by A K Bhagwat
The Arctic Home in the Vedas was published in 1903. In The Orion Tilak had pursued the astronomical method. In The Arctic Home in the Vedas, he has based his theory on the latest researches in geology and archaeology bearing on the primitive history of man. Tilak in the preface to The Arctic Home remarked that after pursuing this line of research for a long time, “the conclusion that the ancestors of the Vedic Rishis lived in an Arctic home in inter-glacial times was forced on me by the slowly accumulating mass of Vedic and Avestic evidence.”
Tilak, alter his release from prison, wrote to Prof. Max Müller thanking him for his disinterested kindness. He also sent to Prof. Max Müller, a brief summary of his new theory regarding the primitive Aryan home as disclosed by Vedic evidence, Prof. Max Müller, wrote in reply that though it was a probable interpretation of Vedic passages, yet the theory ‘appeared to be in conflict with the established geological facts.’ Tilak informed him of his research from that point of view and intended to place before him the evidence he had collected in support of his theory. Prof. Max Müller, however, died soon alter this and Tilak had no opportunity of knowing his reaction to his new research.
Tilak was always conscious of the disadvantages under which he was working and made an appropriate reference to the remarks of Prof. Max Müller, who pointed out how different branches of knowledge were closely linked with each other and how a research scholar in one subject had to take the counsel and help of recognised authorities on other subjects. Tilak wrote: “But alas! it is not given to us to move in an atmosphere like this in which there was a scientific give and take.”
The Arctic Home begins with the remark: “If we trace the history of any nation backwards into the past, we come at last to a period of myths and traditions which eventually fade away into impenetrable darkness.” Tilak then referred to the attempts made by mythologists in order to throw light on the pre-historic period and pointed out that they assumed that the physical and geographical surroundings of ancient man were not different from those of present day. He pointed out how owing to this wrong assumption efforts were made to explain every Vedic myth in the light of the storm or the dawn theory, and it was found that the Vedas could only be imperfectly understood. Tilak then pointed out how owing to recent discoveries in archaeology, geology and palaentology, the conclusions of the philologists and mythologists had to be revised and the theory of successive migrations into Europe from a common home of the Aryan race in Central Asia had to be given up. After stating that the question of the primeval home of the Aryan race still remained unsolved, Tilak concluded the first chapter with the remarks: “The North Pole is already considered by several eminent scientific men as the most likely place where plant and animal life first originated; and I believe it can be satisfactorily shown that there is enough positive evidence in the most ancient books of the Aryan race, the Vedas and Avesta to prove that the oldest home of the Aryan people was somewhere in regions roundabout the North Pole,” In the concluding chapter, ‘Primitive Aryan Culture and Religion,’ the proofs of the theory of the Arctic Home are summed up, the ancient Vedic chronology and calendar are examined and the current views regarding primitive Aryan culture and religion are discussed. The theological views regarding the origin and character of the Vedas is further summarised. Tilak then reiterated his claim that many points in Vedic interpretation and Vedic mythology were rationally explained by the theory of the Arctic home in inter-glacial times. In conclusion, Tilak remarked: “In these days of progress when the question of the primitive human culture and civilisation is approached and investigated from so many different sides, the science of Vedic interpretation cannot stand isolated or depend exclusively on linguistic or grammatical analysis; and we have simply followed the spirit of the time in seeking to bring about the co-ordination of the latest scientific results with the traditions contained in the oldest books of the Aryan racebooks which have been deservedly held in the highest esteem and preserved by our ancestors, amidst insurmountable difficulties, with religious enthusiasm ever since the beginning of the present age.”
