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

286 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS.
different rewards which a Mazdayasnian receives in the next
life for what he gives as present in this to the Ratu (re-
ligious head); and we have therein such expressions as
"On the 45th (day) of Maidhyô-Zaremya, i. e., on (the day)
Dae of (the month) Ardibehest;" or "On the 60th (day) of
Maidhyôshma, i. e., on (the day) Dae of (the month) Tîr;" and
so on. Here each date is given in two different ways: first, by
mentioning the Gâhanbâr or the season (the year being
divided into six Gâhanbârs), and the day of that season;
and secondly, by mentioning the month and the day of
that month. Strictly speaking there is no necessity to
adopt this double method of marking the days of the year, for
either of them is enough to accurately define the day required.
It is, therefore, highly probable, as remarked by Mr. Ervad
Jamshedji Dadabhai Nadershah, that the method of counting
by seasons and days is the older of the two, and the phrases
containing the names of months and days are later interpola-
tions, made at a time when the older method was superseded
by the latter.* But even supposing that the double phrases
were used originally, we can, so far as our present purpose is
concerned, safely infer from these passages that the method of
marking the days of the year by mentioning the season and
the day thereof was in vogue at the time when the Âfrigân was
written: and if the method is so old, it fully warrants us in in-
terpreting chatvâriṁshyâm sharadi to mean "On the 40th (day)
in Sharad (autumn)." There can be little doubt that the Vedic
bards have recorded in this passage the exact date of the com-
mencement of Indra's fight with Shambara, but in the absence
of the true key to its meaning the passage has been so long un-
fortunately misunderstood and misinterpreted both by Eastern
and Western scholars. The grammatical possibility of connect-
ing chatvâriṁshyâm, as an adjective, with sharadi helped on

• See his essay on "The Zoroastrian months and years with their
  divisions in the Avestic age" in the Cama Memorial Volume, pp. 251–

VEDIC MYTHS—THE CAPTIVE WATERS. 287
this misconception ; and though Vedic scholars were unable to
explain why Shambara, according to their interpretation, should
be described as having been found in the 40th year, yet they
seemed to have accepted the interpretation because no other
meaning appeared possible to them. The alternative construction
proposed by me above is very simple. Instead of taking chatvâriṁ-
shyâm as an adjective qualifying sharadi, I take the two
words as independent locatives, but the change in the meaning
caused thereby is very striking and important ; and so long as
the Arctic theory was unknown, the attention of scholars was not
likely to be drawn to this alternative construction.* But now we
can very well understand why Indra is said to have found Sham-
bara on the 40th (day) of Sharad, and why the forts, which gave
shelter to the demon, are described as shâradîḥ, as well as why
Arbuda or the watery demon is said to be killed by ice (hima). I have
stated before that the forts (puraḥ) of Shambara must be understood
to mean 'days,' and the adjective shâradîḥ only serves to

• A similar phrase is found also in the Atharva Veda (XII, 3, 34
  and 41). The hymn describes the preparation of Brahmaudana, or the
  porridge given as a fee to the Brâhmans, and in the 34th verse it is
  stated that "The treasurer shall fetch it in sixty autumns, (shashṭyâm
  sharatsu nidhîyâ abhîchhât)." But, as remarked by Prof. Bloomfield
  (vide his translation of A.V. with notes in S. B. E. Series, Vol. XLII,
  p. 651), the meaning of the phrase "sixty autumns" is obscure; and
  the only other alternative possible is to take shashṭyâm as the loca-
  tive of shashṭî (feminine form, in long î, of shashṭa) meaning "the
  60th"; and interpret the original phrase to mean "On the 60th (tithi)
  in autumns". "The word shashṭa cannot be used in classical Sanskrit
  as an ordinal numeral according to Pâṇini (V, 2, 58); but the rule does
  not seem to hold strictly in Vedic Sanskrit (See Whitney's Grammar,
  § 487). Even in the post-Vedic literature we meet with such ordinal forms
  as shashṭa ashîta, &c. Thus the colophon of the 60th chapter of the
  Sabhâ and the Udyoga-parvan of the Mahâbhârata (Roy's Cal. Ed.)
  reads thus:--Iti...shashṭaḥ.adhyâyaḥ, shewing that shashṭa was used at
  the time as an ordinal numeral, (See Pet Lex. s. v. shashṭa). The
  Brahmaudana is, according to this interpretation, to be cooked on the
  60th day in autumns, i. e., at the end of Sharad every year.

