4

Untouchability can be of a couple of forms:

  1. one which arises out of temporary impurity (aśauca) e.g., not touching a menstruating woman

  2. a person is untouchable due to the nature of his work e.g., a sewer worker

  3. a person belonging to a certain class, tribe, country, etc. is untouchable

Do Vedas (saṃhitas, āraṇyakas or brāhmaṇas) discuss untouchability of either of these forms?

  • Why did you consider above 3 cases only as untouchability? Is there any reason for it? – The Destroyer Apr 19 '18 at 17:10
  • I'm interested in all forms untouchability. Only listed the types that I know of so people don't assume I'm only referring to #3 @TheDestroyer – sv. Apr 19 '18 at 17:52
  • 1
    For brahmacharis and Sanyasis even girls are untouchables. For a chaste wife, every man other than her husband is untouchable. Same with a chaste husband. – Tat Tvam Asi Apr 19 '18 at 17:56
  • That must be from the smritis. What do Vedas say? @NarayanaSharma – sv. Apr 19 '18 at 20:06
  • 1
    For a man or woman who is in "madi" their own family is untouchable @NarayanaSharma – user1195 Apr 20 '18 at 16:13
3

I don't know the answer in its entirety but 1. is apparently discussed in yajur veda. Regardless, I'd like you to think about the following.

  1. Vedas were not divined in the kali yuga.

  2. The different varnas came into being in different yugas. Narada explains this in Uttara Kanda of Ramayana.

  3. Vedas embody universal truths that endure across time and space. So if something that is a kali yuga phenomenon does not appear in the veda, it does not mean the veda is wrong nor does it mean that the yuga dharmas are invalid. It is precisely for the changing yuga dharmas that smritis were born. And these smritis note the practices that are to be upheld by various people during various times.

  4. Even within a certain yuga, if a certain phenomenon is unacceptable, change does happen within that yuga itself. It does not render the Veda or the change invalid. As an example, are computers mentioned in the veda? (although this is a favorable kali yuga change)

So the lens of "if it does not appear in Rig Veda, it is false" is really just a blinder with a very tiny aperture.

  • 1
    This looks like commentary. Doesn't answer my question. – sv. Apr 19 '18 at 18:09
  • Where exactly is Yajur Veda discussing this topic? If u give me the locations I can easily verify as I have both the books SYV and KYV. – Rickross Apr 20 '18 at 7:29
  • @Rickross don't know. You may just have to rifle through the whole thing; sorry. – user1195 Apr 20 '18 at 16:14
  • @sv i guess it is. – user1195 Apr 20 '18 at 16:14

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .