The Vratyas Author(s): A.

Berriedale Keith Reviewed work(s): Source: Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, (Jan., 1913), pp. 155-160 Published by: Cambridge University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25188932 . Accessed: 11/01/2012 12:47
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Cambridge University Press and Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

http://www.jstor.org

THE VttATVAS IV.?He

155

has definitely [i.e. the author, Sarngadeva] as settled in the science the measure of an angula uo angula of arithmetic: of five yavas is seen either in or in popular use. An angula is made the Sastras ly fixed six [the finger of the right hand (is used). has described the form of a Vina-stick V.?Sarngadeva on another measure : ly four and a half ojavodaoxts free from husk and placed crosswise (is onade) an oiigida the little here: described in accordance with this measure there are, of Vina-sticks, varieties before, twenty-two name of the first] with the Ekavira [the commencing about these we are going to speak. II. Shamasastry. yavodaras in the measure free of from the husk and khdni crosswise? : placed stick of the hollow

Vina]

as

The In a recent

Vratvas to the Vienna Oriental

contribution

has endeavoured Journal1 Paul Charpentier to establish a new account of the He Vratyas of the Vedic tradition. finds in them the founders of the widespread Rudra-Siva of the later and modern ancestors cult, and the spiritual Sivaites. The of the ritual were per Vratyastomas formances circle of to mark such the admission within the Brahmin to the cult of whose addiction Vratyas, Siva in his dread forms rendered them an object of to their more orthodox fellows. the Further, suspicion of the Atliao'vaveda, book xv, is no other than Vratya himself and simultaneous^7 Uudra-Siva counter hisearthty part, the Sivaite ascetic. The theoiy is attractive and interesting: to it remains consider how far it can claim to be more than a speculation or to have real value. In the first place the argument : its can be from the later literature is disregarded point
1 xxv, 355-GS. Cf. xxiii, 151 seq<|.

156 that Manu and Mallas have been for the fact l derives

THE VRATVAS from a Rajanya bhe Licchavis Vratya fame ; now bhese families cannob from the despised mixed castes, but

of Buddhisb derived that

an unbrahininic they practised religion, never that of Rudra-Siva, and it is stated that they in the Buddhist texts as practising Brahminical appear can This suggestion offerings. clearly be of no value for of early Vedic times or throw light on the early character the Vratya, and it is therefore it has for later days. validity needless to consider what

is argued that in the PancavimsaBrahmana2 Secondly,it are described as those left behind when the Vratyas the went to the world In the Satapatha* of heaven. gods is left behind. It is go to the sky and Rudra that the Vratyas must be connected with Siva. The argument is wholly without value, as the passages and any theory could be stand in no conceivable relation, were allowed if such evidence to stand good ; supported yet in the Pancavimsa is left behind as Dyutana not Siva at all. Maruta, expressly given it is argued that the Grhapati of the Vratyas Thirdly, in their offerings is Siva himself his apparatus is because the leader of those similar to that of Siva. a goad (tiryaiinaddhd), includes a turban apparatus a particular kind of bow (pratoda), as an ayogyam by Katyayana4 The as a dhanuska the gods deduced

(jydhroda, explained and dhanuh by Latyayana6 a black planked ornament and

ani?u), a (krsnasam wagon vdsah), garment rough and an ass, a silver over, drawn by a horse two Now sheepskins Rudra-Siva fastened has at the the sides

turban, he c is in the Aitareya and carries Brahmana referred to as li/snasavdsi, and in one passage in the Rgveda7 he has a niskdm and and yajata visvdrrvpam, yajatdm a bow,
4 Srauta * v, 14. 2 x, 22. xvii, xxii. 4, 11. ZDMG. Sec Roth, 1 1. 1. vi, 24(1. a i, 7. 3. 1. * Srauta Siitra, 7 ii, 33. 11.

(niska), krsnabalakse.

Sutra,

viii,

0, S.

THE VRATYAS 157 raj ata attired regular Grhapati the same dramatic "stehen Rudra-Siva circle time of einander sehr nahe ". Thus jedenfalls is accepted the ottering into the by and the followers of the the gods, their older the faith by uncanny, the rite, but at comrades ghostty iu its Soma

also abandon

of Rudra-Siva.

represent The whole to

ceremoiy

character

the

is comparable at the performances The

buying But all this

or the Mahavrata. is without sure ground. greater part has no parallel the sheepskins,

of the Grhapati's attire and accompaniments are the wagon, in Rudra at all : where

is there, but not tiryaiinaddha, the goad ? The turban and it is the mode, not the common turban, that matters. and it is the bow The bow is there, but not the jydhroda, of a peculiar Nor will yajo.ta kind that is the point. It is onty open transform itself into oxljata to please us. to fall back that black on the krsnasaoii is a common vasas, but be it remembered associated colour regularly with in fact, wholty There is, lacking is essential in detail which for

the uncanny and dread. the exact correspondence

and Rudra-Siva. any proof of the identity of the Grhapati The obvious explanation is that of the whole of the outfit it is the description of a local form of dress worn ly the to the texts: indeed, Latyayana1 oxpressty " a chariot of the vipatha is a prdcyaratha, the easterners," of the and the rite ends with the bestowal an a Mdgadhades'iya2 to brahona-baoidhu, apparatus Vratyas, tells us that easterner. of Charpentier Nor does confirm with In the face of this obvious real explanation, from this the effort that to is clearty it win any invalid. support xv. That doubt section deals known

it hy Atharvareda, the Vratya is shown to the turban, the goad,

1 Srauta 2

beyond the vipatha,

by and the Magadha.

