Posts filed under ‘Sambalpur-Chipilima-Hirakud-Huma-Kandhara-Ushakothi’
BARGARH: Unlike other wildlife sanctuaries in the state, the Debrigarh wildlife sanctuary in Bargarh district is a much sought after destination for tourists as it offers easy and better sighting of animals, thanks to the park’s proximity to the Hirakud water reservoir. And now that winter has set in, tourists will start arriving in droves.
The reservoir is the main source of water for the prey and wild animals. Besides, there is less human interference here. While the route between Dhodrokusum to Chourasimal has been identified as the bison route, the stretch from Dhodrokusum to Damkighati is known for the presence of herbivores such as boar, spotted deer and sambar. Leopards are sighted on the route from Lakhanpur to Badduma.
Divisional forest officer (Hirakud wildlife division) Sudeep Nayak said sighting is best between 4 and 6 pm.
“Mostly tourists from West Bengal flock the sanctuary between December and March. The eco-tourism cottages at Barakhandia have been designed in such a way overlooking the reservoir that tourists can watch migratory birds such as ducks, geese and waders from the cottages. To see animals along specific routes, permission has to be sought from the range office at Dhodrokusum,” Nayak said.
The eco-cottages can accommodate 20 people and they are booked to capacity during the season. “According to our records, during the lean season, 25 per cent of the rooms are booked. In a year, around 2,000 people come to stay in the cottages. Other visitors, who come for sight-seeing take passes. On an average, 1,000 tourists visit the sanctuary in a month,” said the senior officer. According to a rough estimate, the sanctuary is home to about 400 ‘sambars’, he added.
Debrigarh, which is spread over 353 sq km, comprises two reserve forests, Lohara and Debrigarh. To maintain the serenity of the place, the wildlife department has decided not to allow more than 21 vehicles into the park in a day. “Because of limited entry of tourists, we have been able to ensure an undisturbed core area. This is the reason, animals roam freely here,” said Nayak.
The water bodies ringing 60% of the sanctuary area form a natural barrier against poaching. “The sanctuary hasn’t recorded poaching in the past two years,” he said.
SAMBALPUR: In a bid to attract more tourists to the leaning temple of Lord Shiva at Huma, located on the banks of river Mahanadi, the district administration has submitted a proposal for a hanging bridge to facilitate movement of visitors from the temple to an island in river Mahanadi.
The proposal of the hanging bridge to be constructed at an estimated cost of `2 crore has been submitted to the State Government. If the proposal is approved, the bridge would connect Huma temple with Kanherkud, an island in the Mahanadi. Kanherkud is also a tourist destination which houses the temple of Goddess Kali.
Now, the tourists visiting Huma temple board country boats at Machhindra Ghat to go to Kanherkud which is named after Kudo fish. A large number of Kudo found in the island is a major attraction.
It takes about 15 minutes to reach Kanherkud by boat. After the hanging bridge is constructed, tourists can easily go there walking on the bridge.
Lord Bimaleswar is being worshiped in the leaning temple, which is located at village Huma, about 23 kms away from Sambalpur town. The temple was constructed by Chauhan ruler King Baliar Singh, the fifth king of Sambalpur from 1545 AD to 1560 AD. Though the reason of tilting of the temple is yet to be confirmed, more than two lakh tourists including foreigners visit it every year.
When contacted, District Tourist Officer Rabindra Dalei said the proposal will be approved by the State Government shortly. While there is large tourist flow to the destination, the bridge will attract more tourists to the temple and other tourist destinations. The area is being developed with all season road, while parking and lighting facilities have already been developed at the temple, he added.
Saiva cult is a primordial cult and it has pervaded all over India. Archaeological and historical remnants of the Indus Valley Civilization attest the fact that Saivism is a pre-Aryan conception. The availability of a large number of ancient relics i.e. stone pieces resembling phallus had led the indologists as well as historians to trust that Pasupati (Siva) was worshipped in the Linga (phallic) shape by the non-Aryans of Indus Valley Civilization. This practice of Siva worship seems to have spread to different parts of India from 3000 B.C. Sambalpur is not an exception to it. The history of Saivism can be traced back to the first century A.D. Siva worship in the form of Bhairava worship was prevalent in the Upper Mahanadi valley of Orissa at least from the first century A.D., even though some other scholars are of the opinion that the Bhairava cult became admired from the eighth century A.D. onwards1. All the same, people of Sambalpur area adore Siva both in iconic and aniconic forms. The phallic worship is the most accepted and symbolical compromise of the worship of Siva in his iconic and aniconic forms.
The Somavamsis, who began their rule in modern Binka-Subarnapur area in the eighth century A.D., were great patrons of this stream of Hinduism. Subsequently, the Chauhan Rajas who reigned Sambalpur area from about 14th century A.D. to middle of the 20th century A.D. had also extended royal patronage to Saivism. They built Siva temples in different parts of Sambalpur Rajya and made extensive village and land grants for regular and elaborate performance of Seva-Puja which is highly structured in these religious shrines.
In the erstwhile Sambalpur Rajya one discovers a large number of Siva temples constructed under the royal patronage during the Chauhan reigns. The most legendary among them are those of the Asta-Sambhus, literary meaning of which is eight Sambhus or Sivas. They are, namely Bimaleswara at Huma, Kedarnatha at Ambabhona, Biswanath at Deogaon, Balunkeswara at Gaisama, Maneswara at Maneswar, Swapneswara at Sorna, Bisweswara at Soranda and Nilakantheswara at Niljee.
Lord Bimaleswara at Huma is understood as the Adya-Sambhu, i.e. the earliest among the Asta-Sambhus who appears to have been much admired during the reigns of Chauhan Rajas in Sambalpur. This Saiva pitha has constantly drawn the attention of visitors and scholars of diverse discipline since a very long time. The reason is that, it has provided new facts which compel to rethink for socio-historical reconstruction and re-building of this place. In the present study, our emphasis is on the oral tradition accessible in the local area.
The area of our study is Bimaleswara tirtha. This Saiva Pitha is located on the left bank of the river Mahanadi 14 miles (24 kms.) down stream and south of Sambalpur. Lord Bimaleswara is worshipped in the Garbhagriha (sanctum sanctorum) of the temple. Bhairabi Devi is adored to his left and Lord Bhairo to his right. As per the oral tradition prevalent in the village Huma and its surrounding area, the Ganga Emperor Anangabhimadeva-III (1211-1239 A.D.) had constructed this temple. In the 16th century AD Balaram Dev, the first Chauhan ruler of Huma desa / Sambalpur, presumably found this pitha in a dilapidated condition. He not only conserved this monument but also gave land-grants for regular seva-puja in the temple. It is also assumed that, the temple was rebuilt or renovated by Maharaja Baliar Singh (1660-1690 A.D.), the fifth Chauhan Raja of Sambalpur Rajya. The rest of the temples of Asta-Sambhus were built during the rule of Raja Ajit Singh (1766-1788 A.D.) of Sambalpur2. All these disclose the truth that, the Chauhan Rajas of Sambalpur Rajya were great champions of Saivism.
It is in fact, amusing and wonderful to see the Bimaleswara temple in leaning shape. One and all look at the temple in silent surprise. As walking on the moon is one of the wonders of our time, leaning temple at Huma is one of the wonders of medieval period. It reminds us the famous leaning tower of Pisa. The temple is positioned on the rocky cradle just on the bank of the river Mahanadi. The basis of leaning cannot be assumed to be the technical flaws at the time of construction. It is also not easily acceptable that weak foundation might have caused leaning attitude of the temple.
In fact, construction of temple is quite favourite of Chauhan Rajas as well-known to us from innumerable temples built during their reigns. They had already established themselves as good builders. Again, the temple is not an enormous structure. There might have been interior displacement of the rocky bed on which it stands, either due to flood current in the river Mahanadi or earthquake, thus affecting the straight posture of the original temple. In other words, the plinth of the temple has been deviated slightly from its original arrangement and as a result, the body of the temple has become tilted or at an angle. Nevertheless, people visiting this temple stare at this phenomenon in bewilderment. Be that as it may, there is no denying the fact that this has fascinated the attention of historians, sculptures and other researchers.
Nonetheless, there is enough shelter among these rocks to harbour a variety of fish locally identified as Kudo fish. That is why, the river Ghat is known as Machhindra Ghat. Some rituals in connection with the reverence of Lord Bimaleswara are performed in this river Ghat. Twenty-two steps leading to this Ghat take you back to Baisi Pabachha i.e. twenty-two steps of Shri Jagannath Temple at Puri. The water of Machhindra Ghat is considered to be sacred. Devotees take their bath here prior to offering Puja to the divinity.
Now and then, people present food to Kudo fishes. It is mesmerizing to see these fishes accepting food from human beings with no fear. This reminds us the Maneswara Saiva Pitha where tortoises in the adjoining pool also acknowledge food from human beings without fear. Entertainingly, the Kudo fishes respond to the call of the priests and approach to the ladder of the bathing Ghat to be fed by the pilgrims. No one is permitted to catch them3. Neighboring inhabitants regard them as godly creatures and Matchha Avatara (incarnation) of Lord Visnu at Huma and Katchhapa Avatara at Maneswara.
