The Great Nāstik Revolt
4.1: Intellectual ferment of post-Vedic period
By 600 B. C. E. a great intellectual ferment was brewing across the Indo-Gangetic plain the like of which India has not seen since. Countless different Kshatriya-inspired philosophies sprang up from the agitated intellect of the Indo-Gangetic civilization. Disgusted and disenchanted by the decadence of Brāhmanism a number of reactionary groups opposed to it arose over the centuries following the Vedic period. These people who lost faith in the Vedas or Vedic sacrifices came to be known as Nāstik -unbelievers or naysayers. Most of these groups were led by Kshatriya nobles. Thousands of wandering sophists known as Parivrājaka crisscrossed the country questioning anything and everything, including the doctrines of the Gunas and Karma, the Vedas, Vedic sacrificial rites, Varnāshrama Dharma, and supremacy of Brāhmins. They engaged each other in robust public debate on every topic on earth. They challenged their adversaries to win them over or to follow them. The public halls all over the country were packed with curious people eager to learn and experiment with new ideas to cope with life and its vicissitudes. New Age Philosophies thrived everywhere.
4.2: Kshatriyas lead the exodus
Soon massive winds of change began to blow through India resulting in the overthrow of the decaying old social, political, and religious orders. Aggrieved by the decadence of Brāhmanism, a large number of dissenting Brāhmins and Kshatriyas began to abandon it en masse. Lord Buddha (563-483 B. C.) and Lord Mahāveera (599-527 B. C. E.), both Kshatriya princes, were the products of this revolt. Over the next few centuries, heterodox religious orders, Buddhism and Jainism, both ascetic and Nāstik in nature, began ascendancy under the sponsorship of disillusioned ruling clans and support of even lower social classes. Emperor Bimbisara, a contemporary of the Lord Buddha, patronized the him if only to protect his favorite goats from being slaughtered on the sacrificial alters. Emperor Chandrgupta Maurya (ruled 321-297 B. C.), the first great emperor of India and protege of Chānakya, the quintessential Brāhmin genius, abandoned Brāhmanism, embraced Jainism, became an ascetic, and starved himself to death in the manner of Jain monks in South India. Abandonment of Brāhmanism by the first great emperor of India in the 4th century B. C. E. must have been a great shock to Brāhmanism. It is likely, though we have no evidence to prove it, that the Original Gita was inserted into the Mahabharata epic after this incident. His son Bindusāra abandoned Brāhmanism and became an Ajīvika, a creed which believed in predetermined destiny. His grandson emperor Ashōka the Great (r. 268-233 B. C.), gave up violence as well as Brāhmanism, and became an ardent supporter of Buddhism, then known simply as Dhamma. He even sent emissaries abroad to spread Buddhism. While Brāhmanism was on death bed, Buddhism became a World Religion. Patronized by the royals, Buddhism spread all over India like wild fire. Buddhist monasteries and Stupas sprang up all over the country. Royal patronage of Buddhism continued over the next few centuries. The Indo-Greek king Menander (Milinda) (r. 155-130 B. C.) and Kushana emperor Kanishka (r. 78-114 B. C.) also became Buddhist. Royal patronage of Buddhism made it the dominant religion of even with the rise of Hinduism around 4th century A. D. under the patronage of Gupta emperors. Even Emperor Harshavardhana (7th century A. D.) patronized Buddhist creed, much to the displeasure of resurgent Brāhmanic lobby, which attempted to assassinate him for this grave indiscretion. It should be noted that not only did Kshatriyas lead the revolt against Brāhmanism, but also they led the Upanishadic revolution to overthrow it. Lord Krishna refers to the Upanishadic doctrines as ”Royal Secret” (9:2) handed down by royal sages (4:1-2) and He, representing them, claims authorship of the Upanishads (15:15).
4.3: Two Nāstik reactionary groups arise
1. The first of these two Nāstik groups resorted to Sanyāsa- literally, “throwing down”- and renounced not only all material comforts but also all socially obligated duties (Karma). In other words, not only did they reject the Vedas, but also they abandoned Varnāshrama Dharma. Sanyāsa became synonymous with the word inaction (Akarma 2:47). Within this group, which came to be known as Sramanas, three distinct subgroups emerged:
A. The first subgroup, following the teachings of Gautama Buddha, later developed into Buddhism. This was essentially a rational religion that emphasized right thinking and conduct. Buddhists rejected all aspects of Brāhmanism except for the doctrine of Karma. Right conduct, not birth-class, should decide one’s status on life, they said [5]. The Buddhist monks were known as Bhikkus as they made their living by begging. The Buddha became a demigod. Beggars became holy and begging became fashionable in India. Buddhist teachings were not much different from the Upanishadic teachings, except for the concept of Brahman.
B. The second subgroup, following the philosophy of Vardhamāna Mahāveera, later on formed Jainism. The hallmark of this religion was absolute nonviolence toward all living things. This religion was clearly reacting to the horror of animal sacrifices rampant in Brāhmanism. Some of these monks walked around naked as an expression of their complete renunciation of material things and violence. Mahāveera became a demigod.
When Guru Krishna said in 2:47: “Do not become attached to inaction” He was pleading with defecting Kshatriyas not to give up their responsibilities and become monks or Sramanas. Criticizing the above two ascetic groups who had given up all action including Yajnas, and also had become Sanyāsins, Lord Krishna says: 3:4: Man cannot avoid earning Karmaphalam merely by abstaining from activity, nor does he gain Self-realization by renouncing attachment (to sense objects). 3:6: That deluded man is called a hypocrite who sits controlling the organs of action, but dwelling his mind on the objects of the senses.
