Amarkośa

नामलिङ्गानुशासनम्

2. Dvitīyaṃ kāṇḍam

16. śūdravargaḥ

(Über Śūdras)

2. Vers 5 - 15: Handwerker

Beispiele zu: 2.16.5.28. Fleischer

Hrsg. von Alois Payer

mailto:payer@payer.de 

Zitierweise | cite as: Amarasiṃha <6./8. Jhdt. n. Chr.>: Nāmaliṅgānuśāsana (Amarakośa) / übersetzt von Alois Payer <1944 - >. -- 2. Dvitīyaṃ kāṇḍam. -- 16. śūdravargaḥ  (Über Śūdras). -- 2. Vers 5 - 15: Handwerker.  -- Beispiele zu: 2.16.5.28. Fleischer. -- Fassung vom 2017-11-23. --  URL: http://www.payer.de/amarakosa8/2.16.5.28.fleischer.htm                                                        

Erstmals hier publiziert:

Überarbeitungen:

©opyright: Creative Commons Lizenz (Namensnennung, keine kommerzielle Nutzung, share alike)

Dieser Text ist Teil der Abteilung Sanskrit von Tüpfli's Global Village Library

Falls Sie die diakritischen Zeichen nicht dargestellt bekommen, installieren Sie eine Schrift mit Diakritika wie z.B. Tahoma.

Die Devanāgarī-Zeichen sind in Unicode kodiert. Sie benötigen also eine Unicode-Devanāgarī-Schrift.

Kasai [قصائی], Kassāb [قصاب] [कस्साब] (Central Provinces)

"Kasai [قصائی] [कसाई], Kassāb [قصاب] [कस्साब].— 1. General notice of the caste. The caste of Muhammadan butchers, of whom about 4000 persons were returned from the Central Provinces and Berār [बेरार] in 1911. During the last decade the numbers of the caste have very greatly increased owing to the rise of the cattle-slaughtering industry. Two kinds of Kasais [कसाई] may be distinguished, the Gai Kasai [गाय कसाई] or cow-killers and the Bakar Kasai [बकर कसाई] or mutton butchers. The latter, however, are usually /Hindus and have been formed into a separate caste, being known as Khatīk [खटीक]. Like other Muhammadans who have adopted professions of a not too reputable nature, the Kasais [قصائی] have become a caste, partly because the ordinary Muhammadan declines to intermarry with them, and partly no doubt in imitation of the Hindu social system. The Kasais [قصائی] are one of the lowest of the Muhammadan castes, and will admit into their community even low-caste Hindu converts. They celebrate their weddings by the nikāh [نکاح] [निकाह]  form, but until recently many Hindu rites were added to it. The Kāzi [قاضي] is employed to conduct the marriage, but if his services are not available a member of the caste may officiate instead. Polygamy is permitted to the number of four wives. A man may divorce his wife simply for disobedience, but if a woman wishes to divorce her husband she must forego the Meher [مهر] or dowry promised at the time of the wedding. The Kasai [قصائی] women, perhaps owing to their meat diet, are noticeably strong and well nourished, and there is a saying to the effect that, ‘The butcher’s daughter will bear children when she is ten years old.’ The deities of the Kasais [قصائی] are a number of Muhammadan saints, who are known as Aulia [اولیاء] or Favourites of God. The caste bury the dead, and on the third day they read the Kalma [كلمة] over some parched grain and distribute this to the caste-fellows, who eat it in the name of the deceased man, invoking a blessing upon him. On the ninth day after the death they distribute food to Muhammadan Fakīrs [فقير] or beggars, and on the twentieth and fortieth days two more feasts are given to the caste and a third on the anniversary of the death. Owing to what is considered the degrading nature of his occupation, the social position of the Kasai [قصائی] is very low, and there is a saying— Na dekha ho bāgh, to dekh belai; Na dekha ho Thag, to dekh Kasai [قصائی], or, ‘ If you have not seen a tiger, look at a cat ; and if you have not seen a Thug, look at a butcher.’ Many Hindus have a superstition that leprosy is developed by the continual eating of beef. 2. The cattle-slaughtering industry. In recent years an extensive industry in the slaughter of cattle has sprung up all over the Province. Worn-out slaughter animals are now eagerly bought up and killed ; their hides are dried and exported, and the meat is cured and sent to Madras [மதராஸ்] and Burma [မြန်မာ], a substantial profit being obtained from its sale. The blood, horns and hoofs are other products which yield a return. The religious scruples of the Hindus have given way to the temptation of obtaining what is to them a substantial sum for a valueless animal, and, with the exception perhaps of Brāhmans [ब्राह्मण] and Banias [बनिया], all castes now dispose of their useless cattle to the butchers. At first this was done by stealth, and efforts were made to impose severe penalties on anybody guilty of the crime of being accessory to the death of the sacred kine, while it is said that the emissaries of the butchers were sent to the markets disguised as Brāhmans [ब्राह्मण] or religious mendicants, and pretended that they wished to buy cattle in order to preserve their lives as a meritorious act. But such attempts at restriction have generally proved fruitless, and the trade is now openly practised and acquiesced in by public opinion. In spite of many complaints of the shortage of plough cattle caused by the large numbers of animals slaughtered, the results of this traffic are probably almost wholly advantageous ; for the villages no longer contain a horde of worn-out and decrepit animals to deprive the valuable plough and milch cattle of a share of the too scanty pasturage. Kasais [قصائی] themselves are generally prosperous. 