V . आर्य विरुद्ध आर्य

CHAPTER V ARYANS AGAINST ARYANS

ENOUGH has been said to show how leaky is the Aryan theory expounded by Western scholars and glibly accepted by their Brahmin fellows. Yet, the theory has such a hold on the generality of people that what has been said against it may mean no more than scotching it. Like the snake it must be killed. It is therefore necessary to pursue the examination of the theory further with a view to expose its hollowness completely.

Those who uphold the theory of an Aryan race invading India and conquering the Dasas and Dasyus fail to take note of certain verses in the Rig Veda. These verses are of crucial importance. To build up a theory of an Aryan race marching into India from outside and conquering the non-Aryan native tribes without reference to these verses is an utter futility. I reproduce below the verses I have in mind :

(1) Rig Veda, vi. 33.3.—“Oh, Indra, Thou hast killed both of our opponents, the Dasas and the Aryas.”

(2) Rig Veda, vi.60.3.—“Indra and Agni—these protectors of the good and righteous suppress the Dasas and Aryas who hurt us.” (3) Rig Veda, vii.81.1.—“Indra and Varuna killed the Dasas and Aryas who were the enemies of Sudas and thus protected Sudas from them.” (4) Rig Veda, viii.24.27.—“Oh you, Indra, who saved us from the hands of the cruel Rakshasas and from the Aryas living on the banks of the Indus, do thou deprive the Dasas of their weapons.”

(5) Rig Veda, x.38.3.—“Oh you much revered Indra, those Dasas and Aryas who are irreligious and who are our enemies, make it easy for us with your blessings to subdue them. With your help we shall kill them.” (6) Rig Veda, x.86.19.—Oh, You Mameyu, you give him all powers who prays you. With your help we will destroy our Arya and our Dasyu enemies. Anyone who reads these verses, notes what they say calmly and coolly and considers them against the postulates of the Western theory will be taken aback by them. If the authors of these verses of the Rig Veda were Aryas then the idea which these verses convey

is that there were two different communites of Aryas who were not only different but oppose and inimical to each other. The existence of two Aryas is not a mere matter of conjecture or interpretation. It is a fact in support of which there is abundant evidence. II The first piece of such evidence to which attention may be invited, is the discrimination which existed for a long time in the matter of the recognition of the sacred character of the different Vedas. All students of the Vedas know that there are really two Vedas: (1) the Rig Veda and (2) the Atharva Veda. The Sama Veda and the Yajur Veda are merely different forms of the Rig Veda. All students of the Vedas know that the Atharva Veda was not recognised by the Brahmins as sacred as the Rig Veda for a long time. Why was such a distinction made? Why was the Rig Veda regarded as sacred? Why was the Atharva Veda treated as vulgar? The answer, I like to suggest, is that the two belonged to two different races of Aryans and it is only when they had become one that the Atharva Veda came to be regarded on a par with the Rig Veda.

Besides this, there is enough evidence, scattered through the whole of the Brahmanic literature, of the existence of two different ideologies, particularly relating to creation, which again points to the existence of two different Aryan races. Reference to one of these has already been made in Chapter 2. It remains to draw attention to the second type of ideology.

To begin with the Vedas. The following ideology is to be found in the Taittiriya Samhita :

T.S.,1 vi.5.6.1.—“Aditi, desirous of sons, cooked, a Brahmaudana oblation for the gods, the Sadhyas. They gave her the remnant of it. This she ate. She conceived seed. Four Adityas were born to her. She cooked a second (oblation). She reflected, ‘from the remains of the oblation these sons have been born to me. If I shall eat (the oblation) first, more brilliant (sons) will be born to me.’ She ate it first; she conceived seed; an imperfect egg was produced from her. She cooked a third (oblation) for the Adityas, repeating the formula ‘may this religious toil have been undergone for my enjoyment.’ The Adityas said, ‘Let us choose a boon; let anyone who is produced from this be ours only; let anyone of his progeny who is prosperous be for us a source of enjoyment.’ In consequence the Aditya Vivasvat was born. This is his progeny, namely, men. Among them he alone who sacrifices is prosperous, and becomes a cause of enjoyment to the gods.”

1 Muir, Vol. I, p. 26.

Turning to the Brahmanas. The stories of creation contained in the Satapatha Brahmanas are set out below :

