Vol. 3 · pages 281–285
Philosophy of Hinduism; Revolution and Counter-Revolution in Ancient India; Buddha or Karl Marx
This text was extracted automatically from the official PDF of Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches, so it may contain small errors. Always check the original page before quoting.
PDF page 281 (printed page 268)
268 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
grew into an Empire and came to be known as the Empire of Magadha.
The Sisunag dynasty continued to rule the kingdom till 413 B.C. In that
year the reigning Emperor of the Sisunag Dyansty Mahananda was killed
by an adventurer called Nanda. Nanda usurped the throne of Magadha
and founded the Nanda Dynasty. This Nanda Dynasty ruled over the
Empire of Magadha upto 322 B.C. The last Nanda king was deposed
by Chandragupta who founded the Maurya Dynasty. Chandragupta was
related1 to the family of the last ruling emperor of the Sisunag Dynasty
so that it may be said that the revolution effected by Chandragupta was
really a restoration of the Naga Empire of Magadha.
The Mauryas by their conquests enormously extended the boundaries
of this Empire of Magadha which they inherited. So vast became the
growth of this Empire under Ashoka, the Empire began to be known
by another name. It was called the Maurya Empire or the Empire of
Ashoka. (From here onwards page Nos. 4 to 7 of the MS are missing.)
It did not remain as one of the many diverse religions then in vogue.
Ashoka made it the religion of the state. This of course was the greatest
blow to Brahmanism. The Brahmins lost all state partonage and were
neglected to a secondary and subsidiary position in the Empire of Ashoka.
Indeed it may be said to have been suppressed for the simple reason that
Ashoka prohibited all animal sacrifices which constituted the very essence
of Brahmanic Religion. The Brahmins had not only lost state partonage
but they lost their occupation which mainly consisted in performing
sacrifices for a fee which often times was very substantial and which
constituted their chief source of living. The Brahmins therefore lived as
the suppressed and Depressed Classes2 for nearly 140 years during which
the Maurya Empire lasted. A rebellion against the Buddhist state was
the only way of escape left to the suffering Brahmins and there is special
reason why Pushyamitra should raise the banner of revolt against the
rule of the Mauryas. Pushyamitra was a Sung by Gotra. The Sungas
were Samvedi Brahmins, 3 who believed in animal sacrifices and soma
sacrifices. The Sungas were therefore quite naturally smarting under
the prohibition on animal sacrifices throughout the Maurya Empire
proclaimed in the very Rock Edict by Ashoka. No wonder if Pushyamitra
who as a Samvedi Brahmin was the first to conceive the passion to end
the degradation of the Brahmin by destroying the Buddhist state which
1 Mr. Hari Krishna Deb: quoted by Smith. Early History of India (1924) p.44. F.N. 1.
2 The inferiority complex of the Brahmins under the Maurya Rule becomes apparent from
the privileges asked for them by Manu in the Manu Smriti. This inferiority complex must
be due to their depressed condition.
3 See Harprasad Shastri in Buddhistic Studies (Ed. Law) Chapter XXXIV p. 819.
PDF page 282
269
THE TRIUMPH OF BRAHMANISM
was the cause of it and to free them to practise their Brahmanic
religion.
That the object of the Regicide by Pushyamitra was to destroy
Buddhism as a state religion and to make the Brahmins the sovereign
rulers of India so that with the political power of the state behind it
Brahmanism may triumph over Buddhism is borne out by two other
circumstances.
The first circumstance relates to the conduct of Pushyamitra himself.
There is evidence that Pushyamitra after he ascended the throne
performed the Ashvamedha Yajna or the horse sacrifice, the vedic rite
which could only be performed by a paramount sovereign. As Vincent
Smith observes :
“The exaggerated regard for the sanctity of animal life, which was
one of the most cherished features of Buddhism, and the motive of
Ashoka’s most characterisitic legislation, had necessarily involved the
prohibition of bloody sacrifices, which are essential to certain forms of
Brahmanical worship, and were believed by the orthodox to possess the
highest saving efficacy. The memorable horse sacrifices of Pushyamitra
marked an early stage in the Brahmanical reaction, which was fully
developed five centuries later in the time of Samudragupta and his
successors.”
