वेदों की प्राचीनता एवं काल-निर्णय / ओरायन (लोकमान्य बाल गंगाधर तिलक - खगोलीय वैदिक शोध)

LONG DAY AND LONG NIGHT. 125
but which, in inter-glacial times, appeared to have caused no
further inconvenience than what might result from darkness, long
and continuous darkness for a number of days, though, by itself, it
was not a desirable state of things, and the end of which must
have been eagerly looked for by men who had to undergo such ex-
perience. There are many passages in the Ṛig-Veda that speak of
long and ghastly darkness, in one form or another, which sheltered
the enemies of Indra, and to destory which Indra had to fight
with the demons or the Dâsas, whose strongholds are all said to
be concealed in this darkness. Thus in I, 32, 10, Vṛitra, the
traditional enemy of Indra, is said to be engulfed in long darkness
(dîrgham tamaḥ âshayad Indra-shatruḥ), and in V, 32, 5, Indra is
described as having placed Shuṣhṇa, who was anxious to fight,
in ‘the darkness of the pit’ (tamasi harmye), while the next verse
speaks of asûrye tamasi (lit. sunless darkness), which Max Muller
renders by ‘ghastly darkness.’* In spite of these passages the
fight between Vṛitra and Indra is considered to be a daily and
not a yearly struggle, a theory the validity of which will be
examined when we come to the discussion of Vedic myths. For
the present it is sufficient to note that the above expressions
lose all their propriety, if the darkness, in which the various
enemies of Indra are said to have flourished, be taken to be the
ordinary darkness of twelve, or, at best, of twenty-four hours’
duration. It was, in reality, a long and a ghastly or sunless dark-
ness, which taxed all the powers of Indra and his associate
Gods to overcome.
But apart from this legendary struggle, there are other
verses in the Ṛig-Veda which plainly indicate the existence
of a night longer than the longest cis-Arctic night.
In the first place the Vedic bards are seen frequently invoking

• See S. B. E. series, Vol. XXXII, p. 218.

126 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS.
their deities to release them from darkness. Thus in II, 27, 14,
the poet says "Aditi, Mitra and also Varuṇa, forgive if we have
committed any sin against you! May I obtain the wide fearless-
light, O Indra! May not the long darkness come over us." The ex-
pression in the original for 'long darkness' is dīrghāḥ tamisrāḥ,
and means rather an 'uninterrupted succession of dark nights
(tamisrāḥ)' than simply 'long darkness.' But even adopting Max
Müller's rendering given above,* the anxiety here manifested
for the disappearance of the long darkness is unmeaning, if the
darkness never lasted for more than twenty-four hours. In I,
46, 6, the Ashvins are asked "to vouchsafe such strength to the
worshipper as may carry him through darkness"; and in VII,
67, 2 the poet exclaims:—"The fire has commenced to burn,
the ends of darkness have been seen, and the banner of the Dawn
has appeared in the east!"† The expression 'ends of darkness'
(tamasaḥ antāḥ) is very peculiar, and it would be a violation of
idiom to take this and other expressions indicating 'long darkness'
to mean nothing more than long winter nights, as we have them
in the temperate or the tropical zone. As stated previously the
longest winter night in these zones must be, at best, a little
short of twenty-four hours, and even then these long nights
prevail only for a fortnight or so. It is, therefore, very un-
likely that Vedic bards perpetuated the memory of these
long nights by making it a grievance of such importance
as to require the aid of their deities to relieve them from

• Hibbert Lectures, p. 231. The verse is:— अदिते मित्र वरुणोत
  मृळ यह्वो वयं चकृमा कच्चिदागः । उर्वश्यामभयं ज्योतिरिंद्र मा नो दीर्घा
  अभि नशन्तमिस्त्राः ॥
  † Ṛig. I, 46, 6,—या नः पीपरदश्विना ज्योतिष्मती तमस्तिरः । तामस्मे
  रासाथामिषम् ॥ Ṛig. VII, 67, 2,—अशोच्यग्निः समिधानो अस्मे उपो अद-
  श्रन्तमसश्चिदन्ताः ।