It is understood that, there is a secret path from the seat of Lord Bimaleswara to the river Mahanadi and the Kudo fishes take refuge at the feet of the deity throughout the rainy season. Similarly, it is also supposed that there is a secret path from the seat of Lord Maneswara to the adjacent pond. A number of myths are associated with Kudo fishes. As per the oral tradition, on one occasion a woman did not pay any heed to the local people and caught a Kudo fish and decided to slash it into pieces. While attempting to cut the fish with her Pankhi (locally made knife) she was instantly altered into a stone. The stone representation of the woman was found on the riverbed for several years. Afterward, it has been swept away by the floodwater.
According to the oral tradition, the temple was inclined from the very beginning of its construction for the reason that Lord Bimaleswara himself desired such a temple. In order to fulfill his wish, Maharaja Baliar Singh built a leaning temple for the god. In course of time, the shape of the temple and associated fable itself popularized this Pitha far and wide. For some, from the very beginning of the construction of the temple, the temple architect might have consciously made the temple inclined towards the river keeping in mind that the centre of gravity of the body would remain outside the temple so that strong floodwater cannot destabilize the temple. Be that as it may, such an abnormal and unusual feature of the temple was not easily acceptable to the ordinary natives for which there was a need of a myth to rationalize its leaning position that Lord Bimaleswara desired to have such a temple for himself.
On the one hand, the myth has glorified Lord Bimaleswara and on the other hand the myth has helped in the popularization of this Pitha. It may be mentioned here that apart from the main temple, there are two small temples of Lord Siva and one Vaisnava Temple constructed latter on inside the temple complex. High boundary walls enclose the temple complex. The temples are made up of siuly cut stones. In Jagamohana burnt bricks are found as well. These miniatures are also said to have been in leaning position. But these are so small in size that they cannot lean unless they are treated to do so. In all probability, in conformity with the existing tradition and design of the main temple these small temples are also built accordingly. These temples cannot situate so, had there been any displacement of foundation area or technical defects.
As pointed out earlier, sculptures, quite pet of the Chauhan rulers are not found in dominating in Bimaleswara temple like that of the Narasinghanath mainly in Vimana portion. Even though, it is presumed that there was no sculpture of significance excepting the Parsva Devatas, it is quite possible that some sculptures are hidden under the thick plaster. Of course, sculptural consideration is of less significance here than the technique of construction which deserves special consideration and attention. In all likelihood, the architects avoided any type of sculptural representations on the body of the temple in order to keep it light so that the centre of gravity was free from heavy pressure.
Though we are not in possession of any documentary support to explain the plan of the Bimaleswara temple as a leaning temple, no clarification or findings properly convinces us to acknowledge the theory that the present shape of the temple is the effect of some natural happenings or calamities. In view of this, the Bimaleswara temple unquestionably bears testimony to the advanced technical know-how of the Chauhan builders of Sambalpur area.
The village Chaunrpur, on the right bank of the river Mahanadi is held to be the seat of Raja Balaram Dev, prior to his approaching to Sambalpur. According to the local tradition, a cowherd boy residing in a nearby village of Chaunrpur initiated worshipping Lord Bimaleswara. He used to take the cows to the interior jungles on the riverbank. To his utter surprise, once he found that a black cow was remaining missing for a particular time on every day. Subsequently, he started watching the movement of the cow. It was a rainy day and the river was enraged. To his amusement, he saw the cow crossing the high current of the river Mahanadi. One fine morning, the cowherd boy followed the cow and swam across the river and came to the left bank of the river Mahanadi. He observed the cow going up to a stone and spraying her milk over it. The cowherd boy realized that there was a greater or superior power, which directed the behavior of the black cow. Thence, he observed devotion, submission and reverence to the supernatural power residing in that rock. Subsequently, people residing nearby came to know about this fact and visited the site. Seeing the location, they at once assumed it to be a Saiva Pitha and since then started worshipping it. It would not be out of context to mention here that the above-mentioned religious myth is connected with a large number of religious Pithas all over the state in Orissa, which consist of not only Saiva Pithas, but Vaisnava Pithas as well4.
Formation of a separate Chauhan kingdom by Balaram Dev in the 16th century AD was the result of the partition of ruling family of Patnagarh. There are three narratives on this subject. First, when Narasingha Dev was the ruler of Patnagarh Ratanpur was a hostile power. So, Narasingha Dev placed the Sambalpur tract under the charge of his younger brother Balaram Dev to check the aggression of Haihaya power of Ratanpur. Subsequently, Balaram Dev formed a separate kingdom and established himself at Sambalpur. Secondly, it is said that, one rainy night when the queen of Narasingha Dev was in the throes of child birth, Balaram Dev swam across a hill-stream named Mayabati, which was flowing between Patnagarh and the village Barapada and brought the nurse from that village to attend the queen. Narasingha Dev was pleased to award the Sambalpur tract to Balaram Dev for his courageous and faithful service.
As per the third narrative, there arose a quarrel between the two brothers on the issue of ‘bhai-bhaga’. The dispute was amicably settled after the intervention of their mother. Tradition goes that, the queen mother took her both sons to the bed of the river Surangi and asked the elder and the younger to sit on her right and left laps respectively. Then she told them that, the river Surangi should be taken as her own body (Ang). The elder brother should enjoy the territory to the right of the river and the younger one to the left of it. Both the brothers acknowledged the decision of their mother. From that time onwards, the river was called Ang and was regarded as the natural frontier between Patna and Sambalpur territories.
We may relate these three oral narratives and try to present a comprehensive picture. Probably, Balaram Dev came to Sambalpur tract to check the aggression of Ratanpur. He established himself initially at Bargarh on the bank of the river Jira and built his fort there. There from, he is said to have shifted his capital to Chaunrpur, on the right bank of the river Mahanadi. Finally, he shifted his capital to Sambalpur on the left bank of the river Mahanadi. These three places are on the bank of the rivers. Bargarh, situated on the Jira delta is a fertile plain. In order to broaden his power base and increase his economic strength, Balaram Dev controlled this fertile region. Similarly, Chaunrpur and Sambalpur, situated on the upper Mahanadi delta is a fertile plain. Balaram Dev controlled this fertile region as well. Thus, he consolidated Chauhan power in this tract and built a separate kingdom namely Huma-desa and subsequently Sambalpur. Subsequently, however, there might have been a fight between the two brothers on the boundary issue of their territories which was resolved peacefully by their mother.
When Balaram Dev shifted to Chaunrpur from Bargarh then heard the miraculous incident of the deity at Huma narrated above and visited this Pitha. Realizing the religious sanctity and popularity of this Pitha he allocated revenues of some villages namely Huma, Bulpunga, Dhatukpali, Gangadharpali and Mahle for the maintenance, regular worship and religious ceremonies of Lord Bimaleswara. O’Malley, in his Sambalpur Gazetteer, has written that, “The temple has an endowment consisting of Huma and 6 other villages, which have been exempted from assessment so long as the temple stands and the religious ceremonies are maintained. The grant is an old one, being said to date back to the time of Balaram Deva, first Raja of Sambalpur”5. In other words, State funding of Seva-Puja has been introduced since then. Most probably, when Raja Balaram Dev carved out a new Rajya out of the province of his elder brother he named it Huma Desa. Thereafter, as the erudite historian Dr. N. K. Sahu has described, the period of establishment of the Sambalpur Rajya was about the year 1570 A.D.6
The village Huma and its Saiva Pitha may be supposed to be much older than the time of Raja Balaram Dev whose Rajya was once identified as Huma Desa. The following analysis unearths the reality that the continuation of this Pitha can at least be dated back to the eleventh century A.D. Panda7 recognizes some significant points that the gateway/doorjamb to the Garbhagriha of this temple is of late Somavamsi period and it is comparable to that of the Jagamohana of the Narsinghnath temple of Gandhagiri near Paikmal of Bargarh district. Another significant stone panel fitted to the wall of the Jagamohana on the proper right of the doorjamb is a broken one, depicting three Grahas of the Nava-Grahas panel which can also be dated to the late Somavamsi period and in all probability was fitted above the doorjamb of the Garbhagriha in its original state. In view of that, the doorjamb as well as the broken Nava-Grahas panel can be iconographically dated to the eleventh century A.D.
According to the oral tradition prevalent in the village Huma and its surrounding area, as stated earlier, the Ganga Emperor Anangabhimadeva-III (1211-1239 A.D.) has constructed this temple. Hence, it can be said with precision that Huma bears the testimony of a significant place of pilgrimage and a glorious place of Siva worship since at least the eleventh century A.D., if these historical relics are reckoned to be the earliest of all antiquities existing at Huma. It is not out of place to mention that, Dakshina Kosala with its capital at Suvarnapur or Yajatinagar was the seat of power of the later Somavamsi for sometime. Sonepur stone inscription of Bhanudeva dated 1268 AD attests this fact. Both the epigraphic evidence as well as tradition combine to prove that, Sonepur was occupied by the Gangas during the reign of Anangabhimadeva-III.
In the 15th and 16th century A.D., after the disintegration of the Ganga Empire of Orissa, a strong pull towards political fragmentation and decentralization of power took place. It happened partly due to the partition of ruling families and partly due to land grants of villages by the ruler to indigenous tribal chiefs who ended up as independent potentates in the frontier zone of uncertain control like Daksina Kosala (roughly west Orissa). The indigenous tribal chiefs and chiefs of obscure origins took advantage of weak central authority, assumed power and formed several Rajyas8.
