Thread by @RangaTheDude

Subaqueous fire problem: A reflective thread.
In the past I've tweeted on this topic which is essentially a highlight of textual evidences and my opinion and let readers draw their own conclusions. In contrast, this thread is an attempt at my reasoning in the form of FAQ.

1. What is the subaqueous fire or "fire in the water" problem?
Rigveda talks about fire that's from waters in numerous instances. "apsu antar" - inside waters; "agnim samudra vāsasam" - agni, having ocean as clothes.

A conception of fire inside the water is strange and there has to be a reason for this conception. Finding a satisfactory reason for this reason is what I call the "fire in water problem".

2. What were the explanations given (Indological or otherwise)?
A. "Rigvedic poets were tripping after imbibing psychoactive soma beverage. No need to look for reasons for a bad acid trip".
Response: Revelations section of Bible is an apt example of a bad acid trip.

RV is nowhere near that and quite tame.
B. "Apam napat - grandson of waters is a poetic way of saying waters are symbolically mothers of woods. Fire is generated from woods. Hence in a poetic sense, agni can be thought of as grandson of waters".

I'll take one example from Gŕtsamada. He says pure agni is generated from 3 sources in a mundane enumeration - from wood, from stones and from waters. It's mentioned as a matter of fact without a hint of poetic excess. IMO this is a huge problem.

If the grandson theory holds, I would have expected something else. Here's my attempt to LARP as an RV poet in English: "Mere mortals know the mothers of Agni, donor of all-wellbeings. Only vipras grasp the hidden grandmothers, bearers of all medicines, rushing like bellowing

Cows from the haunt of ahi budhnya.

Instead you just find "matter of fact" mentions.

IIRC, Kuiper thinks apam napat isn't even a fire deity but a pure "water spirit" merged with Agni in Indic branch based on Avestan reading (incorrectly IMO). Secondly, the subaqueous mentions are not confined to apam napat form of agni alone. So no need to give undue importance

To etymological meaning alone based on apam napat. Also, the epithet "having ocean as clothes" would be meaningless in the symbolic grandson explanation.

C. "Agni in the form of lightning" - again, this explanation makes "clothed in ocean" meaningless. Some indologists even argued that Aryas didn't know ocean and the ocean is really the sky. This is nonsense and this will be addressed in another question below.

2. What made me interested in this problem?
I was watching a nature documentary regarding submarine volcanoes. And there it was - a real fire under water. Even "clothed with ocean" makes sense.

4. What are the attractive features of this explanation and what are the problems?
We have a real geological phenomenon that tallies with descriptions in RV. We don't have to torture the text to extract a coherent meaning.

OTOH, locations of those submarine volcanoes are deep in pacific ocean (and some in Atlantic) - none of them suitable for Vedic homeland - let alone human habitation. You can search Wikipedia for the geographic distribution of sea mounts.

5. Is there another geological phenomenon that is similarly attractive?
Yes. It's called hydrocarbon seep. Liquid and gaseous hydrocarbons escape deep from fissures on earth's crust and can self-ignite. Popularly, they are called mud Volcanoes.

6. What is the geographical spread of mud volcanism?
Over 50% of mud volcanoes are in the Caspian region - along Kura-Arash river. Also see -

https://mobile.twitter.com/RangaTheDude/status/1066985658596569088

7. What else is attractive about mud volcanoes in this region?
This phenomenon was observed and recorded historically - attestation of real underwater fire. See -

https://mobile.twitter.com/RangaTheDude/status/853707933850284032

8. What other salubrious outcome of this "mud volcanism as geological phenomenon" behind apam napat theory?
Apam Napat is an indo-Iranian deity. Though he's not fire, he's the seizer of xvarena, a fiery substance below vouru-kasha, traditionally identified with Caspian.

Naphtha, a hydrocarbon seep from under Arash river or even Caspian neatly explains the Avestan conception. So the same geological phenomenon explains both vedic and Avestan conceptions.

The Pahlavi tradition also places Apam Napat near Arash.

https://mobile.twitter.com/RangaTheDude/status/1066986066358366208

Apam Napat myth is intimately linked with a river in both Iranian and Vedic traditions. Those involve horses and the "seed of atharvan" which should be a separate thread. IMO the original river behind the apam napat myth is river Arash - historically Araxes. /Fin

Appendix:
A. Aryas didn't know ocean bro:
Here's a picture Caspian sea. You decide if a super lake is sufficient to arrive at a notion of ocean. Keep in mind that Mongols from land-locked regions had a notion of ocean.