Vol. 3 · pages 436–440

423 SHUDRAS AND THE COUNTER-REVOLUTION the Nandas and who ruled from 322 3.C, to 183 B.C.* were also Shudras. What more glaring piece of evidence can there be to show the high dignity enjoyed by the Shudra than to point to the case of Asoka who was not merely the Emperor of India but a Shudra and his Empire was the Empire built by the Shudras. On the question of the right of the Shudra to study the Vedas a reference may be made to the Chhandogya Upanished (V. 1.2). It relates the story of one Janasruti to whom Veda Vidya was taught by the preceptor Raikva. This Janasruti was a Shudra. This story if it is a genuine story leaves no doubt that there was a time when there was no bar against the Shudra in the matter of studying the Vedas. Not only was Shudra free to study the Vedas but there were Shudras who had reached the status of Rishis and has been composers of the Hymns of the Vedas. The story of the Rishi Kavasha Aliusha 1 is very illuminating. He was a Rishi and the author of several hymns of the Tenth Book of the Rig-Veda. 2 On the question of the spiritual eligibility of the Shudra to perform the Vedic ceremonies and sacrifies the following data may be presented. Jaimini3 the author of the Purva Mimansa mentions an ancient teacher by name Badari—whose work is lost as an exponent of the view that even Shudra could perform Vedic sacrifices. The Bharadvaja Srauta Sutra (v. 28) admits that there exists another school of thought which holds that a Sudra can consecrate the three sacred fires necessary for the performance of a Vedic Sacrifice. Similarly the Commentator of the Katyayana Srauta Sutra (1 & 5) admits that there are certain Vedic texts which lead to the inference that the Shudra was eligible to perform Vedic rites. In the Satpath Brahmana (I. 1.4.12) there is enunciated a rule of etiquette which the priest officiating at the performance of a sacrifice is required to observe. It relates to the mode in which the priest should address the Haviskut (the person celebrating the sacrifice) calling upon him to begin the ceremony. The rule says: “Now there are four different forms of this call, viz. ‘Come hither’ (Ehi) in the case of a Brahmana; ‘approach’ (Agahi) and ‘hasten hither’ (Adarva) in the case of a Vaishya and a member of the Military caste and ‘run hither’ (Adhava) in that of a Shudra.” In the Satpatha Brahman 4 there is evidence to show that the Shudra was eligible to perform the Soma Yaga and to partake of the divine drink Soma. It says that in the Soma Yaga in place of a ‘payovrata’ 1 Aitercya Brahmana Vol. II. p. 112. 2 Max-Muller— Ancient Sanskrit Literature 1860, p.58. 3 See Kane—History of Dharmashastras. 4 Quoted by Kane—History of Dharmashastras. 5 Figures are incorporated by Editors as they are not in the MS. —Editors.

424 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES (vow to drink milk only) Mastu (whey) is prescribed for the Shudra. In another place the same Satapatha Brahmana 1 says: “There are four classes, the Brahmin, Rajanya, Vaishya and Sudra. There is no one of these who dislikes Soma. If any one of them however should do so, let there be an atonment.” This means that the drinking of Soma was not only permissible but it was compulsory on all including the Shudra. But in the story of the Ashvins there is definite evidence that the Shudra had a right to the divine drink of Soma. The Ashvins as the story 2 goes once happened to behold Sukanya when she had just bathed and when her person was bare. She was young girl married to a Rishi by name Chyavana who at the time of marriage was so old as to be dying almost any day. The Ashvins were captivated by the beauty of Sukanya and said “accept one of us for your husband, it behoveth thee not to spend thy youth fruitlessly.” She refused saying “I am devoted to my husband.” They again spoke to her and this time proposed a bargain—“We two are the celestial physicians of note. We will make thy husband young and graceful. Do thou then select one of us as thy husband.” She went to her husband and communicated to him the terms of the bargain. Chyavana said to Sukanya “Do thou so” and the bargain was carried out and Chyavana was made a young man by the Ashwins. Subsequently a question arose whether the Ashwins were entitled to Soma which was the drink of the Gods. Indra objected saying that the Ashwins were Shudras and therefore not entitled to Soma. Chyavana who had received perpetual youth from the Ashwins set aside the contention and compelled Indra to give them Soma. All these provisions can have no meaning unless the Shudra was in fact performing the Vedic ceremonies to which they relate—there is evidence to show that a Shudra woman took part in the Vedic sacrifice known as the Ashwamedha. 3 With regard to the Upanayana ceremony and the right to wear the sacred thread there is nowhere an express prohibition against the Shudra. On the other hand in the Sansakara Ganapati there is an express provision declaring the Shudra to be eligible for Upanayan. 4 The Shudra though belonging to a lower class was nonetheless a free citizen in days before Manu cannot be gainsaid. Consider the following provisions in Kautilya’s Artha Shastra: 1 Quoted by Muir Sanskrit Texts I p. 367. 2 V. Fausboil Indian Mythology pp. 128-134. 3 Jaiswal Indian Polity Part II. p. 17. 4 Referred to by Max-Muller in Ancient Sanskrit Literature-(1860)—p. 207.

