Ancient Indian Education (Brahmanical and Buddhist) c21.14

c21.14

**Its Brahminical Forms.** The Brahmanical order of life provided for a progressive realization of this idea of renunciation through the discipline of the four Āśramas, of which only the last two directly lead up to it. Even the *Vānaprastha*, the man in the third Āśrama of life, does not wander about absolutely homeless but would have a fixed place of abode in the forest where his wife would follow him as well as their sacred fire, and a part of their old household duties in connection with sacrifice would still be performed. It is, however, to be noted that exceptions to these general rules were also quite common, though these exceptions became the rule with the Buddhist Order or Community. Thus we read of householders at once passing on to the life of hermits, dissolving all earthly ties without undergoing the penances of the third Āśrama. Similarly, a *Brahmachārī* electing perpetual pupilage without marrying and entering upon the householder's state was a very usual phenomenon and a regular institution was made of it with special rules for its governance. This institution was adopted, as we shall see, as the starting-point of the Buddhist religious organization. There are other features in the old Vedic monasticism which are borrowed by Buddhist though it is not so apparent. In the first place, the right to renunciation did not belong exclusively to the Brahman caste alone. We have already seen how the observance of the rule regarding the division of life into four Āśramas or stages was binding upon all the three twice-born classes which made up a large proportion of the total Indian population. We may also recall scenes depicted in the Upanishads of learned disputations at the courts of kings in which scholars of different classes and castes participate equally—the Brahmans equally with the princes and Kshatriyas and even women. Nay, the kings are represented as the enthusiastic and active organizers of these philosophical Congresses and Conferences. And, indeed, if the right to listen to the discourses on deliverance be conceded to all, why should the right to seek the means of that deliverance in a life of renunciation be denied to them? No one, by reason of his caste or social position, was debarred from the citizenship of the kingdom of the spirit, from the sacred, inviolable right or birthright to renounce home, wife, and child, goods and chattels and embrace, as a mendicant monk, a life of poverty and purity in pursuit of the highest end of existence. Princes and peasants equally with Brahmans had the right "to those spiritual treasures to obtain which men parted with all earthly treasure".