Originally shared by KIRON KRISHNAN
The Reality behind the Ashvamedha - Does Veda advocate it?
Vedic period, as we have seen many times, was not homogenous throughout, nor was its society. As we can see, the Vedic poets and sages were spiritual, while the common people could not easily resort to the simplicity of "no ritual" idea. People usually like myths, and complex hypothesis involving supernatural elements to explain the day to day phenomena. The divinely inspired poets of Rig Veda were also secluded from the upcoming ritualists, and we have seen this tension many times within the Rig Veda, but Vedic poets take care that the satire and the refutes are not explicit, but in their poetic cryptic way. May be ritualists threatened the sages...
One of the foremost poets of world's history, the great Dirghatamas Aucathya, explicitly discusses the upcoming ritual of his time, the Ashvamedha, in three poems - Rig Veda 1.162, 1.163, 1.164.
The 1.162 is actually a satirical poem, with double meaning words starting from the first line, and extends continuously to the last line, whereby the mystic poet plays with the divinely inspired words in a great manner. Usually, Rig Veda does not discuss any ritual, and this is but an exception, and one should certainly honour the great poet Aucathya for leaving his remarkable poems that have remained puzzling to the scholars till date.
As a first step, I would like to talk of the account of Ashvamedha of Rig Veda 1.162. If one just takes a read of, say Griffith translation, it would appear that this poem is a factual account of Ashvamedha, and that Veda endorses the ritual. But on scrutiny, if one checks the actual Vedic poem in its language, he should certainly understand that it is a double ended sword. And such a mystic poet like Dirghatamas can never create such a "one sided poem" with no imageries and poetic beauty, and interpreting his poem as such, advocating the ritual, is the product of prejudice as well as ignorance of facts.
The poem paradoxically starts with the lines :
_"Do not, O Mitra, Varuna, Aryaman, Ayu
Indra, Rbhukshan, Maruts!, regard us! ("parikhyan")
when we speak of the qualities in assembly
Of the strong horse, God-descended."_
The verb "parikhyAti" means simultaneously "regard" as well as "disregard". The usual translation is that "Do not disregard us", advocating the ritualist view. But the most prominent meaning is still "regard", and the phrase comes out to be "Do not regard us....."
or simply "ignore us"... This satirical use continues in every line till the end. The God descended (devajAta) is a special usage, which we will understand only when we read the next poem on Ashvamedha, 1.163 by the same poet. As usual, the poet Aucathya, as in 1.161 which we had seen, brings together many imageries and metaphors into his poems. And to ignore them, and be adamant on the outdated view that Vedas should be ritualistic is just a fantasy born out of limited knowledge, fact-resistance and non scholarly prejudice.
The next stanzas describe the fate of the poor goat, and Aucathya uses the situation correctly to mock the ritualists, and uses a double meaning word "vishvadevyaH" meaning both "dear to All divinities" as well as "having all divine attributes". As usual, traditional scholars have opted the first, while we shall stress on the satirical second meaning - goat symbolising the All divinity (vishvadeva).
In a way, does Aucathya mean to say that All - divinities are sacrificed in their cold blooded murder? And why the horse is "covered in gold" and why is goat called fire.. all those things shall be discussed as we move on to 1.163, the "key poem"...
The third stanza again, talks of Tvashta, the Universal Fashioner form of God, who by "arvat", impels the goat to glory. "Arvat" as a noun in Classical Sanskrit, usually stands for the charger horse. But on going to its roots, we see a totally different version - "arvat" as an adjective is used to mean "inferior", "vile"... along with "running", "hastening"..
Thus, the arvat noun should also mean "vile deed" or "inferior manner", along with "running animal (horse)", and it is this poetic use that Aucathya uses throughout the poem. The usage of "arvatA" (by arvat) further attests the situation. It suits well the situation "by bad means"... again, satire on the inferior way of killing the animal, claiming that "it shall get glorified". (The bad view of glorification which echoes in works of Sayana, Brahmanas, Puranas and later philosophers of India)
The usage of arvat for inferior is also a manner to show that "arvati", which means "to kill" is regarded as inferior in old age.
And why does Tvashta enter the picture? Again, only next poem shall tell the situation.
The poet, then touches our heart, through the plight that horse is made to experience. The poet starts - my prayers are with him... it is again a double ended sword, the prayers being "ritualistic" by the ritualists praying for the sacrifice of horse, and the poor poet's prayer for the hurt soul of the horse. The poet addresses the prayers to the horse, reaffirming his love to the horse, rather than to the ritualists who pray to the "God" for proper conduct of sacrifice, and
kill the horse for their materialistic needs.
The poet does not stop here. In fact, he even makes more double meaning statements, like "May the songs of the fashioners of the sacrificial post, the carriers of the stake, the carvers.. may all that "force us" . And again, the arvat used here stands for both horse, and inferior. The horse case, is not well attestable here, since the cooking pots are not "for the horse". Again, the conventional translation has to be shunned. Instead, the poet explicitly tells, "cooking pots for the vile inferior people"... and the last verb is "invatu" which means "to force us", and here it means to "force us back" rather than to "promote".
The poet calls us for an introspection, and tells paradoxically in his usual way.. "let the cries of the inferior people force us back.."
And the poet again paints the scenario of the sacrificial killing, and makes our eyes water. He also creates a satire - the horse meat, once cooked, is not really offered to God, only those sticking to the hands, nails, those eaten by fly... are "offered" to God.. Poet tells,
"whatever meat fly has eaten,..................,let those be your's God!!"
The greedy ritualists performing the ritual to eat meat is aptly mocked here.
The poet further tells in a stanza, explicitly :
"Those, observing the horse, who tell "cooked, smell's good, remove it"
Those who are intent on the inferior (horse?) meat distribution,
May their songs force us back."
The poem continues, telling what all they actually offer to God.. each time mocking in a beautiful manner.. the cooking pots, food horse ate, water he drank.... it is a heavily loaded satire on the greedy ritualists.
A greatest phrase then comes :
"मा त्वाग्निर्ध्वनीयद् धूमगन्धिः
मोखा भ्राजन्त्यभि विक्त जघ्रिः"
"May not the smoke-scented fire blind (wrap) you,
not the glowing thighs segregate, vanguish"
The poet hopes that may the smoke scented fire not envelop the horse, may not the glowing thighs (the part which is the strength of a horse) separate and vanguish in the fire. Poet hopes that horse should not be killed.
The popular translations take the meanings "dhvanIyad" for crackle, which may mean right at the moment, but it has no connection with "smoke scented fire". Instead the meaning of dhvaniyati as "to wrap", "to blind" (it is attested meaning) is more correct, as it explains the significance of the fire, and smoky fire. The "ukha" means vessels (used in popular translations) but also means upper part of leg. The latter fits well in the picture, as ukha is the stronghold of a courser horse, and the poet hopes that he should not be killed.
The poet further turns emotional, and cries out :
"If anyone out of urge, by "sacrifice", has hurt you
with heel or whip, when you were seated,
Just as those who rejoice in the offering,
I kill all of those "ritualists" in the unstoppable sacrifice"
Note that the word used for ritualists is "brahmaNa", which means actually "praying person", but after the formation of the ritualistic cult of "Brahmanism", the name explicitly refers to the ritualistic priests, who have created the Brahmanas. (BrAhmaNa, ritual texts = created by Brahmanas, ritualists)
And word "mahas" is usually used for a great sacrifice, and the popular translation just uses the meaning "excessive urging", while the actual intention is "through sacrificial urge".
The poet continues with the emotional lines, but having another realm of meanings, that shall be revealed in 1.163. He tells :
"Thirty four ribs of the strong horse, friend of God,
The axe pierces ! (omg!!)
with wisdom, ye create the flawless body parts!
cry for each part, and dissect!" (advice)
These are the emotional words of the poet to the immolators who kill and dissect the horse. He mocks that by "wisdom", let the immolators first themselves create the parts that they cut... and only then dissect after crying out loudly, for each part. Poet is sure that such wise people are not there. Again, a satire, emotionally tinted.
And poet makes some symbolic statements about cosmic sacrifice, and makes a riddle : (like the ones in 1.164)
"Of Tvashta's (Creator's) horse, there is one dissector,
And really, there are his two guides
Thus, his limbs, by order (seasons? rtu-thA = as seasons?), I create.
I honour the Agni of those limb-parts"
(Answer is revealed only later, pls wait.. :D)
Even after the riddle, the poet is still sad of the horse sacrifice.
He tells, emotionally to the horse :
"Let not your dear Soul be sad through death,
Let not the axe linger in your body;
May not thou be immolated, by the greed drunk people,
Let not perverted people get your limbs cut and segregated"
Our hero poet, frees the horse and declares :
"Neither you die here, nor are you injured,
By much easy paths to the divinities you go;" (mocking the ritualist claim that horse is led to divinity through this sacrifice, poet refutes after freeing that this is the easy path to reach God)
"The both spotted bay mares are now nearby,
yoked with the horse, in the place of the donkey"
The horse gets his companions back, and is yoked instead of ass, but why does the ass ("rAsabha") come here? Again, answer shall be revealed only later, when poet gives us the key to decode these poems.
The horse is thus set free by the poet, and this horse is the symbol of good fortune, and this act is praised.
And at last, the poem ends in a difficult passage, that is symbolic :
"May Aditi make us sinless, and the horse with oblations bestow on us the quality of protection"
(To be continued...)
The Reality behind the Ashvamedha - Does Veda advocate it?
Vedic period, as we have seen many times, was not homogenous throughout, nor was its society. As we can see, the Vedic poets and sages were spiritual, while the common people could not easily resort to the simplicity of "no ritual" idea. People usually like myths, and complex hypothesis involving supernatural elements to explain the day to day phenomena. The divinely inspired poets of Rig Veda were also secluded from the upcoming ritualists, and we have seen this tension many times within the Rig Veda, but Vedic poets take care that the satire and the refutes are not explicit, but in their poetic cryptic way. May be ritualists threatened the sages...
One of the foremost poets of world's history, the great Dirghatamas Aucathya, explicitly discusses the upcoming ritual of his time, the Ashvamedha, in three poems - Rig Veda 1.162, 1.163, 1.164.
The 1.162 is actually a satirical poem, with double meaning words starting from the first line, and extends continuously to the last line, whereby the mystic poet plays with the divinely inspired words in a great manner. Usually, Rig Veda does not discuss any ritual, and this is but an exception, and one should certainly honour the great poet Aucathya for leaving his remarkable poems that have remained puzzling to the scholars till date.
As a first step, I would like to talk of the account of Ashvamedha of Rig Veda 1.162. If one just takes a read of, say Griffith translation, it would appear that this poem is a factual account of Ashvamedha, and that Veda endorses the ritual. But on scrutiny, if one checks the actual Vedic poem in its language, he should certainly understand that it is a double ended sword. And such a mystic poet like Dirghatamas can never create such a "one sided poem" with no imageries and poetic beauty, and interpreting his poem as such, advocating the ritual, is the product of prejudice as well as ignorance of facts.
The poem paradoxically starts with the lines :
_"Do not, O Mitra, Varuna, Aryaman, Ayu
Indra, Rbhukshan, Maruts!, regard us! ("parikhyan")
when we speak of the qualities in assembly
Of the strong horse, God-descended."_
The verb "parikhyAti" means simultaneously "regard" as well as "disregard". The usual translation is that "Do not disregard us", advocating the ritualist view. But the most prominent meaning is still "regard", and the phrase comes out to be "Do not regard us....."
or simply "ignore us"... This satirical use continues in every line till the end. The God descended (devajAta) is a special usage, which we will understand only when we read the next poem on Ashvamedha, 1.163 by the same poet. As usual, the poet Aucathya, as in 1.161 which we had seen, brings together many imageries and metaphors into his poems. And to ignore them, and be adamant on the outdated view that Vedas should be ritualistic is just a fantasy born out of limited knowledge, fact-resistance and non scholarly prejudice.
The next stanzas describe the fate of the poor goat, and Aucathya uses the situation correctly to mock the ritualists, and uses a double meaning word "vishvadevyaH" meaning both "dear to All divinities" as well as "having all divine attributes". As usual, traditional scholars have opted the first, while we shall stress on the satirical second meaning - goat symbolising the All divinity (vishvadeva).
In a way, does Aucathya mean to say that All - divinities are sacrificed in their cold blooded murder? And why the horse is "covered in gold" and why is goat called fire.. all those things shall be discussed as we move on to 1.163, the "key poem"...
The third stanza again, talks of Tvashta, the Universal Fashioner form of God, who by "arvat", impels the goat to glory. "Arvat" as a noun in Classical Sanskrit, usually stands for the charger horse. But on going to its roots, we see a totally different version - "arvat" as an adjective is used to mean "inferior", "vile"... along with "running", "hastening"..
Thus, the arvat noun should also mean "vile deed" or "inferior manner", along with "running animal (horse)", and it is this poetic use that Aucathya uses throughout the poem. The usage of "arvatA" (by arvat) further attests the situation. It suits well the situation "by bad means"... again, satire on the inferior way of killing the animal, claiming that "it shall get glorified". (The bad view of glorification which echoes in works of Sayana, Brahmanas, Puranas and later philosophers of India)
The usage of arvat for inferior is also a manner to show that "arvati", which means "to kill" is regarded as inferior in old age.
And why does Tvashta enter the picture? Again, only next poem shall tell the situation.
The poet, then touches our heart, through the plight that horse is made to experience. The poet starts - my prayers are with him... it is again a double ended sword, the prayers being "ritualistic" by the ritualists praying for the sacrifice of horse, and the poor poet's prayer for the hurt soul of the horse. The poet addresses the prayers to the horse, reaffirming his love to the horse, rather than to the ritualists who pray to the "God" for proper conduct of sacrifice, and
kill the horse for their materialistic needs.
The poet does not stop here. In fact, he even makes more double meaning statements, like "May the songs of the fashioners of the sacrificial post, the carriers of the stake, the carvers.. may all that "force us" . And again, the arvat used here stands for both horse, and inferior. The horse case, is not well attestable here, since the cooking pots are not "for the horse". Again, the conventional translation has to be shunned. Instead, the poet explicitly tells, "cooking pots for the vile inferior people"... and the last verb is "invatu" which means "to force us", and here it means to "force us back" rather than to "promote".
The poet calls us for an introspection, and tells paradoxically in his usual way.. "let the cries of the inferior people force us back.."
And the poet again paints the scenario of the sacrificial killing, and makes our eyes water. He also creates a satire - the horse meat, once cooked, is not really offered to God, only those sticking to the hands, nails, those eaten by fly... are "offered" to God.. Poet tells,
"whatever meat fly has eaten,..................,let those be your's God!!"
The greedy ritualists performing the ritual to eat meat is aptly mocked here.
The poet further tells in a stanza, explicitly :
"Those, observing the horse, who tell "cooked, smell's good, remove it"
Those who are intent on the inferior (horse?) meat distribution,
May their songs force us back."
The poem continues, telling what all they actually offer to God.. each time mocking in a beautiful manner.. the cooking pots, food horse ate, water he drank.... it is a heavily loaded satire on the greedy ritualists.
A greatest phrase then comes :
"मा त्वाग्निर्ध्वनीयद् धूमगन्धिः
मोखा भ्राजन्त्यभि विक्त जघ्रिः"
"May not the smoke-scented fire blind (wrap) you,
not the glowing thighs segregate, vanguish"
The poet hopes that may the smoke scented fire not envelop the horse, may not the glowing thighs (the part which is the strength of a horse) separate and vanguish in the fire. Poet hopes that horse should not be killed.
The popular translations take the meanings "dhvanIyad" for crackle, which may mean right at the moment, but it has no connection with "smoke scented fire". Instead the meaning of dhvaniyati as "to wrap", "to blind" (it is attested meaning) is more correct, as it explains the significance of the fire, and smoky fire. The "ukha" means vessels (used in popular translations) but also means upper part of leg. The latter fits well in the picture, as ukha is the stronghold of a courser horse, and the poet hopes that he should not be killed.
The poet further turns emotional, and cries out :
"If anyone out of urge, by "sacrifice", has hurt you
with heel or whip, when you were seated,
Just as those who rejoice in the offering,
I kill all of those "ritualists" in the unstoppable sacrifice"
Note that the word used for ritualists is "brahmaNa", which means actually "praying person", but after the formation of the ritualistic cult of "Brahmanism", the name explicitly refers to the ritualistic priests, who have created the Brahmanas. (BrAhmaNa, ritual texts = created by Brahmanas, ritualists)
And word "mahas" is usually used for a great sacrifice, and the popular translation just uses the meaning "excessive urging", while the actual intention is "through sacrificial urge".
The poet continues with the emotional lines, but having another realm of meanings, that shall be revealed in 1.163. He tells :
"Thirty four ribs of the strong horse, friend of God,
The axe pierces ! (omg!!)
with wisdom, ye create the flawless body parts!
cry for each part, and dissect!" (advice)
These are the emotional words of the poet to the immolators who kill and dissect the horse. He mocks that by "wisdom", let the immolators first themselves create the parts that they cut... and only then dissect after crying out loudly, for each part. Poet is sure that such wise people are not there. Again, a satire, emotionally tinted.
And poet makes some symbolic statements about cosmic sacrifice, and makes a riddle : (like the ones in 1.164)
"Of Tvashta's (Creator's) horse, there is one dissector,
And really, there are his two guides
Thus, his limbs, by order (seasons? rtu-thA = as seasons?), I create.
I honour the Agni of those limb-parts"
(Answer is revealed only later, pls wait.. :D)
Even after the riddle, the poet is still sad of the horse sacrifice.
He tells, emotionally to the horse :
"Let not your dear Soul be sad through death,
Let not the axe linger in your body;
May not thou be immolated, by the greed drunk people,
Let not perverted people get your limbs cut and segregated"
Our hero poet, frees the horse and declares :
"Neither you die here, nor are you injured,
By much easy paths to the divinities you go;" (mocking the ritualist claim that horse is led to divinity through this sacrifice, poet refutes after freeing that this is the easy path to reach God)
"The both spotted bay mares are now nearby,
yoked with the horse, in the place of the donkey"
The horse gets his companions back, and is yoked instead of ass, but why does the ass ("rAsabha") come here? Again, answer shall be revealed only later, when poet gives us the key to decode these poems.
The horse is thus set free by the poet, and this horse is the symbol of good fortune, and this act is praised.
And at last, the poem ends in a difficult passage, that is symbolic :
"May Aditi make us sinless, and the horse with oblations bestow on us the quality of protection"
(To be continued...)
Sharada Panda
ReplyDelete