The Inner Conflict of Tradition: Essays in Indian Ritual, Kingship, and Society c6.s6.8

c6.s6.8

In the same way, the brahmin—that is, of course, the ideal brahmin—though rigidly separate from the world, can entertain relations with it. It is significant that at the śrāddha one should neither invite a friend nor an enemy—apparently a reference to the agonistic pattern of ritual—but an impartial (*madhyastha*) brahmin.⁹⁵ It is also recommended that he should be neither a teacher nor an officiating priest,⁹⁶ as is in keeping with the individualization of the ritual in general. Such a brahmin, who remains outside and above the oppositional relations, is not touched by impurity. He can accept food and gifts without accepting at the same time the impurity, as the purohita or the ṛtvij has to do. Of particular importance here is the motif of “knowledge.” The brahmin invited to the śrāddha must be entirely devoted to it.⁹⁷ In general, the importance of knowledge in accepting gifts is stressed. It would seem to me that this knowledge refers to the knowledge of the equivalences through which the brahmin realizes his cosmic identification. By virtue of this knowledge, “evil does not overcome him, he overcomes all evil; evil does not burn him, he burns all evil,” as the *Bṛhad-Āraṇyaka* says of the true brahmin.⁹⁸ *Manu* 3. 187 speaks of the knowledge of the rules for accepting gifts, but even so it is not to be lost sight of that these rules also contain a rite through which the donee identifies himself with the cosmic man Prajāpati.⁹⁹