Comments
Dr. F. W. Warren
Of The Arctic Home in the Vedas, Dr. F. W. Warren, the President of Boston University and author of Paradise Found, thus speaks in the Open Court magazine, Chicago (September 1905): “Within the limits of this article no summary of the author’s argument can be given. Suffice it here to say that in the judgment of the present writer the array of the evidences set forth is far more conclusive than any ever attempted by an Indo-Iranian scholar in the interest of the earlier hypothesis. Absolute candour and respect for the strictest methods of historical and scientific investigation characterise the disquisition throughout. This results in part no doubt from the fact that the author’s own attitude of mind was at the outset highly sceptical.” He says: “I did not start with any preconceived notion in favour of the Arctic theory; nay, I regarded it as highly improbable at first, but the accumulating evidence in its support eventually forced me to accept it.” It is now to be seen how any other candid minds can master the proof produced without being mastered by it in turn. Twenty years ago in preparing my work on the broader problems of the cradle-land of the humane race, I went through all the Vedic and Arctic texts so far as existing translations would then permit; reaching at the end the same conclusion that Mr. Tilak has now reached. Incidentally in my arguments a new light was thrown upon various points in the mythical geography and cosmography of ancient Iranians — light which the foremost Iranist of his time, Prof. Spiegal, generously acknowledged. Incidentally I also arrived at a new interpretation of the Vedic myth of captive waters and of other Vedic myths. Especially gratifying, therefore, is it to me to find in Mr. Tilak a man in no degree dependent on translations, yet arriving not only at my main conclusion, but also at a number of minor ones of which I had never made public mention. I desire to publicly thank this far-off fellow-worker for the generosity of his frequent references to my work in the common field and for the solidity and charm of his own, in certain respects, more authoritative contribution. Whoever will master this new work and that of the late
Mr. John O’Neille on The Night of the Gods will not be likely ever again to ask, where was the earliest home of the Aryans?”
Critics of the Arctic Theory
Among the critics of The Arctic Home was Narayanrao Bhavanrao Pavgi, a close friend of Tilak. In the Reminiscences of Tilak he wrote: “Lokmanya showed to me the important part of his manuscript of The Arctic Home, but I was left unconvinced.” Pavgi also delivered, on 19th May 1906, a lecture, over which Tilak presided. In the course of his speech, he unequivocally stated his points of difference with Tilak. In 1915 he wrote the book Aryawartic Home and its Arctic Colony in which he tried to refute Tilak’s thesis.
Tilak who had a scholar’s conscience, always wanted to improve on his work. Dr. S. K. Belvalkar, the renowned Sanskrit scholar, in the Reminiscences wrote: “While discussing the Arctic theory Tilak said: ‘I very much want to publish the second edition of The Arctic Home in the Vedas but before that, it is necessary to study some recently published works on Scandinavian mythology. ... If you come to Sinhgad for a month, we shall discuss the subject and make the necessary modifications in the second edition....’ Tilak had also ‘agreed to give in the second edition a chronological history of Vedic and post-Vedic literature.”
Today many of the Sanskrit scholars interpret the Vedic hymns in a manner different from that to Tilak. Dr. R. N. Dandekar has also expressed a point of view very different from that of Tilak. He observed: “Linguistic, archaeological, anthropological and cultural-historical evidence entitles us to assume that the North Kirghis Steppes between the Urals and the Altai, was the home of the Indo-European.... This was the primary Urheimat. From this region the first major migration started in south-eastern direction — the immigrants ultimately settling in the Balkh region, before their further migrations.... We know that Aryan speech and religion had alre
ady been assuming noble forms, ever since the Proto-Aryans migrated to and settled in the region around Balkh. After the stray secondary migrations of some of the Proto-Aryan tribes... the remaining stock of the Proto-Aryans continued to live in that region for some centuries, and developed their unique culture and civilisation. This was the Proto-Indo-Iranian period. The Vedic ‘Mantras’ in their primary form, came to be composed, and the distinctive Soma-ritual was evolved.... Indians gradually moved eastward into the land of seven rivers, conquering... the tribes of the Dasas. Ultimately by about 1900 B.C. these Vedic Aryans advanced where they came across what was perhaps the last phase of Harappa civilisation.”
Dr. Dandekar, however, observed in a personal interview: “In spite of certain limitations, The Arctic Home of Lokmanya Tilak contains many brilliant hints and suggestions and could certainly be called an inspired piece of research. It is to be appreciated for its rich possibilities rather than for its actual conclusions.”
