In the early stage of Brahmanism, the kings were not much perturbed by the pretensions of the priests, and very probably some of the Aryan rulers actively patronised them. In so far as Brahmanism aimed at checking the growing power of Indian rulers and peoples by keeping them out of the Aryan pale, it must have appealed to some of the orthodox Aryan monarchs. King Dasaratha of Kosala was one of the prominent rulers who had accepted the Brahmanical creed. So long as the Brahmans kept to their sphere of religion and sacrifice, their audacious claims did not cause disturbance to the smooth working Of the ancient royal houses, and Brahmans proved excellent ministers, advisers and diplomats.

But the ambition of the priests knew no limits. They wanted to dominate the whole of society, in­cluding the kings. Even before they began to inter­fere with the political power of the warrior class, troubles arose because the Brahmans disputed the right of the Kshatriyas to officiate as sacrificial priests. “The fight between Vasishta and Viswamitra, described in the Vedas and in the Ramayana as well as the Mahabharata, represents the struggle bet­ween the priest and the warrior with regard to the ‘tendency to restrict occupations to particular classes.

It was a revolt by the Kshatriyas against the rising dogma that the son of a Brahman alone could perform priestly duties. Why could not the son of a Kshatriya be a priest? That was in effect the point of contention between Vasishta and Viswarnitra.”

The difference, therefore, first arose in the religious sphere, in the realm of learning and spiritual authority. It became the subject of warm discussion in the learned assemblies. As public matters are discussed in the newspapers in our own day, so were the Brah­manical theories made the topic of heated contro­versy between Kshatriyas and the Brahmans in the literature of the period. The priests composed the numerous Brahmans to establish the validity of the Vedas and the sacrifices, the importance of the priest and the duty of all other classes to submit to the Brahman. The Kshatriyas opposed these doctrines by expounding some of the highest truths of philoso­phy that man has attained in any age or clime. They are embodied in the Upanishads.

“It will be observed that the second period was a period of the submission of the people under the Brahmans and the Kshatriyas, and of the submission of the Kshatriyas themselves under the Brahmans. At the close of the period, however, there appears to have been a reaction, and the proud Kshatriyas at last tried to shake off the galling yoke and to prove their equality with the Brahmans in learning and religious culture. Wearied with the unmeaning ritual and ceremonials prescribed by priests, the’ Kshatriyas started new speculations and bold enquiries after the truth . . and these speculations remained as a heritage of the nation and formed the nucleus of the Hindu philosophical systems and religious revolu­tions of a later day. . ‘• The bold speculations started by the Kshatriyas are known as the Upanishads.” Thus the rivalry started as a healthy reaction by earnest and thoughtful kings to the grotesque claims and pedantry and ceremonialism of the priests. The kings while conforming to the formalities dictated by their priestly advisers, began to dispute their value

*Pages 1243, Introduction to X01. I, Ristory of Civilisation in Ancient  India, by R.

  1. Dutt.

and truth and started those earnest soul-searching enquiries which have given us the wonderful Upani­shads. Just as the Brahmans depict the beginnings of the dark forces which in later centuries crushed the nation’s life, so the Upanishads represent the glorious dawn of the intellectual freedom and spiri­tual aspirations of India to which even the greatest of modern thinkers pay their willing homage. That great German philosopher and thinker, Schopenhouer says about the Upanishads: “From every sentence deep, original, and sublime thoughts arise, and the whole is pervaded by a high and holy and earnest spirit. Indian air surrounds us, and original thoughts of -kindred spirits. . In the whole world there is no study, except that of the originals, so beneficial 2nd so elevating as that of the Oupnekhat (Latin for Upanishads). It has been the solace of my life, it will be the solace of my death.”*

The Brahmans claimed supremacy for the Vedas and maintained that sacrifices to the Vedic deities were the only means to divine grace and happiness in the life after 6ath. The Upanishads speak, in glow­ing terms, or the Supreme Being, the All-Pervading Soul, the Universal Self from whom all the manifest­ed universe has come forth, in whom it exists and in whom it will merge in the end. All the gods are manifestations of the Great Purusha or Brahma who is immanent in gods and men, high and low, learned and ignorant, in the Sudra, the Kshatriya and the Vaishya, no less than in the Brahman., By true knowledge of the Self alone can man attain the state of perfect truth, wisdom and happiness. He attains the highest state who by meditating on his own self recognizes the Sunrerne God who is every­where. This is the essential teaching of the Upani­shads. It rises above the trammels of meaningless