In all probability, Huma as well as its adjoining area was a thick forested area and inhabited by aboriginal people when Raja Balaram Dev first arrived here. He was a reputed warrior. Owing to military necessity, his elder brother, Raja Narasingha Dev, the tenth Chauhan Raja of Patna Rajya entrusted the administration of this tribal dominated, hilly and forested part to him. Balaram Dev first established himself at Bargarh on the bank of the river Jira as mentioned earlier. Then, he shifted his capital to Chaurpur on the right bank of the river Mahanadi and named it Huma desa. There from, he sifted his capital to the left bank of the river Mahanadi and formed the present Sambalpur. As discussed earlier, Bargarh-Sambalpur-Sonepur area, situated on the upper Mahanadi delta was a fertile plain with a high yield of per unit of land. Balaram Dev successfully consolidated the Chauhan rule in this part of their Rajya and carved out a new Rajya out of the territory of his elder brother and named it Huma Desa. This period, thus, marked the culmination of the process of state formation in this area under the Chauhans. Thus, Chauhan power was mainly responsible for unifying different areas of West Orissa under one rule.
In this process of consolidation of power, there is no denying that, Balaram Dev was basically liable for amalgamating Bargarh-Sambalpur-Sonepur regions under his rule and carved out a new kingdom. The topographical condition was helpful for agriculture. He made the plain area suitable for settled cultivation. During this period, presumably, local communities and people were mobilized for plough cultivation. Even brahmanas could not confine their activities to their traditional duties and followed the profession of plough cultivation. ‘Halua’ brahmana, for instance, is a category of agricultural brahmanas of Sambalpur area. The word ‘halua’ is derived from ‘hala’ meaning ‘plough’. The aboriginal base of plough cultivation and the transformation of tribal chiefs into big landlords/gauntias/Zamindars/kshatriyas in Sambalpur area paved the path of assimilation. With the assimilation of the local and tribal people as peasants there was a great deal of agricultural expansion and surplus mobilization in this area. This constituted the material base for the rise of Balaram Dev. In this context, one cannot ignore the change in the material base and its corresponding reflection on society and polity. During this period, there was a striking change in power equation in West Orissa. Sambalpur became most powerful of the garhjat cluster. From that time onwards, the importance of Patnagarh declined and the significance of Sambalpur increased.
In order to sustain his separate and independent Rajya, most probably Raja Balaram Dev had to depend upon the Bhogas and Bhagas. As mentioned above, he had to persuade the local tribal people to become settled agriculturists so that production would increase. Perhaps, the socio-economic life of the people was very simple. They were reliant on subsistence economy which was primarily based on hunting, food gathering and shifting cultivation. This type of survival economy almost certainly could not create adequate surplus and could not sustain an emerging Rajya as analyzed elsewhere9. To legitimize his status as Raja and to his share of the produce (Bhaga), Raja Balaram Dev granted lands to Brahmins and temples which contributed to the changing agrarian situation, formation of a hierarchical social order and Brahminisation / Hinduisation of the society. In this process, we may assume that, tribal people were assimilated as peasants. The process of tribal integration appears to have been gradual through acculturation. In the economic sphere, thus, this period may be characterized as peasant cultivation. As a result of this, there was agricultural expansion, which constituted the material base for the rise of the Chauhan kingdom in this part of West Orissa.
It may be suggested here that Huma Pitha already existed when Raja Balaram Dev arrived here. Possibly, the temple was in a dilapidated condition. Raja Balaram Dev extended royal patronage and rebuilt or renovated the temple. Subsequently, Maharaja Baliar Singh, the fifth Raja of Sambalpur Rajya had also most probably rebuilt or renovated it during his time. Be that as it may, there is no denying the fact that, Raja Balaram Dev adopted this Pitha and extended royal patronage.
As it has been discussed earlier, Balaram Dev first established himself at Bargarh on the bank of the river Jira. But a pertinent question arises here, why Chaurpur or Huma or Sambalpur was the better choice of Balaram Dev for his new capital. There are four probable reasons for this. Broadly speaking, the topographical condition of West Orissa was not helpful for settled agriculture. Chaurpur, Huma and Sambalpur were positioned strategically in a jungle area during those days on the bank of the river Mahanadi. Huma is in between Sambalpur and Sonepur. Admittedly, the Sambalpur-Sonepur area, situated on the upper Mahanadi delta is a fertile plain. The historical Huma desa was situated in this delta area of the Mahanadi flowing into the Bay of Bengal. It was not surprising that, this area had the benefit of an active delta growth with a high yield of per unit of land. It was also not unexpected that, the Chauhan power while trying to broaden its power base, had attempted to control this fertile region just like it had done earlier in Bargarh. Most probably, they had made the plain area suitable for agriculture for agrarian expansion as well as surplus mobilization. It is not unanticipated that, these areas have been conducive for high yield. One cannot ignore the fact that, the chief areas of cultivation lay along the banks of the river Mahanadi. The cultivated plains of this area yielded numerous varieties of paddy, some of which were the finest in the country.
Secondly, a large tract of this area was abounded with forests. This might have facilitated a continuous supply of fuel, fodder and timber and vast pastoral ground. This also suggests that, efforts were being made to bring forests area under plough cultivation resulting in an increase of crop growing area. Perhaps, the Chauhans brought a large tract of land under cultivation. Despite the fact that we do not come across any major irrigation projects during this period, yet prevalent terms like kata, bandh, chuan, etc., give us an impression that some kind of artificial irrigation was prevalent during Chauhan rule. It may be noted that, kata, bandh, chuan etc., are small reservoirs of water formed either by natural process or created by human agency.
Third one is the Mahanadi. In olden days, river was used as the main trade route. It was the convenient way of transportation of goods by boats. It did not astonish that, the river Mahanadi was the main out-let for the trade and produce of this area. The produce was carried in boats from Sambalpur to Binka (Binitapur), Subarnapur, and Boudh and even to Cuttack. Commodities were also brought back through this river route. Boats could also ascend the Mahanadi as far as Arang in the Raipur district of Chhattisgarh. Conspicuously, boat transport was carried on as far as Subarnapur and Boudh in the flood season till very recently. As regards water communication O’Malley in his Sambalpur Gazetteer published in 1909 writes as follows, “In flood time boats take 5 days to reach Cuttack from Sambalpur, while the journey to Sonpur lasts one day and to Binka 6 hours. At other times the length of the journey depends on how often they are stranded on the sand or between rocks-a frequent occurrence soon after the rains, owing to the low depth of water in the river and the numerous rocks cropping up its bed. The duration of the return journey is much longer. In July and November it takes laden boats 25 days and 21 days respectively to reach Sambalpur from Cuttack, 6 and 5 days from Sonpur and 5 and 4 days respectively from Binka”10.
Fourthly, Sambalpur had the tradition of producing diamonds extracted from the sands of the river Mahanadi at Hirakud. Etymologically, the name Hirakud is a combination of Hira and Kud. The word Hira means diamond and the word Kud means island. Consequently, the literary meaning of Hirakud (Hira+Kud) is ‘Diamond Island’. As regards Hirakud O’Malley in his Sambalpur Gazetteer published in 1909 (page 203-04) writes as follows, “The name means the diamond island, diamond mining being formerly carried on by a class of people called Jhoras, for whose maintenance, it is said, the revenue of about 30 villages on either bank of the river Mahanadi was assigned by the former Rajas of Sambalpur. These people worked during the cold and hot weather, when the water was low. The work was done in the bed of the river in either branch, and some large and valuable diamonds are known to have been found in the right branch.” Hirakud to Subarnapur-Boudh was that component of the river Mahanadi where the diamonds and gold were procurable down the river Mahanadi to as far as Subarnapur11. Even these days, valuable stones are reportedly recovered from the riverbed of the Mahanadi.
It may be noted that, benefits of the first three points were available in case of Bargarh also. But, relatively speaking, Chaunrpur/Sambalpur was far better location being on the Mahanadi than Bargarh on the Jira. Fourth point was an added advantage for Balaram Dev. Perhaps, he wanted to control the mineral business under his direct supervision. This business was so important during the Chauhan rule that, the revenue of 30 villages on either bank of the river Mahanadi was assigned by the Chauhan rulers of Sambalpur for maintenance of Jhoras who were traditionally employed for this purpose.
In view of the above analysis it may be suggested that, Huma region was quite important from commercial, political and social points of view besides its religious significance. Raja Balram Dev was not indifferent to the reality that there were antagonism between people of different races, religions and communities. He was well aware of the problem of communalism that would weaken the State formation, cause disharmony in social life and divert the attention of people from formation of a separate Rajya in this area, which was his preferred goal. Therefore, he had made attempts to integrate the indigenous communities into one fold under the umbrella of the Hinduism. As expected, in the process of the building of a unified and separate Rajya, indigenous communities with their religious traditions were also successfully absorbed in the mainstream of the Hindu Great Tradition through its branches like Saivism, Saktism and Vaisnavism and various Hindu epics and Puranas.
In this context, it may be mentioned here that temple is an important agent or instrument of Hinduisation12. The newly founded ruling house at Chaunrpur in connivance with the brahmanas wanted to bridge the gulf between the elite and the folk. Of course, the process of integration appeared to have been gradual through acculturation was perhaps a planned device imposed from above. Construction of a Siva temple led to the upward mobility of the local priests of this shrine, who were non-Brahmins. The royal patronage drew the attention of the people in large number from far and wide. It led to the regular flow of devotees, both tribal and non-tribal people to this Pitha. The coming of non-tribal devotees might have led to social interaction between the caste-Hindus and the local tribal people.