3. Muhammadan rite of zibah [ذَبِيْحَة‎] or halāl [حلال] . When killing an animal the butcher lays it on the ground with its feet to the west and head stretched towards the north and then cuts its throat saying : In the name of God ; God is great. This method of killing an animal is known as zibah [ذَبِيْحَة‎]. [...] 4. Animism. [...] 5. Animal-gods. The domestic animals. [...] In India Siva [शिव] rides upon the bulk Nandi [नन्दी], and when the Kunbis [कुणबी] were too weak from famine to plough the fields, he had Nandi [नन्दी] castrated and harnessed to the plough, thus teaching them to use oxen for ploughing; the image of Nandi [नन्दी] is always carved in stone in front of Siva [शिव], and there seems little reason to doubt that in his beneficent aspect of Mahādeo [महादेओ / महादेव] the god was originally the deified bull. Bulls were let loose in his honour and allowed to graze where they would, and formerly a good Hindu would not even sell a bull, though this rule has fallen into abeyance. The sacred cow, Kāmdhenu [कामधेनु], was the giver of all wealth in Hindu mythology, and Lakshmi [लक्ष्मी], the goddess of wealth, is considered to have been the deified cow. Hindus are purified from grave offences by drinking the five products of the sacred cow, milk, curds, butter, dung and urine ; and the floors of Hindu houses are daily plastered with cowdung to the same end. 6. Other animals. [...]   7. Animals worshipped in India. Finally, in India we have Hanumān [हनुमान], originally the deified ape, about whose identity there can be no doubt as he still retains his monkey’s tail in all sculpture. Bhairon [भैरव], the watchman of Mahādeo [महादेओ / महादेव]’s temples, rides on a black dog, and was perhaps originally the watch-dog, or in his more terrible character of the devourer of human beings, the wolf. Ganesh [गणेश] or Ganpati [गणपति] has the head of an elephant and rides on a rat and appears to have derived his divine attributes from both these animals, as will be explained elsewhere ; Kārtikeya [कार्त्तिकेय], the god of war, rides on a peacock, and as the peacock is sacred, he may originally have been that bird, perhaps because its plumes were a favourite war emblem. Among his epithets are Sarabhu, born in the thicket, Dwādasakara [द्वादशकर] and Dwādasāksha [द्वादशाक्ष], twelve-handed and twelve-eyed. He was fostered by the maidens who make the Pleiades, and his epithet of twelve-eyed may be taken from the eyes in the peacock’s feathers. But, like the Greek gods, the Hindu gods have now long become anthropomorphic, and only vestiges remain of their animal associations. Enough has been said to show that most of the pantheons are largely occupied by deified animals and birds. 8. The sacrificial meal.   [...] 9. Primitive basis of kinship.   [...] 10. The bond of food. [...] 11. The blood-feud. [...] 12. Taking food together and hospitality. [...] 13.The Roman sacra. [...] 14. The Hindu caste feasts. The intense importance thus attached to eating in common on ceremonial occasions has a very familiar ring to any one possessing some acquaintance with the Indian caste-system. The resemblance of the gotra [गोत्र] or clan and the subcaste to the Greek phratry [φρατρία] and phule [φυλή] and the Roman gens and curia or tribe has been pointed out by M. Emile Senart in Les Castes dans I'lnde. The origin of the subcaste or group, whose members eat together and intermarry, cannot be discussed here. But it seems probable that the real bond which unites it is the capacity of its members to join in the ceremonial feasts at marriages, funerals, and the readmission of members temporarily excluded, which are of a type closely resembling and seemingly derived from the sacrificial meal. Before a wedding the ancestors of the family are formally invited, and when the wedding-cakes are made they are offered to the ancestors and then partaken of by all relatives of the family as in the Roman sacra. In this case grain would take the place of flesh as the sacrificial food among ipeople who no longer eat the flesh of animals. Thus Sir I. G. Frazer states : “ At the close of the rice harvest in the East Indian island of Buro each clan (fenna) meets at a common sacramental meal, to which every member of the clan is bound to contribute a little of the new rice. This meal is called ‘ eating the soul of the rice,’ a name which clearly indicates the sacramental character of the repast. Some of the rice is also set apart and offered to the spirits.” 2 2 Golden Bough, ii., p. 321. Grain cooked with water is sacred food among the Hindus. The bride and bridegroom worship Gauri [गौरी], perhaps a corn-goddess, and her son Ganesh [गणेश], the god of prosperity and full granaries. It has been suggested that yellow is the propitious Hindu colour for weddings, because it is the colour of the corn. At the wedding feast all the guests sit knee to knee touching each other as a sign of their brotherhood. Sometimes the bride eats with the men in token of her inclusion in the brotherhood. In most castes the feast cannot begin until all the guests have come, and every member of the subcaste who is not under the ban of exclusion must be invited. If any considerable number of the guests wilfully abstain from attending it is an insult to the host and an implication that his own position is doubtful. Other points of resemblance between the caste feast and the sacrificial meal will be discussed elsewhere. 15. Sacrifice of the camel. [...]   In Bhopāl [भोपाल] it is stated that a camel is still sacrificed annually in perpetuation of the ancient rite. Hindus who keep camels revere them like other domestic animals. When one of my tent-camels had broken its leg by a fall and had to be killed, I asked the camelman, to whom the animal belonged, to shoot it; but he positively refused, saying, ‘ How shall I kill him who gives me my bread ’; and a Muhammadan orderly finally shot it. 16. The joint sacrifice. [...] 17. Animal sacrifices in Greece. [...] 18.    The Passover. [...] The Banjāras [बंजारा] retain in their marriage and other customs various reminiscences of their former migratory life, as shown in the article on that caste. The Gadarias [गड़रिया] of the Central Provinces worship a goddess called Dishai Devi [देवी], who is represented by a stone platform just outside the sheep-pen. She has thus probably developed from the deified sheep or goat, which itself was formerly worshipped. On the eighth day of the fasts in Chait [चैत] and Kunwār [कुंवार] the Gadarias [गड़रिया] offer the goddess a virgin she-goat. They wash the goat’s feet in water and rub turmeric on its feet and head. It is given rice to eat and brought before the goddess, and water is poured over its body ; when the goat begins to shiver they think that the goddess has accepted the offering, and cut its throat with a sickle or knife. Then the animal is roasted whole and eaten in the veranda of the house, nothing being thrown away but the bones. Only men may join in this sacrifice, and not women. [...] 19. Sanctity of domestic animals. [...] 20. Sacrificial slaughter for food. [...] This is the stage reached by the Hebrews in the time of Samuel [שְׁמוּאֵל], as described by Professor Robertson Smith, and it bears much resemblance to that of the lower Hindu castes and the Gonds [गोंड] at the present time. They too, when they can afford to kill a goat or a pig, cows being prohibited in deference to Hindu susceptibility, take it to the shrine of some village deity and offer it there prior to feasting on it with their friends. At intervals of a year or more many of the lower castes sacrifice a goat to Dulha Deo [दुल्हादेव], the bridegroom-god, and Thākur Deo [ठाकुर देव], the corn-god, and eat the body as a sacrificial meal within the house, burying the bones and other remnants beneath the floor of the house. Among the Kāfīrs [كافر] of the Hindu Kush [هندوکش], when a man wishes to become a Jast, apparently a revered elder or senator, he must give a series of feasts to the whole community, so expensive that many men utterly ruin themselves in becoming Jast. The initiatory proceedings are sacrifices of bulls and male goats to Gīsh, thewar-god, at the village shrine. The animals are examined with jealous eyes by the spectators, to see that they come up to the prescribed standard of excellence. After the sacrifice the meat is divided among the people, who carry it to their