The whole system of Dharmaśāstra presupposes the existence of disciplined, learned persons who know and act upon the vast body of precepts that constitute the Brahmanical model of right conduct (dharma ). The literature of Dharmaśāstra, in fact, came into existence precisely as part of the process by which such persons were trained, and trained others in turn. 1 The training combined strict adherence to elaborate ritualized rules of practice with largely oral textual study with a preceptor. Notionally, at least, this dharma has its roots in the Veda, the transcendent wisdom revealed to the ancient poet-sages, crystalized in collections of verse, ritual formulas, and explanatory (exegetical) prose. The oldest verses were collected in canonical form as the Ṛgveda (composed ca. 1400–1200 bce ), for use by a particular class of priests in the Vedic fire-offering rites (yajña ). Two distinct collections of liturgical verses and ritual formulas were later likewise transmitted as Veda (the Sāmaveda and Yajurveda ). A fourth collection of texts pertaining to a separate group of ritual specialists dealing with domestic ceremonies, healing rites, and sorcery, some of it quite ancient, was eventually reclassified as a fourth Veda, the Atharvaveda .
These mnemonically transmitted utterances, considered timeless and not of human authorship, were called brahman , and the process for learning them by rote and thus embodying them was called brahmacarya , literally “pursuit or practice of brahman. ” This term very early took on a specific technical sense: starting with an initiation by the teacher, symbolically a rebirth, brahmacarya required adherence to a set of disciplinary rules (including celibacy) as well as study, and concluded with a ceremonial bath. The Vedic student (brahmacārin ) served his preceptor as an apprentice, residing in his home. It is likely that, at first, it was this training itself that constituted a person as a Brahmin (brāhmaṇa ), that is, a specialist in brahman . Even so, it is also clear that the profession soon came to be passed down in families as a birthright and became, in social terms, an ascriptive caste status. This chapter examines the form and purpose of the Vedic studentship, and the special importance that came to be attached to it as Brahmins sought to reposition their tradition as a basis for establishing religious and legal norms for society.
The Vedic initiation and rule of brahmacarya closely parallel the rites and regimens of consecration (called vrata and dīkṣā ) undertaken by the sponsor of Vedic “high-cult” fire-offering services. The dominant symbolism in all of these is the overcoming of human weaknesses and the attainment of a quasi-divine status during the period of consecration. Like the dīkṣā for the Soma ritual, the upanayana is presented as a ritual rebirth, but while in the dīkṣā the sacrificer regenerates himself in the “womb” of the Veda, the upanayana casts the Vedic preceptor (ācārya , “guide, authority on correct practice”) as spiritual parent. Thus, whereas in the consecrations for worship the sponsor performs the ceremony of “approaching” (upāyana ) the state of consecration, the rite of initiation into Veda study is more commonly spoken of as an “inducting” (upanayana ) because the teacher “leads” the student into brahmacarya . 2
Probably the earliest work to mention brahmacarya is a hymn of the Atharvaveda (11.5). 3 The Atharvaveda generally is more concerned with subjects that would later be treated systematically in the codes of domestic ritual (Gṛhyasūtras), e.g., life-cycle ceremonies, among which the initiation comes to be classed. The hymn eulogizes the Veda student in grandiose terms—even cosmic terms, as the sun itself—mentioning several distinctive attributes familiar to us from later sources: the characteristic grass belt, the antelope skin, the beard allowed to grow uncut (after the initiatory shaving), the duty of bringing of firewood to tend (upāste ) the fire, the begging of alms (bhikṣā ), and the state of being consecrated (dīkṣita , v. 6). The initiation rite is presented as a pregnancy, with the teacher as the expectant mother: “The preceptor, drawing the brahmacārin near (upanáyamāna ), makes him an embryo within. Three nights he carries him in his belly; the gods gather to see him when he is born” (v. 3). The student is repeatedly said (vv. 1–5) to heat his teacher, the gods, and the world with his fervor (tapas ). Brahmacarya and tapas , virtually equated, are said to be the energy by which all beings attain their natural aims: thereby, the ox and horse win food; a girl wins a young husband; a teacher seeks a student; a king protects his realm; Indra wins heaven; and the gods overcome death (vv. 17–19).
The upanayana is not an integral part of the sacrificial ritual, so it is barely mentioned in the other three Vedas; the only discussion of it is in Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa 11.5.3–11.5.4, where a debate between Śauceya Prācīnayogya and the sage Uddālaka Āruṇi ends with Śauceya asks asking to become Uddālaka’s student: “‘Here are sticks of firewood. May I approach (úpāyāni ) you (for study).’ And he said, ‘…Come, approach (úpehi ).’” The request is an opportunity to enumerate the key features of the rite: “‘I have come to brahmacárya ,’ he says—thus he announces himself to bráhman . ‘Let me be a brahmacārín ,’ he says—thus he gives himself over to bráhman .… Then (the teacher) takes his hand, saying, ‘You are Indra’s brahmacārín , Agni is your teacher, I am your teacher, O so-and-so.’” After placing the student in the care of various divinities, the preceptor declares, “You are a brahmacārín ,” and enjoins upon his new disciple the rules of the discipline: “Eat water” (ápo ‘śāna ). “Do work” (kárma kuru ). “Lay on a stick of firewood” (samídham āâ dhehi ). “Do not sleep” (mâ suṣupthāḥ ). “Eat water” (again). Finally, the teacher recites for him the Sāvitrī-mantra (ṚV 3.62.10): tát savitúr váreṇyam bhárgo devásya dhīmahi /dhíyo yó naḥ pracodáyāt (“May we attain that desirable splendor of the Heavenly Impeller [Deva Savitṛ], that he might stimulate our thoughts”), first one pāda at a time, then by hemistichs, then all together. This marks the start of Veda study.
Some say that a preceptor who is “pregnant” (garbhín ) with a student should abstain from sexual relations, but the Śatapatha disagrees: “Human progeny are born from the procreative organ (prajánanāt ). The divine progeny are the meters—he generates them from the mouth, and from there he generates the (student). That is why he may follow his desire” (ŚB 11.5.4.17). However the student girds himself with a belt (mékhalā ), to separate the pure, immortal parts, above the navel, from those below (TS 6.1.3.4; cf. ŚB 6.7.1.9–6.7.1.11; 10.1.2.11).
Thus, the canonical Vedic texts describe many features of the rite of initiation into studentship: the student approaches with firewood in hand; the teacher takes him by the hand, and commits him into the care of deities, enjoins upon him the rule (vrata ), and commences teaching with the Sāvitrī stanza. The Atharvaveda mentions the student’s beard, belt, deerskin, and alms-gathering (bhikṣā ). The Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa summarizes the rule of conduct with four commands (to “eat water,” perform work (karman ), tend the fire, and avoid sleep). Notable by its absence is any reference to celibacy, which is perhaps the most famous aspect of brahmacarya in later sources—so prominent, indeed, that in Buddhist literature, brahmacarya becomes the usual term for monastic celibacy.
Following the codification of the Vedic “high cult” in the śrautasūtras, priestly authors undertook to codify household ceremonies as well, which came to include a diverse assortment of sacraments (saṃskāra s), domestic offerings to the gods performed by the head of household, rites to appease various spirits and genii loci , and rites to avert misfortune. Initiation into studentship is included in the sequence of sacraments, but there are a number of important and revealing differences in how it is presented in the various codes. These differences can in fact provide an index of a shift in the mode of presentation, which further provides clues to the changing significance of studentship in priestly doctrine.
The first important difference is that while the codes naturally present the sacraments mostly in chronological order from the rite of impregnation onward, some of them present the marriage ceremony first, while others begin with the initiation. The marriage-first order is probably the older one, since this rite creates the ritual agent of all other rites in the Gṛhyasūtras—in fact, when no subject of a verb of ritual action is stated, it is presumed to be the married man of the house. The other sacraments follow from the marriage insofar as they are to be performed by the father upon his child.
