Linga Banajiga.

This explanation will throw some light on the scheme of classification adopted in the Bombay Gazetteer (see volumes Bijapur and Dharwar) where the smaller groups are shown as—

These divisions, of which the full significance is not clearly conveyed by the titles, may perhaps be expanded with advantage by the addition to each of the alternatives already explained, viz., Panchamsālis, non-Panchamsālis with ashtavarna rites, and others, including the unclean castes attached to the Lingāyat community by reason of performing its menial services, e.g., Dhors, Chalvādis, etc. It is the modern practice to deny to these low castes the right to style themselves Lingāyats at all. It must be further explained that there are seven divisions of Panchamsālis, and that these stand to each other in the relation of hypergamous groups, that is to say, members of the higher orders may wed the daughters of those beneath them, which suggests the probable former existence of free intermarriage. Members of the lower orders among these Panchamsālis may rise to the higher by performing certain religious ceremonies, constituting a form of initiation. In the second and third divisions, i.e., non-Panchamsālis and “others,” the sub-castes are functional groups and are endogamous, i.e., intermarriage is prohibited. It seems probable that the members of these divisions became converts to Lingāyatism some time after the initiation of the reforms, to which it gave birth, when the crusade against caste distinctions had lost much of its pristine vigour, and ceased to be a living part of the fundamental doctrine of the sect.

At the present day, marriage is both infant and adult, and the parties to the contract have practically no choice. Widows are indeed allowed to remarry, but such marriages are regarded with disfavour by the stricter members of the sect. A Pariah or a Māla cannot be invested with the lingam, and, if he pretends to be a Lingāyat, the Jangam does not acknowledge him. The strict rules regarding meat and drink are maintained, and Lingāyats are still free from many of the ceremonies and religious performances required of other Hindus. But the tendency of to-day is to follow the lead of the Brāhman; and, while no Lingāyat will admit the superiority of that caste, they practically acknowledge it by imitating many Brāhmanical practices. Much of the good effected by the founder has thus been counteracted, and the Lingāyat is gradually becoming more and more like his orthodox Hindu brother. In proof of this tendency it may be noted that, at the time of the census of 1891, there were numerous representations from Lingāyats claiming the right to be described as Vīrasaiva Brāhmans. Further, on the occasion of the census of 1901, a complete scheme was supplied to the census authorities professing to show all Lingāyat sub-divisions in four groups, viz., Brāhman, Kshatriya, Vaishya and Sūdra. It is noted, in the Mysore Census Report, 1891, that the Lingāyats interviewed the Maharāja, and begged that their registration as Vīrasaiva Brāhmans might be directed. “The crisis was removed by His Highness the Maharāja’s Government passing orders to the effect that the Lingāyats should not be classed as Sādras any more than any other non-Brāhmans, but should be separately designated by their own name, and that, while they were at liberty to call themselves Vīrasaiva Brāhmans, they should specify the name of the particular and well-known sub-division to which each censused unit belonged. It is noteworthy that, as soon as the clamour of the Lingāyats was set at rest, some of their leaders seem to have become ashamed of their own previous vehemence, while the movement seemed to have lost the spring imparted by sincerity. Their feelings were brought to the test when the question of permitting the wonted periodical procession of their religious flagstaff, the nandī-dhvaja, came on for consideration by the Police department. The Lingāyats’ application for a license was opposed by the other castes on the ground that, since they had become Brāhmans, and had ceased to belong to the right-hand faction, they had no right to parade the nandī-dhvaja. The Lingāyats then showed themselves glad to regain their status quo ante.”

Linga Banajiga.

In connection with the name Vīrasaiva, it may be noted en passant that the first session of the Shreemat Veerashaiva Mahasabha[39] was held at Dharwar in the Bombay Presidency in 1904. Thereat various suggestions were made concerning religious instruction, education, marriage, the settlement of disputes by arbitration, and other matters affecting the material welfare of the Lingāyat community as a whole.

It is worthy of note that, according to some writers, Basava is supposed to have come within the influence of the Syrian Christians. The idea was started by Mr. C. P. Brown, whose essay on the Jangams[40] is the classic on this subject. Mr. A. C. Burnell quotes the remarkable fact from Cosmos that, in the sixth century, there was a Persian Bishop at Kalliāna near Udupi. And it is presumed by Surgeon-Major W. R. Cornish, the writer of the Madras Census Report, 1871, that Kalliāna is identical with Kalyān, where Basava was prime minister six centuries later. This is clearly wrong, for Udupi is on the west coast 30 miles north of Mangalore, whereas Kalyān, the Chalukyan capital, is in the heart of the Deccan, 350 miles away over the western ghauts. There was another Calyaun or Kaliāna close to Udupi on the coast, as shown by some of the older maps. But it is well known that Western India was at this time tenanted by large settlements of Persians or Manichæans, and recent discoveries tend to show that these people were Christians. It seems, therefore, to be quite possible that the discussions, which preceded Basava’s revolt, were tinged with some Christian colouring, derived from the followers of the Syrian school. Mr. Burnell even thinks that all the modern philosophical schools of India owe much to the same source.