Vol. 7 · pages 381–385

DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES362 ANTYAVASIN ANTYAJA Madhyamangiras Atri Veda Vyas 1. Chandala. 1. Nata 1. Chandala. 2. Shvapaka. 2. Meda. 2. Shvapaka. 3. Kshatta. 3. Bhilla. 3. Nata. 4. Suta. 4. Rajaka. 4. Meda. 5. Vaidehika. 5. Charmakar. 5. Bhilla. 6. Magadha. 6. Buruda. 6. Rajaka. 7. Ayogava. 7. Kayavarta. 7. Charmakar. 8. Virat. 9. Dasa. 10. Bhatt. 11. Kolika. 12. Pushkar. From this table it is quite clear that there is neither precision nor agreement with regard to the use of the terms Antyavasin and Antyaja. For instance Chandala and Shvapaka fall in both the categories Antyavasin and Antyaja according to Madhyamangiras and Veda Vyas. But when one compares Madhyamangiras with Atri they fall in different categories. The same is true with regard to the term Antyaja. For example while (1) Chandala and (2) Shvapaka are Antyajas according to Veda Vyas, according to Atri they are not. Again according to Atri (1) Buruda and (2) Kayavarta are Antyajas while according to Veda Vyas they are not. Again (1) Virat (2) Dasa

THE UNTOUCHABLES : THE IMPURE.. UNTOUCHABLES 363 (3) Bhatt (4) Kolika and (5) Pushkar are Antyaja according to Veda Vyas but according to Atri they are not. To sum up the position reached so far : neither the Dharma Sutras nor the Smritis help us to ascertain who were included in the category of Asprashya. Equally useless are the Dharma Sutras and the Smritis to enable us to ascertain whether the classes spoken of as Antyavasin, Antyaja and Bahya were the same as Asprashya. Is there any other way of ascertaining whether any of these formed into the category of Asprashya or Untouchables? It would be better to collect together whatever information is available about each of these classes. What about the Bahyas? Who are they? What are they? Are they Untouchables? They are mentioned by Manu. To understand their position, it is necessary to refer to Manu’s scheme of social classification. Manu divides the people into various categories. He first 1 makes a broad division between (1) Vaidikas and (2) Dasyus. He then proceeds to divide the Vaidikas into four sub-divisions: (1) Those inside Chaturvarnya (2) Those outside Chaturvarnya (3) Vratya and (4) Patitas or outcastes. Whether a person was inside Chaturvarnya or outside, was a question to be determined by the Varna of the parents. If he was born of the parents of the same Varnas, he was inside the Chaturvarnya. If, on the other hand, he was born of parents of different Varnas i.e., he was the progeny of mixed marriages or what Manu calls Varna Samkara, then he was outside the Chaturvarnya. Those outside Chaturvarnya are further sub-divided by Manu into two classes. (1) Anulomas and (2) Pratilomas. Anulamas 2 were those whose fathers were of a higher Varna and mothers of a lower Varna. Pratilomas, on the other hand, were those whose fathers were of a lower Varna and the mothers of a higher Varna. Though both the Anulomas and Pratilomas were alike for the reason that they were outside the Chaturvarnya. Manu proceeds to make a distinction between them. The Anulomas, he calls Varna Bahya or shortly Bahyas, while Pratilomas he calls Hinas. The Hinas are lower than the Bahyas. But neither the Bahyas nor the Hinas does Manu regard as Untouchables. 1. See Manu 1, 45, 2 Ibid

DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES364 Antya as a class is mentioned in Manu IV.79. Manu however does not enumerate them. Medhatithi in his commentary suggests that Antya means Mlecha, such as Meda, etc. Buhler translates Antya as a low-caste man. There is thus nothing to indicate that the Antyas were Untouchables. In all probability, it is the name given to those people who were living in the outskirts or end (Anta) of the village. The reason why they came to be regarded as low is to be found in the story narrated in the Brahadaranyaka Upanishad (1.3) to which reference is made by Mr. Kane. 1 The story is that- “Gods and Asuras had a strike and the gods thought that they might rise superior to the Asuras by the Udgithana. In this occurs the passage ‘this devata (Prana) throwing aside the sin that was death to these devatas (vak, etc.) sent it to ends of these devatas there; therefore one should not go to the people outside the Aryan pale nor to disam anta (the ends of the quarters) thinking, otherwise I may fall in with papmani i.e., death.” The meaning of Antya turns on the connotation of the phrase ‘disam Anta’ which occurs in the passage quoted above. If the phrase ‘ends of the quarters’ can be translated as meaning the end of the periphery of the village, without its being called a far-fetched translation, we have here an explanation of what Antya originally meant. It does not suggest that the Antyas were Untouchables. It only meant that they were living on the outskirts of the village. As to the Antyajas, what we know about them is enough to refute the view that they were Untouchables. Attention may be drawn to the following facts 2 : In the Shanti Parvan (109.9) of the Mahabharat there is a reference to Antyajas who are spoken of as Soldiers in the Army. According to Sarasvativiiasa, Pitamaha speaks of the seven cases of Rajakas included in the term Antyaja as Prakritis. That Prakritis mean trade guilds such as of washermen and others is quite clear from the Sangamner Plate of Bhillama II dated Saka 922 which records the grant of a village to eighteen Prakritis. Viramitrodaya says that Srenis mean the eighteen castes such as the Rajaka, etc., which are collectively called Antyajas. In view of these facts how could the Antyajas be said to have been regarded as the Untouchables? Coming to the Antyavasin, who were they? Were they Untouchables? The term Antyavasin has been used in two different 1. Kane– History of Dharma Shastra II. Part I. p. 167. 2. Kane– History of Dharma Shastra. Vol. II. part I. p. 70

