Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Social Life in Ancient India: Studies in Vatsyayana's Kamasutra c8.s9: Conclusion

Social Life in Ancient India: Studies in Vātsyāyana's Kāmasūtra c8.s9

Language
English

Conclusion

c8.s9.1

We have thus seen that the *nagaraka* was a man of considerable intellectual culture and aesthetic refinement, but at the same time he was not very scrupulous with regard to sexual morality. He is the product of an age when wealth and riches were flowing into India through an extensive commerce with the east and the west and the picture that the *Kāmasūtra* furnishes of his life also shows the virtues and vices characteristic of such an age. In the first place we observe that this materialistic prosperity had led to the formation in the country of materialistic ideals that made more of the comforts of the world than of *dharma* or the life of discipline. There are people, says Vātsyāyana, who hold that the *dharmas* should not be practised, in as much as the fruits of such practice,—the rewards for these austerities, are only prospective, and moreover they are doubtful and uncertain at the best; who but a fool would give away to others, what he has in his own hands, in the hope of some future gain? Better a dove to-day than a peacock to-morrow. Better a copper token (*kārṣāpaṇa*) that is certain than a piece of sterling gold—a *niṣka*—the acquisition of which is doubtful. Vātsyāyana, of course, combats these ideas, but it shows that the materialistic ideals of pleasure are there in the country, though limited only to a small section of the people, mostly to the Laukāyatikas or materialists.¹

c8.s9.2

¹ न धर्माचरेत् । एतत्फलत्वात् । सांशयिकत्वाच्च । काष्ठवान्निधौ हस्तगतं परगतं कुर्यात् । वरमद्य कपोतः मयूरान वरं सांशयिका निष्कादसांशयिकः कार्षापण इति लोकायतिकाः ।—Ibid, p. 19 (*sūtras* 25-30)

c8.s9.3

It must not be imagined, however, that the age in which Vātsyāyana lived was as a whole an age of gross materialism or that the whole of Indian society at the time bore this character; it will be a mistake to suppose that the *nāgaraka's* easy morality was even a main feature of the character of the majority of the people. In the first place, Vātsyāyana paints in his *nāgaraka* the picture of a particular and limited section of the dwellers in cities. A *nāgaraka* is a wealthy person who has received a liberal education in youth and has already earned a competence by inheritance or by personal endeavour, so that he can afford to lead the life of comfort and pleasure in a city. The class which he represents has lived in all ages and in all countries wherever economic prosperity has enabled a section of the people to command and enjoy the good things of the earth. His counterpart is not wanting in our modern days in countries which are rich in material wealth and where the people "enjoy life." He can be traced with but few changes, and these only in details, in the salons of Paris and Vienna, of London and Berlin. In India itself, his successors though not absolutely extinct, are but few, for the good reason that the abundance of material riches and the consequent joys of life out of which the *nāgaraka* could grow, have departed from this country.

c8.s9.4

Then, again, we observe that the character of the matron was marked by firmness and purity, modesty and restraint, showing that the general ideals of society as regards sexual purity had not been lowered since the age of the *Dharmasūtras*. In fact it is apparent from what Vātsyāyana says, that the main current of social life had not undergone much transformation and that the ideals set up in the Dharma-codes still controlled society. He asserts that the whole structure of society is upheld and maintained by the observance of the principle of the division of the people into *varṇas* or classes and into *āśramas* or stages of life. In this society a man does not marry until he has finished his education; after marrying he lives the life of a good citizen and brings up a family, and in advanced years, retires from worldly activities and devotes himself exclusively to matters spiritual. The Brāhmaṇas among the four classes were highly respected, their blessings being considered as conducive to long life and glory.¹ Respect for the *Vedas* and the other Holy scriptures is insisted upon; it is declared that there is no room for doubting the validity of their teachings: in matters relating to life in this world, which can produce visible effects, one has to guide oneself in accordance with the ordinances of the Sacred Codes, and in matters relating to the life beyond and producing effects beyond the physical vision of man, one is also guided by the prescriptions of Holy Writ such as the performance of sacrifices and similar other observances. It is declared that the authority of the sacred scriptures is binding with regard to *dharma* or the principles of right conduct which have to be learned from *Sruti*, or the *Vedas*, and also from the assembly of men proficient in them.²

c8.s9.5

¹ ब्राह्मणानां प्रशस्तानामिषः (यथसमायुधम् ) ।—Ibid, p. 380 (*sūtra* 51); also p. 170 (*sūtra* 36). Cf. वर्णाश्रमाचारस्थित्यपलाय लोकयात्रायाः etc.—Ibid, p. 20 (*sūtra* 31); ब्रह्मचर्यमेव लाविशायदष्यात् ।—p. 12 (*sūtra* 6); वाक्यं विद्यादष्यादीनर्थान् । कामं च जीवने । स्थाविरे धर्मे मोक्षं च ।—pp. 11-12 (*sūtras* 2-4).

c8.s9.6

² ......लौकिकलाददृष्टार्थलादप्रमाणं यत्रादीनां शास्त्रात् प्रवर्तनम्, लौकिकलाद दृष्टार्थलाच प्रत्ययभय मांसभक्षणादिषः शास्त्रादेव निवारणं धर्मः । ... मु तेधमैत्रसमवायाच प्रतिपद्यत ।—Ibid, pp. 12-13 (*sūtras* 7-8).

c8.s9.7

Vedic sacrifices still appear to have constituted an important feature of the religious exercises of the people; along with other common occurrences of life sacrifices are mentioned by Vātsyāyana as occasions which permitted a gathering of people of both sexes and we are told that even the virtuous matron could attend such assemblies with the permission of her husband. The erection of sacrificial altars and houses, formed one of the most earnest desires of women, nay even of the courtesans. Sacrifices formed an indispansable part of the ceremony of marriage, which, if once performed in the presence of fire, i. e., with sacrifices, could never be repudiated; this is declared as the rule upheld by all teachers and throughout his chapter on courtship and marriage, Vātsyāyana advises a young lover, again and again, to ratify his marriage with the maiden of his love with sacrifices in the fire brought from the house of a *śrotriya*, i. e. a man who keeps up the sacrificial fire constantly burning in his house and daily offers oblations in it. A person initiated for sacrifice (*dīkṣita*) is also mentioned along with persons who have taken certain vows or have assumed the marks of certain sects of ascetics.¹ This makes it abundantly clear that the sacrifices laid down in the *gṛhya-sūtras* still held a prominent place in the life of the period when Vātsyāyana lived and here he is corroborated by epigraphic evidence. The inscriptions in Western India of the early centuries of the Christian era show that sacrifices on a large scale were performed at the time and munificent gifts were made to Bhikṣus and Brāhmaṇas even by persons of foreign extraction like Uṣabhadāta. Vātsyāyana speaks of a thousand cows given away to Brāhmaṇas. Moreover the daily performance of *bali-karma* at the *nāgaraka's* under the supervision of his wife shows the unabated influence of the *gṛhyasūtras*.² Then again, the *nāgaraka*, though a pleasure-seeker, was a worshipper of the gods. We have already referred to the niche at the head of his bed for holding an image of the *iṣṭa-devatā* or the deity to whom he was particularly devoted and also to the daily worship of the gods at the household temple. Moreover, he, and specially his wife, took part in fasts and observances whose number was apparently not insignificant. Besides, we have seen, how at regular, as well as irregular, intervals the public took part in grand religious festivals (ghaṭā) often accompanied by processions of images and attended by men and women in large numbers. Even a courtesan considered it as the greatest happiness of her life (lābhātiśaya) to institute arrangements for the worship of the gods.¹ All these facts go to prove that religious observances played a great part in the life of the people in Vātsyāyana's time, and that the Code of Manu had at the time acquired its full authority over the public mind as is shown by Vātsyāyana who speaks of Svāyambhuva Manu as the person who had taken up the Dharma section of Prajāpati's all-embracing encyclopaedia and dealt with it in a separate treatise. Besides, Yājñavalkya's great code, second in importance to Manu alone, is supposed to have been composed about the time when Vātsyāyana lived.²

c8.s9.8

¹ प्रतिपन्नमभिप्रेतावका शवसिनीं नायकः श्रोत्रियागारादधिमानाय कुशानास्तीर्य यथाश्रुति हुत्वा च विः परिक्रामेत् । अप्रिसाचिका हि विवाहां न निवर्तन्त इत्याचार्यसमयः ।—Ibid, pp. 219-220 (*sūtras* 11 and 13). See also pp. 220-222 (*sūtras* 14-27); and आवाह्ये विवाहे यच्च गमनं सखीभिः सह गोष्ठौ देवताभिगमनमित्यत्रता कुर्यात् ।—Ibid, p. 226 (*sūtra* 15), विवाहे यज्ञव्यसनोत्सवेषु etc.—Ibid, p. 274 (*sūtra* 41); सखीनामभ्रिचेत्यानां निबन्धनं etc.—Ibid, p. 340 (*sūtra* 25); श्रोत्रियस्य ब्रह्मचारिणो दीक्षितस्य यतिनो लिङ्गिनो वा etc.—Ibid, p. 351 (*sūtra* 28).

c8.s9.9

² For the epigraphic evidence see *Epigrahia Indica*, vol. viii, pp. 59-96, etc.; also *Report of the Arch. Sur. of Western India*, vols. iv and v. गोसहस्रा पादाचरितं ब्राह्मणेभ्यो दानं ।—*Kāmasūtra*, p. 340 (*sūtra* 25); and विश्ववणाचरितबलिकर्म—Ibid, p. 224 (*sūtra* 3).

c8.s9.10

¹ Ibid, p. 43 (sūtra 6) ; p. 224 (sūtra 3) ; p. 228 (sūtra 26) ; pp. 49-51 ; p. 226 (sūtra 15) ; p. 311 (sūtra 20) ; p. 340 (sūtra 25).

c8.s9.11

² प्रजापतिर्हि प्रजाः सृष्ट्वा तासां स्थितिनिबन्धनं त्रिवर्गस्य साधनमध्यायानां शतसहस्रं प्राचे । तस्य कदेशं स्वायंभुवो मनुर्धर्माधिकारिकां पृथक् चकार ।—Ibid, p. 4 (sūtras 5-6). For Yājñavalkya, see Weber, History of Indian Literature (Eng. Trans.), p. 281.

c8.s9.12

It was in this period, again, that Mahayana Buddhism grew and spread, and it must be admitted that the literature of the Mahāyāna school bears on its face the impress of this age of aesthetic refinement and culture. Its great preacher, Aśvaghoṣa, sought to popularise his faith by writing dramas and magnificent poetical works instead of works on dry dialectics and abstruse theology. The few fragments that we possess of Aśvaghoṣa's dramas, Śāriputraprakaraṇa and others, show that in at least one of them the gaṇikā played almost as important a part as in Bhāsa's Cārudatta, and that too in a work where Buddha himself makes his appearance with some of his dearest disciples. Aśvaghoṣa was in the first place a theologian and a dialectician as his *Vajrasūcī* would go to prove, but in an age of great aesthetic culture, he had to adapt himself to the refined tastes of his audience and so he sweetened the tasteless doses of his dry theological doctrines with the honey of poetry and music, and he knew how to mix the ingredients with all the skill of a master. The *Lalitavistara* also has succeeded eminently in combining intense love and reverence for the Master with poetic skill and grace. The *Divyāvadāna* and the *Mahāvastu* also appear to have received, at least, some additions in this era of *kathās* and *ākhyānas* of which we find a frequent mention in Vātsyāyana.¹

c8.s9.13

¹ For Aśvaghoṣa's Dramas, see Lüders, *Königliche preuss. Turfan Exp.*, *Kleinere Sanskrit Texte*, Heft I and *Das Śāriputraprakaraṇa* (*Sitz. der K. preuss. Akad. d. Wiss.*), 1911.

c8.s9.14

In the next place, we gather from the philosophical literature of the age in which Vātsyāyana lived, that it was one of intense philosophical speculation. Nāgārjuna in the second century A. D. had established his *Śūnyavāda* or Philosophic Nihilism and he was followed by a string of great logicians of his school. His success roused to activity all the orthodox schools of philosophy the representatives of which proceeded to compose new works, to write extensive commentaries on the already existing texts, or at any rate to bring their systems up to date by fresh additions calculated to combat successfully the new school that was gradually acquiring strength and volume. Whether we do or do not accept the conclusion of Prof. Jacobi that the *Nyāyadarśana* and the *Brahmasūtra* were originally composed between 200 and 450 A.D., we have less reason to doubt him when he assigns to this period the old commentators, Vātsyāyana, Upavarṣa and Baudhāyana (the *Vṛttikāra*) who were all working to bring their respective systems in line with the new ideas originated by Buddhist thinkers. Even the author oft he Kāmasūtra has shown the prevailing tendency of the time by defining his general concepts and discussing the current theories about them in the approved philosophical method, and he has approached his subject with the detachment of a scientific observer and the analytic skill of a subtle logician. Moreover, we must not forget that in the period embraced by the first four centuries of the Christian era, the Mahābhārata was receiving the final form in which we possess it now.¹

c8.s9.15

¹ For Prof. Jacobi's views see Journal of the American Oriental Society, 1911, p. 29. For Vātsyāyana's philosophical discussions, see Kāmasūtra, pp. 11-25. For the date of the Mahābhārata, see E. W. Hopkins, The Great Epic of India, pp. 397-98 and Winternitz, Geschichte

