|
The Vamadeva Hymns to Agni
INTRODUCTION
THE
interpretation of the Rig-veda is perhaps the most difficult and disputed question with which the
scholarship of today has to deal. This difficulty and dispute are
not the creation of present-day criticism; it has existed in different forms since very early times. To what is this incertitude due?
Partly, no doubt, it arises from the archaic character of a language in which many of the words were obsolete when ancient
Indian scholars tried to systematise the traditional learning about
the Veda, and especially the great number of different meanings
of which the old Sanskrit words are capable. But there is another
and more vital difficulty and problem. The Vedic hymns are full
of figures and symbols, — of that there can be no least doubt,
— and the question is, what do these symbols represent, what is
their religious or other significance? Are they simply mythological figures with no depth of meaning behind them ? Are they the
poetic images of an old Nature-worship, mythological, astronomical, naturalistic, symbols of the action of physical phenomena
represented as the action of the gods? Or have they another and
more mystic significance ? If this question could be solved with
any indubitable certitude, the difficulty of language would be no
great obstacle; certain hymns and verses might remain obscure,
but the general sense, drift, purport of the ancient hymns could
be made clear. But the singular feature of the Veda is that none
of these solutions, at least as they have been hitherto applied,
gives a firm and satisfactory outcome. The hymns remain con-
fused, bizarre, incoherent, and the scholars are obliged to take
refuge in the gratuitous assumption that this incoherence is
a native character of the text and does not arise from their
own ignorance of its central meaning. But so long as we can
get no farther than this point, the doubt, the debate must
continue.
A few years ago I wrote a series of articles in which I suggested
Page
– 465
an explanation of the ambiguous character of the Veda. My
suggestion hinged on this central idea that these hymns were
written in a stage of religious culture which answered to a similar
period in Greece and other ancient countries, — I do not suggest
that they were contemporary or identical in cult and idea, — a
stage in which there was a double face to the current religion,
an outer for the people, profanum vulgus, an inner for the initiates,
the early period of the Mysteries. The Vedic Rishis were mystics who reserved their inner knowledge for
the initiates; they
shielded them from the vulgar by the use of an alphabet of symbols which could not readily be understood without the initiation,
but were perfectly clear and systematic when the signs were once
known. These symbols centred around the idea and forms of
the sacrifice; for the sacrifice was the universal and central institution of the prevailing cult. The hymns were written round
this institution and were understood by the vulgar as ritual
chants in praise of the Nature-gods, Indra, Agni, Surya Savitri, aruna, Mitra and Bhaga, the Ashwins, Ribhus, Maruts, Rudra,
Vishnu, Saraswati, with the object of provoking by the sacrifice
the gifts of the gods, — cows, horses, gold and other forms of
wealth of a pastoral people, victory over enemies, safety in travel,
sons, servants, prosperity, every kind of material good fortune.
But behind this mask of primitive and materialistic naturalism,
lay another and esoteric cult which would reveal itself if we once
penetrated the meaning of the Vedic symbols. That once caught
and rightly read, the whole Rig-veda would become clear, consequent, a finely woven, yet straightforward tissue.
According to my theory the outer sacrifice represented in
these esoteric terms an inner sacrifice of self-giving and communion with the gods. These gods are powers, outwardly of physical, inwardly of psychical nature. Thus Agni outwardly is the
physical principle of fire, but inwardly the god of the psychic
godward flame, force, will, Tapas; Surya outwardly the solar
light, inwardly the god of the illuminating revelatory knowledge;
Soma outwardly the moon and the Soma-wine or nectarous
moon-plant, inwardly the god of the spiritual ecstasy, Ananda.
The principal psychical conception of this inner Vedic cult was
the idea of the Satyam, Ritam, Brihat, the Truth, the Law, the
Page
– 466
Vast. Earth, Air and Heaven symbolised the physical, vital and
mental being, but this Truth was situated in the greater Heaven,
base of a. triple Infinity actually and explicitly mentioned in
the Vedic Riks, and it meant therefore a state of spiritual and
supramental illumination. To get beyond earth and sky to Swar,
the Sun-world, seat of this illumination, home of the gods, foundation and seat of the Truth, was the achievement of the early
Fathers, pūrve pitaraḥ, and of the seven Angiras Rishis who
founded the Vedic religion. The solar gods, children of Infinity,
Adityas, were born in the Truth and the Truth was their home,
but they descended into the lower planes and had in each plane
their appropriate functions, their mental, vital and physical cosmic motions. They were the guardians and increasers of the
Truth in man and by the Truth, ṛtasya pathāḥ}, led him to felicity
and immortality. They had to be called into the human being
and increased in their functioning, formed in him, brought in or
born, devavīti, extended, devatāati, united in their universality,
vaiśvadevya.
The sacrifice was represented at once as a giving and worship, a battle and a journey. It was the centre of a battle between
the Gods aided by Aryan men on one side and the Titans or
destroyers on the opposite faction, Dasyus, Vritras, Panis, Rakshasas, later called Daityas and Asuras, between the powers of
the Truth or Light and the powers of falsehood, division, dark-
ness. It was a journey, because the sacrifice travelled from earth
to the gods in their heaven, but also because it made ready the
path by which man himself travelled to the Home of the Truth.
This journey opposed by the Dasyus, thieves, robbers, tearers,
besiegers (Vritras) was itself a battle. The giving was an inner
giving. All the offerings of the outer sacrifice, the cow and its
yield, the horse, the Soma were symbols of the dedication of inner
powers and experiences to the Lords of Truth. The divine gifts,
result of t he outer sacrifice, were also symbols of inner divine gifts,
the cows of the divine light symbolised by the herds of the sun,
the horse of strength and power, the son of the inner godhead
or divine man created by the sacrifice, and so through the whole
list. This symbolic duplication was facilitated by the double
meaning of the Vedic words; go, for instance, means both cow
Page
– 467
and ray; the cows of the dawn and the sun. Heaven's
boes
Helioi, are the rays of the sun-god. Lord of Revelation, even
as in Greek mythology Apollo the sun-god is also the Master of
poetry and of prophecy. Ghṛta means clarified butter, but also
the bright thing; soma means the wine of the moon-plant, but also delight, honey, sweetness,
madhu. This is the conception, all
other features are subsidiary to this central idea. The suggestion
seems to me a perfectly simple one, neither out of the way and
recondite, nor unnatural to the mentality of the early human
peoples.