425 SHUDRAS AND THE COUNTER-REVOLUTION “The selling or mortgaging by kinsmen of the life of a Sudra who is not a born slave, and has not attained majority, but is an Arya in birth shall be punished with a fine of 2 panas.” “Deceiving a slave of his money or depriving him of the privileges he can exercise as an Arya (Aryabhava), shall be punished with half the fine (levied for enslaving the life of an Arya).” “Failure to set a slave at liberty on the receipt of a required amount of ransom shall be punished with a fine of 12 panas; putting a slave under confinement for no reason (samrodhaschakaranat) shall likewise be punished. “The offspring of a man who has sold himself off as a slave shall be an Arya. A slave shall be entitled without prejudice to his master’s work but also the inheritance he has received from his father.” Why did Manu suppress the Shudra? This riddle of the Shudra is not a simple riddle. It is a complex one. The Aryans were for ever attempting to Aryanize the Non-Aryans i.e. bringing them within the pale of the Aryan Culture. So keen were the Aryans on Aryanization that they had developed a religious ceremony for the mass conversion of the Non-Aryans. The ceremony was called Vratya-stoma. Speaking of the Vratya-Stoma Mahamahopadhyaya Haraprasad Shastri says: “The ceremony by which these Vratyas were purified, and which is described in the Pancavimsa Brahmana differed at least in one particular from other great ceremonies of the Vedic times, namely, while other ceremonies had only one sacrificer and his wife in the hall of sacrifice, this ceremony had thousands of sacrificers. One of them, the wisest, the richest or the most powerful acted as Grahapati or Patriarch and the rest simply followed him. The Grahapati had to pay a higher Daksina or fee than the rest.” “I consider this to be a device by which thousands and thousands of Vratyas were admitted to the society of the Rsis by one ceremony, and such ceremonies were of frequent occurrence, thus admitting hordes after hordes of nomadic Aryans into settled habits. The purified Vratyas were not allowed to bring their possessions in Vratya life with them in settled life. They had to leave them to those who remained Vratyas still or do the so-called Brahmins of the Magadha-desa, which, as I have elsewhere shown, was mostly inhabited by men whom the Rsis looked down upon.” “But when the Vratyas were admitted to settled life, they were admitted as fully equals. The Rsis used to eat food cooked by them, and they used to eat food cooked by the Rsis. They were taught all

