Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v7.c96.s1: Chapter XXXVI. Fundamental and leading characteristics of Hindu culture and civilization

History of Dharmaśāstra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v7.c96.s1

Language
English

Contents

Chapter XXXVI. Fundamental and leading characteristics of Hindu culture and civilization

v7.c96.s1.2

It is necessary to gather together the threads scattered over six thousand pages of the History of Dharmaśāstra and to emphasize the fundamental and leading characteristics and conceptions of Hindu culture and civilization.

v7.c96.s1.3

The word Hindu (in the form 'Hidu') appears to have been applied by the Persian²⁶⁰⁰ Emperors Darius (522-486 B. C.) and Xerxes (486-465 B C.) to the territory and people to the west and to the east of the great river Sindhu, while the Greeks referred to the people in the same region as 'Indoi', from which comes the word 'Indian'. Herodotus in his History (Loeb series) states that the Thracians were the biggest nation in the world next to the Indians (Book 5 para 3, vol. III p. 5) and that the Indians constituted the 20th province of the Persian Empire and paid 360 talents of gold dust as tribute. The word 'Sindhu' occurs more than two hundred times in the Ṛgveda alone in the singular as well as in the plural. The words 'Sindhavaḥ' and 'Sapta Sindhūn' occur more frequently than Sindhu in the singular. Indra is often described as having let loose the seven Sindhus for flowing (Ṛg. I. 32.12, II. 12.12, IV. 28.1, VIII. 96.1, X. 43.3). In such passages what is meant is the great river Sindhu and its tributaries (or possibly its seven mouths).

v7.c96.s1.4

²⁶⁰⁰ Vide the Naqsh-i-Rustam Inscription of Dāraya-ush (Darius) and the Persepolis Inscription of Kshayārsha (Xerxes) in 'Select Inscriptions' edited by Dr. D. C. Sircar, No. 4 p. 10 and No 5 p. 12. Sanskrit 'sa' is changed to 'ha' even now in some parts of our country. The ancient Parsi scripture Vendidad (S B.E. Vol IV p. 2) mentions sixteen lands out of which nine can be identified, the 15th being Hapta Hindu (Sapta Sindhu)

v7.c96.s1.5

Many passages of the Ṛgveda where the singular is employed refer to the river Sindhu alone (as in Ṛg. II. 15.6, IV. 30.12, V. 4.9 &c). In Ṛg. II. 15.6 it is said that Indra made Sindhu flow northwards. This would obviously refer to the first part of the river flowing northward from the Himālayas. Pāṇini uses the word 'Sindhu' as the name of a country in IV. 3.93 ('Saindhava' means one who or whose ancestors lived in the Sindhu country). For the fluctuating limits of Āryāvarta, vide H. of Dh. Vol. II pp. 11-16 and p. 1525, note 2483 above, where Ṛg. passages about Bharatas are set out and it is shown that the Purāṇas speak of Bhārata-varṣa as of the same extent as that of modern India and the name is said to have been due to Bharata, son of Duṣyanta and Śakuntalā. Bhāratavarṣa occurs in the Hathigumpha Inscription of Khāravela (line 10 on p. 79) which cannot be assigned to a date later than the 1st century²⁶⁰¹ B. C. It has been shown above (p. 1016 n. 1649) that Aśoka in one of his edicts refers to his kingdom as Jambudvīpa. Even in these days in the rather long *saṅkalpa* (declaration) at the beginning of a religious act in Mahārāṣṭra, occur the words 'Jambudvīpe Bhāratavarṣe Bauddhāvatāre Godāvaryā dakṣiṇe tīre' &c. Therefore, the proper word to be used by us for our country should be Bhāratavarṣa. It may be said that our culture and civilization had throughout the past ages a geographical background. The Constitution of India has recognized this in its very first Article which runs 'India, that is Bharat, shall be a union of States'. In view of the fact, however, that the words 'Hindu' and 'Indian' have been employed for centuries by foreign as well as our own writers, this work will employ these words instead of 'Bhāratavarṣa'.

v7.c96.s1.6

²⁶⁰¹ Vide E. I. vol. XX pp. 71-89. Scholars differ about the date of this Inscription, Jayaswal holding (*ibid.* p. 77) that it belongs to the first half of the 2nd century B. C., while N. N. Ghosh in J G J. R. I vol. VI pp. 97-106 opines that it belongs to the last quarter of the first century B. C.

v7.c96.s1.7

The words 'culture' and 'civilization' are used as synonyms by some writers, while some others regard them as quite distinguishable. These two are defined in various ways by scholars. A few definitions are set out here by way of sample.

v7.c96.s1.8

Dr. Tylor states (in 'Primitive Culture' vol. I p. 1, Murray, London, 1871) 'Culture or civilization is that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society'. Matthew Arnold's definition of culture in his lengthy essay on 'Culture and Anarchy' (1869, Preface p. VIII) is rather restricted in scope. He regards culture as a 'pursuit of our total perfection by means of getting to know, on all the matters which concern us, the best which has been thought and said in the world, and through this knowledge turning a stream of fresh and free thought upon our stock notions and habits which we know follow staunchly but mechanically, vainly imagining that there is a virtue in following them staunchly which makes up for the mischief of following them mechanically'. Prof. P. A. Sorokin in 'Social and Cultural Dynamics' (1957, p. 2) defines human culture as 'the sum total of everything which is created or modified by the conscious or unconscious activity of two or more individuals interacting with one another or conditioning one another's behaviour.²⁶⁰² Prof. Edgerton in Journal of American Oriental Society in a paper on the 'Dominant ideas in the formation of Indian Culture' (vol. 62 for 1942 pp. 151-156) understands culture as a total way of life viewed as a norm and as such approved or at least tolerated by a people as a whole and by its articulate representatives generally.

v7.c96.s1.9

²⁶⁰² Prof Sorokin (*ibid* pp 24-25) distinguishes two types of integrated cultures, one called ideational and the other sensate. None of the two has, according to him, existed in the purest form. In some cultures the first type prevails, in others the 2nd; while in still others both might mingle in equal proportions and on equal basis. This last he terms 'idealistic type' (which is not to be confused with the ideational type). Dr G S. Ghurye's 'Culture and Society' (University of Bombay Publications, 1947) is a very useful book on culture and civilization and considers at length the views of eminent writers like Emerson, Arnold, Morley, Whitehead, Russell, Laski, Wells and others. Prof. Northrop in 'Meeting of East and West' (1946) and Prof Sorokin in 'Social Philosophies in an age of crisis' (London, 1952) p 145 hold that the total culture of a nation in the East or West is not a mere heap of numerous phenomena unrelated to each other but rather as grounded in differing philosophical conceptions of the nature of man and of the universe.

