Indo-European Peoples

James R. Womack III

10.03.2007

Indo-European Peoples - Origins

While studying Zoroastrianism, I discovered several topics that I felt worthy of further exploration. One such study would center on the origins of the people group and culture from which the Zoroastrians descend. It is specifically this topic that I chose to research and write about. In this paper I will give an account of the Indo-European and Indo-Aryan cultures and how they developed throughout history.

“To understand the origins of Zoroastrianism, We need to go back to the earliest of prehistory. This requires a bit of detective work and a lot of detailed data. But it will be worth it. We will find evidence that there was a religion with roots that go back as far as five thousand years. Tribes holding this religion eventually settled in various locations of Europe and Asia. Zoroastrianism is a descendant of that ancient religion (Corduan 114).”

Scholarly research of the Indo-European culture has been going on for about the past 200 years (Bryant 38). In this time we have seen stringent efforts to discover the origins of this people and knowledge of their homeland. What we know of this culture is that they were clan like nomadic travelers who are broadly referred to as the Aryans. One may ask the question, “Why has so much time been spent on studying one group of wandering nomads?” The answer to this comes in a very profound statement: The Proto-Indo-Europeans (or Aryan Predecessors) are believed to be the people group from which much of our language across the world today is derived (Fortson 14). There is much speculation of how this is possible, but the majority of archeological, historical, and philological evidence points to this conclusion. According to Oxford University Press, philology is “an older term for linguistics, and especially for the branch of linguistic study devoted to comparative and historical research into the development of languages. In a wider sense, the term sometimes also covers the study of literary texts. A researcher in this scholarly field is a philologist.”

Historical Background

While the Indo-European people are known to be nomadic travelers, up until this place in history they had not made “mass migrations” into distant lands. “Around 1500 B.C., for reasons kept to themselves, they undertook one of the mass migrations that occur form time to time in ancient history. Some of then went as far as India; others wound up settling in the Iranian Plateau,” (Corduan 114).

The best-known source of documented historical evidence comes to us through the earliest texts of the Vedas (Hindu Scriptures) and, more specifically, the Rig-Veda (written in Sanskrit). In one section of the text, we find Hymns mentioning the invading “Arya” moving into India from the northwest to the southeast. We also find several other Hymns referring to the request of the Indian people asking their gods to assist the warlike “Arya” in the defeat of Dasya. Apparently the latter occurring after the “Arya” had been in the land for some time (Fortson 12).

Other parallel evidence comes to us through Zoroaster’s teaching in the Avesta against Aryan religion. This and other information in the Avesta leads us to the conclusion that the Aryan migration was responsible for the people living Iran. This seems to be a logical place to make an important to connection between the Zoroastrian culture and the Aryan people. Dr. Win Corduan points out that as the Aryan people settled in the Iranian Plateau (Home of Zoroaster) this is where we derive the name “Iran” meaning – “Land of the Aryans” I had never personally made this connection, but after reading through Corduan’s book this seems to make sense, particularly phonetically.

Societal Structure

In trying to extrapolate a societal structure from the understood knowledge of an ancient people, anthropologists and archeologists are often faced with a daunting task. Benjamin Fortson, in his book Indo-European Language and Culture, uses a technique borrowed from philology that pulls a shared meaning of words, phrase, and ideas through comparative study of them. He suggests that just as a great comprehension of a proto-language can be drawn from a comparative word study of the descendant dialects of that language, so by comparing not only the words but also their contexts can one discover knowledge of the proto-culture. (Fortson 16)

“A language does not exist apart from a people, and it always mirrors their culture to some extent. Furthermore, we can broaden the scope of comparison to include not only individual words but also their use in context, which reveals the semantic and cultural associations that attend different concepts. Thus comparative linguistic study allows us to reconstruct a proto-culture alongside the proto-language (Fortson 16).”

