225 (#259) ############################################
XI]
THE MAHĀBHĀRATA
225
was developed by the bards and became the recogoised language of
narrative poetry ; and their metre is the final reproduction of Vedic metres
in modern form.
XI]
THE MAHĀBHĀRATA
225
was developed by the bards and became the recogoised language of
narrative poetry ; and their metre is the final reproduction of Vedic metres
in modern form.
Cambridge History of India - v1
E.
vol.
II p.
78.
2 Generally speaking we may say that exogamy is the rule, but epic literature
records cases of marriage between near relations (cousins).
1
## p. 218 (#252) ############################################
218
(ch.
LIFE AND CUSTOMS IN THE SUTRAS
9
>
to employ the inheritance for the spiritual good of the deceased. Probably
the general rule anticipates not the death of the owner but a division
of property among the sons during his lifetime. The king inherits in default
of the others named, and some say that among the sons only the eldest
inherits. These rules are sufficiently vague, but local laws are also provided
for in the additional rule : In some countries gold, (or) black cattle,
(or) black produce of the earth (grain or iron ? ) is the share of the
eldest' (Āp. , Dh. S. , II, 14, 7). Then in regard to what the wife receives, the
Sūtra leaves it doubtful whether the rule 'the share of the wife consists
of her ornaments and wealth received from her relations, according to some
(authorities),' is to be interpreted in such a manner that 'according to some'
refers only to the last clause or to the whole.
What is obvious is that the whole matter of inheritance was as yet not
regulated by any general state law. Different countries or districts of India
have different laws ; different authorities differ in regard to the interpreta-
tion of these laws; and, finally, different texts of Vedic authority contradict
by inference the rule to be got from them. Thus because one Vedic text says
‘Manu divided his wealth among his sons', it is implied that there should be
no preference shown to the eldest ; but, on the other hand, another
Vedic text says they distinguish the eldest by the heritage', which
countenances the preference shown to the eldest. Now this last point,
despite the desire for conciseness, demands consideration at length, so
the maker of the Sūtra takes it up, arguing that a mere statement of fact is
not a rule. For example (he says), the dictum ‘a learned priest and a he. goat
are the most sensual beings' is a statement, but cannot be taken as
rule. Hence, he says, the statement ‘they distinguish the eldest' is not a rule.
But the question remains, why then should the other statement, 'Manu
divided his wealth,' be regarded as a rule ? The subject of inheritance
is treated first by Baudhāyana under the head of impurity, where he
says simply that Sapindas inherit in default of nearer relations, and
Sakulyas (remoter relations) in default of Sapindas ; but afterwards he
adds that the eldest son, in accordance with the quotations cited by
Āpastamba, may receive the best chattel, or the father may divide
equally among his sons. Here also the fact that the same subject is treated
in different sections shows that as yet the matter of civil law was not treated
systematically but incidentally.
It is no part of the present discussion to enter into the confusing
details of the laws of inheritance; only to show in what state were these laws
at the time of the Sūtras. The latest Sūtra, however, already stands on
a level with the formal law-books, and, for example in this matter of
inheritance, is not content with the vague ‘sons' of the earlier authors
but makes a formal classification of the (later legal) 'twelve sons',
six
a
1
## p. 219 (#253) ############################################
X]
ROYAL DUTIES
219
of whom are entitled to inherit as 'heirs and kinsmen' while six (kinds) are
‘kinsmen but not heirs', among the last being the son of a Çūdra wife.
Civil law is in general discussed in the Sūtras under the head of royal
duties ; for it is assumed that the king administers justice both civil and
criminal. It is his part to pay attention to the special laws of districts,
castes (jāti), and families, and make the four orders (varņas, castes in a
general sense) fulfil their duties. The summary, in the following order,
includes punishing those who wander from the path of duty, not injuring
trees that bear fruit, guarding against falsification of weights and measures,
not taking for his own use the property of his subjects (except as taxes),
providing for the widows of his soldiers, exempting from taxation a learned
priest, a royal servant, those without protectors, ascetics, infants, very old
men, students, widows who have returned to their families, unmarried girls,
wives of servants, and pradattās (doubtful, perhaps girls promised in
marriage) ; but first and foremost, the king is to protect all in his realm
(Vasishțha XIX, 1-24). This quaint summary of royal duties does not even
belong to the early Sūtra period but derives from a text, which in some
regards is practically, as it is called, a law-book (Çāstra). It reflects, as do
the elaboration of details and additions casually made, the fact that even
at this comparatively late period the king was still a small local rāja, not
an emperor.
Although we may agrec in general with the judgment of Bühler to the
effect that the Dharma Çāstra of Gautama takes temporal precedence over
the extant Dharma Çāstras and Dharma Sūtras", yet it is historically as
important to remember that this judgement was tempered by the considera-
tion that interpolations occur in the work of Gautama, and that in its
present form the language ‘agrees closer with Pāṇini's rules than that of
Āpastamba and Baudhāyana. The title itself of Gautama's work is Çāstra
not Sūtra, and it is obvious from his chapter on kings that sundry works
called Dharma Çāstras were in vogue, for he says : "The administration of
justice (shall be regulated by) the Veda, the Dharma Çāstras, the Angas, and
the Purāņas (and Upavedas)'(XI, 19), and though the word “Upavedas'
occurs in but one manuscript, and logically Dharma is included under
Anga, yet it is not necessary to assume an interpolation for these words,
especially as Gautama mentions Manu among teachers of the law, from
‘some' of whom he cites, though not by name. The Atharvaçiras, a late
work, is also known to him (XIX, 12). It may then be questioned whether
each and every rule of Gautama can bc cited as being an integral part of the
"earliest law-book. '
The royal duties as described by Gautama are few. After stating that
all the ‘reborn (men of the three upper castes) are to study, offer sacrifice,
S. B. E. vol. II. p. liv.
## p. 220 (#254) ############################################
220
[ch.
LIFE AND CUSTOMS IN THE SÜTRAS
1
and give alms, and that the priest in addition is to teach, perform sacrifice
for others, and receive alms, or, if he does not do the work himself, to
practise agriculture and tradel, Gautama says that a king's special addition-
al duty is to protect all beings, to inflict proper punishment, support learned
priests and others unable to work, those free of taxes and temporary
students, to take measures for ensuring victory, to learn how to manage a
chariot and use a bow, to fight firmly, to divide the spoils of battle equitab-
ly, to take a tax of one-tenth, one-eighth, or one-sixth (of produce) to force
artisans to pay one day's work monthly, to proclaim by crier lost property,
and, if the owner be not found in a year, to keep it, giving one-fourth to
the finder (but all treasure-trove belongs to the king), and to protect the
property of infants. In the following section the author says that the king
is the master of all except the priests ; that he is to be moral and impartial,
worshipped by all except Brāhmans, who shall honour him (ibid. xi, 1 f. );
that he must protect the castes (orders) and different stages of the (açramas),
and, with the assistance of his chaplain fulfill all his religious duties, as enu-
merated above. Authoritative in the realm shall be all rules of castes
(jāti), and families (kula), as well as district-rules not opposed to (Vedic)
tradition, while for their respective orders (varga) ploughmen, traders,
herdsmen, money-lenders, and artisans may make their own rules (ibid. 21).
In this resume of royal duties there is no indication or implication of
any power greater than that of a small king. But the later Sūtra of Āpas-
tamba indicates the beginning of that system of government by proxy
which obtains in the Çāstra of Manu and other Smțitis. Nor is Āpastamba's
account of royal duties otherwise without interest, since it shows just such
a combination of old and new as characterises the Sūtra period. Te begin
with, after discussing caste-duties in general, Āpastamba describes the town
where the king is to live :
I will now explain the duties of a king. He shall build a town (pur), and a
dwelling (v? Çma), each with a door facing south. The dwelling (Bühler, 'palace') is
within the pur, and to the east of the dwelling shall be a hall called the invitation'
(guest) place. South of the pur shall be an assembly-house (sabhā), having doors on
the south and north sides so that it shall be in plain view within and without. There
shall be fires in all these places (burning) perpetually, and offering to the Fire-(god) shall
there be made regularly, just as to the sacred house-fire. He shall put up as guests in
the hall of invitation learned priests. . . and in the assembly-house he shall establish a
1 This and the permission to teach for money are not in accord with the usual
rules of the Sūtras. The practice of Brāhmans bocoming ‘gentlemen farmers and sleep-
ing partners in mercantile or banking firms managed by Vaiçyas' is not countenanced in
other Sūtras (see Buhler's note to Gautama, x, 5) and probably the permission to teach
for money is intended only for priests in distress.
2 An exception in the case of treasure trove is made in the case of a priest being the
finder, and ‘some' say that anybody who finds it gets one-sixth. In the rules for taxes, if
the stock is cattle or gold the tax according to‘some' one fiftieth and if it merchandise
one-twentieth, while one sixtieth is the tax on roots, fruits, flowers, herbs, honey, meat,
grass, and firewood (Gaut. , X, 25 f. )
a
## p. 221 (#255) ############################################
X]
TAXES, STATUS OE WOMEN, ETC.
221
>
>
>
>
>
>
gaming. table, sprinkle it with water, and throw down on it dice made of Vibhitaka
(nuts), sufficient in number, and let Aryans play there they are) pure men of honest
character. Assaults at arms, dances, singing, concerts, etc. , should not take place except
in houses kept by the king's servants. . . Let the king appoint Āryans, men of pure and
honest character, to guard his people in villages and towns, having servants of similar
character ; and these me must guard a town (nagara) from thieves for a league
(yojana), in every direction ; villages for two miles ( a kos or quarter of a league). They
must pay back what is stolen within that distance and collect taxes (for the king).
A learned priest and women are not taxed, nor are children before
puberty, temporary students, or ascetics, or slaves who wash feet, or blind,
dumb, deaf, and diseased persons. The king goes personally into battle
and is exhorted not to turn his back and not to use poisoned weapons or
to attack those who supplicate for mercy or are helpless (Äpastamba, II,
5, 10, 11), such as those who have ceased to fight or declare themselves
cows (by eating grass, a sign of submission) (Baudh. , I, 10, 18, 11, ; Gaut. ,
X, 18).
