Bihar and Eastern Uttar Pradesh (early history)
by Prakash Narayan | 2011 | 63,517 words
This study deals with the history of Bihar and Eastern Uttar Pradesh (Northern India) taking into account the history and philosophy of Buddhism. Since the sixth century B.C. many developments took place in these regions, in terms of society, economic life, religion and arts and crafts....
Samanas and Brahmanas
The central feature of Hindu dharma was the theory of ashramas which was totally opposed by the samanas or paribbajakas. There are certain points related to the term shrama na (Sanskrit for Pali samanas) which need to be noted. The word first appears in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad[1] and is used for one engaged in a religious endeavour but significantly, in the latter Upanishads and the Dharamsutras, where the ashramas theory finds mention, the term is important by its absence. It was used as a generic term for titthiyas by the monopoly of Buddhists and Jainas, after the Buddha. In the same way, the term sannyasin was never used by Buddhists and Jainas[2] and was confined only to the Brahmanical and semi-Brahmanical tradition. Many references in Pali literature reveal that samanas saw themselves in opposition to brahmanas. Brahmanas were not in favour of Buddhist monks and the latter was criticized for having renounced social life and duties prematurely; a brahmana householder at Rajagaha[3] once abused the Buddha for this. Brahmanical literature in the form of the Upanisads and Dharmasutras regularly refer to the grihastha ashrama as the best ashrama.[4]
However, at the time of the Buddha, the brahmana was seen as a householder by the brahmanas themselves as well as by others. An example of this was given by the Anguttara Nikaya in a statement of the brahmana Vassakara, a significant official of Magadha. Vassakara asserted that the brahmanas, proclaimed a man to be great if he possessed four qualities, one of which was skill in the business of being a householder.[5] In the similar way, the brahmana subha, who was on a business visit to savatthi, tells the Buddha that the brahmanas believed that only the householder could accomplish the right path and not the recluse (gahattÌo aradhako hoti, na pabbaja aradhako hoti).[6] Moreover, the example of shrama na-brahmana has taken used by the grammarian Patanjali to illustrate an antagonistic compound (samahara dvanda) and remarks that the opposition of the two was eternal (Yesham cha virodhah shashvatikah), like that of the snake and the mongoose.[7]
The constant feature of the Pali texts is the opposition between the brahmanas on the one hand, and the samanas as typified by the Buddhist bhikkhu on the other. There are many derogatory references to the brahmanas, who are depicted in a variety of negative situations. Their vices include pride, deceit, avairice, and even crimes such as matricide and patricide, beside milder human failings such as gluttony. The real basis of the opposition was that the Brahmanas were an integral part of the social world, they lived like other householders, acquiring wealth and possessions, and led a thoroughly mundane existence which in the view of the Buddhists was an obstruction to the ‘higher life’.[8]
In the opinion of the Buddhists, the greed for material possessions and comfort was the root cause of the brahmana’s fall from the values and norms expected of him. The ritual of the sacrifice was itself related to the brahmanas’ drive for wealth in a graphic description in the sutta Nipata. A group of wealthy but decrepit and old brahmanas of Kosala came to see the Buddha and inquired of him whether brahmanas of the day were engaged in the brahmanas-dhamma of ancient brahmanas. This rendered an opportunity to the Buddha to vent his grievances on the faults of contemporary brahmanas. In his opinion[9], the brahmanas of old were self-restrained and penitent, abandoning the objects of the five senses. They had no cattle, gold, or corn but they possessed the greatest treasure, which was meditation. They collected as alms what was prepared for them and the people showed respect for their austerity. They collected rice, butter, and oil from the people justly and performed sacrifices with them, but they avoided killing cows. Consequently, in addition to this, a change was to be seen among the brahmanas, and this was attributed to their witnessing the prosperity of kings. This aroused great desire concerning wealth and beauty that they saw around them, and this led them to advocate sacrifices such as ashvamedha, purisamedha and vajapeya to the king Okkaha. The King then offered these sacrifices and gave the brahmanas wealth with the inclusion of cows, beds, garments, adorned women, well-made chariots drawn by well-bred horses, and beautiful places filled with corn.[10] The entire narrative is suggestive of the fact that the brahmanas were not able to resist the increasingly materialistic orientation of society. As a result, the simple sacrificial ritual was transformed into an elaborate and cruel one with the involvement of the slaughter of many animals as a means to gain great wealth and possessions for themselves. In Buddhist literature, the brahmanas were known as exploiters.
The Pali texts declare a firm establishment of the brahmanas’ in the social world. In fact, the Pali texts in depicting the picture of the brahmana’s reveal that most brahmanas were firmly established in agriculture.[11] It has not been indicated that they lived on alms. The task of teaching other young brahmanas was pursued by only a few brahmanas but even many of these were well? They possessed additional property away from their homes and were considered to be the major recipients of the brahmadeya lands in Kosala and Magadha.
The paribbajakas wandered around to meet other thinkers and discuss with them but the purpose of wandering of the brahmanas was in connection with their work which was in the nature of business. Bhikkhus or the Buddha met some of these brahmanas because the bhikkhus toured from one place to another. The discussions of the brahmanas when compared to the samanas hardly ever centred on philosophical questions.[12] The brahmanas took up questions with the Buddha related to the pre-eminence of the brahmanas as a social group who deserved the best gifts because of their knowledge of the Vedas.[13] The Brahmanas advocated and performed the system of sacrifice which brought merit to many people[14] but the Buddha’s advocating a path for the bhikkhus would yield gain for only one individual and that’s why the brahmanas censured the Buddha.
Footnotes and references:
[1]:
Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, tr. by F. Max Muller, S.B.E., Vol. XVI, p. 169.
[4]:
[5]:
A.N., II, p. 38.
[6]:
M.N., II, p.38.
[7]:
The Vyakarna of Patanjali, ed. by F. Kielhorn, Vol. I, pp. 474, 476.
[8]:
D.N., I, pp. 208-9. See also Uttaradhyayana, Jaina Sutras, tr. by Hermann Jacobi, S.B.E., Vol. XLV, p. 52.
[9]:
Sutta Nipata, Khuddaka Nikaya, Vol. I, pp. 311-14.
[10]:
Ibid., p. 313.
[11]:
See, for example, the kasibharadvaja sutta of the sutta Nipata (Khuddaka Nikaya, Vol. I, p. 281). Similarly Dhananjani brahmana states that he has no time for practicing diligence (appamato) since he has to look after his wife and children, support his guests (M.N., II, p. 450; M.L.S., II, p. 373).
[12]:
S.N., II, pp. 18-19, 21; S.N., III, pp. 204, 223; M.N., I, pp. 291, 126; M.N., II, p. 173.
[13]:
D.N., I, p.80; M.N., II, p. 404; A.N., I, p. 153.
[14]:
A.N., I, p. 155.