Was India in Primitive Communism in the Early Vedic Period

7/28/2019 Was India in Primitive Communism in the Early Vedic Period

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/was-india-in-primitive-communism-in-the-early-vedic-period 1/22

Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute

WAS INDIA IN PRIMITIVE COMMUNISM IN THE EARLY VEDIC PERIOD?Author(s): Bibhuti Bhushan KunduSource: Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Vol. 66, No. 1/4 (1985), pp. 63-83Published by: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41693597 .

Accessed: 14/04/2013 03:23

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to

Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 203.78.9.150 on Sun, 14 Apr 2013 03:23:22 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=bori

http://www.jstor.org/stable/41693597?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp





http://www.jstor.org/stable/41693597?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=bori



WAS INDIA IN PRIMITIVE COMMUNISM INTHE EARLY VEDIC PERIOD ?

BY

BIBHUTIBHUSHAN KUNDU

Of late, here avebeenattemptso explainthecourseofthevery arlyIndian History by means of the relation existingbetween the differentsections r classes of thesociety s governed y the relationsof production

whichprevailed n thesociety t that ime. Referencesmaybe made hereto S. A. Dange's India from primitivecommunismo slaveryx D. D.Kosambi's An introduction o the study of Indian History and to D. P.Chattopadhyaya's okByata* Of these authors,Mr. Dange is a most in-

terestingne in the sense thathe has taken muchpainsto claim theexistenceofthecommunismnthe VedicAge. Apartfromhisbook, he emphasisedthepointbefore the intellectual ommitteen Vijayawada on February 1,1975, when he quoted fromthe Hindu Scriptures nd contended thatcommunismn its essential orm xisted n the Vedic Society, there was no

king,no state, no policemen nd no punishment; it was a co-operativeorganisationwhere hepeoples protectedach other. Hence, I shalldiscusshere the book ofMr. Dange which s very omplete n nature. The Aryanswhomhe discusses n thebook are " those whoare battlingn Central Asia,expandingand advancingtowards ndia and who ultimatelyeize it andcolonise t."5 The keyhe uses to unlock the ancient Vedic society is theinstitutionf Yajfla performedn it6 and the religious extswhich he usesto explainthisancient nstitution re the Vedas, the Brãhtnanasand theMakãbhãrata.''

Mr. Dange has notassigneddates for he period of the study. Allthathesaysabout the date of the study is : " The PrimitiveCommune

1 Dange, . A, India frontrimitive ommunismoSlavery, 979, eople's ubli-shing ouse,NewDelhi. This s a reprintfthe hirdditionf he ookpublishedin March. 955.

s Kosambi, . D, An ntroductiono the tudy f IndianHistory, 975, opularPrakashanP) Ltd.,Bombay.

8 Chattopadhyaya,, P., Loky ta, 4th ediUon 978, eople Publishing ouse,New Delhi.

* References toa News tem ublishednthe AmritaBazar Patrikaon 2-2- 97 .' Dange, ndia from rtmtttveommunismoSlavery, .23.Dange, bid.p.¿t.

7 Dange,bid,,pp.28-29.







64 AnnalsBORI, LXVl ( 1983

Period can be said to have been ended with the earlyVedic Institutes nd

the period of slavery and civilisation o have begunwith he ater VedicInstitutes, he'earlý Sturiti iteratureand the Epics

" : ( Preface to thethird ditionof thebook, on page X ). But forthe ake of convenienceetus assign t. As the discussion s about theAryanswho have just settled n

India, it is necessaryo findout theirprobable date of entrynto ndia. Asthere is no indication bout such date or timein the Vedic literature, ti$>ustomaryo find ut the date of theRgveda as it is the most ancientbookof the Vedic literaturehatdeals with he lifeof the Aryansafter heyhad settledn India. The probabledate of the Rgveda,afterM. Winternitz,

is round about 2,500 or 2,000 B. C.8 Hence, I feelthat t is about theAryans ftheperiod2500 B. C. to 1500 B. C. that Mr. Dange has in hismind, s thisperiodcan roughly e called the earlyVedic period, for tak«Mr. Dange's words- " EarlyVedic Institutes - to refer o theperiodof theŠrutí iterature.

. But theAryansof that imewerenot in thestage of savagery. Ashe pointsout, " The Aryanswefinddescribed n thè recordsof the Hindusare,no doubt, n the stage of savagery But theyhad fat

advanced from he man of earliestsavagery. Yet some memoriesof thatstageare hinted t in themythswhichrecallthatperiod".9

Speakingabout theYajftasMr. Dange pointsout that he inventionoffire n the Vedic society,hanges he character f the Aryans. It introducesa newmodeofproduction « It liftsman from avagery o barbarism;fromthe Kritû ge to theTretaage, fromwanderingso settlements, rom stârva^tios to' occasional cannibalism,to assured supply of food, shelteranddéfettoe; romnakedness to covering,from'helplessnessbeforeNature* tf

strengthnd growth.no He notes that" Vedic traditionays thatwith tòrìseof fire, hetaming f animals nd thebuilding f settlementsvishas or

vrajas), Yajna came into existence.Brahifian,he Creator,gave Yajtia tomanin the Tretaage, whichwas notthere n theKrita. Tradition aysthatYajna was thegreatest ift f Brahman o man, ifting im out of one Yugpto- nother.

Thenhe pointsout to themeaning fthe word Yajña and its deriva-tion- " The word Yajña is not a wordbut a sentence formed fyd, d&ad

8 Wmternitz,. A. History f IndianLiterature,977,Munshiratnanoharlal,NewDelhi, p.390-410.

8 DangeOp.at p,23. 10 Dange, bid.,p.42,11 Pqnçe, bid,p. 43.







Kundu : Was India in Primitive ommunism.. ? 63

na. The root Yã or/.meant" to go, to gather ja-meant" to beget; na,an,

ant wereterminationsignifyinghird-person-pluralorm f the verb. Thusput togetherhe sentencemeant ' Theygather ogethernd beget. -What?Thingsand children. Similarly,he wordYajus or Yajur in Yajurveda is asentence.Yaj and Us or Ur. Thus Ur also is a pronominaltermination fthirdpersonplural,thewhole meaning again : ' They gather together nd

beget Lateron the sentence cquiredthe form fa noun, Yajfta a modeofacquisitionofproductionn commonofthings ndmen, and Veda is thô

knowledge fthismode. "I2

The above will show how Mr. Dange deriveshis chosen meanings orthewordsYajriaand YajurVeda. A littlereflection ill reveal the difficultywithwhich hese re arrived t. All that mean is this the derivations renot in the usual grammatical orms. In our ancient literature, . g. theVedas and theBrShmanas, Yajfia meansa sacrifice ortherethe verb yajmeansa worship, o sacrifice.13*The word Yajur is used incompoundfor

Yajus e.g. yajurãranyaka= Tait . Ärany., yajuruttamaendingwith erses fthe Yajurveda. ( See M. Williams - Sanskrit nglishDictionary. I fail tofollowhow Yajurcan mean- " Theyget togethernd beget . Such is also

thecase with hewordYajus which n our literaturemeans sacrificial ymns;itsplural s YajUmsi Winternitz A Historyof Indian Literature,Vol. I,

P- 163).

