365bet娱乐

356
from capital punishment existed in ancient times.' The
Arthasastra of Kautilya, though written by a Br膩hma峁嘺,
is said to be distinguished throughout by want of undue
partiality for the Br膩hma峁嘺s. Dr. Ray begins his thesis
3 stating that the Br膩hma峁嘺s enjoyed no prominence
nor any special privileges. Towards the close of his article,
however, he is rightly required to admit that the position of
the Br膩hma峁嘺s as a class "was a somewhat privileged
one" It was a sign of the times that the Arthas盲stra,
though professedly a book on politics and proclaiming
impartial treatment to all alike, could not but promulgate
special rules in the case of the Br膩hma峁嘺s on account of
their status. Even many of the J膩takas testify to the
high position and great esteem enjoyed by the Br膩hma峁嘺s.
In the days of our poet, the Br膩hma峁嘺s were proficient in
all the Vedas and Ved膩ngas, the Dharma艣膩stra,
Arthasastra, Yoga艣膩stra, Ny膩ya艣膩stra, 艢r膩ddhakalpa,
etc. Though all these sastras appear to us as too
voluminous for studies in these days, they were included
in the normal course of a learned Br膩hma峁嘺. They
conveyed no speciality or anything extraordinary in those
days. In spite of an all round spread of education in
traditional lore among the Br膩hma峁嘺s, the custodians of
Vedic learning, a thoroughly ignorant Br膩hma峁嘺 was
not a rarity. The jester in the Avim盲raka remarks on
the contrary that it was
difficult to come across
Br膩hma峁嘺 knowing both-the word (i. e., the Vedas) and
its meaning. Evidently the jester's word is not to be
taken at its face value and the reasonable inference seems
to be that, as ever, there were black sheep in every fold.
in those days also. Moreover, the jester's observation
shows that as now there were at the time of our poet,
many so-called priests who simply memorized the mantras
without caring to know their meaning.
KSATRIYAS.
a
Though not idealized as in the J膩takas, we find that
the Ksatriyas also occupied a very high position, next only
1 Pol. Hist. Anc. Ind., 1st Ed., p. 192. The evidence, however, does not
warrant the conclusion. 2 OC, II, pp. 389-396 at p. 395. 3 Prat, p. 99
'啶�啷嵿ぐ啶距す啷嵿ぎ啶｀じ啶�啷佮う啶距�氞ぞ啶班ぎ啶ㄠ�佮し啷嵿�犩ぞ啶膏�嵿く啶距ぎ啶� 啷� 啶膏ぞ啶權�嵿�椸�嬥お啶距�權�嵿�� 啶掂�囙う啶�啶о��啶�啷�, 啶�啶距え啶掂��啶�啶� 啶оぐ啷嵿ぎ啶多ぞ啶膏�嵿い啷嵿ぐ啶�, 啶�啶距す啷囙ざ啷嵿さ啶班�� 啶�啷嬥�椸ざ啶距じ啷嵿い啷嵿ぐ,
啶�啶距ぐ啷嵿す啶膏�嵿お啶む�嵿く啶�啶班�嵿ぅ啶多ぞ啶膏�嵿い啷嵿ぐ啶�, 啶�啷囙ぇ啶距い啶苦ぅ啷囙く啶�啶多ぞ啶膏�嵿い啷嵿ぐ啶�, 啶�啷嵿ぐ啶距�氞�囙い啶膏�� 啶多�嵿ぐ啶距う啷嵿ぇ啶曕げ啷嵿お啶� 啶� 啷�
[br膩hma峁嘺samud膩c膩ramanu峁ａ弓h膩sy膩mi | s膩峁単op膩峁単a vedamadh墨ye, m膩nav墨ya峁� dharma艣膩stra峁�, m膩he艣vara峁� yoga艣膩stra,
b膩rhaspatyamartha艣膩stra峁�, medh膩titheyaya艣膩stra峁�, pr膩cetasa峁� 艣r膩ddhakalpa峁� ca |
] 4 Avi, p. 16. 啶�啶灌�嵿ぎ啶｀�� 啶︵�佮げ啷嵿げ啶灌��
[bahma峁噊 dullaho
] rkari 啶呧い啷嵿ぅ啶� 啶� 啷�
[atthao a |
]