Chapter 2
Emergence of Caste (Varṇa) and its
Evolution
24
Chapter 2
Emergence of Caste (Varṇ a) and its Evolution
The caste system in India can be described as an elaborately stratified social
hierarchy distinguishing India’s social structure from any other nation. There is no
unanimous view regarding the origin and development of Indian caste system. But,
almost all thinkers admit that the notion of caste is closely associated with the ideas of
pollution and purity. They also agree in ascribing caste to extreme antiquity. However,
for the sake of convenience we may study the emergence of caste (Varṇa) and its
evolution in India under the following heads :
(1) The Vedic period (comprising early Vedic period and later Vedic period).
(2)The Post-Vedic period (comprising Buddhist period, Sutra period and Smṛti period).
(3) The period up to the advent of Vivekānanda.
(1) The Vedic period: The Vedic period can be divided into two segments(i) Early Vedic period or Ṛg Vedic period and (ii) Later Vedic period comprising the Epic
period.
(i) Early Vedic period or Ṛg Vedic period : Caste system in India has had a
history going back to the Varṇas of the Vedic times. Varṇa is a Sanskrit term derived
from the root ‘vṛ’ which means ‘to cover’, ‘to envelop’. Derived meaning include ‘coat,
25
mantle, outward appearance, exterior form’ and hence ‘colour’ and more generally ‘kind,
sort, character, quality’. All these meanings are present in the Ṛg Vedic use of the term.
In the Ṛg Veda, the word ‘Varṇa’ is used to refer to the colour of skin and hair of two
different races viz, the Aryan race and the Dāsa race (aboriginal people). The roots of the
Varṇa system lie in the clash of races. Fair complexioned Aryan hordes which started
pouring into India through the north-west vanquished and subjugated the dark
complexioned earlier settlers.1 But nowhere is the word Varṇa used for caste or class in
the Ṛg Veda. The Śatapatha Brāhmana, on the other hand, describes the four classes of
society (divided on the basis of occupation) as the four Varṇas.2 The Bṛhaspati hymn in
the fourth mandala of Ṛg Veda mentions about two classes viz. the Brāhmin and the
Kṣatriya.3 In another hymn prayer is offered to Aśvins to promote the prosperity of the
brahma, kṣattra and viś and secure intellectual progress, military pre-eminence, and
cattle prosperity.4 This passage also presupposes the division of Aryans into three
categories- Brāhmin, Kṣatriya and Vaiśya. These three appear to be the names of three
professions, which could be followed by any Aryan according to his inclination.
Priesthood is considered as the highest profession in the Ṛg Vedic civilization. It is worth
noting that the priest is referred to not invariably by the terms ‘brahma’ or ‘brāhmana’;
he is more frequently described as kāru, vipra, kavi, vedhas etc. The warrior is usually
described as rājanya and rarely as a Kṣatriya. The word ‘rājanya’ points to the ruling
activities, and thus brings out the functional aspect of this class. The term viśah denotes
in several places Aryan citizens in general rather than the farmers or merchants in
particular.5 They are described as those who pay taxes to the king. There is no mention of
Śudra class in the Ṛg Veda except in the Puruṣa Sukta. The Puruṣa Sukta of Ṛg Veda
26
which is a later composition, contains the sole reference to the division of society into
four categories or classes. It is the 90th hymn of the 10th mandala of Ṛg Veda. It points out
that these four divisions of society were born from the various parts of the sacrificed
Puruṣa. The priestly class or Brāhmins were born from the mouth, the warrior class or
Kṣatriyas were born from the arms, the common people or Vaiśyas were born from the
thigh, and from the feet the servants or Śudras were born.6 The hierarchy is determined
by the descending order of the different organs from which they are created. It is to be
noted here that this division is not same as the modern concept of caste or class. It is
merely a functional division which was very flexible in nature.
The Puruṣa Sukta is considered to be the composition of an era when the Aryans
had already settled down in the Indian subcontinent. The Viś or the common masses of
Aryan required agricultural labour, so they employed the Dāsas. Gradually the Dāsas
were given the generic name of Śudra.7 In due course of time, Śudras formed the lowest
strata of Aryan society. The composition of Puruṣa Sukta and its inclusion in the Ṛg Veda
is probably the first attempt to systematise, justify and legitimise the exploitation of the
non-Aryan masses by the Aryans.8 The elite Aryans used to maintain a distance from the
Śudras and they had been assigned a place in the society only for the manual service that
they performed. To serve the higher three Varṇas was considered as the sole duty of the
Śudras.
There is a controversy among various scholars regarding the period of the Vedic
age when the Śudras were classified as the fourth Varṇa. Dr. Ᾱmbedkar in his book “Who
were the Sudras” clearly and rationally proved the thesis that the Śudras were Aryans,
and they belonged to the Kṣatriya class previously and they constituted a powerful
27
community of the Kṣatriyas. He cited the example of many eminent Kings of the ancient
Aryan period who were Śudras.
However, during the early Vedic period the society was conceived as an organic
whole and all the four classes formed its parts. Caste (not in the modern sense) system
which was nothing but the classification of society on the basis of professions was very
flexible and permits mobility from one caste to another. Professions were not hereditary.
A hymn of Ṛg Veda seems to indicate this fact where a sage tells us that ‘I am a poet, my
father is a physician, and my mother’s job is to grind the corn’.9 In the Ṛg Veda there is
no mention of the concept of ‘untouchability’. The concept of the Śaṅkara Varṇa or
mixed castes is also not found in the early Vedic period.
(ii) Later Vedic period comprising the Epic period: The Sāmaveda, Yajurveda,
Atharvaveda, the principal Brāhmanas and Upaniṣads, the principal Ᾱrnyakas and the
two epics viz. Rāmāyana and Mahābhārata are the sources of information of this period.
During this period, the caste system developed further. However, the system was not so
rigid as it became in the Sutra period. It is considered midway between the laxity of the
Ṛg Veda and the rigidity of the Sutras. The origin of the Varṇas has not been discussed
elaborately in the later Vedic period. However the Brāhmanas clearly mentioned about
the four Varṇas. Śatapatha Brāhmana clearly states four Varṇas or castes- Brāhmin,
Rājanya, and Śudra (catvaro vai Varṇah, brāhmano rājanya h śudrasca).10 The duties of
the four Varṇas have been recorded in the Brāhmana texts. Aitareya Brāhmana
mentions-the receipt of gifts, drinking of soma, moving at will, smartness and optional
submission to the king as the marks of a Brāhmin.11 The has been described as one who
pays tax to another, is lived on by another, and can be oppressed or enslaved at will. The
28
Śudra is the servant of another, to be evicted at will and to be slain at will. It means the
Śudra has no right to property or security of life against the king or the nobility in
general. He is to serve the three higher Varṇas. The Kṣatriyas are the owners of land and
the Vaisyas were the tenants. From the Brāhmana texts it becomes evident that the
Brāhmins were the spiritual guardians of the people, whereas, the Kṣatriyas have the
supreme position as the temporal ruler, protector and fighter. They were entitled to
perform sacrifice, but have no right to partake of the oblations of the sacrifice, which was
the sole right of the Brāhmins. Vaiśya community comprises the majority of the subjects.
Their social status was far more exalted and honourable than that of the Śudras. Like the
Brāhmins and the Kṣatriyas, the Vaiśyas were entitled to upanayaṇa or investiture with
the holy thread. Hence, the word ‘Dwija’ includes the three higher Varṇas or castes.
