Why Vaayu rather than Agni

The five verses of the Rg Veda forming the BaLitthA Suukta are generally misinterpreted and/or mistranslated as referring to three forms of Agni -- as translated by SaayaNa and other scholars, the Suukta hardly conveys any sensible meaning. H.H. Wilson has written a translation of the Rg Veda that largely follows SaayaNa's commentary; in the portion dealing with the BaLitthA Suukta, he makes the candid admissions: "pra yat.h pituH paramAn.h nIyate paryApR^ixudho vIrudho da.nsu rohati is a very unintelligible line," and "asya vR^ishhabhasya dohase is the vague phrase of the text." He is, of course, unaware of Sri Madhva's exposition.

Such expositions and translations as those by SaayaNa and Wilson tend to ignore the specific reference to three incarnations, each of which is described by the Vedic text with special epithets; they also ignore the fact that the prime referent of the Suukta, the entity whose avataara-s are being described, is stated to be Maatarishvan, a nomer which clearly denotes Vaayu or Mukhya PraaNa (entity which represents Life itself) -- this usage is consistent with that applied in other works such as the Mahaabhaarata. Agni (the god of fire) has no appellations elsewhere in the scriptures, of such words as P.rksha, Pitumaan, Dashapramati, Madhva, etc., (these, however, fit Mukhya PraaNa to a tee, because Mukhya PraaNa has been glorified immensely in the Upanishads and other texts) -- nor, indeed, is Agni known as having had three incarnations, especially those of specific properties as described in the Suukta.

The interpretations given to the Balitthaa Suukta by SaayaNa and others are more literal and can at best be considered as Adibhautika ones. Even with this unwarranted concession, a number of key words and expressions in the text which seem to call for a metaphorical intepretation seem to be missed by him completely -- e.g., `sahasaH', `matiH', `dhenaa', `sasrutaH', `pR^ikshaH', `pitumaan.h', `vR^ishhabhasya', `dohase', `dashapramatiM', `yoshhaNaH', `mahishhasya', `IshaanaasaH', `madhva', `guhaasantaM', `maatarishvaa', `shuchi', `ahiMsyamaanaH', etc.,etc. In fact, SaayaNa cannot help but interpret `pR^ixa' as `anna sAdhaka' -- the digester of food; a direct application to Agni is not possible. However, "a digester of food" can only be taken as a reference to one of the PraaNa-s, specifically to Mukhya PraaNa, rather than to Agni. Although SaayaNa's etymology in reading `pR^ixa' as `anna sAdhaka' is far from clear, it still follows that he is unable to hold out any hope of coherence in his interpretation of the Suukta unless he invokes a characteristic of Mukhya PraaNa rather than Agni, for explaining a key word (of course, with Shruti, every word is a key word). His style of exposition would thus appear to be unsatisfactory even from the Adidaivika point of view, let alone the Adhyaatmika one.

In the context of the total passage of the BaLitthA Suukta itself, the description of Mukhya PraaNa referred to as PraaNaagni, who sustains life itself on the five fold forms of life -- as also stated in chapter fifteen of the Bhagavad Gita:

       ahaM vaishvaanaro bhuutvaa praaNinaaM dehamaashritaH  |
       praaNaapaanasamaayuktaH pachaamyannaM chaturvidham.h  || 14 ||

-- as the deeper meaning of Agni referred to in other texts, is singularly apt. The concept of Mukhya PraaNa being described by the word prANaagni is also mentioned in the ShaTprashnopanishad:

       sa eshha vaishvAnaro vishvarUpaH prANA.agnirudayate  |

He, called Vaishvaanara, the World-form, the Life, expresses as Agni.

Further support for this may be found in the BrhadaaraNyaka Upanishad:

       pR^ithivyeva yasyAyatanamagnirloko manojyotiryo vai taM purushhaM
       vidyAtsarvasyAtmanaH parAyaNaM sa vai veditAsyAj~navalkya  | veda
       vA ahaM taM purushhaM sarvasyAtmanaH parAyaNaM yamAttha ya evAyaM
       shArIraH purushhaH sa eshha vedaiva shAkalya  | tasya kA
       devetyamR^itamiti hovAcha  |

O Yaagnavalkya (said Shaakalya), he who knows him whose abode is the Earth, whose manifestation is Agni, whose inward manifestation is the mind, to be the support of all creatures, is a wise man.

I know him indeed, O Shaakalya (said Yaagnavalkya), to be the best support of all beings, whom you speak of, and who is the purushha in the body. Ask again, O Shaakalya.

Who is this deity? (said Shaakalya)

AmR^ita (said Yaagnavalkya).

The IshAvAsya Upanishad says

       vAyuranilamamR^itamathedaM bhasmAntaM sharIram.h  |

-- Vaayu is known as `anila' (`a+nila': `a' refers to Vishnu, and `nila' refers to residence as in `nilaya'), and because of the residence of Vishnu in him, he is AmR^ita (without destruction); even when the body he occupies as Mukhya PraaNa, the deity of the Life-principle, expires and is destroyed, he does not suffer destruction.

Thus, the ShaTprashnopanishad gives us a hint that Mukhya PraaNa may also be referred to as Agni; the BrhadaaraNyaka tells us that the deity who manifests as Agni is `AmR^ita', and the Ishaavaasya tells us that Vaayu is called AmR^ita because he has the residence of Vishnu in him and is hence indestructible.

Therefore, considering all of the above together, it is seen that while it is incorrect for SaayaNa and other scholars to attempt to resolve references to Mukhya PraaNa as referring instead to Agni, it is wholly appropriate, on the other hand, to resolve apparent references to Agni occurring elsewhere in the Vedas, as actually referring to Mukhya PraaNa, as shown by the ShaTprashnopanishad, the BrhadaaraNyaka Upanishad, and the Ishaavaasya Upanishad.

This section is due to Shrisha Rao, with much help and advice from D. Prahladacharya and N.A.P.S. Rao.

Use the arrow-buttons to navigate to nearby pages.

Created June 18, 1996; last updated June 18, 1996