Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Inner Conflict of Tradition: Essays in Indian Ritual, Kingship, and Society c6.s5: 11

The Inner Conflict of Tradition: Essays in Indian Ritual, Kingship, and Society c6.s5

Language
English

11

c6.s5.1

It is often thought that the institution of renunciation emerged as a protest against brahminical orthodoxy or that it originated in non-brahminical or even non-Aryan circles.⁷⁸ The theory of the four āśramas, or stages of life, would then have been an attempt at legitimizing the renunciatory modes of life and drawing them within the orbit of brahminical orthodoxy. There is of course full scope for recognizing the influence of extraneous beliefs and practices, for instance, in the matter of various forms of ascetism. But the important point is that these influences do not seem to have made a decisive irruption in the development of religious thought. They seem rather to have fitted themselves into the orthogenetic, internal development of Vedic thought. Or one might say that these extraneous beliefs and practices were not in principle dissimilar from those that obtained among the adherents of the preclassical ritual.

c6.s5.2

The ritual is usually thought of as belonging to the sphere of the householder, but it is possible to find traces of the other modes of life in the classical theory as well. The four āśramas divide themselves neatly in two parts: life in the world as a householder (*gṛhastha*) and life outside the world, either as a Vedic student (*brahmacārin*), as a forest dweller (*vānaprastha*), or as a roaming mendicant (*pravrājaka*, *saṃnyāsin*). The solidarity of the various modes of life outside the world seems to be borne out by the possibility of passing immediately from the brahmacārin's to the other modes of life outside the world without living first as a householder. These modes of life outside the world correspond to the stages through which the sacrificer has to pass. The brahmacārin corresponds to the dīkṣita; not only are their observances and dress similar, but the connection between brahmacārin and vrātya and between vrātya and dīkṣita suggests that they were originally variants of the same basic type.⁷⁹

c6.s5.3

As to the modes of the life in the forest and the life of the mendicant, the ritual texts contain some interesting information. At the *abhijit* and the *viśvajit* sacrifices, the sacrifier spends all his possessions in dakṣiṇās or he gives a thousand cows, which is tantamount to giving all, as *Kauṣītaki Brāhmaṇa* 25. 14 declares. The number thousand being fairly ubiquitous as the number of dakṣiṇās to be given at various types of sacrifices, we may assume that the idea of giving one's all, either symbolically or in reality, in dakṣiṇās, underlies much of the śrauta ritual. Having given away his possessions, the sacrificer then retires with his wife, in a kind of renewed dīkṣā, to the forest. According to the prescription in the *Jaiminīya Brāhmaṇa*, this period lasts twelve days.⁸⁰ During three days, he and his wife live on roots and fruits they collect in the forest; then they stay for three days in a tribal (*niṣāda*) settlement; next they resort for three days to alien people (*jana*), explained as either a vaiśya or a rival (*bhrātṛvya*);⁸¹ and the last three days they stay with their own relatives (*sajana*), explained as a kṣatriya. In this way, the sacrificer obtains the various types of food associated with his hosts and in the end becomes (re)established in śrī, good fortune.

c6.s5.4

In these rules we can recognize a perhaps not too distant reflection of the preclassical alternating pattern: the sacrificer offers the sacrificial banquet and presents to the others; then he regains what he has spent by resorting to the forest and going as a guest to other people to be entertained in his turn. Having thus recouped strength, he finally returns home, possibly to start on a new cycle. A similar alternation seems to have been the basis of the vrātya ritual, which even in its normalized classical form shows a markedly agonistic character. Perhaps we can even recognize this pattern in the epics, in the vicissitudes of the Pāṇḍavas and of Rāma. The fortunes of the Pāṇḍavas especially alternate between royal court and forest, and the joints of the cycle, the points where the reversals take place, are marked by large-scale contests. It would seem to me that here perhaps lies also the origin of the well-known figure of the exiled (*aparuddha*) king, who turns up in the ritual texts with disconcerting frequency.⁸² In this connection, it is interesting that it is said that one should renounce the world in times of distress, when overcome by old age or when vanquished by the enemy.⁸³

c6.s5.5

In the course of development, the two poles of life in the world and life in the forest have been dissociated. This dissociation is part of the general evolution of the ritual outlined above. The ancient cycle of exchange and reversal has been broken up, the participating parties have been separated, and the sacrificer has been left alone on the place of sacrifice. By the same token, the cycle of alternating sacrifices to which the parties invited each other has been broken. The sacrifice no longer derives its value from its place in a cyclical concatenation, but each sacrifice has a value of its own. Sacrifices have even become independent of the time cycle, having lost in many cases the periodicity of performance and the connection with a particular season.

c6.s5.6

In the same way, the cycle of the modes of life alternating between the community and the forest—which was no other than the cycle of the reciprocal prestations—has been cut in two. Consequently, the renouncer cannot return anymore to his previous state as the *viśvajit* sacrificer did. Where there was cyclical alternation, brahminical theory has substituted a rectilineal succession. The transition can be illustrated by what the ritual texts teach about a sacrifice similar to the *viśvajit* and abhijit, the *sarvamedha*. At this ceremony, the sacrificer should give in dakṣiṇās all he has conquered, and having resumed the fires in himself, he should betake himself to the forest.⁸⁴ After the sarvamedha, however, the sacrificer does not return anymore.

Linked texts (2)