With the assimilation of tribal societies into a state society there was a marked change in their stratification system. In the place of an egalitarian tribal social structure there arose a hierarchical social system. Gonds, for instance, are divided into two main groups, ‘Raj’ Gonds who form the aristocracy and ‘Dhur’ or dust Gonds who are the common people. The Raj Gonds may be considered to be the descendants of Gond landed proprietors, who have been formed into a separate group and admitted to Hinduism with the status of a cultivating caste. Notably, brahmanas take water from them and many Raj Gonds wear the sacred thread like the brahmanas13. Second example is Binjhal tribe. “The more advanced Binjhals boast of an alliance with Rajputs and call themselves Barhias, a title originally borne by small hill chiefs, but the common Binjhals do not claim such Rajput descent”14. However, they do not employ brahmanas as their priests15. thus, we cannot ignore the change in material base and its corresponding reflection on society and polity.
The fame and popularity of the deity enshrined in Huma temple had come to be known as Lord Bimaleswara. By the time of renovation of this temple in 1670 by Maharaja Baliar Singh, this was very popular as Huma-Kshetra not only due to its religious importance but also owing to its socio-economic and political contributions. Businessmen as far as from Kantilo, Bolangir, Barpali, Bargarh, Subarnapur and Maniabandha were attending the fairs and festivals at this Pitha to sale their goods16.
State sponsorship or royal patronage by Balaram Dev to this religious Pitha was a firm and uncompromising measure to appease and pacify the natives and to legitimize his authority over them, which also facilitated the process of Hinduisation to build up a larger Hindu / Chauhan Rajya in this area. Understandably, Balaram Dev was successful in bringing people closer to this temple and by means of this temple he was able to consolidate his authority and influence over the forest region of Huma. In a similar fashion, he adopted Samalei Devi and constructed a temple at Sambalpur and extended royal patronage17. The successors of Raja Balaram Dev had also methodically followed this principle and patronized the Saiva Pithas in different parts of former Sambalpur Rajya. The most famous among them were those of Asta-Sambhus as mentioned earlier.
Thus, the Chauhan Rajas consolidated their power and position and established a superior Chauhan Rajya in Sambalpur. It is imperative to note down that, the religious importance of Huma-Kshetra is equated with other Kshetras of Orissa namely, Sri-Kshetra (Shri Jagannath Temple) at Puri, Arka-Kshetra (Sun Temple) at Konark. It may be recommended that the rationale behind such royal patronages is to give a boost to the local cults and at the same time to capitalize on the religious sentiments of the local people to such an extent / degree that it can be used as a means for political ends. In any case, the rise of Huma-Kshetra in Sambalpur, particularly during the 16th century has to be accredited to the patronage of the Chauhan Rajas, which has helped in consolidation of the Chauhan rule and State formation in Sambalpur area and also facilitated the process of Hinduisation in this region.
1. S. S. Panda, “Bhairava Worship in Upper Mahanadi Valley”, Orissa Review, January, 2004, p.39; C. Pasayat, “Oral Tradition of Huma and Legitimisation of Chauhan Rule”, The Orissa Historical Research Journal, Vol. XLVII, No. 2, 2004, pp. 90-96; idem., “Myth and Religious Cult of Orissa: A Study of Bimaleswara of Huma”, The Orissa Historical Research Journal, Vol. XLIX, No. 1, 2, 3 & 4, 2008, pp. 186-192.
2. N. Senapati and B. Mahanti (Eds.), Sambalpur District Gazetteer, Cuttack: Gazetteers Unit, Government Press, 1971, p. 51, 526; C. Pasayat, “The Leaning Temple of Huma in Sambalpur District in Orissa”, Orissa Review, November, 1990, pp.20-23; S. S. Panda, “Early Chauhan Temples of Sambalpur Town”, Orissa Review, April, 1996, pp.34-35.
3. N. Senapati and B. Mahanti (eds.), op. cit., 1971, p. 11; C. Pasayat, op. cit., 1990, p. 20-23.
4. C. Pasayat Glimpses of Tribal and Folkculture, New Delhi: Anmol Publications Pvt. Ltd., 2003, pp. 16-18.
5. O’Malley, L. S. S., Sambalpur Gazetteer, New Delhi: Logos Press, 1909 (reprint 2007), p. 204; N. Senapati and B. Mahanti (eds.), op. cit., 1971, p. 526.
6. S. S. Panda, op. cit., 1996, p. 35.
7. ibid., pp. 34-35.
8. F. Deo, “Chauhan Myth and Royal Legitimisation in Kosala (Daksina)”, Souvenir, Sambalpur Lok Mahotsav, Sambalpur, 2003, pp.96; C. Pasayat, “The State and Culture in Early Medieval Western Orissa: A Study of Myths and Fables on Patnagarh and Marjarakesari in Narasinghanath”, Utkal Historical Research Journal, Vol. XXII, 2009, pp. 135-152.
9. ibid., 96.
10. O’Malley, op.cit., 1909, p.162; N. Senapati and B. Mahanti, op. cit., 1971, p. 86.
11. O’Malley, op.cit., 1909, pp. 1, 9-12, 20, 203-04; N. Senapati and B. Mahanti, op.cit., 1971, pp. 273-74.
12. A. Eschmann, “Hinduisation of Tribal Deities in Orissa: The Sakta and Saiva Typology” in A. Eschmann, H. Kulke and G. C. Tripathy (eds.), The Cult of Jagannath and the Regional Tradition of Orissa, New Delhi: Manohar Publications, 1978, pp.78-98.
13. N. Senapati and B. Mahanti, op. cit., 1971, p. 117.
14. ibid., p. 118.
15. ibid., p. 121.
16. ibid., p. 526.
17. C. Pasayat, op. cit., 2003, p. 67-84.
Dr. Chitrasen Pasayat
152, Vijay Vihar, Nuagaon Road, PO: Sishupalgarh, Bhubaneswar, Orissa, 751002.
Dr. Chitrasen Pasayat
Sambalpur, above and beyond the seat of Buddhism and Hinduism, is also abode of other religions and communities such as Muslims, Christians and numerous indigenous tribal communities. With this multi-racial, multi-religious, multi-cultural and multi-lingual composition, Sambalpur has always preferred the path of social accommodation and social integration. In Sambalpur, as a consequence, people of diverse religious faiths have inhabited collectively in harmony. It may correctly be identified as the most pluralistic society. The present essay is an effort to appreciate how the autochthonous groups and their religious traditions (Little Tradition) have been effectively wrapped up in the regional Hindu society and culture (Great Tradition). Moreover, this paper is an attempt to understand how afterward these traditions have played most noteworthy role in the process of state formation in the regional level i.e. in the erstwhile Sambalpur Rajya or kingdom during medieval period. In Sambalpur, as discussed elsewhere, the ruling class was always aware of the fact that communalism would weaken the state and would cause disharmony in social life and would divert the attention of the people from formation of a separate Sambalpur Rajya. So, attempts were made to integrate the indigenous communities into one fold under the broad umbrella of Hinduism. What’s more, their deities were acknowledged, exalted and glorified to the Hindu status by the ruling class of Sambalpur in order to appease the local subjects so that the ruling class could consolidate their power over the natives and exercise their suzerainty over this area. Understandably, in this process of building unified Sambalpur Rajya indigenous communities with their religious traditions were successfully absorbed in the mainstream of the Hindu Great Tradition through its branches like Saivism, Vaisnavism and Saktism. The area of our study i.e. Sambalpur is the headquarters town of modern Sambalpur district. It is situated on the left bank of the river Mahanadi.
From the earliest time, Sambalpur has been celebrated as the land of Tantrik Buddhism. It is an ancient town and it has the global reputation of being a Tantra Pitha. When Buddhism as a religious-cultural power began to decline in several parts of India, Sambalpur shouldered the vital responsibility of the continuation of this faith in its new form i.e. Tantrik Buddhism. In this context, it may be mentioned that the existence of Sambalpur may be dated back at least to the early Christian era. The Greek Geographer Ptolemy (middle of the second century A.D.) in his book the Geographike refers to a town named Sambalaka located on the bank of the river Manada. Ancient Sambalaka and Manada are identified with modern Sambalpur and the river Mahanadi respectively (O’Malley, 1909:20). The suffix Pur has been later supplemented by sanskritising the original name Sambala when this region has come under the Chauhan rule (Senapati and Mahanti, 1971:2-3). Likewise, the Samalei Pitha may be supposed to be much older and the aborigines may have worshiped the deity since time immemorial. Sambalpur is intimately linked with the spread of Tantrik Buddhism both in India as well as overseas. It is recognized to be the land where the Sambara Tantra was advocated by a famous Siddha called Pitopada who is as well regarded to have conquered the Siddhi of invisibility at Sambala (Senapati and Mahanti, 1971:446). Sometimes, in the eighth century A.D., Indrabhuti was the king of Sambalaka / Sambalpur and was believed to have patronized Tantrik Buddhism. He was the author of the manuscript the Jnanasiddhi. His sister Laksmikara / Laksminkara is also reported to be Tantrik Buddhist perfectionist. She is celebrated as one of the 84 Siddha–Gurus in Tantrik Buddhism and as the propounder of a religious faith called Sahaja-yana, consequently, building a grand name and reputation for herself. It implies that by the time of medieval period, the land of Sambala / Sambalaka / Sambalpur was one of the key seats of Tantrik Buddhism.