Taittiriya Brāhmana states that while the Brāhmin sprang from the gods, the
Śudra sprang from the asuras or demons. The Śudras have the lowest position in the
society. The superiority of Brāhmin and Kṣatriya to Vaiśya and Śudra has been
proclaimed in innumerable passages. Śatapatha Brāhmana states, the Brāhmin and
Kṣatriya never go behind the Vaiśya and Śudra,…….he thus encloses those two classes
(Vaiśya and Śudra) on both sides by the priesthood and the nobility, and makes them
submissive.12 Again the two lower Varṇas are described as incomplete Varṇas whereas
Brāhmin and Kṣatriya are described as complete ones. Śatapatha Brāhmana states,
incomplete is he who is not either a Kṣatriya, nor a Purohita (asarvam va tad yat
asksatriyo va apurohito va).13 It clearly states that only the higher three classes are
eligible to perform sacrifices. It also prohibits the entrance of the Śudras into the
sacrificial ground.14 But Dr. Ᾱmbedkar challenged this view. According to him, the
29
popular concept that Śudras never performed sacrifices is wrong. He has proved without
doubt that Paijavana was born a Śudra but he performed sacrifices. He also quoted ślokas
from Mahābhārata and writes, “Śudrah Paijavano nama”, “Śudrah Pailavano nama”,
“Śudrah Yailanano nama”, “Śudrah Yaijanano nama”, “Sudropi Yajana nama”, “Śudrah
Paunjalka nama”, “Suddho Vaibhavano nama”.15 The Śanti Parva of the Mahābhārata,
according to Dr. Ᾱmbedkar, says that Paijavana was simply another name of Sudas who
was a powerful Śudra King.
Bhāgavat Gitā holds that the four Varṇas were created by God on the basis of
guna (quality) and karma (one’s own action).16 But it is to be noted that this is natural
and not man-made caste. By nature, the children of the same parents may be teachers,
statesman, merchants or labourers. The Gitā nowhere mentions that caste is hereditary.
It indeed speaks against Varṇa- Śaṅkara.
In the later Vedic period, the Varṇas continued to be decided by occupation,
mobility among the castes is still there; but compared to the early Vedic period, such
occurrences are limited in number. There are instances of persons like Viśwāmitra, Vyāsa
and the like who were elevated to higher status in the social hierarchy. The Aitareya
Brāhmana records the tale of Kavasa, son of Ilusa and a maid-servant.17 By means of his
enlightment, he attains the status of a Ṛṣi. Mahidāsa, the author of Aitareya Brāhmana is
another illustration in point. Though born of a Śudra mother, by dint of his intellectual
attainment he achieves the status of a Brāhmin and composes many Vedic hymns. In the
Mahābhārata, the upward march from one caste to another in succeeding births till a
person is born as Brāhmin is described in detail.18 In Chāndogya Upaniṣad we find the
story of Satyakāma Jabāla. The teacher Gautama pleased with the truthfulness of
30
Satyakāma, acclaimed him as a Brāhmin because none but a Brāhmin could speak the
truth in that manner. The test of lineage is subordinated here to the criterion of the moral
characteristic of truth-speaking. Similarly, there is also provision for degradation in the
social hierarchy. Aitareya Brāhmana records the story of the grandsons of Viśwāmitra
who were degraded outside the fold of castes owing to their heinous acts.19
During the Brāhmanic age, the Brāhmins enjoyed a supreme position in the
field of both politics and religion. They had equal hold on the ruler and the ruled. But
towards the last phase of this period (during the Ᾱranyakas and Upaniṣads), priestly
power was declining. The ruling power gained importance in both political, spiritual and
academic spheres. It is clear from the Upaniṣadic literature that some of the kings like
Janaka, Prvāhana etc.of the age were not only the patrons of philosophers, but were
themselves well versed in the profound philosophical speculations of their time.
Brāhmanic age represent the period of transition from early Vedic period to the
Upaniṣadic period, as such it may be termed as the halfway house between the Samhitā
(early vedic period) and the Upaniṣadic age.
On account of their dubious origin and their low social status, the Śudras are
very often referred to as Anāryas or non-Aryans. Śudra community comprises various
non-Aryan aboriginal people who submitted to the hegemony of the Aryans. They were
deprived of taking part in sacrifices. The Taittiriya denies the Śudra even the right to
milch cows for the milk to be used for sacrificial purposes. This taboo with respect of
Śudras is also found in Śatapatha Brāhmana.20 A sacrifice, after initiation for sacrifice, is
debarred from speaking with one who is not a ‘Yajniya’ (entitled to perform sacrifice) --
31
this clearly excludes a Śudra from sacrificial work. They were even denied the entrance
into the sacrificial ground.
