VEDIC HINDUISM by S. W. Jamison and M. Witzel, Study notes of Religion

Download VEDIC HINDUISM by S. W. Jamison and M. Witzel and more Study notes Religion in PDF only on Docsity! Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 1 VEDIC HINDUISM by S. W. Jamison and M. Witzel (1992) CONTENTS Introduction 2 I. General Treatments a. The texts 4 b. Philological work 25 II. An Outline of Vedic Religion and Ritual a. Overviews of Vedic Religion 28 b. Ritual 29 c.
gvedic ritual and its forerunners 30 d. Classical ritual 32 e. The development of ritual 36 f. The individual rituals 38 g. Domestic ritual 44 h. Ritual magic / magic ritual 49 i. Recent developments 50 III. Deities and Mythology a. Vedic mythology 52 b. The principal Vedic gods 54 IV. The "Philosophy" of Vedic Religion a. Early Vedic 63 b. Middle Vedic: The power of ritual 70 c. Speculation in the Ārayakas and Upaniads 73 V. The Religious Life: Personal and popular religious experience a. Personal religious experience 80 b. Popular religion 82 Abbreviations, Literature 88 Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 2 Introduction* The Vedic period is the earliest period of Indian history for which we have direct textual evidence, but even with this evidence it is difficult to fix even imprecise chronological limits to the period, much less to establish absolute dates within the period. We tentatively suggest 1500-500 BCE as convenient limiting dates of the period,1 the latter marking the approximate date of the codification of Sanskrit by Påini and the transition from "Vedic" to "Classical" Sanskrit; the former perhaps approximating the beginnings of the
g Veda, the earliest Indian text.2 Since (almost3) all our evidence for Vedic India is textual, much more fruitful than defining the Vedic period by date is defining it by texts. For purposes of this work, we will define Vedic literature (and hence the Vedic period) as consisting of the earliest texts, the four Vedas proper, and texts based on them and the cult in which they were embedded -- the Bråhmaas and the Śrauta Sūtras, also including the increasingly speculative Ārayakas and Upaniads, as well as the texts relating to the domestic cult, the Ghya Sūtras. The content of these texts is wholly religious (though "religion" more broadly * Composed jointly by both authors in 1991/2 and representing their then consensus. This text has subsequently been distributed in samizdat fashion to many students and colleagues as the volume for which it had been written did not speedily appear and in fact still has not appeared (as of Jan. 2003). Even a shorter version that is about to come out in an edited volume on Hinduism (hence our title, for which see see note 3) still is awaited some seven years after it had been written. -- We have left the text as it stood in 1992; some updating obviously is necessary now and will be carried out in due course. -- In the version distributed since 1992 most of the footnotes (by MW) had been excluded, however, all these have been kept and included here. 1 For the beginning of the period, see the following note; for its end note that the earliest Buddhist texts in Påli presuppose the Vedic literature down to the Upaniads, cf. now Gombrich 1992. Cf. below, n. 71. For the date of the Buddha, see Bechert 1972. 2 According to recent archaeological research the disappearance of the Indus cities is determined at 1900 B.C.; on the other hand, the AV is the first text mentioning iron which was introduced in North India at c. 1100 BCE. The RV, which no longer knows of the Indus cities but only mentions ruins (armaka, [mahå]vailasthåna), thus could have been composed during the long period between 1990 and 1100 BCE. An ad quem date for the RV is provided by the mentioning of Vedic gods (Varua, Mitra, Indra, Nåsatya = Aśvin) in the Hittite- Mitanni agreement of c. 1380 BCE. The RV, however, presents, for the greatest part, only a "snapshot" picture of c. 5-6 generations of poets and kings who lived closer towards the end of the period (cf. Witzel, forthc. a). 3 Archaeology begins to provide some evidence now, especially for the Swat (RV Suvåstu) area in
gvedic and post-
gvedic times and for the North Indian plains from the Mantra period (Atharvaveda etc.) down to the Bråhmaas, in an area stretching from the Eastern Panjab and Kuruketra up to Allahabad (Painted Grey Ware culture), cf. Witzel, 1989, 1989b, and forthc. a,d. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 5 Sūtras, see Gonda 1980a; for the Dharma Sūtras s. Lingat, 1973; for the Śulba Sūtras s. Michaels 1978. Before proceeding to a catalogue of the important texts, we should first discuss the categories of texts and their organization into schools. Vedic literature is ritual literature -- dividable into two major types: a) liturgical material internal to the ritual, used in performance. Almost all of the verse and some of the prose fits into this category. b) material about the ritual, external to its performance -- commentary in the broadest sense, almost entirely in prose. The texts have traditionally been catalogued into Vedas (better: veda- sahitås), Bråhmaas, Ārayakas, Upaniads, and Sūtras, in roughly that chronological order. The Indian tradition distinguishes between śruti ("hearing"), i.e. texts revealed to the
is, the primordial Seers, and texts having human authors (smti "remembrance"). All texts from the Sa hitås to the Upaniads are śruti while the late Vedic Sūtras are regarded as smti. Because their traditional names sometimes misrepresent the type of text contained within, it is useful to speak first of text-type. The veda- (or mantra or sahitå-) text-type consists of collections of liturgical material, the bråhmaa- text-type of ritual exegesis. The årayaka-text-type often develops the cosmic side of bråhmaa explanations into esoteric speculation about some of the more cryptic and secret of the rituals and generally has served as a catch-all for the later texts of the particular school involved. The upaniad-text-type proceeds further on this speculative path. The sūtra-text-type, in contrast, contains straightforward, often very elaborate and detailed directions for ritual performances, with little or no commentary. However, from the point of view of linguistic development -- always a good yardstick for discovering the historical development of text layers -- we have to distinguish the following text layers which do not always coincide with the traditional division of Vedic texts given just now: 1.
gveda (with as late additions, book 10 and also parts of book 1), 2. the so-called Mantra language (Atharvaveda,
gvedakhila, the mantras of the Yajurveda etc., the Såmaveda), 3. the expository prose of the Yajurveda Sa hitå texts (MS, KS, KpS, TS), 4. the Bråhmaa prose (including the older portions of the Ārayakas and Upaniads, as well as some of the earliest Sūtras), 5. the late Vedic Sūtras. As was implicit in our discussion of oral transmission above, there is another important dimension in Vedic textual classification -- that of the theological schools or śåkhås (lit. 'branch'). Each school began as a set of adherents to a particular Veda in a relatively small area of northern India (becoming further splintered as time went on). In addition to transmitting its Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 6 Veda, the school spawned exegetical texts proper to that Veda, its own Bråhmaa, Sūtra, etc. On these schools, see especially Renou 1947; Tsuji 1970, Witzel 1987a.7 Let us begin with the key to the whole system, the four Vedas:
g Veda, Såma Veda, Yajur Veda, and Atharva Veda. The oldest and most important in Vedic ritualism, as to later Indian religion, is the
g Veda (hereafter also RV). This is a collection (Sa hitå) of cs 'verses', forming hymns to be recited during ritual, praising various divinities. They were composed by a number of bards or bardic families, over a period of several hundred years, at the very least, as linguistic and stylistic evidence shows.8 The ritual, as it appears in these hymns, is earlier and less developed than the "classical" one of the later texts, such as the Yajurveda Mantras and all of the Bråhmaas. The
g Veda has come down to us basically in only one9 extremely well preserved school, that of Śåkalya, who analyzed the traditional text towards the end of the Bråhmaa period, apparently in Eastern India (Videha, N. Bihar). His grammatical analysis, in form of a text without any euphonic combinations (sandhi) has been transmitted as the RV-Padapå ha.10 The standard editions of the
g Veda are that of Max Müller 1849-1874, incorporating Såyaa's medieval commentary (14th cent.),11 and the more compact one of T. Aufrecht 1877. The standard current translation is that of K. F. Geldner 1951 (written already in the Twenties), into German, which supersedes earlier ones such as that of H. Grassmann 1876-77. There is also an almost complete French translation by L. Renou 1955-69, and the first volume of a Russian translation by T. Ya. Elizarenkova has recently appeared (1989). Unfortunately there is no complete modern English translation, though there are unsatisfactory and outmoded ones by H. H. Wilson (1888) which largely depends on the medieval commentary of Såyaa, and by R. T. H. Griffith (1889- 92). There are also useful translations of selected hymns, such as that of W. D. 7 Unfortunately, there is no progress (rather regress, with respect to Renou 1947, Tsuji 1970) in Rai 1990. 8 Possible between c. 1900 BC. and c. 1100 BCE, see above, n.1. This time frame includes only the period of possible immigration and settlement in Northern and North-West India; parts of the RV may have been composed already in Afghanistan (on the *Sarasvatī = Avest. Hara aiti, etc.). 9 The other two about which we know something more than just their names are the Båkala and the Må ukeya schools, see Scheftelowitz, 1906. 10 Edited in Max Müller's RV (1849-74), and also several times in India as separate volumes. 11 Cf. now also the earlier commentaries of the RV, ed. Vishva Bandhu 1963-66. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 7 O'Flaherty 1981a and Maurer 1986 which includes much of the preceding scholarship. An up-to-date, philologically sound translation of the entire text, incorporating the grammatical and semantic progress that has been made in recent decades, would be extremely welcome. Other important tools for
gvedic researches include the invaluable (if somewhat out of date) Wörterbuch of H. Grassmann 1872-75, which lists all the occurrences of all but the most common words in the RV, with definitions, grammatical identification, and contextual information; the Prolegomena and the Noten of H. Oldenberg (1888 and 1909, 1912 respectively), one of the leading Western Indologists, E.V. Arnold's treatise on Vedic meter (1905), one of the first attempts to develop an internal chronology of the text, and also several of Bloomfield's reference works (Concordance, Repetitions, Variants, see below). The Atharva Veda (AV) stands a little apart from the other three Vedas, as it does not treat the śrauta rituals, but contains magical (black and white) and healing spells, as well as two more large sections containing speculative hymns and materials dealing with some important domestic rituals such as marriage and death, with the vråtya (s. below), and with royal power. There are two extant recensions of the AV, differing considerably from each other. Currently the more usable one is that ordinarily known as the Śaunaka recension (AVŚ, ŚS). The standard edition is that of Roth and Whitney (1856, corrected repr. Lindenau 1924). For certain sections, however, the Bombay edition by Shankar Påndurang Pandit (1895-98) or the recent amalgamated edition by Vishva Bandhu (1960-64) has to be compared, notably in book 19-20. A nearly12 complete English translation of this text exists by W. D. Whitney (1905), as well as a partial translation by M. Bloomfield (1897) that remains valuable, and a popular one by Griffith (1895-96). Whitney (1881) also compiled a complete word list, arranged grammatically, but it lacks the semantic and contextual information given by Grassmann's Wörterbuch for the RV. The other, the Paippalåda recension (AVP, PS), was until recently known only in a very corrupt manuscript from Kashmir, which was heroically, though not too successfully edited by L. C. Barret, in a series of articles (1905-1940), save for one book done by F. Edgerton (1914). On this basis, Raghu Vira (1936-41) published the text from Lahore as well. The discovery of a much better version 12 It lacks only book 20 which almost completely has been taken over from the RV. Griffith 1895-96, however, includes a translation of this book and its difficult Kuntåpa hymns as well. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 10 by Caland 1923-1928. Neither the Maitråyaī Sa hitå nor the Kå haka Sa hitå has a surviving separate text called a Bråhmaa, though a collection of fragments of the original Ka ha Bråhmaa, called Śatådhyåya Bråhmaa, is found in Kashmiri ritual handbooks and has been partially edited by von Schroeder (1898) and Surya Kanta (1943); cf. also Lokesh Chandra 1982, 1984. The
g Veda has two Bråhmaas, the Aitareya Bråhmaa (AB) and the Kauītaki (or Śåkhåyana) Bråhmaa (KB), of which the Aitareya is the older and the more extensive. The AB was edited by Aufrecht (1879); the KB by Lindner (1887) and in its Kerala version by E.R.S. Sarma (1968). Both have been translated into English by Keith (1920). The major Bråhmaas of the Såmaveda are the Jaiminīya Bråhmaa (JB) and the Pañcavi śa Bråhmaa (PB, or Tå ya Mahåbråhmaa). The JB is an immense, unfortunately corrupt, and very rich text, that has not yet been sufficiently worked on (see Ehlers 1988). Caland (1919) edited and translated significant portions of it (into German), and added many passages in an English rendering in his translation of the PB (1931b), as did, to a lesser extent, Oertel in a series of articles (1897-1909). Only in 1954 did a complete edition appear (that of Raghu Vira and Lokesh Chandra), unfortunately still riddled with misprints and corruptions.15 A carefully, and if possible critically edited version of the JB is greatly desirable.16 There are several recent partial translations, e.g. H. W. Bodewitz (1973, 1990) of the Agnihotra and Soma sections, accompanied by detailed philological though not particularly pioneering commentary. W. Doniger O'Flaherty (1985) has translated some of the narrative portions, however, mostly a recapitulation of those translated by Oertel and Caland, with a Freudian commentary.17 Tsuchida (1979) and Schrapel (1970) have translated parts of book 2. A complete, philologically grounded translation of the JB, would contribute mightily to our understanding of middle Vedic religion, but it may be premature to desire one without an accurate text. The Pañcavi śa Bråhmaa, which is available only in unsatisfactory uncritical editions, presents fewer difficulties, but also fewer rewards than the JB. 15 A guide to the MSS has been given by W. Rau, 1988, and a useful compilation of emendations that have been proposed, by Ehlers 1989. 16 E. R. Sreekrishna Sarma (Adyar, Madras) has begun a new edition in the early Eighties, based on new MSS from Kerala. 17 And some basic misunderstandings of Indian sociology, (e.g. fear of the father in case of a måtula?!); the date assigned to JB (of 900 B.C.) is pure guesswork and definitely too early for the text as it stands now, especially for book 1,1-65. For further criticism see Bodewitz 1990:19-24. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 11 For a preliminary critical reading of the text the old manuscript from Gujarat printed by Lokesh Chandra (1981) and Caland's remarks in his translation, referring to another old MS at Leiden,18 are invaluable. The text has been translated and copiously annotated, with many valuable references to and partial translations of JB, by Caland (1931a). There are a number of other, minor "Bråhmaas" attached to the SV, most of which rather belong to the category of the Sūtras. Most of them have been edited by B.R. Sharma.19 The AV has a very late and inferior Bråhmaa, the Gopatha Bråhmaa (GB), critically edited by Caland's pupil D. Gaastra 1919. Its first part, in fact, presupposes the grammar of Påini. However, this text which to a large degree quotes from other bråhmaa type texts, probably was nothing but an additional Bråhmaa (anubråhmaa) of the Paippalåda school of the AV, which was, just like some other texts, incorporated into the Śaunaka school of Gujarat only during the Middle Ages (Witzel 1985a). A collection of fragments of 'lost' Bråhmaas found in various medieval commentaries has been compiled by Batakrishna Ghosh 1947. Ārayakas are found under this name only in the tradition of the
gveda (Aitareya Ār., Kauītaki or Śåkhåyana Ār.), and Yajurveda (Taittirīya, Ka ha Ār.). The SV and AV have no text named in this way. However, the Jaiminīya Upaniad Bråhmaa may, in part, be regarded as the Ār. of this Veda,20 and the Gopatha-Bråhmaa plays the same role for the AV.21 In addition, the first part of Kå a 14 of the Śatapatha-Bråhmaa, which deals with the Pravargya ritual (ŚB 14.1-3), may with good reason be called the Ār. of the Mådhyandina school of the White YV, for all three Ār. texts of the YV deal centrally with this ritual. Its performance and even its acquisition by learning is regarded as too 18 One may use, for the time being, the notes on two old Leiden MSS from Gujarat in Caland's translation PB (1931) as well as the facsimile ed. by Lokesh Chandra 1981, the proper use of which is explained by W. Rau, 1985; cf. Caland 1990, p. XXX, n. 35. 19 a vi śa Bråhmaa, ed. B. R. Sharma 1967, transl. W. B. Bollée 1956. -- The other SV Bråhmaas are in reality of Sūtra character: Såmavidhåna, Āreya, Devatådhåya, Upaniad Bråhmaa (or Mantra-Br., a list of Ghya Mantras), Sa hitopaniad- Br., Va śa-Br.; most of them have recently been (re-)edited by B.R. Sharma, as are the Kudra Sūtra and Maśaka Kalpa Sūtra, which are Śrauta Sūtras preceding the Låty. / Dråhy.ŚS. A good account of the literature of the SV has been given by Caland 1931a, updated by Parpola 1968; cf. also B.R. Sharma 1976. 20 See Witzel 1977:145 for further discussion of the relationship between the Paippalåda and Śaunaka schools. 21 There must have been another text, still known to Śa kara (c.700 CE), which began with sarvam pravidhya (cf. PS 12.19.5), see Witzel 1977:143sqq Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 12 dangerous to be carried out inside the village and has to be done "where the houses of the village cannot be seen any more." This points to the correct meaning of the designation Ār., from araya "wilderness" which curiously still eludes most modern Sanskritists though it was established long ago by Oldenberg (1915-6).22 This oversight also clouds the understanding of the type of text the Ār. constitute. They are not, as medieval Hindu tradition asserts, the texts of the third stage in life, the Vånaprastha, but deal, quite in the fashion of other Bråhmaa type texts, with a particular ritual. In the case of the RV it is the Mahåvrata day of the year long Gavåm Ayana and some other rituals. Around this nucleus of dangerous and secret texts (Śakara and others call this sort of texts Rahasya) are clustered various additions to the canon: the RV schools add their Upaniads (see below) and even a brief Sūtra style addition (in AĀ 5, by Āśvalåyana); the Taitt. school, similarly, begins with one of the eight special Kå haka Agnicayana rituals,23 adds two sections with death ritual as well as all of their Upaniads. As mentioned before, the White YV contains in its book 14 both the Ār. and its Upaniad, the Bhadårayaka Up. However, the last sections of this Up. contain various "strange" materials not expected in an Upaniad. P. Thieme is the first to have correctly understood the structure of this text.24 The sections dealing with the procreation of particular types of sons, etc. belong to the last instructions of a Veda teacher to his departing student, similar to those, it may be added, that TU 1.11 = Ka ŚiUp. 11 present in a normative fashion.25 The last sections of BĀU thus are of Ārayaka type and provide a frame surrounding the Bhadårayaka Upaniad. Its very name may signify this amalgamation: it is a Bhad-Ārayaka-Upaniad, a "large (text consisting of) the Ārayaka and the Upaniad" of the White YV, similarly to Båhv-cyam "the text consisting of many c", the RV. The Āit. Ār. has been edited and translated by Keith 1909; the Kauītaki or Śåkhåyana Ār. by V. N. Apte 1922 and Bhim Dev 1980 and transl. by Keith 1908. The Taitt. Ār. was edited by Rajendralål Mitra 1864-72, Mahådeva Śåstrī and P.K. Rangåcharya 1900-02, and in the Ānandåśrama Series by K.V. Abhyankar et al. in an often incorrect newly set reprint 1967-69 of the earlier 22 See now Sprockhoff 1981, WZKS 25, 28. 23 Interestingly a very late, quasi Puråic one, see Witzel 1972:180 n.12; 1977:152; the others are found in the last parts of Taittirīya Bråhmaa (TB 3.10-12). 24 In his lecture at Kyoto on accepting the Kyoto Prize in 1989. 25 See above, n. 22, and cf. below, on Dharma Sūtra texts. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 15 traditional triubh meter and not yet the Epic śloka (cf. below on M. C. Smith's study (1992) of the core of the Mahåbhårata). Finally, we turn to the Sūtras. The Indian tradition refers to these texts with the term Kalpa(-Sūtra) and regards them as post-Vedic, that is not as revealed texts (śruti) but as texts composed by human authors (smti), and as such, along with grammar (vyåkaraa), meter (chandas), phonetics (śikå), etymology (nirukta) and astronomy (jyotia), not as belonging to the body of Vedic texts but to the "limbs of the Veda" (vedå ga). From the point of view of content and language, however, these texts are closely allied to the preceding Bråhmaas and Ārayakas. Indeed, N. Fukushima (alias/a.k.a. N. Tsuji, 1952) has shown that the Śrauta Sūtras are, by and large, based on the preceding Vedic literature of their particular school (śåkhå). -- As we cannot mention each text here by name, we refer to the table of Vedic texts given below and to the up-to- date and nearly complete list of editions of the Sūtras, of their often independent appendices (and of most other Vedic texts), as given by Kashikar 1968 and more completely by Gotō 1987, p.355-371. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 16
