VRATYA AND SACRIFICE by

J. C. H E E S T E R M A N

Utrecht

I. INTRODUCTION The problem of the vr~tyas is certainly one of the most-beaten tracks of Vedic studies. Each generation of Indologists has, since more than hundred years, contributed to its study and tried to define the identity of the vrgtyas, and still there seems to be scope for generations to come. 1 The positions taken by the scholars who have dealt with the problem fall, broadly speaking, in two groups. On the one hand the emphasis is on the secular aspects, in which case the vrgtyas are equated with non-brahmanized tribes of nomades and cattle thieves of Aryan or non-Aryan origin; in this line we find Weber, Aufrecht, Hopkins and Winternitz. 2 On the other hand the greater emphasis is put on the possible religious content of vr~tyahood, its beliefs and cults; thus Bloomfield, who puts the vr~tya of AV. XV on a par with the brahmac~irin; Charpentier, who saw the vr~tya as the precursor of Sivaitic ascetics; and, above all, Hauer's comprehensive study of the vr~tyas as "Glieder ketzerischer Kultgenossenschaften", viewed in the perspective of the development of mysticism and yoga. On one point, however, all studies seem to agree: the vrgtya is beyond the pale of brahmin religion and society, and the vrgtyastoma serves the purpose of his "conversion". A notable exception in this respect is a recent attempt at the solution of the vr~tya problem by S. N. Biswas, who rejects the conversion-concept and replaces it by the concept of purification, the vr~tyas being, in his view, brahmins who have lost their purity by going groupwise to impure countries as warriors and who are
1

For an account of the various studies, see J. W. Hauer, Der Vratya, I (Stuttgart, 1927), pp. 5--40. Cir. also recentlyH. Rau, Staat und Gesellschaft im alten lndien (Wiesbaden, 1957), p. 17, who sees in the vrgtyas 'Werschiedenerlei andersglfiubigeWanderstfimme".

J . C . HEESTERMAN

purified and received back into the brahmin fold groupwise through the vratyastoma, a It is of course clear that the introduction and liberal use of terms like "orthodoxy", "heretics", "conversion", far from simplifying matters, imply a far-reaching statement about Vedic religion; to wit that it took cognizance of other forms of religion as antithetical to itself. The overall picture arising from the ritual texts indicates on the contrary that Vedic religion did not relate itself to differing forms of religion. The antithesis is between more or less effective rites, or of old, superseded (utsanna) versus new rites, all of which are viewed within the framework of the same religion. Moreover the ritual texts are concerned with orthopraxy, not with orthodoxy. Where an orthodoxy may open the possibility of conversion, orthopraxy, being indifferent to conversion, will stress purification. As the vr~tyas have been studied exclusively in terms of extra-brahmanical ethnic groups and religions as opposed to brahmin religion and society, and as they have been viewed in the perspective of postvedic developments, the present paper intends to approach the problem of the vr~tya and his purification from within the brahmanical orthopraxy, in terms of the brahmanical ritual In other words: to investigate whether and, if so, how the vr~tyas fitted in the brahmanical ritual system, our knowledge of which has considerably increased, since Hauer published his study on the vratya, through the later works of Caland3 The attempt may be the more worthwhile since Hauer's Der Vratya, although it offers the basis for any further discussion of the problem in its exhaustive documentation, is particularly weak in its translation and interpretation of the ritual texts. 5 We shall therefore give priority to the ritual texts. Moreover it would seem to me that the much-discussed Vratya book of the AV., important though it is, is of comparatively late date; it presupposes and refers to the fully developed theory of sacrifice, especially from the point of view of the S~maveda (s~mans, metres); ~pDhS. 2.7.16
8 S. Biswas, "Ober das Vr~tyaproblem in der Vedischen RituaUiteratur", ZDMG., 105 (1955), p. 53 f. The same author has dealt at length with the vrfttyastomas in an unpublished Berlin thesis (1955). I am indebted to Dr. H. P. Schmidt for lending me his copy of the latter. Here I also wish to record my gratitude to Dr. Schmidt for his critical remarks. 4 To some extent Biswas seems to have taken the same line, studying, as he does, the problem in its ritual context. A comparison of Hauer's and Caland's translations of the relevant PB. passages will suffice to illustrate this point. As to the documentation: the publication of the complete text of the JB. in the edition of Raghu Vira and Lokesh Chandra (Nagpur 1954) has made the relevant chapters of the JB. (JB. 2.221-227) available.

VR.~TYA AND SACRIFICE

calls it a br~hma.na; contents a n d style are reminiscent o f the Upani.sads. U n d e r these circumstances it is h a r d to accept its cla;m to a n t i q u i t y a d v o cated b y H a u e r a n d Charpentier. D e a l i n g with the vr~tyas f r o m the r i t u a l p o i n t o f view m a y offer also a n o t h e r advantage. T h e ~rauta ritual as p r e s e n t e d in the br~hma.nas a n d sfitras is highly systematized, all statements a n d rules are m e a n t t h r o u g h the a p p l i c a t i o n o f i n t e r p r e t a t o r y rules (paribhg.s~) - to fit into a wellknit whole. O n the o t h e r h a n d we find, however, statements t h a t go c o u n t e r to the system. ~ The ritual texts represent n o t only an effort o f systematization, b u t at the same time the ritualists were c o n c e r n e d with the p r e s e r v a t i o n o f obsolete diverging t r a d i t i o n s - as is for instance b r o u g h t o u t b y the use o f terms which were no l o n g e r u n d e r s t o o d , or the r e c o r d i n g o f rites m a r k e d as utsanna - , even at the price o f c o n t r a d i c t i n g the l a b o r i o u s l y d e v e l o p e d system. It is these cases o f a p p a r e n t c o n t r a d i c t i o n t h a t m a y offer o p p o r tunities to p e n e t r a t e into the h i s t o r y a n d the u n d e r l y i n g ideas o f the Vedic ritual. T h e v r ~ t y a s t o m a s w o u l d seem to p r e s e n t such a case. The r i t u a l system k n o w s o n l y two types o f S o m a sacrifice, those in which one p e r s o n is consecrated a n d acts as the sole sacrificer assisted b y a g r o u p o f n o t - c o n secrated priests (ekdha, ah~na), a n d those where sacrificers a n d priests are the same a n d all o f t h e m are c o n s e c r a t e d (sattra). 7 I n the vr~tyastomas, however, a l t h o u g h t h e y are ekghas, there is a g r o u p o f sacrificers h e a d e d b y a sthapati or g.rhapati, s a n i n s t i t u t i o n otherwise occurring only in sattras. I n c o n t r a d i s t i n c t i o n to sattras, however, there are notc o n s e c r a t e d priests w h o receive daks.i.ngs, a c c o r d i n g to PB. a n d Baudh. 9 For instance, when a brahmin is invited to officiate at a Soma sacrifice, he has to ask among other questions whether it is not an ahina sacrifice for which he is invited, because in that case he ought not to officiate (Caland-Henry, Agnis. toma, no. 4, of. GB. 1.3.20; also Manu XI, 198). On the other hand the ahina sacrifices are dealt with in the normal way and do require the offices of brahmin priests (cf. Caland ad .Ap. 10.1.3). 7 Cf..~p~S. 21. 3.4; BaudhSS. 26.12:289.1-2; these passages deal with the twelveday Soma sacrifice which can be celebrated either as an ahina, in which case there is one diksita assisted by priests, or as a sattra in which case all are dik.sita. Since the 12-day Soma sacrifice is the model for both ahinas and sattras, this statement about the difference between ahina and sattra is of general application. a The term g rkapati is used in connection with the vffttyas; PB. 17.1.7, 14, 17; 4.3. Biswas (Diss., p. 267ff.) has been the first to observe and comment upon the sattra character of the vr~tyastomas. 9 Cf. PB. 17.1.t7; Baudh~S. 18.25:373.9; also Baudh~S. 26.32:318.10: ath~smin vrdtyastome bahava ekasmai dik.sante, 'dik.sita evaindn ydjayanti. There are some cases of ekghas with more than one sacrificer but their case is different since there is no grhapati as in a sattra (of. also PB. 6.9.13 and 24 where the case of a plurality of sacrif-

J. C. HEESTERMAN

The vratyas themselves, according to the indications about their nature, unclear though they be, do not fit either in the picture of the normal sacrificer: they eat unclean food, use bad language (ritual obscenities?), unconsecrated they use the language proper to the dik.sita, assail those who are not to be assailed) ~ This has led all scholars to consider the vr~tyas as extra-brahmanical groups that are to be integrated or reintegrated into the brahmanical fold. In th e present paper it will be argued that the vr~tyas can be linked with certain features of the grauta ritual, which, though overlaid by the systematizing efforts of the ritualists, seem to point to older forms of the ritual. At the same time it will be possible to obtain a glimpse of the development of the ~rauta ritual. II. VRATYASTOMA CELEBRATES VR~TYA ALLIANCE In the first place it will have to be investigated whether the evidence actually points at integration (or reintegration) in the brahmanical fold as the object of the vr~tyastomas. Usually the texts, when dealing with a particular sacrifice, start out stating the occasion, the purpose or the special wish connected with the sacrifice. As regards the vrgtyastomas the relevant passages give the following information: JB. iI, 121:11 tad yad vr~tyastomena yajante lokasy~nukhy~tyai. Like their predecessors, the divya vratya.h, the vrfityas find the way to heaven through the vratyastoma (see also below, Sfifikh.). PB. 17.1.1 also speaks of the failure of the mythical vrfityas, here called daiva vratya.h, to reach heaven. They were left behind (ahiyanta) when the gods went to heaven, and wander about not knowing the stoma and metre by which to reach heaven. Eventually the gods charge the Maruts with delivering the stoma and metre to the daivd vratya.h, who thereupon reach the gods. L~t.ygS. 8.6.2 ye ke ca vr~tya.h sampddayeyus, te prathamena (vratyastomena) yajeran " A n y vratyas who want to join in a group, should perform the first vratyastoma" (in contradistinction to specific categories of icers is distinguished from a group, vrata). Moreover the case of the sam.yajamfina is also irregular since the system as such does not take it into account; otherwise we would expect rules about the relations between the savo. yajarnfinas during the sacrifice, since they should not come into contact with each other (except in the case of a vr~tyastoma or a sattra, BaudhSS. 29.5:375.2-3). 10 Cf. PB. 17.1.9; the rendering of this difficult passage is not meant as an exact translation (see for this passage below, section III). So much, however, is clear that the vr~tyas act in a way which disqualifies them for the ritual in its classical form. 11 Numbering after Nagpur edition. Caland, Auswahl no. 146.

VR.~TYA AND SACRIFICE vr~tyas for w h o m the following v r h t y a s t o m a s are destined). This sfitra should be r e a d t o g e t h e r w i t h : K~ty~S. 22.4.3 vrdtyagan, asya ye sampddayeyus, te prathamena yajeran, which virtually m e a n s the same. 12 BaudhSS. does n o t state explicitly the occasion or aim o f the vr~tyastomas. It does however say t h a t the v r h t y a is cut off f r o m social a n d r i t u a l intercourse (and~y~nna, vicchinnasomapitha) unless he p e r f o r m s the v r ~ t y a s t o m a (BaudhSS. 18.25:372.12). Here o f course there is a cont r a d i c t i o n because it is n o t clear h o w a priest can sacrifice for s o m e b o d y who is cut off f r o m the s o m a d r i n k a n d whose f o o d (and gifts) are unacceptable. ~3 This c o n t r a d i c t i o n m a y be explained in terms o f the classical system overlaying older strata o f ritual t h i n k i n g a n d practice, as will be shown below. A p ~ S . 22.5.4 vrdtydndm, pravdse vrdtyastom~.h, " I n the case o f the going a b r o a d o f the v r ~ t y a s , the v r a t y a s t o m a s are p e r f o r m e d " , vratyana.m pravase m i g h t be t a k e n to m e a n " i n the case o f the residence a b r o a d o f the v r h t y a s " , i.e. being o r having been a b r o a d the vr~tyas p e r f o r m the vrhtyastomas34 It seems however m o r e a p p r o p r i a t e to t a k e it, as C a l a n d does, in the sense of: " W h e n the vr~tyas set o u t (to l e a d a vr~tya life)

12 For sampddayati cf. Lh~y, 9.4.25, sakhdyo bhrdtaro vd ye sampddayeyus te marutstomena yajeran, which Caland (ad PB. 19.14.3) renders: "friends or brothers who wish to come to an agreement should perform the marutstoma (ek~ha)." Also: JB. 2.55 :te ha sma ydvanta.h sampddayanti, te ha sma dik.sante, "as many as united (as co-sattrins), used to undertake (all of them) the consecration." (The previous passage deals with how the sattrins of old selected each other; then those who finally made up the group of sattrins undertook the d~s~t; cf. also BaudhSS. 16.13:260.3). Sampddayati frequently means: to complete, in the sense of: to (cause to) make up a certain number (so as to bring about the sampad, the numerical congruence with another entity characterized by the same number); e.g. SB. 5.3.1.I2 (cf. author's Rdjas~ya, p. 53 n. 28), 11.1.2.2; cf. Minard, Trois Enigmes sur les cents Chemins 1, Lyon 1949, p. 73. In this connection it would be tempting to follow Agnisv~min's comm. ad L~y. 8.6.2., who takes sampddayati as: to make up a certain number; for this number he refers to PB. 17.1.17, where is spoken of the 33 daivd vrdtyd.h. One might also think of the specific numbers of sacrificers mentioned in connection with the dv~da~fiha (KS. 24.9 and 13; PB. 10.3.2-4; .~pSS. 21.1.11 and 14). KfitySS 22.4.3 might in that case mean: "those who want to make up a (specific) number of vr~tyas"; however, sampddayati with gen. in this sense Seems not to be evidenced elsewhere. Caution should prevent us from going beyond suggesting the possibility. 1~ Manu 11.198 consequently puts a fine on officiating at a vratyastoma. The same difficultyobtains in other cases of purification sacrifices, suchlas Agni.slut or Puna.hstoma. 1~ For vrdtydna.m pravdse cf. the expression vrdtyd.rn pravasati (PB.), elsewhere vratya.m dhavayati (JB.) and vrdtydm carati (Bandh.). These expressions are not completely clear. Caland (ad PB. 17.1.1, n. 2) suggests that the expression is elliptic: vrdtyd.m vasati.m pravasati. Anyhow, this much is clear that vr~tyahood involves wandering.

J.c. HEESTERMAN

the vr~tyastomas are to be performed". 15 In this connection particular interest is to be attached to K~t.hSS. 1~ vratyam. (read: vrdtyam.) caritva

cari.syanto vratyastomair agnin samopya guddhyarthdh, saha yajeran,

"When people have led a vrhtya life or are about to enter upon it, they should, after having brought together their (sacrificial) fires, 17 perform together the vr~tyastomas for the sake of purification". It is interesting to note that according to this sQtra the vratyastomas mark the beginning as well as the end of the vratya career. M~n~S.9.3.3.2 grotriy~n vraty~rhg catv~ri p~vanartham, yajeran is clearly corrupted. The above K~t.haka passage shows how it can be emended: drotriya vratyam, caritvd pavanartham, yajeran, "learned (vr~tyas?) should at the end of their vr~ttya life perform (the vr~tyastomas) for the sake of purification". ~s ghflkh~S. 14,69 has it that the vr~tyastomas were performed originally by the Vasus desirous of reaching heaven, thus considering these sacrifices as a k~mya-yajfia for the purpose of reaching heaven. Surveying these passages we see that, apart from the idea of purification (Baudh., K~thaka, M~nava), the purpose of the vr~tyastomas is given by some texts as reaching heaven (JB., PB., ~fikh.). Other texts, without mentioning a specific wish to be attained, state the occasion at which they serve: the uniting of a number of vr~tyas in a group (L~.ty., K~ty.), their setting out on a vrfitya expedition (Ap., Hir.), the end (Mhn.) and the beginning of their expedition (K~.th.). Leaving aside for a moment the impurity and purification of the vr~tyas, which will presently be considered, it would seem that the vr~tyastomas are primarily intended to celebrate the gathering and uniting of a vr~tya group at the beginning as well as at the end of what in view of their wandering and aggressive habits may be termed a raiding expedition. This conclusion is supported by Baudh., who relates that the sons of the Kurubrahmins, after performing the vr~tyastomas, set out as vrhtyas on an expedition against the Pafichlas (atho haitena kurubrahman, dm putrd ~jire... tena he.st.vdpa~cdldn vrdty~ abhiprayayu.h, 18.26:374.8). In the same direction points also the sam.jfi~ne.st.i, which according to Baudh. 18.25: 15 HireS. 17.2.31 reads vrdtyana.rnpravaso... ; the text is corrupt. Caland translates the ~p. passage: "wenn man auszieht urn ein Vr~ttyatebenzu fiihren..." 1~ Suryakanta, Kat.hakaSalhkalana, Lahore 1943, p. 28 of ~rauta s~tra part. 17 The bringing together of the fires of the sacrificers is the normal procedure at sattras; cf. Ap~S. 21.2.12. 18 For the learned vratyas, el. the learned (anacana)sons of the warrior vr~ttinas, who are to be engaged as priests for a ~yenasacrifice(L~ty~S. 8.5.1).

VR.~TYA AND SACRIFICE

373.10 forms part o f the morning service o f the vr~tyastoma. 1~ W h e n performed independently this i.st.i aims at establishing agreement and unity r o u n d a leader. Its being part o f the vrgtyastoma is accounted for by Baudh. (1.c.): asam.j~tam ira va ete caranti ye vr~ty~.m caranti sam evainan j~dpayanti, " w i t h o u t agreement are those who live a vr~tya life, (the gods to w h o m the i.s.ti is destined) cause them to agree a m o n g themselves". ~~ In the course o f the afternoon service (again according to Baudh., 1.c.) a cake for I n d r a and the Maruts is offered. This offering is to be c o m p a r e d with the I n d r a cake offered as a sequel to the independent sam.ffiane.st.i (MS. 2,2,5; M~ngS. 5,1,10,9). Baudh. explains it:aindro vai vratyo, m8ruto grdmo, grdmen, aivainan sam~co dadh8ti, "the vrhtya (-leader) is Indra-like, the group is Marut-like, he (Indra) unites them in a group"Y 1 Thus again the unity r o u n d the leader is given expression. F r o m the above we m a y conclude that the vr~tyastoma primarily celebrates the covenant between the vrfityas when setting out on a vr~tya expedition, while on return a similar celebration takes place. ~ III. IMPURITY OF THE VR~TYA It is significant for the tenacity o f established ideas that Hauer, although he saw clearly that several passages could not refer to conversion rites, 23 still adheres to the conversion theory, which unnecessarily complicates his main thesis. The impurity and exclusion o f the vrgtya f r o m social intercourse is however undeniable and presents a strong case for Biswas' purification theory. Besides the passage f r o m Baudh. quoted in the previous section, where

1~ For the sam. jfi~ne.st.i cf. Caland, Wunschopfer, no. 117. s0 Hauer, o.c., p. 111, takes it to refer to the unity between vr~tyas and brahmins. In the first place, however, the vr~ttyas are not mentioned as a party with whom agreement is to be reached; secondly the sa.mjfi~me.s~iis meant to establish agreement among the sacrificers themselves, as can be seen from the relevant passages dealing with it as an independent sacrifice; cf. Caland, o.c. Cf. also BaudhgS. 18. 24:371.6: te yam abhisarojdnate, ta.m sthapatim kurvanti. ~1 Taken by themselves Baudh.'s explanations could of course be interpreted in the sense of reconciliation of the vr~tya with the community, gr~ma. The fact, however, that the Maruts themselves are considered by Baudh. as vffttyas (see below), and the parallelism of the Indra-Marut offering with the sam.jfiane.sti indicate that the gr~ma is not the village community but the community of the vr~ttyas who are being united among themselves. 22 Compare the parallel pr~yan.iya and udayaniya rites, opening and closing the normal Soma sacrifice. 3a O . c . , pp. 105, n. 154; 114, n. 201; 119.

J . C . HEESTERMAN

the exclusion of the vr~tya from social intercourse is clearly stated, we have to discuss a number of other passages. In the first place our attention is required by PB. 17.1.2, where an interpretation is given of the vrgtyas' "being left behind". "Those who lead a vrgtya life are left behind as defective because they neither practice the vows connected with Veda study nor agriculture or trade. Through the sixteen-versed stoma this can be reached," i.e. this stoma is capable of eliminating the deficiency, of making them complete (Mn~ v~ ete Myante

ye vratyam, pravasanti, na hi brahmacaryam, caranti, na kr.sim, va.nijyam. ; .so.da~o va etat stoma.h samaptum arhati). As S~ya.na makes us observe, brahmacarya on the one hand and kLsi and van.ijya on the other are the
characteristics of respectively brahmins and vaigyas. On first sight one might conclude that the vr~tyas will be k.satriyas; this would moreover be in accordance with their aggressive habits which will presently be discussed. Indeed JB. 2.223 says: "the vr~tyas are deprived of brahman, for they are called r~japutras" (brahmaoo va ete vy.rddhyante, ye vratyam. dhavayanti; rgtjaputra iti hyenan acak.sate). It appears however that according to the same text they are not only to be furnished with brahman but also with k.satra. Also it may be noted that according to JB. 2.220 the vrhtyas are deprived of Indra force (indriya v~rya) and it is exactly this deficiency which the sixteen-versed stoma is expected to make up for, as JB. consistently declares in the passages dealing with the vrgtyastomas. Neither should it be forgotten that we find also learned sons of warrior vr~tinas as against vrgtyas deprived of brahman who are called king's sons. Under these circumstances the proper conclusion seems to be that the vr~tyas are actually "betwixt and between"; they are neither brahmin nor vai~ya (PB.), neither brahmin nor k.satriya UB.). This ambiguous condition has already been stated in the preceding PB. passage: the wandering about in quest of heaven; the vrgtyas' practising neither Vedastudy nor worldly occupations is offered as a paraphrasis, another way of expressing the same ambiguous condition. In this respect they closely resemble the dik.sita who is in the same predicament of having left this world but not yet reached heaven (TS. 6.1.1.1; MS. 3.6.1). In the next section we shall further investigate the resemblance of vrgtya and dik.sita. Here, however, mention should be made of another dik.sitalike figure: the r~jasfiya sacrificer, who has equally departed from this world but has not yet arrived in the world of the gods and who, like the dik.sita, is made to integrate in himself the universe. As k.satra in statu naseendi he must integrate on the one hand k.satra and brahman; on the other k.satra and vig. This he realizes during the ratnin offerings, through

VR.~TYA AND SACRIFICE I n d r a force (indriya), activated by the offering for Indra, which encompasses the other ratnin offerings. 24 I n the same way the indriya vfrya, under the liturgical f o r m o f the sixteen-versed stoma, makes the vrgtyas (or rather their sthapati who, according to Baudh. II, p. 371.7, undertakes the dik.sg vows in behalf o f the others) complete and causes them to reach heaven. Seen in this light PB.'s statemelit a b o u t the position Of the vrhtya does not primarily refer to his exclusion f r o m " o r t h o d o x " society, but is an idiom expressing the ambiguous condition o f the consecrated. 25 The most important passage regarding the impurity o f the vrhtyas is PB. 17.1.9, where the guilt (papman) o f the vr~tyas is described. This passage, differently translated and c o m m e n t e d u p o n by several scholars, remains unclear as to its precise meaning. Caland renders it: "Swallowing poison are those who eat foreign f o o d as b r a h m a n ' s food, who call g o o d words bad, who use to strike the guiltless with a stick, who, t h o u g h not initiated, speak tl~e speech o f the initiated." "Swallowing p o i s o n " (garagir) usually refers to the accepting o f f o o d and presents from, and the officiating at sacrifices of, unqualified patrons. Their "eating foreigfi f o o d as b r a h m a n ' s f o o d " (ye brahmadya.m janyam annam adanti) is doubtful. Since all following phrases start with a-privans (aduruktam, ada.n.dyam, adTk.sita.h) it is tempting to read 'brahmadyam avagraha being often dropped in ross. -, " t h e y eat f o o d n o t to be eaten by brahmins (i.e.) foreigners' f o o d " . This m u c h "is clear that they eat food impure because o f its source, as is also implied in their being garagir. 2~ Cf. Rajasaya,ch. VI, esp. p. 51. For other indications of resemblance with rhjasfiya rites, see below, sect. X, end. 25 Since the PB. and especially the JB. passages discussed here seem to be cornerstones in Biswas' vrfttya theory, it has been necessary to state at length my view on these passages. I cannot follow Biswas when he interprets the position of the vratyas in terms of casterules: the vr~tyas' being brahmins, who have lost their caste because of their going abroad and acting as k.satriyas. Apart from the dubious equation of var.na with caste, the texts seem to indicate that the caste system did not yet obtain, as will be seen later on. Even in the rftjas~ya's ratnin list the articulation of the varoa system is realized only in the White YV., i.e. at a comparatively late date. It should further be noted that the PB. and JB. passages discussed above seem each to consider only two opposites: brahman-k.satra (21B.) or brahman-vi~ (PB.). The point is that the vr~tya is neither of the two opposites; in order fully to unfold himself he must integrate both opposites, not become or rebecome one of the two. In the same way the rhjasQya sacrificer must integrate k.satra and brahman or k.satra and viL The tripartite division brahman-k.satra-vi~, and the quadripartite division which takes into account the ~udra, are not very prominent in the r~jas~ya and can be shown to be the result of development. This much is clear, however, that the rhjas~ya sacrificer does not belong to one of the constituents of the system, but is, as an extra element, born out of the others, at the same time encompassing them. The same seems to be true of the vr~tya,

l0

J~ C. HEESTERMAN

The next clause - aduruktavakyam, duruktam ahu.h - must refer to their speech, as a comparison with the JB. will show: vaca va ete vy.rdhyante ye vratyam, dhavayanti, vaca hy apfttam amedhyam, vadanti (JB. 2.221-222), "the vr~tyas are defective as regards their voice, because with their voice they speak what is impure 2e and unfit for sacrificial purposes", i therefore prefer to render this clause in PB. as: " t h e y call improper language proper language." One o f the gains o f H a u e r ' s study is the connection between the rites o f the vrfityas and the mah~vrata festival. ~7 The improper language will probably have been in the same line as the reviling and obscene dialogues in the mahhvrata. ~s I f the reading is correct, JB. 2.222 seems to support this: mriyanta ira va ete ye vratyam, dhavayanti, uta hi sthaviratarasyanta ahanasya.m vadanti, "those who set out as vrfityas die as it were, for they speak in the presence o f an older m a n (?) obscene language". ~9 The improper language o f the vr~tyas, as has already been stressed by Hauer, is a form o f the consecrated ritual speech. This is also implied in the last clause o f the PB. passage: adfk.sita d~k.sitavacam, vadanti, "(though) not having undergone the (normal) diks.~, they speak dik.sita speech." This statement should be read together with Baudh.'s equation o f the vrfityav~da and the dik.sitav~da (18.24: 371. 12). s~ A l t h o u g h the vr~tyav~da is different f r o m the dik.sita's speech in the classical sacrifice, the point in c o m m o n is that b o t h are ritual, consecrated speech. We m a y conclude f r o m this that the vr~tyas used peculiar ritual utterances, considered impure because o f their abusive and obscene contents. ~s Caland, Auswahl, reads avratam, "what is against the vow", i.e. against the vow of the normal dik~ita (?). 37 O.c.,p. 246 ft. Not all of his arguments are however valid. PB. 24. 18 mentions the vr~tyas as the founders of the 61 days lasting sattra of which the mahftvrata forms part. The mahftvrata forms part of many sattras and the passage cannot be quoted in support of the vrhtyas as founders of the mahfivrata. There is no evidence that the 61-day sattra would be older or more original than any other sattra. Further, in view of the uncertainty regarding the derivation of vrata and vratya and their possible connection, no argument should be derived from the term mahavrata. As to the hymn RV. 10.101 and its sexual allusions, there is no obvious connection with the mahftvrata or the vrfttyas except for the name of its r.si, Budha Saumya; the .r.si name has, however, as Geldner suggests, probably been concluded from the beginning of the hymn: ~d

budhyadhvam.
~8 Hauer suggests this connection, o.c., p. 267. 29 The reading according to the Nagpur edition, which records no other variants except Caland's reading sthaviratarasyO.sya.m vadanti. 30 For the speech of the dik.sita cf. Caland-Henry, Agni~toma, no. 19. dik~itavada can also mean the proclamation of the dik.sita; thus Charpentier, WZKM., 25 p. 362 f., who takes dik.sitavac of PB. in the same sense, vratyavf:da would then be the proclamation of having become a vrfttya. The weight of the evidence lies however on their speech, nowhere their "proclamation" is mentioned.

VRATYA AND SACRIFICE

11

The third clause of PB. 17.1.9 - ada.nd.yal.n da.n.dena ghnantad caranti, "they go about assailing those who are not to be assailed" - speaks of unlawful aggressiveness. Here also the JB. can elucidate the meaning: ahi.msyam, brahman, am. him. santi, ~rotriya .m va g.rhamedhina .mva (JB. 2.225), "they harm the brahmin who is not to be harmed, whether Vedascholar or householder performing the domestic rites". They commit cruel, unappeased deeds (krftra, adanta, ib. 223). This guilt (paprnan) is removed, according to PB. 17.1.9, by the sixteenversed stotras, al but it is also removed in another - probably older - way by "wiping off", i.e. by giving away their possessions and special equipment. "They wipe off (their guilt) on him to whom they give it". 32 Finally, L~t.y~S. 8.6.29-30, after quoting PB. 17.1.16, says that after performing the vrAtyastoma the vr~tyas should resort to the way of living of those who know the Vedas (traividyavrtti.m samati.st.heyu.h), while one m a y from then on eat with them and officiate at their sacrifices. KhtySS. 22.4.28 equally states that they obtain access to social intercourse, become vyavaharya; compare also Baudh.'s statement to this effect quoted in the previous section. The impurity of the vr~tyas is thus clearly attested. It remains to be seen whether this indeed means that they are to be integrated or reintegrated into brahmanical religion and society. That is: whether they are in need of purification any more than the normal sacrificer. IV. VRATYA LINKED WITH D[K$1TA

The pivotal point, in m y opinion, is the fact that the vr~tya is put on a par
with the diksita. Not only calls Baudh. 18.24, as has been seen, his speech (vrdtyavdda) the rftpa of the speech of the dik.sita (dik.sitavada), while PB. 17.1.19 calls it directly d~k.sitavac, but we also find that PB. 24.18.5-7 mentions three ~lokas, not known from elsewhere, which extol the dik$a of the vr~tya leader Budha Saum~yana. N o w when we take a close look at the condition of the dik.sita, we observe some features which usually are characteristic of impurity. One 3~ The same statement PB. 17.2.2; 3.3. JB. on the other hand equates the sixteenversed arrangement of the stotras with the indriya virya which the vr~tyas had lost and which they now regain. 3~ PB. 17.1.16. For the possessions of the vr~tyas (vrdtyadhana) see lb. 14 and 15. Here only their special equipment is mentioned. According to an opinion quoted ApgS. 22.5.13 not only the equipment but everything they obtained (sdtam) constitutes the vrfttyadhana that has to be given away. Cf. HireS. 17.2.41, reading sampdditam instead of sdtam, where this opinion is marked by iti vij~dyate as a ~ruti. Cf. also M~nSS. 9.3.3.9: vr~tya equipment and vratyadhana are to be given to an enemy.

12

J.C. HEESTERMAN

should not accept the food of the dik.sita, one should not wear his garments, nor should one touch him or mention his name (,~pSS. 10.13 1-2; 15.15). One may interpret these rules in terms of "dangerous sacredness". It then remains to be seen whether this dangerous sacredness is different from impurity. It seems open to doubt whether in dealing with Vedic sacrifice the terms sacred and profane are workable. The texts themselves do not seem to use these concepts but express themselves on the lines of this world and yonder world, truth versus non-truth (satya - an.rta),8a pure versus impure, what is possessed of ~r~ versus what is evil (pdpa). s~ It wilI therefore be advisable to avoid the concept of sacredness. It will be shown that the dik.sita is actually impure. It can be said that the rules quoted above, as well as other prescriptions for the conduct of the dik.sita are intended to safeguard the power accumulated and tied up in the dik.sita during the dik.s~ period against "leakage";35 the tying up of the dik.sita and the power accumulated in him seems to be indicated by KS. 23.6:81.11 "he who has undergone the dik.s~ is tied by a noose, a6 the noose is of Varun. a's nature; he who eats his (the dik.sita's) food will be grabbed by Varu.na ... therefore one should not eat the food of the dik.sita". Or, as the parallel passage MS. 3.6.7 has it: "His food is not to be eaten, for, since he is tied, he is afflicted as it were" (etdsydnnam an~dydm, drta ira hy ~.sd baddhd.h). The dik.sita's being tied implies therefore more than precautions against "leakage" of accumulated power. The texts make it perfectly clear that the dik.sita is possessed of pdpman. KS. lb. continues: "the evil (pdpman) of the dik.sita is divided in three ways: he who eats his food (takes on) a third p a r t ; he who mentions his inauspiciousness (a~l~larn) (takes on) a third part; he who mentions his name (takes on) a third part; therefore one should not eat the diks.ita's food, mention his name or his inauspiciousness". In the same way MS. 3.6.7:69.17 says: "The guilt of the dil~.sita is divided in three ways; he 3a Thus, for instance, the sacrificer at an i.s~isays: "here I go from non-truth (an.rta) to truth (satya)" cf. Hillebrandt, N.V.O., p. 5. a~ On ~rf - p~pd, cf. Gonda, Early Vis.nuism,p. 182 f.; on ~reyas versus papfyas, see Ran, o.c., pp. 32-34. 36 On the power-accumulation of the dik.sita, cL author, "Dak~i.n~t", llJ., 3 (1959), p. 248 ft. The idea of concentration and accumulation is also borne out by the dosed embryo-like attitude of the dik.sita (cf. Hentze, Tod, Auferstehung, Weltordnung, Ziirich, 1955, p. 131); closing his hands, like an embryo, "he clasps in his hands the sacrifice and all the deities" (AB. 1.3.19). 36 The noose seems to refer to the dik.sita's mekhalS. It is no matter of wonder that one should think of one's enemy when one is girded with the mekhalgt (MS. 3.6.7).

VRATYA AND SACRIFICE

13

who eats his food (takes on) a third part; he who mentions his inauspiciousness (takes on) a third part; the ants who bite him (take on) a third part; therefore his (the dik.sita's) food is not to be eaten, his inauspiciousness is not to be mentioned, the dik.sita-garment is not to be worn for in this (latter) are the ants who bite him". 87 The vr~tya and the dik.sita are very much alike. Both are possessed of p~pman. Both are avyavahdrya, to borrow K~ty.'s expression. The comparison can be pushed further. The descriptions of the vrhtya's p~pman in PB. 17.1.9 find their counterpart in the drk.sita. The vr~tya's as well as the dik.sita's food is not to be accepted. The speech of vr~tya and dik.sita are squarely put on a par. As to this point it is interesting to note that JB. 2.64 explains the use of the word vicak.sa.na by the dik.sita, when addressing people, as pairing (mithuna). 3s It would seem as though we find here a mitigated, distant echo of the obscene ritual speech of the vr~tyas. The aggressiveness of the vr~tyas, their assailing those that are not to be assailed, can in my opinion be linked with the dik.sita's sending san~hdras, emissaries who collect goods for him. ~9 Although this rite in the normal paradigms of the Soma sacrifice is not at all violent, it has a parallel in the a~vamedha, where indeed goods are taken by force; it is also connected with the cattle raid in the rhjas~ya. In both the cases of the vr~tya and the dik.sita the collected goods are given away as dak.sin.~s. 4~ In this connection it is also interesting to note that the acceptance by the dik.sita of the goods collected through the saniy~cana is considered an.rta, because he undertakes the dik.sh in order to give (and not to take) (KS. 23.6:81.17). It seems therefore that also on this count the vr~tya and the dik.sita are alike. It is also significant, as was already noted by Hauer, 41 that Baudh. 18. 24:371.7 equates the equipment of the vr~tyas with that of the dik.sita (garment, hide, turban, staff). In both cases the special apparel is to be discarded at the end of the sacrifice. We may therefore conclude that in principle the dik.sita is as much in need of purification as the vr~tya. This purification is provided for in
87 Cf. also PB. 5.6.10. 38 vicaksa.navatf~n vdca.m vadati ... prd.no vai vicak.sa.nas, tasya vdg eva rnithunam, mithunavat[m vdca.m vadati. The use of the word vicaksa.na is characteristic for the diksitav~c. Cf. Caland-Henry, Agnis.t.oma, no. 19. 39 Cf. on this saniyacana rite Caland-Henry, Agni$t.oma, no. 23; author, Dak.si.nd, p. 248. 40 Cf..~pSS. 22.5.13 "they should give all they have obtained (sdta); that is the wealth

of the vr~tyas (vrdtyadhana)." 41 O.c., p. 193.

14

J.C. HEESTERMAN

the Soma paradigm by the final rites and especially by the avabh.rtha bath. Through the avabh.rtha rites the dik.sita frees himself from Varun. a's noose. 42 He is freed " o f both god-made and man-made guilt (enas)" as KS. 29.3:171.10 has it, 43 while SB. 4.4.5.5. states that he is freed of all guilt, of all evil pertaining to his heart (tdd ena.m sdrvasmad dh.rdydd ~nasa.h papmdnah, prdmu~cati). According to JB. 2.67 the avabh.rtha is a recess, a hiding place so as not to be followed by phpman (papmano "nanvav~y~ya); the avabh.rtha takes away the sacrificer's p~pman; he should quickly come out of the water so as to separate himself from the p~pman (papmano vyav.rttyai). In section II it has been concluded that the vrhtyastoma represents a festival celebrating the alliance of the vrhtyas setting out on an expedition, and repeated at the end of their expedition. Although the dik.s~ in the normal Soma paradigm is a rite preparatory to a sacrifice, it should be remembered that the dik.sita condition lasts for the whole period of the sacrifice up to the concluding rites; that is, up to the avahb.rtha rites and the hair-cutting and paring of the nails. Moreover there are a few instances where the dik.s~ is not preparatory to a Soma sacrifice but survenes after a sacrifice, or where the dik.s~ observances fill the period intervening between two sacrifices. Such a case is given by Ap~S. 22.3. 16-17 where the observances to be held during a year after the s~dyaskra sacrifice are pointedly called dik.sh: "this is the dik.sa". Also after the abhijit and vi~vajit Soma sacrifices dik.s~-like observances are prescribed (ApgS. 17.26.14-20, cr. especially the wearing of an u.sni.sa). Equally in the periods intervening between the c~turm~sya sacrifices diks~ observances are to be kept (ApSS. 8.5.4-11 ; cf. also the hair-cutting after each of the c~tttrm~syas, during the intervening periods the sacrificer has his hair grow). Another instance is provided by the r~jasfiya, which begins with the socalled pavitra Soma sacrifice, followed by a year-long dik.s~ or by the c~turm~syas, 4~ at the end of which the unction festival takes place; then again after the unction and da~apeya festivals a year of dik.sg observances follows, ended by the hair-cutting Soma sacrifice.45 ~ CL TS. 6.6.3; KS. 29.3; MS. 4.8.5. 4~ Cf. ~B. 4.4.5.22; 12.9.2.4. 44 Cf. Rajasftya,p. 7. I have argued there that there are two ways of marking the year preceding the unction: either by the cgturm~syas or, in terms of the Soma ritual, by a year-long d~.s~. Both patterns are used by ikp. and Hir. ~5 Baudh~S.26.3:274.14, dealing with the shortened form of the rgtjasfiya,explicitly speaks of d~.sa with reference to the period after the unction and dagapeya festivals: ardhamasena saptada~o da~apeyo, 'rdhamasar~diks.ito dik.sitavratf. For the ensuing hair-cutting sacrifice he then prescribes a separate dik~ftperiod in accordance with the normal Soma paradigma.

VR_ATYA AND SACRIFICE

15

These instances of the non-paradigmatical occurrence of dik.sh periods point at an older state of affairs, in which the ritual was conceived of as fully cyclical, that is as a sequence of periods of concentration and growth involving impurity (dik.sg), punctuated by dispersion, disintegration and lustration (sacrifice, dak.si.nh-giving, final b a t h ) ) 6 Viewed against this background vratyahood and dik.s~ show the same pattern. In the same way that dik.s~ periods succeed each other, the vr~tyastoma is followed by another vr~tyastoma. If we take into account the development of the classical ritual, we may also understand how the vrgtyastomas came to be a purely lustratory ceremony. At the time of the codification in br~hma.nas or sfitras, or even before, 47 the cyclical pattern was broken up. Thus the dik.sg and avabh.rtha ceremonies, which are alike and may in the original cyclical pattern have coincided, were dissociated and specialized: the dik.sg ceremony became an introductory rite and the avabh.rtha a final bath. It would seem that in the same way the vrgtyastoma was finally specialized as a purely lustratory ritual.
V. VR~TYAS A N D INDO-ARYANS

From the investigation it has so far become clear that the vr~tya is no less "orthodox", not more outside brahmanical religion and society, than the dik.sita. Actually the vr~tyas are found in the homeland of Vedic brahmanism. As has been seen above, the sons of the Kuru-brahmins set out as vrhtyas against the Paficglas, among whom Kegin Dgrbhya is performing a sacrifice (BaudhSS. 18.26). On this episode TB. 1.8.4.1-2 sheds an interesting light; this passage deals with the 12 "yoking offerings" (prayujdm. hav~m..si) which can be performed as monthly sacrifices covering a whole year. These offerings are explained by referring to the habits of the KuruPafichlas, who are said to set out on an expedition, which the comm. ad TS. 1.8.20 terms digvijaya, in easterly direction during the cold season, where they seize the barley crop, feed their men and animals and return westward at the end of the hot season before the rainy season; during the second part of the year they work their own fields and harvest. 48
~6 Cf. R~jas~ya, p. 224; Dak.si.n~, pp. 251, 257. a7 There is evidence of the existence of fixed sfitra-like rules, preceding the sfitras

as known to us. These latter show sometimes divergent interpretations of the various schools of what clearly must have been one and the same rule (for an example cf. Rajasaya, p. 63 f.). 48 Cf. Ra]as~ya, pp. 209-211. cf also ~B. 5.5.2.5.

16

J . c . HEESTERMAN

In this connection also the figure of the Pafic~la Kegin D~rbhya is interesting. The vr~tyas can also be considered, in a general sense, as kegina.h. JB. 2.225, speaking about the verses on which the agni.s.tomastotra, the last stotra, of the vrgtyastoma is chanted, calls these verses kegin~h and explains that the vrgtyas go about with (long) hair (ke~air ira hy ete caranti). The rink between Kegin Dgrbhya and the vr~tyas seems to be even closer. Nid~nas~3tra 6.11 speaks of two kinds (two families, or lineages?) of vr~tyas: the Sir.s~dis and the Ai~ikayfivis. The Ai.sikayfivis and their g.rhapati Ku.sita occur also as vr~tyas in JB. 2,226; 40 the gir.s~dis are not known from elsewhere. This latter name may however be connected with the change of name of Ke~in D~rbhya as related in BaudhSS. 18.39:389.450 into gir.sa.nya (for Kegin; i.e. connected with, growing on the head) Kauga (substituting Dgrbhya, son of Darbha); gir.s~di m a y mean then: "whose name begins with (a reference to the) head" or "the first among whom (had a name mentioning the) head". I f I am right in connecting Sir.sfidi and Sir.sa.nya (Kau~a) i.e. Kegin D~rbhya, who is always mentioned as a Paficfila, their counterparts the Ai.sikay~vis whose name m a y be connected with ~.sik~, reed, like darbha used as a ritual material, 51 might be Kurus. Now PB. 17.4.3 speaks of the vr~tyas whose grhapati was Ku.sRaka, i.e. of the Ai.sikay~vi vr~tyas, and relates that they were cursed by Lug~kapi Kh~rgali who predicted their downfall. This Luggkapi Khgrgali is mentioned elsewhere as connected with Kegin Dgrbhya and the Pafic~las (JB 2.122; KS. 30.2). It seems possible that if in the gir.s~dis we have to recognize Pafic~las, the Ai.sikay~vis represent the Kurus. The rivalry between Kurus and Paficfilas is illustrated by the Baudh. passage quoted above, where the Kurus set out as vr~tyas against the Pafic~las. 5~ In this connection it should also be noted that the vr~tyas are intimately 49 Here they are called ai.sikap~va. 50 Cf. Caland, Abh. K. M., XII, 1, p. 25. 51 If we have to think here of darbha and i.sik~tas purifiers at the dik.s~t,JB.'s reading ai.sikapava may be the correct one. In a broader conspectus it is, however, equally possible that such names as D~rbhya, Ai.sikay~tvi,Ku~a, Kh~m. ~tika and the like point at a connection with vegetation; their bearers are then to be thought of as cosmic men concentrating in their hair the power of vegetation. 52 For the downfall of the Kurus, cf. JB. 2.206; SatikhSS. 15.16.11-12. Held, The Mahabharata, Thesis Leiden 1935, p. 310 considers the Kurus and the Pafic~las as two rival phratries. It is perhaps significant for their relationship that the Kuru king Uccaih.w is mentioned as the maternal uncle of the Pafic~la king Kegin D~rbhya (JB. 2.279; JUB. 3.29.1). The ~ir~tdis and the Ai.sikay~tvisare related to each other as 'older' and 'younger'; in the same way there are 'older' and 'younger' vr~tyas. Generally speaking indications of a dualistic religious and social system are frequently met with (cf. e.g. ~B. 3.3.2.2; see also Kuiper, Numen 8, 1961, p. 39ff.).

VRATYA AND SACRIFICE

17

connected with the Maruts. The Maruts seem to be the mythical prototype of the vr~tyas. BaudhSS. 18.26 relates that the vrgtyastoma was performed by the Maruts, who had as their sthapati Vis.nu; next the daiva vratya.h performed it with Budha Saumya as sthapati; then lastly the sons of the Kuru-brahmins performed it. According to PB. 17. 1.1 the gods went to heaven, but from among them the daiva vratya.h were left behind; in the end the Maruts were told by the gods to deliver to the daiva vraty&h the stoma by which they ultimately reached the gods. This stoma is called the stoma of the Maruts. It would seem indeed that the Maruts are themselves vr~tyas. ~3 PB. 17.1.7 mentions a Dyut~na Mgruta as a g.rhapati of the vrgtyas, This Dyutgna Mgruta we find also in the formula TS. 5.5.9.4:... dyut~nds tv~ rn~rut6 mar~tdbhir uttaratd.h patu, 54 where he apparently is the leader of the Maruts. 55 It is significant that the Kuruvr~tyas, when asked about their identity, answer that they are the Maruts and that their sthapati is Vi.s.nu. As to the vr~tyas' connection with the Maruts the karfr7 i.s.ti offers an interesting detail. The sacrificer of this i.s.ti puts on a garment with black fringes - like the vr~tyas' garment - with the mantra " T h o u art the force of the Maruts". Thus the black-fringed garment seems to be connected with the Maruts (TS. 2.4.9.1; cf. KS 11.10; MS. 2.4.8). A few words should be added here about the daivya (Baudh.), divya OB.) or daiv~ (PB.) vr~ty~.h. It is typical that the Kuru-Pafic~la vr~tyas identify themselves not with these daivyd vratya.h but directly with the Maruts. The relevant opposition seems not to be divine vr~tyas as against human vrgtyas - indeed the texts never speak about mdnu.sa vr~tyd.h -, but of dev&h as against daivy~ vrdty~.h. When the gods go to heaven the daivya vratya.h stay behind and rejoin them later on. ~G They belong to the gods but at the same time are opposed to them. They are said to have offended Rudra (ighna) or V~yu OB. 2.221) or Varu.na (PB. 24.18.2). They are consequently left behind, defective. Keeping this in mind we m a y render the expression "daivya" with 53 For the Maruts as sacrificers who wish to reach heaven cf. JB. 2.175 in the exposition of the pafica~radiya or marufft.m stoma; also as ygtsattrins wishing to reach heaven, JB. 2.297. We shall see later on, section X, that the y~tsattrins are closely connected with the original vr~tya ritual. 54 Cf..~pSS. 17.10.11. ~5 SB. 3.6.1.16 Dyutana Mfiruta, in an udg~t.rformula at the erection of the udumbari pillar in the sadas (Agni.yt.omano. 94; PB. 6.4.2), is identified with Vayu. According to JUB. 3.21.3 the ekavrgtya is Vayu; cf. also JB. 2.221. s6 The motif of being left behind as against going to heaven is well known; cf. PB. 8.5.7; 12.11.10; 15.5.20; 16.12.1; 20.11.3.

18

J. c. HEESTERMAN

"belonging to the gods". 57 Deva and daivya vratya seem to be the two poles of the heaven-going process: deva stands for the successful completion, daivya for the aspiring to heaven. In this sense all vrhtyas are daiwa. 5s These considerations will have made it clear that the vr~tyas, far from being outside the brahmanical pale or even non-Aryan, are ethnically through their connections with the Kuru-PaSc~las, as well as religiously, through their links with the Maruts, authentic Aryans.

