________________
SEPTEMBER, 1880.]
CORRESPONDENCE AND MISCELLANEA.
227
Yasod , who received the newly-born child im- lactans" in my paper on the Saptasatakam of mediately after his birth, on her part gave birth to Hâla, p. 208); but he has no right whatever to say her own child, that magical girl who is exchanged that I have "erroneously" called her. Devaki, with him. The reason of this, indeed, can only be or as he now puts it that I have "deliberately subthat, from the beginning, the celebration of the Jan- stituted Devaki for Yasoda," for in the ritual mdshtami festival stood in close relation to the Devaki too is described as Krishna's nurse. representation of Kộishna's growing up among With reference to the picture, therefore, both cowherds, and consequently this conception en- names are a priori equally justifiable-the one tirely preponderated over the other, according to not more than the other. Nor do I lay any which he was & prince born in prison.'
special stress on the title attached to it in Moor's "(3) These differences between the ritual of work, -not by me,-as may be seen from my Krishna's birthday and between the legends of remarks (Ind. Ant. vol. VI. pp. 350, 351) : "no his birth are the very keystone of my theory of direct reference to the special accounts of the the foreign origin of the first. Thus you read in manner in which the infant Krishna is representthe Indian Antiquary, vol. III. (1874), p. 21:- ed at the festival of the Krishňajanmashtami is • The most difficult point in connection with the found in it; he is neither represented as 'asleep festival of the birthday of Krishna, as we now have drinking at the breast,'nor pressing,' &c." And described it, lies clearly in the description, and when I continue " of the identity of the persons, particularly in the pictorial representation, of him however, there can be no reasonable doubt," I as a suckling at his mother's 'breast, and in the refer to those doubts only which I discuss in the homage paid to the mother, represented as lying | sequel, viz. of Niclas Müller, Creuzer, Guigniauton a couch in a cono-house, who has borne him, tho who on their part conceive the mother to be lord of the world, in her womb. Such a repre- Bhavani or M&y. If therefore the Babu presentation of the god is a strange contrast to the fers to call the mother represented in that picture other representations of him to that of the epos, | Yasod & rather than Deva ki, he is quite for example, in which he appears as a warrior welcome to do so. Whether she be the one or the hero-and is, moreover, the only thing of its kind other matters nothing in the end, and does not in in India (mark the note). Again, the pictorial the least affect the results arrived at in my paper, representation of the festival differs in various which are quite independent of the question about details from the usual legends about Krishna's this picture. birth in a way which it is difficult to explain. My reclamation against him, the "gross misThe enquirer is therefore not surprised if external take" with which I charge him, refers to the grounds present themselves in explanation of this arguments by which he tries to support his own unique phenomenon, which give probability to view of it. For when he states: 2, that "Devakt the supposition that we have in this festival nome- had no opportunity to perform the maternal duty thing transferred from outside, and retained, in of nursing her child," as, 3,"According to the spite of the incongruities it has given rise to, in Puranas Krishna was, as soon as born, taken the form in which it was received. And such away from his mother," I beg on the contrary to grounds are, as & matter of fact, sufficiontly maintain, or rather to repeat, that this is a mere numerous....'
begging of the question. I never questioned at all " PROFESSOR ALBR. WEBER." that such were the legends of the Purdņas, but I 2. To the Editor of the Indian Antiquary.
shewed that the ritual prescriptions for the fesNot having seen The Academy of 28th February tival of Krishna's birthday had a different aspect in till a few days ago, I was not aware that Babu view; and it is just this very difference of the two Råjendralala Mitra bad replied to my letter of representations which serves as the basis of my 27th October last. This may account for the theory of the foreign origin of the latter. Now Dr. delay of this, but I think it my duty not to let RajendralAla may be quite correct in saying that his statements pass without necessary correction. "to the Vaishnava there is no scriptural authority And as the Ind. Antiquary brought out the Eng. higher than the Bhagavata Purdna," as undoubtedly lish version of my original paper, I hope you will he is, when he says that "it entirely contradicta" not refuse to produce in its columns this comple- my position; but he fails to take into account two ment to it.
things-1, that I am fully aware of this inconThe Babu is fully entitled to call the mother in gruity, and have repeatedly noticed and commented the picture in question (Ind. Ant. vol. VI. p. 350, upon the fact that the Bhagavata does not mention from Moor's Hindoo Pantheon) by the name of this sort of festival (see e. g. pp. 170, 171, 179), Yagoda, for, in the legend, she is the nurse and 2, that we European scholars are not bound of Krishna, (960 also my remarks on "Yaboda to swear by the authority of his scriptures and
