04 Untouchability

CHAPTER IV

UNTOUCHABILITY

Those who have written on the Indian caste system bave always been struck by the fact of the existence of certain castes that are treated as untouchables. But it should not be supposed that this is something confined only to India. Even nations that have no caste system at all have often carried out complete segregation of certain people dwelling in their midst, which in essentials is the same as the system of untouchability in India. The Encyclopaedia of social sciences vol. XI. p. 339 says that in the southern States of U. S. A. discrimination against Negroes took the form of residential segregation, separation of the races in public conveyances and places of amusement, exclusion of Negroes from public institutions and educational discrimination. Disenfranchisement and social discrimination had their economio counterpart in all branches of industry except agriculture and domestic and personal service,88% occupations to which Negroes had been habituated under the slave regime.’ It is also within living memory that Mahatma Gandhi had to lead a movement of satyagraha in South Africa against the disoriminating treatment of Indians and even now in Natal and other parts of British Africa there is legislation restricting Indians in the matter of residence and purchagos of land.

In the early Vedic literature several of the names of oastes that are spoken of in the emptis es antyajas occur. We have carmamna (a tanner of hides ?) in the Rgveda (VIII. 5, 38), the Capdala and Paulkasa occur in the Vaj. S., the Vapa or Vapta ( barber ) even in the Rg., the Vidalakara or Bidalakāra ( corresponding to the buruda of the smśtis) oocurs in the Vaj. 8. and the Tai. Br., Vāsaḥpalpūli ( washerwoman) correspond. ing to the Rajaka of the smrtis in the Vaj. S. But there is no

  1. Vide Westermarck’s ‘The Origin and Development of the moral ideas’ vol. I. pp. 370-371 for the treatment of Bushmen in Africa and Australia and of Negroes in America. Vide ‘Satyagraha in South Africa’ by Mahatma Gandhi translated by Mr. Valji Govindji Desai (published by B. Ganesan, 1928).166

indioation in these passages whether these, even if they formed castes, were at all untouchables. The utmost that can be said is that as the Paulkasa is assigned to bibhatsā (in Vaj. S. 30. 17) and Candala to Vāyu (in the Puruṣamedha), the Paulkasa lived in such a way as to cause disgust and the Candala lived in the wind ( i. e. probably in the open or in a cemetery ). The only passage of Vedic literature on which reliance can be placed for some definite statement about cāndalas is in the Chandogya Up.386 V. 10.7. where while describing the fate of those souls that went to the world of the moon for enjoying the rewards of some of their actions it is stated those who did praiseworthy actions here, quickly acquire birth in a good condition, viz. in the condition of a brāhmaṇa, a kṣatriya or vaisya, while those whose actions were low ( reprehensible ) quickly acquire birth in a low condition i. e. as a dog, or a boar or & capdala.’ This occurs in Pañcāgnividyā, the purpose of which is to teach vairāgya and disgust with the transmigratory world. This passage does not enjoin anything, it is a bare statement by way of explanation or elucidation. All that can be legitimately ipferred from this is that the first three varṇas were cominended and that caṇdalas were looked upon as the lowest in the social scale. It is to be noticed that the sūdra vārng does not occur in this passage at all. So probably even in the times of the Chandogya the candāla was looked upon as a sūdra, though lowest among the several sūdra subcastes. The candala is equated with the dog and the boar in this passage, but this leads hardly anywhere. It is no doubt stated in the Sat. Br. XII. 4. 1. 4 387 that ’three beasts are unclean in relation to a sacrifice viz. the vicious (filthy) boar, the ram and the dog.’ Here it is clear that every boar is not unclean, but probably only that variety that subsists on the village offal. On the other hand the flesh of boars was said to cause great delight to the Pitps when offered in sraddha (vide Menu III. 270 and Yāj. I. 259). Therefore this Upaniṣad passage does not say anything on the point whether the Candala was in its day untouchable. This passage may be com pared with another in which the śūdra is said to be a walking

  1. तब इद रमणीयचरणा अभ्याशो ह यत्ते रमणीयां योनिमापोरन बामणयोनि पा क्षत्रिययोनि पा वैश्ययोनि पाथ यह कपूयचरणा अभ्याशोह यत्ते कपूया योनिमापोरन

fa a Firenet a VETMUTTI girate V. 10. 7. The Vedantasutra III. 1. 8-11 deals with this passage.

