Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
by
J. C. H E E S T E R M A N
Utrecht
I. INTRODUCTION
1
For an account of the various studies, see J. W. Hauer, Der Vratya, I (Stuttgart,
1927), pp. 5--40.
Cir. also recentlyH. Rau, Staat und Gesellschaft im alten lndien (Wiesbaden, 1957),
p. 17, who sees in the vrgtyas 'Werschiedenerlei andersglfiubigeWanderstfimme".
2 J . C . HEESTERMAN
purified and received back into the brahmin fold groupwise through the
vratyastoma, a
It is of course clear that the introduction and liberal use of terms like
"orthodoxy", "heretics", "conversion", far from simplifying matters,
imply a far-reaching statement about Vedic religion; to wit that it took
cognizance of other forms of religion as antithetical to itself. The overall
picture arising from the ritual texts indicates on the contrary that Vedic
religion did not relate itself to differing forms of religion. The antithesis
is between more or less effective rites, or of old, superseded (utsanna)
versus new rites, all of which are viewed within the framework of the
same religion.
Moreover the ritual texts are concerned with orthopraxy, not with
orthodoxy. Where an orthodoxy may open the possibility of conversion,
orthopraxy, being indifferent to conversion, will stress purification.
As the vr~tyas have been studied exclusively in terms of extra-brah-
manical ethnic groups and religions as opposed to brahmin religion and
society, and as they have been viewed in the perspective of postvedic
developments, the present paper intends to approach the problem of the
vr~tya and his purification from within the brahmanical orthopraxy, in
terms of the brahmanical ritual In other words: to investigate whether
and, if so, how the vr~tyas fitted in the brahmanical ritual system, our
knowledge of which has considerably increased, since Hauer published
his study on the vratya, through the later works of Caland3 The attempt
may be the more worthwhile since Hauer's Der Vratya, although it offers
the basis for any further discussion of the problem in its exhaustive
documentation, is particularly weak in its translation and interpretation
of the ritual texts. 5 We shall therefore give priority to the ritual texts.
Moreover it would seem to me that the much-discussed Vratya book of
the AV., important though it is, is of comparatively late date; it presup-
poses and refers to the fully developed theory of sacrifice, especially
from the point of view of the S~maveda (s~mans, metres); ~pDhS. 2.7.16
icers is distinguished from a group, vrata). Moreover the case of the sam.yajamfina is
also irregular since the system as such does not take it into account; otherwise we
would expect rules about the relations between the savo.yajarnfinas during the sacrifice,
since they should not come into contact with each other (except in the case of a vr~tya-
stoma or a sattra, BaudhSS. 29.5:375.2-3).
10 Cf. PB. 17.1.9; the rendering of this difficult passage is not meant as an exact
translation (see for this passage below, section III). So much, however, is clear that
the vr~tyas act in a way which disqualifies them for the ritual in its classical form.
11 Numbering after Nagpur edition. Caland, Auswahl no. 146.
VR.~TYA AND SACRIFICE
Leaving aside for a moment the impurity and purification of the vr~tyas,
which will presently be considered, it would seem that the vr~tyastomas
are primarily intended to celebrate the gathering and uniting of a
vr~tya group at the beginning as well as at the end of what in view of their
wandering and aggressive habits may be termed a raiding expedition.
This conclusion is supported by Baudh., who relates that the sons of the
Kurubrahmins, after performing the vr~tyastomas, set out as vrhtyas on
an expedition against the Pafichlas (atho haitena kurubrahman, dm putrd
~jire... tena he.st.vdpa~cdldn vrdty~ abhiprayayu.h, 18.26:374.8). In the same
direction points also the sam.jfi~ne.st.i, which according to Baudh. 18.25:
2~ Cf. Rajasaya,ch. VI, esp. p. 51. For other indications of resemblance with rhjasfiya
rites, see below, sect. X, end.
25 Since the PB. and especially the JB. passages discussed here seem to be cornerstones
in Biswas' vrfttya theory, it has been necessary to state at length my view on these
passages. I cannot follow Biswas when he interprets the position of the vratyas in
terms of casterules: the vr~tyas' being brahmins, who have lost their caste because of
their going abroad and acting as k.satriyas. Apart from the dubious equation of var.na
with caste, the texts seem to indicate that the caste system did not yet obtain, as will be
seen later on. Even in the rftjas~ya's ratnin list the articulation of the varoa system is
realized only in the White YV., i.e. at a comparatively late date. It should further be
noted that the PB. and JB. passages discussed above seem each to consider only two
opposites: brahman-k.satra (21B.) or brahman-vi~ (PB.). The point is that the vr~tya
is neither of the two opposites; in order fully to unfold himself he must integrate both
opposites, not become or rebecome one of the two. In the same way the rhjasQya
sacrificer must integrate k.satra and brahman or k.satra and viL The tripartite division
brahman-k.satra-vi~, and the quadripartite division which takes into account the
~udra, are not very prominent in the r~jas~ya and can be shown to be the result of
development. This much is clear, however, that the rhjas~ya sacrificer does not belong
to one of the constituents of the system, but is, as an extra element, born out of the
others, at the same time encompassing them. The same seems to be true of the vr~tya,
l0 J~ C. HEESTERMAN
The pivotal point, in m y opinion, is the fact that the vr~tya is put on a par
with the diksita. Not only calls Baudh. 18.24, as has been seen, his
speech (vrdtyavdda) the rftpa of the speech of the dik.sita (dik.sitavada),
while PB. 17.1.19 calls it directly d~k.sitavac, but we also find that PB.
24.18.5-7 mentions three ~lokas, not known from elsewhere, which extol
the dik$a of the vr~tya leader Budha Saum~yana.
N o w when we take a close look at the condition of the dik.sita, we
observe some features which usually are characteristic of impurity. One
3~ The same statement PB. 17.2.2; 3.3. JB. on the other hand equates the sixteen-
versed arrangement of the stotras with the indriya virya which the vr~tyas had lost and
which they now regain.
3~ PB. 17.1.16. For the possessions of the vr~tyas (vrdtyadhana) see lb. 14 and 15.
Here only their special equipment is mentioned. According to an opinion quoted
ApgS. 22.5.13 not only the equipment but everything they obtained (sdtam) constitutes
the vrfttyadhana that has to be given away. Cf. HireS. 17.2.41, reading sampdditam
instead of sdtam, where this opinion is marked by iti vij~dyate as a ~ruti. Cf. also
M~nSS. 9.3.3.9: vr~tya equipment and vratyadhana are to be given to an enemy.
