Vedic Gods/Deities
The vedic texts (c. 1500–500 BCE) praise, mention, or invoke a host of deities, canonically 33 but in fact many more. These deities are regarded as persons but have no manufactured images; some are personified abstract notions. The gods are vivid personifications of the forces of nature or of social concepts, under one or more individual names. Each of them has a more or less individual mythology and is involved in certain rituals. The deities are known to us ever since their first appearance in the oldest Indian text, the Ṛgveda (c. 1500–1000 BCE), and from subsequent middle and late vedic texts.
Some deities can be traced in Mitanni documents, and to a minor degree, in Kassite records of 2nd-millennium BCE Mesopotamia (Mayrhofer, 1974). The Mitanni were a Hurrite-speaking group (from the Caucasus area) in northern Iraq and Syria, whose language nevertheless has a certain number of Indo-Aryan (not Iranian) loanwords, especially in the religious sphere, in horse racing, as well as in the personal names of their kings and noblemen, found as far south as Jericho.
The earliest written evidence for vedic gods is found in Mitanni inscriptions dating from around 1400 BCE. After a long list of Hurrian and other local deities, an agreement between the Hittites and the Mitanni mentions the gods Mitra-šil, A/Uruna-šil, Indara, and Našatiya-nna – that is, the vedic gods Mitra, Varuṇa, Indra, and the Nāsatya (Aśvin), in exactly the order they are mentioned in vedic texts. Iranian religion lacks Varuṇa and knows of Indra and the Nāsatya (just once) as demons (Thieme, 1960).
The more or less contemporaneous Kassites, another Zagros mountain tribe with an isolate language, conquered Babylon in around 1595 BCE. Their records, too, exhibit some Indo-Aryan names for deities, such as Šuriyaš (Sūrya), Bagaš (Bhaga), and Maruttaš (Marut), as well as words for horses and their colors (Balkan, 1954).
In both cases, cultural influence of the Indo-Aryans lurking behind the Zagros Mountains is visible. The Mitanni/Kassite Indo-Aryans constitute a lost western branch of those who entered the Indian subcontinent about the same time. Importantly, the language of the Mitanni Indo-Iranian words is slightly more archaic than that of the Ṛgveda, supplying an important clue for its date (see below).
A number of deities corresponding to the vedic ones are also found in the closely related Old Iranian texts (Avesta, Old Persian inscriptions), in spite of Zaraϑuštra’s reform that eliminated most of the old deities in favor of Ahura Mazdā. However, even then, Miϑra (Ved. Mitra), Baga (Bhaga), and Airiiaman (Aryaman) do appear The combined evidence indicates the Indo-Iranian age (c. 2000 BCE) of a common language, religion, and ritual; it also requires a location somewhere in the Central Asian Steppe zone. Likely candidates, close to the southern Ural Mountains, are the archaeological sites of Sintasthta (with the first horse-drawn chariots), Arkhaim, and so on (Gening, 1977). Further comparison of the vedic and Old Iranian religions indicates a series of additional influences by the religions of the southern central Asian and of Hindukush populations, again clearly substantiated by local loanwords (Witzel, 2004). Importantly, the soma cult and its deity Soma was added; it is most probably based on a local ritual involving a high mountain plant, perhaps ephedra (Falk, 1989).
These influences occurred before the Indo-Aryan – speaking tribes moved to the plains of the greater Punjab, where they were further influenced by the "Little Tradition" of the local, post-Harappan village populations – that is, that of the northern segment of the great Indus civilization. What exactly occurred between the Indo-Iranian period and the Ṛgveda can be established only by comparison with Old Iranian and other Indo-European texts, aided by a few hints from archaeology. Nevertheless, it is clear that the rgvedic deities are continuants of Indo-European “nature deities” and the early Indo-Iranian asura deities of social harmony.
These are, in addition, different from the gods of the third generation of gods, the demonic “Titans” who appear in the Vedas as Tvaṣṭṛ and his son, the three-headed dragon Viśvarūpa, but not in the asura group of 7 or 12. Some of this opposition between these earlier gods (pūrve devāḥ) like Tvaṣṭṛ/Viśvarūpa and the deva/asura group is still represented in the dichotomy between the dry (winter) season and the moist (late spring/summer snow melt) season, personified by the fight between, in Indo-Iranian times, the great hero Vərəϑraγna (Ved. Vṛtrahan) and Aj’hi (Ved. Ahi), in vedic terms, between Indra and the dragon or giant snake (Vṛtra; Witzel, 2004)
In effect, the asuras are a particular group of “social” deities. In the Veda, these deities are also called ādityas, as they are the children of the primordial goddess Aditi (“Nonbinding”), while their father is unclear. In a post-Ṛgveda myth, they are conceived by Aditi by eating the leftovers of food (as women must do even today) prepared for the “earlier” sādhya (pūrve devāḥ) deities. Comparable to Aditi on the Iranian side is Anāhitā (“Not Bound”) in the Avesta (Gotō, 2006); both seem to have been influenced by the Bactria-Margiana “mother goddess” (Bactria Margiana Archaeological Complex culture, c. 2400–1600 BCE).
However, the asura deities must have evolved much earlier, in the northern steppes, as early Indo-Iranian loanwords of deities into the Uralic and Yeneseian languages indicate. The old loanword asura, and not the later Iranian ahura, is found in Uralic in the old meanings of both “lord” and “rich.” In Yeneseian (or Ket), the old Indo-Iranian dichotomy of asura and deva appears under the names ess and xosadam (Witzel, 2003). Later on, one of the asuras, Bhaga, was transmitted by Iranian Scythians as their god baga (in its Iranian form and meaning) to their northwestern neighbors, where it appears as the Proto-Slavic bogu, the common Slavic word for “god.” The asura-daiva distinction made by the Indo-Iranian speakers in the Northern Steppes around 2000 BCE subsequently spread to their northern neighbors as well as southward with the early vedic and Iranian tribes.
The rgvedic asuras are to be distinguished from their post-rgvedic continuants, the asura demons (see below). In the Ṛgveda they still represent a series of 7 or 8 (later 12) divine concepts that were crucial for the maintenance of family, clan, society, and cosmos. For a list of the vedic (and Iranian) asura/ahura or āditya, see page 767.
The list of personifications given above reflects human society closely (Brereton, 1981; Thieme, 1957). Understanding best starts with the name and role of Mitra. His name is based on mitra-m, a neuter noun that means “agreement, treaty”; his name thus is merely a personification with masculine ending mitra-s. Consequently, he watches over the agreements between tribes and helps tribal leaders (rājan). He also guards the herdsmen and their large pastures (Avest. vouru.gaoiiaoiti, Ved. urugavyūti), and therefore Miϑra also is a war god in the Avesta.
In the same way, Aryaman (Avest. Airiiaman) is derived from the word arya “hospitable, belonging to our group,” and he therefore is a god of hospitality and bride exchange between clans (gotra). He functions at the level of the śreṣṭha svānām, as “the best one of one’s own,” as clan leader. His name is a rather artificial formation, as the suffix -man can only be attached to verbal roots, not to nouns and adjectives. Aryaman thus means “Arya-hood” or “Clan-Ship”; it is nevertheless a relatively old formation going back to the Indo-Iranian period. The artificial coinage underlines the great importance of the concept of arya/ārya for the Indo-Iranian peoples.
The next in the list, Bhaga, indicates the extended family’s “share of the bounty” in its neuter form and the “God Share” as a masculine. As the vedic proverb has it, andho hi bhagaḥ (“luck is blind”). The word has been taken over into Uralic early on: Mordwinian has pakas (good luck), while in most Iranian languages it has become the general world for “god.” Aṃśa, too, indicates distribution, but one based on lots (aṃśa). Dakṣa, however, indicates the personal “cleverness, skill.”
The seventh and eighth deities Indra (see below) and Mārtānḍa Vivasvant are of a different nature. The latter is important as he is the ultimate ancestor of the vedic people. According to post-rgvedic myth (Hoffmann, 1957), Mārtāṇḍa was born as a “dead egg” (mṛta-āṇḍa, Avest. gaiiō marətan), when he and his stronger twin Indra were aborted by their elder āditya brothers because both spoke already inside the womb of their mother. The gods took pity on Mārtāṇda and carved his egglike shape in the form of a man, who became the sun deity (Vivasvant, “The Widely Shining One”). He is the father of both Yama, the first mortal and subsequent deity of the world of the ancestors, and of his brother Manu, the father of all of the vedic people.
However, the first āditya, Varuṇa, is more difficult to explain (Lüders, 1951; 1959). His name can have a large number of possible etymologies (such as from “true”; Lüders; Thieme). However, his functions are clear: he is the personification of universal dominance (and of the intertribal leader) and may originally have reflected the preeminent lord(s) of the large settlements in the Ural “land of towns,” with aspirations of widespread “undying” fame and respect. As such, the “universal chieftain” Varuṇa guards the implementation of the universal force of ṛta (Avest. aša) that sustains the functioning of the universe and of society. He also supervises the truthfulness of humans; the sun as well as the stars spy on humans to submit to the rules of ṛta.
Ṛta (Avest. aša, Old Pers. arta) is a much-debated concept. Recently, a number of scholars such as H. Lüders, P. Thieme, and H.-P. Schmidt have translated it as “truth”; however, the term rather seems to indicate the “active force of truth” (Witzel & Gotō, 2007), for which we do not have an equivalent in a modern language. (The postvedic and modern Indian dharma , equally untranslatable, comes close to it.) Ṛta can best be understood by its opposite, the active force of untruth, druh (Avest. druj). This is not just “lie,” but corresponds linguistically to German Trug and English be-tray – in other words, “deceit” or “cheating.” The positive force of ṛta is universal; even the gods are governed by it, while they also protect it, much as the vedic chieftain or king has to do, or as the Hindu king must protect dharma.
In sum, the asura/āditya deities represent all the features that sustain both vedic society and the universe at large.
The two groups have an ambiguous relationship, usually one of opposition and constant strife, but at certain times one of cooperation. For example, the designation asura is used for some of the most important deities, the asura Varuṇa and the deva Agni. F.B.J. Kuiper (1983) has called that “the central problem of vedic religion” and has characterized the “defection” of Varuṇa from the group of the ādityas to that of the devas as the central aspect of the new year ritual, a move that underlies not only the constant tension but also the recurrent stability of vedic religion: the asuras were regarded as the primordial gods (though still preceded by the sādhya, the “earlier gods,” pūrve devāḥ), who were challenged and ultimately defeated by the upstart devas. Some asuras joined the ranks of the devas (the ones who receive both titles in the Ṛgveda); others remained in perpetual opposition, which led to the post-rgvedic demonization of the asuras. The early vedic situation certainly was no longer that of the original proto–Indo-Iranian times when the asuras were a group of newcomers not found in Indo-European religion.
Like Indo-Iranian religion, vedic religion is characterized by the dichotomy between devas and asuras (ādityas). The devas are led by Indra, who is called the “king” (rājan) of gods, and the asuras (originally) by Varuṇa (also called asura and medhira, ṚV. 1.25.20), which in early Iranian religion is the title of the highest (or only) deity, Ahura Mazdā (“Lord Wisdom” or “The Wise Lord”).
However, in post-rgvedic prose texts in the style of the Brāhmaṇas (Black Yajurvedasaṃhitās: Maitrāyaṇīsaṃhitā, Kaṭhasaṃhitā, Taittirīyasaṃhitā, and in the Brāhmaṇas), the rivalry between the two kin groups is stated hundreds of times as “the gods and the asuras were competing.” Usually, the gods win, and the asuras are “beaten off,” apparently like all evils, to the ends of the world. While it is unclear what exactly happens to them, they reappear at another occasion or at the new year festival.
