Abstract: It has become a general premise of Indology that the development and content of the poetry of the Samhitas, the ritualistic prose of the Brahmanas, and the philosophical outpourings of the Upanishads are chronologically and qualitatively exclusive of each other i.e. they represent successive stages of Vedic literature, history, and philosophy. On closer look, the view fails to hold either in the concern of composition, compilation or even of concept. One safe path across this chronological obscurity is to search out the references to historical personalities, contemporary or reminiscent, contained within these texts. The line of teachers of Vedantic philosophy recorded in Brihadaranyaka Upanishad VI.5 offers a unique opportunity in this regard.

The story of philosophy, no doubt, begins with the Upanishads. In them are contained man’s first search and first answers to things beyond the perceptional and phenomenal. And the Brihadaranyaka (the great forest) is one of the most important of this class of texts. We also see, curiously, that the central concepts of the Upanishads such as ‘Brahman’ already appear in a developed form in texts assumed to be a long anterior to the formative phase of Upanishadic thought. Of special note is the occurrence of the concept of the personal Brahman in the Kaushitaki Brahmana (XXI.1) and even more astonishingly of the neuter Brahman in the Aitareya [1]. This is anomalous, considering that the Upanishadic literature and philosophy are given dates no earlier than 800–600 BCE by most scholars [2]. Is it possible that the Upanishadic literature is quite older? And that it’s oldest traditions may be contemporary, parallel, and yet completed with the Brahmana texts? That the historical philosophers in the Upanishads also appear and play a role in the Brahmana literature? We may attempt to test this scenario using the list of teachers named in the Brihadaranyaka VI.5 (omitting verse 2) [3]:

“1. Now the line of teachers: The son of Pautimati (received it) from the son of Katyayani. He from the son of Gautami. The son of Gautami from the son of Bharadvaji. He from the son of Parasari. The son of Parasari from the son of Aupasvasti. He from the son of another Parasari. He from the son of Katyayani.

The son of Katyayani from the son of Kaushiki. The son of Kaushiki from the son of Alambi and the son of Vaiyaghrapadi. The son of Vaiyaghrapadi from the son of Kanvi and the son of Kapi. The son of Kapi –

2. From the son of Atreyl. The son of Atreyi from the son of Gautami. The son of Gautami from the son of Bharadvaji. He from the son of Parasari·. The son of Parasari from the son of Vatsi. The son of Vatsi from the son of another Parasari. The son of Parasari from the son of Varkaruni. He from the son of another Varkaruni. This one from the son of Artabhagi. He from the son of Saungi. The son of Saungi from the son of Samkrti. He from the son of Alambayani. He again from the son of Alambi. The son of Alambi from the son of Jayanti. He from the son of Mandukayani. He in his turn from the son of Manduki. The son of Manduki from the son of Sandili. The son of Sandili from the son of Rathitari. He from the son of Bhaluki. The son of Bhaluki from the two sons of ·Kraunciki. They from the son of Vaidabhrti. He from the son of Karsakeyi. He again from the son of Pracinayogi. He from the son of Samjivi. The son of Samjivi from Asurivasin, the son of Prasni. The son of Prasni from Asurayana. He from Asuri. Asuri-

3.·From Yajnavalkya. Yajnavalkya from Uddalaka. Uddalaka from Aruva. He from Upaveshi. Upaveshi from Kusri. Kusri from Vajashravas. He from Jihvavat, the son of Badhyoga. He from Asita, the son of Varsagana. He from Harita Kashyapa. He from Silpa Kashyapa. This one from Kashyapa, the son of Nidhruva. He from Vac. She from Ambhini....”

4. The same up to the son of Samjivi. The son of Samjivi from Mandukayani. Mandukayani from Mandavya. He from Kautsa. Kautsa from Mahitthi. He from Vamakakshayana. He from Shandilya. Shandilya from Vatsya. Vatsya from Kusri. Kusri from Yajnavacas, the son of Rajastamba. He from Tura, the son of Kavashi...”

It would be easy to argue that since there are over 60 generations here and no reason whatsoever to doubt their veracity, the origins of the philosophy must reach into the first half of the 2nd millennium BCE, sticking to the arbitrary lower limit ourselves. But that would be grossly inadequate to greater purpose and woefully wasteful of the numerous opportunities yielded by this unique constellation of names. We shall take no less than Tura Kavasheya himself for our inquiry. The first teacher as per Upanishadic testimony itself. Who was he? When and where did he live? What did he do? Where else does he find mention?

- He was the purohita of King Janamejaya of the Kuru kingdom in the region of Haryana. Aitareya Brahmana IV.27.9, VII.34.9, 8.21, etc. attests to this.

- Janamejaya is the king of singular importance in the Aitareya Brahmana [4]. Tura Kavasheya anointed him during his royal consecration.

- The Shatapatha Brahmana lists his name as the first teacher at the close of its section on Agnicayana, implying that he was a major figure in the origination of this ritual attributed to the Kurus [5].

- His is mentioned even in the Rig Veda khila 1.9.6 of the Baskala recension [6].

