Self in the family books of RV

September 17, 2008

http://www.vedavid.org/diss/

CHAPTER 4

TERMINOLOGY FOR THE SELF

IN THE FAMILY BOOKS

The religion of the Family Books of the Rg Veda is characterized

by a potent, interconnected cosmos of interacting deities, priests,

poets, and worshippers. The content of these books is concerned with

how to make these different elements interact for the benefit of the

worshipper. Accordingly, this chapter demonstrates that terminology

for individuality, primarily represented in the words tanuÃº and -dhii,

is restricted in its application to the realm of the gods. More than

three-fourths of the uses of tanuÃº are in reference to deities. When

humans are the referent, the tanuÃº is decidedly frail and in need of

assistance. MÃ¡nas is the source of the thought posited and directed to

prompt the desired response from the gods.

The means of acquiring this assistance forms the central theme the

Family Books. Efficacious prayers, prayers that achieve the desired

attention of the deities, are those which are endowed with a special

power, brÃ¡hman. It is the task of a variety of priests to utter these

prayers. Moral and ethical considerations are referred to only

generally--and infrequently with the terms under study--as with R'ta.

The components of individuality are not discussed objectively. Words

for mental processes-derivatives of -cit, -man, -budh, and -dhii--are

applied to the actions of the poets. References to corporeal

presence--i.e. the body--are all but non-existent. In the oldest

segment of the RV, MaNDalas 2-7, the so-called " Family Books, " the

predominant word for existential presence is tanuÃº. The other primary

terms--especially aatmÃ¡n and pÃºruSa--are quite scarce, though ahÃ¡m and

tmÃ¡n are not entirely uncommon.

AAtmÃ¡n, pÃºruSa, and brÃ¡hman are usually the predominant terms with

respect to discussions of individuality and its relation to the cosmos

in Vedic literature, yet of the three terms, only brÃ¡hman is found

with any frequency in this earliest portion of the RV. AAtmÃ¡n and

pÃºruSa are all but absent in the Family Books (RV 2-7). In addition,

pÃºruSa is largely absent from later RV MaNDala's as well, as we will

see in Chapter 5, while aatmÃ¡n makes a more marked increase in its

appearance in these same later portions. There are only two occasions

of aatmÃ¿Ã¡n, in 7.87.2a and 7.101.6b, and four of pÃºruSa in 3.33.8d,

4.12.4a, 5.48.5c and 7.57.4b.

Other lexemes from the core group--e.g. ahÃ¡m, tanuÃº, and tmÃ¡n--are

found in place of aatmÃ¡n and pÃºruSa in the semantic fields which, in

later literature, are dominated by them. Accordingly, I will turn to

the isolated occasions of aatmÃ¡n and pÃºruSa after first addressing the

other core terms in detail, beginning first with brÃ¡hman, followed by

tanuÃº, tmÃ¡n, and ahÃ¡m.

The words will be studied within two general fields of comparison:

the immediate semantic field (the words within the same line or

paada), and the larger semantic field (within the same or, on

occasion, adjacent verses). Each word is first studied in relation to

words which frequently occur in its semantic field--immediate or

larger--and then with regard to words for mental processes

(derivatives of -cit, -dhii, -budh, -man, as well as krÃ¡tu) when they

occur in the semantic field of the term under examination. For

instance, with brÃ¡hman the other words for prayer--arkÃ¡, ukthÃ¡, -stu

derivatives, and -gaa are considered. Following this there is an

examination of words like -cit and -budh with brÃ¡hman as well as forms

of -man and -dhii. In addition, where translation of an entire verse

is warranted I have included comparison translations--usually

Geldner--to enable analysis of syntax and the overall sense of the

passage as rendered here.

In this first portion of the RV survey, the primary objective is

to determine, as closely as possible, the way the words under scrutiny

were used in this early portion of the literature. This leaves the

whole of this chapter as predominantly synchronic in its analysis, as

distinctions between earlier and later portions of the Family Books is

largely impossible. However, there are times when the difference in

meaning from one hymn to another happen to coincide with particular

findings by Arnold, Lanman, and Oldenberg as to the lateness of a

given hymn. When this occurs, I have made note of the internal

chronology and the development of the term which is implied. In

addition, it becomes apparent that of the Family Books, MaNDalas 3 and

7 are slightly later and, of the two, the evidence I have

gathered--regarding tanuÃº in particular--indicates that MaNDala 3 is

later than 7 (suggested by Witzel, 1989; reiterated, 1997). Diachronic

findings of a mostly statistical nature (e.g. observation of numerical

changes in the relative frequency of use with tmÃ¡n in later

literature) are included where appropriate but, for the most part,

extensive diachronic analysis is not practical here.

The main project here, then, is to outline starting points for

comparison in the next two chapters. The basic collection of common

semantic fields and meanings for each word will be brought under the

focus of diachronic analysis in Chapter 5 (covering the later RV) and

Chapter 6 (Middle

Vedic & conclusions). By far the most complex and frequently ambiguous

term is brÃ¡hman. There is no paucity of scholarship on the word, and

the effort here is to comprehensively consider it, most specifically

as it relates to prayer, priests, and deities.

brÃ¡hman

?

If there is any term among those chosen for this study which shows

a consistent development from its Early Vedic uses to the role it

assumes in Middle and Late Vedic, it is brÃ¡hman. In other words,

brÃ¡hman is first seen in the Family Books with a meaning of pure,

independent power (cf. Elizarenkova, " independent force " in some early

passages, 1996: 97). This meaning is complemented by occasions where

its association with an act of speech, or word of prayer, is equally

apparent, as Thieme suggests " Formulierung " (1952: 103). It never

loses these basic connotations but, instead, develops both independent

force, which I have sometimes translated as " pure energy, " and

Formulierungthe latter by way of the association with Vaac which

develops in Middle Vedic, especially in the BraahmaNa Prose--into the

all-encompassing totality of the universe, or macrocosm, in the

aatmÃ¡n-brÃ¡hman teachings of the UpaniSads.

As I have indicated below and in Chapter 5, several changes in

the use of aatmÃ¡n and pÃºruSa were yet to occur in the Family Books and

the later RV before the early stages of their association with brÃ¡hman

could begin. I suggest this--even acknowledging my own reservations

against seeking

later meanings in early uses (cf. Bodewitz vs. " development " theories,

1991: 40)--in careful consideration of the data assembled below.

Inasmuch as Indra and the other deities require the potency of

brÃ¡hman in order to most effectively perform their characteristic

feats, brÃ¡hman appears already to have a significance which is, at the

very least, on a par with--if not ascendant over--the Early Vedic

pantheon. I am suggesting that brÃ¡hman represents the pure energy

which is invoked by a rightly delivered praise. As a pure energy, it

is both independent and ritually sacred. By rendering it in this way,

I can more easily draw the reader's attention to the development in

the use of brÃ¡hman to represent an energy or power which is almost

inseparable from speech in the later portions of the RV. In these

later occasions it is more appropriate to suggest " empowered speech "

or, with Thieme (1952) " formulated speech " or " formulation. " My only

problem or reluctance with " formula " is that it implies the priest as

sole creator of this kind of potent speech which is not supported in

every case below. If the priest is righteous, brÃ¡hman is a power which

attends upon his speech as an additional element of potency in what he

utters or sings. When brÃ¡hman is present, it is in response to a

righteous priest's praise (see 6.38.3-4 below). The word " formulated "

implies that the priest " creates " brÃ¡hman with his invocation which is

not consistently the case in the Family Books.

BrÃ¡hman is frequently associated with prayer but brÃ¡hman does not

consistently indicate a dependence upon the prayer or the priest for

its existence. In fact it is often the other way around, brÃ¡hman

exists of its own accord as a power which can bring about desired

traitsfor example, strengthening/vÃ¡rdhan Indraand it is the task of

the priests to rightly articulate prayer such that it resonates with,

or " accesses " brÃ¡hman for the desired ends. As Thieme notes (1952:

98), the function of brÃ¡hman to produce strength is in large part

reason for the suggestion of Gonda (1950: 40-41) that the word means

power. Etymology is another reason for this association, of course,

but Thieme disagrees with the use of etymology or religious

interpretation " die Feststellung der Grundbedeuteng is nicht

Angelegenheit riligionsgeschichtlicher Interpretation " (1952: 93).

BrÃ¡hman is primarily used to signify an empowerment which attends

upon priestly utterances--whether of or from prayer, worship, and

devotion; it is also a resource of human and divine potency, not

unlike the " inherent firmness, supporting or fundamental principle "

noted in detail by Gonda (1962: 70). The research here reveals that

there are definite

indications of a broader signification similar to Gonda's suggestion

of power, growth, and preservation (1950: 32, 39, 43). However, as

noted in Chapter 1, Gonda's findings need to be reconsidered in an

historical, developmental context as his conclusion arises from a

compilation of many textual sources--BraahmaNa's (1962: 10), UpaniSads

(1962: 11-12), or even the Mahaabhaarata and the Shatapatha BraahmaNa

at the same time (1962: 29)--without attention to temporal sequence or

development of meaning from one text to the next. Thieme has noted

that Gonda does not attend accurately to the formation of the

tradition as well (1952: 95). However, the current study is especially

attentive to the developments of the tradition--diachronic

change--within the RV which is not, apparently, part of Thieme's

argument (e.g., he cites the later period with 1.47, a later hymn

3.53, and several hymns of the Family Books--4.16, 7.37--together

[1952: 103]). Thus the attention to Thieme's finding will be useful to

inform those occasions where " Formulierung " is supported.

The first point which must be established, if the sense of pure,

independent energy is to be accepted for brÃ¡hman in the Family Books,

is the role of the priests in the crafting of praises, both vocally in

the act of uttering them, and mentally in the act of conceiving them.

First I will attend to the various priests who performed these

functions: the R'Si's, kavÃ's, brahmÃ¡n's, and vÃpra's. This will lead

us to a discussion of the role of mental processes in the formulation

of prayer and the invoking of brÃ¡hman. I will close the section on

priests with a discussion of the two deities of prayer, BrahmaNaspati

and BRhaspati. Both deities are differently related to brÃ¡hman by the

tradition--king and father, respectively--and, aside from the fact

that a majority of the neuter genitive forms of brÃ¡hman are part of

the name BrahmaNaspati, there is a distinct development and change in

the role of each god and the place of brÃ¡hman with respect to each.

Makers of Mantras: poets, priests and seers

?

Throughout the Family Books, it is the neuter form, brÃ¡hman, which

predominates over masculine brahmÃ¡n. H. G. Narahari notes that there

are over 200 occurrences of " brahman " in the RV (1944: 3). In fact,

most of these appear in the Family Books alone. RV 2-7 contains 165

cases of brÃ¡hman/power and 17 of brahmÃ¡n/priest. The neuter form

brÃ¡hman is hardly ever found with either vÃpra, R'Sii, or kavÃ.67

BrahmÃ¡n/priest is found in the semantic field of brÃ¡hman only once, in

RV 6.45.7,

to be discussed below. BrÃ¡hman/pure or poetic energy rarely shares its

semantic field with the other terms for priests or liturgists.

In the Family Books, brÃ¡hman frequently appears as an active

emboldening power independent of any kind of priest or poet--brahmÃ¡n,

vÃpra, R'Sii, kavÃ--and it is sometimes a separate category of potency

distinct from words for hymns or sacred utterance, e.g., arkÃ¡, ukthÃ¡,

gÃr, -stu derivatives (stutÃ¡, stÃ³ma, etc.), and -gaa--which are

rarely68 found in its semantic field (in the same paada or line, or

sharing a given declension, occurs in 18 hymns).69 For instance, in RV

6.45.4c-d, praise is offered/Ã¡rcata and songs are sung/prÃ¡ - gaayata

to Indra, the one to whom pure energy is brought (sÃ¡khaayo

brÃ¡hmavaahase 'rcata prÃ¡ ca gaayata). Later in the same hymn, brÃ¡hman

is brought to the priest--instead of being generated by or through

him--in 6.45.7a (brahmaÃ¡Nam brÃ¡hmavaahasaM).

?

In the same MaNDala, however, we see a case where it is unmistakable

that brÃ¡hman is best rendered as formulated speech in the following

list of spoken acts which strengthen Indra along with sacrifice in RV

6.38.4a-b (vÃ¡rdhaad yÃ¡M yajÃ±Ã¡ utÃ¡ sÃ³ma ÃndraM vÃ¡rdhaad brÃ¡hma gÃra

ukthaÃ¡ ca mÃ¡nma).

This observation may come as quite a surprise considering the

frequent association of brÃ¡hman with Vaac in the later literature. But

that is precisely the point: what is commonly seen with a given term

in the later literature, particularly in those texts most intricately

concerned with notions of self and the micro-macrocosmic equivalences,

is exactly that--a feature of the later literature. There are ample

points of origin in the RV Family Books from which these later ideas

develop, and even more such origins in the later portions of the RV.

?

Such is the case with Vaac and brÃ¡hman. To be sure, they are

occasionally associated quite directly in the later RV as in 10.114.8d

where Vaac extends only so far as does brÃ¡hman (yaÃ¡vad brÃ¡hma viSThaM

taÃ¡vatii vaÃ¡k). This is a significant occasion for the suggestion that

the association between the two is a development predominantly

associated with the ritual literature. RV 10.114 has been noted by

Staal as containing the only occasion in the RV (10.114.3) with a

description of the shape of a sacrificial altar (1983, I: 129). In

addition, 10.114 meets three of Arnold's five criteria for determining

a later hymn--one which post-dates both the composition and

arrangement of the RV--including the most reliable category of later

vocabulary and grammar (1897: 213).70 In addition, the godhood of Vaac

is infrequently attested, as in 8.100.11a-b where her crea

tion by the gods and her form as the speaking of all animals is

described (deviÃM vaÃ¡cam ajanayanta devaÃ¡s taÃ¡M vishvÃ¡ruupaaH pashÃ¡vo

vadanti).71 The various forms of association between Vaac and brÃ¡hman

in the later literature is repeatedly evident from the Mantra

Language, SaMhitaa Prose and BraahmaNa Prose.72 Subsequent to this, of

course, are the intricacies of Vaac's role in the Tantric traditions

as discussed by Padoux (1990).

Vaac is not specifically identified with brÃ¡hman in the Family

Books--and hardly at all apart from a handful of verbal forms (for

example, RV 2.16.7, 5.73.10, 6.29.4, 7.22.3, 7.23.1, 7.72.3)--except

in RV 7.103.8 in the famous Frog Hymn where it appears not to

designate a divinity so much as the generic voices of the priests

raised yearly for rains73 (braahmaNaÃ¡saH somÃno vaÃ¡cam akrata brÃ¡hma

kRNvÃ¡ntaH parivatsariÃNam) in what is a later hymn (Oldenberg 1888;

Arnold, 1897: 212; Vajracharya, 1990; Witzel, 1995b; cf. note 6

above). I do not agree with Padoux, however, that while Vaac appears

in " a number of isolated stanzas in various books of the Rg Veda,

including those held as the oldest ones: the creative role of the Word

[Vaac] seems therefore a notion present from the greatest antiquity "

(1990: 7). The evidence in the Family Books does not support this (cf.

note 71). BrÃ¡hman is not " spoken " --with forms of -vaac, -gaa, -stu,

etc.--in the Family Books. BrÃ¡hman's association with spoken praise

does become quite strong in the later portions of the RV and, of

course, significantly greater in the later Vedic literature.

The kind of power bestowed by invoking brÃ¡hman is not dependent

for its existence upon human conjuring (through hymns, etc.) or on the

beneficence of any deity. This is qualified somewhat by BrahmaNaspati

as the king of brÃ¡hman and BRhaspati as its father in 2.23.1-2.

However, it is BRhaspati who comes to be fully associated with, and is

even the maker of passage for, brÃ¡hman (7.97.8). This is a product

both of the later predominance of BRhaspati over BrahmaNaspati, as

well as the inherent differences between each deity (see discussion

below). Considering that brÃ¡hman denotes a power which is sought by

humans and is necessary to the full well-being of the gods--e.g.

Indra's or the Ashvins' strength--its association with BRhaspati, who

is " protector of what is great " (N 10.11 bRhaspatir bRhataH paataa

vaa), is a logical consequence.

Only marginally more common in the semantic fields surrounding

brÃ¡hman are the words relative to mental processes, primarily -man,

and -dhii (see below). BrÃ¡hman is rarely posited or actively reflected

upon in

thought. In addition, only five times in the immediate semantic fields

(i.e. within the same paada) of all 165 occasions of brÃ¡hman in the

Family Books is the verb -shru (to hear) to be found (cf. 5.85.1,

6.17.3, 6.40.4, 7.29.2, and 7.83.4). BrÃ¡hman is intimately related to

prayer and to the priest, but that is not its primary or predominant

meaning, nor is the priest its source.

?

In contrast, however, words of " making " and " forming " do occur in

brÃ¡hman's semantic fields as we see below with RV 7.97.9 (Ã¡takSad),

and 4.16f. (Ã¡kaari). We also see brÃ¡hman made or performed in 4.6.11a

(Ã¡kaari brÃ¡hma samidhaana tÃºbhyaM). The priests also claim brÃ¡hman as

their own in efforts to attract the gods to their worship rather than

that of anyone else as in 2.18.7a asking Indra to come over to the

priest's brÃ¡hman (mÃ¡ma brÃ¡hmendra yaahy Ã¡chaa). Thieme notes the

occasions of 4.6.11 and 2.18.7 as well as 2.39.8, which offers a point

where the distinction between brÃ¡hman and prayer or stÃ³ma is suggested

(1952: 103-104). In 2.39.8 the GRtsamadas have made both brÃ¡hman and

stÃ³ma to strengthen the Ashvins (etaÃ¡ni vaam ashvinaa vÃ¡rdhanaani

brÃ¡hma stÃ³maM gRtsamadaÃ¡so akran). While brÃ¡hman is clearly made by

the priest, it is clearly distinct from the connotations of speech

attested with stÃ³ma. In this connection it is important that Thieme

suggests " Formulierung " which lies somewhere between prayer and

independent power, excluding neither meaning. My only problem with

applying this term throughout the translations is that it does not

illuminate a change in the way that brÃ¡hman is understood as it comes

into closer association first with speech and then, later, with an

abstract metaphysical monism in Middle Vedic. As we will see below in

Chapter 5, with several exceptions brÃ¡hman is justifiably considered a

formulation.

?

The well-known term for the singer of the sacred hymn,RSi, the

gifted or wise poet, the kavÃ, and from -vip (to quiver, be stirred)

the vÃpra, the one who is stirred or excited, are the three terms

which share similar meanings with regard to uttering or conceiving

prayer. RSi is the most scarce, appearing only 29 times in the Family

Books compared with 78 in the remainder of the RV74 (33 of which are

in RV 8 and 9). Far and away the most dominant term is kavÃ with 113

occasions in the Family Books (32 in RV 3 and 27 in RV 5 comprise over

half these occurrences) and 184 in the later RV portions. Thus kavÃ is

relatively more frequent in the Family Books than in the later books

in which 72 occurrences of kavÃ are found in RV 9 (almost half of

which are the nominative singular

kavÃH). We find vÃpra in the Family Books 99 times, two-thirds of

which are in the Vishvaamatra (RV 3) and VasiSTha (RV 7) MaNDalas in

near-equal distribution. This is in comparison with 159 occasions in

the later books where it is relatively less common.

After the RV became " fixed " or cemented in its form and content,

the role of the " stirred " poet/vÃpra and the kavÃ is substantially

diminished. New hymns were not added, the existing ones were recited.

The mental effort of positing thought signified in -man and the

reflections and intent of devotion in -dhii are no longer pivotal. The

proper recitation and remembering of the hymns is more important over

time, and with this change the brahmÃ¡n priest becomes more prominent

and the kavÃ and vÃpra as well as the R'Si become less prominent. The

R'Si is already scarce in the RV which reflects that the period of its

composition was coming to a close and its transition to a repository

for recitation is marked with a steady decline in references to the poets.

The relative frequency of reference to the poets--vÃpra, kavÃ and

R'Si--decreases coincidentally with the increase in references to the

brahmÃ¡n priest. However, the brahmÃ¡n--while still somewhat uncommon in

the RV--was a poet in these RV references. He later became a priest

such as, for the most part, in the AV (Witzel, 1998: 271). Eventually,

as the RV becomes solidified as a canon, the role of the Adhvaryu

becomes more important and the priest of the RV, the Hotar, decreases

in significance. A resulting spirit of competition between the Hotar

and Adhvaryu's is suggested as the reason for the " modern "

philosophical ideas included in the later RV MaNDalas--especially RV

10 and later the AV. This was the effort of the Hotars insure their

relevance in the changing political structure as the various kings

moved eastward. Witzel has noted that after the RV became fixed and

the population moved further and further east, it became more and more

important to the validity of the eastern kings' authority that they

have authentic North-western ritualists in their households (1998:

267, 278f., 294f., 311-312). Accordingly, the ability to generate

effiicacious prayers was pivotal in the new competitive environment.

It stands to reason, then, that the poets would " fatten their

resumÃ©'s " by directly attributing the efficacious power of the prayer,

the brÃ¡hman, with their own abilities.

?

It is apparent that the terminology for the priests shows a

concurrent development with these sociological and geographical

changes. The occasions of reference to all kinds of poet but the

brahmÃ¡n truncate signifi-

cantly in the later periods of Vedic literature. This coincides with

the time of " closure " on the composition of the RV. The traditional

poets were no longer relevant. In particular, the use of vÃpra, kavÃ,

and R'Si steadily declines parallel to the increase of brahmÃ¡n. In the

later portions of the RV, R'Si increases somewhat in frequency in the

later books of the RV (though brÃ¡hman and R'Si are rarely found

together75). It is also interesting that forms in the plural,

designating them as a class of liturgist, are found only 11 times in

the Family Books and 39 times in the later books. The trend toward

greater frequency of occurrence for R'Si continues through the next

strata of the literature, those of the Mantra Language and SaMhitaa

Prose.76 However, by the time of the BraahmaNa Prose, the surge in

usage of R'Si found in the Atharva Veda recensions tapers off

dramatically in correspondence to the increase of brahmÃ¡n (cf. below)

with 19 total occasions of singular and plural in the Aitareya

BraahmaNa and a mere 16 in the whole of the Shatapatha BraahmaNa.

For vÃpra and kavÃ the decrease in use is considerably more

pronounced. VÃpra virtually disappears with only a handful of

occasions throughout the later periods of the literature.77 KavÃ

decreases gradually through the Mantra Language and SaMhitaa Prose,

but is also virtually absent by the time of the BraahmaNas.78 By

contrast, the increase in frequency for brahmÃ¡n becomes pronounced in

the Shatapatha BraahmaNa where there are 51 nominative singulars as

opposed to the scattered few occasions of vÃpra, kavÃ, and R'Si.79

Thus we have two basic groups of liturgists: those who are

consistently mentioned throughout the RV and the subsequent

literature--R'Si and brahmÃ¡n--and those who are prominent in the RV

and decrease significantly in the later literature--kavÃ and vÃpra.

This is not surprising as each liturgist term--with the slight

exception of kavÃ and vÃpra--is almost completely nonexistent in the

semantic fields that surround brÃ¡hman.80 During this period of

composition of the Family Books it was not necessary for the

poet--prior to the Adhvaryu rivalry--to self-consciously validate his

efficacy in generating brÃ¡hman. Not only do kavÃ and vÃpra present

several exceptions to the overall absence of liturgist words in the

semantic fields surrounding brÃ¡hman, both terms for liturgist are

treated differently in RV 7 and 3.81 The feuding Vishvaamitras (RV 3)

and VasiSThas (RV 7) differ with respect to how the mental processes

function for the different liturgists. The role of -man is central to

the act of the kavÃ's and vÃpra's in RV 3 but entirely peripheral for

RV 7 suggesting the possible

earlier period for most of the hymns of RV 7 as opposed to RV 3.82 In

the following analysis, I will be paying close attention to those

differences between the Vishvaamitras and VasiSThas which bear upon

the chronological precedence of one book over the other so that it

will be possible to ascertain such a diachronic change within the

otherwise fairly contemporaneous--insofar as current research

suggests--Family Books.

Neither RV 3 nor RV 7 include kavÃ in the semantic field with

brÃ¡hman in spite of the fact that kavÃ is the predominant word for

liturgist in the RV. By far the predominant word for religious

functionary throughout the RV is kavÃ which we find 297 times, of

which 113 are in the Family Books and, of the remaining 184 in the

later books, 71 are found in RV 9. When kavÃ is present within the

same verse as brÃ¡hman, it is clear that other words--e.g. in 5.39.5b

ukthÃ¡m, 4.36.7b stÃ³mo, 2.5.3b vÃ³cad--suggest the speaking or praising

while brÃ¡hman designates the energy or power these praises invoke.

Generally, brÃ¡hman has an indirect relation--not in the immediate

semantic field, nor connected grammatically--when it occurs in the

same verse with words for the actions of prayer, or the words for the

poets themselves, as in the later hymn 2.23.1 (cf. note 3 above,

Witzel, 1995b):

gaNaÃ¡naaM tvaa gaNÃ¡patiM havaamahe kavÃM kaviinaÃ¡m upamÃ¡ shravastamam

| jyeSTharaÃ¡jam brÃ¡hmaNaam brahmaNaspata aÃ¡ naH shRNvÃ¡nn uutÃbhiH

siida saÃ¡danam ||

" Leader of the troops we worship you, KavÃ of the KavÃ's highest

reknown; BrahmaNaspati (cf. note 3 above), king of pure energy pay

attention to us with protection and sit at this recitation (of

praise). " 83 Here, in the language of the gods with the refernce to

BrahmaNaspati, the sense of brÃ¡hman as pure energy applies.

?

The one occasion in which kavÃ is in the immediate semantic field

of brÃ¡hman is 6.16.30, part of a lengthy praise to Agni as all manner

of protector, hero, provider, invoker, and so forth.

tvÃ¡M naH paahy Ã¡Mhaso jaÃ¡tavedo aghaayatÃ¡H | rÃ¡kSaa No brahmaNas kave ||

" Protect us from trouble; from injury JaÃ¡tavedas, guard us, KavÃ of

pure energy. " 84 The hymn also contains R'Si as a proper name

(6.16.14a, tÃ¡m u tvaa dadhyaÃ¡ R'SiH) and a verse on the offering of

praises/suSTutÃm by a vÃpra (6.16.6c, shRNÃ¡n vÃprasya suSTutÃm). BrÃ¡hman

does not necessitate either a prayer or a priest in order to perform

its invigorating, strengthening role. There seems to be a pattern with

brÃ¡hman when used in language referring to the divine realm--as here

of Jaatavedas, or in 2.23.1 with BrahmaNaspati, or below in 6.35.1

with Indra--suggesting that it is better translated as pure energy.

This is attested also in 5.31.4 and 11, discussed below, where Indra

is expressly strengthened by brÃ¡hman.

?

Turning now to the occasions of vÃpra, the independence of brÃ¡hman

is additionally clear in the Family Books wherein the semantic fields

of brÃ¡hman rarely contain any word for a liturgist or hymn. Instead,

brÃ¡hman is clearly self-efficacious. For instance, RV 6.35.5d, in

praise of Indra, suggests that by brÃ¡hman something is bestowed or

impelled/jinva upon the intended object:

aa^NgirasaÃ¡n brÃ¡hmaNaa vipra jinva

" VÃpra: impel the A^Ngirases with pure energy. " Indra is the VÃpra,

and " pure energy " works perfectly in this instance of the language of

the gods. The hymn begins with a query as to when this brÃ¡hman will

come to Indra's side 6.35.1 (see discussion below also re. dhÃyaH

which is still uncommon in semantic fields with brÃ¡hman in the Family

Books):

kadaÃ¡ bhuvan rÃ¡thakSayaaNi brÃ¡hma kadaÃ¡ stotrÃ© sahasrapoSyÃ M daaH |

kadaÃ¡ stÃ³maM vaasayo 'sya raayaÃ¡ kadaÃ¡ dhÃyaH karasi vaÃ¡jaratnaaH ||

" When will that pure energy come to be beside you in your chariot?

When is the thousandfold abundance given in the praise/stotrÃ¡? When

will you sweeten this praise with wealth? When will you complete this

devotion with richness in treasure? " 85

Next we must consider the unique treatement of vÃpra by the

VasiSTha's. RV 7 contains almost every occasion where brÃ¡hman is found

in the semantic field with vÃpra in the Family Books. The five

occasions of vÃpra in the semantic field with brÃ¡hman in RV 7 include

three within the same paada and two within the same verse.86

?

While the basic sense of brÃ¡hman as pure or poetic energy is not

replaced in these cases, it is also clear that the VasiSThas view the

ability to bestow or invoke that energy quite differently than the

other families of MaNDalas 2-6 (who do not use vÃpra with brÃ¡hman

except in 6.35.5, above). When vÃpra is used with brÃ¡hman the emphasis

is upon the verbal aspect of brÃ¡hman. Typical of the relation between

brÃ¡hman and the bidding of the vÃpra is 7.31.11b (cf. semantic field

of 7.22.9b immediately below):

uruvyÃ¡case mahÃne suvRktÃm Ãndraaya brÃ¡hma janayanta vÃpraaH |

" In great widening spaces, the VÃpras are generating excellent praise

and formulations for Indra. " 87 Translating brÃ¡hman only as prayer--or

even solely as power of prayer or sacred word--does not take into

account the frequent usage of other words--arkÃ¡, ukthÃ¡, gÃr, -stu

derivatives--in its semantic field which more directly designate the

hymn, prayer, or praise (cf. 6.35.1a-b above with stotrÃ©). BrÃ¡hman is

more a force, an extensive reservoir to which the vÃpra has special

access for the VasiSTha poets. The situation is similar in 7.43.1c-d:

yÃ©Saam brÃ¡hmaaNy Ã¡samaani vÃpraa vÃSvag viyÃ¡nti vanÃno nÃ¡ shaÃ¡khaaH |

" Among the unequaled VÃpra formulas, like a tree's branches, which

part in all directions. " 88 BrÃ¡hman is unquestionably a product of a

hymn, and many words for hymn are found in its semantic field. But the

power signified in the word brÃ¡hman is independent of a priest or his

utterance and is thus invoked separately.

An additional perspective upon vÃpra is afforded by one of only

two occasions in the whole of the Family Books (both in RV 7) wherein

we find R'Si in the semantic field surrounding brÃ¡hman, RV 7.22.9a-b

yÃ© ca puÃºrva R'Sayo yÃ© ca nuÃºtnaa indra brÃ¡hmaaNi janÃ¡yanta vÃpraaH |

" Among those R'Si's from before and among those newly arising, Indra,

the VÃpras are generating formulas. " 89 Earlier in the hymn the

VasiSTha specifically draws Indra's attention to the praise from his

clan in a hymn less focused upon praise of Indra than upon imploring

Indra's attention to the praiser. The vÃpras are singled out in this

passage among the R'Sis--both old and new--according to their special

distinction as those who generate brÃ¡hman as underscored by an

association of nominative plurals afforded by the relative clauses in

yÃ©. This is appropriate for a hymn in which the concern is the

viability of the offerer of prayers as providing

vÃ¡rdhanaa/strengthening brÃ¡hmaaNi/powers (7.22.7b). This also marks an

indication of the growing significance of the R'Si which, by the time

of BraahmaNa Prose is dramatically replaced by the brahmÃ¡n. However,

in this portion of the Family Books, the ability to generate brÃ¡hman

is clearly a trait of the vÃpra for the VasiSTha's who, along with the

Vishvaamatra's of RV 3, are the two families most frequently using

this liturgist term. The Vishvaamitra's never attribute production of

brÃ¡hman to any of the four

kinds of liturgists--R'Si, kavÃ, vÃpra, or brahmÃ¡n--an issue to which

I will return in the section below addressing mental powers. It will

become apparent that the abstract meaning of brÃ¡hman as a potency or

power in prayer existed independent of its invoking by any of the

various priests and was, instead, always inherently connoted in its

meaning.

?

We can clearly see how this has facilitated the more commonly--and

too broadly assigned--meaning for brÃ¡hman as prayer or sacred speech

in those contexts where the masculine brahmÃ¡n is also found. RV

5.31.4c-d and 10c-d provide a clear comparison, sharing similar

semantic fields in a discussion of increasing Indra's strength. In

4c-d it is the songs/arkaÃr of the priests/brahmaÃ¡Na coming to Indra's

aid:

brahmaÃ¡Na Ãndram mahÃ¡yanto arkaÃr

Ã¡vardhayann Ã¡haye hÃ¡ntavaÃ¡ u ||

" BrahmÃ¡ns by their praise glorifying Indra increased him for killing

Ahi. " It is via the arkaÃr, not the priest himself, that the BrahmÃ¡ns

are empowering Indra. The use of kavÃ in the semantic field of the

following verse from later in the same hymn provides additional

verification of brÃ¡hman and not the religious functionary as a power

which can be present when there is neither arkÃ¡ or liturgist (the kavÃ

exits!). Note that it is the existence of brÃ¡hman within or by means

of the arkÃ¡ which manifests the tÃ¡viSiim/power, as indicated in 10c-d:

vaÃ¡tasya yuktaÃ¡n suyÃºjash cid Ã¡shvaan kavÃsh cid eSÃ³ ajagann avasyÃºH |

vÃshve te Ã¡tra marÃºtaH sÃ¡khaaya Ãndra

brÃ¡hmaaNi tÃ¡viSiim avardhan ||

" VaÃ¡ta's yoked horses--all well-joined--even this KavÃ has left to

find help; here are all your friends the Maruts, Indra, these

formulations have you increased your strength. " 90 BrÃ¡hmaaNi--the

nominative plural form--makes clear from where the increase (avardhan

from -vrdh) has come. Even in 5.31.4c-d it is apparent that more than

the brahmÃ¡n himself, it is the potency/brÃ¡hman of their praise/arkÃ¡ir

that bestows the power upon Indra.

In 5.31.10 this is adumbrated. The kavÃ is likely UshÃ¡nas,

labelled " already a half-mythic figure " by the time of the RV

according to Macdonell and Keith (1912, I: 103). Even the great

UshÃ¡nas who called Indra and Kutsa in the past does not bestow brÃ¡hman

upon Indra: he leaves while the arrival of the Maruts affirms Indra's

increased power. UshÃ¡nas is frequently related to Indra and

Kutsa--both of whom are discussed in

5.31.891-9 --and it is UshÃ¡nas who calls upon Indra to carry Kutsa (a

hero, with a checkered past92 and " mythical " status by the time of the

RV [MacDonnell and Keith, 1912, I: 161]; see also note 165) to his

home. UshÃ¡nas also has something of a checkered existence, at times on

Indra's side--as in this hymn (5.31.8)--or Purohita to the Asuras

according to the Taittiriiya SaMhitaa (2.5.8.5) in contradistinction

to Agni, the messenger of the gods. It is also in the later literature

that the recruiting of UshÃ¡nas from the Asuras was an important act by

Indra (Jaiminiiya BraahmaNa 1.126) for the gaining of brÃ¡hman.93

In 5.31.10b the kavÃ " exits " the field of action. Either Kutsa or

UshÃ¡nas is signified in the word, and both individuals rise to

unambiguous import through the actions of Indra in later Saama Veda

BraahmaNa narratives (e.g. JB 1.125, PB 7.5.20, etc.; cf. note 30)

with specific relation to the words aatmÃ¡n and brÃ¡hman. Significantly,

the term kavÃ also exits by the time of these same narratives.

Aside from these issues regarding the kavÃ of 5.31.10, it becomes

clear in the development of brahmÃ¡n that it does not become a common

term until the later portions of the RV as noted statistically

above--and as will be discussed in more detail in the next chapter--it

played no part in the Kutsa/UshÃ¡nas mythology, which is more ancient.

?

As in 5.31.4, the brahmÃ¡n is usually a functionary of ritual, offering

prayers, or participating in yajÃ±a as in 2.1.2, where Agni is praised

metaphorically as priest with a variety of sacrificial roles:

tÃ¡vaagne hotrÃ¡M tÃ¡va potrÃ¡m RtvÃyaM tÃ¡va neSTrÃ¡M tvÃ¡m agnÃd RtaayatÃ¡H

| tÃ¡va prashaastrÃ¡M tvÃ¡m adhvariiyasi brahmaÃ¡ caÃ¡si gRhÃ¡patish ca no

dÃ¡me ||

" Agni you are the HotR, you are the PotR, rightly sacrificing; you are

the NeSTR, the pyrotechnicist, maintainer of the sacrificial

prescriptions; you are praised, you the Advaryu; you are BrahmÃ¡n and

master of our home. " While this semantic field is predominantly

sacrificial (i.e. extensive enumeration of priests)--the only semantic

field with such a detailed catalogue of liturgists in which we find

brahmÃ¡n in the Family Books--it is consistent for brahmÃ¡n to be used

to indicate a ritual functionary who offers prayers.94

?

Similar to the example in 5.31, the power or significance of the

brahmÃ¡n is dependent upon his ability to effectively use brÃ¡hman. The

relative infrequency of brahmÃ¡n (17 occasions) as opposed to brÃ¡hman

(165 occasions) in the Family Books confirms that the importance of

the power of the prayer was always greater than that of the pray-er.

This is apparent where both words are found in each other's semantic

field. The Family Books contain one occasion where both brÃ¡hman and

brahmÃ¡n are in the same verse. In the case of RV 6.45.7a-b, they share

the same paada in praise of Indra (also, in the same verse, 7.33.11):

brahmaÃ¡Nam brÃ¡hmavaahasaM

giirbhÃH sÃ¡khaayam RgmÃyam |

gaÃ¡M nÃ¡ dohÃ¡se huve ||

" Like a cow to be milked I worship the Priest (Indra) who has powerful

offerings, the friend to be celebrated with praises. " 95 Using

metonymy,96 Indra is implied by brahmÃ¿aÃ¡Nam/priest, and his boons of

gifts (milk) are enabled by the empowered offerings to him

(brÃ¡hmavaahasaM).97 The act of vocalizing, of addressing Indra is

denoted with giirbhÃh and huve.

This utilitarian conception of the relation of the prayer to the

offerer of prayer provides the only occasion of brahmÃ¡n in the whole

of RV 6.98 ShaMyu Baarhaspatya (Van Nooten and Holland, 1994: 266), is

credited as the seer who perceived in its most straightforward nature

the completion of the sacrifice (shaMyurha99 vai baarhaspatyo '^Njasaa

yajÃ±asya saMsthaaM vidaa^Ncakaara, ShB 1.9.1.25 and ff.) Accordingly,

in 6.45, the hymn is littered with admonitions about making a hymn

efficaciousas in verse 7 for employing the powerful offerings

carried/brÃ¡hmavaahasaM by Indraas well as references to competition

among praisers (6.45.29):

puruutÃ¡mam puruuNaÃ¡M stotrr'NaÃ¡M vÃvaaci | vaÃ¡jebhir vaajayataÃ¡m ||

" O early/first-invoked among the many contending praisers, bellowing

for wealth. " 100 And the hymn continues its self-advocacy in 6.45.29:

asmaÃ¡kam indra bhuutu te stÃ³mo vaÃ¡hiSTho Ã¡ntamaH | asmaÃ¡n raayÃ© mahÃ©

hinu ||

" Among ours, Indra, may the praises of you be carried most near; for

you to send forth great wealth to us. " 101 Further underscoring the

independence of brÃ¡hman, each of the three occasions of brÃ¡hmavaahasaM

in the RV include a separate word denoting the praise (6.45.4: Ã¡rcata,

gaayata; 45.7: giirbhÃH, huve; and 45.19: huve). It is clear that

speech in various forms--invocation, praise, song--is not the only

thing signified by the use

of brÃ¡hman in the Family Books. Instead, brÃ¡hman is present when this

speech is rightly formed by a virtuous priest. There can be praise or

song, but only if righteousness/R'ta is there will brÃ¡hman be able to

effect an intent. In fact, the song or hymn must be put together with

the praise, as seen below in RV 6.38.

?

RV 6.38.3-4 offers nearly every term for prayer, affording the

opportunity to both summarize our discussion of brÃ¡hman with -dhii as

well as move on to the occasions where -man is found in the semantic

field with brÃ¡hman. The proliferation of words for prayer within both

the immediate and wider semantic fields surrounding brÃ¡hman make clear

the independent nature of power it bestows. The hymn is directed to

Indra, with particular attention to the results of a well-articulated

prayer for pleasing the deity, underscored in verses 3-4:

tÃ¡M vo dhiyaÃ¡ paramÃ¡yaa puraajaÃ¡m ajÃ¡ram Ãndram abhy Ã nuuSy arkaÃH |

brÃ¡hmaa ca gÃro dadhirÃ© sÃ¡m asmin mahaÃ¡Msh ca stÃ³mo Ã¡dhi vardhad Ãndre

|| 3 || vÃ¡rdhaad yÃ¡M yajÃ±Ã¡ utÃ¡ sÃ³ma ÃndraM vÃ¡rdhaad brÃ¡hma gÃra

ukthaÃ¡

ca mÃ¡nma | vÃ¡rdhaÃ¡hainam uSÃ¡so yaÃ¡mann aktÃ³r vÃ¡rdhaan maÃ¡saaH sharÃ¡do

dyaÃ¡va Ãndram || 4 ||

" To him, primeval and undecaying Indra, I effuse these excellent

devotions and praises; pure energy and song are put together in this

laud, let greatness and eulogy praise Indra. Indra, whom the sacrifice

and the Soma strengthen; pure energy, song, praise, and petitions

strengthen; strengthen indeed this dawn/USa fleeing from darkness;

Indra strengthened from months, autumns, and days. " 102 In this case,

even without the passage being purely the language of the gods, it is

very clear that brÃ¡hman is an addition to the other purely

speech-related acts.

In 6.38.3c the upasarga sÃ¡m with dadhirÃ© with the locative

pronoun asmin, indicating a point of deixis with immediate proximity,

reiterate the separate character of brÃ¡hma and gÃro such that they

must be " put together. " In 4b the close relation of brÃ¡hman to prayer

is indicated by the list with gÃra, again, and also ukthaÃ¡, and mÃ¡nma.

But these are not synonyms-- each is a particular component of the

worship experience: gÃra, the speaking of the invocation (from -grr/to

call out); ukthaÃ¡, the verse or sentence uttered; mÃ¡nma, the mental

intent in the utterance, and brÃ¡hman, the empowering element. The

passage is an anatomy of the

appropriate elements of efficacious worship--in this case to

strengthen Indra/vÃ¡rdhaan.

The mental component of the prayer, mÃ¡nma, is often associated

with brÃ¡hman and the acts of vocal worship throughout the later

tradition. The other primary term for mental processes which we see

with brÃ¡hman is -dhii. Much less frequent are -cit and -budh. Words

for mental processes are extremely rare with R'Si--4 each of -man and

-dhii and never in RV 3 or 7. With vÃpra and kavÃ, only RV 3, 6, and 7

show any frequency of -man and -dhii. As we will see below, the

overall prevalence of mental faculties in the composition of hymns by

kavÃ's and vÃpra's in RV 3 is an innovation which is more common in

the later portions of the RV. For the balance of the Family Books,

however, brÃ¡hman is neither dependent upon the priests, nor upon

mental effort for the power it bestows. The priests, in turn, must

display appropriate devotion and piety or brÃ¡hman will not be

attendant upon their prayers (cf. 7.61.2 below).

brÃ¡hman in Relation to the Mental Faculties

?

Throughout the passages that include brÃ¡hman, we see the

characteristic meaning of an empowering force which is concurrent with

prayer and distinctly not autochthonous in its relation to it. This is

borne out in the handful of occasions wherein words signifying mental

processes and words frequently associated with prayer or even

denotative of its formulation (e.g. mÃ¡nmaani, dhiitÃ), are found in

the immediate semantic field of brÃ¡hman.

As brÃ¡hman is commonly associated with prayer--but not, as shown

above, as a necessary trait or possession of the various priests--it

is important to examine the occasions of words for mental processes

frequently associated with worship to gain a clearer picture of the

relationship of brÃ¡hman and prayer. In short, the roots -budh/to

become alert or aware and -cit/to think or notice are used

infrequently with brÃ¡hman and, where they do occur, denote the

attention of the deity in response to the worshipper. The two most

frequent terms which connote mental processes with the word brÃ¡hman

throughout the Family Books and the later portions of the RV, are

-dhii/to wish or reflect, and -man/to think or posit.

That brÃ¡hman is not a mental process of perception or

awareness--as might be expected were it connotative of prayer--is

indicated when -cit and -budh are used with it. The examples are

limited for drawing broad inferences (2.2.10, 2.34.7, and, in a pair

of verses, 6.17.2d-3b for -cit;

2.16.7, 3.51.6, and 7.22.3 for -budh). In addition, if brÃ¡hman were

primarily a " prayer word " , it would frequently be the result of the

intent of mental effort or will/krÃ¡tu. In point of fact, there are

only two occasions of brÃ¡hman with krÃ¡tu, both in 7.61.2, to be

discussed below. As a mental force or intent, krÃ¡tu is revisited below

in the discussion of tanuÃº where it is found much more frequently.

?

With brÃ¡hman, however, the only mental actions with which it is

somewhat frequently associated in the Family Books--though much more

in the later RV--are those with -man and, to a lesser extent, -dhii.

When brÃ¡hman includes -dhii in its semantic field, we find two

predominant forms in the Family Books: dhiÃra/intelligent or wise, and

dhiÃ/ religious thought, devotion. Accordingly, the distinction

between brÃ¡hman as the power of prayer and the prayer itself is

underscored, as seen above with 6.35.1:

kadaÃ¡ bhuvan rÃ¡thakSayaaNi brÃ¡hma kadaÃ¡ stotrÃ© sahasrapoSyÃ M daaH |

kadaÃ¡ stÃ³maM vaasayo 'sya raayaÃ¡ kadaÃ¡ dhÃyaH karasi vaÃ¡jaratnaaH ||

" When will that pure energy come to be beside you in your chariot?

When is the thousandfold abundance given in the praise/stotrÃ¡? When

will you sweeten this praise with wealth? When will you complete this

devotion with richness of treasure? "

?

We do not find derivatives of -dhii in the immediate semantic field of

brÃ¡hman in the Family books, but many of the occasions of larger

shared semantic fields do bear upon occasions of prayer, as in 6.35.

This serves the current argument as here with RV 7.97.9:

iyÃ¡M vaam brahmaNaspate suvRktÃr brÃ¡hmÃ©ndraaya vajrÃNe akaari |

aviSTÃ¡M dhÃyo jigRtÃ¡m pÃºraMdhiir jajastÃ¡m aryÃ³ vanÃºSaam Ã¡raatiiH ||

" For both of you, BrahmaNaspati, and for the thunderbolt-wielding

Indra, this excellent hymn/suvRktÃr, formulation, has been fashioned;

impel these prayers, now you've awakened bounty, exhaust the

wants/envies of the jealous ones toward the favorable one/aryÃ³. " 103

The final verse calls upon the empowered devotions to exhaust the

desires or envies of the Arya's foe.104 It is brÃ¡hman which

invigorates the devotions/dhÃyo with their potency to accomplish these

ends. This is also indicative of brÃ¡hman in the language of humans as

the formula is spoken of as fashioned by the priest. If the foe is no

longer envious, or wanting, it is accordingly no

longer a threat.

?

Many elements of the semantic field in 7.97.9 are found in the formula

which closes hymns 4.16-17 and 4.19-24. Again, there are many words

for prayer and it is the existence or absence of brÃ¡hman that serves

to designate their potency (4.16.21, 4.17.21, 4.19.11, 4.20.11, etc.):

nuÃº STutÃ¡ indra nuÃº gRNaanÃ¡ ÃSaM jaritrÃ© nadyÃ² nÃ¡ piipeH | Ã¡kaari te

harivo brÃ¡hma nÃ¡vyaM dhiyaÃ¡ syaama rathyÃ H sadaasaÃ¡H ||

" Now celebrated Indra, just now invoked, let nourishment flow for the

singer like a river, this new formula has been fashioned for you,

driver of golden horses (Soma?- cf. GraÃŸmann, 1996: 1651), by devotion

may we be always the dominant charioteers. " 105 In this case it is very

hard to separate brÃ¡hman from speech. As I am suggesting below, RV

7.97 shows signs of being a later hymn which would, in turn, support

the unmistakable sense of formulated speech in this passage.

The cycle in which we find this formula is one of warrior hymns,

repeatedly invoking the vigorous powers of Indra setting forth the

waters, conquering VRtra, and enabling a bounty of spoils. These

spoils, not surprisingly, are requested to flow forth for the warriors

like the waters. The " new power, " or brÃ¡hman, that has been fashioned

refreshes this inherent potency in Indra, and the act of verbal

devotion which conveys it serves to direct the potency manifested in

the reference to the legendary Indra to effect similar battlefield

ends in the present.106

In the other Family Books, where an absence of vÃpra in the

semantic field surrounding brÃ¡hman has already been noted, it is the

mental faculties of the mind in forms of -man (8 times in RV 3--

3.5.3; 3.8.5; 3.11.8; 3.14.5; 3.31.5; and 3.50.4--and 2 times out of

the total 8 occasions of vÃpra in RV 4-- 4.3.16; 4.26.1) and of

perception in the forms of -dhii (8 occasions scattered through RV

2-6: 2.11.12; 3.27.8; 4.50.1; 5.41.6; 5.81.1; and 6.50.10) which are

also more frequent than brÃ¡hman in the semantic fields of vÃpra. As

noted above (cf. note 82), the use of -man in RV 3 with both vÃpra and

kavÃ is quite pronounced, in greatest contrast to RV 7, but also in

marked contrast to each of the other Family Books. It is primarily in

the later portions of the RV that we see the forms of -man and -dhii

regularly associated with brÃ¡hman (Chapter 5). Both -budh and -cit are

present in only a handful of occasions in all of the Family Books and

the later RV combined. In the later RV, then, -man and -dhii become

prominent in the semantic fields surrounding brÃ¡hman in the later RV

which coincides, in turn, with an increasingly inextricable

association between brÃ¡hman and speech, in which the meaning suggested

by Thieme (1952: 103), " formulated speech " becomes quite prominent.

The prevalence of -man and -dhii with brÃ¡hman over -cit and -budh

makes sense considering that, as noted in Chapter 1, -cit and -budh

are mental processes that are more connotative of a spontaneous reflex

than are -man and -dhii which represent the more deliberate thought

processes which would logically associate themselves with the

formulation of sacred speech. The VasiSTha's of the 7th MaNDala

attribute brÃ¡hman to the actions of the vÃpra more than to the mental

intent represented in -man107 and -dhii as we see in RV 3.

?

Another word related to mental processes which must be considered

is krÃ¡tu. What is immediately worth noting is the extreme paucity of

occasions where krÃ¡tu--a word for mental effort or will--is found in

the semantic fields around brÃ¡hman (twice, in RV 7.28 and 7.61,

discussed immediately below).

?

This is consistent with the argument here that the empowerment

afforded by brÃ¡hman is independent of--though at times associated

with--the individual's effort or that of a deity. In 7.28.2, brÃ¡hma

and krÃ¡tvaa are not in the immediate semantic field of each other

(7.28.2b and d, respectively) and the praise of Indra in which they

are found is simply enumerating attributes of the deity. RV 7.61.2 has

two instances of krÃ¡tu:

prÃ¡ vaaM sÃ¡ mitraavaruNaav RtaÃ¡vaa vÃpro mÃ¡nmaani diirghashrÃºd iyarti

| yÃ¡sya brÃ¡hmaaNi sukratuu Ã¡vaatha aÃ¡ yÃ¡t krÃ¡tvaa nÃ¡ sharÃ¡daH pRNaÃthe

||

" Before you two, Mitra-VaruNa, this holy vÃpra heard far and wide

raises petitions; whose skillful formulations please you, which you

fulfill like the autumn harvest (krÃ¡tu: purpose). " Cf. Elizarenkova

" To the both of you, O Mitra-VaruNa, this pious / Poet addresses (his)

compositions, (he) the far-heard (one) " (1995: 55).108 The empowering

effect of a pious vÃpra would naturally reap rewards: a harvest of

boons. Similarly, later in the same hymn (7.61.6c-d), a slew of

first-person singular imperatives in -aani express the poet's effort

to direct new praises to Mitra-VaruNa with the intent to please with

the exaltation in them (prÃ¡ vaam mÃ¡nmaany RcÃ¡se nÃ¡vaani kRtaÃ¡ni brÃ¡hma

jujuSann imaÃ¡ni ). Thieme discusses the association between RtÃ¡ and

brÃ¡hman as a later development where brÃ¡hman comes to mean " Formung

(Wahrheits-) Formulierung " more

than, as in the RV, " Formung (dichterische) Formulierung " (1952: 117).

Of course, in this hymn the association is not direct, rather it is

the RtÃ¡ of the vÃpra that is mentioned. As Arnold, Oldenberg, et. al.,

do not suggest this hymn as later, it seems that this is not the case

as of this point in the Family Books.

?

The semantic field confirms the sense of brÃ¡hman as a bestower or

enabler of pure or poetic energy and power, but it is somewhat

ambiguous as to the autochthony of this empowering capacity. As

observed above, the vÃpra accesses the power by prayers/mÃ¡nmaani, but

does not generate it. The vÃpra is not uttering brÃ¡hmaaNi, he is

raising/iyarti petitions--positing intentions--mÃ¡nmaani, the skillful

empowerments/exaltations (brÃ¡hmaaNi sukrÃ¡tu) of which/yÃ¡sya will bring

forth the fulfillment or satisfaction/pRNaÃthe which is like a

harvest--krÃ¡tvaa nÃ¡ sharÃ¡daH. When Elizarenkova discusses this verse,

it is in connection with a semantic exposition of RtaÃ¡vaa--one who

supports or conforms to the law, i.e. is pious. Thus it is not simply

the mÃ¡nmaani--basically a repeatable formula--which is important. It

is the special factor that, coming from a vÃpra who is RtaÃ¡vaa, the

mÃ¡nmaani are specially endowed with power/brÃ¡hmaaNi sukrÃ¡tu.

The mechanism--or medium--of this exchange and interraction is

completely lost in the case of any subsequent scholarship or bhaashya

which does not understand that the gods and humans were part of an

interconnected continuum. This continuum--or " spread/expanse " --of

divine and human realms is facillitated by the hitherto unnoticed

notion of the self in the early Rig Veda: that designated by tanuÃº

(cf. overview of terminology with tanuÃº in Chapter 2, and the findings

beginning with Chapter 4). First, however, there is more to be learned

about brÃ¡hman in the Family Books.

King of Prayer, Father of Prayer: BrahmaNaspati and BRhaspati

?

I am attending to both deities at length in this section for

several reasons. First, because the name of one of

them--BrahmaNaspati--contains one of the more frequent occurrences of

the key word, brÃ¡hman (33 of 37 genitives for neuter brÃ¡hman in the RV

are part of the designation BrahmaNaspatiH, [MacDonell, 1898: 24]).

Second, the function of brÃ¡hman when used with either deity provides

useful information which underscores the independent nature of the

power which brÃ¡hman represents. In addition to the role of BRhaspati

and BrahmaNaspati (later, in 7.97, Indra as well), as the king or

father of prayer, BRhaspati also gives brÃ¡hman easy passage to the

gods (7.97.8). Third, the examination of the hymns below reveals

additional information about earlier and later additions to the RV.

Macdonell sees no distinction between the two deities in the RV,

but notes occasions where both terms are found in the same hymn, as in

RV 2.23--click here to open an image of RV 2.23 in separate window for

reference in the following discussion--(1898: 36; 101). Keith suggests

that BrahmaNaspati is identical with BRhaspati, " lord of prayer, " and

spouse--a duty shared with Soma--to AAditi (1925: 65; 82; 162).

Hillebrandt, following Bergaigne (1878, I: 299-

300) also believes they have an identical nature, with BrahmaNaspati

being something of a secondary side-kick to the more primary term

BRhaspati (1891: 100; 107). Hillebrandt109 considers BrahmaNaspati to

be simply a gloss--both terms designate the sacrificial fire in their

semantic origins. Oldenberg follows suit, suggesting they are

" obviously synonymous " (1888: 45).

I disagree with this simplification. There is reason not only to

grant a distinction between them, but also to identify a process of

development where BRhaspati replaces BrahmaNaspati by taking on his

characteristics. The distinction between both deities seems to involve

BRhaspati as the more active deity who is closer in his actions to the

human realm whether in battle or as a friend (7.97--click here to open

an image of RV 7.97 in separate window for reference in the following

discussion--) or as the noise of thunder giving gifts (4.50--click

here to open an image of RV 4.50 in separate window for reference in

the following discussion--). Throughout RV 2.23, BRhaspati is the more

active, striking, quelling, punishing, destroying foes (2.23.3, 4, 6,

8, 13, 14, and 18), on the one hand; and giving access to the gods,

protecting, or bestowing wealth on the other (2.23.7, 12, 15).

BrahmaNaspati, following 2.23.1, is both protector, giver of wealth,

and controller of the hymn (2.23.5, 9, 19). He also shares some of

Brhaspati's designations as driver away of evil, avenger of sin, and

of guilt (2.23.5, 9, 11). Still, even here, there are distinctions.

With regard to driving away the wicked, BrahmaNaspati is the

avenger/RNayaÃ¡ in 2.23.11c of sin and he tames/damitaÃ¡ the wild and

intense/viiLuharSÃNaH (Ã¡si satyÃ¡ RNayaÃ¡ brahmaNas pata ugrÃ¡sya cid

damitaÃ¡ viiLuharSÃNaH).

Yaaska also appears to support a clearer distinction. In N 10.11,

BRhaspati is so named as the preserver or protector (from -paa/paataa)

of what is great (bRhaspatir bRhataH paataa vaa). In contrast,

BrahmaNaspati is so named as the protector of the brÃ¡hman (N 10.12:

brahmaNaspatir brahmaNaH paataa vaa)--I am assuming, in the absence of

accent in Yaaska's prose--that it is the neuter brÃ¡hman that he

intends. Following this identification of BrahmaNaspati, Yaaska's

justification in N 10.13 cites RV 2.24.4--click here to open an image

of RV 2.24 in separate window for reference in the following

discussion--which praises BrahmaNaspati as he is associated with the

flowing forth of waters, of might, and of power, and light (cf. the

dawn is his spouse).

Yaaska's citation in support of BRhaspati as protector of what is

great comes from the later portions of the RV, 10.68.8. It is

interesting to note that in the hymn where several verses are

considered to be later--2.23.6-8 (Oldenberg, 1888; Witzel,

1995b)--BRhaspati is associated with the sun (2.23.2) and with the

flowing waters (2.23.18) though the actual vocabulary

in 2.23.2 and 18 is quite different from 2.24.4 (possibly attributable

to the later date of 2.23, cf. below). Even though Witzel (1989) and

Oldenberg (1888) suggest 2.23.6-8 as belonging to the later portions,

I would suggest that the changes in content with 2.24 indicate that

the entire hymn is of substantially later in origin (cf.Arnold, 1897:

212).

Throughout the RV, BRhaspati outnumbers BrahmaNaspati 2:1 (cf.

MacDonell, 1898: 101). It is quite reasonable that BRhaspati and

BrahmaNaspati are considered synonymous by scholars due to the fact

that in the later period BRhaspati supplants or adopts the functions

and characteristics of BrahmaNaspati. The replacement is indicated as

well by the continued decrease in frequency of BrahmaNaspati in

comparison with BRhaspati throughout the later literature (Bandhu,

1959, IV: 2302ff). The evidence of the other occasions where we find

both words in the same hymn does not argue against this hypothesis. In

RV 7.97, a hymn to BRhaspati, notice that, of the two verses to

BrahmaNaspati (7.97.3 and 9), the distinction of supreme king of

prayers accorded to BrahmaNaspati in 2.23.1c (jyeSTaraÃ¡jam brÃ¡hmaNaam

brahmaNas pata) is accorded instead to Indra in 7.97.3--a verse which

is nonetheless addressed to BrahmaNaspati (ÃndraM shlÃ³ko mÃ¡hi daÃvyaH

siSadktu yÃ³ brÃ¡hmaNo devÃ¡kRtasya raÃ¡jaa). BrahmaNaspati and BRhaspati

are both addressed for wealth, but they furnish it differently.

BrahmaNaspati is the means through which it is received (2.23.9),

while BRhaspati is named actively as the giver (2.23.7).

BRhaspati is also the giver in the two references to him in RV

2.24.1 and 10. However, this hymn gives credence to the theory that

BRhaspati replaces BrahmaNaspati as we see a very active BrahmaNaspati

shooting arrows (2.24.8), bringing food and wealth while he is

extolled in battle (2.24.9), encompassing all 2.24.11d (vÃshvÃ©d u taÃ¡

paribhuÃºr brÃ¡hmaNas pÃ¡tiH), is great as paired with Indra (2.24.12),

strong in the brunt of fight 2.24.13c (vaajiÃ samithÃ© brÃ¡hmaNas

pÃ¡tiH), his will does great deeds (2.24.14), and he controls the hymn

and benefactor to children in 2.24.16 (brÃ¡hmaNas pate tvÃ¡m asyÃ¡

yantÃ¿aÃ¡ suuktÃ¡sya bodhi tÃ¡nayaM ca jinva).

Certainly both 2.23 and 24 are almost reverse images of one

another with BRhaspati in 2.23 taking on all the dynamic active roles

in battle which are attributed to BrahmaNaspati in 2.24. RV 2.24 has

only two references to BRhaspati, 2.24.1 and 10, which attest to him

as a gift giver. RV 2.25 and 2.26 also praise BrahmaNaspati alone. In

these hymns BrahmaNaspati per

forms a similar function as he does in 2.24. RV 2.25 has BrahmaNaspati

conquering foes and granting protection (2.25.1, 2, 3), bringing rain

(2.25.4, 5), giving shelter and prosperity (2.25.2, 5) always

reiterating that these boons come for whoever takes him as a friend at

the close of each verse (yÃ¡M-yaM yÃºjaM kRNutÃ© brÃ¡hmaNas pÃ¡tiH). RV

7.97, has the friend of BRhaspati receiving protection (7.97.2), a

dwelling (7.97.6), and refreshment (7.97.7).

It appears that BrahmaNaspati is supplanted over time by

BRhaspati. BRhaspati also shows an active, war-related role most

predominantly in 2.23 where we also find BrahmaNaspati, a later hymn

which reverses the respective roles played by the gods in 2.24.

BrÃ¡hman is more readily associated with BRhaspati--being given

passage by him in 7.97.8. This is perhaps the most significant

development with brÃ¡hman which is illuminated by the close examination

of BRhaspati and BrahmaNaspati. With 7.97 as an arguably later hymn,

this close association of brÃ¡hman and BRhaspati attests not only to

the development of the more metaphysical significations of BRhaspati

as he comes to be known in the BraahmaNa Prose. With brÃ¡hman we see a

clear indication of the change from the relative independence of its

empowering energy to a close association with a deity of speech and

wisdom. This is the first occasion with brÃ¡hman in the Family Books

where it is brÃ¡hman that receives assistance, rather than providing

it. This is characteristic of the god whose role becomes one of a

guardian of knowledge and a divinity with specific relation to the

priests.

Gatherings of R'Sis and vÃpra's attend upon BRhaspati with deep

thought/diÃdhyaanaaH in 4.50, while such intellectual gatherings are

not associated with BrahmaNaspati who is, after all, only the king of

brÃ¡hman, rather than its progenitor. BRhaspati is more typically

associated with wisdom (cf. 1.190 immediately below).

?

The sacrosanct, independent power designated by brÃ¡hman was associated

more with its parent than with its king--a title which seems almost

honorific--such that only its parent could give it passage. Even

later, BrahmaNaspati is the preserver of the course of sacrifice in

1.18--click here to open an image of RV 1.18 in separate window for

reference in the following discussion, but no mention is made of his

protecting brÃ¡hman. Similarly, in 1.40.5 he speaks the mantra (mÃ¡ntraM

vadatyukthyÃ¡m), but brÃ¡hman is not mentioned.

The development of the two deities is even more interesting when

we consider RV 1.190--click here to open an image of RV 1.190 in

separate window for reference in the following discussion. This hymn

falls in the first addition to the RV after the Family Books, and so

is itself quite old. RV 1.190 is an extensive testament

to BRhaspati as leader of the song (1.190.1), giving light (1.190.3),

pervading the earth (1.190.4), he is an easy pathway/supraÃtuH

(1.190.6, cf. especially 7.97.8: sutÃ¡raa sugaadhaÃ¡), and he is the

wise/vidvaÃ¡M, great/mahÃ¡s, strong/tuvijaatÃ¡s, mighty/tÃºviSmaan and

powerful/vRSabhÃ³ (1.190.7-8). These are the characteristics seen in

the hymns such as 7.97 and 4.50 where he is praised apart from

BrahmaNaspati and more according to what--assuming 1.190 is earlier

than 7.97 (we know that both RV 3 and 7 are somewhat later Family

Books) and 4.50--becomes his later ritual significance.

Armed with this information, let us revisit the hypothesis above,

that RV 2.24 represents a " first incursion " of Brhaspati into the

Family Books. This is plausible as the only two verses of the hymn

which address BRhaspati--2.24.1 and 2.24.10--refer to him as one who

is generally beneficent, grants boons, and simply should be loved.

Now, what is most illuminating is how the first verse begins with the

attestation that this is a new and mighty song while still attesting

to the old ways (sÃ©maÃ¡m aviDDhi prÃ¡bhRtiM yÃ¡ Ã¿iÃshiSe 'yaÃ¡ vidhema

nÃ¡vyaa mahaÃ¡ giraÃ¡). Muir cites this as one of 23 occasions where a

hymn is cited as new or old in the Family Books, out of 53 such

occasions throughout the RV (1872, III: 226).

When we look again at 2.24.10, the other verse to BRhaspati, the

" new member " of the pair is again " introduced " as the worshippers are

enjoined to love him/venyÃ¡sya in a passage which even suggests that

two distinct peoples--jÃ¡naa/races, classes; and vÃshaH/settler,

enterer--are both/ubhÃ¡ye standing to benefit/bhuÃ±jatÃ© in doing so

(imaÃ¡ saataÃ¡ni venyÃ¡sya vaajÃno yÃ©na jÃ¡naa ubhÃ¡ye bhuÃ±jatÃ© vÃshaH).

This comparatively tentative introduction is fully reversed in the

later insertion of 2.23 which reverses both the ratio of verses

directed to each deity and the attributes praised. Still, 2.23

represents a substantially more active and embattled BRhaspati than in

the earlier 1.190, and also the intervening hymns before 2.23 (I am

suggesting 4.50 and 7.97 come after 2.24, which is arguably older, and

that they are also prior to 2.23: i.e. first or contemporaneous are

2.24 and 1.190, followed by 4.50 and 7.97, with 2.23 as the latest).

BRhaspati was steadily incorporated into the dynamic roles originally

attributed to BrahmaNaspati--as in 2.25--before finally replacing it

and returning to its more heavenly, praise, and wisdom-related

significations in the upper abodes of heaven (10.67.10--though other

mythic feats are attributed to him in this hymn as well), finding the

dawn and the cow (10.67.5), helping the sun and moon to rise

(10.68.10), and so forth.

As brÃ¡hman comes to be associated with BRhaspati in the later

books, it is accordingly more associated with mental and devotional

acts and is, in turn, less independent. During the period when brÃ¡hman

was more closely associated with BrahmaNaspati it was the power by

which Indra was strengthened for battle and so on. BRhaspati reflects

a refinement and increased attention upon the role of wisdom and

devotion for brÃ¡hman which characterizes the later development of the

word. In RV 3.62.4-6, BRhaspati is the beneficent gift-giver,

radiant/shÃºcim (cf. his association with Agni), and

multi-formed/vishvÃ¡ruupami. This is consistent with his later

significations in the ritual. BrahmaNaspati is not invoked in RV 3,

again suggesting the lateness of this Family Book.

Summary: brÃ¡hman in the Family Books

?

And so we return to the original purpose for which this inquiry

into brÃ¡hman was undertaken: to examine the developing terminology for

the self. My initial assertion remains true: there is little or

nothing of a doctrine associated with the self that can be identified

with brÃ¡hman in the Family Books. Additionally, the qualification I

offered is also confirmed--that, of any term related to the self,

brÃ¡hman shows the most consistent connection with its later

significations such that an almost unbroken line of development is

traceable without stretching or misapplying later doctrines to the

early materials. I conclude this inquiry with deep empathy for the

teaching in BAAU 2.3.6, that the formless/amuurtÃ¡ brÃ¡hma, remainsmore

than any other single conclusive remark I can make, it's not this,

it's not that-- " neti, neti " ! In the Family Books, brÃ¡hman is neither

prayer nor formulated speech only; neither pure energy nor empowerment

only; and neither a component of the self nor disassociated with the

later significations it has with the self.

The suggestion above of " pure energy " may still strike the reader

as surprising. However, my task in this dissertation--thankfully--is

not to define or retranslate brÃ¡hman. I am looking at the earliest

uses of brÃ¡hman just as I am the other words related to the self. In

order to most accurately portray what is different about the early

uses of brÃ¡hman from the later uses, I have to emphasize a composite

sense of its early use which allows for the vicissitudes--to adopt

Gonda's most apt terminology (1965)--of both change and continuity.

Words like " sacred " or " formulation " speech do not always accurately

convey the sense of dynamic enablement which brÃ¡hman signifies,

especially on those occasions such as 7.61.2 and 6.38.3 where there

are other words which clearly designate the vocal com

ponent of worship. A suggestion that brÃ¡hman is prayer or sacred

speech may fit comfortably with our own Western notions110 and the

informed reading we may have done of later Vedic and post-Vedic

developments. It will not work in every case of the Family Books or

the later RV and also does not easily facilitate analysis of

development because, for instance, " sacred speech " already confirms

those later developments.

Thus I am presenting brÃ¡hman in the most objective possible terms,

which allows both for its relative independence from priest and mental

effort as well as its undeniable semantic proximity with speech which

develops into ever closer associations as the literature develops.

Similarly, the conclusions presented below must be considered strictly

for the purposes guiding their assertion. In many ways this chapter is

confined by the relatively limited data on relative chronology within

the Family Books, so much of what can be said amounts to starting

hypotheses to which the results in Chapters 5 and 6 can be compared.

Certainly there are also suggestions of development within the Family

Books--I have seen several occasions where RV 3 appears later than the

other books. Similarly, a handful of hymns--e.g. 2.23.6-8, 3.52, 53,

etc.--were previously identified (lanman 1880, Oldenberg 1888, Witzel

1995b) as later. I have added several suppositions to this based upon

this research: 7.97, the whole of 2.23, and--possibly--4.50 are also

later. So I ask the reader to look at the foregoing and all that

follows as I do: a puÃºrvapakSin of my own making against which to pit

the results of Chapters 5-6 and, where possible, any traceable

sequential chronology within the Family Books.

?

From this initial survey of brÃ¡hman in the Family Books I have

identified several starting-points to which later developments can be

compared. As regards the priests with whom the word is frequently

associated, there is no predilection of one or the other (kavÃ, vÃpra,

Ã¿R'Si, or brahmÃ¡n) for use of the word. It is brÃ¡hman's existence or

absence in the lauds of each which determines efficacy. That existence

is dependent upon--as in 6.38.3-4 and 7.61.2--the worthiness and

righteousness/R'ta of the priest. In addition, brÃ¡hman is therefore

not prayer per se, but an essential outcome of it. It is the task of

the worshippers to rightly attune themselves to the Vedic cosmos both

before and during the laud in order to effect the desired ends. In the

later books, the distinction between brÃ¡hman as an independent power

and the prayer itself begins to be much less clear. This is seen

already in RV 3 which, in addition to increased emphasis upon -man and

-dhii, also mentions the brÃ¡hman as something " heard " (3.41.3), associ-

ated with song (3.53.12), and as a verbal praise which

accompanies--rather than is--power/dyumnÃ¡ (3.29.15).

In the other Family Books, brÃ¡hman is not a prerequisite or

inherent part of prayer, yet without it the prayer is wasted air.

Also, the King of brÃ¡hman, BrahmaNaspati, is replaced by the father of

brÃ¡hman, BRhaspati. At the same time, the more battle-intensive,

active role first associated with BrahmaNaspati in RV 2.24 is

initially transferred to BRhaspati, then deemphasized altogether.

Parallel to this development is that of brÃ¡hman which becomes more

associated with speech or formulated praise while BRhaspati, in turn,

becomes more the deity of sacrifice and wisdom. What it is that the

worshipper seeks to attain from the gods, a particular

presence/tanuÃº--e.g., one with strength, kindness, or blessing--is

denoted by tanuÃº as we will see below. Still, it is brÃ¡hman within the

prayer which, as a key in a lock, opens the door of the deity's

graciousness. Though by the later parts of the Family Books--e.g. RV

3, 2.23, 7.97 and so forth--brÃ¡hman is decidedly more closely

connected with acts of speech and more dependent on speech and its

parent deity, BRhaspati, to perform its appointed duties.

These conclusions also support the basic qualification I mentioned

above: the earliest uses of the word brÃ¡hman show a direct connection

to its later significations. Precisely because it was an independent

source of empowerment or pure energy, it was able to develop both into

the more empirical meanings it had in the associations with speech

which begin to become clear in the period of BraahmaNa Prose as well

as the incorporeal, abstract significations of ultimate monistic

totality in the Vedaanta. Either development is equally plausible from

this basic origin as pure or poetic energy. This original sense need

not be lost in the course of that development, only one part or

another--the sacred and pure speech or the independent empowering

energy which made the Vedic cosmos function for the worshipper--was

emphasized from one period to the next. It was the association with

speech which began to predominate in the later RV and the sacrificial

cult, moving from there to the later traditions as outlined by Padoux

(1990) and others. In contrast, the independent empowering energy,

while never absent in the sacrificial period, was emphasized more in

the UpaniSads and schools of Vedaanta. So rests the puÃºrvapakSin for

this section.

tanuÃº

?

There are three primary issues to consider with tanuÃº. First, it

is important to consider the issue of whether tanuÃº indicates a

corporeal body. This includes a brief discussion of the other words

for body--which are scarce--in the Family Books. Second is the

significant distinction between tanuÃº when it is used in reference to

the gods and when it is used in reference to humans. As two-thirds of

the occurrences of tanuÃº are references to deities, this is an

important distinction to consider with respect to whether tanuÃº means

corporeal body. Third are the uses of tanuÃº with the words indicating

mental processes. As we will see, -man is the predominant root which

we find with tanuÃº. In addition to these three considerations, there

are also larger patterns of use--specifically between RV 3 and RV

7--which bear upon the hypothesis that there is a diachronic

development, or chronological sequence, between the MaNDala's of the

Vishvaamitras and the VasiSthas. In addition, tanuÃº is used

consistently in semantic fields where reference to the individual

existence of a human or deity might otherwise have a form of aatmÃ¡n or

pÃºruSa as in later portions of the RV and Middle Vedic Literature.

With tanuÃº the feature which first struck me in my research was

its complete dominance over pÃºruSa, aatmÃ¡n, and tmÃ¡n in semantic

fields describing individual identity. As noted above, we find pÃºruSa

only in RV 3.33.8d, 4.12.4a, 5.48.5c and 7.57.4b; and aatmÃ¡n only in

7.101.6b and 7.87.2a in the Family Books. This raises the two

questions which will guide the following inquiry: what is the

relationship between tanuÃº and the body with respect to the other

words for body--e.g., deha, ruupÃ¡, shÃ¡riira; and what sort of self is

implied by this term considering the paucity of the other common " self

words " in the Family Books?

?

TanuÃº is used consistently throughout the Family Books and the

Later RV, the Mantra Language and the SaMhitaa Prose, with little

noticeable change in proportion.111 The exception, as noted in Chapter

3, is found in RV 3 and 7. In the former, tanuÃº is used only with Agni

and Indra (the only such exclusivity of the Family Books), and in the

latter, tanuÃº is more abstract with a wide distribution of uses among

all the deities--except Agni and Indra (3 and 2 times each,

respectively). For instance, RV 7.86.2, with the tanuÃº communion of

thought with VaruNa is possible (utÃ¡ svÃ¡yaa tanvaÃ¡ sÃ¡M vade tÃ¡t kadaÃ¡

nvÃ¡ntÃ¡r vÃ¡ruNe bhuvaani).

In the later books of the RV the less abstract, more corporeal use

of tanuÃº coincides with the appearance of more frequent occurrences of

aatmÃ¡n and pÃºruSa. In RV 3 pÃºruSa is found once (3.33.8d), in a use

which is somewhat different than the other early occurrences where

pÃºruSa is vulnerable, prone to sin, or unworthy of knowledge (4.12.4a,

5.48.5c, 7.57.4b). In 3.33, pÃºruSa is a class of humans among which

the praiser does not wish to be humbled (see discussion below). Thus

the more corporeal sense we will see with tanuÃº in RV 3 is consistent

with the later developments. RV 7 has a more neutral use of pÃºruSa

which simply designates humans, or those prone to sin. But tanuÃº in RV

7 is much more abstract, and less corporeal, than it is in RV 3.

In the absence of words commonly considered as connotative of the

self--aatmÃ¡n and pÃºruSa--the predominance of tanuÃº in various forms in

those cases where aatmÃ¡n and pÃºruSa are later used suggests that the

Family Books attribute that meaning to tanuÃº. As tanuÃº is often

translated as body, it is necessary first to evaluate it with other

words for body.

The Body: dÃ©ha, ruupÃ¡, and shÃ¡riira as compared with tanuÃº

?

The words less ambiguously associated with the body: dÃ©ha,

shÃ¡riira, and ruupÃ¡ are significantly less frequent throughout the RV

than tanuÃº.112 There are 14 occasions of ruupÃ¡ in the Family books and

37 occasions in the later books. DÃ©ha, a derivative of -dih/increase

or accumulate, is not present in the Family Books and the later

portions of the RV.113 ShÃ¡riira is almost nonexistent with only one

occasion in the Family Books (6.25.4a), and six occasions in the

remaining books. In addition, five of the 14 Family Book occasions of

ruupÃ¡ are found in hymns identified as later insertions: 6.47.18a

where there are three occasions, and 3.53.8a with two occasions.

The evidence indicates that these are all later words for body or

that these words for the body were not part of the religious or

canonical vocabulary in the Family Books. DÃ©ha shows the most pointed

evidence of being a term included later. There are no occasions in the

RV--early or later--or in any other SaMhitaa. In addition, it is found

only three times in the BraahmaNa's and AAraNyaka's (TAA 1.27.2,

10.11.2, and GB1.1.39). However, by the time of the UpaniSads it

literally erupts into the Vedic literature with over 150 occurrences.

?

The occasions of ruupÃ¡ increase from 12 in the Family Books114 to

25 in the later MaNDala's. It's usage then increases dramatically to

several hundred occasions in the subsequent SaMhitaa's. Taking, for

example, the accusative singular--ruupÃ¡m (also the predominant form in

the RV with 5

in the Family Books and 15 in the later portions)--the usage increases

with 44 in the MS, 41 in the KS, and 72 in the TS. It falls off in the

Atharva Veda, with 23 in the Paipalaada and 16 in the Shaunaka

recensions. Later in the BraahmaNas it is found over 175 times, 12 in

the AB (plus 2 in the AAA), 16 in the TB (interestingly, 13 of these

are in TB 1 and there are also 6 in the TAA), 11 in the JB and 27 in

the ShB. By the time of the UpaniSads we find ruupÃ¡ over 110 times.

Finally, as already noted with shÃ¡riira, there are only 6

occasions in the later RV. There are quite a few more occasions in the

remaining SaMhitaa's under study--MS, KS, TS, AVP and AVSh--total 94.

With the accusative singular shÃ¡riiram there are 3 in the MS, 7 in the

KS, 9 in TS, 25 in the AV Paippalaada and 20 in the AV Shaunaka. By

the time of the BraahmaNa's, there are over 130 occasions, the

predominant form among them, again, the accusative singular with 4 in

the AB (plus 5 in the AAA), 7 in the TB (plus 8 in the TAA), 8 in the

JB, and over 50 in the ShB. By the period of the UpaniSads there are

over 120 occasions.

?

Thus it is apparent that the ways of referring to the body in the

early portions of the RV, and also in the later portions, was carried

on with increased complexity in later periods as the religion changed

in accordance to the rise in speculative discourse about the sacrifice

(cf. Chapter 6, pp. 311f.). This is not to say that there are not

descriptions of Indra's physical strength, etc. Instead, physical

existence was described as it appeared with different characteristics

such as strength and the effects of Soma. That there was a specific

" body " as part of the identity of the deity, however, is not

supported. The only other likely candidate for a term denoting the

body in the vocabulary of the Family Books (and, as will be seen in

Chapter 5, there are few words for a corporeal body also in the later

portions, with 4 of shÃ¡riira and 1 of deha in the RV Khilaani), then,

is tanuÃº. As will be shown below, however, tanuÃº is less a corporeal

body than a specific presence which, when referring to a god is

capable of multiple manifestations, and when referring to a human--a

far less common occurrence (in the Family Books the ratio of uses of

tanuÃº for a god and that for a man is 3:1)--it is always frail,

vulnerable, or in need of protection.

The semantic field of tanuÃº is shared with ruupÃ¡ once (3.53.8a-b)

and shÃ¡riira once (6.25.4a-b). While it is hard to make a

generalization from such isolated occasions, these afford a useful

point at which both to bring the investigation of other words for the

body to a close and begin the detailed study of tanuÃº. In 3.53.8a-b,

the use of both tanuÃº and ruupÃ¡

comes as part of a later hymn (Arnold, 1897: 212; Lanman, 1880: 581;

Witzel, 1995b: 311) where the achievements of Indra under the

promptings of Vishvaamitra hymns are both attested and called upon to

be repeated (cf. Elizarenkova on the past/present temporal role of the

injunctive, 1995: 190f.):

ruupÃ¡M-ruupam maghÃ¡vaa bobhaviiti maayaÃ¡H kRNvaanÃ¡s tanvÃ m pÃ¡ri svaÃ¡m |

" With MaghÃ¡van (Indra) becoming/changing form by form, making his own

presence/tanuÃº/himself abundantly supernatural. " 115 The juxtaposition

of ruupÃ¡M-ruupam in 8a with pÃ¡ri and maayaÃ¡H in 8b for the divine

Indra requires that tanvÃ m be more attenuated and amorphous than a

strictly physical sense of " body. " Compare the locative plural of

tanuÃº later in the same hymn, 3.53.18:

bÃ¡laM dhehi tanuÃºSu no

" Give us might/vigor in our bodies/ourselves/tanuÃºs. " Geldner again

chooses Leib: " StÃ¤rke verleih unseren Leibern " (1951, I: 393). This is

consistent with the frailty of the human tanuÃº, in need of protection

or, as here, being bolstered for battle.116 BÃ¡lam is a more abstract,

less corporeal attribution of power deriving from 2 -bal/to breath,

live, nourish, explain. GraÃŸmann suggests it is cognate with Latin

valor, and the meaning Kraft, Leibeskraft, or--with Geldner

here--StÃ¤rke (1996: 901). Mayrhofr agrees, though he questions the

root form noting conflicting theories as to Iranian and Dravidian

origin (1963, II: 417), and BÃ¶htlingk also has the more abstract

notion of force, " Wucht " and " Gewalt, " (1879, IV: 211). The word

choice in each of these passages indicates that a conception of

something more refined than a mere corporeal reference was in the mind

of the poets. The use of ruupÃ¡ which is common in the later literature

is, of course, not surprising in the hymn which is, itself, a later

addition (Witzel, 1989: 159-160; 1995b: 311).

If it is to a " tanuÃº/body " that the bÃ¡lam is to be given, it seems

more in the sense of " body " as in " somebody, anybody, etc. " than " that

body lying over there. " Further, as noted in the preliminary

discussion of terminology above in Chapter 2, the word tanuÃº derives

from -tan/to spread as suggested also by BÃ¶thlingk with " dehnen,

erstrecken " (1879, III: 7), GraÃŸmann with " fortlaufend, Dauer " (1996:

517), and Elizarenkova suggests " to draw or pull " (with " stretch "

being the meaning when the upasarga aa- is attached)117 and the sense

is one of a duality and connection between gods and men (1995: 43).118

In this context, the generic

sense of " life " or " body " (i.e. everybody, somebody) as a

participation, or presence, in the ongoing animate cosmos--cf.

" Leib " --will also work for tanuÃº.119

This is similar to the meaning suggested by N. Ross Reat in The

Origins of Indian Psychology, discussed in Chapter 1, where the word

specifically indicates the inherent connection between and even shared

identity of gods and humans through its meaning of " form " in the sense

of a subtle body, or a " template for the physical body " (1990: 63ff.).

Mayrhofr does not address the root -tan, but is unambiguous as to a

more abstract meaning for the word: selbst, eigen (1963, I: 473).

Other occasions of the accusative singular tanvÃ m are frequently used

to indicate how a divinity transforms to manifest a given trait of

power.120 For instance, in RV 7.101.3b Parjanya changes his tanuÃº as

he wishes (stariÃr u tvad bhÃ¡vati suÃºta u tvad yathaavashÃ¡M tanvÃ¡M

cakra eSÃ¡H).

It is along these same lines that the form of self indicated by

Mayrhofr is not unlike that suggested above viz. body: self in the

sense of " itself " or " oneself, " not " the " self. BÃ¶thlingk's meaning is

quite abstract for tanuÃº, " dÃ¼nn machen, behauen " (1879, III: 8).

GraÃŸmann holds with a more tangible meaning, " Leib, KÃ¶rper " (1996:

519). This translation leaves room for agreement for the sense of body

as " everybody, " i.e. personal or individual presence, posited here. In

the passage under examination, the meaning of ruupÃ¡ serves to

underscore the sense of tanuÃº as something more subtle than a purely

physical existence. This hymn (3.53) being a later insertion, the

passage in question appears as a retrospective suggesting the many

manifestations under which Indra's beneficence occurs.

?

If the larger meaning of presence/tanuÃº is attested in the

occasion of the less tangible word, ruupÃ¡, in tanuÃº's semantic field

as above in 3.53.8, then the occasion in RV 6.25.4a-b, where shÃ¡riira

is in the semantic field with tanuÃº, is equally informative:

shuÃºro vaa shuÃºraM vanate shÃ¡riirais tanuurÃºcaa tÃ¡ruSi yÃ¡t kRNvaÃte |

" With their bodies the mighty masters the mighty, both are made with

shining presence/tanuurÃºcaa when in combat. " 121 My translation could

also work with the sense of Ã¶berlegenheit: both are made for shining

presence/tanuÃº when in superiority/triumph.

In the previous verse (6.25.3) the tumult of battlev--ersus foe or

kinsman--is the occasion for a call to Indra for assistance. In the

battle both sides would wax to their glory/tanuurÃºcaa fighting with

all their might. It

is ultimately at the level of body-to-body (cf. shÃ¡riirais) that the

victory comes. But it is also a glorified, amplified presence/tanuÃº

which those bodies have in that combat. It is only the body that is

taking the blows, but it is a battle-inspired or enriched

presence/tanuurÃºcaa that delivers them. GraÃŸmann shows only two other

occasions of tanuurÃºcaa, in 2.1.9b with the blazing Agni implored for

boons, and 7.93.5b much like the occasion here with two foes bristling

against each other (1996: 520).

Though there are very few occasions for direct comparison between

tanuÃº and the words which unquestionably refer to a corporeal body,

the following discussion supports the observations above. With tanuÃº

there is definitely a sense of empirical, observable presence. There

are changes in the tanuÃº, and the tanuÃº is something which can receive

vigor. There are not occasions where the tanuÃº " dies " --though its use

in the human realm clearly indicates something which is vulnerable,

and urgently in need of the deity's assistance. For the deities, the

tanuÃº is always the word applied to that aspect of a divinity which

the worshipper most specifically seeks to achieve a desired end. The

tanuÃº of a deity is not vulnerable, nor is it in need of strengthening

from brÃ¡hman (we do not find brÃ¡hman used with tanuÃº in the Family

Books). It appears that tanuÃº is the word for what " appears " or is

identifiable--as frail, beneficent, in need of vigor--but is not

necessarily corporeal. This becomes clearer when we examine the

distinction between tanuÃº as it is used in the language referring to

gods and the language referring to men. Two-thirds of the occasions of

tanuÃº in the Family Books are used in reference to deities and it does

not refer to a vulnerability in these occasions.

TanuÃº in the Language of Gods and the Language of Men

?

That tanuÃº is not corporeal is supported more substantially than

these isolated occasions with ruupÃ¡ and shÃ¡riira. Consistently it

infers a countenance, something active and animate. Another instance

of tanuÃº includes an instance of -cit in 4.16.14a-b:

" Approximate to the sun you place your (Indra) presence/tanuÃº

(yourself), when it has appeared with your immortal aspect. " 122 In

other words, the presence/tanuÃº or Leib (i.e. as one might say " to

save lives " ) of Indra's immortal aspect is associated with the sun.

This returns us to the discussion begun in Chapter 2 with regard to

tanuÃº in the language of the gods

as opposed to that of humans.

There are several passages suggesting that tanuÃº refers to a

countenance, or presence, of a deity which manifests in multiple ways

according to the dispensation of the deity of its own accord, or in

response to a specific prayer. RV 3.34.1 affords a perfect example of

such an occasion. It also adumbrates what we have already argued

above, along with Elizarenkova's suggestion (1995: 97) that brÃ¡hman is

an independent empowering force:

ÃndraH puurbhÃd aÃ¡tirad daÃ¡sam arkaÃr vidÃ¡dvasur dÃ¡yamaano vÃ shÃ¡truun

" Indra, with abundant prayers overcame the DaÃ¡sa, finding wealth,

dividing enemies; with a presence/tanuÃº enriched with pure energy,

rich in gifts, filled both heaven and earth. " 123 Indra's tanuÃº is

enriched with brÃ¡hman which, if translated " formulas " sounds a little

mechanistic.

As for tanuÃº, the presence of Indra fills both worlds when it is

enhanced or engorged with the empowerment of brÃ¡hman. Similarly, with

the addition/drinking of Soma, Indra's tanuÃº manifests a special

strength in 2.16.2c-d, especially when additionally enhanced by krÃ¡tu

or mental effort (see below). There is some sense of tanuÃº connoting

an abstract, reflexive self when the rare form

tanuÃºpaa/ " self " -protecting is found (4.16.20, 6.46.10, and 7.66.3).

This is a more abstract application of tanuÃº than the specific

meanings or applications of " presence " discussed thus far. BÃ¶thlink

suggests " Leib und Leben schirmend " (1879, III: 8). It is a phrase

limited to the realm of the gods and serves to connote the

preservation powers they have for their efficacy.

Frequently, then, the tanuÃº of a deity is lauded in a particular

manifestation or besought in a specific manifestation for a given

purpose. In RV 2.17.7d, the tanuÃº of Indra is sought as that aspect

which makes people glad (kRdhÃ praketÃ¡m Ãºpa maasy aÃ¡ bhara daddhÃ

pair Mitra-VaruNa is to be praised in RV 5.67.5a-b (kÃ³ nÃº vaam

mitraÃ¡stuto vÃ¡ruNo vaa nam), and Agni's tanuÃº which is untouchable

when it blazes/jÃ¡rbhuuraNaH discussed below in 2.10.5.124

?

The tanuÃº in the realm of the gods is a point of presence where a

variety of valuable countenances manifest or can be called forth.

Thus, in the realm of humans, there is nothing other than adversity

discussed or implied in the semantic fields surrounding tanuÃº.

?

The deities are repeatedly implored to protect, prevent injury to,

heal, cleanse, or otherwise save the vulnerable human tanuÃº. The

genitive plural tanuÃºnaam shows up twice with the aorist

imperative--bodhi--of -budh or -bhuu125as here in RV 5.4.9c-d (cf.

2.9.2c-d, 4.16.17d):

Ã¡gne atrivÃ¡n nÃ¡masaa gRNaanÃ² 'smaÃ¡kam bodhy avitaÃ¡ tanuÃºnaam ||

" Agni, bowed to with praise like Atri, awaken (or be) as protector of

our lives. " And Geldner, translating bodhi as the imperative aorist of

-bhu: " Agni, wie von Atri unter Verbeugung gepriesen, sei der

BeschÃ¼tzer underer Leiber! " (1951, II: 7) offers this same sense of

tanuÃº. Passages such as these contrive to awaken-or bring to

existence--Agni in his microcosmic tanuÃº as gÃ¡rbha and in the

macrocosm as divine intercessionary force. As tanuÃº implies an

attenuated presence or, with Reat and Elizarenkova, et al, what is

drawn out (cf. dehnen, Dauer) the micro-macrocosmic awakening--or

being--is interwoven (cf. -tan as including weaving, shining, and

spreading).126 Invariably, however, the human tanuÃº remains frail, and

in need of protection as seen here and repeatedly elsewhere (cf.

6.25.4 above).127

Mental Processes and tanuÃº

?

Each of the words relating to mental processes occurs somewhat

infrequently, most prominently included is -man.128 Forms of -man are

found in hymns, verses, and the same paada several times with tanuÃº in

the Family Books (7 times). Of these there is one occasion of -man in

the immediate or related semantic fields of tanuÃº. The other instances

of shared fields do not entail a direct modification of meaning one

way or the other between the words studied.

?

An exception is RV 2.10.5:

aÃ¡ vishvÃ¡taH pratyÃ¡Ã±caM jigharmy arakSÃ¡saa mÃ¡nasaa tÃ¡j juSeta |

mÃ¡ryashrii spRhayÃ¡dvarNo agnÃr naÃ¡bhimR'she tanvaÃ¡ jÃ¡rbhuraaNaH ||

" I sprinkle (oblations) all around to (Agni), may he enjoy it with

pure mind; Agni, the glorious young man, a figure to be desired, a

presence/tanuÃº untouchable as it flickers. " 129 It hardly requires much

imagination or rhetoric to conclude that the flaming presence/tanuÃº of

Agni is both like a vibrant young man, desirable for its many

benefits, and also quite untouchable when blazing. As above, we see

again that tanuÃº is something which manifests in a variety of ways, a

changing presence/tanuÃº according to the

aspect sought or addressed by the worshipper. This is a quality not so

easily attributable to a substantive or corporeal body.

?

We do not find krÃ¡tu in the semantic fields with tanuÃº in those

occasions where tanuÃº is used to refer to the frailty of the human

existence. As with the other terms for mental processes, there is not

a direct relation between tanuÃº and krÃ¡tu. Such for instance is the

case in RV 2.16.2c-d to Indra (cf. also 2.39.2, 6.41.5--with

shÃ¡takratu--and 7.3.9):

jaThÃ¡re sÃ³maM tanviÃ sÃ¡ho mÃ¡ho hÃ¡ste vÃ¡jram bhÃ¡rati shiirSÃ¡Ni krÃ¡tum

||

" Soma he carries in his stomach, in his presence/tanuÃº, powerful and

great, he carries the bolt in his hand, and determination with his

head. " In this verse Geldner is persuaded by the anatomical

vocabularyjaThÃ¡re, hÃ¡ste, shiirSÃ¡Nito render tanuÃº as KÃ¶rper: " Im

Bauch trÃ¤gt er den Soma, im KÃ¶rper die Ã¼berlegene StÃ¤rke, die Macht,

in der hand die Keule, im Haupte die Ãœberlegung " (1951, I: 296).

?

The weight of the foregoing discussion of tanuÃº allows that it is

the enriched overall presence/tanuÃº of Indra, additionally embellished

with strength of purpose/krÃ¡tu, that is lauded. Of course, Indra's

KÃ¶rper is part of that presence/tanuÃº so--as above with bodhi viz.

-budh and -bhuu (see note 128)--either reading does not do injustice

to the passage. But " presence " or " life " (in a generic sense of 'our

lives " as a complete reference to the course of existence from birth

to death--i.e., a " presence " in the world--rather than life as an

animate force like aayÃº or praaNÃ¡) allows for consistency through the

range of passages with tanuÃº. It is also more representative of the

interconnected cosmos of the RV Family hymns wherein lines of

demarcation for individuality or abstracted " selves " were not drawn by

the poets.

If tanuÃº is an attenuated presence, capable of various

manifestations among the gods, and frail among humans, what--if

any--existential notion of self is present in the Family Books as an

independent entity? We see brÃ¡hman as an empowering force which is

independent and operating in many realms, including the semantic

fields of tanuÃº where it serves to augment the potency of a desired

countenance of the gods. There is a fluid continuum between the realm

of the gods and that of men which is traversed by ppure energy, or

brÃ¡hman. This energy affects changes in the tanuÃº of gods, and invokes

protection of the frail tanuÃº of humans. Within that continuum, are

there nodes of existence which are independent? This question leads us

to the next word in our study, tmÃ¡n.

tmÃ¡n

?

In Vedic, tmÃ¡n is like a mysterious person who appears at a party,

interacts with a select few guests, and then leaves quietly without

ever being heard from again. It is scattered infrequently through both

the early and later portions of the RV. Its most predominant--almost

only--use is in the instrumental tmÃ¡naa which is striking with its

semantic and sonorous closeness to aatmÃ¡n. Mayrhofr (1963, I: 473)

discusses the possible etymology of both aatmÃ¡n and tmÃ¡n from -tan and

is quite unconvinced, suggesting that this is highly unlikely-- " Hochst

fraglich! " --but this does not preclude a possible relation between

aatmÃ¡n and tmÃ¡n nonetheless. There are 27 occasions of the

instrumental singular in the Family Books and 35 in the later

portions. There are 11 occasions in the MS, 10 in the KS, and 9 in the

TS. There is one occasion in the RVKh, 3.1.4, in a Khila to Indra

inspired by Soma. By the time of the Atharva Veda, the SV Paippalaada

uses it 3 times and it is found 4 times in the AV Shaunaka. Other

forms, locative tmÃ¡ni, are 1 each in the Early and late portions of

the RV; dative tmÃ¡ne is found 3 and 4 times respectively, and tmÃ¡nyaa

is used 3 times in the later RV, 3 times in the MS, 3 in the KS, once

in the TS, and once in the AV Shaunaka. After that, it drops off the

Vedic map with only two occurrences in the TB, one in the JB, and one

in a later addition to the ShBM in 3.8.1.13. The question which

follows (with deference to the TV series), " Who was that masked tmÃ¡n? "

remains a difficult puzzle.

The predominant form of the instrumental suggests that, more than

anything, tmÃ¡n is something " by or with which " a human or deity

achieves something. Effectively, " himself/itself " is the more

reasonable translation in many cases (cf. svayÃ¡m and reflexivity

discussion above, and the philosophical implications of reflex

reference in the Introduction). In Chapter 2, tmÃ¡n was defined as a

word which serves the specific function of characterizing a trait as

inherently part of a deity's identity--Agni as the conveyor of the

offerings to the gods is himself a priest (4.6.5a), Agni encompasses

all by his own nature (3.9.5a), BrahmaNaspati, the king of prayer is

himself wise (2.25.2b), etc. The instrumental tmÃ¡naa is most

applicable to establish that the trait is by the very nature of the

deity or person. The other forms of tmÃ¡n are quite infrequent and it

is difficult to establish a pattern from them. In 4.29.4c Indra sets

the coursers to the pole itself with the locative tmÃ¡ni (Ãºpa tmÃ¡ni

dÃ¡dhaano dhuryaÃ¡shuÃºn), and Agni, like a melter of metal, knows

himself to be able to consume all, and not to be detained in

plants--cf. discussion of Agni in the plants and waters in 10.51 below

in Chapter 5--as he is immortal in 6.12.3c-d (adroghÃ³ nÃ¡ dravitaÃ¡

cetati tmÃ¡nn Ã¡martyo 'vartrÃ¡ Ã³SadhiiSu).

As far as its later disappearance, from the one and only

appearance of the word in the ShBM it is clear that it is not the

" right " word as the passage corrects the prescribed recitation

this oblation. " The mantra in question is found also in the much

earlier KS 3.6 and somewhat earlier TS 1.3.8.2 (cf. chronology of the

Veda's in Chapter 3), but--significantly--without the " correction, "

and without the direction of the havÃS to vaÃ¡c/Speech.

Glossing tmÃ¡n with aatmÃ¡n is certainly not uncommon. As noted in

Chapter 2, Yaaska does so without hesitation or explanation.130 In

addition, tmÃ¡n is not part of the lexicon of the NighaNTu.131 In the

absence of native etymologies, we have few alternatives other than the

comparison of semantic fields. Repeating the summary presented

earlier, the basic meanings share reasonable concurrence among the

current lexicons, " Lebenshauch, " " selbst, " and " das eigene Person "

(BÃ¶thlingk, 1879, III: 45; Mayrhofr, 1956, I: 528; and Mylius, 1975:

192). Rather than a later gloss, GraÃŸmann suggests tmÃ¡n is " aus aatman

gekÃ¼rzt " (1964: 552). Mayrhofer has summarized the scholarship of

Kuiper, Hertel, and Wackernagel viz. the probability of a derivation

from -tan (1956, 1: 529). There is fairly consistent agreement as to

the link with aatmÃ¡n: " Ist von aatmÃ¡ nicht zu trennen, und tÃ¡n-

(s.d.!) ist zu beachten. " ; but continues, " Die nÃ¤here ErklÃ¤rung bleibt

schwierig " (1956, I: 529).

?

What gives the strongest case for the link between tmÃ¡n and

aatmÃ¡n--apart from phonetic or etymological arguments--is the usage in

context. In so doing, reading how tmÃ¡n is used in context also

addresses the question of the relevance of tanuÃº, though, again, not

in terms of a derivational paradigm. To illustrate, a recapitulation

of the evidence adduced thus far presents the following notions about

the early Vedic cosmos. Gods and humans lived in a continuum, and

their mutual presences/tanuÃº therein have specific realms of activity

with unique characteristics. The tanuÃº of the deity is potent, capable

of various manifestations to provide assistance or characteristics

worthy of worship. This aid is also prompted with prayers which, when

rightly spoken, access that vital power/brÃ¡hman that makes it possible

to overcome adversity and weakness.

Somewhere in this continuum of presences/tanuÃº which can be

affected by brÃ¡hman, there is still the need to account for those

occasions of

self-generated action or traits. In other words, there are times when

a trait or characteristic of a deity or person is attributable to that

individual's own existence, rather than accessed from outside or

produced with the assistance of brÃ¡hman. It is tmÃ¡n which carries this

weight. Numerically, it is obviously not a frequent requirement in

Vedic speech--only 31 times in the Family Books do we find tmÃ¡n and

only 35 times in the later books--especially when compared with the

hundreds of occasions of the other terms--tanuÃº and brÃ¡hman--and the

words for mental processes which are integral to influencing the

components of the continuum. The points of a particular existence, in

that continuum which are peculiar to a deity or entity--such as

prayer--are identified by use of the word tmÃ¡n.

It is likely then that such a potent word would have

characteristics which fall clearly along the lines of language for

gods or for hymns. Of the occasions with tmÃ¡n, we observe a similar

pattern to that with tanuÃº: the ration of occasions where it is the

tmÃ¡n of a deity over those occasions where the tmÃ¡n of a human is

concerned is 9:1. An excellent example is Agni, the priest to the

gods, who is lauded as the priest to the gods of his own nature,

through whose flames the offerings are literally carried upward, in RV

4.6.5a-b:

pÃ¡ri tmÃ¡naa mitÃ¡drur eti hÃ³taa 'gnÃr mandrÃ³ mÃ¡dhuvacaa RtaÃ¡vaa |

" He goes about as if himself a priest, Agni, pleasant with sweet

speech and righteousness. " 132 Similarly in RV 7.7.1d Agni himself

it is the sacrifice itself which goes to the varied forms of Indra in

7.84.1d (pÃ¡ri tmÃ¡naa vÃSuruupaa jigatii). The self-presented wisdom of

the " father of prayer, " BrahmaNaspati is a likely candidate for an

occasion of tmÃ¡n in RV 2.25.2a-b:

tmÃ¡naa |

" With heroic men he will attack his jealous foes, with cattle he

spreads his wealth, wise of his own accord. " 133 This is not confined

to any one deity. Using a tangible metaphor for Agni, the apparent

independent willfulness within the shifting patterns of a fire, the

poet uses tmÃ¡n in RV 3.9.5:

sasRvaÃ¡Msam iva tmÃ¡naa

'gnÃm itthaÃ¡ tirÃ³hitam |

" Moving really as if of his own, Agni, hidden (therein). " 134 Similar

use is found throughout almost all occasions with tmÃ¡n, and in all but

six occasions, in the instrumental.135 It is " by means of " tmÃ¡n that a

node of self-evident quality or power is marked or specified in Vedic.

It is not surprising that a point of such self-defined

presence/tanuÃº (as we see below, a tanuÃº can have a particular tmÃ¡n)

is confined primarily to the gods. The Vedic cosmos was a realm of

powers and divinities wherein the humans were always at the outskirts,

or fringes, using prayer to invoke or participate. This is quite clear

in the handful of occasions when something relating to the human realm

is marked with the use of tmÃ¡n. The independent self-evident power of

the sacrifice (e.g., RV 7.84.1d) indicates that it is by pious action

that the human realm reaches forth to the divine with the

self-contained power of the rites. We see this in 5.10.4e where good

praises of themselves waken Indra (sukiirtÃr bÃ³dhati tmÃ¡naa). The

separation in realms is underscored by the deictic reference to humans

being made godlike as charioteers of wealth-bringing vehicles by the

beneficence of Indra and VaruNa as in RV 4.41.10 (Ã¡shvyasya tmÃ¡naa

uutÃbhir nÃ¡vyasiibhir asmatraÃ¡ raÃ¡yo niyÃºtaH sacantaam || ).

aatmÃ¡n and pÃºruSa

?

It is unlikely that observations of the few occurrences of aatmÃ¡n

and pÃºruSa can provide conclusive evidence of how these words were

used in the period of the Family Books. While they are obviously not

unknown in this early period, they were also not important enough to

appear frequently in the early collection of the RV. I will limit this

preliminary inquiry to the synchronic data of the passagesfew though

they arewhere we find each term. In later chapters, this initial

survey will be re-evaluated from the perspective of subsequent usage

for each term. It is clear, however, that pÃºruSa in the Family Books

conveys little of the exalted role of archetypical sacrifice as seen

in RV 10.90, nor does it even have the significance as a portion of

plants fit for offering to Agni as in 10.51. The one occasion in

?

In the Family Books, aatmÃ¡n is used only twice, in RV 7.87.2a and

7.101.6b. On both occasions, it is firmly associated with the root

etymologies suggested by Yaaska. As noted in Chapter 2, N 3.15 where

verbs of motion-- -at/go, or -aap/reach, obtain--are suggested for its

etymology, the early RV uses seem consistent with that. In RV 7.87.2a,

the suggestion by scholars (cf. Chapter 2, pp. 79f.) that aatmÃ¡n is

derived from -an, to breath, appears justifiable as the wind is called

the aatmÃ¡n of VaruNa (aatmaÃ¡ te vaÃ¡to rÃ¡ja aÃ¡ naviinot). This is a

common association of aatmÃ¡n with wind or air (in the later RV we see

this in 1.34.7d, 1.116.3c, 1.182.5b, 10.92.13c). It is also just as

likely that the aatmÃ¡n of VaruNa being likened to the wind is due to

aatmÃ¡n as a word of dynamic vitalityor motion. The other occasion of

aatmÃ¡n in the Family Books supports this. In RV 7.101.6b, Parjanya,

lord of crop-enriching rains, is the holder of the aatmÃ¡n of all

things fixed and moving (tÃ¡sminn aatmaÃ¡ jÃ¡gatas tasthÃºSash ca).

Elsewhere aatmÃ¡n is again associated with what moves and is fixed as

later with the very same semantic field in 1.115.1d where Suurya is

the aatmÃ¡n of both (suÃºrya aatmaÃ¡ jÃ¡gatas tasthuSas ca).136 In other

cases aatmÃ¡n is animated or associated with vigor (1.73.2d, 1.116.3c,

1.182.5b, 9.74.4a, 9.113.1c).

It is important to note an additional aspect of RV 7.101 for the

ongoing discussion of the developing uses of aatmÃ¡n and tanuÃº. This

hymn affords the only occasion in the Family Books and one of only 5

occasions in the whole RV where aatmÃ¡n and tanuÃº are found in the same

or adjacent semantic fields (1.162.20b within the same verse; 10.16.3a

with tanuÃº in 4; 10.97 with aatmÃ¡n in 4d, 8d, 11c and tanuÃº in 10d;

10.107.7c with tanuÃº in 6c). In 7.10.3a-b, tanuÃº is used in its usual

context to refer to the changeable presence of the deity which can be

beneficial to the realm of humans:

stariÃr u tvad bhÃ¡vati suÃºta u tvad yathaavashÃ¡M tanvÃ M cakra eSÃ¡H |

" Now from you it (field) is barren, now from you it is a cow fertile

with offspring; according to your pleasure is the presence/tanuÃº of

this cycle (of seasonal harvest and planting). " 137 At least in the

Family Books, the appearance of aatmÃ¡n does not necessitate a

corporeal meaning for tanuÃº. This will change in the later RV as will

be seen in Chapter 5.

These quite limited examples in the Family Books indicate that

aatmÃ¡n first appears in the RV as something vital or dynamic. This

later becomes easier to associate with like phenomena and entities

such as the wind. Correspondingly, its association with breath leads

to its later meta

physical significations in the later Vedic literature. In between, the

distinction between tanuÃº and aatmÃ¡n further underscores the dynamic

side of aatmÃ¡n (cf. 1.162.20b, 8.3.24a, also discussed above, and in

more detail below), and its sense of being an inner core (as of

sacrifice in 9.2.10c, 9.6.8a, 10.168.4a). However, there is very

little to suggest that aatmÃ¡n was originally used as a word for an

eternal, imperishable self or essence. It suggests an essence,

perhaps, but more likely is the active characteristic of a deity or human.

?

With pÃºruSa, the uses are slightly more common, with seven

occasions in the Family Books (3.33.8d, 4.12.4a, 5.48.5c, 7.4.3c,

7.29.4a, 7.57.4, and 7.102.2c). In point of fact pÃºruSa is altogether

rare in the RV. In the later RV, there are only fourteen attestations

of which seven are in the PuruSa Suukta, RV 10.90, and all fourteen

but one (8.71.2a), appear in RV 10. Apart from 8.71, there are no

occasions of pÃºruSa in the portions of the RV dated immediately after

the Family Books (1.51-191, 8.1-66, 1.1-50, 8.67-103, 8.49-59, and RV

9). This lends itself to the easy suggestion that pÃºruSa is simply a

later term. Unfortunately, the available data does not enable the

additional observation that the occasions of pÃºruSa in the Family

Books are hymns of later date.

In the Family Books pÃºruSa denotes a decidedly frail existence in

the human realm--with the exception of 3.33.8d and, somewhat,

7.102.2c--not unlike the use of tanuÃº in the human realm.

Unfortunately, tanuÃº does not share the same hymn with pÃºruSa, so a

direct comparison is not possible here. Nonetheless, the existence

suggested by pÃºruSa is quite different from the elevated significance

the term has beginning with RV 10.90, and continuing through the later

UpaniSads--especially the Shvetaashvatara and MuNDaka UpaniSads--and

the traditions of Yoga. The pÃºruSa of the Family Books is almost

rhetorically opposed to these later developments. In RV 3.33.8d Indra

is lauded and called to prevent the worshippers from being humbled

among mortals (maÃ¡ no nÃ kaH puruSatraÃ¡ nÃ¡mas te), and in RV 4.12.4 a

confession and plea for absolution from evil is made to Agni (yÃ¡c cid

dhÃ te puruSatraÃ¡ yaviSThaÃ¡cittibhish cakRmaÃ¡ kÃ¡c cid aÃ¡gaH | kRdhiÃ

7.57.4b underscores the human condition of sinfulness conveyed in the

use of pÃºruSa with a plea to the Maruts to not punish harshly (R'dhak

aÃ¡ vo maruto didyÃºd astu yÃ¡d va aÃ¡gaH puruSÃ¡taa kÃ¡raama).

There is one likely exception to the vulnerability of humanity as

usually implied by the use of pÃºruSa in 7.102.2. This is another hymn to

Parjanya which, as above with 7.101 to Parjanya, also marks a general

change in terminology from other hymns of the Family Books with a

feminine genitive plural form:

yÃ³ gÃ¡rbham Ã³SadhiinaaM gÃ¡vaaM kRNÃ³ty Ã¡rvataam | parjÃ¡nyaH puruSiÃNaam ||

" Parjanya who makes the germ/egg in women, plants, of cattle, and of

horses. " 138 The exception to the other uses of pÃºruSa in the Family

Books, coupled with uncertainty as to authorship and metric aberration

(Van Nooten and Holland, 1994: 330, 633) makes the conclusion that

this is a later insertion the most tempting solution to the anomaly.

Unfortunately, this is the only use of puruSiÃNaam in the entire RV

and comparison is not easy. It is clear, however, that pÃºruSa in this

case refers to the mortal realm which is enabled with offspring by

Parjanya's beneficence. There is a good chance that this hymn might

also be later (Arnold, 1897: 212). In the remaining passages using

pÃºruSa, the limits of humanity as conveyed by the semantic fields that

surround pÃºruSa are much clearer.

The scattered few uses of pÃºruSa and the mere pair of aatmÃ¡n in

the Family Books leaves a multitude of questions which will be better

answered in Chapter 5 concerning the later RV. Further study of later

insertions of hymns into the Family Books will answer some of these

questions especially with regard to the Parjanya hymns in 7.101 and

102. However, as these are agrarian in nature, they are much more

likely of indigenous origin and possibly quite early. As we noted

above 7.102 is likely a later addition. This suggests the more

interesting hypothesis that the changing terminology for the self in

the RV represents not so much " new " ideas of individuality coming into

existence, but a steady and subtle incorporation of existing notions

from the Indus Civilization into the newly-arrived Aryan mythology. As

indicated above in Chapter 2, the pÃºruSa has been identified by Van

Buitenen (1964: 104, note 2), as " already " great and Elizarenkova

suggests it represents a borrowing from another language (1995: 67).

These theories are attended to in detail in Chapter 6 where the Middle

Vedic literature has a great deal more attestations of pÃºruSa allowing

a more careful assessment of its pedigree.

The early uses of aatmÃ¡n show that it began in the RV as a term

for an inner vitality, a dynamic core marking the potency of VaruNa

and Parjanya. These uses and their association with motion and air are

easy seeds for the later metaphysical associations, through breath, of

aatmÃ¡n as

the eternal essence of living beings. For pÃºruSa, the picture is still

unclear. The pÃºruSa is a generic term for beings whose mortal

existence is fraught with frailty.

Conclusions

?

The Vedic cosmos of the Family Books is marked by several concepts

from which the later developments represent a marked departure.

Foremost among these is the absence of reference to corporeal bodies

body (but still somewhat ambiguously), as will be seen as early as the

next earliest portion of the RV in 1.162.20b--serves as a word for the

existence or " self " of deities which can manifest desired

characteristics in response to the prayers of the worshipper. Those

prayers are efficacious when endowed with the special potency

designated by brÃ¡hman. When there is occasion to refer to a

self-generative quality of a given deity's presence/tanuÃº, it is tmÃ¡n

which performs this service. Noting the sudden drop in its use once

aatmÃ¡n appears regularly, it is apparent that the conception of

individuality in the cosmos of Vedic religions changes as well.

The interactive presences/tanuÃº which are variously invoked by

efficacious utterances empowered by brÃ¡hman comes to be replaced by an

absolute equivalency--aatmÃ¡n-brÃ¡hman--where human individuality,

defined and identified as its own entity, must reconcile the verbal

separation implied with the aatmÃ¡n-brÃ¡hman relationship. Still, in the

Family Books, such an evolved conception of human individuality is

nonexistent. It is the gods who have selectively changing

presences/tanuÃº. It is also the gods who have self-generative or

self-sustaining/tmÃ¡n qualities. Only through careful uttering of

prayers with brÃ¡hman can things be affected or put to right order.

This action takes place largely in the realm of speech as far as the

descriptions and texts of the RV are concerned.

It is not until the later literature that detailed cosmologies

arise and, with them, different terminology appears which first

reshapes the meaning of the words as they are found in the Family

Books (e.g. tanuÃº comes to have a decidedly corporeal meaning before

it is virtually lost from use in the BraahmaNa's) and then replaces

them altogether (as with aatmÃ¡n replacing tmÃ¡n). As this newly

evolving self is found in philosophical discourses, the basic

identification of a mental function, mÃ¡nas will, in turn, develop

abstract significations of identity all its own. Concurrent with these

changes, and a move in literary focus to the sacrificial ritual, the

traditional

terms for the great priests of liturgy--kavÃ, vÃpra, and later,

R'Si--are replaced by brahmÃ¡n. The word brÃ¡hman itself becomes more

and more synonymous with Vaac--or becomes the primary aspect of

Vaac--and in so doing begins to develop into its more commonly known

role in the later literature as the designation for the ultimate

cosmic principle.

Sign In

Self in the family books of RV

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Join the conversation

Support the Ashram

Join Groups

Top Downloads