Jump to content

User:Kautilya3/sandbox/History of the Indian caste system

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

History of the Indian caste system

Caste system in the Sangam literature

[edit]

Caste system in the Vedic literature

[edit]

Rigvedic period (1500-1200 BCE)

[edit]

Late Vedic period (1200-1000 BCE)

[edit]

In the later Vedic period, the Yajurveda, Samaveda and Atharvaveda were composed, apparently in parallel. During this period, the term dāsa came to be replaced by the term shudra, apparently derived from the name of another defeated tribe.[a] The earlier opposition between ārya and dāsa was replaced by one between ārya and shudra.[1] This is found in the first `grand division' of Atharvaveda (Books 1-8).[b]. It appears that the original shudras were a tribe inhabiting the northwestern India and treated as if they were a "foreign people," even though there is no indication that they spoke non-Indo-Aryan languages.[2] However, in course of time, the term Shudra came to represent large groups of pre-Aryan and degraded Aryan populations,[3] who were possibly reduced to a servile status.[4]

In the second `grand division' of Atharvaveda (Books 8-12), the Brahmins (priests) and the Kshatriyas (or rājanyas, the nobles) were distinguished from the remaining āryas, and mentioned as separate classes. The term Vaishya (derived from viṣ-the tribe) was also used to refer to the ārya commoners, but the two terms are used interchangeably.[5] Thus the varna system appears to have evolved considerably during the composition of the Atharvaveda.[5] R. S. Sharma believes that the formulation of Brahmins and Kshatriyas as separate classes was motivated by priestly influence.[c]

Towards the end of the Atharvaveda period, possibly as late as 800 BCE, the Purusha Sukta (hymn of man) is believed to have been composed and interpolated into the Rigveda. It is also repeated in the 19th book of the Atharvaveda with minor variations. It states that the Brahmins emanated from the mouth of the primeval man, the Kshatriyas from his shoulders, the Vaishyas from his thighs and the Shudras from his feet.[6] This indicates that the tribes disintegrated into social classes and differentiations of rank emerged.[4] However, the differences in rank were not pronounced. The Brahmin is said to enjoy the right to be the "first husband" of a woman, ahead of Kshatriyas and Vaishyas, but there is no mention of any impurity or imparted pollution to the food or body.[7]

Vedic consolidation (1000-600 BCE)

[edit]

In the later Vedic period, the Vedic rituals were further developed through the formulation of Brahmanas and Shrautasutras, during the course of which increased differentiation of ranks occurred among the four varnas.[8] As the Aryan groups expanded into Gangetic settlements, large groups of aborigines were successively incorporated into the Aryan society and regarded as members of the Shudra varna.[4]

In early references, Shudras were said to be born without god or sacrifice. But they were said to be owners of cattle, which needed to be given up for the sake of sacrifice by higher varnas.[9] The Jaiminiya Brahmana states that the Shudras were created from the feet of the primeval man for the service of the higher varnas.[10] An early Upanishad refers to the Shudra as pūṣan or nourisher, implying that the Shudras were engaged in agriculture and cattle-rearing for the sustenance of the society. However, Jaiminya Brahmana applies the label to Vaishyas instead.[11] In later references, the Shudras were represented as being tied to the land, and could be given as gifts along with the land.[12] The Vaishyas were mentioned as tax-payers without a corresponding mention of Shudras, which indicates that the Shudras were no more regarded as owners of property.[13]

The artisan sections of the population were reduced to the status of Shudras. However, there was no notion of impurity associated with their tasks, even in the case of leather work.[14] Several kinds of Shudra craftsmen were regarded as `high functionaries of the state' called ratnins (jewel-holders). These included the rathakāras (chariot-makers), takṣan (probably metal carvers), govikartanas (herdsmen) and pālāgalas (messengers). The king had to make offerings to them before a rājasūya sacrifice but later perform expiation for having brought the non-sacrificing Shudras in contact with the sacrifice.[15] The sacrifice also involved a ritual of a game of dice in which all four varnas participated.[16] The aśvamedha sacrifice involved conquering all four varnas, implying that the king had to obtain the allegiance of all the varnas.[17]

However, the position of both the Vaishyas and the Shudras deteriorated in course of the later Vedic period. They were eliminated from the rājasūya game of the dice ritual in later versions.[16] The Shudras were not admitted to the vājapeya (drink of strength) sacrifice and, in later times, even the Vaishyas were prohibited.[18] The Brahmins and the Kshatriyas were given a special position in the later Vedic political events. The Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa states that the Brahmins and the Kshatriyas "enclose" the Vaishyas and Shudras.[19] In Aitareya Brāhmaṇa, the Vaishyas are said to be "oppressed at will" and the Shudras "beaten at will."[20]