c8.s9.16

There can be no doubt, then, that this age of great philosophical discovery and analysis, the age that produced the Lalitavistara and the code of Yājñavalkya, could not have been marked by a general low tone in moral life. The age to be studied as a whole requires a study of all sides of the Indian civilisation of the time based on a far ampler stock of materials than only Vātsyāyana can supply. Vātsyāyana's work deals with only one aspect of it and shows that his was an age of great intellectual activity in all directions, and the great thinker makes an analysis of the erotic feelings and of the elementary relations between the sexes in a right scientific spirit : in doing so he naturally turned for illustration to the class that had cultivated this side of the humanistics for centuries, at least since the time of Pāṇini, to whom as we have seen, the nāgaraka was a familiar character. Vātsyāyana does not cast a charm over illicit love, nor does he invest it with the halo of romance. He merely gives a frank and matter of fact account of the social sore, proceeds to a masterly analysis of the psychology of the man who seeks such love—the jealousy, anger, hatred, passion, greed, selfishness that working within the brain of the human animal, cloud his judgment and pervert his tastes. He points out categorically that a scientific work (*śāstra*), dealing with a subject as a whole, must be exhaustive, but that is no reason why a particular practice described in it should be carried into effect; for example, the taste, the properties and the digestive qualities of dog's flesh are given in medical works, but that is no reason why it should be adopted as an article of diet by sober men.¹ He winds up his thesis by saying, "whenever, on account of the character of the subject dealt with, I had to speak about things that might smack of lust and desire, I have taken care immediately afterwards to censure and condemn them", and he adds that, he himself had followed the strictly pure life of a *brahmacārin* and had been deeply immersed in contemplation (*samādhi*) while composing the work for the benefit of the world and not for feeding the flames of desire. The ideal of life that he holds up, is that of harmonious blending of the three elements—*dharma*, *artha* and *kāma*—which sum up according to Indian ideas all human motives of action for the people of the world. He enjoins that a rightminded person should occupy himself with such actions as, while giving pleasure (*kāma*), do not stand in the way of the acquisition of the good things of the earth (*artha*), and at the same time do not disregard the behests of *dharma*, that is, as he explains, do not afford any ground for the fear of their being followed by evil effects hereafter. This is the same as the teaching of the *Bhagavadgītā* that God dwells in such desires as do not violate *dharma*. Vātsyāyana thus emphasises the working out of the threefold functions of man (trivarga) in such a way that there may be no conflict among these three, while he is not unmindful of the fourth or final good of mankind, viz., mokṣa,¹ the ultimate release from the limitations that curb the eternal growth of his soul.

c8.s9.17

¹ For Vātsyāyana's analysis of illicit love see *Kāmasūtra*, pp. 60-65 (*sutras* 5-22), and his *Pāradārika* section, pp. 247-298. Cf. also न शास्त्रमपि तावत् प्रयोगे कारणं भवेत् । शास्त्रार्थान् व्यापिनो विद्यात् प्रयोगस्ते कदेशिकान् । रसवीर्य-विपाका हि ममासस्यापि वैद्यकै । कीर्तिता इति तत् किं शास्त्रयोक्तं विवक्षयै ।—Ibid, p. 170 (*sutras* 37-38).

c8.s9.18

¹ अधिकारवशादुक्ता ये पिता रागवर्धनाः । तदनन्तरमते व ते यथाविनिवारिताः ॥ तदैतदभ्रायचर्यं च परिण च समाधिमा । विहितं लोकयात्रार्थं न रागाद्योऽस्य संविधिः ॥ रक्ष्यन् धर्माद्यमानां स्थितिं स्वां लोकवर्तिनीम् । अस्य शास्त्रस्य तत्त्वज्ञो भवतीव जितेन्द्रियः ।—Ibid, pp. 381-382 (sūtras 54, 57 and 58). किं स्यात्परं लाभदा कार्यं यत्किञ्च जायते । न चायं 'सुखं चेति शिष्टास्तत्र व्यवस्थिताः ॥ विवक्षसाधकं यस्याद्योरिकस्य वा पुनः । कार्यं तदपि कुर्वीत न स कार्यं विबाधकम् ।—Ibid. p. 26 (sūtras 50-51). Cf. धर्माविरुद्धो भूतेषु कामोऽस्मि भरतर्षभ ।—Bhagavadgītā, vii, 11 see also स्यादिदं धर्म मोचं च ।—Kāmasūtra, p. 12 (sūtra 4):

c8.s9.19

A. Riss, Y. Khodorovsky

c8.s9.20

Production

c8.s9.21

of

c8.s9.22

Ferroalloys

c8.s9.23

FOREIGN LANGUAGES PUBLISHING HOUSE Moscow

Linked texts (12)