Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

India as Known to Panini: A Study of the Cultural Material in the Ashtadhyayi c8: Chapter III. Social Life

India as Known to Pāṇini: A Study of the Cultural Material in the Ashṭādhyāyī c8

Language
English

Contents

Chapter III. Social Life

Section 1. Caste

c8.s1.1

The *Ashṭādhyāyī* is full of interesting details regarding the social life, manners and customs of its times. Pāṇini, as we have seen, was acquainted with a large part of India including Gandhāra, Vāhīka, Sindhu, Sauvīra, and the Prāchya country or eastern India. His master-mind did not fail to observe minutely the characteristics of social and economic life in these different regions.

c8.s1.2

Society in his time was based on Varṇāśramadharma, i.e. on Castes and Āśramas or stages into which life was divided.

c8.s1.3

Pāṇini twice uses the Vedic term *Varṇa* for caste (*Dharma-śīla-varṇāchcha*, V.2.132; VI.3. 84) which is more often referred to by the specific term *Jāti* adopted in later legal texts (II.1.63; VI.3.41).

c8.s1.4

The term *Jāti* seems to have a more comprehensive sense so as to include both *gotra* and *charaṇa* indicative of natural and cultural lineage as implied in *sūtra* II.1.63 (*Katara-katamau jāti-paripraśne*). Patañjali explains *jāti* in this extended sense (*gotraṁ cha charaṇaiḥ saha*, IV.1.63), citing as its examples the Kaṭha and Kalāpa *charaṇas* (cf. also *sūtra* V.3.93). Evidently the *gotras* and *charaṇas* were fast developing their separate entity as *jātis*.

c8.s1.5

*BRĀHMAṆA.* The Brāhmaṇas formed the highest caste. There were four principal castes which Kātyāyana mentions as *Chāturvarṇya* (V.1.124). These were to be mentioned in their order of status, as pointed out definitely by Kātyāyana in a *vārttika* on Pāṇini II.2.34 (*varṇānām ānupūrvyeṇa pūrva-nipātaḥ*), as Brāhmaṇa-Kshattriya-Viṭ-Śūdrāḥ (*Bhāshya*, I. 436). Thus the Brāhmaṇa was the highest caste.

c8.s1.6

Pāṇini uses the Vedic term Brahman (V.1.7) and also Brāhmaṇa for the caste (*Brāhmo' jātau*, VI.4.171). He seems to find a distinction between them taking the former in a cultural reference as shown in the derivative *brahmaṇya* (*Brahmaṇe hitam*) to indicate what appertains to the spiritual welfare of a Brāhmaṇa (*Brāhmaṇebhyo hitam*, *Bhāshya*, V.1.7; II.339), and reserving the term Brāhmaṇa for the caste based on birth (son of a Brahman). This point is also explained by Patañjali stating that ‘although the two terms Brahman and Brāhmaṇa are synonymous (*samān-ārthau etau . . . Brahman-śabdo Brāhmaṇa-śabdaścha*, II.339), yet the affix *yat* is added only to Brahman to have the form *brahmaṇya*.

c8.s1.7

Pāṇini in a *sūtra* V.1.124 refers to the *bhāva* (nature) and *karma* (conduct) which should characterise a Brāhmaṇa (*Guṇavachana-Brāhmaṇādibhyaḥ karmaṇi cha*). These are indicated in the derivative expression *Brāhmaṇya*. Kātyāyana applies this rule to the four castes collectively to indicate the norm and the duties for which the system stands.

c8.s1.8

*Provincial Distinctions amongst Brāhmaṇas* (JĀNAPADĀKHYĀ). Pāṇini knows of the practice of the Brāhmaṇas being named after the localities (*janapada*) to which they belonged by birth (V.4.104, *Brahmaṇo jānapadākhyāyām*), of which the *Kāśikā* cites the following examples: *Avanti-Brahmaḥ* and *Surāshṭra-Brahmaḥ*, i.e. a Brāhmaṇa of Avanti *janapada*, (modern Malwa), and a Brāhmaṇa of Surāshṭra or Kathiawar. Such names are the precursors of the later terms like Kānyakubja, Sārasvata, Mahārāshṭra and Gurjara Brāhmaṇas.

c8.s1.9

A degraded Brāhmaṇa was called *ku-Brahmaḥ* (V.4.105), while a Brāhmaṇa pre-eminent in his duties (*dharma*) *mahā-Brahmaḥ* (V.4.105). The Pāli texts take Mahā-Brahmā to mean a super-Brāhmaṇa, one with realised soul. The *Mahānārada-kassapa Jātaka* speaks of Bodhisattva Nārada as being the Mahā-Brahmā (Great Brahmā) at a particular epoch (*Jāt.* VI.242). The *Mātaṅga Jātaka* explicitly refers to the superior position of a Mahā-Brahmā (*Jāt.* IV.377; cf. also *Jāt.* No. 254).

c8.s1.10

KSHATRIYA. Pāṇini mentions the Kshatriya caste in connection with *gotras, janapadas* and *saṅghas*. For example the Kuru *gotra* occurred both amongst Brāhmaṇas (IV.1.151) and Kshatriyas (IV.1.172). If the father was a Brāhmaṇa, he and his young (*yuvan*) son were both called Kauravya, but if a Kshatriya they would be Kauravya and Kauravyāyaṇi (II.4. 58, *Kāśikā*). Andhaka and Vṛishṇi were Kshatriya *gotras*. As to Kshatriyas associated with the *janapadas*, they as original founders gave their name to the region where they settled down (*Janapada-śabdāt kshatriyād añ*, IV.1.168), the ruling families being designated as *janapadins* (IV.3.100); e.g. Pañchāla country named after the Pañchāla Kshatriyas; similarly Dardistan from Darads, Johiyāwār (Bahawalpur) from Yaudheyas, Mālva (in Ferozpur-Ludhiana) from ancient Mālavas (now called Malavais). Pāṇini specially mentions the Vāhīka *saṅghas* (V.3.114), some dominated by Brāhmaṇas as ruling caste (Gopālavas), others by Rājanyas, and called Rājanyaka (IV.2.53), most likely referring to the Rāṇas of the Hill-States. The majority were Kshatriya *saṅghas*, as Kshudrakas, Malavas (V.3.114, *Kāśikā*), Vṛikas (V.3.115), Yaudheyas (V.3.117). Distinguished Kshatriya heroes had become objects of religious *bhakti* (IV.3.99) before Pāṇini's time, referring to the emergence of a popular cult of hero-worship.

c8.s1.11

*RĀJANYA*—In the Saṁhitās *Rājanya* is a synonymous term with Kshatriya. Pāṇini has retained the old sense of the word in *sūtra* IV.2.39, whereas he has used it in a new constitutional significance in *sūtra* VI. 2. 34 (*Rājanya-bahuvachana-dvandve Andhaka-Vṛishṇishu*), where the *Kāśikā* defines *rājanya* as a member of such families in a Kshatriya tribe as were consecrated to rulership (*abhishikta-vaṁśya kshatriya*).

c8.s1.12

VAIŚYA. The Vaiśyas were given the title *arya* to indicate their social status (*Aryaḥ svāmi-vaiśyayoḥ*, III.1.103).