12 J.C. HEESTERMAN
should not accept the food of the dik.sita, one should not wear his
garments, nor should one touch him or mention his name (,~pSS. 10.13
1-2; 15.15). One may interpret these rules in terms of "dangerous sacred-
ness". It then remains to be seen whether this dangerous sacredness is
different from impurity.
It seems open to doubt whether in dealing with Vedic sacrifice the
terms sacred and profane are workable. The texts themselves do not
seem to use these concepts but express themselves on the lines of this
world and yonder world, truth versus non-truth (satya - an.rta),8a pure
versus impure, what is possessed of ~r~ versus what is evil (pdpa). s~ It wilI
therefore be advisable to avoid the concept of sacredness. It will be
shown that the dik.sita is actually impure.
It can be said that the rules quoted above, as well as other prescriptions
for the conduct of the dik.sita are intended to safeguard the power
accumulated and tied up in the dik.sita during the dik.s~ period against
"leakage";35 the tying up of the dik.sita and the power accumulated in
him seems to be indicated by KS. 23.6:81.11 "he who has undergone the
dik.s~ is tied by a noose, a6 the noose is of Varun. a's nature; he who eats his
(the dik.sita's) food will be grabbed by Varu.na ... therefore one should
not eat the food of the dik.sita". Or, as the parallel passage MS. 3.6.7 has
it: "His food is not to be eaten, for, since he is tied, he is afflicted as it
were" (etdsydnnam an~dydm, drta ira hy ~.sd baddhd.h). The dik.sita's being
tied implies therefore more than precautions against "leakage" of accu-
mulated power. The texts make it perfectly clear that the dik.sita is
possessed of pdpman.
KS. lb. continues: "the evil (pdpman) of the dik.sita is divided in three
ways: he who eats his food (takes on) a third p a r t ; he who mentions his
inauspiciousness (a~l~larn) (takes on) a third part; he who mentions his
name (takes on) a third part; therefore one should not eat the diks.ita's
food, mention his name or his inauspiciousness". In the same way MS.
3.6.7:69.17 says: "The guilt of the dil~.sita is divided in three ways; he
3a Thus, for instance, the sacrificer at an i.s~isays: "here I go from non-truth (an.rta)
to truth (satya)" cf. Hillebrandt, N.V.O., p. 5.
a~ On ~rf - p~pd, cf. Gonda, Early Vis.nuism,p. 182 f.; on ~reyas versus papfyas, see
Ran, o.c., pp. 32-34.
36 On the power-accumulation of the dik.sita, cL author, "Dak~i.n~t", llJ., 3 (1959),
p. 248 ft. The idea of concentration and accumulation is also borne out by the dosed
embryo-like attitude of the dik.sita (cf. Hentze, Tod, Auferstehung, Weltordnung,
Ziirich, 1955, p. 131); closing his hands, like an embryo, "he clasps in his hands the
sacrifice and all the deities" (AB. 1.3.19).
36 The noose seems to refer to the dik.sita's mekhalS. It is no matter of wonder that
one should think of one's enemy when one is girded with the mekhalgt (MS. 3.6.7).
VRATYA AND SACRIFICE 13
who eats his food (takes on) a third part; he who mentions his inauspi-
ciousness (takes on) a third part; the ants who bite him (take on) a third
part; therefore his (the dik.sita's) food is not to be eaten, his inauspicious-
ness is not to be mentioned, the dik.sita-garment is not to be worn for in
this (latter) are the ants who bite him". 87
The vr~tya and the dik.sita are very much alike. Both are possessed of
p~pman. Both are avyavahdrya, to borrow K~ty.'s expression. The
comparison can be pushed further. The descriptions of the vrhtya's
p~pman in PB. 17.1.9 find their counterpart in the drk.sita. The vr~tya's
as well as the dik.sita's food is not to be accepted. The speech of vr~tya
and dik.sita are squarely put on a par. As to this point it is interesting to
note that JB. 2.64 explains the use of the word vicak.sa.na by the dik.sita,
when addressing people, as pairing (mithuna). 3s It would seem as though
we find here a mitigated, distant echo of the obscene ritual speech of
the vr~tyas.
The aggressiveness of the vr~tyas, their assailing those that are not to
be assailed, can in my opinion be linked with the dik.sita's sending
san~hdras, emissaries who collect goods for him. ~9 Although this rite
in the normal paradigms of the Soma sacrifice is not at all violent, it
has a parallel in the a~vamedha, where indeed goods are taken by force;
it is also connected with the cattle raid in the rhjas~ya. In both the cases
of the vr~tya and the dik.sita the collected goods are given away as dak-
.sin.~s. 4~ In this connection it is also interesting to note that the acceptance
by the dik.sita of the goods collected through the saniy~cana is considered
an.rta, because he undertakes the dik.sh in order to give (and not to take)
(KS. 23.6:81.17). It seems therefore that also on this count the vr~tya
and the dik.sita are alike.
It is also significant, as was already noted by Hauer, 41 that Baudh. 18.
24:371.7 equates the equipment of the vr~tyas with that of the dik.sita
(garment, hide, turban, staff). In both cases the special apparel is to
be discarded at the end of the sacrifice.
We may therefore conclude that in principle the dik.sita is as much in
need of purification as the vr~tya. This purification is provided for in
87 Cf. also PB. 5.6.10.
38 vicaksa.navatf~n vdca.m vadati ... prd.no vai vicak.sa.nas, tasya vdg eva rnithunam,
mithunavat[m vdca.m vadati. The use of the word vicaksa.na is characteristic for the
diksitav~c. Cf. Caland-Henry, Agnis.t.oma, no. 19.
39 Cf. on this saniyacana rite Caland-Henry, Agni$t.oma, no. 23; author, Dak.si.nd,
p. 248.
40 Cf..~pSS. 22.5.13 "they should give all they have obtained (sdta); that is the wealth
of the vr~tyas (vrdtyadhana)."
41 O.c., p. 193.
14 J.C. HEESTERMAN
the Soma paradigm by the final rites and especially by the avabh.rtha
bath. Through the avabh.rtha rites the dik.sita frees himself from Varun. a's
noose. 42 He is freed " o f both god-made and man-made guilt (enas)" as
KS. 29.3:171.10 has it, 43 while SB. 4.4.5.5. states that he is freed of all
guilt, of all evil pertaining to his heart (tdd ena.m sdrvasmad dh.rdydd
~nasa.h papmdnah, prdmu~cati). According to JB. 2.67 the avabh.rtha is a
recess, a hiding place so as not to be followed by phpman (papmano
"nanvav~y~ya); the avabh.rtha takes away the sacrificer's p~pman; he
should quickly come out of the water so as to separate himself from the
p~pman (papmano vyav.rttyai).
