The origin of the khatvanga staff.

• Author: Brick, David
• Position: Essay

In its most widely known meaning, the Sanskrit word khatvariga denotes the skull-adorned staff carried by Siva and commonly found in visual and literary representations of that deity, especially in representations of his particularly fearsome aspect known as Bhairava. However, in its earliest occurrences, which are found in the dharmagastra literature, the word khatvanga has no discernible Saivite connotations whatsoever. Instead, it refers to a staff that a Brahmin-killer is supposed to carry as a component of his prescribed penance. In particular, the dharmasiitras of Gautama and Baudhayana state that a Brahmin-killer should carry a khatviitiga as part of the twelve-year rite that will expiate his sin. The relevant passages of these works read as follows:

agnau saktir brahmaghnas trir avacchatasya I laksyariz vet syCzj janye Sastratthrteun khatvidrigakaplilapCznir vd dvadata sarhvatsaroin brahtnaciiri bhaiksclya gramariz pravilet karmacaksanah I (GDh 22.2-4) Emaciated, a Brahmin-killer should cast himself into a fire three times; or he should become a target for armed men in battle; or for twelve years, he should carry in hand a khatviiriga and skull, remain celibate, and enter a village to beg alms while proclaiming his deed. bhrunaha dvildasca samtih I kapali kharveirigi gardabhavasii aranyaniketanah ttnascane dhvajath tavagirah krtva kutith karayet tam. avaset I (BDh 2.1.2-3) A Brahmin-killer' should do the following for twelve years: He should carry a skull and a khatveiriga; wear the skin of a donkey; reside in the wilderness; make the head of a corpse his banner; have a but built in a cemetery; and live in it. Subsequent to these works, a number of purdnas recount two different stories in which Siva commits acts of Brahmin-murder: firstly, he kills Vist,u's doorkeeper, the Brahmin Visvaksena, and, secondly, he cuts off the fifth head of the creator god Brahm[bar.a](2) Hence, based upon these textual sources, several scholars have drawn the rather obvious conclusion that Siva must carry the khatvariga staff because he is in some sense a Brahmin-killer.(3) As far as I am aware, however, no one has answered the more fundamental question that this raises: why should a Brahmin-killer carry as his staff something called a khatvanga, which by its etymology would appear to denote the 'post' ((Riga) of a 'bed' or 'cot' (khatvet)? It is the purpose of this article to provide a satisfactory answer to this question.

In order to understand why a Brahmin-killer is supposed to carry a khapariga, it is first necessary to understand the precise meaning of the term when it is originally mentioned as part of the penance for Brahmin-murder. Unfortunately, the earliest passages in which the word khatvCiriga occurs--all of which come from the early dharmasUtras (4)--are far from explicit on this point. Later dharmagastric commentaries, however, explain the term's signification quite unambiguously. These texts offer two possible interpretations. Vijrianegvara's Mitakyara (on YSm 3.243) clearly expresses the first of these in the following passage:

khatvangagabdena dandaropitairahkapalatmako dhvajo grhyate na punah khatvaikadelali mahoksah khatvangariz parafur ity adivyavaharesu tasyaiva prasiddhet I The word khatvanga is understood to denote a banner having the character of a skull mounted on a staff, rather than a particular part of a bed, for that exact meaning is well established in usages such as "A great bull, a khatvatiga, an axe. ..." (5) Here it is argued that the word khatvouiga does not denote a particular part of a bed, but rather a staff upon which a skull has been mounted; and as support for this position the Mittikrard cites the usage of the word in the givamahimnastava (8), a well-known praise of Siva. Hence, the text clearly dissociates the word khatvariga from its apparent etymology and, instead, associates it explicitly with Saivite paraphernalia.

The second possible interpretation of khatviinga is found in Apararka (on YSm 3.243), whose statements on this matter read as follows:

dhvajavan khatvaizgi I . . . .khatva catra tavanirharanartha I tadangam eva dhvajatabdena viva/Q.11am I The phrase 'carrying a banner' [in YSm 3.243] means 'carrying a bed-post' (khatvariga). . And in this compound, the word 'bed' (khatva) refers to one used to carry away a corpse. The word 'banner' [in YSm 3.243] denotes a 'post' (anga) of that (= khatva). As one can see, in direct contrast with the Mitaksara, Apararka defines a khatviiriga as part of a bed, specifically as part of a bed used to carry away corpses, which would nicely explain its use in a penance for Brahmin-murder. The fact that Apararka's interpretation reflects what appears to be the etymology of khatvibiga strongly suggests that it is closer to the original meaning of that term. And significantly, both Bilhler (1879) and Olivelle (2000) apparently agree, for they interpret the word khatvatiga in the various dharmasutras to denote a post from a bed-frame.

Important additional support for this position comes from the following passage of the A pastamba Dharmasutra (1.28.21-29.1):

atha bhravaha scvajinariz kharafinath va bahirloma paridhaya purusafirah pratipanartham adaya I khatvarigath dar3darthe karmartamadheyath prabruvartat cankramyeta ko bhrunaghne bhilcsam iti I Now, a bhrunahan [= abortionist/Brahmin-killer] should wear the skin of either a dog or a donkey with the hair facing out; carry a human skull for a drinking cup and a khatvatiga for a staff; and wander about, announcing the name of his deed, saying, "Who (will give) alms to a bhrittjahan?" This passage, which contains probably the earliest occurrence of the word khatvatiga in Indic literature, (6) prescribes the penance for a bhrtinahan, a term that can denote either an abortionist or a Brahmin-killer. Tellingly, it specifies that a bhrigtahan should "carry a human skull for a drinking cup and a khatvariga for a staff" (purusafiralz pratipanOrtham adaya khatvatigath danarthe). Since here a human skull is obviously being put to an unusual use, there is the implication that a khafrariga is as well. And if it is not being put to an unusual use, then Apastamba supplies a clearly unnecessary detail when he specifies how a bhrunahan should use it. Consequently, it makes much better sense to interpret khatvatiga in this passage as a post from a bed-frame rather than as a specially designed staff. Moreover, given that Apastamba uses both the words khatvc1 (1.6.4, 15.21) and (lga (1.2.28, 22.7, 26.7, etc.) separately outside of the compound khcoviinga, it is clear that they were part of his active vocabulary. Therefore, it seems most natural to interpret khatvariga in Apastamba and by extension elsewhere in the dhannasiitras as a compound of these words. Of course, this conclusion is unlikely to surprise many Indologists, but it is, nevertheless, crucial to establish at the outset if one hopes to understand why a Brahmin-killer must carry a khatvii riga.

Beyond this, one might even plausibly surmise from the available evidence both the precise part of a bed that was originally a khatvariga and the particular kind of bed that was originally a khatva. Since, according to [bar.A] pastamba (1.29.1), a khatvanga can function as a staff, it would likely have been one of the long wooden rails of a rectangular...