S.B.,1 i.8.1. 1.—In the morning they brought to Manu water for washing, as men are in the habit of bringing it to wash with the hands. As he was thus washing, a fish came into his hands (which spake to him) ‘preserve me; I shall save thee.’ (Manu enquired) ‘From what wilt thou save me?’ (The fish replied) ‘A flood shall sweep away all these creatures; from it will I rescue thee.’ (Manu asked) ‘How (shall) thy preservation (be effected)?’ The fish said : ‘So long as we are small, we are in great peril, for fish devours fish; thou shalt preserve me first in a jar. When I grow too large for the jar, then thou shalt dig a trench, and preserve me in that. When I grow too large for the trench, then thou shalt carry me away to the ocean. I shall then be beyond the reach of danger. Straight, away he became a large fish; for he waxes to the utmost. (He said) ‘Now in such and such a year, then the flood will come; thou shalt embark in the ship when the flood rises, and I shall deliver thee from it.’ Having thus preserved the fish, Manu carried him away to the sea. Then in the same year which the fish had enjoined, he constructed a ship and resorted to him. When the flood rose, Manu embarked in the ship. The fish swam towards him. He fastened the cable of the ship to the fish’s horn. By this means he passed over this northern mountain. The fish said, ‘I have delivered thee; fasten the ship to a tree. But lest the water should cut thee off whilst thou art on the mountain, as much as the water subsides so much shalt thou descend after it.’ He accordingly descended after it as much (as it subsided). Wherefore also this, viz., ‘Manu’s descent’ is (the name) of the northern mountain. Now the flood had swept away all these creatures, so Manu alone was left here. Desirous of offspring, he lived worshipping and toiling in arduous religious rites. Among these he also sacrificed with the paka offering. He cast clarified butter, thickened milk, whey and curds as an oblation into the waters. Thence in a year a woman was produced. She rose up as it were unctuous. Clarified butter adheres to her steps. Mitra and Varuna met her. They said to her ‘who art thou?’ ‘Manu’s daughter’ (she replied). Say (thou art) ours’ (they rejoined). ‘No’, she said, ‘I am his who begot me.’ They desired a share in her. She promised that, or she did not promise that; but passed onward. She came to Manu. Manu said to her, ‘who art thou?’ ‘Thy daughter’ she replied. ‘How, glorious one ‘asked Manu,’ (art thou) my daughter?’ ‘Thou hast generated me,’ she said,’ from those oblations, butter, thick milk, whey and curds, which thou didst cast into the waters. I am a benediction. Apply me in the sacrifice. If thou wilt employ me in the sacrifice, thou shalt abound in offspring and cattle. Whatever benediction thou will ask through me, shall accrue to thee.’ He (accordingly) introduced her (as) that (which comes in) the middle of the sacrifice; for that is the middle of the sacrifice which (comes) between the introductory and concluding forms. With her he lived worshipping and toiling in arduous religious rites, desirous of offspring. With her he begot this offspring which is this offspring of Manu. Whatever benediction he asked with her, was all vouchsafed to him. This is essentially that which is Ida. Whosoever, knowing this, lives with Ida, begets 1 Muir, Vol. I, pp. 181-184.

this offspring which Manu begot. Whatever benediction he asks with her, is all vouchsafed to him.”

(2) S.B., 1 vi.1.2.11.— “Wherefore they say, ‘Prajapati having created those worlds was supported upon the earth. For him these herbs were cooked as food. That (food) he ate. He became pregnant He created the gods from his upper vital airs, and mortal offspring from his lower vital airs. In whatever way he created, so he created. But Prajapati created all this, whatever exists.”

(3) S.B., 2 vii.5.2.6.— Prajapati was formerly this (universe), one only. He desired.’ Let me create food, and be propagated.’ He formed animals from his breath, a man from his soul, a horse from his eye, a bull from his breath, a sheep from his ear, a goat from his voice. Since he formed animals from his breaths, therefore men say,’ the breaths are animals.’ The soul is the first of the breaths. Since he formed a man from his ‘soul’ therefore they say ‘man is the first of the animals, and the strongest.’ The soul is all the breaths; for all the breaths depend upon the soul. Since he formed man from his soul, therefore they say,’ man is all the animals;’ for all these are man’s.”

(4) S.B., 3 x.1.3.1.— “Prajapati created living beings. From his upper vital airs he created the gods: from his lower vital airs mortal creatures. Afterwards he created death a devourer of creatures.”

(5) S.B., 4 xiv.4.2.1.— “This universe was formerly soul only, in the form of Purusha. Looking closely, he saw nothing but himself (or soul). He first said,’ This is I.’ Then he became one having the name of I. Hence even now a man, when called, first says, ‘this is I, ‘and then declares the other name when he has. In as much as he, before ( purvah) all this, burnt up ( aushat) all sins, he (is called), purusha. The man who knows this burns up the person who wishes to be before him. He was afraid. Hence a man when alone is afraid. This (being) considered that ‘there is no other thing but myself; of what am I afraid?’ Then his fear departed. For why should he have feared? It is of a second person that people are afraid. He did not enjoy happiness. Hence a person when alone does not enjoy happiness. He desired a second. He was so much as a man and a woman when locked in embrace. He caused this same self to fall as under into two parts. Thence arose a husband and wife. Hence Yajnavalkya has said that ‘this one’s self is like the half of a split pea.’ Hence the void is filled up by woman. He cohabited with her. From them Men were born. She reflected ‘how does he, after having produced me from himself, cohabit with me? Ah! let me disappear’; she became a cow, and the other a bull; and he cohabited with her. From them kine were produced. The one became a mare, the other a stallion, the one a she-ass, the other a male-ass. He cohabited with her. From them the class of animals with undivided hoofs were produced. The one became a she-goat, the other a he-goat, the one a ewe, the other a ram. He cohabited with her. From them goats and sheep were produced. In this manner pairs of all creatures whatsoever down to ants, were produced.