There is no denying the fact that the Vajra-yana of Indrabhuti and Sahaja-yana of Laksminkara flourished and prospered in Sambalpur region in the eighth century A.D. At that time, Sambalpur might have developed a very high standard of Tantrik culture. Most probably, Samalei Pitha was an essential part of that great cultural tradition. In the Garbha-griha (inner sanctum) of this temple, “the image of Samlai is a large block of stone in the middle of which is a projection with a narrow groove regarded as the mouth. On both sides of this are depressions covered with beaten gold leaf to represent the eyes” (O’Malley, 1909:218).The fierce and typical shapeless rock made to appear like the face of Samalei Devi (goddess) with two gold leaves in the forms of eyes and in the middle a projection resembling the mouth of a cow recommends some influence of Tantra. In this context, mention may be made of Panda (1996:37) who has recognized some noteworthy points that in front of the Garbha-griha of Samalei Gudi (temple), there is a pillared hall wherein a pair of human foot prints with two eight-petalled lotus-rosette motifs on both sides is engraved on a stone panel. This pair of footprints is worshipped as Sitala-mata. Such footprints are found to be imprinted on stone slabs at Ghudar and Ranipur-Jharial in the district of Bolangir and Narsinghnath in the district of Bargarh. Panda (1985:106) viewed that admiration of footprints of Siddhacharyas was very widespread and common to the Tantrik School. His view may be corroborated by the opinion of Patel (2004:42) on footprint emblem discerned in the site of Ranipur-Jharial. Patel accepts as true that it is reminiscent of early Buddhist worship of anoconic diction. In this respect, availability of footprints in crude form at Rampad on the riverbed near Sambalesvari temple carries significance to a great extent. For that reason, Samalei Pitha had Buddhist connection. In other words, Sambalpur had made Tantrik Buddhism a potent spiritual power and effective cultural force in the Indian sub-continent. In view of this, Sambalpur might be recognized as one of the important urban centers with intercontinental reputation in between the second and eighth century A.D. it seems that, Tantrik Buddhism continued to triumph in Sambalpur till about 13th century A.D. long after Buddhism had vanished from many parts of India.
Reportedly, Laksminkara had married Sevole, the son of the king Jalendra of Lanka / Lankapuri. But, Laksminkara preferred the career of a Tantrik Buddhist perfectionist and practiced Tantra Sadhana in Lankapuri which was regarded as Mahayogapitha or a great centre of Tantrik Buddhist Yoga. Continuous meditation and Tantra Sadhana for seven years in the cemetery of Lankapuri Mahayogapitha made her properly enlightened and she distinguished herself among the people of India and abroad as Bhagavati Laksminkara or Goddess Laksminkara because of her Uttama Siddhi or excellent attainment. Lanka or Lankapuri is identified with modern Sonepur or Subarnapur (Mishra, 2003:87-88). Lankesvari, therefore, may be recognized as Laksminkara as the former nomenclature appears to be a corruption of the latter. A legend also ascribes Goddess Samalei to Lankesvari. Furthermore, Chaurasi Samalei are important deities of the Keutas, the fishermen caste of Bolangir (Senapati and Sahu, 1968:107). This notion of Chaurasi (84) Samalei prevalent among the Keutas (fishermen) of west Odisha very probably refers to 84 Siddha-Gurus in Tantrik Buddhism. In view of this, Goddess Laksminkara may reasonably be identified with Laksminkara i.e. Samalei or Samalesvari who has been worshipped by the local people in Sambalpur. Raja Ramai Dev founded the kingdom of Patna in the fourteenth century. Within a very short span of his military career, Raja Ramai Dev became the chief of the cluster of eighteen Garhs (forts). Patna was an important State in west Odisha under the Chauhans since fourteenth century. By the sixteenth century, almost the whole of west Odisha came under the political sway of the Chauhan Rajas of Patna who occupied as many as eighteen Garhs (Athara-Garh) under them. The twelfth king Raja Narasingha Dev handed over to his younger brother Balaram Dev the territory lying north of the river Ang / Ong (O’Malley, 1909:21; Senapati and Sahu, 1968:3). It is said that one rainy night when the Rani of Narasingha Dev was in the throes of childbirth, Balaram Dev swam across a hill-stream named Mayabati, which was flowing in between the capital town of Patnagarh and the village Barapada, and brought the nurse from that village to attend the Rani. It was reward for this courageous and faithful service that Raja Narasingha Dev gave the northeastern part of his dominion to Balaram Dev. Later on, there arose a quarrel between the two brothers concerning the extent of their respective territories. However, it was cordially settled by the intervention of the Queen mother. Tradition goes that the Queen mother took her both sons to the bed of the river Surangi and asked the elder and the younger to sit on her right and left laps respectively. After that she told them that the river Surangi should be taken as her own body (Ang). The elder brother should enjoy the territory to the right of the river and the younger one to the left of it. Both the brothers acknowledged the decision of their mother and from that time onwards the river was called Ang and was regarded as the natural frontier between Patna and Sambalpur territories.
It appears that Raja Narasingha Dev placed the Sambalpur region under the charge of his younger brother Balaram Dev to check the aggression of Haihaya power of Ratanpur (Senapati and Sahu, 1968:52-53). In other words, Balaram Dev was given the Sambalpur tract where he, later on, assumed the power and founded the state of Sambalpur, which became most powerful of the Garhjat cluster and from that time onwards, the importance of Patna declined (Senapati and Sahu, 1968:3). Accordingly, Balaram Dev became the first Chauhan Raja of Sambalpur Rajya about the middle of the 16th century A.D. “The town is named after its tutelary goddess Samlai, who was installed here when it was founded; and local tradition asserts that this name is derived from the fact that a cotton tree (simul) grew at the place where her image was set up” (O’Malley, 1909:1). Thus, as per the prevailing tradition, Balaram Dev discovered the image of Samalei beneath a Semel (silk cotton) tree. The botanical name of this tree is Bomax malabaricum. Because of phonetic resemblance between Semel and Samalei some scholars give credence to this tale that the deity worshipped under a Semel tree has come to be recognized as Samalei. Oral tradition relates that Raja Balaram Dev was given a grant of this area by his elder brother Raja Narasingha Dev of Patnagarh. Balaram Dev “first established himself at a place in the Bargarh tahsil which he called Nuagarh, i.e., the new fort. Next, as his power grew, he made a new capital at a larger place called Baragarh, or the big fort, the modern Bargarh” (O’Malley, 1909:21). Thus, he established himself first at Bargarh on the bank of the river Jira. Bargarh is on the National Highway No.6 and is about 50 kms. to the west of Sambalpur. The original name of this place was Baghar-Kota as identified from an inscription of the 11th century A.D. It was called Bargarh probably from the time of Raja Balaram Dev who made it for some time his headquarters and constructed a big (Bar / Bad) fort (Garh) for its protection. Later on, Raja Narayan Singh, the last Chauhan Raja granted this place in Maufi (free hold) to two Brahmin brothers Krusna Das and Narayan Das, sons of Baluki Das who was killed in action by the Gond rebels led by Bandya Ray and Mahapatra Ray. The grant is known as the Sri-kata / Sir-Kata grant (Senapati and Mahanti, 1971:510). Etymologically, the word Sri-Kata or Sir-Kata is a combination of Sir and Kata. The word Sir means head and Kata means cutting. In other words, the award is meant for sacrifice of life.
However, Raja Balaram Dev is believed to have shifted his capital from Bargarh to Chaunrpur, “a village lying opposite to Sambalpur on the southern bank of the river Mahanadi” (O’Malley, 1909:21). In all probability, during this phase when Raja Balaram Dev carved out a new Rajya out of the territory of his elder brother he named it Huma Desa. Thereafter, the time of foundation of Sambalpur Rajya was about the year 1570 A.D. (Panda, 1996:35).
As per the legend, the village Chaunrpur is supposed to be the seat of Raja Balaram Dev previous to his coming to Sambalpur. One day while hunting, Raja Balaram Dev crossed the river Mahanadi. When he arrived at the left bank an attractive hare appeared before him. Raja Balaram Dev set his hounds at the innocent creature. But the outcome was contrary to his expectation. After some time, Raja Balaram Dev discovered his hounds repulsed by the hare. He had not anticipated such a scene. Struck by the most timid of animals, he thought that there might be some supernatural power in the land. That night Goddess Samalei appeared in his dream and said, “Why do you appear so sad? Don’t think that there appears to have been a mistake. I am Lankesvari here. Worship me. Your expectations and hopes will be fulfilled.” Next day, Raja Balaram Dev discovered the deity in the form of a stone. Afterward, he decided to build his Gad or Garh nearby. Having built a Gad he installed in it the deity Samalei. The place where her image was set up was a Kud (island) on which stood a Semel tree and hence was called Semel-Kud while the deity was named Samalei. Similar narratives are recorded by O’Malley (1909:217) and Senapati and Mahanti (1971:2-3) in their Sambalpur Gazetteer.
Afterward, Samalei has been sanskritised to Samalesvari. Etymologically, the name Samalesvari is a combination of Samala and Isvari. The word Samala refers to Sambala or Sambalpur. Accordingly, Samalesvari means Isvari of Sambala in the reigns of Chauhans. In other words, Sambalpur is acknowledged as the land of Samalei and she is the reigning deity of Sambalpur “A similar legend is still current regarding the foundation of Kharagpur, the city of the hare, in the Monghyr district” (O’Malley, 1909:21; Senapati and Mahanti, 1971:2-3). Be that as it may, identical stories prevail about origins of other places of Odisha like Cuttack, Talcher and Baripada. Matching story is also associated with detection of deities like Banibakreswari of Kuapada village under Delanga block in Puri district and Barala Devi of Balasakumpa village in Phulbani district. This is why, it is hard to estimate the accurate time and locate the exact place of the origin of this myth (Pasayat, 2003:10-12). Nevertheless, this story attests the fact that the aboriginal religious shrine like Samalei has received royal patronage. Raja Balaram Dev enshrined Samalei Devi inside his Gad. During his reign, Seva-Puja (Puja services) was provided from the royal treasury. In other words, State funding of Seva-Puja has been introduced since then. Subsequently, the present temple was built during 1657-95 A.D. in the reign of Raja Chhatra Sai (Senapati and Mahanti, 1971:548). In view of this, it may be suggested here that Samalei Pitha already existed when Raja Balaram Dev arrived here. Perhaps, the temple was in a dilapidated condition. So, Raja Balaram Dev extended royal patronage and rebuilt the temple. Afterward, Raja Chhatra Sai had also most probably rebuilt or renovated the temple.
