Introduction

1In 1970, Ivanov & Toporov have published the paper “Le mythe indo-européen du dieu de l’orage poursuivant le serpent: reconstruction du schéma”1. Having analyzed the Slavic and Baltic sources (although they also refer to the non Indo-European data), they propose the general schema of the Indo-European myth which presents the God who kills the Snake and thus creates water and fire. In their analysis, they also refer to the ancient Indian texts, mainly to the R̥gvedic myth of Indra who, having killed Vr̥tra or Vala, releases waters, cows and other life-giving elements of cosmos.

2In my analysis, I would like to focus on the concept of the Snake and to show its affinities with the Vedic concept of Agni as it is presented in the R̥gveda (RV) and in the Śatapathabrāhmaṇa (ŚB). Moreover, I will show some affinities of the God with Prajāpati which are less frequent but significant. I will also argue that the scenario of the myth reflects the solar-rain cycle of cosmos according to which fire appears from water (Soma in the RV) and, then, water (Soma) appears from fire (Jurewicz 2010). My hypothesis is that the myths on killing the Snake by the God are motivated by the concept of ambivalent fire. I will also present how the ancient myth is used by the R̥gvedic poets in ritual context.

1. Connection of the Snake with tree

3Ivanov & Toporov (1970, 1194) quote a myth of the Polesian folklore according to which the Devil (who here replaces the Snake) did not know where to hide from Perun (the main hero of the myth) and finally he hid himself below a dry tree. Then Perun, who wanted to kill the Devil, broke the tree with such force that tree begun to burn. Since then, whenever Perun wanted to get fire, he rubbed a piece of tree and thus he got fire. This description brings to mind the experience of kindling fire with aid of kindling sticks. According to the RV, wood is one of the most important hiding places of fire and kindling sticks are conceived in terms of his parents (RV III 23.3, III 29.2, IV 7.6; Jurewicz 2010, 124–125). The experience of kindling fire by friction is also evoked in the cosmogony of Agnicayana where Prajāpati creates milk by friction; milk is the liquid form of fire (Jurewicz 2016, 316–320). It is then elaborated in Br̥hadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad (BU) 1.4.6, in the description of creation of Agni (Jurewicz 2016, 423–424).

4In their analysis of the conceptual connections between the Snake and the tree, Ivanov & Toporov (1970, 1189) quote two chants (Serbian and Bulgarian) in which the eagle or the nightingale seat on the top of the tree, the Snake is hidden in its roots. In RV 1.164.20–22, the image of two birds on a tree is created. One of them eats a sweat berry, another one only watches. As I have shown in Jurewicz (2010, 304–305), the tree can be understood as the axis mundi the top of which represents the sun in zenith filled with Soma (see also Witzel 2012, 133). In Jurewicz (2016, 126–127), I have argued that in terms of the birds men are conceived of whom one realizes the omniscient state thanks to the solar Soma (the bird which eats the berry), the second one does not cognize and only watches (the bird which does not eat and only watches). However, there is also a concept in the RV of a bird (śyena) stealing Soma from a place which is high up in the sky or on the mountain (Kuiper 1996, 229). If we take into account the Slavic myths just presented, it is possible that the image of a tree with the sun filled with Soma guarded by the eagle could be the source of the image elaborated in RV I 164.20–22.

2. Connection of the Snake with stone

5The stone as the hiding place of the Snake is mentioned in many Slavic myths (Ivanov & Toporov 1970, 1195). In a Belarusian myth, the main hero (called here Osilok) breaks with force a great stone in order to take the life of the snake enclosed in it (Ivanov & Toporov 1970, 1195). In another Belarusian myth, Perun is presented as rubbing two stones and thus producing fire. Ivanov & Toporov (1970, 1196) refer here to RV 2.12.3, where Indra is presented as producing fire from two stones, but there is more evidence in the RV attesting that stone is one of the hiding places of Agni in the RV (Jurewicz 2010, 124–125).

6In the Slavic myths the ontological relationship between the Snake and fire is not clear. Only the sequence is presented: the Snake, hidden in tree or stone, is killed and fire appears. On the other hand, the R̥gvedic accounts do not refer to the concept of snake (at least explicitly, see below, section 10). The Slavic and R̥gvedic data agree in their description of activity of the God and in its results, i.e. the appearance of fire.

