fo ee, ety cee, —i, 
1923. | An Essay on the History of Newar Culture. 525 
upon the Bauddhas as Anacharaniya, especially their higher 
! shall also put down in this connection some general 
notes on the thirty classes of heterodox or mixed Hindus and 
Buddhists as given by Oldfield. According to him, those 
thirty classes, though of inferior status to Banras and Udas, 
are vet all “caste’”’ men and from their hands any Hindu 
may drink water. They are moreover Bauddhas only in name. 
They worship openly at Hindu temples and at marriages, 
funerals, ete., they adopt the Hindu ceremonies along with the 
Bauddha ones employing a Brahman to assist their own Vajra 
Acharya in the performance of his sacred duties. They are 
rapidly adopting Hinduism.” 
I shal] now proceed to the discussion of the table. It is 
evident that Earle’s intermediate castes agree remarkably well 
With the lists of heterodox Buddhists of Oldfield and the 
Ekthureeahs of Hodgson. This is the reason why this account 
has been placed beside those of Hodgson and Oldfield, although 
professedly it deals with Hindu castes. I have not attached 
importance to this latter aspect of the list of Earle as it was 
collected in British territories. Away from Nepal, in the 
absence of Banras, Buddhists as well as Hindus have to resort 
to Brahmans and in a more or less strong Hindu surrounding, 
the tendency will be for all Nepal people to return themselves 
as Hindus. It is mentioned in the Census Report that even 
Several Udas and Banras returned themselves as Hindus. 
Therefore as Earle does not give, and probably had not 
that some Buddhist castes were ex unged, or at any rate, as 
the Census superintendent puts it, all the Buddhist castes 
were expunged from the table. Their presence would have 
made the composite character of the list obvious and also 
allowed an estimation of its completeness. As we shall see 
later, the elimination has not been thorough, and it would have 
been better if it had been merely indicated what castes were 
Buddhists, definitely mentioning why they were so considered. 
The following castes* are found both in Hodgson’s and 
Oldtield’s list and are not adversel y criticised by the Gubhaju :— 
Jatta Chitrakar Gaukau Chhippah Sarmi Gartho Pahi 
: o 
or or or 3 iia wit 
Jvapoo Cheeka Ghukco  Cheepa Salmi Gatha Pihi. 
; | Haraprasad Sastri, in the introduction to N. Vasu’s ‘* Modern Bud- 
dhism’’, Caleutta (no date). The actual statement is that they are 
Anacharaniya but as they are not so to Newar Hindus, evidently this 
applies to Gurkhas. 
2 Oldfield: ibid., Vol. IL, p. 147. 
» The Yungwar are left out for reasons given later. 
