the Vahyas and the Dasyus. The minute differences among the last two were more historical than practical and I do not care to dwell upon them here. One of the great causes why peoples often suffered in their status was their continued adhesion to Buddhism.
There were definite rules regarding excommunication, and there was a class of sins recognized as jātibhransha, i. e., the sins which ought to cause loss of caste. They were giving pain to a Brāhmana, smelling at things that ought not to be smelt,[1] smelling spirituous liquor, cheating, and unnatural offense against man (xi, 68).
There were also a class of sins like killing a donkey which would reduce a person to a conditios of mixed caste (xi, 69). The rule giving the sins which reduce a man to the condition of mixed caste is very hard to interpret historically. The interpretation is rendered much more difficult as we do not know the source from which our writer has derived his doctrine. No ancient writer has referred to it.
Suppose there is a case of a man who has committed a sin which degrades a man to a mixed caste, and he did not care to take any penance. A question arises whether a man who is rejected by his caste-fellows would be taken in by another so-called "mixed caste" like Ambastha, Magadha, or Vaideha, which were in
- ↑ Here is again an evidence to show that the book is likely to be written near Bengal. We do not hear of any people losing caste on account of smelling things that ought not to be smelt in any other part of India except Bengal. In Bengal we have a tradition that the Tagores lost caste because their ancestors smelt food prepared by a Mohammedan. It should again be noted that this verse is the writer's own addition.
