"Chapter I. Prehistoric times"
"Chapter II. Ice Age"
"Chapter III. Arctic regions"
"Chapter IV. Night of the Gods"
"Chapter V. Vedic Dawns"
"Chapter VI. Long day and long night"
"Chapter VII. Months and seasons"
"Chapter VIII. The path of the cows"
Promotional video:
"Chapter IX. Vedic myths about captive waters"
"Chapter IX. Vedic myths about captive waters. 1. Legend of Indra and Vritra"
"Chapter IX. Vedic myths about captive waters. 2. Four victories of Indra in the fight against Vala"
"Chapter IX. Vedic myths about captive waters. 3. Cosmology in the Rig Veda"
"Chapter IX. Vedic myths about captive waters. 4. Cosmic circulation of atmospheric waters in myths"
The hymn of the Rig Veda (X, 62, 2) says that the Angirasas, who helped Indra in his fight for the cows, defeated, as indicated in the hymn, Vala at the end of the year ("parivatsara"). This shows that the battle was annual, not daily. We also see in the passage (VIII, 32, 26) that the water demon Arbuda was killed by Indra, who used not his usual weapon vajra, but a block of ice - "hima". In addition to the fact that the battle was annual, we must understand that the conflict took place in winter, during the ice and snow season, and this is consistent with the statement in the Avesta that it was in winter that the waters, and with them the sun, stopped moving. The fortresses of Vritra are again described as "autumn" ("charadih"), which indicates the beginning of the battle in late autumn ("charade"), and it continued in winter. We saw further that a hundred night sacrifices took place, and now in Tir-Yasht it is said thatthat the battle of Tishtrya with Apaosha lasted either one or a hundred nights.
All these moments can be explained only through the Arctic theory or the theory of the long autumn night, but not by the daily battle of light with darkness.
We concluded that the battle between Indra and Vritra should have started during the charade (autumn) season and continued until the end of the shishira (cold season) season in the aquatic area of the nether world. Fortunately, this conclusion is strikingly revealed in a very important passage preserved in the Rig Veda, which gives us the true date of the beginning of the conflict with Vritra, although the real meaning of the passage has not yet been fully explained due to the fact that a true key to understanding its content has not been found.
In the hymn (II, 12, 11) we read: "Indra found Shambara abiding on the mountain in chatva-rimshyam sharadi." Chatvarimshyam is a common feminine numeral given here in the locative * case (local case), and similarly, charadi is also a locative of charades (autumn), a Sanskrit feminine word. And although these words are simple in themselves, but in this combination they can be perceived as two semantic variants or two constructions. "Chatvarimshyam" means "in the fortieth" and "charadi" means "in the autumn", then the meaning will be "in the fortieth autumn." But if both words are taken separately, then the meaning will be "for the fortieth, in the fall (autumn)."
Sayana and Western scholars accepted the first version and translate the passage as follows: "Indra found Shambara on the mountains in the fortieth autumn, that is, in the fortieth year", since the words denoting the seasons are understood as indications of the year, especially when accompanied by a numeral greater than "one" … Grammatically, this construction is correct, since the indicated forms of words are indeed given in the feminine gender and in the locative case, and if they are taken together, that is, in mutual combination, then it turns out "in the fortieth autumn or year." But what does the fact that Shambara was found by Indra in the fortieth year give us? Are we to assume that Indra has been in search of the demon for forty years? And that it was only at the end of such a long period that the enemy was finally found dwelling in the mountains? If so, then the conflict between Indra and Shambara could not have been one day or one year,but then it should be assumed that it happened once every forty years - such an assumption directly contradicts the statement in the hymn (X, 62, 2): "Vala was killed at the end of the year (parivatsara)." Some scholars have tried to find a way out of this situation, expressing the idea that the passage can be perceived as referring to the fact of famine or drought that happened forty years later, or that it could be a question of a war that lasted forty years between the Aryans, whose defense was Indra, and some local hill tribes protected by Shambara. But both of these assumptions are too vague and contrived to merit serious consideration and a good reputation. The story of Shambara is found many times in the Rig Veda, and everywhere it represents the conflict between Indra and Vritra.that it happened once every forty years - such an assumption directly contradicts the statement in the hymn (X, 62, 2): "Vala was killed at the end of the year (parivatsare)." Some scholars tried to find a way out of this situation, expressing the idea that the passage could be perceived as referring to the fact of famine or drought that happened forty years later, or that it could be a question of a war that lasted forty years, between the Aryans, on whose defense Indra stood, and some local hill tribes protected by Shambara. But both of these assumptions are too vague and contrived to merit serious consideration and a good reputation. The story of Shambara is found many times