Chapter 87

“The punishment which the Code of Manu awards to the slayer of a Brahman was to be branded in the forehead with the mark of a headless corpse, and entirely banished from society; this being apparently commutable for a fine. The poem is therefore in accordance with the Code regarding the peculiar guilt of killing Brahmans; but in allowing a hermit who was not a _Divija_ (twice-born) to go to heaven, the poem is far in advance of the Code. The youth in the poem is allowed to read the Veda, and to accumulate merit by his own as well as his father’s pious acts; whereas the exclusive Code reserves all such privileges to _Divijas_ invested with the sacred cord.” Mrs. SPEIR’S _Life in Ancient India_, p. 107.

Page 174. The Praise Of Kings

“Compare this magnificent eulogium of kings and kingly government with what Samuel says of the king and his authority: And Samuel told all the words of the LORD unto the people that asked of him a king.

And he said, This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen: and some shall run before his chariots.

And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains over fifties, and will set them to work his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instrument of war, and instruments of his chariots.

And he will take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be cooks, and to be bakers.

And he will take your fields, and your vineyards and your oliveyards, even the best of them, and give them to his servants.

And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants.

And he will take your men-servants, and your maid-servants, and your goodliest young men, and your asses, and put them to his work.

He will take the tenth of your sheep: and ye shall be his servants.

And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you. I. _Samuel_, VIII.

In India kingly government was ancient and consecrated by tradition: whence to change it seemed disorderly and revolutionary: in Judæa theocracy was ancient and consecrated by tradition, and therefore the innovation which would substitute a king was represented as full of dangers.” GORRESIO.

Page 176. Sálmalí.

According to the Bengal recension Śálmalí appears to have been another name of the Vipáśá. Śálmalí may be an epithet signifying rich in Bombax heptaphyllon. The commentator makes another river out of the word.

Page 178. Bharat’s Return.

“Two routes from Ayodhyá to Rájagriha or Girivraja are described. That taken by the envoys appears to have been the shorter one, and we are not told why Bharat returned by a different road. The capital of the Kekayas lay to the west of the Vipáśá. Between it and the Śatadru stretched the country of the Báhíkas. Upon the remaining portion of the road the two recensions differ. According to that of Bengal there follow towards the east the river Indamatí, then the town Ajakála belonging to the Bodhi, then Bhulingá, then the river Śaradaṇḍá. According to the other instead of the first river comes the Ikshumatí … instead of the first town Abhikála, instead of the second Kulingá, then the second river. According to the direction of the route both the above-mentioned rivers must be tributaries of the Śatadrú.… The road then crossed the Yamuná (Jumna), led beyond that river through the country of the Panchálas, and reached the Ganges at Hástinapura, where the ferry was. Thence it led over the Rámagangá and its eastern tributaries, then over the Gomati, and then in a southern direction along the Málini, beyond which it reached Ayodhyá. In Bharat’s journey the following rivers are passed from west to east: _Kutikoshṭiká_, _Uttániká_, _Kuṭiká_, _Kapívatí_, _Gomatí_ according to Schlegel, and _Hiraṇyavatí_, _Uttáriká_, _Kuṭilá_, _Kapívatí_, _Gomatí_ according to Gorresio. As these rivers are to be looked for on the east of the Ganges, the first must be the modern _Koh_, a small affluent of the Rámagangá, over which the highway cannot have gone as it bends too far to the north. The Uttániká or Uttáriká must be the Rámagangá, the Kuṭiká or Kuṭilá its eastern tributary, Kośilá, the Kapívatí the next tributary which on the maps has different names, _Gurra_ or above Kailas, lower down _Bhaigu_. The Gomatí (Goomtee) retains its old name. The Máliní, mentioned only in the envoys’ journey, must have been the western tributary of the Sarayú now called Chuká.” LASSEN’S _Indische Alterthumskunde_, Vol. II. P. 524.

Page 183.

_What worlds await thee, Queen, for this?_

“Indian belief divided the universe into several worlds (_lokáh_). The three principal worlds were heaven, earth, and hell. But according to another division there were seven: Bhúrloka or the earth, Bhuvarloka or the space between the earth and the sun, the seat of the Munis, Siddhas, &c., Svarloka or the heaven of Indra between the sun and the polar star, and the seventh Brahmaloka or the world of Brahma. Spirits which reached the last were exempt from being born again.” GORRESIO.

Page 203.

_When from a million herbs a blaze_ _Of their own luminous glory plays._

This mention of lambent flames emitted by herbs at night may be compared with Lucan’s description of a similar phenomenon in the Druidical forest near Marseilles, (_Pharsalia_, III. 420.).

_Non ardentis_ fulgere incendia silvae.

Seneca, speaking of Argolis, (Thyestes, Act IV), says:—

Tota solet

Micare flamma silva, et excelsae trabes _Ardent sine igni_.

Thus also the bush at Horeb (Exod. II.) flamed, but was not consumed.

The Indian explanation of the phenomenon is, that the sun before he sets deposits his rays for the night with the deciduous plants. See _Journal of R. As. S. Bengal_, Vol. II. p. 339.

Page 219.

_We rank the Buddhist with the thief._

Schlegel says in his Preface: “Lubrico vestigio insistit V. Cl. _Heerenius, prof. Gottingensis_, in libro suo de commerciis veterum populorum (OPP. Vol. HIST. XII, pag. 129,) dum putat, ex mentione sectatorum Buddhae secundo libro Rameidos iniecta de tempore, quo totum carmen sit conditum, quicquam legitime concludi posse.… Sunt versus spurii, reiecti a Bengalis in sola commentatorum recensione leguntur. Buddhas quidem mille fere annis ante Christum natun vixit: sed post multa demumsecula, odiointernecivo inter Brachmanos et Buddhae sectatores orto, his denique ex India pulsis, fingi potuit iniquissima criminatio, eos animi immortalitatem poenasque et praemia in vita futura negare. Praeterea metrum, quo concinnati sunt hi versus, de quo metro mox disseram, recentiorem aetatem arguit.… Poenitet me nunc mei consilii, quod non statim ab initio, … eiecerim cuncta disticha diversis a sloco vulgari metris composita. Metra sunt duo: pariter ambo constant quatuor hemistichiis inter se aequalibus, alterum undenarum syllabarum, alterum duodenarum, hunc in modum:

[-)] [-] [)] [-] | [-] [)] [)] [-] | [)] [-] [-)] [)] [-] [)] [-] | [-] [)] [)] [-] | [)] [-] [)] [-)]

Cuius generis versus in primo et secundo Rameidos libro nusquam nisi ad finem capitum apposita inveniuntur, et huic loco unice sunt accommodata, quasi peroratio, lyricis numeris assurgens, quo magis canorae cadant clausulae: sicut musici in concentibus extremis omnium vocum instrumentorumque ictu fortiore aures percellere amant. Igitur disticha illa non ante divisionem per capita illatam addi potuerunt: hanc autem grammaticis deberi argumento est ipse recensionum dissensus, manifesto inde ortus, quod singuli editores in ea constituenda suo quisque iudicio usi sunt; praeterquam quod non credibile est, poetam artis suae peritum narrationem continuam in membra tam minuta dissecuisse. Porro discolor est dictio: magniloquentia affectatur, sed nimis turgida illa atque effusa, nec sententiarum pondere satis suffulta. Denique nihil fere novi affertur: ampli ficantur prius dicta, rarius aliquid ex capite sequente anticipatur. Si quis appendices hosce legendo transiliat, sentiet slocum ultimum cum primo capitis proximi apte coagmentatum, nec sine vi quadam inde avulsum. Eiusmodi versus exhibet utraque recensio, sed modo haec modo illa plures paucioresve numero, et lectio interdum magnopere variat.”

“The narrative of Ráma’s exile in the jungle is one of the most obscure portions of the Rámáyana, inasmuch as it is difficult to discover any trace of the original tradition, or any illustration of actual life and manners, beyond the artificial life of self-mortification and selfdenial said to have been led by the Brahman sages of olden time. At the same time, however, the story throws some light upon the significance of the poem, and upon the character in which the Brahmanical author desired to represent Ráma; and consequently it deserves more serious consideration than the nature of the subject-matter would otherwise seem to imply.

“According to the Rámáyana, the hero Ráma spent more than thirteen years of his exile in wandering amongst the different Brahmanical settlements, which appear to have been scattered over the country between the Ganges and the Godáveri; his wanderings extending from the hill of Chitra-kúṭa in Bundelkund, to the modern town of Nasik on the western side of India, near the source of the Godáveri river, and about seventy-five miles to the north-west of Bombay. The appearance of these Brahmanical hermitages in the country far away to the south of the Raj of Kasala, seems to call for critical inquiry. Each hermitage is said to have belonged to some particular sage, who is famous in Brahmanical tradition. But whether the sages named were really contemporaries of Ráma, or whether they could possibly have flourished at one and the same period, is open to serious question. It is of course impossible to fix with any degree of certainty the relative chronology of the several sages, who are said to have been visited by Ráma; but still it seems tolerably clear that some belonged to an age far anterior to that in which the Rámáyana was composed, and probably to an age anterior to that in which Ráma existed as a real and living personage; whilst, at least, one sage is to be found who could only have existed in the age during which the Rámáyana was produced in its present form. The main proofs of these inferences are as follows. An interval of many centuries seems to have elapsed between the composition of the Rig-Veda and that of the Rámáyana: a conclusion which has long been proved by the evidence of language, and is generally accepted by Sanskrit scholars. But three of the sages, said to have been contemporary with Ráma, namely, Viśvámitra, Atri and Agastya, are frequently mentioned in the hymns of the Rig-Veda; whilst Válmíki, the sage dwelling at Chitra-kúṭa, is said to have been himself the composer of the Rámáyana. Again, the sage Atri, whom Ráma visited immediately after his departure from Chitra-kúṭa, appears in the genealogical list preserved in the Mahá Bhárata, as the progenitor of the Moon, and consequently as the first ancestor of the Lunar race: whilst his grandson Buddha [Budha] is said to have married Ilá, the daughter of Ikhsváku who was himself the remote ancestor of the Solar race of Ayodhyá, from whom Ráma was removed by many generations. These conclusions are not perhaps based upon absolute proof, because they are drawn from untrustworthy authorities; but still the chronological difficulties have been fully apprehended by the Pundits, and an attempt has been made to reconcile all contradictions by representing the sages to have lived thousands of years, and to have often re-appeared upon earth in different ages widely removed from each other. Modern science refuses to accept such explanations; and consequently it is impossible to escape the conclusion that if Válmíki composed the Rámáyana in the form of Sanskrit in which it has been preserved, he could not have flourished in the same age as the sages who are named in the Rig-Veda.” WHEELER’S _History of India, Vol._ II, 229.

Page 249.

_And King Himálaya’s Child._

Umá or Párvatí, was the daughter of Himálaya and Mená. She is the heroine of Kálidása’s _Kumára-Sambhava_ or _Birth of the War-God_.

Page 250.

_Strong Kumbhakarṇa slumbering deep_ _In chains of never-ending sleep._

“Kumbhakarṇa, the gigantic brother of the titanic Rávaṇ,—named from the size of his ears which could contain a _Kumbha_ or large water-jar—had such an appetite that he used to consume six months’ provisions in a single day. Brahmá, to relieve the alarm of the world, which had begun to entertain serious apprehensions of being eaten up, decreed that the giant should sleep six months at a time and wake for only one day during which he might consume his six months’ allowance without trespassing unduly on the reproductive capabilities of the ” _Scenes front the Rámáyan_, p. 153, 2nd Edit.

Page 257.

_Like Śiva when his angry might_ _Stayed Daksha’s sacrificial rite._

The following spirited version of this old story is from the pen of Mr. W. Waterfield:

“This is a favorite subject of Hindú sculpture, especially on the temples of Shiva, such as the caves of Elephanta and Ellora. It, no doubt, is an allegory of the contest between the followers of Shiva and the worshippers of the Elements, who observed the old ritual of the Vedas; in which the name of Shiva is never mentioned.

Daksha for devotion Made a mighty feast: Milk and curds and butter, Flesh of bird and beast, Rice and spice and honey, Sweetmeats ghí and gur,(1038) Gifts for all the Bráhmans, Food for all the poor. At the gates of Gangá(1039) Daksha held his feast; Called the gods unto it, Greatest as the least. All the gods were gathered Round with one accord; All the gods but Umá, All but Umá’s lord. Umá sat with Shiva On Kailása hill: Round them stood the Rudras Watching for their will. Who is this that cometh Lilting to his lute? All the birds of heaven Heard his music, mute. Round his head a garland Rich of hue was wreathed: Every sweetest odour From its blossoms breathed. ’Tis the Muni Nárad; ’Mong the gods he fares, Ever making mischief By the tales he bears. “Hail to lovely Umá! Hail to Umá’s lord! Wherefore are they absent For her father’s board? Multiplied his merits Would be truly thrice, Could he gain your favour For his sacrifice.” Worth of heart was Umá; To her lord she spake:— “Why dost thou, the mighty, Of no rite partake? Straight I speed to Daksha Such a sight to see: If he be my father, He must welcome thee.” Wondrous was in glory Daksha’s holy rite; Never had creation Viewed so brave a sight. Gods, and nymphs, find fathers, Sages, Bráhmans, sprites,— Every diverge creature Wrought that rite of rites. Quickly then a quaking Fell on all from far; Umá stood among them On her lion car. “Greeting, gods and sages, Greeting, father mine! Work hath wondrous virtue, Where such aids combine. Guest-hall never gathered Goodlier company: Seemeth all are welcome. All the gods but me.” Spake the Muni Daksha, Stern and cold his tone:— “Welcome thou, too, daughter, Since thou com’st alone. But thy frenzied husband Suits another shrine; He is no partaker Of this feast of mine. He who walks in darkness Loves no deeds of light: He who herds with demons Shuns each kindly sprite. Let him wander naked.— Wizard weapons wield,— Dance his frantic measure Round the funeral field. Art thou yet delighted With the reeking hide, Body smeared with ashes. Skulls in necklace tied? Thou to love this monster? Thou to plead his part! Know the moon and Gangá Share that faithless heart Vainly art thou vying With thy rivals’ charms. Are not coils of serpents Softer than thine arms?” Words like these from Daksha Daksha’s daughter heard: Then a sudden passion All her bosom stirred. Eyes with fury flashing. Speechless in her ire, Headlong did she hurl her ’Mid the holy fire. Then a trembling terror Overcame each one, And their minds were troubled Like a darkened sun; And a cruel Vision, Face of lurid flame, Umá’s Wrath incarnate, From the altar came. Fiendlike forms by thousands Started from his side, ’Gainst the sacrificers All their might they plied: Till the saints availed not Strength like theirs to stay, And the gods distracted Turned and fled away. Hushed were hymns and chanting, Priests were mocked and spurned; Food defiled and scattered; Altars overturned.— Then, to save the object Sought at such a price, Like a deer in semblance Sped the sacrifice. Soaring toward the heavens, Through the sky it fled? But the Rudras chasing Smote away its head. Prostrate on the pavement Daksha fell dismayed:— “Mightiest, thou hast conquered Thee we ask for aid. Let not our oblations All be rendered vain; Let our toilsome labour Full fruition gain.” Bright the broken altars Shone with Shiva’s form; “Be it so!” His blessing Soothed that frantic storm. Soon his anger ceases, Though it soon arise;— But the Deer’s Head ever Blazes in the skies.”

_Indian Ballads and other Poems._

Page 286. Urvasí.

“The personification of Urvasî herself is as thin as that of Eôs or Selênê. Her name is often found in the Veda as a mere name for the morning, and in the plural number it is used to denote the dawns which passing over men bring them to old age and death. Urvasî is the bright flush of light overspreading the heaven before the sun rises, and is but another form of the many mythical beings of Greek mythology whose names take us back to the same idea or the same root. As the dawn in the Vedic hymns is called Urûkî, the far-going (Têlephassa, Têlephos), so is she also Uruasî, the wide-existing or wide-spreading; as are Eurôpê, Euryanassa, Euryphassa, and many more of the sisters of Athênê and Aphroditê. As such she is the mother of Vasishtha, the bright being, as Oidipous is the son of Iokastê; and although Vasishtha, like Oidipous, has become a mortal bard or sage, he is still the son of Mitra and Varuṇa, of night and day. Her lover Purûravas is the counterpart of the Hellenic Polydeukês; but the continuance of her union with him depends on the condition that she never sees him unclothed. But the Gandharvas, impatient of her long sojourn among mortal men resolved to bring her back to their bright home; and Purûravas is thus led unwitingly to disregard her warning. A ewe with two lambs was tied to her couch, and the Gandharvas stole one of them; Urvasî said, ‘They take away my darling, as if I lived in a land where there is no hero and no man.’ They stole the second, and she upbraided her husband again. Then Purûravas looked and said, ‘How can that be a land without heroes or men where I am?’ And naked he sprang up; he thought it was too long to put on his dress. Then the Gandharvas sent a flash of lighting, and Urvasî saw her husband naked as by daylight. Then she vanished. ‘I come back,’ she said, and went. ‘Then he bewailed his vanished love in bitter grief.’ Her promise to return was fulfilled, but for a moment only, at the Lotos-lake, and Purûravas in vain beseeches her to tarry longer. ‘What shall I do with thy speech?’ is the answer of Urvasî. ‘I am gone like the first of the dawns. Purûravas, go home again. I am hard to be caught like the winds.’ Her lover is in utter despair; but when he lies down to die, the heart of Urvasî was melted, and she bids him come to her on the last night of the year. On that night only he might be with her; but a son should be born to him. On that day he went up to the golden seats, and there Urvasî told him that the Gandharvas would grant him one wish, and that he must make his choice. ‘Choose thou for me,’ he said: and she answered, ‘Say to them, Let me be one of you.’ ”

COX’S _Mythology of the Aryan Nations._ Vol. I. p. 397.

Page 324.

_The sovereign of the Vánar race._

“Vánar is one of the most frequently occurring names by which the poem calls the monkeys of Ráma’s army. Among the two or three derivations of which the word Vánar is susceptible, one is that which deduces it from vana which signifies a wood, and thus Vánar would mean a forester, an inhabitant of the wood. I have said elsewhere that the monkeys, the Vánars, whom Ráma led to the conquest of Ceylon were fierce woodland tribes who occupied the mountainous regions of the south of India, where their descendants may still be seen. I shall hence forth promiscuously employ the word _Vánar_ to denote those monkeys, those fierce combatants of Ráma’s army.” GORRESIO.

Page 326.

_No change of hue, no pose of limb_ _Gave sign that aught was false in him._ _Concise, unfaltering, sweet and clear,_ _Without a word to pain the ear,_ _From chest to throat, nor high nor low,_ _His accents came in measured flow._

Somewhat similarly in _The Squire’s Tale_:

“He with a manly voice said his message, After the form used in his language, Withouten vice of syllable or of letter. And for his talë shouldë seem the better Accordant to his wordës was his chere, As teacheth art of speech them that it lere.”

Page 329. Ráma’s Alliance With Sugríva.

“The literal interpretation of this portion of the Rámáyana is indeed deeply rooted in the mind of the Hindu. He implicitly believes that Ráma is Vishnu, who became incarnate for the purpose of destroying the demon Rávana: that he permitted his wife to be captured by Rávana for the sake of delivering the gods and Bráhmans from the oppressions of the Rákshasa; and that he ultimately assembled an army of monkeys, who were the progeny of the gods, and led them against the strong-hold of Rávana at Lanká, and delivered the world from the tyrant Rákshasa, whilst obtaining ample revenge for his own personal wrongs.

One other point seems to demand consideration, namely, the possibility of such an alliance as that which Ráma is said to have concluded with the monkeys. This possibility will of course be denied by modern critics, but still it is interesting to trace out the circumstances which seem to have led to the acceptance of such a wild belief by the dreamy and marvel loving Hindi. The south of India swarms with monkeys of curious intelligence and rare physical powers. Their wonderful instinct for organization, their attachment to particular localities, their occasional journeys in large numbers over mountains and across rivers, their obstinate assertion of supposed rights, and the ridiculous caricature which they exhibit of all that is animal and emotional in man, would naturally create a deep impression.… Indeed the habits of monkeys well deserve to be patiently studied; not as they appear in confinement, when much that is revolting in their nature is developed, but as they appear living in freedom amongst the trees of the forest, or in the streets of crowded cities, or precincts of temples. Such a study would not fail to awaken strange ideas; and although the European would not be prepared to regard monkeys as sacred animals he might be led to speculate as to their origin by the light of data, which are at present unknown to the naturalist whose observations have been derived from the menagerie alone.