Tulsi Prajna 1996 10

SR No.: 524589
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Parmeshwar Solanki
Publisher: Jain Vishva Bharati
Publication Year: 1996
Total Pages: 166
Language: Hindi
Classification: Magazine, India_Tulsi Prajna, & India
File Size: 7 MB

Page 160

Vol. XXII, No. 3
141
Schedule is "taken to be both exhaustive and authentic" list of the "vast number of communities which are regarded as hereditary untouchables by Hindus". Ambedkar couterposes the list to the names in the Smṛtis and observes that.
1. Antyaja castes in the Smrtis do not number more than twelve, while the untouchable castes and tribes in the Schedule number 429.
2. Out of the castes mentioned in the schedule only three, namely, Nata, Rajaka and Carmakara are found in the Smrtis.
3. Many communities mentioned in the Smṛtis do not find a place in the Schedule.
4. Only one caste, namely, Carmakara is mentioned in the Smrtis as well as in the Schedule and regarded as untouchable throughout India. Nata and Rajaka appear in both lists but they are regarded as untouchables in part of India only.
These facts are "so significant and so telling" according to Ambedkar that they cannot but force the conclusion that people mentioned in the Dharma sastras do not belong to the same category as people mentioned in the Schedule, so he argues that the Smrtis enumerate the 'Impure' while the Schedule lists the untouchable'. Rejection of such interpretation leads to insurmountable difficulties in his opinion35. These difficulties as pointed out by him are as follows:
1. "If these 429 communities belong to the same class as the 12 mentioned by the sastras why none of the sastras mention them ?"
2. "If the Impure are the same as the untouchables why is it that as many as 42 out of 429 should be unknown to the Smrtis"? 3. "If the Impure and the untouchables are one and the same, why those communities which find a place in the Smrtis do not find a place in the list given in the Order-in-Council" ?
It is worthwhile to remind here that we have opined that there was untouchability during the age of the Dharmasastras but that is not based on the lists given in the Smrtis. We have established the existence of untouchability during the age independently, not by taking the words like 'Antyaja' and 'Antyavasayin' to chable. Moreover, we have expressed doubts as to how old and reliable the Madhyamängirasa Smrti and Atri Smrti are. So the quesBut we turn to tions raised above do not affect our position at all.
mean untou