The Inner Conflict of Tradition: Essays in Indian Ritual, Kingship, and Society c19.s3.78

c19.s3.78

79. On brahmacārin and vrātya, cf. M. Bloomfield, *The Atharvaveda and the Gopatha Brahmana* (Strassburg, 1909), 94. J. W. Hauer rejects this connection on the ground that the vrātya book, AV 15, does not mention brahmacarya (*Der Vrātya* [Stuttgart, 1927], 16.f.). Hauer further considers the vrātya as an exponent of non-brahminical religion and therefore has to separate him rigidly from the brahmacārin. In my opinion, both vrātya and brahmacārin belong to the preclassical stage of development, where the meaning of brahmacārin was certainly not yet limited to that of a young man learning the Vedas. On the vrātya as predecessor of the classical dīkṣita, see my “Vrātya and Sacrifice,” 11ff.