← Volver a la ficha del textoJOHANNES
BRONKHORST
"Two Sources
"'Indian
Asceticism
1
JOHANNES BRONKHORST
THE TWO SOURCES OF
INDIAN ASCETICISM
Second edition
Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. 1998
2
Table of contents
Preface
Preface to the second edition
Introduction
Part I. The asramas
1 . The Apastamba Dharmasutra
2. Samnyasa
3. The four asramas as alternatives
4. The four asramas as sequence
5. Conclusions of Part I
Part II. Vedic asceticism and the sacrificial tradition
6. Vedic asceticism
7. The position of the early Upanisads
8. Conclusions of Part II
Part III. The two traditions
9. Kapila and the Vedic tradition
10. Sramanas and Brahmins
1 1 . Asceticism in the Mahabharata
Part IV. General Conclusions
12. Concluding observations
Bibliography
Abbreviations
3
Preface
This book promises, in its title, to deal with the two sources of
Indian asceticism. This is somewhat misleading. For direct information
about these sources does not appear- to be available. The oldest literary
remains of India, primarily the R^gveda, do not contain unambiguous
information about the object of our interest, and nor does the
archaeological evidence. Speculations can be based on them, but no
certain, or very probable conclusions.
The somewhat younger literature - though perhaps already far re-
moved from the sources concerned - is far more interesting in this
respect. It shows a clear awareness on the part of its authors that there
were two different kinds, or currents, of asceticism. It also shows the
tendency of these two currents to unite, and to become ever more
indistinguishable as time goes by. It therefore allows us to conclude that
they were distinct from the beginning. In other words, the two currents
have, or rather had, two different sources.
This much seems clear-, and certain. More precise information about
the sources themselves is hard to come by. As said above, the early
Vedic texts and the archaeological evidence do not help us much. The
present study therefore largely ignores them.
There is another word in the title that requires elucidation. It is
asceticism. This word is here used in a rather general sense: it covers the
whole range of physical and mental exercises from extreme mortification
[2] to certain forms of ‘gentle’ meditation, it being understood that all
these forms of asceticism constitute the whole, or at least a major part, of
the life of the ascetics concerned.
The preparation of this volume has taken several years, during
which I have had the opportunity to discuss its contents with various
4
colleagues. I thank all those whose comments have enabled me to further
clarify different points. Most of all I thank Prof. Gerald J. Larson, who
went through the final draft, and made a number of helpful suggestions.
Preface to the second edition
This edition is largely identical to the first one, published by Peter
Lang, Bern, in 1993. The occasion has however been grasped to correct
minor errors, mainly typographical, in the main text. Only the
Introduction has been rearranged to some extent. Some observations -
dealing with new publications or publications that have belatedly come to
my attention - have been added to the footnotes. These publications
have themselves been added to the bibliography. New footnotes can be
recognized by the use of an asterisk (*). Additions to existing footnotes
are indicated as such. For ease of comparison, the page numbers of the
first edition are indicated in brackets [].
Introduction
The origin of Indian asceticism has puzzled investigators. The
reason is clear. Asceticism plays a central role in classical Hinduism and
in the two other religions that arose on Indian soil, Buddhism and
Jainism. Yet the earliest surviving documents of India, the Vedas,
breathe a different atmosphere. No quest for liberation from this and the
next life, no withdrawal from the world, but rather a wish to obtain all
the goods this life has to offer: life until an advanced age, sons, cows,
riches, etc.
In spite of this, early researchers believed that the Vedic tradition in-
spired the non- Vedic manifestations of the ascetic spirit. Jacobi (1884:
xxii f.), for example, concluded from the similarities that exist between
the main vows and obligations of the Jaina and Buddhist monks on the
5
one hand, and certain rules for ascetics in the law-books of Gautama and
Baudhayana on the other, “that neither the Buddhists nor the Jainas have
in this regal'd any claim to originality, but that both have only adopted
the five vows of the Brahmanic ascetics” (p. xxiii). Similar remarks had
been made before him by Biihler (e.g., 1879: 193 n. 13) and MUller
(1879: 318), and were to be made by Kern (1896: 73) afterwards. Ideas
current at the time about the antiquity of the Vedic age no doubt
facilitated this conclusion.1 The question of how asceticism fitted into
Vedic religion remained, however, unanswered. It is primarily J.W.
Hauer’s (1922) merit to have [4] initiated a search for antecedents of
later Yoga in the Vedic texts, and thus to have tried to bridge the chasm
that appeared to exist between Vedic religion and the later ascetic
movements.
Meanwhile T.W. Rhys Davids (1899: 215 f.), P. Deussen (1906:
17f.; German original 1899) and especially R. Garbe (1903) had
proposed a different origin for the religious current that manifests itself
in the Upanisads and in Buddhism and Jainism.2 This current, Garbe
maintained, is no continuation of or development out of Vedic religion,
but rather a reaction against it.3 This reaction originated with the
Ksatriyas, members of the warrior caste, who thus expressed their
discontent with the ritualism of the Brahmins.4
1. Cf. Olivelle, 1974a: 11; Bronkhorst, 1989.
2. See already Muller, 1879: 306.
3. So also Levi, 1898: 11.
4. A reflexion of this point of view is still to be found in Wiltshire, 1990: xvi: “The
Buddhist and Jain traditions had their origin in the Sramana Movement which be-
gan as a protest by Ksatriyas against the Brahmanic stranglehold on religion and
society.” (cp. also p. 227 f.) See also Frauwaliner, 1953: 47-48; Jaini, 1970: 43.
Schneider (1989: 56 f.) distinguishes between Ksatriya-religion and Brahmin-reli-
gion, but assigns the atotan-doctrine squarely to the latter. Bakker (1989: 48-49 n.
64) thinks, in view of the fact that both Ksatriyas and Brahmins play an equal role
in these texts, that Upanisadic philosophy is mainly a joint product that has devel-
oped outside the traditional orthodox Vedic schools.
6
Garbe’s proposition remained within the confines of Vedic society.
The discovery of urban centres belonging to the pre- Vedic Indus civilisa-
tion, on the other hand, focused attention on the non-Vedic elements in
Indian culture. Sir John Marshall (1931: 1: 52) described a figurine on a
seal from Mohenjo-daro as a “God, ... seated ... in a typical attitude of
Yoga”,5 and a statue as “seemingly in the pose of a yogi, and it [5] is for
this reason that the eyelids are more than half closed and the eyes
looking downward to the tip of the nose” (id., p. 44, cf. p. 54). Indian
asceticism, then, might have an altogether non-Vedic origin. This is
indeed the position taken by several authors, some of whom speak of a
Sramana movement outside the Vedic pale, which however influenced
Vedic religion.6
A fair number of scholars these days emphasize none-the-less the
continuity that exists between the Vedic sacrificial tradition on the one
hand, and the penchant towards asceticism on the other. Consider, for ex-
ample, J.C. Heesterman’s article “Brahmin, ritual, and renouncer”, first
published in 1964, and reprinted in 1985 in The Inner Conflict ofTra-
5. This interpretation has been criticized in Srinivasan, 1984; During Caspers, 1985:
234 f. Basham (1989: 5) calls the evidence for Yoga in the civilization of the Indus
“so tenuous that the suggestions [that Yoga was practised] are quite unacceptable
except as faint possibilities”. (Added in the 2nd edition:) A renewed evaluation of
this issue will have to take into considerations some of the elements added to the
discussion by Thomas McEvilley (1981).
6. See, e.g., Dutt, 1924: 60 f.; Lamotte, 1958: 6 f.; Pande, 1974: 321 f.; Warder, 1980:
33 f. Lilian Silbum (1955: 135 f.) combines the last two points of view and ascribes
a role to both Sramanas and Ksatriyas. Harvey (1990: 10-11) presents another
melange: “Brahmins learnt of yogic techniques ... from ascetics whose traditions
may have gone back to the Indus Valley Civilization. Such techniques were found
to be useful as spiritual preparations for performing the sacrifice. Some Brahmins
then retired to the forest ... Out of the teachings of the more orthodox of these forest
dwellers were composed the Upanisads ... The ideas expressed in the Upanisads ...
were being hotly debated, both by Brahmins and wandering philosophers known as
Samana' s, who ... rejected the Vedic tradition ...” Olivelle (1992: 21) believes “that
when the evidence is examined completely it does point to a profound conflict
between [renunciation and Vedic religion], a conflict that cannot be adequately
explained if renunciation was in fact ‘an orthogenetic development of Vedic
thought'”.
7
dition (pp. 26-44). Heesterman finds in the Vedic ritual a development
towai'd ever decreasing involvement with others. The pre-classical sacri-
fice, Heesterman claims, involved rivalry between different parties. This
‘agonistic cooperation’ has disappeared in the classical sacrifice, where
only one institutor of the sacrifice ( yajamana ) remains. This yajamana,
however, is still dependent, this time upon his officiants. The [6] next
step, therefore, would be in the direction of discarding the officiants. In
Heesterman’s words (1985: 38-39): “The development of brahmanical
theory, set off by the individualization of the ritual, did not stop at the
point where the host-guest, protagonist-antagonist complementarity was
fused into the single unit of yajamana and officiants. It had to advance to
its logical conclusion, that is, the interiorization of the ritual, which
makes the officiants’ services superfluous”. With the interiorization of
the ritual, Heesterman thinks, “we touch the principle of world
renunciation, the emergence of which has been of crucial importance in
the development of Indian thinking”.
One might of course raise doubts as to whether historical develop-
ments have to follow such rigid rules.7 It is however clear that elements
of asceticism accompany the Vedic ritual. This is also the opinion of
Hans-Peter Schmidt (1968), who follows Heesterman in believing that
“[t | here are ... in the Vedic ritual some significant details to be found
which can be regarded as precursors of the later vanaprastha and
parivrajaka ” (p. 651). His own article draws attention to the fact that “the
whole ritual is pervaded by acts meant for immediately eliminating any
killing and injury - the acts of appeasing ( sand )” (p. 646). It is even
possible to speak of ‘a ritual ahimsa- theory’ (p. 649). This ritual ahimsa-
theory, Schmidt suggests (p. 649-650), “is the ultimate source of the later
renunciatory ab/m.sa-doctrinc’ ’ .
7. This is probably also Olivelle’s (1992: 70) intention when he states that “Heester-
man's theory depends too heavily on the development of ideas”.
8
Again it is possible to raise doubts. One might recall, with Doniger
and Smith (1991: xxxii n. 39), that “[w]hile it is true that in Vedic
ritualism there was expression of concern that the sacrificial victim
should not suffer [7] or cry out ..., that he accepts his fate voluntarily and
eagerly and so forth, all this is part and parcel of sacrificial ideologies
everywhere”. Halbfass (1991a: 113), too, questions Schmidt’s
conclusions: “Was there really a ‘ritual a/?/m.sa-thcory ’ ? And in what
sense can we say that this ‘ritual ahimsa- theory is the ultimate source of
the later renunciatory ahimsa- doctrine ’ ? Does it not seem more likely
that external factors contributed to these developments which
subsequently led to a sharp antagonism between Vedic ritualism and
ahimsa as two basically different forms of religious orientation?”
A different approach is taken by Joachim Friedrich Sprockhoff in a
number of publications, most notably in his article “Die Alten im alten
Indien” (1979). Sprockhoff, too, thinks that the Vedic ritual is one of the
foundations of samnyasa (1987: 256). But he recognizes another root in
the situation of the aged individual. Briefly stated, samnyasa is here pre-
sented as the decision of the aged father to leave all his possessions to his
sons and to disappear from his house and village.8 Such decisions, origi-
nally no doubt taken under pressure (if they were not cases of downright
eviction), took on religious dimensions and resulted in the prescription
that, ideally, the aged twice-born should end his days as solitary
wanderer. The stage of vanaprastha should then be considered a first step
in this direction.
[8] It will be clear that both the approaches outlined above face seri-
ous difficulties. If we accept that asceticism is originally a non-Vedic
phenomenon, we will be hard put to explain the ascetic features which
8. Already in 1879 Heinrich Zimmer (1879: 327-28) had drawn attention to the pos-
sibility in Vedic India to banish (“aussetzen”) the aged father; see also Haberlandt,
1885.
9
seem to be inseparable from the Vedic sacrifice. If, on the other hand, we
postulate a Vedic origin, it is hard to explain the coherence of ideas
encountered in the non-Vedic manifestations of asceticism. Also certain
chronological questions - such as the beginnings of Jainism, reputedly
[9] 250 years before Mahavrra - are then hard to answer.
There is a third possibility. Indian asceticism might have two
sources, the one Vedic, the other non-Vedic.* This possibility avoids the
problems connected with the two earlier ones. Moreover, it agrees with
the textual evidence, as this book will show.**
This ‘two sources’ solution is, to be sure, not completely unknown
to the secondary literature. Jean Varenne (1971: 12), for example,
observed: “L’accueil du Yoga par- le brahmanisme ... est du ... surtout au
fait que les rituels vediques connaissaient des pratiques analogues a
Tsuchida has argued in a recent publication (1997) that there may further have
been a ksatriya tradition of asceticism. Further research will be required to substan-
tiate this.
*01ivelle (1995: 13-14) comments in the following manner upon the first edition of
this book: “I remain unconvinced by both sides of [Bronkhorst's] argument, not
because they do not contain some elements of truth, hut because all by and large
ignore the social and economic factors that underlie the emergence of these new re-
ligious forms ...” Here Olivelle has obviously missed my point. Social and eco-
nomic factors may explain what we find in our texts, and should certainly not be
ignored. But before we look for explanations, we have to know what needs to be
explained, and for that we depend on the texts. This book deals with the textual ev-
idence.
Olivelle then continues: “That the Indian society in the Gangetic valley was
composed of diverse ethnic groups, many of which were of non- Aryan origin, is
obvious. It is equally obvious that the religious beliefs and practices of these groups
must have influenced the dominant Aryan classes. It is quite a different matter,
however, to attempt to isolate non- Aryan traits at a period a millennium or more
removed from the initial Aryan migration.” This may be correct, but does not
constitute a criticism of the thesis defended in this book, which makes no claims as
to the Aryan or non-Aryan origins of the beliefs and practices dealt with.
Olivelle concludes: “The most we can say is that the ascetic traditions contain
beliefs and practices not contained in the early vedic literature, and that they are in
many ways opposed to the central vedic ideas.” This is quite correct, and it turns
out that two currents of asceticism can be distinguished (and are distinguished in
the texts), one of which deviates considerably more from the “central vedic idea”
than the other. This is what the present book is about.
10
celles que prone le Yoga ...” Walter O. Kaelber (1989: 110) suggests
“that the brahmacarin’s career is in large measure a forerunner and
legitimizing model for the initially heterodox practices of ascetics later
assimilated into orthodoxy as forest hermit ( vanaprastha ) and world
renouncer ( sannyasin , bhiksu, pravrajita, parivrajaka, muni, yati)”.
Mircea Eliade (1969) finds precedents of Yoga in both Brahmanism and
‘aboriginal India’. Steven Collins (1982: 31) observes that “the
phenomenon of world-renunciation in India seems also to have drawn on
extra-Brahmanical roots”. Albrecht Wezler (1978: 111 n. 304) draws
attention to the “Tatsache, dass es, gleichgiiltig, of die weltflUchtige
Askese nun nur eine Wurzel hat, namlich brahmanisch-ritualistischer
Herkunft ist oder nicht, zahlreiche und verschiedene Formen der
Weltentsagung gegeben hat, die zugleich eine deutliche Abkehr vom
Brahmanismus und traditionellen Ritualismus darstellten”; he is of the
opinion that this whole complex of questions needs further investigation
and rethinking.
The ‘linear’ approach which induced most scholars to look for one
source of Indian asceticism, induced them also to look upon different
forms of asceticism as being ‘earlier’ and ‘later’, even in cases where
both [10] occur in the same text, or in the same story. An interesting
example are the studies of Hacker (1978), Wezler (1979) and Shee
(1986: 1-30), all of them dealing with the Mahabharata story of Samlka
and Srngin.9 Only Shee (1986: 7) has pointed out that the two forms of
asceticism described in this story cannot necessarily be ordered linearly
into an older and a younger one.
Phenomena of the same type - such as asceticism in ancient India -
may, but do not necessarily all belong to the same current of
development. Indeed, the present study intends to show that the different
forms of asceticism that can be distinguished in India belong to (at least)
9. See also chapter 11, below.
11
two different currents. These currents did not fail to influence each other
in subsequent times, and become ever more difficult to distinguish from
each other as time goes by. But they are clearly distinguishable in the
early texts.
[It will become clear in the following pages that one of the two cur-
rents to be considered has close connections with the belief in
transmigration, each new birth being in accordance with one’s actions.
An earlier study (1986) has drawn attention to the complex of ideas that
links this belief [8] to the different forms of asceticism meant to put an
end to those rebirths. Briefly stated, these forms of asceticism aim at the
elimination of all actions. They do so, grosso modo, in two ways. One of
these is to literally abstain from all, or most, activity. This leads to a
number of ascetic practices which share the common theme of
motionlessness of body and mind. The other way centres around the
insight that the body - and the mind - do not constitute the true self. This
second way encouraged the development of different ‘philosophies’,
which specified how body and self are related to each other; all these
philosophies share the belief that the self does not participate in any
action.
This complex of ideas constitutes an organic whole.10 It is therefore
not without risk to isolate one aspect or another from this complex and
‘trace’ its history back to the Vedic texts. The fact that Vedic religion
knows the phenomenon of renunciation ( sainnyasa ), or non-violence
( ahimsa ), does not necessarily prove that therefore this complex of ideas
derives from Vedic religion.]***
10. This is not to deny that “[i]n its concrete totality, the doctrine of karma and sam-
sara is a very complex phenomenon, both historically and systematically” (Halb-
fass, 1991a: 295).
*** This passage occurred, in slightly different form, on pp. 7-8 of the first edition.
Klaus Butzenberger has adopted in a recent publication (1996) a line of reasoning
which he describes as a kind of methodological positivism, and which implies that
12
“If all specific features and characteristics of [the doctrine of the transmigration of
souls] prove to be derivable from Indian texts, we confess to be in no need of as-
suming major or even relevant influences from other sources ... Non enim entia
sunt miltiplicanda praeter necessitatem.” (p. 58). Butzenberger furthermore claims
on the same page “that the extant Indian texts are perfectly sufficient in order to
trace the sources, motives and origins of [that doctrine]”. He then presents a scheme
of how ideas about the afterlife might, or should, have developed. The inherent
weaknesses of such schemes have already been pointed out while discussing
Heesterman's ideas, above. Butzenberger's approach is also limited by the fact that
he merely seeks to exclude “pre-Aryan” and “extra-Indian” influences, overlooking
the fact that, just as Vedic religion and thought underwent major changes in the
thousand years or so following its appearance in India, also the religious world
views of those Indian who were less directly, or not at all, connected with Vedic re-
ligion might have undergone major changes. Most seriously, however, Butzen-
berger does not consider the fact that the Indian tradition itself clearly distinguishes
between different currents of practices and beliefs, as documented in the present
book.
4
PARTI
THE ASRAMAS
5
Chapter 1. The Apastamba Dharmasutra
Patrick Olivelle, following earlier authors,11 observed in 1974 that a
number of old Dharmasutras - the oldest, by common consent - present
the four asramas not as four stages in the life of a high-caste Hindu, but
as four alternatives, four options regarding how to spend one’s life
after an initial period in the family of a teacher. It would not be correct to
take this to mean that these Dharmasutras allow one to skip one or more
intervening asramas; the very idea of succession is absent. The
importance of this observation has gone largely unnoticed. It implies that
one may become an ascetic without ever having been a householder, and
therefore without ever having obtained the right to sacrifice. This, of
course, is difficult to explain for those who believe that early Indian
asceticism arose from the sacrificial tradition.
The first and most important text to be considered is the Apastamba
Dharmasutra (ApDhS).12 This text deals with brahmacai'ins, parivrajas,
vanaprasthas and grhasthas, in this order. This remarkable sequence -
which deviates from the later temporal sequence brahmacarin, grhastha,
[12] vanaprastha, parivraja (or samnyasin) - is explained by the fact, al-
ready referred to, that no chronological sequence in the life of an
individual is intended.
Note to begin with that the ApDhS prefers the choice of grhastha to
the three other ones, and even rejects the other ways of life in which, ac-
cording to the ApDhS, the Vedic injunctions are not obeyed (2.9.23.10);
11. Deussen, 1909: 128-29; Farquhar, 1920: 40; Wintemitz, 1926; 218-19; Kangle,
1986: III: 151. See further Brockington, 1981: 92; Olivelle, 1984: 100; Sprockhoff,
1991a: 15.
12. Cf. Sprockhoff, 1991a, which also mentions variant readings in the parallel pas-
sages in the Hiranyakesi Dharmasutra and in the Satyasadha Srautasutra.
6
we shall see that the way of life of the parivraja is explicitly stated to be
against the scriptures (2.9.21.15). Yet the text presents a clear and
interesting description of these ways of life.
Sutras 2.9.21.7-16 deal with the parivraja. We leam that the wander-
ing ascetic is chaste (8), without (sacrificial) fire, without house, without
shelter, without protection, he is a muni who utters words only during
recitation, who obtains support of life in a village, moving about without
interest in this world or in the next (10); 13 he uses only relinquished
clothes (11) or, according to some, no clothes at all (12); he leaves
behind truth and falsehood, pleasure and pain, the Vedas, this world and
the next, searching his self (13).
In this enumeration no painful mortifications are included. The life
of the parivraja is no doubt simple, extremely simple, but the only
remaining thing that interests him is not the capacity to endure hardship,
but rather to find his self.
This is extremely interesting. It shows that the parivraja of the
ApDhS is engaged in one of the two ways of escape from the never end-
ing cycle of birth and rebirth determined by one’s actions, briefly [13]
explained in the Introduction, above. This belief is not unknown to the
ApDhS. Sutra 1.2. 5. 5, for example, states that “some become R^sis on
account of their knowledge of the scriptures (sru tarsi) in a new birth,
due to a residue of the fruits of their [former] actions”.14
Recall that this way of escape may imply that, once the true nature of the
self has been realized, the aim has been reached. The remainder of the
description of the wandering ascetic confirms that this possible
implication was known to the author of the ApDhS. Sutra 2.9.21.14
13. Sprockhoff (1991a: 10 + n. 42) translates “fur den es weder ein Hier noch ein Dort
gibt”. He further suggests (p. 17-18) that sutra 10 was originally metrical and read:
anagnir aniketah syad asarmasarano munih / svadhyaya utsrjed vacant grame prana-
dhrtim caret H.
14. ApDhS 1.2. 5. 5: srutarsayas tu bhavanti kecit karmaphalasesena punahsambhave;
yatha svetaketuh.
7
states: “In an enlightened one there is obtainment of peace” ( buddhe
ksemaprapanam). The next two sutras then turn against the preceding
description. Sutra 15 begins: “That is opposed to the scriptures” ( tac
chastrair vipratisiddham). No. 16 continues: “If there were obtainment
of peace in an enlightened person, he would not experience pain even in
this world” ( buddhe cet ksemaprapanam ihaiva na duhkham upalabheta).
These sutras confirm again that the wandering ascetic is concerned with
liberation through enlightenment; they also show that the author of the
ApDhS rejects this as impossible.
[Here it must be pointed out that the ApDhS contains another
section - to be precise: the eighth Pat ala of the first Prasna - which
appears to be in contradiction with the above rejection of the parivraja.
That other section sings the praise of what it calls ‘the obtainment of the
self’. Indeed, “there is no higher [aim] than the obtainment of the self’
(1.8.22.2). A number of slokas are then quoted, possibly from a no
longer existing Upanisad,15 which elaborate this theme (1.8.22.4 - 23.3).
This section does [14] not concern only the parivraja. Its concluding lines
(1.8.23.6) enumerate the virtues that have to be cultivated in a/7 the
asramas, and which, presumably, bring about identification with the
universal soul.16 The puzzling bit is the quoted stanza 1.8.23.3, which
15. Nakamura (1983: 308 f.) points at the similarities with the Kathaka Upanisad.
16. The concluding portion is obscure: ... iti sarvasramanam samayapadani tany anu-
tisthan vidhina sarvagaml bhavati “ these (good qualities) have been settled by the
agreement (of the wise) for all (the four) orders; he who, according to the precepts
of the sacred law, practises these, enters the universal soul” (Biihler, 1879: 78);
“these are [the virtues] which must necessarily be observed thoughout all of the
[four] stages of life. He who puts them into practice according to the rules becomes
one who goes everywhere” (Nakamura, 1983: 308); “these (virtues) have been
agreed upon for all the asramas; attending to them according to the rules one be-
comes possessed of that one who is going everywhere (= one becomes united with
the universal Self)” (Schmidt, 1968: 641). The commentator Sankara believes that
one of the quoted stanzas refers to a state of renunciation ( sarvasamnyasa ), see Na-
kamura, 1983: 307 and 318 n. 10. This interpretation is in no way compelling. The
relevant portion of the stanza (1.8.22.8) reads: (yah) ... pradhvam casya sadacaret.
This means no more than: “and who acts always in accordance with its path”. No
far-reaching conclusions can be drawn from this.
8
seems to say that the aim of the religious life ( ksema ) is reached in this
life: “But the destruction of faults results from the yoga here in this
existence. Having eliminated [the faults] which destroy the creatures, the
learned one arrives at peace (. ksema ).”17 It appears, therefore, that the
author of this portion of the ApDhS accepts what is rejected as
impossible in the discussion of the parivraja. Do we have to conclude
that the ApDhS had more than one author?]18
We turn to the next question: The ApDhS deals explicitly with the
way of insight, practised by the parivraja. Does this mean that it knows
the alternative way of inaction? Yes it does, and it speaks about it in [15]
connection with the forest-dweller ( vanaprastha ). The forest-dweller, like
the wandering ascetic, is chaste (19), without (sacrificial) fire,19 without
house, without shelter, without protection, he is a muni who utters words
only during recitation (21); until this point the description is identical
with the one of the wandering ascetic.20 The forest-dweller, unlike the
wandering ascetic, wears clothes made from products of the jungle
(2.9.22.1), he supports his life with roots, fruits, leaves and grass (2); in
the end only things that come by chance support him (3); subsequently
he depends successively on water, air, and ether alone (4).21 It is clear
that the forest-dweller reduces progressively his intake of outside matter.
17. ApDhS 1.8.23.3: dosanam tu vinirghato yogamula iha jlvite / nirhrtya bhutada-
hlyan ksemarn gacchati panditah I I Tr. Nakamura, 1983: 308. Note the use of ‘yo-
ga' here and in 1.8.23.5.
18. The question is also raised in Gampert, 1939: 8.
19. The edition reads ekagnir: this must be a later ‘correction’ of original anagnir,
which occurs in the otherwise identical sutra no. 10 (beginning). The presence of a
sacrificial fire is in any case excluded by the absence of house, shelter and protec-
tion. (According to sutra 2.9.22.21 ( agnyartham saranam) a shelter is required for a
fire.) See also Skurzak, 1948: 17 n. 1; and Sprockhoff, 1979: 416; 1991a: 19 f.
20. The term muni is used in connection both with the parivraja and with the vanapra-
stha. A similar general use of muni is found in the epic (Shee, 1986: 175).
21. ApDhS 2.9.22.1-5: tasyaranyam acchadanam vihitam / tato miilaih phaiaih parnais
trnair iti vartayams caret / antatah pravrttani / tato ’po vayum akasam ity abhi-
nisrayet / tesam uttara uttarah samyogah phalato visistah/
9
Eating is reduced, then stopped, only water being taken in. Subsequently
this too stops, while breathing remains. Then this too comes to an end,
expressed by the words that the forest-dweller now depends on ether
alone. It is not necessary to recall the fasts to death of Jaina and other
ascetics in order to show that the author of the ApDhS was also
acquainted with what might be called the ‘way of inaction’.
The part of the ApDhS so far considered, then, teaches the four asra-
mas as four alternative ways to lead one’s life. The same alternatives are
enumerated at ChU 2.23.1, be it that different terms are used. The [16]
passage reads, in translation:
There are three divisions of Dharma. The first is sacrifice, study
[of the Veda] and munificence. The second is asceticism and
nothing else ( tapa cva). The third is the brahmacarin who lives in
the family of a teacher (and who causes his self to sink in the
family of the teacher).22 All of these obtain an auspicious world.
[But] he who resides in brahman goes to immortality 23
The preference of the Chandogya Upanisad is the exact opposite of
that of the Apastamba Dharmasiitra. But the four possible ways of spend-
ing one’s life are the same for both. We can take this passage from the
ChU as a confirmation that we have so far correctly understood the
ApDhS. Let us return to the latter text.
The only connection with the Veda of the parivraja and of the vana-
prastha as described so far in the ApDhS, is their recitation of Vedic
mantras ( svadhyaya; so sutras 2.9.21.10 and 21). These ascetics have
nothing to do with Vedic rites, neither in their real, external form, nor in
22. Bohtlingk (1889: 99) considers this a gloss.
23. ChU 2.23.1: trayo dharmaskandhah / yajno ’dhyayanam danam iti prathamah / tapa
eva dvitlyah / brahmacary acaryakulavasl trtlyo (’ tyantam atmanam acaryaki.de
’vasadayan) / sarva ete punyaloka bhavanti / brahmasamstho ’mrtatvam eti / /
10
an interiorized form. Our text, in any case, does not say a word about it.
Or rather, it confirms that these ascetics cannot perform Vedic sacrifices,
by now introducing another type of forest-dweller, one who does
sacrifice, and who for this purpose must take a wife and kindle the sacred
fires. This other type of forest-dweller is described in sutras that
represent the opinion of ‘some’ (eke), which may indicate that this
description derives from a [17] different source altogether. This other
forest-dweller finishes his study of the Veda, takes a wife, kindles the
sacrificial fires and performs the rites prescribed in the Veda (2.9.22.7);
he builds a house outside the village, where he lives with his wife and
children, and with his sacrificial fires (8) 24 This alternative way of life
of the forest-dweller is also characterized by an increasing number of
mortifications (sutras 2.9.22.9 - 23.2). Sutras 2.9.23.7-8 are especially
interesting: they show that this kind of forest-dweller obtains
supernatural powers: “Now they accomplish also their wishes merely by
conceiving them; for instance, (the desire to procure) rain, to bestow
children, second-sight, to move quick as thought, and other (desires) of
this description” (tr. Biihler, 1879: 158).25
It will be clear that the ApDhS describes, under the two headings of
forest-dweller and wandering ascetic, not two, but three different forms
of religious practice: 1) the way of insight into the true nature of the self;
2) the way of inaction, in this case: of fasting to death; and 3) a half
sacrificial - half ascetic way of life 26 Only one of these three ways of
24. It is the succession described in these two and the following sutras that is an-
nounced by the word anupurvya in sutra 6, not “the successive performance (of the
acts prescribed for the asramas)”. Olivelle (1984: 101) may therefore be mistaken
in thinking that these rules constitute “an exception to the rule that an asrama has to
be selected immediately after completing one’s Vedic studies”. See further
Sprockhoff, 1991a: 25, 27 .
25. ApDhS 2.9.23.7-8: athapi samkalpasiddhayo bhavand / yatha varsam prajadanam
dure darsanam manojavata yac canyad evam yuktam /
26. Skurzak (1948) had already drawn attention to the threefold classification of as-
cetics in the ApDhS.
11
life has any connection with Vedic ritual. Yet the ApDhS is an orthodox
Brahmanical text. It is hard to believe that its author, had he been aware
of a connection between the other two ways of life and the Vedic
sacrificial tradition, [18] would have kept silent about it. The conclusion
seems justified that for him the way of life of the parivraja and that of the
vanaprastha - i.e., the one who does not sacrifice - stood quite apart from
the Vedic rites. Being an orthodox Brahmin, it is not surprising that he
preferred the life of the householder to its three alternatives.
We shall henceforth distinguish between ‘non-Vedic’ and ‘Vedic’
asceticism. We shall further assume that the two forms of asceticism de-
scribed in the ApDhS that have no link with the Vedic sacrifice, are
reflections in a Brahmanical text of originally ‘non-Vedic’ ways of
asceticism. Besides these, the ApDhS describes one type of ‘Vedic’
ascetic. The practices of the Vedic ascetics are linked to the Vedic
sacrifice; this is not true in the case of the non-Vedic ascetic. Indeed, the
latter may not know the Vedic sacrifice from direct experience, and not
infrequently he may not be entitled to, nor ever have been entitled to
perform them. Vedic ritualism does not appeal' to play any role
whatsoever in his ascetic endeavours. On the contrary, his efforts are
directed toward liberation from rebirth, an aim which he may not share
with his Vedic colleagues. The aims of the Vedic ascetics are harder to
pin down on the basis of the ApDhS. It may however be very significant
that this text mentions the obtainment of supernatural powers in the
context of the Vedic vanaprastha.
Consider now the three types of ascetics which Megasthenes distin-
guishes in Schwanbeck’s fragment 41 (tr. McCrindle, 1877: 98-102):
Megasthenes makes a ... division of the philosophers, saying that
they are of two kinds - one of which he calls the Brachmanes, and
[19] the other the Sarmanes.
12
The Brachmanes ... have their abode in a grove in front of the
city within a moderate-sized enclosure. They live in a simple
style, and lie on beds of rushes or (deer) skins. They abstain from
animal food and sexual pleasures, ... Death is with them a very
frequent subject of discourse. They regard this life as, so to speak,
the time when the child within the womb becomes mature, and
death as a birth into a real and happy life for the votaries of
philosophy. On this account they undergo much discipline as a
preparation for death. ... on many points their opinions coincide
with those of the Greeks, for like them they say that the world had
a beginning ...
Of27 the Sarmanes he tells us that those he held in most hon-
our are called the Hylobioi. They live in the woods, where they
subsist on leaves of trees and wild fruits, and wear garments made
from the bark of trees. They abstain from sexual intercourse and
from wine. ... Next in honour to the Hylobioi are the physicians,
since they are engaged in the study of the nature of man. They are
simple in their habits, but do not live in the fields. Their food con-
sists of rice and barley-meal, which they can always get for the
mere asking, or receive from those who entertain them as guests
in their houses. ... This class and the other class practise fortitude,
both by undergoing active toil, and by the endurance of pain, so
that they remain for a whole day motionless in one fixed attitude.
One type of Brahmin ascetic is here described, besides two kinds of Sra-
manas. Megasthenes’ remark about the embryonic nature of this life, [20]
and of death as a birth into another, better existence is of particular
27. The remaining portion is also translated in Zysk, 1991: 28.
13
interest. The Vedic texts look upon the consecrated sacrificer ( dlksita ) as
an embryo preparing to be reborn into another kind of existence.28 It will
also become clear in a later chapter that Vedic asceticism was in many
respects a permanent form of dlksa.
Megasthenes’ remarks about the two kinds of Sramanas are even
more interesting, for they correspond almost exactly to the two kinds of
non- Vedic ascetic of the ApDhS.29 One of these stays in the forest, and
survives on what he finds there. The other one begs for his food and,
very significantly, is “engaged in the study of the nature of man”; we can
safely interpret: this ascetic is in search of the true nature of the soul.30
Both Sramanas are described as remaining motionless for long periods of
time. This remark shows that these ascetics belong to the non-Vedic
current.
Megasthenes’ testimony constitutes a striking confirmation of the
conclusions which we were able to draw from the ApDhS. Both sources
state that there were two types of ascetics in ancient India, Vedic and
non-Vedic. Both describe only one type of Vedic ascetic, and two kinds
of non-Vedic ascetic. We cannot but believe that we are here confronted
with fairly reliable descriptions of the actual situation, rather than with
mere Brahmanic rationalizations.
Let us once more return to the ApDhS. This text uses the terms [21]
vanaprastha and parivraja. Vanaprastha is used to denote both Vedic and
non-Vedic ascetics; it is therefore difficult to determine whether this term
belonged originally to the Vedic or to the non-Vedic realm. The term
28. See, e.g., Oldenberg, 1917: 405 f.
29. Megasthenes does not, therefore, refer to Buddhists; see also Halbfass, 1991b: 207.
30. This kind of ascetic is further described as ‘physician’, and Zysk (1990; 1991) has
argued that Ayurveda in its origins is linked to non-Vedic asceticism. Wolz-Gott-
wald’s (1990) criticism of Zysk’s position overlooks the fact that the non-Vedic
ascetics presuppose the existence of social milieus from which they recruited their
members, and which most probably shared many of their ideas (such as the belief in
rebirth, but also perhaps the ‘empirico-rational’ approach to disease).
14
parivraja, on the other hand, is here connected with non-Vedic ascetics
only. This agrees with the use of the corresponding term paribbajaka in
the Pali Buddhist canon. Here it refers throughout to non-Vedic ascetics.
No term corresponding to vanaprastha is found in these texts.31 (The
same is true of Panini’s grammar, which may have to be dated around
350 B.C.E. (Hiniiber, 1989: 34). The term vanaprastha is not mentioned,
whereas parivrajaka, bhiksu, maskarin and sramana do occur. Patanjali’s
Maha-bhasya (around 150 B.C.E. ), on the other hand, mentions the
caturasramya under P. 5.1.124 vt. 1.)
The situation is different in the Jaina canon in Ardha-Magadhi. Here
the word vanaprastha (vana(p)pattha) occurs a few times, always in
connection with Brahmanical ascetics. We read here about vanaprastha
ascetics ( vanapattha tavasa), who are, among other things, hottiya, which
corresponds to Sanskrit agnihotrikah according to the commentator.32
According to one ms reading, these ascetics are also sottiya, which might
correspond to Sanskrit srotriya .33 Interestingly, the Jain canon uses on
some occasions also the term parivrajaka (AM parivvayaga/-ya ) to refer
to Brahmins. The parivrajaka Khanda(g)a, for example, knows the four
Vedas with their ahgas and upahgas, and many other Brahmanical and
parivrajaka texts (Viy 2.1.12). Essentially the same description is
repeated [22] for the parivrajaka Moggala (orPoggala) (Viy 11.12.16)
and for the Brahmins Gobahula and Bahula (Viy 15.16, 36).34
31. Seech. 10, below.
32. Viy 1 1.9.6; Uvav 74; Pupph 3.4. Cf. Deleu, 1966: 122-23; 1970: 175; Lalwani,
1985: 184; Jain, 1984: 300; Leumann, 1883: 163 s.v. hottiya.
33. See Viy 11.9.6 p. 517 n. 3.
34. See further Jain, 1984: 302 f.
15
Chapter 2. Samnyasa
The ApDhS does not use the word samnyasa or its cognates (sam-
nyasin, samnyasta, etc.). And indeed, it would be a mistake to associate
these words with any of the ascetics so far described. The early texts use
these terms in connection with an altogether different kind of ascetic.
Very interestingly, these texts are not Dharmasutras, but Samnyasa
Upanisads and a Srauta Sutra.
The ascetic dealt with in these texts has a clear link with the Vedic
sacrifice. But unlike the Vedic ascetic considered above, this one
interiorizes the sacrifice, and continues in this new way his ritual
obligations. We first look at a short passage from the Manava Srautasutra
(MSS 8.25) which deals with him.35 This passage contains the term
samnyasa, but does not as much as mention the terms vanaprastha and
parivraja, or any of their usual synonyms. The rule of renunciation here
described implies that the renouncer parts with all his possessions, and
abandons the sacrificial fires. The text makes clear that one has to be a
householder with children, and therefore married, in order to qualify for
renunciation; this requirement does not surprise in the Vedic sacrificial
context of the MSS. More problematic is, at first sight, the abandonment
of the sacrificial fires. In reality the renouncer does not abandon his fires,
[24] he rather makes them rise up within himself (8.25.6: ... atmany
agnln samaropayet). Moreover, he heats himself at the three sacrificial
fires (8.25.7: ... ahavanlye garhapatye daksinagnau catmanam
pratapayet ); we may conclude, with Sprockhoff (1987: 241), that the
renouncer increases his tapas during this operation. Sutra 10 adds that he
takes ashes from the three fires, but the following sutras arc too corrupt
to allow us to conclude with certainty what he does with them. Sutras 12
and 13 specify that henceforth his meals and certain other activities are
35. This passage was recently studied by J.F. Sprockhoff (1987).
16
his oblations. Sutra 15, finally, tells us how the renouncer ends his days.
The presence of twice va ‘or’ seems to indicate that three alternatives are
offered: 1) entering the fire, the road of the hero ( agnipravesanam
vlradhvanam ); 2) non-eating ( anasakam ); 3) the asrama of the aged
( vrddhasramam ). It is true that entering the fire and the road of the hero
are presented, in some later texts,36 as alternatives. The preoccupation of
the renouncer here described with the sacrificial fires, which he has
absorbed in his body, permits us to take the present passage at its word:
entering the fire is the preferred, but also most difficult method of killing
oneself, and is therefore called ‘road of the hero’.37
The main elements to be noted in the passage from the MSS arc:
1) Samnyasa is not brought in connection with the four asramas.
[25] 2) The renouncer parts with all his possessions, including
specifically the Vedic fires, which arc interiorized.
3) The renouncer is or has been married.
4) He may decide to kill himself in some well-defined way.
We find these same elements in the Kathasruti .38 However, the posi-
tion of the samnyasin with regard to the sacred fires is here inconsistent:
p. 38 1. 7 f. states that they arc interiorized, p. 32 1. 1 f. speaks rather of a
transfer of the vital breaths into the fires. Sprockhoff (1976: 73 n. 20;
1989: 143) concludes rightly that the Kathasruti text cannot be a unitary
work. This does not change the fact that the Kathasruti contains a
36. Jabala Upanisad p.68 1.2-4 has: ayam vidhih pravrajinam: vlradhvane vanasake
vapam pravese vagnipravese va mahaprasthane va; similarly in Paramahamsa-
parivrajaka Upanisad p. 279 1. 13 - p. 280 1. 1. The Kathasruti (p. 39 1. 3-4), on the
other hand, presents ‘entering the fire’ and ‘the road of the hero' together in such a
way that it is not possible to decide whether they refer to one or two methods.
37. Instances where sacrificer and victim are identical are, according to Scheuer
(1975: 78 f.), the epic characters of Amba and Asvatthaman. For traces of self-
sacrifice by fire in the Veda, see Falk, 1986: 37 f.
38. See Sprockhoff, 1989: 147 + n. 2.
17
particularly clear passage showing that the samnyasin is dead to the
world:39
Having made the sacrificial priests place all the sacrificial utensils
on the limbs of the sacrificer (i.e., of his own), he should place
(his five breaths, viz.) prana, apana, vyana, udana and samana,
that are in (the five sacrificial fires, viz.) ahavanlya, garhapatya,
anva-haryapacana, sabhya and avasathya, all [five of them], in all
[of the five sacrificial fires].
The connection between this passage and Vedic descriptions of funeral
rites is beyond doubt,40 so much so that the only reason for believing that
the present passage does not describe a real sacrifice - i.e., the burning
[26] alive of the renouncing sacrificer - is the following context, which
describes how the renouncer cuts off his hair, throws away his sacrificial
cord, regards for the last time his son (if he has one), and wanders off.
The initial prose portion of the ( Laghu -) Samnyasa Upanisad - to be
separated from the following slokas, and from most of what follows in
the Upanisad - satisfies three of the above four points.41 The person
described is an Ahitagni, and therefore presumably a married man 42 We
also read that two fires are interiorized (dvav agnl samawpayet; p. 17 1.
8); according to Sprockhoff (1976: 63) these are the Garhapatya and
Ahavaniya fires. Very interesting is further the remark that the
samnyasin to be wishes to “go beyond the asrama( s)” ( asramaparam
39. Kathasruti p. 3 1 1. 7 - p. 32 1. 3 : yajamanasyahgan rtvijah sarvaih patraih samarop-
ya yad ahavanlye garhapatye 'nvaharyapacane sabhyavasathyayos ca
pranapanavyanodanasamanan sarvan sarvesu samaropayet. Cf. Sprockhoff, 1989:
147-148; Olivette, 1992: 129-130.
40. See Sprockhoff, 1989: 148 n. 11; Bodewitz, 1973: 131 ff.
41. See Sprockhoff, 1976: 36 f., esp. 52 f.; 1991.
42. Some texts on Dharma allow for the possibility that someone kindle the sacred
fire without marrying and becoming a householder; see chapter 3 below.
18
gaccheyam, p. 151. 3). This does not necessarily imply that the four
asramas were known, for the person described, being an Ahitagni, is
probably a householder. Yet it justifies the conclusion: “Der Samnyasa
ist ausdriicklich kein Asrama” (Sprockhoff, 1976: 54).
The relationship between samnyasa and the asramas is further eluci-
dated by a passage from the Aruni Upanisad. Here we read (p. 5 1. 3 f.)
that a householder ( grhastha ) or a brahmacarin or a vanaprastha can
abandon his sacrificial cord ( upavlta ) and interiorize the fires ( lokagnln
udaragnau samaropayet; p. 6 1. 1-2). There is no indication in the text
that these three ways of life were thought of as succeeding each other;
the order in which they are presented suggests the opposite.43 The
precise [27] significance of the terms brahmacarin and vanaprastha in
this context is not clear.44 P. 6 1.3 speaks of a kuticara brahmacarin who
abandons his family; this is obviously not the same as a Vedic student
who lives in the family of his teacher.45 And if it is true that our passage
speaks of interiorizing the Vedic fires ( lokagnln udaragnau samaropayet
is somewhat obscure), also the vanaprastha must be assumed to maintain
a Vedic fire; this of course leads to no difficulty if a ‘Vedic’ vanaprastha
is meant here.
It will be clear from the above that some of the oldest texts that de-
scribe samnyasa do not link this institution to the four asramas, even
though at least one of these texts knows the term asrama, and another one
43. This passage does not agree with p. 9 1. 1-2 which allows a boy to renounce al-
ready before the upanayana; the present passage speaks of abandoning the sacred
thread, which is obtained at the upanayana. It is therefore hard to believe that the
two passages were originally part of one and the same text.
44. See Sprockhoff, 1981: 59-60, which speaks - in connection with ChU 8.5 - about
the wider sense of brahmacarya. See also Arthasastra 1.3.9-12 which, while enu-
merating the asramas as four alternatives, mentions brahmacarya as a duty of the
vanaprastha ; see ch. 3, below. Note further that the Nyayabhasya on sutra 3.1.4
(Anandasrama ed. p. 193) speaks of the practice of brahmacarya in order to reach
liberation: tatra muktyartho brahmacaryavaso na syat.
45. On kutlcara/-caka, see Sprockhoff, 1976: 128.
19
the terms grhastha, brahmacarin and vanaprastha. The earliest texts that
describe explicitly the four asramas, on the other hand, do not mention
samnyasa.46 To this opposition another one must be added: the ApDhS,
as well as the texts to be considered in chapter 3 below, introduce the
asramas as alternatives; samnyasa, on the other hand, is reserved for men
of a certain age. We shall return to this important distinction.
One might try to explain these oppositions, pointing at the different
[28] kinds of texts which represent the opposing points of view: the
asramas are described in Dharmasutras, samnyasa primarily in Upani-
sads. The Dharmasutras, one might argue, represent the interests and
points of view of the grhasthas, while only the Upanisads were directly
inspired by the ascetic ways of life.47 However, this approach to the texts
is not without serious risks. It provides an excuse for not taking seriously
a large proportion of our sources about ancient Indian asceticism. More-
over, it decides a priori that the samnyasa of the early Samnyasa Upani-
sads and the ascetic asramas of the early Dharmasutras concern the same
phenomenon. (And this a priori decision would then without much
further difficulty entail that the whole of ancient Indian asceticism
derives from Vedic antecedents.)
No such a priori position will here be taken. If samnyasa and the two
ascetic asramas concern the same thing, the texts must provide evidence
for this. Our inspection of the texts so far, however, suggests something
quite different: the four asramas in the earliest texts do not cover sam-
nyasa', and samnyasa is no asramal
In a way this was to be expected. Sprockhoff (1976: 291 f.; 1979;
1980) has rightly drawn attention to the fact that the samnyasin, though
living in a biological sense, is dead to the world. Indeed, the ceremonies
46. A partial exception is VasDhS 10.4, which reads in the context of the parivrajaka :
sannyaset sarvakarmani vedam ekam na sannyaset / vedasannyasanac chudras
tasmad vedam na sannyaset / / . See Olivelle, 1981: 269; 1984: 127 f.
47. This is essentially Sprockhoff’s approach (1979: 376).
20
that introduce him into this final state of ‘life’ include his symbolic
cremation, as we have seen. But clearly the four asramas, being
presented as four alternative ways of living one’s life, should not cover a
way of ‘living one’s death’!
One thing, however, seems clear. The moment efforts were made to
[29] include samnyasa into the asramas, a temporal ordering of those
asramas became virtually inevitable. For samnyasa concerned the aged.
This too has been convincingly shown by Sprockhoff. A text like the
(Laghu-) Samnyasa Upanisad, for example, introduces samnyasa, very
significantly, as an alternative to death for those healthy ahitagnis who
have not yet died. In other words, it is the mutual adaptation of asramas
and samnyasa which introduced temporal order into the former.
A few words must finally be said about the number of asramas. The
ApDhS enumerates four of them, but only three are Brahmanic in the
proper sense. In fact, we have seen that of the two ascetic asramas only
the vanaprastha can be Vedic, the parivraja is completely non-Vedic. The
addition of samnyasa to the asramas in later times changed the situation,
but at a price; for samnyasa was originally no asrama. In the light of
these considerations it is not without interest to see that one verse of the
Manusmrti (2.230) speaks of ‘the three asramas’; this in spite of the fact
that elsewhere (6.87) this same text enumerates four asramas.14 Also
MBh 12.109.6 speaks of three asramas. MBh 12.311.27, finally, speaks
of the three asramas that are based on the state of householder, and that
do not please him who looks for liberation.15
14. Cf. Sprockhoff, 1991a: 39 f.
15. MBh 12.3 1 1 .27 : na tv asya ramate buddhir asramesu naradhipa / trisu garhasthya-
miilesu moksadharmanudarsinah //.
21
Chapter 3. The four aBramas as alternatives
We shall now briefly consider some other early texts which present
the four asramas as alternatives.
The rejection of all forms of withdrawal from the world which we
found in the ApDhS we find again in the Gautama Dharmasutra (GDhS).
This text concludes a discussion of the four asramas with the words: “But
the venerable teacher (prescribes) one order only, because the order of
householders is explicitly prescribed (in the Vedas)” (3.36 (= 1.4.35):
aikasramyam tv acaiyah pratyaksavidhanad garhasthasya ...; tr. BUhler,
1879: 196). That is to say, the author of this text accepts but one of the
four asramas. This does not stop him from providing a short description -
which represents the opinion of ‘some’ (3.1 = 1.3.1) - of the other three;
the names used are brahmacarin, bhiksu and vaikhanasa respectively. We
are here of course especially interested in the bhiksu and vaikhanasa
(3.11-35 = 1.3.10-34).
The first thing to be noted is that neither of these two, bhiksu and
vaikhanasa, appears interested in finding the true nature of the self. Both
engage rather in various forms of restraint and mortification. An
important difference between them is constituted by the different ways in
which they obtain their nourishment: the bhiksu begs, and is for this
reason allowed to enter a village, the vaikhanasa never enters a village
and lives by what he finds in the forest.48 An even more important
difference, at any rate from [31] the point of view of our present
investigation, concerns their position with regard to Vedic ritual. The text
is silent about the bhiksu’ s link with it. The vaikhanasa, on the other
hand, establishes a fire in accordance with the Sravanaka (v.l.
Sramanaka ; 3.27 = 1.3.26: sravanakenagnim adha-ya ), which is the
authoritative book of the vaikhanasas ( vaikhanasam sastram ) according
48. The vaikhanasa. though never entering a village, is stated to live in a vana (3.26 =
1.3.25), not in the aranyal
22
to the commentator Haradatta.
We might here be tempted to identify this vaikhanasa with the
‘Vedic’ vanaprastha of the ApDhS. There is however a major difference.
For the vaikhanasa is not necessarily married! In normal circumstances
he would therefore not be entitled to kindle the Vedic fire. The solution
which was apparently devised for ascetics bent on an ascetic life-style
from a young age, consisted in some special rules for the vaikhanasas,
which allowed them to kindle the Vedic fire without first having to get
married.
The GDhS gives us no details concerning these special rules of the
vaikhanasas. It is not impossible that they have found expression in the
Vaikhanasa Dharmasutra ( VDhS), a text which, in its present form,
seems to be younger than the GDhS.49 VDhS 8.6 requires that a house-
holder who plans to take his abode in the woods ( vanasramam yasyari),
whether he be in the possession of a sacred fire ( ahitagni ) or not, should
churn a Sramanaka fire and take it with him to his new abode.
So the vaikhanasa of the GDhS appears to combine elements of the
‘Vedic’ and ‘non-Vedic’ vanaprasthas in the ApDhS: he is no longer re-
quired to marry, and is yet allowed to kindle the Vedic fire, so as to be-
come a sacrificing ascetic. But the bhiksu of the GDhS, too, is an
amalgam of different elements. He corresponds to the parivraja of the
[32] ApDhS, but without his most important characteristic, viz., the
search for the self. He also corresponds to the samnyasin, but is not
stated to have interiorized his sacred fires. Indeed, the bhiksu may never
have kindled these fires to begin with.
Also the Vasistha Dharmasutra (VasDhS) presents the four asramas
as alternatives. The vanaprastha is here once again described (adhy. 9) in
terms which are often identical with the GDhS. Most importantly, he
49. Caland, 1929: xvii - xviii.
23
kindles the fire in accordance with the Sramanaka, and become in this
way ahitagni (9.10: sramanakenagnim adhayahitagnih syat). However,
after six months he gives up fire and house, and dwells at the root of a
tree (9.11: vrksamulaniketana urdhvam sadbhyo masebhyo ’nagnir
aniketah). The result of all this is that the vanaprastha goes to heaven, to
infinity (9.12: ... sa gacchet svaigam anantyam ...).
Chapter 10 deals with the parivrajaka. This chapter contains a num-
ber of quoted verses, which show that the VasDhS derived its
information regarding this ascetic form from another source. We learn
from these verses that the parivrajaka abandons50 all (sacrificial?)
actions (10.4), that his mind is concentrated on his self
( adhyatmacintagata-manasa ), that he will certainly not return (10.17),
that he aims at liberation ( moksa ; 10.20, 23).
It seems clear that the parivrajaka of the VasDhS remains close to
the parivraja of the ApDhS. Both pursue clearly non-Vedic ideals, viz.,
liberation to be obtained through knowledge of the self. The fact that
interiorizing the Vedic fire is not mentioned is not surprising: the way of
[33] the parivrajaka has really nothing to do with Vedic ritual, and the
text has made no effort to impose such a link. True, the parivrajaka is
enjoined not to abandon one Veda, that is, to recite mantras (10.4) or,
even better, the syllable om (10.5); but this does not affect our
conclusion. After all, we are dealing with an orthodox Vedic text, which
cannot but show a tendency to vedicize non-Vedic practices.
The vanaprastha of the VasDhS is different. He combines - like the
vaikhanasa of the GDhS - Vedic and non-Vedic elements. But the Vedic
ritual element is weak: the sacrificial fire is kindled, only to be
abandoned six months later.
Baudhayana Dharmasutra ( BDhS) 2.6.11.9-34 uses the designations
50. samnyas-; see note 12 to chapter 2 above.
24
brahmacarin, grhastha, vanaprastha and parivrajaka. Like the GDhS and
the ApDhS, this portion of the BDhS accepts in the end only one asrama,
that of the householder (sutra 27).
Sutras 14-26 describe the conduct of the vanaprastha and parivraja-
ka. Neither of the two is credited with an interest in the true nature of the
self.51 The vanaprastha, now called vaikhanasa, is described in sutra 15
in terms which are often identical with those of the GDhS. Here too he
kindles a fire in accordance with the Sramanaka. The parivrajaka, on the
other hand, keeps no fire, and no link with Vedic ritual is indicated. A
further difference between the two types of ascetics, as in [34] the GDhS,
is that the vanaprastha does not enter the village, whereas the parivrajaka
does, in order to beg his food.
Some passages from the MBh are of particular' interest, not only be-
cause they present the two ascetic asramas as alternatives, but also be-
cause they link these two asramas to different aims. When king Pandu
becomes the object of a curse as a result of which he has to abstain from
sexuality, his first reaction is to decide to become a shaven ascetic
( m unir m unda [ h\ ; MBh 1.110.7), bent on release ( moksam eva
vyavasyamr, 1.110.6), equal-minded to all breathing creatures (11),
begging for his food and thinking neither good nor ill of those who cause
him pleasure or pain (14).52 His two wives, however, oppose this
decision, pointing out that there are other asramas, asramas which he can
51. BDhS 2.6.11.26, only found here in the mss. containing Govindasvamin’s com-
mentary, has the following enigmatic reading: apavidhya vaidikani karmany ubha-
yatah paricchinna madhyamam padam samslisyamaha iti vadantah. Biihler (1882:
260) translates: “(Ascetics shall) say, ‘Renouncing the works taught in the Veda,
cut off from both (worlds), we attach ourselves to the central sphere (Brahman).’” It
is not certain that ‘the central sphere’ is Brahman. Gombrich (1992: 173) wonders
whether there is here an allusion to the Buddhists. (Added in the 2nd edition:) The
analysis of this passage by Tsuchida (1996a) does not confirm Gombrich's conjec-
ture.
52. This story of Pandu is analyzed in Shee, 1986: 144 f.
25
undertake together with his two wives, practising asceticism, and which
permit him to obtain heaven (1.110.26). Pandu then decides rather to
become a vanaprastha (34); this implies, among other things, living in
the forest, surviving on fruits and roots, making offerings in the fire
twice daily, matting his hair, etc., all this until his body is finished
(1.110.30-35).
The plural of asrama in verse 26 shows that there were at least three
asramas for the author of this passage. Two of these are described: that of
the shaven muni and that of the long-haired vanaprastha. Pandu has the
freedom to choose between them, which shows that they are alternatives
rather than successive stages. Indeed, the fact that Pandu plans to be
vanaprastha until his body is finished confirms this.53
[35] The vanaprastha makes offerings in the fire and betrays thus his
link with the Vedic sacrificial tradition. The muni does nothing of the
sort, and does not appear to have any link whatsoever with the Vedic
fire. What is more, his aim is liberation ( moksa ), whereas Pandu as
vanaprastha soon wins the road to heaven by his own power (sarthah
svargasya, 1.110.26; svargam gantum parakrantah svena viryena,
1.111.2).
The same distinction is presented in Adhyaya 9 of the Santiparvan
(12), where Yudhisthira makes known his intention to leave the world.
His first option is described in verses 4-1 1. It implies living in the jungle
( aranya ), eating fruits and roots (4), pouring oblations in the fire, fasting,
having matted hair (5), and satisfying ancestors and gods (10). The
second option is dealt with in verses 12-29: Verse 12 begins, very
appropriately, with the words atha va ‘alternatively’. If one follows this
option one becomes a shaven ascetic (munir mundah) who lives by
begging ( caran bhaiksyam, 12, 23) and abandons all attachments (28-29).
53. Shee (1986: 166 f., esp.174) draws attention to the discussion between Yayati and
Astaka (MBh 1.86.1 - 87.3) which deals with the four asramas without introducing
the idea of temporal order.
26
The connection of the parivrajaka with liberation is also clearly ex-
pressed in MBh 12.185.6, which speaks of the moksasrama. The preced-
ing discussion of the vanaprastha makes no mention of liberation: the
vanaprastha can merely “conquer worlds that are hard to conquer”
(12.185.2: ... jay el lokains ca durjayan ) .
The story of Mudgala (MBh 3.246-247) is of particular interest,
even though it does not use the terms asrama, vanaprastha and
parivraja(ka). Mudgala follows the rules of the life-style by gleaning
ears of corn ( silohchavrtti ) in such a manner that a place in heaven is
offered to him. Considering the (few) disadvantages connected with
accepting this offer, he rejects it, abandons this life-style, and turns to
dhyanayoga, which allows him access to nirvana , which is eternal. It is to
be recalled that the [36] silohchavrtti characterizes certain vanaprasthas
(such as the ‘Vedic’ vanaprastha in ApDhS 2.9.22.10) and ascetic
householders (e.g. BDhS 3.1.7; see ch. 6 below), and that this life-style
leads to heaven according to the present passage. Liberation ( nirvana )
requires a different practice, which our passage refers to by the term
dhyanayoga.
A similar contrast opposes Vyasa, the ‘author’ of the MBh, to his
son Suka. Vyasa practises asceticism for various this-worldly purposes
such as, indeed, obtaining a son (MBh 12.310-311). The son has
different interests: he takes no pleasure in ‘the three asramas that are
based on the state of the householder’ and looks for liberation instead
(12. 311. 27). 54
To conclude one more passage from the MBh which presents the
four asramas as alternatives: MBh 12.226.4-5 speaks of a Brahmin who
must, after studying the Vedas, choose one of the four asramas, viz., by
producing offspring and [taking] a wife, by brahmacarya (?), in the forest
54. Cf. Sullivan, 1990: 40 f.
27
in the presence of a teacher, or by accepting the duties of a yati.55
Mention may here be made of Arthasastra 1.3.9-12, which briefly
enumerates the special duties (, svadharma; 1.3.5) of the grhastha, brah-
macarin, vanaprastha and pari vraj aka, in this order. The order suggests
already that these four asramas - the term is used in 1.3.4 - are alterna-
tives and imply no sequence. This is confirmed by the description of the
duties of the brahmacarin; these include “residing till the end of his life
with the preceptor or, in his absence, with the preceptor’s son or with a
[37] fellow -brahmacarin” (1.3.10: acarye pranantiki vrttis tadabhave gu-
ruputre sabrahmacarini va; tr. Kangle, modified).56 The duties of the
vanaprastha include the performance of the agnihotra ; this shows that the
present account agrees by and large with the accounts of the GDhS and
BDhS. And indeed, the discovery of the self does not figure in the list of
duties of the parivrajaka.
The fifteenth chapter of the Ahirbudhnya Samhita contains an
interesting description of the four asramas. This text is quite explicit
about the fact that one chooses just one of the four asramas after the
completion of one’s Vedic studies.57 At this stage one can choose to
become a brahmacarin , a grhastha, a vanastha, or a pari vraj (the terms
samnyasa, sam-nyasin, etc. are again not used). Of particular interest is
AhS 15.18, according to which only the householder keeps a Vedic fire,
the other three being without.58 AhS 15.56 specifies this for the
55. MBh 12.226.4-5: acaryenabhyanujnatas caturnam ekam asramam / a vimoksac
chanrasya yo 'nutisthed yathavidhi // prajasargena darais ca brahmacaryena va
punah / vane gurusakase va yatidharmena va punah I I
56. Cf. Kangle, 1986: III: 151.
57. AhS 15.43cd - 44ab: vedasnayl vratasnayl gurave daksinam dadat / prapyanujnam
guror icchec caturnam ekam asramam /
58. AhS 15.18: agniman bahumatravan ekah kautumba asramah / vratadiniratah sud-
dhas trayo 'nye ’nagnayah smrtah //
28
vanastha: “Worshiping the fire outside or inside himself, sacrifice is his
principal object.”59 The pari v raj has made the fires rise up (in him)
(; samaropy[a\ ... agnl[n\; 15.62). We must conclude that the institutions
of vanastha and pari v raj in the AhS are already touched by the sacrificial
element, as they are in most of the texts under consideration. One
distinction between the vanastha and the parivraj - the most important
one, to judge by the ApDhS - is however preserved in the AhS: the
vanastha occupies himself with [38] asceticism (‘the three mortifications’
Inn i tapamsi; 15.57) and reduces his activity ( vrttisamkocakrt ; 15.58),
whereas the parivraj searches the highest self ( anviksamanah suksmam
ca paramatmanam atm an a: 15.64) and is less concerned with tapas.
It seems beyond doubt that the texts considered in this chapter
present in their ascetic asramas a mixture of elements belonging to
originally different ways of life. Most fortunately the ApDhS, the MSS
and some early Samnyasa Upanisads have preserved relatively
uncontaminated descriptions of those earlier ways of life which enable us
to disentangle the different elements.
The confusion is not hard to explain. One important reason is that
samnyasa belongs to the end of life, and that the ‘Vedic’ vanaprastha
must keep the Vedic fire, and should therefore really be married. The
asramas, on the other hand, were originally alternatives, each of which
could be chosen rather early in life. The two divisions would obviously
not go very well together.
One would expect that the two forms of Vedic asceticism presented
in our texts - that of the ‘Vedic’ vanaprastha and of the samnyasin -
would tend to transmogrify the asramas so as to become a sequence. We
know that indeed all later texts do present us the asramas as a sequence
of stages in the life of a high-caste Hindu. The next chapter will study
how exactly this came about.
59. AhS 15.56cd: bahir atmani vapy agnirn juhvad yajnaparayanah.
29
Chapter 4. The four asramas as sequence
We have studied above the portion of the BDhS that deals with the
brahmacarin , grhastha, vanaprastha and parivrajaka. The term samnya-sa
is not used here, for good reasons as we have come to think. Samnyasa is
dealt with in another portion of the BDhS, kandikas 2.10.17 and 18. The
beginning of this section reads:
2.10.17.1: athatahh samnyasavidhim vyakhyasyamah
After this we will explain the rule of samnyasa.
2.10.17.2: so ’ta eva brahmacaiyavan pravrajatlty ekesam
According to some, he wanders forth from this very [state],
practising chastity.
The atah in these two sutras evidently refers back to the preceding
section, which deals with the householder ‘desirous of offspring’. Others
disagree:
2.10.17.3: atha sallnayayavaranam anapatyanam
But [according to others, samnyasa] belongs to Salinas and
Yayavaras, who are childless.
2.10.17.4: vidhuro va prajah svadharme pratisthapya va
Or he is a widower; or he has established his children in their
dharma.60 [40]
2.10.17.5: saptatya urdhvam samnyasam upadisanti
They prescribe samnyasa after [the age of] seventy.
2.10.17.6: vanaprasthasya va karmavirame
60. It is not necessary to read the gerund pratisthapya with the following sentence, as
does Biihler (1882: 273); this may be an independent gerund clause, not infrequent
in late Vedic and later Sanskrit; see Bronkhorst, 1991.
30
Or [samnyasa is fit] for the vanaprastha when he abstains from
[sacrificial] activity.
These sutras clearly look upon samnyasa as something that takes
place in old age, as indeed it should. But they also betray uncertainty
about its prerequisites. ‘Some’ think there are no special requirements;
but the general tendency expressed by these sutras rather seems to be that
a period of chastity must precede samnyasa. Sutra 6 mentions the
vanaprastha in this context. This may, but does not necessarily imply
that these sutras are familiar with a system of consecutive asramas. (It is
true that sutras 15 and 16 mention the passage ‘from asrama to asrama’
( asramad asramam ); but both times these terms occur in quotations,
which - in the case of the composite BDhS in which “even the first two
Prasnas are not quite free from interpolations” (Biihler, 1882: XXXV) -
might conceivably be interpolations.)
Following sutras describe how the sacred fires are deposited in the
renouncer (esp. 2.10.17.21, 25; 18.8). This, of course, is essential to sam-
nyasa. But other sutras emphasize the importance of the self, and its
identity with Brahman (2.10.17.40; 18.9). This suggests that (Vedic)
samnya-sa and the (non-Vedic) endeavour of finding the true self had be-
come linked up.
As pointed out above, it is not certain that this portion of the BDhS
knows the asramas as stages of life. Even if it doesn’t, certain features of
its description of samnyasa show that it was but a small step removed
[41] from that notion.
With the Manusmrti we come to a text that presents us the four asra-
mas as four successive stages. It is also a text in which the confusion of
features has become inextricable. The third asrama in particular unites
virtually all the features of the two Vedic and two non-Vedic forms of
asceticism which we have come to distinguish.
31
Entering the third asrama, one may take his wife with him, but this
is optional (6.3); one does bring the sacred fire to the new abode (6.4) in
order to perform certain specified sacrifices (6.9 f.). Forms of fasting and
mortification are prescribed throughout the section concerned. All this
fits in general outline what we know about the ‘Vedic’ vanaprastha of the
ApDhS. However, Manu 6.25 then tells us that the ascetic concerned
- who is supposedly still in the third asrama - deposits the sacred fires in
himself, and lives on without fire and without house. This rather fits the
renouncer of chapter 2, above. We learn subsequently in Manu 6.29 that
the ascetic occupies himself with Upanisadic texts for the perfection of
the self ( atmasamsiddhaye ); this concern with the self reminds us of the
parivraja of the ApDhS. The activity which typifies the non- Vedic vana-
prastha of the ApDhS, finally, is prescribed in Manu 6.31: “Or he should
set out in a north-easterly direction and walk straight forward, diligently
engaged in eating nothing but water and air, until his body collapses” (tr.
Doniger and Smith).
There can be no doubt that the Manusmrti is a composite text. This
does not change the fact that its section on the third asrama unites
features which - if our analysis is correct - belonged originally to four
clearly distinct ways of life.
[42] The fourth asrama does somewhat better, but not much. It is
clear that the ascetic in this asrama strives to obtain liberation ( moksa ;
6.35f.),61 and that the way to obtain it is knowledge of the self (6.49, 65).
But he also deposits the fires in himself (6.38), and practises tapas (6.70,
75).
Most interestingly, even the Manusmrti does not yet identify the
fourth asrama with samnyasa ; this has been pointed out by Olivelle
(1981: 270 f.; 1984: 132 f.). Manu distinguishes also a so-called
61. Sometimes (e.g., 6.44) this ascetic is referred to as already liberated; cf. Olivelle,
1984: 132.
32
vedasam-nyasika (6. 86), 62 who gives up ritual activity, but does not
leave home: he lives peacefully under the protection of this son
( putraisvarye sukham vaset; 6.95). That is to say, in spite of the
confusion that is already noticeable in the Manusmrti, this text preserves
some of the earlier distinctions.
62. Doniger and Smith (1991: 126 n.) call this “a troubling verse” and point out that
of the verses that follow it “only in 6.94-6 is such an ascetic described”.
33
Chapter 5. Conclusions of Part I
With the Manusmrti we have arrived at the classical exposition of the
four asramas; it is not necessary to pursue the development of this
institution any further. The preceding chapters have shown that the
development of the classical asrama system - in as far as it concerns its
two final stages - is the story of an ever increasing intermixture of
elements which at one time belonged to four clearly distinguishable, and
distinguished, forms of ascetic life. Two of these four show no signs of
having any inherent comiection with the Vedic sacrificial tradition: they
are the path of mortification and the path of insight, both of which have
an intimate link with the belief in rebirth as a result of one’s actions. The
other two forms of ascetic life preceding the classical asrama system are
connected with the Vedic sacrificial tradition, but their link to each other
is less evident. There is, on the one hand, the Vedic vanaprastha, who
lives the life of a sacrificer, but with a number of additional restrictions
and mortifications. And on the other hand there is the renunciation
( samnyasa ) of the aged sacrificer, who renounces everything including
his sacrificial habits; only his fires he keeps, but in a different form: they
are interiorized.
There is one undoubtedly Vedic feature that pervades the life of all
theses different ascetics: Vedic recitation. The fact that all the texts we
have considered so far are Brahmanical texts, has certainly something to
do with this. But it would be a mistake to brush, on this ground, the
significance of recitation aside. Recitation had a tendency to make itself
independent from [44] its sacrificial context. This tendency shows itself,
for example, in a chapter of the Taittiriya Aranyaka63 - called
svadhyayabrahmana by its commentators - and in the Japakopakhyana of
6-\ Text, translation and study in Malamoud, 1977.
34
the Mahabharata (12. 189- 193). 64 Recitation - of a samhita, as in the
Japakopakhyana, or of selected Vedic and non-Vedic mantras - made its
way into the ascetic and meditative traditions of India, so much so that its
original link with Vedic religion became soon obscured. The details of
this development cannot here be traced.65 But we should be aware that
the mention of recitation (svadhyaya, japa) in a certain text does not
necessarily imply that the form of asceticism with which it is connected
is of Vedic origin.
64. See Bedekar, 1964; and Padoux, 1987: 119.
65. Biardeau (1964: 106) contrasts the meanings of the term svadhyaya in MImamsa
and Nyaya on the one hand, and in Yoga on the other.
35
PART II
VEDIC ASCETICISM AND THE SACRIFICIAL
TRADITION
36
Chapter 6. Vedic asceticism
We have so far limited our attention to the ascetic asramas as they
are presented in the earliest texts that mention them, without asking
where these forms of asceticism came from. In the case of the two forms
of non- Vedic asceticism this question may be difficult to answer. We
know, to be sure, that these forms of asceticism were not confined to
orthodox Brahmanism; on the contrary, it is no more than reasonable to
think that the forms of non-Vedic asceticism which we have discerned
had a non-Vedic origin, from which both the Brahmanical texts
considered above and certain non-Brahmanical movements - prominent
among them the Jainas - drew their inspiration. But the absence of
textual evidence does not allow us at present to say more about this.
Samnyasa falls in a different category. Its link with the Vedic
sacrificial tradition is sufficiently clear from the passages studied in
chapter 2, above. Yet it is doubtful whether one can speak of an inherent
link between samnyasa and Vedic religion. If it is true, as seems likely,
that sam-nyasa evolved out of the custom to deprive the aged father of
his rights, or, somewhat less harshly, out of the aged father’s decision to
withdraw from his possessions and prerogatives, leaving them to his
sons, it would be vain to search for the aspect of Vedic religion which
gave rise to this institution. This is not to say that there is no connection
at all with [46] Vedic religion. Samnyasa took on religious forms which
sanctified the separation between the samnyasin and human society, and
added a religious dimension to this incredibly hard way of ending one’s
life. Yet these religious forms would have to be looked upon as more or
less adventitious.
The present chapter will concentrate on the question of the relation-
ship between the ‘Vedic vanaprastha ’ and Vedic religion. Sprockhoff
(1979: 416 f.) has drawn attention to the similarities between the Vedic
37
va-naprastha of the ApDhS and certain kinds of householder - called
Sali-nas, Yayavaras, and Cakracaras - described in the BDhS (3.1. If.).66
These householders leave their house in order to settle in a hut or cottage
at the end of the village (BDhS 3.1.17). There they serve the fires and
offer certain sacrifices (19). They neither teach nor sacrifice for others
(21). BDhS 3.2 enumerates the various ways of subsistence out of which
these householders can choose. The ninth of these (3.2.16 f.) - called
siddheccha (or siddhohcha) - is most interesting in the present context. It
is reserved for him who has become tired of the (other) modes of
subsistence on account of old age or disease ( dhatuksaya). The person
who adopts this mode of subsistence must interiorize (the fires; atma-
samaropana) and behave like a samnyasin ( samnyasivad upacarah), [47]
except for using a strainer and wealing a reddish-brown garment. This
description shows that the way of life of these householders is not
preparatory to that of the vanaprastha, as it has been claimed.67 On the
contrary, the siddheccha presents itself as the mode of subsistence for
those who are old and sick, and therefore likely to die as householders.
Nor is there any indication in the text that this form of life was only, or
predominantly, chosen by old men; the fact that one of the sub-choices is
especially recommended for the aged suggests rather that the other
alternatives were preferred by younger candidates.
The BDhS is not the only early text that prescribes ascetic practices
for the householder. Sprockhoff (1984: 25) has rightly drawn attention to
66. Sprockhoff, 1984: 21 f., deals in more detail with these types of householder, and
criticizes Varenne (1960: II: 81 f.), according to whom these are not grhasthas\ in
support of his position Sprockhoff refers to Schmidt, 1968: 635 n. 2; Bodewitz,
1973: 298 f.; Sprockhoff, 1976: 1 17 f., 124; Kane, History of Dharmasastra II, 1, p.
64 1 f. One might add that the Padarthadharmasangraha (alias Prasastapadabhasya )
refers to householders who, with the help of riches acquired through the life-style
of Salma and/or Yayavara, perform the five mahayajhas ; ed. Dvivedin p. 273.
Heesterman (1982), having studied the opposition Sallna-Yayavara in earlier texts,
thinks that in the BDhS “the basic opposition has ... been reduced to a secondary
differentiation within the common category of the householder” (p. 265).
67 Sprockhoff, 1979: 417; 1984: 25; Schmidt, 1968: 635.
38
the fact that gleaning corns ( silohcha ) - which constitutes one of the pos-
sible ways of subsistence of the ‘ascetic’ householders of the BDhS - is
enumerated among the proper occupations ( svakaima ) of a Brahmin in
the ApDhS (2.5.10.4). Also the Manusmrti mentions this activity as an
option for the householder (Manu 4.5, 10). The best householder,
moreover, makes no provisions for the morrow ( asvastanika; Manu 4.7-
8); almost the same term is used in connection with the householder in
MBh 12. 235.3, which also mentions the mode of life of the pigeons
( kapotl vrtti), another form of asceticism also found in the enumeration
of the BDhS.
In view of the above, we cannot but agree with Malamoud’s (1977:
60) observation: “... le vanaprastha n’est qu’une variete de grhastha ”.68
Of [48] course, this conclusion applies only to the Vedic vanaprastha, the
alternative variety of vanaprastha, described in the ApDhS, who
continues (or starts) his sacrificial activity here. The non- Vedic
vanaprastha of the ApDhS has obviously nothing to do with the grhastha.
It is not possible here to study the origin of asceticism within the
Vedic tradition. The evidence is meagre, and we would almost inevitably
be led to speculate about earlier forms of the Vedic sacrifice, which is
beyond the scope of this book.69 The later history of Vedic asceticism, on
the other hand, offers fewer difficulties. It is clear how the Vedic
vanaprastha could come to be looked upon as constituting a separate
asrama. Originally his activities differed in no way from those of certain
kinds of householders. The influence from non-Vedic forms of
asceticism led to the assimilation of what we have called the non-Vedic
vanaprastha on the one hand, and the more ascetically inclined
householders on the other. These householders now came to be
68. Similarly Winternitz, 1926: 220-2 1 . Some authors see in the vanaprastha a com-
promise between the life of the householder and that of the ascetic (Biardeau, 1981:
38; Sullivan, 1990: 43), but this does no justice to his historical position.
69. See, e.g., Heesterman, 1982.
39
distinguished from their more worldly colleagues. However, the break
between householder and vanaprastha was never complete; the ApDhS,
the BDhS, the Manusmrti and parts of the MBh - all of which know the
four asramas, the last two even in their later, consecutive form - still
preserve rules that pertain to ascetic householders.
It seems clear, then, that the asrama of the Vedic vanaprastha is es-
sentially a redesignation of a form of life which before that had been -
and to some extent remained - an option for the Vedic householder. At
best it emphasizes and enlarges certain elements which were not
unknown [49] to the observant Vedic Brahmin. The ascetic element, in
particular, is not at all foreign to the Vedic sacrificial tradition. The
execution of a sacrifice demands from the sacrificer ( yajamana ) various
restrictions.70 G.U. Thite (1975: 193 f.) enumerates and illustrates, on the
basis of Brahmana passages, restrictions concerning food - according to
some a complete fast may be required -, sexual abstinence, limitations of
speech - e.g., complete silence until sunset -, restricted movements, and
various other rules. Similar restrictions are mentioned in the Srautasutras.
The ApSS takes a rather extreme position in the following passage:71
“When the consecrated sacrificer ( dlksita ) has become thin, he is pure
for the sacrifice. When nothing is left in him, he is pure for the sacrifice.
When his skin and bones touch each other, he is pure for the sacrifice.
When the black disappears from his eyes, he is pure for the sacrifice. He
begins the dlksa being fat, he sacrifices being thin.”
70. The consecration (dlksa) of the sacrificer has repeatedly been studied; see, e.g.,
Lindner, 1878; Caland and Henry, 1906: 11 ff. ; Oldenberg, 1917; 397 f.; Hauer,
1922: 65 f.; Keith, 1925: 300 f.; Gonda, 1965: 315 ff. Knipe (1975: 124), who is
aware of the ascetic element of Vedic religion, claims without justification that “a
renunciant tradition ... was certainly an important dimension of brahmanical ortho-
praxy well before the advent of the heterodox schools”.
71. ApSS 10.14.9-10: yada vai diksitah krso bhavaty atha medhyo bhavati / yadasminn
antar na kimcana bhavaty atha medhyo bhavati /yadasya tvacasthi samdhl-yate 'tha
medhyo bhavati /yadasya krsnam caksusor nasyaty atha medhyo bhavati / plva
dlksate /krso yajate /.
40
This link with the Vedic diksa remains visible in some of the later
texts. The BDhS, for example, speaks of the diksas of the forest
dwellers.72 Certainly not by coincidence these dlksas include the
restriction of food to roots and fruit ( kandamulaphalabhaksa ; 3.3.3), to
what comes by chance [50] ( pravrttasin ; 9, 11), to water (toy ah am: 13)
and to wind ( vayubhaksa ; 14), restraints which we know characterize the
life of the vanaprastha (both ‘Vedic’ and ‘non-Vedic’) in the ApDhS.
Also the MBh (e.g., 5.118.7; 12.236.14), the Manusmrti (6.29) and the
Ahirbudhnya Samhita (15.58) use the term diksa in connection with for-
est-dwellers. One passage of the MBh (12.66.7) goes to the extent of
calling the stage of life of the forest-dweller diksasrama, which confirms
our impression that this way of life constitutes one permanent diksa.13
The observation in the MBh (12.185.1.1) that forest-dwellers pursue the
Dharma of R.sis is also suggestive in this connection.74
We find some evidence for Vedic asceticism in the Vedic texts
themselves. Take for example RV 1.179, which contains a discussion
between Agastya and his wife Lopamudra. Thieme (1963) has drawn
attention to the fact that Agastya and Lopamudra live a life of celibacy,
and that this was apparently not uncommon among Vedic seers ‘who
served truth’ ( rtasap ).75
Another example is AB 7.13 (33.1), which has a corresponding pas-
72. BDhS 3.3.15: vaikhanasanam vihita dasa dlksah. The word vaikhanasa here is
obviously a synonym of vanaprastha in sutra 3.3.1.
73 . Cf. Malamoud, 1989: 65. Malamoud (1976: 185) observes that the life of the
brahmacarin , too, is one long diksa. The extension from temporary abstinences to a
permanent life of asceticism is not unknown outside India; see, e.g., W. Burkert’s
(1985: 303-04) remarks on this phenomenon in Greek religion.
74. Compare this with Biardeau’s (1976: 35) observation that many R sis that appear
in the classical mythical texts - who live in the forest with wife and children, com-
pletely absorbed in their ritual observances, their fires, their Vedic recitation - cor-
respond rather well to the descriptions of the vanaprastha. An example of such a
Rsi is Vyasa; see Sullivan, 1990: 27 ff.
75. See also O'Flaherty, 1973: 52 f.
41
sage in SSS 188-89 (15-17). We find here the following stanzas:76
[51] By means of a son have fathers always crossed over the deep
darkness, since he was born as [their] self from [their] self. He is a
[ship] provided with food, that carries over [to the other shore].
What is the use of dirt, what of an antelope-skin? What is the use
of a beard, what of asceticism? Wish for a son, O Brahmins, ...
The mention of an antelope-skin confirm that the ascetics here criticized
are Vedic ascetics: also the diksita is associated with an antelope-skin.77
Similar criticism is expressed in a sloka cited in the Satapatha Brah-
mana :78 “Durch das Wissen steigen sie dort hinauf, wo die Begierden
iiberwunden sind. Dorthin gelangen weder Opferlohne noch unwissende
Asketen.”
The fact that the Vedic ascetics are here criticized suggests that,
within the Vedic tradition itself, there existed a certain opposition
between practising ascetics and those who felt that asceticism should not
go too far. This impression is confirmed by numerous passages from the
MBh.
Consider first the story of Jaratkaru, which the MBh presents in two
versions.79 The for us important part of the story is as follows. Jaratkaru
is an ascetic who abstains from sexuality, and who therefore has no son.
During his wanderings he comes across his ancestors, who find them-
selves in an extremely disagreeable position: they hang down in a hole,
heads down, attached to a rope which a rat is about to gnaw through. [52]
The reason, it turns out, is the fact that their lineage is soon to die out,
76 sasvat putrena pitaro ’tyayan bahulam tamah / atma hi jajha atmanah sa iravaty
atitarinl // kim nu malam kim ajinam kim u smasruni kirn tapah / putram brahmana
icchadvam ... I I
77 . See, e.g., Caland-Henry, 1906: 21; Oldenberg, 1917: 398 f.; Falk, 1986: 20 f.
7X. SB 10.5.4.16: vidyaya tad arohanti yatra kamah paragatah / na tatra daksina yanti
navidvamsas tapasvina[h ] //. Tr. Horsch, 1966: 136.
79 MBh 1.13.9-44; and 1.41.1 - 1.44.22. See Shee, 1986: 31-73.
42
this because Jaratkaru has no son. Jaratkaru learns his lesson and begets a
son in the remainder of the story, which is of no further interest for our
purposes.
In both versions of the story Jaratkaru and his ancestors are Yayava-
ras,80 i.e., one of those Vedic householders who, according to the BDhS,
live ascetic lives.81 Indeed, he is said to “observe dlksa ”,82 to be a
“scholar of the Vedas and their branches”,83 the “greatest of Vedic schol-
ars”.84 The longer version makes clear that Jaratkaru is an agnihotrin, one
who never fails to perform the agnihotra sacrifice.85 Even more interest-
ing is the self-professed aim of Jaratkaru’s ascetic life-style: he wishes to
carry his body whole to the world hereafter.86 Shee (1986: 48, with note
83) draws quite rightly attention to the fact that this aim is known to ac-
company the Vedic sacrifice.
It is clear from this story - as it was from the AB passage discussed
above, and from other MBh passages still to follow - that the ascetic life-
[53]style which evolved within the Vedic tradition was not accepted by
all.87 Or rather, it appears that the aspect of complete sexual abstinence
met with opposition from the side of those who saw the possession of a
son as the sole guarantee for future well-being.
80. MBh 1.13.10, 14; 1.34.12; 1.41.16. Jaratkaru is brahmacarin according to 1.13.19;
41.12.
81. See above.
82. caran dlksam ; MBh 1.41.2.
83. vedavedangaparagah ; MBh 1 .41.18. The same term is used to describe his son at
MBh 1.13.38. (Here and occasionally elsewhere I follow the translation by van
Buitenen.)
84. mantravidam sresthas; MBh 1.43.4.
85. MBh 1.43.13-20.
86. MBh 1.42.4: ... sariram vai prapayeyam amutra vai. MBh 1.13.43-44 states simply
that Jaratkaru went to heaven ( svarga ) with his ancestors.
87. Cp. Sahara Bhasya 1.3.4 (p. 103): apumstvam pracchadayantas castacatvarimsad
varsani vedabrahmacaryam carivantah “Some people, with a view to conceal their
want of virility, remained religious students for forty-eight years” (tr. Jha, 1933: 1:
95).
43
This same element recurs in connection with Agastya, an ascetic
about whom a variety of stories are told in the MBh.88 His connection
with Vedic ritual is more than clear. He is the son of Mitra and Varuna,
or simply of Varuna.89 He takes an active part in the struggle between
gods and demons.90 Most significantly perhaps, he is described as
performing a great sacrifice, and as undertaking a diksa of twelve years
in this connection.91 This Agastya meets his ancestors in the same
disagreeable situation as had Jaratkaru, and he too decides to beget a
son.92
The critical attitude toward asceticism, even within the Vedic
tradition, manifests itself differently in the story of Yavakri/Yavakrita.93
Yavakri’s connection with the Vedic tradition is beyond all doubt. His
father performs the agnihotra?4 He himself practises asceticism in order
to [54] obtain knowledge of the Vedas 95 The form of asceticism he
practises is itself close to the Vedic sacrifice: he heats his body by
placing it near a well-lit fire.96 He even threatens to cut off his limbs one
by one and sacrifice them in the fire.97 Ritual purity is of such
importance to him that his final fall will be caused by impurity 98 For the
88. For his occurrence in the RV, see above. For the stories told about him in the MBh,
see Shee, 1986: 74-1 18.
89 Shee, 1986: 74 n. 1,2 and 3.
90 Shee, 1986: 74 n. 10.
91. MBh 14.95.4 f. Note the mention of antelope skins (ajina: 3.95.10) to characterize
Agastya' s form of asceticism (= Vedic asceticism). This asceticism falls nonethe-
less under the category garhasthya (3.95. 1 ).
92. MBh 3.94.11 f.
93. Shee, 1986: 119-143.
94. MBh 3.137.17.
95. MBh 3.135.16, 19-21.
96 MBh 3.135.16-17.
97 . MBh 3.135.28: samiddhe 'gnav upakrtyangam angam hosyami
98. MBh 3.137.13-15.
44
story of Yavakri, too, constitutes an example of misdirected asceticism."
Interestingly, another passage of the MBh (9.39.5-6; referred to in Shee, 1986: 124
n. 36) mentions Arstisena who succeeds in obtaining knowledge of the Vedas by
means of tapas. This passage clearly represents a position more favourable to as-
ceticism within the Vedic tradition than the preceding one.
45
Chapter 7. The position of the early Upanisads
Our analysis thus far has all but ignored the early Upanisads. This
may seem surprising, for it is precisely these old Upanisads that have
often been considered to contain the earliest traces of the doctrine of
karma and of the views and practices that came to characterize the
religious current we are studying. The earliest Upanisads express these
new ideas in a form which closely resembles the Vedic Brahmanas,
which has often been interpreted to support the view that they made here
their first appearance.
However, the Upanisads themselves admit on several occasions that
these new ideas are not Vedic in origin.100 They are then put in the mouth
of Ksatriyas, often kings. This should not induce us to believe in a
supposed Ksatriya origin of these ideas. Obviously no Brahmin could
accept new ideas from Sudras or other ‘low’ people, only the Ksatriyas
being in positions of sufficient authority to be taken seriously. Indeed,
one of the passages concerned states quite explicitly: “This knowledge
has never yet come to Brahmins before you; and therefore in all the
worlds has the rule belonged to the Ksatriya only” (ChU 5.3.7; tr. Hume,
1931: 231). In a religion in which obtaining power played such a major
role, only those in the possession of even more power than the Brahmins
might be considered to be able to impart new knowledge.101 Nothing is
this way said [56] about the real origin of the new ideas.
The new knowledge normally concerns the doctrine of karma, the
true nature of the self, or both. We recognize these as the central themes
of the non-Vedic religious current identified in preceding chapters. The
100 So Chandra, 1971: 322 f.
101. Olivelle (1992: 38) suggests that “the identification of a doctrine with a king ...
may have served to signal that it was a doctrine of and for the new age, an urban
doctrine suitable for the new urban culture”.
46
earliest Upanisads, not surprisingly, present these themes in a Vedic
garb. Consider, for example, the teaching by the Ksatriya Pravahana
Jaibali to the Brahmin Aruni Gautama in ChU 5.4-10, which follows the
remark quoted above. It presents first a long series of Brahmana type
identifications of a variety of objects with different aspects of the
sacrificial fire. The crucial part of the teaching follows in ChU 5.10.
Briefly put, it states that “those who know this (i.e., the preceding
identifications), and those who worship in the forest with the thought
‘ tapas is faith’”, will reach Brahma. Those, on the other hand, “who in
the village reverence a belief in sacrifice, merit and almsgiving” will,
after a complicated journey, be reborn in the womb of a Brahmin,
Ksatriya or Vaisya if they were of pleasant conduct, and if otherwise, in
the womb of a dog, swine or Candala.
This passage merits some comments, for it highlights the position
midway between two traditions of the early Upanisads. It clearly knows
the distinction between rebirth and liberation from rebirth. Yet it does not
speak of ‘liberation from rebirth’ but of reaching Brahma. This choice of
expression, about which more will be said below, is obviously inspired
by the desire to use Vedic terminology. The further statement that this is
the path of the gods confirms this.
It is even more remarkable that the liberating knowledge specified in
this passage is quite different from a knowledge of the self. This is very
significant. The Upanisads represent a development of Vedic religion in
[57] which knowledge plays an increasingly important role.102 There is
no reason to think that this development owed its origin to the non- Vedic
current which we have been studying. After all, its early manifestations
(in the Brahmanas and esp. the AV-Samhita) show no link with ideas
102. This aspect of the Upanisads is emphasized in Edgerton, 1929; 1965: 28 f. The
continuity between Brahmanas and early Upanisads has recently again been empha-
sized by H.W. Tull (1989). Tull is however mistaken in thinking that this continuity
proves ‘the Vedic origins of karma’. See also Boyer, 1901.
47
about rebirth, liberation, and the true nature of the self. Yet both this
Vedic development and the non-Vedic current concerned share the
conviction that certain kinds of knowledge, or insight, are quite essential
for reaching their respective goals. The Upanisads appear to bear witness
to the interaction that took place between these two originally completely
distinct religious currents.103 The passage just considered borrows the
non-Vedic aim of liberation from rebirth, puts it in a Vedic garb, and
offers it as reward for a typically Vedic type of knowledge.
This same passage appears further to recommend tapas as leading to
Brahma. BAU 6.2, which contains the same story in a somewhat
different form, speaks in the present context of truth rather than of tapas
(6.2.15); it [58] enumerates tapas among the activities that lead to rebirth
in this world (6.2.16). The ambiguous position of tapas, which has a role
to play in both traditions, Vedic and non-Vedic, accounts no doubt for its
different evaluation in these two otherwise parallel texts.
In BAU 2. 1 (and in slightly different form KU 4) it is king
Ajatasatru - clearly again a Ksatriya - who instructs a Brahmin, (Drpta-
)Balaki Gargya. The teaching concerns the ‘ purusa consisting of
consciousness’, identical with Brahman, and from which “all vital
energies (prana), all worlds, all gods, and all beings come forth”. The
knowledge here imparted concerns the true nature of the self, yet it is not
103. So essentially already Winternitz (1908: 203): “Mil dieser Priesterphilosophie,
welche wir in den Brahmanas und den zu ihnen gehorigen Aranyakas verfolgen
konnen, und welche teils das Opfer, teils das von demselhen unzertrennliche heilige
Wort (das Brahman) zum hochsten Prinzip erhob und zum Urquell alles Seins
machte, wurde die ausserhalb der Pries terkreise entstandene und der priesterlichen
Religion eigentlich zuwiederlaufende Lehre von dem inneren Selbst (dem Atman)
als dem Alleinseienden verquickt. Das Resultat dieser unnatiirlichen und gewalt-
samen Verquickung sind die Upanisads.” Brockington (1981: 78) observes: “So
swift an acceptance [in Buddhism, Jainism, etc.) of the doctrine [of transmigration]
probably conceals the fact that it was current in those circles from which the
Buddha came before it penetrated orthodoxy. This is the more striking in that early
Buddhism denied other basic tenets of the Upanisads ...” Karttunen (1989: 154)
remarks: “As far as Buddhism and the Upanisads represent the same trend at all, the
latter are an orthodox compromise.”
48
presented as liberating knowledge. Contrary to ChU 5.4-10, considered
above, the present passage has only borrowed, and adjusted, the
liberating knowledge, but not the idea of liberation. The borrowed piece
of knowledge - concerning the true nature of the self - has, to be sure,
been adjusted to its new surroundings. The self is equated with the
Brahmanical concept of Brahman, the source of all there is. In a way this
identification is a continuation, even the culmination, of the
identifications which characterize the Brahmanas and other Vedic texts.
At the same time this supreme identification Brahman = self constituted
an almost natural inlet for the non-Vedic ideas into orthodox Vedism.
The fact that, here too, the teaching is put in the mouth of a Ksatriya,
indicates that we are not alone in thinking that in this passage non-Vedic
ideas are being introduced.
In ChU 5.1 1-18, once again, a group of learned Brahmins have to
ask a Ksatriya - king Asvapati Kaikeya - to instruct them on the true
nature of our atman and of Brahman. Interestingly, here too no mention
is made of liberation from rebirths. Note further that the king is not
presented as a revolutionary: the Brahmins have to wait, upon their
arrival, for the king is about to perform a sacrifice! The idea of a
Ksatriya ‘revolt’ against the [59] Brahmins is therefore in patent
opposition to this passage.
BAU 3.2.13 is another example of a passage which introduces only
the new doctrine of karma, without speaking about knowledge of the real
nature of the self, nor indeed of liberation.104 This time the new teaching
is put in the mouth of the ancient sage Yajnavalkya, who refuses, to be
sure, to speak of it in public. It seems clear that we face here another way
used to convince the Brahmins of the respectability, and this time also of
the Brahmin origin, of the new ideas: they are not here attributed to
104. It is not clear either whether the passage speaks of rebirth in the ordinary sense of
the term; this was pointed out by Schrader (1910).
49
Ksatriyas, but to an ancient and respected sage.105
Interestingly, this same Yajnavalkya finds himself a little later
(BAU 3.5) involved in a discussion regarding the true nature of the self,
which is Brahman. The result of knowing the atinan is described as
follows:106 “It is this atman, I say, which when they know, Brahmins
abjure the desire for sons, the desire for possessions, the desire for
[heavenly] worlds, and take up the begging ascetic’s life”. We recognize
in the begging ascetic who knows the self, or strives to obtain knowledge
of the self, the non-Vedic wandering ascetic of the ApDhS and
elsewhere. Clearly this form of asceticism was known to the author of
this portion of the BAU. This passage further bears witness to the fact
that non-Vedic asceticism was [60] already practised by Brahmins. There
is every reason to think that these Brahmins lived this kind of life in
order to attain liberation, even though the present passage of the BAU
says nothing to that effect.
There is no need to discuss in detail all the Upanisadic passages that
introduce the new ideas. One more passage (BAU 4.4.22) will here be
cited which expresses explicitly the crucial doctrine that the real self does
not take part in any action:107 “Verily, he is the great, unborn Soul, who
is this [person] consisting of knowledge among the senses. ... He does
not become greater by good action nor inferior by bad action.”
The non-Vedic ideas do not only make their appearance in the
Upani-sads. As an example we consider Jaiminlya Brahmana 1.1 7- 18, 108
105. It is impossible to believe, with Basham, 1989: 43 f., that this passage shows that
Yajnavalkya invented the doctrine of karman, which he here still held secret but
subsequently discussed in public. Yajnavalkya, be it noted, is already an old man in
SB 3.8.2.25.
106. BAU 3.5.1: etam vai tam atmanam viditva brahmanah putraisanayas ca vittaisa-
nayas ca lokaisanayas ca vyutthayatha bhiksacaryam caranti; tr. Edgerton, 1965:
141.
107. BAU 4.4.22: sa va esa mahan aja atmayo ’yam vijnanamayah pranesu / ... / sa na
sadhuna karmana bhuyan no evasadhuna kanlyan /. Tr. Hume, 193 1 : 143, modified.
108. Translated in Bodewitz, 1973: 52 f.
50
which has its own way of integrating the new ideas. This passage men-
tions, and accepts, both rebirth and the continuation of life in one’s son.
In order to make this possible the existence of two selves is propounded.
The self of the human world is reborn in the womb of the wife, whereas
the self of the divine world is carried towards the sun by the sacrificial
and funerary fire. There this second self must answer the question ‘who
are you?’ If he merely mentions his name and the name of his family, he
is sent back. (The text is not completely clear, but the expression “Night
and day overtake his world” ( tasya hahoratre lokam apnutah) suggests
that this self returns to the world of days and nights, i.e., to the world of
mortals.) If, on the other hand, he proclaims his identity with the God
Prajapati, he “approaches the essence of good deeds” [61] ( sa etam eva
sukrtarasam apyeti).
The essential elements of the new doctrine are present: One will be
reborn in this world, unless one knows the true nature of one’s self.
These elements are, here again, put in a Vedic garb which, this time,
allows also for the Vedic belief in continued life in one’s son.
The concern with the true nature of the self that we find so often in
these and other passages leaves no doubt that their authors must have felt
akin to the life-style of the parivraja of the ApDhS. And indeed, a
number of Upanisadic passages confirm this. BAU 4.4.22, for example,
states in connection with the atinan :109 “Such a one the Brahmins desire
to know by repetition of the Vedas, by sacrifices, by offerings, by
penance, by fasting. On knowing him, in truth, one becomes a muni.
Desiring him only as their home, wandering ascetics ( pravrajin ) wander
forth. ... They live the life of a mendicant.” The pravrajin of this passage
and the parivraja of the ApDhS have in common their wandering life-
109. BAU 4.4.22: tarn etam vedanuvacanena brahmana vividisanti yajnena danena ta-
pasa 'nasakena /etam eva viditva munir bhavati /etam eva pravrajino lokam ic-
chantah pravrajanti / ... te hasma ... bhiksacaryam caranti/. Tr. Hume, 1931: 143,
modified.
51
style, their habit to beg for food, their concern with the true nature of the
self. BAU 3.5, too, explains that Brahmins who know the Self live the
life of mendicants ( bhiksacaryam cai'and).
The new doctrines that make their appearance in the early Upanisads
- and which, I propose, were borrowed from non-Vedic currents - did not
radically change the Vedic tradition. The Upanisads remained, quite on
the contrary, marginal. They continued a tradition of their own which, as
time went by, became ever more outspoken in its criticism of the Vedic
[62] sacrificial tradition. The Mundaka Upanisad (1.2.7 f.), to cite but
one example, states that only fools consider the Vedic sacrifices the best
means; they will obtain old age and death all over again.110 The orthodox
- and orthoprax - Vedic tradition simply ignored its Upanisads, including
the oldest ones. The link of the later Upanisads with the rest of Vedic
literature became, not surprisingly, ever more tenuous. Indeed, most of
them came to be assigned to the Atharvaveda, which shows that their
Vedic nature ( sruti ) was not taken very seriously. The controversy in the
commentaries on the Brahmasutras whether samnyasa is or is not a
srauta asrama, moreover, could not have arisen if any of the Samnyasa
Upanisads had been really considered Vedic.111 The oldest texts on
Dharma rarely refer to the Upanisads.112 Very significantly, the ApDhS,
which has a great deal to say about the different forms of asceticism,
does not refer to the Upanisads in this context. It is true that it mentions
the Upanisads in a different context (2.2.5. 1) and cites in 1.8.22-23 lines
which show some similarity with the Kathaka Upanisad 3 13 but this
110. Deshpande (1990: 26) observes that the “markedly anti-ritual tendencies and a
decisive preference for the ascetic and meditative way of life [in the Mundaka
Upani-sad\ may perhaps show a certain influx of non-Vedic traditions.”
1 1 '. See Sprockhoff, 1976: 8, 22; Deussen, 1887: 648 f.; Thibaut, 1904: III: 693 f.
1 12. BDhS 2.10.18.15 speaks of teachers who explain the Upanisad (upanisadam acarya
bruvate) in the context of its description of the life of the samnyasin.
113. Nakamura, 1983: 308 f.
52
merely accentuates the fact that, in the opinion of the author of the
ApDhS, the Upanisadic tradition has no direct link with any of the three
forms of asceticism he describes. Later texts on Dharma mention the
Upanisads in the context of the ascetic asramas;114 one gains the
impression that their [63] mention is meant to lend an air of orthodoxy to
the ascetic practices which had originally nothing to do with Vedism.
This marginal position of the Upanisads does not come to an end un-
til, many centuries later, the Vedanta system of philosophy gains enor-
mously in popularity and manages to present the Upanisads as the ex-
pression of orthodox Vedism.115 This development cannot be separated
from the intrusion of non-Vedic asceticism into the Vedic world view,
even though an enormous time gap separates the two.
To conclude this chapter, let us consider which of the ascetic life-
styles studied in the earlier chapters of this book were known to the au-
thors of the early Upanisads. It seems more than likely that the two forms
of Vedic asceticism which we have come to discern were known to them,
even if the terms samnyasa and vanaprastha were not necessarily used.
Samnyasa, as we have seen, concerned the fate of the aged, and indeed,
Yajnavalkya’s departure (BAU 2.4; 4.5; Sprockhoff, 1976: 291; 1979:
396 f.; 1981: 68 f.) falls within this category. And if we are correct in
thinking that the Vedic vanaprastha was really a householder who im-
posed upon himself extra restrictions, this form of life, too, may have
been known to those Upanisads. We must however be aware that this
form of life was not of much interest to the oldest Upanisads, for their
object of real interest is the non-Vedic search for the true nature of the
self. The ideal of the non-Vedic ascetic who, through cessation of
activity, aspired to become freed from the effects of activity, did not find
114. So Manu 6.29, 83,94.
1 15. The earliest evidence for a Vedantic system of philosophy as an independent
school appears to date from the sixth century C.E. See Mesquita, 1991: 214-15.
53
much resonance in these Upanisads either, and is not obviously present
in them.
54
Chapter 8. Conclusions of Part II
There is no reason to doubt that Vedic asceticism developed largely
or wholly independently out of certain aspects of the Vedic sacrifice. It is
certainly not impossible that this development was aided by the
simultaneous existence of non- Vedic forms of asceticism, but this seems
at present beyond proof. The available evidence suggests that the
appearance of forms of asceticism within Vedic religion came about
largely independently of anything that took place outside it.
Similar claims have been made about the ideas of rebirth and
karman.116 Here, however, the available evidence leaves ample scope for
doubt. We have seen that many of the earliest passages that introduce
these ideas contain themselves indications that they had a non-
Brahmanic origin. What is more, there are numerous passages in early
Indian literature - a number of them presented in different chapters of
this book - which show that the ideas of rebirth and karman were
associated in the Indian mind with non-Vedic currents of religion and
asceticism. Most of the early Vedic passages which supposedly show the
Vedic origins of these ideas concern, as Horsch (1971: 156) correctly
observed, “Universalvorstellungen, die bei den verschiedensten Volkern
der Erde auftreten, ohne dort zur Seelenwanderungslehre gefiihrt zu
haben.” In other words, they [65] prove nothing.
Nor does the continuity of style and content which exists between
the early Upanisads and the earlier Brahmanas prove anything about the
origin of the new ideas. It merely proves that these ideas could only be
accepted by the Brahmins in a Brahmanic garb, fully integrated into their
116. See, e.g., Horsch, 1971; Witzel, 1984; Tull, 1989. Note on the other hand Biar-
deau’s (1964: 90 n. 1) remark: “On peut done penser que la doctrine des rites est re-
prise par les tenants du karman et de la delivrance qui, ce faisant, l’integrent a leur
perspective.”
55
new surroundings.117
1 17. The doctrine of karman kept having to compete with other causalities; see
Halbfass’ (1991a: 291 f.) chapter “Competing causalities: karma, Vedic rituals, and
the natural world”.
56
PART III
THE TWO TRADITIONS
57
Chapter 9. Kapila and the Vedic tradition
In order to study the opposition that was felt in the early texts
between Vedic and non-Vedic asceticism, it will be interesting first to
study the figure of Kapila. Kapila is often presented as a representative
of non-Vedic asceticism. Toward the end of the chapter we will study a
passage in which his type of asceticism is explicitly contrasted with
another type of asceticism, viz., that of Vedic ascetics.
Kapila is mentioned in an intriguing passage of the BDhS immedi-
ately after its rejection of the four asramas. Sutra 2.6.11.28 states, in
Biihler’s translation: “With reference to this matter they quote also (the
following passage): ‘There was, forsooth, an Asura, Kapila by name, the
son of Prahlada. Striving with the gods, he made these divisions. A wise
man should not take heed of them.’”118 Two features of this passage call
for closer attention: (i) the demoniacal nature of the sage Kapila; and (ii)
the opposition here expressed between the Vedic tradition and that
associated with Kapila.
(i) Kapila is, of course, primarily known as the sage who reputedly
created the Samkhya system of philosophy. In the classical Samkhya
texts [67] he is more than just a sage; he is an incarnation of God
( Isvara ). The Yuktidlpika describes him as Isvaramaharsi ‘great seer who
is [an incorporation of] God’ (Bronkhorst, 1983: 153). The Matharavrtti
speaks of “the great seer called Kapila, an incarnation of the exalted old
Self, the son of Prajapati Kardama” (id. p. 156). God is also “the light of
Kapila” (id. p. 157). Yoga sutras 1.24-25, moreover, describe God, who
is a special kind of self, as possessing the germ of Kapila, here referred
118. BDhS 2.6.1 1.28: tatrodaharanti / prahladirha vai kapilo namasura asa sa etan
bhedams cakara devaih spardhamanas tan manlsl nadriyeta //. The translation de-
viates from Biihler’s in substituting Asura for Asura. See Winternitz, 1926: 225;
Lingat, 1967: 66.
58
to as ‘the omniscient one’; in other words, God is the self of Kapila, and
Kapila an incarnation of God. This interpretation is supported by the
Yoga Bhasya (Bronkhorst, 1985: 194 f.). The commentary on the
Samkhyakai'ika which only survived in Paramartha’s Chinese translation
tells us, under karika 1, that Kapila was ‘born from heaven’ and
‘endowed with self-existence’.119 According to the Yuktidipika, again, he
- i.e., the paramarsi - who gave names to things (p. 5 1. 9-10), is the first-
born ( visvagraja ; p. 6 1. 1). Va-caspati Misra’s TattvavaisaradI on Yoga
sutra 1.25, finally, calls Kapila an avatara of Visnu, and adds that Kapila
is identical with the self-existent Hiranyagarbha, and with God ( isvara ).
Kapila’ s divine nature may therefore be taken as established for classical
Samkhya.
An inspection of the earlier texts shows that Kapila was already di-
vine in the pre-classical period. Consider, to begin with, Asvaghosa’s
Buddhacarita XII.20-21. Verse 20 introduces the ‘field-knower’ ( ksetra -
jna ) and states (20cd): “Those who think about the self call the self
ksetrajna ” (ksetrajna iti catmanam kathayanty atmacintakah). Verse 21
then continues:
[68] sasisyah kapilas ceha pratibuddha120 iti smrtih /
saputro 'pratibuddhas tu prajapatir ihocyate //
This must mean:
[This ksetrajna ] when having students and being Kapila is remem-
bered in this world as the enlightened one. But when having sons
and not being enlightened it is here called Prajapati.
Clearly Kapila is, if anything, more elevated than Prajapati.121
119 T. 2137, vol. 54, p. 1245a 1.5-6; Takakusu 1904: 979.
12°. Johnston's most important ms. has - buddhi , which has been changed into -
buddhir in the edition. This reading does not however seem to make much sense.
Kapila is described as buddha MBh 12.290.3.
59
The Mahabhai'ata contains numerous references to Kapila, the
supreme seer ( paramarsi ). He is identified with Prajapati (12.211.9) and
with Vasudeva (3.106.2); he is one of the mind-born sons of Brahman
(12.327.64); or he is called deva ‘god’, identical with Sakradhanu, son of
the sun (5.107.17). Both Narayana and Krsna say of themselves that the
Samkhya masters call them “Kapila, possessor of wisdom, residing in the
sun, eternal” (12.326.64; 330.30; see also 12.43.12). Siva is Sanatkumara
for the Yogins, Kapila for the Sankhyas (13.14.159). As propounder of
Samkhya, Kapila is mentioned beside Hiranyagarbha, who propounded
Yoga (MBh 12.337.60; 326.64.65; 330.30-31).
Perhaps the earliest reference to ‘the seer Kapila’ occurs in
Svetasvatai'a Upanisad 5.2. Modern interpreters have not infrequently
preferred the translation ‘tawny, red’ to ‘Kapila’, because comparison
with other verses of the SvetUp (3.4; 4.11-12) shows that this seer Kapila
must [69] be identical with Hiranyagarbha and linked to Rudra.122 This
identity poses no problem the moment we abandon the idea that Kapila
ever was an ordinary human being.
The present passage of the BDhS calls Kapila an Asura, i.e., a
demon. It is to be noted that Asuras are not in principle subordinated to
the gods; they are, on the contrary, often engaged in battles with the
gods, battles which, it is true, the gods normally win. The fact that Kapila
appears here as an Asura, is revealing. It suggests that the author of our
passage of the BDhS knew Kapila as a divine being, but one who was
not, in his opinion, connected with orthodox Vedism.123
12 *. It is doubtful whether Kapila Gautama, the founder of Kapilavastu according to
Asvaghosa's Saundarananda canto I, is to be identified with this Kapila.
122. See, e.g., Hume, 1931: 406 with n. 2.
123. Another instance where the term Asura appears to relate to non-Vedic Indians is
discussed in Staal, 1983: 1: 136 f. A similar situation may prevail in the case of the
Raksasa Ravana, “who is elsewhere known as a prince of demons but who in this
milieu (i.e., of the Kumaratantra ) occupies the position of a tutelary deity of
exorcism” (Goudriaan, 1981: 128); see also Goudriaan, 1977: 165 f.; J. Filliozat,
1937: 159 ff. Examples of the transformation in traditional narratives of ‘enemy’
60
Kapila’s characterization as ‘son of Prahlada’ ( prahladi ) is not with-
out interest either. Prahlada is, in the earliest texts ( Taittirlya Brahmana,
Puranapancalaksana, Mahabharata) the king of the Asuras (Hacker,
1959: 14 f.). This characterization, though unknown elsewhere in
connection with Kapila, confirms that the latter is here indeed looked
upon as an Asura. But Prahlada is also, in a number of passages of the
MBh, a teacher of wisdom, who possesses omniscience (Hacker, p. 18
f.). This suggests that his link with Kapila may have more than
superficial significance. For Kapila, too, is described as possessor of
wisdom, of omniscience, as we have seen.
Kapila is nowhere else, to my knowledge, explicitly described as a
[70] demon. Yet some features of early literature are suggestive in this
connection. Consider first the role of Kapila in the story of Sagara and
his sons (MBh 3. 104- 106), 124 as retold by Wendy Doniger O’Flaherty
(1980: 220 f.):
King Sagara had two wives. In order to obtain sons, he performed
asceticism ...; then, by the favor of Siva he obtained sixty
thousand sons from one wife and one son ... from the other. After
some time, the king performed a horse sacrifice; as the horse
wandered over the earth, protected by the king’s sons, it reached
the ocean, and there it disappeared. The king sent his sixty
thousand sons to search for the horse; they dug with spades in the
earth, destroying many living creatures, digging out the ocean that
is the abode of sea demons. They reached down into Hell, and
there they saw the horse wandering about, and they saw the sage
Kapila haloed in flames, blazing with ascetic power. The sons
were angry and behaved disrespectfully to Kapila; infuriated, he
into ‘hero' are known from elsewhere, too; see Forsyth, 1987: 36. (Added in the
2nd edition:) Hayagriva is an Indian example of a demonic figure who becomes di-
vine, even an avatara of Visnu; cp. Stutley, 1986: 111.
124. For a study of this myth in epic-puranic literature, see Bock, 1984.
61
released a flame from his eye and burnt all the sons to ashes. Then
[Sagara’s grandson] Amsuman came and propitiated Kapila ...
One might wonder why Kapila practises his asceticism in Hell of all
places. Even more telling may be that many elements of the above myth,
as O’Flaherty points out, recur in the story of Dhundhu (MBh 3.193-195)
who, though playing a role similar to that of Kapila, is an Asura. I quote
again from O’Flaherty (1980: 222; with modifications):
King Brhadasva had a son called Kuvalasva, who in his turn had
[71] 21,000 sons. When the old king handed over his throne to
Kuvalasva and entered the forest, he met the sage Uttanka, who
told him that a demon named Dhundhu was performing
asceticism there by his hermitage, in the sands of the ocean,
burning like the doomsday fire, with flames issuing from his
mouth, causing the waters to flow about him in a whirlpool.
Brhadasva asked Kuvalas-va to subdue the demon; his sons dug
down into the sand, but Dhundhu appeared from the ocean,
breathing fire, and he burnt them all with his power of asceticism.
Then Kuvalasva drank up the watery flood, quenched the fire with
water, and killed the demon Dhundhu, burning him up.
The parallelism between Dhundhu and Kapila is emphasized by the
MBh itself: “Dhundhu burnt the sons of Brhadasva with the fire from his
mouth, just as Kapila had burnt the sons of Sagara.”125
In conclusion it may be observed that Kapila’ s frequent association
with Asuri might be significant: Asuri means ‘son of an Asura’.
(ii) The opposition between Kapila and the Vedic tradition finds ex-
pression in an interesting passage of the Mahabharata (12.260-262)
125. MBh 3.195.25: mukhajenagnina kruddho lokan udvartayann iva / ksanena raja-
sardula pureva kapilah prabhuh / sagarasyatmajan kruddhas tad adbhutam iva -
bhavat // tr. O' Flaherty.
62
which records a discussion between Kapila and the seer (rsi)
Syumarasmi, in order to show that both the life of a householder and that
of the renouncer ( tyaga ) result in great fruit and are both authoritative
(260.
2-4). 126 Syumarasmi sings here the glory of the Vedic way of life, with
heavy emphasis on the sacrifice. He criticizes the “cessation of effort
called [72] pravrajya’’ of the lazy ( alasa ) sages who arc without faith and
wisdom, devoid of subtle vision (261.10). He rejects the possibility of
liberation ( moksa ), pointing out that mortal beings rather have to pay off
their debts towards the manes, the gods, and the twice-born (261.15).
And he reminds Kapila of the central position of the Brahmin; the
Brahmin is the cause of the three worlds, their eternal and stable
boundary (12.261.11).
Kapila, in his turn, stresses his respect for the Vedas (12.260.12:
naham vedan vinindami; 262.1: na vedah prsthatahkrtah), but points out
that the Vedas contain the two contradictory messages that one must act
and that one must abstain from action (260.15). A little later he
pronounces several verses which tell us what a true Brahmin is like: he
guai'ds the gates of his body - i.e., his sexual organ, stomach, arms and
speech -, without which there is no use of tapas, sacrificing and knowing
the self; the true Brahmin’s requirements are very limited, he likes to be
alone where all others like to live in couples, he knows the original form
( prakrti) and the modified forms ( vikrti ) of all this, he knows and
inspires no fear, and is the soul of all living beings.127 Kapila then gives a
description of the people of yore, who had direct knowledge of Dharma
( pratyaksadharma ; 12.262.8) and led in general exemplary lives. They all
followed one Dharma which, however, has four legs: “Those virtuous
bull-like men had recourse to the four-legged Dharma; having reached it
126. Cf. Wintemitz, 1926: 225.
127 MBh 12.261.27-32.
63
in accordance with the law, they [all] obtain the highest destiny, leaving
the house, others by resorting to the forest, by becoming householders,
others again as brahmacarin s.”128 Kapila also mentions the ‘fourth
Upanisadic [73] D Hanna’ ( caturtha aupanisado dharmah ; 12.262.27) to
be attained by accomplished, self-restrained Brahmins (28). We learn
from ChU 2.23.1 - cited above, ch. 1 - that this fourth Dharma belongs to
the man ‘who resides in Brahman’ ( brahmasamstha ), and the following
verses of MBh 12.262 confirm this. The fourth Upanisadic Dharma is
rooted in contentment, consists in renunciation, and in the search of
knowledge.129 The two following verses then speak of liberation
( apavarga ) as the eternal duty of the ascetic (yatidharma), and of the
desire for Brahman’s abode, as a result of which one is freed from the
cycle of rebirths (30cd: brahmanah padam anvicchan samsaran mucyate
suciti). In conclusion Kapila points out that (sacrificial) acts are a
purification of the body (sarlrapakti; 36), whereas knowledge is the
highest path. But this does not prevent him from saying (v. 41): “Those
who know the Veda know all; all is rooted in the Veda, for in the Veda is
the foundation of all that exists and does not exist.”
Kapila, according to MBh 12.327.64-66, represents - along with cer-
tain other sages - the nivrtta dharma, he is a knower of Yoga (yogavid)
and master in the science of liberation ( moksasastre acaiya). The group
of sages to which Kapila belongs is contrasted with another group,
consisting of knowers of the Veda ( vedavid ), whose dharma is pravrtti
(12.327.61-63). In MBh 12.312.4 the science of Yoga (yogasastra ) which
leads to liberation (3, 6, etc.) is called kapila ‘belonging to Kapila’.
1 2X. MBh 12.262.19-20: dharmam ekam catuspadam asritas te nararsabhah / tam santo
vidhivat prapya gacchanti paramam gatim // grhebhya eva niskramya vanam anye
samasritah / grham evabhisamsritya tato 'nye brahmacarinah //
129. MBh 12.262.28 cd: ( sa ) samtosamulas tyagatma jnanadhisthanam ucyate. (Added
in the 2nd edition:) For a detailed discussion of the ‘fourth Upanisadic Dharma' in
connection with ChU 2.23, see Tsuchida, 1996.
64
We now turn again to Asvaghosa’s Buddhacaiita. This text de-
scribes, among other things, how the future Buddha acquainted himself
with various forms of religious life, before he found his own way to [74]
nirvana. Most noteworthy are his visit to the penance grove described in
Sarga 7, and the instruction he receives from Arada Kalama in Sarga 12.
Arada Kalama teaches a form of Samkhya and mentions in this con-
text Kapila (see above). His aim is to reach liberation from samsara
( yatha ... samsaro ... nivartatc: 12.16) through knowledge of the self.130
We recognize this as one of the non-Vedic ways leading to final
liberation.
At least as interesting are the Bodhisattva’s experiences in the
penance grove ( tapovana , asrama). Its inhabitants divide their time, as
appears from the description, between a variety of ascetic practices and
Vedic sacrifices. Very important in the present context are the reasons
for which these practices are undertaken: most prominently mentioned is
the obtainment of heaven (7.10, 18, 20, 21, 24, 48). Indeed, the main
reason given by the Bodhisattva for leaving the asrama is that he does
not want heaven, but the end of rebirth. It is in this context (7.48) that he
remarks that the nivrttidharma is different from pravrtti. Pravrtti here
designates the asceticism practised in the asrama. The teaching of Arada,
on the other hand, aims at final liberation (7.52-54) and belongs to the
category nivrttidharma.
Here, then, Kapila ’s way is explicitly contrasted with the ascetic
practices of the Vedic penance grove. The former is nivrtti, the latter is
pravrtti-, the former leads to liberation, the latter to heaven.
To conclude this chapter, let us note that Kapila’ s link with
renunciation is evident also from Baudhayana Grhyasesasutra 4.16,
which terms the rules of becoming a samnyasin
13°. The meditative practices taught by Arada (12.46 f.) are of Buddhist origin.
65
‘ Kapilasarnnyasa vidhf . 1 3 1 [75] P.V. Kane (History of Dharmasastra II p.
953) draws attention to a line of royal kings called nrpati-parivrajaka
‘kingly ascetics’, attested in Gupta inscriptions, whose founder is said to
have been (an incarnation of) Kapila.132 The Jaina text Uttaradhyayana
chapter 8, which describes the virtues of asceticism, is also ascribed to
Kapila. The commentary on the Pannava-na describes the wandering
beggars called Carakas as descendants of Kapila.133
Recall in this context once again that Kapila in the BDhS is the son
of Prahlada. Prahlada, king of the Asuras, is frequently engaged in battles
with Indra, king of the gods (Hacker, 1959: 16-17). But Indra is also an-
tagonistic to the practice of asceticism, with which he interferes in
various ways; Minoru Hara (1975) enumerates dissuasion, seduction by
celestial nymphs, and straightforward violence, and illustrates these with
passages from the MBh and from the Pali Jatakas. Again one is tempted
to interpret these stories as giving expression to an opposition which was
felt to exist between orthodox Vedic religion and the tradition of wisdom
and asceticism linked to the names of Prahlada and, more in particular,
Kapila.
This tradition of wisdom and asceticism is, of course, the one which
we have come to distinguish from the Vedic tradition. Kapila belongs
most often to that manifestation of the non-Vedic tradition which looks
for liberation from the cycle of rebirths through insight into the true
nature of the self. It is not necessary to recall that the Samkhya
philosophy, in its various forms, is precisely the school of thought that
stresses the fundamentally non-active nature of the soul, which is
profoundly different from the material and mental world.
131. Gonda, 1977:589.
132. Fleet, 1970: 114-1 15. (Added in the 2nd edition:) Scharfe (1987: 308) proposes a
different interpretation for the term nrpati-parivrajaka.
133. Jain, 1984: 304.
66
Chapter 10. Sramanas and Brahmins
We have seen in chapter 1 that Megasthenes used the terms Sramana
and Brahmin to refer to the two types of ascetics that we have come to
distinguish. The opposition that existed between these two groups is con-
firmed by a passage of the second century B.C.E. in Patanjali’s Maha-
bhasya (ed. Kielhorn I p. 476 1. 9; on P.2.4.12 vt. 2), which mentions the
compound sramanabrahmanam to illustrate the sense yesam ca virodhah
sasvatikah “opposition between whom is eternal”.
The term Sramana is little used in the Veda and in the epics.* It is,
on the other hand, frequently found in the old Buddhist and Jaina canons.
Indeed, the founders of these two religions are themselves referred to as
Sramanas ( samana in Pali and ArdhamagadhI), as are their followers.
The question to be addressed is: do these texts preserve any trace of the
distinction that existed between Sramanas and Brahmin ascetics?
Consider first the Agganna Sutta of the Digha Nikaya. While
describing the history of the world, which is a history of ever increasing
decline, this text relates (DN III p. 93 f.) how some beings decide to get
rid ( bahenti ) of evil. This fact is presented as an etymological
explanation of the name Brahmin, which these beings obtain.134 These
Brahmins build leaf [77] huts in the jungle and meditate there. They are
* (Added in the 2nd edition:) For a recent discussion, see Olivelle, 1993: Ilf. Oli-
velle concludes from the use of the term in some Vedic passages (essentially one:
Taittiri^ya Aranyaka 2.7) that here the Sramana is right at the centre of the Vedic
tradition. However, he rightly points out that “[t]he meaning of this term ... should
not be simply assumed to be the same as in ... later (and we may add: different, JB)
ascetical contexts”. Indeed, the preponderant use elsewhere (e.g., by Megasthenes
and Patanjali) allows us to speak of a (non-Vedic) Sramana movement without
much risk of confusion.
134. For a comparison with the Chinese parallels, see Meisig, 1988: 146 f. One of
these parallels, the isolated text T. 10 (vol. 1) p. 221a esp. 1. 12-13, reserves the
name Brahmin for those who desist from meditating. This etymology, incidentally,
indicates that some such form as bamhana or bahana, instead of brahmana. was in
use at the time; Hintiber, 1991: 186.
67
therefore called jha-yaka ‘meditator’. This designation distinguishes
them from ‘certain among them’ who, incapable of meditating, become
ajjhayaka ‘non-meditator’, but also ‘reciter [of the Veda]’.135 The real
Brahmins, i.e. those who meditate, are further described as follows:136
“Extinct for them the burning coal, vanished the smoke, fallen lies pestle
and mortar; gathering of an evening for the evening meal, of a morning
for the morning meal, they go down into village and town and royal city,
seeking food. When they have gotten food, back again in their leafhuts
they meditate.”
It is remarkable, and somewhat puzzling, that the Brahmin
meditators are here described as without fire. Perhaps Gombrich (1992:
174) is right in assuming that the vital terms vitahgara, vltadhuma, and
panna- (or sanna-1) musala were borrowed from Brahmanical
phraseology,137 but twisted to suit a different purpose. We may then also
have to agree that this passage was not intended to describe a single
historical phenomenon. It is however clear that the present passage does
not claim that Brahmin meditators, who live in leaf huts in the jungle, are
a thing of the past. It is true that ‘certain among them’ have abandoned
this way of life, but at least some have stuck to it. This is interesting, for
the next page describes the [78] origin of the Sramanas:138 “Now there
135. Richard Gombrich (1992, esp. p. 163) draws attention to the humoristic aspect of
the ‘etymology’ of ajjhayaka.
136 DN III p. 94: vitahgara vltadhuma pannamusala sayam sayamasaya pato patar-
asaya gamanigamarajadhaniyo osaranti ghasam esana / te ghasam patilabhitva
punad ev a arahhayatane pannakutlsu jhayanti /. Tr. Rhys Davids, 1921: 89.
1 ’7. BDhS 2.6.11.22 has sannamusala and vyahgara. Manu 6.56 vidhuma, sannamu-
sala and vyahgara ; here these expressions refer, not to the situation of the ascetic
described, but to that of the village in which he is going to beg.
138. DN III p. 95 f.: ahu kho so vasettha samayo yarn khattiyo pi sakam dhammam ga-
rahamano agarasma anagariyam pabbajati ‘samano bhavissamlti’ / brahmano pi
sakam dhammam garahamano agarasma anagariyam pabbajati ‘samano bhavis-
samlti’ / vesso pi sakam dhammam garahamano agarasma anagariyam pabbajati
‘samano bhavissamlti’ / suddo pi sakam dhammam garahamano agarasma anaga-
riyam pabbajati ‘samano bhavissamlti’ / imehi kho vasettha catuhi mandalehi
samanamandalassa abhinibatti ahosi /. Tr. Rhys Davids, 1921: 92, modified.
68
came a time, Vasettha, when some Khattiya, misprizing his own norm,
went forth from home into the homeless life, saying: I will become a
Sramana. Some Brahmin too did the same, likewise some Vessa and
some Sudda, each finding some fault in his particular norm. Out of these
four groups, Vasettha, the group of the Sramanas came into being.”
The Agganha Sutta, as will be clear from the above two passages,
distinguishes between Brahmin ascetics and Sramanas. It adds that a
Brahmin can become a Sramana, which implies that two ways of asceti-
cism are open to the Brahmin. The properly Brahmanic way is character-
ized by a leaf hut in the jungle. The Sramana, as against this, is stated to
“go forth into the homeless life” (anagariyani pabbajati). The other fea-
tures attributed to the Brahmin ascetic - being without fire, begging for
food in villages and towns - are puzzling and do not agree well with the
other sources of information which we have considered so far.
A more detailed description of a Brahmin ascetic contained in the
Buddhist canon shows that tending the fire did after all characterize at
least some of them. I refer to the matted hair ascetic ( jatila ) Kasyapa of
Uruvilva, whose encounter with the Buddha is described in the [79]
Mahavagga of the Vinaya Pi taka. 1 39 Kasyapa is not only a Brahmin (Vin
I p. 25), but he is clearly presented as a Vedic ascetic who tends the
sacred fire, for he lives in an asrama, where he has a fire-house
( agyagara , aggisala). It is in this fire-house that the Buddha is going to
combat a mighty snake, which represents no doubt Kasyapa’ s power. No
need to add, the Buddha subdues the snake, or more precisely, he
destroys with his fire the fire of the snake. Kasyapa is subsequently
converted,140 which may safely be interpreted to mean that he accepts the
Buddha’s powers to be greater than his own.
139. Vin I p. 24 f., also CPS ch. 24; for a comparison with the two Chinese parallels,
see Bareau, 1963: 257-266.
140. In the original account perhaps immediately after this event; see Bareau, 1963:
261-62.
69
Another matted hair ascetic ( jatila ) is Keniya, who figures in the
Sela Sutta (Sn p. 102 (99) ff.; MN II p. 146) and in the Mahavagga of the
Vinaya Pitaka (Vin I p. 245 f.). Keniya, too, lives in an asrama, and is
described as “favourably disposed to the Brahmins” ( brahmanesu abhip-
pasanno ).
The Buddhist scriptures mention numerous encounters between the
Buddha and one or several Brahmins. In the majority of cases the Brah-
mins concerned are not ascetics.141 The Subha Sutta of the Majjhima
Nikaya does however mention asceticism ( tapa ) as a Brahmanic virtue,
along with truth, chastity ( brahmacariya ), study, and renunciation
(caga).142 These same terms - in Sanskrit satya, brahmacarya, adhyayana
[80] and tyaga respectively - occur frequently in combination with tapas
in the MBh to describe Brahmanic virtues.143
There can be no doubt that the Buddhist texts do at times use the
term Brahmin in order to refer to Brahmin ascetics. A clear example is
SN IV p. 118:144 “Fasting, sleeping on the ground, bathing early in the
morning and [reciting] the three Vedas, [wealing] rough hides, with
matted hair and dirt, [uttering] sacred syllables, following ethical rules
and observances, using ascetic practices, hypocrisy, deceit, sticks, the
various ritual uses of water, these are the characteristics of the Brahmins,
practised for some insignificant gain.” This happens however almost
exclusively in combination with the term Sramana, even where clearly
only Brahmins are intended. Consider, for example, the Ambattha Sutta
141. This led Thomas (1933: 86) to the conclusion that “[t]he brahmins are never re-
ferred to as living an ascetic life”. We have seen, and will see below, that this is not
correct.
142. MN II p. 199.
143. See Hara, 1979: 29 ff.
144. SN IV p. 1 18 (read with the emendations proposed in Woodward, 1927: 75 n. 2,
5): anasaka thandilasayika ca / patosinanan ca tayo ca veda // kharajinam jata-
panko/ manta silabbatam tapo // kuhana vankam danda ca/udaka ca majjani(?) ca
// vanna ete brahmananam / kata kincikkhabhavana // . Tr. Kloppenborg, 1990: 56.
70
of the DIgha Nikaya. Here the Buddha enumerates (DN Ip. 101) four
‘gates of destruction’ ( apayamukha ) which a Sramana or Brahmin may,
unwisely, choose instead of the highest attainment of wisdom and
conduct ( anuttara vijjacara-nasampada). The third of these ‘gates’ is of
particular interest: it concerns the ‘Sramana or Brahmin’ who erects a
fire-house (agyagara) near a village or small town and stays there
looking after ( paricaranto ) the fire. There can be no doubt that the fire
talked about is the Vedic fire, and that the ‘Sramana or Brahmin’ is a
Brahmin. This is again confirmed by the fact that the description of this
third gate occurs in a discussion with Am-battha, a Brahmin who takes
pride in his descent.
[81] However, the third ‘gate of destruction’ must be read along
with the other three. The first concerns the ‘Sramana or Brahmin’ who
lives on fruits that have fallen of themselves,145 the second concerns the
‘Sramana or Brahmin’ who only eats bulbs, roots and fruits,146 and the
fourth concerns one who entertains passing Sramanas and Brahmins.
These four ‘gates of destruction’ together combine many of the features
that we find in the Brahmanic ascetic studied in earlier chapters. Their
mention in a discussion with a pretentious Brahmin appears to indicate
that indeed all the characteristics of the four ‘gates’ were actually
practised by Brahmin ascetics.
Theragatha 2 1 9-22 1 describes the conversion to the Buddha’s
method by someone who used to tend the (sacrificial) fire in the forest
( aggim paricarim vane ) and practised asceticism ( akasim ... tapam; 219),
who used to be a kinsman of Brahma, but has now become a true
Brahmin ( brahmabandhu pure asim, idani kho ’mhi brahmano; 221).
The testimony of Megasthenes (chapter 1, above) gave the
impression that Sramanas and Brahmins were different groups
altogether. The Srama-nas corresponded to what we call the non-Vedic
145. pavattaphalabhojana. Cf. chapter 1 n. 11, above.
146. kandamulaphalabhojana
71
ascetics, the Brahmins encompassed the Vedic ascetics. The passages
studied above, on the other hand, seem to mix up the two terms. This
kind of confusion is not exceptional in the Buddhist texts. The
Culyiassapura Sutta of the Majjhima Nikaya (no. 40) lists quite a number
of Sramanas whose Sramana-ship ( sa-manna ) is stated not to depend
exclusively on this or that feature (MN I p. 281-82). We read here, for
example, that the Sramana-ship of one who is unclothed ( acelaka ) does
not depend on his being [82] unclothed, and other similar cases which
are not problematic. The same list, however, speaks also of “one who
bathes ceremonially” ( udakorohaka ), “one who meditates on chants”
( mantajjhayaka ), and “one who has matted hair” ( ja-tilaka ). All of these
are Brahmins. I.B. Horner (1954: 335 n. 2) draws attention to other text
passages (SN IV p. 312 = AN V p. 263) which use the first expression to
refer to Brahmins of the west. The other two expressions are clear by
themselves. We see, then, that the expression samanna ‘Sramana-ship’
can here be used in connection with a Brahmin.
It is to be noted that Brahmins are not infrequently associated with
special powers in the Buddhist texts. In the discussion with Ambattha we
learn first that his ancestor Kanha was not really a Brahmin. But Kanha
became a great R s i by studying the sacred mantras ( brahme manic: DN I
p. 96). These gave him great powers, which protected him against an at-
tempt by king Okkako to kill him with an arrow.
We have not, so far, spoken of the Buddhist Jatakas. Yet these texts
contain much valuable information about different kinds of ascetics, both
in the original gathas and in the later, but still old, prose commentary.
Before we turn to the stories, some preliminary remarks must be made.
Jatakas recount what happened to the Buddha to be (Bodhisattva;
Pali Bodhisatta) during his earlier lives, i.e., before he had found the way
to Nirvana. We cannot therefore expect to find Buddhist ascetics in these
72
stories. (An exception must be made for the occasional Pratyekabud-
dha/Paccekabuddha; these figures remain however marginal and impre-
cise.) We do find other kinds of asceticism, which find however varying
degrees of favour in these stories. The reason is clear. The [83] Bodhisat-
tva being an ascetically inclined person, he is often presented as an
ascetic in the Jatakas. But the form of asceticism which he practises is
necessarily non- or only partially Buddhist, yet cannot be described by
the Buddhist authors as totally worthless.
Consider the Vessantara-Jataka. This Jataka, the longest one, refers
repeatedly to what we have called Vedic asceticism. The banished prince
Vessantara is often referred as “looking like a Brahmin with his matted
hair and garment of animal skin, with his hook and sacrificial ladle,
sleeping on the ground and reverencing the sacred fire”.147 He lives, with
wife and children, in a leaf-hut ( pannasala) in the forest ( vana ), eating
roots and fruit obtained by gathering.148 Royal ascetics ( rajisi ) who have
offered in the sacred fire ( ahutaggi ) dwell in the same area.149 A special
mention is made of the seer ( isi) Accuta, who lives in an asrama ( assama )
and is described in exactly the same terms as Vessantara above.150
Other Jatakas, too, know the Vedic ascetic.151 The Asatamanta- Jata-
ka, for example, concerns a Brahmin boy who, when he is sixteen, is told
by his parents: “Son, having kindled fire on the day of your birth, we
have kept it burning. If you desire to become one whose heart is set on
the World of Brahman, take the fire, enter the forest, and set your heart
147. Ja VI p. 528 gatha 201 1, p. 529 gatha 2016, p. 530 gatha 2034, p. 533 gatha 2055,
p. 534 gatha 2059, p. 539 gatha 2115: dharento brahmanam vannam asadan
camasan jatam / cammavasi chama seti jatavedam namassati //. Tr. Cone and Gom-
brich, 1977:47,48,49,52, 53.
148. Ja VI p. 516 gatha 1923 (vana), p. 518 gatha 1948 ( pannasala ), p. 542 gatha 2121
( atho unchena yapema, atho mulaphala bahu).
149 Ja VI p.518 gatha 1935.
150 Ja VI p. 532 gathas 2037-38.
151. See Mehta, 1937: 572-73.
73
on the [84] World of Brahman, worshipping the Lord of Fire.”152 The
boy is also offered the choice to become a householder. These two ways
of life are here presented as alternatives, not as constituting a sequence.
Almost the same words are used by the parents of the Bodhisatta in
the Nanguttha-Jataka. Here, however, they add that if their son prefers to
become a householder, he has to learn the three Vedas.153 In other words,
the Vedic ascetic does not necessarily know the Vedas according to this
text!154
Even more interesting is the end of the Nanguttha-Jataka. Here the
Bodhisatta, after an unpleasant experience, extinguishes the fire with wa-
ter, departs to become an R s i , and becomes one whose heart is set on the
World of Brahman.155 Here two forms of asceticism are contrasted with
each other, the one Vedic, the other without sacred fire, and therefore
non-Vedic. It is also clear that the author of this Jataka prefers by far the
non- Vedic version.
Something quite similar happens in the S an thava- Jataka. Here too
the Bodhisatta has to choose between learning the three Vedas and
becoming a householder on the one hand, and tending the sacred fire in
the forest on [85] the other. He chooses the latter alternative, has an
unpleasant experience, extinguishes his fire with water, beating (?) it
with sticks, enters the ascetic state of an Rsi, and reaches the World of
152. Ja I p. 285: putta. mayam tava jatadivase aggim gahetva thapayimha , sace Brah-
malokaparayano bhavitukamo tarn aggim adaya arahham pavisitva Aggim Bhaga-
vantam namassamano Brahmalokaparayano hohi ...
153. Ja I p. 494: mayan te putta jatadivase aggim ganhimha. sace si agaram ajjhava-
situkamo tayo vede ugganha, atha Brahmalokam gantukamo aggim gahetva arah-
ham pavisitva aggim paricaranto Mahabrahmanam aradhetva Brahmalokapara-
y=yano hohlti.
154. The beginning of the Sona-Nanda-Jataka (Ja V p. 312) suggests rather that the
choice between married life and asceticism is made after the Vedas have been
learned.
155. Ja I p. 495: ... Mahasatto aggim udakena nibbapetva isipabajjam pabbajitva ...
Brahmalokaparayano ahosi.
74
Brahman.156 It seems clear that the ascetic state of being an Rtsi
( isipabbajja) is here (unlike in the case of Accuta, see above) not
characterized by tending the Vedic fire.
The Jatakas do not tell us much about the two types of non-Vedic
ascetics which we have come to distinguish. Some do indeed live in asra-
mas, feeding on roots and fruit which they find in the forest, while others
go begging in towns and villages. But several Jatakas create the impres-
sion that the non-Vedic ascetics can move from one of these two life-
styles to the other and back again for no clear reason. Consider the
Uddalaka-Ja-taka. Uddalaka, having been made the teacher of a group of
ascetics, asks the latter: “Sirs, you always live in the forest, feeding on
roots and fruit from the woods; why don’t you go where there are peo-
ple?” They reply: “Sir, the people give us gifts, then expect gratitude
from us, want us to speak of the Dhamma, ask questions; for fear of this
we don’t go to them.”157 There is no doubt a fair amount of Buddhist
irony in this account of the ascetics’ reason to stay away from society.
Indeed, the sequel of the story recounts how the ascetics at last follow
Uddalaka to Benares, only to be exposed as knaves. One gains at the
same time the impression that the composers of the Jatakas did not know
very well why some non-Vedic ascetics remained in the forest, while
others came to beg their food in towns and villages. This is all the more
noticeable since, as [86] we have seen, the difference between Vedic and
non-Vedic ascetics had not escaped their attention.
We have seen (chapter 1) that the Jaina canon has a tendency to use
the term parivrajaka to refer to Brahmins, thus confusing to some extent
the original distinction between Sramanas and Brahmins. The distinction
156 Jallp. 43-45.
157. Ja IV p. 298: atha ne so aha: “marisa tumhe niccam vanamulaphalahara arahhe
yeva vasatha, manussapatham kasma na gacchathS' d / “marisa, manussa nama
danam datva anumodanam karapend dhammakatham kathapend pahham pucchand ,
mayam tena bhayena tattha na gacchama”/
75
is nevertheless known, for the compound samanamahana, ‘Sramanas and
Brahmins’, occurs in the Suyagada. 1 38 In an enumeration of five types of
beggars ( vanlmaga ), moreover, Brahmins ( mahana ) and Sramanas are
mentioned separately.159 It is not, however, certain that we must in this
last case think of Brahmins who actually beg for their food; it is also
conceivable that Brahmins in general are here described as potential
recipients of gifts. The institution of Brahmin asceticism, on the other
hand, is well known to the Jaina canon, as is shown by the references
given at the end of chapter 1, above.
158. Suy 2.2.696.
159. Than 5.3.454; see Jain, 1984: 316.
76
Chapter 11. Asceticism in the Mahabharata
The MBh does not appear to distinguish between Sramanas and
Brahmins. The two kinds of ascetics that we are studying are, however,
not unknown to this epic. But where the Buddhist and Jaina texts contain
much information about non-Vedic asceticism, the MBh contains, in its
narrative portions, mainly information about Vedic asceticism.
We have considered a number of Vedic ascetics from the MBh in
chapter 6, above. Their asceticism takes place in connection with the
Vedic sacrifice or replaces it. Its aims are by and large the same as those
of the sacrifice: reaching heaven, preferably in bodily form, supporting
the gods in their fights with the demons, obtaining certain powers,
obtaining a son, etc.160 Vedic asceticism can therefore be looked upon as
an extension and elaboration of the ascetic elements which are present in
the Vedic sacrifice.
Non-Vedic asceticism, as we have come to know it in the preceding
pages, has quite different aims.161 It aims primarily at inaction, with the
[88] ultimate goal of liberation from the effects of one’s actions. These
are hardly ideals which easily give rise to stories, as do the aims of the
Vedic ascetic. We may however be sure that where the two forms of
160. See Shee, 1986: 346 f. Cf. Hara, 1979: 511 ff. On the connection that existed, and
exists, between ascetics and other ‘holy men' on the one hand, and performing ma-
gicians on the other, see Siegel, 1991: passim. On levitation, for example, Siegel
observes (p. 215): “It’s impossible to know if such religious stories ... result from
people having seen magicians do the levitation trick, from their need to explain it,
or if the trick is invented, its method worked out, by magicians who have heard the
stories and realize that, because people believe such things as levitation are possible
and a mark of merit or of ritual accomplishment, there is power to be had in the
performance of them. In either case, the street magicians, of the present as well as
of the past, try to elicit religious associations.”
161. Hara (1979: 517) notices, with regard to the MBh, “the incapability of tapas to be
ranked among the highest religious ideals ( vairagya , moksa, nirvana), which are
never found in the accusative case in such passages where tapas stands in the in-
strumental.”
77
asceticism confront each other, the non-Vedic ascetic can not really be
expected to deny the powers which the Vedic ascetic claims to possess,
or acquire; this would obviously weaken his position in the eyes of all
outsiders. Rather one would expect to find passages where the non-Vedic
ascetic is counseled against the use of these powers.
A confrontation of this type is found in the longer version of the
story of Samrka and Srhgin.162 Wezler (1979) has argued that this is the
amplified form of the shorter version,163 and has itself suffered at least
one addition. Whether or not this be the case, there are some important
points to be noted. Both the long and the short version describe Samrka
as an ascetic characterized by motionlessness and silence, at least during
the events which make up the story. He is “like a tree trunk”
(. sthanubhuta , 1.37.7; sthanuvat, 1.45.25) and “observing silence”
(maunavrate sthita, 1.36.18,46.7; anabhibhasin, 1.37.6;
maunavratadhara, 1.45.25; etc.), even when king Pariksit puts in anger a
dead snake on his shoulder. In fact, he does nothing to remove the snake
even after the departure of the king ( tathaiva aste, 1.36.20, 37.9; etc.).
The parallelism with certain stories from Jaina literature is striking,164
and one is tempted to conclude that Samlka’s asceticism is of the non-
Vedic type. This seems confirmed in the last part of the longer version,
where Samrka states unambiguously that the ascetic should abandon
anger and cultivate serenity ( sama ) and forgiveness [89] ( ksama ). The
object of these instructions is Samrka’s son Srhgin who had, in an attack
of anger, directed his ascetic powers against king Pariksit. It will be clear
that those who follow Samrka’s advice arc hardly the characters that
could provide the MBh with its many stories about ascetics. Even Sa-
mrka found his way into the epic owing to the fact that his son - also a
great ascetic - was less restrained than his father.
162. MBh 1.36.8 - 1.38.26.
163. MBh 1.45.20 f.
164. See, e.g., Ayaranga 9.2, tr. Jaini, 1979: 26; further Wezler, 1979: 55.
78
This interpretation of the story of Samika and Srngin, however, can
be no more than tentative, for two reasons. The first one is that the story
does not tell us whether Samika is in search of liberation, the differentiat-
ing characteristic of the non-Vedic tradition. This means that we have to
judge on the basis of his practices. But Vedic ascetic practices are fre-
quently very similar to non-Vedic ones. The theme of motionlessness
characterizes also ascetics who strive for more worldly aims. Cyavana
Bhargava, for example, remains Tike a tree trunk’ ( sthanubhuta ; MBh
3.122.2) until an ant-hill has formed around him; he uses his ascetic pow-
ers to cause constipation in the army of the king, then marries his
daughter. Savitrr stands upright ‘as though she had become wood’
( kasthabhuteva ; MBh 3.280.8) in order to save her husband from death.
The three R sis Ekata, Dvita and Trita stand on one leg for four thousand
years Tike pieces of wood’ ( kasthabhuta ; MBh 12.323.20) in order to see
Narayana.
Opposition against the use of the powers arising from asceticism is
also found in the philosophic portions of the MBh. These portions fre-
quently speak of Yoga, which is considered to give rise to supernatural
powers. However, “he who having passed beyond the supernatural pow-
ers of Yoga, leaves them behind, is released”.165 These powers are [90]
described as “mastery over [the gross elements] earth, air, ether, water,
and fire, and of the I-faculty” (12.228.14) or “mastery of the unmanifest
( avyakta )” (15). Elsewhere we read: “The Yoga-follower, having
attained power, can create many thousands of selves (i.e., may make
himself many-thousand fold), and may roam the earth in all these
(guises)” (12.289.26).
The real aim of Yoga, in these passages, is different from these su-
pernatural powers: “As an archer that is attentive and concentrated hits
the target, so the perfectly disciplined ( yukta ) yogin attains liberation
165. MBh 12.228.37cd: yogaisvaryam atikranto yo ’tikramati mucyate. Here and in
what follows I make use of Edgerton’s (1965) translation.
79
( moksa ), without a doubt” (12.289.31). This same chapter of the MBh
explains that Yoga consists in disciplining the self so that it is motionless
(33), remaining motionless (38). Exercises in concentration (samadhi)
and fixation ( dharana) are obviously means to attain this aim.
There is no need to multiply citations, for the nature of epic Yoga is
already well-known. Nor is it necessary to analyse the ‘philosophies’
presented in the MBh - often referred to as Sankhya - which share the
idea of a motionless self; they have to, because these ‘philosophies’
constitute the knowledge which is deemed to lead to liberation.166
We must address the question whether the two forms of asceticism
which we have come to distinguish - Vedic and non-Vedic - are referred
to by the two terms tapas and yoga respectively. A priori there is much
that seems to support this. The literal meaning of tapas ‘heat’ fits well in
the Vedic sacrificial context. Yoga, on the other hand, is frequently used
in combination with Samkhya; both terms refer to methods that lead to
liberation.167
[91] It must not, however, be overlooked that both the terms tapas
and yoga are used in connection with both Vedic and non-Vedic asceti-
cism. We have also seen that supernatural powers are ascribed to the
practice of Yoga. All this can, of course, be easily explained on the
assumption that the two forms of asceticism influenced each other and
borrowed each other’s terminology. This may very well be the correct
explanation, yet I know of no evidence which would definitely prove the
original dichotomy between tapas and yoga. Their original connection
with only Vedic and non-Vedic asceticism respectively remains therefore
an attractive, but unproven, hypothesis.
To conclude this chapter I would like to draw attention to an episode
in the MBh where explicit Vedic elements appear to have been added to
166. See Edgerton, 1965: 35 f.; Bronkhorst, 1986: 51 f.
167. See Hara, 1979: 517, cited in n. 2 above; and Hopkins, 1901: 367 f.
80
a story which was originally without them; this is the episode of
Duhsanta and Sakuntala (1.64 f.). Duhsanta chances upon the hermitage
where Sakuntala lives. He sees Brahmins engaged in Vedic rites
(1.64.16-17, 30, 38, 40) and hears the sound of Vedic recitation (20-22,
31). In spite of this, he then discovers that the hermitage is empty, and
shouts: “Who is here?” ( ka iha; 1.65.2). The preceding description of
numerous men engaged in Vedic rites and recitation appears to be an
addition to the story, for the Vedic element does not recur in it.168
168. On the origin of the Epic Sakuntala story, see Insler, 1991, esp. p. 123 f.
81
PART IV
GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
82
Chapter 12. Concluding observations
The preceding chapters have shown that early India knew ascetic
practices in two different religious contexts. On the one hand there were
the non-Vedic religious currents which encompassed, and gave rise to,
Jainism and other ‘sramanic’ beliefs and practices, and which shared a
conviction in rebirth as a result of one’s actions, and sought ways to stop
this. On the other hand there was Vedic religion which, for reasons of its
own, required ascetic restrictions in connection with the execution of the
sacrifice. The non-Vedic search for liberation occasioned the presence of
life-long ascetics and wanderers more or less as a matter of course. The
Vedic restrictions, normally confined to the duration of a sacrifice,
inspired some to make of them a way of life, and were in any case
believed to lead the practitioner to the same aims as those which others
tried to reach by performing sacrifices. This led to the existence, side by
side, of essentially two different types of ascetics in ancient India, often
called Sramanas and Brahmins respectively. Both among the Sramanas
and among the Brahmins a further twofold distinction can be observed.
Early sources, including Megasthenes, confirm these distinctions. The
differences between the two main groups of ascetics were more than
superficial; they concerned their aims, and consequently also their
behaviour.
No doubt aided by popular opinion, which could not always [93]
distinguish between the two, both kinds of asceticism became more and
more blurred, and characteristics of the one came to be ascribed to the
other, and vice versa. The final result of this process is the classical
doctrine of the four asrainas, in which all distinctions have become
blended, or rather added on to each other. If we had no other evidence
than this classical doctrine to go by, the double origin of Indian
asceticism would remain hidden from us.
83
Which is the exact position of Buddhism within the scheme
elaborated in the preceding pages? Buddhism plays virtually no role in
the present book. Buddhist texts were used, to be sure, but only in order
to obtain information about non-Buddhist ascetics, primarily Brahmins.
Buddhism could be left out precisely because it plays practically no role
in the developments here studied. It is of course clear that early
Buddhism had links with non-Vedic asceticism. Indeed, the Buddha
himself is frequently referred to as a Sramana. But early Buddhism
distinguished itself clearly from the other forms of non-Vedic asceticism,
and its aims and methods should not be confused with the latter. Some
authors believe that what seem to be distinctive features of early
Buddhism must be reinterpreted so as to agree better with what we know
of the other religions of its day.169 This approach, which tells the texts
what they should contain, rather than trying to find out what they
actually have to say, must of course be discarded as unacceptable.
It seems, then, that early Buddhism, in spite of the efforts of some
[94] modern scholars to obfuscate this, was in fact markedly different
from the other religious movements that existed in its day. It shared, to
be sure, many of the ideas (rebirth determined by one’s actions) and
ideals (reaching freedom from rebirth) with the non-Vedic current which
we have identified, yet appears to have introduced an altogether different
method to reach this goal. Earliest Buddhism as we know it from the
texts does not preach immobility of body and mind, nor does it search for
the true, i.e. inactive, nature of the soul. It is true that Buddhism, which
thus took a direction of its own, soon came to adopt certain practices
which it had initially abandoned. And typically Buddhist practices found
their way back into the non-Buddhist movements, thus contributing to
169. See, e.g., Paul Mus’s (1935: 1: *41) remark: “Mais alors le bouddhisme initial se
trouvant separe des superstitions populaires et des pratiques cultuelles les plus ac-
tives a l’epoque oil il fut formule, et les acquisitions successives etant reputees he-
terogenes, l’histoire de cette religion ne sera plus constitute que d 'exceptions et de
renoncements.’" Mus offers, of course, a way ‘pour echapper a ces anomalies’.
84
the checkered image of asceticism in classical India. Since these
developments and mutual influences have been studied elsewhere,170
they will not be discussed in further detail here.
By way of conclusion it may be useful to emphasize once more that
the description of Indian asceticism in its historical development
presented in this book is, and can be, no more than a broad outline of this
development. It would be a truism to add that the historical reality that
hides behind the scheme presented was without a shadow of a doubt
richer and more varied than this description may suggest. This does not,
however, detract from whatever value it may have. Broad outlines have
their use, and, if correct, can constitute major advances in our
understanding. We all know that the earth is no sphere; yet the discovery
that the earth is almost spherical was, in its time, a significant step ahead.
Insisting that the shape of the earth is too complicated to describe cannot
compare to it in informative value.
17°. See Bronkhorst, 1986. (Added in the 2nd edition:) See also the Preface to the sec-
ond edition of that book, and Bronkhorst, 1995.
85
Bibliography
Ahirbudhnya Samhita. Edited by Pt. M.D. Ramanujacharya, under the
supervision of F. Otto Schrader; revised by Pt. V. Krishnamacharya.
2 vols. Madras: The Adyar Library and Research Centre. Second
edition 1966. (Adyar Library Series, 4.)
Apastamba Dharma Sutra. Apastambryadharmasutram, edited by George
Buhler. Third edition. Poona: Bhandarkar O.R. Institute. 1932.
(Bombay Sanskrit Series, 44 and 50.)
Arthasastra. The Kautilrya Arthasastra. Part I: edition; part II: translation;
part III: study. By R.P. Kangle. Reprint. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
1986.
Aruni Upanisad = Schrader, 1912: 3-12.
Asvaghosa: Buddhacarita. Edited and translated by E.H. Johnston. Re-
print: Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. 1978.
Bakker, Hans (1989): De Leer van de Wind. Een natuurfilosofie uit de
Upanisaden. Ingeleid, vertaald en geannoteerd. Kampen: Kok
Agora.
Bareau, Andre (1963): Recherches surla biographie du Buddha dans les
Sutrapitaka et les Vinayapitaka anciens: de la quete de 1’eveil a la
conversion de Sariputra et de Maudgalyayana. Paris: Ecole
Francaisc d’Extreme-Orient. (Publications de l’EFEO, 53.)
Basham, A.L. (1989): The Origins and Development of Classical Hin-
duism. Edited and annotated by Kenneth G. Zysk. Boston: Beacon
Press.
Baudhayana Dharma Sutra. The Baudhayanadharmasastra, edited by E.
Hultzsch. Leipzig 1884. Genehmigter Nachdruck: Kraus Reprint,
Nendeln, Liechtenstein. 1966. (Abhandlungen fur die Kunde des
Morgenlandes, VIII. Band, No. 4.)
[96] Bedekar, V.M. (1964): “The place of japa in the
86
Moksadharmaparvan (MB. XII 189-193) and the Yoga-Sutras: a
comparative study.” Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research
Instituted (1963), 63-74.
Biai'dcau, Madeleine (1964): Theorie de la connaissance et philosophic
de la parole dans le brahmanisme classique. Paris - La Haye:
Mouton.
Biai'dcau, Madeleine (1976): “Le sacrifice dans l’hindouisme.” In: Le
sacrifice dans l’lnde ancienne, by Madeleine Biardeau and Charles
Malamoud. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. (Bibliotheque de
l’Ecole des Hautes Etudes, Section des Sciences Religieuses, Vol.
LXXIX.) Pp. 7-154.
Biardeau, Madeleine (1981): L’hindouisme. Anthropologie d’une
civilisa-tion. Paris: Flammarion.
Bock, Andreas (1984): Der Sagara-Gangavatarana-Mythus in der episch
-puranischen Literatur. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner. (Alt- und Neu-Indi-
sche Studien, 27.)
Bodewitz, H.W. (1973): Jaiminiya Brahmana I, 1-65. Translation and
commentary, with a study Agnihotra and Pranagnihotra. Leiden:
Brill.
Bohtlingk, Otto (1889): Khandogjopanishad. Kritisch herausgegeben und
iibersetzt. Leipzig: H. Haessel.
Boyer, A.-M. (1901): “Etude sur l’origine de la doctrine du samsara.”
Journal Asiatique, Neuvieme Serie, 18, pp. 451-499.
Brhadaranyaka Upanisad = Limaye and Vadekar, 1958: 174-282.
Brockington, J. L. (1981): The Sacred Thread. Hinduism in its continuity
and diversity. Edinburgh University Press. 1989.
Bronkhorst, Johannes (1983): “Godin Samkhya.” Wiener Zeitschrift fur
die Kunde Siidasiens 27, 149- 1 64.
Bronkhorst, Johannes (1985): “Patanjali and the Yoga sutras.” Studien
zur Indologie und Iranistik 10 (1984), 191-212.
87
[97] Bronkhorst, Johannes (1986): The Two Traditions oT Meditation in
Ancient India. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag Wiesbaden. (Alt- und
Neu-Indische Studien, 28.) A new edition has been published by
Mo-tilal Banarsidass, Delhi, 1993.
Bronkhorst, Johannes (1989): “L’indianisme et les prejuges
occidentaux.” Etudes de Lettres (Revue de la Faculte des Lettres,
Universite de Lau-sanne) 1989, 2, 119-136.
Bronkhorst, Johannes (1991): “Panini and the nominal sentence.” Annals
oT the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 7 1 (1990), 301-304.
Bronkhorst, Johannes (1995): “The Buddha and the Jainas reconsidered.”
Asiatische Studien / Etudes Asiatiques 49(2), 333-350.
Buhler, Georg (tr.)(1879): The Sacred Laws of the Aryas as Taught in
the Schools of Apastamba, Gautama, Vasishtha and Baudhayana.
Part I: Apastamba and Gautama. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. 1986.
(Sacred Books of the East, 2.)
Bidder, Georg (tr.)(1882): The Sacred Laws of the Aryas as Taught in
the Schools of Apastamba, Gautama, Vasishtha and Baudhayana.
Part II: Vasishtha and Baudhayana. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
1984. (Sacred Books of the East, 14.)
Burkert, Walter (1985): Greek Religion. Archaic and Classical.
Translated by John Raffan. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. 1990.
Butzenberger, Klaus (1996): “Ancient Indian conceptions on man’s
desti-ny after death. The beginnings and the early development of
the doc-trine of transmigration. I.” Berliner Indologische Studien 9,
55-118.
Caland, W. (tr.)(1929): Vaikhanasasmartasutram. The domestic rules and
sacred laws of the Vaikhanasa school belonging to the Black Yajur-
veda. Calcutta: Asiatic Society of Bengal.
Caland, W., and Henry, V. (1906-07): LAgnistoma: Description com-
plete de la forme normale du sacrifice de soma dans le culte
vedique. 2 tomes. Paris: Ernest Leroux.
88
Catusparisat Sutra. 1) Edition: Das Catusparisatsutra, eine kanonische
Lehrschrift iiber die Begriindung der buddhistischen Gemeinde.
Text in Sanskrit und Tibetisch, verglichen mit dem Pali nebst einer
Uber-setzung der chinesischen Entsprechung im Vinaya der Mula-
Sarvasti-vadins. Auf Grund von Turfan-Handschriften
herausgegeben und be-arbeitet von Ernst Waldschmidt. Teil II.
Textbearbeitung. Berlin 1962. (Abhandlungen der deutschen
Akademie der [98] Wissenschaften zu Berlin. Klasse fur Sprachen,
Literatur und Kunst, Jahrgang 1960, Nr. 1.) 2) Translation: The
Sutra on the Foundation of the Buddhist Or-der, translated by Ria
Kloppenborg. Leiden: E.J. Brill. 1973.
Chandogya Upanisad = Limaye and Vadekar, 1958: 68-173
Chandra, Pratap (1971): “Was early Buddhism influenced by the Upani-
sads?” Philosophy East and West 2 1 , 317-324.
Collins, Steven (1982): Selfless Persons. Imagery and thought in Thera-
vada Buddhism. Cambridge University Press.
Cone, Margaret, and Gombrich, Richard F. (1977): The Perfect Generos-
ity of Prince Vessantara: a Buddhist epic. Oxford University Press.
Deleu, Jozef (1966): “Nirayavaliyasuyakkhandha - Uvanga’s 8-12 van de
jaina Canon.” Orientalia Gandensia 3, 77-150. An English trans-
lation by J.W. de Jong and Royce Wiles has now been published:
Nirayavaliyasuyakkhandha: Uvanga’s 8-12 of the Jain Canon. To-
kyo: The Chuo/ Academic Research Institute. 1996. (Philologica
Asia-tica, Monograph Series 10.)
Deleu, Jozef (1970): Viyahapannatti (Bhagaval). The Fifth Anga of the
Jaina Canon. Introduction, critical analysis, commentary & indexes.
Brugge: De Tempel.
Deshpande, Madhav M. (1990): “Changing conceptions of the Veda:
from speech-acts to magical sounds.” Adyar Library Bulletin 54, 1-
41.
Deussen, Paul (tr.)(1887): Die Sutra’s des Vedanta. Leipzig: F.A. Brock-
haus. Reprint Georg Olms Verlag, Hildesheim - New York, 1982.
89
Deussen, Paul (1906): The Philosophy of the Upanishads. Authorized
English translation by A. S. Geden. New York: Dover. 1966.
Deussen, Paul (1909): “Asrama.” In: Encyclopedia of Religion and
Ethics II (ed. James Hastings). Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark. Pp. 128-
131.
Doniger, Wendy, with Smith, Brian K. (1991): The Laws ofManu. Pen-
guin Books.
During Caspers, E.C.L. (1985): “Magic hunting practices in Harappan
times.” South Asian Archaeology 1985 (Denmark), 227-236.
[99] Dutt, Sukumar (1924): Early Buddhist Monachism { 600 B.C. -100
B.C. ). London: Kegan Paul.
Edgerton, Franklin (1929): “The Upanisads: what do they seek, and
why?” Journal of the American Oriental Society 49, 97-121.
Edgerton, Franklin (1965): The Beginnings of Indian Philosophy. Select-
ions from the Rig Veda, Atharva Veda, Upanisads, and
Mahabharata, translated from the Sanskrit with an introduction,
notes and glossarial index. London: George Allen & Unwin.
Eggeling, Julius (tr.)(1882-1900): The Satapatha-Brahmana, according to
the Text of the Madhyandina School. Five volumes. Reprint. Delhi-
Patna- Varanasi: Motilal Banasidass. 1966. (Sacred Books of the
East, vol. XII, XXVI, XLI, XLIII, XLIV.)
Eggers, Wilhelm (1929): Das Dharmasutra der Vaikhanasas. Nebst einer
Einleitung iiber den brahmanischen Waldeinsiedler-Orden und die
Vaikhanasa-Sekte. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
Eliade, Mircea (1969): Yoga: Immortality and Freedom. Translated from
the French by Willard R. Trask. Second Edition. Princeton
University Press.
Falk, Harry (1986): Bruderschaft und Wiirfelspiel. Untersuchungen zur
Entwicklungsgeschichte des vedischen Opfers. Freiburg: Hedwig
Falk.
Farquhar, J.N. (1920): An Outline of the Religious Literature of India.
90
Reprint. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. 1967.
Fausbpll, V. (ed.)(1877-1896): The Jataka, together with its
Commentary. 6 vols. Reprint: London: Pali Text Society. 1962-
1964.
Filliozat, Jean (1937): Etude de demonologie indienne. Le Kumaratantra
de Ravana, et les textes paralleles indiens, tibetains, chinois,
cambod-giens et arabes. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale. (Cahiers de la
Societe Asiatique, Premiere Serie, IV.)
[100] Fleet, John Faithfull (1970): Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum, vol
III: Inscriptions of the early Gupta kings and their successors. Third
revised edition. Varanasi: Indological Book House.
Forsyth, Neil (1987): The Old Enemy. Satan and the combat myth.
Prince-ton University Press. Princeton Paperback. 1989.
Franke, R. Otto (tr.)( 19 13): DIghanikaya. Das Buch der langen Texte des
buddhistischen Kanons in Auswahl iibersetzt. Gottingen: Vanden-
hoeck & Ruprecht.
Frauwallner, Erich (1953): Geschichte der indischen Philosophic. I.
Band. Salzburg: Otto Muller.
Gampert, Wilhelm (1939): Die Siihnezeremonien in der altindischen
Rechtsliteratur. Prag: Orientalisches Institut. (Monografie Archivu
Orientalmho, 6.)
Garbe, Richard (1903): Die Weisheit des Brahmanen oder des Kriegers?
In: Beitrage zur indischen Kulturgeschichte. Berlin: Paetel. Pp. 1-36.
Gautama Dharma Sutra. Gautamapranitadharmasutrani, edited, with Ha-
radatta’s Mitaksara, by Narahari Ta^ekara. Poona: Anandasrama.
1959. (Anandasramasamskrtagranthavali, 61.)
Gombrich, Richard (1992): “The Buddha’s book of Genesis?” Indo-Iran-
ian Journal 35, 159-178.
Gonda, J. (1965): Change and Continuity in Indian Religion. The Hague:
Mouton.
91
Gonda, Jan (1977): The Ritual Sutras. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz. (A
History of Indian Literature I, 2.)
Goudriaan, T. (1977): “Kadga-Ravana and his worship in Balinese and
Indian Tantric sources.” Wiener Zeitschrift fur die Kunde Siidasiens
21, 143-169.
Goudriaan, Teun (1981): “Hindu Tantric Literature in Sanskrit.” = Gou-
driaan and Gupta, 1981: 1-172.
[101] Goudriaan, Teun, and Gupta, Sanjukta (1981): Hindu Tantric and
Sakta Literature. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz. (A History of Indi-
an Literature II, 2.)
Haberlandt, Michael (1885): “Ueber den dritten agrama der Inder.” Mit-
theilungen der Anthropologischen Gesellschaft in Wien 15 (N.F. 5),
[10]-[12],
Hacker, Paul (1959): Prahlada. Werden und Wandel einer Idealgestalt.
Teil I. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner. (Akademie der Wissenschaften
und der Literatur. Abhandlungen der Geistes- und Sozialwissen-
schaft-lichen Klasse. Jhrg. 1959, Nr. 9.)
Hacker, Paul (1978): “‘Topos’ und chresis. Ein Beitrag zum Gedanken-
austausch zwischen den Geisteswissenschaften.” Kleine Schriften,
ed. by Lambert Schmithausen. Wiesbaden. Pp. 338-359.
Halbfass, Wilhelm (1991a): Tradition and Reflection. Explorations in In-
dian thought. State University of New York Press.
Halbfass, Wilhelm (1991b): “Early Indian references to the Greeks and
the first Western references to Buddhism.” In: The Dating of the
Histori-cal Buddha /Die Datierung des historischen Buddha. Part I.