LONG DAY AND LONG NIGHT. 127
it. There are other passages where the . same longing for the.
end of darkness or for the appearance of light is expressed, and
these cannot be accounted for on the theory that to the old
Vedic bards night was as death, since they had no means, which
a civilised person in the twentieth century possesses, of dispel-
ling the darkness of night by artificial illumination. Even the
modern savages are not reported to be in the habit of exhibiting.
such impatience for the morning light as we find in the utter-
ances of the Vedic bards ; and yet the latter were so much ad-
vanced in civilisation as to know the use of metals and carriages.
Again not only men, but Gods, are said to have lived in long
darkness. Thus, in X, 124, 1, Agni is told that he has stayed
“too long in the long darkness,” the phrase used being jyog eva
dîrgham tama âshayishṭâḥ. This double phrase jyog (long) and
dîrgham is still more inappropriate, if the duration of darkness
never exceeded that of the longest winter-night. In II, 2, 2,
the same deity, Agni, is said to shinè during “continuous nights,”
which, according to Max Muller, is the meaning of the word
kshapạḥ in the original.* The translation is no doubt correct,
but Prof. Max Muller does not explain to us what he means by
the phrase “continuous nights.” Does it signify a succession of
nights uninterrupted by sunlight? or, is it only an elegant render-
ing, meaning nothing more than a number of nights ? The learn-
ed translator seems to have narrowly missed the true import of
the phrase employed by him.
But we need not depend on stray passages like the above
to prove that the long night was known in early days. In
the tenth Maṇḍala of the Ṛig-Veda we have a hymn
(127) addressed to the Goddess of night, and in the
6th verse of this hymn Night is invoked to “ become

• See S. B, E. Series, Vol. XLVI, p. 195.

128 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS.
easily fordable " to the worshipper (nah sutarâ bhava). In the
Parishishṭa, which follows this hymn in the Ṛig-Veda, and which
is known as Rātri-sûkta or Durgā-stava, the worshipper asks the
Night to be favourable to him, exclaiming “May we reach the
other side in safety ! May we reach the other side in safety !"* In
the Atharva-Veda, XIX, 47, which is a reproduction, with
some variations, of the above Parishishṭa, the second verse runs
thus : “Each moving thing finds rest in her (Night), whose yonder
boundary is not seen, nor that which keeps her separate. O spacious,
darksome Night ! May we,uninjured, reach the end of thee, reach,
O thou blessed one, thine end !" And in the third verse of the 50th
hymn of the same book the worshippers ask that they may pass
uninjured in their body, “through each succeeding night, (rātrim
rātrim)." Now a question is naturally raised why should every
one be so anxious about safely reaching the other end of the
night ? And why should the poet exclaim that “its yonder
boundary is not seen, nor what keeps it separate ?” Was it
because it was an ordinary winter night, or, was it because it
was the long Arctic night ? Fortunately, the Taittirīya Saṁhitâ
preserves for us the oldest traditional reply to these questions,
and we need not, therefore, depend upon the speculations of
modern commentators. In the Taittirīya Saṁhitâ I, 5, 5, 4,† we

• The 4th verse in the Râtri-Sûkta is:—प्रपद्येऽहं शिवां रात्रीं भद्रे
  पारमशीमहि भद्रे पारमशीमहि। The Atharva-Veda, XIX, 47, 2, — न
  यस्याः पारं ददृशे न योयुवद्विश्वमत्वां नि विशते यदेजति। अरिष्टांसस्त उर्वि तम-
  स्वति रात्रि पारमशीमहि भद्रे पारमशीमहि॥ Ibid, XIX, 50,3,— रात्रिं रात्रिम-
  रिष्यन्तस्तरेम तन्वा वयम् ।
  † Taitt Sam. 1, 5, 5, 4,— चित्रावसो स्वस्त ते पारमशीव ॥ Taitt,
  Sam. 1,5,7,5,— चित्रावसो स्वस्ति ते पारमशीयेत्त्वाह । रात्रिर्वै चित्रावसुर्-
  व्युष्ट्यै वा एतस्यै पुरा ब्राह्मणा अभैषुः ॥ Sâyaṇa thus explains the passage
  हेमन्तर्तौ रात्रेर्दीर्घत्वेन प्रभातं न भविष्यत्येवेति कदाचिद् ब्राह्मणा भीता अतः
  पारमशीवेति प्रार्थनया प्रभातं लभते ।

LONG DAY AND LONG NIGHT. 129
have a similar Mantra or prayer addressed to Night in these
words:—"O Chitrâvasu! let me safely reach thy end." A little
further, (I, 5, 7, 5,) the Saṁhitâ itself explains this Mantra, or
prayer thus:—"Chitrâvasu is (means) the night; in old times
(purâ), the Brâhmans (priests) were afraid that it (night) would
not dawn." Here we have an express Vedic statement, that,
in old times, the priests or the people, felt apprehensions regard-
ing the time when the night would end. What does it signify?
If the night was not unusually long, where was the necessity for
entertaining any misgivings about the coming dawn? Sâyaṇa,
in commenting on the above passage, has again put forward
his usual explanation, that nights in the winter were long
and they made the priest apprehensive in regard to the coming
dawn. But here we can quote Sâyaṇa against himself, and show
that he has dealt with this important passage in an off-hand
manner. It is well known that the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ often
explains the Mantras, and this portion of the Saṁhitâ is called
Brâhmaṇa, the whole of the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ being made up
in this way of Mantras and the Brâhmaṇa, or prayers and their
explanations or commentary mixed up together. The statement
regarding the apprehensions of the priests about the coming dawn,
therefore, falls under the Brâhmaṇa portion of the Saṁhitâ. Now
the contents of the Brâhmaṇas are usually classified by Indian
divines under the ten following heads*:—(1) Hetu or reason; (2)
Nirvachana, or etymological explanation; (3) Nindâ, or censure;
(4) Prashamsâ, or praise; (5) Saṁshaya, or doubt; (6) Vidhi, or
the rule; (7) Parakriyâ, or others' doings; (8) Purâ-kalpa, or ancient
rite or tradition; (9) Vyavadhâraṇa-kalpanâ or determining the

• These are enumerated in the following verses:—
  हेतुर्निर्वचनं निंदा प्रशंसा संशयोविधिः । परक्रिया पुराकल्पो व्यवधारणकल्पना ॥
  उपमानं दशैवैते विधयो ब्राह्मणस्य तु । एतद्वै सर्ववेदेषु नियतं विधिलक्षणम् ॥

130 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS.

limitations; (10) Upamâna, an apt comparison or simile. Sâyaṇa
in his introduction to the commentary on the Ṛig-Veda men-
tions the first nine of these, and as an illustration of the eighth,
Purâ-kalpa, quotes the explanatory passage from the Taittirîya
Saṁhitâ, I, 5, 7, 5, referred to above. According to Sâyaṇa the
statement, "In former times the priests were afraid that it
would not dawn," therefore, comes under Purâ-kalpa, or ancient
traditional history found in the Brâhmaṇas. It is no Arthavâda,
that is, speculation or explanation put forth by the Brâhmaṇa
itself. This is evident from the word purâ which occurs in
the Saṁhitâ text, and which shows that some piece of ancient
traditional information is here recorded. Now if this view
is correct, a question naturally arises why should ordinary long
winter nights have caused such apprehensions in the minds of the
priests only 'in former times,' and why should the long darkness
cease to inspire the same fears in the minds of the present
generation. The long winter nights in the tropical and the
temperate zone are as long to-day as they were thousands of
years ago, and yet none of us, not even the most ignorant, feels
any misgiving about the dawn which puts an end to the darkness
of these long nights. It may, perhaps, be urged that in ancient
times the bards had not acquired the knowledge necessary to
predict the certain appearance of the dawn after a lapse of
some hours in such cases. But the lameness of this excuse
becomes at once evident when we see that the Vedic calendar
was, at this time, so much advanced that even the question
of the equation of the solar and the lunar year was
solved with sufficient accuracy. Sâyaṇa's explanation of winter
nights causing misgivings about the coming dawn must, there-
fore, be rejected as unsatisfactory. It was not the long winter-
night that the Vedic bards were afraid of in former ages. It

LONG DAY AND LONG NIGHT. 131
was something else, something very long, so long that, though
you knew it would not last permanently, yet, by its very length,
it tired your patience and made you long for, eagerly long for,
the coming dawn. In short, it was the long night of the Arctic
region, and the word purâ shows that it was a story of former
ages, which the Vedic bards knew by tradition. I have shown
elsewhere that the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ must be assigned to the
Kṛittikâ period. We may, therefore, safely conclude that at
about 2500 B. C., there was a tradition current amongst the Ve-
dic people to the effect that in former times, or rather in the
former age, the priests grew so impatient of the length of the
night, the yonder boundary of which was not known, that they
fervently prayed to their deities to guide them safely to the
other end of that tiresome darkness. This description of the
night is inappropriate unless we take it to refer to the long and
continuous Arctic night.
Let us now see if the Ṛig-Veda contains any direct reference
to the long day, the long night, or to the Circum-polar calendar,
besides the expressions about long darkness or the difficulty of
reaching the other boundary of the endless night noticed above.
We have seen before that the Ṛig-Vedic calendar is a calendar
of 360 days, with an intercalary month, which can neither be
Polar nor Circum-polar. But side by side with it the Ṛig-Veda
preserves the descriptions of days and nights, which are not
applicable to the cis-Arctic days, unless we put an artificial con-
struction upon the passages containing these descriptions. Day
and Night is spoken of as a couple in the Vedic literature, and is
denoted by a compound word in the dual number. Thus we have
Ushâsâ-naktâ (I, 122, 2), Dawn and Night; Naktoshâsâ (I, 142, 7),
Night and Dawn; or simply Ushâsau (I, 188, 6), the two Dawns;
all meaning a couple of Day and Night. The word Aho-râtre also

132 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS.
means Day and Night ; but it does not occur in the Ṛig-Veda,
though Aitareya Brâhmaṇa ( II, 4 ) treats it as synonymous
with Uṣhâsâ-naktâ. Sometimes this pair of Day and Night is
spoken of as two sisters or twins ; but whatever the form in
which they are addressed, the reference is usually unambiguous.
Now one of the verses which describes this couple of Day and
Night is III, 55, 11.* The deity of the verse is Aho-râtre, and
it is admitted on all hands that it contains a description of Day
and Night. It runs thus :—
Nânâ chakrâte yamyâ vapûṁṣhi
tayor anyad rochate kṛiṣhṇam anyat ।
Shyâvî cha yad aruṣhî cha svasârau
mahad devânâm asuratvam ekam ॥
The first three quarters or feet of this verse contain the
principal statements, while the fourth is the refrain of the song
or the hymn. Literally translated it means:—"The twin pair
(females) make many forms ; of the two one shines, the other (is)
dark : two sisters (are) they, the dark (shyâvî), and the bright
(aruṣhî). The great divinity of the Gods is one (unique)." The verse
looks simple enough at the first sight, and simple it is, so far as the
words are concerned. But it has been misunderstood in two
important points. We shall take the first half of the verse first.
It says " the twin pair make many forms ; of the two one shines
and the other is dark." The twin pair are Day and Night,
and one of them is bright and the other dark. So far, there-
fore, there is no difficulty. But the phrase 'make many forms'
does not seem to have been properly examined or interpreted.
The words used in the original verse are nânâ chakrâte vapûṁṣhi,

• Ṛig. III, 55, 11,—नाना चक्राते यम्या वपूंषि तयोरन्यद्रोचते कृष्ण-
  मन्यत् । श्यावी च यादरुषी च स्वसारौ महद्देवानामसुरत्वमेकम् ॥

LONG DAY AND LONG NIGHT. 133
and they literally mean ‘make many bodies or forms.’ We
have thus a two-fold description of the couple ; it is called the
shining and the dark, and also described as possessed of many
forms. In I, 123, 7, the couple of Day and Night is said to be
vishurûpe; while in other places the adjective virûpe is used
in the same sense. It is evident, therefore, that the ‘bodies’
or ‘forms’ intended to be denoted by these words must be
different from the two-fold character of the couple as shining
and dark; and if so, the phrases vishurûpe, virûpe or nânâ vapûmṣhi
used in connection with the couple of Day and Night must
be taken to mean something different from ‘bright and dark’,
if these expressions are not to be considered as superfluous
or tautological. Sâyaṇa. interprets these phrases as referring
to different colours (rûpa), like black, white, &c., and some
of the Western scholars seem to have adopted this interpreta-
tion. But I cannot see the propriety of assigning different
colours to Day and Night. Are we to suppose that we may
have sometimes green, violet, yellow or blue days and nights ?
Again though the word rûpa lends itself to this construction,
yet vapûmṣhi cannot ordinarily be so understood. The question
does not, however, seem to have attracted the serious atten-
tion of the commentators; so that even Griffith translates vishurûpe
by ‘unlike in hue’ in I, 123, 7. The Naktoshâsâ are described as
virûpe also in I, 113, 3, but there too Sâyaṇa gives the same
explanation. It does not appear to have occurred to any one
that the point requires any further thought. Happily, in the
case of Ṛig. I, 113, 3, we have, however, the advantage of
consulting a commentator older than Sâyaṇa. The verse occurs
in the Uttarârchika of Sâma-Veda (19, 4, 2, 3), and Mâdhava
in his Vivaraṇa, a commentary on the Sâma-Veda, explains virûpe
thus:— “In the Dakshiṇâyana during the year there is the increase of

134 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS.
night, and in the Uttarâyaṇa of day.'"* Mâdhava's Vivaraṇa
is a scarce book, and I take the above quotation from an
extract from his commentary given in a footnote to the
Calcutta edition of the Sâma-Veda Saṁhitâ, with Sâyaṇa's
commentary, published by Satya-vrata Sâmashramî, a learned
Vedic scholar of Calcutta. It is not known who this Mâdhava
is, but Pandit Satyavrata states that he is referred to by
Durga, the commentator of Yâska. We may, therefore,
take Mâdhava to be an old commentator, and it is satis-
factory to find that he indicates to us the way out of the
difficulty of interpreting the phrases vishurûpe and virûpe,
occuring so many times in the Ṛig-Veda, in connection with
the couple of Day and Night. The word 'form' (rûpa) or
body (vapus) can be used to denote the extent, duration,
or length of days and nights, and virûpe would naturally denote
the varying lengths of days and nights, in addition to their
colour, which can be only two-fold, dark or bright. Taking
our cue from Mâdhava, we may, therefore, interpret the first
half of the verse as meaning "The twin pair assume various
(nânâ) lengths (vapûṁshi); of the two one shines and the
other is dark."
But though the first half may be thus interpreted, another diffi-
culty arises, as soon as we take up the third quarter of the verse.
It says, "Two sisters are they, the dark (shyâvi) and the bright
(arûshî)." Now the question is whether the two sisters (svasârau)
here mentioned are the same as, or different from, the twin pair
(yamyâ) mentioned in the first half of the verse. If we take them as