*Page 302, Vol. IL, History of Civilisation in Ancient India. R. C.Dutt

ceremonies to comprehend the Supreme, the Truth of ;all truths, the Life of all lives. King Janaka of Videba was the father of the Upanishadic movement Learned men assembled in his court and held discus­sions, and the king rewarded them according to their scholarship. Brahmans, in those days, sat at the feet of Kshatriya kings to learn the highest wisdom which was known only to kings like Janaka. Owing to the exclusiveness of the Brahmans, the social position and sphere of influence of the two sections of the aristocracy became more and more defined and em­phasised the rivalry which started in the learned as­semblies. The Brahmanical rules involved consider­able curtailment of the political and social privilege of the Kshatriyas, in addition to the denial of the sovereign authority of the monarch. Even in the sphere of philosophy and religion, the Kshatriyas were not disposed to accept without reserve the authority of the priests; much less were they pre­pared to submit to any curtailment of their royal prerogatives and dignity. Moreover, the kings who were directly concerned with the problems of admin­istration, war and peace, and had to hold their sub­jects together as leaders and protectors, were natur­ally more liberal in their outlook and had a greater sense of justice and equality than the priests, whose governing passion was the exploitation of the religious feelings of the people and assertion of a sacrosanct status in society for themselves. The difference, therefore, went on widening and produced active opposition from the Kshatriyas when the Brahmans began to assert their influence in politics.

We have already seen how King Vena was killed by the Brahmans for violating the rule of Dandanithi and his son was placed on the throne after the exac­tion of a promise that he would not punish the Brahmans. The increasing power of the priestly class was becoming unbearable to the kings. The Brahmans were also consolidating their influence outside the Indo-Aryan society and had made settlements in the kingdoms of prominent Indian rulers, where also a similar process of subordinating the royal authority to that of the Brahman was being steadily pursued. The stories connected with the earliest Avataras (Incarnations) of Vishnu give us some clues as to what the Brahmans were accomp­lishing in those spheres. M. M. Kunte writes: “The Brahmans doubtless acquired a great power over the Kshatriyas by means of constantly promulgating sacrificial dicta, and audaciously advancing claims to an origin directly from the supreme Brahman the establishment and consolidation of their power as distinct from that of the Kshatriyas favored their pretensions and enlarged the sphere of their ambition. The process of organizing the aborigines and their leaders was developed. The son of Hiranyakasipu adopted the Aryan gods, the Aryan mode of life and Aryan thoughts and feelings. Prahlada was. often asked by his father not to be denationalized and not to sympathize with the alien Aryas, the hereditary foes of their race and creed. Some Brahmans perhaps had laid a plot for secretly dispatching the father of Prahlada who was to be Eelped in mounting the throne. The incarnation of Narasimba thus throws light on the politics of the Aryas, and especially of Brahmans during this period. The son brought under Aryan influences was encouraged to rebel against his father. The Aryas gave substantial aid to the son. The father was killed…. Prahlada was not treated justly. Promises made to him when he entered into a conspiracy with the Aryan intriguers against his father, were not kept. The aborigines’ mustered strong Aryan his grandson Bali who also had adopted the Aryan civilization. The Brahmans, assisted by .thousands of the Aryas, intrigued against the power of Bali, whom his subjects often attempted to induce to wage .war against the foreign settlers. The power of. Bali was great, his preparations, political and military, bade fare to make him the leading sovereign of ancient India. In the growth of his power the Aryas found a danger to their supremacy. At this time, the credulity of Bali was taken advantage of. A plot, the bearings of which cannot be realized, was laid. In the modern language of Europe, he was induced to sign a proto­col, but was suppressed and supplanted. The para­mountcy of the Aryas as led by the Brahmans was established. The Brahman wielded the real power. Prahlada came to see the bearings of this political system for he seriously advised Bali to con­sider before he made up his mind to grant the request of Vamana. . Bali ‘granted the request of Vamana and the Aryas under the leadership of the Brahman advisers triumphed. Bali was suppressed. Thus Hiranyalsha, Hirankasipu and Bali fell victims to the intrigues of Aryan politicians; not a drop of blood was shed, no war was waged. . . . But the Rajas did not like to be ruled by their Brahrnanicat advisers. They saw that the real power was with the intriguing Purohits, that they were mere tools in their hands. . .‘ . The crisis came. Jarnadagni, a Brahman of reputation, was at first insulted, and then killed, by an impulsive Kshatriya– youth. Hundreds of Kshatriyas sympathised with the youth. In many places the Purohits were insulted. Th6 political con­stitution of the Aryas was overthrown. Parasurama waged dreadful war against the Kshatriyas. The Brahmans triumphed.”* Before many years passed, a strong Kshatriya king, Sree Rama, came on the scene, defeated the Brahman warrior Parasurama and reestablished Kshatriya supremacy.

These ‘developments, religious as well as political,

*Pages 248-50, Vicissifudes of Aryan Civilization: in India, M M.

Kunte.