1 Muir. Vol. I, p. 30.

2 Muir. Vol. I. p. 24.

3 Muir, Vol. I, p. 31.

4 Muir. Vol. I, p. 25.

The Taittiriya Brahmana has the following :

T.B.,1 ii.2.9.1.—“At first this (universe) was not anything. There was neither sky, nor earth, nor air. Being non-existent, it resolved ‘let me be.’ It became fervent. From that fervour smoke was produced. It again became fervent. From that fervour fire was produced. It again became fervent. From that fervour light was produced. It again became fervent. From that fervour flame was produced. It again became fervent. From that fervour rays were produced. It again became fervent. From that fervour blazes were produced. It again became fervent. It became condensed like a cloud. It clove its bladder. That became the sea. Hence men do not drink of the sea. For they regard it as like the place of generation. Hence water issues forth before an animal when it is being born. After that the Dasahotri (a particular formula) was created. Prajapati is the Dasahotri. That man succeeds, who thus knowing the power of austere abstraction (or fervour) practises it. This was then water, fluid. Prajapati wept (exclaiming). ‘For what purpose have I been born, if (I have been born) from this which forms no support.’ That which fell into the waters became the earth. That which he wiped away, became the air. That which he wiped away, upward, became the sky. From the circumstance that he wept (arodit), these two regions have the name of rodasi, (words). They do not weep in the house of the man who knows this. This was the birth of these worlds. He who thus knows the birth of these worlds, incurs no suffering in these worlds. He obtained this (earth as a) basis. Having obtained (this earth as a) basis, he desired. ‘May I be propagated.’ He practised austere fervour. He became pregnant. He created Asuras from his abdomen. To them he milked out food in an earthen dish. He cast off that body of his. It became darkness. He desired ‘May I be propagated.’ He practised austere fervour. He became pregnant. He created living beings ( prajah) from his organ of generation. Hence they are the most numerous because he created them from his generative organ. To them he milked out milk in a wooden dish. He cast off that body of his. It became moonlight. He desired ‘May I be propagated.’ He practised austere fervour. He became pregnant. He created the seasons from his armpits. To them he milked out butter in a silver dish. He cast off that body of his. It became the period which connects day and night. He desired ‘May I be propagated.’ He practised austere fervour. He became pregnant. He created the gods from his mouth. To them he milked out Soma in a golden dish. He cast off that body of his. It became day. These are Prajapati’s milkings. He who thus knows, milks out offspring. ‘Day (diva) has come to us:’ this (exclamation expresses) the godhead of the gods. He who thus knows the godhead of the gods, obtains the gods. This is the birth of days and nights. He who thus knows the birth of days and nights, incurs no suffering in the days and nights. Mind (or soul, manas) was created from the non-existent. Mind created Prajapati. Prajapati created offspring. All this, whatever exists, rests absolutely on mind. This is that Brahma called Svovasyasa. For the man who thus knows, (Ushas), dawning, dawns more and more bright; he becomes prolific in offspring, and (rich) in cattle; he obtains the rank of Parameshthin.”

(3) T.B., 2 ii.3.8.1.— “Prajapati desired, ‘May I propagate.’ He practised austerity. He became pregnant. He became yellow brown. Hence a woman when 1 Muir, Vol. I, pp. 28-29.

2 Muir, Vol. I, p. 23.

pregnant, being yellow, becomes brown. Being pregnant with a foetus, he became exhausted. Being exhausted he became blackish-brown. Hence an exhausted person becomes blackish-brown. His breath became alive. With that breath (asu ) he created Asuras. Therein consists the Asura-nature of Asuras. He who thus knows this Asura-nature of Asuras becomes a man possessing breath. Breath does not forsake him. Having created the Asuras he regarded himself as a father. After that he created the Fathers (Pitris). That constitutes the fatherhood of the Fathers. He who thus knows the fatherhood of the Fathers, becomes as a father of his own; the Fathers resort to his oblation. Having created the Fathers, he reflected. After that he created men. That constitutes the manhood of men. He who knows the manhood of men, becomes intelligent. Mind does not forsake him. To him, when he was creating men, day appeared in the heaven. After that he created the gods. This constitutes the godhead of the gods. To him who thus knows the godhead of the gods, day appears in the heavens. These are the four streams, viz; gods, men, fathers and Asuras. In all of these water is like the air.”

(4) T.B., 1 iii.2.3.9.—“This Shudra has sprung from non-existence.” The following explanation of the origin of creation is given by the Taittiriya Aranyaka :

T.A.,2 i.12.3.1.— “This is water, fluid. Prajapati alone was produced on a lotus leaf. Within, in his mind, desire arose, ‘Let me create this.’ Hence whatever a man aims at in his mind, he declares by speech, and performs by act. Hence this verse has been uttered, ‘Desire formerly arose in it, which was the primal germ of mind, (and which) sages, searching with their intellect, have discovered in the heart as the bond between the existent and the nonexistent’ (Rig Veda x.129.4). That of which he is desirous comes to the man who thus knows. He practised austere fervour. Having practised austere fervour, he shook his body. From its flesh the rishis (called) Arunas, Ketus and Vatarasanas arose. His nails became the Vaikhanasas, his hairs the Valakhilyas. The fluid (of his body became) a tortoise moving amid the waters. He said to him ‘ Thou hast sprung from my skin and flesh.’ ‘No,’ replied the tortoise,’ I was here before.’ In that (in his having been ‘before’ purvam) consists the manhood of a man ( purusha). Becoming a man Purusha with a thousand heads, a thousand eyes, a thousand feet (R.V.x.90.1) he arose. Prajapati said to him, ‘thou wert produced before me; do thou first make this.’ He took water from this in the cavity of his two hands and placed it on the east, repeating the text, ‘so be it, O Sun.’ From thence the sun arose. That was the eastern quarter. Then Aruna Ketu placed (the water) to the south, saying ‘so be it, O Agni.’ Thence Agni arose. That was the southern quarter. Then Aruna Ketu placed (the water) to the west, saying ‘so be it, O Vayu.’ Thence arose Vayu. That was the western quarter. Then Aruna Ketu placed (the water) to the north, saying ‘so be it, O Indra.’ Then arose Indra. That is the northern quarter. Then Aruna Ketu placed (the water) in the centre, saying ‘so be it, O Pushan.’ Thence arose Pushan. That is this quarter. The Aruna Ketu placed (the water) above saying ‘so be it, gods.’ Thence arose gods, men, 1 Muir, Vol. I, p. 21.

2 Muir, Vol. I, p. 32.

Fathers, Gandharvas and Apsaras. That is the upper quarter. From the drops which fell apart arose the Asuras, Rakshasas, and Pisachas. Therefore they perished, because they were produced from drops. Hence this text has been uttered; ‘when the great waters became pregnant, containing wisdom, and generating Svayambhu, from them were created these creations. All this was produced from the waters. Therefore all this is Brahma Svayambhu.’ Hence all this was as it were loose, as it were unsteady. Prajapati was that. Having made himself through himself, he entered into that. Wherefore this verse has been uttered; ‘Having formed the world, having formed existing things and all intermediate quarters, Prajapati the first born of the ceremonial entered into himself with himself.’ ”

VI The Mahabharata has its own contribution to make to the subject. It propounds the theory of creation by Manu.

The Vanaparvan 1 says:

“There was a great rishi, Manu, son of Vivasvat, majestic, in lustre equal to Prajapati. In energy, fiery vigour, prosperity and austere fervour he surpassed both his father and his grand father. Standing with uplifted arm, on one foot, on the spacious Badari, he practised intense austere fervour. This direful exercise he performed with his head downwards, and with unwinking eyes, for 10,000 years. Once, when, clad in dripping rags, with matted hair, he was so engaged, a fish came to him on the banks of the Chirini, and spake:’ Lord, I am a small fish; I dread the stronger ones, and from them you must save me. For the stronger fish devour the weaker; this has been immemorially ordained as our means of subsistence. Deliver me from this flood of apprehension in which I am sinking, and I will requite the deed.’ Hearing this, Manu filled with compassion, took the fish in his hand, and bringing him to the water threw him into a jar bright as a moonbeam. In it the fish, being excellently tended, grew; for Manu treated him like a son. After a long time he became very large and could not be contained in the jar. Then, seeing Manu he said again:’ In order that I may thrive, remove me elsewhere.’ Manu then took him out of the jar, brought him to a large pond, and threw him in. There he continued to grow for very many years. Although the pond was two yojanas long and one yojana broad, the lotus-eyed fish found in it no room to move; and again said to Manu.’ Take me to Ganga, the dear queen of the oceanmonarch; in her I shall dwell; or do as thou thinkest best, for I must contentedly submit to thy authority, as through thee I have exceedingly increased.’ Manu accordingly took the fish and threw him into the river Ganga. There he waxed for some time, when he again said to Manu, From my great bulk I cannot move in the Ganga; be gracious and remove me quickly to the ocean.’ Manu took him out of the Ganga; and cast him into the sea. Although so huge, the fish was easily borne, and pleasant to touch and smell, as Manu carried him. When he had been thrown into the ocean he said to Manu:’ Great Lord, thou hast in every way preserved me; now hear 1 Muir, Vol. I, pp. 199-201.