In section II it has been concluded that the vrhtyastoma represents a
festival celebrating the alliance of the vrhtyas setting out on an expedition,
and repeated at the end of their expedition. Although the dik.s~ in the
normal Soma paradigm is a rite preparatory to a sacrifice, it should be
remembered that the dik.sita condition lasts for the whole period of the
sacrifice up to the concluding rites; that is, up to the avahb.rtha rites and
the hair-cutting and paring of the nails. Moreover there are a few in-
stances where the dik.s~ is not preparatory to a Soma sacrifice but sur-
venes after a sacrifice, or where the dik.s~ observances fill the period
intervening between two sacrifices. Such a case is given by Ap~S. 22.3.
16-17 where the observances to be held during a year after the s~dyaskra
sacrifice are pointedly called dik.sh: "this is the dik.sa". Also after the
abhijit and vi~vajit Soma sacrifices dik.s~-like observances are prescribed
(ApgS. 17.26.14-20, cr. especially the wearing of an u.sni.sa). Equally in
the periods intervening between the c~turm~sya sacrifices diks~ obser-
vances are to be kept (ApSS. 8.5.4-11 ; cf. also the hair-cutting after each
of the c~tttrm~syas, during the intervening periods the sacrificer has his
hair grow). Another instance is provided by the r~jasfiya, which begins
with the socalled pavitra Soma sacrifice, followed by a year-long dik.s~
or by the c~turm~syas, 4~ at the end of which the unction festival takes
place; then again after the unction and da~apeya festivals a year of dik.sg
observances follows, ended by the hair-cutting Soma sacrifice.45
~ CL TS. 6.6.3; KS. 29.3; MS. 4.8.5.
4~ Cf. ~B. 4.4.5.22; 12.9.2.4.
44 Cf. Rajasftya,p. 7. I have argued there that there are two ways of marking the year
preceding the unction: either by the cgturm~syas or, in terms of the Soma ritual, by a
year-long d~.s~. Both patterns are used by ikp. and Hir.
~5 Baudh~S.26.3:274.14, dealing with the shortened form of the rgtjasfiya,explicitly
speaks of d~.sa with reference to the period after the unction and dagapeya festivals:
ardhamasena saptada~o da~apeyo, 'rdhamasar~diks.ito dik.sitavratf. For the ensuing
hair-cutting sacrifice he then prescribes a separate dik~ftperiod in accordance with the
normal Soma paradigma.
VR_ATYA AND SACRIFICE 15
V. VR~TYAS A N D INDO-ARYANS
From the investigation it has so far become clear that the vr~tya is no
less "orthodox", not more outside brahmanical religion and society, than
the dik.sita.
Actually the vr~tyas are found in the homeland of Vedic brahmanism.
As has been seen above, the sons of the Kuru-brahmins set out as vrhtyas
against the Paficglas, among whom Kegin Dgrbhya is performing a
sacrifice (BaudhSS. 18.26). On this episode TB. 1.8.4.1-2 sheds an inter-
esting light; this passage deals with the 12 "yoking offerings" (prayujdm.
hav~m..si) which can be performed as monthly sacrifices covering a whole
year. These offerings are explained by referring to the habits of the Kuru-
Pafichlas, who are said to set out on an expedition, which the comm. ad
TS. 1.8.20 terms digvijaya, in easterly direction during the cold season,
where they seize the barley crop, feed their men and animals and return
westward at the end of the hot season before the rainy season; during the
second part of the year they work their own fields and harvest. 48
~6 Cf. R~jas~ya, p. 224; Dak.si.n~, pp. 251, 257.
a7 There is evidence of the existence of fixed sfitra-like rules, preceding the sfitras
as known to us. These latter show sometimes divergent interpretations of the various
schools of what clearly must have been one and the same rule (for an example cf.
Rajasaya, p. 63 f.).
48 Cf. Ra]as~ya, pp. 209-211. cf also ~B. 5.5.2.5.
16 J . c . HEESTERMAN
connected with the Maruts. The Maruts seem to be the mythical proto-
type of the vr~tyas. BaudhSS. 18.26 relates that the vrgtyastoma was
performed by the Maruts, who had as their sthapati Vis.nu; next the
daiva vratya.h performed it with Budha Saumya as sthapati; then lastly
the sons of the Kuru-brahmins performed it. According to PB. 17. 1.1 the
gods went to heaven, but from among them the daiva vratya.h were left
behind; in the end the Maruts were told by the gods to deliver to the
daiva vraty&h the stoma by which they ultimately reached the gods. This
stoma is called the stoma of the Maruts. It would seem indeed that the
Maruts are themselves vr~tyas. ~3 PB. 17.1.7 mentions a Dyut~na Mgruta
as a g.rhapati of the vrgtyas, This Dyutgna Mgruta we find also in the
formula TS. 5.5.9.4:... dyut~nds tv~ rn~rut6 mar~tdbhir uttaratd.h patu, 54
where he apparently is the leader of the Maruts. 55 It is significant that
the Kuruvr~tyas, when asked about their identity, answer that they are
the Maruts and that their sthapati is Vi.s.nu.
As to the vr~tyas' connection with the Maruts the karfr7 i.s.ti offers
an interesting detail. The sacrificer of this i.s.ti puts on a garment with
black fringes - like the vr~tyas' garment - with the mantra " T h o u art the
force of the Maruts". Thus the black-fringed garment seems to be
connected with the Maruts (TS. 2.4.9.1; cf. KS 11.10; MS. 2.4.8).
A few words should be added here about the daivya (Baudh.), divya
OB.) or daiv~ (PB.) vr~ty~.h. It is typical that the Kuru-Pafic~la vr~tyas
identify themselves not with these daivyd vratya.h but directly with the
Maruts. The relevant opposition seems not to be divine vr~tyas as
against human vrgtyas - indeed the texts never speak about mdnu.sa
vr~tyd.h -, but of dev&h as against daivy~ vrdty~.h. When the gods go to
heaven the daivya vratya.h stay behind and rejoin them later on. ~G
They belong to the gods but at the same time are opposed to them.
