Re: [INDOLOGY] Brāhmaṇa and Savarṇa

[palaniappa at aol.com]

Thank you for the information. This is interesting. Given that Savarṇas are most often seen as physicians, I would have expected savarṇa-vṛtti to be glossed as a grant for the livelihood of a physician instead of a scribe. Is the posted interpretation given by Sircar or T. N. Subramanian? Is there any reference to an inscription or SITI reference?


Regards,
Palaniappan



-----Original Message-----
From: Dmitriy <july2307 at yandex.ru>
To: indology <indology at list.indology.info>
Sent: Thu, Jul 17, 2014 2:09 am
Subject: Re: [INDOLOGY] Brāhmaṇa and Savarṇa


 
Possibly, it is a question of a rather late inscriptions.
In any case, I didn't find "savarNa" mentions in my base (and don't remember such definitions) in texts of inscriptions till the V-VIII centuries.
Interestingly, that D. Ch. Sircar in his Epigraphical Glossary mentions savarNa only once (savarNa-vRtti = profession of writing the document).
And just refers to a South Indian Temple Inscriptions by T.N. Subramanian
 
Dmitriy N. Lielukhine
Oriental Institute
Moscow
http://indepigr.narod.ru/index_1.htm
 
17.07.2014, 10:13, "palaniappa at aol.com" <palaniappa at aol.com>:




In an inscription of ca. 1009, Brahmin villages, Vaikhānasa villages, and Savarṇa villages are mentioned separately. (E. Hultzsch, the editor of the inscription corrects the reading of 'Cavaṇṇar' as 'camaṇar' and interprets them as Jains. This correction was not necessary.) There are other inscriptions where individuals mentioned as Savarṇa are listed with their Brahminical gotras and at least in one inscription a Savarṇa is described as belonging to Bhāradvāja gotra and Bodhāyana sūtra. One inscription mentions 32 Savarṇas being given 32 house sites as an agrahara. These Savarṇas seemed to have functioned as physicians. It is clear that they were Brahmins but are classified as separate from 'Brāhmaṇa'. K. V. Subrahmanya Aiyer mentions (without citing the specific reference) Yādavaprakāśa as explaining in his work Vaijayanti that Savarṇa was an offspring of a Brahmin father and a Kṣatriya mother. To me this explanation seems to be suspect. It looks like a section of Brahmins was willing to engage in professions such as being musicians, physicians, etc., notwithstanding any objections from the orthodox Vedic Brahmins who  seemed to have reserved for themselves the designation 'Brāhmaṇa' (without any modifier), at least in the beginning.  Inscriptions also differentiate Brāḥmaṇa from Śiva-Brāhṃaṇa. (The Tamil epic Cilappatikāram mentions the music-loving Brahmins as having their own quarters separate from Vedic Brahmins.)  This is similar to the adoption of the Tamil classical dance form by the Brahmins in the 20th century. In spite of the earlier objections from orthodox Brahmins, that dance form has become very popular among all Tamil Brahmins nowadays. Tamil Brahmins serving as physicians also seem to have gained acceptance from the orthodox over time. I would like to know if 'Savarṇa' as a Brahmin was known to texts/inscriptions outside the Tamil region. 

 
Thanks in advance.

 
Regards,
Palaniappan



,
_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
http://listinfo.indology.info


_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
http://listinfo.indology.info

 



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://list.indology.info/pipermail/indology/attachments/20140717/af66e46a/attachment.htm>