The fight between the devas and the asuras, however, also has a counterpart real life, between the immigrating Arya tribes and the local inhabitants, the Dasyu or Dāsa, and, after the rgvedic period, with the Śūdra, the lowest, fourth class of the vedic populations. This kind of strife was still found, until Islamicization in 1895, with the Kafirs (Nuristani) in the Afghan Hindukush, and it is continued even today with the only other non-Hindu remnant population, the Kalasha people of Chitral (northwest Pakistan). They still have a group of seven devalog (“god people”), echoing the seven ādityas; Indr is one of their main gods, next to Imrå (Yamarājā) or Māra. The division between two groups of deities (devalog) and their opponents, but also including interaction such as intermarriages (Imrå’s mother is a “giant”) has been preserved as well, and the dichotomy is still reenacted in rituals and festivals, especially in the chaumos at winter solstice (Witzel, 2004). It echoes the loss of power by Indra and his ambiguous, doubted status and existence at that time (ṚV. 10.86).
In sum, instead of the usual “static” or structural view of the universe, the gods, and mythology, we must adopt one of a cyclical nature of the year and of the vedic rituals performed at its crucial liminal points (new year, summer solstice, snow melt/rainy season, autumn, winter solstice; Witzel, 2004).
However, all these deities are not the simple manifestations of natural phenomena that 19th-century mythologists wanted to see in them. Instead, they each have a clearly marked personality to which many individual myths are attached. For example, heaven is not just the shining sky, but “Father Heaven” (Dyauspitṛ) or earth is “Mother Earth” (Pṛthivīmātā; in the Ṛgveda and the Ṛgvedakhila).
In Indo-Iranian mythologies, the waters are seen as flowing streams and rivers, but not as stagnant ponds or lakes (Narten, 1971). It is the flowing waters that bring life to the desert landscapes of central Asia, Iran, Afghanistan, and the Punjab. Their arrival in spring because of snow melt is a major event and celebrated with a soma ritual (Falk, 1997). In myth, this could happen only after the great hero Indra had freed the primordial waters that were encapsulated then (and again, each winter) by the demonic dragon or giant snake called Vṛtra. Because of their purity as flowing waters, they are regarded as healing and possessing medicines. They contain both water and milk (which can be separated by a particular bird in later myth); they carry milk for women and semen for men. They are also regarded as immortal and as the mothers of Agni, the fire god.
One of their major representatives is the river (and goddess) Sarasvatī, “She Who Has Many Ponds,” the modern Sarsuti-Gagghar-Hakra river flowing through Kurukshetra, northwest of Delhi (Witzel, 1984). The name Sarasvatī is identical with that of the Iranian river Haraxvaitī (of Arachosia) that is represented by the goddess Ārəduuī Sūrā Anāhitā (“The Moist, Heroic, Unbound”). Both seem to correspond to an older, southern central Asian “mother goddess” of 2000 BCE. The Yamunā and Gaṅgā are not important yet.
Fire is brought from its primordial hiding place by a deity called Mātariśvan (“Swelling inside His Mother”). The underlying myth is not clearly explained in vedic texts and may predate the Indo-European period (compare similar accounts in Maori or Japanese myth as Homusubi). However, in contrast with Greece, fire is not stolen from the gods by Prometheus for the humans, but stolen (pramath) for the gods (Kuiper, 1983) and for the mythical ṛṣi (poet) clan of the Bhṛgu, whose father is Varuṇa himself. Agni’s birth is from the waters; he is Apām Napāt (“The Grandson of the Waters”), or he is born from the waters and lightening of the clouds. He is also called Tanūnapāt (“Grandson of [His Own] Body”) as there are three consecutive births (and deaths) of Agni. In ritual, he is reborn every morning through the agnihotra ritual ( yajña), and therefore he also has the epithet Jātavedas (“The One Who Is Born Just Now”) when he is rekindled every morning from its embers.
After his birth, Agni is persuaded by the gods to perform his service as offering fire and as messenger from the humans to the gods. At first, he wants to avoid this task and flees, but is found again by the gods searching the ground in a “police line.” As the sacred fire, Agni is at the center of vedic ritual and one of the most invoked deities. His identification with the sun is an old prevedic – indeed, Eurasian – concept (Witzel, 1992).
However, he is not just the messenger of the humans to the gods, as purohita or hotar (offering priest), but he also carries their offerings in transubstantiated (burnt) form to the gods. Alternatively, the gods come to the offering ground and sit on straw around the offering fire as honored guests who, like their human counterparts (governed by Aryaman), get invited, fed, and praised and then are sent off again with a present – a pattern of ancient Indo-European guest worship that has persisted until today in the common pūjā rituals performed at home and in temples (Witzel, 1998).
This common fire of all humans is frequently called Vaiśvānara (“Belonging to All Men”), which is the central fire of a tribe (a motif that is expanded in Zorastrianism with “national” Iranian and other regional fires that burn permanently). In this sacrificial role, Agni continues to be a central figure until today: he is present in marriage and many other rituals. Hinduism may thus be characterized as “fire worship,” just as it has traditionally been done for Zoroastrianism, where the sacred fire (as visible manifestation of the sun and Ahura Mazdā) plays an equally central role. It is important to note that Agni, along with Soma, is one of the few gods that are actually present and visible on the offering ground.
Vedic Śrauta ritual indeed retains the custom of buying soma from foreign, nonvedic tribesmen of the mountains who are then beaten up. Similarly, in myth, soma is obtained by humans from a high mountain through theft by an eagle. This curiously corresponds to the theft of ambrosia in Greek myth, and of wine by an eagle in the Indr myth of the contemporary Kalasha: always the theft of a sacred drink under the same circumstances. Clearly, the soma myth has been transferred from that of the sweet, fermented honey drink, the Indo-European mead, to that of the bitter soma, which nevertheless still is called sweet (madhu).
The vedic texts often describe the exhilarating physiological effects of soma juice; the plant may indeed be some form of ephedra (Falk, 1989;), whose most potent form is found on the high mountains. The non-Indo-Iranian origin of soma is also underlined by a number loanwords dealing with soma and its ritual (Witzel, 2003). The Old Persian inscriptions still call one of the major Saka (Scythian) tribes the Saka Haumavarga (“The Soma Twisting Saka”). Soma-like rituals may be archaeologically represented in south central Asia by libation rites, though ephedra has not yet been attested.
In sum, a Bronze Age central Asian sauma cult was encountered by the Indo-Iranians after around 2000 BCE and was taken over, replacing the ancient mead rituals, which were difficult to carry out in the absence of honey bees in the deserts of central Asia. Sauma (soma, haoma) became a central feature of Indo-Iranian religion and ritual. Its pressing and offering is the central part of an elaborate ritual, normally called agniṣṭoma . It has close correspondences in the Zoroastrian haoma offerings of the ancient Persians, Avestan-speaking Iranians, and modern Parsis. In post-rgvedic times, the soma ritual has intentionally been made even more complex, incorporating a number of additional rites such as the sacrifice of a goat and the pravargya, an originally independent offering of milk to the Aśvins.
Apart from its origin myth, soma has fairly little mythology, perhaps not surprising, given its comparative recent origins in Indo-Iranian times. In the Ṛgveda, however, soma’s heroic and warlike characteristics are stressed (Oberlies, 1989). Indeed, Soma is one of the four kings (rājans) of the vedic pantheon. Without drinking soma, Indra, the king of the gods, could not perform the primordial killing of Vṛtra, which was necessary for the release of the sweet waters necessary for plants and animal life. Soma is also said to confer immortality on its drinkers, just as ambrosia (the immortal one) did for the Greeks. It heals illnesses and works in all sorts of cures.
Many myths belong to this rather complex and composite personality, which is due, in part, to his diverse origins. Clearly, he has amassed not only the character of several Indo-European deities, but also that of other deities acquired by the Indo-Aryans on their path from the Northern Steppes to the Punjab. As far as we are able to discern now, he integrates the following facets.
He is the king (rājan) of the current generation of the gods, the devas, just as his counterpart, Zeus, is that of the Olympian gods; he thus continues the traditions attached to the Indo-European sky god (Zeus Pater, Iuppiter).
At the same time, Indra has many of the characteristics of tricksters and heroes, such as those of the Greek hero Herakles. He shows great physical strength as well as (sometimes amoral) trickery. But like the Greek Atlas, he also is a demiurge who pushed up the sky. He released the sunlight from its rocky cave: it is envisioned as dawn and as the reddish cows (Schmidt, 1968). The myth is very similar to that of Herakles’ retrieval of the cows from “Redland.” He is the great dragon slayer, and as such is similar to the Greek Apollo, Herakles, or the Germanic Thor, and others; as such, he releases the primordial waters and rain.
In addition, there are some influences from southern Central Asia, where the great hero (often depicted with an eagle head) vanquishes the scaled, humanlike demon of draught (Avest. Apaoša) who carries a water vessel (Witzel, 2004). This feature is very prominent both in Avestan as well as in vedic myth: Indra facilitates the arrival of the waters in spring, after his killing of Vṛtra, who encapsulated the waters just like the Bactria-Margiana scaled monster. This heroic act also makes him the prototype of the Aryan warrior and the helper of the Aryan in their fights.
The greater Punjab, with remnants of the Indus civilization, has contributed very little to his rgvedic image, as these farmers of the greater Punjab added only some aspects of their "Little Tradition" to vedic religion. Nevertheless, local influence can be seen in Indra’s fighting with the great boar Emuṣa and the seven mountains (ṚV. 1.61.7; Kuiper, 1983).
Other Indra myths deal with his origin that is uncertain even in the vedic texts. He is sometimes included as the seventh āditya (Hoffmann 1975), but he is also frequently regarded as having been born suddenly (from where is unclear). The texts typically say that he “stood up” immediately as soon as he was born, due to his great inherent strength, and was ready to act. The Black Yajurvedasaṃhitās (Hoffmann, 1975) may provide the background: he and Vivasvant were aborted, and thus Indra suddenly appeared. Apparently, his mother hid him and perhaps set him out on a river; later, he drank soma in the house of his father Tvaṣṭṛ, whom he killed. He then set out to kill Vṛtra; Indra apparently was accompanied by his comrade Viṣṇu, but was deserted by the other gods. He even was without proper food and ate the entrails of a dog, until the eagle brought him soma that emboldened him to kill the dragon. Remarkably, the isolated Kalasha and Nuristani people have preserved several aspects of Indra’s deeds: about his eagle who is shot at, the killing of his father, the killing of the snake or of a demon with many heads, and the central myth of releasing the sun from an enclosure (Witzel, 2004).
Other acts of Indra include his pushing up the sky: after heaven and earth had emerged, they were in constant close sexual embrace, so that their children had no space and were left in eternal darkness (a myth best told by the Maori). Only after Indra had pushed them apart was open space (antarikṣa) created. Indra is thus often described as standing up, pushing up the sky with both his arms. He is the prototype of the central pole, pillar, or mountain (like Atlas) and of the newly anointed king, his human image.
His second important primordial act is his battle with and killing of his opponent, Vṛtra, by which he released the waters that the giant dragon or snake Vṛtra had encompassed (Kuiper, 1983). In Indo-Iranian, Vṛtra merely meant “resistance” that was destroyed by a hero, called Vṛtrahan (Avest. Vərəϑraγna), the “Slayer of Resistance” (Benveniste & Renou, 1934). The vedic Vṛtra is the subsequently personified resistance. The release of the waters from his embrace was a most important natural feature in spring and at the same time a cosmic event. In Iran, and in post-rgvedic myths, the hero killed a three-headed monster, again something not only restricted to the Indo-Iranians but also found in other parts of Eurasia, such as in Japan (Witzel, 2004). Similarly, the rgvedic Puruṣa myth that involves the killing and dissection of the primordial giant is a Eurasian motif that is found in Iceland as well as in south China and Mesopotamia (killing and dissection of Tiamat by Marduk). The Kalasha (and Kashmiris) too have preserved echoes of this myth.