The shift toward moving the Vedic initiation forward to be first in sequence happened largely in tandem with a greater emphasis on Veda study as a requirement incumbent upon and distinctive of all three of the higher social strata (varṇa s)—viz., Brāhmaṇas (Brahmins), Kṣatriyas (“rulers”), and Vaiśyas (“commoners”)—and a sign of their status as “Āryas” (roughly, “noble ones”) in contrast with the Śūdras ranked below them. The primary sign of this shift is that whereas initiation and studentship were earlier said to constitute a person as a Brahmin, now they constituted people as belonging to one of three different ranked groups, differentiated on the basis of symbolic variations in how the rite was to be performed. Each of the variables in the ritual—proper age at initiation; proper type of animal skin, garment, belt, and staff; proper season for the rite—could have three values, corresponding to the three strata respectively. These separate values reaffirmed the distinctions between the classes, and the hierarchy implied in them, while linking them within the shared privilege (and duties) of Veda study. It asserted their solidarity vis-à-vis the Śūdra class, providing a justification for their relative superiority. On account of being eligible for the ritual rebirth of Vedic initiation, the three “upper” varṇa s were called “twice-born” (dvija ). In fact, the word dvija begins to be used in this sense only during the period when this new doctrine was explicitly formulated, in order words, with the promulgation of the Dharmasūtras.
While the Gṛhyasūtras show many disagreements on these points, the direction of change is made evident in that the fully elaborated three-part model, with eight, eleven, and twelve as the ideal ages of the initiation, is the model that all the dharmasūtras univocally adopt, and which becomes ubiquitous the later dharmaśāstras. Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa 11.5.4 made no mention of different social classes (varṇa s) in connection with initiation. By contrast, most of the Gṛhyasūtras do so. But they do not always do so for all of the variables, nor do they agree on what values to assign to each variable in each case. The lists of distinctions generally come in a bundle at the beginning of the description of the rite (Pāraskara alone has them at the end), but they are sometimes inserted haphazardly and out of context. 4
The first distinction made has to do with the proper age for initiating a student. The classical pattern recognized by Mānava Dharmaśāstra and all later authorities dictates that initiation be performed for a Brahmin ideally at age eight, for a Kṣatriya at age eleven, and for a Vaiśya at age twelve. This rule in coupled with a corollary: initiation should occur by ages sixteen, twenty-two, and twenty-four (respectively)—that is, at twice the lower age limit. One who remains uninitiated after that age will be deemed patitasāvitrīka , disqualified from learning the Sāvitrī mantra (the verse to Savitṛ that the teacher recites for new initiates), and is subject to social sanction (exclusion) and the performance of penance.
The rationale for the three separate ages is never given directly, but a deliberate correlation does appear between these ages and the number of syllables in a metrical foot (pāda ) of each of the three common meters, gāyatrī, triṣṭubh , and jagatī . The stanza taught to the student during the initiation is thus supposed to be a Savitṛ-verse in the appropriate meter (as Śāṅkhāyana Gṛhyasūtra makes clear). Yet it is the Sāvitrī verse in the gāyatrī meter, the famous ṚV 3.62.10, that is cited in most of the texts (with the exception of Vārāha 5.23–5.26, which provides an example of each). As so often, the Brahmin is the default category in descriptions of the ritual, and the sūtras in general assume a Brahmin student.
Yet very few of the Gṛhyasūtras prescribe these ages unambiguously. The Mānava does not make distinctions of class by age at all, simply prescribing initiation at age seven or nine. All the others do make the class distinctions, but the Kāṭhaka prescribes 7:9:11 as the ages; the Hiraṇyakeśin and Jaiminīya give 7:11:12 (Jaiminīya offering other options for the Brahmin). 5 Altogether, four codes (Kāṭhaka, Mānava, Hiraṇyakeśin , and Jaiminīya ) give the age for a Brahmin as seven; of these, two (Mānava and Jaiminīya ) offer other options, but age eight is not one of them. Of those that prescribe age eight for the Brahmin, four (Śāṅkhāyana, Kauṣītaki, Vārāha , and Bharadvāja ) allow other options for the Brahmin only. 6
In light of the fact that most of the Gṛhyasūtras take some notice of the tripartite scheme, it is surprising that so little effort has been made to ensure consistency. For this reason, I argue that the distinctions by class were deliberately introduced during the period when the Gṛhyasūtras were being codified in an effort that was only partially coordinated across schools. Because the rules were already circulating in an older oral form, the editors of the codes were reluctant to do away completely with traditionally authoritative views on the proper age. Hence, the prescriptions for the age of Kṣatriya and Vaiśya initiates are relatively consistent, as are the upper age limits as a set, 7 which were devised with the triple distinction already in mind. The original diversity of views is preserved only in the case of the proper age of initiation for a Brahmin. The fact that the age seven appears so often as the first or only choice for a Brahmin, even when it spoils the symmetry of the pattern, in a telling clue that seven was once widely regarded as a standard age for initiates—perhaps the standard.
An interesting circumstance supports this view. Many of the discussions of upanayana use a peculiar method for calculating the initiate’s age: they begin counting from conception rather than from birth (e.g., garbhāṣṭame varṣe …). This system is used only in this context, and only by Gṛhyasūtras that prescribe age eight for a Brahmin initiate. By this method of calculation, the number eight can be adopted without conflicting with an established tradition of initiation at seven years (from birth). Yet here too, the application of a novel principle is inconsistent: all (except the Mānava ) give the other ages as eleven and twelve (and the upper limits as sixteen, twenty-two, twenty-four) regardless of the method of reckoning used. Thus Hiraṇyakeśin gives the ages: seven, eleven, twelve. Āśvalāyana and Pāraskara acknowledge both methods. But with the composition of a new set of rules on the subject, embodied in the dharmasūtras, the ambiguities of age disappear: The Mānava Dharmaśāstra diverges from the Mānava tradition (to which it nominally belongs) under the impulse toward catholicism on this point.
There are other sorts of indications that initiation into brahmacarya was earlier reserved for Brahmins (or at least expected only of Brahmins). Thus, ŚB 11.5.4.16 speaks of the teacher “initiating a Brahmin into brahmacarya .” Taittirīya Saṃhitā (of the Yajurveda) 6.3.10.5 makes study a duty, but only for Brahmins: “A Brahmin, even as he is born, is born indebted with three (debts): (first), to the sages (he is indebted) with brahmacarya …” Chāndogya Upaniṣad 4.4.5 presupposes that birth in a Brahmin family is a prerequisite for initiation, since Hāridrumata Gautama accepts Satyakāma Jābāla as a student only when he determines that the boy’s truthfulness is a sign of his Brahmin ancestry. 8
Otherwise, though, it sometimes appears that brahmacarya is precisely what defines the status: one pursues bráhman and thus is deemed brāhmaṇa . Thus the verse from ŚB 11.5.4.12 (quoted above) has the teacher’s “pregnancy” issue in the birth of a brāhmaṇa on the third day. In any case, there is an awareness that merely being related to Brahmins (brahmabandhu ) does not by itself make one a real Brahmin (AitB 7.27, ChU 6.1.1; cf. Sutta Nipāta 2.7, v. 312, etc.).
Another possible indication of the novelty of initiation for lower varṇas is the fact that the the term dvija (or dvijāti ) was never used to designate the three higher varṇa s in any text definitely prior to the younger dharmasūtras. 9 In later Brahmanical sources, by and large, the term designates Brahmins in particular, which probably should be taken as a tacit acknowledgment that, in practice, Veda study was regarded as the province mainly of Brahmins. The same may be said about the sacred thread supposed to be worn by those who have had initiation into Veda study. In the Gṛhyasūtras and older dharmasūtras, the word yajñopavīta (“wrapped for worship”) refers only to the particular mode of wearing the upper garment (or in place of that, a string, as in Āpastamba and Gautama ) over the left shoulder and under the right arm while worshiping the gods and for other auspicious activities such as sipping water. It is only beginning with the Baudhāyana and Vāsiṣṭha Dharmasūtra s that the word is applied to a special string conferred upon the student at initiation, to be worn thenceforth, serving as a badge for properly credentialed Āryas of all three classes—though in this case too it has generally been understood more narrowly as a marker of Brahmin status. 10
The gear assigned to the Vedic student in the ritual codes is also sometimes (but not always) subject to distinctions according to class. Around his waist, a Brahmin must bind a triple cord of muñja grass, worn also by a consecrated sacrificer (dīkṣita ); this feature of the initiation is so distinctive that in later times the ritual was often referred to as “the binding with muñja ” (muñjībandhana ). (A bowstring is prescribed for a Kṣatriya; for a Vaiśya various fibers are suggested.) Students should wear an animal skin: the codes are unanimous that the Brahmin (again, like a consecrated sacrificer) should wear the skin of a black antelope, an animal specially associated with the fire sacrifice. Four codes in fact prescribe the antelope skin to all classes (at least as an option), but otherwise the Kṣatriya is assigned the skin of a ruru deer or a tiger, and the Vaiśya the hide of a goat or cow (in most texts). Like the deerskin and belt, a lower garment is part of the equipment of the dīkṣā as well. The Black Yajurveda schools make no distinctions, but Pāraskara 2.5.16 (belonging to the White Yajurveda) would use hemp for the Brahmin, flax for a Kṣatriya, and wool for a Vaiśya; Jaiminīya suggests linen or hemp (without distinction), while Gobhila limits those to Brahmins, assigning cotton and wool to the other groups, respectively. The Rigvedic codes prescribe different colors instead of fabrics. Further distinctions are in certain codes made for the wood or height of the staff, the season of initiation, and the order of the words used in the student’s request for alms.
