Harmless Saints and Godlings.
Most of these saints and godlings whom we have been considering, are comparatively harmless, and even benevolent. Such is nearly always the case with the ghosts of the European dead, who are constantly deified. Perhaps because the Sâhib is such a curiously incomprehensible personage to the rustic, he is believed to retain his powers in the other world. But it is a remarkable and unconscious tribute to the foreign ruler that his ghost should be beneficent.
The gardener in charge of the station cemetery in Mirzapur some time ago informed me that he constantly sees the ghosts of the ladies and gentlemen buried there coming out for a walk in the hot summer nights, and that they never harm him.
But with ordinary graves it is necessary to be cautious. As appears in the cycle of tales which turn on the magic ointment which enables the possessor to see the beings of the other world, spirits hate being watched. The spirit, for instance, often announces its wishes. When the Emperor Tughlaq began to build the tomb of the Saint Bahâwal Haq, a voice was heard from below, saying, “You are treading on my body.” Another site was chosen at a short distance, and the voice said, “You are treading on my knees.” He went a little further, and the voice said, “You are treading on my toes.” So he had to go to the other end of the fort, and as the voice was not heard there, the tomb was built. If you visit an old tomb, it is well to clap your hands, as the ghost sometimes revisits its resting-place, and if discovered in déshabille, is likely to resent the intrusion in a very disagreeable manner. So it is very dangerous to pollute a tomb or insult its occupant in any way, and instances have occurred of cases of epilepsy and hysteria, which were attributed to the neglect of these precautions.
Thus, there is nothing permanent, no established rule of faith in the popular belief of the rustic. Discredited saints and shrines are always passing into contempt and oblivion; new worthies are being constantly canonized. The worst part of the matter is that there is no official controller of the right to deification, no Advocatus Diaboli to dispute the claims of the candidate to celestial honours. At the same time the system, though often discredited by fraud, admirably illustrates the elastic character of the popular creed. Hinduism would hardly be so congenial to the minds of the masses, if some rigid supervising agency disputed the right of any tribe to worship its hero, of any village to canonize its local worthy. The steady popularity of the system, for the present at least, shows that it satisfactorily provides for the religious wants of the people.
[1] Tylor, “Primitive Culture,” ii. 113.
[2] Hearn, “Aryan Household,” 18; Spencer, “Principles of Sociology,” i. 270 sq; Whitney, “Oriental and Linguistic Studies,” 1st Ser. 59; Mommsen, “History of Rome,” i. 73.
[3] Dalton, “Descriptive Ethnology,” 132, 133, 139, 160, 229; Campbell, “Notes,” 2 sqq.; Tylor, “Primitive Culture,” ii. 117.
[4] Hislop, “Papers,” 16 sq.
[5] Dalton, loc. cit., 158.
[6] Campbell, “Notes,” 5; Tylor, loc. cit., ii. 116.
[7] E.g. Monier-Williams, “Brâhmanism and Hinduism,” 278 sqq.
[8] See Frazer, “Golden Bough,” i. 177.
[9] Gubernatis, “Zoological Mythology,” i. 279.
[10] “North Indian Notes and Queries,” i. 95.
[11] “Bombay Gazetteer,” vii. 16 sq.
[12] Malcolm, “Central India,” i. 144.
[13] Dalton, “Descriptive Ethnology,” 148.
[14] “Rambles and Recollections,” i. 269 sqq.
[15] “Central Provinces Gazetteer,” Introduction, cxxi.
[16] “Berar Gazetteer,” 191.
[17] For an account of this worthy see “North Indian Notes and Queries,” i. 163.
[18] Spencer, “Principles of Sociology,” i. 187; Lubbock, “Origin of Civilization,” 284; Tylor, “Primitive Culture,” i. 458 sq.
[19] Ralston, “Songs of the Russian People,” 327.
[20] Hislop, “Papers,” 19; Appendix, iii.
[21] “Panjâb Ethnography,” 115.
[22] “Annals,” i. 79.
[23] Ferguson, “History of Indian Architecture,” 470; “Râjputâna Gazetteer,” iii. 46; Growse, “Mathura,” 138.
[24] “Berâr Gazetteer,” 191.
