The Inner Conflict of Tradition: Essays in Indian Ritual, Kingship, and Society c16.26

c16.26

Now one may raise the question whether this was perceived as a problem by the participants. The answer is that it was. Thus hierarchic interdependence requires that the brahmin perform sacrifice for the king, who provides him with sustenance and protection by "worshipping" him with gifts. This relationship is a standard item. But here the problem of the two orders comes out sharply, as is well illustrated by a caste text from Gajarat, dealing with the Modh brahmins. The brahmins, even when entreated by the divine king Rāma, refuse to perform the sacrifice for him and to accept his largesse. The refusal can only be overcome by the supernatural intervention of the gods. But then new obstacles come in the way of the sacrifice: "All the signs were inauspicious, the fire would not take the oblation, the brahmins could not recite the sacred formulas, and the gods were not favorably inclined." Again supernatural intervention is invoked, and finally the sacrifice is successfully completed. Even so, some of the brahmins—significantly called Caturvedis, that is, those who possess all four Vedas—hold out and keep refusing the king's munificent gifts.³² The point of the story is that, although the connection between the king's power and the brahmin's authority is indeed required, the exclusivism of the Veda and the brahmin's purity forbid him to enter into this relationship with the king. Ironically, the same texts that require the connection between king and brahmin threaten the brahmin who responds to the king's advances with losing the purity that was the reason for the king's seeking his association. The brahmin loses his superior status, and the king ends up with an empty shell.³³ The problem is deadlocked—or one compromises, as the situation requires, knowing full well that one does.