from me what thou must do when the time arrives. Soon shall all these terrestrial objects, both fixed and moving, be dissolved. The time for the purification of the worlds has now arrived. I therefore inform thee what is for thy greatest good. The period dreadful for the universe, moving and fixed, has come. Make for thyself a strong ship, with a cable attached; embark in it with the seven rishis and stow in it, carefully preserved and assorted, all the seeds which have been described of old by Brahmins. When embarked in the ship, look out for me. I shall come recognizable by my horn. So shalt thou do; I greet thee and depart. These great waters cannot be crossed over without me. Distrust not my word. ‘Manu replied,’ I shall do as thou hast said. ‘After taking mutual leave they departed each on his own way. Manu then, as enjoined, taking with him the seeds’ floated on the billowy ocean in the beautiful ship. He then thought on the fish, which knowing his desire, arrived with all speed, distinguished by a horn. When Manu saw the horned leviathan, lofty as a mountain, he fastened the ship’s cable to the horn. Being thus attached the fish dragged the ship with great rapidity transporting it across the briny ocean which seemed to dance with its waves and thunder with its waters. Tossed by the tempests, the ship whirled like a reeling and intoxicated woman. Neither the earth nor the quarter of the world appeared; there was nothing but water, air, and sky. In the world thus confounded, the seven rishis, Manu and the fish were beheld. So, for very many years, the fish, unwearied, drew the ship over the waters; and brought it at length to the highest peak of Himavat. He then, smiling gently, said to the rishis,’ Bind the ship without delay to this peak.’ They did so accordingly. And that highest peak of Himavat is still known by the name of Naubandhana (‘the Binding of the Ship’.} The friendly fish (or god, animisha) then said to the rishis,’ I am the Prajapati Brahma, than whom nothing higher can be reached. In the form of a fish I have delivered you from this great danger. Manu shall create all living beings, gods, asuras, men, with all worlds, and all things moving and fixed. By my favour and through severe austere fervour he shall attain perfect insight into his creative work, and shall not become bewildered.’ Having thus spoken, the fish in an instant disappeared. Manu, desirous to call creatures into existence and bewildered in his work, performed a great act of austere fervour; and then began visibly to create all living beings.” The Adi Parvan of the Mahabharata gives a somewhat different version of the story of creation: 1 “Vaishampayana said : I shall, after making obeisance to Svayambhu relate to thee exactly the production and destruction of the gods and other beings. Six great rishis are known as the mind-born sons of Brahma, viz., Marichi, Atri, Angiras, Pulastya, Pulaha and Kratu. Kasyapa was the son of Marichi: and from Kasyapa sprang these creatures. There were born to Daksha thirteen daughters of eminent rank, Adili, Diti, Danu, Kala, Danayu, Simuka, Krodha, Pradha, Visva, Vinata, Kapila and Muni. Kadru also was of the number. These daughters had valorous sons and grandsons innumerable.

Daksha, the glorious rishi, tranquil in spirit, and great in austere fervour, sprang from the right thumb of Brahma. From the left thumb sprang that great Muni’s wife on whom he begot fifty daughters. Of these he gave ten to Dharma, 1 Muir, Vol. I, pp. 122-126.

twentyseven to Indu (Soma), and according to the celestial system, thirteen to Kasyapa. Pitamaha’s descendant Manu, the god and the lord of creatures, was his (it does not clearly appear whose) son. The eight Vasus, whom I shall detail, were his sons. Dividing the right breast of Brahma, the glorious Dharma (Righteousness), issued in a human form, bringing happiness to all people. He had three eminent sons, Sama, Kama, and Harsha (Tranquillity, Love, and Joy), who are the delight of all creatures, and by their might support the world .... Arushi, the daughter of Manu, was the wife of that sage (Chyavana, son of Bhrigu)... There are two other sons of Brahma, whose mark remains in the world, Dhatri, and Vidhatri, who remained with Manu. Their sister was the beautiful goddess Lakshmi, whose home is the lotus. Her mindborn sons are the steeds who move in the sky... When the creatures who were desirous of food, had devoured one another, Adharma (Uprighteousness) was produced, the destroyer of all beings. His wife was Nirriti, and hence the Rakshasas are called Nairritas, or the offspring of Nirriti. She had three dreadful sons, continually addicted to evil deeds, Bhaya, Mahabhaya (Fear and Terror) and Mrityu (Death) the ender of beings. He has neither wife, nor any son, for he is the ender.”

“Born all with splendour, like that of great rishis, the ten sons of Prachetas are reputed to have been virtuous and holy; and by them the glorious beings were formerly burnt up by the fire springing from their mouths. From them was born Daksha Prachetasa; and from Daksha, the Parent of the world (were produced) these creatures. Cohabiting with Virini, the Muni Daksha begot a thousand sons like himself, famous for their religious observances, to whom Narada taught the doctrine of final liberation, the unequalled knowledge of the Sankhya. Desirous of creating offspring, the Prajapati Daksha next formed fifty daughters, of whom he gave ten to Dharma, thirteen to Kasyapa, and twenty-seven devoted to the regulation of time to Indu (Soma)... On Dakshayani, the most excellent of his thirteen wives, Kasyapa, the son of Marichi, begot the Adityas, headed by Indra and distinguished by their energy, and also Vivasvat. To Vivasvat was born a son, the mighty Yama Vaivasvata. To Martanda (i.e., Vivasvat, the Sun) was born the wise and mighty Manu, and also the renowned Yama, his (Manu’s) younger brother. Righteous was this wise Manu, on whom a race was founded. Hence this (family) of men became known as the race of Manu. Brahmins, Kshatriyas, and other men sprang from this Manu. From him, O king, came the Brahmin conjoined with the Kshatriya. Among them the Brahmins, children of Manu, held the Veda with the Vedangas. The children of Manu are said to have been Vena, Dhrishnu, Narishyanta, Nabhaga, Ikshvaku, Karusha, Saryati, IIa the eighth, Prishadra the ninth, who was addicted to the duties of a Kshatriya, and Nabhagarishta, the tenth. Manu had also fifty other sons; but they all, as we have heard, perished in consequence of mutual dissensions. Subsequently, the wise Pururavas was born of IIa, who, we heard, was both his mother and his father.”

