fond of the cryptic, as it were, and dislike the evident.” 45 The
Chāndogya Upaniṣad
(II, 22, 3) says: “All vowels are embodiments of Indra.” And the
Aitareya Upaniṣad
(I, 3, 13ff): “I have seen it
(idam adarśa)
said he. Therefore his name is
idam-dra
. Idamdra, verily is his name. Him who is Idam-dra they call ‘Indra’ cryptically, for the gods are fond of the cryptic, as it were.”
The profound change which took place in the attitude toward the Vedic gods is best expressed by an episode narrated in the
Chāndogya Upaniṣad
. Prajāpati acts as
guru
to Indra in order to impart
brahmavidyā
to him. 46 Indra’s position with regard to the “new salvation” is in no way better than the position of any human or, for that purpose, of even the
asuras
. His is only a temporary advantage. His entire realm is transitory and therefore not interesting for the seeker of immortality. If he does not acquire Brahman knowledge, he will lose his Indrahood one day and be reborn as a lower being. Any mortal can win
brahmavidyā
but not even to the Lord of the Gods is it given by nature.
Indra is still called
Vṛtrahan
, but Vṛtra is never mentioned and salvation is not connected with this deed of Indra. It is, however, interesting to see that in the Upaniṣads Indra is always on the side of the Brahmanknower, never on the side of
avidyā
(which is connected with
asuras)
, so that it can be said: he who has
brahmavidyā
has also Indra. Madhva, the only one among the major Vedāntins to write a commentary on the
Ṛgveda
, provides a philosophical explanation of the episode. According to him Vṛtra represents the concentrated essence of ignorance
(ajñāna)
, figuratively described as cloud, serpent, or mountain. Indra is the Supreme Being who slays the demon of ignorance, with his weapon of
vajra
, true knowledge, and confers lasting benefit on the cows (individual selves) which have been imprisoned by the power of ignorance. 47
ITIHĀSA AND PURĀ Ṇ A
Most scholars today attribute to
Itihāsa-Purāṇa
considerable importance as a source for Indian religion, independent from the Veda, and parallel to the
Ṛgveda
which is seen as an anthology in which “mythical episodes are referred to in an allusive way” and which constitutes only “remnants of an immense literature of legend which must have existed in an oral form long before.” 48 The
Itihāsa-Purāṇa
in many cases preserves the entire myth, whereas the
Ṛgveda
contains only an allusion to the myth.
The existence of Purāṇas from the Sūtra-period onwards is certain; there are early references to
Purāṇas
as sources of law. The
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad
mentions
Itihasa-Purāṇa
among the subjects of study of learned men. Internal evidence from the
Ṛgveda
also justifies the assumption that besides the highly formal hymns used in the official Vedic liturgy there existed popular forms of narratives, oral for many centuries and constantly growing. Several attempts have been made to reconstruct the “Original
Purāṇa Saṃhitā,”
which “existed long before the Christian era.” 49 Usually the
Vāyu Purāṇa
is considered to be closest to the “Original Purāṇa.” 50 Though the actual shape of the Purāṇas and Epics as they are known to us is recent, 51 they preserve materials and myths that might actually be as old as, or even older than, the
Ṛgveda. 52
Very often the myths have been reinterpreted in the Purāṇas to fit into a sectarian context, but generally the old narrative can be recognized and reconstructed.
The Indra-Vṛtra battle is dealt with in
Itiādsa-Purāṇa
in amazing detail; often the same work has several accounts of it. That may be one more argument for our thesis that the Indra-Vṛtra fight constitutes the great Vedic salvation myth which was so popular that the later Hindu sects could not afford to leave it out but had to reinterpret it to show the superiority of their own accepted god over Indra, the
Chāndogya Upaniṣad
(II, 22, 3) says: “All vowels are embodiments of Indra.” And the
Aitareya Upaniṣad
(I, 3, 13ff): “I have seen it
(idam adarśa)
said he. Therefore his name is
idam-dra
. Idamdra, verily is his name. Him who is Idam-dra they call ‘Indra’ cryptically, for the gods are fond of the cryptic, as it were.”
The profound change which took place in the attitude toward the Vedic gods is best expressed by an episode narrated in the
Chāndogya Upaniṣad
. Prajāpati acts as
guru
to Indra in order to impart
brahmavidyā
to him. 46 Indra’s position with regard to the “new salvation” is in no way better than the position of any human or, for that purpose, of even the
asuras
. His is only a temporary advantage. His entire realm is transitory and therefore not interesting for the seeker of immortality. If he does not acquire Brahman knowledge, he will lose his Indrahood one day and be reborn as a lower being. Any mortal can win
brahmavidyā
but not even to the Lord of the Gods is it given by nature.
Indra is still called
Vṛtrahan
, but Vṛtra is never mentioned and salvation is not connected with this deed of Indra. It is, however, interesting to see that in the Upaniṣads Indra is always on the side of the Brahmanknower, never on the side of
avidyā
(which is connected with
asuras)
, so that it can be said: he who has
brahmavidyā
has also Indra. Madhva, the only one among the major Vedāntins to write a commentary on the
Ṛgveda
, provides a philosophical explanation of the episode. According to him Vṛtra represents the concentrated essence of ignorance
(ajñāna)
, figuratively described as cloud, serpent, or mountain. Indra is the Supreme Being who slays the demon of ignorance, with his weapon of
vajra
, true knowledge, and confers lasting benefit on the cows (individual selves) which have been imprisoned by the power of ignorance. 47
ITIHĀSA AND PURĀ Ṇ A
Most scholars today attribute to
Itihāsa-Purāṇa
considerable importance as a source for Indian religion, independent from the Veda, and parallel to the
Ṛgveda
which is seen as an anthology in which “mythical episodes are referred to in an allusive way” and which constitutes only “remnants of an immense literature of legend which must have existed in an oral form long before.” 48 The
Itihāsa-Purāṇa
in many cases preserves the entire myth, whereas the
Ṛgveda
contains only an allusion to the myth.
The existence of Purāṇas from the Sūtra-period onwards is certain; there are early references to
Purāṇas
as sources of law. The
Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad
mentions
Itihasa-Purāṇa
among the subjects of study of learned men. Internal evidence from the
Ṛgveda
also justifies the assumption that besides the highly formal hymns used in the official Vedic liturgy there existed popular forms of narratives, oral for many centuries and constantly growing. Several attempts have been made to reconstruct the “Original
Purāṇa Saṃhitā,”
which “existed long before the Christian era.” 49 Usually the
Vāyu Purāṇa
is considered to be closest to the “Original Purāṇa.” 50 Though the actual shape of the Purāṇas and Epics as they are known to us is recent, 51 they preserve materials and myths that might actually be as old as, or even older than, the
Ṛgveda. 52
Very often the myths have been reinterpreted in the Purāṇas to fit into a sectarian context, but generally the old narrative can be recognized and reconstructed.
The Indra-Vṛtra battle is dealt with in
Itiādsa-Purāṇa
in amazing detail; often the same work has several accounts of it. That may be one more argument for our thesis that the Indra-Vṛtra fight constitutes the great Vedic salvation myth which was so popular that the later Hindu sects could not afford to leave it out but had to reinterpret it to show the superiority of their own accepted god over Indra, the
Similar Books
