FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   144   145   146   147   148   149   150   151   152   153   154   155   156   157   158  
159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   >>   >|  
s inculcated and formulated in the Atharvan were the stronghold of a certain class of priests, or that such priests were feared and employed by the laity, openly by the low classes, secretly by the intelligent. In respect of the name the magical cult was referred, historically with justice, to the fire-priests, Atharvan and Angiras, though little application to fire, other than in _soma_-worship, is apparent. Yet was this undoubtedly the source of the cult (the fire-cult is still distinctly associated with the Atharva Veda in the epic), and the name is due neither to accident nor to a desire to invoke the names of great seers, as will Weber.[11] The other name of Brahmaveda may have connection with the 'false science of Brihaspati,' alluded to in a Upanishad.[12] This seer is not over-orthodox, and later he is the patron of the unorthodox C[=a]rv[=a]kas. It was seen above that the god Brihaspati is also a novelty not altogether relished by the Vedic Aryans. From an Aryan point of view how much weight is to be placed on comparisons of the formulae in the Atharvan of India with those of other Aryan nations? Kuhn has compared[13] an old German magic formula of healing with one in the Atharvan, and because each says 'limb to limb' he thinks that they are of the same origin, particularly since the formula is found in Russian. The comparison is interesting, but it is far from convincing. Such formulae spring up independently all over the earth. Finally, it is to be observed that in this Veda first occurs the implication of the story of the flood (xix. 39. 8), and the saving of Father Manu, who, however, is known by this title in the Rik. The supposition that the story of the flood is derived from Babylon, seems, therefore, to be an unnecessary (although a permissible) hypothesis, as the tale is old enough in India to warrant a belief in its indigenous origin.[14] * * * * * FOOTNOTES: [Footnote 1: XV. 15.] [Footnote 2: X. 2.] [Footnote 3: VII. 69. Compare RV. VII. 35, and the epic (below).] [Footnote 4: X. 173.] [Footnote 5: V. 30.] [Footnote 6: XI. 2. 28.] [Footnote 7: XI. 9; VIII. 6 and 7, with tree-worship.] [Footnote 8: V. 24. 4-5. On 'the one god' compare X. 8. 28; XIII. 4. 15. Indra as S[=u]rya, in VII. 11; cf. xiii. 4; XVII. 1. 24. Pantheism in X. 7. 14. 25. Of charms, compare ii. 9, to rest
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   144   145   146   147   148   149   150   151   152   153   154   155   156   157   158  
159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Footnote

 

Atharvan

 

priests

 

worship

 

Brihaspati

 

formulae

 

compare

 

origin

 
formula
 

implication


saving
 

Father

 

interesting

 
convincing
 

independently

 
spring
 
Finally
 

Russian

 

comparison

 

observed


occurs

 

indigenous

 
charms
 

Pantheism

 
Compare
 

unnecessary

 

permissible

 

Babylon

 
supposition
 

derived


hypothesis

 

FOOTNOTES

 

warrant

 

belief

 

comparisons

 

source

 

undoubtedly

 

distinctly

 
apparent
 
application

Atharva

 

invoke

 

accident

 

desire

 

Angiras

 

feared

 

employed

 

inculcated

 

formulated

 

stronghold