VI. TENDENCY TO EXCLUDE IMPURITY IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SRAUTA RITUAL If it be accepted that the vrfitya fully belongs to the world of the Vedic ritual and that his impurity is essentially the same as the condition of the dik.sita, the problem arises as to what role impurity plays in the ritual drama. One will be inclined to see the Vedic sacrifice solely as the domain of rigid ritual purity. This has indeed been the tendency of the systematizing ritualists and in the course of development the sacrifice became more and more the exclusive domain of purity as against the impurity of the outside world. It is, for instance, significant that whereas MS. and KS., as has been seen above, still speak at length about the p~pman of the dik.sita, the gB. does not mention it. A similar instance is discussed by Hauer 59 regarding the ritual copulation during the mah~vrata festival, which was finally relinquished as antique and fell into disuse (puran. a, utsanna; ~aflkh~S. 17.6.2). In the same way the killing of the sacrificial victim will in all probability have taken place originally while it was bound to the sacrificial post, as seems to be evidenced by Ru 1.162.9: "what of the flesh of the (immolated) horse has been eaten by flies, what sticks to the post and to the knife ... all that of you should be with the gods." Possibly the peculiar way in which the animal is bound to the stake points in the same direction: the cord is fastened to the right foot, goes round the left side of the neck and is then wound round the right horn and finally fastened to the stake, s~ Thus room is left for the slaughterer's knife. TS. 6.3.6.3 explains this 5~ Caland, PB. translation, renders it "adherents of the god", i.e. Rudra, joining in this respect Charpentier; see also below section X. 58 An interesting note is supplied by TS. 2.5.11.8, where the envoy of the gods is Agni; the one of the Asuras is called daivya. 59 O.c., p. 264 ft. e0 Cf. Schwab, Thieropfer, p. 81.

VRATYA AND SACRIFICE

19

proceeding by referring to the apparently profane practice for killing animals: "for they tie ~an animal) for killing in such a way that it is standing opposite (the man who ties it)" (vddhyam. h[pratyd~ea.m pratimu~cdnti); thus in contradistinction to ritual practice, where the animal is bound "transversely", i.e. probably from the side. The important point here for our purpose is the direct link between tying to the post and killing. That the sacrificial animal was originally killed in this way, by severing the head from the trunk seems also to be indicated by the frequent references in the ritual speculations to the "cutting off of the head of the sacrifice" (e.g. ~B. 14.2.2.11). However, in the ritual as it is known to us the animal is killed by suffocation and not while bound at the stake, but actually outside the place of sacrifice, in the ~amit.r's shed placed north of the sacrificial place. Here again, in my opinion, the concern to remove what is impure and inauspicious from the place of sacrifice is evident. It would be wrong to ascribe this tendency to some kind of puritanical concern. Its rationale is rather to be found in a shift of ritual thinking in which the ritual universe and its brahmin guardians came to be viewed as pure as against the impure profane world. This latter attitude is borne out when the sacrificer at the beginning of a sacrifice says: "here I go from untruth to truth" (iddm ahdm dn.rt~t satydm @aimi ''61 and at the end: "here I am the man that I am in reality" (iddm ahdmyd evdsmisb'smi. G~. These formulas seem however to be comparatively young and proper to the WhYV.; in the B 1YV. only TB. 1.2.1.15 has the first formula. This tendency is part of a wider development in ritual thinking. Making use of the possibilities of symbolical and numerical equivalences a ritual system was developed consisting of a limited number of elements stomas, s~mans, metres, formulas, offerings and the like - which, used in endless variations, could be made to carry any meaning. Thus, for instance, we have a great number of ek~has for different purposes which differ only in their stoma plan and the sfimans used. In this way the ritualists could do away with cumbersome rituals and replace them with a limpid system of liturgical or other variations. This procedure can be illustrated by the vi~vajicchilpa ek~ha (PB. 16.15), to be performed by one who is desirous of reaching the heavenly world. One of its peculiarities is that it is "wheeled". The being "wheeled" refers to the second and third pavam~ina-lauds which are both eighteen-versed and considered as two "wheels". Now this ek~ha belongs to the s~dyaskra-ek~has, begun
-

,1 VS. 1.5, cf. Hillebrandt, N.V.O., p. 5. e2 VS. 2.28; cf. Hillebrandt, N.V.O., p. 174.

20

J. C. HEESTERMAN

and finished on one and the same day. In the sgdyaskra the chariot still has an important function: the Soma heralds go out on chariots in the four directions to summon the priests, while according to Baudh~S. 18.20:367.6 it was connected with a chariot race. All this, however, has been eliminated in the vi~vajicchilpa and replaced by the simple symbol of the liturgical "wheels". JB. 2.69-70 (Auswahl, no. 128) this process is given expression in the myth of the contest between Praj~pati and Death performing rival sacrifices. For a long time they kept each other in check, neither gaining any advantage over the other, till Praj~pati saw the sampad, the numerical equivalence, and thereby conquered Death. Praj~pati's sacrificial "weapons" belonged to the normal Soma paradigrna (yad yaj~e stf~yate, yae ehasyate, yat praearyate, sa prajapate.h sen~tsa); those of Death, on the other hand, consisted in singing, playing the lute, dancing and frivolous activities (yad v~n.~tya.mg~yate, yan nrtyate, yad v.rthacaryate, s~t mrtyoh. senasa). It is to be noted that singing, playing the lute and dancing are characteristic of the mahavrata and of the vrhtyas. Through symbolical and numerical equivalence Praj~pati overcame this ritual: the singing, dancing and frivolous activities of Death were homologized with stotra, ~astra and the adhvaryu's ritual; the plectrum for playing the lute with the sacrificial post; the parts of the lute with the numerically equivalent elements of the normal sacrifice, e.g. the seven strings with the seven metres. Thus the victory of Prajhpati, who generally stands for the classical ritual doctrine in its fully developed form, signifies in fact the substitution of the systematized abstract forms of the classical ritual for the older ones. na The classical Soma paradigma becomes more effective than the cumbersome mah~vrata and its utsanna rites. At the same time Death and its impurity which, as will be argued below, originally held a more important and explicit place in the ritual, are disposed of.
VII: P U R I T Y A N D I M P U R I T Y I N THE SACRIFICE

Notwithstanding this tendency the texts still show clearly that actually the sacrifice is wrought with impurity and evil, The ritual copulation is still present, but only symbolically under the liturgical form of the pairing of
es In passing it may be noted that at the mah~vrata as known to us the lute is not played by the udg~t.r, who only holds it for a moment while touching the strings, nor by any of the other priests, but by a nonofficiating brahmin. Cf./~p~S. 21.18.11-12; Dr~thySS. 11.1.10. It is also worthy of note that in the dvfidagAha, which is the model for all sattras and equivalent with the year-long sattra, the mah~vrata is left out.

VR.~TYA AND SACRIFICE

21

s~man and .rc, 64 as also under the form of the mixing of water and Soma. Therefore, as SB. 4.6.7.9-10 explains, the sadas and the havirdhfina shed, where these actions take place, should be fenced off so that one should not see what in the words of SB. is a transgression (yddydpi jdyapatt mithund.m cdrantau pd~yanti, vy bvd dravata, dga evd kurvdte). MS. 4.8.4: 111.4 calls the pairing of rc and s~man "that which is wrong, defective, of the sacrifice" (vi~vdrf~po vd etdt tvds.t.r6 yaj~dsya vy~.ddham amanyata, ydd rksamd vyuhydte). An interesting passage in this respect is JUB. 1.16.7-9 where it is said that the gods could not reach heaven through the s~man alone; Praj~pati tells them to mix it with evil (i.e. with the .rc); thus mixing good and evil they reached heaven. Impurity is essential to the sacrifice. Against this background we can understand that this same text says that one should not eat the food of the chanters since they live on defilement (JUB. 1.57.1 : tasmad u gdyatam, nd~nfydt, malena hy ete fivanti}. The central evil of the sacrifice is, of course, the killing of Soma or of the sacrificial substance in general, whether animal or cereal. This killing is frequently referred to in the brhhma.nas, e.g. SB. 2.2.2.1: "they kill the sacrifice in that they "weave" it; in that they press the Soma they kill it; in that they suffocate (and) cut the animal victim they kill it; through mortar and pestle, through the upper and lower millstones they kill the cereal offering". The caru offering for Soma during the evening pressing of the n o r m a l agni.stoma is considered as the anustara.ni cow ~5 for the dead (KS. 29.2; MS. 4.7.2; TS. 6.6.7.1). It is a means of healing for the sacrifice (bhe.sajam. va etad devd yajgayakurvan yat saumya.h, KS. 29.2: 169.11). MS. 4.7.2:94.14 says: "they kill Soma in that they press it; in that there is the caru for Soma, they restore Soma to life and cause it to swell". Further on it is stated that this caru for Soma is a means of purifying and that it purifies the saerificer. In this way it can also be understood that MS. 4.8.5 says about the immersion of the pressed-out Soma stalks in the avabh.rtha water: "what cruel deed is done here, that is appeased through this rite" (ydd evdtra

krarrm, kriydte trc chamayati).

Thus the p~pman of the sacrificer can be seen to be the evil of killing, the impurity of death. n~ Cf. also the last stotra of the agni.st.oma, where the wife of the sacrificer should exchange glances with the udg~t.r; during this stotra she should also pour water along her right thigh. Both actions are considered as pairing leading to birth, as is also borne out by the relevant mantras, see ApSS. 13.16.8-11; TS. 6.5.8.6. JB. 1.197 explains the pouring of water as birth. ns Indeed while dealing with this offering, one has the thread over the right shoulder, as in the death ritual; see Agni.s.toma,no. 237.

22

J. c. HEESTERMAN

It is interesting to compare the dik.sita's threefold papman, mentioned above, with Indra's equally threefold guilt which he incurred on account of the killing of Tvas.t..r's son Vi~varf~pa, whose three heads were cut off by Indra. As TS. 2.5.1.1 has it, Vigvarflpa was the sister's son of the Asuras and acted as purohita for the gods; with his three heads which take respectively Soma, surg and food, he is able to perform alone the whole ritual (cf. JB. 2.253) and thus may be considered to incorporate sacrifice. Indra's kilting VigvarOpa and the dik.sita's killing the sacrifice seem to carry the same meaning. Here it may be remembered that the sacrificer is often identified with Indra. Moreover Indra, after killing Vigvar~pa, is addressed by an "inauspicious voice" (agl~la vac) (KS. 12.10:173.7; PB. 17.5.1), which reminds us of the mentioning of the dN.sita's a~lilam, discussed above. In this connection it may be worthwhile to note that not only Indra but also Praj~pati, the classical representative of sacrifice and of the sacrificer, is possessed of evil, mention of which is a feature of the ritual of the tenth day of the ten-day period of the dvgda~gha and the year-sattra (PB. 4.9.14). Prajhpati's equally threefold p~pman is also dealt with in JB. 2.369-70. In the course of development, and in keeping with the increasing emphasis on the overall purity of the sacrifice and its technical elaboration, the evil inherent in sacrifice was superseded by the concept of the ritual mistake. To illustrate this development I refer to the mah~vrata. Among the several contests which are a distinctive feature of the mahhvrata there is the dialogue of the "praiser" and the "reviler". a~ The wording of this dialogue is recorded in TB. The praiser says: "These (sacrificers) succeeded, these have brought about welfare" (imb 'ratsur, imd subhf~tdm akran). The reviler opposes: "these (sacrificers) have brought about destruction (? or: have driven out the people?), these have brought about mishap" (imd udvas~karl.na, imd durbhfttdm akran). Although the word udvas~karin is not completely dear, it is safe to assume that it refers to violence on the part of the sacrificers and we will not be far wrong in linking this with the well-known violence of the vrgtyas. Now the function of the reviler is to drive away the papman of the sacrificers (PB.), to purify them (JB., TS.). The praiser then is supposed to place the indriya virya in them (JB.) or food (TS.). The next step in the development can be seen in PB. Whereas this text says that the function of the reviler is to drive away the papman, the praiser's role is to praise ae TS. 7.5.9.3; TB. 1.2.6.7; KS. 34.5:39.1; PB. 5.5.13; JB. 2.405. Except in PB. and KS., they are the same persons as the ~,rya and the ~Odrawho fight for the hide, cf. /~p~S. 21.19.9-10.

VRATYA AND SACRIFICE

23

"what has been well-chanted and well-recited by them," that is: their ritual correctness. In the same way TB. explains the rite as propping up what has been well, successfully done (suk.rta, raddhi) in the ritual, and driving away what has been done incorrectly, defectively (du.skrta, ardddhi), although the words of the dialogue, as recorded in the same passage, make it perfectly clear that the reference is not to procedural flaws and correctness. In KS. the development is complete: the praiser praises what has been well chanted, well recited; the reviler drives away what has beenincorrectly chanted, incorrectly recited. 6~ The same development can be discerned in the so-called avivakya day, the tenth day of the twelve-day sacrifice, on which ritual mistakes should not be pointed out. Comparing this tenth day with a race, TS. 7.3.1.1 says: "if one points out his error to one who stumbles (as in a race), he (the one who stumbles) takes hold of him (who points out) and comes out successfully, and the one who pointed out is left out". In other words the mishap is transferred to him who points it out. This corresponds exactly to the case of the dik.sita's p~pman which is transferred to the one who mentions it. We have seen that the dik.sita's pgpman is the evil of death and does not bear on ritual incorrectness. Thus the original idea in the aviv~kya will not have had to do with mention of mistakes but with the sacrificer's p~pman. Another instance of the development by which the ritual mistake came to replace the idea of killing and death can be seen in KS. 29.4:172. 5 and MS. 4.8.6:114.10. Dealing with the anflbandhy~ sacrifice for Mitra and Varun. a at the end of the Soma sacrifice, the KS. passage says: "the head of the sacrifice was cut off, the fluid that streamed out became the vagg cow; that this va~h cow is immolated at the end, serves to provide the sacrifice with pith. Mitra grasped that of the sacrifice which was well offered, Varun.a what was badly offered; in that this cow for Mitra and Varu.na is immolated at the end, he frees the sacrifice from both (Mitra and Varu.na) and hands it to the sacrificer... This anflbandhya cow serves for bringing the sacrifice to rest". Here we see the juxtaposition of killing e7 KS . . . . atho yo nindati, yad evai~ar~ su.st.utam sugasta.m, tat so 'pahanti. Here su.stutam and su~astam are certainly to be read du.hstutam, du.hgastam. At first sight it may surprise that one of the older texts should reflect a later development. The passage seems however a borrowing; its wording largely agrees with PB., with which text it also shares, against the other texts, the abhigara and the apagara as separate officiants. Moreover KS., being a Yajus text, is not primarily concerned with chant and recitation. If this statement were original in this place it would rather bear on the adhvaryu's proceedings (du~k.rta - suk.rta, duris, t a - svi.st.a).

24

J . C . HEESTERMAN

and ritual mistake. The parallel passage in the MS. seems to go a step further; it does not mention the cutting off of the head of the sacrifice, but gives only the statement about Mitra and Varu.na in about the same terms as KS. It then continues by comparing the liturgical operations with ploughing a field, and the sacrifice of the vagg cow with the harrow levelling the field, finally adding: "what has been incorrectly chanted, what has been incorrectly recited, what (has been done) against the fixed order of the ritual, that he puts right by means of this cow sacrifice". in this last statement the idea of killing is completely replaced by the concept of the mistake.
VIII. R E L A T I O N S A C R I F I C E R - P R I E S T

The discussion so far will have made it clear that evil and impurity were essential in the sacrifice. What is, originally, at stake in the sacrifice is the canalizing of these impurities into proper channels so that they remain within the cycle of production and procreation. The two phases of this cyclical process are birth and death, concentration and dispersion, ascension and descent. 68 This dual aspect of the ritual has its counterpart in the relation dik.sita :priest. The dik.sita is burdened with the impurity of death in much the same way as Indra is burdened with evil on slaying the asuras or V.rtra or, as seen above, Vigvarflpa. The gods acting as priests for Indra cause him to reach on the tenth day of the dagar~tra pdpmano nairdagya (PB. 22. 14.2), i.e. literally: the state of having passed the ten critical days and thus becoming free from evil. e9 Now nairdagya, as Caland remarks (PB. translation), refers to the ten critical days that the impurity of the lying-in woman last and after which the new-born child and its mother are safe. In other words: out of V.rtra's death indra is reborn (cf. also KB. 15.3). Similarly the dik.sita is reborn "out of the sacrifice", which according to the view current in the brghma.na texts is killed. His rebirth is the culminating point of the sacrifice, the moment of complete ascension and concentration. At this point the reversal takes place. The dik.sita sheds the impurity of death and killing on the priest, while dispersing himself in the form of dak.sin.~. The dik.sita comes out pure, while his impurity is transferred to the priest. This idea is clearly reflected in the speculations on the dv~da~gha sacrifice. The dvgda~ha - but the same holds good for the sacrifice in
68 See above, n. 46. e9 Cf. also JB. 3.324;/~pgS. 22.4.28,

VR/kTYA AND SACRIFICE

25

general - is described as a successive purification of the sacrificer, who eventually divests himself of his old self (KS. 34.7 and 11 ; TS. 7.2.10.3). The parts of the sacrificer's body and excrements are equated with the various offerings and the daks.in.hs, so that partaking of the offerings, as the priest is required to do, and accepting dak.si .ngs amounts to man-eating or partaking of a corpse (KS. 34.8:41.17; 34.11:44.14; TS. 7.2.10.2). Therefore one should not officiate as a priest at a dvgdag~ha, in order to "avoid evil", as TS. 7.2.10.4 has it. It m a y be recalled here that generally speaking the sacrificer is himself the offering, 7o while the dak.si.n~s represent the parts of the sacrificer's body (ApSS. 13.6.4--6). Thus we can readily understand that occasionally it is prescribed that the dak.si.ng is to be given to an enemy, as is the case in the s~dyaskra sacrifice (ApSS. 22.3.13). 71 It is therefore hardly surprising that the dak.sin.5 is considered a heavy burden on the donee, that it makes him "heavy" (AB. 4.25). The Afigirasa Ay~sya stumbles under the weight of the dak.si.na received from the Ndityas for whom he acted as brahman priest (JB. 3.188); in another version he became ill on account of eating the (sacrificial) food of the ,~dityas (PB. 11.8.10; 14.3.22). The same idea will also underly the injunction not to officiate at an ahina and the question of the priest, when invited to officiate, whether the sacrifice is not an ahina. Of course the s a m e difficulty arises in the case of the normal agnistoma, which is the basic paradigm o f the Soma sacrifice. But this latter in its classical form is the outcome of the development which, a s has been seen, tended to push the concept of impurity in the sacrifice into the background, while at the same time preserving timehonoured rites and opinions, such as those regarding the ahina, even at the price of incongruity. 7z N o w the dak.si.ng, like the gift in general, establishes or seals a bond between giver and donee. In the case of the dak.si.ng it is even possible further to define this bond as a marriage-like union. This union enables the sacrificer not only to dispose of the impurity of death, the remainder 70 E.g. TS. 6.1.4.5; KS. 23.3; MS. 3.4.7; JB. 3.115. In the last resort this means that the sacrificer is reborn out of his own dead and impure self. n Cf. also JB. 2.67 where it is prescribed that at the avabh.rtha (after the avabhr.tha i~i) the antelope skin of the dik.sita is to be given to an enemy (yam aratizn manyate). The Nagpur edition seems to give the correct reading aratim as against Caland, Auswahl, no. 127, reading ratirn, friend (see also Lokesh Chandra's note, The Jatminfya Brrhmatta II, 1-80, Thesis Utrecht 1950, p. 93). The vrf~tyaproperty is also given to an enemy acc. to M~nSS. 9.3.3.9. Compare also MS. 4.8.2.:109.2: arrtfydnti
vd etd etdsmai dddate.

72 Discussion of the question whether or not to act as a priest for a sacrificer,/~pSS. 211.5-7; also LB. 9.5.2.12-16.

26

J . c . HEESTERMAN

of the birth process, but also to make it productive again. 73 The dak.sin.~ will produce rich returns, the p~pman will be turned into its opposite. This seems to be illustrated in JB. 2.369-70: when Praj~pati is born p~pman is attached to him; the personified brahman removes the p~pman from Praj~pati's head, waist and feet with three strokes, whereupon the phpman becomes threefold wealth (dr[), in the form of three status symbols: cow, sleep and shadow, which, as the text explains, are most in evidence with the wealthiest man (gre.stha). Here we see the reversal p~pman - ~ri through the medium of the brahman power. It stands to reason that the relation sacrificer: priest is highly critical. Commenting on the meticulous care surrounding the dak.si.n~-giving and the near-aversion against accepting them, Mauss observed: "Toute cette theorie est mSme assez comique. Cette caste enti6re, qui vit de dons, pr6tend les refuser... C'est que le lien que le don 6tablit entre le donateur et le donataire est trop fort pour Ies deux". 74 In my opinion the difficulty is in the one-sidedness of the process. The idea underlying the ritual seems originally to have been fully cyclical, The sacrificer, enacting Praj~pati's role, integrates, disintegrates and reintegrates the universe; undergoes conception and birth, but at the same time dies, again to mature towards rebirth; ascends, descends and ascends again. But all the time it is the same sacrificer who undergoes this process in endless repetition. Sacrificer and priest are each fixed in their respective roles, without a reversal taking place in their relation.75 The dak.sin.~-giving is in fact a one-way process, the depleted wealth of the sacrificer being supposedly replenished automatically as the result of the sacrifice. There are, however, traces of a - perhaps more original - bilateral pattern. AB. 4.25 tells us that PrajSpati, wishing to procreate, had the seasons officiate for him as priests; then Praj~pati prospered but the seasons became "heavy" with dak.sin.~s. To restore the seasons Praj~pati in his turn conceded to act as priest for the seasons; thus they found

73 Dak~in.a, pp. 243-245.

Mau ss, "Essai sur le Don", Annde Soc., n.s, I, p. 150. 7s This fixation is possibly related to the gradual realization of a tendency towards endogamy, which eventually led to the rise of the caste system. Cf. Held, o.c., ch. V, esp. pp. 79-89, who argues that original clan exogamy may have declined in favour of endogamy. Such a development would go counter to actual matrimonial alliances and impair mutuality. Thus the ~rauta sacrifice remained meaningful only within the brahmin community. This development may in its turn have tacilitated the elaboration and systematization of the classical ritual, which made sacrifice the exclusive domain of brahmin specialists. 74

VR,~TYA AND SACRIFICE

27

support in each other. Alternatively the one represents the brahman out of which the other is reborn. 7~ IX. THE BRAHMAN - PRIEST In this connection the b r a h m a n priest is of particular interest. In the classical ritual doctrine he is in charge of the prgyagcittas for mistakes. He is the bhisaj, the healer, of the sacrifice (AB. 5.34). It is clear however that originally this has meant that he made up for the killing and took away the impurity of death and birth. Thus, for instance, he has to eat the pr~gitra portion of the sacrificial cake. This portion represents the wound of the sacrifice, caused by Rudra (TS. 2.6.8.3-4; cf. KB. 6.14). T h a t the evil and impurity of the sacrifice are unloaded on the brahman priest (and the brahmin in general) can also be viewed in another way. When a number of sacrificers undergo the dik.sg for a d v ~ d a ~ h a (or any other sattra) one is singly pointed out as the last: "if more (than one sacrificer) undertake (a sacrifice) twelve or thirteen should sacrifice; (they should count them out as follows) "these four, these four, these four, this single one", whom they wish "the deficiency of the sacrifice (yaj~asya vyrddhi) m a y go after him", him the deficiency of the sacrifice will follow"; thus JB. 3.4 which also mentions the numbers sixteen or seventeen and twenty-four or twenty-five. 77 According to Ap~S. 21.1.12 the extra one should be consecrated afterwards during the upasad days. KS. 34.9:43.1 ft. says in this connection: "they (the half months) whished to become months; they undertook the twelve-day sacrifice; they made the thirteenth the brahman and when they had seen him 7s they broke up the sacrificial session; he (the thirteenth month) is without a fixed abode and lives on the others, therefore the brahman should not be the thirteenth". Notwithstanding this last assertion it is clear that in the mythical prototype of the twelve-day sacrifice the b r a h m a n was the thirteenth and last participant. TM Thus, according to 76 Perhaps we may compare the priestly Afigirases who also occur, RV. 3. 53.7, as munificent patrons. The same obtains for the Maruts, below n. 92 and 93. 77 Cf. also PB. 10.3.3-4. /~pSS. 21.1.11-14 mentions the numbers one, three, six, twelve, thirteen, fifteen, seventeen, twenty-one, thirty, thirty-three, forty, forty-four. Each number constitutes of course a sampad. Cf. also KS. 34.9. 7s Read: tasmin d.r.staudatis..than, cf. Caland ad ~pgS. 21.1.13. 7~ For the connection between brahman and the thirteenth month cf. the hair-shaving mantras at the occasion of the gunasiriya, the last of the c~tturm~syas: "One month the Lord left out for the creatures; thereby he brought them a great thing, immortality for the mortals; that is for you, O mortal, immortality; through which the months and the half-months, the seasons, the years, through which they cut your hair, O Prajgpati,