A careful review of these variations shows plainly that the initiation ritual, modeled on the consecration (dīkṣā ) for sponsoring offerings, originally had only a single form, and was understood to confer or at least to confirm Brahmin status. In the domestic ritual codes, we find the priestly authorities extrapolating the elements of the ritual as a way of asserting the idea that Veda study is naturally incumbent upon all members of the Ārya classes, while maintaining a vivid (if contrived) system for marking hierarchical differences among these classes in the initiation. Half of the distinctions are simply impositions of a set of ranked items. The age-to-meter correlations (eight = gāyatrī; eleven = triṣṭubh; twelve = jagatī) reflect the long-established associations of these meters with Agni and the priestly class, Indra and the warrior-chieftain class, and the Viśve Devāḥ (All-Gods) and the common Ārya people, respectively. 11 Likewise, the correlations of class with season mirror old associations between the “foremost class” and the “first season” of the year, the warriors with the hot season, and the Vaiśyas with the season of ripening and harvesting. 12 Finally, the ordering of words in the request for alms, and the height of the staff are bare sequence-patterns arbitrarily applied (in the latter case, suggesting both directions without rationale). The irregular deviations from the programmatic pattern that one would expect in a code based on customary practice occur mainly in the matter of the age of the Brahmin initiate, for this was probably the most common type in practice. If seven was widely accepted as the proper age, it could be reconciled with a theoretical figure of eight by calculating from conception rather than birth; but as we saw, this peculiar “fix” (if such it was) was not applied systematically at all.
The factors cited here suggest that the initiation into Vedic study was at first simply the ritual basis of Brahmin status. If at one time Brahminhood was not considered a birth status, initiation and study would then have constituted someone as a Brahmin. In any case, there is a clear sense that initiation and study makes one a “true” Brahmin (as opposed to a brahmabandhu , a “Brahmin by relation only”). During the period when the domestic ritual codes were being composed, the initiation into Vedic studentship was extended as a religious duty to all who laid claim to Ārya social status as Kṣatriyas or Vaiśyas, such status being signaled in the ritual by the use of different indices for each varṇa . The widespread inconsistencies on this point in the ritual codes exhibit the new doctrine in a formative phase, given (a) that not all schools recognize them; (b) that even when they do recognize them, the generic option tends to be identical with the mode otherwise used for a Brahmin; and finally (c) that, having spelled out the various options, the texts often tend to proceed as if the prospective initiate were a Brahmin.
Certainly Vedic initiation (and its marker, the sacred thread) have even in the classical literature been treated as a mark of Brahminhood. Second, it seems that such differentiations were devised as part of a concerted program of inculcating Brahmanical forms of religious life more broadly in Indian society, while maintaining symbolically the preeminence of the Brahmin. The priestly authorities’ purpose in doing so was show that Vedic recitation and the priestly theorists’ particular brand of fire ritual should be practiced by all of the Ārya segments of society, while providing signals of the social hierarchy. A little later, the Dharmasūtras regularized many of these patterns of differentiation.
