š€š—šˆš’ ֎ šŒš”ššƒšˆ

Dravidian Origins: Indus Valley Civilization as the origin of some Vedic myths and rituals

This article reconstructs the relevant coincidences between various finds from the Indus Valley Civilization and the myths and rituals of the later Vedic culture.

di Alessandro Lorenzoni

Cover: pashupati seal

Perhaps the most significant find from the Indus Valley Civilization is the seal found at Mohenjo-daro showing a three-faced deity seated in a yogic position and surrounded by various animals: a rhinoceros, a buffalo, an elephant, a man, a tiger and, below, two antelopes. The meaning of this mute relic ā€“ conserved in the National Museum of New Delhi ā€“ could be at the origin of some myths of the Vedic civilization, subsequent to that of Mohenjo-daro. Until now the two civilizations have been considered separately; but a thorough analysis of the Mohenjo-daro seal elements suggests a close relationship between them. So let's look at each of these elements.

Seal of Pashupati

1. The deity and the animals

The three-faced deity sitting in a yogic position is surrounded by various herbivorous animals. The Vedic deity Prajāpati sends forth all genitures (or creatures) only to have them stay with him for his śrī [1] and his food:

ŚBK, 4, 9, 1, 1. In fact, Prajāpati ā€“ given the genitures ā€“ was thought of as emptied. Therefore, furthermore, the genitures became distant (from him) ā€“ they did not stay with him, for laśrÄ«, for the food.

ŚBK, 4, 9, 1, 2. He (Prajāpati) reflected, ā€œI (am) exhausted. Furthermore, the desire ā€“ for which I have issued the geniture [2] ā€“ it was not satisfied (attained) for me: they (genitures, ŚBM, 3, 9, 1, 2) became distant (from me) ā€“ they do not stay with me, for śrÄ«, for food! ā€. ā€œHow and how can I further increase myself and the parents they can get back together next to me ā€“ can they stay with me, for śrÄ«, for food?ā€

Prajāpati is thus at the center of all parentages ā€“ which return close to him and are thus his food [3]:Ā 

PB, 17, 10, 2. Prajāpati issued the genitures. Emitted, they went away from him. (ā€¦) Thus, (Prajāpati) went (vyavait) to their center. Their they came back close to him. They surrounded him.

PB, 21, 2, 1. Prajāpati issued the genitures. Emitted, they went away from him, scared: "He will devour us". He said, ā€œWhat come back close to me! Indeed, I will devour you, in such a way that ā€“ devour ā€“ more numerous [abundant] you will generateā€. To them ā€“ they had told him: ā€œPromise!ā€ ā€“ He promised, (with the melody) with the final į¹›tĆ”. (With the melody) with the ending Ä«, (Prajāpati) (le) devoured (āvayat). (With the melody) with the triple ending, (le) prompted to generate (prājanayad).

Prajāpati's genitures are only the food and so they are like the herds for the Devās:

JB, 2, 254. (The thousand cows) said: "Indeed, I am afraid of the decrease." ā€œNo,ā€ said (the Devās), ā€œIndeed, we will devour you, in such a way that ā€“ eaten, drunk ā€“ you will not decrease for us". To him ā€“ ā€œIndeed, that (you) promise me!ā€ ā€“ they promised, (with the melody) with the ending į¹›tĆ”. (with melody) with the ending Ä«, (lo) they devoured (āvayan). (With melody) with triple ending, and lo they induced to generate e for him they did the Ć”kį¹£iti [4].

With the exception of the tiger, the herbivorous animals around the deity of Mohenjo-daro are all bent on four feet:

KS, 29, 9. Prajāpati issued the genitures. They had gone away from him. They had gone up. He wanted them: ā€œThey can come back close to meā€. He was burning. He immolated himself, for the sacrifice. Their they came back close to him. They were scared of him. They were bent. Therefore, the herds are folded.

The Vedic myths narrate how ƍndra becomes with a face (with a mouth) in every direction and thus devours all the begettings of Prajāpati:

TB, 2, 2, 10, 6 and 7. Became Prajāpati, he (ƍndra) devoured (āvayat) the parentage. They didn't stay with him for food. (ā€¦) Having become with a face (with a mouth) in every direction, (ƍndra) devoured them. In this way, in fact, the parentage remained with him, for food.

ƍndra shaves his head and thus becomes with a face (or with a mouth) in every direction ā€“ like Prajāpati: Ā«He who, knowing thus, makes himself shaved, became Prajāpati, devour the parentage. The parents stay with him, for food. He becomes a devourer" (TB, 2, 2, 10, 7). Prajāpati's food flies away from him in every direction:

JB, 3, 256. Prajāpati gave out the food. Frightened by the decrease, (food) went away in directions. He (Prajāpati) wished, ā€œI can get the foodā€. He saw a melody. With this (melody): ā€œHe stayed, here! It stayed, here!ā€, (Prajāpati) got food, from all directions.Ā 

Not only is the deity of the Mohenjo-daro seal surrounded by animals, but it has three faces for as many directions. The TB further relates how ƍndra ā€“ the rājanyĆ” [5] of the Devās ā€“ is installed by Prajāpati:

TB, 2, 2, 10, 1-3. Prajāpati emitted ƍndra ā€“ the youngest of the Devās. He ordered him: ā€œGo! Let (thou) be the Ć”dhipati [6] of these Devās!ā€. The Devas said to him, ā€œWho are you? In fact, we are better than you." He said (to Prajāpati): "'Who are you?', the Devās said to me, 'Indeed, we are better than you'". Then, at that time, fervor ā€“ which is in the Sun ā€“ was here in Prajāpati. (ƍndra) said to him: ā€œMay (you) give it to me! Then I will become the Ć”dhipati of these Devāsā€. "The who can I be,ā€ said (Prajāpati), ā€œ(having) given it?ā€. ā€œYou can beā€, said he (ƍndra), ā€œwhat you say (= About)". Indeed, About it is the name (of) Prajāpati. (ā€¦) Having made a golden disc (rukmĆ”į¹ƒ), (Prajāpati) put it on him. In this way, ƍndra became the Ć”dhipati of the Devās. He who thus knows becomes the Ć”dhipati of peers.

A statue from Mohenjo-daro shows a king or priest with a discus on his forehead:

With Harappa

Similar myths to those about Prajāpati and his parentage extend to ƍndra and his Devās:

JB, 2, 100. Prajāpati issued the genitures. He issued, they did not respect him. He wished, "I can attain respect in these parentages." (ā€¦) In this way, in fact, they respected him. In fact, moreover, the Devā did not respectno Indra. He went to Prajāpati: "Indeed, the Devās do not respect me." (Prajāpati) gave him (vyadadhāt) the sacrifice (for) respect. (ā€¦) In this way, in fact, the Devā respected him.Ā 

ƍndra is the main Indo-European deity; while Prajāpati could be a deity of Dravidian origin. ƍndra's power over genitures (or creatures) comes from Prajāpati:

PB, 16, 4, 1. Prajāpati issued the genitures. They did not stay with him, for the śraĆ­į¹£į¹­hya [7]. He ā€“ having attracted the juice (rasaį¹ƒ) of these directions and parentages, made (he had) a garland ā€“ put (it) on himself. In this way, the parentage remained with him, for the śraĆ­į¹£į¹­hya.Ā 

PB, 16, 4, 3. He (Prajāpati) wished, ā€œĆndra may be the best (śreį¹£į¹­haįø„) in my parentageā€. She put the wreath on him. In this way, the parentage remained with ƍndra, for the śraĆ­į¹£į¹­hya ā€“ seeing (in ƍndra) the adornment they saw in his father.

The genitures ā€“ only for him and not for themselves ā€“ rise up against Prajāpati:

PB, 7, 5, 1 and 2. Prajāpati wished: ā€œI can be many. I can generateā€. He remained ā€“ afflicted, unhappy. (ā€¦) Thus (with this āmahÄ«yava [8]), he issued these genitures. He issued, they were happy. (ā€¦) Issued, they they had gone away from him. He took (ā€¦) their prāį¹‡Ä (breaths). Taken in the prāį¹‡Äs, them they came back still close to him. He gave (ā€¦) them again (back, punaįø„) the prāį¹‡Ä. They had risen up against him (or had shown aversion to him). He broke (ā€¦) their anger. In this way, in fact, they stayed with him, for the śraĆ­į¹£į¹­hya.


