Gavam Ayanam(THE COWS’ WALK) Lokamanya TilaK

June 11, 2009

173

CHAPTER VIII

THE COWS' WALK

The Pravargya ceremony — Symbolizes the revival of the yearly sacrifice — Milk representing seed heated in Gharma or Mahâvîra

— Mantras used on the occasion of pouring milk into it — The two

creating the five, and the ten of Vivasvat — Indicate the death of the

year after five seasons or ten months — The tradition about the sun

falling beyond the sky — Annual Sattras — Their type, the Gavâm-ayanam

or the Cows' walk — Lasted for 10 or 12 months according to the

Aitareya Brâhmaá¹‡a — Two passages from the Taittirîya Samhitâ describing

the Gavâm-ayanam — Mention to months' duration of the Sattra,

but give no reason except that it was an ancient practice — Plainly

indicates an ancient sacrificial year of ten months-Comparison with the

old Roman year of ten months or 304 days — How the rest of 360 days

were disposed of by the Romans not yet known — They represented a long

period of darkness according to the legend of the Dashagvas — Thus

leading to the Arctic theory — Prof. Max Müller on the threefold nature

of cows in the Vedas — Cows as animals, rain and dawns or days in the

á¹šig-Veda — Ten months' Cows' walk thus means the ten months' duration

of ordinary days and nights — 350 oxen of Helios — Implies a night of

ten days — The stealing of Apollon's oxen by Hermes — Cows stolen by

Vá¹›itra in the Vedas — Represent the stealing of day-cows thereby

causing the long night — Further sacrificial evidence from the Vedas —

Classification of the Soma-sacrifices — Difference between Ekâha and Ahîna — A hundred nightly sacrifices — Annual Sattras like the Gavâm-ayanam

— Model outline or scheme of ceremonies therein — Other modifications

of the same — All at present based upon a civil year — But lasted for

ten months in ancient times — Night-sacrifices now included amongst

day-sacrifices — The reason why the former extend only over 100 nights

is yet unexplained — Appropriately accounted for on the Arctic theory —

Soma juice extracted at night in the Atirâtra, or the trans nocturnal sacrifice even now — The analogy applied to other night-sacrifices — Râtrî Sattras

were the sacrifices of the long night in ancient times — Their object —

Soma libations exclusively offered to Indra to help him in his fight

against Vala — Shata-râtra represented the maximum duration of

the long night — Corroborated by Aditi's legend of seven months'

sunshine — Explains why India was called Shata-kratu in the

Purâá¹‡as — The epithet misunderstood by Western scholars — Similarity

between Soma and Ashvamedha sacrifices — The epithet Shata-kratu unlike other epithets, never paraphrased in the Vedas — Implies that it was peculiar or

proper to Indra — Dr. Haug's view that kratu means a sacrifice in the Vedas — Hundred forts or

174

puraá¸¥

(cities) of Vá¹›itra — Explained as hundred seats of darkness or nights —

Legend of Tishtrya's fight with Apaosha in the Avesta — Only a

reproduction of Indra's fight with Vá¹›itra — Tishtrya's fight described

as lasting from one to a hundred nights in the Avesta — Forms an

independent corroboration of hundred nightly Soma sacrifices — The

phrase Sato-karahe found in the Avesta — The meaning of the nature of Ati-râtra

discussed — Means a trans-nocturnal Soma sacrifice at either end of the

long night — Production of the cycle of day and night therefrom — Hence

a fitting introduction to the annual Sattras — Marked the close of the long night and the beginning of the period of sunshine — Sattra Ati-râtra, night sacrifices and Ati-râtra

again thus formed the yearly round of sacrifices in ancient times —

Clearly indicate the existence of a long darkness of 100 nights in the

ancient year — Ancient sacrificial system thus corresponded with the

ancient year — Adaptation of both to the new home effected by the

Brâhmaá¹‡as, like Numa's reform in the old Roman Calendar — The

importance of the results of sacrificial evidence.

The

legend of the Dashagvas, who completed their sacrifices during ten

months, is not the only relic of the ancient year preserved in the

sacrificial literature. The Pravargya ceremony, which is described in

the Aitareya Brâhmaá¹‡a (I, 18-12), furnishes us with another instance,

where a reference to the old year seems to be clearly indicated. Dr.

Haug, in his translation of the Aitareya Brâhmaá¹‡a, has fully described

this ceremony in a note to I, 18. It lasts for three days and precedes

the animal and the Soma sacrifice, as no one is allowed to take part in

the Soma feast without having undergone this ceremony. The whole

ceremony symbolizes the revival of the sun or the sacrificial ceremony (yajña),

which, for the time being, is preserved as seed in order that it may

grow again in due time (Ait. Br. I, 18). Thus one of the chief

implements used in the ceremony is a peculiar earthen pot called Gharma or

Mahâvîra. Placing it on the Vedic altar the Adhvaryu makes a circle of clay called khara,

because it is made of earth brought on the back of a donkey to the

sacrificial ground. He places the pot on the circle and heats it so as

to make it quite hot (gharma). It is then lifted by means of two shaphas

(two wooden pieces), and then milking a cow, the milk is poured into

the heated pot and mixed with the milk of a goat whose kid is dead.

After

175

this has been done, the contents of the Mahâvîra

are thrown into the Âhavanîya fire. But all the contents of the pot are

not thus thrown away, for the Hotá¹›i is described as eating the

remainder of the contents of the Gharma, which are said to be

full of honey, full of sap, full of food and quite hot. The Aitareya

Brâhmaá¹‡a (I, 22) gives us a rational of this ceremony as follows "The

milk in the vessel is the seed. This seed (in the shape of milk) is

poured in Agni (fire) as the womb of the gods for production, for Agni

is the womb of the gods." This explanation proves the symbolic nature

of the ceremony, and shows that the sun, the sacrifice or the year is

thus preserved as seed for time, and then revived at the proper season.

The Mantra or the verse, which is recited on the occasion of pouring

the milk into the Mahâvîra is taken from the á¹šig-Veda VIII, 72

(61) 8, and it is very likely that the verse was selected not simply on

account of mere verbal correspondence. The hymn, where the verse

occurs, is rather obscure. But the verse itself, as well as the two

preceding verses (VIII, 72 (61), 6-7-8) present no verbal difficulty

and may be translated as follows: —

"6. And now that mighty and great chariot of his with horses (as well as) the line of his chariot is seen."

"7. The seven milk the one, and the two create the five, on the ocean's loud-sounding bank."

"8. With the ten of Vivasvat, Indra by his three-fold hammer, caused the heaven's bucket to drop down."*

Here,

first of all, we are told that his (sun's) chariot, the great chariot

with horses has become visible, evidently meaning that the dawn has

made its appearance on the horizon. Then the seven, probably the seven Hotá¹›is,

or seven rivers, are said to milk this dawn and produce the two. This

milking is a familiar process in the á¹šig-Veda and in one place the cows

of the morning are said to be milked from darkness

*

176

(I,

33, 10). The two evidently mean day and night and as soon as they are

milked, they give rise to the five seasons. The day and the night are

said to be the two mothers of Sûrya in III, 55, 6, and here they are

the mothers of the five seasons. What becomes after the expiry of the

seasons is, described in the eighth verse. It says that with the ten of

Vivasvat, or with the lapse of ten months, Indra with his three-fold

hammer shook down the heavenly jar. This means that the three storing

places of the aerial waters (VII, 101, 4) were all emptied into the

ocean at this time and along with it the sun also went to the lower

world, for sunlight is described to be three-fold in (VII, 101, 2 and

Sâyaá¹‡a there quotes the Taittirîya Samhitâ (II, 1, 2, 5), which says

that the sun has three lights; the morning light being the Vasanta, the midday the Grîá¹£hma, and the evening the Sharad.

The verse, therefore, obviously refers to the three-fold courses of

waters in the heaven and the three-fold light of the sun and all this

is. said to come to an end with the ten of Vivasvat The sun and the

sacrifice are then preserved as seed to be re-generated some time

after, — a process symbolized in the Pravargya ceremony. The idea of

the sun dropping from heaven is very common in the sacrificial

literature. Thus in the Aitareya Brâhmaá¹‡a (IV, 18) we read, "The gods,

being afraid of his (sun's) falling beyond

them being turned upside down, supported him by placing above him the

highest worlds";* and the same idea is met with in the Tâá¹‡á¸ya Brâhmaá¹‡a

(IV, 5, 9, 11). The words "falling beyond" (parâchas atipâtât)

are very important, inasmuch as they show that the sun dropped into

regions that were en the yonder side. One of the Ashvin's protégé is

also called Chyavâna, which word Prof. Max Müller derives from chyu

to drop. The Ashvins are said to have restored him to youth, which,

being divested of its legendary form, means the rehabilitation of the

sun that had dropped into the nether world. The Pravargya ceremony,

which preserves

* Ait. Brâh. VI, 18.

177

serves

the seed of the sacrifice, is, therefore, only one phase of the story

of the dropping sun in the sacrificial literature and the verses

employed in this ceremony, if interpreted in the spirit of that

ceremony, appear, as stated above, to indicate an older year of five

seasons and ten months.

But

the Mantras used in the Pravargya ceremony are not so explicit as one

might expect such kind of evidence to be. Therefore, instead of

attempting to give more evidence of the same kind, — and there are many

such facts in the Vedic sacrificial literature, — I proceed to give the

direct statements about the duration of the annual Sattras from

the well-known Vedic works. These statements have nothing of the

legendary character about them and are, therefore, absolutely certain

and reliable. It has been stated before that institution of sacrifice

is an old one, and found amongst both the Asiatic and the European

branches of the Aryan race. It was, in fact the main ritual of the

religion of these people and naturally enough every detail concerning

the sacrifices was closely watched, or accurately determined by the

priests, who had the charge of these ceremonies. It is true that in

giving reasons for the prevalence of a particular practice, these

priests sometimes indulged in speculation; but the details of the

sacrifice were facts that were settled in strict accordance with

custom, and tradition, whatever explanations might be given in regard

to their origin. But sometimes the facts were found to be so stubborn

as to, defy any explanation, and the priests had to content themselves

with barely recording the practice, and adding that "such is the

practice from times immemorial." It is with such evidence that we have

now to deal in investigating the duration of the annual Sattras in ancient times.

