The Cambridge History of India, Vol. I: Ancient India v1.c19.s9.131

v1.c19.s9.131

Nothing in all the foregoing evidence has gone to show that, in the India of early Buddhist literature, the pursuit of agriculture was associated with either social prestige or social stigma. The stricter Brāhman tradition, not only in the law-books, but also in the Sutta Nipāta, the Majjhima Nikāya, and the Jātakas, expressly reserved the two callings of agriculture and trade for the Vaiçya or middle class, and judges them unfit for Brāhman or noble. Thus the Brāhman Esukārī of Sāvatthī considers village and dairy farming as not less the property and province of the Vaiçya than are bow and arrow, endowed maintenance (by alms), and sickle and yoke, the property and province of noble, Brāhman, and working classes respectively¹. And here and there, in the Jātaka-book, Brāhmans who engage in agriculture, trade, and other callings are declared to have fallen from their Brāhmanhood². On the other hand, in both Jātakas and Suttas, not only are Brāhmans frequently found pursuing tillage, cow herding, goat keeping, trade, hunting, wood-work or carpentry, weaving, caravan guarding, archery, carriage-driving, and snake-charming³, but also no reflection is passed upon them for so doing, nay, the Brāhman farmer is at times a notably pious man and a Bodhisat to boot⁴. Dr Fick is disposed to think that the North-western (*Udicca*) Brāhmans of the Kurus and Pañchālas, some of whom came east and settled there, inherited a stricter standard⁵. Nevertheless it is not claimed for the pious ones just mentioned, living near Benares and in Magadha, that they were *Udicca* immigrants. Even the law-books permit Brāhmans to engage in worldly callings if they are in straitened circumstances, or if they take no active share in the work⁶.