[25] “Descriptive Ethnology,” 138.
[26] Tod, “Annals,” ii. 544, 546, 676; Wright, “History of Nepâl,” 159, 212.
[27] “North Indian Notes and Queries,” ii. 199; “Panjâb Notes and Queries,” iv. 44 sq. In the “Katha Sarit Sâgara” (Tawney, ii. 254), a mother proposes to go into the fire with her dead children.
[28] “Institutes,” xi. 84.
[29] Frazer, “Golden Bough,” i. 8.
[30] Leland, “Etruscan Roman Remains,” 202.
[31] Tod, “Annals,” ii. 430 sq.
[32] Cunningham, “Archæological Reports,” xvii. 160 sqq.; Buchanan, “Eastern India,” i. 488; “North Indian Notes and Queries,” ii. 38.
[33] “Oudh Gazetteer,” i. 540 sq.
[34] Oldham, “Memoir of Ghazipur,” i. 55 sq.
[35] Baillie, “N.-W.P. Census Report,” 214.
[36] Tod, “Annals,” ii. 40.
[37] Atkinson, “Himâlayan Gazetteer,” ii. 817; “North Indian Notes and Queries,” iii. 5.
[38] “Oudh Gazetteer,” i. 284.
[39] Tod, “Annals,” i. 659 sq.
[40] Sherring, “Sacred City,” 118, 174; Moorcroft, “Journey to Ladakh,” i. 190.
[41] “Panjâb Notes and Queries,” i. 1; “Indian Antiquary,” xi. 290; “Gazetteer, N.-W.P.,” vi. 634; “Dâbistân,” ii. 24 sq.
[42] Atkinson, loc cit., ii. 805; “Bombay Gazetteer,” xi. 300, 302.
[43] Cunningham, “Archæological Reports,” xvi. 28; Grierson, “Behâr Peasant Life,” 407; “Maithili Chrestomathy,” 3 sqq.
[44] Risley, “Tribes and Castes,” i. 256.
[45] “Berâr Gazetteer,” 199 sq.
[46] Buchanan, “Eastern India,” i. 83.
[47] Cunningham, “Archæological Reports,” xi. 129.
[48] “Oudh Gazetteer,” i. 517.
[49] “Rambles and Recollections,” i. 116.
[50] “North Indian Notes and Queries,” iii. 200.
[51] “Berâr Gazetteer,” 195.
[52] The Persian version of the play has been translated by Sir Lewis Pelly. See Hughes’ “Dictionary of Islâm,” 185 sq.
[53] The five Pîrs give their name to the Pîr Panjâl pass in Kashmîr (Jarrett, “Aîn-i-Akbari,” ii. 372, note). For another list of the Pîrs see Temple’s “Legends of the Panjâb,” ii. 372, note.
[54] See Brand, “Observations,” 197.
[55] For a very complete account of the cultus, see Mr. R. Greeven’s articles in Vol. I. “North Indian Notes and Queries,” afterwards republished as “Heroes Five.”
[56] “Panjâb Notes and Queries,” iv. 64.
[57] For instances see Frazer, “Golden Bough,” i. 279.
[58] Briggs, “Farishta,” i. 587.
[59] For the history of Masaud, see “Oudh Gazetteer,” i. 111 sqq.; Sleeman, “Journey through Oudh,” i. 48; Elliot, “Supplementary Glossary,” 51.
[60] Maclagan, “Panjâb Census Report,” 132; “North Indian Notes and Queries,” ii. 182; “Calcutta Review,” lx. 78 sqq.; Ibbetson, “Panjâb Ethnography,” 115; Oldham, “Contemporary Review,” xlvii. 412; “Panjâb Notes and Queries,” ii. 181 sq.; Temple, “Legends of the Panjâb,” i. 66 sqq.
[61] Ibbetson, loc. cit. 115 sq.
[62] Temple, “Legends of the Panjâb,” i. 121 sqq.; iii. 261 sqq.; Tod, “Annals,” ii. 492.
[63] “Indian Antiquary,” xi. 33 sq.; Cunningham, “Archæological Reports,” xvii. 159; “Panjâb Notes and Queries,” ii. 1.
[64] Rhys, “Lectures,” 502.
[65] Campbell, “Popular Tales,” i. 72.
[66] “Râjputâna Gazetteer,” ii. 37.
[67] “Bombay Gazetteer,” v. 218; Risley, “Tribes and Castes of Bengal,” i. 41.
[68] Miss Roalfe Cox, “Cinderella,” 484; Temple, “Wideawake Stories,” 423; Knowles, “Folk-tales of Kashmîr,” 21; Clouston, “Popular Tales,” i. 117; Tawney, “Katha Sarit Sâgara,” i. 14, note, 571.
[69] Yule, “Marco Polo,” i. 132 sq.
[70] Ibbetson, “Panjâb Ethnography,” 115.
[71] “Annals,” ii. 199, note.
[72] “Central Provinces Gazetteer,” 197 sq., 515.
[73] For the History of Farîd, see “Indian Antiquary,” xi. 33 sq.; Thomas, “Chronicles of the Pathân Kings,” 205; Ibbetson, “Panjâb Ethnography,” 115; Sleeman, “Rambles and Recollections,” ii. 165; Maclagan, “Panjâb Census Report,” 193.
[74] Führer, “Monumental Antiquities,” 69, 270; “North Indian Notes and Queries,” ii. 21, 56, 155, 189.
[75] “Karnâl Settlement Report,” 153.
[76] “Karnâl Gazetteer,” 103.
[77] “North Indian Notes and Queries,” iii. 17.
[78] “Oudh Gazetteer,” i. 92.
[79] “Panjâb Notes and Queries,” iii. 81.
[80] Mrs. Mîr Hasan ’Ali, “Observations on the Muhammadans of India,” ii. 324.
[81] Maclagan, “Panjâb Census Report,” 198.
[82] “North Indian Notes and Queries,” iii. 18.
[83] “Berâr Gazetteer,” 192.
[84] O’Brien, “Multâni Glossary,” 146.
[85] “Oudh Gazetteer,” i. 334; Cunningham, “Archæological Reports,” xvi. 5. For the Chanod shrine, “Bombay Gazetteer,” vi. 160.
[86] Risley, “Tribes and Castes,” i. 367.
[87] “North Indian Notes and Queries,” iii. 144.
[88] “Eastern India,” i. 82 sq.
[89] “Panjâb Notes and Queries,” iii. 143.
[90] “Reports,” i. 98, 130; xiv. 41; xxiii. 63.
[91] “Journal, Asiatic Society of Bengal,” xiii. 205; “Panjâb Notes and Queries,” i. 109.
[92] “Oudh Gazetteer,” i. 11 sq.
[93] “Central Provinces Gazetteer,” 175.
[94] Atkinson, “Himâlayan Gazetteer,” ii. 777; Wright, “History,” 114, 124.
[95] “Oudh Gazetteer,” i. 38.
[96] “Oudh Gazetteer,” i. 210 sq.
[97] Ibid., i. 8 sq.
[98] Campbell, “Notes,” 366.
[99] “North Indian Notes and Queries,” i. 50.
[100] Hunt, “Popular Romances,” 378.
[101] Forbes, “Râs Mâla,” ii. 332, quoted by Campbell, “Notes,” 15.
[102] “Legend of Perseus,” i. 72, 207.
[103] Lâl Bihâri Dê, “Folk-tales of Bengal,” 1, 117, 187; Tawney, “Katha Sarit Sâgara,” i. 52, 172, 355, 382; ii. 216; Knowles, “Folk-tales of Kashmîr,” 131, 416.
[104] Leland, “Etruscan Roman Remains,” 246.
CHAPTER V.
WORSHIP OF THE MALEVOLENT DEAD.
Πρώτη δὲ ψυχὴ Ἐλπήνορος ἦλθεν ἐταίρου,
Οὐ γάρ πω ἐτέθαπτο ὑπὸ χθονὸς εὐρυοδείης.
Odyssey, xi. 51, 52.
These deified ghosts and saints whom we have been discussing, though occasionally touchy and sensitive to insult or disrespect, are, as a rule, benevolent. But there is another class of beings at whose feet the rustic lies in grievous and perpetual bondage. These are the malevolent dead.