They are said to have offended Rudra (ighna) or V~yu OB. 2.221) or
Varu.na (PB. 24.18.2). They are consequently left behind, defective.
Keeping this in mind we m a y render the expression "daivya" with
53 For the Maruts as sacrificers who wish to reach heaven cf. JB. 2.175 in the expo-
sition of the pafica~radiya or marufft.m stoma; also as ygtsattrins wishing to reach
heaven, JB. 2.297. We shall see later on, section X, that the y~tsattrins are closely
connected with the original vr~tya ritual.
54 Cf..~pSS. 17.10.11.
~5 SB. 3.6.1.16 Dyutana Mfiruta, in an udg~t.rformula at the erection of the udumbari
pillar in the sadas (Agni.yt.omano. 94; PB. 6.4.2), is identified with Vayu. According to
JUB. 3.21.3 the ekavrgtya is Vayu; cf. also JB. 2.221.
s6 The motif of being left behind as against going to heaven is well known; cf. PB.
8.5.7; 12.11.10; 15.5.20; 16.12.1; 20.11.3.
18 J. c. HEESTERMAN
"belonging to the gods". 57 Deva and daivya vratya seem to be the two
poles of the heaven-going process: deva stands for the successful com-
pletion, daivya for the aspiring to heaven. In this sense all vrhtyas are
daiwa. 5s
These considerations will have made it clear that the vr~tyas, far from
being outside the brahmanical pale or even non-Aryan, are ethnically
through their connections with the Kuru-PaSc~las, as well as religiously,
through their links with the Maruts, authentic Aryans.
If it be accepted that the vrfitya fully belongs to the world of the Vedic
ritual and that his impurity is essentially the same as the condition of the
dik.sita, the problem arises as to what role impurity plays in the ritual
drama.
One will be inclined to see the Vedic sacrifice solely as the domain of
rigid ritual purity. This has indeed been the tendency of the systematizing
ritualists and in the course of development the sacrifice became more and
more the exclusive domain of purity as against the impurity of the outside
world. It is, for instance, significant that whereas MS. and KS., as has
been seen above, still speak at length about the p~pman of the dik.sita, the
gB. does not mention it. A similar instance is discussed by Hauer 59
regarding the ritual copulation during the mah~vrata festival, which was
finally relinquished as antique and fell into disuse (puran. a, utsanna;
~aflkh~S. 17.6.2).
In the same way the killing of the sacrificial victim will in all probability
have taken place originally while it was bound to the sacrificial post, as
seems to be evidenced by Ru 1.162.9: "what of the flesh of the (immolated)
horse has been eaten by flies, what sticks to the post and to the knife ...
all that of you should be with the gods." Possibly the peculiar way in
which the animal is bound to the stake points in the same direction: the
cord is fastened to the right foot, goes round the left side of the neck and is
then wound round the right horn and finally fastened to the stake, s~
Thus room is left for the slaughterer's knife. TS. 6.3.6.3 explains this
5~ Caland, PB. translation, renders it "adherents of the god", i.e. Rudra, joining in
this respect Charpentier; see also below section X.
58 An interesting note is supplied by TS. 2.5.11.8, where the envoy of the gods is
Agni; the one of the Asuras is called daivya.
59 O.c., p. 264 ft.
e0 Cf. Schwab, Thieropfer, p. 81.
VRATYA AND SACRIFICE 19
and finished on one and the same day. In the sgdyaskra the chariot still
has an important function: the Soma heralds go out on chariots in the
four directions to summon the priests, while according to Baudh~S.
18.20:367.6 it was connected with a chariot race. All this, however, has
been eliminated in the vi~vajicchilpa and replaced by the simple symbol
of the liturgical "wheels".
JB. 2.69-70 (Auswahl, no. 128) this process is given expression in the
myth of the contest between Praj~pati and Death performing rival
sacrifices. For a long time they kept each other in check, neither gaining
any advantage over the other, till Praj~pati saw the sampad, the numerical
equivalence, and thereby conquered Death. Praj~pati's sacrificial "wea-
pons" belonged to the normal Soma paradigrna (yad yaj~e stf~yate, yae
ehasyate, yat praearyate, sa prajapate.h sen~tsa); those of Death, on the
other hand, consisted in singing, playing the lute, dancing and frivolous
activities (yad v~n.~tya.mg~yate, yan nrtyate, yad v.rthacaryate, s~t mrtyoh.
senasa). It is to be noted that singing, playing the lute and dancing are
characteristic of the mahavrata and of the vrhtyas. Through symbolical
and numerical equivalence Praj~pati overcame this ritual: the singing,
dancing and frivolous activities of Death were homologized with stotra,
~astra and the adhvaryu's ritual; the plectrum for playing the lute with
the sacrificial post; the parts of the lute with the numerically equivalent
elements of the normal sacrifice, e.g. the seven strings with the seven
metres. Thus the victory of Prajhpati, who generally stands for the classi-
cal ritual doctrine in its fully developed form, signifies in fact the sub-
stitution of the systematized abstract forms of the classical ritual for the
older ones. na The classical Soma paradigma becomes more effective than
the cumbersome mah~vrata and its utsanna rites. At the same time Death
and its impurity which, as will be argued below, originally held a more
important and explicit place in the ritual, are disposed of.
Notwithstanding this tendency the texts still show clearly that actually
the sacrifice is wrought with impurity and evil, The ritual copulation is still
present, but only symbolically under the liturgical form of the pairing of
es In passing it may be noted that at the mah~vrata as known to us the lute is not
played by the udg~t.r, who only holds it for a moment while touching the strings, nor
by any of the other priests, but by a nonofficiating brahmin. Cf./~p~S. 21.18.11-12;
Dr~thySS. 11.1.10. It is also worthy of note that in the dvfidagAha, which is the model
for all sattras and equivalent with the year-long sattra, the mah~vrata is left out.
VR.~TYA AND SACRIFICE 21
s~man and .rc, 64 as also under the form of the mixing of water and Soma.
Therefore, as SB. 4.6.7.9-10 explains, the sadas and the havirdhfina shed,
where these actions take place, should be fenced off so that one should
not see what in the words of SB. is a transgression (yddydpi jdyapatt
mithund.m cdrantau pd~yanti, vy bvd dravata, dga evd kurvdte). MS. 4.8.4:
111.4 calls the pairing of rc and s~man "that which is wrong, defective, of
the sacrifice" (vi~vdrf~po vd etdt tvds.t.r6 yaj~dsya vy~.ddham amanyata,
ydd rksamd vyuhydte). An interesting passage in this respect is JUB.
