Note: This was the manuscript that I submitted to two top-end journals and got very good comments from the Referees, but the journals didn’t accept it for publication. I decided therefore to publish it in my blog, since it was more than three years back that I prepared this manuscript.
I am providing excerpts of the comments from these two Journals below. Also I am preparing a much larger and more comprehensive manuscript for a book on the same topic. This book will contain my further work in the last three years with many additional proofs and new findings in allied areas of research.
___________________________________________________________________________________________
An excerpt from the comments from the first Journal:
“Dear Professor Krishnakumar,
We appreciate the submission of your manuscript “EGYPTIAN ORIGIN OF MAHABHARATA.” Our Editors found it a solid piece of scholarship, but decided in reviewing the paper that the subject matter falls outside the concerns of History of Religions. The Editors encourage you to submit your manuscript to a more specialized journal where it will reach an audience more attuned to the paper’s specific materials and issues.
The Editors thank you for the opportunity to consider your manuscript and extend their best wishes to you in placing it in a more apposite forum.
Sincerely,
Emily D. Crews and Kenneth W. Yu
Editorial Assistants”
____________________________________________________________________________________________
An excerpt from the comments from the second Journal:
“Dear Ms. Krishnakumar,
I’m writing to you regarding manuscript # JHS-2015-008 entitled “EGYPTIAN ORIGIN OF MAHABHARATA” which you submitted to the Journal of Hindu Studies.
Thank you for submitting your article to the Journal of Hindu Studies. We have given extensive consideration to your submission. While there is much of interest here, unfortunately, our reviewers have concluded that it is not fully appropriate for the journal at this time.
Thank you for considering the Journal of Hindu Studies for the publication of your research. I hope the outcome of this specific submission will not discourage you from the submission of future manuscripts.
Sincerely,
Associate Editor, Journal of Hindu Studies”
____________________________________________________________________________________________
ABSTRACT
Mahabharata is one of the greatest epics of Hinduism. Apart from its Sanskrit version, which is commonly believed to be the original, there are several regional versions in different Indian languages. These regional versions may considerably deviate from the Sanskrit version. The regional versions are also believed to be derived from the original Sanskrit version. One such version is preserved in the Tamil language by the followers of a cult associated with goddess Draupadi. In this paper, we will show that the Sanskrit and Draupadi cult versions of Mahabharata might have originated from the Egyptian story of Osiris. Further we also show that the Draupadi cult version is closer to the Egyptian story and might be the source for the Sanskrit version, contrary to the common belief. We conclude this paper alluding to an anthropological study that supports our observations.
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS:
Sanskrit Mahabharata (SM), Cult story (CS), Egyptian story of Osiris (ES)
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION
In this paper, we compare the Indian story of Mahabharata to the Egyptian story of Osiris. We try to show that there is a natural similarity between Mahabharata and Osiris story with several key characters and events in the two stories having common signatures. We show that these similarities are beyond coincidence, thus leading one to suspect that one of them can be the source for the other.
Mahabharata has several versions in many Indian languages. Scholars believe the Sanskrit version to be the source for the regional versions,1, 2, 3, 4 though there are contrary views.5 One such version of Mahabharata is found in Tamil language, preserved by the followers of goddess Draupadi; we hereafter refer to it as the Cult story. The Cult story though similar to the Sanskrit version in its broad framework also deviates significantly in several details and in its value system. It is these differences in details and value systems that brings Cult story even more close to the Egyptian story of Osiris than the Sanskrit Mahabharata.
The similarity between Mahabharata and Osiris story with a more intense proximity of the Cult story to the latter leads us to the following major claims of this paper:
Claim 1: The Sanskrit Mahabharata and the Cult story are similar to the Osiris story of Egypt.
Claim 2: The Cult story lies between the Osiris story and Sanskrit Mahabharata, and is closer to the former.
Claim 3: The Osiris story can be the origin for the Cult story and Sanskrit Mahabharata.
Apart from the Cult story we at times refer to other South Indian traditions which provide some additional supportive evidences for our claims.
One natural question that arises out of the above claims is how the story might have propagated from Egypt to India. We briefly discuss an anthropological evidence for this in connection with the Asura tribes of India, who are suspected to have Egyptian links.
LAYOUT OF THIS PAPER:
The prerequisites for this paper would be the three stories which we compare: Sanskrit Mahabharata (SM), the Cult story (CS) and the Egyptian story of Osiris (ES). They are provided in the required detail in Section 2. In Section 3, we prove Claim 1. In Sections 4 and 5, we prove Claims 2 and 3. In Section 6, we briefly discuss Asuras’ migration to India.
SECTION 2: PREREQUISITES
2(A) SANSKRIT MAHABHARATA:
The core story of Mahabharata begins with the birth of Pandavas and Kauravas. Pandavas, five in number were considered to be the sons of King Pandu, though they were born through divine intervention of Gods with the wives of Pandu. The first three Pandavas were the sons of Kunti, the first queen of Pandu. The other two Pandavas were the sons of Madri, the second queen.
Yudhistira, the eldest of Pandavas, was born to god Yama and Kunti. Yama is the lord of death and netherworld and the lord of righteousness. Both Yudhistira and Yama were given the epithet Dharmaraja since they upheld justice, the former on earth and the latter in the netherworld. Second son of Kunti was Bhima born to the wind god Vayu. Kunti’s third son was Arjuna born to god Indra. Nakula and Sahadeva were the twin sons of queen Madri through the pair of gods called Ashwins.
Kauravas, the cousins of Pandavas were one hundred in number. Kauravas were the children of queen Gandhari and the blind king Dhritarastra, the elder brother of Pandu. The eldest of Kauravas was Duryodhana who led his brothers.
Kunti also had one son before her marriage to Pandu called Karna through the Sun god. She abandoned him soon after birth. Karna joined Duryodhana and fought against Pandavas till his death.
Since Dhritarastra was blind, Pandu ruled the kingdom. Kauravas hated Pandavas as they feared that Pandavas would inherit the kingdom from their father Pandu. On a number of occasions, Kauravas tried to trouble and even kill Pandavas, but only in vain. One such instance was when Duryodhana tied Bhima with ropes and threw him into a river with an intention to kill him. Bhima entered the world of serpents which is considered to be the netherworld in Hindu mythology. Bhima returned unhurt.6 On another occasion, Duryodhana made arrangements for Pandavas to attend a festival in honor of Lord Shiva at Varanavata and stay in an elaborately decorated palace made of lac; then he set the palace on fire.7 However, Pandavas escaped unhurt and went to Drupada’s kingdom.
Draupadi was the princess of Drupada kingdom; she was born of the fire god. She was dark complexioned and known for her extraordinary beauty. Arjuna won her in an archery contest and married her. As advised by Kunti, the other Pandavas also married Draupadi. Duryodhana and Karna, who lost in this contest, became more jealous of Pandavas.
Pandavas returned to their kingdom after their marriage. The kingdom was split between Pandavas and Kauravas. Yudhistira was crowned for the portion that Pandavas received; he conquered the entire world and commemorated this with a Rajasuya sacrifice.8
In the final and the most precarious trick, Duryodhana invited Yudhistira for a game of dice. Duryodhana defeated Yudhistira by charms with the help of his maternal uncle Shakuni. Yudhistira lost his kingdom, brothers and wife as stake in the game. Dusshasana, being misguided by his elder brother Duryodhana disrobed and humiliated Draupadi in the court. As per the contract of the game, Pandavas along with Draupadi had to spend twelve years in jungles and another year incognito. The insulted Draupadi untied her hair and took an oath of not tying it back till Duryodhana was killed.
While Pandavas were in exile Arjuna went for penance and procured a deadly weapon, Pashupathastra from Lord Shiva. The story of procuring this weapon is of significance: While Arjuna was in penance, Lord Shiva played a trick. Shiva came in the guise of a hunter chasing a boar that disturbed Arjuna’s penance. Both Shiva and Arjuna shot arrows simultaneously at the boar and got into a dispute over who shot it first. Shiva mangled Arjuna into a ball of flesh. Finally Shiva revealed his identity and rewarded Arjuna with the weapon Pashupathastra. Arjuna’s penance almost completely spans the twelve-year stay of Pandavas in the forest.9 Arjuna visited his father Indra’s abode at the end of his penance, where he was offered half the throne.
After completing twelve years of forest stay, Pandavas along with Draupadi stayed incognito, in the palace of king Virata. Before they entered Virata’s kingdom, they hid their weapons on a Banni/Sami tree and concealed it with a corpse. Draupadi before entering Virata’s kingdom put on black and dirty clothes, wandered hither and thither in seeming affliction. Virata’s queen took Draupadi into her palace. Here, Draupadi combed and braided the hair of women of the palace that involved pounding fragrant materials to make unguents and tying garlands.10 Bhima became a cook in the royal kitchen. Arjuna became a eunuch (in order to fulfill an earlier curse) and taught dance to Virata’s daughter in the guise of a woman. Yudhistira assisted the king as a Brahmin by name Kanka. One significant event during this incognito stay was Kichaka, the brother of Virata’s wife Sudeshna, desired Draupadi, and Bhima killed him.
At the end of incognito stay, Pandavas recovered the weapons they had hidden and started preparing for the war. A great eighteen-day long war followed, in which Lord Krishna, the greatest of the Hindu gods, drove the chariot of Arjuna. The flag on the chariot of Arjuna had the image of the Hindu monkey god Hanuman. All the Kauravas including Duryodhana were killed in the war. Pandavas finally won the war and Yudhistira was crowned.
Yudhistira was succeeded by Parikshit, the grandson of Arjuna. Parikshit died of a snake bite due to a curse. Janamejaya, the son of Parikshit avenged his father’s death, by performing a sacrifice in which all snakes were invoked into a fire altar. This marks the end of the story.
2(B) DRAUPADI CULT STORY (CULT STORY):
Cult story is the underlying Mahabharata story in a sequence of dramas performed by the followers of Draupadi cult during the festival of goddess Draupadi. The order of events in the Cult story roughly follows that in the Sanskrit Mahabharata with some additional characters and events. We discuss the Cult story under the following headings, where it deviates from the Sanskrit Mahabharata.
Centrality of Draupadi:
Draupadi is the supreme goddess and occupies the central position in the Cult story. This cult is in fact associated with her. She is also viewed as a form of goddess Kali. She is born from fire.11
Arjuna’s penance:
Arjuna’s penance does not look very significant in the Sanskrit Mahabharata; one can dispense it without any loss in continuity. On the contrary, he does a serious penance on a penance tree in the Cult story. His penance and the penance tree are extremely sacred for the cult followers; there are important rituals associated with them. Garuda, the Hindu god depicted as a Brahmany kite circles above Arjuna as he is in penance.12
Researchers are under the opinion that Arjuna’s penance also has a connotation of his premature death as discussed by Hiltebeitel.13, 14 In Melacceri where annual Draupadi festival is celebrated, a baby in a cloth cradle is hung from the rung of the penance tree, which is suspected by Hiltebeitel to symbolize death and rebirth of Arjuna15 (more details in Section 3.6).
The episode of boar hunting:
Duryodhana, with an intention to disturb Arjuna’s penance, sent a boar, which tried to uproot the penance tree. Also Duryodhana sent Shiva and Parvathi who chased the boar, and caused commotion disturbing Arjuna’s penance. Both Arjuna and Shiva shot arrows at the boar simultaneously, and then fought for it as in Sanskrit Mahabharata. Finally in order to settle the dispute they fixed a challenge of who will throw the other the farthest. Shiva threw Arjuna as far as the sky,16 whereas in Sanskrit Mahabharata Shiva mangled Arjuna into a ball of flesh. After this Arjuna recovered and visited Kailasa, the abode of the dead according to the Cult story.
Draupadi as gypsy with baby Sahadeva:
Following Arjuna’s penance, Draupadi went to Duryodhana’s court in the guise of a gypsy (Kuravanci), with Sahadeva (fifth of the Pandavas) on her hip disguised as a child. In the court she demanded fresh grain for her child, though her real intention was to sow it in their forest garden.17
Sahadeva viewed as a child can also be seen in Sanskrit Mahabharata: Kunti asked Draupadi to be the surrogate mother of Sahadeva in the forest, and in the northern recension to even feed him.18
Lord Krishna’s relation to Draupadi:
In Sanskrit Mahabharata, Krishna was the savior of Draupadi and was there for her in her troubles. Krishna is addressed to as Draupadi’s brother in several of the Indian literature. In the Cult story we come across two conflicting relations: On one occasion, Krishna addresses Draupadi as his sister.19 On a different occasion, Draupadi when asked to reveal an innermost secret tells that she wanted one another man to be her great husband which is suspected to be Krishna.20 In a Telugu version of Mahabharata, when Draupadi came to know that Bhima made love to her with Krishna’s energy, she requested Krishna to marry her; he promised to marry her in a future birth as Lord Jagannath of Puri.21
Aravan’s story:
Aravan, one of the sons of Arjuna, was a great warrior. He was sacrificed prior to the war to secure victory by the Pandavas. The sacrifice involved dismantling his body into thirty-two pieces.22 God Adishesha, the snake ancestor of Aravan coiled around the remains of his body.
23 Finally, goddess Kali (another form of Draupadi) revived Aravan.24 Garuda, the Brahmany kite god, appeared in the sky going in circles at the death of Aravan.25
Following are the other significant points in relation to Aravan:
Pre-war sacrifice of Aravan is absent in Sanskrit Mahabharata.26
In the Aravan temple at Koovakkam, castrated eunuchs are the principle participants in his annual festival.27
Nine-grains are sown ritually and sacrificed in this festival to symbolize Aravan’s premature death, rebirth and immortality.28
Aravan is also called Koothandavar, meaning the god of dramas and dances.29
Fire walking:
Fire walking is an important ritual in Draupadi cult festivals. There are three important claims in connection with this:
Fire walkers are unhurt after walking on burning coals.
Fire walk is performed to achieve immortality.
During fire walk sighting of Brahmany kite is believed to occur.
There are other significant points of deviation in the Cult story that would be discussed in the relevant sections.
2(C) THE OSIRIS STORY OF EGYPT:
Osiris was the greatest king of Egypt who became their greatest deity later.30, 31 Osiris, Seth and Horus were the three sons and Isis and Nephthys were the two daughters of sky goddess Nut, born through the divine intervention of earth god Geb, though the sun god Re was the husband of Nut.32
Osiris married his sister Isis and his brother Seth married Nephthys. Osiris along with Isis developed the technique of cultivation and ended cannibalism in Egypt. He travelled to different parts of the world including India and taught agriculture. He returned to Egypt with a huge wealth that he received as gratitude from other countries. He brought law and order in his country and was loved by his subjects.33
Isis was dark complexioned, very beautiful and was considered the goddess of fire.34 Seth desired her and this was one of the main reasons for his hatred towards Osiris.
When Osiris returned to Egypt after travelling the world, Seth out of jealousy plotted against him along with seventy-two associates. He tricked him into an elaborately carved coffin and threw it into the Nile. When Isis heard this she sheared off a lock of her hair, put on mourning attire and wandered up and down disconsolately.35 She also tore her clothes, covered her hair with dust and mourned piteously.36
The wandering Isis entered the palace of Byblus (on the coast of Syria) in a humble guise, where people enquired about her distress. She braided the hair of the king’s hand-maidens and breathed perfume into their hair. The queen was impressed by this and made Isis the nurse and care-taker of her child.37
Meanwhile, the coffin of Osiris floated away out to the sea and drifted ashore on Byblus, on the coast of Syria. Here, an Erica tree shot up and enclosed the coffin in its trunk. The king of Byblus fetched the tree and made a pillar out of it.38
While at Byblus, Isis placed the royal infant over burning coals and recited a spell. As parts of his body burned, she changed into a kite and flitted over Osiris’ casket in the roof. The child was claimed to be unhurt by burning coals. Isis claimed that she did this to make the royal infant immortal.39
Isis procured the coffin and left Byblus by a boat and finally opened it to see her dead husband. Meanwhile Seth who was hunting a boar happened to see Osiris’ body. He stole the body, mangled it and dismantled it into fourteen pieces and scattered them in different places. Isis could recover all his body parts except his genitals. She, along with gods Thoth and Anubis, threaded the pieces together, wrapped Osiris with linen bandages and Isis fanned Osiris and he revived. Osiris became the lord of the netherworld after this. It is claimed that Isis conceived Horus (the younger) somewhere after the resurrection of Osiris, though there are several confusing versions.40 Isis gave birth to Horus on a papyrus bed, wrapped him in a red shawl and tied it in a magic knot called Tyet. She begged food for baby Horus disguised as a beggar-woman.41
Isis returned the Erica tree to the king of Byblus after recovering the coffin of Osiris. The tree was worshipped later by the people of Byblus.42
Isis and Horus wanted to avenge the injustice done to Osiris by Seth.43 There are several stories of encounters and contentions between Horus and Seth.44 In the final battle, the sun god Re himself came in his boat to help Horus.45 According to Egyptian mythology, the mast of the nocturnal boat of Re is the phallus of the monkey god Babi (we do not know whether this nocturnal boat is the same as the one on which Re came to assist Horus).46 In the final war, Horus killed Seth and ruled Egypt.
Isis was the goddess of fire for the Egyptians;47 later she was viewed as Aphrodite by the Greeks.48 She was considered immensely powerful and to be the greatest of all goddesses for the Egyptians.49 Isis protected her husband Osiris and son/husband Horus.50 Isis is considered as the power behind the throne.51 She is a fierce goddess.52 Isis had a cult associated with her.53 She was the goddess of sea-farers.54
Osiris was also deified in Egypt.55 He was believed to be the lord of the netherworld administering justice to the dead.56 He was worshipped as the corn god by the Egyptians later.57 He was true of speech.58 The story of Osiris has several versions and variants.
SECTION 3: SIMILARITY OF THE STORIES
We first map the three major characters in ES to the corresponding characters in Indian stories (SM and CS) namely Isis to Draupadi, Osiris to Yudhistira and Seth to Duryodhana. Following this we map the major events in ES to those in the Indian stories and show that their chronological order is mostly preserved. It may be noted that at times multiple characters/events in the Indian stories may get mapped to a single character/event in the Egyptian story.
3.1 ISIS TO DRAUPADI:
We map Isis of the Egyptian story to Draupadi of the Indian stories. Both are the greatest goddesses in their respective civilizations. Both are goddesses of fire, immensely powerful and are dark complexioned. Both are born through divine intervention. Both of them have a peculiar story associated with their hair at a very crucial point in their lives, that is at a time when they lose the protection of their husbands: Isis shears a lock of her hair when she learns of her husband’s death, while Draupadi unties her hair knot in the Indian stories following her husband staking and losing her in the dice game (thus losing charge of her). Following this both spend life in jungles, begging food for their children. Finally before they get justice, they live in disguise in a different kingdom, braiding the hair of the women in the royal house. Isis is considered as the power behind the throne, while in the Cult story Draupadi is considered as the power behind her husbands. Both are believed to be the protectors of their husbands. Both are strong women, who yearned for justice and ultimately won it. Isis is considered a virgin as is Draupadi in the Cult story though both were married and had sons. Their husbands also resemble each other as we show in 3.2.