288 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS.
strengthen the same view. The disappearance of the sun below
the horizon in the-beginning of the 8th month in autumn, follow-
ed by a long twilight, a continuous dark night of about 100 days,
and a long dawn of 30 days in the Arctic regions, is the basis of
the legend, and every incident therein can be naturally and
intelligibly explained only on this theory.
There is one more incident in the Vṛitra legend which re-
quires to be considered before we close its examination. We have
seen that water and light are described as having been simultane-
ously liberated by Indra after slaughtering Vṛitra. These waters
are sometimes spoken of as streams or rivers (II, 15, 3 ; II, 2),
which flow upwards or udañcha (II, 15, 6), and are said to be seven
in number (I, 32, 12; II, 12, 12). ‘The theory of the cosmic cir-
culation of aerial waters explains why these waters are described
as flowing upwards simultaneously with the dawn, for as the sun
was believed to be carried in the sky by aerial currents, the light
of the sun appeared above the horizon when the aerial rivers
began to flow up from the nether world where they had been
blocked before by Vṛitra. The waters or the rivers were, therefore,
aptly described as flowing upwards and bringing the light of the
sun with them. But we have still to answer the question why the
rivers or waters are described as seven in number, and it is alleged
that the Storm theory supplies us with a satisfactory reply to this
question. Thus it has been suggested by Western scholars that the
seven rivers, here referred to, are the seven rivers of the Panjaub
which are flooded during the rainy season by waters released by
Indra from the clutches of the demon who confines them in the
storm-cloud. The rivers of the Panjaub may therefore, it is urged,
be well described as being set free to flow (sartave) by
Indra himself, and in support of this explanation we are refer-
red to the Ṛig-Veda X, 75, and to the phrase hapta-hindu oc-
curring in Fargard I of the Vendidad, where it is said to denote

VEDIC MYTHS—THE CAPTIVE WATERS. 289
the Panjaub or India. But the hypothesis, howsoever tempting
it may seem at the first sight, is quite inadequate to explain
the seven-fold division of waters in a satisfactory way.
It has been pointed out above that the simultaneous release of
waters and light can be accounted for only on the theory
of the cosmic circulation of aerial waters; and if this is correct,
we cannot identify the seven rivers, set free to flow upwards
(udañcha) by Indra, with any terrestrial rivers whether in the
Panjaub or elsewhere. The Panjaub is, again, as its name
indicates, a land of five and not of seven rivers; and it is
so described in the Vâjasaneyî Saṁhitâ.* The term pañcha-
nada is, therefore, more appropriate in the case of the
Panjaub, than sapta sindhavaḥ or the Hapta-hindu of the
Avesta. But we might get over the difficulty by supposing
that Kubhâ and Sarasvatî, or any other two tributaries of the
Indus were included in the group by the Vedic bards, when
they spoke of seven rivers. In the Ṛig-Veda (X, 75), about
fifteen different rivers are mentioned, including the Gaṅgâ,
the Yamunâ, the Kubhâ, the Krumu, the Gomatî, the Rasâ,
and the five rivers of the Panjaub; but nowhere do we find
what specific rivers were included in the group of seven rivers.
This has given rise to a difference of opinion amongst scholars.
Thus Sâyaṇa includes the Ganges and the Jamuna in the
group, which, according to Prof. Max Muller, is made up by
adding the Indus and the Sarasvatî to the five rivers of the
Panjaub. On the other hand, Lassen and Ludwig hold that the
Kubhâ must be included in the group at the cost of the Sarasvati.
This shows that we are not on a safe ground in supposing
that the expression "seven rivers" once meant what is, by
nature, "the land of five rivers." The expression sapta
sindhavaḥ occurs in about a dozen places in the Ṛig-Veda, and
in five of these it distinctly denotes the seven rivers set free by