Mr. Fortson further mentions that there are other comparative strategies used in understanding a proto-culture. By comparing the myths, laws, and various social institutions and coupling this information with a linguistic comparison, anthropologists can better realize the characteristics of that people’s social interaction. An example of this is that of two “daughter societies”, who both hold to or believe in similar myths, such as a “Thunder god.” Fortson states that when these similarities are coupled with an accurate language analysis, it will more greatly secure a particular theory the proto-culture. While these research techniques aid and support each other, Fortson does conclude that the linguistic analysis is not always necessary to derive a particular meaning or custom of the culture being explored (Fortson 16).

The final statement on Fortson’s method for studying the Indo-European People rests in the idea that language is not static or unbending, but that over time it changes and is influenced by outside factors and cultural developments that can not always be accounted for. While he appears to be fairly confident in his own assertions and the method itself, he provides for us a way of understanding that absolute certainty that can be drawn from the conclusion of this method (Fortson 17).

As we begin reviewing the structure of the Indo-European society it is important to note that cultural and societal structures, habits, and norms can be based on incorrect notions of personhood and therefore the treatment of people may also be incorrect. However, when making judgments of a particular people group we must be cautious. In the midst of these judgments, we must be aware of our own cultural historical heritage and bias that come with it. We must not to conclude that a particular structure is “wrong” just because it does not align with our particular experience, within our context.

The first suggestion given to us by Benjamin Fortson for the structure if the Proto-Society is that it was based on a higharchial arrangement. The primary distinction is that of the freeman to the slave. Although, we do not know all of the circumstances that would give rise to slavery in the Aryan people, it is universally agreed upon that this type if system was adopted and permeated the entire culture. Scholars also believe that slaves were most likely captives of war or debtors who were unable to repay they lender. Beyond this first institution we find a sub categorization that establishes a type of cast system. In this institution, researchers have discovered the clustering of people into groups, which is often by family. These groups would then receive assignments of a specified role and required contribution to the whole clan. First of all we see that there is a religious and sovereign responsibility that is assigned to lineage of the Priest and King. Second, we find that there is a function of “martial force” which is rendered to the Warrior class. Third, there is a class of the common worker who would manufacture goods, raise livestock, and work with the soil to produce vegetation. Fortson speculates that there is a likely connection between this cast system and the cast system of India. Part of this thinking comes from the knowledge that the cast system of Hindu religion is discussed extensively in the earliest weightings of the Rig-Veda which are written in the oldest Sanskrit (Fortson 17).

Within this society, we also find a highly patriarchal presence. There is evidence that women do not possess the same rights as men. But we do not find language concerning the mistreatment of the female or evidence that they are seen as property and something to be disposed of when broken or weary of. What we do find is that these people are drawn together in a “group” oriented manner to which loyalty to ones own family and clan (in group) is of utmost significance. While there is emphasis on the roles of those who have a governmental or religious importance, this society would value the significance and need for all of these people, even of those in places that to us would be seen to us as insignificant or “non-equal”

Economically we see trade as a very vital contributor to the health and function of the Proto-European group. However, amidst this economic trade we also learn that the clans are given to war like economics in which the Adolescent males of the clans would, from time to time, raid, plunder, and pillage other clans. We do not know much about these violent acts but understand enough to know that the whole society was primarily structured around warfare. (Fortson 18-20)

I wish that I could provide an Indo-European book of law or codes that would help us to decipher this question of intentionality with in slavery and familial hierarchy a little further. According to Fortson, there is very little that can be derived from the laws of the Aryan people. He mentions that scholars can extrapolate enough to know that there was no formal court system, as the one we now know. Clans dealt specifically with in their own group to make judgments and decisions in relationship to laws and expectations. Apparently, business deals and pledges were done in front of others and seen as a binding agreement with a witness present. When dept went unpaid often this left individuals with the necessity to take matters into their own hands. (Fortson 21) War far then is a possible necessity in defense of those who would invade, kill, and harm.

To recap what we have just learned from Fortson above: First of all we can understand that there is a value and heavy emphasis on loyalty to family and group ties. Second, we see what appears to be inequality through the cast system and in gender relations. Third, we see that these people live in a world that is bent on warfare and the taking from other clans. Finally, there is no organized law that pulls these groups together, they are warring brothers. I believe this helps to provide insight into a possible reason for the establishment of “inequality” and slavery.

