Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T13:49:44.235Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Vedic Mitra and the Epic Dharma

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 March 2011

Extract

In his important book Mythe et épopée Dumézil recently asserted that the god Dharma as he appears in the Māhabhārata is a continuation of the Vedic Mitra. Arguing “la substitution de Dharma à Mitra en tant que père de Yudhiṣṭhira” the French savant is of the opinion that “à l'époque de la rédaction définitive de l'épopée, dharma était certainement le mot le meilleur—ou le moins inadéquat—pour exprimer la substance du Mitra védique et prévédique, substance dont le Mitra épique avait été vidé”. Or, expressing himself briefly, Dharma—one of those so-called abstract figures of the “classical” pantheon which have no counterpart in the Veda—is Mitra “under a rejuvenated name”. Considering myself absolved from the obligation to give an account of the main relevant features of Dumézil's theories, which are well known to every student of Indo-European antiquity and of the comparative history of Indo-European religions, as well as from the necessity to resume my objections to some of his opinions and hypotheses, I shall limit myself here to a discussion of the question as to how far some form of identity of both divine figures can be substantiated or made acceptable.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Asiatic Society 1971

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Dumézil, G., Mythe et épopée, I, Paris, 1968, 146Google Scholar; 151 f.; 170 ff.

2 Dumézil, op. cit., 152.

3 Dumézil, op. cit., 174.

4 I refer to my former publications Review of Dumézil's Mitra-Varuṇa in Bibliotheca Orientalis, 6, Leiden, 1949, 124 f.; Notes on brahman, Utrecht, 1950, 6 ff.; Die Religionen Indiens, I, Stuttgart, 1960, 5.

5 In Dumézil's opinion (see his article “La transposition des dieux souverains mineurs en héros dans le Mahābhārata”, IIJ, 3, 1959, 1 ff., the plot of the Great Epic is nothing but a transposition in human events of a mythology which, in some of its essential features, was more archaic than Vedic mythology. He seems to overlook that this conclusion, drawn from Wikander's hypothesis (see n. 6), should be corroborated by an all-embracing study of the origin of the Mahābhārata, of the intentions of its “original authors”, and by an investigation into the problem as to how this enormous epic which has for all centuries after its completion fascinated millions of Indians could have as its main theme nothing more than the transposition of an almost forgotten and no longer actual mythologeme which could hardly serve to explain the socio-religious situation known to the post-Vedic generations.

6 As is well known he whole-heartedly subscribes to S. Wikander's views expounded in his noteworthy article “Pāṇḍavasagan och Mahābhāratas mytiska förutsättningar”, Religion och Bibel, Nathan Söderblomsällskapets Årsbok, 6, 1947, 27 ff., which was written under the influence of Dumézil's ideas. This article was translated into French by Dumézil, G., in Jupiter Mars Quirinus, IV, Paris, 1948, 37 ff.Google Scholar

7 Dumézil, op. cit., 146.

8 Cf. also Mbh. 1, 113, 39 ff.

9 See especially Thieme, P., “Mitra and Aryaman”, Transactions of the Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences, 41, New Haven, 1957, 6 ff.Google Scholar; Gonda, J., The Vedic god Mitra, Leiden, 1972, ch. iiGoogle Scholar; “Mitra in India”, Proc. Int. Cong. Mithraic Studies, Manchester, 1971.

10 In my recent book The Vedic god Mitra.

11 Cf. also Hopkins, E. W., Epic mythology, Strassburg, 1915, 199.Google Scholar

12 See Kirfel, W., Das Purāṇa Pañcalakṣana, Bonn, 1927, 37Google Scholar; 116.

13 Gonda, J., Aspects of early Viṣṇuism, Utrecht, 1954Google Scholar (2New Delhi, 1969), 223.

14 The Vedic god Mitra, 85.

15 For Dharma as the father of the Vasus see Mbh. 12, 200, 23, and Nīlakaṇṭha on Mbh. 1, 57, 17b.

16 See Gonda, J., The relations between “gods” and “powers” in the Veda, The Hague, 1957, passim.Google Scholar

17 See Oldenberg, H., Vorwissenschaftliche Wissenschaft. Die Weltanschauung der Brāhmaṇa-Texte, Göttingen, 1919, 100 ff.Google Scholar

18 One might compare explications such as Nīlakaṇṭha's on Mbh. 1, 1, 111b. dharmaḥ puṇyaṃ term tatkāraṇībhūtaśamadamasatyāhiṃsādikaṃ grāhyam.

