534 Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. [N.S., XIX. 
these three sections may therefore be considered as ordinary 
Jyapoo cultivators. 
The Cheos are not mentioned anywhere else, and Hodgson 
himself does not explain what precise duties they perform. and 
for what deities. In the absence of further information, this 
statement of Hodgson cannot be accepted. There may of 
course be a class of Jyapoos who are grooms. 
The Mooshaka are also not described anywhere else, but 
they are mere torchbearers. As no real distinction is shown 
from other Jvapoos, it may be conceded that some Jyapoos 
specially follow this occupation. This kind of menial’s work 
for the gods of the Newars is known from other examples, to 
be performed by Jyapoos (see also Jyapoo in App. E 
The Ookoo Kumbhals are potters specially working for 
Matsyendranatha, and enjoying a grant of land in return. 
Such a practice is common to the creat temples of India and as 
there is no real distinction from Jyapoos, there is no ground 
for criticism. The large amount of details given favours the 
view that Hodgson’s statement is correct. 
The Soa section is said to follow the occupation of cooks 
to Matsyendranatha and also certain menial offiees connected 
with it. It is not very unusual in India to have priests and 
worship.' This statement in itseli therefore ssisiniee nothing 
startlingly uncommon, but in the absence of corroboration it 
is best toassume that the Soa are merely one of gaveral sec- 
tions of Jvapoos who serve in the capacity of menials, in the 
worship of Matsyendranatha. 
One fact should however be noted about all these sections, 
that all the divisions of Jyapoos definitely connected with the 
worship or service of Matsyendranatha, pray to that group of 
them which claims a mixed Banra ancestry 
The different accounts of outcastes | now remain to be 
does not at all mean that they are eubeastea: He has bons 
put down alternative translations of the word Ekthureeah. 
The two renderings given make this quite clear. The 
mention of outcastes from whom water is not taken occurs 
immediately after this group in the manuscript, and dispels 
all donbt on this point.2 The anomalous phr-se remains in 

The case of the Daitas in the temple of Jagannath at Puriisa a 
ceaedacey at this. They are believed to be of Savara origin. It cannot 
of c claimed to be a par mallet C. R.1901, Bengal, p. 406-7. This 
does n not eg course contradict the statement made in connection with the 
anni. 
7 The list of outeastes in his essay on ‘* Law and Legal Practice’ 