The Mahabharata
Chintaman Vinayak Vaidya, an eminent scholar and a friend of Tilak, wrote in 1905 a monumental book, The Mahabharata—a Criticism. Tilak wrote seven articles in the Kesari, reviewing the book a nd discussing various problems a bout the Mahabharata. Tilak and Vaidya agreed that the date of the Mahabharata was between 300-250 B.C.; but they differed about the date of the Bharatiya Yuddha (The war between Pandavas and Kauravas). Whereas Vaidya maintained that the war took place about 3000 B.C., Tilak was of opinion that it took place about 1400 B.C. Vaidya had mainly based his argument on the times of the Satapatha Brahmanas as decided by the astronomer S. B. Dikshit who had made the calculations in the light of the statement that the Krittikas appeared directly in the east. Tilak did not accept this as convincing and remarked to Vaidya, “I think that the statement about the appearance of Krittikas was made in a traditional way and was not based on astronomical observations.” Tilak referred to the Shulva Sutra wherein it was remarked that Krittikas appeared a few degrees to the north. This was one of the many instances which was a testimony to Tilak’s scholarship.
Vedanga Jyotisha
Tilak had a rare keen interest in the astronomy of the Vedic period. He believed that in the Vedic period, astronomy was an advanced science and while talking to K. L. Daphtari, a great scholar and a writer on astronomy, referred to a passage from Ancient Calendars and Constellation by Plunket in which he acknowledged the fact that the Greeks learnt much from Indian astronomers. In his exhaustive essay on Vedanga Jyotisha, Tilak first acknowledged the importance of the work done by eminent scholars like Jervis, Webber and Dr. Thibaut. The late Shankar Balkrishna Dikshit who had done valuable research in astronomy, had in his Bharatiya Jyotishshastra (Indian Astronomy) explained 14 stanzas in Vedanga Jyotisha. 23 had been explained already. Pandit Sudhakar Dwivedi of Benares made further advances and threw light on eight more stanzas. In the course of his essay, Tilak discussed the interpretations offered before him and explained 2 or 3 more stanzas. His interpretations have been practically accepted by Shamashastri of Madras who in the light of his study of the works by Jain authors, has explained all the 49 stanzas in Vedanga Jyotisha. Tilak, before arriving at his conclusions, got the different manuscripts collated. In the second part of his essay on Vedanga Jyotisha, he has given information about the Vedic calendar in an interesting manner.
The Chaldean and Indian Vedas
On 6th December 1904, in a meeting held in Bombay under the auspices of the Graduates’ Association, Tilak delivered a lecture on Chaldean and Indian Vedas. K, R. Cama, the great Parsi scholar, in his presidential remarks, paid tributes to Tilak’s original approach to the problem. Tilak had little time to write out his opinions. But in 1917, he contributed an article on the subject to The Bhandarkar Commemoration Volume, published by the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Poona.
Tilak mentioned at the outset that the discovery of Chaldean literature, of the record of their religious beliefs and culture in the form of brick-inscriptions was one of the most important events of the latter half of the 19th century. These inscriptions were aptly described by M. Lenormant as the Chaldean Veda. He then made a reference to his theory in The Orion and remarked: “This makes the Vedic and Chaldean civilizations almost contemporaneous, and it is not unnatural to expect some intercourse either by land or sea between the Chaldean and the Vedic races even in those ancient times.” Tilak then stated that in the course of this essay he would confine himself to the words and ideas which he had found common to the Chaldean and the Indian Vedas, and would also state the work done by previous scholars.
Tilak summed up the essay with a clear statement of his object in writing it. “My object was simply to draw the attention of Vedic scholars to the importance of the comparative study of Indian and Chaldean Vedas by pointing out some words which, in my opinion, are common to both and which fairly establish the case of mutual, and not merely one-sided, indebtedness between the almost contemporaneous Aryan and Turanian people. What effect it may have on the current theories on the inter-relation between the two ancient cultures must be left for the scholars to decide.”
A Missing Verse Restored
Another highly imaginative piece of research was the missing verse in the Sankhya Karika restored by Tilak. According to the concluding verse of the Sankhya Karika of Ishwarkrishna, it (Karika) contained 70 verses; only 69 verses are, however, available and even authoritative scholars like Colebrooke and Wilson could not make any conjecture. Tilak while reading the commentary of Gaudapada on the 61st verse of the book, noticed that the commentary did not just explain the said verse but appeared to explain something which was not contained in the verse. He felt that the additional part in the commentary might refer to the missing verse. He pursued the subject, and particularly with the help of the French translation made by Dr. Takayusu from the original Chinese commentary, reconstructed the verse as follows:
‘The Cause is God,’ say some. Time or Nature,’ say others. But how can something, which possesses no quality, be the cause of anything? And as to Time or Nature both of them are determinate, And cannot be the cause of indeterminate Prakriti. This creative piece of Tilak’s research has met with approval of the most fastidious of critics.
