2

The Ekavrātya, Indra and the Sun

Moreno Dore

I
In earlier articles, I have already stressed the close ties and the
special relationship existing between the gods and three particular
Vedic figures — the Keśin of ṚV 10.136, the Vrātya of AVŚ 15 and the
Brahmacārin of AVŚ 11.5 — as well as their connection with esoteric
knowledge.1 I tried to provide an explanation for the supremacy
and pre-eminence achieved by the Brahmacārin and the Ekavrātya
among the gods, and also for their role as demiurges. Furthermore,
I also tried to demonstrate2 that the figure of the Gandharva in
AVŚ 2.1 is an archetypal model arising from the set of beliefs that
belong to the vrātya-culture. My assumption is that the exaltation
of these figures has its roots in an ideology that is connected to the
search for esoteric knowledge. Therefore all these compositions, if
considered together, can be understood as an ideological manifesto.
The hymn devoted to the Ekavrātya relates a cosmogonic myth
in which the poet’s attention is directed towards the creator and,
when the Vrātya becomes Mahādeva, the multiplicity of the newly-
created universe is left aside to follow the evolution of this figure,
rather than focus on his progeny. If it is true that the Keśin and the
Brahmacārin are described as gods among the gods, there cannot be
any doubt about the divine status reached by the Vrātya. In order to

1
Dore 2015.
2
Dore (forthcoming).
34 Moreno Dore

obtain a better understanding of the hymn, we must focus on the

way the story is told and on the relationship between the two: the
Vrātya and the Ekavrātya. The poet places them at the beginning
and at the end of the creation process. This means that the hymn
does not merely allude to an evolution of the cosmos, but also to
that of the Vrātya who eventually reaches the role of the Ekavrātya.
Since this paper also deal with this hymn, there follows a partial
translation:3
vrāt́ ya āsīd īyamāna
́ evá sá prajāṕ atiṁ sám airayat AA 1 AA
A Vrātya was there, just going around, he set Prajāpati in motion.

sá prajāṕ atiḥ suvárṇam ātmánn apaśyat tát prāj́ anayat AA 2 AA

He, Prajāpati, saw gold in himself; he begot that.

́ am abhavat tán mahád abhavat táj

tád ékam abhavat tál lalām
jyeṣṭhám abhavat tád A
bráhmābhavat tát tápo ’bhavat tát satyám abhavat téna
prāj́ āyata AA 3 AA
That became one, that became marked, that became great, that
became pre-eminent;
that became bráhman, that became tapas, that became reality,
then he procreated.

só ’vardhata sá mahāń abhavat sá mahādevó ’bhavat AA 4 AA

He increased, he became great, he became the great god.

sá devāń ām īśāṁ
́ páry ait sá īśāno
́ ’bhavat AA 5 AA
He reached the lordship of the gods,4 he became Īśāna.

For the translations of the Vrātya-Kāṇḍa I referred to the works by

3

Aufrecht (1850), Griffith (1896), Whitney (1905) and Charpentier (1911).

4 Scholars have translated this passage in different ways. Cf. Aufrecht
(1850: 130): “Er strebte nach der Götterherrschaft”; Griffith (1896:
186): “He gained the lordship of the Gods”; Whitney (1905: 773): “He
compassed the lordship of the gods”; and Charpentier (1911: 377): “Er
übertraf (paryāit) die Herrschaft der Götter”.
 The Ekavrātya, Indra and the Sun 35

sá ekavrātyó bhavat sá dhánur ād́ atta tád evéndradhanúḥ AA 6 AA

He became the Ekavrātya, he took a bow: that (was) just Indra’s
bow. — AVŚ 15.1.1-6

At the beginning, the poet simply refers to the Vrātya, but then
in crescendo he is defined as Īśāna and Ekavrātya. It is difficult to
doubt that this corresponds to the transfiguration of a man into a
supreme deity, because when “the only Vrātya” takes possession
of the bow he seems to replace Indra in his role as lord of the gods.
He is not identified with the god, he is just taking his place.
The act performed by the Ekavrātya requires an explanation.
According to Kramrisch (1981: 91f.) the Vrātya “sees his god taking
up the bow in the radiance of his vision”, and she states that the
bow is “the symbol of lordship over the cosmos” and a symbol
“of cosmic supremacy”. None the less, this does not explain the
meaning of the act itself. Why, then, does the deity with whom
the Vrātya intends to identify himself (i.e. the Ekavrātya) take the
role of another god? In my opinion, it is easier to hypothesize that
Vrātya and Ekavrātya are names that hint at two different moments
of the transfiguration of the same character. In this sense, we do not
have a man who facilitates and later assists in the “emancipation”
of his divinity, but rather, a transfiguration of a man who achieves
— through the conquest of a particular knowledge — a place in the
divine pantheon.5 Knowledge plays a key role in the understanding
of the Vrātya-Kāṇḍa.
My guess is that the hymn is not intended simply to replace
the other myths of creation, but rather, to indicate the path of the
Vrātya, who — by re-enacting and actualizing the creative process
— assumes the role of Indra and becomes the Ekavrātya.

5
According to Kramrisch (1981: 89), the Vrātya go beyond the Keśin
of ṚV in his relationship with Rudra, since the Vrātya “had been
the instrument and witness of the taking shape of his god” and “the
instrument that stirred and moved Prajāpati to manifest the ‘gold’
within him in the shape of Mahādeva himself as the Sole Vrātya”.
36 Moreno Dore

II
As far as I know, no attempt has ever been made to identify the
actual content of this knowledge, which is clearly considered
esoteric and difficult to access. In an earlier paper (forthcoming a), I
tried to demonstrate that when the poets ascribe the typical powers
of a demiurge to figures like the Brahmacārin and Prajāpati, they
are simultaneously hinting at the fact that they have obtained not
only a divine power but also a divine knowledge. This is because
the former depends on the latter. In any case, although it is true
that throughout the hymn devoted to the Brahmacārin there are
multiple references to the power he obtained, we have to admit that
there is no explicit mention of a particular wisdom for the Vrātya
and the Ekavrātya in the first hymn of the Vrātya-Kāṇḍa. None the
less, it is also true that other hymns of the same kāṇḍa clearly state
that the Vrātya is a sage.
sá úd atiṣṭhat sá prāć īṁ díśam ánu vy àcalat AA táṁ bṛhác ca
rathaṁtaráṁ cādityāś́ ca víśve ca devā́ anuvyàcalan AA bṛhaté ca
vaí sá rathaṁtarāý a cādityébhyaś ca víśvebhyaś ca devébhya ā́
vṛścate yá eváṁ vidvāṁ ́ saṁ vrāt́ yam upavádati AA bṛhatáś ca vaí
sá rathaṁtarásya cādityāń āṁ ca víśveṣāṁ ca devāń āṁ priyáṁ
dhām ́ a bhavati yá eváṁ véda AA [. . .] aínaṁ kīrtír gachaty ā́ yáśo
gachati yá eváṁ véda AA — 15.2.1
He stood up, he moved towards the easterly direction; after
him moved the bṛhat and the rathaṁtara and the Ādityas and
all the gods. In fact, whosoever slanders a thus-knowing Vrātya
is separated from the bṛhat and the rathaṁtara and the Ādityas
and all the gods; in fact, who has thus known becomes the dear
abode of the bṛhat and the rathaṁtara and of the Ādityas and all
the gods. [. . .] To him who has thus known goes fame and glory.

The second hymn is a good starting point, both because the

Vrātya is explicitly alluded to as the subject in this composition
(while elsewhere it is just implied), and he is defined as a sage at
the beginning and end of the verse. This hymn is also important
for another reason: in my opinion, it clearly demonstrates the
 The Ekavrātya, Indra and the Sun 37

ambiguity of the sentence that closes the verse, the yá eváṁ véda,
which theoretically could equally refer either to the Vrātya praised
in the hymn, or to a “third” figure who is different from both
the Vrātya and the poet, namely, someone who is a hypothetical
listener to the hymn. I shall return to this issue later on, for the
time being, suffice it to say that with similar expressions the poet
may possibly have had both solutions in mind. In fact, he might
have wanted to refer, on the one hand, to the wisdom of the Vrātya,
while, on the other, to indicate which path a hypothetical listener
should follow in order to emulate the sage. The same could be said
regarding those hymns in which the poet does not use the name
vrātya: on the one hand, it seems obvious that the pronoun yaḥ is
used to refer to the Vrātya himself — the male character alluded
to at the beginning of the verse (tásmai/tásmai/sá) — on the other,
it is also true that the poet may also be referring to the recipient
of the hymn who is eager to learn.
tásmai prā́cyā diśáḥ A vāsantaú mā́sau goptā́rāv ákurvan bṛhác
ca rathaṁtaráṁ cānuṣṭhātā́rau A vāsantā́v enaṁ mā́sau prā́cyā
diśó gopāyato bṛhác ca rathaṁtaráṁ cā́nu tiṣṭhato yá eváṁ
véda AA — 15.4.1
For him, from the easterly direction, they made the two spring
months guardians and bṛhat and rathaṁtara attendants; the two
spring months guard from the easterly direction, and bṛhat and
rathaṁtara follow after the one who has thus known.

tásmai prāć yā diśó antardeśād́ bhavám iṣvāsám anuṣṭhātāŕ am

akurvan A bháva enam iṣvāsáḥ prā́ c yā diśó antardeśā́ d
anuṣṭhātāń u tiṣṭhati A naínaṁ śarvó ná bhavó néśāno nāś ya
paśū́n ná samānāń hinasti yá eváṁ véda AA — 15.5.1
For him, from the intermediate region of the easterly direction,
they made the archer Bhava attendant. The archer Bhava, from
the intermediate region of the easterly direction, [as] attendant
stands near; not Śarva, nor Bhava, nor Īśāna injures him who has
thus known, nor his cattle, nor his fellows.
38 Moreno Dore

sá díśó ’nu vy àcalat táṁ virāḍ́ ánu vy àcalat sárve ca devāḥ́

sárvāś ca devátāḥ A virā́jaś ca vaí sá sárveṣāṁ ca devā́nāṁ
sárvāsāṁ ca devátānāṁ priyáṁ dhām ́ a bhavati yá eváṁ véda AA
— 15.6.8
He moved towards the direction; after him moved the Virāj
and all the gods and all the deities. In fact, who has thus known
becomes the dear abode of the Virāj and of all the gods and of
all the deities.

Moreover, the Vrātya is often referred to as vidvān:

tád yásyaiváṁ vidvāń vrāt́ yo rāj́ ñó ’tithir gṛhāń āgáchet  AA
— 15.10.1
To the houses of whatever king, then, a thus-knowing Vrātya
may come as a guest,

śréyāṁsam enam ātmáno mānayet táthā kṣatrāý a nā́ vṛścate

táthā rāṣṭrāý a nā́ vṛścate AA — 15.10.2
He should honour him better than himself; in this way he is not
separated from the warrior power; in this way he is not separated
from the kingship.

tád yásyaiváṁ vidvāń vrāt́ yó ’tithir gṛhāń āgáchet AA

— 15.11.1
To the houses of whosoever, then, a thus-knowing Vrātya may
come as a guest;

tád yásyaiváṁ vidvāń vrāt́ ya úddhṛteṣv agníṣu ádhiśrite ’gni-

hotré ’tithir gṛhāń āgáchet AA — 15.12.1
To the houses of whosoever a thus-knowing Vrātya may come as
a guest — when the fire is drawn out and the agnihotra set on fire;

tád yásyaiváṁ vidvāń vrāt́ ya ékāṁ rāt́ rim átithir gṛhé vásati A
́ púnyā lokāś tāń evá ténāv́ a runddhe AA
yé pṛthivyāṁ
— 15.13.1
He whose house a thus-knowing Vrātya inhabits for one night as a
guest obtains those pure worlds on the earth, just for this reason.
 The Ekavrātya, Indra and the Sun 39

III
What we have seen seems to be enough to connect the peculiar
role assigned to the Vrātya in these hymns with the knowledge
he obtained. None the less, I should like to try to reach the same
conclusion in another way. I think it could be useful to compare
hymn AVŚ 15.1 with another one which, to the best of my knowledge,
has never been correlated with the Vrātya-Kāṇḍa. In fact, although
some hymns from book thirteen have been commented on and
analysed, the fourth hymn — the last one in the book — has
practically been ignored by scholars. Bloomfield’s interpretation
(1893: 167) of the Keśin hymn as a praise of Sūrya has become a
classic, but several other scholars have also interpreted the hymn
as praise to the sun. Although my interpretation is different,6 it
is clear that the image of the sun in the Keśin hymn has a role in
the interpretation of some verses. Furthermore, Bloomfield (1897:
626) also interpreted AVŚ 11.5 as a solar hymn differing little from
that dedicated to the Keśin and, in this case too, it is obviously true
that the image of the sun is referred to in some passages. Finally,
in Bloomfield’s opinion (1899: 89) the name Vena in AVŚ 2.1 must
also be considered as an epithet attributed to the sun. In another
paper7 I have tried to single out the elements that — in my opinion
— connect this last hymn to the vrātya culture, concluding that
the poet’s words in the two final verses are nothing more than the
foreshadowing of what awaits the wise who wish to be with Agni
and the immortal gods. He moves around heaven and earth, and
this expression can be understood as a reference to the movement
of the sun: in this case, the sun represents the possibility of vision
and absolute knowledge.
The thirteenth book of the AVŚ is known to be devoted to a solar
figure, namely, to Rohita. Even though there are no occurrences of
this name in hymn 13.4, it is interesting to take note of Srinivasan’s

6
Cf. Dore and Pontillo (2013).
7
Dore (forthcoming).
40 Moreno Dore

observation (1978: 216) regarding this figure:

Rohita appears to be an independent invention of the poets of the
AV to advance their inquiries into the nature of supreme power.

Furthermore, while the term rohita can also be found in the ṚV, it is
never used as an epithet or as a proper name of the sun. This detail
helps us to place this kāṇḍa in the right perspective, and allows its
recognition as the result of a speculative effort of the Atharvanic
poet. The last hymn of this section, in particular, can be seen as an
outcome of the Śaunakīya school and, in fact, it is missing in the
Paippalāda recension of the AV.8
Is it possible to confirm this hypothesis and simultaneously
affirm the idea that the transfiguration of the Vrātya depends on the
obtainment of an esoteric knowledge? An attempt in this direction
can be made, in my opinion, by comparing the opening hymn of
the Vrātya-Kāṇḍa with the fourth hymn of the thirteenth book. In
1891 Victor Henry published the first complete translation of this
book, justifying his choice with the fact that the kāṇḍa was one of
the most worthy of extensive studies and that it could be easily
separated from the rest of the Saṁhitā. He wrote:
En effet, il forme à lui seul un ensemble et n’a d’équivalent dans
aucune autre partie de l’Atharva-Véda, non plus que dans le Rig-
Véda tout entier: il est consacré à la glorification d’une entité
mythique qui n’apparaît guère que là et parfois dans la littérature
postérieure, le Dieu Rôhita (le Rouge), incarnation évident du
soleil, avec son épouse Rôhiṇî, qui sans doute représente l’aurore.
Ce couple divin, probablement aussi ancien que beaucoup
d’autres, n’a pas eu la même fortune: le culte semble l’avoir
ignoré ou dédaigné; du moins, sans la compilation des Atharvans,
on pourrait croire qu’il ne s’était jamais élevé des bas-fonds du
folklore jusqu’aux hauteurs de la religion. — VII-VIII

