Reviews Of Different Books

Page 19

REVIEWS 225 separation has the inconvenience that he is often compelled to postpone his judgment until the justification of Gonda's view has been published. A second difficulty with which Gonda had to cope was the fact that "for reasons of space and in spite of the drawbacks of monographs dealing with one single member of the pantheon" (Preface, p. VIII) the character of Varuna could not systematically be discussed. This limitation must have been the more painful to him since he rightly states "that the pair of gods represents in a complementary way the two-sided aspect of the idea they stand for" (p. 40, cf. p. 15). In other words, it is in this case not even a single god but only one aspect of a dual deity that could be described in these 138 pages. Varuna is only mentioned "as far as his relations to Mitra may require" (Preface, p. VIII). In some cases, however, the complementary character of their relation may not explicitly have been stated in the text but nevertheless throw an instructive light on Mitra (see below). The limitation makes itself further felt in the fact that, although Varuna and Mitra are the most important members of the group of Adityas, this characteristic group of the Devas is but seldom mentioned in this monograph (p. 129). In this connection it may be remarked that Mitra's relation to the western quarter in ASPaipp. XVII.41.7 praticyai dise, varunaya 'dhipataye, prdakave raksitre, mitraye 'sumata etam pari dadhmah (quoted p. 83) is in line with the Vedic system of classification in which the Adityas as a group are constantly associated with the western quarter. The Saunaka reading (a)nnaye 'sumata (XII. 3.57) need not represent the original version. Also, the wider context of the whole pantheon might finally have been of some importance for the interpretation of such passages as MS. 1.8.6 (123,10f.), KS. VI.7 (57,9f.): yat sadhumam jyotis tad vaisvadevar, yal lohitam tad varunar, yat suvarnar tad barhaspatyar, yan na lohitam na suvarnam tan maitram "The light that is enveloped in smoke belongs to the Visve Devah, the blood-red light to Varuna, the goldencoloured to Bshaspati, that which is neither red nor golden-coloured belongs to Mitra". At any rate, in a more structural approach than Gonda's it might have been observed that Varuna and Bshaspati sometimes seem to stand for the cosmic moieties (e.g., JB. I. 180 and 181) and that the Mitra aspect of the dual deity, accordingly, was considered to belong to neither of the moieties. In passing it may be observed that this fits in very well with the tentative characteristic of Mitra given in IIJ, V. p. 53 as "the link that connects both cosmic moieties". As for Mitra's association with Bphaspati in the ritual (Gonda, p. 82f.), Mitra may here represent the dual godhead, Varuna being considered too inauspicious for this purpose. The general character of this book is clearly defined in the following words of the Preface (p. VIII): "It will mainly consist of a (nearly) complete collection and, as far as may be desirable, thorough interpretation of the relevant Vedic text places". "Speculation concerning that on which the texts are silent has wherever possible been dismissed". Again, on p. 105f., after quoting from a work with a characteristically structural approach, the author concludes with the words: "I for one would prefer relying on textual evidence to mere linguistic suppositions and prehistoric speculations, however natural they may seem to prejudiced minds". It is entirely in keeping with this basic principle that questions to which the texts do not give an answer are left open, although they are sometimes pointed out. Such a question, which has constantly been ignored by former scholars is: How can the fact be accounted for that in the Rigveda hardly any traces are found of the current identification of Mitra with day, and of Varuna with night, which is so well known from the brahmanas? On' p. 37 Renou's reference to "cas rarissimes ... ou le Rgveda distingue entre Mitra et Varuna" is quoted without comment but on p. 107 n. 1, in an incidental remark in a foot-note, this is stated to be, indeed, a fundamental problem. The author here sums up his objections to a book by Duchesne-Guillemin, the first of which are: "In my opinion the term Contract should in any case be avoided; the silence