There is no denying the fact that Raja Balaram Dev adopted this Sakti-Pitha and extended royal patronage. But, the most significant development in the period of Raja Chhatra Sai (1657-95) was endowment of forty villages for the regular worship of Samalei Devi. Names of some villages have been collected from the natives. These are Jayaghanta, Kalamati, Ambasada Katapali, Nunia Jampali, Karpula Senapali, Chaunrpur etc. In other words, Raja Chhatra Sai made a permanent arrangement for the maintenance of the Samalei Gudi. It means that recognized steps have been taken by the Chauhan rulers for the state-funding of the Seva-Puja in Samalei Gudi and she has been elevated to the status of Rastra-Devi and called Sambalesvari i.e. Isvari or presiding deity of Sambala or Sambalpur. However, the landed property assigned for the performance of the daily and special Puja of Samalei Devi have been converted into personal property by the priests. This had been possible, most probably, during the British rule, either by hiding or destroying the copper plate grants. Any how, the priests are now managing the Seva-Puja of Samalei Gudi. Allegedly, the temple has no landed property at present (Senapati and Mahanti, 1971:548).
It may be understood with exactitude that in the 15th and 16th century A.D., after collapse of the Ganga empire of Odisha, a strong pull towards political fragmentation as well as decentralization of power took place to a certain extent due to the partition of ruling chiefs who ended up as independent potentates. In the frontier zone of uncertain control like Daksina Kosala (roughly modern west Odisha) the indigenous tribal chiefs and chiefs of obscure origins took advantage of weak central authority; they assumed power and formed several small Rajyas (Deo, 2003:96). Formation of a separate Bargarh and subsequently Huma Desa and finally Sambalpur Rajya by Raja Balaram Dev in the 16th century A.D. was the product of the partition of the ruling family of Patnagarh. In all probability, this was a forested area and inhabited by aboriginal people when Raja Balaram Dev first arrived here. He was a reputed warrior. Owing to military necessity, the administration of this tribal dominated, hilly and forested part was entrusted to him by his elder brother Raja Narasingha Dev, the-then Chauhan Raja of Patnagarh. Raja Balaram Dev was successful to consolidate and strengthen the Chauhan rule in this part of the Rajya and he carved out a new Rajya out of the country of his elder brother. Subsequently, he and his successors extended and strengthened Chauhan rule in Sambalpur Rajya. In order to sustain a separate and independent Sambalpur Rajya, most probably, Raja Balaram Dev and his successors had to depend upon the Bhagas (share) and Bhogas. They had to influence the local tribal people to become settled agriculturists, so that production would augment because tribal economy based on hunting and shifting cultivation cannot maintain a Rajya as analysed somewhere else by Deo (2003:96). To legitimize their status as Rajas and to their share (Bhaga) of the produce, the Chauhan rulers granted lands to Brahmins and temples, which contributed to altering the agrarian situation, formation of hierarchical social order and also encouraged Brahminisation or Hinduisation of society in this area. In view of this, it may be recommended that Samalei Pitha previously existed when Raja Balaram Dev arrived here. Perhaps, this religious Pitha was in a decaying state. He extended state patronage and rebuilt or renovated this Pitha. Later on, Raja Chhatra Sai was also, most probably, instrumental in rebuilding or renovating it. As a result, the temple of Samalei or Sambalesvari became an important apparatus of Hinduisation in Sambalpur.
“There is a tradition that the country was invaded by the Muhammadan general Kalapahar…The story is that when Kalapahar invaded Odisha (A. D. 1568), the priests of Puri fled with the images of Jagannath and buried it on the Mahanadi to the south of Sambalpur. Kalapahar followed them to Sambalpur with his army, but could not force an entrance into the fort. While encamped outside it, his force was destroyed by the goddesses Samlai and Patneswari; for the former assumed the form of a milkmaid and sold curds and milk to his soldiers, while the latter appeared as a malini or gardener and sold them fruit. Milk, curds and fruit spread desolation in the army, for cholera broke out; and Samlai put Kalapahar to flight, capturing among other things his drum, the sound of which had the reputation of making the limbs of the Hindu gods and goddesses off their images. The drum, ghanta or big bell, and ghulghula or small bell taken by Samlai are still to be seen in her temple; while the tombs of Muhammadans who accompanied Kalapahar are pointed out at Sankerbandh, where his army encamped” (O’Malley, 1909:22).
It is believed that the priests buried the images on the Mahanadi in Soneur or Subarnapur, which is situated to the south of Sambalpur. It is said that the incident took place when Chhatra Sai was the ruler of Sambalpur. But it is also said that it took place during the reign of Balabhadra Dev. When the soldiers of Kalapahada drank the milk and curd, which spread desolation among them, at this hour, Raja Balabhadra Dev of Sambalpur drove back Kalapahada effectively. Accordingly, Samalei Devi satisfied Kalapahada’s thirst for quest to destroy the image of Lord Jagannath. It would not be out of place to mention that matching stories prevail in other shrines of Odisha namely Chalhakhai Devi at Kulada in Ganjam district, Dahikhai-Chamundai Devi at Rambha in Ganjam district. This tale is also associated with Danteswari Devi at Bastar in the neighbouring state of Chhattisgarh (Pasayat, 2003:20). It may be suggested that the foundation of this narrative is a feat of imagination. This is why, it is complicated to identify the place wherefrom and classify the time when this tale has initially been conceived and later adopted in other religious shrines. Nonetheless, we cannot disregard the information that this tale has singled out the supernatural power and deeds of Samalei Devi. It has established socio-cultural affiliation between the aborigines and the caste Hindus. By assimilating such stories into Samalei cult, the aboriginal people identify themselves as part of the larger Hindu religious culture, thus, contributing to Hindu cultural unity at a larger level which had facilitated at the time of state formation in Sambalpur.
Samalei at Sambalpur is a shapeless rock made to appear like a face. It may be believed to be a big piece of head-like stone structure. According to the oral tradition, Daksa arranged a Yajna. He invited all the deities and relatives to be present at the function. But he did not call his own daughter Sati and son-in-law Lord Siva, for the reason that Sati married Lord Siva against the desire and wish of Daksa. When Sati came to know about it, tears rolled down her face. When she settled down she got down at her father’s residence to attend the ritual ceremony without invitation. Unfortunately, Sati was received with dihonour and disgrace. She protested and accused her father for his neglect and disregard shown to her husband. Daksa broke into anger and cursed Lord Siva as a beggar, ashman, Yogi, king of goblins and so on. Sati could not put up with such abuse and insult; she jumped into the Yajna-Kunda. Consequently, Lord Siva became furious and started his Tandava bearing the corpse of Sati on his back. It was terrible and the destruction of the entire universe was imminent. So, Lord Visnu came out to protect the mankind. He instructed his Sudarsana Chakra to slash the dead body of Sati into pieces. When Lord Siva became conscious, Lord Visnu consoled him and the anger of Lord Siva cooled. Thereafter, Lord Siva retired alone to his abode Kailas. The corpse of Sati hewn into a number of pieces and wherever a fragment touched the earth, a Sakti-Pitha i.e. shrine of mother goddess sprang up. It is understood to be the head of Sati, which is enshrined and worshipped in the Samalei Gudi of Sambalpur.
Though mythological origin of the Sakti-Pitha at Sambalpur is connected with the most famous Daksa-Yajna story, originally it is not reported or recorded in any of the epic tradition of the Hindu religion. There is no denying the fact that the image of Samalei Devi is a large block of stone. There is also a projection with a narrow groove in the middle of the stone image of the deity. This projection is supposed to be the mouth of the deity. On both sides of projection are depressions covered with beaten gold leaves, which symbolize the eyes of the deity. Moreover, the image of Samalei Devi does not bear a resemblance to any other Sakti goddess found in Odisha. There is a Parsva-Devata of Samalei identified as Pitabali who is understood to be the deity of tribal people namely Kandhas (Senapati and Mahanti, 1971:547). The above account of Samalei Devi recommends us to accept as true that she is a non-Brahmin deity, formerly worshipped by the aborigines of Sambalpur. Addition of Daksa-Yajna narrative is very likely a later improvement to add to Samalei some supplementary doses of Sanskritik fundamentals. This may be recommended to be an excellent illustration of localization or parochialisation of renowned Daksa-Yajna account to validate the faith of the aborigines with the Hindu epic tradition (Great Tradition) of India. By identifying Sambalpur with the manifestation of Sakti as Sambalesvari and her mythical and miraculous actions, the local people identify and classify themselves as component of the larger Hindu culture (Great Tradition), thus, contributing to cultural unity and consolidation of Chauhan rule in Sambalpur.
