How the Brahmins Won

• This book is the third in a trilogy dealing with the early development of classical Indian culture.
• The first book, “Greater Magadha,” studied the culture of the eastern Ganges valley.
• The second book, “Buddhism in the Shadow of Brahmanism,” depicted the strong brahmanization of Buddhism.
• This book focuses on the success of Brahmanism, which grew from a movement in danger of extinction to one that imposed its imprint on the Indian subcontinent and Southeast Asia.
• It aims to understand how the Brahmins achieved this success without military conquest, an empire, or religious conversion.
• The provided text also includes the book’s detailed table of contents, a list of previously published materials used, and a comprehensive list of abbreviations.

Introduction

• The traditional chronological scheme for early South Asia (Vedic culture -> Buddhism/Jainism -> Classical India) has long been accepted but is now considered incorrect.
• A new understanding proposes that Vedic-Brahmanical culture was geographically limited to the west, while a distinct culture existed in ‘Greater Magadha’ to the east, which was the centre of the ‘second urbanization’ and the Maurya Empire.
• Political changes, particularly the rise of the non-Brahmanical Maurya Empire and foreign invasions, threatened the existence of Brahmanism.
• In response, Brahmanism reinvented itself, transforming from a priestly religion focused on sacrifice into a flexible socio-political ideology.
• This ‘new Brahmanism’ insisted on the superior and separate position of Brahmins at the top of the social and political hierarchy, allowing it to adapt to various cults while maintaining Brahmin authority.
• This ideology spread successfully across South and Southeast Asia, creating a ‘Sanskrit cosmopolis’, not through military conquest but through its adoption by local rulers.
• The book’s central thesis is that Brahmanism’s success stemmed from a coherent vision of the world developed by Brahmins to create a separate identity for themselves during a period of crisis.
• Brahmanical ideas about society at large (purity, hierarchy, statecraft) were extensions of the ideas Brahmins first developed about themselves.

Chapter I - Catastrophe and New Departures

I. 1 Catastrophe

1.1.1 Alexander and After

• Alexander the Great’s visit to the Indian subcontinent (326-325 BCE) was brief, but his historians provided the earliest reliable foreign accounts of the region.
• His invasion was a catastrophe for the Brahmins of the Northwest, a region which previously had a strong Brahmanical presence, as evidenced by the grammarian Pāṇini.
• Alexander’s forces slaughtered many Brahmins in Sindh.
• Following Alexander, the Maurya Empire’s rule, particularly under Aśoka, brought further suppression of Brahmins through actions like quelling revolts in Taxila and disapproving of animal sacrifice.
• After the Mauryas, invasions by Greeks and Scythians (Śaka) continued to make life difficult for the northwestern Brahmins.

I.1.2 The End of Time

• Following the collapse of the Maurya Empire (c. 185 BCE), foreign invasions led to a breakdown of Brahmanical society.
• Texts like the Yuga Purāṇa and the Mahābhārata interpreted these disasters as signs of the approaching end of the Kali-Yuga.
• Initially, the Yugas were conceived in shorter, historical terms (e.g., the Kali-Yuga lasting 1,000 human years).
• When the world did not end as predicted, the concept was reinterpreted by calculating Yugas in much longer “divine years.”
• This shifted the perception from living at the end of the Kali-Yuga to living in a very long period of misery, where calamities were attributed to the nature of the era itself.

1.1.3 Brahmins in Gandhāra

• There is scholarly debate about the presence of Brahmins in Gandhāra in the early centuries CE.
• Some scholars argue for a Brahmanical presence based on coins and icons depicting deities like Viṣṇu and Śiva.
• The author argues against this, citing Brahmanical texts that define their core territory (āryāvarta) as excluding the Northwest and state that no Brahmins were seen among the Yavanas (Greeks) and Śakas.
• The presence of deities like Kṛṣṇa and Śiva is not definitive proof of Brahmanism, as these were originally non-Brahmanical cults that were absorbed later. The core of Brahmanism, the varna system, was absent.
• Depictions of Brahmins in Gandharan art may represent iconographic types (e.g., for Bodhisattvas) or figures from the Buddha’s life stories, rather than a living community.

1.1.4 The Vedic Tradition Reinterpreted

• The center of Brahmanism shifted eastward from the Northwest between the time of Alexander and the early Common Era.
• The self-immolation of the ascetic Calanus, who accompanied Alexander, is presented as evidence of a reinterpreted or obscured Vedic tradition.
• While often considered non-Brahmanical, the author argues that suicide by fire aligns with the Vedic concept of self-sacrifice, where the sacrificer is the ultimate victim.
• Evidence for this practice within Brahmanism includes passages in the Dharmasūtras, the symbolic self-sacrifice in the Sattra ritual, and the Śunaskarṇa sacrifice described by the commentator Śabara.
• This suggests that classical Vedic texts may have downplayed or sanitized a real practice of sacrificial self-immolation that was current at the time of Alexander.

I. 2 New Departures

I.2.1 Patañjali and Kātyāyana

• The grammarian Patañjali, author of the Mahābhāṣya, lived after the collapse of the Maurya Empire and was active around the mid-second century BCE under the pro-Brahmanical Śunga dynasty.
• Evidence suggests he composed his work in Kashmir, possibly completing it closer to 100 BCE.
• Kātyāyana, author of the vārttikas on which Patañjali commented, lived before him, likely also under a pro-Brahmanical ruler after the Mauryas.
• Based on Patañjali’s description, Kātyāyana was likely from a region south of Kashmir, but within the northern Indian plains.

I.2.2 Manu and His Predecessors

• While most surviving Dharmasūtras may have been composed after Patañjali, he was aware of an earlier work on Dharma from the Mānava school.
• This earlier Mānava text, which is now lost, contained rules not found in the extant Mānava Dharmaśāstra (Manusmṛti).
• The extant Manusmṛti is a later, unified composition, likely dating to the 2nd-3rd centuries CE.
• Its relationship with the Mahābhārata is complex, suggesting its core was composed after the epic’s initial version but before its final form was fixed.

I.2.3 Literature on Statecraft

• Treatises on statecraft existed before the extant Arthaśāstra (c. 1st-2nd c. CE).
• The Arthaśāstra itself claims to be a compilation of earlier works, which it refers to as commentaries (bhāṣyas).
• The Mahābhārata also refers to multiple Bhāṣyas that, in context, appear to be texts on statecraft (rājaśāstra), distinct from grammatical or religious works.

I.2.4 Literature on Domestic Ritual

• The surviving Gṛhyasūtras (manuals on domestic rituals) likely date to the period after Patañjali (post-150 BCE).
• Several Gṛhyasūtras mention “sūtra” and “bhāṣya” in a list of revered texts, which probably refers to Pāṇini’s grammar and Patañjali’s Mahābhāṣya.
• Other features, such as the use of technical grammatical terms and the recognition of the Atharva-Veda as the fourth Veda, also point to a relatively late date of composition for these texts in their current form.

I.2.5 The Mahābhārata

I.2.5.1 Archetypes and Autographs

• An “autograph” is an author’s original manuscript, while an “archetype” is the reconstructed common ancestor of surviving manuscripts; they are often not the same.
• Vākyapadīya: The archetype of this 5th c. CE text includes parts of a later commentary.
• Mahābhāṣya: The archetype of this 2nd c. BCE text dates to c. 1000 CE, over a millennium after the autograph.
• Paippalāda Saṃhitā: All surviving manuscripts descend from a single archetype from Gujarat (c. 800-1000 CE).
• Mānava Dharmaśāstra: The archetype contains later additions, showing the text grew between its original composition and the version from which all manuscripts descend.

I.2.5.2 Archetype and Autograph in the Case of the Mahābhārata

• The Mahābhārata’s first written version (autograph) is dated to c. 100 BCE.
• The archetype reconstructed by the Critical Edition is likely from a later period, as indicated by its complex relationship with the Mānava Dharmaśāstra.
• This suggests a significant time gap between the autograph and the archetype, during which the epic expanded.

I.2.5.3 Archetype and Hyparchetype

• Evidence from the Spitzer Manuscript (c. 2nd-3rd c. CE) and the absence of Śāradā manuscripts for the Anuśāsanaparvan suggest this book was a later addition to the epic.
• The original archetype of the Mahābhārata likely did not include the Anuśāsanaparvan.
• The text of the Critical Edition, which includes this book, represents a later “hyparchetype” from which most surviving manuscripts descend.

I.2.5.4 Autograph and Archetype

• A 5th c. CE commentary on the Vākyapadīya quotes a version of a Mahābhārata passage that appears older than the one in the Critical Edition.
• This suggests that versions of the epic closer to the original autograph were still in circulation long after the archetype was established, confirming that the autograph and archetype were different.

I.2.5.5 Pāṇini and the Mahābhārata

• The scholarly consensus places the Mahābhārata’s first written version around 100 BCE.
• Pāṇini’s mention of the word mahābhārata is not conclusive evidence that he knew the epic, as the term could have referred to a person.
• Therefore, the post-Maurya dating of the epic’s autograph remains plausible.

I.2.6 Literature on Phonology

• Phonological treatises like the Prātiśākhyas were created to ensure the correct oral preservation of Vedic texts.
• These texts are based on two versions of the Veda: the continuous Saṃhitāpāṭha and the word-for-word Padapāṭha.
• The Padapāṭha of the Ṛgveda is older than the surviving Saṃhitāpāṭha and preserves more archaic phonetic features, such as a more limited use of retroflexion.
• Pāṇini’s grammar is chronologically situated between the Padapāṭha and the later Saṃhitāpāṭha and Kramapāṭha (a complex recitation mode).
• This indicates that key texts on Vedic phonology and recitation were developed after Pāṇini, during the period of Brahmanism’s major transformation.