Using slavery through war as a starting place for this argument, I can see very few options, life as a slave, life imprisonment, or death. Life without slavery would continue to allow freedom and anonymity to the individual and the possibility of threat, harm and continued animosity toward the other party. This decision may actually make an ethical and philosophical statement about the value of life. At the same time it also represents wisdom in that imprisonment would use valuable resources for sustaining prisoners.

In turn, slavery as a debtor provides the opportunity for one to continue to provide for himself, his family, and pay off his debt with out imprisonment (or worse). If one where imprisoned for debt, there is no one to provide for the family, which could become more of a burden for the clan, represent the possibility of more debt accrual, and poor health or even death to family members.

In reference to the subjection and inequality of females, an institution such as this is easily dismissed and scrutinized. However, in the process of these critiques people may stop short of acknowledging the value of such a structure in a proto-culture. In a world that was hostile and dangerous for all people, not just those who are physically weaker, this normative practice would allow for protection and provision of females. It is easy for us to think of the strong, independent and self sufficient women of our day and then to extrapolate it or project that model onto all women at all times. There is often a large inconsideration and disapproval of primitive or prehistoric people due to this type of ideology. In doing this, there is a great failure to recognize the fact that the females of our day were only permitted to arrive at this independent state they now possess, largely due to the protective and secure environment in which they now live.

These thoughts are in need of further development but their lack of development does not disqualify the position as a possible perspective and logical response in each given situation. It also provides for a basis of good intentionality on the part of a patriarchal society. In our day there is a great hatred of the masculine, particularly in the American “anti-male dominance” attitude that is written into of our hearts and minds as being the downfall of all societies. On the other hand, just because this is a possible background and logical reason for these norms, this does not mean that these practices were not abused, they probably were. My argument is not to establish a case for slavery and the subjugation of females. I simply wish to propose that these people (and all people who had similar customs) are not wrong in their thinking or actions in virtue of our “misunderstanding” of them. If they are wrong, it is because of the abuse of such things, not for their value of human life and their goal to protect and secure those they love.

The Indo-European Religion – Possibility of Monotheism

This religion was notably polytheistic, not only in relationship to its offshoots in surrounding Aryan nations but this is also evidenced within the Indo-European group itself. While researching, I found several interesting similarities in my various sources but there is one that I am particularly interested in pointing out. Win Corduan, like the other scholars I have observed, begins his discussion on the polytheistic nature of the Aryan religion. First, he presents a case for the asuras and the deavas and discussing the various names of these gods. However, after doing this he enters into a discourse concerning the origins of he Zoroastrian monotheism, this is where I became intrigued. To make sure that I portray this assertion accurately I quote Win Corduan below.

“Behind this pantheon, however, we find the remnants of an original monotheism, although it had undergone several changes. The same root word, div, which became the source of the word daevas, originally served as the word for a single God, known in Indian as Dyaus Pitar, which means literally “father god” (note how the stem of pitar survives the words such as paternal). In various permutations, this name survived into Greek mythology as Zeus Pater or its Latin form, Jupiter. This god was believed to live in the sky; by the time of the Aryan invasions, his identity had merged into the sky itself, and so we have the sky god Varuna in India or his counterpart Ouranos in Greek mythology. We meet him in Iran under the name of Uruwana; here he is also called Ahura Mazda, literally the ‘wise lord’ (Corduan 115).”

This concept is significant and gripping and is a topic that deserves further study. As a Christian it gives me a true since of awe and curiosity. Christian’s believe that all people do indeed come from a common source (the first being Adam and the second Noah) and that all language must as well. It is easy to speculate on this and to trust the scriptures to shed light or give hints of an ancient society but it encourages the faith of individuals to hear arguments such as the one Dr. Corduan provides. Later in the text Corduan makes the statement that it is likely Zoroastrianism was just a return to its monotheistic roots rather than some strange aberration and new concept.

“Thus we find in Iran, as elsewhere, the remnant of an original belief in one God. Though displaced by layers of religious development, this deity remains part of the religious heritage. The eventual move back to monotheism thus did not have to be either a brand-new invention or the result of some external influence. It was a return to what was already part of the culture” (Corduan 115).”

