________________
I ADHYÂYA, 3 PÂDA, 34.
225
founded on reasoning, that he is unfit for knowledge also; for the argumentation is the same in both cases ? -With reference to the purvapakshin's opinion that the fact of the word. Sadra' being enounced in the samvarga-knowledge constitutes an inferential mark (of the Sûdra's qualification for knowledge), we remark that that inferential mark has no force, on account of the absence of arguments. For the statement of an inferential mark possesses the power of intimation only in consequence of arguments being adduced; but no such arguments are brought forward in the passage quoted? Besides, the word 'Sûdra' which occurs in the samvarga-vidyâ would establish a claim on the part of the Sûdras to that one vidyâ only, not to all vidyâs. In reality, however, it is powerless, because occurring in an arthavada, to establish the Sûdras' claim to anything.--The word 'Sûdra' can moreover be made to agree with the context in which it occurs in the following manner. When Gânasruti Pautrâyana heard himself spoken of with disrespect by the flamingo ("How can you speak of him, being what he is, as if he were like Raikva with the car?' IV, 1, 3), grief (suk) arose in his mind, and to that grief the rishi Raikva alludes with the word Sadra, in order to show thereby his knowledge of what is remote. This explanation must be accepted because a (real) born Sûdra is not qualified (for the samvarga-vidya). If it be asked how the grief (suk) which had arisen in Gânasruti's mind can be referred to by means of the word Sûdra, we reply: On account of the rushing on (âdravana) of the grief. For we may etymologise the word Sûdra by dividing it into its parts, either as 'he rushed into grief' (Sukam abhidudrâva) or as 'grief rushed on
The Sûdra not having acquired a knowledge of Vedic matters in the legitimate way, i. e. through the study of the Veda under the guidance of a guru, is unfit for sacrifices as well as for vidya.
? The linga contained in the word 'Sadra' has no proving power as it occurs in an artharâda-passage which has no authority if not connected with a corresponding injunctive passage. In our case the linga in the arthavada-passage is even directly contradicted by those injunctions which militate against the Sadras' qualification for Vedic matters.
[34]
Digitized by
Digized by Google