• See Sâma-Veda, Cal. Ed., Utta. 19, 4, 2, 3. The verse in the
  Veda is,—समानो अध्वा स्वस्रोरनंतस्तमन्यान्या चरतो देवशिष्टे । न मेथेते न
  तस्थतुः सुमेके नक्तोषासा समनसा विरूपे ॥ Mâdhava's Vivaraṇa says,
  सुमेके—संवत्सरे, दक्षिणायने रात्रेर्वृद्धिः, उत्तरायणे त्वह्नः, नक्तं रात्रिः—
  उषाकालप्रभृत्यहः।”

LONG DAY AND LONG NIGHT. 135
identical, the third pâda or quarter of the verse becomes at
once superfluous. If we take them as different, we must explain
how and where the two pairs differ. The commentators have
not been able to solve the difficulty, and they have, therefore,
adopted the course of regarding the twins (yamyâ) and the
sisters (svasârau) as identical, even at the risk of tautology. It
will surely be admitted that this is not a satisfactory course,
and that we ought to find a better explanation, if we can. This
is not again the only place where two distinct couples of Day
and Night are mentioned. There is another word in the Ṛig-
Veda which denotes a pair of Day and Night. It is Ahanî,
which does not mean 'two days' but Day and Night, for, in VI,
9, 1, we are expressly told that "there is a dark ahaḥ (day) and
a bright ahaḥ (day)." Ahanî, therefore, means a couple of Day
and Night, and we have seen that Ushâsâ-naktâ also means a
couple of Day and Night. Are the two couples same or
different ? If Ahanî be regarded as synonymous with Ushâsâ-
naktâ or Aho-râtre, then the two couples would be identical; other-
wise different. Fortunately, Ṛig. IV, 55, 3, furnishes us with the-
means of solving this difficulty. There Ushâsâ-naktâ and Ahanî
are separately invoked to grant protection to the worshipper,
and the separate invocation clearly proves that the two couples
are two separate dual deities, though each of them represents
a couple of Day and Night.* Prof. Max Muller has noticed
this difference between Ushâsâ-naktâ and Ahanî or the two
Ahans; but he does not seem to have pushed it to its logical
conclusion. If all the 360 days and nights of the year
were of the same class as with us, there was no necessity of
dividing them into two representative couples as Ushâsâ-naktâ

• Ṛig. IV, 55, 3;—उभे यथा नो अहनी निपात उषासानक्ता करतामद-
  ब्धे । See Max Muller's Lectures on the Science of Language, Vol. II,
  p. 534.

136 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS
and Ahani. The general description “dark, bright and of various
lengths” would have been quite sufficient to denote all the days
and nights of the year. Therefore, if the distinction between
Ushāsā-naktā and Ahanī, made in IV, 55, 3, is not to be ignored,
we must find out an explanation of this distinction; and looking
to the character of days and nights at different places on the
surface of the earth from the Pole to the Equator, the only
possible explanation that can be suggested is that the year spoken
of in these passages was a circum-Polar year, made up of one
long day and one long night, forming one pair, and a number of
ordinary days and nights of various lengths, which, taking a
single day and night as the type, can be described as the second
couple, “bright, dark and of varying lengths.” There is no other
place on the surface of the earth where the description holds
good. At the Equator, we have only equal days and nights
throughout the year, and they can be represented by a single
couple “dark and bright, but always of the same length.” In
fact, instead of virūpe the pair would be sarūpe. Between the
Equator and the Arctic Circle, a day and night together never
exceed twenty-four hours, though there may be a day of 23
hours, and a night of one hour and vice versa, as we approach
the Arctic Circle. In this case, the days of the year will have
to be represented by a typical couple, “dark and bright, but of
various lengths, virūpe.” But as soon as we cross the Arctic
Circle and go into “The Land of the Long Night,” the above
description requires to be amended by adding to the first couple,
another couple of the long day and the long night, the lengths of
which would vary according to latitude. This second couple of
the long day and the long night, which match each other, will
have also to be designated as virūpe, with this difference, how-
ever, that while the length of days and nights in the temperate

