Other Natural Religions

[Husky]

Still on that.

The narratives of Shibi and the other king - Alarka - clearly must have been familiar and old in the time of Ramayana and MBh, that they just get namedropped in the first (since everyone is expected to know the details already and of why Kaikeyi invoking them for comparison is relevant) and Shibi moreover gets a revisit in the MBh.

Here:



mahabharataonline.com/translation/mahabharata_01003.php

Translation of Mahabharata of Vyasa by Kisari Mohan ...

then the excellent history of the hawk and the pigeon; then the examination of king Sivi by Indra, Agni, and Dharma;

Another brief allusion: MBh also expected all to already know of it by then.



(And More general mentions of King Sivi/Shibi son of Usinara in MBh.)







Searching for occurrences of Shibi in the MBh translation led me to the following interesting bit in the MBh that Bhishma narrates as a "well-known tale", one that "Bhrigu's son Rama" was already to have narrated to an earlier Vedic king, and which tale Yudhisthira already knows enough on to ask about it of Bhishma.



A hungry "fowler" (bird-hunter of sorts?) requests a pigeon for some food. As his host, the pigeon wants to do right by his guest by observing the right code of conduct. Having no food to give him, it leaps into a fire and cooks itself for him. He feels penitent and, inspired by its self-sacrificial nature, is determined to



mahabharataonline.com/translation/mahabharata_12a142.php

mahabharataonline.com/translation/mahabharata_12a145.php

mahabharataonline.com/translation/mahabharata_12a146.php

"Yudhishthira said, 'O grandsire, O thou of great wisdom, O thou that are conversant with every kind of scripture, tell me what the merit is of one who cherishes a suppliant that craves for protection.'



"Bhishma said, 'Great is the merit, O monarch, in cherishing a suppliant. Thou art worthy, O best of the Bharatas, of asking such a question. Those



p. 323



high-souled kings of old, viz., Sivi and others, O king, attained to great bliss in heaven by having protected suppliants. It is heard that a pigeon received with respect a suppliant foe according to due rites and even fed him with his own flesh.'



"Yudhishthira said, 'How, indeed, did a pigeon in days of old feed a suppliant foe with his own flesh? What also was the end, O Bharata, that he won by such conduct?'



"Bhishma said, 'Listen, O king, to this excellent story that cleanses the hearer of every sin, the story, viz., that Bhrigu's son (Rama) had recited to king Muchukunda.



[...]



Thus addressed, the fowler said, 'So be it.' And he set himself to warm his stiffened limbs. Recovering (as it were) his life-breathes the fowler said unto his winged host, 'Hunger is afflicting me. I wish thee to give me some food.' Hearing his words the bird said, 'I have no stores by which to appease thy hunger. We, denizens of the woods, always live upon what we get every day. Like the ascetics of the forest we never hoard for the morrow.' Having said these words, the bird's face became pale (from shame). He began to reflect silently as to what he should do and mentally deprecated his own method of living. Soon, however, his mind became clear. Addressing the slaughterer of his species, the bird said, 'I shall gratify thee. Wait for a moment.' Saying these words, he ignited a fire with the help of some dry leaves, and filled with joy, said, 'I heard in former days from high-souled Rishis and gods and Pitris that there is great merit in honouring a guest. O amiable one, be kind to me. I tell thee truly that my heart is set upon honouring thee that art my guest.' Having formed this resolution, the high-souled bird with a smiling face, thrice circumambulated that fire and then entered its flames. Beholding he bird enter that fire, the fowler began to think, and asked himself, 'What have I done? Alas, dark and terrible will be my sin, without doubt in consequence of my own acts! I am exceedingly cruel and worthy of reprobation. Indeed, observing the bird lay down his life, the fowler, deprecating his own acts, began to indulge in copious lamentations like thee.'"





