The Origin of the Ganapati Cult

By

S. M . M ic h a e l
Institute of Indian CultureBombay

I n t r o d u c t io n
The Ganapati cult is a living reality in India today. It permeates
the thoughts, beliefs and aesthetic values of the people. Ganapati is
the most popular deity worshiped next to Vishnu, Shiva and their
consorts. Unlike some other gods in the Hindu pantheon, his worship
has spread through all of the castes of Hindu society. According to
Margaret and James Stutley (1977: 92): In modern times Ganesa is
regarded as the personification of those qualities which overcome dif
ficulties. He is the typical embodiment of success in life, and its ac
companiments of good-living, prosperity and peace, and hence his images
and shrines are seen throughout India. In all ceremonies (except
funeral rites) and undertakings Ganesa is first invoked.
ganapati is the god of wisdom and he is said to have written down
the Mahabharata from the dictation of Vyasa. As to his appearance,
He is represented as a short fat man of a yellow colour, with pro
tuberant belly, four hands, and the head of an elephant, which has only
one tusk. In one hand he holds a shell, in another a discus, in the
third a club or goad, and in the fourth a water-lily. Sometimes he is
depicted riding upon a rat or attended by one (Dowson 1968: 107).
These extraordinary features of Ganapati have spurred interest
among scholars in tracing the origin of tms most revered deity. Various
hypotheses have been proposed. First let us analyze some of these
hypotheses, before going into detail of the interpretation I would like
to make on this subject.

G a n a p a t i as a H arvest G od

According to Gupte (1919: 55), some philologists and ethnographists

Asian Folklore Studies^ V o l . 421983: 91-116.

92 S. M . M IC H A E L

have tried to trace the origin of the Ganapati cult to the harvest season.
They argue that Ganapati was originally called Mushhak Vahan, or
rider on a rat. The word mushhak means a thief, and the
title Mushhak Vahan thus implies that he is a rider on the field
rat, the thief of the field.
The figurative representation of Ganapati as having the head and
the snout of an elephant may possioly have its origins in the familiar
sight of a farmer carrying a load of cornsheaves on his head, with the
lower ears of corn swinging to and fro. The idea, then, of a bumper
crop overriding the pestilence of the rats might have been expressed
by a god with the head of an elephant pictured riding a rat and also
having a round pot-belly (a barn), surrounded by a hooded cobra, the
great destroyer of the field rat. According to Gupte (1919: 55): Con
quest is very often symbolised in this manner. Sniva rides the bull
he conquered; Krishna dances on the hood of the snake Kaliya whom
he vanquished; and so Ganesh rides over the rat he destroys, as Lord
of the Harvest. The orign of the gigantic head of an elephant on one
side and the little field mouse on the other can thus be accounted for
in his figure.
Ganapati is also addressed by the names Surpakarna and
Ekadanta. The meaning of supra (or supa) is winnowing basket
and ekadanta means one-toothed.M Tms ekadanta may thus re
present the plowshare. Since both the winnowing basket and the
plowshare are necessary for the harvest, both Getty and uupte con
clude that Ganapati's origin may have some link with the harvest (Getty
1936: 3; Gupte 1919: 55).
In conformity with the above hypothesis, Pandit Lachmidhar
Shastri (1937) says that the oneinal conception of Ganesha with an
elephant-head and riding on a rat was not a deliberate creation of the
peoples mind. It was the result of a suggestion originating from the
known environment rather than a conscious effort on the part of an
artist, the spontaneous production of the imagination of an agrigultural
people. Ganesha is only an appellative name, the highest title of the
deity, whose original name must have had to do with the wearing of
an elephant head, such as Gajavadadana or Gajanana
There is also another explanation given for Ganapatis association
with the harvest, fhe rat (musika), an animal that multiplies with
tremendous rapidity, is perhaps symbolic of fertility and productive
power. It is well known that banapatis venicle is the rat, and this
association of Ganapati with a rat, and thereby with fertility and pro
ductive power, is thereby explained.
Other relevant names of Ganapati are Gauriputra, Vakratunda,
 T H E O R IG IN O F T H E G A N A P A T I C U L T 93

Lambakarnay Dhumravarna and Akhuratha. As I noted in the intro

duction, Ganapati is pictured as a short fat man, of yellowish color
and having a protuberant belly, with ears and a tusk from the elephants
head, attended by a rat. It has been suggested that the yellowish
color (or Dhumravarna) of Ganapati is the color that is characteristic
of the cornsheaf. Ganesha, who is the personification of a good harvest,
is shown riding on a r a t . 1 his illustrates the fact that rats devastate
the fields, and that no good crop is possible without the rats being kept
under control.
Frazer, in The Golden Bough, has recorded a very interesting custom
connected with rats (1971: 695-96). In the Indonesian island of Bali,
the mice which ravage the rice fields are caught in great numbers and
burned in the same way that corpses are burned. But two of the cap
tured mice are allowed to live, and receive a little pocket of white linen.
The people then bow down before them as gods, and let them go. From
this illustration, Frazer concludes that in primitive religion it is some
times thought that the object of desire can be attained by treating one
or two individuals of the obnoxious species with high distinction while
pursuing the remainder with relentless vigor.
The distinction of rats in ancient religions may be further noted
in the Old Testament, where in the Book of I Samuel 6 (4-5) it is said
that the Philistines were advised by their priests to give a trespass of
fering of five golden mice. Make images of your mice that mar the
land and you shall give glory unto the God of Israel In Hindu
mythology we also come acrossr such offerings of rats. In the Katha
the Kapisthala and the Maitrayana Samhitas we read that a rat is given
as an offering to Rudra and his sister Ambika (who in the Taittinya
Brahmana is identified with autumn, or the harvest earth). In later
mythology Rudra is identified with Shiva, and Ambika with Parvati,
while the rat is the offering to Rudra. In Hindu mythology Ambika
is associated with ganesha, the son of Shiva and Parvati, who is known
as Rudraputra and Akhuyana. Thus the original conception of Ganesha
as having a rat as his attendant is complete when he is regarded as the
lord of the harvest.
This association of Ganapati with the harvest is further corro
borated by the ceremonies performed during the Ganapati festival.
At the time of Anata Chaturthi, the statue of Ganapati is consigned
to a river or a tank, from winch a handful of clay or sand is brought
home and ceremoniously thrown into the barn and the grain barrels
by the celebrants. It is believed that the presence of this clay or sand
will prevent the grain from being eaten by the hunerrv rats. In some
communities the water in which the Ganapati statue is immersed is
94 S. M . M IC H A E L

then released in the fields, and as soon as it reaches the fields rain is
expected (Abbot 1932: 346).
The food offered to Ganapati at the time of worship also associates
him with the harvest. During worship Ganapati is offered a broth of
sweet rice called modakas This is made of rice flour, raw sugar
and coconut meat, all things associated with the harvest.
In certain parts of the Ratnagiri District in Maharashtra a special
festival in honor of the rat, the favorite conveyance of Lord Ganesha,
is generally observed on Bhadrapad Sud 5. It is called Undir B i
or the second day of the mouse. On this day food is offered to an
image of the mouse which is worshiped along with an image of Ganapati.
The food offerings made to the image of the mouse are taken the next
day to the fields and the crumbs are thrown in with the standing crops.
It is believea that by doing this the field mice will be appeased and
not damage the standing crops (Census of India 1961:14).
There are also various other rituals which closely associate Ganapati
with the harvest. The last sheaf to be reaped has many names. In
Kanara it is art, holigattu or benappu, the last of which is a synonym
for Ganapati. A ritual is performed to protect the grain on the floor
from the evil or from theft by spirits. As a protection against spirits,
in many districts a line is drawn around the pile of grain and chaff
with the ashes of burnt chaff. Auspicious designs are drawn with
ashes or with turmeric and camphor on the floor as well as on the pile
of grain. Similarly, to prevent any decrease in the grain which could
be attributed to spirits, the cultivators in the Panch Mahals use ashes
to draw the figure of a tree on the pile of grain. In Kandesh they
draw the marks of a svastika and of a douole triangle, and in Karnatak
figures of the sun and moon and symbols of Ganapati.
In Kalwan Taluka, the newly threshed grain is heaped over a plow
and a stone representing Ganapati, and a hen or goat is sacrificed and
eaten. In another ceremony an asan (seat) of grain is always used
for kalasas (the Indian water pot, pitcher or ewer), installed in all santi
ceremonies. According to Margaret and James Stutley (197: 268)
it is An expiatory or propitiatory rite for preventing disease, averting
the effect of curses, adverse stellar influences, or the karmic results of
bad actions in a previous existence. In all the ceremonies mentioned
above the betel nuts and coconuts representing Ganapati are placed on
the grain. These nuts also represent the Saptarsis or Navgrah ( 1 he
Seven Seers RV X . 1307)whom the post-Vedic commentators
identify as the seven great rsis individually mentioned in various pas
sages of the Rig Veda. According to the northern traditionthese
comprise Atri, Vasistha, Kasyapa, Visvamitra, Gotama, Jamadagni and
 T H E O R IG IN O F T H E G AN APATI C U LT 95

Bharadvaja. In some traditions the list varies only slightly, in others

considerably. Other names were subsequently added as stellar mytho
logy expanded, and astrology and cosmogonic theory developed.
The saptarsi tradition also became associated with the notion of
descent (jati), not from a single ancestor but from the tribal group or
clan (gotra), each represented by one of the original Seven Seers.
The notion that the brahmarsis, or mind-born sons of Brahma, are the
progenitors of the human race, is only faintly discernible in the Veda,
thougn it is clearly enunciated in post-Vedic theory (Stutley and Stutley
1977: 269). Certain images are always placed on an asan (seat) of
grain on important festivals. Accordingly, Ganapati is placed on grain
on the Ganesha Chaturthi. The ritual to Ganapati is one of the most
important ceremonies to be faithfully followed at weddings. The
newlyweds will worship Ganapati in a betel nut placed on a seat of grain,
and the grain and the nut are then tiea into the corners of their clothes.
Surprisingly, all of the above rituals are somehow connected with
grain. But does this in any way link the origin of the Ganapati cult
to the harvest?

G a n a p a t i as a N o n -a r y a n G od

N. Devaraj Sarma observes, from the researches conducted in the past

seventy-five years in Indology by various scientists, that Ganapati as
such is not a Vedic deity, but that Rudra and Brhaspati have contri
buted to the evolution of the later form of Ganesha. Hazara traces
the worship of Ganapati-Vinayaka back to an early period; according
to him, Ganapati was originally a kind of demon, or a jungle genius.
He also mentions that this demon was included in the retinue of the
Great Lord, who along with innumerable more or less maligant
spirits, was believed to haunt the mountains and forests. All these
spirits were gradually fused into one elephant god, Ganapati, who
later also became a remover of obstacles (Chinmulgund 1%7: 728).
Thani-Nayagam (1970: 3 1 ) agrees with this proposal and says,
Ganesa the elephant-headed demon who was to be appeased at the
outset of any function to avert supernatural hindrances, remained such
a demon with the Mahayana Buddhists, but with the Brahmanical
Hindus he was transformed into the benign god who removes obstacles
and who typities wisdom. The very character of the god as having
an elephant-head shows his native Indian, i.e., pre-Aryan origin.
Crooke sees in vianesha a Dravidian sun god. This opinion has
been confirmed by de Gubernatis, who says that Ganesha was originally
a Dravidian deity worshiped by the aboriginal populations of India
who were sun worshipers. On ms rat vahana (vehicle), Ganapati
96 S. M . M IC H A E L

symbolized a sun god covering the animal, which in ancient mythology

is a symbol of the night (see Stutley and Stutley 1977: 92).

From an A n im a l C u lt
Admitting Ganapati to be a Dravidian sun god, Crooke further adds
that Ganapatis elephant head and his vehicle, the rat, indicate that
although Ganapati might have been taken over from indigenous mytho
logy, he originally belonged to an animal cult. Getty, in support of
this idea, says, This seems a plausible theory, since his image is found
in Hindu temples worshiped in company with the animal avatars (in
carnations) of V isnu (Getty 1936: 2). Joseph Campbell (1946: 184)
also makes a note that the elephant as a determinant placed beneath
the anthropomorphic symbols of divine power is a common feature
in early Buddhist reliefs in India.
Risley observes that the rat is a totem of at least one Dravidian
tribe, the Oraons, a fact wmch points to its early symbolism (1969: 113).
But Haridas Mitra is of the opinion that Ganapati was perhaps originally
the special deity of the Ganas, the wild Aryan tribes which inhabited the
desert wastes, mountains and forests of India. These peoples might
have been struck with fear by the strength of the wild elephants. Other
wise unable to ward off their attacks and the havoc they causedthese
people thus might have begun to worship a guardian (Ganapati) in
the form of an elephant. Ih is deity was later affiliated with Pasupati
(Sankara) and Bhutapati (Shiva), and when he was admitted to the
higher Aryan pantheon various descriptions of his origin were given in
the Puranas.
These descriptions doubtless took centuries to grow. As evidence
for his position Mitra points out that Ganesa worship was rather
connected with the elephants as known both from Tantrika and Saivaga-
mtna texts from West and South India respectively. For the increase
of elephants (which were royal beasts, belonging to the king) in the
preserves and for the general prosperity of the people, the kings had
to perform a ceremony called Gaja-sampadana or Gaja-graha (Mitra
N.D.: 19-20).

O t h e r E x p l a n a t io n s
Przyluski suggests that Shiva and Ganesha were originally one and the
same god. According to this theory, Ganapati was another aspect of
Shiva and might therefore have been considered identical with Rudra-
Shivaeven though he had been introduced into the Indian pantheon
as Ganapati, the Lord of the Ganas (Mukerji 1932: 83).
Sudhakar Chattopadhyaya considers Ganapati as a reconciliation
 T H E O R I G IN O F T H E G A N A P A T I C U L T 97

of the Shiva and Vishnu sects. He has critically studied a unique

copper coin of Huviska, on which there is a figure of an archer standing
upright, holding a bow as long as his own height, with the string turned
inwards; the coin has an inscription which looks like Old Brahmi for
Ganesha. In the Ramayana, Shiva is described as Ganeasalsambhuscca.
In the Mahabharata, on the other hand, Ganesa is a name for Shiva,
while Ganesvara is a designation of Vishnu. Thus both Shiva and
Vishnu claim to be the lord of the divine hosts, and here we find a rap
prochement between the two rival sects. The epic contemplates Vishnu
in the form of Dhiva and Dhiva in the form of Vishnu. This reconcilia
tion between the Shaivas and the Vaishnavas possibly took place for
the first time during the Kusana a g e ,140 B.c-1 B.C. (Allan 1934:3).
Thus we find on a coin of Huviska the figure of Shiva with a cakra
(wheel) in his hands along with the trisula (trident of Shiva) and vajra
(the th u n d e rb o lt).1 he weapon cakra is Vishnus emblem, and in
the hands of Sniva it shows the beginning of the interesting composite
icon of Hari-Hara of a subsequent age. Thus when the Shaiva and
the \aishnava sects were growing closer to each other newer concep
tions arose to cement their alliance (Sudhakar Chattopadhyaya 1962:
79-83).
According to Stutley and Stutley (1977: 92) Coomaraswamy
regards Ganesa as a folk-godling having affinities with yakasas and
nagas, while Monier-Williams places Ganesa and Skaada at the head
of the tutelary village divinities {grama-devatas) who, as the controllers
of good and evil actions, guard the households. A few other scholars
maintain that the origins of this god may be discerned in Rig Veda
itself, in the descriptions given there of such deities as the Maruts,
Rudra, Brhaspati and Indra (Mahadevan 1960: 182).
R. G. Bhandarkar traces the beginnings of Ganapati worship to
the veneration given by many Indians to such imps and evil spirits
as Sala, Katamkata, Usmita, Kusmandaraja-putra, Devayjana and others
mentioned in the Mana Grhyasutra and Yajnavalkya Smrti (1965:
147-50). On the other hand, Mr. Debiprasad Chattopadhyaya says
that gana means the people, and ganesa or Ganapati, lord of the people,
was the chief of a clan which had the elephant for its totem and de
feated or absorbed another clan which had the mouse or rat for its totem.
This explains how a man with an elephants head became a god, and
why he is depicted standing or riding on the mouse or rat (Spratt
1966: 124).

C r it ic a l R e m a r k s
None of these numerous theories proposed by the various scholars
 98 S. M . M IC H A E L

noted above is satisfactory. Haridas Mitra has the following com

ments regarding the association of Ganapatis origin with agriculture:
Even admitting that Ganesa might have somehow some vague connection
with agriculture and harvest, as has been suggested sometimes, it is im
possible to agree with the view the Ganesas elephant head and trunk
have their origins in the appearance of a farmer carrying on his head
a load of corn-sheaf, particularly when the lower or lowest ears swing
to and fro and that if two winnowing baskets, so essential at harvest-time,
and the plough-share be added to the bundle, one would get forms of
the elephant-head, ears and tooth of Ganesa, It is hardly possible if
the primitive Indian people had a well-developed imaginative power to
discover such analogies. Such theories which make Ganesa a composite
of so many elements must, therefore, be regarded as wildly fantastic
(Mitra ND: 20).

Against the hypothesis of Risley, which sees the origin of Ganapati

in the totemic worship of the Oraons, Mitra vindicates the view that
Ganeshas vehicle the rat might be the totem of the Oraons, but says
that it is hardly possible for these primitive tribes to have adopted it
so early and from the folk religion of an alien people with whom they
were probably often at war (ND: 31).
A scrutiny of the various theories that shows those of R. G. Bhandar
kar and Debiprasad Chattopadhyaya seem to be the most logical, but
even these lack depth and do not give a full treatment to the subject.
In the following pages I shall make an attempt to present an integral
approach to the problem, in the light of the disciplines of comparative
philology, comparative mythology, linguistics, anthropology and cultural
history.

An I n t e g r a l A p p r o a c h t o t h e P r o b l e m
In our attempt to trace the origin of the cult, let us first consider the
meaning of the term Ganapati This word is composed of two
words, namely gana and pati. The word pati means chief. The
Sanskrit word gana is derived from the Indogermanic hypothetical
root gery meaning to comprise, or to hold together or come to
gether/*
The word gana and the many compounds and derivatives from
it are well known in ancient literature, beginning with the Rig Veda.
Wilson has collected the following meanings for the word gana
a flock, a multitude, a troop, a tribe or class, etc. (Wilson 1819).
The meanings collected by Monier-Williams (1899) and Macdonell
(1893) also agree with the meanings of Wilson. In Indian lexicons
the word gana is given as a synonym of samuha or samghta, meaning
 T H E O R IG IN O F T H E G A N A P A T I C U L T 99

a gathering together or a collection On the basis of this Fleet

(1915: 138) says that gana could also mean tribe. Thus we can
conclude that the term Ganapati could mean a tribal chief or
the head of a group of subjects.

Ganapati in the Rig Veda. Apart from knowing the meaning of the
term Ganapati we should also know in what senses tms term has
been used in different contexts of Indian cultural mstory. The word
Ganapati appears the first time in the second mandala of the Rig
Veda, which is the oldest stratum of the Vedic literature. The text
says, We invoke thee, O Brahmanaspati, thou who art the Ganapati
among the ganasthe seer (kavi) among the seers, abounding beyond
measure in foodpresiding among the elders and being the lord of
invocation; come for thy seat where the yajnas are being performed
(Danielou 1954: 110).
After this we come across the word Ganapati only in the tenth
mandala of the Rig Veda: O Ganapati, take thy seat amidst the ganas
thou art called the supremely wise among the seers; nothing nearby or
afar is performed without thee. O thou possessor of wealth, extol
the great and variegated s u n (RV X : 112, 9). These are the only
appearances of the word Ganapati in the Rig Veda. We do, how
ever, find the word gana along with its derivatives, no fewer than
forty-four times, most of wmch refer to the group life of the Maruts.
To understand the context in which the term Ganapati is used
in the Rig Vedait is necessary to look into the nature of Vedic mythology.
Can we conclude that the stories in the Rig Veda are merely myths
Or could the details in the stories have some relationship with the actual
way of living during that period?
Until the nineteenth century historians proclaimed that all myths
were unhistorical and that legendary events like the Trojan war never
took place. But archaeologists such as ochliemann confirmed that
Homer was not all myth and that the Biblical stories of the Flood and
the Tower of Babel were not devoid of a basis in truth (see Encylcopedia
of World Mythology foreword by Rex Warner). Hence to regard all
mythologies and puranas as tales told by prattlers is now rightly held
to be unscientific. Mythology can help us greatly in understanding
the unfolding of civilization, or in understanding various civilized or
primitive cultures, or the human psyche its e lfth e dreams and hopes
and fears of man. Myths are at once both a record of ancient mans
world view as well as a testimony to ms artistic inventiveness (see Nitya-
chaitanya 1960: 18).
Since myths can be the transposition of natural phenomena (Renou
100 S. M . M IC H A E L

1972: 14)it is appropriate that we go back to the cultural history of

the Vedic people. This will help us understand in what sense the
term Ganapati is used in Vedic mythology.
The Vedas are the holy books which are the foundation of the
Hindu religion. There are four Vedas, and the oldest is the Rig Veda,
These are among the oldest literary productions of the world (Mehta
1 9 7 4 :1 ;Swami Sharvananda 193:18+)and according to the most
generally supported opinion, they were composed between 1500 and
1000 b .c . (Dowson 1968: 345).
The Rig Veda hymns are collections of the religious poetry current
among the Vedic tribes (Keith 1 9 7 0 : 1 ) .They tell us a great deal of
the land in which the Aryans lived, of their tribal organization, their
language and literature, their social and economic conditions and their
philosophy, religion, moral ideas and art (Jain 1961: 84).
Analyses of the social life of the people of Vedic time by A. A.
Macdonell (1905:153 ff) and D. D. Kosambi (1972: Chapt. 4) reveal
that the early Vedic people were organized in tribal groups. These
tribal groups had their own chiefs and their own patron deities. The
word gana was used in Rig Vedic literature to signify tms group
life of the tribes and their collections of deities.
What, in this context, might have been the meaning of the term
Ganapati in the Rig Veda} As I have noted, the term Ganapati
is used in two places in the Rig Vedaonce in the second mandala
which is the oldest stratum of the Vedic literature to address Brahmana-
spati and once in the tenth mandala, much later than the first ex
ample, to address Indra. If the word gana meant in Vedic literature
a tribe or a collection of people or aeitiesand pati meant
chief it is logical that Ganapati would mean either tribal
chief or chief deity This would suggest that Brahmanaspati and
Indra were either tribal chiefs or chief deities in their respective periods
of history. To verify these possibilities it is necessary for us to go
into the religious history of the Vedic people.
According to R . Zaehner:
It is probably impossible for a modern scholar to reconstruct the signi
ficance of a primitive religion, particularly that of Vedas which
seem to take for granted much material the nature of which we can only
surmise. To attempt to explain Vedic religion as nature worship
as was commonly done in the hey-day of Vedic studies in the nineteenth
century, failed because so much of the evidence obstinately refused
to fit into this narrow frame. Similarly the philological method (now
revived by Thieme and others) which would explain the nature of any
given deity solely by the etymology of his name, failed in its turn not
only because the etymology itself is often doubtful, but also because
 T H E O R IG IN O F T H E G A N A P A T I C U L T 101

a god, like a man, grows and develops into something very much more
than his name. More recently attention has been focussed on the eth
nological approach which tends to emphasize social trends existing in
given societies and to explain the divine society portrayed in myth by
analogy with the social structure of the human society of the gods de
votees. Thus, for example, the naturalist school saw that the Vedic
pantheon could be roughly divided into three classes of godsheavenly
godsgods of the atmosphere, and gods of the earth. The tripartite
classification is accepted by the ethnological school, but it sees the dis
tinction not so much as between heaven, atmosphere, and earth as be
tween the three great classes into which Vedic society seems to have been
divided Brahmans (priests). Kshatriyas (warriors among whom were
included the kings or tribal chieftains), and Vaisays (the mass of
the common people, peasantry, and artisans) (Zaehner 1962: 22-23).

Spencer goes so far as to say that the Vedic gods were the worshiped
souls of the dead (Hopkins 1970: 10). Dumezil says that as far as
the Vedic religion and mythology is concerned, the two antithetical
yet complementary divine rulers Mitra and Varuna are the representa
tives of the class of priests, Indra (or Vayu) of that of warriors, and
Asvins of that of food producers (Dandekar 1968: 438).
A deep study of the gods of the Vedic people reveals that Brah
manaspati and Indra could not be tribal chiefs because, the deities of
the Rigveda were mostly personifications of natural phenomena under
which the herders had to live (Bhattacharyya 1974: 30). The fol
lowing hymn from the Rig Veda confirms this idea:
I call upon Agnifirstfor welfare;
I call upon Mitra-Varuna, here, for aid.
I call upon Night, who brings the world to rest;
I call upon the god of Savitri for support (Campbell 1962:14).

Indra, who is the most prominent divinity in the Rig Vedat is also
an atmospheric god who is often identified with thunder. As such he
destroys the demons of drought and darkness, and heralds the approach
of the rain so vital to India. In the Veda, the most significant myth
which recounts his deeds centers around his slaying of the demon
Vritra, who has enclosed the waters (i.e., the rains) and the sun, and who
is the very embodiment of cosmic chaos (Dandekar 1958: 13).
Through the changing of the praises of these gods by the Vedic priests
the gods were persuaded to confer favors on devout Aryans (Pusalker
1937: 137).
Another reason that Brahmanaspati and Indra cannot be tribal
chiefs is that the doctrine of the divinity of the king or of his office
102 S. M . M IC H A E L

is not found developed in the Vedic age. Only in a solitary passage

King Purukutsa is called ardha-deva or semi-divine; but that was be
cause he was believed to be the gift of Indra and Varuna to his widowed
mother . . Though kings are mentioned scores of times in the Vedic
literature, nowhere else is divinity ascribed to them (Altekar 1937:
232). Only in the period of the later Samhitas will we find a gradually
growing tendency to elevate the king to divinity. Hence the gods
mentioned in the Rig Veda, namely Brahmanaspati and Indra, must be
patron deities of the then existing tribal chiefs. That is the reason
the poet-priests had for praising the patron gods of their chiefs. Ac
cording to Hopkins, even in the earliest period the religious litany
to a great extent, is the book of worship of a warrior-class as prepared
for it by the priest. Priest and King~these are the main factors in
the making of the hymns of the Rig Vedat and the gods lauded are chiefly
the gods patronized by these classes (Hopkins 1970: 29).
Thus in the second mandala Brahmanaspati, who is addressed as
Ganapati, coula be thought of as the chief deity of a particular tribe
among the invading Aryans. But later the warrior god Indra seems
to have attained the supreme position among the various tribal gods.
The lineage of tribal chiefs who had Brahmanaspati as patron deity
must have been defeated by a lineage of tribal chiefs who worshiped
Indra in that capacity. This is presumably the reason that Indra
is addressed as Ganapati in the tenth mandala. This change might
have taken place due to the constant in-fighting of the tribal people
themselves as well to changes in confederacies.
A scrutiny of Vedic literature shows that from the earliest times
the pantheon is the product of a continual clash and rriction, not only
with gods of other ethnic groups but among those of various clans and
families of the Aryans themselves. Each family seems to have had its
weakness for its own god or gods. Ihose gods who could represent
larger segments of life and experiencewho could mobilize greater
strength and significanceand, later who could annex other gods by
virtue of their greater potentialities, grew, while others faced out
(Bhattacharji 1970: 12-13). It is common that the gods of the conquered
will yield to the gods of the conquerors. There is no reason for the
fact that a one-time supreme deity would vanish while an unknown
god rises to eminence other than the fact that the deity of the victorious
people has emerged as the supreme god, while that of the defeated is
discredited.
The cultural history of the Vedic people shows that the people were
divided into many tribes. Each of these tribes was under a king, who
was styled the protector (Luniya 1951:46). These tribal chiefs were
 T H E O R IG IN O F T H E G A N A P A T I C U L T 103

very quarrelsome (Barnett 1964: 6)and The Aryans looked on

the king primarily as a leader in war, responsible for the defence of
the tribe (Basham 1954: 35). Many hymns in the Rig Veda refer
to the battle between one Aryan tribe and another. Sir Leonard Wooley
goes so far as to say that The Rigveda is the epic of the destruction
of one of the greatest cultures of the ancient world (Majumdar 1959:
23). Whether or not Sir Leonard is absolutely correct, at least one
thing is clear these tribal chiefs were fighting with one another. Ac
cording to B. N. Luniya:
As they (the Aryans) advanced in easterly direction, they came into
conflict with peoples living in fortified areas (puras and durgas)under
their own kings and chiefs. They are contemptuously spoken oi in
the Vedas as Dasyus or slaves. The Rig Veda itself describes a hundred-
pillared fort of the enemies that the Aryans had tq contend with. The
fact that many of the hymns of the Vedas are addressed to the gods
for assistance in fighting their enemies reveals to us that the Aryans
waged prolonged wars with the non-Aryans. The nigh god of the
Vedas, Indra who is described as Purandara (the shaker of cities), is
stated to have destroyed many cities for the Aryans (Luniya 1951:43).

Thus we can say that each tribal chief had his own god, and be
fore the war the chiefs used to pray to their gods for success. The
war god Indra was doubtless the patron deity of a certain tribe.
As this tribe defeated the others, its god Indra became the chief god
of the victorious tribe. That is why Indra is addressed as Ganapati
in the tenth mandala of the Rw Veda.
An analysis of the history of the god-head of Indra shows that by
the end of the Rig Vedic period Indra had become the greatest of the
gods, praised in some two hundred-fifty hymns (Berry 1971:19). But
as is also the case with Agni and Soma, the history of Indra is ambi
valent. For a long time Indra was regarded primarily as a storm god;
later his character of warrior god for the Aryans was emphasized; later
still his positive power in recreating order in a disordered world is
pushed into the foreground, and Indra is constantly involved in mytho
logical battles. His adversary in battle is usually called V rtra and
Indras own stock epithet is Vrtra-han
or Slayer of Vrtra. But
according to Zaehner:
Vrtra (in the neuter) is also used in a more general sense meaning ob
struction, defence or according to Lrershevitch Vigour. And so
Indra is essentially the destroyer of (his enemies power to resist,
the destroyer of their vigour. Vrtra, the encompasser is the
demon who imprisons the waters, and as such he may be considered to
be demon of drought: but he is also the lord of ninety-nine fortresses,
104 S. M . M IC H A E L

which suggests that he may be a human foe. Be that as it may, the

salient episodes of the myth are that Indra smashes the fortresses and
slays Vrtra: the waters are released, the sun is made to shine, and
Vrtras wealth in cattle is liberated (Zaehner 1962: 29).

Thus the history of Indra bears witness to the fact that he has gradually
raised himself from a lower position to that of supreme god-head.
Apart from the second and tenth mandalas mentioned above, we
do not come across the term Ganapati anywhere else in the Rig
Veda. But as I noted earlier, the word gana along with its deriva
tives, is found many times. In most of these cases, the word gana
refers to the group life of the Maruts.
But who were these Maruts? The Maruts were the sons of Rudra,
and the constant companions of Indra. They were handsome young
spirits, vigorous, who, according to the Rig Vedanumbered either
twenty-seven or one hundred eighty. Like Indra, their leader, the
Maruts were alternately gay youths and fearsome warriors and they
were valuable allies to Indra when he attacked the demon Vritra, rrighten-
ing his followers with their war-cries and adept at harrying the cloud-
cattle in the words of Veronica Ions (1967: 17). Thus the Maruts
were the constant companions of Indra, and like Indra, were youthful
warriors. According to Zaehner (1962: 33)they are the heavenly
counterparts of a young mens tribal confederation or what we would
call a commando-group specially attached to the person of the warrior
king. The main point of our consideration here is that since Indra
is the supreme god to these Maruts, whose group life is called gana
it is logical that Indra should be addressed as G anapati
which meant
the chief of the ganas in the tenth mandala of the Rig Veda.

Ganapati in the Grihya Sutra. The only mention of Ganapati besides

those of the Rig Veda occurs in the Grihya Sutra. The date assigned
to this sutra is the fifth century B.C. The Grihya Sutra speaks of
not one Ganapati, but of G anapatis in the plural. After this time
the later Vajasaneyi Samfiita, Manava Grihya Sutray Yajnavalkya and
the Mahabharata all begin to speak of Ganapati as Ganesvaras
and Vinayakas in the plural.
And these Ganapatis inspired only dread and contempt in the
days of the Grihya Sutra. According to R. G. Bhandarkar:
The Manava Urtnya Sutra declared that when possessed by these a
person pounds sods of earth, cuts grass, and weites on his body, and
sees in dreams waters, men with shaved heads, camels, pigs, asses, etc
and feels he is moving in the airand when walking sees somebody pur
suing him from behind. These were not the only misdeeds wmch
 T H E O R IG I N O F T H E G A N A P A T I C U L T 105

the Ganapati caused. The text describes how because of the Vinayaka
or Ganapati Princes Royal do not obtain the kingdom, though qualified
to govern. Girls do not obtain bride-grooms, though possessed of the
necessary qualities. Women do not get children even if otherwise
qualified. The children of other women die. A learned teacher qualified
to teach does not obtain pupils, and there are many interruptions and
breaks in the course of a student. Trade and agriculture are unsuccess
ful (Bhandarkar 1965: 147).

Ih u s we see a complete contrast in the nature of Ganapati. In the

Rig Veda Ganapati was the supreme deity, but here in the Manava
Grihya Sutra he is considered to be many, and they are all evil or catas
trophe incarnate. Why this transformation?
During the Rig Vedic period Indra was Ganapati'because the
tribal chiefs who worshiped Indra as their patron deity were victorious.
But by the .time of the Manava Grihya Sutra the lineage of tribal
chiefs who worshiped Indra and related gods as patron deities had
begun to lose in battle. As a result of this the positions of Ganapati
and related deities were degraded, and they began to be seen as trouble
makers and as catastrophe incarnate. This transformation doubtless
took place gradually. Vedic mythology clearly indicates that the posi
tion of the gods has changed in accordance with the vicissitudes of the
cultural life of the Vedic people. Any given god, for example, might
be regarded as being sovereign and supreme during a specmc time, only
to have ms position change after a time. These changes occurred
because the characters of the gods were in full conformity with the ethos
of the period, and changes in the ethos subsequently brought about
changes in the positions of the gods (see Dandekar 1968: 438).
Changes in the confederacies also brought about changes in the
positions of the gods. According to S. Bhattacharji (1970: 5-6): Some
of the old gods had faded out altogether, some had grown more im
portant while others were less so than before, and many new gods had
appeared in the new pantheon. These gods had appeared in the new
pantheon. These gods and the changed old gods were worshiped
differently. As an example, we have the following:
Most of the Vedic Adityas died out by the time of the epics. We no
longer hear of SavitrBhaga, Aryman, Daksa, Amsa, Pusan or Martanda.
Vivasvat becomes unconvincing, mythologically the Asyins are as good
as forgotten, while Varuna changes his character to a great extent. Indra,
too, dwindles in power and significance. The Adityas gradually become
less powerful. Only Visnu grows, but even he grows as a culture-hero
of the Indian people, not as an Aditya (S. Bhattacharji 1970: 7-8).
106 S. M . M IC H A E L

Thus, because or the changes in confederacies, the supreme position

of Indra, who was Ganapati at that time, might well have been
defamed as a Vighnaraja or Vighness, terms which mean the arch
mischief maker. The attitude of the Buddhists toward Ganapati also
confirms the fact that Ganapatis association with Indra cast him into
the role of trouble maker. According to Haridas Mitra (N.D.: 40)
Ganesa was generally styled as Vighna obstacle, or Vighnaraja
Chief of obstacles by the Buddhists. He was the rascally and iras
cible son of In d ra (see also Arya-Manjusri-mulakalpa part I I I : 53).
A study of the gods of the Brahamanas will throw further light
on the above proposition. Such a study has been made by Bhattacharji

From the Brahmattas onwards certain gods are spoken of as guardians

of certain quarters. A study of this relationship brings out an important
fact: Indra and the solar gods rule only one quarter, the east (regarded
mythologically as Aditi who gives birth to the Adityas). In sharp op
position the west is ruled by Varuna. Varuna, when included among
the Adityas, symbolizes the setting sun and, as such, is more closely
allied to the gods and powers of darkness than to those of light. Varuna
is gradually absorbed in the Siva-complex and the west is alloted as
his quarter. Agni, in the RVis both beneficient and sinister; as Havya-
vahana he is with the solar gods, as Kavyavahana and Kravyad he is with
the gods of darkness. Isana, too, has both divine and sinister bearings.
He is a product of the Brahamanas and is clearly an intermediary be
tween the gods and the other powers. Rudra a is Vedic god, but with
time he comes to take on dark and malevolent associations. Kuvera,
his friend, is subdivine, with some links with the camp of the gods through
ms friendship with Rudra. He is the lord of the Yaksaswho again
are a species of Sondergdtter. Between Rudra and Varuna is Vayaa
god who leans more to the dark gods than to the dwellers in the east.
In the south is the region of Yama and the fathers. Yama, too, like
Rudra and Varuna was a god like any other god in the RV but came
to be associated with dark and destructive functions and character from
the Brahmanas until in the Puranic age he is almost a malevolent figure.
When Yama rules in the south, his subjects are the fathers that is, the
dead ancestors. Between Yama and Varuna is the Nairrta Kona, the
south-west quarter, where Nirrti rules and where monsters (Nairrtas)
dwell.
Analysing the residences of the gods we see that while Indra and
the Adityas command only one quarter, the seven other quarters are
presided over by gods who somehow oppose the solar forces. What
connects the other seven guardians of the quarters is their association
with death, decaydestruction and the fathers.1 his is a vitally im
portant characteristic of the Indian pantheon.
 T H E O R IG IN O F T H E G A N A P A T I C U L T 107

The evidence also shows that Indra gradually became less powerful
and significant. Indras association with Rudra and Maruts, who were
considered to be malevolent, might also have contributed in making
his identity as Ganapati, who was a trouble maker and catastrophe
incarnate. There are also scholars who hold that the origin of Ganapati
may be in the descriptions given in Rig Veda of such deities as the
Maruts, Rudra, Brhaspati and Indra (see Mahadevan 1960: 182).
Those who hold this view also believe that Ganesa was originally a
deity of malevolent or malignant nature, but that he later underwent
a transformation, becoming a more benign deity (Bhandarkar 1965: 147).

Ganapati in Manu Smrti and Yajnavalkya Smrti. After the Grihya

Sutra we next encounter Ganapati in Manu Smrti. Manu instructed
that those who performed the ganayaga should be excluded from the
funeral feasts, but what was this ganayaga According to D.
Chattopadhyaya (1959: 131):
Govindaraja, the traditional commentator, interpreted it to refer to the
ritual of followers of Ganapati. However, under the influence of the
changed attitude to Ganapati, our modern scholars find difficulties in
accepting this straight-forward interpretation. They therefore wonder
as to what Manu might have really meant. But Manu himself was
sharing only the sentiments of his day. A couplet, ascribed to him,
describes Ganapati as the deity of the depressed classes, the Sudras,
and this in clear contrast to Sambhu, the deity of the Brahmanas, and
Madhava, the deity of the Ksatriyas. The Sudras, according to Manu,
were entitled to wear only the worn-out clothes and eat only the refuse
of food. We do not, therefore, expect him to be reverentially disposed
to the followers of Ganapati, the deity of the Sudras. His contempt
for ganayaga was thus only logical.

Thus we can see that during the time of Manu Ganapati was considered
to be a god of the low castes.
The attitude that the Ganapatis were evil incarnate seems to have
persisted for a long time. It is the source of the opinion of Yajnavalkya,
separated by many centuries from the Manava Grhiya Sutra, that the
Ganapatis were trouble makers. While the Manava Grhiya Sutra
mentions four Vinayakas Sala-KatankataKusmanda-rajaputra, Usmita
and Deva-Yajna~-the Yajnavalkya Smrti addresses only one Vinayaka,
though this one has six names Mita, Sammita, Sala, Katankata, Kus-
manda and Rajaputra (Karmarkar 1950: 137). Yajnavalkya also de
scribes how Rudra and Brahmadeva appointed Vinayaka to the leadership
of the Ganas (Mitra N.D.: 20).
As I pointed out earlier, R. G. Bhandarkar traces the beginnings
108 S. M . M IC H A E L

of Ganapati worhip to the veneration paid by many Indians to such

imps and evil spirits as Sala Katamakata, Usmita, Kusmanda-
rajaputra, Devayjana and others mentioned in the Manava Grihya Sutra
and the Yajnavalkya Smrti, These creatures are collectively described
in both these texts and the Mahabharata as Vinayakas/1 prone to
possess men and women, to cause them to rail in life, and to put ob
stacles in the way of their performing good deeds (Bhandarkar 1965:
148).
The idea that Ganapati was catastrophe incarnate and a trouble maker
is not confined to literary sources. Some of the early sculptural re
presentations of Ganapati depict him as a terrifying demon and indicate
his nature and position to have been similar to that found in the Smrtis
noted above. These early sculptures are indeed different from current
works; in them his clumsy nudity and total lack of jewelery gives one
the impression that he is hardly different from the rank and file (Getty
1936: xix).
A few early images of Ganapati portray his hostile nature both
bluntly and directly. In certain Tibetan bronzes Ganapati is found
being trampled under the feet of Mahakala, a deity who was supposed
to have been the deity of law and order, r igures of Ganapati on stone
images found in Bengal portray him under a padmasana (sitting posture)
of Bhrukuti Tara, and lying under the lotus throne of Parnasavari.
In the latter representations Ganapati holds a shield and a sword, in
dicating that his surrender was not without resistance. According to
D. Chattopadhyaya (1959; 133-34):
Ganapati being trampled under the feet of Manjusree is, again, not a
piece of very rare sculpture. Probably more significant than all these
is an image found of a certain deity called Vighnantaka, literally meaning
one wno destroys obstacles or conquers troubles. Trampled under
his feet, Ganapati could only mean the creator of catastrophes.

Ganapati in the Puranas. The image of Ganapati as the creator of

catastrophes is not to be found in the Puranas; here the same Ganapati
who was a trouble maker in Manava Grihya Sutra and Yajnavalkya
Smrti is declared to be the god who sanctions success. The Vighnaraja,
or trouble maker has become the Siddmdata, or bestower of
success. Ganapati figures prominently in the Puranas, with lengthy
sections of texts such as Brahma Vaivarta Purana and Skanda Purana
being devoted to describe his pomp and glory. According to D. Chat
topadhyaya (1959: 134):
Hyperboles were freely used. The Skanda Purana declared him to
be an avatar that is an incarnation of ^jod himself. Another text, called
the oanapati Tattva, went a step further and equated him to the Upa-
 T H E O R IG IN O F T H E G A N A P A T I C U L T 109

nisadic Brahman, the all absorbing spiritualistic Brahman, the all ab

sorbing spiritualistic reality. At least one Upa-Purana and one minor
Upanisad were composed exclusively for the purpose of praising him.
These were the Ganesa Purana and Ganapati Upanisad,

This transformation of Ganapati into one who bestows success is also

brought into Indian sculptures. Ganapati, once trampled under the
feet of heroes, begins to receive costly ornaments and sophisticated
decorations.
A scrutiny of the Puranas noted above will show us that the trans
formation of Ganapati from creator of catastrophes to bestower of
success is sudden and abrupt. It appears to have been a deliberate and
planned effort on the part of the authors of the texts to give publicity
to a newly transformed god. For example, the Ganesa Stotra of the
Narada Purana concludes with these words: One who copies out
this (i.e., the Ganapati Stotra) in eight copies and distributes the copies
among eight Brahmanas, is sure to attain immediate success in learning
and that by the grace of Ganesa (D. Chattopadhyaya 1959: 135).
Furthermore, the Ganesa Gita was written to substantiate the claim
of Ganapatis wisdom; in this text Ganesha is made to discuss philo
sophy. The Ganese Gita is the same as that of the Bhagavat Gita
except that the name Ganesha is used in place of Krishna.

The time of this transformation. There are various opinions regarding

precisely when this transformation from creator of catastrophes to
bestower of success was made in Ganapati. R. G. Bhandarkar, speaking
about the various aspects of Ganapati, says (1965: 148):
That the Vinayakas had come to be objects of faith before the Christian
era may be taken to follow from the occurrence to the ceremony men
tioned (above) in a Grhysutra. But the one Ganapati-Vinayaka, the son
of Ambika, was introduced into the Hindu pantheon much later. None
of the Gupta inscriptions which I subjected to an examination on a
former occasion contains any mention of his name or announces any gift
or benefaction in his honour. But in two of the caves at Ellora, there
are groups of images of Kala, Kali, the Seven Mothers or Saktis, and
Ganapati. These caves are to be referred to the latter part of the eighth
century. So that between the end of the fifth and the end of the eighth
century the Ganapati cult must have come into practice. . . .

