Upabrmhana and Rgveda Interpretation

Author(s): T G Manikar
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 17

The Upabrihana and the Rgveda Inter pretation
clearly show. In this manner in this Urvasi Purūravas narration also there is an effort on the part of the Purāņa to weave its narration round the Vedic tale by utilising the Rgvedic expressions. The tale is clearly an ancient one and has exercised unique hold on the Indian mind. To me, the mingling of the Purāņa and the Rgveda is of greater significance for the Purāņa confirms the Rgvedic account and in a way in some measure is seen illuminating the same, supplying a few gaps in the Vedic narration.
In support of my contention regarding the inter-relation of the two traditions that I have been speaking of, I may refer to yet another narration. The Rgveda Hymn (X,109), the celebrated enigmatic 'brahmajāyā' hymn describes an outrage on the wife of Brāhmaṇa and her restoration back to her husband. Scholars who have made an effort to study this hymn have described it as 'almost unintelligible fragment and of compa. ratively late' origin. The Tāndya Brāhmaṇa, the Visnu Purana (IV. 6. 10-33) and the Srimadbbāgavata Purāņa (9. 14) also narrate this story and throw some light on the Rgvedic episode. Before going to the Purāņic account it would be worth our while to carefully note the few details supplied by the Rgvedic hymn itself. We are informed that King Soma restored the consort of a Brāhmana, (X. 109. 2),
'somo rājā prathamo brahmajāyam punaḥ prāyacchat ahşniyamānaḥ'. It was Brhaspati, a Brāhmana who received this wife back, (X. 109.5)
"tena jāyām anvayindat bịhaspatiḥ somena nītām juvham na devāl'. The gods and the sages, devāḥ, saptarṣayah', intervened and saw to it that the Ksatriya, the king, respected and obeyed the sacred law. The very elements seem to have risen in revolt and registered their loud protest against the outrage on a Brāhmaṇ performed by this act of kidnapp. ing his wife by the king, the protector of the land and law,
'te avadan prathamā brahmakilbişe akūpārah salilo mātariśvā' (X.109) Sayanācārya in his effort to explain this hymn has given in his gloss a legend, according to him, itibasa, which parrates that Juhu or Vāk, the wife of Bịhaspati who is identified with Brahmä here, had been by her husband deserted. The gods feeling concern over the matter held a coasultation between themselves as to the discovering adequate means of expiating his sin and restored her to him. Sāyaṇācārya observes,
"atra itihāsam acakşate / juhüriti vāk-nāma / sa hralmano jayā ca / hrhos pateh vūcas patitvāt bịhaspateh juhūmnāma bhāryā babhūva / kadacit asya kilbişamasyā daurbhāgyarūpena āsāṁcakre / ala eva sa enām paryat yākṣit, anantaram adityādayo devä mitho vicārya enam akilbiņām krtvā punaḥ
bịhas pataye prāduh iti / tadatra varnyate' It is clear that Sayanācārya is referring here to a story that is hardly to the point and therefore relevant. For the Roveda hymn is very clearly