Babasaheb Dr B.R Ambedkar

z:\ ambedkar\vol-05\vol5-03.indd MK SJ+YS 23-9-2013/YS-10-11-2013 174
174 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
There was a distinction between a male Path and a female Patit.
Neither was exempt. The Rule applies to both, for Manu says:
“XI.189. Let him follow the same rule in the case of female
outcast; but clothes, food, and drink shall be given to them, and
they shall live close to the (family) house.”.
There can be no doubt that the legal sanction was powerful sanction.
The punishment prescribed by law for breach of Caste was twofold.
It involved excommunication and loss of right to inherit. How
formidable these punishments were has been well described by Sir
Thomas Strange in his treatise on Hindu Law. Referring to the subject
he says:
“It remains to consider one case, that may be said to be, with
reference to personal delinquency, instar omnium—occurring in
every enumeration on the subject as a cause of exclusion, namely:
degradation, or the case of the outcaste. Accompanied with
certain ceremonies, its effect is, to exclude him from all social
intercourse, to suspend in him every civil function, to disqualify
him for all the offices, and all the charities of life;—he is to be
deserted by his connexions, who are from the moment of the
sentence attaching upon him, to desist from speaking to him,
from sitting in his company, from delivering to him any inherited,
or other property, and from every civil or usual attention, as
inviting him on the first day of the year, or the like, so that a
man under these circumstances, might as well be dead; which,
indeed, the Hindu Law considers him to be, directing libations to
be offered to Manes, as though he were naturally so. This system
of privations, mortifying as it must be, was enforced under the
ancient law, by denouncing a similar fate to any one, by whose
means they were endeavoured to be eluded; but this severity was
moderated at the beginning of the present age, in which it is said
“the sinner alone bears his guilt”, the law deeming so seriously of
non-intercourse, that if one who ought to associate at meals with
another, refuses to do so, without sufficient cause, he is punishable.
And, in the Bombay reports, there is an instance of an action
of damages, for a malicious expulsion from caste. The analogy
between degradation by the Hindu law, and excommunication,
as it prevailed formerly among us, holds, not merely in the
general nature and effect of the proceeding, but in the peculiar
circumstance of the one and the other being two-fold. As, with
us, there was the less, and the greater excommunication, so, of
offences considered with reference to their occasioning exclusion
from inheritance among the Hindus, they may also be regarded in
a two-fold point of view. This we learn from a case that was before