Further,n thederivation, hereis nothingto signify he sense of

together. Thus withdifficulty, r. Dange can derive the meaningof thewordsyajña andyajusas : they ather nd beget.

Now he explains hetwoYajñas; theSatra and the Kratu. " Sottas

and Kratus xisted nfullbloomwhenthe gods did the Yajnas. Later theAryans arelymitated hem,butthey ontinued o derive heirYajnas.fromthis arliestYajna. "1S Satra was " a collective functioningn the pristinemanner,n which ll participatedn the collective abour without istinction

, r division f labour.**u The Kratushowsus how the Aryans f themostancient times produced and rearedtheir attle wealth. The Akhyayika r

Yajna Legend ells us how itaroseandwhat ts procedurewas. The specia-lityof theTrirãtrakratus that t is a combination f threeKratus united none and carried ut collectively.16

» Dange, bid.,p.50. 18 Dange,bid,pp.44-45.1?aW-- "(^+3, .** uange, bid.,p.43.

£ [AnnalsBQRi]

j^ange, oia,p.«*o.







66 Annals BORI , LXVI ( 1985

Fromtheabove,he concludesas under

" The Yajna is thusthe collectivemode of production f the ancientAryan,before heydevelopedprivate roperty,lassesand State. As soon asthathappens, he old Satra and Kratugo outof existence,and Yajna thensurvives s purely ritual, form fworship, social memory.n#

" Yajna is the newmode of productionn which Aryan Society en-fers with the discoveryof fire. The new existenceof the man of Yajnamode leads to prosperity nd development f Brahman. When Yajna isperformed, rahman creation o to say, begins to come into existence. Itçannot live outside Yajna nor withoutit. Yajna is its very mode ofexistence. Thus wemaydefine arlyBrahman nd Yajna as follows

Brahman s the commune f Aryanman and Yajna is itsmodeof production,heprimitive ommunewith he collec-tivemodeof production.And theVedasare theknowledgeof this mode of production,of thisway of life of thegreatBrahman,he ommune.Thatis thewayAryanHindutradition utshistoryn record;and that s the keyto the

understandingf theearliest pochof Aryanhistory,f tsepochofprimitiveommunism.

The above, inshort, is Mr. Dange's propositionbout theprevalenceofprimitiveommunismntheverybeginningfthe VedicEra.

Now, whatare the characteristics f theYaj&a ? Let us enumeratethese afterMr. Dange.18

ieDange,bid.,p. 50.I* Dange, bid., p. 43. I am ndebtedo Dr.N. C. Bhattacharyya,ecretaryf theVangiyaanskritiksaParishad, alcutta,ndto SriN. N. VedsraritiirthaftheBrahmamoyeehatuspathi,um Dum,Calcutta, orthefollowingrammaticalconstruction33 : TOUT. | ^ I sngfcrç

I afa ^ I tfòfêr. 3! | #

18 Danga,J id., pp. 45-46,also see p. 62 wherehe sumsup theYajna modeof productions under "The earlyVedicSociety f theYajna mode ofproductionherefore,as a Gana Gentile organisation,n which ll memberswere elatedyblood, nwhichhere as ollectiveabourndpropertyntheveryearly tages,o divisionfclasses r astes, ostate,no king, o exploitersnd ex-ploited,twas self ctiogrmed rganisationf he eoplç.







ÍCUNDU Was tnáia in Primitive ommunism... êi

" The mostoutstandingharacteristicftheSatra is that ll theparti-

cipants n itare Ritvijas nd Yajamãnas. .. It was a collective unctioningnthepristinemanner, n which ll participatednthe collective abourwithoutdistinction r division f labour. The division f labour into sevencategoriesofRitvijas fthe aterAryanSocietyhad notyetcome intoexistence.

" The second characteristic f Satra, unlike he ater Yajnas, is thatthe Yajnaphala . e. the proceeds of labour, is a jointor collective roduct,to be distributedolletivelynd equallyand consumed qually,theprocedurebeing symbolised n the ritual of Samakhya . e. drinkingoma-Juicc rom

one and the samepot." The third haracteristics that ll theparticipantsnthe Satra are of

the same Gotra . e. blood relations,which s notthe case in otherYajnas.

" The fourth haracteristicwas thatmen were electedto temporaryfunctionalroles,when work became varied and as productive orces rew,fromwhich rosePravaranaVidhi, heact of choosing,electing. Whenthework was over, the functionaries issolved in the common-hood of thecommune.

" The fifthharacteristic as thatboth man and womanparticiptedntheSatra Yajna or labour, which s notthe case with aterYajnas.

•' All thesecharacteristics f Satra labour or Satra Yajna show theexistence ftheprimitiveommune mongtheearlyAryans.

And, how theprimitive ommune ived? According o Mr. Dange19" Everythinghat was producedcame to the Mahavedi direct oruse and

consumption, s Dharma demanded. After hegods and Pitaras weregiventheir hare theHavi, withoutwhich hey ould not ive- this,of course, inthe case whenthe Yajna appliedto man , whatwas left .e. theHutashesha*was for all to consume. The daily Havana was nothing ut themode ofdistributionffood,collectively roduced, othewholecommune nd as suchwas an intergral artoftheYajna.

" All workbeganand was interspersed ith heexhilaratingrinks fSoma,aided with aked flour urodashas,withparchedbarley nd ricemixedwith urdsand milk. The heaviest nd pleasingmeal ofthedaywas the feastofmeat,and theAryan scrupled at nothing n thatmatter. Therewas not

i» Dange, bid,p.49. Theword Mahavediistobe noted ere. t s,forMr.Dange,the ommon eetinglace f ll, eep.48 ofhisbook.








one living hing hat hey hunned n thismatter,hemost ommon, fcoufsé,

beingthegoat, a sheepand deer. The cow and the bullwerealso eaten,buttopingmorevaluabletheir urn ame wiih ess frequency. Well-fed nd well-drunk,theyslept roundthe fire n promiscuityn theearlydays, or retiredwith heir electedpairsto theirhuts when ateron the pairingfamilydeve-loped in thecommunehouse-hold. Man waspleasedand so was Agni. ThusthéBrahman, hecommune, ived and laboured,enjoyedand multiplied.