homes. These special sacrifices at the shrine recur at intervals ; but the great slaughterings are at the feast-giver’s own house, where he entertains sometimes the Jast exclusively and sometimes the whole tribe, as already mentioned. Even in the latter case, however, after a big distribution at the giver’s house one or two goats are offered to the war-god at his shrine ; and while the animals are being killed at the house offerings are made on a sacrificial fire, and as each goat is slain a handful of its blood is taken and thrown on the fire. The Kāfīrs [كافر] would therefore appear to be in the stage when it is still usual to kill domestic animals as a sacrifice to the god, but no longer obligatory. 21. Animal-fights. Finally animals are recognised for what they are, all sanctity ceases to attach to them, and they are killed for food in an ordinary manner. Possibly, however, such customs as roasting an ox whole, and the sports of bull-baiting and bullfighting, may be relics of the ancient sacrifice. Formerly the buffaloes sacrificed at the shrine of the goddess Rankini or Kāli [काली] in Dalbhūm [ধলভূম] zamīndāri of Chota Nāgpur [छोटा नागपुर] were made to fight. “Two male buffaloes are driven into a small enclosure and on a raised stage adjoining and overlooking it the Rāja [राजा] and his suite take up their position. After some ceremonie's the Rāja [राजा] and his family priest discharge arrows at the buffaloes, others follow their example, and the tormented and enraged beasts fall to and gore each other whilst arrow after arrow is discharged. When the animals are past doing very much mischief, the people rush in and hack at them with battle-axes till they are dead.” 3 3 Dalton, Ethnology of Bengal, p. 176. 22. The sacrificial method of killing. Muhammadans however cannot eat the flesh of an animal unless its throat is cut and the blood allowed to flow before it dies. At the time of cutting the throat a sacred text or invocation must be repeated. It has been seen that in former times the blood of the animal was offered to the god and scattered on the altar or collected in a pit at its foot. It may be suggested that the method of killing which still survives was that formerly practised in offering the sacrifice, and that the necessity of allowing the blood to flow is a relic of the blood offering. When it no longer became necessary to sacrifice every animal at a shrine the sacrificial method of slaughter and the invocation to the god might be retained as removing the impiety of the act. At present it is said that unless an animal’s blood flows it is a murda [मुरदा] or corpse, and hence not suitable for food. But this idea may have grown up to account for the custom when its original meaning had been forgotten. The Gonds [गोंड], when sacrificing a fowl, hold it over the sacred post or stone, which represents the god, and let the blood drop upon it. And when sacrificing a pig they first cut its tongue and let the blood fall upon the symbol of the god. In Chhattisgarh [छत्तीसगढ़], when a Hindu is ill he makes a vow of the affected limb to the god ; then on recovering he goes to the temple, and cutting this limb, lets the blood fall on to the symbol of the god as an offering. Similarly the Sikhs [ਸਿੱਖੀ] are forbidden to eat flesh unless the animal has been killed by jatka [ਝਟਕਾ] or cutting off the head with one stroke, and the same rule is observed by some of the lower Hindu castes. In Hindu sacrifices it is often customary that the head of the animal should be made over to the officiating priest as his share, and so in killing the animal he would naturally cut off its head. The above rule may therefore be of the same character as the rite of halāl [حلال] among the Muhammadans, and here also the sacrificial method of killing an animal may be retained to legalise its slaughter after the sacrifice itself has fallen into desuetude. In Berār [बेरार] some time ago the Mullah [ملا] or Muhammadan priest was a village servant and the Hindus paid him dues. In return he was accustomed to kill the goats and sheep which they wished to sacrifice at temples, or in their fields to propitiate the deities presiding over them. He also killed animals for the Khatīk [खटीक] or mutton-butcher