Identity of the Dasas and Dasyus of Rg Veda

There is a general tendency among many scholars to identify the Dasa/Dasyus with dark tribes of India. The word ‘krishnatvac’ (darkskinned) is used as a major ‘evidence’ for this identity ‘discovered’ by them. Now, we are going to verify this evidence and discovery. The aim of this essay is to determine whether these scholars were right or wrong in their assumption.

An overview of Rg Veda shows that Dasa/Dasyus were one of the greatest enemies of the Vedic Aryans. They were described by the Vedic Aryans in the most contemptible manner – ‘anasah’ (noseless), ‘krishnatvac’ (darkskinned) etc. These words are used by many scholars as evidence for their theory that Rg Veda speaks about the fight for the land between the ‘invading’ fair skinned Aryans and the ‘dark aborigines’. Giving further boost to their claim are the verses which identify Maruts (friends of Indra) as fair complexioned. At a passing look, these claims appear to be very sensible. But do they represent the actual facts? The interpretation of Rg Veda keeping in mind the philosophical, theological and mythical beliefs of the Vedic people throw a completely new light upon the above mentioned cases. Also, a study of Avesta is included to find out the actual identity of the Dasa/Dasyus and the use of the words in the ancient Indo-Iranian languages (Dahyu is found in Avesta and it refers to country, district etc. We shall see that the Vedic Dasyu is nothing but a reference to the Iranians who called themselves Dahyu/Daha.)

First, let us consider the mythical beliefs of the Vedic Aryans and their impact upon the interpretation of the Dasa/Dasyu verses.

Rg Veda (5-14-4) says that Agni with his brilliant light killed both Dasyus and darkness (tamah).

In the above verse, the parallel has been established between darkness and Dasyus. Thus, the Dasyus were considered as representing the darkness which is dispelled by the Devas. The fight between the forces of light and darkness has been the theme of most of the ancient faiths. The Vedic people saw such a conflict as well and they identified Dasyus (their enemies) with darkness. In some cases, a few Dasyus were elevated to a supernatural state and they appear as forces of darkness dispelled by Indra and Agni. The Vedic seers identified their enemies (Dasyus) as the representative of the darkness fought by their Gods.

The word ‘krishnatvac’ used for referring to the Dasas and Dasyus appear to be the result of this identification of Dasyus as representatives of darkness. This makes much more sense because of the following reasons:

1. The Avesta (e.g. Yasna 1.11, 2.5, 2.11, 3.7 etc) have the word ‘Dahyu’ and uses the term as referring to the country, district etc. Similarly, Daha is a term used by the ancient Iranians to refer to a particular tribe. Even in the Rg Veda, Sudas himself has the word ‘Dasa’ in his name. It appears to have used in the sense ‘man’ (‘Sudas’ itself means ‘good man’). Thus, the words ‘Dasa’ and ‘Dasyu’ appear to be Indo-Iranian words. In all probability, these words were used by the Vedic Aryans to refer to their Iranian (Avestan) enemies.

2. The fact that Iranians and the Vedic people became enemies over a period of time and developed different modes of worship gives strength to the above point. Iranians called their God as Asura (Ahura) and their demons as Daevas.

3. No community in the subcontinent has been identified as ‘Dasyu’ community while the terms ‘Dahyu’ and ‘Daha’ were common in ancient Iran.

4. The above three points clearly establish the identity of the Dasa/Dasyu as Iranians. As the Iranians were definitely white in colour, clearly the description of Dasyus as ‘krishnatvac’ seems to be the result of the identification of the Dasyus with forces of darkness.

5. Rg Veda (1.130.8) says that Indra tore off the black skin of the ‘avrata’. But immediately it adds that Indra burns the enemies (tyrannical men). The seer appears to provide a reason for the riteless’ (avratas) black skin (after all the Dasyus are fair in colour). Also, it must be noted that ‘krishnatvac’ can also mean covered by black/darkness.

6. Rg Veda (7.5.6) states that Agni drove away the Dasyus and brought light to the Vedic Aryans. Once again, this shows that the Dasyus were associated with darkness and it justifies the claim made by us that the term ‘krishnatvac’ does not have any anthropological meaning.

The word ‘anasah’ actually proves right that our interpretation of ‘krishnatvac’. The word literally means ‘noseless’ or ‘mouthless’. There is/was no human race/community which lack nose or mouth. Some scholars try to interpret it as flat-nosed. But they forget that the Dravidians are Caucausians as well. As such, they are not flat-nosed. Moreover, they seem to forget a very basic thing when interpreting the word – figure of speech. Even today, the words ‘naak cut gaye’ (nose was cut) is very common phrase used in Hindi to refer to a person who was thoroughly insulted. In Ramayana, Lakshmana is said to have cut the nose of demoness Surpanaka. As such, lack of nose is a matter of insult. Thus, ‘anasah’ is a word of insult used to refer to the Dasa/Dasyus. It could also refer to the fact that the Iranians spoke a variant dialect of the Vedic. As some of their pronunciations were not perfect according to the Vedic standard (use of ‘h’ instead of ‘s’), they could very well be called as ‘noseless’/’mouthless’. The mention of an example of Asura/Mleccha speech in Satapatha Brahmana (3.2.1.23,24) is interesting to note.

All in all, we can see that the words ‘Dasa/Dasyus’ must have been used to refer to the Iranians and not to the tribes of India (especially considering the fact that there are no Dasyu/Dasa tribes in India while the Iranians used the terms to refer to themselves).

Finally, it will do well to go through the commentary of Sri Sayanacharya. Sayana describes the word ‘krishnatvac’ as ‘skin of Krishna’. Krishna is the name of a demon (a force of darkness) mentioned in Rg Veda (he has got nothing to do with the later Sri Krishna who is considered as an avatar of Lord Vishnu). This interpretation does not give any quarter for racial quarrel being mentioned in the Rg Veda. Considering the fact that most of the enemies of the Devas are supernatural beings and atmospheric demons (who are agents of darkness as opposed to the Devas – beings of light), it is more sensible to discard the unnecessary imposition of the western theories of racism on this ancient text. A cursory reading of the later Vedic texts show that there was no colour based discrimination against dark skinned people. After all, the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad places the birth of a black skinned son above that of a white skinned son.

Date of Andaal and other Azhvaars

Andaal is one of the most greatest saints of Sri Vaishnava Bhakti movement. She was the only woman among the 12 Azhvaars. The few details that we can gather from the story of Andal is that she was the daughter of Sri Vishnucitta (another Azhvaar - popularly called as 'Periyaazhvaar'). Her father established the supremacy of Lord Vishnu at Pandya court. He built the temple tower(Gopuram) of Srivilliputtur with the prize money received at the court. From Andaal's 'Tiruppaavai', it is found that the year in which she undertook 'paavai nonbu'(a vrata to attain Vishnu as her husband), Jupiter set after the rise of Venus in the early morning after twilight on the full moon day of Tamil month Maargazhi (Tiruppaavai 8 an 13). Her date as given by traditional texts is unacceptable as they say that she was born about 5000 years ago. We know that her period was somewhere in the post-Kalabhran era as her father attended the Pandyan court and the language of her works are post-Sangam Tamil.

Now, we try to find out the year in which Tiruppaavai could have been composed keeping in mind the astronomical phenomena mentioned above. People have tried to claim that Tiruppaavai was composed in 736 CE or even in the mid 9th century CE. The latter is based on the assumption that Vallabha Deva Pandyan mentioned in Periyaazhvaar's hagiography must be Srimara Srivallabha (830 CE – 862 CE). This assumption does not hold water as it is very common to write the name of a person in Sanskrit as the translation of his Tamil name. As such 'Vallabha deva' must be a translated name as 'Srimara Srivallabha' would have been identified by his own name rather than simply 'Vallabha deva'. The date of 736 CE is not possible as this was the period of Tirumangai Azhvaar (contemporary of Pallavamalla Nandivarman) who was the last of Azhvaars. Hence, Periyaazhvar most probably belonged to an earlier era.

From the works of the first four Azhvaars and the lack of personal information about them, we can conclude that they belonged to the dark age of Kalabhran era. Kulashekara Azhvaar nust have also belonged to this era as he claims that he ruled all the 3 Tamil countries(Chera, Chola and Pandya) [Perumal Tirumozhi 2-10]. This could have happened only in the Kalabhran era. For no Chera king ruled the entire Tamil land between the 6th and 10th century CE. Periyaazhvaar is placed after Kulashekara Azhvaar. It is also mentioned that he attended the Pandya court. Hence, he must belong to the post-Kalabhran era. It is stated that he attended the court when there was an assembly for 'tattva nishkarsha' (finding out the supreme truth). The most probable explanation for this would be that the Pandyan dynasty had been re-established and they wanted to revert to their ancient ways as the presence of Kalabhras had hindered their religious freedom. Now we try to find out the possible dates in which Tiruppaavai could have been composed:

10 Jan 662 Full Moon

Venus rises: 4.53 AM Jupiter sets: 5.20 AM Sun rises: 6.42 AM

30 Dec 578 Full Moon

Venus rises: 5.29 AM Jupiter sets: 6.11 AM Sun rises: 6.39 AM

18 Dec 731 Full Moon

3:29 - Venus rises 3:57 AM - Jupiter sets 6:33 AM - Sun rises

24 Dec 744 Full Moon

Venus rises: 3.43 AM Jupiter sets: 6.33 AM 5.02 AM – Mars rises

Sun rises: 6.37 AM 6.23 AM – moon sets

Among the given dates, only 662 CE and 578 CE can be considered as 731 CE and 744 CE are very late for Andal, this being the period of Tirumangai Azhvaar. Among the two years 578 CE and 662 CE, 578 CE must be the year of composition of Tiruppaavai as the Pandya ruler of 662 CE was a Jain who converted to Saiva sect. He could not be the patron of Periyaazhvaar. 578 CE is considered to be the period of Kadungon who conquered the Kalabhras and freed the Pandya country from their yoke. He was also the first Pandya ruler of the post-Kalabhran era. Being so, there is a very high chance for such a king to convene an assembly, to establish the ancient Brahminical system, in which Periyaazhvaar seems to have participated. Also the name 'Kadungon' ends with the Tamil word 'kon' which has very similar meaning to 'Vallabha'. Hence, this is the most probable period. We conclude this short essay by stating that Andaal and Periyaazhvaar belonged to the 6th century CE. The first four Azhvaars (Poigai, Bhutam, Pei and Tirumazhisai) along with Nammazhvaar and Kulashekara Azhvaar belonged to the Kalabhran era. Periyaazhvaar and Andaal belonged to the early post-Kalabhran era. Tondaradipodi and Panaazhvaar belonged to the 7th and early 8th century CE while Tirumangai Azhvaar belonged to the 8th century CE.

Identity of Sarasvati

Sarasvati in the Rg Veda

Sarasvati is mentioned in the following verses of Rg Veda:

Rg Veda:

1-3-10 to 12 : 10 - bestower of food, 11 – Goddess, 12 – river (maho arNaH)

1-13-9 – Apri Sarasvati, Ila, Mahi

1-89-3 – mentioned with many deities

1-142-9 – Apri Ila, Sarasvati, Mahi

1-164-49 – breast of Sarasvati – suits the river

1-188-8 – Bharati, Ila, Sarasvati Apri

2-1-11 – Agni is praised as Bharati, Indra, Sarasvati etc.

2-3-8 – Apri Sarasvati , Ila, Bharati

2-30-8 – Sarasvati kills foes

2-32-8 – Sarasvati along with Sinivali, Indrani etc

2-41-16 to 18 – 16- best of mothers, rivers, Goddesses

3-4-8 – Bharati, Ila, Sarasvati Apri

3-23-4 – banks of Drishadvati, Sarasvati and Apaya (perhaps a confluence), MAnusha, 

IlAyAspada, Vara A PrithivyA (all the three referring to the Kurukshetra region)

3-54-13 – Sarasvati and Maruts

5-5-8 – IlA, SarasvatI, MahI Apri

5-42-12 – SarasvatI with other deities

5-43-11 – SarasvatI descends from mountains and sky : a reference to the sources of river being mountains and rain

5-46-2 – SarasvatI with other deities

6-49-7 – SarasvatI as vIra patnI gives boons

6-50-12 – SarasvatI with other deities

6-52-6 – SarasvatI swells with rivers

6-61-1 - gave Divodasa to VadhrayaSva, 2-breaking the mountains, banks etc, 8 – great flood of the river, roaring river, 9-sister rivers, 10-seven sisters, 12- three sources/ three worlds, seven sistered, 13- greatest among rivers and huge like chariot, 14- don’t overwhelm with waters

7-2-8 – SarasvatI (along with Her daughters SArasvatAs/rivers see 7.36.6), IlA, BhAratI Apri

7-9-5 – SarasvatI with other deities

7-35-11 – SarasvatI with other deities

7-36-6 – great river, mother of rivers

7-39-5 – SarasvatI with other deities

7-40-3 – SarasvatI with other deities

7-95-1 – greater than other rivers, like a chariot, 2 – flows from mountain to ocean

7-96-1 - Sarasvati is the greatest river, 2 – Purus dwell on Her two banks.

8-21-17, 18 – 17 – Only Sarasvati or Indra may give such gifts as Chitra, 18 – Along the banks of Sarasvati live King Chitra and other small chieftains

8-38-10 – Indra and Agni are referred as companions of Sarasvati

8-54-4 (a VAlakhilya hymn which is a late interpolation) – Sarasvati and the seven streams are mentioned together.

9-5-8 – Apri BhAratI, SarasvatI, IlA

9-67-32 – SarasvatI provides milk, honey etc to those who recite/read the hymn

9-81-4 – SarasvatI with other deities

10-17-7 to 9 – SarasvatI as Goddess who gives food (could refer to her waters which help grow  crops)

10-30-12 – SarasvatI is identified as a water deity

10-64-9 – SarasvatI, Sarayu and Sindhu are mentioned

10-65-1 – SarasvatI with other deities

10-65-13 – SarasvatI is mentioned. It can be taken to represent river or Goddess.

10-75-5 – SarasvatI is identified as a river between YamunA and Sutlej.

10-110-8 – BharatI, IlA, SarasvatI Apri

10-131-5 – SarasvatI with other deities

10-141-5 – SarasvatI with other deities

10-184-2 – SarasvatI is asked to place womb.

In the Rg Veda, SarasvatI is a prominent Goddess. She is identified as a deity of intellect, speech, wealth and most importantly as a river. Among the rivers, only SarasvatI has been so greatly deified in the Rg Veda. The first question is this: what is the original identification of SarasvatI – river or Goddess? If SarasvatI was originally a Goddess, why is it that SarasvatI alone was made a river? There is no answer to the second question. But if SarasvatI was originally a river, we can explain as to why She alone was made a Goddess. Rg Veda is the book of Puru Bharatas. Purus lived on the banks of SarasvatI (7-96-1). Nowhere in the Rg Veda are the Purus connected with any other river as they are connected with SarasvatI. That river was the life giver of their country and that was why She was highly deified.

Next, we come to the identification of river SarasvatI on the terra firma. Some people wish to banish the river to the night sky. But certain verses of the Rg Veda make it very clear that SarasvatI is a terrestrial river (e.g.) Purus did not live in the night sky but on earth. Now, we have to identify the river which corresponds with the Rg Vedic SarasvatI. The Nadi Stuti hymn makes it clear that SarasvatI lies between Yamuna and Sutlej. This corresponds to the present SarasvatI-Ghagghar-Hakra.

Certain ‘scholars’ try to identify the Rg Vedic SarasvatI with Helmand (Harahvati in Avestan) of Afghanistan. But this identification is a mere speculation which is baseless. Nowhere in the Rg Veda is SarasvatI mentioned as a river to the west of Indus. DrishadvatI and Apaya are tributaries of Rg Vedic SarasvatI (3.23.4) and this does not suit Helmand. 7.95.2 makes it very clear that SarasvatI flowed from the mountains to the sea/ocean. This does not suit Helmand. For those people who claim that Vedic Aryans did not know about sea, my answer is: please use some common sense (If the Aryans did migrate into India from Central Asia, they were great wanderers and hence, they would have come to know about the sea when they entered Indus valley.). Rg Veda identifies SarasvatI as the greatest of the rivers (6-61-13) and is also called as having seven sisters. Thus Sarasvati was the greatest river of the Saptasindhu-Haryana region during the period of Family Mandalas. Later, she lost her prominence and Indus became the greatest river (in Mandala 10). All these details point towards the Ghagghar-Hakra. It has been proved that Ghagghar-Hakra was a very mighty river in the past before its desiccation. Helmand can never be compared with the glacier fed rivers of Punjab and thus the Rg Vedic seer would not have called Helmand as the greatest river. Finally, every river name in the Rg Veda refers only to one river. Being so, there is no reason why SarasvatI alone must refer to more than one river. There is nothing in the Rg Veda which identifies SarasvatI with any Afghan river let alone Helmand. It is clearly placed between Yamuna and Sutlej in the Haryana region.

If we consider Helmand as Sarasvati, the following questions arise:

Were the Rg Veda and Avesta composed in the same region (Afghanistan)? The answer will be ‘no’. Then, how is it that the Vedic people and Iranians referred to the same river in their hymns. If the ‘scholars’ claim that Vedic people lived on the banks of Helmand and that they later migrated to India while the Iranians migrated to Helmand, even then how is it that both the tribes gave the same name to the same river. Also, is there any direct evidence in Rg Veda or later Samhitas for any such migration from Afghanistan (which must have occurred during their composition, if the ‘scholars’ are right in their speculation)? Does the Rg Veda identify SarasvatI with Afghan Helmand in any manner? Is the river mentioned alongside any Afghan animal/flora/fauna or is it placed west of Indus? The answer for all the above questions will be an emphatic ‘no’. Being so, it is entirely ridiculous to postulate an ‘Afghan Sarasvati’ theory.

Finally, we know that Vendidad lists Saptasindu as one of the places in which the Iranians previously lived. Hence, it is highly probable that they took the name ‘sarasvatI’ from Punjab to Afghanistan. ‘HarahvatI’ is a phonetic corruption of ‘SarasvatI’ and not the other way around.

Later texts like Panchavimsa Brahmana, Mahabharata etc speak about SarasvatI disappearing in the desert. Rg Veda speaks about Sarasvati as a river reaching the sea. Later texts record that SarasvatI is lost in the desert. Therefore, we can say for sure that the Vedic SarasvatI is Ghagghar-Hakra. Helmand does not satisfy any of the characteristics mentioned above. Moreover, Rg Veda identifies Drishadvati and Apaya as tributaries of SarasvatI. Also, IlAyAspada (Kurukshetra) is identified as the region in which SarasvatI flows. All the above points clearly identify Ghagghar-Hakra as Vedic SarasvatI.

Thus we conclude that:

• SarasvatI was essentially a river Goddess who was given a high place among the Vedic deities.
  
• SarasvatI is not merely a heavenly river but it is a river firmly established on the terra-firma.
  
• SarasvatI-Ghagghar-Hakra constitutes of the ancient course of the Vedic SarasvatI.
  
• Helmand cannot be identified with the Vedic SarasvatI. The name of the Afghan river must have been derived from the Indian SarasvatI.