TENSING RODRIGUES
The manuscript of Shennvi Jati Dharmanirnnay was found at a local Sanskrit school in Rajapur and published by P. N. Patvardhan in the 1913 annual report of Bharatiya Samshodhaka Mandala at Pune. The manuscript mentions the names of two scribes: Gopal Gurjar and Vinayak (who made a copy in 1895, after a previous copy of the text was donated to the Sanskrit school in 1812); the available text is thus only a copy and not the original.
This text is a good example of how in pre-colonial coastal Maharashtra dharmashastras were deployed in conjunction with “historical accounts” to construct a narrative of identity and hierarchy about the Sarasvats and the Karhades; the narrative claims to summarise a verdict issued by a council at Shivaji’s court led by Gagabhatt of Banaras, the celebrated priest, who officiated at Shivaji’s coronation ceremony. The verdict concerns the dharma (duties/faculties) of the shennvijati– jati is used here in the sense of ‘an endogamous community’; shennvi refers to the sarasvat.
The narrative begins with a letter addressed by a group of bramhans from various places in Ratnagiri to a community of karhade bramhans. At the very outset, these bramhans from Ratnagiri pay a tribute to the karhade Brahmans; this tribute describes them as ideal in conduct and great scholars of various Shashtras (such as Mimamsa, Samkhya, Vedanta, and various Smritis). They are also said to be experts in the Dharma shashtras and the very embodiment of the conduct prescribed therein. The authors announce that they write this letter to the Karhades in response to a query from the latter. In the krodhisarmvatsara (the 38th year of the 60-year Bhaspati cycle) some Karhade Brahmans had asked the authors questions regarding the dharma and achara (conduct) of a group of people from Rajapur town. We do not know if there was genuinely a query or whether it was fake. It is obvious that ‘Dharmanirnnay’ is the Karhade response to Sahyadrikhand, using the verdict given by Shivaji’s court led by Gagabhatt. Here we need to remember that it was this same group which had humiliated Shivaji and withheld his legitimate right to ascend to the throne on the ground that he was a ‘shudra’, not a ‘ksatriya’.
Rajapur was a well-known port in North Konkan for the export of goods from the Desh region to other countries. In the early 17th century, it was under the control of the Dutch, the French, and the British who had established various ‘factories’ there. Although the Karhades were aware that the shennvis had migrated to Rajapur “due to a calamity that had occurred in a certain place and time” (deakalaviplavena), they pretended to be keen to know the precise nature of the dharma and acara of shennvis, a relatively obscure community in that part of Konkan. The authors assure the karhade bramhans that their response to the query is written with due consideration of the traditional (purvaparamparagata) acara of the shennvis and therefore may serve as a guide on how to treat the shennvis residing among the karhade bramhans. The authors’ response begins by narrating an incident at
Shivaji’s court.
Following the lyrical praasti, the authors begin an account of a remarkable episode in Shivaji’s court: when Shivaji was ruling the kingdom, a group of people from the Sahyadri region came to visit him. These people are said to have been dressed like bramhans, better known as shennvi. As the king was unaware of their community, he asked his well-versed courtly scholars questions regarding their dharma and conduct. The assembly of these scholars comprised prominent dharmadhikarins and upadhyayas who were experts in the Veda and the Dharmashastras, followers of the path laid down in the Smritis, and capable of seeing the truth. Thus – apart from Gagabhatta – those who were present included: Raghunath Dikshit, Kavindra Paramananda, Mahadev Pandit, Prabhakar Upadhyaya, Sriranga Shastri, Narsimha Shastri, and several others. Some of these pandits are said to be from the banks of the Krishna and the Godavari rivers, while others are termed natives of the Maratha country.
As noted earlier, while others described the sarasvats as shennvis, among themselves, the shennvis were the elite ‘sarasvats’ who pursued professions such as teaching, writing, and accounting. Sarasvats such as Varde Valavalikar argued that shennvi was an honorific title.
The authors introduce the court members who delivered the verdict. Paramananda was Shivaji’s court-poet who wrote the famed biography of the king titled ‘Sivabharata’. Also included were a dharmadhikarin named Gurjara (most likely the ancestor of Gopala Gurjara, the scribe of the manuscript) and Panduranga Upadhyaya; both are “of noble origins, truthful, expert in the Vedas and Vedangas, and pleased the gods with their speech.” Other members of the council are enumerated as follows: learned men from Rajapur named Raghunatha Upadhyaya, Keava Upadhaya, Vishvanath Upadhyaya, Vitthala Upadhyaya, and a reputed upadhyaya and dharmadhikarin named Ananta Galavallikar from the Sangameshvar Town of Ratnagiri. In order to answer the king’s questions regarding the shennvis, all those present consulted the Dharmasashtra, scriptures such as the Smrtis of Manu and Yajnavalkya along with their commentaries, multifarious Upasmrtis by 18 commentators, the 18 great Puranas. Upon knowing the gist of all these texts, the learned council reached a decision regarding the dharma of the shennvis and reported it to the king. Having narrated this incident, the authors from Ratnagiri describe the pandits’ decision to the Karhada Brahmans from this point onward. Thus, there are two layers in the narrative. The outer layer is the letter by the authors from Ratnagiri to the Karhada Brahmans. Within this outer layer unfolds the inner layer of the elaborate verdict given.
As several traders from Gujarat migrated to Rajapur in the 14th century, their priests mixed with the native priests of the same gotra and thus new Bramhan families came into existence. The Gurjara family, whose family name clearly indicates their connection with Gujarat, was a prominent Karhade family in Rajapur. The erudite men from this family had obtained the title Padhye (short for Upadhyaya or erudite scholar).
The texts consulted by the court-pandits were as follows – commentaries of Hemadri, Madhava, and Vijneshvara on Yajnavalkya; the Ratnavali, the Madanapariata, the Candrika, the Krtyakalpataru, the Smrtikaustubha; Smrtis by Brhaspati, Gautama, Yama, Angira, Pracetas, Paramara, Sankha, and Atri, besides the Manusmrti; the Dharmasutras of Apastamba and Baudhayana; the 18 Upasmritis including the works of Jabali, Nachiketa, Skanda, Laugakika, Asita, Vyasa, Sanatkumara, and Gobhila.
