SV: Date of the Buddha and RV

Lars Martin Fosse lmfosse at ONLINE.NO
Fri Sep 3 16:49:37 UTC 1999


George Thompson [SMTP:GthomGt at CS.COM] skrev 03. september 1999 18:30:
>
> A solid terminus a quo must be based on completely independent criteria. And
> this confronts us with an entirely different set of problems.

I concur with George Thompon's view, but may I suggest a few principles:

1. We have to separate linguistic form from contents. Some of the Rigvedic
contents are obviously very old, and when comparative material from other I-E
cultures are similar to Vedic material (e.g. the purusha myth, which has a
counterpart in Norse religion), we may assume  that that material goes back to
the common I-E period (unless there are good reasons for assuming a loan).

2. Elements that are common to Iranian, but not to other branches of I-E, may
presumable be regarded as Indo-Iranian and would at least go back to the common
Indo-Iranian period.

3. Bernard Sergent has suggested that Vedic culture (at least the Brahmana
stage) represents an amalgamation of Aryan and Harappan culture. If this is
correct - and it seems a tempting solution to me - then certain elements with
an Harappan background may be as old - or older - than the Harappan culture,
and consequently older than the Aryan migration into India. An amalgamation of
traditions could explain some of the astronomical data that seem difficult to
reconcile with the Indo-Aryan chronology (although the astronomical data are
not quite as clear and straightforward as they sometimes seem in the debates on
this list. Jacobi's views on the matter represent a complex set of inferences
that are not necessarily correct).

So what are we dating? If we are dating the Vedas as they appear today, in the
linguistic garb that we find in our editions, then they are not necessarily
much older than 1000 BCE. But if we look at the constituent elements, the
situation is much different.  Maybe the question of Vedic chronology would
become more rewarding if we concentrated upon its constituent parts rather than
upon its outer termini (ad quem, ab quo).

Best regards,

Lars Martin Fosse

Dr. art. Lars Martin Fosse
Haugerudvn. 76, Leil. 114,
0674 Oslo
Norway
Phone/Fax: +47 22 32 12 19
Email: lmfosse at online.no





More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list