1.16.7-9 where it is said that the gods could not reach heaven through the
s~man alone; Praj~pati tells them to mix it with evil (i.e. with the .rc);
thus mixing good and evil they reached heaven. Impurity is essential to the
sacrifice. Against this background we can understand that this same text
says that one should not eat the food of the chanters since they live on
defilement (JUB. 1.57.1 : tasmad u gdyatam, nd~nfydt, malena hy ete fivanti}.
The central evil of the sacrifice is, of course, the killing of Soma or of
the sacrificial substance in general, whether animal or cereal. This killing
is frequently referred to in the brhhma.nas, e.g. SB. 2.2.2.1: "they kill the
sacrifice in that they "weave" it; in that they press the Soma they kill it;
in that they suffocate (and) cut the animal victim they kill it; through
mortar and pestle, through the upper and lower millstones they kill the
cereal offering". The caru offering for Soma during the evening pressing
of the n o r m a l agni.stoma is considered as the anustara.ni cow ~5 for the
dead (KS. 29.2; MS. 4.7.2; TS. 6.6.7.1). It is a means of healing for the
sacrifice (bhe.sajam. va etad devd yajgayakurvan yat saumya.h, KS. 29.2:
169.11). MS. 4.7.2:94.14 says: "they kill Soma in that they press it; in that
there is the caru for Soma, they restore Soma to life and cause it to swell".
Further on it is stated that this caru for Soma is a means of purifying and
that it purifies the saerificer.
In this way it can also be understood that MS. 4.8.5 says about the
immersion of the pressed-out Soma stalks in the avabh.rtha water: "what
cruel deed is done here, that is appeased through this rite" (ydd evdtra
krarrm, kriydte trc chamayati).
Thus the p~pman of the sacrificer can be seen to be the evil of killing,
the impurity of death.
n~ Cf. also the last stotra of the agni.st.oma, where the wife of the sacrificer should
exchange glances with the udg~t.r; during this stotra she should also pour water along
her right thigh. Both actions are considered as pairing leading to birth, as is also borne
out by the relevant mantras, see ApSS. 13.16.8-11; TS. 6.5.8.6. JB. 1.197 explains
the pouring of water as birth.
ns Indeed while dealing with this offering, one has the thread over the right shoulder,
as in the death ritual; see Agni.s.toma,no. 237.
22 J. c. HEESTERMAN
ae TS. 7.5.9.3; TB. 1.2.6.7; KS. 34.5:39.1; PB. 5.5.13; JB. 2.405. Except in PB. and
KS., they are the same persons as the ~,rya and the ~Odrawho fight for the hide, cf.
/~p~S. 21.19.9-10.
VRATYA AND SACRIFICE 23
"what has been well-chanted and well-recited by them," that is: their ritual
correctness. In the same way TB. explains the rite as propping up what
has been well, successfully done (suk.rta, raddhi) in the ritual, and driving
away what has been done incorrectly, defectively (du.skrta, ardddhi),
although the words of the dialogue, as recorded in the same passage,
make it perfectly clear that the reference is not to procedural flaws and
correctness.
In KS. the development is complete: the praiser praises what has been
well chanted, well recited; the reviler drives away what has beenincorrectly
chanted, incorrectly recited. 6~
The same development can be discerned in the so-called avivakya day,
the tenth day of the twelve-day sacrifice, on which ritual mistakes should
not be pointed out. Comparing this tenth day with a race, TS. 7.3.1.1
says: "if one points out his error to one who stumbles (as in a race),
he (the one who stumbles) takes hold of him (who points out) and comes
out successfully, and the one who pointed out is left out". In other words
the mishap is transferred to him who points it out. This corresponds
exactly to the case of the dik.sita's p~pman which is transferred to the one
who mentions it. We have seen that the dik.sita's pgpman is the evil of
death and does not bear on ritual incorrectness. Thus the original idea
in the aviv~kya will not have had to do with mention of mistakes but with
the sacrificer's p~pman.
Another instance of the development by which the ritual mistake came
to replace the idea of killing and death can be seen in KS. 29.4:172. 5 and
MS. 4.8.6:114.10. Dealing with the anflbandhy~ sacrifice for Mitra and
Varun. a at the end of the Soma sacrifice, the KS. passage says: "the head
of the sacrifice was cut off, the fluid that streamed out became the vagg
cow; that this va~h cow is immolated at the end, serves to provide the
sacrifice with pith. Mitra grasped that of the sacrifice which was well
offered, Varun.a what was badly offered; in that this cow for Mitra and
Varu.na is immolated at the end, he frees the sacrifice from both (Mitra
and Varu.na) and hands it to the sacrificer... This anflbandhya cow serves
for bringing the sacrifice to rest". Here we see the juxtaposition of killing
and ritual mistake. The parallel passage in the MS. seems to go a step
further; it does not mention the cutting off of the head of the sacrifice,
but gives only the statement about Mitra and Varu.na in about the same
terms as KS. It then continues by comparing the liturgical operations with
ploughing a field, and the sacrifice of the vagg cow with the harrow
levelling the field, finally adding: "what has been incorrectly chanted,
what has been incorrectly recited, what (has been done) against the
fixed order of the ritual, that he puts right by means of this cow sacrifice".
in this last statement the idea of killing is completely replaced by the
concept of the mistake.
VIII. R E L A T I O N S A C R I F I C E R - P R I E S T
The discussion so far will have made it clear that evil and impurity were
essential in the sacrifice. What is, originally, at stake in the sacrifice is
the canalizing of these impurities into proper channels so that they
remain within the cycle of production and procreation.
The two phases of this cyclical process are birth and death, concen-
tration and dispersion, ascension and descent. 68 This dual aspect of the
ritual has its counterpart in the relation dik.sita :priest.
The dik.sita is burdened with the impurity of death in much the same
way as Indra is burdened with evil on slaying the asuras or V.rtra or, as
seen above, Vigvarflpa. The gods acting as priests for Indra cause him
to reach on the tenth day of the dagar~tra pdpmano nairdagya (PB. 22.
14.2), i.e. literally: the state of having passed the ten critical days and
thus becoming free from evil. e9 Now nairdagya, as Caland remarks (PB.
translation), refers to the ten critical days that the impurity of the lying-in
woman last and after which the new-born child and its mother are safe.
In other words: out of V.rtra's death indra is reborn (cf. also KB. 15.3).