3.2 OSIRIS TO YUDHISTIRA:
We are comparing, Osiris, the husband of Isis, with Yudhistira, the husband of Draupadi. Osiris was born through divine contact of earth god Geb with goddess Nut. However, Re, the husband of Nut accepted this child to be his own. Similarly, Yudhistira was born through divine contact of Yama, the god of the netherworld, with queen Kunti. Pandu, the husband of Kunti accepted this child to be his own.
Both Osiris and Yudhistira established law and order in their respective countries, in particular they were hailed as the custodians of law. Both were claimed to be true of speech. Osiris after death became the lord of the netherworld, where he administered justice to the dead, while Yudhistira was the son of Lord Yama, who administers justice for the dead in the netherworld in Hindu mythology. Our mapping gains more strength from the fact that Yudhistira and Yama are viewed with a certain degree of oneness in Hindu mythology and in fact they are given the same epithet Dharma. Thus, we can now extend our mapping of Osiris to the father-son pair of Yama-Yudhistira. This extension of mapping brings out another similarity of significance: Yama married his sister Yami, who was dark complexioned. This is similar to Osiris marrying his sister Isis, who was also dark complexioned. It may be noted that marriage between siblings is quite uncommon (and even shunned) in Hindu mythology and Yama-Yami is one such rare pair. Comparison of Yama-Yami to Osiris-Isis can be seen in the work of earlier authors.59, 60, 61
In due course we expand to mapping all Pandavas as one unit to Osiris. This is because the different events and characteristics of Osiris get distributed to different Pandavas, in particular to Yudhistira and Arjuna.
3.3 SETH TO DURYODHANA:
We map the opponent and cousin of Yudhistira, namely Duryodhana to Seth, the opponent and brother of Osiris. Duryodhana, along with his ninety-nine brothers constantly schemed against Yudhistira and his brothers (the Pandavas), while Seth along with his seventy-two aides killed Osiris. The causes for hatred in both the cases are quite similar: Seth felt jealous of Osiris for his fame, excellence and desired his beautiful wife Isis. Similarly Duryodhana was jealous of Yudhistira’s fame, excellence and desired his beautiful wife Draupadi.
It may be noted that the mapping is strong: the trio of Isis-Osiris-Seth is mapped to the trio of Draupadi-Yudhistira-Duryodhana with their mutual relations being preserved.
3.4 COMPARISON OF MAJOR EVENTS AND THEIR CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER:
We now compare the events in ES with those in the Indian stories. There are a total of sixteen events in each of the stories and they are so numbered that the ith event in the Egyptian story maps to the ith event in the Indian stories for each i, 1 through 16. The principle players in these events are Isis, Osiris and Seth in ES and Draupadi, Yudhistira (Pandavas) and Duryodhana (Kauravas) in the Indian stories. When we compare each of the events, the mappings of these characters are perfectly preserved, that is, the role of Isis in an Egyptian event maps to the role of Draupadi in the corresponding event in the Indian stories, and similarly for the other two characters.
3.4.1 The events in ES:
Osiris was considered the greatest king of Egypt and he was deified later.
Osiris was born through the association of a god with his mother and not her husband. However, he was considered to be the son of her husband.62
Osiris married Isis, the dark complexioned fire goddess of immense power having all the attributes discussed in detail in Section 3.1.
Osiris travelled all over the world and returned with huge wealth after he became the king.
Osiris ruled Egypt justly and his subjects were fond of him.
Seth being jealous of Osiris’ success and the latter’s beautiful wife, tricked and killed Osiris by trapping him in a coffin. The coffin later got trapped in a tree.
Isis was seduced by Seth during Osiris’ absence earlier when Osiris travelled all over the world and gathered wealth (see event 4 above).
When Isis learnt of her husband’s death, she sheared a lock of her hair, put on mourning attire and wandered up and down disconsolately in the forest before taking shelter in Byblus.
Isis stayed in the palace of Byblus in the guise of a maid. There she combed and braided the hair of the king’s hand maidens and breathed perfume into it.
Seth while hunting a boar, noticed dead Osiris in his coffin, intended to destroy his body in order to prevent his resurrection.
Seth dismantled and mangled Osiris’ body and dispelled it.
Osiris was revived by Isis with the help of gods which enabled him to have a son who would avenge injustice done to Osiris in a future war.
Osiris became the lord of the netherworld, the abode of the dead. This netherworld was sacred to the Egyptians.
Re, the greatest of the Egyptian gods, took Horus on his boat in the final war. The phallus of the monkey god Babi was the mast of Re’s nocturnal boat. However these two boats may not be the same.
Horus was born to Osiris after the latter’s death. Also Osiris was considered as the god of fertility.63
The tree in which Osiris was trapped was sacred to the people of Byblus.
3.4.2 The events in the Indian stories:
Yudhistira was considered to be the greatest king of India and he was deified later.
Pandavas were born through the association of gods with their mother and not her husband. However, they were considered to be the children of her husband.
Pandavas married Draupadi, the dark complexioned fire goddess of immense power having all the attributes discussed in detail in Section 3.1.
Pandavas won the world and returned with huge wealth after Yudhistira became the king.
Yudhistira ruled the kingdom justly and his subjects were fond of him.
Duryodhana being jealous of Pandavas’ success and the latter’s beautiful wife, tricked and defeated Pandavas in a dice game and ousted them to a forest. Arjuna entered penance. According to CS he performed his penance on a tree.
Draupadi was molested by Dusshasana following the advice of Duryodhana. This followed the defeat of Pandavas in the dice game.
Draupadi untied her hair following the above insult to her husbands. She wandered in the forest with her husbands. Before taking shelter in Virata’s kingdom she put on a black dress and wandered hither and thither in seeming affliction.
Draupadi stayed in Virata’s palace in the guise of a maid. There she combed and braided the hair of the women of the harem that involved pounding fragrant materials to make unguents.
Shiva while hunting a boar disturbed Arjuna in penance intentionally.
Shiva mangled Arjuna into a ball of flesh according to SM. He tossed Arjuna into the sky according to CS.
Arjuna recovered and was rewarded with a weapon to destroy Duryodhana in a future war, thus avenging injustice done to Pandavas.
Arjuna, during his penance, visited the abode of Lord Indra according to SM. While in his abode, Indra offered Arjuna half his throne. Whereas according to CS, Arjuna visited Kailasa, the abode of the dead. Both Kailasa and Indra’s abode are sacred to Hindus.
Lord Krishna, the greatest of the Hindu gods, was the charioteer of Arjuna in the final war. The monkey god Hanuman was on the flag of this chariot.
Draupadi cult followers believe that Arjuna while on the penance tree confers fertility to women.
The penance tree of Arjuna is sacred to the followers of the Draupadi cult.
It may be noted that the sixteen events in the Indian story are in perfect chronological order whereas the Egyptian story is in chronological order throughout except the event 7 which should have appeared between events 3 and 4. The two lists provided above are comparable item wise as we mentioned earlier. We also mentioned above that we have preserved the mapping of the characters in these events as in Sections 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3.
It may be noted that, several earlier authors have viewed Arjuna’s penance to represent his own death (see section 3.5 for more details). We extend this mapping of Arjuna’s penance to his own death further to Osiris’ death. We have the following additional mappings in relation to the events that are necessary for our parameter-wise analysis:
Osiris’ death mapping to Arjuna’s death which is equivalent to Arjuna’s penance
Erica tree in which Osiris’ coffin was trapped mapping to Arjuna’s penance tree
We also map Seth to Shiva
We now list the parameters for comparison between ES and the Indian stories. The parameter numbers correspond to the respective items in the above mentioned two lists:
Hero being considered the greatest king and deified later.
Born to mothers through gods but still considered to be children of their actual husbands.
Marriage with the dark complexioned fire goddess of immense power having all the attributes discussed in detail in Section 3.1.
Travel/Invasion of the entire world and returning with huge wealth after becoming the king.
Ruling the kingdom justly and subjects being fond of him.
There are three points under this parameter:
Opponent being jealous of hero’s success and beautiful wife
Trick to kill/oust the hero into a tree/forest
Death or penance of the hero with tree association
Seduction/molestation of heroine by the villain in the absence/defeat of the hero.
Heroine shearing/untying of her hair following death of/insult to her husband; heroine in a mourning/black dress, walking hither and thither disconsolately in jungles; all of this happening before she took shelter in a different kingdom.
Heroine entering a different kingdom in the guise of a maid, where she combed and braided the hair of women in the palace, making the hair fragrant.
Opponent hunting a boar, noticing hero in penance or being dead, and disturbing him intentionally.
Hero’s body mangled and thrown by the opponent.
Hero recovered/revived; hero awarded with a means to avenge injustice done to him by the opponent, in a future war.
There are three points under this parameter:
Hero visits the sacred abode of the dead (netherworld/Kailasa in ES/CS)
This abode being sacred to the respective people
Hero becoming the lord or occupies half the throne of that sacred abode (in ES/SM)
Greatest god assisting the hero/hero’s son on his chariot/boat in the final war; association of the respective monkey gods with the chariot/boat’s parts.
Hero while in death/penance associated with fertility and/or conferring fertility to women.
The tree associated with the hero being sacred to the respective followers.
Conclusion: The similarity of the sixteen events in (almost) chronological order forms a signature that shows the two stories are similar beyond coincidence.