28

J . C . HEESTERMAN

AB. 4.25, one should seek to be consecrated first, for, when the seasons undertook the dik.s~ for the twelve-day sacrifice, only the first six of them were able to do away with evil and became equal to daylight; the latter six however did not get rid of evil and became darkness. To fulfill this function of the extra, the last one, one did originally not have to be a brahmin; on the contrary, one became a brahmin upon fulfilling it. This seems at least the opinion of JB. 2.55: "the sattra consists in that they break up after having made him a brahmin with whom, though not called a brahmin, they undertake the dik.s~; therefore one should undertake the dik.sg together with one who is not called a brahmin". Anyhow disposal of impurity originally seems to have been the brahminical specialty par excellence. Even as late as SB. 12.1.1.9, when the classical doctrine of sacrifice has been fully developed and the brahman has become a mahartvij heading one of the four groups of officiating priests, it is said, after the order in which the priests should consecrate each other at a sattra has been so described, that the last priest, the unnet.r, is to be consecrated by a sn~taka, a brahmac~rin or somebody else who is not consecrated; because, as the text has it, "one who is purified should not purify others" (nd pgttd.h pavayet). TlSis man does not seem to have any further role in the proceedings, but it is not difficult to recognize in him the original brahman who as the l~st one is left burdened with the impurity of the others. In general the thirteenth or any other extra one added to a given number of entities carries or represents on the one hand the impure rest, on the other hand it is at the same time the nucleus of reproduction. 8~ This seems to be equally true in the case of the brahman, In the above quotation from the KS. on the sattra of the twelve months it is said that they broke up "when they had seen him (i.e. the thirteenth month)". Considering that the "thirteenth month" is conceived of as "the embryo of the year" (gB. 8.4.1.19) this will mean that they broke up after a year when they had seen the new year that was b o r n from their sacrifice. According to the JB. passage quoted above, the central issue of the sattra is the creation of a brahmin, apparently " b o r n " out of the sacrifice. 9The interesting consequence is that viewed against this background the brahman and the sacrificer fall into the same place. The sacrificer who is consecrated is born out of the sacrifice and is proclaimed as a brahmin through that brahman I cut your hair in order that you may live" (TB. 1.5.5.5-6). In another hair-cutting mantra, used at the ke~avapaniya festival Of the r]jasfiya,the brahman is said to rule over the hair-cutting. (TB. 2.7.17.1). S~ ~" Rijl~ ftya, pp. 34-37.

VR,~TYA AND SACRIFICE

29

(SB. 3.2.1.40). Sacrificer and brahman are joined in a dynamic pattern of purity and impurity; at the outset the sacrificer (as dik.sita) is loaded with the impurity of death; then at the climax of the sacrifice a reversal takes place: the sacrificer is born as a brahmin shedding his impurity on the priest. The sacrificer and the brahman (or the patron and the purohita, Indra and B rhaspati) form between them the fundamental antithetical pair of the sacrificial universe through their exchange of impurity. X. VR,~_TYA RITUAL AND SRAUTA RITUAL. CONCLUSION It is time we return to the vr~tya. We have seen that there is, in principle, no difference between the vrhtya and the dik.sita. Though the vr~tya ritual has been normalized almost beyond recognition in the classical ritual system as an ekfiha, its original pattern of purifying, cyclical celebrations alternating with periods of impurity resembling the dik.s~ can still be discerned. The same pattern is also at the base of the classical ~rauta ritual (section IV). This pattern is connected with the social and economic life of the Kuru-Pafichlas, to whom the vr~tyas seem to belong (section V). In the light of the development of the ritual during which the impurity inherent in sacrifice was toned down and eventually eliminated as sketched above (sections VI and VII), it would seem that the vr~tya and his ritual represent an older stage of ritual marked by more direct rites and less sophistication in the use of symbols. Whereas the dik.sita's saniyhcana has become a rather tame affair, the vr~tyas seem to have resorted to violence during their expeditions. There is some justification for considering them robbers, as Winternitz does. 81 Actually there is no explicit statement to this effect, but the description of the habits of the Kuru-Pafic~las in TB. 1.8.4.1 and the vr~tyas' violent character makes this probable. It may be that they claimed presents and hospitable accommodation under threat of violence, either real or magical. In this connection it is worthwhile to note what KS. 10.6 relates about the Naimi.siyas? 2 The Naimi.siyas performed a sattra and after breaking up obtained twentyseven young bulls from the Kuru-Pafic~ilas. One of them, Baka D~lbhya, sz told them to divide these bulls among themselves,
Sl Zeitschriftj~r Buddhismus, 1924-25, p. 48 ft. s2 Cf. Caland, Wunschopfer, no. 73. The name is found as Naimi~iya in JB. 3.332.

83 If I am right in the interpretation of the change of name of Ke~in Dalbhya and its connection with the vr~tyas (section V), Baka's second name D~lbhya, descendant of Dalbha, may also point to a connection with the vffttyas.

30

J. c. HEESTERMAN

whereas he himself would go to king Dh.rtar~.s.tra who would treat him hospitably. The king however treated him with contempt and gave him dead cows. s~ In revenge Baka performed with these cows a sacrifice against king Dh.rtarfi.s.tra and made his possessions wither overnight. The king then comes round and calls Baka in again. This may be compared with AV. 15.10.2, where the loss of power and kingdom is held out as a threat against him who does not properly receive the vrgtya. We are also reminded of the ~yena sacrifice of the vrhtinas. The dividing line between raiding and claiming presents is a thin one. Elsewhere the Naimi.siyas are clearly described as raiders (JB. 3.332; cf. PB. 10.12.1). Another indication of the vr~tyas' warlike and conquering habits is the importance of the warrior's chariot with them. Baudh. 18.24 seems to describe their ritual, all of which centres round the chariot, and equates it with the various elements of the standard Soma ritual. It may, however, well be that what Baudh. gives as their parok.sa Soma ritual actually refers to their raiding expeditions. The equation with the Soma ritual then serves only the purpose of underlining the ritual function of the vrgtya raids. On their return they purify themselves by distributing the vrgtyadhana collected during the raiding period. As to the ritual copulation, for which the ~rauta ritual has developed symbolic forms, it seems to have known with the vrgtyas factual reality as is still documented by the ritual copulation at the mahhvrata festival and at the agvamedha. Also the idea of death seems to have been more direct with the vr~tyas. The brghman.a texts dealing with the classical sacrifice are replete with allusions to the self-sacrifice and death of the consecrated, s5 as for instance in the repeatedly expressed view that the diks.ita is the offering s4 Db.rtar~.sIrasays to Baka: "Drive away these cows which Pa~upati kills" (prdkalayataitd gd brahmabandha ity abravft, padupatir gd hanti; Caland reads pa~upatir ya hanti). Interesting is here the reference to Rudra Pa~upati, who seems closelyconnected with the vratyas tcf. also the close connection between vr~ttyas and Maruts). Baka takes these cows and cooks them, considering: "King Devas~ has authorized me to this food" (tasam devasar me rajdnna.m prdsu.sod iti). This king Devgtsuis probably, as Caland comments (o.c., p. 52, n. 173), Rudra. The implication seems to be that the Naimi.siyas are devotees of Rudra Pa~upati, kill cows and eat them, as they are indeed said to do in JB. 3.332. The same may be true of the vr~ttyas,though definite indications are wanting; according to Bau0ah~S. 18.24:372.4 they apparently slaughter goats and cook them, which action is equated to the normal animal sacrifice. Dh.rtara.st.ra's contemptuous answer seems to mean: since you, as devotees of Pa~upati, slaughter cows, take these that are already killed by Pa~upati; which is another way of saying: cows that have perished somehow (cf. the parallel in Mhbh. 9.41 : yad.rcchaya m.rta~). s5 Cf. e.g. PB. 4.9.20-21 on the year-long sacrifice; TB. 1.5.6.5 on the hair-cutting at the caturmasyas.

VRATYA AND SACRIFICE

31

But, although it is clear that the embryonic condition of the dik.sita is the same as the condition of the dead, this idea seems to have been relegated to the background in accordance with the general development of ritual thinking. Thus the emphasis in the dik.s~ is quite naturally on rebirth, as Of those, however, who go out on a vrgtya expedition it is clearly said that they "die as it were" (IB. 2.222 mriyanta ira va ete ye vratydm, dhavayanti). Ritual death in the form of the immolation of the animal victim seems also to have been different. According to BaudhSS. 18.24:372.4 the vrgtyas snatch away goats and cook the meat, which action is equated with the classical animal sacrifice (te yam ajam pramatham pacante, sa e.sam, pagu.h). The use of the verb pra-math "to snatch away ''sT suggests comparison with wolves snatching away goats and sheep and rending them, for which the same verb or its simplex is used. as However this m a y be, this much is clear that the vr~tyas did not kill the victim in the way prescribed by the classical ritual. The Naimi.siyas, who if I a m right can be linked with the vr~tyas, are said to "cut asunder" (vi-cchid) (JB. 3.332) the animals. Above I suggested that originally the animal victim will have been killed at the stake, probably by severing the head from the trunk. This may as well have been the procedure followed by the vrhtyas. There is still another feature in the vrgtyastomas which in my opinion is archaic. The standard Soma sacrifices are neatly divided in ekhhas, ahinas and sattras. The ek~has, one-day sacrifices, are performed by one dik.sita-sacrificer and sixteen or seventeen officiating priests; the sattra, sacrificial session of at least twelve days, is performed by seventeen sacrificers who all of them undergo the dik.sg. The ahinas, though in later theory performed by only one sacrificer like the ekghas, take actually a middle position. According to KS. 34.13 (cf. ,~pSS. 21.1.11-16) there m a y be more than one sacrificer, even an unlimited number of them, at an ahina, a~ This seems to have been the general rule; the sattra is the a6 The dik.sft is equated with death in JUB. 3.11.3. Cf. Lommel in Hentze, o.c., p. 124, who rightly observes that here the condition of the embryo is considered as the condition of the dead. I do not think, however, that Lommel is right in separating this passage from the "Dik.s~ Lehre" of the br~thma.nas. It rather seems that we have to take the different statements as complementing each other. In the dik.sft we are concerned with a coincidence of opposites: dark-light, death-birth, upper world - nether world, as Hentze points out elsewhere in the same work (pp. 131,137). 87 Cf. Narten, "Das Vedische Verbum math", 11J., IV (1960), 121 ft., esp. p. 124. Miss Narten does not discuss this Baudh. passage. 8s See Baudh~S. 18.45:398.4; ~B. 11.5.1.2-3; AV. 5.8.4; 7.50.5; RV. 8.66.8, where Indra is compared with a sheep-robbing (uram6thi) wolf. s~ Cf. also Mhn~S. 7.2.1.1-3 where is spoken of the ahina dvftdaw sacrificers in the plural: 1. the dvftda~ha is twofold, sattra and ahina; 2. there are either one or many

32

J . c . HEESTERMAN

special case because, as/~p~S. 22.1.16 says, it is a sattra only when there are seventeen sacrificers (i.e. o n e g~hapati and sixteen co-sattrins performing the priestly functions). 9 The vr~tyastomas, however, cut through these divisions. Theoretically they are ek~has but there are several sacrificers who combine, according to BaudhgS. 26.32:318.8-9, their fires as at a sattra. 9x Since dak.sin.~s are given they can not be sattras either. They might be considered ahinas performed by a group of sacrificers, but they are not completely equal, since there is a sthapati. This sthapati undertakes the diksitavratas for the others (BaudhgS. 18.24:371.6-7, te yam abhisam.jdnate ta~ sthapatim, kurvanti, sa e~rp vratani carati). The vr~tyas partake of the nature of both sacrificers and priests. In this respect they resemble the Maruts, with whom, as has been seen (section V), they are intimately connected. The Maruts are not only munificent or malignant warriors, but also act as priests. 9z The relationbetween sthapati and vr~tyas is squarely put on a par with that between Indra and the Maruts in Baudh.'s explanation of the sa.mjfi~na is[i (section IA). The contradictions in the position of the vr~tyastomas can again best be explained in terms of an older ritual at the base of the later system. Ritual technique did not yet require rigorous specialization, nor were warriors and priests rigidly exclusive groups. 9s Also the systematic division of the Soma sacrifices was not yet developed. But the basic polarity o f purity and impurity exchanged between sacrificer and brahman obtains. On the one hand there is the dik~ita sthapati who receives the thirty-three cows, obtained as gifts or conquered, which each of the vr~tyas brings to him (PB. 17.1.17) like the s a n ~ r a s do in the normal Soma sacrifice; one the other hand we find the brahmabandhu from Magadha, who later on receives these cows together with the vr~tya equipment, and on whom the vrhtyas thus "wipe off" their guilt) 4