3. Connection of the Snake with water

7In some Slavic and Baltic myths, the Snake hides finally in water, his original abode (Ivanov & Toporov 1970, 1199). The myth of Agni who hides in water is elaborated in RV X 51. It is abstracted in the model of Child of the Waters (RV II 35) which presents appearance of fire from waters and its ontological identity with them, conceived in terms of family relationships, mutual sexual union and birth (Findly 1979, Proferes 2007, Jurewicz 2010). Here the similarity between the Snake and Agni can be seen in their watery abode.

4. Connection of the Snake with horns and cattle

8In the Belarusian folklore, the Snake has horns (Ivanov & Toporov 1970, 1189 and 1197) which also makes this concept close to the R̥gvedic concept of Agni which is presented as horned too (e.g. RV V 2.9, III 8.10). Moreover, there is evidence (again in the Belarusian folklore) which attests the belief that cattle belongs to the Snake (Ivanov & Toporov 1970, 1190–1191). The connection of Agni and cattle is attested in ŚB II 3.4.1–2: the gods deposit all the beasts (paśu) with Agni who seizes them and enters night with them, then gives them back in the morning.

5. Solar-rain cycle

9The data analyzed by Ivanov & Toporov attest the belief that the killing of the Snake results in the appearance of rain (1970, 1182, 1197 and 1998). In this context, Ivanov & Toporov (1970, 1197–1198) refer to the RV according to which rain and rivers appear thanks to the killing Vr̥tra and to the concept of Parjanya, the R̥gvedic god of rain whose name is cognate with Slavic and Baltic names of the God (Perun, Perkūnas).

10However, this motive can also be explained against the more general R̥gvedic background. As I have shown elsewhere (Jurewicz 2010), the R̥gvedic poets created the general model of creation and functioning of the world conceived as alternate manifestations of fiery and liquid aspects of Agni. The liquid aspect is conceived in terms of Soma. In cosmic dimension, this transformation is realized in the following way: Soma is poured into fire in the morning sacrifice, then fire, mixed with Soma, becomes the sun which rises up to zenith. There, the final purification of Soma takes place and Soma becomes rain. Taking into account the conceptual affinities between the Snake in the Slavic and Baltic beliefs and Agni in the RV, it can be argued that the appearance of rain after the Snake’s death is possible because the Snake is conceived as a kind of being which possesses fiery and liquid features. This is implied by Ivanov & Toporov (1970, 1194) who write that typological parallels show that the myths of the origins of fire may be connected with the myths of origins of water.

11In this context, it is worth noting that there are conceptual affinities between the concept of the Snake and the concept of Soma. In the RV, Soma is presented as appearing from wood and stone (Jurewicz 2010, 150–151), in some stanzas it is Soma which is presented as the child of the waters (Jurewicz 2010, 211–212) and as having horns (e.g. RV IX 5.2, 70.7, 87.7). Another possible conceptual affinity between the concept of the Snake and the concept of Soma can be seen in connection of the Snake with the wool which is observed in the Slavic ritual myths and in the Hittite ritual (Ivanov & Toporov 1970, 1190). According to the RV, the sheep wool was used as filter in which the Somic juice was purified.

6. Conceptual affinities between the concept of the Snake and the God and the concepts of Agni and Prajāpati in the ŚB

12In some Lithuanian myths, the Snake, being afraid of the God, hides himself in man, horse, cow, and in a tree, stone and in water (Ivanov & Toporov 1970, 1181, 1191 and 1193). I have already shown that tree, stone and water are the hiding places of Agni in the RV. Now I will discuss how the motive of the Snake who hides in living beings is reflected in the ŚB. In the cosmogony of the Agnicayana, Agni, being afraid of Prajāpati, hides himself in five animals: man, horse, bull, ram and goat (ŚB VI 2.1.1–5). Since the animals are killed in the sacrifice, it is obvious that Agni hides against Prajāpati because he is afraid of being killed by him, similarly to the Snake in the Lithuanian myths. Moreover, the sequence of the first three hiding places (man, horse, bull) is the same in both traditions.

13On the other hand, there are affinities in conceptualization between the God in the Baltic sources and Prajāpati in ŚB in that the God (Perkūnas) is identified with four cardinal directions and four seasons (Ivanov & Toporov 1970, 1185–1186). In the Agnicayana ritual, the fire altar which is the ritual manifestation of Prajāpati represents four seasons and four cardinal directions, Prajāpati himself is identified with the year and cosmos (Smith 1994, 173, 189, and 198, note 11).

