The Arian Witness

On the Imtiiution and Doctrine of Sacrificea.

In our Iniroduetion we gave a brief summary of tlie Scriptural account of the institution of Sacrifices and the doctrine therein involved. We need not repeat that the cardinal teaching of Christianity is connected therewith. Our business now is to show the extent to which the Ariau records testify to the fact of the institution and approximate to the doctrine typified by it.

The practice of sacrifices, as a mode of propitiating the gods or supernatural powers, has indeed existed among ali nations. We do not, however, know of any nation which manifested such an intelligible view of the underlying doctrines as the primitive Arians did in their early writings. Nor have we seen, outside the limits of Jewry wherein "God was known," such an approximation to the Scriptural teaching on the subject as is found in ancient Arian records.

The institution as a fact existed according to Ariau records from time immemorial;. and, as to this postdiluvian age, it is dated as early as the descent of the surviving man from the ship whereby he escaped the catastrophe of the Flood. The first act of Manu

"wasj as we have seen, to sacrifice with the pAka offering as ho was ioiling in religious austerity.

The institution was carefully maintained both by Iranians and Indo-Arians. In an early portion of the Zend Avesta, " Fire, the beresma, the cup, the Haoma, and the mortar," are described as the necessary furniture of " the habitations in this corporeal world," and as a sort of preservative from " the deadly serpent, the two-footed, who is very hurtful and impure."'.

Now the fire, the beresma, the cup, the Haoma, the mortar, and, as another passage adds it, "the fiesh,"* were the necessary implements for the celebration of sacrifices. The fire was for the consumption of the animal victim or any other oblation, the cup was for the drinking of the "Haoma" or consecrated Soma juice, the " mortar" was for the expression of that juice, and the flesh was the substance of the vi<5tim. Fire worship was held in such estimation because of the necessity of that element in the celebration of the sacrifices. Fire was accordingly honoured as "the son of Ahura Mazda," and "the Navel of the kings."'

The Indo-Arians cherished the institution of sacrifices still more fondly. In the antediluvian world they date it as prior to the crea,tion. "The Lord of

creatures initiated the Sacrifice." " The Lord of

creatures was in the beginning but one. He uttered the Nirid (a sacrificial formula) Ail things were ere ated after it."*

The " nivida" in the primitive rituals appear to hare been similar to the "Bodhana" of our modern Pujas. The " nivid" was so called because thereby the announcement of the ceremony was made.*

Again, "The Lord of creatures desired, "May I be produced, may I be multiplied. He practised austerity. Having practised austerities he saw this (sacrificial formula) Dwadasaha in his own Hmbs. From his own limbs he made it into twelve parts. He took it and sacrificed with it."*

Once more, " The Lord of creatures desired, May I be produced, may I be multiplied. He saw this Agni-stoma, (a Sacrificial rite,) he took it, and with it he created these creatures."^

Passages of this kind are numerous. It would severely try the reader's patience if we attempted to present a larger number of such citations. What we have cited show with sufficient clearness that in the conception of Indo-Arians, the institution of sacrifices was coeval with the creation, — curiously confirming the idea of "theLamh slain from the foundation of the world."

The Vedas afford passages equally numerous on the institution of Sacrifices in the post-diluvian world by Manu, the man who survived the Flood, and from whom the present generation of mankind sprang. Agnij as the instrument and symbol of the Sacrifice, is, in the Rig Veda, said to have been placed or consecrated by Manu. " 0 Agni, adored by us, bring the gods in a most pleasant chariot. Thou art the Invoker, appointed by Manu." ' ' O Agni, thou art the accomplisher of the burnt-ofi'ering, appointed by Manu."«

The same Agni is said to have " displayed the sky" to Manu, whose daughter Ila or Ida is again described as his " instructress."' The Taittiriya Brahmana, in like manner, calls Ida, the daughter of Manu, " the revealer" of Sacrifice;"'" The lady's lessons to her father were on the order and the direction in which the sacred sacrificial Fire was to be placed. And both were to be the reverse of what the Asuras had done. There can be no doubt here as to the identity of the Asuras with the Assyrians, since " Sanda,"" their priest, is introduced as a hostile character in the very initiatory section of this Br^hmana. And as " Sanda" has already been identified with a divinity of the Assyrians, the " Asuras" could be no other than those people. The lecture of Ida appears to have also had a mystical reference to the subsequent movements of the Devas and Asuras, the former moving south-east from their original habitation and ultimately settling in India, represented as the way to " Heaven" which they, the Devas, ultimately won, the latter, the Assyrians, (including probably the Iranians too) keeping westward and in the west, and thus losing their good luck m the end. The Iranians were not, originally at least, repudiated by the Devas. Their guru Sukra'"" identified as a

Vol. i. p. 2 " Sanda ie pat out. Marka is pat out." " Sanda and Marka are put out witli that (cast out piece)." Sanda and Marka are Bometiiaes considered as one name — Sanda-Marka. Possibly the Assyrian Sanda of Beroeus was connected with " the cily of Marqae," (Norria 409) and therefore called " Sanda Marka." See also p. 75 supra.

" Sukra was otherwise called Bhargava, and Usana.

Strange to say, that while the preceptor of the Iranians is known in Hindoo astronomy by the name of Salira as the bright morning and evening star, the Big Yeda idontifiea an aerial deity placed in the firmament as " Yenas," the very name by which the brightest Stat in the sky is distinguished in the Latin world,

The author of Hymns ix. 85 and x. 123 is called Vena Bhirgavah, that is to say, Sukra Tenas. The meaning of the word is lovely, agreeable, btavliful. In i, 83. 6 Vena is represented as a second sun or Indra, born for the recovery of the lost cows, and helping him planet is more favourably noticed, and " Brihaspati" the spiritual preceptor of the Devaa is identified with the all-knowing Indra who is hailed aa " the first" among " the gods," and the protector of the world, and also dignified with the title of " Viswakarma," as the accompUsher of all manceaTres against the Asuras."

The address of Ida to her father Manu was to the following efiect. She had heard that the Asuras were placing the Fire. She went to see it. She found that they were placing first the oblation Fire, then the household fire, and thirdly the fire for cooking the sacrificial food. She said their Fortuna became adverse to them. Having prospered for a time, they would be overthrown. She then noticed the fire placed by the gods; 1st, the food-cooking, 2nd, the household, 3rd, the oblation. Their Fortuna tended eastward, they got to heaven, but had no offspring. Then Ida said to Mann, " I will so place thy fire that thou shalt first have oflPspring and cattle, prosper in the world, and nltimately obtain heaven." She accordingly placed first the household Fire, then that by which food was cooked, lastly the butter oblation Fire by which heaven is acquired. The mystical meaning seems to be that the Asnras having, after together with Snkra, the Aaura-guru, in "the taming" of the placing the oblation Fire in tho East, turned to the household Fire in the West, they lost their Fortuna which tended eastward, whereas the Arians having first served the household Fire and been blessed with offspring and cattle in the West, turned to the South for the food-cooking Fire and then by virtue of the oblation Fire obtained heaven in the East.^*

Numerous passages in the Sanhitas and Brahmanas of the Vedas drive us to the conclusion that sacrifices and oblations were considered the most sacred ceremonies in the primitive ritual of the Indo-Arians. Sacrifice as well as Fire, its symbol of success, was called " the Navel of the world."" All the honors paid to Agni in the Rig Veda were because of his being the accomplisher of offerings and oblations, and Agni is well known as pervading that Veda from first to last. Indra who is equally conspicuous in the Vedic hymns with Agni was the most frequent at sacrificial ceremonies.

Those ceremonies are said to have existed prior to the institution of the Brahmanical order, and they were esteemed as a panacea for all evils, the one means for obtaining wished for objects, either here or the next world. This again was true both as to gods and men. We need not stop long to inquire elaborately who ike gods were. Suffice it to say that the Veda itself constantly represents them as quondam mortals, promoted to the dignity of immortals, and the enjoyment of heaven by virtue of sacrifices. Indra Limaelf, according to the testimony of both Iranian and Indian tradition, was at one time a great chief who had slain Vritra, a common enemy of the two branches, -and (as the Indian legends add) raised himself to the sovereignty of heaven by the hundred great sacrifices which he had completed.

" The gods were formerly mortals. Aa soon as tbey attained the Sanvatsara (which could only be done by the completion of a certain number of sacrifices for a certain number of days) they became immortals.'"*

Indra himself was described as a man and the best of men. " I again call our man, to come from the site of our ancient home to a multitude of sacrificers, whom, that is to say, thee, 0 Indra, I used formerly to call our father." " The showerer of desires, the ■best of men (Indra), the fierce worker, having by his arms struck his four-cornered weapon against the enemy, &c."'^ The birth of all the gods is also as -we have seen recorded in the Rig Veda. But although they were human creatures like the rest of men, they attained to heaven by virtue of the sacrifices they had celebrated.

"The gods were formerly just like men. They

desired to overcome want, misery, death, and to go to the divine assembly. They saw, took, and sacrificed with, this Ohaturvimsatiratra, and in consequence overcame want, misery, death, and reached the divine assembly.""

Hence the sacrificial ceremony is constantly represented as the path by which the gods attained to heaven — the very passport to the celestial regions — the secret by which they overcame the Asuras. All welfare for gods and men has its foundation in Sacrifice— it is the summum honum. It abolishes death and redeems from sin, through the victim, which is the ransom thereof. It is the good boat or ark by which we escape sin and all perils of life — " and the Lord of creatares" had offered himself as a sacrifice with that view. Our object is not declamation but inquiry, and therefore we shall now see how far these statements can be supported by texts of the Vedas.

" To the regular performer of Sacrifices the breezes are sweet, and the rivers distil sweetness.'""

" By means of the sacrifice gods got to heaven; by means of the sacrifice they turned out the Asuras; by means of the sacrifice enemies become friends. In

sacrifice everything gets a firm footing, therefore, they say, sacrifice is the most excellent."*"

" By this sacrificial hymn the gods had overpowered the Asuraa. By the same does the sacrificer, whoever he be, still overpower the most wicked '* cousin or foe" (or gets over the enemy which is sin, for the commentator reads vi?E^ as s^noni/mous with li'4) Tandya Maka Brakmana, vol. I. p. 106.*'

*' The gods were before called S&dhyas. They came to the heavenly world with the sacrifice and all its implements." Tandya Mahd Brdhmana, voL 1, p. 49 1. «

** To them (the gods) the Lord of creatures gave himself. He became their Sacrifice. Sacrifice is food for the gods. He, having given himself to them, made a reflection of himself which is Sacrifice. Therefore they say, the Lord of creatures is a Sacrifice, for ho made it a reflection of himself. By means of this Sacrifice he redeemed himself from them." Satapatha Brdhmana, p. 836."

"The Lord of creatures offered himself a sacrifice for the gods." Tandya Ma. Br. p. 410.'*

This idea of the " Lord of creatnres" oflfering himself a sacrifice for the benefit of the Devas, who were then hut mortals, is also foand, hut ia a more complicated form, in the celehrated Purttsha Sukta. It would not he easy to account for the genesis of such an idea except on the assumption of some pritQitive tradition of the '* Lamh slain from the foundation of the world," who was " over all, God blessed ior ever."

" When the gods celebrated a Sacrifice with Purusha as their oblation, the spring was its butter, summer its fuel, and autumn its (supplementary) oblation. When the gods, celebrating the sacrifice, bound Purusha as the victioi, they immolated him, the Sacrifice, on the grass — even him, the Purusha, who was begotten in the beginning. With him as their offering, the gods, the S&dhyas and the Rishis also sacrificed." TaitHriya Aranyaka, pp. 331-333.*'

This description of the sacrifice of Purusha has by some eminent scholars been accounted for by *' the barbarous practice of human sacrifices." But there are two difficulties in that theory which could not be easily explained away. In the first place, " Purusha" is not synonymous with manuahya or man. It simply means a person — without distinction of divine, human, or aerial, and here he is represented as coeval with the Creation, " begotten in the beginning." And in the second place, this immolation of Purusha does not seem altogether of a different character from the selfsacrifice of Prajapati or the Lord of creatures noticed before, — or from the following story of the puruahamedha of Narayana.

" The Purusba Narayan desired — I shall surpass all things, I shall become all this. He saw for fire nights that ' purusha-medha' Sacrifice. He took it. He sacrificed with it. Having sacrificed with it he surpassed all things. He who, knowing this, sacrifices with the * purusha medha,* becomes everything — whoever knows this." Satapatha Brahmana, p. 997.**

These mysterious descriptions cannot refer to any custom, prevalent at the time, of human sacrifices. Such practices were certainly not in vogue in the Vedic period. Indeed, they had never existed among the Indo-Arians as an institntion, and where instances of such inhuman sacrifices are found in Indian history or tradition, they were in the worship of beings of much darker hue than the ancient gods of Brahminism. It was almost unexceptionally in the worship of SaJctij as wife of Siva, in her blackest form, that such murderous oblations have ever been heard of. The name of Narayan has never been connected with such - sacrifices. And it would be as great a violence to truth to construe the above purusha sacrifice into human slaughter, as was indeed the vulgar idea, in the early days of the Christian religion, deduced from the sacrament of the Lord's Supper and from the wording of the Liturgy, that the followers of Jesus sacrificed human beings and feasted on their flesh! A less revolting account ia due of the sacrifices noticed in the Veda, which were probably indicative of some mysterious doctrine, originated from traditional recollections of the teaching of the first Sacrificer in the post-diluvian world. Noah's sacrifice met with divine acceptance, and Noah must have had some insight into the mystery of " the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world."

As to the efScacy of sacrifices in human concerns, we find these prominent ideas in the Vedas, viz. — (1) The mystical identification of the saerificer with the victim, which is the ransom for sin; (2) Sacrifice the great remedy for the ills of life — the ship or ark by which we escape sin and all worldly perils. (3) Sacrifice the instrument by which Sin and Death are annulled and abolished.

" By the quintuple saerificer, the animal victim is brought. The quintuple sacrifice is for heaven. The saerificer is himself the victim. — It takes the very saerificer himself to heaven." Taittiriya Brakmana, p. 202."

The commentator expounds this passage thijs:

"The oblation of the Agni-Shamiya animal (or victim) is the sacrificing fire. It is brought to the altar by this quintuple sacrificial mantra. Its own mantra being a means of attaining to heaven, and the animal being for the redeniptiou of the sacrificer, it leads the sacrificer himself to heaven." TaiUiriya Brahnana, p. 448.'™

" Because he presents the Agni-Shomiya animal, the sacrificer redeems himself from all gods Even by this the sacrificer redeems himself." Aiiareya Brahmana, p. 27.'*

He himself translates the passage thus: "He who is initiated into the sacrificial mysteries fails into the very mouth of Agni Soma (to Ibe their food). That is the reason that the Sacrificer kills on the day previous to the Soma festival an animal being devoted to Agni-Soma, thus redeeming himself (from the obligation of being himself sacrificed). He then brings his (soma) sacrifice after having thus redeemed himself and become free from debts. Thence the sacrificer ought not to eat of the flesh of this (animal)."

2. Sacrifice is described as a ship, boat, or ark, pretty much in the same way as " the Church" in the

Baptismal service, — " that they being delivered from Thy wrath may b© received into the Ark of Ckrisfs Church, and may so pass the waves of this troublesome world that they may finally come to the land of everlasting life, &c." In Rig Veda x. 113. 10 there is a mantra to this effect: " Give us, O Indra, multitudes of good horses with which we may offer our oblations by the repetition of the proper sentences — ^by the prospering of which we may escape all sins. Do thou now accept our service with much regard." '* Do thou lead us safe through alt sins by the way of Sacrifice." And we have in viii. 43. 3 " 0 illustrious Varuna, do thou quicken our ouderstanding — we that are practising this ceremony, that we may embark on the good ferrying boat by which we may escape all sins."** Ou this the Aitareya Brahmana remarks: " Sacrifice is the good ferrying boat. The black skin is the good ferrying boat. The Word is the good ferrying boat. Having embarked ou the word, one crosses over to the heavenly world." Aitareya Brahmana, p. 10.'^

The commentator of the TaitUriya Sanhitd remarks thus on the same passage: " May we also embark od that safe and good ferrying boat of black skio by which we may at once get over all sins that beset us."** It was not unusual iu those days for ferry boats to be made of leather.

The " black skin" and " the Word" above mentioned are explained in the Satapatha Brakmana, where " Sacrifice" is represented as retreating from the gods in a hlack form. They found it and took off its skin, and thence was produced the threefold knowledge (Veda) which, as a product of the Sacrifice, is identified with " the good ferrying boat."

" Sacrifice was retreating from the gods. It was going about in a black form. The gods having found it tore off its skin and took it. The same is the threefold knowledge, Sacrifice." Satapatha Brakmana

This accounts for the " boat" being assimilated with " the black skin" and " the word" — the latter two being inseparable from the " Sacrifice," which is also here declared " The threefold knowledge," otherwise called the Veda or its '* word."

Another reason for assimilating the saving boat with " the word" is, that there was actually a hymn which was called j»/aya "raft" or " boat," and it was to be used daily.

" The plava is used daily. Those who complete the

Samaitara sacrifice have to dip in the Sea [bo called from tbe " eiscesaive depth" of the Sacrifice, according to the oommentator] He who dips in the sea without a plava or raft never gets out of it. Where there is the plava, it leads to the attainment of the celestial world." Tandia Maha Brahmana, p. 293.^

3. Sacrifice has accordingly been held in all Vedic treatises as the great remedy for sins and trespasses. It is at the same time both a satisfaction for heinous and moral ofiences, and an atonement for trivial mistakes and transgressions. Katyayana says that Sacrifice procures heaven, and "heaven" is a word which stands for the highest happiness. The commentator of the Taiitiriya Sankita tells us that it is Nirriti oc the Sin-deity that is a disturber of Sacrifices.'^

That sacrifice was held as the great means for procuring remission or annnlment of sins of every description is declared in numerous passages — not only by the figures of saving boats or rafts, but literally in express terms. Witness tbe following formula in which, after slaughtering and cutting up the victim, the eacrificer says, as each limb is offered to the fire:

" (0 thou animal limb now being consigned to the fire!) Thou art the annulment of sins committed by gods. Thou art the annulment of sins committed by the (departed) fathers. Thou art the annulment of

siQs committed by men. Thou art the annulment of aiofi committed by ourselves. Whatever sins we have committed, by day or by night, thou art the annulment thereof. Whatever sins we have committed sleeping or awake, thou art the annulment thereof. "Whatever sins we have committed, knowing or unknowing, thou art the annulment thereof. Thou art the annulment of sin, — of sin."**

The same is also the teaching of the Taittiriya Sanhita. " The animal he presents to the Agni~»oma is his own ransom." On which the commentator says: '* The presenting of the animal on the part of the Sacrificer is his own ransom. Having given the animal as.a price to Agni'Soma, he thereby redeems his own soul which had become subject to them,""

The Vedio ai^ument appears to presume that " whosoeT«: is 4ikshi(a or initiated in divine service, virJ^ally devotes his sou! to all the gods."*" He can be redeemed only by a price, and the person so devoted, redeems his soul by presenting an animal as a sacrifice for himself.

But " it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goate should take away sins." Our ancestors could not be entirely unconscioua of that. And notwithstanding their hazy conceptions of the scape-goat, and of the self-sacrifice of the Lord of creatures, they felt a difficulty. The sacrificial ritual was more easily perpetuated than its meaning or purport understood, or communicated. It was difficult for recollections of the unwritten theology, on which it may have been originally founded, to be preserved in their purity irom generation to generation. The ritual was held an opita operatum. There would be little difficulty for ehildren to keep it up exactly aa they saw their fathers perform it. The underlying doctrine in the absence of written records could nut be so easily transmitted by tradition. The correct learning and coirect transmission of doctrine always requires closer attention, and greater intellectual effort on the part both of preceptor and pupil, than the minute observation and imitation of external ceremonies. The ritual itself may have had " a shadow of good things to come^ but could not with those sacrifices offered year by year make the comers thereunto perfect."

To what extent the Indo-Arians had correctly comprehended the doctrine on which sacrificial ceremonies were founded, we cannot easily guess. But we find they considered it a mystery, as in the following passage: —

" O death! the thousand myriads of thy bands for the destruction of mortals, we annul them all by the maya or mysterious power of sacrifice.'""

The doctrine involved, whether the Indo-Ariana rightly understood it or not, is doubtless a *' mystery." Many things connected with the iascrutable will of the Almighty musi be mysteries. The finite cannot grasp the Infinite. Whether there be any event in the history of the world's religions, capable of throwing light on Prajapati, or the Lord of creatures, offeriiy himself a aacrifice for others, is a question we shall take up in the nest chapter. It is manifest that the sacrificial ritual did not tranquillize the Brahmanical mind., It still brooded over theories of many kinds — it betook itself to philosophy, and even submitted to accept. lessons from its hated rival Buddhism, but without any tranquillizing result. They seem to have had an idea that there must be a really saving Sacrifice, and that their own ritual was but its distant reflection."" We repeat an expression we have already cited above that *' Prajapati, or the Lord of creatures, is Sacrifice, for he made it a reflection fpratimdj of himself." And he is further called "atmada" ov giver of self, " whose shadow, whose death, is immortality (to usj."*'

The above refers to Hiraniagarbha, wbom Siyana identifies with Prajapati, citing the following from the Taittiriya iisimFJr fl f^FTVnii) This ideatificatiun is found in all later Sanscrit literature.