आसमानों को झुकाने की जरूरत ही नहीं,
वे मेरे पाँव छू रहे हैं, गौर से देखो।

LlBRATING-39
BRAHMANISM AS A COMMERCE

The original arrangement of the Devas was perfect. Society was a lager family. The division of work was based on the golden principle of ‘from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.’ If gathering and hunting was primitive communism, intuitively followed, initial agrarian arrangement attributed to Manu was early communism repeated mechanically with additions and amplifications in Hindu law books. In its pristine simplicity it appears to be both ideal and practical. In fact it was practiced for millennia till it was disturbed by the crafty Asuras who high jacked and modified it to suit their ascendency.

In the older scheme no one was ‘the other’. There was no superiority and inferiority. Of course due regard for age, and due respect for the brave youngsters who were their own dear ones was shown with pride and affection. The Kulpati, prototype of kings and patrons, of course enjoyed some authority including the power to punish in case of grave defaults.

The problem arose with the penetration into elders rank of the ‘wisemen from the wilderness. They appear to have claimed supernatural wisdom by which they could protect from the enemies and diseases, could enhance production and appease the benevolent gods through satiation. This in our surmise, was the beginning of ritual yajna, emulating agricultural operations combined with offering to please the deities through fire but allocating major share for them under this pretext.

They had good explanations for everything. Their power could be compromised in case they soiled their hands participating in any agricultural activity. They could instead promote production through simulation and symbolisms. They had devices to assemble the forces of nature per their wish. The smoke of the yajna rising to sky acted as messenger to invite gods, it also acted as carrier of oblation to them. It appears there was some confusion as to the propriety: should they be invited to attend the feast or they be served where they were. In the first scheme they as well as the manes were invited and offered their seat (सीद श्येनो न योनिमा।). In the latter Agni as carrier (वह्नि) carried their share (देवभाक्) to them.

Parallel to yajna there arose another method to please them. Offering the Brahmns, the fire incarnate, the choicest food to be consumed by them on behalf of the gods and thus satiate them. Whatever the Brahmins consumed reached the manes and the deities as it did when offered directly to Agni.

Ritual yajna appears to have been established as early as 7000 BCE, as a rough estimate, based on the fact that initially ghrit produced from goat milk (आज्य) was offered as oblation. The ghee as oblation is continued to be called ajya even though now it was extracted from cow milk.

Cattle domestication marked the beginning of the Manav yuga, or Martya yuga somewhere around 5000 BCE. The distinction has been drawn on the basis that the Devas are ajya-loving while martyas gavya-loving.

Due to a large gap of some five thousand years when the history was recorded for the first time much confusion was generated, even so remarkable clarity if found in the records not to allow us go astray. Look at the following observations:
1. Earlier the gods were mortals likewise at that time the Brahmins were immortal(मर्त्या ह वा अग्रे देवा आसु:, स यत एव ब्राह्मणापुरथा अमृता आसु:, श. ११.२.३.६ ).
2. Both Devas and humans lived together (उभये ह वा इदमग्रे सहासुर्देवाश्च मनुष्याश्च, श. २.३.४.४
3. Those born earlier were Devas, and those born later were men (प्राचीन जनना वै देवा: प्रतीचीनजनना मनुष्या:, श.७.४.२.४०).
4. Men are just as the Devas (देवानां वै विधामनु मनुष्या:, ६.७.४.९).
5. This ajya is the dearest abode of Devas (एतद्वै देवाना प्रियं धाम यत् आज्यम्, श. १.३.२.१७).

The Devas settle in wall-protected vaikunthas (settlements which were safe from Asuras, but kep their interest alive, in land produce. Only after paying their share could the mortals consume what they produced. We may note the beginning of absentee-landlordism in this transfer of roles. The erstwhile landlords switched to trade and settled in cities of some sort perhaps planned and inhabited by their likes, prohibiting entry of common men for security reason, but they realised their share in produce. By the time of the Rigveda this system had been thoroughly established. ‘Indra, the all powerful was the lord of land, the Maruts the tillers ( इन्द्र: आसीत सीरपति: शतक्रतु: कीनाश: आसन मरुत: सुदानव।). On crucial points we find reference to tillers and labourers as our men, a clear hiatus between work force and the masters.