v7.c96.s1.10

Prof. Toynbee in 'Civilizations on trial' (1948) states (p. 223) 'I mean by a civilization the smallest unit of historical study at which one arrives when one tries to understand the history of his own country, U. S. A., say, or U. K.' Prof. Toynbee in his latest work 'Reconsiderations' (vol. XII pp. 76-77, of his Study of History) adopts Bagbey's definition of culture as meaning 'regularities in the behaviour, internal and external, of the members of a Society, excluding those regularities which are clearly hereditary in origin' and adds that 'religious practices and institutions and, by implication, also religious beliefs and experiences are certainly a part of culture as thus defined' and mentions religion together with art, technology, social structure as examples of the elements of which culture consists (pp. 84, 95). Prof. Toynbee further says that in his volumes he employed the word 'culture' in two different senses, viz. (1) the comprehensive one in which it is used by Bagby and (2) in an exclusive sense in which the word has been current in contemporary English since the time of Matthew Arnold (*ibid.* p. 272). As regards the word 'civilization' he remarks (p. 273) that civilization is a hybrid word of modern French coinage and Johnson refused to include it in his dictionary.

v7.c96.s1.11

Archibald Robertson (in 'Rationalism in theory and practice', London, 1954 p. 62) says "when we use the word 'civilization', we mean a society with enough command over nature to raise it above savagery or barbarism. Civilization primarily means 'civitas' city life, division of labour and consequent surplus production over and above mere animal needs.' Vide Prof. S. Levi's book 'L' Inde et le Monde' p 63 translated in H Kraemer's 'World cultures and world religions' (London 1960) p. 345 where it is really a definition of Hindu civilization alone.

v7.c96.s1.12

It is unnecessary to cite further definitions. We may accept any one of these for a working hypothesis. If a distinction is to be made between the two words, one may say that the word 'culture', being neutral in meaning, is the better one to use than the word 'civilization'. The latter word is often employed for an advanced stage of social development and is contrasted with the stage of primitive or barbarian societies. People often speak of primitive culture, but rarely, if at all, of primitive civilization.

v7.c96.s1.13

During the last 6000 years of human history, several cultures and civilizations rose and fell Spengler, a militarist and anti-rationalistic author, who does not rely on religion, morality or politics but is a votary of force, examines about thirty civilizations and cultures and propounds the thesis that all of them (except seven or eight) follow a certain common pattern, viz. they are born, grow, decline and die and that once defunct they are not revived. Prof. Toynbee, a Christian (and not a militarist) in his ‘Study of History’ appears to arrive at conclusions not unlike those of Spengler, viz culture and societies have stages of childhood, maturity, senility and disintegration. On p. 758 of Volume IX of his ‘Study of History’ he gives a table for nineteen civilizations with the dates of their Epiphany (manifestation), of their breakdown and the span of growth phase in number of years. He puts down Indic civilization as starting in 1375 B C. and as breaking down in 725 B. C. and Hindu civilization as beginning in 775 A D. and its breakdown in 1175 A. D. This is, to say the least, most objectionable²⁶⁰³ The distinction between Indic and Hindu civilization is arbitrary and the dates also are so. Why the Hindu civilization is held by him as breaking down in 1175 A. D. is quite unconvincing and what was the nature or name of India’s civilization between 725 B. C. and 775 A. D. is not stated by him. On the other hand, the whole metaphor of being born, growing, maturing and disintegrating is held inapplicable to civilizations by other distinguished writers, such as J. G. De Beus in the ‘Future of the West’ (London, 1953), who remarks that civilizations are not born and they do not die (p 60), but are transformed or absorbed. Prof. Sorokin asserts (in ‘Social and Cultural Dynamics’) that his theory has little in common with the age-old theories of the life cycle of culture and societies with stages of childhood, maturity, senility and decay (p. 627). Leonard Woolf in ‘Quack, quack’ mercilessly criticizes Spengler’s theories (pp 139-160). A. L. Kroeber in ‘Style and Civilizations’ (New York, 1957) agrees with Prof. Sorokin and disagrees with Spengler and Toynbee and remarks that ‘the study of civilizations can hardly become truly scientific or scholarly until it divests itself of emotional concern about crisis, decay, collapse, extinction and doom’ (p. 160).

v7.c96.s1.14

²⁶⁰³ While these pages were passing through the press, I received Prof. Toynbee's 'Reconsiderations' (Vol XII of his Study of History) on p 184 of which he revises his opinion by saying "the maintenance of the brahmans' monopoly of the religious ministry gives Indian History a continuity throughout the period running from the Aryan invasion to the impact of the West".

v7.c96.s1.15

Among the numerous civilizations and cultures that flourished in the world there are only two (namely, the Indian and the Chinese) that have survived and kept up a continuity of tradition for four thousand years (if not more) in spite of recurrent invasions by foreign hordes like those by Persians, Greeks, Scythians, Huns, Turks and notwithstanding internal conflicts and convulsions,²⁶⁰⁴ India absorbed such people and made many Greeks, Śakas and other foreigners adopt the spiritual ideologies of India and found for them a place in the Indian social fabric (as has been and will be shown later). Not only so, India could spread its literature, religion, art and culture, not by invasions or annexations but mostly by peaceful means, viz. teaching, translations of Sanskrit works and persuasion, to Ceylon, Burma, Sumatra, Malaya, Java, Bali, Borneo, China, Tibet, Japan, Mongolia and Corea.²⁶⁰⁵ The charming island of Bali is still Hindu with four varnas, priests being called Pedanda (Pandita), consecrated water for worship being called *Toya* (vide S. Levi's 'Sanskrit texts from Bali' Preface p. XIII G. O. S.), priests still repeating one quarter of Gāyatrī, viz. 'bhargo devasya dhīmahi' (ibid. p. XV) and repeating the yajñopavīta mantra (yajñopavītam paramam etc.) in a corrupt form.

v7.c96.s1.16

²⁶⁰⁴ Vide Prof. Sorokin in 'Social and Cultural Dynamics' p. 697, Dr. Radhakrishnan in 'Religion and Society' (1947) p 101.

v7.c96.s1.17

²⁶⁰⁵ The number of works and papers on the spread of Indian culture in South East Asia, China and what is called 'Further India' or 'Greater India' is very large. A few only out of those that the author has read or consulted are mentioned here. Dr. R C. Majumdar's 'Ancient Indian Colonies' Vol I and II, 'Towards Angkor' with 42 illustrations, 1937 and 'Making of Greater India' (London, 1951), both by H. G Quaritch Wales, the latter containing a good Bibliography, 'Śrī Vijaya' by Prof. K. A Nilakanta Sastri, 1949, with an appendix of Inscriptions from 683 A D. to about the 14th century A. D., 'Civilizations of the East' by Rene Grousset, translated from French by Catherine A Phillips with 249 illustrations, Vol II on 'India, Farther India and Malaya' pp 1-343. For China's debt to India, vide Viśvabhāratī Quarterly, Vol II pp 251-261 by Prof. Liang Chi Chao, who states that Hindu scholars that came to China from 8th century A D were 24 and Chinese scholars that went to India for study from 265 A. D. to 790 A D. numbered 187 (the names of 105 out of these being ascertained), vide also 'India and China' by Prof. P. C Bagchi (Hind Kitabs, 1950), particularly chapters II and III.

