Research paper No 1956
Written by London swaminathan
Date: 26 June 2015
Uploaded in London at 19-20
There are lots of unsolved mysteries in the Rig Veda, the oldest book in the world. One of the unsolved mystery is the word “PANCHA JANAAHA”. It means FIVE PEOPLES. As usual the foreign “scholars” stood like Nava Grahas looking at different directions with different views. Even among the Hindu scholars Yaska and Sayana, there is a difference of opinion. It is very interesting to study various explanations.
The Vedic Index by Keith and Macdonell says:
Panca-janaah, the five peoples, are mentioned under various names in Vedic literature. Who were meant by the five is very uncertain.
The Aitareya Brahmana explains the five to be gods, men, Gandharvas and Apsarasses, snakes/Nagas and the Fathers/departed souls.
Aupamanyava (in the Yaska’s Nirukta 3-8) held that the four castes and the Nisadas made up the five, and Sayana (on RV 17,9)is of the same opinion. Yaska thinks that the five are the Gandharvas, Fathers/departed people, Gods, Asuras and Rakshasas (Nirukta).
No one of these explanations can be regarded as probable.
Foreigners’ interpretations
Roth and Geldner think that all the peoples of the earth are meant; just as there are four quarters, there are peoples to the four quarters with the Aryan folk in the middle.
Zimmer opposes this view on the ground that the inclusion of all peoples in one expression is not in harmony with the distinction so often made between Aryan and Dasa. After long explanation he concludes that they are five tribes of the Anus, Druhyus, Yadus, Turvasas, and Purus who are all mentioned in one or two hymns of the Rig Veda (1-108-8; 7-18).
Hopkins has combated Zimmer’s view, but his own opinion rests mainly on his theory that there was no people named Turvasa, but only the King of the Yadus called Turvasa and that theory is not very probable.
My comments: No two clocks agree; no two foreigners agree on Vedic matters. So we must rely on Yaska the earliest person to explain the word. He lived around 850 BCE. Moreover he was the one who knew the culture and lived nearer to the Vedic times. Another point is that the meaning may change in course of time. For instance we in our Panchayajna, give offerings to Brahma/ Vedic recitation, Deva/god, Manusya/guests, Pitru/ departed souls, and Bhuta/Living beings (animals).
More over the very grouping of five tribes or five sets of people show that they have been living together for long in the same place. Otherwise the phrase “five peoples” is not possible to use in so many places.
In the Satapata Brahmana and the Aitareya Brahmana, the five people are opposed to the Bharatas, and in the former work seven people are alluded to.
Shrikant G.Talageri in his book The Rig Veda – A Historical Analysis makes a passing reference:
“Traditional history knows of many different streams of peoples, but the two main streams are of those belonging to the Solar race of the Ikshvakus, and those belonging to the Lunar race of the Ailas. The Ailas are further divided into five main branches: the Yadus, Turvasas, Druhyus, Anus and Purus (but Talageri did not mention anything about Pancajanah here).
A.Kalyanaraman in his scholarly work “Aryatarangini”, says
“Apart from the Bharatas, four other principal Aryan clans inhabited the Sapta Sindhu and were collectively known as Panchajanah. These were Trustus, the Anus, the Druhyus and the Turvasas or Yadus.
Kalhana’s Rajatarangini says
Commentary on verse 3-353 (ruler of Pacajanah)
This is an intriguing word with many possible meanings. It may mean
1).The four castes with the barbarians as the fifth, see the exposition in Saarirabhaasya on Brahmasutras 1-4, 2-13
2).The Five classes of beings viz. the gods, men, Gandharvas, Nagas and the Pitr (departed souls)
3).Or does it possibly mean the Panchayats as we know them.
