As its subtitle indicates, the book reviewed here is a collection of papers originally presented in the Vedic section of the Thirteenth World Sanskrit Conference held in Edinburgh, 10–14 July 2006. It comprises nine papers – all in English – prefaced by an introduction. Since the editors, who also organized the conference section, “did not establish a unifying theme for the section but rather solicited papers that would advance Vedic scholarship on a variety of fronts” (p. 7), the topics addressed range from the self-designation of Ṛgvedic poets to the ostracism-like situation of the Maitrāyaṇīya Brahmans in Maharashtra. Thus, Creating the Veda, Living the Veda covers a great many different aspects of current research in the field, just as the editors intended.
Before starting with the review of the book as such, I feel obliged to comment briefly upon an issue of some concern: Creating the Veda, Living the Veda lines up with several other section proceedings of the Thirteenth World Sanskrit Conference, as there is a substantial gap – in this particular case, of twelve years – between the section taking place and the eventual publication of its proceedings. It goes without saying that such a delay is rather unfortunate for the short-term advancement of Vedic studies.
In the introduction (pp. 7–14), the editors provide the reader not only with concise summaries of the individual papers but also with valuable information on their context.
The first paper, “‘Sacrificer's wife’ in the Ṛgveda: ritual innovation?” (pp. 19–30) from the pen of Stephanie W. Jamison, evaluates the textual evidence in favour of the pátnī ’s existence and outlines the emergence of her role. Based on her readings of several passages, Jamison lays out a convincing scenario in which the ritual involvement of the pátnī was a controversial issue among the poets of the Ṛgveda and their clans.
In his “The early evolution of the puróhita” (pp. 31–43), Joel P. Brereton pursues the question of whether this compound of purás “in front” and hitá- “placed” already refers to the eponymous functionary in the Ṛgveda – as commonly assumed on the basis of later texts – or not. Following a thorough study of the most informative passages, he finds that all instances of puróhita- can still be read quite literally as “set in front”, expressing nothing but relative prominence. Depending on the context, this prominence is either spatial or, by metaphorical extension, social.
Theodore N. Proferes’ paper “Fire in the waters and the alchemical king” (pp. 45–53) explains the ritual mechanisms by means of which authority and sovereignty are bestowed upon the king in Vedic India. Moreover, Proferes sheds light on the conception of royal power that is behind the consecration rite and the symbolism of its imagery.
In the fourth paper “Masculinity and violence in the Ṛgveda: defining the roles of nár, vīrá, and śū́ ra” (pp. 55–69), Jarrod Whitaker studies how poetry is used for the construction of male identity as revealed by its choice of words.
The fifth paper, “Is the Cosmic Giant an Indo-European myth?” (pp. 71–80), by Ferenc Ruzsa, deals with the famous Puruṣasūkta of the Ṛgveda and its mythological parallels found all over the world.
Tamara Ditrich's contribution, “Stylistic analysis of coordinative nominal constructions for dual deities in the Ṛgveda” (pp. 81–109), examines the distribution of Devatādvandvas and the alternation of these compounds with other strategies of coordination.
In “Mapping the poet in the Ṛgveda” (pp. 111–25), Frank Köhler explores different ways to get a hold of the bewildering variety of words meaning “poet” to be encountered in this Samhita alone. The possible reasons for the poet's choice when styling himself or others – including gods – as “poets” are discussed as well.
In the eighth paper, “Kauṣītaki-Upaniṣad: the development of the text and its final redaction” (pp. 127–53), Mislav Ježić studies the arrangement of this Upanishad with special attention given to the conclusions of its chapters and their implications for the history of its text.
The final paper of the collection, “Predicament of the Maitrāyaṇīya community in Maharashtra: migration, acculturation, and identity-crisis” (pp. 155–68) by Madhav M. Deshpande addresses the historically difficult situation of these Brahmans and investigates how it developed over the last couple of centuries. In doing so, Deshpande exploits a wealth of early modern sources on the so-called Maitrāyaṇīya prakaraṇa affair crucial for understanding the reasons that led to their marginalization by the other Brahman communities of Nasik and its surroundings.
The comprehensive indices found at the end of the book (pp. 169–85) facilitate its use immensely, and are also valuable if consulted in a cursory manner to check for the reading of a given verse from the Veda, details on the meaning of a specific term in Vedic Sanskrit, or similar tasks.
Apart from a very small number of misprints, the book as a whole appears to be almost flawless, and its layout is excellently done. The only criticism I have is editorial in nature and pertains to some minor inconsistencies the alert reader might notice when comparing the bibliographical references appended to the respective papers carefully. The same holds true for the different renderings of metrical caesuras in the transliteration of verses from the Veda used throughout the book since the editors obviously decided to leave them unstandardized.
In conclusion, it seems more than fair to say that Creating the Veda, Living the Veda really is a conspectus of Vedic studies and its topics. The editors have certainly succeeded in their aforementioned goal as the collection of papers they have assembled illustrates the wide spectrum of interests and ongoing research in the Veda. Therefore, this book is beyond doubt a welcome addition to the vast yet growing literature on Vedic India and the continued existence of its traditions across the millennia. Moreover, I am convinced that Creating the Veda, Living the Veda will not fail to stimulate further research in all kinds of directions.