Taxes and inheritance form the chief subjects of civil law together
with the vexed question of the status of women. Women may not on
their own account offer either the Vedic Çrauta sacrifices or the Grihya
sacrifices. A woman is ‘not independent'(Baudh. II, 2, 3, 44; Gaut. , XVIII,
1), either in respect of sacrifice or of inheritance. Widows, if sonless,
are expected to bear eons by the levirate marriage (Baudh. , II, 2, 4, 9).
Suttee is not acknowledged. Women are property and come under the
general rule : 'A pledge, a boundary, the property of minors, an open or
sealed deposit, women, the property of a king or of a learned priest are not
lost by being enjoyed by others' (Vas. , XVI, 18).
In proving property, documents, witnesses, and possession are admit-
ted as proof of title by the late Sūtra of Vasishțha (XVI, 19), and if the
documents conflict, the statements made by old men and by gilds and
corporations are to be relied upon (Vas. , XVI, 15), an interesting passage
as it shows what importance was ascribed to the gilds (freni) of the time.
In criminal law, only Āpastamba recognises the application of ordeals
(Dh. S. , II, 11, 3 ; cf. 29, 6). The ordeals, here merely refered to, consist in
the application of fire, water, etc. , according to the later law-books
but are not defined in the Sūtras. Assaults, adultery, and theft are
the chief subjects discussed in the Sūtras under this head. The fines
of the later law are generally represented here by banishment or corporal
injury. Most of the regulations are dominated by caste-feeling. A Çūdra
who commits homicide or theft or steals land has his property confiscated
and suffers capital punishment (Āp. , Dh. S. , II, 27, 16) ; but a Brāhman
priest for such crimes shall be blinded (ibid. 17). A Kshatriya a (warrior)
who abuses a Brāhmaṇa (priest) is fined one hundred (coins); Vaiçya
(farmer) must pay half as much again for the same offence ; but if a
Brāhman abuses a Kshatriya he pays only fifty coins (kārshāpaņas), and only
>
## p. 222 (#256) ############################################
222
[ Ch.
LIFE AND CUSTOMS IN THE SUTRAS
1
>
>
>
twenty-five if he abuses a Vaiçya, while if he abuses a Çūdra he pays nothing
(Gaut. , XII, 8 f. ), etc. The same caste-interest works outside of criminal
,
law.
Thus the legal rate of interest is set at (the equivalent of) fifteen per
cent. per annum (five măshas a month for twenty kärshāpaņas, Gaut. , X! I,
29 ; Baudh. , 1, 5, 10, 22) ; but according to Vasishtha (II, 48), 'two, three,
four, five in the hundred is declared in the Smriti to be the monthly interest
according to caste. ' This means that the highest caste pays two, the next
caste three, and so on (limited by the scholiast to cases on loans without
security). The same author prohibits Brāhmans and Kshatriyas from
being usurers; but Baudhāyana says that a Vaiçya may practise usury (Vas. ,
II, 40 and Baudh. , I, 5, 10, 21). That there was, however, notable laxity
in carrying out the supposed inflexibility of caste-rules is evident from the
fact that the law-makers expressly permit the upper castes to take to the
occupation of the lower when in need of sustenance. Even the Brāhman
.
priest who neglects to say his prayers may at the king's pleasure be forced
to perform the work of Çūdras (Baudh. , II, 4, 7, 15). Thus, with certain
restrictions as to what he sells, etc , a priest or warrior may support life
by trade and agriculture (Vas. , II, 24 f. ). But a man ‘reborn' who persists
in trade cannot be regarded as a Brāhman, nor can a priest who lives as
an actor or as a physician (ihid. III, 3). In other words, as may be con-
cluded from the very laws inveighing against them, at the time of the
Sūtras there were many nominal members of the priestly and royal orders
who lived as farmers and traders, perhaps even as usurers (a special law
prohibits this, Vas. ; II, 40, cf. Manu, X, 117), not only acting the part of
gentleman farmers but living as humble ploughmen (Vas. , II, 33).
As touching the outer world, as one is directed to avoid going into
towns, so one should avoid visiting foreign places and 'not learn a language
spoken by barbarians' (Vas. , VI, 41 ; Āp. , I, 32, 18). In religion, as
to be expected, denying the authority of the Vedas, carping at the teaching
of the Vedic seers, and wavering in regard to any traditional duty is to
'destroy one's soul' (Vas. , XII, 41), and there is no salvation for a man
who devotes himself to epicurean ways or to captivating men or to philology
çabdaçāstra, Vas. , X, 20). On the other hand the Upanishad doctrine that a
priest who is learned and austere and repeats the sacred texts is not tainted
with sin, though he constantly commit sinful acts, is a morally destructive
teaching already legalised (Vas. , XXVI, 19). The highest named god is
Brahmā or Prajāpati, to whom, after the manner of the epic, verses of legal
character are assigned. Philosophically the Sūtras are dominated by the
Vedānta Ātman-theory, which appears to be known as a system to
Āpastamba, whose Sūtra seems to have been a work which arose among the
Andhras of the south-eastern coast, and probably is not older than the
was
1
## p. 223 (#257) ############################################
X]
RELATIVE AGES OF THE SUTRAS
223
>
second century B. C. It recognises, alone among Sūtras, a named Purāņa
(the Bhavishya, II, 24, 6) and its archaic effect linguistically, which in large
measure determined Bühler in his conjecture that this Sūtra might revert to
the fifth century, may well be due to the fact that the Andhras retained
linguistic peculiarities long after Pāniņi fixed the northern usage. Āpas-
tamba knows the Atharvaveda, as does Vasishțha, who appears to have
been a still later writer. It is true that Bühler arranged a chronological
series of Sūtras of the law in the order Gautama, Baudhāyana, Vasishtha
and Āpastamba ; but in doing so he minimised the late characteristics of
Vasishtha (who alone mentions 'documents' as legal proofs); and in his re-
mark (S. B. E. XIV, pxvii) concerning the fourth Veda he appears to have
overlooked the passage at VI, 4, where the four Vedas are mentioned. It is
also quite probable that the passage which seems to make Baudhāyana
earlier than Vasishtha is interpolated, and Bühler himself admits that many
other passages have been tampered with. Whatever the earlier text may bave
been, the present text, with its free use of Çloka verse, its recognition of
Dharma Çāstras, its citations from Manu, Vishņu, etc. , and its possible
allusion to the Romans (Romaka, XVIII, 4), seems to be the latest of the
legal Sūtras, though containing much older material. In general, the age
to which the Sūtras may be assigned cannot well be earlier than the
seventh or later than the second century B. C. They represent both the
views of different Vedic schools and different localities, from the Andhra
country in the S. E. to the countries of the N. W. , where probably the
school of Vasishtha is to be sought? . Probably the Gșihyas represent the
earlier Sūtras ; the Dharmas as a whole come later : perhaps 300 B. C.
would represent the earliest.
1 For Bühler's views regarding Apastamba, as dating from the third to the fifth
century B. C. , see S. B. E. vol. XIV, p. xlii. The strongest proof that Apastamba was a
Southerner lies in II, 17, 17, where he says that ‘Northerners' pour water into a priest's
hand at funeral feasts. That he followed Baudhāyana is undoubted ; but for historical
use it nust also be remembered that only the first two of the four books of
Baudhāyana are genuine and the latter half may be much later.
## p. 224 (#258) ############################################
CHAPTER XI
1
THE PRINCES AND PEOPLES OF EPIC POEMS
The Sūtra literature does not lack connexion with the epics, to
which we now turn. In the Gộihya Sūtra of Çānkāyana, for example,
occur the names of Sumantu, Jaimini, Vaiçampāyana, and Paila, who are
teachers of the great epic Mahābhārata ; and the list of revered teachers,
and no less revered species of literature, mentioned in the Sūtra of
Āçvalāyana includes the Bhārata and Mahābhārata, while the Çāmbhavya
Sūtra also mentions the Mahābhārata (it omits Bhārata, perhaps as included
in the greater name). Although the words are assumed by modern
scholars to be interpolated, the reason given, because otherwise it would
make the Sūtra too late? , has never been very cogent, since the end of the
Sūtras and beginning of the epics probably belong to about the same time.
As an indefinite allusion not to a special epic poem but to the kind
of poetry are also to be noticed such early references as that of Āçvalāyana
(III, 3, 1) to Gāthās, hero-lauds, tales and ancient legends.
Epic poetry is divided by the Hindus themselves into two genera, one
called 'tales and legends' (Itibāsa and Purāna) and the other called 'art-
poem' or simply ‘poem' (Kāvja, the production of a Kavi or finished
poet) ; but the compilation named Mahābbārata is both Itihāsa-Purāņa, its
original designation, and then Kāvya till the introductory verses exalt it as
such. In its origin it was undoubtedly a popular story of the glorified
historical character which attaches to tribal lays even to-day. The
second epic, the Rāmāyaṇa, has always stood as the type and origin of the
refined one author poem, and whatever may have been the date of its
germ as a story, as an art-product it is later than the Mahābhārata.
Thus the oldest references which may indicate epic poetry point
rather to the story of the Bharatas than to the story of Rāma. These
references, however, in any event are not nearly old enough to warrant the
assumption of immense antiquity made by the native tradition. The
• language of both epics is not Vedic but a popular form of Sanskrit, which
1 Weber, Ind. Lit. , p. 63=Eng. trans. , p. 58.
224
## p.
225 (#259) ############################################
XI]
THE MAHĀBHĀRATA
225
was developed by the bards and became the recogoised language of
narrative poetry ; and their metre is the final reproduction of Vedic metres
in modern form. Both language and verse are not widely different from
those of the latest Sūtras. We may reasonably conclude, then, that
the latest Sūtras and the epics belong to the same period, and that they
represent two contemporary styles of literature, the former priestly and the
latter secular.