and the latter exposed them for sale. The Mullah [ملا] was entitled to the heart of the animal killed as his perquisite and a fee of two pice. Some of the Marāthas [मराठा] were unmindful of the ceremony, but in general they professed not to eat flesh unless the sacred verse had been pronounced either by the Mullah [ملا] or some Muhammadan capable of rendering it halāl [حلال] or lawful to be eaten.1 Hence it would appear that the Hindus, unprovided by their own religion with any sacrificial mode of legalising the slaughter of animals, adopted the ritual of a foreign faith in order to make animal sacrifices acceptable to their own deities. The belief that it is sinful to kill a domestic animal except with some religious sanction is thus clearly shown in full force. 1 Grant-Duff, History of the Marāthas, vol. i. p. 27. Mr. Hīra Lāl notes that owing to the predominance of Muhammadans in Berār [बेरार] the of slaughtering all animals by the method of halāl [حلال] and the regular employment of the Mullah  [ملا] to pronounce the sacred text before slaughter may have grown up for their convenience. And, as in other instances, the Hindus may have simply imitated the Muhammadans in regarding this method of slaughter as necessary. This however scarcely seems to impair the force of the argument if the Hindus actually refused to eat animals not killed by halāl [حلال]; they must in that case have attached some religious significance or virtue to the rite, and the most probable significance is perhaps that stated in the text. As Mr. Hira Lāl [हीरालाल] points out, the Hindu sacred books provide an elaborate ritual for the sacrifice of animals, but this may have fallen into abeyance with the decline in the custom of eating meat. 23. Animal sacrifices in Indian ritual. Among high-caste Hindus also sacrifices, including the killing of cows, were at one time legal. This is shown by several legends, and is also a historical fact. One of Asoka’s royal edicts prohibited at the capital the celebration of animal sacrifices and merry-makings involving the use of meat, but in the provinces apparently they continued to be lawful. This indicates that prior to the rise of Buddhism such sacrifices had been customary, and also that when a feast was to be given, involving the consumption of meat, the animal was offered as a sacrifice. It is noteworthy that Asoka’s rules do not forbid the slaughter of cows. In ancient times also the most important royal sacrifice was that of the horse. The development of religious belief and practice in connection with the killing of domestic animals has thus proceeded on exactly opposite lines in India as compared with most of the world. Domestic animals have become more instead of less sacred and several of them cannot be killed at all. The reason usually given to account for this is the belief in the transmigration of souls, leading to the conclusion that the bodies of animals might be tenanted by human souls. Probably also Buddhism left powerful traces of its influence on the Hindu view of the sanctity of animal life even after it had ceased to be the state religion. Perhaps the Brāhmans [ब्राह्मण] desired to make their faith more popular and took advantage of the favourite reverence of all cultivators for the cow to exalt her into one of their most powerful deities, and at the same time to extend the local cult of Krishna [कृष्ण], the divine cowherd, thus following exactly the contrary course to that taken by Moses [מֹשֶׁה] with the golden calf. Generally the growth of political and national feeling has mainly operated to limit the influence of the priesthood, and the spread of education and development of reasoned criticism and discussion have softened the strictness of religious observance and ritual. Both these factors have been almost entirely wanting in Hindu society, and this perhaps explains the continued sanctity attaching to the lives of domestic animals as well as the unabated power of the caste system." [Quelle: Russell, R. V. (Robert Vane) <1873-1915> ; Hīra Lāl <Rai Bahadur> [हीरालाल <राय बहादुर>] <1873 - 1923>: The tribes and castes of the Central Provinces of India. -- London: MacMillan, 1916. -- 4 Bde. : Ill. -- Bd. 3. -- S. 346 - 369]