Then there is evidence that Pushyamitra after his accession launched
a violent and virulent campaign of persecution against Buddhists and
Buddhism.
How pitiless was the persecution of Buddhism by Pushyamitra can
be gauged from the Proclamation which he issued against the Buddhist
monks. By this proclamation Pushyamitra set a price of 100 gold pieces
on the head of every Buddhist monk. 1
Dr. Harprasad Shastri speaking about the persecution of Buddhists
under Pushyamitra says 2 :
“The condition of the Buddhists under the imperial sway of the
Sungas, orthodox and bigotted, can be more easily imagined than
described. From Chinese authorities it is known that many Buddhists
still do not pronounce the name of Pushyamitra without a curse.”
II
If the Revolution of Pushyamitra was a purely political revolution
there was no need for him to have launched a compaign of persecution
1 Burnouf— L’Introduction a L’Historie on Buddhisme Indien (2nd.Ed.) p. 388.
2 Buddhistic Studies (Ed. by Law) Chapter XXXIV p. 820.
PDF page 283 (printed page 270)
270 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
against Buddhism which was not very different to the compaign of
persecution launched by the Mahamad of Gazni against Hinduism. This
is one piece of circumatantial evidence which proves that the aim of
Pushyamitra was to overthrow Buddhism and establish Brahmanism
in its place.
Another piece of evidence which shows that the origin and purpose
of the revolution by Pushyamitra against the Mauryas was to destroy
Buddhism and establish Brahmanism is evidenced by the promulgation
of Manu Smriti as a code of laws.
The Manu Smriti is said to be divine in its origin. It is said to be
revealed to man by Manu to whom it was revealed by the Swayambhu
(i.e. the Creator). This claim, as will be seen from the reference already
made to it, is set out in the Code itself. It is surprizing that nobody has
cared to examine the grounds of such a claim. The result is that there
is a complete failure to realise the significance, place and position of the
Manu Smriti in the history of India. This is true even of the historians
of India although the Manu Smriti is a record of the greatest social
revolution that Hindu society has undergone. There can however be no
doubt that the claim made in the Manu Smriti regarding its authorship
is an utter fraud and the beliefs arising out of this false claim are quite
untenable.
The name Manu had a great prestige in the ancient history of India
and it is with the object to invest the code with this ancient prestige
that its authorship was attributed to Manu. That this was a fraud to
deceive people is beyond question. The code itself is signed 1 in the family
name of Bhrigu as was the ancient custom. “The Text Composed by
Bhrigu (entitled) “The Dharma Code of Manu” is the real title of the
work. The name Bhrigu is subscribed to the end of every chapter of
the Code itself. We have therefore the family name of the author of the
Code. His personal name is not disclosed in the Book. All the same it
was known to many. The Author of Narada Smriti writing in about the
4th Century A.D. knew the name of the author of the Manu Smriti and
gives out the secret. According to Narada it was one Sumati Bhargava
who composed the Code of Manu. Sumati Bhargava is not a legendary
name, and must have been historical person for even Medhatithe 2 the
great commentator on the Code of Manu held the view that this Manu
was ‘a certain individual’. Manu therefore is the assumed name of Sumati
Bhargava who is the real author of Manu Smriti.
1 On this point see Jaiswal’s Volume on Manu & Yajnavalkya.
2 Commentary on Manu 1.1.
PDF page 284
271
THE TRIUMPH OF BRAHMANISM
When did this Sumati Bhargava compose this Code? It is not possible
to give any precise date for its composition. But quite a precise period
during which it was composed can be given. According to scholars whose
authority cannot be questioned Sumati Bhargava must have composed
the Code which he deliberately called Munu Smriti between 170 B.C.
and 150 B.C. Now if one bears in mind the fact that the Brahmanic
Revolution by Pushyamitra took place in 185 B.C. there remains no doubt
that the code known as Manu Smriti was promulgated by Pushyamitra as
embodying the principles of Brahmanic Revolution against the Buddhist
state of the Mauryas. That the Manu Smriti forms the Institutes of
Brahmanism and are a proof that Pushyamitra Revolution was not a
purely personal adventure will be clear to any one who cares to note
the following peculiarities relating to the Manu Smriti.