LONG DAY AND LONG NIGHT. 137

zone would vary at the same place, the length of the long night
and the long day would not vary at one and the same place, but
only at different latitudes. Taking a couple of Day and Night,
as representing the days and nights of the year, we shall have,
therefore, to divide the different kinds of diurnal changes over
the globe into three classes:—
(i) At the Equator,—A single couple; dark and bright, but
always of the same form, or length (sarûpe).
(ii) Between the Equator and the Arctic Circle,—A single
couple; dark and bright, but of various forms, or lengths,
(virûpe).
(iii) Between the Arctic Circle and the Pole,—Two couples;
each dark and bright, but of various forms, or lengths, (virûpe).
At the Pole, there is only one day and one night of six
months each. Now if we have an express passage in the Ṛig-
Veda (IV, 55, 3) indicating two different couples of Day and
Night, Ushásâ-naktâ and Ahanî, it is evident that the aho-râtre
represented by them are the days and nights of the Circum-Polar
regions, and of those alone. In the light of IV, 55, 3, we must,
therefore, interpret III, 55, 11, quoted above, as describing two
couples, one of the twin pair and the other of two sisters. The
verse must, therefore, be translated:—“The twin pair (the first
couple) make many forms (lengths); of the two one shines and
the other is dark. Two sisters are they, the shyâvî or the dark
and arushî or the bright, (the second couple).” No part of the
verse is thus rendered superfluous, and the whole becomes far
more comprehensible than otherwise.
We have seen that days and nights are represented
by two distinct typical couples in the Ṛig-Veda Ushásâ-
naktâ and Ahanî; and that if the distinction is not unmeaning
we must take this to be the description of the days and

138 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS.
nights within the Arctic Circle. Whether Ahanî means a
couple of Day and Night distinct from Uṣhásá-naktá in every
place where the word occurs, it is difficult to say. But that in
some places, at least, it denotes a peculiar couple of the Day and
Night, not included in, and different from, Uṣhásá-naktá is evident
from IV, 55, 3. Now if Ahanî really means the couple of the
long day and the long night, as distinguished from the ordinary
days and nights, there is another way in which these two couples
can be differentiated from each other. The ordinary days and
nights follow each other closely, the day is succeeded by the night
and the night by the day; and the two members of the couple,
representing these days and nights, cannot be described as
separated from each other. But the long night and the long
day, though of equal duration, do not follow each other in close
succession. The long night occurs about the time when the sun
is at the winter solstice, and the long day when he is at the sum-
mer solstice; and these two solstitial points are separated by
180°, being opposite to each other in the ecliptic. This
character of Ahanî seems to have been traditionally known in
the time of the Âraṇyakas. Thus the Taittirîya Âraṇyaka,
I, 2, 3, in discussing the personified Year,* first says that
the Year has one head, and two different mouths, and then
remarks that all this is 'season-characteristic,' which the
commentator explains by stating that the Year-God is said to
have two mouths 'because it has two Ayanas, the northern and
the southern, which include the seasons. But the statement
important for our purpose is the one which follows next. The
Âraṇyaka continues "To the right and the left side of the Year-
God (are) the bright and the dark (days); and the following verse refers
to it:—'Thy one (form) is bright, thy another sacrificial (dark), two

• Taitt. Âran. 1, 2, 3,--एक हि शिरो । नाना मुखे । कृत्स्नं तदृतुलक्षणम् ॥

LONG DAY AND LONG NIGHT. 139
Ahans of different forms, thou art like Dyau. Thou, O Self-
dependent ! protectest all magic powers, O Pûṣhan ! let thy
bounty be here auspicious.'* The verse, or the Mantra, here
referred to is Ṛig. VI, 58, 1. Pûṣhan is there compared to
Dyau and is said to have two forms, dark and bright, like the
Ahanî. These dark and bright forms of Ahanî are said to
constitute the right and the left side of the Year-God, that is,
the two opposite parts of the body of the personified year. In
other words the passage clearly states that the dark and the
bright part of Ahanî, do not follow each other closely, but are
situated on the diametrically opposite sides of the year. This
can only be the case if the couple of Day and Night, represent-
ed by Ahanî, be taken to denote the long night and
the long day in the Arctic regions. There the long night is
matched by the long day, and while the one occurs when the
sun is at the winter-solstice, the other occurs when he is at the
summer-solstice. The two parts of Ahanî are, therefore, very
correctly represented as forming the right and the left side of
the Year-God in the Âraṇyaka, and the passage thus materially
supports the view about the nature of Ahanî mentioned above.
Lastly, we have express passages in the Ṛig-veda where
a long day is described. In V, 54, 5, an extended daily course
(dîrgham yojanam) of the sun is mentioned and the
Maruts are said to have extended their strength and
greatness in a similar way.† But the most explicit state-
ment about the long day is found in X, 138, 3. This

• Taitt. Âraṇyaka, 1, 2, 4,—शुक्लकृष्णे संवत्सरस्य । दक्षिणवामयोः
  पार्श्वयोः । तस्यैषा भवति । शुक्लं ते अन्यद्यजतं ते अन्यद्विषुरूपे अहनी द्यौरि-
  वासि । विश्वा हि माया अवसि स्वधावो भद्रा ते पूषन्निह रातिरस्तु । नात्र भुवनं।
  न पूषा न पशवः । नादित्यः । संवत्सर एव प्रत्यक्षेण प्रियतमं विद्यात् ।
  † Ṛig. V, 54, 5—तद्वीर्यं वो मरुतो महित्वनं दीर्घं ततान सूर्यो न
  योजनम् ।