His third important feat is the opening of the Vala (Avest. Vara). The Vala is a cave in a great rock or a mountain, in which the sunlight is hidden. The sunlight, especially the dawn (Uṣas), is identified with the reddish cows who must be freed to guarantee the preconditions for the life of the pastoralist Indo-Iranians. Indra proceeds to do so with the help of the primordial poets and priests, the Aṅgiras. These sing and make noises in front of the cave, mimicking the cows, and trying to make them come out. Finally, Indra smashes the bolt of the cave door with his weapon, the macelike vajra (Schmidt, 1968). Comparisons outside the Indo-European sphere have hardly been carried out so far; however, this Indo-Iranian (notably Kafiri, vedic) myth again has close parallels in Greek myth (the cows of Geryoneus) and also in other old Eurasian versions, such as in ancient Japanese mythology. In sum, Indra produces the prerequisites of culture by killing Vṛtra and opening the Vala.
Fourth, in his role as trickster and cultural hero, Indra is typical for bringing elements of human culture, such as the opening of the Vala, the deliverance of mythical and real cows to the Aryan, and his involvement with the stealing of soma (Kuiper, 1983). He also fights various other monsters, such as Namuci, Śuṣna, and Kuṇāru. However, Indra is well known, even in later times, for his many misdeeds (kilbiṣa), like tricking opponents or pursuing females (Rau, 1975). In that respect, he again resembles his Greek counterparts, Herakles and Zeus. For example, he tricks his cousin, the three-headed (triśīrṣan) monster Viśvarūpa, the son of Tvaṣṭṛ, and kills him; for this deed he is denounced as a Brahman killer, indicating that Tvaṣṭṛ was regarded as a Brahman. He has to undergo atonements to get rid of the resulting evil, which typically literally sticks to him. The legend was reshaped in much later times in the myth of Kṛṣṇa’s killing the great water snake Kaliya.
Indra also tricks the two priests of the asuras, who, like Tvaṣṭṛ, act like regular Aryans in having priests. The two want to offer Manu’s wife in sacrifice, but Indra rescues her, using the ambiguity of the term athitipati (host/lord of the guest) to get them killed. In another trick, he turns into a leech sticking to a floating fortress to listen in to the opponents’ talk. A large number of his kilbiṣa, however, refer to his pursuit of any attractive woman he encounters. Just like Zeus, he can change his shape in this endeavor.
With the movement of the Aryans into the eastern Punjab and beyond, the spring floods became less important than the monsoon rain, and Indra’s role as provider of water became that of a god of rain, a role he retains to this day. At the Kathmandu indrajātrā festival in Nepal, Indra’s pillar (the vedic indradhvaja) is erected, and he is represented as a small figure at its bottom in a cage, as he must be stopped from raining too much. Indra also retains a major temple on the Thankot Hill west of Kathmandu. Little studied, Indra is still generally prominent in northern Indian villages and in Punjabi names (Indar-), as well as with the Kalasha of the Hindukush, where Indr is still one of their major deities who kills the many-headed river snake.
Finally, Indra also is the god of war for the Indo-Aryans: he is invoked to take the side of one’s own group and to defeats one’s enemies. Cattle raiding (gaviṣṭi), skirmishes, and wars involved both other Indo-Aryans and the preexisting local population (Dasyu, Dāsa). These were often seen as embodiments of the mythical Paṇi (probably a reminiscence of the Parna people in Bactria-Margiana). Their demonization proceeded along mythical lines. As the traditional adversaries of Indra, the Parna as well as the local people of the greater Punjab shared the attributes of possessing cows and of enclosing them in their forts, which was enough to assign mythical status also to the non-Aryan inhabitants, the Dasyu, of the greater Punjab.
In addition to this quadripartite division, still other divisions of the deities can be discerned: one that is horizontal and one that is vertical; the various deities and spirits live in different lokas (worlds or living spaces), as one text calls those of the ancestors.
This more structured arrangement of the deities and their respective functions in a synchronic fashion is one aspect that needs more attention than given to it so far (Witzel, 2004). It must cover the spheres of the gods, various other (semi-)divine beings (such as the gandharvas), the primordial and rgvedic poets ( ṛṣis), the human ancestors (pitṛ), the human beings, some netherworld beings (such as the nāgas), and finally, demonic beings such as rakṣas, piśāca, and kimīdin ( asuras and the later daityas), as well as the universal force of destruction, Nirṛti. It may then be seen that, already in the vedic period, these beings are set in opposition to one another, with typical functions attached, at the various levels of the universe. For example, why are there promiscuous extrasocietal groups such as the vrātyas (Falk, 1986) on earth with counterparts in heaven (daivya vrātya, gandharva), as well as in the netherworld (nāgas)? The concept of the vrātya and gandharva obviously is in need of further elaboration (Oberlies, 2005).
All the vedic gods, whether āditya/asura or deva, form the group of the “33 gods” that are frequently mentioned in the vedic texts. The number has some persistence until today (for example, in Nepalese rituals). Commonly, however, popular opinion now has it that there are “330 million gods” in India.
These reconstructed divisions aside, not only do the vedic texts divide the deities into a group of 33 (and unnamed ones outside this group), but there also is the major group of the viśvadevas (viśve devāḥ; "all the gods"). However, this is a group does not include all deities; it is an undefined one. Originally, the viśvadevas probably appeared at new year, just as the devalog of the Kalasha still do at the winter solstice festival.
However, there also is a division into three further major groups: 11 rudras (apparently the rudriyas or Rudra’s troop, the maruts), 8 vasus, and 7 ādityas (later 12). While these are mentioned in the Ṛgveda, the classification with numbers attached stem only from post-rgvedic texts. Except for the named 7 or 8 ādityas, it is unclear whom exactly these groups include. In order to work out the divisions of the deities, one may take a look at a little-studied group of mantras, the nivids. These ritual formulas are found in an early appendix to the Ṛgveda, the Ṛgvedakhila, which still use rgvedic grammar. The nivids are an unstudied first indigenous list made for ritual purposes of individual deities; they mention the major features, epithets, and deeds of the following gods (often called deva): Agni (Vaiśvānara), Indra, Savitṛ, Dyauspitṛ (“Father Heaven”) and Pṛthivīmātā (“Mother Earth”), the ṛbhus, viśvadevas, and the maruts. The viśvadevas are called the “gods belonging to all men” and are active all over the universe (Witzel, 2004).
Finally, the sādhya gods are an ill-defined group of deities who are called the “older gods” (Kuiper, 1983). In the post-rgvedic form of the Mārtāṇḍa myth, it is clear that they are the ancestors of the current devas. In sum, the number 33 stands for a totality: the viśvadevas are also numbered in the Ṛgveda as 3,339, and in the nivids, as 3x11, 33, 303, and 3,003, thus 3,372 gods. Obviously this large, schematic number must include, as in the lists of hundreds and thousands of deities of other cultures, the minor local deities as well, such as local gandharvas, apsarases, and the like.
Rudra also shares some aspects with other liminal and transgressive deities, such as the Germanic Odin and of course the later Śiva. However, in the Ṛgveda he is not yet called Paśupati (“Lord of Cattle”). It is therefore not obvious to link him with the famous horned figure found on an Indus civilization seal that has erroneously been called “Śiva Paśupati” ever since its discovery in the early 20th century. Actually, that horned deity is surrounded by four wild animals, and a strikingly similar depiction of the Celtic deity Cernunnos has been found at Gundestrup in west Denmark: in both cases this is the Stone Age “Lord of the Animals.”
Rudra continues in these functions after the Ṛgveda and is frequently invoked to spare humans and cattle. He resides at crossroads and at other ominous places. A late vedic text (Kaṭhāraṇyaka) has a myth of how he acquired his entry into the heaven of the gods and acquired his name Śiva (“Friendly One”): he abandoned threatening the gods when they admitted him and gave him his share. From that time onward, he developed into the Hindu deity Śiva.
One of their famous deeds is the acquisition of the secret called “honey” or “mead” from Dadhyañc Ātharvaṇa. Indra had threatened Dadhyañc to cut off his head if he would divulge the sweet (honey) secret belonging to the gods. However, the Aśvins supplied Dadhyañc with a horse head, by which he told them the secret – directly from the horse’s mouth. Indra cut off this head, which the Aśvins again replaced with his real one. The myth reminds of a Bronze Age find at Popatovka west of the Urals, where a human male was buried, without head but with the substitution of a horse’s head. The area was old Indo-Iranian territory at the time. Apparently because of their role as doctors and the pollution that goes with it, the Aśvins are regarded as less elevated than other deities, a fact also indicated by their riding horses instead of the more-prestigious chariots (Falk, 1995).
As a beautiful young woman, she is the girlfriend of the poets who describe her in glowing terms. She exposes her breasts to them, an ethological gesture of greeting and pacification. They wake her up with their poems and songs. In an important myth, her father Dyaus pursues her and is punished by the other gods: in post-Ṛgveda texts, the great archer Rudra (Sirius) shoots at Dyaus, who had taken the form of a gazelle (Orion).
The gandharvas are a group of a multifaceted beings (Oberlies, 2005). In the Ṛgveda, they are heavenly beings at the vault of the sky, with wind in their hair; but they are also linked with the waters and a female water spirit, apparently an apsaras. They play an important role in the marriage of Sūryā, the daughter of the sun deity Sūrya. They know secrets and immortal names and are connected with poetry, songs and soma, especially one of them, Viśvāvasu. However, they also use a noose to catch miscreants.
In the Atharvaveda, the gandharvas, and their companions, the sexually active apsarases, are frequently found on the mountains (just like the yakṣa). The word apsaras is probably derived from an Indo-Iranian root psar- “to have shame,” as they are a-psara ("without shame"). As sexually promiscuous beings, they consort with various gandharvas, humans, or ṛṣis (such as in the epic, as to seduce them and rob them of their tapas, "heat"). These concepts find a modern correlation with the varōtī fairies (from vātaputrī, “daughters of the wind”) or the yakṣī and śuci of the Kalasha. These deities too live in the high mountains and may take a liking to a particular man, which is dangerous as they may strike humans not just with desire but also with madness. They haunt the high mountains (now also as the Muslim fairies, the peris) due to the purity of the snowy peaks and alpine meadows. However, in the colder months, the gandharvas and apsarases descend to lower altitudes, as is also seen in the Kashmiri Rājataraṅgiṇī, where the piśāca do so for half a year, while the “aboriginal” nāga stay there for the other half. Piśāca is substituted here for the demons of the cold, while nāga follows the common Indian usage.
The nāga usually are understood as half-human, half-snake–like beings. They do not occur in the Ṛgveda (snakes do), but only from the Atharvaveda onwards. They can shift shape between both forms during sleep and while having sex, and older depictions show them as humans with a snake hood above their heads. However, in the mountain regions of Kashmir, the Hindukush, and with the Nuristanis, they represent not just the water associated with the Indian monsoon (that does not reach these areas) but also the waters of springs, ponds, and lakes, even high up in the permanently frozen areas, and as the Lunang River (derived from devanāga) in Nuristan. These nāgas echo the Bactria-Margiana and Indo-Iranian concept of the waters hemmed in by a giant dragon or snake during winter.
A newcomer, however, is the late rgvedic Prajāpati, the “Lord of Creatures.” He has no predecessors either in Indo-Iranian or in Indo-European religion and appears only in a handful of passages, mostly in the late book 10 (Gonda, 1986; 1989). However, in post-rgvedic times, he has turned into a major creator deity who is closely linked to the power of the ritual and the periodic renewal of the world. It cannot be excluded, and is indeed likely, that substrate influences are visible here. Prajāpati is a deity that exhausts itself through ritual and the “creation” (rather, “emergence”) of various beings. Therefore he must be reconstituted annually, which points to his function as a deity of plant life. He became prominent at the same time when agriculture became more important than pastoralism, as the vedic tribes increasingly settled down. The post-rgvedic texts clearly speak about extensive agriculture and about the robbing of agricultural products. Prajāpati – along with his transparent name – apparently was borrowed from the local indigenous agriculturalists. Planters and farmers worldwide have a preference for deities that sustain plants and that are born and reborn. In sum, Prajāpati is a typical agricultural deity that intruded into the pastoralist world of the Indo-Aryans.
It remains unclear how far the older vedic deities were regarded as important during this period. A detailed study of their appearance in the enormous corpus of post-rgvedic mantras would be informative. However, the continued popularity of gods like Indra point to the survival of some major vedic concepts, including that of ṛta, gradually changing to dharma. In fact, Indra is, even today, a popular deity, not just of rain (such as in Kṛṣṇa’s Govardhana myth).
Starting with the Atharvaveda, we notice the emergence of the four, then eight, “guardians of the directions of the sky” (lokapālas). While these still were snakelike (nāga) demigods in the Atharvaveda, their role has consecutively been taken over by the major vedic gods, such as Indra, Agni, Yama, Sūrya, Varuṇa, and so on.
The study of the appendixes (Pariśiṣṭas) of the late vedic ritual handbooks, the Sūtras, indicates the increasing popularity of deities such as Rudra, and even Gaṇeśa (Einoo, 1996). However, it is very difficult to ascertain the date of such additions. As they provide standard pūjā descriptions, even of Vināyaka (i.e. Gaṇeśa) imitating the ritual of other earlier deities, they may have been added at any time. Occasionally, however, later deities appear in the texts: for example, the semidivine Nārada is already seen in Aitareyabrāhmaṇa 7 and Chāndogyopaniṣad 7.1.1 or Umā Haimavatī in Kenopaniṣad 3.25; Śrī (the later goddess Śri-Lakṣmī) developed from her vague appearance in Ṛgvedakhila 2.6, which mentions wealth and luck in general terms. We know nothing about their predecessors and development.
Similarly, given the increasingly uncertain status of the so-called mother goddess in the Indus civilization (Clark, 2007) and in early vedic texts, little can be said about the development of female deities in emerging Hinduism. In the early Veda, there are very few female deities: there is Aditi, the mother of the āditya (asura) gods, Uṣas (“Dawn”), Pṛthivī, Āpaḥ, Yamī, Vāc (“Speech”), and a few even less significant ones, in addition to river goddesses such as Sarasvatī, the personification of the river of the same name (later a deity of learning – or even of wealth in her Japanese Buddhist incarnation). However, most other female deities are just mentioned as (deva)patnīs (the wives), with names based on their husband’s names, such as Agneyī (“Wife of Agni”), Indrāṇī, Varunāṇī, and so on. Such names are equivalents of the Russian ones ending in -skaya (e.g. Politovskaya) or older German ones ending with –in (e.g. Müllerin). Very little is known about the character and mythology of these goddesses. However, the later name of the wife of Indra, Śacī, is derived from his epithet Śacīpati (“Lord of Strength”) by reinterpretation of the compound as “Husband of Śacī.”
Most important, however, is the deployment of the great gods of Hinduism, the deities Śiva and Viṣṇu that have become of supreme importance. They were very minor figures in the Ṛgveda and even in the post-rgvedic texts.
In the Brāhmaṇas and in the early Upaniṣads, listings of various agencies in the universe and of the “senses” (vital forces) of the human body established “identification” (correlation) tables between macrocosm and microcosm, one of them being bráhman, which became the ultimate reality, a neuter word. Even then, the early Kauṣītakyupaniṣad describes the abode of bráhman (neuter, nominative brahma, occasionally already brahmā!) as a palace with all the specifications of a royal abode, including a “throne.” From such ideas, the development of a male god Brahman was a fairly small step. We thus find a male deity in Muṇḍakopaniṣad, Śvetāśvataropaniṣad, or Maitryupaniṣad.
However, Brahmā, as a result of speculation and ensuing personification, never became a popular deity. He was said to have only three temples dedicated to him in all of South Asia. Though a few more have been discovered since, Brahmā remains a unimportant deity outside the medieval concept of the trimūrti (trinity) with Viṣṇu and Śiva, and outside his role as “creator” and as preserver of the Veda.
In sum, the three major Hindu deities have vedic roots, although very minor ones, and in the case of Brahmā, only a very tenuous one. As in all living religions, concepts of deities change, and a certain figure attracts other characteristics and may become dominant, while others, such as Varuṇa or Pūṣan, fade or become extinct.
History
The vedic deities of the Ṛgveda have a long prehistory: almost all major ones have earlier forms in Indo-Iranian – and, in some cases, even in Indo-European – religion.Some deities can be traced in Mitanni documents, and to a minor degree, in Kassite records of 2nd-millennium BCE Mesopotamia (Mayrhofer, 1974). The Mitanni were a Hurrite-speaking group (from the Caucasus area) in northern Iraq and Syria, whose language nevertheless has a certain number of Indo-Aryan (not Iranian) loanwords, especially in the religious sphere, in horse racing, as well as in the personal names of their kings and noblemen, found as far south as Jericho.
The earliest written evidence for vedic gods is found in Mitanni inscriptions dating from around 1400 BCE. After a long list of Hurrian and other local deities, an agreement between the Hittites and the Mitanni mentions the gods Mitra-šil, A/Uruna-šil, Indara, and Našatiya-nna – that is, the vedic gods Mitra, Varuṇa, Indra, and the Nāsatya (Aśvin), in exactly the order they are mentioned in vedic texts. Iranian religion lacks Varuṇa and knows of Indra and the Nāsatya (just once) as demons (Thieme, 1960).
The more or less contemporaneous Kassites, another Zagros mountain tribe with an isolate language, conquered Babylon in around 1595 BCE. Their records, too, exhibit some Indo-Aryan names for deities, such as Šuriyaš (Sūrya), Bagaš (Bhaga), and Maruttaš (Marut), as well as words for horses and their colors (Balkan, 1954).
In both cases, cultural influence of the Indo-Aryans lurking behind the Zagros Mountains is visible. The Mitanni/Kassite Indo-Aryans constitute a lost western branch of those who entered the Indian subcontinent about the same time. Importantly, the language of the Mitanni Indo-Iranian words is slightly more archaic than that of the Ṛgveda, supplying an important clue for its date (see below).
A number of deities corresponding to the vedic ones are also found in the closely related Old Iranian texts (Avesta, Old Persian inscriptions), in spite of Zaraϑuštra’s reform that eliminated most of the old deities in favor of Ahura Mazdā. However, even then, Miϑra (Ved. Mitra), Baga (Bhaga), and Airiiaman (Aryaman) do appear The combined evidence indicates the Indo-Iranian age (c. 2000 BCE) of a common language, religion, and ritual; it also requires a location somewhere in the Central Asian Steppe zone. Likely candidates, close to the southern Ural Mountains, are the archaeological sites of Sintasthta (with the first horse-drawn chariots), Arkhaim, and so on (Gening, 1977). Further comparison of the vedic and Old Iranian religions indicates a series of additional influences by the religions of the southern central Asian and of Hindukush populations, again clearly substantiated by local loanwords (Witzel, 2004). Importantly, the soma cult and its deity Soma was added; it is most probably based on a local ritual involving a high mountain plant, perhaps ephedra (Falk, 1989).
These influences occurred before the Indo-Aryan – speaking tribes moved to the plains of the greater Punjab, where they were further influenced by the "Little Tradition" of the local, post-Harappan village populations – that is, that of the northern segment of the great Indus civilization. What exactly occurred between the Indo-Iranian period and the Ṛgveda can be established only by comparison with Old Iranian and other Indo-European texts, aided by a few hints from archaeology. Nevertheless, it is clear that the rgvedic deities are continuants of Indo-European “nature deities” and the early Indo-Iranian asura deities of social harmony.
Asura/Āditya Gods
The asura (Avest. ahura) gods, deities of universal and social order (Brereton, 1981), are an innovation. They do not appear in Indo-European religion but are confined to the religions of the Indo-Iranians (Iranians, Nuristanis, vedic people). They are opposed to the Indo-Iranian daiva gods (Ved. deva), mostly deities representing the forces of nature. What exactly was the background of the dichotomy? Such moieties are already seen in Indo-European and even in Eurasian religion – for example with the Olympian gods : Titans; the Old Norse Æsir : Vanir; or their Old Japanese adaptation as Ama.no Kami : Kuni.no Kami – however, these three moieties lack the social component of the Indo-Iranian asuras.These are, in addition, different from the gods of the third generation of gods, the demonic “Titans” who appear in the Vedas as Tvaṣṭṛ and his son, the three-headed dragon Viśvarūpa, but not in the asura group of 7 or 12. Some of this opposition between these earlier gods (pūrve devāḥ) like Tvaṣṭṛ/Viśvarūpa and the deva/asura group is still represented in the dichotomy between the dry (winter) season and the moist (late spring/summer snow melt) season, personified by the fight between, in Indo-Iranian times, the great hero Vərəϑraγna (Ved. Vṛtrahan) and Aj’hi (Ved. Ahi), in vedic terms, between Indra and the dragon or giant snake (Vṛtra; Witzel, 2004)
In effect, the asuras are a particular group of “social” deities. In the Veda, these deities are also called ādityas, as they are the children of the primordial goddess Aditi (“Nonbinding”), while their father is unclear. In a post-Ṛgveda myth, they are conceived by Aditi by eating the leftovers of food (as women must do even today) prepared for the “earlier” sādhya (pūrve devāḥ) deities. Comparable to Aditi on the Iranian side is Anāhitā (“Not Bound”) in the Avesta (Gotō, 2006); both seem to have been influenced by the Bactria-Margiana “mother goddess” (Bactria Margiana Archaeological Complex culture, c. 2400–1600 BCE).
However, the asura deities must have evolved much earlier, in the northern steppes, as early Indo-Iranian loanwords of deities into the Uralic and Yeneseian languages indicate. The old loanword asura, and not the later Iranian ahura, is found in Uralic in the old meanings of both “lord” and “rich.” In Yeneseian (or Ket), the old Indo-Iranian dichotomy of asura and deva appears under the names ess and xosadam (Witzel, 2003). Later on, one of the asuras, Bhaga, was transmitted by Iranian Scythians as their god baga (in its Iranian form and meaning) to their northwestern neighbors, where it appears as the Proto-Slavic bogu, the common Slavic word for “god.” The asura-daiva distinction made by the Indo-Iranian speakers in the Northern Steppes around 2000 BCE subsequently spread to their northern neighbors as well as southward with the early vedic and Iranian tribes.
The rgvedic asuras are to be distinguished from their post-rgvedic continuants, the asura demons (see below). In the Ṛgveda they still represent a series of 7 or 8 (later 12) divine concepts that were crucial for the maintenance of family, clan, society, and cosmos. For a list of the vedic (and Iranian) asura/ahura or āditya, see page 767.
The list of personifications given above reflects human society closely (Brereton, 1981; Thieme, 1957). Understanding best starts with the name and role of Mitra. His name is based on mitra-m, a neuter noun that means “agreement, treaty”; his name thus is merely a personification with masculine ending mitra-s. Consequently, he watches over the agreements between tribes and helps tribal leaders (rājan). He also guards the herdsmen and their large pastures (Avest. vouru.gaoiiaoiti, Ved. urugavyūti), and therefore Miϑra also is a war god in the Avesta.
In the same way, Aryaman (Avest. Airiiaman) is derived from the word arya “hospitable, belonging to our group,” and he therefore is a god of hospitality and bride exchange between clans (gotra). He functions at the level of the śreṣṭha svānām, as “the best one of one’s own,” as clan leader. His name is a rather artificial formation, as the suffix -man can only be attached to verbal roots, not to nouns and adjectives. Aryaman thus means “Arya-hood” or “Clan-Ship”; it is nevertheless a relatively old formation going back to the Indo-Iranian period. The artificial coinage underlines the great importance of the concept of arya/ārya for the Indo-Iranian peoples.
| Table 1: | ||||
| Ved. | Mitanni | Iran. | Nuristani/Kalasha | meaning/acting in_________ |
| 1. Varuṇa (~ ṛta) | Uruna (~aṩa) | --- | --- | (active truth: Ṛta; oath) cosmic order UNIVERSE |
| 2. Mitra | Mitra | Miϑra | --/a-mitrá dis-‘obedient’ | agreement, contract mitra, n. “contract” TRIBAL LEVEL |
| [Dhātṛ | --- | (dātar “ordainer”) | | “ordainer,creator”: rare)] |
| 3. Aryaman | --- | Airiiaman | (Wushum, Shomde, Sajigor?) | “Arya-hood,” guestfriendship, marriage arya “hospitable” CLAN LEVEL |
| 4. Bhaga | --- | baγa | Bagisht? < bhāgya-? | bhaga, n. “share” wealth, luck FAMILY LEVEL |
| 5. Aṃśa | --- | (ąsa “party”) | onshái? “lot” | aṃśa “lot” FAMILY (?) LEVEL |
| 6. Dakṣa | --- | (daxš) | | “cleverness” PERSONAL LEVEL |
| 7. Vivasvant | --- | Vīuuaŋhant | | SUN DEITY, ANCESTOR |
| Mārtāṇḍa born from a “dead egg” | | gaiia marətan (Gayōmart) | | of all ārya lineages |
| ---------------------------------------- | ||||
| (8.) Indra | Indara | Indra | Indr/Indr,Varen(dr); Giwish, Munjem; Māndi / Mahandeu | “the strong one”? Son of Vivasvant, King of Gods |
| Yama | --- | Yima | Imra (< yama-rāja) | Son of Vivasvant, |
| | | | (Māra) | ancestor of humans, first mortal being. |
| [Manu | | | | first human] |
| | | | | (Witzel, 2004) |
The seventh and eighth deities Indra (see below) and Mārtānḍa Vivasvant are of a different nature. The latter is important as he is the ultimate ancestor of the vedic people. According to post-rgvedic myth (Hoffmann, 1957), Mārtāṇḍa was born as a “dead egg” (mṛta-āṇḍa, Avest. gaiiō marətan), when he and his stronger twin Indra were aborted by their elder āditya brothers because both spoke already inside the womb of their mother. The gods took pity on Mārtāṇda and carved his egglike shape in the form of a man, who became the sun deity (Vivasvant, “The Widely Shining One”). He is the father of both Yama, the first mortal and subsequent deity of the world of the ancestors, and of his brother Manu, the father of all of the vedic people.
However, the first āditya, Varuṇa, is more difficult to explain (Lüders, 1951; 1959). His name can have a large number of possible etymologies (such as from “true”; Lüders; Thieme). However, his functions are clear: he is the personification of universal dominance (and of the intertribal leader) and may originally have reflected the preeminent lord(s) of the large settlements in the Ural “land of towns,” with aspirations of widespread “undying” fame and respect. As such, the “universal chieftain” Varuṇa guards the implementation of the universal force of ṛta (Avest. aša) that sustains the functioning of the universe and of society. He also supervises the truthfulness of humans; the sun as well as the stars spy on humans to submit to the rules of ṛta.
Ṛta (Avest. aša, Old Pers. arta) is a much-debated concept. Recently, a number of scholars such as H. Lüders, P. Thieme, and H.-P. Schmidt have translated it as “truth”; however, the term rather seems to indicate the “active force of truth” (Witzel & Gotō, 2007), for which we do not have an equivalent in a modern language. (The postvedic and modern Indian dharma , equally untranslatable, comes close to it.) Ṛta can best be understood by its opposite, the active force of untruth, druh (Avest. druj). This is not just “lie,” but corresponds linguistically to German Trug and English be-tray – in other words, “deceit” or “cheating.” The positive force of ṛta is universal; even the gods are governed by it, while they also protect it, much as the vedic chieftain or king has to do, or as the Hindu king must protect dharma.
In sum, the asura/āditya deities represent all the features that sustain both vedic society and the universe at large.
Asura and Deva in the Ṛgveda
The asura/āditya, however, are opposed by another group of deities, the deva. These are the dominant deities of the current age, echoing the Olympians in old Greek mythology. The deva leader, not surprisingly, is the āditya Indra who shares many characteristics with the Greek Zeus. The devas are a somewhat amorphous group of “nature” deities and some others that will be discussed later.The two groups have an ambiguous relationship, usually one of opposition and constant strife, but at certain times one of cooperation. For example, the designation asura is used for some of the most important deities, the asura Varuṇa and the deva Agni. F.B.J. Kuiper (1983) has called that “the central problem of vedic religion” and has characterized the “defection” of Varuṇa from the group of the ādityas to that of the devas as the central aspect of the new year ritual, a move that underlies not only the constant tension but also the recurrent stability of vedic religion: the asuras were regarded as the primordial gods (though still preceded by the sādhya, the “earlier gods,” pūrve devāḥ), who were challenged and ultimately defeated by the upstart devas. Some asuras joined the ranks of the devas (the ones who receive both titles in the Ṛgveda); others remained in perpetual opposition, which led to the post-rgvedic demonization of the asuras. The early vedic situation certainly was no longer that of the original proto–Indo-Iranian times when the asuras were a group of newcomers not found in Indo-European religion.
Like Indo-Iranian religion, vedic religion is characterized by the dichotomy between devas and asuras (ādityas). The devas are led by Indra, who is called the “king” (rājan) of gods, and the asuras (originally) by Varuṇa (also called asura and medhira, ṚV. 1.25.20), which in early Iranian religion is the title of the highest (or only) deity, Ahura Mazdā (“Lord Wisdom” or “The Wise Lord”).
However, in post-rgvedic prose texts in the style of the Brāhmaṇas (Black Yajurvedasaṃhitās: Maitrāyaṇīsaṃhitā, Kaṭhasaṃhitā, Taittirīyasaṃhitā, and in the Brāhmaṇas), the rivalry between the two kin groups is stated hundreds of times as “the gods and the asuras were competing.” Usually, the gods win, and the asuras are “beaten off,” apparently like all evils, to the ends of the world. While it is unclear what exactly happens to them, they reappear at another occasion or at the new year festival.
The fight between the devas and the asuras, however, also has a counterpart real life, between the immigrating Arya tribes and the local inhabitants, the Dasyu or Dāsa, and, after the rgvedic period, with the Śūdra, the lowest, fourth class of the vedic populations. This kind of strife was still found, until Islamicization in 1895, with the Kafirs (Nuristani) in the Afghan Hindukush, and it is continued even today with the only other non-Hindu remnant population, the Kalasha people of Chitral (northwest Pakistan). They still have a group of seven devalog (“god people”), echoing the seven ādityas; Indr is one of their main gods, next to Imrå (Yamarājā) or Māra. The division between two groups of deities (devalog) and their opponents, but also including interaction such as intermarriages (Imrå’s mother is a “giant”) has been preserved as well, and the dichotomy is still reenacted in rituals and festivals, especially in the chaumos at winter solstice (Witzel, 2004). It echoes the loss of power by Indra and his ambiguous, doubted status and existence at that time (ṚV. 10.86).
In sum, instead of the usual “static” or structural view of the universe, the gods, and mythology, we must adopt one of a cyclical nature of the year and of the vedic rituals performed at its crucial liminal points (new year, summer solstice, snow melt/rainy season, autumn, winter solstice; Witzel, 2004).
The Devas
The term deva is derived from the Indo-European dyeu-, “to shine” (like the daylight sky), thus, “the shining, heavenly, immortal, divine ones,” who are opposed to the mundane, earth-bound, mortal humans. Among the devas, we find the most prominent Indo-European gods “of nature,” including those of the “shining” heaven (Dyaus), the sun (Sūrya), dawn (Uṣas), earth (Pṛthivī), wind (Vāyu, Vāta), rain and thunder (Parjanya), or the flowing waters (Āpaḥ), a group of female deities also called “divine ladies” (gnāḥ, devapatnīḥ). These also appear individually as personifications of specific rivers, such as the Sarasvatī and the Punjab rivers.However, all these deities are not the simple manifestations of natural phenomena that 19th-century mythologists wanted to see in them. Instead, they each have a clearly marked personality to which many individual myths are attached. For example, heaven is not just the shining sky, but “Father Heaven” (Dyauspitṛ) or earth is “Mother Earth” (Pṛthivīmātā; in the Ṛgveda and the Ṛgvedakhila).
Sun
Again, in the case of the sun god (much later concept of navagrahas), the disjunction between person and natural phenomenon is clearly marked, even grammatically: the sun is Sūrya, “He Who Belongs to Sunshine/Sunlight” (from svar/sūr “sunlight,” with suffix -ya, “belonging to”), a word that has exactly the same Indo-European origin and grammatical formation as the Greek sun god Hēl-io-s. The sun deity is closely linked with its Bronze Age heavy wagon, and later on its horse-drawn chariot: the designation “wheel of the sun” is already an Indo-European one. In vedic texts the sun god is often described as riding his chariot, drawn by seven horses. As in much of Eurasia, the sun deity is frequently identified with the fire on earth; in the vedic agnihotra fire ritual, the sun is protected during the night and rekindled in the morning to make it rise again (Witzel, 1992). The god’s chariot is taken care of by the Aśvins, who appear as the morning and evening star, Venus (Goto, 2006). During the night, they take the sunlight in a ship, led by birds, from the western shores of the mythological night sky “ocean” back to its eastern shores, where the sun rises again. Post-rgvedic texts also have the rare myth that the sun flips over in the evening and, showing its dark side, travels back to the east, where it turns its bright side again towards us in the morning (Sieg, 1923). The sun is also seen as the eye of the gods, notably that of Varuṇa; it spies on human behavior (Lüders, 1951; 1959).Agni and Āpas
Similarly, the god of fire, Agni (= Lat. ignis), is the male personification of the neuter “element” of “fire” (= Grk. pūr, Ger. das Feuer), while Āpaḥ, the “Waters,” are the female personifications (= Latin aqua, Toch. āp) of the neuter element “water” (Grk. hūdōr, Skt. udan, udaka, root udr-, Ger. das Wasser). Both deities possess old myths that in part go back to Indo-Iranian and Indo-European times.In Indo-Iranian mythologies, the waters are seen as flowing streams and rivers, but not as stagnant ponds or lakes (Narten, 1971). It is the flowing waters that bring life to the desert landscapes of central Asia, Iran, Afghanistan, and the Punjab. Their arrival in spring because of snow melt is a major event and celebrated with a soma ritual (Falk, 1997). In myth, this could happen only after the great hero Indra had freed the primordial waters that were encapsulated then (and again, each winter) by the demonic dragon or giant snake called Vṛtra. Because of their purity as flowing waters, they are regarded as healing and possessing medicines. They contain both water and milk (which can be separated by a particular bird in later myth); they carry milk for women and semen for men. They are also regarded as immortal and as the mothers of Agni, the fire god.
One of their major representatives is the river (and goddess) Sarasvatī, “She Who Has Many Ponds,” the modern Sarsuti-Gagghar-Hakra river flowing through Kurukshetra, northwest of Delhi (Witzel, 1984). The name Sarasvatī is identical with that of the Iranian river Haraxvaitī (of Arachosia) that is represented by the goddess Ārəduuī Sūrā Anāhitā (“The Moist, Heroic, Unbound”). Both seem to correspond to an older, southern central Asian “mother goddess” of 2000 BCE. The Yamunā and Gaṅgā are not important yet.
Fire is brought from its primordial hiding place by a deity called Mātariśvan (“Swelling inside His Mother”). The underlying myth is not clearly explained in vedic texts and may predate the Indo-European period (compare similar accounts in Maori or Japanese myth as Homusubi). However, in contrast with Greece, fire is not stolen from the gods by Prometheus for the humans, but stolen (pramath) for the gods (Kuiper, 1983) and for the mythical ṛṣi (poet) clan of the Bhṛgu, whose father is Varuṇa himself. Agni’s birth is from the waters; he is Apām Napāt (“The Grandson of the Waters”), or he is born from the waters and lightening of the clouds. He is also called Tanūnapāt (“Grandson of [His Own] Body”) as there are three consecutive births (and deaths) of Agni. In ritual, he is reborn every morning through the agnihotra ritual ( yajña), and therefore he also has the epithet Jātavedas (“The One Who Is Born Just Now”) when he is rekindled every morning from its embers.
After his birth, Agni is persuaded by the gods to perform his service as offering fire and as messenger from the humans to the gods. At first, he wants to avoid this task and flees, but is found again by the gods searching the ground in a “police line.” As the sacred fire, Agni is at the center of vedic ritual and one of the most invoked deities. His identification with the sun is an old prevedic – indeed, Eurasian – concept (Witzel, 1992).
However, he is not just the messenger of the humans to the gods, as purohita or hotar (offering priest), but he also carries their offerings in transubstantiated (burnt) form to the gods. Alternatively, the gods come to the offering ground and sit on straw around the offering fire as honored guests who, like their human counterparts (governed by Aryaman), get invited, fed, and praised and then are sent off again with a present – a pattern of ancient Indo-European guest worship that has persisted until today in the common pūjā rituals performed at home and in temples (Witzel, 1998).
This common fire of all humans is frequently called Vaiśvānara (“Belonging to All Men”), which is the central fire of a tribe (a motif that is expanded in Zorastrianism with “national” Iranian and other regional fires that burn permanently). In this sacrificial role, Agni continues to be a central figure until today: he is present in marriage and many other rituals. Hinduism may thus be characterized as “fire worship,” just as it has traditionally been done for Zoroastrianism, where the sacred fire (as visible manifestation of the sun and Ahura Mazdā) plays an equally central role. It is important to note that Agni, along with Soma, is one of the few gods that are actually present and visible on the offering ground.
Soma
Soma is both the deified soma plant and its pressed juice that is offered in an elaborate ritual (Oberlies, 1999). The word soma is formed from the verb su-, “to press out.” The concept goes back to Indo-Iranian, but not to Indo-European, times. The Indo-Iranian sauma (Avest. haoma, Old Pers. hauma) is a comparatively younger deity, but it can boast of a number of myths. The Ṛgveda and the Avesta say that the best soma is found on the high mountains, somewhere in the high Himalayas, Pamirs, and Hindukush. Indeed, the Ṛgveda mentions the mountain Mūjavant (“Having Mūja”), from where the best soma comes. A Muža tribe is also found in the Avesta in an eastern area that has vedic-like names. The name seems to survive as the impressive 7,549-meter-high Muzh Tagh Ata Mountain in the Kirghiz and Sariqoli (Saka) lands of southwestern Xinjiang (Witzel, 2004).Vedic Śrauta ritual indeed retains the custom of buying soma from foreign, nonvedic tribesmen of the mountains who are then beaten up. Similarly, in myth, soma is obtained by humans from a high mountain through theft by an eagle. This curiously corresponds to the theft of ambrosia in Greek myth, and of wine by an eagle in the Indr myth of the contemporary Kalasha: always the theft of a sacred drink under the same circumstances. Clearly, the soma myth has been transferred from that of the sweet, fermented honey drink, the Indo-European mead, to that of the bitter soma, which nevertheless still is called sweet (madhu).
The vedic texts often describe the exhilarating physiological effects of soma juice; the plant may indeed be some form of ephedra (Falk, 1989;), whose most potent form is found on the high mountains. The non-Indo-Iranian origin of soma is also underlined by a number loanwords dealing with soma and its ritual (Witzel, 2003). The Old Persian inscriptions still call one of the major Saka (Scythian) tribes the Saka Haumavarga (“The Soma Twisting Saka”). Soma-like rituals may be archaeologically represented in south central Asia by libation rites, though ephedra has not yet been attested.
In sum, a Bronze Age central Asian sauma cult was encountered by the Indo-Iranians after around 2000 BCE and was taken over, replacing the ancient mead rituals, which were difficult to carry out in the absence of honey bees in the deserts of central Asia. Sauma (soma, haoma) became a central feature of Indo-Iranian religion and ritual. Its pressing and offering is the central part of an elaborate ritual, normally called agniṣṭoma . It has close correspondences in the Zoroastrian haoma offerings of the ancient Persians, Avestan-speaking Iranians, and modern Parsis. In post-rgvedic times, the soma ritual has intentionally been made even more complex, incorporating a number of additional rites such as the sacrifice of a goat and the pravargya, an originally independent offering of milk to the Aśvins.
Apart from its origin myth, soma has fairly little mythology, perhaps not surprising, given its comparative recent origins in Indo-Iranian times. In the Ṛgveda, however, soma’s heroic and warlike characteristics are stressed (Oberlies, 1989). Indeed, Soma is one of the four kings (rājans) of the vedic pantheon. Without drinking soma, Indra, the king of the gods, could not perform the primordial killing of Vṛtra, which was necessary for the release of the sweet waters necessary for plants and animal life. Soma is also said to confer immortality on its drinkers, just as ambrosia (the immortal one) did for the Greeks. It heals illnesses and works in all sorts of cures.
Indra
Next to Agni and Soma, Indra is the most prominent god of the vedic pantheon. His character is multifaceted. He continues many aspects of the Indo-European “Father Heaven” (Dyauspitṛ), who is very little mentioned the Ṛgveda, such as with his functions as thunderer or lord of the gods, the Greek Zeus. Like him, he also is of mischievous and miscreant behavior, especially in his pursuit of any tempting women. He is also critically important at the time of the emergence of the world (Kuiper, 1983), as well as in the struggles of the Indo-Aryans with their various enemies, Aryan or otherwise.Many myths belong to this rather complex and composite personality, which is due, in part, to his diverse origins. Clearly, he has amassed not only the character of several Indo-European deities, but also that of other deities acquired by the Indo-Aryans on their path from the Northern Steppes to the Punjab. As far as we are able to discern now, he integrates the following facets.
He is the king (rājan) of the current generation of the gods, the devas, just as his counterpart, Zeus, is that of the Olympian gods; he thus continues the traditions attached to the Indo-European sky god (Zeus Pater, Iuppiter).
At the same time, Indra has many of the characteristics of tricksters and heroes, such as those of the Greek hero Herakles. He shows great physical strength as well as (sometimes amoral) trickery. But like the Greek Atlas, he also is a demiurge who pushed up the sky. He released the sunlight from its rocky cave: it is envisioned as dawn and as the reddish cows (Schmidt, 1968). The myth is very similar to that of Herakles’ retrieval of the cows from “Redland.” He is the great dragon slayer, and as such is similar to the Greek Apollo, Herakles, or the Germanic Thor, and others; as such, he releases the primordial waters and rain.
In addition, there are some influences from southern Central Asia, where the great hero (often depicted with an eagle head) vanquishes the scaled, humanlike demon of draught (Avest. Apaoša) who carries a water vessel (Witzel, 2004). This feature is very prominent both in Avestan as well as in vedic myth: Indra facilitates the arrival of the waters in spring, after his killing of Vṛtra, who encapsulated the waters just like the Bactria-Margiana scaled monster. This heroic act also makes him the prototype of the Aryan warrior and the helper of the Aryan in their fights.
The greater Punjab, with remnants of the Indus civilization, has contributed very little to his rgvedic image, as these farmers of the greater Punjab added only some aspects of their "Little Tradition" to vedic religion. Nevertheless, local influence can be seen in Indra’s fighting with the great boar Emuṣa and the seven mountains (ṚV. 1.61.7; Kuiper, 1983).
Other Indra myths deal with his origin that is uncertain even in the vedic texts. He is sometimes included as the seventh āditya (Hoffmann 1975), but he is also frequently regarded as having been born suddenly (from where is unclear). The texts typically say that he “stood up” immediately as soon as he was born, due to his great inherent strength, and was ready to act. The Black Yajurvedasaṃhitās (Hoffmann, 1975) may provide the background: he and Vivasvant were aborted, and thus Indra suddenly appeared. Apparently, his mother hid him and perhaps set him out on a river; later, he drank soma in the house of his father Tvaṣṭṛ, whom he killed. He then set out to kill Vṛtra; Indra apparently was accompanied by his comrade Viṣṇu, but was deserted by the other gods. He even was without proper food and ate the entrails of a dog, until the eagle brought him soma that emboldened him to kill the dragon. Remarkably, the isolated Kalasha and Nuristani people have preserved several aspects of Indra’s deeds: about his eagle who is shot at, the killing of his father, the killing of the snake or of a demon with many heads, and the central myth of releasing the sun from an enclosure (Witzel, 2004).
Other acts of Indra include his pushing up the sky: after heaven and earth had emerged, they were in constant close sexual embrace, so that their children had no space and were left in eternal darkness (a myth best told by the Maori). Only after Indra had pushed them apart was open space (antarikṣa) created. Indra is thus often described as standing up, pushing up the sky with both his arms. He is the prototype of the central pole, pillar, or mountain (like Atlas) and of the newly anointed king, his human image.
His second important primordial act is his battle with and killing of his opponent, Vṛtra, by which he released the waters that the giant dragon or snake Vṛtra had encompassed (Kuiper, 1983). In Indo-Iranian, Vṛtra merely meant “resistance” that was destroyed by a hero, called Vṛtrahan (Avest. Vərəϑraγna), the “Slayer of Resistance” (Benveniste & Renou, 1934). The vedic Vṛtra is the subsequently personified resistance. The release of the waters from his embrace was a most important natural feature in spring and at the same time a cosmic event. In Iran, and in post-rgvedic myths, the hero killed a three-headed monster, again something not only restricted to the Indo-Iranians but also found in other parts of Eurasia, such as in Japan (Witzel, 2004). Similarly, the rgvedic Puruṣa myth that involves the killing and dissection of the primordial giant is a Eurasian motif that is found in Iceland as well as in south China and Mesopotamia (killing and dissection of Tiamat by Marduk). The Kalasha (and Kashmiris) too have preserved echoes of this myth.
His third important feat is the opening of the Vala (Avest. Vara). The Vala is a cave in a great rock or a mountain, in which the sunlight is hidden. The sunlight, especially the dawn (Uṣas), is identified with the reddish cows who must be freed to guarantee the preconditions for the life of the pastoralist Indo-Iranians. Indra proceeds to do so with the help of the primordial poets and priests, the Aṅgiras. These sing and make noises in front of the cave, mimicking the cows, and trying to make them come out. Finally, Indra smashes the bolt of the cave door with his weapon, the macelike vajra (Schmidt, 1968). Comparisons outside the Indo-European sphere have hardly been carried out so far; however, this Indo-Iranian (notably Kafiri, vedic) myth again has close parallels in Greek myth (the cows of Geryoneus) and also in other old Eurasian versions, such as in ancient Japanese mythology. In sum, Indra produces the prerequisites of culture by killing Vṛtra and opening the Vala.
Fourth, in his role as trickster and cultural hero, Indra is typical for bringing elements of human culture, such as the opening of the Vala, the deliverance of mythical and real cows to the Aryan, and his involvement with the stealing of soma (Kuiper, 1983). He also fights various other monsters, such as Namuci, Śuṣna, and Kuṇāru. However, Indra is well known, even in later times, for his many misdeeds (kilbiṣa), like tricking opponents or pursuing females (Rau, 1975). In that respect, he again resembles his Greek counterparts, Herakles and Zeus. For example, he tricks his cousin, the three-headed (triśīrṣan) monster Viśvarūpa, the son of Tvaṣṭṛ, and kills him; for this deed he is denounced as a Brahman killer, indicating that Tvaṣṭṛ was regarded as a Brahman. He has to undergo atonements to get rid of the resulting evil, which typically literally sticks to him. The legend was reshaped in much later times in the myth of Kṛṣṇa’s killing the great water snake Kaliya.
Indra also tricks the two priests of the asuras, who, like Tvaṣṭṛ, act like regular Aryans in having priests. The two want to offer Manu’s wife in sacrifice, but Indra rescues her, using the ambiguity of the term athitipati (host/lord of the guest) to get them killed. In another trick, he turns into a leech sticking to a floating fortress to listen in to the opponents’ talk. A large number of his kilbiṣa, however, refer to his pursuit of any attractive woman he encounters. Just like Zeus, he can change his shape in this endeavor.