Section CXLVII

"Bhishma said, 'The fowler, seeing the pigeon fall into the fire, became filled with compassion and once more said, 'Alas, cruel and senseless that I am, what have I done! I ant certainly a mean wretch! Great will be my sin for everlasting years! Indulging in such self-reproaches he began to say, repeatedly, 'I am unworthy of credit. My understanding is wicked. I am ever sinful in my resolves. Alas, abandoning all kinds of honourable occupation, I have become a fowler A cruel wretch that I am, without doubt, this high-souled pigeon, by laying down his own life, has read me a grave lesson. Abandoning wives and sons, I shall certainly cast off my very life-breaths that are so dear. The high-souled pigeon has taught me that duty. From this day, denying every comfort to my body, I shall wear it out even as a shallow tank in the season of summer. Capable of bearing hunger, thirst, and penances, reduced to emaciation, and covered with visible veins all over, I shall, by diverse kinds of practise such vows as have a reference to the other world. Alas, by giving up his body, the pigeon has shown the worship that should be paid to a guest. Taught by his example. I shall henceforth practise righteousness. Righteousness is the highest refuge (of all creatures). Indeed, I shall practise such righteousness as has been seen in the righteous pigeon, that foremost of all



p. 328



winged creatures.' Having formed such a resolution and said these words, that fowler, once of fierce deeds, proceeded to make an unreturning tour of the world, 1 observing for the while the most rigid vows. He threw away his stout staff, his sharp-pointed iron-stick, his nets and springes, and his iron cage, and set at liberty the she-pigeon that he had seized and immured.'"

About the final paragraphs:



The lame ur-Shramanism peddlers will no doubt declare that Section CXLVII above magically points to ur-/Shramanism, and that the (implicitly Vedic ascetic) vows mentioned "must therefore actually be" Jain or Buddhistic monastic vows, or because there is mention of the notion of compassion that it must be Buddhist onlee, etc.

Sadly for ur-Shramanism peddlers/any desperate people trying to find proof of their later religions in the MBh and other early Hindu texts and oral traditions, the above tale too is Vedik Hindoo/it speaks of Vaidika principles onlee, and Bhishma - as he himself says - is only retreading here what other Vedic Hindoos before him* had long ago narrated to others as instruction. [* And a son of Bhrigu would be not just a Veda Brahmana but a Rishi moreover. Hence not Jain/Buddhist/whatever.]

Conclusion: the above narrative retold by Bhishma is Vedic Hindoo onlee. Plus MBh and preceding contexts do not know of Jainism/Buddhism yet (since those nouveau religions appeared much, much later) just like the MBh hasn't heard of the recently-invented, back-projected ur-Shramanisms or oryan-dravoodianisms or christianisms etc either.





Anyway, there are definite parallels between the pigeon's tale in the MBh - highlighted in blue above - and that of the hare in the Jataka. Can compare with

sangye.it/altro/?p=235

"Jataka Tales on Lord Buddha's life: 6 - THE HARE".



Can observe how both the MBh pigeon above and the hare at the link are determined, and insist on their action.

But still wonder if there's a more direct predecessor to the first Buddhist Hare story, the Jataka one: where Indra's still the one immortalising the hare's lesson by placing its image on the moon; whereas the later one - which sounds more properly/completely Bauddhicised - has Buddha playing Indra's role, while the hare no longer seems to be a previous incarnation of the Buddha. In any case the 2nd story doesn't appear to be a Jataka.)[/color]





Returning to the earlier posted

encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/hare

(Added numbering)

1. A Buddhist folktale recounts that the Buddha, in an earlier incarnation as a hare, willingly gave his own flesh to help feed a hungry soul. He gained immortality through this good deed, rising in the shape of a hare to the moon, where he is still visible to us today.



2. A legend from India claims that a hare once performed a great act of compassion for the god Indra. The hare spied Indra, disguised as a famished pilgrim, praying for food. The hare had nothing but his body to give so he cast himself on the fire so that the pilgrim might eat. The god rewarded the hare by granting him immortal life on the moon.