Thus far about Mr. Dange's standpoint. Now letus see what s themeaning of the word Yajña in the most ancient Indian literature, iz.

the Rgveda and what part it played in the ancient Tndian ife. Yajña'0has been defined s theofferingfoblation or clarified utter i'y ie havirdlyatextra. Sacrificeregulatedthe Aryan lifefrom birth to death. Thedifferentitualsviz. Garbhãdhãna,Upanayana, Vivãha, and ŠrSddhawhichwere observedfrombefore his birthto evenafterhis deathnecessitated heperformancefdifferentindsofYajña. Moreover,Yajñas wereperformedto avoid natural calamities nd forobtainingriches nd prosperity21nd forattainingheaven.22 Apart fromthese,a man had to performhe famousPañca Yajña, inhiseveryday ife, n order o pay off his debts to theseers,

to thegods and to the Manes. These are !adhyãpanam rahmayajñah itryajñastu iarpanam /homodaivo balir bhautonryajño'tithipüjanam/ ( Kãlikã-purãrta

In fact,the ChãndogyaUpanisad ( 3. 1. 6. 1 has likened he ifeof aman toa Yajña ( puru?ovãva yajñah). The Šatapatha Brahmano13/1/4)tellsthatPrajipati inventedYajña {prajõpatiryajñam asFjat). It has beenechoedin theGita. 3.10 :

sahayajñahprajãhsrstvã

purovãca prajãpatihfanena prasavisyadhvamsa vo'stv stakãmadhuk//

Englishtranslation The Lord ofbeingsafore»timereating eings ogetherwith hesacrifice spake this " By this ncreaseyourkind;be thisthemilch-cow ofyourdesires ( from . D. Bamett's ranslation f theBhagavadgïtà n

i0 A sacrifices composedf hree lementsDravya ( Oblatorymaterials, Devalã( a deity)ndTySga ( Qivingway hematerials.

81 Thevariousypesfthe stiYajñas areperformedorachievinghese nds, . g.Putrestior egettingson,Kãrlrlstifor voidingraughtndtobring ownfin,Ãgrayan'stifor fferinghefirst ruitrproducefthe ieldo he ods nd oon.Inthe oyal ield, ingserformedäjasüya ajñatoproclaimovereignty.Agnistomaajñawasprescribedor ttainingeaven" esa vai yajñah vargyo ada¿ni fornaliTãndyaBr.4. 2. 11 .







ÍČUNDU : Was India in Primitive ommunism.. ? 69

thecollectionentitled Hindu ScripturespublishedbyJ.M. Dent & Sons,

Ltd. London ).

In a Yajña, fire Âbavanïya Agni) plays a very mportant ole inas-muchas it is the messengerwho carries the various offeringso thegods.The Rgvedatells us thatAtharva Rsi invented ire nd thathis son Dadhicikindled t ( RV 6. 16. 13 and 6. 16, 14). RV 1.71.3 notes thatAngirasasheldfire ikeriches. Prof.Wilsonthinks Thisand theprecedingtanzaarccorroborativef theshare bornebytheAngirasas n theorganisation, fnotin the origination, f the worship of fire. J. Muir, the distinguished

Scholar,takesthis tanzato meanthat heworship f fire preadthroughhefamilies fthe rsis ikeManu, Angiras, Bhj-gu, tharvan nd Dadhici. The

Gopatha Br hmana informs s that the rsisBhrgu nd Angirasfirstntro*-duced Soma Yajña.2a

Soma Yajña is of three kinds Ahina, Satra and Ekãha. A Yajñawhich s performedna day is called Ekãha ; if textendsover2 to 12 days,it is calledAhina» and if t extends ver12 days, t is called Satra.

Itis not

necessaryto discuss here indetailsa Vedic

Yajña.24It is

sufficiento pointout here hattheVedicAryansperformedhevariouskindsofYajñas formeterial nd spiritual enefitndregardedhese nhigh steem.

ButMr. Dange has specificallymentioned attra ndKratuto'show hecolle-

ctive abouron thepartof theearlyAryans,hence it is necessary o discuss

thesetypesofYajñas within short ompass.

28 VideVidyabhusan,. C. PrachtnBharaterSanskirtiO Sãhitya 1369B. S.Bharatiibrary,alcutta,.22 inBengali.

Interestedeaders ay onsulthe ollowingSastri,. Sa Translationf heSatapv»thaBrãhmanaPart-IinBengali)1316 .S. Bangiyaahitya arishad, alcutta,Trivedi,.S.Translationf heAitareya rãhmanainBengali1318 .S.BangiyaSahityaarishadalcuttandhisshort ookentitled ajña Kathã (in Bengali)alsopublishedromalcuttan1327 ,S.The ast wo regoingobepublishedyGrantha elaofCalcuttasVol, I of he

collected orksfR. S. Trivedi.Theessay nYajna-Tattan thecollectionfessaysnBengalintitledharat

Sanskritiublishedn Calcuttan 1357B. S. on the occasion f the SixtyfifthBirthdaynniversaryfDr. M.N.Sarkar Mahendra ayantimarakGranthaand dited yA.K. Mazumdar.

Vidyabhusan,.C. ibid Ch. I,-Basu J. Beder Parichayin Bengali)1975,FirmaK. L. Mukhopadhyay,alcutta,p.121-139.Basu,J.R. India ofthe geoftheBrahmans 969,Sanskrit ustakBhandar, alcutta-BookIII, ChaptersÏ and I. Keith, .B. TheReligionndPhilosophyf heVedaandUpanishad$s1976. Motilal anarasidass,elhi,Vol. II, Chs. 0and21.







fo AnnalsBORÌ, LXVt ( 1983

Satira- It is a greatSoma YajSa lasting rom13 days to a year tir

moreand evenup to 100yearsdependingon its nature. The Gaväm-ayanais a model of the one year Sãmvatsarika Sattra and the DvSdašSha is themodel of a Sattra astingmore than 13 but ess than360 days. In it thereare 16 priests. As the sacrificerlso playsa vitalrole in a Yajña, he is alsoreckonedwith hepriests nd the numberof priests s takenas 17. Sometexts regardSadasya as the 17thpriest. The sacrificer,long withhiswife,arranges for the Yajfia. Soma-Juice s the principaloblation in it. Thepriests ettheir ees.

The Gavämayanais a sessional sacrifice overing 61 days . e. nearlya year. It is divided nto threeparts The first art forming he first 80days, the second or the middlepartof 1 daycalled Visuva ( Equinox andthethird artof 180days. The performance f the last 180days s in thereverse rderof thefirst80 days.

The following hart of the sacrifices nvolved n a Gavämayana istakenfrom. r. J.Basu's India oftheAge oftheBrãhmanas,pp. 163-164 toillustratets continuationhrough year.

Names of sacrifices Numberofdays involved

Atirätra ... ... 1

Ukthyahavingcaturvimša toma ... 1

4 Abhiplavasadaha 4X6 ) ... 24 ' (Repeated First ix1 Pfsthya-çadaha 1x 6 ) ... 6 > five imes) months.

J 30x5 = 1503 Abhiplava§adaba (3x6)... 18

1 Prçthya-sadaha ... 6Abhijit ... ... 13 Svarasämans ... ... 3

Total 180 days

Yisuvantday; also called ... 1Ekavim&Sha

3 SvarasSmans ... 3

Višvajit ••• 11 Prsthya ••• 63 Abhiplava 3x 6 ) ... 18 Last six

months.







