Vol. 7 · pages 46–50

THE SHUDRAS : THE RIDDLE OF THE SHUDRAS 27 III These are the real reasons why the Purusha Sukta is unique. But the Purusha Sukta is not merely unique, it is also extraordinary. It is extraordinary because it is so full of riddles. Few seem to be aware of these riddles. But anyone who cares to inquire will learn how real in their nature and how strange in their complexion these riddles are. The cosmogony set out in the Purusha Sukta is not the only cosmogony one comes across in the Rig Veda. There is another cosmogony which is expounded in the 72nd Hymn of the Tenth Mandala of the Rig Veda. It reads as follows : 1 “1. Let us proclaim with a clear voice of the generation of the gods (the divine company), who, when their praises are recited, look (favourably on the worshipper) in this latter age. 2. Brahmanaspati filled these (generations of the gods) with breath as a blacksmith (his bellows); in the first age of the gods the existent was born of the non-existent. 3. In the first age of the gods the existent was born of the nonexistent; after that the quarters (of the horizon) were born, and after them the upward-growing (trees). 4. The earth was born from the upward growing (tree), the quarters were born from the earth; Daksha was born from Aditi and afterwards Aditi from Daksha. 5. Aditi, who was thy daughter, Daksha, was born; after her, the gods were born, adorable, freed from the bonds of death. 6. When, gods, you abode in this pool well-arranged, then a pungent dust went forth from you as if you were dancing. 7. When, gods, you filled the worlds (with your radiance) as clouds (fill the earth with rain) then you brought fourth the sun hidden in the ocean. 8. Eight sons (there were) of Aditi who were born from her body; she approached the gods with seven, she sent forth Martanda on high. 9. With seven sons Aditi went to a former generation, but she bore Martanda for the birth and death (of human beings). The two cosmologies are fundamentally different in principle as well as in detail. The former explains creation ex nihilo ‘being was born of non-being’. The latter ascribes creation to a being which it calls Purusha. Why in one and the same book two such opposite cosmologies should have come to be propounded? Why did the author of the Purusha Sukta think it necessary to posit a Purusha and make all creation emanate from him? Any one who reads the Purusha Sukta will find that it starts with the creation of donkyes, horses, goats, etc., but does not say anything 1 Wilson’s, Rig Veda, Vol. VI, p. 129

DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES28 about the creation of man. At a point when it would have been natural to speak of the creation of man, it breaks off the chain and proceeds to explain the origin of the classes in the Aryan society. Indeed, the Purusha Sukta appears to make the explaining of the four classes of the Aryan society to be its primary concern. In doing this, the Purusha Sukta stands in complete contrast not only with other theologies but with the other parts of the Rig Veda also. No theology has made it its purpose to explain the origin of classes in society. Chapter I of the Genesis in the Old Testament, which can be said to be analogous in intention and purpose to the Purusha Sukta, does nothing more than explain how man was created. It is not that social classes did not exist in the old Jewish society. Social classes existed in all societies. The Indo-Aryans were no exception. Nevertheless, no theology has ever thought it necessary to explain how classes arise. Why then did the Purusha Sukta make the explanation of the origin of the social classes its primary concern? The Purusha Sukta is not the only place in the Rig Veda where a discussion of the origin of creation occurs. There are other places in the Rig Veda where the same subject is referred to. In this connection, one may refer to the following passage in the Rig Veda which reads as follows : 1 Rig Veda, i.96.2: “By the first nivid, by the wisdom of Ayu, he (Agni) created these children of men; by his gleaming light the earth and the waters, the gods sustained Agni the giver of the riches.” In this, there is no reference at all to the separate creation of classes, though there is no doubt that even at the time of the Rig Veda, the Indo-Aryan Society had become differentiated into classes; yet the above passage in the Rig Veda ignores the classes and refers to the creation of men only. Why did the Purusha Sukta think it necessary to go further and speak of the origin of the classes? The Purusha Sukta contradicts the Rig Veda in another respect. The Rig Veda propounds a secular theory regarding the origin of the Indo-Aryans as will be seen from the following texts: (1) Rig Veda, i.80.16: “Prayers and hymns were formerly congregated in that Indra, in the ceremony which Atharvan, father Manu, and Dadhyanch celebrated.” 2 (2) Rig Veda, i.114.2 : “Whatever prosperity or succour father Manu obtained by sacrifice, may we gain all that under thy guidance, O Rudra.”3 1 Muir, Vol. I. p. 180 2 Muir, Ibid., Vol. I, p. 162. 3 Ibid., p. 163.

