As per the mahAbharata, the great war on the kuru field came to a conclusion with the smashing of duryodhana’s thighs by bhIma. While balarAma wanted kill bhIma for unfairly defeating the kuru prince in the gadAyuddha, kR^iShNa convinced him to refrain from doing so. Thereafter, he led the surviving pANDu-s and his relative sAtyaki to rest in the enemy camp. But the remaining survivors on the pANDu side slept in their own camp. Late that night, ashvatthAman, having been inspired by an owl hunting sleeping crows, attacked the pANDava camp aided by his uncle kR^ipa and yadu hero kR^itavarman. There he killed the sleeping pA~nchAla princes shikhaNDin, dR^iShTadyumna, yudhAmanyu and uttamaujas by kicking them or strangling them with bowstrings. Then he killed and beheaded the 5 sons of draupadI: prativindhya, sutasoma, shrutakIrti, shatAnIka and shrutakarman. With that the line of the illustrious pa~nchAla-s, which was praised in the veda, came to an end. The pANDu-s were left with draupadI, who represented the “shrI” of the erstwhile pa~nchAla realm. While much of this is in the realm of history filled into the variegated bottles of Indo-European mythic and epic motifs we can still discern some kind of actual historical events behind these narratives. As we have tentatively argued before there appears to have been an older layer involving a civil war within the kuru-pa~nchAla confederation in core AryAvarta. In this confrontation, the kuru-s might have destroyed the pa~nchAla-s, perhaps via the action of the feral bharadvAja brAhmaNa ashvatthAman. The larger canvas of these events appears to have included conflicts with another Indo-Aryan state of the salva-s who were initially defeated by the kuru-s and subsequently destroyed by the yadu-s under kR^iShNa devakIputra nd his allies. Another group, the nAga-s, called by some as non-Aryan, were in reality most certainly culturally Arya. This group was also contending for power in this period against the yadu-s led by kR^iShNa. The pANDu-s coming from the Iranian border zone appear to have subsequently emerged as key players. Initially they allied with the yadu-s to gain territory from the nAga-s. This sparked off a long standing feud between the latter and the pANDu-s with some nAga groups allying themselves to the pANDu-s and other fiercely opposing them. Subsequently, they destroyed the surviving kuru power in alliance with the remnants of the pa~nchAla-s and the yadu-s. Finally they placed themselves as rulers after completing the destruction of the nAga power. Their joint queen draupadI appear to symbolically represent the shrI or the wealth and power of the old pa~nchAla monarchs, which was now in the hands of the pANDu-s though the former had no successors.

In historical terms these pANDu-s might be seen as epic representations of a secondary wave of Aryans invading from the northwest towards the end of the kuru-pa~nchAla or Vedic period. They in alliance with local pre-existing Indo-Aryan groups appear to have established new successor states with the fragmentation of the kuru-pa~nchAla-s in northern India. This secondary wave along with others might be associated with the transformation of Vedic India into the early “classical” India wherein new religious systems, concepts and deities were superimposed upon the earlier shrauta system formalized in the kuru-pa~nchAla realm. It is conceivable that archaeologically they correspond to the famous Painted Grey Ware cultures of northern India. Despite their huge cultural effect, their own direct political contribution was limited. There are few India dynasties that consistently claim origin from the pANDu-s. The Greek authors noted that there was a lineage of pANDu-s ruling in the pa~nchanada region in the last centuries of the common era. Indeed, Indic sources mention the yaudheya and arjunAyana republics in the same region which are believed to be founded by successors of the kaunteya-s descending respectively from secondary wives of yudhiShThira and arjuna respectively. These republics played a major role in the nativist movement leading to the defeat of the eastern Iranian Kushanas. The pANDya in south India might also represent such dynastic, if not biological, successor state of the old pANDu-s. But evidence for their true successors is otherwise sparse. Rather, the fragmentation of the unified bhArata realm caused by the actions of the pANDu-s probably resulted in several local Indo-Aryan republics and kingdoms holding sway till the times of udayana and later the revival of magadhan imperialism [consistent with the concluding statements of the bhArata where several city states are established in the aftermath of the pANDu reign].

-۩۞۩-۩۞۩-۩۞۩-

Now we shall take a detour into the history of a neighboring nation, which shares close cultural links with our own, that in recent times has been blithely swallowed by Han imperialism. Indeed, as though to mirror the obliteration of this nation from the maps of the world, a certain strand of modern white Tibetologists tend to attribute greater than observed roles for the Han in the emergence of the Tibetan civilization. These present the Indic role as a later one, coming in the form of the Tantric state, which caused the Tibetans to lapse into a medieval la-la land from which they were awakened into modernity by the successive actions of the English and the Han conquerors under Mao Zedong. The role of the Tibetan emperor (tsenpo) in aiding the Chinese invasion of the Indian province of tirAbhukti after harShavardhana’s death is seen as evidence for subservient alignment, right from the inception of the Tibetan state, with the Han as opposed to the Hindu. However, in history the chIna-s were rather unbothered about Tibetan existence, until, somewhat embarrassingly for the former, they intruded into the sinosphere during the reign of Taizong, their greatest ruler since Shi Huang-di of the Chin. The rise of the Tibetans coincided in part with the revival of the chIna-s under Taizong but the two events were not causally connected in any direct way. Taizong, born of a Han father in the lineage of Laozi the founder of Taoism and a mother from a subsidiary clan of Blue Turks, through a series of victories raised the chIna-s to their greatest glory. Perhaps by virtue of the vigor of his hybrid genetics he was a tall and powerful man, said to tower imperiously above his cowering fellow chIna-s. He was also described as a rather impressive personality with a good knowledge of chIna scientific texts and artistic skill in calligraphy. The Chin Shi Huang had built the wall and combined it with the terror of genocidal slaughters [a fact much admired by Mao in recent times]; the rulers of the Han dynasty thereafter built huge infantry forces and fortified settlements; but Taizong combined all of this with the martial spirit of the Turkic side of his ancestry along with their capacity for mobile cavalry warfare. Having reunified the chIna-s as a single empire he advanced westwards with his Turkic allies to conquer the Tarim city states, displace their Indic culture and bring them into the Han realm. Having raised the chIna-s to the peak of their power, he instituted a system with the Taoism and bauddha dharma as the outer coat for the inner core of legalism centered on his persona. In other matters he adopted Turkic customs such as as allowing chIna women to ride horses and letting his sons live in yurts on the palace-grounds and speaking with them in Turkic. Finally, despite his ministers’ advice to the contrary, he clearly outlined his policy of sending the Han to settle all territory he conquered marking the beginnings of the expansive territorial claims that persist to this day.

Around the same time in 630s of CE, the young Songtsen Gampo unified the Tibetan states into the Tibetan empire. Then he aided the lichChAvI rAjA of Nepal narendradeva to regain the throne from his rival viShNugupta in course of the Nepali civil war. He sealed this alliance by taking the daughter of narendradeva as his wife. But to the north he faced bigger challenges. To give some background about this we have go back in time to little after 300 CE when the Hunnic Mongols led by their Kha’Khan Tuguhun established the eponymous kingdom in central Asia (called Azha by the Tibetans). He conquered the Tarim region and extended his sway in direction of Kashgar, taking Khotan in the south and part of what is now Kyrgyzstan. He was what one might call a lesser, proto-version of Chingiz Kha’Khan – the re-organized the administration, introduced a written script for the old Mongolian dialect and even introduced agricultural sectors in his kingdom which complemented the pastoral lifestyle of his peoples. His successor Kha’Khans expansively conquered territory in central Asia creating a large empire in the mid-late 400s and early 500s.after subjugating the chIna-s in their western territories, much of Tibet, and coming close to the borders of Kashmir. But by the beginning of the 600s their vitality was on the decline with much land lost to the rising Gök (Blue) Turks. In a much reduced state in the early 600s they came in conflict with the rising Turkic confederation of the Toquz Oghuz, which allowed the chIna-s to recover some territory from them. However, the Khan of the Tuguhun fought back recovering most of his ground. Finally, in 634 CE after having secured the chIna core, Taizong ordered a massive campaign to exterminate the Tuguhun completely and annex their lands to that of the chIna-s. Songtsen Gampo sent an embassy to Taizong evidently asking him to respect the Tibetan territorial claims to the north as the chIna forces came close to their lands in attempting the conquest of the Tuguhun. In the midst of a demanding war with the Tuguhun Khanate, Taizong decided to buy time by sending his messenger to assure the Tibetans of peace. An year later when the chIna-s had gained the upper hand in the campaign Songtsen again sent an embassy to the chIna-s. Taizong quickly realized that if he destroyed the Tuguhun completely he would end up strengthening he Songtsen. So he married off a royal chIna woman to the Khan of the Tuguhun with the assurance that he would become the vassal of the chIna-s and a counter-balance for the Tibetans.

Realizing what this implied Songtsen decided to invade the Tuguhun Khanate. Having massed a large force he completed the subjugation of the Khanate in 637 CE. In the following year he invaded the vassals of the Tuguhun, the Tangut and the Sumpa and annexed their territories entirely. Latter that autumn taking advantage of Tibetan ability with cold he attacked the chIna army at the city of Sung and captured it. Taizong sent a large force to evict the Tibetans. The forces commanded by Songtsen and the Tang general met in late 638 CE; Songtsen inflicted a decisive defeat on the chIna-s and threatened to march deep into China unless Taizong acceded to his demands. As Taizong was planning his invasion of Qocho and beyond he felt it wise to pacify his southern flank. He also saw that there was the danger of a rebellion against Chinese occupation by the Turkic alliance called the Ch’iang in the southwest. He further reasoned that an alliance here could help him with his plans of invading India. With these considerations he capitulated to the Tibetan demands by sending his niece as a wife to Songtsen. Indeed in Tibet there is a statue of Songtsen flanked by his Hindu and chIna wives. But Songtsen did not stop with a wife he asked his prime minister Gar who had gone to get the wife from China to ask Taizong to send him the technology for paper-making and block printing in 641 CE. Having secured peace at the north he allowed embassies exchanged by harShavardhana and Taizong to pass through his realm. Now with paper and printing in hand he wanted a script for this language. So at the same time he sent several emissaries to harShavardhana to acquire the Indic scripts for Tibetan. But these emissaries died from sunstroke in the hot summer of Uttar Pradesh. Finally Tonmi Anu was sent by Songtsen. The lichChAvi king narendradeva’s physician gave him medicines to survive Indian illnesses on the way. He finally went to mAlava to the school of a brAhmaNa paNDita named devavidyA-siMha. There he told him that he wished to learn the Indian script. The brAhmaNa told him that he knew 20 different scripts and asked him which one he wanted. Tonmi said he wished to learn all and soon did so. Then devavidyA-siMha taught him pANini and pata~njali. Pleased with his progress he gave Tonmi the title sadbhoTa (the good Tibetan; preserved in Tibetan as Sambhota). Thereafter, he taught Tonmi sAMkhya, yoga and vaisheShika. Tonmi on his return to Tibet used the Hindu scripts as a model to invent the Tibetan script and create a formal grammar for his language based on the principles of pANini. These he taught to Songtsen.

In 647 CE harSha passed away after a glorious reign and shortly thereafter his minister aruNAshva seized power imprisoning harSha’s wife. The chIna spies reported this to Taizong who saw it as an opportune moment to invade India. Taizong’s initial invasionary force in 648 was defeated and massacred to man by aruNAshva but a second force backed by Songtsen captured aruNAshva and a chIna-bhoTa force occupied tirAbhukti. But they were defeated and evicted by alliance of narendradeva and bhAskaravarman. Taizong, Songtsen and bhAskaravarman died shortly thereafter within few months of each other in 649 bringing a closure to these tumultuous period. But the Tibetan conquests were to continue. One wave of them surging into Arunachal conquered Assam from bhAskaravarman’s clan (He had died without an offspring) in 650 CE. But the local brAhmaNa-s crowned the Tibetan general as a descendant of narakAsura under the Hindu name sAlastambha and his dynasty ruled for 250 years as Hindu rulers. To their north they faced a rebellion of the Mongols of the Tuguhun Khanate but finally destroyed them completely in 663 CE. In 670s they captured Khotan after much brutal fighting with the chIna-s. In the 700s the emperor of kAshmira, lalitAditya also defeated them and captured some of their territory. But they recovered upon his death and conducted a long struggle with the chIna-s which culminated with the victorious army of the tsenpo Trisong Detsen entering the Tang capital of Chang’an in 763 CE sending the emperor into a cowardly flight. The crushing of the chIna-s in the battlefield was followed by the chIna Zen practitioners threatening to kill the Indian bauddhas in Tibet followed by a ritual suicide. It was then that their great tsenpo Trisong Detsen had the famous Indian Acharya kamalashIla from nAlandA debate the chInAcharya Moheyan and the latter was roundly defeated. With that the chIna interpretation of the bauddhamata was comprehensively overthrown. Importantly, during Trisong Detsen reign he was visited by the tAntrika padmasaMbhava from northwestern India, considered by many as the second buddha of the age. The tsenpo gave one of his own wives Yeshe Tsogyal, who was considered an incarnation of the supreme goddess sarasvatI, as the tAntrika ritual consort of padmasaMbhava. This marked the completion of the transition of Tibet into tAntrika state ruled by Trisong Detsen as the dharmarAjan.

-۩۞۩-۩۞۩-۩۞۩-

It is in origin legend of this line of Tibetan tsenpo-s of the Yar-lung dynasty that we encounter the kaunteya-s and other mahAbharata characters again. This legend takes many forms in the preserved Tibetan vaMsha literature on their tsenpo-s: One version narrates that the line of draupadI did not end with the massacre by ashvatthAman on the kuru field. Rather her son shatAnIka by nakula in turn had 3 offspring. The third of these rupati supposedly bore the marks of a mahApuruSha and was destined for greatness in a celestial voice delivered by the deva-s. Assuming the disguise of a woman he is supposed to have sneaked out of India when ashvatthAman deployed his missile with the incantation “apANDavAya”. As rupati and his battalion of soldiers were fleeing several are said to have been killed by the kaurava missile. But he himself with few survivors, disguised as women, are said to have reached the himAlaya-s were they lived for a while in caves. Thus journeying they reached the Tibet where they were met by some yak-herders who elected their leader rupati the son of shatAnIka as their king. Thus, is supposed to have begun the royal dynastic line of Tibet. Some identify rupati with the tsenpo Nyatri the early recorded ancestor of Songsten Gampo. Another version of the myth claims that rupati was not the son of shatAnIka but he was a son of karNa. He is supposed to have been chased by bhImasena in the great kurukShetra showdown, but fleeing in the disguise of a woman reached Tibet and the rest of the story is as before. Yet another version say he was an ikShvAku, the son of the king bR^ihadbala of Kosala who slain by abhimanyu in the great kuru encounter. He is similarly said to have fled to Tibet as in the above tale. When entering Tibet this Indic prince, irrespective of his epic origin, is supposed to have descended into Tibet from the holy mountain named Yarlha Shampo. The deity of the mountain and thereby of the land where the prince is said to have first come is shaMbhu, whose vehicle is a large white yak, while the protectress of the land is called lhamo tsaNDika (i.e. the devI chaNDikA)

Now apart from this Indian royal lineage the Tibetans have another tale for the origin of their peoples that has a peculiar evolutionary ring to it, and is likewise decorated with some motifs of Indic origin. In its existing forms the narrative usually goes thus: There was a great monkey Hilumada who was an emanation of avalokiteshvara. He was asked by the latter to go to Tibet and meditate. As he was performing his meditation he drew the attention of a rAkShasi. Attracted by the monkey she went to him and constantly milled around him. Seeing him not pay any attention her she directly asked him to consort with her. He said he was a celibate monkey and refused her approaches. She then threatened to kill herself or said that she would then have to mate with a rAkShasa and give rise to several more rAkShasa-s who would kill living beings. So the monkey asked avalokiteshvara if he could mate with the rAkShasi. In his compassion for all avalokiteshvara gave the monkey permission to mate with the rAkShasi and as result they had 6 monkey-like children with tails. They left them in a vast himAlayan forest and went their way. After returning a few years later they found that the 6 offspring had become 500 and were now short of food. They asked Hilumada and his rAkShasi mate to save them. They invoked avalokiteshvara who scattered some grain on the ground. These grew into crops and fed the monkey-like beings. Gradually feeding on these crops they grew in number. In the process their tails reduced, their body hair started decreasing and they learned to wear clothes and speak. Thus, they became the Tibetans. Some, took after the rAkShasi and were violent and lustful, while others took after Hilumada and were compassionate and hard-working.

-۩۞۩-۩۞۩-۩۞۩-

The general thinking has been that these Indic motifs represent a passage by phoresis of material along with the bauddha textual corpus. Indeed there are several indicators of prominent motifs transmitted via the bauddha mode. Among the most dramatic of these is the vision of kalkin in the kAlachakra tantra. Here the last kalkin ruler of shaMbala, raudra-chakrin, is assisted by Astika deities descending from Kailasa in the epic battle in makkha-viShaya (Mecca) against the tAyin-s (Arabs), Meccan demons led by kR^iNmati and evil-minded (pApa-chitta) mlechChendra-duShTa-s. However, there is little evidence that the Tibetans were notably bauddha in the time of Songtsen Gampo and his immediate successors. Importantly, we have the evidence of the account by the bauddha princess praNIyatA (the daughter of Ishvaravarman, the Hindu ruler of Khotan) in the text known as the vimalaprabhA-paripR^ichCha of the Tibetan invasion to the capture of the city. Another text known as the go-stana bhaviShya (“The prophecy of Khotan”) describes how Khotan was founded by a Hindu rAjA saNu of the mauryan clan. Subsequently, he was attacked by the chIna-s and a great battle ensued between the Hindus and chIna-s. In course of that lakShmI and kubera are supposed to have appeared in the sky and established peace between them. The chIna-s were said to have been directed by the deities to stand by Khotan’s Hindu rulers in the event of future invasions. In 665 CE Ishvaravarman had repulsed an attack by the Tibetans and Turks but this had left him considerably low on resources. Thus, the son of Ishvaravarman, vijayavikrama was killed in the Tibetan attack in 670 and the princess praNIyatA fled the city-state once the Tibetans sacked the vihAra-s and stupa-s and left them in ruins. She sought the aid of the kShatriya vijayavarman to recapture Khotan. The old “prophecy” seems to have been taken as a serious excuse by the Tang who send their armies to prop up vijayavarman in Khotan and repulse the Tibetans in the 670s. In the vimalaprabhA-paripR^ichCha the tathAgata is described as stating that the Tibetans wish to destroy the bauddha-dharma. Interestingly, their war cry from those times, which survives to date, was “ki ki so so lha gyalo!” meaning “May the deva-s be victorious!” – this again suggests that they were worshiping multiple deva-s rather than the tathAgata at that point. As we have noted before, prior the bauddha-mata there was the Bön and this religious layer already contains a flavor of Indic transmission from Astika traditions. Here, it is interesting to note the homology of the rudra and chaNDikA with the guardian deities of the Yarlha Shampo region, which again point to an earlier presence of Astika influence.

The Bön layer was still very active just before Trisong Detsen: In the 730s of CE the Tang emperor Xuanzong was alarmed by the deep conversion of several members of his clan to the bauddha fold and he felt that a Tantric state on Indian lines might be established in China threatening the inner core of legalism. So he banned the bauddha-dharma and gave a short notice to all Indian, Korean and Japanese bauddha-s to leave China. Many of the bauddhas went to Tibet and brought with them smallpox which raged through the land killing a part of the population. Even a bauddha chIna princess who had gone to Tibet died in this epidemic. The Bön exponents felt that this disaster could because the old deva-s had been neglected under the bauddha influence and suggested that even the Tibetans should abolish the bauddha-mata.

In conclusion, we hold that the Hindu motifs among early Tibetans was not merely a retro-superposition after the bauddha-mata was established. The early Tibetans of history were not deeply influenced by the bauddha-mata and had their own endogenous polytheistic religion. However, this religion was influenced by Hindu motifs and remnants of such influence can be seen in the surviving Bön tradition, though bauddhized. The fact that Songtsen Gampo sent Tonmi Sambhota to India to acquire a script and his links to narendradeva indicate that they already had ties with the indosphere before their conversion to the bauddha-mata. We may also consider the preservation in translation of the works of the brAhmaNa brothers from kAshmira, udbhaTa-siddha-svAmin and shaMkara-svAmin, respectively the sarvaj~na-mahesvara-stotra and the devatA-vimarsha-stuti in this light. These show that astika material was incorporated in the Tibetan system and later given nAstika interpretations (e.g. in the commentaries of these works). Hence, the spread of such motifs should not be seen as unusual. In light of this one cannot entirely rule out some vague memory of an Indic strand in the Yar-lung royalty.

chitrabandha-s are widely represented in classical works on kAvya. The bandha-s of the form of the sword find mention in agni-purANa, the kAvyAlaMkAra of rudraTa and the praise of chaNDI by the other Kashmirian Anandavardhana. Sword-shaped yantra-s comparable to the poetic chitrabandha-s are to our knowledge seen first in the kubjikAmata texts in the pashchimAMnAya of kaula tradition. This sword with the mantra’s arNa’s on it was said to be like the vidyAdhara’s sword. Such inscriptions on swords were also transmitted to other cultures which acquired tantrika traditions – for example, the inscription of the marIchI mantra on the swords in Japan [the solar goddess marIchI was homologized on occasions to the native deity Amaterasu]. Below is the verse of the sword, a shAkta praise of umA as the supreme deity.

mArAri-shakra-rAmebhamukhair AsAra-raMhasA
sArArabdhastavA nityaM tad Arti-haraNa-kShamA ||
mAtA natAnAM saMghaTTaH shriyAM bAdhita-saMbhramA
mAnyAtha sImA rAmANAM shaM me dishyAd umAdimA ||

mArAri= the enemy of death (shiva); shakra= indra; rAma=the dark one(viShNu) ibhamukha=the elephant-headed god; AsAra-raMhasA=by them who are rapidly assailed; sArArabdhastavA->sAra-Arabhdha-stavA= One whom them eloquently commence to praise; nityaM= always; tad= then; Arti-haraNa-kShamA= one who is the pain-removing forgiving one.
mAtA natAnAM=Mother to the supplicants; saMghaTTaH shriyAM=collection of riches; bAdhita-saMbhramA: one who removed confusion; mAnyAtha sImA rAmANAM= moreover venerable as the chastity of auspicious women; shaM me dishyAd= may confer felicity to me; umAdimA->umA-AdimA= umA the primal goddess
[I would like to thank shrI vishvAso vAsukiputra for pointing a proper reading for an element of this verse]

Approximately:
The forgiving one, who when the enemy of death (shiva), the powerful one (indra), the dark one (viShNu) and the elephant-headed one (vinAyaka) are rapidly assailed, commence to eloquently praise always removes pain; mother to the supplicants; richly endowed removeress of perplexity; moreover one venerable as the chastity of auspicious women; may umA the primal goddess confer felicity on me.

A biochemical aside: We had earlier compared some chitrabandha-s as the linguistic analogs of the histone-tails and such other low complexity sequences such as silaffins which constitute a protein component of diatom shells, where many different meanings can be written via epigenetic modifications. Such examples, like the sarvatobhadra, are by definition low in complexity but different meanings are obtained by means of differential saMdhi splits, which act like “epigenetic” information superimposed on the underlying low complexity. Extending such analogies, one might compare chitrabandha-s, such as the one provided in this note, with well-structured RNAs such as tRNAs, rRNAs or riboswitches, which enforce regions to maintain complementarity (stem) and those that do not (loops). These loops in such RNAs contain the key binding sites: In tRNAs the anticodon loop supported by a rigid stem is central to reading the genetic code by complementarity. In riboswitches one or more loops or bulges might come together to form a binding site for a ligand (see figure below). This may be compared to this class of chitrabandha-s wherein the stem like constraints like the sword haft support the structure of the sword (the loop).

The vyapohana stava is an important saiddhAntika purificatory incantation. It may be compared with other works composed by deshika-s of the Urdhvasrotas such as: 1) the vyomavApistava of the Kashmirian commentator bhaTTa rAmakANTha-II; 2) the shiva-pUjA-stava of j~nAnashambhu, a scholar from the Tamil country who worked in Kashi; 3) the pa~nchAvarNa-stava by the illustrious aghorashiva of the Tamil country; 4) the ananta-vijaya-maNDala-stava of rAjA bhojadeva paramAra. While those stava-s are of clearly human composition, the vyapohana presents itself as a scriptural text of divine origin only retold by human agents.

sUta uvAcha
vyapohana stavaM vakShye sarva-siddhi-pradaM shubham
nandinash cha mukhAch-ChrutvA kumAreNa mahAtmanA || 1
vyAsAya kathitaM tasmAd bahumAnena vai mayA

The sUta said: I will now narrate the auspicious vyapohana-stava which confers all success. And having heard it from the mouth of nandin it was expounded by the great kumAra to vyAsa. From him indeed it was respectfully received by me [the sUta].

[The sUta here is transmitting information from vyAsa as is typical of purANa-s. However, as the post-vaidika shaiva tradition was expanding it gradually began absorbing the kaumAra tradition within it in large part in a subordinate position (However, in south India, especially the Tamil country, the kaumAra tradition while colored by the saiddhAntika shaiva tradition still retained much independence). In course of the absorption of the kaumAra-mata kumAra was often placed as a intermediary who transmitted the shaiva shAstra-s. In the early skanda-purANa, which is primarily a shaiva text, shiva mostly does not act by himself, rather using his agents to act on his behalf. In this kumAra is an agent of rudra who acts repeatedly on his behalf. The other notable agent of shiva is his famous gaNa nandin who is also often shown acting on his behalf. Importantly, he is also presented as a major transmitter of shaiva shAstra-s. Thus, kumAra and nandin, the major transmitters of shaiva lore, are here placed before vyAsa and the sUta stressing the point that this inheres from the core shaiva tradition.

sadAshivaH:
namaH shivAya shuddhAya nirmalAya yashasvine |
duShTAntakAya sharvAya bhavAya paramAtmane ||
pa~ncha-vaktro dasha-bhujo hy akSha-pa~ncha-dashair-yutaH |
shuddha-sphaTika-saMkAshaH sarvAbharaNa-bhUShitaH ||
sarvaj~naH sarvagaH shAntaH sarvopari susaMsthitaH |
padmAsanasthaH someshaH pApam Ashu vyapohatu ||

[Like several saiddhAntika shaiva AvaraNa stava-s, this one too begins with the worship of the innermost maNDala and proceeds outwards. The innermost deity here is sadAshiva with 5 heads, 10 arms and 15 eyes. As is typical of the saiddhAntika tradition, he is seated in padmAsana on top of all. A superb representation of such a sadAshiva from the Vanga country, as expounded in the saiddhAntika tantra-s, might be seen in the University Museum of U Penn. Despite the progressive establishment of many levels of rudra ectypes in shaiva tradition, passing through the early pAshupata-s, lakula-s, kAlAmukha-s and finally to the saiddhAntika-s, his organic link to the old vaidika rudra remains clear by the use of the ancient epithets bhava and sharva. Indeed, this is made clear by the deshika-s, j~nAnashambhu and the great-great grandson of trilochanashiva, where they term the preferred form of sadAshiva worshiped by them as rudrasadAshiva. Tradition informs us that in this form he is visualized as holding the following in the ten hands: 1) trishUla (trident); 2) khatvA~Nga (skull-topped brand); 3) shakti (spear); 4) varada-mudra; 5) abhayamudra; 6) indIvara (lotus); 7) ahi (snake); 8) Damaru (dumbbell drum); 9) pomegranate; 10) akShasUtra (rosary). His praise here begins with the ancient pa~nchAkSharI mantra, which also has its beginnings in the shatarudrIya of the yajurveda. The worship of each deity in this stava concludes with the verb vyapoh in imperative mood applied to pApa, meaning remove the sins of the worshiper]

pa~ncha-mUrtayaH:
IshAnaH puruShash-chaiva aghoraH sadya eva cha |
vAmadevash cha bhagavAn pApam Ashu vyapohatu ||

[The pa~nchabrahma-s or the five face mantra-s, as a group, come from the early layer of the shaiva tradition recorded in the late vaidika period and used by shaiva-s ever since. They are central to the pAshupata tradition practice and the five sections of the pAshupata sUtra-s have been identified with these mantra-s. They stand for the faces of sadAshiva or the rudra repesenting each of the five faces. The saiddhAntika tradition holds that their tantra-s were narrated by the upward face or the IshAna face, hence their appellation Urdhavasrotas. Keeping with this, we have the list here begin with IshAna and then go around east-south-west-north. This is an interesting departure from the common brahmabha~Ngi sequence of the saiddhAntika texts (e.g parAkhya tantra) of ishAna-tatpuruSha-aghora-vAmadeva-sadyojAta or its reverse seen in the veda and tantra-s like kiraNa and mR^igendra. In the saiddhAntika tradition these five faces are shown as IshAna (quartz ), sadyojAta (conch-white), vAmdeva (red), aghora (black), and tatpuruSha (yellow). If they are visualized as faces of sadAshiva then that of IshAna is shown as a boy, that of tatpuruSha as a young man, that of aghora as a fierce one with a prominent mustache, that of vAmadeva as a seductive woman, and that of sadyojAta as a great king. If they are visualized as separate rudra-s then several distinct prescriptions are given: In the mata~NgapArameshvara tantra they are visualized with 4 heads and 4 arms during mantra-practice. If idols are made then they have 4 heads and 8 arms with gems embedded in them. In the Chera country, the deshika ravi in his prayogama~njarI recommends visualizing the 4 directional rudra-s thus – sadyojAta 4 heads, 4 arms; vAmadeva as a goddess with 4 heads and 4 hands; aghora with 4 heads with fangs and 8 arms; tatpuruSha as yogin with 1 head and 4 arms; Ishana just like sadAshiva with 5 heads and 10 arms. In the bhairava-srotas (svachChanda tantra) they are all visualized with 5 heads and 10 arms around svachChanda-bhairava with 5 heads and 18 hands. The manual from the Kashmira country by kShemarAja, student of abhinavagupta states that these rudra-s should be depicted as holding varada, abhaya, a sword, shield, a lasso, a hook, arrows, a pinAka bow,a severed head and the khaTvA~Nga.]

vidyeshvarAH:
anantaH sarva-vidyeshaH sarvaj~naH sarvadaH prabhuH |
shiva-dhyAnaika-sampannaH sa me pApaM vyapohatu ||
sUkShmaH surAsureshAno vishvesho gaNa-pUjitaH |
shiva-dhyAnaika-sampannaH sa me pApaM vyapohatu ||
shivottamo mahApUjyaH shiva-dhyAna-parAyaNaH |
sarvagaH sarvadaH shAntaH sa me pApaM vyapohatu ||
ekAkSho bhagavAn IshaH shivArchana-parAyaNaH |
shiva-dhyAnaika-sampannaH sa me pApaM vyapohatu ||
[ekarudro mahAtejo sarva-bhUta-supUjitaH |
shiva-dhyAnaika-sampannaH sa me pApaM vyapohatu ||]
trimUrtir bhagavAn IshaH shiva-bhakti-prabodhakaH |
shiva-dhyAnaika-sampannaH sa me pApaM vyapohatu ||
shrIkaNThaH shrIpatiH shrImA~n shiva-dhyAna-rataH sadA |
shivArchana-rataH shrImAn sa me pApaM vyapohatu ||
[shikhaNDI shUla-dR^ik dhImAn shaktIsho gaNapUjitaH |
shivArchanarataH shrImAn sa me pApaM vyapohatu ||]

[The vidyeshvara-s are rudra-s who represent the apotheosis of the shaiva mantra-s. In a sense this directly represents a key feature of the tAntrika mantra-mArga inherited from a stream of the mImAMsa tradition where there and no extra-natural deities. Rather, the deities are the mantra-s themselves. Hence, these vidyA-s have been deified as 8 distinct deities, the vidyeshvara-s, who are depicted thus: ananta (golden); sUkShma (fiery); shivottama (black); ekanetra (bee-colored); ekarudra (white); trimUrti (grey); shrIkaNTha (red); shikhaNDin (light pink). In this system they occupy the circuit of the maNDala around the pa~nchabrahma-s in the 8 cardinal directions. The vidyeshvara-s are depicted as 2 armed, 8 armed or 10 armed. The saiddhAntika manual from Nepal pratiShTha-lakShaNa-sAra-samuchchaya states that the 8 armed vidyesha-s are shown with 4 heads and if two armed they grip a spear and a trident in the crooks of their elbows. The commonly preserved readings appear to drop the names in brackets of ekarudra and shikhaNDin probably because of the unfamiliarity of the later paurANika transmitters with the intricacies of saiddhAntika tradition.]

mahAdevI:

trailokya-namitA devI solkAkArA purAtanI || 13
dAkShAyaNI mahAdevI gaurI haimavatI shubhA
ekaparNAgrajA saumyA tathA vai chaikapATalA || 14
aparNA varadA devI varadAnaikatatparA
umA suraharA sAkShAt kaushikI vA kapardinI || 15
khaTvA~NgadhAriNI divyA karAgra-taru-pallavA
naigameyAdibhir divyaish chaturbhiH putrakair-vR^itA || 16
menAyA nandinI devI vArijA vArijekShaNA
aMbAyA vItashokasya nandinash cha mahAtmanaH || 17
shubhAvatyAH sakhI shAntA pa~nchachUDA varapradA
sR^iShTyarthaM sarvabhUtAnAM prakR^iti tvaM gatAvyayA || 18
trayoviMshatibhis tattvair mahadAdyair vijR^imbhitA
lakShmyAdi-shaktibhir nityaM namitA nanda-nandinI || 19
manonmanI mahAdevI mAyAvI maNDanapriyA
mAyayA yA jagat-sarvaM brahmAdyaM sacharAcharam || 20
kShobhiNI mohinI nityaM yoginAM hR^idi saMsthitA
ekAnekasthitA loke indIvaranibhekShaNA || 21
bhaktyA paramayA nityaM sarva-devair-abhiShTutA
gaNendrAmbhoja-garbhendra-yama-vittesha-pUrvakaiH || 22
saMstutA jananI teShAM sarvopadrava-nAshinI
bhaktA-nAmArtihA bhavyA bhava-bhAva-vinAshanI || 23
bhukti-mukti-pradA divyA bhaktAnAm-aprayatnataH
sA me sAkShAn-mahAdevI pApam Ashu vyapohatu || 24

[It seems that in the iconography of the earlier saiddhAntika tantra-s sadAshiva was an ekavIra depicted without the accompanying shakti. But in the pa~nchAvarNa stava of aghorashiva we find the shakti very much in place. However, her visualization is not described there as it seem the unity of the shakti with sadAshiva is emphasized this way. Interestingly, in this stava she receives a longer praise than sadAshiva. This, points to the parallel saiddhAntika stream where she played a major role, reminiscent of what was seen in the development of the bhairava- and vAma- srotAMsi. She is praised with her usual epithets from paurANika legend and also described as the mother of the four fold kumAra-s starting with naigameya. This rather archaic feature is reiterated in this text (see below). Moreover, she is also described as the mother of nandin, gaNesha and the deva-s. She is identified with prakR^iti and its 23 evolutes as described in the sAMkhya tradition. This is in opposition to the saiddhAntika situation where 36 tattva-s are believed to exist. Thus, this seems to represent a paurANika “smArtization” of the saiddhAntika shaiva position.]

chaNDeshvaraH:
chaNDaH sarvagaNeshAno mukhAch-ChaMbhor-vinirgataH
shivArchanarataH shrImAn sa me pApaM vyapohatu || 25

nandikeshvaraH:
shAla~NkAyana-putrastu hala-mArgotthitaH prabhuH
jAmAtA marutAM devaH sarva-bhUta-maheshvaraH || 26
sarvagaH sarvadR^ik sharvaH sarvesha-sadR^ishaH prabhuH
sa-nArAyaNakair devaiH sendra-chandra-divAkaraiH || 27
siddhaish cha yakSha-gandharvair bhUtair-bhUta-vidhAyakaiH
uragair R^iShibhish chaiva brahmaNA cha mahAtmanA || 28
stutas-trailokya-nAthastu munir-antaH puraM sthitaH
sarvadA pUjitaH sarvair nandI pApaM vyapohatu || 29

gaNapatiH:
mahAkAyo mahAtejA mahAdeva ivAparaH
shivArchanarataH shrImAn sa me pApaM vyapohatu || 30
meru-mandAra-kailAsa- taTa-kUTa-prabhedanaH
airAvatAdibhir divyair dig-gajaish cha supUjitaH || 31
sapta-pAtAlapAdash cha sapta-dvIporuja~NghakaH
saptArNavA~Nkushash-chaiva sarva-tIrthodaraH shivaH || 32
AkAsha-deho dig-bAhuH soma-sUryAgni-lochanaH
hatAsura-mahAvR^ikSho brahma-vidyA-mahotkaTaH || 33
brahmAdyAdhoraNair divyair yoga-pAsha-samanvitaiH
baddho hR^it-puNDarIkAkhye staMbhe vR^ittiM nirudhya cha || 34
nAgendra-vaktro yaH sAkShAd gaNa-koTi-shatair-vR^itaH
shiva-dhyAnaika-sampannaH sa me pApaM vyapohatu || 35

bhR^i~NgI:
bhR^i~NgIshaH pi~NgalAkSho .asau bhasitAshastu dehayuk
shivArchanarataH shrImAn sa me pApaM vyapohatu || 36

kumAraH:
chaturbhis-tanubhir nityaM sarvAsura-nibarhaNaH
skandaH shaktidharaH shAntaH senAnIH shikhivAhanaH || 37
devasenApatiH shrImAn sa me pApaM vyapohatu

aShTa-mUrtayaH:
bhavaH sharvas-tatheshAno rudraH pashupatis tathA || 38
ugro bhImo mahAdevaH shivArchanarataH sadA
etAH pApaM vyapohantu mUrtayaH parameShThinaH || 39

ekAdasha rudrAH:
mahAdevaH shivo rudraH sha~Nkaro nIlalohitaH
IshAno vijayo bhImo devadevo bhavodbhavaH || 40
kapAlIshash cha vij~neyo rudrA rudrAMsha-saMbhavAH
shiva-praNAma-sampannA vyapohantu malaM mama || 41

dvAdashAdityAH:
vikartano vivasvAMsh cha mArtaNDo bhAskaro raviH
lokaprakAshakashchaiva lokasAkShItrivikramaH || 42
Adityash cha tathA sUryash chAMshumAMsh cha divAkaraH
ete vai dvAdashAdityA vyapohantu malaM mama || 43

tanmAtrAH:
gaganaM sparshanaM tejo rasash cha pR^ithivI tathA
chandraH sUryas-tathAtmA cha tanavaH shiva-bhAShitAH || 44
ete pApaM vyapohantu bhayaM nirNAshayantu me

lokapAlAH:
vAsavaH pAvakashchaiva yamo nirR^itireva cha || 45
varuNo vAyusomau cha IshAno bhagavAn hariH
pitAmahash cha bhagavAn shivadhyAnaparAyaNaH || 46
ete pApaM vyapohantu manasA karmaNA kR^itam

marutaH:
nabhasvAn sparshano vAyur anilo mArutas tathA || 47
prANaH prANesha-jIveshau mArutaH shivabhAShitAH
shivArchanaratAH sarve vyapohantu malaM mama || 48

chAraNAH:
khecharI vasuchArI cha brahmesho brahma-brahmadhIH
suSheNaH shAshvataH pR^iShTaH supuShTash cha mahAbalaH || 49
ete vai chAraNAH shaMbhoH pUjayAtIva bhAvitAH
vyapohantu malaM sarvaM pApaM chaiva mayA kR^itam || 50

siddhAH:
mantraj~no mantravit prAj~no mantrarAT siddhapUjitaH
siddhavat-paramaH siddhaH sarvasiddhipradAyinaH || 51
vyapohantu malaM sarve siddhAH shivapadArchakAH

kuberAdi yakShagaNAH:
yakSho yakShesha dhanado jR^imbhako maNibhadrakaH || 52
pUrNabhadreshvaro mAlI shiti-kuNDalir-eva cha
narendrashchaiva yakSheshA vyapohantu malaM mama || 53

sarpAH:
anantaH kulikashchaiva vAsukistakShakastathA
karkoTako mahApadmaH sha~NkhapAlo mahAbalaH || 54
shivapraNAmasampannAH shivadehaprabhUShaNAH
mama pApaM vyapohantu viShaM sthAvaraja~Ngamam || 55

kinnarAH:
vINAj~naH kinnarashchaiva surasenaH pramardanaH
atIshayaH sa prayogI gItaj~nashchaiva kinnarAH || 56
shivapraNAmasampannA vyapohantu malaM mama

vidyAdharAH:
vidyAdharash cha vibudho vidyArAshirvidAM varaH || 57
vibuddho vibudhaH shrImAn kR^itaj~nash cha mahAyashAH
ete vidyAdharAH sarve shivadhyAnaparAyaNAH || 58
vyapohantu malaM ghoraM mahAdevaprasAdataH

asurAH:
vAmadevI mahAjambhaH kAlanemirmahAbalaH || 59
sugrIvo mardakashchaiva pi~Ngalo devamardanaH
prahrAdash chApy anuhrAdaH saMhrAdaH kila bAShkalau || 60
jambhaH kuMbhash cha mAyAvI kArtavIryaH kR^itaMjayaH
ete .asurA mahAtmAno mahAdevaparAyaNAH || 61
vyapohantu bhayaM ghoram AsuraM bhAvameva cha

garuDAH:
garutmAn khagatishchaiva pakShirAT nAgamardanaH || 62
nAgashatrur hiraNyA~Ngo vainateyaH prabha~njanaH
nAgAshIrviShanAshash cha viShNuvAhana eva cha || 63
ete hiraNyavarNAbhA garuDA viShNuvAhanAH
nAnAbharaNasampannA vyapohantu malaM mama || 64

R^iShayaH:
agastyash cha vasiShThash cha a~NgirA bhR^igureva cha
kAshyapo nAradashchaiva dadhIchashchyavanas tathA || 65
upamanyustathAnye cha R^iShayaH shivabhAvitAH
shivArchanaratAH sarve vyapohantu malaM mama || 66

pitaraH:
pitaraH pitAmahAsh cha tathaiva prapitAmahAH
agniShvAttA barhiShadas tathA mAtAmahAdayaH || 67
vyapohantu bhayaM pApaM shivadhyAnaparAyaNAH

mAtaraH:
lakShmIsh cha dharaNI chaiva gAyatrI cha sarasvatI || 68
durgA uShA shachI jyeShThA mAtaraH surapUjitAH
devAnAM mAtarash chaiva gaNAnAM mAtaras tathA || 69
bhUtAnAM mAtaraH sarvA yatra yA gaNa-mAtaraH
prasAdAd devadevasya vyapohantu malaM mama || 70

apsarasaH:
urvashI menakA chaiva raMbhA rati tilottamAH
sumukhI durmukhI chaiva kAmukI kAmavardhanI || 71
tathAnyAH sarvalokeShu divyAshchApsarasas tathA
shivAya tANDavaM nityaM kurvantyo .atIva bhAvitAH || 72
devyaH shivArchanaratA vyapohantu malaM mama

grahAH:
arkaH somo .a~NgArakash cha budhashchaiva bR^ihaspatiH || 73
shukraH shanaishcharashchaiva rAhuH ketustathaiva cha
vyapohantu bhayaM ghoraM grahapIDAM shivArchakAH || 74

rAshayaH:
meSho vR^iSho .atha mithunas tathA karkaTakaH shubhaH
siMhash cha kanyA vipulA tulA vai vR^ishchikas tathA || 75
dhanush cha makarashchaiva kuMbho mInastathaiva cha
rAshayo dvAdasha hyete shiva-pUjA-parAyaNAH || 76
vyapohantu bhayaM pApaM prasAdAt-parameShThinaH

nakShatrANi:
ashvinI bharaNI chaiva kR^ittikA rohiNI tathA || 77
shrImanmR^igashirashchArdrA punarvasupuShyasArpakAH
maghA vai pUrvaphAlgunya uttarAphAlgunI tathA || 78
hastachitrA tathA svAtI vishAkhA chAnurAdhikA
jyeShThA mUlaM mahAbhAgA pUrvAShADhA tathaiva cha || 79
uttarAShADhikA chaiva shravaNaM cha shraviShThikA
shatabhiShak pUrvabhadrA tathA proShThapadA tathA || 80
pauShNaM cha devyaH satataM vyapohantu malaM mama

pramatha-ganAH:
jvaraH kumbhodarash-chaiva sha~NkukarNo mahAbalaH || 81
mahAkarNaH prabhAtash cha mahAbhUtapramardanaH
shyenajichChivadUtash cha pramathAH prItivardhanAH || 82
koTikoTishataishchaiva bhUtAnAM mAtaraH sadA
vyapohantu bhayaM pApaM mahAdevaprasAdataH || 83

parvatAH:
shivadhyAnaikasampanno himarAD aMbusannibhaH
kundendusadR^ishAkAraH kuMbhakundendubhUShaNaH || 84
vaDavAnalashatrur yo vaDavAmukhabhedanaH
chatuShpAdasamAyuktaH kShIroda iva pANDuraH || 85
rudraloke sthito nityaM rudraiH sArdhaM gaNeshvaraiH
vR^iShendro vishvadhR^ig devo vishvasya jagataH pitA || 86
vR^ito nandAdibhir nityaM mAtR^ibhir makhamardanaH
shivArchanarato nityaM sa me pApaM vyapohatu || 87

ga~NgA:
ga~NgA mAtA jaganmAtA rudraloke vyavasthitA
shivabhaktA tu yA nandA sA me pApaM vyapohatu || 88

bhadrA:
bhadrA bhadrapadA devI shivaloke vyavasthitA
mAtA gavAM mahAbhAgA sA me pApaM vyapohatu || 89

surabhiH:
surabhiH sarvatobhadrA sarvapApapraNAshanI
rudrapUjAratA nityaM sA me pApaM vyapohatu || 90

sushIlA:
sushIlA shIlasampannA shrIpradA shivabhAvitA
shivaloke sthitA nityaM sA me pApaM vyapohatu || 91

brahmA-viShNu-indra-yamaH:
vedashAstrArthatattvaj~naH sarvakAryAbhichintakaH
samasta-guNa-sampannaH sarva-deveshvarAtmajaH || 92
jyeShThaH sarveshvaraH saumyo mahAviShNu-tanuH svayam
AryaH senApatiH sAkShAd gahano makhamardanaH || 93
airAvata-gajArUDhaH kR^iShNa-ku~nchita-mUrdhajaH
kR^iShNA~Ngo raktanayanaH shashi-pannaga-bhUShaNaH || 94
bhUtaiH pretaiH pishAchaish cha kUShmANDaish cha samAvR^itaH
shivArchanarataH sAkShAt sa me pApaM vyapohatu || 95

aShTa-mAtR^ikAH cha yoginyaH:
brahmANI chaiva mAheshI kaumArI vaiShNavI tathA
vArAhI chaiva mAhendrI chAmuNDAgneyikA tathA || 96
etA vai mAtaraH sarvAH sarvalokaprapUjitAH
yoginIbhir mahApApaM vyapohantu samAhitAH || 97

vIrabhadraH:
vIrabhadro mahAtejA hima-kundendu-sannibhaH
rudrasya tanayo raudraH shUlAsaktamahAkaraH || 98
sahasrabAhuH sarvaj~naH sarvAyudhadharaH svayam
tretAgni-nayano devas trailokyAbhayadaH prabhuH || 99
mAtR^INAM rakShako nityaM mahAvR^iShabhavAhanaH
trailokyanamitaH shrImAn shivapAdArchane rataH || 100
yaj~nasya cha shirashChettA pUShNo danta-vinAshanaH
vahner hastaharaH sAkShAd bhaga-netra-nipAtanaH || 101
pAdA~NguShThena somA~Nga-peShakaH prabhusaMj~nakaH
upendrendrayamAdInAM devAnAm a~NgarakShakaH || 102
sarasvatyA mahAdevyA nAsikoShThAvakartanaH
gaNeshvaro yaH senAnIH sa me pApaM vyapohatu || 103

mahAlakshmI:
jyeShThA variShThA varadA varAbharaNabhUShitA
mahAlakShmIrjaganmAtA sA me pApaM vyapohatu || 104
mahAmohA mahAbhAgA mahAbhUtagaNairvR^itA
shivArchanaratA nityaM sA me pApaM vyapohatu || 105

lakShmI:
lakShmIH sarvaguNopetA sarvalakShaNasaMyutA
sarvadA sarvagA devI sA me pApaM vyapohatu || 106

mahiShamardinI:
siMhArUDhA mahAdevI pArvatyAstanayAvyayA
viShNornidrA mahAmAyA vaiShNavI surapUjitA || 107
trinetrA varadA devI mahiShAsuramardinI
shivArchanaratA durgA sA me pApaM vyapohatu || 108

rudrAH:
brahmANDadhArakA rudrAH sarvalokaprapUjitAH
satyAsh cha mAnasAH sarve vyapohantu bhayaM mama || 109

bhUtagaNeshvarAH:
bhUtAH pretAH pishAchAsh cha kUShmANDagaNanAyakAH
kUShmANDakAsh cha te pApaM vyapohantu samAhitAH || 110

phalashruti:
anena devaM stutvA tu chAnte sarvaM samApayet
praNamya shirasA bhUmau pratimAse dvijottamAH || 111
vyapohanastavaM divyaM yaH paThechChR^iNuyAdapi
vidhUya sarvapApAni rudraloke mahIyate || 112
kanyArthI labhate kanyAM jayakAmo jayaM labhet
arthakAmo labhedarthaM putrakAmo bahUn sutAn || 113
vidyArthI labhate vidyAM bhogArthI bhogamApnuyAt
yAnyAnprArthayate kAmAn mAnavaH shravaNAdiha || 114
tAnsarvAn shIghramApnoti devAnAM cha priyo bhavet
paThyamAnamidaM puNyaM yamuddishya tu paThyate || 115
tasya rogA na bAdhante vAtapittAdisaMbhavAH
nAkAle maraNaM tasya na sarpairapi dashyate || 116
yatpuNyaM chaiva tIrthAnAM yaj~nAnAM chaiva yatphalam
dAnAnAM chaiva yatpuNyaM vratAnAM cha visheShataH || 117
tatpuNyaM koTiguNitaM japtvA chApnoti mAnavaH
goghnashchaiva kR^itaghnash cha vIrahA brahmahA bhavet || 118
sharaNAgataghAtI cha mitravishvAsaghAtakaH
duShTaH pApasamAchAro mAtR^ihA pitR^ihA tathA || 119
vyapohya sarvapApAni shivaloke mahIyate ||120

It was the an early Indian summer morning. The type that makes one rise rapidly from bed rather than remain tucked in like the mornings in the cold northern lands. Vidrum had arisen from his bed and briskly jogged up to the small temple on the edge of the cemetery that enshrined a 16 armed kAlI. He mentally recited the incantation “krIM krIM krIM sA mAM pAtu devI kAlI bhagavatI vijayaM dadAtu naH ||” He then picked up pinch of vermillion from the old calvaria placed in front of the image and smeared it on his forehead. Thereafter he ran back home and seated himself on the Damaru-shaped cane chair and lazily looked out at the road and the field beyond the compound wall – after all it was vacation time and free from the cares of life he had all the opportunity to just sit and stare. Sipping the coffee his grandmother had given him, staring at the yonder space, he wondered how wonderful it might have been if Meghana of pretty locks was seated as his side. Just then he saw Lootika passing by holding a net and bag with pill-boxes in it. He was surprised. What was she doing in this village of his? After all she was not from these parts. She had always been frosty towards him, perhaps because of her distaste for Meghana, whom she considered superficial and dimwitted. Or perhaps it was her belonging to the socio-economic pinnacle that placed a divide between her and the middle class types. He had heard her refer to Meghana as “j~NanashUNyA” several times. But carried by the surprise of her unexpected appearance he went up to the compound wall and called her, enquiring what she was doing in these parts.

Lootika, it seemed to him, was more relaxed and amenable to conversation in these days of vacation than at school. She said that she was on her way to collect false scorpions and daddy-long-legs in the jungle that lay just beyond the cemetery. She then excitedly showed him a photocopy of a book titled “Chelonethi, an account of the Indian false scorpions together with studies on the anatomy and classification of the order”. This book published in 1906 was so hard to obtain that there was apparently only one copy of it in India. But her relative had managed to provider her a copy from abroad. She then went on tell Vidrum that the Scandinavian arachnologist Carl Johannes With had made an expedition to India at the beginning of the 1900s to discover and describe false scorpions at length. No one had studied these arachnids in detail after that in the subcontinent. Then, Lootika went on that closer to her time there was a naturalist named Krishnan who had spent a lifetime studying these arachnids and wrote a book on them. But then most of his people looked at him much like Tennyson’s wife had looked at Charles Darwin and felt Krishnan must be positively mad to be seeing arthropods where others saw only a heap of desiccating vegetation. Indeed, Somakhya had told her that though there were few men as learned as the old ayya, they would dismissively say of Krishnan in the dramiDa language: “avaruku velayE ille; chumma edo kuppaya nonDiNDu irrupar”. In any case, ever since Somakhya had shown her these arachnids she found them fascinating and finally decided that summer to launch a new study of them. She excitedly remarked that it was truly uncharted territory with discoveries waiting to be made by the observant and the patient.

Vidrum found all this utterly bizarre and felt more sympathy with the detractors of Krishnan than Lootika. He was reminded of the lecture he had heard from an advaita-teaching saMnyAsin where the renunciate clarified that “sapta-dvIpa vasumati” was an example of useless knowledge. Vidrum remarked to himself that if such basic geography was useless then the engrossment in the ways of false scorpions must be the epitome of it. Just then there was a blaring noise from a wind instrument and much beating of drums. Lootika was startled and asked what that was. Vidrum asked her to climb up on to the wall since a procession of the kAlI temple was to pass through the street she was on. It featured the temple elephant and also a buffalo, which was to be eventually be “married” to a horse at the house of a brAhmaNa, after it had made a round to the ritual at the shrine of the sister deity mahAmArI. Lootika was excited by this new distraction and decided to watch it all sitting on Vidrum’s wall. The procession wended its way and the elephant as well as the buffalo copiously defecated on the street in front of Vidrum’s ancestral home. Once the procession had gone past something extraordinary happened. A couple of street dogs came running and rolled vigorously for a while on the dung. Vidrum thought of his renunciate’s lecture and remarked to himself that this must be truly the lower animal birth he was admonishing about, for what else would delight in something as undignified as a viShsnAnaM. But his curiosity was also aroused and he asked Lootika as to what that might mean. She said she was as puzzled as him and would think about it.

Then she gathered her stuff and was about to leave when Vidrum turned to her and said: “Hey it is not really safe for a pretty girl like you to be wandering in the yonder forest all by yourself.”
L: “Oh there is no cause of concern. My relatives are the local IAS officials with some “powers” who administer these regions. Anyone would be a fool to do something to me if they want to remain standing.”
V: “Well but you never know … some desperate rogues…”
L: “I am not as vulnerable as you think.” Saying so she drew out an asi-putrikA with an 7 inch gleaming blade. “I got this from the feral brAhmaNa gardabhImukha.” Then she took out something which looked like a bottle of nail polish and said: “Moreover if that fails here is a secret weapon. I heard you and Somakhya talking about how the Soviet agents used to assassinate people with the umbrella tip. So some days back I talked to Somakhya about making such a weapon for ourselves. Here is the result and herbal formulae remain our secret.”
V: “Ah, I never you were so much a female version of a ‘chupA-rustam’! Good luck with your wanderings.”
Vidrum spent much of the rest of his day sitting and starring or taking circles around his grandfather’s house, much like an ox driving an old oil-press, or reading some mangas. That night he heard some strange howls and went out into the garden to check those out. He saw eyes flashing in the dark and eventually as his own adjusted to the dark he made out the shapes of jackals. They ran on the street in front of his house and, like the dogs earlier in the day, rolled vigorously on the elephant and buffalo dung. He remarked to himself that he should mention this to Lootika in case he saw her the next day.

The next day Vidrum spent the time constructing geometric figures using his old compass box. In one such construction he observed the incenters of the 4 triangles with the diagonals of a cyclic quadrilateral as one of their sides formed a rectangle. He did this construction again and again and found that irrespective of the cyclic quadrilateral he got a rectangle. He wondered why this was so and roamed out that evening to make circles around his grandfather’s house. Just then he caught sight of Lootika who was returning from her false scorpion and opilione hunt. He called out to her and told her of the jackals and his constructions of cyclic quadrilaterals. She was also unable to prove why always a rectangle is obtained but hoped work more on it. She in turn excitedly showed Vidrum her drawing of a false scorpion attached to a fly.

At that point Vidrum proposed that the next day they should probably climb up a crag that lay in the midst of the jungle and explore the environs of cairn that lay beyond it. Atop the crag lay a shrine whose deity was called chauryalakShmI. A legend which Vidrum had heard claimed that thieves after their plundering expeditions used to come to worship this deity. There were rumors of buried wealth in its vicinity but also one that people who tried to take it would be killed by the thieves. Lootika was immediately game because she felt it might give her the opportunity to explore a more diverse array of ecological niches. Accordingly they set off the next day. Vidrum had picked up goodly billhook from his grandfather’s collection which came in many shapes and sizes. He was confident that with that muscular billhook he could defend himself sufficiently against any local rowdy who might take a chance. After scaling the steep crag and reaching its top Lootika and Vidrum went their own ways. Lootika was carefully turning leaves and stones and picking up her scorpions – interestingly she found that the version which Somakhya had shown her prowling in the used-book store was common even in these wooded environs near the cairn. After digging for a while in the vicinity of the chauryalakShmI shrine Vidrum went on to explore the circumference of the cairn. He remembered that Somakhya had described these as remnants of the megalithic people who probably brought the Prakritic languages to southern India. There, after some scratching around he found two implements that were somewhat out of place vis-a-vis the megalithic era – an old rusted billhook with an inscription in a West Asian script and the barrel of a gun. He carefully collected these and that afternoon Vidrum and Lootika returned, both immensely pleased with their spoils.

Some weeks later Vidrum was back in his town and went to meet Somakhya. They spent a long time palavering about how their vacations had progressed. Vidrum had much to say, from the rectangle within the quadrilateral, to the animals wallowing in dung, to the climax of his metallic finds. He asked Somakhya what the origin of those implements might be. Of course Somakhya had no answer but only felt a bit envious of that Vidrum had found stuff so interesting. Some days later Somakhya was engaging in ball-making as he did during most summers those days: He had gathered a large mass of raintree pods and was de-seeding them. Then he took the fruit walls and was crushing them with a stone pestle to obtain a paste with which to make the ball. As he was hunched pounding the pods, Lootika, who was prone to display of childish activities on occasions, stole up from behind Somakhya and covered his eyes with her palms. As a result, rather than take in the pleasure of the sparSha with Lootika he now smashed his own finger with the stone pestle and was in deep agony. Lootika wanted to help but he shooed her away because he did not want to be seen in her presence as he ran to the elders for some help. Soon his wound got infected and he lay in bed with a high fever, perhaps in a delirium induced by the bacterium.

-۩۞۩-۩۞۩-۩۞۩-

Perhaps it was during this delirium or perhaps it was under the influence of the opioid he had been administered after the physician had lanced the wound, Somakhya saw something like a dream. It was small nR^isiMha temple in well known town of the mahAraTTas. A mahArAShTrI brAhmaNa from the clan of the kauNDinya-s arrived at the temple. He was unlike many of his coethnics of the age, who were closer to what the old ayya samarapu~Ngava had to say about them in his travelogue through bhAratavarSha a few hundred years ago: “neglecting the shAstra-s they are more like a mArvADI of the 3rd varNa or a kAyastha account-keeper”. He took out a text of the R^igveda and began his daily pArAyaNa, that day starting with the 9th maNDala. He still belonged to the world that was crumbling around him; his clansmen still performed soma rituals and his community still counted several who knew one of more of all the 4 veda-s in entirety. He too had hoped to be a R^itvik who might perform rituals all the way up to the great vAjapeya with its long-distance shooting contest and grand 17 lap chariot races.

At the same time the heavy air of defeat still hung all around – he had not yet entered his teens when he saw with his own eyes the catastrophic defeat of the Indian army in the first war of independence, many of whose leaders had been his own coethnics. Some of his own relatives from the extended family had been slain in the great battlefields of North India in the attempt to shake off the shveta-shavasAdhaka yoke. The news had reached him of the genocide of Indians in the north. In his own circles he had heard the story of how a coethnic who had protected an Englishman and his girl from being killed during the Indian attack was skewered like a kebab by the bayonet of the very same Englishman at the end of the war. He had learned English in school and had read in person the account of the total genocide conducted by the pretasAdhaka warrior Hugh Rose in Jhansi: “No maudlin clemency was to mark the fall of the city.” As he ended for the day with the gAyatrI “siShAsatU rayINAM vAjeShv arvatAm iva | bhareShu jigyuShAm asi ||” his mind wandered towards the catastrophe of the first war of independence again. He had a conflicting thought run through him. After all the shruti had just said that the soma was drunk by victorious warriors conquering like indra and soma with their horses racing with booty. After all the great vAjapeya was performed by the victorious Arya, with bow held aloft, whose horses had trampled upon his vanquished foes and beaten his land flat beneath their hoofs. So what was the point of performing the vAjapeya when bhAratI, who is invoked to come at the beginning of every rite, was bound by the pretAchArin-s.

Continued…

She said that she was shoNitamekhalA, the barmaid from the glorious oDDiyAna. We excitedly asked her teaching of the amaraugha. She said: somAkhyaH pathena gachChati | hAlApIvI devadattaM pathena gamayati | pathaM vR^iNIShva || (somAkhya goes by the path; hAlApIvin makes devadatta go by the path; choose a path for yourself.) Then she then became silent, showed the sign of the three fingers, and went away stating that customers were waiting at the counter.

Then we proceeded to the cluster of caves in kR^iShNagiri in the country of the rAShTraka-s. As we were about to enter the chosen cave sutvachA the fair daughter of the brAhmaNa crossed our path. She asked: “Did you understand the teachings of shoNitamekhalA”. We said we were still seeking their meaning. She went away giggling. There in the cave where the Iranian lord had performed a homa to rudra sat the yamoghaNTa named antakabhR^itya. He asked pointed to a rocky seat and said: “About two thousand years ago the Iranian lord sat there; he is long dead and mostly forgotten today but take that seat. We shall now study some poetry.” Then he went on to expound three verses from fifty known as the vakrokti pa~nchAshika of Kashmirian kavi bhaTTa ratnAkara from the court of rAjan avantivarman:

tvaM hAlAhala-bhR^it karoShi manaso mUrchAM mamAli~Ngito
hAlAM naiva bibharmi naiva cha halaM mugdhe kathaM hAlikaH |
satyaM hAlikataiva te samuchitAsaktasya govAhane
vakroktyeti jito himAdri-sutayA smero harah pAtu vaH || 2
When embraced by me you make my mind dizzy – \with the [noxious] hAlAhala you hold.\by the beer and plow (water) you hold.\
Silly lady! I hold neither beer nor a plow, how am I a plowman?
Truth to be told the state of a plowman is appropriate for your attachment – \to the bovine vehicle\to plying the bovine.
May hara smiling while thus defeated via use of vakrokti (ambiguous speech/punning words) by the daughter of the Himalayas protect you.

The pun here creates an equivalence between rudra the holder of the hAlAhala and the saMkarShaNa of the pA~ncharAtrika-s who holds the hala and hAlA. Indeed, the mahAbharata mentions that balarAma, the earthly manifestation of the saMkarShaNa, is pacified when a bowl of beer is placed before him by the fair hands of his wife revatI. The poet bhAsa makes a word play on this in the open verse of his play the svapnavAsavadatta thus:
udayanavendusavarNAvAsavadattAbalau balasya tvAm |
padmAvatIrNapUrNau vasantakramau bhujau pAtAm ||

May bala[rAma]‘s arms protect you, whose color is like the newly arisen moon, imparted vigor by beer, enhanced by padmAvatI (supposed to mean revatI here), like the pleasant progression of spring. It also plays on the names of the menage-a-trois in the drama comprised of king udayana, his wife vAsavadattA and the princess padmAvatI

But this beer-swilling saMkarShaNa in the pA~ncharAtrika tradition is indeed an equivalent of rudra and performs the same functions as him. Hence, the word play in this verse indicates the homology between the deities is indicated. Moreover, rudra denying his association with beer indicates his domesticated state. This is different from his wild state as a manifestation of the violent principle inherent in beer – a point alluded to in the shruti (e.g. shatapatha brAhmaNa) in the context of the sautrAmaNi ritual. It also distinguishes him from the state where accompanied by the many female deities, the one in which alcoholic beverage is a sacrament as in the tantra-s of the bhairava-srotas.

tvaM menAbhimato [me na-abhimato\menA-abhimato] bhavAmi sutanu shvashrvA avashyaM mataH
sAdhUktaM bhavatA na me ruchita [nameru-chita] ity atra bruve .ahaM punaH |
mugdhe nAsmi nameruNA nanu chitaH prekShasva mAM pAtu vo
vakroktyeti haro himAchala-bhuvaM smerAnanAM mUkayan || 3

\You are not loved by me \menA likes you\; Indeed, my mother-in-law likes me, O pretty-bodied one.
Well played (said) by you; [but] I am saying it again:\you are not liked by me\you are a rudrAkSha tree (have rudrAkSha-s piled on you).\
But I’m not piled up with rudrAkSha-s, silly lady, look at me!
May hara silencing with his punning words the smiling faced one born of the Himalayas protect you.

Here rudra is in his domesticated form stated above; hence, he is not piled up with rudrAkSha-s.

no saMdhyAhita-matsarA [saMdhy-Ahita\saMdhyA-Ahita] tava tanau vatsyAmy ahaM saMdhinA
na prItAsi varoru chet kathaya tat prastaumi kiM vigraham |
kAryaM tena na kiM chid asti shaTha me vInAM graheNeti vo
dishyAsuH pratibaddha-keli shivayoH shreyAMsi vakroktayaH || 4

\I resent our truce\I resent [your] flirting with saMdhyA\ and no more in your body I will stay.
Pretty-thighs! If you are not happy with the truce simply say that. Should I [then] call declare \hostilities?\a hunt for catching birds?\
You rascal! Of what use is this business of catching birds to me.
May the punning words of shiva and shivA contesting in this game bring you to felicities.

The catching of birds (vi-graha) is an allusion to rudra being called a pu~njiShTha in the shruti. But you must note that here umA has called rudra a rascal and clearly told him of her lack of love for him and expressed her intention not to stay in his body. Hence, he has to wander on his own.

Most worship mahAdeva along with his shakti. This is the sAdhAraNa-patha. The ecstatic and high kulapatha is that of rudra as vIra in the midst of his kula with the yoginI-s, DAkinI-s and shAkinI-s. But now that sati has left him he is an ekavIra. The one who follows that path shall explore the mysteries of the akulavIra.

We said: “But then they say shiva without shivA is but a shava. So how could one tread the path of the akulavIra”.
The yamoghaNTha: “Close your eyes.”
We found ourselves in the draMiDa country near where the land meets the sea. There was an image of the old goddess patnI, who had been worshiped by the drAviDa-s in the long past days even as the Iranian was performing his homa to maheshvara. It was a grim and inauspicious day. Yet, everyone around us was laughing and talking in loud tones trying to make themselves heard over the din. Tired from the exertions of the long day we laid ourselves near a large image of kumAra to get some rest. Suddenly, a band of shAkinI-s arrived and tore us to shreds eating us up entirely.
We opened our eyes and asked: “Are we dead?”
The yamoghaNTha: “Close your eyes again.”
We were in the holy city of jAlandhara in the pa~nchanada country. There were three corpses in the biers which were laid beside us. All of a sudden one of them started moving and then getting up made a loud and terrible noise. We were reminded of kShemendra’s words “ghora-pherAvahuMkR^itaM”. We opened our eyes and asked: “Why did that one who was dead move?”
The yamoghaNTha: “It was animated by a vetAla captured by shoNitamekhalA.”
We: “You are indeed a yamoghaNTha without the chitra-paTa-s (painted scrolls)”.
The yamoghaNTha: “Go the mouth the cave and gaze at the yonder sky.”
We: “A flock of egrets in flight.”
The yamoghaNTha: “the old bhAsa had said:
vidUShaka- hI hI, sharat kAla nirmale .antarikShe prasArita-baladeva-bAhu-darshanIya sArasa-pa~Nkti yAvat samAhitaM gachChantI prekShatAM tAvad bhavAn |
The king- vayasya, pashyAmy enAm |
R^ijvAyatAM cha viralAM cha natonnatAM cha
saptarShi-vaMsha-kuTilAM cha nivartaneShu |
nirmuchyamAna-bhujagodara-nirmalasya
sImAm ivaambara-talasya vibhajyamAnAm ||
The jester: Hey hey, may your highness see that flock of cranes flying in the clear autumnal welkin like the outstretched arm of baladeva.
The king: friend, I see these.
Sometimes straight, sometime dispersed wide apart, sometimes in a V-shaped configuration,
taking the form the constellation of the seven seers (Ursa Major) while turning,
like the white belly of a snake which has sloughed its skin,
[the flock] is like a dividing contour on the surface of the sky.

This old bhAsa must have been a bit of a pA~ncharAtrika. The saMkarShaNa indeed stirs things up, much like the atmospheric dance of the crane flock. That is what one might see in the simile which likens his fair hand to them. Then there is also the welkin in you which is the chidAkAsha. These birds are tracing paths on that. Those are the movements of prANa that we term the ajapA gAyatrI, the mantra, so.ahaM haMsaH |

It is that mantra you now go forth and try to master. It must be done in solitude. As you leave the fair daughter of the brAhmaNa will come you path. But you have to walk past her for no use will come of coitus with her. But three ladies whose names will have the initial consonants p, v, and b will keep you company – but remember their company will be even like that of hatyA who gave the bhairava company till he drank viShNu’s blood. You might die on the path sooner or later and might become the dwelling of a vetAla. The end only you will know”

We were not sure if we were dead or alive.

Mathematical objects, despite existing in a purely abstract “Platonic” realm, have the ability (perhaps by the very virtue of their Platonic idealism) to produce synesthetic experiences. We have often wondered in our life as to why the realization or experience of such objects that do not belong to the real world produce such real even if very idiosyncratic experiences. Indeed, this synesthetic experience seems to form the fundament of what both layman and mathematician alike might term as beauty in mathematics [Footnote 1]. These need not stem from the experience of the understanding of extremely complex mathematical relationships; rather they can emerge from things as trivial as the experience of increasing dimensionality from a point, to a triangle to a tetrahedron. Not surprisingly, such mathematical objects often serve as metaphors (since metaphor is an expression of the synesthetic experience) in philosophy, religion and ritual of many cultures. In our own tradition such metaphors are abundant in many philosophical streams, like the decimal place value system being used in the sAMkhya of the vyAsa-bhAShya and by shaMkara the advaitin.

viShNu, on behalf of the fellow deva-s, during the pitched contest for the universe with the daitya-s, took three great strides. With these strides he won the whole universe for the deva-s and excluded the daitya-s from it. He is said to be viShNu because with this three strides he measured out or pervaded the whole universe – the old etymologists would say: “viShNur vishvaM vishate |”. We saw a paradox in this: The measuring out or the pervading of the universe is a volumetric action – i.e. you fill out the volume of the universe. But then the taking of strides has a sense of linearity to it: three steps would map as the summation of three lengths in a one dimensional space but how come a volume is implied as being filled?

Many, many revolutions of the earth ago, our father, in attempt to lead us to the path of mathematics, asked us to consider several triangles and take the sum of the tangents of the three angles of the triangle and see how they compared with their products. Being not very mathematically gifted, we set ourselves to the task in a slightly un-Hindu manner by drawing triangles and doing what we were asked to do:

It amazed us to learn that given any triangle with angles a, b and c the following held true:
tan(a)+tan(b)+tan(c)=tan(a)*tan(b)*tan(c)

We saw immediately that it was rather trivial for an equilateral triangle or any right triangle or the extreme situation of a collapsed triangle (0,0, pi) but stopped at that. It also struck us that the value for the equilateral triangle (5.196) was the lowest positive value the that product or sum of the tangent triad took. We excitedly pointed this to our father. He seemed unimpressed and simply mumbled something and went to attend to his work.

Sometime later, armed with that wonderful elixir known as testosterone, when we teaching our brother trigonometry we effortless showed him why this beautiful relationship was rather trivial.
For a triangle:
a+b+c = pi;
a+b = pi-c;
tan(a+b) = tan(pi-c);
(tan(a)+tan(b))/(1-tan(a)tan(b)) =-tan(c);
thus: tan(a)+tan(b)+tan(c)=tan(a)*tan(b)*tan(c)
It then hit us that no wonder our father was unimpressed by our mental vapidity.

Of course, we showed more celerity when confronted by a problem based on this theorem in one of those life-deciding battles that come upon you in the realms of bhArata:
There is a result in algebra which says that arithmetic mean of n positive numbers is always greater than or equal to the geometric mean of the same. The tangents of the angles represent such a triad of numbers when the triangle is acute i.e.,is all angles are less than pi/2 as red triangle in the figure.
Hence, for such a triangle –
the arithmetic mean (tan(a)+tan(b)+tan(c))/3 >= (tan(a)*tan(b)*tan(c))^(1/3);
tan(a)*tan(b)*tan(c)/3 >= (tan(a)*tan(b)*tan(c))^(1/3);
(tan(a)*tan(b)*tan(c))^2 >= 27;
thus tan(a)*tan(b)*tan(c) >= 5.196 in an acute triangle. That lowest value is (tan(pi/3))^3, which is what we had stumbled upon in the exercise given to us in our childhood.

After the event as we were spilling out of the hall we remarked to our friends that it was rather trivial and went on (several of whom agreed since most of our circle were at the peak of our mathematical abilities at that point). But we also had a synesthetic experience that cut Gordian knot of the viShNu paradox: The product of 3 scalar entities is an abstraction of a volumetric mensuration. The sum of the same entities is like a linear measurement of 3 steps. Thus, we saw the equivalence between the 3 steps and a volumetric measurement. Moreover, that excluded region between 5.196 and 0 was the realm from which the daitya-s had been excluded.

We had at that point asked our student to show that it is obvious that:
sin(x)/x = ∏[n=1..∞]cos(x/2^n)
[
For those interested but unaware, this may be achieved thus, as was first shown by the great Leonhard Euler:
sin(x)/x= (sin(x/2)/(x/2))*cos(x/2) by half-angle formula for sin(x)
we do the same with sin(x/2) to get:
sin(x)/x= (sin(x/4)/(x/4))*cos(x/2)*cos(x/4)
We can continue thus ad infinitum:
Hence, we will have:
sin(x)/x= (sin(x/2^n)/(x/2^n))*∏[n=1..∞]cos(x/2^n)
but as n->∞, x/2^n->0, therefore sin(x/2^n)/(x/2^n)->1
thus, sin(x)/x = ∏[n=1..∞]cos(x/2^n)
]

The synesthetic experience of this relationship was both calming and foreboding (as in the sense of the end of existence): one of perturbations caused by an upheaval being reabsorbed by enormous magnitude of the unchanging fabric of existence (we felt a certain connection the sAMkhya term for the same: mahat – the enormity).
Imagine the function y=x/x it is the epitome of constancy, an unperturbed straight line – the metaphor of the unchanging fabric of existence. Now a perturbation emerges in the numerator in the form of a sine wave. Its normalization by the denominator makes that perturbation to fade out into nothingness, the y=0 straight line (like the sAMkhya universe fading out into mahat). The same thing as the product of increasingly halved cosines explicitly illustrates this, as those halved cosines come closer and closer to our original line y=x/x.

-۩۞۩-۩۞۩-۩۞۩-
Footnote 1: Some mathematicians find something they call rigor to be the basis for the beauty. We had a mathematics teacher who loved using the word rigor ad nauseum. But to us rigor was never a major source of inspiration or interest – for we simply saw gaNita as either a generator of beauty or a tool for vyavahAra in the real world.

Under the modern Indian practice of secularism it is common to hold the view that Mohammedanism and the sanAtana dharma can come close together to forge something termed as the Indian identity. Abroad, especially in the Anglosphere, it is common for both mlechCha-s and people of Indian origin to believe that the two can intimately coexist under what they would term as “South Asian” identity. Versions of such views have been expressed for over a century by influential Hindu leaders such as svAmI vivekAnanda:

“I am firmly persuaded that without the help of practical Islam, theories of Vedantism, however fine and wonderful they may be, are entirely valueless to the vast mass of mankind. We want to lead mankind to the place where there is neither the Vedas, nor the Bible, nor the Koran; yet this has to be done by harmonising the Vedas, the Bible and the Koran. Mankind ought to be taught that religions are but the varied expressions of THE RELIGION, which is Oneness, so that each may choose that path that suits him best.

For our own motherland a junction of the two great systems, Hinduism and Islam – Vedanta brain and Islam body – is the only hope.

I see in my mind’s eye the future perfect India rising out of this chaos and strife, glorious and invincible, with Vedanta brain and Islam body.”

Hence, it is not surprising to see some form of such a construct surfacing from time to time in expressions of what are called both “left” and “right” in the Indian political spectrum [it should be emphasized that left and right in the Indian parlance are non-identical to their homonyms in the leukosphere]. We have argued on multiple occasions on these pages that such synthetic formulations, which see a union of Islam and the dharma, and identities that deny a root in the sanAtana dharma (e.g. South Asian or secular Indian) are unnecessary, and even extremely deleterious for those following the way of the sanAtana dharma. Here we shall examine some extra-military facets of the Islamo-Hindu confrontation that have a bearing on this issue. First, a few premises and prefatory remarks: 1) We have previously discussed with historical examples how Abrahamisms have had an extremely destructive effect on heathens and developed a theoretical framework to describe the same. Here, we shall assume that framework and not dilate upon it any further. 2) Here we shall not be discussing at length other predatory manifestations of Abrahamism, and specifically focus on Mohammedanism. 3) We include under the rubric of “military” all events that involved the use of force both in confrontations between armies and on civilian populations during the entry and metastasis of Mohammedanism in jaMbudvIpa. Thus, both the invasion of the Turk Mahmud Ghaznavi and the enslaving raids conducted by him are military events. However, the actions of a Naqshbandi Shaikh in terms of calling upon Sultans to suppress Hindu practice or sending out missionaries to convert Hindus will be considered as “extra-military” for the purposes of this epistle.

Our foray into this issue first arose when we were wandering in bhagAnagari in the days of our vigorous youth. What in bhArata is often described as a “riot between two communities” had broken out in a part of the city just on the eve of our travel to our natal city in the karNATa country. At that time an Amirzada, the Mohammedan K, descending from the old Mogol aristocracy, paid us a visit in the lab where we worked as an intern to enquire about a biochemical issue. In course a digression which followed, with much clarity [since he was aware we entertained no philo-Islamic fuzziness] he stated that the biggest fear of the Mohammedan in bhArata was that he would be absorbed into Hindu heathenism. He went on to add that they would take every measure to ensure that the Hindu juggernaut does not roll over them, even if it were to mean use of violence. Another, [at that point] nominally Hindu acquaintance joined in, asking Mohammedan K if it was not possible for Hindus and Mohammedans to live together. To this he gave a more animated response which ran something like: “There is no need for Mohammedans to follow primitive superstitions of Hindus. We come from a great culture, which has invented algebra, built the Taj Mahal, saved women from tonsure or sati, brought the sophisticated concept of monotheism to the subcontinent and the like… We do not want any of that to be replaced by Hindu stuff. If that is assured we might be able to live together.” Two points became clear to us: First, he changed from being a third person narrator of mass Islamic opinion while initially talking to us to being a direct spokesman for Mohammedanism while answering the other acquaintance’s query. Second, in his voice and body language there was an unmistakeable undercurrent that he was the representative of a great tradition that saw the Hindu tradition (at least as he understood it) in a dim light. Analyzing this matter further, we realized that the conscientious Mohammedans in the subcontinent typically felt a great and explicit loathing for being absorbed by the sanAtana dharma and the resistance to this is a very key aspect to their identity. Digging into historical records of the Islamo-Hindu confrontation we see much evidence for this as the defining aspect of the extra-military confrontation between this invasive Abrahamism and the dharma of bhAratavarSha. Its influence runs deep even today: we have run into some Mohammedans (primarily from TSP and TSBD) who have lapsed out of Islam into atheism or Isaism but still retain intact that pUrva vAsana of the fear and loathing of the heathen sanAtana dharma. Thus, we see this as an Indian version of a comparable fear, seen earlier in Jewish history regarding absorption by Hellenistic heathenism, or in the vigorous reaction of all three Abrahamisms against Hindu ideas of brAhmaNa-s teachers introduced to West Asia by the literature of the Persian, Jewish and Arab free-thinkers.

As a starting point let us consider the words of the Naqshbandi Sufi Shaikh, Ahmad Sirhindi, who lived during the reigns of Akbar and Jahangir (1564-1624):

“The spread of the illustrious shari`a comes from the efficient care and good administration of the great sultans, which has lately slackened causing inevitable weakness of Islam. The infidels of al Hind [thus] fearlessly destroy mosques and build their own places of worship in their stead. In Thanesar in the Krukhet tank there was a mosque and a shrine of a saint. Both have been destroyed by the infidels and in their place they have now built a big temple. Again, the infidels freely observed the rituals of infidelity, while the Muslims are unable to execute most of the Islamic ordinances. On the day of ekAdashI when the Hindus abstain from eating and drinking, they see to it that no Muslim bakes or sells bread or any other food in the bazaar. On the contrary, in the blessed month of Ramzan they cook and sell food openly. Due to the weakness of Islam nobody can stop them from doing this. Alas, a thousand times alas!”

It is necessary to understand the context in which Sirhindi made this comment. For this let us take a brief look at a statement made by Abu al-Fazl `Allami a prominent courtier and confidant of the Mogol tyrant Akbar:

“Therefore the sublime decree (of Padishaw Akbar) went forth concerning the book of the mahAbhArata, written by masters of genius, containing most of the principles and applications of the beliefs of the brAhmaNa-s of al Hind, than which there is no book more famous, greater, or more detailed among this group. The wise of both factions [Hindus and Mohammedans] and the linguists of both groups, by way of friendship and agreement, should sit down in one place, and should translate it into a popular
expression, with the knowledge of judicious experts and just officials.”

In the same context we might also look at a grandiose, panegyric inspired by vIrabala, a Hindu confidant of Akbar, provided by the Hindu scholar vihArI kR^iShNadAsa who composed a grammar of Persian (pArasI-prakAsha) based on pANini’s principles:

yad brahma vedena vikAra-hInaM pragIyate sma prakR^iteH parastAt |
tad eSha go-brAhmaNa-pAlanArthaM mahI-mahendro .akavaraH prajAtaH ||

As brahman is sung by the veda as changeless and beyond prakR^iti, so also Akbar, like the great indra on earth, was born
in order to protect cows and brAhmaNa-s.

yad asya nAmAkhila-shAstra-sAgare smR^itItihAsAdiShu sAdhu vishrutam |
gataM trilokIShu chira-sthitiM tatas tadAkhyayA tantraM idaM vitanyate ||

Even as the name of [brahman] is celebrated throughout the ocean of shAstra-s, smR^iti-s, itihAsa-s, and the like, and is established firmly forever in the three worlds, so also with the name [of Akbar] this work is composed.

yad gopAla-sutena kR^iShNa-vibhunA gAvas tathA pAlitA |
rAmair bhUsura-daivatair dvijavarAs trAtA na chitraM hi tat ||

That cows were protected by the cowherd’s son kR^iShNa and the foremost of the dvija-s were protected guarded by the rAma-s, deities worshiped by brAhmaNa-s, is no surprise

go-viprAbhibhava-priye turuShkaje vamshe .avatIrNo vibhuH |
go-viprAn pratipAlayaty akavaro viShNur vichitraM mahat ||

However, its truly mysterious that the god viShNu, having descended in a clan of Turks that delights in injuring cows and brAhmaNa-s as Akbar, protects cows and brAhmaNa-s.

The above textual extracts give a flavor of the vicissitudes of religious sentiment during the long reign of Akbar [readers may also read an account of the history of Akbar by shrI Sarvesh Tiwari on these issues]. Having successfully conducted Jihads all over the northern subcontinent and having piled pyramids of Hindu heads in the manner of his ancestor Timur he was reigning as the supreme ruler of northern Hindustan. Indeed, the Persian ruler, the Shia Jihadist, Tahmasp, sent Akbar a letter congratulating him as the “unsurpassed upholder of the Koran and the destroyer of the Hindus.” The Mogol tyrant who then indulged heavily in gruesome hunting ventures often killing scores of elephants, tigers and leopards in one go [Footnote 1], had experiences that made him take a new turn. In 1575 CE he had built the `ibadat-khanah at his capital and was staging debates between Islamic groups as well as with non-Islamic groups. Akbar keenly followed these and found himself increasingly discovering an innate interest in natural religions. In 1578 CE while he was on a mass hunt in the jungle, he felt thst his vision suddenly became clear and that he was seized by a great upwelling of bliss. Then he sat down in a trance. Upon coming out of it he declared that the forest where he was hunting was no different from Mecca. He was also attracted towards the suggestion of some rAjpUts in his retinue that some vana-devatA-s had suddenly sent him a message of enlightenment. Alternatively, some of Turko-Mongolic origin in the retinue recalled elements of their pre-Islamic pagan religion and declared that the animals were imparting him divine secrets even as they did to the Altaic shamans of his ancestors in their trances. He felt all this must be true and released the animals he had encircled in the hunt. He called upon his officers to stop cow slaughter and declared that he was going vegetarian on all Fridays, in addition to several other days (once he observed a 9 month vow of being totally vegetarian). He also declared that he would give up the garlic, onion, wine and narcotics on several days, greatly moderate his hunting [footnote 2], and give up the old Mongolian vice, qumis, for good. This was not the end of Akbar’s heathenizing tendencies; they developed further with increasing interest in Hindu matters and Hermetica, interests that were to last for the rest of his life. Around the time of his special experience we see him pass a decree that there was no point studying the Koran and Hadith and that people should only spend time on useful stuff like astronomy, mathematics, medicine, history, poetry and philosophy in Arabic literature. He started wearing a yaj~nopavIta and maintained a ritual fire, where he performed homa-s uttering Sanskrit mantra-s. Thus, Abu al-Fazl’s record of Akbar’s admiration of the mahAbhArata or kR^iShNadAsa/vIrabala’s account of him as a protector of cows and brAhmaNa-s are entirely in line with his religious transmogrification.

Within a decade of the high point of Mohammedanism, where Turco-Mongol rulers from the Osman Turk Suleyman in the West to Akbar in East were crushing other Abrahamists and heathens alike, there was a clear possibility of Islam being digested in al Hind by the ancient heathenism of bhArata. The same Shaikhs who had triumphantly joined Akbar’s march against the illustrious mahArANa pratapa siMha some years back with hope of becoming ghazi-s or shahid-s were now finding themselves increasingly sidelined. Indeed, Ahmad Sirhindi gives as the two main causes for the failure of Mohammedanism in al Hind: 1) Akbar’s decree to translate Hindu dharmashAstra-s into Persian with the objective of displacing Islamic law. 2) Akbar calling for the study of the philosophy and knowledge systems of the Hindu sages. Thus, the victories gained by Mohammedanism against the sanAtana dharma on the battlefield, were now being nullified in the extra-military sphere. The old sites like the one in Thanesar, which was seized by the Moslems for the construction of Masjid, were now being taken back by the Hindus as result of this extra-military triumph. It should be noted that this phenomenon, while reaching its meridian point during the reign of Akbar, was not something initiated by him. Rather he and his great-grandson Dara Shikoh were a “symptom” of a more extensive extra-military response of the sanAtana dharma after being “shell-shocked” by the initial trauma of the Mohammedan irruption. In the days of the monstrous Sultan Firoz Tughlaq we come across the following incident narrated by `Afif:

“A brAhmaNa of Delhi had constructed a wooden seal on which were engraved the pictures of Hindu deities. Large numbers of Hindus resorted to his house to worship the seal. He had also converted Moslem women to the Hindu polytheism. For these crimes the Sultan sent for him along with his idol. His case was placed before the qadis, fuckihs and sharifs of Islam. Their unanimous verdict was that the Brahman must either become Moslem or be burnt to death. The Brahman refused to embrace Islam and therefore orders were issued for raising a pile of faggots in front of the royal court. The Brahman was tied hand and foot and cast into it. The wooden seal was thrown on the top of the pile and it was lighted in two places at his head and feet. The fire first reached his feet where the wood was dry and in a short while the crying Brahman was immolated by fire. Behold the Sultan’s strict adherence to law and rectitude, how he would not deviate in the least from its decrees.”

The Shaikhs and Sultans struck hard as noted above (another comparable incident is narrated during the Lodi period) but the Hindu influence exerting itself on Moslems could not be entirely blunted continued throughout the subcontinent. For example, we may note the case of the famous Hindu physician and poet lolimbarAja from the mahArAShTra country who ran away with a Turkic Moslem woman Muraza and converted her to the Hindu fold upon marriage as ratnakalA, even naming a medical preparation he discovered after her (the ratnakalA chUrNa). Eventually, with Akbar and Ibrahim Adilshah-II the Hindu influences started swaying even the Sultans. Even after the reign of Akbar was brought to conclusion by Jahangir and Mohammedanism reinstated as before the Hindu counter-activity continued. Jahangir himself records that numerous Moslems were taking to the Hindu dharma due to festivals/rituals organized by temples in Mathura and Kangra in Himachal. In mahArAShTra the influencing and conversion of Moslems by Hindu religious figure is recorded into the 1600s of CE – e.g. an enigmatic female shaiva teacher who was active in this regard in the Adilshahi territory of the 1600s. In south India we hear of the great bhAskararAya makhIndra converting a Turkic woman to the Hindu fold in the 1700s. Moreover, there was also the passive interest in Hindu expression that contributed to a creeping influence via interest in various artistic media. Thus, we encounter instances such as the Persian Mohammedan historian Rafi `al-Din Shirazi express some regret for the destruction of Hindu religious art and interestingly calls on Allah to forgive the Mohammedan ruler for this act:

“Imagine how much work has been done on the inside and outside of all the idol temples, and how many days and how much
time it took to complete them. May Allah, the exalted and transcendent, forgive the emperor (Ali Adil Shah) with the light of his compassion, for after the conquest of Vijayanagara, he with his own holy hand destroyed five or six thousand adored idols of the Kaffrs, and ruined most of the idol temples (of Vijayanagara). But the limited number [of buildings] on which the welfare of the time and the kingdom depended, survive as the art of Ellora in Daulatabad; this kind of idol temple and art we have forgotten.”

These observations suggest that despite not being a missionary religion, the dharma was able to hold its own against the actively proselytizing and demographically aggressive Mohammedanism and even counter-attack. In this regard we may also note that Abu al-Fazl unhappily and defensively records Hindu polemicists aggressively attacking the Mohammedan faith:

“They regard the group of those who are connected to the religion of Mohammed as utterly foolish, and they refute this group ceaselessly, although they are unaware of its noble goals and special sciences.”

We may also observe that Islamic accounts right from the early invasions mention Hindus actively keeping out Islamic missionaries: The Moroccan traveler Abd-al-Lah ibn Battuta who reached bhArata during the reign of Mohammad ibn Tughlaq states that Hindus in India do not let Moslem religious men into their houses or the give food or water with their utensils. Thus, while on one hand the Hindus kept away Moslem god-men from intruding into their homes, on the other hand the dharma was also on the warpath by disputing Mohammedanism and even converting its votaries to the Hindu fold. Thus, we posit that Mohammedanism needed special backing for its effective survival in the subcontinent. The Shaikhs were quick to realize this and seeing that their desert delusion was in the danger of being subsumed by desertions to the dharma started taking steps to call upon their rulers provide muscle for the enforcement of Mohammedanism. While Jahangir and Shah Jahan were helpful, they hit a real bonanza in the Mogol tyrant Awrangzeb who was proactive in reversing the harm done to Mohammedanism by his great-grandfather and his heathenizing brother Dara Shikoh. In response to the translation of the dharma-shAstra-s he commissioned the voluminous work on the shari`a, the Fatawa-i Jahangiri, which was first composed in chaste Arabic and then translated into Persian for those who did not understand the former. This was to become the authoritative guide for legal decisions in his reign. Yet, even during his reign the Hinduizing influences as those recorded by Jahangir continued and Awrangzeb strove to eradicate them. For example:

“The padishaw, cherisher of Mohammedanism learned that in the provinces of Thatta, Multan and especially at Benaras, the brAhmaNa infidels used to teach their false books in their established schools, and their admirers and students, both Hindu and Muslim, used to come from great distances to these misguided men in order to acquire their vile learning. His Majesty, eager to establish Islam, issued orders to the governors of all the provinces to demolish the schools and temples of the infidels, and, with the utmost urgency, put down the teaching and the public practice of the religion of these unbelievers (imperial decree of 9th April 1669).”

But by this point the dijnn of extra-military successes of the Hindu counter-activity, which took hold of the Sultan’s mind during Akbar’s reign, could not be put back into its lamp. When Awrangzeb reinstated jizya there was a strong Hindu reaction. We shall quote the Mohammedan historian S.M. Ikram (“Muslim Civilization in India”) in this matter:

“The Hindu position was so strong that in some places Aurangzeb’s order for the collection of jizya was defied. On January 29, 1693, the officials in Malwa sent a soldier to collect jizya from a zamindar called Devi Singh. When he reached the place, Devi Singh’s men fell upon him, pulled his beard and hair, and sent him back empty-handed. The emperor thereupon ordered a reduction in the jagir of Devi Singh. Earlier, another official had fared much worse. He himself proceeded to the jagir to collect the tax, but was killed by the Hindu mansabdar. Orders to destroy newly built temples met with similar opposition. A Muslim officer who [was] sent in 1671 CE to destroy temples at the ancient pilgrimage city of Ujjain was killed in a riot that broke out as he tried to carry out his orders.”

Thus, the effects of the earlier extra-military response was now giving rise to a reasonably effective military response. In conclusion much of the historical data favors few general points with bearing on the current Indian secularism:

● Demographic and missionary aggression by Mohammedanism might not have been sufficient for it to overrun the Hindu dharma. Rather, the former might have been eventually digested and neutralized by the latter.

● This point was realized clearly by the Shaikhs who hence sought to prop it up by repeated calls to the Sultans to lend their arms to enforce Mohammedanism. On several occasions this included calls to external Mohammedan invaders, e.g. Ghiyat al-Din Tughlaq, Babar, Ahmed Shah Abdali and his successors or calls to more pious Sultans to punish the slackers (e.g. Awrangzeb being sought to punish the Hindu-controlled Qutbshah in gavalakuNDa).

● An important point is that Shaikhs, over a large period of time and across bhAratavarSha, have been very clear in noting that the spread of Hindu influences was deleterious to Mohammedanism and that the only way for Mohammedanism to survive was to keep itself distinct while mustering sufficient force/demography to destroy the Hindus. The bottom-line is Mohammedanism needs force to survive in jambudvIpa either in the form of wars on Hindu powers or in the form of coercion directed at civilians.

● The striving for non-Hinduness might have even lead to internal rifts within Mohammedanism as each group was trying be more Mohammedan than the other. For example, Mohammedan historians have correctly (unlike mlechCha apologists) interpreted the Mahdavi movement as part of the revitalization movements within the desert cult in India in order to stem what was clearly seen as the decay arising from Hinduization. This Mahdavi movement, when it arose in Gujarat, emphasized jihad, which it ended up launching it on the Muzzafarid Turks who were occupying Gujarat at the time of its origin. Thus, one should not be confused by internecine conflicts between various Mohammedan sects as they were actually competing for space of the ideal Mohammedan shorn of all Hindu influences. Indeed, this dynamic of competition for the ideal Mohammedanism is an important issue missed by most Hindus. It implies that as along as Islam exists as a distinct entity in the subcontinent there is always going to be a strain that would go for the Hindu’s neck or foreskin.

● From the viewpoint of the Shaikhs the subcontinent of jambudvIpa is their rightful property, where Hindus had no place beyond Dhimmis in the best case scenario. Anything that fuels a distinct Islamic identity in the subcontinent is going to favor its striving for an identity free of Hindu influence. Hence, “two-nation theory” is alive in its most primal form (people should not be confused by the presence of more than 2 physical countries) and is fundamentally incompatible with an Indian state, secular or Hindu.

● Hence, from the Hindu viewpoint a synthetic existence with Mohammedanism as a separate entity in their land, jaMbudvIpa, is not possible. This is not so much because Hindus do not want to live with them – many of our modern secularists would be delighted to do so, visiting them for syrupy semolinas or for their meat shops, or even for an occasional genuflection at a mazar, as it happens so often in ajayamerupura. However, as the Shaikhs have repeatedly emphasized they do not brook such a cohabitation and greatly fear the incubus of Hindu practice that accompanies it. No amount of mollycoddling by the Hindus or secularists will change this, only the erasure of the Hindu dharma will.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Footnote 1: Akbar lined the highway between ajayamerupura (Ajmer) and agrevana (Agra) with hundreds of thousands of trophy heads of artiodactyls and rhinos from hunts sponsored by him in northern India. Such activities of the Mogol tyrants played a major role in the extinction of fauna in bhArata.

Footnote 2: Ironically in this period he suffered some serious hunting accidents when he did go out on occasional hunts. In 1589 CE he was trying to kill a hyena in Kashmir when he injured his head in a fall and lost consciousness. After hanging in a precarious condition for a while he made a remarkable recovery and was back in action within a month. In 1595 CE he was trying to kill a black buck when it pierced him in the scrotum with its horn. It entered deep into his viscera and he was saved after 21 days in a life-and-death situation by a Hindu physician chandrasena who performed a surgery.

The primary paurANika text of the shrI-kula tradition is the famed lalitopAkhyAnam, which is tagged to the brahmANDa purANam. The text describes the exploits of the central deity of the shrI-kula system, tripurasundarI, who is simultaneously praised as simultaneously erotic:
kAmesha-j~nAta-saubhAgya-mArdavoru-dvayAnvitA – she with a pair of graceful, smooth thighs which are enjoyed by kAmesha (her bhairava consort).

kAmeshvara-prema-ratna-maNi-pratipaNa-stanI – she who paid back the love of kAmesha by giving her breasts which are like jewel [pots]

Warlike:
bhaNDAsura-vadhodyukta-shaktisenA-samanvitA – she who is surrounded by an army of goddesses ready to slay bhaNDAsura

bhaNDAsurendra-nirmukta-shastra-pratyastra-varShiNI – she who showers missiles to counter the weapons hurled by bhaNDAsura

kAmeshvarAstra-nirdagdha-sabhaNDAsura-shUnyakA – she who annihilated bhaNDAsura by burning him with the kAmeshvara missile

And imperial:
shrImahArAj~nI – the empress
shrImat-siMhAsaneshvarI – the goddess seated on the imperial throne
rAja-rAjeshvarI – the imperial goddess

This triad of metaphors, while reaching a literary culmination in the lalitopAkhyAnam, is a theme which is present in some form in other kaula traditions such as those of the pUrvAMnAya (the trika goddess and bhairava-s), uttarAMnAya (kAlI), paschimAMnAya (kubjikA and navAtman). The kaula tradition appears to have gained considerable prominence with the teachings of fisherman-teacher matsyendra and his successors. He is named as the primary teacher or nAtha of this yuga (mentioned by his prAkR^itic name as macChanda vibhu (nAtha) by the great Kashmirian tAntrika abhinavagupta) and is said to have authored the kaula-j~nAna-nirNaya, a definitive yoginI-kaula work. The kula tradition also influenced the emerging gANapatya sect, giving rise to a kaula version of it, whose founder is said to have been heramba-suta. A version of this tradition transplanted to China and Japan acquired considerable popularity there and survives in the latter country to date, even if in a diluted form. Eventually, within the core Astika tradition, we find streams of smArta-s attributing the origin of the kula system, in a somewhat “domesticated” form, to the advaita teacher shaMkarAcharya. Thus, a notable text of this tradition, the saundaryalahari, which presents the kubjikA and tripurA kula systems, is attributed to shaMkarAchArya. Reflexes of these expressions also thoroughly permeate the bauddha yoga and yoginI tantra-s. Versions such as the bauddha sAdhanA of the vilAsinI-s and padma-nR^ityeshvara closely imitate the shrIkula tradition. The bauddha tAntrika tradition ultimately culminated in their grand synthesis, which again parallels the shaiva kaula tradition, in the form of the kAlachakra-tantra, which teaches the system centered on deities, the 4-headed, 24-armed kAlachakra and his 4-headed and 8-armed consort vishvamAtA. Such lateral influences emanating from the core shaiva kula tradition are also seen in the jaina bhairava tantra-s. Thus, it is clear that the kula “movement” was a pervasive one, which impacted not only the source religion but also it paratypes both in the sub-continent of jaMbudvIpa and the greater Indosphere in Tibet and the east.

If we look closely, this triad of metaphors is also seen in the language of royal discourse as what might be termed the “tantra age” unfolded in India. As an example let us consider the royal praise supposed to have been composed by the noted lexicographer amara-siMha to praise the great monarch vikramAditya chandragupta-II:

abhayam abhayaM deva brUmas tavaasi-latA-vadhUH kuvalaya-dala-shyAmA shatror uraH sthala-shAyinI |
samaya-sulabhAM kIrtiM bhavyAm asUta sutAm asAv api ramayituM rAgaandheva bhramaty akhilaM jagat ||

abhayam= guarantee of protection (in this context); deva= lord; brUmaH= we say; tava=your; asi= sword; lata=creeper, here a flammard’s blade (i.e. like the kris which survives in the Malay archipelago); vadhuH= bride; kuvalaya=blue water-lily; dala= petal; shyAmA= dark; shatroH= enemy (genitive); uraH= chest; sthala= place; shAyinI= rested upon.

samaya= in due course; sulabhAM= effectively/easily; kIrtiM= fame; bhavyAm= beautiful; asuta= conceived; sutAM= daughter; asau=who; api= now; ramayitum= to cause pleasure; rAgAndhA= passionate woman; iva= like; bhramati= wanders; akhilaM= entire; jagat= world.

Give us the guarantee our protection, O lord, when we say that your flammard-blade-bride, dark as the petal of a blue water-lily [Footnote 1], has laid herself on your enemy’s chest; there, she in due course easily conceived a beautiful daughter kIrti (fame) who now roams about the entire world like a passionate woman to bring pleasure to all!

This trend is also apparent in the royal inscriptions from the “tantra age”. For example, we may consider the famous inscription of  the jaina poet ravikIrti describing the exploits of the chAlukyan emperors:
nAnA heti shatAbhighAta-patita-bhrAtaashva-patti-dvIpe nR^ityAd bhIma-kabandha-khaDga-kiraNa-jvAlA-sahasre raNe |
lakshmIr-bhAvita-chApalaapi cha kR^ita shauryeNa yen[a]AtmasAd rAjA[A]sIj jayasiMha-vallabha iti khyAtash chAlukyAnvayaH ||

There was, of the chAlukya dynasty, the king named jayasiMha-vallabha, who in battle – where horses, infantry and elephants, bewildered, fell down under the strokes of many hundreds of weapons, and where thousands of frightful headless trunks and of flashes of rays of swords were leaping to and fro – by his valor made fortune his own [woman], even though she is suspected of fickleness [Translation adapted from Epigraphia Indica Vol. 6].

Or this verse with a simultaneous heroic and erotic cadence of describing the conquest of the emperor ma~Ngalesha:
sphuran-mayUkhair-asi-dipikA-shatair vyudasya mAta~Nga-tamisra-sa~nchayam |
avAptavAnyo raNa-ra~Nga-mandire kaTachchuri-shrI-lalanA parigraham ||

Who in that fortress, which was the drama-theater of the battle-field, took in marriage the damsel,
the fortune of the kaTachchuris [form of the haihaya clan kalachuri-s for later history], having scattered the gathering gloom, i.e. the array of elephants (of the adversary), with hundreds of bright-rayed lamps, i.e. the swords (of his army) [Translation adapted from Epigraphia Indica Vol. 6].

It is not as if the sexual element was not associated with the royal in earlier Hindu tradition. Indeed, this is an inheritance from the Indo-European past of the Hindus. It was expressed in their early tradition within the grand culmination of all shrauta rites, the ashvamedha, performed by the supreme monarch upon subjugation of all rival kings. Here, the sacrifice of the horse is followed by the central sexual ritual along with the sexual banter between the brAhmaNa ritualists and the royal ladies. However, we see this as being primarily a fertility ritual – as fecundity of the people and other animals directly translated into armies and power of the rAShTra – a fact made clear in the yajus and atharvan incantations used in the ashvamedha. This is paralleled in the Roman and Celtic versions of the horse sacrifice [the only account of the Germanic one indicates a purely fertility ritual with no royal dimension], suggesting that the link goes pretty deep in the Indo-European past. However, we believe that the expressions we see in the “tantra age” are somewhat distinct – they embody what is termed the shR^i~NgAra rasa (eroticism) in saMskR^ita aesthetics rather than a primarily fertility element (though shR^i~NgAra could merely represent an aesthetic metaphor for the latter).

The explicit emphasis on rasa-s was first seen the Hindu theater as described in its earliest surviving text, the nATyashAstra of bharata. By contrast with the poetry of the itihAsa-s, we can see that this form of poetic expression was probably originally exclusively used in the theater as opposed to the royal courts. From here it appears to have merged with and then taken over the conventions of court poetry, which were originally represented by the itihAsa-s. Indeed the exalted ashvamedha ritual involved the participation of two kinds of performers: The sUta who composed and recited itihAsa – the recitation of which is explicitly mentioned as being done on the pariplava nights in the ashvamedha rite. The rite also involved sessions where shailUSha-s (actors) and raibhin-s/nArAshaMsin-s (associated poets) put up their performances. Thus, such old royal rituals themselves might have provided the setting for the beginnings of the hybridization of different poetic conventions that then crystallized as the classical saMskR^ita kAvya. With the expression of rasa and the associated theory of dhvani becoming the mainstay of kAvya, the old fertility element in royal power might have been re-configured s the expression shR^i~NgAra rasa.

Given the parallel expression of these metaphors in both royal discourse and kula tantra-s, we suggest that the two were intimately linked. However, we posit that the above motifs in classical kAvya were not a secondary consequence of this linkage, rather kAvya was itself the initial catalyst for it. Under this scenario we posit that the emergence of classical kAvya as the main mode of poetic expression in the royal court [Footnote 2] brought with it the need to emphasize the rasa-s even as in the theater. Simultaneously, the reworkings of the purANa-s into neo-purANa-s allowed this form of expression to also enter what was once the exclusive domain of the religious sUta poetry (originally similar to the itihAsa poetry under the category itihAsa-purANa). Thus, we see expressions in an extant shiva purANa (Venkateshvara Steam Press edition) that are paralleled in the kumArasaMbhava of kAlidAsa. These developments were also paralleled in space and time by the kaula reconfiguration of the sexual ritual of the older shaiva tantra. In those older tantra-s like the siddhayogeshvarI-mata and pichu-mata or brahma-yAmala (which teaches the system of the deities kapAlIsha bhairava and his consort raktachAmuNDA) the sexual ritual is primarily for production of substance (kuNDagola), which also used as offering to the deities. In the kaula reconfiguration the ritual was not just for the old purpose but also for the act of pleasing the deities residing in the various parts of the body via the highest pleasurable experience, namely ratisukham. Indeed, it is accompanied by other pleasurable experiences (bhoga) such as perfumes (gandha/lepa), food (bhojana) and drinks (pAnaka), which similarly please the deities of the various organs. Now the aesthetic theory of classical kAvya fitted well into this kaula paradigm because kAvya also produces what was termed originally in the theatrical theory as the sthAyibhAva. The experience of sthAyibhAva-s was an ultimately pleasurable experience – the reason for enjoyment of poetry or theater. Thus, kAvya too could be used to please the deities of the organs, with the shR^i~NgAraM, vIraM and adbhutaM being the most pleasurable and deeply moving (thus most pleasing to the deities) of the rasa-s. Thus, it appears that the aesthetics of kAvya was incorporated as a part of the kaula tradition. We see this plainly manifested in the saundaryalahari or the commentaries of abhinavagupta on the nATyashAstra and the lochana on dhvanyAloka of Anandavardhana.

In the subsequent phase, paralleling the rise of the saiddhantika shaiva AchArya-s as major teachers of most major royal courts of bhArata and the greater Indosphere there was also an epigraphically less visible network of kaula and other bhairava-srotas teachers and their bauddha imitators. They were reinforced by charismatic siddha-s, successors of the original kaula tradition of matsyendra. We posit that the increasing influence of these in royal discourse resulted in a strong juxtaposition of the triad of motifs, the erotic, the warlike and the imperial. Of course this was also in part adopted by the other shaiva and vaiShNava tAntrika teachers resulting in further amplification. For example, the polymath saiddhAntika from the Tamil country, aghorashiva deshika, was among other things also a noted exponent of kAvya and the theater.

We conclude with a praise by a forgotten poet of king bhojadeva paramAra who lay towards the end of this period and was often compared to emperor vikramAditya who lay closer to its beginnings:

svasti kShIrAbdhi-madhyAn nija-dayita-bhujAbhyantara-sthaabja-hastA kShmAyAm-akShAma-kIrtiM kushalayati mahAbhU-bhujaM bhojadevam |
kShemaM me .anyad yugAntAvadhi tapatu bhavAn yad yasho ghoShaNAbhir devo nidrA-daridraH saphalayati harir yauvana-rddhiM mameti ||

svasti= blessing; kShIrAbdhi= milk ocean; madhyAn= midst; nija-dayita= own husband; bhujAbhyantara-stha= enclosed within the embrace of the arms; abja-hastA= lotus hands; kShmAyAm= on the earth; akShAma-kIrtiM= undamaged fame; mahAbhU-bhujaM= emperor; bhojadevam.

kshemaM= conferring security; me= my; anyad= moreover; yugAntAvadhi= period encompassed by the ends of yuga-s; tapatu= blaze (third person imperative); bhavAn=you; yad= who; yashaH= glory; ghoShaNAbhir= by the loud announcements; devaH= god; nidrA= sleep; daridraH= deprive; saphalayati= fulfills; hariH= viShNu; yauvana= youthful; R^iddhiM= endowments; mama= my ; iti= thus
“Blessings! by my conferring of security may you blaze forth for the whole period between two yuga-endings”. Thus, in the midst of the ocean of milk, enclosed in the embrace of her own husband’s arms the lotus-handed [lakShmI] blesses emperor bhojadeva, whose fame is undamaged on the earth; the god hari, deprived of his sleep by the loud announcements of whose (bhojadeva’s) glory, fulfills the promise of my [lakShmI's] youthful endowments.

Thus, herein the erotic fulfillment of lakShmI’s endowments by viShNu is linked to the glory of the king bhojadeva – the same metaphor now lie in a vaiShNava context.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Footnote 1: The dark colored water-lily sword-blade appears to be prevalent metaphor from the “tantra age” of India. For example we encounter it in the Bhagalpur inscription of nArAyaNapAla, the king of Bengal, in punning verse:
bhayAd arAtibhir yasya raNa-mUrdhani visphuran
asir indIvara-shyAmo dadR^ishe pIta-lohitaH ||
From fear of it, while it was flashing on the battle-front, his dark water-lily sword-blade looked as though it was yellow-red-hot [pun: as though it had drunk blood] to his enemies.

Footnote 2: We may note that Tamil anthologies pura-nAnUru and aka-nAnUru, most of whose poems were in place by the first 400 years of the common era, celebrate the vIra and the shR^i~NgAra rasa respectively. These poems appear to have been mostly composed under the patronage of the Tamil warlords and kings. Thus, by this period the influence of kAvya was spreading beyond the Indo-Aryan languages and inspiring parallel expressions even in Tamil. This suggests that it was a pan-India phenomenon by that time.

The siddha tirumUlar or sundarnAtha is supposed to have journeyed from Kashmir to the Tamil country to teach a distinctive flavor of the shaiva mantramArga, which is encapsulated in his famous but obscure tirumantiram. While the tirumantiram is widely known among the practicing brAhmaNa-s of the Tamil country it is not understood by most of them due to: 1) the saMdhyA bhAShA typical of tAntrika encodings; 2) its allusions to traditions from an expert insider viewpoint; 3) loss of the direct context of the sub-tradition to which tirumUlar belonged: a hybrid of the saiddhAntika and shrIkula doctrines [such a tendency is mentioned, albeit disapprovingly, by bhaTTa rAmakaNTha-II the Kashmirian saiddhAntika commentator of the mata~NgapArameshvara tantra].

The paNDita who had taught us elements of vaidika issues brought to our attention one of the few surviving verses of sundaranAtha in saMskR^ita. Apparently, it was recorded by the great kaula mantravAdin of chidambaram, maheshvarAnandanAtha, without any surviving explanation, at the directive of his female teacher who gave him the famous instruction in mahArAShTrI prAkR^ita. It displays the same enigmatic nature of some of the Tamil verses in the tirumantiram, which ironically a vaiShNava brought to our father’s attention.

The verse goes thus:
Ananda-tANDava-pure draviDasya gehe
chitraM vasiShTha-vanitA-samam AjyapAtram |
vidyul-lateva pari-nR^ityati tatra darvI
dhArAM vilokayati yoga-balena siddhaH ||

In the city of the joyous tANDava, in the Tamil’s home,
there is a beautiful ghee-cup like vasiShTha’s lady;
there a ladle dances around like the trace of lightning;
the stream [of ghee from it] the siddha see with his yoga power.

Certain elements can be interpreted in relatively straight forward way:
The city of the Ananda-tANDava is Chidambaram as is clearly mentioned in the chidambara mAhAtmya. This is also confirmed by the mention of the Tamil’s house – indicating it is indeed referring to the place in the Tamil country. Beyond this obvious part the rest of the verse requires a non-trivial explanation.

The beautiful ghee-cup that is likened to vasiShTha’s lady: why should a woman be likened to ghee cup? We suggest that vasiShTha’s wife arundhati is the name of Alcor (80 Ursae Majoris) the binary companion of Zeta Ursae Majoris (vasiShTha). This association is an old and undisputed one. The Adiparvan of the mahAbhArata states:

suvratA.api hi kalyANI sarva-loka-parishrutA |
arundhatI paryasha~Nkad vasiShTham R^iShi-sattamam ||
Even though arundhati was well-known in the world as being well-mannered and auspicious she had doubted vasiShTha, the great R^iShi.

vishuddha-bhAvam atyantaM sadA priyahite ratam |
saptarShi-madhyagaM vIram avamene cha taM munim ||

Though [vasiShTha was] of highest purity in conduct and and delighting in pleasing his wife, she insulted him, the muni who stood in the midst of the seven R^iShi-s.

apadhyAnena sA tena dhUmaaruNa-samaprabhA |
lakShyAlakShyA nAbhirUpA nimittam iva lakShyate || (“Critical” 1.224.27-29)

Due to her jealousy [towards vasiShTha] her luminosity became low (like smoke obscuring light) [Footnote 1]: sometimes visible and sometimes not, like and inauspicious omen [Footnote 2].

In Hindu tradition planets and stars have been called cups (typically soma cups) from which the gods and manes are supposed to drink [Footnote 3]. Hence, we suspect that vasiShTha’s lady in this verse is actually the star Alcor. But what is the ladle dancing around and the ghee dripping from it?. A distinct possibility is that it means the rest of Ursa Major (the constellation of the seven seers), which is shaped like a ladle and has been termed so in vaidika tradition (the heavenly chamasa, sruch or darvi). Indeed, such an allusion of Ursa Major as as darvi is found in the atharvaveda:

aditer hastAM srucham etAM dvitIyAM saptaR^iShayo bhUtakR^ito yAm akR^iNvan |
sA gAtrANi viduShy odanasya darvir vedyAm adhy enaM chinotu || AV-vulgate 11.1.24

aditi’s hand, this second ritual ladle, which the seven seers, the makers of beings, made; may that ladle, knowing the limbs of the rice-offering gather, it on the altar.

Here the darvi (ladle) is described as being made [up of] by the seven seers, i.e. the 7 stars of the Ursa Major.

In another place the atharvaveda describes the seven seers constituting the ritual ladle (chamasa) that contains within it the glory of all types:

tiryag bilash chamasa Urdhva-budhnas tasmin yasho nihitaM vishvarUpam |
tad Asata R^iShayaH sapta sAkaM ye asya gopA mahato babhUvuH || AV-vulgate 10.8.9

A ritual ladle with slanting opening and bottom-side up, in it is placed glory of all forms; there sit the seven seers all together; these have become the guardians of the great one.

Interestingly, this mantra comes, along with several other such riddle-mantras, in the mysterious riddle or brahmodaya sUkta of the atharvaveda, which has a tone similar to the siddha’s riddle-speech. A version of this again offered by the bR^ihadAraNyaka upaniShad of the shukla yajurveda and expanded further offering a clue for what the siddha meant:

tad eSha shloko bhavati –
Regarding this there is the following verse:

arvAgbilash chamasa Urdhva-budhnas tasmin yasho nihitaM vishvarUpam |
tasyAsata R^iShayaH sapta tIre vAg aShTamI brahmaNA saMvidAna|| iti |

“There is a ritual vessel which has its mouth below and bottom-side up. In it is placed glory of all forms [shaMkarAcharya clarifies: “yathA somash chamase” as soma in the chamasa vessel]; on its rim sit the seven seers; and speech, the eight is speech apprehending the brahman”

arvAgbilash chamasa Urdhvabudhna iti | idaM tach Chira eSha hy arvAgbilash chamasa UrdhvabudhnaH |
“There is a ritual vessel which has its mouth below and bottom-side up”: is this head, for it is a vessel which has its mouth below and with bottom-side up.

tasmin yasho nihitaM vishvarUpam iti | prANA vai yasho vishvarUpam | prANAn etad Aha |
“In it is placed glory of all forms”: the life functions (prANa-s) are indeed the manifold glory. Hence, this statement means the life functions.

tasyAsata R^iShayaH sapta tIra iti |prANA vA R^iShayaH | prANAN etad Aha |

“On its rim sit the seven seers”: the seers are indeed the life functions; this statement means the life functions i.e. the 7 prANa-s.

vAg aShTamI brahmaNA saMvidAneti | vAg ghy aShTamI brahmaNA saMvitte || BU-kANva 2.2.3

“the eighth is speech apprehending the brahman”: speech indeed is the eight which perceives the brahman.

From the version in the atharvaveda it is clear the external Ursa Major is being meant with the term tiryagbilaH being proper for the constellation. The bhR^ihadAraNyaka has made a few adjustments to suit the internalization of the external visualization of the constellation via homologizing with bodily functions. The speech here is the one which results in mantra-s being articulated and mantra-s are from the beginning of Vedic tradition seen as an embodiment of the “brahman power”. So speech is seen as being in constant apprehension of the brahman.

Coming back to the siddha’s verse we propose that it uses a similar set of metaphors as these Vedic mantra-s. Thus, we sum up the interpretation of the verse:
● The siddha first locates himself in the Tamil country in Chidambaram – here he specifies the location of his sAdhana.
● Next he uses the metaphor of vasiShTha’s lady (arundhati) to give a clue regarding how his next metaphor must be interpreted.
● Then he talks of the ladle and gives a further hint that it dances around and tracing a path like a lighting streak (indicating it is a luminous object).
● Finally, he states that the ghee-stream from this ladle is perceived by the siddha by means of his yogic powers. We suggest that as in the upaniShad the siddha has internalized the celestial ladle, Ursa Major. This ladle is now in his internal sky that in that in the tAntrika parlance is the chidAkAsha. The stream of ghee pouring from this ladle is consistent with a well-known metaphor of the stream of nectar which the tAntrika drinks during the performance of khecharI or from his head as he meditates of on a deity in the head or the conjunction of the deities in the sahasrAra chakra in the cranial crown (in the kaula traditions). Hence, it appears that as in the upaniShad, the internalized ladle is situated in the head and pours the ghee-stream which is equivalent to the amR^ita-sravaNa of the yogin.

A excursus on vasiShTha and arundhatI:

In addition to the two stars vasiShTha and arundhatI forming one of widest binaries [Footnote 4] there is the notorious non-associated star Sidus Ludoviciana which forms a triangle with them. But its magnitude is 7.6 and beyond typical naked eye visibility. However, there have been reports of seeing up to magnitude 8 in the darkest of sites. Perhaps in the darkest premodern skies mag 8 could have been attainable and Sidus Ludoviciana sighted – a fitting feat for a siddha’s eyesight – the yoga-chakShu indeed! There is Mizar B the closer optical binary companion of Mizar at magnitude ~4. But then this is too close to resolve with naked eye at 15 arcseconds (human eye resolves ~2 arcminutes). The period of the vasiShTha-arundhati binary would be too long to have been observed during human existence to date: currently estimated at approximately 750,000 years. The Mizar A-B system is estimated at approximately few thousands of years but then it should not have been visible to premodern viewers. Yet, mysteriously, the mahAbharata makes an allusion, though entirely anachronistic, of arundhati’s motion relative to vasiShTha:

yA chaiShA vishrutA rAjaMs trailokye sAdhu-saMmatA |
arundhatI tayApy eSha vasiShThaH pR^iShThataH kR^itaH ||

She, O king, who is well-known in the three worlds and respected by the good, even that arundhatI has made vasiShTha stand to her rear!

Interesting as this is, it might not necessarily imply knowledge of the revolution of arundhati and vasiShTha – alternative explanations could be the change in brightness of arundhati [Footnote 1] or an ancient memory of a time when due to precession of the earth’s axis arundhati might risen before vasiShTha. In any case it is anachronistic in the context of the many unconnected omens narrated at the beginning of the great war.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Footnote 1: We were for long puzzled by this legend and wondered if it meant that at some point in the historical past Alcor underwent a loss of brightness. Interestingly, in 2001 a paper was published Polcaro and Viotti in which they suggested that the Sumerian/Babylonian records suggest that Alcor was probably brighter than what it is now around 2000 BCE, perhaps being as bright as Mizar itself. Their main reason to suggest this is because the Sumerian/Babylonian records place Alcor as a separate constellation apart from the rest of the core Ursa Major, which is termed the constellation of the great wain. So they reason that the Sumerians might have done this only if Alcor was much brighter then. The Hindu legend is, to our knowledge, the most explicit reference to Alcor having become fainter in human memory. Another point of interest is the connection between Alcor and the so called lost Pleiad in multiple traditions. In several traditions there is the legend of one of the 7 Pleiades being lost and the number becoming 6. Of these, in Mongol, Greek and Hindu tradition there is the legend that the lost one was/became Alcor. In Mongol tradition the 7 stars of Ursa Major are considered 7 thieves who kidnapped one of the 7 maidens, the lost Pleiad, and kept her with them, where she is the Cold star, Huitung Ot. This raises the question if this connection is merely a consequence of numerology and shape (Pleiades and Ursa Major) or it the variability of Alcor and the lost Pleiad happened roughly around the same time.

Footnote 2: In Shinto omenlogy too there is an inauspicious omen associated with the non-visibility of Alcor: If a person fails to see Alcor, he is said to die by the end of that year. Given the presence of a portent in both the Indian and Japanese world it is conceivable that there was some omen associated with star going back to prehistoric times.

Footnote 3: Interestingly, the Canadian Miqmak tribe also has a legend which takes Alcor to be a vessel.

Footnote 4: The widest double (more correctly triple) known to date is Fomalhaut the brightest star in Pisces Austrinus. This system in addition to the widely separated companions which were only recently discovered also has an exoplanet and a ring around Fomalhaut A. Fomalhaut B is the variable star TW Piscis Austrini which is a BY Draconis variable varying due to large star spots and rotation.

Like the ikShvAku-s bound by the rakShas,
like bhIma neutralized by the cast of dice,
like rAma stopped by the lord of the armies,
like abhimanyu felled by the kuru hosts,
within us were diversely oscillating pistons,
we lay as an engine unable to engage the wheels.

We dodged the strike of the agent of skanda,
twice skipped entry into the abode of the asura,
then came out of the realm of the sylvan durgA,
thereafter back-hurled the vile, gripping kR^ityA,
But was this all just to fall like a common man,
in the manner truly detested by kShatriya-s

Eight are the cremation grounds, the mahAshmashAna-s:
chaNDogra in the eastern reaches of the va~Nga-s,
yamajvAla where the sea laps the draMiDa shores,
varuNakapAla where the Anarta-s have their drinks,
kuberabhairava where one learns mahAlIlAdevI’s teachings,
shrInAyaka, outside which the andhra-s flock to brothels,
aTTahAsa, wherein cherikA-s are possessed by bhUta-s,
ghorAndhakAra, from beneath which hi~NgulA prances,
And kilikilArava where the gargantuan ape was killed.

We only vaguely knew of the shmashAna-s, not their names or locations. Then we ascended to the stronghold of upasha~Nkushiras where he was relaxing with his dUtI barbarIkA. We asked what had befallen mahAsha~Nkushiras. His face turned pale. He then pointed to the west and said: “there he is roasting away on a pyre at varuNakapAla”. The amAtya and shachiva wanted to hide from us or play down the end of mahAsha~Nkushiras. But we were not to be fooled. It struck a cord somewhere deep within us: could it be that we follow him on that way? The lesser brAhmaNa in our retinue said that we should go and meet vAtulashiras. So we went there with our retinue . We heard from his beautiful daughter kShetrA that vAtulashiras had been possessed by a DAvI. The looks of kShetrA bewitched us; we wanted to linger in her company, reading comics, and our retinue was more than happy to oblige. We soon learned she was accomplished in more ways than her looks despite living in the midst of mUDha-s and praduShTa-s and kShetrA of her own tried to make conversation with us. She was telling us that she was intent on performing a six year sAdhana to relieve her father of the DAvI. We intently listened to her plans, all the while snatching glimpses of her face. But right then our most trusted alter ego signaled to us, pointing to two mating cats, which were screaming in an orgiastic climax just beyond the hedge which surrounded kShetrA’s house. We were awakened like matsyendra in kadalIrAjya by gorakSha. Leaving the amAtya and the lesser brAhmaNa to deal with kShetrA we rushed out with our alter ego. The cats continued their engagement, their cries reverberating through the afternoon quiet. Our alter ego said that the DAvI had probably seized both of us even as we had been enamored by kShetrA. We left the place without even saying bye to kShetrA.

We returned home and at the evening hour with our alter ego left towards the rocky massif of vAyava. In our mind we were repeatedly turning the issue of the end of mahAsha~Nkushiras. We reached the great vaTa-vR^ikSha that sprawled like a forest in itself. There we mentally worshiped indra that he may raise us, the Arya, above our dasyu foemen. We wondered what is that befell mahAsha~Nkushiras: how could he be killed while being so well-versed in his lore. We wondered why was it that he fell much like the great agnimanthin before him. What was the chink in his armor? We sat there with our alter ego thinking if such an end might befall both of us. Just then tura~NgA came by running covering the whole length of the ground that lay in from of us in less than a minute as was usual of her. She said: “Those great yoddha-s are all puffed up with pride about their preparation and are eagerly awaiting battle. It seems only you and me are here not doing anything serious. You just sitting and staring idly with your alter ego beside you, and me trying to increase my athleticism.” Still thinking about mahAsha~Nkushiras roasting away on the pyre we absentmindedly asked her: “Are you trying participate in some race.” She: “Yes, do you not know I am the fastest.” We: “May be somebody will be faster in the actual race.” She: “But they will not be prettier than me.” That made us look up more closely at tura~NgA. We had to generally agree with her self-assessment and this induced us to spend more time with her. So we asked our alter ego to proceed home and left the shade of the great vaTa vR^ikSha to hang out with tura~NgA. She said: “Let us go to check out what the puffed up yoddha-s are doing in the sabha and figure out where we stand vis-a-vis them.”

There samastasena stood up and said: “Alien brAhmaNa! If you are really a brAhmaNa like us then tell us what would be the period of water oscillating in this U-tube.” We struggled for some time but failed. Then sphichChiras stood up and said: “sqrt(tan(x))dx iti shritasya ko .anukalaH? api tasya dx/(1+x^4) iti shritasyaanukalena saha sambandhaH ?”. We struggled for some time and failed again.

Pleased with our failure they asked: “O nAma-mAtra brAhmaNa! Can you ask us anything that we would not know?” We: “Why does cyclooctatetraene behave like and acid and what is the salt it would form with KOH?”. The yoddha-s struggled for sometime and fell silent. Thus, we had at least managed a draw in the j~nAnodaya. It struck us then that we should not be draining our time in tura~NgA’s moha and instead seek to emulate Odin in drinking from Mimir’s well.

We then reached that well of the great drink in the year of pramoda. We drew up the drink and were about to consume it like the warrior dashadyu drinking soma for we were to head to the great war like the one where the varashikhas were consumed. Then much to our consternation and pleasure the three pretty girls kShetrA, tura~NgA and tantunAbhikA appeared beside. We were momentarily distracted for not one but all three stood beside us, before whom there was hardly a man who would not be imprisoned by the shR^i~Nkhala of kAma, much as the mysterious danava imprisoned by gaNendra. We felt like placing aside our cup and conjoining with them in sa~Ngha hoping to enjoy pleasures such as those enjoyed by the deva of the deva-s in maithuna with the bewitching asura kanyA viliste~NgA. At that point the brightest of the three tantunAbhikA who shone like a trikA devI standing on a bhairava spoke forth: “If you really wish to enjoy our sa~Ngha you need to exhibit skills of a yoddha. I know you have conquered many of my UrNapaTa-s but mastery of the lUtikA-s is not enough. You need to conquer the mighty ratha and the koSha.” We smiled for with the cup of the elixir we knew it was hardly a difficult thing for us. The sachiva said just drink a sip and mount the ratha which we have ready here – all will be accomplished with that. We marveled at the forethought of sachiva and how he had kept the ratha ready. But just then braindeya appeared on the scene and said: “O bhArgava this elixir is like the gift of indra to the sUtaputra – you can drink it only once. Like rAdheya having to either slay ghaTotkacha or arjuna you can either drink it to enjoy the company of these girls or you may drink it and become the yoddha you desire to be. It was by trying to drink twice did mahAsha~Nkushiras and agnimanthin attain their ends.” Just then the amAtya shouted: “do not fear, you can drink twice.” Since braindeya had already drunk his sip we feared he could be right and remained cautious. We chose not to pursue the women and drank for victory in the other wars. Now we felt like bhImasena after emerging from drinking the juice at vAsuki’s lair. The battles piled on quick and hard shortly thereafter. In first of the encounters that followed samastasena rushed at us like an invincible droNa but like vR^ikodara we overthrew him after a close combat. Then we hurled the dreaded sphichChiras from his ratha and he was crushed by his own wheels.

It seemed the elixir was taking us where we wished to be. Years latter, tantunAbhikA came back to us and asked us to go with her. We thought that was great idea and embarked on what was a long journey. We first moved a little west and settled in the cave at puShpakedAra. There for long we stayed subsisting on two meals and a beverage for the day. Indeed they say:
He who eats once is a tyAgin;
He who eats twice is a yogin;
He who eats thrice is a bhogin;
And he who eats four times a day
is verily destined to be a rogin!
Thus, we resided in that cusp between the yogin and the bhogin. Avoiding contact with society, except for the necessities of commerce and for the rare gaNachakra-s with the inner circle, we spent the hours in contemplation and discourse. Our objects of contemplation were there great words we discovered in that truly voluminous and seemingly never-ending tantra of the great tiraskariNI. On the first few days we explored for ourselves the van der Pol equation in the form:
dx/dt = y
dy/dt = b*(1 – x^2)*y – x
Where b is a constant.

On all those nights we gazed southwards at the dog of rudra. Hence, the shruti says: “ArdrayA rudraH prathamAnam eti |” To the south of the dog near the edge of the Milky Way we saw a little asterism. A little to its north lay RS Puppis. We kept watching it night after night as long as we could, a star so bright that it shone at Mv= -6.09. We thought of the halcyon days of yore when our first telescope caught its first light in Perseus. Turning to the north we spent time gazing at the nebulosity of M76 and thereafter in what may be called the connection to the gods of M81.

One day we awoke from a bad dream. “What was it?” tantunAbhikA asked.
It was a large hall but with not much sunlight despite it being the middle of the day. There were vague faces all around us, much like hazy figures king yudhiShThira might have seen in course of his Stygian sojourn. Of those, we only recognized tantunAbhikA veiled by a considerable haze.
There as paper of coarse consistency before us. On it were scrawled the desha-bhAShA words which included among other things:
nimnalikhita muhAvaro.n se vAkya banAo-
vIra-gati ko prApta honA
TUTa-fUTakara-ronA
Dhera ho jAnA …

Sitting in that hall we started making sentences such as:
apabhraMsha kI patrikA se laDate hue haM vIra-gati ko prApta hue |
apabhraMsha kI bhayAnaka patrikA ko dekhakar hamArA puruShatva miTa gayA aura haM TUTa-fUTakara-rone lage |
apabhraMsha se ghora Thokara khAke haM vahI.n Dhera ho gaye |

tantunAbhikA laughed and went to the sprawling book shelf to pick a dusty volume termed the “muhAvarA aura kahAvata saMgraha”. As she was leafing through it a Mongolian pop song played in a loop in the background. We felt a strange sensation – not something which could be described in words – it combined the fear put into the Iranians by the ancient god Pan (Arya: puShaN) with the awe of the same god experienced by the Greeks during their great clash. Even as we watched the tantunAbhikA receded into the background even as a wisp of spider web and vanished.

A yakShiNI dIrghanidrArati appeared from beyond the haze and said:

Some find rest by going home,
Some find rest on the bed,
Some find rest in a woman,
But for some there is no rest,
except that which death brings.

Continued…

We provide below a translation of the proto-scientific section of bhR^igu smR^iti along with a comparative analysis vis-a-vis Miletian school of Greeks:
Translation of the bhR^igu smR^iti 1-4

We are not entirely happy with this translation done sometime back: Despite trying to be as literal as possible it is difficult to achieve that exactness for a text like this one. Yet it might be good enough for those interested in the comparative history of early philosophy and science in India and Greece

We have to admit that there is nothing very new in these episodic geopolitical musings; nevertheless, we engage in revisiting these themes for it is perhaps away of registering the connection between history which is being made and history which has gone by.

Sometime back we were in the desh on a visit. There we met a marAThA gentlemen, whom we have been meeting rather sporadically since the days of our youth. However, on each occasion we have ended up having long conversations – typically on a rather narrow area of biology, but also, at times, extending to other matters of more general interest. On that visit, just before leaving home to meet him, I was leafing through the newspaper while having breakfast. Incited by its contents I remarked to my parents that Hazare was not exactly what he seemed to be but someone who had been co-opted by a rather dark force, the Anglosphere and its allies, for fomenting trouble in bhArata. They responded by asking what I thought about Kejriwal, who was still relatively low in his profile. Based on the data streaming in via the internet, it was not hard for me to reply that he was something more sinister – not merely a Gandhian who was drawn into committing Gandhian blunders but a full-fledged “first responder” who was way more dangerous for bhArata than the bumbling Anna. We then met the said marAThA and discoursed on the usual topic. Thereafter, he spontaneously remarked that there was great change taking place in bhAratavarSha and said with some excitement that Kejriwal promised to bring a whole new system in place that will make parties like the Kangress and the BJP irrelevant. We were aghast, for we knew him to be a sensible and generally sharp man otherwise. For a moment we wondered whether we should rebut the claim and try to bring him to light, or simply let it pass and let him learn the reality the hard way. For some unknown reason, we adopted the former path and after one more hour of conversation we had sowed sufficient doubt in this mind that we felt a cure was likely. We just heard from him out of the blue that he is not buying any of Kejriwal’s wares anymore and fears that the nation is being brought to dire straits by this man and his gang. He declared that it was an attempt at bringing a Maoist coup to bhArata – indeed, he recalled us saying that democracy and Marxism usually come gift-wrapped; so the receiving nation usually does not know of the horror of what is lurking within the package until the wrapper unravels.

This prompted us to put down a note on the varieties of first responders and the paradox of the thing called Maoism. First responders might be defined as individuals who react to any event in a distant nation to create situations that are ultimately in the interest of the Anglosphere, in particular its current overlord. They might be: 1) “native levies” who, similar to their equivalents in the colonial era, would voluntarily fight on behalf of the “masters” (here the Anglosphere and allies) against their coethnics; 2) They could be agents of various types from the Anglosphere itself operating either within the target nation or in one of the Anglospheric countries. 3) They could be local rabble-rousers and mobsters who have their own agenda but are purchased or co-opted for unwittingly doing dirty work for the Anglosphere. One may ask: If these are the first responders are there any other tiers of responders? Certainly – there are the external attack dogs, primarily Islamic forces, which are often deployed quite independently of particular events. There are also the internal violent forces. like leftists (most important ones being Naxalites in India), and Christian missionaries who act on a different schedule. Finally, there are the mlechCha armies themselves primarily lead by and mostly composed of white fighters who only rarely deployed for direct action (e.g. in Central America).

Looking at history, one can see how this strategy of first responders was developed by the Anglosphere. As is always the case in such matters, the pioneers were the English and their activities took a more contemporary shape during the height of the WWII (We are of course not describing earlier precursors such as the sepoy army of India and the Indian police force of the British Raj in this note, though there is no doubt that these mechanisms are related). As the imperial Japanese forces started their conquest of Singapore the English were badly beaten. However, they had built a force of first responders who would delay the objective of the Japanese military and do their best to uphold the English rule. These constituted the Singapore Overseas Chinese Volunteer Army of Han fighters who put up a strong resistance against the Japanese force on behalf of the English. The important point to note regarding the SOCVA was that they were not fighting for an independent Chinese state against Japanese hegemony. Nor were they native levies for the English force or paramilitary defense personnel in British payroll. Rather they were a new type of force who acted as seemingly independent native responders but whose real job was to act to uphold English interests. As the Japanese conquering force advanced into the Malay peninsula the English set up yet another such force first responders, this time constituted from the Malayan Communist Party and they were given the new name, the Malayan Peoples’ Anti-Japanese Army. These were trained by the English in subversive activities and let lose all over Malaysia to act on behalf of British interests (A detailed account of this might be found in the excellent book by Bayly and Harper; Forgotten Wars: Freedom and Revolution in Southeast Asia). In this tangled web we also see a connection between Chinese MPAJA fighters, like Lai Lai Fuk (his English interlocutors called him “a very likeable guy with an incisive brain”; his head was summarily chopped off the Japanese when they caught him) and Chin Peng, and the new emperor of all chIna-s, Mao Zedong. This connection is of importance to understand the underpinnings of the chIna-mlechCha alignment against the Hindus which played out over the subsequent decades. Thus, there is ample precedence for such action mediated by the first responders coming straight from the mouths of English themselves. Yet, a Hindu were to propose that such things also happened in India, where the English were forced to quit against the wishes, he would tarred as a conspiracy theorist (for instance we as we were penning this essay, the generally pro-Hindu author K Elst wrote a tract claiming that all Hindu claims for Anglospheric intervention were merely figments of their conspiratorial thinking).

Anyone aware of these events would realize that they offer sufficient probabilistic priors in the Bayesian sense that the Anglosphere was involved in similar mischief in India. This becomes especially relevant given the fact that the English knew fully well that the mainstay of the struggle against them were the forward caste Hindus: brAhmaNa-s and kAyastha-s forming the vanguard backed by kShatriya-s or functionally equivalent jAti-s, vaNija-s and service castes. The English elite had a deep-seated hatred against them, which was accentuated by their being heathens and resisting Christianity by virtue of their civilizational moorings. The English had a long tradition of allying with Islamic powers against their rivals, in India against the Hindus, and also against Russia and France. But the First war of Independence of 1857 CE had shown that there could be an alignment of Hindu and Mohammedan interests when it came to the English. Hence, they worked assiduously to cultivate useful Islamic forces who could act as a counterbalance against Hindus. In the earlier phases of the struggle, Hindu savarNa leaders had managed to mobilize both lower strata of Hindu society and the tribal forest peoples against the English. The latter were hence targeted for subversion and were set up as a counterbalance for the forward caste Hindus. The English also tried to create a rift among the forward castes by classifying the particularly restive kAyastha-s as shUdra-s contrary to Hindu tradition. These well-known actions of the English left them with a sufficient raw material in the form of the Mohammedans and the people of the lower social strata as potential first responders. Additionally, after the emergence of fiery nationalist leaders like Tilak (a brAhmaNa) and Aurobindo (a kAyastha of the bomb in Bengal movement) and subsequently the armed struggle, the English closely “managed” the liberation movement by eliminating such dangerous leaders and attempting to channelize the Indian expression via more non-threatening leaders epitomized by the Gandhi-Nehru clique. These activities also gave the English further opportunities to plant first responders. The aftermath of WWII, however, left the English power in a disarray. Their initial defeat at the hands of Japan had smashed their image of invincibility in the eyes of Indians. The subsequent trial of the Indian National Army of Subhas Chandra Bose and the Indian reaction to it showed that the Indians were unlikely to be suppressed for much longer and the days of the British empire were numbered. This realization seems to have led to concerted action by the English to have their first responders in place to give the Indians long-lasting pain from a parting sting even as the imperial scorpion was forced to scurry out of the subcontinent of jaMbudvIpa.

After the defeat of Japan in WWII the French oppressors tried to reoccupy their territory in Indochina but they were repulsed in the fierce struggle for freedom by the Vietnamese. In a parallel situation, in Korea forces of the Han chIna-s and the Americans, the new hegemon of the Anglosphere, clashed. Subsequently, the Americans waded into Vietnam to reinforce the white domination over Asian states. In these battles the Americans imitated the English strategy of setting up first responders. An important facet of the first responders set up by the Americans was the more blatant use of Christianity: Being less tempered by Charles Darwin than the English, the Americans were way more ready to use this viral West Asian memeplex to mentally subvert people there by creating large masses of first responders as well as sleeper cells. The strategy worked wonders in Korea and early one in Vietnam. However, these efforts were less successful during their occupation of Japan due to the earlier extensive immunization program against Christianity by the Japanese elite and the private protection of Shinto and bauddha ritual despite its public restriction. The Americans got their first taste of the subcontinent when the aided the English in repulsing the Japanese thrust along with the INA towards India. We suspect that it was during this event the Americans seem to have formulated their basic concept of Northeastern India as a foothold to reach China. Around the time of WWII, the Americans supported Indian independence against the wishes of their imperial cousins. However, once independence was achieved the Americans hoped the Indians would attach themselves to the US as a humble client state. Luckily, the Indians, fresh from the battering at the hands of the previous overlords of the Anglosphere, were in no mood to play along with the American wishes. Moreover, uncle Nehru, who was now the ruler of India, did not appreciate the significance of the leadership change within the Anglosphere. He thought of the Americans as not being the real thing, unlike the English with whom he was close, both culturally and socially (e.g. his relationship with Mountbatten’s left-leaning wife), and consequently dismissed the former. Given a certain vindictiveness, which is characteristic of the US foreign policy, this inauspicious start of the relationship meant that the Americans were going to act vengefully like a scorned lover, and reactivate the English first responders for harming the Indian state. In addition, they had developed their own white indological brigade under Norman Brown as part of the OSS (the predecessor of the CIA) and deployed them to create a new generation of first responders.

In the second half of the 1900s the Indians moved close to the Soviets with whom the American were locked in the Cold War. In India two major anti-government and also anti-Hindu forces that emerged over this period – the Maoist socialists (Naxalites) and violent Mohammedan groups, a continuation of millennial enemies of the Hindus, who remained behind due to the blunder of secularism imposed on the Hindus by the Nehru-Gandhi clique. The Americans at that point were not too sanguine about overtly supporting either. If the former became powerful they would be worse than the “Non-aligned” government and could join the other socialist forces in creating a further anti-American front. The Mohammedans were not too happy with the support given to Israel against the founders of their religion, the Arabs; hence the Americans were not too sure if strengthening them within India would be the best strategy, especially for their ultimate project of infiltrating Christianity. So they spent greater effort in propping up the terrorist state of Pakistan as external handle to contain the rise of India keeping with the well-known American policy of not to let any large territory to be dominated by a single power. In the later stages of this period, with the help of Pakistan, they also set up the violent Sikh insurrection in the Panjab. The Anglosphere also received unexpected help for more long term subversion from the secular Nehru as he did nothing to prevent American missionary activity in the Northeastern states. Rather than arm the great heathen leader Rani Gaidinliu to uproot the Christian evil in those regions and restore the old heathen tradition the Kangress government ended up disarming her. Thus, they were able to create a suitable foundation for their strategy of using the Northeast of India as foothold to reach China. Likewise, they used the laxity of the secular Indian system vis-a-vis Christianity to infiltrate vast swaths of the Indian population (e.g. Andhra) and create assets that were to come of use later (e.g. YSR Reddy).

As the Americans emerged victorious in the Cold War, they were buoyed by further by wins against weaklings in Central America and Iraq. This freed them to set rolling the internal actions in India with greater force. The end of the 1900s also saw the upwelling of the true spirit of India, the Hindu spirit, and this expressed itself first in the form of the rAma-janmabhUmI incident and then the election of a nationalist government headed by the BJP. The subsequent testing of nuclear weapons by this government was perhaps the key event that goaded the Americans to deploy the first responder strategy in full force. We noticed the first major wave of such deployments after the nuclear tests – suddenly a whole group of Indians and Americans connected to Indians emerged like termites from the wood work to deride and condemn the tests in various media. These were still early days of the internet and we remember actively engaging in battling such entities both in real life and on online fora in the stupidity of our youth. The same repeated itself when Hindus forcefully responded to the arsonist violence of the Mohammedans in Gujarat. Here, the rising BJP leader, the chief minister of Gujarat, who had handled the Mohammedan violence pretty well was singled out for character assassination by the first responders. A key factor was the insertion of such agents into the India media right under nose of the NDA government (despite the fact they had people like A Shourie who were well aware of this). Moreover, the action of these first responders in the media influenced BJP to adopt a non-Hindutva line of electoral campaigning leading to their failure to achieve a majority in the subsequent elections. They also fought hard to build the image for the anti-national UPA government by covering up every event which showed their incompetence and tried particularly hard to prop up our Helena and her son. However, it soon became apparent that the eternally tongue-tied, anglophone Sikh prime minister of the UPA was an inveterate blunderer and the son of our Helena was no Constantine but a bumbling bonehead. Realizing the failure of this experiment, and the growing frustration of the normally apathetic Hindu masses, the mlechCha-s knew they needed a new trick. They realized that the chief of the lATAnarta provinces was not limp like the aging, weak-kneed, false vAjapeyin or self-centered as the declining saindhava octogenarian. Above all he had shown that not only could he put the Abrahamistic rioters and subversionists in place but also show good development for his state. If he were to do this for bhArata, then the Anglosphere primary principle of not allowing a single power to be become dominant in any major world territory would be plainly nullified. To counter this scenario, they worked out a clever plan to exploit the brewing discontent in urban India stemming from UPA misrule as a catapult for propelling their first responders into the government itself. Thus, was born the fellowship of the broom, which deftly stole the thunder from the haThayoga/Ayurveda proponent Baba Ramdev with the help of the preexisting first responders in the media. Given this link, it is not surprising to see that a large number of these very media people are now members of the fellowship of the broom. After having brought chaos to Delhi, by cunningly taking power, just as the UPA had done after the NDA called elections, the fellowship of the broom revealed its more sinister links, much as we had predicted: the Naxalites whose sole objective is to destroy the Indian nation-state were now an integral part of this fellowship.

This final aspect puzzled some of our compatriots. Most Indian thinkers thought that the Naxalites as leftists are part of the sinosphere (after all they go by the name of Mao Zedong). They reasoned that being part of the Sinosphere the Naxalites should be natural enemies of the US – so how could it be that they are allying with the first responder system set up by the Anglosphere, including the Christian missionaries. In this regard, critical factors of the Sino-Anglospheric interaction are not understood by most Hindu thinkers. The Anglosphere and the Sinosphere while locked in conflict, have a certain mutual admiration for each other going back to the days of the statistician Francis Galton who believed that the chIna-s were superior in IQ to the Hindus and possess a superior civilization that could potentially resonate with the Anglosphere. He even felt that Africa should be gifted to the chIna-s at the expense of the black Africans (something the chIna-s are indeed pursuing today). Several western authors having reinforced this line of thinking have given it a certain mainstream respectability in the Anglosphere, such that to a extant the chIna-s are considered a valid civilization (whereas Hindus are not being rank heathens). In part this was achieved by chIna-s adopting the outer coat of western “socialism” (a highly respected construct in white academia of the Anglosphere) suffused with Confucian “rationality” (rationality is another construct deeply beloved to white academics) while keeping the inner legalism intact drawing its nutrients from Confucianism. Thus, Mao Zedong was not like any other socialist leader from the Soviet world, or Latin American or India. The allegiances of these latter socialists is not towards their nation rather towards the utopian Marxian realm – the comrades are much like the Mohammedan brothers of the pan-Islamic Umma. Thus, they are anti-national by definition and adopt a transnational Marxian identity. After initially displaying such an facade, Mao Zedong unveiled his real nature – he was the new Han emperor – the ultimate Han nationalist who ruled as the center of the legalist system even as the wall-building lord of the Chin founded that state. Hence, Maoism in China is ultimately the same legalist system by which the great chIna emperors held their sway. But what is Maoism elsewhere, like say in India, is actually an imitation by fools, which is very distinction from its Chinese cognomen. It is just the shell which acts against the nation-state without the inner ruling force of legalism that most aggressively upholds the Chinese nation. Once, the Anglosphere realized this, it became a tool to amplify and cloak their first responders. This, combined with the “acceptance” of the chIna-s as a great power, also meant that their interests vis-a-vis bhArata could align. Thus, in the territory which the Anglosphere defines as south Asia the chIna-s are to prevent India from rising to be a dominant power. As corollary it is not surprising to see that they accept a chIna role in Afghanistan after their retreat while trying hard to deny one for India in its own natural sphere of influence.

sAndra-sthUla-naloparodha-viShamAH shakyAvatArAH
puras toyottIrNa-nivR^itta-nakra-jaThara-kShuNNa-sthalI-vAlukAH |
vyakta-vyAghra-padA~Nka-pa~Nkti-nichitonmudrArdra-pa~NkodarAH
saMtrAsaM janayanti ku~nja-saritaH kAchAbha-nIlodakAH ||

sAndra: thick; sthUla: large; nala: reed; uparodha: barrier; viShamAH: rough; shakya: possible; avatArAH: descents; puraH: first; toya: water; uttIrNa: descended; nivR^itta: climbed back; nakra: crocodile; jaThara: belly; kShuNNa: roughed up; sthalI: bank; vAlukAH: sands;

vyakta: adorned; vyAghra: tiger; pada: foot; a~Nka: print; pa~Nkti: track; nichita: full of; unmudra: opened; Ardra: wet; pa~Nka: mud; udarAH: cavities; saMtrAsaM: terror; janayanti: evoke (plural); ku~nja: forest; saritaH: streams; kAchAbha: glistening like glass; nIla: dark blue; udakAH: waters;

The forest streams with dark blue waters glistening like glass,
with thick, large reed-barriers, accessible via rough descents,
with sand banks roughed up by the bellies of crocodiles,
that have descended forth into the water and climbed back,
entirely covered with tracks of tiger footprints,
where sinkholes have opened in the wet mud,
evoke terror! [perhaps by abhinanda]

varAhAn AkSheptuM kalama-kavala-prIty-abhimukhAn
idAnIM sImAnaH prativihita-ma~nchAH svapatibhiH |
kapotaiH potArthaM kR^ita-nibiDa-nIDA viTapinaH
shikhAbhir valmIkAH khara-nakhara-khAtodara-mR^idaH ||

varAhAn: boars (accusative) ; AkSheptuM: to drive away; kalama: rice ; kavala: mouthful; prIti: desire; abhimukhAn: coming; idAnIM: now ; sImAnaH: boundaries; prativihita: guarding against; ma~nchAH: platforms ; svapatibhiH: landowners (instrumental);

kapotaiH: doves (instrumental); potArthaM: for rearing chicks; kR^ita: make; nibiDa: abundant; nIDA: nests; viTapinaH: fig trees; shikhAbhir: tops; valmIkAH: termite mounds; khara: jackal; nakhara: claw; khAta: dug up; udara: hole; mR^idaH: mud (plural);

To drive away boars coming with desire
of having their fill of the rice crop,
now landowners set up watch-platforms
at the boundaries of their fields;
the fig-treetops have abundant nests,
of doves wishing to rear their chicks,
and mud of termite mounds have holes,
dug up by the claws of jackals. [by shatAnanda]

toyAntar-lIna-mIna-prachaya-vichaya-navyApR^ita-troTi-koTi
prAg-bhAga-prahva-ka~NkAvali-dhavala-ruchaH paryaTat-kha~njarITAH |
kUjat-kAdamba-rAjI-pihita-parisarAH shAradInAM nadInAM tIrAntA
ma~nju-gu~njan-madakala kuraba-shreNayaH prINayanti ||

toyAntar: within water ; lIna: lurking; mIna: fish;-prachaya: increasing; vichaya: examination; navya: fresh; ApR^ita: engaged; troTi: beak; koTi: extremity; prAk: front; bhAga: part; prahva: stooping; ka~NkAvali: flock of herons; dhavala: white; ruchaH: shining; paryaTat: wandering around; kha~njarITAH: wagtails;

kUjat: cooing; kAdamba: duck; rAjI: rows; pihita: covered; parisarAH: environs; shAradInAM: of autumnal; nadInAM: rivers; tIrAntA: banks; ma~nju: pleasantly; gu~njan: buzzing; madakala: intoxicated; kuraba: Barleria cristata; shreNayaH: arrays; prINayanti: please (causative plural)

Banks of autumnal rivers, with their line of brilliant white herons,
with their necks stooping forward, currently engaged in probing,
with the tips of their beaks, a school of fish lurking within the waters,
with wagtails wandering around, and their environs covered
by rows of quacking ducks, with arrays of Barleria cristata
pleasantly buzzing with intoxicated bees, are the cause of much pleasure!

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
These poetic sketches belong to that large body of kAvya which we have repeatedly alluded to on these pages – sketches which bring out the kavI as a naturalist.
Some earlier examples might be revisited here:

● The crows and the parasitic koel by kavi vallaNa
● bhavabhUti’s avifauna and flora
● The kingfisher by vAkpati-rAja
● The great master kAlidAsa

We thought of our own tumultuous life and realized that we experienced some of these sights as of few years ago. More than two decades ago we saw the crocodiles. As of just over an year ago we saw the bumble bees enter the Barleria cristata flowers. From the earliest days from when we started observing the dinosaurs of the current era, aided by the man from the puraMdara fort, we noted the herons probing the autumnal streams for guppies and doves building their chaotic tangles of nests. We have seen many a towering termite mound throughout our existence. But three sights are no longer the share of the sAdhAraNa mAnava of bhAratavarSha: The tiger, or even is spoor, the boar or the jackal. For these one needs to stray far from the overgrown urban sprawls and journey to those inaccessible refugia that may be counted on ones fingers. This indeed marks the change from the bhArata of the kavI-s to that of today’s mahAnAgarin-s.

barbarin was born in an indigent brAhmaNa household. They lived just beyond a sprawling slum in an area where the Mogols had formerly camped during their final struggle with the mahArATTa-s for that city. In his youth he had been struck by a gaja, as though the wrath of the awful vinAyaka had come upon him. He was taken by some onlookers and placed in the local government hospital, where people used to say that the destitute normally went there to contribute to the supply chain of corpses for the aspiring physicians in their student years. Perhaps, vinAyaka-s were not so ill-disposed to him – he somehow survived on the care given to him by a neophyte who had just begun her medical internship. The damage to his skull notwithstanding, barbarin exhibited an atavistic manifestation of his brahminical past – as he grew up became a master of both secular lore and the shruti – the star of his otherwise unremarkable family, which at best produced methane dwarfs among a multitude of non-luminous planets. As time went by he used his skills to depart from the shores of bhAratavarSha and reach those of krau~nchadvIpa. Later he remarked that when he gained entry into the madhyama-mlechCha-varSha he felt like free man in a free country for the first time. In those alien lands his skills were widely sought after and he was solicited by many a mlechCha professor seeking to build even larger pyramids than their rivals had ever done. He noted that one such professor carried the weighty qualifier of being a Nobel laureate. While the professor was not in his own field of study, barbarin noted that the artillery of his mathematical and numerical skills could be brought to decisively bear on any academic fortress the said laureate might wish to storm. He also reasoned that with such pedigree his own future success would be assured. Accordingly, barbarin apprenticed with that professor and ere long he had landed himself a plush job using his mathematics as a facade for his pecuniary manipulations.

Having accumulated some assets, barbarin decided that he needed a woman to complete his life. With that objective he returned to the shores of bhArata and displayed his wares but no woman was caught in his snares. Disappointed he returned to his job in the mlechCha-land and rethought his strategy. He realized that barring gold-diggers, women of the type he wanted mostly sought something more biological and heritable – the signals of an alpha male or at least a facade thereof – what else is interesting to a woman in a man? Hence, he went again the next year, this time playing a different game – he did not emphasize his wealth but his physical prowess and verbal celerity. As result he snagged a reasonably endowed woman, phalgu, from a respectable brAhmaNa clan of higher standing than his own, and returned to the mlechCha country with her as his wife. For sometime barbarin felt his life had reached its pinnacle, but soon he felt a lack. He long wanted to “belong” with the mlechCha-s: He had tried everything – he acquired the mlechCha accent, he dressed like them, he watched their films, talked about their bizarre sports, and above all he hoped his wealth would make them see him as their equal. Somewhere deep within he realized that none of these were taking him where he wished to be. Now that he had a wife he decided to adopt a new strategy – he believed that if he called the mlechCha-s home and threw parties they might finally accept him into their inner fold. He accordingly played out this script and thought that it worked. He felt more and more mlechCha and apparently so did phalgu. They spoke admiringly of their dear mlechCha friends and condemned the ineptitude, disorderliness and lackadaisical ways of their friends and relatives from bhArata.

Around this time barbarin acquired a fascination for the productions of white indology – he procured a vast collection of such books and read extensively. He flaunted the knowledge acquired from these to his bhAratIya and mlechCha contacts alike. One day he would talk of the bhagabhakShakI from Chicago another day of her guru, the ex-spy from Harvard. This was his way of showing his connections to his roots. Those in bhArata took his knowledge to be profound and believed him to be a genuine arbitrator on the matters of the shAstra. One day some of phalgu’s clansmen felt called upon us to discuss these matters with him for they felt it might be of mutual interest. In course of this encounter barbarin went on about: 1) how nobody could say if the bhArata or the rAmAyaNa came first, adding that the itihasa-purANa were full of baloney that should not be mistaken for reality; 2) How the ritual of chaula-karman was of primitive, tribal, Dravidian origin – a substitute for offering the head itself as a sacrifice; 3) How murukan was a Dravidian deity who had been Aryanized and that the Dravidian word kanda was the precursor of skanda. We attacked these terrible misapprehensions of Hindu historical tradition but he waved us aside stating that we were yet to read solid literature on these matters.

With the passage of time barbarin lost both his interest in the shruti and these indological fancies. He gave up his daily veda recitations, which is the duty of a brAhmaNa, claiming that he had a lot of important work to do that left him with no time for these. Yet, his partying with the mlechCha-s continued with much elan. By now his kids were grown up and themselves carousing with the dizzying ferments of white occidental liberalism they were imbibing at high school and college. They enjoyed talking about diversity, anti-racism, egalitarianism, democracy, and above all saving the world. By now their whole clan felt no different from the mlechCha-s – they had finally attained that coveted padavI, much as the early vedAntins of the yajurveda held that after a series of ascents the supremely endowed young man attains the highest state known as brahmAnanda. Now they spoke of the great land of the free and endearingly referred to the mlechCha-rAjan (i.e., the president) of the country as the dynamic and farsighted leader of the free-world. When they got the chance of having a photo snapped with them beside the mlechCha-rAjan’s patnI they felt like mANikkavachakar and his band felt in the company of rudra and his shakti. They told their relatives in bhArata how all was free and fair in the glorious land of the mlechCha-s and expressed sympathetic condolences regarding their putrid lives. “There is nothing which is impossible here if you have the ability to do it. Merit is what counts” were the words of advice barbarin doled out to them, not bothering for a moment to tell them how they could cross the immense samudra-s to reach the shores of the mlechCha paradise.

In midst of all of this vicissitudes of existence served up a surprise that barbarin had never seen coming. While barbarin thought he was displaying virtuoso financial agility for his firm, he found that his mlechCha colleagues suddenly ganged up on him much like the crow, the jackal and the tiger on the camel in the teachings of bhIShma-pitAmaha and viShNusharman. As result he was out of his job and back home. A similar fate struck phalgu shortly thereafter. Suddenly, they were left without a means of sustaining their lifestyle. Not long after that they had to call off their parties with the mlechCha-s hoping the shore up some money for seeing through this harsh period. The mlechCha-s no longer came home and his kids went their own ways. Then barbarin was struck by a painful affliction that came upon him like an arrow of rudra. But he could not get anything beyond the most meager temporary medical assistance rendered by a third-rate physician – he could no longer afford any thing, leave alone even obtain a basic diagnosis of his condition. Bound by the disease, barbarin had to grit his way through it hoping that his body’s repair mechanisms would some how take him across this vaitaraNI of existence. He had visions of the time when he was struck by the gaja. Suddenly faces of his indigent former countrymen, who lay beside him in the hospital, and had gone the way of vivasvAn’s dreadful son crowded his vision. barbarin had yet another vision where he found himself shivering before chitragupta who was taking his own sweet time to sum up the account-book as barbarin stood before him. He wondered if a blow from the mace of the buffalo-rider might fall on him soon. He had a vision of the intern who had saved him them and though she was indrANI and hoped someone may come to save him thus. The only saving grace was that phalgu being a woman of the former times took care of him in these dire straits. He realized things could have been worse: he had long been envious of his friend tailakesha who had snagged a hiraNyakeshinI mlechChikA as a wife. Like him, tailakesha too was out of employment. But the news had just reached him that to add salt to the wounds his friend’s mlechChikA had decamped with all his earnings to enjoy maithuna with a pratikAmin. Even worse tailakesha learned his children were jAragarbha-s and not his own. Thus, getting comfort from the fate of tailakesha, barbarin and phalgu spent their now long days talking about why fate had been so adverse to them. Suddenly, it dawned on phalgu that despite all their sense of belonging they never belonged here. With some trepidation she tried to explain her gnosis to the ailing barbarin: She told him the tale of the blue jackal chaNDarava and his grim end. It hit barbarin that perhaps he was chaNDarava. He realized that the life of a jackal might be rough but that of the blue jackal was tragic. However, like the once great rAjarShi of the ikShvaku-s all he could do was to remain suspended in the incomplete universe of the son of gAthin.

In 1207 CE, after Chingiz Khan had been proclaimed as the sole ruler of all Mongolia, he decided to decisively settle outstanding military issues. In 1204 CE he had sent an exploratory force to subdue the Turkic Kirghiz of Siberia to the north. After initial successes of the Mongols they were repulsed by the energetic Khan of the Kirghiz. Chingiz Khan was hardly the one who would take such things lightly. Thus, in 1207 CE he dispatched a force, which might have numbered up to 15,000, under the leadership of his eldest son Jochi to conquer Siberia. He had the following strategic objectives: 1) He correctly reasoned that to conquer the Jin empire (i.e. the Jurchen, the ancestors of the Manchus) it would be good to have strategic depth to their North and Northeast. 2) He wished to bring the various Tungusic tribes under his banner and there by prevent them from forming a truck with their Jin cousins. 3) He wished to unify the Mongolic and Turkic people of those regions who shared a common ethnicity with his peoples into the core of his empire. 4) Erase the Kirghiz Khanate. In 1207 Jochi’s army first defeated the Turkic nations of the Uriankhai (and related Tuvans), Barga, Bashkir (who in the old days had founded the Bulgar Khanate in the west) and Khakas (a sister group of the Kirghiz) and incorporated them into the Chingizid empire. In the following months the Mongolic nations of the Buryat and the Oirat (Who were to later rise to greatness under the Khans Esen Taiji and Amasanji Taiji) were annexed. With all these peoples accepting Chingiz Khan as their overlord, they were recruited to further strengthen Jochi’s ranks to launch an assault on the Kirghiz. To the west the Khanty nation [Footnote 1] of Ugric people speaking a language related to Hungarian accepted the rule of Chingiz Khan without a conflict and joined Jochi. In 1208 CE Jochi launched a major operation on the Kirghiz. Now with all the other tribes being incorporated into the Mongol empire the Kirghiz were isolated and had little chance of gaining any allies. But their Khan who saw himself as a descendant of their great leaders like the legendary Manas and those who had destroyed the then mighty Uighur Khanate centuries ago and believed he could over come Chingiz. He fought 3 pitched battles in 1208 against Jochi’s now enhanced invasionary force but was defeated on each occasion; with each defeat he found the Mongols closing a circle around him. Finally, in 1209 Jochi launched a devastating attack on the Kirghiz in which their Khan was killed and the Kirghiz Khanate was formally annihilated. The Mongols let the Kirghiz stay in their original territory but incorporated it under their direct rule.

In 1209 CE Chingiz Khan moved Southwest against the Tanguts (of Tibetan ethnicity) after noting that they had failed conclude an alliance with the Jin. Having taken many of their towns and cities he forced them surrender. In 1211 CE he performed a major ritual to various Tengris and set out to attack the Jin. The great Khan personally led a force of 60,000 men assisted by Yelü Tuhwa, a prince of the old Khitan clan, while his three sons Jochi, Chagadai and Ögödei marched with 10,000 men each to perform an outflanking operation. The four Mongol armies eventually converged at the pass known as Badger Mouth in China where they completed the encirclement of the gigantic Jin force of 450,000 men. In the battle which followed the Khan deployed a remarkable combination of tactics: first opening with an unexpected rear attack, followed by several rounds of unrelenting cavalry charges from mount slopes interleaved with showers of arrows and ballistas from heights followed by a final frontal attack after a controlled retreat. It resulted in one of the most dramatic victories scored by any army against a vastly numerically superior force, with over 400,000 Chinese and Jurchen lying dead on the battle ground.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Footnote 1: The Khanty people remained heathen for long despite vigorous attempts to impose the Christian delusion on them by the Rus. They were finally subjugated by the 1800s and partly converted. In the 1900s they were subject to ethnic cleansing by Stalin who systematically suppressed their heathen religion and killed off all their shamans.

Continued…

brahmA rudraH kumAro hari-varuNa-yamA vahnir indraH kuberash
chandrAdityau sarasvaty-udadhi-yuga-nagA vAyur urvI-bhuja~NgAH |
siddhA nadyo .ashvinau shrIr ditir aditi-sutA mAtarash chaNDikAdyA
vedAs tIrthAni yakShA gaNa-vasu-munayaH pAntu nityaM grahAsh cha ||

As Tennyson had put it: “Nature, red in tooth and claw” and indeed biological conflict is our biggest teacher. It has lessons so profound that some of the foundations of biology itself emerge from its understanding. And we being a microcosmic part thereof learn much about how to conduct ourselves in our conflicts from the upAya-s of other life around us. It is perhaps this understanding that made viShNusharman and his wise predecessors situate their lessons on human interaction in the natural world that was there for all to see in old India. It is for this reason after invoking the pantheon as above he says:

ishvarANAm idaM tantraM prAyeNautsukyam Avahet |
yatas tirashchAM charitair nItimArgaH pradarshyate ||

This text of the gods might appear puzzling due to its teachings; however, it intends illustrating by actions of animals the path of right conduct/politics. In the midst of the wide wisdom he offers he also gives a brief lesson biological warfare. This comes in the tale of the bull and the lion where the jackals attendants strive to create a conflict between the two. In justifying the case for the lion to abjure his friendship with the bull the jackal damanka warns him of the danger of biological warfare waged by the bull:

siMha Aha: “sa tAvach ChaShpabhug vayaM pishitabhujas tat kim asau mamaapakartuM samarthaH ?”
The lion said: After all this guy is a plant-eater; whereas we are a flesh-eater; so how is he capable to do me harm?

damanaka Aha: “evam etat | sa shaShpabhug devapAdAH pishitabhujaH | so .anna-bhUto devapAdA bhoktR^i-bhUtAH | tathA .apy asau yadi svayam anarthaM na kariShyati tato .anyasmAd utpAdayiShyati |”
damanaka said: It is indeed so that he is a plant-eater and your Highness is a flesh-eater; he is food and your Highness is the food-eater. Even if he cannot himself cause harm, however, he will get some else to do it for him.

siMha Aha: “kA shaktir asya svato .apakartuM parato .apakartuM vA?”
The lion said: What power does he have to cause me harm by himself or by others?

so .abravIt (damanakaH): “tvam tAvad ajasram aneka matta-gaja gavaya mahiSha varAha shArdUla chitraka yuddheShu nakha-danta-saMnipAta-kR^ita-vraNa-shabala-tanuH | ayaM punaH sadA tvat samIpa-vAsI prakIrNa viN-mUtraH | tad anuSha~NgAch cha kR^imayaH saMbhaviShyanti | te yuShmach-CharIra-sAmIpyAt kShata vivaraanusAriNo .antaH pravekShyanti | tathA tvaM vinaShTa eva |”
He said (damanaka): you are incessantly in combat with elephants in musth, Gayals, buffaloes, boars, tigers and cheetahs, during which your body is dotted with wounds caused by the strikes of their claws and fangs. Now again (saMjIvaka the bull) always stays beside you splattering feces and urine. And by consequence of that parasites will begin breeding. As your body is close by, they will invade it making their way in via the perforations from the wounds. By this means he (the bull) will cause your destruction.

Thus, viShNusharman’s account is perhaps one of the earliest textual references of excreta  having a major role in parasite-transmission as part of predator-herbivore interactions. Of course modern studies suggest that parasites transmitted by carnivorans (example the apicomplexan Sarcocystis) can infect herbivores and weaken their muscles/other organs, thereby making them easier prey and furthering parasite transmission. It is not clear if herbivoran parasites can have a reciprocal fitness effect on carnivorans. The practice of excreting in latrines (an ancient trait in the mammalian line first recorded in dicynodonts of the Triassic) suggests that mammals try to limit parasite-transmission by localizing excreta. Such latrines of herbivores could in principle allow transmission of certain debilitating parasites to carnivorans. Potential parasites transmitted via ungulate excretion to felids include the apicomplexan Cryptosporidium and the worm nematode Trichuris. Such transmission could be exacerbated by a behavior of carnivorans, namely rolling in ungulate dung and licking themselves. Another possibility is the nematode worm Spirocerca. This worm is transmitted by dung beetles to felids – such dung beetles could indeed breed in larger numbers in the presence of bovid dung and could be available for transmission of the parasite to felids.

nIchaiH khananty asurA arusrANam idaM mahat |
tad AsrAvasya bheShajaM tad u rogam anInashat ||
Deep down the Asura-s bury this great healer of wounds: that is the drug for diarrhea, which verily destroyed the disease.

upajIkA ud bharanti samudrAd adhi bheShajam |
tad AsrAvasya bheShajaM tad u rogam ashIshamat ||
Termites bring the remedy from the [underground] water body: that is the drug for diarrhea, which verily silenced the disease.

arusrANam idaM mahat pR^ithivyA adhy udbhR^itam |
tad AsrAvasya bheShajaM tad u rogam anInashat || (AV-vulgate 2.3.3-5)
This great healer of wounds has been brought out of the earth: that is the drug for diarrhea, which verily destroyed the disease.

Such were the words of the ancient a~Ngira R^iShi-s who composed the atharvaveda. It has generally been taken to be some mumbo-jumbo; was it really so?

This article is being offered in the memory of the somewhat forgotten biologist and linguist of Hindu origin, Lekh Raj Batra. He is said to have begun his first exploration of the mycological world to find edible fungi to feed his family after they had to flee the marUnmatta violence during the partition of akhaNDa-bhArata. His extensive research on fungi and insects is central to the topic under consideration here. Our attention was drawn to this subject many years ago in our youth when we read a beautifully illustrated article by Batra and his wife on fungal agriculture by ambrosia beetles – a topic in which they were pioneers. This led us to explore Xyleborus beetles with much interest in the then undevastated ecosystem of the karNATa country. When we were probably aged 11 or so we wrote an account of our dissection of such a beetle, which revealed its anatomy, and a microscopic examination of the fungus in the bark it inhabited with our newly acquired microscope.

Humans often pride themselves over their agriculture, animal husbandry and medicine. Indeed, this has been a key to their departure from their closest cousins like the bonobo and the chimpanzee. However, they are certainly not the first develop these industries. Rather they are among the latest and probably not even the best adapted in these processes. Hence, there might be somethings to learn from the earlier organisms that have taken this path. Per say agriculture and animal husbandry are rare in the biological world. In large part it is because it entails a large investment of energy at the cost of self-reproduction while being exposed to exploitation by others who do not invest any effort but are the table to dine off the farmer’s efforts. These may be slackers from the same species who contribute nothing to the farmer’s efforts. In addition to slackers from their own species, the potential farmer is also confronted by thieves or parasites who might feed off his crop nullifying his effort. Moreover, the farming ground is susceptible to what has been termed by the American ecologist Hardin as the “tragedy of the commons”: here if there is a free-for-all access to the basic resource used in agriculture it could result in destruction of the resource itself thereby limiting any long-term gain from the agricultural strategy. Thus, agriculture or animal husbandry can be successfully established in an organism only if this investment of effort pays off down the line as a net gain in fitness. Thus, to date we are aware of the evolution of agriculture only in the following organisms:
1) The dictyosteliid slime molds: They farm bacteria like Klebsiella or Escherichia; perhaps this trait is more widely spread and awaits discovery in other slime molds including the related plasmodial slime molds (e.g. Physarum) and the more distant heterolobsean slime molds. Here, the amoebae stop eating their preferred food bacterium just before the bacterial supply gets completely exhausted and carry the surviving bacteria into their fruiting bodies. These are then sowed along with the spores and grow to provide the newly germinated amoebae and their descendants with a supply of food bacteria. These amoebozoans have been showing their sophistication other ways: Physarum was shown to solve mazes and anticipate events displaying a certain intelligence inherent in their social aggregates – having studied their G-protein signaling systems at some depth we are not surprised at this sophistication.

2) Marine snails like Littoraria irrorata: These farm fungi; these snails damage marsh grass plants to facilitate fungal growth on them and then graze on the growing fungi.

3) Termites of the clade Macrotermitinae ( e.g. Macrotermes natalensis): These farm fungi of the mushroom clade, like Termitomyces; these are cultivated within chambers in their complex mounds with elaborate internal structures. These termites need water, both for themselves and for the cultivation of their fungus especially in the drying summers and winters of the Indian subcontinent. They modify the soil below their mounds and form something called the “perched water table” that collects water percolating during rains. This provides a large “saucer” of liquid water which the termites can use for irrigation.

4) Ambrosia beetles: These farm fungi like Fusarium solani and Raffaelea. Some of their farms also interesting contain the fungus Cephalosporium (see below for more on this); these are cultivated in galleries carved into the wood of dead or live trees by the beetles. At least 11 clades of such beetles with more than 3,500 species possess different levels of agriculture. Many of them bear their fungal crop in special membranous pockets, mycangia, within which the fungi exist in a yeast-like form that serves as the inoculum for a new crop. The mycangia have evolved in the prothoracic segment (e.g. Dendroctonus frontalis) or the mesonotal segment (e.g. Xylosandrus germanus) or the mandibular region (e.g. Xyleborus affinis).

5) Attine ants: Fungi; these are the leaf-cutter ants that cut up plant material and transport them to their underground chamber to use as compost for their fungi. The newly mated queen leaves the mother’s nest carrying an inoculum of fungus to start a new crop. On the fungal crops of the attine ants is the mushroom Leucoagaricus gongylophorus which has specialized hyphae called gongylidia which are rich in fats and sugars.

6) Damsel fish: rhodophyte algae (e.g. Polysiphonia or Womersleyella cultivated by Stegastes nigricans); The might cut the surface of coral to encourage their crop to take hold.

In terms of animal husbandry we have farmer ants which herd “flocks” of aphids and leaf-hoppers and Homo sapiens who has many domestic animals. The relative rareness of these suggests that it takes a lot for agriculture or animal husbandry to be an evolutionarily stable strategy. Studying the non-human agriculturalists reveals some striking parallels and lessons.

Most non-human agriculturists, which are relatively well studied, share certain key traits that appears to be critical for overcoming the problems relating to investment in agriculture. This is the use of biological warfare to protect their crops:

● The slime mold Dictyostelium, in addition to packing their food bacteria into the fruiting body, pack certain other bacteria (5-10% of bacterial mass) that are not food (In the studied example this bacterium is Burkholderia xenovorans). These non-food bacteria secrete molecules that harm the non-farmer amoebae that might try to free-load off the bacterial crop of the farmers. Thus, the non-farmers are excluded from utilizing the crop of the farmers or finishing up all food bacteria before they can be packed into the fruiting body. Some years ago we discovered an RNA-cleaving toxin in Dictyostelium, Tox-EDA39C, which has evolved from bacterial toxins. This is likely to have been acquired from symbiotic bacteria, such those it farms, and might be also deployed as an additional line of defense against the freeloaders or even “weed bacteria” that might compete with the crop.

● The termite Macrotermes natalensis cultivates Bacillus subtilis as its bio-warfare agent. This bacterium produces the antibiotic bacillaene which is a polyene with 2 amide linkages. This antibiotic prevents the growth of antagonistic fungi that harm of the termite’s chosen mushroom Termitomyces while not inhibiting the latter. Thus it could keep the chambers free of competing fungi.

● The ambrosia beetle Dendroctonus frontalis which farms the fungus Entomocorticium (one of LR Batra’s fungi) also keeps a strain of Streptomyces thermosacchari in its mycangia. This actinobacterium produces an interesting antibiotic mycangimycin which contains a seven-conjugated double bond chain and a five-membered endoperoxide ring linked to acetic acid. Another beetle farmer Xyleborinus saxesenii houses the bacterium Streptomyces griseus strain XylebKG-1 that produces a cocktail of antibiotics. These antibiotics kill the rival fungi which harm the crop of the beetle. In this context the fungus Cephalosporium, typically farmed as a secondary fungal crop, might also produce antibiotics that are antagonists of competitors. In addition to fungal “weeds”, these beetles are victims of mycokleptic beetles that drill holes parallel to the farmer beetles and invade their galleries to raid their crops. We wonder if some of the other bacteria found in the mycangia, such as the Mycoplasmas and Rickettsias might be used against such mycokleptic raiders (see below for similar use of bacteria in inter-insect conflicts).

● The attine ants similarly deploy actinobacterial species of Pseudonocardia, Streptomyces and
Amycolatopsis against the antagonists of their fungal crops. The ant Acromyrmex octospinosus deploys a Streptomyces strain that produces a wide range of antibiotics, including the polyene candicidin and antimycin that might kill some antagonistic fungi. It appears that the attine ants might pick up new antibiotic-producing actinobacterial strains, even as antagonistic fungi evolve resistance to older antibiotics. Thus, ants appear to have preceded humans in an antibiotic search program among actinobacteria. In addition to antibiotics it is conceivable that proteinaceous toxins from the bacteria are also deployed in these battles.

In conclusion, most studied non-human farmers have a strong third party-dependent defensive strategy against parasites.

This strategy belongs to the wider set of strategies involving use of bacteria as defensive partners that is not limited to farmers. The digger wasps grow Streptomyces on specialized antennal glands to use their production of antibiotics like the piericidins and streptochlorin for prophylactic treatment of their larvae against infections during their parasitoid cycle. The aphids use the protein toxins (including some we characterized sometime ago) made by gammproteobacteria like Hamitonella and Serratia symbiotica against parasitoid wasps which attack them, while they deploy another gammproteobacterium Regiella against pathogenic fungi which infect them. Another hemipteran the silverleaf whitefly (Bemisia) deploys a Rickettsia against parasitoid wasps that attack it. We recently showed that the spider latrotoxin was derived from a bacterium like Wolbachia or Rickettsia and a subset of the several protein toxins they produce are likely to be used as biological weapons in inter-arthropod or arthopod-pathogen conflicts. Indeed, such protein toxins from the alphaproteobacterium Wolbachia are likely to be the defensive agents that aid the fruitfly Drosophila against infection by the Drosophila C virus. The blood-sucker bugs Rhodnius prolixus and Triatoma infestans and the sap-sucking bug Pyrrhocoris apterus have symbiotic actinobacteria like Rhodococcus, Corynebacterium and Coriobacterium – most researchers assume they have a nutritional role like producing the vitamin B complex (in Rhodnius); however, we suspect they have some additional role in defensive strategies that are as yet unknown. We have earlier narrated how certain beetles use bacteria to produce deadly toxins like pederin. Outside insect the nematode worm Heterorhabditis deploy the bioluminescent gammaproteobacterium Photorhabdus. As the worm pierces prey insect larvae in releases this bacterium, which then uses its remarkable cocktail of protein toxins to kill the larvae. The larvae are then eaten by the worm; in course of this process Photorhabdus release the antibiotic 3,5-dihydroxy-4-isopropyl-trans-stilbene to kill rival bacteria which might rot the larval carcass.

Thus, the origins of medicine, bio-warfare, and crop-defense are facets of the same same underlying strategy in these realms. Importantly, these appear to be fairly stable strategies: the use of antibiotics by ants is likely to back to at least tens of Myrs, while that by digger wasps is spread across all continents and might even go back to the Mesozoic. Hence, we have much to learn in terms of how these organisms have managed to stay in the arms race arising from developing resistance.

Finally, a point of note is that farming and animal husbandry is strongly linked to sociality, in particular eusociality or at least a tendency towards it: Dictyostelium, termites, ambrosia beetles, ants, and Homo sapiens. It is clear in the case of the slime mold, termites, ants and Homo that the origin of (eu)sociality preceded the origin of farming or animal husbandry. Thus, one might say that (eu)sociality predisposes organisms for activities like farming because: 1) an increase in relative fitness (inclusive fitness included) with respect to non-farmers due to benefits to long-lived groups of kin that assemble together as proposed by JE Strassmann et al.; 2) the preadaptation arising from division of labor in (eu)social groups. 3) Once established, farming might be stabilized in such (eu)social organisms due to a much-maligned proposal more recently championed by EO Wilson – group selection.

Though, (eu)sociality might have preceded farming in these organisms it probably had a strong feedback on the social structure of the organism: attine ants and the termites that farm are among the most highly stratified societies, both in terms of number and morphology of the castes. Interestingly, the attine ants have four castes (chatur-varNa!) in addition to the queen: minims (grow fungi and clean larvae), minors (guards and rank-and-file soldiers), mediae (cut and transport leaves for composting) and majors (the elite attack force and big movers).

However, in the case of ambrosia beetles, such feedback on social structure from farming might have played a major role in the emergence of (eu)sociality itself. This is suggested by the fact that while there is haplo-diploidy in ambrosia beetles, the other predisposing factor for (eu)sociality, not all haplo-diploid species are (eu)social; the farming ones however are. This again suggests that as championed by Wilson it is possible that incipient farming reinforced (eu)sociality via group-selection-like mechanisms. Interestingly, in the ambrosia beetles like Xyleborinus saxesenii the emergence of eusociality with farming appears to have resulted in caste formation along developmental lines, i.e. division of labor between larvae and adults. Here, the larvae serve as workers that compact sawdust in balls and help the adults in digging and extending the galleries into the wood. In contrast only adults perform fungus cropping and only females perform the task of plugging entrance tunnels.

In human society the emergence of farming and animal husbandry has resulted in both a stratified society and strategies for guarding farm/pasture land. This lead to the emergence of defense castes that aided such human societies to dominate or overrun hunter-forager societies. The Indo-Europeans who mastered both farming and diversified animal husbandry proved more than an match for the pure farmers, pure animal husbandsmen or those with less diversified animal stocks. In no small part was this due to the emergence of a specific caste structure in these peoples.

Lootika had wound up her fieldwork. While her group was not much interested, she somehow convinced them to go with her to the shrine of shAmalAjI. To its north lay some derelict shrines, which had been vandalized in the days of yore by the marauding Ghazis of Alla-ad-din Khalji. Their curiosity being piqued a bit they wandered around in the vicinity of the shrines. Lootika drifted away from her group for a while and went towards a small shrine, under an ashvattha tree, which was strangling a large amalaka tree, much like the mlechCha alliance strangles a heathen nation. She shone her torch to see if there was anything within. Too her surprise she saw an exquisite image of kArttikeya. He had a single head with an exquisite ram-horn crown. To his right was a peacock and to his left was the graha-mAtR^i sunandA wearing a turban, on whose head he rested his elbow. In his right hand he held a mAtulu~Nga fruit while in his left hand he held a large shakti. Lootika was amazed and looked more closely. As she gazed at the image she remembered that Somakhya had mentioned something about the pashchimAMnAya of the kaumAra shAsana when he had given her the secret 8-syllabled manu. It struck her that this might be the temple installed by manvarNavanAtha and his dUtI sarvama~NgalA, the preceptors of the adhoretas lineage of the mAnavaugha at the time the great emperor harShavardhana ruled over most of India to the north of the Narmada. She excitedly scooped some earth from the foot of the shrine and placed it in a bag hoping to gift it to Somakhya. Just then she heard her group calling out her name, stating that they needed to be going. She hurriedly placed the earth in her backpack and rushed back to join the rest.

The next day they got on the train and returned to their home city. On getting off the train they found that the whole station looked deserted. That was rather strange they thought as normally at that time of the day the station would hardly have any standing space, even as the masses of bhArata poured out to make their way to far-flung towns and cities. They found that their phones did not catch any signal and as they got out of the station they could not find a single cab. This got them worried and they looked around to see if there was someone who could tell them what had happened. To their surprise the restaurant outside the station was shuttered – an unusual sight for a Friday afternoon. Just then they caught sight of a porter who told them that the prime minister had been assassinated and it was best they made their way home carefully because there were riots raging in several parts of the city. The group panicked: Some decided that they were going to board a train and go elsewhere. Others declared they were going wait in the station itself, while Lootika remembered a secret route through the hills which Vidrum had once lead them through. She decided to take that to reach her place. A couple of others with light luggage decided to accompany her while the rest adopted their own plans.

Continued…