LIBRATING – 40
BRAHMNISM as TRADE AND COMMERCE

We have the first clear picture of Social relations and concerns in the Rigveda, but the events reflected or depicted in it may or may not be contemporary. Even the poets who appear to have composed those hymns may or may not be their authors but revered manes only, who are remembered in one Ric. इदं नम ऋषिभ्यः पूर्वजेभ्यः पूर्वेभ्यः पथिकृद्भ्यः । Reverent obeisance to the seers of the time gone by and to manes who set the course of progress. For example it is pointedly mentioned about Vasishtha, the legendary founder of Social division by birth, वर्णव्यवस्थाया: स्थातार:, that it was in his another birth that he was miraculously born out of the illumination of lightening विद्युतो ज्योति: परिसंजिहान: … तत्ते जन्मं अपरं वसिष्ठ। Similar previous births of Gautam is mentioned by none else but he (नाहमतो निरया दुर्गहैतत् तिरश्चता पार्श्वान्निर्गमाणि। बहूनि मे अकृता कर्त्वानि युध्यै त्वेन सं त्वेन पृच्छै ।। परायतीं मातरमन्वचष्ट न नानु गान्यनु नू गमानि । त्वष्टुर्गृहे अपिबत् सोममिन्द्रः शतधन्यं चम्वोः सुतस्य ।। 4.18. 2-3
)। The God Supreme, (परमेष्ठी, नारायण), and such other characters could hardly compose hymns. We should therefore have a larger view of the time and context of Rigvedic allusions. Even as recorded memory of the past, the glimpses do not help us in drawing a clear line of development. In fact the memories recorded in some of the later works are more helpful in drawing a picture of earlier times.

We may give a sketch of the problems of this parasite class taking hints from them and filling the gaps as faithfully as we can:
1. The new Brahmanical section, because of its inhibitions did neither take to agriculture nor own landed property. R.S. Sharma had very rightly observed that in the danstutis (दानस्तुति) there is no mention of land. But the inference that he drew was far from reality. It didn’t mean that the king did not own property in land but the poets weren’t interested in landed property.

As already mentioned the shift from gathering to service of the cultivators was a forced one. They had been defeated not exactly in battle but because of the burning of the woodland and appropriation of their territory by cultivators (देवासरायन् परशूँरबिभ्रन् वना वृश्चन्तो अभि विड्भिरायन् । नि सुद्र्वं दधतो वक्षणासु यत्रा कृपीटमनु तद्दहन्ति ।।10.28.8 ) The Devas came with their workforce, carrying axes, felling the trees. They kept apart the good timber in riverbeds and burnt the useless part. What is left unsaid is that in the process those who depended on the bounties of the woodland were left with the only option to serve those who dispossessed them, baring only one escape, that was exile. But the devas did not allow them even to escape either because of their fear that they may reorganize and attack them, or to force them to surrender and serve them. In recent history we have seen how the Bumihars of Bihar did not allow the land labourers to run to Punjab for better wages. The same appears to be the case with added injury to the Asuras.

We have earlier mentioned how because of the taboo on causing hurt or damage to nature, they used their expertise to serve the peasant joining as priests, technicians, miners, carpenters, smiths, potters,etc, but the rest lacking ingenuity had to help them in agricultural operations, gradually shouldering the entire burden of odd jobs, which must have taken time. We think they could not be accommodated as soldiers, because transferring defense could turn the table. They were so cautious on that score that they did not allow them to hold weapons. It is another thing that tribes switching over to agriculture, overcoming their taboos, entered en mass claiming kshatriya identity were admitted to the Varna fold taking the help of the Brahmins who were as eager to extend their clientele.

Our evidence defies the general misgiving that the Brahmins were responsible for keeping the Shudras in perpetual subjugation. We do not absolve them of their sins and sanctions. Their role has been more complex than our anthropologists have, in their idleness, depending on western ‘researchers’, made us believe. The Brahmins were never a hurdle to upward rise of anyone in social scale.

The process has been that firstly the aspirants had to improve their economic status and acquire necessary qualities and qualifications of the Varna, to which it intended to rise. For some time it had to claim that social status without others recognizing them as such. Then they arranged matrimonial relations offering their daughter with rich gifts to someone in that Varna, and thus meekly entering that Varna which after some time became normal. Brahmin did at no point become a hurdle. On the contrary he presided over the rituals for fee. Throughout the known history foreigners (The Greeks, Huns, Kashas, Sakas etc.) as well as Sudras and tribals made their entry into respective Varnas, but within the Varna, they were deftly discriminated against for generations till some outstanding feat by someone or many, all of a sudden, raised them in esteem and they boasted of superiority in relation to those who earlier looked down upon them. This process was applicable even to the Brahmins. In other words there was both overt and covert discrimination in all the Varnas, justifying three kannaujiyas; thirteen ovens (तीन कनौजिया तेरह चूल्हा).

We must return to the early stages of Varna economy and Varna relations. The Brahmins, as they adhered to the same subsistence pattern as was normal with elders, had no independent support base. It was not out of sheer indifference towards wealth or property that they remained totally parasites but was irony of a peculiar situation. They had no productive avocation either. Begging in absence of gifts and charity, became prime source of income.

We do not have any record of their plight, but even charity and praise showered on the patron, the praise and thanksgiving in return of food served even for a single meal, and some painful memories of such gifted ones who were later patronized as teacher, when they had to serve their son flour mixed water in their inability to arrange milk, do not give a good account of his economic conditions.

This anguish found its expression in his hardness towards the Shudras as the latter had a source of support which on an average was more stable, more respectful, and in case of skilled Shudras more self satisfying. The breach between his desire and material conditions was too wide. In Brahmanical remedies offering food to Brahmins is a recurring theme. Give, give on any pretence please. Give to earn credit of being liberal, give out of shame, and mind it, if you refuse to give you are likely to incur misery either out of Brahmins curse, or as a penalty for sin, so give out of fear (श्रिया देयम्, ह्रिया देयम्, भिया देयम).

More than poverty, the uncertainty of food, forced him to commit fraud, even crime. His extreme aversion towards Shudras was out of this very fact, otherwise he would not provide that in case a Shudra is well off, a Brahmin has the right to dispossess him of his wealth for sacrificial purposes. He had no means to execute his wish, that is another thing. His indifference towards wealth was a compensatory move to maintain his social position, whereas his incitement to gift and donations was a part of hard reality faced by him.