There are many annual Sattras like Âdityânâm-ayanam, Aá¹…girasâm-ayanam, Gavâm-ayanam,

& c. mentioned in the Brâhmaá¹‡as and the Shrauta Sûtras; and, as

observed by Dr. Haug, they seem to have been originally established in

imitation of the sun's yearly course. They are the oldest of the Vedic

sacrifices and their duration and other details have

178

been all very minutely and carefully noted down in the sacrificial works. All these annual Sattras

are not, however, essentially different from each other, being so many

different varieties or modifications, according to circumstances, of a

common model or type, and the Gavâm-ayanam is said to be this type; (vide, com. on Âshv. S. S. II, 7, 1). Thus in the Aitareya Brâhmaá¹‡a (IV, 17) we are told that "They hold the Gavâm-ayanam,

that is, the sacrificial session called the Cows' walk. The cows are

the Âdityas (gods of the months). By holding the session called the

Cows' walk they also hold the Âdityânâm-ayanam (the walk of the Âdityas)."* If we, (therefore, ascertain the duration of the Gavâm-ayanam, the same rule would apply to all other annual Sattras and we need not examine the latter separately. This Gavâm-ayanam,

or the Cows' walk, is fully described in three places. Once in the

Aitareya Brâhmaá¹‡a and twice in the Taittirîya Samhitâ. We begin with

the Aitareya Brâhmaá¹‡a (IV, 17), which describes the origin and duration

of the Sattra as follows: —

"The

cows, being desirous of obtaining hoofs and horns, held (once) a

sacrificial session. In the tenth month (of their sacrifice) they

obtained hoofs and horns. They said, `We have obtained fulfillment of

that wish for which we underwent the initiation into the sacrificial

rites. Let us rise (the sacrifice being finished).' Those that arose,

are these, who have horns. Of those, who, however, sat (continued the

session) saying, `Let us finish the year,' the horns went off on

account of their distrust. It is they, who are hornless (tûparâá¸¥). They (continuing their sacrificial session) produced vigor (ûrjam).

Thence after (having been sacrificing for twelve months and) having

secured all the seasons, they rose (again) at the end. For they had

produced the vigor (to reproduce horns, hoofs, & c. when decaying).

Thus

* See Dr. Haug's Ait. Brâh. Vol. II, p. 287.

179

the cows made themselves beloved by all (the whole world), and are beautified (decorated) by all."*

Here

it is distinctly mentioned that the cows first obtained the fulfillment

of their desire in ten months, and a number of them left off

sacrificing further. Those, that remained and sacrificed for two months

more, are called "distrustful," and they had to suffer for their

distrust by forfeiting the horns they had obtained. It is, therefore,

clear, that this yearly Sattra, which in the Samhitâs and Brâhmaá¹‡as is a Sattra of twelve months in imitation of the sun's yearly course, was once completed in ten months. Why should it be so? Why was a Sattra,

which is annual in its very nature and which now lasts for twelve

months, once completed in ten months? How did the sacrificers obtain

all the religious merit of a twelve months' sacrifice by sacrificing

for ten months only? These are very important questions; but the

Aitareya Brâhmaá¹‡a neither raises them, nor gives us any clue to their

solution. If we, however, go back to the Taittirîya Samhitâ, the oldest

and most authoritative work on the sacrificial ceremonies, we find the

questions distinctly raised. The Samhitâ expressly states that the Gavâm-ayanam can be completed in ten or twelve months, according to the choice of the sacrificer; but it plainly acknowledges its inability to assign any reason how a Sattra

of twelve months could be completed in ten, except the fact that "it is

an old practice sanctioned by immemorial usage." These passages are

very important for our purpose, and I give below a close translation

* See Dr. Haug's Ait. Brâh. Trans. Vol. II, p. 287.

180

of each. The first occurs in the Taittirîya Samhitâ (VII. 5, 1, 1-2),* and may be rendered as follows: —

"The

cows held this sacrificial session, desiring that `being hornless let

horns grow unto us.' Their session lasted (for) ten months. Then when

the horns grew (up) they rose saying, `We have gained.' But those,

whose (horns) were not grown, they rose after completing the year,

saying `We have gained.' Those, that had their horns grown, and those

that had not, both rose saying `We have gained.' Cow's session is thus

the year (year session). Those, who know this, reach the year and

prosper verily. Therefore, the hornless (cow) moves (grazes) pleased

during the two rainy months. This is what the Sattra has achieved for her. Therefore, whatever is done in the house of one performing the yearly Sattra is successfully, timely and properly done."

This

account slightly differs from that given in the Aitareya Brâhmaá¹‡a. In

the Samhitâ the cows whose session lasted for twelve months, are said

to be still hornless; but instead of getting vigor (ûrjam), they

are said to have obtained as a reward for their additional sitting, the

pleasure of comfortable grazing in the two rainy months, during which

as the commentator observes, the horned cows find their horns an

impediment to graze freely in the field, where new grass has grown up.

But the statement regarding the duration of the Sattra viz., that it lasted for ten or twelve months, is the same both in the Samhitâ and in the Brâhmaá¹‡a. The Samhitâ again takes up the question in the next Anuvâka (VII, 5, 2,

* Taitt. Sam. VII, 5, 1, 1-2

181

1-2 ),* and further describes the cows' session as follows: —

"The

cows held this sacrificial session, being hornless (and) desiring to

obtain horns. Their session lasted (for) ten months; then when the

horns grew (up), they said, `We have gained, let us rise, we have

obtained the desire for which we sat (commenced the session).' Half, or

as many, of them as said, `We shall certainly sit for the two twelfth

(two last) months, and rise after completing the year,' (some of them

had horns in the twelfth month by trust, (while) by distrust those that

(are seen) hornless (remained so). Both, that is, those who got horns,

and those who obtained vigor (ûrjam), thus attained their

object. One who knows this, prospers, whether rising (from the

sacrifice) in the tenth month or in the twelfth. They indeed go by the

path (padena); he going by the path indeed attains (the end). This is that successful ayanam (session). Therefore, it is go-sani (beneficial to the

cows)."

This passage, in its first part repeats the story given in the previous anuvâka

of the Samhitâ and in the Aitareya Brâhmaá¹‡a with slight variations. But

the latter part contains two important statements: firstly that whether

we complete the sacrifice within ten months or twelve months the

religious merit or fruit obtained is the same in either case, for both

are said to prosper equally; and secondly this is said, to be the case

because it is the "path" or as Sâyaá¹‡a explains "an immemorial custom." The Samhitâ is, in fact, silent as to the reason why an annual sattra which ought to, and as a matter of fact does, now last for twelve months could be completed in ten months;

* Taitt. Sam. VII, 5, 2, 1-2.

182

and

this reticence is very remarkable, considering how the Samhitâ

sometimes indulges in speculations about the origin of sacrificial

rites. Any how we have two facts clearly established, (1) that at the

time of the Taittirîya Samhitâ the Gavâm-ayanam the type of all annual Sattras could be completed in ten months; and (2) that no reasons was known at the time, as to why a Sattra

of twelve months could be thus finished in ten, except that it was "an

immemorial custom." The Tâá¹‡dya Brâhmaá¹‡a IV, 1, has a similar discussion

about Gavâm-ayanam, and clearly recognizes its two-fold

characters so far as its duration is concerned. Sâyaá¹‡a and Bhaá¹á¹

Bhâskara, in their commentaries on the Taittirîya Samhitâ, cannot

therefore, be said to have invented any new theory of their own as

regards the double duration of the annual Sattra. We shall discuss later on what is denoted by "cows"

in the above passages. At present we are concerned with the duration of the Sattra; and if we compare the above matter-of-fact statements in the Samhitâ about the double duration of the annual Sattra

with the legend of the Dashagvas sacrificing for ten months, the

conclusion, that in ancient times the ancestors of the Vedic Aryas

completed their annual sacrificial session in ten months, becomes irresistible. This duration of the Sattra must have been changed and all such Sattras

made to last for twelve months when the Vedic people came to live in

regions where such an annual session was impossible. But conservatism

in such matters is so strong that the old practice must have outlived

the change in the calendar, and it had to be recognized as an alternative period of duration for this Sattra in the Samhitâs. The Taittirîya Samhitâ has thus to record the alternative period, stating that it

is an ancient practice, and I think it settles the question, so far as the duration of these Sattras in ancient times is concerned. Whatever reasons we may assign for it, it is beyond all doubt that the oldest annual Sattras lasted only for ten months.

But

the Taittirîya Samhitâ is not alone in being thus unable to assign any

reason for this relic of the ancient calendar, or the duration of the

annual Sattra. We still designate

183

the twelfth month of the European solar year as December which word etymologically denotes the tenth month, (Latin decem, Sans. dashan, ten; and ber Sans. vâra,

time or period), and we all know that Numa added two months to the

ancient Roman year and made it of twelve months. Plutarch, in his life

of Numa records another version of the story, viz., that Numa

according to some, did not add the two months but simply transferred

them from the end to the beginning of the year. But the names of the

months clearly show that this could not have been the case, for the

enumeration of the months by words indicating their order as the fifth

or Quintilis (old name for July), the sixth or Sixtilis, (old name for August), the seventh or September and so on the rest in their order, cannot, after, it is once begun, be regarded to have abruptly stopped at December,

allowing only the last two months to be differently named. Plutarch

has, therefore, rightly observed that "we have a proof in the name of

the last (month) that the Roman year contained, at first ten months

only and not twelve."* But if there was any doubt on the point, it is

now removed by the analogy of the Gavâm-ayanam and the legends of the Dashagvas and Dîrghatamas. Macrobius (Saturnal Lib.

I. Chap. 12) confirms the story of Numa's adding and not simply

transposing, two months to the ancient year of ten months. What the

Avesta has to say on this subject we shall see later on where

traditions about the ancient year amongst the other Aryan races will

also be considered. Suffice it to say for the present that, according

to tradition, the ancient Roman year consisted only of ten months, and

like the duration of the Gavâm-ayanam, it was subsequently

changed into a year of twelve months; and yet, so far as I know, no

reason has yet been discovered, why the Roman year in ancient times was

considered to be shorter by two months. On the contrary, the tendency

is either to explain away the

* See Plutarch's Lives, translated into English by the Rev. John and William Langhorne (Ward, Lock & Co.), p. 54, ƒ.

184

tradition

some how as inconvenient, or to ignore it altogether as incredible. But

so long as the word December is before us and we know how it is

derived, the tradition cannot be so lightly set side. The Encyclopædia

Britannica (s.v. calendar) records the ancient tradition that

the oldest Roman year of Romulus was of ten months of 304 days and

observes "it is not known how the remaining days were disposed of." If,

with all the resources of modern science at our command, we have not

yet been able to ascertain why the oldest Roman year was of ten months

only and how the remaining days were disposed of, we need not be

surprised if the Taittirîya Samhitâ refrained from speculating on the

point and contented itself with stating that such was the "path"

or the old custom or practice handed down from generation to generation

from times immemorial. The Arctic theory, however, now throws quite a

new light on these ancient traditions, Vedic as well as Roman; and if

we take the Gavâm-ayanam

of ten months and the old Roman year of ten months as relics of the

period when the ancestors of both these races lived together within the

circum-polar regions, there is no difficulty of explaining how the

remaining days were disposed of. It was the period of the long night, —

a time when Indra fought with Vala, to regain the cows imprisoned by

the latter and Hercules killed the giant Cacus, a three-headed

fire-vomiting monster, who had carried off Hercules' cows and hid them

in a cave, dragging them backwards in order that the foot-marks might

not be traced. When the Aryan people migrated southwards from this

ancient home they had to change this calendar to suit their new home by

adding two more months to the old year. But the traces of the old

calendar could not be completely wiped off, and we have still

sufficient evidence, traditional or sacrificial, to warrant us in

holding that a year of ten months followed by a night of two months was

known in the Indo-Germanic period — a conclusion, which is further

confirmed by Teutonic myths and legends, gas explained by Prof. Rhys,

whose views will be found summarized in a subsequent chapter.

185

The Taittirîya Samhitâ and the Aitareya Brâhmaá¹‡a speak of the Gavâm-ayanam

as being really held by the cows. Was it really a session of these

animals? Or was it something else? The Aitareya Brâhmaá¹‡a, we have seen,

throws out a suggestion that "the cows are the Âdityas," that is the

month-gods, and the Cows' session is really the session of the monthly

sun-gods.* Comparative mythology now fully bears out the truth of this

remarkable suggestion put forward by the Brâhmaá¹‡a. Cows, such as we

meet them in the mythological legends, represent days and nights of the

year, not only in the Vedic but also in the Greek mythology; any we

can, therefore, now give a better account of the origin of this

sacrificial session than that it was a session of bovine animals for

the purpose of obtaining horns. Speaking of cows in the Aryan

mythology, Prof. Max Müller in his Contributions to the Science of Mythology (Vol. II.

p. 761) writes as follows: —

"There

were thus three kinds of cows, the real cows, the cows in the dark

cloud (rain = milk), and the cows stepping forth from the dark stable

of the night (the rays of the morning). These three are not always easy

to distinguish in the Veda; nay, while we naturally try to distinguish

between them, the poets themselves seem to delight in mixing them up.

In the passage quoted above (I, 32, 11), we saw how the captive waters

were compared to cows that had been stolen by Paá¹‡i (niruddhâá¸¥ âpaá¸¥ Pâá¹‡înâ iva gâvaá¸¥),

but what is once compared in the Veda is soon identified. As to the

Dawn, she is not only compared to a cow, she is called the cow straight

out. Thus when we read, R.V. I. 92, 1. These dawns have made a light on

the eastern half of the sky, they brighten their splendor, the bright

cows approach, the mothers, the cows, gâvaá¸¥, can only be the

dawns themselves, the plural of dawn being constantly in the Veda used

where we should use the singular. In R.V. 1, 93, 4, we read that

`Agnîshomau deprived Paá¹‡i of his cows and found light

* See Aitareya Brâh. IV, 17.

186

for

many.' Here again the cows are the dawns kept by Paá¹‡i in the dark

stable or cave of the night, discovered by Saramâ and delivered every

morning by the gods of light."

"We read in R.V. I, 62, 3, that Bá¹›ihaspati split the rock and found the cows."

"Of

Indra it is said, II, 19, 3, that he produced the sun and found the

cows; of Bá¹›ihaspati, II, 24, 3, that he drove out the cows, that he

split the cave by his word, that he hid the darkness, and lighted up

the sky. What can be clearer? The Maruts also, II, 34, 1, are said to

uncover the cows and Agni. V, 14, 4, is praised for killing the

friends, for having overcome darkness by light, and having found the

cows, water and the sun."

"In all these passages we find no iva or na,

which would indicate that the word cow was used metaphorically. The

dawns or days as they proceed from the dark stable, or are rescued from

evil spirits, are spoken of directly as the cows. If they, are spoken

of in the plural, we find the same in the case of the Dawn (uá¹£has) who is often conceived as many, as in II, 28, 2, upâyane uá¹£hasâm gomatînâm,

`at the approach of the dawns with their cows.' From that it required

but a small step to speak of the one Dawn as the mother of the cows,

IV, 52, 2, mâtâ gavâm."

"Kuhn

thought that these cows should be understood as the red clouds of the

morning. But clouds are not always present at sunrise, nor can it well

be said that they are carried off and kept in prison during the night

by the powers of darkness."

"But

what is important and settles the point is the fact that these cows or

oxen of the dawn or of the rising sun occur in other mythologies also

and are there clearly meant for days. They are numbered as 12 × 30,

that is, the thirty days of the 12 lunar months. If Helios has 350 oxen

and 350 sheep, that can only refer to the days and to the nights of the

year, and would prove the knowledge of a year of 350 days before the

Aryan separation."

Thus the cows in mythology are the days and nights, or

187

dawns,

that are imprisoned by Paá¹‡i, and not real living cows with horns.

Adopting this explanation and substituting these metaphorical cows for gâvaá¸¥ in the Gavâm-ayanam,

it is not difficult to see that underneath the strange story of cows

holding a sacrificial session for getting horns, there lies concealed

the remarkable phenomenon, that, released from the clutches of Paá¹‡i,

these cows of days and nights walked on for ten months, the oldest

duration of the session known as Cows, walk. In plain language this

means, if it means anything, that the oldest Aryan year was one of ten

months followed by the long night, during which the cows were again

carried away by the powers of darkness. We have seen that the oldest

Roman year was of ten months, and the Avesta, as will be shown later

on, also speaks of ten months' summer prevailing in the Airyana Vaêjo

before the home :was invaded by the evil spirit, who brought on ice and

severe winter in that place. A year of ten months with a long night of

two months may thus be taken to be known before the Aryan separation,

and the references to it in the Vedic literature are neither isolated

nor imaginary. They are the relics of ancient history, which have been

faithfully preserved in the sacrificial literature of India, and if

they were hitherto misunderstood it was because the true key required

for their solution was as yet unknown.

But

as stated in the previous chapter, a year in the circum-polar region

will always have a varying number of the months or sunshine according

to latitude. Although, therefore, there is sufficient evidence to

establish the existence of, a year of ten months, we cannot hold that

it was the only year known in ancient times. In fact we have seen that

the legend of Aditi indicates the existence of the seven months of

sunshine; and a band of thirty continuous dawns supports the same

conclusion. But it seems that a year of ten months of sunshine was more

prevalent, or was selected as the mean of the different varying years.

The former view is rendered probable by the fact that of the Aá¹…girases

of various forms (virûpas) the Navagvas and the Dashagvas are said to be the

188

principal

or the most important in the á¹šig-Veda (X, 62, 6), But whichever view we

adopt, the existence of a year of seven, eight, nine, ten or eleven

months of sunshine follows as a matter of course, if the ancient Aryan

home was within the Arctic circle. Prof. Max Müller, in his passage

quoted above, points out that the old Greek year probably consisted of

350 days, the 350 oxen of Helios representing the days, and 350 sheep

representing the nights. He also notices that in German mythology 700

gold rings of Wieland, the smith, are spoken of, and comparing the

number with 720 sons of Agni mentioned in I, 164, 11, he draws from it

the conclusion that a year of 350 days is also represented in the

German mythology. This year is shorter by ten days than the civil year

of 360 days, or falls short of the full solar year by 15 days. It is,

therefore, clear that if a year of 350 days existed before the Aryan

separation, it must have been followed by a continuous night of ten

days; while where the year was of 300 days, the long night extended

over 60 days of 24 hours each. We shall thus have different kinds of

long nights; and it is necessary to see if we can collect evidence to

indicate the longest duration of the night known before the Aryan

separation. Speaking of the cows or oxen of Helios, as stated in the

passage quoted above, Prof. Max Müller goes on to observe: —

"The

cows or oxen of Hêlios thus receive their background from the Veda, but

what is told of them by Homer is by no means clear. When it is said

that the companions of Odysseus consumed the oxen of Helios, and that

they thus forfeited their return home, we can hardly take this in the

modern sense of consuming or wasting their days, thought it may be

difficult to assign any other definite meaning to it. Equally puzzling

is the fable alluded to in the Homeric hymn that Hermes stole the oxen

of Apollon and killed two of them. The number of Apollon's oxen is

given as fifty (others give the number as 100 cows, twelve oxen and one

bull), Which looks like the number of weeks in the lunar year, but why

Hermes should be represented as carrying off the whole herd

189

and then killing to, is difficult to guess, unless we refer it to the two additional months in a cycle of four years."

In

the light of the Arctic theory the puzzle here referred to is solved

without any difficulty. The stealing away or the carrying off of the

cows need not now he taken to mean simple wasting of the days in the

modern sense of the word; nor need we attribute such stories to the

"fancy of ancient bards and story tellers." The legend or the tradition

of stealing consuming, or carrying off the cows or oxen is but another

form of stating that so many days were lost, being swallowed up in the

long night that occurred at the end of the year and lasted, according

to latitude, for varying period of time. So long as everything was to

be explained on the theory of a daily struggle between light and

darkness, these legends were unintelligible. But as soon as we adopt

the Arctic theory the whole difficulty vanishes and what was confused

and puzzling before becomes at once plain and comprehensible. In the

Vedic mythology cows are similarly said to be stolen by Vá¹›itra or Vala,

but their number is nowhere given, unless we regard the story of

á¹šijrâshva (the Red-horse) slaughtering 100 or 101 sheep and giving them

to a she-wolf to devour (I, 116, 16; 117, 18), as a modification of the

story of stealing the cows. The Vedic sacrificial literature does,

however, preserve for us an important relic; besides the one above

noted, of the older calendar and especially the long night. But in this

case the relic is so deeply buried under the weight of later

explanations, adaptations and emendations, that we must here examine at

some length the history of the Soma sacrifices in order to discover the

original meaning of the rites which are included under that general

name. That the Some sacrifice is an ancient institution is amply proved

by parallel rites in the Parsi scriptures; and whatever doubt we may

have regarding the knowledge of Soma in the Indo. European period, as

the word is not found in the European languages, the system of

sacrifices can be clearly traced back to the primeval age. Of this

sacrificial system„ the Soma sacrifice may, at any rate, be safely

taken as the oldest

190

representative,

since it forms the main feature of the ritual of the á¹šig-Veda and a

whole Maá¹‡á¸ala of 114 hymns in the á¹šig-Veda is dedicated to the praise

of Soma. A careful analysis of the Soma sacrifice may, therefore, be

expected to disclose at least partially, the nature of the oldest

sacrificial system of the Aryan race; and we, therefore, proceed to

examine the same.

The

chief characteristic of the Soma sacrifice, as distinguished from other

sacrifices, is, as the name indicates, the extraction of the Soma juice

and the offering thereof to gods before drinking it. There are three

libations of Soma in a day, one in the morning, one in mid-day and the

last in the evening, and all these are accompanied by the chanting of

hymns during the sacrifice. These Soma sacrifices, if classed according

to their duration, fall under three heads; (1) those that are performed

in a single day, called Ekâhas, (2) those that are performed in more than one and less than thirteen days called Ahînas, and (3) those that take thirteen or more than 13 days and may last even for one thousand years, called Sattras.

Under the first head we have the Agniá¹£há¹oma, fully described in the

Aitareya Brâhmaá¹‡a (III, 39-44), as the key or the type of all the

sacrifices that fall under this class. There are six modifications of

Agniá¹£há¹oma, viz., Ati-agniá¹£há¹oma, Ukthya,

Shoá¸ashî, Vâjapeya, Atirâtra and Aptoryâma, which together with

Agniá¹£há¹oma, form the seven parts, kinds or modifications of the

Jyotiá¹£há¹oma, sacrifice (Ashv. S.S. VI, 11, 1). The modification chiefly

consists in the number of hymns to be recited at the libations, or the

manner of recitation, or the number of the Grahvas or Soma-cups used on the occasion. But with these we are not at present concerned. Of the second class of Soma sacrifices, the Dvâdashâá¸¥a or twelve days' sacrifice is celebrated both as Ahîna and Sattra and is considered to be very important. It is made up of three tryahas (or three days' performances, called respectively Jyotis, Go, and Ayus), the tenth day and the two Atirâtras (Ait. Br. IV, 23-4). The nine days' performance (three tryahas) is called Nava-râtra. Side

by side with this,

191

there

are, under this head, a number of Soma sacrifices extending over two

nights or three nights, four nights, up to twelve nights, called dvi-râtra, tri-râtra

and so on (Tait. Sam. VII, 1, 4; VII, 3, 2. Ashv. Shr. Sut. X and XI;

Tân. Brâ. 20, 11, 24, 19). In the third class we have the annual Sattras and of these the Gavâm-ayanam is the type. Some Sattras

which come under this class are described as extending over 1,000 years

and a discussion is found in sacrificial works as to whether the phrase

one thousand years signifies 1,000 real years, or whether it stands for

1,000 days. But we may pass it over as unnecessary for our purpose. The

annual Sattras are the only important Sattras of this class, and to understand their nature we must see what a á¹£haá¸·aha means. The word literally denotes a group of six days (á¹£haá¹+ ahan)

and is used to denote six days' performance in the sacrificial

literature. It is employed as a unit to measure a month in the same way

as we now use a week, a month being made up of five á¹£haá¸·ahas. The á¹£haá¸·aha, in its turn, consists of the daily sacrifices called Jyotis, Go, Âyus and the same three taken in the reverse order as Âyus, Go and Jyotis. Every á¹£haá¸·aha, therefore, begins and ends with a Jyotiá¹£há¹oma (Ait. Br. IV, 15). The á¹£haá¸·aha is further distinguished into Abhiplava and Pá¹›ishá¹hya, according to the arrangement of the stomas or songs sung at the Soma libations. An annual Sattra is in the main, made up of a number of á¹£haá¸·ahas joined with certain special rites at the beginning, the middle and the close of the Sattra. The central day of the Sattra is called Vihuvân, and stands by itself, dividing the Sattra into two

equal halves like the wings of a house (Tait. Br. I, 2, 3, 1); and the rites in the latter half of the session or after the Vihuvân

day are performed in an order which is the reverse of that followed in

forming the ceremonies in the first half of the sacrifice. The model

annual Sattra (the Gavâm-anayam) thus; consists of the following parts: —

192

Parts

Days

1.

The introductory Atirâtra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1

2.

The Chaturvimsha day,

otherwise called the Ârambhaniya (Aît. Br. IV, 12), or the Prâyaá¹‡îya

(Tâá¹‡á¸. Br. IV. 2), the real beginning of the Sattra . . .

1

3.

Four Abhiplava, followed by

one Pá¹›iá¹£há¹hya á¹£haá¸·aha each month; continued in this way for five months

.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

150

4.

Three Abhiplava and one Pá¹›iá¹£há¹hya á¹£haá¸·aha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

24

5.

The Abhijit day . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1

6.

The three Svara-Sâman days . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3

7.

Vishnuvân or the Central day which stands by itself i.e., not counted in the total of the Sattra days

8.

The three Svara-Sâman days . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3

9.

The Vishvajit day . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1

10.

One Pá¹›iá¹£há¹hya and three Abhiplava á¹£haá¸·ahas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

24

11.

One Pá¹›iá¹£há¹hya and four

Abhiplava á¹£haá¸·ahas each month continued in this way for four months . .

.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.. . . . . . . .

120

12.

Three Abhiplava á¹£haá¸·ahas, one

Go-á¹£há¹oma, one Âyu-á¹£há¹oma, and one Dasharâtra (the ten days of

Dvâdashâha), making up one month . . . . . . .

30

13.

The Mahâvrata day,

corresponding to the Chaturvimsha day at the beginning . . . . . . . .

.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.. . . . . . . . . . .

1

14.

The concluding Atirâtra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1

Total days:

360

It

will be seen from the above scheme that there are really a few

sacrificial rites which are absolutely fixed and unchangeable in the

yearly Sattra. The two Atirâtras, the introductory and the

concluding, the Chaturvimsha and the Mahâvrata day, the Abhijit and the

Vishvajit, the three Svara-Sâman days on either side of Viá¹£huvân, the

Viá¹£huvân itself, and the ten days of Dvâdashâha, making up 22 days in

all exclusive of Viá¹£huvân, are the only parts that have any specialty

about them. The rest of the days are all made up by Abhiplava and Pá¹›iá¹£há¹hya á¹£haá¸·ahas which therefore constitute what may be called the elastic or the variable part of the yearly Sattra. Thus if we want a Gavâm-ayanam of ten months, we have only to strike off five á¹£haá¸·ahas from the

193

parts marked 3 and 11 in the above scheme. The Adityânâm-ayanam is another modification of the above scheme in which amongst other changes, the á¹£haá¸·ahas are all Abhiplava, instead of being a combination of Abhiplava and Priá¹£há¹hya; while if all the á¹£haá¸·ahas are Priá¹£há¹hya, along with some other changes, it becomes the Aá¹…girasâm-ayanam.

All these modifications do not however, touch the total number of 360

days. But there were sacrificers, who adopted the lunar year of 354

days and therefore, omitted 6 days from the above scheme and their Sattra is called the Utsarginâm-ayanam (Tait. Sam. VII, 5, 7, 1, Tâá¹‡á¸ya Brâh. V, 10). In short, the object was to make the Sattra

correspond with the year adopted, civil or lunar, as closely as

possible. But these points are not relevant to our purpose. The

Brâhmaá¹‡as and the Shrauta Sûtras give further details about the various

rites to be performed on the Viá¹£huvân, the Abhijit and the Vishvajit or

the Svara-Sâman day. The Aitareya Araá¹‡yaka describes the Mahâvrata

ceremony; while the Atirâtra and the Chaturvimsha are described in the

fourth book of the Aitareya Brâhmaá¹‡a. The Chaturvimsha is so called

because the stoma to be chanted on that day is twenty-four-fold. It is the real beginning of the Sattra

as the Mahâvrata is its end. The Aitareya Brâhmaá¹‡a (IV, 14) says, "The

Hotá¹›i pours forth the seed. Thus he makes the seed (which is poured

forth) by means of the Mahâvrata day produce off-spring. For seed if

effused every year is productive." This explanation shows that like the

Pravargya ceremony, the Mahâvrata was intended to preserve the seed of

the sacrifice in order that it might germinate or grow at the proper

time. It was a sort of link between the dying and the coming year and

appropriately concluded the annual Sattra. It will be further seen that every annual Sattra

had an Ati-râtra at each of its ends and that the Dvâdashâha, or rather

the ten days thereof, formed an important concluding part of the Sattra.

The above is only a brief description, a mere outline of the scheme of the annual Sattras mentioned in sacrificial works, but it is sufficient for our purpose. We can see from it that

194

a

civil year of 360 days formed their basis, and the position of the

Viá¹£huvân was of great importance inasmuch as the ceremonies after it

were performed in the reverse order. I have shown elsewhere what

important inferences can be drawn from the position of the Viá¹£huvân

regarding the calendar in use at the time when the scheme was settled.

But we have now to consider of times which preceded the settlement of

this scheme, and for that purpose we must describe another set of Soma

sacrifices included under the general class of Sattras. It has been stated above that side by side with the Dvâdashâha, there are Ahîna

sacrifices of two nights, three nights, etc. up to twelve nights. But

these sacrifices do not stop with the twelve nights' performance. There

are thirteen nights', fourteen nights', fifteen nights', and so on up

to one hundred nights' sacrifice called Trayodasha-râtra,

Chaturdasha-râtra and so on up to Shata-râtra. But since the Ahîna

has been defined to be a sacrifice extending over not more than twelve

or less than thirteen days, all the night-sacrifices extending over a

period longer than twelve-nights are included in the third class, viz., the Sattras. If we, however, disregard this artificial division, it will be found that along with the Ekâha, the Dvâdashâhaand the annual Sattras, there is a series of, what are termed, the night-sacrifices or sattras extending over a period of time from two to one hundred nights, but not further. These night-sacrifices or Ratri-sattras

are mentioned in the Taittirîya Samhitâ, the Brâhmaá¹‡as and the Shrauta

Sûtras in clear terms and there is no ambiguity about their nature,

number, or duration. The Taittirîya Samhitâ in describing them often

uses the word Râtriá¸¥ (nights) in the plural, stating, that so

and so was the first to institute or to perceive so many nights meaning

so many nights' sacrifice, (vimshatim râtriá¸¥, VII. 3, 9, 1; dvâtrimshatam râtriá¸¥

VII, 4, 4, 1). According to the principle of division noted above all

night-sacrifices of less than thirteen nights' duration will be called Ahîna, while those extending over longer time up to one hundred nights will come under Sattras; but this is, as remarked

195

above,

evidently an artificial division, and one, who reads carefully the

description of these sacrifices, cannot fail to be struck by the fact

that we have here a series of night-sacrifices from two to a hundred

nights, or if we include the Ati-râtra marked in this series,

we have practically a set of hundred nightly Soma sacrifices, though,

according to the principle of division adopted, some may fall under the

head of Ahîna and some under that of Sattras.

Now an important question in connection with these Sattras is why they alone should be designated "night-sacrifices" (râtri-kratus), or "night-sessions" (râtri-sattras)? and why their number should be one hundred? or, in other words, why there are no night-sattras

of longer duration than one hundred nights? The Mîmâmsakas answer the

first part of the question by asking us to believe that the word

"night" (râtriá¸¥) is really used to denote a day in the denomination of these sacrifices (Shabara on Jaimini VIII, 1, 17). The word dvi-râtra according to this theory means two days' sacrifice, and shata-râtra

a hundred days' sacrifice. This, explanation appears very good at the

first sight, and as a matter of fact it has been accepted by all

writers on the sacrificial ceremonies. In support of it, we may also

cite the fact that as the moon was the measurer of time in ancient

days, the night was then naturally more marked then the day, and

instead of saying "so many days" men often spoke of "so many nights,"

much in the same way as we now use the word "fort-night." This is no

doubt good so far as it goes; but the question is why should there be

no Soma sacrifices of a longer duration than one hundred nights? and,

why a gap, a serious gap, is left in the series of Soma sacrifices

after one hundred nights Sattra until we come to the annual Sattra

of 360 days? Admitting that "night" means "day," we have Soma

sacrifices lasting from 1 to 100 days; and if so where was the harm to

complete the series until the yearly Sattra of 360 days was

reached? So far as I know, no writer on sacrificial ceremonies has

attempted to answer this question satisfactorily. Of course adopting the

196

speculative

manner of the Brâhmaá¹‡as we might say that there are no Soma sacrifices

of longer than one hundred nights' duration, because the life of a man

cannot extend beyond a hundred years, (Tait. Br. III, 8, 16, 2). But

such an explanation can never be regarded as satisfactory, and the

Mîmâmsakas, who got over one difficulty by interpreting "night" into

"day," have practically left this latter question untouched, and

therefore, unsolved. In short, the case stands thus: — The sacrificial

literature mentions a series of 99 or practically one hundred Soma

sacrifices, called the "night-sacrifices"; but these do not form a part

of any annual Sattra like the Gavâm-ayanam, nor is any

reason assigned for their separate existence, nor is their duration

which never exceeds a hundred nights, accounted for. Neither the

authors of the Brâhmaá¹‡as nor those of the Shrauta Sûtras much less

Sâyaá¹‡a and Yâska give us any clue to the solution of this question; and

the Mîmâmsakas, after explaining the word "night" occurring in the

names of these sacrifices as equal to "day" have allowed these

night-sacrifices to remain as an isolated group in the organized system

of Soma sacrifices. Under these circumstances it would no doubt appear

presumptuous for any one to suggest an explanation, so many centuries

after what may be called the age of the Sattras.

But I feel the Arctic theory which, we have seen, is supported by

strong independent evidence, not only explains but appropriately

accounts for the original existence of this isolated series of a

hundred Soma sacrifices; and I, therefore, proceed to give my view on

the point.

It seems to me that if the word râtri in Atî-râtra is still understood to mean "night," and that if the Ati-râtra sacrifice is even now performed during the night, there is no reason why we should not similarly interpret the same word in Dvi-râtra, Tri-râtra & c. up to Shata-râtra.

The objection, that the Soma juice is not extracted during the night,

is more imaginary than real; for as a matter of fact Soma libations are

made in the usual way, during the Ati-râtra sacrifice. The Ati-râtra sacrifice is performed at the beginning and the end

197

of every Sattra; and all the three libations of Soma are always offered during the three turns, or paryâyas,

of the night. The Aitareya Brâhmaá¹‡a (IV, 5), in explaining the origin

of this sacrifice, tells us that the Asuras had taken shelter with the

night and the Devas, who had taken shelter with the day, wanted to

expel them from the dark region. But amongst the Devas, Indra alone was

found ready and willing to undertake this task; and entering into

darkness, he with the assistance of Metres, turned the Asuras out of

the first part of the night by the first Soma libation, while by means

of the middle turn (paryâya) of passing the Soma-cup, the Asuras

were turned out of the middle part and by the third turn out of the

third or the last part of the night. The three Soma libations, here

spoken of, are all made during the night and the Brâhmaá¹‡a further

observes that there is no other deity save Indra and the

Metres

to whom they are offered (Cf. Apas. Sh. Su. XIV, 3, 12). The next

section of the Brâhmaá¹‡a (IV, 6) distinctly raises the question, "How

are the Pavamâna Stotras to be chanted for the purification of the Soma

juice provided for the night, whereas such Sutras refer only to the day

but not to the night?" and answers it by stating that the Stotras are

the same for the day and the night. It is clear from this that Soma

juice was extracted and purified at night during Ati-râtra sacrifice and Indra was the only

deity to whom the libations were offered in order to help him in his

fight with the Asuras, who had taken shelter with the darkness of the

night. That the Ati-râtra is an ancient sacrifice is further proved by the occurrence of a similar ceremony in the Parsi scriptures. The word Ati-râtra does not occur in the Avesta, but in the Vendibad, XVIII, 18, (43)-22 (48), we are told that there are three parts of

the night and that in the first of these parts (trishvai),

Fire, the son of Ahura Mazda, calls upon the master of the house to

arise and put on his girdle and to fetch clean wood in order that he

may burn bright; for, says the Fire, "Here comes Azi (Sans. Ahi) made by the Daêvas (Vedic Asuras), who is about to strive against me and wants

198

to

put out my life." And the asme request is made during the second and

the third part of the night. The close resemblance between this and the

three paryâyas of the Ati-râtra sacrifice does not seem to have been yet noticed; but whether noticed or not it shows that the Ati-râtra

is an ancient rite performed during the night for the purpose of

helping Indra, or the deity that fought with the powers of darkness,

and that such sacrificial acts as putting on the girdle (kosti) or squeezing the Soma, were performed during this period of darkness.

Now

what applies to the sacrifice of a single night may well be extended to

cases where sacrifices had to be performed for two, three or more

continuous nights. I have already shown before that the ancient

sacrificers completed their sacrificial sessions in ten months and a

long night followed the completion of these sacrifices. What did the

sacrificers do during this long night? They could not have slept all

the time; and as a matter of fact we know that the people in the

extreme north of Europe and Asia do not, even at present sleep during

the whole of the long night which occurs in their, part of the globe.

Paul Du Chaillu, who has recently (1900) published an account of his

travels in The Land of the Long Night, informs us (p. 75) that

although the sun went below the horizon for several days in the Arctic

regions, yet during the period "the Lapps could tell from the stars

whether it was night or day, for they were accustomed to gauge time by

the stars according to their height above the horizon, just as we do at

home with the sun"; and what the Lapps do now, must have been done by

the oldest inhabitants of the circum-polar regions. It is, therefore,

clear that the ancient sacrificers of the Aryan race could not have

gone to sleep after sacrificing for ten months. Did they then sit idle

with their hands folded when Indra was fighting for them with the

powers of darkness? They performed their sacrifices for ten months with

a view to help Indra in his war with Vala; and just at the time when

Indra most needed the help of invigorating songs and Soma libations,

are we to suppose

199

that

these sacrificers sat idle, gave up the sacrifices and left Indra to

fight with Vala alone and single-handed as best as be could? The whole

theory of sacrifices negatives such a supposition. Therefore, if the

Arctic theory is true, and if the ancestor of the Vedic á¹šiá¹£his ever

lived in a region where the darkness of the night lasted for several

days (a day being taken as a measure of time equal to 24 hours), we

naturally expect to find a series of nightly Soma sacrifices performed

during the period, to help the gods in their struggle with the demons

of darkness; and as a matter of fact, there are in the Vedic

sacrificial literature, a number of sacrifices which, if we include the

Ati-râtra in it, extend from one to a hundred nights. The

Mîmâmsakas and even the authors of the Brâhmaá¹‡as, who knew little about

the ancient Arctic home, have converted these night-sacrifices into

day-sacrifices; but the explanation evidently appears to be in vented

at a time when the true nature of the Râtri-kratus or Râtri-sattras

was forgotten, and it does not, therefore, preclude us from

interpreting these facts in a different way. I have already stated

above that if we accept the explanation of the Mîmâmsakas, we cannot

explain why the series of the night-sacrifices should abruptly end with

the Shata-râtra or a hundred nights' sacrifice; but by the

Arctic theory we can explain the fact satisfactorily by supposing that

the duration of the long night in the ancient home varied from one

night (of 24 hours) to a hundred continuous nights (of 2400 hours)

according to latitude, and that the hundred nightly Soma sacrifices

corresponded to the different durations of the night at different

places in the ancient home. Thus where the darkness lasted only for ten

nights (240 hours) a Dasha-râtra sacrifice was performed, while where it lasted for 100

nights (2400 hours) a Shata-râtra sacrifice was necessary. There are no sacrifices after the Shata-râtra

because a hundred continuous nights marked the maximum duration of

darkness experienced by the ancient sacrificers of the race. We have

seen that the legend of Aditi indicates a period of seven months'

sunshine; join to it the Dawn and the Twilight of 30

200

days

each, and there are left three months, (or if we take the year to

consist of 365 days, then 95 days), for the duration of the long

continuous night, — a result which remarkably corresponds to the

longest duration of the night-sacrifices known in the Vedic literature.

The Dawn marked the end of the long night, and could not; therefore, be

included in the latter at least for sacrificial purposes. In fact

separate sacrifices are enjoined for the Dawn in sacrificial works; and

we may, therefore, safely exclude the long Dawn from the province of

the nightly sacrifices, and the same may be said of the period of the

long evening twilight. A hundred nights' sacrifice thus marked the

maximum duration of darkness during which Indra fought with Vala and

was strengthened by the Soma libations offered to him in this

sacrifice. As there is no other theory to account for the existence of

the night-sacrifices, and especially for their number, to wit, one

hundred, these sacrifices may be safely taken to indicate the existence

of an ancient year approximately divided into seven months' sunshine,

one month's dawn, one month's evening twilight and three months' long

continuous night.

There

are other considerations which point out to the same conclusion. In the

post-Vedic literature we have a persistent tradition that Indra alone

of all gods is the master of a hundred sacrifices (shata-kratu),

and that as this attribute formed, so to say, the very essence of

Indraship, he always jealously watched all possible encroachments

against it. But European scholars relying upon the fact that even

Sâyaá¹‡a prefers, except in a few places (III, 51, 2) to interpret shata-kratu,

as applied to Indra in the á¹šig-Veda, as meaning, not "the master of a

hundred sacrifices," but "the lord of a hundred mights or powers," have

not only put aside the Purâá¹‡ic tradition, but declined to interpret the

word kratu in the á¹šig-Veda except in the sense of "power,

energy, skill, wisdom, or generally speaking, the power of body or

mind." But if the above explanation of the origin of the night

sacrifices is correct, we must retrace our steps and acknowledge

201

that

the Purâá¹‡ic tradition or legend is, fater all, not built upon a pure

misunderstanding of the original meaning of the epithet shata-kratu

as applied to Indra in the Vedic-literature. I am aware of the fact

that traditions in the post-Vedic literature are often found to have

but a slender basis in the Vedas, but in the present case we have

something more reliable and tangible to go upon. We have a group, an

isolated group of a hundred nightly Soma sacrifices and as long as it

stands unexplained in the Vedic sacrificial literature it would be

unreasonable to decline to connect it with the Purâá¹‡ic tradition of

Indra's sole mastership of hundred sacrifices, especially when in the

light of the Arctic theory the two can be so well and intelligibly

connected. The hundred sacrifices, which are regarded as constituting

the essence of Indraship in the Purâá¹‡as, are there said to be the

Ashvamedha sacrifices and it may, at the outset, be urged that the shata-râtra sacrifice mentioned in

the sacrificial works is not an Ashvamedha sacrifice. But the

distinction is neither important, nor material. The Ashvamedha

sacrifice is a Soma sacrifice and is described in the sacrificial works

along with the night-sacrifices. In the Taittirîya Samhitâ (VII, 2, 11)

a hundred offerings of food to be made in the Ashvamedha sacrifice are

mentioned, and the Taittirîya Brâhmaá¹‡a (III, 8, 15, 1) states that

Prajâpati obtained these offerings "during the night," and consequently

they are called Râtri-homas. The duration of the Ashvamedha

sacrifice is again not fixed, inasmuch as it depends upon the return of

the horse and in the á¹šig-Veda (I, 163, 1) the sacrificial horse is

identified with the sun moving in waters. The return of the sacrificial

horse may, therefore, be taken to symbolize the return of the sun after

the long night and a close resemblance between the Ashvamedha and the

night-sacrifices, which were performed to enable Indra to fight with

Vala and rescue the dawn and the sun from his clutches, may thus be

taken as established. At any rate, we need not be surprised if the Shata-râtra Soma sacrifice appears in the form of a hundred Ashvamedha sacrifices in the Purâá¹‡as. The tradition is substantially the

202

same

in either case and when it can be so easily and naturally explained on

the Arctic theory, it would not be reasonable to set it aside and hold

that the writers of the Purâá¹‡as created it by misinterpreting the word Shata-kratu occurring in the Vedas.