CTTISANAT: I gaire ge#: 427 I het forutsetts Part 2 T T ransferfra gago X11.4. 1: 4.

Oh. IV )

Untouchability

167

cemetery. If the sūdra was not untouchable in the Vedic literature, and if he was allowed to be a cook for brāhmaṇas and to wash the feet of brāhmaṇa guests in spite of that passage ( as stated in the Dharmasutras quoted above pp. 161-162 ), there is no reason to suppose that the Chandogya passage indicates that the candāla was untouchable in the remote ages. Another passage is relied upon by orthodox writers to support the theory that untouchability of candālas is declared in Vedic writings. In the Br. Up. I. 3 the story is narrated that gods and asuras had a strife and the gods thought that they might rise superior to the asuras by the Udgitha. In this vidya occurs the passage388

this devata ( Prana) throwing aside the sin that was death to these devatās (vāk eto. ) sent it to the ends of these quarters and he put down the sin of these devatās there; therefore one should not go to people (outside the Āryan pale) nor to the ends ( of the quarters ) thinking otherwise I may fall in with pāpman i. e. death’. In the first place there are no peoples expressly named here. Samkara explains that by ’end of the quarters are meant regions where people opposed to Vedic culture dwell. This description can only apply to people like the mleochas and not to cāṇdalas who are not opposed to Vedic knowledge (but who have no adhikāra to learn it). Besides cindalas might stay outside the village, but they do not stay at the end of the quarters:89 (or at the end of the arya territory ). Hence this passage does not help in establishing the theory of untouchability for Vedic times.

Next comes the consideration of the evidence derived from the sūtras and smrtis. But certain preliminary observations must be made to olarify the position. The theory of the early emptis was that there were only four yarpas and there was no fifth varṇa. Vide Manu X. 4 and Apusāganaparva 47.18.390 When in modern times the so-called untouchables are referred

  1. सावा एषा देषततासां देवताना पाप्मान सत्युमपाहत्य पत्रासां दिए पांचकारतवासा पाममो पिन्यदधात्तस्मान जनमियानान्तमियाद पाप्मान मुत्युमन्यवा arthair. 7. 1. 8. 10. . 389. The Mlocohas wore koown to the Sat. Br. (III. 2. 1. 24 “tasmda da brahmapo mlcochet). Vido Ait. Br. 33. 6 ‘antan rah. prajabhakpista’ quoted above in noto 118 for the meaning of disam antah’,

· 890. u grana TE HIT & WEI AE 10,4; Furut port cara rasm 47. 18.

168

Éistory of Dharmadāstra

(Ch. It

to as the pañcamas,89l that is something against the smrti tradi tion. Pān, II. 4. 10 and Patañjali398 say that & Samahara dvandva oompound can be formed from several subdivisions of sūdras that are not nirarasita e. g. we can have the compound *takṣayaskaram’ meaning carpenters and blacksmiths, but not ‘candala-mṛtapam’, because capdalas and mrtapas’are niravasita sūdras (and so the compound will be ‘caṇdālamstapaḥ). There fore it follows that Pan. and Patañjali inoluded caṇdalas and mṛtapas among sūdras. When Angiras ( note 171 above) includes kṣats, sūta, vaidehika, māgadha and dyogava ( that are pratiloma castes) among antyāvasāyins along with cāndala and svapaca, he makes it clear that he regarded cāndalas as included among sūdras, for Manu X. 41 deolares that all pratiloma castes are similar to śūdras in their dharma and because the Santiparva 297,28393 expressly says that the vaidehika is called sūdra by learned dvijas. Gradually how. ever, a distinction was made between sūdras and castes like capdalas. Fresh castes were then added to the list of untoucha. bles by custom and usage and the spirit of exclusiveness, though there is no warrant of the sāstras for such a procedure.

Untouchability did not and does not arise by birth alone. It arises in various ways. In the first place, persons become outcasted and untouchable by being guilty of certain acts that amount to grave sins. For example, Manu IX. 235-239 presori bes that those who are guilty of brahmana-murder, theft of brāhmapa’s gold or drinkers of spirituous liquors should be excommunicated, no one should dine with them or teach them, or officiate as priests for them, nor should marriage relationship be entered into with them and they should wander over the world excluded from all Vedic dharmas. But if they perform the proper priyasoitta they are restored to caste and become touchable. Secondly, persons were treated as untouchables simply through religious hatred and abhorrence beobuse they belonged to a different sect or religion. For example, Aparārka

  1. N. P. Dutt in Origin and growth of caste in India’ vol. I, p. 105, (1931) aposks of Nihadas, chandalas and paulkasas as the fifth varṇa’.