gvedic texts Såmavedic texts _____________________________________________________________ RV
gveda Sa hitå (Śåkala) (Båkala Sa hitå, Såmaveda Sa hitå Må ukeya Sa h., lost) SV(K) = SV(R) SVJ Kauthuma Rååyanīya Jaiminīya Śåkha Śåkha Śåkha RVKh
gveda Khilåni (Śåkha unclear perhaps Må .) AB KB PB JB Aitareya-Br. Kauītaki-Br. Pañcavi śa-Br. Jaiminīya-Br. 1-5 old (=Tå ya-Br., ---------------- Mahå-Br.) 6-8 new B a vi śa -Br. (=Tå Br.,26) AA KA Aitareya-Ār., Kauītaki- ChU JUB contains: Ār.,contains: Chåndogya-Up. Jaiminīya- Båhmaa Upaniad- Ait.Up. KU MB Bråhmaa, Aitareya- Kau.Up. Mantra-Bråhmaa contains: Upaniad Kena-Up. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SŪTRAS: Maśaka-Kalpa Sūtra Kudra Sūtra Såmavidhåna, Āreya, Devatådhåya, Upaniad Bråhmaa (= Mantra-Br.), Sa hitopaniad- Br., Va śa-Br. AŚS ŚŚS LŚS DŚS JŚS Āśvalåyana- Śåkhåyana- Lå yåyana- Dråhyåyana- Jaiminīya- Śrautrasūtra Śr .S. Śr.S. Śr.S. Śr.S. AGS KauGS, ŚGS GGS/KauthGS/DGS/KhådGS JGS Āśv.Ghya- Kauītaki, Gobhila- Kauthuma- Jaiminīya.GS sūtra Śåmbavya Dråhyåyana- Khådira-GS VåsDhS GautDhS Våsi ha Gautama Dharmasūtra DhS. various Pariśi as ____________________________________________________________________________________ Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 17 Yajurvedic texts Atharvavedic texts MS KS KpS TS VS(M) VS(K) AV,ŚS PS Mai- Ka ha- Ka ha- Taitti- Våjasa- Våj.. Śau- Paippalåda trå- S. Kapi- rīya S. saneyi Kåva S. S. yai  hala Mådh- S. (=vulgate) Sa hitå Sa h. yandina S. (VS 40= ĪśåUp) - Ka hB KpBr TB ŚB(M) ŚBK *Paipp.Br. no Ka ha only Taitt. Śatapatha Śatapatha -no text- (lost) text Br. one 1-3.9 Bråhmaa (Kåva) frag. frag. old (Mådhy.) TB 3.10 1-5 Eastern > 1- 7 -12 from 6-10 Western = 7- 12 Ka hB. 11-13 add. < 13-15 VådhB Vådhūla Ānvåkhyånas ------------------- adopted <----GB man- Ka hĀ TĀ 14.1-3 = 16.1-3 Gopatha Br. tras Ka ha- Taitt. = Ārayaka mostly in Ārayaka 1-2 < derived MS Ka hB from other 4.9 3-6 =Ār. Br. texts -------- (Praava Up = 7-9 = TU 14.4-9 = 16.3- GB 1.1-16-30, is Taitt. BAUM BAUK post-Påinean, Upaniad Bhadårayaka- as such later Upaniad than KauśS) -------- 10 = MNU Mahånåråyaa-Up. [Iśopaniad] --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MŚS *Ka hŚS BŚS VådhŚS BhŚS ĀpŚS HŚS VkhŚS KŚS VaitS *ĀgŚS- VårŚS Månava (almost Baudhå- Bhårad- Hira- Kåtyå- Āgastya Śrauta compl. yana vå ja yakeśi- yana Śr.S. Sūtra, lost) Śr.S. ŚrS. Śr.S. Śr.S. (lost) Våråha Vådhūla Āpastamba Vaikhånasa Vaitåna S. Śr.S. ŚrS ŚrS ŚrS (uned.) (very late) MGS KGS/LGS BGS *VådhGS BhGS ĀpGS HGS VkhGS PGS KauśS *Pai hGS VårGS / ĀgGS Mån.Vår. Ka ha/ Baudh.Vådh. Bhår. Āp. Hir. Vaikh. Påras- Kauśika Pai hī- Ghya Laugåki- Āgniveśya kara Sūtra nasi GS śūtra GS GS GS GS GS GS GS GS (probably sur - viving in Orissa) Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 20 general rules of interpretation (paribhåå) that have to be understood when interpreting the whole text. There is not enough room to describe or discuss in detail all the texts belonging to the Sūtra category. We therefore refer to the appended table for reference. The bibliographical details and a short discussion of each text can be found in the survey by Kashikar (1968). Only a few Śrauta Sūtras have been translated, notably the encyclopedic Āpastamba Śr.S. of the YV (by Caland, into German, with many notes referring to other Bråhmaa and Sūtra texts, 1921 Göttingen, Amsterdam 1924, 1928), and into English: the Śåkhåyana Śr.S. of the RV (Caland 1953), large parts of the Lå yåyana and Dråhyåyana Śr.S. of the SV by Parpola 1968, 1969, and the Vaitåna Sūtra of the AV again by Caland 1910; other recent English translation of YV Śrauta Sūtras are those by Kashikar 1964, van Gelder 1963, Ikari & Arnold 1983, Ranade 1978, 1981, and Mylius 1967-1972-1971-1987. The smaller and often independent chapters of the Śrauta Sūtras mentioned above may be characterized briefly. The Hautra Sūtras of the YV deal with the portion of the RV priest, recited during the ritual. The Pravara Sūtras give the hypothetical
i ancestors of the yajamåna (see Brough 1953 and Narten 1985). The Pitmedha Sūtras deal with the rituals of cremation and burial (Kashikar 1964: 460-501; Śrauta Kośa Engl. Section). The Śulba Sūtras, finally, discuss the layout of the offering ground and the building of the complicated fire altars of the Agnicayana (see below). They are of special interest as they contain the earliest geometry of India; in addition, they are based on an independent development of the mathematical sciences that began from clear, and unusual, maxims (see Michaels 1978, 1983 for all further details of editions and translations; cf. Khadilkar 1974.) The Ghya Sūtra do not deal with solemn rituals but with the rituals "belonging to the house" (ghya). These are by and large the various rites of passage, beginning even before birth with the "placing of the fetus" (garbhådhåna) and they end long after death, cremation, and burial, with the rituals of ancestor worship. In language and style they are similar to the Śrauta Sūtra of their respective school, and occasionally refer back to it, as Caland was often quick in pointing out (cf. Kleine Schriften, 1990, passim). Apart from the life cycle rites, the Ghya Sūtras include a few special rites connected with the seasons, such as the sarpabali (Winternitz 1888), ploughing, offerings of the first grains, etc., or other domestic topics such as house building, crossing a river, etc. Most of the Ghya texts have been translated by Oldenberg (1886, 1892); to be Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 21 added are e.g. Caland, Jaiminīya 1922, Vaikhånasa 1929, Dresden, Månava 1941, Rolland, Våråha 1971. Many of these rituals, notably the rites of passage, are of considerable age, and often have correspondences with those of the closely related Iranian people (for example the introduction to the study of the sacred texts, upanayana or kūstīk) or even beyond that, in the rest of the Indo-European area. The Indo- European marriage ritual, for example, can be reconstructed to a large degree from the Ghya Sūtras but only with difficulty from the scattered materials found among the various European peoples. Occasionally we can trace the earlier stages of these rites before the Ghya Sūtras on the Indian side as well. Notably some of the mantras connected with the rites of marriage, death and upanayana can be found on the RV and AV (see below ch. 5). The Ghya Sūtras usually follow the same plan, namely that of the sequence of life cycle rituals from conception and birth to death and beyond. However, the texts of the older YV schools (Ka ha, Laugåki, Månava) form a block that begins with the initiation to Vedic study. Just as is the case with the Śrauta ritual found in the Sa hitå texts of these schools, this may reflect an earlier stage as it marks the beginning of the ritual life of a young male person, which seems a logical point of departure for this type of Sūtras. - Many Ghya Sūtras may be located in particular parts of northern India26 (Ram Gopal 1959, cf. Witzel 1987a) as they mention the river along which their adherents live. Archaeology now confirms this fact: the early settlements were situated along rivers such as the Yamunå and Gagå but not in the area between these rivers (their doåb). The Dharma Sūtras form a natural continuation to the Ghya Sūtras. They deal with all aspects of customs, rites and beliefs concerning the persons (again, notably men) belonging to the three higher classes (vara, often wrongly called 'castes'), the Bråhmaa, Katriya and the Vaiśya. They also deal with often quite ancient rules involving formal law (such as swearing an oath, see Lüders, 1917, 1944, Brown 1978, Narten 1971). In the later texts such in the Manu and the Yåjñavalkya Smtis, even the rules for court cases and the duties of the king are dealt with. This difference in time is significant. The earlier Dharma texts usually are called Dharma Sūtras and still have a more or less clear link to a particular 26 Bühler (in his DhS transl., 1886, 1879, 1882) was not correct in locating some of the YV Sūtras in South India: Only the modern followers of these texts are found there while the texts still refer only to the north (for example to northern rivers such as the Yamunå). See now Ram Gopal 1959, Brucker 1980, Witzel 1987a Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 22 Veda school (see the table; for a discussion of the texts and their contents see Lingat 1973). Moreover, certain legal provisions in these dharma texts and their exact phraseology are also found in the earliest Vedic prose and provide evidence for a legal "code" of some formality even in this period (see Jamison 1991, pp. 217-221). Other comparatively old sections, "a Dharmasūtra in nuce", are those dealing with the teacher's last instructions on proper behavior (TU 1.11, Ka hŚiU 11), given at the completion of Veda studies (Witzel 1980:78). However, the later Dharma texts, called Smti, usually have given up this link and have evolved into texts accepted on a more general level, all over (northern) India. Bühler (1886) hypothesized that the Manu Smti had developed from an earlier but lost Månava Dharmaśåstra or Sūtra which belonged to the Maitråyaī school of the Black YV. This has not been found; his case can be sustained, however, by a similar development in the related Ka ha school. Fragments of the lost Kå haka Dharma Sūtra have been found in Nepalese manuscripts, but the Dharma text of this school survived only in the late Viu Smti, composed under Vaiava influence in Kashmir in the first few centuries C.E. Many Smtis, such as the Śakha-Likhita ("the one written down"), are even later and generally belong to the first millennium C.E. Their earliest, but so far unused MSS. (c. 1000 C.E.) again come from Nepal. All the earlier Sūtras (including the sources of Manu) were composed orally, without the use of the script, just as the rest of the Veda. The Smtis also differ from the Dharma Sūtras in that they contain a number of rules on certain particular topics that seem to contradict each other. Efforts to understand them by the historical development of the text or as interpolations are misguided. Doniger and Smith (1991:liv ff.) do not quite correctly describe the problem. "Manu", for example, merely sums up the positions current in his time as derived from various areas and schools. The procedure is foreshadowed by texts such as the Śatapatha Bråhmaa or the Baudhåyana Śrauta Sūtra which discuss at length the various positions of schools referring a particular point; the procedure, in fact, goes back all the way to the early YV texts which frequently quote the various opinions of fellow "theologians" (brahmavådin). Manu merely leaves out the sources of these statements and does not offer a solution to these positions as they always can be justified in theological discussion. The Dharma Sūtras as well as Manu27 have been translated by Bühler 1882, 1886, 1879 and Jolly 1880, 1889. Many of these topics as well as those from the preceding Śrauta texts can conveniently be 27 For the recent transl. of Manu by W. Doniger and B.K. Smith, 1991, see notes 6, 30. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 25 Other collections include: Lüders 1940, van Buitenen 1962, W. N. Brown 1978, N. Tsuji 1977, 1982, Heesterman 1985, Malamoud 1989. We especially miss a collection of the articles of M. Bloomfield and L. Renou (for the latter's bibliography see Renou 1968 and Tsuji 1982:390-423). b. Philological work This is the right time, however, to pause for a moment and reflect on the state of the art of text editions and translations. The shocking truth is that even for Vedic texts, not to speak of other Sanskrit texts, there hardly exists any truly critical edition. What we have are the generally reliable standard editions, largely of the last century, by European and American Indologists (Whitney, Bloomfield) which, however, in reality are editions with the variae lectionis more or less diligently recorded. They all lack a stemma of the MSS. In some cases, such as Roth-Whitney's Atharvaveda, it is extremely difficult to get even a vague idea of the distribution of the MSS at a certain passage. This "technique" no doubt was instigated by the commonly known fact that the written tradition of Vedic texts was and is remarkably inferior to that of the oral tradition. The latter has preserved, to this day with hardly a deviation, not only the exact wording of the text, but even the Vedic accents which had disappeared already at the beginning of our era. Surprisingly almost no editor has made use of this living tradition.29 What we need, therefore, is a new, detailed study of the manuscript tradition of each text and school, and the salvaging, as far as still possible, of the oral tradition. Only then can suitable editions be prepared which must on the one hand make use of the text-critical method for the written tradition and on the other include and critically evaluate the oral tradition (cf. Howard 1977, 1986) as well, which is quite different by its very nature. The same holds good, mutatis mutandis, for the interpretation of some of the texts. There is a consensus now that the
gveda is not to be regarded as the simple nature poetry of a people at the dawn of civilization, but as based on a complex poetic and mythological code. However, the much less studied bråhmaa type texts still linger in a sort of limbo, as they were traditionally regarded by western Indologists as incoherent and boring. Some, notably K. 29 Exceptions are Śakar Påndurang Pandit (1895-98), Rajendralal Mitra (1864-72), and then, after a fatal lapse of more than half a century, during which much recitation vanished, E.R.S. Sarma (1968). For living traditions see now the short summary by K.P. Aithal 1991. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 26 Hoffmann (1960 = 1992, p.709, and 1975/76 passim), have stressed that the bråhmaa type texts represent the earliest start of reasoned thought in India and are based on a strict logic (see also Lévi 1898, Oldenberg 1919, Schayer 1924, 1925), which is, however, based on the assumption that "similarity between two entities means identity" (Witzel 1979b, cf. B.K. Smith 1989). In addition to the "view from within" of these texts, facilitated by the very little used Bråhmaoddhårakośa (Vishva Bandhu 1966), we also are in need a much more detailed discussion of the realia of nature and culture of the period, initiated by W. Rau (1954, 1983), Sparreboom 1985, Klaus 1989, Jamison 1991 passim, to appear b). Good translations (and studies) are possible only when taking these factors into account. The interpretation of the religion and mythology (Jamison 1991, cf. Witzel 1984a) and of the history (Witzel 1989b, forthc. a,d) of the period has only begun. The much read and interpreted Upaniads, surprisingly, mostly lack even a critical edition of the "var. lect." type described above. In addition, the study of these texts has largely been based on the much later commentaries of Śakara (7th cent. A.D.) and others. Time, place, religious and cultural setting of the commentators are almost as far removed from the authors of the Upaniads (c. 500 B.C.) as that of a well read, present day Western reader of the Upaniads. In addition, Śakara and other medieval Advaita writers took the ancient Upaniads as a whole and used them as scriptural underpinnings for the monistic philosophy of their time. The Upaniads, however, must be treated as texts embedded in their Vedic context. This has not been understood well by the Indologists who treat the Upaniads as a separate piece of literature, the philosophy of which somehow developed instantaneously. Some Vedic scholars have now noticed the necessity to steer away from the Advaita influence and have occasionally done so in their translations (e.g. P. Thieme's and W. Rau's recent translations of some Upaniads into German, see above). What we finally wait for is a detailed, extensive treatment of one Upaniad which spells out clearly these principles and shows their application. The new translations, such as the one of the BĀU in preparation by J. Brereton, will for the first time indicate what the Upaniads really have to say, their "original intent". One item of importance for all translations from Vedic (or any other language belonging to a culture historically or geographically distant from ours) is translation method. This is especially true of the translation of certain words that signify a concept or a bundle of concepts that have no close equivalent in English or have to be circumscribed by a number of words Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 27 standing for concepts not closely related in English. The typical examples for Vedic are those of ta or brahman (see below), but the same problem exists, for example in the translation of French liberté or German Freiheit which have to be translated in English, according to context, either by liberty or freedom. For ta, however, neither law nor order nor truth will do, as the word signifies the carrying out, the creative power of active truth, something opposed to active untruth, lie, i.e. deceit, cheating. Geldner, in his RV translation, chose, according to context, a variety of words, while Thieme prefers to translate by using one and the same word (truth, Wahrheit), which, however, does not carry the same semantic spectrum in English or German as ta. A third possibility would be not to translate ta at all, leaving the uninitiated reader more puzzled than the two other choices do. We thus have to choose which method to follow and for which audience. The best solution with words as "difficult" as this one may be to translate idiomatically but to add the Sanskrit word in brackets.30 30 A feature not used by W. Doniger - B. K. Smith (1991), in spite of a discussion (p. lxxvi) of the problematic nature of translating such words as dharma or karma; cf. note 6, 27. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 30 c.
