RV 10.136), cf. also that of the bird Laba (RV 10.119) who touches heaven and
earth with his wings. The AV contains much popular sorcery and magic, but in
a form that has been influenced by the priests. Later on, we have the infernal
visions of Bhr.gu (S ́B, JB) or those of Ya ̄jñavalkya of the dream state (BA ̄U 4.3),
or about the way of the emancipated to the “heavenly” palace of Brahman (KU,
Thieme 1951/2).
Popular festivals at New Year include horse chariot races and bow shooting,
public riddles, sexual banter and public intercourse of two “outcasts” (a prosti-
tute, maha ̄nagnika ̄, and a Ma ̄gadhaman); further, singing and dancing at summer
solstice. Such materials have been collected by Zimmer 1879 for the Sam.hita ̄s,
and by W. Rau 1957, 1977, Mylius 1971–4, Basu 1969, Gopal 1959 for the
later texts.
Some late sections in the GS deal with the worship of particular gods, such
as Rudra/Maha ̄deva/I ̄s ́a ̄na, Vis.n.u/Na ̄ra ̄yan.a, S ́rı ̄, Durga ̄ (Baudha ̄yana
Gr.hyas ́es.asu ̄tra, Atharveda Paris ́is.t.a etc., Einoo 1992, 1996). They contain pu ̄ja ̄-
like rites that cannot be pinpointed in time. Pu ̄ja ̄is, however, a clear continua-
tion (Witzel 1980) of the R.gvedic guest worship offered to the gods. Other
worship, such as that of snake deities (Na ̄ga), trees, etc. is even more opaque. The
worship of images is first visible in texts in Patañjali’s Maha ̄bha ̄s.ya (5.3.99:
429.3), at ca. 150 bce.
True heterodoxy is attested by ca. 400 bcewhen several such systems had
developed, including those of wandering teachers such as the Buddha and
Maha ̄vı ̄ra (Dı ̄ghanika ̄ya 2). Nearly all them stem from eastern North India,
where the constantly changing cultural ferment favored dialogue and competi-
tion. Ya ̄jñavalkya’s departure into homelessness (BA ̄U 4.5.15) takes up the tra-
dition of (long distance) wandering by Veda students and Vra ̄tyas; indeed, the
Buddhist san.ghahas, unobserved so far, some vra ̄tyafeatures as well: a single
leader of a larger group of equals who wander about in the countryside and live
on extortion (or by begging), stay away from settlements, have special dress and
speech, etc.
The east was indeed quite different from the western parts of Northern India,
as seen in language (Witzel 1989a), social structure including the oligarchic
states, and in burial practices: while the Kurus built small square grave mounds,
the “easterners and others(!)” have “demonic” round graves (S ́B 12.8.1.5).
We get only glimpses of what may have been other aberrant (ritual?) sexual
behavior at AB 7.13, or in the Gosava ritual, or already in the RV notion of
s ́is ́nadeva,mu ̄radeva.
Even less can be said about the pre-Vedic religion of the Indus Civilization and
of the contemporaneous aboriginal tribes. They were assimilated by Sanskriti-
zation, e.g., a leader (sthapati, MS 2.2.4) of the Nis.a ̄das, or at AB 7.18, where
the R.gvedic(!) R.s.i Vis ́va ̄mitra assists the eastern Iks.va ̄ku king Haris ́candra by
symbolically adopting local “barbarian” tribes (dasyu), such as the Andhra,
Pun.d.ra, S ́abara “who live in large numbers beyond the borders.”
Though some ideas, customs and beliefs of the Harappan civilization seem to
have been incorporated into the subsequent Vedic world view (tree worship,
90 michael witzel