________________
ORIGIN OF BRAIIMIN GOTRAS
bccausc lc is actually the pricst of a decaying clan, and vii.18, which describes the victorics of Sudis over many hostilc kings, cnds with a description of the gifts to Vasiştha ; thcsc gifts would bc uncalled for if some of the victorics were not duc to a Vasistha's incantations. Thc first battlc (vii.18.5-8) is on the Paruşņi, but there is at Icast onc other in vii.18.19, on thc Yamunā. This virtually spans the whole of greater Punjab, if thc Yamunā is to be understood as the modern river of that name (though it has been suggested that thc name, indicating mcrcly thc "twin river", inight again denotc thc Paruşņi; but x. 75.5 which has thc only rgvcdic mcntion of the Ganga sccms clcar for our intcrprctation). Now wc havc noted that thc gcncral movement is to thc cast, specifically proved in this casc by Patañjali's remark that the adjective "castcrn" for Bharatas is superfluous, as there aren't any Bharatas cxccpt in the cast : bharala-visesanam prig grahanam anarthakam, na hy aprāfico bharat (commenting on Piņ.2.4.66 ; latcr commentators takc Auddalaki as an example of a Bharata). Whcncc Visvamitra's passage of thc Bcas and thc Sutlej must bc an carlicr cvent, and the priority of Viúvamitra is therefore not in doubt.
Thc inversion consists in that Visvāmitra is made the upstart by later Brahmanical tradition in direct contradiction to thc clcar historical development.
If Vasistha and Visvamitra were both Brahmins as the term is understood by latcr writers, and thc Aryan priesthood confined to thc Brahimin caste, the logical development would have been thic adoption of Vasiştha into the Vibvāmitra or Kusika gotra. The story of Sunahácpa (Ait.Brāh.vii. 13-18 ; the names of thc thrcc brothers arc a suspicious scature) docs show such adoption, cvcn of onc chosen as sacrificial victim (cf. v.2.7 ;i.24.12-13). Indeed this adoption with thc changed name of *Devarāta is made responsiblc for the double marriage restrictions upon the Devarāta gotra though contrary to the acccpted results of adoption in tribal socicty. Even to this day. Brahmanical marriage restrictions arc circumvented by adoption into somc other gotra, which also forfcits inheritancc rights. But Vasiştha is cmphatically called thc first Brahmin priest, whence Brahminism is forcign to the original Aryan system. It susficcd, thercforc, that Vasiştha be adopted into the tribe, i not necessarily into the gens of the original tribal pricst, Viśvāmitra. It follows that Viśvāmitra, though a pricst, is originally not a Brahmin ; this is . attested by his title of rjarşi, applicd also to scvcral other ksatriya priests, as' for example the five (supposed) authors of i.100, tlic threc of x.179.
Whilc references to Sudās and his victories are scattered throughout the Rgvcda (though with highest frcqucncy by Vasiştha), the name Tștsu_occurs nowhere outside the seventh book. There is a faint possibility that the who of thc Tịtsu group (including ancestors of Sudās) was adopted into, and not
*Sunahsepa, son of Ajigarta, is the traditional author of 1.2 -30; tho RV. knows a Bharata Devavāta in iii. 28.2-3. The intended victim must have been a Jamadagni (clip.23).