426 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES the three Vidyas, Sama, Rk, and Yajus, and they were allowed to study the Vedas, and teach them, and to sacrifice for themselves and for others, that is, they were considered as fully equal. Not only were they treated as fully equal but they attained the highest proficiency of a Rsi. Samans were revealed to them, and even Rks. One of the purified Vratyas, Kausitaki was allowed to collect Brahmans of the Rig-Veda, which collection still goes under his name.” The Aryans were not only converting to their way of life the willing non-Aryans they were also attempting to make converts from among the unwilling Asuras who were opposed to the Aryans, their cult of sacrifice, their theory of Chaturvarna and even to their Vedas which according to the mythology the Asuras stole away from the Aryas. The story of Vishnu rescuing Pralhad by killing his father the Asura called Hiranya Kashapu on the ground that Pralhad was willing to be converted to the Aryan Culture while Hiranya Kashapu was opposed to it is an illustration in point. Here are instances of Non-Aryans being naturalized and enfranchized. Why was an opposite attitude taken against the Shudra? Why was the Shudra fully naturalized and fully enfranchized, denaturalized and disfranchized? The treatment given to the Nishadas gives a point to this riddle which should not be overlooked. The Ancient Sanskrit Literature is full of reference to the five tribes. They are described under various appellations1 such as Panch-Krishtayah, Panch-Kshitayah, PanchKshityas Manushyah, Panch-Charshanayah, Panch-Janah, Panchijanya viz., Pancha-Bhuma, Panchajata. There is a difference of opinion as to what these terms denote. Sayanacharya the Commentator of Rig Veda says that these expressions refer to the four Varnas and the Nishads. The Vishnu Purana gives the following story about the Nishads: “7. The Maiden named Sunitha, who was the first born of Mrityu (Death) was given as wife to Anga; and of her Vena was born.” 8. This son of Mrityu’s daughter, infected with the taint of his maternal grandfather, was born corrupt, as if by nature. 9. When Vena was inaugurated as king by the eminent rishis, he caused this proclamation to be made on the earth; “Men must not sacrifice, or give gifts, or present oblations. Who else but myself is the enjoyer of sacrifices? I am for ever the lord of offerings.” 10. Then all the rishis approaching the king with respectful salutations, said to him in a gentle and conciliatory tone: 1 Source not quoted. — Editors.

427 SHUDRAS AND THE COUNTER-REVOLUTION 11. ‘Hear, O King, what we have to say: 12. We shall worship Hari, the monarch of the Gods, and the lord of all sacrifices with a Dirghasattra (prolonged sacrifice), from which the highest benefits will accrue to your kingdom, your person and your subjects. May blessing rest upon you? You shall have a share in the ceremony. 13. Vishnu the Lord of sacrifices Male, being propitiated by us with this rite, will grant all the objects of your desire. Hari, the Lord of Sacrifices, bestows on those kings in whose country he is honoured with oblation everything that they wish.” Vena replied: “What other being is superior to me? Who else but I should be adored ? Who is this person called Hari, whom you regard as the Lord of sacrifice? Brahma Janardana, Rudra, Indra, Vayu, Yama, Ravi (the Sun) Agni, Varuna, Dhatri, Pushan, Earth, the Moon,— these and the other gods who curse and bless are all present in king’s person: for he is composed of all the gods. Knowing this, ye must act in conformity with my commands. Brahmans, ye must neither give gifts, nor present oblations nor sacrifices. 14. As obedience to their husbands is esteemed the highest duty of women, so is the observance of my orders incumbent upon you.” The Rishis answered. ‘Give permission great kings: let not religion perish: this whole world is but a modified form of oblations. 15. When religion perishes the whole world is destroyed with it, When Vena although thus admonished and repeatedly addressed by the eminent rishis, did not give his permission, then all the munis, filled with wrath and indignation, cried out to one another, “Slay, slay the sinner.” 16. This man of degraded life, who blasphemes the sacrified Male, the god, the Lord without beginning or end, is not fit to be lord of the earth.’ So saying the munis smote with blades of kusa grass consecrated by texts this king who had been already smitten by his blasphemy of the divine being and his other offences. The munis afterwards beheld dust all round, and asked the people who were standing near what that was. 17. They were informed: “In this country which has no king, the people being distressed, have become robbers, and have begun to seize the property of others. 18. It is from these robbers rushing impetuously, and plundering other men’s goods, that this great dust is seen ?” Then all the munis, consulting together, rubbed with force the thigh of the king, who was childless, in order to produce a son. From his thigh when