gvedic ritual and its forerunners Early Vedic ritual can be compared not only with what follows it, but with what precedes it -- or, rather, it can be compared with cognate ritual tradition(s), and an attempt can be made to reconstruct the shared ritual system from which each of these traditions derived. Striking parallels to Vedic ritual and religion appear in ancient Iranian religion, as found in the texts of Zoroastrianism preserved in a language closely related to Vedic Sanskrit, namely Avestan.33 Although Iranian religion seems to have undergone significant changes, especially the revolutionary reforms apparently led by the prophet Zarathustra, it still shows many remarkable similarities to Vedic religion: the poetic phraseology is often identical across the languages; there are identically named deities (e.g. Vedic Mitra, Avestan Miθra); and the ritual foci are the same. In both the fire is the center of ritual activity (e.g. Narten 1986); in both the most highly valued oblation is an invigorating drink (of still debatable identity), Vedic soma, Avestan haoma. [The two words are historically identical, despite superficial appearance.] Moreover, even the types of texts preserved in Iran mirror those of Vedic India: the praise poetry of Zarathustra (in his Gåθås) recalls that of the less personal
gveda; the Yasna Haptahåiti, a highly ritualistic text, is stylistically close to the non-metrical mantras of the Yajur Veda; in the later Avesta, a Bråhmaa-like passage has been preserved in Yasna 19-21; and the Nirangistån is a sort of Zoroastrian Śrautasūtra.34 Indeed, the most ancient purely ritual text in Avestan, the Yasna Haptahåiti, shows traces of a triple division of liturgical speech exactly like that in Vedic and a consequent splintering of ritual functions reminiscent of Vedic. For a convenient collection of technical religious terms shared by Vedic and Avestan, see Hillebrandt 1897, p. 11. For connections between Vedic and Zoroastrian religion in general, see, e.g., Keith 1925, 32-36; Thieme 1957b [reprinted with changes in R. Schmitt 1968, 204-241]. 33 We may add comparisons with the Roman October horse sacrifice, and similar accounts, even from the turn of this century, from the Altai; cf. further the widespread Eurasian fire rituals (cf. Witzel 1992). 34 Actually, the similarities go beyond this: the text of the Zoroastrian hymns (Gåθås) has been transmitted in what can only be called a Padapå ha, with even more of the idiosyncrasies that mark this kind of text but in a much less pure transmission. And while the Yašts and parts of the Yasna correspond in character to
gvedic hymns addressed to various gods, much of the Vīdẽvdåd reads like a Ghya or Dharma Sūtra. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 31 Discussions of
gvedic ritual itself are relatively rare and generally are purely comparative. Taking the reasonably clear descriptions of middle and late Vedic ritual as their starting points, earlier correspondents of this or that detail or ritual episode are sought, piecemeal, in the
g Veda. Examples are the discussions of van Buitenen (1968) of the Pravargya or Gonda on the Sautråmaī mantras (1980). The only more sustained, if brief discussion of a "classical" Vedic ritual in the RV is that of the Soma ritual by Geldner in the introduction to book 9 of his RV translation (1951). Also commonly treated is the use or the absence of
gvedic mantras in the later ritual, see Renou 1962, Gonda 1978, Schneider 1971. A certain amount of attention has been given to the purpose, function, and context of
gvedic ritual -- for example, the theory of Kuiper's (going back in part to Ludwig and Hillebrandt) that "the oldest nucleus of the
gveda was a textbook for the new year ritual" (1960, p. 222). This and other suggestions are briefly summarized and a new one proposed in H. Falk (to appear). Schmidt (1968) proposes connecting the morning pressing of the Soma ritual with the Vala myth and the New Year and the spring season and suggests a connection of the midday pressing with the Vtra myth and the rainy reason However, as we have indicated, relatively little systematic work has been done on assembling the details of
gvedic praxis. Hillebrandt 1897:11-17 contains a very brief but still useful survey of evidence for
gvedic ritual, esp. ritual terminology (see also Keith 1925, 252-56, and Bergaigne, 1878; for the åprī hymns of the RV see L. van den Bosch 1985). Both Oldenberg (1889) and Bergaigne (1889) examined the structure of the RV for clues to its liturgical use in the ritual. But what is needed is a thoroughgoing study of the evidence, not only terminological but descriptive, if possible calibrated according to a rough internal chronology of the text and regional differences. Once we know what
gvedic ritual was, we will be in a better position to hypothesize about its purpose (and about its successor, the "classical" Vedic ritual). What actually can be found out for the
gvedic period by painstaking study has been shown by Schmidt, 1973: in
gvedic time, tying the sacrificial animal to the offering pole (yūpa) was followed by decapitation of the victim, while in the later "classical" ritual, the tying to the offering pole remained as a fossil element only. The animal was untied, led towards (å labh) a place outside the sacrificial ground where it was suffocated (śam, "to pacify"). Heesterman (1967, 1985 passim) instead would reconstruct the same decapitation ritual from the later, YV evidence of tying and untying the animal (and only then killing it) and project this back to a prehistoric practice of his rather undefined pre- Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 32 classical period of Indian ritual -- which, however, can be shown to actually have been that of the
gveda. d. Classical ritual In contrast to the sketchy and tentative treatment of
gvedic ritual, "Classical" Vedic ritual -- the ritual constantly referred to by the Bråhmaas and exhaustively described by the Śrauta Sūtras -- has been abundantly studied. A general survey35 is A. Hillebrandt's important Ritual-Litteratur. Vedische Opfer und Zauber (1897), which covers Ghya as well as Śrauta rites and offers almost a digest of the relevant Sūtras. It sums up the knowledge gathered by the turn of the century and is still a very useful - and the only - compendium. S. Lévi's La doctrine du sacrifice (1898) offers a first intellectual analysis stressing the regenerative function of the ritual; it was a critical source for the general, epoch- making work of Hubert and Mauss, "Essai sur la nature et la fonction du sacrifice" (1898).36 The general works on Vedic religion mentioned above (Oldenberg 1917, Keith 1925, Renou and Filliozat 1947; Gonda 1960) also treat the rituals in much detail, and Renou 1954 offers a useful lexicon of ritual terminology, with abundant references to the Sūtras.37 C.G. Kashikar (1968), one of the foremost ritualists in the footsteps of Caland, has summed up the formal aspects of the Śrauta literature in a handbook.38 In addition, the introductions and notes to particular text editions and translations are often rich sources of detailed information about rituals and comparison of them across texts. For individual rituals, there are numerous monographic treatments, which will be referred to in what follows. The great Poona project of a Śrautakośa was intended as a collection of all available Mantra, Bråhmaa and Sūtra passages dealing with each of the Vedic rituals. The New/Full Moon and the Soma ritual have been published in Sanskrit, and in the accompanying English section a translation has been given of the relevant passages from the Baudhåyana Śrautasūtra (and other Śrautasūtra passages as far as they deviate), 35 Extensive surveys are those by Weber in Indische Studien X, 321 sqq., XIII, 217 sqq. and Eggeling in the introductions to his translation of the Śatapatha Bråhmaa. 36 Cf. also the long discussion in an unlikely source: Paul Mus, Barubu ur. Esquisse d'une histoire du bouddhisme fondée sur la critique archéologique des textes, Hanoi 1935, pp. 79- 121. 37 Sen's Dictionary (1978) largely is an English translation of Renou 1954. 38 Mylius has written a summary as well 1973:475-498. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 35 four of the Vedas. (An exception is the daily Agnihotra, which needs only one, the Adhvaryu.) The priests of the
g Veda, the Såma Veda, and the Yajur Veda are responsible for the three types of sacral utterance that together form the verbal sector of Vedic ritual: the loud recitation of verses (c) of the RV, the elaborate and very intricate singing of the melodies (såman) of the SV, and the mumbling of the sacrificial formulas (yaju) of the YV. The chief priest representing the
g Veda is called the Hotar; that of the SV the Udgåtar; that of the YV the Adhvaryu. The latter is also the performer of most ritual actions -- the preparation of the ground, the implements, and the oblations, the offering of the oblations, and so on. He and his helpers (Pratiprasthåtar, etc.) therefore are the most prominent priests, and it is the schools of the YV that have produced the largest amount of texts, and not surprisingly, also the largest groups of followers, as can be observed in the medieval land grants made to Vedic scholars and priests and as still is the case today (Witzel 1986b, cf. Renou 1947). The representative (or supposed representative) of the Atharva Veda is the Brahman. In Śrauta ritual the Brahman oversees the whole operation, mostly in silence, watching for slips and omissions and authorizing certain actions (see Bodewitz 1983, Renou 1949). He is not specialized in function, as the other priests are, and it is highly unlikely that he originally "belonged" to the Atharva Veda. Instead it is likely that this pairing was made secondarily, for symmetry and to provide a place for the Atharva Veda (and its adherents) in the śrauta ritual. This assignment probably reflects one of the major changes in the ritual. The third set of participants is invisible, with the exception of the gods Soma and Agni, but not the less crucial for that fact. These are the gods, a selection of whom (varying according to the ritual) is invited to attend, offered a comfortable seat on fragrant (if somewhat hard kuśa) grass, entertained with praise and song, and given food and drink in the form of oblations: each offering in the fire is made to a particular god or set of gods, and they are urged to partake of it. The model of Vedic ritual is then that of a formal meal, ceremonial hospitality, offered to particularly worthy dignitaries. This has been stressed by Thieme 1957b, but it has hardly been observed that medieval and modern pūjå still follow this pattern (Witzel 1980a, p.37-39, Bühnemann 1988), with its main upacåras such as åvåhana, havana / stotra, visarjana, etc. Vedic rituals are often classified according to the identity of their most important offering. The offering of this chief oblation will generally occur at the Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 36 exact center of the ritual, for Vedic rituals are bilaterally symmetrical,43 leading up to and away from the climactic moment,44 The simplest of the categories is that of the Haviryajñas, with oblations of vegetable and dairy products; also technically considered Haviryajñas are animal sacrifices, but it is convenient to treat these separately. And finally Somayajñas, with oblations made with the highly prized inspiring drink soma. This classification is very early; it underlies already the ordering of mantra collections in the YV Sa hitås (MS, KS, TS, VS). First or second in these early Mantra collections are the two small Mantra Sa hitås of the New and Full Moon and of the Soma ritual. The New and Full Moon sacrifice of cakes is the base pattern (prakti) of all food offerings (I i rituals), while the simplest form of the Soma ritual (Agni oma, adhvara) is that of the more complicated Soma rituals, such as the Ukthya, Atiråtra, Våjapeya. The offerings (havis) of vegetarian dishes or meat (ii) are "strewn" (nir-vapati), and those of liquids (soma, ghee) are "poured" (juhoti). These oblations are not mutually exclusive. Animal sacrifices also include offerings of the other Haviryajña classes, and the Soma Sacrifice has both offerings of that sort and animal sacrifices embedded in it. Indeed, many of the basic actions and patterns of Vedic ritual are common to all the rituals or to large groups of them. In particular, certain rituals serve, as has been alluded to above, as the type or model of a group of variants. Moreover, rituals can be nested or embedded in other rituals, building larger and increasingly intricate ritual structures out of a collection of smaller, self-contained ritual units. (Hillebrandt 1897, 1987; Heesterman 1957, 1985; Staal 1982, 1983, 1990; Witzel 1987b, 1992, Minkowski 1991.) e. The development of ritual Reference has already been made to the pre-history of the Classical Vedic ritual as preserved in the Yajurveda Mantras and the various Bråhmaas and Sūtras. The major development took place towards the end, or rather after the
gvedic period, during the linguistically defined "Mantra" period. The Śrauta rituals which were then shaped are the priestly elaboration of more simple rituals (partly preserved in the Ghyasūtras) of great antiquity. 43 For this feature, see Minkowski 1991, cf. Staal 1982, etc. 44 Something already found in
gvedic "guest worship of the gods" and still reflected in modern pūjå, see above ch. 2.b (as well as in the closely related Zoroastrian ritual). Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 37 As has been indicated, this elaboration was built on the principles of basic paradigm and variation. The two paradigms are the New and Full Moon ritual and the Soma ritual. Other Śrauta rituals were made to be variations of this scheme. The variations, smaller or larger, are always described (or referred to in the Bråhmaas) in relation to the basic set. Only the divergent parts are mentioned in the Sūtras (with the exception of the oldest, Baudhåyana). The understanding of the development of ritual also is of importance for an understanding of the origins and the development of Vedic texts and schools. The post-
gvedic period is characterized by the continuing stress of the importance of the Adhvaryu priests and their texts. But the myths make the Adhvaryus late-comers to the ritual; their prototype is the Aśvins.45 At some period following the RV, a number of Mantras from the RV and others from an unknown, separate priestly tradition were joined to form the corpus of the Adhvaryus, the main "acting" priests. Apparently,
gvedic hymns had such a high prestige already that they were necessarily incorporated into the YV texts, to enhance the status of the Adhvaryu ritual. In a way, the Adhvaryus formed their own small Sa hitås: Dårśapauramåsa / Soma Sa hitå and the rest of the rituals in separate small Sa hitås constituting the Mantra portion of MS, KS, TS (cf. Oldenberg 1888). This goes hand in hand with the development of the
gvedic hotar ("pourer (of ghee)" > "reciter of
gvedic hymns." All of this restructuring of post-RV ritual necessitated a complex re-arrangement of texts, rituals, and priestly functions; it took place between the end of the
gvedic period and the collection of the YV Mantras, as well as the emergence of early, but lost, Bråhmaa-like prose texts (K. Hoffmann, 1969), in Kuruketra under the early Kuru kings (like Parikit and Janamejaya Pårikita, see Witzel 1989b). While the stage was set at that time and the YV Mantras, as well as the lost Br., composed, the ritual developed for a long time afterwards, all through the YV Sa hitå and the Bråhmaa periods. It culminated with the reformulation of all rituals in Bråhmaa form in ŚB and, at about the same time, in Sūtra form in BŚS. The general stages of this development can be followed; however, we know too little yet about its starting point, i.e. the
gvedic ritual, and about the relative age of the various YV texts (e.g., the age of the Våjapeya section in MS, KS, TS, etc.), to allow the criterion of the development of ritual in the post-
gvedic period to be used prominently in this investigation. It will be of more 45 The ideology behind this myth has to be treated in detail; cf., for the time being, Witzel 1987c, n. 103. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 40 important preliminary rites to the Soma sacrifice is the Pravargya, which involves the preparation of a hot milk drink for the Aśvins; it has been treated by Garbe 1880, van Buitenen 1968, also Rönnow 1929, and Kashikar 1972. Van Buitenen wanted to interpret it as a 'first' iconic rite, the three superimposed pravargya vessels representing a man, but this has cogently been denied by Kashikar 1972. Its meaning is elusive as that of many other rituals. Oldenberg (1917, p.448) connected it with the sun and the onset of the rainy season. There are a number of variants on the One-Day Soma sacrifices, as well as multi-day types, some lasting up to a year, or indeed many years (at least theoretically). Sacrifices of 12 days or more are known as Sattras ("Sittings" or "Sessions"), which have the further peculiarity of having no separate Yajamåna. The priests themselves undertake the ritual for their joint benefit. On the Sattra, see e.g. Falk 1985. A number of important and elaborate rituals incorporate Soma sacrifices and conform to their model. We mention here only the Råjasūya ("Conse- cration of the King") and the Aśvamedha ("Horse Sacrifice"), both of which have been extensively discussed. For the former see especially Weber 1893 and Heesterman 1957. The latter can only be performed by an eminent king, to consolidate and increase his power among the neighboring kingdoms. It is in essence an animal sacrifice (or set of animal sacrifices) with a horse as chief victim. But before the horse is slaughtered (with extensive ceremony), it is set free to roam at will for a year, with a large entourage to follow and protect it. The standard treatment of this ritual is Dumont 1927; for its development cf. also the practical Mantra collection (and discussion) by S. Bhawe 1939. A ritual that stands slightly apart from the system just outlined is the Agnicayana ("Piling of the Fire Altar"). Rather than using the ordinary ritual ground, Soma sacrifices can employ a raised fire altar of bricks, the construction of which is the object of another extremely elaborate rite, which has generated much esoteric speculation in later texts. This ritual has been treated in a massive and extremely important recent work, including a videotape and film of a modern performance of the ritual, in Staal 1983. See also Rönnow 1929, Kolhatkar 1986. In addition to these treatments of particular rituals, many works deal with features that are found in a number of rituals. E.g. -- particular priests: Mylius 1982, Bodewitz 1983, Minkowski 1991; -- particular physical objects, such as the Dakiå or 'priestly gift': Heesterman 1959, Malamoud 1976, Mylius 1979; -- particular events in ritual, e.g. the Dīkå or consecration of the sacrificer: Lindner Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 41 1878, Gonda 1965:315-462, Thite 1970; the Avabhta or 'final bath' of the sacrificer, which releases him from the Dīkå: Mylius 1976; or the Pråyaścittis or 'expiations' to be performed if a mistake is made in the ritual performance: Willman-Grabowska 1935, Gampert 1939, cf. Hoens, Śånti (1951). Gonda has devoted a number of studies to the texts of various ritual recitations (e.g. 1981a, 1981b) and to offerings and implements of the ritual such as rice and barley (1987) or grasses (1985). Thus we have a daunting amount of primarily descriptive material about Vedic ritual. The word "descriptive" is not meant to denigrate or patronize the efforts of the scholars who have produced these works. Anyone who has attempted to approach the vast, unwieldy, allusive, and often enigmatic primary ritual texts knows how difficult it is to extract a clear picture of even a minor episode, and we must offer unrestrained thanks to those scholars who have sifted the often frustrating material and displayed it coherently. Nonetheless, it is true that there is a relative dearth of interpretive work making informed use of this wealth of first-order descriptions (with important exceptions, such as Lévi 1898, and the related Hubert-Mauss 1898). In particular, the structure(s) of the ritual, the interrelations of particular rituals, and their internal development (cf. Witzel 1981/2, Falk 1986a, 1988) deserve more searching attention than they have heretofore received. Though Thite 1975 assembles a useful collection of statements from the Bråhmaas about the meaning, origins, etc. of sacrifice, the level of analysis is rather unsophisticated. In recent years the synchronic question has generally been framed by F. Staal's provocative but over-simple pronouncements about "the meaninglessness" of ritual (e.g. Staal 1979a,b; 1990), (contra, e.g. Penner 1995, MacDonald 1989: 9, B.K. Smith, 1989: 38sqq., Scharfe 1990, Bodewitz 1990: 7-9, Minkowski 1991, Witzel 1992), which have deflected attention from the more complex issues mentioned above. The main problem with Staal's approach is his refusal to view ritual on several, if not on many interpretative levels. However, if anything should be clear at the close of this century it is the fact that (a) ritual, like poetry, cannot be grasped by attributing its meaning to a single guiding concept and submitting it to a single "explanation". It is the art of the poet and ritualist to grasp several ideas, concerns, wishes or fears of mankind in the given form, whether a poem or a rite, and to give expression to it in such a way as to allow multiple interpretations, -- or in more mundane terms, as to cater to the many different tastes of various individuals and of the various groups in society. There is another item in Staal's approach which needs some more discussion: When he speaks of "meaninglessness", one should not take this word Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 42 at face value. He has simply redefined, without telling us, the term "meaning." He does not characterize all ritual or a particular ritual, such as the Agnihotra, as having no meaning or as never having had any meaning (but does not say so expressly). He rather points out the lack of meaning of the various small constituent parts of a particular ritual, just like the various small melodic phrases that make up a particular song of a bird. But he overlooks the point that both ritual and bird song are a system of signs with a function outside this system. A nightingale has a song which differs somewhat from that of a crow. If some birds can vary their songs (as do whales), then such insertions have a function: they serve (at least) to identify the individual bird and its territory, not unlike the way we use personal names, which often do not have a meaning any more. In short, we cannot accept Staal's private redefinition of the term "meaning" - especially without his telling us so. Just as the "meaning" of ritual has shaped recent discussion of the synchronic questions, diachronic questions have been shaped in response to Heesterman's equally provocative but over-simple theories48 (see esp. the essays of various dates collected in Heesterman 1985) about the bloodily agonistic background of "Classical" Vedic ritual and its transformation into the (as he sees it) non-competitive machinery described in the Śrauta texts, neglecting, e.g. the social aspects of the increasingly difficult "ritual career" a sacrificer undertakes by becoming a dīkita. This approach views the development of the ritual too much in terms of a sudden revolutionary break-up of the old ritual rather than in terms of observable ritual development. Heesterman specifically does not identify his older ritual stage with that of the
g Veda. A general problem with his approach is the great stress put on a purely "deductive", but anecdotal method: Once the pre-classical ritual has been defined as agonistic and violent, every hint in the classical ritual is used to support the pre-conceived theory, -- instead of carefully if not tediously investigating the various strands and stages in the development of a particular ritual and, especially, the evidence we actually have for these stages: in extremely lucky cases from the pre-Vedic (Indo-Iranian) period, from the
gveda, the Mantra texts, the YV prose and the Bråhmaas, and finally, the Sūtras (for this approach, see Witzel 1981/2, 1992, forthc. d). Surprisingly, a discussion of
gvedic ritual is strikingly absent in all the recent discussions of the forerunners of "classical" Vedic ritual, as present in that of the Bråhmaa and Śrauta Sūtras, even though it is in the RV and in the Avestan texts that we have evidence for 48 For a (partial) critique, see e.g. B.K. Smith, 1989, p. 40-45. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 45 publications dealt with the customs and rites of these handbooks. By the time Frazer opened the door to comparisons of ethnographical materials, even more interest was created. Scholars like Caland compared the customs of people all over the world --in the manner of his time fairly uncritically, but still useful as a collection of similar materials. Some general works exist, e.g. Apte 1939, as well as significant treatment in Hillebrandt 1897, and there has been some discussion, often superficial, about the relationship between Ghya and Śrauta ritual (see, e.g., recently B. K. Smith 1986). There is a summary and discussion of the saskåras by Pandey 1957/1969; cf. also, for many of these aspects, the large work by P.V. Kane, History of Dharmaśåstra, with an enormous wealth of information on all these (and other) topics. Gonda 1980a is a rich compendium of practices and beliefs primarily culled from the Ghya literature, though, due to its organization, this book is somewhat difficult to use. Much remains to be done in this area. More work has been devoted to particular Ghya rituals, especially marriage and ceremonies relating to death. For marriage, see e.g. Apte 1978, Winternitz 1892, 1920; Zachariae 1977, 1989 passim, Tsuji 1960; for death Caland 1896, for ancestor worship Caland 1893, Winternitz 1890. Since the RV already contains hymns devoted both to marriage (10.85, also in expanded form in AV 14, PS 18.1-14) and to funerals (10.14-18, AV 18, PS 18.57-82) and as the Paippalåda Atharvaveda even contains some of the dialogue of the upanayana rituals, modeled on the verbal exchanges at the marriage ceremony, in the later part of its book 20, the question again -- and again not entirely resolved -- is how much the older and younger rituals share and how much has changed. The RV marriage hymn is long and elaborate, but extremely obscure in many places and seems to be a composite of verses from different sources.52 It is, of course, in large part, a recounting of the mythical origin and prototype of human marriage, in the marriage of the goddess Sūryå with Soma. Some of the little understood parts are puns, others are based on the --so far not understood-- identification of eating and sex. Though some features of the later Ghya ceremony are clearly present (the wooers, the mounting of the chariot), others are not mentioned (the circumambulation of the fire, the mounting of the stone, the gazing at the pole-star) -- some of which do already appear in the AV. 52 Compare also the often obscure (and "obscene") marriage hymn, sung in Vedic times at the performance of marriages (Vådh.S. 4.47 = Caland 1990 p. 458), which was actually part of the (lost) Kå haka Mantrapå ha, and is preserved in the Kashmirian
cakas (Caland 1925: 292 sqq. as Sarasvaty-Anuvåka). Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 46 The funeral hymns clearly describe cremation, though in other parts of the RV burial seems to be indicated [cf. Keith, ERE XI, 842]. Satī seems not to have been practiced; in fact there is evidence for levirate marriage; see Schmidt 1987. Ancestor worship has been dealt with at length by Caland (1893) who also wrote a comparison with the corresponding rituals of other Indo-European peoples, especially the conservative Lithuanians (Caland 1914). Nevertheless, the same materials still contain much that has not been used, e.g. for the emergence for the idea of rebirth (further see below). For the other saskåras so elaborately treated in the Ghya Sūtras and in later Hindu texts we have far less evidence in earlier texts. There is essentially no treatment in the RV of the ceremonies surrounding the birth of a child, though the AV does contain a few appropriate hymns, e.g. one on the occasion of the appearance of the child's first tooth -- not, interestingly enough, the occasion for separate treatment in the Ghya Sūtras. Other Ghya observances have received less attention, at least in a Vedic context, though the Sa skåras (rites of passage, see Pandey 1957) are usually treated in general works on Hinduism. Of the Sa skåras one that receives occasional attention from Vedicists is the upanayana or 'initiation' of a young boy into studentship, since this event (and the consequent period of study) make him fit to establish the fires and perform the Śrauta rituals. The upanayana and subsequent studentship are passed over without mention in early Vedic texts [except for PS book 20 in its second, late part, ŚB 11, and TĀ 2, cf. also TU 1.11, Ka hŚiU], though fully treated in the Ghya texts, and often the mise-en-scène of the Upaniadic dialogues, see Jolly 1897, Malamoud 1977. A detailed comparison of these materials has, as so much in the field, not yet been carried out. The final admonition on good behavior in adult life by a Veda teacher to his departing student is appropriately (cf. above, Thieme on BĀU) contained in the Upaniads (TU 1, Ka hŚiU, see Witzel 1979a/1980a). The special topic of the yearly return of the Veda student to his teacher has been discussed by Heesterman (1968a). In fact, students spent about half of the year away from "school" -- something that had not sufficiently been paid attention to until Falk published his book on the old Indian sodalities and on dicing games (1986, cf. also Bollée 1981). This aspect of a young man's life, the membership in a Männerbund, goes without comment in the Ghya texts, but may be reflected in some earlier Vedic texts. See again by Falk 1986a, and cf. also Wikander 1938, Heesterman, 1981, Bollée 1981. A picture of young Vedic men quite opposite to that of a Veda student emerges: the members (vråtya) of a Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 47 Männerbund live an independent life, away from home and trying to collect a starting capital of cattle by threat and extraction from their neighbors. The Kurus and Pañcålas seem to have exchanged their vråtyas; equally, the Jaiminīyas in their southern location sent their young men northwards to the Kurus and significantly not into the Dravidian South (Witzel 1989a:236). This sort of (ritual) partnership may also be reflected by the fact that Kuru and Pañcåla royal families have intermarried regularly. The åśrama system of Manu and other Dharma texts by which men were divided into four age groups (brahmacårin, ghastha, vånaprastha, sannyåsin) is not found in earlier Vedic texts. However, we can distinguish (1) childhood, up to 7 or 8 years, basically a life outside the "ritual society" of the Twice Born, the årya; (2) a period of study, beginning with the initiation (upanayana) and ending with the final bath turning the brahmacårin into a snåtaka to whom the teacher gives final advice on proper behavior (Witzel 1979a-80a); this is interspersed with periods of roaming the country in young men's associations (vråtya); (3) the householder (ghastha) stage after marriage, ending at an undefined moment when the father hands over his power and his property to his sons (see W. Rau 1957: 43 ff., Sprockhoff 1979). However, life in retirement is not yet termed, as later on, vånaprastha, simply because the old parents do not live in a copse (vana, see Sprockhoff 1980,1984) close to the village but continue to stay with their extended family, in an antigha (RV 10.95.4). The vånaprastha and sannyåsin concepts developed only when men, such as Yåjñavalkya, began to leave their homes for homelessness (pravråjika, see Sprockhoff 1979, 1981, 1984, 1987). It is detailed in a ritual found in the Ka ha Śruti Up and in an appendix to the Månava ŚrS (Sprockhoff 1987). The fourth åśrama, that of the Sannyåsin, is of still later date (Sprockhoff 1976, 1979, Olivelle 1976-77). Cf. further, Winternitz 1926, Eggers 1929, Skurzak 1948, Olivelle 1974. The religious, and indeed secular, life of women lacks systematic treatment in the Vedic texts, though she is of course mentioned in treatments of the saskåras that concern her (marriage and birth of a child). However, the wife of the sacrificer is an integral part of many Śrauta rituals, so that there are brief allusions to her scattered through the Śrauta texts. A collection of these passages and a systematic discussion of the sacrificer's wife is needed, and the portrait thus obtained should be compared with the mythological treatments of women's religious practice, e.g. that of Apålå, discussed recently by Schmidt 1987, Jamison 1991, cf. Winternitz 1889. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 50 preserved in more recent sorcery (cf. Türstig 1980) and more texts are expected from the Oriya Paippalådins. Also partly overlapping with the sorcery practices of the Atharva tradition is the Såmavidhåna Bråhmaa (see above). The Kauś.S. is a virtual handbook of customs and beliefs of the Vedic period, but, as just noted, unfortunately little studied and somewhat inaccessible. The text contains, among common white and black sorcery practices, the many healing procedures and cases of omina and portenta, such interesting items as the use of lacquer for healing a wound, 28.5, or the common fear of crossroads, 26.30, etc. Then there are such eminently practical sorcery practices as finding a lost object, 37.4, or finding out what kind of wife a prospective bride will turn out to be, 37.7-12, or the expiation for the marriage of a younger brother before the older one, 46.26. There are remedies for such perennial male problems as grey hair 26.23, losing hair 30.8, 31.28, and other sorcery important for Vedic man, such as making someone impotent or a eunuch by burying a particularly unappetizing concoction (Watkins 1986). Coming to some areas of Vedic life that hardly ever are mentioned in the texts dealing with the solemn ritual, we may note in the KauśS rules about spitting, 31.17 or drinking urine by someone who wishes to become rich 22.8-9, -- a procedure still found today to ensure long life. Slightly behind Indus civilization practice but more advanced than much that we note today is the use of a latrine 48.19. Turning to psychic terrors, we note the occurrence of panic (apvå, cf. Hoffmann 1955, 1968b) 14.21 or possession by demons at 26.36; 27.5; 28.7,9; 29.27; 31.8, or more specified by a piśåca demon at 25.32 who causes epilepsy; cf. 28.12 about madness. All such details can be followed up later on in books on dreams (e.g. Stuhrmann 1982, v. Negelein 1912), or in the Jyotia literature. For Vedic magic in general, see Henry 1904, Stutley 1980. Much of the specifically medical lore has been treated by Filliozat 1975 and, with more emphasis on the Atharva Veda, by Zysk 1985. On the conception of the structure of organisms that underlies much of the medical literature see Jamison 1986, and for the development of embryos see Rolland 1972. i. Recent developments In India, an increasing interest in Vedic ritual can be observed since independence. Many public functions and ceremonies and related radio and television broadcasts now include Vedic chanting, and this is actively furthered Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 51 in South India through the employment of Vedic reciters (vaidika) at temples who recite their particular school texts in its entirety, a "lesson" per day (vedapåråyaa). Especially at Hoshiarpur and at Poona, many texts, translations and studies (including such massive undertakings as the Vedic Word Concordance and the Śrautakośa) have appeared. At Poona, again, special attention has also been paid to the actual performance of Vedic rituals. While the more simple forms, such as the Agnihotra and the Dårśapauramåsa, are found performed reasonably often in various parts of India and Nepal (for a list of some 550 Śrauta sacrificers in South Asia during the last c. hundred years, see Kashikar and Parpola in Staal 1983, II, 199-251), the more complicated rituals are quite rare. The Soma ritual, for example, is regularly performed only in certain districts of Andhra, Tamil Nadu and Kerala. At Poona a large Våjapeya rite was performed in 1955 (see report, Våjapeya Anu håna Samiti, 1956). This was followed by a Pravargya (van Buitenen 1968). Due to the interest stirred by these rites among the -mainly- Dutch ritualists, J. F. Staal was able to help organize and film a large Agnicayana in Kerala in 1975 (and again in 1990). The first resulted in a feature film, some 30 video tapes and a large 2 volume book production with many photos (Staal 1983). Vedic recitation has increasingly been studied during the past few decades (e.g. by Staal 1961, Howard 1977, 1986, 1988a.b); earlier descriptions were given by Haug 1863, Felber 1912 (based on early recordings), Bake 1935. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 52 III. DEITIES AND MYTHOLOGY a. Vedic Mythology Vedic mythology has attracted at least as much scholarly attention as Vedic ritual. The late 19th and early 20th centuries saw a number of comprehensive treatments, notably Bergaigne's La réligion védique (1878-83) mentioned above, Macdonell's The Vedic mythology (1897), and Hillebrandt's Vedische Mythologie (1927-29), as well as the extensive surveys in Oldenberg 1917, Keith 1925, and studies confined primarily to a single text, like that of Hopkins 1908. Though still indispensable for their detailed and stimulating engagement with the text (especially Bergaigne and Hillebrandt), these treatments suffer from overschematization and reliance on the nature- mythology paradigm then current. The felt necessity to assign each divinity to a natural force resulted in some extremely unconvincing solar, lunar, and netherworld deities. It is rather discouraging constantly to encounter, at the end of a stimulating and nuanced discussion fully utilizing the textual resources, the same shortcut taken: "X must then be the sun" and so on. Nonetheless, the seminal nature of these works, particularly of Bergaigne's, should not be forgotten. Bergaigne's announced method of "complicating the ideas by simplifying the vocabulary" -- i.e. by seeking the single semantic kernel of a word rather than allowing it a chameleon-like ability to change meaning according to context -- has had an immense influence on the more philologically inclined interpreters of the Veda to this day: Thieme, for example, adopts Bergaigne's statement as his watchword (see Thieme 1957a, p. 22). Moreover, Bergaigne's judgment of the
g Veda as a verbally and poetically sophisticated, indeed deliberately obscure text, rather than the simple and rude effusion of a primitive people (as it has often been treated), has encouraged interpreters of many stripes to investigate the techniques and effects, the mysteries and flourishes of the Vedic poets. For an elegant and revealing appraisal (revealing also of the author) of Bergaigne, Oldenberg, and others, see Renou 1928. The same overschematic tendency marks a more recent approach towards Vedic mythology, the Trifunctionalism associated especially with the French scholar G. Dumézil. For many decades Vedic has furnished much of the evidence for the "Trifunctional" analysis of Indo-European ideology, a theory that sees all aspects of the culture of the Indo-Europeans (and its daughter Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 55 deified Fire, especially ritual Fire. It is important to note that Agni, along with Soma, is one of the few gods that are actually present and visible on the offering ground. Indra, the most vividly realized Vedic god, embodies the powerful Aryan warrior. But his role as demiurge (pushing up the sky) and bringer of culture (by killing Vtra and opening the Vala) is equally important. See further below. Soma, as already noted, is the deified soma drink, as well as the plant from which it is derived. Without drinking Soma, Indra could not perform the important killing of Vtra. The
gvedic Soma has recently been discussed by Oberlies 1989, 1991. The Ādityas or "Sons of Aditi", a group of divinities of fluid number, contains as core gods: Varua, a stern but just king-figure; Mitra, Varua's constant partner; Aryaman,57 a more shadowy figure than Mitra and Varua, though frequently joined with them. They are followed in enumerations by the still more vague but evidently popular Bhaga "share", a god of good luck, and A śa "lot", a still more obscure figure. On the Ādityas, see further below. The Aśvins are divine twins who perform miraculous cures and rescues. The Maruts, a group of spirited youths, a sort of Männerbund, are often associated with Indra. Pūan, a "pastoral" god of somewhat bizarre appearance and behavior, nonetheless protects and makes thrive many aspects of daily life. Uas 'Dawn' is the most prominent goddess in Vedic and functions as the friend of poets. Other deified natural phenomena in this sphere include Sūrya 'Sun', rather "the male one belonging to the sun"; Dyaus 'Heaven, Sky' (or Dyaus Pitar 'Father Sky') and his consort, Pthivī 'Earth', who has complementary maternal characteristics; the Āpas 'Waters', an undifferentiated group of female divinities often called "divine ladies" (Narten 1971); Våyu or Våta 'Wind'; and Parjanya 'Thunder'. It is notable that, as in many Indo-European (and other) civilizations, fire is regarded as masculine and water a feminine deity, while the "elements" fire and water exist separately as grammatical neuters (athar-, udr- /udn-). This seems to be a very old notion.58 Certain gods are merely deified roles or concepts, like Savitar 'Impeller'. Some of these, like Tva ar 'Fashioner', acquire a certain amount of "personality." 57 Whose name means "arya-hood", an otherwise uncommon combination of an adjective with a primary suffix, indicating a rather artificial formation (as found also in some other Indo-Iranian words from the sphere of religion and society). 58 See Witzel 1992, n. 68. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 56 The two great gods of later Hinduism, Viu and Śiva, are not at all prominent in Vedic, though they do appear there. (Śiva under his name "Rudra", and under his epithets ghora 'terrible' or simply indicated by the taboo avoidance expression asau deva 'that god'. The name "Śiva" itself of course originated as a taboo replacement epithet 'the kindly/auspicious one' (see Ka hĀ 2.100). The process of the development of their later prominence is rather controversial. For example, Kuiper (1962) argues that Viu was more prominent in the Vedic conceptual scheme than the texts allow us to recover, more prominent even than Indra, as central mediating figure between the older Asuras and the younger Devas -- a theory that depends crucially on accepting Kuiper's views on the Asura-Deva rivalry (for which see below). This list scarcely exhausts the Vedic divinities. Indeed it is not really possible to determine exactly how many gods there are, as a number of divine titles seem sometimes to be merely epithets of a particular god, sometimes to have an independent or quasi-independent existence. In fact, in the course of the Vedic period we must reckon both with conflation of two originally separate gods through the reinterpretation of one name as an epithet, and with sundering of a god and his epithet into two distinct deities. Needless to say the literature on the individual gods is extremely copious. For example, for the not particularly prominent god Pūan, one can cite a number of studies devoted entirely to him (Siecke 1914, Atkins 1941, 1947, Dandekar 1942, Kramrisch 1942), as well as considerable other literature treating him in conjunction with other gods. Nonetheless, there are still important gaps. Our knowledge of some gods, especially the three principal Ādityas, has benefited from the intensive if sometimes acrimonious reassessment of their nature and function in recent decades, in reaction to the nature-mythology interpretation of them current in the beginning of the century. However, many others have not been so studied. Our information about them is inadequate and has been interpreted through obsolete schemata. Moreover, the relations among gods, especially gods of apparently different types, and between gods and their epithets, deserves restudy, in order to gain a clearer picture of the nature and development of the curiously mixed Vedic pantheon. See e.g. Schmidt 1968. Rather than give an even partial list of the literature on each god, we will exemplify the trends in the study of Vedic mythology by concentrating on those gods that have been especially the subject of debate in recent years, namely the Ādityas, and on the god with the most narrative mythology, namely Indra. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 57 The Ādityas, needless to say, participated in the interpretation of myths as a system of nature mythology during its heyday. In this paradigm, Mitra and Varua were "celestial" gods, though each interpreter put a slightly different twist on this conception. For Bergaigne (1878-83, Vol. III, 110ff.), Mitra could be identified with the day, Varua with night though in a brief but telling aside, he suggests that Mitra is also to be interpreted through the common noun mitra ('friend' for B.). For Macdonell (1897, 22-30) and for Keith (1925, 96-104), Mitra was the sun and Varua the sky. Oldenberg (1917, 178-206, inter alia) saw Mitra as the sun, Varua as the moon, and Aryaman as the planet Venus (and the other Ādityas as other planets), and Hillebrandt (1927-29, 2ff., 41ff. likewise thought Mitra the sun, Varua the moon, Vol. II, 1-100). This baldly presented set of equations does not do justice to the subtlety (or lack thereof) of each scholar's discussion of these gods or the textual evidence, but does show what the "bottom line" inevitably was. In the words of Macdonell (1897, 27): "What conclusions as to the natural basis of Varua can be drawn from the Vedic evidence which has been adduced?" The first major challenge (though cf. Bergaigne's mitra 'friend' just mentioned) to this set of conflicting interpretations was that of Meillet 1907, who, with the French penchant for a social interpretation of religion, interpreted Ved. Mitra / Avest. Miθra as deified 'Contract', in other words as an abstract social, rather than natural force. Though vehemently attacked by Hillebrandt in his second ed. of Vedische Mythologie, Meillet's article set the stage for a radical reinterpretation of all the Ādityas as belonging to the social and conceptual sphere -- even though there has not been general agreement as to their exact place there. The most vigorous disputes have taken place between Thieme (esp. 1938, 1957a) and Dumézil (e.g. 1934, 1940, 1941, 1949, 1958b), a debate that has centered not only on the actual character of these deities but also on scholarly methodology and assumptions. Dumézil, of course, sees these gods as part of his tripartite functional schema, specifically as embodiments of sovereignty, of the First Function. Thieme, in his more rigorously philological approach, identifies the gods with social abstractions: Mitra as Meillet's 'Contract', Aryaman as 'Hospitality'. There have also been voices dissenting from both Thieme and Dumézil, notably Gonda (e.g. 1972), who returns to Bergaigne's view of Mitra as 'Friend'. The third, and in many ways the most compelling of the major Ādityas is Varua, and the reformulation of his nature also begins in some sense with Meillet 1907, who noted Varua's association with the by now much discussed Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 60 Bråhmaa to the history of the Bråhmaa literature"), and also E. W. Hopkins 1908.61 Again, however, more is needed, particularly in confronting the fragments of mythology in the Mantra texts and the prose texts, in an effort to produce a coherent story (see Sieg 1902, Jamison 1991). This brings us to our next question: to what extent do the mythologies of the RV, the mantra texts and the bråhmaa texts form a unity, partly obscured by the distorting effects of literary genre and religious purpose -- and to what extent has there been a real change in the conception of the deities and their exploits? This question is, of course, parallel to the one we asked about ritual in the two text types, and it is equally difficult to answer. Given the obvious differences in content, in genre, and in purpose between mythology as presented in the mantra texts and in the bråhmaa texts, some investigators have on principle excluded the later, prose material from comparison with the poetic evidence, while others (e.g. Sieg 1902, Jamison 1991) attempt to construct a unified picture from these different types of evidence, when they seem to reflect a similar underlying phenomenon. On the one hand, most of the same gods are mentioned in both types of texts, and many of their characteristics and deeds are at least superficially the same. However, there are some important differences. In the general religious picture, the power of the ritual, the sacrifice, seems to have usurped some of the gods' power. Even in early Vedic men could use the ritual to manipulate or at least influence gods' behavior, as we will see; in the middle and late Vedic period the sacrifice is almost coercive and the gods subject to it -- though it does not seem to be the case that the gods are imprisoned by the sacrifice and completely controlled by it, as is sometimes claimed. Moreover, there have been two obvious and important changes in the ranks of the deities themselves. First, the figure of Prajåpati ('Lord of creatures'), a very marginal figure in the RV, appearing only in late hymns, becomes in the prose texts the central creator god embodying the power of the ritual -- though he still lacks much personal definition. On this change, see e.g. Gonda 1984, 1986, 1989.62 Second, one of the most characteristic aspects of Bråhmaic mythology is the ceaseless rivalry between the gods (Devas) and their kin, the so-called Asuras. 61 For a list of recent literature see B.K. Smith 1989, p. 54, n. 12. 62 More recent collection with a Freudian commentary, see O'Flaherty's (1985) (re- )translation of JB myths, dealt with earlier by Oertel and Caland. Further collections include A. Hillebrandt 1921, K. F. Geldner 1911. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 61 Perhaps hundreds of mythic episodes in Vedic prose texts begin with the sentential formula "The Devas and the Asuras were in contention". (On such formulae, see Jamison, to appear, a.) Yet in the RV the epithet asura is often used of some of the most respected of the Devas, e.g. Varua and Agni, and in early Iranian religion the cognate word ahura is part of the title of the most august god in the pantheon, Ahura Mazdå 'Lord Wisdom'. The difference in treatment of the word asura in mantra and prose texts, the apparent emergence of a distinct group of supernatural beings, the Asuras, counterpoised to the gods, has been called, by Kuiper (1975, p. 112 [= 1983, p. 14]), "the central problem of Vedic religion", and has received considerable scholarly attention. (For full details of the history of the problem, see W. E. Hale 1986, Chap. 1.) For example, Kuiper himself believes that there is no real contradiction between the two textual levels: the Asuras were the primordial gods, challenged and ultimately defeated by the upstart Devas. Some Asuras joined the ranks of the Devas (the ones who receive both titles in the RV); others remained in perpetual opposition. Though such a scenario could encompass both types of evidence about the Asuras, it unfortunately finds very little support in the texts. A recent survey of the philological evidence, Hale 1986, while not producing a final answer to the question, gives us the means to achieve such a solution and to reject, as contrary to the textual evidence, a number of previous discussions of the issue. It must not be forgotten that the fight between the Devas and the Asuras has its mundane counterpart in the
gvedic opposition between the immigrating and spreading årya tribes and the previous local inhabitants, the dasyu or dåsa; this opposition is later on, in the Atharvaveda and the bråhmaa type texts replaced by that of the årya and śūdra.63 Their opposition, in contrast to the automatically expected, not always voluntary cooperation in everyday society, is expressed frequently, most notably in the context of war and of the New Year ritual, at a time when the old order breaks down temporarily and chaos reigns among the gods and in society (cf. the Roman carnival). Vedic ritual tends to enforce the social role of deva/asura and årya/śūdra precisely at these occasions (e.g. in the Mahåvrata rite). 63 On the compound name śūdrårya, which is a counterpart to brahma-katra "Brahmins and noblemen" of the YV Sa hitås, see H. Oertel, Zu śūdrårya "Arier und Śūdra" 1936-37, KZ 63, 249. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 62 This leads to another important question that remains to be thoroughly explored, namely the relation between myth and ritual in Vedic. Although in the early period of Vedic studies, their intimate connection was not questioned, the sheer mass of material to be surveyed in each area generally guaranteed that in practice each was pursued independently. Hillebrandt's Vedische Mythologie (and to a lesser extent, in Bergaigne's La réligion védique) is exceptional in this regard, as it relies heavily on ritual materials. The perceived excesses of the "Ritualistic School" of mythology may have propelled this de facto separation into a matter of principle, and many recent students of one or the other explicitly see the myth/ritual mixture of the texts as tainting the purity of each strain. (Cf. e.g. Oertel 1899, O'Flaherty 1985, esp. pp. 12ff.) Nonetheless, the intimacy of the two within this tradition (and not only the Vedic one)64 cannot be denied: the existence of figures that are at once functioning parts of the ritual and divinities with a developed mythology (e.g. Agni, Soma); the recital of mythic episodes in liturgical context; the use of mythology to explain details of the ritual or the ritual itself; the embedding of ritual activity in mythological narrative -- all these point to a deep connection felt by the composers of the text (Hoffmann 1968). It seems time now to reexamine this connection without preconceptions, in order to distinguish true cases of secondary influence from organic and historical connections. Recent scholars who have worked on this problem, directly or obliquely, include Hoffmann 1957, 1970, Heesterman 1985 passim, Schmidt 1968, Falk 1984, Jamison 1991. 64 See Witzel, The myth of the hidden sun, forthc., which contains some links illuminating the more obscure mythical allusions and ritual practices with regard to the Vala myth and the Mahåvrata ritual. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 65 bestowed from the spontaneous gratitude of an overflowing heart. The gift (and usually its extent and nature) is mandated by the reciprocal system. Other aspects of exchange are visible in the rules of hospitality (see e.g. Thieme 1957b) and marriage. Here, too, a certain amount of reciprocity is seen, as for example in the function of Aryaman as god of marriage: The underlying principle is the exchange of brides. The important term śraddhå [lit. 'place the heart (in/on)', and cognate to Latin credō], often misleadingly translated 'faith', originally referred to 'confidence' in the efficacy of the ritual, i.e. its ability to motivate counter-gifts, as Köhler (1948/1973) has shown. (See Köhler also for discussion of the abundant earlier literature on this word; cf. also Lüders 1924, Hara 1964, Hacker 1963, and the rather weak Rao 1971.) The same sort of relationship and exchange is seen between men and the ancestors, as well as between men and the dead poets' society in heaven of the
is. Both are "fed" by men with actual food offerings (pia), but in the case of the seers additionally with their own sort of "food", that is the daily recitation of their
gvedic poetry. It should be noted that Vedic recitation is preceded by the actual mentioning of the name of the poet, not only to keep alive65 his memory but also to supply him with "spiritual food". The circle, in this regard, would be closed by the release of "divine" inspiration (dhī) to latter day poets who want to compose "a new song" (bráhman) or a sorcery spell (bráhman) and who want to make truth work (*satyakriyå). The extraordinary power and prestige accorded to verbal behavior is another important aspect of Vedic thought that is visible from the earliest times. The very existence of the RV is a tribute to this notion -- the multitude of elaborate hymns directed to the same divinity, composed by a variety of bardic families, results from the belief that the gods were most pleased by "the newest hymn", as the text often tells us. The gods of early Vedic were not the mere dutiful receivers of a set liturgy that they became in the middle Vedic period, but -- as guests at their solemn ritual reception on the offering ground -- critical connoisseurs of poetic craftsmanship and virtuosity, just as the modern Hindu gods savor the stutis and stotras addressed to them in pūjå and other rituals. The 65 This also is necessary for reasons of ordering the RV: in a scriptless time, the masses of
gvedic verses were ordered according to the poets' clans ("family books"), the deities and the length of the hymns, and, if necessary, the meter used. The mentioning of a poet's name (along with his father's or clan's name), and along with the deity and the meter allows one to pinpoint a hymn in the corpus, -- to this very day. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 66 better the hymn, the greater the reward -- to the poet from the patron, to the latter from the god. But what is most prized is not elegant verbal trickery, but rather the putting into words of a cosmic truth. This aspect of Vedic religion has been much discussed -- and much disputed -- especially in the last fifty years or so. The discussions have centered around two terms, bráhman- and tá-. The neuter noun bráhman- is the derivational base to which the masculine noun brahmán- 'possessor of bráhman-' and ultimately bråhmaa-, the name both of the priestly caste and of the exegetical ritual texts. Bráhman- has been the subject of several searching studies by eminent 20th century Vedicists, e.g. Renou and Silburn 1949, Gonda 1950, Thieme 1952, Schmidt 1968. Philological examination of the
gvedic passages seems especially to support the view of Thieme that bráhman refers originally to a "formulation" (Formulierung), the capturing in words of a significant and non-self-evident truth.66 The ability to formulate such truths gives the formulator (brahmán-) special powers, which can be exercised even in cosmic forces (see Jamison, 1991, on Atri). This power attributed to a correctly stated truth is found in the (later) "*satyakriyå" or 'act of truth', seminally discussed by W. Norman Brown (1941, 1963, 1968), which is in fact already found in the RV and has counterparts in other Indo-European cultures (see e.g. Watkins 1979). Such formulated speech (bráhman) must be recited correctly, otherwise there is danger of losing one's head (as explained in the indraśatru legend TS 2.4.12.1, ŚB 1.6.3.8), and it must be recited with its author's name. In the prose texts the emphasis has shifted slightly from this correct formulation, as freely composed poetry has been replaced by rote recitation in the liturgy. But its influence is still to be discerned in the great stress laid on correct pronunciation of the ancient verses67 and especially on correct knowledge. 'He who knows thus' (ya eva veda) about the hidden meanings of the ritual or the homologies it encodes has access to greater power and greater success than one who simply has the ritual performed without this knowledge. 66 This usually is a (
g-) Vedic verse but it also can be a sorcery stanza, as for example AV 2.2.1 = PS 1.7.1 tá (PS ta[t]) två yaumi bráhmanå; cf. already Oldenberg, 1919:476. 67 There exists, in fact, a rather old and famous myth about it: As Tva  wished to take revenge on Indra who had killed his son Viśvarūpa; he created the demon Vtra, but while wishing him to be an enemy and killer of Indra, he mispronounced ''índraśatru "having Indra for his enemy" instead of indraśátru "Indra's enemy" (i.e. slayer of Indra); therefore Indra came and killed Vtra ŚB 1.6.3.8-10, cf. TS 2.4.12.1, 2.5.2.1-2, etc. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 67 The power attributed to esoteric knowledge leads directly to the speculations found in the later parts of the Ārayakas and in the Upaniads. The notion of bráhman is closely allied in early Vedic thought with the term ta-, which is a very difficult and controversial word. Continually celebrated in the RV and invested with the power to keep the cosmos functioning correctly, ta has been approached in two different ways. On the one hand, it is quite commonly translated 'cosmic order' or 'cosmic harmony'. This interpretation works rather well with its apparent etymology, to the root *h2er, meaning 'fit together', but it requires that in the negated compound an- ta- 'untruth', and in the Avestan cognate aa-, usually rendered 'Truth', the word has undergone serious semantic narrowing. On the other hand it has been strenuously argued (esp. by Lüders 1944, 1951, 1959) that ta- means only 'truth', as in anta and aa, and that its cosmic ordering properties are indeed the province of an abstract 'truth', as conceived by Vedic culture. Insisting on a single translation for a cultural complex of such importance is no doubt a mistake (though in the tradition of Bergaigne's method discussed above); nonetheless, it is clear that an abstract yet active Truth is credited with power on the human (cf. satya-kriyå), divine, and cosmic planes. Many words in Sanskrit as well as in other languages cannot be rendered by a single good translation of the term. The concept encompassed by ta is in fact quite similar to the equally untranslatable later Hindu dharma. Our modern usage of the word "truth" does not cover all aspects of the term ta. For example, when Varua lets the rivers flow because of and with "truth" (ta) , then it does not make sense in English. Rather, ta is an active realization of truth, a vital force which can underlie human or divine action. That a translation "active, creative truth, realization of truth, Wahrheitsverwirklichung," is indeed close to the meaning of the Sanskrit word becomes obvious if one investigates the antonym of tá- / aa-, i.e. drúh- / Avest. druj- which can easily be translated as "deceiving, cheating action, (Be)-trug" (cf. also the semantically slightly narrower Engl. be-tray). Druh-/druj- is active untruth, i.e. it indicates a lie that is actually carried out, a realization of untruth by pronouncing it and acting it out. English, German, etc. have no word expressing the combination of concepts carried by ta-. The rather bland 'Cosmic Order' fails to capture the nature of this power, but merely names the macrocosmic aspect of its results. The common word for 'truth' in Skt. is satya, originally meaning "reality". Now it is interesting to observe that the blurring of distinctions already begins Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 70 large amounts of evidence that does not support their picture and, on the other, to be far more explicit about physical details than the RV seems to allow. It might be that the early Vedic period was a time of ferment, with competing cosmological/-gonic paradigms from various sources. (Note the apt plural in Varenne's title, Cosmogonies védiques, 1982.) It is even more likely that, beyond the straightforward 'facts' on which there was agreement (like the three "worlds"), this intellectual area was a legitimate forum for speculation, and that the speculation was not aimed at producing a precise picture -- the exact number of the divisions of heaven or the exact location of the heavenly ocean, or to produce a precise "history" -- who created the earth, when, and how -- for this (as we like to think)68 most unhistorical of people. The purpose of
gvedic speculation was rather to signal in metaphorical and poetic terms the abstract relations among things. That these signals are sometimes contradictory is not surprising: the Vedic poets love paradox (of the type "the son begot the father", etc.), as Bergaigne long ago pointed out and so do their listeners, the gods, who are often said, in middle Vedic texts, to love the hidden (parokapriyå hi devå ). It has often been noted that the so-called "speculative hymns" (see Renou 1956a), linguistically among the latest of the RV, are in great part cosmogonic, but the import of this has not been entirely grasped. If early Vedic religion had possessed a detailed, agreed upon cosmogony, speculation would not have been necessary -- or rather the speculation would have been based upon -- or have disputed -- the facts of this shared vision. Moreover, the speculations are often framed as questions ("who? what?) or as contradictions (the famed "in the beginning there was neither being nor non-being"), which would suggest that the composers had passed beyond what was commonly accepted, into the realm of the genuine unknown. b. Middle Vedic: The power of ritual. The system of reciprocity identified for early Vedic remained in force in the middle Vedic period, notwithstanding a large amount of political and social change. At the beginning of the so-called Mantra period (see above, introduction) when the Kuru and Pañcåla tribes develop, in the Kuruketra- Haryana and Uttar Pradesh area, the ritual, too, was undergoing the restructuring described above. Nevertheless, the gods still are regarded as 68 For the evidence to the contrary, see Witzel 1991c. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 71 nourished by sacrifice carried out by men, and they themselves have to offer (in Kuruketra, the devayajana "offering place of the gods") to sustain their ancestors, the pūrve devå , as well as to support, just like humans, their own position. Indeed, the ritual, which had been one step in the cyclic exchange of favors between men and gods, has become the compelling mainspring, to which even the gods are in some sense subordinate. When the ritual was restructured from its
gvedic to its classical form and the earlier freely composed verse gave way to a set ritual liturgy of RV verses and other formulae, the verbal form most prized became ritual speech, specifically the triple division into c, såman, and yajus -- and the silence that is, in some ways, its divine counterpart (for silence, see Renou 1949, Brereton 1988). So, it is clear that the elevation of the ritual in the middle Vedic period has affected every aspect of the religious and a large section of the social realm. In turn, the new power of the ritual derives from the strengthening of the system of identifications we discussed briefly above. The ritual ground is the mesocosm in which the macrocosm can be controlled. Objects and positions in the ritual ground have exact counterparts in both the human (i.e. microcosmic) realm and the cosmic realm -- e.g. a piece of gold can stand for wealth among men and the sun in the divine world. The recognition of these bonds of identification -- many of which are far less obvious than the example just given -- is a central intellectual and theological enterprise, the continuation of the 'formulation of mythical truths' discussed above. The universe can be viewed as a rich and often esoteric system of homologies, and the assemblage, manipulation, and apostrophizing of homologues in the delimited ritual arena allows men to exert control over their apparently unruly correspondents outside it. This "ritual science" is based on the strictly logical application of the rule of cause and effect, even though the initial proposition in an argument of this sort ("the sun is gold") is something that we would not accept.69 Ritual Science received a seminal discussion by Oldenberg 1919 and also by Schayer 1925 and has frequently been treated since, e.g. in the most recent extensive 69 This has nothing to do, as B. K. Smith (1989, p. 37), assumes, with sympathetic or other (imagined) attitudes towards Vedic ritual and thought: simply put, the sun just is not gold, nor is the fire here on earth the Sun; the Vedic texts give monocausal reasonings for a particular effect where this normally is due to co-variation, i.e. several "causes". - For an incisive discussion of the topic of magical thought see R. Horton. 1973. African traditional thought and western science. Africa 37, 50-71, 155-87; cf. also R. Horton and R. Finnegan. 1973. Modes of thought: essays on thinking in western and non-Western societies. London. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 72 treatment by B. K. Smith 1989; for references to other lit., see Smith 1986 : 95, n. 44.70 Notions of cosmogony have become simplified, after the chaotic questioning of the RV; the emergent figure of Prajåpati (see above) provides a focal point to which all questions of origin can be referred. Many Vedic prose stories begin "In the beginning Prajåpati..." Nevertheless, the old myths of origin survive as well: that of an origin of the world from the primordial waters, from a large egg (hirayagarbha), as being brought up from the primordial ocean by a diving animal, a boar (later an incarnation of Viu). Due to the large amount of middle Vedic texts, ideas of cosmology can be traced in much more detail and more successfully than in the older Vedic period (of the RV). However, just as in
gvedic cosmology, no unified picture evolved. The sun is thought, in the standard view, as moving across the sky in daytime, setting in the west and moving underground to its rising point in the east. However, there also is a divergent, apparently more speculative and "learned" view (Sieg 1923) which holds that it has two sides, a bright and a dark one, and that it turns its dark side downwards in the evening, travels backwards across the sky during the night and turns down its bright side again in next morning in the East. Similarly, the minority view of the stars as being holes in a stone sky, illuminated by the light behind it (Reichelt, 1913) survives at least in one text (JUB 1.25, 4.5.1, see Witzel 1984a, n.104). For a recent appraisal of the Bråhmaa evidence for cosmology, see Klaus 1986. An important point in middle Vedic thought is the problem of how to avoid evil (agha, enas, påpa, on the last word, see Das 1984) and pollution. In fact, this wish, -- and not the avoidance of violence as such, as Heesterman will have it -- can be seen as the motivating force underlying much of the ritual reform that took place at the beginning of the period. The little studied myth of Indra cutting off the head of Dadhyañc illuminates the concern of the main acting priests in ritual, the Adhvaryu priests, of avoiding direct involvement in killing, as exercised by them in ritual. They fear pollution by påpa, the "evil" of being stained with blood and being "touched" by death (cf. the concept of meni) but they do not object to killing and force as such. Rather they delegate these actions and substitute another person and avoid direct "contact". The tale has become main myth of justification of the priestly class (Witzel 1987b, n. 103): The Aśvin, doctors and latecomers to the ritual of the 70 Add the work of the late A. Benke 1976, who investigates especially three level and five level homologies. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 75 necessary precursor to early Buddhist and Jain thought).71 But it is at least as accurate to view them as the almost inevitable outcome of the intellectual development we have been discussing. The system of homologies, the mystical identifications, remain the intellectual underpinning of these new texts -- the identifications simply become more esoteric and more all-encompassing. Such questioning had been going on during the whole YV Sa hitå and the Bråhmaa period, only it was more hidden, e.g. behind the statement "some say..." In fact, intellectual exchange was going on inside the schools and between them all of the time, as the frequent quotation of divergent views in the bråhmaa type texts clearly indicates. ŚB, especially, bears witness to this by habitually discussing various "solutions" to a problem. Moreover, the ritual itself, though its actual performance seems less a concern, increasingly becomes the subject of similar identifications. On the one hand, the ritual becomes interiorized: non-physical counterparts are suggested for ritual actions and objects, so that the ritual can be performed entirely mentally (cf. the pråågnihotra, Bodewitz 1973). Moreover, not only the simple objects used in ritual, but also whole sections of the ritual, particular recitations, and finally even complete rituals come to have cosmic counterparts (e.g. the horse of the horse sacrifice in BĀUK 1.1). This is accompanied by an increasing use of multiple identifications (A. Benke 1976). So, as the actual physical performance of the elaborate Vedic rituals seems to decline --at least with some part of the (Brahmanical) population-- the concept and structure of ritual spawn intense intellectual activity (including also among some Katriyas and women, cf. Oldenberg 1915, Renou 1953a, Horsch 1966, Witzel 1989a). The Upaniads then do not represent a break with the intellectual tradition that precedes them, but rather a heightened continuation of it, using as raw material the religious practices then current (Renou 1953a). What makes the Upaniads seem more different than they actually are from the Bråhmaas and even from the Ārayakas, which contain similar speculative and "mystical" material, is their style. The Bråhmaas and the Ārayakas are authoritative in presentation; even the most advanced and esoteric speculation is positively stated, as an exegetical truism. The early Upaniads, with their dialogue form, the personal imprint of the teacher, the questioning and admissions of innocence -- or claims of knowledge -- from the students, seem to reintroduce 71 As far as culture and civilization are concerned, even the late Vedic Upaniads clearly precede the urban civilization as described in the Påli texts. The Vedic texts do not mention towns (cf. Mylius 1969, 1970) and forbid entry into the country of Magadha to Brahmins while the Påli texts speak of Brahmin villages south of the Ganges. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 76 some of the uncertainties of the late RV, give the sense that the ideas are indeed speculation, different attempts to frame solutions to real puzzles. Still, certain new doctrines emerge. The changing view of the late Bråhmaa authors on the fate of man after death (punarmtyu) has already been noted. These views have to be taken up in more detail now as they are closely linked with the emergence of the "classical" doctrine of rebirth, reincarnation and karma. There is no lack, it is true, of studies on rebirth and reincarnation (Hastings 1909-1921, Kane 1962, Head and Cranston 1967, Horsch 1971, Werner 1977, O'Flaherty 1981b, Tull 1989, Göhler 1990 to name but a few).72 Nearly all of them, however, fail to study these concepts in their proper setting, that is by asking: what happens, in the view of Vedic people, at conception, at birth, and at death to a human being? It is interesting to note, and consistent with the system that all men are reborn within a cycle of eternal return already in the older Vedic texts. No one wants to escape this cycle, as one indeed wishes to do in later, post-Vedic Hinduism. We do not yet witness the concept of a sannyåsin who wants to leave the system. In fact, the ones who "escape" are precisely those who have committed some obvious actions that undermine this closed system: murderers of embryos, of the brahmins' cow, etc.: that is destroyers of the "line of progeny" (prajåtantu TU 1.11, Ka hŚiU 11) and of poetic inspiration (dhī, dhenå), the "cow" (dhenu ) of the Brahmins. Such persons (in later language, the mahåpåtaka) fall out of the system and drop into "deepest darkness", into the lap of Nirti. At this location outside the Vedic cosmos there is no food but only polluted nail clippings and drinks of blood, there is no light at all (a term for bliss: Kuiper 1964), and there are no sons: These persons are doomed to oblivion. The idea is nicely summed up in the well known episode (Mahåbhårata 1.41) of Jaratkåru and his ancestors, who hang on a thin thread over a deep well and are threatened with falling into it if he does not produce a son who can carry out the required ancestor worship. The concept of karma, however, is new. The texts themselves indicate this at least once when ChU 5.3.7 says that it was known only to the Katriyas (but cf. BĀU 2.1.15, KauU 4.19), and in BĀU Yåjñavalkya takes his fellow brahmin Jåratkårava Ārthabhåga 3.2.13 away from the discussion ground at Janaka's court to talk with him in private about karma. Apparently, the idea was not very 72 Cf. also: R. Morton Smith, Religion of India: death, deeds, and after, JOIB 15, 1966, pp. 273-30. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 77 "popular" (pace O'Flaherty, 1981, introd.) at all, at first. This is apparent even in later texts, such as the beginning of the Bhagavadgīta which still defends the kula-dharma of a Katriya family as the norm, in this case, the duty of a Katriya to fight and kill. Precisely this point is stressed by a god, Ka, as to prompt Arjuna to action. It is clear that by the late Bråhmaa / Ārayaka period a concern had developed that linked the older Bråhmaa concept of cause and effect with the newly expressed anxiety about another death after leaving this world, and the new (or only newly attested) fear of a "reverse world" with retribution for one's actions towards living beings. This sets the stage (H.-P. Schmidt 1968b) for the development of a consistent theory of automatic retribution in one's next life according to the actions (karma) undertaken in this one. The idea that it was the Katriyas who introduced this concept thus seems rather far-fetched. Nevertheless it has had and still has its adherents (e.g. Horsch 1966). As briefly indicated above, we rather have to see the introduction of the topic by a king, or the secretive conference by Yåjñavalkya about its as literary devices (cf. Witzel, forthc. b) which indicate the importance of the theme for the late Vedic texts. Note also that the role a woman, Gårgī, plays in the Upaniads is quite similar: Women usually do not appear in such public assemblies of learned disputation. When they do so, they stand out as very special persons. For example, the other prominent woman in the later Veda, Maitreyī, is precisely the one of Yåjñavalkya's two wives who had learnt Brahmanical lore, and therefore it is only to her that he speaks about eschatology (BĀU 4.5.15). Similarly, the idea that it was the Jainas, the aboriginals, etc. who "invented" these ideas is, of course, nothing more than saying "we do not know" with other words (O'Flaherty, 1982). There simply are no early records of the Jainas and even less of the aboriginal inhabitants of Northern India. Several factors thus come together and lead to a qualitative breakthrough, which results in the new karmic rebirth idea and in the assertion of the identity of the human soul73 (åtman) with that of brahman (neuter) in such famous sentences as tat tvam asi (BĀU). Vedic thought quite naturally led to this stage, -- though the outcome was not necessarily the one we find in the Upaniads. Indeed, the Pali canon (Dīghanikåya 2) bears witness to a whole range of more or less contemporary points of view on the topics as treated in the early Upaniads. 73 On the soul, see among others Arbmann 1926-27, Narahari 1944, Bodewitz 1991. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 80 V. The religious life: Personal and popular religious experience As should be clear from the foregoing, we have fairly ample evidence from the whole Vedic period about religious institutions -- rituals, mythology, and widely held belief systems (such as dō ut dẽs or the developing ideas about rebirth). But we have hardly touched on how these religious institutions affected or were experienced by individuals, or what, as it were, non- institutional, "popular" beliefs and practices were mixed, in the religious lives and consciousnesses of individuals, with those "official" ones we have discussed. The evidence for these questions is very scant and, for the most part, indirect, given as always the nature of our texts and their means of preservation. Even for daily life, outside the narrow sphere of solemn (and brahmanized house) ritual, material can only be discovered accidentally, so to speak, between the lines. This has been done by Zimmer 1879 for the RV and the other Sa hitås and has been continued by Rau 1957 and Mylius 1971-74 for the post- RV texts. A shorter treatment of the Bråhmaa period is that of Basu 1969, and Ram Gopal 1959 treats the Sūtras. As for the specific questions raised above, we will briefly discuss what little we can glean about personal and popular religious experience. a. Personal religious experience. Although the hymns of the RV are attributed to individual poets, who indeed often speak in the first person and sometimes by name, the poet's persona in such cases is usually that of a generic figure. The individuality lies in the art -- the ingenious deployment of poetic devices -- rather than the emotional revelations of the poet. (Unlike Zarathustra, whose Gåθås seem to use the former to the accomplish the latter.) The major exception is Vasi ha, a/the bard of RV Ma ala 7, whose hymn sequence 7.86-89 speaks, not unlike Zarathustra, of a very personal relationship with Varua -- whose friend he was and to whose celestial and blissful company (Kuiper 1964) he was admitted, until, for some reason unknown to him, he lost Varua's favor. Of course, even in this apparently revelatory set of poems, we must be wary of misinterpreting a poetic and religious topos as direct personal experience. (This is, to some degree, also a danger with Zarathustra.) Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 81 Other aspects of personal relations with the gods are apparent in the very frequent appeal to the gods for help (avas, especially with avase hū "to call to ...one's help"). The question of
gvedic prayer has recently been dealt with by Gonda 1989. Visionary, mystical, or shaman-like experiences may be reported in other
gvedic hymns (cf. Bodewitz 1991). Bharadvåja Bårhaspatya in RV 6.9.6-7 speaks quite extra-ordinarily not simply of a vision (dś, paś, dhī) but also of an acoustic experience: "Asunder fly my ears, asunder my eye, asunder this light which has been put into (my) heart. Asunder wanders my mind, pondering far away..." Strangely enough, this is an experience of God Fire, Agni, -- someone whom we would associate, in the first place, with vision (cf. now Insler 1989-90). There also is a vision of the Aśvins. Other experiences of gods include the possibly old Indo-Iranian topic of flying through the night time sky on a boat, reported in the RV and in the Avesta (Oettinger 1988); there is a somewhat similar experience of the shaman-like Keśin, RV 10.136. Indirectly, this kind of experience is also reflected in the self-praise of a small bird (RV 10.119) who describes touching heaven and earth with its wings. It is important to remember, however, how rare such visionary passages are in the RV, even in the hymns devoted to Soma, the intoxicating or hallucinatory drink. Attempts to see early Vedic religion as shamanistic falter on the textual evidence. The unalloyedly ritualistic focus of middle Vedic texts makes recovery of personal religious experience extremely difficult. However, the Kåmya I i or "Special Rites" discussed above, performed for individual wishes, as well as the AV magical spells (and the associated rituals set forth in the Kauś.S., both also discussed above), give us some notion of the personal uses religious practice might be put to, the range of individual goals aided by ritual performance. We might also note that the priest-performer of the solemn Śrauta rituals has the option of furthering some of his own personal goals in the ritual. It is constantly stated in the Beåhmaa texts that the priest, if he wishes the yajamåna (who engaged him) to be worse, or better off, can secretly manipulate parts of the ritual to that end. There is other middle Vedic evidence for personal religious experience, which has not been sufficiently exploited, namely the (semi-)mythological tales involving human protagonists in the various prose texts. O'Flaherty 1985 makes a start in this direction, but the categories into which she sorts these tales are rather crude, and she deliberately ignores the religious/ritual context in which they are set. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 82 The more individual, questioning nature of the Upaniads, compared to the earlier Vedic texts, has already been discussed -- where it was also noted that many of the apparently "personal" features of the Upaniads are actually better interpreted as literary devices, topoi utilized to signal particular points of view. Personal experiences of the gods or other types of supernatural experiences can only be deduced from such Upaniadic occurrences as the infernal visions of Bhgu, the son of the god Varua(!, ŚB 11.6.1), or the visions of Yåjñavalkya (about the dream state, BĀU 4.3), or KU about the way to Brahman (Thieme 1951/2). The Upaniadic experience as such is a separate topic, as it is situated right between Brahmanical "philosophy", i.e. logical argumentation in the mold of the earlier Bråhmaas and Ārayakas, and straightforward "mysticism", as in the spiritual experience of an "intermediate" state (såndhya, BĀU 43.) or a non-dualistic state (tat tvam asi). b. Popular religion. As we noted above, there is a certain circularity in identifying particular elements embedded in Vedic religion as "popular", since the texts in which they appear are uniformly brahmanical products. Such identifications may rather reflect our own notions of what is suitably serious and "high", rather than any real stratification in our sources. Nonetheless, there are some checks on these sources. On the one hand, one can collect the statements in bråhmaa type texts introduced by "they say". Many of them are popular maxims. Other common beliefs are hidden in the secondary clauses, the tasmåd sentences of these texts. Examples are: Of someone who has died, people say: "it (the prajåtantu, the line of progeny) has been cut off for him" (achedy asya, ŚB 10.45.2.13); or a popular saying has it that one cannot present people with silver as this would produce tears and bad luck (TS 1.5.1); or that termite mounds were regarded as the "ears of the earth" in whose presence one had to speak softly (JB 1.126). Cf. Rau 1977. On the other hand, we can utilize texts that lie somewhat outside the Vedic frame. In addition to the Ghya and Dharma texts already discussed, wherever possible the Vedic materials should be compared with the slightly later evidence of the Påli canon, which has many conceptual overlaps with the late Bråhmaas and the early Upaniads. In addition, the evidence of the older strata of the Mahåbhårata, which are perhaps more easily accessible now through the work of M.C. Smith (1992), should be taken into account. According to Smith the older strata of the Mahåbhårata reflect an early katriya Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 85 deities in modern Bengal where the worship of a special snake deity, Manaså is p r o m i n e n t . 8 0 Others, such a AVP Śarko a, survive in the name of Karko a/Kårko a,81 one of the major Någas of Kashmir and Nepal. The beginning of the worship of images is another mystery. Patañjali's Mahåbhåya (c. 150 BCE) mentions them as having been sold by the Mauryas (5.3.99:429.3) but he thinks that they rather should have been treated pūjårtha "for worship". Another typical object of worship in later times, the various sacred trees (cf. J.J. Meyer 1937), are dealt with in the Påli canon but hardly by the Veda. In late Vedic texts there are cases such as: fruit bearing and flowering trees are not to be injured (Våsi ha Dharmasūtra 19.11, cf. Manu 8.285); trees are to be worshipped, according to a late portion of the Viu Dharmasūtra 68.9. In addition, there exists, of course, the old Eurasian concept of a world tree (Laycock 1981), as well as its mundane counterpart, the offering pole (yūpa), and certain trees such as the palåśa, para, or the udumbara (Minkowski, 1991 : 141 sqq.) are used in ritual. The Buddhist (and the Jaina) canon, however, have many passages on tree worship; in fact cutting down of such a caitya tree is regarded as an offense which was committed by only by detractors of the Buddhist order, such as the avargika monk Channa, to instigate unrest among the local people. This indicates, at least, that very shortly after the end of the Vedic period the villagers actively worshipped particular trees -- a fact still common in modern India in the case of such trees as the Pipal, which cannot be cut down but can only be transplanted. Female tree deities (Yakinī) who seem to overlap, to some extent, with the Vedic Apsaras some of whom inhabit trees, also occur regularly in the early Buddhist texts. This provides some idea of what was happening during the (late) Vedic period, but with hardly a trace in the Vedic canon. For this reason, too, the slightly later Buddhist canon in Påli has to be compared constantly, certainly for the later Vedic period (see above). Finally, we come to the problem of true heterodoxy in the Vedic period.82 It is, of course, obvious that by 400 BCE several heterodox systems had developed, notably that of the Buddha and that of Mahåvīra. The two founders of Buddhism and Jainism, however, were not the only prominent 80 Cf. A.K. Banerji, Bånkurå, (Gazetteer of India, West Bengal District Gazetteers), 1968, p.219 sqq. 81 The interchange between ś/k is found more often in Vedic texts and needs more study. It is not of Indo-European antiquity (the centum / satem split) but restricted to "foreign" (non- Indo-Aryan) words and seems to reflect a sound not easily reproducible by the speakers of Vedic; cf. kīstá and śa (the "correct" Vedic form), etc. 82 Cf. also Heesterman, 1968. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 86 teachers of the time. Dīghanikåya 2 gives a good idea of the diversity of competing views. It is, certainly surprising that all these movements are recorded from the eastern part of N. India only. This may be due to the nature of our sources (the late Bråhmaa texts and most of the Upaniads come from this area). Nevertheless, one would expect some inkling of new ideas in more western texts such as PB or ChU. For their connections with the Upaniad literature see Horsch, 1966. The problem has been briefly alluded to above; however, as has been stated, the cultural situation in the 'homeland' of heterodoxy, the Vedic East (Kosala, Videha) has not been understood well enough. The area was one with a constantly changing ferment of older and new tribes, various social systems, emerging great powers, etc. By the time of the Buddha (c. 400 BCE), wandering teachers of all sorts were normal appearances in the towns and villages of the East. We get a glimpse of the earlier stages of this phenomenon when Yåjñavalkya leaves home (BĀU 4.5.15). This procedure takes up an older tradition of wandering about as a Veda student and Vråtya, as indeed the structure of the Buddhist sa gha takes up some vråtya features: a rather amorphous group of (not always young) men with a leader, special dress, -- but not their bloody rituals. Both types of men traveled far away from their homelands, and if we may trust the BĀU and ŚB accounts of Yåjñavalkya's travels in the Panjab, such traveling did indeed reach both the western and the eastern ends of Vedic India. That the east indeed was different from the more central and western sections of Northern India can easily be noticed in the simple fact that in the east, graves were built that differed from what is described in the Vedic texts. While the Kurus and Pañcålas built small square grave mounds of about a yard high the "easterners and others(!)" are reported by ŚB 12.8.1.5 to have round graves, which the text interestingly calls åsurya "demonic". Such mounds have indeed been found at such places like Laurīya on the Nepalese border. These graves have a great similarity or are virtually the same as the later stūpa of the Buddhists (and the kurgan type grave mounds in S. Russia). There are a number of other indications of a differences in language and customs, such as dialects (Witzel 1989a), social structure etc. (e.g., the oligarchical states of the East, called "republics" by Rhys-Davies 1911, and following him, by all historians). Little can be said about the religion of the aboriginal tribes that survived in Northern India before merging into the lower Hindu castes. The process of Sanskritization (Srinivas 1952) had been going on, at that time, as we witness already in the RV where some kings with clearly non-Indo-Aryan names were Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 87 being praised as performing proper Aryan rituals (cf. now Kuiper 1991). This continues throughout the mantra- and bråhmaa periods, for example by making the leader (niådasthapati, MS 2.2.4) of a local aboriginal tribe, the Niådas ("those residing at their proper place" instead of wandering about like the Āryas), eligible to perform the solemn Śrauta ritual. Even clearer is the evidence from the later (and eastern) section of AB: at 7.18 the
gvedic(!)
i Viśvåmitra, assisting the (eastern) Ikvåku king Hariścandra, adopts the local eastern tribes (dasyu), the Andhra, Pu ra, Śabara, Pulinda, Mūtiba "who live in large numbers beyond the borders" (udantya, just like the Vråtyas, JB § 74 : 1.197): tå ete andhrå ... ity udantyå bahavo bhavanti Vaiśvåmitrå dasyūnåm bhūyihå ). Adoption has been a favorite type of inclusion since the RV. Apart from this we get tantalizing glimpses of what may have been aberrant behavior, perhaps early Tantra, in the AB 7.13, cf. also the notions about the Gosava ritual. Compare, finally RV śiadeva, mūladeva. There is, however, no connection with the so-called Śiva on some Harappa seals (D. Srinivasan 1984). Nothing much for a connection with Vedic beliefs can be deduced from the few seemingly religious objects found in the Indus civilization. Notably the remnants of so-called fire rituals at Kalibangan may represent nothing more than a community kitchen. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 90 12] 46 (1926), [Book 13] 48 (1928), [Book 14] 47 (1927), [Book 15] 50 (1930), [Book 18] 58 (1938); The Kashmirian Atharva Veda, Books 16 and 17. 1936. Books 19 and 20. 1940. New Haven. Basham, A. L. 1989. The Origins and Development of Classical Hinduism, ed. and annotated by K. G. Zysk, Boston. Basu, J. 1969. India of the age of the Bråhmaa, Calcutta. Bechert, H. 1972. The date of the Buddha reconsidered, Ind. Taur. 10, 29-36. Belvarkar, S.K. 1925. Four unpublished Upaniadic texts. Report of the Third Oriental Conference. Madras. Benfey, Th. 1848. Die Hymnen des Såma-Veda. Leipzig. Benke, A. 1976. Die Magie in der Bråhmaa-Zeit. [MA Thesis] Erlangen. Benveniste, E. and L. Renou. 1934. Vtra et Vthragna. Etude de mythologie indo-iranienne. Paris. Bergaigne, A. 1878-83. La religion védique. 3 vols. (Bibliothèque de l'école des Hautes études 36, 53-54.) Paris. [Engl. transl. V.G. Paranjpe, Poona 1978.] _______. 1889. Recherches sur l'histoire de la liturgie védique, JA 13, 5-32, 121-97. Bhattacharyya, D. M. 1964. Paippalåda Sa hitå of the Atharvaveda. First Kå a. Calcutta. _________. 1970. Paippalåda Sa hitå of the Atharvaveda. Volume two. [Kå as 2-4]. Calcutta. Bhawe, S. 1939. Die Yajus' des Aśvamedha. Stuttgart. Bhide, V. V. 1979. The Cåturmåsya sacrifices. With special reference to the Hirayakeśi Śrauta Sūtra. Poona. Bhim Dev. 1980. Śåkhåyanårayakam. Hoshiarpur. Biardeau, M. and Ch. Malamoud. 1976. Le sacrifice dans l'Inde ancienne. Paris. Bloomfield, M. 1889. The Kauśika Sūtra of the Artharvaveda JAOS 14 [Repr. Delhi 1972.] _______. 1899. The Atharvaveda and the Gopatha-Bråhmaa, (Grundriss der Indo-Arischen Philologie und Altertumskunde II.1.b.) Strassburg. _______. 1893. "Contributions to the interpretation of the Veda. Third Series. JAOS 15, 143- 188. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 91 _______. 1897. Hymns of the Atharva-Veda. (Sacred Books of the East 42.) Oxford. Repr. Delhi 1964. _______. 1906. A Vedic Concordance. Cambridge, Mass. _______. 1908. The religion of the Veda, the ancient religion of India (from Rig-Veda to Upanishads). New York - London. Bloomfield, M., F. Edgerton, and M. B. Emeneau. 1930-34. Vedic variants: A study of the variant readings in the repeated mantras of the Veda. (3 vols.) Philadelphia. Bodewitz, H. W. 1973. Jaiminīya Bråhmaa I, 1-65. Translation and commentary with a study of the Agnihotra and Pråågnihotra. Leiden. _______. 1976. The daily evening and morning offering (Agnihotra) according to the Bråhmaas. Leiden. _______. 1983. "The fourth Priest (the Brahmán) in Vedic ritual". Studies in the history of religions 45, 33-68. _______. 1984. "What did Indra do with the Yatis?", in Amtadhårå [Fs. Dandekar], pp. 65- 72. Ed. S. D. Joshi. Delhi. _______. 1990. The Jyoti oma Ritual. Jaiminīya Bråhmaa I,66-364. Introduction, translation and commentary. Leiden. _______. 1991. Light Soul and Visions in the Veda. Poona Bollée, W. B. 1956. a vi śa-Bråhmaa. Introd., transl., extracts from the commentaries and notes. [diss.] Utrecht. ______. 1981. The Indo-European sodalities in Ancient India, ZDMG 131, 172-191. van den Bosch, L. 1985. The Āprī hymns of the
gveda and their interpretation, IIJ 28, 95- 122, 169-122. Brereton, J. P. 1981. The
gvedic Ādityas. New Haven. _______. 1988. "Unsounded speech: Problems in the interpretation of BU(M) I.5.10 = BU (K) 1.5.3". IIJ 31, 1-10. Brough, J. 1953. The early Brahmanical system of gotra and pravara. Atranslation of the Gotra-Pravara-Mañjari of Puruottama-Pa ita. Cambridge. Brown, W. N. 1940. The basis for the Hindu Act of Truth, Review of Religions 5, 36-45. _______. 1942. "The creation myth of the RV". JAOS 62, 85-98. _______. 1963:
g Veda 10.34 as an Act of Truth, Bharatīya Vidyå 20-21, 8-10. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 92 _______. 1965. "Theories of creation in the RV". JAOS 85, 23-24. _______. 1968. The Metaphysics of the Truth Act ( * Satyakriyå), Mélanges d'Indianisme a la mémoire de L. Renou, Paris 171-177. _______. 1978. India and Indology. Delhi. Brucker, E. 1980. Die spätvedische Periode nach den Quellen der Śrauta-, Ghya-, und Dharmasūtras. Der Siedlungsraum. Wiesbaden. van Buitenen, J. A. B. 1968. The Pravargya: An ancient Indian iconic ritual described and annotated. Poona. Bühler, G.1879, 1882. The sacred laws of the Āryas. Āpastamba Gautama, Våsi ha and Baudhåyana. (2 vols.) Oxford. _______. 1886. The Laws of Manu. Oxford. [Repr. Delhi 1964, 1967]. G. Bühnemann. 1988. Pūjå: A study in Smårta ritual. Wien. van Buitenen, J.A.B. 1962. The Maitråyaīya Upaniad. The Hague. _______. 1968. The Pravargya. Poona. Caland, W. 1888. Über Totenverehrung bei einigen der Indo-germanischen Völker. Verh. Kon. Akad. 17. Amsterdam. ________. 1893. Altindischer Ahnenkult. Das Śråddha nach den verschiedene Schulen mit benutzung handschriftlicher Quellen dargestellt. Leiden. ________. 1896. Die altindischen Todten- und Bestattungs-gebräuche. Amsterdam. ________. 1900. Altindisches Zauberritual. Probe einer Übersetzung der wichtigsten Theile des Kauśika Sūtra, Amsterdam 1900. ________. 1907. Die Jaiminīya-Sa hitå mit einer Einleitung über die Såmaveda-literatur. Breslau. ________. 1908. Altindische Zauberei. Darstellung der altindischen "Wunschopfer". Amsterdam. ________. 1910. Das Vaitånasūtra des Atharvaveda. Amsterdam. ________. 1914. Die vorchristlichen baltischen Totengebräuche. Archiv für Religionswissenschaft 17, 476-512. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 95 Eggers, W. 1929. Das Dharmasūtra der Vaikhånasas ... Nebst einer Einleitung über den brahmanischen Waldeinsiedler-Orden und die Vaikhånasa-Sekte. Göttingen. Ehlers, G. 1989. Emendationen zum Jaiminīya-Bråhmaa (Zweites Buch). Bonn. Einoo, S. 1985. The interpretation of the Cåturmåsya Sacrifice according to the Ancient Indian Bråhmaa Literature [in Japanese, with Engl. summary], Journal of the Nat. Museum for Ethnology (Kokuritsu Minpaku Hakubutsukan) 10, 1001-1068. _______. 1988. Die Cåturmåsya oder die altindischen Tertialopfer dargestellt nach den Vorschriften der Bråhmaas und der Śrautasūtras. (Monumenta Serindica No. 18.) Tokyo. Elizarenkova, T. Ja. 1989. Rigveda. Mandaly I-IV. (Akademija Nauk SSSR. Literatwenye Pramjatniki.) Moskva, Nauka. Falk, H. 1984. "Die Legende von Śunaśepa vor ihrem rituellen Hintergrund", ZDMG 134, 115-135. _______. 1985. "Zur Ursprung der Sattra-Opfer", ZDMG, Supplement VI, 275-281. _______. 1986a. Bruderschaft und Würfelspiel, Freiburg. _______. 1986b. Vedisch upaniad. ZDMG 136, 80-97. _______. 1988. Vedische Opfer im Pali-Kanon. Bulletin des Etudes indiennes 6, 225-254. _______. To appear. "The purpose of
gvedic ritual". Felber, E. 1912. Die indiche Musik der vedischen und klassischen Zeit. Wien. Fick, R. 1897. Die soziale Gliederung im nord östlichen Indien zu Buddhas Zeit. Kiel. Filliozat, J. 1975. La doctrine classique de la médecine indienne. Paris. [1st ed,. Paris 1949; Engl. transl.: The classical doctrine of Indian medicine, its origins and its Greek parallels. Delhi 1964] Frauwallner, E. 1953. Geschichte der indischen Philosophie I. Salzburg. Frenz, A. 1969. Kauītaki Upaniad. IIJ 11, 72-129. Garbe, R. 1880. "Die Pravargja Ceremonie nach dem ĀpŚS" ZDMG 34, 319-370. Gaastra, D. 1919. Das Gopatha Bråhmaa, Leiden. Gampert, W. 1939. Die Sühnezeremonien in der altindischen Rechtsliteratur. Prag. van Gelder, J.M. 1963. The Månava Śrautasūtra belonging to the Maitråyaī Sa hitå. New Delhi. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 96 Geldner, K. F. 1911. Die Religionen der Inder: Vedismus und Brahmanismus. (Religionsgeschichtliches Lesebuch). Tübingen. _______. 1951. Der Rigveda. Aus dem Sanskrit ins Deutsche übersetzt und mit einem laufenden Kommentar versehen. 3 vols. (Harvard Oriental Series 33, 34, 35; Cambridge, Mass. (Index, ed. by J. Nobel, HOS Vol. 36, 1957.) Gonda, J. "Ein neues Lied", WZKM 48, 275-90. _______. 1950. Notes on Brahman. Utrecht. _______. 1960. Die Religionen Indiens. I. Veda und älterer Hinduismus. Stuttgart. _______. 1965. Change and Continuity in Indian Religion. The Hague. _______. 1971. Old Indian. Leiden-Köln. _______. 1972. The Vedic god Mitra. Leiden. _______. 1975, 1977. A history of Indian literature: I.1 Vedic literature (Sa hitås and Bråhmaas); I.2 The Ritual Sūtras. Wiesbaden. _______. 1978. Hymns of the
gveda not employed in the solemn ritual. Amsterdam. _______. 1980a. Vedic ritual. The Non-Solemn Rites. Leiden. _______. 1980b. The Mantras of the Agnyupasthåna and the Sautråmaī, Amsterdam. _______. 1981a. The Praügaśastra. Amsterdam. _______. 1981b. The Vedic Morning Litany. Leiden. _______. 1984. Prajåpati and the year. Amsterdam. _______. 1985. The ritual functions and the significance of grasses in the in the religion of the Veda. Amsterdam. _______. 1986. Prajåpati's rise to higher rank. Leiden. _______. 1987. Rice and barley offering in the Veda. Leiden. _______. 1989. Prajåpati's relations with Brahman, Bhaspati and Brahma. Amsterdam. _______. 1989. Prayer and blessing: ancient Indian ritual terminology. Leiden Ghosh, Batakrishna. 1947. Collection of the fragments of lost Bråhmaas. Calcutta. von Glasenapp, H. 1943. Die Religionen Indiens, Stuttgart. 2nd ed. 1956. Jamison & Witzel VEDIC HINDUISM 97 Gombrich, R. 1992. The Buddha's book of genesis? IIJ 35, 159-178. Go bole, V. Ś. et al. 1934. Taittirīyabråhmaam. (Ānandåśrama Sa sktagranthåvali 37). Poona. Göhler, L. 1990. Zu philosophisch-methodologischen Grundlagen der Erforschung des vedischen Opferrituals. Frankfurt. Gotō, T. 1987. Die "I. Präsensklasse" im Vedischen. Untersuchung der vollstufigen thematischen Wurzelpräsentia. Wien. Grassmann, H. 1872-75. Wörterbuch zum Rig-Veda. Leipzig. _______. 1876-77. Rig-Veda. (2 vols.) Leipzig. Griffith, R. T. H. 1889-92. The hymns of the Rig-Veda, translated with a popular commentary. Benares. _______. 1893. The hymns of the Såmaveda, transl. with a popular commentary. Benares. [2nd ed. 1916]. _______. 1895-96. The Hymns of the Atharva-Veda transl. with a popular commentary. Benares. [Reprint Benares 1962]. _______. 1899. The Hymns of the Yajur-Veda, transl. with a popular commentary. Benares. Hacker, P. 1963. "śraddhå", WZKSO 3, 151-189. Hale, W. E. 1986. Asura in early Vedic religion. Delhi. Hara, M. 1964. Note on two Sanskrit religious terms: bhakti and śraddhå IIJ 7, 124-145. Hastings, J. 1909-21. Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics: vol.VII, s.v. Transmigration: articles by N.W. Thomas: introductory and primitive, M. Anesaki: Buddhist, D. Dottin: Celtic, W.M.Flinders Petrie: Egyptian, A.C. Pearson : Greek and Roman, R. Garbe :Indian, G. Master : Jewish, B. Dickins : Teutonic, pp. 425- 440. Edinburgh. Haug, M. 1863. Über die vedischen Accente, ZDMG 17, 799-802. Head, J. and Cranston, S. L. 1967. Reincarnation in World Thought. A living study of reincarnation in all ages; including selection from the world's religions, philosophies, sciences, and great thinkers of the past and present. 2nd ed. 1969. New York. Heesterman, J. C. 1957. The ancient Indian royal consecration: The Råjasūya described according to the Yajus texts and annoted [sic]. s'Gravenhage. _______. 1959. "Reflexions on the significance of the Dakiå", IIJ 3, 241-58. _______. 1960. Reflections on the significance of the dakiå, IIJ 3,241-258.