c8.s1.13

ŚŪDRA—Pāṇini refers to some Śūdras living within the pale of the Aryan society (*aniravasita*, II.4.10), implying that there were other Śūdras, probably aboriginal peoples, who were yet to be assimilated in the Aryan society.

c8.s1.14

Patañjali makes clear the social status of the Śūdras in his time. Firstly, there were Śūdras who were not excluded from Āryāvarta but were living within its social system. Secondly, there was another class of Śūdras who were living outside Āryāvarta and its society. He cites as examples (1) Kishkindha-Gabdikam (2) Śaka-Yavanam and (3) Saurya-Krauñcham. Of these Kishkindhā may be identified with Pāli Khukhundo in Gorakhpore, Gabdikā with the Gaddis of Chambā, who were deemed as living outside the limits of Āryāvarta, Saurya with Soreyya or Soron in Etah district and Krauñcha with the later Krauñcha-dvāra somewhere in Garhwal. The Śakas and the Yavanas who are termed Śūdras were not yet parts of the Aryan society and were outside Āryāvarta in Patañjali's time. The Aryan society was at pains to repel the invasion of the Yavanas (Greeks under the leadership of Demetrius and Menander) and this hostility must have emphasized the cleavage between them. The Śakas geographically were still living outside the borders of India in the second century B.C. But in the first century B.C. we find Śaka settlements springing up at Takshaśilā, Mathurā and Ujjayinī.

c8.s1.15

Thirdly, there were Śūdras who had separate settlements of their own within the Aryan colonies (*ārya-nivāsa*), such as a *grāma* (village), a *ghosha* (cattle ranch), a *nagara* (town) or a *saṁvāha* (caravan camp). Examples of such Śūdras are Mṛitapas (undertakers), Chāṇḍālas, who were of the lowest grades. Fourthly, there was another class of Śūdras who were entrusted with some of the work connected with *yajñas* or sacrifices as carpenters (*takshā*), metal-workers (*ayaskāra*), washermen (*rajaka*) and weavers (*tantuvāya*). There were also Śūdra untouchables who had to take their food in their own utensils and not in those of the household, while there were others who were not subject to this restriction as being more closely associated with the household (*yair-bhukte pātram saṁskāreṇa śudhyati*, II.4.10; I.475).

c8.s1.16

ĀRYA AND DĀSA. Pāṇini applies the epithet Ārya to a Brāhmaṇa to denote the king's chief counsellor (*Ārya-Brāhmaṇa*) and to Kumāra to denote the Crown-Prince (*Ārya-Kumāra*, VI.2.58).

c8.s1.17

The use of the term Ārya in the expression *Ārya-kṛita* in *sūtra*, IV.1.30, (feminine *Āryakṛitī*, terms which were also Vedic words) had a specific meaning in current speech (*saṁjñā*). The meaning of these terms is best explained by Kauṭilya (Dāsakalpa chapter). Kauṭilya takes Ārya to mean a free man as opposed to *Dāsa* who had lost his freedom, e.g. "The offspring of a man who has sold himself off as a slave shall be an Ārya; on paying the value (for which one is enslaved) a slave shall regain his Āryahood' (*Āryatava*, *Āryabhāva*, *Artha*. Text, III.13). The regulations contained in that chapter aim at humanising the institution of *dāsya* and restoring to the *dāsas* the privileges of an Ārya or 'free citizen.' The linguistic form *Āryakṛita* (i.e. Ārya with the root *kṛi*) is also implied in Kauṭilya's expression, *Dāsamanurūpeṇa nishkrayeṇ-Āryamakurvato dvādaśa paṇo daṇḍaḥ*, *i.e.*, '12 *paṇas* is the fine for not making a slave a freeman (Ārya) even after receiving the proper ransom.' The feminine form *Āryakṛitī* would denote the woman similarly made free, or her daughter who had obtained the status of an '*adāsa*' or '*Ārya*' either through payment of ransom or birth. (Cf. *Artha*. Text, III.13, *Mātā bhrātā bhaginī chāsyā adāsāḥ syuḥ*). Pāṇini uses *dāsī-bhāra* in *sūtra* VI.2.42, as a word with specific meaning (*saṁjñā*). The *Kāśikā* explains it as *dāsyā bhāraḥ*, i.e. the burden of a *dāsī* to be borne (by her master). Kauṭilya states, 'If a pregnant female slave is sold or pledged without any provision for her confinement, her master is punishable.' (*Artha*. Trans. p. 207). This probably explains the nature of the burden implied in the term *dāsī-bhāra* of Pāṇini.

c8.s1.18

MIXED *CASTES*—Pāṇini uses the terms *anuloma* and *pratiloma* (V.4.75) which are well-known in later Smṛiti texts. The *Ashṭādhyāyī* mentions the names *Ambashṭha* and *Āmbashṭha* (VIII.3.97). These were a republican people in the Panjab. They are taken to be a mixed caste in the Smṛitis, as the offspring of a Brāhmaṇa husband and a Vaiśya wife. Pāṇini also knows of a class of people called *udakahāra* (or *udahāra*, VI.3.60), 'drawer of water,' who may be taken as a caste (Hindi *kahāra*). It may be noted that Kātyāyana knows of a special caste (*jāti*) called *mahāśūdra*, with its female *mahāśūdrī*. The *Kāśikā* explains the term to mean the Ābhīras regarded as higher Śūdras.

Section 2. Āśramas

c8.s2.1

Pāṇini knows of (1) Brahmachārin (V.2.134), (2) Gṛihapati (IV.4.90), (3) ºParivrājaka (VI.1.154), and (4) Bhikshu (III.2.168). The system of four *āśramas* is called by Kātyāyana *chāturāśramya* (V.1.124).

c8.s2.2

*BRAHMACHĀRIN*—Brahmacharya denoted the condition or life of a Brahmachārin or religious student. The institution of *Brahmacharya* was known to Pāṇini in its full development. He refers to educational institutions known as the *Charaṇa* or Vedic schools devoted to the study of some major recension (*āmnāya*) of the Vedas together with its accessory and subordinate literature (IV.3.126). The Brahmachārins congregated for study at a *Charaṇa* which was run under the direction of one great teacher or Vedic exponent. From the manner of Pāṇini's reference to this organisation it appears that the Brahmachārins looked upon their *Charaṇa* as their *alma mater*, and were attached to it by permanent bonds of common fellowship with other members of the same school, all distinguished as *sabrahmachārins* (*Charaṇe Brahmachāriṇi*, VI. 3.86).

c8.s2.3

The growing distinction of the religious student is indicated by the emergence of a new word *Varṇī*, unknown in the Saṁhitā and Brāhmaṇa literature. Pāṇini explains it as a synonym for Brahmachārin (*Varṇād Brahmachāriṇi*, V.2.134). According to the *Kāśikā* the students of only the three upper classes (*traivarṇika*) were called *Varṇī*.

c8.s2.4

The preceptor or *Āchārya* initiated the young student. Every pupil became attached to his preceptor by a formal ceremony which Pāṇini calls *upanayana* and *āchārya-karaṇa* (I.3.36). The *Kāśikā* explains it as follows:

c8.s2.5

'*Āchāryakaraṇa* is a ceremony (*kriyā*) by which the

c8.s2.6

teacher brings the pupil (*māṇavaka*) into close relationship with him (*ātmasamīpaṁ prāpayati*). By means of this ceremony the *upanetā* (performer of the *upanayana* ceremony) formally becomes the *āchārya*.'

