7629974005

60

texts¹ set forth t.his history without the slightest criticism or disapproval, but merely stating that the princes, who lived in exile, were afraid to corrupt their caste. Needless to add that no Aryan genealogy would boast of the incest of their ancestors, and it should be underlined that endogamous traditions were something morę actual than a legend in Buddha’s family as, both his father and himself, married their nearest cousins ². The question whether these genealogies are historical is however of no great importance in this case. Even if they are mere legends, the fact remains that they reflect a legał family $tanding diffe-rent from Brahmanic customs.

3) It is easy to realize that the doctrine concerning the con-ception of a new human individual is closely related to the or-ganisation of the family. According to the Aryan patriarchal ideology, the family is composed of men related by blood rela-tionship. The symbol of this kinship is the cult of common małe ancestors which is justified by a faith in the rebirth of father in his son. Vedic texts, speaking of this mystical doubling of father into offspring should be understood in its literał sense as a real identity of all małe members of the family and not merely as a poetical metaphor. This conception explains the Brahmanic definition of woman as a field which receives the seed of her husband. Man is the exclusive progenitor of descendants, whereas woman is only the place where the procreative act is performed. Sanscrit syntax reflects this idea, as it says NN is born from such and such a father (ablative) in such and such a mother (locative)³. A legał problem arises as to whether the principle that the crop belongs to the owner of the land, can be applied to offspring? The legał schools of ancient India differ. The institution of the leyirate (niyofja), which was also well known in India, is in favour of the thesis according to which the legał owner of the wife was also the legał father of the offspring she borę. These are however paradoxes of androcracy: the words of

1

Dlgha NikSya, I, p. 92 (Ambattha Sutta), Mahavastu, I, p. 351.

2

* Cf. E. J. Thomas, 1. c., p. 23.

3

^s Cf. Kathasaritsagara II, 31: tasyam tasmad dvijavardd eta jato ’smi śapatah.