4. Identification of 艢腻办补诲惫墨辫补

The Sun-Worshipping Sakadvipiya Brahmanas

by Martina Palladino | 2017 | 62,832 words

This page relates 鈥業dentification of Shakadvipa鈥� of study dealing with the Sun-Worshipping Sakadvipiya Brahmanas (i.e., the Shakdwipiya Brahmin) by researching their history, and customs from ancient times to the present. The Sakadvipiya Brahmanas have been extensively studied since the 19th century, particularly for their origins and unique religious practices.

Go directly to: Footnotes.

4. Identification of 艢腻办补诲惫墨辫补

< Previous

Next >

艢腻办补诲惫墨辫补 is one of the seven 诲惫墨辫补 or islands, and it is generally conceived as the sixth in the Pur膩峁噄c and epic lists.^[1] The island is surrounded by the Milk Ocean. Many scholars have dealt with the real geographical position of 艢腻办补诲惫墨辫补.^[2] ^[3] On many occasions, it has been identified with the 鈥榣and of the 艢补办补蝉鈥�, i.e. Iran or the Central Asiatic lands between Iran and India, where these 艢补办补 tribes used to live. The 惭补丑腻产丑腻谤补迟补 affirms that all the names of the 诲惫墨辫补s, with the exception of 碍谤补耻帽肠补, come from the names of plants and trees. In fact, in the 叠丑墨峁补-parvan (11, 28), it is stated that in the centre of the continent, there is a huge teak (艣补办补) tree, a descendant of Kuru.^[4] 鈥楾he teak tree is indigenous to both peninsulas of India. Granted an early acquaintance with Indo-China, the tradition which connects the name 艢腻办补诲惫墨辫补 with the 艢腻办补 tree and with the east, is more credible than the later tradition which derives the name from that of a tribe in the north-west where there are no 艢腻办补 trees鈥� (CLARK 1919: 223).

The island is also described in these paragraphs as a land of 鈥�rivers full of sacred waters鈥� (CHERNIAK 2008: 91), with long-lived people who are honest and respect the social order (cf. ibid.).

In the same parvan (惭补丑腻产丑腻谤补迟补 VI. 6, 55), we also find mention of the term N膩ga诲惫墨辫补, where the Kumbakonan edition reads 艢腻办补诲惫墨辫补.^[5] This is very interesting with respect to the fact that snakes and especially the 苍腻驳补s are very important in the 艢腻办补d墨p墨ya cult (cf. paragraph 2.7).

Many scholars propose to identify 艢腻办补诲惫墨辫补 with Sakast膩na, identified in turn with the Drangiana (Zranka^[6]) satrapy of the Achaemenid Empire. This region or a part of it probably acquired the name *厂补办补蝉迟腻苍 due to a significant immigration of Saka (艢补办补) to this land. Medieval Islamic sources mention it as 厂颈臒颈蝉迟腻苍, known also to Isidore of Charax in the Greek variant 危伪蠂伪蟽蟿维谓畏.^[7] The first attestation of the term 厂补办补蝉迟补苍脓 was probably the inscription of 艩膩hpuhr I (241鈥�272 A.D.) at Naq拧-i Rustam.^[8]

We have already dealt with the names of social classes on this island (cf. paragraph 1.3). The Maga 叠谤腻丑尘补峁嘺蝉, flying on 骋补谤耻岣峚, reached India, according to the Pur膩峁噄c legend.

CARTER鈥檚 theory (1981: 85 ff.) about the migration of the Magas from 艢腻办补诲惫墨辫补 (identified with Iran or this 鈥樑毑拱觳� land鈥�) to India is curious and interesting. During the third century, Kird墨r, a strictly orthodox Zoroastrian high priest, carried out a religious reform, destroying idols, condemning heresies and attacking any other religious cult, like Manicheism, Judaism, Christianism, Brahmanism and Buddhism (cf. Kird墨r鈥檚 inscription at Naq拧-i Bust膩n, KNRM; cf. MACKENZIE 1989). In the same inscription, Kird墨r mentions Sakast膩na twice, at lines 14 and 23,^[9] as being the place where these events took place. CARTER believes that the Zoroastrian reform and the persecution of other cults could have caused the Magas to leave Sakast膩na and move to India, firstly to Mult膩n. Probably, the Magas had maintained their peculiar Mitra (Mithra)icsolar cult, and Kird墨r was punishing all the Magi that did not carry out correct Mazd膩worshipping practices. Due to the evidence of the Magas having settled in India before the third century (cf. Ptol. Geog. 123, 19), it is possible that a second wave of Magas, having fled Kird墨r鈥檚 reform, could have joined the previously-migrated Magas, who had been in India possibly since Achaemenid times.^[10]