Intermarriage between higher and lower classes commence from the early
Vedic period. During the age of the Brāhmanas and Vajasaney Samhitā (which is
contemporaneous with the early Brāhmanas), various mixed castes have come into
existence probably due to the intermarriage of every possible variety between four main
castes. Very low castes, mixed castes (śankar jāti) and outcastes (antyavāsayin) such as
Śabara, Andhra, Pundra, Pulinda, Nicya, Niṣāda and many others are met with for the
first time. Thus the pattern of society which was simple in the early Vedic age become
highly complicated. In the post-Ṛg Vedic literature, there are more frequent references to
primitive forest-dwellers who were kept on the fringes of Aryan society in the conquered
regions. Amongst these were Chandalas. Although the Chandalas were severely
stigmatised in the later Vedic age, it was only in the period between 600BC and 200AD
that untouchability appeared as such.
(2)The Post-Vedic period (comprising Buddhist period, Sutra period and Smṛti period):
Caste system became more rigid during the post Vedic period. However, its rigidity and
gravious effect reaches its peak just before the advent of Buddhism. The members of the
different castes were bound to follow their hereditary profession. The four castes became
subdivided into numerous sub-castes. Buddhist literature gives a glimpse of the different
aspects of the institution of caste. According to this view, the existence of caste was
purely a secular and practical affair – a kind of hereditary division of tasks and labour
which has become necessary in the distant past.21 Buddha refutes the Vedic myth of the
divine origin of the Varṇa hierarchy. He openly speaks against the prevalent caste system
32
of his time and declares that all human beings belong to a common human species,
whatever be the colour of their skin. To him, inter-mixture of blood through inter-caste
or inter-racial marriage do not and cannot have any disastrous consequence, since the
psychological make-up of a new- born baby is determined not only by heredity but also
by environment or the karma of the previous birth.22 Buddha challenges the supremacy of
the Brāhmins. According to him, one cannot be considered superior just because of birth
or lineage. He declares :
“By mere birth no one becomes a Brāhmin,
By mere birth no one becomes an outcaste.
By deeds one becomes a Brāhmin,
By deeds one becomes an outcaste.”23
During this period, Kṣatriyas were at the apex of the social structure. Along with the four
established castes, there were some other people below the rank of the Śudras and they
were marked as despised castes.
Caste system has undergone remarkable changes during the Sutra period. Sutras
are manuals of instruction. Gṛhya Sutras and Dharmasutras are the manuals of conduct in
domestic and social relations. Dharmasutras are more universal, whereas, Gṛhya Sutras
reflect individual schools. In Dharmasutras, which are four in number viz., Apastamba,
Gautama, Baudhāyana and Vaśiṣtha, we find rigid rules regarding the conduct of various
castes and about their duties, prerogatives, and disabilities. The three upper castes were
allowed to study the Vedas and perform sacrifices. The Brāhmins duty is to do teaching
33
and perform sacrifices, in return for gifts. Kṣatriyas duty is to protect others and manage
the administration. They have to support the Brāhmins, non-Brāhmins, ascetics and
others in distress. Cultivation of land, to carry trade and commerce, rearing of cattle etc.
were the respective duties of the Vaiśya community. The Śudras were the manual labours
and their duty is to serve the three upper castes. The higher the caste he serves the greater
the merit he earns. Dharmasutras allow one, in times of distress, to follow the occupation
prescribed for the members of the lower orders, but never that of the higher. Gautama
allows a Brāhmin to take agriculture and trade as lawful occupation, provided he employs
servants to carry on the actual business and does not do the work himself.
The primary concern of the Dharmasutras is social cohesion. Caste mobility is
becoming a thing of the past (period of Dharmasutras 500B.C. and 200AD). The Gṛhya
Sutras deal with the duties of the people from their birth to their death. They seem to
mark the systematic and concerted efforts on the part of the priestly elites to re-establish
their supremacy and revive the social order in which they would have an unrivalled
position. By that time there had already been a great deal of racial admixture in the
society and as such the hierarchy could no longer be established on the basis of race.
Because of this, it seems that the criteria of ritual purity were introduced by the Gṛhya
Sutras to take the place of racial purity. They laid down a number of saṁskāras or
sacraments which are to begin before the birth of a child and lasts for many years even
after the death of the individual. These sacraments were imperative on the part of an
individual and non-performance of these could lead to even in ex-communication from
the community. Gṛhya Sutras maintains that marriages should be hypergamous, i.e., in
the direct order of Varṇas.
34
During the period of the Dharmasutras, there is widening of gap between the two
higher Varṇas. The priestly elites re-establishe their superior status in society. They made
it a point to assign a lower position to the Kṣatriyas. It is asserted that even a king should
make a way for a Brāhmin on the road. A Brāhmin of ten years and a Kṣatriya of a
hundred years stand to each other in the relation of father and son; of the two, the
Brāhmin is the father.24
According to the Dharmasutras (eg, Gautama, Baudhāyana), the various subcastes spring from the intermarriages of Śudras with the members of the upper Castes.25
The theory of ‘mixed Varṇa’ children had started from about the Sutra period. In Varṇa
hierarchy the status of the mixed Varṇa children was not always uniform. It was
generally accepted as is natural in a patriarchal society that anuloma sons belonged to the
Varṇa of their father and even Manu accepted such marriages in society. Especially
children born of anuloma marriages with the next higher Varṇa were accepted, as a rule,
in the Varṇa of their father.
The Dharmaśastras or the Smṛtis or Saṁhitas are the versified recasts of the
corresponding Sutra composition. For example, the Apastamba Saṁhita is a metrical
recast of the Apastamba Dharmaśastra. They belong to the revivalist era and they came
into being for restoring the Varṇa hierarchy, the backbone of the traditional Indian social
structure. The society was divided into castes and many sub-castes. Rules of social
interaction and marriage were strictly followed. They laid down rules for every caste and
vocation, for every relation in society-king and subjects, husband and wife, teacher and
pupil. But these rules were not fixed; rather they were revised from time to time to meet
the new developments in society. In this process of development, sometimes the law35
givers and the priestly class incorporated their own ideas and laid down strictures and
taboos.26 All the authors of the Smṛtis adopted the names of the Vedic seers to get
themselves established. ManuSmṛti (200BC-200AD), YajnavalkyaSmṛti (200-500AD),
NāradaSmṛti (100BC-400AD), ViṣnuSmṛti (700-1000AD) etc. are some important texts
of this category. They reports cases of mixing of castes and numerous violations of
Shastric canons and injunctions. ManuSmṛti is the most authoritative work on Hindu law.
According to Manu, a Varṇa can be viewed as a group of castes or a social division that
consists of various sub-castes called jātis. Jātis are small groups developed in the later
Vedic age based on occupations which later took the form of castes. Armed with the
ancient myth of creation and various sacraments, together with the doctrine of Karma,
Manu tried to revive the bygone golden age by re-establishing the ancient system of
Varṇa hierarchy. In this process women and Śudras were the greatest losers. The social
justice they had found during the Buddhist period was taken away. Manu tried to assign
each and every ethnic group, whether Indian or foreign, a specific place in the Varṇa
hierarchy according to his own criteria. He says that there is no fifth Varṇa, and all the
mixed castes are included under the fourth Varṇa. Broadly, he followed the guideline laid
down by the Dharmasutras. He categorised Brāhmin, Kṣatriyas and Vaiśyas as Dwijātis
and Śudras as Ekjātis. According to Manu, the Brāhmin is the lord of this whole creation,
because he is produced from the purest part, viz., the mouth of the Supreme Being.27
They are considered to be the most exalted amongst men, and the living embodiment of
the eternal law. To Manu, the whole world is the property of Brāhmin and others live on
his charity. The main duty of a Kṣatriya was to fight and protect the people. The Vaiśyas
duty is cultivation, trade, commerce and cattle rearing. The duty of the Śudras remain
36
almost the same as the earlier period. Manu gives the injunction that Brāhmins should not
recite the sacred texts in the presence of Śudras. He prescribes such heavy sentences as
cutting of the tongue or pouring of molten lead in the ears of Śudra, who recites or hear
the Veda. Manu allowed the rites and duties of the twice-born (dwijātis) to the offspring
of the mixed marriages among the three upper castes. The other mixed castes, according
to him, are entitled only to the religious privileges of the Śudras. Regarding the nature
and dimensions of caste system, the other Smṛties maintain almost similar viewpoints.
