Age of the Nandas and Mauryas c9.s29: 17. Philosophers

Age of the Nandas and Mauryas c9.s29

Language: English

c9.s29.1 — 4 parts

17. Philosophers

c9.s29.1.1

Megasthenes has much to say on Indian philosophers; he must have gained his knowledge from previous writers as well as from personal observation. His distinction between those who inhabited the mountains and worshipped Dionysus, and those who lived in the plains and worshipped Herakles is not easily understood, and Strabo himself remarked: 'These accounts are fabulous, and are contradicted by many writers.' His account of the Brāhmaṇas and Śramaṇas is much more valuable, though there is room for doubt about what exactly he meant by these terms. The Brāhmaṇas, he says, were held in higher esteem and had a more consistent dogmatic system. The pre-natal ceremonials (*saṃskāras*), the stages of life (*āśramas*) and the rules and practices governing them, the relative freedom from restraint enjoyed by the *grihastha* (house-holder) were all known to Megasthenes, though on some matters he seems to portray theory rather than actual fact, as when he says that the Brāhmaṇas marry as many wives as possible to secure good progeny; or when he gives the period of study as thirty-seven years. Their philosophy and cosmogony which had some things in common with Greek teaching on the subjects are also briefly expounded by him. He says that women were kept out of philosophical studies for fear of the bad women divulging the secret lore to unworthy people, and the good ones deserting their husbands for a life of asceticism;

c9.s29.1.2

but here he is contradicted by Nearchus, though on this matter quite possibly both theory and practice differed in different localities. This account of the Brāhmaṇas then is reasonably accurate and interesting as a record of the impression produced by them in the mind of an observant foreigner. But the description of the Śramaṇas is not a little puzzling, because while the name generally indicates Buddhist ascetics, there is little in the description itself which will not apply to Brāhmanical ascetics. Here is the account as reproduced by Strabo: ‘Of the Sarmanes the most highly honoured are the Hylobioi. They live in forests, subsist on leaves and wild fruits, wear garments made from the bark of trees, and abstain from wine and commerce with women. The kings consult them by messengers regarding the causes of events, and use their mediation in worshipping and supplicating the gods. Next in honour to the Hylobioi are the physicians, for they apply philosophy to the study of the nature of man. They are frugal in their habits, but do not live in the fields. Their food consists of rice and barley-meal which every one gives who is asked, as well as every one who receives them as a guest. By their knowledge of medicine they know how to make marriages fertile and how to procure male or female children as may be desired. They effect cures rather by regulating diet than by the use of medicines. The remedies in most repute are ointments and plasters.

c9.s29.1.3

All others they suppose to partake largely of a noxious nature. Both this class and the other class of persons practise fortitude as well by undergoing active toil as by enduring suffering, so that they will remain motionless for a whole day in one fixed posture. Besides these there are divines and sorcerers and those who are conversant with the rites and customs relating to the dead, who go about villages and towns begging. Those who are more cultured than these, even they allow themselves to make use of popular ideas about hell which seem to make for godliness and purity of life. Women study philosophy with some of the Sarmanes, on the condition of observing sexual continence like the men. The name ‘forest-dwellers’ (Hylobioi) does create a doubt if Megasthenes had the *vānaprasthas* in mind; but the Buddhist monks also shunned cities and villages and dwelt in forests; and the term Sarmanes (*Śramaṇas*) as well as the social services described, such as healing the sick and preaching to the people seem more appropriate to the Buddhist monks than to Brahman ascetics; again women were admitted more readily into the order of *bhikkuṇis* than among Brahmanical ascetics. If this reasoning is correct, we have here one of the earliest accounts of the Buddhist order of monks, and it is to be noted that when Megasthenes wrote, they did not yet command as much esteem in Society as the Brāhmaṇas. Asoka’s labours for the cause of Buddhism lay still in the future;

c9.s29.1.4

but the *bhikkus* were already making a name for themselves by their zeal in the practice of Dhamma.