• See Vâj. Saṁ. XXXIV, 11,— पंच नद्यः सरस्वतीमपि यंति सस्रोत-
  तसः। सरस्वती तु पंचधा सो देशेऽभवत् सरित्॥ Here सो is equal to सा+अटः.
  19

290 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS.
Indra along with the release of cows or the recovery of dawn (I,
32, 12 ; II, 12, 3 and 12 ; IV, 28, 1, &c.); and for reasons given
above, we cannot suppose that they represent any terrestrial
rivers in these passages. In the remaining cases, there is not a
single instance where the expression may be said to decisively
denote only the terrestrial rivers; nay, it is more likely that
celestial rivers are referred to everywhere by the expression of
sapta sindhavaḥ. I do not mean to say that sapta sindhavaḥ,
sapta pravataḥ, or sapta sravataḥ can in no case denote any
terrestrial rivers. For there are three groups of seven rivers
mentioned in the Ṛig-Veda,—the celestial, the terrestrial and
the infernal. Thus in X, 64, 8, “thrice three wandering rivers”
are mentioned ; while the waters are said “to flow forward
triply, seven and seven” in X, 75, 1. It is, therefore, clear
that like the Ganges in the Purâṇas, the Vedic bards conceived
a group of seven rivers in the heaven, another on the earth,
and a third in the nether world, somewhat after the manner
of the eleven gods in the heaven, eleven on the earth, and eleven
in the waters (I, 139, 11 ; I, 34, 11 ; X, 65, 9). If so, we cannot
say that a seven-fold division of the terrestrial rivers was not
known to the Vedic bards. But, for reasons given above, we
cannot hold that this seven-fold division was suggested by
the rivers of the Panjaub ; and then extended to the upper and
the lower celestial hemishhere. The Panjaub, as remarked
above, is a land of five rivers and not seven ; and though we
might raise the number to seven by adding to the group any
two insignificant tributaries according to our fancy, yet the
artificial character of the device is too apparent to justify us
in holding that the expression sapta sindhavaḥ was originally
suggested by the rivers of the Panjaub. We must again bear
in mind that the seven-fold division of waters does not stand
by itself in the Ṛig-Veda; but is only a particular case of a
general principle of division adopted therein. Thus we have
seven earthly abodes (I, 22, 16), seven mountains (VIII, 96, 2),

VEDIC MYTHS—THE CAPTIVE WATERS. 291
seven rays or horses of the sun (I, 164, 3), seven hotṛis (VIII,
60, 16), seven regions (dishaḥ) and seven Âdityas (IX, 114, 3), seven
dhîtis or devotions (IX, 8, 4), seven sisters or maryâdâḥ,
(X, 5, 5-6), and possibly seven and seven gods (X, 55, 3),
in the Ṛig-Veda; while in the later Sanskrit literature we
have the seven heavens, seven earths, seven mountains, seven
oceans and seven nether worlds. This seven-fold division is
also found in other Aryan mythologies, as, for instance, in the
Avesta, where the earth is said to be divided into seven Kar-
shavares (Yt. X, 16 and 64), and in the Greek mythology, which
speaks of the seven layers of heaven over one another. It
follows, therefore, that the seven-fold division must be traced
back almost to the Indo-European period; and if so, we cannot
maintain that the seven-fold division of waters, which is only
a particular case of the general principle, was suggested by the
rivers of the Panjaub, for, in that case, we shall have to
make the Panjaub the home of the Aryans before they separ-
ated. But if the rivers set free to flow up by Indra are not
terrestrial, and if the expression sapta sindhavaḥ was not ori-
ginally suggested by the rivers of the Panjaub, it may be asked
how we account for the number of rivers and the origin of the
phrase Hapta-hindu occurring in the Avesta. The true key to
the solution of the question will be found in the simultaneous
release of waters and light effected by Indra after conquering
Vṛitra. In II, 12, 12, Indra, who caused the seven rivers to
flow, is described as sapta-rashmiḥ, or seven-rayed, suggesting
that seven rays and seven rivers must have, in some way, been
connected. We have also seen that the waters and the sun
are said to move at the same time in the Parsi scriptures. If
so, what can be more natural than to suppose that the seven
suns required seven horses or seven aerial rivers to carry them
over the sky, much in the same way as Dîrghatamas is said to
have been borne upon waters in I, 158, 6? Again according
to the legend of Aditi, there were seven suns or month-gods

