365bet娱乐

We now come to the most important, informative and interesting part of our study in dealing with the sociological conditions of the period as revealed from the works of Bhasa. It has already been stated as our considered view that Bhasa belongs to the pre-Mauryan or at least the Mauryan period, and our conclusion would be strengthened if it could be shown that there exist striking parallelisms between the social conditions as portrayed in Bhasa and those obtained from the works of the Mauryan period. This would be a very strong proof in favour of the antiquity of Bhasa, as close similarities in peculiar social customs necessarily indicate proximity in in time, and judging from the difficulties experienced even today in getting at ancient historical material in this vast continent, those in the remote period may better be imagined than described, the more so, if the poet did not belong to the period we ascribe to him. It would be impossible for an author coming centuries after the Mauryan period to incorporate in his works some minute peculiarities of the epoch; and the possibility of his hailing from the South is necessarily excluded if the portrayal of the sociological conditions of our poet agrees remarkably with those of the Mauryan age. It may rightly be contended that many of the customs that were observed in quite ancient times are strictly adhered to even in these days. The sociological conditions of different epochs in India present many striking similarities, thanks to the conservatism and orthodoxy of the people. On the contrary, India being a vast expanse of land containing peoples of various races

316 and religions since the ancient times, there are found to be diversities in the sociological conditions in a single period between different provinces; many divergent practices again are seen to exist side by side in the same or in different provinces. It cannot be denied, nevertheless, that there are some peculiar characteristics of a particular period that are not to be found in subsequent or earlier epochs, and which, therefore, may rightly be called the distinguishing features of that period. In the following pages every section dealing with a social problem contains a short introductory historical sketch describing the development of that particular topic from the Vedic times down to the period of the Arthasastra, which, as we shall presently show in brief, belongs to the Mauryan age. No reference has been made to the subsequent periods. After tracing the vicissitudes of a particular social, political or religious problem under different periods, we have given the information supplied by our works in regard to the problem showing the state of affairs at the period of our poet. Readers are left to judge for themselves as to the particular period with which the sociological conditions described in our works closely agree, though at places we have referred to some resemblances in foot-notes. The age of the Rgveda as to the date of which there is a good deal of difference of opinion among orientalists has been taken as the starting point. Scholars variously put the date between 25000 B. C. and 700 B. C., the generally accepted view being to place the period in the second millenium before Christ following Max Muller.' Rightly has the late Rev. Father Zimmermann drawn the attention of scholars in this connection to the differences of view-point that naturally arise between those who reside thousands of miles away from India and those residing nearer the scene of action. Without entering into details as to the discussion of the date of the Rgveda, we may state that the reasonable view appears to be that which puts the Vedic civilization at about 4500 B. C. propounded by Dr. Jacobi and 1 25000 B. C.-A. C. Das; 11000.-S. V. Venkatesvara; 6000 B. C.Tilak 4500 B. C.-Jacobi; 2780-1820 B. C.-Weber; 2400-2000 B. C.-Haug; 2000 B. C.-Winternitz; 2050-1600 B. C.-Pargiter; 1400-1200 B. C.-Macdonell, Keith 700 B. C.-Waddell. 2 Hymns from the Rgveda, Bom. Sans. Ser. No. 58, Second Ed., Preface, p. vii.

317 " Lok. Tilak, which estimate is not prima facie incredible " according to Dr. Buhler." For the social conditions of the Vedic age, we mainly rely on our own study of the Rigveda and also on the works of Dr. Winternitz and other scholars. 66 2 Next in chronological order comes the age of the Indus culture. All the European archaologists and scholars and most of those from India have placed the Indus civilization in the pre-Aryan period in India. They have provisionally assigned the period 3250-2750 B. C. to the Indus Valley culture, and the so-called Aryan invasion of India cannot be placed, according to them, before 2000 B. C. Elsewhere, we have briefly dealt with the "Authors of the Indus Culture" where we have. shown that the age of the Indus culture is postRgvedic. Prof. Viswanatha, Prof. Venkatesvara, Prof. Dikshitar, Dr. Sarup and others rightly opine that the Indus civilization flourished between the period of the earliest Vedic mantras and the time when the Atharva practices had come to be recognized as part and parcel of the religion of the Hindus." We depend on our own impressions and conclusions formed about the social conditions of the Indus period from the information gathered from the study of the monumental works by Sir John Marshall supplemented by the equally magnificent volumes brought out by Dr. Ernest Mackay and the reports of the Archaological Department as also the vast literature on the subject. With regard to most of the topics dealt with following pages, such as Varnasramadharma, Marriage Political Organisation, Literature, Social Life etc., no information could be gleaned from the sociological conditions of the period of the Indus Civilization as the data furnished by in the Laws, 1 Indian Antiquary, 1894, p. 248. 2 Marshall, Mohenjo-Daro and the Indus Civilization Vol. I, pp. 102-106; Doctors Mackay, Langdon, Konow, Thomas, Keith, Woolley, Fabri, Krishnaswami Aiyangar, K. N. Dikshit, Daya Ram Sahni and others have expressed their approval of the date proposed by Sir John Marshall. 3 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, XVIII, pp. 385-895. 4 Viswanatha, Racial Synthesis, p. 28; also Venkatesvara, Aryan Path, 1930, pp. 11-15; 1934, pp. 86-90; Dikshitar, The Culture of the Indus Valley (Rep. from Mad. Univ, Journ, Jan. 1934); N. N. Law, Indian Historical Quarterly, VIII, pp. 121-164; Sarup, Ganga, 1933, pp. 62-69; Indian Culture, IV, pp. 149-169. 5 MohenjoDaro and the Indus Civilization, 3 Vols., 3 Vols., London, 1931; Mackay, Further Excavations at Mohenjo-Daro, 2 Vols. Delhi, 1988; Indus Civilization, London, 1985; Childe, New Light on the Most Ancient East, London 1984; Annual Reports of the Archaeological Survey of India, 1927 onwards; and a number of articles by these scholars and by Fabri, Frankfort and others.

318 the archaological remains are necessarily silent on such subjects. Then we come to the epic age, viz., the period of the Mahabharata and the Ramayana. Though the epics came to be written at a comparatively late period, the age of the actual events described in the epics goes back to the later phases of the Vedic period. Indian opinion considers the bulk of the epics to have been already written in the pre-Christian epoch. At any rate, it will be generally acceptable, it is hoped, that the social conditions portrayed in the epics relate to a long period embracing some centuries before and after the Buddhist age. We have mainly utilized Mr. Vaidya's Epic India" and Upasamhara" for the social life of the age." 66 2 66 Then comes the Buddhist age of which the Jatakas have been taken as the representative literature. Whatever be the age of the individual Jatakas, it will have to be admitted that many Jatakas were vastly popular before the third century B. C. as would appear from the bas-reliefs on the stupas at Barhut and Sanchi, where a number of scenes from the Jatakas are carved on the railings round these stupas. According to Fick, Buhler, Fausboll, Rhys Davids and other Buddhist scholars the social conditions of the Jatakas refer at least to the time of Buddha himself and the political conditions show the period before the rise of the Nandas and the Mauryas. In spite of the scepticism of Dr. Winternitz to assign the antiquity claimed by these scholars for the Jatakas, we think we are not far from right in stating that the Jatakas may be taken to relate the political and social conditions of North India in and before Buddha's time. The kernel of the Jataka stories goes back to the earliest Hindu literature; there was nothing peculiarly Buddhist about them. Verses were added later on to the original stories when they were adapted into the Buddhist scheme of Jatakas. The Jatakas and other Buddhist writings no doubt show a distinct Ksatriya bias and look down upon the Brahmanas in contrast to the Brahmanical 1 Mahabharataca Upasamhara, Poona, 1918; Epic India (First Reprint), Bombay, 1983. 2 Rhys Davids, Buddhist India, pp. 190-194. 3 Fick, Die Sociale Gilderung in Nordostlichen Indien Zu Buddhas Zeit, pp. vi, vii; G. Buhler, Indian Studies, No. 5, (Vienna, 1895); Rhys Davids, Buddhist India, pp. 202 n 2, 204 n 1, 205, 206. 4 History of Indian Literature, II, pp. 121-123. 5 Rhys Davids, Buddhist India, pp. 189, 205-206.

319 literature of the period which idealizes the Brahmanas; yet the picture of society presented by them is not only not unreliable, but, barring distinct sectarian propaganda, is more faithful. In fact, we get a good deal of realistic information about the life of the common people, their follies and foibles, their sports and amusements, their virtues and vices from the Jatakas and allied literature. As the period we have assigned to Bhasa is not far distant in time from the Buddhist age, there appear to be many similarities in the social conditions of the period. as painted by both. 2 8 Finally, we have referred to Kautilya's Arthasastra, which we have taken as the product of the Mauryan age and hence contemporaneous with the period we have assigned to Bhasa. Non-mention of the great Brahmana minister of Candragupta by Megasthenes need not be taken to mean that Kautilya or Canakya was a mythical person. For one thing, the Indika of Megasthenes is available only in fragments; again argumentum ex silentio cannot be relied on too much. The fact that Kautilya is eulogized in Brahmanical literature and depreciatory remarks occur about him in the Buddhist and Jain works is sufficient to establish the existence and historicity of Kautilya. The discrepancies between Megasthenes and Kautilya need not postulate a late date for the latter, since the alleged discrepancies have been shown to be no discrepancies at all. Besides, Megasthenes possessed very little critical judgment, was unacquainted with the language and literature of India, was often misled by wrong information received from others, and has, at places, idealized the Indians. The arguments of Dr. Jolly, Dr. Winternitz, Dr. Keith, Dr. Stein and others questioning the authenticity of Kautilya's Arthasastra, casting doubts on the existence of Kautilya, the famous Mauryan minister, and relegating the work to the post-Christian period have been ably controverted by Dr. R. Shama Sastri, Dr. D. R. Bhandarkar, 5 1 Fick, Social Organization, Chapters 1, 2; Cowell, Jatakas, Vol. I, Intr. 2 Jolly, Arthasastra, Intr., p. 34. 3 Bhandarkar, Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, VII, p. 68. 4 For discrepancies, cf. Jolly, op. cit., pp. 34-41; Keith, History of Sanskrit Literature, pp. 459-460; Stein, Megasthenes und Kautilya, Wien, 1922; etc. Contra, Bhandarkar, Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, VII, pp. 70-72; Arthasastra, Shama Sastri, Eng. Trans., Third Ed., Preface, pp. xxxi-xxxiii; 5 Cf. Bhandarkar, Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, VII, p. 68; Ray Chaudhury, Political History of Ancient India, Second Ed., p. 170; also Jolly, op. cit., Intr. etc.