Ed. Heinz Bechert. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. Pp. 197-
208.
Hara, Minoru (1975): “Indra and tapas.” Adyar Library Bulletin 39, 129-
160.
Hara, Minoru (1979): Koten Indo no Kugyo (Asceticism in Classical In-
dia). Tokyo.
92
Harvey, Peter (1990): An Introduction to Buddhism. Teachings, history
and practices. Cambridge University Press.
Hauer, J.W. (1922): Die Anfange der Yogapraxis im alten Indien. Stutt-
gart: W. Kohlhammer.
Heesterman, J.C. (1964): “Brahmin, ritual, and renouncer.” Wiener Zeit-
schrift fiir die Kunde Slid- und Ostasiens 8, 1-31. Repr.:
Heesterman, 1985: 26-44.
[102] Heesterman, J.C. (1982): “Householder and wanderer.” In: Way of
Life. King, Householder, Renouncer. Essays in honour of Louis Du-
mont. Edited by T.N. Madan. Paris: Editions de la Maison des
Sciences de l’Homme.
Heesterman, J.C. (1985): The Inner Conflict of Tradition. Essays in In-
dian ritual, kingship, and society. University of Chicago Press.
Hiniiber, Oskar v. (1989): Der Beginn der Schrift und friihe
Schriftlichkeit in Indien. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner. (Akademie der
Wissenschaften und der Literatur, Abhandlungen der Geistes- und
Sozialwissenschaft-lichen Klasse, Jhrg. 1989 Nr. 11.)
Hiniiber, Oskar v. (1991): “Linguistic considerations on the date of the
Buddha.” In: The Dating of the Historical Buddha /Die Datierung
des historischen Buddha. Part I. Ed. Heinz Bechert. Gottingen: Van-
denhoeck & Ruprecht. Pp. 183-193.
Hopkins, E. Washburn (1901): “Yoga-technique in the great epic.” Jour-
nal of the American Oriental Society 22, 333-379.
Horner, I.B. (tr.)(1954): The Middle Length Sayings (Majjhima-Nikaya)
Vol. I. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. (Pali Text Society Trans-
lation Series, No. 29.) Second impression 1976.
Horsch, Paul (1966): Die vedische Gatha- und Sloka-Literatur. Bern:
Francke Verlag.
Horsch, Paul (1971): “Vorstufen der indischen Seelenwanderungslehre.”
Asiatische Studien / Etudes Asiatiques 25, 99-157.
Hume, Robert Ernest (tr.)(1931): The Thirteen Principal Upanishads.
93
Second edition, revised. Oxford University Press. 1975.
Insler, Stanley (1991): “The shattered head split and the Epic tale of Sa-
kuntala.” Bulletin d Etudes Indicnncs 7-8 (1989-1990), 97-139.
Jabala Upanisad= Schrader, 1912: 59-72.
Jacobi, Hermann (tr.)(1884): Jaina Sutras. Part I: The Acaraiiga Sutra,
the Kalpa Sutra. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. 1980. (Sacred Books of
the East, vol. 22.)
[103] Jain, J.Ch. (1984): Life in Ancient India as Depicted in the Jain
Canon and Commentaries: 6th century BC to 1 7th century AD. Sec-
ond rev. and enl. edition. New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal.
Jaini, P.S. (1970): “Sramanas: their conflict with brahmanical society.”
In: Chapters in Indian Civilisation, Vol. I. Edited by Joseph W.
Elder. Dubuque (Iowa): Kendall Hunt. Pp. 41-81.
Jaini, Padmanabh S. (1979): The Jaina Path of Purification. Delhi:
Motilal Banarsidass.
Jha, Ganganatha (tr.)(1933): Sabam-Bhasya. 3 vol. Baroda: Oriental
Insti-tute. 1973-74.
Kaelber, Walter O. (1989): Tapia Marga. Asceticism and initiation in
Ve-dic India. State University of New York Press.
Kane, Pandurang Vaman: History of Dharmasastra. Vol. I, revised and
enlarged, part 1, 1968; part 2, 1975. Vol. II, second edition, 2 parts,
1974. Vol. Ill, second edition, 1973. Vol. IV, second edition, 1973.
Vol. V, second edition, part 1, 1974; part 2, 1977. Poona:
Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute.
Kangle, R.P. (1986): The Kautiliya Arthasastra. 3 parts. See under Artha-
sastra.
Karttunen, Klaus (1989): India in Early Greek Literature. Helsinki: Fin-
nish Oriental Society. (Studia Orientalia, 65.)
Kathasruti = Schrader, 1912: 31-42.
Katha Upanisad= Limaye and Vadekar, 1958: 11-27.
94
Keith, Arthur Berriedale (1925): The Religion and Philosophy of the
Veda and Upanishads. 2 volumes. Second Indian reprint. Delhi:
Motilal Banarsidass. 1976.
Kern, H. (1896): Manual of Indian Buddhism. Reprint. Varanasi - Delhi:
Indological Book House. 1972.
Kloppenborg, Ria (1990): “The Buddha’s redefinition of tapas (ascetic
practice).” Buddhist Studies Review 7 , 49-73.
[104] Knipe, David M. (1975): In the Image of Fire. Vedic experiences
of heat. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
Lalwani, K.C. (1985): Bhagavati Sutra. Vol. IV (Satakas 9-11). Prakrit
text with English translation. Calcutta: Jain Bhawan.
Lamotte, Etienne (1958): Histone du bouddhisme indien, des origines a
l’ere Saka. Reimpr. 1967. Louvain: Institut Orientaliste.
(Bibliotheque du Museon, 43.)
Leumann, Ernst (1883): Das Aupapatika Sutra, erstes Upanga derJaina.
I. Theil. Einleitung, Text und Glossar. Nachdruck: Kraus Reprint,
Nendeln, Liechtenstein. 1966.
Levi, Sylvain (1898): La doctrine du sacrifice dans les Brahmanas. Paris:
Ernest Leroux.
Limaye, V.P., and Vadekar, R.D. (ed.)(1958): Eighteen Principal Upani-
sads. Vol. I. (Upanisadic Text with Parallels from extant Vedic
Liter-ature, Exegetical and Grammatical Notes.) Poona: Vaidika
Samsodha-na Mandala.
Lindner, Bruno (1878): Die DIksha, oder Weihe fur das Somaopfer.
Leip-zig: Poschel & Trepte.
Lingat, Robert (1967): Les sources du droit dans le systeme traditionnel
de l’Inde. Paris - La Haye: Mouton.
Malamoud, Charles (1976): “Terminer le sacrifice.” In: Le sacrifice dans
l’Inde ancienne, by Madeleine Biardeau and Charles Malamoud.
Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. (Bibliotheque de l’Ecole des
Hautes Etudes, Section des Sciences Religieuses, Vol. LXXIX.) Pp.
95
155-204.
Malamoud, Charles (1977): Le svadhyaya, recitation personnelle du
Veda. Taittirlya-Aranyaka II. Texte traduit et commente. Paris: E.
de Boc-card. (Publications de l’lnstitut de Civilisation Indiennes,
42.)
Malamoud, Charles (1989): Cuire le inonde: rite et pensee dans l’lnde
an-cienne. Paris: Editions la Decouverte.
[105] Manava Srauta Sutra. Edited by Jeannette M. van Gelder. Reprint:
Sri Satguru Publications, Delhi. 1985.
Marshall, John, et al. (1931): Mohenjo-daro and the Indus Culture. Lon-
don. 3 vols.
McEvilley, Thomas (1981): “An archaeology of yoga.” RES 1, 44-77.
McCrindle, J.W. (1877): Ancient India as described by Megasthenes and
Arrian. Reprinted in: McCrindle ’s Ancient India, edited by
Ramchan-dra Jain. New Delhi: Today & Tomorrow’s Printers &
Publishers. 1972.
Mehta, Ratilal (1937): “Asceticism in pre-Buddhist days.” Indian Culture
3, 571-584.
Meisig, Konrad (1988): Das Sutra von den vier Standen. Das Agahha-
Sutta im Licht seiner chinesischen Parallelen. Wiesbaden: Otto Har-
rassowitz. (Freiburger Beitrage zur Indologie, 20.)
Mesquita, R. (1991): Review of Nakamura, 1983. Wiener Zeitschrift fur
die Kunde Siidasiens 35, 213-217.
Muller, F.M. (1879): Origine et developpement de la religion, etudies a
la lumiere des religions de l’lnde. (Transl. of Lectures on the Origin
and Growth of Religion, as illustrated by the Religions of India,
Hib-bert Lectures, 1878.) Paris: C. Reinwald.
Mundaka Upanisad = Limaye and Vadekar, 1958: 38-47.
Mus, Paul (1935): Barabudur. Esquisse d’une histoire du bouddhisme
fondee surla critique archeologique des textes. 2 vols. Hanoi.
96
Nakamura, Hajime (1983): A History of Early Vedanta Philosophy. Part
One. Translated into English by Trevor Leggett e.a. Delhi: Motilal
Ba-narsidass. (Religions of Asia Series, 1.)
Nyayabhasya. Srrmad-Vatsyayanamunikrtabhasya-SrrVisvanathabhatta-
caryakrtavrttisametani Srr-Gautamamunipranrta-Nyayasutrani. Ed.
by Nagesa Digambara Sastri Josr. Poona: Anandasrama. 1922.
O’ Flaherty, Wendy Doniger (1973): Siva, the Erotic Ascetic. Oxford
Uni-versity Press paperback, 1981.
[106] O’Flaherty, Wendy Doniger (1980): Women, Androgynes, and
Other Mythological Beasts. Chicago and London: University of Chi-
cago Press.
Oldenberg, Hermann (1917): Die Religion des Veda. Zweite Auflage.
Re-print: Magnus- Verlag, Stuttgart.
Olivelle, Patrick (1974): “The notion of asrama in the Dharmasutras.”
Wiener Zeitschrift fur die Kunde Siidasiens 18, 27-35.
Olivelle, Patrick (1974a): The Origin and the Early Development of Bud-
dhist Monachism. Colombo: Gunasena.
Olivelle, Patrick (1981): “Contributions to the semantic history of sam-
nyasa.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 101, 265-274.
Olivelle, Patrick (1984): “Renouncer and renunciation in the Dharmasas-
tras.” In: Studies in Dharmasastra, ed. by Richard W. Lariviere. Cal-
cutta: Firma KLM. Pp. 81-152.
Olivelle, Patrick (1992): Samnyasa Upanisads. Hindu scriptures on asce-
ticism and renunciation. Translated with introduction and notes. Ox-
ford University Press.
Olivelle, Patrick (1993): The Asrama System. The history and hermeneu-
tics of a religious institution. Oxford University Press.
Olivelle, Patrick (1995): Rules and Regulations of Brahmanical Ascetic-
ism. Yatidharmasamuccaya of Yadava Prakasa. Edited and translat-
ed. State University of New York Press.
97
Padoux, Andre (1987): “Contributions a T etude du mantrasastra, III: Le
japa.” Bulletin de l’Ecole Frangaise d’ Extreme- Orient 76, 117-159.
Pande, Govind Chandra (1974): Studies in the Origins of Buddhism.
Third edition. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. 1983.
Paramahamsaparivrajaka Upanisad= Schrader, 1912: 277-89.
Patanjali: Vyakarana-Mahabhasya. 3 vols. Edited by F. Kielhorn. Third
Edition by K.V. Abhyankar. Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental Research
Institute. 1962-72.
Prasastapada: Padarthadharmasahgraha. The Prasastapada Bhashya with
Commentary Nyayakandali of Sridhara, edited by Vindhyesvari Pra-
sad Dvivedin. Reprint. Delhi: Sri Satguru. 1984.
Rhys Davids, T.W. (tr.)(1899): Dialogues of the Buddha. Part I. London:
The Pali Text Society. Reprint 1977.
[107] Rhys Davids, T.W. and C.A.F. (tr.)(1921): Dialogues of the Bud-
dha. Part III. London: The Pali Text Society. Reprint 1977.
Sahara Bhasya. Edited by Kasmatha Vasudevasastrr Abhyamkara and
Ganesasastrr Josr. Poona: Anandasrama.
Scharfe, Hartmut (1987): “Nomadisches Erbgut in der indischen Tradi-
tion.” Hinduismus und Buddhismus. Festschrift fur Ulrich
Schneider. Ed. Harry Falk. Freiburg: Hedwig Falk. Pp. 300-308.
Scheuer, Jacques (1975): “Siva dans le Mahabharata: l’histoire d’Amba /
Sikhandin.” Purusartha 2, 67-86.
Schmidt, Hanns-Peter (1968): “The origin of ahimsa.” Melanges d’lndia-
nisme a la Memoire de Louis Renou. Paris: E. de Boccard. (Publica-
tions de l’lnstitut de Civilisation Indienne, 28.) Pp. 625-655.
Schneider, Ulrich (1989): Einfiihrung in den Hinduismus. Darmstadt:
Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
Schrader, F. Otto (1910): “Zum Ursprung der Lehre vom Samsara.” Zeit-
schrift der Deutschen Morgenlandischen Gesellschaft 64, 333-335.
Reprint: Kleine Schriften ( Wiesbaden, 1983) pp. 148-150.
98
Schrader, F. Otto (ed.)(1912): The Minor Upanisads. Vol. I: Samnyasa-
Upanisads. Madras: Adyar Library.
Schwanbeck, E.A. (1846): Megasthenis Indica. Bonn. (Reprint: Amster-
dam 1966.)
Shee, Monika (1986): tapas und tapasvin in den erzahlenden Partien des
Mahabharata. Reinbek: Inge Wezler. (Studien zur Indologie und Ira-
nistik, Dissertationen Band 1.)
Siegel, Lee (1991): Net of Magic. Wonders and deceptions in India. Uni-
versity of Chicago Press.
Silburn, Lilian (1955): Instant et cause. Le discontinu dans la pensee phi-
losophique de l’lnde. Paris: J. Vrin.
Skurzak, Ludwik (1948): Etudes sur l’origine de Tascetisme indien.
Wroclaw. (Travaux de la Societe des Sciences et des Lettres de
Wroc-law. Seria A, Nr. 15.)
[108] Sprockhoff, Joachim Friedrich (1976): Samnyasa. Quellenstudien
zur Askese im Hinduismus, I. Untersuchungen iiber die Samnyasa-
Upanisads. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner. (Abhandlungen fur die Kunde
des Morgenlandes, Band XLII, 1.)
Sprockhoff, Joachim Friedrich (1979): “Die Alten im alten Indien: ein
Versuch nach brahmanischen Quellen.” Saeculum 30, 374-433.
Sprockhoff, Joachim Friedrich (1980): “Die feindlichen Toten und der
be-friedende Tote.” In: Leben und Tod in den Religionen: Symbol
und Wirklichkeit. Hrsg. Gunther Stephenson. Darmstadt:
Wissenschaft-liche Buchgesellschaft. Pp. 263-284.
Sprockhoff, Joachim Friedrich (1981): “Aranyaka und Vanaprastha in
der vedischen Literatur.” Wiener Zeitschrift fur die Kunde
Siidasicns 25, 19-90.
Sprockhoff, Joachim Friedrich (1984): “Aranyaka und Vanaprastha in
der vedischen Literatur.” Wiener Zeitschrift fur die Kunde
Siidasiens 28, 5-43.
Sprockhoff, Joachim Friedrich (1987): “Kathasruti und Manavasrauta-
99
sutra: eine Nachlese zur Resignation.” Studien zur Indologie und
Ira-nistik 13/14, 235-257 .
Sprockhoff, Joachim Friedrich (1989): “Versuch einer deutschen
Uberset-zung der Kathasruti und der Katharudra-Upanisad.”
Asiatische Stu-dien /Etudes Asiatiques 43, 137-163.
Sprockhoff, Joachim Friedrich (1991): “Laghu-Samnyasa-Upanisad und
Kundika-Upanisad: Versuch einer deutschen Ubersetzung.” Etudes
Asiatiques / Asiatische Studien 45, 107-131.
Sprockhoff, Joachim Friedrich (1991a): “Aranyaka und Vanaprastha in
der vedischen Literatur.” Wiener Zeitschrift fur die Kunde
Siidasicns 35, 5-46.
Srinivasan, Doris (1984): “Unhinging Siva from the Indus civilization.”
Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society ( 1 984), 77-89.
[109] Staal, Frits (1983): Agni. The vedic ritual of the fire altar. Vol. I.
Berkeley: Asian Humanities Press.
Stutley, Margaret and James (1986): A Dictionary of Hinduism. Its
Myth-ology, Folklore and Development 1500 B.C.-A.D. 1500. New
Delhi: Heritage Publishers.
Sullivan, Bruce M. (1990): Krsna Dvaipayana Vyasa and the Mahabha-
rata: a new interpretation. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
Suyagadamgasutta. Ed. Muni Jambuvijaya. Jaina-Agama-Series No. 2
(2). Bombay: Shri Mahavlra Jaina Vidyalaya. 1978.
Svetasvatara Upanisad= Limaye and Vadekar, 1958: 283-300.
Takakusu, J. (1904): “La Samkhyakarika.” Bulletin de l’Ecole Frangaise
d ’Extreme-Orient 4, 1-65 & 978-1064.
Thanamgasutta. In: Thanamgasuttam and Samavayamgasuttam, ed. Mu-
ni Jambuvijaya. Jaina-Agama-Series No. 3. Bombay: Shri Mahavlra
Jaina Vidyalaya. 1985. Pp. 1-322.
Thibaut, George (tr.)(1904): Vedanta-Sutras. 3 parts. Reprint: Motilal
Ba-narsidass, Delhi, 1971-1973. (Sacred Books of the East 34, 38,
100
48.)
Thieme, Paul (1963): “Agastya und Lopamudra.” Zeitschrift derDeut-
schen Morgenlandischen Gesellschaft 113, 69-79. Reprint: Kleine
Schriften (Wiesbaden, 1984) pp. 202-212.
Thite, Ganesh Umakant (1975): Sacrifice in the Brahmana-Texts. Poona:
University of Poona.
Thomas, Edward J. (1933): The History of Buddhist Thought. London:
Routledge & Kegan Paul. 1971.
Tsuchida, Ryutaro (1996): “Versuch einer Interpretation von Chandogya-
Upanisad 2,23.” Studien zur Indologie und Iranistik 20 (Festschrift
Paul Thieme), 453-484.
Tsuchida, Ryutaro (1996a): “An interpretation of Baudhayana-dharma-
sutra 2, 11, 26.” Toyo Bunka Kenkyu Shokiyo 130, 181-211.
Tsuchida, Ryutaro (1997): “Die Weltentsagung der Iksvaku-Konige.”
Me-moirs of the Institute of Oriental Culture (University of Tokyo)
133, 105-161.
Tull, Herman W. (1989): The Vedic Origins of Karma. Cosmos as man
in ancient Indian myth and ritual. Albany: State University of New
York Press. (SUNY Series in Hindu Studies.)
Vaikhanasa Dharma Sutra. In: Vaikhanasasmartasutram, edited by W.
Caland. Calcutta: Asiatic Society of Bengal. 1927.
van Buitenen, J.A.B. (tr.)(1973, 1975, 1978): The Mahabharata. 3 vol-
umes, covering 5 books, have appeared. The University of Chicago
Press.
[110] Varcnnc, Jean (1960): La Maha Narayana Upanisad. Edition cri-
tique, avec une traduction francaise, une etude, des notes et, en an-
nexe, la Pranagnihotra Upanisad. Publications de l’lnstitut de Civili-
sation Indienne, 11 et 13. Paris: E. de Boccard. 2 vol.
Varenne, Jean (tr.)(1971): Upanishads du Yoga. Gallimard/Unesco.
Vasistha Dharma Sutra. The Vasisth ad h arm asast ram , edited by Alois
101
An-ton Fiihrer. Poona: B.O.R.I. Institute. 1930. (Bombay Sanskrit
and Prakrit Series, 23.)
Viyahapannattisutta. Edited by Pt. Bechardas J. Doshi (for part II
assisted by Pt. Amritlal Mohanlal Bhojak). Bombay: Shri Mahavira
Jaina Vi-dyalaya. 1974-78. 2 parts. (Jaina-Agama-Series No. 4.)
Waixler, A.K. (1980): Indian Buddhism. Second revised edition. Delhi:
Motilal Banarsidass.
Wezler, Albrecht (1978): Die waren ‘Speiseresteesser’ (Skt. vighasasin).
Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner. (Akademie der Wissenschaften und der
Li-teratur, Abhandlungen der geistes- und sozialwissenschaftlichen
Klasse, Jahrgang 1978 Nr. 5.)
Wezler, Albrecht (1979): “Samika und Smgin. Zum Verstandnis einer
as-kesekritischen Erzahlung aus dem Mahabharata.” Wiener
Zeitschrift fur die Kunde Siidasiens 23, 29-62.
Wiltshire, Martin G. (1990): Ascetic Figures before and in Early Bud-
dhism. The emergence of Gautama as the Buddha. Berlin - New
York: Mouton de Gruyter. (Religion and Reason, 30.)
Winternitz, Moriz (1908): Geschichte der indischen Literatur. Band 1:
Einleitung, der Veda, die volkstiimlichen Epen und die Puranas.
Stutt-gart: K.F. Koehler. 1968.
Winternitz, Moriz (1926): “Zur Lehre von den Asramas.” Beitrage zur
Li-teraturwissenschaft und Geistesgeschichte Indiens. Festgabe Her-
mann Jacobi zum 75. Geburtstag. Hrsg. v. Willibald Kirfel. Bonn:
Fritz Klopp. Pp. 215-227.
[Ill] Witzel, Michael (1984): “The earliest form of the idea of rebirth in
India.” Proceedings of the Thirty-First International Congress of
Human Sciences in Asia and North Africa (Tokyo-Kyoto, 31st Au-
gust - 7th September 1983). Edited by YAMAMOTO Tatsuro. Vol. I.
Tokyo: The Toho Gakkai (The Institute of Eastern Culture). Pp.
145-146.
Wolz-Gottwald, Eckard (1990): “Zur Bedeutung des Asketentums fur die
102
Entstehung des Ayurveda.” Journal of the European Ayurvedic
Soci-ety 1,125-126.
Woodward, F.L. (tr.)(1927): The Book of the Kindred Sayings
(Samyutta-Nikaya). Part IV. London: Pali Text Society. Reprint
1972.
Yuktidipika. Edited by Ram Chandra Pandeya. Delhi: Motilal
Banarsidass. 1967.
Zimmer, Heinrich (1879): Altindisches Leben. Die Culturder vedischen
Arier nach den Samhita dargestellt. Nachdruck: Georg Olms,
Hildes-heim - New York. 1973.
Zysk, Kenneth G. (1990): “The Indian ascetic traditions and the origins
of ayurvedic medicine.” Journal of the European Ayurvedic Society
1, 119-124.
Zysk, Kenneth G. (1991): Asceticism and Healing in Ancient India.
Med-icine in the Buddhist Monastery. Delhi: Oxford University
Press.
103
Abbreviations
AB
Aitai'eya Brahmana
AhS
Ahirbudhnya Samhita
AN
Ahguttara Nikaya (PTS edition)
ApDhS
Apastamba Dharmasutra, ed. Buhler
AV
Atharva Veda
BAU
Brhadaranyaka Upanisad
BDhS
Baudhayana Dharma Sutra
ChU
Chandogya Upanisad
CPS
Catusparisat Sutra
DN
DIgha Nikaya (PTS edition)
GDhS
Gautama Dharma Sutra
Ja
Jataka (= Fausbpll, 1877-1896)
KU
Katha Upanisad
MBh
Mahabharata (crit. ed.)
MN
Majjhima Nikaya (PTS edition)
MSS
Manava Srauta Sutra
PTS
Pali Text Society
Pupph
Pupphiyao (= Deleu, 1966: 117-124)
SB
Satapatha Brahmana, Madhyandina version
SN
Sarny utta Nikaya (PTS edition)
Sn
Suttanipata (PTS edition)
sss
Sahkhayana Srauta Sutra
Suy
Suyagadamgasutta
[113]SvetUp
Svetasvatara Upanisad
T.
Taisho ed. of Buddhist Tripitaka in Chinese
Than
Thanamgasutta
104
Uvav
Uvavaiya (see Leumann, 1883)
VasDhS
Vasistha Dharma Sutra
VDhS
Vaikhanasa Dharma Sutra
Vin
Vinaya (PTS edition)
Viy
Viyahapannattisutta
The Two Sources Of Indian Asceticism
Anónimo