292 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS.
located in seven different regions and producing seven
months of sun-shine of different temperatures. But how could
the seven suns move in seven different parts of heaven except
by the agency of seven different aerial rivers coming up from
the nether world, each with its own sun ? In short, when the
close connection between waters and light is once established,
it is not difficult to perceive why the waters and light are each
said to be seven-fold. The seven celestial rivers are expressly
mentioned in the Ṛig-Veda (IX, 54, 2), and the flowing forth
of the seven rivers and the appearance of the dawn on the
horizon are described as simultaneous in many passages, some
of which have been already referred to above. Neither the
Storm theory, nor the geography of the Panjaub, satisfactorily
accounts for the simultaneous happening of these events; and so
long as this difficulty is not solved, except by the Arctic theory
and the cosmic circulation of aerial waters, we cannot accept
the hypothesis of Western scholars referred to above, howso-
ever eloquently expounded it may be. As regards the origin
of the phrase Hapta-hindu, which is believed to denote India
in the Avesta, I think, we can explain it by supposing that
the expression sapta sindhavaḥ was an old one, carried by
the Aryans with them to their new home, and there applied to
new places or countries, just as the 'British colonists now carry
the old names of their mother country to their new places of
settlement. Hapta-hindu is not the only expression which
occurs in the Avesta in the enumeration of the Aryan coun-
tries. We have, Vârena, Haêtumant, Rangha and Harahvaiti
in the list, which are the Zend equivalents of Varuṇa, Se-
tumat, Rasâ and Sarasvatî.* But it is never argued from it

• Darmesteter, in his introduction to Fargard I of the Vendidad,
  observes that "names, originally belonging to mythical lands, are often,
  in later times, attached to real ones." If this is true of Varena, Rangha-
  (Rasâ), and other names, there is no reason why Hapta-hindu should not
  be similarly explained, especially when it is now clear that the phrase
  sapta sindhavaḥ denotes celestial rivers in the Vedas.

VEDIC MYTHS—THE CAPTIVE WATERS. 293
that the Vedic deity, Varuṇa, was so named from the country
called Varena by the worshippers of Mazda ; and the same
may be said of Rasâ and Sarasvatî. Rasâ and Sarasvatî
sometimes denote the terrestrial rivers even in the Ṛig-Veda.
But there is ample evidence to show that they were originally
the aerial rivers. It is, therefore, more natural to hold that
all these were ancient mythological names brought with them
by they Aryan settlers to their new home and there applied to
new places or objects. There are places in Burma which are
named Ayodhya, Mithila, &c., and this is explained on the
ground that they were so named by the Indian settlers in
Burma after the well-known places in their native land.
There is no reason why the same theory should not be applied
in the case of Hapta-hindu, especially when we see that the
rivers set free by Indra by slaughtering Vṛitra cannot but
be celestial.
It will be seen from the foregoing discussion that the true
nature and movements of waters released by Indra from the
grasp of Vṛitra has been misunderstood from the days of the
most ancient Nairuktas, or, we might say, even from the days
of the Brâhmaṇas. There are passages in the Ṛig-Veda where
Pûshan is said to cross the upper celestial hemisphere in boats;
but the Ashvins and Sûrya are generally described as travers-
ing the heaven in their chariots. This led the ancient Nairuk-
tas to believe that the upper celestial hemisphere was not a
seat of aerial waters, and that when Indra was described as
releasing waters by slaughtering Vṛitra, the waters referred to
could not but be the waters imprisoned in the rain-clouds.
The seven rivers set free to flow by killing Vṛitra were simi-
larly understood to be the rivers of India, like the Ganges, the
Jamuna, &c., while the piercing of the mountains was ex-
plained away by distorting or straining the meaning of such
words as, parvata, giri, &c., as stated above. It was at this
stage that the subject was taken in hand by Western scholars,