We have seen that shata-kratu

as applied to Indra is interpreted by Western scholars and in many

places even by Sâyaá¹‡a himself, as meaning the lord of a hundred powers.

Sâyaá¹‡a now and then (III, 51, 2; X, 103, 7) suggests or gives an

alternative explanation and makes Indra "the master of a hundred

sacrifices"; but Western scholars have gone further and discarded all

other explanations except the one noted above. It is, therefore,

necessary to examine the meaning of this epithet, as used in the

á¹šig-Veda, a little more closely in this place. If the word kratu in shata-kratu be interpreted to mean "might" or "power," the numeral shata,

which strictly denotes "a hundred," will have to be taken as equivalent

to "many" or "numerous" inasmuch as no definite set of a hundred powers

can be pointed out as specially belonging to Indra. That the word shata may be so interpreted is

evident from the fact that adjectives like shata-nîtha (I, 100, 12) and shatam-ûti (I, 102, 6; 130, 8), as applied to India in the á¹šig-Veda, are found in other places in the form of sahasra-nîtha (III, 60, 7), and sahasram-ûti (I, 52, 2). Again Indra's arrow is once called shata-bradhna and also sahasra-pará¹‡a in the same verse (VIII, 77, 7); while Soma is represented as going in a hundred ways (shata-yâman) in IX, 86, 16, and a few hymns after it is said to be sahasra-yâman or going in a thousand ways (IX, 106, 5). Even the adjective shata-manyu

which Sâyaá¹‡a interprets as meaning "the master of a hundred sacrifices"

in X, 103, 7, has its counterpart, if not in the á¹šig-Veda at least in

the Sâma-Veda which reads sahasra-manyu for sahasra-muá¹£hka in á¹šig-Veda VI, 46, 3. This shows that the Vedic bards considered shata (a hundred) and sahasra (a

thousand) as interchangeable numerals in some places and if the numeral shata in shata-kratu had been of the same character, we should naturally have met with a paraphrase

203

of the epithet as sahasra-kratu somewhere in the Vedic literature. But although the epithet shata-kratu,

as applied to Indra, occurs about sixty times in the á¹šig-Veda and

several times in other Vedic works, nowhere do we find it paraphrased

as sahasra-kratu, which shows that the Vedic bards did not feel themselves at liberty to alter or paraphrase it as they liked., The adjective amita-kratu is applied to Indra in I, 102, 6; but as amita

does not necessarily mean more than "one hundred," it does not follow

that on this account we should give up the ordinary meaning of shata in shata-kratu. If the word kratu had nowhere been used in the á¹šig-Veda to denote a sacrifice, we may have been justified in interpreting shata-kratu

in the way suggested by Western scholars. But, as observed by Dr. Haug,

when Vasiá¹£htha prayed to Indra (VII, 32, 26) "Carry, O Indra! our

sacrificial performance (kratum) through, just as a father

does to his sons (by assisting them). Teach us, O thou, who art invoked

by many that we may, in this turn (of the night) reach alive the

(sphere of) light (jyotis),"* the prayer in all probability refers to the sacrificial performance (kratu) held for the purpose of enabling the sacrificers to safely reach the other end of the night. In fact, it refers to the Ati-râtra

sacrifice and the Aitareya Brâhmaá¹‡a (IV, 10) quotes and interprets it

in the same way. Sâyaá¹‡a in his commentary on the Aitareya Brâhmaá¹‡a

though not in the á¹šig-Veda Bhâá¹£hya, also takes the same view; and as

the Ati-râtra sacrifice is referred to expressly by its name in

the á¹šig-Veda (VII, 103, 7) it is not at all unlikely that a verse

referring to this Soma sacrifice should occur in other hymns. Hence if

there are passages where kratu can be taken to mean "a

sacrifice" there is no reason why the epithet shata-kratu be not understood to mean "the master of a hundred sacrifices" as suggested by the Purâá¹‡ic tradition.

*

See Dr. Haug's Ait. Br. (IV, 10), Trans. Vol. II, p. 274, and the

translator's note thereon. Dr. Haug thinks that the verse (á¹šig. VII,

32, 26 ) evidently refers to the Ati-râtra feast, for which occasion it was in all likelihood composed by Vasiá¹£há¹ha.

204

Another

fact which favors this interpretation, is that in the á¹šig-Veda Indra is

described as destroying 90, 99 or 100 fortresses or cities (puraá¸¥) of his enemies (I, 130, 7; II, 19, 6; VI, 31, 4; II, 14, 6). Now deva-purâá¸¥, which means "the fortresses of the gods," has been interpreted to mean "days" in the description of the dash râtra sacrifice in the Taittirîya Samhitâ VII, 2, 5, 3-4; and if deva-purâá¸¥ means "days," the purâá¸¥

(cities, fortresses) of Shambara may well be taken to mean "nights."

This view is confirmed by the statement in the Aitareya Brâhmaá¹‡a

previously quoted, which says that the Asuras found shelter with the

night, or in other words, the darkness of the night was, so to say,

their fortress. Indra's destroying a hundred forts of Shambara is,

therefore, equivalent to his fighting with the enemy for a hundred

continuous nights, a period during which the ancient sacrificers

offered him Sonia libations in order that he may be better prepared for

the struggle with Vala. The destruction of 99 or 100 forts of the

enemy, a group of a hundred nightly sacrifices, the nine and ninety

rivers (sravantîá¸¥)

which Indra is described as crossing during his fight with Ahi (I, 32,

14), and a hundred leather straps with which Kutsa is said to have

bound down Indra to his sacrifice in the Tâá¹‡dya Brâhmaá¹‡a IX, 2, 22, and

from which he is invoked to free himself in á¹šig. X, 38, 5, are but so

many different kaleidoscopic views of the same idea which makes Indra

and Indra alone the lord of a hundred sacrifices; and if we take all

these together they undoubtedly point out to the existence of a hundred

continuous nights in the ancient home of the ancestors of the Vedic

people. In V, 48, 3, "a hundred," moving in the abode of Indra are said to turn on and turn off the course of

ordinary days when Indra strikes Vá¹›itra with his bolt;* and I think we have

*

205

here

a distinct allusion either to a hundred sacrifices performed or to a

hundred continuous nights required for securing a complete victory over

the powers of darkness in the nether world, and which nights (or rather

one long night of hundred days) may well be described as breaking off and bringing back

the succession of ordinary days and nights, inasmuch as the long night

immediately follows and precedes the period of sunshine in the Arctic

regions.

But

a far more striking corroboration of the above view is furnished by

certain passages in the Avesta which describe the fight of Tishtrya

with the demon of draught called Apa osha or "the burner" in the Parsi

scriptures. In the á¹šig-Veda the fight of Indra with Vá¹›itra (Vá¹›itra-tûrya) is often represented as "a struggle for waters" (up-tûrya), or as "the striving for cows" (go-iá¹£há¹i), or "the striving for day" (div-iá¹£há¹i)

and Indra is said to have released the cows or waters, and brought on

the dawn or the sun by killing Vá¹›itra (I, 51, 4; II, 19, 3). Now India,

as Vá¹›itra-han, appears as Verethraghna in the Avesta;

but the fight for waters is therein ascribed not to Verethraghna but to

Tishtrya, the star of rain. It is he, who knocks down Apaosha and

liberates the waters for the benefit of man, "with the assistance of

the winds, and the light that dwells in the waters." In short

Tishtrya's conquest over Apaosha is an exact parallel of Indra's

conquest over Vá¹›itra as described in the á¹šig-Veda; and as the legends

are interpreted at present, they are said to refer to the breaking up

of the clouds and the bringing on of the rains on the earth. Tishtrya

being supposed to be the star of rain. But this theory fails to account

for the fact how the recovery of the dawn and the rising of the sun, or

the bringing on of light, were included amongst the effects of Indra's

victory over Vá¹›itra. It will be shown in the next chapter that the

struggle for waters has very little to do with rain, and that the fight

for waters and the fight for light are really synchronous, being two

different versions of the same story. In short, both of these legends

really represent the victory of the powers of light over darkness.

Shuá¹£há¹‡a or "the scorcher"

206

is

one of the names given to Indra's enemy in the á¹šig-Veda (I, 51, 11),

and the result of the conflict between Indra and Shuá¹£há¹‡a is the release

of the waters, as well as the finding of the morning cows (VIII, 96,

17), and the winning of the sun (VI, 20, 5). Apaosha is thus Shuá¹£há¹‡a

under a different garb, and the only difference between the two legends

is that while Indra is the chief actor in the one, Tishtrya is the

chief hero in the other. But this difference is immaterial inasmuch as

the attributes of one deity are often transferred, even in á¹šig-Veda, to

another. The Avestic legend of Tishtrya is, therefore, rightly

understood by Zend scholars to be a reproduction of the Vedic legend of

Indra and Vá¹›itra.* Now, in the Tir Yasht, Tishtrya is represented as

eventually overcoming Apaosha with the help of the Haoma sacrifice

offered to Tishtrya by Ahura Mazda (Yt. VIII, 15-25). The fight is

carried on in the region of the waters, the sea Vouru-Kasha, from which

Tishtrya is described as rising up victorious after defeating Apaosha

(Yt. VIII, 32). Daêva Apaosha is again said to have assumed the form of

a dark horse, while Tishtrya is represented as opposing him in the form

of a bright horse, hoof against hoof (Yt. VIII, 28), and eventually

coming up victorious from out of the sea Vouru-Kasha, like the

sacrificial horse rising from the waters in the á¹šig-Veda (I, 163, 1).

But the passage most important for our purpose is the one in which

Tishtrya informs Ahura Mazda as to what should be done in order to

enable Tishtrya to overcome his enemy and to appear before the faithful

at the appointed time. "If men would worship me," says Tishtrya to

Ahura Mazda, "with a sacrifice in which I were invoked by my own name,

as they worship the other Yazatas with sacrifices in which they are

invoked by their own names, then I should have come to the faithful at

the appointed time; I should have come in the appointed time of my

beautiful immortal life, should it be one night, or two nights, or

fifty, or a hundred nights," (Yt. VIII, 11).

* See Darmesteter's Trans. of Zend-Avesta Part II, (Vol. XXIII S. B. E. Series), p. 12. He remarks that Tishtrya's legend is "a refacimento of the old storm-myths."

207

As

Tishtrya appears before man after his battle with Apaosha, the phrase

"appointed time" signifies the time during which the battle is fought

and at the termination of which Tishtrya comes to the faithful; and the

passage, therefore, means (1) that the "appointed time," when Tishtrya

was to appear before man after fighting with Apaosha, varied from one

night to a hundred nights and (2) that Tishtrya required to be

strengthened during the period by Haoma sacrifices in which he was to

be invoked by his own name. We have seen above that a hundred nightly

Soma sacrifices were offered to Indra by the ancient Vedic sacrificers

to enable him to secure a victory over Vá¹›itra and that Indra was the

only deity to whom the libations were offered in these sacrifices. The

legend of Tishtrya and Apaosha is, therefore, an exact reproduction of

Indra's fight with Vá¹›itra or Vala; and with his correspondence before

us, we should feel no hesitation in accepting the view stated above

regarding the origin of the Shata-râtra

sacrifice. Neither Darmesteter nor Spiegel explains why the appointed

time for the appearance of Tishtrya is described as "one night, or two

nights, or fifty or a hundred nights," though both translate the

original in the same way. The legend also forms the subject of chapter

VII of the Bundahish, but there, too, we find no explanation as to why

the appointed time is described as varying from one to a hundred

nights. It is, however, suggested by some that the appointed time may

refer to the season of rains. But rains cannot be said to come after

"one night, two nights, or fifty, or a hundred nights," and the latter

expression would therefore, be utterly inappropriate in their case;

nor, as stated above, does Tishtrya's fight with Apaosha represent only

a struggle for rain, since we know that it is a struggle for light as

well. We have also seen that the existence of night-sacrifices in the

Vedic literature, extending over one, two, three, or ten, or a hundred

nights, indicates the long darkness during which Indra fought with

Vala; and the coincidence between this fact and the "appointed time,"

of Tishtrya cannot be regarded as accidental. The legends

208

are

undoubted in identical character, and taking the one to illustrate the

other, the only conclusion deducible from them is that, a hundred

nights was regarded to be the maximum duration of the fight between

Indra and Vala, or Tishtrya and Apaosha, so far as the ancestors of the

Indo-Iranian people were concerned, and that the sea Vouru-Kasha, or

the ocean "encompassed with darkness," as the á¹šig-Veda has it (II, 23,

18), was the scene of this battle between the powers of light and

darkness. We also learn from them that the hero of the battle, whether

he was Indra or Tishtrya, stood in need of help, derived from the

performance of the sacrifices specially offered to him during the period; and that as a matter of fact such sacrifices were performed in ancient times. The word shata-kratu does not occur in the Avesta, but in the Ashi Yasht (Yt. XVII, 56) "a ram of hundred-fold energy" (maeshahe satokarahe)

is spoken of; and considering the fact that in the Bahram Yasht (Yt.

XIV, 23) "a beautiful ram, with horns bent round" is said to be one of

the incarnations of Vere-thraghna, and that Indra is also described as

appearing in the form of a ram in the á¹šig-Veda (VIII, 2, 40), it is

very probable that the phrase sato-karahe maeshahe refers to Vere-thraghna in the Ashi Yasht, and like the epithet shata-kratu, the adjective sato-karahe

means not "possessed of hundred powers," but "the master of a hundred

deeds or sacrifices." There is thus a very close correspondence between

the Vedic and the Avestic ideas on this subject, and this strengthens

the conclusion that the night sacrifices in the Vedic literature had

their origin in the existence of a long continuous night of varying

durations in the original home of the Vedic people. We can now also

satisfactorily explain why Tishtrya is described (Yt. VIII, 36, vide

Spiegel's Trans.) as "bringing hither the circling years of men." It is

the Avestic parallel of the Vedic story of the Dawn setting in motion

"the ages of men, or mânuá¹£hâ yugâ,"

discussed in the last chapter, and stews that when Tishtrya's fight

with Apaosha, or India's war with Vala, was over, the new year

commenced with the long dawn, followed by the months of sunshine

varying from

209

seven to eleven in number, according to the latitude of the place.*

In the light of what has been stated above, we can now better understand the original nature and meaning of the Ati-râtra

sacrifice. It is a nightly sacrifice, performed during the night, even

at present, and the Mîmâmsakas have not succeeded in converting it into

a day-sacrifice. So far it is all right; but the question is why should

the sacrifice be called Ati-râtra? The prefix ati (corresponding with Latin trans)

ordinarily denotes "something beyondsomething on the other side, or

at the other end," and not "something pervading, extending, or

spreading the whole extent of anything." Even Sâyaá¹‡a in his commentary

on VII, 103, 7, the only place where the word Ati-râtra occurs in the á¹šig-Veda, explains it to mean "that which is the past or beyond the night" (râtrim atîtya vartate iti ati-râtraá¸¥), and Rudradatta in his commentary on the Âpasthamba Shrauta Sûtra (XIV,

1, 1), gives the same explanation. The Ati-râtra therefore, denotes a trans nocturnal sacrifice that is, performed at either end of the night. Now according to the Aitareya Brâhmaá¹‡a (IV, 5),

*

The passage about Tishtrya's connection with the year is noticed by Mr.

Meherjibhai Nosherwanji Kuka, M.A., in his essay "On the order of Parsi

months," published in the Cama Memorial Volume (p. 58), and of which he was kind enough to send me a separate copy. The passage is in the Tir Yasht, § 36: — "Tishtrîm

stârem raevantem kharenanghuantem yazamaide, yim yâre-chareá¹£ho maá¹£hyehe

Ahuracha khratu-gûto aurunacha gairiá¹£hâcho sizdaracha ravascharâto

uziyoirentem hisposentem huyâiryâicha danghve uzjasentem duzyâiryâicha,

kata Airyâo danghâvo huyâiryâo bavâonti." Spiegel translates it

thus, "We praise the star Tishtrya, the shining, the majestic, who

brings here the circling years of men." Darmesteter takes yâre-chareá¹£ho & c., with the words following, viz., uziyoirentem hisposentem,

and translates, "We praise Tishtrya & c., whose rising is watched by

men, who live on the fruits of the year." According to Dastur Erachji

Mleherjirana (see his Yasht bâ mâeni),

the meaning of the whole paragraph, in which this passage occurs, is: —

"We praise Tishtrya, & c, who maketh the year revolve in accordance

with the notions of the mountaineers and the nomads. He riseth and is

visible towards the regions where there is no correct calculation of

the year." But whatever the difficulties of interpretation

may be, one thing seems to be quite clear from this passage, viz., that

Tishtrya was the star by which the year was reckoned. In the Tir Yasht

§ 5, springs of water are said to flow at the rising of Tishtrya, who

in § 16 is described as "mingling his shape with light," or "moving in

light," § 46. All these incidents can be satisfactorily explained if we

suppose that, after Tishtrya's fight with Apaosha, lasting for 100

nights at the longest; the aerial waters, which communicated motion to

the sun and other heavenly bodies (see Faravardin Yasht 53-58) and

which lay still or stagnant during the time, were set free to move

again along the path made by Mazda, bringing on with them the light of

the sun and thus commencing the new year after the long winter night in

the Arctic region. The simultaneous character of the motion of waters,

the commencement of the new year, and the winning of light after

Tishtrya's fight with Apaosha, can be explained only in this way, and

not by making the legend refer to the rainy season (see the discussion

about "waters" in the next chapter). The Pairika Duz-yairya, or the Bad Year, which Tishtrya is said to break asunder, is on this theory, the wearisome dark Arctic night.

210

the Ati-râtra

sacrifice is performed for the purpose of driving out the Asuras from

the darkness of night; and the Tâá¹‡á¸ya Brâhmaá¹‡a (IV, 1, 4-5) tells us

that Prajâpati, who first perceived the sacrifice, created from it the

twin of day and night (aho-râtre). It follows from this that the Ati-râtra

was performed at the close of such night as give rise-to the ordinary

days and nights, or, in other words, the regular succession of days and

nights followed its performance. This can only be the case if we

suppose that the Ati-râtra was performed at the end of a long

continuous night in regions where such night occurred. With us in the

temperate or the tropical zone, ordinary days and nights regularly

succeed each other throughout the year without any break, and it is

meaningless, if not absurd, to speak of the cycle of day and night as

produced from a particular night in the year. Again, on the theory of a

daily struggle between light and darkness the Asuras must be turned out

of darkness every night, and strictly speaking the performance of the Ati-râtra is necessary on every one of the 360 nights of the Sattra. But as a matter of fact the Ati-râtra is performed only at the beginning and the end of the Sattra; and even then the regular Sattra is said

211

to

commence on the Chaturvimsha and close on the Mahavrata day, and not on

the concluding Atirâtra day. It seems, therefore, that the performance

of the Ati-râtra was not originally intended to drive away the Asuras from only the first of 360 nights over which the Sattra

now extends. For in that case there is no reason why the Asuras were

not required to be expelled from everyone of the 360 nights. It

follows, therefore, that the Ati-râtra or the traps-nocturnal sacrifice

refers to some night not included in the regular nights of the Gavâm-ayanam. It is true that the Ati-râtra is performed at the beginning and the end of every Sattra and in one sense it is therefore, a trans-sattra or ati-sattra sacrifice. But that does not account for the name Ati-râtra as the Sattra is not held during night. We must, therefore hold that the two Ati-râtras were originally

performed not at the beginning and the end of a Sattra but at the beginning and the end of a night which occurred or intervened between the last and the first day of the Sattra. When this night ended with an Ati-râtra the usual Sattra began and as the sun was above the horizon during the period producing the regular succession of days and nights no Ati-râtra was needed during the Sattra, for as stated in the Taá¹‡á¸ya Brâhmaá¹‡a the object of the Ati-râtra was gained. But the Sattra closed with the long night and the Ati-râtra had therefore again to be performed at the end of the Sattra

to drive the Asuras from this night. I have shown before that we have

direct and reliable authority in the Taittirîya Samhitâ to hold that

the Gavâm-ayanam was once completed in ten months or 300 days and it was therefore appropriately closed with and introduced by an

Ati-râtra. The word Ati-râtra

is thus rationally explained, for the sacrifice was performed at the

beginning and the close of the long night and, was therefore,

adequately called a trans-nocturnal sacrifice. Between these two Ati-râtras came all the night-sacrifices mentioned above, offered exclusively to Indra. The old Gavâm-ayanam of ten or less than ten months, the Ati-râtra or the trans-nocturnal, the Râtri-kratus and Râtri-sattras, or nightly Soma sacrifices of two, three, & c., up to a hundred continuous nights' duration,

212

and lastly the Ati-râtra, to be again followed by the Gavâm-ayanam,

thus formed the complete yearly round of sacrifices performed by the

primeval ancestors of the. Vedic people; and each of these sacrifices

had originally the same place in the yearly round as is indicated by

the root-meaning of its name.* But when the year of ten months was

converted into one of twelve to suit the altered conditions of the new

home, the Gavâm-ayanam expanded into a performance of 360 days,

and the elastic nature of the greater portion of the performance, as

pointed out above, permitted the change to be easily carried out. But

though the annual Sattra expanded in this way, encroaching upon the night-sacrifices of the long night, which were no longer needed, the Ati-râtra was retained as an introductory sacrifice and was incorporated in the ceremonies of the Sattra itself. Thus the two Ati-râtra

sacrifices, which were originally performed, as shown by the etymology,

at the two termini of the long night, came to be converted into the

introductory and concluding sacrifices of the annual Sattra; and if the word Ati-râtra

had not been retained, we could not have got any clue to reveal to us

the-story of its changing fortune. But the night-sacrifices, the Râtri-kratus or Râtri-sattras, which were performed during the long night between the two Ati-râtras,

were no longer needed and. their nature came to be soon misunderstood,

until at last the Mîmâmsakas finally made room for them in the class of

daily Soma sacrifices, partly under Ahînas and partly under Sattras, by means of the equation that râtri (night) is equal to aho-râtre

(day and night) in the sacrificial literature. How this change was

carried out is a question beyond the scope of this book; but I may-

here state that, in my opinion, it was the authors of Brâhmaá¹‡as,

* The time here assigned to the Râtri-sattras

appears to have been known to the Shrauta Sûtras, or in the Lâá¹yâyana

Shrauta Sûtra VIII, 2, 16, we read that "After the year (annual

sacrificial session) is over, the Soma should be purchased during the Râtri-sattras," evidently showing that the Râtri-sattras came at the end of the yearly Sattras.

