Chapter IX: Brahmanism (2)

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

The principle of _karma_ if not the theory, is already known, but the very thing that the completed philosopher abhors is looked upon as a blessing, viz., rebirth, body and all, even on earth.[56] Thus in one passage, as a reward for knowing some divine mystery (as often happens, this mystery is of little importance, only that 'spring is born again out of winter'), the savant is to be 'born again in this world' _(punar ha v[=a] 'asmin loke bhavati, Çat. Br._ i. 5. 3. 14). The esoteric wisdom is here the transfer of the doctrine of metempsychosis to spring. Man has no hope of immortal life (on earth);[57] but, by establishing the holy fires, and especially by establishing in his inmost soul the immortal element of fire, he lives the full desirable length of life (_ib_. ii. 2. 2. 14. To the later sage, length of life is undesirable). But in yonder world, where the sun itself is death, the soul dies again and again. All those on the other side of the sun, the gods, are immortal; but all those on this side are exposed to this death. When the sun wishes, he draws out the vitality of any one, and then that one dies; not once, but, being drawn up by the sun, which is death, into the very realm of death (how different to the conception of the sun in the Rig Veda!) he dies over and over again.[58] But in another passage it is said that when the sacrificer is consecrated he 'becomes one of the deities'; and one even finds the doctrine that one obtains 'union with Brahm[=a],' which is quite in the strain of the Upanishads; but here such a saying can refer only to the upper castes, for "the gods talk only to the upper castes" (_Çal. Br._. xi. 4. 4. 1; iii. 1. 1. 8-10). The dead man is elsewhere represented as going to heaven 'with his whole body,' and, according to one passage, when he gets to the next world his good and evil are weighed in a balance. There are, then, quite diverse views in regard to the fate of a man after death, and not less various are the opinions in regard to his reward and punishment. According to the common belief the dead, on leaving this world, pass between two fires, _agniçikhe_ raging on either side of his path. These fires burn the one that ought to be burned (the wicked), and let the good pass by. Then the spirit (or the man himself in body) is represented as going up on one of two paths. Either he goes to the Manes on a path which, according to later teaching, passes southeast through the moon, or he goes northeast (the gods' direction) to the sun, which is his 'course and stay.' In the same chapter one is informed that the rays of the sun are the good (dead), and that every brightest light is the Father-god. The general conception here is that the sun or the stars are the destination of the pious. On the other hand it is said that one will enjoy the fruit of his acts here on earth, in a new birth; or that he will 'go to the next world'; or that he will suffer for his sins in hell. The last is told in legendary form, and appears to us to be not an early view retained in folk-lore, but a late modification of an old legend. Varuna sends his son Bhrigu to hell to find out what happens after death, and he finds people suffering torture, and, again, avenging themselves on those that have wronged them. But, despite the resemblance between this and Grecian myth, the fact that in the whole compass of the Rik (in the Atharvan perhaps in v. 19) there is not the slightest allusion to torture in hell, precludes, to our mind, the possibility of this phase having been an ancient inherited belief.[59]

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

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

BRAHMANIC THEORIES OF CREATION.

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

In the Br[=a]hmanas the creator is the All-god in more anthropomorphic form. The Father-god, Praj[=a]pati, or Brahm[=a] (personal equivalent of _brahma_) is not only the father of gods, men, and devils, but he is the All. This Father-god of universal sovereignty, Brahm[=a], remains to the end the personal creator. It is he who will serve as creator for the Puranic S[=a]nkhya philosophy, and even after the rise of the Hindu sects he will still be regarded in this light, although his activity will be conditioned by the will of Vishnu or Çiva. In pure philosophy there will be an abstract First Cause; but as there is no religion in the acknowledgment of a First Cause, this too will soon be anthropomorphized.

The Br[=a]hmanas themselves present no clear picture of creation. All the accounts of a personal creator are based merely on anthropomorphized versions of the text 'desire is the seed.' Praj[=a]pati wishes offspring, and creates. There is, on the other hand, a philosophy of creation which reverts to the tale of the 'golden germ.'[62] The world was at first water; thereon floated a cosmic golden egg (the principle of fire). Out of this came Spirit that desired; and by desire he begat the worlds and all things. It is improbable that in this somewhat Orphic mystery there lies any pre-Vedic myth. The notion comes up first in the golden germ and egg-born bird (sun) of the Rik. It is not specially Aryan, and is found even among the American Indians.[63] It is this Spirit with which the Father-god is identified. But guess-work philosophy then asks what upheld this god, and answers that a support upheld all things. So Support becomes a god in his turn, and, since he must reach through time and space, this Support, Skambha, becomes the All-god also; and to him as to a great divinity the Atharvan sings some of its wildest strains. When once speculation is set going in the Br[=a]hmanas, the result of its travel is to land its followers in intellectual chaos.[64] The gods create the Father-god in one passage, and in another the Father-god creates the gods. The Father creates the waters, whence rises the golden egg. But, again, the waters create the egg, and out of the egg is born the Father. A farrago of contradictions is all that these tales amount to, nor are they redeemed even by a poetical garb.[65]

In the period immediately following the Br[=a]hmanas, or toward the end of the Brahmanic period, as one will, there is a famous distinction made between the gods. Some gods, it is said, are spirit-gods; some are work-gods. They are born of spirit and of works, respectively. The difference, however, is not essential, but functional; so that one may conclude from this authority, the Nirukta (a grammatical and epexigetical work), that all the gods have a like nature; and that the spirit-gods, who are the older, differ only in lack of specific functions from the work-gods. A not uninteresting debate follows this passage in regard to the true nature of the gods. Some people say they are anthropomorphic; others deny this. "And certainly what is seen of the gods is not anthropomorphic; for example, the sun, the earth, etc."[66] In such a period of theological advance it is matter of indifference to which of a group of gods, all essentially one, is laid the task of creation. And, indeed, from the Vedic period until the completed systems of philosophy, all creation to the philosopher is but emanation; and stories of specific acts of creation are not regarded by him as detracting from the creative faculty of the First Cause. The actual creator is for him the factor and agent of the real god. On the other hand, the vulgar worshipper of every era believed only in reproduction on the part of an anthropomorphic god; and that god's own origin he satisfactorily explained by the myth of the golden egg. The view depended in each case not on the age but on the man.

If in these many pages devoted to the Br[=a]hmanas we have produced the impression that the religious literature of this period is a confused jumble, where unite descriptions of ceremonies, formulae, mysticism, superstitions, and all the output of active bigotry; an _olla podrida_ which contains, indeed, odds and ends of sound morality, while it presents, on the whole, a sad view of the latter-day saints, who devoted their lives to making it what it is; we have offered a fairly correct view of the age and its priests, and the rather dreary series of illustrations will not have been collected in vain. We have given, however, no notion at all of the chief object of this class of writings, the liturgical details of the sacrifices themselves. Even a résumé of one comparatively short ceremony would be so long and tedious that the explication of the intricate formalities would scarcely be a sufficient reward. With Hillebrandt's patient analysis of the New-and Full-Moon sacrifice,[67] of which a sketch is given by von Schroeder in his _Literatur und Cultur_, the curious reader will be able to satisfy himself that a minute description of these ceremonies would do little to further his knowledge of the religion, when once he grasps the fact that the sacrifice is but show. Symbolism without folk-lore, only with the imbecile imaginings of a daft mysticism, is the soul of it; and its outer form is a certain number of formulae, mechanical movements, oblations, and slaughterings.

But we ought not to close the account of the era without giving counter-illustrations of the legendary aspect of this religion; for which purpose we select two of the best-known tales, one from the end of the Br[=a]hmana that is called the [=A]itareya; the other from the beginning of the Çatapatha; the former in abstract, the latter in full.