C. The third subgroup consisted of individual Ascetics (Munis), who renounced everything and wandered in search of the Ultimate Reality (Brahad. Up. 4:4:22). They practiced severe austerities (Tapas) in the form of self-denial and self-torture as the means of mastering their senses to achieve personal liberation from Samsāra (17:5-6). Half-naked Sadhus and Sanyāsins who wander all over India even now belong to this subgroup.
Condemning this group of people Lord Krishna says: 17:5-6: Those men who practise violent austerities (Tapas) not enjoined by the scriptures, given to hypocrisy and egoism, impelled by the force of lust and attachment (to supernatural powers); fools that they are, they torture their bodily organs, and Me, too, who dwell within the body -know that they are Asurika (demoniacal) in their resolve.
2. The second major Nāstik reactionary group, known as Materialists or Lokāyatas, went in the opposite direction (Maitra. Up.: 8:9). The leading subgroup in this category was Chārvakas, who, declaring Vedic teachings as humbug, taught that pursuit of happiness should be the only goal in life. This was a largely rational philosophy which the priests of Brāhmanism hated with passion. [6] All of their revolutionary literature was destroyed by the pro-Vedic fanatics. What little we know of this philosophy comes to us from quotes in various Brāhmanic scriptures condemning them. Anti-Brāhmanic shlokas survived in the Bhagavad Gita only because the revolutionaries declared them as uttered by the Supreme Lord Himself. Since they could not destroy them, Brāhmins buried them in heaps of interpolated shlokas and bewildering commentaries.
Condemning the Lokāyata followers as demoniac, Lord Krishna says: 16:8-9: They say, “the universe is unreal, without a moral basis, without a God, born of mutual union, brought about by lust; what else? Holding this view, these ruined souls of small intellect, of fierce deeds, rise as the enemies of the world for its destruction.
4.4: The Upanishads
The revolt against Brāhmanism was not restricted to those who abandoned it. During the post-Vedic period (1000-200 B. C.) an internal revolt against Brāhmanic excesses was initiated by some great philosophers, most of whom were Kshtriaya royals (BG:9:2; Chandogya Up.: 1:9:2-4) who wrote treatises known as the Upanishads (”sitting devotedly near” a Guru), which were essentially anti-Brāhmanic in spirit. The Upanishadic Dharma was distinct from Brāhmanism and was based on the doctrines of Knowledge of Atmān and Buddhiyoga. Knowledge of Atmān countered the doctrine of the Gunas and Buddhiyoga countered the doctrine of Karma. Besides, the Upanishads insisted on equality of all people by virtue of the fact that Brahman is the same in all (5:18-19). Like Buddhists, the Upanishadic seers asserted that a person should be judged not by his birth but by his character (Chandogya Up.: 4:4:1-5). The Upanishads posed a grave threat to Brāhmanism. As we will study in Chapter Seven of this book, Brāhmanic seers dealt with this threat by declaring them as Shruti (divinely revealed) as well as Rahasyam (secret). It took some very bold and clever Upanishadic seers to reveal the secrets of the Upanishads in Gita, a Smriti, so everyone could know about the New Dharma.
4.5: Brāhmanism faces total annihilation
The net result of this ominous trend was that by 4th century B. C. E. a large number of people of all classes, especially Kshatriyas, were abandoning the elitist Brāhmanism and embracing egalitarian heterodox Dharmas such as Buddhism and Jainism. This was no different than the disgusted “lower castes” and “outcastes” abandoning Brāhmanized Hinduism, and embracing Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism in the modern times. Becoming a monk or ascetic not only meant giving up material comforts but also abandoning Brāhmanism and socially designated duty ordained by Varnāshrama Dharma. To Brāhmanism, dissolution of Varnāshrama Dharma or class system meant class confusion (Varnasankara 1:41) and its consequences, namely birth of unwanted progeny and decimation of elite class (3:24). Now Brāhmanism faced imminent demise.
4.6: The age of invasions
This also happened to be the time when Aryavarta experienced threat of fresh invasions from both the west and the east. By 520 B. C. the empire of Darius I of Persia extended up to the Punjab. The emperors that followed him were an ever present threat to the land. On the eastern front, the great non-Aryan kingdom of Magadha had always been a threat to kings of Aryavarta. Mahāpadma Nanda of Magadha, a Sudra by origin, declared war against every Kshatriya clan on Aryavarta. Nanda entertained the ambition of establishing his empire under one umbrella. In 327 B. C. E. Alexander the Great crossed Indus river and defeated the brave king Porus. Porus was probably of the proud and ancient Paurava clan, a branch of the Bharatas. Within twenty years after this, Chandragupta Maurya, emperor of the first great empire of India abandoned Brāhmanism. Kshatriyas abandoning their Dharma could not have come at a worse time. If all aggrieved Kshatriyas gave up their duty, embraced nonviolence, and became monks who would protect Aryavarta against the invaders? Facing imminent disaster for Brāhmanism as well as the land of the Arya, Brāhmanism seers sprang into action. They inserted into the ever-expanding and immensely popular Mahābhārata epic the brief parable of Arjuna’s Grief by means of which they conveyed to the public the need to strengthen Varnāshrama Dharma rooted in the Brāhmanic doctrines of the Gunas and Karma. This 64 shloka long Original Gita, which we will study next, became the Policy Paper of Brāhmanism at its most critical moment.
__________________________________________________
[5] In the Buddha’s Words, Bhikku Bodhi, Wisdom Publication, Boston, 2005, page 132.
[6] The Mind of India, Edited by William Gerber, Southern Illinois University Press 1977, page 102.