RUNDU s WasIndia in Primitive ommunism.. ? 71

Names ofthesacrifices Numberofdaysinvolved

1 Prfthya 4 Abhiplava'

repeatedfour imes ... 1203 Abhiplava 3x6) 181 Goçfoma& 1 Ayuçfoma ... 2 LastDaáarStra 10 six.Mah&vrata ... 1 monthsAtirStra ... 1

Total 181

Grand Total - 361

Now, we may note here afterTilak that "There are manyannualSaitras like ÂdityõnSm-ayanam, ngirasõm-ayanamGavãm-ayanam tc.mentioned n the Brãhmanas and the ShrautaSütras; and as observedbyDr. Haug, they eemto have beenoriginally stablished n imitation fthesun's yearly ourse. They are the oldest of theVedic sacrifices nd their

durationand otherdetails have beenall veryminutelynd carefully oteddown inthe sacrificial orks. All these annual Sattras are not, however,'essentiallyifferentrom achother, eing o manydifferentarieties rmodi»

fications, according ocircumstances, fa commonmodelor type, nd the

Gavãm-ayanams said to be thistype."K

Let us nowdiscussKratu.®6 Kratu means a sacrifice;as Indra isnamed as Shata-Kratu s havingperformed 00 sacrifices. t mayalso meana special " sacrificial erformanceeld for hepurposeofenabling hesacri-

fleers o safely eachtheother nd ofthenight ( as in the ŘV VII, 32,26 ." Jnfact, it refers o the Ati-rãtrasacrifice nd the AitareyaBrahmapat

( IV, 10 quotes and interpretst in the same way."27

It has alreadybeenpointedout above that a Soma sacrificehas itsvariants ccording o the number f thedays involved n thesacrifice.Thus," Soma sacrifices xtendingover two nights, threenights,four nights,upto twelve nightsare called dvirãtra, tri-rãlra nd so on. "M So, aTrirätraKratu is a Soma-Yajna lasting for threenights. This meaning f

28 Tilak,B. G. ArcticHomein the Vedas, 1956,TilakBrothers,oona City,pp.177-178.

SB "yajnahsavo'dhvaro ftgahaptatantur akhah ratuh-rBrhat-Amarartha-candrikQ

ST Tffck,bid,p.203. " Tilak,bid,p. 191,








the Tr r tra Kratu is also clear in Monier-Williams Sanskrit-English

Dictionarywhere referenceshave been madeto the manyBrähmanas andthe Šrauta sûtras to substantiate hismeaning. Thus, TrirätraKratu isnot any special Yajña.

Mr. Dange emphasises in his discussion the ÃkhySyikãor Yajïialegendconnectedwith heTrirätraKratu. He finds that threeGod-Com-munes Deva Ganas ) namedVasu, Rudra and Ãdityaperformedhis acri-fice. It is of special importancen whichhe uses theterm anas in connec-tion withVasu, Rudra and Ãditya. He takes these ganas to mean collec-

tives n thesense n which hese re used in theMarxian Literature. But inthe ancient ndian literaturehe word gana was used to mean a group orsaňghaas Säyana explained the word in his commentaryn the {Igveda.Thus thisDeva Gana meantDeva Saňgha or a groupof the Devas. I saythatMr. Dange's meaningof the word gana in the sense of a collective sunwarrantedntheancient ndianliterature s collectives in the Marxiansense werenot known n theearlyVedicAge.

The story r Ãkhy5yik5s a mythologicalne and it is difficulto saywhat s thecorrect

nterpretationf it. But its

imports

veryclear;the

yajñaphala, . e. theproceedsof Yajña, is notto be consumedbytheYaja-mana i. e. one who institutes Yajña; it is to be distributedmong others,as in thestory, heproceeds ftheYajña, thecows, were not consumedbytheVasus, Rudras and Ãdityas,but were given away as daksinã or gift oothers. This is the import f everyYajãa as it is said that those who takewhat remains fterthe distribution f yajñaphala become freed fromallsins.30

Now, let us see, who participatedn a Yajña and what part they

playedin it.

Theyajamãna i. e. the sacrificer,nvites he priests the Adhvaryus,the Brahmans,the Hotfs and the Udgätrs and welcomes them to theyajñabhümi31 it ncludes rrangementor ome Vedi ( altar such as Mahã-vedi, Uttama Vedi etc. the place speciallyarrangedfor the sacrifice. Thepriestsnecessaryn a Soma Sacrificewere ixteen nnumber,eachgroup ofthe priestshavingfour members. Some textsregardSadasya (the sacri-ficer imself as theSeventeenth riest.

58 Dange, b.Cit.p.46.30 Gîta3.13 yajnasistäsinahantomucyantearvakilbisaih81 A. C. Vidyabhusan'sook cited above and R. S. Trivedi's ranslationf the

4 itareya rahmano ontainfigurefYajñaBhümi.







RUNDU : Was India in Primitive ommunism.. ? 73

Io a PaSu Yajña, Šamita,a priest,cuts the bodyofthe sacrificial

beastafter thas been killedbyblowsand fists.We have, ntheabove, talked bout sacrifice;we maynow note some

of itscharacteristics;tconsists n invitinghegodsnearthe acrificial roundwith nuvãkyã pells, inofferingblationsto thefire nd in eating of theremains foblationbythe priests known as theeatingof ida ) and in giv-ingthepriests heir ees. Whenthe sacrificewas over,the sacrificer athedin a pond ( avabhrthasnâna and tooknewdress.

Fromtheabove, it will follow hat sacrifice s an individual effort

rather hancollective, nwhich hesacrificer, iswife, hepriests, nd otherrelatives nd friendsparticipated. The yajñaphala was distributedmongtherelatives nd others. The distribution as notequal for ll therecipients.The differentriests layed differentoles na sacrifice; hus the Hotã invi-tedthegods, theAdhvaryus repared hethings ecessary or sacrificendofferedblations o thefire,he Udgãta recited ome songs in the praise of

gods and theBrahmãsupervised verotherpriests'work. The Sadasya,thesacrificerimself, beyedthe directions f thepriests nd gavethemdaksinãat the end of the sacrifice. Thus, a sacrifice o be performed equiredtheparticipationf differentandsdoingtheir espectivework. Here,therewas none" electedto temporaryunctional ole.''