The entire purpose of the regimen (vrata ) that commences with the upanayana is to maintain the sanctified state into which the newly “reborn” disciple has been drawn. This is accomplished through a discipline combining ascetical restrictions and deferential service of master and ritual fire (the earthly form of the deity Agni): “The student’s constant obligations are daily to put fuel on the fire (samidādhāna ), to go around for alms (bhikṣācaraṇa ), to sleep on the ground (adhaḥśayyā ), and to obey the preceptor (guruśuśrūṣā )” (ŚāṅkhGṛ 2.6.8). Beyond the requirement that food be got by begging, and presented to the teacher before eating, the student is also supposed to avoid condiments and salt (kṣāra-lavaṇa ); many authorities also ban honey (as is stated in ŚB 11.5.4, along with Uddālaka’s dissent) and meat. The aim here is to subsist on unappealing, meager food as a rejection of luxury.
Food was a central symbol of growth, vitality, and power in the Vedic religion. Worldly success was framed in terms of winning food. Yet the student’s relationship to food was regimented. To beg for alms was to surrender autonomy over one’s sustenance, to renounce the ready gratification of desires. It also signified a redirection of all effort from worldly production to divine toil, the service of the teacher and his fire. To sleep on the ground was likewise to renounce luxury and self-indulgence, as was the injunction never to sleep while the sun was up. Although the student’s avoidance of sexual gratification is rarely mentioned in the ritual codes, it is tacitly understood; even the preceptor, though he may be married, is sometimes required to practice chastity. 13 Later, in the dharma codes, failing to beg or to offer fuel for the teacher’s fire is equivalent to sexual incontinence, and equal consequences result from either violation (BDh 1.2.54).
This aspect of the practice was so important that the term brahmacarya came to refer primarily to sexual chastity in other contexts as well. For example, after a wedding, for three nights following their wedding, newlyweds must “observe brahmacarya ” by sleeping before the fire without having sex, and by avoiding condiments and salt. The clerical celibacy of the alms-collecting Buddhist monk (bhikṣu ) was from the start called brahmacarya .
Beyond the general rules of brahmacarya , Vedic training also included special, more intense rules that were to be observed when one was studying certain esoteric chapters of the canon. 14 Baudhāyana Gṛhyasūtra (3.2.3) states this principle clearly: “There is a regimen to be observed (vratacaryā ) for each section (of the Veda).” The lists of such higher-level vrata s (or dīkṣā s, often referred to collectively as veda-vrata s) vary from Veda to Veda, and to some extent even by subtradition. Here, only an overview is possible. Most of the special regimens relate to the study of “secret” texts: chapters of the sort that tend to be called āraṇyaka (“forest lesson”) and upaniṣad or rahasya (“secret, mystery”). 15 Many of these consist of groups of mantras and exegetical passages connected with the symbol-laden Vedic rites called Pravargya, Mahāvrata, and Agnicayana. The study of these passages was often said to convey particular benefits.
The śākvara-vrata is the name applied in the Ṛgveda and Sāmaveda to the special rule for learning the Mahānāmnī verses, which are touted as an effective rain charm. 16 The procedure is as follows (ŚāṅkhGṛ 2.12.1–2.12.14): The preceptor asks the student to affirm that he has fulfilled his duties of brahmacarya to the gods, and then wraps his face tightly in a new cloth before commanding him: “For three nights, leave off fueling the fire, begging, sleeping on the ground, and waiting on your teacher, and fast in the wild, in a ‘house of the gods’ (devakula ), or in an agnihotra fire-shed, undistracted and restraining your speech.” The lesson itself must take place outside the village, in the forest. The teacher as well is under several taboos during this period: he must abstain from meat and sex, and avoid gazing on inauspicious objects (including raw meat, blood, or a menstrual or postpartum woman).
A similar regimen is imposed when the student takes up the study of the vrātika-vrata (for the liturgy of the Mahāvrata ritual in the Ṛgveda, or “forest” chapters of the Sāmaveda), and the aupaniṣada-vrata (for the chapters classed as upaniṣads in each Vedic tradition), 17 with the difference that in the latter two the student only listens while the teacher recites (ŚāṅkhGṛ 2.12.14). The Sāmaveda tradition also teaches the jyaiṣṭhasāmika-vrata (for study of the ājyadoha verses, which yields benefits such as wealth in cattle).
