Caste system in HinduismThe historical background It is difficult to trace out when the caste system entered into the life of Hindus

Authors Avatar

Caste system in Hinduism

The historical background 

It is difficult to trace out when the caste system entered into the life of Hindus and how and why there occurred confusion between the Varna System and the caste  creation. In fact in the Vedic era, there existed no such division and discrimination among the people.

In the later Vedic period, the Varna system showed its signs of appearance with the classification of Brahmin. The word Brahmin was not used out of any sense of respect. Devas were called kavi and also Brahman but not as Brahmin. The word Brahmin was out of place in the composition of Kavis. They came to be related to rituals and were called the Vedagya Brahmins. It was they who first created distinction in their ranks for financial gains in performance of rituals. This discrimination was based on professional competition. The Kavis began to challenge this discrimination since its very inception.  They voiced their grave concern over it.

In the beginning of Rg Veda period, the word Brahman was used but it did not indicate any Varna. Then the word Rajanya followed it. The use of this word Rajanya indicates that even in the later Vedic period the word Kshatriya was not known. The word Rajanya was used in context of a divine power or the power of governance of the king or any other power. During those days, there existed two types of political orders 1 – One based on Kingship and 2 – based on power of ganas or other type of peoples rule. Rajanya was used for kings and other ruling powers or even for a powerful person. It was never used in context of caste. Rg Veda only at one place mentions Sudra and Vaisya each and that too at a very late period in MandalX-10-90-12, though the word Visha has been frequently used as equivalent to common people of a gana.

It can therefore be safely concluded that the caste was never known to exist in the Vedic era.

The word Sudra

There is mention of the word Sudra in the Purush Sukta, but it is proved a later day interpellation. We do not find any mention of the word Sudra in the Brahmanas but they do mention Kshatriyas and Vaisyas but not the Sudras. It may be concluded that the Sudras might have belonged to either of the two mentioned castes and thus there existed no need to mention them separately.  It also makes it clear that no section, group or division was considered low in social order.

Chandogya Upanishad says that Guru Raikva taught Jansruti even though he was a cart man (Sudra) Dr Ambedkar, the champion of the low caste people treats Kavas Ailavya as Sudra but he was great exponent of sacrificial rites despite belonging to the lower class. The Ashwani Kumaras, the physician of gods, were not allowed to participate in yajna, but were offered Soma by Maharsi Chayavan. The Vedic king Sudas was a Sudra but was patron of Visvamitra, the Brahmin saint. The conclusion is that no where in ancient India, the low class people were treated and placed so differently and maliciously as they are today in the Hindu social order.

The Nature of free Intermixing of the People

Rg Veda, Sat path Brahman, Taittarya Upanishad, all speak of only the three divisions and none speaks of the fourth one. This leads us to conclude that the Sudras were either a part of Kshatriyas or had their share among the Brahmins. During those days the intermixing among castes was as liberal as it made the cross-over an easy-go. The caste changes were very easy in the process.

Innumerable examples can be cited. The Rsi in the Vedic Sukta says, ’I am a poet , my father was a physician and my mother a pissan ‘ Rg Veda in( X-102) describes Rsi Mudagalya ,as a warrior -seer with a sword in hand rushing to recover the cows from the thieves. So was Parasuram, famous as a seer with a sphere (Farsa), an edged weapon to fight the battles. The brave seers, Braghus, were carpenters, makers of chariot-bodies. Even among gods, Ribhus, were architects, sculptures and carpenters. These seers and saints were Brahmins and Kshatriyas and Vaisyas, with out any restriction. All belonged to one and the same profession. This is the clear picture that emerges unto the Itihaas and Purana periods.

In the beginning there was flexibility among castes but the caste as a system began to be rigidly adhered to during the Islamic Invasions and their rule of torture leading to conversion. It may probably be the 10th century. Till the time of Gori’s attack, there are examples of inter-caste mixing. In the year 1178, the Islamic army of Gori was defeated by the mother of the minor king Mool Raj of Gujarat, who was also the lady chief of the army. As a result, the mustachios and beards of the captured prisoners were cut off and the chiefs were assimilated into the Rajput caste and the rest of the army among the Kolis, Khauts, and other sub-castes. There never existed any rigid observation of the system that separated one from the other. Even the food prepared by the low caste people was consumed by all caste peoples regardless of any reservation. It may be that rigidity came to be observed with the influence of Buddhism and Jainism when the people began to be divided into veg and non-veg. dietary habits.

Join now!

Jai Chand Vidyalankar in Itihaas Pravesh writes that in the beginning the castes had all the possible flexibility but it began to be rigid in the 10th century, to defend the Hindu life from the barbaric invaders who not only raped, murdered, plundered but also terrorized people towards conversion to Islam.

The power of Assimilation

The Hindu culture was flexible enough to accommodate and assimilate in the main stream the outside influences of different sects and faiths into its fold from time to time. Jawaharlal Lal Nehru says that ‘Iranians and the Greeks, Parthian and the Bactrian, the ...

This is a preview of the whole essay