v7.c96.s1.18

This persistence of Indian culture and civilization for several millennia requires an explanation and a consideration of the fundamental conceptions, values and characteristics of that civilization would enable us to offer a satisfactory one. Indian culture and civilization have a distinct personality and should not and could not be judged by purely European standards.

v7.c96.s1.19

Various peoples during past centuries had the conceit that they were far superior to others and had a mission to propagate. When the British empire became so extensive that the 'Sun never set on it', many British imperialists claimed (most hypocritically) that they were carrying on the 'white man's burden'[^2605 A] for the benefit and betterment of undeveloped and backward people (when British Imperialism was impoverishing to the utmost the people whom they governed by their colonial policies as will be briefly indicated later on so far as India is concerned). Russia claims that it has the mission to liberate the proletariat from capitalism and to bring about a Paradise on Earth. The Germans under Hitler believed that they belonged to the superior Nordic race and that they would save the world from communism. Such a conceit is not confined to the West. The Chinese believed that they alone were civilized. The Japanese hold that their Emperor is the son of Heaven. In these days some Indians also claim that spirituality existed nowhere except in India. It is quite correct to say that ancient Indian culture and civilization were based on great spiritual values. It would be entirely in the wrong to say that other people had no spirituality. All that we can at most say is that spirituality is more basic to Hinduism and was more diffused among Hindu people than anywhere else. The Manusmṛti provides that only those usages of varṇas and mixed castes that are traditionally prevalent in the country of Brahmāvarta, in Kurukṣetra, in the countries of Matsya, Pañcāla (the country called Doab) and Śūrasena (round about Mathurā) are spoken of as *sadācāra* (II. 17-19) and that all men on the earth should learn their respective duties from brāhmaṇas born in those countries The Manusmṛti excludes the countries of Madhyadeśa (as defined by it) and Āryāvarta from this provision (II 21-22). Recently, some people appear to rely on the words 'kṛṇvanto viśvam-āryam' occurring in Ṛg IX. 63. 5-6 and hold that the Veda has put forward the mission of our country as making the whole world *ārya*. But there is hardly any foundation for this conceit These words occur about the offering of Soma juice (indavaḥ) to Indra. They only mean this-these Soma libations, brown in colour,²⁶⁰⁶ (pressed from Soma plant) increase (the

v7.c96.s1.20

²⁶⁰⁶ इन्द्रं वर्धन्तो अप्तुरः कृण्वन्तो विश्वमार्यम् । अपघ्नन्तो अराव्णः ॥ सुता अनु स्वमा (*Continued from last page*) रक्षोऽभ्यर्पन्ति घघ्नतः । इन्द्रं गच्छन्त इन्दवः ॥ ऋ IX. 63.5-6; compare verse 14 of the same hymn एते धामान्यार्या शुक्रा ऋतस्य धारया । वाजं गोमन्तमक्षरन् ॥ The words धामान्यार्या mean 'the noble dwellings or noble statutes' (of Gods)

v7.c96.s1.21

[^2605 A]: *Vide* Leonard Woolf in 'Barbarians at the Gate' (London, 1939) p 54 for saying that 'white man's burden' was another name for economic imperialism and also p. 162 might of) Indra, making the waters to fall (from the sky), destroy hostile men coming to Indra, making all (the whole environment) noble they reach their proper sphere.' There is here no reference whatever to Vedic people making the whole world Ārya. At the most these verses may be interpreted as suggesting that Soma sacrifices to Indra would make the world *Ārya*. Then there is no message in it which modern Indians can give and spread. Soma plant itself became unavailable in Vedic times and substitutes had to be utilized. And hardly any solemn Vedic sacrifices have been performed for centuries in India and very rarely, if at all, Soma sacrifices.

v7.c96.s1.22

During the last four or five hundred years the Western nations professing Christianity started on a career of conquest, exploitation of undeveloped countries and peoples, colonial empires, use of the discoveries of science for competitive purposes, the amassing of wealth with such ideologies as those expressed in the words 'everybody should be for himself and the devil take the hind-most.' But the devastation and atrocities of the last two world wars and the possibility of the annihilation of the human race or a very large part of it by atomic warfare have now opened the eyes of many thoughtful leaders and people in the West that, if modern civilization is to be saved, they must cultivate regard for spiritual values, love of righteousness and justice, sympathy with the oppressed, and active belief in the brotherhood of man. Though our ancient sages and lawgivers laid great emphasis on spiritul values, a very large majority of our people and so-called leaders have been wanting in the practice of those values for centuries. Instead of merely praising our past glories, the present author would humbly request all educated Indians to be introspective and to ponder over certain questions that are often asked and seek to find the reasons for the loss of our freedom from the 13th century onwards. (1) Why Hindus were generally found inferior to the invaders, Persian, Greek, Scythian, Turk, English, even though Indians far outnumbered and even though most invaders were impressed by the courage and perfect indifference to death on the part of India's soldiers; (2) Why Hindus could not form a permanent organized State comprising the whole of India for many centuries; (3) why did they fail to take advantage of the splendid natural resources of India to excel in manufactures, commerce and industry. We must enter upon a thoroughgoing and honest inquiry into our past to find our own defects (political and others) that led to our fall for centuries and try to remove those defects as quickly as possible, now that Bhārata has won independence after centuries. There was no political unity of the whole of India till the British began to rule over the whole of India. There were constant wars among Hindu kingdoms and princes. For example, because the Marathas invaded Bengal, the Bengalis hated Marathas and were jubilant over the defeat of the Marathas by the British. We Indians hardly had any deep-seated feeling of all Indians being one people or of nationalism till the 2nd half of the 19th century A. D. This chapter cannot discuss at length the subject of the causes of the downfall of India, politically and in other respects. But a few remarks would not be altogether out of place here.

v7.c96.s1.23

Hinduism is a combination of many systems and religious ideologies including Vedic ritualism, Vedāntic thought, Vaiṣṇavism, Śaivism, Śāktism and primeval cults, adapted to the requirements of different types of men and communities with great disparities of intellectual and spiritual attainments. There were only a few matters that would be said to have bound most of the Hindus to each other, viz the doctrine of Karma and Punarjanma, the unifying influence of the vast and venerated Sanskrit literature that gradually enriched the regional languages, the veneration in which the Vedas were held by all Hindus as the final authority in religious matters, though only a small minority could learn and understand them, the geographical unity of the country from the Himālaya to Cape Comorin emphasized by the Purāṇas and by the pilgrimages to holy places from Mānasa lake and Badrinath to Rāmeśvara. These few elements, however, were not enough to neutralize the causes that militated against effective unity amongst all Hindus. Most of the *ācāryas* and saints laid too much emphasis on other-worldliness and Vedānta and did not lay equal or greater emphasis on or recognize the importance of active and thorough performance of people's duties to themselves, to their families, and to society, the result being that many people, whether fit or unfit, tried to become otherworldly and did not actively pursue worldly values with righteousness. Another cause of disunity and downfall was the great disparity between the high metaphysical teaching of the whole world being one and the treatment meted out to lower classes and untouchables, owing to ideas of exclusiveness, of purity and pollution by touch &c. The education of the masses was greatly neglected²⁶⁰⁷ and the higher classes did not seriously mind who ruled the country as long as their life was not much disturbed. The great patriot and revolutionary Savarkar, hammered on seven fetters by which Hindu society was bound for centuries, viz. untouchability, prohibitions of several kinds viz sea travel, of mutual dining among the hundreds of castes and subcastes, of intercaste marriages, of Veda study against several castes, prohibition against following certain occupations and prohibition against re-admission to Hinduism of people that were converted to other religious faiths by force, fraud or ignorance.

v7.c96.s1.24

²⁶⁰⁷ Vide Works of Vivekananda (Mayavati ed. Vol III. pp 191-192, 428-29, V. 122, VI. 224) The census of 1951 disclosed that there were fifty-one million untouchables in Bhārata.

v7.c96.s1.25

Our cultural history shows some central features which may be mentioned in one place here. The first is that there has been an unbroken religious tradition from the Vedic times almost to the present day. Vedic mantras are still employed throughout the whole of India in religious rites and ceremonies by all brāhmaṇas and by a large number of the members of castes claiming to be Kṣatriyas and Vaiśyas. The Vedic gods are not entirely forgotten. Kindling of Agni is still required at the beginning of all rites, Viṣṇu (though not so frequently praised as Indra, Agni or Varuṇa, yet often enough, is praised in Ṛg I. 22. 16-21, I. 154. 1-6, I. 155. 1-6, VI. 69 1-8, both Indra and Viṣṇu are praised in Ṛg. VII. 99. 1-7, Atharvaveda VII. 27. 4-9) and Śiva (Rudra of the Ṛgveda, transformed a great deal yet highly praised in Ṛg. II 1.6, II. 33,9, X. 92.9 where he is spoken of as Śiva) are even now the principal deities worshipped In the morning and evening Sandhyā worship, brāhmaṇas in many parts of India still repeat respectively verses addressed to Mitra (Ṛg III. 59) and Varuṇa (Ṛg I. 25). The second feature is that, India being a vast country (as large as the whole of Europe minus Russia), central authority in political power never existed (except perhaps for a short time under Aśoka). The ideal was that of supreme ruler (*samrāt* or *cakravartin*). But, if a king submitted, acknowledged the prowess of the successful conqueror and paid some tribute, no samrāt troubled himself to look into the affairs of the kingdoms ruled by petty kings. There could, therefore, be no common front against a foreign invader, no uniformity in laws, customs and practices and there were frequent wars among kings and petty princes. A third feature was that there did not develop a serious clash of cultures, there was tolerance about varying ideologies and beliefs and constant adaptation to create harmony in diversity.

v7.c96.s1.26

It makes one sad to find that not a single Hindu scholar resembling Alberuni came forward to inquire into the causes of the successful invasions of India by Mahmud of Gazni and later hordes. Intellectuals were mostly engaged at least from the 11th century onwards in composing works of thousands of pages on such topics as Vrata, Dāna, Śrāddha (as the very learned minister Hemādri did) or in mental gymnastics about logic, Vedānta, Poetics and similar subjects and appear to have bestowed little thought on finding means of meeting the onslaught of foreigners or the remedies for removing their own weaknesses and defects. There were also other causes of the downfall of Hindus. Our intellectuals did not or could not pursue and make their own discoveries of science and technology made in the world from the 15th century A. D. Shahaji purchased firearms from foreigners. Neither he, nor his great son Shivaji, the founder of the Maratha empire, started factories for the manufacture of up-to-date firearms and cannon. Similarly, our people did not properly appreciate the role of a powerful navy. If the Hindus or their rulers had possessed a powerful navy they would have been able to nip in the bud the ambitions of the Portuguese, the French and the English.

v7.c96.s1.27

We must now set out the important characteristics of Hindu culture and civilization.

v7.c96.s1.28

1. The most striking conception even as early as the Rgveda is that there is only one Reality or Essence, in spite of the fact that people speak of it or worship it as Indra, Mitra, Varuna, Agni &c (Rg I. 164 46, VIII. 58. 1, X. 129. 2, q. above on p. 1487). In the Mahābhārata, Purāṇas, in classical Sanskrit Poetry and even in medieval times, when there were various cults and schisms, such as the worship of Viṣṇu or Śiva or Śakti, almost all Hindus had an inner consciousness that God is one though called by various names; vide p 118 note 306, p 973 and note 1593 above, and Harivaṁśa (Viṣṇuparva 25. 31), Kumārasaṁbhava VII. 44.

v7.c96.s1.29

2. From this conception arose the great tolerance that Hinduism at all times showed to freedom of thought and worship, which has been dwelt upon by the present author in H. of Dh. Vol. II p. 388 note 928, Vol. V. pp. 970-71, 1011-1018 (references to Aśoka's edicts and Yāj. I. 343 and numerous instances of Indian kings and donors of one persuasion making gifts to temples and institutions of other cults and persuasions); vide also Gītā 7. 21-22 and 9 23. To hunt down heretics, real or supposed, has been a favourite business of some religions²⁶⁰⁸ for centuries. This has been absent from Hinduism. Hindusim is not bound by any fixed creed nor does it rely on a single book²⁶⁰⁸ or a prophet as its founder. All that it requires is that man shoud be God-fearing and what matters is not correct beliefs but moral conduct and social behaviour. Hindus do not deny the truth of any religion or reject the validity of another man's religious experience. A verse²⁶⁰⁹ quoted below breathes a broad-minded approach to religious beliefs and worship 'May Hari, the Lord of the three worlds, bestow on you the desired reward, whom the Śaivas worship as Śiva, Vedāntins as brahman, the Bauddhas as Buddha, the Naiyāykas proficient in the means of knowledge as the Creator, those devoted to Jain teachings as Arhat and Mīmāṁsakas as Yajña'. The great logician Udayana who composed his Lakṣanāvalī in śaka 906 (984 A. D.) breathes in his Nyāyakusumāñjali the same spirit as is contained in the verse translated above Tolerance is thus of the essence of Hinduism and even an atheist is often met with amusement and not with persecution.

v7.c96.s1.30

²⁶⁰⁸ For Biblical intolerance one may read Jeremiah 29. 8-9, Colossians II. 8, Galatians I 7-9

v7.c96.s1.31

²⁶⁰⁹ यं शैवाः समुपासते शिव इति ब्रह्मेति वेदान्तिनो बौद्धा बुद्ध इति प्रमाणपटवः कर्तेति नैयायिकाः। अर्हन्नित्यथ जैनशासनरताः कर्मेति मीमांसका सोऽयं वो विदधातु वाञ्छितफलं त्रैलोक्यनाथो हरिः॥ सुभाषितरत्नभाण्डागार (Nir ed of 1935 p. 15 verse 27). न्यायकुसुमाञ्जलि I 2 is: स्वर्गापवर्गयोर्मार्गमामनन्ति मनीषिण । यदुपास्तिमसावत्र परमात्मा निरूप्यते॥ इह यद्यपि ये कमपि पुरुषार्थमर्थयमानाः शुद्धबुद्धस्वभाव इत्यौपनिषदाः। आदिविद्वान् सिद्ध इति कापिलाः। क्लेशकर्मविपाकाशयैरपरामृष्टो निर्माणकायमधिष्ठाय सम्प्रदायप्रद्योतकोऽनुग्राहश्चेति पातञ्जलाः। लोकवेदविरुद्धैरपि निर्लेपः स्वतन्त्रश्चेति महापाशुपताः। शिव इति शैवाः। पुरुषोत्तम इति वैष्णवाः। पितामह इति पौराणिकाः। यज्ञपुरुष इति याज्ञिकाः। निरावरण इति दिगम्बराः। उपास्यत्वेन देशित इति मीमासकाः। यावदुक्तरूपपक्ष इति नैयायिकाः। लोकव्यवहारसिद्ध इति चार्वाकाः। किंबहुना कारवोऽपि यं विश्वकर्मेत्युपासते॥.

v7.c96.s1.32

III. Working on the doctrine that there is only one Essence or Godhead, the sages of the Upaniṣads arrived at the conclusion that the individual self is non-different from the one Essence, that all manifoldness is only apparent, that even fishermen, slaves, gamblers and the inanimate world are non-different from it. This Vedānta doctrine is one of the most characteristic features of Hinduism and is India's great contribution to the spiritual development of man, though there are sporadic instances of this doctrine having been held by some ancient philosophers in other lands. This idea of one in the many and many in one is the very core or centre of Vedānta. This has been dealt with above (vide pp. 1499-1500 notes 2451-52 and pp. 1509-10). In Europe the study of philosophy is an end in itself. In ancient India this idea of the unity in diversity was made the basis of education and sociology and it was held that the realization of this unity in one's life was the highest freedom (moksa).

v7.c96.s1.33

The Upanisadic teaching is a universal doctrine in which all men of good will can meet and combine, in whatever religion they might have been brought up from their childhood. Many illustrations are adduced in the Upanisads to bring home non-difference to the inquirer about the Essence. But two are very apt. The Mundaka Upanisad (III. 2. 8) declares "just as rivers flowing (towards the ocean) become merged in the ocean after giving up their names and forms, so the man who realizes (knows), being free from name and form, attains the divine Person that is higher than the highest". The Praśnopanisad has (VI.5) the same illustration in prose. The Kathopanisad IV. 15 states 'just as pure water poured into pure water assumes the same form (appearance), similarly the soul of the sage who has realized (the Essence) becomes the Ātman (Self).' Deussen in his address on 20th February 1893 before the Asiatic Society of Bombay (in J. B. B. R. A. S. No. 18 for 1893 Art 20 pp. 330-340) after quoting the verse of Mundaka III. 2. 8 remarks "It is not the falling of the drops in the infinite ocean, it is the whole ocean returning to that which he really is and has never ceased to be, to his own all-pervading eternal almighty nature" and concludes (p. 340) "Vedānta in its unfalsified form is the strongest support for morality, is the greatest consolation in the sufferings of life and death; Indians, keep to it." Vide V. S. II. 3.43, where reference is made to Atharvaveda 'Brahma dāśā brahma dāsā brahmeme kitavā uta' (occurring in the Paippalāda version as shown by Prof. Durgamohan Bhattacharya in his paper on a palm-leaf ms. of the Paippalāda-saṃhitā in Adyar Library Bulletin, vol. XXV, parts 1-4 ).

v7.c96.s1.34

IV. From very ancient Vedic times one of the fundamental conceptions of our Indian culture has been the idea of three spiritual and religious debts owed by a person to the sages, gods and *pitṛs*, which he paid off by the study of the ancient lore, by sacrifices, and by having a son or sons respectively. This subject has been dealt with at length in the H. of Dh. Vol. II pp. 270, 425, 560-61, 676, Vol. III p. 416 and above, p. 1318 note 2168. To these three debts the Mahābhārata added a fourth viz. the debt owed to all men paid off by goodness ( vide H. of Dh. Vol. III p. 416 n. 675 ). Śabara on Jaimini VI. 2.31 explains that this doctrine is not confined to brāhmaṇas but to all members of the three classes, the word 'brāhmaṇa' used in the Tai S. and other Vedic texts being only illustrative

v7.c96.s1.35.1

V. Another set of values is contained in the conception of *puruṣārthas* (ends or goals of human endeavour) viz. Dharma (right conduct), Artha (economics, politics and civics), Kāma (life of sex, of pleasures and aesthetics), Mokṣa (salvation, release or recovery by the self of its real nature and freedom from the bondage of low desires and aims). Mokṣa is said to be the highest goal (*paramapuruṣārtha*) and the first three are spoken of as 'trivarga'. The concept of Dharma is a far-reaching one and has been emphasized from very ancient times and refers to the principles which men have to observe in their lives and in social relations. This subject of puruṣārthas and of dharma has been dealt with at some length in H of Dh. Vol. II pp. 2-11 and Vol. III pp. 8-10 and 239-241. Therefore, only a few matters would be briefly emphasized here. It has been shown above on pp. 1-21 how the Ṛgveda had three words viz. *ṛta* (cosmic order), *vrata* (laws or ordinances deemed to be laid down by a god or gods) and *dharma* (religious rites or sacrifices or fixed principles), how gradually *ṛta* receded into the background and 'satya' took its place and Dharma became an all-embracing conception and vrata came to be restricted to sacred vows and rules of conduct. When a teacher was about to take leave of the pupil at the end of the latter's studenthood he placed in his final exhortation (Tai. Up. I. 11) Truth as the first and Dharma as next to it (*satyaṃ vada dharmaṃ cara*). The Br. Up. I.

