Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

An Outline of the Religious Literature of India c8: Chapter III

An Outline of the Religious Literature of India c8

Language
English

Contents

Chapter III

c8.1

200 B. C. TO A. D. 200.

c8.2

§ 72. The Hindu movement towards theism shows two distinct stages, and a corresponding though not identical evolution within Buddhism takes place in two unfoldings also, and also at the same times. Great political changes form the background to those religious events.

c8.3

Early in the second century B. C. the Maurya empire fell. A Hindu dynasty, the Śuṅga, took its place at the capital, Patna, and doubtless annulled Aśoka's laws against animal sacrifice; while on the now contracted western frontier crouched Bactrian Greeks, Parthians, and Scythians, waiting to spring at the central empire. Under the Hindu dynasty arose new texts of the Rāmāyaṇa and the Mahābhārata in which Rāma and Kṛṣṇa walk the earth as divine incarnations. In Buddhist works of the same period the Buddha appears as a semi-divine being with new attributes.

c8.4

The Scythian race called Kushans seized all the western frontiers of India soon after the Christian era, and about the middle of the century conquered the Hindu government at Patna, and thus formed a vast empire stretching from Central Asia to the Gangetic plain. Not long after these events, as it would seem, the Bhagavadgītā arose, in which Kṛṣṇa is represented as a full incarnation of Viṣṇu and as the eternal Brahman of the Upaniṣads: Vaiṣṇava theism was thus formed; and other sects hastened to follow the great example. About the same time, or a little later, Mahāyāna Buddhism was formed, in which the Buddha almost became an eternal god.

c8.5

It seems clear that the wealth and general culture of the times created a strong and intelligent body of laymen, as distinct from the monastic orders. Literature, philosophy, and art all show great activity; and both Hindus and Buddhists found it necessary to modify their standards and prepare fresh literature to meet the needs of the cultured layman.

c8.6

One of the greatest happenings of these centuries is the spread of Buddhism to Persia, to Turkestan, and to China.

i. Hinduism.

A. The Twice-born and their Literature.

c8.s1.t1.1

§ 73. No addition of any importance seems to have been made during this period to the literature of the Vedic schools except a number of new Upanishads. The sacrificial discipline of each school still consisted of Mantra, Brāhmaṇa, and Sūtra, with probably the further help of the Karma Mīmāṃsā system, while the Āraṇyaka and the Upanishad formed special courses. The Upanishads which made their appearance during the period fall into two classes, of which only the first attach themselves quite naturally to the original Vedānta texts. Of these there are three, the Praśna, Maitrāyaṇa, and Māṇḍūkya, the Maitrāyaṇa belonging to the Black Yajus, the other two to the Atharvaveda.

c8.s1.t1.2

§ 74. It seems to be clear also that already about the middle of our period, there existed a work which summed up the teaching of the Upanishads, and was thus a forerunner of the famous but far later Brahma-sūtra of Bādarāyaṇa. That at least seems to be the natural inference from the reference in the *Bhagavadgītā*¹ to *Brahma-sūtras* and from the occurrence of the descriptive phrase *sarvopaniṣadvidyā*, i.e. ‘the science of all the Upanishads’, in the nearly contemporary *Maitrāyaṇa Upanishad*². It is most likely that it was the example of the Karma-mīmāṃsā, which undertakes to unify and sum up the teaching on sacrifice, that led to the exposition of all Upanishad texts in similar fashion. The ancient Karma-Mīmāṃsā text of those days and also the original Upanishad manual were early lost, eclipsed by the classical documents of the next period.

c8.s1.t1.3

¹ XIII. 4.

c8.s1.t1.4

² II. 3.

c8.s1.t1.5

§ 75. Thus far we have dealt with the legitimate literature of the Vedic schools. The second class of Upanishads have not the same standing. They fall into three groups, each related to a special type of ascetic, but all diverging in some degree from the original Vedānta texts. These are the Sannyāsa, Yoga, and Śaiva Upanishads. All were finally attached to the *Atharvaveda*, but in rather irregular fashion.

c8.s1.t1.6

§ 76. It is clear that from some early date in the period there existed a document belonging to the Sāṅkhya philosophy. It is also probable that, besides the Yoga Upanishads already mentioned, an orderly exposition of the Yoga system existed. The Vaiśeshika, the Nyāya, and the Chārvāka systems must have each had a fundamental text. But these five all stood outside the Vedic schools and were regarded as more or less aberrant. The growth of the epic, which is discussed below, affords an opportunity of setting these works in historical connexion with the rest of the literature.

c8.s1.t1.7

§ 77. The increasingly complicated curriculum taught in each Vedic school rendered it impossible for the student to master all the subjects taught; and the result was that schools for the study of special subjects, such as grammar, law, and politics, were established. The law schools are of especial interest, as their labours were of large practical value for the twice-born layman. Their method seems to have been to take the Dharma-sūtra of some Vedic school and modify it in some degree, so as to make it suitable not for members of that school alone, but for all twice-born men. The Dharma-sūtras of Gautama and of Vāsiṣṭha, already included in our study of dharma in our last chapter, seem to have undergone this process.

c8.s1.t1.8

§ 78. But verse was the medium for popular literature

c8.s1.t1.9

during this period, and many of the old laws in their sūtra-form were ambiguous. Hence in the schools it became customary to express the old sūtras in ślokas. The most famous of all Indian law-books, the code of Manu, is a work of this kind, and took shape during the period. It is probable that it was founded on the Dharma-sūtra of the Mānavans, one of the sūtra-schools of the Black Yajurveda. The time of the creative activity of the Mānava law-school seems to have been contemporary with the gradual growth of the didactic epic. About the time when this latter was completed, or rather later, the labours of the school culminated in a great law-book in verse, the text of which thereafter underwent very little change.¹ Law-books in verse, in contradistinction to the older treatises in prose sūtras, are called śāstras. Hence, the full name of the text is the Mānava Dharmaśāstra, popularly known as the law of Manu, and usually said to be fabulously old. It is to be noted that this law-book and others of the same class were meant for the twice-born only. They are of special interest here because of their importance for the twice-born householder.

c8.s1.t1.10

¹ Hopkins, GE. 19.

c8.s1.t1.11

This great code registers several advances in Hindu religious law. Here, and also in the contemporary didactic Epic, the ideal is laid down, though it is not made compulsory, that the twice-born man should pass through the four āśramas in order, i. e. the life of the celibate student, the householder, the hermit, and the monk. No widow, not even a virgin child-widow, may remarry: her duty is to live an ascetic life. The twice-born may still eat flesh, but there are many restrictions.

