INDIA. PART II. HISTORY OF time in Westminster Hall at the coronation of the ancient kings of England; and which were attended by the feudal Barons of the realm who had already paid their homage and sworn fealty to the new sovereign. Still, like most ancient institutions, the banquet was invested with a religious meaning, and was regarded both as a coronation feast and as a sacrifice to the gods. Indeed, it seems to have been a ceremonial at once devotional and festive; in which animals were sacrificed and roasted, and duly offered with hymns and invocations to the deities of the Vedas, as well as served up at the national banquet to the kinsmen, neighbours, and tributary Chieftains.1 The mode by which the Brahmans arrogated to themselves the sole right of officiating at the great sacrifices, and even of partaking of the meat, is curiously indicated by the following myths, which have been preserved in the Aitareya Brahmanam (Book VII. c. 4, Haug's translation). It should be premised that sacrifice is personified; so, too, is divine knowledge as the Brahma, and sovereignty as the Kshattra. The following texts are extracted verbatim : “After Prajâpati had created the sacrifice, the Brahma (divine knowledge) and the Kshattra (sovereignty) were produced. After both two kinds of creatures sprang up, such ones as eat the sacrificial food, and such ones as do not eat it. All eaters of the sacrificial food followed the Brahma, the non-eaters followed the Kshattra. Therefore, the Brahmans only are eaters of the sacrificial food, whilst the Kshattriyas, Vais'yas, and Shûdras do not eat it. "The sacrifice went away from both of them. The Brahma and Kshattra followed it. The Brahma followed with all its implements, and the Kshattra followed (also) with its implements. The implements of the Brahma are those required for performing a sacrifice. The implements of the Kshattra are a horse, carriage, an armour, and a bow with arrow. The Kshattra, not reaching the sacrifice, returned; for, frightened by the weapons of the Kshattra, the sacrifice ran aside. The Brahma then followed the sacrifice, and reached it. Hemming thus the sacrifice in its further course the Brahma stood still; the sacrifice, reached and hemmed in its course, stood still also, and recognizing in the hand of the Brahma its own implements, returned to the Brahma. The sacrifice having thus remained only in the Brahma, it is therefore only placed among the Brahmans (i. e. they alone are allowed to perform it). "The Kshattra then ran after this Brahma, and said to it,' Allow me to take possession of this sacrifice (which is placed in thee).' The Brahma said, 'Well, let it be so; lay down thy own weapons, assume, by means of the implements of the Brahma (the sacrificial implements) which constitute the Brahma, the form of the Brahma, and return to it!' The Kshattra obeyed, laid down its own weapons, assumed, by means of the implements of the Brahma which constitute the Brahma, its form, and returned to it. Therefore, even a Kshattriya, when INDIA. political element Brahmanical During the subsequent period when the ascend. HISTORY OF ancy of the Bráhmans began to assert itself side by PART II. side with the sovereignty of the Kshatriyas, the Decline of the ceremonial of these sacrifices underwent a significant during the change. The simple The simple offerings to the gods were no ascendancy. longer made by the patriarch of the family, or Chieftain of the tribe, but by an exclusive sacerdotal class, claiming a divine origin, and invested with supernatural powers. The result was that the political Change in the purport of the festival appears in a great measure to ment. Simple have passed away, whilst even the religious ideas, delicious food, which found expression in the original institution, complex iden lost all their natural and joyous character. The child- wits to be prolike idea of propitiating the gods with choice viands became more or less modified by the more gloomy, but, at the same time, more complex conception, that he lays down his weapons and assumes the form of the Brahma by means of the sacrificial implements, returns to the sacrifice (he is allowed a share in it).’ "As regards the portion of sacrificial food which is to be eaten by the sacrificer, they ask, whether the Kshattriya should eat, or whether he should not eat it? They say, if he eat, then he commits a great sin, as having eaten sacrificial food although he is an ahutâd (one not permitted to eat). If he do not eat, then he cuts himself off from the sacrifice (with which he was connected). For the portion to be eaten by the sacrificer, is the sacrifice. This is to be made over to the Brahma priest. For the Brahma priest of the Kshattriya is in the place of (his) Purohita. The Purohita is the one-half of the Kshatriya; only through the intervention of another (the Brahma priest), the portion appears to be eaten by him, though he does not eat it with his own mouth. For the sacrifice is there where the Brahma (priest) is. The entire sacrifice is placed in the Brahma, and the sacrificer is in the sacrifice. They throw the sacrifice (in the shape of the portion which is to be eaten by the sacrificer) into the sacrifice (which has the form of the Brahma) just as they throw water into water, fire into fire, without making it overflow, nor causing any injury to the sacrificer. Therefore is this portion to be eaten by the sacrificer (if he be a Kshattriya) to be given up to the Brahma. "Some sacrificial priests, however, sacrifice this portion to the fire, saying, ‘I place thee in Prajâpat's world, which is called vibhan (shining everywhere), be joined to the sacrificer, Svâha!' But thus the sacrificial priest ought not to proceed. For the portion to be eaten by the sacrificer is the sacrificer himself. What priest, therefore, asserts this, burns the sacrificer in the fire. (If any one should