I.3 Conclusions

• Between Alexander’s invasion and the early centuries CE, Brahmanism in the Northwest faced severe crises, leading to its decline in regions like Gandhāra.
• Despite these setbacks, this turbulent period was highly productive, leading to the creation of new forms of literature and the reinterpretation of traditions.
• Major works of grammar (Patañjali’s Mahābhāṣya), law (Dharmasūtras), domestic ritual (Gṛhyasūtras), and the epic (Mahābhārata) were composed or significantly developed after the collapse of the Maurya Empire.
• These developments provided Brahmanism with the intellectual and cultural tools for its subsequent successful expansion across South and Southeast Asia.

Chapter II - Brahmanism

II.A The Core Vision

• Brahmanism emerged as a conservative, inward-looking ideology primarily concerned with the Brahmin way of life.
• It distinguishes between literature for an internal Brahmin audience (e.g., Gṛhyasūtras, Dharmasūtras) and literature with an outward-looking focus for wider society (e.g., epics, Purānas).
• Its core vision was to separate Brahmins from everyone else, maintaining their distinctiveness and aloofness.
• Brahmanism was extremely conservative, detesting and often ignoring new realities like cities, instead projecting an idealized, non-existent past (such as the Brahmanical hermitage or āśrama) to shape the future.
• This ideological bias makes Brahmanical literature an unreliable source for historical facts about ancient Indian society, as it intentionally hides or misrepresents aspects like urban life and the use of writing.

IIA. 1 Purity of Descent

IIA.1.1 The Rules

• The fundamental rule of Brahmanism is that one can only become a Brahmin through birth.
• While the strictest rule requires both parents to be Brahmins, several early texts state that the child of a Brahmin father and a Kṣatriya mother is also a Brahmin.
• Some texts are more lenient, allowing for a Śūdra to become a Brahmin over seven generations of intermarriage with superiors, a process known as jātyutkarṣa.
• The practice of hypergamy, where a man marries a woman from a slightly lower social division, is also noted.

IIA.1.2 Brahmins of Foreign Origin: The Magas

• The Magas, immigrants likely from Persia, were a notable exception to the rule of pure descent, as they were accepted as Brahmins.
• Brahmanical texts rationalized their acceptance by creating a mythological origin story, claiming they came not from nearby Persia but from a distant, mythical continent called Śākadvīpa.
• This continent was already described in texts like the Mahābhārata as having a perfect four-varna social order, allowing the Magas to be seen as pre-existing Brahmins from a remote land rather than as foreign mlecchas.

IIA.1.3 Temple Priests and Other Bramins of Debatable Origin

• Temple worship is a relatively recent development in Brahmanism, and temple priests (devalakas) were often held in low esteem by orthodox Brahmins.
• A debate exists as to whether these priests were originally “fallen Brahmins” who took up a new profession, or non-Brahmins who successfully claimed Brahminical status.
• Puranic stories tend to support the “fallen Brahmin” origin, but modern scholars suggest that the Brahmin class was not genetically pure and likely absorbed various local priestly groups over time.

IIA. 2 Admittance

IIA.2.1 Vedic Initiation (upanayana) and Other Sacraments (saṃskāra)

• Key rituals for Brahmin identity, such as the upanayana (Vedic initiation), are argued to be relatively recent innovations from the last centuries BCE.
• Central features like the sacred thread (yajñopavīta) and the concept of the “twice-born” (dvija) appear even later in texts.
• The upanayana evolved from a simple custom of approaching a teacher into a complex, ritualized sacrament (saṃskāra), likely to create a formal barrier preventing outsiders from claiming Brahmin status.

IIA.2.2 Vedic Knowledge

• Knowledge of the Veda was central to Brahmin identity.
• During the final centuries BCE, extra efforts were made to ensure the correct oral transmission of Vedic texts, leading to the composition of works on phonology like the Prātiśākhyas and Śikṣās.
• The Veda came to be seen as the ultimate foundation of Dharma, and the belief in the power of its mantras spurred further theoretical developments.

IIA.2.3 The Ideal Brahmin

• The ideal Brahmin life was one of ritual purity and separation from society, often depicted as living in a forest hermitage (āśrama).
• This period saw a significant shift from Brahmins performing large, sponsored sacrifices for others to performing individual, domestic rites (gṛhya) for themselves.
• This “interiorization of the sacrifice,” exemplified by domestic rites and the patron-less sattra sacrifice, is seen as a response to a period when Brahmins lacked powerful sponsors and had to turn inward.

IIA. 3 Illiteracy

IIA.3.1 The Problem

• Brahmanical literature often ignores the existence of writing, even when composed in a literate era, creating a challenge for understanding the relationship between literacy and the development of rationality in ancient India.

IIA.3.2 Ordinary Memorisation versus Vedic Memorisation

• India possessed two distinct forms of oral transmission.
• Vedic memorization is a unique and highly precise technique ensuring syllable-perfect transmission of texts, focusing on sound over meaning.
• Ordinary memorization, used for texts like epics, is less reliable and allows for significant variation between performances.

IIA.3.3 Pāṇini

• Pāṇini’s highly complex grammar is often cited as evidence of sophisticated rationality in a purely oral culture.
• However, Pāṇini himself provides the first unambiguous reference to writing (lipi) in Indian literature.
• Given his time period (c. 350 BCE) and location in Northwest India, it is plausible that he used a script for his work. The unpronounceable nature of some of his rules further suggests a written composition.

IIA.3.4 The Mahābhāsya

• The claim that Patañjali’s massive commentary, the Mahābhāṣya, was composed and transmitted orally is challenged.
• Its great length and the absence of a rigorous Vedic-style memorization tradition for it make an exclusively oral history unlikely.
• The Brāhmī script of the era was likely adequate for writing such a technical Sanskrit text.

IIA.3-5 Systematic Philosophy

• The rise of classical Indian philosophy marks a radical break from earlier thought, driven by intense debates between competing schools (e.g., Buddhist vs. Brahmin) often held in royal courts.
• This adversarial environment forced thinkers to systematize their doctrines and defend them against external criticism.
• This intellectual revolution was likely facilitated by literacy, which gave thinkers access to the written texts and arguments of their opponents.

IIA.3.6 Conclusions

• While the evidence is not definitive, it is plausible that writing played a role in the composition of complex early works like Pāṇini’s grammar and was a key factor in the rise of systematic philosophy.
• The subsequent development of Indian philosophy clearly depended on access to the written works of rival schools.

IIA. 4 Sanskrit and the Veda

IIA.4.1 The Linguistic Background of Brahmanism

• Brahmanical thought is rooted in the Vedic belief in a magical connection between language and reality, where phonetic similarities between words reveal hidden links between things.
• Pāṇini’s grammar and Yāska’s etymology are systematic expressions of this worldview, analyzing words into minimal, meaning-bearing components.

IIA.4.2 The Eternal Nature of Sanskrit

• A major innovation of later Brahmanism (seen in Kātyāyana and Patañjali) was the belief that Sanskrit words are eternal and uncreated.
• This transformed the understanding of grammar: words were seen as fixed entities, and derivation became a mental process of substituting one whole word for another, rather than building them from parts.

IIA.4.3 New Ideas about Sanskrit and the Veda

IIA.4.3.1 Categories of Words and Categories of Things

• The belief in eternal Sanskrit led to the assumption of a direct correspondence between linguistic categories and reality.
• Patañjali’s classification of words (nouns, adjectives, verbs) provided the foundation for the ontological categories of the Vaiśeṣika school of philosophy (substances, qualities, actions).

IIA.4.3.2 Words

• Some Brahmanical thinkers, especially early Mīmāṃsakas, argued that the existence of a Sanskrit word guarantees the existence of the object it denotes.
• This view was later abandoned by Mīmāṃsā thinkers like Śabara, likely due to their ideological opposition to temple worship and its deities, whose existence they denied despite the existence of words for them.

IIA.4.3.3 Vedic Sentences

• As individual words lost their status as direct sources of truth, this role shifted to the sentences of the Veda, which were also considered eternal and authorless.
• The Mīmāṃsā school developed a hermeneutic principle of seeking the “most direct” interpretation of a Vedic text—the one requiring the least mental inference—to minimize human error and preserve the Veda’s purity.
• This principle led them to conclude that only Vedic injunctions provide new, reliable knowledge, as other statements could be contradicted by perception or inference.

IIA.4.3.4 Other Sentences

• Non-Vedic sentences, even if grammatically correct, posed philosophical problems that were debated with other schools, particularly Buddhists, leading to further philosophical developments.

IIB Brahmins and Society

IIB. 1 Imitatio Brahmanae

• The Brahmanical vision for society was an extension of their own ideals, promoting the imitation of Brahminical practices by other classes.
• Kṣatriyas and Vaiśyas were encouraged to adopt Brahminical duties such as studying the Veda, performing sacrifices, and adhering to rules of ritual purity and marriage.
• The widespread adoption of Sanskrit by non-Brahmin groups, including Buddhists, Jains, and even sailors, is a key indicator of this process of brahmanization.
• This imitation was justified by the Brahmanical claim to be “gods on earth,” whose lifestyle was exemplary.

II B. 2 Brahmanical Power

II B.2.1 The Atharva-Veda

• The magical formulas of the Atharva-Veda became a crucial tool for Brahmins to demonstrate their supernatural power outside the context of expensive solemn rituals.
• This was particularly important during the period when Brahmanism was re-establishing its value in society, especially to rulers.
• The text suggests that the Atharva-Veda was collected and elevated to the status of a Veda during this period of Brahmanical reinvention.

II B.2.1.1 The Atharva-Veda in Tradition

• Early sources often refer to three Vedas (Ṛg, Yajur, Sāma) or five (including Itihāsa), but rarely four.
• The Atharva-Veda was incorporated into the canon relatively late, and its collection into a formal Saṃhitā appears to postdate the other three.

