34 Kalivarjya

CHAPTER XXXIV

KALIVARJYA

(ACTIONS FORBIDDEN IN THE KALI AGE. )

It has been stated above (pp. 865-866 ) that one of the several ways in which the conflict between several smṛti texts was got over was to hold some of them as legislating for a bygone age (yugāntara ). For example, when Hārsta allowed upanayana to women, both the Sm. C. (1. 24 ) and Par. M. (1. 2. p. 83 ) hold that the text refers to another kalpa (aeon). In H. of Dh. vol. II. (on pp. 151, 162, 424, 451, 603,612, 620,750,790, 796, 928, 929,934,953, 1005 n, 1201 n) reference has been made to several matters forbidden in the Kali age. It is remarkable in this connection to note that, though the Parāśarasmrti ( in I. 24 ) claims par excellence to lay down the dharmas for the Kali age, several inportant provisions contained in it, viz. the remarriage of a married woman 1730 (Parāsara IV. 30), the variation in the period of impurity due to births and deaths depending on the learning and character of a brāhmaṇa Parāśara II. 5-6), permission for a brāhmaṇa to partake of the food of five classes among sūdras (XI. 21 ) are included among Kalivarjyas by the Adityapurāṇa (as quoted by writers of the 12th and later centuries ). It is necessary, therefore, to investigate into the origin and development of the Yuga theory and of the topic of Kalivarjya.

From the Mahabharata (Santi 59 ), Manu (1. 81 ), Nārada (I. 1-2), Bṭhaspati and the Purāṇas it is clear that they all believed in the existence of an ideally perfect community in the dim past followed by gradual degeneracy and decline in morals, health and lengti of life. But they also believed that a.cycle of decline would be followed in the far distant future

· 1730. Some of the printed editions of Parāśara (IV. 30 ) read ..

ofitar a forea. But the Par. M. on it ( vol. II part 1 p. 53 ) makes it clear that this reading was fabricated by orthodox people and that Madhave at least read it as: afar fattat, as he remarks so FT góra .

886

I Vol.

by another of moral perfection. The only pity is that all works that are extant think that they are in the midst of a very sinful age and there is not a single work which thinks that the era of perfection may dawn in the very near future,

The germ of the theory of progressive deterioration in morals is found even in the Rgveda. In the famous dialogue of Yama and Yami the former exclaims in one place 1731 (Rg. X. 10. 10) ’those later ages are yet to come when sisters would do what is not sister-like’. The word ‘yuga’ occurs at least 33 times in the Rg., but the exact meaning is somewhat doubt ful. In a few places it means yoke’( Rg. X. 60. 8, X. 101. 3 and 4). In several places it appears to stand for a very brief period of time ( e. g. Rg. III. 26. 3). Generally it means ‘a generation’ (as in Rg. I. 92. 11, I. 103, 4, I. 124. 2, II. 2.2, III. 33. 8, V. 52. 4). In Rg. I. 158. 6 ‘dirghatamā māmateyo jujurvān dasame yuge’yniga probably means ‘a period of four or five years ‘, while in Rg. VI. 15. 8, VI. 8. 5, X. 72. %, X, 94. 12, X. 97. 1 it should mean 1732 ’ a long period of time’. In the Atharvaveda VIII. 2. 21 yuga appears to mean a period of several thousand years, two yugas being indicated as longer than 10000 years ( satam tesyutam hāyanān dve yuge tiṇi catvāri krnmah). Here there is a clear reference to four yugas and to the fact that yuga’ meant a very long period of time. What ever be the meaning of the word in each passage, the Rgveda doos not contain the names of all the four well-known yugas viz. Kșta, Tretā, Dvāpara and Kali. The word “Kfta’ when used in the Rgveda appears to mean ’the best throw of dice or of the seeds of vibhitaka in gambling ‘(X. 34. 6, X. 43. 5). In the Atharvaveda VII. 52. %, 5, 6 kpta has the same meaning. Kali is the name of the author of Rg. VIII. 66 and in verse 15

1731. ST ET MT TETET me # : FUTTI #. X. 10. 10. The Nirukta (IV. 20 ) understood this verse in the sense given above

of mit SATTI ofa y la p ura HATAPIHITUT!, Ṛg. 1, 113, 13 and III. 33.8 make it clear that must mean’ future’. $egrier युवास देण्ययो अपेदं व्यावो मघोनी । अथो म्युच्छापूसरों अनुचनजरास्ता चरति स्वधामिः ।।

. I. 113. 13. Here the occurrence and sequence of yo. 39 and Tu leave no doubt about the meaning of the last word,

W32. I sitate gai amar tayforge grir. X. 97. 1. Here what is mcant by fergai is doubtful. The f IX. 28 explains who gm . पुरा, while सापण says कतादिशुमश्यम् . In the: शतपथ VII. 2. 4. 26 विपुणे menas ’three sonsons of spring, rains and autumn’ ($. B, E. vol. 41 pp. 339-340),

DI)

Meaning of Kali and Kyta

887

of that hymn we read “kalayo mā bibhitana’ (O descendants of Kalil do not be afraid ). In Rg. X. 39. 8 the Asvins are said to have rejuvenated Kali who had become old. Vide also Rg. I. 112. 15 ( where Kali is said to have got a wife from Aśving ). But Kali as a throw of dice does not occur in the Rgveda. In the Atharvaveda VII. 114. 1 Kali 1733 means a throw of dice. The words kyta, treta, dvūpara and āskanda occur in the Tai. S. IV. 3. 3, Vāj. S. 30. 181734 and in the Sat. Br. XIII. 6. 2. 9-10 (S. B. E. vol. 44 p: 416). In later literature Kali is also called Tiṣya (as in Bhiṣmaparva 10. 3). In the Tai. Br. III. 4. 16 the word Kali is used 1735 in place of Askanda. In all the above places Kfta and the other three words denote throws in gambling, Kr̥ta being the most lucky and Kali being the most unlucky. In another passage of the Tai. 1736 Br. (1.5.11) we read the four stomas (Trivrt, Pañcadaśa, Saptadasa and Ekavimśa) are Kr̥ta and the five are Kali; therefore the catuscoma (should be performed in the Jyotiṣtoma). This shows that Kșta meant a throw of four or any multiple of four and Kali a throw which when divided by four left one as remainder. The Aitareya Br. employs the words Kļta 1737 and the other three in a metaphorical sense as representing progres. sively more desirable states of human activity, one lying down becomes Kali, when about to leave the bed he becomes Dvāpara, when rising he becomes Tretā, and when he moves about he

1733. GET THE FAIT mg tarastigata TH # Freter CÊ # HY VII. 114. 1.

1734. TOTO Perant argitaas at least T TTAFF *TU HTFUTTE I ATST. H. 30. 18.

1735. कुताय सभाविन घेताया आदिनवदर्श द्वापराय बहिःसदं कलये सभास्थाणुसू। ते. बा. III. 4. 16. For आदिनव vide अधर्व VII. 114. 4 ‘आदिन प्रतिदीदने पतेमास्मी अभिक्षर’ सायण explains ‘आदिनवदर्श मर्यादापी देवनस्य वधार परीक्षकम् । The meanings of these technical expressions in gambling are extremely uncertain,

1736. TATT: FIAT: SATTE I u vur: #: I ARTTUA: 1 2. II. I. 5. 11.

1737. Pas rret part #ferred TTT: I chargeur perfet haut

1738. 7. 33. 3. The pranuar (15. 19) reads ares: yua: gou: and uitgerent wafat. IX. 301-302 seem to be reminiscent of this verso of the 9. T.

……

888

( Vol.

becomes Kr̥ta’. The Sat. Br. V. 4. 4. 6 speaks of Kali 1738 as * abhibhu’ (the vanquisher ) and suggests that Kali ig a throw of five that vanquishes all others. In the Chan, Up. IV, 1, 4 it is said ‘as (in a game 1739 of dice ) all the lower throws are included in the Kr̥ta throw which becomes victorious, so to him (to Raikva ) comes ( the merit of all the good acte that people do’. Here Śhaṅkara explains that Kṛta is a throw of dice having four marks, while other throws that have three, two or one mark are called Trotā, Dvāpara and Kali respectively. The Mundaka Up. I. 2. 1 refers to Tretā 1740. ‘This is the truth; the sacrificial rites which the sages saw in the mantras ( i. e. as presoribed in the hymns of the Rgveda and other vedas) have been performed in many ways in the Tretā! This last word is explained by Saṅkarācārya in two ways, first as referring to the threefold priestly duties (of hots, adhvaryu and udgātr ) which are based on the three Vedas and alternatively as refer ring to the Tretā age. From this resume it appears that even up to the times of the latest period of Vedic literature (i. e. Upaniṣads) the words Kļta, Tretā, Dvāpara and Kali were used in the sense of throws of dice in gambling and that it is very doubtful whether they were used in the sense of different ages of the world. Even in the Mahabharata Kṛta 1741 and Dvāpara are used also in the sense of throws of dice ( vide Virāta 50. 24). In the Gopatha Brāhmaṇa (I. 28 ) there is a reference to the beginning of the Dvāpara age.

Even in the Vedānga Jyotisa1742 (of Rg.) the word yuga is used in the sense of a period of five years (pañcasamvatsaramayar

1738. अधास्मै पशालाम्पाणावावपति । अभिभूरस्येतारते पश्च दिशः कल्पन्तामित्येष वा अपानभिर्यत् कलिरेष हि सानयानभिभवति तस्मादाहाभिभूरसीति । शत. प्रा. V. 4.4.6. It is impossible to say definitely how the game was played. Vide S. B. E, vol, 41 p. 106 for a note on the various explanations.

1739. TUT Grefforitat: tri * Tara Tren 31: Fly in I Urreira IV. I. 4 and 6. TFT explains: putih : मामाको पुतसमये प्रसिद्धश्वतरक स यदा जयति यूते प्रवृसानां तस्मै विजिताय तदर्थमितरे भिवका अधरेयाप्रतावापरकलिनामान: संयन्ति समान्तेऽन्तर्भवन्ति । छान्दोग्य IV, 3. 8 suggests that each die was marked in all with ten dots (4, 3, 2, 1) ‘तरमा उहवारते पा एते पधाग्ये पक्षारये दश सन्तस्तस्कृतम् ।

1740. तदेतत्सत्य मन्त्रेषु कर्माणि कवयो यान्यपश्यस्तानि त्रेताया बहुधा सन्ततानि। gente. I. 2. 1.

1741. nunc ferufet sporten op groen ! PARTE 50. 24 (cr. ed, 45. 23).

1742. srpna w atera utaraton i goren aradan rawat R* verso 5 of

t ime.

III)

Meaning of yuga

889

yugādhyaksam prajāpatim). The ancient Pitāmahasiddhanta which is not now extant, stated, according to the Pancasid dhāntikā of Varāhamihira (XII. 1), that yuga means five years of the Sun and the Moon (raviśasinoh pañca ‘yugam varṣāṇi Pitāmahopadiṣtāni). This sense of the word is still found in the Sabhāparva 11. 38.

The Nirukta (I. 20) distinguishes between ancient sages and those of later days in the words, 1743 ’the (ancient) sages had an intuitive perception of dharma and they imparted the Vedic mantras by instruction to later (sages) who had no intuitive perception of dharma’. But it does not mention or refer to any theory of four yugas. Both Gaut. I. 3-4 and Āp. Dh. S. II. 6. 13. 7-9 give expression to the view that among sages of old transgressions of dharma and violent actions are observed, but that on account of their distinguished spiritual greatness they incurred no sin, while a person of later days, being weak in spiritual merit, should not imitate them, otherwise he would come to grief. Here a distinction is drawn between very ancient sages and later sages as regards the endowment of spiritual merit, but nothing is said about the names or the theory of the four yugas. Āp. Dh. S. I. 2. 5. 4 further says 1744 that sages are not born among men of later days (avaresu) on account of the transgressions of religious ordinances (prevalent in later ages). Therefore, it would not be quite wrong to assume that the theory had not been fully developed even in the times of the early dharmasutras of Gaut. and Ap. even though both held that they were living in an age of decline and that sages coming after the authors of the mantras were inferior.

Here epigraphic evidence affords some help in fixing the lower limit of the period when the theory of yugas must have been developed.

In the Rock Edicts of Asoka No. 4 and No. 5 we have at Kalsi and two other places the words ‘āva kapam’ (yāvat kalpam) and at Girnar the words ‘ava samvata kapa’ which mean up to the end of the kalpa’ or ‘up to the end of the kalpa when the clouds or fires of destruction called samvarta

a

1743. #PROTA #991 oras laura JT #PERTO: 1

1744. 20. Almost the same words occur in qua 183. 67. 1744. AT Atsutg a faqana FATC9409. 27. . I. 2. 5.4.

11%

890

( Vol.

will arise * 1745. Vide C. I. I vol. I. pp. 8, 10, 30-33. This indi cates that the idea of a kalpa (a vast period of time at the end of which the universe would be dissolved) which is part of the theory of the yugas had been developed in the 3rd century B. C. The Junāgadh Inscription of Rudradāman 1746 (150 A.D.) refers to ‘wind the velocity of which was as terrible as that at the end of the yuga’. In certain very early inscriptions of Pallava 1747 kings (of about the 3rd or 4th century A. D.) they are described as always ready to extricate dharma that had sunk deep owing to the evil effects of the Kali age’. In one of the Gupta Inscriptions dated in the 96th year of the Gupta era ( 415-16 A. D.) Dhruvaśarman is praised as following the path of righteous conduct which prevailed in Kṛtayuga, 1748 while the Chammak copperplate of the Vākātaka emperor Pravara gena II also speaks of Kr̥tayuga (Gupta Inscriptions No. 55 p. 237 at p. 240). The Talgupda inscription of the early Kadamba king Kakusthavarman refers to Kaliyuga ( E. I, vol. VIII p. 34). It is not necessary to adduce passages from ins. criptions of a later date. From the above it may be said that the theory of yugas and kalpas had begun to take shape at least in the 4th or 3rd century B. C. and that in the first cen turies of the Christian era it had been fully developed. It must have gone through several stages in the course of its develop ment. For example, Brahmagupta (Brābmasphuṭa-siddhānta

XI. 10) states that the theory of yugas, Manus and kalpas set out by Aryabhata was not like that of the smrtis.

The same conclusion is arrived at from a consideration of the classical Sanskrit literature. The theory of yugas and manvantaras as detailed in the Mahābhārata (Vanaparva chap ters 149, 188, Santi chapters 69, 231-232), Manu chap. I, Viṣṇu dharma-sūtra XX. 1-21, the Purāpas (such as Viṣṇu I. 3, VI. 3, Mārkandeya 46, Brahma 229-230, Mateya 142-144) and, astro nomical writers from Brahmagupta is briefly as follows: Kr̥ta, Tretā, Dvāpara and Kali comprise together with the period

1745. Compare ; qu: afeitrafegant FE HYTTI Anlaga garrara cupifora igatur 188. 69.

1746. gnfruntareata rga in E. I. vol. VIII P. 36 at p. 43.

1747. Vide mognatawyal Toner y -which occurs as an epithet of Yuvamahārāja Viṣṇugopavarman in 1. A. vol. V. p. 50 at p. 51 and of ṣimhavarman in the Pikira grant la E, I, vol. VIII p. 159 at p. 162.

1748. FESTH ACHT … … eta or in Gupta Inscription No.10 pp. 44-45.

III )

Theory of yugas and kalpas

891

called sandhyā (that precedes each yuga) and the period call ed sandhyāṁsa ( that follows each yuga) 12000 years, i. e. Kr̥ta, Tretā, Dvāpara and Kali extend respectively over 4000, 3000, 2000, 1000 years and sandhya and sandhyamsa of these four extend over 400, 300, 200 and 100 years each (i. e. the sandhyā of Kṛta is 400 years and the sandhyāmśa of Kr̥ta is 400 years and so on). But these are divine years. Each divine year is equal to 360 human years. Therefore we have to multiply 12000 by 360 to arrive at the number of human years in the four yugas (i. e. the figure is 4320000). The Kṛtayuga with its sandhyā and sandhyāṁsa comes to 1728000 human years, Tretā to 1296000, Dvāpara to 864000 and Kali to 432000. These four yugas are together called sometimes caturyuga (Manu I. 71 ) or simply yuga algo ( Vanaparva 188. 27, Santi 232. 29 ); 1000 of these four yugas constitute a day of Brahmā, which is called Kalpa. The night of Brahmā is of the same duration. At the end of a kalpa the universe is resolved into Brahmā ( and this is called pralaya ) and at the end of Brahmā’s night the world is created again. In one day of Brahmā there are 14 Manus and therefore each Manyantara is equal to about 71 caturyugas (1000 divided by 14). The life of Brahmā is 100, out of which half is gone and therefore the present is said to be the 2nd or latter half (dvitiya parārdha) of the life of Brahmā and at present the kalpa that is running is called Vārāha. From the above it will be seen that, according to the Purāṇas, the universe has been created and dissolved many times and there have been numerous Manyantaras also ( vide Manu I. 80). The four yugas in various ways differ in their characteristics. Kșta is 80 called because it is an age in which everything is fulfilled by every one and nothing is left to be done. 1749 The symbolic colours of the four yugas are respectively white, yellow, red and dark (Vanaparva 189. 32). In Kśta, Dharma prevails in all its perfection and it stands with all its four feet ( dharma being figuratively spoken of as vrṣa, 1750 a bull, in Manu VIII. 16 and Vanaparva 190. 9) and it declines or deteriorates by a quarter in each of the following yugas (Manu I. 81-82

Santi 232. 23–24 ), so that in Kali only one quarter (or one foot) of dharma remains and adharma occupies three quarters. In Kr̥ta people are entirely free from diseases, secure all that

1749. AT 7 pret af te garaianaf 149. 11. 1750. varit Paritaria i Tusfahan sa Hora 77** 8 maaf 190. 9.892

[ Voi.

they desire and the length of human life is four hundred years, all of which decline by one quarter successively in the follow ing three yugas ( Manu I. 83=Sānti 232. 25 ). The dharmas in each of the four yugas are different ; tapas was the highest in Kyta, philosophic knowledge in Tretā, sacrifice in Dvāpara and charity alone in Kali (Manu I. 85-86 =Parāśara I. 22-23

Santi 232. 27-28). Manu I. 85, Santi 232. 27 and 261. 8, Parāśara I. 22 all have the same verse stating that the dharmas prescribed for men in each yuga differ.

In Kṛta, Tretā, Dyāpara and Kali the dharmas ( that should *be observed) are respectively declared by Manu, Gautama, Saṅkha-Likhita and Parāśara ( Parāśara I. 24). In Kr̥ta there was a single varṇa but at the end of Kali almost all will be śūdras (Brahma 229. 52, Matsya 144. 78). Parāśara (I. 25-28 ) points out other characteristics of the four yugas, which need not be detailed here. Manu IX. 301 and 30%, however, indicate that the yugas are not watertight parts of Time. It is the king who can by his conduct introduce the characteristics of one yuga into another. Medhātithi on Manu IX. 301 explains that the king should not be misled into thinking that Kali is a historical part of Time and that he ( the king ) cannot therefore be Kali or Kṛta, but that it is the king’s way of conducting himself that will produce the conditions of the several yugas among his people.

In Vanaparva 149. 11-38, Vāyu 32 and 57-58, Linga 39, Matsya 142-144, Garuḍa 223, Nāradapurāṇa (pūrvārdha 41 ) and in several other purāṇas there are descriptions of the nature of the four yugas, which are passed over here. But it is important to see how the Great Epic and the Purāṇas describe the nature of Kaliyuga. Vanaparva chap. 188 and 190, the Yugapurāṇa chapter of the Gargasamhitā (published in the J. B. O. R. 8. vol. 14 pp. 400 ff, by K. P. Jayaswal), Harivamsa (Bhaviṣya chap. 3.5 ff), the Brahmapurāṇa 229-230, Vāyu 58 and 99. 391 428, Matsya 144. 32-47, Kūrma I. 30, Viṣṇu VI. 1-%, Bhāgavata XII. 2, Brahmapda II. 31, Nāradiya (Pūrvārdha 41, verses 21-88), Linga 40, Nṛsimha 54. 11-49 and several others present, often in identical verses, a very pessimistic, dismal and harrowing account of what will happen in the Kali age, One extract 1751 taken from the Vanaparva (188) is added at the end by way of sample, of which a summary is given below. All men will generally be liars ; in

•

1731. Vide Appendix,

III)

What will Kaliyuga be like

893

the Kali age substitutes will be invented for yajñas, gifts and vratas; brāhmaṇas will do actions prescribed as peculiar to śūdras and śūdras will be acquiring wealth (which is the peculiar privilege of vaisyas) or they will maintain themselves by following the profession of arms; brāhmaṇas giving up the study of the Veda and the performance of sacrifices and devoid of the staff and deer skin will eat anything (i. e. will not observe rules about bkaksyābhaksya); brāhmanas will not engage in japa (muttering of Vedic mantras), while sūdras will be intent on japa; when the world will be turned topsy turvy, it will be the first indication of coming destruction; many mleccha kings will rule over the earth, who will be sinful, will issue false edicts and will be engaged in fruitless wrangling; there will be Andhras, Sakas, Pulindas, Yavanas, Kambojas, Bahlikas ( from Balkh) and valiant Abhiras (as rulers ); no brāhmana will maintain himself by pursuing his own dharma; kṣatriyas and vaiśyas will indulge in prohibited or bad acti vities; people will be short-lived, have little strength, their valour and prowess will be insignificant, their spirits will be low and their bodies diminutive and they will speak words that have very little truth; countries will be mostly untenanted and the spaces will be occupied by beasts and snakes; people will be engaged in dry discussions about brahma (they will have no realisation or experience of brahma), sūdras will employ the word ‘bhoh’ (in addressing others 1752 of higher classes ) and brāhmaṇas will employ the word ārya (in addressing peo ples other than brāhmaṇas); swarms of insects will abound; all perfumes will not smell as fragrant as before and fluids will lose their sweet taste; women will have numerous progeny, will be of short stature, devoid of character and good conduct and engage in sexual intercourse against the order of nature ; countries will suffer pangs of hunger 1753, squares where four

cusly empty means Veda, et himself explains diferent preventati, ferait

1752. This would be against the rules of dharmaśātras and smrtis about abhivadana. Vide H, of Dh. vol. II. pp. 336–339,

1753. Nilakantha notes that the verse 36 FC Arget: &c. was vari ously explained before him; ug meant either ‘food’ or ‘bulka’; sy means f y, fare means Veda, Troqu means two or the square where four roads meet, y means 77. Tieto himself explains differently. According to bim

the explanation is: gata sew opt rafetar:, fter: - 959914941 64107977: Yor: court og a ista 11: Rougargon, for पाणिग्रहणवत्योपि केशोपलक्षित सौभाग्य लज्जामूलं शीलं शूलमिव दु:खदं स्याज्यं च यासो

T: Lør: waar@ourg . The first p. 244 quotes the verse HOT: and then remarks HUHTE TO TH: I 30 fratara: FT

914 paragraprotafora: 1.’

894

[Vol.

roads meet will be full of nautch girls, and women will give up their chastity; cows will yield little milk; trees will pro duce few flowers and fruits and will abound in crows; brāh manas will receive gifts from kings that are guilty of brāh mana murder and that falsely accuse others of grave sins ; people in the various spaces will be dunned for alms by brāh maṇas stooped in greed and ignorance, who falsely make a pretence of their being religious; householders afraid of the burden of taxation, guilty of thieving and subsisting on trade, will remain concealed under the false garb of ascetics; brāh manas pretending to be brahmacārins will, through greed of wealth, fraudulently allow their nails and hair to grow; persons in the various stages of life, that observe false rules of conduct but are drunkards and indulge in incest, will desire mundane objects and the increase of flesh and blood; the asramas (forest dwellings) will be full of various heretical opinions and will extol the merits of food provided by others (out of charity ); Indra will not send down rain at the proper season and all seeds will not put forth proper growth; people will take delight in killing and will be. impure and abundant will be the fruit of adharma; whoever will then be acting according to his dharma may be regarded as having a short time to live, since there will be no dharma whatever (in Kaliyuga); people will sell goods mostly with false weights and measures and traders will be full of many tricks; the righteous will wither away, the sinful will prosper ; dharma will lose its strength and adharma will be powerful; those who follow dharma will have short lives and will be poor, while those who give up dharma will have long lives and will be prosperous ; in the sporting grounds of cities people will be sinful (or adulterous ) and people will enter into transactions by sinful means; people, that have saved a little, will be puffed up with the pride of the rich; people with whom wealth was deposited privately through trust will mostly be ready to deny the deposit, shamelessly saying “it was never so deposited ;’ the sporting grounds of towns and temples belonging to towns will be infested by beasts and birds that prey upon human beings; girls of seven or eight years will become pregnant and males of ten or twelve years old will have sons born to them; people will be bald headed in the 16th year and there will be quick decline in the length of the lives of men; young men whose lives will be short will act like old people and old people will have the habits of the young; women acting contrary to their duty

III )

Description of Kaliyuga

895

will deceive worthy husbands, will be of bad character and will have intercourse with slaves and even boasts ; wives of heroes will resort to other men and will be guilty of adultery even while their husbands are alive. 1754

The dates of the composition of the Purāṇas not being beyond controversy, it would be difficult to point to a particular period as the time when the full-fledged theory of the yugas was developed. But this much can be stated with certainty that by the 4th century A. D. at the latest the theory had been completely doveloped. Āryabhata 1755 (in Kālakriyāpāda 10 ) states that when three pādas of the yuga ( i. e. Kr̥ta, Treta and Dvāpara ) and 3600 years more had elapsed, he was 23 years old’ i. e. (accepting the calculations current at present) in 499 A. D. Āryābhata was 23 years old and so was born in 476 A. D. In his Pancasiddhāntikā Varāhamihira 1756 (505 to 587 A. D.) summarises the data of several astronomical

1754. It would be interesting to compare the descriptions of Kali given in the Mahābhārata and the several Puranas. Some verses are com. mon to several of them and the ideas are almost the same throughout. The principal counts in the indictment are that there will be sūdra and Mleccha kings, that heretical sects will predominate, that the ordered duties and privileges of the several castes will be turned topsyturvy and there will be great physical and moral decline. After Vanaparva chap. 188 there is an additional description in chap. 190 of what will happen in the Kali age, which appears, from the express words of Vanaparva 191, 16, to have been taken from the Vāyupurāṇa. So this chapter is a later interpolation. The verse EIGT &c. occurs agaio in Vanaparva 190. 52 and also in Harivansa (Bhaviṣyaparva 3. 12), Brahmapurāṇa 230. 11. Matsya 47. 258

Two characteristic verses are: 9 RETTHYST guer: TTTTAA: 1 27 ā rarura TOTEUTTfaa: ( STT 230. 13, arg 58. 59,

E II, 31. 59-60, Harivamsa, Bhaviṣyaparva 3. 15) and arura rag FTATATAT I ET geht naar #pauh 190. 67. The first says that sūdras with white teeth and professing to have) curbed their senses, with the head shaved and wearing ochre-coloured robes and maintaining themselves on false doctrines will propound dharma, This is a direct attack on Buddhist monks taken from the class of sūdras. The 2nd says that the earth will be covered with edifices enshrining bones (of Buddha) and not with temples of gods. The idea about girls of 5, 6 and 7 being mothers occurs in Viṣṇupurāṇa VI. 1. 41-42, Brahma 229, 41-42, Nāradiya Purvārdha 41. 64 and elsewhere.