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

Hariçcandra, a king born in the great race of Ikshv[=a]ku, had no son. A sage told him what blessings are his who has a son: 'He that has no son has no place in the world; in the person of a son a man is reborn, a second self is begotten.' Then the king desired a son, and the sage instructed him to pray to Varuna for one, and to offer to sacrifice him to the god. This he did, and a son, Rohita, at last was born to him. God Varuna demanded the sacrifice. But the king said: 'He is not fit to be sacrificed, so young as he is; wait till he is ten days old.' The god waited ten days, and demanded the sacrifice. But the king said: 'Wait till his teeth come.' The god waited, and then demanded the sacrifice. But the king said: 'Wait till his teeth fall out'; and when the god had waited, and again demanded the sacrifice, the father said: 'Wait till his new teeth come.' But, when his teeth were come and he was demanded, the father said: 'A warrior is not fit to be sacrificed till he has received his armor' (_i.e._, until he is knighted). So the god waited till the boy had received his armor, and then he demanded the sacrifice. Thereupon, the king called his son, and said unto him: 'I will sacrifice thee to the god who gave thee to me.' But the son said, 'No, no,' and took his bow and fled into the desert. Then Varuna caused the king to be afflicted with dropsy.[68] When Rohita heard of this he was about to return, but Indra, disguised as a priest, met him, and said: 'Wander on, for the foot of a wanderer is like a flower; his spirit grows, and reaps fruit, and all his sins are forgiven in the fatigue of wandering.'[69] So Rohita, thinking that a priest had commanded him, wandered; and every year, as he would return, Indra met him, and told him still to wander. On one of these occasions Indra inspires him to continue on his journey by telling him that the _krita_ was now auspicious; using the names of dice afterwards applied to the four ages.[70] Finally, after six years, Rohita resolved to purchase a substitute for sacrifice. He meets a starving seer, and offers to buy one of his sons (to serve as sacrifice), the price to be one hundred cows. The seer has three sons, and agrees to the bargain; but "the father said, 'Do not take the oldest,' and the mother said, 'Do not take the youngest,' so Rohita took the middle son, Dogstail." Varuna immediately agrees to this substitution of Dogstail for Rohita, "since a priest is of more value than a warrior."

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

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

When the priest is secretly told how he may ruin the king by a false invocation at the sacrifice, and the king is made to swear that if ever he hurts the priest the latter may rob him of earthly and heavenly felicity, the respective positions of the two, and the contrast between this era and that of the early hymns, become strikingly evident. It is not from such an age as this that one can explain the spirit of the Rig Veda.

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

"In the morning they brought water to Manu to wash with, even as they bring it to-day to wash hands with. While he was washing a fish came into his hands. The fish said, 'Keep me, and I will save thee.' 'What wilt thou save me from?' 'A flood will sweep away all creatures on earth. I will save thee from that.' 'How am I to keep thee?' 'As long as we are small,' said he (the fish), 'we are subject to much destruction; fish eats fish. Thou shalt keep me first in a jar. When I outgrow that, thou shalt dig a hole, and keep me in it. When I outgrow that, thou shalt take me down to the sea, for there I shall be beyond destruction.'

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

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

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

* * * * *

FOOTNOTES:

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Footnote 7: The _Çata-patha Br[=a]hmana_ (or "Br[=a]mana of
the hundred paths") II. 2. 2. 6; 4.3.14.]

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

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

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

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

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

[Footnote 13: Interesting is the fact that only priests may
eat sacrificial food and drink _soma_ at this period. When
even the king should drink _soma_, he is made to drink some
transubstantiated liquor which, the priests inform him, has
been 'made into _soma_' for him by magic, for the latter is
too holy for any warrior really to drink (VII. 19; VIII.
20). But in the more popular feasts there are indications
that this rule is often broken. Compare Weber,
_R[=a]jas[=u]ya_ p. 98.]

[Footnote 14: For the relations of the different castes at
this period, see Weber, in the tenth volume of the _Indische
Studien_.]

[Footnote 15: The Atharvan is not yet recognized as a Veda.]

[Footnote 16: And even the pronunciation of a word or the
accent is fateful. The famous godly example of this is where
Tvashtar, the artificer, in anger mispronounced
_indra-çátru_ as _indraçatru,_ whereby the meaning was
changed from 'conqueror of Indra' to 'Indra-conquered,' with
unexpected result (_Çat. Br._ I. 6. 3. 8; _T[=a]itt. S._ II.
4. 12. 1).]

[Footnote 17: The word is _a[.m]sala_, strong, or 'from the
shoulder' (?). In III. 4. 1. 2 one cooks an ox or a goat for
a very distinguished guest, as a sort of guest-sacrifice. So
the guest is called 'cow-killer' (Weber, _Ved. Beiträge_, p.
36).]

[Footnote 18: Compare _ib_. I. 9. 1. 21, "let the priest not
say 'guard me (or us),' but 'guard this worshipper
(sacrificer),' for if he says 'me' he induces no blessing at
all; the blessing is not for the priest, but for the
sacrificer." In both passages, most emphatically,
_yajam[=a]nasy[=a]iva_, 'for the sacrificer alone.']

[Footnote 19: _Ya[.m] k[=a]ma[.m] k[=a]mayate so 'sm[=a]i
k[=a]ma[h.] sam[r.]dhyate_.]

[Footnote 20: [=A]suri's name as a theologian is important,
since the S[=a]nkhya philosophy is intimately connected with
him; if this [=A]suri be not another man with the same name
(compare Weber, _Lit_. p. 152).]

[Footnote 21: The regular sacrifices to the Manes are daily
and monthly; funerals and 'faith-feasts,' _çr[=a]ddha_, are
occasional additions.]

[Footnote 22: Each generation of Manes rises to a better
(higher) state if the offerings continue. As a matter of
ceremonial this means that the remoter generations of
fathers are put indefinitely far off, while the immediate
predecessors of a man are the real beneficiaries; they climb
up to the sky on the offering.]

[Footnote 23: Compare _Çat. Br_. i. 8. 1. 40; ii. 6. 1. 3,
7, 10, 42; ii. 4. 2. 24; v. 5. 4. 28.]

[Footnote 24: This passage (_ib_. ii. 1. 2. 7) is preceded
by a typical argument for setting up the fires under the
Pleiades, the wives of the Great Bear stars. He may do or he
may not do so--the reasons contradict each other, and all of
them are incredibly silly.]

[Footnote 25: This last fee is not so common. For an
oblation to S[=u]rya the fee is a white horse or a white
bull; either of them representing the proper form of the sun
(_Çat. Br_. ii. 6. 3. 9); but another authority specifies
twelve oxen and a plough (T[=a]itt. S. i. 8. 7).]

[Footnote 26: _Çat. Br_. ii. 1. 1. 3; 2. 3. 28; iv. 3. 4.
14; 5. 1. 15; four kinds of fees, _ib_. iv. 3. 4. 6, 7, 24
ff. (Milk is also 'Agni's seed,' _ib_. ii. 2. 4. 15).]

[Footnote 27: Yet in _[=A]it. Br_. iii. 19, the priest is
coolly informed how he may be able to slay his patron by
making a little change in the invocations. Elsewhere such
conduct is reprobated.]

[Footnote 28: For other covenants, see the epic (chapter on
Hinduism).]

[Footnote 29: _Çat. Br_. iii. 4. 2. 1 ff.; iii. 6. 2. 25;
iv. 3. 3. 3; iv. 4.1.17; 6. 6. 3; 7. 6, etc.; iii. 8. 2. 27;
3. 26; _[=A]it. Br._. i. 24.]

[Footnote 30: _ib_. ii. 6. 2. 5. Here Rudra (compare Çiva
and Hekate of the cross-roads) is said to go upon
'cross-roads'; so that his sacrifice is on cross-roads--one
of the new teachings since the time of the Rig Veda. Rudra's
sister, Ambik[=a], _ib_. 9, is another new creation, the
genius of autumnal sickness.]

[Footnote 31: _Çat. Br_. ii. 2. 1. 21. How much non-serious
fancy there may be here it is difficult to determine. It
seems impossible that such as follows can have been meant in
earnest: "The sacrifice, _pray[=a]ja,_ is victory, _jaya_,
because _yaja_ = _jaya_. With this knowledge one gets the
victory over his rivals" (_ib_. i. 5. 3. 3, 10).]

[Footnote 32: Although Bhaga is here (_Çat. Br_. i. 7. 4. 6-7,
_endho bhagas_) interpreted as the Sun, he is evidently the same
with Good Luck [Greek: typhlhos ghar ho Êlohhytos] or wealth.]

[Footnote 33: _Çat. Br_. iii. 1. 2. 13 ff.; l. 1. 2. 18;
iii. 6. 1. 8 ff.; ii. 5. 2. 1; iv. 2. 1. 11; iii. 4.4. 3
ff.; 2. 3. 6-12, 13-14; iv. 5. 5. 12; 1.3. 13 ff.; iii. 2.
4. 5-6; 3. 2. 8; 7. 1. 17; iv. 2. 5. 17; 4. 1. 15; i. 7. 4.
6-7; ii. 4. 3. 4 ff.; li. 5.2.34; 5. 1. 12; 5. 1. 1 ff.; RV.
viii. 104. 14. The reader must distinguish, in the name of
Brahm[=a], the god from the priest, and this from
_brahm[=a]_, prayer. The first step is _brahma_--force,
power, prayer; then this is, as a masculine Brahm[=a], the
one who prays, that is, prayer, the Brahman priest, as, in
the Rig Veda, x. 141. 3. Brihaspati is the 'Brahm[=a] of
gods.' The next (Brahmanic) step is deified _brahma_, the
personal Brahm[=a] as god, called also Father-god
(Praj[=a]pati) or simply The Father (_pit[=a]_).]

[Footnote 33: _Çat. Br_. iii. 1. 2. 13 ff.; l. 1. 2. 18;
iii. 6. 1. 8 ff.; ii. 5. 2. 1; iv. 2. 1. 11; iii. 4.4. 3
ff.; 2. 3. 6-12, 13-14; iv. 5. 5. 12; 1.3. 13 ff.; iii. 2.
4. 5-6; 3. 2. 8; 7. 1. 17; iv. 2. 5. 17; 4. 1. 15; i. 7. 4.
6-7; ii. 4. 3. 4 ff.; li. 5.2.34; 5. 1. 12; 5. 1. 1 ff.; RV.
viii. 104. 14. The reader must distinguish, in the name of
Brahm[=a], the god from the priest, and this from
_brahm[=a]_, prayer. The first step is _brahma_--force,
power, prayer; then this is, as a masculine Brahm[=a], the
one who prays, that is, prayer, the Brahman priest, as, in
the Rig Veda, x. 141. 3. Brihaspati is the 'Brahm[=a] of
gods.' The next (Brahmanic) step is deified _brahma_, the
personal Brahm[=a] as god, called also Father-god
(Praj[=a]pati) or simply The Father (_pit[=a]_).]

[Footnote 34: Compare _M[=a]it. S_ iii. 10. 2; _[=A]it.
Br_. ii. 8; _Çat. Br_. i. 2. 3. 5; vi. 2. 1. 39; 3. 1. 24;
ii. 5. 2. 16, a ram and ewe 'made of barley.' On human
sacrifices, compare Müller, ASL. p. 419; Weber. ZDMG. xviii.
262 (see the Bibliography); _Streifen_, i.54.]

[Footnote 35: Weber has translated some of these legends.
_Ind. Streifen_, i. 9 ff.]

[Footnote 36: _T[=a]itt. Br_. iii. 2. 9. 7; _Çat. Br_. i. 2.
5. 5; ii. 1. 2. 13 ff.; vii. 5. 1. 6.]

[Footnote 37: Compare _M[=a]it. S_. i. 9. 8; _Çat. Br_. i.
6. 1. 1 ff. The seasons desert the gods, and the demons
thrive. In _Çat. Br._ i. 5. 4. 6-11, the Asuras and Indra
contend with numbers.]

[Footnote 38: Müller, ASL. p. 529.]

[Footnote 39: _M[=a]it. S_. iv. 2. 12; _Çat. Br_. i. 7. 4.
1; ii. 1. 2. 9; vi. 1. 3. 8; _[=A]it. Br_. iii. 33. Compare
Muir, OST. iv. p. 45. At a later period there are frequently
found indecent tales of the gods, and the Br[=a]hmanas
themselves are vulgar enough, but they exhibit no special
lubricity on the part of the priests.]

[Footnote 40: _Idam aham ya èv[=a] smi so asmi, Çat. Br_. i.
1. 1. 6; 9. 3. 23.]

[Footnote 41: RV. viii. 51. 2; Zimmer, _loc. cit_. p. 328.]

[Footnote 42: Compare Weber, _Episch. in Vedisch. Ritual_,
p. 777 (and above). The man who is slaughtered must be
neither a priest nor a slave, but a warrior or a man of the
third caste (Weber, _loc. cit_. above).]

[Footnote 43: _Le Mercier_, 1637, ap. Parkman, _loc. cit_.
p. 80. The current notion that the American Indian burns his
victims at the stake merely for pleasure is not incorrect.
He frequently did so, as he does so to-day, but in the
seventeenth century this act often is part of a religious
ceremony. He probably would have burned his captive, anyway,
but he gladly utilized his pleasure as a means of
propitiating his gods. In India it was just the other way.]

[Footnote 44: Substitutes of metal or of earthen victims are
also mentioned.]

[Footnote 45: That the Vedic rite of killing the sacrificial
beast (by beating and smothering) was very cruel may be seen
in the description, _[=A]it. Br_. ii. 6.]

[Footnote 46: _Çat. Br._ i. 5. 2. 4.]

[Footnote 47: _Sams[=a]ra_ is transmigration; _karma_,
'act,' implies that the change of abode is conditioned by
the acts of a former life. Each may exclude the other; but
in common parlance each implies the other.]

[Footnote 48: Weber, _Indischt Streifen_, i. p. 72.]

[Footnote 49: _Çat. Br_. i. 7. 3. 19: iii. 4. 1. 17.]

[Footnote 50: _Çaf. Br_. iii. 5. 4. 10; 6. 2. 24; 5. 3. 17
(compare 6. 4. 23-24; 3. 4. 11; 2. 1. 12); iii. 1. 2. 4; 3.
14; i. 7. 2. 9; vi. 1. 2. 14. The change of name is
interesting. There is a remark in another part of the same
work to the effect that when a man prospers in life they
give his name also to his son, grandson, _and to his father
and grandfather_ (vi. 1. 2. 13). On the other hand, it was
the custom of the Indian kings in later ages to assume the
names of their prosperous grandfathers (JRAS. iv. 85).]

[Footnote 51: Were it not for the first clause it would be
more natural to render the original 'The gods are truth
alone, and men are untruth.']

[Footnote 52: In _Çat. Br_. ii. 4. 2. 5-6 it is said that
the Father-god gives certain rules of eating to gods, Manes,
men, and beasts: "Neither gods, Manes, nor beasts transgress
the Father's law, only some men do."]

[Footnote 53: _Çat. Br_. ii. 5. 2. 20. Varuna seizes on her
paramour, when she confesses. _T[.a]itt. Br_. i. 6. 5. 2.
The guilt confessed becomes less "because it thereby becomes
truth" (right).]

[Footnote 54: See _Çat. Br._. ii. 4. 2. 6; 4. 1. 14; 1. 3.
9; 3. 1. 28: "Who knows man's morrow? Then let one not
procrastinate." "Today is self, this alone is certain,
uncertain is the morrow."]

[Footnote 55: Some little rules are interesting. The
Pythagorean abstinence from _m[=a][s.][=a]s_, beans, for
instance, is enjoined; though this rule is opposed by Barku
V[=a]rshna, _Çat. Br_. i. 1. 1. 10, on the ground that no
offering to the gods is made of beans; "hence he said 'cook
beans for me.'"]

[Footnote 56: Animals may represent gods. "The bull is a
form of Indra," and so if the bull can be made to roar
(_Çat. Br._ ii. 5. 3. 18), then one may know that Indra is
come to the sacrifice. "Man is born into (whatever) world is
made (by his acts in a previous existence)," is a short
formula (_Çat. Br._. vi. 2. 2. 27), which represents the
_karma_ doctrine in its essential principle, though the
'world' is here not this world, but the next. Compare Weber,
ZDMG. ix. 237 ff.; Muir, OST. v. 314 ff.]

[Footnote 57: Though youth may be restored to him by the
Açvins, _Çat. Br._. iv. i. 5. 1 ff. Here the Horsemen are
identified with Heaven and Earth (16).]

[Footnote 58: _Cal. Br_. ii. 3. 3. 7. Apropos of the
Brahmanic sun it may be mentioned that, according to _Ait.
Br._ iii. 44, the sun never really sets. "People think that
he sets, but in truth he only turns round after reaching the
end of the day, and makes night below, day above; and when
they think he rises in the morning, he having come to the
end of the night, turns round, and makes day below, night
above. He never really sets. Whoever knows this of him, that
he never sets, obtains union and likeness of form with the
sun, and the same abode as the sun's." Compare Muir, OST. v.
521. This may be the real reason why the Rig Veda speaks of
a dark and light sun.]

[Footnote 59: _Çat. Br._. i. 4. 3. 11-22 ('The sinner shall
suffer and go quickly to yonder world'); xi. 6. 1 (compare
Weber, _loc. cit._ p. 20 ff.; ZDMG. ix. 237), the Bhrigu
story, of which a more modern form is found in the Upanishad
period. For the course of the sun, the fires on either side
of the way, the departure to heaven 'with the whole body,'
compare _Çat. Br._ i. 9. 3. 2-15; iv. 5. 1. 1; vi. 6. 2. 4;
xi. 2. 7. 33; Weber, _loc. cit._: Muir, _loc. cit._ v. p.
314. Not to have all one's bones in the next world is a
disgrace, as Muir says, and for that reason they are
collected at burial. Compare the custom as described by the
French missionaries here. The American Indian has to have
all his bones for future use, and the burying of the
skeleton is an annual religious ceremony.]

[Footnote 60: Compare RV. iv. 28. 4: 'Thou Indra madest
lowest the heathen.' Weber has shown, _loc. cit._, that the
general notion of the Br[=a]hmanas is that all are born
again in the next world, where they are rewarded or punished
according as they are good or bad; whereas in the Rig Veda
the good rejoice in heaven, and the bad are annihilated.
This general view is to be modified, however, by such
side-theories as those just mentioned, that the good (or
wise) may be reborn on earth, or be united with gods, or
become sunlight or stars (the latter are 'watery' to the
Hindu, and this may explain the statement that the soul is
'in the midst of waters').]

[Footnote 61: There is in this age no notion of the repeated
creations found in later literature. On the contrary, it is
expressly said in the Rig Veda, vi. 48. 22, that heaven and
earth are created but once: "Only once was heaven created,
only once was earth created," Zimmer, AIL. 408.]

[Footnote 62: When the principle of life is explained it is
in terms of sun or fire. Thus Praj[=a]pati, Lord of beings,
or Father-god, is first an epithet of Savitar, RV. iv. 53.
2; and the golden germ must be fire.]

[Footnote 63: Schoolcraft, _Historical and Statistical
Information_, i. 32. As examples of the many passages where
'water is the beginning' may be cited _Çat. Br._ vi. 7. 1.
17; xi. 1. 6. 1. The sun, born as Aditi's eighth son, is the
bird, 'egg-born,' RV. x. 72. 8.]

[Footnote 64: Among the new curators of Atharvan origin are,
for instance, the sun under the name of Rohita, Desire
(Love), etc., etc.]

[Footnote 65: Illustrations of these contradictions may be
found in plenty _apud_ Muir iv. p. 20 ff.]

[Footnote 66: Nirukta, vii. 4; Muir, _loc. cit._ p. 131 and
v. 17.]

[Footnote 67: _Neu-und Vollmonds Opfer_, 1880. The
_D[=i]ksh[=a]_, or initiation, has been described by
Lindner; the _R[=a]jas[=u]ya_ and _Vajapeya_, by Weber.]

[Footnote 68: The water-sickness already imputed to this god
in the Rig Veda. This tale and that of Bhrigu (referred to
above) show an ancient trait in the position of Varuna, as
chief god.]

[Footnote 69: This is the germ of the pilgrimage doctrine
(see below).]

[Footnote 70: Perhaps (M. ix. 301) interpolated; or the
first allusion to the Four Ages.]

[Footnote 71: These (compare _afri_, 'blessing,' in the
Avesta) are verses in the Rig Veda introducing the
sacrifice. They are meant as propitiations, and appear to be
an ancient part of the ritual.]

[Footnote 72: A group of hymns in the first book of the Rig
Veda are attributed to Dogstail. At any rate, they do allude
to him, and so prove a moderate antiquity (probably the
middle period of the Rik) for the tale. The name, in
Sanskrit Çunasçepa, has been ingeniously starred by Weber as
Cynosoura; the last part of each compound having the same
meaning, and the first part being even phonetically the same
_çunas, [Greek: kunhos]_.]

[Footnote 73: _Ait. Br._ viii. 10, 15, 20.]

[Footnote 74: The epic has a later version. This earlier
form is found in _Çat. Br._ i. 8. 1. For the story of the
flood among the American Indians compare Schoolcraft
(_Historical and Statistical Information_), i. 17.]

* * * * *