Similarly the dik.sita is reborn "out of the sacrifice", which according to
the view current in the brghma.na texts is killed. His rebirth is the culmi-
nating point of the sacrifice, the moment of complete ascension and con-
centration. At this point the reversal takes place. The dik.sita sheds the
impurity of death and killing on the priest, while dispersing himself in the
form of dak.sin.~. The dik.sita comes out pure, while his impurity is trans-
ferred to the priest.
This idea is clearly reflected in the speculations on the dv~da~gha
sacrifice. The dvgda~ha - but the same holds good for the sacrifice in
68 See above, n. 46.
e9 Cf. also JB. 3.324;/~pgS. 22.4.28,
VR/kTYA AND SACRIFICE 25
70 E.g. TS. 6.1.4.5; KS. 23.3; MS. 3.4.7; JB. 3.115. In the last resort this means that
the sacrificer is reborn out of his own dead and impure self.
n Cf. also JB. 2.67 where it is prescribed that at the avabh.rtha (after the avabhr.tha
i~i) the antelope skin of the dik.sita is to be given to an enemy (yam aratizn manyate).
The Nagpur edition seems to give the correct reading aratim as against Caland,
Auswahl, no. 127, reading ratirn, friend (see also Lokesh Chandra's note, The Jatmi-
nfya Brrhmatta II, 1-80, Thesis Utrecht 1950, p. 93). The vrf~tyaproperty is also given
to an enemy acc. to M~nSS. 9.3.3.9. Compare also MS. 4.8.2.:109.2: arrtfydnti
vd etd etdsmai dddate.
72 Discussion of the question whether or not to act as a priest for a sacrificer,/~pSS.
211.5-7; also LB. 9.5.2.12-16.
26 J . c . HEESTERMAN
of the birth process, but also to make it productive again. 73 The dak.sin.~
will produce rich returns, the p~pman will be turned into its opposite.
This seems to be illustrated in JB. 2.369-70: when Praj~pati is born
p~pman is attached to him; the personified brahman removes the p~pman
from Praj~pati's head, waist and feet with three strokes, whereupon the
phpman becomes threefold wealth (dr[), in the form of three status
symbols: cow, sleep and shadow, which, as the text explains, are most in
evidence with the wealthiest man (gre.stha). Here we see the reversal
p~pman - ~ri through the medium of the brahman power.
It stands to reason that the relation sacrificer: priest is highly critical.
Commenting on the meticulous care surrounding the dak.si.n~-giving and
the near-aversion against accepting them, Mauss observed: "Toute cette
theorie est mSme assez comique. Cette caste enti6re, qui vit de dons,
pr6tend les refuser... C'est que le lien que le don 6tablit entre le donateur
et le donataire est trop fort pour Ies deux". 74 In my opinion the difficulty
is in the one-sidedness of the process. The idea underlying the ritual seems
originally to have been fully cyclical, The sacrificer, enacting Praj~pati's
role, integrates, disintegrates and reintegrates the universe; undergoes
conception and birth, but at the same time dies, again to mature towards
rebirth; ascends, descends and ascends again. But all the time it is the
same sacrificer who undergoes this process in endless repetition. Sacri-
ficer and priest are each fixed in their respective roles, without a reversal
taking place in their relation.75 The dak.sin.~-giving is in fact a one-way
process, the depleted wealth of the sacrificer being supposedly replenished
automatically as the result of the sacrifice.
There are, however, traces of a - perhaps more original - bilateral
pattern. AB. 4.25 tells us that PrajSpati, wishing to procreate, had the
seasons officiate for him as priests; then Praj~pati prospered but the
seasons became "heavy" with dak.sin.~s. To restore the seasons Praj~pati
in his turn conceded to act as priest for the seasons; thus they found
support in each other. Alternatively the one represents the brahman out
of which the other is reborn. 7~
76 Perhaps we may compare the priestly Afigirases who also occur, RV. 3. 53.7,
as munificent patrons. The same obtains for the Maruts, below n. 92 and 93.
77 Cf. also PB. 10.3.3-4. /~pSS. 21.1.11-14 mentions the numbers one, three, six,
twelve, thirteen, fifteen, seventeen, twenty-one, thirty, thirty-three, forty, forty-four.
Each number constitutes of course a sampad. Cf. also KS. 34.9.
7s Read: tasmin d.r.staudatis..than, cf. Caland ad ~pgS. 21.1.13.
7~ For the connection between brahman and the thirteenth month cf. the hair-shaving
mantras at the occasion of the gunasiriya, the last of the c~tturm~syas: "One month
the Lord left out for the creatures; thereby he brought them a great thing, immortality
for the mortals; that is for you, O mortal, immortality; through which the months and
the half-months, the seasons, the years, through which they cut your hair, O Prajgpati,
28 J . C . HEESTERMAN
AB. 4.25, one should seek to be consecrated first, for, when the seasons
undertook the dik.s~ for the twelve-day sacrifice, only the first six of them
were able to do away with evil and became equal to daylight; the latter
six however did not get rid of evil and became darkness.
To fulfill this function of the extra, the last one, one did originally not
have to be a brahmin; on the contrary, one became a brahmin upon ful-
filling it. This seems at least the opinion of JB. 2.55: "the sattra consists
in that they break up after having made him a brahmin with whom,
though not called a brahmin, they undertake the dik.s~; therefore one
should undertake the dik.sg together with one who is not called a brahmin".
Anyhow disposal of impurity originally seems to have been the brahmi-
nical specialty par excellence. Even as late as SB. 12.1.1.9, when the
classical doctrine of sacrifice has been fully developed and the brahman
has become a mahartvij heading one of the four groups of officiating
priests, it is said, after the order in which the priests should consecrate
each other at a sattra has been so described, that the last priest, the un-
net.r, is to be consecrated by a sn~taka, a brahmac~rin or somebody else
who is not consecrated; because, as the text has it, "one who is purified
should not purify others" (nd pgttd.h pavayet). TlSis man does not seem to
have any further role in the proceedings, but it is not difficult to recognize
in him the original brahman who as the l~st one is left burdened with the
impurity of the others.
In general the thirteenth or any other extra one added to a given
number of entities carries or represents on the one hand the impure rest,
on the other hand it is at the same time the nucleus of reproduction. 8~
This seems to be equally true in the case of the brahman, In the above
quotation from the KS. on the sattra of the twelve months it is said that
they broke up "when they had seen him (i.e. the thirteenth month)".
Considering that the "thirteenth month" is conceived of as "the embryo
of the year" (gB. 8.4.1.19) this will mean that they broke up after a year
when they had seen the new year that was b o r n from their sacrifice.
According to the JB. passage quoted above, the central issue of the sattra
is the creation of a brahmin, apparently " b o r n " out of the sacrifice.
9The interesting consequence is that viewed against this background the
brahman and the sacrificer fall into the same place. The sacrificer who
is consecrated is born out of the sacrifice and is proclaimed as a brahmin
through that brahman I cut your hair in order that you may live" (TB. 1.5.5.5-6).
In another hair-cutting mantra, used at the ke~avapaniya festival Of the r]jasfiya,the
brahman is said to rule over the hair-cutting. (TB. 2.7.17.1).
S~ ~" Rijl~ ftya, pp. 34-37.
VR,~TYA AND SACRIFICE 29
s4 Db.rtar~.sIrasays to Baka: "Drive away these cows which Pa~upati kills" (prdka-
layataitd gd brahmabandha ity abravft, padupatir gd hanti; Caland reads pa~upatir ya
hanti). Interesting is here the reference to Rudra Pa~upati, who seems closelyconnected
with the vratyas tcf. also the close connection between vr~ttyas and Maruts). Baka
takes these cows and cooks them, considering: "King Devas~ has authorized me to
this food" (tasam devasar me rajdnna.m prdsu.sod iti). This king Devgtsuis probably, as
Caland comments (o.c., p. 52, n. 173), Rudra. The implication seems to be that the
Naimi.siyas are devotees of Rudra Pa~upati, kill cows and eat them, as they are indeed
said to do in JB. 3.332. The same may be true of the vr~ttyas,though definite indications
are wanting; according to Bau0ah~S. 18.24:372.4 they apparently slaughter goats and
cook them, which action is equated to the normal animal sacrifice. Dh.rtara.st.ra's
contemptuous answer seems to mean: since you, as devotees of Pa~upati, slaughter
cows, take these that are already killed by Pa~upati; which is another way of saying:
cows that have perished somehow (cf. the parallel in Mhbh. 9.41 : yad.rcchaya m.rta~).
s5 Cf. e.g. PB. 4.9.20-21 on the year-long sacrifice; TB. 1.5.6.5 on the hair-cutting
at the caturmasyas.
VRATYA AND SACRIFICE 31
But, although it is clear that the embryonic condition of the dik.sita is the
same as the condition of the dead, this idea seems to have been relegated
to the background in accordance with the general development of ritual
thinking. Thus the emphasis in the dik.s~ is quite naturally on rebirth, as
Of those, however, who go out on a vrgtya expedition it is clearly said that
they "die as it were" (IB. 2.222 mriyanta ira va ete ye vratydm, dhavayanti).
Ritual death in the form of the immolation of the animal victim seems
also to have been different. According to BaudhSS. 18.24:372.4 the
vrgtyas snatch away goats and cook the meat, which action is equated
with the classical animal sacrifice (te yam ajam pramatham pacante, sa
e.sam, pagu.h). The use of the verb pra-math "to snatch away ''sT suggests
comparison with wolves snatching away goats and sheep and rending
them, for which the same verb or its simplex is used. as However this m a y
be, this much is clear that the vr~tyas did not kill the victim in the way
prescribed by the classical ritual. The Naimi.siyas, who if I a m right can
be linked with the vr~tyas, are said to "cut asunder" (vi-cchid) (JB. 3.332)
the animals. Above I suggested that originally the animal victim will
have been killed at the stake, probably by severing the head from the
trunk. This may as well have been the procedure followed by the vrhtyas.
There is still another feature in the vrgtyastomas which in my opinion
is archaic. The standard Soma sacrifices are neatly divided in ekhhas,
ahinas and sattras. The ek~has, one-day sacrifices, are performed by one
dik.sita-sacrificer and sixteen or seventeen officiating priests; the sattra,
sacrificial session of at least twelve days, is performed by seventeen
sacrificers who all of them undergo the dik.sg. The ahinas, though in
later theory performed by only one sacrificer like the ekghas, take actu-
ally a middle position. According to KS. 34.13 (cf. ,~pSS. 21.1.11-16)
there m a y be more than one sacrificer, even an unlimited number of them,
at an ahina, a~ This seems to have been the general rule; the sattra is the
a6 The dik.sft is equated with death in JUB. 3.11.3. Cf. Lommel in Hentze, o.c.,
p. 124, who rightly observes that here the condition of the embryo is considered as the
condition of the dead. I do not think, however, that Lommel is right in separating this
passage from the "Dik.s~ Lehre" of the br~thma.nas. It rather seems that we have to
take the different statements as complementing each other. In the dik.sft we are con-
cerned with a coincidence of opposites: dark-light, death-birth, upper world - nether
world, as Hentze points out elsewhere in the same work (pp. 131,137).
87 Cf. Narten, "Das Vedische Verbum math", 11J., IV (1960), 121 ft., esp. p. 124.
Miss Narten does not discuss this Baudh. passage.
8s See Baudh~S. 18.45:398.4; ~B. 11.5.1.2-3; AV. 5.8.4; 7.50.5; RV. 8.66.8, where
Indra is compared with a sheep-robbing (uram6thi) wolf.
s~ Cf. also Mhn~S. 7.2.1.1-3 where is spoken of the ahina dvftdaw sacrificers in the
plural: 1. the dvftda~ha is twofold, sattra and ahina; 2. there are either one or many
32 J . c . HEESTERMAN
special case because, as/~p~S. 22.1.16 says, it is a sattra only when there
are seventeen sacrificers (i.e. o n e g~hapati and sixteen co-sattrins per-
forming the priestly functions). 9°
The vr~tyastomas, however, cut through these divisions. Theoretically
they are ek~has but there are several sacrificers who combine, according
to BaudhgS. 26.32:318.8-9, their fires as at a sattra. 9x Since dak.sin.~s
are given they can not be sattras either. They might be considered
ahinas performed by a group of sacrificers, but they are not completely
equal, since there is a sthapati. This sthapati undertakes the diksitavratas
for the others (BaudhgS. 18.24:371.6-7, te yam abhisam.jdnate ta~ stha-
patim, kurvanti, sa e~rp vratani carati).
The vr~tyas partake of the nature of both sacrificers and priests. In
this respect they resemble the Maruts, with whom, as has been seen (sect-
ion V), they are intimately connected. The Maruts are not only muni-
ficent or malignant warriors, but also act as priests. 9z The relationbetween
sthapati and vr~tyas is squarely put on a par with that between Indra and
the Maruts in Baudh.'s explanation of the sa.mjfi~na is[i (section IA).