There can be no doubt that, so far as much of their subject-matter
is concerned, the epics and the Purāņas are the literary descendants
of the stories and legends (Itihāsas and Purāņas) which are mentioned in
literature from the time of the Atharvaveda onwards ; and the particular
legend or historical tale (the two are confused) which is embedded in the
Mahābhārata or 'great epic of the Bharatas' is also not wholly without
scholastic affinities. Just as the Brāhmaṇas held the kernel of the Gșihya
Sūtras, so the great epic through its promulgator, as traditionally recorded,
is connected with the school of the White Yajurveda. Parāçara is a name
especially common in this Veda, occurring often in its genealogical lists ;
and the epic acknowledges the Çata patha as the greatest of Brāhmaṇas,
while the heroes of the epic are particularly mentioned in the Brāhmaṇa,
and indeed in such a way that Janamejaya, prominent in the epic, is treated
as a recent personage by the authors of the latter part of the Brāhmaṇa,
though the epic treats him as a descendant of the chief epic hero. The
explanation of this is not such a mystery as it seemed to Weber,
who was unable to reconcile the facts that the same person the
descendant of the later family and yet appeared as an immediate pre-
decessor or contemporary of the earlier. The explanation is simply that at
the time of the eleventh Kānda of the Çatapatha Brāhmaṇa, Janamejaya
to the priestly author was an historical character, while to the epic poet he
was legendary, and the poet himself was, if not a bard, a domestic
chaplain probably incompetent to analyse history, but anxious to give his
tale a noble frame.
Other early allusions to epic characters only show that the epic
which we now possess was unknown. Vaiçampāyana and Vyāsa are
mentioned as early as the Taittirīya Araṇyaka, but not as authors or
editors of the epic which is now their chief claim to recognition. The word
mahābhārata is used by Pāṇini, but only as an adjective which might
be applied to anything great connected with the Bharatas, a hero or town as
well as a war or a poem. But above all, the Mahābhārata epic is at
bottom the story of a feud between Kurus and Pāņdus, and the Pāņdus are
unknown to the early literature, either Brāhmaṇas or Sūtras. The idea that
the original epic was a poem commemorating a war between Pañchālas and
Kurus, which was ably developed by Lassen (Ind. Alterthümskunde, 1, pp.
was
## p. 226 (#260) ############################################
226
.
PRINCES AND PEOPLES OF THE EPIC POEMS
[ch.
592 f. ), and adopted with modifications by Weber (Ind. Literaturgesch,
pp. 126 and 203=Eng. trans. , pp. 114 and 186), is an ingenious attempt to
account for what is assumed to have existed. As a matter of fact a
Mahābhārata without Pāņdus is like an Iliad without Achilles and
Agamemnon : we know of no such poem. The Kurus and Pañchālas are foes
in the epic but only as the Pāndus ally themselves with the latter. The
Kurus of the epic, however, are doubtless the Kurus celebrated in
ancient times ; even the family records show that the epic reflects the glory
of these old aristocrats. Thus the names Ambā and Ambikā as wives of a
. Kuru in the Çatapatha Brāhmaņa are preserved in the name Ambā( Ambikā)
as mother of the king of Kurus in the epic. The first occurrence of the name
Pāņu which can be dated seems to be in a vārtika or supplementary rule
to Pāņini iv, 1, 44, attributed to Kātyāyana (c. 180 B. c. ). The Pānļus,
whatever may have been their antiquity, first come into view with the
later Buddhist literature, which recognises the Pandavas as a mountain
clan, and possibly in the myth mentioned by Greek writers in regard to a
Hindu Heracles and his wife Pandaia, though the latter is indeed of little
weight. The epic Pāņdus are not a people but a family.
It is not till the second century B. c. that we find unmistakable allu-
sion to what we may probably call our epic poem, in the account of the
Mahābhāshya, which alludes to a poetic treatment of the epic story and
speaks of epic characters. The second century B. is also the period to
which those portions belong in which the foreign invaders of the Punjab-
Yavanas, Çakas, and Pahlavas-are mentioned (v. sup. p. 201). These
foreigners are represented as fighting on the side of the Kurus. As for the
Panchālas being opponents of the Aryan Kurus, the Çatapatha Brāh-
maņa represents them as allies, and in early literature they are frequently
mentioned as forming one people, the Kuru-Pañchālas. A single reference
in a formula may, indeed, imply disdain of the Pañchālas on the part of
the Kurus', but it is not certain that any racial antagonism existed bet-
ween the two. We may say with Weber that the epic commemorates a
fight between Aryans in Hindustān after the time when the original inha-
bitants had been overthrown and Brāhmanised', oniy on the assumption
that Kurus, Panchālas, and Pāņdus were Aryans ; but this is doubtful,
ind force of the remark in any case somewhat impaired by the fact
that contests between Āryans are no indication of late date, since such
contests are commemorated even in the Rigveda.
It is possible that the Pañchālas represent five Nāga clans (with ala 'a
water-snake' cf. Eng. eel) connected with the Kurus or Krivis (meaning
'serpent' or Nāga'), and that none of the families is of pure Aryan
1 Weber, Ind. Lit, p. 126=Eng. trans. , p. 114. V. sup. Chapter v, p. 106.
2 Op. cit. , p. 204=Eng. trans. , p. 187.
1
>
## p. 227 (#261) ############################################
X]
EARLY EPIC POETRY
227
a
blood, for the Nāgas in the epic are closely related to the Pāņļus; but
all such considerations at present rest on speculation rather than fact,
Whether we are to suppose that, anterior to our extant epic, there
was a body of literature which had epic characteristics, must depend also
largely on speculation regarding the few well-known facts in the case.
These are briefly as follows. At certain ceremonies, not chiefly heroic,
Gāthās, 'strophes', in honour of great men are sung with the lute as accom-
paniment. These verses apply to men of the past or present, that is, they
are laudatory verses of a memorial characterł. Further, the Gțihya Sūtras
recognise Nārāça msis, a sort of xyča auçou 'hero-lauds', as a literary
genre. These may have served as nuclei for the stories of heroes preserved
in epic form. In the epic itself genealogy forms an important sub-division,
and such a genealogy includes the origin of gods as well as of men. Now
the Brāhmaṇas also know what they call the Devajana-vidyā, knowledge
of the gods' race' ; and since the epic genealogy of gods is in many ways
indicative of respectable antiquity, it is possible that it derives from such
a vidyā or science. The stories told in the Brāhmaṇas, like that of Haric-
chandra in the Aitareya Brāhmaṇa, often have epic fulness, and likeness,
being composed in the later epic verse though in ruder metre. In these
also we get a form of narrative told in verse which might presumably have
evolved into epic form. A great deal of the inflated epic is didactic, and
much of this is derived from didactic sources older than the present epic.
Thus dramatic tale, genealogy, and instruction in pedagogic form have all
aided in the making of the epic. Even the theology of the epic has its
prototype in the Brāhmaṇas, where Vishņu is already the 'best' or most
fortunate god (freshtha), and Çiva is already called Mahādeva.
In the hymns of the Rigveda we find stories in verse which appear to
need the complement of explanatory prose, and as the epic also has exam.
ples of this mingling of verse and prose in the telling of a story, it is
possible that we may have the right to presuppose a sort of epic narrative
even in the time of the Rigveda. Yet this presumptive epic of the Rigveda
is so entirely a matter of theory, and not undisputed theory, that it may
be left out of consideration when discussing the historical epic, as the pre-
sumptive drama of the Rigveda may be ignored in discussing the origin of
Hindu historical drama.
The element in ancient literature which seems at first most likely to
have contributed to the rise of epic poetry is that already mentioned under
the name of Nārāçamsi or 'hero-lauds', withal not so much on account of
the subject matter as on account of the circumstances in which the lauds
were sometimes sung. At the yearlong celebration preparatory to the horse-
sacrifice ten days were devoted to a series of lauds of gods and heroes,
1 Compare Indische Studien, vol. I, p. 187.
## p. 228 (#262) ############################################
228
[CH.
PRINCES AND PEOPLES OF THE EPIC POEMS
>
a
whereby the nobility and great deeds of kings were sung by priest and
warrior musicians in Gāthās of an extemporaneous character, while the re-
citation of legends in verse accompanied various events of life? .
Now there are certain scenes in the great epic which lend themselves
especially to such an interpretation. One can well believe, for example,
that the story of Ambā, who was carried off by Bhishma from her home
and given to Çalya (v, 173 f. ), was best rendered as a thrilling lay, its in-
tensity is almost equal to that of the gambling-scene (II, 60 f. ). But there
are many others not suited for anything save recitation, not to speak of
the interminable didactic material loaded upon the epic by the bookful. How
are we to reconcile this mass with a theory of lyric recitation or song ?
A study of the interpolations in the so-called Southern text shows that
thousands of verses of n arrative and didactic material have been added to
the epic text, and that the redaction comprises a shameless incorporation of
material drawn from the Purāņas and from the Harivamça, a sort of Purāņa
which was added to the Mahābhārata, as well as elaborations of the
original text, sometimes by the insertion of a dozen or so verses, sometimes
by the addition to a chapter of half a dozen new chapters narrating feats of
the heroes or insisting on the godliness of a demi-god. Now there is no
reason not to suppose that the same process has made the Mahābhārata
what it is from the beginning. It contains at present a hundred thousand
verses, with some prose admixture, but internal evidence shows that this is
an accumulation, and the text itself admits that it was originally less than
;
nine thousand verses in length. As we have seen above (p. 224) the Gșihya
Sūtra of Āçvalāyana mentions both a Bhārata and a Mahābhārata, no
doubt a shorter and a longer version of the same poem. The theme of the
epic as a story, the conflict between Kurus and Pāņdus, is at most not so
long, about twenty thousand verses, as the whole Rāmāyaṇa, or twenty-four
thousand verses. In short, in the great epic of India we have a combination
of matter, partly, epical, partly pedagogic partly narrative or historical. The
genealogies and the religious-didactic parts are not necessarily later in date,
but they are later additions to the original material. Some of the additions
may be as old as the original or even older, but this does not entitle us to
maintain that the epic was originally didactic, nor is this the best explan-
ation of the heterogeneous mass which we call the epic, and which in its
present form resembles such a combination as, barring dialectal differences,
might be effected by combining a few books of the Iliad with Hesiod,
extracts from Euripides, Theocritus, Aristotle, and a few chapters of the
New Testament. With this exception, most of the didactic material is not
1 Cf. especially Weber's article in the Proceedings of the Berlin Academy for 1891
(Episches im vedischen Ritual) and that of Lüders in Z. D. M. G. , vol. LVIII, p. 7071 .
2 Cf. also the half-forgotten tale of Vidulā, revivified to-day by Professor Jacobi
(Ueber ein verlorenes Heldengedicht der Sindhu-Sauvīra) in the Album Kern (1903), p. 53.
a
## p. 229 (#263) ############################################
XI ]
CHARACTERS OF THE MAHĀBHĀRATA
229
for the everyday man, but distinctly for the military caste. Even the philo-
sophy is not for the philosopher, the priest, but for the king and his nobles.
The predominative religion, too, is that of the kingly castel Indra is their
sovereign Lord ; and the heaven of Indra, with his celestial nymphs, the
1
Apsarasas, is the reward for kingly duty faithfully performed on earth. The
lower castes, Vaiçya and Çūdra, the agriculturist, the trader, the slave, are
scarcely recognised except adventitiously, as it becomes convenient to refer
to them. The epic is thoroughly aristocratic. a work completed by priests
for warriors, to recount the deeds of warriors and show them the need of
priests, who convert to orthodoxy the service of popular gods dear to the
local aristocracy. The epic has thus become what it calls itself, the 'fifth
Veda,' and may be regarded either as a didactic storehouse (it calls itself a
Dharma Çāstra) or as a magnified Itihāsa-Purāņa, which even before the
epic existed was regarded as supplementing the Vedas. Both elements are
united, religious-didactic and legendary, in such parts as treat of the demons,
gods, and seers of old. How ancient may have been collections of such
material prior to our extant epic is uncertain ; but the evidence for earlier
collective works does not appear to be convincing. That a mass of legends
existed and that this mass was used by Brāhmans and Buddhists alike as
they needed them may be granted, just as the mass of fables known to the
ancient world was utilised by the epic writers and by those who composed
the Buddhist Jātakas, though India had no Aesop.
Many of the characters of the Mahābhārata appear to be real, his-
torical figures. Others are mythical, in that they represent a personality
evolved from a divine name or a local hero-god. Thus the name Arjuna is
first a title of Indra, whose son the epic Arjuna is ; but his cousin Krishņa
is a local demi-god hero, and there is no reason to doubt the historical
character of the king of Magadha who was a foe of this pair and a Çivaite,
though what is said about him in the epic may be merely the exaggeration
of legend, as sung by the bards who made expeditions with the army and
sang the exploits they themselves had seen. The stories of historical
characters, like king Janaka, also reeflct history through the mists of legend.
The complete anthropomorphisation of heavenly beings, which some
scholars are reluctant to admit as a possible phenomenon in the best of
cases), is found in the Hindu epic, especially in the inserted tales of the gods;
1 Cf. Rapson, Ancient India, p. 72.
2 The Sūtas or bards were also charioteers. They made a special sub-caste and
lived at court, while the Kuçīlavas learned the songs of the bards and wandered among
the people at large singing them. This name was resolved into Kuça and Lava who are
represented as two singers, sons of Rāma. They learned the poern of Vālmīki and
recited it among tho people, as the later story goes (Rāmāyaṇa, I, 4). The Magadha
king Jarāsandha was the ruler of the East, as the Pādūus were his rivals in the West,
3 Chadwick, The Heroic Age, p. 265.
## p. 230 (#264) ############################################
230
[
RINCES AND PEOPLES OF THE EPIC POEMS
but it does not appear at all certain that any epic hero represents a heavenly
being in either of the Hindu epics. Kțishņa in the Mahābhārata and Rāma
in the Rāmāyaṇa are forms of the sun-god only as being identified with
Vishņu as All-god ; and in the case of the Rāmāyana this is a palpably late
procedure, while it is doubtful whether Krishṇa was ever a form of the sun.
Both Rāma and Krishna appear to have been tribal heroes, mythical per-
haps but not products of divine mythology. But, as no attempt has ever
been made to separate myth from history in India, it is impossible to say
whether Krishņa, the divine hero of the Mahābhārata, ever really existed,
though this is probable. Křishņa served as the charioteer of Arjuna, the
chief Pāņdu and epic hero ; and though he promised not to fight in person
he did all he could to keep up and intensify the enmity between the
Pāņdus and their related foes, the Kurus, not avoiding even tricks opposed
to knightly honour. It is not likely that such shameful acts as those re-
corded of him by his own followers would have been invented of a god,
but rather that the tricks belonged to him as a hero, and that no amount
of excuse, of which there is enough offered, could do away with the crude
facts of tradition, which represented the man-god Krishņa as a clever but
unscrupulous fighter. A later age exonerated him by offering various
excuses, the higher morality of imperative needl, the tit-for-tat rule (one sin
to offset another), etc. . just as it offered various explanatory excuses for the
polyandry of the Pāņdus, who, however, as a northern hill-tribe or family,
probably were really polyandrous and needed no excuse. 2
Although the epic age in India must necessarily be an epoch too
elastic for historical purposes, since it is not all certain that any one epic
statement may not be many years later than another, yet the effect of this
now trite observation is to exaggerate the relation between isolated cases
and the epic mass. It is true that we have additions to the greater epic
which are hundreds of years later than the mass, but it is possible from the
mass to get an impression which will represent conditions on the whole, and
we are tolerably sure that this whole is bounded by the space of from three
to four centuries, since external evidence, inscriptions, the Greek reference
to the Indian Homer", etc. , prove that the great epic in nearly its present
extent existed before the fourth century 1. D. , and negative evidence in India
makes it improbable that any epic existed earlier than the fourth century
B. C. , Since the length of the work requires the assumption of several
1 Thus Kșishna is made to say, 'if I had not done this (unknightly deed) our side
would have been beaten,’and this is accepted as an excuse ; but an excuse was demanded
2 Polyandry is not denounced in the Sutras ; but this is no proof that the Pandus
lived before they were composed. The custom is found among the hill-tribes and also
sporadically on the plains. Strictly speaking, epic polyandry is the marriage of one
woman to a family of brothers,
3 Chrysostom, A. D. 347-407 ; see Ind. Stud. , II, pp. 161 f.
## p. 231 (#265) ############################################
XI]
THE MAHĀBHĀRATA AND THE RĀMĀYANA
231
centuries for its completion as it now exists, the centuries immediately
preceding our era seem to be those to which it is most reasonable on general
grounds to assign the composition of the Mahābhārata as a whole. This
agrees best also with the external data to which reference has been made
in the preceding chapter. During these centuries we find a revival of
Brāhmanism, a cult of Vishņuism by the masses and a return to Brāhmanism
in a modified form indicated by the Civaite faith of the kings of the north-
western part of the country. Now Vishņuism is the cult that permeates
the great epic, though it contains tales showing an older Brāhmānism, and
the Çivaite portions are chiefly late in character. Again it is not un-
reasonable to assume a certain connexion between the two epics. We
cannot think of them as isolated productions of the western and eastern
parts of the country. That they represent in general a western and eastern
cycle of epic material is true, but there are sundry considerations which
make it impossille to believe that they aicee independently. In the first
place, while the metre of the Mahābhārata represents a less polished verse
than that of the Rāmāyaṇa, that metre is so nearly that of the Rāmāyaṇa,
especially in its later portions, that the two are practically the same.
Secondly, there are many tales, genealogies, fables, etc. , which are identical
in the two epics. Thirdly, the phraseology of the two epics, is so cast in
one mould that hundreds of verse-tags, phrases, similes, etc. , are verbally
the same. These correspond to the iterata found in Homeric verse, and
indicate as do the Grecian parallels that there was a certain common epic
body of phrase and fable. Fourthly, the economic conditions and social
usages as represented in the two epics are sufficiently alike for us to be able
to draw on both together for a picture of the times showing few discordant
elements. In detail, the references in the Rāmāyaṇa betray a later or more
advanced stage in some particulars, such as architectural elaboration, plans
of temples, etc. , which may be due to a higher civilisation ; but in general
the life of priest, noble, people of the lower castes, slaves. etc. , is the same
in both epics, and except for the use of caste. names does not differ from
that exhibited by Buddhistic works of the same period. The chief difference
here is that the Buddhists speak more of householder and gildman as if
they were separate orders. But the Gehapati or householder is also a
common expression for the ordinary men of affairs in Sanskrit works, and
the gilds as shown above in discussing the Sūtras (p. 221) have their im-
portance admitted by the authors of the Sūtras and epics alike. It is
therefore more a question of terminology than a vital distinction when we
find that the social order is reckoned as composed of priest, warrior, house-
holder, gildman, instead of priest, warrior, and “people's man,' Vaiçya, as
)
## p. 232 (#266) ############################################
232
( ch.
PRINCES AND PEOPLES OF THE EPIC POEMS
the Brāhman priests divided the 'regenerate' members of the community. '
The main difference in the presentation of social data given by the
Brāhman and the Buddhist is the one already referred to. The Buddhist
does not accept the spiritual authority of the Brāhman and belittles him as
a caste-member ; but he cannot rid himself of inherited faith and phrase,
and so constantly recognises him as member of a caste or order like that
of the monks. On the other hand, the Buddhist state was a democracy
in spirit ; the teaching of the church (to use the word) was apt to exalt the
humble and lower the aristocracy. The emperor himself was humbled by
himself, and his nobles became subject to the religious law of love and
kindness, while any common person was magnified for piety and could
obtain high office in the council chamber. This was not only theoretically
true ; it affected the whole constitution of the State. The merchants
and farmers and the mass of working people were endowed with a new
influence, which superseded for a short time the influence of priest and
noble. It is sometimes said that this was no supersession ; that Buddhism
arose before the four orders were recognised as state constituents, and that
in the freer use of householder and merchant (such was really the Setthi or
gildman) we have the expression of a freer life not yet bound in four-caste
orders. It is probable that at all times the third 'caste' was an elastic term
for every Āryan not priest or warrior ; but it connoted pure blood and
hence excluded those 'mixed castes' which were sometimes higher, but
more often lower, than the house-slave. A great mass of these people
were the hill-tribes reduced to servitude or to low pursuits, such as leather-
workers, fowlers, etc. , all those useful but dirty and disagreeable people
whom the Brāhman despised and the Buddhist affected to love and honour.
