God is both imminent and transcendent.

As stated in BGS (p. 93), God has assumed the universal form and is immanent in the universe. This had been repeatedly stated in the Gita. The Gita further states in ix.4 and 5 that God pervades the universe as space pervades the pots etc. and that He is the originator and sustainer of all beings, affirming at the same time that he does not exist in them. Various explanations have been offered by the commentators on this contradiction in terms. But all these explanations, apart from being different, do not at all explain why the Lord should say that he exists in them and also repeats it again in the very next verse. Since he is the material cause of all beings, he exists in them in one sense, but as he transcends them all individually and in their totality. He cannot be said to exist in thepi wholly. As Dr. Radhakrishnan points out, the cosmos is only a partial manifestation of the Absolute. 2 No finite world can fully express the infinite, although it is a manifestation of God. There is no limit to His Divine manifestation (x.40) and God sustains the whole creation, pervading it with only a part of himself.

In the Vedic period there was an ideological conflict between the protagonists of ritualism and asceticism. We shall now show that this coflict had deeper roots in two different cultures, which may be called the Asura culture and the Vedica culture. As we saw before, in the early Vedic period Indra was the war hero who had been raised to the status of a god by the docrime of euhemerism. His killing of Vritra, his arch-rival among the asuras was further transformed into the myth of the hero and the dragon which is usually associated with the solar god, by identifying Vritra with the dragon (ahi). In the Brahmana period, when the people had adopted different occupations, the need was felt of a preserver of sacrifice.

Macdonel has brought forth the traits of Vishnu as a preserver in the Rigveda. He states that Vishnu is beneficent (RV.I.36), is innocuous and bountiful (RV.VII. 12) and a generous Protector (RV.VIII. 155). The Brahmanas, therefore, looked to him for the preservation of sacrifice and identified him with sacrifices as a whole (Ait Br. 1.1). Thus in the time of the early I Vedic period, Indra was the war hero of the Vedic Aryans, who I had led them from one victory to another over the dasyus and It asuras after their entry into Aryan Bharata. We find frequent references to the struggle between the asuras and the devas f 0r supremency not only in the RV and the Brahmanas but also j n the Shrauta literature and the Mbh.; the most important exploit of Indra invariably link the killing of the asura kings and the destruction of their towns.

The conflict between the asuras and the devas did not stop at the ideological level but assumed sinister forms. We come accross frequent accounts of how the austerities undertaken by the asuras were interrupted by Indra out of fear that they would become strong thereby and wrest from him his overlordship of heaven. There are also other accounts in which we are told how the asuras took every opportunity to destroy the sacrifices undertaken by the followers of Indra in order to weaken the power of gods by depriving them of their customary offerings.

The Tandya Mahabrahmana (xiv.4) tells us that the Vaikhanasa munis, who were the favourites of Indra (RV.VIII.7), were killed by one Rahasya Devamahimluc in a place which came to be known as munimarana. On the other hand, the hermit clan known as yatis, who were connected with the Bhrigus, were thrown by Indra to the wolf-hounds (shalavrikas), (Tai. Sam, VI.28). Both the Ait. Brahmana (VII.2) and the Mbh. (XII. 15) record this action of Indra as sinful.

It is stated that Indra conquered hundred of towns asura king Shambara (RV.IV.30) and gave their wealth to Divodas and Bharadvaja (RV.VI.30). He conquered seven cities of the asura king Sharat and made a gift of these to Purukutsa (RV.VI.20). He performed the terrible feat of killing his archenemy Vritra, destroyed his ninety-nine cities and released the waters which were impounded by Vritra (RV. 1.32). The latter is probably a reference to the destruction of embankments, which stored river water for supply of drinking water to the town peopleWe are told (RV.III.30) that assisted by Agni, Indra destroyed ninety-nine towns in one attempt which would indicate that he resorted to incendiarism to destroy enemy towns. Indra's epith et,s s uch as purabhid and purandara seem to suggest that he made a forced entry into the fortified settlements of asuras and destroyed them. 1 This literary evidence of the destruction of asura towns by the Vedic Aryans is supported by the archaeological remains of the Indus civilization. Thus both the literary and archaeological evidence seems to lend support to Sir Mortimer Wheeler's view that the Vedic aryans led by Indra were responsible for the ruin and destruction of the Indus civilization. 2

The arguments advanced by Sir John Marshall 1 are unquestionable and we can do no better than summarize them here. There were at Mohenjodaro and Harappa densely populated towns with solid commodious houses of brick with adequate sanitation, bathrooms, wells and other amenities. On the other hand, the Vedic people formed a prominently pastoral society and lived in houses largely constructed of bomboos in villages. The draft animal bull was prized by the Indus people above all animals, while the milk-yielding cow was held in special veneration by the Vedic people. The horse, which plays such an important part in the Vedic society, was unknown to the people at Mohenjodaro and Harappa, as it was not found among the figurins of animals recovered at those places. The seafood was a common article of diet of the Indus people, while the Vedic Aryans were mainly meat-eaters, as there is no mention of fishing in the Vedas. The Vedic Aryans used in the times of Rigveda gold, copper and bronze but silver was more common than gold among the Indus people, while both of them employed copper and bronze for making vessels and utensils.

The Indus people sometimes made use of stone also for this Purpose, obviously a relic of the neolithic age. For offensive Capons both used the bow and the arrow, dagger and the axe, bu t defensive armour such as the helmet and the coat of mail used by the Vedic people were quite unknown to the Ind Us people, which must have worked heavily to their disadvantage in armed conflicts between the two. While the Vedic religj 0n was aniconic, icon worship was common among the Indus people, as is apparent from the remains at Mohenjodaro and Harappa. While in the Vedic pantheon the female element was in a subordinate position, the cults of mother goddess and Lord Shiva were prominent among the Indus people. While phallus worship was abhorent to the Vedic people, it was widely practised by the Indus people.

As pointed out by Sir John Marshall, these two civiliztions were so unlike each other that it would be difficult to stipulate a common Indo-Aryan source for them. In an interesting monograph, Dr. Malati Shendge 1 has shown how the so called demons (asuras) had reached a height of urban civilization unusual in those times. The asuras also appear to have been more advanced culturally in comparison with the Vedic Aryans.

As compared with the Vedic god Indra with his drinking habits and amorous adventures, their asura god Varuna stands out prominently as the defender of truth and cosmic order. From the roughly carved seal found by Mackay from the remains at Mohenjodaro, it is apparent that they also worshiped the prototype of god Shiva seated in a yogic posture. We read in the HM.XIII.18 that the asura kings were his special proteges and obtained special boons from him by propitiating him with rigorous austerities. There were some well known asura kings, who held advanced views on politics and moral conduct. In HM. III. 28, Prahlada, an illustrious asura king, is said to have explained to his grandson Bali the respective merits of soft and hard decisions. He told Bali that a king had to take soft or hard decisions as the occasion required. He taught Indra, who had approached him in the guise of a brahmin, the rules of good conduct. He gifted Indra his virtue (shila), as a result of which along with virtue righteousness, truth, good conduct and prosperity left him one by one and entered Indra. 1

The following accounts of some illustrious asura kings mentioned by Sauti shows that they had accepted their defeat by Indra with philosophic calm. After Indra had wrested the overlordship from Pralhada, he went to see the latter and found him living in a desolate place, apparently calm and collected.

When asked about the secret of his equanimity, Prahlada explained to him the doctrine of svabhava. He said whatever happens in this world is the result of the inherent nature (svabhava) of things and that one should, therefore, watch the appearance and disappearance of all created things without attachment, without pride, free from all bonds and with indifference to everything (Mbh. XII.215). Mbh. records a similar dialogue between Bali and Indra, where Bali explained his defeat and loss of fortune to the inexorable march of time.

He expounded the doctrine of Kaala, which brought everything to fruition and established everything (XII. 216). When Vritra was asked the same question by Ushanas, the former replied that there was no cause for elation or grief, as one got his due as a result of his past actions (Mbh. XII. 270). In religious books such as the Yoga-Vaasishtha the story of Bali is given to illustrate disinterestedness (anasakti) 2 Even if these dialogues are apocryphal, they seem to enshrine the tradition that the doctrines of svabhava, kaala and karma, as also the qualities of equanimity and disinterested actions, on which dhe Bhagvadgita lays such great emphasis, seem to have had their °rigin in the asura culture.

Now the question arises, who were these asuras who, from all accounts, were a cultured and civilised people? Sayana’s commentary does not throw any light on the identity of those whom Indra defeated. He called some of them as asura, others as enemy kings. The Vedic scholars generally assume that the asuras were non-Aryan tribes on the Indian soil, whose chiefs offered resistance to the invading Aryan hordes. There are, however, indications in the RV. itself that the Vedic aryans had to fight with ary an tribes also. In RV. VI. 60.6.' Indra and Agni are praised for their conquest of the dasas as well as aryan tribes.

The Brahmanas describe the asuras as prajapatyah, i.e. as sons of Prajapati. It is stated in the Shat. Br. (IX.5) that both the devas and asuras had sprung from Prajapati and entered upon their father's inheritance. The Brih. Up. (1.3.1) tells us that Prajapati had a two-fold progeny, the devas and asuras, of whom the devas were the younger and the asuras were the elder. We cannot explain such statements unless both the devas and asuras belonged to the Aryan race and the Asuras entered India before the Vedic Aryans. The asura Varuna religion is akin to the AhuraMazda religion of the Iranian Aryans so that both of them could be said to have developed out of a common religious ideology of their Aryan ancestors. Vatsa Kanva mentioned that he received wealth from Tirinder, son of Parshu, which according to Griffith are Iranian names (Tirindores and Persa). 2 From this it is evident that there were close relations between Indians and Iranians in those days. 3

The Iranian Aryans must have come to know with horror and helplessness the destruction of a sister civilization by the Vedic Aryans led by Indra. Otherwise one cannot explain why the same conquests which led to the deification of the Vedic war hero Indra in India led to his being represented as the arch-devil in ancient Iran. Thus in the Avesta the word Ahura denotes the mighty God and the word Daeva means a demon. A victorious people ususaliy ascribe their victory to their godlike qualities and denounce their enemies as demons. Thus the Asuras came to be regarded as demonaical and the word Sura was artificially coined to denote a god by deleting the negative prefix a in Asura. 1

This pejorative sense in which the word Asura came to be known later is also to be found in the Gita. (adhy. xvi).

The Vedic religion has always been eclectic, absorbing within itself all the deities which existed in different periods.

Fire, as also the sun and the moon were the deities of both the Asuras and the Devas. As we saw before, with the growing popularity of the Indra cult, some of the devotees of Varuna such as Gritsamada and Vasishtha changed sides and became the enthusistic supporters of Indra. Later Vasishtha seems to have made a serious attempt to bring about a compromise between the Indra religion and Varuna religion by some such arguments as 4 Indra conquers and Varuna rules. ’ (RV.VII.83). However, as a result of these efforts Varuna got only a subordinate position in the Vedic pantheon with hardly a dozen hymns to celebrate his glory. It is true that we come across some passages in RV.

which glorify Varuna as the supreme God, but they seem to testify to his former glory. In fact we are told in RV (IV.42) that Varuna tried to stake his claim to religious hegemony, but Indra flatly refused to give up his position as the mighty God. Eventually fnoral authority had to yield before superior might and the sages had to concede Indra's claim to supremacy unreservedly.

Although Varuna was accorded a special position by his Association with Indra as dual deity Indravarunau, he never ^gained his former glory. From his position as the controller of the world whose decrees all followed, he was reduced to the Position of the god of ocean and lord of the acquatic creatures (BG.x.29). The other god of the asuras Rudra Shiva seems to have fared better. He too was given an insignificant status in RV.

with only three hymns and was originally denied a share in the sacrificial offerings. His claim was allowed only after he threatened the gods (Shat. Br. 1.7). In the Rigveda there is a Vedic god Rudra, who is described as a destroyer of wild animals in the hunting stage. Shiva later came to be indentified with this Vedic god Rudra. He later became the Supreme God (mahadeva)

The people of Kosala were Vedic Aryans who had colonised this region in the immediate post-Vedic period to which Valmiki's original Ramayana belonged. As Brokington observes (p. 194), “ The religious pattern of the core of the text is decidedly more archaic than has been generally recognised elsewhere. ” During the period of Valmiki, and even upto the time of Sauti, the gods were recognised to be 33 koti, where the term koti meant kinds and not crores as stated in the Puranas.

Kaikeyi could not invoke a larger number of gods to bear witness to the promise given by King Dasharatha to make her son his successor^ The gods so recognised consisted of eight Vasus, eleven Rudras, twelve Adityas and Indra and Prajapati (SR. 1.39). Agni, Shiva and Vishnu were also Vedic gods, but they were not yet prominent enough to deserve separate mention. They were included among the Vasus, Rudras and Adityas respectively. The people of Kosala worshipped deities in the Vedic pantheon such as Indra, the Ashvins, Parjanya and Varuna. Although Varuna, the supreme God of the Asuras was given a place in the Vedic pantheon, he ranked lower than Indra. In the time of Valmiki Indra was still the most prominent God with Vishnu subordinate to him, as Raama is compared to Indra and Lakshmana to Vishnu. Varuna was still more prominent than Shiva, as it was he and not Shiva who gave the famous bow to Janaka (VR.2-28; 110.38). Indra who was the most prominent God in the Vedic period continued to be so Valmiki's time also.

We shall now briefly review the factors which led to the growth of the Shaiva religion during the period of the Mbh. In the Vedic circles the influence of the Vedic god Indra seemed to be waning during the time of the Upanishads. This war god had ceased to have any economic relevance, when in course of time, the Vedic Aryans had settled down to pastoral life with little agriculture. Indra’s human foibles and his amorous habits must also have been jarring on the sensitivity of a people, who were trying to evolve a moral code for people engaged in different occupations. Of the two other gods who had become important in the time of Valmiki, the position of Brahmaa seems to have declined, as there are only a few references to him in Vaishampayana text. Sauti has tried to justify his unpopularity on the ground that only gods who were killers such as Indra, Shiva and Vishnu were adored by the people. 1

Most probably he was not accepted by the Aryan people as he was a Dravidian God. It was only in Sauti's time that he was identified with the Vedic god Prajapati 2 and included among the Vedic gods.

In the time of Vaishampayana, however, Lord Shiva had come to be regarded as the foremost God and worshipped in the human form as well as the form of a linga (phallus That the word linga was employed in the sense of phallus is clear from the epithets of Shiva in the sahasranamastotra such as having an erect phallus, having a big male organ and as containing the seed of progeny. 4 There is also a clear mention of phallus worship in Anushasanaparva (VM. 14.101). When Lord Shiva appeared before Upamanyu in the disguise of Indra and asked him to choose a boon, he declined it on the ground that he would accept a boon only from Shiva. When he was asked for a reason, he said that he was the only god, whose male organ was worshipped by all. The Vedic religion did not know of even image worship until the time of Panini. The seers of Rigveda deprecated the practice of phallus worship and derisively called the worshippers of Shiva shishnadevas or phallus-worshippers.

We have, therefore, to trace the origin of this God not to the Vedic Rudra, but to a proto-Indian God, who existed prior to him.

A roughly carved seal was found by Mackay in the archeological excavations carried out at Mohenjodaro (Plate XII.

17). This seal portrays a three-faced male god, seated on a low Indian throne, in a typical yogic pose with legs bent beneath him, heel to heel and toes turned downwards. His lower limbs were bare with the phallus seemingly exposed. In addition to being the prince of yogis, he was also the lord of beasts, pashupati.

Moreover, both at Mohenjodaro and Harappa, some anicomic objects were found, which were mainly fashined out of stone, but occasionally metals were also used. Sir John Marshall observes that two of these (PI. XIV. 2 & 4) are unquestionably phalli, more or less realistically modelled and prove conclusively that phallic worship in India had a pre-Aryan origin. 1 As Dr.

Dandekar has aptly said, the Indus valley religion, namely the pre-epic Shiva religion, promoted the worship of the anthropomorphic ithyphallic god as well as of the separate phallic symbol. 2

He had special fondness for flesh and blood, which he liked to receive as an offering (bali) and not in the form of an oblation through fire (havis). His devotees worshipped him among other things, by pouring over his icon blood of animals, more particularly the buffalo and as a consequence of this, the god actually looked red. Dr. Dandekar states that both the words Rudra and Shiva mean red, the former being derived form a hypothetical lost root rud, meaning to be red and the latter from a proto-Dravidian word meaning the red one. 1 Though Shiva liked his devotees to offer flesh and blood as a bali, he also liked them to chant hymns especially the Shatarudriya and practice austerities. In the Shaiva religion greater emphasis is placed on tapas or austerity than on any other form of worship.

If the Vedic seers viewed these unusual farms of worship of Shiva with disparagement, his uncouth appearance and outlandish associations were not such as to inspire their confidence. The gods of the Vedic pantheon were goodlooking, splendidly attired, bedecked with costly jewels and pleasure-loving. As against this Shiva is described in the epic as draped in dripping animal hide, crazy, short of stature, ithyphallic and of ascetic habits. 2 Barth, therefore, rightly observes that, “We cam conceive nothing more life-like than the figure, which stands from this piece of rude realism, but nothing at the same time, less Brahmanic.”

That Shiva was a god of non-Vedic origin is clear from the fact that he was initially denied a share in the sacrificial oblations. Its first mention is to be found in the Tait. Sam. (II.

6.8), which tells us that when the gods excluded Shiva from a share in the sacrifice (makha), he pierced it with his dart, whereupon the gods offered him his share. In the Shat. Br, it is stated that when the sacrifice fled from the gods in the form of a deer and when the gods found it, they stripped it of its skin and brought the skin with them. The same Brahmana (I 7.3)

further adds that when Rudra was denied his share, he could get it only by threatening the gods. This story is further developed in the Gopatha Br. (1.2), which says that in the conflict that ensued after Rudra pierced the sacrifice, the gods Bhaga, Savitru and Pushan lost their limbs. These earlier versions of the myth do not connect the sacrifice with Daksha, and the later stories of Dakshayajna seem to be legends. In Vaishampayana’s time, however, the legend of Dakshayajna was wellknown, as he mentions the destruction of Daksha’s sacrifice by Shiva. 1 In this account we notice the reluctance on the part of the Vedic seers to admit an alien god in their pantheon and allot him a regular share in the sacrifice.

Vaishampayana describes Shiva as smoke-coloured with a blue neck and matted locks. He has three eyes, for when Uma playfully closed his two eyes, he created the third eye. He is clad in animal skins, smears himself with ashes and bears skulls in his hands. He is a night-wanderer who frequents the cremation grounds in the company of ghosts and spirits. His abnormal proportions and shapes are described in the Anushasanaparva.2

He carries the pinaka bow, the thunderbolt, a flaming trident, a club, an iron dagger and a pestle. He wears a garland of aksha seeds or Karnikara (pterospermum ace-rifolium) flowers. The bull is his mount as well as his emblem. The other creature closely associated with Shiva is the cobra. Shiva is frequently described as wearing the cobra round his neck (nagopavita)

instead of the sacred thread. His terrible aspect (ghora tanu) is specifically brought out in the Bharata, justifying his equation with Rudra, the dreadful God, who sends blights of diseases when he is enraged. He also had the reputation of being the destroyer of animals, suggestive of his character as a hunter.

The epic also mentions his benevolent aspect for which he is known as Shiva, the benevolent and later as Ashutosha, easy to please. He is also the protector of animals and so known as pashupati, as also the Lord of cows and bulls. 3 He is also a healing God and people in distress go to him for succour. Sages Jaigishavya, Parashara, Animandavya and Galava received his favours and Vyasa also became famous through his grace. The asura kings were his special proteges and obtained special boons by propitiating him with rigorous austerities (VM. XIII. 18)

From this it is clear that Lord Shiva was regarded as supreme God in the time of Vaishampayana. His pre-eminent position at this time is best illustrated by the fact that most of the hymns to Shiva (Shiva-stuti) form part of Vaishampayana text. Shiva is praised by Krishna (VII. 172), by Vyasa (VII.

173), by the gods and sages on the eve of the burning of the three cities (tripuradahana, viii. 20), by Ashvathama (X. 7)

and by Upamanyu (XIII. 14). The Shivasahasranama-stotra and its peculier merit (XIII. 17, 18) also form part of the Bharata. This enhanced status of Shiva in Mbh. period is attested by an appropriate legend added by Vaishampayana (VII.24).

We shall now briefly review the factors which led to the growth of the Shaiva religion during the epic period. Yajurveda speaks of Bhava, Sharva, Ishana, Mahadeva etc. as separate deities. In the Atharvaveda he is known by eight names; of these four Rudra, Sharva, Ugra and Ashani indicate his destructive power, while the other four Bhava, Pashupati, Mahadeva and Ishana denote his benignant forms. In the AV, however, the bearers of these names are known as separate gods. Some of these gods were worshipped in the North, for instance, the people of the Punjab, the Bahikas, worshipped god Bhava. There were a number of such local deities similar to Shiva, who slowly came to be absorbed in the Shiva theopany and some of the important conceptions of Shiva have come from them. 1 Only the tribal god Kartikeya remained outside this process of amalgamation, though efforts were made to bring him within the Shiva theopany, as is evident from the temple of Khandoba, which is a Shiva temple near Pune.

However, later he came to be regarded as his son. All these gods except Skanda had come to be regarded as the names of one God in the Shat, and Kaushi. Brahmanas. 2

Uma, who was known as a mountain goddess before also absorbed all the mother goddesses in her personality and became the supreme mother goddess. 1 She had similar traits as Shiva, possessing both the terrible and benign forms. In her terrible form she was known as Chandi or Kali and in her benign forms as Uma or Durga. She became the spouse of Shiva and so both came to known in the famous words of Kalidasa as jagatah pitarau as parents of the world. As husband and wife they came so close to each other, that Shiva came to be known as ardhanarinateshavara i.e. a god, who is half male and half female. Initially there seems to have been considerable resistance even to the identification of Kartikeya as their son, as we get different accounts of his birth even in the epic. In XIII.

84, he is said to be the son of the fire-god (Agni) from the Ganga brought up by Krittikas (the Pleiads), but in later account^ the indirect parentage of Shiva and Uma has been suggested. The cult of a holy family has supporters all over the world, and Shiva, Uma and Kartikeya as father, mother and son, held a great appeal for the masses. 2 Their popularity is reflected in a number of pilgrimage spots dedicated to them as described by Pulastya to Narada. 3

During the time of Vaishampayana, as stated before, Krishna had not come to be identified with Vishnu or Narayana, though the Vrishni tribe to which he belonged worshipped him as human god. However, there are four passages (VM. VII. 172-175) which are shown to belong to the Vaishampayana text. These seem to identify Arjuna and Krishna with the divine sages Nara and Narayana. However, they seem to have been added later, as is shown in the Dronaparva (VII. 166-167) which describes the release of Narayanastra by Ashvattha against the Pandavas. We are told in this section that Ashvatthama being incensed at the treacherous killing of his father Drona by Arjuna, had employed it against the Pandavas. which his father Drona had secured by worship of god Narayana and it was sufficiently powerful to kill any worrior who offered fight. Had Krishna been identified with Marayana at this time, he himself would have offered to recall it or the Pandavas would have implored him to do so. However, Krishna simply advised the Pandavas not to offer fight but placate jt by dismounting and discarding their arms. 1

Arjuna and Krishna had come to be identified with the divine sages Nara and Narayana in the time of Suta, who refers to it in the Ashramvasika (39.11), and this identification had come to be established in the days of Sauti, who mentions it on a number of occasions. Harivanshakara also refers to it in VII.

171. Panini refers to this identification in his Sutra (IV. 3-98), where he derives the words to denote the worshippers of Arjuna and Vaasudeva. The implication of the dvandva compound vaasudevakarjunkabhyam is that both were regarded as divine and worshipped as such by devotees known as Vasudevakas and Arjunakas. Although their worhip seems to have been fairly common in the days of Panini to justify the special derivation of the above terms, no religious sects seem to have been associated with their names at this time. The Buddhist canonical text Anguttaranikya, which refers to such religions as the Ajivakas, the Nirgranthas etc. does not refer to the Vasudevakas or the Arjunakas.

As pointed out by Kane (p. xi), the worship of Vaasudeva Krishna as the Supreme God must be regarded as old as Panini.

The panegyrics of Lord Krishna in the Mbh. have been added by Sauti and later redactors of the epic. Thus Sauti has inserted in the Shantiparva the Krishnamamastuti by Yudhisthira (43), the Bhishmastavarja (47) and the Krishnamahatmya (200).

Thus by the middle of the fifth century B.C. the supreme godhead of Vaasudeva Krishna with his identification with Vishnu had been clearly established. This is further confirmed I. Although the adhyayas VII. 172-175 have been shown to belong to the Vaishampayana text, further examination showed that the adhyaya 173 was addded by the author of the Parvasangraha and the other three adhyayas were added by Harivamshakara by Megasthenis (4th century B.C.), who states that Heracles (by which he obviously refers to Harikrishna) was held j n veneration by the people of Shurasena. Further Harivamshakara had added the Mahapurushastava 1 (xii. 325)

and the Bhagvan-nama-nirvachana 2 (xii. 328, 330) and the author of the Parvasangrha has added the Vishnusahasranama 3

(xiii. 135). Thus by the end of the first millenium B.C., there emerged another figure, in the religious firmament rivalling Shiva in grandeur. This enhanced status of Shiva and Vishnu by the first century A.D. is attested by the fact that the two Ashmedha sacrifices described in the Uttarakanda of Ramayana (1st century A.D.) are offered to them. One is offered by Indra to Vishnu to free himself from the sin of the brahmin-slaughter, which he had incurred by killing Vritra (UR 7.77). and the second is offered to Shiva to secure Ila’s restoration to manhood (UR. 7.81).

There is sufficient evidence to show that in Sauti’s time (450 B.C.), Vasudeva Krishna had come to be identified as an icarnation of Vishnu. In the Vamshavatarana (I. 61) it is stated that Vasudeva was a partial incarnation of Narayana, the god of gods. This is repeated in the Sabhaparva (33), where it is said that Narayana, the Lord of the world was born in the house of the Yadus. In the Udyogaparva (81), Krishna is described as Srivatsakritalakshana i.e. one who bears the mark of a curl of hair on his chest, which is the mark of Vishnu. When sage Kanva advised Duryodhana to come to terms with Pandavas (V. 103). he said that Krishna was none else than Vishnu, the bearer of the discuss and the mace. Even Bhishma told Duryodhana that Vaasudeva was Narayana and should not be disregarded as a human being (VI. 63, Sauti).

The enhanced status of Shiva and Vishnu in the Mbh. period is attested by appropriate legends added by Vaishampaya and its later redactors. The legend of Tripuradahana, narrated by Vaishampayana (VIII. 24), describes the extraordinary feat of Shiva in which Shiva burnt the three cities and killed the three demons by which he became famous in the Vedic circles, earning the sobriquet Tripurari. Another legend which is suggestive of Shiva’s growing influence in the Gangetic plain is his holding the Ganga in his matted hair, as he alone could bear the force of her descending current. This has been added by Suta. Vaishampayana seems to have known this legend, as he calls Shiva Jahnavidhara i.e. holder of the Ganga. Similar legends came to be invented later when the devotees of Vishnu set up claims of superiority of their god. It is obvious that in the Vulgate Harivamsha 1 the legend of Vishnu’s destroying six Asura towns (shatpura) was thought of to raise him above Shiva who had destroyed only three Asura cities. Later we find Harivanshakara retelling the story of Dakshayajna 2 so as to bring out the hegemony of Shiva.

Vishnu, on the other hand is known from the very beginning as a god of activity. The Rigvedic Vishnu assisted Indra in his wars with Vritra and other Asura kings. 3 In the Brahmana period, he was identified with sacrifice, which was the most important religious activity in those times and was also famous for his three strides. In the Mbh. we are told that he killed Hiranyaksha and Hiranyakashipu and humbled Bali by assuming respectively the forms of the Boar, the Man-lion and the Dwarf. It is stated in the Nara-Narayaniya section of the Shantiparva (HM.335-87) that dharma characterised by active life constitutes the very nature of Narayana. 4

The Gita also calls Krishna-Vaasudeva as Yogeshavara of a different kind, because of his creative activity, which brings into being the existence of things (xi.4). Even in his incarnations, he.performs actions with detachment and so his actions do not bind him. This creative activity is, therefore, the highest form of Yoga, justifying his apithat as Yogeshvara Hence devotees who are inclined to activity (pravriti) and selfexpression worship him by performing actions without attachment and without desire for the fruits of action.

Both Suta and Sauti found it necessary to give a plausible explanation for the identification of the human Vrishni hero with Lord Vishnu and based it on the avatara theory. Suta refers to the four incarnations of Vishnu, namely the boar, the manlion and the dwarf (SM.100.19) and later to Dasharathi Rama (SM.188.III.299). Sauti also mentions the first three incarnations of Narayana (1.61), to which Harivanshakara adds Bhargava Rama as an incarnation, increasing the number to six (HM. XII. 326). But surprisingly the latter does not allude to the fish incarnation, although he narrates the legend of the Fish (HM. III. 185). These six incarnations are also mentioned by him in the Harivansha. He also refers to Kalki, but this could be a later interpolation. Among the Puranas, Vayu and Bhagavata give different number or different names, although they include the six avataras mentioned above. In one passage, the Vayu Purana gives the number of avataras as ten by adding to the six mentioned above. Dattatreya, one unnamed called the fifth, Vedavyasa and Kalki. It is only in Varaha purana, we get the ten incarnations which came to be accepted later, namely the Fish, the Tortoise, the six mentioned above, Buddha and Kalki. Thus the doctrine of the ten incarnations is a much later development.

The epigraphic evidence also shows the prevalence of the worship of Krishna and temples dedicated to him and Balarama since the early centuries before the Christian era. The earliest lepiesentation of any deity in the whole field of Hindu religion is that of Balarama, which cannot be placed later than the second century B.C. 1 There are two inscribed Garuda columns found near Besanagar, which can be placed near the second century B.C. The earlier of these was erected by Heliodoms, who represented himself to be a Bhagavata, in honour of Vaasudeva. the God of gods. Heliodorus had come on a political mission from Antalikita to Bhagabhadra, who must have ruled over eastern Malwa. The second was erected by Maharaja Bhagavata of the Shunga dynasty. 2

Thus by the end of the 1 st millenium B.C. there emerged another figure on the religious horizon rivaling Shiva in grandeur. In the Shanti and Anushasana parvas, we read one account after another in which either of these gods sets up a claim to priority and supremacy. Both these sects had priestly classes with large followings, who set up claims of superiority for their respective god. We are told in the Dronaparva (17252) that Narayana practised regorous penance on the Mainaka mountain and received boons from Shiva, the holder of the Pinaka. Later in the Shanti. 330, we find Harivamshakara retelling the story of Dakshayajna so as to bring out the hegemony of Lord Narayana. There we are told that after the last dart hurled by Shiva consumed Daksha’s sacrifice, it fell with great force on the chest of Narayana. Narayana then gripped Shiva by the throat and a fight ensued. When Shiva and Narayana were thus locked in battle, the whole world was filled with anxiety. Later Brahmaa brought about a reconciliation between the two, whereupon Narayana addressed Shiva thus:

‘ He that knows you knows me; he that follows you follows me. There is no difference between you and me, the mark made by your dart on my chest will remain as a beautiful whirl (shrivatsa), while the mark made by my clutch on your throat W >11 make you known as Srikantha, It is obvious that in the vulgate edition of Harivamsha. 3 the legend of Vishnu’s feat of destroying six Asura towns (shatpura) was thought of to raise him above Shiva, who had destroyed only three Asura cities (tripura).

Both these cults had an irresistible appeal to the common people, as they were based on monotheism, which was more easy to comprehend than the abstract monism of the Upanishads, Shaivism flourished by the amalgamation of all local gods possessing common attributes with Shiva, while Vaishnavism became popular with the identification of Vishnu with the Satvata god Narayana and the Vaasudeva Krishna. No further synthesis’ was possible between these two cults.

Harihara was tried as a symbol of a possible synthesis between the two, but it did not work. This is because Shiva and Vishnu symbolised two different aspects of life and commanded the allegiance of different types of devotees. As pointed out by Sukumari Bhattacharji, although Shiva is the only God who is frequently described with his family, he lives on the cremation ground, with no ties to the outside world. He is usually represented as lost in meditation or practicing rigorous austerities. When sage Markandeya danced with joy as vegetable juice oozed out from his wound, Shiva discomfited him by pressing one finger on another when ashes fell out from it. (III. SI). The ashes symbolisecomplete mortification of the body, the triumph of the spirit over the flesh. We come across many, episodes in the Mbh., which suggest that selfmortification was associated with the cult of Shiva. Shiva was thus the ascetic par excellence, the Yogishvara who typified complete inactivity and withdrawal from the world (nivritti)

Hence devotees with a contemplative bent of mind and inclined to self-abnegation worship him.

Vishnu, on the other hand, is known from the very beginning as a God of activity (pravritti). The Rigvedic Vishnu assisted Indra in his wars with Vritra and other Asuras. 1

In the B rah manic period, he was identified with sacrifice, which was the most important religious activity in those times.

In the epic we read that he killed Hiranyaksha and Hiranyakashipu and humbled Bali by assuming respectively the forms of the boar, the man-lion and the dwarf (vamana), It is stated in the Nara-Naraayaniya section that dharma characterised by active life constitutes the very nature of Vishnu-Narayana. 1 The holy family for the Vaishn.avas consists of Vishnu as the embodiment of everlasting dharma (Gita, xiv.

211), his wife Lakshmi, the goddes of wealth and his-son Madana or Kama, god of love, representing respectively the first three aims (purusharthas > concerned with worldly life.

The Yoga of the Gita is not the yoga of meditation to be practiced in solitude, but the Yoga of action, which is to be pursued for the attainment of the first three purusharthas and also for social solidarity and the good of the world (loksangraha, iii. 25). The Gita further declares that this Yoga of action, when performed without selfish interest and sense of self-importance, leads to the fourth purushartha, namely liberation. The teaching of Lord Krishna has, therefore, a popular appeal for those who wish to lead and enjoy an active life. Finally as a result of these contradictory attitudes of the two cults, the religious thinkers appear to have adopted the Trimurti conception of Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva as the different forms of the Supreme God, fulfilling respectively the functions of creation, preservation and destruction.

This is not a proper place to deal with the spread of Buddhism in the country. I can do no better that quote two passages from Radhakrishnan’s work on Indian Philosophy.'

(1) "At a time when bloody sacrifices were not yet out of fashion, the teaching of mercy to all creation had a tremendous e ffect. His opposition to ceremonialism contributed largely to re commend his doctrine to the masses. This subline grandeur of Buddha’s teaching may be gathered from the following utterances of his: “Never in this world does hatred cease by hatred - hatred ceases by love.” “Victory breeds hatred, for the conquered is unhappy.” “One may conquer a thousand men i n battle, but he who conquers himself is the greatest victor.” “Let a man overcome anger by kindness, evil by good.” Not by birth, but by his conduct alone, does a man became a low-caste or a brahmin.” (2) The missionary spirit of Buddha’s followers contributed considerably to the spread of his gospel. Buddha who bade his disciples: “Go into all lands and preach this gospel. Tell them that the poor and the lowly, the rich and the high are all one and that all castes unite in this religion as do the rivers in the sea.” Dr. Radhakrishnan concludes, “Buddhism succeeded so well because it was a religion of love, giving voice to all the inarticulate forces which were working against the established order and the ceremonial religion, addressing itself to the poor, the lowly and disinherited.” It was, therefore, fitting that in the Varaha Purana, we get the name of Buddha included in the ten incarnations which came to be included later, namely the fish, the tortoise, the six mentioned above, Buddha and Kalki.

Among the upkhyanas added subsequently by its redactors to the Mbh, the Bhargava legends account for the largest number and the greatest variety. Sukthankar has made a thorough and critical study of these legends in his Paper, Epic Studies VI, which is now incorporated in the Sukthankar Memorial Edition. He calls Mbh. a veritable thesaurus of Bhargava legends’ and points out that compared to this epic Ramayana contains very few references to Bhargavas. There is only a solitary reference to Rama Jamdagnya in which he challenges Rama Dasharathi, who has broken the bow of Shiva and is worsted in the encounter. Sukthankar, however, thought it best to examine the Bhargava material in the sequence in which it appeared in the Mbh. and so has studied it ‘book by book’ and chapter by chapter. My object is to show how the myths and legends in the epic illustrate that the observance of the moral law leads to prosperity and a place in heaven, while its neglect leads to perdition and hell.

As we saw before, Vaishmpayana has added only the legend °f Vasu Uparichara in the Bharata. The later redactors have e nriched the epic by the additions of myths and legends. In the additions made by Suta, we come across such myths as those of Agastya, Rishyashringa, Mandhatri, Jantu, Shyenakpotiya and Ashtavakra- (Aranyaka) a.nd of Galava (. Udyoga). Among the more important legends added by Sauti are those of Sunda and Upasunda (Adi), Sav-itri and Satyavan (Aranyaka);

Viduraputranushasana (Shanti), Nachiketa (Anushasana) and Uttanka (Ashramavasika). Harivanshakara has added the Nalopakhyana, the story of the deluge, the Matsyopakhyana, the tale of the frog god, the Ramopakhyana (Aranyaka), Sarasvatopakhyana (Shalya) and Narada’s visit to Shvetadvipa.

In the Critical Edition of the Aranyakaparva. Sukthankar himself points out that the Aranyaka contains episodes of diverse kinds, stories of ancient kings and sages and of virtuous women, ancient gathas and stanzas relating to genealogical tables (anuvartisha). As regards these episodes, Pusalkar observes (p. 123) that these are not subsequent elaborations secondarily introduced, but formed part of the original epic, its purpose being to fill up temporary hiatuses in the narrative (namely the twelve years of exile etc.). The statistical study shows that except for the episode of Uparichara in the Vaishampayana text, all the myths and legends have been added by the subsequent redactors. The epic bards did not stop with the heroic tales of the principal characters in the Bharata war, but have also tried to glorify their ancestors by suitable myths and legends. It is, therefore, proposed to start with the legends of Vasu Uparichara and take up the myths and legends added by them for the glorification of the principal characters and their ancestors in the epic. It is rfot possible to do full justice to all the myths and legends in the epic, but an attempt will be made to deal with the more important of them, especially those which find a mention in the Anukramani and explain how they came to be included.in the epic.

Vaishampayana himself has added the legend of king Vasu Uparichara to describe the parentage of Satyavati, who became the mother of sage Vyasa and the wife of ’the Kuru King Shantanu. King Uparichara was devoted to virtue, but was fond of hunting. This king of the Paurava race, conquered the kingdom of Cedi under instruction of god Indra. After becoming the king of Cedi he performed great sacrifices and the festival of Indra. He was much respected by Indra, who gifted to him an aerial car and since he coursed through the sky in it, he came to be called Uparichara. When his wife Girika finished her monthly period and was ready for him, he was asked by his forefathers to bring deer meat for offering-it to them on the shraddha day. When he had gone hunting for this purpose, he was still thinking of his wife. Being further excited by the fragrance of the flowers and the seductive breeze, he shed his seed and asked a hawk to take it to his wife. On the way this hawk was seen by another hawk, which flew at it, thinking that it was carrying a piece of meat in its mouth. While they were fighting with each other, the seed fell into the water of the river Yamuna and was swallowed by a female fish. This female fish was in reality a celestial nymph, who was transformed into the form of a fish by the curse of a brahmin.

After a period of ten months, this fish was caught by a fisherman, and when he opened the stomach of the fish, there came out a male and a female child. The fisherman took those children to the king Uparichara and narrated to him the story of their birth. The king adopted the male child and handed over the female child to the fisherman, who adopted her and named her Satyavati. When this child grew up as a maiden, she was endowed with great beauty and had a pleasant and smiling face.

She, however, smelt of fish, as she passed her time among the fishermen. She tried to serve her father by plying a boat on the waters of the Yamuna.

One day when she was plying the boat, she was seen by the great sage Parashara, who happened to come there in the course of his wandering. The sage instantly conceived a passion tor her and expressed his desire to mate with her. When the hashful maiden demurred on the ground that they would be se en by others, he created a fog so that they could not be seen by others. He told her that she would retain her virginity even after their union and that her body would exude a sweet fragrance instead of the smell of fish. Satyavati then coyly submitted to the embrace of the sage and conceived and gave birth on that very day to a son endowed with great lustre. Thus Vyasa was born of Satyavati through Parashara. After taking permission of his mother, Vyasa set his heart on becoming a hermit. He came to be known as Dvaipayana as he was born on an island (dvipa) on the Yamuna and as Veda-Vyasa, as he later became a Vedic scholar. He taught Sumanta, Paila, his own son Shuka and his disciple Vaishampayana, whom he instructed to compose the story of the Bharata war.

Vaishampayana, as we saw, merely states.(I. 55.57) that Pandu had five sons, of whom the first three Yudhisthira. Bhima and Arjuna were born from Dharma, the god of justice, Bhima from Marut, god of wind, Arjuna from Indra, the god of heavens and the twins from the Ashvins. Thus although the Kauravas knew that they were not Pandu’s sons, we find that none of them, not even Duryodhan questioned their right to the throne on that ground. For while counselling peace to Duryodhana, even Dhritarashtrai asked Duryodhana how the latter could stake his claim f? the throne, when he himself was not entitled to it. 1

They were'all known as Pandu’s sons according to the Vedic rule that the child bore the name of the person, who took the mother's hand in wedlock. 2 Sauti states (I. 1.113) that when Pandu came to know that he could not produce his own children because of the sage’s curse, he tried to persuade Kunti to beget them through a brahmin. He told her that he himself owed his birth to Krishna Dvaipayana, who had agreed to produce children in the wives of Vichitravirya for the preservation of the Kuru race. Then Kunti told Pandu that she had served sage Durvasa when he had come to her father s.

palace and had received charms (mantras) by which she could summon a deity and produce a child through him. After first three sons were born to her by invoking Dharma, Marut and Indra, Pandu persuaded Kunti to give the charms to Madri, who begot the twins by invoking the two Ashvins.

Sauti has added a myth about the birth of Kama (1.104), who was well known for his munificence. Sura, the grandfather of Krishna was a worthy king of the Yadava race. He had a virtuous and beautiful daughter Pritha, whom he gave in adoption to his cousin Kuntibhoja, who was childless. From that time she came to be known as Kunti. When Kunti was a girl, the sage Durvasa had stayed for some time as a guest in her father’s palace. She served the sage with such care and devotion that he gave her a divine mantra and told her that if she repeated the mantra and called upon any god, he would appear before her and bless her with a son. Kunti was curious to know the efficacy of the mantra and repeated it by invoking the sun. Instantly the sun appeared before her and started gazing at her in admiration. Kunti was abashed to see him and told him that she merely wanted to test the power of the mantra.

She pleaded with him to forgive her folly and go back. He told her that he was bound by the mantra to give her a son, but assured her that after giving birth to the son, she would still remain a virgin. Kunti gave birth to a son who was as bright and handsome as the sun. He was also born with divine armor and ear-rings. In order to hide her shame, Kunti placed the child in a box and set it afloat in the river. A childless charioteer saw the floating case and took it home. He was surprised and delighted to find a handsome child and took it to his wife, who brought him up with a mother’s care. When the boy grew up, he became one of the world’s greatest heroes in his time.

Vaishampayana merely states that Bhishma, the grandsire °f Kurus, was born in the womb of Ganga by king Shantanu.

Sauti has composed a beautiful legend in Adi. 94 after 'dentifying this Ganga with the river goddess Ganga. When Shantanu had gone to the bank of the river Ganga, a maiden met him there intoxicating his senses with her superhuman loveliness.’ He proposed marriage to her and she also agreed to it on the condition that he would not come in the way of whatever she did, good or bad and that she would leave him if he broke this promise. The infatuated king gave her assent and they lived happily. But when she gave birth to a child, she took the baby to the river and cast it into the water. She thus killed seven children and each time she came back with a smiling face. But when the eighth child was born and she was about to take it to the river, he restrained her. She said, “O great king, you have broken your promise. Since I have spared your child, you do not need me. I am the goddess Ganga adored by gods and men. I had to play this hateful role, because the eight Vasus were cursed by Vasishtha to be born in this world of human beings. Please listen to this story before you judge me. ”

Then Ganga told Shantanu how the Vasus came to incur Vasishtha’s curse. Once when the Vasus went with their wives to a mountain forest, they came upon Vashistha’s hermitage.

There they saw the sage's cow Nandini grazing there and all of them admired the graceful animal. The wife of one of them pressed her husband Prabhasa to carry her away with them. He tried to dissuade her by saying that it was not worth incurring Vashistha’s wrath. Finally her husband yielded and they carried away the cow with them. When Vashistha noticed the absence of the cow on his return, he came to know by his yogic power alb that had come to pass. He was so enraged that he cursed them that they would be born into the world of men. When the Vasus came to know of the sage’s curse, they threw themselves on his mercy and begged for his forgiveness. The sage relented and said that except for Prabhasa, who had seized the cow, all others would be freed from the curse as soon as they were born.

The Vasus felt relieved and requested me to marry a worthy king and throw them into the river after their birth. Farewell, 0

shall leave with you one s: on of great promise so that you can bring him up with loving care. So saying the goddess disappeared. But in adhyaya 94, we have a different version, which says that Ganga took her son with her and brought him back when he had become a young boy, which seems to have been added by a subsequent redactor. 1

The legend of Mandavya, also known as Animandvya, added by Sauti (I. 101) describes the birth of Vidura, the uncle of the Kauravas and Pandavas. He was well-known for his knowledge of dharmashastra and statesmanship. Mandavya (I.

57) spent his days in penance and practice of truth. Once when he was immersed in deep penance, some robbers entered his ashrama to hide with their booty. The soldiers of the king were in hot pursuit artd- tracking their foot-prints came to this hermitage. c When they questioned the sage whether he had seem the robbers pass;fig by and where they had gone, they received no reply, a*s the sage was wTapt up in deep meditation. The soldiers thought that he was the chief of the robbers and was feigning to be a sage to escape punishment. They reported the matter to the king, who without making proper inquiries, ordered that the criminal should be impaled. As the sage was practising penance, he did not die. The sages, who lived'in the forest came to se.e’him and asked him how he had come to be in that state. „He replied that the king whose duty it was to protect his subjects, had inflicted this punishment on him.

When the king came to know that the offender, though impaled, was still alive-and was surrounded by other sages, he became frightened, went to see him and asked for his forgiveness.

Mandavya was not angry with the king but went to Dharma, the god of justice and asked him for what crime of his, he was made to suffer this torture. Dharma replied in all humility that he had tortured the birds and bees as a child and. so had to suffer this punishment. The sage replied that the punishment given to him was far in excess for the mistakes committed by him as a child in ignorance and cursed him. As a result of this curse Dharma was born as Vidura, brother of Dhritarashtra and Pandu, who was renowned for his wisdom, righteousness and strict impartiality. He tried to dissuade Dhritarashtra not to grant permission to the dice game and tried his best to prevent the war.

Both Suta and Sauti have added legends to glorify the ancestors of the heroes who figure in the Bharata of Vaishampayana. In Adi. 160-62. Suta tells us how Tapati, daughter of Surya got married to Samvarana, father of Kuru, the ancestor of the Kauravas and Pandavas. In Adi 62, Sauti has given the legend of Dushyanta and Shakuntala, daughter of nymph Menaka, who were the parents of Bharata, the originator of the Kuru dynasty. He also traces the ancestry of the Kauravas and Pandavas to Puru, the youngest son of Yayati;

a king of the lunar race and Sharmishtha, daughter of Vrishparva, king of the asuras. He has also added the legend of Yayati and Devayani, daughter of the great asura priest Shukra, whose eldest son Yadu was the progenitor of the Yadava race to which Krishna belonged.

Suta gives the legend how Samvarana, a famous ancestor of the Pandavas came to marry Tapati, daughter of sun-god (Adi. 90). Samvarana was the son of Riksha and grandson of Ajamidha. Once Tapati, who was born from the shadow of Vivasvat Surya, was seen by Samvarana, who had gone out hunting on a mountin. When he saw her matchless beauty, he fell in love with her and wanted to have her as his wife. He told her that he would like to get married to her according to the gandharva form of marriage. But she disappeared and the king fell down senseless. She, however, reappeared and told him that she was the daughter of Surya and could not marry him without her father’s consent. On seeing the king’s state, Vashistha, the hereditary priest of the Ishvaku kings, went to her father Surya and managed to secure his consent to his daughter’s marriage w jth the king. Pargiter says that the story may have a historical background, as Tapati may have been the daughter of a king named Surya and that this history had come to be mythologised in course of time. 1

Sauti has given in Adi (104) the myth of Dushyanta and Shakuntala whose son Bharata was the ancestor of the Kauravas and Pandavas. Dushyanta was king of the lunar race and descendent of Puru and Shakuntala was the daughter of sage Vishvamitra and nymph Menaka. When Vishvamitra started rigorous austerities, gods became afraid and sent nymph Menaka to interrupt his penance. After enticing the sage, Menaka gave birth to a female child and went to heaven, after leaving the new born baby girl on the bank of a river. Birds (shakuntas) took care of the child and so she came to be known as Shakuntala. Sage Kanva found her and adopted her as his daughter. Shakuntala grew up to be a beautiful maiden.

When king Dushyanta lost his way while he had gone out for hunting, he arrived at the hermitage of Kanva. In the absence of sage Kanva, Shakuntala greeted him and rendered him all the hospitality due to an honoured guest. She also narrated to him how she was born as a daughter of Vishvamitra and Menaka and was later brought up by Kanva. The king was so fascinated by her beauty that he proposed to marry her then and there by the gandharva form of marriage. Shakuntala gave her consent after taking a promise from him that her son would become his heir-apparent. After spending a few days with her, Dushyanta went away to his capital. Shakuntala in due course gave birth to a son in the hermitge. When her son Bharata was about six years old, Kanva advised Shakuntala to take him to the king.

When she took him to the king’s court and declared him to be his son, Dushyanta (fearing a public scandal) declined all knowledge of her. Shakuntala was so upset that she was about to leave the court in anger, when a voice from heaven declaied that Bharata was Dushyanta’s son. Then the king asked for the forgiveness of his wife and installed Bharata as his crown prince. Though this story is a myth. Ait Br. (I. 104) mentions that he was crowned king by Dirghatamas Mamateya and the Shat Br. (XIII. 5.4) states that he had performed an, ashvamedha sacrifice. Bharata became an illustrious monarch and the country came to be known as Bharatavarsha after him.

Kurushravana was a king of the Kuru tribe, who was a descendant of Trasadasyu. a well-known king of the Purus'.

The epic tradition too, which dates from Vaishampayana, traces the tribe of the Kurus to Puru in (Jdyoga. 147. The Kuru kings are said to belong to the lunar race, being the descendants of Soma, the Moon-God. Puru is mentioned as the youngest son of Yayati, son of Nahusha, sixth in descent from Soma, Although Yadu was the eldest son of Yayati, he was full of hauter and disrespectful to his father. Yayati, therefore, gave his kingdom to Puru, who showed filial affection and obedience to him. Bharata and Dushyanta were descended from him. In Drona. 119, Vishampyana traces the lineage of Vasudeva, father of Krishna to Yadu, son of Yayati and Devayani. Here Yayati is said to be the son of Nahusha, sixth in descent from Soma. The geneology is given as follows: Atri - Soma Budha - Pururava - Aayu - Nahusha, Yayati - Yadu Vasudeva. It is stated there that Yayati was the son of Nahusha;

sixth in descent from Soma, but he is said to be the grandson of Pururavas, whom he mentions as grandson of Soma, fourth in descent from Atri (MGG, p. 65). Thus Soma seems to have been the son of Atri, who came to be mythologised as the moon-god.

Vrishaparva, an asura king, was aided by his preceptor Shukra to carry on a struggle with the- gods. He became invincible by the gods, as Shukra had the power to revive the I K dead warriors by his Sanjivani mantra. Once Sharmishtha, the I daughter of the asura king, was bathing in a lake along with | Devayani, daughter of Shukra and other friends. 1 They had left j their clothes on the bank and these got mixed up by a strong * wind. On getting out of the water Sharmishtha put on Devayani’s clothes by mistake, which led to a violent quarrel between them. Sharmishtha taunted her that her father was a humble panegyrist of her father, and that she should consider it an honour to wear her clothes. The quarrel became so heated that Sharmishtha pushed Devayani into a well and walked away. Shortly thereafter, Yayati son of Nahusha, a king of the lunar race, passed by that well and seeing Devayani fallen into it, raised her up. When Devayani told her father all that had happened, he became so upset that he wanted to leave the court of Vrishparva then and there. As the king wanted to retain him at any cost, he pleaded with him not to leave his court and promised to do anything which Devayani desired. Devayani wanted Sharmishtha to serve her as a house-maid and the king persuaded his daughter to serve her with proper respect.

Some time later Davayani went into the forest with her friends and there she met again king Yayati. After knowing who he was,pavayani offered her hand to him. After consulting her father Shukra and obtaining his consent, he took her as his wife.

Then Devayani went to stay with her husband and Sharmishtha, her housemaid also went with her. One day when Sharmishtha met Yayati, she persuaded him that a maiden should look upon her friend’s husband as her own husband. Yayati accepted her suit, but knowing Devayani’s temper kept it a secret. 2 In course °f time Devayani- bore him two sons, Yadu and Turvasu and Sharmishtha gave birth to three sons Druhyu, Anu and Puru.

When one of Sharmishtha’s sons addressed Yayati as father in the presence of Devayani, she became furious and complained to her father, who cursed Yayati with old age and decrepitude.

After a great deal of solicitation, Shukra modified his curse to the extent that the Yayati would be able to exchange his old age with anyone who was willing to do so. When he asked his five sons if anyone would do so, only Puru agreed to the exchange.

Что будет с Землей, если ось ее сместится на 6666 км? Что будет с Землей? - задался я вопросом...

ЧТО И КАК ПИСАЛИ О МОДЕ В ЖУРНАЛАХ НАЧАЛА XX ВЕКА Первый номер журнала «Аполлон» за 1909 г. начинался, по сути, с программного заявления редакции журнала...

Что делает отдел по эксплуатации и сопровождению ИС? Отвечает за сохранность данных (расписания копирования, копирование и пр.)...

Что вызывает тренды на фондовых и товарных рынках Объяснение теории грузового поезда Первые 17 лет моих рыночных исследований сводились к попыткам вычислить, когда этот...

Не нашли то, что искали? Воспользуйтесь поиском гугл на сайте: