Mleccha

For the dynasty of Kamarupa, seeMleccha dynasty.

Mleccha(fromVedic Sanskrit:म्लेच्छ,romanized:mlecchá) is aSanskritterm, referring to those of an incomprehensible speech, foreign or barbarous invaders as distinguished from the Vedic tribes.Within Vedic Brahmanical discourse, the term is used to refer to 'non-Aryans' (Sanskrit:अनार्याः,romanized:anāryaḥ): foreigners who are considered outside the realm ofVedic dharma.

The word Mleccha was commonly used for foreign barbarians of whatever race or colour.As amleccha,any foreigner stood outside thevarna systemand the ritual ambience. Thus, historically, contact with them was viewed by theHindusas polluting. The Mleccha people wereŚākas,Huns,Chinese,Greeks,Kambojas,Pahlavas,Bahlikas,RishikasandDaradas.TheBarbaras,Kiratas,Paradas,Saka-Greeks,Indo-Greeks,Pulindas,Scythians,Kushans,Kinnaras,Tusharas,Nishadas,Türks,Mongols,Romans,BalochsandArabswere also mlecchas.

Etymology

The Sanskrit wordmlecchadoes not have a standard Indo-European etymology and has no counterpart in Iranian languages.However, it has cognates in Middle Indo-Aryan languages:Palimilakkha,andPrakritmliccha,from the latter of which originateSindhimilis,Punjabimilech,Kashmiribrichun(weep or lament),Western Paharimelech(dirty),Odiamḷecha,Bengalimyaloch (dirty).The Sanskrit word occurs as a verbmlecchatifor the first time in the latic Vedic textŚathapatha‐Brāhmaṇadated to around 700 BCE. It is taken to mean to speak indistinctly or barbarously.Brahmins are prohibited from speaking in this fashion.

Asmlecchadoes not have an Indo-European etymology, scholars infer that it must have been a self-designation of a non-Aryan people within India. Based on the geographic references to theMleccha deśa(Mleccha country) to the west, the term is identified with theInduspeople, whose land is known from the Sumerian texts asMeluḫḫa.Asko Parpolahas proposed aDravidianderivation for "Meluḫḫa", asmel-akam( "high country", a possible etymological relationship and reference toBalochistanfrom where originated the Indus Valley Civilization.Franklin Southworthsuggests that mleccha comes frommizimeaning 'speak', or 'one's speech' derived fromProto-Dravidianfor language.

Pali,the olderPrakritused byTheravadaBuddhism, uses the termmilakkha.It also employsmilakkhu,a borrowing from aDramatic Prakrit.

Language

Some explanations of the namemlecchasuggest that the word was derived from theIndo-Aryanperception of the speech of the indigenous peoples. Namely,mlechwas a word that meant 'to speak indistinctly'. As such, some suggest that the Indo-Aryans used an onomatopoeic sound to imitate the harshness of alien tongue and to indicate incomprehension, thus coming up withmleccha.

Early Indo-Aryans spoke Sanskrit, which evolved into the various local modern Sanskrit-derived languages. Sanskrit was believed to include all the sounds necessary for communication. Early Indo-Aryans would therefore dismiss other languages as foreign tonguemleccha bhasha.As the Sanskrit word itself suggests, mlecchas were those whose speech was alien.Correct speech was a crucial component of being able to take part in the appropriateyajñas(religious rituals and sacrifices). Thus, without correct speech, one could not hope to practice correct religion, either.

The notion of being Arya suggested a knowledge of Sanskrit in order to effectively perform ritual hymns; thus suggesting the importance of language. Parasher discusses the importance of knowing thecorrect speechin order to perform sacrifice and ritual in the religion of thebrahmanas.Parasher continued, "The best experts of the sacrificial art were undoubtedly the various families of the Brahmins who, placed in a hierarchy within the Indo-Aryan social system, became the upholders of pure and best speech".

Historians note that early Indo-Aryans believed Sanskrit to be the superior language over all other forms of speech. As such, mleccha or barbarian speech was said to have meant any of the following:

1. a language which was not necessarily alien, but the speech of the person or persons was improper because it was either hostile or vulgar
2. a language, and here most probably Sanskrit, that was mispronounced and, thereby, incomprehensible
3. finally, any foreign tongue which was naturally incomprehensible because it was unintelligible to those who did not understand a particular language.