294 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS.
who, taking their cue from the Hapta-hindu of the Avesta,
eloquently advanced the theory that the seven rivers, set free
by Indra, were the rivers of the Panjaub. This explanation,
when first started, was regarded as an important historical
discovery ; and so it would have been, if it had been a real
fact. But, as pointed out above, the Panjaub is, by nature, a
land of five rivers and not seven ; and it is so described in the
Vâjasaneyî Saṁhitâ. It is also evident that as the seven rivers,
set free to flow by Indra, were released simultaneously with
the dawn, they could not be the rivers of the Panjaub. We
do not mean to say that the Panjaub was not an Aryan settle-
ment at the time when the Vedic hymns were sung, for the
rivers of the Panjaub are expressly mentioned in the Ṛig-Veda.
But the rivers of the Panjaub were not the seven rivers
mentioned in the Vedas ; and if so, a new explanation of the
Vṛitra legend becomes necessary, and such an explanation is
furnished only by the theory of the cosmic circulation of aerial
waters or rivers through the lower and the upper world, carry-
ing along with them the sun, the moon and the other heav-
enly bodies. We can now very well explain how Vṛitra, by
stretching his body across, closed the passages in the mountain-
ous ranges (parvatas), which, on the analogy of mountains
usually seen on the horizon, were believed to lie between the
upper and the lower world ; and how the waters, and with
them the sun and the dawn, were prevented from coming up
from the nether world for a long time in the Arctic home of
the ancestors of the Vedic bards. Another oint elucidated by
the present theory is the four-fold character of the effects of
Indra's conquest over Vṛitra, a point which has been entirely
neglected by ancient and modern Nairuktas, not because it was
unknown but because they were unable to give any satisfactory
explanation of the same, except on the hypothesis that differ-
ent effects have been confounded with one other by the poets
of the Ṛig-Veda. But the theory of the cosmic circulation of

VEDIC MYTHS—THE CAPTIVE WATERS. 295
aerial waters, a theory which is also found in the mythology
of many other nations, now clears up the whole mystery. If
Indra is described as the leader or the releaser of waters (apâm
netâ, or apâm srashtâ), the waters do not mean the waters
in the clouds, but the waters or the watery vapours which fill
the universe, and formed the material out of which the latter
was created. In other words, the conquest over waters was
something grander, something far more marvellous and cosmic
in character than the mere breaking up of the clouds in the
rainy season; and under these circumstances it was naturally
considered to be the greatest of Indra's exploits, when, in-
vigorated by a hundred nightly Soma sacrifices, he slew with
ice the watery demon of darkness, shattered his hundred
autumnal forts, released the waters or the seven rivers up-
stream to go along their aerial way and brought out the sun
and the dawn, or the cows, from their place of confinement
inside the rocky caves, where they had stood still since the
date of the war, which, according to a Vedic passage, hitherto
misread and misunderstood, commenced in higher latitudes
every year on the 40th day of Sharad or autumn and lasted till
the end of winter. It is not contended that Indra had never
been the god of rain. There are a few passages in the Ṛig-
Veda (IV, 26, 2; VIII, 6, 1), where he is expressly mentioned
as sending down rain, or is compared to a rain-god. But
as Vṛitra-han or the killer of Vṛitra and the releaser of waters
and the dawn, it is impossible to identify him with the god
of rain. The story of the release of captive waters is an
ancient story; for Vṛitra appears as Orthros in the Greek mytho-
logy, and Vṛitra-han, as Verethragna, is the god of victory in
the Parsi scriptures. Now this Vṛitra-han may not have
been originally the same as Indra, for the word Indra does not
occur in European Aryan languages, and it has, therefore, been
suggested by some comparative mythologians that the con-
quest of waters, which was originally the exploit of some other

296 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS.
Aryan deity, was probably ascribed to Indra in the Vedic my-
thology, when Indra become the principal deity in the Vedic
pantheon. The fact that Tishtrya, and not Verethraghna, is
said to be the releaser of waters and light in the Avesta, lends
some support to this theory. But whichever view we adopt, it
does not affect the conclusion we have come to above regarding
the true explanation of the Vṛitra legend. Clouds and rain
cannot constitute the physical basis of the legend, which is
evidently based on the simple phenomenon of bringing light
to the people who had anxiously waited for it during the
darkness of the long night in the Arctic regions; and it is
a pity that any misconception regarding Vedic cosmography,
or the nature of waters and their cosmic movements, should
have, for sometime at least, stood in the way of the true inter-
pretation of this important legend. Indra may have be-
come a storm-god afterwards; or the conquest over Vṛitra,
originally achieved by some other deity, may have come
to be ascribed to Indra, the rain-god in later times. But
whether the exploits of Vṛitra-han were subsequently ascrib-
ed to Indra, or whether Indra, as the releaser of captive
waters, was afterwards mistaken for the god of rain, like
Tishtrya in the Avesta, one fact stands out boldly amidst
all details, viz., that captive waters were the aerial waters
in the nether world, and that their captivity represented the
annual struggle between light and darkness in the original
home of the Aryans in the Arctic region; and if this fact
was not hitherto discovered, it was because our knowledge
of the ancient man was too meagre to enable us to perceive
it properly.

This image is completely blank and contains no text to transcribe.

VṚITRA TRIUMPHANT.
( WATERS AND THE SUN CONFINED. )

1. Varuṇa's tree. 2. Waters.

This image appears to be a blank page with no text to transcribe.

The provided image is a completely blank page with no text to transcribe.

VṚITRA SLAIN.
(WATERS AND THE SUN SET FREE TO MOVE.)
3. Vṛitra, as a Serpent. 4. The Sun.

The provided image is a blank page and does not contain any text to transcribe.

CHAPTER X.
VEDIC MYTHS--THE MATUTINAL DEITIES.
Vernal theory and the legends of the Ashvins--The part played
by the Ashvins in the struggle for waters and light--Intelli-
gible only on the Arctic theory--Their exploits and legends--
Saving or rejuvenating, rescuing from the ocean, or restoring
the eye-sight or light, to Chyavâna, Rebha, Bhujyu, Atri
Vandana &c.--All explained at present as referring to the
rescue of the daily dawn or the vernal restoration of the
powers of the winter sun--But the theory fails to explain
references to blindness or darkness in several legends--Nor
does it account for the duration of the distress of the Ashvins'
proteges--Nor for the character of the place of distress
from which the proteges were saved--Bottomless and dark
ocean really means the nether world--A bowl with bottom
up and mouth downwards indicates the inverted hemisphere
of the Hades--Legend of Rijrâshva--The slaughter of a
hundred sheep represents the conversion of a hundred days
into so many nights--The story of Saptavadhri or the seven
eunuchs, praying for safe delivery after ten months of gestation
--Remains unexplained up to the present--The interior of
heaven and earth is conceived in the Veda as the womb in
which the sun moves when above the horizon--Ten months'
gestation thus represents the ten months when the Sun is
above the horizon--Prayer for safe delivery indicates the
perils of the long night--Riddle or paradox of a child becom-
ing invisible as soon as born--The story of the hidden
Agni refers to the same phenomenon--Probable origin of the
Purânic story of Kumâra or Kârttikeya--Superiority of the
Arctic over the vernal theory in explaining the legends of the
Ashvins--The legend of Indra's stealing Sûrya's wheel--
The meaning of dasha-prapitve discussed--Indicates darkness
on the completion of ten months--Vishnu's three strides
--Different opinions about their nature quoted--Vishnu's
strides represent the yearly course of the sun--And his
third invisible step represents the nether world--Vishnu's op-
probrious name, Shipivishta--Represents the dark or the diseased
sun during the long Arctic night--The three abodes of Savitri,
Agni and the Ashvins compared to Vishnu's third step--The