D. A. Pai (1928: 86) and A. P. Karmarkar (1950: 138) also say that
Ganapati worship must have come into vogue during the fifth century.
A careful and comparative study of the iconographic texts char
acterizing the various types of images of Ganapati also tell us that there
110 S. M . M IC H A E L

were not many icons of Ganapati before the sixth century (see Upadhyay
1964: 270). From the seventh century, however, Ganapati figures
regularly in Hindu sculptures (Martin 1972: 190). According to D.
Chattopadhyaya (1959: 138-39):
In Cordingtons Ancient India, we come across an image of Ganapati in
which he appeared in glory and grandeur.1 his sculpture is assigned to
about 500 A.D. and is looked at as one of the earliest in which Ganapati
appeared in this new light. Coomaraswamy, too, has pointed to the fact
that Ganesa does not appear in iconography before the Gupta period
and, further, the figure of Lranesa appears suddenly and not rarely in
the Gupta period. Kane has conjectured that the well known char
acteristics of Ganesa and his worship had become fixed before the fifth
or sixth century of the Christian era.

Thus we can speculate that Ganapati was made into a popular god around
the fifth to sixth centuries.

The reason for the transformation, Ganapati, a trouble maker and

catastrophe incarnate in Manaya Grihya Sutra and Yajnavalkya Smrti,
is transformed into a supreme god in the Puranas, one who helps people
avert troubles and attain success. We have seen that this appears to
be a sudden an abrupt transformation, as though it were a deliberate
and planned effort on the part of the authors of the Puranas to give
publicity to tms newly transformed god. Why should this have hap
pened? Ganapati surprisingly begins to be depicted as having the
head of an elephant, riding on a rat. Ganapati, with his huge body,
is riding on a rat which is quite small. Why this contrast?
The explanation of the origin of Ganapati in the Puranas is con
fusing and contradictory. The Siva-purana says that the origin of
Vighnesvara was different in different aeons of creation; the Skanda-
purana ascribes the birth of Ganapati to Parvati alone; the Linga-purana
says that one of Sivas amsas, that is a part of Sivas power, took the
shape of a handsome being and was delivered out of the womb of Parvati.
The Matsya-purana is of the opinion that while Parvati was bathing
she formed the oil, ointments and impurity that came from her body
into the figure of man, and then gave life to it by sprinkling it with
the water of the Ganges (see Rao 1968: 35-07). Still another story
goes that Parvati took the unguents she had annointed herself with
and mixed them with the impurities of her own body, went to the mouth
of the river Ganga and made the elephant-headed raksasi (ogress) Malini
drink the mixture; as a result of tms Malini conceived and gave birth
to a child which was eventually taken away by Parvati (D. Chattopad
hyaya 1959: 137). In the Suprabhedagama Siva explains the reason
 T H E O R IG IN O F T H E G A N A P A T I C U L T 111

that Ganapati has an elephant head:

I in the company with Parvati once retired to the forest on the slopes
of the Himalaya to enjoy each others company, when we saw a female
elephant making herself happy with a male elephant. This excited our
passion and we decided to enjoy ourselves in the form of elephants.
I became a male elephant and Parvati a female elephant and we pleased
ourselves; as a result you were born with the face of an elephant (Getty
1936: 9).

Why this confusion and contradiction in the Puranas regarding the birth
of Ganapati?
One possible reason may be as follows. I have already pointed
out that in Rig Veda Brahmanaspati and Indra are both addressed as
Ganapati, and were the supreme gods during their respective periods
of history. I have also noted that this supreme position once claimed
by Ganapati might have been changed to that of Arch-mischief
maker by dint of changes in the political and military confederacies
of the time. Now the identification of Ganapati as mischief maker
persisted for a long time, but by the time of the Puranas we might
assume that the tribal chiefs who worshiped this defamed Ganapati
as their patron deity had established their own superiority by victories
over the other tribal chiefs. It is possible that the victorious chiefs
had the elephant as their totem, and the defeated ones had the rat as
theirs. Thus the fact that Ganapati is depicted as having a human
body and an elephant head, and as riding a rat, might have evolved
to symbolize the victory of the chiefs who worshiped him and who had
an elephant as their totem.
An analysis of the Ganapatis mentioned in the texts Manava Grihya
Sutra, Yajnavalkya and Marabharata reveals that these Ganapatis had
different animal appearances. The Tantrika literature indicates that
some of the Ganapatis had the emblem of the bull, and others the em
blem of the snake. Hence there is every possibility that the specific
Ganapati who was the Arch-mischief maker of the time had the
emblem of the elephant. It is also clear that each tribal group had
its own patron god, and that these were represented either as natural
forces (wind, thunder, etc.) or as animals. It is an accepted phenomenon
that gods of the conquered yield their positions to the gods of their
conquerors. Hence it is natural to assume that once those tribes who
had Ganapati as patron were victorious they would have raised their
own patron deity to a high status.
This must then be the reason that the Ganapati seen as the Arch
mischief maker to whom, as we have seenall manner of chaos was
attributed, suddenly in the Puranas becomes the bestower of success
112 S. M . M IC H A E L

and is even declared by the Skanda Purana to be an avataror an in

carnation of God himself. Tms is further the reason that this trans
formation appears sudden and abrupt, giving us the impression it was
a deliberate and planned effort on the part of the writers of the Puranas
to give publicity to this newly transformed god. Keeping this back
ground in mind we can understand why the Ganesa Stotra of the Narada
Purana concluded with the words, One who copies out this [i.e., the
Ganapati Stotra] in eight copies and distributes the copies among
eight Brahmanas, is sure to attain immediate success in learning and that
by the grace of ganesa.** This is nothing less than publicity for a newly
transformed Ganesha. Many stories had been composed to explain
Ganapatis elephant head, and that is the reason most of these stories
are contradictory and confusing.
There is some historical evidence in ancient India to support the
above thesis. According to D. Chattopadhyaya (1959: 143) Kosambi
has suggested that the later Kosalan coinage, when arranged in chrono
logical order, reveals the history of the gradual establishment of the
Matanga (elephant) dynasty. We hear too of the rats of the Musikas
in ancient India, but we never hear of them as having established any
state power: Rather, we hear of them as being one of the peoples
vanquished by an early state power. Strikingly again, this story of the
Musikas being vanquished is to be found in the famous Hasti-gumpha
(elephant cave) inscription of king Kharavela of Kalinga (D. Chat
topadhyaya 1959: 144). A scrutiny of Indian mstory reveals that
Mousikanos (lord of the Musikas) had his capital in Alor (Sukkur dis
trict). History also tells us that he was subjugated by Alexander (see
Tripathi 1967: 139). We also hear of a king called Kharavela, who
lived during the third quarter of the first century B.C. and attacked the
city of Musikas (Tripathi 1967: 200).
So, in ancient Indian history we have evidence of the existence
of dynasties with elephants and rats as their emblems, and we know
that the elephant dynasty was victorious and the rat dynasty was van
quished. There is, therefore, nothing intrinsically impossible about
the proposition that an elephant-headed god, ganapati, was depicted
as the rider of a rat. Tms also reflects the phenomenon that the gods
of the conquered yield to the gods of the conqueror.
Once Ganapati established himself as a popular and accepted god
of the people, he was soon able to exalt himself within the hierarchy
of gods and goddesses. By the tenth century an independent sect
commonly known as the Ganapatya comes into being. The cult of
Ganapati assumed a unique position in Hinduism mainly because of
the influence of Saktism. rhe Ganapatyas popularized their god by
 T H E O R IG I N O F T H E G A N A P A T I C U L T 113

setting up the cult of the Sakti-Ganapatis with various representations

Ucchista-Ganapati was four-armed and red; Maha-Ganapati was
ten-armed and red; Urdhva-Ganapati was six-armed and white.
The various names such as Ekadanta, Surpakana, Gauriputra,
Gajanana, Vakratunda, Lambakarna, Dhumravarna and Akhuratha
were given him to portray his dignity. The followers of Ganapati also
developed their own philosophical system, called Ganapati Upanisad
which is the eighty-ninth among the one hundred eight Upanisads.
The Ganapati upanisad opens with a mantra in adoration of Ganapati
and a prayer seeking his protection, and after expounding his All-Atmic
character, the eight-syllabled Ganesi Vidya, the Ganapati Gayatri and
the Mala-mantra, it winds up with a narration of the various fruits
obtainable through the special practice of the mantra (prayer), ultimately
leading to the remaining as the supreme sentience alone, devoid of all
things apart from it. The concept of Maha-Ganapati (Great Ganapati)
developed along with these philosophical systems.
According to Mitra (N.D.: 68):
Maha-Ganapati was an Exalted God-head~with the weapons of defence
and offence;offering boons of Blessing and Protection: Means of
sustenance and delicious foods, wealth, knowledge and ultimately divine
illumination. His attributes, weapons and postures symbolise his eminent
nature and also the diversified all-comprehending character.

Once the Ganapatyas grew in number they began to wear on their fore
head a distinguismng mark of a red circle. They looked on Ganesha
as a supreme deity, superior to Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva. As time
went by Ganapati was identified as the god of good luck and of all fortune.
This popularity of Ganapati continues to exist even today among
the masses of the people in India.

R E F E R E N C E S C IT E D

A bbot, J.
1932 The keys of power. L ondon: Methuen & Co.
A lla n , J.
1934 The Cambridge shorter history of India. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
A l t e k a r , A. S.
1937 Vedic society. In Ramakrishna Mission, ed Cultural heritage of India,
Vol. I. Calcutta: Ramakrishna Mission.
B arnet, L . D .
1964 Antiquities of India. Calcutta: Sunkar Bhattacharya.
B asham , A . L.
1954 The wonder that was India. London Grove Press.
114 S. M. M IC H A E L

B erry, T hom as
1971 Religions of In d ia : Hinduism, Yoga, Buddhism. New York: Bruce Pub
lishing Co.
Bhandarkar, R . G .
1965 Vaisnavism Saivism and minor religious systems. Varanasi: Indological Book
House.
B h a t t a c h a r ji, S .
1970 The Indian theogony L ondon: Cambridge University Press.
B hattacharyya, N . N .
1974 History of the Sakta religion. New D e lh i: Munshiram Manoharlal.
C a m p b e l l , Jo se ph
1946
Myths and symbols in Indian art and civilization. New Y ork: Bollingen
Foundation.
1962 The masks of God. New Y ork: The Viking Press.
Census of India
1961 V o l.X , Part V II B. Fairs and festivals. Maharashtra: Government of
India.
C hattopadhyaya, D .
1959 Lokayata. New Delhi.
C hattopadhyaya, Sudhkar
1962 The evolution of theistic sects in ancient India. Calcutta: Progressive Pub
lishers.
C h in m u l g u n d , P . J.
1967 Review of Indological research in last 75 years. Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental
Research Institute.
D andekar, R. N.
1958 Brahmanism. In W m . Theodore de Bary, et al., eds.Sources of Indian
Tradition. New Y ork: Columbia University Press.
D a n ie l o u , A la i n
1954 The meaning of Ganapati. The Adyar library bulletin X V III . Madras:
The Adyar Library.
D ow son, Jo h n
1968 A classical dictionary of Hindu mythology and religion geographyhistory and
literature. L ondon: Kegan Paul.
F leet, M .
1915 Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society.
F razer, J. G .
1971 The golden bough. L on do n : Macmillan Sc Co.
G etty, A.
1939 Ganesa. Oxford.
G upte, B. A .
1919 H indu holidays and ceremonials. Calcutta: Thacker, Spink & Co.
H o p k in s , E dw ard W a s h b u rn
1970 The religions of India. New D e lh i: Munshiram Manoharlal.
I o n s , V e r o n ic a
1967 Indian mythology. L ondon: Paul Hamlyn.
J a in , R a m a c h a n d ra
1961 Rig Veda and Archaeology. Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research
Institute, X L I I . Poona.
 T H E O R IG IN O F T H E G A N A PA T I C U L T 115

K arm arkar, A . P.
1950 The religions of India. Lonavla: Mira Publishing House.
K e it h , A . B.
1970 The religion and philosophy of the Veda and Upattishads. Part I. Delhi.
K o s a m b i, D. D.
1972 The culture and civilization of ancient India in historical outline. D e lh i:
Vikas Publishing House.
L u n iy a , B. N.
1951 Evolution of Indian culture. Agra: Educational Publishers.
M acdonell, A. A.
1893 Sanskrit-English dictionary. London.
1905 History of Sanskrit literature. New D e lh i: Munshiram Manoharlrl (3rd
Indian edition 1972).
M ahadevan, T .M .P .
1960 Outlines of Hinduism. Bombay: Chetanar Ltd.
M a ju m d a r , R. C.
1959 Rg Vedic civilization in the light of archaeology. Annals of the Bhandarkar
Oriental Research Institute, X L . Poona.
M a r t in , E. O .
1972 The gods of India. Delhi.
M ehta, D .D .
1974 Positive sciences in the Vedas, New D e lh i: Arnold Heinemann Publishers
(India).
M it r a , H a r id a s
N .D . Ganapati. Calcutta: Visva-Bharati Publishing Department
M o n ie r W illia m s , M o n ie r
1899 Sanskrit-English dictionary. D e lh i: Motilal Banarsidass (reprint 1979).
M u k e r ji, A. C.
1932 Ancient Indian fasts and feasts. Calcutta: Macmillan & Co.
N it y a c h i a t a n y a , Y a ti
1960 Intelligent marts guide to H indu religion. Bombay: Hari Kishandas Aggarwal.
Pai, D . A.
1928 Monograph on the religious sects in India among the Hindus. Bombay: The
Times Press.
P usalkar, A . D .
1937Cultural interrelation between India and outside world before Asoka. In
Ramakrishna Mission, ed., Cultural heritage of India, Calcutta Rama
krishna Mission.
R ao , Gopinatha, T. A,
1968 Elements of Hindu iconography. V o l.I Part I. D e lh i: Motilal Banarsidass.
R e n o u , L o u is
1972 Religions of ancient India. New D e lh i: Munshiram Manoharlal.
R is e l y , H erbert H .
1969 The people of India. W . Crooke, ed., 2nd edition. D e lh i: Oriental Books
Reprint Corp.
Sharvananda, Sw am i
1937 The Vedas and their religious teaching. In Ramakrishna Mission, ed.,
Cultural heritage of In d ia Calcutta: Ramakrishna Mission
S h a s t r i, L a c h h m id h a r , P a n d it
1937 Proceedings and transactions of the ninth All-India Oriental Conference. T ri
vandrum.
116 S. M. M IC H A E L

S pratt, P.
1966 H indu culture and personality. Bom bay: Manaktalas.
S t u t l e y , M a r g a r e t, a n d J o h n S t u t l e y
1977 A dictionary of Hinduism. Bom bay: Allied Publishers.
T h a n i -n a y a g a m , X . S.
1970 Tamil culture and civilization. Madras: Asia Publishing House.
T r ip a t i, Ram ashankar
1967 History of ancient India. D e lh i: Motilal Banarsidass
U padhyaya, Vasudeva
1964 The socio-religious condition of north India. Varanasi: The Chowkhamba.
W il s o n , H. H.
1819 Sanskrit-English dictionary. Calcutta.
Z aehner, R . C.
1902 Hinduism. L ondon: Oxford University Press.