Tãnunaptra s a ceremonyn whichTanü-Napät is involvedand theoblation s touchedbythe sacrificernd priests s a form f adjurationand

Tänünaptra s a vesselused in thisceremony Monier Williams Sanskrit

EnglishDictionary. Thus, a Yajna is notwhatMr. Dange assertsviz. thecollectivemode of productionof the ancientAryan,beforehe developedprivateproperty,lasses and state.32 Outwardly, t consists in the offering

of oblationsto fire nd in eatingthe remnants f it, its innermeaning squite deeper. " Once we look into the innermeaningof Yajna, keepingseparately he outersacrifice s symbolic, henits universal haracterbe^comesplainand thefactbecomespatent hatthat s thetruth f the EternalCreativeSpirit,theLaw of Sacrifice,Yajna-dharmaby whichthe Purushaoffered he substanceof his own Beingfortheworld-creation.For whatelse is the meaningof the famous Purusha-sukta Nor is this a solitaryinstance n theRig Veda whichgivesus the dea of creation by the Purusa-

sacrifice,hough he anguage s comparativelyasierand the Vedic imagery

is stillmaintained n some formtherein. Everywheren the hymnswhenthe Rishicalls upon the gods to accept his offering, e knows that be is

«2 Dange, p.cit.p.50.

JO [ AnnalsBORI ]







74 AnnalsBORI, LXVI ( 1985

leavingbehind hehuman,themortal n himto that xtent,forthat s taken

up and displaced by thegods acceptinghim and hisoffering.f by thesacr¡¿fice the mortal becomes the immortal, he gods oftheVeda, the CosmicPowers also take their econd birth nman, dwi-janma. This is the law of

interchange,he secret of Yajna, by which creationand every part of itsubsists. There s everywhere subtle ransactionfgiveand take. But it isa spiritual ommerce hat s the essence of theVedic Yajna known to theVedic Rishiwho is often ace to face withthe gods, addresses them as hisfriends nd enters nto intimaterelationwith them. It is this true butlost senseofthe Yajna thattheGita recovers orus and expressesit in its

characteristic ay. 33There s anotheraspectofa Yajña. We havealreadynoted see f.n.

2 above ) that a Yajña consists of three elementsviz. dravya oblatorymaterials, devota ( a deity and tyãga giving way the materials. Ofthese, the thirdelement s the most important, t has a social bearing.It prompted he Sacrificero distributeheyajñaphala amongothers. T have

alreadyquotedfrom he Gita ( see footnote30 above ) to showtherelationbetween a Yajña and its sacrificer. It futher aysthathe who cooks for

himself ione, indeed is afflictedwith sin.34 The very dea is an echo fromthe Rgveda3&which says " The inhospitableman acquiresfood in vain. I

speak the truth it verily s his death. He cherishesnot Aryamannor afriend;he who eats alone is nothing ut a sinner (Wilson's translation).In fact,thesewillpointout to theoutlook on Yajña in ancient ndia and tothe need of performinghese withinthe society. It is thus clear whydifferenteligioustextsenjoinforthe performancef these. The conceptofYajna has attracted ome modernminds.

Thusthe ateR. S. Trivedi, n his beautiful ssayYajña ,l# aswell m-

phasised he lement ftyãga .e. renunciationn a Yajña; he has evenpointed

88 Kapali hastri,. V. Lights ntheVeda,Arabindasram, adras 947, p.49-50*84 Gîta3.13: bhunjatee tvaghath apa yepacanty tmakãranats» fiV.X. 118.6

tnoghamnnain inciatepracctah ty mbravimi adha tsa tasya/niryamanam usyt nosakhãyam evalãgho havati evalädt /If I am notaccused fanachronism,may e permittedoquotehere ne lokafromhe ¡rimad hãgavata, work fthenearmid 3th entury .D., to showthe hangenthe ndian utlook.Theslokamay ven oundmodernn outlook o

some; t really oes a stepfurtherromhe ancientndian ttitude hent aysyãvadbhriyetaatharam ãvat vatvam idehinãmadhikam o'bhimanyetaa steno andam rhati//VII. 14.8

Eng. translationAman's ightxtendspto hatwhichatisfiesishunger;ewhoaspiresftermore han his hould epunished.

80 ReprintednR.S. TrivedrsookKarmaHatha jnBengali 1327. . ». caicutta.







KuNDU ! Was India in Primitive ommunism,..? 75

outthat tupheldtheancient ndian social structure nd it is also necessary

for hepresentociety. The element f tyagahas beennicely llustratedn astory f the MahãbhãratcP where half-golden-body ongoose who appea-red inthe AšvamedbaYajñabhümiofYudhisthira, fterthe completion ofthe Yajña with greatpompand splendour,and narrated to him and thebrahmins nd priestswhosat around him,the storyof a poor brahminofKuruksetra s to howhe performed real Yajña byofferinghe entire foodof his family iz. a few handfulsof flour obtained as alms to a hungryguest venwhenhewithhisfamilywas starving or everal days and extre-melyhungry orfood and opinedthattheYajña performedby Yudhisthira

was notworthyfits name inspite f itsgreat how. This storybrings outclearly he true mport f a Yajña. However, I neednotelaborate here theconceptof Yajña further. Interested eadersmaywell consult he ateR. S.Trivedi's ssay ustmentioned.

Let us nowsee howMr. Dange dwellson theantiquity f theYajñas.He pointsout, " Saíras and Kratus xisted n fullbloom when hegods didthe Yajnas. Later Aryans rarelyimitatedthem, but they continued toderivetheirYajnas from this earliestYajna. Gods in the mythology f

the Aryans tandfortheir ncient ncestors, s also the naturalphenomena.They can moreor less be so distinguishedrom ach other. 38

I havealreadydealt with hismatter n pages 68-69 of this essay astowhatour religious extshaveto say on thispoint. The fact hatYajñas arementionedn the Vedas and in the Brãhmanas learlypoints o theantiquityof these,because these texts re quite ancient in nature and these recordfacts r incidentswhich ccurredong ago before hesewere recorded n thetexts.39 Mr. Dange's point s thattheseYajñas weredoneby the gods and

thesegods in India are theancestors of the ancientmen and the person^fled natural phenomena. It is true that ancient Indians imagined theexistence fa supernatural oweror a god behind the natural phenomenabutit s not true o saythatthey lso regarded heir ncestors as gods, tho-ughtheywereregardedn highesteem nd as capable ofconferring oonstothe iving nd as such theyare " Often referred o in the Rigveda and thelater literature s invoked to conferboons.''40 Now, the Yajñas in the

81 SeetheMahnbhnrata,s'vamedhikaarvan,2ndAdhyäya.»s Dange, p.cit.pp.44-45.88 On theantiquityftheseYajñas, ee thelluminatingiscussionnM. Winternitz

A History f IndianLiterature,977, elhi,Munshiram anoharlalVol. Esp.pp.194-195.

*« Keith, .B. op.cit.Vol. I, p.425.