II B.2.1.2 The Atharva-Veda in the Gṛhyasūtras

• The Gṛhyasūtras, which deal with domestic rituals, show a growing respect for the Atharva-Veda, often including it as the fourth Veda.
• Some texts give it the honorific title “Brahma-Veda,” linking it to the Brahman priest and the powerful office of the purohita (royal chaplain), who required magical knowledge.

II B.2.1.3 The Atharva-Veda in the Mahābhārata

• The Mahābhārata also grants the Atharva-Veda a respected position, frequently listing it as the fourth Veda and associating it with powerful spells and magical abilities.

II B.2.2 The Authorship of the Mahābhārata

II B.2.2.1 An Alternative to Sukthankar’s Thesis

• The text proposes an alternative to V.S. Sukthankar’s theory that the Bhārgava clan historically redacted the Mahābhārata.
• Instead, it argues that the prominence of the Bhārgava and Āṅgirasa sages in the epic is a literary device.
• Because these two families are mythologically associated with the magical powers of the Atharva-Veda, their stories were strategically used to project an image of immense and fearsome Brahmanical power to the epic’s primary audience of kings and warriors.

Chapter III - External Influence

• While Brahmanism claimed independence, it was significantly influenced by surrounding cultures, particularly from the region of ‘Greater Magadha’.
• Key concepts borrowed from Greater Magadha include cyclic time, the fundamentals of Sāṃkhya philosophy, and most importantly, the doctrine of rebirth and karmic retribution.
• This chapter examines how Brahmanism incorporated these external influences, leading to the development of Brahmanical philosophy and the Indian theater.

III. 1 Karma and the Individual

• This section contrasts the traditional Brahmanical worldview with the belief in rebirth and karma, focusing on the concept of the individual.
• It critiques the theories of Louis Dumont (who saw an opposition between the innovative ‘renouncer’ and the ‘man in the world’) and J. C. Heesterman (who saw an ‘inner conflict’ within the Vedic tradition). The text argues that renunciation was often a consequence of pre-existing beliefs like karma, not the cause of innovation.
• The belief in rebirth and karma originated in Greater Magadha, not in Vedic culture. Renunciation in this context (e.g., Buddhism, Jainism) was a path to end the cycle of rebirths.
• Brahmanism developed its own ideal of a hermit, the vānaprastha (forest-dweller), who sought total independence from society to attain heaven.
• Brahmanism eventually absorbed the Greater Magadhan model of the wandering beggar seeking liberation from rebirth, institutionalizing it as the last of four life stages (āśramas) to control its influence.
• The doctrine of karma, with its emphasis on individual responsibility, posed a threat to the Brahmanical social order.
• The Bhagavadgītā is presented as a key text that neutralized this threat by reinterpreting the path to liberation. It argued that one could achieve liberation by performing one’s social duties without attachment to the results, thereby reinforcing the static social hierarchy.

III. 2 Rationality

• Rationality is defined as a tradition of institutionalized critical debate where no topic is off-limits to examination.
• While Brahmanism was not inherently fertile ground for such a tradition, its philosophical schools adopted it, likely under pressure from external challenges.

III.2.1 How Rationality Came to India

• Ancient India and Greece are identified as the only two early cultures to develop a tradition of rational inquiry.
• This is contrasted with China, which, despite its technological prowess, lacked a tradition of systematic debate that challenged established authority.
• The rise of rationality in Greece is linked to its political climate of open debate.
• In India, the initial impulse for rational philosophy is traced to the Sarvāstivāda school of Buddhism in the Northwest.
• This development was spurred by interactions with the Hellenistic kingdom in Gandhāra (from c. 185 BCE), where Greek practices of rational debate compelled Buddhists to systematize their doctrines.
• This tradition of debate was then maintained at royal courts, spreading throughout India and eventually influencing Brahmanism.

III.2.2 Brahmanism and Rationality

• Brahmanism adopted rational inquiry primarily in philosophy, as it was necessary for public debates against opponents like Buddhists at royal courts.
• In fields without such competition, such as mathematics, tradition was preferred over critical inquiry.
• Early Indian mathematical texts, unlike Euclidean geometry, lack formal proofs, axioms, and definitions. This led to the acceptance and transmission of incorrect theorems (e.g., for the volume of a pyramid).
• The objects of Indian geometry were treated as concrete, real-world items rather than abstract ideals, making it more akin to an empirical science like grammar than to abstract mathematics.
• The absence of a competitive, critical culture in mathematics, in contrast to philosophy, explains this lack of rigor.

III. 3 Patañjali’s Reinterpretation of Grammar

• This section argues that the systematic philosophy of northwestern Buddhism exerted a significant influence on the grammarian Patañjali.

III.3.1 Earliest Buddhist Systematic Philosophy

• The Sarvāstivāda school of Buddhism in Northwest India developed a philosophy where reality consists of momentary, atomic elements called dharmas.
• In this view, composite objects like chariots or people are not ultimately real; they are merely names or concepts.
• Causality was understood as a strict, linear sequence where each moment is determined solely by the one immediately preceding it.
• To account for the reality of language, linguistic units (words, sentences, sounds) were themselves posited as existing dharmas.

III.3.2 Buddhist Influence on Patañjali

• Patañjali, living in Kashmir near Gandhāra, was likely exposed to these Buddhist philosophical developments.
• Evidence for this influence includes shared proverbs, the concept of a text being “auspicious in the beginning, middle, and end,” and his discussion of objects as collections of qualities, a position held by Sarvāstivādins.

III.3.2.1 Patañjali on Words and Speech Sounds

• Influenced by Buddhist ontological concerns, Patañjali treated words and speech sounds as independently existing, eternal entities (sphoṭa).
• This parallels the Buddhist reification of linguistic units as dharmas, although Patañjali makes them eternal rather than momentary.
• He conceived of a word as a single, unified entity (saṃghāta) that exists apart from the temporal sequence of its constituent sounds.

III.3.2.2 Patañjali on Derivations

• Patañjali imposed a strict, linear model on grammatical derivations, where each step is determined only by the information available at the immediately preceding stage.
• This model mirrors the Sarvāstivāda Buddhist concept of linear, moment-to-moment causality.

III.3.2.3 Knowledge of What Precedes

• The text shows through analysis of several grammatical problems that Patañjali consistently resisted and sought alternatives to derivations that required knowledge of previous stages (bhūtapūrvagati), reinforcing his commitment to a strict step-by-step model.

III.3.2.4 Knowledge of What Follows

• Patañjali also strongly resisted the need for ‘lookahead’ (knowledge of future stages or the final outcome of a derivation).
• He devised complex solutions and reinterpretations to solve derivational problems without admitting the need to know what would come later.

III.3.2.5 Knowledge of the Final Outcome

• When faced with a conflict between two applicable rules, Patañjali sometimes argued that the ‘desired’ (iṣṭa) rule should take precedence.
• This was not an appeal to the user’s knowledge of the correct word, but an appeal to the authority of tradition (vyākhyāna), which dictates the ‘desired’ choice of the original grammarian, Pāṇini.

III.3.2.6 Complications Ignored

• In some instances, Patañjali simply ignored complex derivational problems that would have challenged his linear model.

III.3.2.7 Two Linearities in Conflict

• Patañjali’s insistence on his own model of step-by-step linearity brought him into conflict with Pāṇini’s own principle of ordered rule application in the final sections of his grammar (Tripādī).
• He reinterpreted Pāṇini’s principle (pūrvatrāsiddham) in a way that, while less effective, preserved his own conception of how derivations must proceed.

III. 4 Brahmanical Philosophy

• Early Brahmanical philosophies like Sāṃkhya and Vaiśeṣika were not purely derived from the Veda but were shaped by non-Brahmanical influences.
• These include the tradition of rational debate (from the Hellenized Northwest, via Buddhism), the doctrine of rebirth (from Greater Magadha), and a shared focus with Buddhism on the philosophical importance of language.

III.4.1 Vaiśeṣika

• The Vaiśeṣika system is an ontology built on the premise of a close correspondence between language and reality.
• Its three core categories of existent things—substance (dravya), quality (guṇa), and motion (karman)—directly correspond to the main word classes in Sanskrit: nouns, adjectives, and verbs.
• The system was created in response to Buddhist Abhidharma philosophy, sharing its atomism and aim for an exhaustive list of categories, but taking the opposite position on the reality of composite objects, which Vaiśeṣika affirmed.

III.4.2 Self-contradictory Sentences

• Sentences describing creation, like “the potter makes a pot,” posed a philosophical problem for thinkers who believed in a strict correspondence between words and an existing reality.

III.4.2.1 Brahmanism and Buddhism on Language

• Both traditions saw a deep connection between language and the commonsense world, but differed on the world’s reality.
• Brahmanical philosophy affirmed the reality of the commonsense world, reflecting the Brahmins’ role as advisors to kings on practical, real-world matters.
• Buddhist philosophy denied the ultimate reality of the commonsense world, reflecting its focus on a spiritual reality beyond everyday concerns.

III.4.2.2 Satkāryavāda

• This is the “doctrine of the effect pre-existing in the cause,” adopted by the Sāṃkhya school.
• It resolves the problem of creation by positing that the effect (the pot) already exists within its material cause (the clay) before it is made manifest.
• This doctrine was likely developed in dialogue with Buddhist philosophy and is similar to the Buddhist sarvāstivāda doctrine.

III.4.2.3 Ajātivāda

• This is the “doctrine of no arising,” a more radical solution found in the Vedāntic Āgamaśāstra.
• It argues that since the concept of creation is logically contradictory, nothing is ever truly produced or created.

III.4.2.4 Asatkāryavāda

• This is the “doctrine of the non-existent effect,” held by the Nyāya and Vaiśeṣika schools.
• It maintains that the effect does not exist before it is produced.
• The linguistic problem is solved by positing that a word like ‘pot’ can refer to the agent’s intention, a mental concept, or, most importantly, the eternal, existing universal of ‘pot-ness’.
• Early Vaiśeṣika texts proposed a more complex solution involving a kind of ‘pre-existence’ or ‘essence’ (astitva) for an object before it fully comes into being, a view that was later abandoned.

III.4.3 Language or Grammar?

• This section argues that the influence of Pāṇinian grammar on Indian philosophy has been overstated.
• While scholars like Renou, Ingalls, and Staal have compared Pāṇini’s influence in India to Euclid’s in the West, this claim holds true mainly for schools of textual interpretation (Mīmāṃsā, Vedānta), not for the core doctrines of philosophical systems.
• Indian mathematics, a field where a Euclidean-style deductive method might be expected, did not adopt a system of formal proofs, suggesting that grammar’s influence was not a universal methodological template.
• The text concludes that while general ideas about language were profoundly influential on Indian philosophy, the specific influence of Pāṇinian grammar was more limited.

III.5 The Origins of the Indian Theater

• The debate on Greek influence on Indian theater has been dominated by Sylvain Lévi’s 1890 rejection of the theory.
• Lévi’s primary argument—a long time gap between the Greeks in India and the first known Sanskrit plays—is now invalid due to the discovery of much earlier dramatic texts from the first centuries CE.
• Lévi and his successors focused on refuting specific theses of direct borrowing (e.g., from New Attic Comedy), but wrongly treated this as a refutation of the more general thesis of influence, as proposed by Albrecht Weber.
• Weber’s thesis, that Greek theater at Hellenistic courts in Northwest India provided an “impulse” or “original cause” for the development of a literary drama in India, was never seriously refuted.
• Given the evidence for Greek theater in the region (e.g., the amphitheater at Ai-Khanoum) and known Greek influence in other cultural domains like astronomy and rational debate, it is plausible that the idea of a formal, court-sponsored theater was adopted, even if the content and conventions of Indian drama remained entirely indigenous.
• Lévi himself later softened his position, acknowledging the problem was more complex than he had initially argued.

Conclusions: How did the Brahmins Win?

• The establishment of Brahmanical ideology was linked to the transition from Vedism to Brahmanism, which involved reorganizing Vedic texts and rituals and imposing the four-varna caste system.
• After Alexander’s invasion, Brahmins lost privileged positions and faced persecution, but this period also saw a rise in Brahmanical literary production.
• This new form of Brahmanism was more self-centered, emphasizing the self-sufficiency of Brahmins, their private rituals, and their claims to supernatural powers.
• Brahmins spread across South and Southeast Asia by settling in their own exclusive villages (brāhmanagāma) or being invited by local rulers.
• Rulers were interested in Brahmins not through conversion, but because they believed Brahmins offered merit, a good afterlife, and magical protection for their kingdoms.
• Brahmins built their reputation through stories, particularly the Sanskrit epics (Mahābhārata and Rāmāyaṇa), which presented a world where Brahmanical power was superior to royal power and rendered their social hierarchy commonsensical.
• These stories, which spread widely, convinced rulers and common people that it was advantageous to support Brahmins and dangerous to cross them.

Appendix I: Brahmins and Śramaṇas

• Aśoka’s thirteenth Rock Edict states that Brahmins and Śramaṇas exist in all countries except among the Greeks.
• The expression “Brahmins and Śramaṇas” was likely a compound term referring to the general category of religious ascetics, not necessarily implying that both groups were present simultaneously in every location.
• Evidence from Patañjali’s grammar and passages in the Pāli canon (like the Devadaha Sutta) show that the two terms were often used together to refer to a single group, which could consist exclusively of Śramaṇas (like the Jainas).
• Therefore, Aśoka’s inscription cannot be used as definitive proof that Brahmins were present in all parts of the Maurya Empire.

Appendix II: Vedic and Para-Vedic Texts on the Śunaskarna Sacrifice

• Various Vedic and para-Vedic texts, including the Pañcaviṃśa Brāhmaṇa and several Śrautasūtras (Hiranyakeśi, Kātyāyana, Āpastamba, Baudhāyana, Lātyāyana), describe a sacrifice known as the Śunaskarnastoma.
• This ritual was performed by someone wishing for a peaceful death, free from disease.
• The texts describe the sacrificer lying down, covered, at a specific point during the ritual (the chanting of the Ārbhava-pavamāna) and dying at that moment.
• The Lātyāyana Śrautasūtra is the only text that explicitly states the sacrificer is dead before being consigned to the Āhavanīya fire, which contradicts a passage quoted by the Mīmāṃsā commentator Śabara.

Appendix III: Manu’s Final Chapter

• The final chapter (12) of the Mānava Dharmaśāstra, which deals with the law of karma and rebirth, is stylistically and thematically different from the rest of the text.
• The first eleven chapters generally explain social status, especially the superiority of Brahmins, as being assigned by the creator at the beginning of time, not as a result of deeds in past lives.
• These earlier chapters invoke heaven and hell more often than rebirth as consequences of actions.
• Chapter 12, in contrast, systematically explains human conditions (highest, middling, and lowest) as the result of actions performed in previous lives, a concept largely absent from the preceding chapters.
• This discrepancy suggests that Chapter 12 may be a later addition by redactors, possibly influenced by ideas from outside the Brahmanical mainstream.

Appendix IV: Passages Dealing with Five-Nailed Animals

• This section lists citations from eight different Dharmaśāstra and Smṛti texts.
• These passages specify which five-nailed animals are considered permissible to eat (bhakṣya).
• The texts cited include the Āpastamba, Baudhāyana, Gautama, Mānava, and Vasiṣṭha Dharmasūtras, as well as the Mārkaṇdeya Purāṇa, Viṣṇusmṛti, and Yājñavalkyasmṛti.

Appendix V: Liberation, Enlightenment and Death

• The Mānava Dharmaśāstra and the Bhagavadgītā present a hazy and somewhat inconsistent notion of liberation while alive (jīvanmukti).
• These texts describe a “liberated” person as one who is still striving for or desiring liberation, suggesting the state is not final or absolute while living.
• This contrasts with the Jaina tradition, which makes a clear distinction between enlightenment (attainable in life) and final liberation (mokṣa), which coincides with physical death.
• Early Buddhist texts also use the term “liberated” (vimutta) for living persons, but this typically refers to liberation from mental taints (āsava), not necessarily from the cycle of rebirth itself.
• The Brahmanical texts may have adopted the concept of liberation but were hesitant to grant living individuals a status beyond the reach of rules and social order.

Appendix VI: The Ṛgveda Prātiśākhya and its Śākhā

• The Ṛgveda Prātiśākhya, a text on Vedic phonetics, primarily describes a version of the Ṛgveda known as the Śaiśirīya school.
• This Śaiśirīya version differs in several phonetic and textual details from the standard Śākala version of the Ṛgveda that is known today.
• The Prātiśākhya itself acknowledges the practices of the Śākalas as different from its own primary subject.
• Evidence suggests that the Śaiśirīya school was once an independent branch but was eventually absorbed by the more dominant Śākala school, a process reflected in later texts like the Anuvākānukramaṇī which equate the two.

Appendix VII: Did Patañjali Know Pāṇini’s Original Text?

• Contrary to the view of many modern scholars, there are indications that the grammarian Patañjali believed he knew Pāṇini’s Aṣtādhyāyī in its original form.
• When faced with textual variants, Patañjali concludes that the master (Pāṇini) taught the rule in multiple ways to different students.
• Patañjali’s main concern was not to reconstruct an original text but to interpret the inherited text in the best possible way.
• He felt free to propose modifications and improvements, such as adding svarita accents to words, to give purpose to rules that might otherwise seem superfluous, while still aiming to remain “Pāṇinian”.

Appendix VIII: Why did Buddhism and Jainism Develop Differently in India?

• Despite common origins, Buddhism and Jainism diverged significantly, particularly during the Kuṣāṇa period in Mathurā.
• Buddhist monks began settling in monasteries, which became centers for wealth and cultic life focused on stūpas, often with royal patronage.
• Jaina monks remained wanderers, lacked monastic establishments, and did not receive state support, leading to the neglect and eventual abandonment of stūpa worship in favor of focusing on lay followers.
• The development of parallel legends about an evil rival to the founder (Devadatta in Buddhism, Gosāla in Jainism) likely occurred during this period of interaction and competition in Mathurā.
• Jainism’s stricter ascetic lifestyle and more limited geographical boundaries for its mendicants may have contributed to it remaining largely confined to the Indian subcontinent, unlike Buddhism.

Appendix IX: Bhāskara’s Acquaintance with Grammatical Literature

• The commentary of the mathematician Bhāskara I shows he was thoroughly acquainted with Sanskrit grammatical literature.
• His work contains numerous direct and indirect quotations from Pāṇini’s Aṣtādhyāyī, Patañjali’s Mahābhāṣya, and Bhartṛhari’s Vākyapadīya.
• Bhāskara uses technical grammatical terms and concepts, such as the analysis of compound words and the use of suffixes, to explain mathematical rules.
• He adopts the grammarians’ terms lakṣaṇa (rule) and lakṣya (object of study) to describe mathematics, referring to Āryabhaṭa’s verses as sūtras.

Appendix X: Was there Buddhism in Gandhāra at the Time of Alexander?

• This section refutes Christopher Beckwith’s theory that the Greek philosopher Pyrrho encountered early Buddhism in Gandhāra during Alexander’s campaign.
• Beckwith’s arguments are criticized for being based on flawed reasoning and factual errors, such as his claim that Jainism is much younger than Buddhism and his misinterpretation of the term Śākyamuni as “Sage of the Scythians”.
• The appendix points out that Beckwith’s method of relying only on datable sources is overly restrictive and leads him to ignore vast amounts of relevant Indian textual evidence.
• It concludes that there is no compelling evidence to support the presence of Buddhism in Gandhāra at the time of Alexander.