213

or

the Brahmavâdins who preceded them, that had to perform the difficult

task of adapting the ancient sacrificial calendar to the changed

conditions of their new home, somewhat after the manner of Numa's

reform of the ancient Roman calendar. The sacrifice was the main ritual

of the Vedic religion, and naturally enough the priests must have tried

to preserve as much of the old sacrificial system as they possibly

could in adapting it to the new conditions. The task was by no means an

easy one, and those that find fault with the Brâhmaá¹‡as as full of

fanciful speculations must bear in mind the fact that an ancient and

sacred system of sacrifices had to be adapted to new conditions, by

assigning plausible reasons for the same, at a time when the true

origin of the system was almost forgotten. The Brâhmaá¹‡as could not have

indulged in free speculations about the origin of the rites and

ceremonies mentioned by them, had the latter originated in their own

time, or in days so near to them that the real traditions about the

origin of these ceremonies could be preserved intact. But so long as

these traditions were fresh, no explanation was probably needed; and

when they became dim, their place had to be supplied by plausible

reasons based on such traditions as were known at the time. This throws

quite a new light on the nature and composition of the Brâhmaá¹‡as: but

as the discussion is not pertinent to the subject in hand, we cannot

enter into it more fully in this place.

We

have now reviewed the leading features of the system of Soma sacrifices

as described in the Vedic literature, so far as our purpose is

concerned, and seen that by the aid of the Arctic theory, some hard

facts therein, which have been hitherto incomprehensible, can be easily

and naturally explained. A history of the whole sacrificial system from

the point of view indicated above is a work quite outside the pale of

this book; but so far as we have examined the subject and especially

the question about the isolated group of a hundred nightly Soma

sacrifices, I think, we have sufficient evidence therein to warrant us

in holding that these sacrifices

214

are

a relic of the ancient times when the ancestors of the Vedic á¹šiá¹£his

performed them with the object of helping Indra to fight with the

powers of darkness. It has been already shown in the first part of this

chapter that the Gavâm-ayanam or the "Cows' walk" like the

Roman year, once lasted only for ten months; and a series of suitable

night-sacrifices is a natural supplement to such sessions. Both are

relics of ancient times, and taken along with the evidence regarding

the existence of a long dawn of thirty days and of the long day and

night discussed in previous chapters, they conclusively establish the

existence of an ancient home of the ancestors of the Vedic people in

the circum-polar region. The sacrificial sessions of the Navagvas and

the Dashagvas, the legend of Dîrghatamas growing old in the tenth

month, the tradition about the ancient year of five seasons, or the

yoking of seven or ten horses to the chariot of the sun, all go to

strengthen the same view; and the Avestic passages regarding the

duration of Tishtrya's fight with Apaosha, the Purâá¹‡ic tradition about

Indra's being the master of a hundred sacrifices or the destroyer of a

hundred cities, the existence of a series of one hundred nightly Soma

sacrifices, which, though obsolete long since, could not have found

place in the sacrificial works as Râtri-sattras,

unless they were ancient sacrifices performed, as their name indicates,

during night, — these and many other minor facts noticed before,

further corroborate, if corroboration be needed, our theory regarding

the original home of the Aryans near the North Pole. It must, however,

be stated here that I do not wish to imply in any way that the numerous

sacrificial details found in the later Vedic literature were in vogue

or were known in these ancient times. On the contrary I am prepared to

believe that in all probability these ancient sacrifices were very

simple in character. I he ancient priests probably went on sacrificing

from day today and afterwards from night to night, without any idea

that the system was capable of giving rise to various rigid annual Sattras. The sacrifice was the only ritual of their religion;

215

and

howsoever simple such sacrifices might have been in ancient times, it

was almost a matter of duty, at least with the priests, to perform them

every day. It was also a means, as remarked by me elsewhere, to keep up

the calendar in ancient times, as the yearly round of sacrifices

closely followed the course of the sun. It is from this latter point of

view that the ancient sacrificial system is important for historical or

antiquarian purposes, and I have examined it above in the same light.

This examination, it will be seen, has resulted in the discovery of a

number of facts which lead us directly to, and can be satisfactorily

explained only by the theory of the original Arctic home; and when our

conclusions are thus supported by the hymns of the á¹šig-Veda on the one

hand, and the sacrificial literature on the other, I think, we need

have no doubt about their correctness

http://www.vaidilute.com/books/tilak/tilak-08.html

June 11, 2009

Dear Sunil ji, Sreenadh ji,Children on Serendip island were loaded with the serendipitous or deliberate catches of goodies and delicacies from the vast ocean by there caretakers. While they were delighted to have everything, their guts started falling out in trying to absorb and assimilate! Love’s labour Lost!

Once I had read a rather funny but interesting fairy tale. The story was about three *travelling princes*. As the travelled, they were always making discoveries, by accidents and by prudence, even of things which they were not in quest of! Once one of them discovered …. a camel blind of the right eye had travelled the same road! How? Clueless! ….because the grass was eaten only on the left side!!!!!

Anyways! Not asking you to stop! Not all kids have delicate digestive systems! And not all are kids like me! And I do hope you two have better sense than the prince in the story!RegardsNeelamPS: Not SERIOUS!

June 11, 2009

Dear Neelam ji """"a camel blind of the right eye had travelled the same road---- ….because the grass was eaten only on the left side!!!!! !"""""""""""""""yes,many times i wondered it is what i also doing it ,but will hav to come back to eat the grass on right side too ,rgrds sunil nair , neelam gupta <neelamgupta07 wrote:>> Dear Sunil ji, Sreenadh ji,> > Children on Serendip island were loaded with the serendipitous or deliberate> catches of goodies and delicacies from the vast ocean by there caretakers.> While they were delighted to have everything, their guts started falling out> in trying to absorb and assimilate! Love's labour Lost!> > Once I had read a rather funny but interesting fairy tale. The story was> about three *travelling princes*. As the travelled, they were always making> discoveries, by accidents and by prudence, even of things which they were> not in quest of! Once one of them discovered …. a camel blind of the right> eye had travelled the same road! How? Clueless! ….because the grass was> eaten only on the left side!!!!!> > Anyways! Not asking you to stop! Not all kids have delicate digestive> systems! And not all are kids like me! And I do hope you two have better> sense than the prince in the story!> > Regards> Neelam> > PS: Not SERIOUS!>

June 12, 2009

Dear

Neelam ji and Sunil ji,

Quote

As the traveled, they were always making

discoveries, by accidents and by prudence, even of things which they were not

in quest of! Once one of them discovered …. a camel blind of the right

eye had traveled the same road! How? Clueless! ….because the grass

was eaten only on the left side!!!!!

Unquote

That reminds me of the daily discoveries based on Nimitta (the eater

grass on the left side is also a nimitta) done by astrologers doing prashna (I

have witnessed numerous such discoveries in a single day in temple prshanas and

family prashnas done in kerala - utilizing the whole day) and also the methodologies

and approach the author of Prashnamarga is trying to teach us. Just

like those intelligent travelers the astrologers are supposed to say -

"What they see and hear", in an intuitive and intelligent way based

on the inferences derived based on conscious observation. Of course good

astrologers can always hear more from the common words and see more from the common

seens! Actually this is one of the major talents Prashna system while using

Nimittas is trying to teach us; one of the capabilities it is trying to develop

in an astrologer.

Sunil ji says -

Quote

yes, many times i wondered it is what i also doing

it ,but will hav to come back to eat the grass on right side too [] ,

Unquote

When he says " yes,many times i wondered it is what i also

doing it", I feel that he is identifying himself with the traveller. If

so, I will have to appreciate him and say - True! It seems that you have

knowingly or unknowingly pickedup the great leasson taught by Prashnamarga and

this must be one of the very reasons for you being an excellent astrologer

especially with Prashna. True, you are a good astrologer and reading these

many books on prahna and nimitta must have caused this truth to emerge in

yourself naturally; learning always happens naturally; knowledge comes from

within!

But when he adds "but will have to come back to eat the

grass on right side too', I fee that he is identifying himself with the camel,

then symbolically the grass is indicative of the knowledge from all directions

he assimilate and I remember the vedic saying "Ano bhadra kratavoyantu

viswata" [Let knowledge come to me from all directions].

Anyway, from the astrological perspective the prime focus should be on

the talent of the traveler and not on identifying ourselves with a camel i

believe. [God! It is good that it was not a donkey. ha...ha... just fun

intended. ] But at the end may be with the burden of life on his back, sunil

ji must be feeling himself identified with the camel - Let us remembers that

Sunil ji is of Capricorn lagna and that the Camel (Tavuru=Camel; Taurus

sign) is his 5th house, his children. -Just having fun from an

astro perspective

It is right that, if Sunil ji goes through a road (symbolically -

any subject), he will not leave any grass (symbolically - knowledge) on both

sides of the road for sure! His eyes will ofcourse fall on both sides (he is

not right blind), but even if he is, then he will turn himself around to see

the other side as well and finish it off! He is so clever! So let us be just

beware of him and wait to utilize the milk and dung he furnishes - milk to make

us healthy and dung to fertilize our cultivations. :=)

Love and regards,

Sreenadh

, "sunil nair" <astro_tellerkerala wrote:>> > Dear Neelam ji> > > []> > """"a camel blind of the right eye had travelled the same road---- > ….because the grass was> eaten only on the left side!!!!! !""""""""""""""" []> > yes,many times i wondered it is what i also doing it ,but will hav to> come back to eat the grass on right side too [] ,> > rgrds sunil nair> > > , neelam gupta> neelamgupta07@ wrote:> >> > Dear Sunil ji, Sreenadh ji,> >> > Children on Serendip island were loaded with the serendipitous or> deliberate> > catches of goodies and delicacies from the vast ocean by there> caretakers.> > While they were delighted to have everything, their guts started> falling out> > in trying to absorb and assimilate! Love's labour Lost!> >> > Once I had read a rather funny but interesting fairy tale. The story> was> > about three *travelling princes*. As the travelled, they were always> making> > discoveries, by accidents and by prudence, even of things which they> were> > not in quest of! Once one of them discovered …. a camel blind of> the right> > eye had travelled the same road! How? Clueless! ….because the> grass was> > eaten only on the left side!!!!!> >> > Anyways! Not asking you to stop! Not all kids have delicate digestive> > systems! And not all are kids like me! And I do hope you two have> better> > sense than the prince in the story!> >> > Regards> > Neelam> >> > PS: Not SERIOUS!> >>