Ï6 ArmáisBORI, LXVI ( 1985

ancientdays couldbe performedfter irewas invented n the societyand

after thad progressedo farfrom ts nfancywhere tcould form some ideaabout the supernaturalpowers of the gods directing he natural pheno-menonthatpuzzledthe humansocietyand where tcould form some innermeaingofthe ife n thisworld ihaloka and its meaning n the ife here-after paraloka and where it had acquired some knowledge about theformation f the altars used in lhe sacrifices and had learnt he art ofcomposingbeautiful oems for somespellsused in the Yajñas are nothingbut beautiful oems , that s to say where t had acquired some spiritualand aesthetic ense. Hence it will be sheer blindnessto carrythe idea of

Yajñas in the nfant aysof the human ocietywheremen lived in a mise-cable condition nd could not think f anything ut bare subsistence ikefoodand shelter, s Mr. Dange does. It is very,ifficulto saywhen theseincidentsookplace in thehumansociety nd,as such, refrain rom his.

Another onceptwhich s required o be discussed n connectionwithMr. Dange's thesis s theone connectedwithBrahman. He writes, Anyonecan see from histhe Ve ieAryan,feeling n everyaction and fibre f hislifetheexistence fthecommune,while collectively abouring, inging nd

drinking,hat swhile n Yajna expressedhis collective xistence, eeling ndconciousness s theUniversalBrahman,whichwas the commune, nd no?thing ut commune. To him,at the. tageof development ewas, it was amysteriousorce, thingthat sprangforth n Yajna and at itscall. The¿xhilaration nd stimulation f animal spirits n collective abour was amysteriousmagicalphenomenon o thebarbarian. But there is no reasonwhywe should be mystifiedyit."41

Now, what s the characteristicf a commune A communenthe

modern anguagemeans a small groupofpeople,notall of one family,ivingcommually nd sharingnwork,earningsetc.43 But how was an ancientcommune Mr. Dange has thefollowingnswer

" The essential featuresof the primitive ommutie, f itsmodeofproduction nd life,are : collective labour and consumption; no privateproperty;no divisionof abourto beginwith,but later on it appearswiththe developingproductiveforces no classes the organisation s a gensorganisation ased on matriarchy,ll of whose membersare kins; private

family nd marriage, s known o latercivilisation,have notcome intoexis-

A* Dange, p,cit p.53.** Seethemeaningsftheword Commune inWebster'sewTwentieth-Century

DictionaryndtheConciseOxford ictionary







ICUNDUs Was India inPrimitive ommunism...?

tence,all functionsre elective y the whole commune thereis no State

with tsarmy,police and taxesto enforce he productionrelationsor pro-perty elations,henceno state law and machinery o enforcet." " Whenthese ppearthe communehas brokendownand collectivism as vanished."

" The Vedic literaturementionsall thesecharacteristicsn its own

way,whiledescribng hevariousYajnas ofthe HinduAryanSociety."43

Without oingdeeplyon thispointhere, I briefly ay that the Vedic

peopleofthesame blood lived in small familiesand a few such familiesboundtogetherysuchcommon ieor bysomeothersupposed commontie

lived na village a number of villages comprised a víš district and anumber fvišformed state. The fatherwas the head of thefamily ndtheproperties fthefamily . g. dwellinghouse, land, cattle etc., belongedto him. He had control ver themembers of his familywhich was patri-archal nnature. The kingwas thehead of the state. Therewas no sharpdivision fsociety n thebasis ofcastes, rather herewas somedivision f it

according o qualitythat s to say accordingto callings or vocation. Thatis to say, therewas somedivisionof labour. There was the bartersystemofexchange n theeconomicfield nd therewerethepursuits f various arts

and crafts s agriculture, ottery,weaving and dyeing , carpentry, lack*smithery. oldsmithery,manufacturingf wine etc. A few wererichand

manywerepoor. Therewerecreditorsnd debtors nd thieves,dacoits and

prostitutes.44

The above is a generallycceptedpicture f theVedicsocial structure,In it, there s no roomforthecommune s Mr. Dange understands t; for,there s theexistence f patriarchalfamilybased on matrimonial elations,private roperty,nequality f incomeand the presenceof such classes as

priests,kings,tradersand slaves. The communewhich Mr. Dange has inmindexisted n theprimitive aysofmankind,far removed from he Vedic

age, whenthese ncidents f thehuman ocietydidnotdevelop. The Vedic

people were definitely ar advanced iu relationto such primitiveman.Mr..Dange also admitsthisforhewrites hattheAryanswho were describedin the records ftheHindus " had far advanced fromthe man of earliest

Savagery.''45 Hence, I hold that he Vedic societywas far removedfromtheage ofthecommune nd faradvanced n relation o it.

±3 Dange,bid%.44.** This aragraphears eavilynmy rticle,TheVedic conomic tructure-publi-shedntheVedantaKesari,Madras, ulyndAugust,978. Esp. eepp.265-301ormy rticle Baidik uge-Arthanaitikbastha (in Bengali)ntheVivekDeepfor 386 . S. Asvin nd1387 .S. Baishakh.

46 Dange, p* it p.23*







1è ÀnnaìsBORI, LXVt ( I98Š )

Moreover,Mr. Dange is not correctnholding hat heYajñas exhibit

thecharacteristicsfa commune. I have already shown thatYajña is notthe collectivemode ofproduction, athert is theofferingfoblationsto thegods ingratitudend honour,thoughsome may hold that tholds the deaof creation.46The fire arries heoblationsto thegods, it s the ntermediarybetweenman and thegods. The invention f firen thehuman society s agreat vent,for it removeddarkness at night nd provided orwarmthncold. Men burnt he hunted nimalon it to make it edible; it thus servedas a means of cooking food or say as a means of production. But thisshould notbe takento meanthefire s Yajña or to equate Yajña with fire

seeing hatfire s an essential equirementfa Yajña. In a Yajña, fire s ameans and not an end. The fire sed in a Yajfia is a sacredthing nd it isbelieved obe endowed withdivine haracteristics. heYajña is also takentobe miraculously owerfuln grantingmen theirwishes; it is a divine xerciseof manto draw themercy fthegods. Thus, it is in no wayconnectedwiththecommune ife. I doubt tverymuch f Mr.'Dange can interpretll the

Yajñas whichmenbad to performntheage : ( all those mentioned n theŠrauta Sutraand in theGfhyaSütra as a mode ofproduction.

And finally, he Brahman is not the commune. In theftgveda hewordBrahman Naturally nd normallymeansprayer, ut there re further

developments,t can meanspell, for the rayermaybe a spell, and notreal

prayer nd itoftenmeansholy speechand theholy writ, thethreefold edaBut inmanypassages itseems as if Brahman must be taken rather

as holypowerthan as prayer n holyrite the gods are said to discuss theBrahman,and, whenthegreatness f the Brahman s celebrated, t is clearthat more than he merewordmaybe intended.47n theUpanisads,Brahmanis

regardeds " The

SupremeBeing, regarded s impersonal nd divested f

all quality nd action; according o Vedantins, rahman s boththe efficientand the material ause of the visible universe, he all-pervading oul and

spirit ftheuniverse, heessencefromwhich ll created hings re producedand intowhich hey re absorbed. 4S This idea of Brahman is still pre a«lent n our society. Mr. Dange's idea of the Brahman s so foreign o itthatthe ndian tradition,which s notnecessarily lind, will fail to recognise t

( i. e. hisBrahman as such.