Opposing View Points

Since the beginning of study in this area, there has been great debate as to the specific origin of the people who influenced the world so much. The origin of language has the possibility of not only meaning the spread of a particular dialect but the possibility of being the “original” culture. There are many who would like to see India as the originating land and people group, but there is insufficient archeological and philological data to support this claim. Not to mention that the Hindu’s own Vedas recording the Arya invaders from the north, which seems to work against this claim. There is interesting work being done in relationship to the Indus Valley people. This phrase is typically used when referring to the culture or civilization that existed before the migration of the Aryan people into the Indus Valley. Archeologists have discovered the remains of ancient cities that trace back to an earlier time than the understood date of Aryan migration. One of the fundamental contrasting points to explain the difference between the Indus Valley People and the Aryan people is that the Aryans travelers were “Agrarian” clan like people and the Indus People were city dwelling and “civilized” for their time period. While some scholars are seeking to provide evidence that these early Cities provide the religious originality and influence of Vedic and Avestaian traditions, the majority of scholarly and archeological research points to the traditional view that the nomadic Aryans provided this heritage and background. In fact, the majority of the evidence points to the Aryans coming from the steppes of southern Russia (Kenoyer 15).

Through this study I feel that I have been swimming in waters that only get deeper and deeper the more I search them. I have concluded that there is a great supply of resources available for a lifetime of study in this particular area. Therefore, the problem with type of exploration is not lack of information; the problem is lack of time. In this paper I have attempted to gain an understanding of the Indo-European people and provide a basic explanation for who they were and how they lived.

Works Cited

Kenoyer, Jonathan Mark. Ancient Cities of the Indus Valley Civilization

New York: Oxford University Press, 1998

Corduan, Winfried. Neighboring Faiths: A Christian Introduction to World Religions

Downers Grove: Inter Varsity Press, 1998

Fortson, Benjamin W. IV: Indo-European Language and Culture: An Introduction

Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2004

Bryant, Edwin. The Quest for the Origins of Vedic Culture: The Indo-Aryan Migration

Debate. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004

Day, John V. Indo-European Origins: The Anthropological Evidence

Washington D.C. : Institute for the Study of Man, 2001

Moulton, James Hope. Early Zoroastrianism

London: Williams and Norgate, 1913

Avatara: Exploring the Idea of Incarnation

Avatara: Exploring the Idea of Incarnation

J. Roscoe Womack III

11.07.2007

I can remember times in my walk as a Christian when I was afraid to examine claims or arguments that would seemingly undermine the foundational beliefs of Christianity. It is threatening to have someone critique your ideas, presuppositions, and worldview. The lives of individuals are shaped by such foundational things. During that stage of my life I did not realize that my method of dealing with a challenge was to ignore it, discredit it, or dismiss it as something unrelated. This reaction to critique demonstrated that I had some level of doubt and skepticism toward my own beliefs and ideological system.

I assert that people should be cautious when doing studies or examinations of various worldviews. Young learners should only do these studies under educated leaders who have ventured into these philosophies, who possess a strong biblical understanding of God (and know Him to be true, first and above all). It is in this spirit that I can approach other worldviews and value them. While do not believe that other religions are a full revelation of God, I do believe that they have come from the original source of all human to Divine interaction. As all people have one original ancestry and lineage, so there is one original religious heritage through which we find common ground. By this, I do not declare or affirm that all religions are the same or that all religions are right and therefore true. However, I do believe that ancestry is one of several explanations for commonality among the world’s religions.

This paper is focused on the examination of the doctrine of “incarnation,” particularly centered within the Hindu religion. This philosophy within Hindu tradition is of chief interest to me because of my own belief that Christ is the Son of God and the second person of the Trinity who became incarnate and human. In my writing I hope to explore the Hindu concept of incarnation, to discover its history and purpose, and to compare the philosophy of Avatara to the incarnate Christ.