c8.s1.t1.12

§ 79. During this period there arose among twice-born householders a religious distinction which was destined to last throughout the history of the religion. As we shall see in our study of the Epic, there was a group of the twice-born on whom the worship of Viṣṇu by temple and image had laid hold with such force that they tended to refuse to recognize the other gods of the pantheon. Another group stood in a similar relation to Śiva.¹ Now the ritual of temple-worship had not sprung from Vedic sources, but apparently from ancient forms of worship traditional among Śūdras.²

c8.s1.t1.13

¹ Patañjali calls them Śivabhāgavatas, devotees of Śiva, and speaks of the stress they lay on the worship of images: *Mahābhāshya* on P.V. ii. 76.

c8.s1.t1.14

² See § 51.

c8.s1.t1.15

It was thus inevitable that those who remained loyal to the ancient sacrificial worship should condemn the exclusive cult of Viṣṇu and of Śiva as doubly heterodox, because its ritual was not Vedic, and because it did not worship all the gods.³ Doubtless, there were many among the orthodox even at this early date who had a god whom they specially favoured; yet this did not affect their orthodoxy, for they freely acknowledged all the others.

c8.s1.t1.16

³ Chanda, *IAR*. 99.

c8.s1.t1.17

From this time, therefore, we must recognize among the twice-born *the orthodox*, who are faithful to the Vedic pantheon and ritual, and *the sectarians*, who exalt one god to the neglect of the rest, and in his cult use a ritual and liturgy of non-Vedic origin. The position of the sects was greatly strengthened by the appearance of the *Bhagavadgītā*,⁴ which provided the Vaiṣṇava with a theology, and led to the formation of a similar system for the worshipper of Śiva. These devoted sectarians still kept up the Vedic forms of worship in their domestic ceremonies, and observed the rules of caste with great strictness. Indeed, throughout their history they have sought to prove themselves orthodox Hindus, and in some cases with considerable success.

c8.s1.t1.18

⁴ See § 86.

c8.s1.t1.19

§ 80. It is probable that the mass of Śūdras belonged to no sect, but worshipped now one god, now another. That certainly has been the position of the mass of the Hindu people for many centuries. Doubtless there would be a certain number of intelligent Śūdras who would share the strictly sectarian position with their twice-born brethren, just as there is to-day, but they would scarcely be regarded as heterodox, since they were not allowed to perform the ancient sacrifices.

B. The Epics.

c8.s1.t2.1

§ 81. The movement towards theism within Hinduism has the ancient god Viṣṇu for its centre. Two stages are very distinctly visible in the movement, and both are reflected in the growth of the epic poems.

c8.s1.t2.2

The original heroic poem called the *Mahābhārata*, which celebrated the fall of the Kuru family through the wiles of the Pāṇḍus directed by Kṛṣṇa, underwent considerable transformation and enlargement. The leading feature of the epic in this, its second stage, is that the Pāṇḍus are now regarded as the heroes of the epic, and, unlike former kings, they are represented as emperors ruling the whole of India. We also find mention in the poem of Yavanas, Pahlavas, and Śakas, i.e. Greeks, Parthians, and Scythians. The mythical Pāṇḍu empire is probably a reflection of the Maurya empire, while the mention of Greeks, Parthians, and Scythians would seem to point definitely to the time of the Śuṅgas. According to the statement of the epic itself, the poem consisted of 24,000 stanzas¹ at this stage, and modern scholars estimate that the epic kernel of the whole work runs to about 20,000 stanzas.²

c8.s1.t2.3

¹ I. i. 81; 101; 105.

c8.s1.t2.4

² Hopkins, *ERE*. VIII. 325 a.

c8.s1.t2.5

We now turn for a moment to the *Rāmāyaṇa*. The five books of Vālmīki’s original work are to-day preceded by one book and followed by another which are clearly of later date. Here also we meet with Yavanas, Pahlavas, and Śakas; so that these additions cannot be dated earlier than the Pāṇḍu form of the great epic.³

c8.s1.t2.6

³ Jacobi, *R*. 28 f. ; 50 ; 64 ; Macdonell, *SL*. 304 f.

c8.s1.t2.7

§ 82. The religious phenomena of both epics are also significant. In the new parts of both, the religion is still polytheistic and sacrificial, but the prominent divinities are now Brahmā, Viṣṇu, and Śiva. It seems as if in the popular mind the three stood on an equality.⁴ Still more noteworthy is the fact that Kṛṣṇa and Rāma, the heroes of the two epics, are now represented as partial incarnations of Vishnu,¹ while ancient deeds of divine might have been transferred from Indra and other old gods to Vishnu.² In these facts we have the first clear indication in Indian literature of the rise of something like an organized sect within Hinduism. Vishnu has now a group of worshippers who exalt him to a place of special honour, and this group has been able to seize and claim for itself the heroes of both the popular poems. A distinct polemic against Buddhism may also be traced in the new form of the Mahābhārata.

c8.s1.t2.8

⁴ For the old religion at this stage, apart from the incarnation doctrine, see Hopkins, *RI*. ch. xix.

c8.s1.t2.9

¹ Macdonell, SL. 286, 305; Rāmāyaṇa, I. xix.

c8.s1.t2.10

² Holtzmann, MBH. I. 10. The dwarf, Vāmana, is in the Rāmāyaṇa said to be an incarnation of Vishnu, I. xxxi.

c8.s1.t2.11

§ 83. These facts seem to point to the conclusion that the transformation of both poems took place after the fall of the Maurya empire. It is scarcely likely that a large work glorifying Hindu kings, and describing a triumphant Hindu empire, would have made its appearance under Buddhist emperors, far less that they would have tolerated direct attacks on Buddhism; while the publication of the ancient poems in these new and most attractive forms would be quite natural under the patronage of a Hindu monarch who had restored old liberties and re-established the sacrificial ceremonial.³

c8.s1.t2.12

³ Hopkins, GE. 399. Inscriptions belonging to the second and first centuries B. C., which mention Vāsudeva, i. e. Krishna, fit in well with this conception. Bhandarkar, VS. 3-4.

c8.s1.t2.13

The two epics thus became religious works, glorifying the god Vishnu; and ever since that time they have been regarded as Vaishnava scriptures. But Vishnu was not yet elevated to the position of the Supreme. A perusal of the first book of the Rāmāyaṇa will show that, while his followers praised him as the best of the gods, they still thought of him as one of the old divinities, a being similar in nature to Śiva, Brahmā, and the rest. This is but the first stage of the movement towards theism.

c8.s1.t2.14

§ 84. We do not know how the Vaishnavas were led to develop the doctrine of divine incarnation. The idea appears suddenly in the literature, and there is nothing in earlier Hindu thought that would seem to be a natural and sufficient source of the conception.¹ It may be that they were led to it by the example of the Buddhists, who, as we have seen, had already raised Buddha to divine powers and honours, and had created a series of precedent Buddhas stretching away into the distant past. So Kṛṣṇa and Rāma with the Dwarf are now conceived as divine, and they already form a short series; for Rāma is held to have appeared at a much earlier date than Kṛṣṇa, and the Dwarf precedes Rāma.

