• Military Menu                       

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Industry
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• WMD
• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

Revival of Brahmanism

The decline of Brahmanism, the ascendancy of early Buddhism, and the neglect of the Sanskrit language and cultivation of the Prakrits, date from abont the first century before Christ to about the middle of the fourth century AD, and a powerful Brahmanic revival came about the end of the fourth century AD. The Puranas began to be recast when the worship of Hindu deities rose in popular estimation about the time of Wema-Kadphises circa 250 A D, and the process continued through the Gupta period to a much later date.

An all-sided revival and renovation could proceed only under the patronage of Hindu princes. And such were the Guptas. The inscriptions recording gifts to Brahmanic deities and for the daily sacrifices begin about the end of the fourth century shows unmistakeably that the Brahmanic revival derived its force and vigor from the patronage of the Gupta princes. In Chandragupta's inscription at Mathura, and Skandagupta's Bihar and Bhihari inscriptions, Samndragupta is represented as having performed the As vamedha, which is pointedly spoken of as having gone out of use for a long time. This is the first instance of the Brahmanic revival under this dynasty. This achievement was considered so important that Samudragupta struck golden coins or medals, on the obverse of which is the figure of a horse let loose, and the title Asvamedhaparukrama, or "one who performed the achievement of a horse-sacrifice" on the reverse. Similar coins bearing on the reverse the legend Asvamedha-Mahendra have been found. Mahendra was a title assumed by Kumaragupta, as is evident from some of his coins on which his proper name as well as the title occur. It appears, therefore that he too performed the horse-sacrifice indicative of supreme sovereignty. Chaudragupta II., Kumaragupta, and Skandagupta are called Parama-BhAgavatas on their coins, which shows that they were worshippers of Rhagavad VAsudeva. One of the two Udayagiri inscriptions dated 82 G.E. = 400 AD is engraved on a panel over two figures, one of a four-armed god attended by two female figures, and the other of a twelve-armed goddess. The god may be Vishnu and the goddess Chandi.

Here there is ample evidence of a powerful upheaval ; and the sacrificial rites and the gods and goddesses adopted into the Brahmanic Pantheon to which there was almost no allusion in the epigraphical records of the country for more than five centuries, suddenly present themselves to view about the end of the fourth century ; and appear uninterruptedly for the whole of the subsequent period of about two centuries covered by inscriptions. The worship of Siva, Vishnu, the Sun, and Mahasena seems to have become popular with all classes from princes and chiefs to ordinary individuals.

But a still more significant change is the universal adoption of the Sanskrit language for the documents inscribed on stone and metal instead of the Pali or Prakrit. It indicates the enhancement of Brahmanic influence. The vernacular dialects had acquired such an importance that not only were they mostly used, as we have seen, in inscriptions, but a number of literary works presupposed by Hala's Saptasati and others like the Brihatkatha attributed to Gunndhya were composed in them in the second or third century of the Christian era. Buddhism had, of course, used one of them for all its religions and literary purposes. But now Sanskrit, the language of learned Brahmans, rose in general estimation and acquired such an overwhelming importance that the vernaculars were driven out of the field. It was more generally studied, and a new and more brilliant period in the history of Sanskrit literature dawued about this time.

The influence of this vigorous Brahmanical revival in the north extended itself to the Dekkan. Of the early Chalukyns whose dynasty was established about the end of the fifth century, Pulakesi I. solemnised the Asvamedha sacrifice and several other princes belonging to the family performed the other great sacriBces, and grants of land were made to Brahmans. A cave temple to Vishnu Whs dedicated by Mangalisa in Saka 500 or 578 AD, at Badanri. And other temples to the same god and to Siva or Mahesvara were constructed in several other places. The worship of Siva in the terrific form of Kapalikesvara seems also to have come into existence.

While Brahmanism thus rose in importance and popular favour, the influence of Buddhism declined in a corresponding degree. It cannot be denied that Buddhism became subject to the same influences which were in operation in the case of Brahmanism, or rather appropriated those points in the rival system which increased its popularity about this time. The principles of faith in personal beings and devotion to them were incorporated into their creed; and Sanskrit was resorted to to confer dignity on their religious books and teachers. The use of this learned language shows, at the same time, that, like Brahmanism, Buddhism now assumed a more exclusive character and ceased to appeal to the people at large in their own language ; and the sphere of its influence became much narrower. Thus it appears that the revival and renovation of Brahmanism went on side by side with corresponding changes in Buddhism which impressed on it the form and character known by the name of Mahayana. The earlier form of Buddhism appealing only to the moral feelings of man had split up into a number of schools and exhausted itself; and its place was taken up by Brahmanism and Mahayanism. But the charm of the names Bnddha, Dharma, and Samgha.the three jewels, was lost; and Mahayanism was unable to regain what had been lost by primitive Buddhism. Compared with revived Brahmanism it was feeble ; and from the first it had to face the severe attacks of its renovated rival.

The vigorous Brahmanical revival must have been due, in a large measure, to the natural decay of early Buddhism. It was this Buddhism that had supplanted Brahmanism in popular favour, and for the four or five centuries that it enjoyed the ascendancy it had acquired, Brahmanism and the Sanskrit language and literature were neglected. The Brahmans themselves regarded their decline as due to the triumph of Buddhism. Subandhu in one of his puns in the Vasavadatta relates that the Bauddha doctrine had brought about the destruction of the system based on the words of the Veda. If so, the Brahmanic revival must be regarded as synchronous with the decline of early Buddhism and the rise of Mahayanism. According to all accounts it was Nagarjuna, the contemporary of Kanishka, that gave a distinct form to this Buddhism; though the movement may have begun a little earlier. As Kanishka reigned in the last quarter of the third century, the revival of Brahmanism must have already begun before that period.

The ascendancy of early Buddhism was not the only cause that had kept down Brahmanism. For about a century before Christ and three centuries and a half after, there was no powerful Brahmanic prince; and this is shown by the Gupta inscriptions already noticed, which state that the horse-sacrifice indicative of supreme sovereignty, had gone out of use for a long time, and also by the fact that no inscription or coin reports the existence of such a prince during the period. This circumstauce must have been the result of the political condition of the country. It was overrun again and again by foreign invaders, each of whom established his power for a short time and had to yield to another. The princes of Malwa and Kathiawad only retained their sovereignty for about three hundred years. These princes held a comparatively small portion of the country, and could not have influenced its literary and religious condition for the worse has no weight. The unsettled condition of the country consequent on their frequent invasions rendered the rise of a supreme Brahmanic ruler impossible; and the foreigners themselves could not be expected to favour Brahmanism in a manner to enable it to deprive Buddhism of its ascendancy. Some of them were no doubt Hinduized, but they were not Brahmanized. And the Brahmans themselves complained of their being neglected by these foreign Yavana, Saka and Pahlava rulers.