Khatīk [खटीक] (Central Provinces)

"Khatīk [खटीक].—A functional caste of Hindu mutton-butchers and vegetable sellers. They numbered nearly 13,000 persons in the Central Provinces and Berār [बेरार] in 1911, and are, as might be expected, principally returned from the Districts with a considerable urban population, Amraoti [अमरावती], Jubbulpore [जबलपुर], Nāgpur [नागपूर] and Saugor [सागर]. The name is derived from the Sanskrit Khattika, a butcher or hunter. In northern India Mr. Crooke states that the caste are engaged in keeping and selling pigs and retailing vegetables and fruits, and does not specially mention that they slaughter animals, though in Agra [आगरा] one of their subcastes is named Buchar, a corruption of the English word butcher. In the Punjab [ਪੰਜਾਬ] Sir D. Ibbetson1 says of them that, 1 Census Report (1881), para. 502. “They form a connecting link between the scavengers and the leather-workers, though they occupy a social position distinctly inferior to that of the latter. They are great keepers of pigs and poultry, which a Chamār [चमार] would not keep.2 At the same time many of them tan and dye leather and indeed are not seldom confused with the Chamrāng. The Khatīk [खटीक] is said sometimes to keep sheep and goats and twist their hair into waistbands for sale.” 2 This statement does not apply to the Chamārs [चमार] of the Central Provinces. Sir H. Risley again describes the Khatīks [खटीक] of Bihār [बिहार] as a cultivating and vegetable-selling caste.3 The differences in the principal occupations ascribed to the caste are thus somewhat remarkable. In the Central Provinces the Khatīks [खटीक] are primarily slaughterers of sheep and goats and mutton-butchers, though they also keep pigs, and some of them, who object to this trade, make their livelihood by selling vegetables. Both in the United Provinces and Punjab [ਪੰਜਾਬ] the Khatīks [खटीक] are considered to be connected with the Pāsis [पासी] and probably an offshoot of that caste. In the Central Provinces they are said to be an inferior branch of the Gadaria [गड़रिया] or shepherd caste. The Gadarias [गड़रिया] state that their old sheep were formerly allowed to die. Then they appointed some poor men of the community to kill them and sell the flesh, dividing the profits with the owner, and thus the Khatīk [खटीक] caste arose. The Khatīks [खटीक] accept cooked food from the Gadarias [गड़रिया], but the latter do not reciprocate. 3Tribes and Castes of Bengal, Art. Khatīk The Khatīks [खटीक] are both Hindu and Muhammadan by religion, the latter being also known as Gai-Khatīk [गाय खटीक] or cow-killer ; but these may more suitably be classed with the Kasais [قصائی] or Muhammadan butchers. In the Marātha [मराठा] Districts the Hindu Khatīks [खटीक] are divided into two subcastes, the Berāria [वर्हाडिया] or those from Berār [बेरार], and the Jhādi or those of the forest country of the Wainganga [वैनगंगा] valley. These will take food together, but do not intermarry. They have the usual set of exogamous clans or septs, many of which are of a totemistic nature, being named after plants, animals or natural objects. In Jubbulpore [जबलपुर], owing to their habit of keeping pigs and the dirty state of their dwellings, one of their divisions is named Lendha, which signifies the excrement of swine. Here the sept is called bān [बान], while in Wardha [वर्धा] it is known as kul [कुल] or ādnām. Marriage within the sept is forbidden. When arranging a match they consider it essential that the boy should be taller than the girl, but do not insist on his being older. A bride-price is sometimes paid, especially if the parents of the girl are poor, but the practice is considered derogatory. In such a case the father is thought to sell his daughter and he is called Bad or Bhand. Marriages commonly take place on the fifth, seventh or ninth day after the Holi [होली] festival, or on the festival of Badsavitri, the third day of Baisākh [बैसाख] (light fortnight). When the bridegroom leaves the house to set out for the wedding his mother or aunt waves a pestle and churning-stick round him, puts a piece of betel-vine in his mouth and gives him her breast to suck. He then steps on a little earthen lamp-saucer placed over an egg and breaks them, and leaves the house without looking back. These rites are common to many castes, but their exact significance is obscure. The pestle and churning-stick and egg may perhaps be emblems of fertility. At the wedding the fathers of the couple split some wood into shreds, and, placing it in a little pit with cotton, set a light to it. If it is all burnt up the ceremony has been properly performed, but if any is left, the people laugh and say that the corpses of the family’s ancestors were not wholly consumed on the pyre. To effect a divorce the husband and wife break a stick in the presence of the caste panchāyat [पंचायत] or committee, and if a divorced woman or one who has deserted her husband marries again, the first husband has to give a feast to the caste on the tenth day after the wedding ; this is perhaps in the nature of a funeral feast to signify that she is dead to him. The remarriage of widows is permitted. A girl who is seduced by a member of the caste, even though she may be delivered of a child, may be married to him by the maimed rites used for widows. But she cannot take part in auspicious ceremonies, and her feet are not washed by married women like those of a proper bride. Even if a girl be seduced by an outsider, except a Hindu of the impure castes or a Muhammadan, she may be taken back into the community and her child will be recognised as a member of it. But they say that if a Khatīk [खटीक] keeps a woman of another caste he will be excommunicated until he has put her away, and his children will be known as Akre or bastard Khatīks [खटीक], these being numerous in Berār [बेरार]. The caste burn or bury the dead as their means permit, and on the third day they place on the pyre some sugar, cakes, liquor, sweets and fruit for the use of the dead man’s soul. The occupation of the Khatīk [खटीक] is of course horrible to Hindu ideas, and the social position of the caste is very low. In some localities they are considered impure, and high-caste Hindus who do not eat meat will wash themselves if forced to touch a Khatīk [खटीक]. Elsewhere they rank just above the impure castes, but do not enter Hindu temples. These Khatīks [खटीक] slaughter sheep and goats and sell the flesh, but they do not cure the skins, which are generally exported to Madras [மதராஸ்]. The Hindu Khatīks [खटीक] often refuse to slaughter animals themselves and employ a Muhammadan to do so by the rite of halāl [حلال]. The blood is sometimes sold to Gonds [गोंड], who cook and eat it mixed with grain. Other members of the caste are engaged in cultivation, or retail vegetables and grain." [Quelle: Russell, R. V. (Robert Vane) <1873-1915> ; Hīra Lāl <Rai Bahadur> [हीरालाल <राय बहादुर>] <1873 - 1923>: The tribes and castes of the Central Provinces of India. -- London: MacMillan, 1916. -- 4 Bde. : Ill. -- Bd. 3. -- S. 453 - 456]

Katike, Katikilu [Telugu]