In this book Rohita became a proper name no different from Sūrya

or Indra, a creator of heaven and earth and “roi unique du monde,

8
Cf. Zehnder 1999: 224ff.
 The Ekavrātya, Indra and the Sun 41

comme le sont tour à tour, dans chaque hymne pris à part, tous
le Dieux du panthéon hindou” (VIII). Moreover, some parts of
this composition have an important role in the Vedic ritual. Not
long after, in his review of the French translation of the kāṇḍa,
Bloomfield (1891: 430) rejected Henry’s belief which saw Rohita and
Rohiṇī as a pair of deities who were actually as old as the others.
He based his statement on the comparison of Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa
2.5.2 with the first verse of AVŚ 13.1, referring to the Brāhmaṇa
commentator who interprets Rohita as “the horse employed at the
açvamedha-ceremony”. According to Bloomfield, however, the central
topic of the hymn was sovereignty, and it represented the allegorical
exaltation of a king and his queen in the guise of Rohita and Rohiṇī.
Moreover, Bloomfield claims that the AV had been adapted and
modified “for definite ends”, so that “the hand of the purohita, who
is compiling and shaping materials for the use of his kṣatriya, seems
to me quite evident” (p. 431). He repeats the same belief in his partial
translation of the AVŚ, when he writes: “the Taittirīya-version is
older and better than that of the Atharvan” (1897: 662). In any case,
the scholar admits (1891: 436) that the thirteenth book of AVŚ “is
compiled from all sorts of sources” and that the “exact purpose is as
yet not quite clear”. Bloomfield’s review makes constant reference
to the first hymn of the section, since it was the only hymn of the
thirteenth book included in his translation.
I shall only deal here with the interpretation of the fourth, and
the following is the translation of some of the most relevant verses
of the hymn,9 namely, the first two paryāyas:
I. sá eti savitā́ svàr divás pṛṣṭhé ’vacāḱ aśat AA 1 AA
He goes towards the heavenly light as Savitṛ, looking down from
the back of the sky,

raśmíbhir nábha āb́ hṛtaṁ mahendrá ety āv́ ṛtaḥ AA 2 AA

9
For the translation I referred to the works by Henry (1891), Griffith
(1896) and Whitney (1905). I was unable to find a copy of the
translation by Paul Regnaud (1892).
42 Moreno Dore

as Mahendra goes hidden towards the cloud10 brought by the

rays (of light);

sá dhātā́ sá vidhartā́ sá vāyúr nábha úcchritam AA 3 AA

He is the establisher, he is the disposer, he is Vāyu, the rising
cloud;

só ’ryamā́ sá váruṇaḥ sá rudráḥ sá mahādeváḥ AA 4 AA

He is Aryaman, he is Varuṇa, he is Rudra, he is Mahādeva;

só agníḥ sá u sū́ryaḥ sá u evá mahāyamáḥ AA 5 AA

He is Agni, He is also Sūrya, he is indeed also the great Yama;

táṁ vatsā́ úpa tiṣṭhanty ékaśīrṣāṇo

́ yutā́ dáśa AA 6 AA
The calves stay below, ten times ten thousands (’yutā́ dáśa11),
with one head;12

paścāt́ prāñ́ ca ā́ tanvanti yád udéti ví bhāsati AA 7 AA

From the west they extend to the east, when he rises and lights;

tásyaiṣá māŕ uto gaṇáḥ sá eti śikyāḱ ṛtaḥ AA 8 AA

This is his troop of Maruts, he goes made of ropes (śikyāḱ ṛtaḥ?).

raśmíbhir nábha āb́ hṛtaṁ mahendrá ety āv́ ṛtaḥ AA 9 AA

as Mahendra goes hidden towards the cloud brought by the rays
(of light);

tásyemé náva kóśā viṣṭambhā́ navadhā́ hitāḥ́ AA 10 AA

His are these nine buckets, the supports are placed nine times;

sá prajāb́ hyo ví paśyati yác ca prāṇáti yác ca ná AA 11 AA

He distinguishes between the creatures that breathe and those
that do not;

tám idáṁ nígataṁ sáhaḥ sá eṣá éka ekavṛ́d éka evá AA 12 AA

10
Cf. Whitney 1905: 732.
11
See the emendation proposed by Henry 1891: 51.
12
See Henry 1891: 51.
 The Ekavrātya, Indra and the Sun 43

This power has entered him, he is this one, the unique,13 the
only one;

The difficulty of understanding this term becomes clear if we note

13

that in the verses of AVŚ 8.9.25-26 (the only other occurrence in this
Veda) the same sentence yakṣám pṛthivyām ́ ekavṛ́d is translated by
Whitney as “the monster on earth [is] simple (ekavṛ́t)” the first time,
and as “the monster on earth [is] single” the second time. While the
term is missing in ṚV, there are occurrences in Taittirīya Saṁhitā
5.2.3.7, Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa 3.6.3.14 and 13.2.1.5, Kātyāyana Śrautasūtra
8.2.28; 7.13 — where it generically means “single”. Although “single”
corresponds to Whitney’s translation for hymn 13.4, this choice does
not help here to understand the verse. An attempt to better grasp the
concept behind this expression could be made through the comparable
root compound trivṛ́t, found several times in the Vedas. In AVŚ it occurs
in four hymns (5.28, 8.9.20, 19.27 and 10.8.17) always meaning triple or
threefold. This same translation is given in Jamison and Brereton (2014)
for the occurrences in ṚV 1.140.2, 8.72.8, 9.86.32 and 10.114.1. None the
less, trivṛ́t- is also translated by the authors as “triply turning” in 1.35:
kvà trī ́ cakrā́ trivṛ́to ráthasya kvà tráyo vandhúro yé sánīḷāḥ [. . .] AA 9 AA
Where are the three wheels of your triply turning chariot, where the
three seats which are in the same nest [= chariot box]? [. . .]
ā́ no aśvinā trivṛ́tā ráthenārvāñ́ caṁ rayíṁ vahataṁ suvīram
́ [. . .] AA 12 AA
Aśvins, with your triply turning chariot, bring wealth in good heroes
our way [.  .  .]

It is also interesting to note that, in verse 4 of the same hymn, we
find trír vartír yātaṁ translated as “three times drive your circuit”.
Elsewhere, the same term is rendered as “triply turning” (1.47.2),
“three turnings” (1.118.2), “triply-turning” (8.85.8), “three turns”
(10.52.4) and “three circles” (1.124.1). On the basis of these authors’
emphasis on the meaning of the verbal base vṛ́t involved in the
mentioned Vedic root compound, it is tempting to assume that the
plural compound ekavṛ́taḥ referred to the gods (AVŚ 13.4.13) must
be interpreted as “turning towards a single [?god]” and the singular
compound ekavṛ́t (AVŚ 13.4.12, 15) as “the one towards which everyone
turns”. For this reason, and for reasons that follow, it is also tempting
to connect this figure to the same ideologic background of the
Ekavrātya.
44 Moreno Dore

eté asmin devā́ ekavṛ́to bhavanti AA 13 AA

These gods in him become the unique;
— 13.4.1-13

II. kīrtíś ca yáśaś cā́mbhaś ca nábhaś ca brāhmaṇavarcasáṁ

cāń naṁ cānnād́ yaṁ ca AA 14 AA
Fame and glory and water (ambhas?14) and cloud and Brāhmanic
splendour and nourishment and good food (annādya);15

yá etáṁ devám ekavṛ́taṁ véda AA 15 AA

Who knows this god [as] the unique;