the references

But I find nothing in it to show that the Vratya

Sutra, viii, xxii, 0. 9. 4. 22 ; Latyayana, viii, G. 28. Katyayaiia,

is

158 Rudra-Siva. The

THE VRATYAS

is a late one, in Brahmana piece style, in the highest way the Vratya, and it celebrates but such are common in the theological peculiarly speculations to suppose that behind and render it needless Atharvaveda, * lies the figure of a great god. the Vratya Charpentier sees proof of this in xv, I, 4-8, but all that is there said became Mahadcva and I&ina, while is that the Vratya in 1 seq., Bhava, Pas u pati, Ugradeva, I sana, xv, 5, Sarva, all signs of his cosmic potency, Rudra, are his servants, not proofs assigned healing Rudra nature. Nor can any weight of his original is depicted to the conjecture2 that the Vratya on him from the wound inflicted Prajapati incest with his be as

by The faets are daughter. for on Bloomfield's3 accounted all adequately hypothesis as Brahman under Sivaite is celebrated that the Vratya for his
influence.

lack of serious evidence is there a complete no attempt to deal with it makes the theory, with which it is confronted. In difficulties fundamental But not only for the no explanation is offered of the peculiar place the god is supposed himself to nature of the rite in which That into the order of the orthodox be received gods. the first the case, for in doubt are hardly ever wise. But denials of possibility religion no trace of any such rite in the Vedic is there religion, it is not a very probable one. and a priori Secondly? assumes that to the serious?it is still more and this such a rite is conceivable Hindus was a strange of the Brahmana period Rudra-Siva one outside circle of the pantheon. the usual god, and can be further from the truth ; the Sataru But nothing is clear proof of Samhitas of all the Yajurveda driya in all his aspects full acceptance his by those to whom the period owes its religious tendencies, and, as Aufrecht4
xxv, 374. Atharraveda, p. 1)4. 4. Seo his Aitareya Brdhmana, 3 1 VOJ. 2 Ibid. vii. 370, n. 2.

is no

pp.

vi,

THE VRATYAS 159 who is the great out, it is Rudra-Siva ago pointed and the Kausltaki of such texts as the Aitareya We to the nuy, regard having that the Rudra of the Brahmanas Rgvedic is a god from aboriginal borrowed tribes, but that to the composers of the Brahmanas of "od that the is he

long

god Brdhonanas.

Rudra, believe with characteristics we cannot he was <*ods. a is a We believe

a god not wholty received into the circle must not confound the fact that a god in some with the view

aspects of Charpentier the theoiy god. Thirdty, to explain the characteristics fails of the completety as they appear in the Pancavimsa Brdhmana.1 Vratyas krsi or trade, We are there told that the3r do not practise in culture from the Brahminical i.e. that they are distinct strange Indians who Moreover,
real meaning

dreadful

practise they have

of

in the times a different

of

the Brahmanas law, for that

ghnanlas

both. is the

code of

adandyam

dandeoia

caranti,2

is speech, for they call what they have a at the least a to say diflicult, easy point indicating in which Prakrit had been consonants conjunct speech as speaking are described softened. diksitavdcam They and though adiksitdh, but this characteristic thinks is not Charpentier:i intelligible. in sense, and that the sense is that, though Sudras, meant the dlksitavdda they reckon their genealogies, comparing but this theoiy of the Satapatha is very Boxihmana,4 vac is not vada. case why for 'But in aiy doubtful, of Rudra-Siva should worshippers have been ignorant of agriculture and trading, and have differed in speech from the ordinary Vedic Indians ? There is no explanation possible
a strange

a different

diksitavddam

may

realty be

unless
new

we
god

accept
of

the all that

2 4

view the the

4. 0.

that Rudra-Siva
to the Brahmana

was

extraneous

origin

period, hand,
1 3 xvii, VOJ.

and the
4. 2. xxv,

this

contradicts view

texts. persons

On

the other meant are

x. 83.

obvious
303.

xvii, iii, 2.

1. 40;

see Weber,

IS.

160 non-Brahminical

SOME BENGALI VERUS tribes of a less advanced be noted. is open

culture

to no intelligible objection. three Of minor* points that the famous suggests sense of naicdsdkha may or saisaka, obscure saikhaka of the names of castes

may crux

Charpenticrl as to the in the Rgveda2 some receive light from the are among from the variants

which

in Manu,3 sprung Vratyas no or serious value, is clearly of but the suggestion help on any nor does prdmaganda really suggest Magadha scientific principle. repeatedly Secondly, Charpentier4 of Dhanamjapya, but, though he has many else in this practice, have we really anyone predecessors nor ? Neither Indian editions5 but Dhanamjayya early the views can be

quotes

to distinguish py and yy in really expected 15-18 is it fair to banish paragraphs Nor Devanagari. : are as a later addition of Atharvaveda, xv, they perfectly even if they in a glorification of the Vratya, reasonable is that the Vratya do not help to bear out the theory Rudra-Siva. really as used by on the Vratyastomas To the authorities should be added the text of the Baudhayana, Charpentier the energy of Caland has now made Srauta Sutra, which MSS. available.0 so far as
and

add any tiling which, It does not, however, on this I can. judge, throws additional light
curious rite.

obscure

A.

Berriedale

Keith.

Some I should premise or research. learning

1 V0J. iii, 53. M x, 21. dift'erenb 4 VOJ. 6 xviii, xxv, 357, n. 5. 14. See Macdonell The text

Bengali this

Verrs note is not the result of

that

On the contraiy,
& Keith, Vedic

the only justification

Index, i, 459 ; ii, 38, 474. the commentators having Viz. that of Latyayana. p. 21.

i? wholly 5 das

uncertain,

readings. xxv, 306-8. 24-6 ; Uber

ritncVa Sutra

(Us Baudhayana,