in the Rig Veda, and everywhere it represents the conflict between Indra and Vritra.that it happened once every forty years - such an assumption directly contradicts the statement in the hymn (X, 62, 2): "Vala was killed at the end of the year (parivatsare)." Some scholars tried to find a way out of this situation, expressing the idea that the passage could be perceived as referring to the fact of famine or drought that happened forty years later, or that it could be a question of a war that lasted forty years, between the Aryans, on whose defense Indra stood, and some local hill tribes protected by Shambara. But both of these assumptions are too vague and contrived to merit serious consideration and a good reputation. The story of Shambara is found many times in the Rig Veda, and everywhere it represents the conflict between Indra and Vritra.expressing the idea that the passage can be perceived as referring to the fact of famine or drought that happened forty years later, or that it could be a question of a war that lasted forty years, between the Aryans, on whose defense Indra stood, and some local mountain tribes, protected by Shambara. But both of these assumptions are too vague and contrived to merit serious consideration and a good reputation. The story of Shambara is found many times in the Rig Veda, and everywhere it represents the conflict between Indra and Vritra.expressing the idea that the passage can be perceived as referring to the fact of famine or drought that happened forty years later, or that it could be a question of a war that lasted forty years, between the Aryans, on whose defense Indra stood, and some local mountain tribes, protected by Shambara. But both of these assumptions are too vague and contrived to merit serious consideration and a good reputation. The story of Shambara is found many times in the Rig Veda, and everywhere it represents the conflict between Indra and Vritra.to earn serious attention and a good reputation. The story of Shambara is found many times in the Rig Veda, and everywhere it represents the conflict between Indra and Vritra.to earn serious attention and a good reputation. The story of Shambara is found many times in the Rig Veda, and everywhere it represents the conflict between Indra and Vritra.
The statement that this one passage speaks of a forty-year war with the natives looks ridiculous, if it can be explained in another way, avoiding violence against his words. This is a common technique in Sanskrit - the use of the locative case when indicating the month, day, season or year, when it is necessary to indicate the date of an incident. We still say so, and here is an example: "Karttika, shukla-pakshe, trayodashyam", which means "In the month of karttika, in the bright (his) half, on the thirteenth day." Ordinary numbers, being feminine words ("chaturthi, trayodashi …" etc.), are used without adding words such as "day" to indicate the date. In "Taittiriya Brahman" (I, 1, 9, 10) there is a phrase: "If the sacrificial fire is not consecrated at the end of the year, it will have to be consecrated on the twelfth later."Here "twelfth" is defined by the word "dvadashyam" - the usual feminine word in the locative case, meaning "on the twelfth day" after the end of the year. The word “chatvarimsyam” I mentioned above, quoted in the Vedic passage, can thus mean “fortieth day”, and “charadi” - season, that is, autumn. Then it all means: "Indra found Shambara staying on the mountains on the fortieth day of autumn."
In turn, the charade is the fourth season of the year, and the fortieth day of the charade can indicate a date such as seven months and ten days since the beginning of the year, which in ancient times began with the Vasanta season, that is, spring, which means it was the 220th day of the year. So, Indra fought with Shambara, that is, the annual conflict between light and darkness flared up, starting from the tenth day of the eighth month of the year. This was the 10th day of October, if you take March for the first month of the year, as in the ancient Roman calendar.
The hymn (I, 165, 6) says that Vishnu made his ninety horses gallop quickly along with four, and this indicates a year with four seasons of 90 days. With this structure of the year, each season is three months long, and the charade is the third in a series of seasons, and therefore the "fortieth day in the charade" marks the 10th day of the 8th month of the year. Thus, the passage indicates the real date of the annual struggle between Indra and Vritra, and if this were correctly understood from the very beginning, many useless speculations about the true essence of the legend of Vritra could have been avoided.
We have seen before that the seven Adityas, or monthly solar gods, were represented by their mother Aditi to all the gods in the previous "south" and that she discarded the eighth, Martand, because he was born underdeveloped. This means that he died shortly after birth, that is, the eighth month was not perfect, was not complete in terms of the number of his days, which directly indicates that in the first days of the eighth month the sun went beyond the horizon, and then Indra's struggle with Vritra - this was the "fortieth day in the charade", or the 10th day of the 8th month. This is the conclusion that the analysis of the passage leads us to. The legend of Aditi and the date of the beginning of the battle of Indra with Shambara (II, 12, 11) show us a remarkable mutual correspondence.
