Hindu Gods And Heroes Part 4

A love of system--unfortunately not always effectual--is a notable feature of the Hindu mind in dealing with most subjects, from grammar to _Ars Amoris_; and this instinct inspired some unknown theologian with the idea of harmonising the three G.o.ds into a unity by representing in one compound form or _Trimurti_ Brahma as creator, Vish?u as the sustaining power in the universe, and Siva as the force of dissolution which periodically brings the cosmos to an end and necessitates in due course new cycles of being.[35] This ingenious plan has the advantage that it is without prejudice to the religion of any of the G.o.ds concerned, for all the three members of this trinity are subordinate to the Supreme Being, or Param Brahma, whom the Vaish?avas identify with Vish?u in his highest phase, Para-Vasudeva, and distinguish from his lower phase, the Vish?u of this compound, while the Saivas draw a corresponding distinction between Parama-Siva, the G.o.d in his transcendent nature, and the Siva who figures in the Trimurti. So the most orthodox Vaish?ava and the most bigoted Saiva can adore this three-headed image of the Trimurti side by side with easy consciences.

[Footnote 35: This idea in germ is already suggested in Maitr. Upan., IV. 5 f., and V. 2.]

This idea of the three G.o.ds in one, though it is embodied in some important works of sculpture such as the famous Trimurti in the Caves of Elephanta, has not had much practical effect upon Hindu religion.

But it has given birth to at any rate one interesting little sect, the worshippers of Dattatreya, who are to be found mainly in the Maratha country. The legend of the saint Dattatreya, which is already found in the Mahabharata and Pura?as and is repeated with some modifications and amplifications in modern works of the sect,[36] relates that when the holy ?ishi Atri subjected himself to terrific austerities in order to obtain worthy progeny, the G.o.ds Brahma, Vish?u, and Siva visited him and promised him the desired boon; accordingly his wife Anasuya gave birth to three sons, of whom the first was the Moon, an incarnation of Brahma, the second Dattatreya, an incarnation of Vish?u, and the third the holy but irascible saint Durvasas, representing Siva. Dattatreya dwelt in a hermitage in the Dekkan: he indulged in marriage and wine-drinking, which however were not detrimental to his miraculous sanct.i.ty and wisdom, and he became famous as a benefactor to humanity. He is said to have lived in the time of Kartavirya Arjuna, the Haihaya king, and to have counselled the latter to remain on his throne when he wished to resign it. In older works of plastic art he is sometimes represented by the simple expedient of placing the three G.o.ds side by side, sometimes by figuring him as Vish?u in the guise of a Yogi with some of the attributes of the other two; but in modern times he usually appears as a single figure with three heads, one for each of the great G.o.ds, and four or six arms bearing their several attributes (usually the rosary and water-pot of Brahma, the conch and discus of Vish?u, and the trident and drum of Siva), while he is accompanied by four dogs of different colours, supposed to represent the four Vedas, and a bull.[37] Observe that in all these types Dattatreya is conceived as an embodiment of the three G.o.ds, which is comparatively a later idea, for in the oldest version of the legend he was simply an incarnation of Vish?u; but as Vish?u was regarded not only as a member of the Trinity but also the Supreme Being over and above it, Dattatreya as his representative has come to include in his personality the nature of all the trio. There is, moreover, something curious in his character. His love of wine and woman is a singular trait, and is quite incompatible with the nature of an ideal saint. It smells of reality, and strongly suggests that he was not a figment of the religious imagination but an actual man; and this is supported by the tradition of his a.s.sociation with Kartavirya Arjuna, who, in spite of all the mythical tales that are related of him, really seems to have been a king of flesh and blood. Thus we may venture to see in him yet another example of the metamorphosis so common in India from a saint to an incarnation of the G.o.d worshipped by him.

[Footnote 36: See Vasudevananda Sarasvati's _Datta-pura?a_ and Ga?esa Naraya?a Karve's _Dattatreya-sarvasva_.]

[Footnote 37: On these figures see Gopinatha Rau, _Elements of Hindu Iconography_, i. p. 252 ff. The dogs seem to be connected with the Vedic Sarama, on whom see Charpentier, _Die Supar?asage_, p. 91.]

V. TWO MODERN INSTANCES

In Northern India, and especially in Bengal, you will often find Hindus worshipping a G.o.d whom they call Satya-naraya?a and believe to be an embodiment of Vish?u himself. The observance of this ritual is believed to bring wealth and all kinds of good fortune; a Sanskrit sacred legend in ill.u.s.tration of this belief has been created, and you may buy badly lithographed copies of it in most of the bazaars if you like, besides which you will find elegant accounts of the G.o.d's career on earth written by quite a number of distinguished Bengali poets of the last three centuries. But curiously enough this "G.o.d," though quite real, was not a Hindu at all; he was a Bengali Moslem, a fakir, and the Muhammadans of Bengal, among whom he is known as Satya Pir, have their own versions of his career, which seem to be much nearer the truth than those of the Hindus. In their stories he figures simply as a saint, who busied himself in performing miracles for the benefit of pious Moslems in distress; and as one legend says that he was the son of a daughter of [H.]usain Shah, the Emperor of Gaur, and another brings him into contact with Man Singh, it is evident that tradition ascribed him to the sixteenth century, which is probably quite near enough to the truth.[38]

[Footnote 38: See Dineshchandra Sen, _Folk-literature of Bengal_, p.

99 ff.]

The next instance belongs to the twentieth century. A few years ago there died in the village of Eral, in Tinnevelly District, a local gentleman of the Shanar caste named Aru?achala Na?ar. There was nothing remarkable about his career: he had lived a highly respectable life, scrupulously fulfilled his religious duties, and served with credit as chairman of the munic.i.p.al board in his native village. If he had done something prodigiously wicked, one might have expected him to become a local G.o.d at once, in accordance with Dravidian precedent; but he being what he was, his post-mortem career is rather curious.

For a legend gradually arose that his kindly spirit haunted a certain place, and little by little it has grown until now there is a regular worship of him in Eral, and pilgrims travel thither to receive his blessings, stimulated by a lively literary propaganda. He is worshipped under the name of "The Chairman G.o.d," in affectionate memory of his munic.i.p.al career, and as Jagadisa, or "Lord of the Universe," a phase of the G.o.d Siva.

CONCLUSION

Can we trace any uniform principle running through the bewildering variety of changes that we have observed?

Consider the changes through which Vish?u has pa.s.sed. At the beginning a spirit of vaguely defined personality, he appears successively as a saviour-G.o.d, as the mystic saint Naraya?a, as the epic warriors K?ish?a and Rama, as a wanton blue-skinned herd-boy fluting and dancing amidst a crowd of wildly amorous women, and as the n.o.ble ideal of G.o.d preached by the great Maratha and Ramanandi votaries, not to mention the many other incarnations that have delighted the Hindu imagination. What does all this mean? It means that the history of a G.o.d is mainly moulded by two great factors, the growth of the people's spiritual experience and the character of its religious teachers. As the stream of history rolls on, it fills men's souls with deeper and wider understanding of life. Old conceptions are pondered upon, explored, tested, sometimes rejected, sometimes accepted with a new and profounder content, and thus enlarged they are applied to the old ideals of G.o.dhead. When Indian society had organised itself out of tribal chaos and settled down under an established monarchical government, it made Indra the king of the G.o.ds, ruling with the same forms and under the same conditions as a human sovereign. When men of finer cast realised that the kingdom of the spirit is higher than earthly royalty, they turned away from Indra and set their souls upon greater conceptions, ideals of vaster spiritual forces, mystic infinitudes. Attracted thus to worships such as those of Siva and Vish?u, they filled them with their own visions and imparted to these G.o.ds the ideals of their own strivings, making them into Yogisvaras, Supreme Mystics. And so the sequence of change has gone on through the generations. Most potently it has been effected by the characters of the preachers and teachers of religion. Almost every teacher who has a personality of his own, whose soul contains thoughts other than those of the common sort, stamps something of his own type upon the ideal of his G.o.d which he imparts to his followers, and which may thereby come to be authoritatively recognised as a canonical character of the G.o.d.

India is peculiarly liable to this transference of personality from the guru to the G.o.d whom the guru preaches, because from immemorial times India has regarded the guru as representative of the G.o.d, and often deifies him as a permanent phase of the deity. Saivas declare that in the guru who teaches the way of salvation Siva himself is manifested: Vaish?avas tell the same tale, and find a short road to salvation by surrendering their souls to him. We have seen cases of apotheosis of the guru in modern and medieval times; reasoning from the known to the unknown, we may be sure that it took place no less regularly in ancient ages, and brought about most of the surprising changes in the character of G.o.ds which we have noticed. Sometimes the gurus have only preached some new features in the characters of their G.o.ds; sometimes, as is the Hindu fashion, they have also exhibited in their own persons, their dress and equipment, their original ideas of divinity, as, for example, Lakulisa with his club; and their sanct.i.ty and apotheosis have ratified their innovations in theology and iconology, which have spread abroad as their congregations have grown.

Thus the gurus and their congregations have made the history of their deities, recasting the G.o.ds ever anew in the mould of man's hopes and strivings and ideals. There is much truth in the saying of the Brahma?as: "In the beginning the G.o.ds were mortal."