A Botanical Perspective on the Identity of Soma (Nelumbo nucifera Gaertn.

) Based on Scriptural and Iconographic Records Author(s): Andrew McDonald Reviewed work(s): Source: Economic Botany, Vol. 58, Supplement (Winter, 2004), pp. S147-S150+S51+S152-S173 Published by: Springer on behalf of New York Botanical Garden Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4256916 . Accessed: 14/12/2011 07:50
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

New York Botanical Garden Press and Springer are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Economic Botany.

http://www.jstor.org

A BOTANICAL PERSPECTIVE ON THE IDENTITY OF SOMA (NELUMBO NUCIFERA GAERTN.) BASED ON SCRIPTURAL AND ICONOGRAPHIC RECORDS'
ANDREW MCDONALD

McDonald, Andrew (Universityof Texas at Austin, Plant Resources Center, 78712; e-mail amcdon@mail.utexas.edu). A BOTANICAL PERSPECTIVE ON THE IDENTITY OF SOMA (NELUMBO
NUCIFERA GAERTN.) BASED ON SCRIPTURAL AND ICONOGRAPHIC RECORDS.

Economic Botany

2004. An examinationi the mythicand artistic records of India of 58(Supplement):S147-S173, Asia indicatesthatthefamouspsychotropicof the ancientAryanswas the eastern and Southeast lotus, Nelumbo nucifera.Vedic epithets,metaphors,and mythsthat describe the physical and behavioralcharacteristicsof the 'soma'plant as a sun, serpent,golden eagle, arrow, lightning or niavel,relate individually as a whole bolt, cloud,phallic pillar, womb,chariot,and imnmortal to the eastern lotus. Since most Hindu and Buddhistgods anldgoddesses trace their origins associations with Nelumbo, there is from the Vedas and have always shared close symnbolic reason to believe the divine status of this symbolicplanitderivesfrom India's prehistoricpast. Vedas. Key Words: India;lotus; narcoticplants;Nelumboniucifera; somna;

Asian historians have long been intrigued by the religious customs of ancient Aryan peoples and their celebrated habit of using a narcotic plant to achieve spiritual revelations. Long before the advent of civilization, these famous nomadic warriors were renowned for their shamanistic approach to the practice of religion, and for their success in spreading their spiritual beliefs from the shorelines of the Caspian Sea to the headwaters of the Indus and Ganges Rivers. Distant communities of their itinerant clans were ultimately assimilated into civilized states that arose in northern India and Iran, the sacerdotal classes of which, remaining true to their prehistoric traditions, proved intent on conserving the archaic rites of their spiritual forebears. As a result, early Aryan priest guilds played a critical role in the establishment of Brahmanic and Zoroastrian schools of religion, and in conveying their prehistoric modes of religious thought into the realms of human history. Numerous written documents that descend from early Aryan civilizations pertain to the traditional use and worship of a specific psychotropic plant. Communities who spoke in dialects of Indian origin, such as Sanskrit, referred to this

' Received 17 January 2003; accepted18 May 2003.

plant as soma, whereas those who spoke in languages of Persian origin, such as Avestan and Pahlavi, referred to the plant as homa. But they all spoke with the same sense of awe and reverence for the same vegetative entity which they believed was responsible for the creation of life and the governance of natural forces. Hence many modern scholars (Doniger 1967; James 1966; Zaehner 1961) are given to conclude that much of what is believed and practiced by Brahmanic and Zoroastrian communities in modem times derives in no small part from the antiquated traditions of an ancient drug cult. Most of what historians know about the role of soma in the religious lives of early Aryan peoples derives from an ancient text that is arguably the oldest known written record of IndoEuropean origin. Known as the Rg Veda, this famous Sanskrit hymnal traces its origin from around the turn of the 8th century BCE (Doniger 1967), during an age in which the practice of literacy began to spread throughout India. Notwithstanding the antiquity of this historical document, it is also widely believed that the contents of the Rg Veda are of a much older age, as there is widespread agreement that most Vedic songs date from India's prehistoric past. Many scholars date the Vedic verses from before

Economic Botany 58(Supplement) pp. S147-S173. 2004 (? 2004 by The New York Botanical Garden Press, Bronx, NY 10458-5126 U.S.A.

S148

BOTANY ECONOMIC

[VOL. 58

the turnof the second millenniumBCE (Parpola 1995; Witzel 1995), when Indo-Aryanclans depended on oral forms of communication to maintain their 'sacred lore' (or 'Veda'). While these rough estimationsof the Rg Veda'shistorin ical age elicit little disagreement scholarlycircles, they are at variancewith the traditional perspectives of modem Brahmanic communities, whose conservativemembershave always maintained that the Vedic hymns descend from the immortal gods, and therefore trace from the dawn of creation.In their point of view, the ancient songs embody the eternaltruth(dharmaor rta) of the Aryan cosmos, and accordinglydefy any attempt to assign them a specific time or place of origin. Brahmanictraditionalistsinsist that the Rg Veda and its derivative texts-the Sama Veda, Yajur Veda and Atharva Veda (known collectively as the 'Vedas' )-are the root-sourceof all that is believed and practiced by Indo-Aryanpeoples and their direct descendants. And they place equal credence in early philosophical commentaries on these chants, such as those that are found in the Upanisads (known collectively as the Vedanta)and Brahmanas. Vedic hymns were originally composed by prehistoricpriestguilds to pay gratitude revand erence to a host of gods and goddesses during the 'sacrifice' of their sacred plant. As officiatthe ing priestsprepared milkyjuices of the soma plant for ingestion, they chantedtheirtraditional hymns in unison to convey theirappreciation for the annualrevival of their vegetative sacrament. Most Vedic hymns were dedicated to specific divinities that ruled over various forces of nature, such as those that caused the sun to shine (Sirya), lightning to strike (Indra), rains to fall (Parjanya), or rivers to flow (Sarasvati). The concerted efforts of these naturalisticpowers made possible the annual recurrenceof the sacred plant. Most of these Aryan gods and goddesses belonged to one of two fundamental classes of deity, including those that inhabitedthe heavenly realms of the material world, known as the Devas or 'Shining Ones', and those that belonged to the chthonic realms of the cosmos, known variously as Vrtras ('Encompassers'or 'Pervaders'),Druhs ('Deceivers'; Gonda 1959; Lahiri 1984), or Asuras2 (i.e., 'Demoniacs'; Macdonell 1995; Panikkar 1977). The Asuras generally representedthe powers of the earth, and sought to retain the invigoratingproperties

of soma within the underworldof Earth. And the Devas, in direct opposition to the Asuras, represented the powers of the heavens, and sought to liberate the plant from the bowels of the earth. Since both classes of gods depended mutuallyon the invigoratingpropertiesof soma to maintaintheir immortallives, they were destined to wage pitched battles against each other on an annual basis, thereby insuring that both parties receive their yearly allotment of soma's immortalizing nectar. These episodic conflicts resulted in the perpetuationof cycles of plant growth in the Aryan world, and therefore the of perpetuation life itself. Vedic hymns were sung to celebratethe past victories of the heroic Devas and to encourage the heavenly host in their yearly assaultson the Asuras, for without an annual triumph of the sky-gods, the Aryan clans would be unable to sharein the treasuresof soma. Prominent among these gods was a solar-bodiedspirit that inhabited the stalks of the Aryan sacramental plantnamely Soma, the 'Lord of Plants' (Vanaspati,
Ksetrapati, Virudhpati) and 'Lord of Divine Speech' (Vdcaspati)-whose golden body was

filled with the 'essence' (rasa'; Bosch 1960) of living creation. Around 120 hymns of the Rg Vedaare dedicatedexclusively to this vegetative spirit, the remaining of which, amounting to around 900 songs, were devoted to a host of supportivecelestial gods. Soma, as both a vegetative spiritand demiurge,was praisedin Vedic refrainsfor his willingness to sacrifice his vegetative body on behalf of the gods and mortals alike, such that both parties might share in his invigoratingessence and enjoy everlastinglife.4 But just as Soma was deemed to be the source of immortallife for the gods, the gods were also instrumental maintainingthe immortallife of in Soma. Hence Soma was identified as both the cause and effect of the Aryan cosmos: both the father5and the child6of the Aryan pantheon. The practiceof the ancientsoma-sacrifice was as beneficial to the Aryan gods7 as the Aryan priestcaste,8since both partiesenjoyed a heightened sense of strength,9 vitality,'0joy,11intelligence and wealth12 when they imbibed the vitalizing virtuesof the divine plant.Indeed,Vedic hymns often proclaimthat adeptmembersof the soma cult attained omniscience,'3perfection,'4 and immortality'5 while under the sway of the plant's inebriatingproperties,which was tantamount to saying that they had become as gods.

2004]

McDONALD:THE IDENTITYOF SOMA

S149

One of various Sanskritterms that was used to distinguish an 'immortal' god from a mortal creature,amrta,'6 or 'non-death' (a-mrta), was also employed as a nominative to refer to the intoxicating beverage (also known as 'soma') which Aryan priests preparedfrom the milky saps of their famous plant. Thus, Aryan bards used the same termsto refer to the beverageand the experience of bliss; for to know the plant was to know the natureof the gods; and to know the nature of the gods was to be a god. This generaltheme is reflectedin an oft-quotedVedic refrain- "We have drunk soma, we have become immortal;we have gone to the light, we have discoveredthe gods"'7-which generations of Vedic bards once chanted as they convened for their ecstatic revelries. This divine state of being was describedin terms of "a vision in a or dream,"18 as a transcendental experiencethat the transported soul to a land devoid of hunger, sorrow and strife.'9 Vedic bards composed and chanted their ancient hymns with the expressedintentionof concealing the identity and secrets of theirholy sacrament.20 They accomplished this objective by rites in closed quarters holding their sacramental and by developing codified forms of speech to describe the material characterof their divine plant in cryptic and symbolic terms. Soma was often identifiedwith a variety of planetaryorbs or charismaticanimals in order to confuse individualswho were not versed in the mythic lore of the priest caste. The plant was often identified, for example, as the sun and moon, clouds, lightningbolts, or a varietyof animals,including a serpent,eagle, lion, or commonly, a bull. The interplayof these symbolic images in Vedic mythology proved effective in obscuring the vital source of Aryan inspiration,both in ancientand modem times, as the secret of soma's botanical identity remains a mystery to modem students of Asian religions and history. While numerous linguists have tried their hand at cracking the esoteric codes of ancient Aryan bards (Brough 1971; Falk 1989; Flattery and Schwartz 1989), along with mythologists (Doniger 1967; Malamoud 1991), anthropologists(Emboden 1972; Furst 1972), and popular commentators(McKenna 1992; Wasson 1967), the enigmaticidentity of the Aryans' sacred plant has yet to be resolved. While modem commentators have arguedenergetically in favor of a number of competing

hypotheses regardingsoma's botanical identity, consensus has not yet been achieved as to what specific Asian plant was the object of early Aryan devotions. Many plant species that have been proposed thus far as possible soma candidates have proven unable to elicit psychoactive responses in human beings, such as rhubarb (Rheum),grapes (Vitis), pomegranates (Punica), moonseeds (Cocculus), ironweeds (Vernonia), hops (Humulus), ginseng, and various milkweeds (Doniger 1968; Flattery and Schwartz 1989; Nyberg 1995). But variousplants that are known to producepsychoactiveproperties,such as marijuana (Cannabis sativa L.), Ephedra, opium poppy (Papaver somniferumL.), Syrian rue (Peganum harmala L.), ginseng (Panax), and the fly-agaric fungus, Amanita muscaria (Fr.) S.F Gray (Doniger 1968; Falk 1989; Flattery and Schwartz 1989; Mahdihassan 1981; Nyberg 1995; Spess 2000), continueto provoke heated debates and discussions among linguists and students of the ancient Orient. Such a diverse assemblageof plants and fungi might suggest to the casual observer that the pursuit of soma's historical identity is bound to prove futile. Indeed,this conclusionhas been reachedby a number of modem commentators (Brough 1971; Eggeling 1978; Keith 1989; Macdonell and Keith 1982), some of whom suggest thatthe plant may have gone extinct, or that early introductionsof substituteand imposterherbshas obscured the issue beyond redemption (Brough 1971; Doniger 1968). These pessimistic viewpoints are not, however,withouttheirdetractors, as it is difficult to imagine that a plant which once extendedfrom the CaspianSea to the Gangetic plains of northernIndia could have been drivento extinction.Nor does it seem likely that such a wide variety of culturesin ancient India and Persiacould have easily lost or forgottenthe primary object of their religious devotions. Since historicalrecordsindicatethatthe practice of the soma sacrificeenduredwell into the classical and medieval periods (500 BCE-1500 CE) of Indian and Persian history (see below), students of the ancientOrientcan only surmisethat the vegetative source of early Aryan poetry and mysticism is still living among us. Some modem Sanskritistsattributetheir lack of success in determiningthe botanicalidentity of soma to difficulties that they encounter in translating archaicforms of Sanskrit.Perhapsas much blame can be attributed,however, to the

S150

ECONOMIC BOTANY

[VOL. 58

fact that a detailed botanical inquiry into the matter has never been undertaken. Nyberg (1995) is perhapsthe only 20th centurybotanist who evaluatedthe issue from a strictly biological perspective, but he confesses to a specialization in plantchemistry,and thereforebases his viewpoints on the psychotropicpropertiesof the plant. Like many modernlinguists, Nyberg concludes that soma was probably one of various species of Ephedra,owing largely to the historical use of this stimulatingplantin the medicinal traditionsof Asian cultures. This popular perspective was recently challenged,however,by a microbiologist(Spess 2000), who arguesthatthe mystery plant of the Vedas was probably the easternlotus (NelumbonuciferaGaertn.)and the Egyptian lotus (Nvmphaeanouchalii Burm. f.). Spess supportsthis argumentby recognizingthe divine reputationsof these plants in the mythic and religious traditions of Egypt and Eurasia, their use as symbols for gods of ecstasy and immortal life, and their psychoactive properties. Neither of the aforementionedscientists have presented,however,a criticalreview of the morphological issues that surroundthe question of Soma's enigmatic identity, and it is here that most discussions on the enigmatic identity of soma have ended in a draw. To more fully explore some of these outstanding issues, the present discussion analyzes soma's physical nature from a botanical perspective. Informationis drawnas liberallyfrom the Vedic record as from mythical accounts of the plant during post-Vedic periods of Indian history (800 BCE-1000 CE), including assessments of the plantin the Brahnianas,Upanisads, epics (Mahabharataand Ramayana)and Puranas. Since various schools of art in India and SoutheastAsia also portraymythic themes that have a direct bearing on Vedic identity of the soma plant, these too are considered in detail, drawing from a variety of iconographictraditions throughoutIndia and SoutheastAsia. BOTANICALATTRIBUTESOF SOMA IN THE RG VEDA Although modern publicationsrarely cite the pioneering works of Alfred Hillebrandt,Max Muller, and HermannOldenberg,early discussions of these 19th century Indologists often provide a more comprehensive perspective on soma's botanicalcharacter than do treatments of the 20th century. Hillebrandt(1990, 1:121-266)

begins his insightful commentariesby examining a perennial controversy that continues to provoke debates, namely the question as to whethersoma was an uprightor creepingplant. Although classical descriptions of soma often suggest that the plant was a 'creeping' herbi.e., sornavaliTor somalata (Brough 1971; Doniger 1967; Wasson 1967; Wujastik1998)- most Vedic verses describe Soma Pavamana ('Soma Clear-flowing', Panikkar 1977) as a lustrous "pillarof heaven" (divo dharunam21) a 'prop' or (skambha22)of the sky. Many translators assume that the ascendant stems of the plant grew to considerable heights, as some verses describe the plant as either a 'tree' (vrksa)23 or a shoot (amsu) that reaches high into the heavens.24 But other commentatorsare inclined to agree that soma lacked woody growth, owing to descriptive allusionsto the plantas an herb(i.e., vfrudh, 6sadhi; Doniger 1967). The latterassumptionis certainly supportedby frequentdescriptionsof soma as either a reed25 [vand26 (Hillebrandt 1990) or nada27 (Macdonelland Keith 1982)] or pointed arrow28 (Hillebrandt 1990); for Soma stood like an arrow among plants29when he raised his sharpenedpoint into the heavens.30 Moreover,since Vedic bardsemployed a variety of different Sanskrit words for 'arrow' in this illusionary context (isu, s'arya, saru, and bana; Macdonell and Keith 1982), it may reasonably be assumed that the plant produced narrow, straight,ascendant,un-branched stalks. We may also surmisethat soma's stalks grew as solitary shoots, since the image of an arrowhardlycalls to mind the figure of a branchingtree. While many moderncommentators have emphasized the fact that the pillared characterof Vedic Soma is inconsistent with post-Vedic characterizations the plant as a creeper(Donof iger 1968), this viewpoint does not precludethe possibility that soma may have producederect and procumbentshoots. Although this distinct prospectwas dismissedemphaticallyby Wasson (1967) and Doniger (1967) in their compelling and provocative study, Soma the Divine Mushroom of Immortality, they did so in supportof a hypothesisthatidentifiedsoma as a narcoticfungus (Amanita muscaria). While both of these authors insist that the Rg Veda never alludesto the creeping nature of soma's stems, a critical review of the Vedic recordsuggests otherwise.To be sure, the creepingnatureof the soma plantis only implied in metaphoricalterms, but as al-

2004]

McDONALD:THE IDENTITYOF SOMA

S151

ready noted, this is standard fare in the Vedic hymns. For example, one hymn refers to Soma as an immortal serpent that slips from his ancient skin when he raises his brilliant pillar into the heavens,3' presumably implying that the plant produced an erect stem from a prostrate runner. Such an interpretation is certainly consistent with various hymns and commentaries of the ancient Satapatha Brahmana32 (ca. 8th c. BCE) that specifically identify Soma as a Vedic serpent known as Vrtra33 (Lahiri 1984), a chthonic god whose primary role in Indo-Aryan mythology is to imprison soma's invigorating pillars within his coiling body. Vrtra was recognized as a powerful underworld spirit that is vanquished by the powerful thunderbolts of the Devas (see below), strikes from which provoke the serpent to release the plant. And since Vedic verses refer to Vrtra as a creeping plant34 (vratati; Macdonell and Keith 1982), there is little reason to question the relevancy of classical allusions to soma's natural creeping habits (i.e., Srautasuitra Samhita; Wujastik 1998:176). Indeed, the Aryans occasionally described the Vedas as the 'wisdom of a serpent' (sarpa-vidya).35 A critical examination of various refrains reveals that the plant probably produced procumbent shoots with prominent nodes and internodes, as numerous verses refer to the 'jointed' character of the soma's stems36 (i.e., pdrvan, pdrus; Falk 1989). Other hymns describe the distinctive nature of the plant's natural growth habit: i.e., "joint by joint, knot by knot"37 (Hillebrandt 1990). Although allusions of such type are clearly inconsistent with descriptions of soma's arrow-like (un-segmented) shoots, they may well apply to the plant's decumbent rhizomes or stolons. Although stem characteristics have limited use in identifying a plant at a generic or species level, we are fortunate that numerous Vedic verses make repeated references to a plant structure that is much more useful in this regard, (= namely the 'flower', or adndhas38 anthos Gr., anthus L.). Hillebrandt (1990) was justified in assuming that soma was an angiosperm, as there can be no doubt that the flower belonged to the sacred plant (somasya andhas39) and had 'maddening' properties (anhaso made40). While it is difficult to understand why this particular feature of the mystery plant has been afforded so little attention by linguists, such has always been the case. In fact, Wasson (1967) was emphatic in

rejecting the possibility that soma was a flowering plant, as it naturallyweakenedhis hypothesis that the 'soma plant' was a fungus. Nevertheless, the Vedic record speaks for itself, and required of Wasson that he at least recognize that the bards made frequent reference to the plant's flowers: i.e., "It is as though the Aryans called Soma the (sic) flower" (Wasson 1967). The flourishingboughs of soma were apparently colorful to the Aryan eye, as Vedic hymns often reach a lyrical crescendo when they proclaim the wondrous beauty of soma's golden4' (ha'ri, hiranya-rupa) and ruddy42(aruna, arusa, phalguna) radiance.These specific hues do not call to mind, of course, the image of a photosyntheticor woody stem, but thereis widespread agreementthat they relate to aerial portions of the plant's ascendantshoots. Soma's golden radiance establisheda basis for the god's intimate mythic and symbolic association with a Vedic
sun-god by the name of
Sarya,43

whose golden

and ruddyorb mirrored mythic image of the the plant (Bhawe 1957). Vedic hymns frequently identify Soma as either a child of the sun44 as or the sun-godhimself45 (Hillebrandt 1990; Wasson 1967), as he exhibitedthe aspect of a sun46 when he raised his golden eye upon an arrow'sshaft47 and adornedhis resplendentbody with brilliant rays of gold48(Wasson 1967). Poetic allusions of this type make no sense, of course, if one attemptsto envisage the plant in termsof a photosynthetic stem; but they do call to mind the image of a golden and red flower that has been raised upon a pillared shoot. Given the probability that soma was an angiosperm, former identificationsof the mystery plant as either a fungus or cone-bearingplant (i.e., Amanita and Ephedra; Nyberg 1995; Wasson 1967) are doubtful.There is also reason to doubt the relevancy of various narcoticplants that have entered into the debates,such as marijuana, Syrian rue, or ginseng, since none of these plants produces reed-likeor creepingstems with milky latex,49or resplendent,sun-like flowers. Since the original composers of the Vedic hymns lived in temperate-montane regions of northwestern India,there is also reason to reject most of the tropical plant candidatesthat have been proposed over the years. Vedic verses make clear that the homelandof the Indo-Aryans was located in the Punjabof modem India and Pakistan(i.e., the panch-ab, or land of the 'Five Rivers'), where five major tributariesof

S152

BOTANY ECONOMIC

[VOL. 58

the Indus River convene to form the northwestern boundary of the Indian subcontinent. While it is generally acknowledged that the soma plant was likely a native plant of the Himalayan mountains (Hillebrandt 1990; Wasson 1967), and was specifically associated with montane habitats,50Brough (1971) was correct in emphasizing that Soma must have lived in the valleys of the Indus, Sarasvati, Ganges and Jumna Rivers. Falk (1989) agreed that the soma plant must have grown in aquatic habitats, since hundreds of refrains refer to soma's habit of dwelling alongside river-banks,51 or indeed, within the waters of the Punjab's rivers,52 streams,53 and lakes,54 such as Lake Saryanavan55('Lake of Arrows' or 'Lake of Reeds'). Hence Soma was occasionally recognized as a 'child of the waters' (apam napat),56 a babe of the proverbial 'seven rivers',57 or a Lord of Rivers58 (Bhawe 1957). Vedic hymns also specify that Soma was the child of the mighty Sindhu59(Indus River), a river whose name derives from the Sanskrit term for a 'drop' (indu) of soma.60 And as Brough (1971) would note, yet other rivers of the Punjab were named in honor of the sacred plant, such as the Amsumati River,6' whose name translates as 'River of Soma shoots', and the Rasa River,62 whose name refers to the 'essence' or 'juices' of the plant of the gods. Since the soma plant was probably an aquatic angiosperm that bore the aspect of a sun, we may reasonably reject all but one of the aforementioned plant candidates that have been identified as soma candidates over the last two centuries. The eastern lotus East, or Nelumbo nucifera, as proposed by Spess (2000), is the only plant species that satisfies all of the mythical and metaphorical attributes of the Aryan's mystery plant in the Vedas, Brahmanas and Upanisads. Moreover, this is the only plant candidate proposed thus far that can claim a sacred status among Brahmanic and Zoroastrian communities. In short, the eastern lotus is a robust, aquatic that produces erect, lactiferous stalks (Fig. la, c). The plant's submerged rhizomes are decidedly jointed in character (Fig. Id) and bear a close resemblance to a creeping serpent, especially during the beginning of each growth cycle (Fig. lc). The plant's budding shoots exhibit the distinct aspect of an emergent arrow when they rise from their aquatic substrates (Fig. la), and each of these shoots eventually develops into a golden and ruddy blossom that bears the distinct as-

pect of a sun (Fig. lb). Lotus flowers are uniquely distinguished in the plant kingdom by their presentation of an expanded, golden-pigmented receptacle that is brightly 'adorned with rays' of golden stamens inside a white, cream, or ruddy perianth. And to be sure, all of these characteristics are consistent with Aryan descriptions of soma. Although our present understanding of the chemistry of Nelumbo nucifera is only cursory, preliminary investigations reveal that this plant species produces a variety of psychoactive compounds. Among these constituents are benzylisoquinoline alkaloids, such as aporphine, proaporphine, nuciferine (Gibbs 1974; Shamma 1972), which are structurally similar to opiate alkaloids of the poppy family: i.e., morphine, codeine, and thebaine. Aporphine invokes a variety of physiological reactions in animals, including emesis and euphoria in humans (Shamma 1972), and reduction of blood pressure in cats (Shamma and Moniot 1978). It is also noteworthy that apomorphines are thought to be the psychoactive agents in Nymphaea, several species of which have been employed for entheogenic purposes by the Mayans of Mexico, Egyptians, and various peoples of the Near and Middle East (Diaz 1975; Emboden 1981; McDonald 2002). Hence a preliminary chemical profile of Nelumbo is consistent with the hypothesis that Soma is the eastern lotus. Nelumbo nucifera has a natural distribution that extends from the Volga River delta on the shorelines of the Caspian Sea to the eastern shores of Asia. This range encompasses and surpasses the historical domains of prehistoric Aryan communities. Furthermore, the plant is presently a dominant element in riparian and marshy vegetations of the Punjab, much as it was in the prehistoric past, as indicated in early Vedic scriptures63and symbolic renderings of the plant species on ancient seals that trace from the Indus River civilization around the turn of the 2nd millennium BCE. There can be little doubt, therefore, that the plant played some sort of mythical and/or religious role in the distant past. Moreover, the age of these seals correlates with the precise time and place of Indo-Aryan bards in the Punjab. One of these small but elaborate objects of art portrays the sacred lotus in a highly stylized manner (Fig. 2a), emphasizing the plant's pillared stalk, reflexed petals (or persistent stamens following anthesis), and flattened,