The list of veda-vrata s in the Yajurveda traditions is quite different: 18 they prescribe the śukriya-vrata or avāntara-dīkṣā (an intensification of brahmacarya for the study of the Pravargya ritual), 19 the cāturhotṛkī (for the Caturhotṛ mantras, which establish correlations between deities and various phenomena with priestly functions), the (agni -)godāna or āgnikī dīkṣā (for study of the Agnicayana liturgy), the āśvamedhikī dīkṣā (for study of the royal horse sacrifice), and the traividyaka (for study of the opening sections of the three Vedas).
A special case is the aṣṭācatvāriṃśat-sammita , a one-year vrata “equivalent to forty-eight (years’ study)” (KGṛ 4; BGṛ 3.3), which can serve as a substitute for the normal brahmacarya , or to compensate when the normal period brahmacarya has been cut short. This short but rigorous observance purifies the “student” (along with ten generations of ancestors and descendants) of impurities and sins (KGṛ 4.21–4.23). In the Kāṭhaka-Gṛhyasūtra , this topic is followed immediately (KGṛ 5–6) by the rules for the kṛcchra (“painful”), atikṛcchra (“extremely painful”), taptakṛcchra (“hot and painful”), and sāntapana (“agonizing”), four expiatory regimens that become standard forms of penance in classical Dharmaśāstra. Although not involving actual study, they require a mode of discipline otherwise very similar to that of the aṣṭācatvāriṃśat-saṃmita . As with the veda-vrata s themselves, an observance requiring unusually severe restrictions counts as equivalent to a much longer but less stringent vrata . In cases like this, performing the ascetic activities themselves become the essential basis of the regimen’s success, rather than the actual learning of texts (earlier the ostensible purpose of such regimens).
In pragmatic terms, ritualized recitation served to reinforce the memory, but for the student (and later for the hermit or wandering ascetic), to recite the liturgy was a substitute for actually performing the corresponding rites. This notion was expressed in Āśvalāyana Gṛhyasūtra 1.1.2–1.1.4, which cites three Ṛgveda stanzas to show that verses recited are like offerings, but it was also formalized in the doctrine of the “Five Great Sacrifices” (mahāyajña , first attested in ŚB 11.5.6.1). 20 These were simple, daily ritual gestures to satisfy spirits (with food), men (with hospitality), ancestors (with a libation), gods (with fuel placed on the sacred fire), and Brahman (with Veda recitation). The fifth great sacrifice, the brahma-yajña , was thus fulfilled through daily private recitation (svādhyāya ). It is better to say that this is a universalized sacrifice, for it is not entirely interior. In this sacrifice, the reciter’s mental and sensual faculties serve as the ritual implements. The wind, lightning, and thunder replace the ritual calls that announce the offerings. Instead of physical substances, the ṛc -verses are the milk libations; yajus -formulas are the ghee libations; sāman -songs are the Soma libations; the texts of Atharvans are the fat libations; and other ancient lore constitutes the honey libations. Accordingly, just as the sacrificial rites could only proceed in pure places and proper times, suspension of recitation (anadhyāya ) was required under a long list of inauspicious circumstances.
The idea that all Āryas have a duty to learn and recite the Veda was also promoted in the dharma codes by the “theology of congenital debts”: 21 of Veda study to the sages, of offspring to one’s ancestors, and of sacrificial offerings to the gods. In its earliest form, this set of debts applied only to the Brahmin (as in TS 6.3.10.5, cited above). But the dharma codes generalized the obligation to apply to all those eligible to be initiated (MDh 6.35–6.37). So while only Brahmins were eligible to teach the Veda, all Āryas were in theory duty-bound to learn it, at least nominally (by undergoing initiation and token instruction). In fact, this is just one of the ways in which Dharmaśāstra extended certain Brahmin norms (albeit in scaled forms) to the middle varṇa s as the template for a life of dharma . The “āśrama system,” the canonization of a set a four ideal modes of life, or religious professions, open to observant Āryas, did so more comprehensively.