c8.s1.t2.15

¹ Yet the idea that a god may temporarily take the form of an animal or a man was clearly present in early Hindu minds; for in the Brāhmaṇas there occur the stories of the fish and the dwarf. These tales may have helped in the evolution of the new conception. Indeed the Dwarf became one of the recognized avatāras of Viṣṇu.

c8.s1.t2.16

§ 85. We now pass to the consideration of the second stage of the movement toward theism, as reflected in the epics. Scholars believe that, during the first and second centuries of the Christian era, the large masses of didactic matter² which are found in certain sections of the *Mahābhārata* as it stands were added to the epic of 24,000 stanzas which we have just discussed. This fresh material consists in the main of discourses on Religion, Philosophy, Politics, and Law.³ Books XII and XIII of the epic, as we have it to-day, consist almost entirely of this material, and masses of it are found also in Books III, V, VI, XI, and XIV. These numerous pieces of teaching are clearly of various date and authorship, and their critical study has not yet proceeded far enough to enable us to arrange them in chronological order; yet certain differences in date stand out quite clear. This whole mass of new material is usually called the didactic epic,⁴ to distinguish it from the real epic and the episodes. Scholars believe that it arose in the eastern section of North India.⁵

c8.s1.t2.17

² Hopkins, *GE*. 387; 398; *ERE*. VIII. 325 ff.

c8.s1.t2.18

³ ‘The sacred law, the best manual of polity and a guide to salvation’, is what the epic itself says, I. 62, 23.

c8.s1.t2.19

⁴ Hopkins also calls it the Pseudo-epic.

c8.s1.t2.20

⁵ Hopkins, *GE*. 78.

C. The Bhagavadgītā.

c8.s1.t3.1

§ 86. The earliest, and also the greatest, of all the sections that form the didactic epic is the far-famed Bhagavadgītā. The date of this poem has caused endless discussion. Its own statement is that it was uttered by Kṛiṣhṇa and Arjuna on the fateful field of Kurukshetra, just before the fighting began; and that is the Hindu tradition to this day. Mr. Justice Telang believed that it belonged to the fourth century B.C.,¹ and Sir R. G. Bhandarkar argues in favour of the same date,² but most modern scholars recognize that, in its present form, it can scarcely be earlier than the first or second century A.D. What is perfectly clear is that it is later than the fresh material of the second stage of the two epics, and earlier than the rest of the documents of the didactic epic.³

c8.s1.t3.2

¹ SBE. VIII. 34.

c8.s1.t3.3

² VS. 13.

c8.s1.t3.4

³ Holtzmann, MBH. II. 121; Hopkins, GE. 205, 225, 384, 402; Keith, SS. 33, 34.

c8.s1.t3.5

§ 87. The poem is a very remarkable one, and has had an immeasurable influence on religion in India. There is no other piece of literature that is so much admired and used by thinking Hindus; and it has won very high praise from many Western thinkers and scholars. Numberless editions, in the original and in translations in many tongues, fall from the press. But it becomes still more remarkable and interesting when one realizes its historical origin. It is the expression of the earliest attempt made in India to rise to a theistic faith and theology. In order to reach this ideal, the Vaiṣhṇava sect identify their own god Viṣhṇu, on the one hand with the great Brahman-Ātman of the Upanishads, and on the other with Kṛiṣhṇa, the hero of the Epic. There is a double exaltation here. Until now Viṣhṇu has been but one of the gods of Hinduism, in nature indistinguishable from the other members of the pantheon, though in the two centuries before our era he held a high position among them beside Brahmā and Śiva. Now he is declared to be the Absolute, the One without a second, the source of all things and all beings. Kṛṣṇa, who had been recognized as a partial incarnation of Viṣṇu in the second stage of the Epic, is now declared to be a full incarnation of Viṣṇu-Brahman, and receives the title Bhagavān, blessed Lord. Hence the name of the poem, *Bhagavadgītā*, the Lord’s Song. Each of these changes is an advance towards theism. The identification of Brahman with Viṣṇu distinctly suggests that the Absolute is personal; and the contention that the same Brahman is fully represented by a being who walked the earth in human form bodies forth the personal idea in the most vivid way possible. The change is most revolutionary. Let the student once more read some of the loftiest passages of the ancient Upanishads with the new thought in his mind.

c8.s1.t3.6

§ 88. But the poem seeks not only to create a theism but to bring a spiritual religion within the reach of all Vaiṣṇavas. The Upanishads had taught cultured Hindus to aim in their religion not at rewards on earth or a sensuous heaven, but at release from transmigration; and Buddhism and Jainism had attempted, in their heterodox way, to stimulate all classes to the same high endeavour. The *Gītā* shows us the reconstitution of the Vaiṣṇava sect under the pressure of these powerful movements. The precise limits within which this is done must also be noticed. The Upanishads as taught in the Vedic schools offered release only to the three highest castes, for these holy texts might not be uttered in the hearing of any but the twice-born; Buddhism and Jainism, on the other hand, offered release to all, to Outcastes and foreigners as well as to Hindus of the four castes, and to women as well as men; but the *Gītā* takes a middle course, offering release to all Hindus, i.e. to men and women of the four castes but to no others. It is noticeable that these are precisely the bounds of the sect; all Hindus of the four castes were admitted to Vaiṣṇava, as to other Hindu, temples. But there is another and still more revolutionary change. In all earlier systems release was possible only for those who gave up the ordinary

c8.s1.t3.7

life of man and became professional ascetics. In the *Gītā* release is made available for the layman and his wife while they maintain the household and take part in the business of the world. These two radical changes necessitated a fresh book: the *Gītā* was written to become the layman’s Upanishad. It may also be said with truth that the *Gītā* is a worthy successor to the old Upanishads.

c8.s1.t3.8

§ 89. The *Gītā* sets forth three distinct ways in which release may be won. The first is the JÑĀNA MĀRGA, or way of knowledge, as taught in the Upanishads and the Sāṅkhya philosophy, and in a modified way by Buddhism and Jainism. The second is the KARMA MĀRGA, or way of works. The earliest conception of religion in Hinduism was a system of duties, summarized in the word dharma. The most prominent of these works in the early days were the sacrifices; but all the duties of caste and condition, of the family and society, were also included. The *Gītā* doctrine of works, which is called Karma-yoga, is this, that the mere performance of the works ordained in Scripture wins only the transient rewards on earth or in heaven that are promised for them, but that the man who does these works without any desire for the rewards will thereby win release. The word Yoga is used in so many senses in the *Gītā* that it is hard to decide which of them is implied in the phrase Karma-yoga, but it probably comes from the radical meaning ‘restraint’. The third, BHAKTI-MĀRGA, the path of devotion, is a new method of winning release. It is simply this: that whole-hearted devotion to Kṛṣṇa brings release from transmigration as effectively as philosophical knowledge or the selfless performance of ordained duties.

c8.s1.t3.9

The method of devotion is the link between the ancient cult of the sect and the new teaching of the *Gītā*. For the whole-hearted devotion which brings release finds its most natural and most vivid expression in the regular worship of Kṛṣṇa in the temples of the sect.¹ The cult would have a new dignity to thinking Vaishṇavas, since it would henceforward be to them not a means merely to health, wealth, and happiness, but also to the great spiritual end of the emancipation of the soul from all the bonds of the phenomenal universe.¹ There is just one change in the cult to be noticed. The Gītā recognizes no animal sacrifice. The offerings to Kṛishṇa which it commends are purely vegetarian.² Thus we must conclude that, about the time when the new theology came to the birth, animal sacrifice was given up in the chief Vaishṇava shrines. The rule is now universal among Vishṇuites.

c8.s1.t3.10

¹ Cf. IX. 6 with XI. 46.

c8.s1.t3.11

¹ IX. 34; X. 10; XI. 54; XII. 2.

c8.s1.t3.12

² IX. 26.

c8.s1.t3.13

§ 90. It is of great importance to notice that the Gītā calls upon all Vaishṇavas to keep the Hindu law as taught in the Dharmaśāstras.³ The rules of caste,⁴ the laws of the family, and the regular worship of ancestors,⁵ are all to be strictly observed. It has been often said that the Gītā is opposed to caste, but that is a complete mistake: the principles and rules laid down in the poem are luminously clear.

c8.s1.t3.14

³ XVI. 23; 24; XVII. 1; 5. For the Dharmaśāstras see § 78.

c8.s1.t3.15

⁴ I. 43; II. 31-33; 37; III. 23-6; 35; IV. 13; XVIII. 41-8.

c8.s1.t3.16

⁵ I. 40-44.

c8.s1.t3.17

§ 91. One of the most startling features of the poem is the transformation of Kṛishṇa. In the genuine epic he is a king and warrior, famous as a grim and powerful fighter, but notorious above all things for his extraordinary cunning and his dirty tricks: in the Gītā he plays the philosophical guru, quoting the Upanishads and praising the Sāṅkhya philosophy; from time to time he declares himself to be the supreme Ātman,⁶ the source and support of the whole universe, the object of all devotion and the recipient of all sacrifices; and again he displays his indescribable glory before the eyes of his astonished friend.⁷

c8.s1.t3.18

⁶ X. 12, 20; VII. 6; 7; 10; IX. 8; 10; 13; XIV. 3; IX. 23-24.

c8.s1.t3.19

⁷ XI. 9-31.

c8.s1.t3.20

§ 92. The theology of the poem is a most imperfect theism.⁸ The idea of the writer seems to have been that he could form a new Vaishṇava system by the mere juxtaposition of the worship of Kṛishṇa and the great philosophies of his day, for he does not attempt to modify and fit together these rather incongruous elements so as to create from them a well-articulated theology.

c8.s1.t3.21

⁸ Cf. Keith, JRAS. 1915, 548.

c8.s1.t3.22

This is especially true with regard to the relation of the Vedānta to the Sāṅkhya. The latter system was clearly very popular in those days.¹ In contrast with the Upanishads, its chief conceptions seem to have been chiselled and polished to smoothness, and carefully fitted together in a system of metaphysical and psychological ideas which any one could readily understand. Further, in it the external world was regarded as a reality, and the soul and its individuality were frankly acknowledged. Thus, in spite of its atheism,² these Sāṅkhya conceptions seemed to fit better into a theistic theology than the monistic conceptions of the Upanishads. The Yoga also was popular, but whether it had yet become a theistic system is not known.

c8.s1.t3.23

¹ Hopkins, *GE.* 99 f.

c8.s1.t3.24

² See Gītā, XVI. 8, which certainly alludes to a *nirīśvara* system. So Hopkins, *GE.* 105.

c8.s1.t3.25

The author brought the three together, declared them identical, and placed them beside Kṛishṇa, the incarnation of Vishnu viewed as the Absolute. These divergent conceptions are not fused into a higher unity but are superimposed, so that the effect is like a composite photograph. Here and there are theistic passages;³ from other sections a stark pantheism stares out;⁴ and now and then the lines seem to suggest an emanation theory and several gods.⁵ Nor is anything done to lessen the gulf that yawns between the actionless Brahman of the Upanishads and the incarnate god, born to slay demons and to teach philosophy.⁶

c8.s1.t3.26

³ IV. 5-7; VI. 47; IX. 22-34; XI. 36-46; XII. 14-20; XVIII. 55-70.

c8.s1.t3.27

⁴ II. 72; IV. 24; V. 24-26.

c8.s1.t3.28

⁵ III. 15; VII. 30; VIII. 3-4; 20-21; XV. 16-18.

c8.s1.t3.29

⁶ IV. 8.

c8.s1.t3.30

§ 93. What unquestionably gives the Gītā its power is the representation of the Supreme as incarnate and as teaching the loftiest philosophy of India to his friend Arjuna, so that he and other simple laymen may find release. The portrait of the incarnate One is drawn with great skill; the situation in which the teaching is given enforces certain of the lessons taught with great vividness; and the literary qualities of the book are well worthy of the teaching it contains. The Bhagavadgītā is a very great work.

c8.s1.t3.31

§ 94. It is of importance to realize that, though the teaching of the Gītā is now the very cream of orthodoxy, it was in some respects heterodox when the poem was written. This comes out most clearly in the section of the second book,¹ where the Vedas are spoken of with some scorn, and in several passages elsewhere in which the opponents of Kṛṣṇa are very vehemently criticized. The fact is that the poem sprang from the young Vaiṣṇava sect, the heterodox position of which is explained above.² At a later point an attempt will be made to show how the Gītā came to be regarded as orthodox.³

c8.s1.t3.32

¹ 41-46.

c8.s1.t3.33

² § 79.

c8.s1.t3.34

³ § 144.

c8.s1.t3.35

§ 95. The poem bears traces of having been rewritten,⁴ but two very different theories of its origin are held by scholars. Accepting Bhandarkar's theory of the origin of the worship of Kṛṣṇa,⁵ Garbe⁶ attempts to explain the inconsistent theological teaching of the Gītā by the hypothesis that it was originally written, early in the second century B.C.,⁷ on the basis of the Sāṅkhya-Yoga system, as a theistic tract to glorify Kṛṣṇa, and that it was contaminated with the pantheism of the Upanishads in the second century A.D. He analyses the poem into what he believes to be these two sources. A few scholars⁸ have accepted this theory, but most would probably follow Hopkins and Keith¹ in saying that the analysis is altogether unconvincing. It is much more likely that the *Gītā* is an old verse Upanishad, written rather later than the *Śvetāśvatara*, and worked up into the *Gītā* in the interests of Krishnaism by a poet after the Christian era.

c8.s1.t3.36

⁴ Hopkins, GE. 205, 234.