The Brahmins and the Kshatriyas were free to marry women of lower varnas. The children of such marriages could be regarded as belonging to higher varnas provided they proved worthy.[21] The Puranas list a dozen rishis who were born of Shudra mothers, including Vyasa and Vasishtha.[22] However, in later times, the Shudra women were regarded as objects of pleasure for higher classes and men of lower varnas were also prohibited from marrying the women of higher varnas.[23]

There is no indication that any varnas were prohibited from education during most of this period. The Taittiriya Brahmana states that the Vaishyas were born of the Rigveda, the Kshatriyas of the Yajurveda, the Brahmins of the Samaveda and, by implication, that the Shudras born of the Atharvaveda.[24] The Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa states that the priest could instruct various disabled groups including Shudras on Itihāsa, the Atharvaveda, the art of snake-charming and demonology.[24] This also indicates that the priests did not keep aloof from arts and crafts in the early period.[24] However, towards the end of the Vedic period, there was a tendency to exclude the Shudras from the upanayana (initiation ceremony for education).[25] This was on the grounds that the upanayana was a Vedic ritual, which was not available to the Shudras.[26] However, the Shudras were indeed part of several Vedic rituals, even though several disabilities were applied to them.[27] On certain ceremonial occasions, harsh provisions were applied. A person consecrated for a sacrifice was asked not to speak to a Shudra. A student initiated into education (upanīta) was also not expected to speak to a Shudra until the education was completed.[28]

During this period, the chandalas began to be regarded as objects of contempt and excluded from the four-fold varna scheme.[23] The Andhras, Pundras, Sabaras, Pulindas, Mutibas and Dasyus are among other low castes mentioned.[29] The term antas also began to be used for `outcastes', who were presumably not regarded as belonging to any varna.[29]

Caste system in the Gangetic states (600 BCE–100 CE)

[edit]

By 600 BCE, the Indo-Aryan settlements in the Gangetic plains organised themselves into 16 Mahajanapadas. In 322 BCE, the Maurya empire was established, which unified all of them and expanded into all of Indian subcontinent. For this period, the evidence from the Brahmanical texts can be supplemented with the early Buddhist and Jain texts.

While the brahmanical texts are entirely focused on varna, the Buddhist texts mention other concepts prevalent during this period: jati (birth group or descent group), kula (family, clan or lineage), kamma (karma—work) and sippa (shilpa—craft). A labelling of "high" and "low" is used to rank all these concepts.[30]

Brahmins and Kshatriyas are referred to as high jatis. The low jatis mentioned are chandala, vena (bamboo weaver), nesada (nishada—hunter), rathakāra (chariot-maker) and pukkusa (literally flower-sweeper, but any sweeper in practice).[30] Other jatis, if any, are not mentioned as either high or low.[30]

The concept of kula is more difficult to discern. While it literally means family or lineage, its use in the texts indicates a social group based on status rather than birth.[citation needed] The classification of kulas in the Buddhists texts overlaps with that of jatis to a great degree, with Brahmins and Kshatriyas mentioned as high kulas. However, another class called gahapatis (grihapathis—literally householders), which was apparently not a jati, is included among the high kulas.[30] The pattern of land holding indicates that the gahapatis were in possession of the majority of agricultural land and they employed workers referrred to as dasa-kammakaras to farm the land.[31] The gahapatis emerged as a major economic class during the period of Gangetic states, constituting the primary taxpayers of the state. This class was apparently not defined by birth, but by economic status.[32]

The high kammas include kasi (krishi—agriculture), vanijya (trade) and gorakkha (goraksha—cattle-keeping). The low kammas are storeroom-keeping and flower-sweeping, which are mentioned as being disdained. Among sippas, the activities of computing, accounting and writing are mentioned as high, and those of basket-maker, barber, weaver and leather-worker are mentioned as low.[30] It appears that the men of high kulas were always engaged in high occupations and those of low kulas in low occupations.[33] It was the occupations that provided identity to the people rather than birth itself.[32]


Caste system of the Dharmashastras

[edit]

Caste system during the medieval period

[edit]

Notes

[edit]
  1. ^ Sharma (1958, p. 30): "There is no doubt that Śūdra existed as a tribe in the fourth century B. C., for Diodoros records the advance of Alexander against a tribe called Sodrai, who occupied portions of modern Sind."
  2. ^ Sharma (1958, p. 31): "Three references to śūdra in the earliest portion of the Atharva Veda can be interpreted in this light. They belong, according to Whitley, to the first grant division of the Atharva Veda (Book I-VII) which is `in very large measure of popular origin' and is by all odds `the most characteristic part' of that collection. In two of them, the worshipper desires to see everybody whether Ārya or Śūdra with the help of a herb... There is no mention of brāhmaṇa or rājanya in this connection."
  3. ^ Sharma (1958, p. 30): "This belongs to the second grand vision of the Atharvaveda, which, according to Whitley, is `palpably of hieratic origin'. This suggests that the varṇa system developed under priestly influence."