v7.c96.s1.35.2

4. 14 equates Satya with Dharma. One of the noblest prayers occurs in the Br. Up. (I 3. 28) 'from falsehood lead me unto truth, from darkness unto light, from death unto life eternal'. The same Upanisad in V. 2. 3 inculcates on all men the three cardinal virtues of self-restraint (*dama*), charity (*dāna*) and compassion (*dayā*). The Chān. Up. V. 10 quotes a verse 'the thief stealing gold, the drinker of liquor, one who dishonours his guru's bed and the murderer of a brāhmaṇa—these four fall (into hell) and the fifth is one who associates with them.' It would be noticed that this ancient verse contains some of the ten commandments of the Bible. In spite of these (noble) Upanisadic teachings of Dharma and morality, Prof. Keith (in 'Religion and Philosophy of the Veda and Upanisads', Vol. II. p. 584, ed. of 1925) makes the pontifical but perverse pronouncement that 'the ethical content of the Upanisads is negligible and valueless'. It is not necessary to combat here his views. Most scholars would rather follow Schopenhauer (quoted in S. B. E. Vol I. p. LXI) and Deussen (quoted above in Vol. II. p. 424) rather than Keith. The concept of Dharma began to occupy the highest position in the times of the Upanisads. The Br. Up I. 4.14 states 'there is nothing higher than Dharma.' The Tai.²⁶¹⁰ Āraṇyaka avers 'Dharma is the support (or prop) of the whole world'. The Mahābhārata and Manu repeatedly refer to the high value of Dharma.

v7.c96.s1.35.3

The Mahābhārata claims that everything concerning the four puruṣārthas is contained in it and that what is not contained in it about them would be found in no other work. In Udyogaparva it is stated 'Dharma is so called because of its character as the sustainer of all beings.' Vanaparva and Manu both declare 'Dharma when violated kills the violator, when preserved it preserves man, therefore, Dharma should not be violated lest Dharma might destroy us.' Vyāsa winds up the Mahābhārata with the solemn appeal 'with arms up-raised I here raise a loud cry, but no one listens to me, from Dharma spring wealth and (satisfaction of) all desires, why is Dharma not resorted to? One should not give up Dharma for some desired object, nor through fear nor from greed nor even for the sake of life itself. Dharma is eternal, pleasure and pain are impermanent, the individual self is eternal, but the conditions (under which self works) are impermanent.' The Mahābhārata passages quoted in n. 18 p. 8 of H. of Dh. Vol. II say 'the three (Dharma, Artha, Kāma) are meant for all men, that Dharma is the best of the three, that Artha is middling and Kāma is the lowest and that if there be conflict then Dharma must be followed and the other two abandoned.' This shows that Artha and Kāma were made subservient to Dharma (the ethical code) and all three were subservient to the spiritual goal. Our Śāstras do not at all prescribe asceticism for all, but they recognized a scale of values. The Manusmṛti (IV.

v7.c96.s1.35.4

3 and 15) provides 'one should accumulate wealth for securing only his needs by actions proper for his station (varṇa &c) and without harm to his body. One should not desire to acquire wealth by excessive attachment nor by actions condemned by Śāstra nor when he has already enough wealth nor from any kind of person (a sinner or like), even when he is in straightened circumstances.' Āp. Dh. S. (II. 8. 20 22-23) declares that man should enjoy all such pleasures as are not against Dharma; by doing so he secures both worlds (this life and life in the next world). Gautama Dharmasūtra²⁶¹¹ IX. 46-47 and Yāj. I. 115 practically say the same thing. In the Bhagavadgītā (VII. 11) Kṛṣṇa identifies himself with Kāma that is not in conflict with Dharma. The Arthaśāstra of Kauṭilya no doubt says (I. 7) that 'Artha is the chief among the three puruṣārthas', but he also provides that one should enjoy a life of pleasures in such a way as not to conflict with Dharma and Artha, that one should not lead a life devoid of pleasures altogether. The Anuśāsanaparva (chap. 111. 18-19) states that Dharma, Artha and Kāma are the three prizes (fruits) of human life, these three should be striven for but in such a way as not to coflict with Dharma'. The Manusmṛti (V. 56) declares that eating flesh, drinking intoxicants and sexual intercourse are not sinful in themselves;

v7.c96.s1.35.5

all beings are naturally inclined to these, but abstention (from these) leads to great rewards (and therefore Śāstra emphasizes abstention)'. The Rāmāyaṇa (Araṇyakāṇḍa 9.30) contains a statement similar to Svargārohaṇaparva 5. 62.

v7.c96.s1.36

²⁶¹⁰ धर्मो विश्वस्य जगतः प्रतिष्ठा । लोके धर्मिष्ठं प्रजा उपसर्पन्ति । धर्मेण पापमपनुदति धर्मे सर्वं प्रतिष्ठितं तस्माद्धर्मं परमं वदन्ति। तै आ X. 63, महानारायणोप०, धर्मे चार्थे च कामे च मोक्षे च भरतर्षभ । यदिहास्ति तदन्यत्र यन्नेहास्ति न तत्क्वचित् ॥ आदिपर्व 62 53 = स्वर्गारोहणपर्व 5 50, vide also आदि° 62 23. धारणाद्धर्म इत्याहुर्धर्मो धारयते प्रजाः । उद्योग 89.67, 137 9, धर्म एव हतो हन्ति धर्मो रक्षति रक्षितः । तस्माद्धर्मो न हन्तव्यो मा नो धर्मो हतोऽवधीत् ॥ मनु VIII 15 वनपर्व 313.128 is the same, except that the third pāda is तस्माद्धर्मं न त्यजामि, ऊर्ध्वबाहुर्विरौम्येष न च कश्चिच्छृणोति माम् । धर्मादर्थश्च कामश्च स किमर्थं न सेव्यते ॥ न जातु कामान्न भयान्न लोभाद्धर्मं जह्याज्जीवितस्यापि हेतो । नित्यो धर्मः सुखदुःखे त्वनित्ये जीवो नित्यो हेतुरस्य त्वनित्यः ॥ स्वर्गारोहणपर्व 5, 62-63

v7.c96.s1.37

²⁶¹¹ न पूर्वाह्णमध्यन्दिनापराह्णानफलान् कुर्याद्यथाशक्ति धर्मार्थकामेभ्यः। तेषु तु धर्मोत्तरः स्यात्। गौ ध सू IX. 46-47, धर्मार्थकामान् स्वे काले यथाशक्ति न हापयेत्॥ या. 1.115, मिताक्षरा comments 'धर्मार्थकामान् स्वोचितकाले यथाशक्ति न परित्यजेत्। यथासम्भवं सेवेतेत्यर्थः।' धर्मश्चार्थश्च कामश्च त्रितय जीविते फलम्। एतत् त्रयमवाप्तव्यमधर्म-परिवर्जितम्॥ अनुशासनपर्व chap 111. 18-19, ब्रह्मपुराण 217. 11.