c8.s1.t3.37

⁵ See above, § 50.

c8.s1.t3.38

⁶ Die Bhagavadgītā, Leipzig, 1905; also IC. 228 ff.

c8.s1.t3.39

⁷ This date is partly based on the belief that the Yoga-sūtra was written by the grammarian Patañjali in the second century B.C., but since it is now clear that the Yoga-sūtra dates from the fourth century A.D. (see below, § 139), the theory seems very improbable. See Keith, SS. 30.

c8.s1.t3.40

⁸ Winternitz, I. 373; Grierson, ERE. II. 541; and Chanda, IAR. 98.

c8.s1.t3.41

¹ Hopkins, *JRAS.* 1905, 384; Keith, *JRAS.* 1915, 548. Deussen also rejects the theory.

c8.s1.t3.42

A careful comparison of the *Gītā* with the *Saddharma Puṇḍarīka*² in ideas, language, and verse would probably help to solve the problems presented by both poems. A number of writers have believed that the *Gītā* distinctly betrays Christian influence, but it seems rather more probable that the poem is purely of Indian origin.³

c8.s1.t3.43

² See *SBE.* XXI. xxvi; xxxiv, and below § 125.

c8.s1.t3.44

³ For all the theories and a summary of the evidence, see Garbe, *IC.* 244 ff.

c8.s1.t3.45

§ 96. The *Bhagavadgītā* is the key to the whole of the didactic epic. Its chief characteristics reappear in nearly all the remaining religious documents added to the great poem in the third stage of its history. Even in the few places where Krishna’s claim is denied, and Śiva, or Sūrya, or Brahmā is glorified as the one God, the influence of the *Gītā* is still supreme; for the mode of exaltation is borrowed directly from the Song: it is only the name of the god exalted that is altered.

D. The Philosophies.

c8.s1.t4.1

§ 97. The *Maitrāyaṇa Upanishad* probably arose about the same time as the *Gītā* or rather later, and it is certainly earlier than the didactic epic, for in two passages its teaching and language are clearly reflected.⁴ We therefore take the Upanishad as standing between the two. Along with it we take the *Praśna* and *Māṇḍūkya* Upanishads. The former is clearly earlier, and the latter later, than the *Maitrāyaṇa*,⁵ but probably no long time intervenes in either case: for in their doctrine of the sacred syllable *Om* they are very closely connected. The *Maitrāyaṇa* alone is of serious significance for the evolution of religious ideas. Professor Keith thus writes¹:

c8.s1.t4.2

⁴ Hopkins, *GE.* 33 ff.

c8.s1.t4.3

⁵ Deussen, *PU.* 25.

c8.s1.t4.4

¹ *SS.* 13.

c8.s1.t4.5

The Upanishad clearly reflects a period when various forms of heresy—probably in no small measure the Buddhist—had attacked the main outlines of the system of the Upanishads, and it endeavours to restate that position with, as is inevitable, many traits borrowed from the doctrine it was refuting, and among these traits are clear marks of the Sāṅkhya. It is characterized by a profound pessimism which is not countenanced by the older Upanishads, which lay no stress normally on that doctrine, but which is characteristic at once of Buddhism and of the Sāṅkhya.

c8.s1.t4.6

§ 98. Sāṅkhya conceptions, similar to those found in the *Gītā* and the *Maitrāyaṇa*, appear also in the didactic epic, and betray the existence of a formed system, an atheistic dualism, enumerating twenty-five principles, extremely like the classic form of the philosophy presented in the *Sāṅkhya Kārikā*, but not identical with it.² The Yoga reflected in the *Maitrāyaṇa* is more detailed than that found in any earlier Upanishad, but the epic shows a still more advanced stage.³

c8.s1.t4.7

² Deussen, *SUV.* 312–13; Hopkins, *GE.* 97–133; Keith, *SS.* 11–13; chap. iii.

c8.s1.t4.8

³ Hopkins, *YT.* 335 ff.

c8.s1.t4.9

§ 99. The Yoga philosophy which appears in the *Arthaśāstra* may not have contained the theistic element which occurs in the classic system; nor do we find any conclusive evidence of the existence of the theistic form in the *Gītā*. But in the latest parts of the didactic epic there is frequent mention of the theistic system of Yoga,⁴ though in a form less complete than that of the *Yoga-sūtras*.⁵ As the *Chūlikā Upanishad* presents the theistic Yoga in the simplest form which we know, we are justified in assigning it to a place near the *Gītā* and before the latest parts of the epic; and since the Sāṅkhya conceptions of the *Chūlikā* stand in very close relation to those of the *Maitrāyaṇa*, the two Upanishads probably belong to very nearly the same time.⁶

c8.s1.t4.10

⁴ Hopkins, *GE.* 97–138; Keith, *SS.* 55.

c8.s1.t4.11

⁵ Hopkins, *YT.* 335; 336.

c8.s1.t4.12

⁶ Deussen, *SUV.* 637.

c8.s1.t4.13

But the *Chūlikā* is clearly not the only Yoga-manual that existed in our period. Among the many teachers of Sāṅkhya and of Yoga named in the didactic epic two seem to be historical, Pañchaśikha and Vārshagaṇya.¹ Numerous references to them occur in the classic documents belonging to the two schools, and a few quotations are embedded in the *Yoga-bhāshya*,² and in Vāchaspati-miśra.³ The evidence is very confused, so that it is hard to make sure of the truth. Probably the most satisfactory solution is to conclude that both authors belonged to the school of theistic Yoga, that Vārshagaṇya was the author of the *Shashṭitantra* (i. e. the Sixty-treatise), a famous work now lost, which seems to have been in verse,⁴ while Pañchaśikha wrote a manual in *sūtras*,⁵ which is also lost. These works and the *Chūlikā* probably belong to the group of Yoga treatises referred to in the epic.⁶ Another interesting tradition which appears in the epic is that Pañchaśikha is the teacher of the new Vaishṇava sect, the Pāñcharātras,⁷ whom we shall have to deal with below.

c8.s1.t4.14

¹ XII. 218; 319 f.

c8.s1.t4.15

² Woods, *Yoga*, 359-60; also *Sāṅkhya-kārikā*, 70.

c8.s1.t4.16

³ *Sāṅkhya-tattva-kaumudī*, 206.

c8.s1.t4.17

⁴ Keith, *SS.* Chap. v. Cf. Schrader, *ZDMG.* 1914, 101-10; *IPAS.* 110 ff.

c8.s1.t4.18

⁵ Keith, *SS.* 42.

c8.s1.t4.19

⁶ XII. 301, 57; 340, 67, Hopkins, *GE.* 100, 110.

c8.s1.t4.20

⁷ Hopkins, *GE.* 144; but see Keith, *SS.* 39.

c8.s1.t4.21

§ 100. There are also two groups of short Upanishads of rather later date which were clearly meant to be practical manuals for monks of the Vedānta and Yoga schools. The first group glorify *sannyāsa*, the world-renunciation of the Vedānta, and describe the initiation and the life of the *sannyāsī*, while the Yoga group describe the six elements of Yoga discipline (later they became eight) and give special attention to meditation on the sacred syllable *Om*. These treatises are clearly posterior to the *Maitrāyaṇa* and the *Chūlikā*, and earlier than the *Vedānta-sūtras* and the *Yoga-sūtras*. They are probably to be regarded as of the same general date as the didactic epic, where many of their features reappear, but some may be still later.

c8.s1.t4.22

Of the Sannyāsa group¹ which are mostly in prose, the *Brahma* and the *Sannyāsa* are composite, their earliest portions being quite as early as the *Maitrāyaṇa*, if not earlier. The later parts of these tracts and the *Āruṇeya*, *Kaṇṭhaśruti*, *Jābāla*,² and *Paramahaṃsa* do not differ much in age, and are probably not later than the chief documents of the didactic epic; while the *Āśrama* may be of later origin.

c8.s1.t4.23

¹ Deussen, *SUV.* 678-715. ² This is clearly a shortened and modified form of an early Upanishad belonging to the *White Yajus*. See Deussen, *SV.* 11.; *SUV.* 706. ³ Deussen, *SUV.* 629-77. ⁴ Thus Hopkins, *YT.* 379, says that the Yoga-technique of the epic is on a par chronologically with the *Kshurikā*. ⁵ *Saṃhitā*, iii. 8, 26 ff; Keith, *JRAS.* 1914, 1093. ⁶ Winternitz, II. i. 209. ⁷ Woods, *Yoga*, xviii. ⁸ Hopkins, *GE.* 387; *ERE.* VIII. 325.

c8.s1.t4.24

The *Yoga*³ group are all in verse, and all follow the lead of the *Chūlikā*. The earliest seemingly is the *Brahmabindu*, which may be as early as the *Maitrāyaṇa*. The main group, consisting of the *Kshurikā*, *Tejobindu*, *Brahmavidyā*, *Nādabindu*, *Yogaśikhā*, *Yogatattva*, *Dhyānabindu*, and *Amṛtabindu*, run parallel with the main Sannyāsa group and the didactic epic,⁴ while the *Haṃsa* is later and of indeterminate date.

c8.s1.t4.25

§ 101. The Vaiśeshika and Nyāya philosophies were already in existence in the first century A. D. Both are mentioned by Charaka,⁵ court physician to king Kanishka; and Aśvaghosha⁶ his contemporary, and Nāgārjuna⁷ who came later, mention the Vaiśeshika. Both are reflected in the didactic epic, but the evidence is too slender to enable us to see what the form of either system was.

c8.s1.t4.26

§ 102. The main didactic epic is believed to have been practically complete by 200 A.D.⁸ It deals with a variety of subjects, but three are of more importance than the rest, Politics, Law, and Religion. Philosophy is included under religion, and ethics partly under law and partly under religion.

c8.s1.t4.27

§ 103. The compilers of the didactic epic introduced a considerable body of political teaching into their cyclopaedia.

E. The Didactic Epic.

c8.s1.t5.1

The first half¹ of the twelfth book is almost wholly given to the subject, and shorter pieces occur elsewhere.² The relation of this teaching to Kauṭilya’s *Arthaśāstra*,³ to later political treatises, and to the actual state of affairs at the time of the epic,⁴ does not seem to have been yet worked out by scholars.

c8.s1.t5.2

¹ Chaps. 1-173.

c8.s1.t5.3

² I. 87; 140-5; II. 15; 17; 25; 62; III. 32; 33; 159; IV. 4; V. 33-4; 36-9; XIII. 13; XV. 5 ff.

c8.s1.t5.4

³ See above, § 45.

c8.s1.t5.5

⁴ See Hopkins, *Ruling Caste, JAOS.* XIII.

c8.s1.t5.6

§ 104. It was natural that the Vaiṣṇava priests, who in the interests of their sect turned the ancient epic into an encyclopaedia of instruction, should wish to include in it a body of law, and that they should choose the new popular form of law in verse. It is also of interest to remember that their constituency included Śūdras and women as well as twice-born men,⁵ and even people lower than Śūdras.⁶ The legal material is found chiefly in the thirteenth book⁷ of the *Mahābhārata*, and shows a very close relationship to the *Mānava Dharmaśāstra*. Hopkins⁸ writes:

c8.s1.t5.7

⁵ *Gītā*, IX. 32.

c8.s1.t5.8

⁶ Hopkins, *GE.* 2.

c8.s1.t5.9

⁷ Numerous pieces of legal lore are found elsewhere, especially in the first and twelfth books.

c8.s1.t5.10

⁸ *GE.* 22-3.

c8.s1.t5.11

In all probability the code known to the later epic was not quite our present code, but it was a code much like ours and ascribed to Manu, a Śāstra which, with some additions and omissions, such as all popular texts in India suffer, was essentially our present text.

F. Vaiṣṇava Material in the Didactic Epic.

c8.s1.t6.1

§ 105. Since the transformation of the epic into an encyclopaedia of religion, law, and politics was carried out in the interests of the Vaiṣṇava sect, nearly all the religious sections are devoted to the exposition of the theology first sketched in the *Bhagavadgītā*, and to the praise of Kṛṣṇa. The second half of the twelfth book, known as Mokshadharma, is a sort of corpus of Krishnaite teaching, containing a number of pieces of distinct origin, and there are noteworthy sections also in Books III, V, VI, XIII, and XIV. Four of these portions are of such outstanding philosophic and religious interest that they are frequently selected for separate treatment: V. 40-45: Sanatsujātīya. VI. 25-42: Bhagavadgītā. XII. 174-367: Mokshadharma. XIV. 16-51: Anugītā.

c8.s1.t6.2

There is one chapter¹ in the thirteenth book which is greatly treasured by devout Vaishṇavas, because it contains the thousand names of Vishṇu, and one chapter in the third book² contains a panegyric of Vishṇu by Bhīma, and another, in the political portion of the twelfth book³, contains a hymn of praise to Vishṇu sung by the great Bhīshma.

c8.s1.t6.3

¹ 149.

c8.s1.t6.4

² 271.

c8.s1.t6.5

³ 48.

c8.s1.t6.6

We have already discussed the Gītā. One considerable section of the Mokshadharma⁴ is known as the Nārāyaṇīya and seems to reflect a later period in the history of the Vishṇuite sect. It will therefore be discussed separately along with a passage from the sixth book,⁵ which seems to contain similar teaching. The other portions fall to be considered here.

c8.s1.t6.7

⁴ Chaps. 335-52.

c8.s1.t6.8

⁵ Chaps. 65-8.