But our interest lies in the fact that the elders in the old scheme had not to bother for food and care, nor were they alienated from the property. Remaining idle, they could be the real masters of the land worked by their offsprings, whereas this new Brahmanical section did owe nothing. It had neither any interest in possessing land and produce anything because of the taboos honoured by them, nor others could take them as intimately as they cared for their elders. Possessing nothing and eager to have the best they had to resort to such multifarious tricks which reduced Brahmanism into commercial venture sans labour, risk and investment. It turned out to be fraud glamorised. The details must be examined in another note.

किसी की परवाह न करते हुए अपनी कहने का साहस था विष्णु खरे में। कुछ लोगों में यह साहस बचा रहे। मरने वाले कुछ न कुछ छोड़ जाते हैं बचे हुए लोगों के लिए।

LIBERATING INDIAN MIND- 38

Looking back we find Agricultural Revolution as it was so fondly called by Childe was not a revolution but a prolonged transformation involving violence no doubt. As we mentioned at the outset, it is still continuing with aggravating food problem and growing population pressure. It is too complex to be understood superficially.

Secondly, although Urban Revolution was impossible without advanced trade and commerce, a sequel to surplus food on the one hand and creation of a deprived section in want of food and ready to do the odd job to get a share in the surplus. Looking from this angle agriculture forms the root of all subsequent developments, but the irony is that the pioneers of agriculture or their heirs were not the authors of urbanization. It was the entry of those deprived of their land, and were forced to join ranks with the former that made all the technical developments possible that demanded intense work and attention. The pioneers kept their control over all sorts of wealth and developed the organs of control- army or armed section, law, a psychological mechanism to reward and punish during the lifetime and even afterwards. This is much better explained by super structure complex in Marxist jargon. What is paradoxical is that an aspiring section of those whose class or compatriots had to bear the brunt enthusiastically offered their services to man these institutions of control. Why? We have to find an answer.
A point needs special attention is that despite its cardinal importance agricultural operations confine the mental exercises in such a cruel way that a peasant is cut off from the wider world. The care of his crop no doubt allowed him some relief during off season, but his domestic animals did not. Like isolation prisoners he is closely bound to his land and isolated from the world. It similarly limits his knowledge and imagination. That is one reason why those confined to villages are thought to be coarse, impolite, less informed, and a bit unruly. This is what vulgar, rustic, ganwar (गंवार) ujadda (उजड्ड) only slightly better than wild, jangali (जंगली) in direct contrast to residents of a city, civilized, urbane, nagara (नागर) means.
If the peasants or say their progeny bracketed as the the three socially privileged Varnas, did not make any contribution to arts, except marshal art, dance, drama, technology we can understand their limitations. But theoretical sciences spared them from physical labour and so did literature. Their they not only excelled, but devised a mechanism in which they made it impossible for the Asuras and their progeny to enter this forbidden zone. We know that well and can therefore pass on without elaborating.

The problem that they faced at the outset was their failure to judge the proper season of a grain, and the proper time for sowing. This failure led to such frustrating experiences that some of the new comers returned to gathering again. It has been recorded as displeasure of the seasons and was interpreted as their pressure for a share in agricultural production. However this led to counting the days of the year, and detailed scheme to ward off errors. Counting of lunar months followed in other ancient civilizations was easier. They had no problems deciding the right time for sowing. Flooding Euphrates, Tigris and the Nile determined the time for them. So was the case with counting the number of years. Simple knowledge of numbers served their purpose well. The case of India was altogether different. Even Summer crops for which field was kept in readiness waiting for the monsoons could be spoiled by pre-monsoon shower followed by dry spell. Winter crop followed many patterns according to the soil and withdrawal of water in floodplain. They had to mark the time by attaching some importance to the days and months. We avoid detailing the parvas (पर्व) or knots of time held sacred on various pretenses. Most of them are observed by women and therefore we feel tempted to confirm the belief that initiative in agricultural activities was taken by women.