v7.c96.s1.38

When reforms are suggested in these days, conservative people put forward the plea that ours is ‘sanātana-dharma’²⁶¹² and so no changes should be introduced. But the words ‘sanātana dharma’ do not mean that Dharma always stands still or is immutable; all that those words mean is that our culture is very ancient and has a long tradition behind it but they do not mean that Dharma permits no change. As a matter of fact fundamental changes in conceptions, beliefs and practices have been made from ancient times to the medieval times by means of various devices. Attention may be drawn to a few Veda was all in all in very ancient times but in the Upaniṣads this was changed, the Muṇḍaka I. 1. 5 designating the four Vedas as inferior knowledge (aparā vidyā) and the knowledge of the immutable *brahman* as the higher vidyā; in the Chān. Up. VII. 1.4, the four Vedas and several other branches of knowledge are called by Sanatkumāra (whom Nārada approached for instruction) mere name (nāma). Yajñas were the most important religious practice in the early Vedic period, but the Muṇḍaka Up. I. 2. 7 designates them as leaky boats and regards those who hold them as the best thing to be fools. Vide above pp. 1265-72 about changes in the views on anuloma marriages, on the topic of whose food may be partaken even by a brāhmaṇa, the abrogation of many Vedic practices by the doctrine of Kalivarjya (matters forbidden in Kali age) &c. Manu, Yāj, Viṣṇudharmasūtra, Viṣṇu and other purāṇas expressly provide that one should not observe but give up what was once Dharma, if it has come to be hateful to the people and if it would end in unhappiness (vide p. 1270 n. 2071 above). The Śāntiparva²⁶¹³ expressly states that what was *adharma* (in one age) may become *dharma* in another and that dharma and adharma are both subject to the limitations of country and time. Kāma also was not neglected, as the Kāmasūtra (particularly its chapter on 'nāgaraka-vṛtta' I. 4) will show. The extensive Nātyaśāstra of Bharata (containing about 5000 verses) is a witness to the aesthetic enjoyment of dance, music and drama in ancient India by thousands of ordinary men and women.

v7.c96.s1.39

²⁶¹² One of the earliest occurrences of the word सनातनधर्म is found in the Khanapur plates of Mādhavavarman (in E. I. Vol 27, p 312) edited by Dr. V. V. Mirashi, who assigns it to about the 6th century A D., in the description of the donee as 'यजनयाजनाध्ययनाध्यापनदानप्रतिग्रहाय (च ?) श्रुतिस्मृतिविहितसनातनधर्मकर्मनिरताय etc'. The land granted was in Returaka (modern Retrem in the Satara District of the Mahārāṣṭra State) Another early reference to the phrase सनातनधर्म is in ब्रह्माण्डपुराण II 33. 37-38 अद्रोहश्चाप्यलोभश्च तपो भूतदया दम । ब्रह्मचर्य तथा सत्यमनुक्रोशः क्षमा धृति । सनातनस्य धर्मस्य मूलमेतदुदाहृतम् ॥. The words 'सनातनधर्म' are used in the sense of ancient practice no longer prevalent in Ādiparva 122 18 (Ch. ed.), and in the sense of 'duty recognised long ago' in रामायण, अयोध्याकाण्ड 19 26, 21 49 etc

v7.c96.s1.40

²⁶¹³ भवत्यधर्मो धर्मो हि धर्माधर्मावुभावपि । कारणाद्देशकालस्य देशकालः स तादृशः ॥ शान्ति 78. 32

v7.c96.s1.41

Hindu thought on the three goals of human life came to this 'do your duty, do not fall into temptations, perform duties for their own sake (Gītā II. 47, III. 19), do unto others as you would be done by (Gītā VI. 32, Anuśāsanaparva 113. 8–9, Śānti 259. 20. = Cr. ed 251. 19), earn wealth but without conflict with dharma and without injury to others and lead a chaste sexual life and enjoy aesthetic pleasures. These summarise the teachings underlying the conceptions of the three puruṣārthas. There was hardly any real pessimism²⁶¹⁴ in the principal Dharmaśāstra works except perhaps here and there in the Mahābhārata. They consider life to be worth living, provided all actions are informed by the dictates of Dharma Manu (XII. 88-89) provides that Karma (conduct or actions) prescribed by the Veda is of two kinds, viz. *pravṛtta* and *nivṛtta*, the former leading to happiness in this world and to *svarga*, and the latter to niḥśreyasa (mokṣa) and requiring complete absence of all hankerings preceded by realization of *brahma*. The Anuśāsanaparva (chap 146. 76-80) divides Dharma into pravṛttilakṣaṇa (characterized by persistent activity) and nivṛttilakṣaṇa (characterised by abstention from worldly activities and desires), which latter is to be followed for mokṣa and lays down certain practical and salutary rules viz. one should constantly make gifts according to one's ability, constantly offer sacrifices and perform rites to secure one's prosperity. One should collect wealth following what is right and such wealth obtained righteously should be divided into three parts; one should secure both dharma and artha with one-third of the wealth acquired, one-third should be spent on Kāma (i. e. chaste sexual life and enjoyment of other pleasures not in conflict with dharma) and one-third he should increase Manu (VII. 99 and 101) prescribes similar rules for the king. The same parvan (Anuśāsana chap. 144 10-25 and 31-39) dwells at length upon those actions that lead men to heaven (the phrase 'te narāḥ svarga-gāminaḥ' is repeated in each verse). These provisions are meant for all ordinary people. The Rāmāyaṇa²⁶¹⁵ quotes a popular verse that man is not condemned to never-ending misery but joy comes to a man even after a hundred years if he be alive.

v7.c96.s1.42

²⁶¹⁴ The Bible was very pessimistic, both Christ and Saint Paul regard the world as evil or at least spoiled. Christ calls upon people not to resist evil (vide Hobhouse 'Morals in evolution' Vol. II. p. 152).

