|
The Indian Analyst
|
|
South Indian Inscriptions |
THE KALACHURI -CHEDI ERA Inhabitants of Mahārāshtra, Vidarbha, Aśmaka, Kuntala and others1. In a third passage the Mārkaņdeyapuraņa groups the Ãbhīras with the people of Bhrigu- kachchha, Kōńkana, Māhārāshtra, Karnāta, the country on the banks of the Vēņi(Wainga- ńgā), Nasikya and others,2 These passages seem to point to the modern district of Khandesh as their stronghold in the south. Even now the Ãbhīras or Ahīrs predominate in that district of the Bombay State. From ancient times the Ãbhīras have followed the profession of cowherds. Their settlement was called ghosha.3 The Harivamśa describes how Krishna the incarnation of Vishnu, was brought up, since his birth, in a ghōsha or settlement of cowherds.4 From certain similarities between the early lives of Krishņa and Christ, such as the worship of the boy-god his reputed father’s knowledge that he was not his son abd the messacre of innocents, Dr. R.G. Bhandarkar inferred that the Ãbhīras must have brought these stories with them when they migrated to India in the first century of the Christian era.5 This theory has since been shown t be untenable. The Harivamśa nowhere states that the cowherds among whom Krishņa was brought up belonged to the Ãbhira race. The main incident of Krishņa’s early life,viz., his killing of Kamsa,was Well-known long before the time of Patañjali( circa 150 B.C.); for, we learn from the Mahābhāshya that it was dramatised and represented on the stage.6 Moreover, Patañjali specifically mentions the Ãbhīras. While discussing the nature of the compound Südr- Ãbhīram, he mentions the à bhīras. While discussing the nature of the compound ultimately states his siddhānta that it is an altogether different caste7. The discussion makes it plain that if the Ãbhīras were foreigners, they must have migrated to India long Before the second century B.C., in which we find them not only admitted to the Hindu fold but given a definite place in the caste system.
The status of the Ãbhiras seems to have undergone changes in the course of ages. We have seen that in the time of Patańjali they were generally asscociated with the Südras from an Ambashtha woman belongs to the Ãbhīra Caste 8 Another smriti, cited by Kaiyata, states that the woman should be of the Ugra caste.9 These are, of course, theories of Brahmanical writers. In practical life the Abhiras generally resembled the Südras. The kāsikā, a well-known commentary of Pānini’s Ashtādhyāyī, says that the Ãbhīras were Mahāsudras i.e., superior Sündras10 and this view is adopted in the Amarakōśa. As
1MP., ad.57, vv.35 and 47; VP., ad. 45, vv.115 and 126 MAP SHOWING IN THE PLACES MENTIONED IN THE EARLY INSCRIPTIONS
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