140 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS.
hymn celebrates the exploits of Indra, all of which are per-
formed in aerial or heavenly regions. In the first verse the
killing of Vṛitra, and the releasing of the dawns and the waters
are mentioned; and in the second the sun is said to have been
made to shine by the same process. The third verse* is as
follows:—
Vi sūryo madhye amuchad rathan divo
vidad dāsāya pratimānam āryaḥ ।
Dṛiḍhāni Pipror asurasya māyinaḥ
Indro vyāsyach chakṛivāṁ Ṛijishvanā ॥
The fourth, fifth and the sixth verses all refer to the destru-
ction of Vṛitra's forts, the chastisement of Uṣhas and the placing
of the moons in the heaven. But the third verse quoted above
is alone important for our purpose. The words are simple
and easy, and the verse may be thus translated, "The sun
unyoked his car in the midst of heaven; the Ârya found a
counter-measure (pratimānam) for the Dāsa. Indra, acting
with Ṛijishvan, overthrew the solid forts of Pipru, the conjur-
ing Asura." It is the first half of the verse that is relevant to our
purpose. The sun is said to have unyoked his car, not at sunset,
or on the horizon, but in the midst of heaven, there to rest for
some time. There is no uncertainty about it, for the words are
so clear; and the commentators have found it difficult to
explain this extraordinary conduct of the sun in the midway
of the heavens. Mr. Griffith says that it is, perhaps, an
allusion to an eclipse, or to the detention of the sun to
enable the Aryans to complete the overthrow of their ene-
mies. Both of these suggestions are, however, not satisfactory.
During a solar eclipse the sun being temporarily hidden by the
moon is invisible wholly or partially and is not besides stationary.
The description that the sun unyoked his car in the mid-heaven

• Ṛig. X, 138, 3—वि सूर्यो मध्ये अमुचद्रथं दिवो. विंदद्दासाय प्रति-
  मानमार्यः । दृळ्हानि पिप्रोरसुरस्य मायिनः इंद्रो व्यासच्चकृवाँ ऋजिश्वना ॥

LONG DAY AND LONG NIGHT. 141
cannot, therefore, apply to the eclipsed sun. As regards the-
other suggestion, viz., that the sun remained stationary for a
while to allow his favourite race, the Aryans, to overthrow
their enemies, it seems to have had its origin in the Biblical
passage (Joshua, X, 12, 13), where the sun is said to have stood
still, at the word of Joshua, until the people had avenged them-
selves upon their enemies. But there is no authority for
importing this Biblical idea into the Ṛig-Veda. Indra's exploits
are described in a number of hymns in the Ṛig-Veda, but in no
other hymn he is said to have made the sun stand still for the
Aryans. We must, therefore, reject both the explanations
suggested by Griffith. Sâyaṇa gets over the difficulty by interpreting
the phrase, ratham vi amuchat madhye divaḥ, as meaning that
“ the sun loosened (vi-amuchat) his carriage, that is, set it free
to travel, towards the middle (madhye) of heaven, (ratham
prasthânâya vi-muktavân).” Sâyaṇa's meaning, therefore, is that
when Indra obtained compensation from Vṛitra, he let loose-
the chariot of the sun to travel towards the midst of the
sky. But the construction is evidently a strained one. The
verb vi much is used in about a dozen places in the Ṛig-Veda
in relation to horses, and everywhere it means to ‘unharness,’
‘unyoke,’ or ‘separate the horses from the carriage for rest;’
and even Sâyaṇa has interpreted it in the same way. Thus
vi-muchya is explained by him as rathat vishliṣhya in I, 104,
1, and rathât vi-muchya in III, 32, 1, and rathât visṛijya in
X, 160, 1, (also compare I, 171, 1 ; I, 177, 4 ; VI, 40, 1). The
most natural meaning of the present verse would, therefore,
be that the ‘sun unyoked his carriage.’ But even supposing
that vi much can be interpreted to mean ‘to loosen for
travel,’ the expression would be appropriate only when there
is an antecedent stoppage or slow motion of the sun. The
question why the sun stopped or slackened his motion in

