _. Ii. 6. 4. 8). 

The principle of _karma_ if not the theory, is already known, but thevery thing that the completed philosopher abhors is looked upon as ablessing, viz. , rebirth, body and all, even on earth. [56] Thus in onepassage, as a reward for knowing some divine mystery (as oftenhappens, this mystery is of little importance, only that 'spring isborn again out of winter'), the savant is to be 'born again in thisworld' _(punar ha v[=a] 'asmin loke bhavati, Çat. Br. _ i. 5. 3. 14). The esoteric wisdom is here the transfer of the doctrine ofmetempsychosis to spring. Man has no hope of immortal life (onearth);[57] but, by establishing the holy fires, and especially byestablishing in his inmost soul the immortal element of fire, he livesthe full desirable length of life (_ib_. Ii. 2. 2. 14. To the latersage, length of life is undesirable). But in yonder world, where thesun itself is death, the soul dies again and again. All those on theother side of the sun, the gods, are immortal; but all those on thisside are exposed to this death. When the sun wishes, he draws out thevitality of any one, and then that one dies; not once, but, beingdrawn up by the sun, which is death, into the very realm of death (howdifferent to the conception of the sun in the Rig Veda!) he dies overand over again. [58] But in another passage it is said that when thesacrificer is consecrated he 'becomes one of the deities'; and oneeven finds the doctrine that one obtains 'union with Brahm[=a], ' whichis quite in the strain of the Upanishads; but here such a saying canrefer only to the upper castes, for "the gods talk only to the uppercastes" (_Çal. Br. _. Xi. 4. 4. 1; iii. 1. 1. 8-10). The dead man iselsewhere represented as going to heaven 'with his whole body, ' and, according to one passage, when he gets to the next world his good andevil are weighed in a balance. There are, then, quite diverse views inregard to the fate of a man after death, and not less various are theopinions in regard to his reward and punishment. According to thecommon belief the dead, on leaving this world, pass between two fires, _agniçikhe_ raging on either side of his path. These fires burn theone that ought to be burned (the wicked), and let the good pass by. Then the spirit (or the man himself in body) is represented as goingup on one of two paths. Either he goes to the Manes on a path which, according to later teaching, passes southeast through the moon, or hegoes northeast (the gods' direction) to the sun, which is his 'courseand stay. ' In the same chapter one is informed that the rays of thesun are the good (dead), and that every brightest light is theFather-god. The general conception here is that the sun or the starsare the destination of the pious. On the other hand it is said thatone will enjoy the fruit of his acts here on earth, in a new birth; orthat he will 'go to the next world'; or that he will suffer for hissins in hell. The last is told in legendary form, and appears to us tobe not an early view retained in folk-lore, but a late modification ofan old legend. Varuna sends his son Bhrigu to hell to find out whathappens after death, and he finds people suffering torture, and, again, avenging themselves on those that have wronged them. But, despite the resemblance between this and Grecian myth, the fact thatin the whole compass of the Rik (in the Atharvan perhaps in v. 19)there is not the slightest allusion to torture in hell, precludes, toour mind, the possibility of this phase having been an ancientinherited belief. [59]

Annihilation or a life in under darkness is the first (Rik) hell. Thegeneral antithesis of light (as good) and darkness (as bad) is hereplainly revealed again. Sometimes a little variation occurs. Thus, according to _Çat. Br. _ vi. 5. 4. 8, the stars are women-souls, perhaps, as elsewhere, men also. The converse notion that darkness isthe abode of evil appears at a very early date: "Indra brought downthe heathen, _dasyus_, into the lowest darkness, " it is said in theAtharva Veda (ix. 2. 17). [60]

In the later part of the great 'Br[=a]hmana of the hundred paths'there seems to be a more modern view inculcated in regard to the fateof the dead. Thus, in vi. 1. 2. 36, the opinion of 'some, ' that thefire on the altar is to bear the worshipper to the sky, is objectedto, and it is explained that he becomes immortal; which antithesis isin purely Upanishadic style, as will be seen below. 

BRAHMANIC THEORIES OF CREATION. 

In Vedic polytheism, with its strain of pantheism, the act of creatingthe world[61] is variously attributed to different gods. At the end ofthis period theosophy invented the god of the golden germ, the greatPerson (known also by other titles), who is the one (pantheistic) god, in whom all things are contained, and who himself is contain in eventhe smallest thing. The Atharvan transfers the same idea in itsdelineation of the pantheistic image to Varuna, that Varuna who is theseas and yet is contained "in the drop of water" (iv. 16), a Varuna asdifferent to the Varuna of the Rik as is the Atharvan Indra to hisolder prototype. Philosophically the Rik, at its close, declares that"desire is the seed of mind, " and that "being arises from not-being. "

In the Br[=a]hmanas the creator is the All-god in more anthropomorphicform. The Father-god, Praj[=a]pati, or Brahm[=a] (personal equivalentof _brahma_) is not only the father of gods, men, and devils, but heis the All. This Father-god of universal sovereignty, Brahm[=a], remains to the end the personal creator. It is he who will serve ascreator for the Puranic S[=a]nkhya philosophy, and even after the riseof the Hindu sects he will still be regarded in this light, althoughhis activity will be conditioned by the will of Vishnu or Çiva. Inpure philosophy there will be an abstract First Cause; but as there isno religion in the acknowledgment of a First Cause, this too will soonbe anthropomorphized. 

The Br[=a]hmanas themselves present no clear picture of creation. Allthe accounts of a personal creator are based merely onanthropomorphized versions of the text 'desire is the seed. 'Praj[=a]pati wishes offspring, and creates. There is, on the otherhand, a philosophy of creation which reverts to the tale of the'golden germ. '[62] The world was at first water; thereon floated acosmic golden egg (the principle of fire). Out of this came Spiritthat desired; and by desire he begat the worlds and all things. It isimprobable that in this somewhat Orphic mystery there lies anypre-Vedic myth. The notion comes up first in the golden germ andegg-born bird (sun) of the Rik. It is not specially Aryan, and isfound even among the American Indians. [63] It is this Spirit withwhich the Father-god is identified. But guess-work philosophy thenasks what upheld this god, and answers that a support upheld allthings. So Support becomes a god in his turn, and, since he must reachthrough time and space, this Support, Skambha, becomes the All-godalso; and to him as to a great divinity the Atharvan sings some of itswildest strains. When once speculation is set going in theBr[=a]hmanas, the result of its travel is to land its followers inintellectual chaos. [64] The gods create the Father-god in one passage, and in another the Father-god creates the gods. The Father creates thewaters, whence rises the golden egg. But, again, the waters create theegg, and out of the egg is born the Father. A farrago ofcontradictions is all that these tales amount to, nor are theyredeemed even by a poetical garb. [65]

In the period immediately following the Br[=a]hmanas, or toward theend of the Brahmanic period, as one will, there is a famousdistinction made between the gods. Some gods, it is said, arespirit-gods; some are work-gods. They are born of spirit and of works, respectively. The difference, however, is not essential, butfunctional; so that one may conclude from this authority, the Nirukta(a grammatical and epexigetical work), that all the gods have a likenature; and that the spirit-gods, who are the older, differ only inlack of specific functions from the work-gods. A not uninterestingdebate follows this passage in regard to the true nature of the gods. Some people say they are anthropomorphic; others deny this. "Andcertainly what is seen of the gods is not anthropomorphic; forexample, the sun, the earth, etc. "[66] In such a period of theologicaladvance it is matter of indifference to which of a group of gods, allessentially one, is laid the task of creation. And, indeed, from theVedic period until the completed systems of philosophy, all creationto the philosopher is but emanation; and stories of specific acts ofcreation are not regarded by him as detracting from the creativefaculty of the First Cause. The actual creator is for him the factorand agent of the real god. On the other hand, the vulgar worshipper ofevery era believed only in reproduction on the part of ananthropomorphic god; and that god's own origin he satisfactorilyexplained by the myth of the golden egg. The view depended in eachcase not on the age but on the man. 

If in these many pages devoted to the Br[=a]hmanas we have producedthe impression that the religious literature of this period is aconfused jumble, where unite descriptions of ceremonies, formulae, mysticism, superstitions, and all the output of active bigotry; an_olla podrida_ which contains, indeed, odds and ends of soundmorality, while it presents, on the whole, a sad view of thelatter-day saints, who devoted their lives to making it what it is; wehave offered a fairly correct view of the age and its priests, and therather dreary series of illustrations will not have been collected invain. We have given, however, no notion at all of the chief object ofthis class of writings, the liturgical details of the sacrificesthemselves. Even a résumé of one comparatively short ceremony would beso long and tedious that the explication of the intricate formalitieswould scarcely be a sufficient reward. With Hillebrandt's patientanalysis of the New-and Full-Moon sacrifice, [67] of which a sketch isgiven by von Schroeder in his _Literatur und Cultur_, the curiousreader will be able to satisfy himself that a minute description ofthese ceremonies would do little to further his knowledge of thereligion, when once he grasps the fact that the sacrifice is but show. Symbolism without folk-lore, only with the imbecile imaginings of adaft mysticism, is the soul of it; and its outer form is a certainnumber of formulae, mechanical movements, oblations, andslaughterings. 

But we ought not to close the account of the era without givingcounter-illustrations of the legendary aspect of this religion; forwhich purpose we select two of the best-known tales, one from the endof the Br[=a]hmana that is called the [=A]itareya; the other from thebeginning of the Çatapatha; the former in abstract, the latter infull. 

THE SACRIFICE OF DOGSTAIL (_[=A]it. Br. _ vii. 13). 

Hariçcandra, a king born in the great race of Ikshv[=a]ku, had no son. A sage told him what blessings are his who has a son: 'He that has noson has no place in the world; in the person of a son a man is reborn, a second self is begotten. ' Then the king desired a son, and the sageinstructed him to pray to Varuna for one, and to offer to sacrificehim to the god. This he did, and a son, Rohita, at last was born tohim. God Varuna demanded the sacrifice. But the king said: 'He is notfit to be sacrificed, so young as he is; wait till he is ten daysold. ' The god waited ten days, and demanded the sacrifice. But theking said: 'Wait till his teeth come. ' The god waited, and thendemanded the sacrifice. But the king said: 'Wait till his teeth fallout'; and when the god had waited, and again demanded the sacrifice, the father said: 'Wait till his new teeth come. ' But, when his teethwere come and he was demanded, the father said: 'A warrior is not fitto be sacrificed till he has received his armor' (_i. E. _, until he isknighted). So the god waited till the boy had received his armor, andthen he demanded the sacrifice. Thereupon, the king called his son, and said unto him: 'I will sacrifice thee to the god who gave thee tome. ' But the son said, 'No, no, ' and took his bow and fled into thedesert. Then Varuna caused the king to be afflicted with dropsy. [68]When Rohita heard of this he was about to return, but Indra, disguisedas a priest, met him, and said: 'Wander on, for the foot of a wandereris like a flower; his spirit grows, and reaps fruit, and all his sinsare forgiven in the fatigue of wandering. '[69] So Rohita, thinkingthat a priest had commanded him, wandered; and every year, as he wouldreturn, Indra met him, and told him still to wander. On one of theseoccasions Indra inspires him to continue on his journey by telling himthat the _krita_ was now auspicious; using the names of diceafterwards applied to the four ages. [70] Finally, after six years, Rohita resolved to purchase a substitute for sacrifice. He meets astarving seer, and offers to buy one of his sons (to serve assacrifice), the price to be one hundred cows. The seer has three sons, and agrees to the bargain; but "the father said, 'Do not take theoldest, ' and the mother said, 'Do not take the youngest, ' so Rohitatook the middle son, Dogstail. " Varuna immediately agrees to thissubstitution of Dogstail for Rohita, "since a priest is of more valuethan a warrior. "

The sacrifice is made ready, and Viçv[=a]mitra (the Vedic seer) is theofficiating priest. But no one would bind the boy to the post. 'Ifthou wilt give me another hundred cows I will bind him, ' says thefather of Dogstail. But then no one would kill the boy. 'If thou wiltgive me another hundred cows I will kill him, ' says the father. The[=A]pri verses[71] are said, and the fire is carried around the boy. He is about to be slain. Then Dogstail prays to 'the first of gods, 'the Father-god, for protection. But the Father-god tells him to prayto Agni, 'the nearest of the gods. ' Agni sends him to another, and heto another, till at last, when the boy has prayed to all the gods, including the All-gods, his fetters drop off; Hariçcandra's dropsyceases, and all ends well. [72] Only, when the avaricious fatherdemands his son back, he is refused, and Viçv[=a]mitra adopts the boy, even dispossessing his own protesting sons. For fifty of the latteragree to the exaltation of Dogstail; but fifty revolt, and are cursedby Viçv[=a]mitra, that their sons' sons should become barbarians, theAndhras, Pundras, Çabaras, Pulindas, and M[=u]tibas, savage races (ofthis time), one of which can be located on the southeast coast. Theconclusion, and the matter that follows close on this tale, issignificant of the time, and of the priest's authority. For it is saidthat 'if a king hears this story he is made free of sin, ' but he canhear it only from a priest, who is to be rewarded for telling it by agift of one thousand cows, and other rich goods. 

The matter following, to which we have alluded, is the use ofsacrificial formulae to defeat the king's foes, the description of aroyal inauguration, and, at this ceremony, the oath which the king hasto swear ere the priest will anoint him (he is anointed with milk, honey, butter, and water, 'for water is immortality'): "I swear thatthou mayst take from me whatever good works I do to the day of mydeath, together with my life and children, if ever I should do theeharm. "[73]

When the priest is secretly told how he may ruin the king by a falseinvocation at the sacrifice, and the king is made to swear that ifever he hurts the priest the latter may rob him of earthly andheavenly felicity, the respective positions of the two, and thecontrast between this era and that of the early hymns, becomestrikingly evident. It is not from such an age as this that one canexplain the spirit of the Rig Veda. 

The next selection is the famous story of the flood, which wetranslate literally in its older form. [74] The object of the legend inthe Br[=a]hmana is to explain the importance of the Id[=a] (or Il[=a])ceremony, which is identified with Id[=a], Manu's daughter. 

"In the morning they brought water to Manu to wash with, even as theybring it to-day to wash hands with. While he was washing a fish cameinto his hands. The fish said, 'Keep me, and I will save thee. ' 'Whatwilt thou save me from?' 'A flood will sweep away all creatures onearth. I will save thee from that. ' 'How am I to keep thee?' 'As longas we are small, ' said he (the fish), 'we are subject to muchdestruction; fish eats fish. Thou shalt keep me first in a jar. When Ioutgrow that, thou shalt dig a hole, and keep me in it. When I outgrowthat, thou shalt take me down to the sea, for there I shall be beyonddestruction. '

"It soon became a (great horned fish called a) _jhasha_, for thisgrows the largest, and then it said: 'The flood will come this summer(or in such a year). Look out for (or worship) me, and build a ship. When the flood rises, enter into the ship, and I will save thee. 'After he had kept it he took it down to the sea. And the same summer(year) as the fish had told him he looked out for (or worshipped) thefish; and built a ship. And when the flood rose he entered into theship. Then up swam the fish, and Manu tied the ship's rope to the hornof the fish; and thus he sailed swiftly up toward the mountain of thenorth. 'I have saved thee' said he (the fish). 'Fasten the ship to atree. But let not the water leave thee stranded while thou art on themountain (top). Descend slowly as the water goes down. ' So hedescended slowly, and that descent of the mountain of the north iscalled the 'Descent of Manu. ' The flood then swept off all thecreatures of the earth, and Manu here remained alone. Desirous ofposterity, he worshipped and performed austerities. While he wasperforming a sacrifice, he offered up in the waters clarified butter, sour milk, whey and curds. Out of these in a year was produced awoman. She arose when she was solid, and clarified butter collectedwhere she trod. Mitra and Varuna met her, and said: 'Who art thou?''Manu's daughter, ' said she. 'Say ours, ' said they. 'No, ' said she; 'Iam my father's. ' They wanted part in her. She agreed to this, and shedid not agree; but she went by them and came to Manu. Said Manu: 'Whoart thou?' 'Thy daughter, ' said she. 'How my daughter, gloriouswoman?' She said: 'Thou hast begotten me of the offering, which thoumadest in the water, clarified butter, sour milk, whey, and curds. Iam a blessing; use me at the sacrifice. If thou usest me at thesacrifice, thou shalt become rich in children and cattle. Whateverblessing thou invokest through me, all shall be granted to thee. ' Sohe used her as the blessing in the middle of the sacrifice. For whatis between the introductory and final offerings is the middle of thesacrifice. With her he went on worshipping and performing austerities, wishing for offspring. Through her he begot the race of men on earth, the race of Manu; and whatever the blessing he invoked through her, all was granted unto him. 

"Now she is the same with the Id[=a] ceremony; and whoever, knowingthis, performs sacrifice with the Id[=a], he begets the race that Manugenerated; and whatever blessing he invokes through her, all isgranted unto him. "

There is one of the earliest _avatar_ stories in this tale. Laterwriters, of course, identify the fish with Brahm[=a] and with Vishnu. In other early Br[=a]hmanas the _avatars_ of a god as a tortoise and aboar were known long before they were appropriated by the Vishnuites. 

 * * * * *

 FOOTNOTES:

 [Footnote 1: In _[=A]it. Br_. I. 22, there is an unexplained antithesis of Rik, Yajus, S[=a]man, Veda, and Brahma; where the commentator takes Veda to be Atharva Veda. The priests, belonging respectively to the first three Vedas, are for the Rig Veda, the Hotar priest, who recites; for the S[=a]man, the Udg[=a]tar, 'the singer'; for the Y[=a]jus, the Adhvaryu, who attends to the erection of the altar, etc. Compare Müller, ASL. P. 468. ]

 [Footnote 2: It is the only literature of its time except (an important exception) those fore-runners of later S[=u]tra and epic which one may suppose to be in process of formation long before they come to the front. ]

 [Footnote 3: There are several schools of this Veda, of which the chief are the V[=a]jasaneyi, or 'White Yajus, ' collection; the T[=a]ittir[=i]ya collection; and the M[=a]itr[=a]yan[=i] collection; the first named being the latest though the most popular, the last two being the foremost representatives of the 'Black Yajus. ']

 [Footnote 4: The different traits here recorded are given with many illustrative examples by Schroeder, in his _Literatur und Cultur_, p. 90 ff. ]

 [Footnote 5: Compare Weber, _Ind. Streifen_, II. 197. ]

 [Footnote 6: Weber, _Lit_. P. 73. ]

 [Footnote 7: The _Çata-patha Br[=a]hmana_ (or "Br[=a]mana of the hundred paths") II. 2. 2. 6; 4. 3. 14. ]

 [Footnote 8: The chief family priest, it is said in the _Çat. Br_. II. 4. 4. 5, is a man of great influence. Sometimes one priest becomes religious head of two clans (an extraordinary event, however; only one name is reported) and then how exalted is his position. Probably, as in the later age of the drama, the chief priest often at the same time practically prime minister. It is said in another part of the same book that although the whole earth is divine, yet it is the priest that makes holy the place of sacrifice (III. 1. 1. 4). In this period murder is defined as killing a priest; other cases are not called murder. Weber, _IS_. X. 66. ]

 [Footnote 9: Barth, _loc. Cit. _ p. 42. ]

 [Footnote 10: He has analogy with Agni in being made of 'seven persons (males), ' _Çat. Br. _ X. 2. 2. 1. ]

 [Footnote 11: Compare M[=a]it. S. IV. 2. 12, 'sons of Praj[=a]pati, Agni, V[=a]yu, S[=u]rya. ']

 [Footnote 12: _Çat. Br. _ I. 3. 4. 12; IV. 3. 5. 1. ]

 [Footnote 13: Interesting is the fact that only priests may eat sacrificial food and drink _soma_ at this period. When even the king should drink _soma_, he is made to drink some transubstantiated liquor which, the priests inform him, has been 'made into _soma_' for him by magic, for the latter is too holy for any warrior really to drink (VII. 19; VIII. 20). But in the more popular feasts there are indications that this rule is often broken. Compare Weber, _R[=a]jas[=u]ya_ p. 98. ]

 [Footnote 14: For the relations of the different castes at this period, see Weber, in the tenth volume of the _Indische Studien_. ]

 [Footnote 15: The Atharvan is not yet recognized as a Veda. ]

 [Footnote 16: And even the pronunciation of a word or the accent is fateful. The famous godly example of this is where Tvashtar, the artificer, in anger mispronounced _indra-çátru_ as _indraçatru, _ whereby the meaning was changed from 'conqueror of Indra' to 'Indra-conquered, ' with unexpected result (_Çat. Br. _ I. 6. 3. 8; _T[=a]itt. S. _ II. 4. 12. 1). ]

 [Footnote 17: The word is _a[. M]sala_, strong, or 'from the shoulder' (?). In III. 4. 1. 2 one cooks an ox or a goat for a very distinguished guest, as a sort of guest-sacrifice. So the guest is called 'cow-killer' (Weber, _Ved. Beiträge_, p. 36). ]

 [Footnote 18: Compare _ib_. I. 9. 1. 21, "let the priest not say 'guard me (or us), ' but 'guard this worshipper (sacrificer), ' for if he says 'me' he induces no blessing at all; the blessing is not for the priest, but for the sacrificer. " In both passages, most emphatically, _yajam[=a]nasy[=a]iva_, 'for the sacrificer alone. ']

 [Footnote 19: _Ya[. M] k[=a]ma[. M] k[=a]mayate so 'sm[=a]i k[=a]ma[h. ] sam[r. ]dhyate_. ]

 [Footnote 20: [=A]suri's name as a theologian is important, since the S[=a]nkhya philosophy is intimately connected with him; if this [=A]suri be not another man with the same name (compare Weber, _Lit_. P. 152). ]

 [Footnote 21: The regular sacrifices to the Manes are daily and monthly; funerals and 'faith-feasts, ' _çr[=a]ddha_, are occasional additions. ]

 [Footnote 22: Each generation of Manes rises to a better (higher) state if the offerings continue. As a matter of ceremonial this means that the remoter generations of fathers are put indefinitely far off, while the immediate predecessors of a man are the real beneficiaries; they climb up to the sky on the offering. ]

 [Footnote 23: Compare _Çat. Br_. I. 8. 1. 40; ii. 6. 1. 3, 7, 10, 42; ii. 4. 2. 24; v. 5. 4. 28. ]

 [Footnote 24: This passage (_ib_. Ii. 1. 2. 7) is preceded by a typical argument for setting up the fires under the Pleiades, the wives of the Great Bear stars. He may do or he may not do so--the reasons contradict each other, and all of them are incredibly silly. ]

 [Footnote 25: This last fee is not so common. For an oblation to S[=u]rya the fee is a white horse or a white bull; either of them representing the proper form of the sun (_Çat. Br_. Ii. 6. 3. 9); but another authority specifies twelve oxen and a plough (T[=a]itt. S. I. 8. 7). ]

 [Footnote 26: _Çat. Br_. Ii. 1. 1. 3; 2. 3. 28; iv. 3. 4. 14; 5. 1. 15; four kinds of fees, _ib_. Iv. 3. 4. 6, 7, 24 ff. (Milk is also 'Agni's seed, ' _ib_. Ii. 2. 4. 15). ]

 [Footnote 27: Yet in _[=A]it. Br_. Iii. 19, the priest is coolly informed how he may be able to slay his patron by making a little change in the invocations. Elsewhere such conduct is reprobated. ]

 [Footnote 28: For other covenants, see the epic (chapter on Hinduism). ]

 [Footnote 29: _Çat. Br_. Iii. 4. 2. 1 ff. ; iii. 6. 2. 25; iv. 3. 3. 3; iv. 4. 1. 17; 6. 6. 3; 7. 6, etc. ; iii. 8. 2. 27; 3. 26; _[=A]it. Br. _. I. 24. ]

 [Footnote 30: _ib_. Ii. 6. 2. 5. Here Rudra (compare Çiva and Hekate of the cross-roads) is said to go upon 'cross-roads'; so that his sacrifice is on cross-roads--one of the new teachings since the time of the Rig Veda. Rudra's sister, Ambik[=a], _ib_. 9, is another new creation, the genius of autumnal sickness. ]

 [Footnote 31: _Çat. Br_. Ii. 2. 1. 21. How much non-serious fancy there may be here it is difficult to determine. It seems impossible that such as follows can have been meant in earnest: "The sacrifice, _pray[=a]ja, _ is victory, _jaya_, because _yaja_ = _jaya_. With this knowledge one gets the victory over his rivals" (_ib_. I. 5. 3. 3, 10). ]

 [Footnote 32: Although Bhaga is here (_Çat. Br_. I. 7. 4. 6-7, _endho bhagas_) interpreted as the Sun, he is evidently the same with Good Luck [Greek: typhlhos ghar ho Êlohhytos] or wealth. ]

 [Footnote 33: _Çat. Br_. Iii. 1. 2. 13 ff. ; l. 1. 2. 18; iii. 6. 1. 8 ff. ; ii. 5. 2. 1; iv. 2. 1. 11; iii. 4. 4. 3 ff. ; 2. 3. 6-12, 13-14; iv. 5. 5. 12; 1. 3. 13 ff. ; iii. 2. 4. 5-6; 3. 2. 8; 7. 1. 17; iv. 2. 5. 17; 4. 1. 15; i. 7. 4. 6-7; ii. 4. 3. 4 ff. ; li. 5. 2. 34; 5. 1. 12; 5. 1. 1 ff. ; RV. Viii. 104. 14. The reader must distinguish, in the name of Brahm[=a], the god from the priest, and this from _brahm[=a]_, prayer. The first step is _brahma_--force, power, prayer; then this is, as a masculine Brahm[=a], the one who prays, that is, prayer, the Brahman priest, as, in the Rig Veda, x. 141. 3. Brihaspati is the 'Brahm[=a] of gods. ' The next (Brahmanic) step is deified _brahma_, the personal Brahm[=a] as god, called also Father-god (Praj[=a]pati) or simply The Father (_pit[=a]_). ]

 [Footnote 33: _Çat. Br_. Iii. 1. 2. 13 ff. ; l. 1. 2. 18; iii. 6. 1. 8 ff. ; ii. 5. 2. 1; iv. 2. 1. 11; iii. 4. 4. 3 ff. ; 2. 3. 6-12, 13-14; iv. 5. 5. 12; 1. 3. 13 ff. ; iii. 2. 4. 5-6; 3. 2. 8; 7. 1. 17; iv. 2. 5. 17; 4. 1. 15; i. 7. 4. 6-7; ii. 4. 3. 4 ff. ; li. 5. 2. 34; 5. 1. 12; 5. 1. 1 ff. ; RV. Viii. 104. 14. The reader must distinguish, in the name of Brahm[=a], the god from the priest, and this from _brahm[=a]_, prayer. The first step is _brahma_--force, power, prayer; then this is, as a masculine Brahm[=a], the one who prays, that is, prayer, the Brahman priest, as, in the Rig Veda, x. 141. 3. Brihaspati is the 'Brahm[=a] of gods. ' The next (Brahmanic) step is deified _brahma_, the personal Brahm[=a] as god, called also Father-god (Praj[=a]pati) or simply The Father (_pit[=a]_). ]

 [Footnote 34: Compare _M[=a]it. S_ iii. 10. 2; _[=A]it. Br_. Ii. 8; _Çat. Br_. I. 2. 3. 5; vi. 2. 1. 39; 3. 1. 24; ii. 5. 2. 16, a ram and ewe 'made of barley. ' On human sacrifices, compare Müller, ASL. P. 419; Weber. ZDMG. Xviii. 262 (see the Bibliography); _Streifen_, i. 54. ]

 [Footnote 35: Weber has translated some of these legends. _Ind. Streifen_, i. 9 ff. ]

 [Footnote 36: _T[=a]itt. Br_. Iii. 2. 9. 7; _Çat. Br_. I. 2. 5. 5; ii. 1. 2. 13 ff. ; vii. 5. 1. 6. ]

 [Footnote 37: Compare _M[=a]it. S_. I. 9. 8; _Çat. Br_. I. 6. 1. 1 ff. The seasons desert the gods, and the demons thrive. In _Çat. Br. _ i. 5. 4. 6-11, the Asuras and Indra contend with numbers. ]

 [Footnote 38: Müller, ASL. P. 529. ]

 [Footnote 39: _M[=a]it. S_. Iv. 2. 12; _Çat. Br_. I. 7. 4. 1; ii. 1. 2. 9; vi. 1. 3. 8; _[=A]it. Br_. Iii. 33. Compare Muir, OST. Iv. P. 45. At a later period there are frequently found indecent tales of the gods, and the Br[=a]hmanas themselves are vulgar enough, but they exhibit no special lubricity on the part of the priests. ]

 [Footnote 40: _Idam aham ya èv[=a] smi so asmi, Çat. Br_. I. 1. 1. 6; 9. 3. 23. ]

 [Footnote 41: RV. Viii. 51. 2; Zimmer, _loc. Cit_. P. 328. ]

 [Footnote 42: Compare Weber, _Episch. In Vedisch. Ritual_, p. 777 (and above). The man who is slaughtered must be neither a priest nor a slave, but a warrior or a man of the third caste (Weber, _loc. Cit_. Above). ]

 [Footnote 43: _Le Mercier_, 1637, ap. Parkman, _loc. Cit_. P. 80. The current notion that the American Indian burns his victims at the stake merely for pleasure is not incorrect. He frequently did so, as he does so to-day, but in the seventeenth century this act often is part of a religious ceremony. He probably would have burned his captive, anyway, but he gladly utilized his pleasure as a means of propitiating his gods. In India it was just the other way. ]

 [Footnote 44: Substitutes of metal or of earthen victims are also mentioned. ]

 [Footnote 45: That the Vedic rite of killing the sacrificial beast (by beating and smothering) was very cruel may be seen in the description, _[=A]it. Br_. Ii. 6. ]

 [Footnote 46: _Çat. Br. _ i. 5. 2. 4. ]

 [Footnote 47: _Sams[=a]ra_ is transmigration; _karma_, 'act, ' implies that the change of abode is conditioned by the acts of a former life. Each may exclude the other; but in common parlance each implies the other. ]

 [Footnote 48: Weber, _Indischt Streifen_, i. P. 72. ]

 [Footnote 49: _Çat. Br_. I. 7. 3. 19: iii. 4. 1. 17. ]

 [Footnote 50: _Çaf. Br_. Iii. 5. 4. 10; 6. 2. 24; 5. 3. 17 (compare 6. 4. 23-24; 3. 4. 11; 2. 1. 12); iii. 1. 2. 4; 3. 14; i. 7. 2. 9; vi. 1. 2. 14. The change of name is interesting. There is a remark in another part of the same work to the effect that when a man prospers in life they give his name also to his son, grandson, _and to his father and grandfather_ (vi. 1. 2. 13). On the other hand, it was the custom of the Indian kings in later ages to assume the names of their prosperous grandfathers (JRAS. Iv. 85). ]

 [Footnote 51: Were it not for the first clause it would be more natural to render the original 'The gods are truth alone, and men are untruth. ']

 [Footnote 52: In _Çat. Br_. Ii. 4. 2. 5-6 it is said that the Father-god gives certain rules of eating to gods, Manes, men, and beasts: "Neither gods, Manes, nor beasts transgress the Father's law, only some men do. "]

 [Footnote 53: _Çat. Br_. Ii. 5. 2. 20. Varuna seizes on her paramour, when she confesses. _T[. A]itt. Br_. I. 6. 5. 2. The guilt confessed becomes less "because it thereby becomes truth" (right). ]

 [Footnote 54: See _Çat. Br. _. Ii. 4. 2. 6; 4. 1. 14; 1. 3. 9; 3. 1. 28: "Who knows man's morrow? Then let one not procrastinate. " "Today is self, this alone is certain, uncertain is the morrow. "]

 [Footnote 55: Some little rules are interesting. The Pythagorean abstinence from _m[=a][s. ][=a]s_, beans, for instance, is enjoined; though this rule is opposed by Barku V[=a]rshna, _Çat. Br_. I. 1. 1. 10, on the ground that no offering to the gods is made of beans; "hence he said 'cook beans for me. '"]

 [Footnote 56: Animals may represent gods. "The bull is a form of Indra, " and so if the bull can be made to roar (_Çat. Br. _ ii. 5. 3. 18), then one may know that Indra is come to the sacrifice. "Man is born into (whatever) world is made (by his acts in a previous existence), " is a short formula (_Çat. Br. _. Vi. 2. 2. 27), which represents the _karma_ doctrine in its essential principle, though the 'world' is here not this world, but the next. Compare Weber, ZDMG. Ix. 237 ff. ; Muir, OST. V. 314 ff. ]

 [Footnote 57: Though youth may be restored to him by the Açvins, _Çat. Br. _. Iv. I. 5. 1 ff. Here the Horsemen are identified with Heaven and Earth (16). ]

 [Footnote 58: _Cal. Br_. Ii. 3. 3. 7. Apropos of the Brahmanic sun it may be mentioned that, according to _Ait. Br. _ iii. 44, the sun never really sets. "People think that he sets, but in truth he only turns round after reaching the end of the day, and makes night below, day above; and when they think he rises in the morning, he having come to the end of the night, turns round, and makes day below, night above. He never really sets. Whoever knows this of him, that he never sets, obtains union and likeness of form with the sun, and the same abode as the sun's. " Compare Muir, OST. V. 521. This may be the real reason why the Rig Veda speaks of a dark and light sun. ]

 [Footnote 59: _Çat. Br. _. I. 4. 3. 11-22 ('The sinner shall suffer and go quickly to yonder world'); xi. 6. 1 (compare Weber, _loc. Cit. _ p. 20 ff. ; ZDMG. Ix. 237), the Bhrigu story, of which a more modern form is found in the Upanishad period. For the course of the sun, the fires on either side of the way, the departure to heaven 'with the whole body, ' compare _Çat. Br. _ i. 9. 3. 2-15; iv. 5. 1. 1; vi. 6. 2. 4; xi. 2. 7. 33; Weber, _loc. Cit. _: Muir, _loc. Cit. _ v. P. 314. Not to have all one's bones in the next world is a disgrace, as Muir says, and for that reason they are collected at burial. Compare the custom as described by the French missionaries here. The American Indian has to have all his bones for future use, and the burying of the skeleton is an annual religious ceremony. ]

 [Footnote 60: Compare RV. Iv. 28. 4: 'Thou Indra madest lowest the heathen. ' Weber has shown, _loc. Cit. _, that the general notion of the Br[=a]hmanas is that all are born again in the next world, where they are rewarded or punished according as they are good or bad; whereas in the Rig Veda the good rejoice in heaven, and the bad are annihilated. This general view is to be modified, however, by such side-theories as those just mentioned, that the good (or wise) may be reborn on earth, or be united with gods, or become sunlight or stars (the latter are 'watery' to the Hindu, and this may explain the statement that the soul is 'in the midst of waters'). ]

 [Footnote 61: There is in this age no notion of the repeated creations found in later literature. On the contrary, it is expressly said in the Rig Veda, vi. 48. 22, that heaven and earth are created but once: "Only once was heaven created, only once was earth created, " Zimmer, AIL. 408. ]

 [Footnote 62: When the principle of life is explained it is in terms of sun or fire. Thus Praj[=a]pati, Lord of beings, or Father-god, is first an epithet of Savitar, RV. Iv. 53. 2; and the golden germ must be fire. ]

 [Footnote 63: Schoolcraft, _Historical and Statistical Information_, i. 32. As examples of the many passages where 'water is the beginning' may be cited _Çat. Br. _ vi. 7. 1. 17; xi. 1. 6. 1. The sun, born as Aditi's eighth son, is the bird, 'egg-born, ' RV. X. 72. 8. ]

 [Footnote 64: Among the new curators of Atharvan origin are, for instance, the sun under the name of Rohita, Desire (Love), etc. , etc. ]

 [Footnote 65: Illustrations of these contradictions may be found in plenty _apud_ Muir iv. P. 20 ff. ]

 [Footnote 66: Nirukta, vii. 4; Muir, _loc. Cit. _ p. 131 and v. 17. ]

 [Footnote 67: _Neu-und Vollmonds Opfer_, 1880. The _D[=i]ksh[=a]_, or initiation, has been described by Lindner; the _R[=a]jas[=u]ya_ and _Vajapeya_, by Weber. ]

 [Footnote 68: The water-sickness already imputed to this god in the Rig Veda. This tale and that of Bhrigu (referred to above) show an ancient trait in the position of Varuna, as chief god. ]

 [Footnote 69: This is the germ of the pilgrimage doctrine (see below). ]

 [Footnote 70: Perhaps (M. Ix. 301) interpolated; or the first allusion to the Four Ages. ]

 [Footnote 71: These (compare _afri_, 'blessing, ' in the Avesta) are verses in the Rig Veda introducing the sacrifice. They are meant as propitiations, and appear to be an ancient part of the ritual. ]

 [Footnote 72: A group of hymns in the first book of the Rig Veda are attributed to Dogstail. At any rate, they do allude to him, and so prove a moderate antiquity (probably the middle period of the Rik) for the tale. The name, in Sanskrit Çunasçepa, has been ingeniously starred by Weber as Cynosoura; the last part of each compound having the same meaning, and the first part being even phonetically the same _çunas, [Greek: kunhos]_. ]

 [Footnote 73: _Ait. Br. _ viii. 10, 15, 20. ]

 [Footnote 74: The epic has a later version. This earlier form is found in _Çat. Br. _ i. 8. 1. For the story of the flood among the American Indians compare Schoolcraft (_Historical and Statistical Information_), i. 17. ]

 * * * * *

CHAPTER X. 

BRAHMANIC PANTHEISM. --THE UPANISHADS. 

In the Vedic hymns man fears the gods, and imagines God. In theBr[=a]hmanas man subdues the gods, and fears God. In the Upanishadsman ignores the gods, and becomes God. [1]

Such in a word is the theosophic relations between the three periodsrepresented by the first Vedic Collection, the ritualisticBr[=a]hmanas, and the philosophical treatises called Upanishads. Yetif one took these three strata of thought to be quite independent ofeach other he would go amiss. Rather is it true that the Br[=a]hmanaslogically continue what the hymns begin; that the Upanishads logicallycarry on the thought of the Br[=a]hmanas. And more, for in the oldestUpanishads are traits that connect this class of writings (if theywere written) directly, and even closely with the Vedic hymnsthemselves; so that one may safely assume that the time of the firstUpanishads is not much posterior to that of the latest additions madeto the Vedic collections, though this indicates only that theseadditions were composed at a much later period than is generallysupposed. [2] In India no literary period subsides with the rise of itseventually 'succeeding' period. All the works overlap. Parts of theBr[=a]hmanas succeed, sometimes with the addition of whole books, their proper literary successors, the Upanishads. Vedic hymns arecomposed in the Brahmanic period. [3] The prose S[=u]tras, which, ingeneral, are earlier, sometimes post-date metrical Ç[=a]stra-rules. Thus it is highly probable that, whereas the Upanishads began beforethe time of Buddha, the Çatapatha Br[=a]hmana (if not others of thisclass) continued to within two or three centuries of our era; that thelegal S[=u]tras were, therefore, contemporary with part of theBr[=a]hmanic period;[4] and that, in short, the end of the Vedicperiod is so knit with the beginning of the Br[=a]hmanic, while theBr[=a]hmanic period is so knit with the rise of the Upanishads, S[=u]tras, epics, and Buddhism, that one cannot say of any one: 'thisis later, ' 'this is earlier'; but each must be taken only for a phaseof indefinitely dated thought, exhibited on certain lines. It mustalso be remembered that by the same class of works a wide geographicalarea may be represented; by the Br[=a]hmanas, west and east; by theS[=u]tras, north and south; by the Vedic poems, northwest and east toBenares (AV. ); by the epics, all India, centred about the holy middleland near Delhi. 

The meaning of Upanishad as used in the compositions themselves, iseither, as it is used to-day, the title of a philosophical work; thatof knowledge derived from esoteric teaching; or the esoteric teachingitself. Thus _brahma upanishad_ is the secret doctrine of _brahma_, and 'whoever follows this _upanishad_' means whoever follows thisdoctrine. This seems, however, to be a meaning derived from the natureof the Upanishads themselves, and we are almost inclined to think thatthe true significance of the word was originally that in which aloneoccurs, in the early period, the combination _upa-ni-[s. ]ad_, and thisis purely external: "he makes the common people _upa-ni-s[=a]din, "i. E_. , 'sitting below' or 'subject, ' it is said in _Çat. Br_. Ix. 4. 3. 3 (from the literal meaning of 'sitting below'). [5] Instead, therefore, of seeing in _upan[=i]sad_, Upanishad, the idea of asession, of pupils sitting down to hear instruction (the prepositionsand verb are never used in this sense), it may be that the Upanishadswere at first _subsidiary_ works of the ritualistic Br[=a]hmanascontained in the [=A]ranyakas or Forest Books, that is, appendices tothe Br[=a]hmana, ostensibly intended for the use of piousforest-hermits (who had passed beyond the need of sacrifice); andthis, in point of fact, is just what they were; till their growthresulted in their becoming an independent branch of literature. Theusual explanation of 'Upanishad, ' however, is that it represents theinstruction given to the pupil 'sitting under' the teacher. 

Although at present between two and three hundred Upanishads areknown, at least by name, to exist, yet scarcely a dozen appear to beof great antiquity. Some of these are integral parts of Br[=a]hmanas, and apparently were added to the ritualistic works at an earlyperiod. [6]

While man's chief effort in the Brahmanic period seems to be bysacrifice and penance to attain happiness hereafter, and to get theupper hand of divine powers; while he recognizes a God, who, thoughsupreme, has yet, like the priest himself, attained his supremacy bysacrifice and penance; while he dreams of a life hereafter in heavenlyworlds, in the realm of light, though hardly seeking to avoid acontinuation of earthly re-births; nevertheless he frees himself attimes from ritualistic observances sufficiently to continue thequestioning asked by his Vedic ancestors, and to wonder whither hisimmortal part is definitively going, and whether that spirit of hiswill live independently, or be united with some higher power, such asthe sun or Brahm[=a]. 

The philosophical writings called Upanishads[7] take up this questionin earnest, but the answer is already assured, and the philosophers, or poets, of this period seek less to prove the truth than to expoundit. The soul of man will not only join a heavenly Power. It is part ofthat Power. Man's spirit (self) is the world-spirit. And what is this?While all the Upanishads are at one in answering the first question, they are not at one in the method by which they arrive at the sameresult. There is no systematic philosophy; but a tentative, and moreor less dogmatic, logic. In regard to the second question they arestill less at one; but in general their answer is that theworld-spirit is All, and everything is a part of It or Him. Yet, whether that All is personal or impersonal, and what is the relationbetween spirit and matter, this is still an unsettled point. 

The methods and results of this half-philosophical literature willmost easily be understood by a few examples. But, before these aregiven, it will be necessary to emphasize the colloquial and scrappynature of the teaching. Legend, parable, ritualistic absurdities, belief in gods, denial of gods, belief in heaven, denial of heaven, are all mingled, and for a purpose. For some men are able, and someare unable, to receive the true light of knowledge. But man's fatedepends on his knowledge. The wise man becomes hereafter what hisknowledge has prepared him to be. Not every spirit is fitted forimmortality, but only the spirit of them that have wisely desired it, or, rather, not desired it; for every desire must have beenextinguished before one is fitted for this end. Hence, with advancingbelief in absorption and pantheism, there still lingers, and not as amere superfluity, the use of sacrifice and penance. Rites and theparaphernalia of religion are essential till one learns that they areunessential. Desire will be gratified till one learns that the mostdesirable thing is lack of desire. But so long as one desires even thelack of desire he is still in the fetters of desire. The way is longto the extinction of emotion, but its attainment results in happinessthat is greater than delight; in peace that surpasses joy. 

In the exposition of this doctrine the old gods are retained asfigures. They are not real gods. But they are existent forms of God. They are portions of the absolute, a form of the Eternal, even as manis a form of the same. Absolute being, again, is described asanthropomorphic. 'This is that' under a certain form. Incessantly madeis the attempt to explain the identity of the absolute with phenomena. The power _brahma_, which is originally applied to prayer, is nowtaken as absolute being, and this, again, must be equated with thepersonal spirit (ego, self, _[=a]tm[=a]_). One finds himself back inthe age of Vedic speculation when he reads of prayer (or penance) andpower as one. For, as was shown above, the Rig Veda already recognizesthat prayer is power. There the word for power, _brahma_, is used onlyas equivalent of prayer, and Brihaspati or Brahmanaspati is literallythe 'god of power, ' as he is interpreted by the priests. Thesignificance of the other great word of this period, namely_[=a]tm[=a]_, is not at all uncertain, but to translate it isdifficult. It is breath, spirit, self, soul. Yet, since in itsoriginal sense it corresponds to spiritus (comparable to athmen), theword spirit, which also signifies the real person, perhaps representsit best. We shall then render _brahma_ and _[=a]tm[=a]_ by theabsolute and the ego or spirit, respectively; or leave them, which isperhaps the best way, in their native form. The physical breath, _pr[=a]na, _ is occasionally used just like _[=a]tm[=a]. _ Thus it issaid that all the gods are one god, and this is _pr[=a]na, _ identicalwith _brahma_ (Brihad [=A]ranyaka Upanishad, 3. 9. 9); or _pr[=a]na_ isso used as to be the same with spirit, though, on the other hand, 'breath is born of spirit' (Praçna Up. 3. 3), just as in the Rig Veda(above) it is said that all comes from the breath of God. 

One of the most instructive of the older Upanishads is theCh[=a]ndogya. A sketch of its doctrines will give a clearer idea ofUpanishad philosophy than a chapter of disconnected excerpts:

All this (universe) is _brahma_. Man has intelligent force (or will). He, after death, will exist in accordance with his will in life. Thisspirit in (my) heart is that mind-making, breath-bodied, light-formed, truth-thoughted, ether-spirited One, of whom are all works, alldesires, all smells, and all tastes; who comprehends the universe, whospeaks not and is not moved; smaller than a rice-corn, smaller than amustard-seed, . . . Greater than earth, greater than heaven. This(universal being) is my ego, spirit, and is _brahma, _ force (absolutebeing). After death I shall enter into him (3. 14). [8] This all isbreath (==spirit in 3. 15. 4). 

After this epitome of pantheism follows a ritualistic bit:

Man is sacrifice. Four and twenty years are the morning libation; thenext four and forty, the mid-day libation; the next eight and forty, the evening libation. The son of Itar[=a], knowing this, lived onehundred and sixteen years. He who knows this lives one hundred andsixteen years (3. 16). 

Then, for the abolition of all sacrifice, follows a chapter whichexplains that man may sacrifice symbolically, so that, for example, gifts to the priests (a necessary adjunct of a real sacrifice) herebecome penance, liberality, rectitude, non-injury, truth-speaking(_ib. _ 17. 4). There follows then the identification of _brahma_ withmind, sun, breath, cardinal points, ether, etc, even puns beingbrought into requisition, _Ka_ is _Kha_ and _Kha_ is _Ka_ (4. 10. 5);[9] earth, fire, food, sun, water, stars, man, are _brahma_, and_brahma_ is the man seen in the moon (4. 12. I). And now comes theidentity of the impersonal _brahma_ with the personal spirit. The manseen in the eye is the spirit; this is the immortal, unfearing_brahma_ (4. 15. I = 8. 7. 4). He that knows this goes after death tolight, thence to day, thence to the light moon, thence to the season, thence to the year, thence to the sun, thence to the moon, thence tolightning; thus he becomes divine, and enters _brahma_. They that goon this path of the gods that conducts to _brahma_ do not return tohuman conditions _(ib. _ 15. 6). 

But the Father-god of the Br[=a]hmanas is still a temporary creator, and thus he appears now (_ib. _ 17): The Father-god brooded over[10]the worlds, and from them extracted essences, fire from earth, windfrom air, sun from sky. These three divinities (the triad, fire, wind, and sun) he brooded over, and from them extracted essences, the RigVeda from fire, the Yajur Veda from wind, the S[=a]ma Veda from sun. In the preceding the northern path of them that know the absolute(_brahma_) has been described, and it was said that they return nomore to earth. Now follows the southern path of them that only partlyknow _brahma_:

"He that knows the oldest, _jye[s. ]tham_ and the best, _çre[s]tham, _becomes the oldest and the best. Now breath is oldest and best" (thenfollows the famous parable of the senses and breath, 5. 1. I). This(found elsewhere) is evidently regarded as a new doctrine, for, afterthe deduction has been made that, because a creature can live withoutsenses, and even without mind, but cannot live without breath, therefore the breath is the 'oldest and best, ' the text continues, 'ifone told this to a dry stick, branches would be produced and leavesput forth' (5. 2. 3). [11]] The path of him that partly knows the_brahma_ which is expressed in breath, etc, is as follows: He goes tothe moon, and, when his good works are used up, he (ultimately mist)rains down, becoming seed, and begins life over again on earth, tobecome like the people who eat him (5. 10. 6); they that are goodbecome priests, warriors, or members of the third estate; while thebad become dogs, hogs, or members of the low castes. [12] A story isnow told, instructive as illustrating the time. Five great doctors ofthe law came together to discuss what is Spirit, what is _brahma_. Inthe end they are taught by a king that the universal Spirit is one'sown spirit (5. 18. 1). 

It is interesting to see that, although the Rig Veda distinctly saysthat 'being was born of not-being' (_ásatas sád aj[=a]yata_, X. 72. 3), [13] yet not-being is here derived quite as emphatically frombeing. For in the philosophical explanation of the universe given in6. 2. 1 ff. One reads: "Being alone existed in the beginning, one, andwithout a second. Others say 'not-being alone' . . . But how could beingbe born of not-being? Being alone existed in the beginning. "[14] Thisbeing is then represented as sentient. "It saw (and desired), 'may Ibe many, ' and sent forth fire (or heat); fire (or heat) desired andproduced water; water, food (earth); with the living spirit thedivinity entered fire, water, and earth" (6. 3). As mind comesfrom food, breath from water, and speech from fire, all that makes aman is thus derived from the (true) being (6. 7. 6); and when one dieshis speech is absorbed into mind, his mind into breath, his breathinto fire (heat), and heat into the highest godhead (6. 8. 7). This isthe subtle spirit, that is the Spirit, that is the True, and this isthe spirit of man. Now comes the grand conclusion of the Ch[=a]ndogya. He who knows the ego escapes grief. What is the ego? The Vedas arenames, and he that sees _brahma_ in the Vedas is indeed (partly) wise;but speech is better than a name; mind is better than speech; will isbetter than mind; meditation, better than will; reflection, thanmeditation; understanding, than reflection; power, than understanding;food, than power; water, than food; heat (fire), than water; ether, than heat; memory, than ether; hope, than memory; breath (=spirit), than hope. In each let one see _brahma_; ego in All. Who knows this issupreme in knowledge; but more supreme in knowledge is he that knowsthat in true (being) is the highest being. True being is happiness;true being is ego; ego is all; ego is the absolute. [15]

The relativity o£ divinity is the discovery of the Upanishads. And therelativity of happiness hereafter is the key-note of their religiousphilosophy. Pious men are of three classes, according to the completedsystem. Some are good men, but they do not know enough to appreciate, intellectually or spiritually, the highest. Let this class meditate onthe Vedas. They desire wealth, not freedom. The second class wish, indeed, to emancipate themselves; but to do so step by step; not toreach absolute _brahma_, but to live in bliss hereafter. Let theseworship the Spirit as physical life. They will attain to thebliss of the realm of light, the realm of the personal creator. Butthe highest class, they that wish to emancipate themselves at once, know that physical life is but a form of spiritual life; that thepersonal creator is but a form of the Spirit; that the Spirit isabsolute _brahma_; and that in reaching this they attain toimmortality. These, then, are to meditate on spirit as the highestSpirit, that is, the absolute. To fear heaven as much as hell, to knowthat knowledge is, after all, the key to _brahma_; that _brahma_ isknowledge; this is the way to emancipation. The gods are; but they areforms of the ego, and their heaven is mortal. It is false to deny thegods. Indra and the Father-god exist, just as men exist, as transientforms of _brahma_. Therefore, according to the weakness or strength ofa man's mind and heart (desire) is he fitted to ignore gods andsacrifice. To obtain _brahma_ his desires must be weak, his knowledgestrong; but sacrifice is not to be put away as useless. Thedisciplinary teaching of the sacrifice is a necessary preparation forhighest wisdom. It is here that the Upanishads, which otherwise are toa great extent on the highway to Buddhism, practically contrast withit. Buddhism ignores the sacrifice and the stadia in a priest's life. The Upanishads retain them, but only to throw them over at the endwhen one has learned not to need them. Philosophically there is noplace for the ritual in the Upanishad doctrine; but their teachersstood too much under the dominion of the Br[=a]hmanas to ignore theritual. They kept it as a means of perfecting the knowledge of whatwas essential. 

So 'by wisdom' it is said 'one gets immortality. ' The Spirit developsgradually in man; by means of the mortal he desires the immortal;whereas other animals have only hunger and thirst as a kind ofunderstanding, and they are reborn according to their knowledge asbeasts again. Such is the teaching of another of the Upanishads, the[=A]itareya [=A]ranyaka. 

This Upanishad contains some rather striking passages: "Whatever manattains, he desires to go beyond it; if he should reach heaven itselfhe would desire to go beyond it" (2. 3. 3. 1). "_Brahma_ is the A, thither goes the ego" (2. 3. 8. 7). "A is the whole of Speech, andSpeech is Truth, and Truth is Spirit" (2. 3. 6. 5-14). [16] "The Spiritbrooded over the water, and form (matter) was born" (2. 4. 3. 1 ff. );so physically water is the origin of all things" (2. 1. 8. 1). [17]"Whatever belongs to the father belongs to the son, whatever belongsto the son belongs to the father" (_ib_. ). "Man has three births: heis born of his mother, reborn in the person of his son, and finds hishighest birth in death" (2. 5). 

In the exposition of these two Upanishads one gets at once the sum ofthem all. The methods, the illustrations, even the doctrines, differin detail; but in the chief end and object of the Upanishads, and inthe principle of knowledge as a means of attaining _brahma_, they areunited. This it is that causes the refutation of the Vedic 'being fromnot-being. ' It is even said in the [=A]itareya that the godsworshipped breath (the spirit) as being and so became gods (great);while devils worshipped spirit as not-being, and hence became(inferior) devils (2. 1. 8. 6). 

It was noticed above that a king instructed priests. This interchangeof the rôles of the two castes is not unique. In the K[=a]ush[=i]takiUpanishad (4. 19), occurs another instance of a warrior teaching aBrahman. This, with the familiar illustration of a Gandh[=a]ra(Kandahar) man, the song of the Kurus, and the absence of Brahmanicliterature as such in the list of works, cited vii. 1, would indicatethat the Ch[=a]ndogya was at least as old as the Br[=a]hmanaliterature. [18]

In their present form several differences remain to be pointed outbetween the Vedic period and that of the Upanishads. The goal of thesoul, the two paths of gods and of _brahma_, have been indicated. Asalready explained, the road to the absolute _brahma_ lies beyond thepath to the conditioned _brahma_. Opposed to this is the path thatleads to the world of heaven, whence, when good works have beenexhausted, the spirit descends to a new birth on earth. The course ofthis second path is conceived to be the dark half of the moon, and soback to man. Both roads lead first to the moon, then one goes on to_brahma_, the other returns to earth. It will be seen that good worksare regarded as buoying a man up for a time, till, like gas in aballoon, they lose their force, and he sinks down again. What thenbecomes of the virtue of a man who enters the absolute _brahma, _ anddescends no more? He himself goes to the world where there is "nosorrow and no snow, " where he lives forever (_Brihad [=A]ran_. 5. 10);but "his beloved relations get his virtue, and the relations he doesnot love get his evil" (_K[=a]ush[=i]t. Up_. 1. 4). In this Upanishadfire, sun, moon, and lightning die out, and reappear as _brahma_. Thisis the doctrine of the _Götterdämmerung_, and succession of aeons withtheir divinities (2. 12). Here again is it distinctly stated that_pr[=a]na_, breath, is _brahma_; that is, spirit is the absolute (2. 13). 

What becomes of them that die ignorant of the ego? They go either tothe worlds of evil spirits, which are covered with darkness--the sameantithesis of light and darkness, as good and evil, that was seen inthe Br[=a]hmanas--or are reborn on earth again like the wicked(_[=I]ç[=a]_, 3). 

It is to be noted that at times all the parts of a man aresaid to become immortal. For just as different rivers enter the oceanand their names and forms are lost in it, so the sixteen parts of aman sink into the godhead and he becomes without parts and immortal(_Praçna Up_. 6. 5); a purely pantheistic view of absorption, indistinction from the Vedic view of heaven, which latter, in the formof immortal joy hereafter, still lingers in the earlier Upanishads. 

It is further to be observed as the crowning point of thesespeculations that, just as the bliss of emancipation must not bedesired, although it is desirable, so too, though knowledge is thefundamental condition of emancipation, yet is delight in the true afatal error: "They that revere what is not knowledge enter into blinddarkness; they that delight in knowledge come as it were into stillgreater darkness" (_Iç[=a]_, 9). Here, what is not real knowledgemeans good works, sacrifice, etc. But the sacrifice is not discarded. To those people capable only of attaining to rectitude, sacrifices, and belief in gods there is given some bliss hereafter; but to himthat is risen above this, who knows the ego (Spirit) and real being, such bliss is no bliss. His bliss is union with the Spirit. 

This is the completion of Upanishad philosophy. Before it is a stagewhere bliss alone, not absorption, is taught. [19] But what is the ego, spirit or self (_[=a]tm[=a]_)? First of all it is conscious; next itis not the Person, for the Person is produced by the _[=a]tm[=a]_. Since this Person is the type of the personal god, it is evident thatthe ego is regarded as lying back of personality. Nevertheless, theteachers sometimes stop with the latter. The developed view is thatthe immortality of the personal creator is commensurate only with thatof the world which he creates. It is for this reason that in theMundaka (1. 2. 10) it is said that fools regard fulfillment of desirein heavenly happiness as the best thing; for although they have their'reward in the top of heaven, yet, when the elevation caused by theirgood works ends, as it will end, when the buoyant power of good worksis exhausted, then they drop down to earth again. Hence, to worshipthe creator as the _[=a]tm[=a]_ is indeed productive of temporarypleasure, but no more. "If a man worship another divinity, _devat[=a]_, with the idea that he and the god are different, he doesnot know" (_Brihad [=A]ran. Up_. 1. 4. 10). "Without passion andwithout parts" is the _brahma (Mund_. 2. 2. 9). The further doctrine, therefore, that all except _brahma_ is delusion is implied here, andthe "extinction of gods in _brahma_" is once or twice formulated. [20]The fatal error of judgment is to imagine that there is in absolutebeing anything separate from man's being. When personified, this beingappears as the supreme Person, identical with the ego, who is lord ofwhat has been and what will be. By perceiving this controlling spiritin one's own spirit (or self) one obtains eternal bliss; "whendesires cease, the mortal becomes immortal; he attains _brahma_ here"in life (_Katha Up_. 2. 5. 12; 6. 14; _Br. [=A]ran. Up_. 4. 4. 7). 

How inconsistent are the teachings of the Upanishads in regard tocosmogonic and eschatological matters will be evident if one contrastthe statements of the different tracts not only with those of otherwritings of the same sort, but even with other statements in the sameUpanishads. Thus the Mundaka teaches first that Brahm[=a], thepersonal creator, made the world and explained _brahma_ (1. 1. 1). Itthen defines _brahma_ as the Imperishable, which, like a spider, sendsout a web of being and draws it in again (_ib_. 6, 7). It states withall distinctness that the (neuter) _brahma_ comes from The (masculine)

One who is all-wise, all-knowing (_ib_. 9). This heavenly Person isthe imperishable ego; it is without form; higher than the imperishable(1. 2. 10 ff. ; 2. 1. 2); greater than the great (3. 2. 8). Againstthis is then set (2. 2. 9) the great being _brahma_, without passionsor parts, _i. E_. , without intelligence such as was predicated of the_[=a]tm[=a]_; and (3. 1. 3) then follows the doctrine of the personal'Lord, who is the maker, the Person, who has his birth in _brahma'(purusho brahmayonis_). That this Upanishad is pantheistic is plainfrom 3. 2. 6, where Ved[=a]nta and Yoga are named. According to thistract the wise go to _brahma_ or to ego (3. 2. 9 and 1. 2. 11), whilefools go to heaven and return again. 

On the same plane stands the [=I]ç[=a], where _[=a]tm[=a]_, ego, Spirit, is the True, the Lord, and is in the sun. Opposed to eachother here are 'darkness' and 'immortality, ' as fruit, respectively, of ignorance and wisdom. 

In the K[=a]ush[=i]taki Upanishad, taken with the meaning put into itby the commentators, the wise man goes to a very different sort of_brahma_--one where he is met by nymphs, and rejoices in a kind ofheaven. This _brahma_ is of two sorts, absolute and conditioned; butit is ultimately defined as 'breath. ' Whenever it is convenient, 'breath' is regarded by the commentators as ego, 'spirit'; but one canscarcely escape the conviction that in many passages 'breath' wasmeant by the speaker to be taken at its face value. It is the vitalpower. With this vital power (breath or spirit) one in dreamless sleepunites. Indra has nothing higher to say than that he is breath(spirit), conscious and immortal. Eventually the soul after deathcomes to Indra, or gains the bright heaven. But here too the doctrineof the dying out of the gods is known (as in _T[=a]tt_. 3. 10. 4). Cosmogonically all here springs from water (1. 4, 6, 7; 2. 1, 12; 3. 1, 2; 4. 20). 

Most striking are the contradictions in the Brihad [=A]ranyaka: "Inthe beginning there was only nothing; this (world) was covered withdeath, that is hunger;[21] he desired, " etc. (1. 2. 1). "In thebeginning there was only ego (_[=a]tm[=a]). " [=A]tm[=a]_ articulated"I am, " and (finding himself lonely and unhappy) divided himself intomale and female, [22] whence arose men, etc. (1. 4. 1). Again: "In thebeginning there was only _brahma_; this (neuter) knew _[=a]tm[=a] . . . Brahma_ was the one and only . . . It created" (1. 4. 10-11); followedimmediately by "he created" (12). And after this, in 17, one isbrought back to "in the beginning there was only _[=a]tm[=a]_; hedesired 'let me have a wife. '"

In 2. 3. 1 ff. The explicitness of the differences in _brahma_ makesthe account of unusual value. It appears that there are two forms of_brahma_, one is mortal, with form; the other is immortal, withoutform. Whatever is other than air and the space between (heaven andearth) is mortal and with form. This is being, its essence is in thesun. On the other hand, the essence of the immortal is the person inthe circle (of the sun). In man's body breath and ether are theimmortal, the essence of which is the person in the eye. There is avisible and invisible _brahma ([=a]tm[=a])_; the real _brahma_ isincomprehensible and is described only by negations (3. 4. 1; 9. 26). The highest is the Imperishable (_neuter_), but this sees, hears, andknows. It is in this that ether (as above) is woven (3. 8. 11). Afterdeath the wise man goes to the world of the gods (1. 5. 16); hebecomes the _[=a]tm[=a]_ of all beings, just like that deity (1. 5. 20); he becomes identical ('how can one know the knower?'_vijñ[=a]tar_) in 2. 4. 12-13; and according to 3. 2. 13, the doctrineof _sams[=a]ra_ is extolled ("they talked of _karma_, extolled _karma_secretly"), as something too secret to be divulged easily, even topriests. 

That different views are recognized is evident from _Taitt_. 2. 6: "Ifone knows _brahma_ as _asat_ he becomes only _asat_ (non-existence);if he knows that '_brahma_ is' (_i. E. _, a _sad brahma_), people knowhim as thence existing. " Personal _[=a]tm[=a]_ is here insisted on("He wished 'may I be many'"); and from _[=a]tm[=a]_, the conscious_brahma_, in highest heaven, came the ether (2. 1, 6). Yet, immediately afterwards: "In the beginning was the non-existent; thencearose the existent; and That made for himself an ego (spirit, conscious life, _[=a]tm[=a]; tad [=a]tm[=a]nain svayam akuruta_, 2. 7). In man _brahma_ is the sun-_brahma_. Here too one finds the_brahma[n. ]a[h. ] parimaras_ (3. 10. 4 = K[=a]ush[=i]t. 2. 12, _d[=a]iva_), or extinction of gods in _brahma_. But what that _brahma_is, except that it is bliss, and that man after death reaches 'thebliss-making _[=a]tm[=a], _' it is impossible to say (3. 6; 2. 8). Especially as the departed soul 'eats and sits down singing' in heaven(3. 10. 5). 

The greatest discrepancies in eschatology occur perhaps in the[=A]itareya [=A]ranyaka. After death one either "gets _brahma_" (i. 3. 1. 2), "comes near to the immortal spirit" (1. 3. 8. 14), or goes tothe "heavenly world. " Knowledge here expressly conditions thehereafter; so much so that it is represented not (as above) that foolsgo to heaven and return, but that all, save the very highest, are torecognize a personal creator (Praj[=a]pati) in breath (=ego=_brahma_), and then they will "go to the heavenly world" (2. 3. 8. 5), "becomethe sun" (2. 1. 8. 14), or "go to gods" (2. 2. 4. 6). Moreover afterthe highest wisdom has been revealed, and the second class of men hasbeen disposed of, the author still returns to the 'shining sky, '_svarga_, as the best promise (3). Sinners are born again (2. 1. 1. 5)on earth, although hell is mentioned (2. 3. 2. 5). The origin of worldis water, as usual (2. 1. 8. 1). The highest teaching is that all was_[=a]tm[=a], _ who sent forth worlds (_lok[=a]n as[r. ]jata_), andformed the Person (as guardian of worlds), taking him from waters. Hence _[=a]tm[=a], _ Praj[=a]pati (of the second-class thinkers), and_brahma_ are the same. Knowledge is _brahma_ (2. 4. 1. 1; 6. 1. 5-7). 

In the Kena, where the best that can be said in regard to _brahma_ isthat he is _tadvana_, the one that 'likes this' (or, perhaps, is 'likethis'), there is no absorption into a world-spirit. The wise 'becomeimmortal'; 'by knowledge one gets immortality'; 'who knows this standsin heaven' (1. 2; 2. 4; 4. 9). The general results are about thoseformulated by Whitney in regard to the Katha: knowledge givescontinuation of happiness in heaven; the punishment of the unworthy isto continue _sams[=a]ra_, the round of rebirths. Hell is not mentionedin the [=A]itareya Upanishad itself but in the [=A]ranyaka[23] (2. 3. 2. 5). That, however, a union with the universal _[=a]tm[=a]_ (as wellas heaven) is desired, would seem to be the case from several of thepassages cited above, notably Brihad [=A]ran. , i. 5. 20 (_saeva[. M]vit sarve[s. ][=a]m bh[=u]t[=a]n[=a]m [=a]tm[=a] bhavati, Yath[=a] i[s. ][=a] devat[=a]ivam sa_); 'he that knows this becomes the_[=a]tm[=a]_ of all creatures, as is that divinity so is he'; thoughthis is doubtless the _[=a]nandamaya [=a]tm[=a]_, or joy-making Spirit(T[=a]itt. 2. 8). 

Again two forms of _brahma_ are explained (M[=a]it. Up. 6. 15 ff. ):There are two forms of _brahma_, time and not-time. That which wasbefore the sun is not-time and has no parts. Time and parts begin withthe sun. Time is the Father-god, the Spirit. Time makes and dissolvesall in the Spirit. He knows the Veda who knows into what Time itselfis dissolved. This manifest time is the ocean of creatures. But_brahma_ exists before and after time. [24]

As an example of the best style of the Upanishads we will cite afavorite passage (given no less than four times in various versions)where the doctrine of absorption is most distinctly taught under theform of a tale. It is the famous

DIALOGUE OF Y[=A]JÑAVALKYA AND M[=A]ITREY[=I]. [25]

Y[=a]jñavalkya had two wives, M[=a]itrey[=i] and K[=a]ty[=a]yani. NowM[=a]itrey[=i] was versed in holy knowledge (_brahma_), butK[=a]ty[=a]yani had only such knowledge as women have. But whenY[=a]jñavalkya was about to go away into the forest (to become ahermit), he said: 'M[=a]itrey[=i], I am going away from thisplace. Behold, I will make a settlement between thee and thatK[=a]ty[=a]yani. ' Then said M[=a]itrey[=i]: 'Lord, if this whole earthfilled with wealth were mine, how then? should I be immortal by reasonof this wealth?' 'Nay, ' said Y[=a]jñavalkya. 'Even as is the life ofthe rich would be thy life; by reason of wealth one has no hope ofimmortality. ' Then said M[=a]itrey[=i]: 'With what I cannot beimmortal, what can I do with that? whatever my Lord knows even thattell me. ' And Y[=a]jñavalkya said: 'Dear to me thou art, indeed, andfondly speakest. Therefore I will explain to thee and do thou regardme as I explain. ' And he said: 'Not for the husband's sake is ahusband dear, but for the ego's sake is the husband dear. Not for thewife's sake is a wife dear; but for the ego's sake is a wife dear; notfor the son's sake are sons dear, but for the ego's sake are sonsdear; not for wealth's sake is wealth dear, but for the ego's sake iswealth dear; not for the sake of the Brahman caste is the Brahmancaste dear, but for the sake of the ego is the Brahman caste dear; notfor the sake of the Warrior caste is the Warrior caste dear, but forlove of the ego is the Warrior caste dear; not for the sake of theworlds are worlds dear, but for the sake of the ego are worlds dear;not for the sake of gods are gods dear, but for the ego's sake aregods dear; not for the sake of _bh[=u]ts_ (spirits) are _bh[=u]ts_dear, but for the ego's sake are _bhuts_ dear; not for the sake ofanything is anything dear, but for love of one's self (ego) isanything (everything) dear; the ego (self) must be seen, heard, apprehended, regarded, M[=a]itrey[=i], for with the seeing, hearing, apprehending, and regarding of the ego the All is known. . . . Even assmoke pours out of a fire lighted with damp kindling wood, even so outof the Great Being is blown out all that which is, Rig Veda, YajurVeda, S[=a]ma Veda, Atharva (Angiras) Veda, Stories, Tales, Sciences, Upanishads, food, drink, sacrifices; all creatures that exist areblown (breathed) out of this one (Great Spirit) alone. As in theocean all the waters have their meeting-place; as the skin is themeeting-place of all touches; the tongue, of all tastes; thenose, of all smells; the mind, of all precepts; the heart, of allknowledges; . . . As salt cast into water is dissolved so that onecannot seize it, but wherever one tastes it is salty, so thisGreat Being, endless, limitless, is a mass of knowledge. It arises outof the elements and then disappears in them. After death there is nomore consciousness. [26] I have spoken. ' Thus said Y[=a]jñavalkya. Thensaid M[=a]itrey[=i]: 'Truly my Lord has bewildered me in saying thatafter death there is no more consciousness. ' And Y[=a]jñavalkya said:'I say nothing bewildering, but what suffices for understanding. Forwhere there is as it were duality (_dv[=a]itam_), there one sees, smells, hears, addresses, notices, knows another; but when all theuniverse has become mere ego, with what should one smell, see, hear, address, notice, know any one (else)? How can one know him throughwhom he knows this all, how can he know the knower (as somethingdifferent)? The ego is to be described by negations alone, theincomprehensible, imperishable, unattached, unfettered; the egoneither suffers nor fails. Thus, M[=a]itrey[=i], hast thou beeninstructed. So much for immortality. ' And having spoken thusY[=a]jñavalkya went away (into the forest). 

Returning to the Upanishad, of which an outline was given in thebeginning of this chapter, one finds a state of things which, ingeneral, may be said to be characteristic of the whole Upanishadperiod. The same vague views in regard to cosmogony and eschatologyobtain in all save the outspoken sectarian tracts, and the sameuncertainty in regard to man's future fate prevails in this wholecycle. [27] A few extracts will show this. According to theCh[=a]ndogya (4. 17. 1), a personal creator, the old Father-god of theBr[=a]hmanas, Praj[=a]pati, made the elements proceed from the worldshe had 'brooded' over (or had done penance over, _abhyatapat_). In 3. 19. 1, not-being was first; this became being (with the mundane egg, etc. ). In sharp contradiction (6. 2. 1): 'being was the first thing, it willed, ' etc. , a conscious divinity, as is seen in _ib_. 3. 2, where it is a 'deity, ' producing elements as 'deities' (_ib. _ 8. 6)which it enters 'with the living _[=a]tm[=a]_, ' and so develops namesand forms (so _T[=a]itt_. 2. 7). The latter is the prevailing view ofthe Upanishad. In 1. 7. 5 ff. The _[=a]tm[=a]_ is the same with theuniversal _[=a]tm[=a]_; in 3. 12. 7, the _brahma_ is the same withether without and within, unchanging; in 3. 13. 7, the 'light aboveheaven' is identical with the light in man; in 3. 14. 1, all is_brahma_ (neuter), and this is an intelligent universal spirit. Likethe ether is the _[=a]tm[=a]_ in the heart, this is _brahma_ (_ib_. 2ff. ); in 4. 3. Air and breath are the two ends (so in the argumentabove, these are immortal as distinguished from all else); in 4. 10. 5_yad v[=a]v[=a] ka[. M] tad eva kham_ (_brahma_ is ether); in 4. 15. 1, the ego is _brahma_; in 5. 18. 1 the universal ego is identified withthe particular ego (_[=a]tm[=a]_); in 6. 8 the ego is the True, withwhich one unites in dreamless sleep; in 6. 15. 1, into _par[=a]devat[=a]_ or 'highest divinity' enters man's spirit, like salt inwater (_ib_. 13). In 7. 15-26, a view but half correct is stated to bethat 'breath' is all, but it is better to know that _yo bh[=u]m[=a]__tad am[r. ]tam_, the immortal (all) is infinity, which rests in itsown greatness, with a corrective 'but perhaps it doesn't' (_yadi v[=a]na_). This infinity is ego and _[=a]tm[=a]_. [28]

What is the reward for knowing this? One obtains worlds, unchanginghappiness, _brahma_; or, with some circumnavigation, one goes to themoon, and eventually reaches _brahma_ or obtains the worlds of theblessed (5. 10. 10). The round of existence, _sams[=a]ra_, isindicated at 6. 16, and expressly stated in 5. 10. 7 (insects havehere a third path). Immortality is forcibly claimed: 'The living onedies not' (6. 11. 3). He who knows the sections 7. 15 to 26 becomes_[=a]tm[=a]nanda_ and "lord of all worlds"; whereas an incorrect viewgives perishable worlds. In one Upanishad there is a verse (_Çvet_. 4. 5) which would indicate a formal duality like that of theS[=a]nkhyas;[29] but in general one may say that the Upanishads aresimply pantheistic, only the absorption into a world-soul is as yetscarcely formulated. On the other hand, some of the older Upanishadsshow traces of an atheistic and materialistic (_asad_) philosophy, which is swallowed up in the growing inclination to personify thecreative principle, and ultimately is lost in the erection of apersonal Lord, as in the latest Upanishads. This tendency topersonify, with the increase of special sectarian gods, will leadagain, after centuries, to the rehabilitation of a triad of gods, the_trim[=u]rti_, where unite Vishnu, Çiva, and, with these, who are morepowerful, Brahm[=a], the Praj[=a]pati of the Veda, as the All-god ofpurely pantheistic systems. In the purer, older form recorded above, the _purusha_ (Person) is sprung from the _[=a]tm[=a]_. There is nodistinction between matter and spirit. Conscious being (_sat_) wills, and so produces all. Or _[=a]tm[=a]_ comes first; and this isconscious _sat_ and the cause of the worlds; which _[=a]tm[=a]_eventually becomes the Lord. The _[=a]tm[=a]_ in man, owing to hisenvironment, cannot see whole, and needs the Yoga discipline ofasceticism to enable him to do so. But he is the same ego which is theAll. 

The relation between the absolute and the ego is through will. "This(neuter) _brahma_ willed, 'May I be many, ' and created" _(Ch[=a]nd_. , above). Sometimes the impersonal, and sometimes the personal "spiritwilled" _(T[=a]iit. _ 2. 6). And when it is said, in _Brihad [=A]ran_. 1. 4. 1, that "In the beginning ego, spirit, _[=a]tm[=a], _ aloneexisted, " one finds this spirit (self) to be a form of _brahma (ib. _10-11). Personified in a sectarian sense, this spirit becomes thedivinity Rudra Çiva, the Blessed One (_Çvet[=a]çvatara, _ 3. 5. 11). [30]

In short, the teachers of the Upanishads not only do not declareclearly what they believed in regard to cosmogonic and eschatologicalmatters, but many of them probably did not know clearly what theybelieved. Their great discovery was that man's spirit was notparticular and mortal, but part of the immortal universal. Whetherthis universal was a being alive and a personal _[=a]tm[=a]_, orwhether this personal being was but a transient form of impersonal, imperishable being;[31] and whether the union with being, _brahma_, would result in a survival of individual consciousness, --these areevidently points they were not agreed upon, and, in all probability, no one of the sages was certain in regard to them. Crassidentifications of the vital principle with breath, as one with ether, which is twice emphasized as one of the two immortal things, wereprovisionally accepted. Then breath and immortal spirit were made one. Matter had energy from the beginning, _brahma_; or was chaos, _asat_, without being. But when _asat_ becomes _sat_, that _sat_ becomes_brahma_, energized being, and to _asat_ there is no return. Ineschatology the real (spirit, or self) part of man (ego) eitherrejoices forever as a conscious part of the conscious world-self, orexists immortal in _brahma_--imperishable being, conceived as more orless conscious. [32]

The teachers recognize the limitations of understanding: "The gods arein Indra, Indra is in the Father-god, the Father-god (the Spirit) isin _brahma_"--"But in what is _brahma?_" And the answer is, "Ask nottoo much" (_Brihad. [=A]ran. Up_. 3. 6). 

These problems will be those of the future formal philosophy. Even theUpanishads do not furnish a philosophy altogether new. Their doctrineof _karma_ their identification of particular ego and universal ego, is not original. The 'breaths, ' the 'nine doors, ' the 'threequalities, ' the _purusha_ as identical with ego, are older even thanthe Br[=a]hmanas (Scherman, _loc. Cit_. P. 62). 

It is not a new philosophy, it is a new religion that the Upanishadsoffer. [33] This is no religion of rites and ceremonies, although thecult is retained as helpful in disciplining and teaching; it is areligion for sorrowing humanity. It is a religion that comforts theafflicted, and gives to the soul 'that peace which the world cannotgive. ' In the sectarian Upanishads this bliss of religion is everpresent. "Through knowing Him who is more subtile than subtile, who iscreator of everything, who has many forms, who embraces everything, the Blessed Lord--one attains to peace without end" (_Çvet_. 4. 14-15). These teachers, who enjoin the highest morality('self-restraint, generosity, and mercy' are God's commandments in_Brihad [=A]ran_. 5. 2) refuse to be satisfied with virtue's reward, and, being able to obtain heaven, 'seek for something beyond. ' Andthis they do not from mere pessimism, but from a conviction that theywill find a joy greater than that of heaven, and more enduring, inthat world where is "the light beyond the darkness" (_Çvet_. 3. 8);"where shines neither sun, moon, stars, lightning, nor fire, but allshines after Him that shines alone, and through His light the universeis lighted" (_Mund_. 2. 2. 10). This, moreover, is not a future joy. It is one that frees from perturbation in this life, and gives relieffrom sorrow. In the Ch[=a]ndogya (7. 1. 3) a man in grief comesseeking this new knowledge of the universal Spirit; "For, " says he, "Ihave heard it said that he who knows the Spirit passes beyond grief. "So in the [=I]ç[=a], though this is a late sectarian work, it isasked, "What sorrow can there be for him to whom Spirit alone hasbecome all things?' (7). Again, "He that knows the joy of _brahma_, whence speech with mind turns away without apprehending it, fears not"(_T[=a]itt_. 2. 4); for "fear comes only from a second" (_Brihad[=A]ran. Up_. 1. 4. 2), and when one recognizes that all is one he nolonger fears death (_ib_. 4. 4. 15). 

Such is the religion of these teachers. In the quiet assumption thatlife is not worth living, they are as pessimistic as was Buddha. Butif, as seems to be the case, the Buddhist believed in the eventualextinction of his individuality, their pessimism is of a differentsort. For the teacher of the Upanishads believes that he will attainto unending joy; not the rude happiness of 'heaven-seekers, ' but theunchanging bliss of immortal peace. For him that wished it, there washeaven and the gods. These were not denied; they were as real as the"fool" that desired them. But for him that conquered passion, and knewthe truth, there was existence without the pain of desire, lifewithout end, freedom from rebirth. The spirit of the sage becomes onewith the Eternal; man becomes God. 

 * * * * *

 FOOTNOTES:

 [Footnote 1: Compare _Çal. Br. _ ii. 4. 2. 1-6, where the Father-god gives laws of conduct; and Kaush[=i]taki Brahmana Upanishad, 3. 8: "This spirit (breath) is guardian of the world, the lord of the world; he is my spirit" (or, myself), _sa ma [=a]tm[=a]_. The Brahmanic priest teaches that he is a god like other gods, and goes so far as to say that he may be united with a god after death. The Upanishad philosopher says 'I am God. ']

 [Footnote 2: Compare Scherman, _Philosophische Hymnen_, p. 93; above, p. 156. ]

 [Footnote 3: Or, in other words, the thought of the Brahmanic period (not necessarily of extant Br[=a]hmanas) is synchronous with part of the Vedic collection. ]

 [Footnote 4: The last additions to this class of literature would, of course, conform in language to their models, just as the late Vedic Mantras conform as well as their composers can make them to the older song or _chandas_ style. ]

 [Footnote 5: Cited by Müller in SBE. I. _Introd_. P. Lxxxii. ]

 [Footnote 6: Compare Weber, _Ind. Lit_. P. 171; Müller, _loc. Cit. _ p. Lxviii. ]

 [Footnote 7: The relation between the Br[=a]hmanas (ritual works discussed in the last chapter) and the early Upanishads will be seen better with the help of a concrete example. As has been explained before, Rig Veda means to the Hindu not only the 'Collection' of hymns, but all the library connected with this collection; for instance, the two Br[=a]hmanas (of the Rig Veda), namely, the Aitareya and the K[=a]ush[=i]taki (or Ç[=a]nkh[=a]yana). Now, each of these Br[=a]hmanas concludes with an [=A]ranyaka, that is, a Forest-Book (_ara[n. ]ya_, forest, solitude); and in each Forest Book is an Upanishad. For example, the third book of the K[=a]ush[=i]taki [=A]ranyaka is the K[=a]ush[=i]taki Upanishad. So the Ch[=a]ndogya and Brihad [=A]ranyaka belong respectively to the S[=a]man and Yajus. ]

 [Footnote 8: This teaching is ascribed to Ç[=a]ndilya, to whose heresy, as opposed to the pure Vedantic doctrinc of Çankara, we shall have to revert in a later chapter. The heresy consists, in a word, in regarding the individual spirit as at any time distinct from the Supreme Spirit, though Ç[=a]ndilya teaches that it is ultimately absorbed into the latter. ]

 [Footnote 9: "God' Who' is air, air (space) is God 'Who', " as if one said 'either is aether. ']

 [Footnote 10: 'Did penance over, ' as one doing penance remains in meditation. 'Brooded' is Müller's apt word for this _abhi-tap. _]

 [Footnote 11: Compare _Brihad [=A]ran. Up_. 6. 3. 7. ]

 [Footnote 12: This is the _karma_ or _sams[=a]ra_ doctrine. ]

 [Footnote 13: In J. U. B. Alone have we noticed the formula asserting that 'both being and not-being existed in the beginning' (1. 53. 1; JAOS. XVI. 130). ]

 [Footnote 14: Opposed is 3. 19. 1 and _T[=a]itt. Up_. 2. 7. 1 (_Br_. II. 2. 9. 1, 10): "Not-being was here in the beginning. From it arose being. " And so _Çat. Br_. VI. 1. 1. 1 (though in word only, for here not-being is the seven spirits of God!)]

 [Footnote 15: As the Vedic notion of not-being existing before being is refuted, so the Atharvan homage to Time as Lord is also derided (_Çvet. _ 6) in the Upanishads. The supreme being is above time, as he is without parts (_ib_. ). In this later Upanishad wisdom, penance, and the grace of God are requisite to know _brahma_. ]

 [Footnote 16: This Vedic [Greek: Adgos] doctrine is conspicuous in the Br[=a]hmana. Compare _Çat. Br_. VII. 5. 2. 21: "V[=a]c ([Greek: Adgos]) is the Unborn one; from V[=a]c the all-maker made creatures. " See Weber, _Ind. Stud_. IX. 477 ff. ]

 [Footnote 17: Compare J. U. B. I. 56. 1, 'Water (alone) existed in the beginning. ' This is the oldest and latest Hindu explanation of the matter of the physical universe. From the time of the Vedas to mediaeval times, as is recorded by the Greek travellers, water is regarded as the original element. ]

 [Footnote 18: The Gandh[=a]ra might indicate a late geographical expansion as well as an early heritage, so that this is not conclusive. ]

 [Footnote 19: Gough, _Philosophy of the Upanishads_, has sought to show that the pure Vedantism of Çankara is the only belief taught in the Upanishads, ignoring the weight of those passages that oppose his (in our view) too sweeping assertion. ]

 [Footnote 20: See the Parimara described, _[=A]it. Br_. VIII. 28. Here _brahma_ is wind, around which die five divinities--lightning in rain, rain in moon, moon in sun, sun in fire, fire in wind--and they are reborn in reverse order. The 'dying' is used as a curse. The king shall say, 'When fire dies in wind then may my foe die, ' and he will die; so when any of the other gods dies around _brahma_. ]

 [Footnote 21: Compare sterben, starve. ]

 [Footnote 22: The androgynous creator of the Br[=a]hmanas. ]

 [Footnote 23: We cannot, however, quite agree with Whitney who, _loc. Cit. _ p. 92, and Journal, xiii, p. Ciii ff. , implies that belief in hell comes later than this period. This is not so late a teaching. Hell is Vedic and Brahmanic. ]

 [Footnote 24: This, in pantheistic style, is expressed thus (Çvet. 4): "When the light has arisen there is no day no night, neither being nor not-being; the Blessed One alone exists there. There is no likeness of him whose name is Great Glory. "]

 [Footnote 25: Brihad [=A]ranyaka Upanishad, 2. 4; 4. 5. ]

 [Footnote 26: _Na pretya sa[. M]jñ[=a] 'sti. _]

 [Footnote 27: Some of the Upanishads have been tampered with, so that all of the contradictions may not be due to the composers. Nevertheless, as the uncertainty of opinion in regard to cosmogony is quite as great as that in respect of absorption, all the vagueness cannot properly be attributed to the efforts of later systematizers to bring the Upanishads into their more or less orthodox Vedantism. ]

 [Footnote 28: In 4. 10. 5 _kam_ is pleasure, one with ether as _brahma_, not as wrongly above, p. 222, the god Ka. ]

 [Footnote 29: This Upanishad appears to be sectarian, perhaps an early Çivaite tract (dualistic), if the allusion to Rudra Çiva, below, be accepted as original. ]

 [Footnote 30: As is foreshadowed in the doctrine of grace by V[=a]c in the Rig Veda, in the _Çvet_, the _Katha_, and the _Mund_. Upanishads (_K. 2. 23; M_. 3. 2. 3), but nowhere else, there enters, with the sectarian phase, that radical subversion of the Upanishad doctrine which becomes so powerful at a later date, the teaching that salvation is a gift of God. "This Spirit is not got by wisdom; the Spirit chooses as his own the body of that man whom He chooses. "]

 [Footnote 31: See above. As descriptive of the immortal conscious Spirit, there is the famous verse: "If the slayer thinks to slay, if the slain thinks he is slain; they both understand not; this one (the Spirit) slays not, and is not slain" (_Katha_, 2. 19); loosely rendered by Emerson, 'If the red slayer think he slays, ' etc. ]

 [Footnote 32: The fact remarked by Thibaut that radically different systems of philosophy are built upon the Upanishads is enough to show how ambiguous are the declarations of the latter. ]

 [Footnote 33: Compare Barth, _Religions_, p. 76. ]

 * * * * *

CHAPTER XI. 

THE POPULAR BRAHMANIC FAITH

For a long time after the Vedic age there is little that gives one aninsight into the views of the people. It may be presumed, since theorthodox systems never dispensed with the established cult, that theform of the old Vedic creed was kept intact. Yet, since the realbelief changed, and the cult became more and more the practice of aformality, it becomes necessary to seek, apart from the inheritedritual, the faith which formed the actual religion of the people. Inasmuch as this phase of Hindu belief has scarcely been touched uponelsewhere, it may be well to state more fully the object of thepresent chapter. 

We have shown above that the theology of the Vedic period hadresulted, before its close, in a form of pantheism, which wasaccompanied, as is attested by the Atharva Veda, with a demonology andwitch-craft religion, the latter presumably of high antiquity. Immediately after this come the esoteric Br[=a]hmanas, in which thegods are, more or less, figures in the eyes of the priests, and theform of a Father-god rises into chief prominence, being sometimesregarded as the creative force, but at all times as the moralauthority in the world. At the end of this period, however, andprobably even before this period ended, there is for the first time, in the Upanishads, a new religion, that, in some regards, is esoteric. Hitherto the secrets of religious mysteries had been treated as hiddenpriestly wisdom, not to be revealed. But, for the most part, thiswisdom is really nonsense; and when it is said in the Br[=a]hmanas, atthe end of a bit of theological mystery, that it is a secret, orthat 'the gods love that which is secret, ' one is not persuaded by theexamples given that this esoteric knowledge is intellectuallyvaluable. But with the Upanishads there comes the antithesis ofinherited belief and right belief. The latter is public property, though it is not taught carelessly. The student is not initiated intothe higher wisdom till he is drilled in the lower. The most unexpectedcharacters appear in the rôle of instructors of priests, namely, women, kings, and members of the third caste, whose deeper wisdom ispromulgated oftentimes as something quite new, and sometimes iswhispered in secret. Pantheism, _sams[=a]ra_, [1] and the eternal blissof the individual spirit when eventually it is freed from furthertransmigration, --these three fundamental traits of the new religionare discussed in such a way as to show that they had no hold upon thegeneral public, but they were the intellectual wealth of a few. Someof the Upanishads hide behind a veil of mystery; yet many of them, asWindisch has said, are, in a way, popular; that is, they are intendedfor a general public, not for priests alone. This is especially thecase with the pantheistic Upanishads in their more pronounced form. But still it is only the very wise that can accept the teaching. It isnot the faith of the people. 

Epic literature, which is the next living literature of the Brahmans, after the Upanishads, takes one, in a trice, from the beginnings of aformal pantheism, to a pantheism already disintegrated by the newerworship of sectaries. Here the impersonal _[=a]tm[=a]_, or namelessLord, is not only an anthropomorphic Çiva, as in the late Upanishads, where the philosophic _brahma_ is equated with a long recognized typeof divinity, but _[=a]tm[=a]_ is identified with the figure of atheomorphic man. 

Is there, then, nothing with which to bridge this gulf?

In our opinion the religion of the law-books, as a legitimate phase ofHindu religion, has been too much ignored. The religion of Upanishadand Ved[=a]nta, with its attractive analogies with modern speculation, has been taken as illustrative of the religion of a vast period, tothe discrediting of the belief represented in the manuals of law. Tothese certainly the name of literature can scarcely be applied, but intheir rapport with ordinary life they will be found more apt than arethe profounder speculations of the philosophers to reflect thereligious belief taught to the masses and accepted by them. 

The study of these books casts a broad light upon that intervalbetween the Vedic and epic periods wherein it is customary to imaginereligion as being, in the main, cult or philosophy. Nor does theinterest cease with the yield of necessarily scanty yet verysignificant facts in regard to eschatological and cosmogonic views. The gods themselves are not what they are in the rites of the cunningpriests or in the dogmas of the sages. In the Hindu law there is areversion to Vedic belief; or rather not a reversion, but here onesees again, through the froth of rites and the murk of philosophy, theunder-stream of faith that still flows from the old fount, if somewhatdiscolored, and waters the heart of the people. 

At just what time was elaborated the stupendous system of rites, whichare already traditional in the Br[=a]hmanas, can never be known. Someof these rites have to do with special ceremonies, such as the royalinauguration, some are stated _soma_-sacrifices. [2] Opposed to these_soma_-feasts is the simpler and older fire-cult, which persists inthe house-rituals. All of these together make up a sightly array ofsacrifices. [3] The _soma_-ritual is developed in the Br[=a]hmanas. Butwith this class of works there must have been from ancient timesanother which treated of the fire-ritual, and of which the more modernrepresentatives are the extant S[=u]tras. It is with S[=u]tras thatlegal literature begins, but these differ from the ritualisticS[=u]tras. Yet both are full of religious meat. In these collections, even in the more special, there is no arrangement that corresponds towestern ideas of order. In a completed code, for example, there is arough distribution of subjects under different heads, but the attemptis only tentative, and each work presents the appearance of aheterogeneous mass of regulations and laws, from which one must pickout the law for which he is seeking. The earlier legal works were inprose; the later evolved codes, of which there is a large number, inmetre. It is in these two classes of house-ritual and law-ritual, which together constitute what is called Smriti, tradition-ritual (indistinction from the so-called Çruti, revelation-ritual), that one mayexpect to find the religion of the time; not as inculcated by thepromoters of mystery, nor yet as disclosed by the philosopher, but astaught (through the priest) to the people, and as accepted by them fortheir daily guidance in matters of every-day observance. We glancefirst at the religious observances, for here, as in the case of thegreat sacrifices, a detailed examination would be of no more valuethan a collective impression; unless, indeed, one were hunting forfolk-lore superstitions, of which we can treat now only in the mass. It is sufficient to understand that, according to the house-ritual(_g[r. ]hya-s[=u]tra_) and the law-ritual (_dharma-s[=u]tra_, and_dharma-ç[=a]stra_), [4] for every change in life there was anappropriate ceremony and a religious observance; for every day, oblations (three at least); for every fortnight and season, asacrifice. Religious formulae were said over the child yet unborn. From the moment of birth he was surrounded with observances. [5] Atsuch and such a time the child's head was shaved; he was taken out tolook at the sun; made to eat from a golden spoon; invested with thesacred cord, etc, etc. When grown up, a certain number of years werepassed with a Guru, or tutor, who taught the boy his Veda; and to whomhe acted as body-servant (a study and office often cut short in thecase of Aryans who were not priests). Of the sacraments alone, such asthe observances to which we have just alluded, there are no less thanforty according to Gautama's laws (the name-rite, eating-rite, etc. ). The pious householder who had once set up his own fire, that is, gotmarried, must have spent most of his time, if he followed directions, in attending to some religious ceremony. He had several little ritesto attend to even before he might say his prayers in the morning; andsince even to-day most of these personal regulations are dutifullyobserved, one may assume that in the full power of Brahmanhood theywere very straitly enforced. [6]

It is, therefore, important to know what these works, so closely intouch with the general public, have to say in regard to religion. Whatthey inculcate will be the popular theology of completed Brahmanism. For these books are intended to give instruction to all the Aryancastes, and, though this instruction filtrates through the hands ofthe priest, one may be sure that the understanding between king andpriest was such as to make the code the real norm of justice andarbiter of religious opinions. For instance, when one reads that theking is a prime divinity, and that, _quid pro quo_, the priest may bebanished, but never may be punished corporally by the king, becausethe former is a still greater divinity, it may be taken for grantedthat such was received opinion. When we come to take up the Hinduismof the epic we shall point out that that work contains a religion morepopular even than that of the legal literature, for one knows thatthis latter phase of religion was at first not taught at all, but grewup in the face of opposition. But for the present, before the rise ofepic 'Hinduism, ' and before taking up the heretical writings, it is agreat gain to be able to scan a side of religion that may be calledpopular in so far as it evidently is the faith which not only wastaught to the masses, but which, as is universally assumed in the law, the masses accept; whereas philosophers alone accept the _[=a]tm[=a]_religion of the Upanishads, and the Br[=a]hmanas are not intended forthe public at all, but only for initiated priests. 

What, then, is the religious belief and the moral position of theHindu law-books? In how far has philosophy affected public religion, and in what way has a reconciliation been affected between thecontradictory beliefs in regard to the gods; in regard to the value ofworks on the one hand, and of knowledge on the other; in regard tohell as a means of punishment for sin on the one hand, andreincarnation (_sams[=a]ra_) on the other; in regard to heaven as areward of good deeds on the one hand, and absorption into God on theother; in regard to a personal creator on the one hand, and a FirstCause without personal attributes on the other?

For the philosophical treatises are known and referred to in the earlycodes; so that, although the completed systems post-dated theS[=u]tras, the cosmical and theological speculations of the earlierUpanishads were familiar to the authors of the legal systems. 

The first general impression produced by a perusal of the law-books isthat the popular religion has remained unaffected by philosophy. Andthis is correct in so far as that it must be put first in describingthe codes, which, in the main, in keeping the ancient observances, reflect the inherited faith. When, therefore, one says thatpantheism[7] succeeded polytheism in India, he must qualify theassertion. The philosophers are pantheists, but what of the vulgar? Dothey give up polytheism; are they inclined to do so, or are theytaught to do so? No. For there is no formal abatement in the rigor ofthe older creed. Whatever the wise man thought, and whatever in hisphilosophy was the instruction which he imparted to his peers, when hedealt with the world about him he taught his intellectual inferiors ascarcely modified form of the creed of their fathers. How in his ownmind this wise man reconciled the two sets of opinion has been shownabove. The works of sacrifice, with all the inherited belief impliedby them, were for him preparatory studies. The elasticity of hisphilosophy admitted the whole world of gods, as a temporary reality, into his pantheistic scheme. It was, therefore, neither the hypocrisyof the Roman augur, nor the fear of results that in his teaching heldhim to the inheritance he had received. Gods, ghosts, demons, andconsequently sacrifices, rites, ordeals, and formulae were notincongruous with his philosophical opinions. He himself believed inthese spiritual powers and in the usefulness of serving them. It istrue that he believed in their eventual doom, but so far as man wasconcerned they were practically real. There was, therefore, not onlyno reason why the sage should not inculcate the old rites, but therewas every reason why he should. Especially in the case of pious butignorant people, whose wisdom was not yet developed to a fullappreciation of divine relativity, was it incumbent on him to keepthem, the lower castes, to the one religion that they couldcomprehend. 

It is thus that the apparent inconsistency in exoteric and esotericbeliefs explains itself. For the two are not contradictory. They donot exclude each other. Hindu pantheism includes polytheism with itsattendant patrolatry, demonology, and consequent ritualism. [8]

With rare exceptions it was only the grosser religion that the vulgarcould understand; it was only this that they were taught and believed. 

Thus the old Vedic gods are revered and worshipped by name. The Sun, Indra, and all the divinities embalmed in ritual, are placated and'satiated' with offerings, just as they had been satiated from timeimmemorial. But no hint is given that this is a form; or that theVedic gods are of less account than they had been. Moreover, it is notin the inherited formulae of the ritual alone that this view isupheld. To be sure, when philosophical speculation is introduced, theFather-god comes to the fore; Brahm[=a][9] sits aloft, indulgentlyadvising his children, as he does in the intermediate stage of theBr[=a]hmanas; and _[=a]tm[=a] (brahma)_ too is recognized to be thereal being of Brahm[=a], as in the Upanishads. [10] But none of thistouches the practice of the common law, where the ordinary man isadmonished to fear Yama's hell and Varuna's bonds, as he would havebeen admonished before the philosopher grew wiser than the Vedicseers. Only personified Right, Dharma, takes his seat with shadowyBrahm[=a] among the other gods. [11]

What is the speech which the judge on the bench is ordered to repeatto the witnesses? Thus says the law-giver Manu: "When the witnessesare collected together in the court, in the presence of the plaintiffand defendant, the (Brahman) judge should call upon them to speak, kindly addressing them in the following manner: 'Whatever you know hasbeen done in this affair . . . Declare it all. A witness who intestifying speaks the truth reaches the worlds where all is plenty . . . Such testimony is honored by Brahm[=a]. One who in testifying speaksan untruth is, all unwilling, bound fast by the cords of Varuna, [12]till an hundred births are passed. ' . . . (Then, speaking to onewitness): 'Spirit (soul) is the witness for the Spirit, and the Spiritis likewise the refuge of the Spirit. Despise not, therefore, thineown spirit (or soul), the highest witness of man. Verily, the wickedthink 'no one sees us, ' but the gods are looking at them, and also theperson within (conscience). _Dyaus, Earth, the Waters_, (the person inthe) heart, _Moon, Sun, Fire, Yama, Wind, Night, the twin Twilights_, and Dharma know the conduct of all corporeal beings. . . . Although, Ogood man, thou regardest thyself, thinking, 'I am alone, ' yet the holyone (saint) who sees the evil and the good, stands ever in thy heart. It is in truth god Yama, the son of Vivasvant, who resideth in thyheart; if thou beest not at variance with him (thou needest) not (to)go to the Ganges and to the (holy land of) the Kurus (to bepurified). '"

Here there is no abatement in Vedic polytheism, although it is circledround with a thin mist from later teachings. In the same way theordinary man is taught that at death his spirit (soul) will pass as amanikin out of his body and go to Yama to be judged; while the feaststo the Manes, of course, imply always the belief in the individualactivity of dead ancestors. Such expressions as 'The seven daughtersofVaruna' (_sapta v[=a]ru[n. ][=i]r im[=a]s, _ [=A]çv. _Grih. S_. 2. 3. 3)show that even in detail the old views are still retained. There is noadvance, except in superstitions, [13] on the main features of the oldreligion. So the same old fear of words is found, resulting in neweuphemisms. One must not say 'scull, ' _kap[=a]la_, but call it_bhag[=a]la_, 'lucky' (Gaut. 9. 21); a factor in the making of Africanlanguages also, according to modern travellers. Images of the gods arenow over-recognized by the priest, for they must be revered like thegods themselves (_ib_. 12; P[=a]r. _Grih. S_. 3. 14. 8. Etc. ). Amongthe developed objects of the cult serpents now occupy a prominentplace. They are mentioned as worshipful in the Br[=a]hmanas. In theS[=u]tra period offerings are made to snakes of earth, air, andheaven; the serpents are 'satiated' along with gods, plants, demons, etc. (Ç[=a][. N]kh. 4. 9. 3; 15. 4; [=A]çv. 2. 1. 9; 3. 4. 1;P[=a]rask. 2. 14. 9) and blood is poured out to them ([=A]çv. 4. 8. 27. ). [14] But other later divinities than those of the earliest Veda, such as Wealth (Kubera), and Dharma, have crept into the ritual. Withthe Vedic gods appears as a divinity in Kh[=a]d. 1. 5. 31 the love-godK[=a]ma, of the Atharvan; while on the other hand Rudra the beast-lord(Paçupati, Lord of Cattle), the 'kindly' Çiva, appears as 'great god, 'whose names are Çankara, Prish[=a]taka, Bhava, Çarva, Ugra, Iç[=a]na(Lord); who has all names and greatness, while he yet is described inthe words of the older text as 'the god that desires to kill' ([=A]çv. 2. 2. 2; 4. 8. 9, 19, [15] 29, 32; _[=A]it. Br_. 3. 34). On the otherhand Vishnu is also adored, and that in connection with the [Greek:logos], or V[=a]c (_ib_. 3. 3. 4). Quite in Upanishad manner--for itis necessary to show that these were then really known--is the formula'thou art a student of _pr[=a][n. ]a_ (Breath, ) and art given over toKa' (_ib_. 1. 20. 8. ), or _'whom?'_ In [=A]çval[=a]yana no Upanishadsare given in the list of literature, which includes the 'Eulogies ofmen, ' Itih[=a]sas, Pur[=a]nas, and even the Mah[=a]bh[=a]rata (3. 3. 1; 4. 4). But in 1. 13. 1, _Upanishad-rites_ (and that of a verydomestic nature) are recognized, which would corroborate theexplanation of Upanishad given above, as being at first a subsidiarywork, dealing with minor points. [16] Something of the sciolism of theUpanishads seems to lie in the prayer that of the four paths on whichwalk the gods the mortal may be led in that which bestows 'freedomfrom death' (P[=a]r. 3. 1. 2); and many of the teachers famous in theUpanishads are now revered by name like gods ([=A]çv. 3. 4. 4, etc. ). 

On turning from these domestic S[=u]tras to the legal S[=u]tras itbecomes evident that the pantheistic doctrine of the Upanishads, andin part the Upanishads themselves, were already familiar to thelaw-makers, and that they influenced, in some degree, the doctrines ofthe law, despite the retention of the older forms. Not only is_sams[=a]ra_ the accepted doctrine, but the _[=a]tm[=a]_, as if in averitable Upanishad, is the object of religious devotion. Here, however, this quest is permitted only to the ascetic, who presumablyhas performed all ritualistic duties and passed through the stadiathat legally precede his own. 

Of all the legal S[=u]tra-writers Gautama is oldest, and perhaps ispre-buddhistic. Turning to his work one notices first that theM[=i]m[=a]msist is omitted in the list of learned men (28. 49);[17]but since the Upanishads and Ved[=a]nta are expressly mentioned, it isevident that the author of even the oldest S[=u]tra was acquaintedwith whatever then corresponded to these works. [18] The opposedteaching of hell versus _sams[=a]ra_ is found in Gautama. But there israther an interesting attempt to unite them. Ordinarily it is to helland heaven that reference is made, _e. G_. , 'the one that knows the lawobtains the heavenly world' (28. 52); 'if one speak untruth to ateacher, even in thought, even in respect to little things, he slaysseven men after and before him' (seven descendants and sevenancestors, 23. 31). So in the case of witnesses: 'heaven (is thefruit) for speaking the truth; otherwise hell' (13. 7); 'for stealing(land) hell' (is the punishment, _ib_. 17). Now and then comes thephilosophical doctrine: 'one does not fall from the world ofBrahm[=a]' (9. 74); 'one enters into union and into the same worldwith Brahm[=a]' (8. 25). 

But in 21. 4-6 there occurs the following statement: 'To be an outcastis to be deprived of the works of the twice-born, and hereafter to bedeprived of happiness; this some (call) hell. ' It is evident here thatthe expression _asiddhis_ (deprivation of success or happiness) isplaced optionally beside _naraka_ (hell) as the view of one set oftheologians compared with that of another; 'lack of obtaining success, _i. E_. , reward' stands parallel to 'hell. ' In the same chapter, whereManu says that he who assaults a Brahman "obtains hell for one hundredyears" (M. Xi. 207), Gautama (21. 20) says "for one hundred years, lack of heaven" (_asvargyam_), which may mean hell or the deprivationof the result of merit, _i. E_. , one hundred years will be deductedfrom his heavenly life. In this case not a new and better birth butheaven is assumed to be the reward of good acts. Now if one turns to11. 29-30 he finds both views combined. In the parallel passage in[=A]pastamba only better or worse re-births are promised as a rewardfor good or evil (2. 5. 11. 10-11); but here it is said: "The castesand orders that remain by their duty, having died, having enjoyed thefruits of their acts, with the remnant of their (merit) obtainre-birth, having an excellent country, caste, and family; having longlife, learning, good conduct, wealth, happiness, and wisdom. They ofdifferent sort are destroyed in various ways. " Here, heavenly joys(such as are implied by _ni[h. ]çreyasam_ in 26) are to be enjoyedfirst, and a good birth afterwards, and by implication one probablyhas to interpret the next sentence to mean 'they are sent to hell andthen re-born in various low births. ' This, too, is Manu's rule(below). At this time the sacred places which purify are in greatvogue, and in Gautama a list of them is given (19. 14), viz. : "allmountains, all rivers, holy pools, places of pilgrimage (_i. E_. , river-fords, _tirth[=a]ni_), homes of saints, cow-pens, and altars. "Of these the _tirthas_ are particularly interesting, as they laterbecome of great importance, thousands of verses in the epic beingdevoted to their enumeration and praise. 