2004]

McDONALD:THE IDENTITYOF SOMA

S153

Fig. 1. Morphologyof the lotus. a. Like soma of the Vedas,the easternlotus is an aquaticplantthatproduces upright,reedy,lactiferous,floweringstalks.Its largeand showy flowersexhibitred and white petals,an expanded golden receptacle,and numerousgolden stamens. Pokhara,Nepal. b. A full-blown lotus flower suggests the image of a radiantsun. c. Uprightlotus stalks grow from a networkof serpentinerhizomes.Modem Kashmiri nativesharvestlong runners the plantto make starch-based of India.d. The thickened, glues. Dal Lake, Srinagar, segmentedrhizomesof Nelumbosuggest the 'nodes' or parva of soma.

orbicularreceptaclewith numerousovarianprotuberances(Fig. la, b). We note that the plant shares a close symbolic relationshipwith a pair of horned dragons, the general character of which is consistentwith mythicaldescriptionsof dragons in Vedic64and Zoroastrianmythology (see below). It is also noteworthy that these same prehistoricsymbols, including the sevenleaved fig tree that overshadowsthe pillaredlotus (Fig. 2a), are standardsymbolic motifs in various Hindu and Buddhist schools of art and

mythology, the origins of which are traced directly from an early Aryan heritage (Coomaraswamy 1928, 1931, 1979).

SOMAMOTIFSIN BRAHMANIC AND BUDDHIST ICONOGRAPHY

The botanical determinationof soma as Nelumbonuciferais boundto have far-reaching impacts on our currentunderstandings eastern of religion, as it is widely acknowledged that the image of the lotus has long served as a versatile

S154

ECONOMICBOTANY

[VOL. 58

_;1_~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1

Fig. 2. Symbolic and Metaphorical Attributesof Soma. a. An IndusRiver seal portraysthe lotus plant as a pillaredfloral motif with a dimpledpericarp(Fig. lb) and reflexedpetals (or possibly persistentstamensfollowing anthesis). A seven-leaved fig tree forms a canopy over the plant. Two homed dragons extend from the plant's stalk in a symbolic context that is consistent with Vedic imagery. Indus River valley, ca. 2000 BCE. (NationalMuseum,New Delhi). b. Buddhistsadoptedthe image of a lotus pillar to symbolize the ancientVedic concept of dharma. Note that the enlighteningstalk producesa sun-like flower and two opposing serpentine tendrils. Sanci, N gate, MadhyaPradesh,India 110 BCE. c. A pyrogenic shaft with a three-tipped arrowhead symbolizes the divine powers and 'truth'(dharma)of the Hindu trinity.Note that the cosmic arrowemerges from a lotus flower and producesa blossom at its apex. Mulchok Temple, Patan, Nepal. 17th c. d. Ancient

2004]

McDONALD: THE IDENTITY OF SOMA

S155

and important religious symbol in the mythic and iconographic traditions of the East. Since the advent of literacy in India,65 the plant has symbolized the human achievement of spiritual enlightenment (bodhi), bliss (ananda), and transcendence (brahman or nirvana). Moreover, the plant has symbolized a host of Vedic gods and goddesses in the mythic traditions of the Hindus, Jains, and Buddhists. Given that the latter religions trace their origins from early Indo-Aryan traditions, we can only assume that this pre-eminent symbol of immortal life and spiritual emancipation derives from a common prehistoric source. This proposition is supported by the many and various ways in which disparate religious traditions of classical India have integrated the lotus into their mythic and iconographic traditions, and by the consistent manner in which the plant has been depicted as a flaming arrow, radiant pillar, solar orb, and immortal serpent over the ages. To fully appreciate the close iconic and mythic connections between the lotus and soma, it is important to note from the outset that Brahmanic communities have never recognized a distinction between Vedic and 'Hindu' traditions of religion. Brahmins have always acknowledged the Vedas are fundamental to everything that they believe and practice.66Furthermore, it is equally important to recognize that the soma-plant continued to play an essential role in myths of the classical epics and Puranas in post-Vedic India (Panikkar 1977). For example, a popular section of the Mahabharata known as the Bhagavad Gita ('Song of the Creator', ca. 1st c. CE) makes clear that Visnu, the Vedic Father of the Hindu pantheon, was none other than Soma himself.67 Just as Vedic verses recognize Visnu as a lover of Soma68 and a revealer of the Vedas,69the Mahabharata (ca. 1st c. CE) recognize Visnu as a drinker of Soma70 and the primal source and material embodiment of the Vedas and the Upanisads.7' Indeed, Visnu is explicitly identified as the "poured oblation" 72 which soma-drinkers seek to enter into paradise.73 Thus we can be

sure that the ancient gods and religious practices of the Vedic period were relevant to Indian mythographers during the turn of the 1st century CE. As a general rule, the gods of classical India are as intimately associated with the sacred lotus as the Vedic pantheon is associated with soma. This is clearly revealed in Puranic and epical tales that date from around the 5th century BCE, and no less so in the arts, which begin to leave their most revealing traces across the Indian landscape around the turn of the 2nd century BCE. It has long been recognized that Brahmanic communities did not leave a substantial iconographic record of their gods until the Andhra and Gupta Periods (lst-5th c.; Lee 1994), and that the earliest known depictions of the Vedic pantheon occur initially among monastic caves and funerary mounds of Buddhist communities from the 3rd-lst centuries BCE (Harle 1987:2631; Lee 1994:87). The domination of Vedic gods among Buddhist sanctuaries at Sanci, Bharut, Mathura, Bhubaneswar, and Bhaja underscores the fact that the Aryan pantheon was no less relevant to Buddhist and Jain communities than it was to Brahmanic communities. This point of fact is also revealed in the oldest known biographical accounts (2nd-Ist c. BCE) of the latest and most famous of Buddhas, Siddhartha Gotama, whose mythic character and pedigree is explicitly defined as Aryan. Siddhartha was born to the Saka clan (the Sacae of whom Herodotus speaks74) under the patronym of Gotama, indicating that he was a descendant of an important Aryan lineage that was responsible for the composition of hundreds of Vedic hymns (i.e., the Gotamas; Macdonell and Keith 1982). One of the oldest known accounts of Siddhartha's fabulous life in the Buddhacarita (1st c. BCE) makes clear that the Prince's father was both a drinker of soma and a knower of bliss;75 hence the birth of the sovereign's divine son was likened to that of a Vedic god,76 both literally and figuratively (Coomaraswamy 1979). Numerous doctrinal texts of the same canon acknowledge

devotees of Suirya envisaged their sun-god's solar chariot wheel as a lotus flower. Konarak, Orissa, India. 13th century. e. The vajra or 'thunderbolt' of various Indian gods is symbolized by opposing lotus flowers. The perianths emit a three-dimensional trident from opposite ends of the bolt. Patan, Nepal. Medieval Period. f. Himalayan painters frequently associate lotus flowers with billowy clouds. Gods of Brahmanic and Buddhist traditions often drink the elixir of immortality on their floral throne. Kathmandu, Nepal. 20th c.

S156

ECONOMIC BOTANY

[VOL. 58

that Siddhartha lived in close contact with 'thirand ty-three'Devas and Asuras,77 that the whole of the Vedic pantheonbore witness to the sage's 4great awakening' (mahasambodhi)on the day that he climbed upon his lotus-throne(i.e., the golden 'Wheel of Awakening',or bodhi-manda) to achieve enlightenment (Majjimha Nikaya 1.21; Bhikku Nanamoli and Bhikkhu Bodhi 1995). Since that wondrousand auspiciousday, the Buddhahas been recognized by both Brahmanic and Buddhisttraditionalists an Aryan as 'god of gods' (devati-deva).78 While many modernhistoriansare inclined to recognize SiddharthaGotama as an historical figure that reformedBrahmanictraditionsby an atheistic approachto religion, such an outlook misses the spiritual significance of the famous sage on both mythic and historical grounds (Coomaraswamy1979). It has been widely acknowledged, for example, that early 'aniconic' schools of Buddhist art employ Vedic themes, symbols and mythic imagery to illustrate the life-stages and spiritual achievements of Siddhartha'smystical life. This fact is clearly exemplifiedby the four famous gatewaysto an ancient Buddhist stupa at Sanci (1st c. BCE), which are covered with images of Vedic gods and goddesses and surmounted numerousloby tus columns (Fig. 2b). The latter images represent the abiding truth (dharma) and awakened mind (bodhi-citta; Foucher 1994; Harle 1987; Lee 1994) of an attainedmasterof the universe (cakravartin).One observes two superimposed tridents (trisulas) upon the floral 'wheel of awakening', both of which symbolize the three fundamental principles of Buddhist tradition (i.e., triratna,or 'triplejewel'): namely the Buddha, his Truth(Dharma),and the Buddha'sMonastic Order (Sangha). Hence the image of the pillared lotus at Sanci is meant to embody the whole of early Buddhistbeliefs and doctrines. This ancientmotif is essentiallyindistinguishable in form and functionfrom early Brahmanic (or 'Hindu') symbols of dharma (Fig. 2c, 3b), the most popular of which portraysa pillared, blazing arrow that occasionally sustains itself within a full-blown blossom. It may be noted that this lotiformedpillarof truthsustainsa fullblown flower as well, and that its generalaspect is reminiscent of Soma's mythic nature as an arrow-likepillar of dharma (Fig. 2c). Since the flower also exhibits the symbolic brillianceof a sun, we are given to suspectthatthe sacredlotus

shares a close mythic and symbolic relationship with Soma. These undeniable connections are furtherreflectedin the etymologicalrelationship between the Sanskritwords for 'pillar' (dharuna) and 'truth' (dhanna), both of which share the same word-root,dhr, meaning to 'prop' or 'support':i.e., Soma's sun-likepropof the heavens. In classical Hindumythology,Siva standsout among the Brahmanicpantheonas the principal wielder of the lotiformedtrident(pillarof dharma). He employs this spiritualweapon to create and destroy delusions of the material world, therebyrevealing the mysteries of his immortal soul (Brahman) and the Vedas. Indeed, various myths specifically identify the three-pronged weapon of Siva as a pillared sun, as soma, or indeed, as the lotus itself79(Fig. 3b). Othertales identify Siva's flaming arrow as a 'phallus', or linga, whose cosmic shaft produces a 'semen' (retas) of cosmic proportions thatbums with the energies of naturalcreation.Since classical texts specificallystatethatthe retas of Siva is the seed of Soma,80 consumptionof which reveals the the mystical secrets of the Vedas,8" can be sure we that the seminal essence of Siva is equivalentto the seminal essence of Soma. When Siva wields this flaming trident as a weapon against the Asuras in classical Indian mythology,he often goes by the name of Sarva, or 'Archer'.And we can be sure that Siva's vegetative character derives in partfrom the mythic and organic natureof Soma, since soma-plants were occasionally called Sarva82 in the Vedas. Soma once sharedhis vegetative arrowswith a variety of Vedic gods, the most pre-eminentof which, Indra,83 was identified as both a stormgod and sun-god.Indrawould employ his triplytipped shafts84 (trikakubh; Coomaraswamy 1979) to pierce the bodies of dragons, thereby liberatingSoma from the underworldof the serpent-demons. Yet Indra's three-prongedshafts were also said to arise from the earthin a jointed configuration85 to glitter in the air,86 a and in mannerthat smacks of Soma'sphysical nature.87 Indeed, one hymn draws no distinctionbetween these two gods (i.e., Indra-Soma88), thereand fore leads us to assume that Indra'spotent trident must relate in some way to Soma's immortalizing stalks. This assumptionfinds supportin various Brahmanicschools of art, which conventionally portray the arrows of Indra, Siva, and Soma as stylized lotus stalks (Fig. 5b, 2c,

2004]

McDONALD:THE IDENTITYOF SOMA

S157

3b, 4b, respectively). And in the case of Indra, one notes that the god's three-prongedarrowhead is a stylized lotus flower,and thatthe floral prongs of the brilliantweapon impale the body of a three-headedVedic dragon known as ViKvarapa

(Fig. Sb). By this cosmic act, Soma's

golden flowers are released from the bodies of diabolical serpentsthat hauntedthe banksof the Punjab'srivers89 (Lahiri 1984). The vegetative arrowsof Indraand Soma are often shot from an elixir-ladenchariot that belonged to a famous Vedic sun-god:
Surya.90

This

mythic theme relates, no doubt, to the fact that Soma was a child of this eminent sun-god, and that both of these deities shimmered in gold when they ascended from the dark recesses of the Earth on a vegetative axis.9' This sun-andflower relationshipis furtherdeveloped by identifying Soma as the chariot itself,92 a theme which seems to imply that the vehicle of the sun was a plant structure.This allusion is certainly consistent with artistic impressions of Suirya's golden chariot at the famous temple of the sun at Karnak(Orissa, Indian), where the celestial vehicle of the Aryan pantheon is fashioned in the image of a lotus-hubbedwheel of creation (Fig. 2d, Sa). The sun is only one of variouscelestial bodies that share close symbolic associations with Soma in Vedic mythology. Other hymns describe Soma as a lightning bolt (vajra or vidwhose shafts of gold were shot into aquatyut),93 ic dragons94 provokethe release of soma's into vigorating shoots.95Variations on this mythic theme pervadethe Rg Veda, and have long been the source of conjectureand contentiousdiscussions. Indeed,it has been widely recognizedthat this same motif is a standard theme in the mythic traditionsof Semitic and Indo-European cultures from Europeto southernAsia. While most Vedic commentatorsinterpretthis mythic image as an allusion to the opening of rain-clouds, or perhaps the swelling of meandering(i.e., serpentine) rivers(Hillebrandt 1990; Lahiri1984; Macdonell 1995; Oldenberg 1993), neither of these explanations accounts for the integral role of Soma in this cosmic act. Nor do they explainthe peculiar mannerin which Soma's bolt emerges from rivers and lakes,96 how a lightning bolt or
could possibly spill forth ambrosia
(amrta).97

One can only assume, nevertheless, that the

golden vajras of Soma and Indra relate in some

obscure way to the plant of the gods.98

of Althoughthe physical attributes a lightning bolt do not readily call to mind the image of a flower, this is precisely how Brahmanic and Buddhist schools of art have portrayedthe vajras of Soma, Indra,and various Buddhas.Icoof nographers both religious traditions depictthe lightning bolt of Aryan gods as a double-ended lotus blossom, the opposing perianthsof which produceeither three or four99 rays of light (Fig. 2e, 5b). This motif seems to mirrorthe mythic image of Indra and Soma's triply-tippedshafts of vegetative light,100 thereforeimplies that and the cosmic arrow, invincible bolt, and sacred flower are homologous attributes.Since lightning bolts are normally associated with clouds and storms rather than rivers and lakes, we might expect soma to share some sort of mythical relationshipwith these specific atmospheric forces. Indeed, the Vedas assert that that Soma or was born from clouds,101 that he robed his golden body in clouds when he attainedhis lofty fame.102 In so doing, he fecundates the Earth with a generous outpouringof amrta.103 As might be expected, only one planthas ever been associatedwith clouds in the arts of Hindu and Buddist peoples, the sacred lotus. This association is commonly encountered in lotus mandala paintings of Brahmanicand Buddhist communities in the Himalaya Mountains,both of which traditionsportrayIndra (Vajradhara, or 'Bearer of the Bolt') and other Aryan sungods as lotus-throned,cloud-born Devas (Fig. 2f). Indraoften displays a golden bolt in one of his handsand a bell in the other,so as to identify his floral throne as both the source of the bolt and the cosmic womb of creation(respectively). The physical union of the bolt and bell, like the conjugal union of the god and goddess, results in a copious outpouringof lotus nectar and the creationof life on earth.While Indraattainsbliss throughthe release of his seed into his consort's flower, the goddess attains bliss by drinking a cup of her god's invigoratingseed (i.e., the nectar of the gods). Although this fertility symbol is most frequentlyencounteredin medieval and modem paintingsof Himalayancommunities,it clearly traces from the Atharva Veda, which originallyrecognized Soma as a bolt-bearing,'04 celestial spirit that spilt his cosmic seed into a golden 'womb of plenty'.105 The soma-ladenbolts of Soma and Indraplay a dual role in mythic traditionsof the Aryans, in the sense that they spell doom for serpentine

S158

ECONOMIC BOTANY

[VOL. 58

r~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

N _ a

Fig. 3.

of ArtisticRenderings Vedic Gods. a. Agni, the Vedic god of spiritualfire (tapas),

is

often portrayed

as a brahmin with flaming shoulders. Like Indra (Fig. 5b), he displays a lotiformed trident, vanquished serpent, and a soma-vessel thiatis decorated with lotus petals. Adinath Temple, Khajuraho, Madhya Pradesh, India. 10th c. b. Indo-malayan sculptors identified Siva's burning trident as a flaming lotus flower. Java, ca. 12th c. (National Museum, Jakarta).c. Varunamounts a vanquisheddragon (makara or vr-tra) as he displays his weapons of choice: the 'noose of Varuna' and a handful lotus rhizomes. A vessel of soma is displayed in his

2004]

McDONALD:THE IDENTITYOF SOMA

S159

Fig. 4. Artistic Renderingsof Vedic Gods. a. Iconographicinterpretations Soma-Candrain India are of almost indistinguishable from those of Brahma,the lotus-bornCreatorof the cosmos. With a soma-vessel in hand, Soma's golden body personifiesthe golden receptacleof a lotus flower. Orissa, India. 13th c. (British Museum).b. Brahmanicartisansof Nepal portraySoma-Candrain the image of Brahmain the Mahabharata. Soma's floralchariotis drivenby a team of Vedic geese (hamsas).Kathmandu Valley,Nepal. 16thc. (Bakhtapur Museum).

Asuras and yet everlasting life for the gods of creation. In a similar vein, Soma himself serves a dual, if not paradoxical, purpose in Vedic mythology, as he is both a serpent and a serpentslayer. These mythical characteristics recall that manner in which Soma assumed the form of an ancient serpent (sarpa or vrtra'06) in order to erect his pillar of the sun.'07 In this context, he is aptly described as an 'Asura that finds the light'.'08 But in other hymns Soma is an invincible serpent-slayer, or Vrtrahan,'09 intent on vanquishing broods of malevolent serpents that imprison his golden shoots in the underworld of

rivers and streams"0 (Lahiri 1984). In the latter context, the creeping demons are described as irreligious (dbrahman or adkarman) spirits and incorrigible opponents of the heroic Devas (dadevayu; Hillebrandt 1990). Although many commentators have been frustrated by these contradictive themes, the paradox is resolved by alternative Vedic verses that describe the vrtras as creeping plants"' (vratati; Macdonell and Keith 1982; Fig. Ic, d). This novel interpretation of Aryan dragons is entirely consistent with visual interpretations of these serpent-gods in the arts of India and South-

lower hand. Adinath Temple, Khajuraho, Madhya Pradesh, India. 10th c. d. Sarasvati, the riverine mother of Soma in the Vedas, is conventionally depicted as a voluptuous lotus-nymph. Note that she presents a cluster of lotus rhizomes and flowering shoot in her upper hand and a lotiformed soma-vessel in her lower hand. Pailu, Rajasthan. 12th c. (National Museum, New Delhi).

S160

BOTANY ECONOMIC

[VOL. 58

Fig. 5.

Vedic Gods in the Arts of India a. Srya dnves his floral chariot with a team of seven horses. His

ascent to the heavens bningslife to a pair of lotus flowers. Bihar,India. 12th c. (VictoriaAlbert Museum).b. Temple,Khajuraho, MadhyaPradesh,India. 10th c.
In keeping with Vedic mythology Brahmanic communities of medieval India portrayed Indra as serpent-slaying storm-god.His lotiformedbolt impalesa three-headed serpentknownas VKvarfipa in Vedic mythology.Adinath

east Asia; the oldest known renderings are encountered among the oldest known Buddhist sanctuaries of Sanci and Bharut (3rd-2nd c. BCE). Here the bodies of dragons are invariably depicted as lotus rhizome: i.e., with segmented stems, paired stipules, localized root scars, and erect flowering shoots (Bosch 1960; Coomaraswamy 1931). Variations on these early interpretations of the mystical serpent are also encountered among abandoned Hindu and Buddhist temples of post-classical origin in India (Campbell 1982; Fig. 5), Indochina (Fig. 6a, b, 7, 8a), and Indonesia (Bosch 1960; Fig. 4, 5, 30, 31). A typical rendering of the dragon by the Khmer portrays a multi-headed cobra that disgorges a continual trail of lotus stems and flowers from

his mouth (Fig. 6b). Each hood of the dragon displays a lotus medallion, presumably to imply that a flower is born each time the immortal serpent raises one of his heads. In classical mythology, these mysterious serpents were often identified with the ophidian aspect of Visnu, a Vedic god and close ally of Soma during prehistoric times, who eventually assumed Lordship over the Brahmanic pantheon by the turn of the 5th century BCE. Like Vedic Soma, Visnu was recognized as both a serpent and serpent-slayer, as well as a pillar of the sun, golden eye of the sun, cosmic charioteer, cosmic archer, primordial source of the sacred lotus, amrta, and so on. Hence one is inclined to assume that Visnu was recognized as a reincar-

2004]

McDONALD:THE IDENTITYOF SOMA

S161

IF.~~~~~~~F
4~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Attributesof Soma. a. Visnu's 'navel of immortality'is often identified Fig. 6. Symbolic and Metaphorical as a floweringlotus stalk. His cosmic umbilicussupportsBrahma,Visnu, and Siva: the gods of birth,existence and death(respectively).BanteaySamrei,Cambodia.12thc. b. Mythicalserpents(nagas or vrtras) thatdecorate the bordersand portals of Khmer temples often disgorge a continuousprocession of lotus shoots from their mouths.MuangLam, Thailand.12thc. c. Garudais portrayed Nepal as lotus-bornsun-god.His cosmic perch in is rootedin a soma vessel. Bakhtapur, Nepal. d. Garuda deliversa vessel of soma to the Devas aftervanquishing a pair of dragons.Note that the famous 'bearerof oblations' ascends to the heavens on a lotus flower and that he wears a skirtthat is made from lotus petals. Chusya Baha Temple,Kathmandu, Nepal. 17th c.

S162

BOTANY ECONOMIC

[VOL. 58

Fig. 7. The Khmerenvisage Indraas a vajra-wielding,serpent-slayingsun-god. Note that the serpentis a lotus rhizomewhich is born from, and consumedby, the burningface of 'Time' (K&la).Banteay Srei Temple, Cambodia.10th c.

nation of Soma. A large part of Indian mythology pertains to the myriad reincamations or avataras ('descents': Panikkar 1977) of Visnu, whose stories relate in one way or another to the annual appearance and disappearance of a 'lotus-cycle' (padma-kalpa). The most primordial of Visnu's incarnations is called the padma-avatara, or 'lotus-descent', in which the Lord of creation appears on earth as a cosmic flower. This vegetative incarnation is soon followed by a series of different animal avatars, including a fish, turtle, pig, lion, and man (Krisna and Rama), all of which reveal, in one way or another, the truth of the Vedas and the nature of the Creator's immortalizing nectar.'12 Following each of these material incarnations, Visnu transforms himself into a seven-headed serpent. This creature is known as Sesa, 'the Remainder', to identify this recurrent aspect as the 'residue' of a former lotus-cycle. The ophidian form of Vis-

nu is born time and again from his aquatic abyss, giving life to a host of lotiformed gods (i.e., his scions) that enter and exit the cycles of life in an everlasting 'stream' or 'fluxion' (samsdra) of material permutations (i.e., avataras). While all of these creatures and gods may come and go within the realms of materiality, the Cosmic Soul (Brahman or Atman) of the Universe resides eternally in the lotus groves of paradise. This cosmic image of creation is frequently portrayed in the arts by surrounding the image of a lotus flower with lotus rhizomes or interlinking dragons. An alternative interpretation portrays Visnu as a cosmic man with a lotus shoot emerging from his immortal navel (Coomaraswamy 1931). In Burma (Thaw 1972) and Cambodia (Fig. 6a) these three symbolic elements often convene to produce a trifurcating lotus-tree of life, each branch of which sustains a member of the Hindu trinity: namely Brahma,

2004]

McDONALD:THE IDENTITYOF SOMA

S163

Visnu, Siva. These threegods represent basic the stages of material existence-birth, existence, and death (respectively)-and therefore exemplify the three sequentialstages of a lotus-cycle. Although this particularimage is far removed from Visnu's original homeland, and was elaboratedalmost three-thousand years afterVisnu's appearanceamong the Indo-Aryans,it remains faithful to ancient Aryan imagery that relates to Soma. For Soma, the originalFatherof the gods, is also a pillar of solar light, golden and red flower, cosmic dragon, immortal navel,113 primordialman,'14 and Lord of Brahmins. 15 Cambodia's peculiar visualizations of Visnu are based primarilyon a Puranicmyth entitled
the Padma-avatara, or 'Lotus-incarnation' .16 In

plumed121 plant, or indeed, a solar-bodiedraptor122that extractedthe nectar of the gods from the bodies of aquatic dragons.'23 Just as Vedic Garutmat perchedhis flamingbody upon a cosmic pillar to view the Aryan world with an allseeing, solar eye,'24Soma placed his golden eye upon a golden pillar'25 peer across the four to quartersof the earth.Thus, Garutmat originally represented a zoomorphic aspect of Soma, whose flamingfeathersare homologouswith the feather-like petals'26of Soma's sun-like eyes (Fig. la, b). In classical and medieval mythology of India, Garudaconserved his traditional roles as a 'Destroyer of Serpents' and 'Stealer of Elixir'"27
(Naganta and Amrtaharana, respectively; Dan-

this tale, Visnu separatesthe realmsof earthand skies with his pillaredumbilicus,andthen brings life to the world by transforming navel cord his into a cosmic lotus. As Visnu's cosmic bud (or egg) begins to awaken at the dawn of creation, it reveals a four-headed,golden Brahminwithin its perianth,the 'first-born'creatorof time and living beings known as Brahma. This golden man is born with the belief thathe is the Creator of the cosmos, but then becomes confused when he encountersVisnu residingat the oppositeend of his lotus stalk in the form of a serpent.After a brief and heated argument,both gods recognize that they are simply differentaspects of the same primeval 'Soul' (i.e., Atman), a term that originally applied to Soma in the Rg Veda."17 The tale of Brahma'sdiscovery of his serpentine self harkensback, of course, to Vedic mythology, which identifies Soma as a primevalserpent, the separatorof the Earth from the Sky,118 the first-born'Brahmanof the Gods',119 a goldand en-bodied flower that gives life to the Aryan cosmos. Mythical portrayalsof Visnu in classical mythology as both a serpentand serpent-slayer are also themes that clearly trace from Vedic periods. In the latter role, Visnu often assumes the form of solar eagle known as Garuda,in which guise he seizes the writhing bodies of aquatic dragonsto dispossess them of their immortalizing nectar.This classical avian figure is clearly identicalto the 'fair-plumed'(suparna)sun-bird of Vedic mythology that once winged his way across the Aryan skies120 a search for soma, in namely Garutmat.And in like manner,he must also be identical to Soma, since the sacredplant of the Indo-Aryanswas also likened to a fair-

ielou 1991, but he was betterknown duringthis laterperiodas an avian avatar'28 'vehicle' (vaor hana) of Visnu. These mythic images are consistent in every respect with iconographicinterpretations of the solar eagle throughoutAsia, which customarilyassociate the dragon-slaying raptor with a pillared lotus stalk (Fig. 6c). In Nepal, for example, Garuda's floral perch is rooted in an 'over-flowingvessel' (purna-kumbha) of elixir (Fig. 6c; the equivalentof Vedic Soma's 'golden vessel' ;129 Hillebrandt 1990), presumablyto identify the nectar of the gods with the nectar of the lotus. It is also notable that the quasi-personifiedraptor and his floral podium are both guilded in gold, ostensibly to imply the equivalencyof the flower'spetals with the bird's 'fair wings'. This same symbolic relationshipis observedin a narrative rendering of the avian sun-god in the nearbytemple of Chusya Baha of Nepal, where the famous bearerof oblations lifts off his lotus pillar with a soma vessel (the Vedic kalasa) in his hand (Fig. 6d) and two writhingdragonsbeneathhis feet. It is noteworthythat this image pertainsspecifically to a detailed accountof Garuda'slife in the Mahabharata,'30 but it holds just as true to prehistoric accounts of Garutmat'sflights over the Punjab. VEDIC GODS IN THE ARTS OF CLASSICALAND MEDIEVAL INDIA As mentionedearlier,the gods of birth, existence, and death in classical mythology-Brahma, Visnu, and Siva-share controlover the Vedic pantheonby governing the timing of recurrent lotus cycles (padma-kalpa).'3' 'Lotus-born' (Padma-yoni)Brahmainitiateseach cycle of life

S164

ECONOMIC BOTANY

[VOL. 58

Fig. 8. ExtractingSoma in Myth and Ritual. a. Devas and Asuras chum for the elixir of immortalityby coiling the body of a serpentarounda lotiformedmountain(Mount 'Kalafa' or 'Soma-vessel'). A vessel of amrita is observed on the back of Visnu's turtle incarnation(Kurma).Angkor,Cambodia. 12th c. (Guimet vessel' (purna-kumbha) the Devas. of Museum). b. The mouthof Rahudisgorgessoma into an 'over-brimming Note thatthe urnis fashionedin the image of a flowerand thata lotus flowerfloatsuponthe elixir of immortality. DasavataraTemple, Deogarh,MadhyaPradesh,India. 6th c. c. Massive mortarsand pestles are often placed inside the inner sanctumsof Hindutemples.The pestle is symbolic of Siva's immortalphallusand his creative

2004]

McDONALD:THE IDENTITYOF SOMA

S165

by awakening his golden body from within a cosmic flower (Fig. 6a, 8a); Visnu sustainseach lotus-cycle by supporting the floral womb of Brahma upon his pillared navel cord (Fig. 6a, 8a); and Siva draws each lotus-cycle to a close by annihilatingBrahma'sfloral throne with the burning energies of his self-consuming fires (Fig. 2c, 3b), thereby setting the stage for another roundof creation.Accordingly,the Hindu trinityembodies the three sequentialstages of a lotus growth cycle, or three aspects (tri-murti) of a Universal Creator (Brahman or Atman). This same primordialsoul, or 'creative principle', was originally recognized in Vedic verses by the name of Visvakarman('All-maker'),'32 Hiranyagarbha ('Golden-womb'),133 or Tad Ekam ('That One').'34All of these titles refer to the same self-createddemiurgewhich produced being (sat) from non-being(asat) in the form of a 'germ', 'navel', 'pillar' or 'sun'. As is now apparent,all of these attributesand roles were also shared by Vedic Soma, yet another name for the ancient 'Lord of Creation'. The rise of Visnu in the ranks of the Vedic pantheonduringthe classical perioddid not portend the obsolescence or disappearance of Soma's ancient associates. Although many new and distinctive gods and goddesses appear on the mythic scene, almost all of them descend from Vedic gods and goddesses. Soma continues to providethe Devas and Asuraswith theiryearly allotments of nectar in classical Indian mythology (Macdonell 1995; Mani 1975), and he continues to fulfill this role by assuming the mythic image of either a sun or moon (Sarya or Candra,'36 respectively;Macdonell 1995; Hillebrandt1990). Indeed, iconographicportrayals of Soma-Candra in Medieval India envisage the god as a lotus-born Brahmin'37 who carries a vessel of elixir to the heavens (Fig. 4a). This perspective comparesclosely with Nepalese interpretations the god (Fig. 4b), which enviof sion the vegetative Moon-god as a lotus-charioteer. We note that the god drives a team of aquatic fowl (hamsas or 'geese'), these being recognized as avian avatarsof Soma in the Rg

We Veda.'38 also note that a pair of Devas have released their cosmic arrowsinto a labyrinthof lotus rhizome that surroundthe floral chariot, Deostensibly to liberatea host of lotus-throned vas. While this particularrendering of Soma seems to mirrorthe mythic image of Brahmain the Mahabharata (i.e., a lotus-born god that it drives a goose-drawnchariot),139 also suggests thatNepalese artisanswere well awareof a close symbolic relationshipbetween Brahma, SomaCandra,and the sacred lotus. Anthropomorphic renderingsof Soma on his lunar chariot are almost indistinguishablefrom contemporaneous portrayals of the sun-god known as Suirya, as both deities are distinguished by their floral chariots (i.e., as a podium) and the conventionalhabit of upholding a pair of lotus stalks (Fig. 4b, 5a). The vegetative character of their celestial vehicles maintains their ancient Aryan image, as the chariots of Soma and Suiryawere originally described as wheels140that served as one-axled, three-hubbed vessels for the nectar of immortality'41 (i.e., = three concentric rings of petals, stamens and ovoid receptacle;Fig. lb, 2b). All of these symbolic attributes incorporated are into a 12th censolar vehicle (Fig. 5a), tury renderingof Suirya's team of seven horses.'42 along with the standard This same solar car was also commandeered by Indra in Vedic mythology, suggesting that this famous wielder of the bolt was also a sun-god. Like Soma, Indraascended into the heavens on the chariot of Suiryato shoot his "feathered
shafts" 141 (i.e., Soma's arrows) into the mouths

of dark and surly serpents.This ancient mythic image is portrayedby numerousrenderingsof Indra in the medieval period of India, one of which places a stylized lotus stalk in one hand of the god and a three-pronged, floralbolt in the other (Fig. 5b). We note that a three-headed
dragon (i.e., Vedic
Visvarapa'44)

has been im-

paled by the god's trident,thus affecting the release of soma from the underworld.This classical Indianimage comparesclosely with Cambodian interpretations Indra,which similarly of hold true to ancient Vedic concepts of the fa-

seed (soma), while the mortaris symbolic of his consort's floral womb (yoni) of creation.The 'churning'of these organs producesthe elixir of immortality. Khajuraho, MadhyaPradesh,India. 11th c. (NationalMuseum, New Delhi). d. JavaneseBrahminsdecoratedtheir mortarsand pestles with lotus flowers so as to equate the immortalizing seed of Siva with lotus nectar.Java, Indonesia.ca. 14th c. (NationalMuseum,Jakarta).

S166

ECONOMIC BOTANY

[VOL. 58

mous storm-god. In one classic Khmer design, Indraassumes a meditative 'lotus-position'on a or 'lion-faced' (simha-mukha; 'sun-faced', sarya-mukha) god of 'Time' (Kala; Fig. 7). The face of the lion is symbolic of the sun, yet one also observes that the burning face represents the head of a lotus-bodiedserpent.As Indraraises his bolt in victory, two immortalserpentsdistend their lotus-navelledbodies in complianceto flowers his will, and release the nectar-bearing from the underworld. Indra's flaming trident emerges from each of the serpent's dangling flowers. The Rg Veda identifies yet anotherimportant Aryan divinity with the sun and Soma, namely Agni, the god of 'Fire' (Fig. 3a). This god's mythic form and functions are essentially identical to those of Soma (Brough 1971; Doniger 1981; Keith 1989; Macdonell 1995), for he too is a cosmic archer,145golden pillar,146brilliant sun,'47 golden Brahmin,'48 'bearer of oblaand 'child of the waters'.'50And not tions',149 unlike his vegetative ally, Agni is a vegetative (creeper' that hides within watery substrates'5' of his ancient mother, the Earth (i.e., Bhu).152 When time is nigh for his body to shine with the brillianceof the sun, he arises into the heavand then ens with sharpened,flaming shafts,'53 kindles himself in the guise of a golden'54and ruddy scion.'55Agni is god paradox,as he lives part of his life as an 'aquatic embryo' (apam garbha'56) and anotherpart as a burningsun.'57 None of these characteristicscan distinguish
him, however, from Soma, as Agni is Soma.'51'

signify his possession of lotus nectar (i.e.,

amrta).

Medieval conceptions of Agni in the plastic from those of Siva durartsare indistinguishable ing the same time period (Fig. 3b), and therefore suggest that Siva is a derivativeform of AgniSoma. This deduction is confirmedby the fact that Siva often goes by the name of Rudra in classical Hindu mythology, and that Rudrawas originally recognized as an ally of Soma and Agni in the Rg Veda.'63 In fact, Rudrawas specifically identified as a destructive aspect of Derived myths Soma himself (Rudra-Soma'64). as of classical origin usually identify Siva-Rudra either an agent or alter-egoof Visnu and Brahma, in which role he is prone to destroyAsuras with his blazing, lotiformedtrident(Fig. 2c, 3b). Since Siva representsthe destructiveaspect of Visnu, it is not surprisingthat this god reveals himself in a numberof animal forms, the most prominentof which is a lotus-faced serpent.'65 In this guise, Siva occasionally assumes the titles of various Vedic dragons, such as Visvarupa, Sarpa, Bala, and Aja-ekapad.'66 But SivaRudraalso maintainshis age-old role as a dragin on-slayer,'67 which context he is openly identified as an aspect of Soma, Agni, Sarva, and
Varuna.'68

Since Vedic verses also assert that Agni hides we himself in lotus plants along riverbanks,'59 can only deduce that Soma and Agni represent deified aspects of this celebratedplant. Like Soma, Agni is also describedin termsof a golden sage (rsi) or Brahmin'60 basks in that the golden aura of his spiritualfires (tapas).'6' This archaic image is consistent with iconographicimpressionsof Brahma,all Buddhas,as well as Agni himself (Fig. 3a). In the lattercase, we note that the ancient Aryan god of fire is enveloped by flames that arise from his pyrogenic shoulders;and like Indra,he wields a lotiformed shaft in one hand and a vanquished three-headeddragon in the other (i.e., Vi?varapa, 162 a Vedic victim of Agni and Indra).He also displays a soma-vessel (kalasa) thatis decorated on its outer face with lotus petals, ostensibly to

Of the lattergods, Vedic Varunais particularly worthyof note, as he was originallyidentified as an Asuran169(as opposed to Devic) ally of Rudra.170 Varuna is a riverine spirit that was lauded for his assistanceto Rudraand yet other in Devas for supportingSoma's pillar of truth"7' the midst of rivers.172 Since Varunasustaineda
vegetative summit (vanasya stupam)'73 that

it opened a pathwayto the Sun,'74 comes as little surprise that this famous 'Lord of Waters' (Apampati)was also identified in Vedic verses as an aspect of Soma.'75Nevertheless, Varuna often distinguisheshimself as a unique and distinctive spirit by his particularchoice of weapons-the pas'a, or 'noose''76-which he uses to bind serpent-demonsin the deep as he raises Soma's pillar of truth.In classical and medieval iconography,Varunaconventionallymounts the back of an aquatic dragon (makara)to indicate his prowess over the serpent-clans(Fig. 3c). He often displays a ropy 'noose' in one hand and a cluster of lotus rhizomes in the other, so as to imply the symbolic equivalency of these weapons of divine warfare.In this specimen, he also

2004]

McDONALD:THE IDENTITYOF SOMA

S167

possesses a soma-vessel, indicating his victory over the dragons. Varunais not the only divinity that mounts the back of aquatic dragons, as this station is also sharedby a varietyof Brahmanic river-goddesses, such as Sarasvati (Fig. 3d), Ganga (Ganges), and Yamuna(Jumna).All of these rivers were worshipped in Vedic mythology,'77but only Sarasvatl appears distinctly as a goddess duringprehistorictimes. She was indirectlyrecognized as a mother-figureof Vedic Soma,'78 in Agni,179 and Indra,'80 the sense that she nurturedtheir divine 'germs' (garbha)'8' in her waters. Other verses imply that she bestowed immortalityon these golden heroes, as her breasts Moreflowed with the nectar of immortality.'82 over, she bestowed ecstasy on Aryans thatpracticed the soma sacrifice on her hallowed banks. Classical and medieval myths generallyidentify this goddess as the consort of Brahmaand the mother of the Vedas (Washburn1986), neither of which roles is out of keeping with her Vedic persona. Although most iconographic impressions of Sarasvatidate from the medievalperiod of Indian history, these depictions invariably A portrayher with Vedic attributes. 12thcentury renderingof the goddess in western Indiaintentionally equates the contents of her voluptuous breastswith the nectariferous contentsof her sacred flowers (Fig. 3d). And like Varunaduring this same time period (Fig. 3c), she holds a cluster of budding lotus rhizomes in one of her hands and tablets of the Vedas in another.Her soma-vessel is decorated on its outer surface with lotus petals to emphasize a connection between the cosmic flower and immortalizing nectar. All the while, her sumptuousbody is illuminatedby the golden light of a full-blownlotus flower.

in eastern religion, and is best revealed in tales that accountfor the sacrificeof soma. This general theme forms the basis of a populartale in the Puranasentitled the 'Churningfor Nectar' (Amrta-manthana),'84 and describes the peculiar mannerin which the Devas and Asurasonce coordinated their oppositional efforts to achieve immortality (amrta).It is not by coincidencethat the title of this myth borrowsthe archaicVedic term for 'churning' (mantha; Macdonell and Keith 1982), which relates to the use of mortars and pestles by Aryan priests to extractthe psychotropic saps of soma's milky stalks.'85In a mythical context, the gods accomplish this feat by wrappingthe body of a cosmic dragon (Vasuki by name, a materialmanifestationof Visnu'86) around a lotiformed mountain (i.e., that has arisen from the navel of VisSoma'87) nu.'88They then churn their Creator's 'milky ocean' for ambrosiaby tugging at opposite ends of the serpent'sbody. Per the usual, the gods must initially overcome a series of obstacles, but not without the indispensableassistanceof their Creator. this In case, the massive mountain proves much too large and unwieldy for the Devas and Asurasto manageby themselves. Hence Visnu transforms himself into a turtle(kurma)to supportthe floral mountainupon his carapace,and then into a cosmic man (purusa)so as to steady the mountain's stalk with an outstretchedarm. Once the mystical mountainhas been stabilized,the gods of the earthand sky proceed to churnthe milky ocean for a generous outpouringof Visnu's immortalizing nectars. As the nectar begins to flow, a banquetis prepared the benefitof the Devas. for The first gods to arriveare the Sun (Surya) and Moon (Candra), soon followed by Indra,Garuda, and the rest of Devas. When Padma ('Lotuslady'), the consortand femininealter-egoof VisTHE SOMA SACRIFICEIN MYTH nu, arrives, along with a host of dancing lotusWith the foregoing, it is increasinglyapparent nymphs (i.e., apsarases, or 'Essence of the wathat most membersof the Vedic pantheonwere ters'; Danielou 1991), all the gods begin to conceived in the Aryan imagination as deified rejoice in song and dance. While a copious outand/or personified aspects of the sacred lotus. pouring of elixir fills their goblets, they raise Yet these same gods and goddesses were also their chalices and pay obeisanceto Visnu, Brahperceivedas distinctiveagents that sacrificedthe ma, and Siva for the gift of immortallife. plant (their own identity) on their own behalf. Visual interpretationsof this colorful tale This recurrenttheme is embodied in the char- among the famous ruins of Cambodia make acter of Soma himself, as he is explicitly iden- clear that the immortalizingnectar of the gods tified as both the sacrifice and the sacrificer.'83 is a byproductof Visnu's lotiformed mountain This pervasiveparadoxin Brahmanic mythology (Fig. 8a). As the serpent's massive body is is at the root of all that is considered mystical grasped from opposite ends by teams of Devas

S168

BOTANY ECONOMIC

[VOL. 58

and Asuras, Brahma assumes his standard 'lotus position' on top the golden mountain. The Sun and Moon ascend to heavens, and dancing troops of apsarases fill the skies to welcome the rest of the Devic host. All of these gods can be traced, of course, from prehistoric hymns, including the famous apsarases, or 'lotusnymphs', hosts of which formerly danced with Soma in the lotus groves of the Punjab.189And we can be sure that the gods have convened to drink lotus nectar, as a large vessel is observed at the base of the churning lotus stalk. The long and complicated myth of the 'Great Churning' includes a number of intriguing subplots and allegorical themes that relate in various ways to the soma sacrifice. One of these episodes describes how an underworld figure by the name of Rdhu ('Seizer') succeeds in dispossessing the Devas of their nectar by disguising himself as the sun. With his true identity concealed, Rahu is able to enter into the company of the sky-gods and swallow a planetary body that serves as a vessel for the nectar of the gods: the Moon (Candra). When the Devas are deprived once again of immortal life, Visnu is called upon for assistance. In this instance, the Creator of the cosmos appears on the scene with golden, blazing disk (cakra) in hand, and decapitates the gluttonous fiend with his invincible weapon. This act results in a copious outpouring of soma from Rahu's sun-like head, and the subsequent rejuvenation of the Devas. While many mythologists have interpreted this fabulous tale as a colorful description of a lunar eclipse, such an explanation fails to account for the important role of nectar in the story. Nor does this explanation take into consideration that the sun and moon traditionally served as soma-vessels in Vedic mythology, which clearly has little to do with movements of planetary orbs. Indeed, renderings of this mythic theme in the arts of India rarely focus on planetary bodies, but mainly on lotus flowers and nectar. In central India, for example, Rahu's sun-like face surrenders a generous spout of nectar into an 'over-brimming vessel' (purna-kumbha), while a disembodied lotus flower is observed floating upon an overflow of nectar (Fig. 8b). Thus, it would seem that Rahu's consumption of the moon is symbolic of lotus anthesis: the radiate configuration of golden raylike stamens engulfing a golden moon-shaped seed receptacle (Fig. lb).

THE SOMA SACRIFICE IN RITUAL

Historical accounts of the soma sacrifice by communitiesare not as obscure early Brahmanic and mysteriousas mythical accountsof the process. Vedic songs and liturgical works of the Brahmanasmake clear that Aryan priests used to stone mortars,pestles, and pressing boards'90 extractthe inebriatingsaps of soma stalks (Hillebrandt1990, I). There are also indicationsthat crude extractswere filteredwith wool and possibly given a heat treatment,as numerousliturgies refer to the use of fire altarsand cauldrons during the process.19'Soma's juices were then mixed with milk, yogurt, and/or roasted cereals'92in specialized vessels (kalasas or dronas)'93 and drunk soon thereafter. Judging from archeological records of India and Southeast Asia, these procedureswere employed by Brahmanic and Buddhistcommunitiesfor thousands of years, as massive mortarsand pestles have been discovered among the ancient temples of these religious sects from the Punjab to IndoMalaya (Fig. 8c, d). These stone implements currentlyserve as altars for modem Brahmanic and Hindu communities,but they are much too large to have been used for decorativepurposes alone. Some of them are more than 3 m wide and weigh in excess of several tons. The foundations of these sacrificial altars are normally cubical, flat-topped platforms,one side of which presents an elongated spout. The altar'sbase is traditionally referredto as the yoni, a termwhich connotes the sacrificial 'locus', 'womb', or 'dwellingplace' of Soma'94 Vedic songs (Panin ikkar 1977). A cavity is hollowed out of the middle of the yoni, into which is fitted a cylindricalor eight-angledpestle (Fig. 8c). The pestle is called a linga, or 'phallus', and, as earlier mentioned,is associatedwith the virile member of various Brahmanicgods, usually the phallus of Siva. In classical mythology, the linga contains a 'semen' or retas of cosmic significance, namely soma;'95 hence the symbolic joining of the linga and yoni, in both a mythical and ritualistic context,resultsin the generationof nectar
(amrta).

Most lingas and yonis that are observed in modem museums and ancient temple sites were elaboratedafter the turn of the 4th century,but they all matchclosely in generalform with early descriptionsof Aryan altars during the turn of
the 8th century BCE. The Satapatha Brahmana

2004]

McDONALD:THE IDENTITYOF SOMA

S169

states explicitly, for example, that the yoni was a four-cornered, stone altar,and that it served as a mortarduring the soma sacrifice.196Into this mortarwas inserted a rounded pestle that was
called the
s<isna'97

ancient altars probably served as mortars and pestles duringcivilized periodsof Asian history. CONCLUSIONS A close examinationof the mythic and artistic records of India and Southeast Asia indicates that the famous inebriantof the ancient Aryans was the eastern lotus, Nelumbo nucifera. Vedic epithets, metaphors,and myths that describethe physical and behavioral characteristics of soma-as a sun, serpent, golden eagle, arrow, lightningbolt, cloud, phallic pillar,womb, chariot, and immortalnavel-relate individuallyor as a whole to the easternlotus. Since most Hindu and Buddhistgods and goddesses trace their origins from the Vedas (or at least share a pedigree of Vedic origin), and have always shared close symbolic associationswith Nelumbo,there is reasonto believe the divine statusof this symbolic plant derives from India'sprehistoricpast. This hypothesiswill requireconfirmation adby ditionalchemical and pharmacological analyses, preferablybased on a broad sampling of wild and domesticated lotus populations that range from the northernshores of the Caspian Sea to the Pacific Ocean. Since many populations of this plant species exist as domesticatedcultivars for the productionof edible seeds, starchyrhizomes, ornamental qualities, and presumably, pharmacological properties,we are likely to encounter considerablechemical variationamong the races. If and when Nelumbo proves to possess psychoactiveconstituentsthat live up to the reputationof Soma, our currentperspectiveson the origin and developmentof easternreligions will requirea thoroughre-examination. For the easternlotus has played an enduringrole in the development of religion, myth and the arts of the ancient Orient,and was likely employed by Brahmanic,Buddhist and Zoroastriancommunities before and after the dawn of civilization in Asia. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Drs. Beryl Simpsonand TomWendtof the PlantResources Center at the Universityof Texas,Austin,providedcriticalreviewson a preliminarydraftof the manuscript. GwenGageassistedin preparing platesfor the photographs J.A. McDonald1998). Early supportof this study (?) was provided the Harvard by University Herbaria ArnoldArboretum. and

(phallus), a Sanskrit term that

is synonymous with linga. Various chapters of this ancient text reveal that Aryan altars were often decorated in the image of the sacrificial which implies thatthey were fashioned victim,'98 in the image of either a flower or stalk. Indeed, to the present day, there is only one plant that is associated with these ubiquitous altars, and
that is the eastern lotus (Fig. 8c, d). The yoni is

conventionally surrounded lotus petals, into by which is fitted a roundedpestle, a symbolic representationof a lotus seed receptacle. Most art historiansidentify the lower portion of the sacrificial altaras a symbol of the Earth,or one of several archetypal in earth-goddesses Hindumythology, such as Padma ('Lotus-lady'),the consort of Visnu, Sarasvat4, the lotus-bornconsort of Brahma,or Kamala('Lotus-girl'),the consort of Siva. All of these goddesses were identified directly or indirectlyas the cosmic womb of the universe,or the womb of a soma sacrifice.Since the yoni was often described in Vedic terms as the receptacle of Soma's cosmic seed,'99or as the birthplaceof the sacrificialgod,200 may one identify the mortaras the materialand symbolic source of the 'essence' of creation.The churning of the phallus and womb producedthe nectarof the goddess and seed of the phallus. So far as we know, lingas and yonis are no longer employed in public arenas to press out the saps of floweringlotus shoots. Nevertheless, contemporarycommunities of Brahmanic and Buddhistpriests still make use of these altarsin a mannerthat clearly traces from the prehistoric past. Lingas and yonis are presently anointed with milk and/or red-pigmentedliquids during specified days of the year, and usually in the context of theirbeing washed with the nectar(or seed) of the gods. Such proceduresare outlined
in detail in the Satapatha Brahmana,20' and were

evidently practiced by Brahmaniccommunities during the 11th century (Fig. 8c). It is still difficult to say, of course, just when and why the practiceof the soma sacrificewas abandonedin the not so distantpast (at least in public arenas), but the sheer size and frequent occurrence of lingas and yonis from northernIndia to Southeast Asia leave little reason to doubt that these

LITERATURE CITED
Bhawe, S. S. 1957. The Soma hymns of the Rg-Veda. Vol. 1. Oriental Institute, Baroda. Bhikku Nanamoli and Bhikkhu Bodhi. 1995. The

S170

BOTANY ECONOMIC

[VOL. 58

middle length discourses of the Buddha: A new of translation the Majjhima Nikaya.WisdomPubl., Boston. Bosch, F. D. K. 1960. The golden germ. Mouton & Co., Gravenhage. Brough, J. 1971. Soma and Amanita muscaria. Bulletin of Oriental and African Studies 34(2):331362, Universityof London. Campbell, J. 1982. The mythicimage. PrincetonUniversity Press, Princeton,NJ. Coomaraswamy,A. 1928. Yaksas. PartI. Smithsonian MiscellaneousCollections, no. 2926. Smithsonian D.C. Institution, Washington, . 1931. Yaksas. Part II. SmithsonianMiscellaneous Collections, no. 3059. SmithsonianInstituD.C. tion, Washington, . 1979. Elements of Buddhist Iconography. Munshiram Manoharlal Publ.Pvt. Ltd.,New Delhi. (1st ed. 1935, Cambridge, MA). Danielou, A. 1991.The mythsandgods of India.Inner Traditions International Inc., Rochester,VT. Deshpande, N. A. 1988-1991. Padma Purana in Ancient Indiantradition mythology(Vols. 39-47). and Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi. de Diaz, J. L. 1975. Etnofarmacologfa plantasalucin6genas Latinoamericanas (CuranderosCientificos CEMEF 4), Centro de Estudios en Farmadependencia, Mexico D.E Doniger O'Flaherty, W. 1967. The post-vedichistory of the soma plant.In G. Wasson,ed., Soma, divine mushroom of immortality.HarcourtBrace Jovanovich, Inc., Italy. . 1981. The Rig Veda. Penguin Books Ltd., New York. Edgerton, F. 1972. The BhagavadGita. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. Eggeling, J. 1978. Satapatha-Brahmana. Sacred In Books of the East. Vols. 12, 26, 41, 43, 44. Motilal Delhi. (1st eds. 1880-1885, Oxford.) Banarsidass, Emboden, W. A. 1972. Narcotic plants. The MacMillan Co., New York. . 1981. Transcultural of narcoticwaterlilies use in ancientEgyptianand Mayandrugritual.Journal of Ethnopharmacology 3:39-83. Falk, H. 1989. Soma I and II. Bull. School of Oriental and AfricanStudies 52:77-90. Flattery, D. S., and M. Schwartz, 1989. Haomaand harmaline.University of CaliforniaPress, Berkeley, CA. Foucher, A. 1994. The beginningsof Buddhistart.L. A. Thomas and E W. Thomas, trans. Asian Educational Services, New Delhi. (1st ed., 1917). Furst, P. T. 1972. The flesh of the gods. Praeger Publ., New Yorkand Washington. Ganguli, K. M. 1990. Mahabharata. C. Roy, ed., P. Munshiram Manoharlal Publ. Ltd., New Delhi. (1st ed. 1886). Gibbs, R. D. 1974. Chemotaxonomyof flowering

plants. Vol. 1. McGill-Queen'sUniversity Press, Montreal. Gonda, J. 1959. Epithetsof the Rgveda. Moutonand Co., The Hague. * 1993. Aspects of early Visnuism. Motilal Delhi. (1st ed. 1954, Leiden). Banarsidass, Griffith, R. T. H. 1991. The hymns of the Rig Veda. Publ. Pvt. Ltd., Delhi. (1st ed. Motilal Banarsidass 1889). . 1995. The AtharvaVeda. 2 vols. Low Price Publ., Delhi. (1st ed. 1916). of Harle, J. C. 1987. The art and architecture the Indian subcontinent. PenguinBooks, London. Hillebrandt, A. 1990. Vedic mythology.S. Rajeswara Sarma, trans. 2 vols., Motilal BanarsidassPubl., Delhi. (1st ed. 1927, Breslau). Iyer, S. V. 1985. VarahaPurana.In Ancient Indian tradition mythology.Vols. 31-32. MotilalBanand arsidass,Delhi. James, E. 0. 1966. The tree of life. E. J. Brill, Leiden. Motilal BanarJohnston, E. H. 1992. Buddhacarita. sidass, Delhi. (1st ed. 1936, Lahore). Sanhita.Harvard Keith, A. B. 1967. TaittirTya Oriental Series. Vols. 18, 19. Motilal Banarsidass,Delhi. (1st ed. 1914). . 1989. The religionandphilosophyof the Veda and Upanishads.2 vols. MotilalBanarsidass Publ., Delhi. (1st ed. 1925, Cambridge, MA). Lahiri, A. K. 1984. Vedic Vrtra.MotilalBanarsidass, Delhi. Lee, S. 1994. A history of Far Eastern art. 5th ed. HarryN. AbramsInc., New York. McDonald, J. A. 2002. Botanicaldetermination the of Middle Eastern tree of life. Economic Botany 56(2):113-129. Macdonell, A. A. 1995. Vedic mythology. Motilal Banarsidass Publ. Pvt. Ltd. Delhi. (1st ed. 1898). , and A. B. Keith. 1982. Vedic index of names and subjects. Motilal Banarsidass,Delhi. (1st ed. 1912, London). McKenna, T. 1992. Foods of the gods. Bantam Books, New York. Mahdihassan, S. 1981. The traditionof alchemy in India. American Journalof Chinese Medicine 9: 23-33. Malamoud, C. 1991. Soma as sacrificial substance and divine figure in the Vedic mythology of Exchange. G. Honigsblum,trans. Pages 803-805 in Y. Bonnefoy and Doniger, comps., Mythologies, vol. 2. Universityof Chicago Press, Chicago. Mani, V. 1975. Puranicencyclopaedia.5th ed., Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi. Nyberg, H. 1995. The problemof the Aryans and the Soma: The botanicalevidence. Pages 382-406 in G. Erdosy,ed., The Indo-Aryansof AncientSouth Asia. Walterde Gruyter, Berlin. Oldenberg, H. 1993. The religion of the Veda. S. B.

2004]

McDONALD:THE IDENTITYOF SOMA

ENDNOTES

S171

Shrotri, transl. Motilal BanarsidassPubl., Delhi. (1st ed. 1894). Panikkar, R. 1977. The Vedic experience, Mantramanjari.Universityof CaliforniaPress, Berkeley. Parpola, A. 1995. The problemof the Aryansand the Soma: Textual-linguisticand archeological evidence. Pages 351-379 in G. Erdosy,ed., The IndoAryans of ancient South Asia. Walterde Gruyter, Berlin. Radhakrishnan, S. 1992. The principle Upanisads. Humanities Press Intl. Inc., Atlantic Highlands, New Jersey.(1st ed. 1953). Rockhill, W. W. 1884. The life of the Buddha(BkahHgyur and Bstan-Hgyur). Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner Co., London. & Shamma, M. 1972. The isoquinolinealkaloids.Academic Press, New York. , and J. L. Moniot. 1978. Isoquinolinealkaloids research.PlenumPress, New York. Shastri, J. L. 1970. Siva Purana.In Ancient Indian traditionand mythology. Vols. 1-4. Motilal Banarsidass,Delhi. . 1973. Linga Purana.In Ancient Indiantradition and mythology. Vols. 5-6. Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi. . 1978-1980. Garuda In Purana. AncientIndian tradition mythology.Vols. 12-14. MotilalBanand arsidass,Delhi. Snodgrass, A. 1985. The symbolismof the Stupa.Motilal Banarsidass Publ., Pvt. Ltd., Delhi. Spess, D. L. 2000. Soma the divine hallucinogen. Park StreetPress, Rochester,VT Tagare, G. V. 1976-1978. BhagavataPurana.In Ancient Indian traditionand mythology. Vols. 7-11. Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi. . 1981-1982. KurmaPurana.In AncientIndian tradition mythology.Vols. 20-21. MotilalBanand arsidass,Delhi. . 1987-1988. Vayu Purana.In Ancient Indian traditionand mythology.Vols. 37-38. MotilalBanarsidass,Delhi. Thaw, A. 1972. Historical sites in Burma. Sarpay BeikmanPress, Rangoon. Washburn, H. 1986. Epic mythology. Motilal Banarsidass,Delhi. (1st ed., 1915, Strassburg). Wasson, G. 1967. Soma, divine mushroomof immortality. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich,Inc., Italy. Wilson, H. H. 1980. Visnu Purana.Nag Publishers, Delhi. Witzel, M. 1995. Early Indianhistory:Linguisticand
textual parameters. Pages 351-379 in G. Erdosy,

RV = Rg Veda(Griffith 1991); SB = SatapathaBrahmana (Eggeling 1978); AV = Atharva Veda (Griffith

1995); TaiS = TaittirFya Sanhita (Keith 1967); MhB (Ganguli 1990); BhG Bhagavad Gita (Edgerton 1972) RV IX.7.1; 35.6; 42.5; 48.4; 46.24 RV VII.99.5; VIII.85.9; X.138.3; X.170.2; AV IV.10.5 3RV IX. 85.5; 61.17; 113.5 4 RV X.90.16; AV 111.8.1-3; 9.10-13; V.28.1-6; VI.61; SB 1.1.1.13; 111.2.2.4; XI.1.1.1 5 RV IX.96.7-8; IX.42.4 6 RV IX.33.5; IX.74.3; IX.94.41 7 RV IX.106.8
2 8

RV VIII.48.3

9 RV IX.51.5 10 RV IX.21.2 RV IX.62.4

12 13 14 5 16 17 18 19

RV IX.32.6
RV IX.9.9 RV IX.4.1-10 (Panikkar 1977, p. 804) RV 8.48.3 RV IX.9.9; SB IX.4.4.8 RV VIII.48.3 Chandogya Upanisad V.2.4-8 (Radhakrishnan1992)

Brhadcranyaka Upanisad 111.5.1; Chandogya Upanisad VIIJ.2.5 (Radhakrishnan1992) SB 11.6.1.19-20; Svetd?vatara Upanisad VI.22; Brhadiranyaka Upanisad 111.2.12-13 (Radhakrishnan 1992) RV IX.2.5; IX.73.7; IX.87.2 RV 1.34.2; IV.13.5; IX.74.2; AV X.8.2-6 RV 11.14.2; 11.39.1; V.78.6-7; AV XII.1.24-29 RV IX.7.1; IX.35.6; IX.66.24 RV IV.24.9; IV.58.5; AV X.7.41 AV X.7.41 RV 1.179.4; 1.32.8; VIII.1.33 RV IX.50.1, IX.69.1; X.42.8; X.89.5 RV X.89.5 RV IX.50.1 RV IX.76.3; IX.86.44-46 SB 111.4.3.13; 111.9.4.2; IV.1.4.8; IV.4.3.4 SB 111.3.9.4; 111.4.3.13; 111.9.4.2; IV.1.4.8; IV.4.3.4: TaiS VI.4.7 RV VIII.40.6 SB XIII.4.3.9 RV X.68.9 SB VII.4.2.14-15 RV 111.48.1; VIII.32.28; X.94.8 RV IX.61.10 RV VIII.32.28; VIII.33.4 RV IX.7.6; IX.8.6; IX.9.5 RV IX.72.1; IX.111.1 RV IX.54.2-3 RV IX.93.1 RV IX.54.3 RV IX.2.6; IX.18.1; IX.54.2; IX.84.2

20

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33

34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46

ed., The Indo-Aryansof Ancient South Asia. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin. Wujastik, D. 1998. The roots of Ayurveda.Penguin Books, Delhi. Zaehner, R. C. 1961. The dawn and twilight of Zoroastrianism. Weidenfeldand Nicolson, London.

S172
47 48

BOTANY ECONOMIC
98

[VOL. 58

RV IX.76.4; IX.9; IX.10.8-9; IX.97.46 RV 1.135.3; IX.5; IX.15.5; IX.86.32; 49 RV 11.13.2; VIII. 1.7, IX.6.6; IX.12.7; IX.54.1; TaiS 1.5.5; 1.5.10 50 RV V.43.4; IX.46.1; IX.71.4 5I RV VII.96.2; IX.67.32; X.30.12 52 RV 1.23.18-20; IX.12.3; AV XX.41.2; SB V.2.2.5 53 RV VIII.80.1 54 RV IX.54.2; IX.85.10 55 RV 1.84.14; VIII.6.38-39; IX.63.22; IX.113.1 56 RV IX.97.41 57 RV IX.86.36; X.13.5; IV.28.1 58 RV IX.15.5 59 AV XIX.44.5-6 60 RV 1.91.1; AV XIX.30.5 61 RV VIII.85.13-15 62 RV 1112.12; V.53.9; X.75.6 63 RV VII.33.11; VIII.1.33; AV IV.34.5
64

RV IX.111.3; IX.72.7; X.144.2; AV 1.13 RV IX.47.3; IX.72.7

99 RV IV.22.2
'0
102 103 104 105

101 RV IX.86.3

RV IX.83.5 RV IX.74.4; IX.89.1; V I.134.6; TaiS 11.5.2.6 AV XII.3.58-59

AV X.7
RV IX.86.44-46; IV.4.3.4 RV IX.86.44 SB 111.4.3.13; 111.9.4.2; IV.1.4.8;

106
107 108

RV X.56.6

109 RV 1.32.11; IV.18.8; VI.47.21; X.113.6

110 RV 11.11.9; 111.32.11; IV.17.7; V.30.6 "I RV VIII.40.6 112 BhG X.18; XII.20 113 RV IX.10.8, IX.24.4 114 RV X.90.6-9; AV XIX.6.4 115 116 117 118

ChandogyaUpanisad111.1.1-4,111.5.1, VIII.1.2;
Kaivalya Upanisad V.6 Brhaddranyaka Upanisad 11.3.6 Chandogya Upanisad 111.5.1 (Radhakrishnan 1992) MhB 1.84,100; Garuda Purana 111.2.59-60, (Shastri 1978-1980), etc. BhG XV.13; MhB 1.25; XIII.149.7003 RV 1.154.5 SB V.5.5.1-6 MhB XIII.149.7003 BhG IX.17; X.22; XV.15; Subala Upanisad VI.1 (Radhadrishnan 1992) BhG IX.16; MhB 1.25; XIII.149.6962 BhG IX.20

RV IX.83.1 Linga Purana 1.20 (Shastri1973)

RV IX.2.10

65

66

119
120 121
122

RV IX.70.2; 95.5 RV IX.96.5,10

IV.26.4 IX.48.3 IX.38.4; IX.66.19; IX.71.6 1.164.46-47 RV IX.71.9; RV IX.112.2 RV IX.9.4; IX.60.1-2 RV IX.48.3, 71.9 BhG X.30; Varaha Purana 1.125.31 (Iver 1985) BhG X.30; Varaha Purana 1.125.31 (Iver 1985); Padma Purana 1.39.124-125 (Deshpande 19881991) RV IX.75.3 MhB 1.16-34; Padma Purana 11.47.41-173 (Deshpande 1988-1991) Linga Purana 1.20 (Shastri 1973) RV X.81; X.82 RV X.7.28, 40-41; X.121 RV X.129 RV IX.96.5,10; IX.97.40 RV X.55.5; X.68.10, AV X.7.2,32; XIX.19.4, SB IX.4.1.7 RV IX.96.5-6 RV V.47.3; IX.112.2; X.144.5 Mhb 111.189 (Ganguli 1990, 111:566) RV 1.164.2 RV IX.89.4 RV V.45.9; VI.44.24 RV VI.46.11,14 RV X.8.9; SB 1.6.3.1 RV 1.70.6; 11.66.4; 11.148.4; IV.4.1 RV X.5.6 RV IV.3.5; IV.8.5; IV.15.19 RV 1.105.14 RV 111.9.6;V.9.1 RV 1.143.1; 111.1.13; 111.9.1;VIII.63.9 RV RV RV RV

67

68 69
70

123
124

71

125 126 127 128

72 73 74 75 76

Histories IV.113; VII.9,64 Buddhacarita11.37(Johnston1992) Buddhacarita 1.61 (Johnston1992); Bkah-Hgyur II

(Rockhill, 1884: 17) RV 1.34.11; 111.6.9; VIII.28.1; IX.92.4 Bkah-Hgyur II, Rockhill 1884:17;Saddharma Pundarika VII.31 MhB XIII.14 (Ganguli 1990, 10:57) RV 111.31.10; IX.74.1 Kurma Purana 1.26.1-109 (Tagare 1981) AV XII.3.58-59 RV VIII.116.11; X.48.9 RV VIII.66.11 RV VIII.7.22 RV V.31.4 RV 111.48.1; VIII.32.28; IX.17.5; X.94.8 RV VI.72; IX.63.9

129 130

77 78

131
132

79 80 81 82 83
84

133 134 135

136

137 138

85 86
87

139
140

88 89 90 91 92

141
142 143

RV IV.19.3;X.99.6 RV IX.38.1, 67.17 RV 1.164.14 RV IX.94.3

RV IX.84.3 RV 11.11.9; 111.32.11; V.30.6; V.32.2 RV IX.17.1 RV VI.47.27; VIII.89.9 RV 111.44.4-5; IX.72.7; IX.77.1; X.144.2

144 145 146 147 140 149

150

93
94 96 96 97

2004]
51
152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166

McDONALD:THE IDENTITYOF SOMA

178 179 188 181

S173

RV 1.59.1;X.45.4 RV X.79.3; 1.145.4-5 RV 1.66.4;V.19.5 AV X.8.3-6 RV IV.15.6;AV X.8.3-6 RV 1.70.3;111.1.12-15; 111.5.3 RV 11.2.8;VII.10.1 RV 1.93 RV VIII.1.33;TaiS IV.2.8 RV 1.36.3;111.21.3; V.4.3 RV X.154.2 RV X.8.8 RV VI.74.3 RV VI.74
Bhagavata Purana V.25.3

RV IX.5.8; IX.67.32; X.17.7-10 RV 111.23.4; VIII.38.10 RV VIII.21.17-18; VIII.38.10 RV 11.1.14;111.1.13; 111.1.13; 111.54.13; IX.68.5; X.184.2; AV V.25.3-7
RV VII.91.5-6; AV XX.123.5 AV VII.5 (Panikkar1977: 357)

182 183 184

185

186 187 188

BhagavataPurana VIII.8.1-9.22 (Tagare19761978) RV 1.28.4; ChandogyaUpanisadVI.6.1 (Radhakrishnan1992) BhG X.28

Varaha Purana 35 (Iver 1985)

167 168

169 170 171 172 173 174 175 76 177

MhB XII.285.72-208; XIII.17.1-182; Siva Purana 18.26-27 Satarudrasamhita AV XI.2.2,17; SB IX.1.1.6 MhB XII.285.72-208; XII.17.1-182; Siva Purana 18.26-27 Satarudrasamhita RV 1.151.4;VII.36.2 RV 1.43 RV 1.24.7-9; SB VII.5.2.18 RV VII.89.4 RV 1.124.7 (Coomaraswamy 1979: 8) RV 1.24.7-8; VII.87.1,6; VIII.82.2 RV IX.95.4 RV VI.74.4; VII.65.3 VII.84.1-2; X.85.24 RV X.75.5

MhB VI.7; Vayu Purana 34.37-46 (Tagare19871988); VisnuPurana 11.2(Wilson 1980); Siva Purana, Umasamhita17.33 (Shastri1970) 189 RV VII.33.11;IX.78.3; SB XIII.4.3.8 190 RV 1.28.3;AV IX.6.15; SB 1.1.1.22;1.1.4.7 191 SB VI.5.1.26, 38; IX.5.1.7; XII.7.3.8,12 192 RV 111.52.5; IV.24.7;IX.8.5; IX.11.6; IX.11.2 193 RV IX.12.5; IX.17.4 194 RV IX.2.2, IX.70.7; 32.4; IX.39.6; IX.64.17; IX.90.2 95 RV IX.74.1; X.94.5 196 SB VII.5.1.10, 15, 23, 38 197 SB VII.5.1.38 198 SB IX.5.1.1-23
199 AV X.7.28; SB X.4.1.2
200 201

RV IX.33.5; IX.74.3; IX.94.41 SB 111.5.2.34-35; IX.3.4.11,17