1755. Epearantate ofer ouretiert Team YTTET: 1 T ferometara HR HPfart: #FITTIT 10. This does not necessarily mean that he composed this work when he was only 23.

1756. Vide J. A. S. B. for 1912 pp. 275-278 for the date of Varāha mihira.

896

(Vol.

Siddhāntas of which Romaka is one, about which Brahmagupta remarks that the Romaka siddhanta is outside the pale of smṛtis because 1757 it omits all mention of yugas, manvantaras and kalpas that have been regarded by the smrtis as useful in measuring time. Kalidasa 1758 in Raghuvamsa 15. 96 speaks of dharma as having only three feet ( in Tretā ) when Rāma made up his mind to depart from this world. No scholar will assign to Kālidāsa a date later than the middle of the 5th century A. D. Therefore the theory of yugas must be deemed to have been perfected long before 400 A. D. K. P, Jayaswal holds that the Yugapurāṇa chapter of the Garga-samhitā was composed about 50 B, C. (J. B.O.R.S. vol. 14 p. 399 ) and he is probably right.

At present it is the practice to hold Kali 5046 (expired) as equal to 1945 A. D. or śake 1867 or saivat 2001-2. But it appears that there were several views about the date of the beginning of the Kaliyuga. The exact starting point on the above computa tion was Friday, 18th February 3102 B. C. One view was that Kaliyuga was about to begin when the great Mahābhārata war was fought out. 1759 This view is expressed in the Aihole Inscription which appears to equate the beginning of Kali with the Bhārata war and states that 3735years ( expired) from the Bhārata war are equal to 556 years of the saka era, 1760 Arya bhata know this computation, since he says that he was 23 years old when three parts of the ( great) yuga and 3600 had elapsed ( Kāla-kriyāpāda, verse 10). Another view set forth in the Purāṇas is that Kaliyuga began when Kșsna finished his avatāru and went to heaven, 1761 This would put the beginning

1757. युगमन्वन्तरकल्पाः कालपरिच्छदकाः स्मृताधुक्ताः। यस्माल रोमके ते स्मृतिषामो TATTUTTO I S hota 1.13 q. by S.B. Dikshit (2nd ed. of 1931) ia #78 a14uvifara p. 155. Uh flourished from 598 A, D, to at least 665 A, D,

1758. Affarnaguta prea muayra Tap: pireret arut o Ta #TO#$ 15. 96.

1759. अग्तरे चैव संप्रासे कलिद्वापरयोरभूत । समन्तपञ्चके युद्धं कुरुपाण्डवसेनयोः॥ tre. 2. 13;

D iego RP 754 60. 25; parca aratama 899 149. 38.

1760. fsg FAHEE THEE aa: 1 Praaghetting Ta पमाश कलो काले पदसु पञ्चशतासु च । समास समतीतासु शकानामपि भूभुजाम् ॥ E, I. vol. VI p. I at p. 7.

1761. R ount FER TOTHER foi oa: TEHT ESTE e lloy 99. 428-429, spre III, 74, 241. The TTTET XII. 2. 33 reads sfato fogorara grazie HE 273. 49-50, fatos IV, 24. 40 respectively read sfarvet garut #py and fat… Feat faut #M. p ro 212. 8 has the same idea in different words.

HI).

The beginning of Kaliyuga

897

of Kaliyuga several years after the date arrived at on the first view. 1762 Vide Mausalapatya chap. 1. 13 and 2. 20 for reference to the lapse of 36 years before Krsna’s passing away. The Yugapurāṇa appears to make Kaliyuga start, on the day Draupadi died ( vide J. B. 0. R. S. vol. 14 p. 400 ). Another view is that of Varāhamihira who says that the constellation of the Great Bear was in Maghā when Yudhisthira was on the throne and that that time is arrived at by adding 2526 years to the saka year. 1963 This would place Yudhisthira in 653 of the Kali age (as calculated at present) and not at the end of Dvāpara and the beginning of Kali. The Rājatarangipi I. 56 quotes the Br̥hat-sanhitā and holds that Kurus and Pandayas flourished in 653 of the Kali yuga ( I. 51). Great efforts have

1762. Vide J. R. A. S. for 1911 pp. 479ff and 675ff about the Kaliyuga and its era; ‘Five thousand years ago, the Mahabharata war’ & paper by Dr. D. S. Triveda in Festschrift Kane pp. 515-525 in which after setting out many divergent views aod criticizing them, it is held that the Mahabhārata war was fought out in 31373.C., ‘Purānic date of Mahābhārata’, a paper by Mr. M. Raja Rao in the Bulletin of the Ganganath Jha Research Society, vol. II pp. 125-143, which mentions numerous dates suggested by various scholars. I am not at all convinced of the correctness of Dr. Triveda’s conclusions, in spite of the great learning that be brings to bear on the problem. Vide also his paper in ‘Bharatiya Vidya’, vol. VI (1945), pp. 117-120.

1763, 7 RIB 474: gzati grunt gati 2 @ga: 7 COTTO TITUY E TT 13,3. This is not a verse of Garga as some scholars assert. In 13, 2 Varāhamihira promises that he will dilate on the movements of the seven sages (municāra) according to the opinion of Vrddhagarga. It appears that 13.3 is his own verse. Garga held the opinion that the Great Bear remained in one constellation for one hundred years. That is all, Utpala quotes the verse of Garga, but it is in the Agustubh metre. It was believed by the authors of the Puranas and even by such astronomers as Varāhamihira that the constellation of the Great Bear remained in each nakṣatra for a hundred years. Vide Br. Sam. 13.4, Bhāgavata XII. 2. 27-28, Matsya 273. 40-44, Vāyu 99. 421-422, Viṣṇu IV. 24. 33. Mr. Velandi Gopal Aiyer in .Chronology of Ancient India’ (p.75) holds that ‘sad-dvika. paāca dvi’ means 26 times 25 i. e. 650 years and that we should read

sakyakala’ orsakyakala’ (p. 73 ) instead of sakakāla’ in Bṛ. Sam. 13. 3 in order to correct the error of one mātrā in the 4th quarter of the verso, In this last he is in error; he forgets that, according to works on chanda-, Sastra, a short syllable at the end of a pāda is deemed to be prosodially long (and therefore the last syllable in Bṛ. Sam. 13. 3 is long). Besides, he is not able to cite a single oxample to show why the usual rule of w at

mi natabould not be followed here also or that Varāhamibira elsewhere employs & similar method in a compound word.

113

898

[ Vol.

been made by several scholars to meet this discrepancy by explaining the word ‘sad-dvika-pañca-dviyutaḥ’( in the Br̥hat samhita) in various fanciful ways, which are far from satisfactory. There is no reason why dvika should not straightforwardly be taken in the sense of ’two!, 1764 as the Lilāvati and Br. Sam. 71. 5 itself do.

It is difficult to believe that the Sakakāla referred to in that verse is different from the Sakendrakāla or Sakbhūpakāla, which the Pancasiddhantika (I. 8) and the Bșhat-samhita ( 8. 20-21) make use of in several places. At least Varābamihira gives no such indication, Mr. C. V. Vaidya in his ‘Maha bhārata, a criticism’ pp. 80-81 holds that the Sakakāla referred to in the verse asan maghāsu &c.’ is the era of Buddha’s Nirvāṇa. There is hardly any warrant for this assumption, His interpretation of ‘sad-dyika-panca-dviyutaḥ as meaning 2566 (and not 2526 ) is not bad and does not seriously affect the argument about the date of Yudhisthira. On that interpretation Yudhisthira would be placed in 2488 B. C. (instead of in 2448 B. C.). But there is no reason why the usual values of sat (six ), dvika ( two ) and other words should not be understood to be meant here,

The data contained in the Nidhanpur plates of Bhaskara varman (E. I. vol. XII p. 65), when properly scrutinized, appear to favour the position of Varāhamihirā. Those plates in sett ing out the genealogy of Bhāskaravarman start with Naraka, whose son Bhagadatta fought on the side of the Kauravas in the Mahabharata war and was killed by Arjuna (vide Droṇa-, parva chap. 29). Bhagadatta’s son is said to have been Vajra. datta. After Vajradatta his descendants ruled over Kāmarūpa for 3000 years and then Puṣyavarman, a scion of the Bhaga datta family, became king of Kamarūpa. King Bhāgkara Varman was 12th from Puṣyavarman and was a contemporary of Emperor Harsa ( first half of the 7th century A. D.). Taking an average of 20 years for the reign of each ruler, Puṣyavarman should be taken as having flourished about the beginning of the 5th century A, D. Adding 3000 years which are alleged by: the plates to have intervened between Puṣyavarman and Vajra datta, we arrive at about 2500 B, C, as the time of Vajradatta and therefore approximately of the Mahabharata war. This

1764. The impact ( to verse 262, Anand. ed.) reads f काम्या विनवाटके, where the com, says हावेव द्विका

ree

Date of the beginning of Kaliyuga

899

corresponds rather very closely with the statement of Varāha mihira who puts Yudhiṣthira’s reign at 653 Kaliyuga (i. e. 2448 B. C.). On the other hand, if we assume that the Mahā bhārata war was fought in or that Kaliyuga started in 3101 B. C., then Puṣyavarman who flourished 3000 years after the Mahābhārata war would have to be placed about 101 B. C. and there will be an interval of about 700 or 750 years between Pusyawarman and Bhāskaravarman. A period of 700 or 750 years for 12 rulers would work at about 60 years for each ruler, which is a very improbable average. Therefore the Nidhanpur plates do not support the hypothesis that the Mahābhārata war was fought about 3101 B, C., but rather support the statement of Varāhamihira that it was fought about 2500 B. C.

. Another epoch for the Mahābhārata war and the beginning of Kaliyuga is indicated by some passages of historic impor tance found in some of the Purāṇas. The Vāyupurāṇa (99, 4-15) and the Matsyapurana ( 273, 36 ) say that from the birth of Parikṣit to the coronation of Mahāpadma (Nanda) a period of 1050 years elapsed, while the Bhagavata XII. 2. 26 assigns 1015 years for the same. There is some mistake in the Purana texts here. The Matsya ( in chap. 271. 17-30 ) enumerates the kings of the Bārhadratha dynasty of Magadha descended from Sahadeva, son of Jarāsandha, and states that the dynasty will rule (i. e, ruled) for a thousand years. Then chap. 272 (verses 1-5) speaks of five kings, who will be followed by the Siśunāka dynasty, that together reigned for 360 years and the last king in which was Mahānandi ( verses 6-13 ) whose son from a sūdra wife was Mahāpadma ( 272. 18). So if the years of these three dynasties are added we get the period of about 1500 years. This is supported by the Bhāgavatapurāṇa (IX, 22. 48 and XII. 1-2) and Vāyupurana ( 99. 308-321), which latter says that 32 kings of the Bārhadratha dynasty will rule for 1000, then five Vitihotra kings for 138 years (Pradyota and others ) and then the Saiśunāka (Sisunāga in the Bhagavata and in the Brabmānda purāṇa III. 74. 134-135 ) dynasty for 362 (in all exactly 1500 years ). The same periods are given by the Viṣṇupurāṇa (IV. 23 and 24 ) and by the Brahmāṇdapurāṇa III. 74. 121-135. ŚrIdhara in his comment on Bhagavata XII. 2. 26 states that the interval between Parīkṣit and Nanda is 1498 as the Bhagavata holds that the Saiśunāga dynasty ruled for 360 years (XII. 1.4-6). Therefore the proper reading in the Vayupurana or Matsyapurāṇa or the Bhagavata should be ‘pañcasatottaran’

goo

History of Pharmatūstrā . i Vol.

instead of ‘pañcāsaduttaram’ or ’ pañcadasottaram.’ Taking the interval between Parikṣit and Nanda to be 1500 years and holding as most modern scholars do that the Nandas flourished in the 4th century B. O., Pariksit, the grandson of Arjuna, the Mahābhārata war and the beginning of Kaliyuga would have to be placed in the 19th century B.O. Therefore there are so far three main different epochs for the Mahābhārata war viz. 3101 B, O., 2448 B, O. and about 1900 B. O. All the three are well attested by evidence dating at least from about the 5th century A. D. One cannot dogmatically say that a certain tradition alone out of these three is the only correct one. All that one can say is that one prefers a particular tradition to the other two. Since the epoch of 1900 B, C. is supported by the Puranas in great detail by citing the names of the several kings and their regnal years I personally regard the epoch of 1900 B. O. for the Mabā bharata war as more probable than the other two. It is best to acknowledge one’s inability to assign a certain date to the Mahābhārata war rather than twist plain words or ignore al together inconvenient passages or put on them fanciful or far fetched interpretations. The first desideratum is to prepare critical editions of the important purkṇas from the best mgs. material. Even then it is doubtful whether unanimity among scholars can be secured. A scholarly beginning was made by Pargiter in his book " The Purāṇa texts of the dynasties of the Kali Age’ (1913). He compares the material available in the printed editions of several Purāṇas and Msg, on the subject of royal dynasties. One cannot or may not agree with many of the assumptions and inferences that he makes or draws, yet one cannot withhold admiration for his industry and method. For example, I cannot agree with him when he takes ‘bhavisye kathitān’ of the Matsyapurana or bhavisye pathitān’ of Vāyu ( 99. 267 ) as referring to the Bhaviṣyapurāṇa. In many passages of the Puranas we have references to ‘bhaviṣyajña’(Brahmānda III. 74, 105), which simply means ’those who are conversant with sections on the future ‘contained in ancient works like the Mahabharata.

It is not possible owing to limitations of space to enter into detailed examination of the theories of several scholars about the date of the Mahābhārata war. But one or two important matters will have to be referred to here.

Mr. Velandi Gopala Aiyer in ‘The chronology of Ancient India in chap. II. (pp. 51-104 ) examines the astronomical data

IHT)

Date of the beginning of Kaliyuga

901

furnished by the Mahābhārata and relying on the far-fetched and wrong interpretation put by him on the words of the Bṛhat samhita ( quoted above) and on the fact that the Kollam era in Malabar appears to take 1177 B.O. as the starting point for Kaliyuga arrives at the conclusion that the Mahābhārata war took place in the latter part of 1194 B. C. This theory goes against all the three other starting points which are supported by comparatively ancient and authoritative evidence.

The information derived from the fragments of the work of Megasthenes on India are supposed to shed some light on this vexed problem. In one fragment (p. 115 of Ancient India as described by Megasthenes &c.’) occurs the passage : ‘From him (i. e. Bacchus ) to Alexander the Great 6451 years are reckoned with three months additional, the calculation being made by counting the kings that reigned in the inter mediate period to the number of 153’. An extract from Pliny makes out the number of kings to be 154. As against this we have the statement in the ‘Indika’ of Arrian (2nd century A. D., translated by McCrindle, p. 203): From the time of Dionysos to Sandrakottus, the Indians counted 153 kings and a period of 6042 years, but among these a republic was thrice established …… another to 300 years and another to 120 years. The Indians also tell us that Dionysos was earlier than Heracles by fifteen generations and that except him no one made a hostile invasion of India. This passage is of very great im portance for one reason, viz. that it proves that in the 4th century B. C. there was a persistent Indian tradition which carried back Indian civilization and ordered government to 6000 years before the 4th century B. O. But there is great doubt as to what Megasthenes actually wrote and there is some divergence as to the number of years and kings also. Besides, this has no direct bearing on the date of the Mahābhārata war or the beginning of Kaliyuga, unless Heracles is taken to be Hari-Krṣpa, as some scholars 1765 do. The account of Heracles (pp. 201-203 of McCrindle’s work ) agrees in some respects with the legends about Krṣpa viz. that he was honoured by the Sourasenoi ( Sūrasenas), an Indian tribe who possegs two large

1765. Vide Mr. C. V. Vaidya’s ‘Mabābhārata, a criticism’ pp. 75–76, where ignoring the figures of total years (viz. 6042 or 6451) he comes to the conclusion that Krsna flourished about 3101 B, C. since 138 Kings between Heracles and Sandrakottus (i. e. Candragupta) may have ruled in all about 2760 years, taking 20 years as the average for each reign,902

[Vol.

cities Methora (Mathura) and Cleisobora and that Heracles had many wives; but then there are other anecdotes about Heracles which do not at all agree viz. his having a daughter Pandaia with whom when she was only seven Heracles had intercourse for raising a mighty race, Here there is some confus ion with the Pandavas and Kunti or with the Pandyan kingdom in the South. Moreover, 6000 years for 153 or 154 kings is rather a very long period. It cannot be said that a king is only a unit of time in these computations ( 40 years on an average), since such Purāṇas as the Vāgu and the Matsya expressly mention the number of years that each dynasty held sway, the number of kings belonging to each dynastly and the lengths of the reigns of several kings. It is no doubt true that the details of the names of the several kings, the number of kings and the duration of their reigns do not always tally. It appears that the Purāṇas that contain historical material were recast at diffe rent times, e. g. the Vāyupurāṇa ( 99. 383 ) refers to the Guptas while the Matsyapurāṇa is silent about them. The extant Puranas cannot be supposed to have given imaginary details about historical dynasties, but they must have had before them older records or traditions. The Purapas do not appear to have invented names of new kings or given imaginary lengths of reigns. The authors surely knew that the total of the several dynasties between Parikṣit and Nanda did not square with the total of the lengths of the reigns of the several individual kings. But they gave both these without trying to solve the discrepancies as they wanted to record all the traditions they had got before them. The Purāṇas have a claim on our attention, but in the present state of our knowledge they cannot unfortunately form the basis of any certain or connected history and chronology of ancient times.

A few words may here be said about the attempts made to deduce the age of the Mahābhārata war from the astronomical references in the Epic.

The number of works and papers in which the dates of the Bharata war and of Kaliyuga are discussed is very large. A few of them only are noted here. The late Shankar Balkrishna Dikshit in his exhaustive volume on the History of Indian Astronomy’ (in Marathi, 2nd ed. of 1931 ) deals with this subject at pp. 107 127. Mr. C.V. Vaidya in ‘Mahabharata, a criticism, 1904 ‘devotes one chapter (pp. 55–78) and appendix note V (pp. 180–190) to the date of the Mahabharata war. He holds fast to the traditional

In )

Astronomical data in Mahābhārata

903

view that the Mahabhārata war was fought in 3101 B, C, Mr. N. Jagannatha Rao writes a book on the Age of the Mahābhārata war’ (Bezwada, 1931), in which he disputes the identity of Candragupta Maurya with Sandracottus mentioned by Megasthenes, holds that Sandracottus is the Gupta Emperor Candragupta, that the date of Candragupta Maurya would be about 1535 B. C., that the word ‘Sakakāla ’ in the Bphatsambitā refers really to the era of the Persian Emperor Cyrus about 550 B. C. and that the Great War was fought in 3139 B. C. The work does not go deeply into anything and is rather superficial. There is a lengthy and interesting article by Mr. K. G. Saṅkar on some problems of Indian Chronology’ in Annals of the B.O.R. Institute, Poona, vol. XII pp. 301-361 in which he seems to favour 1198 B. O. as the date of the Mahābhārata war. Mr. J. S. Karandikar, editor of the ‘Kesari’ (Poona), contribut ed certain articles (in Marathi) which are now issued as a booklet (1939), in which he examines many of the astronomical references in the Mahābhārata and the Paurānic lists about the dynasties of ancient Indian kings and arrives at the conclu sion that the Mahābhārata war was fought in 1931 B. C. Though I differ from him in important details, I think that the date arrived at by him appears to be one of the two probable or best authenticated dates among the several dates proposed by various scholars. Prof. P. C. Sen-Gupta contributed a paper to the Journal of the Bengal Asiatic Society in 1937, vol. III pp. 101-119, in which he discusses the date of the Mahabharata war and arrives at the conclusion that the Bhārata war was fought about 2449 B. C. This also is a very probable date and has the authority of the tradition mentioned in the Bșhatsamhitā that the saka era is 2526 years after the era of Yuddhisthira. In J. A. S. B. for 1938, vol. IV pp. 393-413 Prof. Sen-Gupta again examines

Bhārata battle traditions and confirms the date 2449 B. C. already arrived at by him. Dr. K. L. Daftari delivered some lectures in the University of Nagpur on the astronomical method and its application to the chronology of Ancient India’ which are published in book form (Nagpur, 1942 ). This work exhaustively deals with almost all the passages of astronomical importance contained in the Mahābhārata and is characterized by great industry, patient calculations and ingenious explana tions of conflicting passages. His conclusion is that the Bharata war was fought in 1197 B. O. Although one feels nothing but admiration for the author’s great learning and acumen, it is not possible to agree with the date arrived at by him or with

904

[ Voli

the method and theories adopted by him. Apart from details one cannot accede to the following theories propounded by him viz. his division of the astronomical references into two groups, his assumption that a passage in the Dronaparva (chap. 184) about the rising of the moon at about 2 A. M. is an interpolation ( because it does not square with his explanations of the other passages ), his bold expedient of changing * citrām’ to caitām’ in Bhiṣma 3. 1% and his transposition of Śravaṇa and Puṣya in Salyaparva 34. 6, his taking’angāraka’ to mean Venus (and not Mars). Dr. Daftari’s work was reviewed by Prof. Sen-Gupta in JASB for 1943, vol. IX pp. 221-228 and after submitting it to a searching analysis and calculations, the learned Professor arrives at the conclusion that he cannot accept Dr. Daftari’s method, which is useless for all practical purposes. Prof. K. V. Abhyankar contributes an article to the Annals of B.O. R. I. for 1914, vol. XXV. pp. 116-136 on the date and time of the Bhārata war’, in which he takes into account only the material available in the Epic itself and bases his conclusions ‘on the principle of following the voice of the majority. He furnishes a useful table in an appendix that shows at a glance some of the important astronomical passages of the Mabābhārata with their interpretations given by the commentators Arjuna miśra and Nilakantha and by Mr. Karandikar and himself and finally gives his opinion that the traditional view of the date (3101 B. c. ) is approximately correct. It appears that he had not, when he wrote the article, the work of Dr. Daftari before him nor Prof, Sen-Gupta’s devastating criticism of it. It will be apparent from the above that the attempts to settle the exact date of the Mahābhārata war on the strength of the astronomical materials contained therein are dismal failures. Hardly any two scholars agree on the exact dates so arrived at, which range from 1193 B. C. to 3101 B. C. and even beyond. There are many reasons for this disappointing result. In the first place, several of the criteria mentioned in the epic are hopelessly inconsistent, as will be made clear a little below by a few-examples. Further, several scholars assume that thefepio was composed within a short time (about three years arcording to Adiparva, 62,52,or.ed.chap. 56. 32 ) after the war. Many (including my humble self ) cannot subscribe to this view. Besides, we are totally in the dark about the details of the system of the calendar generally adopted at the period of the war. Many suppose that it largely resembled the rules contained in the Vedānga Jyotiga ( of the Rgveda ). There is no unanimity on the question whether the months.

DI]

Astronomical data in Mahābhārata

905

onded with amāvāsyū (i. e. whether they were amanta) or wliether they ended with Full Moon (i. e. whether they were pūrnimānta ). 176 That a pūrnimānta month was in vogue in Vedic times is beyond dispute. For example, Tai. 8. states that Pūrva Phaigunt is the last night of the year and Uttarā Phalgunl is the mouth (i. e. beginning). Similarly Tai. S. VII. 4. 8.2 declares that the citrāpūrnamāsa is the mouth of the year; while San. Br. IV. 4 declares that the Phālguni Paurṇa māsl is the mukha of the year. The author or authors of the Mahābhārata, in describing the evil portents of an impending tragic or catastrophic event, often assemble together (as in Udyoga 143.5-29, Bhiṣme 2. 16-33 ) all of them irrespective of the fact whether some of them are possible in the very order of nature. For example, it is stated that Arundhati wont before Vasiṣtha ( Bhiṣma 2. 31 ), that a mare gave birth to a cow calf and that a bitch gave birth to a jackal ( Bhiṣma 3. 6 ) and that images of gods trembled, laughed and vomited blood (Bhiṣma %. 26, which may be compared with Br̥hatsamhitā 45. 8 and the verses of Garga quoted by Utpala thereon); it is several times said that the Moon and the Sun are seized (i, e, eclipsed) at an unusual season (aparvani ) or simultaneously by Rāhu (vide

1766. That the months in North-west Iğdia were pūrṇimānta in the Kharostbi records drawn up in Kaniṣka’s era is shown in E. I. vol. 18 p. 266 and E. I. vol. 19 at p. 10. Aparārka (p. 423 ) quotes a verse from TIOT **** orqat a ri faa fa and remarks that Bhādrapada dark half is in that verse said to be the dark half of Aśvina. In the Bhaviṣya purana (Uttara-parva, chap. 132. 17) the Full Moon of Phālguna is said to be the end of the month’ (foto Fregatura coafat gra I Fiat

vai ra TTÀ gigt). In the Matsyapurāṇa ( 159. 4-6) it is said that Skanda and Visakha were born on the 15th of the dark half of Caitra, that to the bright half of Caitra itself on the 5th Iadra made one boy out of the two and on the 6th crowned him as Lord. This shows that in the Matsya Caitra was fūrgimanta and not amānta. When the month is pūrnimānta, the first fortnigbt ending with amāvāsyā is assigned to a month which is one month in advance of the amanta reckoning i. e. what is Kārtika dark hall with amanta reckoning becomes Mārgasīrsa dark half with the pārgi. mānta reckoning. On Jai. VI. 5. 31 Sabara quotes a Vedic passage about गवामयन ‘पुरस्तारपोर्णमास्याश्चतुरहे दीक्षेरन् । तमुख वैषा पौर्णमासी संवत्सरस्य या चैत्री ahoraret’, which seems to indicate that the year began with the Full Moon of Caitra and that the pūrnimānta reckoning was not unknown,

114

906

(Vol.

Bhiṣmaparva 3.28 and 32-33 and Āśvamedhikaparva 77.15 ). 1767 Further, these very verses state that the eclipses of the Sun and the Moon took place on the same day and on the 13th and in the same month. Dr. Daftari interprets ’ekāhnā ‘as mean ing on the same week-day and’ on the 13th tithi’ (pp. 5-6 of his work ) caloulated according to the wrong method of those days. It is extremely doubtful whether week-days had been known or named at the time of the Bhārata war or even at the time of the composition of the Epic. It is too much to assuine that the astronomers of the Mahabharata war days, while they could predict eclipses and state accurately the position of the planets, were so clumsy as to allow a mistake of two tithis to occur in their calendar with respect to the occurrence of a solar eclipse. The words in Bhiṣmaparva 3. 28 and 32-33 appear to be a mere exaggerated statement of portents. If real observed eclipses are meant they would have to be taken in the order of the words in the text, viz. first an eclipse of the Moon (on Kārtika paurpima ) and then an eclipse of the Sun ( on Kārtika amāvāsya ) and further it must be assumed that the dark half of Kartika contained only 13 days. Dr. Daftari (pp. 44-46 of his work ) holds that first there was a solar eclipse on Aśvina amāvāsyā, then a lunar eclipse and then again a solar eclipse. In that case we should expect the order to be ‘sūrya-candrau’ and not ‘candragūryau’. Besides, hardly any other scholar holds that there were three eclipses one after another. There fore, it is hardly possible to say with certainty that the author accurately states astronomical facts observed by him or even traditionally handed down as definite facts and does not draw on his own imagination about the portents or does not exaggerate

1767. चमवावुभौ यसो एकाला हि योदशीम्। अपर्वणि ग्रह यातौ प्रजासंक्षय मिच्छतः ॥ चन्मपर्यावुभौ मस्सो एकमासी प्रयोदशीम् । अपर्वणि ग्रहेणैतौ प्रजाः संक्षप furua: a POATE 328, 32. The cr. edition of the Mahābhārata gives oply the first of these two verses. Utpala in his com. on Bphatsambitā 5. 26 reads एकमासे त्रयोदशे. The words प्रजाः संक्षपयिन्यतः make it quite clear that eclipses and the fortnight of thirteen tithis are taken as very evil omens. Similar words occur in Bhiama 3, 12 and 13 quoted below in note 1779. In: Bșhatsamhita 3, 6 it is said that a graha called Tvaṣtr makes the orb of the Sun look dark even when there is ao parva (amāvāsyā). Utpala quotes on the same a verse of Parisara surat per MT MET * FRETE: I guta TAIFA: Forum H. There is no doubt whatever that the writer of Bhisma 2 and 3 is more concerned with chronicling evil omeas than with setting out accurate astronomical and other data observed by him personally or ovon by others.

til Åstronomical data in Mahabhārata 907

as a rhetorical device. In Bṭhatsaṁhita 5. 26, 97-98 Varāha mihira states the evil consequences if a moon eclipse precedes or follows a sun eclipse in the period of one fortnight.

Most of the important astronomical details will now be set out from the time when Lord Krsna is said to have started as a peace-maker to the Kauravas. In Udyogaparva 83, 6-71768 it is said that Krsna started in the month of Kārtika (Kaumude māsi) at the end of the farad season and about the advent of winter, when the moon was in Revati nakṣatra and on maitra muhurta. Asyina and Kārtika are at present said to form the season of sarad, and Mārgasirṣa and Pausa form hemanta. This verse itself presents a difficulty. On the Full Moon day of Kārtika, the moon is in Kr̥ttikā nakṣatra and the moon would be in Revati three days before i. e. on or about the 12th of the bright half of Kārtika. If we take this along with the words ‘at the end of sarad’ it follows that the month was pūrnimānta ; otherwise (i. e. if the month were amūnta) it would be highly improper to say that the 12th of the bright half of Kārtika was at the end of Sarad. After Krsna failed in his mission he returned to the Pāṇdavas ( for all of which we must allow a few days after the 12th of Kārtika sukla) and reported what Duryodhana and he himself said. Two of the statements reported by him are very material. Duryodhana said to his allies’: March towards Kuruksetra (for battle); to-day the moon is (in) Pusya nakṣatra ‘. 1769 If Krsna started on his mission when the moon was in Revati ( on the 12th of the bright half of Kārtika ), then these above words must have been uttered in his presence on or about the 5th of the dark half of Kartika ( or of Mārga. śirṣa if the month was pūrpimānta ). Another important state. ment is that Krspa in his conversation with Karna ( whom he had tried to win over ) stated to him: ’this is a mild month in

1768. मैत्रे मुर्ते संपाने साधषि विधाकरे। कौमुदे मासि रेवत्या शरदन्ते हिमागमे । gotto 83. 6–7, 15 mubūrtas of the day and 15 of the night are referred to even in the po or X, 4. 2. 18, 25, 27 and the trattaro (III. 10. 1.1) mentione the names of the 15 mubūrtas of the day (such as Citra, Ketu &c.). In the Kumārasambhava VII. 6 the maitra mubūrta is mentioned in connection with ceremonies preceding marriage. The commentators explain maitra as the 3rd mubūrta after sunrise. In the Atharva Jyotisa fifteen muhūrtas of the day are enumerated of wbich the first three are Raudra, Sveta and Maltra.

1769. T a nt qui reg : 1 7W ** gratura F: 971: # Juta 150. 3.

908

Vole

which fodder and fuel oan be easily had, which is neither too hot nor too cold; on the 7th day (from today ) there will be amāvāsyā; battle may be joined on that day; they regard it as having Indra for its ( guardian )1770 deity’. Therefore this must have been said on or about the 8th of the dark half of the month. But what was the name of the month? If the reckon ing was pārṇimānta, the month must be Mārgasirṣa, but if the reckoning was amānta, the month must be Kārtika. The words ’this month’ taken along with Udyoga 83, 6–7 would indicate that the month meant was Kārtika. Further, Indra was the deity of Jyesthā nakṣatra and the amavasya ( as stated in Udyoga 142. 16-18) had Jyesthā nakṣatra. In modern times this is possible on Kārtika Amāvāsya, while there cannot be Jyesthā nakṣatra in modern times on Mārgasirsa amāvāṣya, but only on or about the 13th of the dark half of it. But this passage itself (Udyoga 142. 16-18) is in conflict with Salya 35. 10 where Krspa says: ’the Kauravas do not act up to my words, being driven to do so by the Time Spirit; 01 descendants of Pāṇdu, go out (for battle ) together with me when the moon is in Pusya’. If the moon was in Jyestha on amāvāsya when Krsna had proposed to Karna that the war should be begun, this passage of Salyaparva would put the beginning of the war 16 or 17 days after Kārtika amāvāsyā, which is not war ranted by any other passage and which no scholar puts forward. In Udyoga 143. 11 it is stated, 1771 “the spot on the moon has turned away ( disappeared) and Rahu approaches the Sun.’ The exact meaning of the first quarter is not quite clear. Some interpret it to mean that ‘an eclipse of the Moon has already taken place’. The moon looks beautiful with the spot thereon (compāre Sakuntala I ’ malinamapi himõisor lakṣma lakṣmim tanoti). The disappearance of the spot might have been looked upon as an evil portent. Even supposing that the first quarter refers to an eclipse of the moon, it does not matter much. The second quarter states that an eclipse of the Sun was expected when Karṇa addressed these words to Krspa, the envoy of the

1770. tama ATA: E vapora: 1 … The TT regte शिशिरः मुखः ॥ सप्तमाचापि दिवसादमावास्या भविष्यति । संग्रामो युज्यतो स्पा तामाहु: $ T arg ! guth 142, 16–18. fry explains ‘ma: HURAT91019: your armati HURTHY Para gantil. Soffro HD कुरवः कालनोदिताः । निर्गवं पाण्डवेयाः पुष्येण सहिता मया । शल्प 35. 10.

1771. सोमस्य लक्ष्म ज्यावृतं राहुरकसपेति च । विषयोल्काः पतस्येताः सनिर्माता prehr: I sute 143. 11. Almost these very words occur in A 2. 32 (WITH

** #MET HOUT T) and in 1 3. 11 (T hu).

III

Astronomical data in Mahabharata

909

Papdavas. Later on in Bhisma 2.23 it is stated 1772 that the Moon had become devoid of brightness, was without its spot on the Full moon day of Kārtika and assumed the colour of fire while the sky retained its original hue; so that if there was an eclipse of the moon it was on Kārlika Paurnimā and an eclipse of the sun was yet to take place. On the whole, therefore, one may assume, though not without hesitation, that the months were amanta, that possibly there was an eclipse of the moon on Kārtika Full Moon when Krsna had gone as a peace-maker and that there was a solar eclipse on the amāvāsya of Kartika just about the time the war began, In Salyaparva 56. 10 we again meet with the words ( at the beginning of the mace duel) ‘Rahu swallowed the Sun at an unusual season’. This passage and Aśvamedhika 77. 15 ( Rabur-agrasadadityam yugapat soma meva ca) rather suggest that the eclipse of the sun at an unusual time had become a stock example of an evil portent without the actual occurrence thereof. The words in Salyaparva refer to the last day of the war before the mace duel between Duryodhana and Bhima and the passage says that Rahu seized the sun and there was an earth-quake also. Hardly any one (except Dr. Daftari) holds that there was another eclipse on the last day of the war, when just before the war there already had been an eclipse on Kartika amāvāsyā.

As to the exact tithi and nakṣatra on which the Great War began, there are many conflicting statements. In the Bhārata dāvitri it is stated that the Bhārata war started in the first month (i. e. Mārgasirṣa ) of Hemanta on the 13th of the bright half when the moon was in the nakṣatra presided over by Yama (1. e. Bharaṇī ) 1773. The Bhārata-sāvitri is no part of the

1772. अलक्ष्यः प्रभया हीनः पौर्णमासी च कार्तिकीम् । चन्द्रोदग्निवर्णश्च समवणे (v. l. quruf- ) * * from 2, 23.

1773. The following verses of the perfitoft are material for the days of the important events of the war: ‘ART QUA RIĦ UPT Tirasit मासं भारतं युदं नक्षत्रं यमदेवतम् ॥ फाल्गुन्यो निहतो भीष्मः ष्णपक्षे च ससमी । अष्ठम्यो चेष सौभद्रो नाम्पा व जयद्रथः । दशम्यो भगवत महायुद्धे निपातितः । एकादश्यामर्धरात्री हतो पीरो घटोत्कचः। ततः प्रभातसमये विरादनुपदो हतो। बादश्यां चैव मध्याहे वोणाचार्यो रणे इतःप्रयोदश्या तु मध्यावषसेनो निपातितः पितुर्दश्यां तु पूर्ण रणे दु:शासनोहतः । … Sangt weghor TETT ATT : i … BATUTAN Tartuat ça: 1 … अमायामेव पामियां बोणिमा निहतास्तदा । अक्षयनः शिखबीचमोपचा पञ्चचारमजाः । (set out at the end of fit in the Citrasala edition). There are some statements here that are opposed to the text of the Mabābhārata. Abbimanyu

(Continued on the next page)

910

,

[ Vol.

Mahabhārata, yet it has some traditional value, being probably earlier than all the commentators of the Mahabharata and later than the text of Sauti. In conflict with this passage of the Bhāratasāvitrī we have the words of Udyoga 142. 18 ( quoted above ) where Krṣṇa says to Karpa that battle may be joined on amā vāsyā when the moon is in Jyesthā. The Mahābhārata itself states that after the disposition of the vast armies were made and commanders were appointed, Duryodhana called Ulūka and sent him to the Pandavas to inflame their feelings with the words 1774 (Udyoga 160. 93 ) ’the worship of steel ( weapons ) has been performed, the site of Kurukṣetra is dried up (has no mud), your horses are well fed, warriors are hired by you; fight tomorrow. This Lohābhihāra (orgāra ) is the game as the rite of nirājanā ( according to the Amarakośa ) or is performed immediately after nirājanā (for which see pp. 230-231 above). Kautilya (IL. 30 p. 135) prescribes a nīrājanā rite at the start of an invasion and when two seasons meet. So a nfrājanā rite on Kārtika amāvāsya would be most appropriate (both because a battle was to be begun and because at the end of Kārtika the season of Sarad ended). The Bṛhatsamhita ( 43. 1-2) prescribes a nfrājana rite for horses, elephants and men on the 8th or 12th of Kārtika bright half or on the 15th of Kartika (Full Moon or amāvāsyā). It is extremely doubtful

(Continued from the last page)

was killed on the third day after Drona became commander-in-chief. It may be noted that Nilakanṭha explains the differently as’ meaning Mr gasirsa wbich bas a double deity as its presiding deity. It may be noted that this text of the TTFEft as printed is not quite reliable, since tour in his commentary on fan 17. 2. reads ‘oa a HYATÀSHTE for funt … Hasit and ‘xviquet a ATT TT&TT) Fafaa:format… Total! If these readings be accepted it follows that the Bhārata savitri impliedly recognizes the existence of a tithiksaya, since Drona is there said to have been killed on the 13th tithi of dark half when the epic itself says that he died on the 15th day after the battle began, As the war commenced on the 13th of bright half, there would be 16 days on 13th of dark half,

1774. Igra PAGO ETA HOTEL JERNST YAT TIT: ? gtak Frakta: # 701 160. 93. About this, w a t says ’te TETT ST! aferson for: (v. l. SFATTETE:). The farura of great quotes ( Jivananda p. 35) a passage from the Devipurāṇa that on the 6th of Caitra Skauda is to be worshipped and it is called the gr. The forurgie II (on fratsite sea) says ‘Halagout metta ATTEE HTI … … इयमेव स्कन्दपाठी,

II)

Astronomical data in Mahābhārata

911

whether Mr. Karandikar is right in saying that Lohābhihara (or-sāra ) refers to Skandaṣaṣth1. In the first place, the worship of weapons can be done at any time,’ particularly when a battle is to be commenced. In the second place, it is not necessary to postulate the lapse of six days and more for the sending of Ulūka and his return from the time when Krspa said that battle may be begun on amāvāsyā. The armies had taken up opposite positions on the field of Kurukṣetra and Ulūka could have come and gone in a day or two. Further, we have no evidence that Skanda-sasthi was performed in northern India in Mārgasirṣa, though very late works composed by dākṣinātyas like the Nirnayasindhu say that Skandaṣasthi is the same as Campaṣasthi in Maharastra and is observed on the 6th of Mārgasirsa. Raghunandana quoting Devipurāṇa places Skandasasthi on Caitra 6th of the bright half and is supported by the Matsyapurāṇa quoted above in n.1766. There is no reason why the actual fight should commence so late as the 13th day of Mārgasirṣa (or even 11th as Mr. Karandikar suggests ) when Krsna said that it should be joined on amāvāsyā. It is quite possible that the war began on or about Kartika amāvāsyā. The observance of. ’lohābhihāra’ does not lead to the certain inference that the war was not begun till several days after the 6th of the bright half of Mārgasirṣa. Similarly, Mr. Karandi kar says that the moon is ordinarily in Bharaṇī on the 11th or 12th of the bright half of Mārgaśirṣa. It may be so. But it is possible to have the moon in Bharaṇl even on the 13th. I am inclined to hold that the Bhāratasāvitri dates of the beginning of the war embody a different tradition altogether from the one contained in the Mahābhārata itself. The Bhāratasāvitri is silent about nakṣatras on which the principal events of the war took place except at the commencement of the war. It mentions no tithikṣaya or tithivṛddhi. Krsna sends a message with Ulūka to Duryodhana (Udyoga 162, 57 ) ’tomorrow you will be seen’ (in your true colours) and Arjuna does the same (Udyoga 163. 14 ).

The Mahābhārata nowhere states quite explicitly the tithi or nakṣatra on which the battle actually commenced. We have to rely upon various indications to arrive at the tithi or nakṣatra, Balarama could not bear to see the fight between Duryodhana and Bhima, both of whom were his pupils in mace-duel and went on a pilgrimage (Udyoga 157. 33-35 and 158,39). Balarama returned on the 18th day of the war and (in Salyapa rva 34. 6).912

History of Dharmasastra,

[ Vol.

he remarks, ‘it is 42 days since I left (on a pilgrimage); I start ed when the moon was in Puṣya and I have come here again on Śravaṇa ‘1775, In Salya 35. 13-14 it is stated that Balarama went to the river Sarasvati on pilgrimage on ‘maitra-nakṣatra yoga’ (i. e. when the moon was in Anuradha ). This conflict may be resolved by holding, as Nilakantha does, that Balarama left the Pandavas on Pusya, reached the Sarasvati on Anuradha and returned on Śravaṇa. If we follow Salya 34.6 the war commenced when the moon was in or near Mrgasirṣa (18 nakṣatras before Śravaṇa ). This would be in direct conflict with a passage in Bhismaparva 17.2 that 1776 on the day of battle the moon was in the province of Māgha’ and also other passages that will be indicated later on. This last passage should ordinarily mean that the moon was near Māgha, Mr Karandikar looks upon Salya 34.6 as an interpolation and takes Bhisma 17.2 to mean that the moon was in an inauspici. ous nakṣatra of the category of Māgha. This would suit Bharaṇī but not Rohiṇī or Mrgaśirṣa. His meaning is far fetched and he does not explain why Bharaṇī was not directly mentioned in the Epic, when in several other places the epic doos mention directly the nakṣatra concerned. His explanation gives the go-by to the 13th tithi. Dr. Daftari boldly asserts that we must transpose the nakṣatras ( in Salya 34. 6 ) and read *śravape samprayatosmi puṣyeṇa punarāgataḥ’. If we once resort to these methods followed by these two learned writers, there is no knowing where one should stop. There are scholars who might with equal or greater plausibility claim that most of these astronomical references are either of very late date or are inter polations ( vide Vaidya’s Mahābhārata’ p. 71). Similarly, if we once concede that we are at liberty to change readings to suit our theories even in the total absence of all manuscript evidence, then there is no sure foundation on which we can build. The Mahabharata passages have a tradition of centuries behind them. We must, in the absence of good mss. evidence to the contrary, either accept them all and try to explain them or we must give up the job of reconciling them as a hopeless tangle and rely on other evidence to arrive at the date of the

1775. चत्वारिंशवहाम्यबवेपमे निसुतस्य है। पुण्येण संमयातोस्मि श्रवणे पुनरा a: 1 TFT 34. 6.

1776. Herfra D# $40i HMTU WOTETE AETAT: 8 A 17, 2. frent expialas; per fasd ** mori fugetarihini

II 1

Astronomical data in Mahabhārata

913

Bhārata war as best as we can. We saw above that Jyestha was the nakṣatra on Kārtika amāvāsyā and, if the war began then, the nakṣatra on the 18th day from then would be Pusya. Nilakantha, following the Mimāṁsā rules of interpretation, holds that the concluding passage (upasamhāravākya) is superior in strength to passages that occur at the beginning of a work, that the passage in Salya 34. 6 is the dominant one and other conflicting passages must be either brushed aside or explained away in conformity with Salya 34.6 and gives an explanation of Maghāyiṣayagaḥ somah’ which is quite unsatisfactory, Dr. Daftari also holds, relying on Atharva Jyotiṣa, that the passage means the moon was in Mūla’ (p. 27 para. 62-65 of his work ‘Astronomical method’ &c.). The explanation is ingenious but one fails to see why this round-about way was resorted to and why the text did not simply say ‘mūlanakṣatragaḥ somaḥ’, which violates no metrical requirements. In Anuśāsana parva ( 167.26-28 ) Bhiṣma, while on the bed of darts, states : 1777 * the sun has turned ( towards the north); 58 days have passed by since I laid myself down on this (arrow bed). This is the mild month of Māgha that is now current, three parts of it remain and this fortnight should be sukla’. Bhiṣma was struck down on the 10th day of the war; so 67 nights had passed from the day when the war began to the day in Māgha on which this was uttered. The difficulty is how to connect ’tribhāgaśeṣah’, whether as an adjective of’ māsa’ or of ‘pakṣa’. If we take it in the first way, these words were uttered on 8th of Māgha śukla : if we take it as an adjective of pakṣa’, then they will have to be taken as uttered on the 4th of the bright half or on the 4th of the dark half which may be regarded in its astrologi cal effects as equal to śuklapakṣa ( though the tithi itself is in the dark half). If the words were uttered on the 8th of Māgha śukla, the Bhārata war began on Kartika amāvāsyā (which will be in consonance with Udyoga 142. 18 quoted in n. 1770 ). The passage in Anuśāgana (167. 26-28) is supported by two other passages. After the war was over, Yudhisthira went to the capital and stayed there for 50 nights and when he found that the Sun had started on its apparent northward path (uttarāyana) he came to Bhiṣma ( Anuśāsana 167,5). In Santiparva 51. 14 Krsna says to Bhiṣma: ‘You have yet to live 56 days.’ Nila kantha, who takes Salya 34. 6 as the dominant passage, puts a

· 1777. H granstif

115

ari 7*: paraATO #77: I… AUTÁ FERRATA: 197 ta: qatā FThe Fausto THA 167.26-28.

914

[ Vol.

most far-fetched construction on the word “astapañcāsatam’, which he takes to mean’one hundred minus 58’ i. e. 42 nights and explains ‘pañcāśatam ṣat ca as equal to 30. This shows to what straits commentators are reduced when conflicting passages bave got to be explained away. One more indication about the tithi on which the war commenced is afforded by Dronaparva chap. 184, where it is stated that a gtim fight went on till midnight when Ghatotkaca was killed, that the fatigued armies then snatched some sleep, that then the moon rose at about 2 A. M. (verge 46 ) and that the fight was then regumed 1718 ( chap 186. 1 tribhagamātrasesāyām rāiryan yuddham-apartata ). This description of moonrise shows that Ghatotkaca was killed on or about the 11th of the dark half. We know from the Mahābhārata itself that Ghatotkaca was kill ed on the night of the 4th day of Drona’s command or on the 14th day after the war began. This would establish that the war began on the 12th or 13th of the bright half and ended on the 14th of the dark balf or on amāvāsya of Mārgasirṣa. Dr. Daftari holds that this description is an interpolation.

If we try to find out the nakṣatra on which the war began, we have one sure criterion in Salya 34. 6 viz. that the war ended on Śravaṇa nakṣatra when Balarāma returned from pilgrimage. Now the moon cannot be in Sravaṇa at all in Mārgasirsa dark half, but may be in it on the first or 2nd of the bright half of Pausa. So between the tithi and nakṣatra as disclosed by the Mahābhārata itself there is a slight dis crepanoy of a day or two. There is another way of looking at the data. Bhıṣma was waiting for uttarāyana to begin and we know that he passed away on the 59th day after he was mortally wounded on the 10th day of the war. Therefore, a period of 67 days ( 58 nights of his lying on arrow-bed plus 9 nights of the battle when he slept on his usual bed ) elapsed between the beginning of the war and the beginning of Uttarayana, which undoubtedly occurred in Māgha in that year(as Anuśāsana 167. 28 expressly states). The real difficulty is to find out the tithi of the commencement of Uttarāyaṇa. But if we accept the approximate tithi and nakṣatra ( as stated above ) of the end of

1778. RETTErat het gewater ont arrat huumut fant orang usia 186.1, testing explalos •

T arihterena, per curatera utamut TUFT HITT: 1’. He supposed that we was killed on the 12th of the dark hair.

taj

Astronomical data in Mahabhārata

916

the war (i.e. Mārgaśirṣa amāvāsyā or 1st of Pauṣa and Śravaṇa nakṣatra ), uttarāyaṇa began 49 days thereafter i. e. on or about the 4th of the dark half of Māgha. According to the Vedānga jyotisa, 4th of the dark half of Māgha is one of the tithis on which uttarayana may begin ( vide Dikehit’s work pp. 75, 91 ). How scholars accept one of the data and reject others is well illustrated here. Acc. to Salya 34. 6 the war ended on Śravaṇa (and so should have begun when the moon was in Mrgaśirṣa ). Acc. to the Bhāratasāyitri the war began on Bharaṇī and on the 13th of the bright half of Mārgaśīrṣa and ended on Amā Vābyā (and therefore the nakṣatra was Mūla or Pārvāṣadha ). Arjunamiśra gives up the nakṣatras and sticks to the tithis. Mr. Karandikar gives up the express verse about Śravaṇa (and regards that whole chapter as an interpolation), he gives up the 13th tithi of the beginning of the war as given in the Bhārata sāvitri, holds that the war began on 11th instead and sticks fast to the Bharaṇī nakṣatra given in the Bhāratasavitrī. Dr. Daftari altogether changes the reading of Salya 34, 6 by transposing the nakṣatras mentioned.

The difference between the day of Uttarāyaṇa in Māgha stated in the Mahābhārata and the day thereof at present is utilised by scholars for arriving at the date of the Maha bhārata war.

There are other data in the Mahābhārata from which also the date of the Mahābhārata war is sought to be deduced. Before entering into details, some matters that are accepted by most scholars may be stated here. It is generally held that there were two eclipses, first, one of the moon immediately followed by a solar eclipse, that there was a fortnight of 13 days which was looked upon as very unusual and a very evil omen. Vide Bhisma 3. 28 quoted in n. 1767. In Bhiṣmaparva 3. 31-32 Vyāsa is reported as saying, ‘I have known amāvāsyā occurring on the 14th, 15th or 16th day (of a pakṣa ), but I do not know an amāyāsyā occurring on the 13th day (of a pakṣa); both the moon and the sun were eclipsed in the same month on the 13th day’. In the Mausala-parva 1779 2. 18-19, when Krsna, 36 years after the war, beheld certain portents it is said, “on observing those portents on the amāvesyā occurring on the 13th day he declared’ Rahu had made this ( 13th day ) appear as the 14th and 15th (when usually there is amavasya ) when the Bharata

1779.. एवं पश्यन् हषीकेशः संमान कालपर्ययम् । प्रयोदश्याममावास्यां तान दुवा प्राणवीदिदम् ॥ चतुर्दशी पथदशी कतेयं राहुणा पुनः । मासे भारते युद्ध माता चाप क्षपाय W: u Atoa 2. 18-19,

916

(Vol.

war took place; to-day it has again occurred for our destruction’. From these words it is clear that the ocourrence of am āvāsya at the end of a pakṣa of 13 days was looked upon as a very evil omen. Then many scholars hold that a comet had also appeared at the time of the great war. Bhiṣma 3. 131780 states, ’ a very frightful comet stands in the sky covering the constellation of Pusya’. There are grave doubts whether the statement is made from actual observation. The appearance of a comet has always been associated in ancient times with great calamities. Compare Kumārasambhava II. 32’ upaplavāya lokānām dhūmaketurivot thitaḥ’. As indicated above, the Mahābhārata gathers together several possible and impossible things to emphasize their significance as to impending calamities. Therefore the inclu sion of a comet among portents does not establish that a comet had actually appeared at the time of the Bhārata war. Supposing for argument that a comet had appeared, that circumstance is of no help at all in settling the date. A large number of comets is included in the sun’s retinue. The number of comets of long periods that approach the sun in a century is said to be 300. There is nothing to show what particular comet appeared at the time of the war and no one has data to connect the Mahābhārata comet with Halley’s comet or any other comet well-known in modern times. Therefore the datum about a comet is entirely worthless for purposes of chronology. According to Bṛhatsamhita 11, 5 and Utpala thereon the ancient writer Parāśara held the view that there were 101 ketus and Garga said that there were a thousand. The description in Bhisma 3. 13 states that the perihelion of the comet was in Pusya. In Udyogaparya 143. 10 it is said ’ since a graha specially afflicts Citrā, a great calamity is indeed approaching the Kauravas’. This may probably refer to a comet. Two other verses appear to have some bearing on this. Bhisma 3. 12 states 1781 that the white graha stands traversing

1780. श्वेतो ग्रहस्तथा चित्रा समातिक्रम्य तिष्ठति । अभावं हि विशेषेण कुरूणां तत्र पश्यति ॥ धूमकेतुर्महापोरः पुण्य चाक्रम्य तिष्ठति । सेनयोरशिवं घोरं करिष्यति महायहः । …श्तो महः प्रज्वलितः सधूम इव पाषक: । ऐन्द्र तेजस्वि नक्षत्र ज्येष्ठामाक्रम्य तिष्ठति ॥ भीम 3. 12, 13, 16. The Madras edition reads U ng: in f 3. 16 and Dr. Daftari proposes to read eat for (p. 64 para 130).

1781. qarat Tatuerda i fire off fiartagati TR** Fevery min: TTE: 1 in 3, 17 ; compare near 11.39 श्वेत इति जटाकारो रुक्षः श्यायो वियनिभागगतः । विनिवर्ततेऽपसव्यं त्रिभागशेषाः *HT: * #. geum explaias: ‘HT: “T: Fra: oparot: >. It is remarkable that Turk. 11. 57 is FETE T UOTT HON FAIGHET: 1, ithus agreeing very closely with PTOA 3. 12.

III)

Astronomical data in Mahabharata

917

citra ( i. e. it is about to enter into svāti) and verse 16 says, the white graha is fiery like fire emitting smoke and stands occupy ing Jyesthā which is a bright star presided over by Indra’. What is meant by ‘white graha’? The words. sveto grahaḥ should ordinarily denote Venus. Nilakantha takes them to mean Ketu (node) in Bhisma 3. 12 and another comet in 3. 16. If this latter explanation be accepted there were two comets seen at the time. Even if we hold that Bhisma 3. 16 describes the tail of the comet mentioned in 3. 13, that is of very little help. All that would be meant would be that the tail of the comet was a very long one. Bhisma 3. 17 has been taken to refer to Rāhu by Nilakantha, while some modern scholars hold that it refers to a comet. It means, ’ a cruel comet standing between Citrā and Svāti, afflicts Rohini and also the sun and the moon’. The description of the Ketu valled Sveta in Br̥hat samhitā 11. 39 agrees very closely with the description in the Bhismaparva and Parāśara quoted by Utpala thereon states that thie Ketu called ‘Sveta’ becomes visible after 115 years and portends the destruction of two-thirds of the population.

Then there are several passages which state the positions of several planets just before the battle or on the day the battle began. Here again at least two different positions are assigned to each planet except Mercury. It is first to be noted that at the beginning of the war all the seven planets excluding Rabu and Ketu are declared to have been near each other ( Bhiṣma 17, 2, 9. in note 1776 above). We know from the Mahābhārata itself that the Sun and the Moon on Kārtika amāvāsyā were in Jyesthā. If the war began on amāvāsyā or a day later, the planets must be near Jyesthā. If the Bhāratasāvitri be follow ed then the war began on Mārgaśirsa bright 13 and on Bharaṇī. If that were so, the sun and the moon cannot be together. Mr. Karandikar takes 11th of the bright half of Mārgaśırsa to be the tithi of the beginning of the war and holds that the Sun was in nakṣatra Jyesthā and that the moon was in Bharaṇī (following the Bhāratasāvitri as to this last). I should hold that we are not at liberty to take one datum from one group of statements and another from another group and then say that it is proved that the war was fought at a particular time. It is further noted in Karpaparva 37. 4 that on Karṣa’s death ( i.e. 17 days after the war began), the seven planets were seen going away from the Sun, 1782 The positions of the planets at the beginning of the war were as follows

1782. FARA SURU H ETTET: # of 37. 4..

918

i Vol.

SUN

Udyoga 143. 11 ( Rahu approaches the Sun) Bhisma 3. 11 ( Bhisnia 3. 28, 32 (q. above in n. 1767)

The Sun was either in Jyesthā or near Mrgaśirṣa. MOON Bhiṣma 3. 17 (paruṣa graha i, e. Rahu afflicted

both the Sun and the Moon) and Rohipi, Bhiṣma 3. 28, 32 (q. above in n. 1767) Bhisma 17.2 ( the Moon was in the province of

Māgha q. above in n. 1776 ). MERCURY – Karnaparva 94. 49 says that on Karna’s death

the son of the Moon ( i. e. Mercury ), the white luminary, rose slantingly resembling in hue fire and the Sun. The Salyaparva 11.18 states that ‘Mars, Venus and Mercury were in con junction. 1783 If Mars was in Maghā as stated in Bhisma 3. 14 and Mars and Mercury were in conjunction Mercury would be in Maghā, which forebodes destruction of people by war,

as stated in Br̥hatsamhitā 7.3.

MARS Udyoga 143. 9 states, “Mars having made a

retrograde motion in Jyesthā seeks ( to reach or afflict?) Anurādhā, the nakṣatra presided

over by Mitra, as if bringing death (to friends)’. Bhiṣma 3, 14 states : *Mars is retrograde in

Māgha.’ What is the meaning of this ? Literal ly it means that Mars was in Maghā and was retrograde in motion. Mr. Karandikar holds that Mars had only drṣti on Maghā and was in Puṣya. Supposing this is correct, Mars was

not near the Sun but far away. Bhisma 3. 18 declares : ‘Mars, having changed

its motion after being retrograde and with the lustre of fire, stands covering Sravaṇa, the mansion of Bșhaspati’ 1704

1783. umfram var: FTAET Targfare for M ore 94. 49; Yulyunsat siste paret i Ta Toyota FTEHTCHUA

TEU 11. 18.

1784. AT $Tn at sagot

n i Brut serta ** # # रयोग 143.9; मपास्वङ्गारको पत्र अषणे बहस्पतिः । भगं नक्षत्रमाक्रम्य सूर्यपुत्रेण

(Continued on the next page)

II

Astronomical data in Mahābhārata

919

We find that the Mahābhārate employs two classes of expres siong. When it uses words like’ tiṣthati’ (stands ), ‘akramya’ (having traversed ),’ samvștya or samparivārya’(having cover ed or concealed ) it means that the planet was in or very near that nakṣatra. When words meaning “afflicts (pīdayati) are employed, the meaning is probably that the planet has only drsti on the nakṣatra. It is impossible to say whether the rules and theories about dṛsti or purṇa drsṭi and partial dṛsti had been evolved at the time of the Mahābhārata War. If the war was fought about 3101 B, C. or even 1931 B, C. there is nothing to establish that the theories about drsti contained even in the Atharvajyotisa ( which is certainly later than the Vedānga jyotiga of the Rgveda i. e. much later than about 1200 B. C.) were known then. Vide under Venus for further difficulties. JUPITER- Bhisma 3. 14 states that Jupiter was retrograde

in Śravaṇa ; Bhiṣma 3. 27 states, 1785 Both Jupiter and Saturn that had stayed together

for a year are near Visakhā and are both fiery’. Jupiter cannot stay for one year in one nakṣatra;

it traverses 27 nakṣatras in a year. If at the time of the war Jupiter was near Visakhā it could not have been near it for a year. Eleven months before that it would have been very

near Citrā. If it was near Viśākha at the time of the war and the Sun was in Jyestha, it can hardly be correct to say that seven planets had come together in the sky (there being’ a dis tance of about two nakṣatras or about 26

(Continued from the last page)

ovat i afroh 3.14; 24 a o 44:1 part PATETT otro arpit syaffua: # FFCH 3, 18. gay 0D THAT 1. 10. explains, var fye TEATTI aut fat UFMT g: foet maar som rege. In these verses there is probably some reference to the verses of Parāśara and Garga quoted by Utpala on Bṛhatsambitā 6. 1-13. thi quoted on 6. 13 says that the nakṣatras from Purvāṣādbā to Aśvinī are to be of dakṣına-mārga and the movements of Mars in them cause danger.

1785. HOTEUTU ut gardergat i PART4: tut stufe शनैश्वरी ॥ भीन्न 3. 273; हस्पतिः संपरिवार्य रोहिणीं बभूव चन्द्रार्कसमो विज्ञापते। Hof 94. 51.

920

[Vol.

degrees between the two). Even if we hold the meaning to be that Jupiter and Saturn had remained near Viśākha for one year and are (now at the time of the war) fiery, that does not solve the difficulty. In the first place, it is not a natural construction. This meaning would leave the exact position of the two planets at the time of the war unspecified. But Jupiter and Saturn must be supposed to be in or near Jyesthā if the Sun was in Jyesthā at the beginning of the war. If Saturn was in Jyestha at the time of the war it could have been one year in Viśākhā about two years before the war. What is the propriety of men tioning Saturn’s position two years before the war? The relevant point is to state that posi tion at the time of the war. Therefore it must be held that Bhisma 3. 27 states their position at the time of the war and adds one more circumstance that they were there for one year.

Karnaparva 94, 51 says: “Brhaspati ‘having

entirely covered Rohipi has become like the Sun and the Moon’. If at the beginning of the war Bṛhaspati was retrograde and was near Visakhā, it passes one’s understanding how in a fortnight it came to Rohini. Mr. Karandikar suggests that Rohini here is the name of Jyestha as in the Tai. S. IV. 4. 10. 1-3. Again in this explanation there are several difficulties. There is nothing to show that at the time of the Bhārata war or of the epic Jyesthā was called Rohiṇī. The Tai. S. does not employ the name Jyesthā in its list. It speaks of Rohipi once as having Prajāpati for its presiding deity and then as having Indra as the presiding deity. Jyeṣthā is well-known to the Mahabhārata and the word is employed by it in other passages. Further, if Bphaspati had covered Jyeṣthā it can hardly be correct or even useful (for the purposes of chronology) to say that Jupiter was near Visakha.

DII ]

Astronomical data in Mahābhārata

921

VENUS

Bhisma 3. 15 states that Venus 1786 having ascend

ed (i. e. occupied ) the Purvābhādrapada pakṣatra shines charmingly and it looks up to Uttarābhadrapadā together with (?). The meaning of’ parikramya sahitaḥ’ is not at all clear. However the first half is as clear as possible. Venus was in Pūrvā Prosthapadā. If the Sun was in Jyesthā on Kārtika amāvāsya. it is impossible that Venus could have been in the 8th nakṣatra from Jyeṣthā. Venus is never more than four nakṣatras from the Sun in the sky. This would completely knock on the head the principal statement that seven planets were near each other. Mr. Karandikar in desperation suggests that we should under stand Pārvāṣāḍhā for “Prosthapade Pārve’ and also that the word ‘Prosthapade’ was an interpolation inserted by some busy body later on. As I have frequently said above, this is a most unjustifiable way of dealing with the so called astronomical data in the Mahābhārata. “Prosthapade Pārve’ can never mean ‘Pūrvā sādha’. In the Tai, S. IV, 4. 10. 1-3, and the Tai, Br. I. 5. 1 and III. 1. 1 the word Prostha padā is expressly employed for Pūrva Bhadra pada. Why should one word in a verse be held to be interpolated ? Is it because it does not agree with one’s hypothesis? In Salya 11. 18 Venus and Mars are said to be in conjunc tion with the Moon. If the war started on Bharaṇī as the Bhāratasāvitri says, then at the time of the mace-duel the moon might be in Jyesthi and therefore both Mars and Venus will have to be in Jyesthā. But this is oppos ed to two of the passages cited above referring to the position of Mars. If the war began on Jyestha and Kārtika amāvāsyā, then on the 18th day the moon will be in Pusya or Aslesa and both Venus and Mars would have to be in one of these two. In any case, if Venus was

in Purva-bhadrapadā at the beginning of the *: 789 FARSU fantai Tata fingra Fa: Freetha

116922

[ Vol

SATURN

war, on the 18th day it can neither be in Jyestha, nor in Puṣya nor in Aśleṣā. Besides, it is debatable whether Bhisma 3. 16 ( where sveto grahaḥ’ is mentioned ) refers to Venus or not. Venus is often called ‘Sita’ in ancient astronomical works (e. g. in Bphat.

samhita 9. 42, 45 ). We have four statements about Saturn. In

Udyoga 143. 8 we read, 1787 ‘A refulgent and malignant planet, Saturn, afflicts the nakṣatra presided over by Prajapati (i. e. Rohini)’; Bhisma 2.32 states, ‘Saturn afflicts Rohiṇī’; Bhiṣma 3. 14 says, ’the nakṣatra presided over by Bhaga is covered and afflicted by Saturn’; Jupiter and Saturn are near Visakha (Bhiṣma 3,27 considered above). In the first three passages the root ‘pid’ occurs and therefore it is possible to argue that some kind of aspect ( drsti or vedha ) of the nakgatra mentioned in the text is meant. But in the third passage both ‘akramya’ and ‘pidyati’ are used about the same nakṣatra. This makes that passage inexplicable in the usual way. The ‘prājāpatya nakṣatra’must be Rohiṇī as in the 2nd passage Robiṇi is expressly named. All authorities agree that Prajāpati is the deity of Rohiṇī. ‘Prājāpatya nakṣatra’ cannot be taken to mean Mūla, since the presiding deity of Mūla ispitaraḥ’ in Tai. 8. IV. 4. 10. 1-3 and Nirfti ( in the Tai. Br. I. 5. 1 and in the Vedānga-jyotiṣa ) and Prajāpati only in some later works. Bhaga is the presiding deity of Uttarā Phalguni in the Tai. S. IV. 4. 10. 1-3 and Tai. Br. I. 5. 1, and IIL 1. 1, while in the Vedāngajyotisa (Rgveda, Verse 25 ), Viṣṇu Dh. S. (78. 16), San. Gr. (I. 26. 9, SBE vol. 29 p. 53 ) Bhaga is the deity of Purvā Phalguni. The 4th passage about Saturn being near Visakha has been already dealt with under Jupiter.

1787. get it reftaun Autora: 1 $ with a fut 143, 8; nfe uff diaren funt pat Ta dona i wien 3, 14. .

. terra dira arrot a Faso • fi 2.32 ;

Astronomical data in Mahābhārata

923

The above detailed statement about the astronomical passages of the Mahabhārata will induce any unbiassed reader who has no axe to grind that they are hopelessly inconsistent and that no certain chronological conclusion can be drawn therefrom. In the above discussion I have generally not cited the various explanations indulged in by several scholars, as that would have involved me in a very lengthy discourse without any adequate benefit. To me it appears probable that the final redactor of the Mahābhārata had two or more sets of astronomical data about the war before him and without trying to examine and sift them he included them all in his work. The Bharata savitri probably represents one (and a later) tradition about the positions of the planets at the time of the war. As I hold that either the Mahābhārata passages on the positions of the planets were interpolated at a very late stage or are hope lessly inconsistent I deem it unnecessary to enter upon an examination of the mathematical calculations made by several scholars to find out the date of the Bhārata war from the shift ing of the solstices and the position of the planets.

Since only 5046 years have elapsed (in 1945 A. D.) from the beginning of the Kali age and as Kaliyuga extends to 432000 years according to Paurānic computations we are just on the threshold of the Kaliyuga and it is beyond one’s com prehension to visualize what will happen towards the end of the vast period of about 427000 years that are still to pass before Kaliyuga ends. It is very small consolation to read in the Purāṇas in a prophetic strain that at the end of that colossal period Viṣṇu will be incarnated as Kalkin in a village Sam. bhala, will destroy all Mlechbas, śūdra kings and heretics and will establish dharma, so that the Kr̥ta age will then be ushered in. Here again as in almost all matters there are differences in the legend. The Vāyu ( 58. 75-90 ) and the Matsya (144, 50-64 ) state that it will be Pramati Bhargava who will be the avatāra of Viṣṇu and uproot the Mlechhas, heretics and sūdra

· kings, while Vayu 98. 104-110 and 99. 396-7, Vanaparva 190. 93-97, Bhāgavata XII. %. 16-23 state that Kalkin will conquer the Mleochas, will become a universal emperor ( cakravartin ) of the dharmavijayin type and will start the Kr̥ta age. In some passages he is oalled Kalki (nom. of Kalkin ) as in Vanaparva 190.93, Brahma 213. 164, Vāyu 99.396, Matsya 47, 248, Nṛsimha 54. 3; while in others as Kalkih (nom. of Kalki) as in Vayu 98. 104, Kalki 2. 28, Bhagavata XIL 2. 16, Matsya 47, 251. In

924

(Vol.

some pageages he is said to be the son of a brāhmaṇa Viṣṇu yasas who will be the head 1788 .of the village.called Sambhala (Bhagavata XII. 2. 16, Viṣṇupuriṇa IV. 24. 26, Agni 16. 8, Nṛsimha 54.3, Kalkipurāṇa 2. 34 ), while in other passages he is himself styled Viṣṇuyasas ( Vāyu 98, 104, Vanaparva 190. 93, Brahma 213. 164, Viṣṇudharmottara I. 74. 40).1788a In some places

1788. 77* DIRECTFT TETTU HETEHET: I want fangu#: : - विष्यति ॥ अश्वमायुगमारा देवदत्तं जगत्पतिः । असिना साधुदमनमवैश्वर्यगुणान्वितः ।…… यदावतीणों भगवानकल्किधर्मपतिहरिः । कृतं भविष्यति तदा प्रजामतिश्च साविकी ।

TITET XII2. 16-23,

17882. Various efforts have been made about finding germs of history in the legend of Kalkin. In I. A. vol. 48 pp. 123-128 Prof. H. B. Bhide tries to show how Jain authorities about Kalkin are conflicting. Mr. K. P. Jayaswal in I. A. vol. 46 (for 1917) p. 145 holds tbat Kalkla must be identified with the great hero Yasodharman who ruled over India from the Brahmaputrā to the Western Ocean and from the Himālaya to Mahendra and who conquered the Hun Mibirakula and made him pay homage to his feet as stated in the Mandasor Inscription (vide Gupta Ias. p. 149). Prof. Pathak on the other hand relying upon certain Jaina sources identifies Kalkin with Mibirakula himself (I. A. for 1918 at p. 19). Otto Schrader in Brahmavidyā vol. I. pp. 17-27 discusses how the names Kalkin or Kalki came to be given to the saviour of India from Mlecchas, heretics and the like. Kalka means ‘sin’ or ‘sediment’ and Karka means ‘a white horse’. Therefore he thinks that Kalkin is a form of karkin (one riding a white borse). Vide also N. I. A, vol. IV, pp. 337–343 (on Kalki from the Kalki. purāṇa). It is probable that the dismal accounts of Kaliyuga were put forth in the first centuries of the Christian era when the ancient varṇa śrama-dharma had suffered a great set-back owing to the ascendancy of Buddhism and Jainism and the invasions of foreigners like the Sakas and Hūnas, that when Yasodharman defeated the great Hun invader Mihirakula, people believed that the dark ages were at an end and that an era of per fect dharma was at hand. That Mihirakula was a most rutbless and blood. thirsty invader who in his long career of 70 years slaughtered myriads of men and women is stated by the Rājatarangini I. 310 ( wbich speaks of him as trikotihan) and 322 (which narrates that he slaughtered three crores of women of respectable birth together with their husbands, brothers and sons). Hiouen Chwang (Beal’s B. R. W. W. pp. 171-172) narrates that Mihirakula either slaughtered or made slaves of nine lakhs of people in Gandhāra. Passages in a prophetic vein were added about the time of Yasodharman to those already existing about the decline of dharma in Kali. yuga. This will of course necessitate that all passages about Kalkin in any work wbatever were put in later than about 530 A. D. There are two theories as to who defeated Mihirakula. Hlouen Chwang’s account gives the name of the victor as Bālāditya of Magadba (vide Beal’s B. R. W, W, part I. pp. 167-171). On the other hand there are three inscriptions, the

(Continued on the next page)

Avatāra of Kalkin

925

he is said to have already flourished (Vāyu 98. 111, Matsya 47. 255 ), in other places the texts employ the future ( Vāyu 99. 396, Bhagavata XII. 2. 16). This last discrepancy is probably due to the fact that the writers sometimes forget their role of prophets. Further, it has to be remembered that according to the Purāṇas the four yugas (and therefore the Kalki avatāra ) have been repeated again and again. The Kalki-purāpa (I. %. 33 and I. 3. 32-33 ) states that Kalki was a contemporary of Vigākhayūpa king of Māhismati, while the Vayu (99, 312-314), Matsya ( 272. 4) and Viṣṇu (IV. 24)-state that Viśākbayūpa was the 3rd of the Pradyota dynasty that preceded the Siśunāga dynasty. Though the Kalki-purāṇa several times uses the past tensa about Kalki, yet at the very beginning it says (I. 10) that what is narrated is an ākhyāna (story) of the future. It is interesting to note that in the Parnālaparvata-grahan akhyāna27896 of Jayarāma composed about 1673 A.D. Bahlolkhan,

(Continued from the last page ) Gwalior stone Inscription of Mihirakula (Gupta Ins. No. 37 p. 161), the Mandasor stone Pillar Inscription of Yasod harman (Gupta Ing. No. 33 p. 142), and the Mandasor Stone Inscription of Yasodharman Viṣṇuvar dhana (Gupta Ins. No. 35 p. 150) in none of which is Bālāditya referred to. But in the Sarnath Stone of Prakatāditya, son of Bālāditya, another Baliditya is referred to (Gupta Ins. No. 79 p. 284 ). In the Maodasor Stone Pillar Inscription (Gupta Ins. p. 147) occur these words relating to Mibirakula pana 777 Foraya atau tergurau fhithout araga Io the Mandasor Stone Ins. (Gupta Ins. No. 35 at p. 153 ) lines 4 and 5 read 30 wir : IITTUÁAIRT I

771 Poteft facere poredi gara fasganiania: # # . Dr. Fleet beld that Yasodharman and Viṣṇuvardhana were different, but the reasons he assigns are unconvincing and Jayaswal appears to be right in holding that Viṣṇuvardhana is the same as Yasodharman (in ‘Imperial History’ pp. 39. 41 ) and that Viṣṇuvardhana was the overlord of Balāditya. It appears likely that the compilers of the extant Porānas combined the two principal parts of the two nanes Viṣṇuvardhana and Yasodharman and that the con. queror of the Mlecchas was said to be Viṣṇuyasas. Vide I. H. Q. vol. XII p. 531 and vol, XV pp. 302-306 for Yasodharman, Viṣṇuvardhana and Mihirakula and Dr. R. G. Basak in History of North-East India’ (1934) pp. 97-101 (who holds that Yasodbarman and Viṣṇuvardhana were two different Kings). Pargiter’s ‘Ancient Indian tradition’ and ‘Dynasties of tbe Kali age’ and Dr. Fradhan’s ‘Chropology of Ancient India’ may be read with advantage in connection with the historic material in the Puranas.

1788b, que eres feryat sie 1349 re i frutTTUR FA: F*** विष्यति।छेस्पते तेन सर्वत्र व्याप्तं यावनमण्डलम् । तस्यैव कल्किनस्तावदसावग्रे समागतः ।

# PWTCYFARE USIFAT ega: i quloq TUOTETT V. 6-8, published by TT-TT- **-me at Poona, 1923.

926

(Vol.

commander-in-chief of the Bijapur army, is made to say to Khawaskhan, the Vazir, as follows, ‘In the Hindu śāstras some say that Kalkin, the 10th avatāra of Vispu will be born and he will destroy the hordes of Yavanas. Shivaji appears to be the first harbinger of that Kalkin’.

Even though the Purāṇas are carried away by their over zeal in condemning the moral and physical decline of the Kali age, almost all of them exhibit no verses about matters for bidden in the Kali age. We have to see when the topic of Kalivarjya attained prominence and what the matters are that were once practised by people without objection and that later on came to be prohibited or condemned.

The Ap. Dh. Ṣ. ( II. 6. 14. 6-10) condemns the practice of giving all or most of the ancestral property to the eldest son as opposed to śāstras. The Āp. Dh, S. (II. 10. 27. 2-6), after referring to the view of some that a woman when being married is given to the whole family of the bridegroom, condemns the practice of niyoga.2789 Both these practices (of uddhāravibhāga and of niyoga ) are among those included in the texts on Kalivarjya, Among the earliest references in the smrtis to practices once current, but forbidden in the Kali age is a passage of Bphaspati quoted by Aparārka p. 97, where niyoga and the numerous secondary sons are said to be impossible owing to the decadence1790 of spiritual power among men of the Dvāpara and Kali ages. Aparārka p. 739 and the D. M. quote a passage of Saunaka to the effect that sons other than the aurasa or dattaka are not allowed in the Kali age 1791. Prajāpati (verse 151 ) refers 1792 to the ancient practice of offering meat and wine in srāddhas, but prescribes that these should be eschewed in the Kali age. Vyāsa 1793 quoted in the Nirnayasindhu and other works forbids

1789. Friseuratai # qita: FA S T Fest satu rurar तदिन्द्रियदौर्बल्याद्विप्रतिपक्षम् । अविशिष्टं हि परत्वं पाणे:तिश्यतिक्रमे खल पुनरुभयोर्नरकः ।

r. . . II, 10. 27. 2-6.

1790. Vide H. of Dh. vol. II. p. 603 n. 1418 for the quotation.

1791. अत एवं कलौ निवर्तन्ते इत्यवत्तौ शौनकेनोक-वत्तौरसेसरेषा तु पुत्रत्वेन aftue- 1 31 p. 739. This is cited as from spreagra in several other works.:

1792. मधमप्यमृतं भाडे कलौता विवर्जयेत् । मसान्यपि हि सर्वाणि युगधर्मक्रमा HOT # 19 151.

1793. AAEHITOT Taartesanal Ger margfar ret AT aftur:

I T erat pruta fra q. by wat in dat op va. fi facut p. 55. Vide H. of Dh. vol. II. p. 953 n. 2481 for other references to this text.

III)

Kalivarjya in the smrtis

927

the setting of the three vedic fires and of resorting to sannyāsa after 4400 years of Kali. The Laghu-Asvalāyana 1794 smrti (21. 14-15 ) states that the two kinds of sons called Kunda and Golaka were permitted in former ages and had the samskāras performed on them, but are condemned in the Kali age. Viśva rūpa and Medhātithi, it is worth noting, do not quote a single verse about Kalivarjya. On Yaj. III. 30 Viśvarūpa tries to recon cile Parāśara III. 5 (saying that a brāhmaṇa who is learned in the Veda and keeps the sacred Vedic fires becomes free from im purity in a day) with Parāśara III. 8 ( that for ten days on impurity due to birth or death the food of that family becomes unpartakable for others). He does not accept the idea that the period of impurity is only one day for a learned man, but explains that Parāśara III. 5 is only an arthavāda meant for glorifying the study of Veda and the keeping of sacred fires. Among later commentators it is stated that the narrowing down of the periods of impurity on the ground of Veda study is forbidden in the Kali age. As this explanation is not offered by Viśvarūpa it is not unreasonable to infer that Viśvarūpa was not aware of the passage on this point quoted from the Adityapurāṇa. Medhātithi 1795 also (on Manu IX, 112 ) refers to the opinion of some that the smrti passages about niyoga and uddhāra-vibhāga were applicable. only in bygone ages, since emstis are restricted to certain ages ( vide Manu I. 85); but he refutes that view and explains Manu I. 85 by saying that the meaning is that the dharmas (i. e. qualities or natures of things) change from age to age as they do from season to season. From this it is clear that he did not accept that certain practices current in one age were forbidden in others. Vijñāneśvara 1796 quotes a single verse which condemns the practice of niyoga, the giving of a special share to the eldest son and the killing of a cow in a sacrifice as not allowable in the Kali age. That

1794. संस्कार्यो विधिवञ्चोक्तौ मुनिभिः कुण्डगोलको । युगान्तरे स धर्मः स्यात् कलो निन्ध इति स्मता परिविश्यां सुतः कुण्डो व्यभिचारसयुजवा। गोलको विधवायर्या च निषिद्धः murat a NESTARITH 21. 14-15.

1795. Vide n. 1197 above for Aunerers remarks pakran … - a m 1. Then he continues : a rarau: faqa: eraro a Friara: पर्वादिनियमादन्यत्रा चान्ये कृतयुगे धर्मा इति तत्पथम एवं ग्याख्यातम् । मेधा. on मनु IX. 112. On FE I. 85 ore Fagi rat he says : wAgreet orana gran

सहि पदार्थगुणमात्रे वर्तते। … यथा बसन्तऽन्यः पदार्थाना स्वभावोऽस्यो ग्रीष्मेश्य एष वर्षा स्वेवं युमेन्वपि.

1796. Vide above p, 628 n, 1198 for the verse que format.

928

History of Dharmaśāstra __[Vol.

verse is said by the Sm. C. II. p. 266 to haye occurred in the Sangraha (i.e. the work called Smrtisangraha). The Sm.C. quotes a verse of Kratu which forbids four acts in Kali, viz. niyoga, remarriage of a married girl, killing a cow in sacrifices and the taking of a jar.1797 The Naradiya-mahapurana contains four verses about Kalivarjya stating that certain practices which were once allowed are forbidden in the Kali age, viz. sea voyage, the carrying of a jar of water, marrying a girl of a class lower than one’s own, niyoga, killing of an animal in Madhuparka, offering of flesh in sraddhas, the stage of a forest hermit, remarriage of a married girl when the marriage was not con summated, perpetual student-hood, human sacrifice, horse sacri fice, starting on the great journey, the sacrifice of a cow 1798. Aparārka ( pp. 15, 63 ) quotes one verse and a half from the Brahmapurāṇa about certain Kalivarjyas viz. perpetual student hood, the carrying of a kamandalu, marriage with a sagotra or sapinda girl, the killing of a cow, human sacrifice, horsa sacri fice, drinking intoxicating liquors 1799. This could not be traced to the Brahmapurana, but the Prayascitta-tattva (p. 520) ex.

1797. ऋतुरपि । देवराञ्च सतोत्पत्तिः दत्ता कन्या न दीयते । म यज्ञे गोवधः कार्यः कलौच न कमण्डलुः ॥ . in स्मृतिच. I. p. 12, भहोजि’s टीका on चतुर्विशतिमत p. 49 कलिषयेषि. folio 1, समयप्रकाश p. 261.

1798. समुदयात्रास्वीकारः कमण्डलुविधारणम् । द्विजानामसवर्णा कन्यासूपयम स्तथा ॥ देवराश सुतोत्पत्तिर्मधुपर्के पशोर्वधः । मांसाद तथा श्राद्ध वानप्रस्थाश्रमस्तथा दत्ताक्षतायाः कन्यायाः पुनान परस्य च । नैष्ठिकं ब्रह्मचर्य च नरमेधाश्वमेधको ॥ महापरथान गमनं गोमेधश्च तथा मखः । एतान् धर्मान् कलियुगे पानाहुर्मनीषिणः ॥ नारदीयपुराण, पूर्वार्ध, 24. 13-16. These are quoted as from the वृहमारदीयपुराण in the उद्वाहतस्व P. 112, the निर्णयसिन्धु p. 367 (reads समुद्रयातुः स्वीकारः), कलिषयवि. folio 2 (reads मांसद्धानं and समवयातृस्वीकार); the स्मृत्यर्थसार p. 2 contains the ball verses समुद्रयात्रा … धारणम् , दत्ता… परस्य च, and महाप्रस्थानगमन गोपाश्व सुराग्रहः (but without name). The मद. पा. p. 16 has the first hall (without name) and also the halt दीर्घकालं ब्रह्मचर्य नरमेधाश्वमेधको.

____1799. दीर्घकालं ब्रह्मचर्य धारण चकमण्डलोः। सगोत्राद्वा सपिण्डाहा विवाहो गोब धस्तथा। नराश्वमेधौ भधं च कलो वयं द्विजातिभिः ॥ इत्यादिना मद्यादेब्रह्मपुराणादौ सामान्यतो पर्यवेनाभिहितत्वात् । अपरार्क p. 15, स्मृतिच. I. p. 12, परा. मा १. part 1 p. 133. The स्मृतिच.,हेमाद्रि III. 2 (p. 666), मदनरत्न and निर्णयसिन्धु (p. 367) read 11 YTFATT: #foreta pery: which means “marriage with a daughter of the patornal aunt or with a girl who is a sapiṇda of one’s mother i, e, maternal uncle’s daughter.’ The स्मृतिच. attributes these verses to आदित्यपुराण while निर्णयसिन्धु p. 286 ascribes them to आदिपुराण. The कलिषज्यविनिर्णय reads गोत्रा ग्मातृसपिण्डात् , notices also the reading गोवामा सपिण्डात् and has a long note on this, citing and refuting various views. According to the मांसतस्वविवेक of विश्वनाथ p. 27 even the कल्पतरु quoted this ब्रह्मपुराण passage (reading गोत्रान्मातसपिण्डार).

Kalivarjya

929

pressly states that these were cited from the Brahmapurāṇa in the works of Halayudha, Sūlapāṇi and in the Grbastharatnā. kara ( i. e. from about the 12th century onwards). Aparārka (p. 98) quotes another passage from the Brahmapurana 1800, which condemns remarriage of women, niyoga, independence of women, on the ground that men in the Kali age are sinners. Aparārka (p. 233 ) quotes two versos from a smrti (without name) the first of which prohibits six acts, viz. killing a cow in sacrifice, niyoga (of husband’s brother), the performance of satiras, taking a water jar, use of wine (in sautrāmaṇi), being an ascetic (of the paramahamsa type) and the second prohibits five, viz. human sacrifice, cow sacrifice, the taking of a kamandalu, niyoga, and the remarriage of a girl whose marriage has not been consummated. Aparārka (p. 233 ) quotes a passage from the Markandeya recommending the offering of a golden vessel in place of the cow in Madhuparka and stating that Bhrgu laid down that no animal was to be sacrificed in Kali. The Sm. C. (I. p. 12) quotes a Purana passage that ’the remarriage of a married woman, special share to the eldest son, the killing of a cow, niyoga and the taking of a kamandalu-these five are to be avoided in Kali 1801. Hemādri and the Sahyadri-khanda state, ‘Agnihotra, the killing of a cow, sannyāsa, offering of meat in śrāddha and raising of a son by the husband’s brother-these five were 1802 to be avoided in Kali. Hemādri in Dānakhanda quotes a passage from the Garuḍapurāṇa in which seven matters are mentioned as forbidden in Kali, viz. Aśramedha, Gosava, human sacrifice, Rājasūya, remarriage oven of a girl whose first marriage was not consummated, the carrying of a kaman dalu and procreation of a son on a widow by her husband’s brother. The Smptyarthasāra (p. 2 ) mentions twenty-six Kali varjyas without expressly citing the name of any work. In the Sm. C., the Caturvargacintāmaṇi of Hemādri ( III. part 2 p. 666), the Par. M. I. part 1 pp. 131-137, the Madanapārijāta (pp. 15-16),

1800. अणिो पुनर्विवाहस्तु देवरात्पुत्रसन्ततिः । स्वातनयं च कलियुगे कर्तव्ये न कदा 17: qenit # F01: Aftet yo u . by P98. .

1801. grona i 379T: PETE Fugtst stari nuri i m fit prae जासं कमण्डलुम् । स्मृतिच. I. p. 12. This is quoted from the आविपुराण in the #977. Vide , 1700 above and finan. pag. ( HR) p. 13 quotes it as from TTSTE.

1802. aastat terrorang r e nearest aresta ## Ferrae. (Horfu p. 176), JAHUE p. 2. FOTO (TTTT chap, V. 64-65). The first two read TITE. The foot of p. 370 quotes the verse as ā ferro.

117

संन्यास पला

निर्णयसिन

930

(Vol.

Madanaratna (samayoddyota), the Udvāha-tattva ( p. 112), the Samaya-mayūkha, the Samayaprakāśa of Mitramiśra (pp. 261 263), the Nirnayasindhu (III, pūrvārdha at end), Bhattoji on Caturvimsati-mata, the Smṛtimuktāphala ( varnāśrama p. 13), the Smṛtikaustubha, the Dharma-sindhu (pp. 357–358) and some other works quote long passages from a purana ( which in some of them is specified as the Adityapurāpa) that mentions about 50 Kalivarjyas 1803. There is a work called Kalivarjyavinirṇaya or Kalivarjyanirṇaya composed by Damodara elder brother of Nilakanṭlia (first half of 17th century A. D.), who in his Samaya mayūkha refers to it. It quotes the Adityapurana, Brahma purana and other texts that are quoted here from Hemādri and other older digests 1804

In the passage quoted the several Kalivarjyas are not arranged on any systematic basis. Here, first of all a few Kalivarjyas that have a bearing on law will be mentioned and then the rest will be taken up one after another in the order in which they appear in the extract and lastly those that do not appear in that extract will also be dealt with. The first verse states that certain actions were discarded by the wise though this was unauthorized ( by śruti or smrti ) after arriving at a convention among themselves through fear of the loss of dharma ( if they were persisted in), because in the Kali age there is absence of good men. The last verse and a half again state that at the beginning of the Kali great men arrived at certain conven tions and discarded certain actions in order to guard the people ( against harm and sin) and (it is well known) that the conven tions of good men are authoritative like Veda 1805,

1. . Giving a larger share of ancestral property or the whole of it to the eldest son ( this is called jyeṣthāṁsa or uddhāra or uddhāravibhāga). Vide pp. 624-631 above for this. 1806

2. Vide Appendix for the passage,

3. A ma, of this work existing in the Central Library at Baroda was very kindly lent to me through the Bhandarkar Oriental lastitute at Poona. There are eleven folios with ten lines on each side and about 40 letters in each line,

: 1805. Compare Ap. Db. S. I. 1. 1. 2-3’, vāgranu: XAVIA 1794and Vas. I. 4-5.

1806. The earliest reference in English to Kalivarjya matters is found in a translation of the passage of the Samayoddyota section of the Madaparatda contained in Sir William Jones’ Works vol. VIII (ad. of 1807), General Note : vide also Strange’s Hiadu Law, vol. II pp. 164-174 for roference in a modern work on Hindu Law to several topics of Kalivarjya.

mj

Kalivarjya

931

%. Appointing the husband’s brother (or a sagotra &c. ) to raise issue on the wife of a sonless man. This is called niyoga and has been dealt with at length in H. of Dh, vol. II. pp. 599 607. It may be added here that in the K. V. N. there is a long discussion on the question whether an elder brother of the deceased could have been appointed to raise issue on his younger brother’s widow and gives it as the opinion of some that he could not be go appointed, but that only a younger brother could be appointed to raise issue on his elder brother’s widow. They rely on the Mit. on Yaj. I. 68 where ‘devara’ is paraphrased as * kaniyan bhrāta’. The K. V. N. (folio 5 band 6 a) relying on Manu IX, 62 and the words of the Mit. on Yāj. II. 127 (where Manu IX. 69-70 are cited and explained as ‘devaras-tasya jyeṣthaḥ kanistho vā) holds that any brother whether alder or younger than the husband could be appointed.

3. ‘The admission of several kinds of secondary song other than the aurasa and the dattaka. For this vide above pp. 647-653.

4. Remarriage of widows. This subject has been dealt with in H. of Dh. vol. II. pp. 608 ff. Some texts such as Vas. 17. 74 make a distinction between the remarriage of a woman whose marriage was not consummated and of a woman whose marriage was consummated, remarriage being allowed in the first case but not in the 2nd. The Kalivariya texts forbid remarriage in both cases. 1807

5. Intercaste marriages. . This subject has been treated of in H. of Dh. vol. II. pp. 447-451. It has been shown by me above (pp. 599-600 ) that the decisions in 46 Bom. 871 and 55 Bom. 1 are based upon a misunderstanding about the real views of Nilakaptha.

6. Marriage with sagotra girls or with girls that are sapiṇdas of the mother (such as the maternal uncle’s daughter). Vide H. of Dh. vol. II. pp. 452-478 for prohibition on the ground

7. odrart at TT **NTI #T axatira: furga: FTFIT eta # 8 17. 74. The bali verse Hagamento da fora! refers to both kinds of widows viz. TTT (whose marriage is not consum. mated) and muta (whose marriage is consummated). The reading of हेमादि and कलिवउपवि. (folio 1) ‘बालिकाक्षसयोग्यास्त (or-ग्याश्र) is to be understood 49 roferring only to the first kind (

w at erat wi sa). The निर्णयसिन्धु (p. 368) reads पालायाः क्षतयोग्यास्त.982

( Vol.

of sapiṇda relationship, pp. 497 ff. for prohibition on the ground of gotra and pp. 458-463 for marriage with maternal uncle’s daughter. The custom of marrying the maternal uncle’s daughter has persisted to this day in many castes in spite of the inclusion of it among Kalivarjyas. An inscription at Nāgārjunikonda ( 3rd century A. D.) shows that Virapuruṣa-datta, son of Santa mūla, married three daughters of his paternal aunts ( E. I. vol.

XX. p. 1).

7. Slaying a brahmana who comes as an atatāyin in a properly conducted fight. Vide H. of Dh. vol. II, pp. 148-151 and p. 517 above for this subject.

8. Awarding of fines against witnesses who depose in disputes between father and son. 1808 It has already been seen (p. 299 ) how ordinarily suits between husband and wife, father and son were not encouraged in ancient India. But when such a dispute came to the king’s notice he could take action suo motu, as Nār. includes ‘pitāputra-vivāda’ among the miscella neous matters ( prakirṇaka verse 3) which the king was to set in motion. Even in ancient times this rule must not have been strictly enforced. As time went on and separation of father and son became frequent the rule must have appeared to be un reasonable. Vide Mit, on Yaj. II. 32 referred to above in n. 418, Yaj. II. 239 ( = Matsya 227. 198) prescribed a fine of 3 paṇas for those who (instead of composing the quarrel between father and son and being able to do so ) undertake to be witnesses. Viśvarūpa read ’ a fine of two hundred paṇas’. Viṣṇu Dh. S. V. 120 prescribes a fine of ten paṇas. This shows that at the time of the Matsyapurāṇa this act was probably not included among Kalivarjyas,

9. Taking (or stealing ) of corn even from one whose actions are lowly (i. e. even from a sūdra ), when a brahmana has been without food for six times (i. e. three days). Gaut. 18. 28-29, Manu XI. 16 and Yāj. M. 43 provide that when a brahmana cannot earn his maintenance in a season of distress even in any one of the ways indicated in Yāj. III. 4% and has been hungry for three days he may steal or take away one day’s food even from a low person such as a sūdra. It should be noted that this Kalivariya text pointedly repeats the very

f

1808. पितापुत्रयोविरोधे साक्षी नतिठेव। यस्तिष्ठेस वपीन कार्षापणाग्यश्चान्तरे

r a 4:feront q. by surp. 824.

INT

Kalivarjya

933

words of Manu XI. 16 ‘bhaktāni sad-anaśnatā … bartavyam hinakarmapaḥ ). In ancient times theft of such a minor nature was permitted when the brāhmaṇa was famished. But later times took a stricter view of the matter.

10. The admission to intercourse of a brāhmaṇa who undertakes a sea voyage, even though he may have performed the penance prescribed for the same’ (1.7 in the appendix ). Here the word used is ‘dvijasya’. It may mean either any person of the three higher castes or a brahmana. If a man who has made a sea voyage took prāyaścitta he expiated only the sin, but did not become fit, according to this dictum, to be associated with by others. Whether the Vedic Aryans knew the sea has been doubted. Vide Vedic Index’ on samudra’, vol. II. pp. 431-433. The Nirukta II, 10 refers to the fact that a doubt arises whether the word ‘samudra’ in a particular vedio Verse refers to the sea or to the sky. In some verses as in Rg. X. 98, 5’he discharged divine rain waters from the higher to the lower samudra’ both the meanings of ‘samudra’ (viz. sea, sky) are pointedly brought out. Vide also Rg. VII. 6.7 (a samudrad-avarādā parasmāt). In Rg. VII. 95. 2 Sarasvati is mentioned as going from the mountains to the sea. In Rg. X. 136.5 the two seas, Eastern and Western, are mentioned ( ubhau samudrāvā kṣeti yaśca pūrva utāparaḥ). In Rg. VIII. 6. 4 it is said, ’ all people bend down to him, as the sindhus (rivers) flow to the Ocean,’ Rg. I. 116. 4-5, X. 39. 4 and X. 143. 5 refer to the story that Asyins saved Bhujyu from the waters of the sea. 1809 The Atharvavada XI. 2. 25 refers to eastern sea and northern sea. There is no doubt that in the Brāhmaṇas the sea was well-known. The Tai. Br. II. 2. 5.6 remarks,’there is no end to desire and also to samudra’ (neva hi kāmasyāntosti na samudrasya). The Ait. Br. ( 40.2) remarks ‘just as the sea stands surrounding the earth’ (tābhi rājānam parigphya tiṣthati samudra iva bhūmim). It has already been seen that among the five practices peculiar to the north the Baud. Dh. 8. (I 1. 22) enumerates sean voyage ( samudra-samyāna) as the last and condemns it. Baud. (II. 1. 51) places sea voyage at the head of grave sins (patanīyāni ) along with misappro priating a brābmana’s wealth kept as a deposit. The Mit.

11. Vide • Vedic Hymns’ by Max Muller (S. B. E. vol. 32 pp. 57– 62 ) for a note on the question whether the Indians of the Vedic age’ knew the surgiag sea (terrestrial).

034

[Voi.

on Yaj. IIL 288 quotes the sutra of Baud. Manu (II. 158 and 166-167) provides that a brāhmana who had been on a 888 yoyage was sinful and was not to be invited at a śraddha. But it is clear that Manu does not say that such a brāhmaṇa altogether loses caste or that he becomes alto gether unfit to be associated with; all that Manu provides is that such a brāhmaṇa became unfit for invitation at a sraddha. The Auśanagasmrti (IV. pp. 525-526) declares that those who sell the Veda, who marry a widow, who undertake a sea voyage are patita and are not to be invited at a srāddha. These passages show that the prohibition against gen voyage affected only brahmanas and even then they did not apparently become alto gether unfit to be associated with. That brāhmaṇas crossed the ocean and went to such distant countries as Siam, Cambodia, Java, Sumatra and Borneo can be easily proved 1810. E. I. vol. 17 p. 314 gives references to inscriptions from Borneo to show that brāhmaṇas from India migrated to that country about 400 A. D. That kings and merchants undertook sea voyages is also clear from several considerations. The Bāveru Jātaka ( vol. III No. 339, Fausböll) tells us that merchants, from Benares went to Babylon in order to sell Indian goods. The ‘Questions of Milinda’s. B. E. vol. 36 p. 269 refers to a ship-owner voyaging by sea to distant countries 1811. The Rajatarangini refers to the sea voyage of an envoy of king Jayāpida of Kashmir to Ceylon (IV. 503-506 ). Manu VIII. 157 prescribes that the king should allow that rate of interest which those who are adepts in sea voyages and land journeys and who understand what is required to be the interest at certain times and in certain

• 1810. Vide Dr. R. C. Majumdar’s Champa’ (1927) and ‘Suvarṇa. dvipa. (1937 and 1938): ‘Todian influence in the Literature of Java and Bali’ by Himansu Bhusana Sarkar : India and Java” by Dr. Bijan Raj Chatterjee (1933); G. Gorer’s ‘Bali and Angkor’; ‘Saṅkrit texts from Bali’ edited by M. Sylvain Levi in G. O. S.; Annual Bibliography of Indian Archaeology, vol. IX. pp. 39-50. The standard writings of Brandes, Ber gaigae, Kern, Krom, Parmentier and other scholars on Java, Champa and other countries of the Eastern Archipelago are not mentioned here, as they are not in English. Tbey are referred to by Dr. Majumdar and others.

1811. The whole passage is interesting and may be set out here: * Just as a shipowner, who has become wealthy by constantly levying freight lo some seaport town, will be able to traverse the high seas and go to Vanga or Takkola or Chiga or Sovira, Surat or Alexandria or Coromandel coast or Further Iadia or any other place where ships do congregate’ &c. (S. B, E. vol, 36 p. 269).

III)

Kalivarjya :

935

places determine to be the proper one. Yāj. II. 38 provides for very high interest ( 20 per cent per month ) from those who engage in trade by sea. Nār. IV. 179 says that a trader ( samu dra-vanik) who makes bea voyages is not a proper witness, The Vāyu ( 45. 78-80 ) and other purāṇas state that Bharata varṣa 1812 has nine divisions called dvipas, all of which are separated from each other by the sea and are not (easily accessible, that Jambudvipa ( India proper ) is the 9th dvipa and the other oight are Indra, Kaseru, Tamraparpi, Gabhastimat, Nāga, Saumya (Siam ?), Gandharva, Vāruna ( Borneo ?). Therefore Bharatavarsa according to Paurāṇic Geography in cluded modern India and also Greater India. None of the ancient works at least says anything against sūdras under taking sea voyages; but now even sūdras, probably in their desire to emulate the brāhmaṇa and rise higher in social esteem, think that sea voyage is forbidden to them also.

When during the latter half of the 19th century some brāhmaṇas went to England on a political mission or for study and returned to India, the question whether after taking the appropriate prāya citta those brāhmapas could be associated with fully as before was referred to many orthodox and learned Pandits (such as the late Taranātha Tarkavācaspati) and it is creditable to the Pandits and gratifying to note that many of them came to the conclusion that they could be asso

ciated with by others. The two principal texts referred to were those of the Bphan-Naradapurana (note 1798 above) and the one from the Adityapurāṇa translated at the head of this parti cular Kalivarjya. Very interesting and hairsplitting argu ments and explanations were advanced by the learned Pandite in 1872. Some of them may be noted here.. As regards the Nāradiya passage, it is argued that only that seavoyage is for bidden in the Kali, which was a righteous act (dharma) in former times. In Parāśara-smpti XII. 58 the following prāya. scitta 1813 is prescribed for brāhmaṇa murder: ’the sinner should

1812. Hartare auto mūr: tran: 1 Tata TETE EFT: परस्परम् ॥ इन्द्वीपः कसेरुश्च ताम्रपर्णी गभस्तिमान् । नागद्वीपस्तथा सौग्यो गन्धर्वस्वथ

TOM: 130 x 747Fiat atq: FTTTHET: 45, 78-80. The same versea ( except the half verse Hamam &c) occur in my 114, 7-9 and Brahma. purāṇa 19, 67,

1813, png Tagoretext a MERI Frutamanho Feat WATCH रामचन्द्रसमाविष्ट मलसमयसाधितम् । सेतं दृष्ट्या सहवस्प ब्रह्महत्या पोहति ॥ पराशर

a XII. 69-71..

936

[Vol.

be directed to perform the penance of going to the setu on the ocean; he should beg for alms on the road to the setu from men of the four classes that are free from improper acts, should walk barefooted and without umbrella, should deolare his sin in all towns, villages and hamlets of cowherds on the way while resting there or in forests, sacred places and rivers and after reaching the sea and on seeing the setu, 100 yojanas long and 10 yojanas broad, constructed with heaps of stones at the bidding of Rāma by Nala he will get rid of the sin of brahmana murder’. Here brahmana murder being a most heinous offence it cannot be supposed that a mere sight of the setu from land would absolve the sinner and the words about the length and breadth of the setu would be otherwise meaningless. Therefore what is meant is that he must uudertake a sed-voyage and go along the whole length and breadth of the setu in a vessel. Such a voyage was religious conduct in former ages, but in Kali this is forbidden. The word ‘holding a kamandalu’ (which also was prescribed as dharma in former ages) conveys that a similar or analogous practice is referred to in the imme diately preceding words. The words ‘dvijasyābdhau &o.’ are to be interpreted as follows: ’nauyātuh’ is the genitive singular of * naujātr’. The affix ’tr’ is not the ordinary ’tr’ but it is ’tṛn’ used in the sense of one who habitually does a thing’, accord ing to Pāṇini III. 2. 134-135. 1814 Therefore the words of the Adityapurāpa apply only to a dvija who habitually engages in a sea voyage either as a trader or as a helmsman or sailor. When Nārada (D&yabhiga 21 ) states that even an aurasa son who is hostile to his father or who is patita ( guilty of one of the five great sins) or is impotent or is ‘apayatrita’ he does not get a share of ancestral wealth, the Vyavahāramayūkha explains the last word as ‘one who goes to another continent (other than Jambudvipa) through mid ocean by means of a vessel for purposes of trade’ and relies on this passage (dvijasyabdhau &c.) for support. So according to the author of the V. Mayūkha only that dvija who constantly undertakes sea voyages for trade is here declared to be unfit for social intercourse though he may have taken a prāyascitta, and not one who casually or once in a life undertakes a sea voyage. No text prescribes a prūyagcitta merely for going in a vessel on the sea. If that were intended in this passage the text would have read different ly vix,’ samudre naugamanābhāve &o.’ Even sistas have been

F

ix

Y NTIT IOI orfora III. 2. 134-135..

.

Kalivariya

937

crossing the sea to Ceylon for purposes of trade. In dramas like the Ratnāvali ( where the kañcukin Babhravya undertakes a sea voyage and a merchant from Kausambi is said to have gone to Ceylon ) and in romances like the Dasakumāracarita frequent references are made to sea voyages to Ceylon and other countries. What is aimed to be bit when prāyaścitta for sea voyage is prescribed is the fact that on such voyages a man may give up for long such daily duties as the performance of sandhyā and may have come in very close contact with mlecchas as regards food etc. If he has done these two, then only he is not fit for inter course even though he may have undergone a prāyasoitta. If he performs his daily duties wherever he may dwell and does not come in too close a contact with mlecchas he may have to perform no prāyaścitta, much less would he become unfit for social intercourse. The view of Medhātithi on Manu II. 23 that any country by itself is not unfit for the residence of an arya, that if mlecchas overrun a country in India and permanently reside there it may become a mlecchadeśa, that even a mlecoha country, if it be conquered by an Indian king and if the system of the four varṇas be introduced therein, would be a fit one for the performance of Vedic sacrifices, has already been noted (in H, of Dh. vol. II. p. 16 ). It has to be remembered that the Adiparva (85, 34) states that mlecchas and yavanas sprang from Anu and Turvasu, sons of Yayāti. The Sabhāparva notes that Bhima made mlecchas dwelling beyond the seas and in Anūpa bring tribute ( 30. 25-27 ) and that mlecchas came to see the Rajasūya sacrifice along with Bhagadatta of Pragjyotisa (Sabhā 34. 9-10). The following propositions follow from the above discussion: (1) As the word ‘dvija’ is used a śūdra or a person of the mixed castes ( sankirna-jāti) does not become unfit for social intercourse even by habitually undertaking a sea voyage, but he may have to undergo a prāyaścitta; (2) a dvija who casually undertakes a sea yoyage to a place outside India either at the king’s bid ding or for any other purpose has to undergo a prāyasoitta, but if he does so he becomes fit for social intercourse ; (3) & dvija habitually undertaking & sea voyage for trade or as a sailor would become unfit for intercourbe even after undergoing prayas citta. Manu IX. 314, when enlarging upon the devastating power of brābmaṇas, mentions that the sea was made undrinkable by brāhmaṇas, which, according to Medhātithi and other commenta tors, has in view the story in Santi 343.60-61. It is difficult to say whether this story had any influence in leading to the pro hibition against sea yoyage..

118

938

| Vol.

The Smṛtikaustubha explains that ‘samudrayātrā’ means tirthayatra’ i. e. pilgrimage to holy places beyond the sea and that is forbidden here. But this seems to be wrong, as stated by Kronabhatta on the Nir. S. The latter says that expiation is to be undergone only where a soa voyage is undertaken from worldly motives, but where a sea voyage has to be undertaken for reaching a holy place like the Saṅkhoddhāra-tirtha, it is an inseparable part of the pilgrimage and therefore there is no necessity to undergo a prayascitta. 1815

11. ‘The initiation for a sattra’ (1.8). Sattras were sacri ficial sessions the duration of which varied from 12 days to a year, 12 years or even more. Only brāhmaṇas could perform them (Jai. VI. 6. 16-23). Acc. to Sabara on Jai. VI. 2. 1 per sons who engaged in them must not be less than 17 nor more than 24. All of them were both sacrificers (yajamāna ) as well as priests. Vide H. of Dh. vol. II pp. 1239-1246 for sattras. The prohibition against engaging in sattras is a clear indica tion that people had become tired of the ancient Vedic sacrifices, of the great demands they made on time and wealth and had begun to prefer other and easier modes of worship.

12. “Carrying a jar of water’ (1. 8). The Baud. Dh. S. I. 4 devotos numerous 1816 sūtras (1-27 ) to the subject of carry ing an earthon or wooden jar full of water. Every snataka was always to carry a jar of water from which he was to take water for fauca. He was to wash it with water and rub it with his hand. This was declared to be equal to paryagnikarana (encir cling with fire for purification, vide H. Dh, vol. II p. 1120 n. 2501 ). . He was not to go to another’s house or to the village boundary or on a journey without the jar. Vas. 12, 14-17, Manu IV. 36, Yaj. I. 133 contain similar provisions. Viśva rūpa explains that the anataka himself need not carry it and that it may be carried for him by another. It was an encum brance, gave rise to unhygienic and unclean habits and so gradually it came to be dispensed with. This practice was regularised by declaring that in the Kali age a water jar was

13. $91912 TATA 41” Tri styrretrante ormaruwa #54Wat TUTTU ERW Yray for TC tung on fot. Ft. p. 1288.

14. 4 Egregyha … rate FAT qrforat affepofter qfo I… tyre i prugfaatat sed ferm go ममणानिहरुपैध तस्मासं धारयेत्सदा शो ततः पानं समयोपासनमेवा निशिरेन कम्प पदीसोय आत्मनः । … पिलदेवामिका सस्मा परिवर्जयेत् । तस्माद विना कम. TEM W T ATUTE T14. v. . I. 4.1, 3, 18-19, 24, 25,

ii

Kalivarjya

939

not to be carried at all. The Madanapārijata (p. 16 ) explained that ‘kamandaluvidharana’ refers to perpetual studenthood, but this explanation cannot be accepted, because in the Nāradiyapurāṇa (note 1798 above) both are mentioned sepa rately. The K. V. N. (folio 3 a) notes that some explained * kamandaluvidhāraṇam’ as standing for ‘dirghakālam brahma caryam’ (studenthood for long periods).

13. ‘Starting on the Great Journey’ (1.9). The Brhan Nāradiya-purāṇa (pārvārdha 24. 16 ) also forbids this. Accor ding to Manu VI. 31 and Yāj. III. 55 a forest hermit, when he Buffered from an incurable disease and could not perform the duties of his order, was allowed to start towards the north-east on the Great Journey (mahāprasthana) till the body fell down to rise no more. Similarly, a man guilty of brāhmana murder was allowed to meet death at the hands of archers or to throw himself head foremost into fire. Vide H. of Dh. vol. Il. pp. 924 928 for Mahāprasthānagamana. Aparārka 1817 (p. 877-879) quotes long passages from the Adipurāṇa to the effect that if a man suffering from an incurable disease starts on the Great Journey in the Himalaya or commits suicide by entering fire or water or by falling from a precipice, not only does he not incur sin, but on the contrary he goes to heaven. It is rather inconsistent that the Adipurana (or Adityapurāṇa ) should in one place extol the starting on the Great Journey and in another place should forbid it in the Kali age. The K. V. N. cites the instance of the Pandavas that are said to have started on the Great Journey. This makes one suspicious about the authenticity of the passages on Kalivarjya quoted from the Adityapurana by some and from Adipurāṇa by others.

14. ‘The killing of a cow in the sacrifice called Gogava’ (1.9).

15. Hur wife gorurgi gratinirahat freterea farrari afanywa दी करोग्यनशनं तथा । अगाधतोयराकिंवा भूमपतनं तथा। गच्छेन्महापथं वापि तुपार. PHATE # amra merat occurr e nt orfatata FE TÈ FETART: 1

TRINITWERP Warrani g. by warraf p. 877 and by . AT. I. 2. 228 (at from recru). potrest (p. 879) farther quotes

t TUTTAVAT कर्तग्या महिनोपरि आभित्य सधैर्य चसास्वर्गप्रक्षाबसा

Wol.

There were various occasions on which in ancient times & cow was sacrificed. The Anubandhyā cow killed at the end of the Udayaniyā iṣti in Agnistoma has been referred to above (on p. 627 n. 1196). In the Madhuparka which was offered to an honoured guest a cow was either killed or let loose at the desire of the guest. Vide H. of Dh. vol. II pp. 543-545. A cow was killed in one of the three or four aṣtakā sraddhas ( vide Khādira gr. III. 4.1, Gobhila gr. II. 10. 16). Ap. Dh. S. II. 7. 16. 25 states that if cow’s flesh is offered in sraddha for the pitrs, the latter are gratified for one year. There was a sacrifice called Gosava or Gomedha, that was an Ukthya in which the fees were ten thousand cows and which according to some could be performed only by a vaisya (Kāt. Śr. 22. 11. 1818 3-8). A bull was killed as an offering in the rite called śūlagava ( vide H. of Dh. vol. II pp. 831-832 ). As flesh-eating came to be looked down upon, cow sacrifice became most abhorrent and Kalivarjya texts only register a prohibition which had been acted upon centuries before.

15. “The employment of cups of wine in the Sautrāmapi’ (1. 10).

The Sautrāmaṇi is not a soma sacrifice but it is a combi nation of an iṣti with an animal sacrifice. It was so called from sutrāman’ (an epithet of Indra). Its peculiar charac toristio was the offering of surā in cups. In modern times milk is offered in its place and Ap. Śr. allowed it even in ancient times 1819. It was included among the seven haviryajñas by Gaut. (VIII. 20). At the end of the Rajasūya it was performed or in Agnicayana or for one who suffered vomiting or purging from the excessive drinking of soma. For sautrāmani and the preparation of surā in it, vide H. of Dh. vol. IL pp. 1225-1228. Bhattoji (in com. on Caturvimsati-mata p. 53 ) and the Nirnaya sindhu construe this to mean “having social intercourse with one who employs surā in Sautrāmaṇi’ but this is not satis factory. The Dharmasindhu explains as above (III. purvārdha p. 357 ) 1820

· 1818. mumerate … et stent agerafdrone e protester T won’t fan gronie H. *. 22. 11. 3, 6-8.

1819. Treatment Rruffatok grey TPU I… GUTTET 11 *74. 1. 19. 2. 7, 13.

1820. C OM ES Fing: TCE 1 WEIP on offerta p. 53 ; par antara RTUETUT I Wafany 111. p. 357. The auth. (follo 6b) remarks, ‘TO #TE: Fortalegru | TT T T स्पाइसारेण रामाणस्येस्यनेन मुरामाणकतारं विवक्षिरवा तस्य संग्रहो व्यवहार इति How

arata i T urina

fton मण्या रामहस्य निधी न स्थासत्मार्ट पर पवहारनिवेधा स्यात् । तच्च समाचारविमर.

Kalivarjya

941

16. The licking of the Agnihotrahavaṇl and the use of it even after it was licked’(1.11). In the Agnihotra the sruva ladle is held in the right hand and the sruc called agnihotra havani is held in the left and the milk is poured into the latter from the milk pot with sruva. After the Agnihotra homa is offered the agnihotrabavani is licked twice in order to take out the remnants of the milk and after wiping it with darbha blades it is used again. Ordinarily a vessel when it is once licked by a man cannot be used again in a religious rite unless proper purification is resorted to. But this did not apply to the Agni hotrahavapi and camascus of soma. Vide H. of Dh. vol. II p. 1002, n. 2663 for agnihotrahavani, p. 1005 for its licking and p. 1177 (n. 2598) for the drinking of soma from the same camasa by the several priests. The licking of the agnihotrahavaṇl and its use constitute really the subject of the prohibition. 1821

17. ‘Entering on the stage of forest hermit as laid down in the texts about it’ (1. 12). Gaut. III. 25-34, Ap. Dh. S. (II. 9. 21. 18 to II. 9. 23. 2 ), Manu VI. 1-32, Vas. IX. 1-11, Yaj. III. 45-55 lay down elaborate rules for the stage of forest hermits. Vide H. of Dh. vol. II pp. 917-929 for a description and remarks on sannyāsa to be made later on.

18. “The narrowing down or curtailment of the periods of impurity depending upon the Vedic learning and the mode of life of a person’ (1. 13). ‘Agha’ means ‘asauca’; *vitta’ (mode of life) refers to tending sacred fires or maintaining oneself in the way described by Manu IV, 7-10. The general rule about the period of impurity for a brāhmaṇa on the death of a sapiṇda was stated by Gaut. 14. 1, Manu V. 59 and 83 to be that it was ten days and Angiras quoted by the Mit. on Yāj. III. 22 prescribes impurity for ton days for all varpas, but Manu V. 59 also spoke of the period being four days, three days or one day, which, acc. to the Mit, on Yaj. III. 28–29, refers respectively to kumbhidhānya, one who has collected food for three days or one who collects nothing for the morrow. Dakṣ& VI. 6 and Para

19. spravedlarever at væ v ara fata p apal. , III. 7. 19; aferat

f r a fara aftuen arah panta faralarreterarnia: ATT * quru: OFTAETT! Fatau p. 471 ; Torua ya FU

pa Retrato para garantesfayfur Aigare ett Brugt Am uifarrararam #: oftast fara STAATUAATTI ondra, folio 7a.949

(vol.

śara 1822 III, 5 both state that a brāhmaṇa who keeps the Vedic fires and has studied the Veda becomes free from impurity in a day, one who has only studied the Veda ( but does not tend sacred fires ) becomes free in three days, while one devoid of both becomes free after ten days. Aparārka (p. 894) and Haradatta on Gaut. 14. 1 quote Bṛhaspati to the same effect. The Mit. remarks 1823 (on Yaj. IIL 28-29) that the curtailment of the period of impurity is not absolute but is restricted only to certain special matters viz. the receiving of gifts, the performance of Agnihotra, the study of the Veda and such matters in which distress would be caused if the period were not curtailed. This explanation clearly proves that Vijñanes vara ( end of 11th century ) was not aware of the prohibition of the curtailmont of the periods of impurity or treated it with scant respect. The curtailment of the period of impurity was laid down probably because curtailment led to confusion, since a person may claim to be learned, while his neighbours may not concede that claim.

19. ‘Prescribing death as the penance for brāhmaṇas’. (1. 14).

Manu XI. 89 provides that if a person intentionally murders a brāhmaṇa there is no expiation for it. Manu XI. 90 prescribes death by drinking boiling wine for the sin of drinking sura, while Manu XI. 146 provides 1824 that if a man knowingly drinks wine there is no expiation for it, but only death. The Vispu dharmaputra (chap. 34 ) states that incest with the mother, daughter or daughter-in-law is atipātaka, such sinners have to

1822. gaire regra fast parafoua: i sutradarea le fait axit fa: # VI. 6 and at T III. 5, quoted by fa a 69 on 7. III, 30, विराणैव धुण्येतु विप्रो वेदानिसंयुक्तः । पाभिवानिमिस्त वशाहाद ब्राह्मणवः ॥ शिलो.

worfer Fa: grūn FTA: 1 TOT TATTFria Forest przery

q ue: E TC. g. by 949 p. 894. 1823. s epteu r sifaranga framfarfare a primirea Ivar … ***: informacarontri foruret ga: agerantare Maria i forat. on TT III. 28-29.

1824. Afaguara poner fra fura: 1 XI, 146. Most of the com mentators of Manu explain this half differently as meaning “a penance destructive of life should not be prescribed’. But this explanation is opposed to Gaut. 21. 7 (Pro f or #9: ) and to Medbātithi. Vide foudf. folio 78 Torre surean Arag… Buranta Anataratt धात सम्वैविनायो मरणान्तिकं नोपदेष्टण्यं सैस्तु रहस्यायधिसवण्याकचित्तववामिति तम्मन्द महसतपणविषपर प्रमाणाभापा ।।.

Kalivarjya

943

enter fire and there is no other penance for this sin. Vide Gaut. 21. 7 also. Some smrtis held that there was no prāyasoitta for certain grave sins except falling from a precipice or into fire. As a brahmana’s person became more and more sacred with the march of time, death ceased to be a penance for a brāhmaṇa ginner, however grave the sin might be. But this did not apply to a kṣatriya or any one else (other than a brahmana).

20. *Pollution through contact with a sinner’ (1.15). Manu XI. 180 ( Santi 165, 37 = Baud. Dh, S, II. 1. 88 ), 1825 Viṣṇu Dh. S. 35, 2-5 provide that if a person continues for one year in close association ( sarsarga) with one guilty of the grave sins ( enumerated in Manu XI. 54 ), in respect of occupy ing the same conveyance or seat with him or dining in the same row with him he becomes patita; but he becomes patita immediately if he officiates as a priest. for such a sinner or performs his upanayana for teaching him the sacred Gāyatri and the Veda or if he enters into a matrimonial alliance with him, Parāśara ( I. 25-26 ) states that in the Kfta age a person became patita by speaking with a patita, in Tretā by seeing him, in Dyāpara by pārtaking of food prepared in his house, but in Kali by actually committing a (sinful ) deed and that when a grave sin was committed by a man, in the Kṛta age the whole district in which he lived was to be abandoned, in Tretā the village, in Dvāpara his family alone and in Kali only the perpetrator. 1826 Parāśara ( XII. 79 ) no doubt 1827 says that sins (i. e, pollutions are caused ) are transferred, as a drop of oil ( spreads ) on water, by sitting or sleeping together or by using the same conveyance, by speaking with or by dining in the same row with a sinner’; but this only means that to associate with a sinner is bad, but it does not mean that to associate with a patita immediately makes the associator himself a patita. The Mit. on Yaj. III. 261 quotes Devala 1828 and Vfddha-Bșhaspati to the effect

21. martor porta grada

F I FA Taala

3 ACT 1 AE XI. 180, *. . . 11. 1. 88.

1826. स्यजेदेश कृतयुगे त्रेतायां याममुस्सुजेत् । द्वापरे कुलमेकं न कर्तारं च कलौ पुगे । कते सम्भाषणात्पापं वेतायां चैव दर्शनात् । द्वापरे चासमादाय कलो पतति कर्मणा ॥ TETETT I. 25-26.

1827. The Fear 1 # Aa Rara de बिगारिखाम्भसि ॥ पराशर XII, 79, which is the same as कण्व q. by परा. मा. II. 1. p. 28 (where FMTTC is read for 1976).

1828. FormA:

TUTTET I TO#Urowiutare Tropa aeg pe by FANT. OD 1. III. 261, #qr p. 1087.

944

(Vol.

that samsarga arises in nine ways viz. by talk, by touch, by breathing the same air (i. e. by being in the same room ), by being in the same conveyance or on the same seat or bed, by dining in the same row, by being a sinner’s priest or vedic teacher or entering into matrimonial alliance with him. The Par. M. says that Parāśara held the view that there was no pātitya by the various kinds of contact in Kali and so provided do prāyaścitta for samsarga. The Nirnayasindhu 1829 and Bhattoji make similar remarks. The Udvāhatattva says that Parāśara I 25 is to be interpreted in this way that merely speaking or touching a patita or receiving money from him does not make another liable to any prāyascitta, but that if the association with a patita goes quite beyond these, then sin may be incurred by association. So almost all the digests are agreed that the rigour of the very strict rules about samsarga in Manu and Baud. was modified by declaring that speech with or sight of a sinner involved no sin in Kali. 1830

21. “Undergoing (secret) expiation for the grave sing (mabāpātakas) except theft’ (1. 15). Harita ( q. by Par. M. II. 1831 part 2, p. 153 ) prescribes secret expiation for a brāhmaṇa who has studied dharmaśāstra and committed a sin without anyone knowing it. Gaut. (chap. 24) prescribes certain expiations to be undergone secretly (without any third person knowing of such performance ) for even mahāpātakas such as brāhmaṇa murder, drinking surā, incest and theft of gold. Vas. (chap, 25) also does the game and states ( 25. 2) that only those who have kept the sacred vedic fires, who are disciplined and old or learned are entitled to secret expiations for sins and not other people. The Vispu Dh. 8. 55 deals with seoret expiations. Parāśara IX. 61 (last verse) laid down 1832 the general rule that one should openly

22. 319rden yet starteterumvarudra par aurai अत एव स्मुत्यन्तरे कलो पानामहक्रमणे संसर्गदोषः पापेषु इत्युक्तम् । परा. मा. II part 2 p. 90; it may be noted that the rearury (p. 132 ) quotes this passage and criticizes it ; sit amet PotateTo set altaat suami TRICO Agus fueratny III. p. 368.

23. nothie Recea - Pin eaplantearoarferyetar fra: I समयमयूख.

24. 59 miguree ga

YATE FACUTA: I TE TO TFT MCI OTT. #T. II part 2, P. 153.

1832. AFTROROTO Hout vai rayonutta fornita fuerzo # QUE IX, last varse,

P

III )

Kalivarjya.”

945

declare one’s sin. The Kalivarjya text provides that secret expia. tion is allowed as regards only theft among the mahāpātakas in the Kali age, though in earlier ages it was allowed as to other mahāpatakas also. The Nirnayasindhu says that secret expia tion is allowed only to brāhmaṇas. According to the Dharma sindhu, in the Kali age if a man is guilty of the murder of a brāhmaṇa or of other mahāpatakas he does not avoid the conse quences of falling into Hell when he undergoes an expiation but he becomes only fit for social intercourse, while as regards theft of gold ( a mahāpātaka ) by undergoing prāyaścitta he avoids the fall into hell and also becomes fit for social intercourse. The Kalivarjyayinirṇaya appears to hold that all secret expia tions are forbidden in Kali, 1833

22. “The act of offering an animal with the recital of Vedic mantras to the bridegroom, to a guest and in honour of pitrs’ (1. 16).1834 Madhuparka was offered in ancient times on several occasions and to several persons such as to ștviks at sacri fices, to the king, to a snātaka, to one’s ācārya, father-in-law, paternal or maternal uncle and to a bridegroom. Vide H. of Dh. vol. II. pp. 542-546 for details about Madhuparka. Originally a cow or a bull was killed for an honoured guest, later on when the cow came to be extremely sacred the flesh of some other animal was offered; when flesh-eating itself came to be looked down upon then only payasa and other vegetarian eatables came to be prescribed. Vide H. of Dh. vol. II pp. 777-782 on flesh-eating. This half line forbids the offering of flesh to a bridegroom or to an honoured guest (in madhuparka) and the feeding of

23. The m etra. (folio 8a) notes, ’ a Weteraggruppa 50Ti saat parere T am: i Tae site of tot #7: शुद्धिविहीनामा निस्कतिर्न ततो भवेत् इत्यादि तत्र तत्र निन्दामक्रमे रहस्यवतमेव निन्दि #1. It should be noticed that the Nirnayasindhu and a few others read

YHETTA Torra: as one word meaning ‘secret expiation for mabāpatakas other than theft and other than association with those guilty of grave sins’. The marriere (p. 2), fq. 1. p. 16 and 4* (p. 112) read this hall line as w er: prog ogranaattou. ’ महापातकेषु मायश्चित्तेन नरकनितिनं भवति कि हि लोके ग्यवहार्यतामा कलौ भवति । Froth y Tafra foreferred to an opp i HITA III, gura p. 358.

1834. 37a7rup has a technical sense. It means touching the ani. mal to be sacrificed with several maotras’. Maou V. 7 employs the word in that sease and Kullūka comments,’ quam n on fit fugiat . The A. (9a) quotes pistes HErfa. With reference to sraddha the word upakarana is used in a secondary sense and not in the literal sense. For the upākarana mantra MESH… , vide . . I. 11.2.

119

946

i Vol.

brālimaṇas with flesh at śrāddhas. Comparatively so late a writer as Yāj. (I. 258-259 ) extols the high gratification that the Manes feel when flesh of various animals is offered in śrāddhas. This one prohibition includes in itself several prohibitions that are separately mentioned in other texts such as govadha’ (in notes 1797 and 1799), the killing of an animal in a Madhuparka (in n. 1798), ‘gavalambba’ and ‘palapaitrka’ (in note 1802). It is noteworthy that even so late as the first half of the 17th century Viśvanātha, a great logician, takes up the cudgels on behalf of flesh-eating by brāhmaṇas in sacrifices, sraddha, madhuparka, in danger to life and when ordered by a brāhmaṇa and charges those who totally forbid flesh-eating with being the followers of the doctrines of Bauddhas, while the latter at the same time prescribe expiations for even murderers of brāhmaṇas through greed of money and marry their maternal uncle’s daughters or other sapiṇdas of their mother, though both of these latter are forbidden by the Kalivarjya texts. 1885

23. Association with those that are guilty of intercourse with women who are not of the same varpa, even though the former may have undergone proper expiation for the lapse’ (1. 18). There was great divergence of views as regards the prāgasoitta for adultery by a male with a female of the same olags, of a higher class or of a lower class. Further the ancient sūtras were rather hard on the guilty parties, the harsh rules being relaxed by later smrti writers. For example, Gaut. 23. 14-15 and Vas. 21. 1-3 prescribe for a male of a lower caste having intercourse with a woman of a higher caste death in Various ways. If a brāhmaṇa had sexual intercourse with a cāndala or svapāka woman Parāśara (X. 5–7) prescribes that he bas to undergo a fast for three days, tonsure of the head together with the top knot, three Prājāpatyas, Brahmakūrca, feeding brāhmaṇas, constant recital of the Gāyatri, gift of two pairs of cows and then he becomes pure, while a sūdra doing the same had to undergo the expiation of one Prājāpatya and had to make a

24. तस्मायज्ञे भाडे मधुपर्क प्राणात्यये प्रामणाज्ञायां च भोकायं तदन्यतिरेकेणापि HTTS afraid or wamfata mararata or maua I AFTY pares of Reparo (Sarasvatibhavana series, Benares, 1927 ); a favela तथा मांसभा निवदन्ते लेयान्यमहापातकनिष्कतिरिति कलिवय॑तयोक्तमपि ममहत्यातत्सं सर्गमापश्चिन धनलोभादुपविशन्ति मातृसपिण्यानपने (सपिण्डापरिणयने !) चन विवदन्ते रागरोषपूषिततसो देवानां पियास्ते केन, शिक्षणीपा इत्पलं मांसविहिषाबः सोगतमतानु. FIAT: H whore i ibid. pp. 28-29.

III)

Kalivarjya

947

gift of two cows. If a person of a low caste has intercourse with & woman of a higher caste ( e. g. a sūdra has intercourse with a brāhmaṇa woman) Samyarta ( verses 166-167 ) prescribes the expiation of subsisting for a month on cow’s urine and yāvaka (barley gruel) for him. If a brāhmaṇa commits adultery with a śūdra or cāndala woman Samvarta (verses 169-170) prescribes the expiation of cāndrāyaṇa, while Parāśara (X. 17-20) prescribes a far more severe expiation. The present text prescribes that, even after undergoing expiation, men guilty of intercourse with women of castes other than their own cannot be allowed to have social intercourse with their castemen, The Dharmasindhu 1836 says that śūdras that have intercourse with brāhmaṇa or other women of a higher caste are hereby declared to be unfit for social inter course even after they undergo expiation. This no doubt made for strictness in morals, but it also led to the preservation of caste exclusiveness.

24. ‘Abandonment of a mother (or other woman who is to be honoured owing to relationship) because she has had sexual intercourse with one of low class’ (1. 19).

The provisions of the sūtras and smstis on the subject of expiation for adultery by women varied from time to time. Gaut. 23. 14 and Manu VIII. 371 prescribe that a woman who has intercourse with a man of low caste is to be punished by the king with being devoured by dogs. But other smrtis and Manu himself (XI. 177) are not so harsh, but are rather humano in their treatment of adulteresses. Manu XI. 176 says that the husband should keep confined to one apartment his corrupt wife and compel her to perform the expiation which is prescribed for males in cases of adultery. Manu XI. 59 and Yāj. III. 235 regard adultery by a male (pāradārya) as an upapātaka and Manu XI. 117 and Yaj. III. 265 prescribe cāndrāyana as an expiation for all upapātakas. Vas. XXI. 12 prescribes that the wives of men of the three higher castes who are guilty of adultery with a sūdra may be purified by an expiation. if no child is born of the intercourse but not otherwise. Yāj. I. 72 provides that a woman becomes free from the taint of adultery when she has her monthly illness after the adultery but if she conceives in adulterous intercourse she may be abandoned. The Mit. on Yāj. I. 72 states that both Yaj. and Vas. are to be

1836. fmrat ma erat uretat arutat Hat MIA FATY III, qar p. 358.