c8.s1.t6.9

The leading ideas here are the same as in the Gītā. We are taught that the highest religion is the worship of Kṛishṇa as Vishṇu, who is the Brahman of the Upanishads. The Sāṅkhya and the Yoga systems are represented as being essentially the same as the philosophy of Brahman, and all three are taught as philosophic foundations for the Vaishṇava religion. There is no care taken to describe any one of these systems with precision, and no articulated Vaishṇava theology is taught. As in the Gītā, there are large pieces of a Sāṅkhyan character, others that teach Yoga, and yet others that reflect the monism of the Upanishads. The Sanatsujātīya (V. 40-45) is the most important monistic section. Numerous passages teach slightly variant philosophic systems in which Sāṅkhya, Yoga, and Upanishad elements intermingle interminably. The student may scan these outlines in Hopkins's Great Epic.¹ The *Anugītā* is a direct imitation of the *Gītā*. In these passages theology makes no perceptible advance, but the pictorial myth of Śeṣa, Viṣṇu, and Brahmā appears, and six incarnations of Viṣṇu are mentioned, the Boar, the Man-lion, the Dwarf, the Fish, Rāma, and Kṛṣṇa.

c8.s1.t6.10

¹ Chap. iii.

c8.s1.t6.11

§ 106. We now take the Nārāyaṇīya,² which shows a later stage of Vaiṣṇava teaching. The ancient name Bhāgavata occurs, but Sāttvata,³ and Pāñcharātra,⁴ especially the latter, appear more frequently. There is a Pāñcharātra scripture⁵ compiled by the seven Chitraśikhaṇḍin Ṛishis, doubtless the forerunner of the Saṃhitās which we shall discuss later.⁶ The origin and meaning of the word Pāñcharātra are not yet known with certainty.⁷ We have shown above in what precise respects the sect was heterodox.⁸

c8.s1.t6.12

² XII. 335-52.

c8.s1.t6.13

³ XII. 349, 29.

c8.s1.t6.14

⁴ XII. 336, 25; 349, 82; 350, 63.

c8.s1.t6.15

⁵ XII. 336, 28; 349, 82; 350, 67.

c8.s1.t6.16

⁶ § 212.

c8.s1.t6.17

⁷ See Schrader, *IPAS.* 24 ff.

c8.s1.t6.18

⁸ Above, § 79.

c8.s1.t6.19

In the Nārāyaṇīya occurs the doctrine of Vyūha or expansion, according to which Viṣṇu exists in four forms. The doctrine⁹ is that from Vāsudeva springs Saṃkarṣaṇa, from Saṃkarṣaṇa Pradyumna, from Pradyumna Aniruddha, and from Aniruddha Brahmā. Saṃkarṣaṇa and the three others are then identified with the cosmic existences posited by the Sāṅkhya philosophy thus:

c8.s1.t6.20

⁹ See Schrader, *IPAS.* 35 ff.; Chanda, *IAR.* 109 ff.

c8.s1.t6.21

Vāsudeva . . the supreme Reality. Saṃkarṣaṇa . primeval matter, *prakṛiti*. Pradyumna . . cosmic mind, *manas*. Aniruddha . cosmic self-consciousness, *ahaṃkāra*. Brahmā . . Creator of the visible world, the *bhūtāni*.

c8.s1.t6.22

It is very difficult to make out what the idea behind this scheme is.¹⁰ Vāsudeva is Kṛṣṇa; Balarāma, or Saṃkarṣaṇa,¹¹ is Kṛṣṇa's brother, Pradyumna his son, and Aniruddha one of his grandsons. It is probable that these three were local divinities, that an arrangement was made to bring them into relation with Kṛṣṇa so as to form a combined sect, and that the doctrine of the Vyūhas is a theologism created to give them a permanent place in the teaching and the worship of the community.

c8.s1.t6.23

¹⁰ See Schrader, *IPAS.* 39 ff.

c8.s1.t6.24

¹¹ Saṃkarṣaṇa means 'Withdrawn', because he was drawn out of his mother's womb and placed in Rohiṇī.

c8.s1.t6.25

The Nārāyaṇīya shows also an advanced stage of the incarnation doctrine. There are ten incarnations of Viṣṇu recognized here,¹ while in the earlier lists² there are four, or six.

c8.s1.t6.26

¹ XII. 340, 100.

c8.s1.t6.27

² Above, § 84.

c8.s1.t6.28

Hopkins³ holds that Pañchaśikha, the teacher of the Sāṅkhya-Yoga, theistic form of the Sāṅkhya philosophy, as we have seen above,⁴ was regarded by the Pāñcharātras as the author of the philosophical teaching of the sect. This is interesting; because the Vaiṣṇava theology unquestionably rests on a Sāṅkhya-Yoga basis.

c8.s1.t6.29

³ *GE.* 144.

c8.s1.t6.30

⁴ § 99.

c8.s1.t6.31

This passage, the Nārāyaṇīya, tells a story to the effect that Nārada took a long journey to the north, where he came to the Sea of Milk, in the midst of which was White Island, inhabited by white men who worshipped Nārāyaṇa, i. e. Viṣṇu.⁵ The men, their beliefs, their sanctity, and their worship are described. A number of scholars have believed they detected distinct traces of Christianity in the passage, and the question has been much discussed, with rather doubtful results.⁶

c8.s1.t6.32

⁵ XII. 336, 8-9.

c8.s1.t6.33

⁶ See the theories and the evidence, Garbe, *IC.* 191-200.

c8.s1.t6.34

§ 107. The two epics borrow from each other at this period.⁷ There are a number of interpolations in the text of the Rāmāyaṇa which are clearly contemporaneous with the didactic epic, one passage containing a copy of the description of the inhabitants of White Island.⁸ These latest interpolations are mostly in the seventh book, but the most important of all is a canto in the sixth,⁹ in which Rāma is praised as a full incarnation of Viṣṇu, and is called the eternal Brahman.

c8.s1.t6.35

⁷ Hopkins, *GE.* 59, 72.

c8.s1.t6.36

⁸ Cf. R. VII. 77 with MBH. XII. 336.

c8.s1.t6.37

⁹ VI. 119; see Muir, *OST.* IV. 148 ff. The other most noteworthy passages are VII. 6, 17, 57, 75-7, 110.

c8.s1.t6.38

The same theological conceptions are here applied to Rāma as are applied to Kṛṣṇa in the didactic epic. We have already seen that Rāma is recognized as Viṣṇu in the Kṛṣṇa-epic. Similarly Kṛṣṇa is recognized in these late interpolations in the Rāmāyaṇa.¹

c8.s1.t6.39

§ 108. It is important to notice what stage the Kṛṣṇa legend has reached in the didactic epic. We are told that he was born in Mathurā to kill Kaṃsa and other demons, and that after he had done that he went to Dvārikā in Kathiawar.² His parents' names, Vāsudeva and Devakī,³ are given, but the story of his birth and of his being miraculously saved from the wrath of Kaṃsa is not told;⁴ and there is nothing to suggest that the child Kṛṣṇa was worshipped in those days. Nor is there the slightest hint that he was brought up among the cowherds of Gokul. The stories of his boyish tricks with the cowherds, his youthful sports⁵ among the Gopīs, and his killing of the demons in the cow-settlement, which are so prominent in the Harivaṃśa and the Purāṇas are absent here, except in a few passages which are manifestly very late interpolations.⁶ Rādhā is not mentioned at all.

c8.s1.t6.40

¹ VI. 119; VII. 50. ² II. 14, 34-50; XII. 340, 86-7. ³ VII. 144; XVI. 7. ⁴ We must note carefully, however, that the story of the death of Kaṃsa is very old; for it was already dramatized in the second century B. C., as Patañjali tells us. ⁵ But in XIII. 149, 88, one of his names is ‘he who sports joyously on the banks of the Jumna’. ⁶ Thus II. 68, 41 b to 46 a, which calls Kṛṣṇa ‘Lord of Vraja’ and ‘favourite of the milkmaids’, is clearly a very late piece interpolated into a very early section; for it makes Draupadī appeal to Kṛṣṇa for help in her frightful need, while the original says that Dharma, the god of law and right, stood and helped her. Garbe’s argument (CI. 227) is thus of very doubtful value. Similarly, in II. 41, Śiśupāla, in abusing Kṛṣṇa, calls him ‘the cowherd’ and says that Bhīṣma has praised him for killing Pūtanā and the vulture and other notable deeds; but, when we turn to Bhīṣma’s praise of Kṛṣṇa in chap. 38, there is no mention of Pūtanā, or the vulture, or any other of these exploits. Thus at least verses 4-11 of chap. 41 are an interpolation: Bhandarkar, VS. 35 f. It is probable that these local legends had been long current in Mathurā. The point we emphasize is that they had not been accepted into the official body of Vaiṣṇava teaching when the didactic epic was formed.

c8.s1.t6.41

G. Śaiva Material in the Didactic Epic.

c8.s1.t6.42

§ 109. In the didactic epic Śiva takes quite as subordinate a place as he does in the heroic poem. Scholars seem to be agreed that the passages in the late books¹ which exalt and praise him are, on the whole, later than the mass of Vaiṣṇava teaching; and indeed it seems most probable that the changed Śaiva theology which those passages show was formed in direct and conscious imitation of the New Vaiṣṇavism.

c8.s1.t6.43

¹ The most important are III. 38-41; VII. 80-1; XII. 284-85; XIII. 14-18; 160-1. The most significant are discussed by Muir, OST. IV. 150-70.

c8.s1.t6.44

The Śaiva sections consist, in the main, of narratives,² hymns of praise,³ and expositions of the new Śaiva theology.⁴ The narratives, which tell how this or that hero went and praised Śiva, in order to receive from him some heavenly weapon of war of peculiar effectiveness, are of minor interest.

c8.s1.t6.45

² III. 38-41; VII. 80-1. Cf. also X. 7, which may be of earlier origin.

c8.s1.t6.46

³ VII. 80, 54-63; XII. 285, 3-115; XIII. 14, 283-326; 16, 12-63; 17.

c8.s1.t6.47

⁴ XII. 285, 122-5; 350, 63-6; XIII. 160-1.

c8.s1.t6.48

The hymns of praise are valuable because we see the new teaching reflected in them most clearly. The greatest of these hymns⁵ sets forth the one thousand and eight names of Śiva, a Śaiva copy of the thousand names of Viṣṇu.⁶ In these ascriptions of praise one half of the new Vaiṣṇava theology is transferred in the lump to Śiva: there is only a change of names. Śiva is the Brahman of the Upaniṣads, the Eternal, the Supreme, the source of all gods, all beings, and all things. The other half of Vaiṣṇava theology, the doctrine of divine incarnations, is not carried over. In its place we have divine theophanies: Śiva appears in various human disguises or other forms to test, or teach, or gratify his worshippers.⁷

c8.s1.t6.49

⁵ XIII. 17.

c8.s1.t6.50

⁶ XIII. 149.

c8.s1.t6.51

⁷ III. 39, 2; VII. 80, 38-40; X. 7, 60; XII. 284, 60; &c.

c8.s1.t6.52

Pāśupata,⁸ the name of the new Śaiva theology, is thus parallel to Pāñcharātra, the name of the new Vaishṇavism. Pāśupata is formed from Paśupati, lord of flocks, an epithet used of Rudra in early literature.¹ But the sect gave the word a new religious significance. Paśupati is the Lord (pati), and man, his creature ² (paśu), is bound by the fetter (pāśa) of the world, and requires to be released by the Lord. Pāśupata is scarcely distinguishable from Pāñcharātra as a system. Both use the fundamental conceptions of the Sāṅkhya and Yoga, yet are anxious to be in complete harmony with the teaching of the Upanishads. The similarity goes even further; for both number thirty-one philosophical principles, an enumeration which is associated with the name of Pañchaśikha.³ There is this difference between the two systems that, while Vishṇu has four forms, Śiva has eight.⁴ The Pāśupata is also heterodox, like the Pāñcharātra.⁵

c8.s1.t6.53

⁸ For the Pāśupata see esp. Hopkins, GE. 86; 96; 118; 152-7; 189 n. Cf. what he says on the theistic faith in general, 102-3; 106; 115; The chief references in the epic are XII. 285; 321; 350; XIII. 14-18; 160-1.

c8.s1.t6.54

¹ White Yajurveda, XVI. 28; Atharvaveda, XI. ii. 28; Āśvalāyana GS. iv. 8; Pāraskara GS. iii. 8; Barth, RI. 164.

c8.s1.t6.55

² The figure comes from the farmer with his beast and the rope with which it is bound. ‘Creature’ must not be taken literally: the soul is eternal and uncreated.

c8.s1.t6.56

³ Hopkins, GE. 152 ff.

c8.s1.t6.57

⁴ Hopkins, GE. 143.

c8.s1.t6.58

⁵ MBH. XII. 285, 124; Hopkins, GE. 114.

c8.s1.t6.59

§ 110. There is one further point to note with regard to Śiva. In a few of the more important Pāśupata passages in the thirteenth book, his phallic emblem, the liṅga, is made the subject of great laudation. No mention of the liṅga occurs in earlier literature;⁶ yet, as is well known, all Śaivas are liṅga-worshippers to-day. The question of its origin has been often discussed, but has not yet been settled.⁷ Archaeologists tell us that liṅgas belonging to pre-Christian dates are in existence; so that they must be earlier than the first mention in literature. The explanation probably is that the liṅga is of aboriginal origin, as śiśnadeva of the Ṛigveda implies, that it passed into popular Hinduism and into sculpture at an early date, but did not receive Brahmanical recognition until after the Christian era. It had been already accepted when the Pāśupata system was formed.

First 187 of 320 passages. Read on

Linked texts (29)