According to the Vedic Encyclopedia, the term Avatar in its truest sense means “descent” or “one who descends.” This is also referred to as the “incarnation” of a deity. (Vedic Encyclopedia) Within the idea of incarnation we must understand that there is a distinction between two similar but separate concepts. The first delineation is that of a deity who simply appears in earthy form, the second is that of a deity who actually becomes “earthly.” To provide an example of this, let us consider a costume party where an individual dresses up like a cat. This individual may very well represent some of the best characteristics of “cat-ness,” she may have fur, whiskers, a long tail, and even make cat noises. She may be so convincing (though not likely) that some people may even believe she is a cat. However, in this scenario, we must note that there is not “true change”: the individual does not take on the true nature of a cat. In the same way, an avatar may take on the appearance and characteristics of an earthly creature, but that does not mean that he is taking on the essential nature of that creature. On the other hand, an “incarnation” could imply the taking on the fleshly nature or essence of a particular earthly being. This is more than just taking on a physical body or form. This type of incarnation is the “becoming” – in true essence – that very creature. With this said, a deity can simply appear to be earthly or can actually “be” of earthy nature.

The function and purpose of an avatar within the Hindu tapestry is primarily to restore dharma. While we see the various incarnations performing different functions throughout history, we find that all of these activities revolve around this primary goal. (Bowker 39) Dharma is defined as “the true teaching of religion”. Below are a few quotes from Bhagavad-Gita As It Is and the Bhagavad-Gita to explains this further:

“Therefore each time and avatara, or incarnation of the Lord, has a particular mission, and they are all described in the revealed scriptures. No one should be accepted as an avatara unless he is referred to by scripture. It is not a fact that the Lord appears only on Indian soil. He can manifest Himself anywhere and everywhere, and whenever He desires to appear. In each and every incarnation He speaks as much about religion as can be understood by a particular people under their particular circumstances. But the mission is the same – to lead people to God consciousness and obedience to the principles of religion.” (Prabhupada 275)

“For the protection of the good, for destruction of evil, and for the establishment of righteousness, I come into being from age to age.” (Bhagavad-Gita, 4.8)

Within these quotes we find that the mission focus of an avatar is to bring humanity to God consciousness and obedience to the principles of religion. This process is the response to the belief that there has been a degradation of the true dharma that over time the practice has become corrupt or rotten in some way. Hence, there is a need for the divine lord to manifest himself and to set things right again. These texts also conclude that the deity is not limited in his ability to appear wherever he wishes. This ability allows him to perform his restorative work wherever and in whatever manner it needs to occur. According to Hindu scriptures the manifestation has taken place many times.

Yet within the Hindu context there can be any number of divine manifestations. According to Sanjay Rath there are six basic categories of avatar: purusa-avataras, lila-avataras, guna-avataras, manvantara-avataras, yuga-avataras, and saktyavesa-avataras.

The categories above encompass a total of 25 avatars. While these are distinctions and subcategories of avatar, I do not have enough time or space in this presentation to elaborate on all 25. Therefore, for this paper, when I discuss a specific Hindu avatara I will always refer to an avatar that is associated within the “dasa-avatara” grouping. The term dasa-avatara does not refer to one of the above categories but rather is the name used to identify the 10 most popular avatars, also known as the great avatars. The incarnations are not separate from the categories given above but rather exist in one ore more of the categories and are only grouped differently due to their popularity. (Rath 5)

These ten incarnations all extend from Vishnu the “Preserver” god. This Preserver god is accompanied by two other gods who together make up the “Triad” of Hinduism. This cluster of three deities belongs to the guna-avataras grouping; they are associated with controlling the modes of nature, which are: Creation, Maintenance, and Destruction. The first god within this triad is Brahma the creator, the second is Vishnu the preserver, and the third is Shiva the destroyer. (Vedic Encyclopedia) It is difficult to speculate as to why these three would be placed within an Avatara context due to their standard scriptural and religious contexts referring to them as deities and not avatars. However, if we are to understand the Brahman as being the impersonal absolute, then I suppose that any personification of that “one-ness” would in some sense be a descent or incarnation of those “attributes” or modes of nature, namely: creation, preservation/maintenance, and destruction. While, I have no external support of this idea, it would seem to me, a fairly logical conclusion.