References

[edit]
  1. ^ Sharma 1958, p. 31.
  2. ^ Sharma 1958, pp. 32–33.
  3. ^ Sharma 1958, p. 41.
  4. ^ a b c Sharma 1958, p. 29.
  5. ^ a b Sharma 1958, p. 30.
  6. ^ Sharma 1958, p. 28 (1990:32-33).
  7. ^ Sharma 1958, p. 40.
  8. ^ Sharma 1958, pp. 42–43.
  9. ^ Sharma 1958, p. 43.
  10. ^ Sharma 1958, pp. 43–44.
  11. ^ Sharma 1958, p. 44.
  12. ^ Sharma 1958, p. 46.
  13. ^ Sharma 1958, p. 47.
  14. ^ Sharma 1958, p. 48.
  15. ^ Sharma 1958, pp. 49–50.
  16. ^ a b Sharma 1958, pp. 51–52.
  17. ^ Sharma 1958, p. 53.
  18. ^ Sharma 1958, p. 57.
  19. ^ Sharma 1958, p. 58.
  20. ^ Sharma 1958, pp. 59–60.
  21. ^ Sharma 1958, pp. 62–3.
  22. ^ Sharma 1958, p. 63.
  23. ^ a b Sharma 1958, p. 64.
  24. ^ a b c Sharma 1958, p. 68.
  25. ^ Sharma 1958, p. 69 (1990:76.
  26. ^ Sharma 1958, p. 70.
  27. ^ Sharma 1958, pp. 70–81.
  28. ^ Sharma 1958, p. 78.
  29. ^ a b Sharma 1958, p. 65.
  30. ^ a b c d e Chakravarti 1985, p. 357. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFChakravarti1985 (help)
  31. ^ Chakravarti 2012, p. 78.
  32. ^ a b Chakravarti 1985, p. 359. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFChakravarti1985 (help)
  33. ^ Chakravarti 1985, p. 358. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFChakravarti1985 (help)
Sources
  • Chakravarti, Uma (1996), The Social Dimensions of Early Buddhism, Munshiram Manoharlal, ISBN 978-81-215-0749-3
  • Chakravarti, Uma (2 March 1985), "Towards a Historical Sociology of Stratification in Ancient India: Evidence from Buddhist Sources", Economic and Political Weekly, 20 (9): 356–360, JSTOR 4374135
  • Chakravarti, Uma (2003), Gendering Caste Through a Feminist Lens, Popular Prakashan, pp. 23–, ISBN 978-81-85604-54-1
  • Eaton, Richard M. (17 November 2005), A Social History of the Deccan, 1300-1761: Eight Indian Lives, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0-521-25484-7
  • Chakravarti, Uma (2012) [first published in 1985], "Of dasas and karmakaras: Servile labour in ancient India", Everyday Lives, Everyday Histories, Tulika Books, pp. 70–100
    • Chakravarti, Uma (1985), "Of dasas and karmakaras: Servile labour in ancient India", in Utsa Patnaik; Manjari Dingwaney (eds.), Chains of Servitude: Bondage and Slavery in India, Sangam Books, pp. 35–75
  • Gadkari, Jayant (1 January 1996), Society and Religion: From Rugveda to Puranas, Popular Prakashan, pp. 168–, ISBN 978-81-7154-743-2
  • Gupta, Dipankar (1980). "From Varna to Jati: The Indian caste system, from the Asiatic to the feudal mode of production". Journal of Contemporary Asia. 10 (3): 249–271. doi:10.1080/00472338085390141.
  • Sharma, R. S. (1990) [first published 1958], Śūdras in Ancient India: A Social History of the Lower Order Down to Circa A.D. 600 (Third ed.), Motilal Banarsidass Publ., ISBN 978-81-208-0706-8
    • Sharma, R. S. (1958), Śūdras in Ancient India, Delhi: Motilal Banarasi Dass
  • Talbot, Cynthia (2001), Pre-colonial India in Practice: Society, Region, and Identity in Medieval Andhra, Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0-19803-123-9
  • Visvanathan, Meera (2011), "Cosmology and Critique: Charting a History of the Purusha Sukta", in Roy, Kumkum (ed.), Insights and Interventions: Essays in Honour of Uma Chakravarti, Primus Books, pp. 143–168, ISBN 978-93-80607-22-1
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Kautilya3/sandbox/History_of_the_Indian_caste_system&oldid=1091350251"