Astronomy had to take its roots in India and all the humbug created by those who tried to convince us that Indians borrowed the science from Mesopotamian was part of a cheap academic politics. This gave impetus to mathematics, geometry etc.

The Brahmans later established their authority through language control and knowledge control and therefore did much to alienate the language of theoretical knowledge from the common men and keep the rest of the society at a bay so simultaneously they tried to make the language more difficult and did enviable work on philosophy and grammar. The rest of the arts and sciences demanding practical work remained property of the Asuras accommodated as Shudras, who they patronized and encouraged.

मनोरचना और सर्जना

मेरे प्रश्नों के उत्तर में अनेक मित्रों ने बहुत है सार्थक बातें लिखी हैं। परंतु जिन कारणों से मैंने ये प्रश्न उठाए थे, वे कुछ अलग है। समस्या केवल #रचनाप्रक्रिया# की नहीं है। हमारा दिमाग कैसे काम करता है इसकी सही जानकारी आज भी विज्ञान के पास
नहीं है। अभी हाल में वैज्ञानिकों ने एक ऐसे जीन की खोज की है जिसकी रचना बिल्कुल अलग तरह की है। उनका मानना है कि हमारे चिंतन और सर्जना को, हमारे मानसिक कार्य व्यापार को यही नियंत्रित करता है । खोज नई है अभी कुछ जांच बाकी है। पर्याय, विलोम, सहचर, सीमा सभी की ओर हमारा ध्यान जाता है या कहें उनकी ओर ढलान पैदा होता है और यह इतना क्षणिक होता है कि हम इस विषय में सचेत नहीं हो पाते। भले हम उनमें से किसी का चुनाव न करें, यद्यपि इसकी संभावनाएं तैयार होती हैं*

{*होना और बोध होना और ध्यान में न आना के कारण, अन्य घटकों की तरह भौतिक ही हैं। किसी वस्तु के ध्यान में आने के लिए उस पर हमारी दृष्टि को जितना समय चाहिहए, जितना प्रकाश चाहिए, सुनने या स्पर्शानुभूति के लिए ग्राह्यता की जिस सीमा में ज्ञानात्मक संवेदन संभव है उससे कम या अधिक होने पर वह होते हुए भी अज्ञात रह जाएगा, या यातना में बदल जाएगा।

इसी तरह शब्दचयन में हम कहते हैं तर्क तो कुतर्क, वितर्क, तर्कहीन, अतर्क्य, इसकी परिधि में आभासित होते हैं और इनमें से किसी का चुनाव अगले वाक्य के तर्क की दिशा तय कर तकता है। यदि हमने विलोम की ओर रुख किया विचार की दिशा ही उलट जाएगी।}

कई बार हम सचेत रूप में विनोद या रोचकताके लिए विषयान्तर हो जाते हैं यह सोच कर कि जल्द ही हम विषय पर आ जाएंगे, परंतु प्रायः ऐसा कर नहीं पाते, इसके कारण आरंभ में हम कहना कुछ चाहते थे और कुछ और कहते चले जाते हैं। जो बात कहनी थी उसे कह ही नहीं पाते । मैंने अपनी बात को कुछ इकहरे रूप में प्रस्तुत किया है, जिससे कुछ बातें अस्पष्ट रह गईं।

आज से 54 साल पहले मैंने रचना प्रक्रिया पर एक शोधपत्र प्री एचडी के लिए तैयार किया था। उसमें रचनाकारों के संबंध में बहुत रोचक जानकारी सामने आई थी। लिखने का उनका मूड कैसे बनता है, रचना कैसे आरंभ होती है, इसके मजेदार नमूने सामने आए थे। एक लेखिका ऐसी थी जिसका मूड सड़े हुए सेव की बदबू से संबंध रखता था, दूसरे का शराब के 1 पेग से । सिगरेट और शराब को तो लेखन के लिए इतना जरूरी माना जाता रहा है कि अनेक लोग लेखक बनने के लिए शराबी ही नहीं मारिजुआना और हीरोइन के भी शिकार हो गए, परंतु लेखक या कवि बने तो घटिया ही या औसत से आगे नहीं बढ़ सके।

परंतु सिद्ध लेखकों के बारे में जो आश्चर्यजनक सच्चाई सामने आई वह यह कि वे लिखने के लिए मूड की चिंता नहीं करते। हेविंगवे पेंसिल से और खड़े होकर लिखते थे। एक दर्जन पेंसिलें गढ़ कर तैयार कर लेते थे । जब सारी पेंसिलें घिस जाती थीं, तो दिन का काम पूरा। इलियट अपने दफ्तर में पूरे कोट पैंट टाई के साथ सज कर बैठते हैं, और कविता लिखते थे। दफ्तर की गुफ्तगू और टाइप मशीनों की आवाज उन्हें बैकग्राउंड म्यूजिक जैसी लगती थी। इससे उन्हें कोई बाधा नहीं होती थी।

मेरा एक बार सुनीति कुमार चटर्जी से साक्षात्कार हुआ। समय तय था। वह स्टेनोग्राफर को कोई लेख लिखा रहे थे। मैंने समझा कोई व्यक्ति भीतर है, और उसके निकलने की प्रतीक्षा करने लगा। मेरा संकोच को देखकर उनके ऑफिस क्लर्क ने कहा, रुक क्यों गए। चले जाइए। मैं झिझकता हुआ भीतर गया, तो वह महाशय बैठे रहे । लगभग 1 घंटे उनसे मेरी बातचीत चलती रही। उसके बाद मेरे बाहर निकलते ही आवाज आनी शुरू हो गई। अब जाकर मुझे असलियत का पता चला। किसी के आने-जाने या कोई और कारण उपस्थित होने से ऐसे लोगों का समय भले चला जाय, पर मूड खराब नहीं होता। रामविलास जी के काम के घंटे निश्चित थे। जहां तक का काम हो चुका है उसे आगे होना ही है।

ऐसे लोगों से, अपनी तुलना करने का कोई इरादा नहीं है, फिर भी न तो किसी के आने-जाने, बात करने से मेरे काम में रुकावट आती है, न ही मूड की प्रतीक्षा करनी होती है। परंतु जिस विषय पर लिख रहा हूं उसका एक ताप होता है जो उसके पूरा होने तक बना रहता है, भले इसमें महीनों का समय लगे। यदि इस बीच में किसी कारण से किसी दूसरे विषय पर लिखने की बाध्यता पैदा हुई और तो यह ताप भी उधर मुड़ जाता है। वह विषय अधूरा रह जाता है। कोशिश करने पर भी उसे उसी तेवर से उठाने मैं सफल नहीं हो पाता। बात समझ में न आई हो ताे चावल पकाइए, पूरा पकने से पहले उसे अंगीठी से उतार कर कोई दूसरी चीज पकाने लगिए। उसके पकने तक चावल ठंढा हो गया। अब इस अधपके चावल को पूरा पकाने की लाख कोशिश करें, पक नहीं सकता। मामला रसायन का है। उधर नए विषय की परतें खुलती चली जाती है।.मांग एक लेख की की गई थी, और पोथा तैयार होने लगता है। परंतु मैं इस समस्या के कारण भी प्रश्न नहीं कर रहा था।

प्रकृति में कोई भी दो चीजें एक जैसी नहीं होती। केवल आंखें देखकर, या आवाज सुन कर आप असंख्य लोगों के बीच किसी को पहचान लेते हैं, इसी तरह का अलगाव प्रत्येक व्यक्ति के बोलने, हंसने, चलने, सोचने और व्यक्त करने के तरीके में भी बना रहता है। कहें अंगूठे के निशान से लेकर कलम के निशान तक सब पर आप का हस्ताक्षर होता है। और इसके बाद भी कुछ ऐसी समानताएं होती है जिनके कारण हम सोचते हैं, हम दूसरों की तरह कुछ कर सकते या वैसा ही बन सकते हैं। दोनों बातें सही है। पहली हमें हमारी निजता प्रदान करती है, और एकरूपता कम करने की कोशिश में इसी को नष्ट किया जाता है। साम्यवादी सोच में सबसे बड़ा दोष यही है। प्रकृति की हर चीज अलग है, मनुष्य ही ऐसा है जो सांचा बना कर एक जैसी चीजें बना या एक जैसे काम कर सकता है। सांचे में ढले हुए इन उत्पादों को निर्जीव या बुद्धिहीन होना ही पड़ेगा, जीवन आते ही उनमें विभिन्नता पैदा हो जाएगी, जो यंत्र के वश में नहीं रह जाएगी। साम्यवाद नया इंसान नहीं सांचा ढले मानव यंत्रों की उत्पत्ति करना चाहता था, यद्यपि उसकी आकांक्षाएं बहुत मानवीय प्रतीत होती थी और आज भी ऐसा ही लगता है।