14Apart from what has been said about similarities between the concept of the God in the Slavic and Baltic sources and the concept of Agni in the RV, there is also a similarity between the concept of the God and of Agni in the ŚB. According to a Lithuanian myth, the God (Perkūnas) has nine hypostases (Ivanov & Toporov 1970, 1187). In the same way Agni is presented in ŚB VI 1.1.14: Agni is identified with the earth which consists of the nine creations.

7. The same features of the Snake and the main hero

15In their conclusion, Ivanov & Toporov emphasize that many features of the God and the Snake are common (1970, 1200–1201). They call these features “mobile classifiers”. The first mobile classifier is stone which is the hiding place of the Snake and the instrument of his killing used by the God. The second one is tree which also is the hiding place of the Snake and the arm of the God with which he kills the Snake. Both, the Snake and the main hero, have horns. In some African myths (Ivanov & Toporov 1970, 1200–1201), the main hero transforms himself into animals like the Snake in the Baltic sources and Agni in the ŚB. By the way, such a conceptualization of the main hero is also similar to that of Indra who is able to transform himself thanks to his magic (mā́yā, RV III 53.8, VI 47.18).

16Even fire and water are connected with the God who is the God of Storm and thunderbolt and cloud are seen as his arms in some myths. The conceptualization of the main hero as fiery is also attested in a Russian myth where cattle (herds of rams, pigs, cows and horses) which belongs to the Snake is burnt by King of Fire and Queen of Lightning who, as Ivanov & Toporov argue, represent the main hero here (1970, 1191). The fact that the God and the Snake possess the same features allows one to presume that they are conceived as the same entity. This presumption again agrees with the R̥gvedic ontological assumptions according to which one reality, i.e. Agni, manifests in creation its opposing aspects (fiery and fluid ones). In the Slavic and Baltic sources, these aspects are conceived in terms of the hero and his enemy.

17In Jurewicz 2010, I have proposed the concept of the defining events which models the main life-giving processes in terms of the appearance of the symbol of light thanks to destruction of the symbol of darkness. A peculiar feature of this model is that the symbol of light plays double role in these events: it is both their efficient and causal cause. For example, one of the defining events is expansion. According of the scenario of this event, the Sun and fire are its aim and, at the same time, they help the poets to kill the enemies and conquer their earth. I have explained this fact on the ground of the self-reflexive nature of the events which are conveyed by one reality. The sameness of some mobile classifiers (stone and tree) can be grounded in the same conviction.

8. Ambivalence of the God and the Snake

18As Ivanov & Toporov show (1970, 1189), the Snake is evaluated ambiguously in some Slavic and Baltic sources. In their analysis of the connections between the Snake and the tree, they show that the Snake is sometimes presented as a positive being, for example, in one Belarusian myth the abode of the Snake is on the top of the tree, in another one he is conceived as falcon with horns, in yet another one the birds which sit on the top of the tree are malefic.

19According to Ivanov & Toporov, this leads us to a more ancient myth in which the Snake is beneficial (1970, 1201). Such a conceptualization of the Snake is attested in some Indo-European myths which present the Snake as bringing fire, fertility and wealth. Ivanov & Toporov also refer to the Ainu myths where the Sun, conceived as the Snake of Fire or the Heavenly Snake, is the main hero who descends on earth in lightnings which form zigzags (1970, 1201). They argue that this data allows one to understand the role of the Cosmic Tree in the reconstructed schema of the myth: the Cosmic Tree corresponds to the lightning and to the Snake who unites the sky and the earth and is beneficial. Such an interpretation again betrays similarities with the R̥gvedic concept of Agni which is conceived in terms of tree in the RV (II 35.8, VI 7.6, Jurewicz 2010).

20The ambivalent evaluation of the God and the Snake can again be explained against the Vedic background. Agni is conceived in the Veda as the ambivalent entity, both beneficial and malefic, which, during creation, manifests its opposing aspects. The opposition of Agni’s aspects is conceived in terms of the opposition of Agni and Soma in the RV, and in terms of the opposition of Agni and other liquids, such as milk, water in the ŚB. In the Brāhmaṇic exegesis, the ambivalent nature of fire is realized in ritual in the opposition of fire and oblation, prototypically oblation is Soma (BU 1.4.6). Fire is manifestation of killing power of reality and Soma is ritual manifestation of aspect of reality which is killed.

