Shudras in Ancient India: A Social History of the Lower Order down to circa A.D. 600 c10.501
Śūdras in Ancient India: A Social History of the Lower Order down to circa A.D. 600 c10.501
- Language
- English
c10.501.1
That the members of the lower orders actually got into the Buddhist church is suggested by a number of instances. Mātaṅga, the son of a caṇḍāla, is said to have attained infinite bliss, which many kṣatriyas and brāhmaṇas could not attain;¹ a monk is described as a former vulture-trainer,² and caṇḍālas appear as adopting the homeless state although Fick thinks that “the acutal existence of such holy men is extremely doubtful”.³ He gives no good reason however for his lack of faith in the statement of the Pāli canon on this point. In the list of the authors of the *Thera*- and *Therigāthas*, at least ten among 259 theras⁴ and eight out of about fifty-nine therīs⁵ belonged to sections of society which may be regarded as śūdras. They included an actor, a caṇḍāla, a basketmaker, a trapper, a prostitute and a woman slave.⁶ We have no similar information to throw light on the proportion of the members of the lower orders in the Jain chruch. But it is significant that the first woman disciple of Mahāvīra is said to have been a captured slave.⁷ It is suggested that the homeless condition was often a reaction to surfeit of wealth and power which the people of the lower orders were totally denied.⁸ But this is hardly borne out by evidence either in the case of the Buddhist or the Jain church.
c10.501.2
According to a Jain canon some of the causes of the renunciation of the world were poverty, sickness, sudden anger and insult.⁹ There might be some truth in the following abuse hurled by the householders at the monks : “those who become śramaṇas are the meanest workmen, men unable to support their families, low-caste men, wretches, idlers.”¹⁰ In order to discourage the influx of such people, it was said that a miserable man who becomes a monk in order to get food from others will be reborn as a boar greedy of wild rice.¹¹ A Buddhist text informs us that in the realm of Bimbisāra the Saṃgha enjoyed special protection from the king, on account of which at times prisoners, thieves, persons condemned to the punishment of whipping, debtors and runaway slaves took refuge in the Buddhist Order and got themselves ordained.¹ When these cases were brought to the notice of the Buddha, he laid down that such people should not be admitted into the Order. A passage of the *Dīgha Nikāya* also makes it clear that members of the lower orders sought an end of their misery by becoming Buddhist monks.
c10.501.3
In the *Sāmaññaphala Sutta* Ajātaśatru of Magadha, after pointing out the advantages derived by mahouts, horsemen, home-born slaves, cooks, barbers, bath attendants, confectioners, garland-makers, washermen, weavers, basket-makers and potters from their occupations,² enquires of the Buddha whether the members of the Order, who have given up the world, derive any corresponding advantages visible in this life from their own profession. In his reply the Buddha lays bare the contrast between the luxurious and full life of the king, who is in possession of the five pleasures of sense, and the life of a slave-servant who rises up earlier, goes to bed later, is always keen to carry out the master's orders and anxious to make himself agreeable to his master in everything.³ The Buddha further adds that the slave wants to live like a king and in order to earn merits for that purpose becomes a recluse.
c10.501.4
And he poses the counter-question : "The very man whom, under ordinary circumstances, you would treat as a slave-servant, — what treatment would you meet out to him after he had joined the Order?" The king confesses that he would treat him as a person worthy of honour and respect, and would honour him with a seat, robes, a bowl, a lodging place and medicine.⁴ The above discourse of the Buddha leaves no doubt that the life of a renouncer offered to the members of the lower orders not only prospects of immediate relief from poverty, but was also supposed to earn merit for a happier life in the next birth. In the same passage the Buddha contrasts the luxurious life of the king with the life of a tax-paying agriculturist householder, and states that he may also be actuated by similar motives for a happier life and decide to become a recluse.¹ It is significant that there is no mention of the brāhmaṇas and the kṣatriyas in this connection, which may suggest that in joining the Saṃgha the poorer sections of the vaiśyas, and the śūdras, were generally moved by materialistic interests. They envied the life of the monks, who ‘having eaten good meals, lie down in beds sheltered from the wind.’²