Early Vedic religion does not show the prominence of these three gods. Rather, the early roots of Indo religion seem to revolve around Varuna the god of moral and physical laws, Indra the great warrior god (to whom Vishnu is brother), and Agni the god of fire who brings light and warmth to the world. However, as the religious heritage evolves over time, we see the initial gods of the Indo people give way to the Triad that is known today. (Braswell 23)

Vishnu in Early Hindu Literature

In an attempt to look at the historical record and the presence of Vishnu and his manifestations, t is necessary to explore the earliest writings of Hindu scriptures. According to the translation that I researched for this document, we find his name mentioned 103 times in the Rig-Vedas. Below I have documented Vishnu’s earliest appearance in the Rig-Vedas:

“16 The Gods be gracious unto us even from the place whence Visnu strode

Through the seven regions of the earth!

17 Through all this world strode Visnu; thrice his foot he planted, and the whole

Was gathered in his footstep's dust.

18 Visnu, the Guardian, he whom none deceiveth, made three steps; thenceforth

Establishing his high decrees.

19 Look ye on Vishnu’s works, whereby the Friend of Indra, close-allied,

Hath let his holy ways be seen.

20 The princes evermore behold that loftiest place where Visnu is,

Laid as it were an eye in heaven.

21 This, Vishnu's station most sublime, the singers, ever vigilant,

Lovers of holy song, light up.” (Rig-Vedas 01:022:16-21)

This passage seems to be alluding to the mythic incarnation of Visnu in the form of the Dwarf, Vamana. In this story Vamana tricks king Bali into surrendering to him a section of Land. The agreement was that Vamana could acquire all which he could traverse with three steps. In turn, Vishnu returns to his true form and envelops the universe within his allotted steps, thus restoring the universe to Indra. (Natha 80) While this section of Hindu literature does not provide the entire story, there seems to be some indication that a philosophy of “Avatara” had been established at this early date. Unless this text was added at a later date, we can conclude that the myth of Vamana was known to the people writing the Rig-Veda. Therefore, these early people would also have had at least some concept of the incarnation of a deity. I believe that there is at least one other observation to be made from the information presented above. If the Rig-Vedas are indeed the earliest known Hindu text then there must be some earlier source that would provide the mythology to the individuals writing this text. While I will not spend a great deal of time exploring this idea I feel that it is at least noteworthy to state this observation. There may even be some evidence for the possibility of an oral tradition through which these stories have been passed down.

Other Ancient Traditions of Incarnation

There seems to be some philological data that indicates the term Vishnu may be derived from early Indo-European language. If this is true, it would provide evidence of a source that would predate the Rig-Vedas. It may also offer some explanation for an oral tradition. It is just as significant to note that while the philological evidence may demonstrate a linguistic heritage and lineage of the word “Vishnu,” it does not alone give us evidence that these early civilizations believed in or ascribed to any doctrine of Avatara. Unfortunately, I have failed to gather the philological evidence to support this conclusion and can therefore, lay no claim to the assertion above. The only information from the author (Erhard J. Knobloch) that I have discovered thus far is all written in German and I am as of yet, incapable of reading that particular language.

While it may be difficult for me to establish or produce information to build a linguistic bridge between an Indo-European concept of incarnation and he Hindu concept, I have more than sufficient information to suggest that the idea of incarnate deities was not unique to Hindu thought. Therefore, it is likely that the ancestral civilization which links these two cultures could have also ascribed to a belief in the physical manifestation of a divine being.

Even in my earliest education, I was fascinated with Greco Roman mythology. From Jason and the Argonauts to travels of Odysseus, I learned fascinating tales of human and divine interaction. These deities would not only take on lesser forms in order to interact with humanity they were in fact projected or magnified forms of humanity themselves. These memories of mythical gods who descended to our terrestrial plane of existence led me into contemplating the possibility of other like ancestral mythology.

