2

This verse of the Satapatha Brahmana calls Shudras and women as untruth . The part from where it is taken deals with the pravargya ceremony.

14.1.1.31

aśūdrociṣṭī eṣa vai dharmo ya eṣa tapati saiṣā śrīḥ satyaṃ jyotiranṛtaṃ strī śūdraḥ śvā kṛṣṇaḥ śakunistāni na prekṣeta necriyaṃ ca pāpmānaṃ ca nejjyotiśca tamaśca netsatyānṛte saṃsṛjānīti

  1. And whilst not coming into contact with Shudras and remains of food; for this Gharma is he that shines yonder, and he is excellence, truth, and light; but woman, the Shudra, the dog, and the black bird (the crow), are untruth: he should not look at these, lest he should mingle excellence and sin, light and darkness, truth and untruth.

Can there be any hidden meaning ? Esoteric in nature or is it referring to all women or some particular women ?

10
  • 1
    You should ignore these offensive verses. These verses were inserted during a time when Hindu society was going through degradation. May 15, 2022 at 4:24
  • 3
    This is the interpolation argument. It needs to be proven that this is interpolated.
    – seeker
    May 15, 2022 at 4:46
  • 2
    These verses are offensive and it doesn't matter if they are interpolated or originally there. They should be rejected because women and shudras are not untruth. Such name calling violates reason and hence is not scripture. 'Even the words heard from an ignorant person, if in themselves they be fraught with sense, come to be regarded as pious and wise. In days of old, Usanas said unto the Daityas this truth, which should remove all doubts, that scriptures are no scriptures if they cannot stand the test of reason.' Mahabharata Shanti Parva Section CXLII May 15, 2022 at 11:57
  • 2
    Women and shudras are called "untruth" because they are not initiated into Vedas. Dog and black crows are called "untruth" because they are inauspicious. Once we know the meaning behind these Vedic statements, then we know that they are not against reason.
    – Ikshvaku
    May 16, 2022 at 11:53
  • 1
    Sudra one who is always towards sense enjoyment such person even tough he is brahmin he is shudra
    – Prasanna R
    Jun 15, 2022 at 9:54

3 Answers 3

1

Such statements in the Vedas are offensive and should be rejected. That the Vedas have many statements that simply can't be of divine origin has been known for quite some time.

There was a time when the Vedas themselves were considered eternal in the sense in which the divine truths contained therein were changeless and permanent and were only revealed to man. At a subsequent time, it appears that the utterances of the Vedic hymns with the knowledge of its meaning was important; and it was held that the hymns themselves must have had a divine origin. At a still later period, the meaning of the hymns showed that many of them could not be of divine origin, because they inculcated upon mankind performance of various unholy acts, such as torturing animals; and we can find many ridiculous stories in the Vedas. The correct meaning of the statement "The Vedas are beginningless and eternal" is that the law or truth revealed by them to man is permanent and changeless. Logic, geometry, chemistry, etc., reveal also a law or truth which is permanent and changeless and in that sense they are also beginningless and eternal. But no truth or law is absent from the Vedas, and I ask any one of you to point out to me any truth which is not treated of in them.

(The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol.5: With the Swami Vivekananda at Madura, pp.205-206)

Such statements violate reason and it is a teaching of Hindu scripture itself that such statements in scripture do not have the status of scripture.

Even the words heard from an ignorant person, if in themselves they be fraught with sense, come to be regarded as pious and wise. In days of old, Usanas said unto the Daityas this truth, which should remove all doubts, that scriptures are no scriptures if they cannot stand the test of reason.

Mahabharata Shanti Parva Section CXLII

Yoga Vasistha II.18 says:

yuktiyuktamupādeyaṃ vacanaṃ bālakādapi | anyattṛṇamiva tyājyamapyuktaṃ padmajanmanā || 3 ||

The remark of a child is to be accepted, if it is in accordance with reason; but the remark of even Brahma Himself, the creator of the world is to be rejected like a piece of straw if it does not accord with reason.

REF: Vasistha's Yoga translated by Swami Venkatesananda, p 35.

Any defense of such statements on the grounds of infallibility can also be rejected. Acharya Shankara, for example, in his Gita Bhasya 18.66 says:

The appeal to the infallibility of the Vedic injunction is misconceived. The infallibility in question refers only to the unseen forces or apurva, and is admissible only in regards to matters not confined to the sphere of direct perceptions, etc ... Even a hundred statements of sruti to the effect that fire is cold and non-luminous won't prove valid. If it does make such a statement, its import will have to be interpreted differently. Otherwise, validity won't attach to it. Nothing in conflict with the means of valid cognition or with its own statements may be imputed to sruti.