392, Vide note 200 above for the quotation from tho Mababb&pya.

893 rata ratat prin TTI FRUTTI HU X. 41: QUY the TOTT AUTOT ipfe 297. 88.

Ob. IV)

Untouchability

169

(p. 923 ) and Sm, 0.894 (I. p. 118 ) quote verses from the Ṣat trimsan-mata and Brahmāṇdapurāṇa that ‘on touching Bauddhas, Pasupatas, Jaingn, Lokāyatikas, Kāpilas ( Samkhyas ) and brahmanas guilty of doing actions inconsistent with their oaste one should enter water with the clothes on and also on touching Śaivas and atheists’. It is worthy of note that Aparārka895 p. 923 quotes a verse of Vṛddha-Yajñavalkys that on touching cāṇdālas, pukkasan, mleccbas, Bhillas and Parasikas and persons guilty of mahāpatakas one should bathe with the clothes on. Thirdly, certain persons, though not untouchable ordinarily, became so, if they followed corta in occupations, o. g. if a person touches & brāhmaps who is devalaka ( i. e. has been doing wor ship to an image for money for three years) or who is & priest for the whole village, or a person who sells a soma plant, then he has to bathe with his clothes on.395 Fourthly, persons become untouchable when in certain conditions e. 8. & person if he touches even his wife in her monthly period or during the first ten days after delivery or if he touches a person during the period of mourning on the death of some relative or a person who has carried a corpse to the cemetery and has not yet bathed, he then has to take a bath with his clothes on ( vide Manu V. 85). Fifthly, certain races such as mleochas and persons from certain countries and the countries themselves were regarded as impure ( vide notes 40, 42, 49). Further the smrtis say that persons following certain filthy, low and dis approved avocations were untouchable e. g. Samyarta 897 quoted

START

  1. aastFATIT I might aguatata ostiraletanaffi AL FET

F E TSATRAST I Stue p. 923, furate. I. p. 118; FATTO ON M. III. 30 quotes it as from ETIH (reading stare for en and TR - for FET); vide murta IX. 359, 363, 364 for bath on touching stem and

entering Bauddha or saiva temples; Four HUHT FJA quoted by fato On Tr. III. 30 and 3 p. 923 ; manq& 76. 6 har ‘STAT und TH TIST: I gā Yvetot RETTUNTUTIS

  1. ETO OTHSTAR I APITARET

Tau quoted by sarap. 923.

  1. ai mare sangre days arriuso ATATTET Frafatar of one चिर्ति चितिकाष्ठं …… शवस्पृशं रजस्वला महापातफिनं शर्व स्पृष्टा सचैलमम्भोगायोती Party Yuesti sig i 734 H FREAT PITĀT FANTO ON , III. 80 and अपरार्क p. 922.

  2. कैवर्त-युगयु-व्याध-सौनिशाकुनिकामपि । रजकं च तथा साष्टा मास्वैषाशन माचरेत् । संवर्त quoted by अपरार्क P. 1196.

  3. D. 48

170

I Ch. IV

by Aparārka p. 1196 says ‘on touching a fisherman, a deer-bunter, a hunter, a butcher, a bird-oatoher, and a washerman one must first bathe and then take one’s meal’. It is to be remarked that such texts do not expressly make a man of those castes untouchable even if he does not pursue the occupation stated, but they have rather the occupation in view. Such oooupations were thought impure, as it was believed that if one was to secure the final goal of liberation, one must oultivate purity of mind as well as body, and as great importance came to be attached to cleanliness and the ceremonial purity of the body for spiritual purposes ; and emphasis was laid upon not coming in contact with persons carrying on filthy or impure pursuits, but also with animals and even inanimate objects. These restrictions were not inspired by any hardness of heart or any racial or caste pride as is often said, but they were due to psychological or religious views and the requirements of hygiene. Āp. Dh. S. L 5. 15. 16 says’ a person touched by a dog should take a bath with his clothes on’. Vide also Vas. Dh. S. 23, 33, Viṣṇu Dh. 8. 22. 69. Vžddha-Harita (chap. 11. 99-102) enumerates certain vegetables and herbs (such as leek) and other articles on touobing which one was to bathe. Ap. Dh. S. (II. 4. 9. 5) requires every house-holder to give food after Vai vadeva to all including cāṇdalas, dogs and crows. And this practice is followed even now by those who perform Vaiśvadeva. The anoient Hindus had & horror of uncleanliness and they desired to segregate those who followed unclean professions like those of sweepers, workers in hide, tanners, guardians of cemeteries &o. This segregation cannot be said to have been quite unjus tifiable. Besides those who are not familiar with anoient or even modern Hindu notions must be warned against being carried away by the horror naturally felt at first sight when certain classes are treated as untouchable. The underlying notions of untouchability are religious and ceremonial purity and impurity. A man’s nearest and dearest women relatives such as his own mother and wife or daughter are untouchable to him during their monthly periods. To him the most affectionate friend is untouchable for several days when the latter is in mourning due to death in the latter’s family. A person cannot touch his own son ( whose thread ceremony has been performed ) at the time of taking meals. In this latter cage there is no idea of impurity and in most of these cases there is no idea of superiority or inferiority. As many professions and · qrafts were in ancient times hereditary, gradually the idea arose