Tilak’s interest in astronomy was that of a scholar and yet it was not of a scholar who was interested only in research of advanced kind. He never lost sight of the relation of knowledge to everyday life. He therefore made great efforts to induce many of the astronomers to carry out reforms in the calendar used by Hindus and to give it a scientific basis. He also appreciated the splendid work done by scholars like Vyankatesh Bapuji Ketkar and others. Presiding over the conference of astronomers held in Poona on 20th October 1917, Tilak exhorted the astronomers to carry on research work and also to satisfy the popular demand for the removal of confusion in the Hindu calendar.
Many persons, writing the reminiscences of Tilak, have written about his scholarship and superb memory. Sakharambhat Bhave of Pen, who was himself a great scholar, wrote: “While discussing certain Vedic subjects I asked Tilak whether one stanza I found both in the Nirukta of Yaska and in the Bhagavad-Gita, was borrowed by Yaska from the Gita or by Vyasa from Yaska. Tilak promptly answered: ‘Neither borrowed it from the other. Both of them have taken it from an Upanishad.’ He immediately showed me the necessary reference from an encyclopaedia.” Tilak had little time to devote to mathematics, but his inventive mind was absorbed in certain topics. Prof. M. L. Chandratreya, a professor of mathematics and a devoted scholar, said in a personal interview: “I met Tilak at the Sardar Griha by appointment sometime in 1919. He talked to me about differential calculus and I found that he had arrived at the ‘Method of Indivisibles’ independently. He had not the time to pursue the latest research work in the subject and therefore did not know that the method was established before him. I was, however, very much impressed by his insight in the subject.”
Shrimad Bhagavadgita-Rahasya
The Gita-Rahasya is one of the great masterpieces written in jail. The enforced separation from the world brought out the long suppressed facet of Tilak’s personality and afforded him the leisure to present to the world his interpretation of the Bhagavadgita. In fact it was no mere interpretation but an account of the realisation of a ‘Sadhaka.’
Though the Gita-Rahasya has been considered along with other scholarly writings of Tilak, in its relation to Tilak’s life, it stands in a class by itself. The Orion, The Arctic Home in the Vedas and of Tilak’s mind with a subject of his liking. His research work in the field was proof of his penetrating intellect and one certainly feels that if circumstances had been different he would have achieved a rare distinction as an orientalist. The list of the books he proposed to write shows his confidence in the brilliant ideas which he wanted to propound. The fact that Tilak could not get leisure to write these books is indeed a great loss to the world of letters. But they were all voluntary endeavours which he proposed to undertake. The Gita-Rahasya is altogether different in the sense that it has an inevitability in Tilak’s life and is an indivisible part of his personality. Great artists, speaking about their own works of art, have stated that they felt an irrepressible urge from within to create something beautiful and they would not have been able to live if these works of art had not been created. To them the impulse to create is not a conscious, voluntary activity with a purpose. Croce has aptly described the process when he says, “We... open our mouths and will to open them, to speak, or our throats to sing, and declare in a loud voice and with extended throat what we have completely said or sung to ourselves.” What is true of artists can also be true of thinkers if their preoccupation with ideas is not a mere intellectual activity but is prompted by a desire ‘to realise’ the nature of the Universe. There have been thinkers and philosophers whose ideas strike us as brilliant and yet make us feel that these were not arrived at in the process of realisation of the self and of the Universe. There are others, however, whose life is a ‘Sadhana,’ a search after knowledge and whose writings, embodying their ideas, are an expression of the yearnings of their mind and the final realisation which has dawned on it. The Gita-Rabasya can justly be termed as ‘a life-blood of a master spirit.’ The Gita was not merely one of the influences on Tilak’s life. It was Tilak’s inspiration, the main- spring of his action. Nor was it merely the work of an erudite scholar or of an interpreter , ‘ Mimamsaka.’ It was the quintessence of the experiences and thinking of a Sadhaka, whose whole life was lived in a spirit of dedication, and who wanted to communicate to the groping humanity a message of ‘The Lord’s Song’ and ‘to lift the aspirant from the lower levels of renunciation, to the loftier heights where desires are dead, and where the Yogi dwells in calm and ceaseless contemplation while his body and mind are actively employed in discharging the duties that are necessary for promoting the good of society.’