In Kautilya’s Arthaśāstra also, Brāhmins were provided with the highest status in
social hierarchy. He suggests that in order to avert providential calamities as fire, flood,
and pestilence, the people should worship gods and Brāhmin.28They acted as advisers to
rulers, tutors to crown princes and retainers of the king. They were exempted from taxes.
The political power rests on the hands of the Kṣatriyas. The kings were responsible for
keeping order in the country and observing Varṇa laws. In Arthaśāstra, Śudras were
looked upon as belonging to the Aryan community.29 In addition to the four castes,
Kautilya refers to some mixed castes by the general name ‘Antyavāsayin’ which literally
means ‘living at the end’. According to him, the various sub-castes or mixed castes born
out of the union of members in the regular or reverse caste order. He points out that
except Chandalas, members of the other mixed castes should follow the occupations of
Śudra. In the Dharmasutras and in Kautilya’s Arthaśāstra, the Chandalas are treated as
untouchables and the ‘mixed caste theory’ of the origin of untouchability is enunciated.
According to Manu, untouchability is the punishment for miscegenation between a
member of a high caste and that of a low caste or an outcaste.
37
(3) The period up to the advent of Vivekananda :
This period shows remarkable changes in various aspects of the caste system.
There are indications that the ideal occupations prescribed for the four castes were not
necessarily followed by them. Charudatta, a Brāhmin by birth, is represented in the play
‘Mricchakatika’ as following the occupation of a Vaiśya. The ancient occupation of the
Kṣatriyas was also taken by other castes E.g. Harshavardhana of Kanauj was a Vaiśya,
while the Kadamba rulers of Banawasi were Brāhmins.30 The imperial Guptas were also
Vaiśyas. The traditional occupations of the four castes are very largely modified. In the
Gupta age, some Brāhmins and Kṣatriyas adopted the occupations of castes below them;
while some of the Vaiśyas and Śudras followed the occupation of the upper castes. The
Vaiśyas and Śudras are found to follow almost similar occupations like trade, agriculture
and crafts. A Jodhpur inscription of the later half of the 9th Century mentions the case of a
Brāhmin who had two wives, one of whom was a Kṣatriya lady. The children of that lady
were classed as Kṣatriyas.31
Castes during Mughal rule :
During the Mughal rule, apart from the four main castes, there were numerous
mixed castes and the despised castes. The Muslim conquest of India largely affects the
old position of the Brāhmins and Kṣatriyas. The Brāhmins used to look after the temples,
direct religious ceremonies, work as teachers and administer Hindu personal laws. But
they lost their royal patronage. The Kṣatriyas were mainly rājas, rais and zamindars,
though there is a declining trend in their domination. In most of the cases they served as
intermediaries in the revenue system organised by the Muslim rulers. The Vaiśyas were
38
engaged in banking, commerce, transport and crafts. There is no remarkable change in
the position of the Śudras. But this period shows a change in the attitude of the Brāhmins
towards the Śudras. Though the Śudras were not entitled to read the Vedas, yet they were
allowed to listen to the recitation of the Purānas. The caste rules and the rules governing
the relations between the various castes as laid down in the Śāstras were not strictly
followed. There are instances of following the occupation of one caste by the members of
other castes. In the 7th Century AD, Sind was ruled by Śudra dynasty. There were some
Śudra rulers in other parts of the country.32 During this period, numerous divisions arose
among castes depending on occupational and regional differences.