In accordance with this understanding, charade is the last season of sunshine, and it is appropriate to note here that etymologically the very meaning of the word "charade" supports our thought. After all, "charade" is derived from the root "sri", which means "to destroy, devastate" (Unadi, 127), and this initially indicates a season of decline and destruction.
The very fact of decline clearly speaks of the weakening of the power of the sun, and not of the drying up of herbs, as Sayana understood when commenting on the hymn (III, 32, 9). In the Taittiriya Samhita, we see the following text: “There are three lights, or powers of the sun: one in vasanta (spring), that is, in the morning, the second in grishma (summer), that is, noon, and the third in charade (autumn), that is, in the evening”(II, 1, 2, 5). We cannot perceive these words - morning, noon and evening - in their literal sense. The three periods of the day indicated by them follow the indication of the annual periods of the sun, and here the charade is called evening, that is, the time of the sun's decline. It follows from this that after the charade the sun did not shine in ancient times. Shabara's commentator's text shows that the power of the sun declined during the days of the charade, and the end of the charade was therefore an annual concession to the forces of darkness, or, more accurately,the double season of hemant and shishir (winter and cold season) was a long night with the sun below the horizon. It should also be mentioned that the word "himya" (literally "winter") is used in the Rig Veda to denote night (I, 34, 1), which emphasized that the winter season was a time of darkness.
But it may be objected to us that we have no right to believe that in ancient times time was counted simply by seasons and days, and therefore "chatvarim-shyam sharadi" cannot mean "on the 40th day in autumn." But this objection has no reliable basis, since we have many inscriptions in which the dates of events were determined only by indications of the seasons, as stated with many examples in the book "Inscriptions from the cave temples of Western India", written by Dr. Burgess and Bhagwanlal Indraji (1881). Even in the first centuries of our era, dates were indicated by mentioning the season, the first or second half of the lunar month and the day of one of them. In the treatises of the 4th-5th centuries A. D. for the first time a system of time measurement close to the modern one is presented by seasons, months, weeks and days. We have every reason to believe that many centuries before this date was determined much easier,for example by mentioning the season and the day in that season. And we see this method of measuring time by seasons and their days, for example, in the Avesta, where certain days of the year are indicated in this way.
In some ancient Iranian manuscripts, two ways of dating events are given: the first consists in indicating the "gakhanbar", that is, the season (the year then consisted of six seasons) and its day, and the second - in indicating the month and its day. Strictly speaking, we do not see the need to resort to such duplication to determine the day or year - one of these methods is sufficient to identify the desired day. It is very likely that the method of calculating seasons and days is the oldest of the two, and the lines containing the names of the months and days are a late introduction to the system, supplanting the older one. But, even assuming that double dating could have occurred in antiquity, we, in accordance with the course of our analysis, will take note that the dating method by mentioning the season and its day is the most ancient.and this justifies our attempt to interpret the words "chatvarimshyam sharadi" as "on the fortieth day in autumn."
One can admit a slight degree of doubt that the Vedic bards recorded in this passage the exact date of the beginning of the struggle of Indra with Shambara, but this passage, due to the lack of a true key to its decoding, for so long, unfortunately, has been misunderstood and incorrectly translated as oriental, and Western experts. The grammar's ability to associate the word "chatvarimshyam" as an adjective with the word "sharadi" has contributed to this misunderstanding. And although the Vedologists were unable to explain why, according to their interpretation, Shambara should be found in the 40th year, they nevertheless adhered to this concept, because they did not see anything else that changed this meaning.
The alternative construction I propose is very simple. Instead of taking the first word for an adjective that defines the second, I consider both words to be used interdependently in the locative case, but this is a very significant amendment, since the meaning of the passage changes. Until the Arctic theory was known, the attention of scientists was not attracted by the possibility of developing an alternative. Now we can clearly understand why it is said about Indra that he found the shambara on the 40th day of the charade, and also why the fortresses that sheltered the demon are described as "sharadih" ("autumn"), as well as the water demon Arbud is said that he was killed by ice ("hima").
Facts such as the disappearance of the sun below the horizon at the beginning of the eighth month in autumn, followed by a time of long twilight, a dark night lasting a hundred days and a long dawn of thirty days, serve as the basis of the legend associated with the Arctic, and every incident in it can be clearly and naturally explained using the Arctic theory.
Before we finish this analysis, it is necessary to dwell on one more event in the story of Vritra. We have seen that water and light were released at the same time after the killing of Vritra. These waters are sometimes said to be streams or rivers flowing upwards - "udancha" (II, 15, 6) and that there are seven of them (I, 32, 12; II, 12, 12).
The theory of cosmic circulation of air waters explains why these waters are described as moving upward at the same time as dawn: people believed that these currents lift the sun into the sky, and its light already appears above the horizon when air rivers begin to rush up from the lower world, where they were held Vritra. These waters, or rivers, were described according to the idea that they flow upward and bring the light of the sun. But the question arises before us - why was it believed that there were seven? Some thought that thunderstorm theory could provide a satisfactory answer to this question. Thus, Western scholars have proposed to consider the seven rivers mentioned as the seven rivers of the Punjab, which during the rainy season are overflowing with water, the one that Indra freed, and it took the form of thunderclouds. The rivers of the Punjab can therefore be appropriately described as having received freedom and fullness of water directly from Indra. In support of this explanation, we are referred to the Rig Veda (X, 75), as well as to the words "Hapta-Hindu" ("seven rivers"), which in the "Vendidad" (fargard 1) designate both Punjab and India. But this hypothesis, which seems convincing at first glance, is completely inadequate to the essence of the plot and cannot satisfactorily explain the sevenfold division of waters.
It has already been said above that the simultaneous release of water and light can only be correlated with the theory of cosmic circulation of air waters, and therefore we cannot accept the earthly rivers of the Punjab or any other region for the seven rivers that were liberated by Indra for their aspiration upward (“udancha "). Again, the very name "Punjab" translates as "Five Rivers", and not as "land of seven rivers". And these five rivers are discussed in the Vaja-saneya Samhita (XXXIV, 11). The term Panchanada (Five Rivers) is more appropriate for Punjab than Sapta Sindhavah or Hapta Hindu in the Avesta. But we could overcome this difficulty by assuming that the Kubha and Saraswati rivers, or any two other tributaries of the Indus, were included in this group by the Vedic bards when they meant the seven rivers. The Rig Veda (X, 75) mentions about 15 different rivers, including the Ganges, Yamuna, Kubha, Kruma,Gomati, Rasu and five rivers of Punjab, but nowhere do we find indications of specific seven rivers. This caused disagreement among scientists. So, Sayana adds the Ganga and Yamuna to the Punjab rivers, and Max Muller adds Indus and Saraswati, while K. Lassen and A. Ludwig insist on the Kubha river. All this shows that there is no solid basis for the assumption that the expression "seven rivers" can be correlated with the "land of five rivers".
In the Rig Veda, about 12 times the expression "sapta sindhavah" ("seven rivers") occurs, and five of them clearly state that Indra liberated seven rivers along with the liberation of the cows, or the revival of the dawn (I, 32, 12; II, 12, 3, 12; IV, 28, 1, etc.). For the above reasons, we cannot believe that these lines are talking about earthly rivers. In other verses, one cannot find a single indication that we are talking about earthly rivers, but, most likely, they speak of heavenly rivers as "sapta sindhavas".
In the Rig Veda, there are three groups of definitions of "seven rivers" - heavenly, earthly and underground. So, in the hymn (X, 64, 8) we see “three times three flowing rivers”, and the waters are said to “flow forward three times, seven and seven” (X, 75, 1). Therefore, it becomes clear that, like the mentions of the Ganges in the Puranas, the Vedic bards assigned one group of seven rivers to heaven, another to earth, and the third to the lower world, which is similar to the reception of placing the gods in three groups of eleven: one group on heaven, another to earth and a third to waters (I, 139, 11; I, 34, 11; X, 65, 9). Therefore, we cannot say that the seven-digit group of terrestrial rivers was unfamiliar to the Vedic bards, but, for the above reason, we cannot assume that it was determined by the Punjab rivers, and then this idea was transferred to the upper and lower celestial hemispheres.
We must always remember that the seven-digit division of waters in the Rig Veda does not represent something self-existent, but is only a reflection of the generally accepted principle of grouping phenomena or facts in this monument. Thus, we find in the text seven earthly refuge (I, 22, 16), seven mountains (VIII, 96, 2), seven rays from the horses of the sun (I, 164, 3), seven hotri priests (VIII, 60, 16), seven countries and seven Adityas (IX, 114, 3), seven rites (IX, 8, 4), seven sisters (X, 5, 5-6) and possibly seven heavens, seven mountains, seven oceans and seven lower worlds.
We find the same division into groups of seven in other monuments of Aryan literature related to mythology. For example, in the Avesta it is said that the earth is divided into seven karshvars (Yasht, X, 16, 64), and in Greek mythology, it is said about seven layers of heaven, located one above the other. Therefore, we can assume that the seven-digit division corresponds to the entire Indo-European period. If the rivers liberated by Indra so that they can flow upward are not terrestrial, then we can ask: how do we estimate the number of rivers and the origin of the definition of "Hapta-Hindu" in the Avesta? In response, it should be pointed out that the key to solving this problem is hidden in the fact of the simultaneous liberation of water and light by Indra after the killing of Vritra.
In the hymn (II, 12, 12) it is said that Indra, who made seven rivers flow again, is called "sap-ta-rashmih", that is, "having seven rays." This serves as an indication that there must be some connection between the seven rays and the seven rivers. In the Scriptures of the Parsis, we also see that the waters and the sun move at the same time. And if so, what could be more natural than the assumption that seven suns need seven horses or seven rivers to carry them across the sky, which is quite consistent with the story of Dirghatamas, who was carried by the waters (I, 158, 6). Returning again to the legend of Aditi, we see there seven suns (seven gods of the months), located in seven different regions and giving people the heat of the sun (different degrees of warmth) for seven months. How could seven suns move across seven different parts of the sky,if there were no such means of transportation for them as seven different air rivers flowing up from the nether world? Moreover, each of them carries its own separate sun. In a word, if we establish the possibility of a close connection between water and light, then it is not difficult to understand why water and light have seven figures.
The Rig Veda expressively mentions seven celestial rivers (IX, 54, 2), and many passages describe the simultaneous beginning of a new course of rivers and the appearance of a dawn on the horizon, explains the Arctic theory of ideas about the cosmic circulation of heavenly waters.
The expression “Hapta-Hindu” in the Avesta, which is believed to define India, can be explained by assuming that the form “sapta sindhavah” (“seven rivers”) is older, which arose even before the separation of the Aryas. It was carried by the Aryans to new places of their settlement, and there it was applied to new regions or countries, just as the British colonists transfer the names of their native places to their new settlements. "Hapta-Hindu" is not the only definition in the Avesta for the Aryan countries. We find in their lists such names as Varena, Haetumant, Rangha and Harahvaiti - in Zenda these are the equivalents of the words Varuna, Setumat, Rasa and Saraswati. But it does not follow from this that the Vedic god Varuna received his name from the country of Varena, where it was given to him by the admirers of Mazda, the same applies to both Race and Sarasvati. Sometimes these two names even in the Rig Veda define earthly rivers, but this does not indicate that they were originally earthly, since everything indicates that they belong to heaven. Therefore, it would be more natural to assert that these ancient mythological names were applied by the Aryans to new places of their settlement or to new objects.
From all of the above discussion, it becomes clear that the nature and movement of the waters freed by Indra from the clutches of Vritra have been misunderstood since the time of the ancient school of Nirukta and even from the days of the creation of Brahman, which is even older. In the Rig Veda there is a passage describing how the god Pushan crosses the upper celestial hemisphere in a boat; but the Ashwins and Surya usually travel across the sky in chariots. This led the followers of Nirukta to believe that the airy waters did not reside in the higher hemisphere. And when Indra is described as the killer of Vritra and the liberator of the waters, the mentioned waters could only appear in the form of clouds filled with rain moisture. Seven rivers, released by Indra to freedom, could, according to such ideas, be only rivers of India, like the Ganges, Yamuna and others, and the breaking through of the mountain range was explained by distorting the meaning of such words,as "parvata", "giri", etc. (as already indicated above).
At this stage of decoding, Western scientists joined it. The starting point of their research was the name "Hapta-Hindu" from the Avesta, which was taken to designate the Punjab as "the land of seven rivers liberated by Indra." This explanation was initially taken as an important scientific discovery and has long been considered correct. But, as mentioned above, the Punjab is the land of five, not seven rivers, as it is said in Vajasaneya Samhi-te. It is also obvious that Indra liberated seven rivers at the same time as dawn, and therefore this does not apply to the Punjab. Knowing that rivers are expressively mentioned in the Rig Veda, we do not assert that it was not the place of the settlements of the Aryans, where the Vedic hymns were sung. But its rivers are not mentioned in the Vedas in the number of seven, and therefore it became necessary to look for another explanation of the legend of Vritra,and such an explanation can appear only when referring to the theory of the cosmic circulation of heavenly waters or rivers through the lower and upper worlds, when these waters carried the sun, moon and other heavenly bodies with them.
We can now correctly understand how Vritra, stretching his body over the mountains, closed all their passages and passes along those mountains, which, by analogy with the contour of distant mountains visible from the ground, were considered to lie between the upper and lower worlds. Because of Vritra, the water, and with them the sun and dawn, could not break through from the lower world for a long period, as happened in the Arctic homeland of the ancestors of the Vedic bards. This theory also illuminates another point revealed with its help - the fact of the four results of Indra's victory over Vritra. This fact was completely denied by both the ancient and modern schools of Nirukta, and not because they did not know about him, but because they were not able to give it a satisfactory explanation, believing that these results were articulated with one another by the poets Rig Veda. But now the theory of cosmic circulation of atmospheric waters,that is, ideas about this, found in the mythology of many other peoples, reveal this whole mystery.
If Indra is described as a liberator and guide of waters ("apam srasta", "apam neta"), they do not mean the moisture of the clouds, but the water vapor that fills the universe and represents the matter from which everything was created. In short, the victory in the name of the waters was something greater, something much more miraculous than simply breaking the clouds in the rainy season. And that is why she was naturally recognized as the greatest of Indra's exploits: supported by libations of soma for a hundred nights, he killed the water demon of darkness with a piece (block) of ice, destroyed his hundred autumn fortresses, freed the waters of seven rivers and let them flow upward along their airways, freed the sun and dawn trapped in rock caves, that is, the cows. They have been in captivity since the beginning of the war, which until now has been misunderstood as not being committed every year on the 40th day of autumn. It was also misunderstood that the battle lasted until the end of winter. The correct understanding argues with the assertion that Indra was only the god of rains - he never appeared in the Vedas only in this role, although in the Rig Veda (IV, 26, 2; VIII, 6, 1) there are passages where he is referred to as a rain-shedder, or where he is compared to the rain god. But in fact, it is unacceptable to perceive him as this god, because Indra is a fighter against Vritra, and a killer of Vritra, and a liberator of waters.and the killer of Vritra, and the liberator of the waters.and the killer of Vritra, and the liberator of the waters.
The story of the liberation of the captive waters is an ancient story, and Vritra appears in Greek mythology as Ortr, and the murderer of Vritra (Vritra Khan) as Veretraghna, the victorious god, in the Parsi writings.
In addition, an opinion emerges, sometimes accepted, that Vritrahan and Indra are not the same thing, since the word "Indra" does not occur in mythology and European-Aryan languages. Therefore, some specialists in comparative mythology suggested that the battle for the waters was a feat of other Aryan gods, and Indra was attributed to it in Vedic mythology when he became the main god of the Vedic pantheon. It is known that in the Avesta not Veretraghna, but Tishtrya is considered the liberator of waters and light, which supports this proposal. But whatever points of view are taken, this does not affect the conclusion we have reached regarding the true meaning of the legend of Vritra. Neither clouds nor rain can provide the main physical basis for this legend, which is clearly based on the simple phenomenon of the gifting of light to people,anxiously awaiting him in the gloom of the long Arctic night.
And it cannot but cause regret that in the way of the correct interpretation of an important legend there is an incorrect concept concerning the Vedic cosmography or the nature of the cosmic movements of waters, and that this concept cannot be immediately overcome.
Indra, indeed, could, in the end, be recognized as the god of storms, as well as some exploits of other gods could be attributed to him, recognizing him at a later time as the god of rains. But even if the feat of Vritrahan was attributed to Indra later, or if Indra, as the liberator of the captive waters, was then mistaken for the god of rains, like Tishtrya in the Avesta, one fact stands out unwaveringly from all descriptions, namely that these captive waters were atmospheric waters. in the nether world and that the fact of their isolation led to the annual struggle between light and darkness on the lands of the first homeland of the Aryans in the Arctic.
And the reason, due to which this fact has not been discovered until now, was that our meager knowledge about the life of people in that antiquity did not make it possible to correctly understand it.
Continuation: "Arctic homeland in the Vedas. Chapter X. Vedic myths about the morning deities. Ashvins"