The Inner Conflict of Tradition: Essays in Indian Ritual, Kingship, and Society c19.s3.51

c19.s3.51

52. The loss in meaning that the sacrificer-officiant bond underwent in the classical doctrine seems to be underlined by the ritual dissolution of the bond at the end of the Soma sacrifice (Caland and Henry, *L'Agniṣṭoma*, no. 251), corresponding to the tānūnaptra rite at the beginning. It is perhaps significant that Caland notes (*ĀpŚS* 13. 18. 2) that there is no older authority for this rite of dissolution. In the classical doctrine, the sacrifice is a closed circuit and stands outside the religious life of the community as a whole. Theoretically there is a possibility here for a viable relationship between patron and officiant. The patron is transformed into a brahmin for the duration of the sacrifice through the dīkṣā (in the classical doctrine it is the dīkṣā, not the sacrifice, that purifies the patron and transforms him into a brahmin). At the end of the ceremony, he returns to his previous status and the bond with the officiants is dissolved. But viewed in this way, the patron-officiant relationship is merely theoretical. The only practical point is that the dakṣiṇās stay with the officiant. The officiant might, in his turn, act as a patron, but this would imply a relapse into the dualist system of exchanges. The classical system, when fully developed, had sealed its own end.