The contradictions in the position of the vr~tyastomas can again
best be explained in terms of an older ritual at the base of the later system.
Ritual technique did not yet require rigorous specialization, nor were
warriors and priests rigidly exclusive groups. 9s Also the systematic divi-
sion of the Soma sacrifices was not yet developed. But the basic polarity
o f purity and impurity exchanged between sacrificer and brahman ob-
tains. On the one hand there is the dik~ita sthapati who receives the
thirty-three cows, obtained as gifts or conquered, which each of the
vr~tyas brings to him (PB. 17.1.17) like the s a n ~ r a s do in the normal
Soma sacrifice; one the other hand we find the brahmabandhu from
Magadha, who later on receives these cows together with the vr~tya
equipment, and on whom the vrhtyas thus "wipe off" their guilt) 4
(Man.) According to Baudh. (18.25) there are priests dividing the dak.si .n~ts, while the
subrahma.nya, according to this text (18.25:373.9) receives the special vrfttya apparel.
95 Cf. PB. 16.12.1. It may be noted that the Afigirases seem to be closely related to
the Maruts (A.ngirases and Maruts occupy parallel positions in resp. the Vala and the
V.rtra myths). Thus the case of the A.ngirases may be relevant also for the vr~tyas.
96 Perhaps a similar idea underlies the relation between devas and asuras in RV.
10.151.3, where the poet prays that his word may prevail with the sacrificial patrons in
the same way as the gods obtained Araddhd - the bond between patron and client
leading to the bestowal of gifts on the latter - with the Asuras (ydtha devd ~isure.su
~raddhdm ugrd.su cakrird, evdm bhoj~s,u ydjvasv asmdkam uditd.m krdhi).
34 J.c. HEESTERMAN
Such a ritual based on two opposite parties isperhaps reflected by the story
in Baudh. 18.26, where the sons of the Kuru brahmins, setting out against
the Pafic~las, exchange challenges with them on the place of sacrifice.
Now it is interesting to note that the ritual in its classical form still
contains indications that the brahman was originally not alone. There is
also the sadasya who has a supervising function exactly like the brahman's
(.~pSS. 10.1.10-11 ; KB. 26.4) and according to VaitS. 11.3 is subordinate
to him. This sadasya seems to be the lone survivor of a group of sadasyas
who are still mentioned in the older texts as dak.si .n~ recipients (MS. 4.8.3;
KS. 28.5). The same development that was responsible for the all but
complete elimination of impurity and its exchange form the ritual also
pushed the sadasyas into the background, retaining only, as a remnant of
the older ritual system, the sole sadasya of ill-defined function. This left
the opposite group, the sthapati and his vr~tya followers, alone in the
field. This process may have been facilitated by the alfiance ritual of the
vr~tyas among themselves. The vr~tyastoma seems to be twofold: the
celebration of the alliance, of special relevance at the outset of their
expedition, and the ritual involving an opposite party which receives,
possibly on the return of the vr~tyas, the collected vr~tya property.
Tentatively we may say that the vr~tyas celebrating their alliance are a
prefiguration of the ~rauta celebrants. The vr~tyas are still unspecialized,
at the same time sacrificer and priest. In due time the relations crystallized
and resulted in two separate systems: the ek~ha (or ahina) and the sattra.
The sthapati developed into the classical yajam~na and into the g~hapati
of the sattra; his followers became on the one hand ~tvija.h, on the other
hand sattrins.
Thus the vr~tyas appear not so much as prototypes of the yogin (Hauer)
or of the ~aivite ascetic (Charpentier), but rather as the genuine prede-
cessors of the ~rauta sacrificer and dik.sita.
We may expect therefore to find traces of vr~tya ritual in the ~rauta
sacrifice. A clear case of this is provided by the y~tsattras, 97 during
which the participants move each day a ~amyh throw along the Sarasvati
or the D.r.sadvati river, each time performing a sacrifice. Their sadas and
havirdh~na sheds are moved on wheels. Thus they go to heaven, as JB. 2.
298 has it. "s The same text 0b.) states that - much like the vr~tyas - they
the discussion of PB. 17.1.2 in section III. Perhaps we can put vr~tya, y~ttsattrinand
dik.sita as points in a developmental chain.
9~ Cf. Dak.si.nd,p. 246 ft. Here again we find pftpman that is shed in the form of
dak.si~s.
loo TS. 1.3.4. c; cf. Agnir p. I10.
36 J. c. HEESTERMAN
(plural). This latter rule can only apply to a plurality of sacrificers. Here
again we see the gradual change from an expedition-like sacrifice of a
group of sacrificers to a purely sedentary one, which has become the rule
in the WhYV.
It is perhaps no coincidence that gB. 12.1.1.1 states that those who
undertake the diks.~ for a year(-long sacrifice) covet "him who blows
here" (V~yu). In the same words the ekavrhtya, whom the vr~tyas have
offended, is described in JB. 2.221.
An important agency in the development from vr~tya to dik.sita has
been, in my opinion, the royal ritual. The cyclical pattern of the original
vrhtya ritual is still clearly discernible in the rgjas13ya. The royal unction
is closely akin to, if not at the base of, the dik.sL 1~ The relation of the
sthapati with the vrStyas bears strong resemblance to the bond between
king and ratnins or vi~a.h.1~ On the other hand the rgjasOya sacrificer
seems to be the forerunner of the common yajam~na of the classical
Soma sacrifice.
ritual. This circumstance m a y have opened the way towards " p u r i f i c a t i o n "
of the ritual a n d its d e v e l o p m e n t into a highly refined a n d systematized
code o f abstract symbols. By the same t o k e n the ~rauta sacrifice becomes
the exclusive d o m a i n of the pure expert a n d thus is spirited out of the
life of the c o m m u n i t y as a whole. 1~
104 The loss of contact of the ritual with the community can also be seen in another
way. The sacrifice has also an economic function: circulation of wealth (dak.si~5).
In the classical ritual the underlying idea of wealth circulation still shines through, but
the actual cycle is broken up. In the sattra no wealth changes hand any more; in the
ek~ha and the ahina (as also in the i.s~iand the pa~ubandha) the dak.si.n~-givingis a
one-way process, the sacrificer exclusively passing on wealth to the brahmin specialists
and expecting returns only from the automatical efficiency of the ritual. Thus the
ritual lost its economic function.