(it shows that even in the 12th century CE, people were not sure about the meaning)
P T Srinivasa Iyengar in his book, “The History of the Tamils” has a long shot at this word:
“One Vedic phrase seems reminiscent of the division of the people into five regional tribes and that is Pancajanah. This mysterious phrase has been attempted to be explained by various writers, ancient and modern, but by none satisfactorily. I have made the conjecture that it must refer to the five tribes of pre-Aryan times, but scholars who know nothing of Tamil literature and who refuse to consider the necessity of historical continuity between pre Aryan India and Arya India have been unable to appreciates the value of this conjecture.
Panchajana and Paanchajanya
Krishna’s victorious conch has a special name PANCHAJANYA. It is in the Bhagavad Gita. The story is that there was a demon called Panchajana in the sea. He lived in the form of a conch shell. He seized the son of Sandipani under whom Krishna had his School education. He learnt the use of arms in Sandipani School. When he learnt that his teacher’s son was abducted, he swung into action, killed the demon and rescued Sandipani’s son. Then he used the conch shell of the demon. That is called Paanchajanya. Krishna had fought several naval battles from his naval base at Dwaraka in Gujarat. I have explained his naval battles with sea pirates, Nivata kavachas in another article (See Hindu Gods’ Naval attacks against Pirates, posted by me on 26 April 2012).
Panchajanah still remains a Mystery!
Pictures are taken from various websites; thanks.
Tamil and Vedas 
Tejaswini Vemburia (@vemburia)
/ June 27, 2015i wonder why INDOLOGISTS/TAMILOGISTS still hang on to the theory and manipulations on twi n duo of MAXMULER-CALDWELL THEORY on VEDIC AGE/IVC/SAARASWATHI CIVILISATION. The problem is that we should move awy from this and see the sequence of history as it is. India is known to outside world one from the period of DARIUS I who included SIND AND PUNJAB as twenty fourth province.Any hypothese before DARIUS I is mere cocnjecture.At the time of DARIUS I there were only sixteen JANAPADAS and people were generally JAINS. ONLY APRABRAMSA was existing and the stories related to JAIN AND BUDDHISTIC themes. UDAYANA STORY WAS THE MOST FAMOUS. Till the emergence of SATAVAHANAS/KADAMBAS/SUNGAS there was no mention about performance of VEDIC SACRIFICES. Ajathasatru was the first king who introduced monarchy in North India. Ypto UDRADAMAN AND KADAMBAS only Prakritic inscriptions were there. Sanskrit began to flourish only from FIRST CENTURY BC with BHASA coming on the stage. Even his initial dramas were based only on UDAYANA–JAIN MYTHOLOGY.Sanskrit literature began to emerge only after BHASA.IT FLOWERED FROM BHASA and ended with KING HARSHA. The first inscriptional evidence on SAKA ERA is AIHOLE insciption of PULAKESIN i. Manu was extensively used only by CHALUKYAS though they were JAINS. Even the PURANAS AND EPICS were compiled only during the period. Now howwe shape the hisory is what is known as BACKWARD INTEGRATION. We form the thesis from MAXMULR’S INTERPRETATION and accepting the concept of VEDIC AGE we go back to SAYANA and then trace VEDIC STORIES THROUGH BHAGAVATHAM AND MAHABHARATHAM and then travrse to PULAKESIN I AND MANU’S LAWS and then move to ASOKAS’ PERIOD AND SO ON. This is absolutely nonsense. Nobody has answered the main question –WHY DID NOT SANSKRIT LITERATURE BLOSSOM BEFORE BHASA! While Stories in Ramayana and Mahabharatha were referred in JAIN AND BUDDHISTIC MYTHS why is that nos troy from VEDAS appear in JAIN OR BUDDHISTIC themes. If JAINISM AND BUDDHISM were rebellious of VEDIC AGE why ws it that there was no single theme referring DASARNA WAR ARYA DASA/DASYU BATTLES/SARAMA’S MESSAGE/WAR WTH PANIS etc., Further but for MAHABHARATHA AND BHAGAVATHAM VEDIC STORIES never prevalent even in PURANAS. When there were only sixteen jana padas and BUDDHA sent emissaries only to BANAVASI/MAHISHAMANDALA IN SOUTH AND TABROPANNI what is the use of reference to umpteen number of kingdoms mentioned in PURANAS AND MAHABHARATHA and fighting over them?The growth of SANSKRIT LITERATURE is limited to KASHMIR/BENGAL/KARNATAKA-MAHARASHTRA and all the mathematicians belonged to KARNATAKA-MAHARASHTRA. Why was not a single treatise on VEDAS IN PUNJAB–THE HEARTLAND OF ARYANS. BENGAL was not considred ARYAN yet Bengal produced numerous Sanskrit scholars and GAUD BRAHMINS. Hence tracing the origin of VEDAS IS FUTILE EXERCISE. Lastly what was the application of famous stories of DASARNA WAR/SARAMA’S MESSAGE/ARYA DASA/DASYU WAR and all controversial hymns. In which SRAUTHA KARMA THEY ARE BEING RECITED?