Gautama says also that ascetics, according to some teachers, need notbe householders first (3. 1), and that the Brahman ascetic stays athome during the rainy season, like the heretic monks (_ib_. 13). Ifone examine the relative importance of the forms and spirit ofreligion as taught in this, the oldest _dharma-s[=u]tra_, [19] he willbe impressed at first with the tremendous weight laid on the former ascompared with the latter. But, as was said apropos of the Brahmanicliterature, one errs who fails to appreciate the fact that these worksare intended not to give a summary of religious conduct, but toinculcate ceremonial rules. Of the more importance, therefore, is theoccasional pause which is made to insist, beyond peradventure, on thesuperiority of moral rules. A very good instance of this is found inGautama. He has a list of venial sins. Since lying is one of the mostheinous offences to a Hindu lawgiver, and the penances are severe, allthe treatises state formally that an untruth uttered in fun, or whenone is in danger, or an oath of the sort implied by Plato: [Greek:_aphrodision orkon ou phasin einai_], --all these are venial, and soare lies told to benefit a (holy) cow, or to aid a priest; or toldfrom religious motives of any sort without self-interest. This isalmost the only example of looseness in morals as taught in the law. But the following case shows most plainly the importance of moralityas opposed to formal righteousness. After all the forty sacraments (towhich allusion was made above), have been recounted, there are given'eight good qualities of the soul, ' viz. , mercy, forbearance, freedomfrom envy, purity, calmness, correct behavior, freedom from greed andfrom covetousness. Then follows: "He that has (performed) the fortysacraments but has not the eight good qualities enters not into unionwith Brahm[=a], nor into the heaven of Brahm[=a]. [20] But he that has(performed) only a part of the forty sacraments and has the eight goodqualities enters into union with Brahm[=a], and into the heaven ofBrahm[=a]. " This is as near to heresy as pre-buddhistic Brahmanismpermitted itself to come. 

In the later legal S[=u]tra of the northern Vasistha[21] occurs a rulewhich, while it distinctly explains what is meant by liberality, viz. , gifts to a priest, also recognizes the 'heavenly reward': "If giftsare given to a man that does not know the Veda the divinities are notsatisfied" (3. 8). In the same work (6. 1) 'destruction' is the fateof the sinner that lives without observance of good custom; yet is itsaid in the same chapter (27): "If a twice-born man dies with the foodof a Ç[=u]dra (lowest caste) in his belly, he would become a villagepig, or he is born again in that (Ç[=u]dra's) family"; and, in respectto sons begotten when he has in him such food: "Of whom the food, ofhim are these sons; and he himself would not mount to heaven . . . Hedoes not find the upward path" (29, 28). In _ib_. 8. 17 the Brahmanthat observes all the rules 'does not fall from _brahmaloka, ' i. E_. , the locality of Brahm[=a]. Further, in 10. 4: "Let (an ascetic) doaway with all (sacrificial) works; but let him not do away with onething, the Veda; for from doing away with the Veda (one becomes) aÇ[=u]dra. " But, in the same chapter: "Let (the ascetic) live at theend of a village, in a temple ('god's house'), in a deserted house, orat the root of a tree; there in his mind studying the knowledge (ofthe _[=a]tm[=a]_) . . . So they cite (verses): 'Sure is the freedom fromre-birth in the case of one that lives in the wood with passionssubdued . . . And meditates on the supreme spirit' . . . Let him not beconfined to any custom . . . And in regard to this (freedom from worldlypursuits) they cite these verses: 'There is no salvation (literally'release') for a philologist (_na çabdaç[=a]str[=a]bhiratasyamokshas_), nor for one that delights in catching (men) in the world, nor for one addicted to food and dress, nor for one pleased with afine house. By means of prodigies, omens, astrology, palmistry, teaching, and talking let him not seek alms . . . He best knowssalvation who (cares for naught)' . . . (such are the verses). Let himneither harm nor do good to anything. . . . Avoidance of disagreeableconduct, jealousy, presumption, selfishness, lack of belief, lack ofuprightness, self-praise, blame of others, harm, greed, distraction, wrath, and envy, is a rule that applies to all the stadia of life. TheBrahman that is pure, and wears the girdle, and carries the gourd inhis hand, and avoids the food of low castes fails not of obtaining theworld of Brahm[=a]" (_ib_. 10. 18 ff. ). Yama, the Manes, and evilspirits (_asuras_) are referred to in the following chapter (20, 25);and hell in the same chapter is declared to be the portion of suchascetics as will not eat meat when requested to do so at a feast tothe Manes or gods (11. 34), --rather an interesting verse, for inManu's code the corresponding threat is that, instead of going to hell'for as long, _i. E_. , as many years, as the beast has hairs, ' as here, one shall experience 'twenty-one rebirths, ' _i. E_. , the hell-doctrinein terms of _sams[=a]ra_; while the same image occurs in Manu in theform 'he that slaughters beasts unlawfully obtains as many rebirths asthere are hairs on the beast' (v. 35. 38). The passive attitudesometimes ascribed to the Manes is denied; they rejoice over avirtuous descendant (11. 41); a bad one deprives them of the heaventhey stand in (16. 36). The authorities on morals are here, aselsewhere, Manu and other seers, the Vedas, and the Father-god, whowith Yama gives directions to man in regard to lawful food, etc. (14. 30). The moral side of the code, apart from ritual impurities, is given, as usual, by a list of good and bad qualities (above), while formal laws in regard to theft, murder (especially of apriest), adultery and drunkenness (20. 44; i. 20), with violationof caste-regulations by intercourse with outcasts, are 'greatcrimes. ' Though older than [=A]pastamba, who mentions theP[=u]rva-m[=i]m[=a]ms[=a], Vasistha, too, knows the Ved[=a]nta (3. 17), and the M[=i]m[=a]ms[=a] (_vikalpin--tarkin_, 3. 20, M. XII. 111). 

From the S[=u]tras of B[=a]udh[=a]yana's probably southern schoolsomething of additional interest is to be gained. Here 'darkness'takes the place of hell (2. 3. 5. 9), which, however, by a citation isexplained (in 2. 2. 3. 34) as 'Yama's hall. ' A verse is cited to showthat the greatest sin is lack of faith (1. 5. 10. 6) and not going toheaven is the reward of folly (_ib_. 7); while the reward of virtue isto live in heaven for long (4. 8. 7). The same freedom in regard toascetics as occurs in other S[=u]tra works is to be found in thisauthor, not in the more suspicious final chapters, but in that part ofthe work which is accepted as oldest, [22] and agrees with the datafound in the Br[=a]hmanas, where the pre-buddhistic monk is calledBhikshu, 'beggar/or Sanny[=a]sin 'he that renounces, ' just as theseterms are employed in the heretical writings. As among the Jains (andBuddhists), the Brahmanic ascetic carries a few simple utensils, andwanders about from house to house and village to village, beggingfood. Some authorities (among the Brahmans) say that one may become anascetic as soon as he has completed his study, though ordinarily thismay be done only after passing through the householder stadium. Onbecoming an ascetic the beggar takes the vow not to injure any livingthing (B[=a]udh. II. 10. 17. 2. 11, 29), exactly as the Jain ascetictakes the vow of non-injury. More than this, as will be seen below, the details of the Brahman ascetic's vows are almost identical withthose of the Jain ascetic. He vows not to injure living beings, not tolie, not to steal, to be continent, to be liberal; with the five minorvows, not to get angry, to obey the Teacher, not to be rash, to becleanly and pure in eating. [23] To this ascetic order in the Brahmanpriesthood may be traced the origin of the heretical monks. Even inthe Br[=a]hmanas occur the termini technici of the Buddhistpriesthood, notably the Çramana or ascetic monk, and the word_buddha_, 'awakened' (_pratibudh_). The 'four orders' are thoseenumerated as the householder, student, ascetic, and forest-hermit. Ifone live in all four orders according to rule, and be serene, he willcome to peace, that is, salvation ([=A]pastamba, 2. 9. 21. I, 2). 

According to this later legal writer, who belongs to SouthernIndia, [24] it is only after one has passed through all the precedingstadia that he may give up works (sacrifice, etc. ) and devote himselfto seeking the [=a]tm[=a], 'wandering about, without caring for earthor heaven, renouncing truth and falsehood, pleasure and pain' (_ib_. 10, 13). There follows this passage one significant of the oppositionbetween purely Upanishad-ideas and those of the law-givers:'Acquirement of peace (salvation) depends, it is said, on knowledge;this is opposed by the codes. If on knowledge (depended) acquirementof peace, even here (in this world) one would escape grief' (_ib. _14-16). Further, in describing the forest-hermit's austerities (_ib. _23. 4 ff. ), verses from a Pur[=a]na are cited which are virtuallyUpanishadic: 'The eight and eighty thousand seers who desiredoffspring (went) south on Aryaman's path, and obtained (as theirreward) graves; (but) the eight and eighty thousand who did not desireoffspring (went) north on Aryaman's path and make for themselvesimmortality, ' that is to say 'abandon desire for offspring; and of thetwo paths (which, as the commentator observes, are mentioned in theCh[=a]ndogya Upanishad), that which gives immortality instead of death(graves) will be yours. ' It is admitted that such ascetics havemiraculous powers; but the law-maker emphatically protests in thefollowing S[=u]tra against the supposition that a rule which standsopposed to the received rites (marriage, sacrifice, etc. ) is of anypower, and asserts that for the future life an endless reward('fruit'), called in revelation 'heavenly, ' is appointed (_ib. _ 8-11). The next chapter, however, limits, as it were, this dogma, for it isstated that immortality is the re-birth of one's self in the body ofone's son, and a verse is cited: 'Thou procreatest progeny, and that'sthy immortality, O mortal, ' with other verses, which teach that sonsthat attend to the Vedic rites magnify the fame and heaven of theirancestors, who 'live in heaven until the destruction of creation'_([=a] bh[=u]tasamptav[=a]t_, 2. 9. 24. 5), But 'according to theBhavishyat-Pur[=a]na' after this destruction of creation 'they existagain in heaven as the cause of seed' (_ib. _) 6. And then follows aquotation from the Father-god: 'We live with those people who do these(following) things: (attend to) the three Vedas, live as students, create children, sacrifice to the Manes, do penance, make sacrifice tothe gods, practice liberality; he that extols anything else becomesair (or dust) and perishes' (_ib. _) 8; and further: 'only they thatcommit sin perish' (not their ancestors). 

The animus of this whole passage is apparent. The law-maker has tocontend with them that would reject the necessity of following inorder the traditional stadia of a priest's life; that imagine that bybecoming ascetics without first having passed through the preliminarystadia they can by knowledge alone attain the bliss that is obtainedby union with _brahma_ (or Brahm[=a]). In other words the jurist hasto contend with a trait eminently anti-Brahmanistic, even Buddhistic. He denies this value of knowledge, and therewith shows that what hewishes to have inculcated is a belief in the temporary personalexistence of the Manes; in heaven till the end of the world-order; andthe annihilation of the wicked; while he has a confused or mixedopinion in regard to one's own personal immortality, believing on theone hand that there is a future existence in heaven with the gods, andon the other (rather a materialistic view) that immortality is nothingbut continued existence in the person of one's descendants, who arevirtually one's self in another body: _dehatvam ev[=a]'nyat, _ "onlythe body is different" (_ib_) 2. As to cosmogony it is stated to be(not the emanation of an _[=a]tm[=a]_) but the "emission (creation) ofthe Father-god and of the seers" (the latter being visible as stars, _ib_. 13, 14). In this there is plainly a received popular opinion, which reflects the Vedic and Brahmanic stage, and is opposed to thephilosophical views of the Upanishads, in other words of the firstVedantic philosophy; while it is mixed up with the late doctrine ofthe cataclysms, which ruin each succeeding^ creation. The equalannihilation of the wicked (_dhvamsanti_) and unorthodox (_dhvamsate_)is to be noticed. They are here subject neither to hell nor torebirth, but they "become dust and perish" (_ib_. 8. 9). 

Throughout the whole legal literature one will find this sameantithesis of views in regard to the fate of good and bad, although itis seldom that annihilation is predicated of the latter. Usually hellor rebirth are their fate--two views, which no one can reallyreconcile. They are put side by side; exactly as in priestlydiscussion in India and Europe it still remains an unsettled questionas to when the soul becomes immortal. [25] Occidental experienceteaches how easy it is for such views to stand together unattacked, although they are the object of speculation. This passage is perhaps, historically, the most satisfactory (as it is philosophicallyunsatisfactory) that can be cited in answer to the questions that wereposed above. But from other parts of legal literature a few morestatements may be culled, to illustrate still further the lack ofuniformity not only in popular belief, but in the teaching providedfor the public. First from the same work of [=A]pastamba, in 2. 11. 29. 9-10 it is said that if a witness in court perjure himself heshall be punished by the king, "and further, in passing to the nextworld, hell" (is his portion); whereas "(the reward) for truth isheaven, and praise on the part of all creatures. " Now, let one comparefirst _ib_. 2. 5. 11. 10-11: "Men of low castes are reborn in highercastes in successive births, and men of high castes in low castes, ifthey respectively perform and neglect their duties. " And then thisVedantic passage of the same author (1. 8. 22 ff. ): "Let one (aspenance for sin) devote himself to the Yoga (mental discipline) whichhas to do with the highest _[=a]tm[=a]_ . . . Nothing is known higherthan the acquisition of _[=a]tm[=a]_. We shall (now) cite some_[=a]tm[=a]_-acquisition-verses, viz. : All living creatures (are) thecitadel of him that rests in secret, the indestructible one, theimmaculate one. Immortal they that devote themselves to the movelessone who has a movable dwelling . . . The great one whose body is light, universal, free . . . The eternal (part) in all creatures, the wise, immortal, unchanging one, limbless, voiceless, formless, touchless, purest, the highest goal. He that everywhere devotes himself to Him(_[=a]tm[=a]_ as Lord), and always lives accordingly; that by virtueof Yoga recognizes Him, the subtile one, shall rejoice in the top ofheaven . . . He, _[=a]tm[=a], _ comprehends all, embraces all, moresubtile than a lotus-thread and huger than the earth . . . From him arecreated all bodies; he is the root, he the Everlasting, the EternalOne. "

This discipline it will be observed is enjoined as penance and to getrid of faults, that is, to subdue the passions. As the same chaptercontains a list of the faults which are to be overcome before one"arrives at peace" (salvation) they may be cited here: "Anger, joy, wrath, greed, distraction, injury, threats, lying, over-eating, calumny, envy, sexual desire, and hate, lack of studying _[=a]tm[=a], _lack of Yoga--the destruction of these (faults) is based on Yoga"(mental concentration). On the other hand: "He that devotes himself, in accordance with the law, to avoiding anger, joy, wrath, greed, distraction, injury, threats, lies, over-eating, calumny and envy; andpractices liberality, renunciation, uprightness, kindness, subduing(of the passions), self-control; and is at peace with all creatures;and practices Yoga; and acts in an [=A]ryan (noble) way; and does nothurt anything; and has contentment--qualities which, it is agreed, appertain to all the (four) stadia--he becomes _s[=a]rvag[=a]min"(ib. _ 23. 6), that is 'one belonging to the all-pervading' (All-soul). There appears to be a contradiction between the former passage, whereYoga is enjoined on ascetics alone; and this, where Yoga is part ofthe discipline of all four stadia. But what was in the author's mindwas probably that all these vices and moral virtues are enumerated assuch for all; and he slips in mental concentration as a virtue for theascetic, meaning to include all the virtues he knows. 

A few further illustrations from that special code which has won foritself a preeminent name, 'the law-book of Manu, '[26] will give inepitome the popular religion as taught to the masses; withal evenbetter than this is taught in the S[=u]tras. For Father Manu'slaw-book, as the Hindus call it, is a popular Ç[=a]stra or metrical[27]composite of law and religion, which reflects the opinion ofBrahmanism in its geographical stronghold, whereas the S[=u]trasemanate from various localities, north and south. To Manu there is butone Holy Land, the Kurus' plain and the region round-about it (nearDelhi). 

The work takes us forward in time beyond even the latest S[=u]tras, but the content is such as to show that formal Brahmanism in thislatest stage still keeps to its old norm and to Brahmanic models. 

It deserves therefore to be examined with care from several points ofview if one would escape from the belief of the philosopher to themore general teaching. In this popular religion all morality isconditioned by the castes, [28] which is true also to a certain degreeof the earlier Sutras, but the evil fruit of this plant is not therequite so ripe as it is in the later code. The enormity of all crimesdepends on who commits them, and against whom they are committed. Thethree upper castes alone have religious privileges. The lowest caste, outcasts, women, and diseased persons are not allowed to hear the holytexts or take part in ceremonies. [29] As to the rites, they are theinherited ones, sacrifices to gods, offerings to Manes and spirits, and all the ceremonies of house and individual, as explained above;with especial and very minute rules of observance for each of the fourstadia of a priest's life. [30] There is no hint in any of this of theimportance of the knowledge of the _[=a]tm[=a]. _ But in their properplace the rules of morality and the higher philosophical views aretaught. The doctrine of re-birth is formally stated, and theattainment of the world of Brahm[=a] _(brahma)_ by union of ceremoniesand knowledge is inculcated. The ascetic should seek, by meditation, to go to Brahm[=a] (or _brahma_) for when he is utterly indifferent, then, both here and after death, he gains everlasting happiness. Therefore he should study the Vedas, but especially the teachings inregard to the Supreme Spirit, and the Upanishads; studying theVed[=a]nta is a regular part of his final discipline (VI, 74-94). Inanother part of the work the distinction made in the Upanishads isupheld, that religious acts are of two sorts, one designed to procurebliss, and cause a good man to reach equality with the gods; the otherperformed without selfish motive; by which latter "even the fiveelements are overcome, " that is, the absorption into _brahma_ iseffected. For "among all virtuous acts the knowledge of the spirit, _[=a]tm[=a], _ is highest; through this is obtained even immortality. One that sees spirit in all things and all things in spirit sacrificesto spirit and enters Brahm[=a] (or _brahma_)" "The spirit (or self) isall divinities; the All is based on spirit. " And in Upanishadic veinthe Person is then proclaimed as lord of gods, whom "some call fire, some call Manu, some call Indra, some call air, and some call eternal_brahma. _" But though this be the view of the closing verses, yet inthe beginning of the work is this Person represented as being producedfrom a First Cause. It would be out of place here to analyse theconflicting philosophical views of the Manu code. Even hiscommentators are uncertain whether he belonged to the pantheisticVed[=a]nta or dualistic S[=a]nkhya school. For them that believe in noManu the solution is simpler. Although Manu is usually called aPuranic Sankhyan, yet are both schools represented, and that withoutregard to incongruous teaching. Manu is no more Sankhyan thanVedantic. Indeed in the main part of the work the teaching is clearlymore Vedantic. But it suffices here to point out that the_[=a]tm[=a]_-philosophy and religion is not ignored; it is taught asessential. Nevertheless, it is not taught in such a way as to indicatethat it is requisite for the vulgar. On the contrary, it is only whenone becomes an ascetic that he is told to devote himself to thepursuit of the knowledge of _[=a]tm[=a]_. In one passage there isevidence that two replies were given to this fundamental question inregard to works and knowledge. For after enumerating a list of goodacts, among which are knowledge and Vedic ceremonies, it is askedwhich among them most tends to deliverance. The answer is vital. Or itshould be, but it is given in an ambiguous form (xii. 85-6): "Amid allthese acts the knowledge of self, _[=a]tm[=a], _ is the highest, for itproduces immortality. Amid all these acts the one most productive ofhappiness, both after death and in this life, is the Vedic ceremony. "

Knowledge gives real immortality; rites give temporary bliss. TheUpanishads teach that the latter is lower than the former, but eachanswers the question. There were two answers, and Manu gives both. That is the secret of many discrepancies in Hindu rules. The law-givercannot admit absolutely and once for all that the Vedic ceremony is ofno abiding use, as it can be of no use to one that accepts the higherteaching. He keeps it as a training and allows only the ascetic to bea philosopher indeed. But at the same time he gives as a sort ofperoration to his treatise some 'elegant extracts' from philosophicalworks, which he believes theoretically, although practically he willnot allow them to influence his ritualism. He is a true Brahmanpriest. 

It is this that is always so annoying in Brahmanic philosophy. For theslavery of tradition is everywhere. Not only does the ritualist, whileadmitting the force of the philosopher's reasons, remain by Vedictradition, and in consequence refuse to supplant 'revelation' with thehigher wisdom and better religion, which he sees while he will notfollow it; but even the philosopher must needs be 'orthodox, ' and, since the scriptures themselves are self-contradictory, he is obligedto use his energies not in discovering truth, but in reconciling hisancestors' dogmas, in order to the creation of a philosophical systemwhich shall agree with everything that has been said in the Vedas andUpanishads. When one sees what subtlety and logical acumen thesephilosophers possessed, he is moved to wonder what might have been theoutcome had their minds been as free as those of more liberal Hellas. But unfortunately they were bound to argue within limits, and were asmuch handicapped in the race of thought as were they that had toconform to the teachings of Rome. For though India had no church, ithad an inquisitorial priestly caste, and the unbeliever was anoutcast. What is said of custom is true of faith: "Let one walk in thepath of good men, the path in which his father walked, in which hisgrandfathers walked; walking in that path one does no wrong" (Manu iv. 178). Real philosophy, unhampered by tradition, is found only amongthe heretics and in the sects of a later time. 

The gods of old are accepted by the orthodox as a matter of course, although theoretically they are born of the All-god, who is withoutthe need of ceremonial rites. To the other castes the active and mostterrible deity is represented as being the priest himself. He not onlysymbolizes the fire-god, to whom is offered the sacrifice, but heactually is the divinity in person. Hence there is no greater meritthan in giving gifts to priests. As to eschatology, opinions are notcontrasted any more. They are put side by side. In morality truth, purity, and harmlessness are chiefly inculcated. But the last(ascribed by some scholars to Buddhistic influence) is not permittedto interfere with animal sacrifices. 

Some of the rules for the life of a householder will show in brief themoral excellence and theoretical uncertainty of Manu's law-code. Thefollowing extracts are from the fourth, the Ten Commandments from thesixth, and the description of the hells (twenty-two in all)[31] fromthe fourth and twelfth books of Manu's code. These rules may beaccepted as a true reflexion of what was taught to the people bystringent Brahmanism as yet holding aloof from Hinduism. 

A householder must live without giving any pain (to living creatures). He must perform daily the ceremonies ordained in the Veda. In this wayhe obtains heaven. Let him never neglect the offerings to seers, gods, spirits (sprites), men, and Manes. Some offer sacrifice only in theirorgans of sense (not in external offerings); some by knowledge alone. Let him not explain law and rites to the Ç[=u]dra (slave) caste; if hedoes so, he sinks into the hell Boundless. Let him not take presentsfrom an avaricious king who disobeys the law-codes; if he does so, hegoes to twenty-one hells (called Darkness, Dense-darkness, Frightful, Hell, Thread of Death, Great Hell, Burning, Place of Spikes, Frying-pan, River of Hell, etc. , etc. , etc. ). Let him never despise awarrior, a snake, or a priest. Let him never despise himself. Let himsay what is true and what is agreeable, but not disagreeable truth oragreeable false-hood. Let him not dispute with anybody, but let himsay 'very well. ' Let him not insult anybody. Remembering his formerbirths, and studying the Veda again and again, he gets endlesshappiness. Let him avoid unbelief and censure of the Vedas, revilingof gods, hatred, pride, anger, and cruelty. He that even threatens apriest will go to the hell Darkness for one hundred years; if hestrikes him he will be born in twenty-one sinful rebirths (accordingto another passage in the eleventh book he goes to hell for a thousandyears for the latter offence). Priests rule the world of gods. Butdeceitful, hypocritical priests go to hell. Let the householder givegifts, and he will be rewarded. One that gives a garment gets a placein the moon; a giver of grain gets eternal happiness; a giver of theVeda gets union with Brahm[=a] (_brahma_; these gifts, of course, areall to priests). He that gives respectfully and he that receivesrespectfully go to heaven; otherwise both go to hell. Let him, withoutgiving pain to any creature, slowly pile up virtue, as does an ant itshouse, that he may have a companion in the next world. For after deathneither father, nor mother, nor son, nor wife, nor relations are hiscompanions; his virtue alone remains with him. The relations leave thedead body, but its virtue follows the spirit: with his virtue as hiscompanion he will traverse the darkness that is hard to cross; andvirtue will lead him to the other world with a luminous form andethereal body. A priest that makes low connections is reborn as aslave. The Father-god permits a priest to accept alms even from a badman. For fifteen years the Manes refuse to accept food from one thatdespises a free gift. A priest that sins should be punished (that is, mulcted, a priest may not be punished corporally), more than anordinary man, for the greater the wisdom the greater the offence. Theythat commit the Five Great Sins live many years in hells, andafterwards obtain vile births; the slayer of a priest becomes in turna dog, a pig, an ass, a camel, a cow, a goat, a sheep, etc, etc. Apriest that drinks intoxicating liquor becomes various insects, oneafter another. A priest that steals becomes a spider, snake, etc, etc. By repeating sinful acts men are reborn in painful and base births, and are hurled about in hells; where are sword-leaved trees, etc, andwhere they are eaten, burned, spitted, and boiled; and they receivebirths in despicable wombs; rebirth to age, sorrow, and unquenchabledeath. But to secure supreme bliss a priest must study the Veda, practice austerity, seek knowledge, subdue the senses, abstain frominjury, and serve his Teacher. Which of these gives highest bliss? Theknowledge of the spirit is the highest and foremost, for it givesimmortality. The performance of Vedic ceremonies is the mostproductive of happiness here and hereafter. The Ten Commandments forthe twice-born are: Contentment, patience, self-control, not to steal, purity, control of passions, devotion (or wisdom), knowledge, truthfulness, and freedom from anger. These are concisely summarizedagain in the following: 'Manu declared the condensed rule of duty for(all) the four castes to be: not to injure a living thing; to speakthe truth; not to steal; to be pure; to control the passions' (VI. 92;X. 63). The 'non-injury' rule does not apply, of course, to sacrifice(_ib_. III. 268). In the epic the commandments are given sometimes asten, sometimes as eight. 

In order to give a completed exposition of Brahmanism we have passedbeyond the period of the great heresies, to which we must soon revert. But, before leaving the present division of the subject, we selectfrom the mass of Brahmanic domestic rites, the details of which offerin general little that is worth noting, two or three ceremonies whichpossess a more human interest, the marriage rite, the funeral rite, and those strange trials, known among so many other peoples, theordeals. We sketch these briefly, wishing merely to illustrate thereligious side of each ceremony, as it appears in one or more of itsfeatures. 

THE MARRIAGE RITE. 

Traces of exogamy may be suspected in the bridegroom's driving offwith his bride, but no such custom, of course, is recognized in thelaw. On the contrary, the groom is supposed to belong to the samevillage, and special rites are enjoined 'if he be from anothervillage. ' But again, in the early rule there is no trace of that taintof family which the totem-scholars of to-day cite so loosely fromHindu law. The girl is not precluded because she belongs to the samefamily within certain degrees. The only restriction in theHouse-rituals is that she shall have had "on the mother's and father'sside" wise, pious, and honorable ancestors for ten generations([=A]çvl. I. 5). Then comes the legal restriction, which some scholarscall 'primitive, ' that the wife must not be too nearly related. Thegirl has her own ordeal (not generally mentioned among ordeals!): Thewooer that thus selects his bride (this he does if one has not beenfound already either by his parents or by his own inclination) makeseight balls of earth and calls on the girl to choose one ('may she getthat to which she is born'). If she select a ball made from the earthof a field that bears two crops, she (or her child) will be rich ingrain; if from the cow-stall, rich in cattle; if from the place ofsacrifice, godly; if from a pool that does not dry, gifted; if fromthe gambler's court, devoted to gambling; if from cross-roads, unfaithful; if from a barren field, poor in grain; if from theburying-ground, destructful of her husband. There are several forms ofmaking a choice, but we confine ourselves to the marriage. [32] Invillage-life the bridegroom is escorted to the girl's house by youngwomen who tease him. The bridegroom presents presents to the bride, and receives a cow. The bridegroom takes the bride's hand, saying 'Itake thy hand for weal' (Rig Veda, X. 85. 36), and leads her to acertain stone, on which she steps first with the right foot (toe). Then three times they circumambulate the fire, keeping it to theright, an old Aryan custom for many rites, as in the _deisel_ of theKelts; the bride herself offering grain in the fire, and the groomrepeating more Vedic verses. They then take together the seven solemnsteps (with verses), [33] and so they are married. The groom, if ofanother village, now drives away with the bride, and has ready Vedicverses for every stage of the journey. After sun-down the groom pointsout the north star, and admonishes the bride to be no less constantand faithful. Three or twelve days they remain chaste, some say onenight; others say, only if he be from another village. The new husbandmust now see to the house-fire, which he keeps ever burning, the signof his being a householder. 

THE FUNERAL CEREMONY. 

Roth has an article in the Journal of the German Oriental Society(VIII. 467) which is at once a description of one of the funeral hymnso£ the Rig Veda (X. 18) with the later ritual, and a criticism of thebearing of the latter on the former. [34] He shows here that theritual, so far from having induced the hymn, totally changes it. Thehymn was written for a burial ceremony. The later ritual knows onlycremation. The ritual, therefore, forces the hymn into its service, and makes it a cremation-hymn. This is a very good (though veryextreme) example of the difference in age between the early hymns ofthe Rig Veda and the more modern ritual. Müller, _ib_. IX. P. I(_sic_), has given a thorough account of the later ritual andritualistic paraphernalia. We confine ourselves here to the olderceremony. 

The scene of the Vedic hymn is as follows: The friends and relativesstand about the corpse of a married man. By the side of the corpsesits the widow. The hymn begins: "Depart, O Death, upon some otherpathway, upon thy path, which differs from the path of gods . . . Harmnot our children, nor our heroes. . . . These living ones are separatedfrom the dead; successful today was our call to the gods. (This man isdead, but) _we_ go back to dancing and to laughter, extending furtherour still lengthened lives. " Then the priest puts a stone between thedead and living: "I set up a wall for the living, may no one of thesecome to this goal; may they live an hundred full harvests, and hidedeath with this stone. . . . "

The matrons assembled are now bid to advance without tears, and maketheir offerings to the fire, while the widow is separated from thecorpse of her husband and told to enter again into the world of theliving. The priest removes the dead warrior's bow from his hand: "Letthe women, not widows, advance with the ointment and holy butter; andwithout tears, happy, adorned, let them, to begin with, mount to thealtar (verse 7, p. 274, below). Raise thyself, woman, to the world ofthe living; his breath is gone by whom thou liest; come hither; of thetaker of thy hand (in marriage), of thy wooer thou art become thewife[35] (verse 8). I take the bow from the hand of the dead for our(own) lordship, glory, and strength. " Then he addresses the dead:"Thou art there, and we are here; we will slay every foe and everyattacker (with the power got from thee). Go thou now to Mother Earth, who is wide opened, favorable, a wool-soft maiden to the good man; mayshe guard thee from the lap of destruction. Open, O earth, be notoppressive to him; let him enter easily; may he fasten close to thee. Cover him like a mother, who wraps her child in her garment. Roomy andfirm be the earth, supported by a thousand pillars; from this time onthou (man) hast thy home and happiness yonder; may a sure place remainto him forever. I make firm the earth about thee; may I not be harmedin laying the clod here; may the fathers hold this pillar for thee, and Yama make thee a home yonder. "

In the Atharva Veda mention is made of a coffin, but none is noticedhere. 

Hillebrandt (_loc. Cit_. Xl. 711) has made it probable that the eighthverse belongs to a still older ritual, according to which this verseis one for human sacrifice, which is here ignored, though the text iskept. [36] 'Just so the later ritual keeps all this text, but twists itinto a crematory rite. For in the later period only young children areburied. Of burial there was nothing for adults but the collection ofbones and ashes. At this time too the ritual consists of three parts, cremation, collection of ashes, expiation. How are these to bereconciled with this hymn? Very simply. The rite is described andverses from the hymn are injected into it without the slightestlogical connection. That is the essence of all the Brahmanicritualism. The later rite is as follows: Three altars are erected, northwest, southwest, and southeast of a mound of earth. In the fourthcorner is the corpse; at whose feet, the widow. The brother of thedead man, or an old servant, takes the widow's hand and causes her torise while the priest says "Raise thyself, woman, to the world of theliving. " Then follows the removal of the bow; or the breaking of it, in the case of a slave. The body is now burned, while the priest says"These living ones are separated from the dead"; and the mournersdepart without looking around, and must at once perform theirablutions of lustration. After a time the collection of bones is madewith the verse "Go thou now to Mother Earth" and "Open, O earth. " Dustis flung on the bones with the words "Roomy and firm be the earth";and the skull is laid on top with the verse "I make firm the earthabout thee. " In other words the original hymn is fitted to the ritualonly by displacement of verses from their proper order and by a forcedapplication of the words. After all this comes the ceremony ofexpiation with the use of the verse "I set up a wall" withoutapplication of any sort. Further ceremonies, with further senselessuse of other verses, follow in course of time. These are all explainedminutely in the essay of Roth, whose clear demonstration of themodernness of the ritual, as compared with the antiquity of the hymnshould be read complete. 

The seventh verse (above) has a special literature of its own, sincethe words "let them, to begin with, mount the altar, " have beenchanged by the advocates of _suttee_, widow-burning, to mean 'to theplace of fire'; which change, however, is quite recent. The burning ofwidows begins rather late in India, and probably was confined at firstto the pet wife of royal persons. It was then claimed as an honor bythe first wife, and eventually without real authority, and in factagainst early law, became the rule and sign of a devoted wife. Thepractice was abolished by the English in 1829; but, considering thewidow's present horrible existence, it is questionable whether itwould not be a mercy to her and to her family to restore the right ofdying and the hope of heaven, in the place of the living death andactual hell on earth in which she is entombed to-day. 

ORDEALS. [37]

Fire and water are the means employed in India to test guilt in theearlier period. Then comes the oath with judgment indicated bysubsequent misfortune. All other forms of ordeals are first recognizedin late law-books. We speak first of the ordeals that have beenthought to be primitive Aryan. The Fire-ordeal: (1) Seven fig-leavesare tied seven times upon the hands after rice has been rubbed uponthe palms; and the judge then lays a red-hot ball upon them; theaccused, or the judge himself, invoking the god (Fire) to indicate theinnocence or the guilt of the accused. The latter then walks a certaindistance, 'slowly through seven circles, each circle sixteen fingersbroad, and the space between the circles being of the same extent, 'according to some jurists; but other dimensions, and eight or ninecircles are given by other authorities. If the accused drop the ballhe must repeat the test. The burning of the hands indicates guilt. TheTeutonic laws give a different measurement, and state that the hand isto be sealed for three days (manus sub sigillo triduum tegatur) beforeinspection. This sealing for three days is paralleled by modern Indicpractice, but not by ancient law. In Greece there is the simple[Greek: _mudrous airein cheroin_] (Ant. 264) to be compared. TheGerman sealing of the hand is not reported till the ninth century. [38]

(2) Walking on Fire: There is no ordeal in India to correspond to theTeutonic walking over six, nine, or twelve hot ploughshares. To lick ahot ploughshare, to sit on or handle hot iron, and to take a shortwalk over coals is _late_ Indic. The German practice also according toSchlagintweit "war erst in späterer Zeit aufgekommen. "[39]

(3) Walking through Fire: This is a Teutonic ordeal, and (like theconflict-ordeal) an Indic custom not formally legalized. The accusedwalks directly into the fire. So [Greek: _pur dierpein] (loc. Cit_. ). 

Water-ordeals: (1) May better be reckoned to fire-ordeals. Theinnocent plunges his hand into boiling water and fetches out a stone(Anglo-Saxon law) or a coin (Indic law) without injury to his hand. Sometimes (in both practices) the plunge alone is demanded. The depthto which the hand must be inserted is defined by Hindu jurists. 

(2) The Floating-ordeal. The victim is cast into water. If he floatshe is guilty; if he drowns he is innocent. According to some Indicauthorities an arrow is shot off at the moment the accused is droppedinto the water, and a 'swift runner' goes after and fetches it back. "If at his return he find the body of the accused still under water, the latter shall be declared to be innocent. "[40] According to Kaegithis ordeal would appear to be unknown in Europe before the ninthcentury. In both countries Water (in India, Varuna) is invoked not tokeep the body of a guilty man but to reject it (make it float). 

Food-ordeal: Some Hindu law-books prescribe that in the case ofsuspected theft the accused shall eat consecrated rice. If the gums benot hurt, no blood appear on spitting, and the man do not tremble, hewill be innocent. This is also a Teutonic test, but it is to beobserved that the older laws in India do not mention it. 

On the basis of these examples (not chosen in historical sequence)Kaegi has concluded, while admitting that ordeals with a generalsimilarity to these have arisen quite apart from Aryan influence, thatthere is here a bit of primitive Aryan law; and that even the minutiaeof the various trials described above are _un_-Aryan. This we donot believe. But before stating our objections we must mention anotherordeal. 

The Oath: While fire and water are the usual means of testing crime inIndia, a simple oath is also permitted, which may involve either theaccused alone or his whole family. If misfortune, within a certaintime (at once, in seven days, in a fortnight, or even half a year)happen to the one that has sworn, he will be guilty. This oath-test isalso employed in the case of witnesses at court, perjury beingindicated by the subsequent misfortune (Manu, viii. 108). [41]

Our objections to seeing primitive Aryan law in the minutiae ofordeals is based on the gradual evolution of these ordeals and oftheir minutiae in India itself. The earlier law of the S[=u]trasbarely mentions ordeals; the first 'tradition law' of Manu has onlyfire, water, and the oath. All others, and all special descriptionsand restrictions, are mentioned in later books alone. Moreover, theearliest (pre-legal) notice of ordeals in India describes the carryingof hot iron (in the test of theft) as simply "bearing a hot axe, "while still earlier there is only walking through fire. [42]

To the tests by oath, fire, and water of the code of Manu are soonadded in later law those of consecrated water, poison, and thebalance. Restrictions increase and new trials are described as onedescends the series of law-books (the consecrated food, the hot-watertest, the licking of the ploughshare, and the lot), Some of theselater forms have already been described. The further later tests wewill now sketch briefly. 

Poison: The earliest poison-test, in the code of Y[=a]jñavalkya (thenext after Manu), is an application of aconite-root, and as the poisonis very deadly, the accused is pretty sure to die. Other laws giveother poisons and very minute restrictions, tending to ease theseverity of the trial. 

The Balance-test: This is the opposite of the floating-test. Theman[43] stands in one scale and is placed in equilibrium with a weightof stone in the other scale. He then gets out and prays, and gets inagain. If the balance sinks, he is guilty; if it rises, he isinnocent. 

The Lot-ordeal: This consists in drawing out of a vessel one of twolots, equivalent respectively to _dharma_ and _adharma_, right andwrong. Although Tacitus mentions the same ordeal among the Germans, itis not early Indic law, not being known to any of the ancient legalcodes. 

One may claim without proof or disproof that these are all 'primitiveAryan'; but to us it appears most probable that only the idea of theordeal, or at most its application in the simplest forms of water andfire (and perhaps oath) is primitive Aryan, and that all else(including ordeal by conflict) is of secondary growth among thedifferent nations. 

As an offset to the later Indic tendency to lighten the severity ofthe ordeal may be mentioned the description of the floating-test asseen by a Chinese traveller in India in the seventh century A. D. :[44]"The accused is put into a sack and a stone is put into another sack. The two sacks are connected by a cord and flung into deep water. Ifthe sack with the man sinks and the sack with the stone floats theaccused is declared to be innocent. "

 * * * * *

 FOOTNOTES:

 [Footnote 1: Literally, transmigration, the doctrine of metempsychosis, successive births; first, as in Plato: [Greek: _metabolê tis tugchanei ousa kai metoikêois tê psuchê ton topon tou enthende eis allon tochon_], then _metabole_, from 'the other place, ' back to earth; then, with advancing speculation, fresh _metabole_ again, and so on; a theory more or less clumsily united with the bell-doctrine. ]

 [Footnote 2: Weber has lately published two monographs on the sacrifices, the R[=a]jas[=u]ya and the V[=a]japeya rites, both full of interesting details and popular features. ]

 [Footnote 3: The traditional sacrifices are twenty-one in number, divided into three classes of seven each. The formal divisions are (1) oblations of butter, milk, corn, etc. ; (2) _soma_ sacrifices; (3) animal sacrifices, regarded as part of the first two. The sacrifice of the new and full moon is to be repeated on each occasion for thirty years. A _sattra_, session, is a long sacrifice which may last a year or more. ]

 [Footnote 4: The latter are the metrical codes, a part of Smriti (sm[r. ]ti). ]

 [Footnote 5: The Five Paramount Sacrifices (Observances) are, according to Manu III. 70, study of the Veda (or teaching it); sacrifice to the Manes and to the gods; offerings of foods to ghosts (or spirits); and hospitality. ]

 [Footnote 6: In the report of the Or. Congress for 1880, p. 158 ff. , Williams has a very interesting account of the daily rites of the modern orthodox Hindu ('_Rig Veda in Religious Service_'). ]

 [Footnote 7: We ignore here the later distinction between the Ved[=a]nta and S[=a]nkhya systems. Properly speaking, the latter is dualistic. ]

 [Footnote 8: At a later date Buddha himself is admitted into the Brahmanic pantheon as an _avatar_ of the All-god!]

 [Footnote 9: Sometimes regarded as one with Praj[=a]pati, and sometimes treated as distinct from him. ]

 [Footnote 10: Thus (for the priestly ascetic alone) in M. Vi. 79: 'Leaving his good deeds to his loved ones and his evil deeds to his enemies, by force of meditation he goes to the eternal _brahma_. ' Here _brahma_; but in Gautama perhaps Brahm[=a]. ]

 [Footnote 11: That is, when the latter are grouped as in the following list. Our point is that, despite new faith and new gods, Vedic polytheism is taught not as a form but as a reality, and that in this period the people still believe as of old in the old gods, though they also acknowledge new ones (below). ]

 [Footnote 12: Compare Manu, ix. 245: "Varuna is the lord of punishment and holdeth a sceptre (punishment) even over kings. "]

 [Footnote 13: In new rites, for instance. Thus in P[=a]rask. _Grih. S_. 3. 7 a silly and dirty rite 'prevents a slave from running away'; and there is an ordeal for girls before becoming engaged (below). ]

 [Footnote 14: Blood is poured out to the demons in order that they may take this and no other part of the sacrifice, _[=A]it. Br_. Ii. 7. 1. ]

 [Footnote 15: Here. 4. 8. 19, Çiva's names are Hara, Mrida, Çarva, Çiva, Bhava, Mah[=a]deva, Ugra, Bhima, Paçupati, Rudra, Çankara, Içana. ]

 [Footnote 16: These rites are described in 6. 4. 24 of the _Brihad [=A]ranyaka Upanishad_ which consists both of metaphysics and of ceremonial rules. ]

 [Footnote 17: Especially mentioned in the later Vasistha (see below); on _m[=i]m[=a]ms[=a]_ a branch of the Ved[=a]nta system see below. ]

 [Footnote 18: The commentator here (19. 12, cited by Bühler) defines Ved[=a]nta as the part of the [=A]ranyakas which are not Upanishads, that is, apparently as a local 'Veda-end' (_veda-anta_), though this meaning is not admitted by some scholars, who will see in _anta_ only the meaning 'goal, aim. ']

 [Footnote 19: The Rudra (Çiva) invocation at 26. 12 ff. Is interpolated, according to Bühler. ]

 [Footnote 20: Here there is plainly an allusion to the two states of felicity of the Upanishads. Whether the law-giver believes that the spirit will be united with Brahm[=a] or simply live in his heaven he does not say. ]

 [Footnote 21: Gautama, too, is probably a Northerner. The S[=u]tra, it should be observed, are not so individual as would be implied by the name of the teachers to whom they are credited. They were each texts of a school, _carana_, but they are attributed uniformly to a special teacher, who represents the _cara[n. ]a_, as has been shown by Müller. For what is known in regard to the early 'S[=u]tra-makers' see Bühler's introductions to volumes ii. And xiv. Of the Sacred Books. ]

 [Footnote 22: Compare Bühler's Introduction, p. XXXV, SBE. Vol. XIV. ]

 [Footnote 23: B[=a]udh. II. 18. 2-3. Compare Jacobi's Introduction, p. XXIII ff. Of SBE. Vol. XXII. ]

 [Footnote 24: Bühler (Introduction, p. XXXI) gives as the district of the [=A]pastamb[=i]ya school parts of the Bombay Presidency, the greater parts of the Niz[=a]m's possessions, and parts of the Madras Presidency. Apastamba himself refers to Northerners as if they were foreigners (_loc. Cit. )_. ]

 [Footnote 25: In India the latter question is: does the soul immediately at death unite with the _[=a]tm[=a]_ or does it travel to it. In Europe: does the soul wait for the Last Day, or get to heaven immediately? Compare Maine, _Early Law and Custom_, p. 71. ]

 [Footnote 26: Thought by some scholars to have been developed out of the code of The M[=a]navas; but ascribed by the Hindus to Father Manu, as are many other verses of legal character contained in the epic and elsewhere. ]

 [Footnote 27: Although S[=u]tras may be metrical too in part, yet is the complete metrical form, as in the case of still later Ç[=a]stra, evidence that the work is intended for the general public. ]

 [Footnote 28: The priest alone, in the post-Vedic age, has the right to teach the sacred texts; he has immunity from bodily punishment; the right to receive gifts, and other special privileges. The three upper castes have each the right and duty of studying the sacred texts for a number of years. ]

 [Footnote 29: Weber has shown, _loc. Cit_. , that the Ç[=u]dras did attend some of the more popular ceremonies, and at first apparently even took a part in them. ]

 [Footnote 30: The 'four orders' or stadia of a priest's life, student, householder, hermit, ascetic, must not be confused with the 'four (political) orders' (castes), priest, warrior, farmer, slave--to which, from time to time, were added many 'mixed castes, ' as well as 'outcasts, ' and natural pariahs. At the time of Manu's code there were already many of these half-assimilated groups. ]

 [Footnote 31: Theoretically, twenty-one; but an extra one has slipped in by mistake. ]

 [Footnote 32: The girl is given or bought, or may make her own choice among different suitors. Buying a wife is reprehended by the early law-givers (therefore, customary). The rite of marriage presupposes a grown girl, but child-marriages also were known to the early law. ]

 [Footnote 33: The groom 'releases her from Varuna's fetter, ' by symbolically loosening the hair. They step northeast, and he says: 'One step for sap; two for strength; three for riches; four for luck; five for children; six for the seasons; seven for friendship. Be true to me--may we have many long-lived sons. ']

 [Footnote 34: There is another funeral hymn, X. 16, in which the Fire is invoked to burn the dead, and bear him to the fathers; his corporeal parts being distributed 'eye to the sun, breath to the wind, ' etc. ]

 [Footnote 35: See below. ]

 [Footnote 36: Compare Weber, _Streifen_, I. 66; The king's first wife lies with a dead victim, and is bid to come back again to life. Levirate marriage is known to all the codes, but it is reprehended by the same code that enjoins it. (M. Ix. 65. )]

 [Footnote 37: The ordeal is called _divyam_ (_pram[=a][n. ]am_) 'Gottesurtheil. ' This means of information is employed especially in a disputed debt and deposit, and according to the formal code is to be applied only in the absence of witnesses. The code also restricts the use of fire, water, and poison to the slaves (Y[=a]j. Ii. 98). ]

 [Footnote 38: Kaegi. _Alter und Herkunft des Germanischen Gottesurtheils_, p. 50. We call especial attention to the fact that the most striking coincidences in details of practice are not early either in India or Germany. ]

 [Footnote 39: Schlagintweit, _Die Gattesurtheile der Indier_, p. 24. ]

 [Footnote 40: This is the earliest formula. Later law-books describe the length and strength of the bow, and some even give the measure of distance to which the arrow must be shot. Two runners, one to go and one to return, are sometimes allowed. There is another water-ordeal "for religious men. " The accused is to drink consecrated water. If in fourteen (or more or less) days no calamity happen to him he will be innocent. The same test is made in the case of the oath and of poison (below). ]

 [Footnote 41: In the case of witnesses Manu gives seven days as the limit. When one adopts the oath as an ordeal the misfortune of the guilty is supposed to come 'quickly. ' As an ordeal this is not found in the later law. It is one of the Greek tests (_loc. Cit_. ). When swearing the Hindu holds water or holy-grass. ]

 [Footnote 42: AV. Ii. 12 is not a certain case of this, but it is at least Brahmanic. The carrying of the axe is alluded to in the Ch[=a]ndogya Upanishad (Schlagintweit, _Die Gattesurtheile der Indier_, p. 6). ]

 [Footnote 43: Y[=a]jñavalkya (_loc. Cit_. ) restricts this test to women, children, priests, the old, blind, lame, and sick. On _ph[=a]la_ for _agni, ib. _ ii. 99, see ZDMG. Ix. 677. ]

 [Footnote 44: Schlagintweit, _loc. Cit_. P. 26 (Hiouen Thsang). ]

 * * * * *

CHAPTER XII. 

JAINISM. [1]

One cannot read the Upanishads without feeling that he is alreadyfacing an intellectual revolt. Not only in the later tracts, which areinspired with devotion to a supreme and universal Lord, but even inthe oldest of these works the atmosphere, as compared with that of theearlier Brahmanic period, is essentially different. The close andstifling air of ritualism has been charged with an electrical currentof thought that must soon produce a storm. 

That storm reached a head in Buddhism, but its premonitory signsappear in the Upanishads, and its first outbreak preceded the adventof Gautama. Were it possible to draw a line of demarcation between theUpanishads that come before and after Buddhism, it would behistorically more correct to review the two great schisms, Jainism andBuddhism, before referring to the sectarian Upanishads. For theselatter in their present form are posterior to the rise of the twogreat heresies. But, since such a division is practically uncertain inits application, we have thought it better in our sketch of theUpanishads and legal literature to follow to the end the course ofthat agitated thought, which, starting with the great identificationof _jiva_, the individual spirit, and _[=a]tm[=a]_, the world-spirit, the All, continues till it loses itself in a multiplication ofsectarian dogmas, where the All becomes the god that has been electedby one communion of devotees. [2]

The external characteristics of Upanishad thought are those of areligion that has replaced formal acts by formal introspection. TheYogin devotee, who by mystic communion desires absorption into theworld-spirit, replaces the Sanny[=a]sin and Yati ascetics, who wouldaccomplish the same end by renunciation and severe self-mortification. This is a fresh figure on the stage of thought, where before were madMunis, beggars, and miracle-mongers. On this stage stands beside theascetic the theoretical theosophist who has succeeded in identifyinghimself, soberly, not in frenzy, with God. [3] What were the practicalresults of this teaching has been indicated in part already. Thefutility of the stereotyped religious offices was recognized. Butthese offices could not be discarded by the orthodox. With the lameand illogical excuse that they were useful as discipline, thoughunessential in reality, they were retained by the Brahman priest. Notso by the Jain; still less so by the Buddhist. 

In the era in which arose the public revolt against the dogmaticteaching of the Brahman there were more sects than one that have nowpassed away forgotten. The eastern part of India, to which appertainthe later part of the Çatapatha Br[=a]hmana and the schismaticheresies, was full of religious and philosophical controversy. Thegreat heretics were not innovators in heresy. The Brahmans permitted, encouraged, and shared in theoretical controversy. There was nothingin the tenets of Jainism or of Buddhism that from a philosophicalpoint of view need have caused a rupture with the Brahmans. 

But the heresies, nevertheless, do not represent the priestly caste, so much as the caste most apt to rival and to disregard the claim ofthe Brahman, viz. , the warrior-caste. They were supported by kings, who gladly stood against priests. To a great extent both Jainism andBuddhism owed their success (amid other rival heresies with no lessclaim to good protestantism) to the politics of the day. The kings ofthe East were impatient of the Western church; they were pleased tothrow it over. The leaders in the 'reformation' were the younger sonsof noble blood. The church received many of these younger sons aspriests. Both Buddha and Mah[=a]v[=i]ra were, in fact, revoltingadherents of the Brahmanic faith, but they were princes and hadroyalty to back them. 

Nor in the Brahmanhood of Benares was Brahmanhood at its strongest. The seat of the Vedic cult lay to the westward, where it arose, in the'holy land, ' which received the Vedic Aryans after they had crossedout of the Punj[=a]b. With the eastward course of conquest thecharacter of the people and the very orthodoxy of the priests wererelaxed. The country that gave rise to the first heresies was one notconsecrated to the ancient rites. Very slowly had these rites marchedthither, and they were, so to speak, far from their religious base ofsupplies. The West was more conservative than the East. It was thehome of the rites it favored. The East was but a foster-father. Newtribes, new land, new growth, socially and intellectually, --all thesecontributed in the new seat of Brahmanhood to weaken the hold of thepriests upon their speculative and now recalcitrant laity. So beforeBuddha there were heretics and even Buddhas, for the title wasBuddha's only by adoption. But of most of these earlier sects oneknows little. Three or four names of reformers have been handed down;half a dozen opponents or rivals of Buddha existed and viedwith him. Most important of these, both on account of his probablepriority and because of the lasting character of his school, was thefounder or reformer of Jainism, Mah[=a]v[=i]ra Jñ[=a]triputra, [4] whowith his eleven chief disciples may be regarded as the first openseceders from Brahmanism, unless one assign the same date to therevolt of Buddha. The two schisms have so much in common, especiallyin outward features, that for long it was thought that Jainism was asub-sect of Buddhism. In their legends, in the localities in whichthey flourished, and in many minutiae of observances they are alike. Nevertheless, their differences are as great as the resemblancebetween them, and what Jainism at first appeared to have got ofBuddhism seems now to be rather the common loan made by each sect fromBrahmanism. It is safest, perhaps, to rest in the assurance that thetwo heresies were contemporaries of the sixth century B. C, and leaveunanswered the question which Master preceded the other, though weincline to the opinion that the founder of Jainism, be heMah[=a]v[=i]ra or his own reputed master, P[=a]rçvan[=a]tha, hadfounded his sect before Gautama became Buddha. But there is one goodreason for treating of Jainism before Buddhism, [5] and that is, thatthe former represents a theological mean between Brahmanism andBuddhism. 

Mah[=a]v[=i]ra, the reputed founder of his sect, was, like Buddhaand perhaps his other rivals, of aristocratic birth. His father iscalled king, but he was probably hereditary chief of a districtincorporated as a suburb of the capital city of Videha, while bymarriage he was related to the king of Videha, and to the ruling houseof M[=a]gadha. His family name was Jñ[=a]triputra, or, in his ownPrakrit (Ardham[=a]gadh[=i]) dialect, N[=a]taputta; but by his sect hewas entitled the Great Hero, Mah[=a]v[=i]ra; the Conqueror, Jina; theGreat One, Vardham[=a]na (Vardahmana in the original), etc. His sectwas that of the Nirgranthas (Nigganthas), _i. E_. , 'without bonds, 'perhaps the oldest name of the whole body. Later there are found noless than seven sub-sects, to which come as eighth the Digambaras, incontradistinction to all the seven Çvet[=a]mbara sects. These twonames represent the two present bodies of the church, one body beingthe Çvet[=a]mbaras, or 'white-attire' faction, who are in the northand west; the other, the Digambaras, or 'sky-attire, ' _i. E_. , nakeddevotees of the south. The latter split off from the main body abouttwo hundred years after Mah[=a]v[=i]ra's death; as has been thought bysome, because the Çvet[=a]mbaras refused to follow the Digambaras ininsisting upon nakedness as the rule for ascetics. [6] The earlierwritings show that nakedness was recommended, but was notcompulsory. [7] Other designations of the main sects, as of thesub-sects, are found. Thus, from the practice of pulling out the hairsof their body, the Jains were derisively termed Luñcitakeças, or'hair-pluckers. ' The naked devotees of this school are probably thegymnosophists of the Greek historians, although this general term mayhave been used in describing other sects, as the practice ofdispensing with attire is common even to-day with many Hindudevotees. [8]

An account of the Jain absurdities in the way of speculation wouldindeed give some idea of their intellectual frailty, but, as in thecase of the Buddhists, such an account has but little to do with theirreligion. It will suffice to state that the 'ages' of the Brahmansfrom whom Jain and Buddhist derived their general conceptions of theages, are here reckoned quite differently; and that the first Jina ofthe long series of pre-historic prophets lived more than eight millionyears and was five hundred bow-lengths in height. Monks and laymen nowappear at large in India, a division which originated neither withJain nor Buddhist, [9] though these orders are more clearly dividedamong the heretics, from whom, again, was borrowed by the Hindu sects, the monastic institution, in the ninth century (A. D. ), in all theolder heretical completeness. Although atheistic the Jain worshippedthe Teacher, and paid some regard to the Brahmanical divinities, justas he worships the Hindu gods to-day, for the atheistical systemsadmitted gods as demi-gods or dummy gods, and in point of fact becamevery superstitious. Yet are both founder-worship and superstitionrather the growth of later generations than the original practice. Theatheism of the Jain means denial of a divine creative Spirit. [10]

Though at times in conflict with the Brahmans the Jains never departedfrom India as did the Buddhists, and even Brahmanic priests in someparts of India serve today in Jain temples. 

In metaphysics as in religion the Jain differs radically from theBuddhist. He believes in a dualism not unlike that of the S[=a]nkhyas, whereas Buddhistic philosophy has no close connection with thisBrahmanic system. To the Jain eternal matter stands opposed to eternalspirits, for (opposed to pantheism) every material entity (even water)has its own individual spirit. The Jain's Nirv[=a]na, as Barth hassaid, is escape from the body, not escape from existence. [11] Like theBuddhist the Jain believes in reincarnation, eight births, after onehas started on the right road, being necessary to the completion ofperfection. Both sects, with the Brahmans, insist on the non-injurydoctrine, but in this regard the Jain exceeds his Brahmanicalteacher's practice. Both heretical sects claim that their reputedfounders were the last of twenty-four or twenty-five prophets whopreceded the real founder, each successively having become lessmonstrous (more human) in form. 

The Jain literature left to us is quite large[12] and enough has beenpublished already to make it necessary to revise the old belief inregard to the relation between Jainism and Buddhism. 

We have said that Jainism stands nearer to Brahmanism (with which, however, it frequently had quarrels) than does Buddhism. [13] The moststriking outward sign of this is the weight laid on asceticism, whichis common to Brahmanism and Jainism but is repudiated by Buddhism. Twelve years of asceticism are necessary to salvation, as thinks theJain, and this self-mortification is of the most stringent sort. Butit is not in their different conception of a Nirv[=a]na release ratherthan of annihilation, nor in the S[=a]nkhya-like[14] duality theyaffect, nor yet in the prominence given to self-mortification that theJains differ most from the Buddhists. The contrast will appear moreclearly when we come to deal with the latter sect. At present we takeup the Jain doctrine for itself. 

The 'three gems' which, according to the Jains, [15] result in thespirit's attainment of deliverance are knowledge, faith, and virtue, or literally 'right knowledge, right intuition, and right practices. 'Right knowledge is a true knowledge of the relation of spirit andnot-spirit (the world consists of two classes, spirit and non-spirit), the latter being immortal like the former. Right intuition is absolutefaith in the word of the Master and the declarations of the [=A]gamas, or sacred texts. Right practices or virtue consists, according to theYogaç[=a]stra, in the correct fivefold conduct of one that hasknowledge and faith: (1) Non-injury, (2) kindness and speaking whichis true (in so far as the truth is pleasant to the hearer), [16] (3)honorable conduct, typified by 'not stealing, ' (4) chastity in word, thought, and deed, (5) renunciation of earthly interests. 

The doctrine of non-injury found but modified approval among theBrahmans. They limited its application in the case ofsacrifice, and for this reason were bitterly taunted by the Jains as'murderers. ' "Viler than unbelievers, " says the Yogaç[=a]stra, quotinga law of Manu to the effect that animals may be slain for sacrifice, "all those cruel ones who make the law that teaches killing. "[17] Forthis reason the Jain is far more particular in his respect for lifethan is the Buddhist. Lest animate things, even plants andanimalculae, be destroyed, he sweeps the ground before him as he goes, walks veiled lest he inhale a living organism, strains water, andrejects not only meat but even honey, together with various fruitsthat are supposed to contain worms; not because of his distaste forworms but because of his regard for life. Other arguments which, logically, should not be allowed to influence him are admitted, however, in order to terrify the hearer. Thus the first argumentagainst the use of honey is that it destroys life; then follows theargument that honey is 'spit out by bees' and therefore it isnasty. [18]

The Jain differs from the Buddhist still more in ascetic practices. Heis a forerunner, in fact, of the horrible modern devotee whosepractices we shall describe below. The older view of seven hells inopposition to the legal Brahmanic number of thrice seven is found (asit is in the M[=a]rkandeya Pur[=a]na), but whether this be the rule wecannot say. [19] It is interesting to see that hell is prescribed withmetempsychosis exactly as it is among the Brahmans. [20] Reincarnationonearth and punishment in hells between reincarnation seems to be theusual belief. The salvation which is attained by the practice ofknowledge, faith, and five-fold virtue, is not immediate, but it willcome after successive reincarnations; and this salvation is thefreeing of the eternal spirit from the bonds of eternal matter; inother words, it is much more like the 'release' of the Brahman than itis like the Buddhistic Nirv[=a]na, though, of course, there is no'absorption, ' each spirit remaining single. In the order of theRatnatraya or 'three gems' Çankara appears to lay the greatest weighton faith, but in Hemacandra's schedule knowledge[21] holds the firstplace. This is part of that Yoga, asceticism, which is the mostimportant element in attaining salvation. [22]

Another division of right practices is cited by the Yogaç[=a]stra (I. 33 ff. ): Some saints say that virtue is divided into five kinds ofcare and three kinds of control, to wit, proper care in walking, talking, begging for food, sitting, and performing natural functionsof the body--these constitute the five kinds of care, and the kinds ofcontrol are those of thought, speech, and act. This teaching it isstated, is for the monks. The practice of the laity is to accord withthe custom of their country. 

The chief general rules for the laity consist in vows of obedience tothe true god, to the law, and to the (present) Teacher; which aresomewhat like the vows of the Buddhist. God here is the Arhat, the'venerable' founder of the sect. The laic has also five lesser vows:not to kill, not to lie, not to steal, not to commit adultery orfornication, to be content with little. 

According to the Ç[=a]stra already cited the laic must rise early inthe morning, worship the god's idol at home, go to the temple andcircumambulate the Jina idol three times, strewing flowers, andsinging hymnsand then read the Praty[=a]khy[=a]na (an old P[=u]rva, gospel). [23] Further rules of prayer and practice guide him throughhis day. And by following this rule he expects to obtain spiritual'freedom' hereafter; but for his life on earth he is "without praiseor blame for this world or the next, for life or for death, havingmeditation as his one pure wife" (iii. 150). He will become a god inheaven, be reborn again on earth, and so, after eight successiveexistences (the Buddhistic number), at last obtain salvation, release(from bodies) for his eternal soul (153). 

As in the Upanishads, the gods, like men, are a part of the system ofthe universe. The wise man goes to them (becomes a god) only to returnto earth again. All systems thus unite hell and heaven with the_karma_ doctrine. But in this Jain work, as in so many of the orthodoxwritings, the weight is laid more on hell as a punishment than onrebirth. Probably the first Jains did not acknowledge gods at all, forit is an early rule with them not to say 'God rains, ' or use any suchexpression, but to say 'the cloud rains'; and in other ways they avoidto employ a terminology which admits even implicitly the existence ofdivinities. Yet do they use a god not infrequently as an agent ofglorification of Mah[=a]v[=i]ra, saying in later writings that Indratransformed himself, to do the Teacher honor; and often they speak ofthe gods and goddesses as if these were regarded as spirits. Demonsand inferior beings are also utilized in the same way, as when it issaid that at the Teacher's birth the demons (spirits) showered goldupon the town. 

The religious orders of the Çvet[=a]mbara sect contained nuns as wellas monks, although, as we have said, women are not esteemed veryfavorably: "The world is greatly troubled by women. People say thatwomen are vessels of pleasure. But this leads them to pain, todelusion, to death, to hell, to birth as hell-beings or brute-beasts. "Such is the decision in the [=A]e[=a]r[=a]nga S[=u]tra, or book ofusages for the Jain monk and nun. From the same work we extract a fewrules to illustrate the practices of the Jains. This literature is themost tedious in the world, and to give the gist of the hereticlaw-maker's manual will suffice. 

Asceticism should be practiced by monk and nun, if possible. But ifone finds that he cannot resist his passions, or is disabled andcannot endure austerities, he may commit suicide; although thisrelease is sometimes reprehended, and is not allowable till one hasstriven against yielding to such a means. But when the twelve years ofasceticism are passed one has assurance of reaching Nirv[=a]na, and somay kill himself. Of Nirv[=a]na there is no description. It isrelease, salvation, but it is of such sort that in regard to it'speculation has no place, ' and 'the mind cannot conceive of it'(copied from the Upanishads). In other regards, in contrast to thenihilistic Buddhist, the Jain assumes a doubtful attitude, so that heis termed the 'may-be philosopher, ' _sy[=a]dv[=a]din_, [24] inopposition to the Buddhist, the philosopher of 'the void. '

But if the Jain may kill himself, he may not kill or injure anythingelse. Not even food prepared over a fire is acceptable, lest he hurtthe 'fire-beings, ' for as he believes in water-beings, so he believesin fire-beings, wind-beings, etc. Every plant and seed is holy withthe sacredness of life. He may not hurt or drive away the insects thattorment his naked flesh. 'Patience is the highest good, ' he declares, and the rules for sitting and lying conclude with the statement thatnot to move at all, not to stir, is the best rule. To lie naked, bitten by vermin, and not to disturb them, is religion. Like a truePuritan, the Jain regards pleasure in itself as sinful. "What isdiscontent, and what is pleasure? One should live subject to neither. Giving up all gaiety, circumspect, restrained, one should lead areligious life. Man! Thou art thine own friend; why longest thou for afriend beyond thyself?. . . First troubles, then pleasures; firstpleasures, then troubles. These are the cause of quarrels. " And again, "Let one think, 'I am I. '" _i. E_. , let one be dependent on himselfalone. When a Jain monk or nun hears that there is to be a festival(perhaps to the gods, to Indra, Skahda, Rudra, Vishnu, [25] or thedemons, as in [=A]c[=a]r[=a]nga S[=u]tra, ii. 1. 2) he must not gothither; he must keep himself from all frivolities and entertainments. During the four months of the rainy season he is to remain in oneplace, [26] but at other times, either naked or attired in a fewgarments, he is to wander about begging. In going on his begging tourhe is not to answer questions, nor to retort if reviled. He is tospeak politely (the formulae for polite address and rude address aregiven), beg modestly, and not render himself liable to suspicion onaccount of his behavior when in the house of one of the faithful. Whatever be the quality of the food he must eat it, if it be not awrong sort. Rice and beans are especially recommended to him. Thegreat Teacher Jñ[=a]triputra (Mah[=a]v[=i]ra), it is said, never wentto shows, pantomines, boxing-matches, and the like; but, remaining inhis parents' house till their death, that he might not grieve hismother, at the age of twenty-eight renounced the world with theconsent of the government, and betook himself to asceticism;travelling naked (after a year of clothes) into barbarous lands, butalways converting and enduring the reproach of the wicked. He wasbeaten and set upon by sinful men, yet was he never moved to anger. Thus it was that he became the Arhat, the Jina, the Kevalin (perfectsage). [27] It is sad to have to add, however, that Mah[=a]v[=i]ra istraditionally said to have died in a fit of apoplectic rage. 

The equipment of a monk are his clothes (or, better, none), hisalms-bowl, broom, and veil. He is 'unfettered, ' in being withoutdesires and without injury to others. 'Some say that all sorts ofliving beings may be slain, or abused, or tormented, or drivenaway--the doctrine of the unworthy. The righteous man does not killnor cause others to kill. He should not cause the same punishment forhimself. '

The last clause is significant. What he does to another living beingwill be done to him. He will suffer as he has caused others to suffer. The chain from emotion to hell--the avoidance of the former is onaccount of the fear of the latter--is thus connected: He who knowswrath knows pride; he who knows pride knows deceit; he who knowsdeceit knows greed (and so on; thus one advances) from greed to love, from love to hate, from hate to delusion, from delusion to conception, from conception to birth, from birth to death, from death to hell, from hell to animal existence, 'and he who knows animal existenceknows pain. '

The five great vows, which have been thought by some scholars to becopies of the Buddhistic rules, whereas they are really modificationsof the old Brahmanic rules for ascetics as explained in pre-Buddhisticliterature, are in detail as follows:[28]

The First vow: I renounce all killing of living beings, whethersubtile or gross, whether movable or immovable. Nor shall I myselfkill living beings nor cause others to do it, nor consent to it. Aslong as I live I confess and blame, repent and exempt myself of thesesins in the thrice threefold way, [29] in mind, speech, and body. 

The five 'clauses' that explain this vow are: (1) the Niggantha (Jain)is careful in walking; (2) he does not allow his mind to act in a wayto suggest injury of living beings; (3) he does not allow his speechto incite to injury; (4) he is careful in laying down his utensils;(5) he inspects his food and drink lest he hurt living beings. 

The Second Vow: I renounce all vices of lying speech arising fromanger, or greed, or fear, or mirth. I confess (etc, as in the firstvow). 

The five clauses here explain that the Niggantha speaks only afterdeliberation; does not get angry; renounces greed; renounces fear;renounces mirth--lest through any of these he be moved to lie. 

The Third Vow: I renounce all taking of anything not given, either ina village, or a town, or a wood, either of little or much, or small orgreat, of living or lifeless things. I shall neither take myself whatis not given nor cause others to take it, nor consent to their takingit. As long as I live I confess (etc. , as in the first vow). 

The clauses here explain that the Niggantha must avoid differentpossibilities of stealing, such as taking food without permission ofhis superior. One clause states that he may take only a limited groundfor a limited time, _i. E_. , he may not settle down indefinitely on awide area, for he may not hold land absolutely. Another clause insistson his having his grant to the land renewed frequently. 

The Fourth Vow: I renounce all sexual pleasures, either with gods, ormen, or animals. I shall not give way to sensuality (etc). 

The clauses here forbid the Niggantha to discuss topics relating towomen, to contemplate the forms of women, to recall the pleasures andamusements he used to have with women, to eat and drink too highlyseasoned viands, to lie near women. 

The Fifth Vow: I renounce all attachments, whether little or much, small or great, living or lifeless; neither shall I myself form suchattachments, nor cause others to do so, nor consent to their doing so(etc. ). 

The five clauses particularize the dangerous attachments formed byears, eyes, smell, taste, touch. 

It has been shown above (following Jacobi's telling comparison of theheretical vows with those of the early Brahman ascetic) that thesevows are taken not from Buddhism but from Brahmanism. Jacobi opinesthat the Jains took the four first and that the reformerMah[=a]v[=i]ra added the fifth as an offset to the Brahmanical vow ofliberality. [30] The same writer shows that certain minor rules of theJain sect are derived from the same Brahmanical source. 

The main differences between the two Jain sects have been cataloguedin an interesting sketch by Williams, [31] who mentions as the chiefJain stations of the north Delhi (where there is an annual gathering), Jeypur, and [=A]jm[=i]r. To these Mathur[=a] on the Jumna should beadded. [32] The Çvet[=a]mbaras had forty-five or forty-six [=A]gamas, eleven or twelve Angas, twelve Up[=a]ngas, and other scriptures of thethird or fourth century B. C. , as they claim. They do not go naked(even their idols are clothed), and they admit women into the order. The Digambaras do not admit women, go naked, and have for sacred textslater works of the fifth century A. D. The latter of course assert thatthe scriptures of the former sect are spurious. [33]

In distinction from the Buddhists the Jains of to-day keep up caste. Some of them are Brahmans. They have, of course, a differentprayer-formula, and have no St[=u]pas or D[=a]gobas (to hold relics);and, besides the metaphysical difference spoken of above, they differfrom the Buddhists in assuming that metempsychosis does not stop atanimal existence, but includes inanimate things (as these are regardedby others). According to one of their own sect of to-day, _ahi[. M]s[=a] paramo dharmas_, 'the highest law of duty is not to hurta living creature. '[34]

The most striking absurdity of the Jain reverence for life hasfrequently been commented upon. Almost every city of western India, where they are found, has its beast-hospital, where animals are keptand fed. An amusing account of such an hospital, called Pi[=n]jra Pol, at Saurar[=a]shtra, Surat, is given in the first number of the_Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society_. [35] Five thousand rats weresupported in such a temple-hospital in Kutch. [36]

Of all the great religious sects of India that of N[=a]taputta isperhaps the least interesting, and has apparently the least excuse forbeing. [37] The Jains offered to the world but one great moral truth, withal a negative truth, 'not to harm, ' nor was this verity inventedby them. Indeed, what to the Jain is the great truth is only agrotesque exaggeration of what other sects recognized in a reasonableform. Of all the sects the Jains are the most colorless, the mostinsipid. They have no literature worthy of the name. They were notoriginal enough to give up many orthodox features, so that they seemlike a weakened rill of Brahmanism, cut off from the source, yetdevoid of all independent character. A religion in which the chiefpoints insisted upon are that one should deny God, worship man, andnourish vermin, has indeed no right to exist; nor has it had as asystem much influence on the history of thought. As in the case ofBuddhism, the refined Jain metaphysics are probably a late growth. Historically these sectaries served a purpose as early protestantsagainst ritualistic and polytheistic Brahmanism; but their realaffinity with the latter faith is so great that at heart they soonbecame Brahmanic again. Their position geographically would make itseem probable that they, and not the Buddhists, had a hand in themaking of the ethics of the later epic. 

 * * * * *

 FOOTNOTES:

 [Footnote 1: We retain here and in Buddhism the usual terminology. Strictly speaking, Jainism is to Jina (the reformer's title) as is Bauddhism to Buddha, so that one should say Jinism, Buddhism, or Jainism, Bauddhism. Both titles, Jina and Buddha ('victor' and 'awakened'), were given to each leader; as in general many other mutual titles of honor were applied by each sect to its own head, Jina, Arhat ('venerable'), Mah[=a]v[=i]ra ('great hero'), Buddha, etc. One of these titles was used, however, as a title of honor by the Jains, but to designate heretics by the Buddhists, viz. , T[=i]rthankara (T[=i]rthakara in the original), 'prophet' (see Jacobi, SBE. Xxii. Introd. P. Xx). ]

 [Footnote 2: It is possible, however, on the other hand, that both Vishnuite and Çivaite sects (or, less anglicized, Vaishnavas, Çaivas, if one will also say Vaidic for Vedic), were formed before the end of the sixth century B. C. Not long after this the divinities Çiva and Vishnu receive especial honor. ]

 [Footnote 3: The Beggar (Çramana, Bhikshu), the Renunciator (Sanny[=a]s[=i]n), the Ascetic (Yati), are Brahmanic terms as well as sectarian. ]

 [Footnote 4: The three great reformers of this period are Mah[=a]v[=i]ra, Buddha, and Gos[=a]la. The last was first a pupil and then a rival of Mah[=a]v[=i]ra. The latter's nephew, Jam[=a]li, also founded a distinct sect and became his uncle's opponent, the speculative sectarian tendency being as pronounced as it was about the same time in Hellas. Gos[=a]la appears to have had quite a following, and his sect existed for a long time, but now it is utterly perished. An account of this reformer and of Jam[=a]li will be found in Leumann's essay, _Indische Studien_, xvii. P. 98 ff. And in the appendix to Rockhill's _Life of Buddha_. ]

 [Footnote 5: The Nirgranthas (Jains) are never referred to by the Buddhists as being a new sect, nor is their reputed founder, N[=a]taputta, spoken of as their founder; whence Jacobi plausibly argues that their real founder was older than Mah[=a]v[=i]ra, and that the sect preceded that of Buddha. Lassen and Weber have claimed, on the contrary, that Jainism is a revolt against Buddhism. The identification of N[=a]taputta (Jñ[=a]triputra) with Mah[=a]v[=i]ra is due to Bühler and Jacobi (Kalpas[=u]tra, Introd. P. 6). ]

 [Footnote 6: According to Jacobi, ZDMG. Xxxviii. 17, the split in the party arose in this way. About 350 B. C. Some Jain monks under the leadership of Bhadrab[=a]hu went south, and they followed stricter rules of asceticism than did their fellows in the north. Both sects are modifications of the original type, and their differences did not result in sectarian separation till about the time of our era, at which epoch arose the differentiating titles of sects that had not previously separated into formal divisions, but had drifted apart geographically. ]

 [Footnote 7: Compare Jacobi, _loc. Cit_. And Leumann's account of the seven sects of the Çvet[=a]mbaras in the essay in the _Indische Studien_ referred to above. At the present day the Jains are found to the number of about a million in the northwest (Çvet[=a]mbaras), and south (Digambaras) of India. The original seat of the whole body in its first form was, as we have said, near Benares, where also arose and flourished Buddhism. ]

 [Footnote 8: Hemacandra's Yogaç[=a]stra, edited by Windisch, ZDMG. Xxviii. 185 ff. (iii. 133). The Jain's hate of women did not prevent his worshipping goddesses as the female energy like the later Hindu sects. The Jains are divided in regard to the possibility of woman's salvation. The Yogaç[=a]stra alludes to women as 'the lamps that burn on the road that leads to the gate of hell, ' ii. 87. The Digambaras do not admit women into the order, as do the Çvet[=a]mbaras. ]

 [Footnote 9: _Die Bharata-sage_, Leumann, ZDMG. Xlviii. P. 65. See also above in the S[=u]tras. With the Jains there is less of the monastic side of religion than with the Buddhists. ]

 [Footnote 10: Jains are sometimes called Arhats on account of their veneration for the Arhat or chief Jina (whence Jain). Their only real gods are their chiefs or Teachers, whose idols are worshipped in the temples. Thus, like the Buddhist and some Hindu sects of modern times, they have given up God to worship man. Rather have they adopted an idolatry of man and worship of womanhood, for they also revere the female energy. Positivism has ancient models!]

 [Footnote 11: The Jain sub-sects did not differ much among themselves in philosophical speculation. Their differences were rather of a practical sort. ]

 [Footnote 12: See the list of the Bertin MSS. ; Weber, _Berlin MSS_. Vol. Ii. 1892; and the thirty-third volume of the German Oriental Journal, pp. 178, 693. For an account of the literature see also Jacobi's introduction to the SBE. Vol. Xxii; and Weber, _Ueber die heiligen Schriften der Jaina_ in vols. Xvi, xvii of the _Indische Studien_ (translated by Smyth in the Indian Antiquary); and the Bibliography (below). ]

 [Footnote 13: A case of connection in legends between Buddhist and Jain is mentioned below. Another is the history of king Paêsi, elaborated in Buddhistic literature (Tripitaka) and in the second Jain Up[=a]nga alike, as has been shown by Leumann. ]

 [Footnote 14: The Jain's spirit, however, is not a world-spirit. He does not believe in an All-Spirit, but in a plurality of eternal spirits, fire-spirits, wind-spirits, plant-spirits, etc. ]

 [Footnote 15: Compare Colebrooke's _Essays_, vol. II. Pp. 404, 444, and the Yogaç[=a]stra cited above. ]

 [Footnote 16: This is not in the earlier form of the vow (see below). ]

 [Footnote 17: II. 37 and 41. Although the Brahman ascetic took the vow not to kill, yet is he permitted to do so for sacrifice, and he may eat flesh of animals killed by other animals (Gautama, 3. 31). ]

 [Footnote 18: _Loc. Cit_. III. 37-38. The evening and night are not times to eat, and for the same reason "The Gods eat in the morning, the Seers at noon, the Fathers in the afternoon, the devils at twilight and night" (_ib_. 58). For at night one might eat a a living thing by mistake. ]

 [Footnote 19: _Loc. Cit_. II. 27. ]

 [Footnote 20: The pun _m[=a][. M]sa, "Me eat_ will be hereafter whose _meat_ I eat in this life" (Lanman), shows that Jain and Brahman believed in a hell where the injured avenged themselves (Manu, V. 55; HYÇ. III. 26), just as is related in the Bhrigu story (above). ]

 [Footnote 21: By intuition or instruction. ]

 [Footnote 22: _Loc. Cit_. I. 15 ff. ]

 [Footnote 23: _Loc. Cit_. 121 ff. Wilson, _Essays_, I. 319, gives a description of the simple Jain ritual. ]

 [Footnote 24: Who says "may be. "]

 [Footnote 25: Mukunda. ]

 [Footnote 26: This 'keeping _vasso_' is also a Brahmanic custom, as Bühler has pointed out. But it is said somewhere that at that season the roads are impossible, so that there is not so much a conscious copying as a physical necessity in keeping _vasso_; perhaps also a moral touch, owing to the increase of life and danger of killing. ]

 [Footnote 27: In the lives of the Jinas it is said that Jñ[=a]triputra's (N[=a]taputta's) parents worshipped the 'people's favorite, ' P[=a]rçva, and were followers of the Çramanas (ascetics). In the same work (which contains nothing further for our purpose) it is said that Arhats, Cakravarts, Baladevas, and Vasudevas, present, past, and future, are aristocrats, born in noble families. The heresies and sectaries certainly claim as much. ]

 [Footnote 28: [=A]c[=a]r[=a]nga S. Ii. 15. We give Jacobi's translation, as in the verses already cited from this work. ]

 [Footnote 29: Acting, commanding, consenting, past, present, or future (Jacobi). ]

 [Footnote 30: SBE. Xxii. Introd. P. Xxiv. ]

 [Footnote 31: JRAS. Xx. 279. ]

 [Footnote 32: See Bühler, the last volume of the _Epigraphica Indica_, and his other articles in the WZKM. V. 59, 175. Jeypur, according to Williams, is the stronghold of the Digambara Jains. Compare Thomas, JRAS. Ix. 155, _Early Faith of Açoka_. ]

 [Footnote 33: The redaction of the Jain canon took place, according to tradition, in 454 or 467 A. D. (possibly 527). "The origin of the extant Jaina literature cannot be placed earlier than about 300 B. C. " (Jacobi, Introduction to _Jain S[=u]tras_, pp. Xxxvii, xliii). The present Angas ('divisions') were preceded by P[=u]rvas, of which there are said to have been at first fourteen. On the number of the scriptures see Weber, _loc. Cit_. ]

 [Footnote 34: Williams, _loc. Cit. _ The prayer-formula is: 'Reverence to Arhats, saints, teachers, subteachers, and all good men. ']

 [Footnote 35: 'A place which is appropriated for the reception of old, worn-out, lame, or disabled animals. At that time (1823) they chiefly consisted of buffaloes and cows, but there were also goats and sheep, and even cocks and hens, ' and also 'hosts of vermin. ']

 [Footnote 36: JRAS. 1834, p. 96. The town was taxed to provide the food for the rats. ]

 [Footnote 37: Because the Jains have reverted to idolatry, demonology, and man-worship. But at the outset they appear to have had two great principles, one, that there is no divine power higher than man; the other, that all life is sacred. One of these is now practically given up, and the other was always taken too seriously. ]

 * * * * *

CHAPTER XIII. 

BUDDHISM. 

While the pantheistic believer proceeded to anthropomorphize in astill greater degree the _[=a]tm[=a]_ of his fathers, and eventuallylanded in heretical sectarianism; while the orthodox Brahman simplyadded to his pantheon (in Manu and other law-codes) the Brahmanicfigure of the Creator, Brahm[=a]; the truth-seeker that followed thelines of the earlier philosophical thought arrived at atheism, and inconsequence became either stoic or hedonist. The latter school, theC[=a]rv[=a]kas, the so-called disciples of Brihaspati, have, indeed, aphilosophy without religion. They simply say that the gods do notexist, the priests are hypocrites; the Vedas, humbug; and the onlything worth living for, in view of the fact that there are no gods, noheaven, and no soul, is pleasure: 'While life remains let a man livehappily; let him not go without butter (literally _ghee_) even thoughhe run into debt, ' etc. [1] Of sterner stuff was the man who invented anew religion as a solace for sorrow and a refuge from the nihilism inwhich he believed. 

Whether Jainism or Buddhism be the older heresy, and it is notprobable that any definitive answer to this question will ever begiven, one thing has become clear in the light of recent studies, namely, the fact already shown, that to Brahmanism are due some of themost marked traits of both the heretical sects. The founder ofBuddhism did not strike out a new system of morals; he was not ademocrat; he did not originate a plot to overthrow the Brahmanicpriesthood; he did not invent the order of monks. [2] There is, perhaps, no person in history in regard to whom have arisen so manyopinions that are either wholly false or half false. [3]

We shall not canvass in detail views that would be mentioned only tobe rejected. Even the brilliant study of Senart, [4] in which thefigure of Buddha is resolved into a solar type and the history of thereformer becomes a sun-myth, deserves only to be mentioned and laidaside. Since the publication of the canonical books of the southernBuddhists there is no longer any question in regard to the humanreality of the great knight who illumined, albeit with anything butheavenly light, the darkness of Brahmanical belief. Oldenberg[5] hastaken Senart seriously, and seriously answered him. But Napoleon andMax Müller have each been treated as sun-myths, and Senart's essay isas convincing as either _jeu d'esprit. _

In Nep[=a]l, far from the site of Vedic culture, and generations afterthe period of the Vedic hymns, was born a son to the noble family ofthe Ç[=a]kyas. A warrior prince, he made at last exclusively his ownthe lofty title that was craved by many of his peers, Buddha, thetruly wise, the 'Awakened. '

The Ç[=a]kyas' land extended along the southern border of Nep[=a]l andthe northeast part of Oude (Oudh), between the Ir[=a]vat[=i] (Rapti)river on the west and south, and the Rohini on the east; the districtwhich lies around the present Gorakhpur, about one hundred milesnorth-northeast of Benares. The personal history of the later Buddhais interwoven with legend from which it is not always easy todisentangle the threads of truth. In the accounts preserved in regardto the Master, one has first to distinguish the P[=a]li records of theSouthern Buddhists from the Sanskrit tales of the Northerners; andagain, it is necessary to discriminate between the earlier andlater traditions of the Southerners, who have kept in general theolder history as compared with the extravagant tradition preserved inthe Lalita Vistara, the Lotus of the Law, and the other works of theNorth. What little seems to be authentic history is easily told; norare, for our present purpose, of much value the legends, whichmangonize the life of Buddha. They will be found in every book thattreats of the subject, and some of the more famous are translated inthe article on Buddha in the Encyclopĉdia Brittanica. We contentourselves with the simplest and oldest account, giving such facts ashelp to explain the religious significance of Buddha's life and workamong his countrymen. Several of these facts, Buddha's place insociety, and the geographical centre of Buddhistic activity, areessential to a true understanding of the relations between Buddhismand Brahmanism. 

Whether Buddha's father was king or no has rightly been questioned. The oldest texts do not refer to him as a king's son, and thisindicates that his father, who governed the Ç[=a]kya-land, of whichthe limits have just been specified, [6] was rather a feudal baron orhead of a small clan, than an actual king. The Ç[=a]kya power wasoverthrown and absorbed into that of the king of Oude (Kosala) eitherin Buddha's own life-time or immediately afterwards. It is only thenewer tradition that extols the power and wealth which the Master gaveup on renouncing worldly ties, a trait characteristic of all the lateraccounts, on the principle that the greater was the sacrifice thegreater was the glory. Whether kings or mere chieftains, the Ç[=a]kyaswere noted as a family that cared little to honor the Brahmanicpriests. They themselves claimed descent from Ikshv[=a]ku, the ancientseer-king, son of Manu, and traditionally first king of Ayodh[=a](Oude). They assumed the name of Gautama, one of the Vedic seers, andit was by the name of 'the Ascetic Gautama' that Buddha was known tohis contemporaries; but his personal name was Siddh[=a]rtha 'he thatsucceeds in his aim, ' prophetic of his life! His mother's nameM[=a]y[=a] (illusion) has furnished Senart with material for hissun-theory of Buddha; but the same name is handed down as that of acity, and perhaps means in this sense 'the wonderful. ' She is said tohave died when her son was still a boy. The boy Siddh[=a]rtha, then, was a warrior _r[=a]jput_ by birth, and possibly had a veryindifferent training in Vedic literature, since he is never spoken ofas Veda-wise. [7] The future Buddha was twenty-nine when he resolved torenounce the world. He was already married and had a son (R[=a]hula, according to later tradition). The legends of later growth here beginto thicken, telling how, when the future Buddha heard of the birth ofhis son, he simply said 'a new bond has been forged to hold me to theworld'; and how his mind was first awakened to appreciation of sorrowby seeing loathy examples of age, sickness, and death presented to himas he drove abroad. Despite his father's tears and protestsSiddh[=a]rtha, or as one may call him now by his patronymic, the manGautama, left his home and family, gave up all possessions, anddevoted himself to self-mortification and Yoga discipline ofconcentration of thought, following in this the model set by allprevious ascetics. He says himself, according to tradition, that itwas a practical pessimism which drove him to take this step. He wasnot pleased with life, and the pleasures of society had no charm forhim. When he saw the old man, the sick man, the dead man, he becamedisgusted to think that he too would be subject to age, sickness, anddeath: "I felt disgust at old age; all pleasure then forsook me. " Inbecoming an ascetic Gautama simply endeavored to discover some meansby which he might avoid a recurrence of life, of which thedisagreeable side in his estimation outweighed the joy. He too hadalready answered negatively the question Is life worth living?

We must pause here to point out that this oldest and simplest accountof Gautama's resolve shows two things. It makes clear that Gautama atfirst had no plan for the universal salvation of his race. He wasalert to 'save his own soul, ' nothing more. We shall show presentlythat this is confirmed by subsequent events in his career. The nextpoint is that this narration in itself is a complete refutation of theopinion of those scholars who believe that the doctrine of _karma_ andreincarnation arose first in Buddhism, and that the Upanishads thatpreach this doctrine are not of the pre-Buddhistic period. The lastpart of this statement of opinion is, of course, not touched by thestory of Gautama's renunciation, but the first assumption wrecks onit. Why should Gautama have so given himself to Yoga discipline? Didhe expect to escape age, sickness, death, in this life by that means?No. The assumption from the beginning is the belief in the doctrine ofreincarnation. It was in order to free himself from future returns ofthese ills that Gautama renounced his home. But nothing whatever issaid of his discovering or inventing the doctrine of reincarnation. Both hell and _karma_ are taken for granted throughout the whole earlyBuddhistic literature. Buddha discovered neither of them, any morethan he discovered a new system of morality, or a new system ofreligious life; although more credit accrues to him in regard to thelast because his order was opposed to that then prevalent; yet evenhere he had antique authority for his discipline. 

To return to Gautama's[8] life. Legend tells how he fled away on hishorse Kanthaka, in search of solitude and the means of salvation, farfrom his home to the abode of ascetics, for he thought: "Whence comespeace? When the fire of desire is extinguished, when the fire of hateis extinguished, when the fire of illusion is extinguished, when allsins and all sorrows are extinguished, then comes peace. " And the onlymeans to this end was the renunciation of desire, the discipline ofYoga concentration, where the mind fixed on one point loses all elsefrom its horizon, and feels no drawing aside to worldly things. 

What then has Gautama done from the point of view of the Brahman? Hehas given up his home to become an ascetic. But this was permitted byusage, for, although the strict western code allowed it only to thepriest, yet it was customary among the other twice-born castes at anearlier day, and in this part of India it awakened no surprise thatone of the military caste should take up the life of a philosopher. For the historian of Indic religions this fact is of greatsignificance, since such practice is the entering wedge which was tosplit the castes. One step more and not only the military caste butthe lower, nay the lowest castes, might become ascetics. But, again, all ascetics were looked upon, in that religious society, as equal tothe priests. In fact, where Gautama lived there was rather morerespect paid to the ascetic than to the priest as a member of thecaste. Gautama was most fortunate in his birth and birth-place. Anaristocrat, he became an ascetic in a land where the priests wereparticularly disregarded. He had no public opinion to contend againstwhen later he declared that Brahman birth and Brahman wisdom had novalue. On the contrary, he spoke to glad hearers, who heard repeatedloudly now as a religious truth what often they had said to themselvesdespitefully in private. 

Gautama journeyed as a _muni_, or silent ascetic sage, till afterseven years he abandoned his teachers (for he had become a disciple ofprofessed masters), and discontentedly wandered about in M[=a]gadha(Beh[=a]r), 'the cradle of Buddhism, ' till he came to Uruvel[=a], Bodhi Gay[=a]. [9] Here, having found that concentration of mind, Yoga-discipline, availed nothing, he undertook another method ofasceticism, self-torture. This he practiced for some time. But itsucceeded as poorly as his first plan, and he had nearly starvedhimself to death when it occurred to him that he was no wiser thanbefore. Thereupon he gave up starvation as a means of wisdom and beganto eat. Five other ascetics, who had been much impressed by hisendurance and were quite ready to declare themselves his disciples, now deserted him, thinking that as he had relaxed his discipline hemust be weaker than themselves. But Gautama sat beneath the sacredfig-tree[10] and lo! he became illumined. In a moment he saw the GreatTruths. He was now the Awakened. He became Buddha. 

The later tradition here records how he was tempted of Satan. ForM[=a]ra (Death), 'the Evil One' as he is called by the Buddhists, knowing that Buddha had found the way of salvation, tempted him toenter into Nirv[=a]na at once, lest by converting others Buddha shouldrob M[=a]ra of his power and dominion. This and the legend of stormsattacking him and his being protected by the king of snakes, Mucalinda, is lacking in the earlier tradition. 

Buddha remains under the _bo_-tree fasting, for four times seven days, or seven times seven, as says the later report. At first he resolvesto be a 'Buddha for himself. '[11] that is to save only himself, not tobe 'the universal Buddha, ' who converts and saves the world. But theGod Brahm[=a] comes down from heaven and persuades him out of pity forthe world to preach salvation. In this legend stands out clearly thesame fact we have animadverted upon already. Buddha had at first nointention of helping his fellows. He found his own road to salvation. That sufficed. But eventually he was moved through pity for his kindto give others the same knowledge with which he had beenenlightened. [12]

Here is to be noticed with what suddenness Gautama becomes Buddha. Itis an early case of the same absence of study or intellectualpreparation for belief that is rampant in the idea of icticconversion. In a moment Gautama's eyes are opened. In ecstacy hebecomes illuminated with the light of knowledge. This idea is totallyforeign to Brahmanism. It is not so strange at an earlier stage, forthe Vedic poet often 'sees' his hymn, [13] that is, he is inspired orillumined. But no Brahman priest was ever 'enlightened' with suddenwisdom, for his knowledge was his wisdom, and this consisted inlearning interminable trifles. But the wisdom of Buddha was this:

 I. Birth is sorrow, age is sorrow, sickness is sorrow, death is sorrow, clinging to earthly things is sorrow. 

 II. Birth and re-birth, the chain of reincarnations, result from the thirst for life together with passion and desire. 

 III. The only escape from this thirst is the annihilation of desire. 

 IV. The only way of escape from this thirst is by following the Eightfold Path: Right belief, right resolve, right word, right act, right life, right effort, right thinking, right meditation. [14]

But Buddha is said to have seen more than these, the Four GreatTruths, and the Eightfold Path, for he was enlightened at the sametime (after several days of fasting) in regard to the whole chain ofcausality which is elaborated in the later tradition. 

The general result of this teaching may be formulated thus, that mostpeople are foolishly optimistic and that the great awakening is tobecome a pessimist. One must believe not only that pain is inseparablefrom existence, but that the pleasures of life are only a part of itspain. When one has got so far along the path of knowledge he traversesthe next stage and gets rid of desire, which is the root oflife, --this is a Vedic utterance, --till by casting off desire, ignorance, doubt, and heresy, as add some of the texts, [15] one hasremoved far away all unkindness and vexation of soul, feelinggood-will to all. 

Not only in this scheme but also in other less formal declarations ofBuddha does one find the key-note of that which makes his method ofsalvation different alike to that of Jain or Brahman. Knowledge iswisdom to the Brahman; asceticism is wisdom to the Jain; purity andlove is the first wisdom to the Buddhist. We do not mean that theBrahman does not reach theoretically a plane that puts him on the samelevel with Buddhism. We have pointed out above a passage in the workof the old law-giver Gautama which might almost have beenuttered by Gautama Buddha: "He that has performed all the fortysacraments and has not the eight good qualities enters not into unionwith Brahm[=a] nor into the heaven of Brahm[=a]; but he that hasperformed only a part of the forty sacraments and has the eight goodqualities, enters into union with Brahm[=a] and into the heaven ofBrahm[=a]"; and these eight good qualities are mercy, forbearance, freedom from envy, purity, calmness, correct behavior, freedom fromgreed and from covetousness. Nevertheless with the Brahman this isadventitious, with the Buddhist it is essential. 

These Four Great Truths are given to the world first at Benares, whither Buddha went in order to preach to the five ascetics that haddeserted him. His conversation with them shows us another side ofBuddhistic ethics. The five monks, when they saw Buddha approaching, jeered, and said: "Here is the one that failed in his austerities. "Buddha tells them to acknowledge him as their master, and that he isthe Enlightened One. "How, " they ask, "if you could not succeed inbecoming a Buddha by asceticism, can we suppose that you become one byindulgence?" Buddha tells them that neither voluptuousness norasceticism is the road that leads to Nirv[=a]na; that he, Buddha, hasfound the middle path between the two extremes, the note is struckthat is neither too high nor too low. The five monks are convertedwhen they hear the Four Great Truths and the Eightfold Path, and thereare now six holy ones on earth, Buddha and his five disciples. 

Significant also is the social status of Buddha's first conversion. Itis 'the rich youth' of Benares that flock about him, [16] of whom sixtysoon are counted, and these are sent out into all the lands to preachthe gospel, each to speak in his own tongue, for religion was fromthis time on no longer to be hid behind the veil of an unintelligiblelanguage. And it is not only the aristocracy of wealth that attachesitself to the new teacher and embraces his doctrines with enthusiasm. The next converts are a thousand Brahman priests, who constituted areligious body under the leadership of three ascetic Brahmans. It isdescribed in the old writings how these priests were still performingtheir Vedic rites when Buddha came again to Bodhi Gay[=a] and foundthem there. They were overcome with astonishment as they saw his powerover the King of Snakes that lived among them. The gods--for Buddhism, if not Buddha, has much to do with the gods--descend from heaven tohear him, and other marvels take place. The Brahmans are allconverted. The miracles and the numbers may be stripped off, but thusdenuded the truth still remains as important as it is plain. Priestsof Brahman caste were among the first to adopt Buddhism. The populareffect of the teaching must have been great, for one reads how, whenBuddha, after this great conversion, begins his victorious wanderingsin Beh[=a]r (M[=a]gadha), he converted so many of the young noblesthat--since conversion led to the immediate result ofrenunciation--the people murmured, saying that Gautama (Gotama) wasrobbing them of their youth. [17]

From this time on Buddha's life was spent in wandering about andpreaching the new creed mainly to the people of Beh[=a]r and Oude(K[=a]çi-Kosala, the realm of Benares-Oude), his course extending fromthe (Ir[=a]vati) Rapti river in the north to R[=a]jagriha (_gaha, _ nowRajgir) south of Beh[=a]r, while he spent the _vasso_ or rainy seasonin one of the parks, many of which were donated to him by wealthymembers of the fraternity. [18]

Wherever he went he was accompanied with a considerable number offollowers, and one reads of pilgrims from distant places coming to seeand converse with him. The number of his followers appears to havebeen somewhat exaggerated by the later writers, since Buddha himself, when prophesying of the next Buddha, the "Buddha of love" (Maitreya)says that, whereas he himself has hundreds of followers, the nextBuddha will lead hundreds of thousands. 

Although, theoretically, all the castes give up their name, and, whenunited in the Buddhistic brotherhood, become "like rivers that give uptheir identity and unite in the one ocean, " yet were most of the earlyrecruits, as has been said, from influential and powerful families;and it is a tenet of Buddhism in regard to the numerous Buddhas, whichhave been born[19] and are still to be born on earth, that no Buddhacan be born in a low caste. 

The reason for this lies as much as anything in the nature of theBuddhistic system which is expressly declared to be "for the wise, notfor the foolish. " It was not a system based as such on love or on anydemocratic sentiment. It was a philosophical exposition of the causalnexus of birth and freedom from re-birth. The common man, untrained inlogic, might adopt the teaching, but he could not understand it. The"Congregation of the son of the Ç[=a]kyas"--such was the earliest namefor the Buddhistic brotherhood--were required only to renounce theirfamily, put on the yellow robe, assume the tonsure and other outwardsigns, and be chaste and high-minded. But the teachers were instructedin the subtleties of the 'Path, ' and it needed no little training tofollow the leader's thought to its logical conclusion. 

Of Buddha's life, besides the circumstances already narrated little isknown. Of his disciples the best beloved was [=A]nanda, his owncousin, whose brother was the Judas of Buddhism. The latter, Devadattaby name, conspired to kill Buddha in order that he himself might getthe post of honor. But hell opened and swallowed him up. He appears tohave had convictions of Jain tendency, for before his intrigue hepreached against Buddha, and formulated reactionary propositions whichinculcated a stricter asceticism than that taught by the Master. [20]

It has been denied that the early church contained lay members as wellas monks, but Oldenberg appears to have set the matter right (p. 165)in showing that the laity, from the beginning, were a recognized partof the general church. The monk (_bhikshu, bhikku_) was formallyenrolled as a disciple, wore the gown and tonsure, etc. The laybrother, 'reverer' (_up[=a]saka_) was one that assented to thedoctrine and treated the monks kindly. There were, at first, only menin the congregation, for Buddhism took a view as unfavorable to womanas did Jainism. But at his foster-mother's request Buddha finallyadmitted nuns as well as monks into his fold. When [=A]nanda asks howa monk should act in presence of a woman Buddha says 'avoid to look ather'; but if it be necessary to look, 'do not speak to her'; but if itbe necessary to speak, 'then keep wide awake, [=A]nanda. '[21]

Buddha died in the fifth century. Rhys Davids, who puts the date laterthan most scholars, gives, as the time of the great Nirv[=a]na, thesecond decade from the end of the fourth century. On the other hand, Bühler and Müller reckon the year as 477, while Oldenberg says 'about480. '[22] From Buddha's own words, as reported by tradition, he waseighty years old at the time of his death, and if one allots himthirty-six years as his age when he became independent of masters, hisactive life would be one of forty-four years. It was probably lessthan this, however, for some years must be added to the first seven ofascetic practices before he took the field as a preacher. 

The story of Buddha's death is told simply and clearly. He crossed theGanges, where at that time was building the town of Patna(P[=a]taliputta, 'Palibothra'), and prophesied its future greatness(it was the chief city of India for centuries after); then, goingnorth from R[=a]jagriha, in Beh[=a]r, and V[=a]iç[=a]l[=i], heproceeded to a point east of Gorukhpur (Kasia). Tradition thus makeshim wander over the most familiar places till he comes back almost tohis own country. There, in the region known to him as a youth, weigheddown with years and ill-health, but surrounded by his most faithfuldisciples, he died. Not unaffecting is the final scene. [23]

'Now the venerable [=A]nanda (Buddha's beloved disciple) went into thecloister-building, and stood leaning against the lintel of the doorand weeping at the thought: "Alas! I remain still but a learner, onewho has yet to work out his own perfection. And the Master is about topass away from me--he who is so kind. " Then the Blessed One called thebrethren and said: "Where then, brethren, is [=A]nanda?" "Thevenerable [=A]nanda (they replied) has gone into the cloister-buildingand stands leaning against the lintel of the door, weeping. " . . . Andthe Blessed One called a certain brother, and said "Go now, brother, and call [=A]nanda in my name and say, 'Brother [=A]nanda, thy Mastercalls for thee. '" "Even so, Lord, " said that brother, and he went upto where [=A]nanda was, and said to the venerable [=A]nanda: "Brother[=A]nanda, thy Master calls for thee. " "It is well, brother, " said thevenerable [=A]nanda, and he went to the place where Buddha was. Andwhen he was come thither he bowed down before the Blessed One, andtook his seat on one side. Then the Blessed One said to the venerable[=A]nanda, as he sat there by his side: "Enough, [=A]nanda, let notthyself be troubled; weep not. Have I not told thee already that wemust divide ourselves from all that is nearest and dearest? How can itbe possible that a being born to die should not die? For a long time, [=A]nanda, hast thou been very near to me by acts of love that is kindand good and never varies, and is beyond all measure. (This Buddharepeats three times. ) Thou hast done well. Be earnest in effort. Thou, too, shalt soon be free. " . . . When he had thus spoken, the venerable[=A]nanda said to the Blessed One: "Let not the Blessed One die inthis little wattle and daub town, a town in the midst of the jungle, in this branch township. For, Lord, there are other great cities suchas Benares (and others). Let the Blessed One die in one of them. "'

This request is refused by Buddha. [=A]nanda then goes to the town andtells the citizens that Buddha is dying. 'Now, when they had heardthis saying, they, With their young men and maidens and wives weregrieved, and sad, and afflicted at heart. And some of them wept, dishevelling their hair, and stretched forth their arms, and wept, fell prostrate on the ground and rolled to and fro, in anguish atthe thought "Too soon will the Blessed One die! Too soon will theHappy One pass away! Full soon will the Light of the world vanishaway!"' . . . When Buddha is alone again with his disciples, 'then theBlessed One addressed the brethren and said "It may be, brethren, thatthere may be doubt or misgiving in the mind of some brother as to theBuddha, the truth, the path or the way. Inquire, brethren, freely. Donot have to reproach yourselves afterwards with this thought: 'OurTeacher was face to face with us, and we could not bring ourselves toinquire of the Blessed One when we were face to face with him. '" Andwhen he had thus spoken they sat silent. Then (after repeating thesewords and receiving no reply) the Blessed One addressed the brethrenand said, "It may be that you put no questions out of reverence forthe Teacher. Let one friend communicate with another. " And when he hadthus spoken the brethren sat silent. And the venerable [=A]nanda said:"How wonderful a thing, Lord, and how marvellous. Verily, in thiswhole assembly, there is not one brother who has doubt or misgiving asto Buddha, the truth, the path or the way. " Then Buddha said: "It isout of the fullness of thy faith that thou hast spoken, [=A]nanda. ButI know it for certain. " . . . Then the Blessed One addressed thebrethren saying: "Behold, brethren, I exhort you saying, transitoryare all component things; toil without ceasing. " And these were thelast words of Buddha. '

It is necessary here to make pause for a moment and survey thetemporal and geographical circumstances of Buddha's life. His lifetimecovered the period of greatest intellectual growth in Athens. If, assome think, the great book of doubt[24] was written by the Hebrew in450, there would be in three lands, at least, about the same time thesame earnestly scornful skepticism in regard to the worn-out teachingsof the fathers. But at a time when, in Greece, the greatest minds werestill veiling infidelity as best they could, in India atheism wasalready formulated. 