First thing to be noted is that the Manu Smriti is a new Code of
law promulgated for the first time during the reign of Pushyamitra.
There was a view once prevalent that there existed a code known as
the Manava-Dharma-Sutra and that what is known as Manu Smriti is
an adaptation of the old Manava Dharma Sutra. This view has been
abandoned as there has been no trace of any such work. Two other
works existed prior to the present Manu Smriti. One was known as
Manava Artha Sastra, or Manava-Raja-Sastra or Manava-Raja-DharmaSastra. The other work was known as Manava-Grihya-Sutra. Scholars
have compared the Manu Smriti. On important points the provisions
of one are not only dissimilar but are in every way contrary to the
provisions contained in the other. This is enough to show that Manu
Smriti contains the new law of the new regime.
That the new regime of Pushyamitra was anti-Buddhist is betrayed by
the open provisions enacted in the Manu Smriti against the Buddhists
and Buddhism. Note the following provisions in Manu Smriti:—
IX. 225. “… Men who abide in heresy ... the king should banish from
his realm.”
IX. 226. “These robbers in disguise, living in the king’s realm constantly
injure the worthy subject by the performance of their misdeeds.”
V. 89. “Libations of water shall not be offered to (the souls of) those
who (neglect the prescribed rites and may be said to) have been born in
vain, to those born in consequence of an illegal mixture of the castes,
to those who are ascetics (of heretical sects) and to those who have
committed suicide.”
PDF page 285 (printed page 272)
272 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
V. 90. (Libations of water shall not be offered to the souls of) women
who have joined a heretical sect…….
IV. 30. Let him (the householder) not honour, even by a greeting
heretics…. logicians, (arguing against the Veda).
XII. 95. “All those traditions and all those despicable systems of
Philosophy, which are not based on the Veda produce no reward after
death, for they are declared to be founded on Darkness.
XII. 96. “All those (doctrines), differing from the (Veda), which spring
up and (soon) perish, are worthless and false, because of modern date.”
Who are the heretics to whom Manu refers and whom he wants the
new king to banish from his realm and the Householder not to honour in
life as well as after death? What is this worthless philosophy of modern
date, differing from the Vedas, based on darkness and bound to perish?
There can be no doubt that the heretic of Manu is the Buddhist and
the worthless philosophy of modern date differing from the Vedas is
Buddhism. Kalluck Bhutt another commentator on Manu Smriti expressly
states that the references to heretics in these Shlokas in Manu are to
the Buddhists and Buddhism.
The third circumstance is the position assigned to the Brahmins in
the Manu Smriti. Note the following provisions in Manu :—
I. 93. As the Brahmana sprang from (Bramha’s) mouth, as he was
the first born, and as he possesses the Veda, he is by right the lord of
this whole creation.
I. 96. Of created beings the most excellent are said to be those which
are animated; of the animated, those which subsist by intelligence; of
the intelligent, mankind; and of men, the Brahmans.
I. 100. Whatever exists in the world is the property of the Bramhans;
on account of the excellence of his origin the Brahmana is, indeed,
entitled to it all.
I. 101. The Brahmana eats but his own food, wears but his own
apparel, bestows but his own in alms; other mortals subsist through
the benevolence of the Brahmana.
X. 3. On account of his pre-eminance, on account of the superiority of
his origin, on account of his observance of (particular)restrictive rules,
and on account of his particular sanctification, the Brahmana is the
lord of (all) castes.
XI. 35. The Bramhana is declared to be the creator of the world, the
punisher, the teacher, and hence a benefactor of all created beings; to
him let no man say anything unpropitious, nor use any harsh words.