Castes during Bhakti movements:
Bhakti movement originates in South India and spreads towards the north during
the medieval age. The history of this movement can be traced back to the times of
Śaṁkarāchārya. The saints of the medieval times recognise the spiritual equality of all
persons. They made every effort to reduce rigidity of caste system to a large extent in day
to day social relations. Moreover, this movement seeks to liberate common people from
the tyranny of the priests. The beginning of 13th Century witnesses a number of nonBrāhmin saints of outstanding personality. Rāmānanda, Kabir, Nāmdev, Ravidās and
others preach the ideal of universal brotherhood and made every possible effort to
eradicate the barriers created in the name of caste. Rāmānanda says, “Let no one ask a
man’s caste or with whom he eats. If a man is devoted to Hari, he becomes Hari’s
own.”33 In the late 15th century, Sri Chaitanya founded a new Vaiṣnava sect which
ignores caste distinctions and opens its door to all, even the lowest strata of the society.
He maintains that even a Chandala (untouchable) is equal to a Brāhmin of the highest
39
category if he is devoted to Hari(God).He raises his voice against the domination of the
priests and preaches universal brotherhood of man. In the same way, Kabir also opposes
to the division of mankind into sects and seeks to abolish the barriers of Caste system. To
the Brāhmins he asks, “How are you a Brāhmin and why I am a Śudra? If I have blood in
my vains, have you milk in yours?”34 In 17th and 18th Century Sahajiyā sect declared
themselves against caste system and declined to accept the superior status of the
Brāhmins in the society. The traditional occupations of the four castes are very largely
modified. The Vaiśyas and Śudras are found to follow almost similar occupations like
trade, agriculture and crafts.
Castes during British rule :
At first the attitude of British Government towards the institution of caste was that
of non-interference. But with the passage of time the situation changes and they became
bound to make some sort of interference in caste related matters. However, the activities
of the British Government have gone very little towards the solution of the problem of
caste. On the whole, the British rulers in India never seem to have given much thought to
the problem of caste, in so far it affects the nationhood of India. Nor did they show
willingness to take a bold step rendering caste innocuous. Their measures generally have
been piecemeal and with due regard to the safety of British domination.35 But after the
great mutiny of 1857, there is a considerable change in the attitude of the British
Government towards the institution of caste. They became aware that the safety of the
British domination in India is very closely connected with keeping the Indians divided on
the lines of caste. Henceforth they did their best to keep the people divided on the basis of
caste. They encouraged the caste-based distinctions and adopted discriminatory policies
40
towards various castes by favouring some caste groups with higher status and by granting
them land. The sole purpose of the British rulers was not to allow the emergence of a
national consciousness against the British.
However, the policy of the British Government became clear to the English
educated people of the 18th and 19th Century India. With the introduction of English
education, many of the intelligent minds of the country came in close contact with the
liberal thoughts of Europe and America and they became conscious of the darkdots,
superstitions, and evil practices of their own society and religion. Consequently, they
took active role in reforming their society and it resulted in the great reform movement of
19th Century. Rājā Rammohan Roy, Debendranāth Tagore, K.C.Sen, M.G.Rāṇāde,
Swāmi Dayānanda Saraswati, and many others took active role in this reform movement.
Brāhmo Samāj, Prārthanā Samāj, Ᾱrya Sāmaj preached universal brotherhood among
man and exhorts that man should not be divided from man because of caste. All of them
tried to make people aware of the evil aspects of the misinterpreted and degraded caste
system of that time and to bring back caste system to its pristine glory. Rāmmohan Roy
denies the special hereditary privileges of the Brāhmins. He translates a Mahāyāna
Buddhist text ‘Vajrasuchi’ and holds that each one is born a Śudra, becomes a Dwija
receiving a sacred thread, a Vipra with the Vedic Knowledge, and a Brāhmin with the
divine knowledge.36 He may be regarded as the first person in modern India to fight for
the right of the lower caste and women. He repudiates Manu’s injunction that lower caste
people cannot study the Vedas. He is dead against untouchability and branded it as
undemocratic, inhuman and anti-national. Swāmi Dayānanda Saraswati preaches that the
four-fold division of Hindu people should be substituted for the ramifications of
41
contemporary caste. One important contribution of this school of thought is that it
recognises the right of women and Śudras in the study of the Vedas. Moreover, by
introducing ‘Śuddhi movement’ Dayānanda Saraswati tries to bring back the converted
Hindus to Hindu fold again. In 1873, Jyotibā Phule of Poona, through his Satya Shodhok
Samāj revoltes against the tyranny of the caste system. He dedicates his whole life for
improving the condition of the lower class people and to provide education to them.