It has been questioned, and the question has been answered bothaffirmatively and negatively, whether the climatic conditions ofBuddha's home were in part responsible for the pessimistic tone of hisphilosophy. If one compare the geographical relation of Buddhism toBrahmanism and to Vedism respectively with a more familiar geographynearer home, he will be better able to judge in how far theseconditions may have influenced the mental and religious tone. TakingKabul and Kashmeer as the northern limit of the period of the RigVeda, there are three geographical centres. The latitude of the Vedicpoets corresponds to about the southern boundary of Tennessee andNorth Carolina. The entire tract covered by the southern migration tothe time of Buddhism, extending from Kabul to a point that correspondsto Benares (35° is a little north of Kabul and 25° is a little southof Beh[=a]r), would be represented loosely in the United States by thedifference between the northern line of Mississippi and Key West. Theextent of Georgia about represents in latitude the Vedic province (35°to 30°), while Florida (30° to 25°) roughly shows the southernprogress from the seat of old Brahmanism to the cradle of youngBuddhism. These are the extreme limits of Vedism, Brahmanism andproto-Buddhism. South of this the country was known to Brahmanism onlyto be called savage, and not before the late S[=u]tras (c. 300 B. C. )is one brought as far south as Bombay in the West. The [=A]itareyaBr[=a]hmana, which represents the old centre of Brahmanism aroundDelhi, knows of the [=A]ndhras, south of the God[=a]var[=i] river inthe southeast (about the latitude of Bombay and Hayti), only as outer'Barbarians. ' It is quite conceivable that a race of hardymountaineers, in shifting their home through generations from thehills of Georgia and Tennessee to the sub-tropical region of Key West(to Cuba), in the course of many centuries might become morallyaffected. But it seems to us, although the miasmatic plains of Bengalmay perhaps present even a sharper contrast to the Vedic region thando Key West and Cuba to Georgia, that the climate in effecting a moraldegradation (if pessimism be immoral) must have produced also theeffect of mental debility. Now to our mind there is not the slightestproof for the asseveration, which has been repeated so often that itis accepted by many nowadays as a truism, that Buddhism or evenpost-Buddhistic literature shows any trace of mental decay. [25] Therecertainly is mental weakness in the Br[=a]hmanas, but these cannot allbe accredited to the miasms of Bengal. They are the bones of areligion already dead, kept for instruction in a cabinet; dry, dusty, lifeless, but awful to the beholder and useful to the owner. Again, does Buddhism lose in the comparison from an intellectual point ofview when set beside the mazy gropings of the Upanishads? We haveshown that dogma was the base of primal pantheism; of real logic thereis not a whit. We admire the spirit of the teachers in the Upanishads, but we have very little respect for the logical ability of any earlyHindu teachers; that is to say, there is very little of it to admire. The doctors of the Upanishad philosophy were poets, not dialecticians. Poetry indeed waned in the extreme south, and no spirited or powerfulliterature ever was produced there, unless it was due to foreigninfluence, such as the religious poetry of Ramaism and the Tamil_Sittars_. But in secondary subtlety and in the marking ofdistinctions, in classifying and analyzing on dogmatic premises, aswell as in the acceptance of hearsay truths as ultimate verities--wedo not see any fundamental disparity in these regards between the mindof the Northwest and that of the Southeast; and what superficialdifference exists goes to the credit of Buddhism. For if one must havedogma it is something to have system, and while precedent theosophywas based on the former it knew nothing of the latter. Moreover, inBuddhism there is a greater intellectual vigor than in any phase ofBrahmanism (as distinct from Vedism). To cast off not only gods butsoul, and more, to deny the moral efficacy of asceticism this was aleap into the void, to appreciate the daring of which one has but toread himself into the priestly literature of Buddha's rivals, bothheterodox and orthodox. We see then in Buddhism neither a debauchedmoral type, nor a weakened intellectuality. The pessimism of Buddhism, so far as it concerns earth, is not only the same pessimism thatunderlies the religious motive of Brahmanic pantheism, but it is thesame pessimism that pervades Christianity and even Hebraism. Thisworld is a sorry place, living is suffering; do thou escape from it. The pleasures of life are vanity; do thou renounce them. "To die isgain, " says the apostle; and the Preacher: "I have seen all the worksthat are done under the sun and behold all is vanity and vexation ofspirit. He that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow. For what hathman of all his labor and of the vexation of his heart, wherein he hathlaboured under the sun? For all his days are sorrows and his travailgrief. That which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even onething befalleth them: as the one dieth so dieth the other; yea, theyhave all one breath; so that a man hath no preeminence above a beast:for all is vanity. All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and allturn to dust again. Who knoweth the spirit of man whether it goethupward? I praised the dead which are already dead more than the livingwhich are yet alive. The dead know not anything, their love and theirhatred and their envy is now perished; neither have they any more aportion for ever in any thing that is done under the sun. Thewandering of the desire, this also is vanity. "

The Preacher is a fairly good Buddhist. 

If pessimism be the conviction that life on earth is not worth living, this view is shared alike by the greatest of earth's religions. Ifpessimism be the view that all beauty ends with life and that beyondit there is nothing for which it is worth while to live, then Indiahas no parallel to this Homeric belief. If, however, pessimism meanthat to have done with existence on earth is the best that can happento a man, but that there is bliss beyond, then this is the opinion ofBrahmanism, Jainism, and Christianity. Buddhism alone teaches that tolive on earth is weariness, that there is no bliss beyond, and thatone should yet be calm, pure, loving, and wise. 

How could such a religion inspire enthusiasm? How could it send forthjubilant disciples to preach the gospel of joy? Yet did Buddhism doeven this. Not less happy and blissful than were they that receivedthe first comfort of pantheism were the apostles of Buddha. Hisprogress was a triumph of gladness. They that believed in him rejoicedand hastened to their fellows with the good tidings. Was it then a newmorality, a new ethical code, that thus inspired them? Let one butlook at the vows and commandments respectively taken by and given tothe Buddhist monk, and he will see that in Buddhism there is no newmorality. 

The Ten Vows are as follows:

 I take the vow not to kill; not to steal; to abstain from impurity; not to lie; to abstain from intoxicating drinks which hinder progress and virtue; not to eat at forbidden times; to abstain from dancing, singing, music and stage plays; not to use garlands, scents, unguents, or ornaments; not to use a high or broad bed; not to receive gold or silver. 

The Eight Commandments are as follows:

 Do not kill; do not steal; do not lie; do not drink intoxicating drinks; do not commit fornication or adultery; do not eat unseasonable food at night; do not wear garlands or use perfumes; sleep on a mat spread on the ground. 

The first five of these commands are given to every Buddhist, monk, orlayman; the last three are binding only on the monk. [26]

These laws and rules were, however, as we have indicated inthe chapter on Jainism, the common property, with some unimportantvariations and exceptions, of the Brahman ascetic, the Jain, and theBuddhist. There was surely nothing here to rouse especial interest. No. But there was one side of Buddhism that was new, not absolutelynew, for it formed part of the moral possession of that early bandwhich we may call the congregation of the Spirit. The Brahmantheoretically had done away with penance and with prayer, with theVedic gods and with the Vedic rites. Yet was it impossible for himpractically to absolve the folk of these. The priest might admit thathe knew a better way to salvation, but he still led the people overthe hard old road, and he himself went that way also, because it wasthe way of the fathers, because it was the only way for them that wereunwise, and perhaps, too, because it was the only way in which thepriest could keep his place as guide and leader of the people. 

Jainism smote down some of the obstacles that the Brahman had builtand kept. Mah[=a]v[=i]ra made the way to salvation shorter, but he didnot make it easier for the masses. Asceticism, self-mortification, starvation, torture, --this was his means of gaining happinesshereafter. 

But Buddha cut down all obstacles. He made the lowest equal with thehighest. It is true that he was no democrat. It is true that hissuccess depended, in great part, on political influence, on theconversion of kings and nobles, men of his own class. It is true alsothat Buddha at first, like every other Hindu theosophist, sought nosalvation for the world around him, but only for himself. But he wasmoved with pity for the multitude. And why? The sages among them knewno path to happiness save through life-long torture; the common peopleknew only a religion of rites in which they took no interest, the verywords of which were unintelligible; and its priests in their eyes, ifnot contemptible, at least were unsympathetic. And at the same timethe old caste-system oppressed and insulted them. It is evident thatthe times were ripe for a more humane religion and a new distributionof social privileges. Then Buddha arose and said: "He that is pure inheart is the true priest, not he that knows the Veda. Like unto onethat standeth where a king hath stood and spoken, and standing andspeaking there deems himself for this a king, seems to me the man thatrepeateth the hymns, which the wise men of old have spoken, andstanding in their place and speaking, deems himself for this a sage. The Vedas are nothing, the priests are of no account, save as they bemorally of repute. Again, what use to mortify the flesh? Asceticism isof no value. Be pure, be good; this is the foundation of wisdom--torestrain desire, to be satisfied with little. He is a holy man whodoeth this. Knowledge follows this. "

Here is the essence of Buddhism, here is its power; and when onereflects that Buddha added: "Go into all lands and preach this gospel;tell them that the poor and lowly, the rich and high, are all one, andthat all castes unite in this religion, as unite the rivers in thesea"--he will understand what key was used to open the hearts ofBuddha's kinsmen and people. 

But, it will be said, there is nothing in this of that extremepessimism, of which mention has just been made. True. And this, again, is an important point to bear in mind, that whereas the logic of hisown system led Buddha into a formal and complete pessimism, whichdenies an after-life to the man that finds no happiness in this, heyet never insists upon this. He not only does not insist, but in histalks with his questioners and disciples he uses all means to evadedirect inquiry in regard to the fate of man after death. He believedthat Nirv[=a]na (extinction of lust) led to cessation of being; he didnot believe in an immortal soul. But he urged no such negativedoctrine as this. What he urged repeatedly was that every oneaccepting the undisputed doctrine of _karma_ or re-birth in its fullextent (i. E. , that for every sin here, punishment followed in thenext existence), should endeavor to escape, if possible, from such anendless course of painful re-births, and that to accomplish this itwas necessary first to be sober and good, then to be learned, but notto be an ascetic. On the other hand the doctrine, in its logicalfullness, was a teaching only for the wise, not for fools. He impartedit only to the wise. What is one to understand from this? Clearly, that Buddha regarded the mass of his disciples as standing in needmerely of the Four Great Truths, the confession of which was the signof becoming a disciple; while to the strong and wise he reserved thelogical pessimism, which resulted from his first denials and thepremises of causality on which was created his complicated system. Only thus can one comprehend the importance of Buddhism to his owntime and people, only in this light reconcile the discrepancy betweenthe accounts of a religion which roused multitudes to enthusiasm andjoy, while on the other hand it stood on the cold basis of completenihilism. Formally there was not an esoteric[27] and exotericBuddhism, but practically what the apostles taught, what Buddhahimself taught to the mass of his hearers was a release from thebondage of the law and the freedom of a high moral code as the onething needful. But he never taught that sacrifice was a bad thing; henever either took the priest's place himself or cast scorn upon theBrahman caste: "Better even than a harmless[28] sacrifice isliberality" he says, "better than liberality is faith and kindness(non-injury) and truth, better than faith, kindness, and truth isrenunciation of the world and the search for peace; best of all, thehighest sacrifice and greatest good, is when one enters Nirv[=a]na, saying "I shall not return again to earth. " This is to be an Arhat(Perfect Sage). 

These are Buddha's own words as he spoke with a Brahman priest, [29]who was converted thereby and replied at once with the Buddhist'sconfession of faith: "I take refuge in Buddha, in the doctrine, in thechurch. "

A significant conversation! In many ways these words should becorrective of much that is hazarded today in regard to Buddhism. Thereis here no elaborate system of metaphysics. Wisdom consists in thetruth as it is in Buddha; and before truth stand, as antecedentlyessential, faith and kindness; for so may one render the passivenon-injury of the Brahman as taught by the Buddhist. To have faith andgood works, to renounce the pomps and vanities of life, to showkindness to every living thing, to seek for salvation, to understand, and so finally to leave no second self behind to suffer again, this isBuddha's doctrine. 

We have avoided thus far to define Nirv[=a]na. It has three distinctmeanings, eternal blissful repose (such was the Nirv[=a]na of theJains and in part of Buddhism), extinction and absolute annihilation(such was the Nirv[=a]na of some Buddhists), and the Nirv[=a]na ofBuddha himself. Nirv[=a]na meant to Buddha the extinction of lust, anger, and ignorance. He adopted the term, he did not invent it. Hewas often questioned, but persistently refused to say whether hebelieved that Nirv[=a]na implied extinction of being or not. Webelieve that in this refusal to speak on so vital a point lies theevidence that he himself regarded the 'extinction' or 'blowing out'(this is what the word means literally) as resulting in annihilation. Had he believed otherwise we think he would not have hesitated to sayso, for it would have strengthened his influence among them to whomannihilation was not a pleasing thought. 

But one has no right to 'go behind the returns' as these are given byBuddha. The later church says distinctly that Buddha himself did notteach whether he himself, his ego, was to live after death or not; orwhether a permanent ego exists. It is useless, therefore, to inquirewhether Buddha's Nirv[=a]na be a completion, as Müller defines it, orannihilation. To one Buddhistic party it was the one; to the other, the other; to Buddha himself it was what may be inferred from hisrefusal to make any declaration in regard to it. 

The second point of interest is not more easily disposed of. What tothe Buddhist is the spirit, the soul of man? It certainly is not aneternal spirit, such as was the spirit of Brahmanic philosophy, orthat of the Jain. But, on the other hand, it is clear that somethingsurvived after death till one was reborn for the last time, and thenentered Nirv[=a]na. The part that animates the material complex is tothe Buddhist an individuality which depends on the nature of itsformer complex, home, and is destined to project itself upon futuritytill the house which it has built ceases to exist, a home rebuilt nomore to be its tabernacle. When a man dies the component parts of hismaterial personality fall apart, and a new complex is formed, of whichthe individuality is the effect of the _karma_ of the precedingcomplex. The new person is one's karmic self, but it is not one'sidentical ego. There appears, therefore, even in the doctrine ofNirv[=a]na, to lie something of that altruism so conspicuous in theinsistence on kindness and conversion of others. It is to save fromsorrow this son of one's acts that one should seek to find the end. But there is no soul to save. 

We cannot insist too often on the fact that the religion of Buddha wasnot less practical than human. He practiced, as he taught, that themore one worked for others, was devoted to others, the less he caredfor himself, the less was he the victim of desire. Hence he says thata true Nirv[=a]na may come even in one's own lifetime--the uttersurrender of one's self is Nirv[=a]na, [30] while the act of dying onlydraws the curtain after the tragedy has ended. "Except, " Buddha says, "for birth, age, and death, there would be no need of Buddha. "

A review of Buddha's system of metaphysics is, therefore, doublyunnecessary for our present purpose. [31] In the first place we believethat most of the categories and metaphysical niceties of Buddhism, ashanded down, are of secondary origin; and, were this not so, it isstill evident that they were but the unimportant, intellectualappendage of a religion that was based on anything but metaphysicalsubtleties. Buddha, like every other teacher of his time, had to havea 'system, ' though whether the system handed down as his reverts tohim it is impossible to say. But Buddha's recondite doctrine was onlyfor the wise. "It is hard to learn for an ordinary person, " saysBuddha himself. But it was the ordinary person that Buddhism took toits bosom. The reason can be only the one we have given. For the laststage before Arhat-ship Buddha had ready a complicate system. But hedid not inflict it on the ordinary person. [32] It was not an essentialbut the completing of his teaching; in his own eyes truth asrepresented by the Four Great Truths was the real doctrine. 

The religion of Buddha, for the mass of people, lies in the Four GreatTruths and their practical application to others, which implieskindness and love of humanity. For Buddha, whatever may have been thereluctance with which he began to preach, shows in all his teachingsand dealings with men an enduring patience under their rebuffs, abrotherly sympathy with their weakness, and a divine pity for theirsorrows. Something, too, of divine anger with the pettiness andmeanness of the unworthy ones among his followers, as when, afterpreaching with parable and exhortation to the wrangling brothers ofthe monastery of Kosamb[=i], he left them, saying, "'Truly these foolsare infatuate; it is no easy task to administer instruction to them, 'and, " it is added simply, "he rose from his seat and went away. "[33]

The significance of the church organization in the development ofBuddhism should not be under-estimated. Contrasted with the lack of anorganized ecclesiastical corporation among the Brahmans the Buddhisticsynod, or congregation, Sangha, exerted a great influence. Indifferent places there would be a park set apart for the Buddhistmonks. Here they had their monastery buildings, here they lived duringthe rainy season, from this place out as a centre the monks radiatedthrough the country, not as lone mendicants, but as members of apowerful fraternity. To this monastery came gifts, receipts of allkinds that never would have been bestowed upon individuals. Undoubtedly organization did much for the spread of Buddhism. Yet wethink its influence has been emphasized almost too much by somescholars, or rather the effect has been represented as too radical. For the monasteries, as represented by tradition, with their immensewealth and political importance as allies of the heretical kings ofthe East, are plainly of secondary growth. If one limit their nationaland political importance to a period one or two hundred years afterthe Master's time, he will not err in attributing to this cause, asdoes Barth, the reason for the rapid rise and supremacy of Buddhismover India. But the first beginnings of the institution were small, and what is to be sought in the beginning of Buddhism is ratherthe reason why the monasteries became popular, and what was the holdwhich Buddha had upon the masses, and which induced the formation ofthis great engine of religious war. And when this first question israised the answer must still be that the banding together of the monkswas not the cause but the effect of the popularity of Buddhism. Thefirst monasteries, as Barth well says, were only assemblies of piousmen who formed a spiritual band of religious thinkers, of men whounited themselves into one body to the end that they might studyrighteousness, learning together how to imitate the Master in holinessof living. But the members converted soon became so many that formalassemblies became a necessity to settle the practical disputes andtheoretical questions which were raised by the new multitude ofbelievers, some of whom were more factious than devout. Brahmanism hadno need of this. The Brahman priest had his law in tradition; his lifeand conduct were regulated by immemorial law. The corporations ofthese priests were but temporary organizations for specific purposes. They made no attempt to proselytize. Their members never exceeded thebounds of the caste. The cause, then, of the rapid spread of Buddhismat the beginning of its career lies only in the conditions of itsteaching and the influential backing of its founder. It was theindividual Buddha that captivated men; it was the teaching thatemanated from him that fired enthusiasm; it was his position as anaristocrat that made him acceptable to the aristocracy, his magnetismthat made him the idol of the people. From every page stands out thestrong, attractive personality of this teacher and winner of hearts. No man ever lived so godless yet so godlike. Arrogating to himself nodivinity, despairing of future bliss, but without fear as withouthope, leader of thought but despising lovingly the folly of the world, exalted but adored, the universal brother, he wandered among men, simply, serenely; with gentle irony subduing them that opposed him, tocongregation after congregation speaking with majestic sweetness, themaster to each, the friend of all. His voice was singularly vibrantand eloquent;[34] his very tones convinced the hearer, his looksinspired awe. From the tradition it appears that he must have been oneof those whose personality alone suffices to make a man not only aleader but a god to the hearts of his fellows. When such an one speakshe obtains hearers. It matters little what he says, for he influencesthe emotions, and bends whoever listens to his will. But if added tothis personality, if encompassing it, there be the feeling in theminds of others that what this man teaches is not only a verity, butthe very hope of their salvation; if for the first time they recognizein his words the truth that makes of slaves free men, of classes abrotherhood, then it is not difficult to see wherein lies thelightning-like speed with which the electric current passes from heartto heart. Such a man was Buddha, such was the essential of histeaching; and such was the inevitable rapidity of Buddhisticexpansion, and the profound influence of the shock that was producedby the new faith upon the moral consciousness of Buddha's people. 

The literature of early Buddhism consists of a number of historicalworks embodying the life and teaching of the master, some of moredidactic and epigrammatic intent, and, in the writings of the NorthernBuddhists, some that have given up the verbose simplicity of the firsttracts in favor of tasteless and extravagant recitals more stagey thanimpressive. The final collection of the sacred books (earlier is theSuttanta division into Nik[=a]yas) is called Tripitaka, 'the threebaskets, ' one containing the tracts on discipline; one, the talks ofBuddha; and one, partly metaphysical; called respectively Vinaya, Sutta, and Abhidhamma. The Southern[35] P[=a]li redaction--for thewritings of the Northern[36] Buddhists are in Sanskrit--was commentedupon in the fifth century of this era by Buddha-gosha ('Buddha'sglory'), and appears to be older than the Sanskrit version ofNep[=a]l. Some of the writings go back as far as the Second Council, and their content, so far as it concerns Buddha's own words, in manycases is doubtless a tradition that one should accept asauthoritative. The works on discipline, instead of being as dull asone might reasonably expect of books that deal with the petty detailsof a monastery, are of exceeding interest (although whole chaptersconform to the reasonable expectation), for they contain fragments ofthe work and words of Buddha which give a clearer idea of hispersonality and teaching than do his more extended, and perhaps lessoriginal discourses. They throw a strong light also on the earlychurch, its recalcitrant as well as its obedient members, the quarrelsand schisms that appear to have arisen even before Buddha's death. Thus in the _Mah[=a]vagga_ (ch. X) there is found an account of theschism caused by the expulsion of some unworthy members. The brethrenare not only schismatic, some taking the side of those expelled, butthey are even insolent to Buddha; and when he entreats them for thesake of the effect on the outer world to heal their differences, [37]they tell him to his face that they will take the responsibility, andthat he need not concern himself with the matter. It is on thisoccasion that Buddha says, "Truly, these fools are infatuate, " leavesthem, and goes into solitude, rejoicing to be free from souls soquarrelsome and contentious. Again these tracts give a picture of howthey should live that are truly Buddha's disciples. Buddha finds threedisciples living in perfect harmony, and asks them how they livetogether so peaceably and lovingly. In quaint and yet dignifiedlanguage they reply, and tell him that they serve each other. He thatrises first prepares the meal, he that returns last at night puts theroom in order, etc. (_ib_. 4). Occasionally in the account of unrulybrothers it is evident that tradition must be anticipating, or thatmany joined the Buddhist fraternity as an excuse from restraint. The_Cullavagga_ opens with the story of two notorious renegades, 'makersof strife, quarrelsome, makers of dispute, given to idle talk, andraisers of legal questions in the congregation. ' Such were theinfamous followers of Panduka and Lohitaka. Of a different sort, Epicurean or rather frivolous, were the adherents of Assaji andPunabbasu, who, according to another chapter of the _Cullavagga_ (I. 13), 'cut flowers, planted cuttings of flowers, used ointment andscents, danced, wore garlands, and revelled wickedly. ' A list of theamusements in which indulged these flighty monks includes 'gamesplayed with six and ten pieces, tossing up, hopping over diagrams, dice, jackstraws, [38] ball, sketching, racing, marbles, wrestling, 'etc; to which a like list (_Tevijja_, II) adds chess or checkers('playing with a board of sixty-four squares or one hundred squares'), ghost stories, and unseemly wrangling in regard to belief ("I amorthodox, you are heterodox"), earning a living by prognostication, bytaking omens 'from a mirror' or otherwise, by quack medicines, and by'pretending to understand the language of beasts. ' It is gratifying tolearn that the scented offenders described in the first-mentioned workwere banished from the order. According to the regular procedure, theywere first warned, then reminded, then charged; then the matter waslaid before the congregation, and they were obliged to leave theorder. Even the detail of Subhadda's insolence is not wanting in theserecords _(Cull_. XI. 1. And elsewhere). No sooner was Buddha dead thanthe traitor Subhadda cries out: "We are well rid of him; he gave ustoo many rules. Now we may do as we like. " On which the assemblyproceeded to declare in force all the rules that Buddha had given, although he had left it to them to discard them when they would. TheConfessional (P[=a]timokkha), out of which have been evolved innarrative form the Vinaya texts that contain it, concerns gradedoffences, matters of expiation, rules regarding decency, directionsconcerning robes, rugs, bowls, and other rather uninteresting topics, all discussed in the form of a confession. [39] The church-reader goesover the rules in the presence of the congregation, and asks at theend of each section whether any one is guilty of having broken thisrule. If at the third repetition no one responds, he says, 'They aredeclared innocent by their silence. ' This was the first publicconfessional, although, as we have shown above, the idea of a partialremission of sin by means of confession to the priest is found inBrahmanic literature. [40] The confession extends to very smallmatters, but one sees from other texts that the early congregationlaid a great deal of weight on details, such as dress, as the sign ofa sober life. Thus in _Mah[=a]vagga_, V. 2 ff. , certain Buddhistsdress in a worldly way. At one time one is informed of the color oftheir heretical slippers, at another of the make of their wickedgowns. All this is monastic, even in the discipline which 'sets back'a badly behaved monk, gives him probation, forces him to besubordinate. In _Cullavagga_, I. 9, there is an account of stupidSeyyasaka, who was dull and indiscreet, and was always getting 'setback' by the brethren. Finally they grow weary of probating him andcarry out the _nissaya_ against him, obliging him to remain under thesuperintendence of others. For, according to Buddha's rule, a wisenovice was kept under surveillance, or rather under the authority ofothers, for five years; a stupid uninformed monk, forever. Buddha'srelations with society are plainly set forth. One reads how hisdevoted friend, King Seniya Bimbis[=a]ra, four years younger thanBuddha, and his protector (for he was King of M[=a]gadha), gives him apark, perhaps the first donation of this sort, the origin of all themonastic foundations: "The King of M[=a]gadha, Bimbis[=a]ra, thought'here is this bamboo forest Venuvana, my pleasure-garden, which isneither too near to the town nor too far from it. . . . What if I were togive it to the fraternity?' . . . And he took a golden vessel (of water)and dedicated the garden to Buddha, saying, 'I give up the park to thefraternity with Buddha at its head. ' And the Blessed One accepted thepark" (_Mah[=a]vagga_, i. 22). [41] Another such park Buddha acceptsfrom the courtezan, Ambap[=a]li, whose conversation with Buddha anddinner-party to him forms a favorite story with the monks (_Mah[=a]v. _v. 30; _Cull_. Ii). The protection offered by Bimbis[=a]ra made theorder a fine retreat for rogues. In _Mah[=a]v. _ 1. 41 ff. One readsthat King Seniya Bimbis[=a]ra made a decree: "No one is to do any harmto those ordained among the Ç[=a]kya-son's monks. [42] Well taught istheir doctrine. Let them lead a holy life for the sake of completeextinction of suffering. " But robbers and runaway slaves immediatelytook advantage of this decree, and by joining the order put the policeat defiance. Even debtors escaped, became monks, and mocked theircreditors. Buddha, therefore, made it a rule that no robber, runawayslave, or other person liable to arrest should be admitted into theorder. He ordained further that no son might join the order withouthis parents' consent (_ib_. 54). Still another motive of falsedisciples had to be combated. The parents of Up[=a]li thought tothemselves: "What shalt we teach Up[=a]li that he may earn his living?If we teach him writing his fingers will be sore; if we teach himarithmetic his mind will be sore; if we teach him money-changing hiseyes will be sore. There are those Buddhist monks; they live an easylife; they have enough to eat and shelter from the rain; we will makehim a monk. " Buddha, hearing of this, ordained that no one should beadmitted into the order under twenty (with some exceptions). 

The monks' lives were simple. They went out by day to beg, were lockedin their cells at night (_Mah[=a]v_. I. 53), were probated for lightoffences, and expelled for very severe ones. [43] The people arerepresented as murmuring against the practices of the monks at first, till the latter were brought to more modest behavior. It is perhapsonly Buddhist animosity that makes the narrator say: "They did notbehave modestly at table. . . . Then the people murmured and said, 'TheseBuddhist monks make a riot at their meals, _they act just like theBrahman priests. '" (Mah[=a]v_. I. 25; cf. I. 70. )

We turn from the Discipline to the Sermons. Here one finds everything, from moral exhortations to a book of Revelations. [44] Buddha sometimesis represented as entering upon a dramatic dialogue with those whom hewishes to reform, and the talk is narrated. With what soft irony hequestions, with what apparent simplicity he argues! In the_Tevijja_[45] the scene opens with a young Brahman. He is a pious andreligious youth, and tells Buddha that although he yearns for 'unionwith Brahm[=a], '[46] he does not know which of the different pathsproposed by Brahman priests lead to Brahm[=a]. Do they all lead tounion with Brahm[=a]? Buddha answers: 'Let us see; has any one ofthese Brahmans ever seen Brahm[=a]?' 'No, indeed, Gautama. ' 'Or didany one of their ancestors ever see Brahm[=a]?' 'No, Gautama. ' 'Well, did the most ancient seers ever say that they knew where isBrahm[=a]?' 'No, Gautama. ' 'Then if neither the present Brahmans know, nor the old Brahmans knew where is Brahm[=a], the present Brahmans sayin point of fact, "We can show the way to union with what we know notand have never seen; this is the straight path, this is the direct waywhich leads to Brahm[=a]"--and is this foolish talk?' 'It is foolishtalk. ' 'Then, as to yearning for union with Brahm[=a], suppose a manshould say, "How I long for, how I love the most beautiful woman inthis land, " and the people should ask, "Do you know whether thatbeautiful woman is a noble lady, or a Brahman woman, or of the traderclass, or a slave?" and he should say, "No"; and the people shouldsay, "What is her name, is she tall or short, in what place does shelive?" and he should say, "I know not, " and the people should say, "Whom you know not, neither have seen, her you love and long for?" andhe should say, "Yes, "--would not that be foolish? Then, after this isassented to, Buddha suggests another parallel. 'A man builds astaircase, and the people ask, "Do you know where is the mansion towhich this staircase leads?" "I do not know. " "Are you making astaircase to lead to something, taking it for a mansion, which youknow not and have never seen?" "Yes. " Would not this be foolishtalk?. . . Now what think you, is Brahm[=a] in possession of wives andwealth?' 'He is not. '

'Is his mind full of anger or free from anger? Is his mind full ofmalice or free from malice?' 'Free from anger and malice. ' 'Is hismind depraved or pure?' 'Pure. ' 'Has he self-mastery?' 'Yes. ' 'Nowwhat think you, are the Brahmans in possession of wives and wealth, dothey have anger in their hearts, do they bear malice, are they impurein heart, are they without self-mastery?' 'Yes. ' 'Can there then belikeness between the Brahmans and Brahm[=a]?' 'No. ' 'Will they thenafter death become united to Brahm[=a] who is not at all like them?'Then Buddha points out the path of purity and love. Here is nonegative 'non-injury, ' but something very different to anything thathad been preached before in India. When the novice puts away hate, passion, wrong-doing, sinfulness of every kind, then: 'He lets hismind pervade the whole wide world, above, below, around andeverywhere, with a heart of love, far-reaching, grown great, andbeyond measure. And he lets his mind pervade the whole world with aheart of pity, sympathy, and equanimity, far-reaching, grown great, and beyond measure. ' Buddha concludes (adopting for effect theBrahm[=a] of his convert): 'That the monk who is free from anger, freefrom malice, pure in mind, and master of himself should after death, when the body is dissolved, become united to Brahm[=a] who is thesame--such a condition of things is quite possible' Here is nometaphysics, only a new religion based on morality and intensehumanity, yet is the young man moved to say, speaking for himself andthe friend with him: 'Lord, excellent are the words of thy mouth. Asif one were to bring a lamp into the darkness, just so, Lord, has thetruth been made known to us in many a figure by the Blessed One. Andwe come to Buddha as our refuge, to the doctrine and to the church. May the Blessed One accept us as disciples, as true believers, fromthis day forth, as long as life endures. '

The god Brahm[=a] of this dialoge is for the time being playfullyaccepted by Buddha as the All-god. To the Buddhist himself Brahm[=a]and all the Vedic gods are not exactly non-existent, but they are dimfigures that are more like demi-gods, fairies, or as some Englishscholars call them, 'angels. ' Whether Buddha himself really believedin them, cannot be asserted or denied. This belief is attributed tohim, and his church is very superstitious. Probably Buddha did notthink it worth while to discuss the question. He neither knew norcared whether cloud-beings existed. It was enough to deny a Creator, or to leave no place for him. Thaumaturgical powers are indeedcredited to the earliest belief, but there certainly is nothing inharmony with Buddha's usual attitude in the extraordinary discoursecalled _[=A]kankheyya_, wherein Buddha is represented as ascribing tomonks miraculous powers only hinted at in a vague 'shaking of theearth' in more sober speech. [47] From the following let the 'EsotericBuddhists' of to-day take comfort, for it shows at least that theyshare an ancient folly, although Buddha can scarcely be heldresponsible for it: "If a monk should desire to become multiform, tobecome visible or invisible, to go through a wall, a fence, or amountain as if through air; to penetrate up or down through solidground as if through water . . . To traverse the sky, to touch the moon. . . Let him fulfil all righteousness, let him be devoted to thatquietude of heart which springs from within . . . Let him look throughthings, let him be much alone. " That is to say, let him aim for thevery tricks of the Yogis, which Buddha had discarded. Is there nothere perhaps a little irony? Buddha does not say that the monk will beable to do this--he says if the monk wishes to do this, let him bequiet and meditate and learn righteousness, then perhaps--but he willat least have learned righteousness!

The little tract called _Cetokhila_ contains a sermon which has notlost entirely its usefulness or application, and it is characteristicof the way in which Buddha treated eschatological conundrums: 'If abrother has adopted the religious life in the hope of belonging tosome one of the angel (divine) hosts, thinking to himself, "by thismorality or by this observance or by this austerity or by thisreligious life I shall become an angel, " his mind does not incline tozeal, exertion, perseverance and struggle, and he has not succeeded inhis religious life' (has not broken through the bonds). And, continuing, Buddha says that just as a hen might sit carefullybrooding over her well-watched eggs, and might content herself withthe wish, 'O that this egg would let out the chick, ' but all the timethere is no need of this torment, for the chicks will hatch if shekeeps watch and ward over them, so a man, if he does not think what isto be, but keeps watch and ward of his words, thoughts, and acts, will'come forth into the light. '[48]

The questions in regard to Buddha's view of soul, immortality, andreligion are answered to our mind as clearly in the following passagesas Buddha desired they should be. 'Unwisely does one consider: "Have Iexisted in ages past . . . Shall I exist in ages yet to be, do I existat all, am I, how am I? This is a being, whence is it come, whitherwill it go?" Consideration such as this is walking in the jungle ofdelusion. These are the things one should consider: "This issuffering, this is the origin of suffering, this is the cessation ofsuffering, this is the way that leads to the cessation of suffering. "From him that considers thus his fetters fall away' (_Sabb[=a]sava_). In the _Vang[=i]sa-sutta_ Buddha is asked directly: "Has this goodman's life been vain to him, has he been extinguished, or is he stillleft with some elements of existence; and how was he liberated?" andhe replies: "He has cut off desire for name and form in this world. Hehas crossed completely the stream of birth and death. " In the_Salla-sutta_ it is said: "Without cause and unknown is the life ofmortals in this world, troubled, brief, combined with pain. . . . Asearthen vessels made by the potter end in being broken, so is the lifeof mortals. " One should compare the still stronger image, which givesthe very name of _nir-v[=a]na_ ('blowing out') in the_Upas[=i]vam[=a]navapucch[=a]_: "As a flame blown about by wind goesout and cannot be reckoned as existing, so a sage delivered from nameand body disappears, and cannot be reckoned as existing. " To thisUpas[=i]va replies: "But has he only disappeared, or does he notexist, or is he only free from sickness?" To which Buddha: "For himthere is no form, and that by which they say he is exists for him nolonger. " One would think that this were plain enough. 

Yet must one always remember that this is the Arhat's death, the deathof him that has perfected himself. [49] Buddha, like the Brahmans, taught hell for the bad, and re-birth for them that were notperfected. So in the _Kok[=a]liya-sutta_ a list of hells is given, andan estimate is made of the duration of the sinner's suffering in them. Here, as if in a Brahman code, is it taught that 'he who lies goes tohell, ' etc. Even the names of the Brahmanic hells are taken over intothe Buddhist system, and several of those in Manu's list of hells arefound here. 

On the other hand, Buddha teaches, if one may trust tradition, that agood man may go to heaven. 'On the dissolution of the body after deaththe well-doer is re-born in some happy state in heaven'(_Mah[=a]parinibb[=a]na, _ i. 24). [50] This, like hell, is a temporarystate, of course, before re-birth begins again on earth. In fact, Buddhist and Brahmanic pantheists agree in their attitude toward therespective questions of hell, heaven, and _karma_. It is only theemancipated Arhat that goes to Nirv[=a]na. [51]

When it is said that Buddha preaches to a new convert 'in due course, 'it means always that he gave him first a lecture on morality andreligion, and then possibly, but not necessarily, on the 'system. ' AndBuddha has no narrow-minded aversion to Brahmans; he accepts 'Brahman'as he accepts 'Brahm[=a], ' only he wants it to be understood what is areal Brahman: 'A certain Brahman once asked Buddha how one becomes aBrahman, --what are the characteristics that make a man a Brahman. Andthe Blessed One said: "The Brahman who has removed all sinfulness, whois free from haughtiness, free from impurity, self-restrained, who isan accomplished master of knowledge, who has fulfilled the duties ofholiness, --such a Brahman justly calls himself a Brahman. "'[52] "The_Mah[=a]vagga_, from which this is taken, is full of such sentiments. As here, in i. 2, so in i. 7: "The Blessed One preached to Yasa, thenoble youth, 'in due course, '" that is to say, "he talked about themerit obtained by alms-giving, the duties of morality, about heaven, about the evils of vanity and sinfulness of desire, " and when theBlessed One saw that the mind of Yasa, the noble youth, was prepared, "then he preached the principal doctrine of the Buddhists, namely, suffering, and cause of suffering, the cessation of suffering, thePath;" and "just as a clean cloth takes the dye, thus Yasa, the nobleyouth, even while sitting there, obtained the knowledge thatwhatsoever is subject to birth is also subject to death. "[53]

The "spirit and not the letter of the law" is expressed in the formula_(Mah[=a]vagga_, i. 23): "Of all conditions that proceedfrom a cause, Buddha has explained the cause, and he has explainedtheir cessation. " This is the Buddhist's _credo_. 

In several of the sermons the whole gist is comprised in theadmonition not to meddle with philosophy, nor to have any 'views, ' for"philosophy purifies no one; peace alone purifies. "[54]

Buddha does not ignore the fact that fools will not desire salvationas explained by him: "What fools call pleasure the noble say is pain;this is a thing difficult to understand; the cessation of the existingbody is regarded as pleasure by the noble, but those wise in thisworld hold the opposite opinion" (_Dvayat[=a]nup. Sutta_, 38). [55] Butto him the truly wise is the truly pure: "Not by birth is one aBrahman, not by birth is one an outcast; by deeds is one a Brahman, bydeeds is one an outcast" (_Vasala-sutta_); and not alone in virtue of_karma_ of old, for: "The man who knows in this world the destructionof pain, who lays aside the burden and is liberated, him I call aBrahman; whosoever in this world has overcome good and evil, bothties, who is free from grief and defilement, and is pure, --him I calla Brahman; the ignorant say that one is a Brahman by birth, but one isa Brahman by penance, by religious life, by self-restraint, and bytemperance" (_V[=a]settha-sutta_). 

The penance here alluded to is not the vague penance of austerities, but submission to the discipline of the monastery when exercised for aspecific fault. 

Later Buddhism made of Buddha a god. Even less exaltation than this ismet by Buddha thus: S[=a]riputta says to him, "Such faith have I, Lord, that methinks there never was and never will be either monk orBrahman who is greater and wiser than thou, " and Buddha responds:"Grand and bold are the words of thy mouth; behold, thou hast burstforth into ecstatic song. Come, hast thou, then, known all the Buddhasthat were?" "No, Lord. " "Hast thou known all the Buddhas that willbe?" "No, Lord. " "But, at least, thou knowest me, my conduct, my mind, my wisdom, my life, my salvation (i. E. , thou knowest me as well as Iknow myself)?" "No, Lord. " "Thou seest that thou knowest not thevenerable Buddhas of the past and of the future; why, then, are thywords so grand and bold?" (_Mah[=a]parinibb[=a]na_. )

Metaphysically the human ego to the Buddhist is only a collection offive _skandhas_ (form, sensations, ideas, faculties of mind, andreason) that vanishes when the collection is dispersed, but thefactors of the collection re-form again, and the new ego is the resultof their re-formation. The Northern Buddhists, who turn Buddha into agod, make of this an immortal soul, but this is Buddhism in one phase, not Buddha's own belief. The strength of Northern Buddhism lies not, as some say, in its greater religious zeal, but in its grosseranimism, the delight of the vulgar. 

It will not be necessary, interesting as would be the comparison, tostudy the Buddhism of the North after this review of the older andsimpler chronicles. In Hardy's _Manual of Buddhism_ (p. 138 ff. ) andRockhill's _Life of Buddha_ will be found the weird and silly legendsof Northern Buddhism, together with a full sketch of Buddhistic ethicsand ontology (Hardy, pp. 460, 387). The most famous of the Northernbooks, the Lotus of the Law and the Lalita Vistara, give a good ideaof the extravagance and supernaturalism that already have begun todisfigure the purer faith. According to Kern, who has translated theformer work again (after Burnouf), the whole intent of the Lotus is torepresent Buddha as the supreme, eternal God. The works, treating ofpiety, philosophy, and philanthropy, contain ancient elements, but ingeneral are of later form. To this age belongs also the wholecollection of J[=a]takas, or 'birth-stories, ' of the Buddhas that werebefore Gautama, some of the tales of which are historically important, as they have given rise to Western fables. [56] These birth-storiesrepresent Buddha (often as Indra) as some god or mortal, and tell whathe did in such or such a form. It is in a future form that, likeVishnu, who is to come in the _avatar_ of Kalki, the next Buddha willappear as Maitreya, or the 'Buddha of love. '[57] Some of the storiesare very silly; some, again, are beautiful at heart, but ugly in theirbizarre appearance. They are all, perhaps, later than our era. [58]

The history of Buddhism after the Master's death has a certain analogywith that of Mohammedanism. That is to say it was largely a politicalgrowth. Further than this, of course, the comparison fails. Thereligion was affected by heretical kings, and by _nouveaux riches_, for it admitted them all into its community on equal terms--no slightprivilege to the haughty nabob or proud king who, if a believer andfollower of Brahman orthodoxy, would have been obliged to bend thehead, yield the path, and fear the slightest frown of any beggarpriest that came in his way. 

The M[=a]ruya monarch Açoka adopted Buddhism as a state religion inthe third century B. C. , and taught it unto all his people, so that, according to his own account, he changed the creed of the country fromBrahmanism to Buddhism. [59] He was king over all northern India, fromKabul to the eastern ocean, from the northern limit of Brahmaniccivilization to its southern boundary. Buddhist missionaries were nowspread over India and beyond it. And here again, even in this laterage, one sees how little had the people to do with Buddha'smetaphysical system. Like the simple confession 'I take refuge inBuddha, in the doctrine, and in the church' was the only credodemanded, that cited above: "Buddha has explained the cause ofwhatever conditions proceed from a cause, and he has declared theircessation. " In this credo, which is en-graved all over India, everything is left in confidence to Buddha. However he explained thereason, that creed is to be accepted without inquiry. The convert tookthe patent facts of life, believing that Buddha had explained all, andbased his own belief not on understanding but on faith. 

With the council of Patna, 242 B. C, begins at thousands of themissionaries the geographical separation of the church, which resultsin Southern and Northern Buddhism. [60]

It is at this period that the monastic bodies become influential. Theoriginal Sangha, congregation, is defined as consisting of three ormore brethren. The later monastery is a business corporation as wellas a religious body. The great emperors that now ruled India (not thepetty clan-kings of the centuries before) were no longer of purebirth, and some heresy was the only religion that would receive themwith due honor. They affected Buddhism, endowed the monasteries, inevery was enriched the church, built for it great temples, and in turnwere upheld by their thankful co-religionists. Among the six[61] rivalheresies that of Buddha was predominant, and chiefly because of royalinfluence. The Buddhist head of the Ceylon church was Açoka's own son. Still more important for Buddhism was its adoption by the migratoryTuranians in the centuries following. Tibet and China were opened upto it through the influence of these foreign kings, who at leastpretended to adopt the faith of Buddha. [62] But as it was adopted bythem, and as it extended beyond the limits of India, just so muchweaker it became at home, where its strongest antagonists were thesectarian pantheistic parties not so heterodox as itself. 

Buddhism lingered in India till the twelfth or thirteenth century, although in the seventh it was already decadent, as appears from theaccount of Hiouen-Thsang, the Chinese pilgrim. It is found to-day inTibet, Ceylon, China, Japan, and other outlying regions, but it isquite vanished from its old home. The cause of its extinction isobvious. The Buddhist victorious was not the modest and devoutmendicant of the early church. The fire of hate, lighted if at all byBuddhism, [63] smouldered till Brahmanism, in the form of Hinduism, hadbegotten a religion as popular as Buddhism, or rather far morepopular, and for two reasons. Buddhism had no such picturesque talesas those that enveloped with poetry the history of the man-godKrishna, Again, Buddhism in its monastic development had separateditself more and more from the people. Not mendicant monks, urging to apure life, but opulent churches with fat priests; not simplediscourses calculated to awaken the moral and religious consciousness, but subtle arguments on discipline and metaphysics were now whatBuddhism represented. This religion was become, indeed, as much askeleton as was the Brahmanism of the sixth century. As the Brahmanicbelief had decomposed into spiritless rites, so Buddhism, changed into dialectic and idolatry (for in lieu of a god the laterchurch worshipped Buddha), had lost now all hold upon the people. Thelove of man, the spirit of Buddhism, was dead, and Buddhism crumbledinto the dust. Vital and energetic was the sectarian 'love of God'alone (Hinduism), and this now became triumphant. Where Buddhism hassucceeded is not where the man-gods, objects of love and fear, haveentered; but where, without rivalry from more sympathetic beliefs, ithas itself evolved a system of idolatry and superstition; where allthat was scorned by the Master is regarded as holiest, and all that heinsisted upon as vital is disregarded. [64] One speaks of the millionsof Buddhists in the world as one speaks of the millions of Christians;but while there are some Christians that have renounced the bigotryand idolatry of the church, and hold to the truth as it is in thewords of Christ, there are still fewer Buddhists who know that theirBuddhism would have been rebuked scornfully by its founder. 

The geographical growth of formal Buddhism is easily sketched. Afterthe first entrance into Kashmeer and Ceylon, in the third centuryB. C. , the progress of the cult, as it now may be called, was steadilyaway from India proper. In the fifth century A. D. , it was adopted inBurmah, [65] and in the seventh in Siam. The Northern school kept ingeneral to the 'void' doctrine of N[=a]g[=a]rjuna, whose chief textsare the Lotus and the Lalita Vistara, standard works of the GreatVehicle. [66] In Tibet Lamaism is the last result of this hierarchicalstate-church. [67] We have thought it much more important to give afuller account of early Buddhism, that of Buddha, than a full accountof a later growth in regions that, for the most part, are not Indic, in the belief that the P[=a]li books of Ceylon give a truer picture ofthe early church than do those of Kashmeer and Nep[=a]l, with theirÇivaite and Brahmanic admixture. For in truth the Buddhism of Chinaand Tibet has no place in the history of Indic religions. It may havebeen introduced by Hindu missionaries, but it has been re-made to suita foreign people. This does not apply, of course, to the canonicalbooks, the Great Vehicle, of the North, which is essentially native, if not Buddhistic. Yet of the simple narrative and the adulteratedmystery-play, if one has to choose, the former must take precedence. From the point of view of history, Northern Buddhism, however old itselements, can be regarded only as an admixture of Buddhistic andBrahmanic ideas. For this reason we take a little more space, not tocite from the Lotus or the grotesque Lalita Vistara, [68] but toillustrate Buddhism at its best. Fausböll, who has translated thedialogue that follows, thinks that in the Suttas of theSutta-nip[=a]ta there is a reminiscence of a stage of Buddhism beforethe institution of monasteries, while as yet the disciples lived ashermits. The collection is at least very primitive, although we doubtwhether the Buddhist disciples ever lived formally as individualhermits. All the Samanas are in groups, little 'congregations, ' whichafterwards grew into monasteries. 

This is a poetical (amoebic) contest between the herdsman Dhaniya andBuddha, with which Fausböll[69] compares St. Luke, xii. 16, but which, on the other hand reminds one of a spiritualized Theocritus, with whomits author was, perhaps, contemporary. 

 I have boiled the rice, I have milked the kine--so said the herdsman Dhaniya--I am living with my comrades near the banks of the (great) Mah[=i] river; the house is roofed, the fire is lit--then rain if thou wilt, O sky!

 I am free from anger, free from stubbornness--so said the Blessed One--I am abiding for one night near the banks of the (great) Mah[=i] river; my house has no cover, the fire (of passion) is extinguished--then rain if thou wilt, O sky!

 Here are no gad-files--so said the herdsman Dhaniya--The cows are roaming in meadows full of grass, and they can endure the rain--then rain if thou wilt, O sky!

 1 have made a well-built raft--so said the Blessed One--I have crossed over, I have reached the further bank, I have overcome the torrent (of passions); I need the raft no more--then rain if thou wilt, O sky!

 My wife is obedient, she is not wanton--so said the herdsman Dhaniya--she has lived with me long and is winning; no wickedless have I heard of her--then rain if thou wilt, O sky!

 My mind is obedient, delivered (from evil)--so said the Blessed One--it has been cultivated long and is well-subdued; there is no longer anything wicked in me--then rain if thou wilt, O sky!

 I support myself by my own earnings--so said the herdsman Dhaniya--and my children are around me and healthy; I hear no wickedness of them--then rain if thou wilt, O sky!

 I am the servant of none--so said the Blessed One--with what I have gained I wander about in all the world; I have no need to serve--then rain if thou wilt, O sky!

 I have cows, I have calves--so said the herdsman Dhaniya--cows in calf and heifers also; and I have a bull as lord over the cows--then rain if thou wilt, O sky!

 I have no cows, I have no calves--so said the Blessed One--no cows in calf, and no heifers; and I have no bull as a lord over the cows--then rain if thou wilt, O sky!

 The stakes are driven in and cannot be shaken--so said the herdsman Dhaniya--the ropes are made of holy-grass, new and well-made; the cows will not be able to break them--then rain if thou wilt, O sky!

 Like a bull I have rent the bonds--so said the Blessed One--like an elephant I have broken through the ropes, I shall not be born again--then rain if thou wilt, O sky!

 Then the rain poured down and filled both sea and land. And hearing the sky raining, Dhaniya said: Not small to us the gain in that we have seen the Blessed Lord; in thee we take refuge, thou endowed with (wisdom's) eye; be thou our master, O great sage! My wife and myself are obedient to thee. If we lead a pure life we shall overcome birth and death, and put an end to pain. 

 He that has sons has delight in sons--so said the Evil One--he that has cows has delight in cows, for substance is the delight of man, but he that has no substance has no delight. 

 He that has sons has care with his sons--so said the Blessed One--he that has cows has likewise care with his cows, for substance is (the cause of) care, but he that has no substance has no care. 

From Buddha's sermons choice extracts were gathered at an early date, which, as well as the few longer discourses, that have been preservedin their entirety, do more to tell us what was the original Buddha, before he was enwrapped in the scholastic mysticism of a later age, than pages of general critique. 

Thus in the _Mah[=a]parinibb[=a]na_ casual allusion is made toassemblies of men and of angels (divine beings), of the greatthirty-three gods, Death the Evil One and Brahm[=a] (iii. 21). Buddha, as we have said, does not deny the existence of spiritual beings; hedenies only their power to affect the perfect man and theircontrolling part in the universe. In the same sermon the refuge of thedisciple is declared to be truth and himself (ii. 33): "Be ye lampsunto yourselves. Betake yourselves to no external refuge. Hold fast tothe truth as to a lamp. "

And from the famous 'Path of Duty' or 'Collection of truths':[70]

 All that we are is the result of what we have thought: it is founded on our thoughts; it is made up of our thoughts. If a man speaks or acts with an evil thought pain follows him as the wheel follows the foot of the ox that draws the carriage, (but) if a man speaks or acts with a pure thought happiness follows him like a shadow that never leaves him. 

 Earnestness is the path that leads to escape from death, thoughtlessness is the path that leads to death. Those who are in earnest do not die;[71]

 those who are thoughtless are as if dead already. Long is the night to him who is awake; long is a mile to him who is tired; long is life to the foolish. 

 There is no suffering for him who has finished his journey and abandoned grief, who has freed himself on all sides and thrown off the fetters. 

 Some people are born again; evil-doers go to hell; righteous people go to heaven; those who are free from all worldly desires attain Nirv[=a]na. 

 He who, seeking his own happiness, punishes or kills beings that also long for happiness, will not find happiness after death. 

 Looking for the maker of this tabernacle I shall have to run through a course of many births, so long as I do not find; and painful is birth again and again. But now, maker of the tabernacle, thou hast been seen; thou shalt not make up this tabernacle again. All thy rafters are broken, thy ridge-pole is sundered; thy mind, approaching Nirv[=a]na, has attained to extinction of all desires. [72]

 Better than going to heaven, better than lordship over all worlds, is the reward of entering the stream of holiness. 

 Not to commit any sin, to do good, and to purify one's mind, that is the teaching of the Buddhas. 

 Let us live happily, not hating them that hate us. Let us live happily, though we call nothing our own. We shall be like bright gods, feeding on happiness. 

 From lust comes grief, from lust comes fear; he that is free from lust knows neither grief nor fear. 

 The best of ways is the eightfold (path); this is the way, there is no other that leads to the purifying of intelligence. Go on this way! Everything else is the deceit of Death. You yourself must make the effort. Buddhas are only preachers. The thoughtful who enter the way are freed from the bondage of Death. [73]

 * * * * *

 FOOTNOTES:

 [Footnote 1: Compare Colebrooke's _Essays_, vol. Ii. 460; and Muir, OST. Iv. 296]

 [Footnote 2: Compare Oldenberg. _Buddha_, p. 155. ]

 [Footnote 3: Especially Köppen views Buddha as a democratic reformer and liberator. ]

 [Footnote 4: Emile Senart, _Essai sur la légende du Buddha_. 1875. ]

 [Footnote 5: _Buddha_ (1881), p. 73 ff. ]

 [Footnote 6: The exact position of Kapilavastu, the capital of the Ç[=a]kyas, is not known, although it must have been near to the position assigned to it on Kiepert's map of India (just north of Gorakhpur). The town is unknown in Brahmanic literature. ]

 [Footnote 7: This is Oldenberg's opinion, for the reason here stated. On the other hand it may be questioned whether this negative evidence be conclusive, and whether it be not more probable that a young nobleman would have been well educated. ]

 [Footnote 8: Siddhartha, the boy, Gautama by his family cognomen, the Ç[=a]kya-son by his clan-name, was known also as the Ç[=a]kya-sage, the hermit, Samana (Çrama[n. ]a); the venerable, Arhat (a general title of perfected saints); Tath[=a]gata 'who is arrived like' (the preceding Buddhas, at perfection); and also by many other names common to other sects, Buddha, Jina, The Blessed One (Bhagavat), The Great Hero, etc. The Buddhist disciple may be a layman, _çravaka_; a monk, _bhikshu_; a perfected saint, _arhat_; a saintly doctor of the law, _bodhisattva_; etc. ]

 [Footnote 9: South of the present Patna. Less correct is the _Buddha_ Gay[=a] form. ]

 [Footnote 10: The famous _bo_ or Bodhi-tree, ficus religiosa, _pippala_, at Bodhi Gay[=a], said to be the most venerable and certainly the most venerated tree in the world. ]

 [Footnote 11: A _pacceka_ Buddha (Oldenberg. _Buddha_, p. 122). ]

 [Footnote 12:

 "Then be the door of salvation opened! He that hath ears to hear let him hear. I thought of my own sorrow only, and, therefore, Have not revealed the Word to the world. "]

 [Footnote 13: He sometimes, however, quite prosaically 'makes' or 'manufactures' it. ]

 [Footnote 14: _Dhammacakkappavattana_. Rhys Davids in his introduction to this _sutta_ gives and explains the eight as follows (SBE. XI. P. 144): 1, Right views; freedom from superstition or delusion. 2, Right aims, high and worthy of the intelligent, earnest man. 3, Right speech, kindly, open, truthful. 4, Right conduct, peaceful, honest, pure. 5, Right livelihood, bringing hurt to no living thing. 6, Right effort in self-training and in self-control. 7, Right mindfulness, the active watchful mind. 8, Right contemplation, earnest thought on the deep mysteries of life. ]

 [Footnote 15: Hardy, _Manual, _, p. 496. ]

 [Footnote 16: "A decided predilection for the aristocracy appears to have lingered as an heirloom of the past in the older Buddhism, " Oldenberg, _Buddha_, p. 157. ]

 [Footnote 17: _Mah[=a]vagga, _ 1. 24. On the name (Gautama) Gotama, see Weber, _IS_. L 180. ]

 [Footnote 18: The parks of Venuvana and Jetavana were especially affected by Buddha. Compare Oldenberg, _Buddha_, p. 145. ]

 [Footnote 19: Like the Jains the Buddhists postulate twenty-four (five) precedent Buddhas. ]

 [Footnote 20: Buddha's general discipline as compared with that of the Jains was much more lax, for instance, in the eating of meat. Buddha himself died of dysentery brought on by eating pork. The later Buddhism interprets much more strictly the rule of 'non-injury'; and as we have shown, Buddha entirely renounced austerities, choosing the mean between laxity and asceticism. ]

 [Footnote 21: Or 'take care of yourself'; _Mah[=a]parinibb[=a]na_, v. 23. ]

 [Footnote 22: The chief Buddhistic dates are given by Müller (introduction to _Dhammapada_, SBE. Vol. X. ) as follows: 557, Buddha's birth; 477, Buddha's death and the First Council at R[=a]jagriha; 377, the Second Council at V[=a]iç[=a]l[=i]; 259, Açoka's coronation; 242, Third Council at P[=a]taliputta; 222, Açoka's death. These dates are only tentative, but they give the time nearly enough to serve as a guide. From the Buddhists (Ceylon account) it is known that the Council at V[=a]iç[=a]li was held one hundred years after Buddha's death (one hundred and eighteen years before the coronation of Açoka, whose grandfather, Candragupta, was Alexander's contemporary). The interval between Nirvana and Açoka, two hundred and eighteen years, is the only certain date according to Köppen, p. 208, and despite much argument since he wrote, the remark still holds. ]

 [Footnote 23: Englished by Rhys Davids, _Mah[=a]parinibb[=a]na-sutta_ (SBE. XI. 95 ff. ). ]

 [Footnote 24: _Ecclesiastes_. ]

 [Footnote 25: The common view is thus expressed by Oldenberg: "In dem schwülen, feuchten, von der Natur mit Reichthümern üppig gesegneten Tropenlande des Ganges hat das Volk, das in frischer Jugendkraft steht, als es vom Norden her eindringt, bald aufgehört jung und stark zu sein. Menschen und Völker reifen in jenem Lande . . . Schnell heran, um ebenso schnell an Leib und Seele zu erschlaffen" (_loc. Cit_. P. 11). ]

 [Footnote 26: Rhys Davids, _Buddhism_, pp. 160, 139. ]

 [Footnote 27: Buddha taught, of course, nothing related to the thaumaturgy of that folly which calls itself today 'Esoteric Buddhism. ']

 [Footnote 28: That is a sacrifice where no cattle are slain, and no injury is done to living beings. ]

 [Footnote 29: _K[=u]tadanta-sutta_ Oldenberg, _Buddha_, p. 175. ]

 [Footnote 30: Sometimes distinguished from _pari-nirv[=a][n. ]a_ as absolute annihilation. ]

 [Footnote 31: Some scholars think that the doctrine of Buddha resembles closely that of the S[=a]nkhya philosophy (so Barth, p. 116), but Müller, Oldenberg, and others, appear to be right in denying this. The Sankhyan 'spirit' has, for instance, nothing corresponding to it in Buddha's system. ]

 [Footnote 32: The twelve Nid[=a]nas are dogmatic, and withal not very logical. "From ignorance arise forms, from forms arises consciousness, from consciousness arise name and bodiness; from name and bodiness arise the six senses (including understanding as the sixth) and their objects; from these arises contact; from this, feeling; from this, thirst; from this, clinging; from clinging arises becoming; from becoming arises birth; from birth arise age and sorrow. " One must gradually free himself from the ten fetters that bind to life, and so do away with the first of these twelve Nid[=a]nas, ignorance. ]

 [Footnote 33: _Mah[=a]vagga_, X. 3 (SBE. XVII. 306). ]

 [Footnote 34 36 1: Compare Kern, the _Lotus_, III. 21, and Fausböll, _P[=a]r[=a]yana-sutta_, 9 (1131), the "deep and lovely voice of Buddha. " (SBE. XXI. 64, and X. 210. )]

 [Footnote 35: As Southern Buddhists are reckoned those of Ceylon, Burmah, Siam, etc. ]

 [Footnote 36: As Northern Buddhists are reckoned those of Nep[=a]l, Tibet, China, Corea, Japan, Java, Sumatra, Annam, and Cambodia. ]

 [Footnote 37: "Let your light so shine before the world, that you, having embraced the religious life according to so well-taught a doctrine and discipline, may be seen to be forbearing and mild. " (SBE. XVII. 305, David's and Oldenberg's translation. )]

 [Footnote 38: 'Removing pieces from a pile without moving the remainder' must, we presume, be jackstraws. ]

 [Footnote 39: For instance, rules for eating, drinking (liquor), and for bathing. The Buddhist monk, except in summer, bathed once a fortnight only. ]

 [Footnote 40: No one is so holy that sin does not hurt him, according to Buddhistic belief. The Brahman, on the contrary, was liable to become so holy that he could commit any sin and it did not affect his virtue, which he stored up in a heap by cumulative asceticism. ]

 [Footnote 41: The offering and reception of gifts is always accompanied with water, both in Buddhistic and Brahmanic circles. Whether this was a religious act or a legal sign of surrender we have not been able to discover. Perhaps it arose simply from water always being offered as refreshment to a guest (with fruit), as a sign of guest-friendship. ]

 [Footnote 42: Sakyaputtiya Samanas, _i. E_. , Buddhists. ]

 [Footnote 43: In the case of a monk having carnal connection with a nun the penalty was instant expulsion(_ib_. 60). The nuns were subject to the monks and kept strictly in hand, obliged always to greet the monks first, to go to lessons once a fortnight, and so forth. ]

 [Footnote 44: Mah[=a]sudassana, the great King of Glory whose city is described with its four gates, one of gold, one of silver, one of Jade and one of crystal, etc. The earlier Buddha had as 'king of glory' 84, 000 wives and other comforts quite as remarkable. ]

 [Footnote 45: Translated by Davids, _Buddhist Suttas_ and _Hibbert Lectures_. ]

 [Footnote 46: What we have several times had to call attention to is shown again by the side light of Buddhism to be the case in Brahmanic circles, namely, that even in Buddha's day while Brahm[=a] is the god of the thinkers Indra is the god of the people (together with Vishnu and Çiva, if the texts are as old as they pretend to be). ]

 [Footnote 47: _Mah[=a]parinibb[=a]na_ iii, to which Rhys Davids refers, is scarcely a fair parallel. ]

 [Footnote 48: The imitation of the original play on words is Rhys Davids', who has translated these Suttas in SBE. Vol. XI. For the following see Fausböll, _ib_. Vol. X. ]

 [Footnote 49: After one enters on the stream of holiness there are only seven more possible births on earth, with one in heaven; then he becomes _arhat_, venerable, perfected, and enters Nirv[=a]na. ]

 [Footnote 50: Compare the fairies and spirits in _ib_. V. 10; and in i. 31, 'give gifts to the gods. ']

 [Footnote 51: We agree with Rhys Davids, _Buddhism_, pp. 111, 207, that Buddha himself was an atheist; but to the statement that Nirv[=a]na was the "extinction of that sinful, grasping condition of mind and heart which would otherwise be the cause of renewed individual existences" should in our opinion be added "and therewith the extinction of individuality. " Compare Rhys Davids' _Hibbert Lectures_, p. 253. ]

 [Footnote 52: Compare the definition of an 'outcast' in the _Vasala-sutta_: "He that gets angry and feels hatred, a wicked man, a hypocrite, he that embraces wrong views and is deceitful, such an one is an outcast, and he that has no compassion for living things. "]

 [Footnote 53: Compare _ib_. 5. 36: "In due course he spoke, of charity, morality, heaven, pleasure, and the advantage of renunciation. "]

 [Footnote 54: See especially the _Nandaman. , Paramatthaka, M[=a]gandiya_, and _Suddhatthaka Suttas_, translated by Fausböll, SBE. Vol. X. ]

 [Footnote 55: Fausböll, in SBE. Vol. X, Suttanip[=a]ta. ]

 [Footnote 56: The distinction between the Northern and Southern doctrine is indicated by the terms 'Great Vehicle' and 'Little Vehicle' respectively, the former the works of N[=a]g[=a]rjuna's school (see below). ]

 [Footnote 57: As M[=a]itrakanyaka Buddha came once to earth "to redeem the sins of men. "]

 [Footnote 58: Of historic interest is the rapport between Brahmanic, Jain. And Buddhist tales. A case of this sort has been carefully worked out by Leumann, _Die Legende von Citta und Sambh[=u]ta_, WZKM. V. III; vi. 1. ]

 [Footnote 59: "The gods who were worshipped as true divinities in India have been rendered false . . . By my zeal"; inscription cited by Barth, p. 135. But Açoka was a very tolerant prince. Barth's notion of Buddhistic persecution can hardly be correct. ]

 [Footnote 60: Köppen, _Die Religion des Buddha_, p. 198. ]

 [Footnote 61: Not to be confused with the seventeen heresies and sixty-three different philosophical systems in the church itself. ]

 [Footnote 62: For more details see Barth, _loc. Cit_. , p. 130 ff. According to tradition Buddhism was introduced into Tibet in the fourth century, A. D. , the first missionaries coming from Nep[=a]l (Rockhill, p. 210). ]

 [Footnote 63: Barth justly discredits the tale of Buddhism having been persecuted out of India. In this sketch of later Buddhism we can but follow this author's admirable summary of the causes of Buddhistic decline, especially agreeing with him in assigning the first place to the torpidity of the later church in matters of religion. It was become a great machine, its spiritual enthusiasm had been exhausted; it had nothing poetical or beautiful save the legend of Buddha, and this had lost its freshness; for Buddha was now, in fact, only a grinning idol. ]

 [Footnote 64: Here are developed fully the stories of hells, angels, and all supernatural paraphernalia, together with theism, idolatry, and the completed monastic system; magic, fable, absurd calculations in regard to nothings, and spiritual emptiness. ]

 [Footnote 65: At the same time the Ceylon canon was fixed by the commentary of Buddhaghosha. ]

 [Footnote 66: Later it follows the mystical school. Both schools have been affected by Brahmanism. The Great Vehicle, founded by N[=a]g[=a]rjuna, was recognized at a fourth council in Kashmeer about the time of the Christian era. Compare Köppen, p. 199. ]

 [Footnote 67: On the Lamaistic hierarchy and system of succession see Mayers, JRAS. IV. 284. ]

 [Footnote 68: For the same reason we do not enter upon the outer form of Buddhism as expressed in demonology, snake-worship (JRAS. Xii. 286) and symbolism (_ib_. OS. Xiii. 71, 114). ]

 [Footnote 69: SBE. Vol. X, part ii, p. 3. ]

 [Footnote 70: Dhammapada (Franke, ZDMG. Xlvi, 731). In Sanskrit one has _dharmapatha_ with the same sense. The text in the main is as translated by Müller, separately, 1872, and in SBE. , voL x. It was translated by Weber, _Streifen_. I. 112, in 1860. ]

 [Footnote 71: That is, they die no more; they are free from the chain; they enter Nirv[=a]na. ]

 [Footnote 72: Buddha's words on becoming Buddha. ]

 [Footnote 73: It is to be observed that transmigration into animal forms is scarcely recognized by Buddha. He assumes only men and superior beings as subjects of _Karma_. Compare Rhys Davids' _Lectures_, pp. 105, 107. To the same scholar is due the statement that he was the first to recognize the true meaning of Nirv[=a]na, 'extinction (not of soul but) of lust, anger, and ignorance. ' For divisions of Buddhist literature other than the Tripitaka the same author's _Hibbert Lectures_ may be consulted (see also Müller, SBE. X, Introduction, p. I). ]

 * * * * *

CHAPTER XIV. 

EARLY HINDUISM. 

While the great heresies that we have been describing were agitatingthe eastern part of India, [1] the old home of Brahmanism in the Westremained true, in name if not in fact, to the ancient faith. But inreality changes almost as great as those of the formal heresies weretaking place at the core of Brahmanism itself, which, no longer ableto be the religion of a few clans, was now engaged in the gigantictask of remodelling and assimilating the indigenous beliefs andreligious practices of its new environment. This was not a consciousact on the part of Brahmanism. At first it was undertaken almostunwittingly, and it was accomplished later not without repugnance. Butto perform this task was the condition of continued existence. Brahmanism had to expand, or shrink, wither, and die. 

For a thousand years almost the only source of information in regardto this new growth is contained in the epic poetry of the time, withthe help of a few additional facts from the law, and some side lightfrom inscriptions. It is here that Vishnuism and Çivaism are found asfully developed sectarian beliefs, accepted by Brahmanism with more orless distrust, and in more or less fulness of faith. It is to the epicthat one must turn to study the budding and gradual flowering of themodern religions, which have cast strict orthodoxy into the shade. 

Of the two epics, one, the R[=a]m[=a]yana, [2] has become the OldTestament of the Ramaite Vishnuites of the present day. TheBh[=a]rata, [3] on the other hand, is scriptural for all sects, becauseit is more universal. The former epic, in its present form, is whatthe Hindus call an 'art-poem, ' and in its finish, its exclusivelyromantic style, and its total lack of nervous dramatic power, it isprobably, as the Hindus claim, the work of one man, V[=a]lm[=i]ki, whotook the ancient legends of Eastern India and moulded them into astupid sectarian poem. On the other hand, the Bh[=a]rata is of no onehand, either in origin or in final redaction; nor is it of one sect;nor has it apparently been thoroughly affected, as has theR[=a]m[=a]yana, by Buddhistic influences. Moreover, in the hugeconglomeration of stirring adventure, legend, myth, history, andsuperstition which goes to make up the great epic there is contained afar truer picture of the vulgar custom, belief, and religion of thetime than the too polished composition of V[=a]lm[=i]ki is able toafford, despite the fact that the latter also has many popularelements welded into it. There are, in fact, only two national worksin India, only two works which, withal, not in their entirety, but intheir nucleus, after one has stripped each of its priestly toggery, reflect dimly the heart of the people, not the cleverness of one man, or the pedantry of schools. For a few Vedic hymns and a few Bh[=a]ratascenes make all the literature, with perhaps the exception of somefables, that is not markedly dogmatic, pedantic, or 'artificial. '[4]So true is this that even in the case of the R[=a]m[=a]yana one neverfeels that he is getting from it the genuine belief of the people, butonly that form of popular belief which V[=a]lm[=i]ki has chosen to letstand in his version of the old tale. The great epic is heroic, V[=a]lm[=i]ki's poem is romantic; the former is real, the latter isartificial; and the religious gleaning from each corresponds to thisdistinction. [5]

Ths Bh[=a]rata, like other Hindu works, is of uncertain date, but itwas completed as a 'Great Bh[=a]rata' by the end of the sixth centuryA. D. , and the characters of the story are mentioned, as well known, byP[=a]nini, whose work probably belongs to the fourth century B. C. Furthermore, Dio Chrysostomos, probably citing from Megasthenes, refers to it; and the latter authority describes the worship of thechief gods of the epic; while the work is named in one of the domesticS[=u]tras, and a verse is cited from it in the legal Sutra ofB[=a]udh[=a]yana. [6] On the other hand, in its latest growth it is ona par with the earlier Pur[=a]nas, but it is not quite so advanced insectarianism as even the oldest of these writings. It may, then, bereckoned as tolerably certain that the beginnings of the epic datefrom the fourth or fifth century before the Christian era, and that itwas quite a respectable work by the time that era began; after whichit continued to grow for five centuries more. [7] Its religiousimportance can scarcely be overestimated. In 600 A. D. , far away fromits native home, in Cambodia, it was encircled with a temple, and anendowment was made by the king providing for the daily recitation ofthe poem. Its legal verses are authoritative; its religion is to-daythat of India as a whole. The latest large additions to it were, as wethink, the Book of Laws, the Book of Peace, and the genealogy ofVishnu, which together form a sort of pseudo-epic. But portions ofother books, notably the first, fourth, and seventh, are probablyalmost as recent as are the more palpable interpolations. 

The Bh[=a]rata (or the epic [Greek: _kat exochên_] gives us our firstview of Hinduism in its sectarian developments. But no less does itshow us a changing Brahmanism. The most typical change in theBrahmanism of this period, which covers all that time called by Müllerthe era of the Renaissance, and ends with the pedantically piquantliterature of the drama, [8] is the abnormal growth of the asceticreligious exercise. Older Brahmanism, like the sects, admitted Yogisand ascetics of various kinds, but their aim was to attain onenesswith God; and 'union' (with God) is the _yoga_ (Latin _jugum_ has thesame origin) which they sought. But it was not long before the starvedascetic, with his wild appearance and great reputation for sanctity, inspired an awe which, in the unscrupulous, was easily turned toadvantage. The Yogi became more or less of a charlatan, more or lessof a juggler. Nor was this all. Yoga-practices began to takeprecedence before other religious practices. In the Br[=a]hmanas it isthe sacrifice that is god-compelling; but in the epic, althoughsacrifice has its place, yet when miraculous power is exerted, it isdue chiefly to Yoga concentration, or to the equally general use offormulae; not formulae as part of a sacrifice, but as in themselvespotent; and mysterious _mantras_, used by priest and warrior alike, serve every end of magic. [9] Apart from acquisition of power, thisYoga-training is, moreover, all that is needful from the point of viewof righteousness. Physical prowess here is the one thing admirable. Tostand for years on one leg, to be eaten by ants, to be in every way anascetic of the most stoical sort, is the truest religion. Such anascetic has no ordinary rules of morality. In fact, his practices aremost peculiar, for to seduce young women is one of his commonestoccupations; and in his anger to cause an injury to his foes is one ofthe ends for which he toils. The gods are nothing to him. They arepuppets whom he makes shake and tremble at will. As portrayed in theepic, in terms of common sense, the Muni (silent saint) is amorose[10] and very vulgar-minded old man, who seeks to intimidateothers by a show of miraculous power. In the matter of penances thoseof the law are extended beyond all bounds. The caste-restrictions areof the closest, and the most heinous crime is to commit an offenceagainst caste-order. On the other hand, the greatest merit is to givegifts to priests. This had already proceeded far enough, as wasindicated by a passage cited above from Manu. But in the epic thegreed and capacity of the priest exceeds all imaginable limits. Hetakes whatever he can get and asks for more. He has, by his ownshowing, scarcely one estimable trait. Avarice, cupidity, sensuality, gluttony, love of finery, effeminacy, meanness, and pride--everythingcharged against him by the Buddhist--are his most markedcharacteristics. He appears, however, to be worse than he always was. For nothing is plainer, from this very epic, than that the priests, although united as a caste, were sharply distinguished in their lives. The ascetic described above represents the fourth period of thepriestly life. Below these stood (apart from students)[11] hermits andhouseholders. The householders, or such of them as the epicunfortunately is busied with, the royal priests, seem to be those thatare in reality priests only in name. In the king's palace, hisconstant advisors, his most unscrupulous upholders in wickedness, theygave themselves up to quest of wealth and power. But one would err ifhe thus dismissed them all. There were others that had no preferment, who lived in quiet content in their own houses, and deserved none ofthe opprobrium rightly bestowed upon their hypocritical brothers. Thehermits, too, appear to have been a mild and inoffensive race, notpresuming too much on their caste-privileges. 

To offset rapaciousness there are tomes of morality of the purestsort. Even in the later additions to the epic one reads: "Away withgifts; receiving gifts is sinful. The silkworm dies of its wealth"(xii. 330. 29). One should compare, again, the exalted verse(Buddhistic in tone) of _ib_. 321. 47: "The red garment, the vow ofsilence, the three-fold staff, the water-pot--these only lead astray;they do not make for salvation. " There were doubtless good and badpriests, but the peculiarity of the epic priest, rapacious andlustful, is that he glories in his sins. 

The chief objects of worship (except for the influence of thesectarian religions) were priests, Manes, and, for form's sake, theVedic gods. These gods, with the addition of the Hindu Plutus (Kubera, the god of riches), are now called the eight 'world-guardians, ' viz. , Indra, Yama, Varuna, Kubera, Agni, S[=u]rya, V[=a]yu, Soma, and areusually simple and shadowy subordinates of the greater new gods. 

In the shifting of religious opinion and in the development oftheological conceptions what difference can be traced between the samegods as worshipped in the Veda and as worshipped in the epic? Althoughthe Vedic divinities have been twice superseded, once by theFather-god and again by the _[=a]tm[=a]_, Lord, they still remainadorable and adored, active in many ways, though passive before thegreat All-god. It is, indeed, extremely difficult, owing to thesuperstruction of sectarian belief, to get down to thefoundation-religion of the epic. The best one can do is to see in whatway the old gods differ, as represented in the poem, from their olderselves of the Rig Veda. From this point of view alone, and entirelyirrespective of the sects, manifold changes will be seen to have takenplace. Great Soma is no more. Soma is there, the moon, but the gloryof the Vedic Soma has departed. His lunar representative is of littleimportance. Agni, too, is changed. As Fire in the Rig Veda is not onlythe altar-fire, but also common, every-day fire, so, too, in the epicthis god is the material flame, and as such even performs his greatestdeeds for his worshippers. He takes on every form, even becoming apriest, and a dove. He remains the priest of the gods, but his day ofaction in war is over. He no longer wins battles. But he burns down aforest to aid his party. For the Vedic gods are now but weak partizansof the combatants. In the sectarian parts of the epic Agni is only apuppet. His new representative, Skanda, is the chief battle-god, aname almost unknown before. He himself is either the son of Vishnu ora form of Çiva. He is the All-god, the _[=a]tm[=a]_. It is he whoburns the world when the time shall have come for the generaldestruction. 

The high and mighty Varuna of the Rig Veda is no longer great. He isno longer serene. He descends and fights on earth. Indra, too, battleswith Vritra as of old, but he is quite anthropomorphic, and of nomarked value in the contest of heroes. Not only this, but all the godstogether are represented as weaker than a good hero, not to speak of apriestly ascetic. In a word, the gods are believed in, but with what abelief! They no longer, as natural powers, inspire special respect. Their nature-origin is for the most part lost. They are thoroughlyanthropomorphic. Even S[=u]rya, the sun, in action if not inlaudation, is often more man than god. This gives a strange effect tothe epic battle-scenes as compared with those of Homer. Unless Vishnuis active on the field the action is essentially human. No great godor goddess stands ready to save the fainting warrior. He fights andfalls alone. Save for the caresses and plaudits of the half-gods, themost that the Vedic gods can do is to wipe away the sweat from thehero's brow. [12] The All-god does not take the place of the band ofwatchful and helpful gods pictured by Homer. Vishnu fights on thefield; he saves only his protégés, and much as a mortal warrior woulddo it. But the Vedic gods hang like a mist upon the edge of battle, and are all but idle spectators of the scene. Abstractions, as well asthe All-god, have routed them, and Dharma or Duty is a greater godthan Indra. But there is an older side to this, as we shall presentlyshow. On the moral side the heroes of the epic profess great belief inthe power and awfulness of this god Duty. And so far as go rules ofchivalry, they are theoretically moral. Practically they are savage, and their religion does not interfere with their brutal barbarity. Thetendency to cite divine instances of sin as excuse for committing itis, however, rebuked: "One should neither practice nor blame the(wrong) acts of gods and seers, " xii. 292. 17-18. 

From an eschatological point of view it is most difficult to get backof the statements made by the priestly composers, [13] who, in theirvarious reëditings of the epic, uniformly have given the pantheisticgoal as that in which the characters believe. But it is evident thatthe warriors were not much affected by this doctrine. To them therewas one law of righteousness exceeding all others--to die on the fieldof battle. And for such as did so, over and over again is theassurance given that 'happiness in Indra's heaven' is their reward. And probably a true note is struck in this reiterated promise. To themass of the vulgar, union with _brahma_ would have been no attractiveend. 

It is interesting to see the remains of the older belief stillflourishing in midst of epic pantheism. Although Indra has no suchhymn as has S[=u]rya, yet is he still lauded, and he is a very realperson to the knight who seeks his heaven. [14] In fact, so long asnatural phenomena were regarded as divine, so long as thunder wasgodly, it was but a secondary question which name the god bore;whether he was the 'chief and king of gods, ' or Vishnu manifestinghimself in a special form. This form, at any rate, was to endure assuch till the end of the cycle. There are other Indras. Each cycle hasits own (i. 197. 29). But sufficient unto the age is the god thereof. If, relinquishing the higher bliss of absorption, the knight soughtonly Indra's heaven, and believed he was to find it, then his beliefpractically does not differ much from that of his ancestor, whoaccepts Indra as an ultimate, natural power. The question ariseswhether, after all, the Indra-worship of the epic is not ratherpopular than merely old and preserved. Certainly the reality of thebelief seems quite as strong as that of the ever-newly convertedsectary. It may be doubted whether the distribution of theologicalbelief is very different in the epic and Vedic ages. Philosophicalpantheism is very old in India. The priest believes one thing; thevulgar, another. The priest of the Vedic age, like the philosopher ofthe next age, and like the later sectarian, has a belief which runsahead of the popular religion. But the popular religion in its salientfeatures still remains about the same. Arjuna, the epic hero, the petof Krishna, visits Indra's heaven and stays there five years. It isthe old Vedic gods to whom he turns for weapons, till the Çivaitemakes Indra send the knight further, to Çiva himself. The old name, king of the Vasus, is still retained for Indra; and though the 'divineweapons, ' which are winged with sacred formulae, are said to be morethan a match for the gods; though in many a passage the knight and thesaint make Indra tremble, yet still appear, through the mists ofascetic and sectarian novelties, Indra's heaven and his grandeur, shining with something of their old glory. Vishnu still shows hissolar origin. Of him and of the sun is it said in identical words:"The sun protects and devours all, " and " Vishnu protects and devours" (of Vishnu, passim; of the sun, iii. 33. 71). A good deal of oldstuff is left in the Forest Book amongst the absurd tales of holywatering places. One finds repeated several times the Vedic account ofIndra's fight with Vritra, the former's thunderbolt, however, beingnow made of a saint's bones (ii. Ch. 100-105). Agni is lauded (_ib_. Ch. 123). To the Açvins[15] there is one old hymn which contains Vedicforms (i. 3). Varuna is still lord of the West, and goes accompaniedwith the rivers, 'male and female, ' with snakes, and demons, andhalf-gods _(d[=a]ityas, s[=a]dhyas, d[=a]ivatas_). Later, but earlierthan the pseudo-epic, there stands with these gods Kubera, the god ofwealth, the 'jewel-giver, ' who is the guardian of travellers, the kingof those demons called Yakshas, which the later sect makes servants ofÇiva. He is variously named;[16] he is a dwarf; he dwells in theNorth, in Mt. K[=a]il[=a]sa, and has a demoniac gate-keeper, Macakruka. Another newer god is the one already referred to, DharmaV[=a]ivasvata, or Justice (Virtue, Right), the son of the sun, a titleof Yama older than the Vedas. He is also the father of the newlove-god, K[=a]ma. It is necessary to indicate the names of the godsand their functions, lest one imagine that with pantheism the Vedicreligion expired. Even that old, impious Brahmanic fable crops outagain: "The devils were the older brothers of the gods, and wereconquered by the gods only with trickery" (in. 33. 60), an interestingreminiscence of the fact that the later name for evil spirit wasoriginally the one applied to the great and good spirit (Asura thesame with Ahura). [17] According to a rather late chapter in the secondbook each of the great Vedic gods has a special paradise of his own, the most remarkable feature of the account being that Indra's heavenis filled with saints, having only one king in it--a view quiteforeign to the teaching that is current elsewhere in the epic. Wherethe sectarian doctrine would oppose the old belief it set aboveIndra's heaven another, of Brahm[=a], and above that a third, ofVishnu (i. 89. 16 ff. ). According to one passage Mt. Mandara[18] is asort of Indian Olympus. Another account speaks of the Him[=a]layas, Himavat, as 'the divine mountain, beloved of the gods, ' though theknight goes thence to Gandham[=a]dana, and thence to Indrak[=i]la, tofind the gods' habitat (III. 37. 41). Personified powers lie allaround the religious Hindu. And this is especially true of the epiccharacter. He prays to Mt. Mandara, and to rivers, above all to theGanges. Mt. Kol[=a]hala is divine, and begets divine offspring on ariver (I. 63). The Vindhya range of mountains rivals the fabled Meru(around which course the sun and all the heavenly bodies), and this, too, is the object of devotion and prayer. [19] In one passage it issaid that in Beh[=a]r (M[=a]gadha) there was a peak which wascontinuously 'worshipped with offerings of flowers and perfumes, 'exactly as if it were a god. The reason why flowers are given and wornis that they bring good luck, it is said in the same chapter (II. 21. 15, 20, 51). 

What is, perhaps, the most striking feature of Hindu religiousthought, as a whole, is the steadfastness with which survive, even inthe epic and in Buddhism, the forms and formulae of the older faith. At a time when pantheism or nihilism is the avowed creed the ancientgods still exist, weak, indeed, yet infused with a true immortality. This is noticeable even more in unnoticeable ways, in the turns ofspeech, in little comparisons, in the hymns, in short, in the by-playof the epic. 'Withered are the garlands of the gods, and their gloryis departed, '[20] but they still receive homage in time of need. Andin that homage is to be seen, and from the same cause, the revived orsurviving worship of the Veda. Each god in turn is mighty, though Agniis the mightiest of the old divinities. In an epic hymn to him it issaid: "Thou art the mouth of the worlds; the poets declare thee to beone and three-fold; as carrier of the sacrifice they arrange theeeight-fold. By thee was all created, say the highest seers. Prieststhat have made reverence to thee attain the eternal course their actshave won, together with their wives and sons. They call thee thewater-giver in the air, together with lightning. On thee first dependswater. Thou art the creator and Brihaspati, thou art the two Horsemen, the two Yamas, Mitra, Soma, Wind" (i. 229. 23 ff. ). [21] And yet thisis in a pantheistic environment! The Rig Veda is directly invoked, though, of course, not directly cited, in the old hymn to theHorsemen, who are, however, elsewhere put with low animals andGuhyakas, demons (i. 66). [22] They are the "physicians of the gods, "the "first-born" the golden birds which weave the white and black oftime, create the wheel of time with all its seasons, and make the sunand sky (i. 3. 55 ff. , "_v[=a]gbhir [r. ]gbhis_"). Indra himself isextolled in Kadr[=u]'s hymn; he is the slayer of Namuci, the lord ofÇac[=i]; he is the great cloud, cloud and its thunder, creator anddestroyer; he is Vishnu, 'Soma, greatly praised, ' as well as fire, air, time in all its divisions, earth and ocean; when lauded he drinksthe _soma_, and he is sung in the Ved[=a]ngas (i. 25. 7 ff. ). Praisedwith this hymn in time of need of rain, Indra "commanded the clouds, saying, 'rain down the ambrosia'" (26. 2); where there is still therain as synonymous with ambrosia, and Indra not very differentlyconceived from his Vedic self. Thus in comparisons: "As Indra standingin heaven brings bliss to the world of the living, so Vidura everbrought bliss to the Pandus" (i. 61. 15). But at the same time whatchanges! The gods assemble and sing a hymn to Garuda, the epic form ofGarutman, the heavenly bird, who here steals the _soma_ vainly guardedby the gods. Garuda, too, is Praj[=a]pati, Indra, and so forth. [23]The gods are no longer divinities distinct from the dead Fathers, forthey are "identical in being. " So Agni says when the latter is cursedby Bhrigu: "The divinities and the Manes are satisfied by the oblationin fire. The hosts of gods are waters, so, too, are the Manes. Thefeasts of the new and full moon belong to the gods with the Manes;hence the Manes are divinities and the divinities are Manes. They areof one being (_ek[i]bh[=u]t[=a]s_). I (Fire) am the mouth of both, forboth eat the oblation poured upon me. The Manes at the new moon, thegods at the full, are fed by my mouth" (i. 7. 7 ff. ). [24] Such godsthe epic hero fears not (i. 227. 38 ff. ). Hymns to them are paralleledby hymns to snakes, as in i. 3. 134 ff. , against whom is made the"_sarpasattram_ (snake sacrifice) of the Pur[=a]nas" (i. 51. 6). Divinity is universal. Knights are as divine as the divinest god, theAll-god. Arjuna, the god-born man, to whom Krishna reveals the DivineSong, is himself god. [25] In this case whether god becomes human, or_vice versa_, no one knows. 

Under the all embracing cloak of pantheism the heart of the epicconceals many an ancient rite and superstition. Here is the covenantof blood, the covenant of death (represented by the modern'sitting'[26]), and the covenant of water, which symbolizes bothfriendship and the solemnity of the curse. The former are illustratedby Bhima's drinking blood as a sign that he will fulfil his vow, [27]and by R[=a]ma lying by Ocean to die unless Ocean grants his wish. Ofthe water-rite that of offering water in hospitality and as a form inreception of gifts is general; that of cursing by 'touching water'(_v[=a]ry upasp[r. ]çya_), occurs in iii. 10. 32. For this purposeholy-grass and other symbols are known also, [28] and formulae yieldonly in potency to love-philters and magic drugs. Another covenantbesides those just noticed seems to lie concealed in the avoidance ofthe door when injury is intended. If one goes in by the door he is aguest who has anticipated hospitality, and then he dares not refusethe respect and offering of water, etc, which makes the formal pact offriendship. If, on the contrary, he does not go in by the door he isnot obliged to receive the offering, and may remain as a foe in thehouse (or in the city) of his enemy, with intent to kill, but withoutmoral wrong. This may be implied in the end of the epic, whereAçvatth[=a]man, intent on secret murder of his foe, is prevented bygod Çiva from entering in at the gate, but going in by stealth, and'not by the door' of the camp, gets to his foe, who lies asleep, andkills him (x. 8. 10). This might be thought, indeed, to be merelystrategic, but it is in accordance with the strict law of all thelaw-books that one, in ordinary circumstances, shall avoid to enter atown or a house in any other way than through the door (Manu, iv. 73;Gaut. 9. 32, etc. ), and we think it has a moral significance, for this_a-dv[=a]ra_ (non-door) rule occurs again in the epic in just thecircumstances we have described. The heroes in this case are notafraid of their foe, who is in his town. They insult every one as theyapproach, but they find some other way of getting in than by passingthrough the gate, for the express purpose of being morally able tomake the king fight with them after they have entered his city. Andthey cite the rule 'according to law, ' which is that one may enter hisfoe's house by _a-dv[=a]ra, _ 'not by door, ' but his friend's houseonly 'by door. ' As they have not entered 'by door' they say they mayrefuse the hospitality which the king urges them to accept, and sothey kill him (ii. 21. 14, 53). Stepping in through the door seems, therefore, to be a tacit agreement that one will not injure theresident. [29]

In the epic, again, fetishism is found. The student of the 'science ofwar, ' in order to obtain his teacher's knowledge when the latter isaway, makes a clay image of the preceptor and worships this clay idol, practicing arms before it (i. 132. 33). Here too is embalmed thebelief that man's life may be bound up with that of some inanimatething, and the man perishes with the destruction of his psychicprototype (iii. 135). The old ordeals of fire and water arerecognized. "Fire does not burn the house of good men. " "If (as thisman asserts) he is Varuna's son, then let him enter water and let ussee if he will drown" (iii. 134. 27 ff. ). A human sacrifice isperformed (iii. 127); although the priest who performs it is cast intohell (_ib_. 128). [30] The teaching in regard to hells is about thesame with that already explained in connection with the law-books, butthe more definite physical interpretation of hell as a hole in theground (_garta_, just as in the Rig Veda) is retained. Agastya seeshis ancestors 'in a hole, ' which they call 'a hell' (_n[=i]ray[=a]_). This is evidently the hell known to the law-punsters and epic (i. 74. 39) as _puttra_, 'the _put_ hell' from which the son (_putra_)delivers (_tra_). For these ancestors are in the 'hole' becauseAgastya, their descendant, has not done his duty and begotten sons (i. 45. 13; iii. 96. 15); one son being 'no son' according to law and epic(i. 100. 68), and all the merit of sacrifice being equal to onlyone-sixteenth of that obtained by having a son. The teaching, again, in regard to the Fathers themselves (the Manes), while not differingmaterially from the older view, offers novelties which show how littlethe absorption-theory had taken hold of the religious consciousness. The very fact that the son is still considered to be as necessary asever (that he may offer food to his ancestors) shows that thebeliever, whatever his professed faith, expects to depend for blisshereafter upon his _post mortem_ meals, as much as did his fathersupon theirs. In the matter of the burial of the dead, one finds, whatis antique, that although according to the formal law only infants areburied, and adults are burned, yet was burial known, as in the Vedicage. And the still older exposure of the body, after the Iranianfashion, is not only hinted at as occurring here and there even beforethe epic, but in the epic these forms are all recognized as equallyapproved: "When a man dies he is burned or buried or exposed"(_nik[r. ][s. ]yate_)[31] it is said in i. 90. 17; and the narrator goeson to explain that the "hell on earth, " of which the auditor "hasnever heard" (vs. 6) is re-birth in low bodies, speaking of it as anew doctrine. "As if in a dream remaining conscious the spirit entersanother form"; the bad becoming insects and worms; the good going toheaven by means of the "seven gates, " viz. , penance, liberality, quietism, self-control, modesty, rectitude, and mercy. This is a unionof two views, and it is evidently the popular view, that, namely, thegood go to heaven while the bad go to new existence in a low form, asopposed to the more logical conception that both alike enter newforms, one good, the other bad. Then the established stadia, thepupil, the old teaching (_upanishad_) of the householders, and thewood-dwellers are described, with the remark that there is nouniformity of opinion in regard to them; but the ancient view cropsout again in the statement that one who dies as a forest-hermit"establishes in bliss" ten ancestors and ten descendants. In this partof the epic the Punj[=a]b is still near the theatre of events, the'centre region' being between the Ganges and Jumna (I. 87. 5);although the later additions to the poems show acquaintance with allcountries, known and unknown, and with peoples from all the world. Significant in xii. 61. 1, 2 is the name of the third order_bh[=a]ikshyacaryam_ 'beggarhood' (before the forest-hermit and afterthe householder). 

It was said above that the departed Fathers could assume a mortalform. In the formal classification of these demigods seven kinds ofManes are enumerated, the title of one subdivision being 'thoseembodied. ' Brahm[=a] is identified with the Father-god in connectionwith the Manes: "All the Manes worship Praj[=a]pati Brahm[=a], " in theparadise of Praj[=a]pati, where, by the way, are Çiva and Vishnu (II. 11. 45, 50, 52; 8. 30). According to this description 'kings andsinners, ' together with the Manes, are found in Yama's home, as wellas "those that die at the solstice" (II. 7 ff. ; 8. 31). Constantly thereader is impressed with the fact that the characters of the epic areacting and thinking in a way not conformable to the idea one mightform of the Hindu from the law. We have animadverted upon this pointelsewhere in connection with another matter. It is this factor thatmakes the study of the epic so invaluable as an offset to theverisimilitude of belief, even as belief is taught (not practiced) inthe law. There is a very old rule, for instance, against slaughteringanimals and eating meat; while to eat beef is a monstrous crime. Yetis it plain from the epic that meat-eating was customary, and Vedictexts are cited (_ iti çrutis_) to prove that this is permissible;while a king is extolled for slaughtering cattle (III. 208. 6-11). Itis said out and out in iii. 313. 86 that 'beef is food, ' _g[=a]urannam_. Deer are constantly eaten. There is an amusing protest againstthis practice, which was felt to be irreconcilable withthe _ahims[=a]_ (non-injury) doctrine, in III. 258, where the remnantof deer left in the forest come in a vision and beg to be spared. Adispute between gods and seers over vegetable sacrifices is recorded, XII. 338. Again, asceticism is not the duty of a warrior, but the epichero practices asceticism exactly as if he were a priest, or a Jain, although the warning is given that a warrior 'obtains a better lot'(_loka_) by dying in battle than by asceticism. The asceticism is, ofcourse, exaggerated, but an instance or two of what the Hindu expectsin this regard may not be without interest. The warrior who becomes anascetic eats leaves, and is clothed in grass. For one month he eatsfruits every third day (night); for another month every sixth day; foranother month every fortnight; and for the fourth month he lives onair, standing on tiptoe with arms stretched up. Another account saysthat the knight eats fruit for one month; water for one month; and forthe third month, nothing (III. 33. 73; 38. 22-26; 167). One maycompare with these ascetic practices, which are not so exaggerated, infact, as might be supposed, [32] the 'one-leg' practice of virtue, consisting in standing on one leg, _ekap[=a]dena_, for six months orlonger, as one is able (I. 170. 46; III. 12. 13-16). Since learningthe Vedas is a tiresome task, and ascetic practice makes it possibleto acquire anything, one is not surprised to find that a devoteeundertakes penance with this in view, and is only surprised whenIndra, who, to be sure has a personal interest in the Vedas, breaks inon the scene and rebukes the ascetic with the words: "Asceticismcannot teach the Vedas; go and be tutored by a teacher" (III. 135. 22). 

One finds in the epic the old belief that the stars are the souls ofthe departed, [33] and this occurs so often that it is another sign ofthe comparative newness of the pantheistic doctrine. When the hero, Arjuna, goes to heaven he approaches the stars, "which seen from earthlook small on account of their distance, " and finds them to beself-luminous refulgent saints, royal seers, and heroes slain inbattle, some of them also being nymphs and celestial singers. All ofthis is in contradiction both to the older and to the newer systems ofeschatology; but it is an ancient belief, and therefore it ispreserved. Indra's heaven, [34] Amar[=a]vati, lies above thesestars[35]] No less than five distinct beliefs are thus enunciated inregard to the fate of 'good men after death. If they believe in theAll-god they unite with him at once. Or they have a higher course, becoming gradually more elevated, as gods, etc, and ultimately 'enter'the All-god. Again they go to the world of Brahm[=a]. Again they go toIndra's heaven. Again they become stars. The two last beliefs are theoldest, the _brahmaloka_ belief is the next in order of time, and thefirst-mentioned are the latest to be adopted. The hero of the epicjust walks up to heaven, but his case is exceptional. 

While angels and spirits swarm about the world in every shape frommischievous or helpful fairies to R[=a]hu, whose head still swallowsthe sun, causing eclipses (I. 19. 9), there are a few that areespecially conspicuous. Chief of the good spirits, attendants ofIndra, are the Siddhas[36] 'saints, ' who occasionally appear to blessa hero in conjunction with 'beings invisible' (III. 37. 21). Theirname means literally 'blessed' or 'successful, ' and probably, like theseers, Rishis, they are the departed fathers in spiritual form. Theselatter form various classes. There are not only the 'great seers, ' andthe still greater '_brahma_-seers, ' and the 'god-seers, ' but there areeven 'devil-seers, ' and 'king-seers, ' these being spirits of priestsof royal lineages. [37] The evil spirits, like the gods, are sometimesgrouped in threes. In a blessing one cries out: "Farewell (_svastigacchahy an[=a]mayam_); I entreat the Vasus, Rudras, [=A]dityas, Marut-hosts and the All-gods to protect thee, together with theS[=a]dhyas; safety be to thee from all the evil beings that live inair, earth, and heaven, and from all others that dog thy path. "[38] InXII. 166. 61 ff. The devils fall to earth, mountains, water, and otherplaces. According to I. 19. 29. It is not long since the Asuras weredriven to take refuge in earth and salt water. [39]

These creatures have every kind of miraculous power, whether they begood or bad. Hanuman, famed in both epics, the divine monkey, withwhom is associated the divine 'king of bears' J[=a]mbavan (III. 280. 23), can grow greater than mortal eye can see (III. 150. 9). He isstill worshipped as a great god in South India. As an illustration ofepic spiritism the case of Ilvala may be taken. This devil, _d[=a]iteya_, had a trick of cooking his embodied younger brother, andgiving him to saints to eat. One saint, supposing the flesh to bemutton (here is saintly meat-eating!), devours the dainty viand; uponwhich the devil 'calls' his brother, who is obliged to come, whethereaten or not, and in coming bursts the saint that has eaten him (iii. 96). This is folk-lore; but what religion does not folk-lore contain!So, personified Fate holds its own as an inscrutable power, mightierthan others. [40] There is another touch of primitive religious feelingwhich reminds one of the usage in Iceland, where, if a stranger knocksat the door and the one within asks 'who is there?' the guest answers, 'God. ' So in the epic it is said that 'every guest is god Indra'(_Parjanyo nn[=a]nusa[. M]caran_, iii. 200. 123. In the epic Parjanya, the rain-god, and Indra are the same). Of popular old tales ofreligious bearing may be mentioned the retention and elaboration ofthe Brahmanic deluge-story, with Manu as Noah (iii. 187); the Açvins'feats in rejuvenating (iii. 123); the combats of the gods with thedemons (Namuci, Çambara, Vala, Vritra, Prahl[=a]da, Naraka), etc. (iii. 168). 

Turning now to some of the newer traits in the epic, one notices firstthat, while the old sacrifices still obtain, especially thehorse-sacrifice, the _r[=a]jas[=u]ya_ and the less meritorious_v[=a]japeya, _ together with the monthly and seasonal sacrifices, there is in practice a leaning rather to new sacrifices, and a newcult. The _soma_ is scarce, and the _p[=u]tika_ plant is accepted asits substitute (iii. 35. 33) in a matter-of-course way, as if thissubstitution, permitted of old by law, were now common. The sacrificeof the widow is recognized, in the case of the wives of kings, as ameans of obtaining bliss for a woman, [41] for the religion of the epicis not entirely careless of woman. Somewhat new, however, is theself-immolation of a man upon the pyre of his son. Such a case isrecorded in iii. 137. 19. Where a father burns his son's body, andthen himself enters the fire. New also, of course, are the sectarianfestivals and sacrifices; and pronounced is the gain in the godhead ofpriests, king, parents, elder brother, and husband. The priest haslong been regarded as a god, but in the epic he is god of gods, although one can trace even here a growth in adulation. [42] The king, too, has been identified before this period with the gods. But in theepic he is to his people an absolute divinity, [43] and so are theparents to the son;[44] while, since the elder brother is the samewith a father, when the father is dead the younger brother worshipsthe elder. So also the wife's god is her husband; for higher even thanthat of the priest is the husband's divinity (III. 206). The wife'sreligious service is not concerned with feasts to the Manes, withsacrifice to the gods, nor with studying the Veda. In all these shehas no part. Her religion is to serve her husband (III. 205. 23), andto die, if worthy of the honor, on his funeral pyre. Otherwise theepic woman has religious practices only in visiting the holywatering-places, which now abound, and in reading the epic itself. Forit is said of both practices: "Whether man or woman read this book (or'visit this holy pool') he or she is freed from sin" (so in III. 82. 33: "Every sin committed since birth by man or woman is absolved bybathing in 'holy Pushkara"). It may be remarked that as a generalthing the deities invoked by women are, by predilection, femaledivinities, some of them being mere abstractions, while 'the Creator'is often the only god in the woman's list, except, of course, thepriests: "Reverence to priests, and to the Creator . . . May Hr[=i], Çr[=i] (Modesty and Beauty), Fame, Glory, Prosperity, Um[=a] (Çiva'swife), Lakshmi (Vishnu's wife), and also Sarasvat[=i], (may all thesefemale divinities) guard thy path, because thou reverest thy elderbrother, " is a woman's prayer (III. 37. 26-33). [45]

Of the sectarian cults just mentioned the _brahmamaha_, I. 164. 20, elsewhere referred to, is the all-caste[46] feast in honor ofBrahm[=a] (or of the Brahmans); as _ib_. 143. 3 one finds a_sam[=a]ja_ in honor of Çiva; and distinctly in honor of the same godof horror is the sacrifice, _i. E. _, immolation, of one hundred kings, who are collected "in the temple of Çiva, " to be slaughtered likecattle in M[=a]gadha (II. 15. 23); an act which the heroes of the epicprevent, and look upon with scorn. [47] As a substitute for the_r[=a]jas[=u]ya_, which may be connected with the human sacrifice(_Ind. Streifen_, I. 61), but is the best sacrifice because it has thebest largesse (III. 255. 12), the Vaishnava is suggested toDuryodhana. It is a great _sattram_ or long sacrifice to Vishnu (_ib_. 15 and 19); longer than a Vishnuprabodha (26 Oct. ). There is a Smritirite described in III. 198. 13 as a _svastiv[=a]canam_, a ceremony toobtain a heavenly chariot which brings prosperity, the priests beinginvoked for blessings (_svasti_). Quite modern, comparativelyspeaking, is the cult of holy pools; but it is to be observed that theblessings expected are rarely more than the acquirement of_brahma_-worlds, so that the institution seems to be at least olderthan the sectarian religions, although naturally among the holy poolsis intruded a Vishnu-pool. This religious rite cannot be passed overin silence. The custom is late Brahmanic (as above), and stillsurvives. It has been an aspect of Hindu religion for centuries, notonly in the view taken of the pools, but even occasionally in theplace itself. Thus the Ganges, Gay[=a], Pray[=a]ga, and Kuru-Plain areto-day most holy, and they are mentioned as among the holiest in theepic catalogue. [48] Soma is now revamped by a bath in a holy pool (IX. 35. 75). As in every antithesis of act and thought there are notlacking passages in the epic which decry the pools in comparison withholy life as a means of salvation. Thus in III. 82. 9 ff. , the poetsays: "The fruit of pilgrimage (to holy pools)--he whose hands, feet, and mind are controlled;[49] he who has knowledge, asceticism, andfame, he gets all the fruit that holy pools can give. If one is aversefrom receiving gifts, content, freed from egoism, if one injures not, and acts disinterestedly, if one is not gluttonous, or carnal-minded, he is freed from sin. Let one (not bathe in pools but) be withoutwrath, truthful, firm in his vows, seeing his self in all beings. "This is, however, a protest little heeded. [50] Pilgrimage is made topool and plain, to mountain, tree, and river. Even then, as now, ofall pilgrimages that to Ganges was most esteemed: "Originally all wereholy; in the second age Pushkara[51] was holy; in the third age thePlain of the Kurus was holy; and in this age Ganges is holy" (III. 85. 90). [52] Besides Ganges, the Plain of the Kurus and Pray[=a]ga, thejunction of Ganges and Jumna, get the highest laudation. Other rivers, such as the Gomal and Sarasvat[=i], are also extolled, and the list isvery long of places which to see or to bathe in releases from sin. "Hewho bathes in Ganges purifies seven descendants. [53] As long as thebones of a man touch Ganges-water so long that man is magnified inheaven. " Again: "No place of pilgrimage is better than Ganges; no godis better than Vishnu; nothing is better than _brahma_--so said thesire of the gods" (iii. 85. 94-96). The very dust of Kuru-Plain makesone holy, the sight of it purifies; he that lives south of theSarasvat[=i], north of the Drishadvat[=i] (_i. E_. , in Kuru-Plain), helives in the third heaven (iii. 83. 1-3=203-205[54]). This sort ofexpiation for sin is implied in a more general way by the remark thatthere are three kinds of purity, one of speech, one of act, and one ofwater (iii. 200. 82). But in the epic there is still another means ofexpiating sin, one that is indicated in the Brahmanic rule that if awoman is an adulteress she destroys half her sin by confessing it (asabove), where, however, repentance is rather implied than commanded. But in the epic Pur[=a]na it is distinctly stated as a Çruti, or tritesaying, that if one repents he is freed from his sin; _na tatkury[=a]m punar_ is the formula he must use, 'I will not do so again, 'and then he is released from even the sin that he is going to commit asecond time, as if by a ceremony--so is the Çruti in the laws, _dharmas_ (iii. 207. 51, 52). [55] Confession to the family priest isenjoined, in xii. 268. 14, to escape punishment. 

Two other religious practices in the epic are noteworthy. The first isthe extension of idolatry in pictures. The amiable 'goddess of thehouse' is represented, to be sure, as a R[=a]kshas[=i], or demoniacpower, whose name is Jar[=a]. But she was created by theSelf-existent, and is really very friendly, under certain conditions:"Whoever delineates me with faith in his house, he increases inchildren; otherwise he would be destroyed. " She is worshipped, _i. E_. , her painted image is worshipped, with perfumes, flowers, incense, food, and other enjoyable things (II. 18). [56] Another practice thatis very common is the worship of holy trees. One may compare thebanyan at Bodhi Gay[=a] with the 'worshipful' village-tree of II. 24. 23. Seldom and late is the use of a rosary mentioned (_e. G_. , III. 112. 5, _aksham[=a]l[=a]_, elsewhere _aksha_), although the word isemployed to make an epithet of Çiva, Aksham[=a]lin. [57]

As has been said already, an extraordinary power is ascribed to themere repetition of a holy text, _mantra_. These are applied on alloccasions without the slightest reference to the subject. By means of_mantra_ one exorcises; recovers weapons; calls gods and demons, etc. [58] When misfortune or disease arrives it is invariably ascribedto the malignant action of a devil, although the _karma_ teachingshould suggest that it was the result of a former misdeed on thevictim's part. But the very iteration, the insistence on newexplanations of this doctrine, show that the popular mind still clungto the old idea of demoniac interference. Occasionally the naïvetéwith which the effect of a _mantra_ is narrated is somewhat amusing, as, for instance, when the heroine Krishn[=a] faints, and theby-standers "slowly" revive her "by the use of demon-dispelling_mantras_, rubbing, water, and fanning" (iii. 144. 17). All theweapons of the heroes are inspired with and impelled by _mantras_. 

Sufficient insight into the formal rules of morality has been given inthe extracts above, nor does the epic in this regard differ much fromthe law-books. Every man's first duty is to act; inactivity is sinful. The man that fails to win a good reputation by his acts, a warrior, for example, that is devoid of fame, a 'man of no account, ' is a_bh[=u]mivardhana, [Greek: achthos arourês]_ a cumberer of earth (iii. 35. 7). A proverb says that man should seek virtue, gain, andpleasure; "virtue in the morning; gain at noon; pleasure at night, "or, according to another version, "pleasure when young, gain inmiddle-age, and virtue in the end of life" (iii. 33. 40, 41). "Virtueis better than immortality and life. Kingdom, sons, glory, wealth, allthis does not equal one-sixteenth part of the value of truth" (_ib_. 34. 22). [59] One very strong summing up of a discourse on virtuousbehavior ends thus: "Truth, self-control, asceticism, generosity, non-injury, constancy in virtue--these are the means of success, notcaste nor family" (_j[=a]ti, kula_, iii. 181. 42). 

A doctrine practiced, if not preached, is that of blood-revenge. "Theunavenged shed tears, which are wiped away by the avenger" (iii. 11. 66); and in accordance with this feeling is the statement: "I shallsatiate my brother with his murderer's blood, and thus, becoming freeof debt in respect of my brother, I shall win the highest place inheaven" (_ib_. 34, 35). 

As of old, despite the new faith, as a matter of priestly, formalbelief, all depends on the sacrifice: "Law comes from usage; in laware the Vedas established; by means of the Vedas arise sacrifices; bysacrifice are the gods established; according to the rule of Vedas, and usage, sacrifices being performed support the divinities, just asthe rules of Brihaspati and Uçanas support men" (iii. 150. 28, 29). The pernicious doctrine of atonement for sin follows as a matter ofcourse: "Whatever sin a king commits in conquering the earth is atonedfor by sacrifices, if they are accompanied with large gifts topriests, such as cows and villages. " Even gifts to a sacred bull havethe same effect (iii. 33. 78, 79; _ib_. 35. 34; iii. 2. 57), theoccasion in hand being a king's violation of his oath. [60] Of thesesacrifices a great snake-sacrifice forms the occasion for narratingthe whole epic, the plot of which turns on the national vice ofgambling. [61] For divine snakes are now even grouped with othercelestial powers, disputing the victory of earthly combatants as doIndra and S[=u]rya: "The great snakes were on Arjuna's side; thelittle snakes were for Karna" (viii. 87. 44, 45). [62] They were(perhaps) the local gods of the Nagas (Snakes), a tribe living betweenthe Ganges and Jumna. 

The religion of the epic is multiform. But it stands, in a certainsense, as one religion, and from two points of view it is worthy ofspecial regard. One may look upon it either as the summing up ofBrahmanism in the new Hinduism, as the final expression of a religionwhich forgets nothing and absorbs everything; or one may study it as abelief composed of historical strata, endeavoring to divide it intoits different layers, as they have been super-imposed one upon anotherin the course of ages. From the latter point of view the Vedicdivinities claim the attention first. There are still traces of theoriginal power of Agni and S[=u]rya, as we have shown, and Wind stillmakes with these two a notable triad, [63] whereas Indra, impotent ashe is, hymnless as he is, --save in the oldest portions of thework, --still leads the gods, now godkins, of the ancient pantheon, andstill, in theory, at least, off a paradise to the knight that diesnobly on the field. [64] But one sees at once that the preservation ofthe dignity of these deities is due to different causes. Indra cannoteven save a snake that grasps his hand for safety; he wages waragainst the demons' 'triple town, ' and signally fails of his purpose, for the demons are as strong as the gods, and there are D[=a]navendrasas well as D[=a]navarshis. [65] But Indra is the figure-head of thewhole ancient pantheon, and for this reason he plays so constant, ifso weak, a rôle, in the epic. The only important thing in connectionwith him is his heaven. As an individual deity Indra lives, on thewhole, only in the tales of old, for example, in that of his cheatingNamuci (ix. 43. 32 ff. ). Nothing new and clever is told of him whichwould indicate power, only a new trick or two, as when he steals fromKarna. It is quite otherwise with Agni and S[=u]rya. They are not sovaguely identified with the one god as is 'Indra and the other Vasus. 'It is merely because these gods are prominently forms of Vishnu thatthey are honored with hymns in the epic. This is seen from the natureof the hymns, and also from the fact that it is either as fire or assun that Vishnu destroys at the end of the aeons. For it is, perhaps, somewhat daring to say, and yet it seems to be the fact, that thesolar origin of Vishnu is not lost sight of. 

The pantheistic Vishnu is the _[=a]tm[=a]_, and Vishnu, after all, isbut a form of fire. Therefore is it that the epic Vishnu isperpetually lapsing into fire; while fire and sun are doubly honoredas special forms of the highest. It is, then, not so much on accountof a survival of ancient dignity[66] that sun and fire stand so high, but rather because they are the nearest approach to the effulgence ofthe Supreme. Thus while in one place one is told that after seven sunshave appeared the supreme gods become the fire of destruction andcomplete the ruin, in another he reads that it is the sun alone which, becoming twelvefold, does all the work of the Supreme. [67]

Indra has hymns and sacrifices, but although he has no so exalted hymnas comes to his 'friend Agni, ' yet (in an isolated passage) he has anew feast and celebration, the account of which apparently belongs tothe first period of the epic, when the worship of Indra still hadsignificance. In i. 63, an _Indramaha_, or 'glorification of Indra, 'is described a festivity extending over two days, and marked by theerection of a pole in honor of the god--a ceremony which 'evento-day, ' it is said, is practiced. [68] The old tales of the fire-cultare retold, and new rites are known. [69] Thus in iii. 251. 20 ff. , Prince Duryodhana resolves to starve to death (oblivious of the rulethat 'a suicide goes to hell'), and since this is a religiousceremony, he clothes himself in old clothes and holy-grass, 'toucheswater, ' and devotes himself with intense application to heaven. Thenthe devils of Rudra called D[=a]iteyas and D[=a]navas, who liveunderground ever since they were conquered by the gods, aided bypriests, make a fire-rite, and with _mantras_ "declared by Brihaspatiand Uçanas, and proclaimed in the Atharva-Veda, " raise a ghost orspirit, who is ordered to fetch Duryodhana to hell, which sheimmediately does. [70] The frequent connection of Brihaspati with theAtharva-Veda is of interest (above, p. 159). He is quite a venerable, if not wholly orthodox, author in the epic, and his 'rules' are oftencited. [71]

That Vedic deity who, alone of pre-Vedic powers, still holds his proudplace, Yama, the king of departed spirits, varies in the epicaccording to the period represented. In old tales he is still quiteVedic in character; he takes the dead man's soul off to his own realm. But, of course, as pantheism prevails, and eschatology becomesconfused, Yama passes into a shadow, and at most is a bugbear for thewicked. Even his companions are stolen from another realm, and onehears now of "King Yama with his Rudras" (III. 237. 11), [72] while itis only the bad[73] that go to Yama (III. 200. 24), in popular belief, although this view, itself old, relapses occasionally into one stillolder, in accordance with which (_ib_. 49) all the world is hounded onby Yama's messengers, and comes to his abode. His home[74] in thesouth is now located as being at a distance of 86, 000 leagues over aterrible road, on which passes a procession of wretched or happymortals, even as they have behaved during life; for example, if onehas generously given an umbrella during life he will have an umbrellaon this journey, etc. The river in Yama's abode is called Pushpodaka, and what each drinks out of it is according to what he deserves todrink, cool water or filth (_ib. _ 46, 58). [75] In the variousdescriptions it is not strange to find discordant views even inportions belonging approximately to the same period. Thus incontradistinction to the prevailing view one reads of Indra himselfthat he is _Yamasya net[=a] Namuceçca hant[=a]_ 'Yama's leader, Namuci's slayer' (iii. 25. 10. ), _i. E. _, those that die in battle goto Yama. 

On the other hand, in the later speculative portions, Yama is notdeath. "Yama is not death, as some think; he is one that gives blissto the good, and woe to the bad. "[76] Death and life are foolishnessand lack of folly, respectively (literally, 'non-folly isnon-mortality'), while folly and mortality are counter opposites. Inpantheistic teaching there is, of course, no real death, only change. But death is a female power, personified, and sharply distinguishedfrom Yama. Death as a means of change thus remains, while Yama isrelegated to the guardianship of hell. The difference in regard to thelatter subject, between earlier and later views, has been noted above. One comparatively early passage attempts to arrange the incongruousbeliefs in regard to _sams[=a]ra_ (re-birth) and hell on a sort ofsliding scale, thus: "One that does good gets in the next life a goodbirth; one that does ill gets an ill birth"; more particularly: "Bygood acts one attains to the state of gods; by 'mixed' acts, to thestate of man; by acts due to confusion of mind, to the state ofanimals and plants (_viyon[=i][s. ]u_); by sinful acts one goes tohell" (_adhog[=a]mi_, iii. 209. 29-32). [77] Virtue must have been, asthe epic often declares it to be, a 'subtile matter, ' for often a taleis told to illustrate the fact that one goes to hell for doing what hethinks (mistakenly) to be right. Thus K[=a]uçika is sent to hell forspeaking the truth, whereas he ought to have lied to save life (viii. 69. 53), for he was "ignorant of virtue's subtilty. "[78] A passage (i. 74. 27 ff. ) that is reflected in Manu (viii. 85-86) says that YamaV[=a]ivasvata takes away the sin of him with whom is satisfied "theone that witnesses the act, that stands in the heart, that knows theground"; but Yama tortures him with whom this one (personifiedconscience) is dissatisfied. For "truth is equal to a thousandhorse-sacrifices; truth is highest _brahma_" (_ib. _ 103, 106). 

Following downward the course of religious development, as reflectedin the epic, one next finds traces of Brahmanic theology not only inthe few passages where (Brahm[=a]) Praj[=a]pati remains untouched bysectarianism, but also in the harking back to old formulae. Thus theinsistence on the Brahmanical sacredness of the number seventeen ispreserved (xii. 269. 26; iii. 210. 20, etc); and Upanishadic is the"food is Praj[=a]pati" of iii. 200. 38 (Yama in 40). There is aninteresting rehabilitation of the primitive idea of the Açvins in thenew ascription of formal divinity to the (personified) Twilights(Sandhy[=a]) in iii. 200. 83, although this whole passage is morePuranic than epic. From the same source is the doctrine that the fruitof action expires at the end of one hundred thousand _kalpas_ (_ib. _vs. 121). One of the oddest religious freaks in the epic is the suddenexaltation of the Ribhus, the Vedic (season-gods) artisans, to theposition of highest gods. In that heaven of Brahm[=a], which is abovethe Vedic gods' heaven, there are the holy seers and the Ribhus, 'thedivinities of the gods'; who do not change with the change of _kalpas_(as do other Vedic gods), III. 261. 19-23. One might almost imaginethat their threefoldness was causative of a trinitarian identificationwith a supreme triad; but no, for still higher is the 'heaven ofVishnu' (vs. 37). The contrast is marked between this and _[=A]it. Br. _ III. 30, where the Ribhus with some difficulty obtain the rightto drink _soma_. 

There is an aspect of the epic religion upon which it is necessary totouch before treating of the sectarian development. In the earlyphilosophical period wise priests meet together to discuss theologicaland philosophical questions, often aided, and often brought to grief, by the wit of women disputants, who are freely admitted to hear andshare in the discussion. When, however, pantheism, nay, evenVishnuism, or still more, Krishnaism, was an accepted fact upon what, then, was the wisdom of the priest expended? Apart from the epic, thebest intellects of the day were occupied in researches, codifyinglaws, and solving, in rather dogmatic fashion, philosophical(theological) problems. The epic presents pictures of scenes whichseem to be a reflection from an earlier day. But one sees often thatthe wisdom is commonplace, or even silly. In dialectics a sophisticalsubtlety is shown; in codifying moral rules, a tedious triteness; inamoebic passes of wit there are astounding exhibitions, in which thegood scholiast sees treasures of wisdom, where a modern is obliged totake them in their literal dulness. Thus in III. 132. 18, a boy oftwelve or ten (133. 16), who is divinely precocious, defeats the wisemen in disputation at a sacrifice, and in the following section (134. 7 ff. ) silences a disputant who is regarded as one of the cleverestpriests. The conversation is recorded in full. In what does itconsist? The opponent mentions a number of things which are one; theboy replies with a verse that gives pairs of things; the othermentions triads; the child cites groups of fours, etc. , until theopponent, having cited only one half-verse of thirteens, can rememberno more and stops, on which the child completes the verse, and isdeclared winner. The conundrums which precede must have beenconsidered very witty, for they are repeated elsewhere: What is thatwheel which has twelve parts and three hundred and sixty spokes, etc. ?Year. What does not close its eye when asleep, what does not move whenit is born, what has no heart, what increases by moving? Thesequestions form one-half verse. The next half-verse gives the answersin order: fish, egg, stone, river. This wisdom in the form of puzzlesand answers, _brahmodya_, is very old, and goes back to the Vedicperiod. Another good case in the epic is the demon Yaksha and thecaptured king, who is not freed till he answers certain questionscorrectly. [79] But although a certain amount of theologic lore may begleaned from these questions, yet is it of greater interest to see howthe priests discussed when left quietly to their own devices. And avery natural description of such a scene is extant. The priests"having some leisure"[80] or vacation from their labors in the king'shouse, sit down to argue, and the poet calls their discussion_vita[n. ][d. ][=a], i. E_. , tricky sophistical argumentation, thedescription bearing out the justness of the phrase: "One cried, 'thatis so, ' and the other, 'it is not so'; one cried, 'and that is so, 'and the other, 'it must be so'; and some by arguments made weakarguments strong, and strong weak; while some wise ones were alwaysswooping down on their opponent's arguments, like hawks on meat. "[81]In III. 2. 15, the type of clever priest is 'skilled in Yoga andS[=a][. N]khya, ' who inculcates renunciation. This sage teaches thatmental diseases are cured by Yoga; bodily, by medicine; and thatdesire is the root of ill. 

But by far the most interesting theological discussion in the epic, ifone except the Divine Song, is the conversation of the hero andheroine in regard to the cause of earthly happiness. This discussionis an old passage of the epic. The very fact that a woman is thedisputant gives an archaic effect to the narration, and reminds one ofthe scenes in the Upanishads, where learned women cope successfullywith men in displays of theological acumen. Furthermore, thetheological position taken, the absence of Vishnuism, the appeal tothe 'Creator' as the highest Power, take one back to a former age. Thedoctrine of special grace, which crops out in the Upanishads, [82] herereceives its exposure by a sudden claim that the converse of thetheory must also be true, viz. , that to those not saved by grace andelection God is as cruel as He is kind to the elect. The situation isas follows: The king and queen have been basely robbed of theirkingdom, and are in exile. The queen urges the king to break the vowof exile that has been forced from him, and to take vengeance on theiroppressors. The king, in reply, sings a song of forgiveness:"Forgiveness is virtue, sacrifice, Veda; forgiveness is holiness andtruth; in the world of Brahm[=a] are the mansions of them thatforgive. " This song (III. 29. 36 ff. ) only irritates the queen, who atonce launches into the following interesting tirade (30. 1 ff. ):"Reverence to the Creator and Disposer[83] who have confused thy mind!Hast thou not worshipped with salutation and honored the priests, gods, and manes? Hast thou not made horse-sacrifices, the_r[=a]jas[=u]ya_-sacrifice, sacrifices of every sort(_pu[n. ][d. ]arika, [84] gosava_)? Yet art thou in this miserableplight! Verily is it an old story (_itih[=a]sa_) that 'the worldsstand under the Lord's will. ' Following the seed God gives good or illin the case of all beings. Men are all moved by the divinity. Like awooden doll, moving its limbs in the hands of a man, so do allcreatures move in the Creator's hands. Man is like a bird on a string, like a bead on a cord. As a bull is led by the nose, so man followsthe will of the Creator; he never is a creature of free will(_[=a]tm[=a]dhina_). Every man goes to heaven or to hell, as he issent by the Lord's will. God himself, occupied with noble or withwicked acts, moves about among all created things, an unknown power(not known as 'this one'). The blessed God, who is self-created, thegreat forefather (_prapit[=a]maha_), plays with his creatures just asa boy plays with toys, putting them together and destroying them as hechooses. Not like a father is God to His creatures; He acts in anger. When I see the good distressed, the ignoble happy, I blame the Creatorwho permits this inequality. What reward does God get that he sendshappiness to this sinful man (thy oppressor)? If it be true that onlythe individual that does the act is pursued by the fruit of that act(_karma_ doctrine) then the Lord who has done this act is defiled bythis base act of His. If, on the other hand, the act that one has donedoes not pursue and overtake the one that has done it, then the onlyagency on earth is brute force (this is the only power to berespected)--and I grieve for them that are without it!"

To this plea, which in its acknowledgment of the Creator as thehighest god, no less than in its doubtful admission of the _karma_doctrine, is of peculiar interest, the king replies with a refutationno less worthy of regard: "Thy argument is good, clear and smooth, butit is heterodox (_n[=a]stikyam_). I have sacrificed and practicedvirtue not for the sake of reward, but because it was right. I givewhat I ought to give, and sacrifice as I should. That is my only ideain connection with religious observances. There is no virtue in tryingto milk virtue. Do not doubt. Do not be suspicious of virtue. He thatdoubts God or duty goes to hell (confusion), but he that does his dutyand is free from doubt goes to heaven (becomes immortal). Doubt notscriptural authority. Duty is the saving ship. No other gets toheaven. Blame not the Lord Creator, who is the highest god. ThroughHis grace the faithful gets immortality. If religious observances werewithout fruit the universe would go to destruction. People would nothave been good for so many ages if there had been no reward for it. This is a mystery of the gods. The gods are full of mystery andillusion. "

The queen, for all the world like that wise woman in the Upanishads, whose argument, as we showed in a preceding chapter, is cut short notby counter-argument, but by the threat that if she ask too much herhead will fall off, recants her errors at this rebuke, and in thefollowing section, which evidently is a later addition, takes backwhat she has said. Her new expression of belief she cites as theopinion of Brihaspati (32. 61, 62); but this is applicable rather toher first creed of doubt. Perhaps in the original version thisauthority was cited at the end of the first speech, and with theinterpolation the reference is made to apply to this seer. Somethinglike the queen's remarks is the doubtful saying of the king himself, as quoted elsewhere (III. 273. 6): "Time and fate, and what will be, this is the only Lord. How else could this distress have come upon mywife? For she has been virtuous always. "

We turn now to the great sectarian gods, who eventually unite withBrahm[=a] to form a pantheistic trinity, a conception which, as weshall show, is not older than the fifth or sixth century after Christ. 

 * * * * *

 FOOTNOTES:

 [Footnote 1: The rival heresies seem also to belong to the East. There were thus more than half a dozen heretical bodies of importance agitating the region about Benares at the same time. Subsequently the Jains, who, as we have shown, were less estranged from Brahmanism, drifted westward, while the Buddhist stronghold remained in the East (both, of course, being represented in the South as well), and so, whereas Buddhism eventually retreated to Nep[=a]l and Tibet, the Jains are found in the very centres of old and new (sectarian) Brahmanism, Delhi, Mathur[=a], Jeypur, [=A]jm[=i]r. ]

 [Footnote 2: 'The wandering of R[=a]ma, ' who is the sectarian representative of Vishnu. ]

 [Footnote 3: The 'Bh[=a]rata (tale)', sometimes called Mah[=a]-Bh[=a]rata, or Great Bh[=a]rata. The Vishnuite sectarianism here advocated is that of Krishna. But there is as much Çivaism in the poem as there is Vishnuism. ]

 [Footnote 4: Dramatic and lyric poetry is artificial even in language. ]

 [Footnote 5: Schroeder, p. 453, compares the mutual relation of the Mah[=a]bh[=a]rata and R[=a]m[=a]yana to that of the Nibelungenlied and the Parzival of Wolfram von Eschenbach. Jacobi, in his 'R[=a]m[=a]yana, ' has lately claimed a considerable antiquity for the foundation legends of the R[=a]m[=a]yana, but he does not disprove the late completed form. ]

 [Footnote 6: i. 78. 10; see Bühler's Introduction. ]

 [Footnote 7: Jacobi seeks to put the completed nucleus at the time of the Christian era, but it must have been quite a large nucleus in view of the allusions to it in precedent literature. Holtztmann puts the completion at about 1000 A. D. ; but in 700 A. D. , it was complete, and most scholars will agree with Bühler that the present Mah[=a]-Bh[=a]rata was completed by the sixth or seventh century. In 533 A. D. It contained 100, 000 distichs, that is, it was about the size it is now. ]

 [Footnote 8: By the time the drama began the epic was become a religious storehouse, and the actual epic story represented not a fifth of the whole work, so that, with its simple language, it must have seemed, as a literary production, very wearisome to the minds that delighted in the artificial compounds and romantic episodes of the drama and lyric. But even to-day it is recited at great fêtes, and listened to with rapt attention, as the rhapsodes with more or less dramatic power recite its holy verses. ]

 [Footnote 9: The later law-books say expressly that women and slaves have a right to use _mantra, mantr[=a]dhik[=a]ri[n. ]as. _ But the later legal Smritis are no more than disguised sectarian Pur[=a]nas. ]

 [Footnote 10: Compare the visit of the old Muni on the prince in iii. 262. 8. He is _paramakopana_, 'extremely irritable'; calls for food only to reject it; growls at the service, etc. Everything must be done 'quickly' for him. "I am hungry, give me food, _quick_, " is his way of speaking, etc. (12). The adjective is one applied to the All-gods, _paramakrodhinas. _]

 [Footnote 11: Each spiritual teacher instructed high-caste boys, in classes of four or five at most. In xii. 328. 41 the four students of a priest go on a strike because the latter wants to take another pupil besides themselves and his own son. ]

 [Footnote 12: The saints in the sky praise the combatants (vii. 188. 41; viii. 15. 27); and the gods roar approval of prowess "with roars like a lion's" (viii. 15. 33). Indra and S[=u]rya and the Apsarasas cool off the heroes with heavenly fans (_ib_. 90. 18). For the last divinities, see Holtzmann's essays, ZDMG. Xxxii. 290; xxxiii. 631. ]

 [Footnote 13: The original author of the Mah[=a]bh[=a]rata is reputed to be of low caste, but the writers of the text as it is to-day were sectarian priests. It was written down, it is said, by Ganeça, 'lord of the troops' of Çiva, i. 1. 79, and some historic truth lies in the tale. The priests of Çiva were the last to retouch the poem, as we think. ]

 [Footnote 14: Agni-worship is partly affected by the doctrine that the Samvartaka fire (which destroys the world at the cycle's end) is a form of Vishnu. In Stambamitra's hymn it is said: "Thou, O Agni, art the all, in thee rests the universe . . . Sages know thee as single yet manifold. At the expiration of time thou burnest up the three worlds, after having created them. Thou art the originator and support of all beings" (i. 232. 12). Elsewhere more Vedic epithets are given, such as 'mouth of the gods' (ii. 31. 42), though here 'the Vedas are produced for Agni's sake. ' In this same prayer one reads, 'may Agni give me energy; wind, give me breath; earth, give me strength; and water, give me health' (45). Agni, as well as Çiva, is the father of Kum[=a]ra K[=a]rtikeya, _i. E_. , Skanda (_ib_. 44). ]

 [Footnote 15: But the Açvins are Ç[=u]dras In the 'cast-hood of gods' (the caste-order being Angirasas, [=A]dityas, Maruts and AÇvins), xii. 208. 23-25; and Indra in one passage refuses to associate with them, xiii. 157. 17 (cited by Holtzmann, ZDMG. Xxxii. 321). ]

 [Footnote 16: Manibhadra, in iii. 64, is king of Yaksash; he is the same with Kubera, _ib_. Ch. 41 (V[=a]içinavana). ]

 [Footnote 17: In the Cosmogony the gods are the sons of the Manes, xii. 312. 9. ]

 [Footnote 18: When the gods churn the ocean to get ambrosia, an ancient tale of the epic, Mandara is the twirling-stick. It is situated in modern Beh[=a]r, near Bhagalpur. ]

 [Footnote 19: III. 42; 139. 14, where the Ganges and Jumna are invoked together with the Vedic gods. So in III. 104 (Vindhya); and Damayanti prays to mountains. Mt. Meru is described in III. 163. 14 (compare I. 17. 5 ff. ). In I. 18. 1 ff. , is related the churning of the ocean, where Indra (vs. 12) places Mt. Mandara on Vishnu, the tortoise. ]

 [Footnote 20: Mbh. I. 30. 37, _mamlur m[=a]ly[=a]ni dev[=a]n[=a]m_, etc. The older belief was that the gods' garlands never withered; for the gods show no mortal signs, cast no shadows, etc. ]

 [Footnote 21: Compare the four hymnlets to Agni in i. 232. 7 ff. ]

 [Footnote 22: After the mention of the thirty-three gods, and Vishnu 'born after them, ' it is said that the Açvins, plants, and animals, are Guhyakas (vs. 40), though in vs. 35: "Tvashtar's daughter, the wife of Savitar, as a mare (_va[d. ]av[=a]_) bore in air the two Açvins" (see above), in Vedic style. For Çruti compare iii. 207. 47; 208. 6, 11. ]

 [Footnote 23: i. 23. 15 ff. His name is explained fancifully in 30. 7. ]

 [Footnote 24: It is at the funeral feasts to the Manes that the Mah[=a]bh[=a]rata is to be recited (i. 62. 37). ]

 [Footnote 25: Arjuna is an old name of Indra, and in the epic Arjuna is Indra's son. ]

 [Footnote 26: The legal _dharma_ or sitting at a debtor's door, which still obtains in India, is, so far as we know, not a very ancient practice. But its application in the case of heralds (who become responsible) is epic. ]

 [Footnote 27: This is the covenant (with friends) of revenge; the covenant of mutual protection in the sacrifice is indicated by the 'protection covenant' of the gods (see the chapter on Brahmanism above, p. 192). ]

 [Footnote 28: See an essay on the Ruling Caste in the epic, in JAOS. Xiii. 232 ff. ]

 [Footnote 29: Reverend Doctor H. C. Trumbull has kindly called our attention to Robert's _Oriental Illustrations_, p. 148 ff. , where it is said that in India today the threshold is sacred. In reference to threshold offerings, common in the law, Dr. Trumbull's own forthcoming book on Covenants may be compared. ]

 [Footnote 30: But these are by no means the last examples of human sacrifices. Several of the modern Hindu sects have caused to be performed such sacrifices, even in this century. ]

 [Footnote 31: This can hardly mean 'put out on the river' as has been suggested as an explanation of the corpse 'thrown aside' in accordance with the earlier text, AV. Xviii. 2. 34 (_paropta_), where the dead are 'buried, thrown aside, burned, or set out. ']

 [Footnote 32: It is assumed in XII. 364. 2 that "leaves and air" are food enough for a great saint. Compare below the actual asceticism of modern devotees. ]

 [Footnote 33: III. 25. 14: _saptar[s. ]ayas . . . Divi viprabh[=a]nti_. Compare _ib. _ 261. 13, and the apocalypse in VII. 192. 52 ff. , where Drona's soul ascends to heaven, a burning fire like a sun; In sharp contrast to the older 'thumbkin' soul which Yama receives and carries off in the tale of Satyavant. Compare also Arundhati in I. 233. 29. ]

 [Footnote 34: Described, as above, as a place of singers and dancers, where are the Vedic gods and sages, but no sinners or cowards (III. 42. 34 ff. ). ]

 [Footnote 35: From another point of view the stars are of interest. They are favorable or unfavorable, sentient, kind, or cruel; influential in man's fate. Compare III. 200. 84, 85, where the sun is included with the _grahas_ (planets) which influence men, and ib. 209. 21, _tulyanak[. S]atrama[. N]gala_. ]

 [Footnote 36: Other of Indra's spirits are the singers, Gandharvas and Apsarasas; also the horse-headed Kinnaras and C[=a]ranas, who, too, are singers; while later the Vidy[=a]dharas belong both to Indra and to Çiva. In modern times the South Indian Sittars, 'saints, ' take their name from the Siddhas. ]

 [Footnote 37: In _d[=a]nnavar[s. ]i_ there is apparently the same sort of compound as in _devar[s. ]i_ and _brahmar[s. ]i_, all associated with the _siddhas_ in III. 169. 23. But possibly 'demons and seers' may be meant. ]

 [Footnote 38: III. 37. 32-35 (_prapadye viçvedev[=a]n!_). ]

 [Footnote 39: Weber finds in the Asuras' artisan, Asura Maya, a reminiscence of Ptolemaios. He is celebrated in I. 228. 39, and II. 1, and is the generai leader of the _d[=a]navas_, demons, perhaps originally a folk-name of enemies. ]

 [Footnote 40: See below. The formal division is, _d[=a]iva, hatha, karma, i. E. _, man's fate depends on gods, Fate, and his own acts; although _hatha_, Fate, is often implied in _d[=a]iva_, 'the divine power. ' But they are separated, for example, in iii. 183. 86. ]

 [Footnote 41: Compare the tales and xii. 148. 9, _sat[=i]_ (suttee). In regard to the horse-sacrifice, compare Yama's law as expounded to Gautama: "The acts by which one gains bliss hereafter are austerities, purity, truth, worship of parents, and the horse-sacrifice. " xii 129. 9, 10. ]

 [Footnote 42: Compare III. 200. 88, even _pr[=a]k[r. ]ta_ priests are divine and terrible (much more in later books). Here _pr[=a]k[r. ]ta_, vulgar, is opposed to _samsk[r. ]ta_, refined, priests. ]

 [Footnote 43: III. 185. 26-31. ]

 [Footnote 44: "My father and mother are my highest idol; I do for them what I do for Idols. As the three and thirty gods, with Indra foremost, are revered of all the world, so are my parents revered by me" (III. 214. 19, 20). The speaker further calls them _paramam brahma_, absolute godhead, and explains his first remark by saying that he offers fruits and flowers to his parents as if they were idols. In IV. 68. 57 a man salutes (_abhivadya_) his father's feet on entering into his presence. For the worship of parents compare XII. 108. 3; 128. 9, 10; 267. 31, XIII. 75. 26: "heroes in obedience to the mother. "]

 [Footnote 45: The marked Brahm[=a] Creator-worship is a bit of feminine religious conservatism (see below). ]

 [Footnote 46: Weber has shown that men of low caste took a subordinate part even in the _r[=a]jas[=u]ya_ sacrifice. ]

 [Footnote 47: In II. 18. There is a brand-new festival appointed in honor of a female fiend, etc. ]

 [Footnote 48: III. 84. 83 (87. 11). We see the first idea in the injunction of Indra to 'wander, ' as told in the tale of Dogstail in the Brahmana (see above). ]

 [Footnote 49: The usual formula (also Avestan) is 'pure in thought, speech, and act. ' The comparison of the six senses to unrestrained wild horses is familiar (III. 211. 24). ]

 [Footnote 50: There is, further, no unanimity in regard to the comparative value of holy places. In XII. 152. 11, Sarasvat[=i] is holier than Kurukshetra, etc. ]

 [Footnote 51: At Pushkara is Brahm[=a]'s only (?) shrine--the account is legendary, but half historical. The modern shrine at Ajm[=i]r seems to be meant. ]

 [Footnote 52: Ganges, according to epic legend, was a goddess who sacrificed herself for men when the earth was parched and men perished. Then Ganges alone of immortals took pity on men, and flinging herself from heaven became the stream divine. Her name among the gods is Alakanand[=a], the 'Blessed Damosel. ']

 [Footnote 53: In iii. 87. 10, "ten descendants and ten ancestors. " The epic, i. 170. 19, regards the Sarasvat[=i] and Jumna as parts of the sevenfold Ganges, which descends from the heavens as these three, and also as the Vitasth[=a] (Rathasth[=a]), Saray[=u], Gomat[=i], and Gan[d. ]ak[=i]; being itself 'V[=a]itara[n. ][=i] among the Manes. ' So xii. 322. 32. ]

 [Footnote 54: According to the commentator the "(northern altar of the Father-god) Kurukshetra-Samantapañcakam, between Tarantuka, Arantuka, R[=a]mahrada, and Macakruka, " mentioned in iii. 83. 208, lies in Benares; but this must be a late addition, as Kurukshetra's position is without doubt. Compare i. 2. I ff. ; ix. 53. I, 23-25. ]

 [Footnote 55: In _ib_. 47, _mah[=a] d[r. ]tiriv[=a]dhm[=a]ta[h. ] p[=a]pas_, there is an interesting reminiscence of Rig Veda, vii. 89. 2. The rules of virtue are contained in Vedas and law-books, and the practice of instructed men, _ib_. 83 (the 'threefold sign of righteousness'). A Çruti cited from _dharmas_ is not uncommon, but the latter word is not properly used in so wide a sense. See note below, p. 378. ]

 [Footnote 56: Some scholars see in the use of the verb, _piç_, a Vedic picturing of gods; but in all instances where this occurs it may be only the poet's mind-picture of the god 'adorned' with various glories. ]

 [Footnote 57: In VII. 201. 69, Çiva wears an _aksham[=a]l[=a]. _ In XII. 38. 23, the C[=a]rv[=a]ka wears an _aksha_, for he is disguised as a _bhikshu_, beggar. ]

 [Footnote 58: It must be remembered that the person using the _mantra_ probably did not understand what the words meant. The epic says, in fact, that the Vedas are unintelligible: _brahma pracuracchalam_, XII. 329. 6. But an older generation thought the same. In Nirukta, I. 15, K[=a]utsa is cited as saying that the _mantras_ are meaningless. ]

 [Footnote 59: Compare xii. 174. 46: "The joy of earth and heaven obtained by the satisfaction of desire is not worth one-sixteenth of the bliss of dead desire. "]

 [Footnote 60: By generosity the Hindu poet means 'to priests. ' In III. 200, where this is elaborated, sixteen persons are mentioned (vs. 4) to whom to give is not meritorious. ]

 [Footnote 61: Little is known in regard to the play. The dice are thrown on a board, 'odd and even' determine the contest here (III. 34. 5) _ayuja and yuja_. At times speed in counting is the way to win (Nala). Dicing is a regular part of the _r[=a]jas[=u]ya_ sacrifice (Weber, p. 67), but not, apparently, an ancient trait. ]

 [Footnote 62: The snakes belong to Varuna and his region, as described in v. 98. It is on the head of the earth-upholding snake Çesha that Vishnu muses, III. 203. 12. The reverence paid to serpents begins to be ritual in the Atharva Veda. Even in the Rig Veda there is the deification of the cloud-snake. In later times they answered to the Nymphs, being tutelary guardians of streams and rivers (Buhler). In i. 36, Çesha Ananta supports earth, and it is told why he does so. ]

 [Footnote 63: These three are the witnesses for the soul at the judgment, xii. 322. 55. V[=a]yu, Wind, is said to be even mightier than Indra, Yama, Indra and Varuna, _ib. _ 155. 9, 10. ]

 [Footnote 64: But (in a later account) not if he dies ignobly; for if one is slain by a man of low caste he goes to hell, xii. 298. 7. ]

 [Footnote 65: Demoniac Indras (_i. E. _, demon-leaders) and seers, xii. 166. 26. ]

 [Footnote 66: 'The god of gods, ' who rains blood in i. 30. 36, is declared by the commentator to be--Parjanya! The gods are here defending Soma from the heavenly bird, Garuda, and nearly die of fright. ]

 [Footnote 67: xii. 313. 1-7, with the same watery finale as is usual. ]

 [Footnote 68: The morning prayer, etc, to the sun is, of course, still observed, _e. G. _, vii. 186. 4. Indra is thanked for victory and invoked for rain (iii. 117. 11; i. 25. 7; Holtzmann, _loc. Cit. _ p. 326) in an hymn that is less fulsome than those to Agni and S[=u]rya. ]

 [Footnote 69: 111. 222, Atharvan's rediscovery of fire. As to Çrutis they are probably no more valuable than Smritis. The one given in iii. 208. 11, _agnayo in[=a]i[. N]sak[=a]m[=a]s_, seems to be adapted (_cf. _ [=A]çv. Gs. Iv. 1; the adjective, by the way, is still starred in Pw. ). So [=A]çv. Gs. I. 15. 9, is repeated Mbh[=a]; i. 74. 63, as a "Vedic _mantragr[=a]ma_ " _(ang[=a]d ang[=a]t sambhavasi_, etc. ). ]

 [Footnote 70: The devils are on the Prince's side, and wish to keep him from death. The proverb is found _ib_. 252. 2; _[=a]tmaty[=a]g[=i] hy adho y[=a]ti_. The holy-grass is used in much the same way when R[=a]ma lies down by Ocean, resolved to die or persuade Ocean to aid him. The rites (vs. 24) are "in the Upanishad. "]

 [Footnote 71: According to XII. 59. 80-84, the 'treatise of Brihaspati' comes from Çiva through Brahm[=a] and Indra. ]

 [Footnote 72: In Buddhism Yama's messengers are Yakkhas. Scherman, _loc. Cit_. P. 57. ]

 [Footnote 73: Compare II. 22. 26: _gaccha yamak[s. ]ayam_, 'go to Yama's destruction'; whereas of a good man it is said, 'I will send Indra a guest' (VII, 27. 8). ]

 [Footnote 74: _Yamasya sadana_. III. 11. 66. He now has hells, and he it is who will destroy the world. He is called 'the beautiful' (III. 41. 9), so that he must, if one take this Rudrian epithet with the citation above, be loosely (popularly) identified with Çiva, as god of death. See the second note below. ]

 [Footnote 75: The old story of a mortal's visit to Yama to learn about life hereafter (_Çat. Br. _ xi. 6. 1; Katha Up. , of N[=a]ciketas) is repeated in xiii. 71. ]

 [Footnote 76: v. 42. 6: _Çiva[h. ] çiv[=a]n[=a]m açivo 'çiv[=a]n[=a]m_ (compare xii 187. 27: 'only fools say that the man is dead'). Dharma (Justice) seems at times to be the same with Yama. M[=a]ndavya goes to Dharma's _sadana_, home (compare Yama's _sadana_), just as one goes to Yama's, and interviews him on the justice of his judgments. As result of the angry interview the god is reborn on earth as a man of low caste, and the law is established that a child is not morally responsible for his acts till the twelfth year of his age (i. 108. 8 ff. ). When Kuru agrees to give half his life in order to the restoration of Pramadvar[=a], his wife, they go not to Yama but to Dharma to see if the exchange may be made, and he agrees (i. 9. 11 ff. , a masculine S[=a]vitr[=i]i). ]

 [Footnote 77: The hells are described in xii. 322. 29 ff. The sight of 'golden trees' presages death (_ib. _ 44). ]

 [Footnote 78: The ordinary rule is that "no sin is greater than untruth, " xii. 162. 24, modified by "save in love and danger of life" (Laws, _passim_). ]

 [Footnote 79: The same scenes occur in Buddhistic writings, where Yakkhas ask conundrums. For example, in the _Hemavatasutta_ and _[=A]tavakasutta_ the Yakkha asks what is the best possession, what brings bliss, and what is swettest, to which the answer is: faith, law, and truth, respectively. ]

 [Footnote 80: _Karm[=a]ntaram up[=a]santas, i. E. , vir[=a]mak[=a]lam upagacchantas_. ]

 [Footnote 81: II. 36. 3 ff. The phraseology of vs. 5 is exactly that of [Greek: _ton êttô ldgon kreittô poithnsi_], but the Pundit's arguments are 'based on the law. ']

 [Footnote 82: See above. In a later period (see below) the question arises in regard to the part played by Creator and individual in the workings of grace, some claiming that man was passive; some, that he had to strive for grace. ]

 [Footnote 83: Perhaps ironical. In V. 175. 32, a woman cries out: "Fie on the Creator for this bad luck, " conservative in belief, and outspoken in word. ]

 [Footnote 84: III. 30. 17. The _gosava_ is a 'cow-sacrifice. ' The _pu[n. ][d. ]ar[=i]ka_ is not explained (perhaps 'elephant-sacrifice'). ]

 * * * * *

CHAPTER XV. 

HINDUISM (CONTINUED). --VISHNU AND ÇIVA. 

In the epic the later union of the sectarian gods is still a novelty. The two characters remain distinct enough. Vishnu and Çiva aredifferent gods. But each in turn represents the All-god, andconsequently each represents the other. The Vishnu-worship which grewabout Krish[n. ]a, originally a friend of one of the epic characters, was probably at first an attempt to foist upon Vedic believers asectarian god, by identifying the latter with a Vedic divinity. But, whatever the origin, Krishna as Vishnu is revered as the All-god inthe epic. And, on the other hand, Çiva of many names has kept themarks of Rudra. Sometimes one, sometimes another, is taken as theAll-god. At times they are compared, and then each sect reduces thegod of the other to an inferior position. Again they are united andregarded as one. The Vishnu side has left the best literaryrepresentation of this religion, which has permeated the epic. It ispantheism, but not an impersonal pantheism. The Blessed Lord is theAll. This is the simple base and crown of its speculation. It is likethe personal development of Vedantic philosophy, only it is heredegraded by the personality of the man-god, who is made the incarnateAll-god. The Krishna of the epic as a man is a sly, unscrupulousfellow, continually suggesting and executing acts that are at variancewith the knightly code of honor. He is king of Dv[=a]rak[=a] and allyof the epic heroes. But again, he is divine, the highest divinity, the_avatar_ of the All-god Vishnu. The sectaries that see in Çiva ratherthan in Vishnu the one and only god, have no such representative towhich to refer. For Çiva, as the historical descendant of the VedicRudra, --although even in his case there is an intrusion of localworship upon an older Vedic belief, --represents a terror-god, eitherthe lightning, the fairest of the gods, or, when he appears on earth, a divine horror, or, again, "a very handsome young man. "[1] These tworeligions, of Vishnu as Krishna and of Çiva alone, are not so muchunited in the epic as they are super-imposed upon the older worship ofBrahm[=a], and indeed, in such a way that Çiva-worship, in apantheistic sense, appears to be the latest of the three beliefs thathave influenced the story. [2]

The personal pantheism of the older Vishnuism has in its form andteachings so close a resemblance to the Christian religion that it hasalways had a great attraction for occidental readers; while the realpower of its "Divine Song" gives the latter a charm possessed by fewof the scriptures of India. This Divine Song (or Song of the BlessedOne) is at present a Krishnaite version of an older Vishnuite poem, and this in turn was at first an unsectarian work, perhaps a lateUpanishad. It is accepted by Vishnuites as a kind of New Testament;and with the New Testament it has in truth much in common. It must bepointed out at the outset that there is here the closest connectionwith the later Upanishads. The verse, like that of the Katha Upanishad(quoted above), which stands almost at the beginning of the Song, istypical of the relation of the Song to the Upanishad. It will benoticed how the impersonal 'That, ' _i. E_. , absolute being, _brahma_, changes almost at once to the personal He (_[=a]tm[=a]_ as Lord). Asshows the whole Song, _brahma_ throughout is understood to bepersonal. [3] The caste-position of the priest in the Git[=a] is owingto the religious exaltation of the poem; and the precedence ofS[=a]man is not unusual in the latest portions of the epic (seebelow). ]

To understand the religion which reaches its culmination in the epicno better course could be pursued than to study the whole of theDivine Song. It is, however, too long a production to be introducedhere in its entirety; but the following extracts give the chieffeatures of the work, than which nothing in Hindu literature is morecharacteristic, in its sublimity as in its puerilities, in its logicas in its want of it. It has shared the fate of most Hindu works inbeing interpolated injudiciously, so that many of the puzzlinganomalies, which astound no less the reader than the hero to whom itwas revealed, are probably later additions. It is a medley of beliefsas to the relation of spirit and matter, and other secondary matters;it is uncertain in its tone in regard to the comparative efficacy ofaction and inaction, and in regard to the practical man's means ofsalvation; but it is at one with itself in its fundamental thesis, that all things are each a part of One Lord, that men and gods are butmanifestations of the One Divine Spirit, which, or rather whom, theVishnuite re-writer identifies with Krishna, as Vishnu's present form. 

The Divine Song, as it is revealed in the epic by Vishnu (-Krishna) tohis favorite knight, Arjuna, begins thus: "Know that the 'That' inwhich is comprised the 'This' is indestructible. These bodies of theindestructible Eternal One have an end: but whoso knows Him as slayer, and whoso thinks Him to be slain, these two have not true wisdom. Heslays not and is not slain. He is not born, he does not die at anytime; nor will He, having been born, cease to be. Unborn, everlasting, eternal, He, the Ancient One, is not slain when the body is slain. Asone puts away an old garment and puts on another that is new, so He, the embodied (Spirit), puts away the old body and assumes one that isnew. Everlasting, omnipresent, firm, unchanging is He, the Eternal;indiscernible is He called, inconceivable, unchangeable. "[4]

The Song now turns into a plea that the warrior who is hearing itshould, as one born to be a soldier, be brave and fight, lest hissorrow for the slain be taken for fear; since "nothing is better for awarrior than a just fight, " and "loss of fame is worse than death. "Then follows (with the usual inconsequential 'heaven') "If thou artslain thou wilt obtain heaven, and if thou art victorious thou shaltenjoy earth; therefore, careless of pleasure and pain, get ready forthe fight, and so thou wilt not incur sin. This is the knowledgedeclared in the S[=a]nkhya; hear now that of the Yoga, " and the DivineLord proceeds:

"Some are pleased with Vedic words and think that there is nothingelse; their souls are full of desires; and they think that going toheaven is the chief thing. Yet have the Vedas reference only to thethree qualities (of which all things partake). Be free from the threequalities (do not care for rewards). In action, not in fruit, is thechief thing. Do thy work, abiding by serene devotion (Yoga), rejectingevery tie; be indifferent to success and failure. Serene devotion iscalled indifference (to such things). Action is lower than devotion ofmind. Devotion is happiness. Do thou, wise in devotion, abandon thefruit that is sprung from action, and, freed from the bonds of birth, attain a perfect state. "

S[=a]nkhya here means the philosophy of religion; Yoga is thephilosophical state of mind, serene indifference, religious_sang-froid_ the practical result of a belief in the S[=a]nkhyadoctrine of the indestructibility of the spirit. In the followingthere is Vedantic teaching, as well as Sankhyan in the stricter sense. 

On the warrior's asking for an explanation of this state of equipoise, the Deity gives illustrations of the balanced mind that is free fromall attachments, serene, emancipated from desires, self-controlled, and perfectly tranquil. As the knight is astonished and confused atthe contradiction, action and inactivity both being urged upon him, the Deity replies that there is a twofold law, that of S[=a]nkhyasconsisting in knowledge-devotion, and that of Yogis inaction-devotion. Idleness is not freedom from action. Freedom fromattachment must be united with the accomplishment of such acts asshould be performed. The deluded think that they themselves performacts, but acts are not done by the spirit (self); they are done onlyby nature's qualities (this is S[=a]nkhya doctrine). "One should knowthe relation between the individual and Supreme Spirit, and withtranquil mind perform good acts. Let the deluded ones be, who areerroneously attached to action. The wise man should not cause those ofimperfect knowledge to be unsettled in their faith, but he shouldhimself not be attached to action. Each man should perform his own(caste) duties. One's own duty ill done is better than doing wellanother man's work. "

The knight now asks what causes one to sin. The Deity answers: "Loveand hate; for from love is born hate; and from anger, ignorance inregard to right and wrong; whence comes lack of reason, andconsequently destruction. The knowledge of a man is enwrapped withdesire as is fire with smoke. Great are the senses; greater, the mind;greater still, the understanding; greatest of all is 'That'"(_brahma_; as above in the _Ch[=a]ndogya). _ The Deity begins again:[5]"This system of devotion I declared to Vivasvant (the sun); Vivasvantdeclared it to Manu, and Manu to kingly seers. " (The same origin isclaimed for itself in Manu's lawbook. ) The knight objects, not yetknowing that Krishna is the All-god: "How did'st thou declare itfirst? thy birth is later than the sun's. " To whom the Deity: "Manyare my births, and I know them all; many too are thine, but thouknowest them not; unborn and Lord of all creatures I assume phenomena, and am born by the illusion of the spirit. Whenever there is lack ofrighteousness, and wrong arises, then I emit (create) myself. [6] I amborn age after age for the protection of the good, for the destructionof the wicked, and for the sake of establishing righteousness. Whosoreally believes in this my divine birth and work, he, when he hasabandoned his body, enters no second birth, but enters Me. Many thereare who, from Me arising, on Me relying, purified by the penance ofknowledge, with all affections, fear, and anger gone, enter into mybeing. As they approach Me so I serve them. [7] Men in all ways followafter my path. Some desire the success that is of action, and worshipgods; for success that is born of action is speedy in the world ofmen. Know Me as the maker of the four castes, know Me as the unendingone and not the maker. Action stains Me not, for in the fruit ofaction I have no desire. He that thus knows Me is not bound byacts. [8] So he that has no attachment is not bound by acts. His actsbecome naught. _Brahma_ is the oblation, and with _brahma_ is itoffered; _brahma_ is in the fire, and by _brahma_ is the oblationmade. Sacrifices are of many kinds, but he that sacrifices withknowledge offers the best sacrifice. He that has faith has knowledge;he that has knowledge obtains peace. He that has no knowledge and nofaith, whose soul is one of doubt, is destroyed. Action does notdestroy him that has renounced action by means of indifference. Of thetwo, renunciation of action and indifference, though both give bliss, indifference in action is better than renunciation of action. Children, not Pundits, proclaim S[=a]nkhya and Yoga to be distinct. Hethat is devoted to either alone finds the reward of both. Renunciationwithout Yoga is a thing hard to get; united with Yoga the seer enters_brahma_. . . . He is the renouncer and the devotee who does the actsthat ought to be done without relying on the reward of action, not hethat performs no acts and builds no sacrificial fires. Through hisself (spirit) let one raise one's self. Conquer self by self (spirit). He is the best man who is indifferent to external things, who withequal mind sees (his spirit) self in everything and everything in self(God as the Spirit). Such an one obtains the highest bliss, _brahma_. Whoso sees Me in all and all in Me I am not destroyed for him, and heis not destroyed for Me. "

The knight now asks how it fares with a good man who is not equal tothe discipline of Yoga, and cannot free himself entirely fromattachment. Does he go to destruction like a cloud that is rent, failing on the path that leads to _brahma_? The Deity replies:"Neither in this world nor in the beyond is he destroyed. He that actsvirtuously does not enter an evil state. He obtains the heaven thatbelongs to the doers of good, and after living there countless summersis reborn on earth in the family of pure and renowned men, or of piousdevotees. There he receives the knowledge he had in a former body, andthen strives further for perfection. After many births he reachesperfection and the highest course (union with _brahma_). There are butfew that strive for perfection, and of them only one here and theretruly knows Me. Earth, water, fire, air, space, mind, understanding, and egoism (self-consciousness)--so is my nature divided into eightparts. [9] But learn now my higher nature, for this is my lower one. Myhigher nature is alive, and by it this world is supported. I am thecreator and destroyer of all the world. Higher than I is nothing. OnMe the universe is woven like pearls upon a thread. Taste am I, lightam I of moon and sun, the mystic syllable _[=O]m_ ([)a][)u]m), soundin space, manliness in men; I am smell and radiance; I am life andheat. Know Me as the eternal seed of all beings. I am theunderstanding of them that have understanding, the radiance of theradiant ones. Of the strong I am the force, devoid of love andpassion; and I am love, not opposed to virtue. Know all beings to befrom Me alone, whether they have the quality of goodness, of passion, or of darkness (the three 'qualities' or conditions of all things). Iam not in them; but they are in Me. Me, the inexhaustible, beyondthem, the world knows not, for it is confused by these three qualities(conditions); and hard to overcome is the divine illusion whichenvelops Me, while it arises from the qualities. Only they passthrough this illusion who come to Me alone. Wicked men, whoseknowledge is taken away by illusion, relying on a devilish (demoniac)condition, do not come to Me. They that have not the highest knowledgeworship various divinities; but whatever be the form that any oneworships with faith I make his faith steady. He obtains his desires inworshipping that divinity, although they are really bestowed upon himby Me. [10] But the fruit of these men, in that they have littlewisdom, has its end. He that sacrifices to (lesser) gods goes to thosegods; but they that worship Me come to Me. I know the things thatwere, that are, and are to be; but Me no one knoweth, for I amenveloped in illusion. I am the supreme being, the supreme godhead, the supreme sacrifice, the Supreme Spirit, _brahma_. "

The knight asks "What is _brahma_, the Supreme Spirit, the supremebeing, the supreme sacrifice?" The Deity: "The supreme, theindestructible, is called _brahma_. Its personal existence is SupremeSpirit (self). Destructible existence is supreme being (all except_[=a]tm[=a]_). The Person is the supreme godhead. I myself am thesupreme sacrifice in this body. "

Then follow statements like those in the Upanishads and in Manu, describing a day of _brahma_ as a thousand ages; worlds are renewed;they that go to the gods find an end of their happiness with the endof their world; but they that go to the indestructible _brahma_, theDeity, the entity that is not destroyed when all else is destroyed, never again return. There are two roads (as in the Upanishads above), one, the northern road leading to _brahma_; one, the southern road tothe moon, leading back to earth. At the end of a period of time allbeings reënter the divine nature (Prakriti[11]), and at the beginningof the next period the Deity emits them again and again (they beingwithout volition) by the volition of his nature. "Through Me, who amthe superintendent, nature gives birth to all things, and for thatcause the world turns about. They of demoniac nature recognize me not;they of god-like nature, knowing Me as the inexhaustible source, worship Me. I am the universal Father, the Vedas, the goal, theupholder, the Lord, the superintendent, the home, the asylum, thefriend. I am the inexhaustible seed. I am immortality and death. I ambeing and not-being. I am the sacrifice and he that offers it. Eventhey that, with faith, sacrifice to other gods, even they (really)sacrifice to Me. To them that ever are devout and worship Me with love(faith), I give the attainment of the knowledge by which they come toMe" (again the doctrine of special grace). "I am the beginning, themiddle, and the end of all created things. I am Vishnu among sun-gods;the moon among the stars; Indra among the (Vedic) gods; the S[=a]manamong the Vedas; among the senses, mind; among created beings, consciousness; among the Rudras I am Çiva (Çankara); amongarmy-leaders I am Skanda; among the great sages I am Bhrigu (whoreveals Manu's code); among the Siddhas[12] I am Kapila the Muni. . . . Iam the love that begets; I am the chief (V[=a]suki and Ananta) amongthe serpents; and among them that live in water I am Varuna; among theManes I am Aryaman; and I am Yama among controllers;[13] among demonsI am Prahl[=a]da . . . ; I am R[=a]ma; I am the Ganges. I am among allsciences the highest science (that in regard to the Supreme Spirit); Iam the word of the speakers; I am the letter A among the letters, andthe compound of union among the compounds. [14] I am indestructibletime and I am the Creator. I am the death that seizes all and I am theorigin of things to be. I am glory, fortune, speech, memory, wisdom, constancy, and mercy. . . . I am the punishment of the punisher and thepolity of them that would win victory. I am silence. I am knowledge. There is no end of my divine manifestations. "

The knight now asks to see the real form of the deity, which wasrevealed to him. "If in heaven the glory of a thousand suns shouldappear at once, such would be his glory. "

After this comes the real animus of the Divine Song in its presentshape. The believer that has faith in this Vishnu is even better thanthe devotee who finds _brahma_ by knowledge. 

The philosophy of knowledge (which here is anything but Vedantic) isnow communicated to the knight, in the course of which the distinctionbetween nature and spirit is explained: "Nature, Prakriti, and spirit, Purusha (person), are both without beginning. All changes andqualities spring from nature. Nature is said to be the cause of thebody's and the senses' activity. Spirit is the cause of enjoyment(appreciation) of pleasure and pain; for the Spirit, standing innature, appreciates the nature-born qualities. The cause of theSpirit's re-birth is its connection with the qualities, (This isS[=a]nkhya doctrine, and the same with that propounded above in regardto activity. ) The Supreme Spirit is the Support and great Lord of all, the _[=a]tm[=a]_, while _brahma_ (=_prakriti_) is the womb in which Iplace My seed, and from that is the origin of all things. The great_brahma_ is the womb, and I am the seed-giving father of all the formswhich come into being. The three 'qualities' (conditions, attributes), goodness, passion, and darkness, are born of nature and bind theinexhaustible incorporate (Spirit) in the body. The quality (orattribute) of goodness binds the soul with pleasure and knowledge;that of passion (activity), with desire and action; that of darkness(dulness), with ignorance. One that has the attribute of goodnesschiefly goes after death to the highest heaven; one that has chieflypassion is born again among men of action; one that has chieflydarkness is born among the ignorant. One that sees that theseattributes are the only agents, one that knows what is higher than theattributes, enters into my being. The incorporate spirit that haspassed above the three attributes (the origin of bodies), beingreleased from birth, death, age, and pain, obtains immortality. Topass above these attributes one must become indifferent to all change, be undisturbed by anything, and worship Me with devotion. . . . I am tobe learned from all the Vedas; I made the Ved[=a]nta; I alone know theVedas. There are two persons in the world, one destructible and oneindestructible; the destructible one is all created things; theindestructible one is called the Unchanging one. But there is still athird highest person, called the Supreme Spirit, who, pervading thethree worlds, supports them, the inexhaustible Lord. Inasmuch as Isurpass the destructible and am higher than the indestructible, therefore am I known in the world and in the Veda as the HighestPerson. "

The references to the S[=a]nkhyas, or S[=a]nkhya-Yogas, are not yetexhausted. There is another in a following chapter (vi. 18. 13) whichsome scholiasts say refers to the Ved[=a]nta-system, though this is indirect contradiction to the text. But the extracts already givensuffice to show how vague and uncertain are, on the whole, thephilosophical views on which depends the Divine Song. Until the end ofthese citations one hears only of nature and spirit, the two that haveno beginning, but here one finds the Supreme Spirit, which is asdistinct from the indestructible one as from the destructible. Moreover, 'nature' is in one place represented as from the beginningdistinct from spirit and entirely apart from it, and in another it isonly a transient phase. The delusion (illusion) which in one passageis all that exists apart from the Supreme Spirit is itself given up infavor of the S[=a]nkhya Prakriti, with which one must imagine it to beidentified, although from the text itself it cannot be identical. In aword, exactly as in Manu, there are different philosophicalconceptions, united without any logical basis for their union. The'system' is in general that of the S[=a]nkhya-Yogas, but there is muchwhich is purely Ved[=a]nta. The S[=a]nkhya system is taught elsewhereas a means of salvation, perhaps always as the deistic Yoga (i. 75. 7:"He taught them the Sankhya-knowledge as salvation"). It is furthernoticeable that although Krishna (Vishnu) is the ostensible speaker, there is scarcely anything to indicate that the poem was originallycomposed even for Vishnu. The Divine Song was probably, as we havesaid, a late Upanishad, which afterwards was expanded and put intoVishnu's mouth. The S[=a]nkhya portions have been redressed as far aspossible and to the illusion doctrine is given the chief place. Butthe Song remains, like the Upanishads themselves, and like Manu, anill-assorted cabinet of primitive philosophical opinions. On thereligious side it is a matter of comparative indifference whether thatwhich is not the spirit is a delusive output of the spirit orindestructible matter. In either case the Spirit is the goal of thespirit. In this personal pantheism absorption is taught but not death. Immortality is still the reward that is offered to the believer thatis wise, to the wise that believes. Knowledge and faith are the meansof obtaining this immortality; but, whereas in the older Upanishadsonly wisdom is necessary (wisdom that implies morality), here as muchstress, if not more, is laid upon faith, the natural mark of allsectarian pantheism. 

Despite its occasional power and mystic exaltation, the Divine Song inits present state as a poetical production is unsatisfactory. The samething is said over and over again, and the contradictions inphraseology and in meaning are as numerous as the repetitions, so thatone is not surprised to find it described as "the wonderful song, which causes the hair to stand on end. " The different meanings givento the same words are indicative of its patchwork origin, which againwould help to explain its philosophical inconsistencies. It wasprobably composed, as it stands, before there was any formalVed[=a]nta system; and in its original shape without doubt it precedesthe formal S[=a]nkhya; though both philosophies existed long beforethey were systematized or reduced to Sutra form. One has not toimagine them as systems originally distinct and opposed. They rathergrew out of a gradual intensification of the opposition involved inthe conception of Prakriti (nature) and M[=a]y[=a] (illusion), someregarding these as identical, others insisting that the latter was notsufficient to explain nature. The first philosophy (and philosophicalreligion) concerned itself less with the relation of matter to mind(in modern parlance) than with the relation of the individual self(spirit) to the Supreme Spirit. Different explanations of the relationof matter to this Supreme Spirit were long held tentatively byphilosophers, who would probably have said that either the S[=a]nkhyaor Ved[=a]nta might be true, but that this was not the chief question. Later came the differentiation of the schools, based mainly on aquestion that was at first one of secondary importance. In anotherpart of the epic Krishna himself is represented as the victim of'illusion' (iii. 21. 30) on the field of battle. 

The doctrine of the Bhagavad G[=i]t[=a], the Divine Song, is by nomeans isolated. It is found in many other passages of the epic, besides being imitated in the Anug[=i]t[=a] of the pseudo-epic. To oneof these passages it is worth while to turn, because of the form inwhich this wisdom is enunciated. The passage immediately followingthis teaching is also of great interest. Of the few Vedic deities thatreceive hymnal homage chief is the sun, or, in his other form, Agni. The special form of Agni has been spoken of above. He is identifiedwith the All in some late passages, and gives aid to his followers, although not in battle. It will have been noticed in the Divine Songthat Vishnu asserts that the Song was proclaimed to the sun, who inturn delivers it through Manu to the king-seers, the sun beingespecially the kingly god. [15] In the third book there is an hymn tothe sun, in which this god is addressed almost in the terms of theDivine Song, and immediately preceding is the doctrine just alludedto. After the explanation is given that re-birth affects creatures andcauses them to be born in earth, air, or water, the changes ofmetempsychosis here including the vegetable world as well as theanimal and divine worlds, [16] the very essence of the Divine Song isgiven as "Vedic word, " viz. , _kuru karma tyajeti ca_, "Perform andquit acts, " _i. E. _, do what you ought to do, but without regard to thereward of action (iii. 2. 72, 74). There is an eightfold path of duty, as in Buddhism, but here it consists in sacrifice, study, liberality, and penance; truth, mercy, self-control, and lack of greed. As theresult of practicing the first four, one goes on the course that leadsto the Manes; as the result of practicing the last four, one goes onthe course that leads to the gods. But in practicing any virtues oneshould practice them without expectation of reward (_abhim[=a]na_, arrière pensée). The Yogi, the devotee, who renounces the fruit ofeverything, is the greatest man; his powers are miraculous. 

There follows (with the same light inconsistency to be found in theDivine Song) the appeal for action and the exhortation to pray to thesun for success in what is desired. For it is explained that the sunis the father of all creation. The sun draws up clouds with his heat, and his energy, being transmuted into water, with the help of themoon, is distilled into plants as rain, and in this way the food thatman eats is full of solar energy, and man and all that live by foodmust regard the sun as their father. Preliminary to the hymn to thesun is given a list of his hundred and eight names, [17] among whichare to be noticed: Aryaman, Soma, Indra, Yama, Brahm[=a], Vishnu, Çiva, Death, Time, Creator, the Endless One, Kapila, the Unborn One, the Person (Purusha; with which are to be compared the names of Vishnuin the Divine Song), the All-maker, Varuna, the Grandfather, the Doorof Heaven, etc. And then the Hymn to the Sun (iii. 3. 36 ff. ):[18]"Thou, O Sun, of creatures art the eye; the spirit of all that haveembodied form; thou art the source of all created things; thou art thecustom of them that make sacrifice; thou art the goal of theS[=a]nkhyas and the hope of the Yogis; the course of all that seekdeliverance . . . Thou art worshipped by all; the three and thirtygods(!) worship thee, etc. . . . I think that in all the seven worlds[19]and all the _brahma_-worlds there is nothing which is superior to thesun. Other beings there are, both powerful and great, but they have nosuch glory as the sun's. Father of light, all beings rest in thee; OLord of light, all things, all elements are in thee. The disc ofVishnu was fashioned by the All-maker (one of the sun's names!) withthy glory. Over all the earth, with its thirteen islands, thou shinestwith thy kine (rays). . . . [20] Thou art the beginning and the end of aday of Brahm[=a]. . . . They call thee Indra; thou art Rudra, Vishnu, theFather-god, Fire, the subtile mind; thou art the Lord, and thou, eternal _brahma_. "

There is here also a very significant admixture of Vedic andUpanishadic religion. 

In Krishna, who in the Upanishads is known already by his own and hismother's name, pantheism is made personal according to the teaching ofone sect. But while the whole epic is in evidence for the spuriousnessof the claim of Krishna to be regarded as incarnate Vishnu (God), there is scarcely a trace in the original epic of the older view inregard to Vishnu himself. Thus in one passage he is called "theyounger brother of Indra" (iii. 12. 25). But, since Indra is at notime the chief god of the epic, and the chapter in which occurs thisexpression is devoted to extolling Krishna-Vishnu as the All-god, thewords appear to be intended rather to identify Krishna with Vishnu, who in the Rig Veda is inferior to Indra, than to detract fromVishnu's glory. The passage is cited below. 

What now is the relation of Vishnu-Krishna to the other divinities?Vishnuite and Çivaite, each cries out that his god includes the other, but there is no current identity of Brahm[=a], Vishnu, Çiva as threeco-equal representations of one God. For example, in iii. 189. 5, onereads: "I am Vishnu, I am Brahm[=a], and I am Çiva, " but one cannotread into this any trinitarian doctrine whatever, for in context thepassage reads as a whole: "I am N[=a]r[=a]yana, I am Creator andDestroyer, I am Vishnu, I am Brahm[=a], I am Indra, the master-god, I am kingKubera, Yama, Çiva, Soma, Kaçyapa, and also the Father-god. " Again, Vishnu says that the Father-god, or grandparent of the gods, is'one-half of my body, " and does not mention Çiva (iii. 189. 39). Thus, also, the hymn to Çiva in iii. 39. 76 ff. Is addressed "to Çiva havingthe form of Vishnu, to Vishnu having the form of Çiva, to thethree-eyed god, to Çarva, the trident-holder, the sun, Ganeça, " butwith no mention of Brahm[=a]. The three gods, Brahm[=a], Vishnu, Çiva, however, are sometimes grouped together (but not as a trinity) in latepassages, in contrast to Indra, _e. G. _, ix. 53. 26. There are manyhymns to Vishnu and Çiva, where each is without beginning, the God, the uncreated Creator. It is only when the later period, looking backon the respective claims of the sects, identifies each god with theother, and both with their predecessor, that one gets even the notionof a trinity. Even for this later view of the pseudo-epic only onepassage will be found (cited below). 

The part of Brahm[=a] in the epic is most distinctly in process ofsubordination to the sectarian gods. He is holy and eternal, but notomniscient, though wise. As was shown above, he works at the will ofVishnu. He is one with Vishnu only in the sense that all is one withthe All-god. When Vishnu 'raises the earth' as a boar, Brahm[=a] tellsthe gods to go to him. [21] He councils the gods. His heaven is aboveIndra's, but he is really only an intermediary divinity, a passiveactivity, if the paradox may be allowed. Not like Indra (to whom he issuperior) does he fight with All-gods, or do any great act of his ownwill. He is a shadowy, fatherly, beneficent advisor to the gods, hischildren; but all his activity is due to Vishnu. This, of course, isfrom the point of view of the Vishnuite. 

But there is no Brahm[=a]ite to modify the impression. There existedno strong Brahm[=a] sect as there were Vishnu and Çiva sects. Brahm[=a] is in his place merely because to the preceding age he wasthe highest god; for the epic regards Creator, Praj[=a]pati, Pit[=a]maha, Brahm[=a] as synonymous. [22] The abstract _brahma_, whichin the Upanishads is the same with the Supreme Spirit, was calledpersonally Brahm[=a], and this Brahm[=a] is now the BrahmanicFather-god. The sects could never get rid of a god whose being wasrooted alike in the preceding philosophy and in the popular conceptionof a Father-god. Each age of thought takes the most advanced views ofthe preceding age as its axioms. The Veda taught gods; theBr[=a]hmanas taught a Father-god above the gods; the Upanishads taughta Supreme Godhead of which this Father-god was the activemanifestation. The sects taught that their heroes were incarnations ofthis Supreme, but they carried with them the older pantheon as well, and, with the pantheon, its earlier and later heads, Indra andBrahm[=a]. Consequently each sect admits that Brahm[=a] is greaterthan the older Vedic gods, but, while naturally it identifies itsspecial incarnation first with its most powerful opponent, and thus, so to speak, absorbs its rival, it identifies this incarnation withBrahm[=a] only as being chief of lesser divinities, not as being arival. One may represent the attitude of a Krishna-worshipper in theepic somewhat in this way: "Krishna is a modern incarnation of Vishnu, the form which is taken in this age by the Supreme Lord. You whoworship Çiva should know that your Çiva is really my Krishna, andthe chief point is to recognize my Krishna as the Supreme Lord. Theman Krishna is the Supreme Lord in human form. Of course, as such, being the One God in whom are all things and beings, he is also allthe gods known by names which designate his special functions. Thus heis the head of the gods, the Father-god, as our ancestors called him, Brahm[=a]; and he is all the gods known by still older names, who arethe children of the secondary creator, Brahm[=a], viz. , Agni, Indra, S[=u]rya, etc. All gods are active manifestations of the Supreme Godcalled Vishnu, who is born on earth to-day as Krishna. " And theÇivaite says: "Çiva is the manifestation of the All-god, " and repeatswhat the Vishnuite says, substituting Çiva for Vishnu, [23] but withthe difference already explained, namely, that the Çiva-sect has noincarnation to which to point, as has the Vishnuite. Çiva is modifiedRudra, and both are old god-names. Later, however, the Çivaite hasalso his incarnate god. As an example of later Çiva-worship may betaken Vishnu's own hymn to this god in vii. 80. 54 ff. : "Reverence toBhava, Çarva, Rudra (Çiva), the bestower of gifts, the lord of cattle, the terrible, great, fearful, god of three wives;[24] to him who ispeace, the Lord, the slayer of sacrifices (_makhaghna_)[25] . . . To theblue-necked god; to the inventor (or author) . . . To truth; to the redgod, to the snake, to the unconquerable one, to the blue-haired one, to the trident-holder; . . . To the inconceivable one . . . To him whosesign is the bull; . . . To the creator of all, who pervades all, who isworshipped by all, Lord of all, Çarva, Çankara, Çiva, . . . Who has athousand heads a thousand arms, and death, a thousand eyes and legs, whose acts are innumerable. " In vii. 201. 71, Çiva is the unborn Lord, inconceivable, the soul of action, the unmoved one; and he that knowsÇiva as the self of self, as the unknowable one, goes to_brahma_-bliss. This also is late Çivaism in pantheistic form. Inother words, everything said of Vishnu must be repeated for Çiva. [26]

As an example of the position of the lowest member of the latertrinity and his very subordinate place, may be cited a passage fromthe preceding book of the epic. According to the story in vi. 65. 42ff. , the seers were all engaged in worshipping Brahm[=a], as thehighest divinity they knew, when he suddenly began to worship "thePerson (Spirit), the highest Lord"; and Brahm[=a] then lauds Vishnu assuch: "Thou art the god of the universe, the All-god, V[=a]sudeva(Krishna). Therefore I worship thee as the divinity; thou, whose soulis devotion. Victory to thee, great god of all; thou takestsatisfaction in that which benefits the world. . . . Lord of lords ofall, thou out of whose navel springs the lotus, and whose eyes arelarge; Lord of the things that were, that are, that are to be; O dearone, self-born of the self-born . . . O great snake, O boar, [27] O thouthe first one, thou who dwellest in all, endless one, known as_brahma_, everlasting origin of all beings . . . Destroyer of theworlds! Thy feet are the earth . . . Heaven is thy head . . . I, Brahm[=a], am thy form . . . Sun and moon are thy eyes . . . Gods and allbeings were by me created on earth, but they owe their origin to thygoodness. " Then the creation of Vishnu through Pradyumna as a form ofthe deity is described, "and Vishnu (Aniruddha) created me, Brahm[=a], the upholder of the worlds; so am I made of Vishnu; I am caused onlyby thee. "

While Brahm[=a] is represented here as identical with Vishnu he is atthe same time a distinctly inferior personality, created by Vishnu forthe purpose of creating worlds, a factor of inferior godliness to thatof the World-Spirit, Krishna-Vishnu. 

It had been stated by Holtzmann[28] that Brahm[=a] sometimes appearsin the epic as a god superior to Vishnu, and on the strength of thisL. Von Schroeder has put the date of the early epic between theseventh and fourth centuries B. C, because at that time Brahm[=a] wasthe chief god. [29] von Schroeder rather exaggerates Holtzmann'sresults, and asserts that "in the original form of the poem Brahm[=a]appears _throughout_ as the highest and most revered god, while theworship of Vishnu and Çiva as great gods is apparently a laterintrusion" (_loc. Cit. _). This asseveration will have to be taken _cumgrano_. Had von Schroeder said 'pantheistic gods' he would have beencorrect in this regard, but we think that both Vishnu and Çiva weregreat gods, equal, if not superior to Brahm[=a], when the epic properbegan. And, moreover, when one speaks of the original form of the poemhe cannot mean the pseudo-epic or the ancient legends which have beenwoven into the epic, themselves of earlier date. No one means by the'early epic' the tales of Agastya, of the creation of Death, of themaking of ambrosia, but the story of the war in its earliest shape;for the epic poem must have begun with its own subject-matter. Now itis not true that Brahm[=a] is regarded 'throughout' the early poem asa chief god at all. If one investigate the cases where Vishnu or Çivaappears 'below' Brahm[=a] he will see, in almost every case thatHoltzmann has registered, that this condition of affairs is recordednot in the epic proper but in the Brahmanic portions of thepseudo-epic, or in ancient legends alone. Thus in the story of thewinning of ambrosia, of Agastya drinking ocean, and of R[=a]ma, Brahm[=a] appears to be above Vishnu, and also in some extracts fromthe pseudo-epic. For the real epic we know of but two cases that canbe put into this category, and neither is sufficient to support thehypothesis built upon it. 

For Krishna, when he ingeniously plots to have Bh[=i]ma slayJar[=a]sandha, is said to have renounced killing Jar[=a]sandhahimself, 'putting Brahm[=a]'s injunction before him' (ii. 22. 36), _i. E. _ recalling Brahm[=a]'s admonition that only Bh[=i]ima was fatedto slay the foe. And when Krishna and S[=a]tyaki salute Krishna'selder brother they do so (for being an elder brother Baladeva isKrishna's _Guru_) respectfully, 'just as Indra and Upendra saluteBrahm[=a] the lord of _devas_' (ix. 34. 18). Upendra is Indra'syounger brother, _i. E. _, Vishnu (above). But these passages are scantyproof for the statement that Brahm[=a] appears throughout the earlyepic as the highest god;[30] nor is there even so much evidence asthis in the case of Çiva. Here, too, it is in the tale of the churningof ocean, of Sunda and Upasunda, of the creation of the death-power, and in late didactic (Brahmanic) passages, where Brahm[=a] makes Çivato destroy earth and Çiva is born of Brahm[=a], and only in suchtales, or extracts from the Book of Peace, etc, that Brahm[=a] appearsas superior. In all other cases, in the real action of the epic, he issubordinate to Vishnu and Çiva whenever he is compared with them. Whenhe is not compared he appears, of course, as the great old Father-godwho creates and foresees, but even here he is not untouched bypassion, he is not all-knowing, and his rôle as Creator is one that, with the allotment of duties among the gods, does not make him thehighest god. All the old gods are great till greater appear on thescene. There is scarcely a supreme Brahm[=a] in the epic itself, butthere is a great Brahm[=a], and a greater (older) than the sectariangods in the old Brahmanic legends, while the old Brahmanhood reassertsitself sporadically in the Ç[=a]nti, etc, and tells how the sectariangods became supreme, how they quarrelled and laid the strife. 

Since the adjustment of the relations between the persons of the latertrinity is one of the most important questions in the theology of thecompleted epic, it will be necessary to go a little further afield andsee what the latest books, which hitherto we have refrained as much aspossible from citing, have to say on the subject. As it seems to betrue that it was felt necessary by the Çivaite to offset the laud ofVishnu by antithetic laud of Çiva, [31] so after the completion of theBook of Peace, itself a late addition to the epic, and one that ismarkedly Vishnuitic, there was, before the Genealogy of Vishnu, anantithetic Book of Law, which is as markedly Çivaitic. In these booksone finds the climax of sectarianism, in so far as it is representedby the epic; although in earlier books isolated passages of lateaddition are sporadically to be found which have much the same nature. Everywhere in these last additions Brahm[=a] is on a plane which is asmuch lower than that of the Supreme God as it is higher than that ofIndra. Thus in viii. 33. 45, Indra takes refuge with Brahm[=a], butBrahm[=a] turns for help to Çiva (Bhava, Sth[=a]nu, Jishnu, etc. ) witha hymn sung by the gods and seers. Then comes a description ofÇankara's[32] (Çiva's) war-car, with its metaphorical arms, whereVishnu is the point of Civa's arrow (which consists of Vishnu, Soma, Agni), and of this war-car Brahm[=a] himself is the charioteer (_ib. _34. 76). With customary inconsistency, however, when Çiva wishes hisson to be exalted he prostrates himself before Brahm[=a], who thengives this youth (_kum[=a]ra_), called K[=a]rtikeya, the 'generalship'over all beings _(s[=a]in[=a]patyam_, ix. 44. 43-49). There is even a'celebration of Brahm[=a], ' a sort of harvest festival, shared, as thetext tells, by all the castes; and it must have been something likethe religious games of the Greeks, for it was celebrated by athleticcontests. [33] Brahm[=a], as the old independent creator, sometimeskeeps his place, transmitting posterity through his 'seven mind-bornsons, ' the great seers (iii. 133; xii. 166. 11 ff. ). But Brahm[=a]himself is born either in the golden egg, as a secondary growth (as inxii. 312. 1-7), or, as is usually the case, he is born in the lotuswhich springs from the navel of musing[34] Vishnu (iii. 203. 14). Inthis passage Brahm[=a] has four faces (Vedas) and four forms, _caturm[=u]rtis_ (15), and this epithet in other sections is transferredto Vishnu. Thus in vii. 29. 26, Vishnu(Vishu in the original) says_caturm[=u]rtir aham_, "I have four forms, " but he never says_trim[=u]rtir aham_ ('I have three forms'). There is one passage, however, that makes for a belief in a trinity. It stands in contrastto the various Vishnuite hymns, one of which may well be reviewed asan example of the regular Vishnuite laudation affected by the Krishnasect (iii. 12. 21 ff. ): "Krishna is Vishnu, Brahm[=a], Soma, the Sun, Right, the Creator ('founder'), Yama, Fire, Wind, Çiva, Time, Space, Earth, and the cardinal points. Thou, Krishna, art the Creator('emitter'); thou, chief of gods, didst worship the highest; thou, Vishnu called, becamest Indra's younger brother, entering into sonshipwith Aditi; as a child with three steps thou didst fill the sky, space, and earth, and pass in glory. . . . At the end of the age thoureturnest all things into thyself. At the beginning of the ageBrahm[=a] was born from thy lotus-navel as the venerable preceptor ofall things (the same epithet is in vs. 22 applied to Vishnu himself);and Çiva sprang from thy angry forehead when the demons would kill him(Brahm[=a]); both are born of thee, in whom is the universe. " Thefollowing verses (45 ff. ) are like those of the Divine Song: "Thou, Knight Arjuna, art the soul of Krishna; thou art mine alone and thinealone am I; they that are mine are thine; he that hates thee hates Me, and he that is for thee, is for Me; thou art Nara ('man') and I amN[=a]r[=a]yana ('whose home is on the waters, ' god);[35] we are thesame, there is no difference between us. " Again, like the Divine Songin the following verses (51-54) is the expression 'the sacrifice andhe that sacrifices, ' etc, together with the statement that Vishnuplays 'like a boy with playthings, ' with the crowds of gods, Brahm[=a], Çiva, Indra, etc. The passage opposed to this, and to otheridentifications of Vishnu with many gods, is one of the most flagrantinterpolations in the epic. If there be anything that the Supreme Godin Çivaite or Vishnuite form does not do it is to extol at length, without obvious reason, his rivals' acts and incarnations, Yet in thisclumsy passage just such an extended laudation of Vishnu is put intothe mouth of Çiva. In fact, iii. 272, from 30 to 76, is aninterpretation of the most naïve sort, and it is here that we find theapproach to the later _trim[=u]rti_ (trinity): "Having the form ofBrahm[=a] he creates; having a human body (as Krishna) he protects, inthe nature of Çiva he would destroy--these are the three appearancesor conditions (_avasth[=a]s_) of the Father-god". (Praj[=a]pati). [36]This comes after an account of the four-faced lotus-born Brahm[=a], who, seeing the world a void, emitted his sons, the seers, mind-born, like to himself (now nine in number), who in turn begot all beings, including men (vss. 44-47). If, on the other hand, one take the latersectarian account of Vishnu (for the above is more in honor of Krishnathe man-god than of Vishnu, the form of the Supreme God), he will seethat even in the pseudo-epic the summit of the theological conceptionsis the emphasis not of trinity or of multifariousness but of unity. According to the text the P[=a]ñcak[=a]lajñas are the same with theVishnuite sect called P[=a]ñcar[=a]tras, and these are mostemphatically _ek[=a]ntinas, i. E_. , Unitarians (xii. 336; 337. 46; 339. 66-67). [37] In this same passage 341. 106, Vishnu is again_caturm[=u]rtidh[r. ]t_, 'the bearer of four forms, ' an entirelydifferent conception of him (below). So that even in this mostadvanced sectarian literature there is no real threefoldness of theSupreme as one in three. In the following chapter (xii. 335. 1 ff. )there is a passage like the great Ka hymn of the Rig Veda, 'whom asgod shall one worship?' The sages say to Vishnu: "All men worshipthee; to whom dost thou offer worship?" and he says, 'to the EternalSpirit. ' The conception of the functions of Brahm[=a] and Çiva inrelation to Vishnu is plainly shown in xii. 342. 19: "Brahm[=a] andÇiva create and destroy at the will of Vishnu; they are born of hisgrace and his anger. " In regard to Çiva himself, his nature and placein Vishnuism have been sufficiently explained. The worship of this godis referred to 'Vedic texts' (the _çata-rudriyam_, vii. 202. 120);[38]Vishnu is made to adore the terrible god (_ib_. 201. 69) who appearsas a mad ascetic, a wild rover, a monster, a satire on man and gods, though he piously carries a rosary, and has other late traits in hispersonal appearance. [39] The strength of Çivaism lay in the eumenidean(Çiva is 'prospering, ' 'kindly') euphemism and fear alike, whichshrank in speech and mind from the object of fear. But this religionin the epic had a firmer hold than that of fear. It was essentiallyphallic in its outward form (VII. 201. 93-96), and as such was deeplyrooted in the religious conscience of a people to whom one may ventureperhaps to ascribe such a form of worship even in the time of the RigVeda, although the signs thereof in great part have been suppressed. This may be doubted, [40] indeed, for the earlier age; but there is noquestion that epic Çivaism, like Çivaism to-day, is dependent whollyon phallic worship (XIII. 14. 230 ff. ). It is the parallel of Bacchicrites and orgies, as well as of the worship of the demons indistinction from that of good powers. Çiva represents the ascetic, dark, awful, bloody side of religion: Vishnu, the gracious, calm, hopeful, loving side; the former is fearful, mysterious, demoniac; thelatter is joyful, erotic, divine. In their later developments it isnot surprising to see that Vishnuism, in the form of Krishnaism, becomes more and more erotic, while Çivaism becomes more and moreghastly and ghoulish. Wild and varied as are the beliefs of the epic, there is space but to show a few more characteristic sides of itstheology--a phase that may seem questionable, yet, since the devoutHindu believes the teachings of the epic, they must all to himconstitute one theology, although it was gradually amalgamated out ofdifferent creeds. 

In connection with Çiva stands, closely united, his son, Ganeça, "leader of troops, " still worshipped as one of the popular gods, andthe battle-god, Skanda, the son first of Agni then of Çiva, theconqueror of the demons, _d[=a]navas_, and later representative ofIndra, with whom the epic identifies him. For it is Skanda that is thereal battle-god of the later epic; though in its original form Indrawas still the warrior's refuge, as attests the stereotypedphraseology. In III. 225-232 honor and praise are ascribed to Skandain much the same language with that used to portray his father, Çiva. "The god of a thousand arms, the Lord of all, the creator of gods anddemons" are phrases used in his eulogy. He too has a list of names;his nurse is the "maiden of the red (bloody) sea, " calledLoh[=i]t[=a]yan[=i]. His terrible appearance and fearful acts make himthe equal of Çiva. [41] His sign is a _kukku[t. ]a_, cock; _ib_. 229. 33. 

Associated, again, with Skanda are the spirits or 'mothers, ' whichafflict people. The belief in mother-gods is old, but its epic form isnew. The exactness and detail in regard to these beautiful monstersshow at least a real belief, which, as one on a lower plane besidesthe higher religion, cannot be passed over without notice. As in otherlands, people are 'possessed' by evil spirits, called possessors orseizers (_grahas_). These are Skanda's demons, [42] and are both maleand female. Until one reaches the age of sixteen he is liable to bepossessed by one group of 'seizers, ' who must be worshipped in properform that their wrath may be averted. Others menace mortals from theage of sixteen to seventy. After that only the fever-demon is to befeared. Imps of this sort are of three kinds. One kind indulge only inmischievous sport: another kind lead one to gluttony; the third kindare devoted to lust. They are known as Piç[=a]cas, Yakshas, etc. , andwhen they seize a person he goes mad. They are to be kept at bay byself-restraint and moderation (III. 230. 43-56). In IX. 46 and III. 226 the 'mothers' are described. They are witches, and live incross-roads, cemeteries, and mountains. They may be of Dravidianorigin, and in their epic form, at any rate, are a late intrusion. [43]

Just before the Divine Song begins, the knight who is about to become, illuminated or 'disillusioned' offers a prayer to the terrible goddessDurg[=a], also one of the new, popular, and horrible forms of divinemanifestation. In this hymn, VI. 23, Durg[=a] (Um[=a], P[=a]rvat[=i], K[=a]li, etc. ) is addressed as "leader of the armies of the blessed, the dweller in Mandara, the youthful woman, K[=a]li, wife of Çiva, shewho is red, black, variegated; the savior, the giver of gifts, K[=a]ty[=a]yan[=i], the great benefactress, the terrible one, thevictorious one, victory itself . . . Um[=a], the slayer of demons, "[44]and the usual identification and theft of epithets then follows: "Othou who art the Vedas, who art Revelation, who art virtue, J[=a]tavedasi, . . . Thou art _brahma_ among the sciences, thou art thesleep of incorporate beings, the mother of Skanda, the blessed one, Durg[=a] . . . Thou art the mother of the Vedas and Ved[=a]nta . . . Thouart sleep, illusion, modesty, happiness . . . Thou art satisfaction, growth, contentment, light, the increaser of moon and sun. "

Turning from these later parasites, [45] which live on their parentgods and yet tend to reduce them, we now revert to that happinesshereafter to which looks forward the epic knight that has not beentempted to 'renounce' desire. In pantheistic passages he is what thelater remodeller makes him. But enough of old belief remains to showthat the warrior really cared a great deal more for heaven than he didfor absorption. As to the cause of events, as was said above, it isFate. Repeatedly is heard the lament, "Fate (impersonal) is thehighest thing, fie on vain human effort. " The knight confesses withhis lips to a belief in the new doctrine of absorption, but at hearthe is a fatalist. And his aim is to die on the field of battle, thathe may go thence directly to the heaven that awaits the good and thebrave. [46] Out of a long description of this heaven a few extractshere selected will show what the good knight anticipates:

 "Upward goes the path that leads to gods; it is inhabited by them that have sacrificed and have done penance. Unbelieving persons and untruthful persons do not enter there; only they that have duteous souls, that have conquered self, and heroes that bear the marks of battle. There sit the seers and gods, there are shining, self-illumined worlds, made of light, resplendent. And in this heaven there is neither hunger, nor thirst, nor weariness, nor cold, nor heat, nor fear; nothing that is terrible is there, nothing unclean; but pleasing sights, and sounds, and smells. There is no care there, nor age, nor work, nor sorrow. Such is the heaven that is the reward of good acts. Above this is Brahm[=a]'s world, where sit the seers and the three and thirty gods, " etc. 

Over against this array of advantages stands the one great "fault ofheaven, " which is stated almost in the words of "nessun maggiordolore, " "the thought (when one lives again on the lower plane) offormer happiness in the higher life is terrible grief" (vs. 30), _i. E_. , this heaven will pass away at the end of the world-period, when the Eternal draws all in to himself again (iii. 261); and thethought that one has been in heaven, while now he is (re-born) onearth, is a sorrow greater than the joy given by heaven. [47]One is reminded by the epic description of heaven of that poet of theUpanishads who describes his heavenly bliss as consisting in the factthat in that world "there is neither snow nor sorrow. " The laterversion is only an amplification. Even with the assurance that the"fault of heaven" is the disappointment of being dropped to earthagain in a new birth, the ordinary mortal is more averse from thebliss of absorption than from the pleasure of heaven. And in truth, except to one very weary of his lot in life, it must be confessed thatthe religion here shown in all its bearings is one eminently pleasantto believe. Its gist, in a word, is this: "If you feel able to endureit, the best thing to do is to study the plan of the universe, andthen conform to it. By severe mental discipline you can attain to thisknowledge, and for reward you will be immortally united with God. " Tothis the sectarian adds: "Or believe in my god and the result will bethe same. " But both philosopher and sectarian continue: "If, however, you do not want to be united with the Supreme Spirit so soon as this, then be virtuous and devout, or simply be brave if you are a warrior;do whatever the rules of morality and caste-custom bid you do, and youwill go to heaven for thousands of ages; at the end of which time youwill be re-born in a fine family on earth, and may again decidewhether to repeat the process of gaining heaven or to join God andbecome absorbed into the World-Spirit at once. " There were probablymany that chose rather to repeat their agreeable earthly experience, with an interlude of heaven after each death, than to make therenunciation of earth and heaven, and be absorbed once for all intothe All-god. 

The doctrine of 'the ages'[48] is so necessary to a true understandingof the rotative immortality offered as a substitute for the higherbliss of absorption (that is, genuine immortality), that an account ofthe teaching in this regard will not be out of place. The somewhatpuzzling distinction between the happy life of them that fail todesire absorption, and yet are religious men, and the blissful life ofthose people that do attain absorption, is at once explained by aclear understanding of the duration of the time of the gods' own lifeand of the divine heaven. Whereas the Greek notion of four agesincludes within the four all time, all the four ages of the Hindu areonly a fraction of time. Starting at any one point of eternity, thereis, according to the Hindu belief, a preliminary 'dawn' of a new cycleof ages. This dawn lasts four hundred years, and is then followed bythe real age (the first of four), which lasts four thousand years, andhas again a twilight ending of four hundred years in addition. Thisfirst is the Krita age, corresponding to the classical Golden Age. Itscharacteristics are, that in it everything is perfect; right eternalnow exists in full power. In this age there are neither gods nordemons (D[=a]navas, Gandharvas, Yakshas, R[=a]kshas, Serpents), neither buying nor selling. By a _lucus a non_ the derivation of thename Krita is _k[r. ]tam eva na kartavyam, i. E_. , with a pun, it iscalled the '_sacred_ age' because there are no _sacrifices_ in thatage. No S[=a]ma Veda, Rig Yeda, or Yajur Veda exist as distinctVedas. [49] There is no mortal work. Fruit comes by meditation; theonly duty is renunciation. Disease, lack of mental power, moraldefects (such as pride and hate) do not exist; the highest course ofthe ascetic Yogis is universally _brahma (paramakam_). In this agecome into existence the Brahman, Kshatriya, V[=a]içya, Ç[=u]dra, _i. E_. , the distinct castes of priest, warrior, husbandman, and slave;all with their special marks, and all delighted with their properoccupations. Yet have all the castes like occupations, like refuge, practice, and knowledge. They are joined to the one god (_eka deva_), and have but one _mantra_ in their religious rites. Their duties aredistinct, but they follow only one Veda and one rule. The four orders(of the time of life) are duly observed; men do not desire the fruitof their action, and so they obtain the highest course, _i. E_. , salvation by absorption into _brahma_. In this age the 'threeattributes' (or qualities) are unknown. After this age follows thedawn of the second age, called Tret[=a], lasting three hundred years, then the real age of Tret[=a], three thousand years, followed by thetwilight of three hundred years. The characteristics of this age are, that men are devout; that great sacrifices begin (_sattrampravartate_); that Virtue decreases by one quarter; that all thevarious rites are produced, together with the attainment of salvationthrough working for that end, by means of sacrifice and generosity;that every one does his duty and performs asceticism. The next age, Dv[=a]para, is introduced by a dawn of two hundred years, being itselftwo thousand years in duration, and it closes with a twilight of twohundred years. Half of Virtue fails to appear in this age, that is, the general virtue of the world is diminished by a half ('the Bull ofJustice stands on two legs'). The Veda is now subdivided into four. Instead of every one having one Veda, four Vedas exist, but somepeople know only three, or two, or one, or are even Veda-less(_an[r. ]cas_). Ceremonies become manifold, because the treatises onduty are subdivided(!). The attribute of passion influences people, and it is with this that they perform asceticism and are generous (notwith disinterestedness). Few (_kaçcit_) are settled in truth;ignorance of the one Veda causes a multiplication of Vedas (_i. E_. , asVeda means 'knowledge, ' the Vedas result from ignorance of theessential knowledge). Disease and sin make penance necessary. Peoplesacrifice only to gain heaven. After this age and its twilightare past begins the Kali, last of the four ages, with a dawn of onehundred, a course of one thousand, and a subsequent twilight of onehundred years. This is the present sinful age, when there is no realreligion, when the Vedas are ignored, and the castes are confused, when _itis_ (distresses of every form) are rife; when Virtue has onlyone leg left to stand upon. The believer in Krishna as Vishnu, besidesthis universal description, says that the Supreme Lord in the Kritaage is 'white' (pure); in the Tret[=a] age, 'red'; in the Dv[=a]paraage, 'yellow'; in the Kali age, 'black, _i. E_. , Vishnu is Krishna, which means 'black. '[50] This cycle of ages always repeats itselfanew. Now, since the twelve thousand years of these ages, with theirdawns and twilights, are but one of countless cycles, when the Kaliage and its twilight have brought all things into a miserable state, the universe is re-absorbed into the Supreme Spirit. There is then auniversal (apparent) destruction, _pralaya_, of everything, first byfire and then by a general flood. Seven suns appear in heaven, andwhat they fail to burn is consumed by the great fire called Samvartaka(really a manifestation of Vishnu), which sweeps the world and leavesonly ashes; then follows a flood which completes the annihilation. Thereafter follows a period equal to one thousand cycles (of twelvethousand years each), which is called 'Brahm[=a]'s night, ' for duringthese twelve million years Brahm[=a] sleeps; and the new Krita agebegins again "when Brahm[=a] wakes up" (iii. 188. 29, 69; 189. 42). [51] All the gods are destroyed in the universal destruction, thatis, re-absorbed into the All-god, for there is no such thing asannihilation, either of spirit or of matter (which is illusion). Consequently the gods' heaven and the spirits of good men in thatheaven are also re-absorbed into that Supreme, to be re-born in thenew age. This is what is meant by the constant harping onquasi-immortality. Righteousness, sacrifice, bravery, will bring manto heaven, but, though he joins the gods, with them he is destroyed. They and he, after millions of years, will be re-born in the newheaven and the new earth. To escape this eventual re-birth one mustdesire absorption into the Supreme, not annihilation, but unity withGod, so that one remains untouched by the new order at the end ofBrahm[=a]'s 'day. ' There are, of course, not lacking views of themthat, taking the precept grossly, give a less dignified appearance tothe teaching, and, in fact, upset its real intent. Thus, in the verysame Puranic passage from which is taken the description above (III. 188), it is said that a seer, who miraculously outlived the universaldestruction of one cycle, was kindly swallowed by Vishnu, and that, onentering his stomach (the absorption idea in Puranic coarseness), hesaw everything which had been destroyed, mountains, rivers, cities, the four castes engaged in their duties, etc. In other words, onlytransference of locality has taken place. But this account readsalmost like a satire. 

One of the most striking features of the Hindu religions, as they havebeen traced thus far, is the identification of right with light, andwrong with darkness. We have referred to it several times already. Inthe Vedic age the deities are luminous, while the demons and the abodeof the wicked generally are of darkness. This view, usually consideredIranian and Zoroastrian, is as radically, if not so emphatically, Indic. It might be said, indeed, that it is more deeply implanted inthe worship of the Hindus than in that of the Iranians, inasmuch asthe latter religion enunciates and promulgates the doctrine, while theformer assumes it. All deeds of sin are deeds of darkness, _tamas_. The devils live underground in darkness; the hells are below earth andare gloom lighted only by torture-flames. 

The development of devil-worship (the side-scenes in the theatre ofÇivaism) introduces devils of another sort, but the general effectremains. The fire-priest Bhrigu says: "Untruth is a form of darkness, and by darkness one is brought to hell (downwards); veiled in darknessone sees not the light. Light is heaven, they say, and darkness ishell, " xii. 190. 2-3. This antithesis of evil as darkness, good aslight, is too native to India to admit of the suggestion that it mighthave been borrowed. But an isolated and curious Puranic chapter of theepic appears to have direct reference to the Persian religion. AllHindu gods have sacrifices, even Çiva the 'destroyer of sacrifice. 'Now in iii. 220, after a preliminary account of the _p[a]ñcajanya_fire (vs. 5 ff. ) there is given a list of 'gods that destroysacrifice, ' _dev[=a]s yajñamu[s. ]as, _ fifteen in number, who 'standhere' on earth and 'steal' the sacrifice. They extend over the fivepeoples in three divisions of five each. The first and third groupcontain names compounded with Bh[=i]ma and S[=u]ra respectively; whilethe third group is that of Sumitra, Mitravan, Mitrajña, Mitravardhana, Mitradharman. There are others without the _mitra_ (vs. 10). Theappellation _dev[=a]s_ seems to take them out of connection withÇiva's demoniac troops, and the persistency of _mitra_ would look asif these 'gods' were of Iranian origin. There may have been (as arepossibly the modern S[=a]uras) believers in the Persian religionalready long established among the Hindus. 

The question will naturally present itself whether in the religious_olla podrida_ known as the Mah[=a]bh[=a]rata there are distinctallusions to Buddhism, and, if so, in how far the doctrines of thissect may have influenced the orthodox religion. Buddhism does notappear to have attacked or to have attracted the 'holy land, ' whence, indeed, according to law, heretics are 'banished. ' But its influenceof course must have embraced this country, and it is only a questionof in how far epic Brahmanism has accepted it. At a later periodHinduism, as has been observed, calmly accepts Buddha as an _avatar_of Vishnu. Holtzmann, who is inclined to attribute a good deal toBuddhism, sees signs of it even in the personal characteristics of theepic heroes, and believes the whole poem to have been more or lessaffected by anti-Buddhistic feeling. If this were so one would have togive over to Buddhism much also of the humanitarianism to be found inthe moral precepts that are so thickly strewn through the variousbooks. In our opinion these signs-manual of Buddhism are notsufficiently evident to support Holtzmann's opinion for the wholepoem, and it is to be noted that the most taking evidence is drawnfrom the latest parts of the work. It is just here that we think itnecessary to draw the line, for while much of late date has been addedin earlier books, yet in the books which one may call wholly lateadditions appear the strongest indications of Buddhisticinfluence. [52] A great deal of the Book of Peace is Puranic, the bookas a whole is a Vishnuite addition further enlarged by Çivaiteinterpolation. The following book is, again, an offset to the Book ofPeace, and is as distinctly Çivaite in its conception as is the Bookof Peace Vishnuite. [53] It is here, in these latest additions, whichscarcely deserve to be ranked with the real epic, that are found themost palpable touches of Buddhism. They stand to the epic proper asstands to them the Genealogy of Vishnu, a further addition which hasalmost as much claim to be called 'part of the epic' as have the booksjust mentioned, only that it is more evidently the product of a laterage, and represents the Krishna-Vishnu sect in its glory after theepic was completed. Nevertheless, even in these books much that issuspected of being Buddhistic may be Brahmanic; and in any concretecase a decision, one way or the other, is scarcely to be made onobjective grounds. Still more is this the case in earlier books. Thus, for instance, Holtzmann is sure that a conversation of a slave and apriest in the third book is Buddhistic because the man of low castewould not venture to instruct a Brahman. [54] But it is a commandemphasized throughout the later Brahmanism that one must take refugein the ship that saves; and in passages not suspected of Buddhistictendency Bh[=i]shma takes up this point, and lays down the rule that, no matter to which caste a man belongs, his teaching if salutary is tobe accepted. It is even said in one passage of the Book of Peace thatone ought to learn of a slave, and in another that all the four castesought to hear the Veda read:[55] "Let him get instruction even from aÇ[=u]dra if he can thereby attain to salvation"; and again: "Puttingthe Brahman first, let the four castes hear (the Veda); for this(giving first place to the priest) is (the rule in) reading theVeda. "[56] And in many places are found instructions given bylow-caste men. It may be claimed that every case which resemblesBuddhistic teaching is drawn from Buddhism, but this would be to claimmore than could be established. Moreover, just as the non-injurydoctrine is prior to Buddhism and yet is a mark of Buddhisticteaching, so between the two religions there are many points ofsimilarity which may be admitted without compromising the genuinenessof the Brahmanic teaching. For Buddhism in its morality is anythingbut original. [57]

Another bit of instruction from the Book of Peace illustrates theattitude of the slave just referred to. In sharp contrast to what onewould expect from a Buddhist, this slave, who is a hunter, claims thathe is justified in keeping on with his murderous occupation because itis his caste-occupation; whereas, as a Buddhist he ought to haverenounced it if he thought it sinful, without regard to thecaste-rule. The Book of Peace lays it down as a rule that the givingup of caste-occupation is meritorious if the occupation in itself isiniquitous, but it hedges on the question to the extent of sayingthat, no matter whether the occupation be sinful or not, if it is aninherited occupation a man does not do wrong to adhere to it. This isliberal Brahmanism. The rule reads as follows: "Actors, liquor-dealers, butchers, and other such sinners are not justified infollowing such occupations, _if they are not born to the profession(i. E_. , if they are born to it they are justified in following theirinherited occupation). Yet if one has inherited such a profession itis a noble thing to renounce it. "[58]

The marks of Buddhistic influence on which we would lay greater stressare found not in the fact that Mudgala refuses heaven (iii. 261. 43), or other incidents that may be due as well to Brahmanism as toBuddhism, but in such passages of the pseudo-epical Book of Peace asfor example the _dharmyas panth[=a]s_ of xii. 322. 10-13; theconversation of the female beggar, _bhikshuk[=i]_, with the king in321. 7, 168; the _buddha_ of 289. 45; the Buddhistic phraseology of167. 46; the remark of the harlot Pingal[=a] in 174. 60:_pratibuddh[=a] 'smi j[=a]g[r. ]mi_ (I am 'awakened' to a sense of sinand knowledge of holiness), and the like phrase in 177. 22:_pratibuddho 'smi_. [59] Of especial importance is the shibbolethNirv[=a]na which is often used in the epic. There seems, indeed, to bea subtile connection between Çivaism and Buddhism. Buddhism rejectspantheism, Çivaism is essentially monotheism. Both were reallyreligions of the lower classes. It is true that the latter wasaffected and practiced by those of high rank, but its strength laywith the masses. Thus while Vishnuism appealed to the contemplativeand philosophical (R[=a]maism), as well as to the easy-going middleclasses (Krishinaism), Çivaism with its dirty asceticism, its orgiesand Bacchanalian revels, its devils and horrors generally, althoughcombined with a more ancient philosophy, appealed chiefly to themagic-monger and the vulgar. So it is that one finds, as one of histitles in the thirteenth book, that Çiva is 'the giver of Nirv[=a]na, '(xiii. 16. 15). But if one examines the use of this word in otherparts of the epic he will see that it has not the true Buddhisticsense except in its literal physical application as when the_nirv[=a][n. ]a_ (extinguishing) of a lamp, iv. 22. 22, is spoken of;or the _nirv[=a][n. ]a_ of duties (in the Pañcar[=a]tra 'Upanishad, 'xii. 340. 67). On the other hand, in sections where the context showsthat this must be the case, Nirv[=a]na is the equivalent of 'highestbliss' or 'highest _brahma_, ' the same with the felicity thus named inolder works. This, for instance, is the case in xii. 21. 17; 26. 16, where Nirv[=a]na cannot mean extinction but absorption, _i. E_. , the'blowing out' of the individual flame (spirit) of life, only that itmay become one with the universal spirit. In another passage it isdirectly equated with _sukham brahma_ in the same way (_ib_. 189. 17). If now one turn to the employment of this word in the third book hewill find the case to be the same. When the king reproaches his queenfor her atheistic opinions in iii. 31. 26 he says that if there wereno reward for good deeds hereafter "people would not seek Nirv[=a]na, "just as he speaks of heaven ('immortality') and hell, _ib_. 20 and 19, not meaning thereby extinction but absorption. So after a descriptionof that third heaven wherein is Vishnu, when one reads that Mudgala"attained that highest eternal bliss the sign of which is Nirv[=a]na"(iii. 261. 47), he can only suppose that the word means hereabsorption into _brahma_ or union with Vishnu. In fact Nirv[=a]na isalready a word of which the sense has been subjected to attritionenough to make it synonymous with 'bliss. ' Thus "the gods attainedNirv[=a]na by means of Vishnu's greatness" (iii. 201. 22); and athirsty man "after drinking water attained Nirv[=a]na, " _i. E_. , thedrink made him happy (_ib_. 126. 16). One may best compare the JainNirv[=a]na of happiness. 