́ ná tṛtīyaś
ná dvitīyo ́ caturthó nāṕ y ucyate AA 16 AA
Not second, nor third, nor even fourth is called;

ná pañcamó ná ṣaṣṭháḥ saptamó nāṕ y ucyate AA 17 AA

Nor fifth, nor sixth, nor even seventh is called;

nāṣ́ ṭamó ná navamó daśamó nāṕ y ucyate AA 18 AA

Nor eighth, nor ninth, nor even tenth is called;

sá sárvasmai ví paśyati yác ca prāṇáti yác ca ná AA 19 AA

He distinguishes between everything that breathes and those
that do not;

tám idáṁ nígataṁ sáhaḥ sá eṣá éka ekavṛ́d éka evá AA 20 AA

This power has entered him, he is this one, the unique, the only
one;

sárve asmin devā́ ekavṛ́to bhavanti AA 21 AA

All the gods in him become the unique;
— 13.4.14-21

The first thing we note about this hymn is obviously the absence of

14
See Whitney 1905: 733.
15
For some other interesting occurrences of the noun annādya in possible
Vrātya sources, see Hauer 1927: 159-68.
 The Ekavrātya, Indra and the Sun 45

the term that is supposed to identify the specificity of this kāṇda. I

am referring to a significant choice made by the poet to avoid using
the term rohita even once. Of course, this hymn has suffered over
the years from a lack of attention by scholars, and the annotations
by Whitney are unusually sparse and often refer to what Henry had
already written on the subject. On the other hand, it is also true
that explicit references to the sun are less numerous here than
in any of the other three hymns in this section, and the topic of
sovereignty itself — which so greatly attracted the attention of a
scholar like Bloomfield — also seems less obvious, at least for the
fact that in this case the figure of a queen cannot be identified. For
several reasons this composition practically seems to be the odd
man out in the thirteenth book, which may partly explain the lack
of attention it has received so far.
As regards the comparison of the two compositions I should
start by pointing out a number of points in common that do exist
between the opening hymn of Vrātya-Kāṇḍa and the first thirteen
verses of this solar hymn. In particular, I shall take their structure
into consideration.
As I have already noted, it is significant that AVŚ 15.1 opens
with the figure of the Vrātya and ends (if we ignore the two final
verses for the moment) with that of the Ekavrātya conquering
the role of Indra; equally remarkable is the fact that in the first
paryāya of 13.4 the name of Indra is found twice, since the same
sentence is found in both the second and in the ninth verse.
According to my interpretation, the author of hymn 15.1 was not
simply aiming to compose a new cosmogonic hymn, but actually
quite the opposite. The very fact of placing the Vrātya, on the
one hand, at the beginning of the hymn and at the beginning
of time as a creator and, on the other hand, at the end in the
guise of the Ekavrātya at the conclusion of the path of creation,
seems to show that the primary intent of the poet was not just
to narrate the events that happened during the first moments
of the universe. It appears that he wished to use these events to
46 Moreno Dore

underline the peculiar path of the Vrātya that leads him to be

transfigured into a supreme deity who gains the role of Indra.
In the Vrātya hymn the role of demiurge is clearly highlighted
by the act of the Vrātya himself on Prajāpati, which stimulates
his creative action (or rather generative action, since everything
begins with a birth). On the contrary, the creative action of the
protagonist (sá eti) may not seem so obvious in hymn 13.4. First
of all, we need to understand to whom the first pronoun refers.
In other words, what exactly is the relationship between the first
male figure moving towards the celestial spaces, alluded to as
Savitṛ, and the god Indra mentioned in the second verse?
Given the context in which the composition is inserted, i.e. in
the kāṇḍa dedicated to Rohita, it would seem obvious to think that
the poet wished to begin the hymn by praising the sun and to then
proceed through identifications, as happens from verse 3 onwards.
Personally, I do not think that the sun is the true protagonist of
this hymn, both because after the first paryāya there are almost no
further clear references to the sun, and also because a comparison
with other hymns allows us to assume a different point of view and
a better working hypothesis.
Let us return for a moment to the Keśin hymn:
keśy àgníṁ keśī ́ viṣáṁ keśī ́ bibharti ródasī A
keśī ́ víśvaṁ svàr dṛśé keśīdáṁ
́ jyótir ucyate AA
— ṚV X.136.1
The Keśin [bears] the fire, the Keśin [bears] the poison, the Keśin
bears both worlds;
the Keśin [lets] everyone see the sun, this light is called Keśin;

antárikṣeṇa patati víśvā rūpāv́ acāḱ aśat A [. . .]

— ṚV X.136.4
He flies among the intermediate spaces, looking down on all the
forms [. . .]
 The Ekavrātya, Indra and the Sun 47

vāt́ asyāś́ vo vāyóḥ sákhāt́ ho devéṣito múniḥ A

ubhaú samudrāv́ ā́ kṣeti yáś ca pū́rva utāṕ araḥ AA
— ṚV X.136.5
[He is] wind’s horse, [he is] Vāyu’s friend and the Muni impelled
by the gods,
who dwells in both oceans, the eastern and the western;16

The first thing that catches our attention is the identification

of Keśin with the sun and the use of the term avacāḱ aśat for this
purpose, which is likewise and identically found in the first verse
of the just mentioned 13.4. Another recurring element is the
shared responsibility for creation on the part of the Keśin (who
supports heaven and earth) and the protagonist of 13.4 (called
Dhātṛ). In addition, we might emphasize the link with the god
Vāyu, which indicates the sovereignty of the intermediate spaces
between the earth and the sun. Should this lead us again to favour
an interpretation of this hymn as praise to the sun?
A second hymn exists that Henry had already put in relation
with the 13.4, where a human figure endowed with divine traits is
identified with the sun. I am obviously referring to the Brahmacārin
hymn. In a note to the hymn, Henry (1891: 52) wrote that
le brahmacārín mythique et mystique de cet hymne étrange n’est
visiblement autre chose qu’une incarnation du soleil.

In my opinion, interpreting both these compositions as solar

hymns would mean betraying their sense, and this also holds true
for hymn 13.4.
́
brahmacārīṣṇáṁś carati ródasī ubhé tásmin devāḥ́ sáṁmanaso
bhavanti A
́ dívaṁ ca sá ācāryàṁ tápasā piparti AA
sá dādhāra pṛthivīṁ
— 11.5.1
The Brahmacārin goes moving both heaven and earth, in him

16
On this hymn, cf. Dore and Pontillo (2013). Now see also Jamison and
Brereton (2014).
48 Moreno Dore

the gods become of the same mind;

he maintains earth and heaven, he fulfils his teacher with tapas;

pū́rvo jātó bráhmaṇo brahmacārī ́ gharmáṁ vásānas tápasód

atiṣṭhat A [. . .] — 11.5.5
Born as first (/in the east) from the bráhman, the Brahmacārin,
clothing himself with gharma, stood up with tapas; [. . .]

́ ŕ̥tasya yónāv índro ha bhūtvāś urāṁs ta-

[. . .] gárbho bhūtvām
tarha AA — 11.5.7
[. . .] after becoming an embryo in the womb of immortality, after
becoming Indra, has crushed the Asuras.

ācāryò brahmacārī ́ brahmacarī ́ prajāṕ atiḥ A

prajāṕ atir ví rājati virāḍ́ índro ’bhavad vaśī ́ AA
— 11.5.16
The teacher is the Brahmacārin, the Brahmacārin is Prajāpati;
Prajāpati rules, the Virāj became the ruling Indra;

[. . .] índro ha brahmacáryeṇa devébhyaḥ svàr āb́ harat AA

— 11.5.19
[. . .] Indra, indeed, through brahmacarya brought the heavenly
light to the gods;

tāń i kálpan brahmacārī ́salilásya pṛṣṭhé tápo ’tiṣṭhat tapyámānaḥ

samudré A
́
sá snātó babhrúḥ piṅgaláḥ pṛthivyāṁ bahú rocate AA
— 11.5.26
Shaping these things, the Brahmacārin stood on the back of the
sea, performing asceticism in the ocean;
after bathing, brown, yellowish, he shines much on the earth;17

I should now like to try to indicate the points of contact between

these verses dedicated to the Brahmacārin and the other
compositions mentioned above, including some passages from

17
On this hymn, cf. Dore 2015.
 The Ekavrātya, Indra and the Sun 49

the Vrātya-Kāṇḍa, which should highlight the complex network

of affinities that binds these hymns and demonstrate how each
composition can help us in understanding the other.
Obviously, the first characteristic is brightness. We read that
thanks to the Keśin, one can see the heavenly light (svar) and that
light itself is called Keśin, which means that the Keśin is considered
as the sun itself; then, we know that the Brahmacārin (v. 11) ascends
through the rays that spread between heaven and earth, and that he
shines on the earth with a golden brown colour (v. 26). Moreover,
since he is the one who has become Indra, we should think that
he is also the same being that bestows the heavenly light on the
gods. An identification with the sun is probably also found in the
final verse of the Vrātya-Kāṇḍa itself (15.18.5), where we read that
áhnā pratyáṅ vrāt́ yo rāt́ ryā prāṅ́ námo vrāt́ yāya A
With the day the Vrātya is westward, with the night eastward;
homage to the Vrātya.