मार्क्सवादी सोच ने सांचे में ढले मनुष्य तो न पैदा किए, वह काम पूंजीवाद ही करने जा रहा है, परंतु उसने वैविध्य की संभावनाओं को कम करते हुए यंत्र चालित साहित्य और साहित्यकार अवश्य पैदा किए। दोष साम्यवाद का नहीं है प्रकृति पर अतिनियंत्रण के बाद यांत्रिक उत्पादन ही होता है। अनुशासन पर अधिक बल देने वाले सभी संगठनों से यही खतरा पैदा होता है। जब मैं संघ से जुड़े लोगों का मन दुखाने की कोई इच्छा न रखते हुए भी यह कहने को बाध्य होता हूं कि उनका अनुशासन शिक्षा, संस्कृति, बौद्धिक विकास, सर्जनात्मकता, और संवेदनशीलता मानवीय अपेक्षा के विपरीत है, तो इसका कारण हमारी ऊपर की समझ ही है। मेरे प्रश्न में कहीं धुंधले रूप में यह समस्या रही हो तो आश्चर्य नहीं, क्योंकि जैसा हम ऊपर देखा आए हैं हम अपने मन की कारगुजारियों को बहुत अच्छी तरह जानने की स्थिति में आज तक नहीं आ सके हैं, पर मेरी चिन्ता के केन्द्र में यह भी न था।

जो बात मैं वास्तव में कहना चाहता था वह यह है कि जैसे जल की धारा होती है, उसी तरह भावनाओं की, आवेग की एक धारा होती है, उसी तरह विचारों की श्रृंखला होती है। अध्ययन और ज्ञान से हमारा भावजगत और ज्ञान जगत अधिक समृद्ध होता है। परंतु ज्ञानी और संवेदनशील व्यक्ति जब लोभ, डर, दबाव, आसक्ति, और दूसरे कारणों से इनके स्वाभाविक प्रवाह में बाधा उत्पन्न करते हुए इसे किसी इच्छित दिशा में मोड़ना चाहते हैं, या दबे ढंग से प्रकट करते हैं तो उनका भाव जगत अपनी सीमा से आगे नहीं बढ़ पाता। ज्ञानजगत जाने हुए दायरे से अधिक विस्तृत नहीं हो पाता । इससे वाग्मिता या कलावादिता पर आधारित रचना या विचार ही प्रकट होते हैं। आप पुरानी भावसंपदा और ज्ञानसंपदा में कोई वृद्धि नहीं कर पाते। परंतु यदि आप में साहस है, आसक्ति से ऊपर उठ चुके हैं, अपने पराए की चिंता से आप अपने विचारों को बाधित नहीं होने देते, तो उनका स्वाभाविक प्रवाह अज्ञात और आश्चर्यजनक लोकों तक पहुंचता है जहां आप स्वयं भावसंपदा और ज्ञानसंपदा में वृद्धि करते हैं, नई जानकारी और नई सौंदर्य चेतना से लोग आह्लादित अनुभव करते हैं और आप स्वयं भी रचना के क्षण में आश्चर्यचकित रह जाते हैं।

ऐसा समर्थ रचनाकारों और विचारकों से ही संभव हो पाता है। अंतर्यामी या रहस्यमय शक्ति का रहस्य यही है। अधिकारी विद्वान और कला सिद्ध कलाकार कमाल कर सकते हैं, पर न तो आत्मविस्तार कर सकते हैं, न ही अपने क्षेत्र की असंभव ऊंचाइयों को हासिल कर सकते हैं।

यदि कोई विचारक या रचनाकार निर्मल मन से किसी ऐसे भाव सत्य या जीवन सत्य को प्रस्तुत करता है जो आपके अपने विचारों, भावनाओं, आग्रहों और योजनाओं अनुरूप नहीं है तो सम्मान पूर्वक उससे कुछ सीखने का प्रयत्न करें न कि उस पर दोषारोपण करने की कोशिश करें । मैं लिबरेटिंग इंडियन माइंड में ऐसे अनेक निष्कर्षों पर पहुंच रहा हूं, जो मुझे स्वयं चकित करते हैं, और आपको कष्टदायक भी लग सकते है, परंतु जो दिख रहा है उसे दूसरों को दिखाना मेरी बाध्यता है.। मेरा प्रश्न इसी विषय में आपको मानसिक रुप में याद करने के लिए था।

मैंने कल प्रतिभा के उस कमाल की बात की थी जिसके ऊपर लोग दाद देते नहीं थकते, पर जिसको सिरजने या सुलझाने के बाद रचनार स्वयं विस्मित हो जाता है कि उससे यह संभव कैसे हुआ। उसे विश्वास नहीं हो पाता कि यह उसने ही किया है। यह उसकी नजर में भी उसके सामर्थ्य से परे का कुछ होता है। इसीलिए इसके पीछे किसी रहस्यमय शक्ति की भूमिका की बात प्राचीन काल से लेकर आज तक के रचनाकार करते आए हैं। मेरे साथ भी बार बार होता है। और तो और जो शेर पहले कहीं दर्ज नहीं करता था, पिछले तीन साल से दर्ज ही नहीं सार्वजनिक भी कर देता हूं, गंभीर लेखन के बीच में या ठीक बाद में पूरा का पूरा तैयार हो कर उपस्थित हो जाती है।मेरी जानकारी के बिना, जब मेरा चेतन किसी दूसरे विषय पर व्यस्त था उसी समय कौन किस तरह इसे रच रहा था। अज्ञेय जी की एक पंक्ति है ‘एक बूंद सहसा उछली’। संभवत: एेसे ही किसी अनुभव परलिखी। गई लगती है। यदि मेरा अनुमान सही है तो कितना कठिन है इस मामूली सी पंक्ति को समझ पाना! आज से पहले मुझे भी इसका यह अर्थ नहीं सूझा था। परन्तु मेरा प्रश्न इस बात को लेकर नहीं था।

LIBERATING INDIAN MIND- 37
RELIGION and BRAHMANISM(iv)

Continuing our discussion we find another seer, namely Agastya who has the same parentage, as that of Vasihtha. He felt equally concerned about those who had not changed their lifestyle although he had made a name among the seers, of course for dubious reasons. He was short tempered- (अगस्त्यः खनमानो खनित्रैः प्रजामपत्यं बलमिच्छमानः । उभौ वर्णौ ऋषिरुग्रः पुपोष सत्या देवेष्वाशिषो जगाम). Our evidence is slender but the circumstantial evidence as well as logical coherence lead us to the conclusion that vasishtha had severed his connection from his previous ‘society’ while all others chose the middle path. There is a story that Vasishtha had committed theft in the house of Varuna. I fail to read it in any other way but a conscious betrayal despite the fact that he showed no open disregard for Varuna.

But who are the Rgvedic poets if out of them only Vasishtha was the founder of Brahmanism? It flows from what I’ve said that all of them came from Asura background, not excluding Vasishtha. It also leads us to the conclusion that the elders alone in whose rank these clever people managed to sneak, were not called Brahmin but all the members of agricultural pursuits were called Brahmin or Deva by others.

Brahmin as a Varna was creation of a person who had come from non Brahmin background, but he appropriated all the laurels attached to the Devas or Brahmanas including the claim that entire earth, i.e. cultivable land, belonged to the Brahmanas. Legally the master of the land was he who cleared and levelled it for cultivation.

