Dh�rman In The Rgveda

JOEL P. BRERETON DHÁRMAN IN THE RGVEDA
 In his article on the development of dharma, Paul Horsch already has  given consideration to the meaning of dharman and related terms in the Rgveda. In this essay, I examine Horsch’s conclusions about
 dharman by approaching its analysis in a somewhat different way.  is set within the Where Horsch’s discussion of Rgvedic dharman
 broader arc of the history of dharma and Indian culture, I will consider only the Rgveda. Where he discussed other nominal and verbal p
  And and dharman. derivatives of dhr, I will study only dharman
finally, where Horsch selected examples to illustrate the semantic  range of dharman, I will account, or at least try to account, for all   in the Rgveda. This strategy will instances of dharman and dharman
not produce a synoptic account that even approaches the scope of Horsch’s work, but it may provide an anchor for the reevaluation of  the history of dharma.  A study of the attestations of dharman in a single article is possible  because dharman occurs a manageable 63 times in the Rgveda,
 including once in a compound dharmak rt, six times in satyadharman,
 and once in an adjective dharmavant. In addition, there are another  and two of dhar  ıman. While this is not a four examples of dharman  small number, the relatively modest frequency of dharman nonetheless implies that it was not a central term in the Rgvedic lexicon or in
Indian culture of the Rgvedic period. Nor does the word have a long
history before the Rgveda. There are Indo-European parallels to
 dharman (cf. Wennerberg 1981: 95f.), but the only Iranian equivalent  ‘remedy,’ which has little bearing on Indois Old Persian darman  Aryan dharman. There is thus no evidence that IIr.  dharman was a significant culture word during the Indo-Iranian period. In this re spect, dharman contrasts with other terms whose semantic sphere  dharman sometimes intersected and eventually subsumed, such as rta
(Av. a sa) and vrata (Av. uruuata). Both these terms had significant roles in the old Indo-Iranian religious vocabulary, and therefore study of their meanings in the Rgveda has to consider the Iranian
evidence and their pre-Rgvedic history. In contrast, the discussion of
 dharman can reasonably begin with the Rgveda.
Journal of Indian Philosophy 32: 449–489, 2004. Ó 2004 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands. 450 JOEL P. BRERETON  But even if it was not a central term within the Rgveda, dharman is
thoroughly established in the text, since the word is attested at all its chronological levels. The following chart presents the occurrences of    dharman (including dharmavant, satyadharman, and dharmak rt)
through the layers of the Rgveda from the old family books (2, 4–6) to
book 10 and the Rgvedic appendix in 8.49–591 :
Old family books (2, 4–6) Young family books (3, 7) 1, 8.1–48, 8.60–103 9 10 8.49–59 (Valakhilya) 11 6 14 13 18 1 The distribution of the term, especially its increasing frequency in the younger layers, confirms that it is a part of the developing terminology of the Rgveda. Interestingly, 7 of the 11 attestations of
 dharman in the oldest Rgvedic layer occur within book 5, and
therefore its increasing occurrence in later books may partly reflect the influence of the Atri poets. In addition, the large number of  attestations in 9, the Soma Pavamana book, shows that dharman belongs especially to the vocabulary of Soma. Not indicated by this chart, but almost as significant, is its association with Mitra and Varun: a. These latter attestations are distributed throughout the Rgveda, although they appear especially in its older levels: 6 in the
family books, 2 in book 8 (including 1 in the Valakhilya section), 1 in 9, and 2 in 10.  Since dharman is a developing term in Rgveda, its meaning reflects
directly its etymology and form. And, happily, the formation of p  dharman is transparent. It is derived from dhr ‘uphold, support, give
foundation to’ and a -man suffix. Therefore, it denotes a thing which upholds or supports, or, more simply, a ‘foundation.’ The word  a noun of agent, then designates an ‘upholder’ or ‘foundharman, dation-giver.’ Unlike dh arma in the later period, which becomes richly evocative, dh arman in the Rgveda has few consistent, concrete associations. To
borrow an example from Stephanie Jamison (1996: 11), ‘porridge’ has specific literary connotations that the neutral term ‘oatmeal’ does not. arman is far more ‘oatmeal’ than ‘porIn its Rgvedic attestations, dh
ridge,’ and therefore, in each of its occurrences, the best approach is to see how the basic meaning of ‘foundation’ applies. Of course, ‘foun-  DHARMAN IN THE RGVEDA
451 dation’ is by no means a perfect rendering of dh arman, as I will soon amply illustrate by so translating it, but it is a good starting place. In examining its attestations, I will try to account for the use of dh arman in as coherent and efficient manner as possible. By ‘coherent,’ I mean that the actual sense of the word in a particular passage should be evidently connected to its basic meaning, ‘foundation.’ By ‘efficient,’ I intend an analysis that avoids unnecessarily inflating its semantic sphere.  DHARMAN AND RITUAL Sacrifice as the ritual foundation for the world  I begin with passages in which dharman describes the ritual as the : a, which Elizabasis or ‘foundation’ for the world. In 5.15, dharun renkova (1995: 152)2 describes as the hymn’s ‘magic word,’ is rep peated and echoed by other derivatives of dhr throughout the
:  ena rtam hymn. Dharman itself occurs only once, in 5.15.2 rt

   e param   : am dharun yaj~ nasya sak e vyoman / div o dharman : dharayanta  ır aj  at  am_ abhı y : e sedus : o nrn~ jata : ‘‘In making powdharun e nanaks: uh
_ erful the sacrifice in the highest heaven, they (= the Angirases) supported the truth, itself a support, by means of the truth / – they who have reached the men (= the gods) that have taken their seat upon the support, upon the foundation of heaven; they who, even though they themselves were born, (have reached) the unborn.’’ Threading _ through this verse is not an easy chore. The Angirases have ‘supported,’ or given foundation to, ‘the truth.’ This truth is the sacrifice itself, which is the truth because it is an expression of the nature of things (cf. Skjaervø, 2003), and as such, it is the template and ultimate basis for world. Since it is the basis for the world, the truth that is the _ sacrifice is ‘itself a support.’ Moreover, the Angirases supported this truth ‘by means of the truth,’ that is, by means of the hymns they sang. In sum, the truth (= the hymns) is the support for the truth (= the sacrifice), which, in turn, is the support for the world. In lines cd, there is an ambiguity, undoubtedly an intentional one, as to whether the seat of the gods is their heavenly seat or their seat in an earthly sacrifice. In either case, however, the ‘support,’ upon which the gods take their seat, is again the sacrifice. Since this sacrifice is   here signifies the itself the foundation (dharman) of heaven,3 dharman ritual as the foundation for the gods and the world. In a similar manner, the sacrifice is both the support and the  subhr  atamam  tam foundation of heaven in 10.170.2 vibhrad: brhat : vajas :

452 JOEL P. BRERETON    dharman div o dhar un: e satyam arpitam / amitraha vrtraha das
 yuhantamam otir jaj~ ne asuraha sapatnaha ‘‘That which blazes forth : jy aloft, well-borne, best prize-winner – (that) real (= the sun) is embedded into the foundation, the support of heaven. Striker of enemies, striker of obstacles, best striker of barbarians, the light has been born as the striker of lords, the striker of rivals.’’ Where and what, then, is the support and foundation in which the sun is ‘embedded’? On one level, at least, this foundation is likely represented by the sacrifice, in which the fire, ritually corresponding to the sun, is installed. At the end of the hymn, the sun itself then becomes a support  abhrta ‘‘by  any that sustains the living world: 4c y enema vı sva bhuvan
whom all these living worlds are borne here.’’ Note also that in the   standing between the phrase dharman div o dhar un: e, the genitive divas,  two locatives dharman and dhar un: e, patterns with either and with   both. With dharman, it replicates the phrase div o dharman dhar un: e of 5.15.2, and with dhar un: e, it inverts it. These shifts argue for the  essential equivalence of dhar un: a ‘support’ and dharman ‘foundation.’ Not only the sacrifice in general, but also the central constituents of the sacrifice function as foundations for the world. The fire is the heart of the sacrifice, and in 10.88.1 the god Agni creates the foun : svarvıdi didation for the living world: 10.88.1 havıs: pantam ajaram    : :tam agnau = tasya  aya ahutam jus bharman e bhuvan deva visp rsy  : :
  : svadhay  a paprathanta ‘‘The pleasing oblation and dharman : e kam drink is poured here in Fire, who finds the sun and touches heaven. For him to bear the living world, and yes, to give it foundation4 in accordance with his own will, the gods will extend themselves.’’ The hymn is addressed to S urya and Agni Vaisvanara. Here Agni, the sacrificial Fire, assumes the form of the universal fire, the sun, and thereby becomes the foundation for all things. Like Fire, so also Soma supports heaven and earth: 9.86.9 div o na nu stanayann    s ca yasya sa acikradad dyau prthivı ca dharmabhih :=
ındrasya sakhyam  pavate viv  ah : kala ses: u sıdati evidat s omah: punan ‘‘Thundering like the back of heaven, he has cried out, by whose foundations heaven and earth (have foundation).5 / He purifies himself, rediscovering again and again his partnership with Indra. Purifying himself, Soma sits in the vats.’’ The verse describes Soma’s pressing and purification through the woollen filter, the ‘back of heaven’ (Oberlies, 1999: 154). The theme of the presence of soma throughout the universe dominates this hymn. Just preceeding this   sanu pavam   passage, for example, we hear that 8cd adhy asthat ano  dharun bha prthivya : ‘‘(Soma) has mounted  : na : o mah o divah avyayam
 DHARMAN IN THE RGVEDA
453 the woollen back as he purifies himself, as the support of great heaven on the navel of the earth.’’ And in the verses that follow vs. 9, Soma is  : janita vs. 10) the ‘father and progenitor of the gods’ (pita devanam  divah : vs. 11). He moves between and the ‘lord of heaven’ (patir heaven and earth (r odası antara vs. 13); he ‘touches heaven’ and, ‘filling the midspace, is embedded into the living worlds’ (divisp rsam
 bhuvanes   antariks: apra v arpitah vs. 14). His representation in vs. 9 as : : the foundation of heaven and earth, therefore, accords with the context of the verse and the theme of the hymn as a whole. The sacrifice as the ritual foundation for gods Soma can likewise act not only as the foundation of heaven and earth, but also as the foundation of gods, especially Indra. This theme occurs several times, or I think it does, for the passages become  : nu stos: am mah increasingly obscure. The clearest is 1.187.1 pitum o n: am        tr am v ıparvam ard ayat dharma t avis ım, y asya trit o vy o jas a vr : : :
‘‘Now I shall praise food, that gives foundation to the great one and that is his force, / that by whose power Trita violently shook away Vrtra, whose joints were broken.’’ Although this is ostensibly a hymn
to ‘food,’ the food addressed both in this verse and throughout is the  the one who gives foundation to soma.6 Soma, then, is the dharman, the great one. We would normally expect this ‘great one’ to be Indra,7 but here Trita occupies the position of Indra as the destroyer of Vrtra. In any case, it is on a foundation of soma (or sacrificially
offered food more generally) that Trita successfully is empowered to break the obstacle represented by Vrtra.
I interpret 10.50.6 along the same lines, although the context is so open that it can be plausibly construed quite differently: 10.50.6 eta  kr:se svayam  aya  te  : suno  a tutum  sahaso yani dadhis: e = var  a vı sva savan
   a yaj~   odyatam  : ‘‘You have patram no mantro brahm : dharman : e tan : vacah made thick all these soma-pressings, which you yourself have received, o son of strength. / For your choice and for your foundation, there is offered, each in its turn, the cup, the sacrifice, the mantra, the formulation, and speech.’’ Even though the epithet ‘son of strength’ is characteristic of Fire, the god addressed here is Indra. Here the poet invites Indra to choose this sacrifice and thereby to give himself a ‘foundation’ in the power and presence that the sacrifice confers on him. In 1.55.3, we enter a realm of syntactic and interpretive uncer : tam  indra parvatam  tainly, even deeper than usual: 1.55.3 tvam : na       ati dharman bh ojase mah o nrmn: asya am irajyasi = pr a v ıry en a dev at : :
454 JOEL P. BRERETON : karman  cekite vı svasma ugrah ohitah: ‘‘To enjoy that (which is) : e pur like a mountain, Indra, you have control of the foundations of great manliness. / He appears foremost among the gods by his heroism, he who is the powerful one placed at the fore for every act.’’ I suggest  refers to the soma (mentioned in vs. 2c) and that the soma is that tam compared to a mountain.8 A problem for this view is that the basis for a comparison of soma to a mountain is not apparent.9 But if Indra’s control results in his drinking the soma, then his control is reasonably over the source or the basis of the soma, the ‘foundations of great manliness.’ These foundations might refer to the ritual, or possibly to the soma juices themselves, which are the basis of Indra’s strength. The precise sense of this verse, however, continues to elude me. The sacrifice as the ritual foundation of Soma In a material and religious sense, the sacrifice is the foundation for soma, both god and oblation, for soma is physically and visibly created within the ritual process. This is particularly evident in the hymns of the 9th book, which celebrate and effect the appearance of both the soma drink and the god Soma as soma drips through the filter and into the soma vat. The ritual is the foundation on which soma is created in    a asya  gram ındavah: patha dharmann rtasya su srıyah: = vidan 9.7.1 asr

y ojanam ‘‘The drops of great glory have been sent surging along the path upon the foundation of truth / – they that know its trek.’’ The basic image of this passage is that of soma as a race horse, and the foundation on which soma runs is the truth. The description of the  truth as a ‘foundation’ is particularly apt here, since dharman suggests a physical foundation which could support a horse.10 This verse describes soma’s descent from heaven to earth during its ritual preparation. The truth upon which the soma’s path rests or course runs, then, is either the sacrifice as a whole or the hymn. A later verse in the same hymn returns to the theme of the foundation of soma. Here, however, the foundation of soma might be either that which creates Soma or that which constitutes the god Soma’s  um  am  madena  : a y  ındram a o nature: 9.7.7 sa vay svına sak gachati = ran  asya dharmabhih : ‘‘He goes to Vayu, Indra, and the Asvins, along with the invigoration, / with the joy which is according to his foundations.’’ Because Soma has been properly fashioned in the ritual, he becomes invested with the ability to invigorate and please the gods of  the morning offering. The dharmans signify his ritual foundations, which may be also the foundations of soma itself, the nature of soma.  DHARMAN IN THE RGVEDA
455  The possibility that dharman refers to the nature of soma is strengthened because of a number of passages, considered section 4, in  which dharman has the sense of the foundational nature of a deity. I  have not included any instances of dharman with Soma among those  passages, however, because in the verses in which dharman might refer  to the nature of soma, the sense of dharman as the ritual foundation of soma is still present or still possible. In the case of 9.7, vs. 1 shows the   sense of dharman as ritual foundation but not that of dharman as the  foundational nature of a god. When dharman reoccurs in vs. 7, even though the sense of ‘foundational nature’ is possible – Re, for exam ple, translates dharmabhis here as ‘dans ses comportements’ – it continues also to carry the sense of a ritual foundation. Likewise, these senses of the foundations of soma are combined  parthivam  divya ca and elaborated in 9.107.24 sa tu pavasva pari : rajo m   matıbhir vicaks: an: a subhram  : hinvanti soma dharmabhih : / tva : vıpraso dhıtıbhih: ‘‘Purify yourself all around the earthly realm and the heavenly (realms), o Soma, according to your foundations. / Fargazing, it is you, the resplendent, whom the inspired poets speed with their thoughts and their insights.’’ Again, soma is purified both according to his ritual foundations and possibly according to his nature as the soma. In addition, the poet also evokes the image of heaven and earth as the universal foundations that support soma.  Similarly, dharman is the ritual foundation of soma and the  o, foundational character of soma in 9.97.12 abhı priyan: i pavate punan    = ındur dharm  an : y rtutha vas  ano,  da sa  dev o devan sv ena rasena prn~can

 ks:ıpo avyata s ano avye ‘‘As he purifies himself, he purifies himself in the direction of the things dear to him – he the god that fills the gods with his own juice. / The soma-drop, clothing himself with his foundations following the ritual sequence, has enwrapped himself in the ten fingers on the woollen back.’’ I have avoided the difficult problem of the identity of ‘the things dear’ to Soma. On the basis of n: i pavate . . . namani,  Ge suggests that the ‘dear’ are 9.75.1 abhı priya the ‘names’ of Soma, but they may just as well be the water and the milk, the vessels, and perhaps the hymns and names. That is to say, the ‘dear’ may be all the ritual constituents toward which soma flows. If Soma moves toward the ritual constituents which make soma become truly soma, then these constituents can be the foundations that create and define him. Note the parallelism of ‘clothing himself in his foundation’ and ‘has enwrapped himself in the ten fingers.’ The ‘10 fingers’ refer to the hands of the priests who ritually prepare the soma, so the ‘foundations’ can likewise refer to things that are the bases of 456 JOEL P. BRERETON  the soma offering. However, both Re and Ge understand the dharman not as the ritual ‘foundations’ through which soma becomes soma, but as the characteristics that soma assumes. So Re translates line c as ‘revetant ses proprietes,’ and Ge as ‘nimmt . . . seine Eigenschaften an.’ Such an interpretation is possible and may well be also implied. But here, I think, it is likely to be a secondary resonance, since the liturgical context implies that Soma is putting on all the physical ritual ingredients that are his foundation. This same hymn also describes more a specific foundation on  : ad yad  ı manaso  which soma is produced in 9.97.22 taks v enato vag            san  a jy e:s:thasya va dharman i ks o r an ıke / a d ım ayan v aram a vava : : va ındum ‘‘When the speech from the thought  : kala se ga : :tam patim jus that is tracking him fashions (Soma) on the foundation of the foremost (thought)11 or in the face of the herd,12 then the cows, bellowing as they wished, came to him, their delighting husband, the soma-drop, in the vat.’’ The verse is open to a variety of explanations, but cd establish a specific ritual context: this part of the verse describes the mixing of milk, the ‘cattle,’ with soma, who is the husband of the cows. Therefore, in b, soma ‘in the face of the cow’ should be the soma as it is about to be mixed with the milk.13 The rest of the verse refers to a different ingredient in soma’s creation, namely the recitation of the hymn. It is this thought of the seer which provides the foundation for soma. I account for the disjunctive va by a locational contrast between the ‘foundation of the foremost (thought)’ and the ‘face of the herd.’ The thought is the starting point for the fashioning of soma (and as such, its foundation) and the ‘herd’ is the point toward which soma goes. This movement reflects a ritual sequence from the beginning of the chant at the first flowing of soma into the filter up to soma’s pouring into the milk mix.   ıman appear in consecutive verses in 9.86, and Dharman and dhar  ıman is attested neither verse lends itself to easy interpretation. Dhar only twice, and so it is difficult to know whether or how it differs from  dharman. However, the formal contrasts between the two words in  this hymn are striking: dharman occurs in the instrumental plural and  ıman in the locative singular. Perhaps dhar  ıman is, as Re sugdhar  ıman is a noun (so Wennerberg, gests, an infinitive. But whether dhar  1981: 94), perhaps equivalent to dharman, or an infinitive, in either case, it can describe the ritual as a foundation for soma: 9.86.4 pra ta   a dhar  ıman: i = prantar   dhıjuvo  divya asrgran payas asvinıh: pavamana
virır asrks: ata y  : a vedhasah  : ‘‘Forth have r:saya stha e tva mrjanty r:sis: an



your (streams?),14 that speed insights and are Asvin-bound, been sent  DHARMAN IN THE RGVEDA
457 surging, together with the milk and upon the foundation.15 Forth have the seers sent surging their stalwart (insights?)16 within (the soma streams [?])17 – they the ritual experts, who groom you, o you that win seers.’’ The passage is amenable to the interpretation of  dharman I have been urging, although I cannot claim much more than that. The verse describes the blending of the soma juices pouring through the filter and the hymns that accompany that process. The juices and hymns are equated (by the fact they are both ‘sent surging’) and mixed (if indeed the hymns enter into the soma streams). In that  ıman: i might recall the ‘foundation of truth’ (9.7.1, 110.4) context, dhar or the ‘foundation of the foremost (thought)’ (9.97.22). That is to say, an additional intersection of the soma juices and the hymns is that the hymns provide the ritual foundation for the creation of soma as it flows through the filter. The meaning of 9.86.4 is not made much clearer by vs. 5, in which   vi dharman also occurs: 9.86.5 vı sva dhamani svacaks: a rbhvasah:
: pari  yanti ketavah  : = vyana  sıh: pavase soma prabh os te satah   vı   dharmabhih svasya bhuvanasya rajasi ‘‘Your beacons circle : patir around all your domains, o inventive (Soma), whose gaze falls on all, even though you are he that comes to the fore. Reaching throughout (your domains), you purify yourself according to your foundations. You rule as lord of the whole living world.’’ The hymn operates on a double characterization of Soma as ‘going around’ and as ‘leading.’ On the one hand, soma visibly goes all around the filter and symbolically goes all around his domains. And in a contrasting movement, soma visibly leads the way forward into the soma vat and symbolically leads the way into the world. This double characterization of Soma’s action is then resumed by the opposition between his domains and his foundations. The former describe the area through which soma moves; the latter the basis upon which it moves and upon which the pressed soma becomes the purified soma.18 Soma – or the Sun or even Soma as the Sun – is produced on the ‘foundation of truth,’ that is, on the foundation of the ritual, in     ıjano amrta martyes dharmann am rtasya 9.110.4 aj : v am_
rtasya

   asaro   a sanis  : yadat ‘‘You have given it birth, o carun: ah: = sad vajam ach immortal one, here among mortals, upon the foundation of the truth, (upon that) of the deathless and cherished. / You have ever raced, always flowing here toward victory’s prize.’’ The initial problem in this verse is to sort out who has done what to whom. First, who has given birth? That, surely, is Soma, who is explicitly addressed throughout the hymn. Who, then, is given birth? According to 458 JOEL P. BRERETON S ayan: a, whom Re follows, soma has given birth to the sun, or rather, soma has given birth to itself as the sun. Elsewhere, as the soma passes through the filter, which represents the midspace, it becomes a symbol of the sun (cf. Oberlies, 1999: 151 n. 107, 244 n. 119), and this passage is moving along the same lines. Who is the ‘deathless and cherished’? Again this must be soma, since these are characteristic epithets of soma. What, then, is the ‘foundation of truth’? The central problem is the relation between the ‘truth’ and the ‘deathless and cherished.’ Ge separates them by taking am rtasya carun: ah: as a par
titive genitive with the soma, which is the implied object of the verb: ‘‘Du . . . hast . . . (den Trunk) des angenehmen G€ ottertranks.’’ But in m_ rtasya  and am rtasya, which form a figure suggesting so dividing a

their connection (as Re rightly points out), this syntactic analysis is forced. It is better to construe the genitives closely, and that leaves two possibilities. First, the ‘deathless and cherished’ is in apposition to the ‘truth,’ as Re interprets it: ‘‘. . . dans l’observance de l’Ordre, (ce) beau (principe) immortel.’’ If the ‘deathless and cherished’ is soma, then soma must be the ‘truth’ as well. This is possible: Soma could be the foundation for the sun and, as part of the ritual process, an expression of the truth. But a second possibility is that the ‘truth’  and the ‘deathless and cherished’ are parallel genitives to dharman. If the ‘truth’ is again the sacrifice (or the hymn), as in 9.7, then the verse would be saying that Soma as the Sun is born on a foundation of the ritual and on a foundation of soma itself. Despite its convolutions, I prefer this second interpretation. At the heart of two other passages rests a paradox. Soma’s journey of purification takes it from heaven to earth through the midspace,19 but unlike heaven and earth, which are visible foundations, the midspace across which soma runs provides no natural foundation. According to two verses, soma nonetheless finds a foundation as it   dhiya rides the wind toward the earth. The first is 9.25.2 pavam ana        hito ¢bhı y onim k anikradat = dh arman a v ay um a vi s a ‘‘Purifying : : yourself, sped by insight, and crying loudly toward your womb, / enter the wind through your foundation.’’ The governing image is once again that of soma as a horse. Here it leaps into the wind and gallops downwards toward the soma vat. The question is: what is the ‘foundation’ that allows him to do that? Re says that it is his ‘nature’ and Ge, his ‘ordinance, instruction’ (‘Bestimmung’). Both are possible, but in light of 9.7.1 and 110.4 in which soma is founded on the truth, the foundation of soma here might also be the ‘insight’ of the priests that speeds him on his way. The difficulty with this view is that  DHARMAN IN THE RGVEDA
459 a parallel passage, 9.63.22 (below), shows no basis for a similar interpretation. Therefore, even though this passage does not demand  this interpretation, I take dharman to refer to the ritual in general, which provides the foundation for soma’s journey from heaven to earth in the purification process. The ritual gives soma a foundation through space, which itself offers no foundation. As I mentioned, the interpretation of 9.25.2 must take into account   : ag  ındram  : / vay  um  a roha 9.63.22 pavasva devayus : gachatu te madah 20  dharman : a ‘‘Purify yourself, god, toward life. Let your invigoration go to Indra. / Mount the wind through your foundation.’’ If anything, the paradox is more sharply stated here: the wind does not offer support, but yet soma finds a ‘foundation’ that allows it to mount the wind. Here Soma is the rider rather than the horse, but the image is otherwise similar to that in 9.25.2. Again too, Re’s interpretation ‘selon (ton) comportement-naturel’ is inviting. Ultimately, however, I think that here also soma’s ‘foundation’ is his foundation in the ritual. Summary  This section has considered those passages in which dharman describes the ritual, or elements of the ritual, as a foundation. The ritual provides a foundation for the world (5.15.2), for heaven (10.121.9, 170.2), for living beings (10.88.1), and for heaven and earth (9.86.9). It is likewise the foundation for the gods (1.187.1), or more specifically of Indra (10.50.6) or the manliness of Indra (1.55.3). The bulk of these passages, however, concern the ritual foundations of soma. This theme emerges especially in the verses in which soma depends on a ‘foundation of truth’ (9.7.1, 110.4, cf. 97.22, 86.4), where the truth may be   the ritual or the ritual chant. The dharman or dharmans of soma may also extend beyond the realm of the ritual and the visible purification  of soma. Dharman may imply also universal foundations (cf. 9.107.24, 86.5, 110.4), physical foundations (cf. 9.25.2, 63.22), or possibly the foundational nature of Soma (cf. 9.7.7, 107.24, 97.12, 25.2, 63.22), as well as ritual foundations. But in all of these verses, the sense of the ritual foundations of soma remains present and primary.  DHARMAN AS THE FOUNDATION FOR THE RITUAL The first foundations  Thus far, I have tried to show that dharman can signify the ritual foundation for heaven and earth or for the gods. But it is also a 460 JOEL P. BRERETON concern of the Rgvedic poets that the ritual itself have a foundation.
This foundation for the ritual can be its ancient precedent or ancient prototype. Especially in the younger parts of the Rgveda, where the
effort to establish the basis of the ritual already emerges, poets mention the ‘first foundations’ which present sacrificers carry for ward. The most famous instance is in the purus: a sukta, 10.90. At the end of the hymn, the poet declares the sacrifice of the purus: a (or possibly the sacrifice that is the purus: a) to be the foundation for  ayajanta subsequent ritual performance: 10.90.16 yaj~ nena yaj~ nam s ta ni dharm  an : i prathamany asan  deva = t e ha nakam mahimanah: sah: santi rve sadhy  pu  a  devah: 21 ‘‘With the sacrifice the gods canta yatra 22 sacrificed the sacrifice : these were the first foundations, / and those, its greatnesses, follow to heaven’s vault, where exist the ancient ones 23   the gods.’’ The ‘first dharmans’ are who are to be attained (sadhyas), the model sacrifice instituted by the gods and replicated in human performance, and as such, they are the ‘foundations’ for ritual performance.  If its use in 10.90 establishes the sense of dharman as a ritual precedent, then we can allow this sense in other, less clearly marked  asi  vajinena suvenıh: suvita passages. One example is 10.56.3 vajy : / suvit  st omam o dıvam o dharma prathamanu satya suvit o : suvit : gah   devan suvit o ¢nu patma ‘‘You are the prize-winning horse with the ability to win, who tracks well (?).24 Go, having travelled easily to the praise-song,25 having travelled easily to heaven, / having travelled easily along the first and real foundations, having travelled easily to the gods, having travelled easily along your flight.’’ One reason that  dharman appears in this verse is that its literal meaning is applicable, since, as we have seen before, a horse requires a physical ‘foundation.’ But the horse itself may be a metaphor26 and its ‘foundations’ certainly are, for the ‘foundations’ on which the horse runs are the  foundations of ritual precedent. The dharmans are thus the first foundations of the past, which are also real and present now in the current ritual performance. In addition to the passages in the tenth book, there are several in the third, which likewise refer to the first foundations of the ritual.  anah  : prathamanu Two appear in the same hymn: 3.17.1 samidhyam  : ik  a sam   arah  : = socıs: ke  dharm aktubhir ajyate vi svav so ghrtanirn
  ah : suyaj~  aya  devan ‘‘Being kindled according to pavak no agnır yajath the first foundations, he is anointed with unguents – he that fulfills all wishes, / the flame-haired, ghee-cloaked, purifying Fire, who makes the sacrifice good – for the sake of the sacrifice to the gods.’’ What  DHARMAN IN THE RGVEDA
461 gives the present sacrifice legitimacy is that it is a new instantiation of the ancient form, and therefore its fire is kindled according to that ancient form. If the foundations in vs. 1 refer to the ancient prototype, then this may also be the case in vs. 5, although here there is no  reference to the ‘first’ and dharma might be either singular or plural: rvo agne yaj  tvad  dh  ıyan  dvita ca satt  a svadhay  a ca 3.17.5 yas ota pu nu dharma  a  : : / tasy sambhuh pra yaja cikitv o ¢tha no dha adhvaram  devavıtau ‘‘The hotar-priest who is before, o Fire, who performs sacrifice better, who sits now, as before, and is luck-bringing by nature – / following his foundations, set forth the sacrifice, o you who are perceptive, and establish the rite for us in our pursuit of the gods.’’ There is much that is puzzling in this verse. Most centrally, who or what is the h ota purvah: ? If purva has a locational sense, then the fire, whom the poet addresses and who is not the h ota purvah: ,   might be the garhapatya or of any other fire except for the ahavan ıya.  The ahavan ıya should be the hotar ‘before you’ or ‘to the east of you.’  In this case, the dharma of that hotar are either the ‘foundations’ or  installation of the ahavan ıya, or they are the ‘foundations’ or starting  point for the sacrifice provided by the ahavan ıya fire. In either case, with its installation, Fire is then asked to carry out the sacrifice. Alternatively, the h ota p urvah: might be the ‘ancient hotar,’ the ancient  Fire, who takes his seat again as the ahavan ıya fire. In this case, his foundations could be Fire’s ancient installation, which forms the prototype for his present installation. Of these alternatives, I think  the latter the more likely. In this interpretation, dharma carries the same sense in this verse as it does in the first verse of the hymn. Another verse returns us to the realms of metaphor and prob matsveha no ¢smın lematic syntax: 3.60.6 ındra rbhuman vajavan
       an : i yemire vrata  savane sacya purus: :tuta = imani tubhyam : svasar   manus  : a  bhu and devanam s ca dharmabhih : ‘‘O Indra, together with R
with V aja, may you become invigorated here in this pressing of ours, along with your power, o you who are much praised. / These pastures (= rituals?) have offered themselves to you according to the command of the gods and according to the foundations of Manu.’’ Again the verse can be construed and interpreted in a number of plausible  as instrumental, as I have done. This interpreways. Ge takes vrata tation is rejected by Ol, who suggests that it might be nom. pl. with an ellipsis of y a – an interpretation, especially with its supposition of an ellipsis, that seems strained.27 If it is instrumental, then vrata parallels  dharmabhih : , and the two form a complementary pair. The gods command that the ‘pastures,’ which I take to be a metaphor for the 462 JOEL P. BRERETON rites that support Indra, be given to Indra. This command is in conformity with the ‘foundations,’ the ancient precedent of Manu’s sacrifice. Since Manu is the first sacrificer, his sacrifice can form an obvious prototype.   ıman If this is the sense of the dharman of Manu in 3.60.6, then dhar  : jayata   : o dhar  ıman: i may have a similar one in 1.128.1ab ayam manus  : :tha u  anu  vratam  agnıh: svam  anu  vratam  ‘‘This one here h ota yajis sıjam is born on the foundation of Manu – (the one) who is the best sacrificing hotar-priest following the command of his acolytes and who is Fire, following his own command.’’ Various interpreters have offered  ıman: i: both Ge ‘im (Feuer)beh€alter des varying interpretations of dhar Manu’ and Hoffmann (1967: 121) ‘in den H€anden des Menschen’ take it materially, Oldenberg (1897: 137) ‘in Manu’s firm law’ more abstractly, and Re ‘pour ^etre porte par l’Homme’ as an infinitive. But if it is interpreted in accord with 3.60.6, then the ‘foundation of Manu,’ on which the Fire is kindled, could again be the ritual precedent established by Manu. This is essentially the view of Grassmann, who translates ‘nach altem Brauch’ (cf. Wennerberg, 1981: 94). Al ıman has a double ways, however, there is the possibility that dhar significance and that it indicates something material as well, perhaps, as Ge surmises, the fire place. Another complex verse also refers to another kind of ancient prototype, this time the prototypes of the sages’ compositions: 3.38.2  a kavınam, manodh rtah: suk rtas taks: ata dyam=ima u in ota prcha janim


  a,  manov  at  a adha   te pran: yo vardham an nu dharman : i gman ‘‘And ask about the forceful generations of sages. Giving foundation to their thought and performing well, they fashioned heaven. / And these are your (= Indra’s) leadings forth, which grow strong and which are won by thought; therefore they go now upon (that) foundation.’’  Although not directly relevant to the the meaning of dharman, it would be helpful to know what exactly is meant by manodh rt, since
 at  ah : . . . dharman  manov : i in cd echoes it. It is typically translated in the sense of ‘resolute’ (Ge: ‘entschlossen’) or, more literally, ‘holding firm the mind’ (Ol: ‘die Festhalter des Geistes’ or Hoffmann, 1967: 225: ‘den Geist festhaltend’), and such an interpretation is both justifiable and sensible. But it yields a bland translation that does not reveal rt refers to much about why the sages are here called manodh rt. If suk

the sages’ ritual performance, then manodh rt should refer to the sa
ges’ ritual speech, which would be the means through which the sages p ‘give foundation’ ( dhr) to their thought. More critical to the inter
 pretation of dharman are Indra’s ‘leadings forth’ (pran: ı). Most likely  DHARMAN IN THE RGVEDA
463 they are the hymns or rather the ‘inspired thoughts,’ which 3.38.1a : :teva dıdhaya manıs: am anounces as a theme of this hymn: abhı tas ‘‘Like a fashioner, I reflect upon my inspired thought.’’ If the ‘leadings forth’ do refer to the hymns, then they might be the inspirations that Indra leads toward the present generation of sages, or they might be inspirations that lead Indra forth. In favor of the latter, the descriptions of the ‘leadings forth’ as ‘growing strong’ and even more, as ‘won by thought’ are appropriate to the sages’ poetry and its  success in making Indra manifest. In this context, then, dharman is the ‘foundation’ on which these new hymns are composed, namely, the old hymns of the ancient sages, the old hymns which helped create the world. Fire as the creator of ritual foundations The sacrifice has not only a historical foundation in its ancient prototypes but also a present foundation in the various constituents on which it depends. The most fundamental constituent is the fire, which sustains the sacrifice. The clearest instances of this image are two  the ‘foundation-giver’ of the passages in which Fire is the dharman,  a~  akrn: vata dharman: am rite. The first is 10.92.2 imam njaspam ubhaye
   us: asah  : pur  : na yahvam agnım sadhanam=aktum ohitam : vidathasya : 28  un  atam    ap tan arus: asya nim : sate ‘‘This one, drinking straightaway, have both29 made their own – Fire, the foundation-giver and successbringer of the ritual distribution – / him, the youth, do the dawns kiss like the night, him who is installed in front and who is the bodily  and sadhana are compledescendant of the ruddy one.’’30 Dharman mentary: Fire is the beginning of the rite as its founder and also its end, as the agent of its success. The second verse is 10.21.3 tv e n: a asate bhih: si~     an: y arjun a vı vo made dharma juhu ncatır iva / kr:sn: a rup
 srıyo dhis: e vıvaks: ase ‘‘The foundation-givers sit on you, like vı sva adhi pouring (ladles) with their tongues.31 / Colors of black and silver: you all, have I in my invigoration – / (you) and all glories you assume – have I made to declare.’’ The address is to the Fire’s flames, which repose on fire as tongues of flame, in the same way that spouts, representing tongues, are attached to the ladles that pour the offerings. The verse does not explain why the flames are foundation-givers, but in view of the preceding verse, it is most likely that they provide the foundations upon which the ritual offerings are poured. If the flames repose on Fire, then they have their ‘foundation’ in  : :tham the fire. Such is the meaning of 10.20.2 agnım ıl: e bhujam : yavis : 464 JOEL P. BRERETON   : durdhar  ıtum / yasya    enıh: saparyanti  mat  ur  sas a mitram dharman svar dhah: ‘‘I call upon Fire, the youngest of those finding satisfaction u [= the gods], the ally (/Mitra)32 difficult to hold33 through his authority, / upon whose foundation, the mottled females wait on the sun, (as on?) their mother’s udder.’’ As the parentheses and query that decorate this translation indicate, the verse is problematic in its  details. The function of dharman, however, is thankfully more plain. As both Ge and Re have recognized, the ‘mottled females’ are the flames. Here, therefore, Fire is the foundation of the flames that reach upward to the sun in order to suckle on it. In three other passages, 3.3.1, 8.43.24, and 5.26.6, Fire creates or oversees foundations, although the identity these foundations is unstated. Given that the verses concern the ritual fire and that Fire is the ‘foundation-giver’ of the rite, these foundations are likely to be either foundations that are the ritual itself or foundations for the ritual. The  aya prthupajase most intriguing of these passages is 3.3.1 vai svanar
  a vidhanta dharun  : es: u gatave / agnır hı devam_ am vıpo ratn rto duvasyaty
 a dharm  an : i sanat  a na dudus  : at ‘‘They give inspired words as riches ath to do honor to Vaisv anara of broad face, in order that he go upon supports, / for Fire as a deathless one befriends the gods, and therefore, from of old, he never ruins their foundations.’’ The ‘sup: a) are the ‘inspired words’ that empower Fire. The ports’ (dharun reason to give these words to Fire and thereby empower him is that the Fire never compromises the ‘foundations’ of the gods. In my view, the foundations are the rites that the Fire brings to success. One  an : i as the foundational ‘ordinances’ of might understand the dharm the gods rather than the ritual ‘foundations’ that sustain the gods. However, the point of the verse is to emphasize the service that Fire renders to the gods and not his obedience to them. Further evidence p : , which governs from the context is inconclusive. The root dus  dharman, is only attested in two other verbal forms. In one verse, though, the thing ‘ruined’ is probably a ritual recitation: 7.104.9ab y e   sam         ayanti svadh a bhih paka s am vih aranta e vair y e v a bhadr am d us : : : : : ‘‘Who distort an innocent recitation in their ways, or who ruin a good one willfully . . .’’ If a ritual recitation can be ruined, so then can a ritual. The other example is in the notoriously problematic Vr:sakapi
hymn. In her study of this hymn, Jamison (1996: 78) translates the  a vy relevant lines in this way: 10.86.5ab priya tas: :tani me kapır vyakt  udus  : at ‘‘The monkey has spoiled my dear (well-)shaped and decad orated things.’’ Indr an:  is speaking, and her ‘things’ are her sexual organs. In both these verses, therefore, the things ruined are  DHARMAN IN THE RGVEDA
465 perceptible objects: words or body parts. The interpretation of the  an : i as rites carries a comparable concreteness. dharm If we understand 3.3.1 in this way, then 5.51.2 might be interpreted similarly. The verse addresses all the gods: 5.51.2 rtadhıtaya a gata
 : o adhvaram  / agn  a ‘‘You whose insights satyadharm an eh: pibata jihvay are truth, come here. You whose foundations are real, (come) to the rite. Drink with the tongue of Fire.’’ Undoubtedly, the thoughts that the gods think are true, and the foundations that they institute are  real. If the verse is so interpreted, dharman might have the sense of ‘decree’ that it has in connection with Mitra and Varun: a in 5.63.1 (below). The reference to the rta ‘truth’ does bring the verse within
the sphere of those sovereign gods, but even granting the possibility of this reading, a second interpretation of the verse is also implied. The ‘insights’ are typically the hymns that are recited to the gods, and therefore the ‘foundations’ could likewise be the ritual foundations that are established for the gods. This reading is particularly appropriate here at the beginning of a hymn, which is inviting the gods to come to the real and present rite that is being offered them. Sup porting this second interpretation is also 1.12.7ab kavım agnım upa  : am adhvar stuhi satyadharm an e ‘‘Praise the sage Fire, whose foundations are real at the rite.’’ Here the ‘real foundations’ are the ritual foundations that Fire creates at the ritual performance.  The possibility that dharman has both a ritual and non-ritual sig  nificance is especially strong in 8.43.24 vi sam adbhutam : rajanam    imam,  agnım ıl: e sa u sravat ‘‘The undeceivable adhyaks : am : dharman : am king of the clans and overseer of the foundations, this one here, – / Fire, I reverently invoke: he will hear.’’ Since Fire is the ‘king of the  clans,’ dharman might also have a political sense and therefore designate the ‘decrees’ of a king. Oberlies (1999: 359), for example, notes that Fire is here similar to Varun: a and translates, ‘‘Den K€ onig der Vis, diesen untr€ uglichen Aufseher der Ordnungen, Agni erquicke  ich.’’ But adhyaks : a, unlike rajan, is not a political term. In 10.129.7, the poet asks about the ‘overseer’ of the world and in 10.88.13, Agni Vaisv anara, representing the sun, is the ‘overseer’ of the ‘marvel’  although it is not clear what that marvel is.34 The most (yaks: a), suggestive parallel occurs in 10.128, which is an appeal for help in the contest of sacrifices. In the first verse, this appeal is made directly to  agne   vihav  : tv  as  tanvam  Fire: 10.128.1 mam varco e:sv astu vayam endhan   pradı   adhyaks: en: a p pus: ema / mahyam sa s catasras tvay rtana : namantam
jayema ‘‘Fire, let luster be mine amid the competing calls. Kindling you, we would thrive ourselves. / Let the four directions pay rever- 466 JOEL P. BRERETON ence to me. With you as overseer, we could win the contests.’’ The imagery is military, but the context is ritual, and here Fire is the overseer of the rite that the poet hopes will triumph over all other rites for the attention of the gods. I would suggest we have a similar context in 8.43.24, and once again, Fire is the overseer of the rites as ‘foundations.’ The verse would reflect Fire’s double role as the image of the priest and of the clan lord, who is the sacrificer. The idea that Fire provides the foundations for the gods by car ah : sahasrajid rying forward the sacrifice appears in 5.26.6 samidhan   an : i pus: yasi devanam  : dut : ‘‘Being fully kindled, o  a ukthyah agne dharm Fire who conquers thousands, you made the foundations thrive, as the praiseworthy messenger of the gods.’’ Elsewhere, the kinds of  uni)  and other things that are ‘made to thrive’ are typically goods (vas  : i]), so the ‘foundations’ should be a things worth choosing (varya[n material thing that makes someone’s life better. Since this an address to the Fire, those things would reasonably be the ritual offerings, and those who are supported would be the gods. This interpretation is strengthened by the description of Fire as the ‘messenger of the gods,’ who carries the words and offerings to the gods. But with equal plausibility, these foundations could be the rewards, the ‘goods’ and ‘things worth choosing,’ that are earned by Fire’s efforts in the sacrifice, and the beings so rewarded could be humans. In the latter case, the ‘foundations’ would then be the possessions that are the foundations of human life or the sacrifice that produces such things. Indra As Fire establishes foundations, so also can Indra, although in the one example, the nature of those foundations is undefined. Tentatively, I place it together with the other passages in which the foundations are  sama gayata   brhat e foundations for the ritual: 8.98.1 ındraya vıpraya
 / dharmak  ‘‘To Indra sing the chant, a rte vipa scıte panasyave brhat

lofty (chant) to the lofty inspired poet, / to him that creates the foundations, that perceives poetic inspirations, and that draws admiration.’’ Scarlata (1999: 74) considers various possible ways of construing the passage. As he points out, it is possible that the first  rather than dharman.  In stem of the compound dharmak rt is dharman, p
 as its favor of this interpretation, kr once (in 10.92.2) has dharman
 But while possible, this acc. object,35 but it never has dharman. interpretation makes the passage even more obscure. Who would be the ‘givers of foundations’ that Indra makes? The priests? Or Fire?  DHARMAN IN THE RGVEDA
467 p  which can semantically parallel Scarlata also cites 9.64.1 where dha, p   kr, governs dharman. In that passage, dharman has the sense of a
foundational authority, and that meaning too is possible here, although otherwise the contexts of the two passages are quite different. But the thing, and it is an admittedly slight thing, that makes me  believe that dharman in 8.98.1 refers to the ritual is its complement vipa scıt, which can describe a ritual performer (cf. Scarlata, 1999: 122). Since vipa scıt establishes a ritual context, I take dharmak rt as meaning
either that Indra creates ritual foundations (for the world) or that Indra creates foundations for the ritual. Summary  The best evidence for the interpretation of dharman as a foundation for the ritual are the passages, such as 10.90.16, that speak of the ‘first foundations’ of the ritual, the ritual precedents which the present rituals follow. Later on, of course, it would be appropriate to speak  of the ritual ‘ordinances,’ eventually formulated in the sutra literature, but for the period of the Rgveda, in which the ritual was varied
and fluid, such reference to ritual ordinances is an anachronism. The theme of the ritual’s foundations carries into Agni hymns, in which  the one who gives foundation to the rites Fire is the dharman, (10.21.3, 92.2). In other verses (e.g., 3.3.1, 8.43.24, and 5.26.6), however, the rites that Fire governs are themselves ‘foundations,’ those of the gods and of humans.  DHARMAN AS THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD While many of the ‘foundations’ mentioned in the Rgveda have ref
 erence to the soma ritual, dharman also means ‘foundation’ in the general sense of a universal, physical foundation, a foundation for all things or living beings. The earth is the ultimate foundation, since every object and living being rests upon the earth. A good example, if  : svapasah   : saso  avah not entirely unproblematic, is 1.159.3 t e sun : sudam ı jaj~  ar  a purv   u  : jagata   acittaye s ca satyam mah nur mat / sthat s ca       dharman i putr asya p athah pad am advay avinah ‘‘These their sons, of : : : good deeds and very wondrous skills, have given birth to the two great parents who are to be attended to first.36 / You two protect the real one upon the foundation of the standing and the moving, and (you protect) the track of your son who is free of deception.’’ The hymn addresses Heaven and Earth, who are the ‘two great parents.’ 468 JOEL P. BRERETON Two problems in this verse are the identities of their ‘sons’ in line a and their ‘son’ in line c. We can leave the first undecided. As Ge suggests, they could be the gods generally or they could be ancient seers, since either might be credited with the creation of Heaven and Earth. The identity of the ‘son’ is more critical to the interpretation of  dharman. According to one explanation of Sayan: a, their son is the sun. Ge notes that this interpretation is supported by 1.160.1 (below), but says that the son more likely refers to the living creature. Similarly, Re understands the son as a human son. But I think Sayan: a’s explanation is right, since it yields a perfectly coherent image of the sun moving across the sky and because it is appropriate to the context. That still leaves the question of the identification of the ‘real one’ in line c. It need not be the same as the ‘son’ in d, but if not, it should be closely connected with him. Most likely it refers to the Fire, who is ‘real’ because he is actually and immediately present in front of the reciter of the hymn and other participants in the rite. Elsewhere, Fire is the ‘real’ (1.1.5, 5.25.2), the ‘real sacrificer’ (3.14.1), and the ‘most real’ hotar-priest (1.76.5, 3.4.10). If so, then line c is a reference to the fire and d to the sun: the fire is on the earth, which is the foundation of both plants and animals, that is, ‘the standing and the moving,’ and the sun, to which the fire corresponds, is in the heaven. The characterization of earth as the foundation also occurs in  : ur gachatu vatam 10.16, which is a funeral hymn: 10.16.3 suryam : caks   dya m     tatra  te  a thiv ım ca dh arman a / ap o v a gacha yadi atm ca gacha pr : : :
 o:sadhıs: u prati  tis: :tha sar  ıraih: ‘‘Let your eye go to the sun, your hitam life-breath to the wind. Go to heaven and to the earth according to your foundation, / or go to the waters, if there (a place) is fixed for you. Take your stand among the plants with your body parts.’’ Lines bc form two alternatives for the dead man: either he finds a place in heaven and earth or in the waters. The translation of line b is awkward and uncertain, but I believe the line means that the deceased should go to heaven and to earth with the earth (or heaven and earth) as his foundation. Note the parallelism in lines b and d. In d, the plants become the body parts of the deceased, as in b, the earth (or heaven and earth) become his foundation. Heaven and earth together function as a foundation also for the sun, which moves between them. This is one sense of 1.160.1, although the verse is complicated because it may refer both to the sun  thivı and to its earthly equivalent, the ritual fire: 1.160.1 t e hı dyavapr
varı rajaso sambhuva rta   atkav   : e antar  vi sva dharay ı / sujanman ı dhis: an
 ıyate dev ı dharman      o dev a s u ryah s ucih ‘‘Because these are Heaven and : : :  DHARMAN IN THE RGVEDA
469 Earth, that are good luck to all, that are truth-bearing, and that give foundation to the sage of the airy space, / he goes between the two stations of strong birth, he the god (goes) between two gods, he, the blazing sun (goes) according to his foundation.’’ According to Ge (following one suggestion of Sayan: a) and Re, the ‘sage of the airy space’ is the sun. The sun is between Heaven and Earth, who give birth and foundation to it. Another possibility is suggested by Ol, who takes the sage to be the Fire. Now, clearly these two interpretations are not exclusive, since the ritual fire can represent the sun. If the ‘sage’ is first the Fire in line b, then line d is reenvisioning that Fire as the Sun. This interpretation would also relocate the main action and principal reference of the verse to the sacrificial ground. : e) could refer to places in the ritual that The two ‘stations’ (dhis: an represent earth and heaven, that is, to the fire places at the western and eastern ends of the vedi. The movement of the ‘sage’ between heaven and earth would therefore be reflected in the movement of the sacrificial fire from the west to the east, as well as in the movement of the sun from the east to the west. The ‘foundation,’ therefore, would be both the installation of the fire in the fire places as well as the foundation for the sun created by heaven and earth. In 10.149, the god Savitar, rather than Heaven and Earth, establishes the foundation for the sun. This hymn presents a short cosmogony in which the sun is born on the foundation provided by  anyad  abhavad yajatram   Savitar: 10.149.3 pa sc edam amartyasya   _ a savitur  purvo jat  ah : sa u   a / suparn: o ang  garutm  an bhuvanasya bhun  asy anu dharma ‘‘After this (world), the other, sacrificial (world) came to be, together with the coming to be of a world of living beings that is deathless. / Surely the strong-winged bird of Savitar was born first, following upon his (= Savitar’s) foundation.’’ As obscure as it is, this translation is clearer than the verse, and especially in ab, the translation makes several interpretive leaps. With some confidence, however, we can say that ab refers to the creation of this world, and possibly also to the creation of the world of the sacrifice and to the creation of the next world. On this cosmogonic level, Savitar’s ‘strong-winged bird’ is the sun, which here is the first created thing after heaven and earth (cf. Oberlies, 1998: 444). But this first creation rests on a foundation provided by Savitar himself. Savitar is associated with the onset of night, but he also brings the night to a close by sending the sun on its course and all the creatures to their various daylight activities (Oberlies, 1998: 222f.). Therefore, the verse depicts the birth of the sun, a birth which Savitar compels, even as he himself disappears. 470 JOEL P. BRERETON The theme of the ‘foundation of the sun’ also occurs in 8.6.19f., which is a complex passage because it sustains metaphor through ellipsis. The result are verses that successfully defy exegetical deter : duhata a sıram / enam mination: 8.6.19 im as ta indra p rsnayo ghrtam

    tvas  a garbham    :ıh: == 20 ya indra prasvas pipyus acakriran / pari rtasya
ryam ‘‘These dappled (cows)37 yield ghee and the milk dharmeva su mix for you, Indra, / (and also) this, (a milk-mix)38 of truth,39 since they are swelling (with truth), // – (they, the) fruitful (cows), that have made you their new-born by their mouth, (are) around (you?) like foundations40 (around) the sun.’’ With the understanding that any interpretation of this verse is a risky enterprise, I understand it in the following way. The insights embedded in the hymns are the ‘dappled’ and ‘fruitful’ cows, which bring Indra into manifestation at the sacrifice (Oberlies, 1998: 276ff.). Since they bring him to manifestation, they therefore give birth to him, who is their ‘new-born’ child, and they surround him, for indeed the hymns do surround Indra. ‘Their mouth’ is the mouth of a cow licking clean a new-born calf, and the mouth of the priest who recites the hymns. Finally, because they give birth to him, these cows and hymns are his foundations.41 Since Indra is like the sun, therefore, the cows and hymns are like foundations for the sun. The reference to the foundations of the sun may suggest a mystery: What holds the sun up in the heavens? It must have a foundation, even if it is not a visible one. An unnamed god gives birth and foundation to the world in  : prthivya y o va dıvam a 10.121.9 m a no him : satyadharm : sıj janita yah
   s cap  a s candra brhatır jajana kasmai  jajana / ya devaya havıs: a vidhema
‘‘Let not him, who is the birth-father of earth, do us harm, or him – the one whose foundations are real – who gave birth to heaven, / and him who gave birth to the glittering, deep waters. Who is the god to whom we should do homage with our oblation?’’ Since the emphasis in this verse is constantly on the unnamed god as the birth-giver of  the world, satyadharman should refer to the foundations that this god establishes, the foundations upon which heaven and all the rest of the world depend. There is one final passage that is intriguing because, on one level, at least, it suggests a more common sense of ‘foundation.’ This verse is 2.13.7 which likely refers to the ‘foundation’ of plants. The verse : pus: pın: ı s ca dharman  addresses Indra: 2.13.7 yah s ca prasva : adhi dane   an  ır adh  arayah  s casama ajano   diva urur  urv  am_ vy av didyuto : / ya sy ukthyah : ‘‘You, who distributed (vi . . . adharayas)  abhıtah: sa the flowering and fruitful (plants)42 according to the foundation (of each)  DHARMAN IN THE RGVEDA
471 and the streams at their division (?),43 and you, who produced the incomparable flashings of heaven, you, the wide one surrounding the  here draws containing ones,44 you are the praiseworthy.’’ Dharman p and plays on vi+ dhr, and represents the basis for the plants’ dis
tribution. But a variety of interpretations are then possible. The  dharman could belong to Indra, and therefore be the ‘ordinance’ according to which he assigns them their place. In this interpretation,  Indra’s command is their foundation. Or the dharman could belong to the plants, in which case the ‘foundation’ could be the place where each kind of plant belongs. I think the latter is the least freighted interpretation. The ‘foundation’ of the plants is therefore the place of the plants. Summary With the exception of 2.13.7, the above passages refer to various kinds of cosmic and physical foundations. Both the living (1.159.3) and the dead (10.16.3) find foundations on heaven or earth or both. The sun especially finds a foundation (8.6.19f.), which may be on heaven and earth (1.160.1) or through the god Savitar (10.149.3).  These uses of the term illustrate the breadth of dharman and suggest that the liturgical sense of the term considered earlier is a reflection of  the character of the Rgveda rather than that of the word dharman
itself.  DHARMAN AS THE ‘FOUNDATION’ OR ‘NATURE’ OF A DEITY  In the passages considered thus far, the sense of dharman as ‘foundation’ has been directly applicable. What follows are passages, in  which occur more extended senses of dharman. These fall into two  groups. In one, dharman has the sense of the foundation of a deity, or more clearly, the ‘foundational nature’ of a deity. In a second,  dharman is the social and material ‘foundation’ provided by the authority of a king. It is not always easy to separate these senses from the more concrete meaning of ‘foundation,’ nor indeed from one another – a hardly surprising circumstance in a poetic collection like the Rgveda. In fact, already in the discussion of the ritual foundations
of Soma, especially with regard to 9.7.7, 86.5, and 110.4, I argued  that dharman might refer to the nature of soma that is created in the ritual, as well as to its ritual foundation. Since the boundaries that separate these different senses are permeable, the following passages 472 JOEL P. BRERETON are those that show the senses of ‘foundational nature’ or ‘foundational authority’ more distinctly, rather than exclusively.  Both Renou and Geldner frequently recognize dharman in the sense of ‘nature’ in their translations, indeed more emphatically and frequently than I. But they are surely right that there are passages which refer to deities’ foundations in the sense of their ‘natures.’ In 10.44, the poet twice speaks of the ‘foundation’ of Indra, the char ındrah: svapatir   aya  y acter that defines his action: 10.44.1 a yatv mad o   as  tuvis  / pratvaks: an : o ati  vı  am  : sy apar  en: a  an  : man dharman sva sah : a tutuj  v mahata r:sn: yena ‘‘As the lord of his own, let Indra journey here for
his invigoration – he, the vibrant, who thrusts forward according his nature (/‘foundation’), / who energetically dominates45 over all strengths according to his boundless and great bull-likeness.’’ The  parallelism in case and construction of dharman r:sn: yena in : a in b and v
d suggest that both belong to Indra and both define who and what he  is. A few verses later, dharman once again appears, although here the   uny  : sis: am  a hı sam sense is less well defined: 10.44.5 gamann asm e vas :   sıs: am bharam   somınah: / tvam  ı sva a yahi sis: e sasmınn a satsi barhıs: y  tava tran  pa : i dharman   :sya anadhr : a ‘‘Let good things go among us, for I
hope for them. Journey here to the soma-bearer’s stake,46 which carries his good expectation.47 / You are master. Take your seat here on this sacred grass. Vessels which belong to you are not to be claimed (by another) according to your nature (/‘foundation’).’’ The focus of cd is still the character of Indra: the verse states that he is master and therefore the poets invite him to sit at the sacrifice. It  would be reasonable, then, if the dharman is that principle according to which the soma cups belong to Indra and to Indra alone in his foundational nature, his very character as Indra. Alternatively, these vessels may be Indra’s according to their foundation, that is, according to their place in the ritual.  One of the problems regarding the sense of dharman as the nature of a deity is the rather limited number of deities of whom it is used. In addition to the passages in which it describes the character of Indra, those considered earlier in which it might refer to the nature of Soma, and those to be considered in which it might refer to the natures of  Mitra and Varun: a, the sense of dharman as ‘foundational nature’ appears distinctly only in connection with Savitar. The latter especially is not a major deity of the Rgveda, and yet there are four
 passages in which dharman is the ‘nature’ of Savitar. The reason for this is the transparency of Savitar, or rather, the transparency of  an : ah: Savitar’s name. Consider, for example, 10.175.1 pra vo grav  DHARMAN IN THE RGVEDA
473 : suvatu dharman   urs  : u yujyadhvam savit a devah : a=dh : sunuta ‘‘Let the god Savitar (Compeller) compel you forth, pressing stones, according to his nature (‘foundation’). / Hitch yourselves to the chariot poles. Press the soma!’’ Renou has this verse exactly right: ‘‘selon sa disposition innee (de dieu Incitateur).’’ ‘Compelling’ is the foundational nature of the god ‘Compeller,’ and therefore it is according to that nature that Savitar compels the pressing stones. This verse is echoed later in the : ah: savita nu vo same hymn and to the same effect: 10.175.4 gravan : suvatu dharman   an  aya  sunvat devah e ‘‘Pressing stones, let the : a / yajam god Savitar compel you according to his nature (‘foundation’) / for the sacrificer who presses soma.’’ Again, it is the character of Compeller to govern the movement of the pressing stones. Two other verses from the core Rgveda show the same idea, al
 am  : si though not as obviously as in 10.175. The first is 4.53.3 apra raj  ni pa rthiva sl         n ute sv a ya dh arman e / pr a b ah u asr ak divya okam dev ah kr : : :
:  sav  ımani nive   aktubhir   savita sayan prasuvann jagat ‘‘He has filled the heavenly and earthly realms. The god sets their rhythm to his own nature (/‘foundation’). / Savitar has stretched forth his two arms to compel, as he makes the moving world settle down and compels it forth at night’s darkest hours.’’ Lines cd depict Savitar as the god that brings the world to rest during the night, and then, in the dark hours before dawn, that begins to rouse it once again. This rhythm reflects his nature as the god that compels both rest and activity, and therefore the verse says that he sets that rhythm to his own nature. A fourth example presents the most complicated (and doubtful)  savitas trın: i rocan  case: 5.81.4 uta yasi ota suryasya ra smıbhih: sam trım ubhayatah  : par  ıyasa, uta mitr ucyasi / uta ra o bhavasi deva  dharmabhih : ‘‘And you travel, Savitar, through the three realms of light, and you abide with sun’s rays. / And you encircle the night on both sides, and you become Mitra, o god, according to (your)48  nature (/‘foundations’).’’ In its interpretation of dharman, this translation essentially follows Ge: ‘‘und du bist nach deinen Eigenschaften der Mitra’’ and Re ‘de par (tes) dispositions-naturelles.’ The question remains, however, how the verse fits together. Why is Savitar Mitra, or, to rather, why is the god that compels also the god of alliances? Lines a-c describe Savitar as embracing the two ends of the day, the beginning and end of night. In doing so, he conjoins those times, as an alliance between them would do. Because his uniting day and night is a reflection of his nature as the god that compels, he becomes, as the compeller, also the god of alliance. Alternatively, the verse might be read: ‘‘according to his (= Mitra’s) nature.’’ This latter 474 JOEL P. BRERETON interpretation gives the verse a slightly difference nuance. Insofar as Savitar acts as the god of alliances by uniting the space and time, he becomes the god of alliances according to the nature of Mitra. In addition to these passages, there is a repeated line that compares an object or being to Savitar because it and Savitar share the same foundational nature, the ability to compel or impel. The first instance is from the gambler hymn, 10.34, in a verse that compares the dice to sah : krıl: ati vrata es: am  : deva iva savita Savitar: 10.34.8 tripa~ nca     na namante raja cid ebhyo nama  ıt satyadharm a / ugrasya cin manyave krn: oti ‘‘Three times fifty in number, the army of these (dice) plays.
Like god Savitar’s, its foundation is real. / They do not bow even to the battle-fury of the powerful; even the king does homage to them.’’ Were it not so awkward, I would like to translate: ‘‘Like god Savitar’s, its (Savitar-like) foundation is real’’ or ‘‘its (Savitar-like) nature is real’’ because the point is not that both Savitar and the army of dice each have a real foundation, but that they each have the same real foundation, the same ability to compel. As the nature of Savitar is to compel, so also the dice too have become a compulsion for the  o budhnah : sam  gambler. The second verse is 10.139.3 ray : gamano bhı cas: :te sac  un  : vı  ıbhih: / deva iva savita sa am a vas sva rup   an  am  ‘‘The basis of wealth and tyadharm endro na tasthau samar e dhan the gathering of goods, (the sun) watches over all visible things through his powers. / Whose foundation is real like god Savitar’s, he stands like Indra in the contest for the stakes.’’ This verse anticipates the merging of the identities of Savitar and the sun, for it attributes to the sun the nature of Savitar. Like a Savitar, the sun impels those whom he wishes to win in the contest for goods that he oversees. Summary  The sense of dharman as the ‘foundational nature’ of a deity is a difficult one to judge. It may be more prominent than I have allowed.  In the above discussion of the dharman of Soma, for example, I have mentioned this possibility in connection with five passages (9.7.7, 107.24, 97.12, 25.2, 63.22) and could have done so with others. But I  am inclined to restrict this sense of dharman primarily to contexts in which the foundational nature of a god is manifest in the god’s name. This is certainly the case for Savitar, whose character is so transparent that he is often marked as deva savit r ‘god Compeller,’ where
deva makes it clear his identity as a god. This same transparency to a  foundational nature of a god and therefore the use of dharman to  DHARMAN IN THE RGVEDA
475 describe that foundational nature may also be the case for Mitra and Varun: a, whom we will consider below. Where a god’s names are less transparent or their characters more complex, I would expect this use  of dharman to be less frequent. It is not absent, however, since  dharman may describe the nature of Indra in 10.44.1, 5.  DHARMAN AS THE FOUNDATION CREATED BY A SOVEREIGN DEITY  The last sense in which dharman is a ‘foundation’ is the most significant, for it is on this sense that much of the later development of    dharman and dharma is established. A dharman can be the ‘foundation’ through which a sovereign deity upholds the life of a community. This foundation can be the material basis for the community, or it can be prescribed behaviors and social relations which structure and sustain the community. In the latter use, it is the sovereign’s ruling ‘authority’ or ‘institute’ – and in these ways it may often and best be translated – upon which the life of a community depends. This use of the term is largely confined to the spheres of two deities, or rather of one deity and one complex of deities: the first is Soma and  the second, Varun: a or Varun: a together with Adityas. Soma In the case of Soma we have some of the clearer instances of the link  between dharman and a ruler. In them, the ‘foundation’ that the rule provides is likely the material foundation for the community, the wealth which sustains it. The text is not unarguably clear on this point, but the context suggests this interpretation in two verses and   dadh  ara permits it in a third. The first is 9.35.6 vı svo yasya vrat e jano    : / punan  asya  dharman prabhuvasoh: ‘‘Under whose command : as pateh p every people finds foundation ( dhr),49 under that of the lord of
foundation, / who is purifying himself, who brings the foremost good things . . ..’’ The foundation that the community finds and Soma governs might be a system of social relations, but since Soma is here invoked as prabh uvasu, it is more likely material. In either case, the verse establishes the link between the authority of Soma and the basis   : because he possesses for communal life. He is the dharman : as patih royal ‘command,’ and therefore establishes the foundations for the people. A similar connection between command and foundation ocr:sa deva v r:savratah: / v r:sa curs in 9.64.1 v r:sa soma dyumam_ asi v



 an : i dadhis: e ‘‘A bull you are, soma, a brilliant one – a bull, dharm 476 JOEL P. BRERETON whose command is a bull, o god. / A bull, you set the foundations.’’ Again, Soma possesses command, and it is through that command that he establishes ‘foundations,’ although here the passage provides little information about the nature of these foundations. Finally, a connection between kingship and the material foundation of a  ‘foundationcommunity occurs in one of the attestations of dharman  rtaya pavate  o divy  giver’: 9.97.23 pra danud o danupinv a rtam

  raja pra ra smıbhir da sabhir sumedh ah: / dharm a bhuvad vrjanyasya
  bhuma ‘‘The divine giver of drops, sweller of drops, (goes) forth. bhari As the truth and for the truth, the very wise one purifies himself. / He will become the foundation-giver, the king of what belongs to the community. He has been brought forward toward the world by the ten reins.’’ It is the king who is the foundation-giver, for he governs what belongs to the community, that is, its wealth. The precise sense vrjanya is not certain because it is attested only here in the Rgveda,

but an earlier verse in this same hymn provides an indication of its sense. Here Soma, as lord of the community, conquers the land and   :o thereby gives the people the space to live: 9.97.10cd hanti raks  dhate pary      ar  at  ır varivah  n v an vr j anasya r a j a ‘‘He strikes down ba kr :
:
the demon, and he presses away hostilities on every side – he who, as king of the community, creates expanse.’’ Soma’s kingship is connected to his ability to give his people the means to raise and pasture their cattle.  Mitra, Varun: a, and the Adityas  Frequently, dharman occurs in close association with Varun: a, Varun: a  and Mitra, or the Adityas and is, therefore, characteristic of the  sphere of the Adityas. While it does not give us much information  about the reason for dharman’s connection to Mitra and Varun: a, 8.35.13 does illustrate how characteristic that connection is: 8.35.13  : avanta uta dharmavant    gachatho mitr avarun a marutvant a jaritur ryen: a caditya   a su   havam / saj o:sasa us: as ır yatam a svina ‘‘Together with Mitra and Varun: a and together with (their) foundation, together with the Maruts, you go to the singer’s call. / Along with Dawn and Sun,   journey with the Adityas, Asvins.’’ Here dharman is something that Mitra and Varun: a would naturally bring with them when they respond to the singer’s summons. It belongs to them as closely as the dawn and sun belong to the Asvins, gods who appear characteristically in the early morning.  DHARMAN IN THE RGVEDA
477  For the most part, when it is linked to Mitra and Varun: a, dharman carries the sense of a foundational authority. The reason for this rests  not so much in the semantic resonance that dharman independently  possesses, but rather in the character of the Adityas. These are the gods most closely associated with the principles that govern the actions of humans. Varun: a is the god of commandments and Mitra is the god of alliances.50 The distinct characters of these gods then give  color to the more neutral dharman and define the kind of ‘foundation’  it describes, and thus, dharman becomes ‘the foundation of authority’ that structures society.  This interpretation of dharman leads to another explanation, or at  least another nuance, of the relationship between dharman and Mitra and Varun: a. Since they represent the authority of alliances and commandments, their ‘foundation,’ that is, their nature, is to represent this authority, just as the nature of Savitar is to compel. When  the poets speak of the dharman of Mitra and Varun: a, therefore, this  dharman can be both the foundational authority that orders the social worlds of gods and humans and the foundational nature that   defines the Adityas themselves. These two sides of dharman are  adhi  possible in two occurrences in 5.63: vs. 1ab rtasya gopav
 : satyadharm  : a param  tis: :thatho ratham an e vyomani ‘‘Herdsmen of the truth, you two stand upon your chariot, o you whose foundations are   real, in the furthest heaven’’ and vs. 7 dharman scita : a mitravarun : a vipa  raks: ethe asurasya    ay  a / rt  ena vı svam bhuvanam v ı r ajathah vrata may : :
 s uryam  a dhattho divı cıtryam ‘‘In accordance with your : ratham foundation, o Mitra and Varun: a, who perceive inspired words, you two guard your commands through the craft of a lord. / In accordance with truth, you rule over the whole living world. You place the  sun here in heaven as your shimmering chariot.’’ Dharman : a could be explained in two different ways. First, it could be that in accordance with the foundation they provide, Mitra and Varun: a guard the commands which keep the world in order. This foundation is their authority, the standard they impose on the world. Note that  ena, dharman : a finds a positional, syntactic, and semantic parallel in
rt the truth that expresses the right organization of the world. Second,  dharman could signify the foundations of Mitra and Varun: a as the embodiments of the authority to govern. It would then be according to their own foundation that Mitra and Varun: a guard their com Etymologically, it is mands. Note especially the appearance of vrata. connected to Varun: a, which again suggests that it is especially his nature or ‘foundation’ as god of commands that is manifest in the 478 JOEL P. BRERETON ‘‘foundation’’ or authority according to which Mitra and he govern the world.  : ema Similar arguments apply also to 5.72.2ab vrat ena stho dhruvaks   ajjan  a ‘‘By your command, you two are those that dharman : a yatay give peaceful dwellings that endure, assigning places to the people according to your foundation.’’ This time vrat ena expresses the general authority of the Mitra and Varun: a to ensure that people can  dwell in peace, and dharman : a expresses their foundational authority to organize the different peoples. Note that ‘assigning places to the people’ is a function particularly connected with Mitra (cf. Thieme,  ajjana,  1957: 40f.). The appearance of vrata and yatay terms that reflect the characters of Mitra and Varun: a, again suggests that the  dharman according to which they act is both their foundation as well as the foundational authority they apply to the world.  The Adityas are kings, and the connection between royalty and   dharman is a constant in verses describing the dharman of the   Adityas. A complex but informative example is 10.65.5 mitraya siks: a  : aya  da sus  a na prayuchatah  : e y  varun a samr aja manas dhama : / yayor  yayor   ubh e r odası nadhası v rtau ‘‘Strive for the dharman ocate brhad : a r

sake of Mitra and of Varun: a who acts dutifully, for them, the universal kings who, through their thought, are not far away, / whose dominion shines aloft according to their foundation, for whom the two worlds are twin need51 and twin course.’’ Ge rightly notes man ‘dominion’ of Mitra and Varun: a is probably, in that the dha  one sense at least, the sun. Therefore, dharman is a ‘foundation’ for  the sun as the symbol of their rule. Thus, dharman has a double resonance. On the one hand, since Mitra and Varun: a are kings, their foundation is their authority. On the other, the hymn recalls also  the image of dharman as the cosmic foundation for the sun. More generally, though, dh aman might refer to the whole heavenly sphere over which Mitra and Varun: a rule and to which they give foundation by their dutiful action as gods of alliance and commandment. Both Soma and Varun: a occur as kings and in connection with    : asya dharman  dharman in 10.167.3 s omasya raj~ no varun rhaspater : i b
         anumaty a u sarman i / t av ah am ady a maghavann upastutau dh a tar :  : kala sam_ abhaks: ayam ‘‘Upon the foundation of king Soma vıdhatah and Varun: a,52 and under the protection of Brhaspati and Anumati, /
today, at your praise, o generous one (= Indra), I consumed vats (of soma), o you that set in place and that set apart.’’ Note the implicit  locational imagery. On top is the ‘cover’ ( sarman) provided by  DHARMAN IN THE RGVEDA
479 Brhaspati and Anumati and below the ‘foundation’ created by Soma
 and Varun: a. Their designation as kings implies that the dharman of Soma and Varun: a is their royal authority. And perhaps, their appearance together reflects the complementary sides of their  dharman: Soma establishes material foundation, Varun: a social foundation. Soma and Varun: a appear together only rarely, but given the re peated connections between Soma and dharman and between Varun: a  and dharman, it is not surprising that Soma and Varun: a, when they   do appear together, do so in the context of dharman: 9.107.15f. tarat  brhat  / ars  : an mitrasya   pavam   urm  ın: a raja deva rtam samudram ana

 brhat  // n  o haryat  : asya dharman   a rtam rbhir yeman o varun : a pra hinvan


 : samudrıyah: ‘‘He crosses the sea in a wave as he vicaks: an: o raja devah purifies himself, he that is king and god – and lofty truth. / He rushes according to the foundation of Mitra and Varun: a, being sped forth – he, the lofty truth53 // – he, that is controlled by fine men, the enjoyed,  the far-gazing, the king and god of the sea.’’ Here dharman shows its underlying meaning as the foundation upon which Soma travels. But that foundation is also the foundation that Mitra and Varun: a pro vide, their authority. The reference to dharman is also conditioned by these verses’ insistence on the kingship of Soma. Soma moves on a foundation of royal authority because he is himself a manifestation of kingship.  A concrete sense of dharman as ‘foundational authority’ occurs in  kım  : varun: a daıvye jane   manus: yas 7.89.5 yat ¢bhidroham : cedam   amasi   ı yat  tava  ma nas tasm  ad  enaso deva rıris: ah: ‘‘Whatever car / acitt this deceit that we humans practice against the race of gods, Varun: a, / if by inattention we have erased your foundations, do not harm us because of that misdeed, o god.’’ The foundations the poets worry about effacing, therefore, are precisely those foundations we would expect the god of commandments and the embodiment of royal authority to create – his institutes, his commands. The context of the  deva verse speaks strongly for this interpretation. In 10.134.7a nakir p    a yopayamasi,  yup, which governs dharman in 7.89, minımasi nakir p p parallels mı (or mi). This later verb characteristically governs the vrata and, in that context, means ‘violate’ these ‘commands’ of the gods (cf. 1.69.7, 2.24.12, 38.7, 3.32.8, 7.31.11, 47.3, 76.5, 10.10.5, etc.).  a yuyopima,  therefore, likely reproduces the sense The phrase dharm p  approximates the meaning of of vrat a(ni) + mı, and thus dharman  vrata ‘command.’ The dharmans are commands as manifestations of royal authority. 480 JOEL P. BRERETON In the passages so far considered, either Varun: a appears alone or in conjunction with Mitra. In one example, however, Mitra appears without Varun: a: 8.52.3 ya uktha k eval a dadh e y ah: s omam :sitapibat / : dhr
      mitrasya yasmai vıs: n: us trın: i pada vicakrama upa dharmabhih : ‘‘He (=Indra) who made the solemn words his own, who boldly drank the soma, / for whom Vis: n: u strode his three steps, according to the foundations of Mitra. . ..’’ The image of ascent is one basis for the  occurrence of dharman here, since it implies the need for a foundation  for that ascent. But the dharman is only figuratively a physical foundation. The real foundation of Vis: n: u’s ascent is his relationship with Indra. The ‘foundations of Mitra’, that is, the foundations of the god of alliances, refer here to the alliance between Indra and Vis: n: u, which is the basis of Vis: n: u’s three strides.  This same combination of dharman in the sense of a foundational  authority with the imagery of dharman as a physical foundation appears in another passage concerning Vis: n: u: 1.22.18-19ab trın: i pada  abhyah   dharm  an : i dhar  ayan  vı cakrame vıs: n: ur gop a ad // vıs: n: oh: : / ato  an : i pa  vratani paspa karm syata yato se ‘‘Three tracks he strode out: he, p Vis: n: u, the undeceivable cowherd, / who gives foundation ( dhr) to
the foundations from there // – see the deeds of Vis: n: u! – from where he watches over his commands.’’ The ‘there’ from which Vis: n: u ‘gives foundation’ is probably heaven, but this still leaves the problem of identifying the ‘foundations.’ The reference to Vis: n: u’s vratani, his ‘commands’, sets this verse within the context of royal authority and again of Varun: a. The ‘foundations’ to which Vis: n: u gives foundation, therefore, are his authority. At the same time, however, again as in 8.52.3, the imagery and the context also suggest the sense of  dharman as a physical and universal foundation. The verse preceding this passage describes the journey of Vis: n: u through the world: vs.  : vıs: n: ur vı cakrame tredha nı dadhe padam  / sam  ul : ham asya 17 idam  : sur pam e ‘‘Vis: n: u strode out – three times he set down his track – through this (world) here, / which is drawn together in his dusty (track).’’ That is to say, the world is encompassed in the footprints of Vis: n: u. In vs. 18, the scene shifts explicitly to heaven, which is the limit of Vis: n: u’s journey. Vis: n: u thus makes heaven the foundation for  the worlds. Thus, while the primary sense of dharman is a foundational authority, the poet again evokes its sense as a physical foundation.  A similar complex deployment of dharman occurs also in 6.70.1-3, where again the context requires a double sense of a foundational authority and of a physical foundation:  DHARMAN IN THE RGVEDA
481  ı bhuvan  am  abhi ı prthv ı madhudughe ı  thiv  an  6.70.1 ghrtavat srıyorv sup esasa / dy avapr


     : asya   u riretas a ‘‘The two rich in ghee and excelling a v ıs kabhite aj are bh varun dharman : : in glory over living beings, wide and broad, giving honey as their milk, well-adorned – / Heaven and Earth are buttressed apart according to the foundation of Varun: a as the pair that are never aging, endowed with abundant semen.’’ jantı asya  payasvat   scantı bhuridhare  : duhate  suk  ı ghrtam 6.70.2 asa rte sucivrate / ra

 manurhitam   bhuvanasya rodası asm e r etah: si~ ncatam ‘‘Never dry, with abundant : yan streams, and rich in milk, they give ghee as their milk to him that performs well – they of flame-bright commands. / You two worlds that rule over this living world, may you pour the semen for us which was established for Manu.’’  rjave  rodası marto  dad   kraman  : aya 6.70.3 y o vam asa dhis: an: e sa sadhati / pra praj abhir  
: as pari  yuv : i savrat   an jayate dharman oh: sikta vıs: urup a ‘‘Who has acted dutifully toward you in order to stride straight ahead – o you two worlds, you two stations – that mortal attains success. / He is regenerated through his offspring from your foundation. Beings of varied form but of like command are poured out from you.’’ The first verse tells of the foundations of Heaven and Earth. This foundation is the authority of Varun: a that determines their place and their distinction from one another.54 At the same time, mention of heaven and earth and of the foundations of heaven and earth also puts the verse in the context of the physical foundations of the world. The authority of Varun: a becomes materially sensible in the stability of the worlds. The second verse mentions the commands of Mitra and Varun: a and the theme is carried over into the third verse, in which, in  complement to the first, dharman becomes a temporal as well as a spatial foundation. Earth and Heaven, paralleling their function as physical foundations for the present world, are also the foundations for future generations. Because of the worshipper’s reverence, the two worlds continue the life of that mortal through his offspring by providing them a foundation, a place for them to be and to prosper.55  At the same time, dharman in vs. 3 does not only have the sense of a physical foundation for generations. Again, consider the context. The  sense of dharman as foundational authority is established in the first verse by its association with Varun: a, and vrata occurs in both vs. 2  and in the compound savrata in vs. 3. Heaven and Earth inherit the  characteristic dharman of Varun: a, the authority that here ordains the continuation of the sacrificer’s line. Moreover, 6.70.3c is repeated twice more in verses which again  suggest the sense of dharman as ‘foundational authority.’ In the first of these, Mitra and Varun: a create the foundation for future gener : tirate vı mahır ıs: o y  aya  dasati / ations: 8.27.16 pra sa ks: ayam o vo var     aris  : :tah: sarva  edhate ‘‘He extends pra prajabhir jayate dharman : as pary his dwelling forward across great refreshments – he, who dutifully acts to your wish. He is regenerated through his offspring from your 482 JOEL P. BRERETON foundation. Never harmed and whole, he thrives.’’ In the second, it is   : :tah: sa marto  the Adityas: 10.63.13 aris vı sva edhate, pra prajabhir         vı  jayate dharman as p ari / y am adity aso n ayath a sunıtıbhir, ati svani :   ‘‘Never harmed, each mortal thrives, and he is durita svastaye regenerated through his offspring from your foundation, / whom,  Adityas, you lead with your good leading beyond all difficult ways to well-being.’’ The function of Varun: a and Mitra that was assumed by Heaven and Earth in 6.70 is here reassumed by those gods in these two verses. At the same time, the foundation that their authority provides is figured as a physical foundation upon which later generations stand. Wind One last verse that I find difficult to interpret, let alone classify, is sah: sucayas  mades  : ugr    a is: an: anta 1.134.5 tubhyam turan: yavo : sukra    : y apam is: anta bhurvan : i / tvam  ı dasam   bhagam  ıt: :te bhurvan ano : tsar ıye / tvam  : vı  bhuvan  pasi  dharman     at takvav svasmad at pasi : asury   dharman a ‘‘For you the glistening, gleaming rapid ones, powerful in : their invigorations, send themselves swirling; they send themselves towards the swirling of waters. / The one moving stealthily [= the priest?], exhausting himself, calls upon you, his fortune, in his pursuit of the swooping (bird) [= soma?]. / You, because of the whole living world, protect according to your foundation; you, because of your lordliness, protect according to your foundation.’’ Since this verse is addressing the wind, I take it as a description of the movement of the soma through the midspace in the process of purification.56 Perhaps this verse again reflects the idea that the wind, which seems to have no foundation, actually does. Its foundation is both all living beings, since breath is located within them, and also its own lordliness. In the latter context, therefore, this passage again attests the connection  between rule and dharman. Summary  This sense of dharman as ‘foundational authority’ is a critical source  for the later development of the concept of dharma, and in consid ering this aspect of dharman several points relevant to the history of    dharman and dharma emerge. First, dharman implies not just ‘foundational authority’ but more specifically ‘royal authority.’ This facet of its meaning is indicated either by the direct description of the gods  DHARMAN IN THE RGVEDA
483  that act in connection with dharman as kings (9.97.23, 5.63.7, 10.65.5, 10.167.3, 9.107.15f., 1.134.5) or by attributing commanding authority to them (as in 9.35.6, 9.64.1, 5.72.2, 1.22.18f., 6.70.1ff., cf. 7.89.5).  It is not difficult to explain directly how dharman ‘foundation’ could come to mean ‘foundational authority’ or ‘institute.’ If an ‘authority’ is the basis of relationships among different beings or for the organization of the world, then it is a ‘foundation’. The fact that   dharman as ‘authority’ is persistently connected to Varun: a and vrata, however, suggests that it is at least partly the character of Varun: a  that invests dharman with the specific sense of authority. As we have  seen, dharman can mean the ‘foundational nature’ of a deity. This sense occurs especially in connection with Savitar, whose name transparently displays his nature as the Compeller. Varun: a’s name is etymologically related to vrata ‘command, commandment’, and the Rgvedic poets were aware that Varun: a embodies vrata and is defined
 As Savitar is the Compeller, so Varun: a is the god of comby vrata. mands. When Varun: a (typically together with Mitra) acts in accor dance with dharman (cf. 5.63.7, 72.2), or when other gods (cf. 10.65.5, 6.70.1, 9.107.15) and humans (cf. 10.167.3, 7.89.5) act by or on his   dharman, his ‘authority’, that dharman also expresses his foundation, his nature, as the god of commands. Since the nature of Varun: a is  predictably vrata appears in close proximity to defined by vrata,  dharman (5.63.7, 72.2, 6.70.1ff., and cf. 7.89.5).  Even if dharman describes a foundational authority primarily in association with Varun: a, nonetheless, already in the younger sections of the Rgveda, it carries this sense in part independently of Varun: a.
 The obvious case is that of the dharman, the ‘foundation’ that Soma  establishes for human communities. Two features of dharman moti vate this use. First, as we have observed, dharman in other senses is frequently connected with soma. Second, the instances in which Soma  is associated with dharman are often contexts involving Varun: a or vrata or are suggestive of Varun: a. In 10.167.3, ritual consumption of soma occurs on the ‘foundation’ of kings Soma and Varun: a. In  provides a foundation and in 9.64.1, 9.35.6, Soma’s command (vrata) he sets foundations through his command. In other instances too,  Varun: a is not far when other gods possess dharman as ‘foundational authority’. Normally paired with Varun: a, Mitra alone appears with   dharman in 8.52.3, where the dharman is foundation constituted by an alliance. Parallel to the relation between Varun: a and command, alliance is both the foundation of Mitra and the foundation that Mitra establishes. Finally, in 1.134.5, Wind protects through a 484 JOEL P. BRERETON  Although various ‘foundation’ because of his ‘lordship’ (asurya).  gods are called asura, Varun: a is characteristically such a ‘lord’, and therefore this term once again places the passages within a Varun: a context.  The close connection between vrata and dharman had consequences for the future development of both terms. To a significant  degree, dharma inherits the functions of Rgvedic vrata ‘command’,
while the word vrata itself becomes circumscribed to a ‘vow.’ Why this development occurs is a difficult question, but it may reflect the  changing nature of the state during the Vedic period. The dharman as a physical foundation of the world and of living beings would lend  concreteness and legitimacy to the dharman as royal and foundational  rest on the personal authority of authority. Moreover, while vratas  and certainly later kings and sovereign gods in the Rgveda, dharman,
 dharma, have universal application. As rule was institutionalized in  India, therefore, dharman may have become the anchor for a broader claim of authority by rulers, an authority that ultimately reflects the very foundation of the world. This claim, therefore, could have  contributed to the replacement of vrata by dharman in the political sphere. We might posit a similar development in case of another term of the  After the early Vedic old Indo-Iranian religious vocabulary, rta.
 ‘truth’ has part of its semantic space occupied by satya period, rta,
 ‘real, true’ and part by dharma. In the Rgveda, the ‘truth’ defines the
functions of both gods and humans, the structure of the ritual, and the  general order of things. These spheres resemble those of the dharman, which, as we have seen, can signify the foundations of gods, humans,   ritual, and world. But dharman and dharma came to be more closely  connected to sovereigns, while rta was less so. To describe the order of
 the world through dharma, therefore, linked it more specifically to  Thus, a rulers and ruling authority than to describe it through rta.
 growing authority of the king may have made dharma a seemingly more realistic description of the governing principle of the world. CONCLUSIONS At the end of his article, Horsch helpfully laid out a summary of his  conclusions concerning the early history of dharman. In order to present the results of this study for that history, I will match the  points he makes about dharman with my own conclusions.  DHARMAN IN THE RGVEDA
485  (1) The origin of the concept of dharman rests in its formation. It is a Vedic, rather than an Indo-Iranian word, and a more recent coinage than many other key religious terms of the Vedic tradition. Its p meaning derives directly from dhr ‘support, uphold, give founda
tion to’ and therefore ‘foundation’ is a reasonable gloss in most of its attestations.  (2) Dharman can mean a physical and even a universal, cosmic foundation; a foundation created by the ritual and a foundation for the ritual; and a foundation comprising royal authority which creates material or social bases for communities.  (3) There is little evidence of semantic development of dharman within the Rgveda. Horsch’s view of a progression from myth to law
is influenced by an understanding of cultural evolution that is imported into the analysis of the Rgveda and does not derive from that
 analysis. Indeed, the ‘mythic’ sense of dharman as a universal foundation occurs especially in the later parts of the Rgveda, while the
 ‘legal’ sense of dharman as royal authority appears regularly in the family books, the old Rgvedic core collection. Rather than reflecting
 are a historical evolution within the Rgveda, the senses of dharman
better understood as different and mutually supportive aspects of the meaning ‘foundation.’ NOTES 1 This chronological analysis of the text follows the generalizations of Oldenberg and Witzel, (cf. Witzel, 1995: 308ff for a more detailed discussion of the structure of the Rgveda). It need hardly be said that this periodization only generally describes
the history of the composition of Rgveda hymns, and no layer forms an absolutely
discreet chronological stratum. p 2 Neither Elizarenkova nor Ge, who also notes the repetition of derivatives of dhr,
is able to explain just what the purpose of these repetitions might be. The Anukraman: ı implies that it is a play on the name of the poet, Dharun: a, but there are no real grounds to believe that this was the poet’s name. 3  The sacrifices could also be at the foundation (dharman) of heaven, in which case  this verse belongs with those in which dharman describes the ‘foundation’ of the world. But see the next verse, 10.170.2. 4   This translation takes both bharman : e and dharman : e as quasi-infinitives with  as the object of both and tasya   aya bhuvan as the subject. Another possibility is that  dharman : e refers to the foundation of Fire himself and therefore is the sacrificial ground: ‘‘for him to bear the living world, and yes, to give him foundation. . .. ’’ Less  likely, dharman : e might be the foundation of the gods themselves: cf. Kümmel, 2000: 320 ‘‘Durch dessen Eigenkraft sollen zum Tragen der Welt die Götter [und] für [ihren] Erhalt sich ausbreiten.’’ Other interpreters have offered other variations: Ge   a and therefore allows the gods both to ‘bear’and ‘give takes tasya only with svadhay    only  aya foundation to the world’, while Ol takes tasya with bharman : e and bhuvan 486 JOEL P. BRERETON  with with dharman : e. In support of his view,pOl refers to 10.81.4, 1.154.4 ( ‘‘one who, by triple division, has given foundation to [ dhr] the earth and heaven and all living
beings’’), 4.54.4. 5  The problem here is the verbal gapping in b. In this case, it is dharman that suggests p a form of dhr.
6 Ge is more circumspect: he says that pitu encompasses food and drink, especially the soma drink. Here, though, I think soma represents all food, cf. vss. 9–10. 7 Cf. 3.34.6, 6.29.1, 7.25.1, 8.68.3, 10.99.12. 8  is This interpretation makes unnecessary Ge’s more convoluted proposal that tam  or tani (referring to nrm  masculine by attraction to parvatam.  for tat na), :
9 It is true that soma ‘grows strong on the mountain’ (e.g., 9.71.4), but this is an uncertain basis for describing soma as mountain. 10 The next verse continues the image of soma as a horse running into a vessel ra madhvo  ır ap  containing waters: 9.7.2 pra dha agriy o mah o vi gahate / havır havi:s:su  vandyah : ‘‘The stream, the lead (horse) of honey, (goes) forth and sinks away into the great waters, / celebrated as the oblation among oblations.’’ 11  The completion of the ellipsis rests principally on the nearby manasas, but also cf. bhyam  brhan  namo   matım bharata ‘‘Bring 1.136.1ab pra su jy e:s:tham havyam : nicira
forth the foremost (reverence) to two attentive (gods), your lofty reverence, oblation, and thought.’’ 12 Like pa su from which it derives, ks: u can be a singular collective ‘herd’, as well as ‘herding animal, cow’. 13  Ge and Re construe jy e:s:thasya with ks: os and take the genitives phrase with anike. Therefore Re translates the line, ‘. . .ou (quand il s¢agissait d¢) établir (le sacrifice) en  présence du plus puissant bétail.’ In this interpretation, therefore, dharman remains  the ‘‘foundation’’ of the ritual. Ge interprets the ‘best cow’ as the daks: in: a. 14  perhaps suggested Jamison (pers. com.) suggests that there is an ellipsis of dh ara,  ıman. by dhar 15 Or ‘to be given foundation through the milk’? 16 virı, on the basis of dh ı with stha ıju I am supposing that the there is an ellipsis of dh in line a. 17  a – or, if not soma streams, whatever other object Within the soma streams in pada might be implied in a. 18  Dharman also occurs in vs. 9 of this hymn, which we have already considered. According to that verse, Soma provides the foundations of heaven and earth, in  contrast to vs. 5, where the dharmans are the foundations of soma. 19 Cf. 9.46.2c ‘The soma drops are set free to the wind’ and, for a discussion of Soma’s journey through the filter, which represents the midspace, see Oberlies 1999: 151ff. 20  as adverbial, although he does not offer a translation. Ol, on 9.25.5, takes ayus: ak Following Ol’s logic, Scarlata (1999: 590) considers ‘towards life’ or ‘lifewards’ (‘dem Leben zugewendet’) a possibility, although ultimately he sets it aside in favor of  ‘accompanying the Ayus’. 21 Line b occurs also in 1.164.43d and the whole verse occurs in 1.164.50, another hymn concerned with the interpretation of the sacrifice and therefore with its foundations. 22 That is, ‘performed for themselves the sacrifice’ or ‘sacrificed the sacrifice (= the  : a).’ But the phrase might also mean ‘sacrificed to the sacrifice.’ Or, according to purus Hoffmann Aufs. I, 117, performed ‘sacrifice after sacrifice’ (‘Opfer um Opfer’). 23  as  already ancient gods in heaven whose desirable status is worth Are the sadhy attaining, as the scholarly consensus suggests (cf. EWA II: 722), or, as I think more  as  simply the gods in general? The verb santi  stresses that heaven likely, are the sadhy  are, and this would be appropriate for the gods. is where the s adhyas  DHARMAN IN THE RGVEDA
487 24 ıh: to be nom. sgl. masc., not acc. pl. fem. Ol With Ol and Re, I understand suven takes venı for ven: ı and therefore as ‘well braided’ with reference to the braiding of pearls in the tail of the horse. On this form, cf. AiGr II, 1: 239, which states that suvena could be a compound with an adjective as second member or a bahuvrıhi. 25 The praise-song sent earlier to heaven? 26 Most interpreters do take it as a literal horse, but in my view, the horse is actually the fire. 27  and in Against Re’s attempt to defend Ol’s syntactic interpretation of vrata support of Ge, see Klein 1985 I: 97. 28 The meaning p of this compound is unclear. Cf. Re ‘celui qui protège à l¢instant pa ‘protect’ and Scarlata (1999: 317) ‘stracks sich bewegend’ from meme’ from p pa ‘move’. 29 Ge: gods and humans. 30 It is not clear who the ‘ruddy one’ is. Ge suggests, tentively, either the fire itself (so also Re) or heaven (citing 6.49.3). In the context of the dawns, however, it might be  the morning sun. Cf. 10.55.6, 30.2, both, however, with arun: a rather than arus: a. 31 According to Ge, they sit with ladles like women pouring water. But according to Ol, either the streams of butter are themselves pouring, or we might supply a plural form of upas ecanı from 2c. 32  an ally, and Mitra, the god who protects alliances. Here the Fire is both a mitra, word is nuanced toward the latter because of the mention of his authority. 33 Literally, of course, but also figuratively because of the authority he possesses. 34 Cf. Ge’s note for other references to the ‘marvel’ and a suggestion, which is unlikely, that it refers to the soul or spirit. 35  is Fire. In that one instance, the dharman 36 According to Ge, they are to be attended to first in the sacrifice, but I do not see that they actually are attended to first. Re offers a more likely interpretation that the thought of men should be first on them, with reference to Ge on 1.112.1 and Ol cited there. 37 On the surface level, as the context demands, the ‘dappled’ are cows, but the ellipsis creates the context for a metaphor. Ge identifies the ‘fruitful’ in vs. 20 as  the ‘insights’ (i.e., dhıtayas) of the poets, and Ol identifies the ‘fruitful’ in vs. 20 with the ‘dappled’ in vs. 19. The ‘dappled cows’, therefore, are also the ‘insights’, the hymns recited by the priests. 38 m, which does not come to a final conThere is a long discussion by Ol on ena sıram, the ‘milk-mix’, which, on the narrative level, I think is clusion. Ge supplies a right. But like the ‘dappled’ and the ‘fruitful’, ‘this’ or ‘this (milk-mix)’refers to ‘insight’(dhı) or something similar. Cf. 8.95.5 where pratn am (dhıyam) occupies the  position of enam. This resolution of the ellipsis depends on the suggestion of rtasya,
which points toward the hymn. If there is a difference between the ‘cows’ and their ‘milk-mix’, it may be that the cows represents the general insights that give rise to hymns and the ‘milk-mix’ is the insight embodied in this particular hymn. 39  :ıh: , but Ge, rightly, argues that the position of Ol construes rtasya with pipyus
  :ıh: suggests that it is to be construed with both. Cf. rtasya between en am and pipyus
 may also be taken with the word before and after it. 8.95.5, where rtasya
40  It is not clear here whether dharma is to be interpreted as singular or plural. 41 There are, to be sure, other ways of interpreting this verse. According to Ol, they  make Indra surround all dharman like the sun coursing around the whole world. But  the position of iva suggests that dharman is part of the comparison. According to Ge, they surround Indra like the supports or pillars the sun. But do supports or the like ‘surround’? Ge refers to 5.15.2, in which the heavens have supports. 42 Both Ge and Re suggests an ellipsis ‘plants,’ presumably o:sadhıh: . 43 Following Roth, Re ‘upon the earth’and Ge ‘upon the field,’ a solution that is na is unique to this verse. If one were to appealing, although this interpretation of da 488 JOEL P. BRERETON take dana as ‘gift’,then it might refer to soma as the ‘gift’to the Indra. Therefore, the verse would then be saying that at the giving of soma Indra carries out his distrip ana from da bution of the plants and streams. But I think it less forced to take d ‘divide’ and therefore in the sense of ‘division’. 44 Re, Ge ‘seas’ and this is surely one reference, but also perhaps the vats of soma? 45  : an: a in 5.34.6. Hapax. But cf. vitvaks 46 Ge: ‘Menge’ with a note explaining it is the ‘abundance’ of soma. In any case, it is what the soma offerer has put up in his offering to Indra in the hopes of gaining something back from Indra. 47 Perhaps both for Indra and the sacrificer, who hopes for Indra’s gift in return? 48 Or ‘according to his (=Mitra’s) nature’ as thepgod of alliances. 49 dhr as intransitive, see Kümmel On this isolated use of the active perfect of
2000: 261. 50  For a discussion of the role of the Adityas in the Rgveda, see Brereton 1981. The functions of Mitra and Varun: a are defined by their
names. In the Rgveda, mitra
means ‘alliance’ or ‘ally’(cf. pp. 25ff.), and therefore Mitra is the god that governs in the sphere of alliance. Varun: a’s name is etymologically and semantically related to vrata ‘command, commandment’(cf. pp. 70ff.), and therefore Varun: a governs in the sphere of ‘command’or ‘authoriy.’ 51 Hapax. With Ol, the word is probably dual and refers to the two ‘Hilfesuchungen’, personified abstracts. 52 As Ge notes, raj~ nas belongs to both Soma and Varun: a, with reference also to Atharvaveda 4.27.5a. 53 On this verse, cf. Hoffmann, 1967: 117. 54 ın: i mitra dharayatho   am  : si/ ımr _ uta dy raj un tr Cf. 5.69.1 trı rocana varun: a tr  dhan  ajuryam  ‘‘The three realms of  raks  : am  : ks: atrıyasyanu vratam  av amatim vavr an: av
light, Varun: a, and the three heavens, the three airy spaces do you two give foundation, Mitra, / having grown strong, protecting the emblem of the ruler, in accordance with his unaging command.’’ Here Mitra, together with Varun: a, ‘gives foundation’ to the three realms of light and the other heavenly spaces. 55 This idea that the two worlds provide a place for the mortal’s continued line is : as, as those that provide a location for reflected in the description of them as dhis: an someone or something. 56 Who is the creeping one and who is or are the swift that the creeping one pursues? Ge takes the language as suggesting a hunter seeking his prey, and this may be the image. But it still does not explain what in the soma rite represents the ‘hunter’ and what the ‘prey.’ In the above translation, I have suggested that they are the priest and  the soma. The epithet dasam anas would be appropriate to a priest laboring at the  ritual, and takvan could describe the movement of soma as it rushes through the filter, but neither is certain. REFERENCES  Brereton, J.P. (1981). The Rgvedic Adityas. American Oriental Series, Vol. 63. New
Haven: American Oriental Society. Elizarenkova, T.J. (1995). Language and Style of the Vedic R:sis. State University of
New York: Albany. Ge = Geldner, K.F. (1951). Der Rigveda. Aus dem Sanskrit ins Deutsche Übersetzt. 3 Vols. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Hoffmann, K. (1967). Der Injunktiv im Veda. Heidelberg: Carl Winter Universit€atsverlag.  DHARMAN IN THE RGVEDA
489 € Hoffmann, K. (1975). Aufs. = Aufsatze zur Indoiranistik I. Wiesbaden: Reichert Verlag. Jamison, S. (1996). Sacrificed Wife/Sacrificer’s Wife. New York: Oxford University Press. Klein, J.S. (1985). Toward a Discourse Grammar of the Rigveda. 2 Vol. Heidelberg: Carl Winter Universitätsverlag. Kümmel, M.J. (2000). Das Perfekt im Indoiranischen. Wiesbaden: Reichert Verlag. Mayrhofer, M. (1986–2001). EWA = Etymologisches Wörterbuch des Altindoarischen. 3 volumes Heidelberg: Carl Winter Universitätsverlag. Oberlies, T. (1998). Die Religion des Rgveda. Erster Teil: Das Religiöse System des
Rgveda. Wien: De Nobili.
Oberlies, T. (1999). Die Religion des Rgveda. Zeiter Teil: Kompositionsanalyse der
Soma-Hymnen des Rgveda. Wien: De Nobili. Ol = Oldenberg, H.
(1909, 1912). Rgveda. Textkritische und exegetische Noten.
Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung. (AbhGWG 11, 13). Oldenberg, H. (1897) [rpt. (1973)]. Vedic Hymns II: Hymns to Agni (Mandalas I-V). Sacred Books of the East, Vol. XLVI. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. Re = Renou, L. (1955–1969). Études ve´diques et p an: ine´ennes. 17 vols. Paris: Boccard. Scarlata, S. (1999). Die Wurzelkomposita im Rgveda. Wiesbaden: Reichert Verlag. Skjaerv, P.O. (2003). Truth and Deception in
Ancient Iran. In: M. Soroushian (ed.), The Fire Within: Jamshid Soroush Soroushian Memorial, Vol. II. 1stBooks Library: Bloomington, IN, pp. 379–430. Thieme, P. (1957). Mitra and Aryaman. Transactions of the Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences, 41. New Haven: Yale University Press. Wackernagel, J. (and Albert Debrunner). (1896–1957) [rpt. (1975–1987)]. AiGr = Altindische Grammatik. 3 Vol. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. Wennerberg, C. (1981). Die altindischen Nominalsuffixe -man- und -iman- in historisch-komparativer Beleuchtung. I. Wortanalytischer Teil – Wörterbuch. Göteborg: Göteborgs Universitet. Witzel, M. (1995). Rgvedic history, poets, chieftains, and politics. In: The IndoAryans of Ancient
South Asia, ed. George Erdosy, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter & Co., pp. 307–352. University of Texas Austin TX 78712 USA