There are certain a priori objections which can be brought
against this theory. One may be urged against it from the side
of Western scholarship. It may be objected that there is no need
for all this mystification, that there is no sign of it in the Veda
unless we choose to read it into the primitive mythology, that it
is not justified by the history of religion or of the Vedic religion,
that it was a refinement impossible to an ancient and barbaric
mind. None of these objections can really stand. The Mysteries
in Egypt and Greece and elsewhere were of a very ancient standing and they proceeded precisely on this symbolic principle, by
which outward myth and ceremony and cult-objects stood for
secrets of an inward life or knowledge. It cannot therefore be
argued that this mentality was non-existent, impossible in
antique times or any more impossible or improbable in India,
the country of the Upanishads, than in Egypt and Greece. The
history of ancient religion does show a transmutation of physical
Nature-gods into representatives of psychical powers or rather
an addition of psychical to physical functions; but the latter in
some instances gave place to the less external significance. I
have given the example of Helios replaced in later times by
Apollo; just so in the Vedic religion Surya undoubtedly becomes
a god of inner light, the famous Gayatri verse and its esoteric
interpretation are there to prove it as well as the constant appeal
of the Upanishads to Vedic Riks or Vedic symbols taken in a
psychological and spiritual sense, e.g. the four closing verses of
the Isha Upanishad. Hermes, Athena represent in classical
mythology psychical functions, but were originally Nature-gods,
Athena probably a dawn-goddess. I contend that Usha in the
Page
– 468
Veda shows us this transmutation in its commencement. Dionysus the wine-god was intimately connected with the
Mysteries ; he was given a similar role to Soma, the wine-god of the
Vedas.
But the question is whether there is anything to show that
there was actually such a doubling of functions in the Veda.
Now, in the first place, how was the transition effected from the
alleged purely materialistic Nature-worship of the Vedas to the
extraordinary psychological and spiritual knowledge of the
Upanishads unsurpassed in their subtlety and sublimity in ancient times? There are three possible explanations. First, this
sudden spirituality may have been brought in from outside; it is
hastily suggested by some scholars that it was taken from an
alleged highly spiritual non-Aryan southern culture; but this is
an assumption, a baseless hypothesis for which no proof has
been advanced; it rests as a surmise in the air without foundation. Secondly, it may have developed from within by some
such transmutation as I have suggested, but subsequent to the
composition of all but the latest Vedic hymns. Still, even then, it
was effected on the basis of the Vedic hymns; the Upanishads
claim to be a development from the Vedic knowledge, Vedanta,
repeatedly appeal to Vedic texts, regard Veda as a book of
knowledge. The men who gave the Vedantic knowledge are
everywhere represented as teachers of the Veda. Why then
should we rigidly assume that this development took place subsequent to the composition of the bulk of the Vedic mantras ?
For the third possibility is that the whole ground had already
been prepared consciently by the Vedic mystics. I do not say that the inner
Vedic knowledge was identical with the Brahmavada. Its terms were different, its substance was greatly developed, much lost or rejected, much added, old ideas shed, new
interpretation made, the symbolic element reduced to a minimum and replaced by clear and open philosophic phrases and
conceptions. Certainly, the Vedic mantras had already become
obscure and ill-understood at the time of the Brahmanas. And
still the ground work may have been there from the beginning. It is, of course,
in the end a question of fact; but my present contention is only that there is no
a priori impossibility, but rather a
Page
– 469
considerable probability or at least strong possibility in favour
of my suggestion. I will put my argument in this way. The later
hymns undoubtedly contain a beginning of the Brahmavada;
how did it begin, had it no root origins in the earlier mantras ?
It is certain that some of the gods, Varuna, Saraswati, had a
psychological as well as a physical function. I go further and say
that this double function can everywhere be traced in the Veda
with regard to other gods, as for instance, Agni and even the
Maruts. Why not then pursue the inquiry on these lines and see how far it will
go? There is at least a prima facie ground for consideration, and to begin with, I demand no more. An examination of the actual text of the hymns can alone show how far the
inquiry will be justified or produce results of a high importance.
Another a priori objection comes from the side of orthodox
tradition. What it amounts to is an objection to go behind the
authority of Sayana, who belongs to an age at least two or three
thousand years later than the Veda, and of Yaska, the ancient lexicographer. Besides, the Veda is currently regarded as
Karmakānda, a book of ritual works, the Vedanta only as jñānakānda, a book of knowledge. In an extreme orthodox
standpoint it is objected that reason, the critical faculty, the
historical argument have nothing to do with the question; the
Vedas are beyond such tests, in form and substance eternal, in
interpretation only to be explained by traditional authority. That attitude is
one with which I am not concerned; I am seeking for the truth of this matter and I cannot be stopped by a
denial of my right to seek for any truth contrary to tradition.
But if in a more moderate form the argument be that when there
is an unbroken and consistent ancient tradition, there is no
justification in going behind it, then the obvious reply is that
there is no such thing. Sayana moves amidst a constant uncertainty, gives various possibilities, fluctuates in his interpretations.
Not only so, but though usually faithful to the ritualistic and
external sense he distinguishes and quotes occasionally various
ancient schools of interpretation, one of which is spiritual and
philosophic and finds the sense of the Upanishads in the Veda.
Even he feels himself obliged sometimes, though very rarely, to
follow its suggestions. And if we go back to the earliest times we
Page
– 470
see that the Brahmanas give a mystically ritualistic interpretation
of the Veda, the Upanishads treat the Riks as a book not of
ritual, but of spiritual knowledge. There is therefore nothing
fantastically new or revolutionary in an attempt to fix the psychological and spiritual purport of the Rig-veda.
A last objection remains that the interpretation of the Veda
has been a field for the exercise of the most extraordinary ingenuity, each attempt arriving at widely different results, and
mine is only one ingenuity the more. If it were so, then I stand in
good company. The interpretations of Sayana are packed with
the most strained and far-fetched ingenuities, which not unoften
light-heartedly do violence to grammar, syntax, order, connection, on the idea that the Rishis were in no way restrained by
these things. Yaska is full of etymological and other ingenuities, some of them of a most astonishing kind. The scholarship
of Europe has built up by a system of ingenious guesses and deductions a new version and evolved the history, true or imaginative, of an Aryan invasion and a struggle between Aryan and
Dravidian which was never before suspected in the long history
of Vedic interpretation. The same charge has been brought
against Swami Dayananda's commentary. Nevertheless, the universality of the method does not make it valid, nor have I any
need to take refuge in this excuse, which is not a justification. If
my or any interpretation is got by a straining of the text, a licentious or fantastic rendering or a foreign importation, then it can
have no real value. The present volume, which I hope to make
the first of a series, is intended to show my method actually at
work and dispel this objection by showing the grounds and
justification.
I hold that three processes are necessary for a valid interpretation of the Veda. First, there must be a straightforward rendering word by word of the text which shall stick to a plain and
simple sense at once suggested by the actual words, no matter
what the result may be. Then, this result has to be taken and it
has to be seen what is its actual purport and significance. That
meaning must be consistent, coherent with itself; it must show
each hymn as a whole in itself proceeding from idea to idea,
linked together in sequence, as any literary creation of the human
Page
– 471
mind must be linked which has not been written by lunatics or is
not merely a string of disconnected cries. It is impossible to suppose that these Rishis, competent metrists, possessed of a style of
great power and mobility, composed without the sequence of
ideas which is the mark of all adequate literary creation. And if
we suppose them to be divinely inspired, mouthpieces of Brahman or the Eternal, there is no ground for supposing that the
divine wisdom is more incoherent in its word than the human
mind, it should rather be more luminous and satisfying in its
totality. Finally, if a symbolic interpretation is put on any part
of the text, it must arise directly and clearly from suggestions
and language of the Veda itself and must not be brought in
from outside.
A few words may be useful on each of these points. The first
rule I follow is to try to get at the simplest and straightforward
sense to which the Rik is open, not to strain, twist and involve.
The Vedic style is terse, but natural, it has its strong brevities
and some ellipses, but all the same it is essentially simple and
goes straight to its object. Where it seems obscure, it is because
we do not know the meaning of the words or miss the clue to the
idea. Even if at one or two places, it seems to be tortured, that is
no reason why we should put the whole Veda on the rack or even
in these places torture it still worse in the effort to get at a sense.
Where the meaning of a word has to be fixed, this difficulty comes
either because we have no clue to the true meaning or because it is capable in the language of several meanings. In the latter case
I follow certain fixed canons. First, if the word is one of the
standing terms of the Veda intimately bound up with its religious
system, then I must first find one single meaning which attaches
to it wherever it occurs; I am not at liberty to vary its sense from
the beginning according to my pleasure or fancy or sense of
immediate fitness. If I interpret a book of obscure Christian
theology, I am not at liberty to interpret freely the constantly
recurring word grace sometimes as the influx of the divine favour,
sometimes as one of the three Graces, sometimes as charm of
beauty, sometimes as grace marks in an examination, sometimes
as the name of a girl. If in one it evidently bears this or that
sense and can have no other, if it has no reference to the ordinary
Page
– 472
meaning, then indeed it is different; but I must not put in one of
these other meanings where the normal sense fits the context.
In other cases I may have greater freedom, but this freedom must
not degenerate into licence. Thus the word ṛtam may signify, we
are told, truth, sacrifice, water, motion and a number of other
things. Sayana .interprets freely without obvious rule or reason
according to any of them and sometimes gives us no alternative;
not only does he interpret it variously in different hymns, but in
three different senses in the same hymn or even in the same line.
I hold this to be quite illegitimate. Ritam is a standing term of
the Veda and I must take it consistently. If I find truth to be its
sense in that standing significance, I must so interpret it always,
unless in any given passage it evidently means water or sacrifice
or the man who has gone and cannot mean truth. To translate so
striking a phrase as ṛtasya panthāḥ in one passage as the "path of
truth", in another "the path of sacrifice", in another "the path
of water", in another "the path of the one who has gone" is a
sheer licence, and if we follow such a method, there can be no
sense for the Veda except the sense of our own individual caprice.
Then again we have the word Deva, which undoubtedly means in
ninety-nine places out of a hundred, one of the shining ones, a
god. Even though this is not so vital a term as ṛtam, still I must
not take it in the sense of a priest or intelligent man or any
other significance, where the word 'god' gives a good and sufficient meaning unless it can be shown that it is undoubtedly capable of another sense in the mouth of the Rishis. On the other
hand, a word like ari means sometimes a fighter, one's own champion, sometimes a hostile fighter, assailant, enemy, sometimes it
is an adjective and seems almost equivalent to arya or even ārya.
But mark that these are all well-connected senses. Dayananda
insists on a greater freedom of interpretation to suit the context.
Saindhava, he says, means a horse or rock-salt; where it is a
question of eating we must interpret as salt, where it is a question
of riding, as horse. That is quite obvious; but the whole question
in the Veda is, what is the bearing of the context, what are its
connections ? If we interpret according to our individual sense
of what the context ought to mean, we are building on quick-sands. The only safe rule is to fix the sense usually current in the
Page
– 473
Veda and admit variations only where they are evident from the
context. Where the ordinary sense makes a good meaning, I
ought to accept it; it does not at all matter that that is not the
meaning I should like it to have or the one suitable to my theory
of the Veda. But how to fix the meaning? We can evidently do it
only on the totality or balance of the evidence of all the passages
in which the word occurs and, after that, on its suitability to the
general sense of the Veda. If I show that ṛtam in all passages can
mean truth, in a great number of passages, but not by any means
all, sacrifice, in only a few water, and in hardly any, motion, and
this sense, truth, fits in with the general sense of the Veda then I
consider I have made out an unanswerable case for taking it in
that significance. In the cases of many words this can be done;
in others we have to strike a balance. There remain the words of
which frankly we do not know the meaning. Here we have to
use the clue of etymology and then to test the meaning or possible
meanings we arrive at by application to the passages in which the
word occurs, taking into consideration where necessary not only
the isolated Riks, but the context around, and even the general
sense of Veda. In a few cases the word is so rare and obscure that
only a quite conjectural meaning can be attached to it.