c8.s2.7

Pāṇini uses the two terms *māṇava* and *antevāsin* for the pupils (VI.2.69). The former were also called *daṇḍa-māṇavas* (IV.3.130), probably from the staff they bore. The *māṇava* seems to have been a novice, as seen from the term *bāla* applied to him in the *Mātaṅga Jātaka*, which also calls him *daṇḍa-māṇava* (IV.379, 387).

c8.s2.8

Pāṇini mentions a *daṇḍa* made of *palāśa* wood (*Butea frondosa*) as *āshāḍha* (V.1.110).

c8.s2.9

PERIOD—There is a general rule by which the student was to be named after the special circumstances of study (*Tadasya Brahmacharyam*, V.1.94). The maximum period of studentship is stated by Kātyāyana to be 48 years, the student concerned being called *ashṭā-chatvāriṁśaka* (also *ashṭā-chatvāriṁśī*). The same *vārttika* refers to *gaudānika* whose period of study ended by the performance of the *godāna* or hair-cutting ceremony (cf. *Manu*, II.65).

c8.s2.10

Besides the studentship proper for fixed periods, there were occasional studentships for shorter terms, e.g., students for half a month (*ardhamāsika*), a month (*māsika*), or a year (*sāṁvatsarika*), as instanced by the *Kāśikā*.

c8.s2.11

Kātyāyana also introduces a new feature, viz. naming occasional students after their subjects, or vows (special disciplines adopted by them), e.g. *Māhānāmnika*, one studying the Mahānāmnī hymn (a kind of Sāman, cf. *Gobhila Gṛihyasūtra*, quoting *Rauruki Brāhmaṇa*); *Ādityavratika*, a student who had consecrated himself to the vow of mastering the *Āditya Sāma* (cf. *Jaiminīya Upanishad Brāhmaṇa*), *Avāntara-dīkshī* (one who enters upon the vow of studentship for an intermediate period), and *Tilavratī* (probably the vow of studentship to last through life, such as that of the *naishṭhika Brahmachārī*).

c8.s2.12

The occasional studentships for shorter terms or study of special texts or observance of particular vows points to a new feature in the educational system. These gave to seekers after truth and advanced knowledge, opportunities for specialisation to realise their desires towards self-fulfilment both through the study of texts and prescribed practices. This practice of occasional studentship is also known to the *Upanishads*. *SNĀTAKA*—The student who completes his study is called *snātaka*. The Gaṇasūtra holds it as completion of Vedic study (*Veda-samāpti*, V.4.29). The more proficient *snātaka* was singled out as *nishṇāta* (with his study fully completed). This term for proficiency was later on applied to proficiency in any study or craft, *e.g.* *nishṇātaḥ kaṭakaraṇe*, skilled (*kuśala*) in the art of mat-making (VIII.3.89). The epithet *sragvī* (V.2.121, wearer of garland) appears also to have been applied to a *snātaka*. The *srak* was a sign of graduation and the *Gṛihya Sūtras* differentiate it from the ordinary garland for decoration called *mālā* (V. M. Apte, *Social and Religious Life in the Gṛihya Sūtras*, p. 107). Manu also applies the term *sragvī* to a *snātaka* (*Manu Smṛiti*, III.3). A student who ends his studentship and enters upon the householder's life is condemned by Pāṇini as *khaṭvārūḍha* ('taking to the luxury of sleeping on a cot,' not permitted to a Brahmachārī, II.1.26). *HOUSE-HOLDER*—*Gṛihapati* is the regular name, from the *Ṛigveda* onwards, for the householder as master of the house. Pāṇini refers to him in connection with the Fire kindled at the time of marriage with whose worship commenced his life as a householder (*Gṛihapatinā saṁyukte ñyaḥ*, IV.4.90). The *Kāśikā* treats *Gārhpatya* as the technical term for the Household Fire.

c8.s2.13

His wife was technically called *Patnī* derived from the term *Pati* to whom she was wedded at the sacrifice (*Patyur-no yajñasamyoge*, IV.1.33). The two together tended through life the sacred Family Fire, (*Gārhapatya Agni*) essential for the performance of domestic ceremonies. As stated by Manu (III.67) the married couple installed and tended the *vaivāhika agni* for the *gṛihya* rites. They were also called *āvasathika* from their dwelling in an *āvasatha* (IV.4. 74), from which their Fire was named *Āvasathya*.

c8.s2.14

Happy family life is envisaged in such terms as *suprajas* (V.4.122), *bahupraja* (V.4.123), *putrapautrīṇa*, 'having healthy sons, a big family, and enjoying generations of sons and grandsons' (*putrapautram anubhavati*, V.2.10).

c8.s2.15

The head of the family was called *Vaṁśya* (IV.1.163) or *Vṛiddha* (I.2.65), i.e. Patriarch, and its other members *Yuvan* (Juniors). Pāṇini teaches different suffixes to distinguish the head of the family from its junior members. This distinction between the patriarch and his descendants was expressed by appropriate suffixes, e.g. Gārgya as patriarch, and his juniors as Gārgyāyaṇa. The family or the household was the centre of social life supporting its different factors. These distinctive titles were of real practical value; e.g. a Gārgya as patriarch represented his family in the social assemblies, whereas the junior members called Gārgyāyaṇa would be given the nomenclature Gārgya only when they were admitted to the headship of the family in the absence of Gārgya the elder.

c8.s2.16

The duties of the householder were to entertain the guests (*atithi*), to make suitable gifts on occasions (*vyaya* I.3.36; *upayoga*, I.3.32), to perform the family sacrifices (*yajñas*) and offer due worship to the ancestors (*śrāddha*, IV.3.12).

c8.s2.17

The economic pursuits of a householder are also indicated. He might be a priest (*ṛitvik*), merchant (*vāṇija*, VI.2.13), an agriculturist (*kṛishīvala*, V.2.112), craftsman (*śilpī*), a labourer earning wages (*bhṛitaka karmakara*, III.2.22), and the like. Rich householders are referred to as possessing hoarded wealth, amounting to 100 (*naiskha-śatika*) and 1000 *niskhas* (*naishka-sahasrika*, V.2.119).