Tejaswini Vemburia (@vemburia)
/ June 27, 2015This is the second part of my observations on subjecting VEDIC HYMNS UNNECESSARY SCRUTINY OF HISTORY. The main questions put forth by me are:1)Why Sanskrit literature was dormant for nearly thousand years from the period of SATAPADA BRAHMANA in eighth century BC to first century AD? 2)Why was there no monarchial kingdoms till the advent of AJATHA SATRU and why was there not even a single historical king except UDAYANA? Now let us look into the inscriptional evidences. Historians have nevr considered the question why did not the kings ever made stone inscriptions in North India unlike South India. Now from Satavahana period onwards upto the collapse of CHOLAS there was a continuous stream of inscriptions having the same pattern–land grants/formation of AGRAHARAS IN PLACES OTHER THAN TAMILNADU AND FORMATION OF CHATURVEDIMANGALAMS IN TAMILNADU. The social conditions from SATAVAHANAS TO CHOLAS was the same-EIGHTEEN PATHINEBHOOMIYAR/NAGARAM/VELAM(MERCANTILE TOWNS)AND VALANGAI/IDANGAI GROUPS. The most interesting part is that upto the period of EARLY CHOLAS AGNIVESHYA SHAKA was given prominence and those who were trained in this SHAKA were known by the term BRAHMA VAIDHYASS. MARANKARI FATHER OF SATTAN GANAPATHI VIGYAPATHI OF THE FAMOUS VELVIKUDI GRANT refers that he hailed from MANGALM IN KANCHIPURAM AND BELONGED TO THIS SHAKA. Further SIRUTHONDAR AND KUMUDAVALLI WIFE OF THIRUMANGAI MANNAN belonged to BRAHMAVAIDHYAS. They were also called BRAHMAKSHATRIYA. A number of grants in ANDHRA PRADESH refer to this shaka. Further most of the inscriptions refer–TAITTRIUM/SAMAM/TALAVAKARAM as Vedas taught to Students. There are a number of GRIHYA SUTRAS referred in inscriptions and some of the GRIHYA SUTRAS like –HIRANYAKESHI/BHARATWAJAM/KAUSHIKAM went out of the stream.I had enquired about MANDALAM SYSTEM OF RIG VEDA from a number of EMINENT PUROHITS. They could not explain the MANDALA SYSTEM but explained that SRAUTHA AND SMARTHA KARMAS were done according to KANDAMS–AGNI KANDAM/VARUNA KANDAM AND INDIRA KANDAM. They also explained that classification is empirical only since most of the important manthras like AGAMARSHANA belong to ATHARVA VEDA. Thus in South India Grihya Sutra are the most important one which alone applies VEDIC RIKS. Now the question is whether controversial RIG VEDIC HYMNS pertaining to INDRA are applied only in YAGYAS? If that be the case there is another perplexion. The early SAIVISM IN SOUTH INDIA was affliated to YAGYAS-MORE SO SOMAYAGA. There has been myths of SOMAYAJINS ADMONISHED BY LORD SHIVA TO BE LIKE PANCHAMAS FOR A PERIOD OF ONEMHURTHA–MADHYAHNIKA PANCHAMAS both in THANJAVUR DISTRICT AS WELL IN KARNATAKA.If that be the case why has not been reference to such stories? I think the problem of extrordinary