Oh. IVI

Untouchability

171

that a man who belonged to a caste pursuing certain filthy or abhorred avocations or crafts was by birth untouchable. Medie val and modern usage had no doubt reached the stage that if & man belonged by birth to a caste deemed by custom to be untou obable he remained an untouchable whatever profession or craft he may pursue or even if he pursued no profession. But ancient and medieval writers thought otherwise and there was also great divergence of view as to who were untouchables and to what ex tent. The only caste that is said by the most ancient Dharma sūtras to be untouchable by birth is that of cāṇdālas and the word cāṇdala has a technical meaning in these works as stated above (p. 81 ) under cīṇdāla, Gaut. (IV. 15 and 23 ) says that the oān. dāla is the offspring of a sūdra from a brāhmaṇa woman and that he is the most reprehensible among the pratilomas. Āp. Dh.S. II, 1. 2. 8-9 388 states that on touching a cāṇḍāla one should plunge into water, on talking to him one should converse with a brāh mana ( for purification ), on seeing him one should look at the luminaries ( either the Sun or moon or stars ). We have seen above that there were three kinds of candālas and they were all 80 by virtue of the circumstances of their birth. Manu ( X. 36, 51 ) makes only the andhra, meda, ciṇdāla and øvepaca stay outside the village and makes the antyāvasāyin (X. 39 ) stay in a cemetery. That leads to the inference that other men even of the lowest castes could stay in the village itself. Harita 399 quoted by A parārka (p. 279 ) states “if a dvijāti’s limb other than the head is touched by a dyer, a shoemaker, a hunter, a fisherman, a washerman, a butcher, a dancer (nata ), a man of sotor caste, oilman, vintner, hangman, village cock or dog, he becomes pure by washing that particular limb and by sipping water (i. e. he need not bathe)’. Here most of the Boven antyajas are included and it is expressly said that their touch is not so impure as to require a bath. Angiras (verse 17 ) states that a dvija when he comes in contact with a washerman, a shoemaker, a dancer (nata ), & fisher man or a worker in bamboo becomes pure by merely acamana (by

  1. या चाण्डालोपस्पर्शने संभाषायां दर्शने च दोषस्तत्र पायाश्चत्तम् । अवगाहनम TENURETTA #TATT Muuraror qara sulatat afaria T. . c. II. 1.2. 8-9.

  2. &fra: 1 ….. T

r urotestati putin mais मता शैलूषकस्तथा ॥ पक्री वजी पायघांती ग्राम्यवाटसकरौ। एभिर्यवहं सृष्ट स्पातिरो.

of forway 14 T

URI: FAT FATI I MOT p. 279; the samo Vorhes are quoted as Tata” by Faro I p. 119.