3.5 ARJUNA’S PENANCE CAN MEAN HIS DEATH:
Hiltebeitel discusses several researchers who have suspected Arjuna’s penance to imply his own death.64 Following are the important observations Hiltebeitel has discussed:
Tapas pole and the scene of Arjuna’s penance evoke initiatory symbolism of death and rebirth.65
Dharma is known as Kenku-pattar or Kanka-pattar during his incognito stay at Virata’s palace. The first word Kanka means heron in Sanskrit, which has connotation of impurity and death and associations with Yama, the lord of death according to Biardeau.66
According to Hiltebeitel, the disheveled hair and the blood stained garment of Draupadi connote symbolic death of Pandavas and of her widowhood.67
According to the cult followers, a Brahmany kite should be seen circling when cult performers ritually enact Arjuna’s penance on the tree.68 Circling of a kite generally occurs around a dead body, hence implying Arjuna could be dead.
3.6 ADDITIONAL EVENTS IN SANSKRIT MAHABHARATA:
We make a passing mention of two other events in SM that have counterparts in ES, though they are not strictly needed for our proofs:
Duryodhana tied Bhima (the second Pandava) with ropes and threw him into a river, with an intention to kill him. Bhima entered the world of serpents which is considered to be netherworld and returned unharmed.69 Opponent throwing the hero into a river with an intention to kill and the latter visiting netherworld and returning unharmed resembles Osiris story.
Duryodhana tricked Pandavas to stay in an elaborately decorated lac house and set it on fire with an intention to kill them. Pandavas escaped unhurt. This somewhat resembles the elaborately carved coffin in which Osiris was trapped, since both were made with an intent to kill the hero.
Conclusions on Section 3:
We have compared the characters and the events in the Indian stories with those in the Egyptian story. The similarity of the characters and events along with the preservation of the chronological order leads us to the following claim:
CLAIM 1:
The Indian stories on one hand (SM and CS) and the Egyptian story on the other hand have similarities, which are beyond coincidence.
Thus, it is possible that their origins are associated in some way: both Indian and Egyptian stories had a common origin or one of them is the source for the other.
SECTION 4: THE CULT STORY IS BETWEEN THE EGYPTIAN STORY AND THE SANSKRIT MAHABHARATA, AND CLOSER TO THE FORMER
The details of the Cult story allow us to go further to make the following claim:
CLAIM 2: The Cult story lies in between the Egyptian story and the Sanskrit Mahabharata. Further, the Cult story is closer to the Egyptian story than the Sanskrit Mahabharata.
PROOF:
We provide a nineteen-point proof for the present claim. Each point of the proof is presented in a certain format defined as follows:
Each point is based on a particular theme that appears in all the three stories namely ES, CS and SM, though at times a particular theme may be totally absent in SM.
Each theme can be split into a set of parameters that are comparable across the three stories.
The parameters may show a gradual transition in quality between the stories, thus enabling us to conclude that CS is in between the other two stories and at times closer to ES than to SM.
Each of the nineteen points that we discuss is presented in the following format:
First we discuss the theme in each of the three stories
Then we enlist the parameters of comparison
Finally we summarize our conclusions
Following are the nineteen points:
Arjuna’s penance and death of Osiris:
ES: Osiris was dead and his coffin got encapsulated in an Erica tree. When his body was recovered from this coffin, he went to the netherworld, the abode of the dead. This Erica tree was returned to Byblus after recovering Osiris’ body; the tree was sacred to the people of Byblus; the death of Osiris was sacred for the Egyptians. Osiris was the god of fertility and gave birth to Horus posthumously.
CS: Arjuna does penance on a tree. Later he visits Kailasa, the abode of the dead. Arjuna’s penance and the tree are very sacred to followers of the Draupadi cult; there are rituals associated with them. Arjuna while on the penance tree is believed to confer fertility to women.
SM: Arjuna does penance. Later he visits the abode of Indra. His penance has no serious sanctity in SM as such.
Parameters for comparison:
Hero in the state of death/penance: hero dead in ES; whereas hero in penance in CS which is argued to symbolize his death by scholars; whereas hero in penance in SM with no connotation of death
Association of hero’s death/penance with a tree: association with tree in both ES and CS, but not in SM
Sanctity of the tree: sacred in both ES and CS, but not in SM
Sanctity of hero’s death/penance itself: sacred both in ES and CS, but not in SM
Hero’s visit to the abode of the dead: visits in both ES and CS, but not in SM
Hero’s association with conferring fertility to women when in death/penance: confers fertility both in ES and CS, but not in SM
Summary: CS is closer to SM in parameter A because Arjuna is in penance in both the stories. However there is some evidence to view his penance as death. Thus CS can be placed between ES and SM. Whereas CS is closer to ES in the other five parameters (B through F); thus bringing CS closer to ES than CS to SM.
The centrality of Isis and Draupadi:
ES: Isis was the supreme goddess for Egyptians. She is the power behind the throne and she protected her husbands, Osiris and Horus. She fought the war against Seth along with her son Horus. Also there was a cult associated with her.
CS: Draupadi is the supreme goddess for the cult followers and occupies the central position (see Pucari songs, cult dramas and cult rituals).70 She is claimed to be the strength behind the Pandavas, she fights and wins the war and protects the Pandavas.71 Also there is a cult associated with her.
SM: Draupadi is not viewed as the central person in the epic though she is the key person behind most of the significant events. There is no notion of Draupadi being either the strength behind the Pandavas or protecting them. It is Pandavas who fought the war and Draupadi did not participate in it. There is no known cult associated with her.
Parameters for comparison:
Importance of heroine: she is the supreme goddess in ES and CS but not in SM
Protection of husbands: she is protector of her husbands in ES and CS, but not in SM
Heroine’s participation in war: she participates in war in both ES and CS, but not in SM
Having a cult of her own: yes in both ES and CS and no in SM
Summary: All the four parameters bring CS closer to ES than CS to SM.
Marriage between siblings: Osiris-Isis and Krishna-Draupadi
ES: Osiris married his sister Isis
CS: Draupadi is addressed by Krishna as his sister on one occasion in the Cult story and on another occasion she expresses her desire to marry Krishna (It may be noted that according to Telugu Mahabharata, he promises to marry her in his future birth).
SM: There is no marital relation or love between Krishna and Draupadi.
Parameter for comparison:
Heroine’s desire to marry her brother: married in ES; whereas desired to marry in CS; no desire at all in SM.
Summary: This parameter shows a gradual transition from ES to CS to SM, thus placing CS in the middle of ES and SM. The parameter also brings CS closer to ES than to SM.
Heroine’s child is also her husband:
ES: Isis, during her wanderings after the death of Osiris, disguised herself as a beggar-woman and begged food for her child Horus.72 Horus would be her husband later when he grew up.73
CS: After Pandavas lost in the dice game and were ousted to the forest, Arjuna was in penance, as in SM. During this time Draupadi went to the court of Duryodhana, in the guise of a Kuravanci (gypsy) carrying baby Sahadeva (Draupadi’s fifth husband) on her hip and begged food for the baby.
SM: After Pandavas lost in the dice game and were ousted to the forest, Kunti asked Draupadi to be the surrogate mother of Sahadeva (Druapadi’s fifth husband). In the northern recension of SM, Kunti also asked Draupadi to feed Sahadeva.74
Parameters for comparison:
We define a complex parameter with four parts (separated by commas) as follows: Death or penance of the hero, followed by heroine wandering in the jungle as a beggar-woman/gypsy, begging food for her younger husband, who was a small child: This is true in ES: Horus was indeed a child and married Isis later. Whereas in CS, Draupadi carried her husband Sahadeva disguised as a child on her hip, thus raising some controversy regarding Sahadeva’s age (though Draupadi carrying him as a child is a fact in the drama, how he can be so young is an issue that can be debated). Whereas in SM, Sahadeva cannot be a young child at all and Kunti’s advice to view him as a child should be more out of affection.
Summary: One sees a gradual transition of a husband being truly a child who was carried in ES to a controversial one in CS to a true adult in SM, thus placing CS in the middle of ES and SM. Also the heroine wandering as a beggar-woman/gypsy and begging food for the child brings CS closer to ES than SM.
Shaving or untying hair:
ES: Isis sheared off a lock of her hair after Osiris was tricked and killed by Seth.
CS: Draupadi untied her hair knot when Duryodhana tricked and defeated Pandavas in a dice game and humiliated her by disrobing. The word used in CS to describe her untying of hair is Kalaintu which has two meanings in Tamil language namely untying and cutting. The latter meaning of Kalaintu that is cutting off hair may be more apt if we suspect Pandavas’ death because shaving off scalp hair was a tradition among widows in some parts of India.
SM: Draupadi untied her hair knot when Duryodhana tricked and defeated Pandavas in a dice game and humiliated her by disrobing.
Parameter for comparison:
Heroine shearing off or untying hair following an insult to her husband: it is clearly shearing off in ES, whereas as it is shearing off or untying in CS (because of the dual meaning of the word Kalaintu) and clearly untying in SM
Summary: The gradual transition of heroine shearing off her hair in ES to just untying in SM with an ambiguous word Kalaintu meaning both in CS puts CS in the middle of the other two stories. Further, if we accept the death of Pandavas then CS is closer to ES than SM.
Rituals involving sowing of grains that symbolizes revival/rebirth after death:
ES: Osiris after his death was believed to be reborn through corn. Further Egyptians commemorated his death annually in several forms where rituals contained death and revival as their principal elements.75 Annual harvest was believed to be death of Osiris.76, 77
CS: Arjuna’s penance is followed by two items involving grains that symbolize death and revival, they are as follows:
Draupadi along with Krishna procures nine-grains from Duryodhana which were seeded later symbolizing death, revival and immortality.78
The annual cult festival has rituals in which the followers of the cult sow and harvest/kill nine-grains symbolic of death and revival.79
SM: Apparently there is no counterpart event of death, revival and immortality or are there the rituals associated with them.
Parameter for comparison:
Commemoration of death and revival of hero in an annual festival by seeding and harvest of crops: present in ES and CS whereas absent in SM.
Summary: This parameter brings CS closer to ES than CS to SM.
A complex signature involving multiple and diverse parameters (dismantling of the hero’s body, his death and revival, sacrifice; rituals associated with him; his association with dance, music and castration):
ES: Seth stole the dead body of Osiris from Isis, cut it into pieces and dispelled them. Isis could recover all parts except his genitals. She threaded those pieces together to reconstruct his body, wrapped it with cloth bandages with the help of his ancestral god Thoth and breathed life into it. Long after this Horus, the son of Osiris won the war.
Osiris was deified by Egyptians much later. There are two more points from the Osiris story that are important in the present context, namely: rituals associated with death-resurrection, and dance. We will discuss them in the required detail as follows:
Egyptians viewed the death of Osiris followed by his resurrection as a sacrifice much later and commemorated this annually; this annual commemoration involved the following rituals80 :
An eighteen day long festival in the month of Khoiak: this festival involved the following:
sowing on a patch of land; growth of crops on this patch was viewed as an emblem of resurrection
placing next to this patch a cow goddess Shenty which had inside it, a headless human image
A new effigy of Osiris was kept in a coffin and the coffin was laid in the grave every year. The effigy of the previous year was placed on boughs of a sycamore tree. Also, according to Frazer, in certain temples, statue of Osiris was placed on branches of sycamore tree.
Harvesting in general was viewed as the death of Osiris.81
Egyptians believed Osiris was a god of dance. Kings danced before the image of Osiris as a tradition and a particular dance was attributed to Osiris.82
CS: Aravan was a great warrior and a son of Arjuna. Following the advice of Lord Krishna, Aravan was sacrificed before the war to secure victory by the Pandavas. The ritual involved dismantling his body into thirty-two pieces.83 His ancestral snake-god Adishesha coiled around his remains and Aravan was revived by goddess Kali (another form of Draupadi). Aravan was deified later. There are two more points from the Aravan story that are important in the present context, namely: rituals associated with death-resurrection, and dance. We will discuss them in the required detail as follows:
Aravan festival celebrated by the followers of the Draupadi cult involves the following:
In this annual eighteen day festival nine-grains are sown ritually on a patch of land and are sacrificed to symbolize his death, rebirth and immortality.84 The Karagam pot representing the goddess Draupadi is kept beside these nine grains sown.85
Aravan’s idol is kept on a tree to symbolize his death.86
Castrated eunuchs are the principle participants in Aravan’s annual festival.87
Aravan is also known as Koothandavar, meaning god of dance in Tamil language. However, we are not aware of his association with a dance.
Arjuna also shares some of these attributes with Aravan, and they are as follows:
It may be noted that Arjuna was a dance teacher to the daughter of king Virata while incognito; at that point of time, he was a eunuch fulfilling the curse he suffered while at Indra’s realm.
We have already discussed the debate regarding Arjuna’s penance being his death. In that case, Draupadi’s procuring of nine grains and seeding in her forest garden follows Arjuna’s death.
SM: It has no counterpart story.
Additional mapping between the stories:
We map Osiris to Aravan in addition to the earlier mapping to Pandavas. This mapping is used in the following parameters of comparison.
Parameters for comparison:
Killing of a hero before the great-war that would be viewed as sacrifice: The intention of killing Osiris was certainly not a sacrifice to secure victory in the war; however it was viewed as his sacrifice for the well being of Egypt by the later people. Whereas, Aravan was intentionally sacrificed for the sake of winning the war. Therefore, so far as one views the killing of them as sacrifice (without bothering about the intent and the time factor), Aravan and Osiris are comparable.
Dismantling hero’s body into pieces: Again the intentions are different: Seth dismantled Osiris body to prevent his resurrection, while Aravan’s body was dismantled as part of the sacrificial ritual.
Revival of the killed by the goddess with the help of his ancestral god: Osiris was revived by Isis with the help of his ancestral god Thoth, whereas Aravan was revived by Kali who is another form of Draupadi (Draupadi is mapped to Isis), with the help of his ancestral god Adishesha.
Revival process involving wrapping: wrapping with bandages for Osiris and with the coils of a snake for Aravan.
Association of castration with the killed: Association of Osiris with castration is because his genitals could not be recovered while putting his body together. Association of castration with Aravan comes from the fact that eunuchs celebrate Aravan’s marriage with Lord Krishna; the latter in female form married Aravan just before his death.
Annual festival commemorating the hero’s death:
This annual festival being eighteen day long
This annual festival having the following three rituals:
Death and resurrection of the hero commemorated by sowing and killing/harvesting of crops on a patch of land
Goddess being placed beside this patch of land on which crops are sown: We speculate that the goddess Shenty placed next to the patch can represent Isis, because Isis was a cow goddess and the headless-human inside might mean beheaded Isis (Isis was beheaded by Horus). Thus we compare this to Draupadi in the form of Karagam pot next to the grains sown in Aravan festival.
Placing the effigy/idol of the killed hero on a tree
Hero being god of dance: Osiris was considered as god of dance by Egyptians whereas the other name of Aravan, that is Koothandavar, means the god of dance in Tamil language.
Note that the two stories ES and CS could be compared on the basis of these parameters once certain details in the stories were blurred. The significance of these parameters is that, though they are many in number and cover diverse topics, they are indeed present in both the stories in connection with the respective heroes, thus constituting a signature. Of course, it is a new mapping from Osiris to Aravan. However, Arjuna whom we have mapped to Osiris also satisfies a significant number of these parameters as follows:
Arjuna was a eunuch, thus supporting the parameter of association of the hero with castration.
Arjuna’s penance/death was followed by Draupadi sowing nine grains on a patch of land commemorating death and resurrection. In fact, this sowing event is claimed to be the basis for the annual sowing of nine grains as part of Aravan festivals discussed above. Thus, the tradition of placing the Karagam pot representing Draupadi next to the patch of land may be symbolic of Draupadi herself sowing the nine grains in CS.
Arjuna was a dance teacher, thus satisfying the parameter of association of the hero with dance.
Arjuna’s death preceded the final war, if one accepts his penance to be his death.
Further each of these parameters is absent in SM.
Summary: These seven parameters bring CS closer to ES than CS to SM.
Fire walking:
ES: Isis, while at the palace of Byblus, was appointed the nurse and care-taker of the royal infant. She placed the royal infant over burning coals and recited a spell. As parts of his body burned, she transformed into a kite and flitted over Osiris’ casket in the roof. The child was claimed to be unhurt by burning coals. Isis claimed that she did this to make the royal infant immortal.88
CS: Draupadi is believed to be the mother/care-taker of her followers in her cult, some of whom also perform fire walk. Fire walking is an important ritual of the annual Draupadi festival. In this ritual, people walk on burning coals with an intention to achieve immortality and seem to be unhurt after fire walk. Draupadi is believed to make the coals cool for the fire-walkers. During fire walk there should be a sighting of Brahmany kite (Garuda Darshanam) in the sky.
SM: There is no counterpart for this.
Parameters for comparison:
Goddess viewed to be the mother/care-taker of the person who comes in contact with burning coals
The act of a person coming in contact with burning coals viewed as a ritual (it involves reciting spells in ES, whereas it is a ritual as part of a festival in CS)
The person coming in contact with burning coals emerging unhurt because of the goddess’ protection
The purpose of the ritual being achieving immortality
The presence of a kite circling above during this ritual
We get the parameters for comparison after suppressing the details of the stories which are quite different. Further each of these parameters is absent in SM, whereas it is present in ES and CS.
Summary: These five parameters bring CS closer to ES than CS to SM (Speculation: The fire walk of the cult followers could be the commemoration of the Egyptian story of Isis burning the child to make him immortal).
Anubis and Shakuni:
ES: Anubis was portrayed as a jackal/jackal-headed human. He assisted Isis in reviving the dead Osiris although he was the son of the opponent Seth/Nephthys. Anubis threatened to devour the dead bodies in cemeteries. Anubis is believed to take part in assessing the goodness and deciding the fate of the deceased in the netherworld.
CS: Shakuni is reborn as a jackal. He threatened and devoured the dying Duryodhana in battlefield though he supported him earlier. Shakuni judged Duryodhana by decrying his cruelty to the Pandavas and said that a just fate had come upon him.
SM: The description of Shakuni in the Sanskrit Mahabharata is more of a cunning man who consistently supported Duryodhana and was against Pandavas. Shakuni’s Sanskrit name connects him with inauspicious carrion eating birds.
Parameters for comparison:
Portrayal as jackal: This is explicit in ES and CS, while he is just cunning in SM (cunningness is often associated with jackal in Indian folk stories)
Devouring the dead: This is clearly mentioned in ES and CS, whereas in SM the Sanskrit name just connects him with such an act
Assessing the righteousness of the dead/dying: This parameter is associated with all the dead in general in ES, whereas it is restricted to Duryodhana in CS while it is absent in SM
Shifting support from the villain to the hero of the story: This parameter is seen in ES and CS but not in SM
The four parameters show a gradual transition from ES to CS to SM.
Summary: These parameters bring CS closer to ES than CS to SM.
Aphrodite:
ES: Isis was viewed to be Aphrodite by the Greeks.
CS: Sahadeva claims Draupadi has Ananku meaning a woman who afflicts or causes distress by her sexuality.89
SM: Draupadi is considered beautiful, but not with any sexual connotation.
Parameter for comparison:
Sexual connotation of the heroine: present in ES and CS; absent in SM
Summary: This parameter brings CS closer to ES than CS to SM.
Heroine siding the opponent:
ES: Isis though she disliked Seth, also had affection for him; she withdrew the weapon directed against Seth in a war.90
CS: Draupadi played dice game with Duryodhana and enjoyed it.91
SM: Draupadi clearly and consistently hated Duryodhana with no sympathy or affection for him
Parameter for comparison:
Heroine having affection for the opponent: heroine clearly expressed affection for the opponent in ES, whereas there are moments of not having hatred for the opponent (enjoyed the dice game) in CS whereas in SM there was a clear hatred.
Summary: This parameter shows a gradual transition from ES to CS to SM; also it brings CS closer to ES than to SM.
Heroine becoming a stone:
ES: Isis withdrew a harpoon directed against her opponent Seth out of affection for him (though he had killed her husband and seduced her earlier). Angered by this, Horus beheaded her, at which she became a statue of flint.92
CS: Draupadi becomes a stone to safeguard her chastity when a demon Kempirnacuran touched her.93
SM: There is no counterpart story.
Parameter for comparison:
Heroine becoming a stone when her chastity was challenged by an opponent: Again here we have to blur the details in the stories while comparing the parameter. This parameter is present in ES and CS whereas it is absent in SM.
Summary: This parameter brings CS closer to ES than CS to SM.
The marriage between siblings – Kichaka-Sudeshna:
ES: Marriage between siblings is an accepted norm
CS: Kichaka claims that his sister Sudeshna will be a widow if he dies.94
SM: There is apparently no marriage between siblings in SM
Summary: Kichaka’s claim of Sudeshna becoming a widow if he dies is suggestive of marriage between siblings, which was a common practice in ancient Egypt, thus bringing CS closer to ES than CS to SM.
Opponent’s strong desire for the heroine:
ES: Seth seduced Isis.95
CS: Kichaka seduced Draupadi.
SM: Kichaka desired Draupadi.
Additional mapping: We map Seth to Kichaka in this context. Kichaka along with his hundred brothers was also an opponent to Pandavas. He desired Draupadi and was killed by Bhima during their incognito stay in Virata’s palace. Kichaka just desires Draupadi in SM whereas he seduced Draupadi in CS. At a very gross level one can view Kichaka as a clone of Duryodhana. It may be noted that the strength of our claims (and their proofs) do not get enriched by this additional mapping of Seth to Kichaka. However we have included this episode for the sake of completeness.
Parameter for comparison:
Opponent seducing the heroine: present in ES and CS whereas absent in SM.
Summary: This parameter brings CS closer to ES than CS to SM.
Association of the heroine with earth god/goddess:
ES: Isis is the daughter of the earth god; the earth covered by Nile is Isis’ body.96
CS: Draupadi is the earth goddess.97
SM: Draupadi is not associated with earth god/goddess.
Parameter for comparison:
Heroine’s association with earth god/goddess: present in ES and CS whereas absent in SM.
Summary: This parameter brings CS closer to ES than CS to SM.
Ending cannibalism:
ES: Osiris and Isis ended cannibalism in Egypt by bringing agriculture.98
CS: Draupadi defeated Arakkan and brought an end to cannibalism.99
SM: There is no counterpart.
Parameter for comparison:
Heroine helping in ending of cannibalism: present in ES and CS but absent in SM.
Summary: This parameter brings CS closer to ES than CS to SM.
Thirst for carrion:
ES: Isis was believed to wander in search of her dead husband as a kite which was more of a scavenging bird going in search of carrion than being a bird of prey.100
CS: Each night in the eighteen day war, Draupadi as Kali devoured the bodies of the slain;101 also she used to eat corpses in crematoriums;102 she went out every night to devour the creatures of the forest;103 Draupadi and Pandavas fought the Mahabharata war just to appease Draupadi’s thirst for eating corpses according to the Telugu Mahabharata.104
SM: There is no counterpart for this in SM, though Draupadi used a comb made of Duryodhana’s bone after smearing her hair with his blood (also present in CS).
Parameter for comparison:
Heroine’s thirst for carrion: present in ES and CS whereas absent in SM.
Summary: This parameter brings CS closer to ES than CS to SM.
Killing of enemies in a war being viewed as sacrifice:
ES: Egyptians viewed killing in war as sacrifice to god Osiris.105
CS: The killing of people in the Mahabharata war was viewed as a sacrifice to goddess Draupadi-Kali. Houben makes an interesting observation regarding Mahabharata: he opines that the sacrifice in Mahabharata after twelve years could be reminiscent of ancient practices of slaying kings twelve years after their reign.106
SM: There is no such concept of killing in war viewed as sacrifice related to the Mahabharata war.
Parameter for comparison:
Enemies slain in war viewed as sacrifice to a god/goddess: present in ES and CS but absent in SM.
Summary: This parameter brings CS closer to ES than CS to SM.
A winged disc being the sole warrior:
In this sub-section we compare an Egyptian myth to a collection of myths in South Indian traditions. The Egyptian myth is that of Heru-Behutet, the son of Re and of Horus, the son of Osiris and Isis. There are two myths in South Indian traditions that together map to this Egyptian myth namely: the story of Barbareeka and the myth of Sudarshana Chakra, the disc weapon of Lord Krishna which is also given a human iconographic form called Chakratthalwar.
The story of Barbareeka is similar to Aravan’s story discussed above, but has its own peculiarities. Barbareeka, the son of Bhima was sacrificed before the Mahabharata war quite similar to Aravan, the son of Arjuna. Both Barbareeka and Aravan witnessed the war from above, after their sacrifice. The story of Barbareeka has certain elements that bring it very close to a myth in ES. Now we will discuss each of these myths in required detail.
ES: The Sun god Re deputed his son Heru-Behutet in the war against Seth. Heru flew up in the form of a winged disc. From the height of heaven he witnessed the enemies and killed all of them.107 It is also claimed that Isis requested Re to give the winged disc as talisman to her son Horus. Also, both Horus and Heru-Behutet were of similar form.108 Further, the iconography of Horus includes the following:
Horus is depicted standing on two crocodiles.109
He is depicted carrying several weapons of war namely a club, mace, bow and arrows indicating his character as a destroyer.110
He typified the greatest power of the heat of the sun111 and was the effulgent god of light.112
Horus is depicted often with Bes mask that is leonine.113
Stories of South Indian traditions (SST): Barbareeka, son of Bhima, was sacrificed before the Mahabharata war and his head was placed on a hillock, which witnessed the war from above. All he saw was lord Krishna’s Sudarshana Chakra, a winged disc killing enemies in the war.114 The Sudarshana Chakra is represented in a human form called Chakratthalwar in South Indian Vaishnava tradition. This human form of Sudarshana Chakra of lord Krishna has the following attributes in South Indian traditions:
Sudarshana Chakra is associated with a crocodile in the story of Gajendra Moksha, where Vishnu used this Chakra to open the crocodile’s jaws -thus subduing the crocodile- as it had caught the leg of an elephant.115
He is depicted with several weapons of war that include, a club, mace, bow and arrows.116
He has a circlet of fire around him.117
He is always depicted with Lord Narasimha who has a lion face.118
SM: There is no counterpart for Barbareeka/Aravan in SM.119 However, Lord Krishna in his gigantic form of Vishwarupa shares some similarities:
Lord Krishna himself showed Arjuna and other warriors his gigantic form of Vishwarupa with several weapons of war including the club, mace, Sudarshana Chakra, bow and arrows.120
In this form he was effulgent.121
In this form he had several faces of which one was Lord Narasimha, which was leonine.122
A new mapping: We map the pair of Heru-Behutet and Horus to Sudarshana Chakra/Chakratthalwar in South Indian traditions and show that they are very close. However we cannot extend this mapping to Lord Krishna in SM because the mapping looks weak.
We have the following parameters for comparison:
The greatest god’s winged disc killing the enemies in the war: present in ES and SST but absent in SM.
The son of god/hero witnessing the enemies from a height: In ES, Heru-Behutet, the son of god Re, in the form of a winged disc witnessed the enemies from a height and also killed them while in SST, Barbareeka, the son of Bhima just witnessed from a height the winged disc killing enemies. There is no counterpart story in SM.
Subduing of crocodile: Horus stands on two crocodiles in ES.A crocodile is subdued in SST.
Being depicted with weapons of war: both Horus and Chakratthalwar are depicted with weapons of war in ES and SST respectively. Lord Krishna expresses himself in Vishwarupa with all war weapons in SM.
Association with Sun/heat or circlet of fire: Horus was associated with the heat of the sun and was the effulgent god of light in ES. In SST Chakratthalwar is depicted in a circlet of fire. Lord Krishna was effulgent in his Vishwarupa form in SM.
Association with lion faced god: Horus is depicted with Bes mask while Chakratthalwar is depicted with Narasimha. One of the faces of Lord Krishna being leonine in his Vishwarupa form is a weak mapping.
Summary: SST is closer to ES than SM to ES.
The final step in the proof of Claim 2:
Each of the parameters listed under the points 1 through 19, fall into one of the following three patterns:
Pattern 1: The particular parameter is similar for SM and CS but different for ES: 1A
Pattern 2: The parameter shows a gradual transition from SM to CS to ES: 3, 4, 5, 9, 11 and 19.
Pattern 3: The particular parameter is absent in SM whereas it is present in both CS and ES: all parameters other than those listed under patterns 1 and 2 fall into pattern 3.
Pattern 3 suggests that CS and ES have to be together; thus we have one of the following two orders possible:
SM-CS-ES
SM-ES-CS
Since according to Pattern 1, SM and CS should be together and according to Pattern 2, CS should be in the middle, SM-CS-ES is the only possibility. This proves the first part of Claim 2, that is CS lies between SM and ES.
Now the Pattern 3 which occurs most frequently among the points discussed above supports the second part of Claim 2 that is CS is more close to ES than SM.
SECTION 5: EGYPTIAN ORIGIN FOR INDIAN STORIES
CLAIM 3: The Osiris story can be the origin for the two Indian stories, namely the Cult story and Sanskrit Mahabharata.
PROOF:
The three stories ES, CS and SM have similarities that are strong enough to suspect a common origin for a certain portion of the stories that we hereafter refer to as the core portion. This core portion is defined as that portion of the story that is shown to have similarities in characters and events under Sections 3.1 through 3.4. We will show that this core portion originated in the Egyptian story and was carried to the Indian stories. We will show this by eliminating the other possibilities. First, we will show that the Indian stories could not have been the source for the Egyptian story for the following reasons:
The Egyptian story is much simpler than the Indian stories: SM is a more mature story with intricate plots and dialogues; the political and literary complexity of SM is far above that of ES. ES is a simple, natural and human story with straightforward emotions coming out of natural instincts. Therefore if SM were the origin of ES, it raises the following objections:
Why did Egyptians copy a complicated story and deliberately make it simple?
If one argues that SM was also naive at the time Egyptians copied it from India, then why didn’t the Egyptians update the story as SM evolved into its present form? This question arises because of the following reasons:
There were enough trade relations between the two countries, thus Egyptians would not have missed the updates in SM.
As the story was sacred to the Egyptians they would not have lost interest in updating it.
Since Egyptians revered their simple Osiris story until the end of their civilization, it is more likely that it was their own sacred scripture and hence remained largely unaltered. It may be noted that though the Osiris story did evolve over centuries in Egypt, its final form was still simple compared to the complexity of SM.
Finally one cannot hypothesize that Egyptians were naive in their literary ability, and thus could not copy it properly in the early stages or update their story later when SM evolved. This is because they have shown exceptional performance in architecture, art and literature.
The Value system: Consider for example sibling marriage. Sibling marriage was a common and respected practice in Egypt while it is shunned in SM. CS has some allusions to sibling marriage though it doesn’t command the respect it enjoys in ES (the case of Sudeshna-Kichaka, Krishna-Draupadi discussed in Section 4). Thus neither CS nor SM can be the source for ES so far as the portions of the story that involve sibling marriage. Since the core portion itself involves sibling marriage in ES, it is not possible that Egyptians copied the story of Pandavas and introduced sibling marriage into it. On the contrary it looks natural for Indians to copy that story and replace sibling marriage by non-sibling marriages. That is, it is unlikely that a partially respected or a disrespected practice in India is copied by Egyptians and respected in Egypt. On the contrary a more natural social order would be to disrespect or discontinue a practice that is respected by someone.
One to many mapping: As we have discussed in our earlier Sections some of the Egyptian characters/events have at times more than one counterpart characters/events in the Indian stories. This suggests that these characters/events should have had Egyptian origin rather than Indian because, it is unlikely that Egyptians while copying the story from Indians would have merged several stories into one.
Written document: Egyptian hieroglyphic writings should have preceded the Indian documentation by writing in any form by hundreds of years. Contrary to the claim, let us suppose that Egyptians copied the core portion of the Indian story. Then we have the following objections: it is not clear why Indians did not learn script from the Egyptians and document their own story at a point of time when Egyptians documented their copied version. Copying a story that would become sacred to a people for millennia is a cultural change and hence requires a substantial amount of interaction. Thus if Egyptians copied their sacred Osiris story from India it should have involved a sufficiently long interaction. Therefore it is unlikely that Indians did not learn (from Egyptians) documenting their own story of Mahabharata had they passed the story on to Egyptians. Therefore it is unlikely that Egyptians copied the core portion of the story from India.
Finally we make an additional claim as follows:
CLAIM 4: CS can be one of the sources of SM.
PROOF:
We have shown in Claim 3 that the core portion passed from ES to the two Indian stories namely CS and SM. Now we have the following three possibilities:
Both SM and CS independently developed from ES
SM is the source for CS
CS is at the least a partial source for SM
The third option, that is CS is at the least a partial source for SM, is supported by the following:
The Cult story stands in between ES and SM according to Claim 2: this was shown by the gradual transition of a set of parameters in Section 4.
The value system of CS is different from SM: Consider the practice of Sibling marriage again: it is disrespected in SM, whereas it is reasonably valid in CS (though not as much respected as in ES). Now an argument similar to that discussed in the proof of Claim 3 regarding sibling marriage will support CS to be the likely origin for SM than the other way. This view is also proposed by several earlier authors as indicated by the following excerpts cited in the works of Hiltebeitel:
“Folk epics have a different value system and hence cannot be regarded as versions of classical mythology” according to Kothari.123
“Tamil Mahabharata re-enplotments in regional epics of Elder Brother’s story and Draupadi cult Mahabharata (Cult story) introduce brother-sister relations that are absent in the Classical epics and intensify mother-son relationships.”124
“Also the regional epics give importance to sister’s husband and wife’s brother; and Aravan has multiple mothers who weep for him at his death.”125
Several earlier authors too have suspected either regional/folk epic origins for SM or more generally the independence of regional/folk versions from SM, as can be seen from the following excerpts in the works of Hiltebeitel:
Stuart Blackburn and Joyce Flueckiger speak of “pathways from regional to pan-Indian epics.”126
According to Smith, Beck and Roghair, “the regional vernacular epics of India are oppositional to the forms of pan-Indian brahminical dominance conveyed through the Sanskrit epics.”127
“Some of the similarities between the oral and classical epics is attributed to Sanskritization with a desire to achieve a higher status” according to Kothari.128
SECTION 6: IMPLICATIONS OF EGYPTIAN ORIGIN FOR MAHABHARATA AND FUTURE WORK
The Egyptian origin for the Mahabharata story leads us to a natural and important question: how did the story propagate to India? In particular did some Egyptians migrate to India bringing their sacred story along with them? There is anthropological evidence of migration of people called Asuras to India by sea through Egypt. We will enumerate some of the observations pertaining to Asuras that support our hypothesis of migrants bringing the Osiris story to India, which might have contributed to the Mahabharata. Asuras are the tribal people of Chotanagpur region of Bihar, India. According to 1981 Census in India they are about eight thousand in number.129 Following are the observations regarding Asuras that are of relevance to us:
They are believed to be outsiders who migrated to India by sea routes; they absorbed the cultures of Egypt and Babylon before they came to India.130
They brought the symbols of Naga and Garuda to India.131
They have some association with Mahabharata:
Some tribes still enact the snake sacrifice of Janamejaya; there is a myth that all snakes in the Chotanagpur region died following this sacrifice.132
The Asura people do not celebrate Navarathri, on the contrary they mourn because they believe that their ancestors were defeated by Devas during that time.133
Snake and falcon were the symbols of the ancient Egyptian civilization as well. The migration through Egypt, the snake and Garuda/falcon symbols and their association with Mahabharata might provide some link to the Egyptian origin of Mahabharata. We discuss this in greater detail in our forthcoming paper. Also we will have future publications that discuss in detail the similarity between other regional stories of India and the Egyptian story of Osiris and also commonalities between several other gods of Egypt and India.
APPENDIX I: SOME IMPORTANT OBSERVATIONS INCLUDING THE TIME OF MAHABHARATA (SOUTH INDIAN AND SANSKRIT VERSIONS)
South Indian versions including the Cult story:
The earliest references to drama (Kuttu) are found in Cankam poetry anthologies of 1st to 3rd century AD and in Tolkappiyam, which was composed a few centuries later.134
There is inscriptional and literary evidence of Paratam, a Tamil version of Mahabharata by Peruntevanar of Cangam period, which Shulman dates to 300 AD.135
The popular recitation of Mahabharata began during conflicts between Mahendravarma and Pulakesi II, around 620 AD.136
Pallavas carved the sculpture of Arjuna penance in Mahabalipuram in 630-688 AD.137
Evidence for rendering of Mahabharata: Copper plates of Parameshvara Varman Pallava, 670-700 AD, from Kuram village near Kanchipuram records a share of donation, to a village assembly hall for reading Bharatam.138
Tamil rendition of Mahabharata was composed by Peruntevanar during Nandivarman III Pallava (846-69 AD).139
Aravan cult is distinct from Draupadi cult and the former might have existed during Pallava period.140
Pampabharata, composed in the tenth century AD is closer to but distinct from Peruntevanar’s Bharatam.141
Arunachalam estimates the beginning of Tamil ballad traditions having Mahabharata themes at 1600 AD.142
The first dramas of the Cult story might have been composed in 17th century AD.143
The Draupadi cult dramas are noted to be similar to Kutiyattam and Kathakkali of Kerala, Veedhinatakam of Andhra and Nattukkuttu of Sri Lanka by various scholars.144
Sanskrit Mahabharata:145
Sanskrit Mahabharata dates between 500 BC and 400 AD.
Oldest records of it are from the Medieval period.
Even if the Sanskrit version had a prototype, it no longer exists.
Mahabharata is an ongoing fluid tradition.
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Acknowledgement: I thank Narasimha M Krishnakumar and Anuradha M Adhyapak for their valuable support for my research work and in making this manuscript.
1 Alf Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 1, Mythologies: From Ginger to Kurukshetra, (New Dehi: MLBD, 1991).
2 Alf Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 2, On Hindu Ritual and the Goddess, (Chicago: University of Chicago press, 1991).
3 Alf Hiltebeitel, Rethinking India’s Oral and Classical Epics: Draupadi among Rajputs, Muslims and Dalits, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999).