In this case, we have all three ascetic figures clearly identified with
the sun. At this point, considering that in the first two hymns — long
interpreted as solar hymns — the two ascetic men represent the
givers of light, and that the Vrātya is also finally identified with the
sun, then we might well be justified in supposing that the pronoun
(saḥ), which begins the first verse in hymn 13.4, could also refer to
a particular human being.
Further evidence is the use of the same verbal form avacāḱ aśat
both at the beginning of 13.4 and in the fourth verse of the
Keśin hymn. The two passages are so similar as to be virtually
exchangeable, and once again one might wonder whether the
subject in the first verse of hymn 13.4 could actually be the sun,
or rather another figure identified with it. Furthermore, the poet
begins the hymn by alluding to the movement of the subject (sá
eti) and if, on the one hand, this may recall the sun’s movement in
the sky, on the other, there are similar passages where the verb
hints at the practice of pilgrimage common to many ascetic groups.
50 Moreno Dore

Verses like these could represent the most ancient legacy of the
vrātya culture. The Brahmacārin hymn begins in a very similar way
(brahmacārí carati), with a pun that confirms pilgrimages as being
one of the figures’ most typical activities, but which also provides
a clue as to the meaning of the name itself, indicating the one that
“brings/bears the bráhman” in his wanderings. No less clear is the
evidence found in the Keśin hymn, when we read that he rises and
flies (patati) in the sky, and when the poet — who again chooses
the same verb as that used for the Brahmacārin (√car) — explains
that he moves “along the path of the gandharvas, of the apsarases, of
the wild animals” (apsarásāṁ gandharvāṇ́ ām mṛgāṇ́ āṁ cáraṇe cáran).
Again, we find similar passages referred to the Vrātya: 15.2 (sá úd
atiṣṭhat18 sá prāć īṁ díśam ánu vy àcalat), 15.6 (sá dhruvāṁ
́ díśam ánu
vy àcalat) and 15.14 (á yát prāć īṁ díśam ánu vyácalan), all of which
have a modular structure and the same verbal form anu + vi + √cal
indicating a movement to and from the various directions. Another
detail that bears witness to the travellings of the Vrātya is given
in four hymns (15.10-13) where he is praised as a guest (atithi) that
comes to the house of a king or of another householder for the night.
In the opening verse of the kāṇḍa itself, just before the beginning of
the creation through Prajāpati, the Vrātya is said to move aimlessly,
in the beginning of time (vrāt́ ya āsīd īyamāna).
́
Another common aspect of these hymns, which I believe
is extremely important for the correct interpretation of the
compositions, is the identification with divinities like Rudra or
Indra. Indeed, it seems obvious that there is a connection between
identifying the ascetics with the sun and their peculiar relationship
with the aforementioned gods. This point will allow us to shed more
light on hymn 13.4 in the following pages. I have already quoted the

18
Moreover, it is noteworthy that the same verbal form úd atiṣṭhat is
found again in the fifth verse of the Brahmacārin hymn, where he is
said to be born in the east and to rise through tapas. This means that,
in hymn AVŚ 15.2, the Vrātya could also be identified with the rising
sun that moves towards the cardinal points.
 The Ekavrātya, Indra and the Sun 51

verse where the Keśin drinks the poison with Rudra (ṚV X.136.7)
and the other where the Ekavrātya conquers Indra’s bow (15.1.6),
as well as the verse where the Brahmacārin is said to have become
Indra (11.5.7, 16). Indra himself is identified with the sun when he
is said to bestow light on the gods through the brahmacarya (v.  19).
The final results are triptychs whose recurring elements are the
figure of an ascetic, a divine figure like Indra or Rudra and, lastly,
the sun which is identified in various ways.
Now, I wish to focus again on Indra and, in particular, on the
sole hymn of Book 17. In this hymn the first five verses are devoted
to the mighty Indra, while in verses 6-19 the poet refers to the sun
(vv. 6-8) and to Indra (vv. 9-18). At the end of each verse there is
a refrain where Viṣṇu is praised as an intermediary (as it seems)
between Indra and the poet himself:
távéd viṣṇo bahūdhā́ vīryā̀ n i A tváṁ naḥ pṛṇīhi paśúbhir
viśvárūpaiḥ sudhāý āṁ mā dhehi paramé vyòman AA
Truly yours, O Viṣṇu, are many heroisms; you satisfy us with
cattle of all forms, set me in wellness, in the highest heaven.

From verse 20 to 26 the author seems to refer once again to the

sun, although this time he uses terms like virāj, svarāj and samrāj,
elsewhere used for Indra. In the final verses, we find the name of
Prajāpati, Kaśyapa and Agni. However, there is one verse (v. 14) in
which a precise and unexpected reference to the sattra is made, a
kind of ritual recognized19 as typical of vrātya groups.
tvām ́ indra bráhmaṇā vardháyantaḥ sattráṁ ní ṣedur ŕ̥ṣayo
nād́ hamānās távéd viṣṇo [. . .] — 17.1.14
Increasing you, O Indra, the begging ṛṣis sat down for the sattra.
Truly yours, O Viṣṇu. [. . .]

This small detail alone seems enough to justify the suspicion that
this composition has at least been influenced by a part of the vrātya

19
Cf. Falk (1986), Heesterman (1993) and now Candotti and Pontillo’s
paper in this volume (Chap. 6).
52 Moreno Dore

culture, as well as the fact that a connection is found between the

ruling Indra, who is clearly identified with the sun, and a vrātya
practice.
We have already found a clear identification between Indra
and the sun in hymn 13.4 and now there is another clue that makes
it possible to suggest a connection between this reflection on the
universal ruler (sometimes a god, sometimes a “human god”) and
the vrātya ideology. Relying on the observations made so far with
regard to the Keśin and the Brahmacārin, I think it is possible to
compare the first part of 13.4 with the Ekavrātya hymn. Henry (1891:
52) was the first scholar to suggest a connection between hymn 13.4
and the Brahmacārin hymn. Commenting on verse 13, he wrote:
“Cf. A.V. XI.5.1b, où il est dit que les Dieux n’ont qu’un seul coeur
en la personne du brahmacārín” (tásmin devāḥ́ sáṁmanaso bhavanti).20
Whatever the case, Henry does not raise the question as to why the
same concept — albeit expressed in different ways — is used for
both the Brahmacārin and for Indra (13.4.13: eté asmin devā́ ekavṛ́to
bhavanti). In fact, if we reject the hypothesis of the Brahmacārin
hymn as a solar one, we also have to reject the idea of hymn 13.4
as praise to the sun: the word rohita is never mentioned, and the
poet seems to be much more focused on the figure of Indra (who is
only clearly connected with the sun in the first two verses). Having
excluded this interpretation, the possibility of interpreting hymn
13.4 as a hymn to Indra is not less difficult. This name, in fact, only
recurs twice in the first paryāya and is then absent until the final
verses (46-47).
Figure 2.1 aims to show graphically the structural affinity that
can be found between the first part of hymn 13.4 (i.e. first two
paryāyas) and the Ekavrātya hymn (verses 1-6 of 15.1).
The first problem concerns the identification of the referent
of the first pronoun, while the second problem concerns the one