While, therefore, Buddhism seems to have left many manifest traces[60]in the later epic the weight of its influence on the early epic maywell be questioned. The moral harangues of the earlier books shownothing more than is consistent with that Brahmanism which has madeits way unaided through the greater humanitarianism of the earlierUpanishads. At the same time it is right to say that since the poem iscomposed after Buddha's time there is no historical certainty inregard to the inner connection of belief and morality (as expounded inthe epic) with Buddhism. Buddhism, though at a distance, environedepic Brahmanism, and may well have influenced it. The objective proofsfor or against this are not, however, decisive. 

Whether Christianity has affected the epic is another question thatcan be answered (and then doubtfully) only by drawing a line betweenepic and pseudo-epic. And in this regard the Harivança legends ofKrishna are to be grouped with the pseudo-epic, of which they are thelegitimate if late continuation. Again one must separate teaching fromlegend. To the Divine Song belong sentiments and phrases that havebeen ascribed to Christian influence. Definitive assurance in thisregard is an impossibility. When Vishnu says (as is said also in theUpanishads) "I am the letter A, " one may, and probably will, decidethat this is or is not an imitation of "I am alpha, " strictly inaccordance with his preconceived opinions. There are absolutely nohistorical data to go upon. One may say with tolerable certainty thatthe Divine Song as a whole is antique, prior to Christianity. But itis as unmistakably interpolated and altered. The doctrine of _bhakti_, faithful love as a means of salvation, cannot be much older than theSong, for it is found only in the latest Upanishads (as shown bycomparing them with those undoubtedly old). But on the other hand the_pras[=a]da_ doctrine (of special grace) belongs to a much earlierliterature, and there is no reason why the whole theory with itsstartling resemblance to the doctrine of grace, and its insistence onpersonal affection for the Lord should not have been self-evolved. Theold omnipotence of inherited knowledge stops with the Upanishads, Totheir authors the Vedas are but a means. They desired wisdom, notknowledge. They postulated the desire for the Supreme Spirit as thetrue wisdom. From this it is but a step to yearning and love for theSupreme. That step is made in the Divine Song. It is recognized byearly Buddhism as a Brahmanic trait. Is it necessarily imported fromChristianity? The proof is certainly lacking. Nor, to one accustomedto the middle literature of Hindu religion, is the phraseology sostrikingly unique as would appear to be the case. Taken all in all, the teaching of Christianity certainly may be suspected, but it cannotbe shown to exist in the Divine Song. 

Quite different is the case with the miraculous matter that grew upabout the infant Krishna. But here one is out of the epic and dealingwith the latest literature in regard to the man-god. This distinctioncannot be too much insisted upon, for to point first to the teachingof the Divine Song and then to the Krishna legends as equallyreflecting Christianity is to mix up two periods as distinct asperiods can be established in Hindu literature. And the result of thewhole investigation shows that the proofs of borrowing are asdifferent as theseperiods. The inner Christianity thought to be copied by the re-writerof the Divine Song is doubtful in the last degree. The outerChristianity reflected in the Puranic legends of Krishna is aspalpable as it is shocking. Shocking, for here not only are miraclestreated grotesquely, but everything that is meant spiritually in theOccident is interpreted physically and carnally. The love of theBridegroom is sensual; the brides of God are drunken dancing girls. 

The 'coincidences, ' as some scholars marvellously regard them, betweenthe legends of Christ and Krishna are too extraordinary to be acceptedas such. They are direct importations, not accidental coincidences. Whatever is most marvellous in the accounts of Christianity findsitself here reproduced in Krishnaism. It is not in the doctrine of_avatars_, which resembles the doctrine of the Incarnation, [61] it isin the totality of legends connected with Krishna that one is forcedto see Christian influence. The scenes of the nativity, the adorationof the magi, the miracles during the Saviour's childhood, thetransfiguration, and other stories of Christ are reproduced withastonishing similarity. One may add to this the Christmas festival, where Krishna is born in a stable, and the use of certainchurch-utensils in the temple-service. Weber has proved by collectingand explaining these 'coincidences, '[62] that there must be identityof origin. It remains only to ask from which side is the borrowing?Considering how late are these Krishna legends in India[63] there canbe no doubt that theHindu borrowed the tales, but not the name; for the last assumption isquite improbable because Krishna (=Christ?) is native enough, andVishnu is as old as the Rig Veda. That these tales are of secondaryimportance, as they are of late origin, is a matter of course. Theyare excrescences upon real Vishnuism (Krishnaism) and the result ofanthropomorphizing in its fullest extent the image of the man-god, whois represented in the epic as the incarnation of the Supreme Spirit. The doctrine of the incarnation is thoroughly Indic. It is Buddhisticas well as Brahmanic, and precedes Vishnuism as it does Christianity. The legends are another matter. Here one has to assume direct contactwith the Occident. [64] But while agreeing with Weber and disagreeingwith Barth in the determination of the relation of this secondarymatter, we are unable to agree with Weber in his conclusions in regardto the one passage in the pseudo-epic that is supposed by him[65] torefer to a visit to a Christian church in Alexandria. This is thefamous episode of the White Island, which, to be sure, occurs in solate a portion of the Book of Peace (xii. 337. 20 ff) that it mightwell be what Weber describes it as being. But to us it appears tocontain no allusion at all to Christianity. The account in brief is asfollows: Three priests with the insignificant names "First, Second, Third, "[66] go to the far North (_diç uttar[=a]_) where, in the "Seaof Milk, " they find an Albion called 'White Island, ' perhaps regardedas one of the seven or thirteen 'islands, ' of which earth consists;and there Vishnu is worshipped as the one god by white men ofextraordinary physical characteristics. 

The fact that the 'one god' is already a hackneyed phrase ofphilosophy; that there is no resemblance to a trinitarian god; thatthe hymn sung to this one god contains no trace of Christianinfluence, but is on the other hand thoroughly native in tone andphraseology, being as follows: "Victory to thee, thou god withlotus-eyes; Reverence to thee, thou creator of all things; Reverencebe to thee, O Vishnu;[67] thou Great Person; first-born one"; allthese facts indicate that if the White-islanders are indeed to beregarded as foreigners worshipping a strange god, that god is strictlymonotheistic and not trinitarian. Weber lays stress on the expression'first-born, ' which he thinks refers to Christ; but the epithet is old(Vedic), and is common, and means no more than 'primal deity. '

There is much that appears to be foreign in the epic. This passageseems rather to be a recollection of some shrine where monotheismwithout Christianity was acknowledged. On the other hand, even in thepseudo-epic, there is much apparently borrowed which yet is altogethernative to Brahmanic land and sect. It is not in any passage which isproved to be of foreign origin that one reads of the boy of twelveyears who entered among the wise men and confuted their reasoning(above, p. 382). It is not of course due to Christian influence thatthe great 'saint of the stake' is taken by the 'king's men, ' iscrucified (or literally impaled) among thieves, and lives so long thatthe guard go and tell the king of the miracle;[68] nor is it necessaryto assume that everything elevated is borrowed. "When I revile, Irevile not again, " sounds indeed like an echo of Christian teaching, but how thoroughly Hindu is the reason. "For I know that self-controlis the door of immortality. " And in the same breath, with a connectionof meaning patent only when one regards the whole not as borrowed butas native, follow the words that we have ventured to put upon thetitle-page of this volume, as the highest and at the same time thetruest expression of a religion that in bringing the gods to menraised man to equally with God--"This is a holy mystery which Ideclare unto you: There is nothing nobler than humanity. "[69]

 * * * * *

 FOOTNOTES:

 [Footnote 1: He appears in different complete manifestations, while Vishnu appears only in part, as a 'descent, ' _avatar, i. E_. , Vishnu is incarnate, Çiva appears whole. ]

 [Footnote 2: The original story perhaps antedates the Brahmanic Brahm[=a]. But, for all one knows, when the poem was first written Brahm[=a] was already decadent as chief god. In that case two strata of religious belief have been formally super-imposed, Vishnuism and Çivaism. ]

 [Footnote 3: While agreeing with Telang that the original G[=i]t[=a] is an old poem, we cannot subscribe to his argument (SBE. VIII. P. 19) that the priority of the S[=a]man over the Rig Veda is evidence of antiquity; still less to the argument, p. 21, from the castes. ]

 [Footnote 4: Compare Manu, i. 7: "He the subtile, indiscernible, eternal, inconceivable One, who makes all creatures. "]

 [Footnote 5: Possibly the original opening of another poem. ]

 [Footnote 6: The _avatars_ of Vishnu are meant. The very knight to whom he speaks is later regarded (in South India) as incarnate god, and today is worshipped as an _avatar_ of Vishnu. The idea of the 'birth-stories' of the Buddhists is thought by some scholars to have been connected historically with the _avatars_ of Vishnu. ]

 [Footnote 7: This is one of the notes struck in the later Upanishads, the doctrine of 'special grace, ' originating perhaps still earlier in the V[=a]c hymn (see above). ]

 [Footnote 8: That is, one that also has no desires may act (without desiring the fruit of action. )]

 [Footnote 9: This is a S[=a]nkhya division. ]

 [Footnote 10: This cleverly contrived or profound universality of Vishnuism is one of the greatest obstacles to missionary effort. The Vishnuite will accept Christ, but as a form of Vishnu, as here explained. Compare below: "Even they that sacrifice to other gods really sacrifice to Me. "]

 [Footnote 11: Prakriti (_prak[r. ]t[=i]_), nature; the term belongs to the S[=a]nkhya philosophy, which recognizes nature as distinct from spirit, a duality, opposed to _adv[=a]ita_, the non-duality of the Ved[=a]nta system, where the S[=a]nkhya 'nature' is represented by _m[=a]y[=a]_, 'illusion. ' Otherwise the word Prakrit is the 'natural, ' vulgar dialect, opposed to Sanskrit, the refined, 'put-together' language. ]

 [Footnote 12: Saints, literally 'the successful ones. ']

 [Footnote 13: Alluding to the later derivation of Yama from _yam_, control. ]

 [Footnote 14: "The letter A, " as in the Upanishads (see above, p. 226). ]

 [Footnote 15: Compare a parallel list of diadochoi in xii. 349. 51. ]

 [Footnote 16: One of the Jaina traits of the epic, _brahm[=a]di[s. ]u t[r. ]u[=a]nte[s. ]u bh[=u]te[s. ]u parivartate_, in distinction from the Buddhistic metempsychosis, which stops short of plants. But perhaps it is rather borrowed from the B[. R]ahman by the Jain, for there is a formal acknowledgment that _sth[=a]var[=a]s_ 'stationary things, ' have part in metempsychosis, Manu, xii. 42, although in the distribution that follows this is almost ignored (vs. 58). ]

 [Footnote 17: It is rather difficult to compress the list into this number. Some of the names are perhaps later additions. ]

 [Footnote 18: In contrast one may note the frequent boast that a king 'fears not even the gods, ' _e. G. _, i. 199. 1. ]

 [Footnote 19: Later there are twenty-one worlds analogous lo the twenty-one hells. ]

 [Footnote 20: Elsewhere, oh the other hand, the islands are four or seven, the earlier view. ]

 [Footnote 21: iii. 142. The boar-shape of Vishnu is a favorite one, as is the dwarf-incarnation. Compare V[=a]mana, V[=a]manaka, Vishnupada, in the list of holy watering-places (iii. 83). Many of Vishnu's acts are simply transferred from Brahm[=a], to whom they belonged in older tales. Compare above, p. 215. ]

 [Footnote 22: In i. 197, Praj[=a]pati the Father-god, is the highest god, to whom Indra, as usual, runs for help. Çiva appears as a higher god, and drives Indra into a hole, where he sees five former Indras; and finally Vishnu comes on to the stage as the highest of all, "the infinite, inconceivable, eternal, the All in endless forms. " Brahm[=a] is invoked now and then in a perfunctory way, but no one really expects him to do anything. He has done his work, made the castes, the sacrifice, and (occasionally) everything. And he will do this again when the new aeon begins. But for this aeon his work is accomplished. ]

 [Footnote 23: Thus in XII. 785. 165: "Neither Brahm[=a] nor Vishnu is capable of understanding the greatness of Çiva. "]

 [Footnote 24: Or "three eyes. "]

 [Footnote 25: Compare III. 39. 77: "The destroyer of Daksha's sacrifice. " Compare the same epithet in the hymn to Çiva, X. 7. 3, after which appear the devils who serve Çiva. Such devils, in the following, feast on the dead upon the field of battle, though, when left to themselves, 'midnight is the hour when the demons swarm, ' III. 11. 4 and 33. In X. 18 and XIII. 161 Çiva's act is described in full. ]

 [Footnote 26: Çiva, called Bhava, Çarva, the trident-holder, the Lord ([=I]ç[=a]na), Çankara, the Great God, etc. , generally appears at his best where the epic is at its worst, the interpolations being more flagrant than in the case of Vishnuite eulogies. The most devout worshipper of Vishnu is represented as an adherent of Çiva, as invoking him for help after fighting with him. He is "invincible before the three worlds. " He is the sun; his blood is ashes. All the gods, with Brahm[=a] at their head, revere him. He has three heads, three faces, six arms (compare iii. 39. 74 ff. ; 83. 125); though other passages give him more. ]

 [Footnote 27: Çiva has as sign the bull: Vishnu, the boar. ]

 [Footnote 28: ZDMG. Xxxviii. Pp. 197, 200. ]

 [Footnote 29: _Lit. U. Cultur_, p. 461. ]

 [Footnote 30: Holtzmann now says (in _Neunzehn Bücher_, p. 198) that the whole episode which terminates with Baladeva's visit an addition to the original. Holtzmann's monograph on Brahm[=a] is in ZDMG. Xxxviii. 167. ]

 [Footnote 31: A good example is that of the two visions of Arjuna, first the vision of Vishnu, then another vision of Çiva, whom Arjuna and Vishnu visit (vii. 80). ]

 [Footnote 32: Çankara and Çiva mean almost the same; 'giver of blessings' and 'prospering' (or 'kindly'), respectively. ]

 [Footnote 33: _Brahma[n. ]as sumahotsavas_ (compare the commentator). The _sam[=a]ja_ of Brahm[=a] may be explained by that of Çiva mentioned in the same place and described elsewhere (iv. 13. 14 ff. ; i. 164. 20). ]

 [Footnote 34: Not _sleeping_, Vishnu, despite _svapimi_, does not slumber; he only muses. ]

 [Footnote 35: Man (divine) and god human, but N[=a]r[=a]yana is a new name of Vishnu, and the two are reckoned as two inseparable seers (divinities). ]

 [Footnote 36: This is the only really trinitarian passage in the epic. In i. 1. 32; xiii. 16. 15, the belief may be indicated, but not certainly, as it is in Hariv. 10, 662. See on this point Holtzroann, ZDMG. Xxxviii. P. 204. In xiv. 54. 14 the form is V[=i]shnu, Brahm[=a], Indra. ]

 [Footnote 37: Compare 339. 114, "thou art _pañcamah[=a]kalpa_. " The commentator gives the names of five sects, S[=a]ura, Ç[=a]kta, G[=a]neça, Ç[=a]iva, Vaishnava. The 'five times, ' implied in Pañcak[=a]ta, he says are day, night, month, seasons, and year (_ib_. 66). In 340. 117 (which chapter is Pancar[=a]tric), Brahm[=a] "knows that Vishnu is superior. "]

 [Footnote 38: V[=a]j. S. Xvi. 1-66; T[=a]itt. S. Iv. 5. 1-11. ]

 [Footnote 39: Çiva has no ordinary sacrifice: he is (as above) in general a destroyer of sacrifice, _i. E_. , of Vedic sacrifice; but as Paçupati, "Lord of beasts, " he claims the bloody sacrifice of the first beast, man. ]

 [Footnote 40: The usual opinion is that phallic worship was a trait of southern tribes foisted upon northern Çivaism. Philosophically Çivaism is first monotheistic and then pantheistic, To-day it is nominally pantheistic but really it is dualistic. ]

 [Footnote 41: There are indications in this passage of some sectarian feeling, and the fear of partisan warfare (229); in regard to which we add from Muir and Holtzmann the passage XII. 343. 121, where is symbolized a peaceful issue of war between Vishnuism and Çivaism. ]

 [Footnote 42: Grahas are also planets, but in this cult they are not astrological, as show their names. ]

 [Footnote 43: They are possibly old, as Weber thinks, but they seem to have nothing in common with the ancient female divinities. ]

 [Footnote 44: Compare another hymn to Durg[=a] in IV. 6. 5 ff. (late). Durgi was probably an independent local deity, subsequently regarded as Çiva's female side. She plays a great rôle, under various names, in the 'revived' literature, as do the love-god and Ganeça. In both hymns she is 'Vishnu's sister, ' and in IV. 6 a 'pure virgin. ']

 [Footnote 45: One comparatively new god deserves a passing mention, Dharma's son, K[=a]ma, the (Grecian?) love-god, 'the mind-shaker, ' 'the limbless one, ' whose arrows are like those of Cupid (I. 66. 32; 171. 34; III. 46. 2). He is an adventitious addition to the epic. His later name of Ananga occurs in XII. 59. 91. In I. 71. 41 and 171. 40 he is Manmatha. The Atharvan god also has darts, III. 25, a mark of this latest Veda. ]

 [Footnote 46: Compare ii. 22. 18: "Great holiness, great glory, penance, death in battle, these are each respectively productive of heaven; the last alone is a sure cause. "]

 [Footnote 47: This description and the sentiments are quite late. The same sort of heaven (without the philosophical bitterness, with which compare above, p. 229) is, however, found in other passages, somewhat augmented with nymphs and facile goddesses. ]

 [Footnote 48: This doctrine is supposed by some scholars to be due to outside influence, but the doubt is not substantiated, and even in the Rig Veda one passage appears to refer to it. Doubtless, however, the later expanded view, with its complicated reckonings, may have been touched by foreign influence. ]

 [Footnote 49: _Na [=a]san s[=a]ma-[r. ]g-yajur-varn[=a]s_. In xii. 342. 8 the order is Rik-Yajus-Atharvan-S[=a]man. The habit of putting S[=a]man instead of Rik at the head of the Vedas is still kept in the late litany to Çiva, who is "the S[=a]man among the Vedas" meaning, of course, the first and best. In the same place, "Çiva is the Itih[=a]sa" epic (xiii. 14. 323; and _ib_. 17. 78, 91), for the epic outweighs all the Vedas in its own estimation. ]

 [Footnote 50: iii. 149. 14; 188. 22; 189. 32; probably with a recollection of the colors of the four castes, white, red, yellow, black. According to xii. 233. 32, there is no sacrifice in the Krita age, but, beginning with the Tret[=a] age, there is a general diffusion of sacrifice in the Dv[=a]para age. In another passage of the same book it is said that marriage laws arose in the Dv[=a]para age (207. 38 ff. ). ]

 [Footnote 51: The teaching varies somewhat in the allotment of years. See Manu, I. 67. ]

 [Footnote 52: Weber thinks, on the other hand, that the parties represent respectively, Çiva and Vishuu worship, _Ind. St_. I. 206. ]

 [Footnote 53: This book also is closely in touch with the later Pur[=a]nas. For instance, Citragupta, Yama's secretary, is known only to the books of the pseudo-epic, the Vishnu Pur[=a]na, the Padma Pur[=a]na, etc. ]

 [Footnote 54: _Neunzehn Bücher_, p. 86. ]

 [Footnote 55: The epic does not care much for castes in some passages. In one such it is said that members of all castes become priests when they go across the Gomal, iii. 84. 48. ]

 [Footnote 56: xii. 319. 87 ff. _(pr[=a]pya j[=n][=a]nam_ . . . _ç[=u]dr[=a]d api_); xii. 328. 49 (_çr[=a]vayee caturo var[n. ][=a]n_). The epic regards itself as more than equivalent (_adhikam)_ to the four Vedas, i. 1. 272. ]

 [Footnote 57: Some ascribe the _sams[=a]ra_ doctrine to Buddhistic influence--a thesis supported only by the fact that this occurs in late Brahmanic passages and Upanishads. But the assumption that Upanishads do not precede Buddha is scarcely tenable. The Katha, according to Weber (_Sits. Berl. Ak. _ 1890, p. 930), is late (Christian!): according to Oldenberg and Whitney, early (_Buddha_, p. 56; _Proc. AOS. _ May, 1886). ]

 [Footnote 58: xii. 295. 5-6. ]

 [Footnote 59: Noteworthy is the fact that parts of the Çivaite thirteenth book seem to be most Buddhistic (ch. I. ; 143. 48, etc. ), and monotheistic (16. 12 ff. ): though the White Islanders are made Vishnuite in the twelfth. Compare Holtzmann, _ad. Loc_. ]

 [Footnote 60: Nirv[=a]na, loosely used; termini technici; possibly the evils of the fourth age; the mention of (Buddhist) temples, etc. ]

 [Footnote 61: On this point we agree neither with Weber, who regards the _avatars_ as an imitation of the Incarnation (_Ind. St. _ ii. P. 169), nor with Schroeder, who (_Literatur und Cultur_, p. 330) would derive the notion from the birth-stories of Buddha. In our opinion the _avatar_-theory is older than either and is often only an assimilation of outlying totem-gods to the Brahman's god, or as in the case of the flood-story the necessary belief that the 'fish' must have been the god of the race. Some of these _avatars_ are Brahmanic, presumably pre-Buddhistic. ]

 [Footnote 62: Krishna's Geburtsfest (_janm[=a][s. ]tam[=i]), _ 1867. ]

 [Footnote 63: Since they do not appear till after the real epic we date them tentatively as arising after 600 A. D. Most of them are in still later Pur[=a]nas. ]

 [Footnote 64: Incidental rapport with the Greeks has been pointed out in other instances; the _surang[=a]_, a mine, of the late tale in i. 148. 12, etc (_Ind. St. _ ii. P. 395), has been equated with syrinx; Skanda with Alexander, etc. It is needless to say that each of these is only a guess in etymology. But Greek influence is perceptible in the Greek soldiers and names of (Greek) kings that are found in the epic. ]

 [Footnote 65: _Ind. St. _ i. 423; ii. 169. Weber believes that little is native to India which resembles Christianity in the way of theology; lore of God, special grace, monotheism, all to him are stolen. We regret that we must disagree with him in these instances. ]

 [Footnote 66: Ekata, Dvita, Trita. A Dvita appears as early as the Rig Veda. Ekata is an analogous formation and is old also. ]

 [Footnote 67: Hrish[=i]keça is 'lord of senses, ' a common epithet of Vishnu (Krishna). ]

 [Footnote 68: i. 107. 1 ff. The spirits of the dead come to him and comfort him in the shape of birds--an old trait, compare B[=a]udh. Dh. Ç[=a]st. Ii. 8. 14. 10; Çat. Br. Vi. 1. 1. 2. ]

 [Footnote 69: xii. 300. 20. ]

 * * * * *

CHAPTER XVI. 

THE PUR[=A]NAS. --EARLY SECTS, FESTIVALS, THE TRINITY. 

Archaeologia, 'ancient lore, ' is the meaning of Pur[=a]na_(pur[=a]na_, 'old'). The religious period represented by the extantwritings of this class is that which immediately follows thecompletion of the epic. [1] These works, although they contain no realhistory, yet reflect history very plainly, and since the advent andinitial progress of Puranic Hinduism, with its various cults, iscontemporary with important political changes, it will be necessarybriefly to consider the circumstances in which arose these new creeds, for they were destined to become in the future the controlling forcein the development of Hindu religion. 

In speaking of the extension of Buddhism we showed that its growth wasinfluenced in no small degree by the fact that this caste-less and, therefore, democratic religion was adopted by post-Alexandrine rulersin the Graeco-Bactrian period. At this time the Aryans were surroundedwith foreigners and pagans. To North and South spread savage or halfHinduized native tribes, while soldiers of Greece and Bactria encampedin the valley of the Ganges. Barbarians had long been active in theNorth, and some scholars have even claimed that Buddha's own familywas of Turanian origin. The Brahmans then as now retained theirprestige only as being repositories of ancient wisdom; and outside oftheir own 'holy land' their influence was reduced to a minimum by thesocial and political tendencies that accompanied the growth ofBuddhism. After the fourth century B. C. The heart of India, the'middle district, ' between the Him[=a]laya and Vindhya mountains fromDelhi to Benares, [2] was trampled upon by one Graeco-Bactrian hordeafter another. The principal effect of this rude dominion waseventually to give political equality to the two great rivalreligions. The Buddhist and the Brahman lived at last if notharmoniously, at least pacifically, side by side. Members of the samereigning family would profess Buddhism or Brahmanism indifferently. One king would sometimes patronize both religions. And this continuedto be the case till Buddhism faded out, replaced by that Hinduismwhich owed its origin partly to native un-Aryan influence (paganism), partly to this century-long fusion of the two state religions. 

To review these events: In the first decades of the fourth century(320 or 315-291 B. C. ) Candragupta, Sandrocottos, had built up amonarchy in Beh[=a]r[3] on the ruins left by the Greek invasion, sharing his power with Seleucus in the Northwest, and had thusprepared the way for his grandson, Açoka, the great patron of Buddhism(264 or 259). This native power fell before the hosts of Northernbarbarians, which, after irruptions into India in the second century, got a permanent foothold there in the first century B. C. TheseNorthern barbarians (their nationality is uncertain), whose greatestking was Kanishka, 78 A. D. , ruled for centuries the land they hadseized; but they were vanquished at last in the sixth century, probably by Vikram[=a]ditya, [4] and were driven out. Thebreathing-space between Northern barbarian and Mohammedan wasnominally not a long one, but since the first Moslem conquests had nodefinitive result the new invaders did not quite overthrow Hindu ruletill the end of the tenth century. During this period the nativeun-Aryan tribes, with their Hinduizing effect, were more destructiveas regards the maintenance of the old Brahmanic cult than wereoutsiders. [5]

When Tamerlane invaded India his was the fourth invasion after theconquest of the Punj[=a]b by the Moslem in 664. [6] In 1525 the fifthconqueror, Baber, fifth too in descent from Tamerlane, founded theMogul empire that lasted till the fall of this dynasty (nominally till1857). But it must be remembered that each new conqueror from 997 till1525 merely conquered old Mohammedan dynasties with new invasions. Itwas all one to the Hindu. He had the Mohammedan with him all this timeonly each new rival's success made his lot the harder, But Baber'sgrandson, the Great Mogul, Akbar (who reigned from 1556 to 1605), gavethe land not only peace but kindness; and under him Jew, Christian, Hindu, and Mohammedan at last forgot to fear or fight. After thisthere is only the overthrow of the Mohammedan power to record; and therise of the Mahratta native kingdoms. A new faith resulted from theamalgamation of Hinduism with Mohammedism (after 1500), as will beshown hereafter. [8] In the pauses before the first Mohammedaninvasion, and between the first defeat of the Mohammedans and theirsuccessful second conquest, the barbarians being now expelled andBuddhism being decadent, Brahmanism rallied. In the sixth centurythere was toleration for all faiths. In the seventh centuryKum[=a]rila renewed the strength of Brahmanism on the ritualistic sidewith attacks on Buddhism, and in the ninth century Çankara placed thephilosophy of unsectarian pantheism on a firm basis by his commentaryon the Ved[=a]nta S[=u]tra. [7] These two men are the re-makers ofancient Brahmanism, which from this time on continued in itsstereotyped form, adopting Hindu gods very coyly, and only as spiritsof small importance, while relying on the laws as well as the gods ofold, on holy _[=a]c[=a]ra_ or 'custom, ' and the now systematizedexposition of its old (Upanishad) philosophy. [8] Its creative forcewas already spent. Buddhism, on the other hand, was dying a naturaldeath. The time was ripe for Hinduism, which had been gatheringstrength for centuries. After the sixth century, and perhaps even aslate as 1500, or later, were written the modern Pur[=a]nas, whichembody the new belief. [9] They cannot, on account of the distinctadvance in their cult, have appeared before the end of the epic age. The breathing spell (between barbarian and complete Mohammedanconquest) which gave opportunity to Kum[=a]rila to take a high handwith Buddhism, was an opportunity also for the codification of the newcreeds. It is, therefore, to this era that one has probably to referthe first of the modern sectarian Pur[=a]nas, though the ritualisticTantras and [=A]gamas of the lower Çivaite sects doubtless belongrather to the end than to the beginning of the period. We arestrengthened in this belief by the fact that the oldest of these worksdo not pretend to antedate Kum[=a]rila's century, though the sectsmentioned in the epic are known in the first centuries of theChristian era. The time from the first to the seventh centuries onemay accordingly suppose to have been the era during which wasdeveloping the Brahmanized form of the early Hindu sects, theliterature of these and subsequent sects being composed in thecenturies succeeding the latter term. These sects again divide intomany subdivisions, of which we shall speak below. At present we takeup the character of the Pur[=a]nas and their most important points ofdifference as compared with the sectarian parts of the earlierpseudo-epic, examining especially the trinitarian doctrine, which theyinculcate, and its history. 

Save in details, even the special 'faith-scriptures' called Tantras gono further than go the Pur[=a]nas in advocating the cult of theirparticular divinities. And to this advocacy of special gods all elsein this class of writings is subordinated. The ideal Pur[=a]na isdivided into five parts, cosmogony, new creations, genealogies of godsand heroes, _manvantaras_ (descriptions of periodic 'ages, ' past andfuture), and dynasties of kings. But no extant Pur[=a]na is dividedthus. In the epic the doctrine of trinitarianism is barely formulated. Even in the Harivança, or Genealogy, _va[. N]ça_, of Vishnu, there isno more than an inverted triunity, 'one form, three gods, ' where, inreality, all that is insisted upon is the identity of Vishnu and Çiva, Brahm[=a] being, as it were, perfunctorily added. [10] In thePur[=a]nas, on the other hand, while the trinity is acknowledged, religion is resolved again into a sort of sectarian monotheism, wherethe devotee seems to be in the midst of a squabbling horde oftemple-priests, each fighting for his own idol. In the calmer aspectsof religion, apart from sectarian schism, these writings offer, indeed, much that is of second-rate interest, but little that is ofreal value. The idle speculations in regard to former divinities arehere made cobweb thin. The philosophy is not new, nor is the spirit ofreligion raised, even in the most inspired passages, to the levelwhich it has reached in the Divine Song. Some of these Pur[=a]nas, ofwhich eighteen chief are cited, but with an unknown number ofsubordinate works, [11] may claim a respectable age; many of them arethe most wretched stuff imaginable, bearing about the same literaryand historical relation to earlier models as do the later legalSmritis. In fact, save for their religious (sectarian) purport, thePur[=a]nas for sections together do not differ much in content fromlegal Smritis, out of which some may have been evolved, though, probably, they were from their inception legendary rather thandidactic. It is more probable, therefore, that they appropriatedSmriti material just as they did epic material; and though it is nowreceived opinion that legal Smritis are evolved out of S[=u]tras, thisyet can be the case only with the oldest, even if the statement thencan be accepted in an unqualified form. In our own opinion it ishighly probable that Pur[=a]nas and later legal Smritis are divergentdevelopments from the same source. [12] One gives an account ofcreation, and proceeds to tell about the social side; the other sticksto the accounts of creation, goes on to theology, takes up tales ofheroes, introduces speculation, is finally wrenched over to andamplified by sectarian writers, and so presents a composite thatresembles epic and law, and yet is generally religious andspeculative. 

A striking instance of this may be seen in the law-book of 'Vishnu. 'Here there is an old base of legal lore, S[=u]tra, interlarded withPuranic material, and built up with sectarianism. The writer is aVishnuite, and while recognizing the trinity, does not hesitate tomake his law command offerings to Krishna V[=a]sudeva, and his family(Pradyumna, Aniruddha), along with the regular Brahmanic oblations toolder spirits. [13] Brahmanism recognized Hindu deities as subordinatepowers at an early date, at least as early as the end of the S[=u]traperiod; while Manu not only recognizes Vishnu and Çiva (Hara), butrecommends an oblation to Çr[=i] and K[=a]l[=i] (Bhadrak[=a]li, here, as elsewhere, is Durg[=a]). [14]

In their original form the Pur[=a]nas were probably Hesiodic in agreat extent, and doubtless contained much that was afterwardsspecially developed in more prolix form in the epic itself. But theworks that are come down as Pur[=a]nas are in general of latersectarian character, and the epic language, phraseology, anddescriptions of battles are more likely taken straight from the epicthan preserved from ante-epic times. Properly speaking one ought togive first place to the Pur[=a]nas that are incorporated into theepic. The epic M[=a]rkandeya Pur[=a]na, for instance, is probably agood type of one of the earlier works that went by this name. That thepresent Pur[=a]nas are imitations of the epic, in so far as they treatof epic topics, may be presumed from the fact that although they oftenhave the formulae intact of the battlefield, [15] yet do they notremain by epic descriptions but add weapons, etc. , of more modern datethan are employed in the original. [16]

The sectarian monotheism of the Pur[=a]nas never resulted indispensing with the pantheon. The Hindu monotheist is a pantheist, andwhether sectarian or philosophical, he kept and added to hispantheon. [17] Indra is still for warriors, Maruts for husbandmen, although old views shift somewhat. So for example, in the K[=u]rmaPur[=a]na the Gandharvas are added for the Ç[=u]dras. [18] Thefourfoldness, which we have shown in the epic to be characteristic ofVishnu, is now represented by the military epithet _caturvy[=u]has_(agmen quadratum), in that the god represents peace, wisdom, support, and renunciation; though, as a matter of fact, he is _avy[=u]ha, i. E_. , without any of these. [19] Starting with the physical 'god ofthe four quarters, ' one gets even in the epic the 'controller offour, ' or perfect person, conceived like [Greek: anêr tetragônos]. Tennyson's 'four-square to all the winds that blow' is a goodconnecting link in the thought. The Pur[=a]nas are a mine of legend, although most of the stories seem to be but epic tales, more or lessdistorted. Nala 'the great-great-grandson of R[=a]ma' is describedafter the history of R[=a]ma himself; the installation of P[=u]ru, when his father had passed over his eldest son, and such reminiscencesof the epic are the stock in trade of the legendary writers. [20]

The origin of the four castes;[21] the descriptions of hell, somewhat embellished, [22] where the 'sinful are cooked in fire';[23] theexaltation of Vishnu as Krishna or K[=a]ma in one, and that of Çiva inanother--these and similar aspects are reflections of epic matter, spirit, tone, and language, only the faith is still fiercer inreligious matters, and the stories are fainter in historicalreferences. According to the Pur[=a]na last cited: "There is noexpiation for one that bows to a phallic emblem, " _i. E_. , Çivaite, and"all the B[=a]uddhas are heretics";[24] and according to the K[=u]rmaPur[=a]na: "Vishnu is the divinity of the gods; Çiva, of the devils, "although the preceding verses teach, in the spirit of the Divine Song, that each man's divinity is that which he conceives to be thedivinity. Such is the concluding remark made by Vasistha inadjudicating the strife between the Vishnuite and Çivaite sectaries ofthe epic heroes. [25] The relation that the Puranic literature bears toreligion in the minds of its authors is illustrated by the remark ofthe N[=a]rad[=i]ya to the effect that the god is to be honored "bysong, by music, by dance, and by recounting the Pur[=a]nas" (xvii. 9). 

Some of the epic religious ceremonies which there are barely alludedto are here described with almost the detail of a technical handbook. So the N[=a]nd[=i]ya (xix. ) gives an elaborate account of the raisingof a _dhvaja_ or standard as a religious ceremony. [26] The legal rulesaffecting morality and especially caste-intercourse[27] show a laxityin regard to the rules as formerly preached. Even the old Puranic formof the epic is reproduced, as when M[=a]rkandeya converses again withYudhistris, exactly as he does in the epic. [28] The duration of theages; the fruit of sacrifices, among which are still mentioned the_r[=a]jas[=u]ya, açvamedha_, and other ancient rites;[29] the virtueof holy-places;[30] the admixture of pure pantheism with the idea of apersonal creation[31]--these traits are again just those which havebeen seen already in the epic, nor is the addition of sections ontemple-service, or other more minute details of the cult, ofparticular importance in a history of religious ideas. 

The Pur[=a]nas for our present purpose may all be grouped with theremark that what is ancient in them is a more or less fugitiveresemblance to the epic style and matter;[32] what is new is the morepronounced sectarianism with its adventitious growth of subordinatespiritualities and exaggerated miracles. Thus for instance in theVar[=a]ha Pur[=a]na there are eleven, in the Bh[=a]gavat Pur[=a]natwenty (instead of the older ten) _avatars_ of Vishnu. So too the godof love--although K[=a]ma and his dart are recognized in the lateAtharvan--as a petty spirit receives homage only in the latestS[=u]tra (as Cupid, [=A]pastamba, ii, 2. 4. 1), and in late additionsto the epic he is a little god; whereas in the drama he is prominent, and in the Pur[=a]nas his cult is described at length (though to-dayhe has no temple). The 'mother'-fiend P[=u]tan[=a], who suckles babesto slay them, is scarcely known to the early epic, but she is a veryreal personality in the late epic and Pur[=a]nas. 

The addition to the trinity of the peculiar inferior godhead that isadvocated in any one Pur[=a]na, virtually making four divinities, ischaracteristic of the period. 

In proportion as sectarian ardor is heightened religious tone islowered. The Puranic votary clinging to his one idea of god curses allthem that believe in other aspects of the divinity. Blind bigotryfills the worshipper's soul. Religion becomes mere fanaticism. Butthere is also tolerance. Sometimes in one and the same Pur[=a]na rivalforms are honored. The modern Hindu sects are in part the directdevelopment of Puranic doctrine. But most of the sects of to-day areof very recent date, though their principles are often of respectableantiquity, as are too their sectarian signs, as well as the animals oftheir gods, some of which appear to be totems of the wild tribes, while others are merely objects of reverence among certain tribes. Thus the ram and the elephant are respectively the ancient beasts ofAgni and Indra. Çiva has the bull; his spouse, the tiger. Earth andSkanda have appropriated the peacock, Skanda having the cock also. Yama has the buffalo (compare the Khond, wild-tribe, substitution of abuffalo for a man in sacrifice). Love has the parrot, etc; while theboar and all Vishnu's animals in _avatars_ are holy, being his chosenbeasts. [33]

EARLY SECTS. 

A classification of older sects (the unorthodox) than those of thepresent remains to us from the works of Çankara's reputed disciple, [=A]nanda Giri, and of M[=a]dhava [=A]c[=a]rya, the former a writer ofthe ninth, the latter of the fourteenth century. According to thestatements made by these writers there were a great number of sects, regarded as partly heterodox or wholly so, and it is interesting inexamining the list of these to see that some of the epic sects (theirnames at least) are still in full force, while on the other hand themost important factions of to-day are not known at all; and that manysects then existed which must have been at that time of greatantiquity, although now they have wholly passed away. [34] These lastare indeed to the author of the critique of the sects not whollyheterodox. They are only too emphatic, in worshipping their peculiardivinity, to suit the more modern conceptions of the Hindu reviewer. But such sects are of the highest importance, for they show thatdespite all the bizarre bigotry of the Pur[=a]nas the old Vedic gods(as in the epic) still continue to hold their own, and had their ownidols and temples apart from other newer gods. The Vedic divinities, the later additions in the shape of the god of love, the god ofwealth, Kubera, [35] the heavenly bird, Garuda, the world-snake, Çesha, together with countless genii, spirits, ghosts, the Manes, theheavenly bodies, stars, etc. , all these were revered, though of lessimportance than the gods of Vishnuite and Çivaite sects. Among theselatter the Çivaite sects are decidedly of less interest than thecorresponding Vishnuite heresies, while the votaries of Brahm[=a](exclusively) are indeed mentioned, but they cannot be compared withthose of the other two great gods. [36] To-day there is scarcely anyhomage paid to Brahm[=a], and it is not probable that there ever wasthe same devotion or like popularity in his case as in the case of hisrivals. Other interesting sects of this period are theSun-worshippers, who still exist but in no such numbers as when[=A]nand[=a] Giri counted six formal divisions of them. The votariesof these sub-sects worshipped some, the rising sun, some, the settingsun, while some again worshipped the noonday sun, and others, allthree as a _tri-m[=u]rti. _ Another division worshipped the sun inanthropomorphic shape, while the last awakens the wrath of theorthodox narrator by branding themselves with hot irons. [37]

Ganeça, [38] the lord of Çiva's hosts, had also six classes ofworshippers; but he has not now as he then had a special and peculiarcult, though he has many temples in Benares and elsewhere. Of thedeclared Çivaite sects of that day, six are mentioned, but of theseonly one survives, the 'wandering' Jangamas of South India, theÇivaite R[=a]udras, Ugras, Bh[=a]ktas, and P[=a]çupatis having yieldedto more modern sectaries. 

Some at least among the six sects of the Vishnuite sects, which aredescribed by the old writers, appear to have been more ancient. Heretoo one finds Bh[=a]ktas, and with them the Bh[=a]gavatas, the oldP[=a]ñcar[=a]tras, the 'hermit' V[=a]ikh[=a]nasas, and Karmah[=i]nas, the latter "having no rites. " Concerning these sects one gets scantybut direct information. They all worshipped Vishnu under one form oranother, the Bh[=a]ktas as V[=a]sudeva, the Bh[=a]gavatas[39] asBhagavat. The latter resembled the modern disciples of R[=a]m[=a]nujaand revered the holy-stone, appealing for authority to the Upanishadsand to the Bhagavad Git[=a], the Divine Song. Some too worshippedVishnu exclusivelyas N[=a]r[=a]yana, and believed in a heaven of sensualdelights. The other sects, now extinct, offer no special forms ofworship. What is historically most important is that in this list ofsects are found none that particularly worship the popular divinitiesof to-day, no peculiar cult of Krishna as an infant and nomonkey-service. 

Infidel sects are numerous in this period, of which sects the worst inthe old writers' opinion is the sensual C[=a]rv[=a]ka. Then follow the(Buddhist) Ç[=u]nyav[=a]ds, who believe in 'void, ' and S[=a]ugatas, who believe that religion consists only in kindness, the Kshapanakas, and the Jains. The infamous 'left-hand' sectaries are also well known. 

To one side of the Puranic religions, from the earlier time of whichcomes this account of heresies, reference has been made above: thedevelopment of the fables in regard to the infant Krishna. That thecult is well known in the later Pur[=a]nas and is not mentioned inthis list of wrong beliefs seems to show that the whole cult is ofmodern growth, even if one does not follow Weber in all his signs ofmodification of the older practice. 

RELIGIOUS FESTIVALS. 

For the history of the cult there is in these works much to interestone in the description and determination of popular festivals in honorof the great sectarian gods. Further details of more specific natureare given in other works which need not here be regarded. By far themost important of these festivals are those that seem to have beenabsorbed by the sectarian cults, although they were originally morepopular. Weber in the paper on the _r[=a]jas[=u]ya_, to which we havehad occasion several times to refer, has shown that a popular elementabided long in the formal celebrations of the Brahmanic ritual. [40]is soundly beaten; that gaming creeps into the ceremony as a popularaspect; that there was a special ceremony to care _katsenjammer_caused by over-drinking; and that the whole ceremony was a popularspring festival, such as is found to-day (but without the royal partin the play). 

Undoubtedly the original celebration was a popular one. Today the mostinteresting of these popular fêtes is in all respects the New Year'sFestival and the Spring Festival. The latter has been cut up intoseveral parts, and to show the whole intent of the original ceremonialit is necessary to take up the _disjecta membra_ and place them sideby side, as has been done by Wilson, whose sketch of these twofestivals, together with that by Gover of the New Year's Feast calledPongol, we give in abstract, premising that, however close be thecomparison with European festivals of like nature, we doubtwhether there is any historical connection between them and the Hinducelebrations. 

We begin with the more popular New Year's, the Pongol:[41] Theinteresting feature of this South India festival is that the Hindushave done their best to alter its divinities and failed. They have, indeed, for Indra and Agni got Krishna formally accepted as the god inwhose honor it is supposed to be held, but the feast remains a nativefestival, and no one really thinks of the Puranic gods in connectionwith it. Europe also has seen such dynamic alterations of divinitiesin cases where feasts would insist till patrons of an orthodox kindwere foisted upon them to give an air of propriety to that whichremained heathenish. [42] The Pongol is a New Year's festival lastingfor three days. The first day is for Indra; the second, for (Agni)S[=u]rya;[43] the third (to which is added, as a wind-up, a fourthday), for cattle. The whole feast is a harvest-home and celebration ofcattle. The chief ceremony is the cooking of rice, which is put toboil with great solemnity, and luck for the next year is argued fromits boiling well. If it does so a universal shout arises, [44] all rushabout, congratulate, and give presents to each other, and merry-makingfollows. On the cattle-days the beasts are led about with paintedhorns and decorated with ribbons, and are then chased and robbed bythe boys. The image of Ganeça is the only one seen, and his worship israther perfunctory. On the evening of the last day the women have aparty, paying obeisance to a peacock, and indulging in a familyreunion of very simple character. On this occasion the girl-wife mayreturn for a few hours to her mother. It is the only general fête forwomen during the year. 

Not unlike this festival of the extreme south is the New Year'scelebration at the mouth of the Ganges. Here there is a grand fair andjewels are cast into the river as propitiation to the river-goddess. Not long ago it was quite customary to fling children also into theriver, but this usage has now been abolished. [45] Offerings are madeto the Manes, general and particular, and to the All-gods. As with thePongol, the feast is one of good-fellowship where presents aredistributed, and its limit is the end of the third day. After this thefestivities have no religious character. Thousands of pilgrimsassemble for this fête. Wilson, who gives an account of thiscelebration, compares the ancient Roman New Year's, with the _mutuiamoris pignora_ which were sent at that season. The gifts in India aresweetmeats and other delicacies, ominous of good for the nextyear. [46]

On the 2d of February occurs a feast to Çr[=i], or Lakshm[=i], Vishnu's bride, patroness of all prosperity to her worshippers. Atpresent it is a literary festival on which all books, inkstands, pens, etc. , are cleaned and worshipped, as adjuncts to Sarasvat[=i], thegoddess of learning. This is rather significant, for Sarasvat[=i] isproperly the wife of Brahm[=a], but the Vishnuites of Bengal have madeher the wife of Vishnu, and identified her with Çr[=i]. It is to benoticed that in this sole celebration of abstract learning andliterature there is no recognition of Çiva, but rather of his rival. Çiva and Ganeça are revered because they might impede, not because, asdoes Sarasvat[=i], they further literary accomplishment. Sarasvat[=i]is almost the only fair goddess. She is represented not as a horror, but as a beautiful woman sitting on a lotus, graceful in shape, acrescent on her brow. [47] The boys, too, celebrate the day with games, bat and ball, prisoner's base, and others "of a very Europeancharacter. " The admixture of sectarian cults is shown by thetransference to this Vishnuite feast of the Çivaite (Durg[=a])practice of casting into the river the images of the goddess. [48] Whenapplied distinctly to Sarasvat[=i] the feast is observed inAugust-September; when to Lakshm[=i], in October-November, or inFebruary. There is, however, another feast, celebrated in the Northand South, which comes on the exact date fixed by the Romans for thebeginning of spring, and as an ending to this there is a feast toK[=a]ma, Cupid, and his bride Rati ('Enjoyment'). This is the Vasanta, or spring festival of prosperity and love, which probably was thefirst form of the Lakshm[=i]-Sarasvat[=i] feast. 

Another traditional feast of this month is the 10th[49] (the eleventhlunar day of the light half of M[=a]gha). The eleventh lunar day isparticularly holy with the Vishnuites, as is said in the BrahmaPur[=a]na, and this is a Vishnuite festival. It is a day of fastingand prayer, with presents to priests. [50] It appears to be a mixtureof Vedic prayers and domestic Vishnu-worship. On the 11th of Februarythe fast is continued, and in both the object is expiation of sin. Thelatter is called the feast of 'six sesamum acts, ' for sesamum is aholy plant, and in each act of this rite it plays a part. Other ritesof this month are to the Manes on the 14th, 22d, and 24th of February. Bathing and oblation are requisite, and all are of a lustral andexpiatory nature. Wilson remarks on the fact that it is the same timeof year in which the Romans gave oblations to the Manes, andthat Februus is the god of purification. "There can be no reasonabledoubt that the Feralia of the Romans and the Çr[=a]ddha (feast to theManes) of the Hindus, the worship of the Pitris and of the Manes, havea common character, and had a common origin. "[51]

The 27th of February is the greatest Çivaite day in the year. Itcelebrates Çiva's first manifestation of himself in phallic form. Tokeep this day holy expiates from all sin, and secures bliss hereafter. The worshipper must fast and revere the Linga. Offerings are made tothe Linga. It is, of course, a celebration formed of unmeaningrepetitions of syllables and the invocation of female Çaktis, snappingthe fingers, gesticulating, and performing all the humbug called forby Çivaite worship. The Linga is bathed in milk, decorated, wrapped in_bilva_ leaves, and prayed to; which ceremony is repeated at intervalswith slight changes. All castes, even the lowest, join in theexercises. Even women may use the _mantras_. [52] Vigil and fasting arethe essentials of this worship. [53]

The next festival closes these great spring celebrations. It bears twonames, and originally was a double feast, the first part being theDol[=a] Y[=a]tr[=a], or 'Swing-procession, ' the second part being theexecrable Holi. They are still kept distinct in some places, and whenthis occurs the Dolotsava, or Dol[=a] Y[=a]tr[=a], follows the Holi. They are both spring festivals, and answer roughly to May-day, thoughin India they come at the full moon of March. We have followedWilson's enumeration of all the minor spring feasts, that they may beseen in their entirety. But in ancient times there was probably onelong Vasantotsava (spring-festival), which lasted for weeks, beginningwith a joyous celebration (2d of February) and continuing with lustralceremonies, as indicated by the now detached feast days alreadyreferred to. The original cult, in Wilson's opinion, has been changed, and the Dol[=a] Y[=a]tr[=a] is now given over to the Krishna-cult, while the Hol[=i] divinity is a hobgoblin. The Dol[=a] Yatr[=a] beginswith fasting and ends (as Hol[=i]) with fire-worship. An image ofKrishna is sprinkled with red powder (_ab[=i]r_), and after this(religious) ceremony a bonfire[54] is made, and an effigy, Holik[=a], is put upon it and burned. The figure is carried to the fire in areligious procession headed by Vishnuite or Brahman priests, of courseaccompanied with music and song. After seven circumambulations of thefire the figure is burned. This is the united observance of the firstday. At dawn on the morning of the second day the image of Krishna isplaced in a swing, _dol[=a]_, and swung back and forth a few times, which ceremony is repeated at noon and at sunset. During the day, wherever a swing is put up, and in the vicinity, it is the commonprivilege to sprinkle one's friend with the red powder or redrose-water. Boys and common people run about the streets sprinklingred water or red powder over all passengers, and using abusive(obscene) language. The cow-herd caste is conspicuous at thisceremony. The cow-boys, collecting in parties under a koryphaios, hold, as it were, a komos, leaping, singing, and dancing[55] throughthe streets, striking together the wands which they carry. Thesecow-boys not only dress (as do others) in new clothes on thisoccasion, [56] but they give their cattle new equipments, and regardthe whole frolic as part of a religious rite in honor of Krishna, thecow-herd. But all sects take part in the performance (that is to say, in the Hol[=i] portion), both Çivaites and Vishnuites. When the moonis full the celebration is at its height. Hol[=i] songs are sung, thecrowd throws _ab[=i]r_ the chiefs feast, and an all-night orgy endsthe long carousal. [57] In the south the Dol[=a] takes place later, andis distinct from the Hol[=i]. The burning here is of K[=a]ma, commemorating the love-god's death by the fire of Çiva's eye, when theformer pierced the latter's heart, and inflamed him with love. Forthis reason the bonfire is made before a temple of Çiva. K[=a]ma isgone from the northern cult, and in upper India only a hobgoblin, Hol[=i], a foul she-devil, is associated with the rite. The wholeperformance is described and prescribed in one of the latePur[=a]nas. [58] In some parts of the country the bonfire of theHol[=i] is made about a tree, to which offerings are made, andafterwards the whole is set on fire. For a luminous account of theHol[=i], which is perhaps the worst open rite of Hinduism, participated in by all sects and classes, we may cite the words of theauthor of _Ante-Brahmanical Religions_: "It has been termed theSaturnalia or Carnival of the Hindus. Verses the most obsceneimaginable are ordered to be read on the occasion. Figures of men andwomen, in the most indecent and disgusting attitudes, are in manyplaces openly paraded through the streets; the most filthy words areuttered by persons who, on other occasions, would think themselvesdisgraced by the use of them; bands of men parade the street withtheir clothes all bespattered with a reddish dye; dirt and filth arethrown upon all that are seen passing along the road; all business isat a stand, all gives way to license and riot. "[59]

Besides these the most brilliant festivals are the R[=a]s Y[=a]tr[=a]in Bengal (September-October), commemorating the dance of Krishnawith the _gop[=i]s_ or milk-maids, and the 'Lamp-festival'(D[=i]p[=a]l[=a]), also an autumnal celebration. 

The festivals that we have reviewed cover but a part of the year, butthey will suffice to show the nature of such fêtes as are enjoined inthe Pur[=a]nas. There are others, such as the eightfold[60]temple-worship of Krishna as a child, in July or August; the marriageof Krishna's idol to the Tulasi plant; the Awakening of Vishnu, inOctober, and so forth. But no others compare in importance with theNew Year's and Spring festivals, except the Bengal idol-display ofJagann[=a]th, the Rath Y[=a]tr[=a] of 'Juggernaut'; and some others oflocal celebrity, such as the D[=u]rg[=a]-p[=u]j[=a]. [61] The temples, to which reference has often been made, have this in common with thegreat Çivaite festivals, that to describe them in detail would be butto translate into words images and wall-paintings, the obscenity ofwhich is better left undescribed. This, of course, is particularlytrue of the Çiva temples, where the actual Linga is perhaps, as Barthhas said, the least objectionable of the sights presented to the eyeof the devout worshipper. But the Vishnu temples are as bad. Architecturally admirable, and even wonderful, the interior is but adisplay of sensual immorality. [62]

HISTORY OF THE HINDU TRINITY. 

In closing the Puranic period (which name we employ loosely to coversuch sects as are not clearly modern) we pause for a moment to cast aglance backwards over the long development of the trinity, to theunits of which are devoted the individual Pur[=a]nas. We have shownthat the childhood-tales of Krishna are of late (Puranic) origin, andthat most of the cow-boy exploits are post-epic. Some are referred toin the story of Çiçup[=a]la in the second book of theMah[=a]bh[=a]rata, but this scene has been touched up by a late hand. The Vishnu Pur[=a]na, typical of the best of the Pur[=a]nas, as inmany respects it is the most important and interesting, representsKrishnaite Vishnuism as its height. Here is described the birth of theman-god as a black, _k[r. ][s. ][n. ]a, _ baby, son of Nanda, and his realtitle is here Govinda, the cow-boy. [63] 'Cow-boy' corresponds to themore poetical, religious shepherd; and the milk-maids, _gopis_ withwhom Govinda dallies as he grows up, may, perhaps, better be renderedshepherdesses for the same reason. The idyllic effect is what is aimedat in these descriptions. Here Krishna plays his rude and rustictricks, upsetting wagons, overthrowing trees and washermen, occasionally killing them he dislikes, and acting altogether much likea cow-boy of another sort. Here he puts a stop to Indra-worship, over-powers Çiva, rescues Aniruddha, marries sixteen thousandprincesses, burns Benares, and finally is killed himself, he the oneborn of a hair of Vishnu, he that is Vishnu himself, who in 'goodness'creates, in 'darkness' destroys, [64] under the forms of Brahm[=a] andÇiva. [65]

In Vishnu, as a development of the Vedic Vishnu; in Çiva, asaffiliated to Rudra; in Brahm[=a], as the Brahmanic third to thesesectarian developments, the trinity has a real if remote connectionwith the triune fire of the Rig Veda, a two-thirds connection, filledout with the addition of the later Brahmanic head of the gods. 

To ignore the fact that Vishnu and Rudra-Çiva developed inside theBrahmanic circle and increased in glory before the rise of sectaries, and to asseverate, as have some, that the two chief characters of thelater trinity are an unmeaning revival of decadent gods, whose namesare used craftily to veil the modernness of Krishnaism andÇivaism, --this is to miscalculate the waxing dignity of these gods inearlier Brahmanic literature. To say with Burnouf that the Vishnu ofthe Veda is not at all the Vishnu of the mythologists, is a statementfar too sweeping. The Vishnu of the Veda is not only the same god withthe Vishnu of the next era, but in that next era he has become greatlymagnified. The Puranic All-god Vishnu stands in as close a relation tohis Vedic prototype as does Milton's Satan to the snaky slanderer ofan age more primitive. 

Çiva-worship appears to have been adapted from a local cult in themountainous West, and at an early date to have been amalgamated withthat of his next resemblance, the Vedic Rudra; while Krishna-worshipflourished along the Ganges. These are those Dionysos and Herakles ofwhom speak the old Greek authorities. One cult is possibly asvenerable as the other, but while Çivaism became Brahmanized early, Krishnaism was adopted much later, and it is for this reason, amongstothers, that despite its modern iniquities Çiva has appealed more tothe Brahman than has Krishna. 

Megasthenes tells us a good deal about these Hindu representatives ofHerakles and Dionysos. According to him there were Dionysiac festivalsin honor of the latter god (Çiva), [66] who belongs where flourishesthe wine, in the Açvaka district, north of the Kabul river. From thisplace Çiva's worship extended into the East, M[=a]gadha (Beh[=a]r), around Gokarna in the West, and even to the Kalinga country in theextreme Southeast. But it was especially native to the mountainousNorthwest, about the 'Gate of Ganges' (north of Delhi, nearSaharampur), and still further north in Kashmeer. In the epic, Çivahas his throne on K[=a]il[=a]sa, [67] the Northern mountain, in theHim[=a]layas, and Ganges descend from the sky upon his head. 

On the other hand, Herakles, of the Ganges land, where grows no wine, is plainly Krishna, who carries club, discus, and conch. The Greekcities Methora and Kleisobora are Mathur[=a] and Krishna-pur, 'Krishna-town'; the latter on the Jumna, the former near it on thesame river, capital of the clan which venerated Krishna as its chiefhero and god, the Y[=a]davas. Megasthenes says, also, that Herakles'daughter is Pandaie, and this agrees with the P[=a]ndya, a southerndevelopment of the epic Gangetic P[=a]ndavas, who especially worshipKrishna in conjunction with the Y[=a]davas. Their South-Indic town, Mathur[=a], still attests their origin. 

In speaking of the relative antiquity of Vishnuism and Çivaism onemust distinguish the pantheistic form of these gods from the singleforms. While Çivaism, _per se_, that is, the worship of Çiva as a greatand terrible god, preceded the same exaltation of Krishna, as is shownby their respective literary appearance, and even by Megasthenes'remark that the worship of Dionysos preceded that of Herakles byfifteen generations, yet did Krishnaism, as a popular pantheism, comebefore Çivaism as such. Although in the late Çvet[=a]çvatara UpanishadÇiva is pantheistic, yet is he not so in the epic till some of thelatest passages make him the All, in imitation of Krishna as All-god. Probably Çivaism remained by the first philosophy, Sankhyan dualism, and was forced into Krishna's Vedantic pantheism, as this becamepopular. At first neither was more than a single great god without anyphilosophy. [68]

In one of the early exegetical works, which is occupied somewhat withphilosophical matter, there is evidence that a triad existed betweenthe Vedic triad of fires and the Puranic triad. Fire, Wind (or Indra), and the Sun (S[=u]rya), are stated in a famous passage to be the onlyreal gods, all the others being but names of these. But, although inform this triad (Nirukta, vii. 4, 5) is like the Vedic triad, [69] itis essentially a triad in a pantheistic system like that of the epicand Pur[=a]nas, for it is added that "all the gods are parts of onesoul. " In explanation it is said: "Fire is the earth-god, Wind, orIndra, is the god of the atmosphere, and the sun is the god of thesky. " Now in the Rig Veda Indra is closely united not only with Agnibut with Vishnu, albeit in this period Vishnu is his subordinate. Thenearest approach of this Vishnu to his classical descendant is in oneof the latest hymns of the Rig Veda, where it is said that the sevenseeds of creation are Vishnu's, as in later times he comprises sevenmales. In the philosophy of the T[=a]ittir[=i]ya Samhit[=a] the threeplaces of Vishnu are not, as in the Rig Veda, the two points of thehorizon (where the sun sets) and the zenith, but 'earth, air, andsky. '[70] That is to say, in the Brahmanic period Vishnu is already agreater god than he had been. Nay, more, he is explicitly declared tobe"the best of the gods. "[71] That best means greatest may be shown fromthe same work, where in savage fable it is recited that all the gods, including Indra, ran up to him to get his strength. [72] But especiallyin the Upanishads is Vishnu the one great god left from the Rig Veda. And it is with the philosophical (not with the ritualistic) Vishnuthat Krishna is equated. 

Of Çiva, on the other hand, the prototype is Rudra ('red'), hisconstant sobriquet. In the Rig Veda he is the god of red lightning, who is the father of the Maruts, the storm-gods. His attributes of afulgurant god are never lost. Even as Çiva the All-god he is still thegod of the blue neck, whose three-forked trident and home among themountains remind us of his physical origin. He is always the fairestof the gods, and both early and late he is terrible, to be averted byprayer, even where his magic 'medicines' are asked for. To him areaddressed the most suppliant cries: "O Rudra, spare us, strike not themen, slay not the kine. " In the Atharva Veda at every step one findscharacteristics which on the one hand are but exaggerations of thetype formulated in the Rig Veda, and on the other precursors of thesigns of the later god. In Çivaism, in contradistinction to Vishnuism, there is not a trace of the euhemerism which has been suspected in theKrishna-Vishnu cult. The Rudra of the Rig Veda already begins to beidentified with the triune fire, for he bears the standing epithet offire, "he of three mothers. "[73] And this name he keeps, whether asRudra, who is "brilliant as the sun" (RV. I. 43. 5), whose weapon is"the shining one that is emitted from the sky and passes along theearth" (_ib_. Vii. 46. 3); or again, as the "red boar of the sky, "the "holder of the bolt" (_ib. _ ii. 33. 3), and, above all gods, "theterrible" (x. 126. 5). 

Coming to the Brahmanic period one finds him a dweller in the mountaintops, of a red color, with a blue neck, the especial lord of themountains, and so of robbers; while he is also the 'incantation-god, 'the 'god of low people. ' Some of these are Rudra's attributes; buthere his name is already Çiva, so that one may trace the changes downthe centuries till he finds again in the epic that Çiva is the lord ofmountains, the patron of thieves (Hara, robber?), and endowed with thetrident, the blue neck, [74] and the three mothers of old. In themiddle period he has so many titles that one probably has to accept inthe subsequent Çiva not only the lineal descendant of the Vedic Rudra, but also a combination of other local cults, where clan gods, originally diverse, were worshipped as one in consequence of theirmutual likeness. One of the god's especial names is here Bhava, whilein the earlier period Bhava and Rudra are distinct, but they areinvoked as a pair (AV). [75] What gives Çiva his later tremendouspopularity, however, is the feature to which we have alluded in thechapter on the epic. In the epic, all the strength of Çiva lies in theLinga. [76] Both Bhava and Rudra, as Çarva, the archer--his localeastern name--are represented as hurling the lightning, and it issimply from identity of attributes that they have become identified inperson (AV. X. I. 23). Rudra's title of Paçupati, or 'lord ofcattle'[77] goes back to the Vedic age: "Be kind to the kine of himwho believes in the gods" is a prayer of the Atharva Veda (xi. 2. 28). Agni and Rudra, in the Rig-Veda, are both called 'cattle-guarding, 'but not for the same reason. Agni represents a fire-stockade, whileRudra in kindness does not strike with his lightning-bolt. The twoideas, with the identification of Rudra and Agni, may have mergedtogether. Then too, Rudra has healing medicines (his magical side), and Agni is kindest to men. All Agni's names are handed over in theBr[=a]hmanas to Rudra-Çiva, just as Rudra previously had taken theepithets of P[=u]shan (above), true to his robber-name. To ignore theheight to which at this period is raised the form of Rudra-Çiva issurely unhistorical; so much so that we deem it doubtful whetherÇiva-invocations elsewhere, as in the S[=u]tra referred to above, should be looked upon as interpolations. In the M[=a]itr[=a]yan[=i]Collection, the Rudrajapas, the invocations to Rudra as the greatestgod, the highest spirit, the lord of beings (Bhava), are expressly toÇiva Giriça, the mountain-lord (2. 9; Schroeder, p. 346). In the[=A]itareya Br[=a]hmana it evidently is Rudra-Çiva, the god of ghastlyforms (made by the gods, it is said, as a composite of all the 'mosthorrible parts' of all the gods), who is deputed to slay theFather-god (when the latter, as a beast, commits incest with hisdaughter), and chooses as his reward for the act the office of 'lordof cattle. '[78] This is shown clearly by the fact that the fearsomeRudra is changed to the innocuous Rudriya in the next paragraph. As anexample of how in the Br[=a]hmanas Rudra-Çiva has taken to himselfalready the powers of Agni, the great god of the purely sacrificialperiod, may be cited Çat. Br. Vi. 1. 3. 10 and 2. 1. 12. Here Agni isKum[=a]ra, Rudra, Çarva (Sarva)[79], Paçupati (lord of beasts), Bh[=a]irava (terrible), Açani (lightning), Bhava (lord of beings), Mah[=a]deva (great god), the Lord--his 'thrice three names. ' But wherethe Br[=a]hmana assumes that these are names of Agni it is plain thatone has Rudra-Çiva in process of absorbing Agni's honors. 

The third element in the Pur[=a]nic trinity, [80] identified with theFather-god, genealogically deserves his lower position. His rivals areof older lineage. The reason for his inferior position is, practically, that he has little to do with man. Being already created, man takes more interest in the gods that preserve and destroy. [81]Even Brahm[=a]'s old exploits are, as we have shown, stolen from himand given over to Vishnu. The famous (totemistic) tortoise legend wasoriginally Brahm[=a]'s, and so with others of the ten 'forms' ofVishnu, for instance the boar-shape, in which Vishnu manifestshimself, and the fish-shape of Brahm[=a] (epic) in the flood-story. The formal _trim[=u]rti_ or _tr[=a]ipurusha_ ('three persons') is alate figure. It would seem that a Harihara (Vishnu and Çiva as one)preceded the trinity, though the dual name is not found till quitelate. [82] But, as we showed above, the epic practically identifiesVishnu and Çiva as equals, before it unites with these Brahm[=a] as anequal third. 

There arises now the further question whether sectarian Vishnuism bethe foisting of Krishnaism upon a dummy Vishnu. We think that, statedin this way, such scarcely can have been the case. Neither of thegreat sects is professedly of priestly origin, but each, like othersects, claims Vedic authority, and finds Brahmanical support. We havesaid that Vishnu is raised to his position without ictic suddenness. He is always a god of mystic character, in short, a god for philosophyto work upon. He is recognized as the highest god in one of the oldestUpanishads. And it is with the philosopher's Vishnu that Krishna isidentified. Krishna, the real V[=a]sudeva (for a false V[=a]sudeva isknown also in the epic), is the god of a local cult. How did heoriginate? The king of serpents is called Krishna, 'the black, ' andVishnu reposes upon Çesha Ananta, the world-snake; but a morehistorical character than this can be claimed for Krishna. Thisgod-man must be the same with the character mentioned in theCh[=a]ndogya Upanishad, 3. 17. 6. One may notice the similaritiesbetween this Krishna and him of the epic cult. Krishna, son ofDevak[=i], was taught by his teacher, Ghora [=A]ngirasa, thatsacrifice may be performed without objective means; that generosity, kindness, and other moral traits are the real signs of sacrifice; andit is then said: "The priest Ghora [=A]ngirasa having said this toKrishna, the son of Devak[=i]--and the latter was thereby freed from(thirst) desire--said: "When a man is about to die let him resort tothis triad: 'the imperishable art thou, ' 'the unmoved art thou, ''breath's firmness art thou'; in regard to which are these two versesin the Rig-Veda:[83] 'till they see the light of the old seed which iskindled in the sky, ' and 'perceiving above the darkness the higherlight, the sun, god among gods, we come to the highest light. '"Krishna thus learned the abolition of sacrifice, and the worship ofthe sun, the highest light (Vishnu), as true being--for this is themeaning of the philosophical passage taken with its context. Kings andpriests discuss philosophy together in this period, [84] and it wouldconform to later tradition to see in the pupil the son of a king. Itis, moreover, significant that the priest, Ghora [=A]ngirasà, is namedspecially as priest of the sun-god elsewhere (K[=a]ush. Br. 30. 6), aswell as that Krishna [=A]ngirasa is also the name of a teacher. It issaid in this same Upanishad (3. 1. 1) that the sun is the honey, delight, of the gods; and this chapter is a meditation on the sun, [85]of which the dark (_k[r. ][s. ][n. ]a_) form is that which comes from theItih[=a]sas and Pur[=a]nas, the fore-runners of the epic (3. 4. 3). This is taught as a _brahma-upanishad_, a teaching of the absolute, and it is interesting to see that it is handed down through Brahm[=a], Praj[=a]pati, and Manu, exactly as Krishna says in the Divine Songthat his own doctrine has been promulgated; while (it is said further)for him that knows the doctrine 'there is day, ' his sun never sets (3. 11. 3-4). It is a doctrine to be communicated only to the eldest sonor a good student, and to no one else (_ib. 5), i. E_. , it was new, esoteric, and of vital importance. Here, too, one findsSanatkum[=a]ra, the 'ever young, ' as Skanda, [86] yet as an earthlystudent also (7. 1; 26. 2), just like Krishna. 

It cannot be imagined, however, that the cult of the Gangetic Krishnaoriginated with that vague personage whose pupilage is described inthe Upanishad. But this account may still be connected with the epicKrishna. The epic describes the overthrow of an old Brahmanic Aryanrace at the hands of the P[=a]ndavas, an unknown folk, whose king'spolyandrous marriage (his wife is the spouse of his four brothers aswell as of himself) is an historical trait, connecting the tribeclosely with the polyandrous wild tribes located north of the Ganges. This tribe attacked the stronghold of Brahmanism in the holy landabout the present Delhi; and their patron god is the Gangetic Krishna. In the course of the narrative a very few tales are told of Krishna'searly life, but the simple original view of Krishna is that he is agod, the son of Devak[=i]. The few other tales are late andadventitious additions, but this is a consistent trait. Modern writersare fain to see in the antithesis presented by the god Krishna and bythe human hero Krishna, late and early phases. They forget that thelower side of Krishna is one especially Puranic. In short, they readhistory backwards, for theirs is not the Indic way of dealing withgods. In Krishna's case the tricky, vulgar, human side is a lateraspect, which comes to light most prominently in the Genealogy ofVishnu and in the Vishnu Pur[=a]na, modern works which in this regardcontrast strongly with the older epic, where Krishna, however hetricks, is always first the god. It is not till he becomes a verygreat, if not the greatest, god that tales about his youthfulperformances, when he condescended to be born in low life, begin torise. An exact parallel may be seen in the case of Çiva, who at firstis a divine character, assuming a more or less grotesque likeness to aman; but subsequently he becomes anthropomorphized, and is fitted outwith a sheaf of legends which describe his earthly acts. [87] And sowith Krishna. As the chief god, identified with the All-god, he islater made the object of encomiums which degrade while they are meantto exalt him. He becomes a cow-boy and acts like one, a god in a mask. But in the epic he is the invading tribe's chief god, in process ofbecoming identified with that god in the Brahmanic pantheon who mostresembles him. For this tribe, the (Yadavas) P[=a]ndavas, succeeded inoverthrowing the Brahmanic stronghold and became absorbed into theBrahmanic circle. Their god, who, like most of the supreme gods ofthis region among the wild tribes, was the tribal hero as sun-god, became recognized by the priests as one with Vishnu. In the Upanishadthe priest-philosopher identifies Krishna with the sun as the 'darkside' (_k[r. ][s. ][n. ]a_, 'dark') of Vishnu, the native name probablybeing near enough to the Sanskrit word to be represented by it. Thestatement that this clan-god Krishna once learned the great truth thatthe sun is the All-god, at the mouth of a Brahman, is what might beexpected. 'Krishna, the son of Devaki, ' is not only the god, but he isalso the progenitor of the clan, the mystic forefather, who as usualis deified as the sun. To the priest he is merely an _avatar_ ofVishnu. The identity of Krishna with the Gangetic god described byMegasthenes can scarcely be disputed. The latter as represented by theGreek is too great a god to have passed away without a sign except fora foreigner's account. And there is no figure like his except that ofKrishna. 

The numerous _avatars_[88] of Vishnu are first given as ten, then astwenty, then as twenty-two, [89] and at last become innumerable. Theten, which are those usually referred to, are as follows: First comethe oldest, the beast-_avatars_, viz. , as a fish; as a tortoise;[90]as a boar (rescuing earth from a flood); and as a man-lion (slaying ademon). Next comes the dwarf-_avatar_, where Vishnu cheats Bali ofearth by asking, as a dwarf, for three steps of it, and then steppingout over all of it (the 'three strides' of the Rig Veda). Then comethe human _avatars_, that of Paraçu-R[=a]ma (R[=a]ma with the axe), Krishna, R[=a]ma[91] (hero of the R[=a]m[=a]yana epic), Buddha, andKalki (who is still to come). 

The parallels between the latest Krishna cult and the Biblicalnarrative are found only in the Pur[=a]nas and other late works, andundoubtedly, as we have said in the last chapter, are borrowed fromChristian sources. Krishna is here born in a stable, his father, likeJoseph, going with his virgin spouse to pay taxes. His restoring of abelieving woman's son is narrated only in the modern J[=a]iminiBh[=a]rata, These tales might have been received through the firstdistant Christian mission in the South in the sixth century, but it ismore likely that they were brought directly to the North in theseventh century; for at that time a Northern king of the V[=a]içyacaste, Çil[=a]ditya (in whose reign the Chinese pilgrim, HiouenThsang, visited India), made Syrian Christians welcome to his court(639 A. D. ). [92] The date of the annual Krishna festival, which is areflex of Christmastide, is variously fixed by the Pur[=a]nas ascoming in July or August. [93]

As Krishna is an _avatar_ of Vishnu[94] in the Bh[=a]rata, and as theaxe-R[=a]ma is another _avatar_ in legend (here Vishnu in the form ofParaçu-R[=a]ma raises up the priestly caste, and destroys thewarrior-caste), so in the R[=a]m[=a]yana the hero R[=a]ma (notParaçu-R[=a]ma) is made an _avatar_ of Vishnu. He is a mythical princeof Oude (hence a close connection between the R[=a]m[=a]yanaand Buddhism), who is identified with Vishnu. Vishnu wished torid earth of the giant R[=a]vana, [95] and to do so took the form ofR[=a]ma. As Krishnaism has given rise to a number of sects thatworship Krishna as Vishnu, so Ramaism is the modern cult of R[=a]ma asVishnu. Both of these sects oppose the Vishnuite that is not inclinedto be sectarian; all three oppose the Çivaite; and all four of theseoppose the orthodox Brahman, who assigns supreme godship to Çiva orVishnu as little as does the devotee of these gods in unsectarian formto Krishna or R[=a]ma. 

Çiva is on all sides opposed to Vishnu. The Greek account of the thirdcentury B. C. Says that he taught the Hindus to dance the kordax, butat this time there appears to have been no such phallic worship in hishonor as is recorded in the pseudo-epic. Çiva is known in earlyBrahmanic and in Buddhistic writings, and even as thebearer-of-the-moon, Candraçekhara, he contrasts with Vishnu, as hislightning-form and mountain-habitat differ from the sun-form andvalley-home of his rival. This dire god is conceived of as asceticpartly because he is gruesome, partly because he is magical in power. Hence he is the true type of the awful magical Yogi, and as suchappealed to the Brahman. Originally he is only a fearful magical god, great, and even all-pervading, but, as seen in the BrahmanicÇatarudriya hymn, he is at first in no sense a pantheistic deity. Inthis hymn there is a significant addition made to the earlier version. In the first form of the hymn it is said that Rudra, who is here Çiva, is the god of bucolic people; but the new version adds 'and of allpeople. ' Here Çiva appears as a wild, diabolical figure, 'the god ofincantations, ' whose dart is death; and half of the hymn is taken upwith entreaties to the god to spare the speaker. He is praised, inconjunction with trees, of which he is the lord, as the one 'clad inskins, ' the 'lord of cattle, ' the 'lord of paths, ' the 'cheater, ' the'deceiver. ' When he is next clearly seen, in the epic, he is the godto whom are offered human sacrifices, and his special claim to worshipis the phallus; while the intermediate literature shows glimpses ofhim only in his simple Brahmanic form of terror. It has long beenknown that Çivaite phallic worship was not borrowed from theSoutherners, as was once imagined, and we venture with some scholarsto believe that it was due rather to late Greek influence than to thatof any native wild tribe. [96]

 * * * * *

 FOOTNOTES:

 [Footnote 1: Parts of the epic are called Pur[=a]nas, as other parts are called Upanishads. These are the forerunners of the extant Pur[=a]nas. The name, indeed, is even older than the epic, belonging to the late Vedic period, where are grouped together Pur[=a]nas and Itih[=a]sas, 'Ancient History' and 'Stories'; to which are added 'Eulogies. ' Weber has long since pointed out that even when the 'deeds of kings' were sung at a ceremony they were wont to be so embroidered as to be dubbed 'fiction' by the Hindus themselves. India has neither literary history (save what can be gleaned from genealogies of doubtful worth), nor very early inscriptions. The 'archaeology' of the Pur[=a]nas was probably always what it is in the extant specimens, legendary material of no direct historical value. ]

 [Footnote 2: Strictly speaking to the present Allah[=a]b[=a]d, where is the Pray[=a]ga, or confluence of Yamun[=a] and Gang[=a] (Jumna and Ganges). ]

 [Footnote 3: M[=a]gadha; called Beh[=a]r from its many monasteries, _vih[=a]ras_, in Açoka's time. ]

 [Footnote 4: So, plausibly, Müller, _loc. Cit_. Below. ]

 [Footnote 5: The tribes became Hinduized, their chiefs became R[=a]jputs; their religions doubtless affected the ritual and creed of the civilized as much as the religion of the latter colored their own. Some of these un-Aryan peoples were probably part native, part barbaric. There is much doubt in regard to the dates that depend on accepted eras. It is not certain, for instance, that, as Müller claims, Kanishka's inauguration coincides with the Çaka era, 78 A. D. A great Buddhist council was held under him. Some distinguished scholars still think with Bühler that Vikram[=a]ditya's inauguration was 57 B. C. (this date that used to be assigned to him). From our present point of view it is of little consequence when this king himself lived. He is renowned as patron of arts and as a conqueror of the barbarians. If he lived in the first century B. C. His conquest amounted to nothing permanent. What is important, however, is that all Vikram[=a]ditya stands for in legend must have been in the sixth century A. D. For the drama, of which he is said to have been patron, represents a religion distinctly later than that of the body of the epic (completed in the sixth or seventh century, Bühler, _Indian Studies_, No. Ii. ). The dramatic and astronomical era was but introductory to Kum[=a]rila's reassertion of Brahmanism in the seventh century, when the Northern barbarian was gone, and the Mohammedan was not yet rampant. In the rest of Northern India there were several native dynasties in different quarters, with different eras; one in Sur[=a]shtra (Gujar[=a]t), one again in the 'middle district' or 'North Western Provinces, ' one in Kutch; overthrown by Northern barbarians (in the fifth century) and by the Mohammedans (in the seventh and eighth centuries), respectively. Of these the Guptas of the 'middle district, ' and the Valabh[=i]s of Kutch, had neither of the eras just mentioned. The former dated from 320-321 (perhaps 319), the latter from 190 (A. D. ). The word _samvat_, 'year, ' indicates that the time is dated from either the Çaka or Vikram[=a]ditya era. See IA. Xvii. 362; Fergusson, JRAS. Xii. 259; Müller, _India, What Can It Teach Us_? p. 282; Kielhorn, IA. Xix. _24;_ xxii. 111. The Northern barbarians are called Scythians, or Huns, or Turanians, according to fancy. No one really knows what they were. ]

 [Footnote 6: The first host was expelled by the Hindus in 750. After a period of rest Mahmud was crowned in 997, who overran India more than a dozen times. In the following centuries the land was conquered and the people crushed by the second great Mohammedan, Ghori, who died in 1206, leaving his kingdom to a vassal, Kutab, the 'slave sultan' of Delhi. In 1294, thus slave dynasty having been recently supplanted, the new successor to the throne was slain by his own nephew, Allah-ud-din, who is reckoned as the third Mohammedan conqueror of India. His successor swept even the Dekhan of all its Hindu (temple) wealth; but his empire finally broke down under its own size; preparing the way for Timur (Tamerlane), who entered India in 1398. ]

 [Footnote 7: Çankara himself was not a pure Brahman. Both Vishnuites and Çivaites lay claim to him. ]

 [Footnote 8: Coy as was the Brahman in the adoption of the new gods he was wise enough to give them some place in his pantheon, or he would have offended his laity. Thus he recognizes K[=a]l[=i] as well as Çr[=i]; in fact he prefers to recognize the female divinities of the sects, for they offer less rivalry. ]

 [Footnote 9: There was a general revival of letters antedating the Brahmanic theological revival. The drama, which reflects equally Hinduism and Brahmanism, is now the favorite light literature of the cultured. In the sixth century the first astronomical works are written (Var[=a]hamihira, who wrote the _B[r. ]hat Sa[. M]hit[=a]_), and the group of writers called the Nine Gems (reckoned of Vikram[=a]ditya's court) are to be referred to this time. The best known among them is K[=a]lid[=a]sa, author of the _Çakuntal[=a]_. An account of this Renaissance, as he calls it, will be found in Müller's _India, What Can It Teach Us_? The learned author is perhaps a little too sweeping in his conclusions. It is, for instance, tolerably certain that the Bh[=a]rata was completed by the time the 'Renaissance' began; so that there is no such complete blank as he assumes prior to Vikram[=a]ditya. But the general state of affairs is such as is depicted in the ingenious article referred to. The sixth and seventh centuries were eras that introduced modern literature under liberal native princes, who were sometimes not R[=a]jputs at all. Roughly speaking, one may reckon from 500 B. C. To the Christian era as a period of Buddhistic control, Graeco-Bactrian invasion, and Brahmanic decline. The first five centuries after the Christian see the two religions in a state of equilibrium, under Scythian control, and the Mah[=a]-Bh[=a]rata, the expanded Bh[=a]rata, is written. From 500 to 1000 is an era of native rulers, Brahmanic revival in its pure form, and Hindu growth, with little trouble from the Mohammedans. Then for five centuries the horrors of Moslem conquest. ]

 [Footnote 10: Har. 10, 662. Compare the laudation of 'the two gods' in the same section. ]

 [Footnote 11: As the Jains have Angas and Up[=a]ngas, and as the pseudo-epic distinguishes Nishads and Upanishads, so the Brahman has Pur[=a]nas and Upapur[=a]nas (K[=u]rma Pur[=a]na, i. P. 3). Some of the sects acknowledge only six Pur[=a]nas as orthodox. ]

 [Footnote 12: As an example of a Puranic Smriti (legal) we may cite the trash published as the V[r. ]ddha-H[=a]rita-Sa[. M]hit[=a]. Here there is polemic against Çiva; one must worship Jagann[=a]th with flowers, and every one must be branded with the Vishnu disc (_cakra_). Even women and slaves are to use _mantras_, etc. ]

 [Footnote 13: The lateness of this law-book is evident from its advocacy of _suttee_ (XXV. 14), its preference for female ancestors (see below), etc. ]

 [Footnote 14: Manu, III. 89; XII. 121. ]

 [Footnote 15: As, for example, in K[=u]rma Pur[=a]na, XVI. P. 186, where is found a common epic verse description of battle. ]

 [Footnote 16: A good instance of this is found in Brihan N[=a]rad[=i]ya Pur[=a]na, X. , where the _churik[=a]_ and _drugha[n. ]a_ (24) appear in an imitative scene of this sort; one of these being later, the other earlier, than the epic vocabulary. ]

 [Footnote 17: Perhaps the most striking distinction between Vedic and Puranic, or one may say, Indic Aryan and Hindu religions, is the emphasis laid in the former upon Right; in the latter, upon idols. The Vedic religion insists upon the law of right (order), that is, the sacrifice; but it insists also upon right as rectitude, truth, holiness. Puranic Hinduism insists upon its idols; only incidentally does it recommend rectitude, truth, abstract holiness. ]

 [Footnote 18: KP. I. P. 29. ]

 [Footnote 19: K[=u]rma, xii. P. 102. Contrast _ib_. Xxii. P. 245, _caturvy[=u]hadhara Vishnur avy[=u]has procyate_ (elsewhere _navavy[=u]ha_). Philosophically, in the doctrine of the epic P[=a]ñcar[=a]tras (still held by some sectaries), Vishnu is to be revered as Krishna, Balar[=a]ma, Pradymana, Aniruddha (Krishna's brother, son, and grandson), representing, respectively, _[=a]tm[=a], j[=i]va, _ supreme and individual spirit, perception, and consciousness. Compare Mbh[=a]. Xii. 340. 8, 72. ]

 [Footnote 20: KP. Xxi. P. 236; xxii. P. 238, etc. ]

 [Footnote 21: _ib. _ I, p. 23. ]

 [Footnote 22: Compare Brihan N[=a]radiya Pur[=a]na, xiv. 10, _bah[=u]ni k[=a][s. ][t. ]hay[=a]ntr[=a][n. ]i_ (torture machines) in hell. The old tale of N[=a]çiketas is retold at great length in the Var[=a]ha Pur[a=]na. The oldest Pur[=a]na, the M[=a]rkandeya, has but seven hells, a conception older than Manu's twenty-one (compare on MP. X. 80 ff. , Scherman, _loc. Cit_. P. 33), or the later lists of thousands. The Padma Pur[=a]na, with celebrates R[=a]ma, has also seven hells, and is in part old, for it especially extols Pushkara (Brahm[=a]'s lone shrine); but it recommends the _taptamudra_, or branding with hot iron. ]

 [Footnote 23: Nar. Xiv. 2. ]

 [Footnote 24: xiv. 54 and 70. ]

 [Footnote 25: KP. Xxii. Pp, 239-241. ]

 [Footnote 26: As will be shown below, it is possible that this may be a ceremony first taken from the wild tribes. See the 'pole' rite described above in the epic. ]

 [Footnote 27: Compare for instance _ib_. Xxviii. 68, on the strange connection of a Ç[=u]dr[=a] wife of a Guru. ]

 [Footnote 28: KP. Xxxvi. It is of course impossible to say how much epic materials come from the literary epic and how much is drawn from popular poetry, for the vulgar had their own epoidic songs which may have treated of the same topics. Thus even a wild tribe (Gonds) is credited with an 'epic. ' But such stuff was probably as worthless as are the popular songs of today. ]

 [Footnote 29: KP. Xxx. P. 305; xxxvii. P. 352. ]

 [Footnote 30: _ib. _ p. 355. ]

 [Footnote 31: Compare N[=a]rad[=i]ya, xi. 23, 27, 31 'the one whom no one knows, ' 'he that rests in the heart, ' 'he that seems to be far off because we do not know, ' 'he whose form is Çiva, lauded by Vishnu, ' xiii. 201. ]

 [Footnote 32: Even Vishnu as a part of a part of the Supreme Spirit in VP. Is indicated by Vishnu's adoration of _[=a]tm[=a]_ in the epic (see above). ]

 [Footnote 33: Compare Williams' _Brahmanism and Hinduism_. ]

 [Footnote 34: Çankara's adherents are chiefly Çivaite, but he himself was not a sectary. Williams says that at the present day few worship Çiva exclusively, but he has more partial adherents than has Vishnu. _Religious Thought and Life, _ pp. 59, 62. ]

 [Footnote 35: The two last are just recognized in Brahmanic legal works. ]

 [Footnote 36: See Wilson's sketch of Hindu sects. The author says that there were in his day two shrines to Brahm[=a], one in [=A]jm[=i]r (compare Pushkara in the epic), and one on the Ganges at Bithur. The Brahma Pur[=a]na is known also as S[=a]ura (sun). This is the first in the list; in its present state it is Vishnuite. ]

 [Footnote 37: Sun-worship (Iranian?) is especially pronounced in the Bhav[=i]shya(t) Pur[=a]na. Of the other Pur[=a]nas the L[=i]nga is especially Çivaite (_linga_ is phallus), as are the Matsya and older V[=a]yu. Sometimes Çiva is androgynous, _ardhan[=a]r[=i]çvara_, 'half-female. ' But most of the Pur[=a]nas are Vishnuite. ]

 [Footnote 38: On the Ganeça Pur[=a]na see JRAS. 1846, p. 319. ]

 [Footnote 39: The worshippers of Bhagavat were originally distinct from the P[=a]ñcar[=a]tras, but what was the difference between them is unknown. The sect of this name in the pseudo-epic is not Ç[=a]kta in expression but only monotheistic. Probably the names of many sects are retained with altered beliefs and practices. The Vishnu Pur[=a]na, i. 11. 54, gives a model prayer which may be taken once for all as the attitude of the Vishnuite: "Glory to V[=a]sudeva, him of perfected wisdom, whose unrevealed form is (known as) Brahm[=a], Vishnu, and Çiva" (Hira[n. ]yagarbha, Purusha, Pradh[=a]na). ]

 [Footnote 40: Weber shows for instance, _loc. Cit_. , that Indra takes the place of older Varuna; that the house-priest yields to the Brahm[=a]; that in this feast in honor of the king he]

 [Footnote 41: Gover, JRAS. V. 91; IA. Xx. 430. ]

 [Footnote 42: In Hinduism itself there is a striking example of this. The Jagann[=a]th ('Juggernaut') temple was once dedicated to Buddha as _loka-n[=a]th_ or _jagan-n[=a]th_, 'saviour of the world' Name, temple, and idol-car are now all Vishnu's!]

 [Footnote 43: That is, Rain and Sun, for all Indra's warlike qualities are forgotten, absorbed into those of Çiva and his son, the battle-god. The sun crosses the equator at noon of the second day, the 'Mah[=a] Pongol. ']

 [Footnote 44: "Now every neck is bent, for the surface of the waters disturbed. Then with a heave, a hiss, and a surge of bubbles, the seething milk mounts to the top of the vessel. Before it has had time to run down the blackened sides, the air resounds with the sudden joyous cry of 'Pongol, oh Pongol, S[=u]rya, S[=u]rya, oh Pongol, ' The word Pongol means "boiling, " from the Tamil word _pongu_, to boil; so that the joyous shout is, 'It boils, oh S[=u]rya, it boils. ' In a moment a convulsion of greetings animates the assembly. Every one seizes his neighbor and asks, 'Has it boiled?' Both faces gleam with delight as the answer comes--'It has boiled. ' Then both shout at the top of their voices--'Oh Pongol, Pongol, oh S[=u]rya, oh Indra, Pongol, Pongol. '" Gorer, _loc. Cit_. ]

 [Footnote 45: The Crocodile, _makara_, like the parrot, is sacred to K[=a]madeva, Love. But as Ganges also is holy it is difficult to say for which divinity the offering was intended. Some, indeed, interpret _makara_ as dolphin. ]

 [Footnote 46: A feast now neglected, though kept up by strict Brahmans, occurs on or about the 20th January. The orthodox adherents of the Çivaite sects and Ç[=a]ktas also observe it. It is a Çr[=a]ddha, or funeral feast to the Manes. Also on the 26th and 30th January there are rites nearly obsolete, the first being signalized by offerings to Yama; the second, a Çivaite feast (to his spouse, as 'giver of bridegrooms'). The list is more celebrated in the South than in the North. It is interesting chiefly as a parallel to St. Valentine's day, or, as Wilson says, the nearer feast of St. Agnes (21st January) on the eve of which divination is practiced to discover future husbands. It is this time also that the Greeks call 'marriage-month' (Gamelion); and the fourth day from the new moon (which gives the name to this Hindu festival, _caturth[=i]_, "fourth day") is the day when Hesiod recommends the bringing home of the bride. ]

 [Footnote 47: In case any writing has to be done on this day it is done with chalk, not with the pens, "which have a complete holiday" (Wilson). ]

 [Footnote 48: The invocations show very well how the worship of Brahm[=a] has been driven out in honor of his more powerful rivals. For Sarasvat[=i] is invoked first as "Thou without whom Brahm[=a] never lives"; but again as "Thou of eight forms, Lakshm[=i], Medh[=a], Dhav[=a], Pusht[=i], G[=a]ur[=i], Tusht[=i], Prabh[=a], Dhriti, O Sarasvat[=i]. " The great festivals, like the great temples, are not very stricly sectarian. Williams says that in Çiva's temple in Benares are kept monkeys (sacred to Vishnu). ]

 [Footnote 49: Between this and the last occur minor holidays, one to avert small-pox; one (February the 4th) sacred to the sun (Sunday, the seventh day of each lunar fortnight, is strictly observed); and one to the Manes. ]

 [Footnote 50: Fasting is not necessarily a part of civilized religion alone. It is found in the Brahmanic and Hindu cults, but it obtains also among the American Indians. Thus the Dacotahs fast for two or three days at the worship of sun and moon. Schoolcraft, _Histor. And Statist_. , iii. 227. ]

 [Footnote 51: The last clause (meaning 'common historical origin') were better omitted. ]

 [Footnote 52: Except the mystic syllable _[=O]m_, supposed to represent the trinity (_[=O]m_ is _a, u, m_), though probably it was originally only an exclamation. ]

 [Footnote 53: A small Vishnu festival in honor of Vishnu as 'man-lion' (one of his ten _avatars_) is celebrated on the 13th of March; but in Bengal in honor of the same god as a cow-boy. On the 15th of March there is another minor festival in Bengal, but it is to Çiva, or rather to one of his hosts, under the form of a water pot (that is to preserve from disease). ]

 [Footnote 54: The bonfire is made of fences, door posts, furniture, etc. Nothing once seized and devoted to the fire may be reclaimed, but the owner may defend his property if he can. Part of the horse-play at this time consists in leaping over the fire, which is also ritualistic with same of the hill-tribes. ]

 [Footnote 55: Compare the Nautch dances on R[=a]macandra's birthday. Religious dances, generally indecent, are also a prominent feature of the religions of the wild tribes (as among American and African savages, Greeks, etc. , etc. ). ]

 [Footnote 56: The 'Easter bonnet' in Indic form. ]

 [Footnote 57: In sober contrast stands the yearly orthodox Çráddha celebration (August-September), though Brahmans join in sectarian fêtes. ]

 [Footnote 58: Wilson draws an elaborate parallel between the Hol[=i] and the Lupercalia, etc. (Carnival). But the points of contact are obvious. One of the customs of the Hol[=i] celebration is an exact reproduction of April-Fool's day. Making "Hol[=i] fools" is to send people on useless errands, etc. (Festum Stultorum, at the Vernal Equinos, transferred by the Church to the first of November, "Innocents' Day"). ]

 [Footnote 59: Stevenson, JRAS. 1841, p. 239; Williams, _loc. Cit. _; Wilkins, _Modern Hinduism_, ch. III. ]

 [Footnote 60: The daily service consists in dressing, bathing, feeding, etc It is divided into eight ridiculous ceremonies, which prolong the worship through the day. ]

 [Footnote 61: The brilliant displays attracted the notice of the Greeks, who speak of the tame tigers and panthers, the artificial trees carried in wagons, the singing, instrumental music, and noise, which signalized a fête procession. See Williams, _loc. Cit_. ]

 [Footnote 62: Such, for instance, is the most holy temple of South India, the great temple of Çr[=i]rangam at Trichinopoly. The idol car, gilded and gaudy, is carved with obscenity; the walls and ceilings are frescoed with bestiality. It represents Vishnu's heaven. ]

 [Footnote 63: From this name or title comes the Gita Govinda, a mystic erotic poem (in praise of the cow-boy god) exaltedly religious as it is sensual (twelfth century). ]

 [Footnote 64: VP. L. 2. 63. The 'qualities' or 'conditions' of God's being are referred to by 'goodness' and 'darkness. ']

 [Footnote 65: All this erotic vulgarity is typical of the common poetry of the people, and is in marked contrast to the chivalrous, but not love-sick, Bh[=a]rata. ]

 [Footnote 66: Compare Duncker, LII^5. P. 327, More doubtful is the identification of Nysian and Nish[=a]dan, _ib_. Note. Compare, also, Schroeder, _loc. Cit. _ p. 361. Arrian calls (Çiva) Dionysos the _[Greek: oitou dotêra Iudêis]_ (Schwanbeck, Fig. 1. ). ]

 [Footnote 67: This remains always as Çiva's heaven in distinction from Goloka or V[=a]ikuntha, Vishnu's heaven. Nowadays Benares is the chief seat of Çivaism. ]

 [Footnote 68: The doctrine of the immaculate conception, common to Vishnuism and Buddhism (above, p. 431), can have no exact parallel in Çivaism, for Çiva is not born as a child; but it seems to be reflected in the laughable ascription of virginity to Um[=a] (Civa's wife), when she is revered as the emblem of motherhood. ]

 [Footnote 69: In RV. V. 41. 4, the Vedic triad is Fire, Wind, and (Tr[=i]ta of the sky) Indra; elsewhere Fire, Wind, and Sun (above, p. 42), distinct from the triune fire. ]

 [Footnote 70: In the Rig Veda the three steps are never thus described, but in the later age this view is common. It is, in fact, only on the 'three steps' that the identity with the sun is established. In RV. 1. 156. 4, Vishnu is already above Varuna. ]

 [Footnote 71: Çat. Br. Xiv. 1. 1. 5. ]

 [Footnote 72: For other versions see Mulr, _Original Sanskrit Texts_, iv. P. 127 ff. ]

 [Footnote 73: Later interpreted as wives or eyes. ]

 [Footnote 74: For an epic guess at the significance of the title _n[=i]laka[n. ][t. ]ha_, 'blue-throated, ' see Mbh[=a] i. 18. 43. ]

 [Footnote 75: AV. Iv. 28; viii. 2; xi. 2. Thus even in the Rig Veda pairs of gods are frequently besung as one, as if they were divinities not only homogeneous but even monothelous. ]

 [Footnote 76: Brahm[=a]'s mark in the lotus; Vishnu's, the discus (sun); Çiva's, the Linga, phallic emblem. ]

 [Footnote 77: The grim interpretation of later times makes the cattle (to be sacrificed) _men_. The theological interpretation is that Çiva is the lord of the spirit, which is bound like a beast. ]

 [Footnote 78: The commenter, horrified by the murder of the Father-god, makes Rudra kill 'the sin'; but the original shows that it is the Father-god who was shot by this god, who chose as his reward the lordship over kine; and such exaltation is not improbable (moreover, it is historical!). The hunting of the Father-god by Rudra is pictured in the stars (Orion), Ait. Br. Iii. 33. ]

 [Footnote 79: See Weber. _Ind. St. _ ii. 37; Muir, iv. 403. Çarva (Çaurva) is Avestan, but at the same time it is his 'eastern' name, while Bhava is his western name. Çat. Br. I. 7. 3. 8. ]

 [Footnote 80: The epic (_loc. Cit_. Above), the Pur[=a]nas, and the very late Atharva Çiras Upanishad and M[=a]itr. Up. (much interpolated). Compare Muir, _loc. Cit_. Pp. 362-3. ]

 [Footnote 81: According to the epic, men honor gods that kill, Indra, Rudra, and so forth; not gods that are passive, such as Brahm[=a], the Creator, and P[=u]shan (xii. 15. 18), _ya eva dev[=a] hant[=a]ras t[=a]l loko 'rcayate bh[=r. ]ça[=. M], na Brahm[=a][n. ]am_. ]

 [Footnote 82: Barth seems to imply that Harihara (the name) is later than the _trim[=u]rti_ (p. 185), but he has to reject the passage in the Hari-va[. N]ça to prove this. On Ayen[=a]r, a southern god said to be Hari-Hara (Vishnu-Çiva), see Williams, _loc. Cit_. ]

 [Footnote 83: RV. Viii. 6. 30; 1. 50. 10. Weber refers Krishna further back to a priestly Vedic poet of that name, to whom are attributed hymns of the eighth and tenth books of the Rig Veda (_Janm[=a][s. ][t. ]am[=i]_, p. 316). He interprets Krishna's mother's name, Devak[=i], as 'player' _(ib)_ But the change of name in a Vedic hymn has no special significance. The name Devak[=i] is found applied to other persons, and its etymology is rather _deva_, divine, as Weber now admits (Berl. Ak. 1890, p. 931). ]

 [Footnote 84: In the epic, also, kings become hermits, and perform great penance just as do the ascetic priests. Compare the heroes themselves, and i. 42. 23 _raja mah[=a]tap[=a]s_; also ii. 19, where a king renounces his throne, and with his two wives becomes a hermit in the woods. In i. 41. 31 a king is said to be equal to ten priests!]

 [Footnote 85: In fact, the daily repetition of the S[=a]vitr[=i] is a tacit admission of the sun god as the highest type of the divine; and Vishnu is the most spiritualized form of the sun-god, representing even in the Rig-Veda the goal of the departing spirit. ]

 [Footnote 86: Skanda (Subrahmanya) and Ganeça are Çiva's two sons, corresponding to Krishna and R[=a]ma. Skanda's own son is Viç[=a]kha, a _graha_ (above, p. 415). ]

 [Footnote 87: Çiva at the present day, for instance, is represented now and then as a man, and he is incarnate as V[=i]rabhadra. But all this is modern, and contrasts with the older conception. It is only in recent times, in the South, that he is provided with an earthly history. Compare Williams, _Thought and Life, _ p. 47. ]

 [Footnote 88: _Ava-t[=a]ra_, 'descent, ' from _ava_, 'down, ' and _tar_, 'pass' (as in Latin in-_trare_). ]

 [Footnote 89: In the _Bh[=a]gavata Pur[=a]na_. ]

 [Footnote 90: The tortoise _avatar_ had a famous temple two centuries ago, where a stone tortoise received prayer. How much totemism lies in these _avatars_ it is guess-work to say. ]

 [Footnote 91: Balar[=a]ma (or Baladeva), Krishna's elder brother, is to be distinguished from R[=a]ma. The former is a late addition to the Krishna-cult, and belongs with Nanda, his reputed father. Like Krishna, the name is also that of a snake, Naga, and it is not impossible that Naga worship may be the foundation of the Krishna-cult, but it would be hard to reconcile this with tradition. In the sixth century Var[=a]hamihira recognizes both the brothers. ]

 [Footnote 92: Edkins, cited by Müller, _India_, p. 286. ]

 [Footnote 93: Weber, _Janm[=a][s. ][t. ]am[=i]_, pp. 259, 318. Weber describes in full the cult of the "Madonna with the Child, " according to the Pur[=a]nas. ]

 [Footnote 94: On the subsequent deification of the Pandus themselves see 1A. VII. 127. ]

 [Footnote 95: Hence the similarity with Herakles, with whom Megasthenes identifies him. The man-lion and hero-forms are taken to rid earth of monsters. ]

 [Footnote 96: Greek influence is clearly reflected in India's architecture. Hellenic bas-reliefs representing Bacchic scenes and the love-god are occasionally found. Compare the description of Çiva's temple in Orissa, Weber, _Literature_, p. 368; _Berl. Ak. _, 1890, p, 912. Çiva is here associated with the Greek cult of Eros and Aphrodite. ]

 * * * * *

CHAPTER XVII. 

MODERN HINDU SECTS. [1]

Although the faith of India seems to have completed a circle, landingat last in a polytheism as gross as was that of the Vedic age, yet isthis a delusive aspect, as will appear if one survey the course of thehigher intellectual life of the people, ignoring, as is right, theinvariable factor introduced by the base imaginings of the vulgar. Thegreater spirituality has always expressed itself in independentmovement, and voiced itself in terms of revolution. But in realityeach change has been one of evolution. To trace back to the Vedicperiod the origin of Hindu sectarianism would, indeed, be a nice taskfor a fine scholar, but it would not be temerarious to attempt it. Wehave failed of our purpose if we have not already impressed upon thereader's mind the truth that the progress of Brahmanic theology (indistinction from demonology) has been one journey, made with rests andhalts, it is true, and even with digressions from the straight path;but without abatement of intent, and without permanent change ofdirection. Nor can one judge otherwise even when he stands before sohumiliating an exhibition of groundling bigotry as is presented bysome of the religious sects of the present day. The world of lowerorganisms survives the ascent of the higher. There is alwaysundergrowth; but before the fall of a great tree its seeds sprout, withal in the very soil of the weedy thicket below. So out ofthe rank garden of Hindu superstitions arise, one after another, loftytrees of an old seed, which is ever renewed, and which cultivation hasgradually improved. 

We have shown, especially in the chapters on the Atharva Veda and onHinduism, as revealed in epic poetry, how constant in India is therelation between these two growths. If surprised at the height ofearly Hindu thought, one is yet more astonished at the permanence ofthe inferior life which flourishes beneath the shady protection of thesuperior. Even here one may follow the metaphor, for the humbler lifebelow is often a condition of the grander growth above. 

In the Rig Veda there is an hymn of faith and doubt

 To INDRA. [2]

 He who, just born, with thought endowed, the foremost, Himself a god hemmed in the gods with power; Before whose breath, and at whose manhood's greatness, The two worlds trembled; he, ye folk, is Indra. 

 He who the earth made firm as it was shaking, And made repose the forward tottering mountains; Who measured wide the inter-space aerial, And heaven established; he, ye folk, is Indra. 

 Who slew the dragon, loosed the rivers seven, And drove from Vala's hiding place the cattle;[3] Who fire between the two stones[4] hath engendered, Conqueror in conflicts; he, ye folk, is Indra. 

 Who all things here, things changeable, created; Who lowered and put to naught the barbarous color, [5] And, like victorious gambler, took as winnings His foe's prosperity; he, ye folk, is Indra. 

 Whom, awful, they (yet) ask about: 'where is he?' And speak thus of him, saying, 'he exists not'-- He makes like dice[6] his foe's prosperity vanish; Believe on him; and he, ye folk, is Indra. 

 In whose direction horses are and cattle; In whose, the hosts (of war) and all the chariots; Who hath both S[=u]rya and the Dawn engendered, The Waters' leader; he, ye folk, is Indra. 

 Both heaven and earth do bow themselves before him, And at his breath the mountains are affrighted; Who bolt in arms is seen, the _soma_-drinker, And bolt in hand; ('tis) he, ye folk, is Indra. 

 Who helps the _soma_-presser, (_soma_)-cooker, The praiser (helps), and him that active serveth; Of whom the increase _brahma_ is and _soma_, And his this offering; he, ye folk, is Indra. 

Here _brahma_, which word already in the Yajur Veda has taken toitself the later philosophical signification, is merely prayer, themeaning which in the Rig Veda is universal. 

The note struck in this hymn is not unique:

 (THE POET. )

 Eager for booty proffer your laudation To Indra; truth (is he), [7] if truth existeth; 'Indra is not, ' so speaketh this and that one; 'Who him hath seen? To whom shall we give praises?'

 (THE GOD. )

 I am, O singer, he; look here upon me; All creatures born do I surpass in greatness. Me well-directed sacrifices nourish, Destructive I destroy existent beings. [8]

These are not pleas in behalf of a new god. It is not the mere god ofphysical phenomena who is here doubted and defended. It is the godthat in the last stage of the Rig Veda is become the Creator andDestroyer, and, in the light of a completed pantheism, is grown toogreat to retain his personality. With such a protest begins the greatrevolt that is the sign of an inner evolution extending through theBr[=a]hmanas and Upanishads. Indra, like other gods, [9] is held by therite; to the vulgar he is still the great god;[10] to the philosopher, a name. The populace respect him, and sacerdotalism conserves him, that same crafty, priestly power, which already at the close of theRig Vedic period dares to say that only the king who is subject to thepriest is sure of himself, and a little later that killing a priest isthe only real murder. We have shown above how the real divinity of thegods was diminished even at the hands of the priests that needed themfor the rites and baksheesh, which was the goal of their piety. EvenPraj[=a]pati, the Father-god, their own creation, is mortal as well asimmortal. [11] We have shown, also, how difficult it must have been torelease the reason from the formal band of the rite. Socially it wasimpossible to do so. He that was not initiated was excommunicated, anoutcast. But, on the other hand, the great sacrifices gradually fellover from their own weight. Cumbersome and costly, they were replacedby proxy works of piety; _vidh[=a]nas_ were established that obviatedthe real rite; just as to-day, 'pocket altars' take the place of realaltars. [12] There was a gradual intrusion of the Hindu cult; popularfeatures began to obtain; the sacrifice was made to embrace in itsworkings the whole family of the sacrificer (instead of its effectbeing confined to him alone, as was the earlier form); and finallyvillage celebrations became more general than those of the individual. Slowly Hinduism built itself a ritual, [13] which overpowered theBrahmanic rite. Then, again, behind the geographical advance ofBrahmanism[14] lay a people more and more prone to diverge from thetrue cult (from the Brahmanic point of view). In the latter part ofthe great Br[=a]hmana[15] there is already a distrust of the Industribes, which marks the breaking up of Aryan unity; not that breakingup into political division which is seen even in the Rig Veda, whereAryan fights against Aryan as well as against the barbarian, but themore serious dismemberment caused by the hates of priests, for herethere was no reconciliation. 

The cynical scepticism of the Brahmanic ritualists, as well as thedivergence of opinions in regard to this or that sacrificialpettiness, shows that even where there was overt union there wascovert discord, the disagreement of schools, and the difference offaith. But all this does but reflect the greater difference inspeculation and theology which was forming above the heads of theritualistic bigots. For it is not without reason that the Upanishadsare more or less awkwardly laid in as the top-stone on the liturgicaledifice. They belong to the time but they are of it only in part. Yetto dissociate the mass of Brahmanic priestlings from the Upanishadthinkers, as if the latter were altogether members of a new era, wouldbe to lose the true historical perspective. The vigor of protestagainst the received belief continues from the Rig Veda to Buddha, from Buddha till to-day. 

The Vedic cult absorbed a good deal of Hinduism, for instance theworship of Fate, [16] just as Hinduism absorbed a good deal of Vediccult. Nor were the popular works obnoxious to the priest. In theCh[=a]ndogya Upanishad[17] the Itih[=a]sas and Pur[=a]nas(fore-runners of the epic) are already reckoned as a fifth Veda, beingrecognized as a Veda almost as soon as was the Atharvan, [18] whicheven in Manu is still called merely 'texts of Atharvan and Angiras'(where texts of Bhrigu might as well have been added). Just as thelatter work is formally recognized, and the use of its magicalformulas, if employed for a good purpose, is enjoined in epic[19] andlaw (_e. G. _ Manu, xi. 33), so the Hinduistic rites crept graduallyinto the foreground, pushing back the _soma_-cult. Idols are formallyrecognized as venerable by the law-makers;[20] even before their daythe 'holy pool, ' which we have shown to be so important to Hinduism, is accepted by Brahmanism. [21] Something, too, of the former'scatholicity is apparent in the cult at an early date, only to besuppressed afterwards. Thus in [=A]it. Br. II. 19, the slave's sonshares the sacrifice; and the slave drinks _soma_ in one of thehalf-Brahmanical, half-popular festivals. [22] Whether human sacrifice, sanctioned by some modern sects, is aught but pure Hinduism, Çivaism, as affected by the cult of the wild-tribes, it is hard to say. At anyrate, such sacrifices in the Brahmanic world were obsolete long beforeone finds them in Hinduism. Of Buddhistic, Brahmanic, and Hinduisticreciprocity we have spoken already, but we may add one curious fact, namely, that the Buddhism of Çivaism is marked by its holy numbers. The Brahmanic Rudra with eight names[23] and eight forms[24] isclearly Çivaite, and the numbers are as clearly Buddhistic[25] Thus, as Feer has shown, Buddhist hells are eight, sixteen, etc, while theBrahmanic hells are seven, twenty-one, etc. Again, the use of therosary was originally Çivaite, not Buddhisttc;[26] and Buddha in Bali, where they live amicably side by side, is regarded as Çiva'sbrother. [27]

Two things result from this interlocking of sectarian Brahmanism withother sects. First, it is impossible to say in how far each influencedthe other; and, again, the antiquity of special ideas is rendereddoubtful. A Brahmanic idea can pretty safely be allotted to its firstperiod, because the literature is large enough to permit theassumption that it will appear in literature not much later than itobtains. But a sectarian idea may go back centuries before it ispermanently formulated, as, for example, the doctrine of special gracein a modern sect. 

One more point must be noticed before we proceed to review the sectsof to-day. Hindu morality, the ethical tone of the modern sects, isolder than the special forms of Hindu viciousness which have beenreceived into the cult. A negative altruism (beyond which Brahmanismnever got) is characteristic of the Hindu sects. But this is alreadyembodied in the golden rule, as it is thus formulated in the epic'Compendium of Duty':

 Not that to others should one do Which he himself objecteth to. This is man's duty in one word; All other rules may be ignored. [28]

The same is true of the 'Ten Commandments' of one of the modern sects. It is one of the strong proofs that Christian morals did not have mucheffect upon early Hinduism, that, although the Christian Church of St. Thomas, as is well established, was in Malabar as early as 522, [29]and Christians were in the North in the seventh century, yet no traceof the active Christian benevolence, in place of this abstention frominjury, finds its way into the epic or Pur[=a]nas. But an activealtruism permeates Buddhism, and one reads in the birth-stories evenof a saviour Buddha, not the Buddha of love, M[=a]itreya, who was tobe the next Buddha on earth, but of that M[=a]itrakanyaka, who leftheaven and came to earth that he might redeem the sins of others. [30]

Whether there is any special touch between the older sects and thoseof modern days[31] that have their headquarters in the same districtsis a question which we have endeavored to investigate, but we havefound nothing to substantiate such an opinion. Buddhism retired, tooearly to have influence on the sects of to-day, and between Jainismand the same sects there does not seem to be any peculiar rapport evenwhere the sect is seated in a Jain stronghold. [35]] The Jains occupy, generally speaking, the Northwest (and South), while the Buddhistswere located in the Northeast and South. So Çivaism may be looselylocated as popular in the Northeast and South, while Vishnuism has itshabitat rather in the jain centres of the Northwest (and South). 

We have mentioned in the preceding chapter the sects of a fewcenturies ago, as these have been described in Brahmanicliterature. [33] The importance, and even the existence of some of thesects, described in the _Conquest of Çankara_, has been questioned, and the opinion has been expressed that, since they are described onlyto be exposed as heretical, they may have been creations of fancy, imaginary sects; the refutation of their principles being a _tour deforce_ on the part of the Brahmanic savant, who shows his acumen byimagining a sect and then discountenancing it. It does not, indeed, seem to us very probable that communities were ever formed as 'Agnis'or 'Yamas, ' etc, but on the other hand, we think it is more likelythat sects have gone to pieces without leaving any trace than thatthose enumerated, explained, and criticised should have been merefancies. [46]] Moreover, in the case of some of these sectsthere are still survivors, so that _a fortiori_ one may presume theothers to have existed also, if not as sects or communities, yet asbodies professing faith in Indra or Yama, etc. The sects with which wehave to deal now are chiefly those of this century, but many of thesecan claim a definite antiquity of several centuries at least. Theyhave been described by Wilson in his famous _Sketch_, and, in specialcases, more recently and more fully by Williams' and other writers. 

THE ÇIVAITES. 

While the Vishnuites have a dualistic, as well as idealisticbackground, they are at present Vedantic, and may be divided to-daysimply into intelligent and unintelligent adherents of pantheism, theformer comprising the R[=a]ma sects, and the latter most of theKrishnaites. On the other hand, in Çivaism one must distinguish quitesharply in time between the different sects that go by Çiva's name. Ifone look at the sects of modern times he will find that the mostdegraded are dualistic, in so far as they may be said to have anyphilosophy, and that idealistic Çivaism is a remnant of the past. Buthe will not find a pronounced sectarianism in any of these oldVedantic aspects of Çivaism. On the contrary, wherever Çivaism ispantheistic it is a Çivaism which obtains only in certain ancientschools of philosophy; where it is monotheistic it is among leaderswho have been influenced by the modern teaching of Islam, and regardÇiva merely as a name for the One God. It is necessary, therefore, asit is everywhere in India, to draw as sharp a line as possible betweenthe beliefs of the vulgar and the learned. For from the earliestperiod the former accepted perfunctorily the teaching of the latter, but at heart and in cult they remained true to their own lights. 

The older S[=a]nkhya form of Çivaism was still found among theP[=a]çupatas, 'adherents of the Lord' (Paçupati) and Maheçvaras('adherents of the great Lord'), who are mentioned in the epic and ininscriptions of the fifth century. In the ninth century there was apurely philosophical Çivaism which is Vedantic. But neither in thefact (which is by no means a certainty) that Çankara accepted Çiva asthe name of the All-god, nor in the scholastic Çivaite philosophy ofKashmeer, which in the next two centuries was developed into a purelyidealistic system at the hands of Abhinavagupta and Som[=a]nanda, isthere any trace of a popular religion. Çiva is here the pantheisticgod, but he is conceived as such only by a coterie of retiredschoolmen. On the other hand, the popular religions which spring up inthe twelfth century are, if Vedantic, chiefly Vishnuite, or, ifÇivaite, only nominally Vedantic. Thus what philosophy the Jangamasprofessedly have is Vedantic, but in fact they are deistic (notpantheistic) disciples of Çiva's priest, Basava (Sanskrit Vrishabha), who taught Çiva-worship in its grossest form, the adoration of theLinga (phallus); while his adherents, who are spread over all Indiaunder the name of Jangamas, 'vagrants, ' or Ling[=a]yits, 'phallus-wearers, ' are idolatrous deists with but a tinge of Vedanticmysticism. So in the case of the Tridandins, the Daçan[=a]mis, andother sects attributed to Çivaism, as well as the Sm[=a]rtas (orthodoxBrahmans) who professed Çivaism. According to Wilson the Tridandins(whose triple, _tri_, staff, _da[n. ][d. ]i_, indicates control of word, thought, and deed) are Southern Vishnuites of the R[=a]m[=a]nuja sect, though some of them claim to be Vedantic Çivaites. Nominally Çivaiteare also the Southern 'Saints, ' Sittars (Sanskrit Siddhas), but theseare a modern sect whose religion has been taught them by Islam, orpossibly by Christianity. [36] The extreme North and South are thedistricts where Çivaism as a popular religion has, or had, its firmesthold, and it is for this reason that the higher religions which obtainin these districts are given to Çiva. But in reality they simply takeÇiva, the great god of the neighborhood, in order to have a name fortheir monotheistic god, exactly as missionaries among the AmericanIndians pray to the Great Spirit, to adapt themselves to theiraudience's comprehension. In India, as in this country, they thatproselyte would prefer to use their own terminology, but they wiselyuse that of their hearers. 

We find no evidence to prove that there were ever really sectarianÇivaites who did not from the beginning practice brutal rites, or elsesoon become ascetics of the lowest and most despicable sort. Forphilosophical Çivaites were never sectaries. They cared little whetherthe All-god or One they argued about was called Vishnu or Çiva. Butwhenever one finds a true Çivaite devotee, that is, a man that willnot worship Vishnu but holds fast to Çiva as the only manifestation ofthe supreme divinity, he will notice that such an one quickly becomesobscene, brutal, prone to bloodshed, apt for any disgusting practice, intellectually void, and morally beneath contempt. If the Çivaite bean ascetic his asceticism will be the result either of his lack ofintelligence (as in the case of the sects to be described immediately)or of his cunning, for he knows that there are plenty of people whowill save him the trouble of earning a living. Now this is not thecase with the Vishnuites. To be sure there are Vishnuites that are nobetter than Çivaites, but there are also strict Vishnuites, exclusively devotees of Vishnu, who are and remain pure, not brutal, haters of bloodshed, apt for no disgusting practices, intellectuallyadmirable, and morally above reproach. In other words, there areto-day great numbers of Vishnuites who continue to be reallyVishnuites, and yet are really intelligent and moral. This has neverbeen the case with real Çivaites. Again, as Willams[37] has pointedout, Çivaism is a cheap religion; Krishnaism is costly. The Çivaiteneeds for his cult only a phallus pebble, _bilva_ leaves and water. The Krishnaite is expected to pay heavily for _leitourgiai_. ButÇivaism is cheap because Çivaites are poor, the dregs of society; itis not adopted because it is cheap. 

We think, therefore, that to describe Çivaism as indifferentlypantheistic or dualistic, and to argue that it must have beenpantheistic a few centuries after the Christian era because Çiva atthat time in scholastic philosophy and among certain intellectualsects was regarded as the one god, tends to obscure the historicalrelation of the sects. Without further argumentation on this point, weshall explain what in our view is necessary to a true understanding ofthe mutual relations between Çivaites and Vishnuites in the past. 

Monotheism[38] and pantheism are respectively the religious expressionof the S[=a]nkhya and Ved[=a]nta systems of philosophy. Çivaism, Krishnaism, and R[=a]maism are all originally deistic. Pure Çivaismhas remained so to this day, not only in all its popular sectarianexpressions, but also in the Brahmanic Çivaism of the early epic, andin the Çivaism which expresses itself in the adoration-formulae of theliterature of the Renaissance. But there is a pseudo-Çivaism whichstarts up from the ninth to the twelfth centuries, and tries to workÇiva's name into a pantheistic system of philosophy. Every suchattempt, however, and all of them are the reflex of the growingimportance of Vedantic ideas, fails as such to produce a religion. Ifthe movement becomes popular and develops into a religious system forthe masses, it at once gives up Çiva and takes up Vishnu, or, keepingÇiva, it drops pantheism and becomes a low form of sectarian ascetism. Çivaism is, therefore, fundamentally non-Vedantic, and Unitarian. [39]

On the other hand, while Krishnaism and Ramaism begin as deistic(tribal) cults, they are soon absorbed into Brahmanic Vishnuism. NowVishnuism is essentially Brahmanistic, and the only orthodox(Brahmanic) system is that which holds to the completion of Vedicpantheism. The first systematic philosophy, however, was not orthodox. It was the S[=a]nkhya, which peeps out in the dualism of the oldestdistinctly philosophical works, and lingers in the Puranic S[=a]nkhya. The marks of this dualism we have shown in the Divine Song of theepic. It is by means of it that Krishnaism as an expression of thisheterodox Vishnuism became possible. Vishnuism was soon rescued fromthe dualists, and became again what it was originally, an expressionof pantheism. But Vishnu carried Krishna with him as his _alter ego_, and in the epic the two are finally one All-god. Vedantic philosopliycontinued to present Vishnu rather than Çiva as its All-god, untilto-day Vishnuism is the sectarian aspect of the Ved[=a]nta system. Butwith Vishnu have risen Krishna and R[=a]ma as still further types ofthe All-god. Thus it is that Vishnuism, whether as Krishnaism or asRamaism, is to-day a pantheistic religion. But, while R[=a]ma is thegod of the philosophical sects, and, therefore, is almost entirely apantheistic god; Krishna, who was always a plebeian, is continuallyreverting, so to speak, to himself; that is to say, he is moreaffected by the vulgar, and as the vulgar are more prone, by whateversectarian name they call themselves, to worship one idol, it happensthat Krishna in the eyes of his following is less of a pantheistic godthan is R[=a]ma. Here again, therefore, it is necessary to draw theline not so much between names of sects as between intelligent andunintelligent people. For Krishnaism, despite all that has been donefor Krishna by the philosophers of his church, in this regardresembles Çivaism, that it represents the religion of unintelligent(though wealthy) classes, who revere Krishna as their one pet god, without much more thought of his being an All-god _avatar_ than isspent by the ordinary Çivaite on the purely nominal trinitarianismwhich has been foisted upon Çiva. 

But we must now give an account of the low sectaries, themiracle-mongers, jugglers, [40] and ascetic whimsicalities, whichtogether stand under the phallic standard of Çivaism. Ancient andrecent observers enumerate a sad list of them. The devotees of the'highest bird' are a low set of ascetics, who live on voluntary alms, the result of their affectation of extreme penance. The[=U]rdhvab[=a]hus, 'Up-arms, ' raise their arms till they are unable tolower them again. The [=A]k[=a]çamukhas, 'Sky-facers, ' hold theirfaces toward the sky till the muscles stiffen, and they live thusalways. The Nakhls, 'Nail' ascetics, allow their nails to grow throughtheir clenched hands, which unfits them for work (but they are all tooreligiously lazy to work), and makes it necessary for the credulousfaithful to support them. Some of these, like the K[=a]naph[=a]ts, 'Ear-splitters, ' who pierce the ear with heavy rings, have beenrespectable Yogis in the past, but most of them have lost what sensetheir philosophic founders attached to the sign, and keep only thelatter as their religion. Some, such as the [=U]kharas andS[=u]kharas, appear to have no distinctive features, all of them beingthe 'refuse of beggars' (Wilson). Others claim virtue on the strengthof nudity, and subdue their passions literally with lock and key. The'Potmen, ' the 'Skull-men, ' G[=u]daras and K[=a]p[=a]likas, aredistinguished, as their names imply, only by their vessels. Theformer, however, are the remnant of a once thoughtful sect known byname since the sixth century, and K[=a]naph[=a]ts and K[=a]p[=a]likasboth show that very likely others among these wretches are but theresidue of ancient Çivaite sects, who began as philosophers (perhapsBuddhists), and became only ascetic and thus degraded; for, Çivaapparently has no power to make his worshippers better than himself, and he is a dirty monster, now and then galvanized into theresemblance of a decent god. 

There is a well-known verse, not in Manu, but attributed to him (andfor that reason quite a modern forgery), [41] which declares thatÇambhu (Çiva) is the god of priests; Vishnu, the god of warriors;Brahm[=a], the god of the V[=a]içyas (farmers and traders); andGaneça, the god of slaves. It is, on the contrary, Çiva himself, nothis son Ganeça, who is the 'god of low people' in the earlyliterature. It is he who 'destroys sacrifice, ' and is anything but agod of priests till he is carefully made over by the latter. Nowadayssome Brahmans profess the Çivaite faith, but they are Vishnuite ifreally sectarian. 

No Brahman, for instance, will serve at a Çiva shrine, except possiblyat Benares, where among more than an hundred shrines to Çiva and hisfamily, Vishnu has but one; and though he will occasionally performservice even in a heretic Jain temple he will not lower himself toworship the Linga. Nor is it true that Çiva is a patron of literature. Like Ganeça, his son, Çiva may upset everything if he be not properlyplacated, and consequently there is, at the beginning of everyenterprise (among others, literary enterprises) in the Renaissanceliterature, but never in the works of religion or law or in any butmodern profane literature, an invocation to Çiva. But he is no more apatron of literature than is Ganeça, or in other words, Çivaism is notmore literary than is Ganeçaism. In a literary country no religion isso illiterate as Çivaism, no writings are so inane as are those in hishonor. There is no poem, no religious literary monument, no Pur[=a]naeven, dedicated to Çiva, that has any literary merit. All that isreadable in sectarian literature, the best Pur[=a]nas, the DivineSong, the sectarian R[=a]m[=a]yana, come from Vishnuism. Çivaism hasnothing to compare with this, except in the works of them that pretendto be Çivaites but are really not sectaries, like the Sittars and theauthor of the Çvet[=a]çvatara. Çiva as a 'patron of literature' takesjust the place taken by Ganeça in the present beginning of theMah[=a]bh[=a]rata. Vy[=a]sa has here composed the poem[42] but Ganeçais invoked as Vighneça, 'Lord of difficulties, ' to help the poet writeit out. Vy[=a]sa does the intellectual work and Ganeça performs themanual labor. Vishnuism, in a word, is the only cultivated (native)sectarian religion of India; and the orthodox cult, in that it isVedantic, lies nearer to Vishnuism than to Çivaism. Why then does onefind Çiva invoked by philosophy? Because monotheism in distinctionfrom pantheism was the belief of the wise in the first centuries afterthe Christian era, till the genius of Çankara definitively raisedpantheism in alliance with orthodoxy to be the more esteemed; andbecause Çiva alone, when the choice lay between him and Vishnu, couldbe selected as the One God. For Vishnuism was now merged withKrishnaism, a new vulgar cult, and Çiva was an old and venerated god, long since a member of the Brahmanic pantheon. The connection betweenÇivaism and the S[=a]nkhya system gave it a more respectable andarchaic appearance in the eyes of the conservative Brahman, while theoriginal asceticism of Çiva undoubtedly appealed much more toBrahmanic feeling than did the sentimentalism of the Vishnuite. In theextreme North, in the ninth century, philosophy and Çivaism arenominally allied, but really sectarian Çivaism was the cult of thelowest, not of the highest classes. Many of the professed Çivaites areto-day tending to Vedantism, which is the proper philosophy of theVishnuite; and the Çivaite sects are waning before the Vishnuitepower, not only in the middle North, where the mass of the populationis devoted to Vishnu, but even in Çiva's later provinces in theextreme South. The social distribution of the sectaries in the MiddleAges was such that one may assign older Vishnuism to the middleclasses, and Çivaism to the highest on its philosophical and decentlyascetic side, but to the lowest on its phallic and magical side. 

But none of the Çivaite sects we have mentioned, imbecile as appear tobe the impostors that represent them, are equal in despicable traitsto the Ç[=a]ktas. These worshippers of the androgynous Çiva (or ofÇakti, the female principle alone), do, indeed, include someVishnuites among themselves, but they are originally and prevailinglyÇivaite. [43] Blood-offerings and human sacrifices are a modern and anancient Trait of Çiva-worship;[44] and the hill-tribes of the Vindhyaand the classical drama show that the cult of Aghor[=i] is a Çivaitemanifestation which is at once old and derived from un-Aryan sources. Aghor[=i] and all female monsters naturally associate with Çiva, whois their intellectual and moral counterpart. The older Aghoris exactedhuman sacrifice in honor of Devi, P[=a]rvat[=i], the wife of Çiva. [2]The adoration of the female side of a god is as old as the Rig Veda, but Çivaism has combined this cult with features probably derived fromother independent local cults, such as that of P[=a]rvat[=i], the'mountain goddess. ' They are all united in the person of Çiva's wifeof many names, the 'great goddess, ' Mah[=a]dev[=i], the 'hard'Durg[=a], K[=a]l[=i], Um[=a], etc. [45] And it is to this ferociousshe-monster that the most abject homage of the Çivaites is paid. Sogreat is the terror inspired by Durg[=a] that they that are notÇivaites at all yet join in her festival; for which purpose, apparently, she is dubbed Vishnu's 'sister. ' But it is notblood-guiltiness alone which is laid at the door of this cult. Thesectarian religions have an exoteric and an esoteric side, thereligion of the 'right hand' and of the 'left hand. ' It is the latter(to which belong many that deny the fact) wherein centre theabominations of Çivaism; in less degree, those of Vishnuism also. Obscenity is the soul of this cult. Bestiality equalled only by theorgies of the Indic savages among the hill-tribes is the form of this'religion. '[47] It is screened by an Orphic philosophy, for is notNature or Illusion the female side of the Divine Male? It is screenedagain by religious fervor, for it is pious profligacy that prompts therites. It is induced practically by an initial carousal anddrunkenness; and this is antique, for even the old _soma_-feasts wereto a great extent drunken revels, and the gods have got drunk from thetime of the Vedas[48] to do their greatest deeds. But in practice, Çakti-worship, when unveiled, amounts to this, that men and women ofthe same class and family indulge in a Bacchanalian orgy, and that, asthey proceed, they give themselves over to every excess which liquorand lust can prompt. A description of the different rites would be toreduplicate an account of indecencies, of which the least vile is tooesoteric to sketch faithfully. Vaguely to outline one such religiousfestival will suffice. A naked woman, the wife of the chief priest, sits in the middle of the 'holy circle. ' She represents Durg[=a], thedivine female principle. The Bacchic orgy begins with hard drinking. Çiva as Bh[=a]irava, 'the dreadful, ' has his human counterpart also, who must then and there pair with the impersonated Durg[=a]. Theworship proper consists in the repetition of meaningless _mantra_syllables and yells; the worship improper, in indulgence in 'wine andwomen' (particularly enjoined in the rite-books called Tantras). Humansacrifice at these rites is said to be extinct at the present day. [49]

But blood-lust is appeased by the hacking of their own bodies. Garments are cast in a heap. Lots are drawn for the women'sgarments[50] by the men. With her whose clothes he gets each mancontinues the debauch, inviting incest in addition to all otherexcess. [51]

The older Vishnuite sects (P[=a][=n]car[=a]tras, etc. ) may have hadsome of this filth in their make-up; but mass for mass the practicesare characteristic of Çivaism and not of Vishnuism. [52] EspeciallyÇivaite, however, is the 'mother worship, ' to which reference was madein the chapter on epic Hinduism. These 'mothers' are guardiangoddesses, or fiends of disease, etc. One may not claim that allÇ[=a]ktas are Çivaites, but how small a part of Vishnuism is occupiedwith Çakti-worship can be estimated only by surveying the whole bodyof worshippers of that name. 

We cannot leave the lust and murder of modern Çivaism without speakingof still another sect which hangs upon the heels of K[=a]l[=i], thatof the Thugs. It may, indeed, be questioned whether Çiva should beresponsible for the doings of his spouse, K[=a]l[=i]. But like seekslike, and there is every historical justification in making out Çivato be as bad as the company he keeps. Durg[=a] and K[=a]l[=i] are notvainly looked upon as Çiva's female side. So that a sect like theThugs, [53] which worshipped K[=a]li, may, it is true, be taken out ofthe Çivaite sects, but only if one will split Çivaism in two andreproduce the original condition, wherein Çiva was one monster andK[=a]li was another; which is scarcely possible after the two have forcenturies been looked upon as identical. With this in mind it may begranted that the Thugs payed reverence to K[=a]li, rather than to herlord. Moreover, many of them were Mohammedans; but, for our purpose, the significant fact is that when the Thugs were Hindus they wereK[=a]li-Çivaites. And we believe that these secret murderers, strangeas it seems, originated in a reformatory movement. As is well known, it was a religious principle with them not to spill blood. [54] Theyalways throttled. They were, of course, when they first became known m1799 (Sherwood's account), nothing but robbers and murderers. But, like the other Çivaite monstrosities, they regarded their work as areligious act, and always invoked K[=a]li if they were Hindus. Wethink it probable, therefore, that the sect originated among theK[=a]li-worshippers as a protest against blood-letting. Admitting thatrobbery is under Çiva's protection (Çiva is 'god of robbers'), andthat K[=a]li wanted victims, a sect probably claimed that the victimsshould be throttled, and not bled. Not that this was necessarily a newreform. There is every reason to suppose that most of Çiva's femalesare aboriginal wild-tribe divinities. Now among these savages one seesat times a distinct refusal to bleed human victims. Thuggery may thenhave been the claim of an old conservative party, who wished to keepup the traditional throttling; though this is pure speculation, for, at the time when the sect became exposed, this means of death wasmerely the safest way to kill. They insisted always on being calledThugs, and scorned the name of thief. They were suppressed by 1840. Reynolds describes them as "mostly men of mild and unobtrusivemanners, possessing a cheerful disposition. "[55]

THE VISHNUITE SECTS. 

There is a formal idealistic Çivaism, as we have shown, and there wasonce a dualistic Vishnuism; but in general the Vishnuite is anidealist. To comprehend the quarrels among the sects of this religion, however, it will be necessary to examine the radical philosophicaldifferences of their founders, for one passes, in going from modernÇivaism to Vishnuism, out of ignorant superstition into philosophicalreligion, of which many even of the weaker traits are but recentHinduistic effeminacy substituted for an older manly thinking. 

The complex of Vishnuite sects presents at first rather a confusedappearance, but we think that we can make the whole body separateitself clearly enough into its component parts, if the reader willpause at the threshold and before entering the edifice look at thefoundation and the outer plan of Vedantic philosophy. 

At the beginning of Colebrooke's essays on Hindu philosophy hethus describes four of the recognized systems: "The twoM[=i]m[=a]ms[=a]s. . . Are emphatically orthodox. The prior one, _p[=u]rva_[56] which has J[=a]imini for its founder, teaches the artof reasoning, with the express view of aiding the interpretation ofthe Vedas. The latter, _uttara_[57] commonly called Ved[=a]nta, andattributed to Vy[=a]sa (or B[=a]dar[=a]yana), deduces from the text ofthe Indian scriptures a refined psychology, which goes to a denial ofa material world. A different philosophical system, partly heterodox, and partly conformable to the established Hindu creed, is theS[=a]nkhya; of which also, as of the preceding, there are two schools;one usually known by that name, [58] the other commonly termedYoga. "[59]

The eldest of these systems, as we have already had occasion to state, is the dualistic S[=a]nkhya. It was still highly esteemed in the ninthcentury, the time of the great Vedantist, Çankara. [60] A theistic formof this atheistic philosophy is called the Puranic S[=a]nkhya, andPata[. N]jali's Yoga is thoroughly theistic. Radically opposed to thedualistic S[=a]nkhya stands the Ved[=a]nta, [61] based on theUpanishads that teach the identity of spirit and matter. 

As representative of the metaphysics of the S[=a]nkhya and Ved[=a]ntasystems respectively stand in general the two great religions ofIndia. The former, as we have shown, is still potent in the great Songof the epic, and its principles are essentially those of earlyÇivaism. The latter, especially in its sectarian interpretation, withwhich we have now to deal, has become the great religion o£ India. Butthere are two sectarian interpretations of Vishnu, and twophilosophical interpretations of the All-spirit in its relation to theindividual soul or spirit. [62] Again the individual spirit of maneither enjoys after death immortal happiness, as a being distinct fromthe All-spirit; or the _jiva_, individual spirit, is absorbed into theAll-spirit (losing all individuality, but still conscious ofhappiness); or the individual spirit is absorbed into an All-spiritthat has no happiness or affection of any kind. 

Now the strict philosophy of the Ved[=a]nta adopts the last view _intoto_. The individual spirit (soul, self) becomes one with theuniversal Spirit, losing individuality and consciousness, for theuniversal Spirit itself is not affected by any quality or condition. Acreative force without attributes, this is the All-spirit of Çankaraand of the strict Vedantist. To Çankara the Creator was but a phase ofthe All-spirit, and the former's immortality ended with his creation;in other words, there is no immortal Creator, only an immortalcreative power. 

In the twelfth century arose another great leader of thought, R[=a]m[=a]nuja. He disputed the correctness of Çankara'sinterpretation of Vedantic principles. It is maintained by some thatÇankara's interpretation is really correct, but for our purpose thatis neither here nor there. [63] Çankara's _brahma_ is theone and only being, pure being, or pure thought. Thought is not anattribute of _brahma_, it is _brahma_. Opposed to this pure being(thought) stands _m[=a]y[=a]_, illusion, the material cause of theseen world. It is neither being nor not-being; it is the cause of theappearance of things, in that it is associated with _brahma_, and inso far only is _brahma_ rightly the Lord. The infinite part of eachindividual is _brahma_; the finite part is _m[=a]y[=a]. _ ThusB[=a]dar[=a]yana (author of the Ved[=a]nta S[=u]tras) says that theindividual is only illusion. 

R[=a]m[=a]nuja[64], on the other hand, teaches a _brahma_ that is notonly universal, but is the universal personal Lord, a supremeconscious and willing God. Far from being devoid of attributes, likeÇankara's _brahma_, the _brahma_ of R[=a]m[=a]nuja has all attributes, chief of which is thought or intelligence. The Lord contains inhimself the elements of that plurality which Çankara regards asillusion. As contrasted with the dualistic S[=a]nkhya phiiosophy bothof these systems inculcate monism. But according to Çankara alldifference is illusion; while according to R[=a]m[=a]nuja _brahma_ isnot homogeneous, but in the diversity of the world about us he istruly manifested. Çankara's _m[=a]y[=a]_ is R[=a]m[=a]nuja's body of_(brahma)_ the Lord. Çankara's personal god exists only by collusionwith illusion, and hence is illusory. The _brahma_ of R[=a]m[=a]nujais a personal god, the omnipotent, omniscient, Lord of a real world. Moreover, from an eschatological point of view, Çankara explainssalvation, the release from re-birth, _sams[=a]ra_, as complete unionwith this unqualified _brahma_, consequently as loss of individualityas well as loss of happiness. But R[=a]m[=a]nuja defines salvation asthe departure from earth forever of the individualspirit, which enters a heaven where it will enjoy perennial bliss[65]. 

R[=a]m[=a]nuja's doctrine inspires the sectarian pantheism of thepresent time. In this there is a metaphysical basis of conduct, apersonal god to be loved or feared, the hope of bliss hereafter. Inits essential features it is a very old belief, far older than thephilosophy which formulates it[66]. Thus, after the hard saying "foolsdesire heaven, " this desire reasserted itself, and underR[=a]m[=a]nuja's genial interpretation of the Ved[=a]nta S[=u]tras thepious man was enabled to build up his cheerful hope again, withal onthe basis of a logic as difficult to controvert as was that of Çankarahimself[67]. 

Thus far the product of Vedantism is deism. But now with two steps onearrives at the inner portal of sectarianism. First, if _brahma_ is apersonal god, which of the gods is he, this personal All-spirit? As ageneral thing the Vedantist answers, 'he is Vishnu'; and adds, 'Vishnu, who embraces as their superior those other gods, Çiva, andBrahm[=a]. ' But the sectary is not content with making the All-god onewith Vishnu. Vishnu was manifested in the flesh, some say as Krishna, some say as R[=a]ma[68]. The relation of sectary to Vishnuite, and tothe All-spirit deist, may be illustrated most clearly by comparisonwith Occidental religions. One may not acknowledge any personal god asthe absolute Supreme Power; again, one may say that this Supreme Poweris apersonal god, Jehovah; again, Jehovah may or may not be regarded asone with Christ. The minuter ramifications of the Christian churchthen correspond to the sub-sects of Krishnaism or Ramaism. [69]

The Occidental and Oriental conceptions of the trinity are, however, not identical. For in India the trinity, from the Vishnuite point ofview, is an amalgamation of Çiva and Brahm[=a] with Vishnu, irrespective of the question whether Vishnu be manifest in Krishna ornot; while the Christian trinity amalgamates the form that correspondsto Vishnu with the one that corresponds to Krishna. [70] To theorthodox Brahman, on the other hand, as Williams has very well put it, Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu, who is himself only anincarnation, that is, a form, of God. 

Having now explained the two principal divisions of the modern sects, we can lead the reader into the church of Vishnu. It is a church oftwo great parties, each being variously subdivided. Of these twoparties the Krishnaites are intellectually the weaker, and hencenumerically the stronger. All Krishnaites, of course, identify theman-god Krishna with Vishnu, and their sub-sects revert to variousteachers, of whom the larger number are of comparatively recent date, although as a body the Krishnaites may claim an antiquity as great, ifnot greater, than that of the Ramaites. 

But the latter party, in their various sub-sects, all claim astheir founder either R[=a]m[=a]nuja himself or one of his followers;and since, if the claim be granted, the R[=a]ma sects do but continuehis work, we shall begin by following out the result of his teachingas it was interpreted by his disciples; especially since theKrishnaites have left to the Ramaites most of the philosophizing ofthe church, and devoted themselves more exclusively to the moralitiesand immoralities of their more practical religion. As a matter offact, the Ramaites to-day are less religious than philosophical, whilein the case of the Krishnaites, with some reservations, the contrarymay be said to be the case. 

THE RAMAITES. 

Since the chief characteristic of growth among Hindu sectaries is asort of segmentation, like that which conditions the development ofamoebas and other lower organisms, it is a forgone conclusion that theRamaites, having formed one body apart from the Krishnaites, willimmediately split up again into smaller segments. It is also aforegone conclusion, since one is really dealing here with humantypes, that these smaller segments will mutually hate and despise eachother much more than they hate their common adversaries. Just as, inold times, a Calvinist hated a Lutheran more than he did a RussianChristian (for he understood his quarrel better), so a 'cat-doctrine'Ramaite hates a 'monkey-doctrine' Ramaite far more than he hates aKrishnaite, while with a Çivaite he often has an amicable union;although the Krishnaite belittles the Ramaite's manifestation ofVishnu, and the Çivaite belittles Vishnu himself. [71]

The chief point of difference theologically between the Ramaites isthe one just mentioned. The adherents of the 'cat-doctrine' teach thatGod saves man as a cat takes up its kitten, without free-will on thepart of the latter. The monkey-doctrinaires teach that man, in orderto be saved, must reach out to their God (R[=a]ma, who is Vishnu, who, again, is All-god, that is, _brahma_), and embrace their God as amonkey does its mother. [72] The resemblance to the Occidental sectshere becomes still more interesting. But we have given an earlierexample of the doctrine of free grace from the epic, and can now onlylocate the modern sects that still argue the question. The 'monkey'Ramaites are a sect of the North (_vada_), and hence are calledVada-galais;[73] the 'cat' or Calvinistic Ramaites of the South(_ten_), are called Ten-galais. Outwardly these sects differ in havingdiverse _mantras_, greetings, dress, and especially in theforehead-signs, which show whether the 'mark of Vishnu' shallrepresent (Vadagal belief) one or (Tengal) two feet of the god(expressed by vertical lines[74] painted fresh daily on the forehead). The Ten-galais, according to a recent account, are the more numerousand the more materialistic. [75]

All the Ramaites, on the other hand, hold that (1) the deity is notdevoid of qualities; (2) Vishnu is the deity and should be worshippedwith Lakshm[=i], his wife; (3) R[=a]ma is the human _avatar_ ofVishnu; (4) R[=a]m[=a]nuja and all the great teachers since his dayare also _avatars_ of Vishnu. 

In upper India, about the Ganges, R[=a]m[=a]nuja's disciple, R[=a]m[=a]nand (fifth in descent), who lived in the fourteenthcentury, has more followers than has the founder. His disciplesworship the divine ape, Hanuman[76] (conspicuous in both epics), aswell as R[=a]ma. They are called 'the liberated, ' Avadh[=u]tas, butwhether because they are freed from caste-restrictions, [77] or fromthe strict rules of eating enjoined by R[=a]m[=a]nuja, is doubtful. R[=a]m[=a]nand himself had in turn twelve disciples. Of these the mostfamaous is Kab[=i]r, whose followers, the Kab[=i]r Panth[=i]s (sect), are widely spread, and of whom no less a person than N[=a]nak, theSikh, claimed to be a successor. But it will be more convenient todescribe the Sikhs hereafter. Of R[=a]m[=a]nand's other disciples thatfounded sects may be mentioned Kil, whose sectaries, the Kh[=a]kis, ofOude, unite successfully R[=a]ma-worship, Hanuman-worship, and Çivaitefashions (thus presenting a mixture like that of the southernM[=a]dhvas, who unite the images of Çiva and Vishnu). The R[=a]sD[=a]sa sect, again, owes to its founder the black Ç[=a]lagr[=a]mapebble, an object of reverent awe, which gives rise to a sort ofsub-cult subsequently imitated by others. [78] Another widely-spreadsect which claim R[=a]m[=a]nand as their founder's teacher is that ofthe D[=a]d[=u] Panth[=i]s. This branch also of the Ramaites we shallmore appropriately discuss under the head of deism (below). Finally, we have to mention, as an outcome of the R[=a]m[=a]nand faith, themodern R[=a]m[=a]yana, Ramcaritmanas, the new bible of the sect, composed in the sixteenth century by Tulas[=i]d[=a]sa ('slave ofVishnu'), the greatest of modern Hindu poets. What the Divine Song andthe Bh[=a]gavata Pur[=a]na are to the Krishnaite, the older (epic)R[=a]m[=a]yana of V[=a]lm[=i]ki and Tulas[=i]d[=a]sa's new poem (ofthe same name) are to the Ramaite. [79]

THE KRISHNAITES. 

There are two great sects that worship Vishnu as especially manifestedin the human form of Krishna. But, as distinguished from thephilosophical Ramaite, the Krishnaite is not satisfied with adeclaration of faith in the man-god, and in fact his chief cult is ofthe child-god Krishna, the B[=a]la Gop[=a]la or Infant Shepherd. Thisrecalls the older Krishna (of the Harivança), whose sporting with themilk-maids is a favorite topic in later Krishnaite literature. As aformulated cult, consisting for the most part of observances based onthe mystic side of affection for the personal saver of man (the_bhakti_ principle of 'devotion, ' erotically expanded[80]), thisworship obtains both among C[=a]itanyas and Vallabhas, sects thatarose in the sixteenth century. [81]

C[=a]itanya, born in Bengal in 1485, of whom it is fabled that wisemen came and gave homage to him while he was yet a child, was activein Bengal and Orissa, where his sect (named after him) is one of themost important at the present day. C[=a]itanya preached a practical aswell as a theoretical reform. He taught the equality of allworshippers of whatever caste, and the religious virtue of marriage. At the present day caste-feeling and religious profession are somewhatat variance. But a compromise is affected. While in the temple thehigh-caste C[=a]itanyas regard their lowly co-religionists as equals;when out of it they become again arrogantly high-caste, Making avirtue of marriage instead of celibacy caused the sect to becomepopular with the middle and lower classes, but its adherents areusually drawn from the dregs of the populace. [82] The principle oflove for God (that is, for Krishna) is especially dwelt upon byC[=a]itanya. The devotee should feel such affection as is felt by ayoung man for a girl. To exercise or inspire this rapt and mysticdevotion, recourse is had to singing, dancing. And other familiarmeans of arousing religious fervor. If the dancing devotee swoons itis a sign that God accepts his love. At the present day C[=a]itanyahimself is regarded as the incarnate deity. He and his two chiefdisciples, who (like all Gosains, religious Teachers) are divine, forma little sub-trinity for the sect. [83] This sect, like so many others, began as a reform, only to become worse than its rivals. 

Vallabha or Vallabh[=a]e[=a]rya, 'Teacher Vallabha, ' was also of thesixteenth century, but his sect belongs especially to the Northwest, while the sphere of C[=a]itanya's influence was in the Northeast. Helived near the Ganges, is said to have been a scholar, and wrote acommentary on the early life of Krishna in the tenth book of theBh[=a]gavata Pur[=a]na, and on the DivineSong. In Bombay and Kutch his disciples are most numerous, theEpicureans of Vishnuism. For their precept is 'eat and enjoy. ' Nomortification of the senses is allowed. Human love typifies divinelove. [84] The teachers acquired great renown and power, assuming andmaintaining the haughty title of _mah[=a] r[=a]jas_ ('great kings'). They are as gods, and command absolutely their devotees. [85] Here theworship of the Infant Krishna reaches its greatest height (or depth). The image of the infant god is daily clothed, bathed, anointed, andworshipped. Religious exercises have more or less of an erotictendency, and here, if anywhere, as one may learn from Wilson, Williams, and other modern writers on this sect, there are almost asgreat excesses as are committed among the Çivaite sects. As a sect itis an odd combination of sensual worship and theological speculation, for they have considerable sectarian literature. The most renownedfestival of the Infant Krishna is the celebration of the stable-birthof Krishna and of the Madonna (bearing him on her breast), but this wehave discussed already. Besides this the Jagann[=a]th procession inBengal and Orissa, and the great autumnal picnic called the R[=a]sY[=a]tra, are famous occasions for displaying Krishnaite, or, indeed, general Vishnuite zeal. At the R[=a]s Y[=a]tra assemble musicians, dancers, jugglers, and other joy-creating additions to the religiousfeast, the ostensible reason for which is the commemoration ofKrishna's dances with the milk-maids. The devotees belong chiefly tothe wealthy middle classes. These low sects worship Krishnawith R[=a]dh[=a] (his mistress, instead of Lakshm[=i], Vishnu's wife). Here, too, as Krishnaites rather than as Vishnuites, are found the'left-hand' worshippers of the female power. [86]

This sensual corruption of Vishnuism, which is really not Vishnuismbut simple Krishnaism, led to two prominent reforms within the fold. Among the Vallabhas arose in protest the Caran D[=a]s[=i]s, who havetaken from the M[=a]dhvas of the South their Ten Commandments (againstlying, reviling, harsh speech, idle talk, theft, adultery, injury tolife, imagining evil, hate, and pride); and evolved for themselves thetenet that faith without works is dead. The same protest was madeagainst the Vallabhas by Sv[=a]mi N[=a]r[=a]yana. He was born about1780 near Lucknow, and advocated a return to Vallabha's purer faith, which had been corrupted. Probably most of the older reformers havehad much the same career as had Sv[=a]mi N[=a]r[=a]yana. Exalted bythe people, who were persuaded by his mesmeric eloquence, he soonbecame a political figure, a martyr of persecution, a triumphantvictor, and then an ascetic, living in seclusion; whence he emergedoccasionally to go on tours "like a bishop visiting his diocese"(Williams). He is worshipped as a god. [87] The sect numbers to-day aquarter of a million, some being celibate clergy, some householders. 

In contrast to Vishnuism the following points are characteristic oforthodox Brahmanism (Çankara's Vedantism): The orthodox believe thatthere is one spirit in three forms, co-eternal impersonalessences--being, knowledge, and joy. When it wills it becomespersonal, exists in the object, knows, rejoices, associating itselfwith illusion. In this state it has three corporeal forms, causal, subtile, gross. With the causal body (identified with illusion, ignorance) it becomes the Supreme Lord, that is, the totality ofdreamless human spirits. With the subtile form it becomes the goldenseed, or thread-spirit (dreaming spirits); with the gross form itbecomes V[=i]r[=a]j, V[=a]içv[=a]nara, the waking spirit. The loweststate is that of being wide awake. The personal god (Brahm[=a], Vishnu, Çiva, of the sectaries) is this it as influenced by the threequalities, _rajas, sattva, tamas_ (passion, truth, and ignorance), respectively. Three essences, three corporeal forms, and threequalities constitute, therefore, the threefold trinity of theorthodox, who are called Sm[=a]rtas, they that 'hold totradition. '[88] What the sectary rejects, namely, the scriptures (Vedaand Upanishads, etc. ) and the caste system, that the orthodox retains;what the sectary holds, namely, R[=a]m[=a]nuja's qualifiednon-duality, and absolute godhead in Çiva or Krishna, that theorthodox rejects (although he may receive the sectary's god into hispantheon). Some of the sects still keep respect for caste, excusingtheir respect on the ground that "it is well enough for God to ignoresocial distinctions, but not for man. " But caste-distinctions aregenerally ignored, or there is positive hate of the Brahman. Inantithesis to the orthodox, the sectaries all hold one other importanttenet. From the idea of _bhakti_, faith or devotion, was developedthat of love for Krishna, and then (as an indication of devotion) theconfession of the name of the Lord as a means of grace. Hence, on theone hand, the meaningless repetition of the sect's special _kirttan_or liturgies, and _mantra, _ or religious formula; the devotion, demanded by the priest, of _man, tan, dhan_ (mind, body, [89] andproperty); and finally, the whole theory of death-bed confessions. Sinner or heretic, if one die at last with Krishna's name upon thelips he will be saved. [90]

Of the sub-divisions of the sub-sects that we have described, thenumbers often run into scores. But either their differences are basedon indifferent matters of detail in the cult and religious practice;or the new sect is distinguished from the old simply by its endeavorto make for greater holiness or purity as sub-reformers of oldersects. For all the sects appear to begin as reformers, and later tosplit up in the process of re-reformation. 

Two general classes of devotees, besides these, remain to be spokenof. The Sanny[=a]sin, 'renouncer, ' was of old a Brahman ascetic. Nowadays, according to Wilson, he is generally a Çivaite mendicant. But any sect may have its Sanny[=a]sins, as it may have itsV[=a]ir[=a]gins, 'passionless ones'; although the latter namegenerally applies to the Vishnuite ascetics of the South. 

Apart from all these sects, and in many ways most remarkable, are thesun-worshippers. All over India the sun was (and is) worshipped, either directly (as to-day by the Sauras), [91] or as an incarnatedeity in the form of the priest Nimba-[=a]ditya, who is said to havearrested the sun's course at one time and to be the sun'srepresentative on earth. Both Puranic authority and inscriptionalevidence attest this more direct[92] continuance of the old Vediccult. Some of the finest old temples of India, both North and South, were dedicated to the sun. 

DEISTIC REFORMING SECTS. 

We have just referred to one or two reforming sects that still hold tothe sectarian deity. Among these the M[=a]dhvas, founded by (Madhva)[=A]nandat[=i]rtha, are less Krishnaite or R[=a]maite thanVishnuite, [93] and less Vishnuite than deist in general; so much sothat Williams declares they must have got their precepts fromChristianity, though this is open to Barth's objection that thereforming deistic sects are so located as to make it more probablethat they derive from Mohammedanism. Madhva was born about 1200 on thewestern coast, and opposed Çankara's pantheistic doctrine ofnon-duality. He taught that the supreme spirit is essentiallydifferent to matter and to the individual spirit. [94] He of coursedenied absorption, and, though a Vishnuite, clearly belonged in spiritto the older school before Vishnuism became so closely connected withVed[=a]nta doctrines. It is the same Sankhyan Vishnuism that one seesin the Divine Song, that is, duality, and a continuation ofÇ[=a]ndilya's ancient heresy. [95]

Here ends the course of India's native religions. From a thousandyears B. C. To as many years after she is practically uninfluenced byforeign doctrine, save in externals. 

It is of course permissible to separate the reforming sects ofthe last few decades from the older reformers; but since we see bothin their aim and in their foreign sources (amalgamation with cis-Indicbelief) only a logical if not an historical continuance of the olderdeists, we prefer to treat of them all as factors of one whole; and, from a broader point of view, as successors to the still olderpantheistic and unitarian reformers who first predicated a supremespirit as _ens realissimum_, when still surrounded by the clouds ofprimitive polytheism. Kab[=i]r and D[=a]d[=u], the two most importantof the more modern reformers, we have named above as nominal adherentsof the R[=a]m[=a]nand sect. But neither was really a sectarianVishnuite. [96] Kab[=i]r, probably of the beginning of the fifteenthcentury, the most famous of R[=a]m[=a]nand's disciples, has asreligious descendants the sect of the Kab[=i]r Panth[=i]s. But no lessan organization than that of the Sikhs look back to him, pretending tobe his followers. The religious tenets of the Kab[=i]r Panth[=i]s maybe described as those of unsectarian Unitarians. They conform to norites or _mantras_. Kab[=i]r assailed all idolatry, ridiculed theauthority of all scriptures, broke with Pundit and with Mohammedan, taught that outer form is of no consequence, and that only the 'innerman' is of importance. These Panth[=i]s are found in the South, butare located chiefly in and about Benares, in Bengal in the East, andin Bombay in the West. There are said to be twelve divisions of them. Kab[=i]r assailed idolatry, but alas! Discipline requiressubordination. The Guru, Teacher, must be obeyed. It was not longbefore he who rejected idolatry became himself a deity. And in fact, every Teacher, Guru, of the sect was an absolute master of thought, and was revered as a god. [97]

In the fifteenth century, near Laho[. R]e, was born N[=a]nak (1469), who is the nominal founder of the Sikhs, a body which, as N[=a]nakclaimed, was a sect embodying the religion of Kab[=i]r himself, ofwhom he claimed to be a follower. The Granth, or bible of the Sikhs, was first compiled by the pontiff Arjun, in the sixteenth century. Besides the portions written by N[=a]nak and Arjun himself, there werecollected into it extracts from the works of 'twelve and a half' othercontributors to the volume, Kab[=i]r, R[=a]m[=a]nand, etc. [98] ThisGranth was subsequently called the [=A]digranth, or First Book, todistinguish it from the later, enlarged, collection of several books, one of which was written by Guru Govind, the tenth Sikh pontiff. Thechange from a religious body to a church militant and political bodywas made by this Govind in the eighteenth century. [99] The religioussect settled in the Punj[=a]b, became wealthy, excited the greed ofthe government, was persecuted, rose in revolt, triumphed, andeventually ruled the province. One of the first to precipitate theuprising was the above-mentioned Arjun (fourth pontiff afterN[=a]nak). He played the king, was accused of rebellion, imprisoned, and probably killed by the Mohammedans. The Sikhs flew to arms, andfrom this time on they were perforce little more than robbers andplunderers. Govind made the final change in organization, and, so to speak, at one blow created a nation, for the church at his handswas converted into the united militant body called Kh[=a]ls[=a] underthe Guru as pontiff-king, with a 'council of chiefs. ' They were vowedto hate the Mohammedan and Hindu. All caste-distinctions wereabrogated. Govind instituted the worship of Steel and Book (sword andbible). His orders were: "If you meet a Mohammedan, kill him; if youmeet a Hindu, beat and plunder him. " The Sikhs invoked the 'Creator'as 'highest lord, ' either in the form of Vishnu or R[=a]ma. Theirfounder, N[=a]nak, kept, however, the Hindu traditions in regard torites. He was a travelled merchant, and is said to have been inArabia. As an example of the Sikh bible may serve the followingextracts, translated from the original dialect by Trumpp and Prinseprespectively:

 _From Trumpp_:

 True is the Lord, of a true name, But the import of (this) language is Infinite. They say and beg, give, give! The Liberal gives presents. What may again be put before (him) By which his court may be seen? What word may be spoken by the mouth, Which having heard he may bestow love? Early reflect on the greatness of the True Name. [100] From his beneficence comes clothing, From his look the gate of salvation. N[=a]nak (says): Thus it is known, That he himself is altogether truthful. 

 _From Prinsep_:

 Thou art the Lord, to thee be praise; All life is with thee. Thou art my parents; I, thy child. All happiness is from thy mercy. No one knows God. 

 Highest Lord among the highest, Of all that is thou art the regulator, And all that is from thee obeys thy will, Thy movements, thy pleasure; thou alone knowest. N[=a]nak, thy slave is a free-will offering unto thee. [101]

The religious side of this organization remained under the name ofUd[=a]sis, [102] or Nirmalas ('spotless ones'). The [=A]digranth wasextended by other additions, such as that of Govind (above), and nowconstitutes a large heterogeneous collection of hymns and moral rules. Seven sub-sects of the religious body were developed in course oftime. The military body has a well-known history. They were completemasters of the Punj[=a]b in 1764, and remained there as an independentrace till that province was occupied by the British in 1848. BothKab[=i]r and his follower N[=a]nak were essentially reformers. Theysought for a religion which should rest on the common truths ofHinduism and Mohammedanism. [103] As a matter of form the politicalparty of Govind, the Govind Singhs, or Simhis, worshipped the Hindugods, and they showed respect for the Brahman priests for a longwhile; but they rejected the Vedas and caste--the two most essentialfeatures of orthodoxy. [104]

D[=a]d[=u], the second great reformer, who shows Mohammedan influencequite as plainly as does Kab[=i]r, also claimed R[=a]m[=a]nand as histeacher. The sects that revert to D[=a]d[=u], D[=a]d[=u] Panth[=i]s, now number more than half an hundred. Some of the votaries aresoldiers; some are mendicants. The founder lived about the end of thesixteenth century. The outwardpractices of the sects differ somewhat from those of other sects. LikePersians, they expose their dead. They are found about [=A]jm[=i]r andother districts of the North, in the seats of the Jains. Their faithand reformatory tendency may be illustrated by the following extract, as translated by Wilson:[105]

"He is my God who maketh all things perfect. O foolish one, God is notfar from you. He is near you. God's power is always with you. Whateveris to be is God's will. What will be will be. Therefore, long not forgrief or joy, because by seeking the one you may find the other. Allthings are sweet to them that love God. I am satisfied with this, thathappiness is in proportion to devotion. O God, Thou who art truth, grant me contentment, love, devotion, and faith. . . . Sit ye withhumility at the feet of God, and rid yourselves of the sickness ofyour bodies. From the wickedness of the body there is much to fear, because all sins enter into it. Therefore, let your dwelling be withthe fearless, and direct yourselves toward the light of God. For thereneither sword nor poison have power to destroy, and sin cannot enter. The greatest wisdom is in preventing your minds from being influencedby bad passions, and in meditating upon the One God. Afford help alsoto the poor stranger. Meditate on Him by whom all things weremade. "[106]

This tradition of reform is maintained by others without intermissiondown to the present century, and the M[=a]dhvas and Sv[=a]miN[=a]r[=a]yana, of whom we have spoken above as being more directlyconnected with sectarian bodies, are, in fact, scarcely more concernedwith the tenets of the latter than were Kab[=i]r and D[=a]d[=u]. Thusthe seventeenth century sees the rising of the B[=a]b[=a]l[=a]ls andS[=a]dhus; and the eighteenth, of the Satn[=a]mis, 'worshippers of thetrue name, ' who, with other minor bodies, such as the N[=a]ngiPanthis, founded by Dedr[=a]j in this century, are really puredeists, although some of them, like the Vi[t. ]h[t. ]hals, claim to befollowers of Kab[=i]r. And so they are, in spirit at least. 

THE DEISM OF TO-DAY. [107]

And thus one arrives at modern deism, not as the result of newinfluences emanating from Christian teaching, but rather as thelegitimate successor of that deism which became almost monotheistic inthe first centuries after our era, and has ever since varied withvarious reformers between two beliefs, inclining now to thepantheistic, now to the unitarian conception, as the respectivereformers were influenced by Ved[=a]nta or S[=a]nkhya (laterMohammedan) doctrine. 

The first of the great modern reformers is R[=a]mmohun Roy, who wasborn in 1772, the son of a high-caste Krishnaite Brahman. He studiedPersian and Arabic literature at Patna, the centre of Indic Mohammedanlearning. When a mere boy, he composed a tract against idolatry whichcaused him to be banished from home. He lived at Benares, thestronghold of Brahmanism, and afterwards in Tibet, the centre ofBuddhism. "From his earliest years, " says Williams, "he displayed aneagerness to become an unbiassed student of all the religions of theglobe. " He read the Vedas, the P[=a]li Buddhist works, the Kur[=a]n, and the Old Testament in the original; and in later years even studiedGreek that he might properly understand the New Testament. Thescholastic philosophy of the Hindus appeared to him, however, assomething superior to what he found elsewhere, and his efforts weredirected mainly to purifying the national faith, especially fromidolatry. It was at his instigation that the practice of widow-burningwas abolished (in 1829) by the British. He was finally ostracized fromhome as a schismatic, and retired to Calcutta, uniting about him asmall body of Hindus and Jains, and there established a sort of churchor sect, the [=A]tm[=i]ya Sabh[=a], 'spiritual society' (1816), whichmet at his house, but eventually was crushed by the hostility of theorthodox priests. He finally adopted a kind of Broad-churchChristianity or Unitarianism, and in 1820, in his 'Precepts of Jesus'and in one of his later works, admits that the simple moral code ofthe New Testament and the doctrines of Christ were the best that heknew. He never, however, abjured caste; and his adoption ofChristianity, of course, did not include the dogma of the trinity:"Whatever excuse may be pleaded in favor of a plurality of persons ofthe Deity can be offered with equal propriety in defence ofpolytheism" (Final Appeal). Founded by him, the first theistic churchwas organized in 1828 at Calcutta, and formally opened in 1830 as theBr[=a]hma Sam[=a]j; ('the Congregation of God'). In doing this hewished it to be understood that he was not founding a new sect, but apure monotheistic worship. The only creed was a confession of faith inthe unity of God. For himself, he abandoned pantheism, adopted thebelief in a final judgment, in miracles, and in Christ as the 'Founderof true religion. ' He died in 1833 in England. His successor, Debendran[=a]th T[=a]gore, [108] was not appointed leader of theBr[=a]hma Sam[=a]j; till much later; after he had founded a church ofhis own ('the Truth-teaching Society'), which lasted for twenty years(1839-1859), before it was united with the Br[=a]hma Sam[=a]j. In themeantime Debendran[=a]th become a member of the latter society (1841). He established the covenant of the Sam[=a]j, a vow taken by everymember to lead holy lives, to abstain from idolatry, to worship nocreated object, but only God, the One without a second, [109] theCreator, Preserver, Destroyer, the Giver of Emancipation. 

The church was newly organized in 1844 with a regularly appointedpresident and minister, and with the administration of the oath toeach believer. This is the [=A]di Br[=a]hma Sam[=a]j, the FirstCongregation, in distinction from the schism which soon took place. The first quarrel in this church was due to a difference of opinion inregard to the authority of the Vedas. Some members rejected them, others maintained their infallibility; while between these extremeslay various other opinions, some members questioning the infallibilityof the Vedas but maintaining their authority. By a majority vote itwas eventually decided that the Vedas (and Upanishads) were notinfallible. 

In the meantime in other provinces rival Sam[=a]jas had been formed, and by 1850 there were several of these broad-minded Congregations, all trammelled by their environment, but doing their best to beliberal. 

We pause here in the compilation of the data recorded in thisparagraph to assert, independently of Professor Williams, who hasgiven us the historical facts, but would doubtless not wish to haveimputed to himself the following judgment which we are led to pass, that the next step of the Sam[=a]j; placed it upon the only groundwhere the objects of this church can be attained, and that in thesubsequent reform of this reform, which we shall have to record below, a backward step has been taken. For Debendran[=a]th changed theessential character of the Sam[=a]j from pantheistic theism to puredeism. The inner circle of the society had a narrower declaration offaith, but in his Br[=a]hma Dharma, published about 1850, Debendran[=a]th formulated four articles of faith, to subscribe towhich admitted any one into the Sam[=a]j. These articles read asfollows: (t) Brahma (neuter) alone existed in the beginning before theuniverse; naught else existed; It [He] created all the universe. (2)It [He] is eternal, intelligent, infinite, blissful, self-governed(independent), without parts, just one (neuter) without a second, all-pervading, the ruler (masculine noun) of all, refuge of all, omniscient, omnipotent, immovable, perfect, without parallel (allthese adjectives are neuter). (3) By worship of this One alone canbliss be obtained in the next world and in this. (4) The worship ofthis (neuter) One consists in love toward this (One) and in performingworks pleasant (to this One). 

This deism denies an incarnate God, scriptural authority, and the goodof rites and penance; but it teaches the efficacy of prayer andrepentance, and the belief in God as a personal Creator and HeavenlyFather. [110] Intellectual--anything but emotional--it failed tosatisfy many worshippers. And as a church it was conservative inregard to social reforms. 

In 1858 Keshub Chunder Sen, a Vishnuite by family, then but twenty, joined the Sam[=a]j, and being clever, young, eloquent, andcultivated, he, after the manner of the Hindus, undertook to reformthe church he had just entered, first of all by urging the abolitionof caste-restrictions. Debendran[=a]th was liberal enough to bewilling to dispense with his own thread (the caste-mark), but toowisely conservative to demand of his co-religionists so complete abreak with tradition and social condition. For the sacred thread tothe Hindu is the sign of social respectability. Without it, he is outof society. It binds him to all that is dearest to him. The leader ofthe older Sam[=a]j; never gave up caste; the younger members indoing so mix religion with social etiquette, and so hinder the advancethey aim at. Sen urged this and other reforms, all repugnant to thesociety in which he lived, changes in the rite at the worship ofancestors, alterations in the established ritual at birth-ceremoniesand funerals, abolition of polyandry and of child-marriages, and, worst of all, granting permission to marry to those of differentcastes. His zeal was directed especially against caste-restrictionsand child-marriages. Naturally he failed to persuade the old Sam[=a]jto join him in these revolutionary views, to insist on which, howeversensible they seem, cannot be regarded otherwise than as indiscreetfrom the point of view of one who considers men and passions. For theSam[=a]j, in the face of tremendous obstacles, had just secured afoot-hold in India. Sen's headlong reforms would have smashed topieces the whole congregation, and left India more deeply prejudicedthan ever against free thought. Sen failed to reform the old church, so in 1865 he, with some ardent young enthusiasts, reformed themselvesinto a new church, ceremoniously organized in 1866 as the Br[=a]hmaSam[=a]j; of India, in distinction from the Calcutta Sam[=a]j, or[=A]di Sam[=a]j. A futile effort was made to get all the other localcongregations to join the new Sam[=a]j, the last, of course, to be thefirst and head of the organization. 

The new Sam[=a]j renounced caste-restrictions and Brahmanismaltogether, but it was tainted with the hysterical _bhakti_ fervorwhich Sen inherited from his childhood's religion, and which (if onemay credit Williams' words) "brought the latest development of IndianTheism into closer harmony with Christian ideas. " The chief leader ofthis Sam[=a]j besides Sen was his cousin Prot[=a]p Chunder Mozoomdar, official secretary of the society. Its literary organ is the _IndianMirror_. 

The reform of this reform of course followed before long. The newSam[=a]j was accused of making religion too much a matter of emotionand excitement. Religious fervor, _bhakti_, had led to "rapturoussinging of hymns in the streets"; and to the establishment of a kindof love-feasts ('Brahma-feasts' they were called) of prayer andrejoicing; and, on the other hand, to undue asceticism andself-mortification. [111] Sen himself was revered too much. One of themost brilliant, eloquent, and fascinating of men, he was adored by hisfollowers--as a god! He denied that he had accepted divine honors, butthere is no doubt, as Williams insists, that his Vishnuite tendencyled him to believe himself peculiarly the recipient of divine favors. It was charged against him that he asserted that all he did was atGod's command, and that he believed himself perennially inspired. [112]If one add to this that he was not only divinely inspired, but that hehad the complete control of his society, it would appear to be easy toforesee where the next reformer might strike. For Sen "was not onlybishop, priest, and deacon all in one, " says Williams, "he was a Pope, from whose decision there was no appeal. " But it was not this thatcaused the rupture. In 1877 this reformer, "who had denounced earlymarriages as the curse of India, " yielded to natural social ambitionand engaged his own young daughter to a Koch (R[=a]jbanshi) prince, who in turn was a mere boy. The Sam[=a]j protested with all its might, but the marriage was performed the next year, withal to theaccompaniment of idolatrous rites. [113] After this Sen became somewhattheatrical. In 1879 he recognized (in a proclamation) God'sMotherhood--the old dogma of the female divine. In 1880 he announced, in fervid language, that Christianity was the only true religion: "Itis Christ who rules British India, and not the British Government. England has sent out a tremendous moral force in the life andcharacter of that mighty prophet to conquer and hold this vast empire. None but Jesus, none but Jesus, none but Jesus, ever deserved thisbright, this precious diadem, India, and Jesus shall have it. . . . Christ is a true Yogi. " He accepts Christ, but not as God, only asinspired saint (as says Williams). More recently, Sen proposed anamalgamation of Hinduism, Mohammedanism, and Christianity as the truereligion. 

Meanwhile the Sam[=a]j was rent by discord. Sen's opponents, the newreformers, were unable, however, to oust the brilliant leader from thepresidency. Consequently they established a new church, intended to bea General Congregation, the fourth development (1878) of the Br[=a]hmaSam[=a]j. And so the fight has gone on ever since. At the present daythere are more than a hundred deistic churches, in which thedevotional exercises consist in part of readings from the Vedas, Bible, Kur[=a]n, and Avesta. The [=A]rya Sam[=a]j is one of the mostimportant of the later churches, some of which endeavor to obtainundefiled religion by uniting into one faith what seems best in all;others, by returning to the Vedas and clearing them of what they thinkto be later corruptions of those originally pure scriptures. Of thelatter sort is the [=A]rya Sam[=a]j. Its leader, Day[=a]nanda, claimsthat the Vedas are a true revelation. The last reformer of which wehave knowledge is a bright young high-caste Hindu of upper India, whois about to found a 'world-religion, ' for which task he is now makingpreliminary studies. He has visited this country, and recently told usthat, if he had time, he could easily convert America. But his firstduty lies, of course, in the reformation of India's reformations, especially of the Sam[=a]jas!

The difficulty with which all these reformers and re-reformers have tocontend is pitifully clear. Their broad ideas have no fittingenvironment. Their leaders and thinkers may continue to preach deism, and among their equals they will be heard and understood. They are, however, not content with this. They must form churches. But a churchimplies in every case an unnatural and therefore dangerous growth, caused by the union either of inferior minds (attracted by eloquence, but unable to think) with those that are not on the same plane, or ofambitious zealots with reluctant conservatists. Many join the churchwho are not qualified to appreciate the leader's work. They overloadthe founder's deism with the sectarian theism from which they have notreally freed themselves. On the other hand, younger men, who have beeneducated in English colleges and are imbued with the spirit ofpractical reform, enter the church to use it as an instrument forsocial progress. So the church is divided, theists and reformers bothbeing at odds with the original deists; and the founder is lucky if heescapes being deified by one party and being looked upon by the otheras too dull. [114]

India is no more prepared as a whole for the reception of the liberalviews of the Sam[=a]j; than was the negro for the right to vote. Centuries of higher preliminary education are needed before the peopleat large renounce their ancestral, their natural faith. A few earnestmen may preach deism; the people will remain polytheists andpantheists for many generations. Then, again, the Sam[=a]jas have tocontend not only with the national predisposition, but with everyheretical sect, and, besides these, with the orthodox church. But thusfar their chief foe is, after all, their own heart as opposed to theirhead. As long as deistic leaders are deified by their followers, andregard themselves as peculiarly inspired, they will preach in vain. Nor can they with impunity favor the substitution of emotion for ideasin a land where religious emotion leads downwards as surely as falls astone that is thrown. 

 * * * * *

 FOOTNOTES:

 [Footnote 1: In the following we keep to the practice we have adopted in the early part of the work, giving anglicized words without distinction of vowel-length, and anglicizing as far as possible, writing thus S[=a]nkhya but Sankhyan, Ved[=a]nta but Vedantist. In modern proper names we have adopted in each case the most familiar form. ]

 [Footnote 2: Rig Veda, II. 12. Compare X. 121. We omit some of the verses. ]

 [Footnote 3: See note, p. 20, above. ]

 [Footnote 4: Metaphor from earthly fire-making; cloud and cliff (Ludwig); or, perhaps, heaven and earth. ]

 [Footnote 5: 'Made low and put in concealment' the D[=a]sa color, _i. E. _ the black barbarians, the negroes. 'Color' might be translated 'race' (subsequently 'caste'). ]

 [Footnote 6: D[=i]ce, _vijas_, literally 'hoppers' (and so sometimes, interpreted as birds). The same figure occurs not infrequently. Compare AV. Iv. 16. 5, _ak[s. ][=a]n iva_. 'Believe, ' _çr['a]d-dhatta, i. E_. , cred-(d)[=i]te, literally 'put trust. ']

 [Footnote 7: Sometimes rendered, "a true (laudation) if any is true. "]

 [Footnote 8: viii. 100. 3-4. The penultimate verse is literally 'the direction(s) of the order magnify me, ' the order being that of the seasons and of seasonable rites. ]

 [Footnote 9: Compare the 'devil-worship of Uçanas, ' and the scoffs at P[=u]shan. The next step in infidelity is denial of a future life and of the worth of the Vedas. ]

 [Footnote 10: In the Buddhistic writings Indra appears as the great popular god of the Brahmans (with Brahm[=a] as the philosophical god). ]

 [Footnote 11: His body is mortal; his breaths immortal, Çat. Br. X. 1. 4. 1; xi. 1. 2. 12. ]

 [Footnote 12: On these curious pocket-altars, double triangles representing the three gods and their wives, with Linga and Yon[=i], see JRAS. 1851, p. 71. ]

 [Footnote 13: In the Tantras and late Pur[=a]nas. In the earlier Pur[=a]nas there is as yet no such formal cult. ]

 [Footnote 14: Embodied in the tale of Agni's advance, IS. I. 170. ]

 [Footnote 15: Çat Br. Ix. 3. 1. 18. ]

 [Footnote 16: On this _quasi_ deity in modern belief compare IA. XVIII. 46. It has happened here that a fate Providence has become supreme. Thus, too, the Mogul Buddha is realty nothing more or less than Providence. ]

 [Footnote 17: 7. I. 2. ]

 [Footnote 18: In RV. X. 90. 9, _chandas_, songs, incantations, imply a work of this nature. ]

 [Footnote 19: Unless it be distinctly _good_ magic the epic heroes are ashamed to use magical rites. They insist on the intent being unimpeachable. ]

 [Footnote 20: [=A]p. I. II. 30, 20, etc. Compare Weber, _Omina_ p. 337, and see the Bibliography. ]

 [Footnote 21: T[=a]itt. S. VI. I. 1, 2, 3, _t[=i]rthesn[=a]li. _]

 [Footnote 22: Compare Weber's account of the R[=a]jas[=u]ya, p. 98; and, apropos of the Daçapeya, _ib. _ 78, note; where it is stated that _soma_-drinking for the warrior-caste is still reflected in this (originally independent) ceremony. ]

 [Footnote 23: The list given above (p. 464) of the 'thrice three names' is made eight by suppressing Kum[=a]ra, and the 'eight names' are to-day the usual number. ]

 [Footnote 24: Ç[=a]nkh. (K[=a]nsh. ) Br. Vi. 1. ]

 [Footnote 25: The Brahmanic multiple by preference is (three and) seven (7, 21, 28, 35), that of the Buddhist, eight. Feer, JA. , 1893, p. 113 ff. , holds the Svargaparva of the epic to be Buddhistic on account of the hells. More probably it is a Çivaite addition. The rule does not always hold good, for groups of seven and eight are sometimes Buddhistic and Brahmanic, respectively. ]

 [Footnote 26: Leumann, _Rosaries_. ]

 [Footnote 27: Friederich, ; JRAS. Viii. 157; ix. 59. The only established reference to Buddha on the part of Brahmanism, with the exception of late Pur[=a]nas of uncertain date, is after Kshemendra (1066 A. D. ). Compare Holtzmann, s. _Geschichte_, p. 103. ]

 [Footnote 28: _Na tat parasya sandadhy[=a]t pratik[=u]la[. M] yad [=a]tmanas_. This is a favorite stanza in the epic, and is imitated in later literature (Sprüche, 3253, 6578, 6593). ]

 [Footnote 29: Burnell in the _Indian Antiquary_, second and following volumes; Swanston, JRAS. 1834; 1835; Germann, _Die Kirche der Thomaschristen_. ]

 [Footnote 30: Above, cited from Hardy. ]

 [Footnote 31: Some of the multitudinous subcastes occasionally focus about a religious principle to such an extent as to give them almost the appearance of religious devotees. Thus the Bhats and Ch[=a]rans are heralds and bards with the mixed faith of so many low-caste Hindus. But in their office of herald they have a religious pride, and, since in the present day they are less heralds than expressmen, they carry property with religious reverence, and are respected in their office even by robbers; for it this caste that do not hesitate to commit _traga_, that is, if an agreement which they have caused to be made between two parties is not carried out they will kill themselves and their families, with such religious effect that the guilt lies upon the offending party in the agreement, who expiates it by his own life. They are regarded as a sort of divine representative, and fed themselves to be so. A case reported from India in this year, 1894, shows that the feeling still exists. The herald slew his own mother in the presence of the defaulting debtor, who thereupon slew himself as his only expiation. ]

 [Footnote 32: As, for example, between the D[=a]d[=u] Panth[=i]s and the Jains in Ajmir and Jeypur. The last was a chief Digambara town, while Mathur[=a] (on the Jumna) was a Çret[=a]mbara station. For a possible survival of Buddhism, see below, p. 485, note. ]

 [Footnote 33: The _Sarcadarça[n. ]asa[=n. ]graha_ of S[=a]yana (fourteenth century) and the _Ça[=n. ]kara-vijaya, _ or 'Conquest of Çankara. ']

 [Footnote 34: Thus the Dabist[=a]n enumerates as actual sects of the seventeenth century, 'moon-worshippers, ' 'star-worshippers, ' 'Agni-worshippers, ' 'wind-worshippers, ' 'water-worshippers, ' 'earth-worshippers, ' '_trip[=u]jas_' (or worshippers of all the three kingdoms of nature), and 'worshippers of man' (_manu[s. ]yabhakt[=a]s_), "who recognise the being of God in man, and know nothing more perfect than mankind" (ii. 12), a faith which, as we have shown, is professed in the Mah[=a]bh[=a]rata. ]

 [Footnote 35: _Religious Thought and Life_. ]

 [Footnote 36: The Kashmeer Çivaites claim Çankara as their teacher. The sect of Basava started in the south, Mysore. They have some trashy literature (legends, etc. ) which they dignify by the name of Pur[=a]nas. Bühler has given an account of the Kashmeer school. For further details see Barth, pp. 184, 206. ]

 [Footnote 37: _Brahmanism and Hinduism_, p. 62 ff. To this and to the same author's _Thought and Life_, we are indebted for many facts concerning the sects as they appear to-day, though much in these books is said after Wilson or other scholars, whose work is now common property, and calls for no further acknowledgment. ]

 [Footnote 38: It is, perhaps, necessary to keep repeating that Hindu monotheism does not exclude other gods which, at the hands of the one god, are reduced to sprites, angels, demons, etc. But it ought not to be necessary to insist on this, for an American monotheist that believes in angels and devils is the same sort of monotheist. The Hindu calls the angels 'gods' or 'divinities, ' but they are only attendant hosts of the One. ]

 [Footnote 39: Some of the Çivaite sects are, indeed, Buddhistic in origin, a fact which raises the question whether Buddhism, instead of disappearing from India, was not simply absorbed; much as Unitarianism in New England has spent its vitality in modifying the orthodox creed. Thus the _karma_ of Buddhism may still be working in the person of some modern Hindu sects. See the next note below. ]

 [Footnote 40: Most of the Yogi jugglers are Çivaites (when they are not Buddhistic), and to-day they share with the (Mohammedan) fakirs the honor of being not only ascetics but knaves. The juggler Yogi is, however, a figure of respectable antiquity. The magical tricks practiced on the epic heroes are doubtless a reflex of the current mesmerism, which deceives so cleverly to-day. We have shown above a Buddhistic strain of Mah[=a]tmaism in an early Buddhistic tract, and Barth, p. 213, suggests a Buddhistic origin for the K[=a]naph[=a]ts. See also Holtzmann, _loc. Cit. _ The deistic Yogis of Gorakhn[=a]th's sect are respectable enough (see an account of some of this sort in the Dabist[=a]n, II. 6), but they are of Buddhistic origin. The K[=a]naph[=a]ts of Kutch (Danodhar) were once a celibate brotherhood. JRAS. 1839, p. 268. ]

 [Footnote 41: See JAOS. Xi. 272. To ascribe this verse to the 'older Manu' would be a grave slip on the part of a Sanskrit scholar. ]

 [Footnote 42: i. 1. 76. ]

 [Footnote 43: The Dabist[=a]n, without any animus, reports of the Ç[=a]ktas of the seventeenth century that "Çiva is, in their opinion, _with little exception_, the highest of the deities" (II. 7). Williams calls Ç[=a]ktaism "a mere offshoot of Çivaism" _Religious Thought and Life_, p. 184. ]

 [Footnote 44: The Dabist[=a]n rather assumes as a matter of course that a body of Yogis would kill and eat a boy of the Mohammedan faith (II. 12); but here the author may be prejudiced. ]

 [Footnote 45: The present sect of this name consists only of a few miserable mendicants, particularly savage and filthy (Wilson). ]

 [Footnote 46: All of them now represent Çakti, the female principle. Linga-worship has also its counterpart, Bhaga-worship (here Yoni), perhaps represented by the altar itself. Compare the Dabist[=a]n, II. 7, on the Çivaite interpretation of the Mohammedan altar. To Durga human beings were always sacrificed. After mentioning a gold idol of Durg[=a] (to whom men were sacrificed yearly), the author adds: "Even now they sacrifice in every village of the Kohistan of Nandapur and the country adjacent, a man of good family" (_ib. _). Durg[=a] {above, p. 416) is Vishnu's sister. ]

 [Footnote 47: The sexual antithesis, so unimportant in the earliest Aryan nature-hymns, becomes more and more pronounced in the liturgical hymns of the Rig Veda, and may be especially a trait of the older fire-cult in opposition to _soma_-cult (compare RV. X. 18. 7). At any rate it is significant that Yoni means the altar itself, and that in the fire-cult the production of fire is represented as resulting from the union of the male and female organs. ]

 [Footnote 48: Nevertheless the Brahmanic, and even the Hinduistic, law-codes condemn all intoxicating liquors except in religious service. To offer such drink to a man of the lower castes, even to a Ç[=u]dra, is punishable with a fine; but to offer intoxicating liquor to a priest is punishable with death (Vishnu, V. 100). ]

 [Footnote 49: Formerly performed by the Kar[=a]ris. "The Ç[=a]ktas hold the killing of a man to be permitted, " Dabist[=a]n, II. 7. "Among them it is a meritorious act to sacrifice a man, " _ib_. ]

 [Footnote 50: Hence the name of K[=a][=n]culiyas _[ka[=n]culi_, a woman's garment). ]

 [Footnote 51: This has no parallel in Vishnuism except among some of the R[=a]dh[=a] devotees. Among the R[=a]dh[=a] Vallabh[=i]s the vulgarities of the Çivaites are quite equalled; and the assumption of women's attire by the Sakh[=i] Bh[=a]vas of Benares and Bengal ushers in rites as coarse if less bloody than those of the Çivaites. ]

 [Footnote 52: Of course each god of the male trinity has his Çakti, female principle. Thus Brahm[=a]'s Çakt[=i] is S[=a]vitr[=i] (in the epic), or Sarasvat[=i], or V[=a]c; that of Vishnu is Çr[=i], or Lakshm[=i], or R[=a]dh[=a]; that of Çiva is Um[=a], Durg[=a], K[=a]l[=i], etc. Together they make a female trinity (Barth, p. 199); So even the Vedic gods had their (later) wives, who, as in the case of S[=u]ry[=a], were probably only the female side of a god conceived of as androgynous, like Praj[=a]pat[=i] in the Brahmanic period. ]

 [Footnote 53: Historically, Thags, like Panj[=a]b, Santh[=a]ls, etc, is the more correct form, but phonetically the forms Thugs, Punj[=a]b, Sunth[=a]ls or Sonth[=a]ls, are correct, and [=a], the indeterminate vowel (like o in London), is generally transcribed by u or o (in Punj[=a]b, Nep[=a]l, the [=a] is pronounced very like au, and is sometimes written so, Punjaub, etc). ]

 [Footnote 54: The Jemidar, captain, gives the order to the Buttoat, strangler, who takes the _rumal_ (yard of cotton) with a knot tied in the left end, and, holding his right hand a few inches further up, passes it from behind over the victim's head. As the latter falls the strangler's hands are crossed, and if done properly the Thugs say that "the eyes stand out of the head and life becomes extinct, before the body falls to the ground" (Notes on the 'Thags, Thugs, or Thegs, ' by Lieutenant Reynolds; of whom Lieutenant-Colonel Smythe says that he knew more than any other European about the Thugs, 1836). The Buttoat received eight annas extra for his share. Each actor in the scene had a title; the victim was called Rosy. For their argot see the R[=a]maseeana. ]

 [Footnote 55: Thugs (defined as 'knaves' by Sherwood, more probably 'throttlers') must be distinguished from Decoits. The latter (Elphinstone, i. 384) are irreligious gangs, secretly bound together to sack villages. Peaceable citizens by day, the Decoits rise at night, attack a village, slay, torture, rob, and disappear before morning, 'melting into the population' and resuming honest toil. When the police are weak enough they may remain banded together; otherwise they are ephemerally honest and nocturnally assassins. The Thugs or Ph[=a]ns[=i]gars (_ph[=a]ns[=i]_, noose) killed no women, invoked K[=a]li (as Jay[=i]), and attacked individuals only, whom the decoys, called Tillais, lured very cleverly to destruction. They never robbed without strangling first, and always buried the victim. They used to send a good deal of what they got to K[=a]li's temple, in a village near Mirz[=a]pur, where the establishment of priests was entirely supported by them. K[=a]li (or Bhav[=a]n[=i]) herself directed that victims should be strangled, not bled (so the Thug legend). Their symbol was a pick, emblem of the goddess, unto whom a religious ceremony was performed before and after the murder was committed. Local small bankers often acted as fence for them. ]

 [Footnote 56: This is called either P[=u]rva-m[=i]m[=a]ms[=a] (Karma-m[=i]m[=a]ms[=a]) or simply M[=i]m[=a]ms[=a]. ]

 [Footnote 57: Or Ç[=a]r[=i]raka-m[=i]m[=a]msa, or Brahma-m[=i]m[=a]ms[=a] (_m[=i]m[=a][=m. ]sa, _ reflexion, philosophy). ]

 [Footnote 58: Kapila's system, usually known as the S[=a]nkhya. ]

 [Footnote 59: And attributed to Pata[=n. ]jali. Compare Deussen, _System des Ved[=a]nta, _ p. 20. ]

 [Footnote 60: Born In 788. But some scholars refer him to the seventh century. See IA. Xiii. 95; xvi. 41. His name, a title of Çiva, indicates his nominal sect. ]

 [Footnote 61: For the meaning of Ved[=a]nta (whether 'end of Veda, ' or 'goal of Veda') compare Deussen, _loc. Cit. _ p. 3, note (above, p. 253, note). ]

 [Footnote 62: The Supreme Spirit or All-Spirit is either purely non-dualistic or qualifiedly non-dualistic; in the latter event he is, says the sectary, identical with Vishnu, who may be represented either by Krishna or R[=a]ma (sub-sects). Pure non-duality (unconditioned _[=a]tm[=a]_) was taught by Çankara. ]

 [Footnote 63: Gough, _Philosophy of the Upanishads_. . Compare Williams, _loc. Cit_. In our own view the unsystematic Upanishads teach both doctrines (above, p. 228, note). ]

 [Footnote 64: Before K[=a]m[=a]nuja it was taught by Ç[=a]ndilya that _brahma_ (and the individual spirit) was conditioned, a doctrine supposed to be that of the old Bh[=a]gavatas or P[=a][. N]car[=a]tras; but this is quite uncertain. The Ç[=a]ndilyan chapter of the Ch[=a]ndogya Upanishad (above, p. 221) may be thus interpreted, _vis_, that the (conditioned) individual spirit is identical with _brahma_. ]

 [Footnote 65: Thibaut, _Introduction to the Ved[=a]nta S[=u]tras_, SBE. XXXIV. P. XXXI; Deussen, _System des Ved[=a]nta_, p. 469. ]

 [Footnote 66: Philosophical illusion, _m[=a]n[=a]_, appears first in late Upanishads. ]

 [Footnote 67: The author of the Dabist[=a]n (seventeenth century) tells a Berkeleyan story in regard to Çankara's doctrine of illusion. His enemies wished to test his belief in his own philosophy; so they drove an elephant at him, on which the philosopher ran away. "Ho!" they jeered, "Did you not maintain that all was a mere illusion? Then an elephant is illusion. Yet you take to flight before it. " "Yes, " replied the philosopher, "all is illusion; there was no elephant, and there was no flight" (II. 4). ]

 [Footnote 68: The Sm[=a]rta (orthodox) Brahman believes, on the other hand, that Vishnu, Çiva, and Brahm[=a] are all mere forms of the Supreme [=A]lm[=a]. ]

 [Footnote 69: If Mohammed were regarded as one with Allah there would be an Occidental parallel to the Krishna and R[=a]ma sects. ]

 [Footnote 70: Whether the Hindu trinitarianism derives from the Occident or not (the former view being historically probable, but not possible to prove) the importance of the dogma and its place in Hindu theology is very different to the condition of things in the Christian church. In India trinitarianism is merely a convenience in adjusting the claims of two heterodox sects and orthodoxy, each believer being willing to admit that the god of the other is his own god, only with the understanding that the last is a superior manifestation. In late Çivaism both Vishnu and Brahm[=a] are indeed called the 'sons of God' (Çiva). But in the sense that they are distinctly subordinate creatures of Çiva (JAOS. Iv. 147). ]

 [Footnote 71: But some Hindus worship both Vishnu and Çiva without insisting that one is higher than the other. Moreover, there is a Mahratta sect of Vishnuites who complacently worship Buddha (Vishnu's ninth _avatar_) as Vi[t. ]h[t. ]hala or P[=a]ndura[. N]ga. These are simply eclectic, and their god is without or with quality. Buddha is here not a deceiver, but an instructor (JRAS. 1842, p. 66; IA. XI. 56, 149). ]

 [Footnote 72: The Çivaites, too, are divided on the questions both of predestination and of free grace. The greater body of them hold to the 'monkey doctrine'; the Paçupatas, to the 'cat. ']

 [Footnote 73: Sanskrit _kal[=a]_, school (_marka[t. ]a-ny[=a]ya_ and _m rj[=a]ra-ny[=a]ya_). The Southern school has its own Veda written in Tamil. Williams, JRAS. Xiv. 301. According to the same writer the Ten-galais hold that Vishnu's wife is finite, created, and a mediator; the Vada-galais, that she is infinite, and uncreated. ]

 [Footnote 74: All Vishnuites have the vertical sign; Çivaites have a horizontal sign (on the forehead). ]

 [Footnote 75: _Proceed. AOS_. 1894, p. Iii. The Vada-school may be affected by Çivaism. ]

 [Footnote 76: A divine monkey appears in the Rig Veda, but not as an object of devotion. ]

 [Footnote 77: The teachers of the Ramaites are generally Brahmans, but no disciples are excluded because of their caste. R[=a]m[=a]nuja adopted the monastic system, which Çankara is said to have taken from the Buddhists and to have introduced into Brahmanic priestly life. Both family priests and cenobites are admitted into his order. ]

 [Footnote 78: What the Linga is to Çivaite the Ç[=a]lagr[=a]ma is to the Vishnuite (who also reveres the _tulas[=i]_ wood). The Ç[=a]lagr[=a]ma is a black pebble; the L[=i]nga is a white pebble or glass (Williams). The Çivaites have appropriated the _d[=u]rv[=a]_ grass as sacred to Ganeça. Sesamum seeds and _d[=u]rv[=a]_ are, however, Brahmanically holy. Compare Çat. Br. Iv. 5-10, where _d[=u]rv[=a]_ grass is even holier than _kuça_-grass. The rosaries used by the sects have been the subject of a paper by Leumann, and are described by Williams. Thirty-two or sixty-four berries of _eleocapus ganitrus (rudr[=a]ksha_) make the Çivaite rosary. That of the Vishnuite is made of lotus-seeds or of _tuls[=a]_ wood in one hundred and eight pieces. ]

 [Footnote 79: For an account and list of the works of Tulas[=i]d[=a]s[=a] (Tuls[=i]d[=a]s), compare IA. Xxii. 89, 122, 227. Jayadeva (twelfth century), the author of the G[=i]ta Govinda (translated by Jones, Lassen, and Ruckert), is sometimes reckoned falsely to the adherents of R[=a]m[=a]nand, but he is really a Krishnaite. ]

 [Footnote 80: The _bhakti_ doctrine is that of the extant Ç[=a]ndilya S[=u]tras, which make faith and not works or knowledge a condition of salvation. They are modern, as Cowell, in his preface to the work, has shown. Cowell here identifies K[=a]çyapa with Ka[n. ][=a]da, the V[=a]içeshika philosopher, his school holding that the individual spirits are infinite in number, distinct from the Supreme Spirit. ]

 [Footnote 81: The infant-cult is of course older than these sects. For an account of the ritual, as well as its intrusion into the earlier cult of the Pur[=a]nas, with the accompanying resemblances to Madonna-cult, and the new features (the massacre of the innocents, the birth in the stable, the three wise men, etc. ) that show borrowing from Christianity, compare Weber's exhaustive treatise referred to above, the _K[=r. ][=s. ][n. ]ajanm[=a][=s. ][=t. ]am[=i], Krishna's Geburtsfest_. ]

 [Footnote 82: Williams, _loc. Cit. _]

 [Footnote 83: 'Gosain' means shepherd, like Gop[=a]la. Some of the sects, like the Kart[=a]bh[=a]js, recognize only the Teacher as God. Williams states that in Bengal a fourth member has been added to this sect-trinity. On Dancing-girls see IA. XIII-165. ]

 [Footnote 84: The philosophical tenet of this sect 'pure _adv[=a]ita_' (non-duality) distinguishes it from the qualified duality taught by R[=a]m[=a]nuja. This is a reversion to Çankara. The C[=a]itanya sect teaches not absorption but individual existence in a heaven of sensuous (sensual) pleasure. ]

 [Footnote 85: "In the temples where the Mah[=a]r[=a]jas (priests) do homage to the idols men and women do homage to the Mah[=a]r[=a]jas. . . . The best mode of propitiating the god Krishna is by ministering to the sensual appetites of his vicars upon earth. Body and soul are literally made over to them, and women are taught to deliver up their persons to Krishna's representatives, " Williams, _loc. Cit_. P. 309. ]

 [Footnote 86: On these sects see Wilson, Hunter (Statistical Account), Williams, JRAS. Xiv. 289. The festival verses in honor of the Madonna are: "Honor to thee, Devak[=i], who hast borne Krishna; may the goddess who destroys sin be satisfied, revered by me. Mother of God art thou, Adit[=i], destroying sin. I will honor thee as the gods honor thee, " _etc_. (Weber, _Janm[=a][s. ][t. ]am[=i]_, p. 286). The birth-day celebration is not confined to Krishnaites; but in the R[=a]ma sect, though they celebrate the birth, they do not represent the man-god as a suckling. In other respects this feast is imitated from that of Krishna (Weber, p. 310, note). The R[=a]macandra celebration takes place in the spring. The birth-day of Ganeça is also celebrated by the Çivaites (in August-September). ]

 [Footnote 87: He himself claimed to be an incarnate god. He adopted the qualified non-duality of R[=a]m[=a]nuja. See Williams' account of him and of the two great temples of the sect, _loc. Cit_. ]

 [Footnote 88: From Williams, _loc. Cit_. P. 291 ff. The three qualities (sometimes interpreted as activity, purity, and indifference) are met with for the first time in the Atharva Veda, where are found the Vedantic 'name' and 'form' also; Muir, v. P. 309. The three qualities that condition the idealist Vedantist's personal Lord in his causal body are identical with those that constitute the 'nature, ' _prak[=r. ]ti_, of the S[=a]nkhya dualist. ]

 [Footnote 89: Among the Vallabhas (above, p. 505). The Teacher is the chief god of most of the Vallabhas (Barth, p. 235}. For the Vi[t. ]h[t. ]hal view of caste see 1A. XI. 152. ]

 [Footnote 90: It is true of other sectaries also, Ramaites and Çivaites, that the mere repetition of their god's name is a means of salvation. ]

 [Footnote 91: Now chiefly in the South. The Dabist[=a]n gives several divisions of sun-worshippers. For more details see Barth, p. 258. Apollonius of Tyana saw a sun-temple at Taxila, JRAS. 1859, p. 77. ]

 [Footnote 92: More direct than in the form of Vishnu, who at first is merely the sun. Of the relation with Iranian sun-worship we have spoken above. ]

 [Footnote 93: They brand themselves with the Vishnu-mark, are generally high-caste, live in monasteries, and profess celibacy. They are at most unknown in the North. They are generally known by their founder's name, but are also called Brahma-Samprad[=a]yins, 'Brahma-adherents. ']

 [Footnote 94: So the P[=a]çupata doctrine is that the individual spirit is different to the supreme lord and also to matter (_p[=a]ça_, the fetter that binds the individual spirit, _paçu_, and keeps it from its Lord, _paçupat[=i]_). The fact is that every sectary is more a monotheist than a pantheist. Especially is this true of the Çivaite. The supreme is to him Çiva. ]

 [Footnote 95: Wilson gives a full account of this sect in the _As[=i]atick Researches_, xvi, p. 100. ]

 [Footnote 96: Of the Kab[=i]r Panth[=i]s Wilson says: "It is no part of their faith to worship any Hindu deity. " A glance at the Dabist[=a]n will preclude the possibility of claiming much originality for the modern deism of India. This work was written in 1645, and its Persian author describes, as a matter of every-day occurrence, religious debates between 'Jews, Nazarines, Mussulmen, and Hindus, ' who meet more to criticise than to examine, but yet to hear explained in full the doctrines of their opponents, in just such tourneys of argument as we showed to be popular among the priests of the Upanishads and epic. Speaking of the Vedas, the author says that every one derives from them arguments in favor of his own creed, whether it be philosophical, mystical, unitarian, atheistic, Judaic, or Christian. Dabist[=a]n, vol. II, p. 45. ]

 [Footnote 97: Before election the Guru must be examined. If the faithful are not satisfied, they may reject him. But, having elected him, they are bound to obey him implicitly. He can excommunicate, but he may not punish corporally. This deification of the Guru was retained by the Sikhs, and the office was made hereditary among them (by Arjun), till Govind, the tenth pontiff, who left no successor, declared that after his death the Granth (bible) should be the sole authority of the church. ]

 [Footnote 98: The 'half' contributor was a woman, and hence was not reckoned as a complete unit. ]

 [Footnote 99: The word Sikh means 'disciple' (of N[=a]nak). The name the Sikhs assumed as a nation was Singhs (_si[. M]has_), 'Lions of the Punj[=a]b. ']

 [Footnote 100: The 'true name, ' _sat n[=a]m_, is the appellation of God. ]

 [Footnote 101: JRAS. 1846, p. 43, Prinsep's compilation (Wilson). Compare Trumpp, ib. V. 197 (1871); and [=A]digranth, 1877. ]

 [Footnote 102: This sect was founded by a descendant of N[=a]nak. ]

 [Footnote 103: It was not till Mohammedan persecution influenced them that the religious Sikhs of N[=a]nak became the political haters and fighters of Govind. ]

 [Footnote 104: It is said that Govind sacrificed to Durg[=a] the life of one of his own disciples to prepare himself for his ministry. Trumpp, [=A]digranth; Barth, p. 204. The lives of the later Gurus will be found in Elphinstone's history and Prinsep's sketch (a _résumé_ by Barth, p. 248 ff. ). ]

 [Footnote 105: With some small verbal alterations. ]

 [Footnote 106: The conclusion of this extract shows the narrower polemic spirit: "Pundits and Q[=a]z[=i]s are fools. What avails it to collect a heap of books? Let your minds freely meditate on the spirit of God. Wear not away your lives by studying the Vedas. "]

 [Footnote 107: For the data of the following paragraphs on the deistic reformers of to-day we are indebted to an article of Professor Williams, which first appeared in the thirteenth volume of the _Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, _ and has since been published in the same author's _Brahmanism and Hinduism. _]

 [Footnote 108: Born in 1818. ]

 [Footnote 109: _ekam[=a]tr[=a]dvit[=i]ya_ (masculine); with this form contrast below, in the Br[=a]hma Dharma (religion) of Debendran[=a]th, the neuter _ekam ev[=a]dvit[=i]yam_. The only God of the first Sam[=a]j; is a person; that of the reform is exoterically Nature. ]

 [Footnote 110: But, as will be noticed in the four articles (which are in part a compilation of phrases from the Upanishads) the personality of Brahm[=a] is not insisted on for the outer church. For this reason, although the inner church doubtless understands It as He, yet this neuter should be preserved in the translation. The articles are so drawn up as to enable any deist to subscribe (without Vedantic belief as a condition of acceptance) to the essential creed of the Congregation. One or two sentences in the original will reveal at a glance the origin of the phraseology: _brahma_ (being) _v[=a] ekam idam-agra [=a]s[=i]t; tad ida[. M] sarvam as[r. ]jal; tad eva nityam, ekam ev[=a]dvit[=i]yam; tasmia pr[=i]tis . . . Tadup[=a]sanam_. Compare Ch[=a]ndogya Upanishad: _sad_ (being) _idam agra [=a]s[=i]d ekam ev[=a]dvit[=i]yam_; and the V[=a]jasaney[=i]-Br[=a]hmana Upanishad: _brahma v[=a] idam-agra [=a]s[=i]t_, etc. ]

 [Footnote 111: It is interesting to see this fervor, or ecstatic delirium, surviving from the time of the Rig Veda, where already (albeit only in the latest hymns, which are quite Brahmanic) flourishes the mad _muni:_ and fervid ascetism ('heat, '_tapas_) begins to appear as a means of salvation. RV. X. 109, 136. ]

 [Footnote 112: "I regard myself as Christ and C[=a]itanya, " reported by Sen's own missionary as the words of the former. Sen's disciples deny some of these assertions, but they seem to be substantiated, and Sen's own language shows that he claimed miraculous powers. Compare the discussions on this point, JRAS. Xiii. 281 ff. ]

 [Footnote 113: This was afterwards excused on the ground that the marriage would not have been legal without these rites. But Sen presumably was aware of this in advance. From the performance of the rites he had the decency to absent himself. It should be said, however, in Sen's behalf, that the marriage itself had nothing revolting about it, and though in consenting to it Sen violated his faith, as is evident from the protest of the Sam[=a]j, yet was the marriage not an extreme case of child-marriage, for both the 'children' were sixteen. Sen's own excuse (he thought excuse necessary) was that he was inspired when he consented to the nuptials. ]

 [Footnote 114: The theistic tendency in the Hindu mind is so exaggerated that even now it is with the greatest difficulty that the vulgar can be restrained from new idolatry. Not only priests, but even poets are regarded as gods. Jñ[=a]ndev and Tuk[=a]r[=a]m, the hymn-makers of the Mahratta Vi[t. ]h[t. ]hals, are demi-gods to-day (IA. Xi. 56. 149). A few striking examples are almost requisite to make an Occidental reader understand against what odds the deism of India has to contend. In 1830 an impudent boy, who could train snakes, announced that he could also work miracles. The boy was soon accepted as Vishnu's last _avatar_; hymns, _abhangs_, were sung to him, and he was worshipped as a god even after his early demise (from a snake-bite). A weaver came soon after to the temple, where stood the boy's now vacant shrine, and fell asleep there at night. In the morning he was perplexed to find himself a god. The people had accepted him as their snake-conquering god in a new form. The poor weaver denied his divinity, but that made no difference. In 1834 the dead boy-god was still receiving flowers and prayers. Another case: In the eighties some Englishmen on entering a temple were amazed to see revered as an _avatar_ of Vishnu the brass castings of the arms of the old India Co. This god was washed and anointed daily. Even a statue of Buddha (with the inscription still upon it) was revered as Vishnu. In 1880 a meteorite fell in Beh[=a]r. In 1882 its cult was fully established, and it was worshipped as the 'miraculous god. ' A Mohammedan inscription has also been found deified and regularly worshipped as a god, JRAS. 1842, p. 109; 1884, pt. III, pp. I, LIX. ]

 * * * * *

CHAPTER XVIII. 

RELIGIOUS TRAITS OF THE WILD TRIBES. 

Besides the phases of pure Aryan and modified Aryan religions whichhave already been examined, there are represented in India severalother aspects of civilized religion; for, apart from Brahmanic andsectarian worships, and apart from Tamil (southern) imitations ofthese, there are at present in the country believers of the Jewishreligion to the number of seventeen thousand; of Zoroastrianism, eighty-seven thousand; of Christianity, two and a quarter millions; ofMohammedanism, more than fifty-seven millions. But none of thesefaiths, however popular, comes into an historical account of India'sreligions in a greater extent than we have brought them into italready, that is, as factors of minor influence in the development ofnative faiths till, within the last few centuries, Mohammedanism, which has been the most important of them all in transfiguring thenative theistic sects, draws a broad line across the progress ofIndia's religious thought. 

All these religions, however, whether aboriginal or imported, mustagain be separated from the more general phenomena of superstitionwhich are preserved in the beliefs of the native wild tribes. Onedescends here to that lowest of rank undergrowth which represents atype of religious life so base that its undifferentiated form can bemated with like growths from all over the world. These secondaryreligions are, therefore, important from two points of view, that oftheir universal aspect, and, again, that of their historicalconnection with the upper Indic growth above them;[1] for it is almostcertain that someof their features have conditioned the development of the latter. 

The native wild tribes of India (excluding the extreme NorthernTibeto-Burman group) fall into two great classes, that of theKolarians and that of the Dravidians, sometimes distinguished as theYellow and the Black races respectively. The former, again, are calledIndo-Chinese by some writers, and the geographical location of thisclass seems, indeed, to show that they have generally displaced theearlier blacks, and represent historically a yellow wave ofimmigration from the Northeast (through Tibet) prior to the Aryanwhite wave (from the Northwest), which latter eventually treated themjust as they had treated the aboriginal black Dravidians. [2] Of theKolarians the foremost representatives are the Koles, the Koches, theSunth[=a]ls, and the Sav[=a]ras (Sauras), who are all regarded byJohnston as the yellow Dasyus, barbarians, of the earliest period;while he sees in the V[=a]içyas, or third caste of the Hindu politicaldivisions, the result of a union of the Northwest and Northeastconquerors. But, although the V[=a]içyas are called 'yellow, ' yet, since they make the most important numerical factor of the Aryans, this suggestion can scarcely be accepted, for there is no evidence toshow that the yellow Mongoloid barbarians were amalgamated so earlywith the body politic of the Aryans. The chief representatives of theDravidians, on the other hand, are the Khonds and Gonds of the middle ofthe peninsula, together with the Or[=a]ons and the Todas of theextreme South. [3] All of these tribes are of course sub-divided, andin some degree their religious practices have followed the bent oftheir political inclinations. We shall examine first the religions ofthe older tribes, the Dravidians, selecting the chief features or suchtraits as have peculiar interest. 

THE DRAVIDIANS. 

Gonds: These savages, mentioned in early literature, are the mostnumerous and powerful of the wild tribes, and appear to have been lessaffected by outside belief than were any other, except the relatedKhonds. Their religion used to consist in adoring a representation ofthe sun, to which were offered human sacrifices. [4] As among theOr[=a]ons, a man of straw (literally) is at the present daysubstituted for the human victim. Besides the sun, the moon and starsare worshipped by them. They have stones for idols, but no temples. [5]Devils, witchcraft, and the evil eye also are feared. They sacrificeanimals, and, with the exception of the R[=a]j Gonds, [6] have been so littleaffected by Hindu respect for that holiest of animals, that theyslaughter cows at their wedding-feasts, on which occasion thebacchanalian revels in which they indulge are accompanied with suchexcess as quite to put them upon the level of Çivaite bestiality. Thepure Gonds are junglemen, and have the virtues usually found among thelowest savages, truth, honesty, and courage. Murder is no crime, butlying and stealing are sinful; for cowardice is the greatest crime, and lying and stealing (instead of straightforward and courageousrobbery and murder) are regarded as indications of lack of courage. But the 'impure, ' that is the mixed Gonds that have been corrupted bymingling with Hindus and other tribes, lie and steal like civilizedpeople. In fact, the mixed Gonds are particularly noted for servilityand dishonesty. The uncivilized Gonds of the table-lands are saidstill to cut up and eat their aged relatives and friends, not to speakof strangers unfortunate enough to fall into their hands. Among thepure Gonds is found the practice of carrying an axe, which is the signof their religious devotion to the sacrifice-god. [7] The favoritereligious practice used to be to take a prisoner alive, force him tobow before the god-stone, and at the moment when he bent his head, tocut it off. To this and to self-defence against other gods (wildbeasts) the hatchet is devoted, while for war are used the bow andknife. One particular celebration of the Gonds deserves specialnotice. They have an annual feast and worship of the snake. Theservice is entirely secret, and all that is knownof it is that it is of esoteric, perhaps phallic character. Both atthe sun-feast and snake-feast[8] licentious and bacchanalian worshipare combined, and the latter trait is also the chief feature ofwedding and funeral sports. In the former case (the natives of thesame tribe intermarry, but with the same pretence of running off withthe bride that is found in the Hindu ritual)[9] there is given awedding feast by the bridegroom's father, and the feast ends with a_causerie de lundi_ (the favorite drink of the Gonds is called_lundi_); while on the latter occasion there is a mourning feast, orwake, which also ends in general drunkenness. 

