CROATIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES AND ARTS

Parallels and Comparisons

Proceedings of the Fourth Dubrovnik International Conference
on the Sanskrit Epics and Purfu;las
September 2005

Edited by
Petteri Koskikallio

General Editor
Mislav Jezic
Member of the Croatian Academy
of Sciences and Arts (Zagreb)

/~'
~ )~

Zagreb
2009
 Table of Contents

Preface by the General Editor .. .... .. ... .. .... ......... .... ...... .... .. ....... ...... ..... ........ .... ..... ix
Abbreviations ...................................................................................................... xix

GREG BAILEY
Introduction: Parallels and Comparisons

MUNEO TOKUNAGA
Vedic Exegesis and Epic Poetry: A Note on atriipi udiiharanti ... .... ........ ...... ..... 21

MISLAV JEZIC
The Tri~tubh Hymn in the Bhagavadgfta ...... .......... ..... ........ .... ..... ...... ....... ..... .... 31

GEORG VON SIMSON

The Lunar Character of Balariima/Saiµk:ar~al).a ... ...... ... ......... ..... ............ ........... .. 67

NICK ALLEN
The Hanging Man and Indo-European Mythology .............................................. 89

Y AROSLAV V ASSILKOV
An Epithet in the Mahabharata: mahabhaga ... ... ........ .... ... .... ...... ..... ....... ..... ...... 107

ADAM BOWLES
Toward a Framing Bm~ma's Royal Instructions:
The Mahabharata and the Problem oflts 'Design' ............................................ 121

SIMON BRODBECK
The Bhiiradvaja Pattern in the Mahabharata ...................................................... 137

SVEN SELLMER
Towards a Semantics of the Mental in the Indian Epics:
Comparative and Methodological Remarks ........................................................ 181

DANIELLE FELLER
Hanuman' s Jumps and Their Mythical Models ... ..... ..... .. ...... .............. .. ...... ..... ... 193
Vlll Table of Contents

ANDREAS VIETHSEN
The Reasons for Vi~i:iu's Descent in the Prologue to the Kf~i:iacarita
of the Harivaf!!sa ................................................................................................. 221

PAOLO MAGNONE
Tejas (and §akti) Mythologemes in the Purfu).as .................................................. 235

KENNETH R. V ALPEY
The Bhagavatapura!}a as a Mahabharata Reflection ......................................... 257

CHRISTELE BAROIS
The Legendary Life of Upamanyu .. ....... ..... ........ ... ........ .. .. .. ........ ... ........ .. ..... ..... 279

HORST BRINKHAUS
The 'Purai:iization' of the Nepalese Mahatmya Literature 303

OLGA SERBAEVA SARAOGI

A Tentative Reconstruction of the Relative Chronology of the Saiva Purai:iic
and Saiva Tantric Texts on the Basis of the YoginI-related Passages ................. 313

RENATE SOHNEN-THIEME
Buddhist Tales in the Mahabharata . .. ... .. ... .... ... .. ... .. ... .. ....... ...... ... .. .. .. .... ... ...... ... 349

KLARA GONC MOACANIN

Epic vs. Buddhist Literature: The Case of Vidhurapa!}tj,itajataka ....................... 373

EVA DECLERCQ
The Jaina Harivaf!!Sa and Mahabharata Tradition: A Preliminary Study .......... 399

ANDRE COUTURE
The Reception ofl<f~i:ia's Childhood in Three Jain Sanskrit Texts ................... 423

NICOLAS DEJENNE
Parasuriima as Torchbearer of a Regenerated Bharat in a Contemporary
Rewriting of His Narratives ................................................................................ 447

Contributors ... .... .... ...... .... ..... ....... ..... ..... ..... ........ ..... .... ..... .... .... ..... ..... .... ... ...... ... 469

Index of Passages Cited ...................................................................................... 473

General Index ..... .. ... ....... ... ..... ... ...... ..... ...... ....... ... ....... ... ........ ..... ...... .. ......... ...... 497

APPENDIX: Summaries in Croatian I Safotci na hrvatskome

(prepared by I priredio MISLAY JEZIC) .................................................................. 533

Table of Contents in Croatian I Sadrfaj na hrvatskome . ......... ...... ..... ......... .... .. . 549
PAOLO MAGNONE

Tejas (and sakti) Mythologemes in the Pura9as

The present paper is part of an ongoing project devoted to the elucidation of different
aspects of the notion of tejas - a notion that is familiar to every reader of the epics
and Purfu:!as, for the word turns up countless times in those texts, in a variety of con-
texts and usages, some of them quite generic and less noteworthy, 1 some of them
more characteristic and specific, to which I will presently tum my attention, after a
few words to place the present contribution into the broader frame. What elicited my
original interest was the notion of tejas as (arguably) the most successful of a whole
range of so-called Daseinsmiichte, as Glasenapp termed them,2 meaning by such
term 'hypostases of qualities and processes conceived as self-standing substances'. 3
The underlying assumption of the notion of Daseinsmiichte, or substance-powers, as
we shall translate the expression, was, according to him, the
understanding of reality characteristic of the [Vedic] time: whatever exists must exist
as a living substance, no matter whether it is about spiritual or bodily properties, facul-
ties, conditions or processes. 4

The older Vedic literature was home to the original Daseinsmiichte according to
Glasenapp, and indeed the Atharvaveda and the Brahma~as teem with a host of such
substance-powers as varcas, ya§as, ojas, vfrya (to name but a few) and of course
tejas. So I set about my research by analysing the earliest Vedic occurrences of the
notion of tejas, pointing out its original meaning of 'sharpness', its early associations
with fire through the metaphor of the 'sharp' tongues of flame, and the ensuing per-
sistent and distinctive connotations of fierceness, abruptness, keenness and excess.
The path of the transition to the epico-purli~ic notion of tejas 'was also summarily
outlined, showing how in the process of time, on the one hand, in the Brahma~as

For example, when the word occurs in frequent epithets such as mahiitejas and the like,
or when it occurs in cosmological contexts as a common term for elemental fire.
2
Glasenapp 1940, chapter 1.1.
'[,,,] als selbstiindige Wesenheiten aufgefaJ3t[e] Hypostasen. von Qualitiiten und Vor-
giingen' (Glasenapp 1940: 256).
4
'[,,.] die eigenartige Realitiits-Auffassung der Zeit: alles was iiberhaupt existiert, exi-
stiert als ein lebendiges Wesen, ganz gleichgiiltig ob es sich um geistige oder korperli-
che Eigenschaften, Fiihigkeiten, Zustiinde oder Vorgiinge handelt' (Glasenapp 1940:
286),
236 PAOLO MAGNONE

tejas came to be reckoned as one of a complex of substance-powers which are the

special appurtenance of brahmm:zas, as against another complex which are the prop-
erty of k!jatriyas; while, on the other hand, in some upani~adic texts a trend becomes
apparent that raises tejas above its kin as the very indwelling place and most intimate
embodiment of atman as well as his selfsame centrifugal energy presiding over
manifestation. 5
Both dimensions of tejas - the brahmanical socio-cosmic and the vedantic meta-
physico-theological one - surface in the epico-puranic literature. The former dimen-
sion of tejas, as implicated in the power dialectics of the two upper var!las which
constitute a primary concern of the epics, has accordingly formed the subject of an-
other paper of mine, entitled 'Patterns of tejas (and k!jama) in the Epics' (Magnone,
in press). In the present paper, turning to the more religious outlook of the Purai:ias, I
purpose to investigate the latter aspect, i.e. tejas as a regular and distinctive attribute
of the parame§vara in his different persona:, and the ensuing crystallization of spe-
cific tejas mythologemes around the most characteristic traits of each of the great
Hindu gods.
As is wont to happen to any human endeavour, research projects are liable to
change in the course of time, more or less subtly (or indeed self-consciously) altering
any or all of their original scope, method, assumptions, objects and so forth - so that
I cannot claim to have been entirely consistent in my dealings with my subject.
Whereas my research began with a scrutiny of the early notion of tejas as could be
elicited through a lexical analysis of the usage of the word itself and its cognates, by
the time I turned to the epic and puranic period I realized that it would have been ill-
advised to stick rigidly to a semantic-field approach that must certainly find more
promising application in the domain of the older literature. As a matter of fact,
whereas the boundaries between related terms for substance-powers appear to be
well demarcated especially in the Brahmai:ias, in the epics and Purai:ias they seem to
have grown moreflou: different terms are often used interchangeably, while one and
the same term may be put to service to express different meanings according as the
context requires. 6 As a consequence, although the occurrence of the word has been

On these early developments of the notion of tejas see Magnone 1993.

6
By the times of Saya1:1a distinctions between the different substance-powers have evi-
dently been lost, for in his ~gvedic glosses they freely interchange with one another (cf.
Gonda 1952: 9 and passim). Discussing various MBh passages where ojas occurs, either
alone or jointly with other power-substances, Gonda himself notes that 'ojas and tejas
are not seldom closely related "ideas" or practically interchangeable' (Gonda 1952: 22).
The same could be said at least for vfrya, and possibly others. Vogel concluded his 1930
path-breaking essay by giving a number of words, including ojas, varcas and others, as
virtually synonyms for tejas (Vogel 1930: 124: 'deals gloed gedachte magische kracht,
die gewoonlijk tejas genoemd wordt, ook door een aantal andere woorden wordt aange-
duid, nl. prabhiiva, ojas, varcas, vapus'). See a couple of examples below, in footnotes
28 and 56.
 Tejas (and §akti) Mythologemes in the PurtilJaS 237

always instrumental in identifying the relevant passages, the interpretation of con-

textual discourse has been equally or more important than lexical analysis in deter-
mining the import of the concept of tejas.
Although such contextual discourse is, needless to say, historically situated and
interconnected, a diachronic perspective of the development of the notion of tejas
has been sketched only in very broad outline, and mostly genre-wise; in particular, in
the present paper the material is presented synchronically, arranged under the head-
ings of the five great Hindu gods, whereas no systematic attempt has been made to
disentangle the question of the relationship between different flavours of the notion
in individual Purli.l_las. To get a clear picture of such relationship would have required
a far more comprehensive survey than has been possible, also given the limited ex-
tent to which indispensable requisites of a would-be exhaustive investigation, such
as indexes and searchable electronic texts, have been made available for puranic
literature.

Tejas and Vi~I).U

In spite of tejas being the supreme power of the parame§vara irrespective of his
actual name in a particular strand of so-called Hinduism, the relationship of tejas
with the parame§vara Vi~l_lu is the most well-established from ancient times, dating
back to the Maitrayw:if-Upani~ad:
The mouth of the truth is hidden behind a veil of gold; do thou remove it, o Pii~an, that
[I may reach to] Vi~1_1u the Satyadharma. I am indeed the puru~a in the sun! For verily,
Satyadharma is the sun-nature in the sun, the pure and indeterminate puru~a-nature.
What abides in the middle of the sun, as well as in the eye and in fire, is but a particle
of tejas permeating space; it is brahman, immortality, effulgence, it is Satyadharma
(MaiU 6.35). 7

This passage is important in that it reproduces the well-known passage from the
Brhadarar:iyaka and lia with a small textual alteration 8 which results in effectively
demoting the Sun god Pii~an to the function of merely ushering in Vi~l_lu as Pii~an's
own sun-nature, the puru~a in the sun, equated with pervasive tejas and brahman.
This privileged relationship of the puru~a Vi~l_lu with tejas is reiterated in another

hiral}mayena ptitrel}a satyasytipihitarri mukham I tat tvarri pu~ann aptiv0u satya-

dharmtiya vi~l}ave I yo 'sa tiditye puru~aJ:t so 'sti aham iti I e~a ha vai satyadharmo yad
tidityasytidityatvam I tac chuklarri puru~am alingam I nabhaso 'ntargatasya tejaso 'msa-
mtitram etad yad adityasya madhya ivety ak~il}y agnau ca I etad brahma I etad amrtam I
etad bhargaJ:t I etad satyadharmaJ:t. The meaning of satyadharma has been variously
interpreted, both as a bahuvrfhi, e.g. 'wahrhafter Satzung' (Deussen 1897: 358) and as a
tatpuru~a, e.g. 'the eternal real' (Radhakrishnan 1994: 847).
BAU 5.15.1; I8aU 15 (with dmaye instead of vi~l}ave).
238 PAOLO MAGNONE

seminal passage from the Bhagavadgftti, which has Kr~~a conclude the enumeration
of his vibhiltis or 'manifestations of excellence' by declaring: 'know that whatever
being is excellent, splendid or powerful is born from a particle of my tejas' (BhG
10.41). 9 Here Kr~~a claims tejas as a property which is eminently his and which
other beings may only share by participation.
Both passages (from the MaiU and BhG) are echoed back in a comparatively
early 10 puranic work which perhaps is the one making the most of the doctrine of
tejas in its vai~!lava denomination, namely the Vi~!ludharmottarapurti!la. In the last
chapter of the Sarikaragftti in the same Pura~a 11 a meditation path is described lead-
ing upwards through the five elements, the manas-moon with the arigu~fhamatra­
puru~a abiding in its centre, the buddhi-sun likewise with the puru~a in its centre,
then the titman with the puru~a in the inverted lotus of the heart, to culminate in the
avyaktapada beyond everything, circumfused with tejas, where the supreme silnya
puru~a dwells (VDhottP l ,65.l 7 ff) who is to be the final support for nirodha-
samadhi. Here the influence of the MaiU passage quoted above is readily apparent.
Later in the same Pura~a a couple of chapters entitled puru~asvarilpa and pradur-
bhavasvarilpava'!lana, respectively, characterize tejas as the underlying own-form
of the puru~ottama Vi~~u, of his manifestations, and indeed of the whole creation.

yad yad vibhiltimat sattvaf!! frfmad ilrjitam eva va I

tat tad evavagaccha tvaf!! mama tejo 'riz§asaf!!bhavam 1141 II
IO
According to Rocher (HIL, p. 252), the proposed datings of the text as a whole mostly
range between the 5th and 7th century CE. However, in his methodologically alert study
of the 'imperial' VDhottP Inden has recently argued for a lower date, identifying the
court of the Karko~a Naga dynasty of Kashmir, competing for paramountcy in the new
political scenario brought about by Har~a's death, as the 'complex author' of the pro-
gressive VDhottP. Accordingly, he believes the first historic recipient of the complete
Purili).a in its now extant form to have been Candrapi<;la Vajraditya (reign. c. 712/3-
720/1 CE), homologous with the VDhottP speaker Markai:i<;Ieya's interlocutor Vajra in
the text itself (Inden 2000: 78 ff). Interesting though it certainly is, his 'admittedly
speculative account' (p. 78) has to meet, according to Inden himself, Biihler's contention
that the Paitamahabrahmasiddhanta constituting VDhottP 2,166-174 is held by Indian
commentators to be the source of Brahmagupta's Sphutabrahmasiddhanta, hence the
date of the latter (628 CE) must count as the terminus ad quern for the composition of
the Purili).a. Inden answers the objection by remarking that 'the only inference that can
safely be drawn[ ... ] is that by the time of these commentators an independent text of the
Paitamahasiddhanta no longer existed' (Inden 2000: 93)- which is sensible enough, but
not decisive in itself. For his part Gail, who has revived Biihler's argument in more re-
cent years, while envisaging the possibility of an independent existence of the Paita-
mahasiddhanta and its subsequent inclusion in the VDhottP, does not regard it as proba-
ble, on account of the strong compositive unity he perceives in the narrative books of the
Purai:ia (Gail 1977: 101). Cf. also Magnone 1987: 8-9.
II
The Sarikaragfta, constituted by chapters 51 to 65 of the first book of the VDhottP, is
titled after his speaker, Siva-Sankara, who proclaims the greatness of Vi~i:iu in response
to a question by his bhakta Para§urama, himself a manifestation of Vi~i:iu.
 Tejas (and §akti) Mythologemes in the Puriil}as 239

Taking the lead from the well-known BhG teaching - 'know that imperishable is that
by which this universe is spread out' (BhG I
2.17ab) 12 the VDhottP goes ahead to
name it: 'nothing is imperishable in this world except that great vai~!lava tejas'
(VDhottP 1, 171.3).13 Vai~!lava tejas is the only permanent substratum of everything,
but living beings are hardly capable of enduring it forever: be they common crea-
tures, divine manifestations or great gods, they eventually wear out and must relin-
quish it, merging back into the five elements whence they were first raised to exis-
tence by the great vai~!lava energy (VDhottP l,171.4--7ab). 14 Vai~!lava tejas is the
one quality-less viriifpuru~a beyond qualities which they call Sadasiva or Jagatpati,
Vasudeva, Time, Fate, Own-nature, Karma, Puru~a or the syllable Of!! (VDhottP
1,171.10 ff).
According to the afore-mentioned text, it is worth noticing, even divine manifes-
tations or priidurbhiivas are indebted to vai~!lava tejas for their subsistence. Along
with the other two trimurti persons, Indra, the Sun and the Moon, also the first five
of the later-to-become standard da§tivatiiras are mentioned as depending on be-
stowal and withdrawal of tejas for their origination and dissolution. Are then
prtidurbhiivas and ordinary people no different, in their common dependence on
tejas? The next chapter clarifies, again echoing the BhG, that whereas in ordinary
people the bestowal and withdrawal of tejas is regulated by karma, in priidurbhtivas
it ensues from Vasudeva's own will. Whenever dharma is on the wane and adharma
waxes strong, as the well-known BhG passage goes, 15 the Lord takes birth in differ-
ent wombs suiting the demands of the circumstance, and in spite of his omnipotence
subjects himself to the very laws of the chosen condition of birth to provide a model
for others to conform to. But apart from these self-assumed initiatives, the Lord also
supports powerful and good works of ordinary living beings: as our text explains,
wherever someone is all bent on some virtuous deed, the Lord lavishly infuses him
with his own tejas, and thus pervaded by the parame§vara's own energy he performs
actions on the Lord's behalf; then in due course, once the task is over, he is again

12
avinasi tu tad viddhi yena sarvam idam tatam, almost literally quoted in VDhottP
1,171.Scd.
13
aviniisi jagaty asmin na kirrzcid atha vidyate I
rte tu mahatas tasmat tejaso nrpa ... II 3 II
14
tejas tasya sudurviihyarrz dehibhir n,rpa sarvadii I
tasmiit tena vihfniis te k~ayarrz gacchanti miinada II 4 II
matsyaJ:i kilrmo variihas ca narasirilho 'tha vamanaJ:i I
brahma sambhus tathaivarkaJ:i candramas ca iatakratuJ:i II 5 II
evam adyiis tathaivanye yuktii vai~l}avatejasii I
gajacchayiinumiinena (v.l.jagatkiiryii°) viyujyante ca tejasii II 6 II
vitejasas ca te sarve pancatvam upayiinti ca I
15
BhG 4. 7, here quoted as follows (VDhottP 1, 172.8):
yadii yadii hi dharmasya gliinir bhavati yiidava I
abhyutthiinam adharmasya tadiitmiinarrz sr.jaty asau II 8 II
240 PAOLO MAGNONE

relinquished by vai~~ava tejas and proceeds to his appointed end as the Lord pleases
(VDhottP 1, 172.17-19). 16 Such people become, so to speak, foster-avatiiras of sorts,
who are not born as avatiiras from a particle (ariz§a) of divine substance, according
to the prevailing conception, but become temporarily such through divine empower-
ment brought about by the infusion (iive§a) of tejas.17 Stretching the notion further,
not only the authors of extraordinary deeds, but even the performers of everyday
dharmic tasks are regarded as empowered by tejas: thanks to vai~~ava tejas Brah-
mans and cows support the living beings, kings protect the earth and seers and Veda-
knowers uphold the entire world. By this transition the doctrine of avatiira-hood by
infusion of tejas ends up finally blending into the doctrine of the vibhiitis. The two
doctrines, which are kept separate in the BhG, 18 are brought here under the same
heading, their solidarity conclusively sealed by another quotation - slightly but sig-
nificantly adapted: 'know that whatever being is excellent, splendid or powerful is
endowed with vai~~ava tejas' (VDhottP 1, 172.33).
We are left with many an interesting question concerning the relationship be-
tween this - arguably earlier - flavour of the doctrine of worldly interventions of
Vi~l).U, resting on the notion of the iive§a of tejas and accordingly qualifying the
intervention as a 'manifestation' or priidurbhiiva, and the ultimately prevailing doc-
trine, resting upon the coinage of the distinctive term avatiira, simultaneously con-
noting, as Hacker has shown, 19 both the notion of a partial 'descent' of the Lord by a
portion of himself (arizsiivatara~a), and that of its purpose, i.e. to 'make descend', or

16
ii/qiptii~ karmabh* pw:iya* kaiscid yaduvarottama I
te!jiim iivi§ate devas tejasii tena sarva§a~ II 17 II
iivi!jfiis tejasii tena devena parame!jfhinii I
tadvat karmii7:1i kurvanti pujamiinii mahar!jibhi~ II 18 II
tathii tu kale sarrmyastiis tena vai!j7:1avatejasii I
di!jfiintava§am iiyiinti tasyaiva rucita'!l yathii II 19 II
17
Cf. e.g. the story of Purukutsa (ViP 4,3), a king of the lineage of Miindhiitf (the latter
himself reckoned as a temporary avatiira in VDhottP 1, 170-172) whose aid to curb the
unruly Gandharvas was enlisted by Vi~I).U by 'possessing' him (tam aham anupravisya).
Thanks to the infusion of divine tejas (bhagavattejasiipyiiyitiitmavfryaM Purukutsa is
able to accomplish his assigned task.
18
In the BhG, avatiiras are viewed 'existentialistically', as the descent of the Lord into
existence in the hie et nunc of particular historical circumstances; on the other hand,
vibhutis are conceived of 'essentialistically', as the universal participation in the divine
essence by all beings in measure according to the degree of their own excellence.
19
Hacker 1960, see especially pp. 59-60: 'Das Wort avatara7:1a wird ... im doppeltem
Sinne verwendet: sowohl fiir das "Abwiilzen" der Last von der Erde [= bhiiriivatara7:1a]
wie auch fiir das "Herabsteigen" der Gotter [= amsiivatara7:1a] und schieJ31ich auch
Vi~I).u's. Das ist sicher beabsichtigt [... ] Und weil das Wort avatara7:1a oder avatiira,
"Herabsteigen", von nun an, sobald sich die sprachliche Gleichsetzung durchsetzte, den
Zweck der Herabkunft, das (bhiira-)avatara7:1a, immer gleich mitandeutete, empfahl es
sich als ein stiirkerer Terminus, der mehr ausdriickte als das bisher tibliche priidurbhiiva.
Dies Wort wurde daher durch den neuen Terminus bald verdriingt.'
 Tejas (and §akti) Mythologemes in the PuriilJGS 241

unload the burden oppressing the earth (bhiiriivatara1;,a) - questions that cannot be
addressed here. 20
At any rate, the notion of tejas is at work in most (if not all) ofVi~i:iu's incarna-
tions, however they be conceived of. Here I will confine myself to some examples
concerning the most ancient triad of avatiiras, 21 i.e. the boar, man-lion and dwarf.
The divine boar is cast in the Purai:ias in either of two major roles: the yajna-
variiha, a symbolic embodiment of sacrifice, on the one hand; 22 and the variihiiva-
tiira proper, in connection with the struggle with the titan Hira9yiik~a, on the other.
In the former role he is purely theriomorphic, as the homologies of his various limbs
with aspects and implements of the sacrifice require; whereas in the latter role he
should perhaps be more accurately conceived of as a hybrid figure, half man and half
boar, as he is usually represented iconographically, and as at least one VDhottP

20
Another open question is that of the relationship between the VDhottP and the Piifica-
riitra doctrine of tejas. Hazra, while dating the VDhottP between 400 and 500 CE and
considering it 'practically free from Tantric influence', ascribed it to the Piificariitra sect
(Hazra 1975: 212, 217); for his part, Inden, while advocating a much later date (see
footnote 10), likewise argues at length for the VDhottP as 'a text that claimed to rework
Indian traditions from a Paiicaratra Vai~l).ava perspective, that of the emergent Agamas'
(Inden 2000: 30). However, neither pays attention to the fact that characteristic Paiica-
riitra tenets are missing, and would actually be out of place in the VDhottP; for example,
the unique status of vai~l)ava tejas as delineated above and explicitly set forth in
VDhottP 1, 171-172 is not compatible with the Paiicaratra core theological doctrine of
~ai/,gul)ya, reckoning tejas as merely one of the six divine attributes (jniina, aisvarya,
§akti, bala, vfrya, tejas), with no special pre-eminence over the other five (cf. Schrader
1973: 37 ff). Indeed, it appears that what little Paiicaratra theology is known to the
VDhottP is confined to the names of Niiriiyal).a and the four vyuhas - maybe because its
'complex author's' primary concern (like Inden's own) was focused on more practical
matters like liturgy and temple-building. Still, it seems to me that, in view of such dis-
crepancies in key theological issues, the claim of the VDhottP's affiliation to the
Piificariitra should at least be qualified, pending further investigation (especially on the
side of the historical development of the Paiicariitra; see e.g. Matsubara 1994).
21
The most ancient locus mentioning the triad is probably a passage of the Niiriiyal).Iya
section of the MBh, where, side by side with the four miirtis (Viisudeva, Sarpkar~al).a,
Pradyumna, Aniruddha), the priidurbhiivas of the boar, man-lion and dwarf are prophe-
sized (MBh 12,326.71-76), followed by the two Riimas and Kf~l).a. Among the earlier
Puriil).as, the MkP (4.54-56) likewise mentions the triad, together with 'countless others'
and Kf~l).a, as incarnations of Pradyumna in a vyuha context. Other manifestations, and
typically those included in the dasiivatiira lists, seem to be later accretions. The MtP
(47.241) goes so far as to contrast a triad (which, however, substitutes Dharma or
Vainya for the boar) of 'divine' manifestations to merely 'human' ones:
etiis tisra~ smrtiis tasya divyii~ sarribhutayo dvijii~ I
miinu~ii~ sapta yiinyiis tu siipajiis tii nibodhata II 241 II
This refers to the story narrated previously in the same chapter, relating how Vi~l).U was
cursed by Bhrgu to become incarnate seven times among men for killing his (Bhrgu's)
wife.
22
Cf. Agrawala 1963.
242 PAOLO MAGNONE

account of his exploits would seem to require.2 3 In both roles he is usually assigned
the cosmogonic task of lifting the earth sunken to the bottom of the cosmic ocean
under some unbearable burden - which connects it more strictly than any other ava-
tara with the mythologeme of bharavataraJJa. The burden can assume different con-
crete forms in variants of the myth, but in essence it amounts to a crystallization of
excessive energy. In a passage from the Harivamfa it is the yolk of the cosmic egg,
identified with the selfsame tejas ofNarayal).a, which, turning into golden mountains,
causes the newly created earth to sink to the rasatala. The earth's prayer for rescue,
eliciting the intervention of the varaha, makes it clear that her power to support
beings rests solely on the tejas of Narayal).a: oppressed by that same tejas she sinks
yuga after yuga beneath the waters, and seeks the Lord's protection (HV [Bombay
ed.] 3,34.20-23)24 - so that both the oppressing and the uplifting power are ultimate-
ly seen to coincide in Vi~I).u's tejas. 25 This theme is spun out to a considerable extent
in a late sectarian development of the varaha myth occurring in the KalikapurllJJa,
where the divine boar, qualified asyajnamaya and tejomaya (KaP 29.10), is respon-
sible for creating and upholding the earth in the varahakalpa, but also for wreaking
havoc by his own irrepressible energy as well as his cubs', who are endowed with
'tejas like the fire of time' (KaP 30.22).
Regardless of eventually becoming the supreme energy of the parameivara, the
notion of tejas is originally qualified by distinctive 'fiery' connotations that naturally
make for a particularly intimate connection with the fiercest of Vi~I).u's avataras,
viz. the man-lion. 26 Thus we find tejas as a characteristic feature even in mantras
devoted to this deity, e.g. Ol'J1 ~aUl'J1 namo bhagavate narasimhaya pradfptasurya-
kofisahasrasamatejase (AgP 63.3), or Ol'J1 namo bhagavate narasimhaya namas

23
This version, occurring in the context of the Sankaragftii of the VDhottP, is discussed in
Magnone 1987: 31 ff. It may be pointed out that the VDhottP knows - and distinguishes
- a variety of boars: besides the above mentioned hybrid n.rvariiha, the primeval yajna-
variiha (VDhottP 1,3); furthermore, a purely theriomorphic variiha, unconnected with
the killing of Hiral).yak~a as taking place some generations later (VDhottP 1, 126). It is
also worth noticing that a priidurbhiiva list in the same Pural).a reckons separately a
variiha and a nrvariiha (VDhottP 1,190.18-19).
24
yat tvayii dhiiryate kirricit tejasii ca balena ca I
tatas tava prasiidena mayii pasciit tu dhiiryate II 20 II
tvayii dhrtarri dhiirayiimi niidhrtarri dhiirayiimy aham I
na hi tad vidyate ruparri yat tvayii na tu dhiiryate II 21 II
tvam eva puru.JO vfra niiriiyal)a yuge yuge I
mama bhiiriivatara1Jarrijagato hitakiimyayii II 22 II
tavaiva tejasii kriintiil'{l rasiitalatalarri gatiim I
triiyasva mii surasre.Jtha tviim eva sara1Jarri gatiim II 23 II
25
On the connections between tejas and gravitaslgurutii see Gonda 1947.
26
As well as, we could add, with another particularly cruel manifestation, i.e. Paraforama;
the latter's manifold connections with tejas have been examined in Magnone 2002;
2004.
 Tejas (and sakti) Mythologemes in the Puriir,ias 243

tejastejase (BhiigP 5, 18.8). A particularly telling example of leonine tejas is found in

a passage from the Lingapurii7Ja to which we shall revert presently.
As for the dwarf, several versions of the myth lay stress on his display of tejas at
various junctions of the story. According to the Viimanapurii7Ja (76-77), 27 right at
the outset Vi~9u promises to be born with a particle of his tejas in Aditi' s womb in
order to destroy the tejas of the daityas. Seeing the asuras bereft of tejas, Bali ques-
tions Prahliida, who, suspecting Vi~9u's hand, scans the universe searching for him
with his yogic sight until he perceives on mount Meru the mother of the gods radiant
with tejas: alerted by this clue, he discovers the viimana embryo, fully equipped with
conch, mace and discus, bent on absorbing the tejas of the demons. Later in the
story, when the dwarf approaches the sacrificial enclosure, the demons are shaken
and subdued by his tejas (BhiigP 8,18.22-25). Finally, when Yamana takes his three
strides, he lights up the quarters with his tejas obfuscating the sun (B<;IP 2,73.78-79;
ViiP 2,36.78-79).
Notwithstanding this special connection of tejas with Vi~9u, obtaining from an-
cient times, as we have seen, tejas figures prominently in the mythology of each of
the great Hindu gods, insofar as each of them is capable of assuming the role of
parame§vara in different 'denominations' of Hinduism. We shall now briefly review
some of the most meaningful tejas myths centring around Siva, Devi, Surya and
Brahma.

Tejas and Siva

On account of the perilous and uncanny features of the personality of Siva it is not
surprising to find tejas present in several Saiva myths with its old connotations of
dangerousness and excess. Thus, for example, well-known is the outburst of tejas
from his third eye which puts out the milder tejas of Kama, oppressing the mortals
with more pleasant heat (BhvP 3, 14.53); or the tejas/retas spilt at the coitus inter-
ruptus with the Goddess, received by Agni and passed along through other recipients
before finally giving birth to Skanda. 28 In one version Agni, directed to get rid of the
scorching semen by depositing it in some yoni, protests that common beings would
be unable to endure such ulba7Javat tejas, as he calls it, playing on the double mean-
ing of ulba7Ja as 'amniotic sac' and 'fearful' (SkP 1,1.27.67-69). But these are rather
secondary instances, which will not detain us further.

27
Cf. also MtP 244-246.
28
Already in Aitareya-Upani~ad 2.1 retas is said to consist of the tejas of all limbs. Accor-
dingly, in different versions of the myth of Skanda's birth Siva's semen is variously
(and sometimes interchangeably) designated as retas, sukra, vfrya and tejas. (e.g. SkP
1,1.27.42 ff (retas/tejas); 6,70.51 ff (sukralvfrya); 2,7.9.67 ff & 5,2.6.4 ff (vfrya);
1,2.29.85 ff (tejas/vfrya); VmP 54.46 ff & VDhottP 1,228.6 (tejaslretas).
244 PAOLO MAGNONE

By and large, it would seem that Saiva mythology makes a more sparing use of
the notion of tejas in its primary value, to designate the very energy of Siva. One
reason for that might lie, I submit, in the competition with a concurring representa-
tion as expressed by the concept of §akti - a concept which, albeit not alien to other
divine persons, is known to bear the closest affinity to the 'erotic-ascetic' god. The
grammatical gender opposition between neuter tejas and feminine §akti may convey
a deeper-rooted opposition, as I would suggest, between a monistic-upani~adic
world-view, where tejas is a sort of mythological allotrope of impersonal and un-
manifest metaphysical brahman, and a polarized-tantric one, where §akti represents
the female and dynamic complement of the male static aspect of the absolute mani-
fested as a couple. Hence, in view of the historically more marked proclivity of
Saivism to tantric developments, on the one hand, and the more 'orthodox' orienta-
tion of Vai~I).avism, matching the traditional heritage, brahmanic and royal in turn,
of the notion of tejas, on the other, the opposition above hinted at between neuter
'vedicizing' tejas and feminine 'tantricizing' 29 §akti may be made to serve the pur-
pose of expressing the more general opposition between what R. G. Bhandarkar
(1913: 106) considered as the Indian incarnations of the theological binomial of
mysterium fascinans and mysterium tremendum, the high-caste, apollonian, wonder-
ful tejas-god and the low-caste, dionysian, awesome §akti-god.
Such an opposition, at least, clearly seems to be at work in some sectarian texts
confronting the two rival gods. A most explicit, albeit succinct, statement is found in
a passage from the Brahma1J<japura1Ja where Brahma directs Parasurama, a well
known sivabhakta, to obtain a kr!f!Jamantra and kavaca from Siva, for, as he says,
durlanghyaf!l vai!jlJGVGf!l tejaJ:t siva§aktir vije!jyati, 'Siva's §akti will overcome un-
surpassable vai!jlJGVa tejas' (B<W 3,31.37).
But the contrast between vai!jlJGVa tejas and §aiva §akti is best brought out in a
story occurring in the Lingapura!Ja (1,96) belonging to the genre of sectarian Saiva
'sequels' to well-known vai!j!JGVa myths, aimed either at carving out a niche for Siva
amidst the rival god's most celebrated exploits, or else at debasing these by exposing
their unwished-for aftermath. In this vein the LiP takes up the myth of the nara-
sirhhavatara, adroitly shifting the focus on the overbearing and irrepressible side of
tejas, depicted as inherent and bound to manifest as a fatal degeneration of the
avataric role.

29
I take here the opposition between 'ved(ant)ic' and 'tantric' in a broad sense; particu-
larly, although Tantrism stricto sensu is usually considered to date from approximately
the 7th century onwards, elements of the complex of characters which loosely constitute
the 'polythetic' notion of Tantrism (see Brooks 1990: 52 ff), among which the sexually
polarized concept of godhead is especially envisaged here, date back to early times, and
indeed form, according to one scholar, a 'parallel tradition' to the Vedic mainstream
(Bhattacharyya 1987, Introduction).
 Tejas (and §akti) Mythologemes in the Puriil)as 245

The story is about how the tejas 'named Narasimha' (nrsirhhakhya), which was
threatening to untimely consume the whole world, was curbed by a terrible form
'arisen from [Siva's] heroic energy' (vfra§aktivijrmbhita), variously named Sarabha,
Bhairava or VIrabhadra. The latter was once instructed by Siva to try and appease
the man-lion, apparently unable to restrain his own flaming rage after completing the
task of killing the daitya king Hiral).yakasipu; only if the conciliation failed should he
'suppress gross by gross and subtle by subtle tejas'. But the man-lion, presently
approached by VIrabhadra with soothing words, boastfully turns down the invitation
to subside, echoing inter alia the well-known refrain 30 that, duly adapted, turns up in
so many texts (LiP 1,96.29):
yad yad vibhatimat satfvaTJ1 §rfmad urjitam eva vii I
tat tad viddhi gal)iidhyak~a mama tejovij_f1!1bhitam II 29 II

He, the man-lion, is the originator and terminator of all §aktis, and Brahma, Indra
and the other gods endowed with §akti are but particles (arh§a) of himself - nay, Siva
is even more removed from the origin as being born from the forehead of Brahma.
Again he, the man-lion, is the highest self-dependent controller, creator, destroyer
and universal Lord: such is his supreme tejas, what more? Setting all cajolery aside,
then VIrabhadra scornfully reminds Narasilhha of the many defeats suffered by vari-
ous forms of Vi~l).U at the hands of Siva; hasn't he learnt the lesson yet? having
slaughtered the daitya thanks to the endowment of but a particle (kala) of §akti he
now goes about roaring unceasingly, puffed up with pride without realizing that he is
neither creator nor destroyer, nor even self-dependent, but is just like a potter's
wheel set in motion by the §akti of Siva. Everything, from the man-lion down to a
tuft of grass, has arisen from rudra§akti. Incensed at these words Narasimha sets
about to seize his opponent, but at that very moment VIrabhadra's terrible form born
of §aiva tejas fills the space, absorbing all other tejas-energies and overpowering the
man-lion, who quickly gives in.
I have summarized the passage in some detail because the lexical usage is quite
instructive. Although there is indeed some sparing mention of §aiva tejas in connec-
tion with VIrabhadra, much more consistent is the usage of the term tejas (explicitly
or implicitly vai~l)ava) to designate Narasimha's supreme essence, 31 whereas §akti is
merely applied by Narasimha to refer to the derivative powers of other gods. 32 On
the other hand, VIrabhadra speaks mostly of (explicitly) §aiva §akti, whether refer-
ring to himself 3 or the man-lion. 34

30
See above footnote 9.
31
LiP 1,96.3 (tejo nrsirhhiikhyam), 29 (mama tejovij.f1!1bhitam), 33 (matpara'!I tejas).
32
LiP 1,96.28 (aha'!! hi sarvasaktfniif!l pravartakanivarttakaf:t), 30 (madarhsii/:t §aktisaf!l-
pannii).
33
LiP 1,96.11 (vfra§aktivijrmbhita/:t ).
246 PAOLO MAGNONE

However, if the opposition is primarily such as I have sketched, viz., to repeat

once again, between neuter impersonal vedantic tejas and feminine personal tantric
§akti, and only secondarily between vai~!lava tejas and §aiva §akti, we should find
reversed solidarities - i.e., vai~!lava §akti and §aiva tejas - in a context of tantriciz-
ing Vai~~avism and vedicizing Saivism respectively. A case in point is the KiiP, at
first sight a text of mixed allegiance, traditionally reckoned among tamasa Pura~as
devoted to the worship of Siva, 35 in spite of being titled after an avatara of Vi~~u;
some sections even seem to betray a penchant for Brahma, which justifies the alter-
native ascription to the rajasa category. For his part, Hazra considers the extant KiiP,
professedly limited to the Brahmfsamhita out of the four collections that made up the
entire Pura~a, as an originally Pii.ficaratra document lately appropriated by Pafopatas
(Hazra 197 5: 57 ff). As a matter of fact, in the opening chapters, which preserve for
the most part the tantric Paficaratra orientation in spite of many tamperings, while
extolling Vi~~u as supreme, Sri is introduced as his para §akti, his maya formed of
brahman by whom he deludes, consumes and renews the whole universe. All the
gods, including Brahma and Isana, are powerful only through a particle of that uni-
versal sakti (KiiP 1,1.34-37). 36 Soon after, it is again reiterated that Brahma, Maha-
deva and the other gods with their respective energies are all established in Vi~~u's
sakti (KiiP 1,1.44). 37 But all in all the word §akti occurs countless times in this rather
variegated Purfu)a, mostly in connection with Siva; see, for example, the eleventh
long chapter, in praise of IsanI, where the latter takes over the rank formerly attrib-
uted to Sn:
One is the sakti, Siva, and one the faktimat, Siva: the other Powers and Powerful Ones
originate from the universal sakti (KuP 1, 11.42). 38

On the other side of this pervasive Sakta influence, we find a fair amount of tejas
in the ifvaragfta constituting chapters 1-11 of the second book, which clearly pur-
poses to represent a sort of Saiva counterpart to the BhG. The gfta begins with Nara-
ya~a gracing the r~is assembled at Badarikasrama with the vision of his true form of

34
LiP 1,96.46 (kuliilacakravac chaktyii prerito 'si piniikinii), 53 (rudrafaktiviJ.17J1bhitam).
Some other passages are unclear, owing to the corrupt condition of the text.
35
Cf. Gupta 1965: 340 ff.
36
iyaf!l sii paramii saktir manmayf brahmarilpil;f I
miiyii mama priyiinantii yayeda1J1 mohita1J1 jagat II 34 II
[... ]
asyiis tv amsiin adhi~!hiiya faktimanto 'bhavan dvijii~ I
brahmesiiniidayo devil~ sarvafaktir iyaf!l mama II 37 II
37
brahmii1J.a1J1 ca mahiidevaf!l deviims ciinyiin svasaktibhi~ I
macchaktau samsthitiin buddhvii miim eva fara1J.a1J1gata~1144 II
38
ekii fakt* sivaiko 'pi saktimiin ucyate siva~ I
saktaya~ faktimanto 'nye sarvasaktisamudbhavii~ 1142 II
 Tejas (and §akti) Mythologemes in the Puriil}as 247

tejas circumfused with a nimbus of light (KiiP 2,1.28-30). 39 Soon after, Siva shows
up, uninvited but gladly welcomed, and affectionately embraces Narayai:ia, who
relates to him the metaphysical questions asked by the r~is (thus willingly demoting
himself to a subordinate rank). While Siva undertakes to expound the doctrine, a
celestial throne appears, on which he sits together with Narayai:ia, filling the space
with the effulgence of his tejas (KiiP 2, 1.46-47). 40 Later on, after the fashion of the
famous visvarilpa chapter of the BhG, Siva manifests his cosmic form as the su-
preme receptacle of tejas, dancing with Vi~i:iu in the space and enveloping the whole
cosmic egg with tejas (KiiP 2,5.1-2, 10). 41
This interpretation, seeing §akti as but the homologue of tejas in a different
theological context, seems to be further corroborated as we now tum to the milieu of
the Goddess, where the concept of §akti indeed comes into its own.

Tejas and DevI

Tejas is still firmly established at the very core of the myth of the birth of the God-
dess, as it appears in the foundational scripture of Sakta cult, the Devfmahatmya of
the MkP. 42 According to this account, the fire of anger gushing forth from the
mouths of Vi~i:iu, Siva and Brahma, as well as from the bodies of other gods, when
hearing about the mischief worked by Mahi~a, coalesces into a mountain oftejas
which finally turns into a womanly figure, the tejas of each particular god contribut-
ing to fashion each particular limb of hers: so that from Siva's tejas the Goddess's
mouth is formed, from Vi~i:iu's her arms, from Brahma's her feet and so forth (MkP
79.9-17). 43 Surprisingly enough (but see below), in this context the term §akti does

39
evam ukte tu munaya/:i priipasyan puru~ottamam I
vihiiya tiipasaf!Z rilpaf!Z sarhsthitaf(l svena tejasii II 28 II
vibhriijamiinaf(l vimalaf!Z prabhiimal}rj,alamal}rj,itam I
[... ]
na dr~fas tatk~m:1iid eva naras tasyaiva tejasii II 30 II
40
athiisminn antare divyam iisanaf!Z vimalaf!Z sivam I
kimapy acintyaf(l gaganiid fsvariirhaf!Z samudbabhau II 46 II
tatriisasiida yogiitmii vi~l}unii saha vi§vakrt I
tejasii pilrayan visvaf(l bhiiti devo mahesvara/:i II 47 II
41
etiivad uktvii bhagaviin yoginiif!Z parame§vara/:i I
nanarta paramaf(l bhiivam aisvaraf(l saf(lpradar§ayan II I II
taf(l te dadrsur fsiinaf(l tejasiif!Z paramaf(l nidhim I
nrtyamiinaf(l mahiidevaf(l vi~l}unii gagane 'male II 2 II
[ ... ]
brahmiil}rf,af!Z tejasii svena sarvam avrtya ca sthitam I
dam~friikariilaf!Z durdhar~af!l silryakofisamaprabham II I 0 II
42
The myth occurs also elsewhere, e.g. in SkP 3,1.6; 7,3.36 (see below); VmP 18; SiP
5,46.
248 PAOLO MAGNONE

not occur. 44 However, when in a subsequent stotra, the Goddess is praised as having
the collective form of the iaktis of the hosts of gods (MkP 8 l .3ab )45 the latter attrib-
ute evidently refers back to the birth episode, this time tejas being replaced by
iakti. 46
Further on, in what amounts to a sort of multiform of the birth episode occurring
in the heat of the struggle with Sumbha and Ni8umbha's army, once again the chief
gods Vi~1_1u, Siva, Brahma, Skanda and Indra contribute their own 'energies' (iakti),
issued from their respective bodies - with two important, and, as I suspect, not un-
related differences: the word iakti is used instead of tejas, and the energies do not
coalesce into a heap, but give rise each of them to a distinct female being, bearing
the same attributes as the respective gods (MkP 85.11 ff). 47 This may provide a clue
to the manner of the transition from the notion of neuter tejas with its impersonal
vedantic ring to that of feminine iakti personified as an individual female being. The
individual seven saktis of the great gods, or mat.rs, as they are later called, each share

43
tato 'tikopapun:iasya cakri1:w vadaniit tata~ I
ni§cakriima mahat tejo brahma1;,a~ §alikarasya ca II 9 II
anye~ii"f!I caiva deviil}ii"f!I §akriidfniirri §arfrata~ I
nirgatarri sumahat tejas tac caikyarri samagacchata II IO II
atfva tejasa~ ka!arri jvalantam iva parvatam I
dadrsus te suriis tatra jviiliivyiiptadigantaram II 11 II
atularri tatra tat tejas sarvadeva§arfrajam I
ekastharri tad abhan niirfvyiiptalokatrayarri tvi~ii II 12 II
yad abhuc chiimbhavatejas teniijiiyata tanmukham I
yiimyena ciibhavan kesii biihavo vi~l}utejasii II 13 II
saumyena stanayor yugmarri madhyam aindrel}a ciibhavat I
viirul}ena cajalighoru nitambas tejasii bhuva~ II 14 II
brahmal}as tejasii piidau tadaligulyo 'rkatejasii I
vasuniirri ca kariiligulya~ kauberel}a ca niisikii II 15 II
tasyiis tu dantii~ sarribhutii~ priijiipatyena tejasii I
nayanatritayarrifajne tathii piivakatejasii II 1611
bhruvau ca sarridhyayos teja~ sraval}iiV anilasya ca I
anye~iirri caiva deviiniirri sarribhavas tejasiirri sivii II 17 II
44
In the DMa generally the overwhelming majority of the occurrences of the word §akti
just mean a 'spear'.
45
As well as spreading out the universe by iitma§akti: devyii yayii tatam idarri jagad
iitmasaktyii I ni~se~adevagal}a§aktisamuhamurtyii.
46
Both terms are juxtaposed in a condensed and rather idiosyncratic version from the SkP
(7,3.36.28) qualifying the newly born goddess at once as tejomayf and saktirupii.
47
etasminn antare bhupa viniisiiya suradvi~iim I
bhaviiyiimarasirhhiiniim ativfryabaliinvitii~ II 11 II
brahme§aguhavi~l}ilniirri tathendrasya ca §aktaya~ I
sarfrebhyo vini~kramya tadrupais Cal}rj,ikiirri yayu~ II 12 II
yasya devasya yad ruparri yathii bhu~al}aviihanam I
tadvad eva hi tacchaktir asuriin yoddhum iiyayau II 13 II
It may be noted that on this occasion the vai~l}avf §akti becomes trine, producing (in
addition to himself) the viiriihf and the niirasirhhf.
 Tejas (and §akti) Mythologemes in the Pural)as 249

their male counterpart's individual form, vehicle and insignia; on the other hand,
after the previous episode of the birth of the collective fakti from the assembled tejas
of all the gods, each god had conferred upon her his emblematic weapon, evoking
the characteristic icon of the multi-armed DevI brandishing all and sundry weapons
at once. Of course, the grant of the weapons is but a reduplication of the conferral of
tejas, for weapons are well-known receptacles and embodiments of tejas (cf.
Whitaker 2000).
The respective stance of tejas and fakti with respect to the Goddess stands out
most clearly in the Brahmavaivartapuraf}a, a late text devoted to the glorification of
the divine couple Kf~l).a and Radha, much indebted to gau<j,fya Vai~l).avism in its
present form. 48 According to the theology therein delineated, the everlasting prakrti
is eternally melted in brahman and united with atman as the burning power is inher-
ent in fire; without her Brahma would not be able to create, for he is §aktiman only
thanks to her, the own-form of all faktis (BVP 2,2.6cd-9). 49 As for the Bhagavat, the
self-willed supreme godhead Kf~l).a is at once formless and possessed of form; his
formless aspect, consisting of tejas, is the object meditated upon by yogins who re-
gard the paramatman f§vara as para brahman; on the other hand, vai~f}ava bhaktas
go a step further, for they posit the trenchant question - whom does tejas belong to?
- and accordingly worship Kf~l).a as the supreme tejas-wielder, seated in the midst of
the halo of tejas (BVP 2,2.12cd-16). 50 Urged by the desire to create, the 'shapely'
svecchamaya Kf~l).a splits in two, originating the beautiful Goddess, his own iccha
personified. After kalpa-long lovemaking he lays the seed and '[his] fakti, aflame
with brahmatejas, bears the embryo for a hundred manvantaras' (BVP 2,2.47), to
finally bring forth a golden egg which she throws away in anger. As a consequence
of this rash act Kf~l).a curses her to be barren, specifying that the curse shall equally
apply to all the goddesses, who are but her offshoots - which sets the ground for the
ensuing peculiar theogony by fission and emanation. The couple Kf~l).a-Radha gemi-

48
See Hazra 1975: 166 f.
49
tathaiva prakrtir nitya brahmalma sanatanf II 6 II
yathagnau dahika candre padme sobha prabha ravau I
[... ]
na hi k:jamas tatha brahma sr!f!if!l sra!f!Uf!l taya vina I
sarva§aktisvariipa sa taya syac chaktiman sada II 9 II
50
sa ca svecchamaya~ kr!flJa~ sakaras ca nirakrti~ II 1211
tejoriipaf!l nirakaraf!l dhyayante yogina~ sada I
vadanti te paraf!l brahma paramatmanam fsvaram II 13 II
adrsyaf!l sarvadra:jfaraf!l sarvajFzaf!l sarvakaral)am I
sarvadaf!l sarvariipantam ariipaf!l sarvapo:jakam II 14 II
vai:jl)aviis laf!l na manyante tadbhakta~ siik:jmadarsina~ I
vadanti kasya tejas te iti tejasvinaf!1 vina II 15 II
tejomal)rj,alamadhyasthaf!l brahma tejasvinaf!l param I
svecchamayaf!l sarvariipaf!l sarvakara1Jakara1Jam II 16 II
250 PAOLO MAGNONE

nates into the new couple Narayal).a-Lak~mI, then both couples emit from their limbs
and pores the myriads of par~adas, dasfs, gopas and gopikas, all of them equally
radiant with tejas as their source. At this junction there emerges abruptly from
Kr~l).a's body the goddess Durga Vi~l).umaya, the own-form of all the iaktis, the seed
of the goddesses, the sovereign original prakrti made up of the three gu~as, whose
most accomplished own-form consists of tejas (BVP 2,2.66-68). 51
We cannot pursue any deeper the intricacies of this wondrously teeming theog-
ony; suffice it to remark that in the summarized passages tejas appears to be tanta-
mount to unqualified brahman as the common original ground of both the god and
the goddess as well as of their offspring; while, on the other hand, the origin of §akti
lies entirely within the field of tejas, in a reification of the logical distinction between
the iaktimat and its sakti. Such reification is parallel to the development of the single
inclusive deity into a polarized couple. Accordingly, although both tejas and iakti
are notions of 'power', the former is more of an encompassing 'substance-power'
which expresses the dynami_f aspect of brahman as the universal ground of reality -
and is especially potent in his qualified manifestations as the supreme person that be;
whereas the latter tends to be more and more individuated as the personification of
the several specific powers that are the property of their specific owners: so that, for
example, the original goddess is both 'aflame with brahmatejas', insofar as rooted
(together with her male counterpart) in the original formless and sexless brahman,
and his partner's iakti, in her capacity as a personification of svecchamaya Kr~l).a's
own iccha.
To proceed further, the myth discussed above of the grant of weapons at Devi's
birth provides an intriguing link to the next instances of tejas mythologemes that we
are going to review, both in connection with Surya and with Brahma.

51
etasminn antare vipra sahasil kr~IJadehatafl I
ilvirbabhuva sil durgil vi~l}umilyii saniitanf II 66 II
devf nilrilyal}fSilnil sarva§aktisvarupil}f I
buddhyadhi~!hiitrdevf sil kr~IJasya paramiltmanafl II 67 II
devfnilf!! bfjarupil ca mulaprakrtir fsvarf I
paripilrl}atamii tejaflsvarupil trigul}iltmikil II 68 II
In a somewhat discrepant account in the preceding adhyiiya, Kr~i:ia svecchilmaya devel-
ops into a couple by differentiating from his own icchil to create, which manifests at
once as the original prakrti. The latter in turn becomes quintuple at Kr~i:ia's behest, sev-
erally originating Durgii, Lak~mI, Sarasvati, Savitri and Riidhii. After the five great god-
desses many lesser manifestations of major and minor portions (amsas and kaliis) of the
original prakrti are enumerated, for virtually every woman is an incarnation of the fe-
male principle (BVP 2,1.59--60). Durgii is described, among others, as tejaflsvarupa,
sarva§aktisvarupa and the Lord's sakti (BVP 2,l.17cd-18ab). A similar juxtaposition of
tejas and sakti occurs in the description of Savitri (BVP 2, 1.44ab).
 Tejas (and §akti) Mythologemes in the Purai:ias 251

Tejas and Surya

The most important myth pertaining to Surya, relating how the Sun god attained his
present condition, plays out the theme of weapons in a reverse fashion. To sum up
the story briefly as it appears in the same MkP (103-105), 52 Surya was originally
a full round sphere of tejas, oppressing the universe, the gods, and his own wife
SaITljfia with unbearable heat. The wife went away secretly leaving her shadow
(chiiyii) in her stead, without her husband ever noticing the difference. When he
eventually discovered what had come to pass, in order to win his spouse back he
agreed to be shorn by Visvakarman of the tejas surplus. He accordingly mounted on
the lathe, and was reduced to shape keeping only 1fi6 of the original endowment of
tejas, whereupon he became exceedingly beautiful. With the tejas trimmings Visva-
karman fashioned Vi~I)u's cakra, Siva's sula and all the other weapons peculiar to
each god (MkP 105.1-5). 53 Here the theme reversal is readily apparent: for just as in
the myth of the birth of DevI the several tejas portions centripetally converge to
make up the composite panoply of the Goddess, so does the unitary tejas mass in the
myth of the shearing of Surya centrifugally fan out to forge the various individual
weapons of the gods.
It is also noteworthy that, in the condensed version found in the Vi~!Jupurii!Ja
(3,2.2-12), Surya's tejas is styled vai~!Java, 54 reminding one of the aforesaid MaiU
doctrine describing the sun as the abode of the puru~a Vi~I)U. This is not the only
locus where Surya's nature is seen to parallel Vi~I)u's. In his demon-fighting capac-
ity Surya greatly resembles Vi~I)u's avataric role; the following words, spoken in
VDhottP's priidurbhiiva chapter with reference to Vi~I)U, might just as well - or
even better - apply to the Sun:
He, the supreme Person, the one and only immaculate light of the worlds, destroys the
darkness in the heart, the nightly shadows and darkness incarnate; the darkness in the

52
The myth occurs also elsewhere, e.g. in ViP 3,2.2-12 (see below); PdP, Svargakhal).qa
8.37-65; SiP, Umiisarhhitii 5.35; BrP 30.49 ff; as well as in the extensive saura mytho-
logical complex found in the BhvP and Samba-Upapurai:ia, for which see von
Stietencron 1966.
53
evaf!l siiryastavaf!l kurvan vi§vakarma divaspateJ:t I
tejasaJ:t ~ofia~af!l bhagaf!l mai:ifialastham adharayat II 1 II
§atitais tejaso bhagair daiabhiJ:t pancabhis tatha I
atfva kantimac caru bhanor asft tada vapuJ:t II 2 II
satifaf!l casya yat tejas tena cakraf!l vinirmitam I
vi~i:ioJ:t siilaf!l ca iarvasya sibika dhanadasya ca II 3 II
dai:ifiaJ:t pretapateJ:t §aktir devasenapates tatha I
anye~af!l caiva devanaf!l ayudhani sa visvakrt II 4 II
cakara tejasa bhanor bhasurai:iy arisantaye I
iti satitatejaJ:t sa susubhe natitejasa II 5 II
54
yat tasmad vai~l)GVaf!l tejaJ:t satilaf!l visvakarmai:ia I
jajvalyamanam apatat tad bhiimau munisattama II 10 II
252 PAOLO MAGNONE

heart of the world he destroys in his divine form, the dreadful nightly shadows in his
heavenly luminary form, whereas in order to destroy darkness incarnate he forever
takes to his manifestations (priidurbhiiva); and darkness incarnate, 0 mighty king, are
daityas, danavas and riik~asas (VDhottP 1,171.12-14). 55

Thus, it is not surprising to find in the MkP ( 101-102), just before the matrimo-
nial adventures of Surya and Saf!ljfia, an account of the incarnation of Martai:u;la in
Aditi's womb, partaking of many traits of his more famous uterine brother, the
vi'imani'ivati'ira. Soon after the creation, the gods having been vanquished by the
demons, Aditi undertook severe penances for the sake of her sons until the Sun god
appeared before her as a great mass of tejas and agreed to 'descend' (avati'ira'!l
sa'!lcakre) into her womb with one of his thousand rays. During the gestation, being
once rebuked by her husband for (supposedly) destroying the embryo by inordinate
fasting, Aditi retorted that the embryo was not destroyed (garbhi'if}<jam ... na mi'iri-
tam ); rather, it would bring about the destruction (mrtyave) of foes - and with these
words she threw forth in anger the flaming foetus, from which Mlirta~c:la emerged
filling the quarters with tejas. At the very moment of his birth the demons were de-
prived of their ojas. 56 In the ensuing battle, no sooner were the demons glanced upon
by the god than they were burnt to ashes by his tejas; so that the gods delighted sang
the praise of Mlirta~c:Ia as the fountainhead of lustre (tejasi'i'!l yonim ).

Tejas and Brahma

In spite of his saumya nature, Brahma too is linked to tejas by a variant version of
the myth of the severing of his inauspicious fifth head by Siva which bears some
points of resemblance both to the myth of the trimming of Surya and to that of the
birth of the Goddess. More or less regular features of the beheading myth are the
inauspiciousness of Brahma's superfetatory head and the contest for supremacy with
Siva; but the reasons for the inauspiciousness are assigned differently by different
versions; the fifth head may be boastful, disrespectful, lying, carried away by inces-
tuous or adulterine lust57 - or, as in the version we are going to review, afflicting the
universe by excessive tejas, as was the case with Surya. Our version, occurring in the

55
hiirdarri lamas lalhii nai§arri murlarri ca puru~ottama~ I
eka eva sa lokiinarri niisayaty amaladyul* II 12 II
hiirdarri dhvaslarri lamas lenajagalo devamurlinii I
jyolirupel)a ca dhvaslarri lamo nai§arri sudiirul)am II 13 II
tamo niisayilurri murtarri priidurbhavagata~ sadii I
murlarri tamas ca riijendra daityadiinavariik~asii~ II 14 II
56
Ojas, originally a distinct substance-power, becomes practically a synonym of tejas in
many epico-puranic contexts. Cf. above footnote 6.
57
For a survey of versions and motifs see Doniger 1981: 123-127; Kramrisch 1981: 259-
265.
 Tejas (and sakti) Mythologemes in the Pura!Jas 253

Padmapuri'i1Ja (Smikhai:i9a 14.91 ft) and (slightly enlarged) in the Skandapuri'i1Ja

(5,1.2.35 ft), narrates how the god once possessed a fifth head facing the zenith in
addition to the usual four cardinal ones, and on that account was deluded into be-
lieving himself to be the self-dependent author of creation. The tejas of that world-
transcending head oppressed the universe and subdued the tejas of all the gods, who
complained to Siva. As the latter reached the celestial court, the Grandfather did not
recognize his supremacy, but his fifth head, which formerly used to dazzle the world
with the tejas of thousand crores of suns, was overshadowed by Rudra's tejas like
the moon at sunrise (SkP 5,1.2.58-6lab). Siva finally cut off the redundant head
with his left fingernail, as if it were the pith of a plantain tree.
As is well-known, Brahma is especially connected with the rajogu1Ja, in his
capacity as the ri'ijasa, creative aspect of godhead in the trimurti. Accordingly, this
myth brings to the fore the special relationship obtaining between tejas and rajas on
account of the dynamic, active character unique to the latter gu1Ja vs. the static, pas-
sive character shared (albeit differently) by sattva and tamas. 58 The PdP version
makes the point with all desirable clarity already while introducing the narrative
(Smikhai:i9a 14.85 ft) with Bhi~ma's question as to the reason why Hirai:iyagarbha,
originally four-faced at his birth in the world-egg, got a fifth wondrous head. Rajas
steers clear of sattva, argues BhI~ma, and so does sattva of rajas: now, how could it
happen that Lord Brahma residing in sattva incurred in excess (Smikhai:i9a 14.88)?59
(Notably, here excess appears to be a distinctive mark of rajas, as it has been of
tejas, from Vedic times onwards). Pulastya explains that, while Mahesvara and Hari
both stick to the good path, Brahma, because of its fifth head rising upwards, became
inflated with rajas (rajasi'i .. . upabrfhhita~, 14. 91 ). Later on in the narration, Siva
58
In this connection it is worth noticing that, even though the two terms rajas and tejas are
not interchangeable, the rajas-dominated aspect of aharrikara is termed taijasa in Sarp.-
khya vocabulary. Interestingly enough, the taijasa aspect of egotism, albeit not deter-
mining in itself, is involved both in the physio-psychic evolution of mind and faculties
from its sattva-dominated vaikrta aspect and in the physical evolution of the subtle and
gross elements from its tamas-dominated bhatadi aspect (cf. sarrikhyakarika 25: sattvika
ekadasakaJ:t pravartate vaikrtad aharrikarat I bhatades tanmatraJ:t sa tamasas taijasad
ubhayam II). This is because, as noted above, both sattva and tamas are inert by them-
selves, hence need to be stirred into action by energetic rajas.
59
satve rajo na drsyeta na satvarri rajasi kvacit I
satvastho bhagavan brahma katham udrekam adadhat II 88 II
This version is rather peculiar in having Brahma 'reside in sattva', whereas the standard
puranic doctrine correlates Brahma, Vi~1,1u and ,'?iva to rajas sattva and tamas,
respectively. Cf. e.g. MkP 43.13-15:
utpannaJ:t sajagadyonir agul)o 'pi rajogul)am I
bhunjan pravartate sarge brahmatvarri samupafritaJ:t II 13 II
brahmatve sa prajan sr~.tva tataJ:t sattvatirekavan I
vi~l)Utvam etya dharme1Ja kurnte paripalanam II 14 II
tataJ:t tamogul)odrikto rndratve cakhilarrijagat I
upasamhrtya vai sete trailokyarri trigul)o 'gu1JaJ:t II 15 II
254 PAOLO MAGNONE

meets Brahma sitting in the celestial assembly, infatuated by rajas and egotism
(rajo 'ha1J1kiiramii¢hadhf~, 14.106)- or even, according to the SkP, wearing the very
form of rajas and egotism (rajo 'ha1J1kiiramiirttiman, SkP 5,l.2.55cd). Brahma does
not recognize the approaching gods because he is enveloped by rajas60 as well as set-
ting the world aglow (ranjayan) with the tejas of myriads of suns - here rajas and
tejas are closely associated, nay even equated by the use of the root .Yrafzj to describe
the effects of tejas. 61
What happened to the severed head? In the version just reviewed, as elsewhere, it
became the skull sticking to the culprit's hand which accounts for Siva's epithet of
kapalin, as well as for the efficacy of the Kapalamocana tfrtha. Otherwise, we have
reason to believe that it ended up turning into a weapon, 62 just as the clippings
from the solar globe did: the weapon is of course the infamous brahmasiras or
brahmastra, the most powerful of all weapons, capable of burning up the whole
world in a single blast. The dreadful missile is still ablaze with the overwhelming
tejas of Brahma's fifth head; and as it was formerly up to Siva to tone down the tejas
of the brahmasiras in its head capacity with his own tejas, so it is Kr~I).a's responsi-
bility to do the same with the brahmasiras in its weapon capacity. According to the
account of the Bhagavatapur0.1Ja (1,7-8), at the end of the Bharata war Asvatthaman
discharged the brahmasiras weapon twice: the first time it was met by Arjuna's
brahmastra, who eventually revoked them both to save the world from conflagra-
tion; the second time it was hurled at Uttara's womb, and was met by Kr~I).a himself,
who enveloped the embryo of the future king Parik~it with his own maya, so that the
brahmasiras, although unfailing and irrepressible by any other weapon, yet became
extinguished by contact with vai~1Java tejas (BhagP 1,8.15). 63

60
rajasavrtaf:i (PdP, Sr~tikhal).<;la 14.187); the parallel reading tamasavrtaf:i (SkP 5,1.2.58)
is evidently unsuitable.
61
Biardeau, while remarking on the strong association between rajas and tejas in Sarpkhya
(see footnote 58 above) as well as pratisarga contexts (e.g. VaP 1,6.52, where the
arvlikSrotas creation of man, formerly characterized by an excess of rajas, is termed
taijasa) goes so far as to posit an equipollence between both notions. Setting great store
by Brahma's epithet sarvatejomaya, she regards it as enough ground to assume a virtual
identity between tejas and rajas through the notion of the taijasa aspect of ahaf!lkiira
(Biardeau 1981: 76: 'ii est peu important pour notre analyse presente [... ]de voir toute la
portee de cette epithete [... ] Le tejas dont est fait Brahma est a mettre en rapport avec
!'aspect taijasa de l'ahaf!1kiira: ii serait done identique au rajas .. .').However, I hope to
have shown that precisely the scope of the notion of tejas, as well as of the epithet
sarvatejomaya, exceeds by far the limits of its usage in Sarpkhya-influenced contexts.
62
Although this development, usually taken for granted (see e.g. Kramrisch 1981: 259) as
implicit to some extent in the very alternate names of brahmasiraslpliSupata of the
brahmlistra, is not explicitly declared in any version known to me.
63
yadyapy astra'!I brahmasiras tv amoghaf!I clipratikriyam I
vai~l}GVGf!I teja asadya samaslimyad bhrgudvaha II 15 II
 Tejas (and §akti) Mythologemes in the Purai:zas 255

Conclusion
In conclusion, even from this quick glance at some of the core mythical themes of
each of the great Hindu gods tejas has emerged as the notion of choice when it
comes to mythologically imaging the inherent 'energy' of the paramefvara. While
an early tendency can be discerned to appropriate tejas to Vi~i:iu as his special and
exclusive property, on the strength of the vedantic dimension of tejas as the most
intimate 'body' of brahman-atman coupled with Vi~i:iu's stronger Vedic credentials,
nonetheless tejas plays a significant role also in the mythologies of the other great
gods insofar as each of them is capable of embodying sagw:za brahman - whereupon
the notion of tejas acquires different shades in the process of adaptation to each of
the different divine persons. Thus the fiery dimension of tejas is particularly played
upon in the mythology of Surya, who is otherwise strictly connected with Vi~i:iu, on
account of the latter's solar background, to the point of occasionally taking over the
avataric role as a sort of alter ego ofVi~i:iu. With Brahma, on the other hand, tejas is
especially linked to the Grandfather's affinity for rajas and aharrzkiira, which share
with tejas the qualities of dynamism and proclivity toward excess. In the case of Siva
and the Goddess, tejas has to vie with the competing notion of §akti, which easily
gains the upper hand in a tantric milieu; even there, however, tejas retains its own
domain when it comes to expressing the primal indeterminate 'energy' or substance
power of the original brahman, antecedent to polarization in more and more indi-
vidualized couples of static-ontic male gods with their respective dynamic-energetic
female paredras, where indeed the notion of §akti comes into its own.

Bibliography
AGRAWALA, V. S. 1963. Yajfia-Varii.ha: An interpretation. Purai:za 5.2: 199-236.
BHANDARKAR, R. G. 1913. Vai~i:zavism, Saivism and Minor Religious Systems. (GrundriB der
lndo-Arischen Philologie und Altertumskunde, 3.6.) Strassburg: Karl J. Triibner.
BIARDEAU, Madeleine 1981. Etudes de mythologie hindoue. I: Cosmogonies puraniques.
Paris: Ecole Franr;:aise d'Extreme-Orient.
BHATTACHARYYA, N. N. 1987. History of the Tantric Religion. Delhi: Manohar.
BROOKS, Douglas Renfrew 1990. The Secret of the Three Cities. An Introduction to Hindu
Sakta Tantrism. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. (Reprint: Delhi:
Munshiram Manoharlal, 1999.)
DEUSSEN, Paul 1897. Sechzig Upanishad's des Veda. Leipzig: F. A. Brockhaus.
DONIGER, Wendy 1981. Siva. The Erotic Ascetic. Oxford: OUP.
GAIL, Adalbert J. 1977. Parasurama Brahmane und Krieger. Untersuchung iiber Ursprung
und Entwicklung eines Avatara Vi~i:zus und Bhakta Sivas in der indischen Litera-
tur. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.
256 PAOLO MAGNONE

GLASENAPP, Helmuth von 1940. Entwicklungsstufen des indischen Denkens. Untersuchungen

uber die Philosophie der Brahmanen und Buddhisten. Halle: Max Niemeyer Ver-
lag
GONDA, Jan 1947. Apropos d'un sens magico-religieux de skt. 'guru-'. Bulletin of the School
of Oriental and African Studies 12.1: 124-131.
1952. Ancient-Indian ojas, Latin *augos and the Indo-European nouns in -es/-os.
Utrecht: N. V. A. Oosthoek's Uitgevers Mij.
GUPTA, Anand Svarup 1965. Purfu).as and their referencing. Purt'il}a 7.2: 331-351.
INDEN, Ronald B. 2000. Imperial Pura1.1as: Kashmir as Vai~1.1ava center of the world. In:
Ronald B. Inden, Jonathan Walters & Daud Ali (eds.), Querying the Medieval.
Texts and the History of Practices in South Asia: 29-98. Oxford: OUP.
HACKER, Paul 1960. Zur Entwicklung der Avatara-Lehre. WZKSO 4: 47-67.
HAzRA, R. C. 1975. Studies in the Purt'il}ic Records on Hindu Rites and Customs. Delhi:
MLBD.
KRAMRISCH, Stella 1981. The Presence of Siva. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
(Reprint: Delhi: MLBD, 1988.)
MAGNONE, Paolo 1987. The avatara myths of the Sankara Gita in the Vi~1.1udharmottara
Purfu).a. Purt'il}a 29.1: 8--45.
1993. The development of 'tejas' from the Vedas to the Purfu).as. WZKS 36
(Supplement volume): 137-147.
2002. Parafarama's rise to avatara-hood: A glimpse of early avatara-theology.
Rendiconti dell '/stituto Lombardo - Accademia di Scienze e Lettere (Classe di
Lettere e Scienze Morali e Storiche) 136.2: 195-210.
2004. Ramo Ramam udaik~ata: The encounter of the two Ramas between iti-
hasapurfu).a and kavya. Paper read at the International Seminar 'Origins of Maha-
kavya' (Milan, June 4-5, 2004).
in press. Patterns of tejas (and k~amii) in the Epics. In: Robert P. Goldman &
Muneo Tokunaga (eds.), Epic Undertakings (Papers of the 12th World Sanskrit
Conference, 2): 283-307. Delhi: MLBD.
MATSUBARA, Mitsunori 1994. Piincart'itra Sarrihitt'is & Early Vai~l}ava Theology. Delhi:
MLBD.
RADHAKRISHNAN, Sarvepalli 1953. The Principal Upani~ads. London: George Allen & Unwin
Ltd. (Reprint: Delhi: Harper-Collins, 1994.)
SCHRADER, F. Otto 1973. Introduction to the Piincart'itra and the Ahirbudhnya Sarrihitt'i. (The
Adyar Library Series, 5.) 2nd edition. Madras: Adyar Library and Research
Centre. (1st edition: 1916.)
STIETENCRON, Heinrich von 1966. Indische Sonnenpriester. Samba und die Siikadvfpfya
Briihmaf}a. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.
VOGEL, J. Ph 1930. Het sanskrit woord tejas (= gloed, vuur) in de beteekenis van magische
kracht. Mededelingen der Koninklijke Akademie van Wetenschappen (Afd. Letter-
kunde) 70 (B/4): 83-125.
WHITAKER, Jarrod L. 2000. Divine weapons and tejas in the two Indian epics. IIJ 43 (2): 87-
113.