Territory

Historians have stated that the notion of foreigners in ancient India – those living outside of the Indian subcontinent – was often accompanied by the idea that one was a barbarian. Still, it seemed that groups who did not come from outside of these areas, as well as foreigners, were designated by the termmleccha,which carried with it a barbarian connotation.

Thus another distinction that was made between the mlecchas and non-mlecchas was area of habitation. Though they were considered a marginal group, the area characterize as the mleccha-desa (the natural border that separated their lands from that of the Aryans) was never permanent. Instead, it was defined by the changing ideas about theĀryāvarta.Parasher noted that the only consistent areas dubbed asmleccha desawere those regions inhabited byprimitive tribeswho for long periods of time did not come under the sway of theVedic,BuddhistorJaininfluence.

Though the area of the Aryas expanded with time, the notion that was held over all of the land was that of purity. As Vedic literature refers only to the places and territories that were familiar to the Indo-Aryans, these lands eventually became part of the Āryāvarta. Parasher thus indicates that the Āryāvarta was designated as the region where the RiverSarasvatidisappears is thePatiala districtinPunjab.ThePariyatra Mountainsbelong to theVindhya Range,probably the hills ofMalwa.The Kalakavana is identified with a tract somewhere nearPrayag.Still, other interpretations of the Āryāvarta refer to those areas where theblack anteloperoams, for these areas are fit for the performance ofsacrifice.Early Vedic literature focused on defining the area of habitation of the Aryas for this land was considered pure; yet there is no actual reference to the mleccha country or behavior. Wherever the territory, though, the implications of naming such lands as the Āryāvarta is that any lands excluded from that area were considered impure.

Further, there is evidence that Indians of the Vedic period actually had contact with people outside of theIndian subcontinent,namely thePersians.TheAchaemenid Persian Empire,which ruled over theIndus River Valleyduring this time (522–486 BC) was not designated as mleccha, perhaps because they did not interfere with the Brahminical way of life.

Later Vedic literature speaks of the western Anava tribes as mlecchas and occupying northernPunjab,Sindhand easternRajputana.The tribes of the north were mlecchas either because they were located on the frontiers such asGandhara,KasmiraandKambojasand therefore both their speech and culture had become contaminated and differed from that of Āryāvarta, or else, as in the case of southern India, they were once Aryas but having forsaken the Vedic rituals were regarded to mleccha status.

Cultural behavior

The wordmlecchaemerged as a way for the ancient Indo-Aryans to classify those who did not subscribe to the traditional value system, though the characteristics of this system were ambiguous. In sum, though, the idea was that the mlecchas were peoples who did not conform to what was culturally acceptable.

Early writings refer to these foreign peoples as half-civilized, unconverted people who rise or eat at improper times. They stated that monks and nuns should avoid certain areas of habitation because they were unsafe. Namely, that the ignorant populace might beat, harass or rob them under the impression that they were spies from hostile villages. Further, while some of these non-mlecchas, such as those of the Jain faith, had established contact with people of the forest tribes, they were automatically designated as mlecchas. This was the typical attitude of people from the plains who took pride in their norms of settled agricultural and urban lifestyles.

Historians note that there were also systems in place to determine the validity – or purity – of certain customs, which would ultimately be judged by thepriest.As such there were intricate rules in place to define purity from impurity, laws of behavior, as well as rituals and customs, in an effort to educate the members of the Brahmanical system. Namely, these advisors took great pains to ensure that peoples of the Brahmanical system did not subscribe to any mleccha customs or rituals.

TheSanskritisationof names was a common feature among both indigenous and foreign mlecchas who slowly tried to move away from their status of mleccha. Very often, in the case of ruling families, it took one to two generations to make a transition. One of the most direct forms of the expression of the Brahmanical ritual purity was the form and type of food which a Brahmin could eat. He was forbidden to accept cooked food from any unclean person. Thus when thePunjab regionbecame a mleccha area conquered by Muslims, the staple food was given a lower place in the food-ranking. By the twelfth century CE,wheatwas described in one lexicon as food of the mlecchas, andricebecame the pure cereal.Onionsandgarlicwas also regarded as the food of the mlecchas and therefore prohibited to the priestly intellectual class ofBrahmins.Mlecchas drankalcohol,atecow flesh,which was strictly forbidden to a follower of Hindu orthopraxy, and followed spiritual practices which were foreign to the Indian subcontinent.

Literature describing the Mleccha

In theMahabharata,some Mleccha warriors are described as having heads completely shaved or half-shaved or covered withmatted locks,as being impure in habits, and of crooked faces and nosesThey are dwellers of hills and denizens of mountain-caves. Mlecchas were born of thecow(belonging toVasishtha), of fierce eyes, accomplished in smiting looking likemessengersofDeath,and all conversant with the deceptive powers of theAsuras.

Swami Parmeshwaranand states the mleccha tribe was born from the tail of the celestial cow Nandini, kept by Vashishta for sacrificial purposes when there was a fight betweenVishvamitraandVasistha.TheMahabharatagives the following information regarding them:

• Mleccha who sprang up from the tail of the celestial cow Nandini sent the army ofVishvamitraflying in terror.
• Bhagadattawas the king of mlecchas.
• Pandavas,likeBhima,NakulaandSahadevaonce defeated them.
• Karnaduring his world campaign conquered many mleccha countries.
• The wealth that remained in theyaga-shalaofYudhishthiraafter the distribution as gifts toBrahminswas taken away by the mlecchas.
• The mlecchas drove angeredelephantson the army of the Pandavas.
• This shows mlecchas were against Pandavas.

The term is not attested in theVedas,but occurs for the first time in the late Vedic text theShatapatha Brahmana.TheBaudhayana sutrasdefine a mleccha as someone who eats beef or indulges in self-contradictory statements or is devoid of righteousness and purity of conduct.

Medieval Hindu literature, such as that ofChaitanya Mahaprabhu,also uses the term to refer to those of larger groups of other religions, especiallyMuslims.Inmedieval India,a foreign visitorAl Birūnī(died 1048) noted that foreigners were regarded as unclean or Mleccha andHinduswere forbidden any social or matrimonial contact with them.

According to theGwaliorinscription of his descendantMihira Bhoja,theGurjara PratiharaKingNagabhata Irepulsed a mleccha invasion. These mlechchhas are identified with theArab Muslim invaders.

See also

• Kala pani (taboo)
• Barbarian
• Meluhha
• Dasa,Dahae,Dahiya (surname)
• Mlechchha dynasty
• Yona
• Massagetae,Mleccha

Bibliography

• Baij Nath Puri(1957).The History of the Gurjara-Pratiharas.Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal.OCLC2491084.
• Bhandarkar, D. R.(1929). "Indian Studies No. I: Slow Progress of Islam Power in Ancient India".Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute.10(1/2): 25–44.JSTOR41682407.
• Parasher, Aloka (1991).Mlecchas in Early India: A Study in Attitudes toward Outsiders up to AD 600.New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharial Publishers Pvt. Ltd.ISBN978-81-215-0529-1.
• Parpola, Asko;Parpola, Simo (1975),"On the relationship of the Sumerian toponym Meluhha and Sanskrit mleccha",Studia Orientalia,46:205–238
• Sharma, Tej Ram (1978).Personal and Geographical Names in the Gupta Inscriptions.Concept Publishing Company – via RYD56P78DL9.
• Southworth, Franklin (2004),Linguistic Archaeology of South Asia,Routledge,ISBN978-1-134-31777-6
• Thapar, Romila(October 1971). "The Image of the Barbarian in Early India".Comparative Studies in Society and History.13(4): 409–410.doi:10.1017/s0010417500006393.S2CID143480731.
• Witzel, Michael(1999),"Substrate Languages in Old Indo-Aryan (Ṛgvedic, Middle and Late Vedic)",Electronic Journal of Vedic Studies,vol. 5, no. 1,archived(PDF)from the original on 6 February 2012