172

sipping water ). The Nityacārapaddhati (p. 130 ) quotes a Verse *00 to the effect that even on coming in contact with cāndalas and pukkasas one need not bathe, if the latter stand near a temple of Viṣṇu and have come for the worship of Viṣṇu. Alberuni in his work on India (tr. by Sacbau vol. I. chap. IX ) refers to two classes of antyajas, the first of which bad eight guilds ( seven of which were practically the same as the seven in note 170 above, the eighth being the weaver) and a second group of four viz, Hadi, Doma, Cbandala and Bhadatau. As to the first group he says that they intermarried except the fuller, shoemaker and weaver. Alberuni seems to have been misinformed as to this and what caste he means by Bhadatau is not clear. Medhātithi 401 in his commentary on Manu X. 13 is positive that the only pratiloma who is untouchable is the cāndala and no bath is necessary on coming in contaot with the other pratilomas ( viz sūta, māgadha, dyogava, vaidebika and kṣat; ). Kullūka also says the same. Therefore it follows that in spite of the smști texts ( notes 170, 171, 173 ) inoluding the pre tilomas among antyajas along with the oāṇdālas, such authorita tive and comparatively early commentators as Medhātithi (about 900 A, D.) were firmly of opinion that they were not untouchable, Manu 408 V, 85 and Angiras 152 prescribe a bath for coming in bodily contact with a divākirti (a cāndala ), udakya (a woman in her monthly period ), patita (one outoasted for sin &o. ), sūtikā (& woman after delivery ), a corpse, one who has touched & corpse. It follows therefore that the only antyaja who was asp?sya according to Manu was the cāṇdāla. But gradually the spirit of exclusiveness and ideas of ritual purity were carried to extremes and more and more castes became untouchable. Some Very orthodox writers of emptis went so far as to hold that on touching even a sūdra a dvijati had to bathe.*03 Among the

  1. विष्ण्वालयसमापस्थान विष्णुसेवार्थमागतान् । चाण्डालपुमसान्धापि सष्ठान Traia a quoted by Pegramy p. 130.

  2. Per at arbetasuna: 1 Auto on X. 13. ; staaruntes gratis मतिलोमतः स्पर्शादौ निरस्यते । कुल्लक.

  3. दिवाकीर्तिमुदक्यां च पतितं सुतिको तथा। शवतत्पृष्टिम चैव सधा मानेन Skf # AT V. 85 op wbich dute says fort ar: …… # TATRY स्पृश्यत्वाबोज्याजत्याच”

  4. eague FT* saatatay mataas na aprendente generale , चरेत् ॥ quoted by अपरार्क P. 1196.

Oh, IV)

Untouchability

173

earliest occurrences of the word asprøya ( as meaning untouch ables in general) is that in Viṣṇu Dh. S. V, 104; Katydyana also uses the word in that sense *04. It will have been seen from the quotations above that cāṇḍālas, mlecchan and Pārasikas are placed on the same level as regards being asprsya. Atri tos ( 267-269) says ’ if a dvijs comes in contact with a cāndala, patita, mleocha, a vessel containing intoxicating drink, a woman in her monthly course, he should not take his meals (without first bathing ) and if he comes in contact with these while taking his meal, he should stop, throw away the food and bathe’, Vide Viṣṇu Dh. 8. 22. 76 about talking with mlecchas and ośndalas. But so far as mlecohus are concerned these restrictions of untouchability have been given up long ago at least in public. Similarly the washerman, the worker in bamboo, the fisherman, the nata, among the seven well-known antyajas, are no longer untouchable in several provinces (though not in all ) and were not so even in the times of Medhātithi and Kullūka.

Once the spirit of exclusiveness and exaggerated notions of ceremonial purity got the upper hand they were carried to extremes. It does not appear from the ancient smrtis that the shadow of even the cāṇḍāla was deemed to be polluting. Manu V. 133 (which is nearly the same as Vispu Dh. $. 23.52 ) declares ‘flies, spray from & reservoir, the shadow ( of a man ), the cow, the horso, the sun’s rays, dust, the earth, the wind and fire should be regarded as pure.’ Yāj. I. 193 is a similar verge (Mārk. Purāṇa 35. 21 is almost the same ). Manu IV. 130 prescribes that one should not knowingly cross the shadow of the image of a deity, of one’s guru, of the king, of a anataka, of one’s teacher, of a brown cow or of a man who has been initiated for & Vedic sacrifice. Here no reference is made to the shadow of a cāṇdala. Medhātithi on Manu V. 133 expressly says that *shadow means ‘shadow of & capdala and the like’. Kullūka, however, adds on Manu IV. 130 that on account of the word * oa ’ in that verse the shadow of oāṇdalas was inoluded in the injunction of that verse. Therefore it is legitimate to infer that Manu and Yaj. did not prescribe that even the shadow of

  1. Vide FTCTTTT TTTTT (od, by me) versos 433, 783 that are quoted by the मिता. on या. II. 99 and by अपरार्क P. 813.

  2. चाण्डालं पतितं म्लेच्छ मनभा रजस्वलाम् । द्विजा सधा म भुशीत मुखानो यदि समेत् । अता पर नक्षीत त्यक्त्वापानमाचरेत् । अत्रि (आनन्दाभम sd.) vorges 267–269.