VII

The Ramayana also deals with the subject of creation. One account of it will be found in the second Kanda. 1 It says :

1 Muir, Vol. I, p. 115.

“Perceiving Rama to be incensed, Vasishtha replied: ‘Jabali also knows the destruction and renovation of this world. But he spoke as he did from a desire to induce you to return. Learn from me, lord of the earth, this (account of) the origin of the world. The universe was nothing but water. In it the earth was fashioned. Then Brahma Svayambhu came into existence, with the deities. He next, becoming a boar, raised up the earth, and created the entire world, with the saints, his sons, Brahma, the eternal, unchanging, and undecaying, was produced from the ether (akasa). From him sprang Marichi, of whom Kasyapa was the son. From Kasyapa sprang Vivasvat: and from him was descended Manu, who was formerly the lord of creatures (Prajapati). Ikshvaku was the son of Manu, and to him this prosperous earth was formerly given by his father. Know that this Ikshvaku was the former king in Ayodhya.”

There is besides this another story of creation. It occurs in the third Kanda and is in the following terms : 1 “Having heard the words of Rama, the bird (Jatayu) made known to him his own race, and himself, and the origin of all beings. ‘Listen while I declare to you from the commencement all the Prajapatis (lords of creatures) who came into existence in the earliest time. Kardama was the first, then Vikrita, Sesha, Samsraya, the energetic Bahuputra, Sthanu, Marichi, Atri, the strong Kratu, Pulastya, Angiras, Prachetas, Pulaha, Daksha, then Vivasvat, Arishtanemi, and the glorious Kasyapa, who was the last. The Prajapati Daksha is famed to have had sixty daughters. Of these Kasyapa took in marriage eight elegant maidens, Aditi, Diti, Danu, Kalaka, Tamra, Krodhavasa, Manu and Anala. Kasyapa, pleased, then, said to these maids:’ ye shall bring forth sons like me, preservers of the three worlds.’ Aditi, Dili, Danu and Kalaka assented; but the others did not agree. Thirty-three gods were borne by Aditi, the Adityas, Vasus, Rudras, and the two Asvins. ‘Manu, (wife) of Kasyapa, produced men, Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, and Shudras. ‘Brahmins were born from the mouth, Kshatriyas from the breast, Vaishyas from the thighs, and Shudras from the feet’ so says the Veda. Anala gave birth to all trees with pure fruits.” VIII As an illustration of what the Puranas have to say, I extract the following passages from the Vishnu Purana : 2 “Before the mundane egg existed the divine Brahma Hiranyagarbha the eternal originator of all worlds, who was the form and essence of Brahma, who consists of the divine Vishnu, who again is identical with the Rik, Yajus, Saman and Atharva-Vedas. From Brahma’s right thumb was born the Prajapati Daksha; Daksha had a daughter Aditi; from her was born Vivasvat; and from him sprang Manu. Manu had sons called Ikshvaku, Nriga, Dhrishta, Saryati, Narishyanta, Pramsu, Nabhaganedishta, Karusha, and Prishadhra. Desirous of a son, Manu sacrificed to Mitra and Varuna. but in consequence of a wrong invocation 1 Muir, I, p. 116.

2 Muir, Vol. I, pp. 220-221.

through an irregularity of the hotri-priest a daughter called Ila was born. Then through the favour of Mitra and Varuna she became to Manu a son called Sudyumna. But being again changed into a female through the wrath of Isvara (Mahadeva) she wandered near the hermitage of Budha the son of Soma (the Moon); who becoming enamoured of her had by her a son called Pururavas. After his birth, the god who is formed of sacrifice, of the Rik, Yajus, Saman, and Atharva Vedas, of all things, of mind, of nothing, he who is in the form of the sacrificial Male, was worshipped by the rishis of infinite splendour who desired that Sudyumna should recover his manhood. Through the favour of this god Ila became again Sudyumna.”

The Vishnu Purana then proceeds to give the following particulars regarding the sons of Manu :

“(i) Prishadhra became a Shudra in consequence of his having killed his religious preceptor’s cow.

(ii) From Karusha the Karushas, Kshatriyas of great power were descended.

(iii) Nabhaga, the son of Nedishta became a Vaishya.”

The above is the story of the Solar race. The Vishnu Purana 1 has also a parallel story relating to the Lunar race which according to it sprang from Atri just as the Solar race from Manu : “Atri was the son of Brahma, and the father of Soma (the moon), whom Brahma installed as the sovereign of plants, Brahmins and stars. After celebrating the rajasuya sacrifice, Soma became intoxicated with pride, and carried off Tara (Star), the wife of Brihaspati, the preceptor of the gods, whom, although admonished and entreated by Brahma, the gods, and rishis, Soma refused to restore. Soma’s part was taken by Usanas; and Rudra, who had studied under Angiras, aided Brihaspati. A fierce conflict ensued between the two sides supported respectively by the gods and the Daityas, etc., Brahma interposed, and compelled Soma to restore Tara to her husband. She had, however, in the meantime become pregnant, and bore a son Budha (the planet Mercury), of whom when strongly urged, she acknowledged Soma to be the father. Pururavas 2 was the son of this Budha by Ila, the daughter of Manu. Pururavas 3 had six sons, of whom the eldest was Ayus. Ayus had five sons; Nahusha, Kshattravriddha, Rambha, Raji and Anenas.

Kshattravriddha had a son Sunahotra who had three sons, Kasa, Lesa and Gritsamada. From the last sprang Saunaka, who originated the system of four castes. Kasa had a son, Kasiraja, of whom again Dirghatamas was the son, as Dhanvantari was of Dirghatamas.”

Compare these ideologies of creation with those set out in Chapter 2 and what do we find? I think the result of comparison may be set down in the following propositions: (1) one is sacerdotal in 1 Muir, Vol. I, pp. 225-226.

2 The loves of Pururavas and the Apsara Urvasi, are related in the Satapatha Brahmanas, xi. 5.1.11; in the Vishnu Purana, vi. 6.19. ff; in the Bhagavata Purana, ix. 14; and in the Harivamsa, section 26. The Manabharata, Adip, section 75, alludes to Pururavas as having been engaged in a contest with the Brahmins. This passage will be quoted hereafter.

3 Vishnu Purana, iv.7.1.

colour and character, the other is secular; (2) one refers to a human being Manu as the progenitor, the other refers to God Brahma or Prajapati as the originator; (3) one is historical in its drift, the other is supernatural; (4) one speaks of the deluge, the other is completely silent about it; (5) one aims at explaining the four Varnas, the other aims at explaining the origin of society only.

These differences are many and fundamental. Particularly fundamental seems to be the difference in regard to Chaturvarnya. The sacerdotal ideology recognizes it, but the secular ideology does not. It is true that an attempt is made to combine the two by explaining, as is done in the Ramayana and the Puranas, how Manu’s progeny developed into four Varnas. But obviously this is an attempt to mould the two ideologies into one. This attempt is deliberate and calculated. But the difference between the two ideologies is so fundamental that inspite of this attempt they persist as two separate ideologies. All that has happened is that instead of one we have two explanations of Chaturvarnya, supernatural Chaturvarnya produced by Purusha, and natural Chaturvarnya as developed among Manu’s sons. That the result should be so clumsy shows that the two ideologies are fundamentally different and irreconcilable. It is a pity that the existence of two such ideologies recorded in the Brahmanic literature has not been noticed by scholars who have dealt with the subject. But the fact of their existence and their significance cannot be ignored. What is the significance of the existence of two such ideologies fundamentally different and irreconcilable? To me, it seems that they are the ideologies of two different Aryan races—one believing in Chaturvarnya and the other not believing in Chaturvarnya —who at a later stage became merged into one. If this reasoning is well-founded then this difference in ideologies disclosed by the Brahmanic literature furnishes further evidence in support of the new theory.

IX The third and the most unimpeachable evidence in support of my view comes from the anthropometrical survey of the Indian people. Such a survey was first made by Sir Herbert Risley in 1901. On the basis of cephalic index, he came to the conclusion that the people of India were a mixture of four different races: (1) Aryan, (2) Dravidian, (3) Mongolian, and (4) Scythian. He even went to the length of defining the areas where they were massed. The survey was a very

rough one. His conclusions have been tested by Dr. Guha in 1936. His Report on the subject forms a very valuable document in the field of Indian anthropology. The map 1 prepared by Dr. Guha on which he has plotted so to say the distribution of the Indian people according to their head measurements throws a flood of light on the racial composition of the people of India. Dr. Guha’s conclusion is that the Indian people are composed’of two racial stocks: (1) longheaded, and short-headed, and that the long-headed are in the interior of India and the short-headed are on the outskirts.

The evidence of skulls found in different parts of India also goes to confirm this. This is how Dr. Guha sums up the evidence on this point :

“The accounts of the human remains from prehistoric sites given above, though extremely meagre, with the exception of those of the Indus Valley, enable us nevertheless to visualise the broad outlines of the racial history of India in these times. From the beginning of the 4th Millennium B.C. North-western India seems to have been in the occupation of a long-headed race with a narrow prominent nose. Side by side with them we find the existence of another very powerfully built race also long-headed, but with lower cranial vault, and equally long-faced and narrow nose, though the latter was not so high pitched as that of the former. A third type with broader head and apparently Armenoid affinities also existed, but its advent occurred probably somewhat later judged by the age of the site as Harappa from which most of these latter type of skulls came.”