He did not do any work as he had given it in charity to the Kshatriyas but even so he was the master of whatever was produced. It was because of his generosity that humanity received food and clothing. If the Brahmin was fed properly and kept satisfied, all the people were automatically fed and kept satisfied. These references find place in the Manusmriti, but we are confident they formed part of a running belief among the Brahmins.

We must admit that some of the links are still missing, but as we have submitted earlier, social systems are not changed by individuals, but because of the socio-economic changes, so we must concede that Vasishtha is a collective name rather than the name of an individual. This we do not infer from the plural of Vasishtha (वसिष्ठाः) and Vishwamitra (कुशिकासः) which may suggest their line. The ground for our surmise is that we find Varna entrenched in the Rigveda, wherein Varuna represents the Kshatriyas and The Fire god those the Brahmanas, whereas Rudriyas are Vaishyas. Shudras are not mentioned as a separate Varna except in the Purush Sukta. Of course identifiable separate identity of those who upheld the Vedic economic production and many other hints confirm it. There has been an attempt to show that social stratification is of late origin, as a verse in the Rigveda clearly mentions different members of the same family pursuing their vocation as per their intent (कारुरहं ततो भिषगुपलप्रक्षिणी नना। नानाधियोवसूयवोऽनु गा इव तस्थिमन्द्रायेन्दो परि स्रव। 9.112.3). In their hurry the appear to read too much in too little. In fact all the vocations enumerated in the verse fall in line of a single social order. Kauru or bards as well as the physicians did not enjoy high ranking in social order, Upanaprakshini (उपलप्रक्षिणी) ofcourse needs be interpreted as the one who parches grain. It must not be overlooked that in the same hymn a profession of Karmar, carpenter, priest and smith is clearly mentioned. There is unmistakable mention of Brahmins in different contexts:
ब्राह्मणादिन्द्र राधसः पिबा सोममृतूँरनु ।
सोमश्च यो ब्राह्मणाँ आविवेश,
ब्राह्मणासः पितरः सोम्यासः
संवत्सरं शशयाना ब्राह्मणा व्रतचारिणः

Likewise Kshatriyas are mentioned many times:
धृतव्रता क्षत्रिया क्षत्रमाशतुः ।। 8.25.8
त्यान्नु क्षत्रियाँ अव आदित्यान्याचिषामहे
धृतव्रता क्षत्रिया यज्ञनिष्कृतो
तथा राष्ट्रं गुपितं क्षत्रियस्य
तस्मिन् क्षत्रममवत् त्वेषमस्तु
राजाना क्षत्रमहृणीयमाना सहस्रस्थूणं बिभृथः सह द्वौ ।
वरुणं मित्रार्यमन् वर्षिष्ठं क्षत्रमासाथे ।
दूणाशं क्षत्रमजरं दुवोयु ।
The term Visha may be interpreted as all the people but authorities agree that the Rudriyas with their fondness for ornaments and dance and music are certainly representatives of the Vaishyas. The entire business operations extended far and wide speak a lot about the existence and fabulous riches of the trades.
Shudras as we concede are mentioned only once but the they occur in innumerable contexts, from skilled artisans to keepers of animals, agricultural labourers etc.

What we want to discuss is that induction of these Asuras in various capacities was such a turning event that real progress towards urbanisation and international trade, different inventions and innovations were possible only after that and primarily because of them. Contrary to old views I have to admit that world Civilisation is a relay-race, the lamp bearers change hands and take long strides with renewed energy. The narrative is long and we must observe patience.