2 Generally speaking we may say that exogamy is the rule, but epic literature
records cases of marriage between near relations (cousins).
1
## p. 218 (#252) ############################################
218
(ch.
LIFE AND CUSTOMS IN THE SUTRAS
9
>
to employ the inheritance for the spiritual good of the deceased. Probably
the general rule anticipates not the death of the owner but a division
of property among the sons during his lifetime. The king inherits in default
of the others named, and some say that among the sons only the eldest
inherits. These rules are sufficiently vague, but local laws are also provided
for in the additional rule : In some countries gold, (or) black cattle,
(or) black produce of the earth (grain or iron ? ) is the share of the
eldest' (Āp. , Dh. S. , II, 14, 7). Then in regard to what the wife receives, the
Sūtra leaves it doubtful whether the rule 'the share of the wife consists
of her ornaments and wealth received from her relations, according to some
(authorities),' is to be interpreted in such a manner that 'according to some'
refers only to the last clause or to the whole.
What is obvious is that the whole matter of inheritance was as yet not
regulated by any general state law. Different countries or districts of India
have different laws ; different authorities differ in regard to the interpreta-
tion of these laws; and, finally, different texts of Vedic authority contradict
by inference the rule to be got from them. Thus because one Vedic text says
‘Manu divided his wealth among his sons', it is implied that there should be
no preference shown to the eldest ; but, on the other hand, another
Vedic text says they distinguish the eldest by the heritage', which
countenances the preference shown to the eldest. Now this last point,
despite the desire for conciseness, demands consideration at length, so
the maker of the Sūtra takes it up, arguing that a mere statement of fact is
not a rule. For example (he says), the dictum ‘a learned priest and a he. goat
are the most sensual beings' is a statement, but cannot be taken as
rule. Hence, he says, the statement ‘they distinguish the eldest' is not a rule.
But the question remains, why then should the other statement, 'Manu
divided his wealth,' be regarded as a rule ? The subject of inheritance
is treated first by Baudhāyana under the head of impurity, where he
says simply that Sapindas inherit in default of nearer relations, and
Sakulyas (remoter relations) in default of Sapindas ; but afterwards he
adds that the eldest son, in accordance with the quotations cited by
Āpastamba, may receive the best chattel, or the father may divide
equally among his sons. Here also the fact that the same subject is treated
in different sections shows that as yet the matter of civil law was not treated
systematically but incidentally.
It is no part of the present discussion to enter into the confusing
details of the laws of inheritance; only to show in what state were these laws
at the time of the Sūtras. The latest Sūtra, however, already stands on
a level with the formal law-books, and, for example in this matter of
inheritance, is not content with the vague ‘sons' of the earlier authors
but makes a formal classification of the (later legal) 'twelve sons',
six
a
1
## p. 219 (#253) ############################################
X]
ROYAL DUTIES
219
of whom are entitled to inherit as 'heirs and kinsmen' while six (kinds) are
‘kinsmen but not heirs', among the last being the son of a Çūdra wife.
Civil law is in general discussed in the Sūtras under the head of royal
duties ; for it is assumed that the king administers justice both civil and
criminal. It is his part to pay attention to the special laws of districts,
castes (jāti), and families, and make the four orders (varņas, castes in a
general sense) fulfil their duties. The summary, in the following order,
includes punishing those who wander from the path of duty, not injuring
trees that bear fruit, guarding against falsification of weights and measures,
not taking for his own use the property of his subjects (except as taxes),
providing for the widows of his soldiers, exempting from taxation a learned
priest, a royal servant, those without protectors, ascetics, infants, very old
men, students, widows who have returned to their families, unmarried girls,
wives of servants, and pradattās (doubtful, perhaps girls promised in
marriage) ; but first and foremost, the king is to protect all in his realm
(Vasishțha XIX, 1-24). This quaint summary of royal duties does not even
belong to the early Sūtra period but derives from a text, which in some
regards is practically, as it is called, a law-book (Çāstra). It reflects, as do
the elaboration of details and additions casually made, the fact that even
at this comparatively late period the king was still a small local rāja, not
an emperor.
Although we may agrec in general with the judgment of Bühler to the
effect that the Dharma Çāstra of Gautama takes temporal precedence over
the extant Dharma Çāstras and Dharma Sūtras", yet it is historically as
important to remember that this judgement was tempered by the considera-
tion that interpolations occur in the work of Gautama, and that in its
present form the language ‘agrees closer with Pāṇini's rules than that of
Āpastamba and Baudhāyana. The title itself of Gautama's work is Çāstra
not Sūtra, and it is obvious from his chapter on kings that sundry works
called Dharma Çāstras were in vogue, for he says : "The administration of
justice (shall be regulated by) the Veda, the Dharma Çāstras, the Angas, and
the Purāņas (and Upavedas)'(XI, 19), and though the word “Upavedas'
occurs in but one manuscript, and logically Dharma is included under
Anga, yet it is not necessary to assume an interpolation for these words,
especially as Gautama mentions Manu among teachers of the law, from
‘some' of whom he cites, though not by name. The Atharvaçiras, a late
work, is also known to him (XIX, 12). It may then be questioned whether
each and every rule of Gautama can bc cited as being an integral part of the
"earliest law-book. '
The royal duties as described by Gautama are few. After stating that
all the ‘reborn (men of the three upper castes) are to study, offer sacrifice,
S. B. E. vol. II. p. liv.
## p. 220 (#254) ############################################
220
[ch.
LIFE AND CUSTOMS IN THE SÜTRAS
1
and give alms, and that the priest in addition is to teach, perform sacrifice
for others, and receive alms, or, if he does not do the work himself, to
practise agriculture and tradel, Gautama says that a king's special addition-
al duty is to protect all beings, to inflict proper punishment, support learned
priests and others unable to work, those free of taxes and temporary
students, to take measures for ensuring victory, to learn how to manage a
chariot and use a bow, to fight firmly, to divide the spoils of battle equitab-
ly, to take a tax of one-tenth, one-eighth, or one-sixth (of produce) to force
artisans to pay one day's work monthly, to proclaim by crier lost property,
and, if the owner be not found in a year, to keep it, giving one-fourth to
the finder (but all treasure-trove belongs to the king), and to protect the
property of infants. In the following section the author says that the king
is the master of all except the priests ; that he is to be moral and impartial,
worshipped by all except Brāhmans, who shall honour him (ibid. xi, 1 f. );
that he must protect the castes (orders) and different stages of the (açramas),
and, with the assistance of his chaplain fulfill all his religious duties, as enu-
merated above. Authoritative in the realm shall be all rules of castes
(jāti), and families (kula), as well as district-rules not opposed to (Vedic)
tradition, while for their respective orders (varga) ploughmen, traders,
herdsmen, money-lenders, and artisans may make their own rules (ibid. 21).
In this resume of royal duties there is no indication or implication of
any power greater than that of a small king. But the later Sūtra of Āpas-
tamba indicates the beginning of that system of government by proxy
which obtains in the Çāstra of Manu and other Smțitis. Nor is Āpastamba's
account of royal duties otherwise without interest, since it shows just such
a combination of old and new as characterises the Sūtra period. Te begin
with, after discussing caste-duties in general, Āpastamba describes the town
where the king is to live :
I will now explain the duties of a king. He shall build a town (pur), and a
dwelling (v? Çma), each with a door facing south. The dwelling (Bühler, 'palace') is
within the pur, and to the east of the dwelling shall be a hall called the invitation'
(guest) place. South of the pur shall be an assembly-house (sabhā), having doors on
the south and north sides so that it shall be in plain view within and without. There
shall be fires in all these places (burning) perpetually, and offering to the Fire-(god) shall
there be made regularly, just as to the sacred house-fire. He shall put up as guests in
the hall of invitation learned priests. . . and in the assembly-house he shall establish a
1 This and the permission to teach for money are not in accord with the usual
rules of the Sūtras. The practice of Brāhmans bocoming ‘gentlemen farmers and sleep-
ing partners in mercantile or banking firms managed by Vaiçyas' is not countenanced in
other Sūtras (see Buhler's note to Gautama, x, 5) and probably the permission to teach
for money is intended only for priests in distress.
2 An exception in the case of treasure trove is made in the case of a priest being the
finder, and ‘some' say that anybody who finds it gets one-sixth. In the rules for taxes, if
the stock is cattle or gold the tax according to‘some' one fiftieth and if it merchandise
one-twentieth, while one sixtieth is the tax on roots, fruits, flowers, herbs, honey, meat,
grass, and firewood (Gaut. , X, 25 f. )
a
## p. 221 (#255) ############################################
X]
TAXES, STATUS OE WOMEN, ETC.
221
>
>
>
>
>
>
gaming. table, sprinkle it with water, and throw down on it dice made of Vibhitaka
(nuts), sufficient in number, and let Aryans play there they are) pure men of honest
character. Assaults at arms, dances, singing, concerts, etc. , should not take place except
in houses kept by the king's servants. . . Let the king appoint Āryans, men of pure and
honest character, to guard his people in villages and towns, having servants of similar
character ; and these me must guard a town (nagara) from thieves for a league
(yojana), in every direction ; villages for two miles ( a kos or quarter of a league). They
must pay back what is stolen within that distance and collect taxes (for the king).
A learned priest and women are not taxed, nor are children before
puberty, temporary students, or ascetics, or slaves who wash feet, or blind,
dumb, deaf, and diseased persons. The king goes personally into battle
and is exhorted not to turn his back and not to use poisoned weapons or
to attack those who supplicate for mercy or are helpless (Äpastamba, II,
5, 10, 11), such as those who have ceased to fight or declare themselves
cows (by eating grass, a sign of submission) (Baudh. , I, 10, 18, 11, ; Gaut. ,
X, 18).
Taxes and inheritance form the chief subjects of civil law together
with the vexed question of the status of women. Women may not on
their own account offer either the Vedic Çrauta sacrifices or the Grihya
sacrifices. A woman is ‘not independent'(Baudh. II, 2, 3, 44; Gaut. , XVIII,
1), either in respect of sacrifice or of inheritance. Widows, if sonless,
are expected to bear eons by the levirate marriage (Baudh. , II, 2, 4, 9).
Suttee is not acknowledged. Women are property and come under the
general rule : 'A pledge, a boundary, the property of minors, an open or
sealed deposit, women, the property of a king or of a learned priest are not
lost by being enjoyed by others' (Vas. , XVI, 18).
In proving property, documents, witnesses, and possession are admit-
ted as proof of title by the late Sūtra of Vasishțha (XVI, 19), and if the
documents conflict, the statements made by old men and by gilds and
corporations are to be relied upon (Vas. , XVI, 15), an interesting passage
as it shows what importance was ascribed to the gilds (freni) of the time.
In criminal law, only Āpastamba recognises the application of ordeals
(Dh. S. , II, 11, 3 ; cf. 29, 6). The ordeals, here merely refered to, consist in
the application of fire, water, etc. , according to the later law-books
but are not defined in the Sūtras. Assaults, adultery, and theft are
the chief subjects discussed in the Sūtras under this head. The fines
of the later law are generally represented here by banishment or corporal
injury. Most of the regulations are dominated by caste-feeling. A Çūdra
who commits homicide or theft or steals land has his property confiscated
and suffers capital punishment (Āp. , Dh. S. , II, 27, 16) ; but a Brāhman
priest for such crimes shall be blinded (ibid. 17). A Kshatriya a (warrior)
who abuses a Brāhmaṇa (priest) is fined one hundred (coins); Vaiçya
(farmer) must pay half as much again for the same offence ; but if a
Brāhman abuses a Kshatriya he pays only fifty coins (kārshāpaņas), and only
>
## p. 222 (#256) ############################################
222
[ Ch.
LIFE AND CUSTOMS IN THE SUTRAS
1
>
>
>
twenty-five if he abuses a Vaiçya, while if he abuses a Çūdra he pays nothing
(Gaut. , XII, 8 f. ), etc. The same caste-interest works outside of criminal
,
law.
Thus the legal rate of interest is set at (the equivalent of) fifteen per
cent. per annum (five măshas a month for twenty kärshāpaņas, Gaut. , X! I,
29 ; Baudh. , 1, 5, 10, 22) ; but according to Vasishtha (II, 48), 'two, three,
four, five in the hundred is declared in the Smriti to be the monthly interest
according to caste. ' This means that the highest caste pays two, the next
caste three, and so on (limited by the scholiast to cases on loans without
security). The same author prohibits Brāhmans and Kshatriyas from
being usurers; but Baudhāyana says that a Vaiçya may practise usury (Vas. ,
II, 40 and Baudh. , I, 5, 10, 21). That there was, however, notable laxity
in carrying out the supposed inflexibility of caste-rules is evident from the
fact that the law-makers expressly permit the upper castes to take to the
occupation of the lower when in need of sustenance. Even the Brāhman
.
priest who neglects to say his prayers may at the king's pleasure be forced
to perform the work of Çūdras (Baudh. , II, 4, 7, 15). Thus, with certain
restrictions as to what he sells, etc , a priest or warrior may support life
by trade and agriculture (Vas. , II, 24 f. ). But a man ‘reborn' who persists
in trade cannot be regarded as a Brāhman, nor can a priest who lives as
an actor or as a physician (ihid. III, 3). In other words, as may be con-
cluded from the very laws inveighing against them, at the time of the
Sūtras there were many nominal members of the priestly and royal orders
who lived as farmers and traders, perhaps even as usurers (a special law
prohibits this, Vas. ; II, 40, cf. Manu, X, 117), not only acting the part of
gentleman farmers but living as humble ploughmen (Vas. , II, 33).
As touching the outer world, as one is directed to avoid going into
towns, so one should avoid visiting foreign places and 'not learn a language
spoken by barbarians' (Vas. , VI, 41 ; Āp. , I, 32, 18). In religion, as
to be expected, denying the authority of the Vedas, carping at the teaching
of the Vedic seers, and wavering in regard to any traditional duty is to
'destroy one's soul' (Vas. , XII, 41), and there is no salvation for a man
who devotes himself to epicurean ways or to captivating men or to philology
çabdaçāstra, Vas. , X, 20). On the other hand the Upanishad doctrine that a
priest who is learned and austere and repeats the sacred texts is not tainted
with sin, though he constantly commit sinful acts, is a morally destructive
teaching already legalised (Vas. , XXVI, 19). The highest named god is
Brahmā or Prajāpati, to whom, after the manner of the epic, verses of legal
character are assigned. Philosophically the Sūtras are dominated by the
Vedānta Ātman-theory, which appears to be known as a system to
Āpastamba, whose Sūtra seems to have been a work which arose among the
Andhras of the south-eastern coast, and probably is not older than the
was
1
## p. 223 (#257) ############################################
X]
RELATIVE AGES OF THE SUTRAS
223
>
second century B. C. It recognises, alone among Sūtras, a named Purāņa
(the Bhavishya, II, 24, 6) and its archaic effect linguistically, which in large
measure determined Bühler in his conjecture that this Sūtra might revert to
the fifth century, may well be due to the fact that the Andhras retained
linguistic peculiarities long after Pāniņi fixed the northern usage. Āpas-
tamba knows the Atharvaveda, as does Vasishțha, who appears to have
been a still later writer. It is true that Bühler arranged a chronological
series of Sūtras of the law in the order Gautama, Baudhāyana, Vasishtha
and Āpastamba ; but in doing so he minimised the late characteristics of
Vasishtha (who alone mentions 'documents' as legal proofs); and in his re-
mark (S. B. E. XIV, pxvii) concerning the fourth Veda he appears to have
overlooked the passage at VI, 4, where the four Vedas are mentioned. It is
also quite probable that the passage which seems to make Baudhāyana
earlier than Vasishtha is interpolated, and Bühler himself admits that many
other passages have been tampered with. Whatever the earlier text may bave
been, the present text, with its free use of Çloka verse, its recognition of
Dharma Çāstras, its citations from Manu, Vishņu, etc. , and its possible
allusion to the Romans (Romaka, XVIII, 4), seems to be the latest of the
legal Sūtras, though containing much older material. In general, the age
to which the Sūtras may be assigned cannot well be earlier than the
seventh or later than the second century B. C. They represent both the
views of different Vedic schools and different localities, from the Andhra
country in the S. E. to the countries of the N. W. , where probably the
school of Vasishtha is to be sought? . Probably the Gșihyas represent the
earlier Sūtras ; the Dharmas as a whole come later : perhaps 300 B. C.
would represent the earliest.
1 For Bühler's views regarding Apastamba, as dating from the third to the fifth
century B. C. , see S. B. E. vol. XIV, p. xlii. The strongest proof that Apastamba was a
Southerner lies in II, 17, 17, where he says that ‘Northerners' pour water into a priest's
hand at funeral feasts. That he followed Baudhāyana is undoubted ; but for historical
use it nust also be remembered that only the first two of the four books of
Baudhāyana are genuine and the latter half may be much later.
## p. 224 (#258) ############################################
CHAPTER XI
1
THE PRINCES AND PEOPLES OF EPIC POEMS
The Sūtra literature does not lack connexion with the epics, to
which we now turn. In the Gộihya Sūtra of Çānkāyana, for example,
occur the names of Sumantu, Jaimini, Vaiçampāyana, and Paila, who are
teachers of the great epic Mahābhārata ; and the list of revered teachers,
and no less revered species of literature, mentioned in the Sūtra of
Āçvalāyana includes the Bhārata and Mahābhārata, while the Çāmbhavya
Sūtra also mentions the Mahābhārata (it omits Bhārata, perhaps as included
in the greater name). Although the words are assumed by modern
scholars to be interpolated, the reason given, because otherwise it would
make the Sūtra too late? , has never been very cogent, since the end of the
Sūtras and beginning of the epics probably belong to about the same time.
As an indefinite allusion not to a special epic poem but to the kind
of poetry are also to be noticed such early references as that of Āçvalāyana
(III, 3, 1) to Gāthās, hero-lauds, tales and ancient legends.
Epic poetry is divided by the Hindus themselves into two genera, one
called 'tales and legends' (Itibāsa and Purāna) and the other called 'art-
poem' or simply ‘poem' (Kāvja, the production of a Kavi or finished
poet) ; but the compilation named Mahābbārata is both Itihāsa-Purāņa, its
original designation, and then Kāvya till the introductory verses exalt it as
such. In its origin it was undoubtedly a popular story of the glorified
historical character which attaches to tribal lays even to-day. The
second epic, the Rāmāyaṇa, has always stood as the type and origin of the
refined one author poem, and whatever may have been the date of its
germ as a story, as an art-product it is later than the Mahābhārata.
Thus the oldest references which may indicate epic poetry point
rather to the story of the Bharatas than to the story of Rāma. These
references, however, in any event are not nearly old enough to warrant the
assumption of immense antiquity made by the native tradition. The
• language of both epics is not Vedic but a popular form of Sanskrit, which
1 Weber, Ind. Lit. , p. 63=Eng. trans. , p. 58.
224
## p.
225 (#259) ############################################
XI]
THE MAHĀBHĀRATA
225
was developed by the bards and became the recogoised language of
narrative poetry ; and their metre is the final reproduction of Vedic metres
in modern form. Both language and verse are not widely different from
those of the latest Sūtras. We may reasonably conclude, then, that
the latest Sūtras and the epics belong to the same period, and that they
represent two contemporary styles of literature, the former priestly and the
latter secular.
There can be no doubt that, so far as much of their subject-matter
is concerned, the epics and the Purāņas are the literary descendants
of the stories and legends (Itihāsas and Purāņas) which are mentioned in
literature from the time of the Atharvaveda onwards ; and the particular
legend or historical tale (the two are confused) which is embedded in the
Mahābhārata or 'great epic of the Bharatas' is also not wholly without
scholastic affinities. Just as the Brāhmaṇas held the kernel of the Gșihya
Sūtras, so the great epic through its promulgator, as traditionally recorded,
is connected with the school of the White Yajurveda. Parāçara is a name
especially common in this Veda, occurring often in its genealogical lists ;
and the epic acknowledges the Çata patha as the greatest of Brāhmaṇas,
while the heroes of the epic are particularly mentioned in the Brāhmaṇa,
and indeed in such a way that Janamejaya, prominent in the epic, is treated
as a recent personage by the authors of the latter part of the Brāhmaṇa,
though the epic treats him as a descendant of the chief epic hero. The
explanation of this is not such a mystery as it seemed to Weber,
who was unable to reconcile the facts that the same person the
descendant of the later family and yet appeared as an immediate pre-
decessor or contemporary of the earlier. The explanation is simply that at
the time of the eleventh Kānda of the Çatapatha Brāhmaṇa, Janamejaya
to the priestly author was an historical character, while to the epic poet he
was legendary, and the poet himself was, if not a bard, a domestic
chaplain probably incompetent to analyse history, but anxious to give his
tale a noble frame.
Other early allusions to epic characters only show that the epic
which we now possess was unknown. Vaiçampāyana and Vyāsa are
mentioned as early as the Taittirīya Araṇyaka, but not as authors or
editors of the epic which is now their chief claim to recognition. The word
mahābhārata is used by Pāṇini, but only as an adjective which might
be applied to anything great connected with the Bharatas, a hero or town as
well as a war or a poem. But above all, the Mahābhārata epic is at
bottom the story of a feud between Kurus and Pāņdus, and the Pāņdus are
unknown to the early literature, either Brāhmaṇas or Sūtras. The idea that
the original epic was a poem commemorating a war between Pañchālas and
Kurus, which was ably developed by Lassen (Ind. Alterthümskunde, 1, pp.
was
## p. 226 (#260) ############################################
226
.
PRINCES AND PEOPLES OF THE EPIC POEMS
[ch.
592 f. ), and adopted with modifications by Weber (Ind. Literaturgesch,
pp. 126 and 203=Eng. trans. , pp. 114 and 186), is an ingenious attempt to
account for what is assumed to have existed. As a matter of fact a
Mahābhārata without Pāņdus is like an Iliad without Achilles and
Agamemnon : we know of no such poem. The Kurus and Pañchālas are foes
in the epic but only as the Pāndus ally themselves with the latter. The
Kurus of the epic, however, are doubtless the Kurus celebrated in
ancient times ; even the family records show that the epic reflects the glory
of these old aristocrats. Thus the names Ambā and Ambikā as wives of a
. Kuru in the Çatapatha Brāhmaņa are preserved in the name Ambā( Ambikā)
as mother of the king of Kurus in the epic. The first occurrence of the name
Pāņu which can be dated seems to be in a vārtika or supplementary rule
to Pāņini iv, 1, 44, attributed to Kātyāyana (c. 180 B. c. ). The Pānļus,
whatever may have been their antiquity, first come into view with the
later Buddhist literature, which recognises the Pandavas as a mountain
clan, and possibly in the myth mentioned by Greek writers in regard to a
Hindu Heracles and his wife Pandaia, though the latter is indeed of little
weight. The epic Pāņdus are not a people but a family.
It is not till the second century B. c. that we find unmistakable allu-
sion to what we may probably call our epic poem, in the account of the
Mahābhāshya, which alludes to a poetic treatment of the epic story and
speaks of epic characters. The second century B. is also the period to
which those portions belong in which the foreign invaders of the Punjab-
Yavanas, Çakas, and Pahlavas-are mentioned (v. sup. p. 201). These
foreigners are represented as fighting on the side of the Kurus. As for the
Panchālas being opponents of the Aryan Kurus, the Çatapatha Brāh-
maņa represents them as allies, and in early literature they are frequently
mentioned as forming one people, the Kuru-Pañchālas. A single reference
in a formula may, indeed, imply disdain of the Pañchālas on the part of
the Kurus', but it is not certain that any racial antagonism existed bet-
ween the two. We may say with Weber that the epic commemorates a
fight between Aryans in Hindustān after the time when the original inha-
bitants had been overthrown and Brāhmanised', oniy on the assumption
that Kurus, Panchālas, and Pāņdus were Aryans ; but this is doubtful,
ind force of the remark in any case somewhat impaired by the fact
that contests between Āryans are no indication of late date, since such
contests are commemorated even in the Rigveda.
It is possible that the Pañchālas represent five Nāga clans (with ala 'a
water-snake' cf. Eng. eel) connected with the Kurus or Krivis (meaning
'serpent' or Nāga'), and that none of the families is of pure Aryan
1 Weber, Ind. Lit, p. 126=Eng. trans. , p. 114. V. sup. Chapter v, p. 106.
2 Op. cit. , p. 204=Eng. trans. , p. 187.
1
>
## p. 227 (#261) ############################################
X]
EARLY EPIC POETRY
227
a
blood, for the Nāgas in the epic are closely related to the Pāņļus; but
all such considerations at present rest on speculation rather than fact,
Whether we are to suppose that, anterior to our extant epic, there
was a body of literature which had epic characteristics, must depend also
largely on speculation regarding the few well-known facts in the case.
These are briefly as follows. At certain ceremonies, not chiefly heroic,
Gāthās, 'strophes', in honour of great men are sung with the lute as accom-
paniment. These verses apply to men of the past or present, that is, they
are laudatory verses of a memorial characterł. Further, the Gțihya Sūtras
recognise Nārāça msis, a sort of xyča auçou 'hero-lauds', as a literary
genre. These may have served as nuclei for the stories of heroes preserved
in epic form. In the epic itself genealogy forms an important sub-division,
and such a genealogy includes the origin of gods as well as of men. Now
the Brāhmaṇas also know what they call the Devajana-vidyā, knowledge
of the gods' race' ; and since the epic genealogy of gods is in many ways
indicative of respectable antiquity, it is possible that it derives from such
a vidyā or science. The stories told in the Brāhmaṇas, like that of Haric-
chandra in the Aitareya Brāhmaṇa, often have epic fulness, and likeness,
being composed in the later epic verse though in ruder metre. In these
also we get a form of narrative told in verse which might presumably have
evolved into epic form. A great deal of the inflated epic is didactic, and
much of this is derived from didactic sources older than the present epic.
Thus dramatic tale, genealogy, and instruction in pedagogic form have all
aided in the making of the epic. Even the theology of the epic has its
prototype in the Brāhmaṇas, where Vishņu is already the 'best' or most
fortunate god (freshtha), and Çiva is already called Mahādeva.
In the hymns of the Rigveda we find stories in verse which appear to
need the complement of explanatory prose, and as the epic also has exam.
ples of this mingling of verse and prose in the telling of a story, it is
possible that we may have the right to presuppose a sort of epic narrative
even in the time of the Rigveda. Yet this presumptive epic of the Rigveda
is so entirely a matter of theory, and not undisputed theory, that it may
be left out of consideration when discussing the historical epic, as the pre-
sumptive drama of the Rigveda may be ignored in discussing the origin of
Hindu historical drama.
The element in ancient literature which seems at first most likely to
have contributed to the rise of epic poetry is that already mentioned under
the name of Nārāçamsi or 'hero-lauds', withal not so much on account of
the subject matter as on account of the circumstances in which the lauds
were sometimes sung. At the yearlong celebration preparatory to the horse-
sacrifice ten days were devoted to a series of lauds of gods and heroes,
1 Compare Indische Studien, vol. I, p. 187.
## p. 228 (#262) ############################################
228
[CH.
PRINCES AND PEOPLES OF THE EPIC POEMS
>
a
whereby the nobility and great deeds of kings were sung by priest and
warrior musicians in Gāthās of an extemporaneous character, while the re-
citation of legends in verse accompanied various events of life? .
Now there are certain scenes in the great epic which lend themselves
especially to such an interpretation. One can well believe, for example,
that the story of Ambā, who was carried off by Bhishma from her home
and given to Çalya (v, 173 f. ), was best rendered as a thrilling lay, its in-
tensity is almost equal to that of the gambling-scene (II, 60 f. ). But there
are many others not suited for anything save recitation, not to speak of
the interminable didactic material loaded upon the epic by the bookful. How
are we to reconcile this mass with a theory of lyric recitation or song ?
A study of the interpolations in the so-called Southern text shows that
thousands of verses of n arrative and didactic material have been added to
the epic text, and that the redaction comprises a shameless incorporation of
material drawn from the Purāņas and from the Harivamça, a sort of Purāņa
which was added to the Mahābhārata, as well as elaborations of the
original text, sometimes by the insertion of a dozen or so verses, sometimes
by the addition to a chapter of half a dozen new chapters narrating feats of
the heroes or insisting on the godliness of a demi-god. Now there is no
reason not to suppose that the same process has made the Mahābhārata
what it is from the beginning. It contains at present a hundred thousand
verses, with some prose admixture, but internal evidence shows that this is
an accumulation, and the text itself admits that it was originally less than
;
nine thousand verses in length. As we have seen above (p. 224) the Gșihya
Sūtra of Āçvalāyana mentions both a Bhārata and a Mahābhārata, no
doubt a shorter and a longer version of the same poem. The theme of the
epic as a story, the conflict between Kurus and Pāņdus, is at most not so
long, about twenty thousand verses, as the whole Rāmāyaṇa, or twenty-four
thousand verses. In short, in the great epic of India we have a combination
of matter, partly, epical, partly pedagogic partly narrative or historical. The
genealogies and the religious-didactic parts are not necessarily later in date,
but they are later additions to the original material. Some of the additions
may be as old as the original or even older, but this does not entitle us to
maintain that the epic was originally didactic, nor is this the best explan-
ation of the heterogeneous mass which we call the epic, and which in its
present form resembles such a combination as, barring dialectal differences,
might be effected by combining a few books of the Iliad with Hesiod,
extracts from Euripides, Theocritus, Aristotle, and a few chapters of the
New Testament. With this exception, most of the didactic material is not
1 Cf. especially Weber's article in the Proceedings of the Berlin Academy for 1891
(Episches im vedischen Ritual) and that of Lüders in Z. D. M. G. , vol. LVIII, p. 7071 .
2 Cf. also the half-forgotten tale of Vidulā, revivified to-day by Professor Jacobi
(Ueber ein verlorenes Heldengedicht der Sindhu-Sauvīra) in the Album Kern (1903), p. 53.
a
## p. 229 (#263) ############################################
XI ]
CHARACTERS OF THE MAHĀBHĀRATA
229
for the everyday man, but distinctly for the military caste. Even the philo-
sophy is not for the philosopher, the priest, but for the king and his nobles.
The predominative religion, too, is that of the kingly castel Indra is their
sovereign Lord ; and the heaven of Indra, with his celestial nymphs, the
1
Apsarasas, is the reward for kingly duty faithfully performed on earth. The
lower castes, Vaiçya and Çūdra, the agriculturist, the trader, the slave, are
scarcely recognised except adventitiously, as it becomes convenient to refer
to them. The epic is thoroughly aristocratic. a work completed by priests
for warriors, to recount the deeds of warriors and show them the need of
priests, who convert to orthodoxy the service of popular gods dear to the
local aristocracy. The epic has thus become what it calls itself, the 'fifth
Veda,' and may be regarded either as a didactic storehouse (it calls itself a
Dharma Çāstra) or as a magnified Itihāsa-Purāņa, which even before the
epic existed was regarded as supplementing the Vedas. Both elements are
united, religious-didactic and legendary, in such parts as treat of the demons,
gods, and seers of old. How ancient may have been collections of such
material prior to our extant epic is uncertain ; but the evidence for earlier
collective works does not appear to be convincing. That a mass of legends
existed and that this mass was used by Brāhmans and Buddhists alike as
they needed them may be granted, just as the mass of fables known to the
ancient world was utilised by the epic writers and by those who composed
the Buddhist Jātakas, though India had no Aesop.
Many of the characters of the Mahābhārata appear to be real, his-
torical figures. Others are mythical, in that they represent a personality
evolved from a divine name or a local hero-god. Thus the name Arjuna is
first a title of Indra, whose son the epic Arjuna is ; but his cousin Krishņa
is a local demi-god hero, and there is no reason to doubt the historical
character of the king of Magadha who was a foe of this pair and a Çivaite,
though what is said about him in the epic may be merely the exaggeration
of legend, as sung by the bards who made expeditions with the army and
sang the exploits they themselves had seen. The stories of historical
characters, like king Janaka, also reeflct history through the mists of legend.
The complete anthropomorphisation of heavenly beings, which some
scholars are reluctant to admit as a possible phenomenon in the best of
cases), is found in the Hindu epic, especially in the inserted tales of the gods;
1 Cf. Rapson, Ancient India, p. 72.
2 The Sūtas or bards were also charioteers. They made a special sub-caste and
lived at court, while the Kuçīlavas learned the songs of the bards and wandered among
the people at large singing them. This name was resolved into Kuça and Lava who are
represented as two singers, sons of Rāma. They learned the poern of Vālmīki and
recited it among tho people, as the later story goes (Rāmāyaṇa, I, 4). The Magadha
king Jarāsandha was the ruler of the East, as the Pādūus were his rivals in the West,
3 Chadwick, The Heroic Age, p. 265.
## p. 230 (#264) ############################################
230
[
RINCES AND PEOPLES OF THE EPIC POEMS
but it does not appear at all certain that any epic hero represents a heavenly
being in either of the Hindu epics. Kțishņa in the Mahābhārata and Rāma
in the Rāmāyaṇa are forms of the sun-god only as being identified with
Vishņu as All-god ; and in the case of the Rāmāyana this is a palpably late
procedure, while it is doubtful whether Krishṇa was ever a form of the sun.
Both Rāma and Krishna appear to have been tribal heroes, mythical per-
haps but not products of divine mythology. But, as no attempt has ever
been made to separate myth from history in India, it is impossible to say
whether Krishņa, the divine hero of the Mahābhārata, ever really existed,
though this is probable. Křishņa served as the charioteer of Arjuna, the
chief Pāņdu and epic hero ; and though he promised not to fight in person
he did all he could to keep up and intensify the enmity between the
Pāņdus and their related foes, the Kurus, not avoiding even tricks opposed
to knightly honour. It is not likely that such shameful acts as those re-
corded of him by his own followers would have been invented of a god,
but rather that the tricks belonged to him as a hero, and that no amount
of excuse, of which there is enough offered, could do away with the crude
facts of tradition, which represented the man-god Krishņa as a clever but
unscrupulous fighter. A later age exonerated him by offering various
excuses, the higher morality of imperative needl, the tit-for-tat rule (one sin
to offset another), etc. . just as it offered various explanatory excuses for the
polyandry of the Pāņdus, who, however, as a northern hill-tribe or family,
probably were really polyandrous and needed no excuse. 2
Although the epic age in India must necessarily be an epoch too
elastic for historical purposes, since it is not all certain that any one epic
statement may not be many years later than another, yet the effect of this
now trite observation is to exaggerate the relation between isolated cases
and the epic mass. It is true that we have additions to the greater epic
which are hundreds of years later than the mass, but it is possible from the
mass to get an impression which will represent conditions on the whole, and
we are tolerably sure that this whole is bounded by the space of from three
to four centuries, since external evidence, inscriptions, the Greek reference
to the Indian Homer", etc. , prove that the great epic in nearly its present
extent existed before the fourth century 1. D. , and negative evidence in India
makes it improbable that any epic existed earlier than the fourth century
B. C. , Since the length of the work requires the assumption of several
1 Thus Kșishna is made to say, 'if I had not done this (unknightly deed) our side
would have been beaten,’and this is accepted as an excuse ; but an excuse was demanded
2 Polyandry is not denounced in the Sutras ; but this is no proof that the Pandus
lived before they were composed. The custom is found among the hill-tribes and also
sporadically on the plains. Strictly speaking, epic polyandry is the marriage of one
woman to a family of brothers,
3 Chrysostom, A. D. 347-407 ; see Ind. Stud. , II, pp. 161 f.
## p. 231 (#265) ############################################
XI]
THE MAHĀBHĀRATA AND THE RĀMĀYANA
231
centuries for its completion as it now exists, the centuries immediately
preceding our era seem to be those to which it is most reasonable on general
grounds to assign the composition of the Mahābhārata as a whole. This
agrees best also with the external data to which reference has been made
in the preceding chapter. During these centuries we find a revival of
Brāhmanism, a cult of Vishņuism by the masses and a return to Brāhmanism
in a modified form indicated by the Civaite faith of the kings of the north-
western part of the country. Now Vishņuism is the cult that permeates
the great epic, though it contains tales showing an older Brāhmānism, and
the Çivaite portions are chiefly late in character. Again it is not un-
reasonable to assume a certain connexion between the two epics. We
cannot think of them as isolated productions of the western and eastern
parts of the country. That they represent in general a western and eastern
cycle of epic material is true, but there are sundry considerations which
make it impossille to believe that they aicee independently. In the first
place, while the metre of the Mahābhārata represents a less polished verse
than that of the Rāmāyaṇa, that metre is so nearly that of the Rāmāyaṇa,
especially in its later portions, that the two are practically the same.
Secondly, there are many tales, genealogies, fables, etc. , which are identical
in the two epics. Thirdly, the phraseology of the two epics, is so cast in
one mould that hundreds of verse-tags, phrases, similes, etc. , are verbally
the same. These correspond to the iterata found in Homeric verse, and
indicate as do the Grecian parallels that there was a certain common epic
body of phrase and fable. Fourthly, the economic conditions and social
usages as represented in the two epics are sufficiently alike for us to be able
to draw on both together for a picture of the times showing few discordant
elements. In detail, the references in the Rāmāyaṇa betray a later or more
advanced stage in some particulars, such as architectural elaboration, plans
of temples, etc. , which may be due to a higher civilisation ; but in general
the life of priest, noble, people of the lower castes, slaves. etc. , is the same
in both epics, and except for the use of caste. names does not differ from
that exhibited by Buddhistic works of the same period. The chief difference
here is that the Buddhists speak more of householder and gildman as if
they were separate orders. But the Gehapati or householder is also a
common expression for the ordinary men of affairs in Sanskrit works, and
the gilds as shown above in discussing the Sūtras (p. 221) have their im-
portance admitted by the authors of the Sūtras and epics alike. It is
therefore more a question of terminology than a vital distinction when we
find that the social order is reckoned as composed of priest, warrior, house-
holder, gildman, instead of priest, warrior, and “people's man,' Vaiçya, as
)
## p. 232 (#266) ############################################
232
( ch.
PRINCES AND PEOPLES OF THE EPIC POEMS
the Brāhman priests divided the 'regenerate' members of the community. '
The main difference in the presentation of social data given by the
Brāhman and the Buddhist is the one already referred to. The Buddhist
does not accept the spiritual authority of the Brāhman and belittles him as
a caste-member ; but he cannot rid himself of inherited faith and phrase,
and so constantly recognises him as member of a caste or order like that
of the monks. On the other hand, the Buddhist state was a democracy
in spirit ; the teaching of the church (to use the word) was apt to exalt the
humble and lower the aristocracy. The emperor himself was humbled by
himself, and his nobles became subject to the religious law of love and
kindness, while any common person was magnified for piety and could
obtain high office in the council chamber. This was not only theoretically
true ; it affected the whole constitution of the State. The merchants
and farmers and the mass of working people were endowed with a new
influence, which superseded for a short time the influence of priest and
noble. It is sometimes said that this was no supersession ; that Buddhism
arose before the four orders were recognised as state constituents, and that
in the freer use of householder and merchant (such was really the Setthi or
gildman) we have the expression of a freer life not yet bound in four-caste
orders. It is probable that at all times the third 'caste' was an elastic term
for every Āryan not priest or warrior ; but it connoted pure blood and
hence excluded those 'mixed castes' which were sometimes higher, but
more often lower, than the house-slave. A great mass of these people
were the hill-tribes reduced to servitude or to low pursuits, such as leather-
workers, fowlers, etc. , all those useful but dirty and disagreeable people
whom the Brāhman despised and the Buddhist affected to love and honour.