When we have got the rendering of the text,
we have to see to what it amounts. Here what we have to do is to see the
connections of the ideas in the verse itself, next its connection if any, with
the ideas in the verses that precede and follow and with the general sense of
the hymn; next parallel passages and ideas and hymns and finally the place of
the whole in the scheme of ideas of the Veda. Thus in IV.7 we have the line
अग्ने कदा त आनुषग् भुवद् देवस्य चेतनम्
and I render it, "O Flame, when shall there be in uninterrupted
sequence the awakening (to knowledge or consciousness) of thee the god (the shining or luminous One) ?" But
the question I have to put is this, "Does this mean the constant
burning of the physical fire on the altar and the ordered sequence
of the physical sacrifice, or does it mean the awakening to
constant developing knowledge or ordered conscious action of
knowledge of the divine Flame in man ?" I note that in the next Rik (3) Agni is described as the possessor of truth (or of
sacrifice?), the entirely wise,
ऋतावानं विचेतसम्,
(in 4) as the vision or
Page
– 474
knowledge, the perception shining for each creature,
केतुं... भृगवाणं विशेविशे
(in 5) as the Priest who knows,
होतारं... चिकित्वांसम् (in 6) as
the bright one in the secrecy who has perfect knowledge,
चित्रं... गुहा हितम् सुवेदम्, (in 7 and 8) as coming possessed of the truth for the
sacrifice when the gods rejoice in the seat of the Truth, as the messenger,
ॠतस्य धमन् रणयन्त देवा:... वेरध्वराय
सदमिदृतवा... दूत ईयसे. All this is
ample warrant for taking Agni not merely as the physical flame on
the altar, but as a flame of divine knowledge guiding the sacrifice
and mediating between man and the gods. The balance is also,
though not indisputably, in favour of taking it as a reference to
the inner sacrifice under the cover of the outer symbols; for why
should there be so much stress on divine knowledge if the question were only of a physical sacrifice for physical fruits ? I know
that he is the priest, sage, messenger, eater, swift traveller and
warrior. How are these ideas, both successive and interwoven
in the Veda, connected together ? Is it the physical sacred flame
that is all these things or the inner sacred flame ? There is sufficient warrant even in provisionally taking it for the inner flame;
but to be sure I cannot rely on this one Rik. I have to note the
evolution of the same ideas in other hymns, to study all the
hymns dedicated to Agni or in which he is mentioned, to see
whether there are passages in which he is undoubtedly the inner
flame and what light they shed on his whole physiognomy. Only
then shall I be in a position to judge certainly the significance of
the Vedic Fire.
This example will show the method I follow
in regard to the third question, the interpretation of the Vedic symbols. That
there are a mass of figures and symbols in the hymns, there can be no doubt. The
instances in this 7th hymn of the Fourth Mandala are sufficient by themselves to
show how large a part they play. In the absence of any contemporary evidence of
the sense which the Rishis attached to them, we have to seek for their meaning
in the Veda itself. Obviously, where we do not know we cannot do without a
hypothesis, and my hypothesis is that of the outer material form as a
significant symbol of an inner spiritual meaning. But this or any hypothesis can
have no real value if it is brought in from outside, if it is not suggested by
the words and indications of the Veda itself. The Brahmanas are
Page
– 475
too full of ingenuities; they read too much
and too much at random into the text. The Upanishads give a better light and we may
get hints from later work and even from Sayana and Yaska, but
it would be dangerous at once to read back literally the ideas of
a later mentality into this exceedingly ancient scripture. We
must start from and rely on the Veda to interpret the Veda. We
have to see, first, whether there are any plain and evident psychological and spiritual conceptions, what they are, what clue
they give us, secondly, whether there are any indications of psychological meanings for physical symbols and how the outer physical is related to the inner psychological side. Why, for instance,
is the Flame Agni called the seer and knower? Why are the
rivers called the waters that have knowledge ? Why are they said
to ascend or get on the mind ? And a host of other similar questions. The answer again must be found by a minute comparative
study of the Vedic hymns themselves. In this volume I proceed
by development. I take each hymn, get at its first meaning; I see
whether there are any psychological indications and what is their
force and what their interweaving and relation to the other surrounding ideas. I proceed thus from hymn to hymn linking them
together by their identical or similar ideas, figures, expressions.
In this way it may be possible to arrive at a clear and connected
interpretation of the Veda.
This method supposes that the hymns of the Rig-veda are
one whole composed by different Rishis, but on the basis of a
substantially identical and always similar knowledge and one system of figures and symbols. This, I think, is evident on the very
surface of the Veda. The only apparent exceptions are certain
hymns, mostly in the tenth Mandala, which seem to belong to
a later development, some almost purely ritualistic, others more
complex and developed in symbol than the body of the Riks,
others clearly announcing philosophical ideas with a modicum
of symbol, the first voices which announce the coming of the
Upanishads. Some hymns are highly archaic, others of a
more clear and relatively modern type. But for the most part
throughout we find the same substance, the same images,
ideas, standing terms, the same phrases and expressions. Otherwise the problem would be insoluble; as it is, the Veda itself
Page
– 476
gives a key to the Veda.
The hymns I have chosen for a beginning are the fifteen
hymns of Vamadeva to Agni. I take them in the order that suits
me, for the first few are highly charged with symbol and therefore to us obscure and recondite. It is better to proceed from the
simple to the difficult, for so we shall get better the preliminary
clue which may help us through the obscurity of the earlier
hymns.
Agni, the Lord of Fire, is physically the god of the sacrificial
flame, the fire found in the tinders, in the plants, in the waters,
the lightning, the fire of the sun, the fiery principle of heat and
light, tapas, tejas, wherever it is found. The question is whether
he is also the same principle in the psychical world. If he is, then
he must be that psychological principle called Tapas in the later
terminology. The Vedic Agni has two characteristics, knowledge
and a blazing power, light and fiery force. This suggests that he
is the force of the universal Godhead, a conscious force or Will
instinct with knowledge, — that is the nature of Tapas, — which
pervades the world and is behind all its workings. Agni then in
the psychical and spiritual sense of his functions would be the
fire of a Will doing the works of its own inherent and innate
knowledge. He is the seer,
कवि:
, the supreme mover of thought,
प्रथमो मनोता, the mover too of speech and the Word,
उपवक्ता जनानाम्, the power in the heart that works,
हृदिस्पृशं क्रतुम्, the impeller of action and movement, the divine guide of man in the
act of sacrifice. He is the Priest of the sacrifice, Hotri, he who
calls and brings the gods and gives to them the offering, the Ritwik, who sacrifices in right order and right season, the purifying
priest, Potri, the Purohita, he who stands in front as the representative of the sacrificer, the conductor of the sacrifice, Adhwaryu; he combines all the sacred offices. It is evident that these
functions all belong to the divine Will or conscient power in man
which awakes in the inner sacrifice. This Fire has built all the
worlds; this creative Power, Agni Jatavedas, knows all the
births, all that is in the worlds; he is the messenger who knows
earth, knows how to ascend the difficult slope of heaven, ārodhanam divaḥ),
आरोधनं दिव:, knows the way to the home of the
Truth; he mediates between God and man. These things apply
Page
– 477
only with difficulty to the god of physical fire; they are of a striking appropriateness if we take a larger view of the divine nature
and functions of the god Agni. He is a god of the earth, a force
of material being,
अवम:
; but he seems to be a vital (Pranic) force
of will in desire, devouring, burning through his own smoke;
and again he is a mental power. Men see him like heaven with
stars
द्याइम्व स्तृभि:;
heaven and the mid-world and earth are his
portion. But again he is a god of Swar, one of the solar deities; he manifests himself as Surya; he is born in the Truth, a master
of Truth, a guardian of Truth and Immortality, a getter and
keeper of the shining herds, the eternal Youth, and he renews
the youth of these mystic cattle. He is triply extended in the
Infinite. All these functions cannot be predicated of the god of
physical fire; but they are all just attributes of the conscient
divine Will in man and the universe. He is the horse of battle and
the horse of swiftness and again he gives the white horse; he is
the son and he creates for man the son. He is the warrior and he
brings to man the heroes of his battle. He destroys by his flame
the Dasyu and the Rakshasa; he is a Vritra-slayer. Are we to see
here the slayer only of mortal Dravidians or of the demons who
oppose the sacrifice ? He is born in a hundred ways; from the
plants, from the tinder, from the waters. His parents are the
two Aranis, but again his parents are Earth and Heaven, and
there is a word which seems to combine both meanings. Are not
the two Aranis then a symbol of Earth and Heaven, Agni
born for mortals from the action of the diviner mental on
the material being? The ten sisters are his mothers, —the ten
fingers, says the scholiast; yes, but the Veda describes them as
the ten thoughts or thought-powers,
दश धिय: . The seven rivers,
the mighty ones of heaven, the waters that have knowledge, the
waters of Swar are also his mothers. What is the significance of
this symbolism, and can we really interpret it as only and solely
a figurative account of natural phenomena, of the physical principle or works of Fire ? There is at least here, to put the thing in
its lowest terms, a strong possibility of a deeper psychological
functioning of Agni. These are the main points for solution.
Let us see then how the physiognomy of Agni evolves in the Riks;
keeping our minds open, let us examine whether the hypothesis
Page
– 478
of Agni as one of the Gods of the Vedic Mysteries is tenable or
untenable. And that means, whether the Veda is a semi-barbaric
book of ritual hymns, the book of a primitive Nature-worship or
a scripture of the seers and mystics.
MANDALA
IV SUKTA
7 MANTRAS
1-3
अयं
this (before you)
होता
Hotri,
प्रथम:
first or supreme, यजिष्ठ: (यष्ट्टतम:)
most strong for sacrifice,
अध्वरेषु ईडय: adorable in the (pilgrim) sacrifices
इह धायि
has here been set
धातृभि: by the Ordainers
(of things), यं
he whom
अप्नवान: भृगव:
Apnavana and the Bhrigus
विरुरुचु: made to shine,
वनेशु चित्रं
luminous (or variegated) in the
woods (or in the logs), विभ्वं
pervading,
विशे-विशे
for creature and
creature or for each (human) being.
CRITICAL
NOTES
धातृभि:
Sayana explains
धातृ
as one who does action for the
sacrifice, therefore a priest. But
धातार: here would more naturally signify the gods, creators and ordainers of things, though it is
possible to take it as the arrangers of the sacrificial action. The
close collocation
धायि धातृभि: can hardly be void of all significance. The gods are those who place or arrange the order of
creation, set each thing in its place, to its law and its function;
they have set Agni here,
इह
. 'Here' may mean in the sacrifice, but
more generally it would mean here on earth.
होता: Sayana takes sometimes as "the summoner of the
gods", sometimes "the performer of the Homa, the burned
offering". In fact it contains both significances. Agni as Hotri
calls the gods to the sacrifice by the Mantra and, on their coming,
gives to them the offering.
अध्वरेषु: the word
अध्वर
is explained by the Nirukta as meaning
literally
अहिंस्र:, "unhurting",
अ + ध्वर
from
ध्वृ, and so, the unhurt
sacrifice, and so simply sacrifice. Certainly, it is used as an
adjective qualifying qir,
यज्ञ अध्वरो यज्ञ:
It must therefore express some
Page
– 479
characteristic so inherent in the sacrifice as to be able to convey
by itself that significance. But how can the "unhurting" come to
mean by itself the sacrifice ? I suggest that as in
असुर
it is a mistake
to take the
अ
as preventive,
असुर
comes from
असु
(not
अस्) and
means strong, forceful, mighty,
अध्वर
is similarly formed from
अध्वन्, path, journey. It means the pilgrim-sacrifice, the sacrifice
which travels from' earth to heaven, led by Agni along the path
of the gods. If we must take the word from
ध्वृ, it is better to take
the ordinary sense of
ध्वृ, not crooked, straight, and then it
would still mean the sacrifice which goes straight undeviating by
the straight path to the gods,
ॠजु, पन्था अनृक्षर:
ईडय: Sayana: "who is praised or hymned" by the Ritwiks.
But it must then mean "worthy to be hymned".
ईळ्, ईड्
must
have meant originally to go, approach; it came to mean to pray
to, ask for, desire,
याचामहै.
I take it in the sense of "desirable"
or "adorable".
वनेषु: वन
means in the Veda tree, wood, but also log, timber.
चित्रं Sayana takes
चित्र
sometimes
चायनीयं =
पूज्यं, sometimes
विचित्र,
varied or wonderful. Here "variedly beautiful". It is in this last
sense of varied light or beauty that I take it in all passages in the
Veda as in
इन्द्र चित्र्भानो. I can see no reason for taking it anywhere as
पूजनीय.
विभ्वं: Sayana: "lord". But
विभु
in Rig-veda means certainly
"widely becoming" or "wide in being" or "pervading, abundant,
opulent". I find no passage in which it must mean lord, the later
classical sense,
विभ्व
must bear the same sense as
विभु.
Translation:
"Lo, here has been set by the Ordainer, the
Priest of the offering, the supreme, the most mighty in sacrifice, one to be adored
in the pilgrim-sacrifices, whom Apnavana and the Bhrigus made
to shine out all-pervading, rich in hues, in the woods, for each
human creature."
This is the first Rik; it contains nothing of an undoubtedly
psychological significance. In the external sense it is a statement
of the qualities of Agni as priest of the sacrifice. He is pointed to
in his body of the sacrificial fire kindled, put there in his place
Page
– 480
or sent by the priests. It amounts to an obvious statement that
this sacred flame is a great power for the sacrifice; that he is the
chief of the gods who has to be hymned or adored, that Apnavana and other Bhrigus first discovered the (sacrificial?) use of
the fire and caused it to be used by all men. The description here
of the forest fire seems inappropriate unless it is meant that they
got the idea by seeing Agni burning widely and beautifully as a
forest fire or that they discovered it by seeing the fire produced
by the clashing of boughs or that they first lit it in the shape of a
forest fire. Otherwise it is an ornamental and otiose description.
But if we assume for the moment that behind this image
Agni is hinted at as the Hotri of the inner sacrifice, then it is
worth seeing what these images mean. The first words tell us
that this flame of conscient Will, this great thing within us,
अयमिह
has been set here in man by the Gods, the creators of the
order of the world, to be the power by which he aspires and calls
the other divine Forces into his being and consecrates his knowledge, will, joy, and all the wealth of his inner life as a sacrificial
action to the Lords of the Truth. These first words then amount
for the initiate to a statement of the fundamental idea of the
Vedic mysteries, the meaning of the sacrifice, the idea of a God-will in man, the Immortal in mortals, अमर्त्य...
मर्त्येषु. This flame is
spoken of as the supreme or first power. The godward will leads
all the other godward powers; its presence is the beginning of the
movement to the Truth and Immortality and the head too of the
march. It is the greatest power in the conduct of the mystic
discipline,
यजिष्ठ,
the most mighty for sacrifice. Man's sacrifice
is a pilgrimage and the divine Will its leader; therefore it is that
which we must adore or pray to or ask for its presence in each
sacrificial action.
The second line of the Rik gives us a statement of the first
discovery or birth of this Flame among men. For the spirit is
there concealed in man, guhā hita, as it is said in Veda and
Upanishad, in the inner cave of our being; and his will is a spiritual will, hidden there in the spirit, present indeed in all our
outward being and action; for all being and action are of the
spirit, but still its real nature, its native action is concealed,
altered, not manifest in the material life in its true nature of a
Page
– 481
spiritual force. This is a fundamental idea of Vedic thinking;
and if we keep it well in mind, we shall be able to understand the
peculiar imagery of the Veda. Earth is the image of the material
being; material being, delight, action, etc. are the growths of
Earth; therefore their image is the forests, the trees, plants, all
vegetation,
वन वनस्पति ओशधि. Agni is hidden in the trees and plants,
he is the secret heat and fire in everything that grows on earth,
वनेषु. All that we take pleasure in in the material life, could not be
or grow without the presence of the secret flame of the spirit. The
awakening of the fire by the friction of the Aranis, the rubbing
together of the two pieces of tinder-wood is one way of making
Agni to shine out in his own form,
रूपे, but this is said elsewhere
to have been the work of the Angiras Rishis. Here the making
of Agni so to shine is attributed to Apnavana and the Bhrigus
and there is no indication of the method. It is simply indicated
that they made him to shine out so that he burned with a beauty
of varied light in the woodlands, a pervading presence,
वनेषु चित्रं
विभ्वम्. This must mean in the esoteric symbolism a rich and varied
manifestation of the flame of divine will and knowledge in the
physical life of man, seizing on its growths, all its being, action,
pleasure, making it its food,
अन्नम्, and devouring and turning it
into material for the spiritual existence. But this manifestation of
the spirit in the physical life of man was made available by the
Bhrigus to each human creature
विशे-विशे
— we must presume,
by the order of the sacrifice. This Agni, this general flame of the
divine Will-force, was turned by them into the Hotri of the
sacrifice.
The question remains, who are the Bhrigus of whom we
may suppose that Apnavana is in this action at least the head or
chief? Is it simply meant to preserve a historical tradition that
the Bhrigus like the Angiras Rishis were founders of the esoteric
Vedic knowledge and discipline? But this supposition, possible
in itself, is contradicted by the epithet
भृगवाणम्
in verse 4 which
evidently refers back to this first Rik. Sayana interprets there,
"acting like Bhrigu" and to act like Bhrigu is to shine. We find this
significant fact emerge, admitted even by the ritualistic commentator in spite of his attachment to a rational matter of fact,
that some at least of the traditional Rishis and their families are
Page
– 482
symbolic in their character. The Bhrigus in the Veda (
भृज्to burn)
are evidently burning powers of the Sun, the Lord of Knowledge, just as the Angiras Rishis are very evidently the seven
lustres of Agni,
सप्त धामानि, — Sayana says the live coals of the
fire, but that is a mere etymological ingenuity — the hints are
everywhere in the Veda, but it is made quite clear in the tenth
Mandala. The whole idea, then, comes out with convincing
luminosity. It is the powers of the revelatory knowledge, the
powers of the seer-wisdom, represented by the Bhrigus who
make this great discovery of the spiritual will-force and make it
available to every human creature. Apnavana means he who
acts or he who attains and acquires. It is the seer-wisdom that
scales and attains in the light of the revelation which leads
the Bhrigus to the discovery. This completes the sense of the
Rik.