The Khonds: Even more striking is the religion of the Khonds. Theirchief rite is human sacrifice to the earth-goddess, [10] Tari; but, like the Gonds, they worship the sun as chief divinity. Other godsamong them are the river-god, rain-god, spring, wealth, hill-god, andsmallpox-god. All their religious feasts are excuses for excess bothin drinking and otherwise. One of their beliefs is that there is ariver of hell, which flows around a slippery rock, up which climbs theone that would escape torment. Their method of sacrificing a humanvictim is to put him into the cleft of a tree, where he is squashed, or into fire. They seem to have an odd objection to shedding blood forthis purpose, and in this respect may be compared with the Thugs. Another very interesting trait is the religion which is intertwinedwith business, and its peculiar features. Victims offered either tothe sun or to the war-god serve to mark boundary lines. Great is thepatience with whichthese victims, called _merias_, are waited for. The sacrificercaptures fit specimens when they are young, and treats them withparticular kindness till they are almost grown up. Indeed, they aretreated thus by the whole village. At the appointed time they areslowly crushed to death or smothered in a mud bath, and bits of theirflesh are then cut out and strewn along the boundary lines. Boys arepreferred, but either boys or girls may be used. This sacrifice issometimes made directly to the 'Boundary-god, '[11] an abstractionwhich is not unique; for, besides the divinities recorded above, mention is made also of a 'Judgment-god. ' Over each village and housepreside the Manes of good men gone; while the 'father is god on earth'to every one. They used to destroy all their female children, andthis, together with their national custom of offering humansacrifices, has been put down with the greatest difficulty by theBritish, who confess that there is every probability that in realitythe crime still *obtains among the remoter clans. These Khonds aresituate in the Madras presidency, and are aborigines of the EasternGh[=a]ts. The most extraordinary views about them have been published. Despite their acknowledged barbarity, savageness, and polytheism, theyhave been soberly credited with a belief in One Supreme God, 'a theismembracing polytheism, ' and other notions which have been abstractedfrom their worship of the sun as 'great god. '

Since these are by far the most original savages of India, a completersketch than will be necessary in the case of others may not beunwelcome. The chief god is the light-or sun-god. "In the beginningthe god of light created a wife, the goddess of earth, the source ofevil. " On the other hand, thesun-god is a good god. Tari, the earth-divinity, tried to preventBella[12] Pennu (sun-god) from creating man. But he cast behind him ahandful of earth, which became man. The first creation was free ofevil; earth gave fruit without labor (the Golden Age); but the darkgoddess sowed in man the seed of sin. A few were sinless still, andthese became gods, but the corrupt no longer found favor in Bella (orBoora) Pennu's eyes. He guarded them no more. So death came to man. Meanwhile Bella and Tari contended for superiority, with comets, whirlwinds, and mountains, as weapons. According to one belief, Bellawon; but others hold that Tari still maintains the struggle. Thesun-god created all inferior deities, of rain, fruit, *hunt, boundaries, etc. , as well as all tutelary local divinities. [13] Menhave four kinds of fates. The soul goes to the sun, or remains in thetribe (each child is declared by the priest to be N. N. Deceased andreturned), or is re-born and suffers punishments, or isannihilated. [14] The god of judgment lives on Grippa Valli, the'leaping rock, ' round which flows a black river, and up the rock climbthe souls with great effort. The Judgment-goddecides the fate of the soul); sending it to the sun (thesun-soul), or annihilating it, etc. The chief sins are, to beinhospitable, to break an oath, to lie except to save a guest, tobreak an old custom, to commit incest, to contract debts (for whichthe tribe has to pay), to be a coward, to betray council. The chiefvirtues are, to kill in battle, to die in battle, to be a priest, tobe the victim of a sacrifice. Some of the Khonds worship the sun-god;some the earth-goddess, and ascribe to her all success and power, while they hold particularly to human sacrifice in her honor. Theyadmit (theoretically) that Bella is superior, but they make Tari thechief object of devotion, and in her honor are held great villagefestivals. They that do not worship Tari do not practice humansacrifice. Thus the Çivaite sacrifice of man to the god's consort isvery well paralleled by the usage that obtains among them. The Khondpriests may indulge in any occupation except war; but some exerciseonly their priestcraft and do nothing else. The chief feast to thesun-god is Salo Kallo (the former word means 'cow-pen'; the latter, aliquor), somewhat like a _soma_-feast. It is celebrated at harvesttime with dancing, and drinking, "and every kind of licentiousenjoyment. " Other festivals of less importance celebrate thesubstitution of a buffalo for human sacrifice (not celebrated, ofcourse, by the Tari worshippers). The invocation at the harvest isquite Brahmanic: "O gods, remember that our increase of rice is yourincrease of worship; if we get little Rice we worship little. " Amonglesser gods the 'Fountain-god' is especially worshipped, with a sheepor a hog as sacrifice. Female infanticide springs from a feeling thatintermarriage in the same tribe is incest (this is the meaning of theincest-law above; it might be rendered 'to marry in the tribe'). 

Of the Or[=a]ons, or Dhangars, [15] we shall mention but one ortwo good parallels to what is found in other religions. TheseDravidians live in Bengal, and have two annual festivals, a harvestfeast and one celebrating the marriage of heaven and earth. Like theKhonds, they recognize a supreme god in the sun, but, just as weshowed was the case with the Hindus, who ignore Brahm[=a] because theydo not fear him, so here, the Or[=a]ons do not pray to the sun, on theground that he does them no harm; but they sacrifice to evil spiritsbecause the latter are evil-doers. These savages, like the BurmeseMishmis, have no idea of a future life in heaven; but in the case ofpeople killed in a certain way they believe in a sort ofmetempsychosis; thus, for instance, a man eaten by a tiger becomes atiger. In the case of unfortunates they believe that they will live asunhappy ghosts; in the case of other men they assume only annihilationas their fate. [16] It is among this tribe that the mouse-totem isfound, which is Çiva's beast and the sign of Ganeça. [17]

THE KOLARIANS. 

The Sunth[=a]ls: These are immigrants into the West Bengal jungles, and have descended from the North to their present site. They arecalled the finest specimens of the native savage. The guardian of thetribe is its deceased ancestor, and his ghost is consulted as anoracle. Their race-god is the 'Great Mountain, ' but the sun representsthe highest spirit; though theyworship spirits of every sort, and regard beasts as divine; the menrevering the tiger, and the women, elephants. The particularly nastyfestival called the _bandana_, which is celebrated annually by thistribe, is exactly like the 'left-hand' cult of the Çaktas, only thatin this case it is a preliminary to marriage. All unmarried men andwomen indulge together in an indescribable orgie, at the end of whicheach man selects the woman he prefers. [18]

The Koles ('pig-stickers'): Like the last, this tribe worship the sun, but with the moon as his wife, and the stars as their children. Besides these they revere Manes, and countless local and sylvandeities. Like Druids, they sacrifice only in a grove, but withoutimages. [19]

All these tribes worship snakes and trees, [25]] and often the onlyoath binding upon them is taken under a tree. [21] Thesun-worship, which is found alike in Kolarian and Dravidian tribes, may be traced through all the ramifications of either. In most of thetribes the only form of worship is sacrifice, but oaths are taken onrice, beasts, ants, water, earth, etc. (among some P[=a]h[=a]riahs onthe arrow). Some have a sort of belief in the divinity of the chief, and among the Lurka Koles this dignity is of so much importance thatat a chief's death the divine dignity goes to his eldest son, whilethe youngest son gets the property. In regard to funeral rites, theKoles first burn and then bury the remains, placing a stone over thegrave. 

Besides the Or[=a]ons' totem of the mouse, the Sunth[=a]ls have agoose-totem, and the Garos and Kassos (perhaps not to be included ineither of the two groups), together with many other tribes, havetotems, some of them _avatars_, as in the case of the tortoise. TheGaros, a tribe between Assam and Bengal, are in many respectsnoteworthy. They believe that their vessels are immortal; and, likethe Bh[=a]rs, set up the bamboo pole, a religious rite which has creptinto Hinduism (above, p. 378). They eat everything but their totem, immolate human victims, and are divided into 'motherhoods, 'M[=a]h[=a]ris, particular M[=a]h[=a]ris intermarrying. A man's sistermarries into the family from which comes his wife, and that sister'sdaughter may marry his son, and, as male heirs do not inherit, theson-in-law succeeds his father-in-law in right of his wife, and getshis wife's mother (that is, his father's sister) as an additionalwife. [22] The advances are always made by the girl. She and her partyselect the groom, go to his house, and carry him off, though hemodestly pretends to run away. The sacrifice for thewedding is that of a cock and hen, offered to the sun. The god theyworship most is a monster (very much like Çiva), but he has no localhabitation. 

Of the Sav[=a]ras or Sauras of the Dekhan the most interesting deityis the malevolent female called Th[=a]kur[=a]n[=i], wife of Th[=a]kur. She was doubtless the first patroness of the throttling Thugs (_thags_are _[t. ]haks_, assassins), and the prototype of their HinduK[=a]l[=i]. Human sacrifices are offered to Th[=a]kur[=a]n[=i], whileher votaries, as in the case of the Thugs, are noted for the secrecyof their crimes. 

Birth-rites, marriage-rites, funeral rites (all of blood), humansacrifice, _tab[=u]_ (especially among the Burmese), witchcraft, worship of ancestors, divination, and demonology are almost universalthroughout the wild tribes. In most of the rites the holy stone[23]plays an important part, and in many of the tribes dances are areligious exercise. 

Descendants of the great Serpent-race that once ruled M[=a]gadha(Beh[=a]r), the Bh[=a]rs, and Ch[=i]rus (Cheeroos) are historically ofthe greatest importance, though now but minor tribes of Bengal. TheBh[=a]rs, and Koles, and Ch[=i]rus may once have formed one body, and, at any rate, like the last, the Bh[=a]rs are Kolarian and notDravidian. This is not the place to argue a thesis which might well besupported at length, but in view of the sudden admixture of foreignelements with the Brahmanism that begins to expand at the end of theVedic period it is almost imperative to raise the question whether theBh[=a]rs, of all the northern wild tribes the most cultivated, whosehabitatextended from Oude (Gorakhpur) on both sides of the Ganges over allthe district between Benares and Allah[=a]b[=a]d, and whose name isfound in the form Bh[=a]rats as well as Bh[=a]rs, is not one with thatgreat tribe the history of whose war has been handed down to us in adistorted form under the name of Bh[=a]rata (Mah[=a]bh[=a]rata). TheBh[=a]ratas, indeed, claim to be Aryans. But is it likely that a racewould have come from the Northeast and another from the Northwest, andboth have the same name? Carnegy believed, so striking was thecoincidence, that the Bh[=a]rats were a R[=a]jput (Hindu) tribe thathad become barbaric. But against this speaks the type, which is notAryan but Kolarian. [24] Some influence one may suppose to have comefrom the more intelligent tribes, and to have worked on Hindu belief. We believe traces of it may still be found in the classics. Forinstance, the famous Frog-maiden, whose tale is told in theMah[=a]bh[=a]rata, reminds one rather forcibly of the fact that inOude and Nep[=a]l frog-worship (not as totem) was an established cult. The time for this worship to Begin is October; it is different tothunder-worship (July, the _n[=a]ga_-feast), and the frog issubordinate to the snake. And, again, the snake-worship that grows sorapidly into the Hindu cult can scarcely have been uninfluenced by thefact that there are no less than thirty snake-tribes. [2]

But despite some interesting points of view besides those

touched upon here, details are of little added value, since it ismanifest that, whether Kolarian or Dravidian, or, for the matter ofthat, American or African, the same rites will obtain with the samesuperstition, for they belong to every land, to the Aryan ancestor ofthe Hindu as well as to the Hindu himself. Even totemism as a survivalmay be suspected in the 'fish' and 'dog' people of the Rig Veda, ashas recently been suggested by Oldenberg. In the Northeast of Indiamany tribes worship only mountains, rivers, and Manes, again a traitboth Vedic and Hinduistic, but not necessarily borrowed. Some of thesetribes, like the Kh[=a]s[=i]as of Oude, may be of R[=a]jput descent(the Khasas of Manu, X. 22), but it is more likely that more tribesclaim this descent than possess it. We omit many of the tribal customslest one think they are not original; for example, the symbol of thecross among the [=A]bors, who worship only diseases, and whose symbolis also found among the American Indians; the sun-worship of theKatties, who may have been influenced by Hinduism; together with thecult of Burmese tribes too overspread with Buddhism. But often thereis a parallel so surprising as to make it certain that there has beeninfluence. The Niadis (of the South), for example, worship only thefemale principle. Many other tribes worship _çakti_ almostexclusively. The Todas worship stone images, buffaloes, and evencow-bells, but they have a celibate priesthood! We do not hesitate toexpress our own belief that the _çakti_-worship is native and drawnfrom similar cults, and that the celibate priesthood, on the otherhand, is taken from civilization. 

Such a fate appears to have happened in modern times to severaldeities, now half Brahmanized. For example, Vet[=a]la (worshipped inmany places) is said in the Dekhan to be an _avatar_, or, properlyspeaking, a manifestation of Çiva. What is he in reality? A nativewild god, without a temple, worshipped in the open air under the shadeof a tree, and in anenclosure of stones. Just such a deity, in other words, as we haveshown is worshipped in just such a way by the wild tribes. Amonolith[26] in the middle of twelve stones represents this primitiveDruidic deity. The stones are painted red in flame-shape for a certaindistance from the ground, with the upper portion painted white. Apparently there is here a sun-god of the aborigines. He is worshippedin sickness, as is Çiva, and propitiated with the sacrifice of a cock, without the intervention of any priest. The cock to Aesculapius("_huic gallinae immolabantur_") may have had the same functionoriginally, for the cock is always the sun-bird. Seldom is Vet[=a]lapersonified. When he has an image (and in the North he sometimes hastemples) it is that of an armless and legless man; but again he isoccasionally represented as a giant 'perfect in all his parts. '[27] Tothe Brahman, Vet[=a]la is still a mere fiend, and presides overfiends; nor will they admit that the red on his stones means aught butblood. In such a god, one has a clue to the gradual intrusion of Çivahimself into Brahmanic worship. At first a mountain lightning fiend, then identified with Rudra, a recognized deity, then madeanthropomorphic. There are, especially in the South, a host of minorHindu deities, half-acknowledged, all more or less of a fiendishnature in the eyes of the orthodox or even of the Çivaite. Seenthrough such eyes they are no longer recognizable, but doubtless inmany instances they represent a crude form of nature-worship ordemonology, which has been taken from the cult of the wildtribes, and is now more or less thoroughly engrafted upon that oftheir civilized neighbors. [28]

One of the most interesting, though not remarkable, cases ofsimilarity between savage and civilized religions is found in theworship of snakes and trees. [29] In the N[=a]ga or dragon form thelatter cult may have been aided by the dragon-worshipping barbariansin the period of the northern conquest. But in essentials not only isthe snake and dragon worship of the wild tribes one with that ofHinduism, but, as has been seen, the tatter has a root in the cult ofBrahmanism also, and this in that of the Rig Veda itself. Thepoisonous snake is feared, but his beautiful wave-like motion and thewater-habitat of many of the species cause him to be associated as adivinity with Varuna, the water-god. Thus in early Hinduism one findssnake-sacrifices of two sorts. One is to cause the extirpation ofsnakes, one is to propitiate them, Apart from the real snake, there isrevered also the N[=a]ga, a beautiful chimerical creature, human, divine, and snake-like all in one. These are worshipped by sectariesand by many wild tribes alike. The N[=a]ga tribe of Chota N[=a]gpur, for instance, not only had three snakes as its battle-ensign, butbuilt a serpent-temple. [30]

Tree and plant worship is quite as antique as is snake-worship. Fornot only is _soma_ a divine plant, and not only does Yama sit inheaven under his 'fair tree' (above, p. 129), but 'trees and plants'are the direct object of invocation in the Rig Veda (V. 41. 8); andthe Brahmanic law enjoins upon the faithful to fling an offering, _bali_, to the great gods, to the waters, and 'to the trees';[31] asis the case in the house-ritual. We shall seek, therefore, for theorigin of tree-worship not in the character of the tree, but in thatof the primitive mind which deifies mountains, waters, and trees, irrespective of their nature. It is true, however, that the greaterveneration due to some trees and plants has a special reason. Thus_soma_ intoxicates: and the _tulas[=i]_, 'holy basil, ' has medicinalproperties, which make it sacred not only in the Krishna-cult, but inSicily. [32] This plant is a goddess, and is wed annually to theÇ[=a]lagr[=a]ma stone with a great feast. [33] So the _çam[=i]_ plantis herself divine, the goddess Çam[=i]. Again, the mysterious rustleof the _bo_ tree, _pipal_ may be the reason for its especialveneration; as its seeming immortality is certainly the cause of thereverence given to the banian. It is not necessary, however, that anymystery should hang about a tree. The palm is tall, (Çiva's) _açoka_is beautiful, and no trees are more revered. But trees are holy _perse_. Every 'village-tree' (above, p. 374, and Mbh[=a]. Ii. 5. 100) issacred to the Hindu. And this is just what is found among the wildtribes, who revere their hut-trees and village-trees as divine, without demanding a special show of divinity. The birth-tree (as inGrecian mythology) is also known, both to Hindu sect and to wildtribe. But here alsothere is no basis of Aryan ideas, but of common human experience. Theancestor-tree (totem) has been noticed above in the case of the Gonds, who claim descent from trees. The Bh[=a]rs revere the (Çivaite!)_bilva_ or _bel_, but this is a medicinal tree. The marriage-tree isuniversal in the South (the tree is the male or female ancestor), andeven the Brahmanic wedding, among its secondary after-rites, is notwithout the tree, which is adorned as part of the ceremony. 

Two points of view remain to be taken before the wild tribes aredismissed. The first is that Hindu law is primitive. Maine and Leistboth cite laws as if any Hindu law were an oracle of primitive Aryanbelief. This method is ripe in wrong conclusions. Most of the matteris legal, but enough grazes religion to make the point important. Evenwith the sketch we have given it becomes evident that Hindu law cannotbe unreservedly taken as an exponent of early Brahmanic law, stillless of Aryan law. For instance, Maine regards matriarchy as a lateBrahmanic intrusion on patriarchy, an inner growth. [34] To prove this, he cites two late books, one being Vishnu, the Hindu law-giver of theSouth. But it is from the Southern wild tribes that matriarchy hascrept into Hinduism, and thence into Brahmanism. Here prevails thematriarchal marriage*rite, with the first espousal to thesnake-guarded tree that represents the mother's family. In many casesgeographical limitations of this sort preclude the idea that thecustom or law of a law-book is Aryan. [35]

The second point of view is that of the Akkadists. It is claimed bythe late Lacouperie, by Hewitt, and by other well-known writers that aprimitive race overran India, China, and the rest of the world, leaving behind it traces of advanced religious ideas and other marksof a higher civilization. Such a cult may have existed, but in so faras this theory rests, as in a marked degree it does rest, onetymology, the results are worthless. These scholars identifyGandharva with Gan-Eden, K[=a]çi (Benares) with the land of the sonsof Kush; Gautama with Chinese ('Akkadian') _gut_, 'a bull, ' etc. Allthis is as fruitful of unwisdom as was the guess-work of Europeansavants two centuries ago. We know that the Dasyus had some religionand some civilization. Of what sort was their barbaric cult, whetherFinnish (also 'Akkadian')[36] or aboriginal with themselves, reallymakes but little difference, so far as the interpretation of Aryanismis concerned; for what the Aryans got from the wild tribes of that dayis insignificant if established as existent at all. A few legends, theDeluge and the Cosmic Tree, are claimed as Akkadian, but it isremarkable that one may grant all that the Akkadian scholars claim, and still deny that Aryan belief has been essentially affected byit. [37] The Akkadian theory will please them that cannot reconcile theRig Veda with their theory of Brahmanic influence, but the fault lieswith the theory. 

 * * * * *

 FOOTNOTES:

 [Footnote 1: The Dasyus, heathen, or pagans, are by no means a wholly uncivilized mass to the poets of the Rig Veda. They have wealth, build forts, and are recognized as living in towns or forts. We learn little about them in Brahmanic literature, except that they bury their dead and with them their trinkets. Their graves and dolmen gray-stones are still found. ]

 [Footnote 2: Some scholars think that the Dravidians entered from the Northwest later than the Kolarians, and, pushing them to either side of the peninsula, descended through them to the South. The fact that some Kolarian tribes closely related by language are separated (to East and West) by hundreds of miles, and have lost all remembrance of their former union, favors this view of a Dravidian wedge splitting and passing through the Kolarian mass. But all here is guess-work. The Dravidians may have been pushed on by Kolarians that entered later, while the latter may have been split by the Aryan invasion; and this seems to us more probable because the other theory does not explain why the Kolarians did not go South instead of taking to the hills of the East and West. ]

 [Footnote 3: The whole list of these tribes as given by Cust, _Sketch of the Modern Languages of the East Indies_, is as follows: The Kolarians include the Sunth[=a]ls, Mund[=a]ri Koles (Koches), Kh[=a]rians, Juangs, Korwas, Kurs, Sav[=a]ras, Mehtos, Gadabas, P[=a]h[=a]rias; the Dravidians include the tribes called Tamil, Telugu, Kanarese, Malay[=a]lim, Tulu, Kudagu, Toda, Kota, Khond, Gond, Or[=a]on, R[=a]jmah[=a]li, Keik[=a]di, Yeruk[=a]la. ]

 [Footnote 4: The sacrifices of the wild tribes all appear to have the object of pleasing or placating the god with food, animal or vegetable; just as the Brahmanic sacrifice is made to please, with the secondary thought that the god will return the favor with interest; then that he is bound to do so. Sin is carried away by the sacrifice, but this seems to be merely an extension of the simpler idea; the god condones a fault after an expression of repentance and good-will. What lies further back is not revealed in the early texts, though it is easy to make them fruitful in "theories of sacrifice. "]

 [Footnote 5: Of course no tribe has what civilization would call a temple, but some have what answer to it, namely, a filthy hut where live the god and his priest. Yet the Gonds used to build roads and irrigate very well. ]

 [Footnote 6: The (R[=a]j) Gonds were first subdued by the R[=a]jputs, and where the Hindus and Gonds have intermarried they are known as R[=a]j Gonds. Others have become the 'Mohammedan Gonds. ' Otherwise, in the case of the pure or '[=A]ssul' (the greater number), neither Hindu nor Mohammedan has had much influence over them, either socially or religiously. The Gonds whipped the British in 1818; but since then they have become 'pacified. ']

 [Footnote 7: It is often no more than a small hatchet stuck in the belt, if they wear the latter, which in the jungle is more raiment than they are wont to put on. ]

 [Footnote 8: The snake in the tree is common to many tribes, both being tutelary. The Gonds are 'sons of the forest Trees, ' and of the northern bull. ]

 [Footnote 9: It seems to us that this feature need not be reckoned as a sign of exogamy. It is often, so far as we have observed, only a stereotyped form to express bashfulness. ]

 [Footnote 10: Some say earth-_god. _ Thus the account given in JRAS. 1842, p. 172, says 'male earth-god as ancestor, ' but most modern writers describe the divinity as a female. Some of the Khonds worship only earth (as a peacock). This is the peacock revered at the Pongol. ]

 [Footnote 11: The Gonds also have a boundary-god. Graves as boundaries are known among the Anglo-Saxons. Possibly Hermes as boundary-god may be connected with the Hermes that conducts souls; or is it simply as thief-god that he guards from theft? The Khond practice would indicate that the corpse (as something sacred) made the boundary, not that the boundary was made by running a line to a barrow, as is the case in the Anglo-Saxon connection between barrow and bound. ]

 [Footnote 12: Some may compare Bellerophon !]

 [Footnote 13: Tutelary deities are of house, village, groves, etc. The 'House-god' is, of course, older than this or than Hinduism. The Rig Veda recognizes V[=a]stoshpati, the 'Lord of the House, ' to whom the law (Manu, III. 89, etc. ) orders oblations to be made. But Hinduism prefers a female house-goddess (see above, p. 374). Windisch connects this Vedic divinity, V[=a]stos-pati, with Vesta and Hestia. The same scholar compares Keltic _vassus, vassallus_, originally 'house-man'; and very ingeniously equates Vassorix with Vedic _vas[=a][. M] r[=a]j[=a]--viç[=a][. M] r[=a]j[=a]_, 'king of the house-men' (clan), like _h[. U]skarlar_, 'house-fellows, ' in Scandinavian (domesticus, *_ouk(tes)_). Windisch, _Vassus und Vassallus_, in the _Bericht. D. K. Sächs. Gesell_. 1892, p. 174. ]

 [Footnote 14: That is to say, a dead man's spirit goes to heaven, or is re-born whole in the tribe, or is re-born diseased (anywhere, this is penal discipline), or finally is annihilated. Justly may one compare the Brahmanic division of the Manes into several classes, according to their destination as conditioned by their manner of living and exit from life. It is the same idea ramifying a little differently; not a case of borrowing, but the growth of two similar seeds. On the other hand, the un-Aryan doctrine of transmigration may be due to the belief of native wild tribes. It appears first in the Çatapatha, but is hinted at in the 'plant-souls' of the RV. (above, pp. 145, 204, 432), possibly in RV. I. 164. 30, 38; Bötlingk, _loc. Cit_. , 1893, p. 88. ]

 [Footnote 15: This tribe now divides with the Lurka Koles the possession of Chota Nagpur, which the latter tribe used to command entire. The Or[=a]ons regard the Lurka Koles as inferiors. Compare JRAS. 1861, p. 370 ff. They are sometimes erroneously grouped with the Koles, ethnographically as well as geographically. Risley, _Tribes and Castes of Bengal_, p. XXXII. ]

 [Footnote 16: Something like this is recorded by Brinton, _Myths of the New World_, p. 243, as the belief of an American tribe, which holds that the fate of the dead depends on the manner of death, the funeral rites, or "some such arbitrary circumstance" (as in Greece). ]

 [Footnote 17: Compare the epic 'Mouse-people, ' M[=u]shikas, as well as Apollo's mouse. Possibly another Hindu mark of sectarianism may be traced to the wild tribes, the use of vermilion markings. This is the most important element in the Bengal wedding rite (Risley). ]

 [Footnote 18: Above the Sunth[=a]ls, who inhabit the jungle and lower slopes of the R[=a]jmah[=a]l hills, live the P[=a]h[=a]r[=i]as, who never tell a lie (it is said), and whose religion in some aspects is worth noticing. They believe in one god (over each village god), who created seven brothers to rule earth. The P[=a]h[=a]r[=i]as descend from the eldest of these brothers. They believe in transmigration, a future state, and oracles. But it is questionable whether they have not been exposed to Buddhistic influence, as 'Budo Gosain' is the name of the supreme (sun-)god. ]

 [Footnote 19: In the ninth century Orissa was formed of the territories of Khonds, Koles, and Sav[=a]ras. In the old grouping of tribes these, together with the Gonds and Bhils, were the "five children of the soil" between the Vindhya mountains, the east chain of the Gh[=a]ts, and the mouth of the God[=a]var[=i] to the centre of the valley of the Nerbudda. The last mentioned tribe of Bhils (Bheels) is almost devoid of native religion, but is particularly noted for truth, honesty, and fidelity. JRAS. 1844, pp. 181, 189, 192; 1852, p. 216 ff. It is an ancient race, but its origin is not certain. ]

 [Footnote 20: Trees are revered by the Brahmans also, as by the American Indians. Schoolcraft, i. 368. The tree-spirit is an advance on this (Brahmanic and Hinduistic). ]

 [Footnote 21: Thus the Bhils' wedding is simply a mutual promise under the _sing[=a]_ tree. These savages, however, live together only so long as they choose. When the family separates, the father takes the elder children, and the mother takes the younger ones. They are polygamous. It is from this tribe that the worship of Aghor[=i], the Vindhya fiend, accepted as a form of K[=a]l[=i], was introduced into Çivaite worship. At present their religion is a mixture of Hindu and native superstition. Thus, like the Gonds, they worship stone images of gods placed in a circle, but they recognize among these gods several of the Hindu divinities. ]

 [Footnote 22: Rowney, _Wild Tribes_, p. 194. The goose-totem of the Sunth[=a]ls is also Brahm[=a]'s sign. As Vishnu is carried on an eagle, and Çiva on a bull, so Brahm[=a] rides a goose (or flamingo). The 'ten ancestors' demanded of the Brahman priest were originally on the mother's side as well as on the father's. Weber, _R[=a]jas[=u]ya_, p. 78. The matriarchal theory is, however, southern. (Compare the oblations to the ancestresses in Vishnu's law-book, 74. )]

 [Footnote 23: The marriage-stone, as in the Hindu rite is quite common. Of lesser superstitions the _tab[=u]_, analogous to the avoidance of unlucky names among the Hindus, may be mentioned. Friendship among girls is cemented by a religious ceremony. After this, among the Or[=a]ons, the two avoid each other's name, calling each other only 'my flower' or 'my meet-to-smile' (Rowney). In this tribe exogamy is 'more respectable, ' but not necessary. The girls are generally bought, and have fixed prices, but we have seen the customary price (twenty-five pigs) cited only for Assam among the Meeris. If one man cannot pay so much, several unite, for polyandry prevails all through the northern tribes (JRAS. XI. 38), and even in the Punj[=a]b. ]

 [Footnote 24: Sherring (JRAS. V. 376) says decidedly that Bh[=a]rs, or Bh[=a]rats, and Ch[=i]rus cannot be Aryans. This article is one full of interesting details in regard to the high cultivation of the Bh[=a]rat tribe. They built large stone forts, immense subterranean caverns, and made enormous bricks for tanks and fortifications (19 X 11 X 2-1/2 inches), the former being built regularly to east and west (_surajbedi_). One of their chief cities lay five miles west of Mirz[=a]pur, and covered several miles, entirely surrounding the Puranic city of Vindhyacal, built in the midst of it. Six or seven hundred years ago the Bh[=a]rs held Oude and Benares. Carnegy's opinion is given in his _Races, Tribes, and Castes of the Province of Oude_ (Oudh). The Bh[=a]rs, says Elliot, _Chronicles of Oonayo_, built all the towns not ending in _pur_, _mow_, or _[=a]b[=a]d_ (Hindu, Mongol, Mohammedan). Their sacra (totems?) are the bamboo, _bel_-tree, tortoise, and peacock. ]

 [Footnote 25: JRAS. XII. 229; IA. XXII. 293. ]

 [Footnote 26: Among the southern Koders the dolmen form grave-stones; perhaps the religious employment of them in this wise led to the idea of the god-stone in many cases; but it is difficult to say in monolith-worship whether the stone itself be not a god; not a fetish, for (as has been said by others) a fetish is a god only so long as he is regarded as being useful, and when shown to be useless he is flung away; but a god-stone is always divine, whether it grants prayers or not. ]

 [Footnote 27: Wilson's note to Stevenson's description, JRAS. 1838, p. 197. The epic disease-gods are not unique. The only god known to the Andaman Islanders (Bay of Bengal) was a disease-devil, and this is found as a subordinate deity in many of the wild tribes. ]

 [Footnote 28: In the current _Indian Antiquary_ there is an exceedingly interesting series of papers by the late Judge Burnell on Devil-worship, with illustrations that show well the character of these lower objects of worship. ]

 [Footnote 29: The standard work on this subject is Fergusson's _Tree and Serpent Worship_, which abounds in interesting facts and dangerously captivating fancies. ]

 [Footnote 30: JRAS. 1846, p. 407. The ensign here may be totemistic. In Hinduism the epic shows that the standards of battle were often surmounted with signa and effigies of various animals, as was the case, for example, in ancient Germany. We have collected the material on this point in a paper in JAOS. XIII. 244. It appears that on top of the flag-staff images were placed. One of these is the Ape-standard; another, the Bull standard; another, the Hoar-standard. Arjuna's sign was the Ape (with a lion's tail); other heroes had peacocks, elephants, and fabulous monsters like the _çarabha_. The Ape is of course the god Hanuman; the Boar, Vishnu; the Bull, Çiva; so that they have a religious bearing for the most part, and are not totemistic. Some are purely fanciful, a bow, a swan with bells, a lily; or, again, they are significant of the heroe's origin (Drona's 'pot'). Trees and flowers are used as standards just like beasts. Especially is the palm a favorite emblem. These signa are in addition to the battle-flags (one of which is blue, carried with an ensign of five stars). On the plants compare Williams, _Brahmanism and Hinduism_, p. 338. ]

 [Footnote 31: [=A]pastambo, 2. 2. 3. 22; Manu, III. 88. ]

 [Footnote 32: Vule _apud_ Williams. ]

 [Footnote 33: _ib_. The Rig Veda, X. 81. 4, knows also a 'tree of creation. ']

 [Footnote 34: _Early Law and Custom_, p. 73 ff. ]

 [Footnote 35: Thus it is common Aryan law that, on the birth of a child, the mother becomes impure for ten days, either alone or with the father. But the latter's impurity is only nominal, and is removed by bathing (Manu, V. 62, and others). B[=a]udh[=a]yana alone states that "according to some" only the father becomes impure (1. 5. 11. 21). This is the custom of a land described by Apollonius Rhodius (II. 1010}, "where, when women bear children, the men groan, go to bed, and tie up the head; but the women care for them. " Yet B[=a]udh[=a]yana is a Southerner and a late writer. The custom is legalized only in this writer's laws. Hence it cannot be cited as Brahmanic or even as Aryan law. It was probably the custom of the Southern half-Hinduized environment. ]

 [Footnote 36: American Indians are also Dravidian, because both have totems![* unknown symbol]]

 [Footnote 37: For the Akkadist theory may be consulted Lacouperie in the _Babylonian and Oriental Record_, i. 1, 25, 58; iii. 62 ff. ; v. 44, 97; vi. 1 ff. ; Hewitt, in reviewing Risley's _Tribes and Castes of Bengal_, JRAS. 1893, p. 238 ff. See also Sayce's _Hibbert Lectures_. On the Deluge and Tree of Life, compare the _Babylonian and Oriental Record_, iv. 15 and 217. ]

 * * * * *

CHAPTER XIX. 

INDIA AND THE WEST. 

If in Hinduism, and even in Brahmanism, there are certain traitswhich, with some verisimilitude, may be referred to the immediateenvironment of these religions, how stands it in respect of that widercircle of influence which is represented by the peoples of the West?With Egypt and Phoenicia, India had intercourse at an early date, butthis appears to have been restricted to mercantile exchange; for Indiatill very late was affected neither by the literature nor by thereligion of Egyptians or Syrians. [1] Of a more direct sort seem tohave been the relations between India and Babylon, and the former mayowe to the latter her later astronomy, but no definitive proof exists(or even any great historical probability) that Babylon gave Indiaeven legendary additions to her native wealth of myths. [2] From theIranians the Hindus parted too early to receive from Zoroastrianismany influence. On the contrary, in our opinion the religion ofZoroaster budded from a branch taken from Indic soil. Even wherePersian influence may, with propriety, be suspected, in the laterIndic worship of the sun, India took no new religion from Persia; butit is very possible that her own antique and preserved heliolatry wasaided, and acquired new strength from more modern contact with thesun-worshippers of the West. Of Iranian influence in early times, along the line of Hindu religious development, there is scarcely atrace, although in 509 B. C. Darius's general conquered the land aboutthe Indus. [3] But the most zealous advocate of Persia's prestige canfind little to support his claims in pre-Buddhistic Brahmanicliterature, though such claims have been made, not only in respect ofthe position of secondary divinities, but even as regardseschatological conceptions. It is not so easy to refute an improbablehistorical theory as it is to propound it, but, on the other hand, the_onus probandi_ rests upon him that propounds it, and till now allarguments on this point have resulted only in increasing the number ofunproved hypotheses, which the historian should mention and may thendismiss. 

The Northern dynasty that ruled in India in the sixth century seems tohave had a hand in spreading Iranian sun-worship beyond the Indus, butwe doubt whether the radical effect of this dominion and its belief(it is described by Kosmas, an Egyptian traveller of the time) is asgreat as has been claimed. [4]

From Greece, the Hindus received architectural designs, numismatic, and perhaps a few literary hints, but they got thence neitherreligious myths, nor, with the possible exception of the cult of thelater Love-god and fresh encouragement to phallic-worship, new rites;[5] though they may have borrowed some fables, andone even hears of a Buddhistic king endeavoring to buy a sophist ofAntiochus. But there is no ground for assuming philosophical influenceon Brahmanism. 

Christianity came late into the religious life of India, and as adoctrine made upon her no deep or lasting impression. Certain detailsof Christian story have been woven into the legends of Krishna, andsome scholars believe that the monotheistic worshippers depicted inthe pseudo-epic were Christians. But in respect of the latter point itis enough to say that this account of foreign belief had no newmonotheizing effect upon the pantheism of India; the strange(unbrahmanic) god was simply accepted as Vishnu. Nor do we believethat the faith-doctrine of Hindu sectarianism and the trinitarianismof India were derived from Christian sources. But it must be admittedto be historically possible that the creed of the Christians, known tothe Hindus of the sixth and seventh centuries, may have suggested tothe latter the idea of the trinity as a means of adjusting the claimsof Brahmanism, Krishnaism, and Çivaism. [6]

But from the Mohammedan India has taken much, albeitonly in the last few centuries. When Alexander entered India therewere still two bodies of Indic people west of the Indus. But the trendwas eastward, as it had been for centuries, and the first inroad ofthe Mohammedan had little further effect than to seize a land forsakenby Aryans and given over to the hordes of the North. The foundation ofthe new empire was not laid till the permanent occupation of thePunj[=a]b and annexation of Lahore in 1022-23. In the thirteenthcentury all Hindustan acknowledged the authority of the slave sultanof Delhi. [7] Akbar died in 1605. By the end of the century the Mogulrule was broken; the Mahratta princes became imperial. It is now justin this period of Mohammedan power when arise the deistic reformingsects, which, as we have shown, were surrounded with deists andtrinitarians. Here, then, we draw the line across the innerdevelopment of India's religions, withKab[=i]r, N[=a]nak, D[=a]du, and perhaps even Basava. In thephilosophy of the age that succeeds the epic there are but two phasesof religion, pantheism for the wise, a more or less deistic polytheismfor the vulgar[8] (in isolated cases may be added the monotheism ofcertain scholastic philosophers); and so Indic religion continued tillthe advent of Islamism. Nevertheless, though under Mohammedaninfluence, [9] the most thoughtful spirits of India received monotheismand gave up pantheism, yet was the religious attitude of thesethinkers not averse from that taken by the Sankyan philosophers and bythe earlier pantheists. From a philosophical point of view one must, indeed, separate the two. But all these, the Unitarian Hariharaist, the real pantheist of the Upanishads, who completed the work of theVedic quasi-pantheist, and the circle that comprises Kab[=i]r, N[=a]nak, and D[=a]du, were united in that they stood againstencircling polytheism. They were religiously at one in that they gaveup the cult of many divinities, which represented respectivelynature-worship and fiend-worship (with beast-worship), for the worshipof one god. Therefore it is that, while native advance stops with theMohammedan conquest, one may yet claim an uninterrupted progress forthe higher Indic religion, a continual elevation of the thoughts ofthe wise; although at the same time, beside and below this, there isthe circle of lower beliefs that continually revolves upon itself. Forin the zoölatry[10] and polytheism that adores monsters to-dayit is difficult to see a form of religion higher in any respect thanthat more simple nature-polytheism which first obtained. [11]

This lower aspect of Indic religions hinges historically on therelation between the accepted cults of Hinduism[12] and those of thewild tribes. We cannot venture to make any statements that will castupon this question more light than has been thrown by the aboveaccount of the latter cults and of their points of contact withHinduism. It may be taken for granted that with the entrance into thebody politic of a class composed of vanquished[13] or vanquishingnatives, some of the religion of the latter may have been receivedalso. Such, there is every reason to believe, was the original worshipof Çiva as Çarva, Bhava, and of Krishna; in other words, of the firstfeatures of modern sectarian Hinduism, though this has been soinfluenced by Aryan civilization that it has become an integral partof Hindu religion. [14]

But, again, for a further question here presents itself, how much inIndia to-day is Aryan? We are inclined to answer that very little ofblood or of religion is Aryan. Some priestly families keep perhaps astrain of Aryan blood. But Hindu literature is not afraid to state howmany of its authors are of low caste, how many of its priests werebegotten of mixed marriages, how many formed low connections; whileboth legendary and prophetic (_ex post facto_) history speak too oftenof slave-kings and the evil times when low castes will reign, for anyunprejudiced person to doubt that the Hindu population, excluding manypure priests but including many of the priests and the R[=a]jputs('sons of kings'), represents Aryanhood even less than the belief ofthe Rig Veda represents the primitive religion; and how little ofaboriginal Aryan faith is reflected in that work has been shownalready. 

As one reviews the post-Vedic religions of civilized India he isimpressed with the fact that, heterogeneous as they are, they yet insome regards are so alike as to present, when contrasted with otherbeliefs, a homogeneous whole. A certain uniqueness of religious style, so to speak, differentiates every expression of India's theosophy fromthat of her Western neighbors. What is common and world-wide in theforms of Indic faith we have shown in a previous chapter. But on thisuniversal foundation India has erected many individual temples, temples built after designs which are not uniform, but are allself-sketched, and therefore peculiar to herself. In each of thesemental houses of God there is revealed the same disposition, and thatdisposition is necessarily identical with that expressed in herprofane artistry, [15] for the form of religion is as much a matter ofnational taste as is that which is embodied in literature, architecture, and painting. And this taste, as expressed in religion, isolates Brahmanic and Hinduistic India, placing her apart, both from the gloom of Egypt and the grace ofGreece; even as in her earliest records she shows herself individual, as contrasted with her Aryan kinsfolk. Like Egypt, she feels her deadever around her, and her cult is tinged with darkness; but she is fondof pleasure, and seeks it deliriously. Like Greece, she loves beauty, but she loves more to decorate it; and again, she rejoices in hergods, but she rejoices with fear; fear that overcomes reason, andpictures such horrors as are conjured up by the wild leaps of anuncurbed fancy. For an imagination that knows no let has run away withevery form of her intellectual productivity, theosophy as well as art. This is perceptible even in her ritualistic, scientific, andphilosophical systems; for though it is an element that at first seemsincongruous with such systems, it is yet in reality the factor thathas produced them. Complex, varied, minute, exact, as are the detailswhich she loves to elaborate in all her work, they are the result ofthis same unfettered imagination, which follows out every fancy, pleased with them all, exaggerating every present interest, unconfinedby especial regard for what is essential. [16] This is a heavy chargeto bring, nor can it be passed over with the usual remark that onemust accept India's canon as authoritative for herself, for the tasteof cosmopolitan civilization is the only norm of judgment, a normaccepted even by the Hindus of the present day when they have learnedwhat it is. But we do not bring the charge of extravagance for thesake of comparing India unfavorably with the Occident. Confiningourselves to the historical method of treatment which we haveendeavored heretofore to maintain, we wish to point out the importantbearings which this intellectual trait has had upon the lesserproducts of India's religious activity. 

Through the whole extent of religious literature one finds what areapparently rare and valuable bits of historical information. It isthese which, from the point of view to which we have just referred, one must learn to estimate at their real worth. In nine cases out often, these seeming truths are due only to the light imagination of asubsequent age, playing at will over the records of the past, andseeking by a mental caper to leap over what it fails to understand. Tothe Oriental of an age still later all the facts deducible from suchstatements as are embodied in the hoary literature of antiquity appearto be historical data, and, if mystic in tone, these statements are tohim an old revelation of profoundest truth. But the Occidental, whorecognizes no hidden wisdom in palpable mystification, should hesitatealso to accept at their face value such historical notes as have beendrafted by the same priestly hand. 

Nor would we confine the application of this principle to the outputof extant Brahmanic works. The same truth cuts right and left amongmany utterances of the Vedic seers and all the theories built uponthem. To pick out here and there an _ipse dixit_ of one of the laterfanciful Vedic poets, who lived in a period as Brahmanic (that is, asritualistic) as is that which is represented by the actualritual-texts, and attempt to reconstruct the original form ofdivinities on the basis of such vagaries is useless, for it is anunhistorical method which ignores ancient conditions. 

In less degree, because here the conditions are more obvious, doesthis apply to the religious interpretation of the great body ofliterature which has conserved for posterity the beginnings ofHinduism. But upon this we have already animadverted, and now needonly range this literature in line with its predecessors. Not becausethe epic pictures Krishna as making obeisance to Çiva is Krishna herethe undeveloped man-god, who represents but the beginning of his(later) greatness, and is still subject to the older Çiva. On thecontrary, it is theepic's last extravagance in regard to Çiva (who has already bowedbefore the great image of Krishna-Vishnu) that demands a furiouscounter-blast against the rival god. It is the Çivaite who says thatKrishna-Vishnu bows; and because it is the Çivaite, and because thisis the national mode of expression of every sectary, therefore whatthe Çivaite says is in all probability historically false, and thesober historian will at least not discover 'the earlier Krishna' inthe Krishna portrayed by his rival's satellites. 

But when one comes to the modern sects, then he has to deplore not somuch the lack of historical data as the grotesque form into which thissame over-vivid imagination of the Hindu has builded his gods. As thescientific systems grow more and more fancifully, detailed, and as theliturgy flowers out into the most extraordinary bloom of weird legend, so the images of the gods, to the eye in their temples, to the mind inthe descriptions of them, take to themselves the most uncouth detailsimagined by a curious fancy. This god is an ascetic; he must beportrayed with the ascetic's hair, the ascetic's wild appearance. Hekills; he must be depicted as a monster, every trait exaggerated, every conceivable horror detailed. This god sported with theshepherdesses; he must have love-adventures related in full, and beworshipped as a darling god of love; and in this worship all must bepictured in excess, that weaker mortal power may strive to appreciatethe magnitude of the divine in every fine detail. 

These traits are those of late Vedism, Brahmanism, and Hinduism. Buthow marked is the contrast with the earlier Vedic age! The grotesquefancy, the love of minutiae, in a word, the extravagance ofimagination and unreason are here absent, or present only in hymnsthat contrast vividly with those of the older tone. This older tone isAryan, the later is Hindu, and it is another proof of what we havealready emphasized, that the Hinduizing influence was felt in thelater Vedicor Brahmanic period. There is, indeed, almost as great a gulf betweenthe Dawn-hymns and the Çatapatha as there is between the latter andthe Pur[=a]nas. One may rest assured that the perverted later tastereproduces the advance of Hindu influence upon the Aryan mind exactlyin proportion to the enormity displayed. 

On the other hand, from the point of view of morality, Brahmanicreligion is not in any way individual. The race, whether Aryan orHinduistic, had as fragile virtue as have other folks, and shows thesame tentative efforts to become purer as those which characterizeevery national advance. There is, perhaps, a little too much formalinsistence on veraciousness, and one is rather inclined to suspect, despite Müllers brave defence of the Hindu in this regard, that lyingcame very naturally to a people whose law-givers were so continuouslyharping on the beauty of truth. The vicious caste-system necessarilyscheduled immorality in accordance with the caste order, as certaincrimes in other countries are estimated according to the race of thesinner rather than according to any abstract standard. In the matterof precept we know no better moral laws than those promulgated by theBrahmans, but they are the laws that every people evolves for itself. Religious immorality, the excess of Çakti worship, is also notpeculiar to the Hindu. If one ask how the morality of India as a wholecompares with that of other countries, we reply that, includingreligious excesses, it stands level with the personal morality ofGreece in her best days, [17]and that without the religiously sensual (Hindu) element, it is_nominally_ on a par with that of London or New York. There are goodand bad men, and these make good and bad coteries, which stand insidethe pale of a religious profession. There is not much theoreticaldifference. Few of the older gods are virtuous, and Right, even in theRig Veda, is the moral power, that is, Right as Order, correctbehavior, the prototype both of ritual and of _[=a]c[=a]ra, _ custom, which rules the gods. In the law-court the gods are a moral group, andtwo of them, Varuna and Agni, hate respectively the sins of adulteryand untruth. In the law it is, however, Dharma and the Father-god orhis diadochos, who, handing down heavenly precepts, gives all morallaws, though it must be confessed that the Father-god is almost thelast to care for morality. And pure Brahmanism stops with Brahm[=a]. In modern Hinduism, to kill, lust, steal, drink, so far fromoffending, may please a god that is amorous, or bloodthirsty, or, likeÇiva, is 'the lord of thieves. ' Morality here has God himself againstit. In the Rig Veda, to sin is merely to displease a god. But even inBrahmanism, as in Buddhism, there is not that intimate connectionbetween goodness and godness that obtains in Christianity. TheBrahman, like the Buddhist, was self-controlled, in order to exertcontrol upon the gods and the course of his own future life. He notonly, as is perhaps the case elsewhere, was moral with an ulteriormotive, but his moral code lacked the divine hand. It was felt as asystem which he applied to himself for his own good. He did not assumethat he offended a god by not following it, except in two specialcases, as in sins against Agni and Varuna. Ulterior motives aredeprecated, but because he that seeks absorption into God must quitdesires. [18]

We have said that the moral code of the Hindus at its best seems to beon a par with the best as found elsewhere. Not to lie, not to steal, not to injure another illegally, [19] to be brave, to be loyal, to behospitable, --these are the factors of its early and late law. Incertain late cases may be added 'to be self-restrained. ' But if theselaws be compared with those of the savage races it will be found thatmost of them are also factors of primitive ethics. Therefore we saythat the Hindu code as a whole is savage and antique, and that, excluding religious excess and debauchery, it is on a par with themodern ethical code only nominally. In reality, however, this savageand ancient code is not on a level with that of to-day. And the reasonis that the ideal of each is different. In the savage and old-worldconception of morality it is the ideal virtue that is represented bythe code. It was distinct laudation to say of a man that he did notlie, or steal, and that he was hospitable. [20] But to-day, while thesefactors remain to formulate the code, they no longer represent idealvirtue. Nay rather, they are but the assumed base of virtue, and sothoroughly is this assumed that to say of a gentleman that he does notlie or steal is not praise, but rather an insult, since the imputationto him of what is but the virtue of children is no longer an encomiumwhen applied to the adult, who is supposed to have passed the pointwhere theft and lying are moral temptations, and to have reached apoint where, on the basis of these savage, antique, and now childishvirtues, he strives for a higher moral ideal. And this ideal ofto-day, which makes fair-mindedness, liberality of thought, andaltruism the respective representatives of the savage virtues ofmanual honesty, truth-speaking, and hospitality, is just whatis lacking in the more primitive ideal formulated in the code ofsavages and of the Brahman alike. [21] It is not found at all amongsavages, and they may be left on one side. In India all the factors ofthe modern code are entirely lacking at the time when the old code wasfirst completely formulated. Liberality of thought comes in with theera of the Upanishads, but it is a restricted freedom. Altruism isunknown to pure Brahmanism. But it obtains among the Buddhists, whoalso have liberality of thought and fair-mindedness. Hence, from thepoint of view of the higher morality, one must confess that Buddhismoffers the best parallel to the best of to-day. On the other hand, Buddhistic altruism exceeds all other. 

We have sketched the sphere of influence exerted by the West uponIndia, and found it on the whole inconsiderable. The Indic religionstill the twelfth century assimilated what little they drew fromforeign sources, and stand before the world as a peculiar growth, native to the soil in all their essential characteristics. [22]

But to the other side of India's contact with the West we have as yetbarely alluded. India has given as she has received. What influencehas she had upon Western cults and beliefs? The worship thatsubstituted idols for ideal forms we have traced back to the end ofthe Vedic period. It is not, however, a mark of early Brahmanism, noris it a pronounced feature before the age of Buddhism. But in Buddha'stime, or soon after, flourished the worship of images, and with it therespect for relics. The latter feature of the new religion madenecessary shrines to keep the holy objects, sacred museums, which soonbecame the formal _st[=u]pas, _ above-groundand under-ground, and these made the first temples of India. [23] Fullydeveloped, they became the great religious buildings affected byBuddhism, with their idol service, prostrations, repetitions ofprayers, dim religious light (lamp-service), offerings of flowers, fruits, etc. From this source may have been derived many of thedetails in the Roman Catholic worship, which appears to have takenfrom Buddhism the rosary, originally a mark of the Çivaite. [24] Bywhat is, to say the least, an extraordinary coincidence, each of thesechurches is conspicuous for its use of holy water, choirs, sacredpictures, tonsure, vestments, the bell in religious service, theorders of nuns, monks, and the vows of the monastic system. [25] Themost curious loan made by the Roman and Greek churches is, however, the quasi-worship of Gotama Buddha himself (in so far as a Romanistworships his saints), for, under cover of the Barlaam and Josaphatstory, Buddha has found a niche as a saint in the row of canonizedCatholic worthies, and has his saint-day in the calendar of the Greekand Roman churches. [26] But it is not his mother who is the Virgin ofLamaism, which has made of Buddha the Supreme God. 

Besides external phases of the religious cult, India has givento the West a certain class of literary works and certainphilosophical ideas. The former consists, of course, in thefable-literature, which spread from India to Eastern Europe (Babrius)and has preserved in many tales of to-day nothing more than BuddhisticBirth-stories or other Indic tales (the Pa[. N]catantra) andlegends. [27] Of these we can make only passing mention here, to turnat once to the more important question of philosophical and religiousborrowing. 

It has been claimed, as we have incidentally stated, that the Logosdoctrine was imported from India. Were this so, it would, indeed, be afact of great historical importance, but, interesting as would be sucha loan, we cannot see that the suggestion is based on data of cogentcharacter. The history of the doctrine in India and Greece is simplythis: V[=a]c, Speech or Word, appears in the Rig Veda (in the hymncited above, p. 143) as an active female divine power, showing graceto mortals. In the Brahmanic period V[=a]c becomes more and more likethe Greek Logos, and it may truthfuly be said that in this period "theWord was God. " In Greece, on the other hand, the conception of Logosbegins with Heraclitus, passes on to the Stoics; is adopted by Philo;becomes a prominent feature of Neo-Platonism; and reappears in theGospel of St. John. It is certainly legitimate to suppose thatHeraclitus might have received the idea indirectly, if not directly, from contemporary Eastern philosophers; but the fact that he did soremains unproved; nor is there any foundation for the assumption ofborrowing other than the resemblance between the Grecian and Indicconceptions. But this resemblance is scarcely marked enough inessential features to prejudice one in favor of Weber's theory(amplified by Garbe), as it is not detailed enough to be striking, forV[=a]c is never more than one of many female abstractions. 

With the exception of the one case to be mentioned immediately, we areforced to take the same position in regard to the similarity betweenother forms of early Greek and Hindu philosophy. Both Thales andParmenides were indeed anticipated by Hindu sages, and the Eleaticschool seems to be but a reflexion of the Upanishads. The doctrines ofAnaximander and Heraclitus are, perhaps, not known first in Greece, but there is no evidence that they were not original to Greece, orthat they were borrowed from India, however much older may be theparallel trains of thought on Indic soil. 

Quite as decidedly, however, as we deny all appearance of borrowing onthe part of the founders of other early Grecian schools, must we claimthe thought of India to be the archetype of Pythagorean philosophy. After a careful review of the points of contact, and weighing asdispassionately as possible the historical evidence for and againstthe originality of Pythagoras, we are unable to come to any otherconclusion than that the Greek philosopher took his whole systemindirectly from India. His 'numbers, ' indeed, are the S[=a]nkhya onlyin appearances. [28] But his theory of metempsychosis is the Indic_sams[=a]ra_, and Plato is full of Sankhyan thought, worked out by himbut taken from Pythagoras. Before the sixth century B. C. All thereligious-philosophical ideas of Pythagoras are current in India (L. Von Schroeder, _Pythagoras_). If there were but one or two of thesecases, they might be set aside as accidental coincidences, but suchcoincidences are too numerous to be the result of chance. Even indetails the transmigration theory of Pythagoras harmonizes with thatof India. Further (after Schroeder und Garbe) may be mentioned thecurious prohibition against eating beans; the Hesiodic-Pythagorean[Greek: _pros êlion mê omichein_]; the vow of silence, like that takenby the Hindu _muni_; the doctrine of _five_ elements (aether asfifth); above all, the so-called Pythagorean Theorem, developed in themathematicalÇulvas[=u]tras[29] of India; the irrrational number [square rootsymbol]2; then the whole character of the religious-philosophicalfraternity, which is exactly analogous to the Indic orders of thetime; and finally the mystic speculation, which is peculiar to thePythagorean school, and bears a striking resemblance to thefantastical notions affected by the authors of the Br[=a]hmana. [30]Greek legend is full of the Samian's travels to Egypt, Chaldaea, Phoenicia, and India. The fire beneath this smoke is hidden. One knowsnot how much to believe of such tales. But they only strengthen theinference, drawn from 'the Pythagorean school, ' the man's work itself, that the mysticism and numbers with which he is surrounded are takenfrom that system of numbers and from that mysticism which are soastonishingly like his own. All subsequent philosophies borrowed fromPythagoreanism, and in so far has India helped to form the mind ofEurope. [31]

But we cannot omit a yet more important religious influence exerted byIndia upon the West. As is well known, Neo-Platonism and ChristianGnosticism owe much to India. The Gnostic ideas in regard to aplurality of heavens and spiritual worlds go back directly to Hindusources. Soul and light are one in the S[=a]nkhya system before theybecome so in Greece, and when they appear united in Greece it is bymeans of the thought which is borrowed from India. The famous 'threequalities' of the S[=a]nkhya reappear as the Gnostic 'three classes, '[Greek: pneumagikoi], [Greek: psuchikoi], [Greek: ulikoi]. [32] Inregard to Neo-Platonism, Garbesays: "The views of Plotinus are in perfect agreement with those ofthe S[=a]nkhya system. "[33] Porphyry, the disciple of Plotinus, hasthe Yoga doctrine of immediate perception of truth leading to unionwith the deity. As is well known and undisputed, this Porphyry copiesdirectly from the treatise of Bardesanes, which contains an account ofthe Brahmatis;[34] while in many instances he simply repeats thetenets of the S[=a]nkhya philosophy. The means of communication mayhave been Alexandria, where met the trades of the East and West. Perhaps the philosophers of India as well as of Greece were broughttogether there. But, if the East and West had a mutual meeting-ground, the ideas common to both occupy no common place in their respectivehomes. In Greece, Pythagoreanism and Gnosticism are strange, and arefelt as such by the natives. In India these traits are founded onancient beliefs, long current, universal, nationally recognized. Thequestion of giver and receiver, then, admitting the identity ofthought, can scarcely be raised. If two men meet, one a Methodist andone a Baptist, and after they have conversed the Methodist be foundtotally immersed, he will not be credited with having inventedindependently his new mode of baptism. 

India's influence as an intellectual factor in modern European thoughthas thus far been of the slightest. Her modern deism is borrowed, andher pantheism is not scientific. Sanskrit scholars are rather fond ofciting the pathetic words of Schopenhauer, who, speaking of theUpanishads, says that the study of these works "has been the solace ofmy life; it will be the solace of my death"; but Schopenbauer knew theUpanishads only in a very free form of translation, and it canscarcely have been the loose philosophy so much as the elevated spiritofthese works that solaced the unphilosophical bitterness of his life. This general impression will doubtless continue to be felt by all thatstudy the best works of Brahmanism. The sincerity, the fearless searchof the Indic sages for truth, their loftiness of thinking, all thesewill affect the religious student of every clime and age, though thefancied result of their thinking may pass without effect over a modernmind. For a philosophy that must be orthodox can never be definitive. But, if one turn from the orthodox completed systems to the tentativebeginnings of the Ved[=a]nta (in the Upanishads), he finds as thebasis of this earlier speculation only an _a priori_ meta-physicalassumption. [35]

Apart from philosophical influence there is at present more or lessinterest in Europe and America in Indic superstition and spiritualism, and half-educated people will doubtless be influenced for some time tocome by Mah[=a]tmaism and Yogism, just as they are moved by nativeséance-spirits and mesmerism. Blavatskyism (which represents no phaseof Buddhism) will always find disciples among the ignorant classes, especially in an agnostic or atheistic environment, so that one shouldattribute the mental attitude of such minds to their lack of culturerather than to India; for if Mah[=a]tmaism had not been discovered, they would still profess it under another name. Buddhism, too, apartfrom Hartmann, may be said to have some influence on popular thought, yet it is a very unreal Buddhism, which amounts only to the adoptionof an altruistic creed. But we know of none among the many thatprofess themselves 'Buddhists' who has really adopted Buddhisticprinciples, and but few who even understand those principles. A bar tothe adoption of Buddhism lies in the implicit necessityof renunciation for all who would become perfected, and in theexplicit doctrine of _karma_ in its native form. The true Buddhist isnot satisfied to be a third-class Buddhist, that is, simply a man thatseeks to avoid lust, anger, and ignorance. He will become asecond-class Buddhist and renounce the world, give up all family tiesand earthly affections, and enter the Order. But he will not do this, thinking that he is thereby to become perfect. For, to be afirst-class Buddhist, he must get wisdom. He must believe in theimpermanence of everything, and in the awful continuation of his own_karma_ as a resultant group, which, as such, will continue to existif, to the purity and peace of the lower classes of Buddhists, he failto add in his own case the wisdom that understands the truth of this_karma_ doctrine. [36] Now no modern mind will believe this hypothesisof _karma_ and no modern will even enter the Order. Nevertheless, while one may not become a true Buddhist in the native sense, it ispossible to be a Buddhist in a higher sense, and in its new form thisis a religion that will doubtless attract many Occidentals, though itis almost too chaste to win adherents where marriage is not regardedas detrimental to high thinking. But if one substitute for theBuddhistic _karma_ the _karma_ of to-day, he may well believe that hisacts are to have effect hereafter, not as a complex but as individualfactors in determining the goodness of his descendants and indirectlyof his environment. Then there remains the attainment of purity, kindness, [37] and wisdom, which last may be interpreted, in accordancewith the spirit of the Master, as seeing things in theirtrue relations, and the abandonment of whatever prevents suchattainment, namely, of lust, anger, and ignorance. But to be a trueBuddhist one must renounce, as lust, all desire of evil, of futurelife, which brings evil; and must live without other hope than that ofextinguishing all desire and passion, believing that in so doing hewill at death be annihilated, that is, that he will have caused hisacts to cease to work for good or ill, and that, since being without asoul he exists only in his acts, he will in their cessation also ceaseto be. 

At least one thing may be learned from Buddhism. It is possible to bereligious without being devout. True Buddhism is the only religionwhich, discarding all animism, consists in character and wisdom. Butneither in sacrificial works, nor in kindness alone, nor in wisdomalone, lies the highest. One must renounce all selfish desires andlive to build up a character of which the signs are purity, love forall, and that courageous wisdom which is calm insight into truth. TheBuddhist worked out his own salvation without fear or trembling. Tothese characteristics may be added that tolerance and freedom ofthought which are so dissimilar to the traits of many other religions. 

So much may be learned from Buddhism, and it were much only to knowthat such a religion existed twenty-four centuries ago. But in what, from a wider point of view, lies the importance of the study of Hindureligions? Not, we venture to think, in their face value for thereligious or philosophical life of the Occident, but in therevelation, which is made by this study, of the origin and growth oftheistic ideas in one land; in the light these cast by analogy on theorigin of such ideas elsewhere; in the prodigious significance of thereligious factorin the development of a race, as exhibited in this instance; in theinspiring review of that development as it is seen through successiveages in the loftiest aspirations of a great people; and finally in thelesson taught by the intellectual and religious fate of them amongthat people that have substituted, like the Brahman ritualist, formfor spirit; like the Vedantist, ideas for ideals; like the sectary, emotion for morality. But greatest, if woeful, is the lesson taught bythat phase of Buddhism, which has developed into Lamaism and itskindred cults. For here one learns how few are they that can endure tobe wise, how inaccessible to the masses is the height on which sitsthe sage, how unpalatable to the vulgar is a religion withoutcredulity. 

Ever since Cotton Mather took up a collection to convert theHindus, [38] Americans have felt a great interest in missionary laborin India. Under the just and beneficent rule of the British the Hindusto-day are no longer plundered and murdered in the way they once were;nor is there now so striking a contrast between the invader's preceptand example as obtained when India first made the acquaintance ofChristian militants. 

The slight progress of the missionaries, who for centuries have beenworking among the Hindus, is, perhaps, justified in view of thispainful contrast. In its earlier stages there can be no doubt that allsuch progress was thereby impeded. But it is cause for encouragement, rather than for dismay, that the slowness of Christian advance is inpart historically explicable, sad as is the explanation. For againstwhat odds had not the early missionaries to struggle! Not the heathen, but the Christian, barred the way against Christianity. Four hundredyears ago the Portuguese descended upon the Hindus, cross and sword inhand. For a whole century these victorious immigrants, with unheard-ofcruelty and tyranny, cheated, stripped, and slaughtered the natives. After them came the Dutch, but, Dutch or Portuguese, it was the same. For it was merely another century, during which a new band ofChristians hesitated at no crime or outrage, at no meanness orbarbarity, which should win them power in India. In 1758 the Dutchwere conquered by the English, who, becoming now the chiefstandard-bearers of the Christian church, committed, UnderVarisittart, more offences against decency, honor, honesty, andhumanity than is pleasant for believer or unbeliever to record; and, when their own theft had brought revolt, knew no better way to impressthe Hindu with the power of Christianity than to revive the Mogulhorror and slay. (in their victims' fearful belief) both soul and bodyalike by shooting their captives from the cannon's mouth. Such wasChristian example. It is no wonder that the Christian precept ('thoushalt love thy neighbor as thyself') was uttered in vain, or that thefaith it epitomized was rejected. The hand stole and killed; the mouthsaid, 'I love you. ' The Hindu understood theft and murder, but it tookhim some time to learn English. One may hope that this is nowforgotten, for the Hindu has not the historical mind. But all thismust be remembered when the expenditures of Christianity are weighedwith its receipts. [39]

In coming to the end of the long course of Hindu religious thought, itis almost inevitable that one should ask what is the present effect ofmissionary effort upon this people, and what, again, will eventuallybe the direction which the native religious sense, so stronglyimplanted in this folk, will take, whether aided or not by influencefrom without. 

Although it is no part of our purpose to examine into the workings ofthat honest zeal which has succeeded in planting so many stations upthe Indic coast, there are yet some obvious truths which, in the lightof religious history, should be an assistance to all whose work liesin making Hindu converts. To compile these truths from this historywill not be otiose. In the first place, Christian dogma was formallyintroduced into South India in the sixth century; it was known in theNorth in the seventh, and possibly long before this; it was the topicof debate by educated Hindus in the sixteenth and seventeenth. It hashelped to mould the Hindus' own most intellectual sects; and, eitherthrough the influence of Christian or native teaching, or that ofboth, have been created not only the Northern monotheistic schools, but also the strict unitarianism of the later Southern sects, whosescriptures, for at least some centuries, have inculcated the purestmorality and simplest monotheistic creed in language of the mostelevated character. [40] In the second place, the Hindu sectary hasinterwoven withhis doctrine of pantheism that of the trinity. In the third place, theorthodox Brahman recognizes in the cult of Christianity, as that cultis expressed, for instance, in Christmas festivities, one that ischaracteristic, in outward form and inner belief, of a nativeheterodox sect. In the fourth place, the Hindu sectary believes thatthe native expression of trinitarian dogma, faith-doctrine, child-godworship, and madonna-worship takes historical precedence over that ofChristianity; and the orthodox Hindu believes the same of hiscompleted code of lofty moral teachings. Vishnuism is, again, socatholic that it will accept Christ as an _avatar_ of Vishnu, but notas an exclusive manifestation of God. In the fifth place, the Hindudoctors are very well educated, and often very clever, both delightingin debate and acute in argument It follows, if we may draw the obviousinference, that, to attack orthodox Brahmanism, or even heterodoxHinduism, requires much logical ability as well as learning, and thatthe best thing a missionary can do in India, if he be not conscious ofpossessing both these requisites, is to let the native scholars alone. 

But native scholars make but a small part of the population, and amongthe uneducated and 'depressed' classes there is plenty for themissionary to do. Here, too, where caste is hated because theseclasses suffer from it, there is more effect in preaching equality andthe brotherly love of Christianity, doctrines abhorrent to the socialaristocrats, and not favored even by the middle classes. But what hereopposes Christian efforts is the splendid system of devotion, themagnificent fêtes, the gorgeous shows, and the tickling ritualism, which please and overawe the fancy of the native, who is apt to desirefor himself a pageant of religion, not to speak of a visible god inidol form; while from his religious teacher he demands either anasceticism which is no part of the Christian faith, or a leadership insensuous and sensual worship. 

What will be the result of proselytizing zeal among these variegatedmasses?[41] Evidently this depends on where and how it is exercised. The orthodox theologian will not give up his inherited faith for onethat to him is on a par with a schismatic heresy, or take dogmaticinstruction from a level which he regards as intellectually below hisown. From the Sam[=a]jas no present help will come to the missionary;for, while they have already accepted the spirit of Christianity, liberal Hindus reject the Christian creed. [42] At a later day theywill join hands with the missionary, perhaps, but not before thelatter is prepared to say: There is but one God, and many are hisprophets. 

There remain such of the higher classes as can be induced to preferundogmatic Christianity to polytheism, and the lowest class, which maybe persuaded by acts of kindness to accept the dogmas with which theseare accompanied. It is with this class that the missionary hassucceeded best. In other cases his success has been in inverse ratioto the amount of his dogmatic teaching. And this we believe to be thekey to the second problem. For, if one examine the maze of India'stangled creeds, he will be surprised to find that, though dogmaticChristianity has its Indic representative, there yet is no indigenousrepresentative of undogmatic Christianity. For agod in human form is worshipped, and a trinity is revered; but this isnot Christianity. Love of man is preached; but this is notChristianity. Love of God and faith in his earthly incarnation istaught; but this, again, is not Christianity. No sect has everformulated as an original doctrine Christ's two indissolublecommandments, on which hang all the law and the prophets. 

It would seem, therefore, that to inculcate active kindness, simplemorality, and the simplest creed were the most persuasive means ofconverting the Hindu, if the teacher unite with this a practicalaffection, without venturing upon ratiocination, and without seekingto attract by display, which at best cannot compete with nativepageants. [43] Moreover, on the basis of undogmatic teaching, themissionary even now can unite with the Sam[=a]j and Sittar church, neither of which is of indigenous origin, though both are native intheir secondary growth. For it is significant that it is the Christianunion of morality and altruism which has appealed to each of thesereligious bodies, and which each of them has made its own. Ininsisting upon a strict morality the Christian missionary will besupported by the purest creeds of India itself, by Brahmanism, unsectarian Hinduism, the Jain heretics, and many others, all of whomeither taught the same morality before Christianity existed, ordeveloped it without Christian aid. The strength of Christian teachinglies in uniting with this the practical altruism which was taught byChrist. In her own religions there is no hope for India, and her bestminds have renounced them. Thebody of Hinduism is corrupt, its soul is evil. As for Brahmanism--theBrahmanism that produced the Upanishads--the spirit is departed, andthe form that remains is dead. But a new spirit, the spirit ofprogress and of education, will prevail at last. When it rules it willundo the bonds of caste and do away with low superstition. Then Indiaalso will be free to accept, as the creed of her new religion, Christ's words, 'Thou shalt love the Lord thy God, and thy neighbor asthyself. ' But to educate India up to this point will take manycenturies, even more, perhaps, than will be needed to educate in thesame degree Europe and America. [44]

 * * * * *

 FOOTNOTES:

 [Footnote 1: Lassen interprets _ophir_ as Abh[=i]ras, at the mouth of the Indus. The biblical _koph_ is Sanskrit _kapi_, ape. Other doubtful equivalents are discussed by Weber, _Indische Skizzen_, p. 74. ]

 [Footnote 2: The legend of the Flood and the fancy of the Four Ages has been attributed to Babylon by some writers. Ecstein claims Chaldean influence in Indic atomic philosophy, _Indische Studien_, ii. 369, which is doubtful; but the Indic alphabet probably derived thence, possibly from Greece. The conquests of Semiramis (Serimamis in the original) may have included a part of India, but only Brunnhofer finds trace of this in Vedic literature, and the character of his work we have already described. ]

 [Footnote 3: Senart attributes to the Achaemenides certain Indic formulae of administration. IA. Xx. 256. ]

 [Footnote 4: Certain Hindu names, like those to which we called attention in the epic, containing Mihira, _i. E. , _ Mithra; the Magas; _i. E. , _ Magi; and recommendations of sun-worship in the Pur[=a]nas are the facts on which Weber bases a theory of great influence of Persia at this later period. Weber claims, in fact, that the native sun-worship was quite replaced by this importation (_Indische Skizzen_, p. 104). This we do not believe. Even the great number of Persians who, driven out by Arabians, settled in Gujar[=a]t (the name of Bombay is the same with Pumbadita, a Jewish settlement in Mesopotamia) had no other effect on the Brahmanic world that absorbed them (_ib. _ p. 109) than to intensify the fervor of a native cult. ]

 [Footnote 5: Weber ascribes to Greek influence the Hindus first acquaintance with the planets. On a possible dramatic loan see above, p. 2, note. The Greeks were first to get into the heart of India (as far as Patna), and between the court of Antiochus the Great and the king S[=a]ubhagasena there was formal exchange of ambassadors in the third century B. C. The name of Demetrius appears as Datt[. A]mitra in the Hindu epic. He had "extended his rule over the Indus as far as the Hydaspes and perhaps over M[=a]lava and Gujarat" (about 200 B. C. ; Weber, _Skizzen_). In the second century Menandros (the Buddhists' 'Milinda') got as far as the Jumna; but his successors retreated to the Punj[=a]b and eventually to Kabul (_ib_. ) Compare also Weber, _Sitz. D. König. Preuss. Akad_. , 1890, p. 901 ff. , _Die Griechien in Indien_. The period of Greek influence coincides with that of Buddhist supremacy in its first vigor, and it is for this reason that Brahmanic literature and religion were so untouched by it. There is to our mind no great probability that the Hindu epic owes anything to that of Greece, although Weber has put in a strong plea for this view in his essay _Ueber das R[=a]m[=a]ya[n. ]a_. ]

 [Footnote 6: The romance of a Russian traveller's late 'discovery, ' which Sanskrit scholars estimate at its true value, but which may seem to others worthy of regard, is perhaps, in view of the interest taken in it, one that should be told correctly. Nicholas Notovitch asserts that he discovered seven years ago in the Tibetan monastery of Himis, a work which purports to give a life of Christ from birth to death, including sixteen years spent in India. This life of 'Issa' (Jesus) is declared to have been written in the first century of the Christian era. Unfortunately for the reputation of the finder, he made a mistake in exploiting his discovery, and stated that his manuscript had been translated for him by the monks of Himis 'out of the original P[=a]li, ' a dialect that these monks could not understand if they had specimens of it before them. This settled Notovitch's case, and since of course he did not transcribe a word of the MS. Thus freely put at his disposal, but published the forgery in a French 'translation, ' he may be added to the list of other imposters of his ilk. The humbug has been exposed for some time, and we know of no one who, having a right to express an opinion, believes Notovitch's tale, though some ignorant people have been hoaxed by it. If the blank sixteen years in Christ's life ever be explained, it may be found that they were passed in a Zoroastrian environment; but until real evidence be brought to show that Christ was in India, the wise will continue to doubt it. As little proof exists, it may be added, of Buddhistic influence in the making of the Gospels. But this point is nowadays scarcely worth discussing, for competent scholars no longer refer vague likenesses to borrowing. Certain features are common to the story of Christ and to the legends of Buddha; but they are common to other divine narratives also. The striking similarities are not found in the earliest texts of the Southern Buddhists. [=I]ça for Jesus is modern, Weber, _loc. Cit. _, p. 931. ]

 [Footnote 7: Elphinstone, I. Pp, 140, 508; II. Chap. I. The 'slave dynasty' of Kutab, 1206-1288. It was the bigoted barbarity of these Mohammedans that drove Brahmanic religion into the South. ]

 [Footnote 8: Though immediately before it the Harihara cult, survival of Sankhyan dualism, is practically monotheistic. Basava belongs to the twelfth century. ]

 [Footnote 9: The literary exchange in the realm of fable between Arabia and later Sanskrit writers (of the twelfth century) is very evident. Thus in Indic dress appear at this time the story of Troy, of the passage over the Red Sea, of Jonas, etc. On the other hand, the Arabians translated native Hindu fables. See Weber, IS. Iii. 327, _Ueber den Zusammenhang griechischer Fabeln mit indischen_, and _Indische Skizzen_, p. 111, and _Die Griechen in Indien_. Arabia further drew on India for philosophical material, and Alber[=u]ni himself translated Kapila's work (Weber, _loc. Cit_. ). ]

 [Footnote 10: Whereby cows, snakes, cats (sacred to one of the Çivaite 'mothers'), crocodiles, monkeys, etc, are worshipped. ]

 [Footnote 11: Pantheists in name alone, most of the lower caste-men are practically polytheists, and this means that they are at bottom dualists. They are wont to worship assiduously but one of the gods they recognize. ]

 [Footnote 12: Where Brahmanism may be said to cease and Hinduism to begin can be defined but vaguely. Krishnaism is rank Hinduism. But Çivaism is half Brahmanic. For the rest, in its essential aspects, Hinduism is as old as the Hindus. Only the form changes (as it intrudes upon Brahmanism). ]

 [Footnote 13: It is highly probable that the mention of the Northwestern Ç[=u]dras in Mbh[=a]. VI. 9. 67 refers to the Afghan S[=u]droi, and that the slave-caste as a whole, which bears the name Ç[=u]dra, received this appellation first as conquered tribes of Afghanistan. ]

 [Footnote 14: Brahmanism has always been an island in a sea. Even in the Brahmanic age there is evidence to show that it was the isolated belief of a comparatively small group of minds. It did not even control all the Aryan population. ]

 [Footnote 15: We refer partly to literature, that of the drama and novel, for instance; and partly to the fine arts. But in connection with the latter it may be remarked that painting, and the fine arts generally, are expressly reckoned as the pursuit of slaves alone. For instance, even as late a jurist as he that wrote the law-code of 'Vishnu' thus (chap. Ii. ) parcels out the duties and occupations of the four castes: The duty of a priest is to teach the Veda, his means of livelihood is to sacrifice for others and to receive aims; the duty of the warrior is to fight, his means of livelihood is to receive taxes for protecting the other castes; the duty of the V[=a]içya is to tend cattle, his means of livelihood 1s gain from flocks, farm, trade, or money-lending. The duty of a slave, Çudra, is to serve the three upper castes; his means of livelihood is the fine arts. ]

 [Footnote 16: It is this that has exaggerated, though not produced, that most marked of native beliefs, a faith which Intertwines with every system, Brahmanic, Buddhistic, or Hinduistic, a belief in an ecstatic power in man which gives him control over supernatural forces. Today this Yogism and Mah[=a]tmaism, which is visible even in the Rig Veda, is nothing but unbridled fancy playing with mesmerism and lies. ]

 [Footnote 17: The Hindu sectarian cults are often strangely like those of Greece in details, which, as we have already suggested, must revert to a like, though not necessarily mutual, source of primitive superstition. Even the sacred free bulls, which roam at large, look like old familiar friends, [Greek: aphetôn dniôn taurôn en tps tou IIoseidônos Ierps] (Plato, _Kritias_, 119); and we have dared to question whether Lang's 'Bull-roarer' might not be sought in the command that the priest should make the bull roar at the sacrifice; and in the verse of the Rig Veda which says that the priests "beget (produce) the Dawn by means of the roar of a bull" (vii. 79. 4); or must the bull be _soma_? For Müller's defence of the Hindu's veraciousness, see his _/India, What Can It Teach Us_, p. 34. ]

 [Footnote 18: Some exception may be taken to this on the ground that moral laws really are referred to the Creator in one form or another, This we acknowledge as a theory of authority, but it so seldom comes into play, and there is so little rapport between gods and moral goodness, that the difference in this regard is greater by far than the resemblance. A Christian sins against God, a Hindu sins against himself. The Christian may be punished by God; the Hindu punishes himself (the _karma_). The latter may say that moral laws are of God, but he means that they are natural laws, the violation of which has the same effect as touching fire. ]

 [Footnote 19: The _lex talionis_ is in full force in Hindu law, even in the codes of Hinduism; for example, 'Vishnu, ' V. 19. ]

 [Footnote 20: Deceit of a foe is no sin in any system. "All is fair in war. "]

 [Footnote 21: This idea may be carried out in other instances. The bravery of civilization is not the bravado that savages call bravery, and modesty is now a virtue where boasting used to be reckoned as the necessary complement of bravery. As for hospitality in the old sense, it is not now a 'virtue' not to kill a guest. ]

 [Footnote 22: India's relations with Rome were late and wholly of mercantile character. ]

 [Footnote 23: It is interesting, as showing incidentally the close connection between Buddhism and Çivaism in other than philosophical aspects, that the first Indic grotto-temple mentioned by foreigners (in the third century A. D. ) was one which contained a statue of an androgynous (Çivaite) deity (Weber, _Indische Skizzen_, p. 86, note). ]

 [Footnote 24: Rosaries are first mentioned in the AV. Pariçista, XLIII. 4. 11 (Leumann, Rosaries). ]

 [Footnote 25: In Lamaism there is also the tiara-crowned pope, and the transubstantiation theory; the reverence to Virgin and Child, confessions, fasts, purgatory, abbots, cardinals, etc. Compare David's _Hibbert Lectures_, p. 193. ]

 [Footnote 26: The literature on this subject is very extensive (see the Bibliography). On Buddhism and Christianity see Bohlen's _Altes Indien_, I. 334 (Weber, _Indische Skizzen_, p. 92). At a recent meeting of the British Association E. B. Tylor presented a paper in which is made an attempt to show Buddhistic influence on pre-Columbian culture in America. On comparing the Aztec picture-writing account of the journey of the soul after death with Buddhistic eschatology, he is forced to the conclusion that there was direct transmission from Buddhism. We require more proof than Aztec pictures of hell to believe any such theory; and reckon this attempt to those already discussed in the eighth chapter. ]

 [Footnote 27: It is a mooted question in how far the influence in this line has been reciprocal. See _Indische Studien_, iii. 128. ]

 [Footnote 28: The S[=a]nkhya has no systematic connection with the 'numbers' of Pythagoras. ]

 [Footnote 29: Compare on the Çulvas[=u]tras, Thibaut, J. A. Beng. Xliv. P. 227; Von Schroeder, _Pythagoras und die Inder; Literatur und Cultur_, p. 718 ff, who also cites Cantor, _Geschichte der Mathematik_, p. 540, and refutes the possibility, suggested by the latter, of the loan being from Greece to India on the ground that the Çulvas[=u]tra are too old to belong to the Alexandrine period, and too essentlal a part of the religious literature to have been borrowed; and also on the ground that they are not an addition to the Çr[=a]utas[=u]tra, but they make an independent portion (p. 721, note). ]

 [Footnote 30: Compare Garbe (_loc. Cit_. Below), and his _S[=a][. M]khya Philosophic_, p. 94. ]

 [Footnote 31: This view is not one universally accepted by Sanskrit scholars. See, for instance, Weber, _Die Griechen in Indien_. But to us the minute resemblance appears too striking to be accidental. ]

 [Footnote 32: Lassen, and Weber, _Indische Skizzen, p_. 91. ]

 [Footnote 33: Garbe, in a recent number of the _Monist_, where is given a _résumé_ of the relations between Greek and Hindu philosophical thought. ]

 [Footnote 34: Weber, _loc. Cit. _]

 [Footnote 35: The existence of a soul (spirit) in man is always assumed in the Upanishads. In the pantheistic system (the completed Ved[=a]nta) the verity of traditional belief is also assumed. The latter assumption is made, too, though not in so pronounced a manner, in the Upanishads. ]

 [Footnote 36: The Upanishad philosopher sought only to save his life, but the Buddhist, to lose it. ]

 [Footnote 37: This is not a negative 'non-injury' kindness. It is a love 'far-reaching, all*pervading' (above, p. 333). The Buddhist is no Stoic save in the stoicism with which he looks forward to his own end. Rhys Davids has suggested that the popularity of Tibet Buddhism in distinction from Southern Buddhism may have been due to the greater weight laid by the former on altruism. For, while the earlier Buddhist strives chiefly for his own perfection, the spiritualist of the North affects greater love for his kind, and becomes wise to save others. The former is content to be an Arhat; the latter desires to be a Bodhisat, 'teacher of the law' (_Hibbert Lectures_, p. 254). We think, however, that the latter's success with the vulgar was the result rather of his own greater mental vulgarity and animism. ]

 [Footnote 38: Hurst's _Indika_, chap. XLIX, referring to _India Christiana_ of 1721, and the correspondence between Mather and Ziegenbalg, who was then a missionary in India. The wealthy 'young men' who contributed were, in Hurst's opinion, Harvard students. ]

 [Footnote 39: The Portuguese landed in Calcutta in 1498. They were driven out by the Dutch, to whom they ceded their mercantile monopoly, in 1640-1644. The Dutch had arrived in 1596, and held their ground till their supremacy was wrested from them by Clive in 1758, The British had followed the Dutch closely (arriving in 1600), and were themselves followed soon after by the Germans and Danes (whose activity soon subsided), and by the French. The German company, under whose protection stood Ziegenbalg, was one of the last to enter India, and first to leave it (1717-1726). The most grotesquely hideous era in India's history is that which was inaugurated by the supremacy of the Christian British. Major Munroe's barbaric punishment of the Sepoys took place, however, in Clive's absence (1760-1765). Marshman, I, p. 305, says of this Munroe only that he was "an officer of undaunted resolution"! Clive himself was acquitted by his own countrymen of theft, robbery, and extortion; but the Hindus have not acquitted him or Hastings; nor will Christianity ever do so. ]

 [Footnote 40: For specimens of the sacred Kural of Tiruvalluvar N[=a]r[=a]yana*N[=a]yan[=]r, see the examples given by Pope, _Indian Antiquary_, seventh and following volumes. The Sittars, to whom we have referred above, are a more modern sect. Their precept that love is the essential of religion is not, as in the case of the Hindu idolators, of erotic nature. They seem to be the modern representatives of that Buddhistic division (see above) called S[=a]ugatas, whose religion consists in 'kindness to all. ' In these sects there is found quietism, a kind of quakerism, pure morality, high teaching, sternest (almost bigoted) monotheism, and the doctrine of positive altruism, strange to the Hindu idolator as to the Brahman. The Prem S[=a]gar, or 'Ocean of Love, ' is a modern Hindu work, which illustrates the religious love opposed to that of the Sittars, namely, the mystic love of the Krishnaite for his savior, whose grace is given only to him that has faith. It is the mystic rapt adoration that in expression becomes erotic and sensual. ]

 [Footnote 41: Hinduism itself is unconsciously doing a reforming work among the wild tribes that are not touched by the Christian missionary. These tribes, becoming Hinduized, become civilized, and, in so far as they are thus made approachable, they are put in the way of improvement; though civilization often has a bad effect upon their morals for a season. ]

 [Footnote 42: The substitution of the doctrine of redemption for that of _karma_ is intellectually impossible for an educated Hindu. He may renounce the latter, but he cannot accept the former. The nearest approach to such a conception is that of the Buddhistic 'Redeemer' heresy referred to above. In all other regards Samaj and pantheism are too catholic to be affected; In this regard they are both unyielding. ]

 [Footnote 43: We question, for instance, the advisability of such means to "fill up the church" as is described in a missionary report delivered at the last meeting of the Missionary Union of the Classis of New York for the current year: "A man is sent to ride on a bicycle as fast as he can through the different streets. This invariably attracts attention. Boys and men follow him to the church, where it is easy to persuade them to enter. " But this is an admission of our position in regard to the classes affected. The rabble may be Christianized by this means, but the intelligent will not be attracted. ]

 [Footnote 44: After the greater part of our work had passed the final revision, and several months after the whole was gone to press, appeared Oldenberg's _Die Religion des Veda_, which, as the last new book on the subject, deserves a special note. The author here takes a liberal view, and does not hesitate to illustrate Vedic religion with the light cast by other forms of superstition. But this method has its dangers, and there is perhaps a little too much straining after original types, giant-gods as prototypes and totemism in proper names, where Vedic data should be separated from what may have preceded Vedic belief. Oldenberg, as a ritualist, finds in Varuna, Dawn, and the Burial Service the inevitable stumbling-blocks of such scholars as confuse Brahmanism with early Vedism. To remove these obstacles he suggests that Varuna, as the moon, was borrowed from the Semites or Akkadians (though be frankly admits that not even the shadow of this moon lingers in Vedic belief); explains Dawn's non-participation in _soma_ by stating that she never participates in it (which explains nothing); and jumps over the Burial Hymn with the inquiry whether, after all, it could not be interpreted as a cremation-hymn (the obvious answer being that the service does imply burial, and does not even hint at cremation). On the other hand, when theoretical barbarism and ritualism are foregone, Oldenberg has a true eye for the estimation of facts, and hence takes an unimpeachable position in several important particulars, notably in rejecting Jacobi's date of the Rig Veda; in rejecting also Hillebrandt's moon-_soma_; in denying an originally supreme Dy[=a]us; in his explanation of henotheism (substantially one with the explanation we gave a year ago); and in his account of the relation of the Rig Veda to the (later) Atharvan. Despite an occasional brilliant suggestion, which makes the work more exciting than reliable, this book will prove of great value to them that are particularly interested in the ritual; though the reader must be on his guard against the substitution of deduction for induction, as manifested in the confusion of epochs, and in the tendency to interpret by analogy rather than in accordance with historical data. The worth of the latter part of the book is impaired by an unsubstantiated theory of sacrifice, but as a whole it presents a clear and valuable view of the cult. ]

 * * * * *

ADDENDA. 

Page 154, note 3: Add to (RV. ) x. 173, AV. Vi. 88. 

Page 327, third line from the top: Read Buddhaghosha. According toChalmers, as quoted by T. W. Rhys Davids in his recent lectures, tracesof mysticism are found in some of the early texts (as yetunpublished). The fact that the canonical P[=a]li books know nothingof the controversy (involving the modification of traditional rules)of the second council gives a terminus to the canon. Senart, on theother hand, thinks that the vague language of the Açoka inscriptionsprecludes the fixing of the canon at so early a date. 

Page 340, note 4: The gods here are priests. The real meaning seems tobe that the Brahman priests, who were regarded as gods, have been putto naught in being reduced to their true estate. Compare Senart, (revised) _Inscriptions de Piyadasi_, third chapter. Açoka dismissedthe Brahman priests that his father had maintained, and substitutedBuddhist monks. 

Page 436, note 2: From B[=e]r[=u]n[=i] it would appear that the Guptaand Valabh[=i] eras were identical (319-20 A. D). See Fleet, IndianAntiquary, xvii. 245. Many scholars now assign Kum[=a]rila to theeighth century rather than to the end of the seventh. 

 * * * * *

BIBLIOGRAPHY. [1]

GENERAL WORKS. 

#Journals#: Journal of the Royal Asiatic Soctety (JRAS. );[2] Journal ofthe German Oriental Society (Zeitschrift der DeutschenMorgenländischen Gesellschaft, ZDMG. ); Journal Asiatique (JA. );Journal of the American Oriental Society (JAOS. ); Branch-Journals ofthe JRAS. ; Calcutta Review; Madras Journal; Indian Antiquary (IA. ). Some of the articles in the defunct Zeitschrift für die Kunde desMorgenlandes (ZKM. ), and in the old Asiatick Researches (AR. ) arestill worth reading. Besides these, the most important modern journalsare the transactions of the royal Austrian, Bavarian, Prussian, andSaxon Academies, the Muséon and the Revue de l'histoire des religions. Occasional articles bearing on India's religions or mythology will befound in the American Journal of Philology (AJP. ); the WienerZeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes (WZKM. ); the Babylonian andOriental Record (BOR. ); Kühn's Zeitschrift für vergleichendeSprachforschuhg (KZ. ); Bezzenberger's Beiträge (BB. ); and theIndogermanische Forschungen (IF. ). 

#Histories, studies, etc. #: Prinsep, Essays (Indian Antiquities);Lassen, Indische Alterthumskunde. Histories of India by Elphinstone(religious material, chapters iv book i, and iv book ii), byElliot, by Marshman (complements Elphinstone), and by Wheeler(unreliable); The Rulers of India; Hunter's Indian Empire and BriefHistory. Mill's excellent History of India is somewhat prejudiced. Dutt's History of Civilization in Ancient India is praise-worthy(1890). Invaluable are the great descriptive Archaeological Surveys byCunningham, Burgess, and Bühler, and Hunter's Statistical Account ofBengal. Literary History:[3] Colebrooke, Essays, reedited by Cowell, with notes by Whitney; Wilson, Essays; Weber, Indische Studien (IS. );Benfey, Orient and Occident (OO. ); Müller, Ancient Sanskrit Literature(ASL. ), Science of Religion; Weber, Vorlesungen über IndischeLiteraturgeschichte (also translated), Indische Streifen, IndischeSkizzen; L. Von Schroeder, Indiens Literatur und Cultur; Whitney, Oriental and Linguistic Studies, Language and the Study of Language;Duncker, Geschichte des Alterthums (third volume, may be boughtseparately); Williams, Indian Wisdom (inaccurate but readable). 

VEDIC RELIGION. 

#Literature#: Roth, Zur Literatur und Geschichte des Weda;[4] Benfey, Vedica und Verwandtes; Zimmer, Altindisches Leben (AIL. );R[=a]jendralala Mitra, Indo-Aryans(unreliable); Bergaigne, La ReligionVédique (also JA. Ix, xiii); De Gubernatis, Letture sopra la MitologiaVedica; Pischel and Geldner, Vedische Studien;[5] Regnaud, Le Rig Vedaet les origines de la mythologie indo-européenne, and Les hymnes duRig Veda, sont-ils prières? (Ann. D. Mus. Guimet, Bibl. D'études, t. I, and special studies). Regnaud's point of view renders nugatory mostof what he writes on the Veda. [6] The most useful collection of Vedicand Brahmanic Texts that illustrate Hindu Mythology and Religion is tobe found in Muir's Original Sanskrit Texts (OST. ), especially thefourth and fifth volumes. [7] For the Sacred Books of the East (SBE. )see Hems below. 

#Translations of the rig veda#: Complete, by Grassmann and by Ludwig;partial, by Roth, Benfey, Langlois, Bergaigne; in English chiefly byWilson, Müller, Muir, Peterson, Griffith. Of these the Germantranslation of Grassmann is often inaccurate;[8] that of Ludwig, oftenunintelligible. Benfey has translated a number of specimens, OO. , BB. , i, vii, and in Kleinere Schriften. The incomplete translation ofWilson has been carried on by Cowell; those of Peterson and Griffithare publishing in India; Langlois' is useless. Müller's partialtranslations will be found in various volumes, Ancient SanskritLiterature, India: What Can it Teach Us, Chips, Hibbert Lectures, JRAS. Ii. 448, iii. 199, etc. ; and all the Hymns to the Maruts, SBE. Xxxii. Whitney has translated the cosmogonic hymn, PAOS. , May, 1882;and Deussen has just published the philosophical hymns, Geschichte derPhilosophie, i, 1. A group of Vedic hymns in English dress will befound in Muir, OST. V. ; extracts (without connection) are given byBergaigne, in La Religion Védique, and special essays in JA. (above). In German a capital little collection is the Siebzig Lieder of Geldnerand Kaegi. The best general introductory manual for the study of theRig Veda, accompanied with frequent translations, is Kaegi's Der RigVeda (translated into English by Arrowsmith). 

#Translations of the atharva veda# are all partial. The handiestcollection is Grill's Hundert Lieder des Atharva Veda. Specimens willbe found translated by Aufrecht, IS. I. 121 (book xv); (Roth) Bruce, JRAS. 1862, p. 321 (book xii. 1); Kuhn, Indische und GermanischeSegensspriiche, KZ. Xiii. 49, 113; Weber, IS. Iv. 393, v. 195, 218, xiii. 129, xvii. 178 (books i-iii, xiv); Grohmann, _ib. _ ix. 381;Ludwig, vol. Iii, of his translation of the Rig Veda; Zimmer, AIL. :Victor Henry, books vii and xiii (Les hymnes Rohitas);[9] Bloomfield, Seven Hymns, and Contributions AJP. Vii. 466, xi. 319, xii. 414, JAOS. Xv. 143, xvi. 1; ZDMG. Xlviii. 541; Florenz, BB. Xii. 249 (book vi. ). Of The S[=a]ma V[=e]da: Stevenson (1842) in English (inaccurate) andBenfey (1848) in Gcrman have made translations. On the Yajur Vedasee Schroeder, Literatur und Cultur, and below. 

#Vedic mythology#: Windischmann, Ursagen der Arischen Völker, Bay. Ak. , 1858; Kuhn, KZ. Iv. 88, Herabkunft des Feuers (Prometheus);[10]Roth, Die höchsten Götter der Arischen Völker, ZDMG. Vi. 67 (_ib. _vii. 607); Wilson, Preface of Langlois: Cox, Aryan Mythology; Whitney, Oriental and Linguistic Studies, ii. P. 149, JAOS. Iii. 291, 331;Müller, Second Series of Science of Language, Biographies ofWords. [11] General interpretation of divinities, Müller, Muir, Bergaigne, Kaegi, Pischel-Geldner, _loc. Cit. _ The last books on thesubject are Oldenberg's scholarly volume, Die Religlon des Veda (note, p. 571, above), and Phillip's The Teaching of the Vedas (1895), thework of a charlatan. 

SPECIAL STUDIES OF VEDIC DIVINITIES:

#Aditi#: Roth, IS. Xiv. 392; Hillebrandt, Ueber die Göttin Aditi;Müller, SBE. Xxxii. 241; Colinet, Étude sur le mot Aditi, Muséon, xii. 81. [=A]dityas, Roth, ZDMG. Vi. 67 (above); Darmesteter, Ormazd etAhriman. 

#Agni#: L. Von Schroeder, Apollon-Agni, KZ. Xxix. 193[12] (see epic, below). 

#Apsaras# (see Gandhanas). 

#Aryaman# (Açvins, Mitra, etc. ): Bollensen, ZDMG. Xli. 494. 

#Asura# as Asen, Schrader, p. 599; P. Von Bradke, Dy[=a]us Asura. SeeDy[=a]us. 

#Açvins#: Myriantheus, Die Açvins oder Arischen Dioskuren; _not_Dioskuroi, Pischel, Vedische Studien, Preface, p. Xxvii; asconstellation, etc. , Benfey, OO. Ii. 245, iii. 159; Gemini, Weber, last in R[=a]jas[=u]ya, p. 100; as Venus, 'span-god, ' Bollensen, ZDMG. Xli. 496; other literature, Muir, OST. V. 234; Colinet, Vedic Chips, BOR. Iii. 193 (n[=a]satya, Avestan n[=a]onhaithya, n[=a] as'very'). [13]

#Brihaspati#: Roth, ZDMG. I. 66; Muir, v. 272; Hillebrandt, VedischeMythologie, i. 404. 

#Dawn# (see Ushas). 

#Dy[=a]us#: P. Von Bradke, Dy[=a]us Asura, also Beiträge, ZDMG. Xl. 347; not the same with Teutonic Tiu, Bremer, IF. Iii. 301; as'all-father' of primitive Aryans, Müller, Origin of Religion, p. 209;followed by Tiele, Outlines of History of Ancient religions, p. 106;see Hopkins, PAOS. Dec. 1894; form of Word, Collitz. KZ. Xxvii. 187;BB. Xv. 17. 

#Earth# (see Nritus). 

#Gandharvas#: KZ. I. 513; Meyer, Gandharven-Kentauren (list ofApsarasas); Pischel, VS. I. 78; Hillebrandt, Vedische Mythologie, i. 427. 

#Haritas# (sun's steeds) as Charites, KZ. X. 96; ib. 365; Sonne, _loc. Cit. S_. S[=u]ryra; Müller, Science of Language, ii. 388. 

#Heaven# (see Dy[=a]us and Varuna). 

#Indra# (etymology, Benfey, OO. I. 49; PW. Sv. ; añdra, A. -Sax. 'ent, ''giant, ' BB. I. 342;[17]] nar, [Greek: _anor-_, Jacobi, KZ. Xxxi. 316;Indra's bolt, vadha, 'wetter, ' Delbrück, KZ. Xvi. 266): Perry, Indrain the Rig Veda, JAOS. Xi. 117 (see epic, below). 

#K[=a]ma#: Weber, ZDMG. Xiv. 269, IS. V. 224, xvii. 290; Muir, v. 402. 

#Manu#:[15] Roth, ZDMG. Iv. 430; Weber, IS. I. 194 ('man and moon'), ZDMG. Iv. 302; Muir, OST. I. 161; Kuhn, KZ. Iv. 91; Burnouf, Prefaceof Bh[=a]g. Pur[=a]na, p. Iii; Ascoli (m[=a]nus, mactus), KZ. Xvii. 334; Maspiter as 'man, ' Corssen, KZ. Ii. 32;[16] Manu's wife, Weber, ZDMG. Xviii. 286. Compare also KZ. Xii. 293, xix. 156, Mannus (seeLaws, below). 

#Maruts# (dubious etymology, Grassmann, KZ. Xvi. 161; P. Von Bradke, _loc. Cit. S. _. Dy[=a]us): von Bradke, Wunderliche Geburt, Festgrussan Roth, p. 117 (Brahmanic, same point of view in parody, RV. X. 102, ZDMG. Xlvi. 445). Hymns to Maruts, translated by Müller, SBE. Xxxii. 

#Mitra#: Windischmann, Abh. K. M. , 1857; Weber, IS. Xvii. 212 (seeVaruna). 

#Namuci#: Lanman, JAS. Beng. Viii. 1889; Bloomfield, JAOS. Xv. 143. 

#Nritus# as Nerthus, Hoffmann; (Roth) Bruce, Vedic Conceptions of theEarth, JRAS. 1862, p. 321; Prithiv[=i], ZDMG. Xli. 494. 

#Parjanya#: Bühler, Zur Mythologic des Rig Yeda, OO. I. 214; Hirt, 1F. I. 481, 'oak-god. '[4]

#Purandhi#: Pischel, VS. I. 202; Hillebrandt, WZKM. Iii. 188, 259;Colinet, BOR. Ii. 245, iv. 121 ('abundance'), Congress, 1892. 

#Priçni# (p[r. ]çni) as Frigy, KZ. Ii. 478; 'freckles, ' KZ. Xix. 438. 

#P[=u]shan#: Muir, OST. V. 171; Bergaigne, La Relig. Vèd. Ii. 420;Hillebrandt, ved. Myth. , i. 456 (with soma); gubernatis, letture, p. 82 (as setting sun); pischel, vs. I. 11 (s[=u]ry[=a] and p[=u]shan);perry, notes on the vedic deity p[=u]shan, drisler memorial, p. 240. 

#Ribhus# ([r. ]bhavas, etymology, 'alf, ' 'Orpheus'; or Orpheus from[r. ]gh, [Greek: orchietai], Kuhn KZ. Iv. 103; Wackernagel, KZ. Xxiv. 297); Ludwig, iii. 187, as Seasons. Nève, Études sur les hymnes(1842), and Essai sur le mythe des Ribhavas (1847, misleading, Ribhuas apotheosis). 

#Rohitas#: Henry (above). 

#Rudra# (etymology, Pischel, VS. I. 57[18]): Weber, Vedic Conceptionof, IS. Ii. 19; Pischel, Vedica, ZDMG. Xl. 120; Rudra's mouseand Smintheus, KZ. Iii. 335; Grohmann, Apollo Smintheus und dieBedeutung der Mäuse in der Mythologie der Indogermanen. 

#Sarany[=u]# (sara[n. ]y[=u]): [Greek: ertngis], ZDA. Vi. 117; KZ. I. 439 (storm; riddle, _ib_. 440); Bloomfield, JAOS. Xv. 172; as Dawn, Müller, Lectures, Second Series; Saram[=a], and S[=a]rameyas asHermeias, _ib. _; Aufrecht, ZDMG. Xiii. 493 (RV. X. 108, translated). 

#Soma#: Windischmann, Ueber den Somacultus der Arier, Abh. Münch. Ak. , iv; Roth, ZDMG. Xxxv. 681, xxxviii. 134; Ehni, _ib. _ xxxiii. 166;Hillebrandt, Vedische Mythologie, i; Soma and the eagle, Kuhn, Herabkunft (above); Roth, ZDMG. Xxxvi. 353; Bloomfield, JAOS. Xvi (p. 1, further literature), Festgruss an Roth, p. 149; Weber, VedischeBeiträge, p. 3 (Sitz. Berl. Ak. 1894, p. 775); and Agni ritual, Knauer, Vedische Fragen, Festgruss an Roth, p. 61. 

#Surya# (see Haritas): sonne, hymn to, kz. Xii-xv; form of word, j. Schmidt, kz. Xxvi. 9. See p[=u]shan (and hinduism, below). S[=a]vitr[=i], whitney, colebrooke's essays, ii. Iii. 

#Trita#: Macdonnell, Mythological Studies, JRAS. 1893, p. 419 (ap[=a]mnap[=a]t, lightning; Trita as Thridhi, name of Odin, 'third' form offire); form of word, BB. Ix. 99; Perry, see Indra (p. 26); Bloomfield, PAOS. 1894, p. Cxix. Other literature, Kaegi, _loc. Cit. _, note 112 d. 

#Ushas# (U[S. ]AS): Muir, v. 181; Bergaigne, i. 241, etc; Sonne, KZ. X. 416; Müller, Science of Language, ii. 391, etc. 

#Vv[=a]c#: logos, Weber, IS. Ix. 473. 

#Varuna# (varu[n. ]a): Roth, ZDMG. Vi. 71; Weber, IS. Xvii. 212; Muir, v. 58; Bergaigne, iii. 110; Hillebrandt, Varu[n. ]a und Mitra;Darmesteter, Ormazd et Ahriman; Sonne, KZ. Xii. 364; Pischel, VS. I. 188; Geldner, _ib_. 142; Ludwig, iii. 314; Oldenberg as a borrowed god(PAOS. 1894); as water, Geldner, BB. Xi. 329; form of word, Bolensen, ZDMG. Xli. 504 (var 'hell sein'); Bohnenberger (Roth), Varu[n. ]a nachden Liedern des Rig Veda (Mitra as appellative becomes a new god, p. 85);[19] as svar, Regnaud, Rev. Xix. 79. 

#Vastoshpati# ('house-lord'): Windisch, Vassus und Vassallus, Bericht. D. K. Säch. Gesell. 1892, p. 174 (vassus for vast). 