20
These same words are found again in verse 8 and a similar concept is
expressed in verse 24: tásmin devā́ ádhi víśve samótā (see below).
 |→ Main character He (1. sá)
Vrātya ---| Identification with Indra
|→ (2. mahendrá ety āv́ ṛtaḥ)
——————————— ——————————— ———————————
́
(1. īyamāna) Movement (1. sá eti)
——————————— ——————————— ———————————
Identification with Demiurge Identification with
Demiurge demiurge
(1. sá prajāṕ atiṁ sám (3. sá dhātā́ sá vidhartā)́
airayat)
——————————— ——————————— ———————————
Identification with gods Identification Identification with
and concepts divinities
verses 2-5 verses 3-5
——————————— ——————————— ———————————
Lordship of the gods Sovereignty over These gods in him become
(5. sá devāń ām īśāṁ
́ páry the gods the unique
ait) (13. eté asmin devā́ ekavṛ́to
bhavanti)
——————————— ——————————— ———————————
Obtains the bow Obtainment of Obtains power
(6. sá dhánur ād́ atta) power (12. tám idáṁ nígataṁ
sáhaḥ)
——————————— ——————————— ———————————
Substitution of Indra Indra Identification with Indra
(6. tád evéndradhanúḥ) (9. mahendrá ety āv́ ṛtaḥ)
——————————— ——————————— ———————————
Became the Ekavrātya Conquest of the role Became the ekavṛt
(6. sá ekavrātyó bhavat) (12. sá eṣá éka ekavṛ́d éka
evá)

——————————— ——————————— ———————————

Sage Esoteric knowledge Sage
(AVŚ 15.2. yá eváṁ (15. yá etáṁ devám
́ saṁ vrāt́ yam)
vidvāṁ ekavṛ́taṁ véda)

fig. 2.1: The structural affinity between the first part of hymn
13.4 and the Ekavrātya hymn.
54 Moreno Dore

(yá) who, in verse 15, is said to know the divinity as the unique
(ekavṛ́taṁ). As regards the first problem, the fact that Whitney adds
“[as]” in a bracket before Savitṛ’s and Indra’s names (vv. 1, 2, 9)
demonstrates that he does not believe that the pronoun opening
the hymn could be referred to Savitṛ or Indra themselves. None
the less, the male figure — to whom the power of a demiurge is
attributed, and who is identified with divinities like Varuṇa, Rudra,
Yama and Agni — should be understood as a supreme god that sees
and distinguishes (vv. 11-19 vi + paś) everything that exists and that
lives. In my opinion, the fundamental issue to be solved for a correct
understanding of the hymn regards the relationship between the
character hinted at in verse 1 (sá) and the one alluded to in verse 15,
i.e. the one who knows (yá . . . véda). The structural similarity of the
confronted hymns may be illuminating in this regard, so that the
first hymn of the Vrātya-Kāṇḍa and the first paryāya of 13.4 (first
part of fig. 2.1) can even seem two different versions of the same
composition. Although I have already mentioned the demiurgic
quality and the verbs of motion with which the two hymns begin,
I believe that only the conquering of a pre-eminent role should be
considered as the core of both compositions. In both cases, great
importance is given to the substitution/identification of Indra
with the figure praised in the hymn. The Ekavrātya is clearly said
to take the role of Indra and replaces the previous divinity from
whom he obtains his own bow, while in hymn 13.4 the identification
with Indra is reaffirmed twice by repeating the same verse. With
this expedient, the poet clearly emphasizes the god among all the
other divinities listed — implicitly recognizing for him the same
role found in 15.1 for Indra — but, at the same time, providing a
recursive and circular structure similar to that of the Ekavrātya
hymn. In fact, fig. 2.1 clearly shows that the verses devoted first to
the Vrātya and then to the Ekavrātya correspond to (or are modelled
on) the two (here identical) verses where the identification with
Indra is affirmed. There are other features that are common to
the two compositions, such as the recurrence of lists (of concepts
 The Ekavrātya, Indra and the Sun 55

in one hymn and of divinities in the other), or the references to

Rudra/Mahādeva.
In the last century, starting with the works by Charpentier
(1909, 1911) and more recently with the above-mentioned
monograph by Kramrisch (1981), great importance was attributed
to the role of Rudra-Śiva for the correct understanding of the
mythology of the Vrātya. Scholars have consistently insisted on
their special connection and tried to interpret the Vrātya-Kāṇḍa
itself from this point of view. None the less, I have never found a
good reason to consider the relationship between the Vrātya and
Rudra as being more important or more revelatory compared to
the relationship with Indra. Moreover, if we consider — as it seems
obvious — the first hymn of the section as the one that is best suited
to explaining the ideology behind the figure of the Ekavrātya, then
we cannot but recognize the pivotal role of Indra. On the contrary,
when many scholars tried to interpret these hymns using the later
texts (e.g. the Brāhmaṇas) as a reference and starting point, they
get an impression of Rudra’s overwhelming importance.21
In any case, the pre-eminent role of the Vrātya is indeed
affirmed elsewhere and in other ways. Even though Henry only
mentions it in a brief annotation, his observation about the
resemblance between the verse from the Brahmacārin hymn and
the corresponding in hymn 13.4 perfectly captures one of the most
revealing details. These are the verses compared:
[. . .] tásmin devāḥ́ sáṁmanaso bhavanti [. . .] — 11.5.1
eté asmin devā́ ekavṛ́to bhavanti AA — 13.4.13
21
The article by Bollée (1981) is an exception in this respect. In
fact, he connects the Indo-European sodalities with the so-called
“brotherhood of Indra” and with the Vrātyas, the Mallas, and
eventually the Buddhist Order. See also sect. 2.3 of Candotti and
Pontillo’s paper in this volume (chap. 6), in particular the reflections
about “the relationship between the sole aindra vrātya and the group
of Maruts” as a later adaptation of the Atharvavedic figure of the
Ekavrātya in a new socio-political context (n 50).
56 Moreno Dore

However, we can add another verse to this list:

sá devāń ām īśāṁ
́ páry ait [. . .] — 15.1.5

In this last verse too, the idea of gathering together and

encompassing matches with the idea of conquering the pre-
eminence. The poet conveys the concept that sovereignty goes hand
in hand with the obtaining of agreement and unity. Interestingly,
the same term ekavṛt is also found in Book 20 of the Paippalāda
recension of Atharvaveda. In Kubisch’s translation (2012: 130), the
verse seems to hint at a similar ‘status of pre-eminence’.
māṁ vadantam anu sarve vadantu māṁ prāṇantam anu
prāṇantu sarve A
māṁ viśantam anu sarve viśantu mayi devā ekavṛto bhavantu AA
— AVP 20.22.1
Mir folgend, wenn ich rede, sollen alle reden! Mir folgend, wenn
ich atme, sollen alle atmen!
Mir folgend, wenn ich heimgehe, sollen alle heimgehen! Bei mir
sollen die Götter einmütig werden!

In his annotation to the hymn, Kubisch explains that “Gemeint ist

wohl, dass die Mitglieder der sabhā- dem Sprecher in allem, was er
tut, folgen sollen”, then he adds that it could mean “im konkreten
Fall wohl ‘einmütig, eines Sinnes’” and suggests the above-quoted
comparison with AVŚ 13.4.13 and with Whitney’s translation “these
gods in him become single” (1905: 733).22
It is now possible to suppose that hymn 13.4 was part of a

22
Cf. again Candotti and Pontillo’s paper in this volume (Sect. 2.3), where
we find that the ideal gṛhapati for the Vrātyaṣṭoma has to be the best
nṛśaṁsa, the richest one or the most learned (Kātyāyana-Śrautasūtra
22.4.7-8), and that the leader is elected on the basis of an indisputable
pre-eminence of the candidate. The authors add that a similar election
of the leader is also recorded in Baudhāyana-Śrautasūtra 18.24, where
he appears as a renouncer or as a temporary ascetic like the śrauta-
dīkṣita.
 The Ekavrātya, Indra and the Sun 57

system of reciprocal cross-references of which the Brahmacārin

and the Ekavrātya hymns were also part. As a consequence, it is
possible to observe that if these figures of ascetics have the same
aim of reaching the status, power and knowledge of a god, then they
likewise share the goal of reabsorbing and uniting the whole Vedic
pantheon in themselves — supposedly the same goal also shared by
the enigmatic figure praised in 13.4.
sá ekavrātyó bhavat sá dhánur ād́ atta tád evéndradhanúḥ
— 15.1.6
tám idáṁ nígataṁ sáhaḥ sá eṣá éka ekavṛ́d éka evá — 13.4.12
The role of the divinities does not seem permanent, but instead
appears to be quite dynamic (elsewhere it is Indra that must
conquer the power, cf. ṚV IV.18 and AVŚ 20.34.1). The last two
verses are so similar that it is hard not to recognize, if not the same
author, at least the same ideological context. No less important is
the numeral eka-, both in the compound ekavrātya and in the second
part of verse 12 where the poet insists on using it three times. It
seems obvious that the poet’s intent is not merely to underline the
individuality of the figure praised, but to highlight his uniqueness
in the pantheon. In fact, this emphasis on eka- comes after a series
of identifications that aim to subsume every divine figure in the
sole pre-eminent figure. Therefore, if the path traced by the poet in
15.1 goes from the Vrātya to the Ekavrātya through the conquest of
Prajāpati’s creative power and the subsequent substitution of Indra,
in 13.4 the male figure is described as a creator at the beginning
and — after being identified with the sun and Indra — finally comes
to deserve the epithet of ekavṛt.
It is difficult not to see an equivalent of ekavrātya in the use of
this word. At this point, it should therefore not be too hazardous
to suggest that the poet of 13.4 uses the pronoun saḥ to refer to a
being that could even be closer to figures like the Brahmacārin, the
Vrātya or the Keśin. It seems apparent that the use of three names
to refer to these extraordinary men in the hymns does not imply
58 Moreno Dore

a real difference: what matters most is the common underlying

ideology, which emerges from the analysis of the hymns.
The most important characteristic of this ideology is the role
attributed to knowledge, something that is clearly present in the
verses. Both the Brahmacārin and the Vrātya are defined as sages,
and the poets hint at a special knowledge they have conquered. This
knowledge gives rise to power and sovereignty over living beings,
heavenly beings and the gods. The first paryāya in 13.4 states that
the one who is known as ekavṛt distinguishes (ví paśyati) all living
beings, and almost the same sentence is repeated again in verse 19
at the end of the second paryāya (in fact, the last three verses are
just a repetition). Despite the fact that one might be led to believe
that the poet is simply continuing to refer to the ekavṛt, reading
the first two verses of the same paryāya (vv. 14 and 15) shows that
this fact is not so obvious.
Let us now compare the second and the third paryāya:
II. kīrtíś ca yáśaś cā́mbhaś ca nábhaś ca brāhmaṇavarcasáṁ
cāń naṁ cānnād́ yaṁ ca AA 14 AA
Fame and glory and water (ambhas?23) and cloud and Brāhmanic
splendour and nourishment and good food (annādya);

yá etáṁ devám ekavṛ́taṁ véda AA 15 AA

Who knows this god [as] the unique;

́ ná tṛtīyaś
ná dvitīyo ́ caturthó nāṕ y ucyate AA 16 AA
Not second, nor third, nor even fourth is called;

ná pañcamó ná ṣaṣṭháḥ saptamó nāṕ y ucyate AA 17 AA

Nor fifth, nor sixth, nor even seventh is called;

nāṣ́ ṭamó ná navamó daśamó nāṕ y ucyate AA 18 AA

Nor eighth, nor ninth, nor even tenth is called;

sá sárvasmai ví paśyati yác ca prāṇáti yác ca ná AA 19 AA

23
See Whitney 1905: 733.
 The Ekavrātya, Indra and the Sun 59

He distinguishes between everything that breathes and those

that do not;

tám idáṁ nígataṁ sáhaḥ sá eṣá éka ekavṛ́d éka evá AA 20 AA

This power has entered him, he is this one, the unique, the only
one;

sárve asmin devā́ ekavṛ́to bhavanti AA 21 AA

All the gods in him become the unique;
— 13.4.14-21

III. bráhma ca tápaś ca kīrtíś ca yáśaś cāmbhaś ca nábhaś ca

brāhmaṇavarcasáṁ cāń naṁ cānnād́ yaṁ ca AA 22 AA
bráhman and tapas and fame and glory and water and cloud and
Brāhmanic splendour and nourishment and good food;

bhūtáṁ ca bhávyaṁ ca śraddhā́ ca rúciś ca svargáś ca svadhā́

ca AA 23 AA
And what is and what will be and śraddhā and brilliance and
heaven and svadhā;

yá etáṁ devám ekavṛ́taṁ véda AA 24 AA

Who knows this god [as] the unique;

sá evá mṛtyúḥ sò3 ’mṛ́taṁ sò3 ’bhvà1ṁ sá rákṣaḥ AA 25 AA

He verily is death, he is immortality, he is immense power, he is
a demon (rākṣasa);

sá rudró vasuvánir vasudéye namovāké vaṣaṭkāró ’nu

sáṁhitaḥ AA 26 AA
He is Rudra in collecting goods; but in liberality, in paying homage
[he is] the concluding utterance vaṣaṭ;

tásyemé sárve yātáva úpa praśíṣam āsate AA 27 AA

All these spirits honour his orders;

tásyāmū́ sárvā nákṣatrā váśe candrámasā sahá AA 28 AA

60 Moreno Dore

All these asterisms are in his control, together with the moon;
— 13.4.22-28

Verse 14 — as well as verses 22 and 23 — shows some similarity

with other passages that we find in the AVŚ and also in the Vrātya-
Kāṇḍa itself (cf. 15.2.1-4; 15.6.1-9; 15.8.3; 15.9.3). These consist in
lists of entities, divinities and abstract concepts which usually
end with these words: priyáṁ dhām ́ a bhavati yá eváṁ véda.24 This
formula seems to have a twofold function. At first, it hints at a path
of knowledge that the transfigured Vrātya obtained, and, second,
it seems to suggest the way the reader might emulate the deeds
of the former. In any case, the lists that we find at the beginning
of the second and third paryāya close with a different refrain: yá
etáṁ devám ekavṛ́taṁ véda. The pronoun yaḥ, at this point, is no
clearer than the saḥ that opens the first verse of the hymn. Are they

24
In the article devoted to this expression in the Vedic texts, Bodewitz
(2002: 165 n 20) asks: “How could one become the favourite or own
abode of e.g. a deity? Someone who becomes the priyáṃ dhām ́ a of
e.g. his kinsmen (AV. 15.8.3) or of the assembly and the meeting
(AV. 15.9.3) obviously becomes the favourite of these groups.”
Nevertheless, he clarifies his position in a following note: “It is true
that all kinds of other entities like food and drinks of which one
may become the priyáṁ dhām ́ a are also mentioned. On the one hand
this is based on the classificatory system of this Brāhmaṇa-like 15th
book of the AV. In AV 15.9 assembly, meeting and strong drinks are
associated because these three items all belong to the sphere of the
warriors or princes. Similarly in AV 15.8 food is associated with tribes
or clans and kinsmen because food also represents the subjects of the
king who is celebrated in this part of the hymn. On the other hand,
obtaining the favour or sympathy of particular items here also seems
to imply getting power over them and even of getting them in one’s
possession.” While it is true that I easily agree with Bodewitz when
criticizes Gonda (1967: 53) for underestimating “the importance of the
qualification priyá here, when he observes that ‘these divine powers
take up residence with part of their nature in this man’”, it also seems
that Bodewitz’s solution is too simple in our case.
 The Ekavrātya, Indra and the Sun 61

referred to the same entity or to two different ones instead? Should

we believe that they are always referred to the figure alluded to as
ekavṛt, and which, in some way, has the same role as the ekavrātya?

IV
In actual fact, the poet’s purpose is to trace the path through
which it is possible to obtain a divine life by means of the
acquisition of esoteric knowledge. As I have already tried to
demonstrate commenting on AVŚ 2.1, the author suggests an
actual transfiguration of the wise man, already obtained by those
known as ekavṛt or ekavrātya. In the end, these figures have the
role of archetypal models that embody the system of belief from
which these hymns emerge and, at the same time, fulfil the need
to show an ideal path for reaching the heavenly life of an eka-. The
second and third paryāyas, thus, must describe the glory of the eka-,
but also clearly underline that glory, power and majesty over the
gods need to be conquered. The identification with Rudra recalls
both the Keśin hymn and the Ekavrātya hymn, and also hymn 15.5
where many other names of the god are listed. The reference to
immortality and to the god of death evokes the identification of the
teacher of the Brahmacārin with death itself (v. 14: ācāryò mṛtyúr),
or the verse where the Vedic student is defined as an embryo in
the womb of immortality (v. 7: gárbho bhūtvām ́ ṛ́tasya yónāv); once
again, the reference (v. 28) to the stars and the moon under the
control of the eka- is similar to another verse in the Vrātya-Kāṇḍa:
sá ūrdhvāṁ́ díśam ánu vy àcalat A tám ṛtáṁ ca satyáṁ ca sū́ryaś
ca candráś ca nákṣatrāṇi cānuvyàcalan A ṛtásya ca vaí sá satyásya
ca sū́ryasya ca candrásya ca nákṣatrāṇāṁ ca A priyáṁ dhām ́ a
bhavati yá eváṁ véda AA — 15.6.2
He moved towards the upward direction; after him moved ṛta and
satya and the sun and the moon and the asterisms. In fact, who
has thus known becomes the dear abode of ṛta and satya and the
sun and the moon and the asterisms.

Moreover, it is worth noticing the references to breaths in hymn

62 Moreno Dore

13.4 (vv. 11 and 19), since these few verses seem to express concepts
similar to those found again in the Brahmacārin hymn and in the
Vrātya-Kāṇḍa:
[. . .] tásmin devā́ ádhi víśve samótāḥ A prāṇāpānaú janáyann ād́
vyānáṁ [. . .] — 11.5.24
[. . .] In him all the gods are woven together, (he) generating prāṇa
and apāna and then vyāna. [. . .]

The first observation that comes to mind is that the idea of the
conquering of the divine unity is strictly connected with the
reflections on concepts like prāṇa, apāna and vyāna in both hymns.
In fact, in the Vrātya-Kāṇḍa, there are three consecutive hymns
devoted to lists of identifications concerning respectively prāṇa,
apāna and vyāna. Finally, in the second last hymn of the kāṇḍa, we
read that the gods move around the same purpose (15.17.8: samānám
árthaṁ pári yanti devāḥ́ ), that they enter together into the sun (verse
9: yád ādityám abhisaṁviśánty) and that one is their immortality
(verse 10: ékaṁ tád eṣām amṛtatvám).
It is surprising to compare the expressions used by the poets
in all these hymns. It is difficult to exclude the hypothesis that
the authors may have had the same concepts in mind and perhaps
even shared a poetic heritage, a common ideology to which all of
them refer.

References
PRIMARY SOURCES
AVP — Atharvaveda Paippalāda, See Kubisch 2012.
AVŚ — Atharvaveda Śaunakīya.
Bandhu, V., ed. 1960–1962. Atharvaveda (Śaunaka) with the Padapāṭha
and Sāyaṇācārya’s Commentary. Hoshiarpur: VVRI.
ṚV — Ṛgveda.
Sontakke, N.S. and C.G. Kashikar, eds. 1933-1951. Ṛgveda-Samhitā — with
a Commentary of Sāyaṇācārya. Poona: Vaidika Samshodana Mandala.
 The Ekavrātya, Indra and the Sun 63

SECONDARY SOURCES
Aufrecht, Th. 1850. “Das XV. Buch des Atharvaveda”. In: Indische Studien.
Zeitschrift für die Kunde des indischen Alterthums, 1, pp. 121-40.
Bloomfield, M. 1891. “Contributions to the Interpretation of the Veda:
Fourth Series.” The American Journal of Philology, 12(4): 414-43.
———. 1893. “Contributions to the Interpretation of the Veda”. JAOS,
15: 143–88.
———. 1897. Hymns of the Atharva-Veda together with Extracts from the
Ritual Books and the Commentaries. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
———. 1899. The Atharvaveda and the Gopatha Brahmana. Strassburg:
Trübner. [repr. Allahabad 1975].
Bodewitz, H.W. 2002. “Where and What Is the priyám dhama of a Vedic
God?”, IIJ, 45(2): 153-71.
Bollée, W.B. 1981. “The Indo-European Sodalities in Ancient India”.
ZDMG, 131: 172-91.
Charpentier, J. 1909. “Über Rudra-Śiva”. WZKM, 23: 151-79.
———. 1911. “Bemerkungen über die Vrātya’s”. WZKM, 25: 355-88.
Dore, M. 2015. “The Pre-eminence of Men in the Vrātya-Ideology”.
In Puṣpikā: Tracing Ancient India Through Texts and Traditions:
Contributions to Current Research in Indology, vol. 3. Ed. R. Leach and
J. Pons. Oxford: Oxbow Books, pp. 48-73.
——— (forthcoming). “Some Observations about the Relationship
with Gods in the Vrātya-culture”. In Cross-cutting Asian Studies: An
Interdisciplinary Approach. Ed. S. Bindi, E. Mucciarelli and T. Pontillo.
London: Anthem Press.
Dore, M. and T. Pontillo. 2013. “What Do Vrātyas Have to Do with Long-
stalked Plants? Darbha, Kuśa, Śara and Iṣīkā in Vedic and Classical
Sources”. In Pandanus ’13: Nature in Literature, Art, Myth and Ritual,
vol. 7.1. Ed. J. Vacek. Prague: Charles University in Prague and
Triton, pp. 35-61.
Falk, H. 1986. Bruderschaft und Würfelspiel. Untersuchungen zur
Entwicklungsgeschichte des vedischen Opfers. Freiburg: Hedvig Falk.
Gonda, J. 1967. The Meaning of the Sanskrit Term dhāman-. Amsterdam:
Noord-Hollandsche Uitgevers-Maatschappij Publisher.
64 Moreno Dore

Griffith, R.T.H. 1896. The Hymns of the Atharva-Veda Translated with a

Popular Commentary, vol. II. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner
& Co. [repr. Benares 1917].
Hauer, J.W. 1927. Der Vratya: Untersuchungen über die nichtbrahmanische
Religion Altindiens, I. Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer.
Heesterman, J.C. 1993. The Broken World of Sacrifice. Chicago; London:
The University of Chicago Press.
Henry, V. 1891. Les Hymnes Rohita. Livre XIII de l’Atharva-Véda. Paris: J.
Maisonneuve.
Jamison, S.W. and J.P. Brereton. 2014. The Rigveda: The Earliest Religious
Poetry of India, 3 vols. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kramrisch S. 1981. The Presence of Śiva. Princeton: Princeton University
Press.
Kubisch, P. 2012. Paippalāda-Saṁhitā Kāṇḍa 20, Sūkta 1-30. Kritische Edition,
Übersetzung, Kommentar. Ph.D. Dissertation, Universität zu Bonn.
Regnaud, P. 1892. Le mythe de Rohita: Traduction raisonnée du treizième
livre de l’Atharva Véda. Paris: E. Leroux.
Srinivasan, D. 1978. “The Religious Significance of Divine Multiple Body
Parts in the Atharva Veda”. In Numen, 25(3): 193-225.
Whitney, W.D. 1905. Atharva-Veda Samhita; translated with a critical
and exegetical commentary by William Dwight Whitney. Revised
and brought nearer to completion and edited by Charles Rockwell
Lanman. Cambridge: Harvard University. [repr. Delhi 1962].
Zehnder, T. 1999. Atharvaveda-Paippalāda Buch 2. Text, Übersetzung,
Kommentar. Eine Sammlung altindischer Zaubersprüche vom Beginn
des 1. Jahrtausends v. Chr. Idstein: Schulz-Kirchner.