There is one more story, which indicates the dietary pattern of Samalei Devi. On one occasion, the priest was offering prayers to the goddess. His small daughter was standing by his side. The priest had fruits and flowers on a plate. All of a sudden, the priest discovered that the deity had disappeared. Looking up, he found the deity devouring his girl child. He was dumb-founded. Thereafter, the priest threw the plate right away at the face of the deity. As a result, the face of the deity turned to back side. So, the deity is thought to be facing away from the main entrance and that is why there is no face on the front side. Interestingly, this tale with little variation is found in the following religious shrines namely Kanaka-Durga at Piteipur village in Jagatsinghpur district, Janlei Devi at Hinjilikatu in Ganjam district and Kumari Devi at Bonai in Sundargarh district. In addition, the narrative is associated with Chandrahasini Devi at Chandrapur in Bilaspur district of the neighbouring state of Chhattisgarh (Pasayat, 2003:19). However, the meaning of this tale is more important for our study. This story is meant not only to frighten children away but also suggests the practice of severe form of blood sacrifice and influence of Tantra on this Pitha. As per the oral tradition, once upon a time human beings were sacrificed before Samalei Devi. It is said that once a Siddha Brahmin arrived at Sambalpur. Priests of Samalei Devi caught him for sacrifice before the deity. The Brahmin told the priests to leave him alone and no one else before the deity inside the Garbhagriha so that Samalei Devi could munch him if she required. Accordingly, the Brahmin was not beheaded and rather left alone and alive in the Garbhagriha and the doors were closed. The episode went contrary to the interest of the priests. Next morning, the Brahmin came out from the Garbhagriha alive and unhurt. The account spread quickly throughout the Rajya that the Brahmin had contended and pleased Samalei Devi and the deity had blessed him. Maharaja Baliar Singh heard this incredible and miraculous incident; he gave order to bring to an end the practice of human sacrifice before Samalei Devi. Since then, buffaloes were sacrificed before the deity. Now a days, Buka (he-goat) and cock are familiar sacrificial objects in Durga Puja, Chaitra Purnima and other occasions in this Sakti-Pitha. This may be understood to be the process of legitimization of Brahmin priests in the non-Brahminik Samalei Gudi and minimization of severe practice of blood sacrifice in this Pitha.
According to the tradition, Samalei was worshipped in the beginning by the natives belonging to Sahara and Jhara communities living on the bank of the river Mahanadi. The chief occupation of these people was to collect diamonds and gold from the riverbed of Mahanadi. On one occasion, they found a big piece of stone under the deep water. They brought it out with the hope to extract diamonds and other valuable stones from it; they positioned it under a Semel tree on the bank of the river. Later on, they realized it as a deity in the shape of a stone. Thence, they started worshipping her (Dash, 1962:227). Although, Raja Balaram Dev adopted the local deity, he did not reject and exclude the traditional servitors of the deity from the temple cult, which was emerging as a testimony to Sanskritisation or Hinduisation of Samalei Devi. He appointed the Saharas, the traditional worshippers of the deity as the priests and Jharas as the servants and holders of canopy of Samalei Devi (Sae Deo, 1985:7-8). Saharas are generally considered to be untouchables in the social hierarchy of this culture area. In villages, the Jhankar worships Samalei as village deity. Though the Jhankars do not belong to any specific caste or community they are, in fact, non-Brahmin priests who also worship other village deities namely Mauli, Budhi–Ma and Gram-Pati. Previously, Jhankars were granted rent-free lands for their service in the villages. All these combinedly point out that Samalei has the personality of a non-Brahmin deity. Most probably, the rulers intended no harm to the sentiments and feelings of the aborigines. In view of this, it may be suggested that Saktism has taken all care to adopt and approve the features of the aboriginal or local religious cult i.e. Samalei. In other words, numerous local indigenous communities with Samalei tradition of erstwhile Sambalpur Rajya have been deeply attracted towards and absorbed in the mainstream of the Indian cultural tradition through Saktism i.e. Great Tradition. Saktism coupled with Saivism has formed the centre of the integration of Indian civilization and has a great influence on the regional religious culture of Sambalpur i.e. Little Tradition.
A very important characteristic of the development of religious system in Sambalpur region during the medieval period is the introduction of Tantrik elements in worship. As it has been discussed earlier, historical and archaeological remains attest the fact that Sambalpur region has been a stronghold of Saivism and Saktism united with Tantrism. Furthermore, severe practice of blood sacrifice at this Pitha, absence of caste distinction, employment or engagement of tribal or non-Brahmin priests, installation of the guardian deity (Samalei) in the Garbhagriha (sanctum sanctorum), belief in the replica or proxy divinity (Chalanti Pratima) of the main deity, annual or periodical journey (Yatra) of the Chalanti Pratima, spirit possession or descending of Samalei Devi through human beings etc. suggest some connections with the Tantra. As it is discussed elsewhere, Sambalpur as well as Samalei Pitha has been identified with an important seat of Tantrism where a very high standard of Tantrik culture had developed during the Buddhist and pre-Chauhan period. But, thereafter, particularly during the Chauhan period the unique blend of Saktism, Saivism, Tantrism and Sanskritik or Brahminical culture rose to a new height in Sambalpur region. Most probably, the Chauhan Rajas have brought their own faith with them. But they have not enjoined on common people of this area to believe and follow their faith and worship their deity rather they have reckoned their own faith with that of the locality. It was not what they practiced and worshipped but what they felt under what they believed that was important. The Chauhan Rajas have taken all care to retain the primitive character of this Pitha like aniconical image of the deity, non-Brahmin priests of the deity, blood sacrifice and the like. By constructing or renovating the temple, they have introduced elaborate rituals in a orderly manner. By giving rent-free land grants to the temple they have ensured regular and expected Seva-Puja for the deity. They have also manufactured myths wherever required to classify the deity as a Hindu goddess. In all probability, they have cautiously followed this principle under political expediency with a view to pleasing the local subjects.
In this context, mention may be made of Asapuri Devi who is the tutelary goddess of the Chauhan Rajas all over the country. Raja Ramai Dev, the first Chauhan Raja of Patna Rajya identified her as Patanesvari in Patna or Patana-gad meaning Isvari of Patana. Since then Patanesvari has been the tutelary goddess of the Chauhan Rajas of the Patana-gad or Patana house. In the same way, Raja Balaram Dev established Sambalpur Rajya. He also extolled the local deity Samalei as Sambalesvari meaning Isvari of Sambala or Sambalpur and the Raja accepted her with his own tutelary goddess. This way, the Hindu scholars and priests hinduised the local name of the deity i.e. from Samalei to Sambalesvari. According to this name, she is the deity of all who dwell in Sambalpur. In other words, the deity represents a larger society wherein people of various ethnic background stay together. Thus, the deity has become the source and symbol of unity and integrity mainly between the aboriginal people and caste-Hindus in Sambalpur. It may be understood that the Chauhan Rajas have made it their principle to esteem and extol the deities of the aborigines or natives wherever they have established their kingdoms and expanded their territory. Samalei, the deity of the autochthonous people has been hijacked by the ruling classes and used as tool to exercise their authority and control over the latter. Not only Samalei of Sambalpur but also Asta-Sambhus in different parts of erstwhile Sambalpur Rajya namely Bimaleswara at Huma, Kedarnath at Ambabhona, Biswanath at Deogaon, Balunkeswara at Gaisama, Maneswara at Maneswar, Swapneswara at Sorna, Bisweswara at Soranda and Nilakantheswara at Niljee have been adopted and given royal patronage in the reigns of Chauhan Rajas. Temples have been constructed and elaborate rituals have been introduced in these temples. Rent-free lands and villages have been granted and regular Seva-Puja of these deities has been ensured. This fundamental principle has made them admired and popular among the local inhabitants and also helped them to expand, consolidate and strengthen the Chauhan rule in Sambalpur region.
It may be noted here that Patanesvari temples are found only at few places like Patnagarh, Bolangir and Sambalpur whereas the number of Samalei Gudi or Samalesvari temples in Sambalpur is quite large. Besides the Samalei Gudi to be found in Sambalpur, Barpali and Subarnapur, the deity occupies a pivotal position in the religious life of the common people through out the length and breadth of the land of Samalei i.e. Sambalpur. She is being commonly worshipped under a tree in the form of a stone in the vicinity of almost each and every village of erstwhile Sambalpur Rajya. This indicates the extent of reverence shown to Samalei in every part of Sambalpur region. In villages, Samalei is worshipped by the Jhankars who enjoy rent-free lands for their Seva-Puja as mentioned earlier. Moreover, many indigenous, aboriginal, native, local, folk or tribal communities with their religious traditions (Little Tradition) of Sambalpur region have been successfully absorbed in the mainstream of the Hindu Great Tradition through Saivism, Saktism and Vaisnavism and helped in the process of state formation during medieval period in erstwhile Sambalpur Rajya. Bose (1941:188) has correctly pointed out, “Hinduism has grown by the incorporation of many tribal cults, until it has become a kind of federation of religious beliefs and practices…which goes by the name of Hinduism”. In sum, it may be concluded that as most of the rulers originated from one of the local groups it was easy for them to raise their deity to be the state deity or Rastra-Devata. In this process, it has helped them to legitimize and consolidate their political power over this area. Deities have become the linkage between the ruler and the ruled. The patronage of local deities and their elevation have helped the ruler to spread the narrative that the local deity has been pleased with the new ruler or the deity has blessed the ruler or the ruler has pleased the deity. They have successfully used the emotional attachment and religious sentiments of the local communities to the deity. This has helped the ruler to mobilize support of the local people and to legitimize their position and status in this area. This pattern has emerged partly because the rulers have needed the support of the local communities for their numerical strength and partly because of the fear of the deity whose wrath might result from absence of worship. The incorporation of local communities into the wider social order and their indoctrination proceeded in multifaceted manner through ceremonial and enactment of hierarchical relations. So, multiple simultaneous processes of Hinduisation, Tribalisation and localization / parochialisation are found linking between the Hindu Great Tradition and the local Little Tradition of Sambalpur. These processes of diffusion, acculturation and assimilation were never one-way flow from Hindu Great Tradition to local Little Tradition alone. In Sambalpur area, simultaneous process of acculturation and de-culturation has been observed down the ages. It has proceeded through complex processes of interaction, which are confirmed by myths, legends and historical evidence.