With the movement of the Aryans into the eastern Punjab and beyond, the spring floods became less important than the monsoon rain, and Indra’s role as provider of water became that of a god of rain, a role he retains to this day. At the Kathmandu indrajātrā festival in Nepal, Indra’s pillar (the vedic indradhvaja) is erected, and he is represented as a small figure at its bottom in a cage, as he must be stopped from raining too much. Indra also retains a major temple on the Thankot Hill west of Kathmandu. Little studied, Indra is still generally prominent in northern Indian villages and in Punjabi names (Indar-), as well as with the Kalasha of the Hindukush, where Indr is still one of their major deities who kills the many-headed river snake.
Finally, Indra also is the god of war for the Indo-Aryans: he is invoked to take the side of one’s own group and to defeats one’s enemies. Cattle raiding (gaviṣṭi), skirmishes, and wars involved both other Indo-Aryans and the preexisting local population (Dasyu, Dāsa). These were often seen as embodiments of the mythical Paṇi (probably a reminiscence of the Parna people in Bactria-Margiana). Their demonization proceeded along mythical lines. As the traditional adversaries of Indra, the Parna as well as the local people of the greater Punjab shared the attributes of possessing cows and of enclosing them in their forts, which was enough to assign mythical status also to the non-Aryan inhabitants, the Dasyu, of the greater Punjab.
Structure: The Four Kings, Groups of Deities
Next to the two moieties of devas and asuras, the vedic texts also know of four kings among the gods, which would indicate four realms of deities. Indra is usually called the king (rājan) of the gods, but there also is Varuṇa, the leader of the ādityas, Soma that of the plants, and Yama that of the departed ancestors, who lives in the world of the “fathers.” This quadripartite division is not too difficult to understand. Indra and Varuṇa are kings that govern the humans as well, and so does Yama, the first mortal but still a god, as the king of the departed (pitṛs). Why Soma is singled out as another rājan is more difficult to fathom: there is no king of the animals, at least not one with this title. However, we can count Rudra as such: he actually is called Paśupati (“Lord of Cattle”). This is a rather old concept, found over much of Eurasia and North America (where we also have a “Lady of the Animals”). However, in spite of Rudra’s Stone Age prehistory, this liminal deity was excluded from the heaven of the gods and thus did not gain the title rājan. Interestingly, again with the Kalasha, Yama as Imrå (from Yama Rājan) has become the main deity. The reason is the cyclical elevation of Imrå to sky god, while around winter solstice, Indr (Balumain) comes as a visitor and takes over (Witzel, 2004).In addition to this quadripartite division, still other divisions of the deities can be discerned: one that is horizontal and one that is vertical; the various deities and spirits live in different lokas (worlds or living spaces), as one text calls those of the ancestors.
This more structured arrangement of the deities and their respective functions in a synchronic fashion is one aspect that needs more attention than given to it so far (Witzel, 2004). It must cover the spheres of the gods, various other (semi-)divine beings (such as the gandharvas), the primordial and rgvedic poets ( ṛṣis), the human ancestors (pitṛ), the human beings, some netherworld beings (such as the nāgas), and finally, demonic beings such as rakṣas, piśāca, and kimīdin ( asuras and the later daityas), as well as the universal force of destruction, Nirṛti. It may then be seen that, already in the vedic period, these beings are set in opposition to one another, with typical functions attached, at the various levels of the universe. For example, why are there promiscuous extrasocietal groups such as the vrātyas (Falk, 1986) on earth with counterparts in heaven (daivya vrātya, gandharva), as well as in the netherworld (nāgas)? The concept of the vrātya and gandharva obviously is in need of further elaboration (Oberlies, 2005).
All the vedic gods, whether āditya/asura or deva, form the group of the “33 gods” that are frequently mentioned in the vedic texts. The number has some persistence until today (for example, in Nepalese rituals). Commonly, however, popular opinion now has it that there are “330 million gods” in India.
These reconstructed divisions aside, not only do the vedic texts divide the deities into a group of 33 (and unnamed ones outside this group), but there also is the major group of the viśvadevas (viśve devāḥ; "all the gods"). However, this is a group does not include all deities; it is an undefined one. Originally, the viśvadevas probably appeared at new year, just as the devalog of the Kalasha still do at the winter solstice festival.
| Table 2: | ||||
| Heaven: deva /asura | ṛṣi | gandharva | pitṛ | || remnant asura/Nirṛti |
| | ||||
| Earth: humans | Brahmans | vrātya | (nāga) | || demons: rakṣas, piśāca... |
Finally, the sādhya gods are an ill-defined group of deities who are called the “older gods” (Kuiper, 1983). In the post-rgvedic form of the Mārtāṇḍa myth, it is clear that they are the ancestors of the current devas. In sum, the number 33 stands for a totality: the viśvadevas are also numbered in the Ṛgveda as 3,339, and in the nivids, as 3x11, 33, 303, and 3,003, thus 3,372 gods. Obviously this large, schematic number must include, as in the lists of hundreds and thousands of deities of other cultures, the minor local deities as well, such as local gandharvas, apsarases, and the like.
Some Individual Deities
In the sequel, some additional deities will be discussed briefly. It is useful to remember F.B.J. Kuiper’s structural(ist) statement (1983) on “the fundamental difficulty of understanding a single mythological figure isolated from the context of the mythological system.” (For discussions of the individual deities, see now Oberlies, 1998–1999.)Rudra
Rudra is an ambiguous deity who lives in the mountains. He governs both illnesses as well as their medicines. He kills cattle, horses, and humans. At the same time, he is a healer of illnesses and carries medicines (bheṣaja); he himself drank a cup of poison (like the later Śiva). Like him, he is accompanied by a troop, often the maruts. He is therefore invoked to be benevolent and is frequently apportioned a share to be appeased. He is armed with a bow and arrows. This makes him comparable to several other famous archers, from the Greek Apollo to central Asia, the Indus, China, Siberia, and beyond, the Maya. The Avestan hero Ǝrəxša is the “the best bow shooter of the Aryas,” the Indo-Iranian T(r)ištriia who shot at the demon of drought (the Avestan Apaoša), namely, in India as Rudra at Dyaus/Prajāpati (comparable to Sirius shooting at Orion; Forssman, 1968). In a local post-Indus variant, Indra shot his bunda arrow at the boar enemy Emuṣa (Kuiper, 1983), and a striding archer is also seen on an Indus copper plate.Rudra also shares some aspects with other liminal and transgressive deities, such as the Germanic Odin and of course the later Śiva. However, in the Ṛgveda he is not yet called Paśupati (“Lord of Cattle”). It is therefore not obvious to link him with the famous horned figure found on an Indus civilization seal that has erroneously been called “Śiva Paśupati” ever since its discovery in the early 20th century. Actually, that horned deity is surrounded by four wild animals, and a strikingly similar depiction of the Celtic deity Cernunnos has been found at Gundestrup in west Denmark: in both cases this is the Stone Age “Lord of the Animals.”
Rudra continues in these functions after the Ṛgveda and is frequently invoked to spare humans and cattle. He resides at crossroads and at other ominous places. A late vedic text (Kaṭhāraṇyaka) has a myth of how he acquired his entry into the heaven of the gods and acquired his name Śiva (“Friendly One”): he abandoned threatening the gods when they admitted him and gave him his share. From that time onward, he developed into the Hindu deity Śiva.
Marut s
The maruts are a group of youths, who form a sort of sodality (Männerbund) and are often associated with Indra and with Rudra (or are his sons). They are frequently mentioned, mostly in connection with their function of bringing rain, fog, and hail, and as Indra’s companions in slaying the dragon. As is typical for a sodality (vrātya), they share one woman, Rodasī. They are forceful and frightening, and they form an armed troop wishing to fight with their spears or bows. Their chariots are drawn by reddish horses or by a variety of unusual animals, such as antelopes or spotted gazelles. Their approach from the ends of the world reaches heaven and earth. Their sound – often that of thunder and lightning – and that of their chariots makes the world shake and tremble. Their noise is also perceived as a heavenly and as singing, and, as such they are even called bards. They help the humans in their fights and provide them with rain, grass, animals, and grain.Aśvins
Another group of young men, the Aśvins or Nāsatyas, are divine twins, sons of heaven, and are famous for their miraculous cures and rescues. They are horse riders (an unusual fact in the Ṛgveda) and may be compared with the Roman Castor and Pollux and the conquering English heroes Hengist and Horsa; they are linked with the morning and evening star, Venus. The Aśvins play an important role in the “rescue” of the sun at the time of its setting. This “saving” quality also is the root of their name Nāsatya (attested in Mitanni, c. 1400 BCE) and indicates “blissful return home” (Gotō, 2006). Many rescues and cures are reported about them.One of their famous deeds is the acquisition of the secret called “honey” or “mead” from Dadhyañc Ātharvaṇa. Indra had threatened Dadhyañc to cut off his head if he would divulge the sweet (honey) secret belonging to the gods. However, the Aśvins supplied Dadhyañc with a horse head, by which he told them the secret – directly from the horse’s mouth. Indra cut off this head, which the Aśvins again replaced with his real one. The myth reminds of a Bronze Age find at Popatovka west of the Urals, where a human male was buried, without head but with the substitution of a horse’s head. The area was old Indo-Iranian territory at the time. Apparently because of their role as doctors and the pollution that goes with it, the Aśvins are regarded as less elevated than other deities, a fact also indicated by their riding horses instead of the more-prestigious chariots (Falk, 1995).
Uṣas
Uṣas (“Dawn”) is the daughter of heaven and one of the few important female deities in the vedic texts (Oguibénine, 1985). Her name is linguistically related to the Greek Eōs, Latin Aurōrā, and Germanic Ostara (comp. Easter). As such, she is the goddess of the daily and yearly dawn (of new year). Uṣas is closely connected with the first dawn (identified with cows), when Indra releases her from the rocky cave (Schmidt, 1968). Often described together with her companion, the night, she brings the light of the sun (Sūrya) and riches.As a beautiful young woman, she is the girlfriend of the poets who describe her in glowing terms. She exposes her breasts to them, an ethological gesture of greeting and pacification. They wake her up with their poems and songs. In an important myth, her father Dyaus pursues her and is punished by the other gods: in post-Ṛgveda texts, the great archer Rudra (Sirius) shoots at Dyaus, who had taken the form of a gazelle (Orion).