298 THE ARCTIC HOME IN THE VEDAS.
legend of Trita A'ptya--Trita, or the third, represents the third
part of the year--The Indo-Germanic origin of the legend--
The Âpas--Their character and nature described--Seven-fold
and ten-fold division of things in the Vedic literature--
Various instances of seven-fold and ten-fold division collected
--This two-fold division probably due to the seven and ten
months' period of sunshine in the Arctic region--The Dâsha-
râjna fight--Represents struggle with the ten-fold division
of darkness--Brihaspati and his lost wife in the Ṛig-Veda--
The ten non-sacrificing kings and Râvana compared--Mythi-
cal element in the Râmâyana probably derived from the Vedic
mythology--Hanumân and Vrishâkapi-- Was Râmâyana
copied from Homer--Both may have a common source--
Conclusion.
THE inadequacy of the Storm theory to explain the legend
of Indra and Vṛitra has been fully set forth in the last chapter; and
we have seen how a number of points therein, hitherto unintelli-
gible, can be explained by the Arctic theory, combined with
the true conception of the circulation of aerial waters in the
upper and the nether world. We shall now take up the legends
that are usually explained on the Vernal theory, and show how,
like the Storm theory, it fails to account satisfactorily for the
different features of these legends. Such legends are to be found
amongst the achievements of the Ashvins, the physicians of
the gods. These achievements are summed up, as it were, in
certain hymns of the Ṛig-Veda (I, 112; 116; 117; 118), each
of which briefly refers to the important exploits of these twin
gods. As in the case of Vṛitra, the character of the Ashvins
and their exploits are explained by different schools of interpre-
ters in different ways. Thus Yâska (Nir. XII, 1) informs us
that the two Ashvins are regarded by some as representing
Heaven and Earth, by others as Day and Night, or as
Sun and Moon; while the Aitihâsikas take them to
be two ancient kings, the performers of holy acts. But as
before, we propose to examine the legends connected
with the Ashvins only according to the naturalistic or the
Nairukta school of interpretation. Even in this school there

VEDIC MYTHS—THE MATUTINAL DEITIES. 299
are, however, a number of different views held regarding the
nature and the character of these two gods. Some believe that
the natural basis of the Ashvins must be the morning star,
that being the only morning-light visible before fire, dawn and
sun; while others think that the two stars in the constellation
of Gemini were the original representatives of the twin gods.
The achievements of these gods are, however, generally explained
as referring to the restoration of the powers of the sun decayed
in winter; and an elaborate discussion of the Ashvins' exploits
on this theory will be found in the Contributions to the Science of
Mythology, (Vol. II, pp. 583-605), by Prof. Max Muller, published
a few years ago. It is beyond the scope of this work to
examine each one of the different legends connected with the
Ashvins, as Prof. Max Muller has done. We are concerned
only with those points in the legends which the Vernal or the
Dawn theory fails to explain, and which can be well accounted
for only by the Arctic theory; and these we now proceed to
notice.
Now, in the first place, we must refer to the part played by
the Ashvins in the great struggle or fight for waters and light,
which has been discussed in the previous chapter. The Ashvins
are distinctly mentioned in the sacrificial literature as one of
the deities connected with the Dawn (Ait. Br. II, 15); and we
have seen that a long laudatory song recited by the Hotṛi
before sunrise is specially devoted to them. The daughter
of Sûrya is also described as having ascended their car (I, 116, 17;
119, 5), and the Aitareya Brâhmaṇa, (IV, 7-9), describes a
race run by the gods for obtaining the Âshvina-shastra as a
prize; and the Ashvins, driving in a carriage drawn by
donkeys, are said to have won it in close competition with
Agni, Uṣhas and Indra, who are represented as making
way for the Ashvins, on the understanding that after win-
ning the race the Ashvins would assign to them a share in
the prize. The kindling of the sacrificial fire; the break