142 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS.
the midst of the sky would, therefore, still remain unsolved.
The phrase divaḥ madhye naturally means ‘in the midst of the
sky,’ and cannot be interpreted to mean ‘towards the mid-heaven.’
Of course if the sun was below the horizon, we may describe him
as having loosened his horses for travel as in V, 62, 1; but even
there the meaning seems to be that the horses rested at the
place. In the present case the sun is already in the midst of
heaven, and we cannot take him below the horizon without a pal-
pable distortion of meaning. Nor can we properly explain the
action of retaliation (pratimānam), if we accept Sâyaṇa's inter-
pretation. We must, therefore, interpret the first half of the
verse to mean that “the sun unyoked his carriage in the midst of
heaven.” There is another passage in the Ṛig-Veda which speaks
of the sun halting in the midst of heaven. In VII, 87, 5, the king
Varuṇa is said to have made “the golden (sun) rock like a swing
in the heaven” (chakre divi preṅkhaṁ hiraṇmayam), clearly
meaning that the sun swayed backwards and forwards in the
heaven being visible all the time, (cf. also VII, 88, 3). The idea
expressed in the present verse is exactly the same, for even
within the Arctic regions the sun will appear as swinging only
during the long continuous day, when he does not go below the
horizon once every twenty-four hours. There is, therefore, nothing
strange or uncommon in the present verse which says that “ the
sun unyoked his carriage for some time in the midst of the sky ; '
and we need not be impatient to escape from the natural meaning
of the verse. A long halt of the sun in the midst of the heaven
is here clearly described, and we must take it to refer to
the long day in the Arctic region. The statement in the
second line further supports the same view. European scholars
appear to have been misled, in this instance, by the words
Ārya and Dâsa, which they are accustomed to interpret as

LONG DAY AND LONG NIGHT 143
meaning the Aryan and the non-Aryan race. But though the
words may be interpreted in this way in some passages, such is
not the case everywhere. The word Dâsa is applied to Indra's
enemies in a number of places. Thus Shambara is called a Dâsa
(IV, 30, 14,) and the same adjective is applied to Pipru in VIII,
32, 2, and to Namuchi in V, 30, 7. Indra is said to inspire fear
into the Dâsa in X, 120, 2, and in II, 11, 2, he is described as
having rent the Dâsa, who considered himself immortal. In the
verse under consideration Indra's victory over Pipru is celebrated,
and we know that Pipru is elsewhere called a Dâsa. It is,
therefore, quite natural to suppose that the words Arya and Dâsa
in the above verse, refer to Indra and Pipru, and not to the Aryan
and the non-Aryan race. The exploits described are all heavenly,
and it jars with the context to take a single sentence in the
whole hymn as referring to the victory of the Aryan over the
non-Aryan race. There is again the word pratimâna (lit. counter-
measure), which denotes that what has been done is by way of
retaliation, a sort of counter-poise or counter-blast, with a view
to avenge the mischief done by Dâsa. A battle between the
Aryans and the non-Aryans cannot be so described unless a
previous defeat of the Aryans is first alluded to. The plain mean-
ing of the verse, therefore, is that the sun was made to halt in
the midst of the sky, producing a long day, and Indra thus found
a counter-poise for Dâsa, his enemy. For we know that dark-
ness is brought on by the Dâsa, and it is he who brings on the
long night; but if the Dâsa made the night long, Indra retalia-
ted or counter-acted by making the day as long as the night
of the Dâsa. The long night of the Arctic regions is, we
have seen, matched by the long day in those regions, and
the present verse expresses the same idea of matching the
one by the other. There is no reference to the victory of

144 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS.
the Aryan race over the non-Aryans, or anything of that kind
as supposed by Western scholars. Sâyaṇa, who had no historic
theories to mislead him, has rightly interpreted Ârya and Dâsa
in this verse as referring to Indra and his enemy; but he, in his
turn, has misinterpreted, as shewn above, the first half of the verse
in regard to the sun's long halt in the midst of the sky. The
misinterpretation of the second hemistich comes from Western
scholars, like Muir, who interprets Ârya, as meaning the Aryans
and Dâsa, the non-Aryans. This shows how in the absence of
the true key to the meaning of a passage, we may be led away by
current theories, even where the words are plain and simple
in themselves.
We thus see that the Ṛig-Veda speaks of two different
couples of Day and Night, one alone of which represents the
ordinary days and nights in the year, and the second, the Ahanî,
is a distinct couple by itself, forming, according to the Taittirîya
Âraṇyaka, the right and the left hand side of the Year, indicat-
ing the long Arctic day and night. The Taittirîya Saṁhitâ
again gives us in clear terms a tradition that in the former age
the night was so long that men were afraid it would not dawn.
We have also a number of expressions in the Ṛig-Veda denoting
‘long nights’ or ‘long and ghastly darkness,’ and also the ‘long
journey’ of the sun. Prayers are also offered to Vedic deities to
enable the worshipper to reach safely the end of the night, the
‘other boundary of which is not known.’ Finally we have an
express text declaring that the sun halted in the midst of
the sky and thereby retaliated the mischief brought on by
Dâsa's causing the long night. Thus we have not only the
long day and the long night mentioned in the Ṛig-Veda,
but the idea that the two match each other is also found
therein, while the Taittirîya Âraṇyaka tells us, that they
form the opposite sides of the Year-God. Besides the passages