v7.c96.s1.43

²⁶¹⁵ > कल्याणी बत गाथेयं लौकिकी प्रतिभाति मे ।

v7.c96.s1.44

The 4th Puruṣārtha Mokṣa can be obtained only by a few. It is not a bow which every man or any man can make strung. It was a very difficult path like a razor's edge (Kaṭha Up III 14), far more difficult than the path of devotion to a Personal God (Bhagavadgītā XII. 5) The Upaniṣadic doctrine of liberation comes to this that man's nature is really divine, that it is possible for a human being to know and become actually identified with the Godhead, that this should be the ultimate goal of man's life, that this can be achieved by one's own efforts, but the way to achieve this goal is most difficult and requires the aspirant to give up egotism, selfishness and worldly attachments. Besides, there is another difficulty. The conceptions about mokṣa differ in the different schools of thought like Nyāya Sāṅkhya, Vedānta. Even in the Vedānta the conception about Mokṣa on the part of the different ācāryas differs. Some declared that there were four stages in Mukti viz. *Sālokya* (place in Lord's world), *Sāmīpya* (proximity), *Sārūpya* (attaining same form as God) and *Sāyujya* (absorption).²⁶¹⁶ These matters cannot be gone into here.

v7.c96.s1.45

²⁶¹⁶ The तै. सं V. 7 5 7 has . एतासामेव देवताना सायुज्यता गच्छति But this is entirely different from the idea of मोक्ष. The words सायुज्य, सारूप्य and सलोकता occur in ऐ आ II. 24. सायुज्य and सलोकता occur in बृह उ. I. 3. 22, सलोकता, सार्टिता (same happiness) and सायुज्य occur in छा. उ II 20 2. The सूतसहिता (मुक्तिखण्ड chap 3 28) speaks of the same four stages of मोक्ष सायुज्य is derived from सयुज् (yoked or joined together) The words सयुज याजान (horses yoked together) occur in Rg III 30. 11 and सयुजा (meaning सयुजौ) occurs in Rg. I. 164 20. The पुरुषार्थसुधानिधि of सायण (Madras Govt Oriental Mss Series, ed. by T Chandrasekharan, 1955) in its मोक्षस्कन्ध states . मुक्तिर्नानाविधा मोक्ता सायुज्यादिप्रभेदत । तत्र सायुज्यरूपाया मुक्ते साक्षात्तु कारणम् । सम्यग्ज्ञान न कर्माक्ति नानयोश्च समुच्चय । कर्मणैव हि सिध्यन्ति पुमानन्याश्च मुक्तयः॥ (chap II Verses 2-3)

v7.c96.s1.46

एति जीवन्तमानन्दो नरं वर्षशतादपि ॥
रामायण सुन्दरकाण्ड 34 6, (M L J. ed.)

v7.c96.s1.47

The महाभाष्य quotes the third पाद 'एति जीवन्तमानन्दः' in two places, viz. on पा I. 3 12 and III 1 67 under वार्तिक 5, Kielhorn's edition, Vol. 1, p 277 and Vol. II p 59

v7.c96.s1.48

Dharma is divided into different classes from different standpoints. One classification is into *śrauta* (based on the Vedas) and *Smārta* (based on Smṛtis). There was another and a more comprehensive classification of Dharma into six classes viz. varṇadharma (duties and rights of varṇas), āśramadharma (rules about the āśramas), varṇāśramadharma (rules enjoined because the person belongs to a certain class and was also in a certain āśrama (e. g. the rule that a brāhmaṇa brahmacārī should carry a staff of *palāśa* tree), guṇadharma (rules for one who holds or occupies a certain position, as in the case of a king), naimittikadharma (rules that have to be observed only on certain occasions such as bath on an eclipse, expiation for a lapse and lastly sāmānyadharma (duties common to all (such as those described in pp. 10-11 of the H. of Dh. Vol. II). This leads on to the next important characteristic of Hindu culture and society, viz. varṇas and castes.

v7.c96.s1.49

VI. *Varṇa and caste*. The subject of the origin of varṇa classification, the caste system and the duties, privileges and disabilities of the four varṇas have been dealt with at length in the History of Dharmaśāstra Vol. II. pp. 19-164. It has been shown that the word 'varṇa' (colour) has been applied to Āryas and dāsas in the Ṛgveda, that these two (āryas and dāsas) were opposite camps, that brāhmaṇas and kṣatriyas are mentioned in the Ṛgveda, but the word varṇa has not been expressly connected with them. The words Vaiśya and Śūdra do not occur in the Ṛgveda except in the Puruṣasūkta (Ṛg X. 90. 12) but even in that hymn the word 'varṇa' is not employed with reference to them. That hymn is held to be comparatively a late one by most modern scholars. It may be conceded that at the time when the Puruṣasūkta was composed the community was divided into four groups viz brāhmaṇas (thinkers, learned men, priests) kṣatriyas (rulers and warriors), vaiśyas (common people following agriculture and crafts) and śūdras (those that did menial work). Such a division of people into four groups is not unnatural and is found in many countries even now. In England there are aristocratic families, there is the middle class and the workers in factories &c. They are not necessarily based on birth alone, though largely so based. It has been shown above (p 1265) that intermarriages between brāhmaṇas and the other varṇas were allowed up to the time of the Yājñavalkya Smṛti which expresses its dissent from its predecessors and prohibits a person of the three upper classes from marrying a śūdra woman. There is no evidence to show that intermarriage or dining among the four varnas was prohibited in the Vedic age. In the Vāj. S 30. 6-13, Kāṭhaka S. XVII 13, Tai. Br. III 4 2-3 numerous artisans and craftsmen such as takṣan, rathakāra, kulāla, karmāra, niṣāda, sūta and others are mentioned but it is extremely doubtful whether they had become petrified castes at the period of these works Rathakāra and karmāra and sūta are mentioned in Atharvaveda III. 5. 6-7. It is probable that by the time of the Chān. Up. V. 10. 7 Cāṇḍālas had become untouchables (like dogs and hogs) and Paulkasa seems to be equated with Cāṇḍāla in Br Up IV. 3. 22. Even in the times of Yājñavalkya and Parāśara (2nd to 6th century A.D.) a brāhmaṇa was permitted to take food at the house of such sūdras as his *dāsa*, cowherd, barber, a tenant of his land on the rent of half share of crops (vide above p 1266). The varnas were only four, there was no fifth varna (Manu X. 4 and Anuśāsanaparva, chap 48 30), though in modern times untouchables are often spoken of as *pañcamas* (against Smṛti usage). The word *jāti* in the sense of caste hardly ever occurs in Vedic literature but it occurs in the Nirukta (XII. 13) and in Pāṇini (V. 4. 9), who explains ‘brāhmaṇajātīya’ as meaning one who is a brāhmaṇa by caste’. Sometimes, Jāti and Varna are differentiated in Smṛtis (Yāj. II. 69, 260), but from ancient times the word *Jāti* is confounded with the word *Varṇa*. Manu (X 31) uses the word Varṇa in the sense of mixed castes; conversely, the word Jāti is employed in the sense of ‘Varṇa’ in Manu (VIII. 177, IX. 85-86, X. 41)

First 52 of 129 passages. Read on

Linked texts (65)