Bose, N.K. (1941),“The Hindu Method of Tribal Absorption”, Science and Culture,pp.199-194.
Dash, S.P. (1962), Sambalpur Itihas (Odia), Sambalpur: Viswabharati Press.
Deo, F. (2003), “Chauhan Myth and Royal Legitimization in Kosala (Daksina)”, Sambalpur Lok Mahotsav Souvenir – 2003, pp.96-101.
Eschmann, A. (1986), “Hinduisation of Tribal Deities in Orissa: The Sakta and Saiva Typology” in A.Eschmann, H.Kulke and G.C.Tripathy (eds.), The Cult of Jagannath and the Regional Tradition of Orissa, New Delhi: Manohar Publications.
Mishra, R. (2003), “Scientific Theories in the Creativities of the Samvalaka – Princess Laksminkara” Sambalpur Lok Mahotsav Souvenir – 2003, pp.87-90.
O’Malley, L. S. S. (1909), Sambalpur Gazetteer, New Delhi: Logos Press (reprinted 2007).
Panda, L.K. (1985), Saivism in Orissa, Delhi: Sundeep Prakashan.
Panda, S.S. (1996), “Early Chauhan Temples of Sambalpur Town”, Orissa Review, April, pp.34-38.
Panda, S.S. (2003), “Narsinghnath Temple of Bargarh District”, Orissa Review, August, pp.61-72.
Pasayat, C. (1998), Tribe, Caste and Folkculture, Jaipur: Rawat Publications.
Pasayat, C. (2003), Glimpses of Tribal and Folk Culture, New Delhi: Anmol Publications Pvt. Ltd.
Pasayat, C. (2007), Adivasi Moukhika Sahitya Parampara (in Odia), Kolkata: Sahitya Akademi.
Pasayat, C. (2007), Tribal Non-tribal Divide: Myth and Reality, Bhubaneswar.
Pasayat, C. (2007), History of Tribal Society and Culture, New Delhi: Zenith Books International
Patel, C. B. (2004), “Manuscript Efflorescence of Rampur Jharial”, Orissa Review, August, pp.41-44.
Sae Deo, L.R. (1985), “Samalesvari Mandira Pratisthara Kimbadanti O Samkshipta Itihas” (Odia), Basanta Milana Smaranika, Hirakhanda, Sambalpur, pp.7-8.
Senapati, N. & B. Mahanti (eds.), (1971), Sambalpur District Gazetteer, Cuttack: Orissa Government Press.
Dr. Chitrasen Pasayat resides at 152, Vijay Vihar, Nuagaon Road, PO: Sishupalgarh, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, 751002
Following report is from the Sambada:
Bhubaneswar, Oct. 24: If you want to know how nature helps human beings in getting formulae for herbal cure at close proximity, then Badrama Wildlife Sanctuary in Sambalpur district could be the next stop for you.
Not only ethno-botanical healing trends, but also Badrama, popularly called as Ushakohi, is famous for its animals, birds, wild mushrooms and the virgin sal and teak forests.
However, its native people and their traditional knowledge to heal common ailments for ages is the mainstay. Even today, a dry deciduous forest, which is vulnerable to forest fire, could retain its greenery through community participation.
Forest department officials in this region have also given due recognition to people’s role in effective conservation and sustainable management practices. Besides the flagship species — elephant which has been declared national heritage animal by the environment and forests ministry — one can spot leopards, tigers, spotted deer hyena and wild boar in the wilderness.
But the beauty of the forest spread is attractive and one can watch them from watchtowers, two at Kutab village and the third one at Pathuri. Badrama Wildlife Sanctuary is nestled in Bamra Wildlife Division of Sambalpur district with an area of 304.03 sqkm, including core area31.28 sqkm (Ushakothi Reserve Forest – 200.68 sqkm, Badrama Reserve Forest – 57.97 sq km, Binjhapalli Reserve Forest – 16.73 sq km and others – 28.65 sq km).
It is 40 km from Sambalpur town on NH-6.The sanctuary has a hilly terrain and is continuous with Khalasuni Sanctuary in the south. There are 172 villages (including hamlets) and 225 revenue villages inside the sanctuary with a population of around 3,000. Almost all are forest dependent tribal communities.
The vegetation is moist sal bearing forest and moist mixed deciduous forest at many places. The single forest rest house (FRH) at Badrama has four suites and the food is also available with expert chefs deployed by the forest department.
There are two perennial streams which provides water for the wild animals throughout the year. One is near Ushakothi, which is 33km from Badrama, FRH on forest road and the other is Deojharan which is 35km from Badrama FRH towards Kutab.
A biodiversity survey was carried out by social service organisation Vasundhara with the joint support of Badrama Wildllife Division and Badrama Abhayaranya Bikas Parishad, a self-help group.
Before that there were no published records available on the status of flora and fauna.
The survey was carried out in June, 2010 which resulted in documenting 220 species of flowering plants including 50 species for medicinal uses, 14 species of wild edible mushrooms, 15 species of mammals, 20 species of butterflies, 30 species of birds, 10 species of amphibians and 12 ologist Prasad Kumar Dash and wildlife biologist Pratyush Mohapatra,who conducted the survey said, “the sanctuary needs to be thoroughly explored to know the existing status of taxonomic novelties. The wildlife of the sanctuary, besides the big animals also include barking deer, sambar, mouse deer, chitals and giant squirrels.’’
“Badrama is rich in traditional knowledge as most of the villagers depend on herbal medicines to cure their diseases and ailments like tuberculosis, jaundice, fever, nephritis, headache, dehydration, common cold, cough and chest pain. The plants used for the purpose are Melia Azadirachta(garuda), Aeilanthus excelsa (mahanimb), Holarrhenaantidysenterica (kurei), Alangium salvifolium (ankula), Atylosia scarabaeoides (banakolatha), Elephantapus scaber (eayura chulia), Carya arborea (kumbhi), Nyctanthes arboritristis (gotikhadika),Occimum sanctum (tulsi) and Ricinus communis (jada),’’ they informed.
The villagers of Kutab with the support of the forest department are being instrumental in protecting 1,200 hectares of forest area from fire in the summer of 2010. This has resulted in very good regeneration of seedlings and saplings of many economic and rare plants of the sanctuary.
Laxman Parua, president, Forest Protection Committee, said: “The prevention of forest fire has helped in natural regeneration of plants such as kendu, bija, sal, harida, bahada, amla and char along with 14 varieties of wild edible mushrooms and many medicinal herbs in their community assessed forest areas.’’
Another young activist Srikar Padhan, who is the secretary of the Forest Protection Committee, said: “The protection of forest against fire has helped in rejuvenating the small streams with the deposition of huge amount of leaf litters on the forest floor.”
He also expressed his satisfaction about the increase availability of elephant fodder plants in Kutab and Tansara after fire protection. This self-initiated forest protection has drawn the attention of the forest department, Badrama Wildlife Sanctuary and the Range Officer has joined hands with the local communities of Kutab to provide small incentives to strengthen future efforts. Dushmanta Pradhan of Badrama Abhayaranya Vikas Parishad said, “Favourite fodder plants of elephants and especially bamboo varieties attract elephants here. Though the water sources are limited, they never create any problem for the elephant population. There are more than 124 species of elephant fodders in the forest. From tourism point of view many caves are also found near Ushakothi, Deojharan and Satpahad. However, despite managing forest fire, things like spread of weeds in the forest area is a thing to worry about.’’
A senior forest official said: “Badrama, which was notified as a sanctuary on December 17, 1987 represents a beautiful landscape and attention is also given to take de-weeding measures. We are having many pro-people projects to help prepare a sustainable management strategy for the forests, medicinal varieties and wild animals.’’
JUNGLE FACTS: BADRAMA
● Area: 304.03 sqkm in Sambalpur district
● Major forest species: Sal, teak and bamboo
● Temperature : Winter around 10°C and summer 45°C
● Tourist season: October – April
● What to see : Elephants, leopard, tigers, spotted deer, hyena, wild boar, 220 species of flowering plants, 50 species of medicinal herbs, 14 species of wild edible mushrooms, 20 species of butterflies, 30 species of birds, 10 species of amphibians and 12 species of snakes
● How to reach: The forest is 48km from Sambalpur town
● From other places: 4200km from Rourkela via Bonai-Barkot, 180km via 4Bamra-Kuchinda-Jamankira route and 217km from via Jharsuguda-Sambalpur route
● Nearest railhead: Sambalpur
● Nearest airport: Bhubaneswar airport is 250 km and Raipur 300 km from Sambalpur
● Here is another report on Badrama: Badrama Abhayaranya Vikas Parishad
● A you tube video on Badrama:
Following is a report from the Sambad: