the vratyas

7/28/2019 The Vratyas

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-vratyas 1/7

The VratyasAuthor(s): A. Berriedale KeithSource: Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, (Jan., 1913), pp.155-160

Published by: Cambridge University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25188932 .

Accessed: 14/04/2013 06:11

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Cambridge University Press and Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland are collaborating with

JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 203.78.9.150 on Sun, 14 Apr 2013 06:11:50 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup

http://www.jstor.org/stable/25188932?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp





http://www.jstor.org/stable/25188932?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup



THE VttATVAS 155

IV.?He [i.e. the author, Sarngadeva] has definitely

fixed the measure of an angula as settled in the science

of arithmetic: uo angula of five yavas is seen either in

the Sastras or in popularuse. An angula is made ly

six yavodaras free from husk and placed crosswise? :

in the measure of the khdni [the hollow stick of the

Vina] the little finger of the right hand (is used).

V.?Sarngadeva has described the form of a Vina-stick

on another measure : ly four and a half ojavodaoxts free

from husk and placed crosswise (is onade) an oiigida

here: in accordance with this measure there are, as

described before, twenty-two varieties of Vina-sticks,

commencing with the Ekavira [thename of the first] ;

about these we aregoing to speak.

II. Shamasastry.

The Vratvas

In a recent contribution to the Vienna Oriental

Journal1 Paul Charpentier has endeavoured to establish

a new account of the Vratyas of the Vedic tradition. He

finds in them the founders of the widespread Rudra-Siva

cult, and the spiritual ancestors of the later and modern

Sivaites. The Vratyastomas of the ritual were per

formances to mark the admission within the Brahmin

circle of such Vratyas, whose addiction to the cult of

Siva in his dread forms rendered them anobject of

suspicion to their more orthodox fellows. Further, the

Vratya of the Atliao'vaveda, book xv, is no other than

Uudra-Siva himself and simultaneous^7 hisearthty counter

part, the Sivaite ascetic.

Thetheoiy

is attractive andinteresting: it remains to

consider how far it can claim to be more than aspeculation

or to have real value. In the firstplace

the argumentfrom the later literature can be disregarded

: its point is

1xxv, 355-GS. Cf. xxiii, 151 seq<|.







156 THE VRATVAS

that Manul

derives from aRajanya Vratya bhe Licchavis

and Mallas of Buddhisb fame;

now bhese families cannob

have been derived from the despised mixed castes, but

for the fact that they practisedan unbrahininic religion,

that of Rudra-Siva, and it is stated that theynever

appear in the Buddhist texts aspractising Brahminical

offerings. This suggestioncan

clearly be of no value for

early Vedic times or throw lighton the early character of

the Vratya, and it is therefore needless to consider what

validity it has for later days.

Secondly,it is argued that in the PancavimsaBrahmana2

the Vratyasare described as those left behind when the

gods went to the world of heaven. In the Satapatha*

the gods go to the sky and Rudra is left behind. It is

deduced that the Vratyas must be connected with Siva.

The argument is wholly without value, as the passages

stand in no conceivable relation, and any theory could be

supportedif such evidence were allowed to stand good ;

yet the leader of those left behind in the Pancavimsa is

expressly givenas

Dyutana Maruta, not Siva at all.

Thirdly, it is argued that the Grhapati of the Vratyas

in their offerings is Siva himself because his apparatus is

similar to that of Siva. The apparatus includes a turban

(tiryaiinaddhd),a

goad (pratoda),a

particular kind of bow

(jydhroda, explained by Katyayana4as an ayogyam

dhanuh and by Latyayana6as a dhanuska ani?u),

a black garment (krsnasam vdsah),a

rough wagon

planked over, drawn bya horse and an ass, a silver

ornament

(niska),

two

sheepskins

fastened at the sides

and krsnabalakse. Now Rudra-Siva has the turban, he

carries a bow, and in the Aitareya Brahmanac

is referred

to asli/snasavdsi, and in one passage in the Rgveda7 he

has a niskdm yajatdm visvdrrvpam, and yajata and

1x, 22. xvii, 1. 1.

ai, 7. 3. 1.

4Srauta Sutra, xxii. 4, 11.

*Srauta Siitra, viii, 0, S.

*

v,14. Sec

Roth,ZDMG.

vi,24(1. 7

ii,33. 11.







THE VRATYAS 157

raj ata "stehen einander jedenfalls sehr nahe ". Thus

attired Rudra-Siva is accepted by the ottering into the

regular circle of the gods, and the followers of the

Grhapati also abandon their older faith by the rite, but at

the same time represent the uncanny, ghostty comrades

of Rudra-Siva. The whole ceremoiy iscomparable iu its

dramatic character to the performances at the Soma

buyingor the Mahavrata.

But all this is without sure ground. The greater part

of theGrhapati's attire and accompaniments has no

parallel

in Rudra at all : where are the wagon, the sheepskins,

the goad ? The turban is there, but not tiryaiinaddha,

and it is the mode, not the common turban, that matters.

The bow is there, but not the jydhroda, and it is the bow

of apeculiar kind that is the point. Nor will yajo.ta

transform itself into oxljata to pleaseus. It is onty open

to fall back on the krsnasaoii vasas, but be it remembered

that black is a common colour regularly associated with

the uncanny and dread. There is, in fact, wholty lacking

the exact correspondence in detail which is essential for

any proof of the identity of the Grhapati and Rudra-Siva.

The obvious explanation of the whole of the outfit is that

it is the description of a local form of dress wornly the

Vratyas, known to the texts: indeed, Latyayana1 oxpressty

tells us that the vipatha is aprdcyaratha,

"a chariot of

the easterners," and the rite ends with the bestowal of the

apparatus to aMdgadhades'iya2 brahona-baoidhu, an

easterner. In the face of this obvious explanation, that

of

Charpentier

is

clearty

invalid.

Nor does it win any real support from the effort to

confirm it hy Atharvareda, xv. That this section deals

with the Vratya is shown beyond doubt by the references

to the turban, the goad, the vipatha, and the Magadha.

But I find nothing in it to show that the Vratya is

1Srauta Sutra, viii, 0. 9.

2

Katyayaiia, xxii, 4. 22 ; Latyayana, viii, G. 28.







158 THE VRATYAS

Rudra-Siva. The piece is a late one, in Brahmana style,

and it celebrates in the highest way the Vratya, but such

theological speculationsare

peculiarlycommon in the

Atharvaveda, and render it needless to suppose that behind

the Vratya lies the figure of agreat god. Charpentier

*

sees proof of this in xv, I, 4-8, but all that is there said

is that the Vratya became Mahadcva and I&ina, while in

xv, 5, 1 seq., Bhava, Sarva, Pas upati, Ugradeva, I sana,

Rudra, are his servants, all signs of his cosmic potency,

not proofsof his original nature. Nor can any weight be

assigned to the conjecture2 that theVratya is depicted

as

healing Prajapati from the wound inflicted on him by

Rudra for his incest with his daughter. The faets are

all adequately accounted for on Bloomfield's3 hypothesis

that the Vratya is celebrated as Brahman under Sivaite

influence.

But not only is there acomplete lack of serious evidence

for the theory, it makes noattempt to deal with the

fundamental difficulties with which it is confronted. In

the first placeno

explanation is offered of the peculiar

nature of the rite in which the god is supposed himself to

be received into the order of the orthodox

gods.

That

such a rite is conceivable is no doubt the case, for in

religion denials of possibilityare

hardlyever wise. But

there is no trace of any such rite in the Vedic religion,

and apriori it is not a very probable

one.Secondly?

and this is still more serious?it assumes that to the

Hindus of the Brahmana period Rudra-Siva was astrange

god, andone outside the usual circle of the

pantheon.But nothing

can be further from the truth ; the Sataru

driya of all the Yajurveda Samhitas is clear proof of

his full acceptancein all his aspects by those to whom

the periodowes its religious tendencies, and, as Aufrecht4

1VOJ. xxv, 374.

2Ibid. 370, n. 2.

3Atharraveda, p. 1)4.

4. Seo his Aitareya Brdhmana, pp. vi, vii.







THE VRATYAS 159

long ago pointed out, it is Rudra-Siva who is the great

god of such textsas

the Aitareyaand

the KausltakiBrdhonanas. We nuy, having regard to the Rgvedic

Rudra, believe that the Rudra of the Brahmanas is agod

with characteristics borrowed from aboriginal tribes, but

we cannot believe that to the composers of the Brahmanas

he was agod not wholty received into the circle of the

<*ods. We must not confound the fact that a "od is

a dreadful god in some aspects with the view that he

is astrange god. Thirdty, the theoiy of Charpentier

completetyfails to explain the characteristics of the

Vratyasas they appear in the Pancavimsa Brdhmana.1

We are there told that the3r do not practise krsi or trade,

i.e. that they are distinct in culture from the Brahminical

Indians who practise in the times of the Brahmanas both.

Moreover, they have a different code of law, for that is the

realmeaning

ofadandyam

dandeoiaghnanlas caranti,2

and they have a different speech, for they call what is

easy to say diflicult, apoint indicating at the least a

Prakrit speech in which conjunct consonants had been

softened. Theyare described as

speaking diksitavdcam

though adiksitdh, but this characteristic is not realty

intelligible. Charpentier:i thinks diksitavddam may be

meant in sense, and that the sense is that, though Sudras,

they reckon their genealogies, comparing the dlksitavdda

of the Satapatha Boxihmana,4 but this theoiy is very

doubtful, for vac is not vada. 'But in aiy casewhy

should worshippers of Rudra-Siva have beenignorant

of

agriculture

and

trading,

and have differed in

speechfrom the ordinary Vedic Indians ? There is no

explanation

possible unless weaccept the view that Rudra-Siva was

astrange

newgod

of extraneousorigin

to the Brahmana

period, and this contradicts all the texts. On the other

hand, the obvious view that the persons meant are

1xvii, 4. 2. 2

xvii, 4. 0.3

VOJ.xxv,

303.4

iii,2. 1.

40;see

Weber,IS. x. 83.







160 SOME BENGALI VERUS

non-Brahminical tribes of a less advanced culture is open

to no intelligible objection.

Of minor* points three may be noted. Charpenticrl

suggests that the famous crux in the Rgveda2 as to the

sense of naicdsdkha may receive somelight from the

obscure saikhaka or saisaka, which are among the variants

of the names of castes sprung from Vratyas in Manu,3

but the suggestion is clearly of nohelp

or serious value,

nor does prdmaganda really suggest Magadha on any

scientific principle. Secondly, Charpentier4 repeatedly

quotes the views of Dhanamjapya, but, though he has many

predecessors in this practice, have wereally anyone else

but Dhanamjayya ? Neither early Indian editions5 nor

MSS. can be really expected to distinguish py and yy in

Devanagari. Nor is it fair to banish paragraphs15-18

of Atharvaveda, xv, as a later addition :they

areperfectly

reasonable in aglorification of the Vratya,

even if they

do not help to bear out the theory that the Vratya is

really Rudra-Siva.

To the authorities on the Vratyastomasas used by

Charpentier should be added the text of the Baudhayana,

Srauta Sutra, which the energy of Caland has now made

available.0 It does not, however, add any tiling which,

so far as I can.judge, throws additional light

on this

obscure and curious rite.

A. Berriedale Keith.

Some Bengali Verrs

I should premise that this note is not the result of

learningor research. On the contraiy, the only justification

1V0J. xxv, 357, n. 5.

iii, 53. 14. See Macdonell & Keith, Vedic Index, i, 459 ; ii, 38, 474.

Mx, 21. The text i? wholly uncertain, the commentators having

dift'erenb readings.4

VOJ. xxv, 306-8.5

Viz. that of Latyayana.6

xviii, 24-6 ; Uber das ritncVa Sutra (Us Baudhayana, p. 21.

This content downloaded from 203.78.9.150 on Sun, 14 Apr 2013 06:11:50 AM



the vratyas

Documents