Local Government in Ancient India c9.66.2

c9.66.2

But, leaving out of consideration these cases which are peculiar to the Brahmanical system of thought and code of life, we shall find that the crafts and castes, trades and professions, on which the Hindu law-books impose a social stigma, are practically identical with those mentioned in the Buddhist books. The Bhikkhu and the Brāhman will indeed appear to have needed the discipline of common regulations and restrictions as regards social intercourse to preserve and protect their respective purity and asceticism. Thus the interdiction of singing, dancing, acting, theatrical performances, and other public spectacles, which we find emphasized with such Puritanic rigour in some of the Buddhist books, is also similarly repeated in all the important Hindu legal works. Thus Manu condemns *kuśīlavas*, explained by Medhātithi as ‘bards, actors, jugglers, dancers, singers, and the like’, as being unworthy of invitation to a *śrāddha* (III. 155 and 158); the food given by a musician (IV. 210) and by an actor (IV. 214) is also not acceptable. Among the lowest classes mentioned are *jhallas*, *mallas*, i. e. ‘fencers with sticks or wrestlers and jesters’ and *naṭas*, i. e. stage-players (XII. 45). Similarly Vasiṣṭha condemns actors (III. 3); also Baudhāyana (I. 5, 10, 24), who adds to them stage-players, and teachers of dancing, singing, and acting, condemned as *upapātakins* (II. 1, 2, 13). Nārada condemns as incompetent witnesses gamesters, dancers, and jugglers (I. 178. 181. 184).