It will be at once said that this is an immense deal to read
into this single Rik, and that there is here no actual clue to any
such meaning. No actual clue, indeed, only covert hints, which
it is easy to pass over and ignore, — that was what the Mystics
intended the profanum vulgus, not excluding the uninitiated
Pundit, should do. I bring in these meanings from the indications
of the rest of the Veda. But in the hymn itself so far as this first
Rik goes, it might well be a purely ritualistic verse. But only if
it is taken by itself. The moment we pass on, we land full into
a mass of clear psychological suggestions. This will begin to be
apparent even as early as the second verse.
अग्ने
O Agni,
कदा
when
ते
देवस्य चेतनं
the awakening to knowledge (consciousness) of thee the god
आनिषग् भुवत्
may it be
continuously (in uninterrupted sequence), arm
अधा हि
for then (or,
now indeed) मर्तास: mortals
त्वा जगृभ्रिरे
have seized (taken and
held) thee विक्षु ईडयं
adorable in (human) beings (or among the
peoples).
Page
– 483
CRITICAL
NOTES
देवस्य:
Sayana takes
देव
sometimes in the sense of "god", sometimes as equivalent simply to an epithet "shining". The Gods
are called देवा: because they are the Shining Ones, the Children
of Light; and the word may well have recalled always that idea
to the Rishis; but I do not think देव
is ever in the Veda merely a colourless epithet; in all passages the sense "god" or "divine"
gives excellent sense and I see no good reason for taking it
otherwise.
चेतनं:
Sayana takes =
तेज:, but
चित्
does not mean to shine,
it means always, "to be conscious, aware, know",
चेतति, चेतयति
=
knows, causes to know, चेतस्
= heart, mind, knowledge,
चैतन्यं, चेतना
= consciousness,
चितं
= heart, consciousness, mind. To take it
here = light, except by figure, is deliberately to dodge without
any justification the plain psychological suggestion.
अधा: अ-धा
= in this or that way, thus, but also then or now. Sayana takes it = therefore with
भुवत्
preparing for
हि
= because,
for this reason: why thy light should be continuous? because...
(a very forced structure absolutely unnatural and contrary to
order, movement and the plain sequence of sense).
जगृभ्रिरे:
a Vedic form, taken by the grammarians as derived
from ग्रह्
to seize, by change of
ह्
to
भ्, more probably an old root
गृभ्
and a peculiar archaic formation. If the force is "for him they
seize", the perfect (tense) giving the sense of an already completed
action, in English one would (say) "will have seized", i.e. "when
thou knowest continuously". Or take
अधा
= now, "now indeed
they have seized but have not yet the
आनुषग् चेतनम्". But this
does not make so good a sense and brings in besides an awkward
inversion and ellipse.
Translation:
"O Flame, when shall thy awakening to
knowledge be a continuous sequence ? For then shall men have seized on thee as one
to be adored in creatures."
Here we get the first plain psychological suggestion in the
Page
– 484
word
चेतनम्. But what is the sense of this continuous knowing or
awakening to knowledge of Agni ? First, we may try to get rid of
the psychological suggestion, take चेतनं
= consciousness, and the
consciousness of the fire as simply a poetic figure for its burning.
But against this we have the repetition of the phrase in the
आनुषक् चेतनं
in the
अग्निर्देवस्य आनुषक् चिकित्वांसं
of Rik 5 which certainly
means conscious knowledge and not merely burning; the next
verse (3) in which the idea of चेतनं
is taken up and the word itself
echoed in the two opening words ॠतावानं विचेतसं, possessed of
truth, complete in knowledge (wisdom), applied to the god.
To shut one's eyes to this emphatic indication and take
चेतनं
= merely
ज्वलनं
would be
a mere dodge. Does it then mean the continuous burning of the flame of the physical sacrifice, but with
this idea that the flame is the body of the god and indicates the
presence of the conscious deity? But in what then does the
knowledge or wisdom of Agni consist ? It may be said that he is
wise only as the होता, a seer,
कवि:, who knows the way to heaven
(Verse 8). But what then of the ॠतावानं
विचेतसम्? That must surely
refer to some greater knowledge, some great Truth which Agni
possesses. Does it at all refer to a god of physical Fire alone or to
the knowledge and wisdom of an inner Fire, the flame of the
God-Force or God-Will in man and the world,
देवस्य, the shining
One, the Guest, the Seer, अतिथि: कवि:?
I take it in this sense. The Rishi cries to this inner Flame,
"When wilt thou shine in me continuously, on the altar of my
sacrifice; when wilt thou be a constant force of knowledge to
give all the uninterrupted sequence, relation, order, completeness
of the revelations of wisdom, speaking always and wholly its
words, काव्यानि
?" If it refers at all to the inner flame, this must
be the sense. We must remember that in the Vedic symbolism
it was by the continuous sacrifice all round the symbolic year,
the nine or the ten months of the sacrifice of the Angirasas,
that the Sun, Master of the Truth, the Wisdom, was recovered
from the cave of darkness. The repeated single sacrifice is only
a preparation for this continuity of the revealing Flame. It is
only then that men not only awake Agni from time to time, by
repeated pressure, but have and hold continuously the inner
flame of will and knowledge, a present godhead, the one whom
Page
– 485
we then see and adore in all conscious
thinking beings. Or we
may take the last two padas in the sense "now indeed they seize"
etc. and we will have to take it in the opposite sense, i.e., that for
the present men do not have this continuous flame, but only lay
hold of him for the actual duration in the effort of sacrifice. This
is possible, but does not make so natural a sense; it arises less
simply and directly, from the actual words. It is in the next two
Riks (3, 4) that the present action of Agni before his
आनुषक् चेतनं
is described, while in Rik 5 the Rishi returns to the idea of the
greater continuous flame of knowledge, repeating the
आनुषक् चेतनं
still more significantly in the
आनुषक् चिकित्वांसं
of that verse. This
seems to me the evident natural order of the thought in the
Sukta.