THE SHUDRAS : THE RIDDLE OF THE SHUDRAS 29 (3) Rig Veda, ii.33.13 : “Those pure remedies of yours, O Maruts, those which are most auspicious, ye vigorous gods, those which are beneficent, those which our father Manu chose, those and the blessing and succour of Rudra, I desire.” 1 (4) Rig Veda, viii.52.1 : “The ancient friend hath been equipped with the powers of the mighty (gods). Father Manu has prepared hymns to him, as portals of access to the gods.” 2 (5) Rig Veda, iii.3.6 : “Agni, together with the gods, and the children (jantubhih) of Manush, celebrating a multiform sacrifice with hymns. ”3 (6) Rig Veda, iv. 37.1 : “Ye gods, Vajas, and Ribhukshana, come to our sacrifice by the path travelled by the gods, that ye, pleasing deities, may institute a sacrifice among these people of Manush (Manusho vikshu) on auspicious days.”4 (7) Rig Veda, vi.14.2 : “The people of Manush praise in the sacrifice Agni the invoker.” 5 From these texts it is beyond question that the rishis who were the authors of the hymns of the Rig Veda regarded Manu as the progenitor of the Indo-Aryans. This theory about Manu being the progenitor of the IndoAryans had such deep foundation that it was carried forward by the Brahmanas as well as the Puranas. It is propounded in the Aitareya Brahmana,6 in the Vishnu Purana 7 and the Matsya Purana.8. It is true that they have made Brahma the progenitor of Manu; but the Rig Veda theory of Manu being the progenitor has been accepted and maintained by them.9 Why does the Purusha Sukta make no mention of Manu ? This is strange because the author of the Purusha Sukta seems to be aware of the fact that Manu Svayambhuva is called Viraj and Viraj is called Adi Purusha, 10 since he too speaks of Virajo adhi Purushah in verse five of the Sukta. There is a third point in which the Purush Sukta has gone beyond the Rig Veda. The Vedic Aryans were sufficiently advanced in their 1 Muir, Vol. I. p. 163. 2 Ibid., p. 163. 3 Ibid., p. 165. 4 Ibid., p. 165. 5 Ibid., p. 165. 6 Quoted by Muir, Vol. I, p. 108. 7 Quoted by Muir, Vol. I pp. 105-107. 8 Quoted by Muir, Vol. I. p. 110-112. 9 There is however a great deal of confusion when one comes to details. The Vishnu Purana says that Brahma divided his person into two parts: with the one half he became a male, with the other half a female. The female was called Satarupa who by incessantly practising austere fervour of a highly arduous description acquired for herself as a husband a Male called Manu Svayambhuva. There is no suggestion in the Vishnu Purana of incest by Brahma with his daughter. The Aitareya Brahmana and the Matsya Purana on the other hand speak of Brahma having begotten Manu by committing incest with his daughter Satarupa; the Matsya Purana adds that Manu by his austerity obtained a beautiful wife named Ananta. According to the Ramayana (see Muir, I, p. 117) Manu was not a male but a female and was a daughter of Daksha Prajapati and the wife of Kasyapa. 10 Matsya Purana- Muir, Vol., 1 p. 111 f.n.

DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES30 civilization to give rise to division of labour. Different persons among the Vedic Aryans followed different occupations. That they were conscious of it is evidenced by the following verse: Rig Veda, 1.113.6 : “That some may go in pursuit of power, some in pursuit of fame, some in pursuit of wealth, some in pursuit of work, Ushas has awakened people so that each may go in pursuit of his special and different way of earning his livelihood.” This is as far as the Rig Veda had gone. The Purusha Sukta goes beyond. It follows up the notion of division of labour and converts the scheme of division of work into a scheme of division of workers into fixed and permanent occupational categories. Why does the Purusha Sukta commit itself to such a perversity? There is another point in which the Purusha Sukta departs from the Rig Veda. It is not that the Rig Veda speaks only of man. It speaks also of the Indo-Aryan nation. This nation was made up of the five tribes, which had become assimilated into one common Indo-Aryan people. The following hymns refer to these five tribes as moulded into a nation: (1) Rig Veda, vi.11.4 : “Agni, whom, abounding in oblations, the five tribes, bringing offerings, honour with prostrations, as if he were a man.” 1 (2) Rig Veda, vii.15.2 : “The wise and youthful master of the house (Agni) who has taken up his abode among the five tribes in every house.” 2 There is some difference of opinion as to who these five tribes are. Yaska in his Nirukta says that it denotes Gandharvas, Pitris, Devas, Asuras and Rakshasas. Aupamanyava says that it denotes the four Varnas and the Nishadas. Both these explanations seem to be absurd. Firstly, because the five tribes are praised collectively as in the following hymns: (1) Rig Veda, ii.2.10 : “May our glory shine aloft among the five tribes, like the heaven unsurpassable.” 3 (2) Rig Veda, vi.46.7 : “Indra, whatever force or vigour exists in the tribe of Nashusa or whatever glory belongs to the five races bring (for us).” 4 Such laudatory statements could not have been made if the five tribes included the Shudras. Besides, the word used is not Varnas. The word used is Janah. That it refers to the five tribes and not to the four Varnas and Nishadas is quite clear from the following verse of the Rig Veda : 1 Muir. Vol. I, p. 177. 2 Ibid., Vol. I, p. 178. 3 Ibid., Vol. I, p. 178. 4 Ibid., Vol. I, p. 180.

THE SHUDRAS : THE RIDDLE OF THE SHUDRAS 31 Rig Veda, i.108.8: “If, O Indra and Agni, ye are abiding among the Yadus, Turvasas, Druhyus, Anus, Purus, come hither, vigorous heroes from all quarters, and drink the Soma which has been poured out.1 That these five tribes had been moulded into one Aryan people is clear from the Atharva Veda (iii.24.2) which says : “these five regions, the five tribes springing from Manu.” A sense of unity and a consciousness of kind can alone explain why the Rishis of the Rig Vedic hymns came to refer to the five tribes in such manner. The questions are: why did the Purusha Sukta not recognize this unity of the five tribes and give a mythic explanation of their origin? Why instead did it recognize the communal divisions within the tribes? Why did the Purusha Sukta regard communalism more important than nationalism? These are some of the riddles of the Purusha Sukta , which come to light when one compares it with the Rig Veda. There are others, which emerge when one proceeds to examine the Purusha Sukta from a sociological point of view. Ideals as norms are good and are necessary. Neither a society nor an individual can do without a norm. But a norm must change with changes in time and circumstances. No norm can be permanently fixed. There must always be room for revaluation of the values of our norm. The possibility of revaluing values remains open only when the institution is not invested with sacredness. Sacredness prevents revaluation of its values. Once sacred, always sacred. The Purusha Sukta makes the Chaturvarnya a sacred institution, a divine ordination. Why did the Purusha Sukta make a particular form of social order so sacred as to be beyond criticism and beyond change? Why did it want to make it a permanent ideal beyond change and even beyond criticism? This is the first riddle of the Purusha Sukta which strikes a student of sociology. In propounding the doctrine of Chaturvarnya, the Purusha Sukta plays a double game. It proceeds first to raise the real, namely, the existence of the four classes in the Indo-Aryan Society, to the status of an ideal. This is a deception because the ideal is in no way different from facts as they exist. After raising the real to the status of the ideal, it proceeds to make a show of giving effect to what it regards as an ideal. This again is a deception because the ideal already exists in fact. This attempt of the Purusha Sukta to idealize 1 Muir. I. p. 179.