As n hePurusa ukta f heRgvedaX.90 .« Keith, .B.op.oit.Vol. I, pp.445-446.Thereadermay eferothe ages445 to

454of his ook or hedevelopmentf the deaof Brahmanhroughifferenteli»gious exts.SeeV. S. Apte'sTheStudent's anskrit-Englishictionary.







RUNDU ! Was India in Primitive ommunism...? 79

We have tried to show above thatYajña does not signifyollective

modeof production. Let us now see how fardistribution f yajñaphala( theproceedsor reward fYajña ) representedommunity eeding o whichMr. Dange refers on pages 45-46 and 49 of hisbook.49 We have alreadyreferredo in theabove as to how theproceedsof a Yajña weredistributedbytheyajamãna the sacrificer and what s thereligious rescriptionboutthedistributionf suchproceeds.50 It will be seen clearly romthe abovediscussion hatthe distribution f proceeds of a Yajña did not representcommunityeeding. In fact, feel, n the Vedic literature here is no ideaof thecommunity eeding. In thisconnection, suppose, some will refer

n»e to the storyof the Sage Kavasa inthe AitateyaBrahmano1and saythatthis tory eferso the idea of the community eeding n India in the

earlyVedicdayswhere hesages performing Sattra a Soma sacrifice eldovera periodof 13 daysand more on the bankof theriver arasvatidrove

away the age Kavasa, whowas sitting mong them, allinghim a son ofamaid servant nd refused o dinewith him but lateron invited imamongstthem. This story, humbly ay, does notrefer to the community eedingofthose ageswith hesage Kavasa. All thatthestory ignifiess thatbeingmoved

bythe

extraordinary owersof Kavasa,

theyacceptedhim as the

guardianof the sacrifice heywere performing it signifies othingmore.So, I reiterateherethatcommunity eedingwas not in vogue in ancientIndia.

I think,Mr. Dange has introduced he idea of community eedingna Yajña only to strengthen is idea of the commune ife n India in the

earlyVedicdays, though such primitive ife had expiredfrom ndia longbefore hebeginning f the Vedic era whichmaybe taken o havebegun nIndia in or about 2500 B. C.52 Communityeedings a featureof the pri-

mitive ife, tmay be a feature of the early commune ife but not of theVedic era. This relation betweenthe primitiveife and the communityfeeding as beennicelydepictedby the late Prof.D. D. Kosambi when be

says" The basic feature fthe primitiven the stone age was a meagreand irregular upplyof food,which ould not be preserved or ong.Thismeansthat t had to be sharedon terms hat nvolvedno other

■I =

49 Therelevantortionsftheseages ave lreadyeenquoted n pp.68-69of thisarticle.50 Seepages 5-20 f his rticle.51 See A t rey Brahmano2ndPañciká,thAdhyãya,stpart Aponaptriyaükta.*2 Seeonthispoint hediscussionbouttheageof heRgvedanM.Winternitz,p.

çiUpp.290-310.







80 AnnalsBORI, LXVI ( 1985

obligation hanreciprocal hariog t somefuturedate. Those who

sharetherefore ormed group,aud specialization n the procure-ment ffood made them ntoa clan,oftenboundbya food totem.When the surplusfirst ncreasedthe group as a whole naturally" own" it,and theexchangewould bewith'some thergroupgathe«ringperhapssome other special food. This implies relationshipbetween thosemakingthe exchange whether f food or techni-ques ) whichmustnecessarily e a group relationship, ftergroupmarriage. It is also importanto notethatthemechanism f shar-:ingwas never calculated transaction. The love of display, the

potlatch orthe validation f some transactions, eremonialfeastswithout umber,nd primitive enerosityll playtheir art. Thereis no question fevery ne having qual title o all produce, s someexponents fprimitiveommunism hink" cf.NewAge [Monthly,Delhi, Feb. 1959,26-39 .58

The above willshowwhy nthevery ncientdays there was commu-nity eeding mongcertain roupsofpeople. It was a necessity f the situa-tion. Thatmight ave been theDharma54 of those people in those days.

But this was not surely the Dharma of the Vedic people who had a farbetteriving nrelation o theprimitive eople. The Dharma of the Vedicpeople consisted n the worshipof the variousgods, whoweremainly per-sonificationsof some natural phenomena, throughthe medium of theYajñas. The Yajña upheldthesocietynotbyprovidingfor mmediate oodforthesacrificers,utby generatinghebelief n men thatthesewouldbring"in material nd spiritual rosperityfterwards. In short, he Vediceconomywas not in a very udimentarytage, which consists fthegatheringf foodand its consumption,but in an advanced stage, in relation to such a

primitiveconomy,which onsisted f the two sectorsviz., agriculture ndindustry ith omedivision f labour.55 It was not surelyat the stage ofprimitiveommunisms Mr.Dange alleges.

It is interestingo note herethat he late Prof.D. D. Kosambi findsthat" The ostensiblemajorpurposeof sacrifice emained uccess n warfare

A farmořepowerful econdary purposeappeared,namely,re-pression fthe nner trugglef newclasses. The Vaišya settlerhusband-

S8 Kosambi, . D. An ntroductiono theStudy fIndianHistory1975, ombay,Popularrakasan,p.24-25.

54 Theword eing eriveds dhr+ manmeaninghatwhicholds rmaintains.56 For discussionn this oint,eemy rticle p. cit. in theVedãntaKesari July,

1978 rmy engalirticlea theVivek eepforAs'vin386B. §.







Kundu : Was India in Primitive ommunism..? 81

man) and theSudra ( helots are to be exploited or the* dvantage of the

rulingwarriorcaste, the Ksatriya with the brahminpriest's help. Thestrugglewith heVaisyawas earlier,reflectedn the Rigvedicstrife etweenthecollectiveMaruts and their hief, ndra; we are told that these Marutsare thepesantry Viš ); Indra eats themup as thekingthepesants. One ofmajorpurposesof thesacrificewas tomake the other hree astesobedient otheKsatriyarulers T. S. 2. 5. 10 ."B#

In thisconnectiont is well to remember hat theYajSa existed venbefore he newclasses developedwithin he tribe,viz. BrShmana,Ksatriya,

Vaišyaand áõdra. No doubt, any big Yajfía necessitated he engagementofcertainmenforvariouspurposes nd the payment o them. Ttmight ethat hesemenwere notpaid in proportion o the abourtheyput undertheserviceof the sacrificer.57 But I humblyfeel that a Yajfia did not re-

present nyexploitation r subjugation ftheVaišyasand theáüdras bytheK$atriyasncolaborationwith heBrahmins.

