We have seen that
the later interpolation, Purushsukta
in Rig Veda provides sanctity to the Varna system by providing it the divine
origin. Some scholars tend to consider that Varnas were later divided into
sub-castes (jati) but they do not explain how this process could have taken place
and what was the basis for it. Brahmin Varna indeed is divided into various
castes, but the divine authority of Brahmin remains intact in the Vedic social
hierarchy. It is not the case with all other castes unrelated to Vedic
structure. There is closed social stratification of every caste, higher to some
and lower to others.
However, unlike
Varna system, there is no divine declaration about the origin of the caste
system. This is why Vasistha SaMhita
(3.1) states that, “The regulations those govern Castes, tribes and local
social systems have no Vedic sanction.”
Though Purushasukta
mentions four Varnas, the fact is rest of the Rig Veda nowhere mentions the
fourth Varna, i.e,. Shudra anywhere, rather the term is completely absent. It
is not even part of Vedic vocabulary. There is no etymology whatsoever of
this terminology. Unless we understand
why all of sudden, and that too in a later interpolated hymn, this strange
terminology could have appeared we cannot solve the problem of the caste system. This
is because barring few, a large part of the Indian castes belong to the
so-called Shudra and ati-Shudra class.
Since the term has been too
controversial, causing irreparable damage to the Indian society and outrage for
its use in a derogatory manner aimed for social suppression, indicating the lowest
status of the larger population of India since a long time, we need to have a brief look at the reality.
Many attempts have been made by
various scholars to find the real meaning of the Shudra and who were they. The people Dasa, Dasyus have been
mentioned many times in Rig Veda, though contemptuously for their different
faith. But Purusha Sukta mentions,
instead of Dasa-Dasyus, the Shudras,
as the name of a class of the people, that too in a hymn that has been proven
to be a later composition.
Surprisingly, in later Vedic texts
the term Dasa and Dasyus (equivalent to Iranian Daha, Dahyu), used in Vedas for
the people, goes on vanishing and remains just as a suffix of the personal
names or denotes the servants. They, Dasa/Dasyus, no longer remains to be a set
of the people, whether rival or not. Rather, while speaking of the fourth section
of the society, the people other than Vedics, the term Shudras have been applied in the Purushasukta.
The sudden shift in the
terminology, assigned for the class of the people clearly means that the Vedic
had come across the new set of the people and needed a new term to address
them. It also is clear that the Dasa/Dasyu people were left far behind by the time
of this hymn was composed. Rather appearance of the term Shudra for people is in itself a proof that the Vedic geography had
changed from Afghanistan to India.
This also
is evident because, we should note here that, the term “Shudra” or its equivalent is not present in Avesta too, at all.
What we find is Daha – Dahyu, equivalent to Dasa and Dasyus, in Avesta applied
to the people of the land or compatriots. To Rig Veda, they are the people those
adhere to the different faiths and thus were enemies. It would appear the term Shudra has been emerged from nowhere
which have no meaning whatsoever! This sure creates a problem for the
proponents of Indigenous Aryan Theory as well.
Also, let
us not forget here that the term Shudra
have no etymology, neither in so-called IE languages or Dravidian languages. R.
K. Pruthi suggests that perhaps Shudra was
originally the name of the non-Aryan tribe. (Indian Caste System, edited by R.K. Pruthi, Discovery Publishing House, 2004,
page 72)
Rajwade suggests that the people
those were taken in the personal service by the victorious Aryans were called
as Shudras. According to him, the term was later applied to those all who were
out of three Varnas. (Radhamadhav Vilas Champu, Preface, Edited by Vi. Ka.
Rajwade, Sarita Prakashan, reprint 2014, page 130-31)
Bhandarakar
too opines that the Shudras could be
a tribe, but afterwards came to signify anybody who was not a full-fledged Arya
or a foreigner who has been partially assimilated by Arya culture. He further
states that, from Sutras Shudra
denotes a person other than the member of three Varnas, i.e. Brahmina,
Kshatriya and Vaishya. (Some Aspects of
Ancient Indian Culture, By D. R. Bhandarkar, 1989, page 12) Bhandarkar
makes sense because in a Maharashtri Prakrit treaty, “Angavijja”, (2nd
to 3rd century AD) includes all the indigenous and foreigners like
Shaka, Hun, Kushanas, Mlecchas in Shudra category excepting three Vedic Varnas.
This would indicate that Shudras were the people who did not belong to Vedic
religion.
If removed Aryan and replaced with
Vedic, it will be clear from the above opinions of the scholars that all those
who were not Dasas or Dasyus or Vedics, those all lived in the Indian
subcontinent, practiced different religions, were Shudras for the Vedic people. The fact is, though, in Purushasukta, Shudra seemingly is enumerated as a fourth
class of Vedic religion; it was never at all the case. Rather, in
Purushsukta too, term Varna does not appear.
Rather, historically we find a tribe
from north-west frequently referred by Greeks as “Sudroi” and in Mahabharata
also while enumerating kings participating Great War. It is possible that the
Vedics came across this tribe first and in sheer ignorance of rest of the
geography mentioned this tribal name as a class of a divine society as they
had come to their domain as a refugee and as they spread their religion they
named the people in their service as “Anirvasit Shudras” (Shudras in Vedic
domain) and “Nirvasit Shudras” (Those did not live in their domain.) (See
Panini)
Manusmriti is very explicit about
this as well. It commands that the Brahmin should not delve or eat in the
regions where Shudras rule. It does mean that the Shudra kingdoms were extant
and they were not governed by the laws of Manusmriti. It also differentiates the
professional castes from Shudras (even kings and idolatrous priests), those are
prohibited from attending the Vedic rituals. Hence Shudra was a term that was
always used by the Vedic people to the different set of the people in early
times, which later came to be used to address all non-Vedic people. Manysmriti’s
commands were applicable to only those Shudras who were in their service.
Otherwise, in Manusmriti’s time how there could be Shudra kings?
However, it seems that the term came
to be used for all Shudras which did enormous harm to the Indian conscious in
general and also created a religious confusion in all, including Vedic people.
As I have stated earlier, the caste
system has nothing to do with any divine declaration. It was a need for human
society to have different professions, expanding with new inventions and
innovations. There were sufficient mobility and professional respect depending on
their economic status and social viewpoints.
It never was a fourth class, the
lowest or menial part of the society as it is largely assumed. The purity of blood
or racial egotism too was not a reason behind formation any caste. Though superficially
similarities can be shown between tribal and caste structure, castes have not
emerged from independent tribes. For example, we find people from Ahir tribe divided
in pastoral, shepherd, salt-maker, fisher, Maratha, Tailor, Goldsmith etc. The
tribe seems to have fragmented in many castes and though they belong to the same
tribal origin, their caste-rituals and social status are separate. So tribes
have not converted to caste.
However, confusion between the Vedic system and
Hindu traditional occupation based society to some point created a chaotic
social condition.
I must reiterate that there never
was any Aryan invasion and the victorious Vedic Aryans did not create this
caste system, as most of the communist thinkers claim supported by the
aboriginalists. The data they provide in their support is outdated and is marred
by European supremacist views.
Here we need to focus on the
doctrines of the two entirely different systems and its later impact on the
overall Indian social system and the reasons that cast an evil shadow over it. This
is apparent that Brahmins weren’t inventors and enforcers of this system. We
also have seen that the caste meant professions and the system was flexible. We
have to find why the system gradually became inflexible, rigid and unjust. We
have also seen that there is no divine declaration or religious sanction for
the creation of the castes as they were merely a practical need of society.
Scholars have made blatant confusion
between Varna system and the castes (Jati) without properly understanding the
difference between both the terms. It also is widely assumed that Vedic
Brahmins are the priests of the Hindu religion. This is not the fact. From
ancient times Shudras (Asura) had their own priests. Almost every caste has its
own priest. 80% of the temples (except Vaishnavait) have no Brahmin priest. The
Brahmin holiness as a priest has been for their Vedic sanctity and their over-glorification. How Brahmins came to worship Hindu deities when none of the
Hindu God finds mention in the Vedas or when Idol worship is banned in Vedic religion?
The answer lies in the deliberate religious confusion created in the medieval
era.
To sum up, Shudra was never a part of Vedic society, but had indeed been an
independent religion they are following from ancient times. To Vedics, like Dasa, Dasyus of Iran those followed
different religions and hence looked upon contemptuously, similarly, Shudras too became a derogatory term in
Vedic literature to the adherents of a different religion. The over-glorification
of the Vedas and their divine origin, has been a carefully nourished myth and
deserves the rejection in totality.
The harm it has done, in the form of
seeding inferiority complex and sense of the inequality in the minds of
non-Vedic masses need to be removed in the light of the bare facts!
If one wants to eradicate the caste
based discrimination from the society one has to first understand how the caste
system came into the existence and how it became birth based and rigid in the
later era.
Nice one!!!
ReplyDeleteA good, researched article.
ReplyDeleteNice article,Sir.
ReplyDelete