9. The myth and the ritual

21In his paper “Angel and Titan: An Essay in Vedic Ontology”, Coomaraswamy (1935) analyses the motive of fight of the Hero with an enemy attested in the early Indian sources. The enemy is a monster or snake, in some myths identified with the R̥gvedic Vr̥tra. Coomaraswamy also shows that the snake/Vr̥tra is identified with Soma and Agni2. The conceptual connections between Agni and snake can be seen in the RV IV 1.11, where Agni is called apā́d aśīrṣā, “without feet and head”. A similar “serpent kenning” (as Coomaraswamy 1935, 401 rightly puts it) is apā́d ahastá, “without feet and hands”, used in reference to Vr̥tra in RV I 32.7. In their analysis, Ivanov & Toporov (1970, 1196) also refer to RV I 32.7 to show that Vr̥tra was conceptualized as snake and discuss the similarity of this conceptualization with the Slavic riddles. Agni is also identified with the Serpent of the Deep (Ahi Budhnya), enigmatic mythic figure of the RV3. On the basis of these identifications, Coomaraswamy (1935, 418) draws the conclusion that the early Indian data confirm the identity of “the Father and the Son, Dragon and the Solar Hero”. According to him, this identity is realized in ritual. He refers to Aitareyabrāhmaṇa 3.43, 5.2 and Jaimīniyopaniṣadbrāhmaṇa (JUB) 1.35 where circular and endless nature of elements of ritual is expressed (Coomaraswamy 1935, 412–413). As he states, this circular and endless nature of reality and ritual is conceptualized in the image of snake with its tail in its mouth (Coomaraswamy 1935, 412).

22The analysis of Coomaraswamy is sometimes more intuitive than analytical, however it opens interesting possibilities of interpretation. As I have shown elsewhere, the R̥gvedic sacrifice aims to abrogate the difference between the earth and the sky: the sacrificer is expected to reach the sky, more specifically, the sun in zenith which was seen as the source domain for the pre-creative heavenly domain (Jurewicz 2010). I have also argued that the myth of Indra-Vr̥tra fight became a model which expressed the situation of man in ritual already in the RV (Jurewicz 2010, 353–360). Within its frames, the sacrificer should identify himself with Indra who fights against the powers of pre-creative state of reality which constantly threaten the cosmos and all living beings in it. These powers are conceived in terms of his enemies which are named as vr̥trá, now the generic name.

23It could be argued then that the old Indo-European myth of the fight of the God with the Snake was not rejected by the R̥gvedic poets, but it was transformed by them to conceive the ritual activity as the restoration of the primordial unity. The primordial unity was in the RV conceived in terms of Agni, the fire which is ambivalent and composed of opposing aspects, fiery and liquid ones. This concept of reality is analytically split in the ritual, conceived in terms of fight of the Hero (Indra) with his enemy (Vr̥tra). Appearance of water thanks to killing Vr̥tra agrees with the general model of reality transformation according to which reality, conceived in terms of Agni, alternatively manifests its fiery and liquid aspects. This model is re-enacted in ritual the final result of which is appearance of rain bringing not only water, but also all the desirable goods for the sacrificer.

10. Conclusion

24My analysis allows me to propose a hypothesis that the myths analyzed by Ivanov & Toporov were also motivated by the ancient concept of reality understood in terms of ambivalent fire. In the Slavic and Baltic accounts, this concept is already lost, but its elements are still present in the specific conceptualization of the God and the Snake. In the Vedic tradition, it is the identification of Agni with snake which is not explicit, but it still motivates thinking of the composers. These facts allow me to suppose that the ancient myth of fight between the God and the Snake developed in two ways: while the Vedic composers elaborated the oneness of reality, the composers of Slavic and Baltic myths elaborated its two opposing aspects conceived in terms of the God and the Snake whose features are common to some extent. It should be added that the main frame of the ancient myth is not completely lost in the Veda: the Vedic composers used it to explain the role of man in ritual.

25It is also worth adding that the research done in this paper shows the great conceptual similarity between the ancient Vedic thinking and Slavic and Baltic thinking which still needs more profound research.