“Assist us in the offering ceremony. O profound [Ashvins], with the powers by which [you urged on] Dadhyanc, O bulls, by which [you urged on] makha's Tura Kavasheya, by which you urged on poetic inspiration, O you two who grant protection close by”

- He may have also left his subtle signatures (such as durah kavashyah) in the apri hymns of the Yajur Veda [7]

His near ancestor Kavasha Ailusha, whose daughter may have been the ‘Kavashi’ of the Brihadaranyaka, is the reputed author of hymns 30-34 of Rig Veda 10. The story of Kavasha who rose to fame despite his low birth is given in the Kaushitaki(xii. 3) and Aitareya (ii. 19) [8]

- Another Kavasha appears in Rig Veda 7.18, described therein as an old man, as an antagonist of Sudasa in the battle of the ten kings. He dies in the battle. It is unclear if the two Kavashas are one and the same. Proferes leaves scope for their distinctness. Pargiter argues they are one and the same person on the fact of their near textual contemporaneity [9]. Talageri concludes that this Kavasha is of Proto Iranian allegiance and very likely of Parthava royalty, identifying him further with ‘Kavi’ thus yielding a full name of ‘Kavi Kavasha’ who may be further identified with Kavi Kavata, the founder of the pre-Avestan dynasty of Kavyan or Kayanian kings [10].

What is to be made of all these references? What thread can connect these dots meaningfully? At the very least, the evident influence of one man in such varied texts as the Rig Veda, Yajur Veda, Aitareya Brahmana and even in the early Upanishad age leaves the general premise stated earlier highly suspect. The three traditions developed contemporaneously for a considerable span of time. The fact that Tura appears only in the Khilani serves to reaffirm that those 98 hymns contain material tracing back to the early Kuru age. Aitareya Brahmana confirms this with Janamejaya Parikshita. The text strongly suggests that the monistic philosophy of the Upanishads is already developed even in its remote age, that Tura Kavasheya may well indeed be one of its founding fathers along with others such as Mahidasa Aitareya [11].

The Brahmana literature dealt primarily with rituals, thus delegating to the later compilers of the Upanishads the charge of systematizing to a degree the philosophy propounded. Janamejaya Parikshita of Aitareya Brahmana requires a clarification. He is not, as assumed by many scholars including Theodore, the ‘post- Rig vedic’ Janamejaya of the Mahabharata. He is an earlier king, generationally very close to Sudasa of mandala 7. There were two father-son duos with the same names in the same Kuru dynasty, a fact well noted by Pargiter [12].

There is nothing unusual about it, considering that we may well have two Kavashas in the same

period too. We may appreciate Aitareya Brahmana vii. 46 testifying that this Janamejaya lived at a time when the memory of Sudasa, Somaka and Sahadeva was still very much alive, unlike the Janamejaya of the Mahabharata where the Rig Vedic heroes are forgotten. Janamejaya II of the Puranas is the great grandson of Samvarana who would have been contemporary to Sudasa [13].

“This also Tura Kāvasheya proclaimed to Janamejaya Pärikshita; this Parvata and Närada proclaimed to Somaka Sähadevya, to Sahadeva Sārijaya, Babhru Daivāvrdha, Bhima of Vidarbha, Nagnajit of Gandhāra; this Agni proclaimed to Sanaçruta Arimdama and to Kratuvid Jānaki; this Vasistha proclaimed to Sudās Paijavana.”

This piece of evidence yields credence to the puranic genealogies. It also shows that the oldest extant Brahmana is separated from one of the oldest mandalas only by 3-5 generations give or take. The appearance of Kavasha Ailusha in book ten warns us against assuming all the hymns and authors of the book belong to the ‘late Rig vedic age’. Though it has obvious and emergent literary and linguistic features, we must not accuse the book in entirety of unusual posteriority. A Stricter criterion must be found before doing so to any part of it, especially if the author is known to have lived far back in time. Other explanations may exist for the features, such as later incorporation after redactions and editions.

Let us acknowledge, as we conclude, that prose did not arise out of poetry, that philosophy did not arise out of prose. Let us admire the ancient Vedic mind which conjured all three independently and did so proficiently.

References

1. Harvard oriental series: Volume 25 — Rig Veda Brahmanas: The Aitareya and Kaushitaki Brahmanas of the Rig Veda. Tr. by A. B. Keith. — Massachusetts: Harvard university press, 1920. — P. 27.

2. Patrick Olivelle. The early Upanishads. — Austin, Texas: Oxford university press, 2014. — P. 12–13.

3. The Brihadaranyaka Upanishad with the commentary of Sankaracharya, tr. by Swami

Madhavananda. — Champawat, Uttarkhand: Swami Bodhasarananda, Advaitha Ashrama, 2011.

4. Harvard oriental series: Volume 25. — P. 30.

5. The Shatapatha Brahmana according to the text of Madhyandina school tr. by J. Eggeling. —

Oxford: Clarendon press, 1882-1900.

6. Theodore Proferes. Kuru kings, Tura Kavasheya, and the -tvaya gerund by // Bulletin of The School of Oriental and African Studies, university of London. — 66 (02). — June 2003. — P. 216.

7. Ibid. — P. 214.

8. Harvard oriental series: Volume 25. — P. 25.

9. Pargiter F. E. Ancient Indian Historical Tradition. — L.: Oxford university press, 1922. —

P.172.

10. Srikant Talageri. Rig Veda: A historical analysis. — New Delhi: Aditya Prakashan, 2000. —P. 246.

11. Harvard oriental series: Volume 25. — P. 28.

12. Pargiter F. E. Ancient Indian Historical Tradition. — P. 114.