Madhuvidya

Author(s): S D Laddu, T N Dharmadhikari, Madhvi Kolhatkar, Pratibha Pingle
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 637

Mitra and Aryaman by Paul Thieme. Transactions of the Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences, Vol. 41, pp. 1-96. 1957. Yale University Press, New Haven, Conn., U.S.A.
Thieme observes: “The two Vedic gods Mitra and Aryaman--for the Rigvedic poet the two most important figures amongst the Adityas after Varuņa-have challenged research again and again." (p. 5). The problem of Mitra and Varuna was discussed by G. Dumézil in his book Mitra Varuna
(Paris, 1940 and 1948). He afterwards took up the problem of Aryaman in his book Le troisième Souverain (Paris, 1949). Before writing the present book, Thieme himself had dealt with Aryaman in his Der Fremdling im Rigveda (Leipzig, 1938) and also in ZDMG 95. 219-221 (1941). As is well known, two very important volumes by Lüders on God Varuņa have appeared in recent times (Goettingen, 1952, 1959).
Dumézil, apparently relying on certain identifications in the Brāhmaṇas, has come to the conclusion that there is a sort of opposition between Mitra and Varuna. Mitra is "le souverain sous son aspect raisonnan, clair, réglé, calme, bienveillant, sacerdotal”, Varuna, on the other hand, is "le souverain sous son aspect assaillant, sombre, inspiré, violent, terrible, guerrier. ....." In fact, to Dumézil, a formula suggests itself : Mitra is brahman, Varuna is the king of the Gandharvas.
Thieme does not agree with this view. Dumézil himself admits that a large majority of the texts studied by him 'do not permit distinguishing Mitra and Varuna by clear features'. Thieme therefore rightly asks: "If there is not even a distinction, how should there be an opposition?" (p. 9).
In the present book Thieme gives his opinion on the views held by Dumézil, and also asserts his own views, which he had already expressed before, regarding these deities. He firmly believes that God Mitra is the personification of an ethical concept 'contract, God Varuņa that of 'true speech', and God Aryaman that of 'hospitality'.
Thieme has set forth his arguments so cogently that it is difficult not to agree with him. As for the method, he says : "Everybody, of course also Dumé zil, is well within his rights when 'throwing an hypothesis'. The value of such hypothesis, however, depends on the accuracy of the experiments that are meant to prove it. If our experiments are arranged in such a way as to be in contradiction to known facts and involve further assumptions which have no justification apart from making our primary assumption possible, our hypothesis remains a preconceived notion .... A hypothesis has sense only when it restricts our imagination and forces us
MadhuVidyā/612