I’

948

(Vol.

understood in the same sense and abandonment does not mean driving out of the house but only not allowing her to participate in religious acts and not having sexual intercourse with her. Vas. XXI. 10 states that only four kinds of women are to be abandon ed, viz. one who has intercourse with the husband’s pupil or with the husband’s guru, one who attempts to kill her husband or one who commits adultery with a man of a degraded caste. Yāj. (III. 296–7 ) provides that to women that are patita the same rules apply as to men, but they should be given food, raiment and protection and that intercourse with a man of low caste is one of the three gravest sins for women. Vide Mit. on Yaj. III. 297. The present text states that a woman (such as a mother) who is entitled to honour from a person because of her relation ship ( as mother, elder sister etc. ) is not to be abandoned and cast on the street by him, although she may be guilty of adultery with a degraded or low caste man, in spite of Vas. XXI. 10 and other texts (such as Br. ). 1837 That is, this text was more humane to such women than ancient texte. Krspa bhatta explains that ‘gurustriyāḥ’ means of a brāhmaṇa woman’. Vide H. of Dh. vol. II pp. 571-573 for further remarks on adulterous women. Ap. Dh, s. I. 10. 28.9 requires the son always to serve and wait upon the mother even though she may be patita. Atri 1838 (195-196) and Devala (50-51) contain two Verges (almost in the same words ) which are lax as compared with other ancient texts. They say: “If a woman conceives through intercourse with a male who is not of her caste, she becomes impure till her delivery. When she is delivered or she has her monthly illness after the intercourse she becomes like pure gold’. Atri (197-198 ) further provides that whether a woman willingly has sexual intercourse or is deceived or is enjoyed against her will or in secret, she should not be abandoned; one should wait till the monthly illness and she becomes purified by that illness’. This comparative laxity of

1837. fun gat of vipo Te A rarat four मानोपजीषिनीम् । कारयसिकुति कच्छ पराक वा समे गताम् । हीनपणापमुक्ता या त्याज्या au 7 grua q. by ra TT P. 400 and by refer P, 360 (last half).

1838. असपणेत यो गर्भो श्रीणां योनी निषिच्यते । अखासा भवेमारी यावर्भ म guest ha et oranla TITET Fi grah PAC FT* TUTU स्वयं रिमतिपक्षाचा पदिपा विस्तारिता । पलामारी प्रभुक्ता पा चौरमुक्ता तथापि पान स्पाग्याइपिता नारीन कामोरया विधीयते । महकाल उपासीत पुष्पकालेन पुण्यति । W 195–198. .

III)

Kalivarjya

949

the later smitis of Devala and Atri is remedied by this Kali varjya text which forbids abandonment of only such women as the mother, but allows the abandonment of others when guilty of intercourse with a male of low caste. Devala prescribes expiation by sāntapana in the case of those women that are raped by mlecchas and conceive (verses 47-49 ). Vide also Atri 201-202. The Sm. Kau. restricts this half verse to the mother alone. Parāśara ( X 24-25) prescribes that if a woman be raped once she becomes free from pollution by undergoing Prajapatya after she has her monthly illness and in other cases of rape she has to undergo Santapana.

25. ‘Sacrificing one’s life for the sake of another’ (1. 20). The Viṣṇu Dh, S. III. 45 states 1839 that those who are killed in saving the life of a cow, a brāhmaṇa, the king, a friend, one’s wealth and one’s wife go to heaven and XVI. 18 provides that even those (untouchables) who are outside (the pale of the four varṇas) and sacrifice their life for brāhmaṇas, for cows and for women and children attain heaven. The Adityapurāṇa quoted in Rājadbarınakśṇda (p. 91 ) has a similar verse. The Samaya mayūkha and Bhattoji quote a smrti, ‘one should at once saori fice one’s life for cows and brāhmanas, 1840 This text forbids self-sacrifice of one’s life simply for the promised reward of heaven in the cases specified. The K. V. N. (folio 9b) offers two more (rather far-fetched) explanations of this phrase, one of which is offering one’s services as a serf to another. This is probibited to members of the three twice-born classes in Kali, but not to the sūdras, acc. to K. V. N.

26. ‘Offering (of food) to another that remains after one has partaken of it’ (1. 20). In the Madhuparka the honoured guest used to partake of a part of the offering of honey, milk

27. T orggatawarte od MICE PEST: I focus सूत्र III. 45; ब्राह्मणार्थे गवार्थे वा देहत्यागोनपाकृतः । श्रीबालाभ्युपपत्तौ च बाथानां p rae* ibid XVI. 18; sinasagtra… Argonat et terra gratui’

#spot and feet at Crousee p. 91. :

1840. wymarfaigua aerei en groteam: tarif p opter 97 Fu: Arora gitara-ergif15:10 on warna p. 54. Almost the same words ‘Fiat … # FAFAT ET… HATOU pren… gry:: occur in Florida. folio 9a. We find in the qumes (1, verse 205 ) this verse quoted, Tara gore of arget Turi furatū RTSEITE : ****** * ! and I. 420 is around your that i t # भिवास याति परमा गतिम् ।

950

[ Vol.

and curds and was to give the remainder to a brāhmaṇa (or a son or a younger brother). This is prohibited by this Kalivarjya text. Vide H. of Dh. vol. II. p. 544 for this practice. Ap. Dh. S.( I. 1. 4. 1-6) provides that the pupil may partake of the leavings of his teacher’s food, but the teacher should not give him honey or meat or other food which will be opposed to the observances of a vedio student. The Nirnayasindhu reads ‘uddistasyāpi varjanam'1841, which means ’not accepting what has been donated,’ Yāj, I. 213 says that if a person worthy of accepting a gift does not keep it for himself (but passes it on to others), he secures the highest worlds obtained by those who make generous gifts. Bhattoji gives another explanation. Vas (14, 21 ) forbids a man to eat the remnants of his own food or to eat food that comes in contact with the leavings of food. This Kalivariya text sets aside for the Kali age the prohibition con tained in Vas. 14, 21 (acc. to Bhattoji). The K. V. N. (folio 10 a) states that this is the explanation given by some, but does not approve of it. The Sm. Kau. gives yet another but extremely far-fetched explanation. 1842 These several explanations of the same half verse indicate how some of the Kalivarjya texts are comparatively recent and have no settled meaning even accord ing to comparatively late writers of digests.

27. “The resolve to offer worship (throughout life ) with various details to a certain idol (1.21 ).

It is not easy to see why such a resolve should have been prohibited. Therefore this explanation given by Bhattoji, K. V. N. (folio 10 a), the Samayamayakha and others is not satisfac tory. It is better to accept the explanation of the Nir. S. that this forbids the undertaking of the worship of a particular image for wages. Aparārka (pp. 450 and 923) quotes a smrti text defin ing a devalaka as a brāhmaṇa who performs the worship of an

· image for wages for three years and who thereby becomes unfit

1841. foguito astafara glugueteget r i ! Elf on man. p. 54; PU T T AFTAT FRUTsempi Quarry III. p. 368.

1842, un sferogata faire face parte hapi gara: I सारस्याप (पि!) पर्जन प्राथपाठाद्विहितव्रतान्तर्गतत्वम् । अपेति पाठेपि ताशस्य वस्तुनः परस्मै समर्पण निविष्यते। … तथा चकलो गुरोर्वचनानुरोधेन अवविरुद्धाचरणे न केवलं बतहानिदोषामा प्रत्युत तवचनोलइन्ने दोषाधिक्यमपि । तथा च जमवैवर्ते कलिनासंवादे

r oncatacofratri Fatorent. p. 477.

T

Kalivarjya

951

to officiate at $rāddhas.1843 Manu III. 152 declares the devalaka to be unfit for being invited for śrāddhas or rites in honour of gods and Kullūka quotes Devala to the effect that one who maintains himself on the treasury of a shrine is called deyalaka. It is remarkable that Vṛddha-Harita (VIII. 77-80) says that only the worshippers of Śiva for wages are called devalaka and those of Viṣṇu are not. Acc, to the Sm. Kau. what is forbidden is the resolve to worship an image for securing a direct vision of the Deity.1814 This is rather pedantio and far-fetched.

28. Touching the bodies of those ( who are impure on the death of a relative ) after the collection of the bones’ (1.22 ). The day on which the bones were to be collected after the body was cremated differed greatly according to various writers. The Mit. on Yaj. III. 17 notes that according to Saṁyarta 1845 (verse 38) the bones may be collected on the first, third, seventh or 9th day, that the Viṣṇu Dh. S. (19. 10-11) prescribes the 4th day for it and recommends the casting of them into the Ganges, that some did it on the 2nd day and that therefore everyone should follow his own Gșhyasūtra. The Mit. on Yaj. III. 18 quotes Devala to the effect that, after the lapse of one-third of the period of impurity prescribed for members of the four varṇas (as in Yaj. III. 22), persons who lost relatives become touchable, that members of the four varṇas become touchable in three, four, five and ten days respectively. Samyarta (verses 39-40) states that, after the collection of bones, touching those who are under pollution due to death is allowed on the 4th, 6th, 8th and 10th day respectively in the case of brāhmaṇas, ksatriyas, vaisyas and sūdras. The present Kalivarjya text forbids this and becomes stricter as to the rules about impurity.

29. The performance by a brāhmaṇa of the duties of the killer of the victim in a sacrifice’ (1. 23 ).

30. स्सस्यन्तरम् । स्पृण्टा देवलकं चैव सवासा जलमाविशेत् । देवार्चनपरो विमो Parrot TH179120 T U TEN: I SOTE p. 923 : otsita जीपी च नाना देवलको भवेत् । अपाइकोयः स विज्ञेयः सर्वकर्मा सर्वदा ॥ देवल प. by अपरार्क p. 450 and OQ AZ III, 152 ( first half ).

31. razruitsforgreets THT90: 1 … 27 METTATHATTentu sa HTATO: Feet pa OT*: Foot aravaat i Te quiera TARIFWEITTFT Toufama r reta Irat. p. 473.

32. quat mat gā ngā #T Gaga nguage En: सायनादमप्रपशों विधीयते। चतुहानि विमस्य पठे क्षत्रियस्य च अमे PTA A Foto TUTTE 14: 38-40.952

History of Dharnasāstra

[Vol.

The animal in a grauta sacrifice was to be killed by choking it and strangling it. The person who did so was called samitr. Different views were entertained as to who was to be the samitr, Acc, to Jai. III. 7. 28-29 1846 the adhvaryu himself was to be the samits; the usual opinion was that he was to be some one other than the striks. The Āśv. Sr. (XII. 9. 12-13) shows that he may be a brāhmaṇa or a non-brāhmaṇa. For further details vide H. of Dh. vol. II. pp. 1121-22, n. 2504. As animal sacrifices themselves came to be looked down upon or even forbidden, this text forbids a brāhmaṇa from being a samitr.

30. The sale of the soma plant by brāhmaṇas’ (1.23).

Soma beverage was to be drunk only by brāhmaṇas. The soma plant had to be purchased and there was a symbolic haggling for it. The vendor of soma in ancient1847 times was, aoo. to Kāt. Sr. VII. 6. 2-4 and Ap. Śr. X. 20.12, either a brāhmaṇa of Kutsa gotra or any brāhmana or a sūdra.1847 In later times, though Manu XI. 7 ( = Sānti.165, 7 ) and Nār. ( dattāpradānika 7 ) 1848 allow a brāhmaṇa who has wealth sufficient for the maintenance of himself and his dependents for three years or more to perform a soma sacrifice, yet Manu III. 158, Yaj. I. 165 and Vas. 14. 3 hold that a brābmana who sells the soma plant is unfit to be invited at a śrāddha and that one should not partake of food at his house. Manu X. 88 forbids a brāhmaṇa to sell water, arms, poison, soma &c. Vide H. of Dh. vol. II. pp. 1141-1143 for purchase of soma and the dramatic haggling for it.

31. ‘Allowing a brāhmaṇa householder to eat food at the houses of four classes of people among sūdras viz, his slave, his cowherd, a hereditary family friend and one who cultivates his fields on the basis of paying a half or other portion of the produce to him’ ( 11. 25–26 ).

Gaut. 17. 6, Manu IV. 253 (=Viṣṇu Dh. S. 1849 57. 16), Yāj. I. 166 and Parāśara XI. 19 say that a brāhmaṇa may eat the

1846. ṢTAT OD *. III. 7. 29 remarks, ‘ETATART Surat Araw gfort कर्तष्पम् । तस्माच्छमनावश्चर्युः शमिता.’

1847. Ferrata mtoturyATET pong TTTMgnffa i situ. 5. X. 20. 12.

1848. The terrori for a yeah I fra ma raaa # #er Ref # TE {974. 7). This is the same as s. XI. 7, but are reads faret for ww

1849. se: goraz P analfaat: regret har varit purcha foto #foreguotes 57. 16.

IL

Kalivarjyo.

953

food of these four and of his own barber. Haradatta on Gaut. 17, 6 and Aparārka (p. 244 ) remark that a brāhmapa can take the food of these persons among sūdras only in the event of extreme calamities. From this it appears that up to the 12th century A. D. the peremptory prohibition contained in this text was either unknown or was not much respected. The exclusive ness of caste in matters of food and marriage was made more strict by the Kalivarjya texts. Vide above ( pp. 869 and 885 ) as to how Parāśara himself was overruled by this text.

32. ‘Pilgrimages to very distant holy places ‘(1. 26).

A brāhmaṇa was called upon to tend his Vedic or grhya fires. If he went to distant places on pilgrimage this duty would be interfered with. It is provided by Ap. 1850 Sr. IV. 16. 18 that even when on a journey the agnihotrin has, after turning his face in the direction of his fire altar, to go mentally over the whole procedure of his daily fire worship and the Darśa pūrṣamāsa. The Gobhila-smrti II. 157 says the same. The Smstikaustubha 1851 says that this prohibits pilgrimage to holy places beyond the sea or on the borders of Bharatavarṣa. This text prohibits a brāhmaṇa from going to distant places on pilgrimage, but it does not prevent him from undertaking & journey for earning wealth for performing sacrifices. K. V. N. (folio 10a ) quotes a text of Satyavrata to this effect.

33. *The rule that a pupil should habitually observe the same behaviour towards the wife of the guru as towards the guru himself (1.7). Ap. Dh. 1852 S. I. 2.7. 27, Gaut. II. 31-34, Manu II, 210, Viṣṇu Dh. S. 32. 1-2 prescribe that a student should perform the same acts of honour and obedience towards the wife or wives of his teacher as towards the teacher (except holding her feet in doing obeisance and eating the leavings of the food). As students were often grown-up young men and the teacher’s wife might often be a young lady, Manu II. 212,

34. • PETTHET T A I 379. . IV. 16. 18 ; ### pu * ATUitga: 1 orang Nia: Fai Tumhargaan II. 157.

35. I fyradar Tat hitro flet af i farten. p. 478 ; धनाभ्यर्जयितुं युक्ता प्रयासो अग्निहोत्रिणः । धनैर्यसम्भवेदिज्या तीर्थार्थ न बजेविति FEATRUTTET I Persire. folio 10a.

36. #4HRFONTROJE agradarear : 19119, . I. 2. 7. 27 तार्यापुत्रेषु वैषम् । भोछिटाशनस्नापनमसाधनपादनक्षालमोम्मईनोपसंपदणानि । favorehuqui Teorgimt. II, 37-39.

120

954

(Vol.

216, 217 ( that are the same as Viṣṇu Dh. S. 32. 13-15) provide that a pupil full twenty years old should not show honour to the young wife of his teacher by clasping her feet, but that he may prostrate himself on the ground before the teacher’s young wife in performing obeisance and that he may hold her feet in obeisance only (once) when he returns from a journey. This text accepts the principle underlying the special rules laid down by Manu and Viṣṇu and prohibits the daily touching of the feet of the guru’s wife on the part of the pupil. The Sm. 1853 Kau. and Dharmasindhu (III p. 353 ) hold that this sets aside the rule laid down in Yāj I. 49 that a perpetual student may stay till his death with his teacher or with the teacher’s son or (in default of both ) with the teacher’s wife.

34. “The modes of maintenance conceded to brāhmaṇas in times of distress (or calamity)’ (1.28).

The special modes of maintenance prescribed for brāli mapas were receiving gifts, teaching the Veda and officiating as priests (Gaut. X. %, Āp. Dh. S. II. 5. 10. 5, Manu X. 76, I. 88, Vas. II. 14, Yaj. I. 118). But it was recognised from very ancient times that if a brāhmaṇa could not maintain himself by following the above modes of earning wealth he could in a season of distress pursue the avocations peculiar to a ksatriya or vaisya (Gaut. VII. 6-7, Baud. Db. S. II. 2. 77-81, Vas. II. 22, Manu X, 81-82, Yaj. III. 35 ) 1854 Vide H. of Dh. vol. II. pp. 118 133 for detailed treatment of this matter and for the restric tions imposed even when brāhmaṇas were allowed to follow the avocations of ksatriyas and vaisyas. The Kalivarjya prohibi tion is merely one on paper. From ancient times till now brahmanas have pursued all sorts of avocations and hardly any importance has been attached to this dictum.

35. *Not acoumulating any wealth (or grains) for the morrow’ (1.28). Manu IV.7 and Yāj. I. 128 provide that brāh manas are of four kinds, viz. those who acoumulate grain of the capacity of a kusula, those who accumulate grain of the capa city of a kumbhi, those that accumulate grain enough to satisfy

___1853. गुरुपत्नीसमीपे गुरुपुत्राभाचे चिरं स्थितिविहिता सा निषिभ्यते।नपुरुषत्पति … # Tangiepfiaafa ya aina furat. p. 478; but

forever. folio 10a asays, frufr 159797 TT EF:-1694eqaret Foruf गुरुयोपित इत्यादि मनूक्ता’

1854. opory ofteret eorge : Paatte TAUTA - farahoru # 47. III. 35.

III)

Kaliverjya

955

their needs for three days and those who do not collect grain even for the next day. The smṛtis prescribe that each later one is superior in merit to each preceding one. The commen tators differ as to the meaning conveyed by kugūladhānya (some holding that it means one who has accumulated grain for three years, while others say it means one who has grain for 12 days) and kumbhidhānya (a person accumulating grain for a year, or grain for six days). Vide H. of Dh, vol. II. p. 110, note 234 and p. 641 note 1502. The Mit. on Yāj. I. 128 says that the advice not to accumulate corn even for three days or one day is not addressed to all brāhmaṇas, but to those only who are called yāykvara 1855. This explanation of the Mit. indicates that the Kalivariya text on this point was either not known to the Mit. or was not much thought of by it. The Kalivarjya text provides that the ideal of extreme poverty and absence of acquisitiveness for brāhmaṇas was not to be insisted upon in the Kali age.

36. ‘The acceptance of the kindling of a log of wood (i. e. setting up sacred Vedic fire) at the time of the homa of Jatakarma for the purpose of securing long life to the child born to a person’ (1. 29). The aranis are two logs of Aśvattha tree from which fire is produced by attrition, which (fire) is used for kindling the gārhapatya fire. In certain śākhās, it is the prac tice to kindle fire from aranis and to use it for the homa in the Jātakarma rite. This fire was to be used in the subsequent rites for the child such as cūda, upanayana, marriage. It was supposed that this enabled the child to live long. 1856 The Sam K. quotes a parisista text to this effect.1857

37. ‘Constant journeys by brāhmaṇas’ (1. 30). The Mahābhārata (Santi 23. 15 ) 1858 says, ‘As a snake swallows mice hiding in holes, the earth swallows two persons viz, a king who does not fight (an invader) and a brāhmaṇa who does not engage

38. For the two kinds of brāhmaṇas, viz. Salina and yāyāvara, vide H. of Dh. vol. II pp. 641-42 n. 1502-1505.

39. erarurat 51 Heta varsitaria foraftuet Pain: 1 FOTHE op fo. f. pp. 1299-1300.

40. feistara a GATTTE TITET PER TORFIMT STUTT - मी तापामनिं । मन्ययेत् । … … तस्मिन् कुमारकमाणि विवाहान्तानि कारयेत् । #.. under FA.

· 1858. mai farina pot ferat fata i Tam wastani wipro Tata Page 1 star 23. 15. Vide also Sabbā 55. 14, Santi 57. 3 and Anusāsana

36. 16 for almost the same words.

956

( Voi.

in travel’ (for acquiring learning from famous teachers). This text only forbids taking aimlessly to long journeys but not those for study or for religious purposes.

38. ‘Blowing on fire with the mouth’ in order to kindle it into flames (1 30 ). Gaut. IX. 32, Manu IV, 53 and Brahmapurāṇa 221. 102 forbid the blowing on fire with the mouth ( as in doing so it is likely that drops of saliva from the mouth may fall into the fire and pollute it). Haradatta on Ap. Dh. S. I. 5. 15. 20 notices that in the Vājasaneya Sākhā it is said that fire should be kindled into flames by blowing upon it with the breath from the mouth since it sprang from the mouth of the Creator (as stated in the Puruṣagūkta, Rg. X. 90. 13). Therefore, acc. to Haradata and the Gobhila-smrti (I. 135-136) 1859 the srauta fire could be kindled by blowing upon it with the mouth, but smārta fire or ordinary fire should not be kindled in that way (but only by using a fan or a bamboo cylindrical piece ). The Kalivariya text forbids blowing with the niouth even on srauta fire.

39. ’ Allowing social intercourse to women who have become polluted by rape and the like(when they have performed prāyasoitta) as prescribed in the sāstras’ (1. 31).1860 Vas. 28. 2-3 state,’ when a woman is polluted by being raped or kidnapp ed by a thief, she should not be abandoned; one should wait till her monthly illness (making her undergo certain expiations till then ) and she becomes pure after it.’ Atri ( V.2-3) has the same verses, which are quoted (from Vas..) by Viśvarūpa on Yāj. III. 256 (p. 133. Tri. ed.) and explained at great length. The Matsyapurāṇa 227. 126 is liberal enough to say that the man who commits rape should be punished with death but the woman raped incurs no blame. Parāśara ( X. 27 ) provides that if a woman is raped by an evil-doer only once she becomes pure by undergoing the Prā jāpatya expiation and after the follow ing monthly illness. Even so late a smrti writer as Davala provides that if a woman of any class is raped by mlecchas and she conceives she can be purified by the expiation of Santapana.

40. ga yarura Tra i all of your et te marta I. 136. This is q. by, the prom. I. p. 212.

is #7 IV. 53.

1860. mn form mySTATATERT: I groft after 1 वर्णेतसया । अभक्ष्यभक्षणं कुर्यात्तस्याः बुद्धिः कथं भवेत् । कुन्द्रं सातपर्म शुवित

A EN 4849.

III

Kalivarjya

957

But this text is harsher on such innocent and unlucky women when it says that they cannot be restored to social intercourse even after undergoing expiation.

Brahmaṇa, 180 Abend from members on allows the be

40. ‘Begging of food by a sannyāsin from members of all varpas (including sūdras ) according to the rules of the śāstra’ (1.32). The Sm. M. p. 201 (on varṇasrama) quotes Kathaka Brāhmaṇa, 1861 Āruṇi Up., Parāsara ( in prose) to the effect that a yati may beg for food from members of all varṇas. Baud. Dh. S. II. 10.69 1862 also quotes a verse which allows the begging of food from all varṇas to a yati. Vas. X. 7 requires a yati to beg at seven houses not selected beforehand and in X. 24 states that he should subsist on what food he gets at the houses of brāhmapas. 1863 The present text requires even the yati to observe caste rules as to food.

41. ‘Not using for ten days fresh rain water’ (1. 33). Haradatta on Ap. Dh. S. L 5. 15. 2, Bhattoji on Catur. (p. 54), Sm. Kau. p. 479 quote a verse,’ she-goats, cows, she-buffaloes and brāhmaṇa women become free from impurity (due to delivery ) after ten nights and so does fresh rain water accumulated on the ground’. According to this the long period of ten days in the case of rain water is set aside. But Bhattoji notes that accord ing to another smrti ‘rain water falling at the proper season is pure, but it is not to be used for drinking for three days; when rain falls at an unusual season rain water is impure for ten days and if a man drinks it within that period he should abstain from food for one day and night’. Bhattoji remarks that the Kalivarjya text only sets aside waiting for ten days, but does not set aside the rule against drinking it for three days.

42. ( Payment of ) the fee demanded by the teacher’ at: the end of the period of brahmacarya (1. 33).

43. 1991 STO ’ uerors are a grotar OTO Guateman pirar totuoret Tut #algrat Tarafts. (auf.) p. 201.

44. To promotie van mag I U T Potrat 41 B iagi. y. a. II. 10. 69.

45. PARTIOTH Petera NTT wport prea ta Fri F ATTISTAS X7 and 24.

46. • AT ANGST roft neft I ETT grapa नबोदकम् ॥ . by हरवस on आप.ध. सु. I. 3. 15.2, ‘काले मबोदक शुद्धं न पिवेश ज्या व सत् । अकाले दशाई स्पारपीत्वा भाचादानिशम् ॥ इति स्मुत्युत्तस्य दशाहपति

a sugarurat a fenti WETS on erat. p. 33.

958

[Vol

The ancient practice was to make no agreement as to fees for teaching. Vide Bs. Up. IV. 1.2. Gaut. (II. 54-55) prescribes 1865 that at the end of his studies the student should request the

· teacher to accept the wealth that he could offer or ask the teacher what should be given and after paying or doing what was required by the guru or if the teacher permitted him to go without demanding anything the student’ should take the ceremonial bath. Vide Manu II. 245-246 and H. of Dh. vol. II. pp. 360-361 for details. Yāj. I. 51 provides that at the end of his studies the student may give to the teacher what he desires (or a cow ) according to his ability or may with his permission take the ceremonial bath (without paying anything). On account of these provisions we have stories in the ancient litera ture that very rarely teachers or their wives made fanciful demands. This Kalivarjya text only gets aside the require ment of paying what the guru demands, but does not prohibit the voluntary gift of a fee by the student. 1866

43. “The engagement of a sūdra for such acts as cooking and the like in the houses of brāhmaṇas and the rest’ (1. 34). Ap. Dh. S. (II. 2. 3. 1-8) requires that 1867 the food for Vaiśva deva should be prepared by pure men of the first three yarnas and also optionally allows a sūdra to be a cook for an ārya pro vided he is under the supervision of men of the first three varpas, provided he sips water whenever he touches the hair, any limb or his garment, provided he cuts the hair (on his head and his body), the beard and nails every day or every 8th day of the month or on the new and full moon day and provided he bathes with the clothes on. It is this permission that is set aside by this Kalivariya text.

44. Suicide of very old people by falling into fire or from a precipice’ (1.35 ).

This is analogous to No. 13 above. Atri did not condemn suicide in certain cases. He states, 1868 (verses 218-219) ’ if one be

1865. Ron Trifa Tar : 1 FATTISET TAI . II. 54-55.

1866. pard TTATOTT affrorati YU Hreich digota T99764.1770 गुपे दक्षिणामा चोदितेतिपदयापत्तेः स्मतिको. p. 479.

1867. 37 : T aswire: u: 1 … r T UUT: Fair: स्युः । तेषां स एवाचमनकल्पः । अधिकमहरहः केशाश्मनुलोममखापनम् । उदकोपस्पर्शनं च FETYT I ft Terraan u aarti 19. y. &. II. 2. 3. 1-8.

1868. Tv: pu : rareorefragaray: 1 groot our - नशमाम्मुभिः । तस्य त्रिरात्रमाशीचे द्वितीये त्वस्थिसत्रयम् । तृतीये नूदक कृत्वा चतुर्थे

RATI 218-219 q. by Awffy on AB. V. 89, ANT. oa 4. III. 6. HUT P. 942.

II ]

Kalivarjya

959

old ( beyond 70), if one cannot observe the rules of bodily puri fication (owing to extreme weakness), if one is so ill that all medical help is discarded, and if one in these circumstances kills himself by throwing himself from a precipice or into fire or water or by fasting, mourning should be observed for him for three days and śrāddha may be performed for him.’ Apar ārka (p. 536 ) quotes several smṛtis to the effect that a very old man or one suffering from very serious illness, one who has no desires left and has carried out his tasks may bring about his death by entering firo or water or falling from a precipice and he will incur no sin. Vide H. of Dh, vol. II. pp. 926-92? for further details. This text may also be taken as forbidding suicide by falling from a precipice or into fire as an expiation in the case of those that are guilty of mahāpātakas knowingly committed. The Mit. on Yāj. III. 226 quotes a smrti to this effect 1869, The Suddhitattva holds (pp. 284-285) that suicide by entering water and the like is allowed in Kali only to śūdras and forbidden to brāhmaṇas and others.

45. “The performance of acamana (purificatory sipping of water) by sistas in as much water as is sufficient for slaking the thirst of a cow’ (1. 36).

Manu V.128, Vas. III. 35, Baud. Dh, S. 1. 5. 65, Yāj. I. 192, Vispu 23. 43 provide 1870 that water collected on the ground is pure (and may be used for acamana) provided it is sufficient in quantity to slake the thirst of a cow. But this text forbids on hygienic grounds the use of small quantities of water collec ted on the ground for sipping and similar purposes,

46. The residence of an ascetic in the house near which he happens to be in the evening’ ( 1. 38).

Aco, to Āp. Dh. S. II. 9. 21. 10 and Manu VI. 43, 55-56, an ascetic was to kindle no fire, was to be houseless and was to beg only once a day in the afternoon or evening when no smoke ascends from the kitchens of people, when the embers have been extinguished, when pöople have finished their meals &o. Vas. (X.

1869. 1: FTATI AETTO : Gorpul #TFT

Farra A II g. by FANT. On 7, III. 226. f

e rguretat a marggrua huruetyo pauni gre pp. 284-286. .

1870. gru nafasat TV met I A1. I. 192; HETTATO AT गोस्तर्पणसमर्थाः स्युः। पसिष्ठ III. 35%3; आपा पवित्र भूमिगता गोवृतियास जायते ।

.. . I. 5. 65.

960

( Vol.

12-15) provides 1871 that a sannyāsin was to change his residence frequently, was to stay at the boundary of the village or in a temple, or in an empty house or at the bottom of a tree and should constantly live in a forest. Saṅkha (VII. 6) states that an ascetic should stay in an empty house or he may stay wherever he may be when the sun sets. This provision of Saṅkha is set aside by the Kalivarjya text. Another meaning of the words, according to Kysnabhatta on the Nir. S. (p. 1310), is that this runs counter to the recommendation of Manu VI. 56 that an ascetic should go for begging to the houses in a village in the evening when all smoke from kitchens has ceased i. e. by this text he is allowed to beg in the noon. In a way this appears to be a better explanation.

The above is a complete list of all Kalivarjyas quoted from the Adityapurāṇa (except one or two). Some of the Kalivarjyas not included here, but included in other texts cited above will also be now set out for the sake of completeness of treatment.

47. ‘Resorting to sannyāsa’. Vyāsa quoted above ( n. 1793) forbade sannyāsa in the Kali age after 4400 years of it had elapsed, but then Devala 1872 made an exception to this extent that as long as the division of society into four varṇas existed and as long as the Veda was studied sannyāsa could be resorted to even in Kali. The Nir, 8. explains that what is forbidden is the sannyāsa with three dandas and not the sannyāsa with one danda. Baud. II. 10. 53 (ekadandi vā ) gives an option that a sannyāsin may carry three staffs or one, while Yāj. III. 58 speaks of a yati as only tridaṇdi. Daṣda meas a staff and also ‘restraint, curbing”. Manu XII. 10 (same as Dakṣa VII. 30) declares that that man is called tridandi who has restraint over his body, speech and mind. Dakṣa1873 also says that a yati is not called tridandi by carrying three bamboo staffs, that he is called tridapdi who has

48. warrat The HET I ORARI I F T T1 9464 parea: 1 AU X. 12-13 and 15: Tift FOTOTHOUT af: VIL 6. The words qu i gfa: occur also in a 12. 11. गृहस्थवेश्मपर: सायंशग्दो प्रदोषवाचका। … भिक्षार्थ प्रविष्टस्य तत्र काले गृहवासो न युक्त

het m i ste Tusfa: 1 OTA Hartaratura i forent. p. 479.

1872. grofferter TTT stati rama i metro mm un # q. by P. III guru p. 370, a. ( p. 176 quoting it as from TTH), u rhun pp. 2-3,

1873. fetitn frame frauen for operationem : #. frustra #UIT VII. 29. Several verses of # VII are quoted by apetyt on p.953,

III )

Kulivarjya

961

the spiritual restraint in him (v. 29). In I. 12-13 Dakṣa says that just as a girdle, deer skin and a wooden staff are the outward signs of a vedic student, 80 three staffs are the peculiar sign of a yati. Vide H. of Dh, vol. II. pp. 937-938 for further details. If the Kalivarjya text were meant to forbid sannyāsa altogether, it must be said that it was never honoured and even now thousands become sanngāsins every year. If, as the Nir. S. says, this text only forbids the carrying of three daṇdas, it is a meaningless prohibition, giving importance only to outward symbols and not to the substance of the matter.

48. “The observance of aynihotra’ or the acceptance of three fires’. Vyāsa (n. 1793 ) forbade the performance of srauta agnihotra along with sannyāsu in Kali, but an exception was made by Devala in favour of its observance as also of resort to sapnyāsa on the grounds stated above (in No. 47). Some digests and authors such as the Nirṇayasindhu 1874 and Bhattoji explain that agnihotra of the sarvadhāna type is forbidden in Kali, but that of the ardhādhāna type is allowed. Agnihotra means ‘adhāna’, that is, setting up of the srauta fires. When a man consecrates the three srauta fires he may do so with half of his smārta fire and keep up the other half of the smārta fire. This is called ardhādhāna. If he does not keep the smārta fire separate, it is sarvīdhūna. Laugākṣi quoted by the Nir. S. (III. p. 370 ), Bhattoji and others states this. The Mit, on Yāj, III. 45 mentions these two modes. Therefore, according to these explana tions, sarvadhāna was allowed in former ages (and acc, to one interpretation up to 4400 years of Kali), while in Kali (or at least after 4400 years of Kali) only ardhādhana is allowed.

49. ‘Human sacrifice’ (vide note 1798 giving extract from Nāradapurāṇa).

The Tai. Br. 1875 ( 11I. 4. 1-19) contains a description of the procedure of human sacrifice. The oldest texts even do not show that a human being was killed. The whole procedure is

1874. satura u tehrafratta qua: i pafuri gra: graf YT1941 MIN q. in fata. acc. to fauferery III. p. 370. * Ten मिति लौगाक्षिवाक्ये पूर्वयुगानि कृतादीनीत्येकार्थः । अन्ये ह युगस्य पूर्व कलेः पूर्वो भाग: स चत्वार्यसहस्राणीति पूर्वोक्तवाक्याच्चतुश्चत्वारिंशच्छतवर्षावच्छिनः तस्मिन् भागे सर्वाधान कार्य तदुसरं तु यावर्णविभागोस्तीति वाक्यात् वर्णविभागपर्यन्तमर्धाधानमित्याहुः। नि.सि.

1875. rengiant W ATSHE #179 79 I figration ITU MEN 8. *1. III. 4.1,

181962

(Vol.

symbolical. The Vāj. S. (XXX. 5 ff.) has many passages in common with the Tai. Br. The Tai. Br. III. 4.1( = Vaj. S. 30.5) begins,’ the brāhmana should be offered to brahman (spiritual power ), the ksatriya to ksatra (military power), the vaisya to the Maruts’ &c. Acc. to Āp. Śr. XX. 24, a brāhmana or ksatriya performs this sacrifice, whereby he attains power and valour and all prosperity. There are eleven sacrificial posts and eleven animals to be offered to Agni and Soma. After the rite of paryugnikarana is performed on the brāhmaṇa and others, they are presented to the several deities and then discharged from the sacrificial posts, eleven goats are killed and oblations of their flesh and limbs are offered. Acc. to the coin, on Vāj. S., it is begun on the 10th day of the bright half of Caitra and goes on for 40 days, which are occupied with 23 dīkṣās, 12 upasads and five sutyas ( days on which soma is extracted). After this yāga, the yajamāna usually resorted to a forest as a sannyāsin. 1876

50. “Aśvamedha’(n. 1798). The Tai, S. V.3.12.2 states, 1877 “he who performs the Asvamedha becomes free from (the sin of) brahmana murder’. In spite of this Vedic authority the Bphan Nāradiya and other purāṇas prohibited it. But no one heeded this prohibition and numerous historio kings performed this sacrifice from at least 200 B, O, to Jayasing in the 18th century A. D. Vide H. of Dh. vol. II. pp. 1238-1239 and .pp. 70-71 above for numerous historical performers of Aśvamedha.

51. “Rājasūya’ (acc. to the Garuḍapurāṇa, p. 929 above). This was a very complex rite extending over two years and could be performed only by a ksatriya. Vide H. of Dh. vol. II. pp. 1214-1223 for a brief description. The Rājasūya was per formed by the Kalinga Emperor Khāravela as he proclaims in his Hāthigumpha Inscription (E. I. vol. XX p. 71 at p. 79) and by queen Nayanikā as stated in the Nāṇāghāt Inscription (A. S.

W. I. vol. V. p. 60).

52. ‘Perpetual studenthood’ (n. 1798). Vedic students were of two kinds, upakurvāra ( who offered some return or fee at the time when they returned home) and the naiṣthika (who remained students till death). Vide p. 764 n. 1471 above,

,1876. urtean geratori ATTICUT CHITTOOTHGEETFUTT YOGA MET I UTÅ AT 11974 traf1991 TRI 14. *. XX. 24. 16–17.

1877. grat tumita que . #. V. 3. 12. 2. .

Kalivariya

963

Hārita, Dakṣa 1878 (1.7) and others mention these two varie ties, while Yaj. I. 49, Vedavyāsa I. 41 and Viṣṇu Dh. 8. 28. 46 name and describe the naiṣthika. Manu II. 243-244, Yāj. I. 49-50, Vas. VII. 4-5 provide that a perpetual Vedic student should stay with his teacher till his own death, that on the teacher’s death he should stay with the teacher’s son or the teacher’s wife or should tend fire, that if he curbs his senses till his death, he reaches the world of brahma (immortality) and is not born again. This was a very diffi cult mode of life, there were great temptations as the flesh is weak and therefore the Bphan-Nāradiya and others prohibited perpetual studenthood. Some works such as the Madanapārijāta (p. 16), the Kalivarjyavinirṇaya of Damodara, and the Nir, S. read ‘dirgha-kālam brahmacaryam’ in place of ’naisthikam brahmacaryam’ in the Bșhan-Naradiya.

53. ‘Brahmacarya for long periods’ (n. 1799). The Baud. Dh, S. (1.7.1-5) declares, “the term of studentship for Veda study as observed in ancient times lasted for 48 years, or 24 years, or 12 years for each Veda or at least one year for each kāṇda (of the Tai.S.) or it lasted till the Veda was committed to memory, as life is evanescent and as the Veda ordains let him kindle the sacred fires while his hair is still black’.” The Āp. Dh. S. (1. 1. %. 11-16 ) provides that the student’s stay with the teacher’s household should be 48 years, 24 years or 12 years at the lowest. Manu III. 1 also states that the vow of studying the three Vedas under a guru must be observed for 36 years or for half of that time or for a quarter of it or until the student has mastered (the Veda). These long periods of 48 years, 36 or 24 years for Veda study (before a man could become an house holder) are here forbidden in Kali. This was nothing new. Yāj. I. 36 had allowed 12 years for each Veda or five and if a man did not want to study all vedas but only one he could finish his studenthood in five years. Only an extremely small number could have spent 48 or 36 years in Veda study. Sabara on Jai. I. 3. 3 held that this text of Band. was opposed to the fruti about kindling fires when a man was a young householder with black hair and was to be discarded. Vide pp. 832–834 above for a

1878, aut wurde fuit

A T 1 orangeforent surugra: I forget wat ditera Traia i te q. by spotrani p. 71; faut want स्यादापोलयुपकुर्वाणक: । द्वितीयो नैष्ठिकथैव तस्मिोष व्रते स्थितः ॥ वक्ष I. 7. q. by ei I. . 64.

964

I Vol.

perpetual studentus of Āp. and Band uns prohibition was

discussion of this. The authors of the Samayamayūkha and the Sm. Kau, both of whom had before them the reading *dirghakālam brahmacaryam’ held that this prohibition was aimed at the words of Ap. and Baud. and that the vow of perpetual studentship which was undertaken with a special purpose in view ( viz. realization of brahma and non-return to samsūra) was not prohibited by the Kalivarjya text and that there was nothing wrong in the practice of perpetual student hood among the Dravidas.

54. ‘Animal sacrifice.’ In the Mārkandeya as quoted in Apararka p. 929 above animal sacrifice was forbidden in the Kali age. Though popular feeling had gradually veered round to the view that meat should not be offered in śrāddhas, in madhuparka (No. 22 above), yet animal sacrifices were performed at all times and are even now performed, though very rarely.

55. “Intoxicating drinks ( madya)’. There were startling vicissitudes in the attitude to intoxicants.

In Vedic times soma was a beverage drunk by the priests and surā was a beverage for common men and usually not meant to be offered to the gods. Soma and surā are sharply distinguished (vide Tai, S. II. 5. 1. 1, Vāj. S. 19.7, Sat. Br. V. 1. 5. 28). The Sat. Br. (V. 1. 5. 28) has the striking antithesis ‘For, Soma is truth, prosperity, light; and surā is untruth, misery, darkness’. In the Sautrāmaṇl iṣti a brāhmaṇa had to be hired for drinking the dregs of surā offered in it and if a brāhmaṇa could not be found the surā was poured on an ant hill (Tai. Br. I. 8. 6 and Sabara on Jai. III. 5. 14-15). It appears from the Kathaka-bambitā XII. 12 that 1879 brāhmaṇas had by that time come to regard the drinking of surā as sinful. From Chān. Up. V. 10.9 it appears that a drinker of surā was enumerated among five grave sinners. In the Asv. gr. II. 5. 3-5 it is said that in the rites of the Anvaṣtaka day when pindas are offered to the male ancestors, the female ancestors viz. the mother, the paternal grandmother and great-grandmother are offered surā and the scum of boiled rice in addition 1880. The Nir. S. (III.

1879. HEHE grat: * Power ATARRETTI FIE 1787. XII 12, quoted by the path on . 1.3.7 p. 210 and by Frere on a

III. 4, 31,

1880. rofaguna ITA RYHurt fagrat qora i ft* HTT Why I SHTAT. T. II. 5. 3-5.

JT ]

Kalivarjya

965

p. 367) refers to this passage of the Aśy. Gr. and holds that the Kalivariya text against intoxicants forbids this also.

Madya is a generic term applicable to all intoxicating drinks; surā is said to be of three kinds, viz. that prepared from molasses, that from honey (or madhūka flowers or from grapes) and that from corn flour (Manu XI. 94, Viṣṇu Dh, S. 22. 82 and Sasvarta 117 ). The Viṣṇu Dh. S. (22. 83-84) specifies ten kinds of madya, all of which a brāhmaṇa was not even to touch. Gaut. II. 25 1881, Ap. Dh, S. I. 5. 17. 21, Manu XI. 95 forbid all kinds of midya to brāhmaṇas at all stages of life. Ap. I. 7. 21. 8, Vas. I. 20, Manu XI. 54, Viṣṇu Dh, S. 35. 1 hold that the drinking of surā is one of the five grave sins (mahāpātakas), while Yāj. III. 227 employs the word ‘madya’ in place of surā in this connection. Baud. Dh. S. I. 1. 22 however notes that among the five practices peculiar to the brāhmaṇas of the north was that of drinking rum and Baud, condemns it. The verses of Manu XI. 93–94 about the three kinds of surā have been the subject of frequent and varying interpretations. Viśvarūpa on Yāj. III. 222, the Mit. on Yāj. III. 253, Aparārka p. 1069 and others establish that the word ‘surā.’ primarily applies to paiṣti ( liquor prepared from flour ) alone, that paiṣti is forbidden to all brāhmaṇas, kṣatriyas and vaisyas, that it is the drinking of paisti alone that constitutes a mahāpātaka, that all intoxi cating drinks are forbidden to brāhmaṇas in all ages, but in toxicants other than paiṣti ( such as those prepared from molasses or madhūka flowers) are not forbidden to ksatriyas and vaisyas. Manu XI. 93 says that surā is the refuse of cooked food ( rice); therefore members of the three higher castes should not drink surā. This clearly shows that Manu took surā as meaning only paisti ( liquor prepared from rice flour). The Viṣṇu Dh. S. ( 22. 84) expressly says that kṣatriyas and vaibyas are not polluted by touching the ten kinds of madyas specified by it. In the Udyogaparva (595) both Vasudeva (Krṣṇa) and Arjuna are described as intoxicated by drinking the liquor prepared from honey and the Tantra vārtika establishes that there was nothing wrong in this as both were kṣatriyas. Intoxicants were not forbidden to sūdras. Brahmacarins of whatever varṇa had to abstain from intoxicants of all kinds. Aparārka 1882 (p. 63)

1881. Ho farei wenn: 1 . II. 25; fā HURT 1979. 7. .1.5.17. 21.

1882. All Rated Tigo: Para PAR T AU yagmeraro muuta sering uporazurata morta in garui … 77 A t

: 1 HIT P. 63.

966

| Vol.

after quoting the Brahmapurāṇa states that intoxicating drinks were forbidden to the three varṇas in Kali and to brāhmanas in all yugas (ages). But this is opposed to tradition. The Adiparva (chap. 76 ) narrates 1883 that Sukrācārya prohibited for the first time brāhmaṇas from drinking intoxicants (vide H. Dh. vol. II. pp. 792-799 for detailed discussion of this topic). The Kalivarjya text forbids the drinking of intoxicants to all the three twice-born classes. But ksatriyas and vaisyas pay scant attention to this prohibition and even some brāhmaṇas in these days have taken to drink as a fashionable indulgence. The K. V, N. (folio 5a), Krsnabhatta 1884 and Sm. Kau, note that in the sākta treatises (called Vāmāgama) madya is allowed to be offered to the idol for all the three varṇas and to ksatriyas in the propitiatory rites for Vināyaka and for birth on the Mūla con stellation but this kalivarjya text forbids all that.

An analysis of these 55 kalivarjyas yields very interesting results. About one-fourth out of the above 55 relate to Srauta matters. There are several texts forbidding Agnihotra, Aśvamedha, Rajasūya, Puruṣamedha, sattras, Gogava, animal sacrifices, while a few others are concerned with matters of detail in sacrifices (vide. No. 11, 14-16, 29-30, 38, 48-51, 54). The first nine of these 55 are concerned with legal matters and relations. Some prohibitions are due to growing caste exclusive ness ( No. 5, 10, 31, 40, 43). Others again spring from ideas of greater insistence on the sacredness of the marriage tie, a stricter morality and a demand for greater decency and purity, particularly in women ( No. 2, 3, 4, 9, 15, 23, 24, 33, 39, 55 ). A few are based on notions of compassion, justice and equity (No. 1, 8, 24, 25, 42). Some owe their origin to the growing sacredness of the brāhmaṇa’s person and his high social position (No. 7, 10, 27, 29, 30). Some must have been suggested by hygienic considerations (No. 12, 16, 28, 38, 41, 45), some arose from strict ideas of sin, expiation and ceremonial purity and impurity (No. 13, 18-21, 28, 44). Two of these, when they

1883. granufie Pier grege Haarfa: Nuat * Forenkets PA: FORETT *infaa 76. 67 =- REAGT70 25. 62.

1884. TT ATTAIEN Sorgenti natural Rufunt afer fare ज्यसे । अथवा विनायकशान्तौ मूलजावशान्तो च-तण्य (पुष्प १) चित्र सुगन्धं च सुरांच निषिधामपि तथा मुरापोलिकांसामवेभोजनादिभिः इत्येताम्यां यम्मय प्रासं तब यद्यपि मधमाससुरादीमि बामणं (माह्मणो1) विनिवर्जयेदित्यनेन माहाणानां निषिद्ध तथापि

TATTETrettorno al foroven pleine rule. (folio 5a). THE P. 1291 gives a summary of this,

III)

Kalivarjya

967

prohibit the stage of forest hermit and of sannyaga, strike at the very root of the ancient scheme of āśramas.

The chapter on Kalivarjyas can be employed as a very effective answer to those who trot out the theory of the ‘unchang ing East’. Social ideas and practices undergo substantial changes even in the most static societies. Many of the practic es, that had the authority of the Veda (which was supposed to be self-existent and eternal) and of such ancient smṛtis as those of Ap., Manu and Yāj., had either come to be given up or had become obnoxious to popular sentiment. This fiction of great men meeting together and laying down conventions for the Kali age was the method that was hit upon to admit changes in religious practices and ideas of morality. The Kalivarjya texts are also a complete answer to those who hold fast to the notion that dbarına (particularly ācāradharma ) is immutable and un changeable (aparivartaniya). This chapter on Kalivarjya unmistakably shows how the most authoritative dicta of the Veda and of ancient sages and law-givers were set aside and held to be of no binding authority because they ran counter to prevailing notions and furnishes a powerful weapon in the hands of those who want to introduce reforms in the incidents of marriage, inheritance and other matters touching modern Hindu society. One can further see how some practices still persist in spite of the prohibitions in the Kalivarjya texts viz. marriage with one’s maternal uncle’s daughter, sannyāsa, agnihotra and even srauta animal sacrifices (rarely).

Some works add two more to the Kalivarjya verses which mean, ‘imprecations, omens, dreams, palmistry, listening for supernatural voices or messages, promises to make presents to a deity if a certain prayer were granted, prophetic replies by astrologers to questions, may rarely turn out to be true. One should not, however, resort to these through the desire to secure results from them. Similarly there are other actions also (that have to be abandoned) in the Kali age, because they have come to be

included (by people ) under improper acts (adharma).’ 1885

1885. 378 37997: $siteurster papaga: 1 Tar: guitar: I FART: पुरुष कृष्णं कुष्णवन्तं पश्यति स एनं हन्तीत्याविश्वतिस्मृतिसिखाः । उपचतिः सन्यायां निणे Ferragostea

FU

1.T HABHI FI सिद्ध भैरवाय सौलं कसरानं दास्यामीत्यादिसङ्कल्पः । आदेश: प्रश्नावशेन ज्योतिर्विधर्भ विष्यकथनम् । एतत्वचितस्पापीयादेः प्रतिबग्धकादृष्टभावाभावाम्यो संपादलाभनियमाभावान शकुनादिलाभमात्रेण जयायवेश्यकविवादादिप्रवृत्तिचितेति इटार्थकार्यनिषेध एवं क्रियते

(Continued on the next page)

968

History of Dharmasāatra

[ Vol.

From the fact that no ancient smrti speaks of Kalivarjya, that the ancient commentaries of Viśvarūpa, Medhātithi and even Vijñānesvara do not cite long lists of Kalivarjyas, that such lists first make their appearance in the Smartyarthasara, the Sm. C. and Hemādri ( works and authors of 12th and 13th centuries), the most probable inference is that these lists of Kalivariyas were first put together at the earliest in the 10th or 11th century A. D. 1886

(Continued from the last page) a TVET sure: i farat. p. 477. The passage gu gu … is quoted by शङ्कराचार्य on वेदान्तसूत्र III. 2.4. The कलिवयवि. (folio 11b) explains

TT: ***Tafelrasiert: 1 … 394 URTETETT Fuat apararei सूचनशम्वाकर्णनम् । … आदेशः आशीर्वादः प्रश्नमलेन भविष्यकथनं वा … एते च निषेधा इति वार्तिकानुसारिणः । निबन्धानुसारिणस्त (निवन्धनानु०१) धर्मविलापसेरेते पर्युदासा para Audi’ fala means here the far of art and apy refers to the works of Prabhākara, wbo was called formaat by the prererar OD . II. 1. 1. .

1886. An attempt at a systematical collection of the Kalivarjya texts and elucidation thereof was made by me in a paper submitted to the 8th All ladia Oriental Conference held at Mysore in December 1935. The paper was published in the Journal of the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, vol. 12 pp. 1-18 (New Series ), 1936. Recently ( 1943 ) Mr. Batuknath Bhattacharya has published a book which contains a full treatment of Kalivarjyas. He states in the preface that it is an exact reprint of the thesis for Jogendrachandra Ghose Research Prize in Comparative Indian Law for 1933’, that the subject is comparatively fresh and unexplored’ and that the treatment is on lines marked out by the writer himself. He claims that bis work is ‘original as a whole except one sec tion on secondary sons’. He does not state exactly in what year the thesis for a prize of 1933 was submitted to the Calcutta University. Presumably a thesis for a prize of 1933 should have been submitted in 1934 or 1935 at the latest. No satisfactory explanation is given why the thesis was published in 1943, so long after the year of the prize, nor does he mention my paper published so far back as 1936. It appears from quotations in tbe book as printed that it was probably retouched, if not actually written, after 1937. For example, on p. 76 be quotes a passage from the Smrtimuktāphala (section on Varnāsrama p. 201 ), which was published by Principal J. R. Gharpuré only in 1937 in Devanagari. If the original thesis was written or revised in or after 1937 my paper published in 1936 should have been mentioned. Mr. Batuknath Bhattacharya in his paper ’the sources of dharma and their comparative authority’ published in the Proceedings of the 10th Oriental Conforence at Tirupati beld in 1940 refers to my paper on Kalivarjyas (p. 160 ) as ‘brief and compact’. This shows that he knew my paper years before he published his work in 1943. The claim of the subject belag * unexplorod’ and the thesis being ’ original’ is bardly admissible.