Section 3. Marriage

c8.s3.1

The householder's life began with marriage. Its ceremony was performed round the Fire as witness. Pāṇini refers to marriage by the word *upayamana* (I.2.16), which he explains as *sva-karaṇa*, *i.e.* 'the bridegroom making the bride his own' (I.3.56). The marriage ceremony was solemnised by *pāṇigrahaṇa*, 'the holding by the bridegroom of the bride's hand.' Pāṇini uses two other terms for it, *haste-kṛitya* and *pāṇau-kṛitya*. This holding of the hand was a symbol of *sva-karaṇa*, *i.e.* formal transfer of the father's dominion over the girl to the husband. We may cite Manu's comment that this ceremony was observed for marriage within the same caste (III.43).

c8.s3.2

This formality was considered so important in marriage that Kātyāyana calls the legally wedded wife as *pāṇi-gṛihītī* (*vār.* on IV.1.52; *Bhāshya* II.221), whereas the girl married without proper ritual was marked out by the different term *pāṇi-gṛihītā* (*yasyā hi yathākathaṁchit pāṇir-gṛihyate*, II.221). *SOCIAL EFFECT OF MARRIAGE*—The legal effect of marriage is an important proposition in Hindu law. The term *sva-karaṇa* of Pāṇini is explained by Patañjali as 'making one's own what was not so previously' (*asvaṁ yadā svaṁ karoti*, *Bhāshya*, I.3.56; I.284). According to Manu marriage meant the gift (*pradāna*) of a girl by her parents by which they transferred their dominion over her to the bridegroom (*pradānaṁ svāmya-kāraṇam*, V.152).

c8.s3.3

According to Pāṇini, the bride whom the husband marries should be a *kumārī*, which is explained by Patañjali as *apūrva pati*, *i.e.* one who is not previously married (*Kaumārāpūrvavachane*, IV.2.13). The virgin after marriage was honoured by the title *kaumārī bhāryā*, and her husband *kaumāra-pati*. It is the same as the epithet *ananyapūrvikā* applied by Yājña-valkya (I.52). The husband and his wife after marriage had to perform jointly the sacrificial rites, from which the wife derived the title of honour as *patnī* (*patyur-no yajña-saṁyoge*, IV.1.33). It was denied to a woman not properly married. The social status of the husband devolved on his wife, as implied in Pāṇini's *sūtra* (*Puṁyogād ākhyāyām*, IV.1.48), *i.e.* a designation derived from her husband; *e.g.* *mahāmātrī* (ministrix), wife of a *mahāmātra*, a high government official, and *gaṇakī*, wife of a *gaṇaka* (accountant). Pāṇini also speaks of *āchār-yānī* as the wife of an *āchārya* (IV.1.49).

c8.s3.4

EXOGAMY—Marriage must have been contracted outside the *gotra*. Pāṇini in one place refers to the formation of compound words showing two *gotras* united in marital relationship. (*maithunikā*) (IV. 3. 125). Patañjali instances (1) *Atri-Bharadvājikā*, (2) *Vasishṭha-Kaśyapikā*, (3) *Bhṛigu-Aṅgira-sikā*, (4) *Kutsa-Kuśikikā*, and (5) *Garga-Bhārgavikā*, *i.e.* marriages contracted between two different *gotras* jointly designated (II.4.62; I.492). Most of these *gotra* names occur in Pāṇini's *sūtras*.

Section 4. Women

c8.s4.1

Pāṇini refers to Woman in all the aspects of her life, as a girl, a maiden, a wife, a mother, a friend and a teacher. We obtain glimpses of her life inside the household as its virtual mistress in her capacity of *patnī*, and in the larger public sphere of education (*charaṇas*) and citizenship (*janapadas*, IV. 1.175). As examples may be cited (1) *Kaṭhī*, a female member of the Vedic Kaṭha *śākhā*, and (2) *Yaudheyī*, a female citizen of the Yaudheya republic (*saṅgha*). The woman also figures as an ascetic as indicated in the title *kumāra-śramaṇā* (II.1.70), *i.e.* an unmarried female mendicant, showing that women were also eligible for the ascetic order. It may be assumed that such women ascetics moved about freely in public as homeless wanderers (*prabrajitā*, *Gaṇa-pāṭha* II.1.70). A veil of privacy was, however, thrown on the ladies of the royal household who were described as *asūryaṁ-paśyā* (III.2.36), 'screened from the sun's gaze' and kept in their harems (*cf.* *Kāśikā*, *rāja-dārāḥ*).

c8.s4.2

MAIDEN—In the first part of her life (*vayasi prathame* IV.1.20) she was called *kumārī*, *kiśorī* and *kanyā*. Some women remained unmarried through life (*kumāryāṁ vayasi*, VI.2.95) and were still called *kumārī* even in old age, *e.g.* *vṛiddha-kumārī*, *jarat-kumārī*.

c8.s4.3

There were exceptional cases of unmarried girls becoming mothers whence their offspring was called *kānīna* (IV.1.116), 'issue of a *kanyā* not formally married.' Manu counts *kānīna* as one of the twelve kinds of sons (*Manu*, IX.172; cf. *Yāj.* II.129). Patañjali makes the objection that *kanyā*, a virgin, and *kānīna*, her son, cannot go together. He holds that the term *kanyā* continued to be applied to a girl before her *legal* marriage (*puṁs-ābhisambandha-pūrvaka saṁprayoga*, II. 257).

c8.s4.4

A maiden of marriageable age was known as *varyā*, i.e. one to be wooed freely without restriction (*anirodha*, III.1.101). When she became engaged, she was called *vṛityā*. No doubt parents exercised their choice in fixing proper matches, but girls of mature age were free to choose their husbands and were described as *patiṃvarā* (III.2.46). *WIFE*—The bride is called *janī* and the maids in attendance who conducted her to the prospective husband *janyāḥ*. The newly wedded bride was called by the Vedic name *sumaṅgalī*, which Pāṇini cites as current in later Sanskrit also (*saṃjñā-chhandasoḥ*, IV.1.30). The term *Jāyā* was used for the wife with reference to the ideal of motherhood, whereas *Patnī* as stated above denoted her religious function (IV.1.33). She is also called *Jāni* in the examples *yuvajāni* and *vṛiddha-jāni* (V.4.134). The term *Palīvatnī* was used to indicate that so long as her husband lived she was the mistress of the household (IV.1.32). Reference to polygamy can be traced in the word *sapatnī* (IV.1.35).

c8.s4.5

Pāṇini also refers to *mantras* repeated for captivating the hearts of lovers which were known as *hṛidya* (*hṛidaya-bandhana*, explained by *Kāśikā*, as *vaśīkaraṇa mantra*, IV.4.96).

c8.s4.6

An elderly sister marrying later than her younger sister was called *didhishū* and her husband *didhishū-pati* (VI.2.19; cf. *Vedic Index*, I. 307).

c8.s4.7

*MOTHER*—The practice of naming sons after their mothers found in the *Vaṃśa* lists was also known to Pāṇini. Sometimes the son is extolled for the virtues of his mother, *e.g.* *bhadramātura*, son of a noble mother (IV.1.115) and *kalyāṇineya*, son of a beautiful mother (IV.1.126). In cases of doubtful parentage the son was named according to the mother's *gotra*, *e.g.* *Gārgika*, son of Gārgī a female descendant of the Garga *gotra*; but such names after the mother involved social opprobrium (*kutsana*, IV.1.147).

c8.s4.8

*CIVIC STATUS OF WOMEN*—Women were distinguished as members of larger associations than the family. They were known by the *gotras* and the *janapadas* or States to which they belonged, *e.g.* *Avantī* (the lady of Avanti *Janapada*), *Kuntī* (of Kunti), *Kurū* (of Kuru) (IV. 1. 176); *Bhārgī* (of Bharga *Janapada*, a part of the Trigarta country), *Yaudheyī* (a woman of the well-known Yaudheya republic); and similarly *Pāñchālī*, *Vaidehī*, *Āṅgī*, *Vāṅgī*, *Māgadhī*, hailing from those Eastern *janapadas* implied in the *sūtra* (IV.1.178). The *Gaṇapāṭha* adds other names, such as Kārūshī, Kaikeyī, Kaśmīrī, Sālvī, Śaubhreyī, Śaukreyī, Bhāratī, Auśīnari, etc. It is also laid down that female names in the plural derived from *gotra* and *janapada* should be distinguished in their formation from those of the male members, and this distinction was brought out by retaining the female-denoting suffix, *e.g.* a bevy of women of Yaska *gotra* was named as *Yāskyaḥ* (II.4.63) and Aṅga women as *Āṅgyaḥ* (II.4.62). A peculiarity in the names of women in the eastern country was the addition of the suffix *āyana* (IV.1.17), *e.g.* a female descendant of the Garga *gotra* was called *Gārgyāyaṇī* in the east corresponding to modern Gargāin, a feature preserved specially in the Bhojpuri dialect.

c8.s4.9

Women also figured as students of Vedic schools (*charaṇas*, cf. *sūtra* IV.1.63 in which *jāti* includes both *gotra* and *charaṇa*), *e.g.* *Kaṭhī*, *Bahvṛichī*. Sometimes they were in-residents at the schools in what were called *chhāttrī-śālā* (VI.2.86).

c8.s4.10

Women also occupied the exalted position of teachers and were called *āchāryā* (IV.1.49, a counter-example of *āchāryāṇī*).

c8.s4.11

We have already seen that women sometimes devoted themselves totally to the pursuit of learning and religion as ascetics, and were called by the generic term *kumāra-śramaṇā*.

c8.s4.12

Women also pursued other cultural occupations. They took part in the cultural sports of the times. Pāṇini refers to the games of Eastern India (*Prāchya-krīḍas*, VI.2.74), *e.g.*

c8.s4.13

*Śālabhañjikā* (the game of plucking the flowers of the Śāla trees in blossom); *Aśoka-pushpa-prachāyikā* (gathering of the flowers of the Aśoka trees in blossom), etc. The *Jātakas* also mention these sports as *uyyāna-kīḍikam* (IV.376). Patañjali mentions *śāktikī*, a woman warrior who specialised in the wielding of lance (IV.4.59; *Bhāshya*, IV.1.15; II. 209).

c8.s4.14

Women also paid attention to personal adornment and beauty (*bhūshaṇa* and *maṇḍana*, III.2.151). Mention is made of an ornament of the fore-head (*lalāṭikā*) and ear-rings (*karṇikā*, IV.3.65), and also to hair-dressing (*keśa-veśa*, IV.1.42). The *lalāṭikā* is seen as an ornament on the forehead of the earliest Indian women in the sculptures of Bharhut (Cunn. *Bharhut*, plate XXIII).

Section 5. Social Formations

c8.s5.1

These include in a descending order the following (1) *Janapada*, (2) *Varṇa*, (3) *Jāti*, (4) *Gotra*, (5) *Sapiṇḍa*, (6) *Sanābhi*, (7) *Jñāti*, (8) *Saṁyukta*, (9) *Kula*, (10) *Vaṁśa*, and (11) *Gṛihapati*.

c8.s5.2

Pāṇini is acquainted with a number of *Janapadas* or States. To start with, a wandering *Jana* which was a Kshattriya clan, settled down in a particular region (*Jana-pada*), which came to be named after it. In time, other peoples also came to settle in it, whence arose the conception of a common citizenship binding them to the *Janapada*. It marked the evolution from the racial (*Jana*) to the territorial (*Janapada*) basis of citizenship embracing a variety of peoples. The citizens bound in loyalty to a common *Janapada* were called *Sajanapadas* (VI.3.85), nationals of the same State. The Vedic Bharata *Jana*, for instance, became settled in the region called Bharata, where were also settled later on other people giving rise to the territorial conception of citizenship replacing the clan. Thus it marked a great progress in political evolution.

c8.s5.3

The governing class of each *Janapada*, however, was distinguished from the rest of its citizens by the designation *Janapadins* (IV.3.100), or the citizens proper as an elect body or nucleus representing the original settlers.

c8.s5.4

A typical *Janapada* was peopled by members of the four principal castes and other mixed castes so that its population was heterogeneous.

c8.s5.5

VARṆA AND JĀTI—Pāṇini mentions members of the same caste or *Varṇa* as *savarṇa* (from *samāna varṇa*, VI.3.85).

c8.s5.6

However, the term *Jāti* is used more often for caste. In the early Vedic texts and even in the *Kātyāyana Śrauta Sūtra*, it had only the sense of family (*Vedic Index*, Vol. I.281).

c8.s5.7

In the *Ashṭādhyāyī* an individual member of a caste is designated as *bandhu* in relation to his *jāti* (*Jātyantāch-chha bandhuni*, V.4.9). ‘The affix *chha* (*īya*) is added to a word ending in the word *jāti*, when it denotes a *bandhu*.’ The examples are *Brāhmaṇa-jātīyaḥ*, *Kshatriya-jātīyaḥ*, *Vaiśya-jātīyaḥ*. The *Kāśikā* says that *bandhu* in the *sūtra* means an individual; the *jāti* or class is in itself an invisible entity which achieves concrete form only through its component parts or *bandhus*. The term *bandhu* implies relationship, thus pointing to the fact that the *jāti* had evolved out of the common bond of mutual kinship. The word *sabandhu* in *sūtra* VI.3.85, indicates this idea of kinship, (*samāna-bandhutva*) uniting members of one caste.

c8.s5.8

SAGOTRA—Next to caste was *Gotra*. *Gotra* denoted the ancestral family from which its members traced their descent. Members belonging to the same *gotra* were called *sagotra* (VI. 3.85). The *gotra* name of a person on the basis of his *gotra* must have been a matter of considerable practical importance. In the *Jātakas* we often find the *gotra* name of a person asked along with his personal name. This is shown by Pāṇini having prescribed elaborate rules for the formation of *gotra* names, *e.g.* Garga, father; Gārgi, son; Gārgya grandson; Gārgyāyaṇa great-grandson.

c8.s5.9

SAPIṆḌA—It is important to note that the word *Sapiṇḍa* is peculiar to the *Sūtra* literature; there is no trace of it either in the *Saṁhitās*, or the *Brāhmaṇas* and *Araṇyakas*. The *Dharma-śāstra* works explain *Sapiṇḍa* as blood-relations upto the seventh degree on the father’s and fifth on the mother’s side (*Manu*, V.60). Pāṇini refers to the *Sapiṇḍa* institution in the aphorism, *Vānyasmin sapiṇḍe sthaviratare jīvati* (IV.1.165), which states that a great-grandson was called *yuvan* when a more elderly *Sapiṇḍa*, *i.e.* either his uncle or grand-uncle was alive.

c8.s5.10

SANĀBHI—Sanābhi is equal to *samāna nābhi*, *i.e.* those connected with a common *nābhi* or umbilical cord (VI.3.85), thus bringing within its fold all the blood-relations of different degrees. In the *Ṛigveda* I.139.9, the seer Paruchchhepa says: our *nābhis* (umbilical cords) join us to Manu, Atri and Kaṇva of old (*Asmākaṁ teshu nābhayaḥ*). In *Manu*, *Sanābhya* is taken as *Sapiṇḍa* (cf. *Kullūka*, V.184).

c8.s5.11

*JÑĀTI*—*Jñāti* mentioned in *sūtra* VI.2.133 is explained by the *Kāśikā* as comprising 'all relations on the mother's and father's side' (*jñātayo mātṛi-pitṛi-sambandhino bāndhavāḥ*, VI.2.133). Pāṇini considers *jñāti* to be synonymous with *sva*, *i.e.* kinsmen or paternal relations (I.1.35).

c8.s5.12

*SAMYUKTA*—*Jñāti* and *Saṁyukta* occur in the same *sūtra* (VI.2.133), the latter formed a smaller social unit than the former. The *Kāśikā* says that the *saṁyuktas* included relations on the wife's side only, as brother-in-law and others (*saṁyuktāḥ strī-sambandhinaḥ śyālālayaḥ*), which means that the wife's *jñātis* were the *saṁyukta* relations of the husband. Among *saṁyuktas* Pāṇini himself mentions *śvaśura-śvaśrū*, *i.e.* father-in-law and mother-in-law (I.2.71), and *śvaśurya* or brother-in-law (IV.1.137).

c8.s5.13

*FAMILY (KULA)*—The family was considered to be the fundamental unit or nucleus of society in ancient India. Society was an aggregate of families, each comprising several members under the headship of the father, or in his absence the eldest brother, and as far as possible partaking of a common household. Pāṇini calls family a *kula* (IV.1.139; IV.2.96).

c8.s5.14

The word *kulīna*, 'of eminent family,' (IV.1.139) indicated high descent. The epithet *mahākula* was indicative of a still higher family status. Pāṇini refers to the members of these distinguished families as *mahākulīna*, *māhākulīna* and *māhākula* (IV.1.141). On IV.1.139 the *Kāśikā* refers to a member of a superior family of śrotriya Brāhmaṇas as *śrotriya-kulīna*. Manu points out that a *kula* could be improved in its status by the following factors: (1) marriage, (2) study of the Vedas, and (3) performance of Vedic rites, (*Manu*, III.66; 184-186), to which the *Mahābhārata* echoing the same popular esteem for *mahākula* adds *tapa*, *dama*, *annadāna* and *samyag vṛitta* (Udyogaparva, 36.23-29).

c8.s5.15

On the other hand some families suffered in social status by their neglect of Vedic study or lapses in morals; members of such degraded families were stigmatised as *dushkulīna* or *daushkuleya* (IV.2.142).

c8.s5.16

VAMŚA—*Vaṁśas* could be both natural and cultural in their character. The spiritual lineage is called by Pāṇini *Vidyā-sambandha*, and the natural *Yoni-sambandha* (IV.3.77; VI.3.23). The spiritual lineage is represented by a succession of teachers and pupils. The natural lineage is traced both on the father's and mother's side, as pointed out by Patañjali (IV.1.147; II.261).

c8.s5.17

It was the duty of the pupils to recite the succession-lists of the teachers of Schools to which they belonged. A few such spiritual genealogies are preserved in Vedic works.

c8.s5.18

Family pedigrees also seem to be carefully preserved by counting the number of its generations from the original founder. *Sūtra*, II.1.19, *Saṁkhyā vaṁśyena*, states that a numeral may be prefixed to the name of an ancestor (*vaṁśya*) and the compound thus formed will indicate the number of generations descended from him. As an instance Patañjali cites *ekaviṁśati-Bhāradvājam*, meaning that there were twenty-one descendants in the line of Bhāradvāja (I.499).

c8.s5.19

A second instance is *tripañchāśad-Gautamam* (Pat. I.499 on II.4.84), meaning that there were already counted fifty-three generations of the descendants of Gautamas. These numbers afford valuable chronological data for computing their time allowing 25 years to a generation. Thus the first Bhāradvāja should be dated to about five-hundred years earlier and the first Gautama to about thirteen hundred years earlier than the time when the two illustrations were adopted. It may be noted as a striking resemblance that the *Bṛihadāraṇyaka Upanishad* also knows only of 57 generations of teachers. It may be surmised that perhaps this stock-example of fifty-three Gautamas dates from the time when the *Vaṁśa* lists were being compiled in the Brāhmaṇa period. We may also note that the Gautama family with which this example is connected was an important family famous for its learning as represented in its several descendants like Aruṇa, Uddālaka Āruṇi and his son Śvetaketu Āruṇeya in the Upanishads.

c8.s5.20

The *sūtra* IV.1.163 mentions the two terms *Vaṁśya* and *Yuvā* which denoted the great-grandfather and the great-grandson respectively as being alive at the same time (*Jīvati tu vaṁśye yuvā*). As stated above, suffixes were added to indicate these distinctions, as in the series Garga-Gārgyāyaṇa. *GṚIHAPATI*—The smallest social formation was the *Gṛiha*, its master being called *Gṛihapati* (IV.4.90), in whom vested the supreme authority of the family. Generally the father was the *gṛihapati*, but after him his eldest son. *Sūtra* IV.1.164 (*Bhrātari cha jyāyasi*) points out that the younger brother was called *yuvā*, when he was under the guardianship of his elder brother as the head of the family.

c8.s5.21

The family system was called *gārhapata*, of which Pāṇini cites the example *Kuru-gārhapatam* (VI.2.42), *i.e.* the family-system in the Kuru country, to which Kātyāyana adds another example, *viz.* *Vṛiji-gārhapatam*, the family-system in the Vṛiji country.

c8.s5.22

*FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS*—The sphere of relationships constituting the family is indicated by the following list from the *Ashṭādhyāyī*:—

c8.s5.23

*Mātā*, *Pitā* (I.2.70); *Pitāmaha*; *Pitṛivya* (uncle IV.2.36); *Bhrātā*, *Sodarya* (uterine brother, IV.4.109); *Jyāyān Bhrātā* (IV.1.164); *Svasā* (sister, I.2.68); *Putra*, *Pautra* (V.1.10); *Pitṛi-shvasā* (father's sister, VIII.3.84), *Paitrishvaseya* (her son, IV.1.132); *Mātṛi-shvasā* (mother's sister, VIII.3.84) and her son *Mātṛishvaseya* (IV.1.134); sister's son or *Svasrīya* (IV.1.143); brother's son or *Bhrātṛivya* (IV.1.144); *Mātāmaha* (mother's father, IV.2.36); *Mātula* (mother's brother, IV.2.36) and *Mātulānī* (maternal uncle's wife, IV.1.49).

c8.s5.24

The parents are called *Pitarau* by the *Ekaśesha* compound which drops out *mātā* (I.2.70). Patañjali's illustration *mātā-pitarau* on the *vārttika*, *Abhyarhitam* (II.2.34; 1.436) recalls Manu's view that the mother was entitled to greater esteem than the father (*Manu*, II.145). Pāṇini was probably of the same view as inferred from his mentioning *Mātāmaha* before *Pitāmaha* (IV.2.36). In the *Ekaśesha* compounds like *Pitarau* (parents), *Bhrātarau* (brother and sister, I.2.68), *Putrau* (son and daughter, I.2.68), and *Śvaśurau* (parents-in-law, I.2.71), it is always the word for the male that is retained and expresses the female also, which is probably indicative of his importance in a patriarchal society. The *sūtra* I.2.67, *Pumān striyā* points to their relative positions. According to *sūtras* I.2.56 and 57 Pāṇini knowingly eschewed the discussion of *Pradhāna* (Principal) and *Upasarjana* (Subordinate) from the *Ashṭādhyāyī*. In his view the usage of society is the best guide in matters like defining the primary and secondary position of husband and wife, teacher and pupil, male and female, etc.

c8.s5.25

Pāṇini refers to a father with many children as *Bahu-prajaḥ* (V.4.123), and to a grandfather as *Putrapautrīṇa*, who lived to enjoy the affection of his sons and grandsons in an expanded family (*Putra-pautramanubhavati*, V.2.10).

c8.s5.26

FRIEND—The domestic sphere of the home was extended in a wider social circle of friends. The *Jātakas* include *mitta* and *suhajja*, friends and acquaintances, in the gradation of relationships. (*māta-pitu-mitta-suhajja ñāti-vaggo*, *Jātaka* Vol. V, p. 132).

c8.s5.27

Pāṇini calls a friend *sakhi* (V.1.126), or *mitra* (V.4.150), and friendship *sakhyam* (*sakhyuḥ bhāvaḥ karma vā*, V.1.126), or also *saṃgataṁ*, comradeship (III.1.105). Pāṇini marks out a friend by his goodness of heart and the enemy by its wickedness (*Suhṛid-durhṛidau*, V. 4. 150). Friendship to last for a life-time is called *ajarya*. In the following interesting *sūtra* Pāṇini puts his seal of approval on the basic principle of friendship so often repeated in Sanskrit literature:

c8.s5.28

*Sāptapadīnaṁ sakhyam*, (V.2.22).

c8.s5.29

Friendship is called *sāpta-padīna* because it is accomplished through "Seven Steps" (*sapta-pada*). In the *Atharva-veda*, Atharvā calls Varuṇa his *sapta-pada* friend, and Varuṇa pleased with the insight of Atharvā and his consequent fitness to keep the Pṛiśni cow reciprocates the same sentiment (*Atharva*, V.11.9, 10). The *Mahābhārata* also repeats the conception of *sāpta-pada* friendship (Vanaparva, 260.35; 297.23). We find the full explanation of *sāpta-pada* in the *Saptapadī* ritual of marriage as given in the *Gṛihya Sūtras* where the bridegroom makes the bride his *saptapadī* friend¹ by repeating seven formulas beginning with *Isha* and *Ūrja*. The conception symbolised by the outer form of taking 'seven steps' appears to be very old, since the *Ṛigveda* also mentions Agni milking the *Isha* and the *Ūrja* for the *Saptapadī* (*Ṛig*. VIII.72.16). Originally the *saptapadī* friendship was perfected round the fire; later the phrase assumed a figurative sense. (Cf. Vālmīki *Rāmāyaṇa* describing the friendship of Rāma with Sugrīva as *agni-sākshika*, Kish. 8.4).

c8.s5.30

¹ For wife as a friend, see *Taittirīya Saṁhitā*, VI. 2.9.2. The same sentiment is echoed by Kālidāsa in *Raghu*. VIII.67: *Gṛihiṇī sachivaḥ mithaḥ sakhā*.

c8.s5.31

SERVANTS—In Pāṇini a new word *kiṁkara* (III.2.21) unknown in the Vedic and Brāhmaṇa literature denotes a domestic servant. The *Gaṇa-pāṭha* mentions several classes of them, *e.g.* (1) *parichāraka* (attendant), (2) *parishechaka* (one helping in bath), (3) *utsādaka* (one who helps in toilet), (4) *udvartaka* (one who rubs the body with unguents), (5) *snātaka* (II.2.9 and VI.2.151, *yājakādi* group), (6) *pralepikā* (a female servant who applies paste to the body), (7) *vilepikā* (a female servant who applies unguents before bath), (8) *anulepikā* (a female servant who applies them after bath), (9) *anuchāraka* (an assistant), (10) *maṇi-pālī* (a female to keep charge of jewellery, IV.4.48), (11) *dvāra-pālī* (a female doorkeeper), (12) *daṇḍa-grāha* (bearer of staff) and (13) *chāmara-grāha* (bearer of fly-whisk, IV.1.146). Most of these servants formed part of the establishment in the king's household and were in the service of aristocratic or high families as stated in the *Arthaśāstra* and the *Kāmasūtra*. In the *sūtras*, Pāṇini mentions *dauvārika*, chamberlain (VII.3.4), *vaivadhika*, carrier of load (IV.4.17) and *udaka-hāra* or *udahāra* water-carrier (VI.3.60).

c8.s5.32

*GUESTS*—Hospitality (*ātithya*, V.4.26) to strangers and guests was a cardinal virtue of household life. The hospitable man is referred to as *ātitheya* (*atithau sādhuḥ*, IV.4.104). The *Gṛihya Sūtras* lay down detailed rules for honouring a guest on his first arrival. Pāṇini mentions *pādya* and *arghya* (V.4.25) in the order in which they were offered to a guest, although grammatically contravening his own rule II.2.33. He also borrows from the Vedic terminology the word *goghna*, *i.e.* one for whom a cow was dedicated (III.4.73). A distinguished guest like a king, a priest, a preceptor, or a respectable relation was considered worthy of this honour. All these persons are incidentally mentioned in a *sūtra* (VI.2.133).

Section 6. Food and Drinks

c8.s6.1

(*Anna-Pāna*)

c8.s6.2

The *Ashṭādhyāyī* contains material for an important chapter on the history of food and drinks in ancient India. Food is called *anna*, and the eater of food *annāda* (III.2.68). The word *bhakta* which also occurs in the *Jātakas* (*yāgu-bhattādīni*, *Takkala Jāt.* IV.43) and the *Arthaśāstra* (Text II.24) primarily denoted *anna*, as in *sūtra* VI.2.71 (*Bhak-tākhyās-tad-artheshu*) where names of edible articles are implied. A servant or wage-earner whose daily remuneration was given to him in the form of food was called *bhākta* or *bhāktika*, a practice which seems to have been more true in the case of agricultural labour. The *Arthaśāstra* says that food and wages (*bhakta-vetana*) were paid to the artisans, but food only to agricultural labour (*Arth.* Text II.24). Patañjali is even more specific: 'The meaning of the root *kṛishi* is not restricted merely to the actual operation of ploughing, but it also implies all accessory efforts by way of providing food (to labour), seed and bullocks, etc. which together contribute to the complete fulfilment of the sense of the verb' (*Bhāshya*, II. 33, *Yadasau bhakta-bīja-balīvardaiḥ pratividhānaṁ karoti sa kṛishy-arthaḥ*). The other sense of *bhakta*, viz. boiled rice is seen in *sūtra* IV.4.100, which prescribes a suffix to denote a thing that is good for *bhakta* (*Bhaktāṇ-ṇaḥ*). *Kāśikā's* examples *bhāktaḥ śāliḥ* and *bhāktas-taṇḍulaḥ* show that *bhakta* here stands only for boiled rice, a meaning which it still retains in Hindi *bhāt*.

c8.s6.3

CLASSIFICATION OF FOODS—(*i*) *Bhojya*—In a simple-looking *sūtra*, round which controversy has raged, Pāṇini explains the meaning of *bhojya*:

c8.s6.4

*Bhojyaṁ bhakshye*, VII.3.69.

c8.s6.5

It means that the word *bhojya* is irregularly derived in the sense of *bhakshya*. To this Kātyāyana raises an objection that *bhakshya* is not to be taken as a synonym of *bhojya*, since *bhojya* includes all articles of diet, both solid and liquid, while *bhakshya* denotes only solid food. Kātyāyana suggests that the proper word to express the sense of *bhojya* is *abhyavahārya*, 'worthy of being taken in.' Patañjali disagrees with Kātyāyana and defends Pāṇini by saying that in such older examples as *ab-bhaksha* and *vāyu-bhaksha* (one who takes in water or air) even non-solid substances occur as the object of *bhakshaṇa*, and hence Pāṇini's idiom in equating *bhojya* with *bhakshya* is unobjectionable. All subsequent commentators have accepted Patañjali's liberal interpretation of *bhakshya* in this *sūtra*, viz. that it stands both for solid (*khara-viśada*) and liquid (*drava*) foods (cf. *Kāśikā*, *Iha bhakshyam-abhyavahāramātram*). Dr. Goldstücker, however, raised his voice of dissent against Patañjali and maintained that 'in Pāṇini's time, which preceded the classical epoch, *bhakshya* must have been used as a convertible term for *bhojya*; while at Kātyāyana's period, this rendering became incorrect, and the *sūtra* needed correction' (*Pāṇini and his Place in Sanskrit Lit.* p. 97). Dr. Goldstücker's statement, however, does not hold good even for the whole of the *Ashṭādhyāyī*, since in Pāṇini's own *sūtra* II.1.35 (*Bhakshyeṇa miśrīkaraṇam*) as read with IV.2.16, (*Saṁskṛitaṁ bhakshāḥ*) *bhakshya* denotes solid food only and not liquids, as is evident from the illustration in the *Bhāshya*, i.e. *guḍena saṁsṛishṭā guḍa-saṁsṛishṭā, guḍa-saṁsṛishṭā dhānā guḍadhānāḥ* (I.387), which is accepted by all subsequent commentators. (Cf. *Kāśikā*, IV.1.16; *Khara-viśadam abhyavahāryaṁ bhaksham ity uchyate*; also II.1.35). Here *bhakshya* cannot be said to be strictly synonymous with *bhojya*, if, as rightly argued, *bhojya* included both liquid and solid diets. The correct view, we submit, is that *bhakshya* has a two-fold sense in the *Ashṭādhyāyī*, a more general sense in *sūtra* VII.3. 69 and a restricted one elsewhere. As for the contention of Dr.

c8.s6.6

Goldstücker (*ibid*, p. 97) that in the classical language *bhakshya* is different from *bhojya* and applies to solid food only, we submit the following three examples from Kauṭilya, where exactly as in Pāṇini both meanings prevail side by side:

c8.s6.7

(a) *Māṁsa-surā-bhakshya-bhojana*. (*Arth.* Text. p. 214), i.e. eating of meat and other solid foods and drinking of liquors;
(b) *Sūdo bhakshakāro vā bhaksha-bhojanam yācheta* (p. 239), i.e. the cook or one who prepares food may ask for some *bhaksha* and *bhojana*;
(c) *Bhakshyeshu smarati* (p. 252), i.e. the king at meals remembers (his courtier).

c8.s6.8

In the above examples (*a*) and (*b*) distinguish between the meanings of *bhakshya* and *bhojya*, while (*c*) uses *bhakshya* as synonymous with food in general. It is this latter sense that holds good in Pāṇini's *sūtra* VII.3.69.

c8.s6.9

(ii) *Bhakshya* and *Miśrī-karaṇa*. For the rest of the *Ashṭādhyāyī* Pāṇini has distinguished *bhakshya* (II.1.35) from *anna* (food in general, II.1.34), and it is, therefore, right to take it as denoting *khādya* (eatable or solid) articles only. Pāṇini's own examples of *bhakshyas* as given in *sūtra* VI.1.128 are (1) *palala* (meat), (2) *sūpa* (pulses) and (3) *śāka* (vegetables), which are compounded with words denoting relish-giving articles of diet like *ghṛita*, *guḍa*, etc. According to *Kāśikā's* gloss on VI.2.154 (*Miśraṁ chānupasargam asandhau*) *guḍa*, *tila* and *ghṛita* are examples of *miśra* articles. It follows that for improving the taste it was permissible to have any suitable combination with the principal *bhakshya* food. The process of *miśrīkaraṇa*, mixing therewith, is the same as *saṁsṛishṭa* (IV.4.22). The *sūtra Saṁsṛishṭe* provides that the suffix *ṭhak* is added to a word when the sense is 'mixed therewith.' According to Pāṇini *chūrṇa* (IV.2.23) *lavaṇa* (IV.2.24) and *mudga* (IV.2.25) are ingredients which are used in 'mixing therewith.' Kātyāyana, perhaps too subtly, thinks that there is something wrong in salt being considered as an article for ‘mixing,’ since it is not an eatable by itself but an adjunct of food (*guṇa*) being one of the six *rasas*. (Cf. Kātyāyana on IV.4.24; II.330). But Pāṇini understands salt not merely as a *rasa*, but to be a *paṇya* or material commodity (*cf.* *lāvaṇika*, a dealer in salt, IV.4.52), and therefore a mixable article with food.

c8.s6.10

(iii) *Vyañjana and Upasikta*. Whereas *miśra* articles are mixed at the option of the eater, the use of *vyañjanas* is obligatory to make the food tasteful. Pāṇini takes *vyañjana* in the sense of *upasechana*, (i.e. ingredients of seasoning to improve the taste, IV.4.26, *Vyañjanair-upasikte*), as example of which Patañjali mentions *dadhi* (curds) (*Annena vyañjanam*, II.¹.34) and the *Kāśikā* on Pāṇini II.4.12 mentions both curds and butter (*dadhi-ghṛitam*). The nature of any dish determines whether a particular article bears to it the relation of a *vyañjana* or *miśrīkaraṇa*, i.e. an indispensable or optional ingredient of mixing. For example, the *Kāśikā* takes *ghṛita* as an article both for mixing and for seasoning the food (*Kāśikā* on VI.2.128 and 154).

c8.s6.11

¹ *Cereals.* (i) *Śāli* (V.2.2), a kind of rice growing

c8.s6.12

(iv) *Saṁskṛita*. This term (IV.2.16 and IV.4.3) denotes such food as is ready for eating direct from its place of preparation, e.g. groats ground in a hand-mill. Patañjali further points out that barley which is being pounded in the mortar is not in an eatable stage until it is boiled (*Bhāshya*, IV.3.25; II.307). Pāṇini mentions *dadhi* (IV.2.18), *udaśvit* (butter-milk, IV.2.19) and milk (*kshīra*, IV.2.20) as examples of *saṁskṛita* food. The *Kāśikā* instances *apūpa* or sweet bread baked in an oven as coming under this class (*bhrāshṭrā apūpāḥ*, IV.2.16).

First 97 of 518 passages. Read on

Linked texts (34)