Regarding the issue of caste the activities of Rāmakrishna-Vivekānanda movement is
worth mentioning. Vivekānanda’s view on caste and class will be elaborated in the fourth
chapter.
Notes and References :
1. Sharma, K L., (Ed.), (2009), Social Inequality in India, New Delhi : Rawat Publications,
p.26.
2. Ghurye,G,S., (2008), Caste and Race in India, Bombay : Popular Prakashan, p.45.
3. Ṛg Veda, IV.50.8.
4. Ṛg Veda, VIII.35.16-18.
5. Ṛg Veda, I.25.1.
6. Puruṣa Śukta, Rigveda 10.90.12,
Brāhmaṇoasya mukhamāsida bāhu rājanyakriah
Uru tadasya yadvaiśya padabhyām śudro ajāyat.
7. Sharma, K.L., (Ed), (1992), Social Stratification in India, New Delhi : Manohar
Publications, p.9.
42
8.
Ibid, p.9.
9.
Ṛg Veda. IX.112.3.
10. Śatapatha Brāhmana , 5.5.4.9.
11. Aitareya Brāhmana, 7.35.3.
12. Śatapatha Brāhmana, 6.4.4.13.
13. Ibid, 6.6.3.12.
14. Ibid, 3.1.1.9,10.
15. Ambedkar, B.R.(1970), Who were the Shudras, Mumbai : Thacker and Company Ltd.,
p.123-24.
16. Bhāgavat Gitā, 4.13,
cātur-varnyam mayā srstam
guna-karma-vibhāgaśah.
17. Aitareya Brāhmana, 2.8.1.
18. Anuśāsana Parva, 4,6.
19. Aitareya Brāhmana, 7.3.36.
20. Śatapatha Brāhmana, 1.7.1.10.
21. Mukhopadhyay, Bandana, (1996), Life in Ancient India as Depicted in the
Dhammapada-Atthakatha, Kolkata : Sanskrit Pustak Bhander, p.49.
22. Majjhimā Nikāya, 2.157.
23. Saddhatissa,H,(Trans.),(1985), The Sutta Nipata, London : Curzon Press.
24. Apastamba Dharmasutra, II.5.11.5-6; 1.4.14.25.
25. Banerjee, Suresh Chandra, (1997), Society in Ancient India, New Delhi : D.K.
Printworld(P) Ltd.
43
26. The Gazetteer of India, (1973), New Delhi : The Government of India Publication,
Vol.-II.
27. Manu Smṛti, I, 92-94.
28. Arthaśāstra, 2, p.419.
29. Ibid, 3.13, 1-4.
30. Smith,V.A., (1923), The Oxford History of India, p.199.
31. Majumdar, R.C., (1922), Corporate Life in Ancient India, Kolkata : Calcutta University,
p. 372-73.
32. Mahajan, V.D., (2004), History of Medieval India, New Delhi : S. Chand & Company.
33. Bose, Devabrata, (1968), The Problems of Indian Society, Bombay : Popular Prakashan,
p.33.
34. Sen, S.P., (1998), Social Contents of Indian Religious Reform Movements, Kolkata :
Institute of Historical Studies.
35. Ghurye, G. S., (2008), Caste and Race in India, Bombay : Popular Prakashan, p.283.
36. Roy, Raja Rammohan, (1973), ‘Vajrasuchi’ in Rammohan Rachanavali (Bengali),
Kolkata : Haraf Prakashan.
44