19 Gonda, J., Viṣṇuism and Śivaism, 1970, 44 f.Google Scholar

20 See The Vedic god Mitra, 62 ff.

21 I refer to Bühler's note (Bühler, G., The Laws of Manu, S.B.E. 25, Oxford, 1886, 22Google Scholar).

22 Cf. also VāsDhŚ. 30, 1, dharmaṃ carata mādharmaṃ satyaṃ vadata mānṛtam.

23 Observing that kings, apprehending truth (AV. 5, 17, 10), or acting out of truth, uphold dharma, S. Radhakrishnan, The principal Upaniṣads, 1953, 170, comments: “Satya and dharma, truth and justice, are organically related”.

24 “But there is no such implication”, Hopkins, op. cit., p. 113.

25 dvārāṇi: dharmaprāptimukhāni (Nīlakaṇṭha).

26 It may be noticed here that Nīlakaṇṭha, on Mbh. 1, 60, 14, considers Kīrti, etc., to be the ten doors or means of access to Dharma.

27 The Vedic god Mitra, 68 ff.

28 See Kane, P. V., History of Dharmaśāstra, I, Poona, 1930, 120 f.Google Scholar

29 For particulars see Kane, op. cit., II, Poona, 1941, 7, n. 17.

30 See The Vedic god Mitra, 144 (Index).

31 In places such as Mbh. 9, 44, 15; 12, 192, 16, mentioning Dharma, Kāla, Mṛtyu, Yama they are clearly distinct.

32 See Gonda, J., Ancient Indian kingship from the religious point of view, Leiden, 1966, 17 ff.Google Scholar; 25 ff. (= Numen 3, 52 ff.; 60ff.).

33 Dumézil, op. cit., 119.

34 Pettazzoni, R., The all-knowing god, 1956, 118 ff.Google Scholar

35 Cf. also Hopkins, op. cit., 66.

36 Cf. Hopkins, op. cit., 58.

37 Dumézil, e.g., op. cit., 173. See Gonda, The Vedic god Mitra, 28 ff.

38 For the latter and the topics included under dharma see the introductory observations made by Kane, op. cit., II, 1 ff.

39 The Vedic god Mitra, 65 ff.

40 I refer to my paper “Mitra and mitra”, to be published by the Istituto di Indologia della Università di Torino.

41 See e.g. Kane, op. cit., II, 5.

42 Cf. J. Gonda, “Het begrip dharma in het Indische denken”, Tijdschrift voor Philosophie, 20, Leuven, 1958, 220 ff.

43 See The Vedic god Mitra, ch. vi.

44 See The Vedic god Mitra, ch. x.

45 Some young learned “theologians” who do not accept gifts are meant.

46 Dumont, P. E., L'Aśvamedha, Paris/Louvain, 1927, 49.Google Scholar

47 In Dumézil's opinion (see op. cit., 152; 159 f.; 172 ff.) Dharma is, in a way, also the heir to the complex of ideas represented by Aryaman, because, he holds, Dharma's other epic son Vidura, the uncle of the Pāṇḍavas and Kauravas, who, though a son of Vyāsa and a śūdra woman, was considered an incarnation of a portion of Dharma, really represents the third Āditya, Aryaman (see also Dumézil, in IIJ, 3, pp. 1 ff., and esp. p. 13). In substantiation of his thesis he brings forward, first, the fact that Vidura is consulted about a marriage (Mythe et épopée, I, 159 f.) and Aryaman's function as the god of the nuptial ties, and in the second place the striking frequency of the terms priya “dear” and prīti “any pleasurable sensation, joy, kindness” in the description of Yudhiṣṭhira's government during which Vidura acted as a faithful minister keeping an eye on the maintenance of the dharma (Mbh. 15, a. 1 f. b), terms which would point to the “spirit of Mitra” in which the state of the Pāṇḍavas was, in Dumézil's eyes, governed. Reserving a discussion of the figure of Vidura for another article it may perhaps be remarked that active interest in the marriages of one's younger relatives, the selection of brides, etc., belonged to the dharma of the elder members of the family and that priya (for which see my Notes on names, Amsterdam Acad., 1970, 40 f.) and mitra (see my article “Mitra and mitra”) are not synonymous. I must further declare myself unable to subscribe to Dumézil's far-fetched explanation of Dharma's double fatherhood and of the relations between his sons Vidura and Yudhiṣṭhira (op. cit., 172 ff.), and the conclusion drawn from this fact, viz. that it corroborates the assumption that in the Veda, Aryaman and Mitra were practically identical (op. cit., 174). Cannot, moreover, the remarkable intimate relations between, or “essential identity” of, Vidura and Yudhiṣṭhira (cf. Dumézil, IIJ, 3, 14) find their explanation in the epic fact that they, both of them, represent Dharma?

48 For priya see n. 47.

49 Cf. also Dumézil, G., Mitra-Varuṇa, Paris, 1948, 85Google Scholar; L'idéologie tripartie des Indo-Européens, Brussels, 1958, 19.Google Scholar

50 See p. 133 below.

51 Dumézil, op cit., 151.

52 These remarks coincide with some observations made by Mlle. Biardeau in an important paper “The significance of the Mahābhārata in classical Hinduism”, read at a Conference on Aspects of Religion in South Asia, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London (March–April 1971), which came to my notice after I had written this part of my article. The authoress is in my opinion also quite right in her critical remarks on Dumézil's view of the gods Vāyu and Indra, the fathers of Bhīma and Arjuna, a discussion of whom would lie beyond the scope of this paper.

53 Cf. Dumézil, op. cit., 146.

54 In his book Jupiter Mars Quirinus, IV, 76 ff., and his article in IIJ, 3, 5 f., Dumézil makes an attempt at showing that Varuṇa has not disappeared altogether but hides himself in the figure of king Pāṇḍu who was pale and unable to generate offspring, features which he has in common with the god. It does not, however, appear that Varuṇa is perpetually impotent; on the contrary, in ŚB. 5, 4, 3, 2 (quoted by Dumézil, op. cit., 5, n. 12), he soon recovers his energy and vigour. I am completely at a loss to understand the author's explanation of the difference in generation between Pāṇḍu-Varuṇa and his son Yudhiṣṭhira–Mitra as “the chronological expression of the opposition between Varuṇa concerned with the other world (and hence ‘le souverain lointain’) and Mitra concerned with this world” (p. 6).

55 Which is likewise touched upon by Mile. Biardeau.

56 Dumézil, op. cit., 152 ff.: “La royauté de Yudhiṣṭhira est évidemment toute mitrienne.”

57 Gonda, Kingship, ch. xxiii.

58 See e.g. also Frankfort, H., Kingship and the gods, Chicago, 1948, esp. 62 ff.Google Scholar; Leeuw, G. van der, Religion in essence and manifestation, 1938, 115 ff.Google Scholar

59 See e.g. Dumézil, p. 60; 70 f., etc.

60 Cf. Dumézil, op. cit., 60 f.

61 It should not, however, be forgotten that Dharma is according to some epic traditions also credited with the fatherhood of the Maruts, the Aśvins, and other gods (see Hopkins, op. cit., 96; 168; 170; 173) and that in verses found in manuscripts of the Rāmāyaṇa (1, 16, 8, 10) the Asvins are reborn as Mainda and Dvivida.

62 Mlle. Biardeau.

63 In this point also I concur with Mile. Biardeau.

64 Mile. Biardeau.