The first steps in the formation of this system can be traced in the Gṛhyasūtras. As observed earlier, most of the Gṛhyasūtras begin the series of the family sacraments with the marriage—fittingly, since that rite marks the commencement of family life, the basis of the household—and introduce the upanayana in the sequence of rites for the couple’s offspring. A few sūtras, though, do begin with the upanayana (Bharadvāja and Hiraṇyakeśin , as well as the very late Āgniveśya , and Vaikhānasa ). Two others (Mānava and Kāṭhaka ) place the rules of brahmacarya near the beginning, although they deal with the upanayana separately, at the end of the childhood sacraments. Such discrepant arrangements in the domestic ritual codes of the Black Yajurveda suggest that in that sphere, observance of the rites of Veda study was moving into its role as the essential prerequisite to an Ārya householder life, with the corollary that mantra-recitation would provide a prestigious marker of orthodox Brahmanical piety.
The trend, and its direction, is confirmed by a comparison with the later tradition, which is nearly unanimous. The Dharmasūtras agree in presenting upanayana and studentship before discussing the duties of the married householder. 22 This reordering shifted primacy from the marriage to initiation as the rite of passage that was fundamental to the virtuous life and to confirming one’s social status. As Olivelle has shown, 23 the Dharmasūtras, the first works devoted to expounding Brahmanical religion in terms of dharma , were also the first works to describe religious occupations as āśrama s (a term otherwise denoting residences set aside for spiritual endeavor), although they also reflect controversy over the validity of lifestyles that reject the domestic ideals of Vedic ritual. 24 They used this term, it seems, as a rhetorical device to elevate the householder’s life to a par with the careers of otherworldly religious professionals such as hermits and mendicants—modes of life that had gained wide acceptance in the Mauryan and post-Mauryan Era (fourth to first centuries bce ).
In the Dharmasūtras, these āśrama s were alternative professions. After completing Vedic studies, the graduate was expected to choose whether to live out the rest of his life in the home of his preceptor as a “permanent student” (naiṣṭhika-brahmacārin ), or to marry and adopt the virtuous life of the pious householder—a gṛhastha , the religious professional “who stays at home”—as opposed to those “who live in the forest” (vānaprastha ) or “wander forth” as ascetics (pravrajita, yati ). In this schema, the studentship of youth was not an āśrama per se, but merely the proper preparation for choosing one: “A common prerequisite for all [the āśrama s] is to live at the teacher’s house following one’s initiation, and all are required not to abandon Vedic learning. After he has learnt the rites, he may undertake the profession that he prefers” (ĀpDh 2.21.3–2.21.5). 25
The claim that being a perpetual student is a mode of life dedicated to dharma appears for the first time, perhaps early in this period, when Chāndogya Upaniṣad 2.23.1 identifies such a student as the third of the types of people who embody dharma (dharma-skandha s): “a celibate student of the Veda living at his teacher’s house—that is, a student who settles himself permanently at his teacher’s house.” 26 Of the other two—one who embraces “worship, study, and giving,” and one who devotes himself solely to tapas (ascetical fervor)—the first may correspond to the later gṛhastha as a life of discipline and piety in the world.
The tension between the worldly and otherworldly ideals was a matter of controversy in early post-Vedic Brahmanism. The major innovation of the Mānava Dharmaśāstra was to resolve this tension by introducing the sequential model of the āśrama s. 27 Thus, each had its place and was valid at its proper time. The ascetical phases complemented and in fact underlined the importance of the householder status on which the others depended for support. In this new arrangement, studentship in youth became in fact the first āśrama in the sequence, and permanent studentship (along with the status of the snātaka ) 28 faded into the background. The brahmacārin , an ascetic living as an apprentice to a householder, learning the skills both of performing sacrificial offerings and of engaging in the interiorized piety of private recitation and austere self-discipline, came to represent the ideal of Brahmin piety. Brahmin settlements, as the locus of such virtuosic training, accordingly came to figure as intentional communities on a par with the monasteries of the Buddhist and Jain mendicants, and won patronage from kings and other elites on similar criteria, as is attested in inscriptions from the edicts of Aśoka Maurya onward. 29