Shudras in Ancient India: A Social History of the Lower Order down to circa A.D. 600 c13.309

c13.309

Generally Nārada, and in some cases Bṛhaspati, repeat the cruel corporal punishments against śūdras offending against brāhmaṇas.¹⁰ Bṛhaspati states that a śūdra should not be subjected to pecuniary punishments but to beating, chaining and ridicule.¹ Bṛhaspati is particularly harsh on the *pratilomas* (i.e. those born of higher caste mothers and lower caste fathers) and the *antyas* (untouchables), whom he considers the dregs of society. If they offend against brāhmaṇas, they should be beaten and never amerced in a fine.² The same provision occurs in Nārada in regard to the śvapacas, medas, caṇḍālas, elephant-drivers, dāsas etc.³ Nārada adds that in these cases the offended parties should punish the offenders themselves, for the king has nothing to do with the penalty to be inflicted on the guilty.⁴ This is an important indication of the weakening of state power. The rule that if a brāhmaṇa abuses a śūdra he must pay 12½ paṇas as a fine is repeated in the law-books of this time.⁵ But Bṛhaspati adds that this applies only to the case of virtuous śūdras; no offence is imputable to a brāhmaṇa for abusing a śūdra devoid of virtue.⁶ Probably this refers to the untouchable sections of the śūdras, who in such cases had no redress in law. But in this respect other sections of the śūdras enjoyed legal protection against offences committed by the members of the three higher varṇas.⁷