8 320 Dr. Jayaswal, Dr. N. N. Law, Prof. P. V. Kane and other orientalists and we need not traverse the same ground here. It is interesting to note in this connection that Dr. Fleet, Dr. Jacobi, Dr. F. W. Thomas and Dr. Vincent Smith are, perhaps, the only European scholars accepting the antiquity of the work." The Arthasastra, thus, is the work of Kautilya or Canakya and naturally belongs to belongs to the fourth century B. C. Dr. D. R. Bhandarkar, however, states that the Arthasastra as we have it at present cannot go back beyond the first century A. D., the original work of Kautilya, according to him, underwent some change of form during the early centuries of the Christian era; he further states that many customs and practices mentioned in the Arthasastra carry us at least to the fourth century B. C. Dr. Shama Sastri has recently adduced an argument based on astronomical grounds to prove the antiquity of the Arthasastra. Attention may also be drawn to the Presidential Address of Dr. Jayaswal at the annual meeting of the Numismatic Society of India in 1935, where he has shown how numismatics helps to settle chronology. The antiquity of the Arthasastra may be proved by reference to the punch-marked coins which conform to the proportion of alloy (viz. one-fourth) prescribed by Kautilya. The reverse-marks of some 4000 coins examined by Dr. Jayaswal show that the marks were not made in the mint by the Superintendent (Laksanadhyaksa) but were impressed subsequently, probably by the examiner of coins (Rupadarsaka) of the Treasury Department after examining the currencyworthiness" of the coins as enjoined by Kautilya; some of the coins, further, have the initial of royal names or the royal monogram (narendranka, rajanka) as laid down by Kautilya, beside the imperial Maurya mark,- 5 66 1 Shama Sastri, Arthasastra, 1919, Intr., Preface to Eng. trans., 1929, pp. vii-xxxiii; Bhandarkar, Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, VII. pp. 65-84; Jayaswal, Hindu Polity, App. I; R. Mookerji, Intr. Essay to Studies in Ancient Hindu Polity, pp. x-xxXV; N. N. Law, Studies in Indian History and Culture, pp. 209-266; Kane, Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, VII, pp. 85-100; Dikshitar, Mauryan Polity, p. 19; Ganapati Sastri, Critical Study, p. 25. 2 Fleet, Introductory Note to Shama Sastri's trans., pp. v-vi; Jacobi, SPAW, xxxviii, pp. 832-849; Thomas, Cambridge History of India, I pp. 467 ff; Smith, Early History of India, 4 th Ed., P. 145. 3 Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, VII, p. 76. 4 Krishnaswami Aiyangar Com. Vol., pp. 122-126. 5 Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Numismatic Society of India, 1935, p. 8. Dr. Jayaswal states that his analysis of a Pataliputra coin showed that it was composed of over 74% of copper, and the rest was iron and lead. The Arthasastra says it as (p. 84) i. e. the copper coins shall contain one- padajiva fourth alloy.

321 the Moon-on-hill.' Considering all these factors, we feel sure that we are justified in assigning fourth century B. C. to the Arthasastra. Full references from the Arthasastra have been given in the foot-notes in support of our statements. It is hoped that the similarities in the social conditions as presented by the Arthasastra and by Bhasa show them to be closely allied in time. Especially in olden times it was extremely difficult to know the exact social life. So our poet must be taken to belong at least to the Mauryan period. 1 Proceedings, pp. 11-12; Kautilya's Arthasastra, p. 84 vyavahariki kosapravesyam ca sthapayet | ' rupikamastakam satam ....... ca The fee for examining the $ currency-worthiness' (kosapravesya) of the coins was 8%. cf. also narendranka in krta narendrankam sastravaranamayudhagaram pravesayet | at p. 249 and rajanka' in parapasunam rajana parivartayita rupasya purvam sahasadandam dadyat | at p. 129 of the Arthasastra.