174

a cāndala was impure and caused pollution. Not only 80, Aparārka 400 quotes a verse the shadow of a caṇdala or patita, if it falls on a man, is not impure’. But Aparārka himself 109 adds on this verse the comment that this favourable rule about the shadow of a cāṇdala or patita is applicable only if he is at & greater distance from a man than the length of a cow’s tail. Bana in his Kādambari ( para 8) describes how the cāndāls girl entered the royal assembly-hall though she was untoucha ble and stood at some distance froin the king. It appears that there was no difficulty about her entering the hall of audience or polluting the assembly by her shadow. Gradually some smptis prescribed & bath for a brābmana coming under the shadow of a cīṇdāla. The Mit. on Yāj. III. 30 quotes a verse of Vyāghrapāda that if a cāṇdāla or patita comes nearer to & person than the length of a cow’s tail, then the latter must take a bath and another verse of Bphaspati to the effect

a patita, a woman in her monthly period, a woman freshly delivered and a cāṇdāla should be kept respectively at a distance of one yuga, two, three and four’. As yuga is four cubits, this means that a capdāla cannot approach within 16 oubits of a caste Hindu, 408

As regards publio roads Vāj. I. 194 says that they become pure by the rays of the sun and the moon and by the wind even when they are trodden by cāṇdālas. In Yāj. I. 197 it is stated that the mud and water on public roads and on houses built of baked bricks, though touched by capdalas, dogs and crows, are rendered pure by the mere blowing of the wind over them.409

  1. parsetur Fuat gera Hai * Beruf a Franti: TREST: # quoted by 39 p. 275.

  2. Pfarreteemi AnamnestiuTirarTICHETSTEI 37 of . 275.

  3. Tourat Tata Tegroit ontfalten wrot toata gat try fary

# of 288-289, a quoted by the FATTO OD UT III. 30, p p . 923; sturen p. 1195 ascribes a similar verge to Satatapa. sistema (od. Jiv. cbap. IX part 1 p. 652 ) also says the same. For त्रियुगं च चतुयुगम् । चखालसूतिकोवक्यापतितानामधः क्रमात् ॥ वृहस्पति quoted by FReTo on . III. 30; araereraat UTT 0:TUTTh oftm a

que M Fare quoted by fag. part I. p. 17. epicurant on got you gar rag’ in the starter remarks har en ret fra TATARE!

  1. Pornhutant partnerenti ar grafa innan vant **** I. 197; spa (verse 144 ) is almost the samo,

Oh. IV)

Untouchability

175

These rules show that the emptis followed a reasonable rule about the public roads and do not countenance the restrictions maintained in some parts of South India, particularly in Malabar, about the use of publio roads by the untouchables viz. that an untouchable must not approach within a certain distance of a high caste Hindu, must leave the road to allow him passage or must shout to give warning of his presence in order to avoid pollution to the easte Hindu. Vide Wilson’s ‘Indian Castes’ vol. II p.74 (footnote ) for details of the distance. In South India also there are various grades of distances within which members of the several lowest castes cannot approach high caste Hindus.

Certain provisions were made in the smrtis by way of exceptions to the general rules about the untouchability of certain castes. Atri *o (verse 249 ) says there is no taint of untouchability when & person is touched by an untouchable in a templo, religious processions and marriages, in sacrifices, and in all festivals’. Śatātapa quoted in the Sm. O. declares that there is no doṣa ( lapse ) in touching (untouchables ) in a village (1. o. on the publio road), or in a religious procession or in an affray and the like, and also when the whole village is involved in a calamity.“1 Bphaspati also remarks that there is no fault (and so no prāyasoitta) if one comes in contact ( with untouch ables ) at & sacred place, in marriage processions and religious processions, in battle, when the country is invaded, or when the town or village is on fire. The Sm. O. adds that these verses were veriously interpreted; some saying that they apply only where one does not know that the man who has touched him is an untouchable, while others bold that they apply to the touch of impure persons who are not uochista (i. e, risen from meals without washing their hands &o). The Smrtyarthasara 418

  1. Te r ug i Th

yeryle of praat 11 of 249. In the Fifa I. pp. 121-128 this is quoted as from T T (v. I. यज्ञेषु प्रकृतेषु च and स्पृष्टा स्पृष्टिर्म). The first word must be taken to be formod of three soparate members as the quotation from the Smrtyartha sara will ghow.

411, Cha T struit afatet omfai urmator that really Rauri stretag quoted by a I. p. 119. . 412. HRIÀ TEArne Treat

g

a nun fare rrota # महाजलसमीपेड महाजनपरेषु च । अग्न्युत्पाते महापस स्पृष्टास्पृष्टिने दुष्यति प्राप्य कारीन्द्रियं स्पृष्टमस्पृधि वितरेनियम् । योश्च विषयं प्राहुः स्वायुष्ठचभिधामतः ॥ Frequirt p. 79.176

( Oh. IV

(p. 79) summarises the places where no blame in incurred on the ground of mixing with untouchables viz. in battle, on publio roads leading to a market, in religious processions, in temples, in festivals, in sacrifices, at sacred places, in calamities or invasions of the country or village, on the banks of large sheets of water, in the presence of great persons, when there is & sudden fire or other great calamity. It is somewhat remarkable that the Smṛtyarthasāra speaks of untouchables entering temples. The Par. M. (vol. II part I p. 115 ) says that there is no doṣa when cāndalas take water from a large tank (used by higher castes ), but as regards small reservoirs the same rules apply to them that apply to the purification of wells touched by untouchables. 413 Vide Vĩddha-Harita IX. 405-406 for the purification of a well.

The Viṣṇu Dh. S. (V. 104 )"}4 prescribed that if an untou chable deliberately touched a man of the three higher castes he should be punished with beating, while Yāj. II. 234 proscribes that if a cāpdāla ( deliberately ) touches any one of the higher castes the cāndala should be fined one hundred panas.

Elaborate rules are laid down about the penanoe for drink ing from the wells or vessels of untouchables, for partaking of their food (either cooked or uncooked), for staying with them and for having sexual intercourse with untouchable women, These matters will be briefly dealt with under prayascitta.

The so-called untouchables were not entirely excluded from worship. When it is said (as in Yaj. I. 93 or Gaut. IV, 20 )415 that the cāndalo is outside all dharma, the meaning is that he is outside such Vedic rites as upanayana, not that he cannot worship the Hindu deities nor that he is not bound by the moral code. He could worship images of the avatāras of Viṣṇu ( vide note 364 above). The Nirnayasindhu quotes a passage of the Devipurāṇa that expressly authorizes antyajas to establish & temple of Bhairava. The Bbāgavatapurana1 X. 70.43 says that even the

  1. महसु तु तदाकादिषु चाण्डालादिसंबन्धेपि नास्ति कश्चिदोषः । अल्पेषु त कूपन्यायः। तदाह विष्णुः। जलाशयेष्वधाल्पेषु स्थावरेषु महीतले । कूपवत्कथिता शुद्धिमहास a #CUTE # TTT. AT. vol. II, part 1 p. 115.

  2. 1941COTTEYTTETOR 1969: i facguET V. 104. 415. HTOOTHTET TAT: 1 Tra# IV. 20. 416, neutrone EUTATE PRATHRI I TERETET Poritter Anta: # 1746 X. 70. 43, Aitor 31: cytun augsto I ………

poffemer fory: faecu: Eu literatura catalat ATT AT: I ……… for affroy III (:under anlagt ).

Ön. IV ]

Untouchability

197

antyāvasāying are purified by listening to the praises or names of Hari, by repeating the names of Hari and by contemplation on Him, much more therefore will those ( be purified) who can see or touob your images’. This however shows that to the author of the Bhagavata it never occurred that an untouchable could see or touch the image of Viṣṇu enshrined in a temple of caste Hindus. In south India among the famous Vaiṣṇava saints called Aļvāre, Tiruppāṇa Alvār was a member of the depressed classes and Nammālvār was a Vellala. The Mit. on Yaj. III. 262 remarks that the pratiloma castes (which include oāṇdāla) have the right to perform vratas.417