2. The deity and the tiger

The animals around the seal deity of Mohenjo-daro are on four feet ā€“ with the exception of a tiger. She the latter is about to devour the divinity, after having grabbed her with her front paws. Prajāpati in the Vedic myths is about to be devoured by his son AgnĆ­ (Fire), who is Death: Prajāpati begets again and thus saves himself from AgnĆ­:

ŚBM, 2, 2, 4, 7. Offered, Prajāpati e generated e he saved himself from AgnĆ­, Death about to devour (him). He who, knowing thus, offers the agni-hotrĆ”, begets that prĆ”jāti [9] which Prajāpati begat; so also saves himself from AgnĆ­, Death about to devour (him).

The tiger ā€“ with its mostly ocher hair ā€“ is the aspect of Death:

ā€œIt stretches (for the rājanyĆ”) the skin of a tiger. (ā€¦) The tiger is this aspect (this form, MS, 4, 4, 4) of DeathĀ» (TB, 1, 7, 8, 1).


3. The deity and the antelopes

The seal deity of Mohenjo-daro appears to be seated upon two antelopes. In the Vedic consecration ritual, the anointed (dÄ«kį¹£itĆ”) sits upon the skin of a sable antelope (kį¹›į¹£į¹‡ÄjinĆ”). The black and white hairs of a sable antelope's skin are day and night:

JB, 2, 62. That (Sun) that burns is this dÄ«kį¹£itĆ”. (ā€¦) The shape of a sable antelope's skin is day and night. The day is the shape of white (of the skin). The night, of black (of the skin). (ā€¦) He (the pĆŗruį¹£a in the disk of the Sun) is the prāį¹‡Ć”. He is Indra. He is Prajāpati. He is the dÄ«kį¹£itĆ”.

JB, 2, 63. He who is this pĆŗruį¹£a in the eye is this dÄ«kį¹£itĆ”. (ā€¦) As the shape of the skin of a sable antelope is the black and white (of the eye). The white (of the eye) is the form of the white (of the skin). Black (of the eye), of black (of the skin). (ā€¦) He (this pĆŗruį¹£a in the eye) is the prāį¹‡Ć”. He is Indra. He is Prajāpati. He is the dÄ«kį¹£itĆ”.

The dÄ«kį¹£itĆ” is above the skin of a sable antelope and so it is beyond the black and white hairs: from day and night:

JB, 3, 357. As, being established in the plane of a chariot (rathopasthe tiį¹£į¹­han), he can gaze upon the wheels, so, being established in the world of the Sun (ādityaloke tiį¹£į¹­han), he gazes at day and night.

The yogic position is proper both to the deity (recognizable by the three faces) and to the sages and ascetics.Ā 

With Harappa

Conclusions

The animals in the seal of the Indus Valley civilization may have been replaced ā€“ in the myths about Prajāpati ā€“ by genitures and herds:

PB, 7, 10, 13. Prajāpati sent forth the herds. Issued, them they were gone from him. She was addressing them with this melody. Their remained with him. They became submissive.

PB, 6, 7, 19. Prajāpati sent forth the herds. Issued, them they were gone from him, hungry. He gave them a prastarĆ” [10] ā€“ food. Their they came back close to him. Therefore, the prastarĆ” is stirred slightly by the adhvaryĆŗ[11]. For the herds come back close to the agitated straw (for food).

Is the seal deity going to devour animals or is only Prajāpati in Vedic myths a devourer? The two deities may have both inspired the vegetarianism of Indian civilization. A Harappan tablet may in fact show a sage or ascetic sitting in a yogic position distracting himself from killing a buffalo:

With Harappa

Perhaps the Vedic texts could contain an example of the lucidity of Harappa's sages and ascetics: the genitures remain with Prajāpati and are only the food for Prajāpati and so the herds and multitudes are situated before the brāhmaį¹‡Ć” and the kį¹£atrĆ” [12] and are only the food for the brāhmaį¹‡Ć” and for the kį¹£atrĆ”:

ŚBK, 4, 9, 1, 3. Offered with this (ekādaÅ›Ć­nÄ« [13]), (Prajāpati) increased (or filled) himself again. The parentages they came back together close to him ā€“ they stayed with him, for śrÄ«, for food. Offered, he became better (vĆ”Å›Ä«yān).

ŚBK, 4, 9, 1, 10. Therefore, the brāhmaį¹‡Ć” (is he who) has more power over the herds. As the herds become situated front (to him), situated in the mouth of him (asya, of the brāhmaį¹‡Ć”).

ŚBK, 4, 9, 1, 14. In fact, furthermore, the vĆ­Å›aįø„ (the multitudes, the peoples) are the food. It renders the food in front (in front, purĆ”stād) of the kį¹£atrĆ”. Therefore, the kį¹£atrĆ­ya is the devourer (of the vĆ­Å›aįø„). As food (= le vĆ­Å›aįø„) becomes situated front (to him), situated in the mouth of him (asya, of the kį¹£atrĆ”).

ŚBM, 6, 1, 2, 25. [Tāį¹‡įøya:] ā€œIndeed, the kį¹£atrĆ­ya is the devourer. The vĆ­Å› (the multitude, the people) is the food. Where (yĆ”tra) the food becomes more numerous [abundant] than the devouring one, the rāį¹£į¹­rĆ” [14] becomes prosperous, (the rāį¹£į¹­rĆ”) increasesā€.

If the multitudes are for the kį¹£atrĆ”, then the herds are for the brāhmaį¹‡Ć”. The brāhmaį¹‡Ć” on the herds instructs [15] the kį¹£atrĆ” about the multitudes and thus the multitudes ā€“ before the mouth [16] of the kį¹£atrĆ” ā€“ are like the herds. As the herds are to the brāhmaį¹‡Ć”, so the multitudes are to the kį¹£atrĆ” [17]. The deity of the brāhmaį¹‡Ć” and the kį¹£atrĆ” can only be Prajāpati and the brāhmaį¹‡Ć” and the kį¹£atrĆ” are both only for Prajāpati:

KB, 12, 8. So, in fact, and with the Brahmaį¹‡Ć” and with the kį¹£atrĆ”, and with the kį¹£atrĆ” and with the Brahmaį¹‡Ć”, Prajāpati came to grasp (or encircle) from both sides, to obtain the food [18].

The Vedic texts could express an esoteric knowledge: the animals around the deity of Mohenjo-daro could be his food ā€“ just as the genitures are just the food for Prajāpati. The brāhmaį¹‡Ć” and the kį¹£atrĆ” are ultimately like Prajāpati: the herds and multitudes are only a food set before them.

Ā«If lightning struck cattle, the people were not distressed. It used to be said, ā€œThe lord has slaughtered for himself among his own food. Is it yours? is it not the lord's? He is hungry; he kills for himselfā€ [19]. "

The oldest Vedic texts - such as the TB and the PB - could testify to the relationship between the original culture of the Indus Valley and that of the Indo-European peoples in India. In conclusion, Prajāpati may be the deity of Mohenjo-daro and Harappa and a source of inspiration for later Vedic myths.


Sources index:

ŚBM ā€“ Śatapatha-Brāhmaį¹‡a, version of Mādhyandina ā€“ Weber (A.), The White Yajurveda, The Ƈatapatha-BrĆ¢hmaį¹‡a in the MĆ¢dhyandina-Ć‡Ć¢khĆ¢, Berlin-London: 1855, II.

ŚBK - Śatapatha-Brāhmaį¹‡a, version of Kāį¹‡va - Caland (W.), The Śatapatha-Brāhmaį¹‡a in the Kāį¹‡vÄ«ya recension, Lahore: 1926, I; 1939, II.

PB - PaƱcaviį¹ƒÅ›a-Brāhmaį¹‡a - ŚāstrÄ« (AC), The Tāį¹‡įøyamahābrāhmaį¹‡am, Benares: 1935, I; 1936, II.

JB ā€“ JaiminÄ«ya-Brāhmaį¹‡a ā€“ VÄ«ra (R.), Candra (L.), JaiminÄ«ya-Brāhmaį¹‡a of the Sāmaveda, Nagpur: 1954 [Reprint Delhi: 1986].

TB ā€“ TaittirÄ«ya-Brāhmaį¹‡a ā€“ Thiį¹­e (GU), TaittirÄ«ya-Brāhmaį¹‡a, New Delhi: 2012, I and II.

KS ā€“ Kāį¹­haka-Saį¹ƒhitā ā€“ Schroeder (L. von), KĆ¢į¹­hakam. Die Saį¹ƒhitĆ¢ der Kaį¹­ha-Ć‡Ć¢khĆ¢, Leipzig: 1900, I; 1909, II; 1910, III.

MS - Maitrāyaį¹‡i-Saį¹ƒhitā - Schroeder (L. von), MaitrĆ¢yaį¹‡Ć® Saį¹ƒhitĆ¢. Die Saį¹ƒhitĆ¢ der MaitrĆ¢yaį¹‡Ć®ya-Ć‡Ć¢khĆ¢, Leipzig: 1881, I; 1883, II; 1885, III; 1886, IV.

KB - Kauį¹£Ä«taki-Brāhmaį¹‡a - Lindner (B.), Das Kauį¹£Ć®taki-BrĆ¢hmaį¹‡a, Jena: 1887, I.


Note:

[1] śrī is prosperity, excellence.

[2] Also ŚBM, 7, 5, 2, 6 and 7. Ā«In the beginning, Prajāpati was here, unique. He wished: "I can emit food. I can generateā€. He created herds from prāį¹‡Ä (senses). (ā€¦) Emitted the food (= the herds), if he (it) placed it ā€“ from front to back ā€“ in himself Ā».

[3] All the myths about Prajāpati and the genitures and herds are collected in my site"Vedic fragments".

[4] Akį¹£iti is inexhaustibility. The deity of Mohenjo-daro has an erect member. Prajāpati emits his genitures from the member: 'He issued the genitures from the member. Therefore, these (genitures) are plentiful. Since she issued them from the memberĀ» (TB, 2, 2, 9, 6). The vaĆ­Å›ya is issued by the member of Prajāpati and thus is prolific: ā€œTherefore, furthermore, (the vaĆ­Å›ya) is prolific. Because (Prajāpati) emitted it from the belly ā€“ from the memberĀ» (JB, 1, 69). For the vaĆ­Å›ya is the food for the brāhmaį¹‡Ć” and for the rājanyĆ”: Ā«Therefore, the vaĆ­Å›ya ā€“ devoured ā€“ has not decreased. As it is issued from the memberĀ» (PB, 6, 1, 10). So also the vaisyaĆØ like the herds: "Therefore, the herds ā€“ eaten, cooked ā€“ have not diminished. Because it makes them established in the matrix (yĆ³nau)Ā» (ŚBM, 7, 5, 2, 2).

[5] The rājanyƔ (or rājā) is the king.

[6] The Ɣdhipati is the lord.

[7] śraĆ­į¹£į¹­hya is superiority, supremacy. Also JB, 3, 218. Ā«Prajāpati sent out the herds. Emitted, they went away from him. He wished, ā€œThe herds may not go away from me. They can come back to me." (ā€¦) So (with this melody), he trapped them. Across the śraiį¹£į¹­hya, subdued (or dominated, upāgį¹›hį¹‡Ät) them. They were with him."

[8] The āmahīyava is a ritual melody.

[9] The prƔjāti is the generation.

[10] The prastarĆ” is a bundle of stalks or hay.Ā 

[11] The adhvaryĆŗ is the one who recites the ritual formulas.

[12] The brāhmaį¹‡Ć” and the kį¹£atrĆ” (or kį¹£atrĆ­ya) are the priestly power and the sovereign power: the two powers.

[13] The ekādaÅ›Ć­nÄ« is an offering of eleven herds or victims.

[14] The rāį¹£į¹­rĆ” is the kingdom.

[15] Bį¹›Ģhas-pĆ”ti ā€“ the brāhmaį¹‡Ć” ā€“ installs ƍndra ā€“ the kį¹£atrĆ” ā€“ on the Devās ā€“ on the vĆ­Å›. Also MS, 2, 2, 6. Ā«WellĢhas-pati li (= the Devā) induced to sacrifice, with this (offering), for consonance. Thus, (the Devas) they came back together towards Indra; they were compliant to Indra".

[16] Also MS, 4, 3, 8. Ā«For him (for the kį¹£atrĆ”), place close to the mouth, for the food, the vĆ­Å› with the driver of a cart at the headĀ».

[17] So, together with the herds, like herds, men are for the rājanyĆ” ā€“ for the work of the rājanyĆ” (ŚBK, 7, 1, 3, 1 and 2).

[18] Literally, he was grabbing from both sides, getting food ('nnādyaį¹ƒ parigį¹›hį¹‡Äno 'varundhāna ait).

[19] C. Callaway, Unkulunkulu; or, the Tradition of Creation as existing among the Amazulu, London: 1868, I, 60.

exit mobile version