________________
206
TULSI-PRAJNA
should a Brahmin attempt to enter their quarters, they turn out in a body and slipper him...". It is said they would kill him for the entry in former times. "Members of the others castes may come so far as the door, but they must not enter house, for that would bring the Holiar bad luck." And what do they do when some body gets in by chance ? The owner of the house "takes care to tear the intruder's cloth, tie up some salt in one corner of it, and turn him out" and that is "supposed to...avert any evil which ought to have befallen the
owner of the house''16.
The belief that the entry of the Brāhmaṇas and other castes will bring bad luck to them and the means adopted to avert the evil reminds us of the superstitions of the primitive societies. That the entry of and contact with strangers may cause trouble is a primitive belief mentioned by Ambedkar himself in the first chapter of his book. The evidence cited by Ambedkar as given above indicates fear rather than hatred towards the Brāhmapas on the part of the untouchables. It has got well-known parallels in the primitive societies. Ambedkar himself has recorded that:
"...there were certain classes of men who were sacred. For a person to touch them was to cause pollution. Among the Polynesians thc tabu character of a chief is violated by the touch of an inferior, although in this case the danger falls upon the inferior...... On the other hand, the chief and his belongings are very often regarded as sacred and, therefore, as dangerous to others of an inferior rank. In the Tonga island, anyone who touched a Chief contacted tabu, it was removed by touching the sole of the foot of a superior Chief. The sacred quality of the Chief in the Malay Pepinsula also resided in the Royal Regalia and anyone touching it was invited with serious illness or death".17
Obliviously, Dr. Ambedkar missed the significance of the evidence he himself cited and the mistake lies in his method. It was stated earlier that the Brāhmaṇas shunned the untouchables because they regarded them as impure. Ambedkar responded as if by reflex action and simply reversed the statement. Such method fails to take note of the fact that persons and things deemed to be sacred were also avoided. But once that fact is recognised, the question arises : were the Brāhmanas too sacred or impure in the eyes or the forebears of the untouchables ? Whatever the answer, the fear of bad luck from the Brahmanas' entry and measures adopted to avert the evil have undoubtedly nothing to do with the logic and ethics of Buddhism.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