मैंने कई बार यह कहा है कि मैं जो लिखता हू वह मै नहीं लिखता। लिखने से पहले मैं जानता तक नहीं हूो कि क्या लिखूंगा. लिखित रूप में यदि यह आपको नया विचार लगता है तो लिखते समय यह मुझे आश्चर्य की तरह प्रतीत होता है। यह विचार और सर्जना की शाश्वत समस्याा है। कभी इसका तर्क न समझ पाने के कारण वाग्वेदी के उपस्थित होने. कंठ या जिह्वा और लिखने वाले को तो कहना चाहिए कलम की नोक पर, उपस्थित होना कहा जाता था। कवीन्द्र इसे प्रभु की लीला, अपने को माध्यम और उसे रचनाकार, कलाकार. संगीतकार मानते थे। द्विवेदी जी अपने अन्तर्यामी को याद करते थे। आप क्या समझते हैं बताएं, फिर मैं अपना मत रखूंगा।

LIBERATING INDIAN MIND- 36
RELIGION and BRAHMANISM (iii)

In the Previous note we found the discordant blocks which do not match to make a compact whole. One thing is certain. A section of the asuras who believed in Supremacy of Lord Varuna, and despised those who played havoc with the environment, and themselves took care not to harm or pollute it in any way, had helplessly joined the Deva society, early, but only after having made several attempts to frustrate the croppers. They had not only failed in their efforts but also had lost the territory belonging to them. They had lost the battle, not faith. They were not ready to surrender their belief system. They were not ready to participate in any activity which called for destruction of mother nature to create more space for the Devas to expand.

Under the circumstances they were left with few choices.

The first was to be part of the Deva society joining a rank wherein they had not to do any physical or agricultural work. In a word they had to make an entry into the rank of the elders and participate in the job assigned to them.

The other was to join the rank of the sentinel and ward off any danger either from animals or the wandering bands who like them were left homeless but resorted to theft and piracy.

The third option was to engage in some technical work through which they could supply ready or raw material to the cultivators and help them in improving the production and ameliorate their living standards. The cultivators would provide them grain and thus enable them to have their share in agricultural products without themselves directly taking part in agricultural operations.

The fourth option was to leave the country, and settle somewhere far off, beyond the reach of the Devas, and try their luck. They appear to have availed all the options. The last one is confirmed by the birth of Sumerian civilisation where those who arrived went under the leadership of Oannes, reminiscent of Ushana, the legendary priest of Asuras, Mahavali among them.

Interestingly they did not take direct part in agricultural operations there as well, but occurred priestly positions, living with notorious isolation to shame even the most segregationist Brahmin in India. Their tales of cruelty toward the working hands is also disheartening. Through them we may gather some hints as to the psychology of Indian Brahmins who also appear to be their brotheren.

Call it a religion or not they believed in a supreme God of taboos (वारण), who restrained them at the cost of their life from violating an any of the provisions laid down for common good. Thou shalt not eat such and such animals or bird which resemble human beings in any way, but these which resemble humans only in this respect can be consumed. Thou shalt not eat or pluck these plants or eat such fruit before such a stage when they are almost ripe. Thou shalt not violate the boundaries set for your land unless someone invites you as his guest. A list of taboos for people enjoying special status has been provided by Frazer in his Golden Bow. There may be many more of which there is no record and some which varied from tribe to tribe.

But this God had such a great concern for law that he could appear cruel in view of penalties given to the defaulters. He was most alert and informed as he had all the stars as his spies, he himself watching the world as the moon in the night (अदब्धानि वरुणस्य व्रतानि विचाकशत् चन्द्रमा नक्तमेति). How much fear could this belief might have generated in their psyche is anybody’s guess.

There are some threads in our web which demand a satisfactory solution. The first is the dispute between the conservative or old Brahmins who did not allow the new entrants the status of a Brahmin. We even in our last note were under the impression that they could be the members of the original Deva society. But those old ones past generative age could not be those that could produce offspring and lay the foundation of Varna by birth. Naturally, it could have been a conflict between the senior ones who had entrenched their position and the late comers. There is one hint that comes useful in this context. It is the character of Vasishtha, said to be the offspring of Varuna as well as Mitra, from a mother not belonging to Deva society. Interestingly he is said to be the founder of Brahmanical order. The transition from Asura category to that of Devas is so obvious that we cannot expect anything more conclusive from legendary sources.

खुश हूँ मैं धरती है अपनी ही धुरी पर कायम
अगर खिसकी तो यह इंसान के कारन होगा।।