impetus given to the stories of YADU/TURVASU/BHARATAS of RIG VIEDIC HYMNS would have arisen due to the explanation of VEDAS THROUGH MAHABHARATHA THATHPARNAYA NIRNAYA by Shri Madhwacharya. The only story prevalent in SAIVITE LITERATURE is DIVODASA OF RIG VEDIC HYMN ASKING LORD SIVA TO QUIT KASHI AS A CONDITION TO RULE THE WORLD. Divodasa was a Dasa/Dasyu king. He could have asked only ARYAN GOD as per VEDIC INTERPRETATION GIVEN BY EVERYBODY. Then Lord Shiva is an Aryan God which goes against MANU since MANU ADMONISHES VRATYAS–most of them belonging to extreme SAIVISM. It is no secret as per the inscriptions initially SHRIVAISHNAVAS were Advaitins who gave up BRAHMIN MARKS-TRIDANDA/PURINOOL/SHIKA and also gave up sacrifices and as per INSCRIPTION OF SHRI VARADARAJASWAMY TEMPLE KANCHIPURAM KULOTHUNGA CHOLA I MADE GRANT FOR RECITING ADVAITAHATMAKA BHAGAVATHAM. The story bof Ramanuja making Brahmins is twisted out of fact–i.e., he brought back SHRIVAISHNAVA ADVAITHIN TO BRAHMINICAL FOLD. SriVaishnava Brahmins did not have the practice of performing YAGYAS unlike EARLY SAIVIAITE BRAHMINS the practice continued still by ANDHRA SAIVAITE BRAHMINS. Thus on the one hand ther INDOLOGISTS vehemently argue that RIG VEDIC HYMNS did not worship Lord Shiva and banished by MANU AS VRATYAS and on the other hand inscriptions say EARLY SAIVIATES PERFORMED SACRIFICES! Geographically what was the relevance of Indra. There has been observations with regard to AFRICAN TRIBES—THAT ARTISAN TRIBES WANTED PROTECTION FROM AGRICULTURAL TRIBES WHO ASSUMED KING’S STATUS AND ONE CHIEF OF ARTISAN TRIBE PROCLAIMED HIMSLEF AS KING AGAINST THE PREVALENT CUSTOM. Does it not look similar to VEDIC HYMN?Since VEDIC HYMNS EXTOLLING INDRA show the despondency of the persons making prayer who cannot fight himself . Further from the dawn of history but for Tamil literature in no other folklore of North India including BUDDHIST/JAIN MYTHS the act of robbing cattle is a main issue and the natural scenes depicted in VEDIC HYMNS can be visualised in GHAT SECTIONS OF KARNATAKAKERALA AND HIMALAYAN REGION. Only in Tamilnadu seventy years ago–there was custom particularly in THANJAVUR DISTRICT of dragging INDRA’S BONFIRE AND LAMENTATION suggesting prayer of rain.How can plains of North India which don’t depend on rain but monsoon rain waters fglowing through Himalayan rivers be considered as places depicted in VEDAS.In North India SRAVAN is more important than BARAS. Lastly why did the VEDIC LANGUAGE abruptly stopped after SATABADA BRAHMANA. Let us restrict VEDAS only to GRIHYA SUTRAS but it should not be extrapolated for history.
Sripati Tantri
/ August 2, 2016Certainly, the questions raised are of very serious nature, and it is not that easy to answer. We have to probe without any pre-conceived mindset here.