THE UNTOUCHABLES : THE IMPURE.. UNTOUCHABLES 365 senses. In one sense it was applied to a Brahmachari living in the house of the Guru during his term of studentship. A Brahmachari was referred to as Antyavasin. 1 It probably meant one who was served last. Whatever the reason for calling a Brahmachari Antyavasin it is beyond dispute that the word in that connection could not connote Untouchability. How could it when only Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaishyas could become Brahmacharis. In another sense they refer to a body of people. But even in this sense it is doubtful if it means Untouchables. According to Vas.Dh.Sutra (18.3) they are the offspring of a Sudra father and Vaishya mother. But according to Manu (V.39) they are the offspring of a Chandala father and a Nishad mother. As to the class to which they belong, the Mitakshara says they are a sub-group of the Antyajas which means that the Antyavasin were not different from the Antyajas. What is therefore true of the Antyajas may also be taken as true of the Antyavasin. III Stopping here to take stock of the situation as it emerges from such information as we have regarding the social condition of the people called Antyavasin, Antya, Antyaja, as is available from ancient literature, obviously it is not open to say that these classes were Untouchables in the modern sense of the term. However, for the satisfaction of those who may still have some doubt, the matter may be further examined from another point of view. Granting that they were described as Asprashya we may proceed to inquire as to what was the connotation of the term in the days of the Dharma Sutras. For this purpose we must ascertain the rules of atonement prescribed by the Shastras. From the study of these rules we will be able to see whether the term Asprashya had the same connotation in the times of the Dharma Sutras as it has now. Let us take the case of the Chandalas as an illustration of the class called Asprashya. In the first place, it should be remembered that the word Chandala does not denote one single homogenous class of people. It is one word for many classes of people, all different from one another. There are altogether five different classes of Chandalas who are referred to in the Shastras. They are (i) the offspring of 1. Amarkosh II Kanda Brahmabarga Verse II.

DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES366 a Shudra father and a Brahmin mother, 1 (ii) the offspring of an unmarried woman 2 (iii) the offspring of union with a sagotra woman 3 (iv) the offspring of a person who after becoming an ascetic turns back to the householder’s life 4 and (v) the offspring of a barber father and a Brahmin mother 5. It is difficult to say which Chandala calls for purification. We shall assume that purification is necessary in the case of all the Chandalas. What is the rule of purification prescribed by the Shastras? Gautama in his Dharma Sutra (Chapter XIV, Verse 30) also refers to it in the following terms :— “On touching an outcaste, a Chandala, a woman impure on account of her confinement, a woman in her courses, or a corpse and on touching persons who have touched them, he shall purify himself by bathing dressed in his clothes.” Below is the text of the rule given by the Vasishta Dharma Sutra (Chapter IV. Verse 37) :— “When he has touched a sacrificial post, a pyre, a burial ground, a menstruating or a lately confined woman, impure men or Chandalas and so forth, he shall bathe, submerging both his body and his head.” Baudhayana agrees with Vasishta for he too in his Dharma Sutra (Prasna 1, Adhyaya 5, Khanda 6, Verse 5) says :— “On touching a tree standing on a sacred spot, a funeral pyre, a sacrificial post, a Chandala or a person who sells the Veda, a Brahmin shall bathe dressed in his clothes.” The following are the rules contained in Manu :— V. 85 : When he (the Brahmin) has touched a Chandala, a menstruating woman, an outcaste, a woman in childbed, a corpse, or one who has touched a (corpse), he becomes pure by bathing. V. 131 : Manu has declared that the flesh of an animal killed by dogs is pure, likewise (that) of a (beast) slain by carnivorous (animals) or by men of low caste (Dasya) such as Chandalas. V. 143 : He who, while carrying anything in any manner, is touched by an impure (person or thing), shall become pure, if he performs an ablution, without pulling down that object. 1. According to all Dharma Sutras and Smritis including Manu Smriti. 2& 3 According to Veda Vyas Smriti (1. 910) 4. According to Yama quoted in Parasura Madhavya. 5. Anusasan Parva (29-17). He is also called Matanga.