पश्यन्त: they see him
ॠतावानं
(ॠतवन्तम्)
having the truth,
विचेतसं
completely wise
द्यामिव स्तृभि:
like heaven with stars,
हस्कर्तारं
the maker to shine
विश्वेषामध्वराणां
of all (pilgrim) sacrifice
दमे-दमे (गृहे-गृहे)
house and house.
CRITICAL
NOTES
ॠतावानम्, ॠत + वन् = ॠतावान्
The Vedic suffix
वन्
has the same force
as the classical
वत् ॠतावा = ॠतवान् ॠत
from root
ॠ
to go. Hence the sense 'water'.
The sense 'truth' may = what is learned, literally, what we go in
search of and attain or what we go over and so learn (of
ॠषि),
but it may also come from the idea of straightness, latin rectum,
ॠजु. How it comes to mean sacrifice is not so clear, perhaps from
the idea of rite, observance, rule,
विधि, or a line followed, cf. Latin regula, rule; or again action,
कर्म, and so the sacrificial action; verbs of motion often bear also the
sense of action, cf.
चरितं वृत्तम्.
ॠतावा, says Sayana, often may
mean possessed of truth or possessed of sacrifice. But here he takes it == truthful, free from deceit,
Page
– 486
अमायिनम्.
Elsewhere he takes
सत्य
used as an epithet of Agni,
सत्यफ़ल, giving a true fruit of the sacrifice. Oftenest he takes
ॠत = यज्ञ. But it is perfectly evident here that
ॠतावानं
must mean
truth-having, in whatever sense we may take the truth of Agni.
विचेतसं
: Sayana:
विशिष्टज्ञानं, having a special, a great knowledge ; in Veda
प्रचेता: and
विचेता: are distinguished very much as
प्रज्ञान
and
विज्ञान
in the Upanishads and later Sanskrit;
चेत: or
चिति
stands for
ज्ञान, the latter word being classical and not
Vedic. n gives the idea of knowledge directed towards an object,
प्रचेता: = intelligent, wise in a general sense (thus Sayana takes
प्रकृष्ट्ज्ञान: and makes no distinction between the words),
वि
means widely, pervadingly or else in high degree;
विचेता: means
then having a complete or great or perfect knowledge, knowledge
of the whole and the parts.
हस्कर्तारं
: from
हस्
to shine, shining (from which comes the
sense, to smile) and
कृ
to make. Sayana says
प्रकाशकम्; illuminer
of the sacrifices.
दमे-दमे
: the Vedic word (Greek domos, Latin
domus) means
always "house"; it is pot used in the later classical sense of
"subduing, control",, etc.
Translation:
"They see the master of truth, the complete in wisdom like
a heaven with stars, the illuminer of all pilgrim-sacrifices in
house and house."
In this Rik the word
विचेतसं
evidently takes up the
चेतनं
of the
last Rik; it means complete in knowledge and is coupled with
ॠतावानं, truth-having, possessed of truth; it is the god Agni, not
the physical fire who is described by these epithets. Therefore
ते चेतनं
in the last Rik must mean Agni "awakening to knowledge"
or Agni's awakening of man to knowledge, — for
चेतयति
means letting to know or to
cause to know, and cannot mean the burning of the physical flame. But what is this truth and knowledge
of Agni ? It is associated again in the next verse with his function
of illumining the sacrifice,
अध्वराणां हस्कर्तारम्. What is the illumination he gives to the sacrifice ? And what is meant by saying that
Page
– 487
he is seen "like a heaven with stars". Sayana with much scholastic ingenuity, but in characteristic disregard of all good taste and
literary judgment, says that the scattering sparks of the fire are
like stars, therefore Agni is like heaven, — though there is no
reason to suppose that the
स्तृभि: here are shooting stars; I cannot imagine any poet with eyes in his head and a judgment and
sense of proportion in his brain so describing a fire burning on an
altar. But if it does not mean that, then we have here a purely
ornamental description and very bad, exaggerated and vicious
ornament at that. All that the verse will then mean is that men
see this wise and truthful Agni in the physical form of the sacrificial fire shedding light by its flames on the whole business of
the sacrifice. The two epithets are also then otiose ornament;
there is then absolutely no connection between the idea
of Agni's
wisdom and the image of the heaven with stars or the illumination of the sacrifice which is the main idea of the verse.
I go on the hypothesis, not, I think, an unfair one, that the
Vedic Rishi Vamadeva like other poets wrote with some closer
connection than that between their ideas. We must remember that in the last
verse he has desired, what he has not got, the continuous knowledge of Agni and said that then indeed men hold
and possess him. But how do they see him before that continuously, though after the Bhrigus have found him for the utility
of each human being ? They see him as the master of truth, the
complete in knowledge, but as we must suppose, — they do not
yet possess him in all his truth or his complete knowledge; for he
is seen only as a heaven with stars and as an illuminer of their
sacrifices. A heaven with stars is heaven at night without the
light of the sun. Agni in the Veda is described as shining even in
the night, giving light in the night, burning through the nights
till there comes the dawn, — which too is brought by him aiding
Indra and the Angirasas. If the meaning of Agni is the inner
flame, this gets a striking, appropriate and profound meaning. In the Veda
darkness or night is the symbol of the ignorant mentality, as is the day and its sunlight of the illumined mentality.
But before there is the day or the continuous knowledge, the
illuminations of Agni are like stars in the nocturnal heavens.
Heaven is the mental as Earth is the physical being; all the truth
Page
– 488
and knowledge of Agni is there, but hidden only by the darkness
of night. Men know that this Light is there pervading the skies
but see only the stars which Agni has kindled as his fires of illumination in these heavens.
Page
– 489
Home
|