Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Ancient Indian Historical Tradition c28.s2: Kṣatriyan Brahmans in the Lunar Race

Ancient Indian Historical Tradition c28.s2

Language
English

Contents

Kṣatriyan Brahmans in the Lunar Race

Śaunakas and Ārṣṭiṣeṇas

c28.s2.t1.1

The first instance occurred in the Kāśi dynasty. Sunahotra, one of the earliest kings, had three sons, Kāśa, Śala and Gṛtsamada. Gṛtsamada’s son was Śunaka, and from him were descended the Śaunkas, who comprised all four castes. Śala’s son was Ārṣṭiṣeṇa. The Śaunakas and Ārṣṭiṣeṇas were kṣatriyan brahmans.² ‘Son’ here means probably ‘descendant’, but even so, this statement implies a very early time for these two gotras. It is not said that they were admitted into any of the great brahman families. This Ārṣṭiṣeṇa is the rishi mentioned above (p. 165, note ¹¹). There was a Śaunaka among the Bhārgavas (p. 201) who was different, and these Śaunakas would seem to be the gotra named among the Ātreyas.³ Nothing more, however, definite is said about these two sub-families.

c28.s2.t1.2

² Vā 92, 3-6. Bd iii, 67, 3-6. Br 11, 32-4. Hv 29, 1518-20. Bhāg ix, 17, 2-3 somewhat similarly.

c28.s2.t1.3

³ Mat 197, 2, where perhaps read ŚaunakaĀrṣṭiṣeṇau.

Bhāratas

c28.s2.t2.1

It has been pointed out (p. 159) that king Bharata adopted the Āṅgirasa rishi Bharadvāja as his son, and Bharadvāja begot Vitatha who continued the Paurava dynasty, and consequently that the Bhāratas could assert either kṣatriya paternity or brahman paternity or both combined.⁴ Some of the junior branches did avail themselves of this option, and their development into kṣatriyan brahmans and brahmans occurred at three stages.

c28.s2.t2.2

⁴ Anukramaṇī and Vedārth on Rigv vi, 52. P. 221.

c28.s2.t2.3

The first arose among Vitatha’s near successors. The portion of the genealogy which explains this is found in four Puranas.⁵ The oldest and best versions are in the Matsya and Vāyu, which are derived from a common original, and show variations chiefly due to corruptions. The Viṣṇu in prose agrees closely with them, and the Bhāgavata repeats the account fairly clearly. The other accounts either say nothing, or speak briefly and incorrectly, in no case noticing the brahmanic developments.

c28.s2.t2.4

⁵ Mat 49, 35-41. Vā 99, 158-64. Viṣ iv, 19, 9-10. Bhāg ix, 21, 1-2, 19-20.

c28.s2.t2.5

By collating the Matsya and Vāyu (the former being the better), and using the Viṣṇu and Bhāgavata for comparison, a version that seems fairly trustworthy can be obtained and is given below.¹ The genealogical tree obtained therefrom is given on p. 112. It is definitely stated that from the three younger sons of Bhuvamanyu sprang four brahman sub-families, from Mahāvīrya the Urukṣayas and Kāpyas, from Nara² the Sāṅkṛtis, and from Garga³ the Gargas or Gārgyas, that the Urukṣayas became brahmans, and that the Gargas, Sāṅkṛtis and Kāpyas were kṣatriyan brahmans. Even the brahmanical Bhāgavata says plainly that Gārgya from a kṣatriya became a brahman. These sub-families will now be considered separately.

c28.s2.t2.6

¹ Dāyādo Vitathasyāsīd Bhuvamanyur mahāyaśāḥ mahābhūtopamāḥ putrāś catvāro Bhuvamanyavaḥ Bṛhatkṣatro Mahāvīryo Naro Gargaś ca vīyavān Narasya Sāṅkṛtiḥ putras tasya putraka mahaujasau Gurudhī Rantidevaś ca Sāṅkṛtyau tāv ubhau smṛtau Gargasya caiva dāyādaḥ Śinir vidvān ajāyata smṛtāḥ Śainyās tato Gārgāḥ kṣatropetā dvijātayaḥ Mahāvīrya-sutaś * cāpi dhīmān āsīd Urukṣayaḥ tasya bhāryā Viśālā tu suṣuve putraka-trayam Trayyāruṇam Puṣkariṇam Kapim caiva mahāyaśāḥ † Urukṣayāḥ smṛtā hy ete sarve brāhmaṇatāṃ gatāḥ Kāpyānām tu varā hy ete trayaḥ proktā maharṣayaḥ ‡ Gargāḥ Sāṅkṛtayaḥ Kāpyāḥ kṣatropetā dvijātayaḥ saṃśritĀṅgirasam § pakṣam—
* Mat Āhārya-tanayaś. † Accusative plural = Prakrit mahāyaśāḥ. ‡ A line seems to have dropped out as they are not named. § That is, saṃśritāḥ Āṅgirasam by double sandhi.

c28.s2.t2.7

² Rigv vi, 35 and 36 are attributed to Nara.

c28.s2.t2.8

³ Rigv vi, 47 is attributed to Garga.

Sāṅkṛtis or Sāṅkṛtyas

c28.s2.t3.1

The Sāṅkṛtis were kṣatriyan brahmans and joined the Āṅgirasas, and they are named as a gotra among the Āṅgirasas,⁴ and Sāṅkṛti is named as a hymn-maker among them.¹ Of the two Sāṅkṛtis mentioned Rantideva was a famous king (pp. 39-42) renowned for liberality and hospitality.² His kingdom was on the R. Carmaṇvatī (Chambal), for that river was connected with him;³ it embodied his fame, and his capital was Daśapura.⁴ With him the kṣatriya status predominated, but his kingdom disappeared, and his descendants would seem to have become brahmans.

c28.s2.t3.2

⁴ Mat 196, 30, 32. Cf. Vā 91, 115; Bḍ iii, 66, 86. But a rishi Sāṅkṛti Ātreya is mentioned, MBh xii, 234, 8596.

c28.s2.t3.3

¹ Bd ii, 32, 107. Mat 145, 101. Vā 59, 98.

c28.s2.t3.4

² MBh iii, 82, 4096; 293, 16674: vii, 67, 2361-74: xii, 29, 1017-1021; 234, 8591: xiii, 66, 3351, 3365; 137, 6250. Bhāg ix, 21, 2 f.

c28.s2.t3.5

³ MBh vii, 67, 2360: xii, 29, 1016. Pad i, 24, 3.

c28.s2.t3.6

⁴ Meghadūta i, 46-8.

c28.s2.t3.7

The other Sāṅkṛti’s name is given as Guruvīrya (Vāyu), Gurudhī (Matsya), Guru (Bhāgavata) and Ruciradhī (Viṣṇu). He is no doubt the same rishi who is named among the Āṅgirasas as Guruvīta⁵ and Gauravīti,⁶ and the correct name is Gaurivīti. Rigveda v, 29 is attributed by the Anukramaṇī to Gaurivīti Śāktya and x, 73 and 74 to Gaurivīti simply, but the Vedārthadīpikā says nothing about the former and ascribes the latter to Gaurivīti Śāktya. If Śāktya refers to Vasiṣṭha’s son Śakti (pp. 207 f.), then Gaurivīti Śāktya was a Vāsiṣṭha and later than this time.⁷ But nothing clear can be decided, because there was also a Śakti among the Āṅgirasas.⁸

c28.s2.t3.8

⁵ Mat 145, 102. The corresponding name in Vā 59, 99 and Bd ii, 32, 108 is Purukutsa.

c28.s2.t3.9

⁶ Mat 196, 32. Also a Guru, ibid. 45.

c28.s2.t3.10

⁷ He is made contemporary with Ṛṣabha Yājñatura, king of the Śviknas (Śatapatha Brāhm xii, 8, 3, 7; xiii, 5, 4, 15), and though Ṛṣabha’s position is unknown, Pratīdarśa Śvaikna was a contemporary of Suplan-Sahadeva, king of N. Pañcāla (id. ii, 4, 4, 3-4), p. 148.

c28.s2.t3.11

⁸ Mat 196, 25.

Gargas or Gārgyas

c28.s2.t4.1

The Gārgyas were a well-known family and were reckoned among the Āṅgirasas, and so also their sub-family of the Sainyas.⁹ Garga and Śini are named as hymn-makers among the Āṅgirasas.¹⁰ Various Gargas¹¹ or Gārgyas are mentioned in tradition; thus, taking them in order, a Gārgya cursed Janamejaya II Pārikṣita for injuring his son (p. 114); another was Vasudeva’s purohita, and was father of Kālayavana,¹ who fought against Kṛṣṇa and was killed. Also Vṛddha Garga² and Kuṇi Garga³ are mentioned; and others.⁴

c28.s2.t4.2

⁹ Mat 196, 23, 24 (where for Saitya read Śainya), 48.

c28.s2.t4.3

¹⁰ Bd ii, 32, 107. Vā 59, 98. Mat 145, 101.

c28.s2.t4.4

¹¹ A Gārgya, ‘son of Viśvāmitra’, is mentioned, MBh xiii, 4, 254.

c28.s2.t4.5

¹ Br 14, 48–56. Hv 110, 6163–6; 111, 6243–5; 115, 6428 f. Pad vi, 273, 2.

c28.s2.t4.6

² MBh ix, 38, 2132 : xiii, 125, 5996. Mat 229, 2.

c28.s2.t4.7

³ MBh ix, 53, 2981.

c28.s2.t4.8

⁴ Vedic Index. A folk-tale of ‘Garga’s’ seven disciples and their transmigrations is connected with king Brahmadatta, Mat 19, 12 to 21; Pad v, 10, 46 f. ; &c. It appears in other connexions, e.g. Hv 19, 1013 f. ; &c. Alluded to, MBh xii, 344, 13264–5; Ag 117, 54–5; &c.

Urukṣayas and Kāpyas

c28.s2.t5.1

Mahāvīrya in the genealogy is called Āhārya in the Matsya version in line 8. The importance of stray readings has been pointed out (p. 83) and Āhārya is supported by another statement which says he was a hymn-maker among the Āṅgirasas.⁵ Āhārya would seem therefore to be the better form,⁶ but the variation suggests that the name may be corrupt. Rigveda x, 118 is ascribed to Urukṣaya Āmahīyava, ‘son of Amahīyu’, and it seems quite probable that Amahīyu may be the true name here,⁷ for Mahāvīrya and Āhārya might be easy corruptions of it.⁸

c28.s2.t5.2

⁵ Vā 59, 100. Bḍ ii, 32, 109. Mat 145, 103 (‘svahāryaś’).

c28.s2.t5.3

⁶ The reading in line 3 then would be tathĀhāryo.

c28.s2.t5.4

⁷ If so, the Amahīyu to whom ix, 61 is ascribed is certainly a different and later rishi, for the hymn alludes to Divodāsa.

c28.s2.t5.5

⁸ So also in the passage cited in third note above.

c28.s2.t5.6

Urukṣaya and Kapi would seem to be named as hymn-makers among the Āṅgirasas.⁹ The genealogy speaks of the Kāpyas as distinct from the Urukṣayas, for it says the Urukṣayas all became brahmans (line 11) and the Kāpyas were kṣatriyan brahmans (line 13).¹⁰ Hence it suggests that the descendants of Urukṣaya’s two elder sons formed the Urukṣayas, and those of Kapi a distinct gotra. All joined the Āṅgirasas, and so in the Āṅgirasa vaṃśa is named Urukṣaya,¹¹ though not Kapi unless Kapibhū stands for it.¹²

c28.s2.t5.7

⁹ Comparing the passages cited in fourth note above, the probable reading of the second pāda would seem to be Rukṣayaḥ Kapir eva ca, where the initial u might have combined with, or been dropped after, the preceding ca, for such irregularities do occur in the Puranas.

c28.s2.t5.8

¹⁰ Also Vā 91, 115 : Bḍ iii, 66, 86.

c28.s2.t5.9

¹¹ Mat 196, 29.

c28.s2.t5.10

¹² Ibid. 48–9.

c28.s2.t5.11

*Maudgalyas and Maitreyas.*

c28.s2.t5.12

The next group of kṣatriyan brahmans arose out of the N. Pañcāla dynasty, which was Bhārata, and is set above (p. 116).¹ Mudgala’s eldest son became a brahman. His descendants, the Mudgalas or Maudgalyas, were kṣatriyan brahmans and joined the Āṅgirasas.² His grandson Vadhryaśva and Vadhryaśva’s son Divodāsa both exercised priestly functions as the Rigveda shows,³ and appear to have joined the Bhārgavas, for both of them are named in the Bhārgava vaṃśa.⁴ Divodāsa’s successor was king Mitrayu who was a brahman, and his son was Maitreya, from whom came the Maitreyas, who were kṣatriyan brahmans and joined the Bhārgavas,⁵ and accordingly they were named in the Bhārgava vaṃśa.⁶ Neither the Maudgalyas nor the Maitreyas produced any rishi of note. A Maudgalya has been mentioned (p. 171), and three others are alluded to.⁷ The Viṣṇu Purana professes to have been declared by Parāśara to a Maitreya. Other Maitreyas are noticed in the Vedic Index.⁸

c28.s2.t5.13

¹ Fully discussed in JRAS, 1918, pp. 230–1, 239–43.

c28.s2.t5.14

² Vā 99, 198–201. Mat 50, 5–7. Hv 32, 1781–4. Br 13, 97.

c28.s2.t5.15

³ Rigv x, 69, 2, 4, 9, 10: viii, 103, 2.

c28.s2.t5.16

⁴ Mat 195, 42. Divodāsa in Mat 145, 100; Vā 59, 87; Bḍ ii, 32, 106.

c28.s2.t5.17

⁵ Vā 99, 206–7. Mat 50, 13–14. Hv 32, 1789–90. Br 13, 97 (note).

c28.s2.t5.18

⁶ Mat 195, 40. See also p. 202.

c28.s2.t5.19

⁷ (1) Pad vi, 68, 5; 111, 21–33, which says the Mudgalas were viśikha, ‘devoid of the top-knot’. (2) Br 136, 1. (3) MBh iii, 259 to 260.

c28.s2.t5.20

⁸ Also MBh iii, 10, 352, 363 : xiii, 120, 5794–5.

c28.s2.t5.21

*Vādhryaśvas and Daivodāsas.*

c28.s2.t5.22

Here may be noticed some of the descendants of Vadhryaśva and Divodāsa. Parucchepa Daivodāsi, the reputed author of Rigveda i, 127 to 139 would seem to have been alive with Divodāsa (130, 7) and would therefore have been his son or grandson; and his son or descendant was Anānata, the reputed author of ix, 111. Pratardana Daivodāsi, the reputed author of ix, 96, would seem to have been a near descendant of Divodāsa. Sumitra Vādhryaśva, the author of x, 69 and 70, was a contemporary of king Cyavana Pijavana (p. 120). All these were probably Bhārgavas, as were Vadhryaśva and Divodāsa.

Other Rishis

c28.s2.t6.1

Lastly may be noticed Devāpi Ārṣiṣeṇa,¹ the author of hymn x, 98, whose story is often told.² He was apparently the eldest grandson of king Pratīpa, and Śantanu a younger grandson (p. 165). He was an excellent prince³ but had a skin disease,⁴ and so was excluded from the throne by the opposition of the people which was led by the brahmans,⁵ or he declined it in Śantanu’s favour.⁶ So Śantanu became king. Devāpi departed to the forest in his youth⁷ and became a muni, a teacher of the gods.⁸ But a twelve-year drought occurred, which was attributed to the supersession, so Śantanu offered him the kingdom;⁹ but he declined it, became Śantanu’s purohita instead,¹⁰ and composed Rigveda x, 98.¹¹

c28.s2.t6.2

¹ To be distinguished from another Ārṣiṣeṇa, p. 165.

c28.s2.t6.3

² Vā 99, 234, 236. Mat 50, 39-41. Br 13, 117. Hv 32, 1822. Viṣ iv, 20, 4-9. Bhāg ix, 22, 12, 14-17. Other references in p. 165, note 9.

c28.s2.t6.4

³ MBh v, 148, 5054-66.

c28.s2.t6.5

⁴ MBh v, Bṛhadd; leprosy, so Mat.

c28.s2.t6.6

⁵ Mat, MBh v.

c28.s2.t6.7

⁶ Bṛhadd, Bhāg.

c28.s2.t6.8

⁷ MBh i and v, Vā, Mat, Viṣ, Bhāg.

c28.s2.t6.9

⁸ Vā, Br, Hv.

c28.s2.t6.10

⁹ Nirukta, Bṛhadd, Viṣ, Bhāg.

c28.s2.t6.11

¹⁰ Nirukta, Bṛhadd.

c28.s2.t6.12

¹¹ Or, according to Viṣ and Bhāg, Śantanu’s ministers (or brahmans) sent teachers who maliciously perverted Devāpi from the Vedas, and he was therefore excluded as a heretic—an amazing story, incompatible with the hymn, with Vā 99, 236, Br 13, 117, Hv 32, 1822, and with the future destined for him, p 165, note 10.

Linked texts (14)