For, what about the daily Yajñas whicha householder, ollowing"the Gfhya Sutras,had to perform verydayn hisfamilywith heassistance

of his wife Can thesebe explainedafterProf.Kosambi? Moreover,themen whoworked or hesacrificer ereguided not only by thequestionofremunerationutalso bya religious nstinct hichwas farmore powerfulnthosedaysthan t is today. Hence, even if theywere not paid in propor^tionto their abour, theydid not take thisas an act ofexploitation n thepart of the sacrificer. For in those days and even to the presenttime,thoughn a lesserdegree men thoughttheir conditionto be due to thedecreeof their ateor as theresult f their wn activities nd not as due totheusurpation yanotherman oftheshareof their roduct ue them. This

feeling ervaded hroughhewholeofthe Vediceconomyand it maintainedtheequilibriumnd harmonyntheeconomy nspiteof thegreat degreeof

inequalityof income among the differentectorsof the economy. Thispropositionmaysound strangeto some, but t seems to meto be a correctstatementbout the Vedic economic structure.59 maybe allowedto go astepfurthero discussthispoint.

58 Kosambi,. D. op.cit.p. 100.81 This henomenons knownn theMarxianconomicss exploitationr technicallythe surpationfthe urplusalue. Readersnterestedn the onceptf he urplusvaluemay rofitablyonsult . M.Sweezy's,he Thor ofCapitalist evelopment,1942London, ennis obson td.Ch. V,

03 I have lready intedtthisdea n myarticlen theVedan a Kesari forAugust1978, .302.11 ( AnnalsBORI }








I liketo quote here one Moka from he AdhyãtmaRdmãyana, work

of notlongbefore he 16thCenturyA. D., as a representativefthe ndianoutlookwhich ays

sukhasya duhkhasyana ko" i dãtã paro dadãtlti kubuddhir sã ¡áham karomlti vrthãbhimãnahvakarmasütrairraíhitohi lokafi//

( English translation Pleasure and Pain are caused by no outsider, t is

wrong o think nthisway. It is a vainglory o think hat t is due tome.Everybody s bound bytheconsequences f hisactivity.

It clearly howsthat n this country not in the ancient timesalonebut» also, in a limited egree,evento-daý a man refers o hisfateor hisown activities s an explanation o hiscondition,whethergood or bad, andnone else.

It is because of this special or unique view-point hat obtains inIndia, itseems to me that it is notvery ogicalto try o explain the courseofancient ndianhistory y meansof the Marxian doctrine fclass struggle,i. e. antagnoismbetween differentlasses of a societyon account of the

economicdifferencesetween hem nd itscause -the exploitationf one classbyanotherand to apply these concepts in the explanationof its ancientsocial structure.

The Vedic society s wellas the economy through he institution fYajña and through he directive f the Rgveda X. 117.5 and 6) and theobservances ftheprinciple f Rtarawas gearedto theprinciple f service oOthers69nd theprofiteeringfa particular lass was not regardedat thattime n India, as theusurpation f " SurplusValue " bythat class, at least

thepoorclass believing overtyo be a decreeof fate bhägyamülamor as aresult fits ownactivities karmaphala did not think hat twas exploited.

Further,men in India at thattimewerenot so consciousas to thinkin terms f exploitation. To look upon a particularphenomenonfromparticular oint of view requires particularocial thinking roughtn bya

*s For nelaborationf this dea, seemyrticlenth VednntaK sari forAugus

1978,he art ntitled TheDirectiverinciplef theVedic ociety occurringnpp.303-304 rmyBengalirticlentheVivek eepfor aisakh 387 .S.ReferencesoRtam refoundntheRgveda,X. 85.1 X. 110.1,V. 23.9,X-136.Itrepresentshe ruthnd he osmicndmoralaw and includesustice ndgood-ness nd satmostynonymousith harmasan ethicaloncept.







Kundu : Was India inPrimitive ommunism...? 83

particular ype f social development.60As the consciousnessof being ex-

ploiteddid notdevelop n India at that ime of course,to saythis s nottosaythattherewas no exploitation n India, in the Marxian sense, at thattime , thefeeling etweendifferentastes or classesdid notgrow bitter ndso the social relationshipmoved n a wayother hantheMarxian.61

It is a uniquefeature f India that relianceon thedecreeof fate ndon theconsequenceof one's own actions ingeredongeven nthepost-Vedicdayswhentheconditions f productionwere slightlydifferentromthosethatprevailed n the Vedic period. It is not an exaggeration o say that

thisreliancehas its influence n the societyeven in thepresent imewhenwe have travelled very ong wayfrom the Vedicperiod. Hence, it seemsthatsocial ideas have their oots at theverydeep layers of thesociety ndthesedo notrespond ufficientlyo thechanges n theconditionsof produc-tion. Accordingly, humbly eelthatthecondition f theVedic India doesnot corroborate heMarxian idea that the conditions of productionexertvery owerfulnfluencespon social thought.

The entireendeavour of Mr. Dange is to fit he Indianfacts n the

Marxianmould. In the preface o thefirstditionofhis book he wrote" This book closely follows the above mentioned workof Engels ( TheOrigin f theFamily,PrivatePropertynd the State , in dealing with thesamesubject n Indian History.''62 I have tried to show above that theMarxian deas do notexplainsomeof thefacts f theancient ndiansocietyas wellas theancient ndianhistory. It seems to me that n his attempt o

explainthefacts ofancient ndia,Mr. Dange has, because of hisblindobedi-enceto the Marxian doctrines,given us a distorted iewofthehistory fAncient ndia without akingnoteof the ndiantradition.A theoryfhistory

that neglectsthe traditionof a country an hardly be said to representits history,or to neglect he tradition s to neglect he peoplewithwhomhistorys concerned.

eo cf.onthis oint . Marx " Themode fproductionf materialife onditionshegeneralrocess fsocial, oliticalndintellectualife, It snot the onsciousnessof men thatdeterminesheirxistence,ut theirocial xistencehat eterminestheironsciousness.In hisprefaceoA contributionothe ritique fPoliticalEconomy,970,Moscow, rogressublishers.

6Mr.Dangehastried o give

omedeaof he lasstruggle

n ancientndiaon pp.XIX- XX of hisPrefaceo thethird dition f his bookunder iscussion. or a

very ood onceptf class trugglen a capitalistociety,he eadersreferredoK.MarxndF. Engels, he ommunist anifesto;eprintedytheModern ibraryU. S. A.

M Dange, p.cit.p.XXVII.

Was India in Primitive Communism in the Early Vedic Period

Documents

Transcript of Was India in Primitive Communism in the Early Vedic Period