The above makes a distinction between "the Buddhist folktale" - with Buddha as the hare in an earlier life - and "the Indian legend" featuring Indra. Yet the former story (distinct from the Buddhist version where Buddha makes a hare immortal) already featured Indra. So does that mean that the 2nd item listed alludes to a version without Buddha/anything Buddhist? Or is it merely that the encyclopedia link confused the two Buddhist variants of the-hare-on-the-moon tale? Hm.







The 2 Buddhist variants again:



sacred-texts.com/astro/ml/ml08.htm

1. [...] (Indra undercover as) The brahmin at last went to the hare and begged alms of him. The hare said, 'Friend, I eat nothing but grass, which I think is of no use to you.' Then the pretended brahmin replied, 'Why, friend, if you are a true hermit, you can give me your own flesh in hope of future happiness.' The hare directly consented to it, and said to the supposed brahmin, 'I have granted your request, and you may do whatever you please with me.' The brahmin then replied, 'Since you are willing to grant my request, I will kindle a fire at the foot of the rock, from which you may jump into the fire, which will save me the trouble of killing you and dressing your flesh.' The hare readily agreed to it, and jumped from the top of the rock into the fire which the supposed brahmin had kindled; but before he reached the fire, it was extinguished; and the brahmin appearing in his natural shape of the god Sakkria, took the hare in his arms and immediately drew its figure in the moon, in order that every living thing of every part of the world might see it."

(The hare had clearly meant to plead that it wanted to stay huddled up forever in Indra's arms instead - and who could blame it. Oh wait, it's probably the Buddhist clone Sakkria/Sakka. Never mind then.)





2. Grimm says: "The people of Ceylon relate as follows: While Buddha the great god sojourned upon earth as a hermit, he one day lost his way in a wood. He had wandered long, when a hare accosted him: 'Cannot I help thee? Strike into the path on thy right. I will guide thee out of the wilderness.' Buddha replied: 'Thank thee, but I am poor and hungry, and unable to repay thy kindness.' 'If thou art hungry,' said the hare, 'light a fire, and kill, roast, and eat me.' Buddha made a fire, and the hare immediately jumped in. Then did Buddha manifest his divine power; he snatched the beast out of the flames, and set him in the moon, where he may be seen to this day." 78

The first seems to be earlier, because the 2nd one (where the hare interacts with and is rewarded by the Buddha) Bauddhises the earlier Bauddhified Jataka variant more. It fits better with later Buddhist cosmology where Buddha is more supreme than Gods.



Consider:



In the hare Jataka, Indra is the one who saves the hare and immortalise its image on the moon. In that version, the hare is the Buddha in a previous life and has no special powers - it couldn't conjure food for its guest: the Buddha-as-hare only has the ability (also seen in the MBh pigeon) to sacrifice its own life - willingly, which is a great trait, but altruism/self-sacrifice is still something within the ambit of mortals and doesn't necessarily indicate a deity (or transform them into one).

And in the Jataka, only Indra (still) had the power to magically extinguish the fire and set an image of the animal on the moon to immortalise its lesson. [Though Indra/Buddhist Indra by whichever time Shibi got Bauddhified into a Jataka did not possess the power to restore regular sight.]



Anyway, the presumably earlier, Jataka version of the hare tale is then superceded by the 2nd Buddhist variant: where the Buddha is now the one who has the power to immortalise the hare. And it is not a case of history coincidentally repeating in Buddhist cosmology, with a now-enlightened Buddha having acquired divine powers and an all-new altruistic hare, but rather a retelling/new version/replacement of the original story, since the main characters are by and large the same and their actions too (plus there's only one hare on the moon in Buddhism, I think, which means they're variants on the same story): in the 2nd version, the hare is no longer the Buddha but the recipient of Buddha's divine powers, which powers were approximately that of Indra in the first version. But the summary of the story already indicates that over time Buddha was viewed as a sort of divinity in Buddhism (or at least, some Buddhisms): "While Buddha the great god sojourned upon earth as a hermit [he met the hare] ... Then did Buddha manifest his divine power".





CORRECTED: a Bhargava, but not Parashurama. Had misread.