The Conflict Of The Devas And The Asuras

Right from the earliest stratum of ṚV the indications of the conflict between the devas and the asuras are found in abundance. It does not end in the Ṛgveda but continues into the Brāhmaṇas, in the Śrauta literature, in the Mahābhārata and a reference to it is found even in the chronicles of Alexander’s historian. The initial stages of the conflict as reflected in Ṛgveda and their religious transformation into Brahmanic ritual show its all-pervading and excruciating character. Though the events took place in the past, yet they seemed to have been fresh in the minds of the poets at the time of narration. Even in the days of the Brāhmaṇas, the victory of the devas and the defeat of the asuras was fresh enough to be enacted through the rituals and remote enough to be the basis for the belief in the magical efficacy. On the one hand, the asuras inspired admiration in the devas but on the other, they were hated for exactly those qualities which inspired admiration.

The earliest description available to us is in ṚV in the prayers addressed to Indra in which he is extolled for the destruction of the asuras. From the praises bestowed on him it is possible to understand the gravity of the conflict and the anxiety it caused to the devas.

Practically in every hymn addressed to Indra, superlatives are heaped on him for his valour displayed in the battles with the asuras. He is called śatakratu, having a hundred powers (which occurs more than 60 times and with two exceptions solely limited to him), śactpati śacnīām, the mighty lord of might or Śacī (i.e. Indiāṇi), of irresistible strength (apraiidhṛṣṭaśavasam, I.84.2), of unbounded force (I.11.4; 102.6 etc.) and many other commoner epithets like śūra (heroic), tura (quick), tavas (stronge etc. He is said to have filled heaven and earth with his varied heroic powers (III.54.15). His greatness was such that he was called the universal monarch (IV. 19.2 etc.) and also a selfdependent sovereign (eko viśvasya bhuvanasya rājā, III.46.2 etc.). His grandeur even surpassed those of the older gods who placed their confidence in him for the status of Asura (asuryāya) for the lordship, for their strength, for dominion (VII.21.7). The praise does not stop here— he is said to have subjected the Asura of the sky (īndrāya hi dyaur asuro anamnata, I.131.1). Probably this is the highest praise bestowed on him.

Most of the hymns addressed to Indra enumerate his heroic deeds which are praised by the poets in unstinted terms. They often refer to the destruction of Vṛtra which by far has been the most important event and won for Indra the epithets Vṛtrahā, Vṛtrahan, Vṛtraghna, Vṛtratūrya, Vṛtrakhāda which are strewn over the ṚV.

Vṛtra is said to be the serpent who was covering the waters which Indra released by killing the ragon. On account of this valorous deed, he is called the winner of the waters, apsujit. The Vṛtra-episode is discussed in greater details later (see Chapter XII. 15) but here some aspects of it are dealt with.

The mythology associated with Vṛtra is that he was a demon of drought, that he was a dragon or serpent who lay covering the waters and the event of his defeat is narrated in detail in ṚV 1.32. The term Vṛtra is traditionally derived from √vṛ, to cover, hide, conceal etc. But the same √vṛ also means

to ward off, check, prevent, keep back, hinder etc. Thus in the latter sense Vṛtra may mean one who wards off, checks. Ahi seems to be a proper name, and there are cases of its use as a proper name in non-Aryan tradition; the non-Aryan origin of Vṛtra is stressed by calling him Dānava (RV II.11.10, V.29.4, V.32.1 etc.) son of Dānu who mourns his death (ṚV I.32.9) and also by calling him dāsa in II.11.2. In IX.88.4, the Rgvedic poet clearly states that: “You are a killer of all those that are called Ahi (ahināmnām).” In the previous pāda he speaks about the destruction of Vṛtra and in the following one that of the dasyus. Aḥḥe and Aḥi have both formed parts of Assyrian names. The catalogue of tablets in the Kouyunjik collection refers to at least twenty-four names of officials and rulers which begin with Aḥi.1 Later Indian tradition confirms this usage. Thus both the words Vṛtra and Ahi do not warrant the interpretation ‘dragon’. Vrtra may have been guarding the dam, preventing any intruders from going near the valves.

The fight between Indra and Vṛtra and his men, who are referred to as the Vṛtras in several places,2 is described in ṚV I.32 in details with innumerable references strewn all over the Ṛgveda.

One significant feature of the fight is the frequent mention of the mountain which obstructed the waters. In I.32.2 Ahi is said to be lying on the mountain (parvate). I.57.6 once again refers to “a great wide mountain (parvataṃ mahāmūrum)” which Indra shatters to pieces by his bolt. Further in V.32.I, the great mountain (mahāntam parvatam) is broken open by Indra. The function of this mountain seems to have been to enclose the water, to obstruct it, because, as the mountain was shattered by Indra, the waters of the seven rivers started running irresistibly towards the sea. Thus Indra is said to have released the imprisoned waters as in I.57.6, I.103.2. ṚV II.11.2 gives some idea of the amount of water that was enclosed where it is called the great expanse (of water, mahiḥ) or elsewhere the term arṇas, flood is used to indicate the waters released by Indra. This may signify that the imprisoned or enclosed volume of water was very big and when it was released, it roared down like a natural flood (II. 19.3). II.15.3 creates a more concrete picture: he opened the channels of the rivers which were blocked. In fact in II. 15.8 Indra is said to have removed artificial barriers on the rivers (riṇag rodhāṃsi kṛtrimāṇy eṣām).

Did he really break the mountain? Metaphorically he did but more concretely he is said to have

“opened the mouth of the waters which was covered, after killing Vṛtra” apām bilam apihitam yadāsit, vrtram jaghanvān apa tad vavāra (I.32.11). In V.32.2, the udder or bosom of the mountain is ripped open by Indra. In II. 11.2, the waters are said to have been obstructed by Ahi in ancient times and in IV. 17.1 they are said to have been devoured (jagrasānam) by Ahi. √gras, to devour etc. later meant to suppress, stop. The three elements i.e. the killing of Vṛtra by Indra, the opening of the mouth of waters and the release of waters result from each other. They may indicate that the mountain, frequently referred to, might have been a dam, containing a fairly large volume of water, and equipped with sluice valves which were guarded by Vṛtra and his men and are mentioned in the episode as the bila, ūdha or dūra (as in ṚV VI.30.5). This dam is directly referred to in ṚV II. 15.8c as rodhāṃsi kṛtrimāṇi, the artificial barriers, mounds, dams. In the second pāda of the same verse he is said to have broken the fortification of the mountain which, as discussed above, was probably a metaphorical description of the dam. There is therefore enough evidence, direct and indirect, to show that there was a dam which was guarded by Vṛtra and which was opened by Indra to let the waters flow down the river. Indra could have access to it only after killing Vṛtra. The water was released not by breaking it, but by opening the mouths. And this Indra did not do once but as is said in ṚV IV.19.8,

‘for many dawns and autumns, did Indra let loose the streams’, pūrvīruṣasaḥ śaradaśca gūrtā vṛtram

jaghanvān asṛjad vi sindhūn. The released waters were those of the sapta-sindhus, the seven streams referred to in II.12.12. Thus even the probable location of the dam could be tentatively fixed with the help of this last detail. It was down the stream after the confluence of the seven rivers.

The cows mentioned in I.32.2 and 11 are clearly metaphorical expressions and do not seem to have any mythic implications.

The destruction of Vṛtra was the chief feather in Indra’s cap as is obvious from the prominent place it occupies in the eulogies sung to him.