(sacrificers); 3. emaciated, they perform it as an ahina; non-dik~itas act as priests for them. ,o Cf. MS~n~S. ib. 5: grhapatisaptadaidb samdnakalp~t~t. ,1 Cf..I~pgS. 2L2.14-15. ,2 Cf. Macdonell, Vedic Mythology, p. 80. ~* For shifts from one class to the other cf. e.g. Ke~in S~tyakSmi in JB. 2.100 as a priest in the service of Daxbha ~atSaaika,or of Ke~in Darbhya, JB. 2.122. In JB. 1.285 the roles are reversed: Ke~in DSxbhya seeks to become a purohita with Ke~in ~ityakimi. These shifts, it may be noted, are in keeping with what has been said above, section VIII, about the dynamic polarity of sacrificer and priest. Cf. also Rau, o.c., p. 63. ~' PB. 17.1.16--17; I.Aty~S. 8.6.28; Katy~S. 22.4.22-3; Ap~S. 22.5.10-11. The vratya property may also be given to those who remain vratyas (La~y., Katy.) or to an enemy

VRATYA AND SACRIFICE

33

It seems not without importance that a brahmabandhu from Magadha is also active during the mah~vrata in the ritual mithuna which is essential in the cycle of death and rebirth. The older system then, which is still partly reflected in the vrgtyastomas, seems to have involved two parties or groups. On the one hand the sthapati and his followers, on the other hand the b r a h m a b a n d h u representing the classical b r a h m a n priest - as chief recipient of the vr~tyadhana. This brahmabandhu may have been the representative of a group rather than a lone figure. It is perhaps significant that Baudh. 18.25:373.9 speaks of priests (rtvija.h) receiving dak.si.nfis at the vr~tyastoma. The most outstanding among them seems to be the subrahmanya - i.e. a representative of the brahman - since he is given the important vrgtya apparel. The use of the word rtvija.h by Baudh. seems a later normalization devised to make the vrgtyastoma fit i n - however awkwardly - with the classical ekhha; but the fact that we find here a group of dak.sin.~-receiving participants over against the vrgtya sacrificers seems to reflect an older state of affairs which corresponds exactly to the position of the ahinas - anomalous from the point of view of the classical s y s t e m where as we have seen an unlimited group of sacrificers is faced by a group of priests. Another instance of two groups in the sacrifice is to be seen in the contest between the Afigirases and the Adityas as to who will be the sacrificers and who the priests. In the end the Adityas prevail. The Afigirases officiate for them. Consequently the ~tdityas go to heaven and the Aflgirases are left behind. 95 It is to be noted that in this story there are no ritual specialists. Both parties are in principle equally qualified. In the same light we can now understand the opposition devas daivy~ vrdty&h. As PB. 17.1.1 has it, the gods go to heaven and the daivya vratya.h are left behind. Apparently the daivya vratya.h, like the Afigirases, were the losers and were left behind with the impurity shed by the gods who went to heaven. 96
(Man.) According to Baudh. (18.25) there are priests dividing the dak.si .n~ts, while the subrahma.nya, according to this text (18.25:373.9) receives the special vrfttya apparel. 95 Cf. PB. 16.12.1. It may be noted that the Afigirases seem to be closely related to the Maruts (A.ngirases and Maruts occupy parallel positions in resp. the Vala and the V.rtra myths). Thus the case of the A.ngirases may be relevant also for the vr~tyas. 96 Perhaps a similar idea underlies the relation between devas and asuras in RV. 10.151.3, where the poet prays that his word may prevail with the sacrificial patrons in the same way as the gods obtained Araddhd - the bond between patron and client leading to the bestowal of gifts on the latter - with the Asuras (ydtha devd ~isure.su ~raddhdm ugrd.su cakrird, evdm bhoj~s,u ydjvasv asmdkam uditd.m krdhi).

34

J.c. HEESTERMAN

Such a ritual based on two opposite parties isperhaps reflected by the story in Baudh. 18.26, where the sons of the Kuru brahmins, setting out against the Pafic~las, exchange challenges with them on the place of sacrifice. Now it is interesting to note that the ritual in its classical form still contains indications that the brahman was originally not alone. There is also the sadasya who has a supervising function exactly like the brahman's (.~pSS. 10.1.10-11 ; KB. 26.4) and according to VaitS. 11.3 is subordinate to him. This sadasya seems to be the lone survivor of a group of sadasyas who are still mentioned in the older texts as dak.si .n~ recipients (MS. 4.8.3; KS. 28.5). The same development that was responsible for the all but complete elimination of impurity and its exchange form the ritual also pushed the sadasyas into the background, retaining only, as a remnant of the older ritual system, the sole sadasya of ill-defined function. This left the opposite group, the sthapati and his vr~tya followers, alone in the field. This process may have been facilitated by the alfiance ritual of the vr~tyas among themselves. The vr~tyastoma seems to be twofold: the celebration of the alliance, of special relevance at the outset of their expedition, and the ritual involving an opposite party which receives, possibly on the return of the vr~tyas, the collected vr~tya property. Tentatively we may say that the vr~tyas celebrating their alliance are a prefiguration of the ~rauta celebrants. The vr~tyas are still unspecialized, at the same time sacrificer and priest. In due time the relations crystallized and resulted in two separate systems: the ek~ha (or ahina) and the sattra. The sthapati developed into the classical yajam~na and into the g~hapati of the sattra; his followers became on the one hand ~tvija.h, on the other hand sattrins. Thus the vr~tyas appear not so much as prototypes of the yogin (Hauer) or of the ~aivite ascetic (Charpentier), but rather as the genuine predecessors of the ~rauta sacrificer and dik.sita. We may expect therefore to find traces of vr~tya ritual in the ~rauta sacrifice. A clear case of this is provided by the y~tsattras, 97 during which the participants move each day a ~amyh throw along the Sarasvati or the D.r.sadvati river, each time performing a sacrifice. Their sadas and havirdh~na sheds are moved on wheels. Thus they go to heaven, as JB. 2. 298 has it. "s The same text 0b.) states that - much like the vr~tyas - they 9~ For the y~tsattras see Hillebrandt, Ritualliteratur, p. 158; PB. 25.10-13. 98 It is perhaps not without importance that also with the vr~ttyasthe object is to go to heaven and join the gods. The same is true of the dik.sita, who, as SB. 3.1.1.8 puts it, turns towards the gods and becomes one of them. Cf. also KS. 23.1:73.4: "the dik.sita has swerved from this world and has not yet reached yonder world." See also

VR~,TYAAND SACRIFICE

35

go along "killing and cursing", this being an expression of force (ghnanta dkro~anto yanti, etad vai balasya r@a.m yad dhatam dkru.st.am). It is further interesting that the Maruts also performed the Sarasvati yhtsattras when going to heaven (JB. 2.297 and 299). They were however robbed of their thousand (cows) by lndra and Agni. In this way, as JB. 2. 299 relates, the evil of the Maruts was eliminated and they successfully broke up the sattra. The story of the thousand cows robbed by Indra and Agni from the Maruts branches out further into the ritual to become the thousand dak.si.n~ cows prescribed for the three-day sacrifice. 99 It is perhaps significant that these yhtsattras have been normalized as six-day rites. We are reminded here of the six first prayujd.m haff.m.si connected with the six months preceding the rainy season, during which the Kuru-Pafic~las went on their expeditions. Their country, Kuruk.setra, "the place of sacrifice of the gods", is the scene of the D.r.sadvati y~tsattra (PB. 25.13.3; JB. 2.300). The raids of the Naimi.siyas are also connected with a six-day rite. The imprint of the vrhtyas on the grauta ritual can also be observed in the generalized equation of the sacrifice with a chariot (e.g. MS. 3.6.9; KS. 26.6; JB. 1.129; PB. 7.7.13; AB. 2.37) and in the habit of calling the sacrificial implements "weapons" (dyudha, sena; e.g. JB. 2.69). When the procession of the fire and the Soma starts out, the adhvaryu in the normal Soma sacrifice recites: "This Agni must create space for me, he must go in front destroying the enemies; hotly roused he should conquer the enemies, at the booty-winning he should conquer booty".100 A trace of the former expeditions can still be seen in the different times prescribed for the settling down at the place of sacrifice, According to the White YajurVeda (gB. 3.1.2.11) this takes place immediately at the beginning of the sacrifice, even before the dik.s~. But in the Black Yajur Veda this is placed later, after the dik.s5 and before the Soma purchase (TS. 3.1.1.4; Ap~S. 10.19.15; BaudhSS. 6.9: 166.5). In this connection elaborate rules are given for the journey of the sacrificer to the place of sacrifice, especially with a view to crossing rivers. The sacrificer should not separate himself from the fire drill and the chariot, to which rule ,~p~S. 10.19.13 adds surprisingly: "according to some, from the fire drills" the discussion of PB. 17.1.2 in section III. Perhaps we can put vr~tya, y~ttsattrinand dik.sita as points in a developmental chain. 9~ Cf. Dak.si.nd,p. 246 ft. Here again we find pftpman that is shed in the form of dak.si~s. loo TS. 1.3.4. c; cf. Agnir p. I10.

36

J. c. HEESTERMAN

(plural). This latter rule can only apply to a plurality of sacrificers. Here again we see the gradual change from an expedition-like sacrifice of a group of sacrificers to a purely sedentary one, which has become the rule in the WhYV. It is perhaps no coincidence that gB. 12.1.1.1 states that those who undertake the diks.~ for a year(-long sacrifice) covet "him who blows here" (V~yu). In the same words the ekavrhtya, whom the vr~tyas have offended, is described in JB. 2.221. An important agency in the development from vr~tya to dik.sita has been, in my opinion, the royal ritual. The cyclical pattern of the original vrhtya ritual is still clearly discernible in the rgjas13ya. The royal unction is closely akin to, if not at the base of, the dik.sL 1~ The relation of the sthapati with the vrStyas bears strong resemblance to the bond between king and ratnins or vi~a.h.1~ On the other hand the rgjasOya sacrificer seems to be the forerunner of the common yajam~na of the classical Soma sacrifice. The foregoing considerations can be summed up briefly: the vrhtyas are authentic Vedic Aryans. Their rituals in which raiding expeditions, probably during the six months preceding the rains, took place, are the crude predecessors of the ~rauta ritual. The vr~tya is the predecessor of the dik.sita. This is not to exclude the possibility of drawing lines connecting them with later developments, such as yoga1~ and gaivism. But once it is recognized that the vr~tyas' relation to brahmanical ritual is not one of antithesis but of precedence in development, these connections lose most of their urgency for the explanation of the vr~tyas' identity. The older ritual, as reflected in the vrhtyastoma, seems to have been based on the exchange of impurity. In the course of development the bilateral exchange pattern of purity and impurity was broken up. The two parties to the exchange became fixed in their respective roles, possibly in connection with an increasing tendency towards endogamy which went to exclude actual realization of the matrimonial bond between k.satra a n d brahman and actual exchange. The operative principle of exchange of impurity being discarded, impurity has no function any more in the lox Ct. RajasSya, pp. 91 ; 98. 102 Cf. e.g. the proclamation formula TS. 1.8.10.2: "We have become the vrdtyab of Mitra, these have become all the vr~taO of Varun.a." 103 It would, however, be more cautious to speak of shamanizing techniques, as Eliade (Yoga, Engl. transl, p. 209) does.

VRATYA AND SACRIFICE

37

ritual. This circumstance m a y have opened the way towards " p u r i f i c a t i o n " of the ritual a n d its d e v e l o p m e n t into a highly refined a n d systematized code o f abstract symbols. By the same t o k e n the ~rauta sacrifice becomes the exclusive d o m a i n of the pure expert a n d thus is spirited out of the life of the c o m m u n i t y as a whole. 1~

104 The loss of contact of the ritual with the community can also be seen in another way. The sacrifice has also an economic function: circulation of wealth (dak.si~5). In the classical ritual the underlying idea of wealth circulation still shines through, but the actual cycle is broken up. In the sattra no wealth changes hand any more; in the ek~ha and the ahina (as also in the i.s~iand the pa~ubandha) the dak.si.n~-givingis a one-way process, the sacrificer exclusively passing on wealth to the brahmin specialists and expecting returns only from the automatical efficiency of the ritual. Thus the ritual lost its economic function.