#V[=a]ta#, vayu (v[=a]ta is [Greek: aêtês], 'wind'): Stokes, BB. Xix. 74, compares Irish fath, 'breath, ' but gives also fáth, a kind of poem(vates, vôds, English 'wood' as 'mad'). V[=a]ta, Wuotan, Zimmer, ZDA. Vii. (19) 179

#Vishnu# (vi[s. ][n. ]u like jishnu, ji[s. ][n. ]u, vi, 'fly, ' theheavenly bird?): Muir, iv and v (older texts relative to Vishnu), PAOS. Dec. 1894. 

#Yama#: Roth, ZDMG. Ii. 216, iv, 417 (Jemshid), JAOS. Iii. 335, IS. Xiv. 393; Whitney, Oriental and Linguistic Studies, i. 46; Müller, Science of Language, ii. 528, 534; Westergaard, with Weber's notes, IS. Iii. 402; Muir, JRAS. I. 287; OST. V. 284; Bergaigne, i. 86, ii. 96, etc; Grassmann, KZ. Xi. 13, 'binder'; Ehni, Der Vedische Mythusdes Yama; Hillebrandt, Vedische Mythologie, i. 489; Bloomfield, JAOS. Xv. 163, 172; Hopkins, PAOS. 1891, p. Xciv; Scherman, Visionsliteratur; Leumann, KZ. Xxxii. 301 (Yam[=i][20]); L. VonSchroeder, Literatur, p. 217 (Ymir, Praj[=a]pati); Bréal, Hercule etCircus; Benfey, Vedica, 149; Van den Gheyn, Cerbère (1883);Casartelli, Dog of Death, BOR. Iv. 265. [21] Yama's sadana, Pischel, VS. I. 242. [22]

#Veda and brahmanism#: Oldenberg, Die Hymnen des Rig Veda, and ZDMG. Xlii. 199, Ueber die Liedverfasser des Rig Yeda (see Hinduism, below);Roth, _ib_. Iv. 514, divisions of the Rig Veda; Bergaigne, Recherchessur l'histoire de la Samhit[=a] du Rig Veda, JA. (1886 and followingyears), also on the liturgy, _ib_. 1888; JA. X. No. 3; Pincott, JRAS. Xvi. 381; Hillebrandt, Spuren einer älteren Rig Veda Recension, BB. Viii. 195; Lanman, JAOS. X. 580; Brunnhofer, KZ, xxv. 374, BB. X. 234(Collitz, BB. Vii. 183); Roth, on the worth of tradition, ZDMG. Xxi. 1; Whitney, on Translation of Veda, OLS. ; PAOS. Oct. 1867; Goldstückeron S[=a]ya[n. ]a, in Preface to P[=a][n. ]ini. Cult against mantra, Roth, ZDMG. Vii. 604; viii. 467; Weber, _ib. _ viii. 389; Pischel andGeldner, Preface to Vedische Studien and ZDMG. Xlviii. 702; Colinet, Les Principes de I'exégèse védique, Muséon, 1890; Bloomfield, Contributions (above); E. Hardy, Die Vedisch-brahmanische Periode d. Relig. D. Alt. Ind. ; Muir, Priests and Interpreters of the Veda, JRAS. Ii. 257, 303; Haug, Contribution, 1863, and Interpretation of theVeda, Congress, 1874; Ludwig, Die philosophischen und religiösenAnschanungen des Veda; also Ludwig, Rig-Veda, iii (Mantra-Literatur), pp. 262, 284, 301, and his works, Ueber Methode bei Interpretationendes Rig Veda, and Ueber die neuesten Arbeiten auf dem Gebiet der RV. Forschung. Further (Vedic and later literature), Oldenberg, ZDMG. Xxxvii. 54; _ib_. Xxxix. 52; Windisch, Verh. D. Geraer PhilologenVersammlung, Vedische Wettfahrtt in Festgruss an Roth; Weber, Epischesim Vedischen Ritual, Sitz. Berl. Ak. , 1891; Schermann, PhilosophischeHymnen (also Visionsliteratur). 

#Vedic and brahmanic belief#: Pott, Vedic and Orphic Kosmic Egg, Ovidiana, KZ. Viii. 179 (Peleus as _Urschlamm I_); von Bradke, Beiträge z. Altind. Religions und Sprachgescbichte, ZDMG. Xl. 347, 655; Schrader, chapter xiii; Zimmer, AIL. ; Roth and Böhtlingk, Vedische Räthsel, ZDMG. Xxxvii. 109; (and eschatology) xlvi. 759;Windisch, _ib_. Xlviii. 353. [23] Eschatology: Weber, Eine Legende, ZDMG. Ix. 237 (Bhrigu) and 308; Burnell, a Legend from theTalavak[=a]ra, Congress, 1880, IA. Xiii. 16, 21; Benfey, Orient undOccident, iii. 169, and Hermes, Minos, Tartaros; Whitney, PAOS. , Nov. , 1858, May, 1886; Böhtlingk, Bericht d. K. Sächs. Gesell, 23. April, 1893, p. 88; Henotheism: Whitney, _loc. Cit_. , Oct. 1881, see IA. Xi. 146; Hopkins, Drisler Memorial. Social position of priests(castes), Weber, [24] Nachträge, p. 795; Collectanea, IS. X; Muir, JRAS. Ii. 257; OST. I; Hopkins, Four Castes, also JAOS. Xiii;Schlagintweit (Caste at Present), ZDMG. Xxxiii. 549. Cult: E. Hardy, _loc. Cit_. Above; on _Om_ see Bloomfield, PAOS. Oct. 1889; Cult of. Manes, Caland, Altind. Ahnencult, and Ueber Totenverehrung bei Einigender IE. Völker; Winternitz, WZKM. Iv. 199; Whitney, OLS. I. 46; Kaegi, _loc. Cit_. , note 265, with literature. Funeral: Roth, ZDMG. Viii. 467; Müller, _ib_. Ix. Pp. I and xiiii (sic); Wilson, JRAS. 1854, p. 201; Regnaud, Çr[=a]ddha védique, Rev. D'hist. D. Relig. Xxv. 1;Donner, pi[n. ][d. ]apit[r. ]yajña; Lanman, Mortuary Urns, PAOS. May, 1891. Wedding: Weber, Hochzeitssprüche, IS. V. 177; Stenzler, P[=a]raskara, ZDMG. Vii. 527; Haas, Heiratsgebräuche d. Alten Inder, IS. V. 267; Schröder, Die Hochzeitsbräuche der Esten; Winternitz, DasAi. Hochzeitsrituell. Omens, Ordeals, etc. : Weber, Zwei VedischeTexte über Omina und Portenta, Wurfel-Orakel, Vedische Beiträge;[25]Schlagintweit, Gottesurtheile; Stenzler, ZDMG. Ix. 661; Kaegi, Alterund Herkunft der germanischen Gottesurtheile (with furtherliterature); Jolly, Beiträge zur Rechtsgeschichte, ZDMG. Xliv. 347. The earliest essay on Ordeals was presented by Warren Hastings, 1784, Asiatick Researches, i. 389. Star-lore: Colebrooke; Weber, IS. Ii. 236; Haug, Introduction to [=A]it. Br. ; Weber, Die VedischenNachrichten von d. Nakshatra; Sitz. Berl. Ak. 1861, p. 267;[26]Müller, Ancient Hindu Astronomy and Chronology; Burgess, JRAS. Xxv. 717; Jacobi, Methods and Tables. Witchcraft, Medicine: Kuhn, KZ. Xiii. 49; Grohmann, IS. Ix. 381; Bloomfield, Contributions, AJP. Vii, xi, xii; Pictet, KZ. V. 24, 321; Jolly, Knoblauch, Festgruss an Roth, p. 18; medicine and divination, Bower MS. , JASB. 1891; IA. Xxi. 29, 129; WZKM. V. 103. Blood-money: Roth, ZDMG. Xli. 672; Aryan and Indic, Bühler and Schroeder, Festgruss an Roth;Jolly, _loc. Cit. _. , p. 339. Sacrifices: Hillebrandt, Das altind. Neu-u. Vollmondsopfer, and Nationale Opfer, Festgruss an Böhtlingk;Lindner, Die Diksk[=a], and _loc. Cit. _, Ernteopfer; Weber, V[=a]japeya and R[=a]jas[=u]ya, Sitz. Berl. Ak. , 1892, 1893, and ZurKenntniss d. Ved. Opferrituals, IS. X. 321, xiii. 217; Schwab, DasAltindische Thieropfer. Suttee and Human Sacrifices: Colebrooke, Duties of Faithful Hindu Widow, Asiatick Researches, iv. 209; Wilson, JRAS. 1851, p. 96, 1854, p. 201, 1859, p. 209; Müller, Chips, ii. 34;Hall, JRAS. Iii. 183, 193; R[=a]jendral[=a]la Mitra, Indo-Aryans, ii. 114; Weber, ZDMG. Vii. 585, xviii. 262 (Manu, Minotaur, _ib. _ p. 286), Ind. Streifen, i. 54; Zimmer, AIL. P. 328; Hillebrandt, ZDMG. Xl. 711. 

#Ritual, etc#: (above and) Müller, ZDMG. Ix. P. Xliii; Garbe, ZDMG. Xxxiv. 319 (Pravargya); Rarity of Soma-sacrifice, Haug, ZDMG. Xvi. 273; Hindu Doctrine of Atonement, Stenzler, Congress, 1874, p. 205;Atharva Ritual, Garbe, V[=a]it[=a]na S[=u]tra; Magoun, Asur[=i] Kalpa;Agni Sacrifice, Thibaut, Agni Citi, Pandit, JAS. Beng. , xliv, 1875, Çulva S[=u]tra; Koulikovski, Les Trois Feux Sacrés, Rev. Xx. 121. Serpent-worship: Stier, Sarpedon, KZ. Xi. 234; Fergusson, Tree andSerpent Worship; Cuthbert, Serpent Temples, JRAS. 1846, p. 407;compare _ib_, 1891; Winternitz, Sarpabali, Schlangencult, Mit. D. Anthrop. Gesell. , Wien, xviii; IA. Xv. 258; Bühler, _ib_. Vi. 270;Snakes and Buddha, Bendall, Meghas[=u]tra, JRAS. Xii. 286; Senart, Buddha; Oldham, JRAS. Xxiii. 361. Idols: Weber, Omina und Portenta, p. 337; Ludwig, Nachrichten; Bollensen, ZDMG. Xxii. 587, xlvii. 586;Müller, Chips, i. 37;[27] Muir, OST. , v. 453; Kaegi, Rig Veda, note79^a. Ages and Holy Numbers:[28] Roth, Ueber den AV. , and Ueber denMythus von den fünf Menschen-Geschlechtern bei Hesiod; Weber, Cycles, IS. Ix. 460; ZDMG. Xv. 132; Kaegi, Die Neunzahl; Schroeder, seven asholy number, KZ. Xxix. 224; Hopkins, Holy Numbers of the Rig Veda. [29]See Star-lore, above. 

#Brahmanism#: Specimens, Muir, OST. Iv; S[=a]man, Benfey, Griffith;Sha[d. ]vi[. M]ça, Weber, Omina (above); M[=a]it. S. , Haug, IS. Ix. 174;von Schroeder, Literatur, and ZDMG. Xxxiii. 177; Çatapatha, partialtranslation, Eggeling, SBE. , xii, xxvi, xli; Muir, JRAS. 1862, p. 31(OST. ); Weber, IS. I. 161 and Ind. Streifen, i. 9; first chapter, ZDMG. Iv. 289; Brunnhofer (relation of parts), BB. X. 234; [=A]it. Br. , Haug; Weber, IS. Ix. 177; Deluge, etc. , Bopp, Sündflüt; Weber, ZDMG. V. 525, Ind. Streifen, i. 9; Roth, ZDMG. Vi. 243; Lindner, Ir. Fluthsage, Festgruss an Roth. Upanishads:[30] Cowell, Roer, Bib. Ind. ; Whitney, Böhtlingk (Ka[t. ]ha, Ch[=a]ndogya, AitK[=a]ush[=i]tak[=i], Kena, B[r. ]had[=a]ra[n. ]yaka); Weber, IS. I, ii, ix; Müller, SBE. , i, xv (all the chief works);[31] Oertel, J[=a]imin[=i]ya, PAOS. 1894; list of, Müller, ZDMG. Xix. 137;Concordance of Upanishads, Jacob. For a general introduction the bestwork in English are the translations in the Sacred Books. Gough'sPhilosophy of the Upanishads has many translations, but the book isotherwise not to be recommended. On [=a]tm[=a] as [Greek: autmên], seeKZ. Xvii 145. Philosophy: Deussen, Das System des Ved[=a]nta, 1883, is now the standard work;[32] to which should be added the sameauthor's S[=u]tra; Jacob's Ved[=a]ntas[=a]ra; and Thibaut, Ved[=a]ntaS[=u]tra, SBE. Xxxiv. [33] For the S[=a]nkhya, Davies, S[=a]nkhya; andBallantyne, Aphorisms; but the best work is now Garbe, Die S[=a]mkhyaPhilosophie (1894). A good general introduction to Hindu Pantheism hasbeen given by Lanman, Beginnings of Hindu Pantheism. The best generalsummary[34] of Hindu philosophies is found in the revised edition ofColebrooke's Essays. Other special studies include Roth, Brahma unddie Brahmanen, [35] ZDMG. I. 66 (on _brahma_); Müller, _ib_. Vi. 1, 219, vii. 287 (Beiträge zur Kenntniss der Ind. Phil. ); Roer, _ib_. Xxi. 309, xxii. 383 (Die Lehrsprüche der Vaiçeshika Philosophie);Muir, Theism in Vaiçeshika Philosophy, JRAS. 1862, p. 22; Ballantyne, Ny[=a]yas[=u]tras; Windisch, Ueber das Ny[=a]yabh[=a]shya, 1888, anSitz der denkenden Seele, Beitr. D. K. Sächs. Gesell. , 1891, p. 55;Ballantyne and Cowell, Ç[=a][n. ][d. ]ilya's Aphorisms (text by B. , translation by C. , Bib. Ind. ); Regnaud, Le Pessimisme Br[=a]hmanique, Ann. Du Mus. Guimet, i, and Matériaux pour servir à l'histoire de laphilosophie d'Inde. The Sarvadarçanasa[. N]graha is translated byCowell and Gough. The S[=u]tras of the six systems have all beentranslated (with the texts) in India. On the date of Çankara seePathak, IA. Xi. 174; and Telang and Fleet, _ib_. Xiii. 95, xvi. 41;Logan, _ib_. Xvi. 160. 

#House-rules and law#: All the most important manuals of custom andlaw have been translated by Stenzler, Bühler, Jolly, Oldenberg, Bloomfield and Knauer (SBE. Ii, vii, xiv, xxv, xxix, xxx, xxxiii;Stenzler, P[=a]raskara, [=A]çval[=a]yana and Y[=a]jñavalkya;Oldenberg, IS. Xv. 1, Ç[=a]ñkh[=a]yana; Knauer, Gobhila, also VedischeFragen, Festgruss an Roth; Bloomfield, Gobhila, ZDMG. Xxxv. 533). [36]

JAINISM. 

Colebrooke's Essays (Cowell), ii. 402; Lassen, iv. 763; Wilson, Essays, i. 319; Weber, IS. Xv. 263, xvi. 211, xvii. 1, [37] and BerlinMSS. , vol. Ii, 1892; Klatt, Stotra (MSS. ), ZDMG. Xxxiii. 445; Leumann, Berichte von den Schismen der Jaina, IS. Xvii. 91; Jacobi, Stutayasand Stotra, ZDMG. Xxxii. 509, IS. Xiv. 359, also origin of sects, ZDMG. Xxxviii. 1, Introduction to Kalpa S[=u]tra (Abh. K. M. , [38]1879, Mab[=a]v[=i]ra is N[=a]taputta). Compare also Jacobi, ZDMG. Xxxiv. 247; Oldenberg, _ib_. 748; Jacobi, _ib_. Xxxv. 667, xl. 92;Burnell, IA. I. 354; Rice and Bühler, _ib_. Iii. 153, vii. 28, 143, etc; Burgess, _ib. _ xiii. 191; Windisch, Hemacandra's Yogaç[=a]stra, ZDMG. Xxviii. 185. Jacobi has translated Ac[=a]r[=a]nga and KalpaS[=u]tras for SBE. Xxii. Hoernle, Digambara Pattavalis, IA. Xx. 341, xxi. 57. A popular essay on Jains by Williams appeared JRAS. Xx. 279. On Jain tradition compare Bühler, Sitz. Wien. Ak. 1883, WZKM. I. 165, ii. 141, iii. 233, iv. 313, v. 59, 175 (Mathur[=a], Congress, 1892, p. 219). On Gos[=a]la compare Hoernle, Bib. Ind. , Uv[=a]saga Das[=a]o(seventh Anga) with Leumann's review; and Rockhill, Life of Buddha, p. 249. Compare also Jain Bh[=a]rata and R[=a]m[=a]ya[n. ]a of Pampa, Rice, JRAS. Xiv. 19; Leumann, Daçavaikalika-S[=u]tra und Niryukti, Jinabhadra's J[=i]takalpa, Sitz. Berl. Ak. 1892, Die Legende von Cittaund Sa[. M]bh[=u]ta, WZKM. V. 111, vi. 1; Thomas, Early Faith of Açoka(to show prior Jainism; a dubious contention) JRAS. Ix. 155. On theJain nurture of vermin see JRAS. 1834, p. 96. On dates compare Jacobi, Kalpas[=u]tra and Oldenberg (above). The Çatruñjaya M[=a]h[=a]tmyam(Weber, Abh. K. M. , 1858) is probably not an early work (Bühler, ThreeNew Edicts, IA. Vi. 154). On Weber's view in regard to Jain-Greeklegends see his essay Ahaly[=a]-Achilleus, Sitz. Berl. Ak. , 1887. Seetoo Barth, Revue, xix. 292 ff. , xx. 332. 

BUDDHISM. 

Colebrook's Essays; Wilson, Buddha and Buddhism, JRAS. , 1856, pp. 229, 357; Bennett, Gaudama, JAOS. Ii. 3; R. Spence Hardy, EasternMonarchism and Manual of Buddhism; E. Hardy, Der Buddhismus nachälteren P[=a]liwerken; Burnouf, Le Lotus de la Bonne Loi andIntroduction à l'histoire du Bouddhisme indien (Nepal); Köppen, DieReligion des Buddha; Weber, Ueber den Buddhismus, Ind. Skizzen, andStreifen, i. 104; Barthélemy Saint-Hilaire, Le Bouddha et sa religion(now antiquated); Oldenberg, Buddha; Kern, Der Buddhismus; T. W. RhysDavids, Manual of Buddhism, and Hibbert Lectures; Copleston, Buddhism;Monier Williams, Buddhism;[39] Mary Sumner's Histoire (ed. Foucaux);Senart's Essai sur la légende du Buddha, JA. 1873, p. 114; 1874, p. 249; 1875, P. 97, and published separately. Valuable is the sameauthor's article, JA. Viii, 1876, Notes, and work (containing) LesInscriptions de Piyadasi; compare IA. Xvii. 188; ZDMG. Xl. 127(bühler). On N[=a]g[=a]rjuna (second century) see Beal, IA. Xv. 353. Of historical interest, if otherwise valueless, are Schoebel, LeBuddha et le Bouddhisme, 1857; and Holmboe, Traces de Buddhisme enNorvège avant l'introduction du christianisme. Lillie, Buddha andEarly Buddhism, also influence of Buddhism on Christianity, and JRAS. Xiv. 218, Buddhist Saint Worship, and _ib_. Xv. 419, on CeylonBuddhism; Beal, Schools, IA. Ix. 299. 

#Buddhist texts#: Burnouf, Foucaux, above; Weber, Dhammapada, [40]ZDMG. Xiv. 29: Müller, Science of Religion, and SBE. X, withFanshöll's Sutta Nip[=a]ta; J. Weber and Huth, Tib. BuddhistS[=u]tras, ZDMG. Xlv. 577; Pischel, Assal[=a]yana Sutta; Childers, Khuddaka P[=a]tha, JRAS. Iv. 309. ; Davids, Buddhist Suttas translatedfrom the P[=a]li; and Davids and Oldenberg, [41] Vinaya Texts, SBE. Xi, xiii, xvii, xx; Kern, Lotus, _ib_. Xxi; Davids, Milinda, _ib_. Xxxv;Cowell and Müller, Mah[=a]y[=n]na S[=u]tras, _ib_. Xlix; Foucaux, Lalita Vistara, Ann. Du MG. Vi, xix; Pratimokha, above, and Beal andGogerly, JRAS. 1862, p. 407; Dickson, _ib_. Vii. 1, viii. 62;Childers, _ib_. Vii. 49; viii. 219; Rogers (and Müller), Buddhaghosha's Parables; Foulkes, IA. Xix. 105; Carus, Gospel ofBuddha. 

#Nirv[=a][n. ]a#: Out of the immense literature we select Müller(Buddhist Nihilism), Science of Religion, p. 141; Oldenberg, Buddha, p. 273; Frankfurter, JRAS. Xii. 548; Rhys Davids, Manual, and HibbertLectures, tenth Appendix. 

#Date of nirv[=a][n. ]a#: Westergaard, Buddha's Totesjahr, Ueber denältesten Zeitraum der Ind. Geschichte; Cunningham, Bhilsa Topes;Bühler IA. Vi. 149 ff. , Three New Edicts of Açoka; Kern, Jaar-telling;Müller, Acad. March 1, 1884, SBE. X. : Davids, Ancient Coins andMeasures of Ceylon, p. 57; Oldenberg, Vinaya Pitaka, SBE. Xiii. P. Xxii. [42]

#Foreign buddhism#: Stan. Julien, Histoire de la vie de Hiouen Thsang, Mémoires (compare JA. Dec. 1857), Voyages des Pélerins Bouddhistes;Wassiljew, Der Buddhismus; Bigandet, Life of Gaudama; Fergusson, Hiouen Thsang's Journey from Patna, JRAS. Vi. 213, 396; Wilson, _ib. _1859, p. 106 ('Summary Account'); JAS. Beng. I; As. Researches, xx(Csoma, Asiatic Buddhism); Beal, Diamond S[=u]tras (etc. , JRAS. );Gutzlatf (Sykes), Buddhism in China, JRAS. 1854, p. 73; 1856, pp. 316, 357 (Wilson, Notes, Inscriptions); Edkins, Chinese Buddhism; Beal(Chinese), Dhammapada, The Romantic Legend, and Travels of theBuddhist Pilgrim Fah-Hian, [43] Life of Buddha, BOR. _passim_; Müller, Buddhist Pilgrims, Chips, i; Köppen (above); Hodgson, Memoirs; Burnouf(above); Schlagintweit, Buddhistic Idols in Tibet, JRAS. 1863, p. 437, and (Ann. Du Musée Guimet, iii) Buddhism in Tibet (Lamaism in thesecond part); Rockhill, The Life of Buddha, and The Land of the Lamas;Lamaistic succession, Mayers, JRAS. Iv. 284; Lamaist extension ofBuddhist Confession, IA. Xxiii. 73; Lamaism and Catholicism, Davids, Hibbert Lectures; Modern Lamaism, Waddell, Buddhism of Thibet orLamaism; Schiefner, T[=a]ran[=a]tha's Geschichte (and TibetischeLebensbeschreibung); Tibet texts (above); Bastian, Buddhist Literatureof the Burmese, ZDMG. Xvii. 697, and Buddhist Psychology, _ib. _ xx. 419; Führer, Buddhist Manu, BBRAS. Xv. 329; Jardine and Forchhammer, Notes on Buddhist Law (in Burmah); Friederich, Buddhism in Bali, JRAS. Viii 158, ix. 59; dharmaç[=a]stra, IA. Xiii. 24; Crawfurd, HinduReligion in Bali, AR. Xiii. 128;[44] in Ceylon, Foulkes, IA. Xvii. 100. 

#Buddhist legends#: Burnouf, Introduction; Davids, Buddhist BirthStories, and BOR. Iv. 9; Beal, JRAS. Vi. 377; Fausböll, TwoJ[=a]takas, JRAS. V. I. , Five and Ten (1872); Feer, JA. 1875(v, vi);[45] Fausböll, Weber, IS. V. 412; Açvaghosha (fifth ccntury);Weber, Streifen, i. 186; Cowell, Açvaghosha; Lévi, JA. 1892, p. 201;Beal, SBE. Xix. Hells: Feer, Études Bouddhiques, l'Enfer indien, JA. 1892, p. 185, 1893, p. 112;[46] Köppen, p. 239; Senart, Notes, JA. Viii. 477. Symbols: Cunningham, JRAS. 1851, pp. 71, 114; Hodgson, _ib. _ 1861, p. 393; Sewell and Pincott, _ib. _ xix. 238 and xxii. 299;[47] IA. Vii. 176; _ib. _ xv. 61, 89, 217, and following volumes(sacred trees); Lillie, Saints and Trees, JRAS. Xiv. 218. Topes, Temples: Cunningham, above, p. 108, and St[=u]pa of Bharhut, BhilsaTopes (synods, schisms); Fergusson, Rock-cut Temples of India, JRAS. 1844, p. 30, and Topes of S[=a]nchi and Amar[=a]vat[=i]; Beal, JRAS. V. 164; Burgess, Arch. Surv. Of Western India, and Cave Temples ofIndia (symbols) with Fergusson; the latter, History of Indian andEastern Architecture, Tree and Serpent Worship; Simpson, JRAS. Xxi. 49(temples from tombs); Müller, Dagobas from Ceylon, ZDMG. Xii. 514[48](also dates). Women leaders of Buddhist Reformation, Miss Bode, JRAS. Xxv. 517. 

#Brahmanism and Buddhism#: Burnouf, Bh. P. Introd. P. 137 (Indrahighest god); Williams, JRAS. Xviii. 127; Holtzmann, Zur Geschichte, p. 103; (and Jainism) Leumann, Die Legende von Citta und Sambh[=u]ta, WZKM (above); Bastian, Brahmanic Inscriptions in Buddhist Temples (ofSiam), JAOS. Viii. 377. 

#Buddhist heresies#, D[=i]pava[. M]sa (above); doctrines, Wassiljew(above); Le Buddhisme et les Grecs, Lévi, Revue, xxiii. 36. 

HINDUISM. 

EPIC: Ktesias, IA. X. 296 ff. ; McCrindle, Ancient India asdescribed by Ktesias and by Megasthenes and Arrian;[49] date ofBh[=a]rata, Bühler, Kirste, Ind. Studies, No. Ii; in Cambodia, Barth, Inscriptions Sanskrites du Cambodge; of R[=a]m[=a]ya[n. ]a, Weber, R[=a]m[=a]ya[n. ]a, IA. , reprint; Jacobi, R[=a]m[=a]ya[n. ]a, [50]Festgruss an Böhtlingk, p. 44, GGA. , Nos. 16 of 1892, 1893; epiclanguage, Franke, Was ist Sanskrit? BB. Xvii. 54; epos and Veda, Oldenberg, ZDMG. Xxxvii. 54, xxxviii. 439, xxxix. 52; Weber, Epischesim Vedischen Ritual, [51] Sitz, Berl. Ak. 1891; Ludwig, Ironie, Festgruss an Böhtlingk. Résumé, Wheeler, History (unreliable);Williams, Indian Wisdom. Translations, Wilson, Sabh[=a], JRAS. 1842, p. 137; Thomson (1855), Davies, Lorinser, and Telang (SBE. Viii), Bhagavad G[=i]ta, etc; Milman, Nala; Muir, IA. Vii, viii, MetricalTranslations, and OST. ; Arnold, S[=a]vitr[=i], Idylls, etc. (free);Holtzmann (Sr. ), Indische Sagen; Foucaux, 'Kairata Parva'; Sadous, fragments (1858); H. Fauche (several books of Bh[=a]rata); PratapaChandra Roy (almost all); Griffith, R[=a]m[=a]ya[n. ]a, Schoebel. (Mus. Guimet, xiii), Gorresio, Fauche, _id_. Studies, Holtzmann, Indra, Apsaras, Brahm[=a], [52] ZDMG. Xxxii. 290, xxxiii. 631, xxxviii. 167, Agni, Arjuna (each separately), Zur Geschichte, Neunzehn Bücher(literature); Hopkins, Manu in Epic, JAOS. Xi. 239, Ruling Caste, _ib_. Xiii, etc. ; Sauer, Mah[=a]bh[=a]rata and Wate (primitive epic, unconvincing); Nève, Morals and Women (antiquated); Weber, Mother-Worship, Zwei Ved. Texte, and West, IA. X. 245; Roussel, Lesidées religieuses, Muséon, xii. 263, 295. For Philosophy, see above. Pur[=a][n. ]as, Modern Sects: Lassen, i. 481; Wilson, Analysis, 1838-39 (essays); Burnouf, Bh[=a]gavata; Wilson, Vishnu; Rückert, M[=a]rka[n. ][d. ]eya, Wortham, JRAS. Xiii. 103, 355 (partial); _ib_. Xvii. 221; Wolheim, Padma (Latin, partial); Stevenson, Ga[n. ]eça, JRAS. 1846, p. 319; Ante-Brahmanic Religions, and Feudalism, _ib_. 1846, pp. 330, 390; in Dekhan, _ib_. 1838, p. 189; Sykes, Traits, _ib_. 1860, p. 223; G[=i]ta-Govinda, Lassen (Latin), Rückert, ZKM. I. 132. Fables: WZKM. Vii. 215; Pratapa Chandra Gosha, Durg[=a]p[=u]j[=a]; T[=i]rtha: Williams, Hinduism (list), IA. V. 209, Cunningham, Survey; Hunter, Indian Empire (sects), Orissa, and Report;Çivaite sects, Sen[=a]th[=i] R[=a]ja, Mus. Guim. Vii; Krishna, Weber, ZDMG. Vi. 92; Berl. Ak. , 1867, p. 217, IS. Xiii. 354; Nève, Deséléments étrangers, etc; Phallus, IA. Iv. 211, v. 183, Kittel, Ueberd. Ursprung des Linga Cultus (refutes Wurm, Geschichte der IndischenReligion); Stevenson, JRAS. 1846, p. 337; P[=a]ñcar[=a]tra, Hall, V[=a]savadatta. C[=a]rv[=a]ka, Colebrooke, Muir, _loc. Cit_. Var[=a]hamihira, see above. Fate: IA. Xviii. 46. Sects: Jones, AR. Ii. 334; names of week-days, Cunningham, IA. Xiv. I; Grierson, _ib_. 322;Dikshit, _ib_. Xvi. 113; Wilson's Sketch of the Religious Sects of theHindus, AR. , Essays; Hunter's Statistical Account of Bengal; Kitt'sCompendium of Castes and Tribes; Elphinstone's History; Müller, Chips, iv. 329; Williams, Religious Thought and Life, and Brahmanism andHinduism; W. J. Wilkins, Modern Hinduism; Wilson, On the Sikhs, JRAS. 1846, p. 43; Prinsep, Origin of Sikh Power; MacGregor, History ofSikhs;[53] Kab[=i]r; Trumpp, [=A]digranth, JRAS. V. 197, Congress, 1880, p. 159, and [=A]digranth (complete), IA. Vi ff. ; Die Religionder Sikhs. Vishnuism, Williams, JRAS. Xiv. 289. Mohammedanism inHinduism, Dabist[=a]n, vol. Ii. [54] Ritual: Bühler, IA. 1883; temples;Hurst, Indika (especially p. 294); Burgess, IA. Xii. 315; Williams, Thought and Life, p. 448 (see Buddhism). Thugs: Reynolds, JRAS. 1837, p. 200; Sherwood, AR. Xiii. 25, Ph[=a]ns[=i]gars; Shakespear, _ib_. Xiii. 282; also Sleeman, Report, and Ramaseeana (Thugs' Argot andpapers on Thugs); Elphinstone, i. 369, 371 (Bh[=a]ts and Ch[=a]rans), 384 (Thugs and Decoits). C[=a]itanyas, Hunter, Statistical Account, Williams and Wilkins, _loc. Cit_. ; On 'pocket-altars, ' JRAS. 1851, p. 71; Vidh[=a]nas, Burnell, Meyer; K[=a]nph[=a]tis, Celibates, of Kutch, JRAS. 1839, p. 268; Ling[=a]yits, Kittel, above, and IA. Iv, v; TulsiD[=a]s, R[=a]m[=a]ya[n. ]a, works of Ramavat sect, Grierson, IA. Xxii. 89, 122, 227; Pandus as gods, IA, vii. 127; their fish-emblems, _ib_. Xxii. 61; Bombay Dancing Girls, IA. Xiii. 165; Sun-worship, temples, St. Julien, Voy. Iii. 172; Burgess, Survey, p. 216; in Taxila, JRAS. 1859, p. 77; in Pur[=a][n. ]as, Lassen, ii. 832, 919; IA. Vi. 11, vii. 69, 71, viii. 30 ([=a]dityabhaktas). Theistic Reformers: Wilson, Essays; Hunter, Account; Müller, Chips; Williams, JRAS. Xiii. I, 281;Tiru Valluvar, Graul, Kural, and Pope, IA. Vii ff. ; N[=a]ngiPanth[=i]s, IA. Xiii. 1; Tamil Çivaites, Foulkes, Catechism; JAOS. Iv. 129; Ph[=a]ndarpur Vishnuites, Vi[t. ]h[t. ]ala Bhaktas (Kab[=i]r), Stevenson, JRAS. 1842 p. 64; especially Mitchell, IA. Xi. 56, 149, hyrons of Tuk[=a], and celebration, Congress, 1892, p. 282. Festivals:[55] above, V[=a]japeya; Hillebrandt, Sonnwendfeste; JRAS. 1846, p. 60; Gover, _ib_. V. 91; IA. Xx. 430; Holi, JRAS. 1838, p. 189; 1841, p. 239; Vet[=a]la, _ib_. 1838, p. 192; Dekhan deities, _ib_. 1842, p. 105. 

WILD TRIBES. 

Johnston. Yellow Men of India; Hunter, _loc. Cit_. ; Hewitt, EarlyHistory of Northern India (speculative), JRAS. Xx. 321, etc. ; Oppert, Original Inhabitants, Madras Journal, 1887, 1888; Breeks, Account ofPrimitive Tribes, etc. (Nilagiris, Todas); Hodgson, Aboriginal Tribes, JAS. Beng. , xxv. 31; Samuelis, Native Dress and Religious Dances, _ib_. 295; Neumann, English Realm in India, ii; Latham, Ethnology ofIndia; Macpherson, JRAS. 1842, p. 172, and 1852, p. 216(Khonds);Briggs, Aboriginal Races, _ib_. 275; Sherring, Hindu (Bengal) Tribes;the Sacred City of the Hindus; also Bhar-tribe by the same, JRAS. V. 376; Risley, Tribes and Castes of Bengal; Rowney, Wild Tribes; Khonds, Koles, [56] S[=a]uras, Gonds (and Bh[=i]ls) JRAS. 1852, p, 216 (1844, p. 181); also _ib_. 1842, p. 172; Marshman, History, iii. P. 108(Khonds); thirty Snake-tribes, JRAS. Xii. 229; _ib_. 1859, p. 1, [57]Frye, Uriya and Khonds, religious dances, p. 16; creed and sacrifice, pp. 20, 36; Marshman ii. P. 164 (infanticide); Kitt, Compendium ofCastes and Tribes found in India; Santh[=a]ls, JRAS. 1852, p. 285; IA. Xxii. 294 (emigration); Avery, Aboriginal Tribes, IA. Xiv. 125;Carnegy, Races Tribes and Castes (Oude); Dalton (Bengal), DescriptiveEthnology; Social Customs in Kashmeer and Oude, IA. Xviii. 287, 386;Campbell, Sant[=a]l folklore (totemistic origin from goose);[58]Kork[=u]s, Kolarian Tribe in middle of (Dravidian) Gonds, JRAS. Xvi. 164; Newbold, Chenchwars, wild tribe in forests of eastern Ghauts, JRAS. 1845, p. 271; Cain, Koi, southern tribe of Gonds, JRAS. Xiii. 410 (witches, Pandus, etc); Dunbar, Lurka Koles, JRAS. , 1861, p. 370;Dravidians, Kittel, and Caldwell, _loc. Cit. _; Polyandry, Thomas, JRAS. Xi. 37; Simpson (rites, sacrifices, etc. ), P[=u]jas in theSutlej valley, JRAS. Xvi. 13; Burnell, Devil-worship of Tuluvas, IA. 1894; Waddell, Frog-worship (Nepal), IA. Xxii. 293; Steere, SwahiliTales, IA. _passim_. [59] A volume has lately been published on theChittagong Hill Tribes[60] by Riebeck with superb illustrations; andphotographic illustrations of racial types may be studied in Watson'sand Kaye's volumes, The People of India. Discussion (biassed) of_r[=a]jputs_ of Scythian origin, Elphinstone, i. 440. On Dravidianliterature, see Elliot, IA. Xvi. 158. On Gipsies, Grierson, _ib. _ 35;etymology, _ib. _ 239. 

GEOGRAPHY, INDIA AND THE WEST. 

Schmidt, Die Urheimath d. Indog. U. D. Europäische Zahlsystem, Sitz. Berl. Akad. 1890, p. 297; Hirt, [61] Die Urheimath d. Indogermanen, IF. I. 464; Schrader, Sprachvergleichung und Urgeschlchte, p. 616; Lassen, Indische Alterthumskunde, i. 643; Vivien de Saint Martin, Études surla Géographie du Véda; Zimmer, Altindisches Leben, p. 3; Aufrecht, ZDMG. Xiii. 498 (Ras[=a] as Milky Way); Ludwig, Nachrichten überGeographie, etc. ; Whitney, Language and the Study of Language;Oldenberg, Buddha, p. 399 (we cite from the first edition); Thomas, Rivers of the Rig Veda, JRAS. Xv. 357. [62] On the relations of theHindus and the West: Weber (relations with Semites), IndischeSkizzen, and Die Griechen in Indien, in Sitz. Berl. Akad. 1890, p. 901; Steinthal, ZDMG. Xi. 396; Grill, _ib_. Xxvii. 425; Stein, IA. Xvii. 89. Leo's view in regard to German-Indian unity (reviewed, ZDMG. Viii. 389) is worth citing as a curioslty. [63] Brunnhofer's works havebeen cited above, p. 15. On the Beziehungen der Indier zum Westen avaluable article has lately been written by Franke (ZDMG. Xlvii. 595). Weber, Ueber d. P[=a]ras[=i]prakaça d. K[r. ][s. ][n. ]ad[=a]sa, as wellas in his R[=a]jas[=u]ya, V[=a]japeya, Vedische Beiträge, etc. , hastreated of the relations with Persia (Fables, IS. Iii. 327). In theworks cited above the same author has discussed the relations with allother Western nations, including the Greeks, on which Sykes, Notes onReligious State of India, JRAS. 1841, p. 243, is readable; Bohlen, _Altes-Indien, _ and Lévi, La Grèce et I'lnde d'après les documentsindiens (revue des études grecques, 1891) should be read. [64] Thesubject of Early Christianity in India has been treated by Burnell, IA. Iii. 308, iv. 153, etc. (see also above, p. 479); while Priaulx, in JRAS. 1861, 1862, has written a series of interesting articles onIndia's Connection with Rome. The Indian travels of Apollonius ofTyana, JRAS. 1859, p. 70, etc. , are of no value beside those ofKtesias and Megasthenes. The origin of the Hindu Alphabet and thenative system of Dates have to do with the originality of parts ofHindu literature, but these outlying subjects, which have a literatureof their own, we can only touch upon. A good _résumé_ of thediscussion in regard to the alphabet will be found in JRAS. Xvi. 325, by Cust; a new theory of Franke's, ZDMG. Xlvi. 731. Halévy derives thealphabet from Greece. But see now Bühler, Ind. Studies, iii, 1895(North Semitic, seventh century, B. C. ) The native eras are discussedby Cunningham, Book of Indian Eras; and in Müller's India, What Can ItTeach Us? p. 282. On the native date for the beginning of theKali-yuga, _i. E. _ this age (the year 3101 or 3102 B. C), JRAS. Iv. 136, and Thomas, edition of Prinsep's Antiquities, may be read. [65] Ageneral survey of primitive Aryan culture will be found in Schrader, _loc. Cit. _, to which may be added on Vedic (Aryan) metres, Westphal, KZ. Ix. 437; and Allen, _ib. _ xxiv. 556 (style, Heinzel, Stil d. Altgerm. Poesie). On the name [=A]rya, besides _loc. Cit. _ above, p. 25, may be added, Windisch, Beitr. Z. Geschichte d. D. Sprache, iv. 211; Pott, Internat. Zt. Für allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft, ii. P. 105ff. Criticism of a too great confidence in the results of thecomparattve method, AJP. Xv. 154; PAOS. 1895. 

 * * * * *

 FOOTNOTES:

 [Footnote 1: This bibliography is meant only to orient the reader in regard to exegetical literature. It is not complete, nor does it give editions of texts. The order follows in general that of the chapters, but the second and last paragraphs respectively must be consulted for interpretation and geography. Works that cover several fields are placed under the literature of the first. The special studies on Vedic divinities have been arranged alphabetically. ]

 [Footnote 2: On account of the inconvenient form in which appeared the earlier numbers of the JRAS. We cite the Old Series only by date. All references without date refer to the New Series (vol i, NS. , 1864). ]

 [Footnote 3: On the artistic side Emil Schlagintweit's great work, Indien in Wort und Bild, contains much of interest to the student of religious paraphernalia. See also below under wild tribes. ]

 [Footnote 4: Roth, Morality of the Veda; Whitney, Result of Vedic Researches (JAOS. Iii. 289 and 331); Whitney, History of the Vedic Texts, _ib_. Iv. 245. ]

 [Footnote 5: Under this title Roth has an essay (on the comparison of texts), KZ. Xxvi. 45. ]

 [Footnote 6: See below. Defence of the same by the author, WZKM. Vii. 103. ]

 [Footnote 7: JRAS, i. 51 ff. , and subsequent volumes, Contributions to a Knowledge of the Vedic Theogony and Mythology and Progress of the Vedic Religion toward Abstract Conceptions of the Deity. ]

 [Footnote 8: It cannot be too much emphasized that Grassmann's translation should never be used for comparative purposes. At the same time, for a general understanding of the contents of the whole Rig Veda it is the only book that can be recommended. Ludwig's translation is so uncouth that without a controlling knowledge of the original it is often meaningless. ]

 [Footnote 9: Bloomfield, AJP. Xii. 429. Compare also Regnaud, Le Mythe de Rohita. The same author has published various Vedic articles in the Rev. De l'histoire des religions, vols. Xv-xxvi. Whitney's complete translation of AV. Will soon appear. ]

 [Footnote 10: Sexual side of fire-cult; whirlwind of fire, M[=a]tariçvan, Schwartz, KZ. Xx. 202; compare Hillebrandt, ZDMG. Xxxiii. 248. ]

 [Footnote 11: Neisser's Vorvedisches im Veda, BB. Xvii. 244, is not a mythological study. ]

 [Footnote 12: Apollon here is Saparye[n. ]ya, 'worshipful. ' This derivation is attacked by Froehde, Apollon, BB. Xix. 230 (compare Fick, _ib. _ xviii. 138), who derives Apollon from [Greek: phellhôn], 'word, ' comparing [Greek: hapellhaxein], 'conciliare, ' _pell_ being 'spell' (in Gospel, etc. ), 'inter-pellare. ' Thus Apollo would be 'prophet, ' 'wârspello. ' On _vahni_, Agni, compare Neisser, Vedica, BB. Xviii. 301 (xix. 120, 248). ]

 [Footnote 13: Oldenberg, _loc. Cit_. , interprets Açvins as morning and evening stars! The epithet (of Agni and Açvins) _bhura[n. ]yu_ has been equated with Phor[=o]neus, we forget by whom. ]

 [Footnote 14: Oldenberg's (Die Religion des Veda) Old-Man-of-the-Mountains-Indra thus gets etymological support. ]

 [Footnote 15: For convenience included in this list. ]

 [Footnote 16: Maspiter is Mars-pater. ]

 [Footnote 17: Hirt equates Parjanya, Perkunas, Fjörgyn, as originally epithet of Dy[=a]ns-Zeus, with [Greek: phêgotaios], the 'Oak-god. ' See also Zimmer, ZDA. Vii. (19) 164. ]

 [Footnote 18: Müller explains Rudra as 'howler'; Leo identifies him with Wuotan; Jones with Apollo, Kuhn. KZ. Iii. 335; as A. Sax. Rodor, _ib_. Ii. 478: P. Von Bradke. ZDMG. Xi. 361. Oldenberg's delineation of Rudra in Die Religion des Veda is based on the Brahmanic Rudra-Çiva (see PAOS. Dec 1894). ]

 [Footnote 19: Kerbaker, Varuna e gli Aditya (Naples, Proceedings of the Royal Academy) is known to us only by title. ]

 [Footnote 20: The author justly remarks that no sociological data can be made of Yama's wife or sister. ]

 [Footnote 21: Dog sees Death, sharp sight of dog causes myth. ]

 [Footnote 22: Other less important examples of etymological ingenuity are Scherer, Brahman as flamen ([Greek: Brhagkos], Bragi, see Kaegi, Rig Veda, note 82); abhrad[=i]t[=a] as Aphrodite, Sonne, KZ. X. 415; Ahaly[=a] as Achilleus, Weber, Sitz. Berl. Ak. , 1887; Id[=a] as Iris (Windischmann), Poseidon, potídas, i[=d. ]aspati (Fick, KZ. Xxi. 462); but in KZ. I. 459 Poseidon is patye davan. On the form compare BB. Viii. 80; x. 237; KZ. Xxx. 570. Prellwitz, BB. Ix. 327, agrees with Fick and Pott as to i[d. ]as representing [Greek: oidma] and compares [prosklhôtios]. Garga is Gorgo, Kern, JRAS. Iv. 431; P[=a]jasya is Pegasos, etc, KZ. I. 416, xxix. 222; Parvata is Pelasgos, Burda, KZ. Xxi. 470; but compare Stier, _ib_. Xi. 229, where Pelasgoi are 'cranes'; and Pische, _ib_. Xx. 369, where they are [Greek: parhrhhasioi]. Sabheya is Yavi[s. ][t. ]ha (not Hephaistos, as says Kuhn), Müller, _ib. _ xviii. 212; and v[r. ]trahan is not Bellerophon (as says Pott), _ib_. Iv. 416, v. 140 (bellero is varvara). Çarád is Ceres, Müller, _ib_. Xviii. 211; svav[=a]n is [Greek: enas], Autrecht, ZDMG. Xiii 499; svar 'sing' in Silenus, Siren: Buddhaguru in Pythagoras, etc. Helena is Saram[=a], and Hermes 1s S[=a]rameya. Müller, Chips, ii. 138, note. Compare for further clever guesses Cox's Aryan Mythology, Müller's Lectures, Second Series, and Biographies of Words. ]

 [Footnote 23: Compare Deussen, Geschichte der Philosophie, i. 105. On Vedic and Sanskrit Riddles, _loc. Cit_. ; also Haug, Vedische Räthselfragen (also Brahma und die Brahmanen); Führer, ZDMG. Xxxix. 99. ]

 [Footnote 24: There is an essay on this subject by Kern, Ind. Theorieen over de Standenverdeeling, which we have not seen. ]

 [Footnote 25: Sitz. Berl. Ak. 1858, 1859, and 1894, respectively. The Wurfel-Orakel (and Schiefner) is published also in Ind. Streifen, i. 274. The essay on Omina and Portenta contains translations of parts of the Sha[d. ]vi[. M]ça Br[=a]hma[n. ]a, of the S[=a]ma Veda, and of the K[=a]uçika (AV. ) S[=u]tra. ]

 [Footnote 26: (Whitney) Burgess, S[=u]ryasiddh[=a]nta, JAOS. Vi; JRAS. 1863, p. 345; Whitney, _ib_. I. 316; Lunar Zodiac, Or. Ling. St. , ii. 341; Kern, translation of BS. , JRAS. Iv-vii; IS. X, xiv, xv; Weber, Ueber altir[=a]nische Sternnamen, Sitz. Berl. Ak. , 1888; see also Whitney, JAOS. Viii. 1, 382; Burgess, _ib_. 309; Weber, IS. Ix. 424, x. 213; Whitney _vs_. Ludwig, PAOS. , 1885. On the twelve intercalated days, 'Twelfth Night, ' see Weber, IS. V. 437 (Çabal[=i]-homa), xvii. 224. ]

 [Footnote 27: The statement is here made that the Vedic religion knows nothing of idols; but see the other cited works which seem to disprove this. ]

 [Footnote 28: The 'Fifteen Puzzle' is Indic (IA. X. 89, xi. 83). ]

 [Footnote 29: Triton und Euphemos, oder Die Argonauten in Libyen, by Water, in 1849, treats of the holy seven in a ridiculous way. Not less ridiculous is the author's attempt to explain everything by the Moon-Cult, thus anticipating modern vagaries. ]

 [Footnote 30: A curious though useless classic is Anquetil du Perron's Oupnekhat, 1801, the first European version of the Upanishads (through the Persian). ]

 [Footnote 31: Whitney, AJP. Vii. 1, xi. 407; Jacob, IA. Xv. 279; Whitney Trans. Phil. Ass. Xxi. 88; Böhtlingk, Bericht d. K. Sächs. Gesellschaft, 1890, and separately. ]

 [Footnote 32: Compare Windischmann, Sancara, 1833; Ecstein, IS. Ii. 369; and Bruining-Bijdrage tot de Kennis van den Ved[=a]nta, 1871. ]

 [Footnote 33: Compare two native expositions, JRAS. X. 33 (Vedantic conception of _brahma_), and WZKM. Ii. 95 (Çankara's _advaita_ philosophy); also Müller, Three Lectures. ]

 [Footnote 34: Compare Ballantyne's Hindu Philosophy, Williams' Indian Wisdom, Brahmanism and Hinduism, Religious Thought and Life, and also the excellent chapters in Weber's Lectures (above), and in Schroeder's Literatur und Cultur. Of Deussen's Allgemeine Geschichte der Philosophie one half volume has appeared. ]

 [Footnote 35: Haug has an article on the M[=a]it. Sa[. M]h. With the same title, Brahma und Die Brahmanen. ]

 [Footnote 36: House-ritual: [=A]çval[=a]yana, Gobhila, Ç[=a][. N]kh[=a]yana, P[=a]raskara, Kh[=a]dira, Hira[n. ]yakeçin, [=A]pastamba. Law: [=A]pastamba, G[=a]utama, Vasistha, B[=a]udh[=a]yana, Y[=a]jñavalkya, Vishnu, N[=a]rada, Brihaspati, Manu. The last is also translated by Loiseleur, Jones, Burnell and Hopkins (besides Bühler, SBE. , above). ]

 [Footnote 37: Ueber die heiligen Schriften, translated into English by Smyth in the Indian Antiquary, 1893. ]

 [Footnote 38: Feer, JA. 1888 (xii), p. 209. Leumann has published in the same German series the Aupap[=a]tika S[=u]tra, but as yet only the text (1883) has appeared. ]

 [Footnote 39: Of the many manuals we recommend especially those of Rhys Davids for ontology (also J[=a]takis. First Part) and Oldenberg (now in second edition). For Northern Buddhism Köppen's Religion is still excellent, although it is vitiated by the point of view taken by the author, who regards Buddha as an emancipator, a political innovator, etc. Davids has two recent articles on Buddhist sects, JRAS. Xxiii. 409; xxiv. 1 (see abo below). ]

 [Footnote 40: L. Von Schroeder, Worte der Wahrheit. On the word Dhammapada, Franke ZDMG. Xlvi. 734. ]

 [Footnote 41: Also Oldenberg, D[=i]pava[. M]sa, with text. ]

 [Footnote 42: For Nirv[=a]na and its date all the manuals may be consulted. See also D'Alwis, Nirv[=a]na (with translation); Edkins, JRAS. Xiii. 59, Congress, 1880, p. 195; Childers, Dictionary, JRAS. V. 219, 289, vii. 49, etc. ; Fergusson, _ib. _ iv. 81 (Indic Chronology); Müller, Origin of Religion, p. 130, note, and Introduction to Buddhaghosha, and to Dhammapada (above). We incline to accept 471 to 483 as the extreme limits of the date of Buddha's death (Kern, 380; Davids, 412). ]

 [Footnote 43: On Hsing (671) see Beal, IA. X. 109, 194; Müller, India. 'Fà-Hien's travels are now published by Legge, 'Record of Buddhistic Kingdoms. ' There are other editions. See also Sykes, JRAS. 1841, p. 248; Beal, _ib. _ xix. 191. ]

 [Footnote 44: On Japanese Buddhism there have been published some texts by Japanese scholars (ed. Müller, Aryán Series of Anecdota Oxoniensia). See JRAS. Xii. 153. ]

 [Footnote 45: Chalmers, J[=a]takas (ed. Cowell, vol. 1) is announced. Compare JRAS. Xxiv. 423. On Barlaam u. Joasaph see now the exhaustive essay of Kuhn, Abh. D. K. Bayerisch. Ak. 1894 (with all literature). ]

 [Footnote 46: By the same, Avad[=a]naçataka, Mus. Guimet, xviii (JA. 1879, xiv). The Da[t. ]havamça, Melloné, Ann. Du MG. Vii. ]

 [Footnote 47: Triratna and triçula. The articles following are by Murray-Aynsley (Asiatic Symbolism), on svastika, trees, serpents, evil eye, etc. On the evil eye and the poison-girl, vi[s. ]akany[=a], see now the interesting essay of Hertz (Abh. D. Bayern. Akad, 1894), who connects the superstition with the religious practice described above, p. 505, note 2. ]

 [Footnote 48: For older essays see also Schönberg, ZDMG. Vii. 101 (rock-temples); JAS. Beng. Xxv. 222 (Khandgiri temples); Yule, JAS. Beng. , 1857, Ancient Buddhistic Remains (on the Irawady): Sykes, Miniature Caityas in Buddhist topes, JRAS. 1854, pp. 37, 227. ]

 [Footnote 49: Çiva is here falsely interpreted as Herakles, p. 39. Compare too Weber, IS. Ii. 409, and his Ahaly[=a]-Achilleus, Berl. Ak. 1887. The original Greek is edited by Schwanbeck. On Darius' conquest see Marshman, i. P. 10. ]

 [Footnote 50: Sixth or eighth century, developed with Buddhistic or Greek influence. ]

 [Footnote 51: An example of the survival of the Hindu cult in the Çr[=a]uta ritual is given by Weber, IS. V. 437, Çabal[=i]-homa. ]

 [Footnote 52: Weber on Skanda, IS. Iii. 478. ]

 [Footnote 53: Compare also Malcolm, AR. Xi (1812), 197; ZKM. V. 1, Die Religion und der Staat der Sikh. ]

 [Footnote 54: The Dalast[=a]n or School of Manners, translated from the Persian, with notes by Shea and Troy, 1843. ]

 [Footnote 55: Williams' Hinduism and the third chapter of Wilkins' Modern Hinduism contain a list of the modern festivals. Grierson, Peasant Life, describes Beh[=a]r. ]

 [Footnote 56: M[=o]ns and Koles, JRAS. X, 234. Lards, Congress, 1874, by Drew; 1880, by Leitner. ]

 [Footnote 57: Snake-nation in America, Shoshone, Clark, Sign-language, p. 337; snake-symbol of life, Schoolcraft, i. 375. ]

 [Footnote 58: Totemism repudiated, Kennedy, on N[=a]gas, JRAS. Xxiii. 480. ]

 [Footnote 59: The Indian Antiquary contains a vast fund of folk-lore stones of more or less religious importance. See Barth's note, Rev. Xxix. 55, for the Orientalist. ]

 [Footnote 60: Early accounts of Burmah will be found in Buchanan's Religion and Literature of the Burmas, AR. Vi. 163; of the R[=a]jmahal tribes, T. Shaw, _ib. _ iv. 45; of the inhabitants of the Garrow Hills, Eliot, _ib. _ iii. 17; of the Kookies, MacRae (or McRae), _ib. _ vii. 183; of Nepal (temples, etc. ), _ib. _ ii. 307. An account of the Tibeto-Burman tribes by Damant will be found in JRAS. Xii. 228. ]

 [Footnote 61: Compare a suggestive paper by the same author, IF. Iv, p. 36 (1894), on Die Verwandtschaftsverhältnisse der Indogermanen (linguistic, but historically important). ]

 [Footnote 62: Volga as 'Pâ, Ranha, Ras[=a], Kuhn, KZ. Xxviii 214; the Sarasvat[=i] and the lost river, Oldham, JRAS. Xxv. 49. ]

 [Footnote 63: Another curiosity will be found in JRAS. , 1854, p. 199, where Curzon claims that the Aryan Hindus are autochthonous. ]

 [Footnote 64: Leitner, Greek Influence on India, Congress, 1880, p. 113. On the Drama see above, pp. 2 and 438. ]

 [Footnote 65: Further, Westergaard, Ueber den ältesten Zeitraum der Indischen Geschichte; Fergusson, JRAS. Xii. 259; Fleet, _samvat_ for Çaka-era, JRAS. , 1884, p. Lxxi; Gupta, IA. Xv. 189, and xvi. 141; (B[=e]r[=u]n[=i]), _ib. _ xvii. 243, 359; also Kielhorn, Vikrama, IA. Xix. 24 ff. ; xxii. III; Bühler, WZKM. V. 215. Methods and Tables for Computing Hindu Dates, Jacobi, IA. Xvii. 145; and Epigraphia ind. I. 430. Last literature on date of Rig Veda, above, p. 5, and add now Oldenberg, ZDMG. Xlviii. 629. Further references, above, pp. 436, 571, notes. ]

 * * * * *

INDEX. 

 A (alpha), 226, 397. 

 abbots, 557. 

 abhangs, 522. 

 abhidhamma, 326. 

 Abhinavagupta, 482. 

 Abh[=i]ras, 543. 

 ab[=i]r, 454, 455. 

 absorption, 496

 abstractions, 112, 135. 

 [=a]c[=a]ra, 554. 

 Achaemenides, 544. 

 [=A]di Br[=a]hma Sam[=a]j, 517, 519. 

 [=A]digranth, 511 ff. 

 Aditi, 55, 73, 139, 142, 154

 [=A]dityas (see Aditi, Varu[n. ]a, etc), 55 (A[. N]ça), 143, 167; [=a]dityabhaktas, see sun and S[=a]uras. 

 adultery, 203

 adv[=a]ita, 396, 496, 505. 

 Aesculapius, 538. 

 Afghanistan, 30, 548. 

 [=a]gamas, 295, 439. 

 ages, 227, 259, 418 ff. , 444, 530. 

 Aghor[=i], 490, 533. 

 Agnes, saint, 451. 

 Agni, 43, 101, 105 ff. , 123, 144, 168, 353, 356, 377, 401, 414. 445, 449, 476, 480, 554. 

 ahimas[=a], 199, 287, 310, 365. 

 Ahura Mazd[=a]o, 49, 67, 167. 170. 

 [=A]k[=a]çamukhas, 486. 

 Akbar, 437, 546. 

 Akkadians, Akkadists, 542, 571. 

 ak[s. ]am[=a]la (see rosary) 374. 

 Al B[=e]r[=u]n[=i], 547, Addenda. 

 Alexander, 431, 546. 

 Alexandria, 431, 561. 

 All-god, 139, 141, 496. 

 All-gods, 137, 144, 450. 

 Allah [=u]d d[=i]n, 437. 

 alphabet, 543, 595. 

 altars, 475. 490

 altruism, 478, 555, 556, 563, 567. 

 American Indians, see Indians. 

 [=A]nanda, 309, 311; [=A]nanda Giri, 445, 447; [=A]nandat[=i]rtha, 509. 

 Ananta, 397. 

 ancestors (see female, Manes), ten, 534. 

 Anaximander, 559. 

 ancestor-tree, 541. 

 Andaman gods, 538. 

 androgynous, 447, 492, 557. 

 a[. N]gas, 440. 

 A[. N]g[=i]ras, 108, 167, 477. 

 A[n. ][=i]m[=a][n. ][d. ]avya, 432. 

 Aniruddha, 441, 442, 457. 

 annihilation (see Nirv[=a][n. ]a), 421, 531, 532. 

 ant-oath, 534. 

 Antiochus, 545. 

 Anug[=i]t[=a], 401. 

 Aphrodite, 471. 

 Apollonius, 508. 

 April-Fool, 455. 

 Apsaras, 137, 169, 355, 365. 

 Arabia, 547. 

 [=A]ra[n. ]yakas, 178, 219. 

 ardhan[=a]r[=i]çvara, 447. 

 Arhat, 280, 285, 303, 320, 564. 

 Arjun, 511. 

 Arjuna, 361. 

 Arrian, 459. 

 arrow-oath, 534. 

 art, artists, 549. 

 Aryaman, 46, 121, 397. 

 Aryan, 11, 26, 548. 

 [=A]rya Sam[=a]j, 521. 

 açani, 464. 

 ascetics, 148, 254, 258, 304, 352 ff. ; asceticism, 287, 366, 470, 520. 

 açoka, 540. 

 Açoka, 311, 340, 341, 435. 

 astrology, 256, 438, 543. 

 Asuras, 42, 49, 104, 170 ff. , 186 ff. , 358

 Asura Maya, 368. 

 Açvins, 38, 54, 78, 80, 381. 

 Atharva Veda, 3, 29, 43, 151, 175, 419, 477, 571. 

 Atharvan, 110, 378, 477. 

 [=A]tm[=a], 42, 47 (soul), 56, 220 ff. , 232, 249, 354, 396, 398, 442. 

 [=A]tm[=i]ya Sabh[=a], 516. 

 atonement, 376. 

 Avadh[=u]tas, 502. 

 avasthas, 412. 

 avatar, 162, 196, 215, 340, 389, 393, 404, 424, 430; number of, 444, 468; Vishnu's last avatar, 522. 

 Avesta (see Iranian), 12, 16, 422. 

 avy[=u]ha 442. 

 Ayenar, 464. 

 axe (see Paraçu R[=a]ma), 527. 

 Aztecs, 557. 

 B[=a]b[=a]l[=a]ls, 514. 

 Baber, 437. 

 Babrius, 558. 

 Babylon, 543. 

 Bacchic rites, 414, 427, 528. 

 Bactria, 32, 33, 434. 

 B[=a]dar[=a]ya[n. ]a, 495, 497. 

 B[=a]la Gop[=a]la, 503. 

 Balar[=a]ma, 442, 469. 

 bali, 540. 

 Bali, 478. 

 bamboo (see pole-rite), 536. 

 bandana, 533. 

 banian, 540. 

 Bardesanes, 561. 

 Barlaam, 557. 

 Basava, 482, 547. 

 basil, see tulas[=i]. 

 Baskets, see Tripi[t. ]aka. 

 Beh[=a]r, 435. 

 bel-tree, 453, 536, 541. 

 bell, 557. 

 Bella Pennu, 530. 

 Bellerophon, 530. 

 Benares, 459. 

 Bhaga, 41, 50 ff. ; bhaga, 490. 

 Bhagavad G[=i]t[=a], 389 ff. , 399, 400, 401, 447. 

 Bhagavat, 303, 389. 

 Bh[=a]gavatas, 447, 497. 

 Bh[=a]irava, 464, 491. 

 Bh[=a]ktas, 447. 

 bhakti (see faith), 429, 503, 519. 

 Bh[=a]rata, 349 ff. , 438, 457. 

 Bh[=a]rs, 534, 535 ff. 

 Bh[=a]ts, 479. 

 Bhava, 462, 464, 548. 

 Bhav[=a]n[=i], 494. 

 bhik[s. ]u, 258, 281, 303, 310, 374; bhik[s. ]uk[=i], 426. 

 Bhils, 533. 

 Bh[r. ]gu, 168, 397, 423. 

 bicycle, used to make converts, 570. 

 bigotry, 445. 

 bila, 12. 

 bilva, see bel. 

 bird (of the sky) 45, 49, 113, 124, 140, 164; birds as spirits, 432. 

 birth-impurity, 541. 

 Birth-stories, see J[=a]takas. 

 birth-tree, 540. 

 Blavatskyism, 562. 

 Blessed One, 19, 388 ff. 

 blood-money, 162. 

 blood-revenge, 375. 

 bloodless sacrifice (see ahi[. M]s[=a], Thugs), 528. 

 boar, 404, 407, 445. 

 Bodhisat, bodhisattva, 303, 564. 

 Bhodhi-tree, bo-tree, Bodhi Gay[=a], 304, 308, 540. 

 boundary-god, 529. 

 brahma, 156, 178, 195, 217, 220 ff. , 231 ff. , 381, 389, 393 ff. , 398, 403, 419, 420, 474, 496, 518. 

 Brahm[=a], 195, 218, 332, 346, 372, 403 ff. , 407, 412, 421, 446, 451, 458 ff. , 464 ff. , 487, 492, 499, 518, 534. 

 Br[=a]hma Dharma, 517. 

 Brahmaloka, 256. 

 Brahmamaha, 371, 411. 

 Br[=a]hma[n. ]as, 4, 5, C^ 22, 23, 174, 219, 502. 

 Brahmanism, 24, 176 ff. , 548. 

 Br[=a]hma Sam[=a]j, 516; of India, 519. 

 Bahmasamprad[=a]yins, 509. 

 brahmodya, 383. 

 branding, 440, 447. 

 B[r. ]haspati, 54 (Lord of Strength), 101, 136, 159, 379, 386. 

 B[=r. ]hat Sa[. M]hit[=a], 438. 

 brothers, 370. 

 Buddha, 258, 280, 303 ff. , 426; precedent Buddhas, 309, 523, 557; avatar of Vishnu, 469, 500; brother of Çiva, 478. 

 Buddhagho[s. ]a, 327, 343. 

 Buddhism, 4, 5, 6, 7, 26, 225, 298 ff. , 310, 401, 448; Northern and Southern, 326, 327, 341; esoteric, 320, 334; epic, 423 ff. ; Çivaite, 485, 486; morals of, 554, 556; Occidental, 563; lesson of, 564. 

 Budo Gosain, 533. 

 buffalo (see cow-bells), 445, 531, 537. 

 bull, 407, 445, 528, 534. 

 bull-roarer, 204, 553. 

 burial, 60, 271, 364, 528, 534, 571. 

 buttoat, 493. 

 Calvinism, 501. 

 Candragupta, 311, 434. 

 Candraçekhara, 470. 

 cara[n. ]a, 255. 

 C[=a]ra[n. ]as, 367. 

 Caran D[=a]s[=i]s, 506. 

 Cardinals, 557. 

 Carnival, 455. 

 C[=a]rv[=a]ka, 298, 374, 448. 

 castes, 27, 28, 29, 40, 141, 226, 263, 426, 507, 571; duties and occupations of, 549. 

 cat, holy, 547. 

 cat-doctrine, 500. 

 cataclysms, 259, 260. 

 cattle (see cow), 50, 462 ff. , 450. 

 caturm[=u]rti, 413. 

 caturthi, 451. 

 caturvy[=u]ha, 442. 

 celibates (see monks), 537. 

 Ceylon, Buddhism of, 341. 

 C[=a]itanya, 503. 

 chandas, 142, 174, 477. 

 Ch[=a]rans, 479. 

 chief, divinity of, 534. 

 child-marriages, 519. 

 children, sacrifice of (see merias), 450. 

 Ch[=i]rus, 535. 

 choirs, 557. 

 chrematheism, 135, 166. 

 Christ, Christianity, 389, 395, 428 ff. , 431, 479, 482, 503, 524, 545, 566, 569, 570; and Buddhism, 546, 557. 

 Christmas, 430, 568. 

 churik[=a], 441. 

 circumambulations, 271, 454. 

 Citragupta, 424. 

 Clive, 566. 

 cock, 415, 535, 538. 

 commandments (see morals), 267, 317, 401, 479, 506. 

 confessional, 203, 373, 557. 

 cosmic tree, see tree. 

 courage, 527. 

 covenants, 192, 361 ff. 

 cow, 156, 189, 527, 547. 

 cow-bells, worship of buffalo cow-bells, 537. 

 cow-boys, 454. 

 creation, 60, 141, 173, 207 ff. , 216, 540. 

 creator, 384, 444. 

 crocodile, 450, 547. 

 cross, 537. 

 Cupid, see Love. 

 custom, 531, 554. 

 Dabist[=a]n, 480, 510. 

 D[=a]d[=u] Panth[=i]s, 480, 502, 510, 513, 547. 

 daevas, 10, 168. 

 Dak[s. ]a, 406. 

 D[=a]navas, see devils. 

 dance, 443, 454, 456, 504, 535. 

 Darius, 544. 

 darkness (as hell and evil), 147, 206, 227, 422. 

 Daçan[=a]mis, 482. 

 Daçapeya, 477. 

 Dasyus, 524, 542. 

 dates, 3-8, 434 ff. , 571, 595, note. 

 Datt[=a]mitra, 545. 

 Dawn (see Ushas), hymns, character of, 553, 571. 

 Day[=a]nanda, 521. 

 Death (see dogs, M[=a]ra), 43, 129, 136. 

 Debendran[=a]th, 516 ff. 

 Decoits, 494. 

 Dedr[=a]j, 514. 

 deism, 498, 515, 523. 

 deluge, 160, 162 214, 369, 421, 542, 543. 

 demons, see devils. 

 demonology, 46, 135, 168, 538. 

 Demetrius, 545. 

 depressed classes, 568. 

 devas, 10, 168. 

 Devadatta, 309. 

 Devak[=i], 465, 467. 

 devils, 368, 414, 423, 475, 526, 539. 

 Dhammapada, 346. 

 dhan, 508. 

 Dha[=n. ]gars, 531. 

 Dharma, dharma (see Path, Right), 249 ff. , 358, 373, 380 417, 420, 554. 

 dharma, 361. 

 Dhav[=a], 452. 

 Dh[r. ]ti, 452. 

 dhvaja, 443. 

 Digambaras, 284 ff. , 480. 

 Dionysos, 458 ff. 

 D[=i]p[=a]l[=a], 456. 

 discus, 440, 462. 

 disease (see small-pox god), 452 ff. , 538. 

 divination, 535. 

 dogs of Death, 132, 138, 147, 163. 

 Dol[=a] Y[=a]tr[=a], dolotsava, 453 ff. 

 dolmen, 538. 

 dolphin, 450. 

 dragon (see N[=a]ga, snake), 42, 48, 165, 539. 

 drama, 2, 436, 438. 

 Dravidian religion, 416, 425, 426 ff. , 542. 

 dreams, 42. 

 drugha[n. ]a, 441. 

 Druids, 533. 

 drunkenness, 491. 

 dualism (see ptak[r. ]ti, S[=a][. N]khya), 13, 396, 414. 

 Durg[=a], 416, 451, 456, 490, 492, 513. 

 d[=u]rv[=a], 502. 

 Dutch rule in India, 566. 

 dv[=a]para, 420. 

 Dy[=a]us, 9, 19 (heaven), 58, 172, 571. 

 eagle (see soma), 534. 

 Earth, 58 ff. , 168, 445; earth-worshippers, 480, 531. 

 Easter, 454. 

 education, salvation of, 571. 

 egg, mundane, 166, 208, 411. 

 Egypt, 543, 550. 

 ek[=a]ntinas, 413; eka deva, 420. 

 Eleatics, 559. 

 elements, 1, 559. 

 elephant, 445, 533. 

 eleocarpus ganitrus, 502. 

 emperors, imperialism, 36, 435 ff. 

 English rule in India, 566. 

 ensigns, 539. 

 epic, 2, 25, 348 ff. , 425, 444, 496; Greek influence on, 545. 

 Epicureans, 505. 

 eras, 436. 

 Eros, see Love. 

 eschatology (see Heaven, Hell, Manes), 173, 204, 216, 253, 367, 394, 496, 530. 

 ethnologists, 11. 

 euphemism, 251. 

 Europe and India, 556 ff. 

 evil eye, 155, 526, 589, note 3. 

 exogamy (see marriage), 534, 535. 

 fables, 545, 558. 

 faith, bhakti, 396, 506, 507, 545. 

 fakirs, 486. 

 family, see matriarchy. 

 fasting, 452, 557. 

 fate (see karma), 369, 417, 477. 

 Father-god, see Praj[=a]pati; Fathers, see Manes; father (see parents), 529. 

 fauna, 35. 

 fees, 192. 

 female (see abstractions, infanticide, mothers, çakti), divinities, 51, 138, 184, 416; female ancestors, 441, 534. 

 Feridun, 11. 

 festivals, 202, 448. 

 fetishism, 169, 363; distinction between fetish and god-stone, 538. 

 fire (see Agni), as germ of life, 141; fire-cult, 158, 378; destroys world, see Sa[. M]vartaka; cult, 454, 460, 491. 

 flood, see deluge. 

 flowers, 440, 540, 557. 

 forest (see wood), 528. 

 fountain-god, 531. 

 free-will, 384. 

 frogs, 14, 100 ff. ; frog-maiden, frog-feast, 536. 

 funeral, see burial. 

 gambler, 14, 162, 376. 

 games, 328, 451. 

 Gandharva, 125, 130, 167, 367, 419, 442, 542. 

 Gan-eden, 542. 

 Ga[n. ]eça, 414, 416, 447, 450 ff. , 456, 466, 487, 506, 532. 

 G[=a][n. ]eças, 413. 

 Ganges, 30, 372, ff. , 450. 

 Garos, 534. 

 Garutman, Garuda, 45, 360, 378, 446. 

 G[=a]ur[=i], 452. 

 Gautama, 302 ff. ; Gotama, 308, note; 542. 

 g[=a]yatr[=i], 46, 124. 

 generosity, 374. 

 geography, 28, 29, 177, 193, 314, 342 ff. 

 Ghori, 437. 

 ghosts, 532. 

 giants, 470, 571. 

 Giriça, 463. 

 g[=i]t[=a], see Bhagavad. 

 G[=i]ta Govinda, 457, 503. 

 Gnosticism, 560. 

 gods (see devas), 29, 90, 141, 182, 209, 395, 402. 

 golden age, see ages. 

 golden germ, 141, 208, 507. 

 golden rule, 479. 

 Gonds, 444, 526 ff. 

 goose-totem, 534. 

 gop[=i]s, 456. 

 Gorakhn[=a]th, 486. 

 gosain, 504. 

 Gos[=a]la, 283. 

 gospels, 546. 

 Gotama, see Gautama. 

 Govind, 511. 

 grace of God, 143, 384, 393, 396, 413, 429. 

 grahas (see planets), 415. 

 gr[=a]mas, 27. 

 Greece, Greeks, 1, 3, 6, 416, 431, 434 ff. , 458 ff. , 470, 471, 544 ff. , 550. 

 Grippa Valli, 530. 

 G[=u][d. ]aras, 487. 

 guest, 369, 531. 

 gu[n. ]as, 507. 

 Gupta era, 436, Addenda. 

 guru, 246, 510. 

 Hanuman (see monkey), 368, 502. 

 haoma, 16. 

 Hara, 462. 

 Harahvati, 31. 

 Harihara, 464, 547. 

 Hariva[. N]ça, 424, 428, 439, 464, 467. 

 H[=a]r[=i]ta, 440. 

 Hartmann, 562. 

 Harvard students, 565. 

 harvest (see festival), 531, 532. 

 Hastings, 567. 

 Heathen, 524. 

 Heaven (see Dy[=a]us, Varu[n. ]a, eschatology), 48, 143, 145 ff. , 253, 365, 417, 448. 

 Helen, 12, 168. 

 Hell, 147, 165, 206, 232 ff. , 253, 267, 336, 363, 381, 402, 443, 478, 528, 557. 

 henotheism, 139, 177, 571. 

 Herakles, 458 ff. , 470. 

 Heraklitus, 558. 

 Hestia, 530. 

 hills, see mountains and wild tribes. 

 Hinduism, 24, 348 ff. , 434 ff. , 548, 568 ff. 

 Hindukush, 31. 

 Hira[n. ]yagarbha (see golden germ), 447. 

 history, 434. 

 holiness, 442. 

 Holl, 453. 

 holy-days, 204, 248 ff. 

 holy-places, 444. 

 holy-stone, see Ç[=a]lagr[=a]ma and stone. 

 holy-water, 557. 

 horse-sacrifice, 444. 

 honesty, 527, 555. 

 hospitality (see guest), 555, 556. 

 house-god, 374, 530. 

 H[r. ][s. ]ikeça, 432. 

 humanitarianism, 428. 

 humanity, 433. 

 idealism, see adv[=a]ita. 

 idolatry, modern, 522. 

 idols, 95, 370, 371, 374, 442, 446, 477, 537, 556 ff. 

 Ilium, 12. 

 illusion, 395, 396, 401, 421, 497. 

 immaculate conception, 431, 460. 

 immortality (see Heaven), 141, 396, 422; immortality of pots, 534. Incarnation (see magic), 470. 

 Incarnation, see avatar. 

 incest (see commandments, left-hand), 531. 

 Indians, 161 ff. , 452, 532, 533, 542. 

 Indra, 10, 20, 39, 56, 57, 89, 91 ff. , 101, 123, 332, 353, 355 ff. , 69, 377, 404, 405, 412, 414, 445, 448, 449, 473 ff. 

 Indramaha, 378, 457, 460. 

 Indus, 30. 

 infanticide, 529, 531. 

 infidelily, 448, 475. 

 Innocents day, 455. 

 inspiration, 305. 

 Iranians, 6, 15, 26, 32 ff. , 67, 132, 168, 170, 186, 422, 543. 

 [=I]ça, 546. 

 islands, 431. 

 Issa, 546. 

 Itih[=a]sa, 434, 477. 

 Jagann[=a]th, 440, 449, 456, 505. 

 J[=a]imini, 495. 

 Jainism, 280, 318, 348, 401, 448, 480. 

 Jam[=a]li, 283. 

 J[=a]mbavan, 368. 

 janas, 26, 27. 

 Jangamas, 447, 482. 

 Janm[=a][s. ][t. ]am[=i], 465, 469. 

 J[=a]takas, 339 ff. , 393, 430, 558. 

 J[=a]tavedas, 416. 

 Jayadeva, 503. 

 Jay[=i], 494. 

 Jem[=i]dar, 493. 

 Jemshid, 11. 

 Jews, 524, 544. 

 j[=i]va, 442, 496. 

 J[. N][=a]ndev, 522. 

 J[. N][=a]triputra, 292. 

 John, saint, 558. 

 Jonas, story of, 547. 

 Josaphat, 557. 

 Judgment-god (see Dharma), 529, 531. 

 Juggernaut, see Jagann[=a]th. 

 jugglers, see Yogi. 

 Justice, see Dharma. 

 Ka, 182, 413. 

 Kab[=i]r (Panthis), 502, 510, 514, 547. 

 Kabul, Kabulistan, 30. 

 kal[=a], 501. 

 K[=a]la, see Time. 

 kali, 421. 

 K[=a]l[=i], 416, 438, 441, 490, 492, 533. 

 K[=a]lid[=a]sa, 438. 

 Kalki, 340, 469. 

 kalpa, see ages. 

 K[=a]ma, see Love. 

 Ka[n. ][=a]da, 503. 

 K[=a]naph[=a]ts, 486, 487. 

 K[=a][. N]culiyas, 492. 

 Kani[s. ]ka, 435, 436. 

 K[=a]p[=a]likas, 487. 

 kapi, 543. 

 Kapila. 397, 402, 495, 547. 

 Kapilavastu, 300. 

 karma, 199, 231, 253, 302, 319, 369, 374. 401. 

 Karmah[=i]nas, 447. 

 Karmam[=i]m[=a][. M]s[=a], 495. 

 Kart[=a]bh[=a]ja, 504. 

 K[=a]rttikeya, see Skanda. 

 K[=a]çyapa, 503. 

 Kashmeer, 31, 314, 482. 

 Kassos, 534. 

 Katties, 537. 

 Kh[=a]kis, 502. 

 Kh[=a]ls[=a], 512. 

 Khasas, Kh[=a]s[=i]as, 537. 

 Khonds, 445, 526, 528 ff. 

 Kil, 502. 

 kindness (see love), 448. 

 kings, 226 465. 

 Kinnaras, 367. 

 kirttan, k[=i]rtan, 508. 

 Koches, 525. 

 Koles, Kolarians, 525, 531, 532 ff. 

 koph, 543. 

 Kosmas, 544. 

 Krishna (k[r. ][s. ][n. ]a), 349, 361, 388 ff, 399, 401, 405, 411, 412, 429, 448, 449, 456, 457, 465, 498, 548, 551. 

 Krishnaism, 427, 464, 484 ff. , 548. 

 Krishnaite[s. ], 503 ff. 

 k[r. ]ta, 419. 

 K[s. ]apanakas, 448. 

 K[s. ]atriya, 419. 

 K[s. ]emendra, 478. 

 Kubera, 251, 353, 358, 446. 

 kukkuja, see cock. 

 Kum[=a]ra K[=a]rttikej-a (see Skanda), 356, 463. 

 Kum[=a]rila, 436, 437, 572. 

 Kural, 567. 

 Kurus, 32, 179. 

 Kuruk[s. ]etra, 33, 263, 372 ff. 

 kush, 542. 

 Lak[s. ]m[=i], 451, 492, 501, 506. 

 Lalita Vistara, 343. 

 Lamaistn, 343, 557, 565. 

 Lamp-festival, 456; service, 557. 

 Law-books, religion of, 247 ff. ; Aryanism of, 541. 

 Left-hand cult, 490, 506, 533. 

 lex talionis, 555. 

 liberality of thought, 556. 

 light, as right, 422. 

 li[. N]ga (see phallus), 447, 453, 456, 462, 475, 488, 502. 

 Li[. N]g[=a]yits, 482. 

 liquor, 491, 531. 

 literature, celebration of, 451. 

 Logos, V[=a]c, 142, 195, 251, 492, 558. 

 Lohit[=a]yan[=i], 415. 

 lotus, 411, 451, 462, 502. 

 Lotus of the Law, 343. 

 Love, 154; love-charm, 155; love as god, 156, 416, 444, 445, 446, 450, 452, 455, 471, 544. 

 lundi, 528. 

 Lupercalia, 455. 

 Lurka Koles, 531, 534. 

 M[=a]dhava [=A]c[=a]rya, 445. 

 M[=a]dhvas, 502, 506, 509, 514. 

 Madonna-worship, 469, 503, 505, 506, 557. 

 M[=a]gadha, 435. 

 Magas, Magi, 544. 

 magic, witchcraft, 135, 137, 149, 151 ff. , 477, 526. 

 Mah[=a]deva, 464; mah[=a]dev[=i], 490. 

 Mah[=a]bh[=a]rata, see Bh[=a]rata. 

 Mah[=a]r[=a]jas, 505. 

 m[=a]h[=a]ris, 534. 

 mah[=a]tmaism, 486, 550, 562. 

 Mah[=a]v[=i]ra, 280 ff. 

 Maheçvaras, 482. 

 Mahmud, 436. 

 Mahrattas, 437. 

 M[=a]itreya, M[=a]itrakanyaka, 340, 479. 

 makara, 450. 

 Man, 508, worshippers of, 481. 

 Manes (see Çr[=a]ddha), 10, 11, 132, 143 ff. , 155, 173, 190, 250, 361, 364, 365, 446, 450, 452, 529, 530, 532, 533, 537. 

 Man-lion, 453, 470. 

 mantra, 174, 374, 440, 453, 491, 508. 

 Manu, 32, 128, 143, 169, 392; code of, 263 ff. , 391, 397, 399, 401; verse attributed to, 487. 

 manvantara, 439. 

 M[=a]ra, 304, 346. 

 m[=a]rj[=a]ra ny[=a]ya, 501. 

 marka[t. ]a ny[=a]ya, 501. 

 marriage-rites, 270, 421, 533. 

 marriage-tree, 541. 

 Maruts, 8, 56, 97 ff. 

 Mather, Cotton, 565. 

 matriarchy, 441, 541. 

 matter (see prak[r. ]ti), 400. 

 M[=a]y[=a], see illusion. 

 May-day, 453. 

 meat-eating (see ahi[. M]s[=a]), 365, 368. 

 medh[=a], 452. 

 Megasthenes, 1, 458 ff. 

 Menandros, 545. 

 merias, 529. 

 metals, 35. 

 metempsychosis, 175, 199, 204, 286, 302, 347, 364, 401, 532, 533, 559; in the Veda, 145, 432, 530. 

 methods of interpretation, 8, 12 ff. , 22, 551. 

 Mihira, see Mithra. 

 Milinda, 545. 

 M[=i]m[=a][. M]s[=a], 495. 

 miracles, 430. 

 missionaries, 566 ff. 

 Mitra (see Varu[n. ]a), 41, 44, 57, 60, 71, 138; mitra, mihira, 423, 544. 

 Mohammedans, 436 ff. , 482, 509, 524, 546 ff. 

 monks (see ascetic, bhik[s. ]u, Sanny[=a]sin), 285, 324; monasticism, 502, 557. 

 monkey (see Hanuman), 448, 452, 502, 547; monkey-doctrine, 500. 

 monolith, worship of, 538. 

 monotheism, 11, 13, 67, 70, 139, 172, 413, 414, 427, 432, 442, 481, 483, 509, 547. 

 monsoon, 35. 

 moon (see eschalology, Gandharva, Soma), 185, 470, 480, 526, 533. 

 morals (see commandments, sin), 14, 143, 180, 203, 353, 375, 401, 443, 553, 570. 

 mother-divinities, 415, 492; motherhoods, 534. 

 mountains, divine, 137, 359, 416, 461, 463, 528, 532, 537. 

 mouse, 532. 

 Mozoomdar, 519. 

 muni, 148, 520. 

 Munroe, Major, 566. 

 murder, 179, 475, 527. 

 music, 443. 

 M[=u][s. ]ikas, 532. 

 mysticism (see Yoga), 504. 

 N[=a]gas (see dragon, snake), 536, 539. 

 N[=a]g[=a]rjuna, 340, 343. 

 Nakh[=i]s, 486. 

 name of the Lord, call upon, 507. 

 names, 201. 

 N[=a]nak, 502, 511 ff. , 547. 

 N[=a][. N]gi Panthis, 514. 

 Nara, N[=a]r[=a]ya[n. ]a, 412, 448; Sv[=a]mi N[=a]raya[n. ]a, 506, 514. 

 Nature, 397. 

 nautch, 454. 

 Neo-Platonism, 558, 560. 

 New Year's festival, 449, 456. 

 Niadis, 537. 

 nid[=a]nas, chain of causality, 323. 

 Night, 48, 76, 79. 

 Nik[=a]ya, 326. 

 Nimb[=a]ditya, 508. 

 Nirgrantha, 283. 

 Nirmalas, 513. 

 Nirv[=a][n. ]a, 286, 310, 319, 321 ff. , 336, 346, 347, 426 ff. 

 Ni[s. ]ads, 440. 

 non-duality, see adv[=a]ita. 

 Notovitch, 546. 

 numbers, 478. 

 nuns, 290, 310, 330, 557. 

 nymphs, in heaven, 417. 

 Nysian, 458. 

 oath (see ordeals), of king, 213; may be broken, 255; water in oath, 362; other forms of oath, 533, 534. 

 observances, 246. 

 oceans, 34. 

 offerings, 183. 

 Om, 395, 453. 

 Omens (see magic), 256, 328. 

 ophir, 543. 

 oracles, 533, 534. 

 Or[=a]ons, 526, 531, 535. 

 ordeals, 3, 270, 275, 363. 

 orders, politica), priestly stadia, 264, 353, 365. 

 orthodoxy, 507, 562. 

 pacceka, 305. 

 P[=a]h[=a]rias, 533. 

 pairs of gods, 83, 102, 138, 462. 

 palm, 540. 

 palmistry (sce omens), 256. 

 P[=a][. N]cajanya fire, 423. Pa[. N]cak[=a]la, Pa[. N]cak[=a]j[. N]as, 413. 

 Pa[. N]camah[=a]kalpa, 413. 

 Pa[. N]catantra, 558. 

 P[=a][. N]car[=a]tra, 413, 427, 442, 447, 492, 497. 

 P[=a][n. ][d. ]avas, 466, 469. 

 P[=a][n. ]dur[=a][. N]ga, 500. 

 pantheism (see K[r. ][s. ][n. ]a, R[=a]ma, Vi[s. ][n. ]u), 37, 47, 57, 138, 140, 248, 356, 407, 414, 484 ff. , 498, 547. 

 Paradise, see Heaven. 

 Paraçu R[=a]ma, 469. 

 parents, 370. 

 parimata, 227, 229, 232. 

 Parjanya, 100 ff. , 369, 378. 

 Parmenides, 559. 

 parrot, 445, 450. 

 P[=a]rvat[=i], (goddess) 'of mountains, ' 416. 

 Paçupati, 413, 462, 463. 

 P[=a]çupata, 447, 482, 509. 

 P[=a]taliputta, 311. 

 Pata[. N]jali, 495. 

 Path, holy, 305 ff. , 401, 426. 

 peacock, 445, 450, 528, 536. 

 Persian, see Darius, Iranian. 

 pessimism, 306, 314, 316 ff. 

 phallus (see li[. N]ga), 150, 414, 443, 470. 471, 528, 544. 

 Ph[=a]nsigars, 494. 

 Philo, 555. 

 philosophy (see S[=a][. N]khya, Ved[=a]nta), 141, 495. 

 Phoenicia, 543. 

 picture-worship, 374, 557. 

 pipal-tree, see bo-tree. 

 Piç[=a]cas (see devils), 415. 

 planets, 367, 415, 545. 

 plants, worship of (see trees), 540; plant-souls, see metempsychosis. 

 Plato, 2, 559. 

 Plotinus, 561. 

 pocket-altars, 475. 

 pole-rite, 378, 443, 534. 

 political divisions, 26, 27. 

 polyandry, 467, 535. 

 polygamy, 533. 

 polytheism, 11, 13, 529, 547. 

 Pongol, 449, 528. 

 pools, 254. 370, 372, 404, 444, 478. 

 pope, 557. 

 Porphyry, 561. 

 Portuguese rule in India, 566. 

 Prabh[=a], 452. 

 Pradyumna, 441, 442. 

 Prabl[=a]da, 397. 

 Praj[=a]pati, 142, 182 ff. , 196 ff. , 404, 412, 475, 492, 554. 

 prak[=r. ]ti, 396, 397, 399, 507. 

 pras[=a]da (see grace) 429. 

 pray[=a]ga, 435. 

 Prem S[=a]gar, 567. 

 priest, 28, 29, 40, 176, 179, 370; privileges of, 263, 549; epic priest, 352. 

 P[=r. ]çn[=i], 97. 

 Prometheus, 107, 165. 

 Punj[=a]b, 30, 33, 34. 

 Pur[=a][n. ]as, 2, 3, 424, 430, 434 ff. , 476, 503. 

 Puranic S[=a]nkhya, 495. 

 purity, 148, 369. 

 purgatory, 557. 

 Purusa, 142, 397, 447. 

 P[=u]rvam[=i]m[=i]m[=a]ms[=a], 495. 

 P[=u][s. ]an, 5, 41, 47, 50 ff. , 80, 101, 463, 464, 475. 

 Pu[s. ]kara, 372. 

 Pu[s. ][t. ]i, 452. 

 P[=u]lan[=a], 444. 

 p[=u]tika, 369. 

 Pythagoras, 209, 559 ff. , 580, note 3. 

 quakerism, 567. 

 quietism (see Yoga), 567. 

 R[=a]dh[=a], R[=a]dh[=a] Vallabhis, 492, 506. 

 R[=a]hu, 367. 

 rain-gods, 99, 528. 

 rajas, 507. 

 R[=a]jas[=u]ya, 444, 448, 477. 

 R[=a]k[s. ]as (see devils), 419. 

 ram, 445. 

 R[=a]ma, 349, 397, 498. 

 R[=a]macandra, 454, 506. 

 Ramaism, 315, 349, 427, 485, 500 ff. 

 R[=a]m[=a]nand, 502, 510, 513. 

 R[=a]m[=a]nuja, 447, 482, 496 ff. , 505, 507. 

 R[=a]m[=a]ya[n. ]a, 349 ff. 

 Ramcaritmanas, 503. 

 R[=a]mmohun Roy, 515. 

 Ras[=a] (Volga, 26), 30, 169. 

 R[=a]s D[=a]sas, 502. 

 R[a=]s Y[=a]tr[=a], 456, 505. 

 Rath Y[=a]tr[=a], 456. 

 Rail, 452. 

 R[=a]udras, 447. 

 R[=a]vana, 470. 

 redemption, doctrine of, 569. 

 reformation of sects, 508, 522. 

 relics, 556. 

 remnant-worship, 151, 157. 

 Renaissance, 2, 435. 

 renunciation (see Yogi, Sanny[=a]si), 394. 

 responsability, moral, 380. 

 Ribhus ([R. ]bhavas), 93, 123, 169, 382. 

 Right (see Dharma), 249, 422, 442, 554. 

 Right-hand cult, 490. 

 Rig Veda ([r. ]g), 3, 5, 7, 9, 10 ff. , 22, 29, 37 ff. , 44; in epic, 360, 419. 

 Rishis ([R. ][s. ]is), see Seers. 

 ritual, 12 ff. , 16 ff. , 106, 124, 175. 

 ritualism, 568. 

 rivers, divine, 30 ff. , 32, 99, 138, 528. 537. 

 Romans, 6, 556. 

 rosary, 374, 413, 478. 502, 557. 

 rosy, 493. 

 Rudra (see Çatarudriya, Çiva), 50, 54, 97, 99, 379, 388, 406; Rudra-Çiva, 458 ff. ; Rudrajapas, 463. 

 rudr[=a]k[s. ]a, 502. 

 sacraments, forty, 255. 

 sacrifice, 47, 60, 149, 177 ff. , 188, 196, 198, 211, 225, 246, 363, 369, 375, 406, 413, 420, 423, 450, 462, 471, 490 ff. , 526, 528, 529, 534, 571. 

 S[=a]dhus, 514. 

 Ç[=a]ivas (see Çivaites), 413. 

 Çaka era, 436. 

 Sakh[=i] bh[=a]vas, 492. 

 Ç[=a]ktas, 413, 489, 533. 

 çakti, 489, 490, 537, 553. 

 Çakuntal[=a], 438. 

 Ç[=a]kya, 300, 302. 

 ç[=a]lagr[=a]ma, holy stone, 447, 502, 540. 

 sallo kallo, 531. 

 Sam[=a]jas, 516 ff. , 369, 570. 

 S[=a]ma Veda, 176, 389, 396, 419. 

 Samana, 302, 344. 

 Çambhu, 487. 

 Çam[=i] çam[=i]-plant, 540. 

 sa[. M]vartaka fire, 421. 

 sa[. M]s[=a]ra. 175, 199, 231, 253, 380, 425. 

 sa[. M]sk[r. ]ta, 396. 

 sa[. M]vat, 436. 

 Sanatkum[=a]ra, 466. 

 Ç[=a][n. ][d. ]ila, 221, 497, 509; s[=u]tras, 503. 

 Sandrocottos, 435. 

 Sa[. N]gha, 324, 341. 

 Ça[n. ]kara, 289, 437, 445; vijaya, 480; 482, 495, 505, 506. 

 S[=a][. N]khya, 323, 365, 391 ff. , 396, 399, 400, 402, 460, 482, 484, 489, 495, 509, 547, 560. 

 Sanny[=a]s[=i]n, 258, 281, 508. 

 Sara[n. ]y[=u], 81, 138. 

 Saram[=a], S[=a]rameya, 131, 132, 138. 

 Sarasvat[=i], 31 ff. , 149, 451, 492. 

 Ç[=a]r[=i]rakam[=i]m[=a][. M]s[=a], 495. 

 Çarva, 462, 463, 548. 

 Sarvadarça[n. ]asangraha, 480. 

 Çatarudriya, 413, 470. 

 Sat n[=a]m, 512. 

 sattra, 371, 420. 

 sattva, 507. 

 Saturnalia, 455. 

 S[=a]ubhagasena, 545. 

 S[=a]ugatas, 448, 567. 

 S[=a]uras, 413, 423, 508. 

 Sav[=a]ras, Sauras, 535. 

 Savitar (see Sun), 41 ff. , 46 ff. 

 S[=a]vitr[=i], 46, 466, 492. 

 S[=a]ya[n. ]a, 480. 

 Schopenhauer, 561. 

 sects, 445. 

 Seers, 368. 

 Semiramis, 543. 

 Semites, 571. 

 Sen, 518. 

 sesamum, 452, 502. 

 Çesa, 446, 465. 

 seven, 18, 26, 32, 49, 64, 98, 162, 533. 

 Seypoys, 566. 

 sex, 43, 59, 183, 490. 

 Siddhas, 367, 397, 482. 

 Sikhs (Singhs, Si[. M]has), 8, 502, 510-513. 

 sin (see commandments, vows), 42, 47, 51, 60, 65, 329, 376, 392, 530, 554; venial, 254; sin and sacrifice, 526. 

 si[. N]g[=a]-tree, 533. 

 Çiçup[=a]la, 457. 

 Sittars, 315, 367, 482, 488, 567, 570. 

 Çiva, 25, 50, 99, 112, 150, 178, 251, 332, 354, 365, 374, 388 ff. , 397, 404, 406, 412 ff. 487, 532-534. 

 Çivaism (see Ç[=a]ivas), 348, 389, 407, 413, 423, 427, 446, 451, 453, 466, 480, 484, 488, 496, 548; sacrifice of, 371, 453, 459, 462, 492. 

 Çivaites, 481 ff. , 483. 

 Skanda (K[=a]rttikeya), 354, 410, 414, 445, 466. 

 slaves, 29, 425, 477, 548, 549. 

 small-pox god, 452, 528. 

 Sm[=a]rtas, 482, 507. 

 Sm[r. ]ti, 440. 

 snake (see dragon, N[=a]ga), 20, 94, 154, 164, 186, 344, 361, 376, 397, 419, 446, 469, 527, 533, 536, 539, 547. 

 sociological data, 27, 60, 524 ff. 

 solar mylhs, 11. 

 Soma, 14, 16, 42, 50, 112 ff. , 185, 354, 369, 378, 477, 491, 531, 540, 571. 

 Som[=a]nanda, 482. 

 son, importance of, 148, 363. 

 sophistry, 383. 

 sorcery, see magic. 

 soul (see [=a]tm[=a], j[=i]va), 530. 

 sources, 3. 

 spirit (see [=a]tm[=a]), 400, 442. 

 spring, god of, 528. 

 spring-festival, 449, 452, 456. 

 Çr[=a]ddha (see Manes), 451, 453, 455. 

 Çrama[n. ]a, 281, 292, 302. 

 çravaka, 303. 

 Çr[=i], 438, 441, 451, 492. 

 Çr[=i]ra[n. ]ga, 456. 

 Çruti, 245 ff. , 373, 378. 

 star-souls, 204, 366, 446. 

 star-worshippers, 480, 526, 533. 

 Stoics, 558, 563. 

 stone, worship of (see ç[=a]lagr[=a]ma), 526, 533, 538; marriage-stone, 271, 535. 

 straw (victim), 526. 

 st[=u]pas, 556. 

 Subrahma[n. ]ya, 466

 Ç[=u]dra (see slave), 419; S[=u]droi, 548. 

 suicide, 378. 

 S[=u]kharas, 487. 

 Çulvasutra, 560. 

 Sun, 17, 39, 40 ff. , 47, 51, 56, 57, 82, 164, 205, 354, 377, 401, 402, 446, 449, 452, 460, 492, 508, 509, 526, 528, 530, 532, 534, 543 ff. 

 Sunday, 452. 

 Sunth[=a]ls, 532. 

 Ç[=u]nyav[=a]ds, 448. 

 sur[=a], 127. 

 S[=u]ry[=a] (see Sun), 51, 82, 449, 492. 

 Sutta, 326. 

 suttee, 165, 274, 369, 441. 

 S[=u]tras, 3, 4, 5, 7, 174. 245 ff. 

 Sv[=a]mi, see N[=a]r[=a]ya[n. ]a. 

 svastiv[=a]canam, 371. 

 Çvet[=a]mbaras, 284 ff. , 480. 

 swing, see D[=o]l[=a]. 

 tab[=u], 251, 535. 

 tamas (see darkness), 507. 

 Tamerlane, 436. 

 Tamil, poetry, 315; religion, 524. 

 tan, 508. 

 Tantras, 2, 439, 476, 491

 tapas (see asceticism), 520. 

 Tari, 528, 530. 

 Tath[=a]gata, 303. 

 temples, 428, 444, 447, 452, 456, 471, 526, 557; snake-temple, 539. 

 Ten-galais, 501. 

 [t. ]haks, 535. 

 [T. ]h[=a]kur[=a][n. ][=i], 535. 

 Thales, 559. 

 theft (see commandments, morals), 527, 554. 

 theosophy, 40, 112, 384. 

 thieves, god of. 554. 

 Thomas, church of, 479. 

 three, 42, 49, 110, 164. 

 Time, see fate. 

 Thugs, 492 ff. , 528, 535. 

 thunder-worship, 536. 

 tiger, 533. 

 tillais, 494. 

 t[=i]rtha, see pools. 

 Tiru-valluvar, 567. 

 Todas, 526, 537. 

 tonsure, 557. 

 tortoise (see avatar), 536. 

 totem, totemism, 163, 430, 445, 464, 468, 532, 534, 537, 557. 

 traga, 479. 

 tr[=a]ipuru[s. ]a, 464. 

 transmigration, see metempsychosis. 

 transubstantiation, 557. 

 trees, worship of, 35, 154, 470, 528, 533, 540; tree of creation, 540, 542. 

 tret[=a], 420. 

 triad, 42, 46, 183, 377, 404, 460. 

 tribes, 26 ff. 

 Trida[n. ][d. ]is, 482. 

 trim[=u]rti (see trinity), 447, 464. 

 trinity (see triad, trim[=u]rti, tr[=a]ipuru[s. ]a), 57, 105, 237, 387, 404, 410, 411, 412, 432, 439, 507, 516, 545; four members, 445; prayer to, 447; history of, 457 ff. ; female, 492, 499. 

 Tripi[t. ]aka, 326, 347. 

 Trip[=u]jas, 480. 

 Trita, 11, 45, 104, 431. 

 Troy, story of, 547. 

 truth, 203, 369, 381, 527, 533, 553. 

 Tuk[=a]r[=a]m, 524. 

 tulas[=i], 456, 502, 540. 

 Tulas[=i]d[=a]sa, 503. 

 Turanian, 15, 435. 

 Tu[s. ][t. ]i, 452. 

 tutelary gods, 530. 

 Ud[=a]sis, 513. 

 Ugras, 447. 

 [=U]kharas, 487. 

 Um[=a], 416, 460, 490, 492. 

 Unitarians, 413, 485, 547. 

 Up[=a][. N]gas, 440. 

 Upani[s. ]ads, 3, 4, 5, 7, 24, 181, 216 ff. , 389, 399, 405, 434, 447, 518. 

 Upapur[=a][n. ]as, 440. 

 up[=a]saka, 310. 

 Upendra, 409. 

 [=U]rdhvab[=a]hus, 486. 

 Uçanas, see B[r. ]haspati. 

 Ushas (U[s. ]as), Dawn, 9, 10, 19, 73 ff. 

 Uttaram[=i]m[=a][. M]s[=a], 495. 

 V[=a]c, see Logos. 

 Vada-galais, 501. 

 V[=a]ikh[=a]nasas, 447. 

 V[=a]ir[=a]gins, 508. 

 V[=a]içe[s. ][=i]ka, 503. 

 V[=a]i[s. ][n. ]ava, 371, 413. 

 V[=a]içv[=a]nara (see Agni), 507. 

 V[=a]içya, 419, 487, 525. 

 Vala, 20. 

 Valabh[=i] era, 436, 572. 

 Valentine, saint, 451. 

 Vallabhas, 504-508. 

 V[=a]lm[=i]ki, 503. 

 Var[=a]hamihira, 438. 

 Varu[n. ]a, 18, 41, 42, 44, 47, 58, 61 ff. , 138, 170, 196, 353, 354, 397, 448, 539, 554; as the moon, 571. 

 vasanta, see spring festival. 

 V[=a]sto[s. ]pati, 530. 

 vassallus, vassus, 530. 

 vasso, 292. 

 V[=a]suki, 397. 

 V[=a]ta, V[=a]yu, see Wind-god. 

 Veda, 12, 15 ff. , 142, 174, 188, 222, 256, 374, 401, 420, 425, 510. 

 Ved[=a]nta, 143, 228, 264, 365, 396, 398 ff. , 416, 460, 484, 495 ff. ; s[=u]tra, 437. 

 'Vehicles, ' 340. 

 vermilion, 532. 

 Vesta, 530. 

 Vet[=a]la, 537. 

 Vidy[=a]dharas, 367. 

 Vighneça, 488. 

 vih[=a]ra, 435. 

 Vikram[=a]ditya, 436. 

 village-tree, 540. 

 Vinaya, 326. 

 Virabhadra, 467. 

 Vir[=a]j, 507. 

 Virgin-worship, 557. 

 virtue (see commandments, dharma, morals), ideals of, 555. 

 viças, 27, 194. 

 Viç[=a]kha, 466. 

 Vishnu (Vi[s. ][n. ]u), 41, 52, 56, 112, 144, 178, 251, 332, 354, 365, 388 ff. , 412 ff. , 451 ff. ; feast of, 456; 460, 487, 492, 498, 508, 534. 

 Vishnuism, 143, 348, 389, 413, 446, 464, 480, 494 ff. 

 Vishnu's law-book, 441. 

 Viçv[=a]mitra, 27. 

 Vi[t. ]h[t. ]hala, 500, 508, 514, 522. 

 Vivasvant, 81, 128 ff. , 146, 392. 

 void, see Ç[=u]nya. 

 Volga, see Ras[=a]. 

 vows, 293, 317, 378. 

 V[r. ][s. ]abha, 482. 

 Vr[=a]tya-hymns, 179. 

 Vritra (V[r. ]tra), 20, 120, 185, 357, 369. 

 Vy[=a]sa, 488, 495. 

 warriors, 28, 29, 419. 

 water (origin of all things), 48, 107, 141, 330, 362, 378. 

 waters, 99. 

 water-pot, 453. 

 water-worshippers, 480. 

 wealth (see Bhaga), 528. 

 White Island, 413, 426 ff:, 431, 545. 

 wife, see woman. 

 wild-tribes, 471, 490, 493, 534 ff. , 569. 

 wind-god, 87 ff. , 123, 165, 354, 460; worshippers, 480. 

 witchcraft, see magic. 

 witness (see oath), 250. 

 women (authors of Rig Veda), 27; burned, see suttee; as nuns, 291, 310; religion of, 370; use mantra, 440, 450, 453; price of wife, 270, 535. 

 wood, see trees. 

 wood-goddess, 138, 530. 

 worlds, number of, 402. 

 writing, 4, 7, 331, 544. 595. 

 Yajur Veda, 24, 176 ff. , 419. 

 Yak[s. ]as, 415. 

 Yama (see Citragupta, Hell), 16, 45, 49, 128 ff. , 144, 146, 353, 365, 378ff. , 397, 451, 480, 540. 

 Yima, 11, 16, 128 ff. 

 Yoga, yogin or yogi, 262, 281, 304, 351, 391 ff. , 399, 402, 470, 486, 495, 550. 

 yoni, vulva, 475, 490. 

 yuga, see ages. 

 Zarathustra, Zoroaster (see Iranian), 10, 72, 524. 

 Zeus, 9, 66. 

 Ziegenbalg. 565. 

 Zoölatry, 547.