REF: Srimad Bhagavad Gita Bhasya of Sri Sankaracarya translation by Dr. A. G. Krishna Warrier, p. 629.

Sri Vachaspati Mishra, another Advaita Vedanta philosopher, says,

Na hy āgamāḥ sahasram api ghaṭam paṭayitum īṣate (Bhāmatī, Introduction)

A thousand scriptures cannot make a jar into a cloth.

REF: Introductory remarks in Bhamati by Sri Vachaspati Mishra

Women and Shudras do not become untruths simply because that is written in the Vedas.

Why are such statements in the Vedas? The accurate answer is that we don't know.

19
  • 2
    Women and shudras are called "untruth" because they are not initiated into Vedas. Dog and black crows are called "untruth" because they are inauspicious. Once we know the meaning behind these Vedic statements, then we know that they are not against reason.
    – Ikshvaku
    May 16, 2022 at 11:53
  • 3
    Denying women and shudras access to the Vedas is anti-reason. May 16, 2022 at 12:12
  • 2
    We have to understand the reason why they are denied the Vedas. The reason women and shudras are prohibited from the Vedas is because the Vedas won't work if they use them.
    – Ikshvaku
    May 16, 2022 at 13:39
  • 2
    And also because it's a sin for them to use the Vedas.
    – Ikshvaku
    May 16, 2022 at 13:45
  • 2
    We are all born from a woman. Women form 50 % of the population. So if women are untruth then what are we? How can the males be truth if they are born from untruth? This is why I said that denying women access to the Vedas is anti-reason. Shudras are persons who in fact need the Vedas even more than those who have attained higher Varna. Denying the needy the Vedas is anti-reason. The claim that Vedas won't work if 50 % of the population (women) read them is also anti-reason. Why should the Vedas not work for 50 % of the population. It makes no sense. May 17, 2022 at 3:32
0

(Please treat this as a comment, this is not an answer, Using answer space instead of the comment , owing to character restrictions)

This snippet is from a veritable resource
Hindu Dharma, The universal way of life, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan Publication,-Pujyasri Chandrashekara Saraswati Swami,
reflects , socio-cultural attitude(which is not in accordance with the quote mentioned in the question) erstwhile, ..is suggestive of the fact that one shouldn't end up in assuming, that there could so much of social inequality in the past

Shankara Bhagvatpada went to Mahismati, the home town of Mandanamisra, where he happened to see women carrying water to their homes from the river. He asked one of them about Mandanamisra's house. In that city even ordinary women were learned. So their reply to the Acarya's question came in verse. Here is one of the stanzas from it:

Svatah pramanam paratah pramanam Kirangana yatra ca sangiranti Dvarastha nidantara sanniruddhah Janihi tan-Mandanapanditaukah

Svatah-pramana and paratah-pramana are part of the pramanya-vada I

From such incidents we know how wrong it is to say that in olden days only men in India were educated and that the women were condemned to remain unlettered

0

Today the Veda and scriptural works are not enforceable by writ of law of the secular democratic country that is India. *However the deep truths within it are timeless. And the words yield their meaning with much practice of discipline of mind and body. At the time of the SB (600 to 800 BC) in BC times, it was strict discipline and job specialisation that kept the Bharatas , the panchaksiti ( 5 peoples, allies of the Bharatas)from extermination by foemen ,all around them. These tribes were the plague of that region and wars and raiding was the way everyone lived. Does not a nation at war have strict rules? These type of warring tribes wreaking havoc and destruction on groups trying to establish and survive are mentioned by Zoroaster. There are verses in the Avesta which ridicule or parody almost identical verses in the Veda. That is no matter as that was a reformation most probably reacting to a sort of what the Prophet saw as tyranny of the Bhrigus. I quote: "Rig Veda Mandala 1, Hymn 100- 11 When in his ways with kinsmen or with strangers he speedeth to the fight, invoked of many, For gain of waters, and of sons and grandsons, may Indra, girt by Maruts, be our succour. 12 Awful and fierce, fiend-slayer, thunder-wielder, with boundless knowledge, hymned by hundreds, mighty, In strength like Soma, guard of the Five Peoples, may Indra, girt by Maruts, be our succour. 13 Winning the light, hitherward roars his thunder like the terrific mighty voice of Heaven. Rich gifts and treasures evermore attend him. May Indra, girt by Maruts, be our succour."

Five people's= panchakshiti

In that light anyone not knowing the strict discipline and ritual purity ( present in all religions particularly the ancient ones eg Judaism), would be ignorant of the ways, the truth , so untruth. Since some arya women were warriors and scholars, this is the most sensible meaning.

You must log in to answer this question.

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