In modern times the eradication of the system of untoucha bility is engaging the minds of great leaders like Mahatma Gandhi whose fast for 21 days for effecting a change of heart among caste Hindus is famous throughout the world. The prinoi. pal matters of concern to the so-called untouchables or depressed classes are facility for education in schools, removal of restrictions about places of public resort such as publio wells, roads, restaurants and eating houses and entry in public temples. A good deal has been done by a few zealous workers from anong the higher castes in these respects. The Christian missionaries have been doing good work among the untouchables, but their efforts are mainly devoted to direot or Indireot proselytization. The conscience of the educated among the higber castes has been roused. But the total removal of un. touchability is yet a matter of the distant future. The greatest draw-back is illiteracy among the masses of India. Hardly twelve per cent of the population are literate. The diffusion of literacy and the spread of the idea of the equality of all men before the law and in publio are the only sure solvents of the evils associated with untouchability which have exis tod for ages. Popular Governments in the provinces are doing what they with their limited resources can do to ameliorate the condition of the untouchables. The Government of India Act ( of 1935 ) has given special representation to the Scheduled Castes (the name given to the depressed classes or untouchables ) in the Provincial and Federal Legislatures of India. The Government of India Soheduled Castes Order of 1936

  1. Bet nu oferaamat

na pret गौतमवयन प्रतिलोमा धर्महीना इति सपनयनादिविशिधर्माभिमापन । निताon

. II1. 269.

LD. 98

178

History of Dharmat astra

( Oh. IV

gets out the names of the numerous scheduled castes in the several provinces of British India. The Provincial Govern ments have issued circulars to enforce the rule that no discrimination be made against the scheduled castes in places of public resort and have tackled to some extent the question of the entry of untouchables in temples by passing such acts as the Bombay Act XI of 1938 viz. Bombay Harijan Temple Worship ( Removal of disabilities Act) and the Madras Temple Entry Authorisation and Indemnity Act of 1939. Much will depend upon the untouchables themselves. As am ong the caste Hindus, the untouchables also have inter se numerous divisions and subdivisions each of which regards itself as superior to several others of them and will not condescend to mix with them in the public or dine with them. They must also throw up from among themselves selfless and capablo leaders. This is a vast problem and the appalling evils which have been growing for ages can not be wholly removed in a day. The leaders of the so-called untouchables also should not make exaggerated claims. For the present they should rest content with equality in public places, public services and before the law and at the most entry into publio temples. But if they indulge in the tall talk of destroying the caste system at one stroke and requiring that all caste Hindus should dine with them and inter-marry with them, they may find that at least two hundred millions of caste Hindus will be dead opposed to them, and the cause of the removal of the evils of untouchability is bound to suffer a set-back. Besides it should not be forgotten that the amelioration of the condition of untouchables is bound up with the problem of the poverty of the entire rural population of India. It should not be supposed that all the untouchables are the poorest of the poor. I know from personal knowledge that many among certain classes of untouohables like the Mahars and Chambhars of the Decoan are economically better off than the ordinary cultivators in many villages. The mahars are hereditary village servants in the Deccan and they recover from every householder bread every day as part of their remuneration or a certain measure of corn from the threshing floor. Vide Grant Duff’s History of the Marathas’ (ed. of 1863 vol. I p. 23 ) for the balutedars ( village servants) among whom the mahar ocoupies an important place and Hereditary Offices Act ( Bombay Act III of 1874, section 18) for Legislative recognition of their ancient rights. The population of untou chables in India has been estimated at various figures from three

Oh, IV)

Untouchability

179

orores to six orores. The Simon Commission Report (1930) vol. I p. 40 estimated that there were about 43 millions of untoucha. bles in the whole of India, the criterion adopted being whether pollution by touch or approach within a certain distance is caused. The ratio of untouchables to the total population of India or to the Hindu population varies greatly in different parts of India. The total Harijan ( the name given to untouchables by Mahatma Gandhi) population is 14 per cent of the whole population of India. In the Bombay Presidenoy the ratio of Harijans to Hindus is only about eleven per cent being the lowest of all provinces and States in India, while in Bengal the ratio is about 32 per cent which is the highest in India except in Assam.*18 The High Courts in India have held that the untouchables are included among sūdras for purposes of marriage. Vide Solan Singh vs. Kabla Singh 10 Lahore 372, Muthusami vs. Masilamani 33 Mad. 342.419

  1. Vide Consus of India (1931), vol. I part 1, p. 494.

  2. Several books and papers have been recently published on the quoption of untouchables in India. Vid. “The Psychology of a guppressed people” (1937) by Rev.J. O. Heinrich; ‘Untouchable Classes of Maharishtra’ by M. G. Bhagat.