Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v2.c20.227

History of Dharmaśāstra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v2.c20.227

Language
English

v2.c20.227

(9) The śūdra gradually came to be so much looked down upon that he could not touch a brāhmaṇa, though at one time he could be a cook in a brāhmaṇa household and a brāhmaṇa could eat food from his house. In the Anuśāsanaparva (59.33) it is said³⁷⁹ 'a brāhmaṇa should be served by a śūdra from a distance like blazing fire; while he may be waited upon by a kṣatriya or vaiśya after touching him.' Aparārka (p. 1196) quotes two smṛti texts 'a brāhmaṇa on touching a śūdra or niṣāda becomes pure by ācamana (ceremonial sipping of water); on touching persons lower than these, he becomes pure by bathing, prāṇāyāma and the strength of *tapas*; on seeing a ram, a cock, a crow, a dog, a śūdra and an antyāvasāyin (an antyaja), one should stop the rite that is being performed and on touching them one should take a bath'. On this Aparārka explains that if a man who touched a śūdra cannot bathe then he may resort to sipping water, but if able he must take a bath or that on touching a sat-śūdra one may have recourse to ācamana and on touching an asat-śūdra one must take a bath. We find from the Gṛhyasūtras³⁸⁰ that in Madhuparka offered to a snātaka the feet of the guest (even if he was a brāhmaṇa) were washed by a śūdra male or female. So there could have been no ban against a śūdra touching a brāhmaṇa then. The Āp. Dh. S. (II. 3. 6. 9-10) says that two śūdras should wash the feet of a guest, according to some teachers (in the case of a householder who has several dāsas), while Āpastamba himself says that one śūdra should wash the guest's feet and another should sprinkle him with water.³⁸¹