4 Alf Hiltebeitel, Rethinking the Mahabharata: A reader’s guide to the Education of the Dharma King, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001).
5 Ibid., 165.
6 Shanta R. Rao, The Mahabharata, (New Delhi: Orient Longman Pvt Ltd, 1985), 26.
7 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 1, 195.
8 Kisari Ganguli, The Mahabharata, (New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers Pvt. Ltd., 1998).
9 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 1, 287.
10 Ganguli, Mahabharata, 15-16.
11 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 1, 6 and 11.
12 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 2, 223.
13 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 1, 221.
14 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 2, 221-25.
15 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 2, 221.
16 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 1, 285.
17 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 1, 303.
18 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 1, 303.
19 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 1, 113.
20 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 1, 288-89.
21 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 1, 290-91.
22 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 1, 326.
23 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 1, 329-30.
24 Hiltebeitel, Rethinking India’s Oral and Classical Epics, 52 and 301.
25 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 2, 223.
26 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 1, 317-18.
27 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 1, 324 and 329.
28 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 2, 65-67.
29 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 1, 319-20.
30 Richard H. Wilkinson, The Complete gods and goddesses of ancient Egypt, (London: Thames and Hudson, 2003), 118.
31 James G. Frazer, The Golden Bough, A study in Magic and Religion, Adonis Attis Osiris, Vol.2 (London: Macmillan and Co. London, 1914), 7.
32 Ibid.
33 Ibid., 7.
34 Ellen C. Reed, Circle of Isis: Ancient Egyptian Magick for Modern Witches, (New Jersey: New Page Books, a division of the Career Press Inc., 2002), 44.
35 Frazer, Golden Bough, Adonis Attis Osiris, Vol.2, 7-8.
36 Diane Wolkstein, The first love stories, from Isis and Osiris to Tristan and Iseult, (New York: Harper Collins Publishers, 1991), 10.
37 Frazer, Golden Bough, Adonis Attis Osiris, Vol.2, 8-9.
38 Frazer, Golden Bough, Adonis Attis Osiris, Vol.2, 9.
39 Wolkstein, The first love stories.
40 Frazer, Golden Bough, Adonis Attis Osiris, Vol.2, 8-16 and 317.
41 Wolkstein, The first love stories, 19.
42 Frazer, Golden Bough, Adonis Attis Osiris, Vol.2, 9-10.
43 Wolkstein, The first love stories.
44 Yakov Rabinovich, Isle of Fire: A Tour of the Egyptian Further World Volume 1, (Invisible books, 2004), 161-233.
45 Margaret A. Murray, Ancient Egyptian legends, (New York: E. P. Dutton and Company, 1913), 60.
46 Wilkinson, The Complete gods and goddesses, 196.
47 Reed, Circle of Isis, 44.
48 Wilkinson, The Complete gods and goddesses, 149.
49 Wilkinson, The Complete gods and goddesses, 146.
50 Frazer, Golden Bough, Adonis Attis Osiris, Vol.2.
51 Thomas M. Dousa, “Imagining Isis: on some continuities and discontinuities in the image of Isis in Greek Isis hymns and Demotic texts,” (Acts of the seventh International Conference of Demotic Studies, Copenhagen, 23 – 27 August 1999), 166.
52 http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/295449/Isis.
53 Zachary Gray, The Intrepid Wanderer’s Guide to Ancient Egyptian Goddesses, (USA: Intrepid spirit Books, 2008), 99-100.
54 Ibid., 99-100.
55 Frazer, Golden Bough, Adonis Attis Osiris, Vol.2, 7.
56 Wilkinson, The Complete gods and goddesses, 119.
57 Frazer, Golden Bough, Adonis Attis Osiris, Vol.2, 96.
58 Ibid., 16.
59 David Frawley, Gods, sages and Kings: Vedic secrets of ancient civilisation, (New Delhi: MLBD, 1993).
60 “The Collected Works of Sri Ananda Goswami: The Primal Revelation at the heart of Civilisation,” accessed September 29, 2012, http://bhaktianandascollectedworks.wordpress.com/direct-links-to-all-articles-on-the-site/.
61 accessed September 29, 2012, but not available now, http://satyavidya.com/egypt.htm.
62 Wallis Budge, The Book of Gates with the Short Form of the Book Am-Tuat, (London: Kegan, Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co, 1905), 51-52.
63 Wilkinson, The Complete gods and goddesses, 118.
64 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 2, 221-25.
65 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 1, 221.
66 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 2, 50.
67 Alf Hiltebeitel, “Sita Vibhusita: The jewels for her journey,” Ludwik Sternbach Commemoration Volume, Indologica Taurinensia 8-9 (1980-81): 193-200.
68 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 2.
69 Rao, The Mahabharata, 26.
70 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 1.
71 Ibid., 10.
72 Wolkstein, The first love stories, 19.
73 Frazer, Golden Bough, Adonis Attis Osiris, Vol.2.
74 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 1, 303.
75 Frazer, Golden Bough, Adonis Attis Osiris, Vol.2, 49-95.
76 Judith Antonelli, The Image of God: A Feminist Commentary on the Torah, (Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers Inc., 1995), 120.
77 Frazer, Golden Bough, Adonis Attis Osiris, Vol.2.
78 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 1, 303-309.
79 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 2, 54-67.
80 Frazer, Golden Bough, Adonis Attis Osiris, Vol. 2, 86-88, the first two of the three following items are from Frazer while the third (reference81 ) is from Mojsov.
81 Bojana Mojsov, Osiris: Death and Afterlife of a God, (USA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2005), 35.
82 Wallis Budge, Osiris and the Egyptian resurrection, (London: P.L.Warner, 1911).
83 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 1, 326.
84 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 2, 65-67.
85 Ibid., 64.
86 We got this information from the priest of Kovakkam, Tamil Nadu, India.
87 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 2, 300.
88 Wolkstein, The first love stories.
89 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 1, 312.
90 Rabinovich, Isle of Fire, 204-206.
91 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 1, 7.
92 Rabinovich, Isle of Fire, 204-206.
93 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 1, 289-90.
94 Ibid., 297.
95 Herman Te Velde, “The Egyptian God Seth as a Trickster,” (in proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh International Congress of Orientalists, Ann Arbor, Michigan August 13-19 1967): 50-51.
96 Moustafa Gadalla, Egyptian Divinities: The All who are the One, (Greensboro: Tehuti Research Foundation, 1944), 58.
97 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 1, 264.
98 Frazer, Golden Bough, Adonis Attis Osiris, Vol.2.
99 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 1, 83-84.
100 Wilkinson, The Complete gods and goddesses, 147-48.
101 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 2, 399.
102 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 1, 291.
103 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 2, 399.
104 Hiltebeitel, Rethinking India’s Oral and Classical Epics, 499.
105 Budge, Osiris and the Egyptian resurrection.
106 Jan E. M. Houben, Karel Rijk van Kooij, Violence Denied: Violence, Non-Violence and the Rationalization of Violence in South Asian Cultural History, (Leiden: Koninklijke Brill NV, 1999), 78-79.
107 Wallis Budge, The Gods of the Egyptians or Studies in Egyptian Mythology, Vol.1, (Chicago: The Open Court Publishing Company, 1904), 477.
108 Ibid., 481.
109 Wilkinson, The Complete gods and goddesses, 132.
110 Budge, The Gods of the Egyptians, 561-62.
111 Ibid., 561.
112 Ibid., 473.
113 Wilkinson, The Complete gods and goddesses, 132.
114 Devdutt Pattanaik, Jaya: An illustrated Retelling of the Mahabharata, (New Delhi: Penguin Group, 2010), 286-88.
115 Goswami and Sastri, Srimad Bhagavatha Mahapurana, (Gorakhpur: Gita Press, 1997), 748.
116 Sudarshan Sahoo, “Sudarshan, The King of Wheels,” Orissa review 61 (2005): 80-82.
117 Ibid.
118 Ibid.
119 Ganguli, Mahabharata.
120 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vishwarupa, one can find many images of Vishwarupa form in google images.
121 Ganguli, Mahabharata.
122 Alexandra Geer, Animals in Stone: Indian Mammals Sculptured through Time, (Netherlands: Koninklijke Brill NV, 2008), 406.
123 Hiltebeitel, Rethinking India’s Oral and Classical Epics, 19.
124 Alf Hiltebeitel, “The Primary Process of Hindu Epics,” International Journal of Hindu Studies 4 (2000): 269-88.
125 Ibid.
126 Ibid.
127 Hiltebeitel, Rethinking India’s Oral and Classical Epics, 11-12.
128 Ibid., 19.
129 Abhik Ghosh et al, “Prehistory of the Chotanagpur Region Part 4: Ethnoarchaeology, Rock Art, Iron And The Asuras,” The Internet Journal of Biological Anthropology 3 (2008).
130 Ibid.
131 Banerji and Sastri, “Asura expansion by sea,” Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society 12 (1926): 334-60.
132 Banerji and Sastri, “Asura expansion in India,” Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society 12 (1926): 243-85.
133 “Asuras of today: the bloodline of Mahishasura,” accessed September 29, 2012, http://akshay-chavan.blogspot.in/2009/09/asuras-of-today-bloodline-of.html.
134 Hiltebeitel, The Cult of Draupadi, Vol. 1, 147-48.
135 Ibid.,13.
136 Ibid., 14.
137 Ibid., 13.
138 Ibid., 14.
139 Ibid., 14.
140 Ibid., 147-48.
141 Ibid., 15.
142 Ibid., 147-48.
143 Ibid., 147-48.
144 Ibid., 147-48.
145 Ibid., 15.
Faint Silhouettes 