I began researching the possibility of a cultural and historical connection to the Indo-European people. While reviewing various resources, I came across a fascinating character within Irish legend. We are told that “Fintan” was an antediluvian who escaped drowning in the great “deluge” or flood by being transformed into a Salmon. The legend goes on to tell of the loss of the “wonderful book” that was eventually recovered from the bottom of the sea, “without a spot or stain upon it.” Marcus Keane tells us that we can still see the figure of the “Divine Fish” with men kneeling in adoration sculpted on the Cross of Kells. (Keane 85) Although there is a great deal of legend and other narratives concerning Fintan, this particular story made an immediate connection to the legend of Matsya the fish. In Hindu scriptures, the first avatar of Vishnu is the incarnation of Matsya. The purpose of the Matsya Avatara was to retrieve the Vedas that were stolen by a demon during the great deluge and then lost in the sea.

Within his book, Keane further argues for a monotheist belief system that existed in early Ireland before the existence of the polytheistic and animistic ritualism. Apparently, there was a belief in a deity who was called Endee or Endeus which is literally translated “The One God.” Within this religion there was also the belief that there would be a savior who would be the son of Endeus and the seed of woman. The son was called “Bar-en-de” or Bar-en-deus. In the story of Fenton above there may be a great deal of mythology that has evolved and invaded the original story. It is also not difficult for one to think that Fintan was of human origin and therefore not a true incarnation in any sense. However, according to the Irish literature the Son of God was worshiped in Ireland under the name of Fin or Finian. Keane states “the identity of Finian to Barende is confirmed by the fact, that one of the names of Barende was Fin-Bar.” If this is true, then there seems to be a fairly concrete argument for establishing the profound similarity between the Hindu incarnation and the incarnation described within Irish legend. (Keane 85)

I find it intriguing that there are such parallel stories found worlds apart. I suppose that these chronicles could be dismissed as happenstance if they were not so similar in detail. However, they seem to almost have an undeniable connection and common heritage. I have found several sources that refer to phrase “seed of a woman.” This is the thought that somehow God would come to earth as a “created one” to restore and reestablish the world that is fallen, depraved, or dead. J. Garnier has written a book that explores the origins of pagan idolatry. In his discourse he mentions that the “seed of woman” doctrine is one that has been taught throughout the history of the world from the earliest prophets and the first translated messages of the night sky. Garnier further argues for a supernatural explanation for the conception of avatar and of the impossibility of this idea arising from naturalistic or evolutionary causes. (Garnier 316)

“It is in the last degree improbable that the idea of the Creator taking human form should have suggested itself to the mind of man. All ancient cosmologies recognize a primary creator of all things, but what is there in creation that could have suggested the idea that the Creator Himself should become created? It is wholly opposed to the very conclusion based upon the knowledge of the things which are seen.” (Garnier 317)

This author continues his argument by illustrating how exceptionally similar animals and humans are. His intention is to demonstrate how we are of the same physical “nature and instincts,” and yet man is so removed from the lower life forms that it would be nearly impossible to consider ourselves becoming one of them. In turn, he asserts that within the early concept of divinity, one would find it equally impossible to conceive the notion of God becoming human. (Garnier 317)

Christian Model of the Incarnation

Form the information we have studied thus far, it is apparent that the conception of incarnation and of Avatar are not exclusive to Christianity or to any other religion. In fact, we can see now that most religions hold some belief in divine descent and have as far into our history as we can trace. With this in mind, we are challenged to explore the various aspects, characteristics, and notions surrounding cultural beliefs in or about incarnation. Many times within ideological systems, we are faced with similarities and corresponding theories concerning profound truth. In these situations we often begin to feel as if we are boxed in and led to conclude that “two things” must be the “same thing” because they have “one thing” in common. I believe that the doctrine of incarnation can cause us to feel very much this way. From what I have learned through this paper, it is simple for me to conclude that these ideas have come from a common source. However, a common source and similar idea does not grant me the right to conclude that the Hindu Avatara model and the Christian concept of incarnation are truly the same thing. I can not, by these things, conclude that Christ is just another “avatar” who appeared to his culture and to his people to fix the problem of his age.

Toward the beginning of this dialogue I explained the different views of incarnation. From the first vantage point, we can comprehend the costume example of incarnation and from the second, we see the idea of taking on, changing, and adding to the essence of the divine being. Hindu belief would lean toward the first understanding. An Avatar may, totally, appear to be human; but, in the end, he sheds his “humanity” as if it were a covering or costume serving him toward one specific end. The early church faced a similar concept called Docetism. The Docetists believed that Jesus was only human in his appearance and was not fully human. (Sheth 104) I have provided a quote from Win Corduan to explain this further:

“Vishnu, even though his avatars are born, possibly suffer and eventually die, the are not fully human. Their humanity (or bodily appearance) is a guise that they eventually put off again. By contrast, Christian theology holds that the incarnation of Christ is complete and permanent. Jesus is fully God, but is also fully human, and he has not abdicated either nature”. (Corduan 192)

As I thought through the differences between the Avatars and Christ there were a few distinctions that initially came to mind. First, the avatars have come into this world many times and in various forms. Christ came into the world one time and in the form of a Man. Second, while Jesus will return one day, the Avatars do not appear multiple times as the same avatar, only once as that particular manifestation. Third, Christ came into the world to save the world “once and for all”. By taking all of our sin upon himself he died a substitutionary death. The Avatars come back from “age to age” to reestablish dharma for a particular people at a particular time, we do not find them dieing in the place of a humanity that has been separated from God. So despite all the similarities, there are several key differences between Christ and Avataras.

Through this paper, I have begun a study and kindled a flame of interest that will burn for the rest of my life. I have found such profound and intriguing ideas about incarnation, that I will take much exploration and examination beyond this brief introduction to the topic. It has been my intention to explore the history and scope of the concept of Divine incarnation. I have learned a great deal and have had the opportunity to see how broad this doctrine really is. At the end of this search, I realize that I am merely scratching the surface of a subject that could take me a lifetime to pursue.

12

Womack

Works Cited

Besant, Annie Wood. Avataras: Lectures Delivered at the Twenty-fourth Anniversary

Meeting of the Theosophical Society. December 1899 Adyar Madras: 1899.

Bhaskarananda, Swami. The Essentials of Hinduism: A Comprehensive Overview of the

World's Oldest Religion . Seattle: Viveka Press, 2002

Bowker, John. The Cambridge Illustrated History of Religions.

New York: Cambridge University Press, 2002

Braswell, George W. Jr. Understanding World Religions

Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1994

Corduan, Winfried. A Tapestry of Faiths: The Common Threads Between Christianity &

World Religions. Downers Grove: Inter Varsity Press, 2002

Garnier, Colonel J. The Worship Of The Dead or The Origin And Nature Of Pagan

Idolatry and Its Bearing Upon The Early History Of Egypt And Babylonia . London: Chapman & Hall, 1904

Hiltebeitel, Alf. Rethinking India's Oral and Classical Epics: Draupadi among Rajputs,

Muslims, and Dalits. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999

Keane, Marcus. The Towers and Temples of Ancient Ireland: Their origin and history

discussed from a new point of view. Boston: Adamant Media Corporation, 2004

Matchett, Freda. Krsna: Lord or Avatara?: The Relationship Between Krsna and Visnu.

Richmond, Surrey: Curzon Press, 2001

Natha, Shanmukha Anantha. Divine Initiation.

Miami: Shri Kali Publications, 2001

Partridge, Christopher H. Introduction To World Religions

Minneapolis: First Fortress Press, 2005

Prabhupada, A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami. Bhagavad-gita As It Is.

Los Angeles: Bhaktivedanta Book Trust, 1989

Rath, Pt. Sanjay. Dasavatara: Dr. B. V. Raman Memorial Conference on Gochara

(Transit) and Workshop on Vedic Remedies 11.15 – 1.00 January 19, 2006

New Delhi: India International Center, 2006

Sharma, Arvind. Our Religions: The Seven World Religions Introduced by Preeminent

Scholars from Each Tradition. New York: Harper Collins Publishers, 1993

Sheth, Noel S.J. “Hindu Avatara and Christian Incarnation: A Comparison.” Philosophy

East & West 52 (2002): 98-125.

The Bhagavad-gita. London: Penguin Books, 1962

The Rig-Veda. London: Penguin Books, 1981

“Incarnations and Expansions of the Lord.” The Vedic Encyclopedia.

Los Angeles: Bhaktivedanta Book Trust, 2001-2007 http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/index.htm