SOMA EXPLAINED PART 29 9 24 CONTD KR IRS
Chapter 4 - The Synchronization of Rituals and Myths of Soma
Myth and ritual are two central components of religious practice. Myth
is commonly taken to be words often in the form of a story. Myth does not
stand by itself but is tied to ritual. Myth is not just a statement but
also an action. Rituals are actions that synchronize the world with myth.
Rituals carry the performer into the world of myth. The law of
synchronization is called Rita (derived from the root √ri to go) meaning
the law of movement or creativity. That all the devatas adhering to Rita
are participating in ritual has been the key-note of the entire Vedic
poetry and has been beautifully presented in the hymns of the Veda. Myth
and ritual are centre components of religious practice. Myth originated
from ritual performance. Thus ritual came before myth and myth depends on
ritual for its existence until it gains an independent status as an
etiological story.
In Vedic thought, myth and ritual have both been regarded as very
follow up to each other. Both are so homologous and redundant that even the
ancient Indian scholars found it difficult to discriminate between the two.
All the Samhitas have ritualistic texts (Brahmanas) attached to them which
texts propound again and again that the poetry of the Vedas is limitless in
the scope of its meaning and the mythical figures as well as the rituals
have indirect or symbolic meaning. So, whatever the form of the myth or the
ritual, it has an inwardly known aspect. Both myth and ritual have
underlying truths regarding the inner nature of the universe as well as
human life. The various components of ritual are also supposed to have
indicative association.
The Brahmanas have demonstrated the possibility of multifold
interpretation of the Vedic myth. The Vedic ritual also has similarly been
interpreted at various levels. The third Kanda of the Shatapatha Brahmana.
describes and analyzes the Soma ritual and the whole ritual is viewed at
various levels. The components of the yajnika pattern are seen as
corresponding to the various organs and faculties of a human being and the
co-ordination of mind, intellect and speech is desired for the performance
of the ritual.
We find a myth of the theft of the Soma by the eagle in the Rigveda.
It belongs to a series of Indra-hymns (Rigveda 4.16-32) which are
attributed to the seer Vamadeva. We also find a number of other allusions
to this mythical exploit scattered in other hymns of the Rigveda[ The
eagle (suparna, shyena) steals the Soma from afar, from the mountain or
from heaven. The hymn, which is address to Indra, simply states that the
eagle brought the Soma for ‘you who desired it’ He brings back the Soma,
holding it in his claw (foot) pada. On the way, an archer named Krishanu,
usually interpreted (according to the later testimonies) as a Gandharva,
the guardian of the Soma shoots an arrow at him. One of the eagle’s
feathers, shot off by the arrow, falls in mid-air. The eagle gives the soma
to Indra. Thanks to the possession of the soma, Indra gets a standing among
the gods, and, in the intoxication of the soma, he is able to perform
several of his well-known exploits, notably slaying Vritra. Alternatively,
the eagle is said to give the Soma to Manu or mankind, so that men can
perform rituals with it. But in this case too, its ultimate recipients
include Indra (as well as other gods, of course), the receiver of the
oblations and the Soma-drinker par excellence. One more theme which is
implied in this mythical account, is that the Soma was originally in the
possession of Indra's enemies, since it is protected by an archer and
either the eagle or the Soma are kept guarded in a hundred metal forts to
prevent the theft: shatam ma pura ayasirarakshannadha "a hundred metal
forts guarded me" ; perhaps these enemies are the older Gods or Asuras, who
are afraid that Indra, once in the possession of the Soma, will usurp their
position of supremacy. {KR: The attributions on SOMA vby the vested
inteerst is thwarted by the Riog vedic verses explained as Garuda brought
only thr AMIRTHAM. This anecdote is also seen in the samudra manthanam}
We find the myth of the Soma-theft in the following texts of the
later Veda, mostly in texts belonging to the black and white Yajurveda. (KR:
There was a row few months back a senior shouting all vedas aresimultaneous
etc which is unproved here; KRISHNA SUKLA YAJUR VEDAM WAS ADOPTED ONLY
AFTER THE ADVENT OF SAMAVEDAM; AND ORIGINAL VEDAM WAS ONLY RIG VEDAM} These
different versions present certain variations. Some of these passages
briefly state that the Soma is in the third heaven. The Gayatri meter
(sometimes assuming the form of a shyena or bird) fetches it. {kr: One may
understand that how the ords of vedas have many splendid interpretatiotns.
1 Garuda brought the amirtham; now Gayatri Mantra has another name viz
SHYENA =GARUDAN; si gayathri chandas alone brought the SOMA chandas the
knowledge as amirtham; amirtham is annam; food; tirukkural says that
(sevikunavu ilaadha pozhdhu, vayitrukkum siridhu eeyappadum) SEVIKKUNAVU IS
KNOWLEDGE THE SOMA.}
On the way back, one of the Soma's leaves (parna) is cut off, and it
becomes a parna -tree. That is why, if a person makes the oblation -spoon
(juhu) out of parna -wood, then his oblations become similar to Soma or, if
his sambhara consists of parna wood, then he obtains a draught of Soma or,
whoever drives the calves away with a parna -branch obtains Soma ;
alternatively, if the sacrificial post (yupa) is made out of palasha-
(parna) wood, a pashubandha ritual performed without soma becomes
equivalent with one performed with Soma.
Other versions[16] present a more developed and complete form of the
story, which can be summarized as follows: Kadru (the Earth) and Suparni
(Speech;sometimes the Sky) hold a bet. Which Suparni loses. Kadru tells her
to get for her the Soma, which is kept in the third heaven, to pay for her
freedom. Suparni sends one after the other her three children, the meters
Jagati, Trishtubh and Gayatri. (Alternatively, the Gods and rishis request
the meters to get the Soma which is in heaven. Only the Gayatri, although
she is the smallest meter, manages to bring back the Soma, holding two
pressings in her feet and one in her beak. Some of these versions have one
common point with the Rigvedic account, namely that a Soma-guardian (a
Gandharva named Vishvavasu or Krishanu) cuts off either a Soma-leaf, or a
feather (or claw) of the Gayatri, as she flies away with the Soma. This
leaf / feather/claw undergoes certain transformations when it falls down.
Alternatively, in an interesting reversal, the Soma is stolen from the
Gayatri by a Gandharva who is not the Soma's legitimate guardian. The Gods,
knowing that Gandharvas are fond of women, send Vac (Speech), who is a
woman, in exchange for the Soma. The Gandharvas agree to this exchange, but
Vac does not want to remain with them. The Gods and Gandharvas vie with
each other for her, exchanging their respective roles, the Gandharvas chant
the Vedas and the Gods to charm her. Vac is pleased with the gods' singing
and goes back to them.
The myth which introduces and explains the necessity of the fivefold
ritual in the agnicayana is complex, proceeding by means of elaborated
reflections made by Prajapati himself which perhaps mirror the perplexity
of the liturgist who found himself obliged to include it in the Soma
ritual.
The myth, as it is presented the Shatapatha Brahmana., starts with the
session (satra) for a Somayajna held at Kurukshetra on a night of full
moon, by a select group of Gods including Indra, Agni, Vishnu, Soma, Makha,
Vishvadeva, but not–and this said explicity -the Ashvins All these Gods are
connected, in one way or another, with pravarga and especially, the absent
Ashvins, the heavenly twins, who were its first beneficiaries. Agni is the
receiver of the first pressing in the morning because he is the sacrificial
God par excellence; Indra is the receiver of the second pressing, at
midday, because he reconquered it from Vishnu, Vishnu is the receiver
together with the other of the following upasad, because he conquered the
sacrifice first. Soma is present because it is in his pressing that the
pravargya is offered and Makha is there because it is the sacrifice’s head.
The Ashvins, who are so drastically and explicitly excluded, are the
receivers of the pravargya itself.
After the usual preparations, the Devas desire a deeper knowledge of the
ritual they are about to perform. So, they enter into a contest among
themselves to see who will succeed in being the first to attain the end of
the ritual. The means to be used are the usual religious ones: tapas,
yajna, faith and asceticism. The palm of victory will be luminous glory to
be then shared by the rest of the group. The winner is Vishnu, a God
relatively new to the Pantheon, who begins to acquire prominence precisely
because of this victory (tad vishnuh prathamah prapa), for which he became
the sacrifice (sa yah sa vishnur sah). But Vishnu is puffed up by his
triumph which sets him on his way to becoming the Supreme God and
forgetting the agreement to share his glory with the rest of the group, he
takes up his bow and three arrows for self-defense and withdraws to a place
apart, waiting and at the same time resting, erect and with his head
reclined on the end of the bow. The other Gods, defeated, sit around him,
keeping a respectful distance from him, not daring to reclaim their share
of the glory. Then, some ants (varmi), of the upadika species, offer to
help them to recover the lost ritual in return for the gift of finding food
and water even in the desert. The Gods agree. So the ants secretly approach
Vishnu and start gnawing away at the bowstring. Finally it snaps, and the
end of the bow on which Vishnu is confidently resting his head, is suddenly
cut loose and severs his head clean off (vishnoh shirah pracicchidatuh).
With a ‘ghrn’ sound, the head falls and becomes the Sun (tad
patitvasavadityobhavad), while the rest of the sacificial body of the God
lies stretched out (pra-vrj) pointing towards the East. Hence the names
‘gharma’ and ‘pravargya’. Vishnu, still resplendent even though decapitated
is admired by the Gods and finally recognized to be the great hero; hence
the name mahavira. Again, the Gods enter into a contest to take possession
of the beheaded yet glorious sacrificial body of Vishnu. The winner this
time is Indra who reaches him first and stretching himself out of him, limb
on limb, takes on himself the glory of Vishnu. Makha does the same and is,
in his turn, taken on by Indra. Hence the latter’s Vedic name of Maghavat
which is explained as being the exoteric form of Makhavat (possessing
Makha) . The Gods, then, now in possession of the al through Indra, their
leader, proceed to toil round it (shram) and enjoy the headless body as it
is. Indeed, it seems that they take their delight precisely because it is
headless. They divide it into three distinct parts: the morning-pressing,
the midday-pressing and the afternoon-pressing which they then share among
themselves in accordance with their needs. To the Vasus and Agni is
offered, with the Gayatri, the morning one; to the Rudras and Indra, with
the trishtubh, the midday one; to the Adityas and Vishvadeva, with the
Jagati, the evening one. While the Gods go on, thus satisfied with their
headless ritual (apashirshna yajnena), there appears on the scence a rishi
of the Atharvan family, Dadhyanc Atharvan, who having spied on the Gods
from afar, now knows about the mystery of the sacrificial decapitation
(dadhyan haya atharvanah etam sukram etam yajnam vidancakara yatha
yathaitad yajnasya shirah pratidhyete yathaisa kritsna yajno bhavati||). He
knows too how to put the head back on the Soma ritual and offers to
demonstrate it to the Gods. These, however, there and then turn him down.
What is more, far from permitting him restore the head to the ritual, Indra
forbids the rishi from divulging the secret for otherwise he would cut off
his head (sa hendrenokta asa | etam cadan yasma anubruyas tata eva te
shirashchindyam iti ||). Indra is overheard by the Ashvins who, we recall,
were absent from the Somayajna and understanding that Dadhyanc Atharvan
knew a great liturgical secret went to him and insistently begged him to
disclose to them the secret of how to make the sacrificial body whole
again. The rishi hesitates for he fears, the anger of Indra, now the Lord
of the Gods. But the ingenious Ashvins devins a stratagem by means of which
they replace the rishi’s head with that of a horse. So that when Indra,
enraged at the transgression of his command, makes good his threat and cuts
off the talking head, they, the heavenly doctors, can easily return him his
original head. When Indra sees that the secret is now out, he accepts in
his own name and in that of the other Gods, even though reluctantly, the
re-incorporation of the ‘head’ in the Soma ritual by means of the pravargya
rite. Still, he demands that the yajamana should not perform this rite
until at least his second or third ritual of Soma under penalty of having
himself and his possessions burnt to ashes (tam yat prathamayajne
pravriniyat | eshosya taptah shushucanah prajan ca pashunsh ca pradahed
atho akuh pramayuko yajamanah). He also lays down severe conditions for the
eventual selection of disciples to be initiated into this secret knowledge. {KR
WHEN ONE READS AS A BEGINNER, THERE WILL BE A CONFUSUIONN ABOUT ALL THESE
AS WEST TOOK THESE THINGS TO WRITE AGAINST THE VEDAS AS SANSKRIT AND VEDAS
WERE MERE MANTREAS FOR PUJAS. VISHNU IS A NAME NOT MAHAVISHNU THE
PROTECTORE;’ INDRA WAS KNOWN AS VISHNU IN RIGVEDAM. ADHANUS CHOPPING THE
HEAD IS INDRA GETS DEFEATED IN SEVERAL BATTLES WHERE ASWIN THE DOCTORS PLAY
NEUTRAL AS MEDICAL MEN. Then come vrtyasura slayed by indra. Soma the
amitham Q@ knowledge helps indra to conquer}
Even though the myth does not directly concern us, it is significant enough
to have it narrated in such detail. It seems to refer to the time when
pravargya a simple morning offering to the Ashvins was incorporated into
the whole complex of the Soma ritual offered to other Gods. It also
reflects the resistance to it on the part of the traditionalists who
maintained that it was possible to continue performing the Soma ritual as
they had always done, without any addition of any sort. They had always
regarded the rite of the three Soma-pressings perfectly complete in itself
without needing any ‘head’ to be joined to it. Moreover, the inclusion in a
rite already so potent by itself, of still another rite which is as potent
as pravargya, could give rite as in fact happened to an excess of sacred
power causing problems within the performance of the rite.
It is but natural that, in a world where it is believed that the sacred
energy of the rite must be maintained in equilibrium, there should be
feared a danger in fusing two rites, each one of which is already full by
itself of sacred energy. But if one wants, in spite of this, to have the
two together, it is essential that this equilibrium is no disturbed. Thus,
the innovators take recourse to a stratagem and present pravargya as the
head of Soma ritual. But, in so doing they implicitly suggested that the
Soma ritual was itself without head and in need to have one. Hence, the
myth of the falling of the head of Vishnu with the consequent restoration
of it in the form of pravargya. In fact, there would have normally been no
reason to consider any Somayajna which is perfectly complete in itself,
lacking anything, let alone a head! On the theoretical level, the
explanation as to how the principal ritual came to be deprived of its head
is, therefore, left to the myth. To the explanation given by the myth,
there is added another: Agnishtoma (or any other kind of Soma ritual)
normally consisting of three principal pressings. Since the ritual is thus
divisible by three, it was not difficult for the mantras of liturgy to
present it as incomplete, lacking as it does the fourth. This ‘fourth’ is
the element which is more subtle, spiritual and mysterious than the other
three and is none other than pravargya.
The myth itself tells us that the Gods were engaged in the Soma ritual in
its normal form and satisfied with it as it was, even though, according to
the myth, it was without a head. The fact that the Gods are said to still
persist in celebrating the Soma ritual in the traditional way even though
it is incomplete, and seek to suppress the knowledge of how to restore the
head to the whole of the ritual, records the opposition encountered by
those who wanted to introduce the new rite. However, the innovation did
take place through a compromise which could at least retain the idea that,
even without the addition of a new head, the ritual was once complete
Pravargya can be added only after the yajamana has offered his second or
third Soma ritua.
Another thing which is of interest in the myth is the explicit mention of
Kurukshetra (sesham kurukshetram devayajanamasa). Whether the place was
really that in actual fact or not, is of no importance here, but its
explicit mention could perhaps be an indication that the myth wants to link
this innovation in the Soma ritual to that great movement of ritual and
doctrinal renewal for which Kurukshetra is so dear to both the Vedic and
Epic Indian tradition. At this point it is interesting to note how a
learned myth can reveal not only the actual state of affairs which gave
rise to it but also all the doctrine which serves it as support. It is
significant that it is during a sacrificial session held there that the
Gods, mostly the traditional ones, spontaneously feel the need to acquire a
deeper knowledge of what they are about to do. In this sense, the Gods
associate themselves with the sentiments of a society whose religion had
reached the limit of exteriorization and now feels the need both for a
resystematization of its religious patrimony and for deeper understanding
of its significance on an inner and spiritual level beyond the normal
ritual requirements. The Gods, significantly, want to know more just in
Kurukshetra where the Indian tradition says that Vyasa undertook the
monumental work of systematizing the Vedas and the Mahabharata.
The myth’s purpose is not only to teach deeper saving knowledge. Its
principal purpose is to justify a liturgical reform and especially to
explain how it is that a sacrificial session. At the same time, the myth
points out the danger in which spiritual exaltation, unless adequately
controlled, can put him who experiences it. Vishnu was the only one among
the Gods who was capable of reaching to the depths of the ritual and
identifying himself with it, but was unable to sustain its glory (taddhedam
yasho vishnur na shashaka samyantum) just as many of the new ascetics were
unable to do (tad idam apyetar hi naiva sarva iva yashah shaknoti
somyanluni||). Vishnu became proud and decided to keep the knowledge he
acquired all to himself. This is a dramatic way of expressing another
consequence of the interiorization of the ritual, namely the realization
that true knowledge cannot easily be communicated since it lies hidden in
the depths of a live experience. Vishnu has won for himself the depths of
the ritual with his personal effort, which, even if he wanted, he could not
pass on to the others. Direct knowledge of the truth is now a personal
experience which one needs to acquire for oneself and make one’s own. Thus
in the second divine contest when the Gods rushed to the fallen Vishnu to
extort the secret form him and understand the ritual[44], the victory did
not entail a mystical identification with the ritual, since Indra’s
knowledge was only, as if it were second hand directly of Vishnu himself
but only indirectly of the ritual.
This learned myth, however, besides exposing the consequences of the
interiorization of the ritual and of a deepened personal knowledge of the
ritual, covers also the changes in the liturgy. In other words, it moves on
two levels simultaneously, the mystical and the liturgical. This is the
reason why it continues to present the Gods as engaged in the Soma ritual
even though they have reached, won for themselves and assimilated, a more
profound understanding of it. After having divided among themselves the
traditional offerings, in the way prescribed by the rite itself, they are
perfectly satisfied since they do not consider the supposed lack of
anything else to be decisive. This is what was probably happening also at
the human level in the great Soma ritual celebrated at Kurukshetra at the
time. It was being performed, most likely, in the traditional manner, with
the upasad in the first three days and the three pressings and libations of
Soma three times a day. No need was felt for any additions to the ritual.
This great ritual at Kurukshetra, remembered in different ways by all the
later traditions as a point of transition between the preceding age and
Kaliyuga, besides having unified in a systematic way the traditional
cultural and religious patrimony of the Vedas was also a theatre of
liturgical innovations. Thus, it is no unlikely that on that occasion there
was inserted into the complex of Somayajna also the offering of the gharma
in honour of the Ashvins by some group of dissident rishis. The story is
narrated only briefly in the Shatapatha Brahmana. and is not found in the
other Brahmanas. It is also variously interpreted[45]. We cannot exclude
the possibility that the fusion of the rites was an attempt to reconcile
two rival groups. It is not unreasonable to see in the rishi Dadhyanc
Atharvan of the myth the mediator in this dispute who offers Indra the
possibility of reconciling the dissident group by inserting the latter’s
rite in the main Somayajna under the title of the head Makha. But the
mediation was a difficult affair. At first, the traditionalists, through
Indra their spokesman refuse. Indra, at least at first, not only refuses to
incorporate the gharma rite but even forbids the very idea to be made
known. He threatens to have the head of whoever divulges it cut off. This
drastic punishment which in the Upanishads and elsewhere becomes the
penalty of defeat in philosophical disputes has a profound ritual import
and already serves to give in outline the new level to which a dispute of
this kind is going to be shifted. The tradionalists are convinced that what
they are performing is a complete ritual with no missing head. If,
therefore, the innovators want to add a new head as charged with sacred
heat and full of mystical significance as is pravargya so powerful in fact
that it is capable of assimilating and identifying the priest with sun this
will evidently lead to a dangerous excess, which can only be balanced by
the loss of the head either of the one who performs the combined ritual or
of the ritual itself. The Gods and the traditionalists seek to avoid this
but they are finally obliged to yield. The very existence of the myth is
proof of that. The myth, in fact, is narrated by those who by now have
succeeded in imposing the fusion of the two rites, so that the Gods (that
is the conservatives) are already aware that theirs is a ritual without a
head, without sap and intrinsic sweetness (madhu), and yet continue to
delight in it as it is and do not want to admit defeat to the innovations.
Nonetheless the bringing together of these rites had its advantages,
especially at a time when, as we have been, it was necessary to generate
much more sacred heat than in previous times when a greater faith and the
immediacy of the sacred action were enough to surmount the difficulties
presented by the opacity of the sacrificial matter which had to be
transformed. Hence the idea of fusing the two rites, after the initial
resistance to it was finally accepted with a pledge on the part of the
priest to respect, as much as possible, the injunctions of secrecy given by
Indra.
Here, however, a new difficulty arises. Pravargya is performed in honour of
the Ashvins who, as we have seen are explicitly said to be absent from the
Soma sacrificial session. It is to them, and in secret, that the sweet
(madhu) doctrine about the restoration of the head to the ritual, is
taught, which may mean that it was the task of the mediating rishi to teach
the representatives of the devotees of the Ashvins themselves about the
advantages and the way of this fusion. After having convinced the Gods that
their own satra was incomplete, the mediating rishi has to explain also to
the Ashvins that the gharma of their rite is not the only one to represent
the sun, but also the head of Vishnu cut off by the bow has the same claim.
He then equates the two rites representing the sun and presents them as the
same head which has to be healed. The rishi in fact knew that this was a
doctrine that the Ashvins, being the physicians of the Gods, could
undoubtedly value. Both factions have to see that there is a sound basis
for the proposed fusion and at the same time that they have to be satisfied
with this way of reconciling their differences. This fusion could produce
much greater sacred energy, provided one knew how to confine it within
certain limits and thus diminish its perils.
The imparting to the Ashvins of the secret doctrine of the integration of
Pravargya into the body of one of the most important Brahmanic rites is,
moreover, the imparting of the same doctrine, with its recondite meanings,
to the priest whose task it is to perform pravargya together with upasad of
Agnishtoma. This doctrine has, however, to be imparted in secret and
surrounded with many precautions. A concentration of energy is extremely
dangerous and only those who are spiritually strong that is, strengthened
for the purpose can bear it.
Shatapatha Brahmana. 3.5.3.1-25 /Rigveda 4.37.1-5 /Rigveda 10.144.3-5
Rigveda 3.43.7 / Rigveda 10.144.5/ Rigveda 9.77.2; Rigveda 4.27.4
Rigveda 10.144.5 Rigveda 10.11.4 Rigveda 4.27.1 Taittiriya Samhita
3.5.7; 6.1.6; Shatapatha Brahmana. 1.7.1.1; 3.2.4.1-7; 11.7.2.8; Aai.Br..
3.25.-26 Taittiriya Samhita. 3.5.7 Taittiriya Brahmana. 1.1.3.10
Maitrayani Samhita 4.1.1 Shatapatha Brahmana. 11.7.2.8 Taittiriya
Samhita. 6.1.6; Kathaka Samhita 23.10; Shatapatha Brahmana. 3.2.4.1-7;
Aai.Br. 3.25-26; Shatapatha Brahmana. 3.2.4.1-7; Aai.Br. 3.25-26
Shatapatha Brahmana. 14.1.1.1: Shatapatha Brahmana. 14.1.1.4:
Shatapatha Brahmana. 14.1.1.4 Shatapatha Brahmana. 14.1.1.5
Shatapatha Brahmana. 14.1.1.6 Shatapatha Brahmana. 14.1.1.7
Shatapatha Brahmana. 14.1.1.8 Shatapatha Brahmana. 14.1.1.9
Shatapatha Brahmana. 1.1.10 Shatapatha Brahmana. 1.1.10 Shatapatha
Brahmana. 1.1.11 Shatapatha Brahmana. 14.1.1.12 Shatapatha
Brahmana. 14.1.1.13 Shatapatha Brahmana. 14.1.1.17 hatapatha
Brahmana. 14.1.1.15-17 Shatapatha Brahmana. 14.1.1.18 Shatapatha
Brahmana. 14.1.1.19 Shatapatha Brahmana. 14.1.1.23 Br. Upanishad
2.5.16 Shatapatha Brahmana. 14.2.2.45 Shatapatha Brahmana.
14.1.1.26 Shatapatha Brahmana. 14.1.1.17-19
Kaushitaki Brahmana. 8.3 Shatapatha Brahmana. 14.1.1.2
Shatapatha Brahmana. 14.1.1.6 Shatapatha Brahmana. 1.1.6
Shatapatha Brahmana. 14.1.1.12 Shatapatha Brahmana. 14.1.1.18
Rigveda. 1.116.12 Shatapatha Brahmana. 14.1.1.1;
Atharva Veda 11.5 Shatapatha Brahmana. 14.1.1.9
END OF 29 9 24
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Thatha_Patty" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CAL5XZoo-k3HCRxibi%3DWGUEcXdDbzGy74eD%2BH3D5oR9BJzPPtww%40mail.gmail.com.