observe a priest doing so) he ought to tell him, Thou hast singed the sacrificer in the fire. Agni will burn his breaths, and he will consequently die. Thus it always happens. Therefore, he should not think of doing so." religious senti idea of propitiating the gods by modified by the that the deity pitiated by blood, and that animals were to be slain as an atonement for sin. INDIA. PART II. HISTORY OF blood must be shed to propitiate an offended deity, and to atone for any neglect in the fulfilment of superstitious duties, or for any breach of Brahmanical law. Accordingly, whilst the primitive ritual was still maintained, whilst the flesh meat, the simple cakes, the parched grain, the clarified butter, the milk, the curds, and the soma wine, were still offered to the genial gods of the Vedas, the animals were slaughtered at the stake in the hope of appeasing the wrath of some revengeful and exacting deity, or as a vicarious atonement for national transgression or individual sin. Brahmanical doctrines of ances, and caste, overthrown by of Buddha, 600 B.C. to 800 A.D. But against these superstitious conceptions of a sacrifices, pen- divine ruler delighting in blood there arose that mighty movement known as Buddhism. In the same reforming spirit, and about the same age of the world's history, in which Isaiah denounced the rites and observances of the Mosaic law, the mysterious Buddha arose to anathematize the animal sacrifices of the Brahmans. For a period of twelve centuries, namely, from the sixth century before the Christian era until the eighth century after it, Buddhism triumphed throughout Hindústan; trampling upon the whole ceremonial of Brahmanism, with all its sacrifices, penances, and castes; and setting forth 2 Isaiah's denunciations of the Mosaic ritual are very strong. "Hear the word of the Lord, ye rulers of Sodom! Give ear unto the law of our God, ye people of Gomorrah! To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the Lord. I am full of the burnt-offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts, and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he-goats. When you come to appear before me, who hath required this at your hand, to tread my courts? Bring no more vain oblations! Incense is an abomination unto me; the new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with; it is iniquity, even the solemn meeting. Your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hateth; they are a trouble unto me; I am weary to bear them" (Isaiah i. 10-14). The story of Cain and Abel points to an opposite direction. The fruits of the earth were not accepted, but only the firstlings of the flock (Gen. iv. 2—4). INDIA. vival 800 A.D. Buddhism the paramount necessity for purity of mind and HISTORY OF Brahmanical fices replaced and Páyasa. subject. Four crifice, viz.: tion banquets of cial sessions of From the foregoing observations it will have been Review of the seen that, since the first institution of the Rajasúya, ceptions of sathe national conception of sacrifice has undergone (1.) The coronafour modifications, corresponding to the four great the Kshatriyas. periods of Hindú history, namely, the Kshatriya, the (2.) The sacrifi Brahmanical, the Buddhistic, and the Brahmanical (3.) The flower revival. The great sacrifices or banquets of the Buddhists. Kshatriyas were modified by the Brahmans into (+) The offering sacrificial sessions of a purely religious character; the Brahmanbut were subsequently swept away by the reformation of Buddha, which only permitted of the of Homa and ical revival. INDIA. PART II. HISTORY OF Offering of flowers. So complete and effectual was this reformation, that animal sacrifices found no place in the Brahmanical revival; and the offerings to the gods henceforth mainly consisted of Homa and Páyasa, the clarified butter and the sacred food.3 These data should be borne in mind whilst considering the description of the Rajasúya of Yudhishthira ; inasmuch as the Mahá Bhárata appears to have assumed its present shape during the later period of Brahmanical revival; and consequently the description of the Rajasúya in the form in which it has been handed down by the Brahmanical compilers, bears traces of nearly all the ideas which prevailed throughout the widely different periods mapped out in the Absence of allu- foregoing paragraphs. One exception, however, sacrifice in the must be noticed, namely, that the fact of animal Yudhishtira, sacrifices in the Rajasúya of Yudhishthira has been formed a part of apparently suppressed in the Mahá Bhárata, although it undoubtedly found a place in the early Brahmanic ritual. The result has been that the sacrifice is not represented as an atonement for sin. Even this exception, however, finds full expression in the Aswamédha, or horse sacrifice performed by Yudhishthira at the conclusion of the great war; as well sions to animal. description of the Rajasúya of although it the ancient rite. 3 Whilst ghee or clarified butter formed the staple of the Homa, and rice and milk were the staple of the Páyasa, other materials of smaller importance were and are mingled with both, chiefly consisting of things produced from the cow. This part of the subject will be considered in connection with the worship of the Cow. 4 That an animal was tied to a stake and sacrificed as a burnt-offering at the Rajasúya, is plainly set forth in the Aitareya Brahmanam, which apparently contains the oldest form of purely Brahmanical ritual extant. Dr Haug has published the original text of this valuable Brahmana, with an English version attached; and it may be added that his work is of the highest authority, inasmuch as he practised all the ancient forms of sacrifice under the direction of one of the few Brahmans who have preserved the sacrificial mysteries as they descended from the remotest times. See Dr Haug's preface to the Aitareya Bráh manam. |