Speaking in terms of the Alpine and the Mediterranean race, one can say that the Indian people are composed of two stocks: (1) The Mediterranean or the long-headed race, and (2) the Alpine or the short-headed race.

About the Mediterranean race, certain facts are admitted. It is admitted that it is a race which spoke the Aryan language. It is admited that its home was in Europe round about the Mediterranean basin and from thence it migrated to India. From its localization, it is clear that it must have come to India before the entry of the Alpine race.

Similar facts about the Alpine race remain to be ascertained. First is about the home of the Alpine race and second is about its native speech. According to Prof. Ripley, the home of the Alpine race was in Asia somewhere in the Himalayas. His reasons may be given in his own words. Says Prof. Ripley : 2 1 See Appendix V 2 Races of Europe, pp. 473-74

“What right have we for the assertion that this infiltration of population from the East 1 it was not a conquest, everything points to it as a gradual peaceful immigration, often merely the settlement of unoccupied territory— marks the advent of an overflow from the direction of Asia? The proof of this rests largely upon our knowledge of the people of that continent, especially of the Pamir region, the Western Himalayan highlands. Just here on the ‘ roof of the world,’ where Max Muller and the early philologists placed the primitive home of Aryan civilization, a human type prevails which tallies almost exactly with our ideal Alpine or Celtic European race. The researches of De Ujfalvy, Topinard, and others localize its peculiar traits over a vast territory hereabouts. The Galchas, mountain Tadjiks, and their fellows are grey-eyed, dark-haired, stocky in build, with cephalic indexes ranging above 86 for the most part. From this region a long chain of peoples of a similar physical type extends, uninterruptedly westward over Asia Minor and into Europe. The only point which the discovery of a broad area in Western Asia occupied by an ideal Alphine type settles, is that it emphasises the affinities of this peculiar race. It is no proof of direct immigration from Asia at all, as Tappeiner observes. It does, however, lead us to turn our eyes eastward when we seek for the origin of the broad-headed type. Things vaguely point to an original ethnic base of supplies somewhere in this direction. It could not lie westward, for everywhere along the Atlantic the race slowly disappears, so to speak. That the Alpine type approaches all the other human millions on the Asiatic continent, in the head form especially, but in hair, colour and stature as well, also prejudices us in the matter; just as the increasing longheadedness and extreme brunetness of our Mediterranean race led us previously to derive it from some type parent to that of the African Negro. These points are then fixed; the roots of the Alpine race run eastward; those of the Mediterranean type towards the south.”

On the question of its language there is a certain amount of dispute 1 as to who introduced the Aryan language in Europe, whether the Nordics (the purest of the Indo-Germans) or the Alpines. But there is no dispute that the language of the Alpine race was Aryan and therefore it is entitled to be called Aryan race in philological sense. X From the foregoing statement of facts, it will be seen that there is a solid foundation in anthropometry and history, in support of the Rig Veda that there were in India two Aryan races and not one. Having regard to this, one cannot refuse to admit that here there is a direct conflict between the Western theory and the testimony of the Rig Veda. Whereas the Western theory speaks of one Aryan race, the Rig 1 Madison Grant, ‘The Passing of the Great Race’ (1922), pp. 238-239.

Veda speaks of two Aryan races. The Western theory is thus in conflict with the Rig Veda on a major issue. The Rig Veda being the best evidence on the subject the theory which is in conflict with it must be rejected. There is no escape.

This conflict on the major issue also creates a conflict on the issue of invasion and conquest. We do not know which of the two Aryan races came to India first. But if they belonged to the Alpine race then its home being near the Himalayas, there is no room for the theory of invasion from outside. As to the conquest of the native tribes, assuming it to be a fact, the matter is not quite so simple as Western writers have supposed. On the footing that the Dasas and Dasyus were racially different from the Aryans, the theory of conquest must take account not merely of a possible conquest of Dasas and Dasyus by Aryans but also of a possible conquest of Aryans by Aryans. It must also explain which of the two Aryans conquered the Dasas and Dasyus if they conquered them at all.

The Western theory, it is clear, is only a hurried conclusion drawn from insufficient examination of facts and believed to be correct because it tallied with certain pre-conceived notions about the mentality of the ancient Aryans which they were supposed to have possessed on no other grounds except that their alleged modern descendants, namely, the Indo Germanic races are known to possess. It is built on certain selected facts which are assumed to be the only facts. It is extraordinary that a theory with such a slender and insecure foundation in fact should have been propounded by Western scholars for serious scholars and should have held the field for such a long time. In the face of the discovery of new facts set out in this Chapter the theory can no longer stand and must be thrown on the scrap heap.

zz