Savitṛ
Savitṛ, the “instigator,” is similar to Uṣas in that he, too, impels the humans in the early morning. However, he is also present at the fall of night. Perhaps he is the one who turns around the sun in the morning and evening. He is most famous as the champion of the Sāvitrī hymn of a late Ṛgveda stanza (3.62.10) that still is recited by many Hindus and is learned at the time of initiation (upanayana ): “We wish to obtain that desirable sparkle of Savitṛ who shall impel our thoughts.”Pūṣan
Pūṣan is a strange god: he does not have incisor teeth and therefore can only eat gruel (Oberlies, 2000). His name is of the same origin as Greek Pan (or Paon). In spite of his great Indo-European age, he is called an asura. He guards the grazing animals, discovers new paths, and thus brings wealth or good luck. His chariot is drawn by rams, and he carries a goad and a golden axe.Tvaṣṭṛ
Tvaṣṭṛ (“Fashioner”), is an old Indo-Iranian deity (Avest. ϑßōrəštar). He too is an asura and sometimes called Indra’s father, who fashioned his mace-like weapon, the vajra, for him. However, he also is the father of the three-headed monster Viśvarūpa that was killed by Indra. As fashioner, he probably is an old demiurge who also created Agni, Bṛhaspati, animals, and all “forms,” and who releases semen and increases progeny.Ṛbhus
The ṛbhus (ṛbhu, ṛbhukṣan, vibhvan, vāja), too, are a group of artisans. They produce a cup for the gods, the tawny horses of Indra, the cow Viśvarūpā, and rejuvenate their parents. They are connected with the evening and year end, when they stay 12 days with the enigmatic person Agohya. (Greek Orpheus is linguistically connected with ṛbhu.)Bṛhaspati or Brahmaṇaspati
The name of this deity clearly means “Lord of Bráhman,” that is, “Lord of Poetic Formulation” (Thieme, 1951) of sacred poetry. As such, he echoes the Old Norse Bragr. His name indicates that he is the prototype and patron of the rgvedic poets (brahmáns). He also acts together with Indra (Schmidt, 1968) in the all-important opening of the Vala cave and release of sunlight and the cows: while Indra smashes the cave door with his vajra weapon, Bṛhaspati and his primordial disciples, the Aṅgiras poets, help to open it and to release the cows by their magically effective poetry and by sympathetic magic (imitating their lowing).Yama and the Ancestors
Finally, the important deity Yama is the lord of the departed and the world of the ancestors, and he was to become the king of hell in Hinduism. However, in the vedic period, the world of the fathers does not have a fixed location yet; it revolves between the netherworld in daytime and the top of the sky at night (Witzel, 1984). Yama (Germ. Ymir) is the brother of Manu (Germ. Mannus); both are sons of Vivasvant Mārtāṇḍa (the Avestan Vīvaŋhuuant or Gayō Marətan). As primordial incest is not allowed in the Veda (also not for Yama and his twin sister Yamī), humans descend from his brother Manu, who, avoiding incest, instead (Adam-like) himself fashions a wife from butter. Yama, however, commits some unspecified misdeed and is punished by becoming the first mortal, Yama Rājan, just as in the Avesta where he is killed with a saw. In Nuristan he has become, due to the revolving nature of his location, the highest god, both as Māra (“Death”), and Imrå (from Yama Rājan).Spirits: Gandharvas and Apsarases, Yakṣas, Nāgas
In addition to these deities, there are a number of semidivine spirits, including the gandharvas and apsarases, yakṣas, nāgas, as well as demons such as the rakṣas, piśāca, kimīdin, attrin, paṇi, śuṣṇa, and so on. The gandharvas, yakṣas, and nāgas each have localized forms well through the Middle Ages that have been little studied.The gandharvas are a group of a multifaceted beings (Oberlies, 2005). In the Ṛgveda, they are heavenly beings at the vault of the sky, with wind in their hair; but they are also linked with the waters and a female water spirit, apparently an apsaras. They play an important role in the marriage of Sūryā, the daughter of the sun deity Sūrya. They know secrets and immortal names and are connected with poetry, songs and soma, especially one of them, Viśvāvasu. However, they also use a noose to catch miscreants.
In the Atharvaveda, the gandharvas, and their companions, the sexually active apsarases, are frequently found on the mountains (just like the yakṣa). The word apsaras is probably derived from an Indo-Iranian root psar- “to have shame,” as they are a-psara ("without shame"). As sexually promiscuous beings, they consort with various gandharvas, humans, or ṛṣis (such as in the epic, as to seduce them and rob them of their tapas, "heat"). These concepts find a modern correlation with the varōtī fairies (from vātaputrī, “daughters of the wind”) or the yakṣī and śuci of the Kalasha. These deities too live in the high mountains and may take a liking to a particular man, which is dangerous as they may strike humans not just with desire but also with madness. They haunt the high mountains (now also as the Muslim fairies, the peris) due to the purity of the snowy peaks and alpine meadows. However, in the colder months, the gandharvas and apsarases descend to lower altitudes, as is also seen in the Kashmiri Rājataraṅgiṇī, where the piśāca do so for half a year, while the “aboriginal” nāga stay there for the other half. Piśāca is substituted here for the demons of the cold, while nāga follows the common Indian usage.
The nāga usually are understood as half-human, half-snake–like beings. They do not occur in the Ṛgveda (snakes do), but only from the Atharvaveda onwards. They can shift shape between both forms during sleep and while having sex, and older depictions show them as humans with a snake hood above their heads. However, in the mountain regions of Kashmir, the Hindukush, and with the Nuristanis, they represent not just the water associated with the Indian monsoon (that does not reach these areas) but also the waters of springs, ponds, and lakes, even high up in the permanently frozen areas, and as the Lunang River (derived from devanāga) in Nuristan. These nāgas echo the Bactria-Margiana and Indo-Iranian concept of the waters hemmed in by a giant dragon or snake during winter.
Late Rgvedic and Post-rgvedic Developments
The number and the character of all these deities remain the same during the post-rgvedic period, even if their importance seems diminished in the ritual-ridden middle and late vedic periods. The early vedic deities underwent a “devaluation” during the Brāhmaṇa period. They functioned more as entities or agencies moved by the ritual and thus by its “technicians,” the Brahman priests, who assumed, through the efficacy of ritual, supreme power to influence society and the universe. Nevertheless, the deities continued to be invoked, also in certain prayerlike mantras.A newcomer, however, is the late rgvedic Prajāpati, the “Lord of Creatures.” He has no predecessors either in Indo-Iranian or in Indo-European religion and appears only in a handful of passages, mostly in the late book 10 (Gonda, 1986; 1989). However, in post-rgvedic times, he has turned into a major creator deity who is closely linked to the power of the ritual and the periodic renewal of the world. It cannot be excluded, and is indeed likely, that substrate influences are visible here. Prajāpati is a deity that exhausts itself through ritual and the “creation” (rather, “emergence”) of various beings. Therefore he must be reconstituted annually, which points to his function as a deity of plant life. He became prominent at the same time when agriculture became more important than pastoralism, as the vedic tribes increasingly settled down. The post-rgvedic texts clearly speak about extensive agriculture and about the robbing of agricultural products. Prajāpati – along with his transparent name – apparently was borrowed from the local indigenous agriculturalists. Planters and farmers worldwide have a preference for deities that sustain plants and that are born and reborn. In sum, Prajāpati is a typical agricultural deity that intruded into the pastoralist world of the Indo-Aryans.
Old and New Deities
In general, it is difficult to identify the development of the rgvedic deities in the middle and later vedic periods. It can be said, however, that Indra continues to be a “popular” deity, as is shown in early Buddhist texts in Pali, where he appears as the king of the devas under the name Sakka (Skt. Śakra), and in many popular tales about his exploits and misdeeds (kilbiṣa; Rau, 1975).It remains unclear how far the older vedic deities were regarded as important during this period. A detailed study of their appearance in the enormous corpus of post-rgvedic mantras would be informative. However, the continued popularity of gods like Indra point to the survival of some major vedic concepts, including that of ṛta, gradually changing to dharma. In fact, Indra is, even today, a popular deity, not just of rain (such as in Kṛṣṇa’s Govardhana myth).
Starting with the Atharvaveda, we notice the emergence of the four, then eight, “guardians of the directions of the sky” (lokapālas). While these still were snakelike (nāga) demigods in the Atharvaveda, their role has consecutively been taken over by the major vedic gods, such as Indra, Agni, Yama, Sūrya, Varuṇa, and so on.
The study of the appendixes (Pariśiṣṭas) of the late vedic ritual handbooks, the Sūtras, indicates the increasing popularity of deities such as Rudra, and even Gaṇeśa (Einoo, 1996). However, it is very difficult to ascertain the date of such additions. As they provide standard pūjā descriptions, even of Vināyaka (i.e. Gaṇeśa) imitating the ritual of other earlier deities, they may have been added at any time. Occasionally, however, later deities appear in the texts: for example, the semidivine Nārada is already seen in Aitareyabrāhmaṇa 7 and Chāndogyopaniṣad 7.1.1 or Umā Haimavatī in Kenopaniṣad 3.25; Śrī (the later goddess Śri-Lakṣmī) developed from her vague appearance in Ṛgvedakhila 2.6, which mentions wealth and luck in general terms. We know nothing about their predecessors and development.
Similarly, given the increasingly uncertain status of the so-called mother goddess in the Indus civilization (Clark, 2007) and in early vedic texts, little can be said about the development of female deities in emerging Hinduism. In the early Veda, there are very few female deities: there is Aditi, the mother of the āditya (asura) gods, Uṣas (“Dawn”), Pṛthivī, Āpaḥ, Yamī, Vāc (“Speech”), and a few even less significant ones, in addition to river goddesses such as Sarasvatī, the personification of the river of the same name (later a deity of learning – or even of wealth in her Japanese Buddhist incarnation). However, most other female deities are just mentioned as (deva)patnīs (the wives), with names based on their husband’s names, such as Agneyī (“Wife of Agni”), Indrāṇī, Varunāṇī, and so on. Such names are equivalents of the Russian ones ending in -skaya (e.g. Politovskaya) or older German ones ending with –in (e.g. Müllerin). Very little is known about the character and mythology of these goddesses. However, the later name of the wife of Indra, Śacī, is derived from his epithet Śacīpati (“Lord of Strength”) by reinterpretation of the compound as “Husband of Śacī.”
Most important, however, is the deployment of the great gods of Hinduism, the deities Śiva and Viṣṇu that have become of supreme importance. They were very minor figures in the Ṛgveda and even in the post-rgvedic texts.
Śiva
Śiva at first appears only as Rudra, with his epithet Ghora (“Terrible”), or for taboo reasons he is called "asau devaḥ" (that god). He is an ominous deity who must be appeased by getting his “share” and being allowed into heaven. He acquires more characteristics as time passes. There is, however, nothing yet to be seen of his later role as great ascetic and yogin (a word that does not occur in the technical sense the Vedas).Viṣṇu
Viṣṇu, similarly, is a very minor figure in the Ṛgveda. He merely appears as making the three giant steps (trivikrama) from earth to heaven and beyond. F.B.J. Kuiper (1983) asserts that he was important as the central mediator between the older asuras and the younger devas. In the Paippalāda recension of the Atharvaveda, a boar myth first appears. The boar rooted in the primordial ocean and brought up the earth on his snout – an Indian version of the well-known North Asian myth of the earth diver (a bird or muskrat; see also Emuṣa in the Ṛgveda). In the Śatapathabrāhmaṇa, there also is the myth of the fish that saved Manu from the great flood; however, both myths are not yet associated with Viṣṇu. The Vaikhānasa Mantrapraśna links late vedic and early Vaiṣṇava concepts, but a deity, like the medieval Viṣṇu, was not yet in sight in vedic times.Brahmā
The same holds true for the male deity Brahmā (nom. of Brahman), who first appears in the late parts of the Upaniṣads (ChāU. 8.15). Otherwise, we only have the neuter brahmán , a general world principle, the underlying force of the universe, a term that has a long history going back to the rgvedic brahmán (formulation) of the universal force of truth, as encapsulated in poems (Thieme, 1952).In the Brāhmaṇas and in the early Upaniṣads, listings of various agencies in the universe and of the “senses” (vital forces) of the human body established “identification” (correlation) tables between macrocosm and microcosm, one of them being bráhman, which became the ultimate reality, a neuter word. Even then, the early Kauṣītakyupaniṣad describes the abode of bráhman (neuter, nominative brahma, occasionally already brahmā!) as a palace with all the specifications of a royal abode, including a “throne.” From such ideas, the development of a male god Brahman was a fairly small step. We thus find a male deity in Muṇḍakopaniṣad, Śvetāśvataropaniṣad, or Maitryupaniṣad.
However, Brahmā, as a result of speculation and ensuing personification, never became a popular deity. He was said to have only three temples dedicated to him in all of South Asia. Though a few more have been discovered since, Brahmā remains a unimportant deity outside the medieval concept of the trimūrti (trinity) with Viṣṇu and Śiva, and outside his role as “creator” and as preserver of the Veda.
In sum, the three major Hindu deities have vedic roots, although very minor ones, and in the case of Brahmā, only a very tenuous one. As in all living religions, concepts of deities change, and a certain figure attracts other characteristics and may become dominant, while others, such as Varuṇa or Pūṣan, fade or become extinct.
Comments
Post a Comment