By OP Sudrania
Caste or Class Systems versus India in Global Perspective – CHAPTER SEVEN
Chapter Seven – Section A
(CHAKRA) Dr. S. Radhakrishnan who does not need any introduction; late President of India and an unparalleled daunting philosopher, teacher and academician has suggested the value of religion in the society in his lectures compiled in the book, “Religion and Society”. In his very first lecture starting in the winter of 1942, he stresses on the need for religion where he describes, “Every civilisation is the expression of a religion, for religion signifies faith in absolute values and a way of life to realise them.” He elaborates further that the civilisation is a way of life, a movement of the human spirit. Its essence lies not in any biological unity of race, or in political and economic arrangements, but in the values that create and sustain them (P 21).
In his third lecture on “Hindu Dharma” while elaborating on ‘The Concept of Dharma’, he defines, “The principles which we have to observe in our daily life and social relations are constituted by what is called dharma. It is truth’s embodiment in life, and power to refashion our nature (P 104). He says further, “Man is a teachable animal, socially controlled. The fashion of our clothes, the food we eat, the way we go about the world, are all social products which we acquire by training.” He continues, “We can be made to do anything, if we are given powerful suggestions and moral clothings which will create in us an attitude of consent. Slavery, infanticide, the inquisition, witch-burning, were all accepted as honourable to human dignity even as wars are today.”
“Under the concept of dharma, the Hindu brings the forms and activities which shape and sustain human life (P 105).” Dr. Radhakrishnan stated. He clearly mentioned, “Hinduism is not based on any racial factor… The different communities which accepted Hinduism rose to the level of the society around them, educated themselves in its spirit, took on its colour and contributed to its growth. The epics of the Ramayana and the Mahabharata describe the spread of Hindu ideals, though in them the facts of history are obscured in a haze of legend.”
In continuing his third lecture on “Hindu Dharma” and under the sub caption, “Caste and untouchability” (P 129 – 135), he has painstakingly expressed his ideas in good bit of details quoting various scriptures and it is worth reproducing them in his own words in entirety that are unsurpassed in their own style and purport.
Caste and Untouchability
NB: The apostrophed numbers and the descriptions or slokas in parenthesis are from the footnotes from original text in the book – Religion and Society.
(P – 129) Caste divisions are based on individual temperament2 (Sattvadhiko brAhmanah syAt ksatriyastu rajodhikah. Tamodhiko bhaved vaisyo gunasAmyattu soodratA), which is not immutable. In the beginning there was only one caste. We were all Braahmins3 (BrihadAranyak Up., I. 4. 11-5; Manu, I. 31. Cp. Also MahAbhArata, XII. 188: Na visesosti varnAnAm sarvam brAhmam idam jagat. brahmanA poorvasrstam hi karmabhir varnatAm gatam) or all Sudras. A smrti text says that one is born a Sudra, and through purification he becomes a Braahmin4 (janmanA jAyate soodrah samskArair dvija ucyate). People were divided into different castes according to social needs and individual actions. The Braahmins are the priests. They should have neither property nor executive power. They are the seers who constitute the conscience of the society. The Kshatriyas are the administrators, whose principle is reverence for life. The Vaishyas are the traders and craftsmen, men of technical ability who aim at efficiency. The routine workers, the proletariat, are the Sudras. They take no interest in their work as such, where they carry out instructions and contribute only a fraction. They lead a life of innocent impulse and adopt traditional ways. Their joy is in the fulfilment of family obligations of marriage and parenthood, and other personal relationships. The caste groups are more trade guilds in charge of the cultural, political, economic and industrial sections of the community. Hinduism has drawn to its fold the Aryan, the Dravidian and the Mongoloid races which had drifted (P – 130) into the Ganges valley from the East, and the Paarthian, Scythian and Hun invaders from beyond the Himaalayas. It brought into its fold a great variety of different peoples and conceded to its converts, though always with a change of form, the retention, within the new religion, of rites and traditions belonging to their old faiths. In the Mahaabhaarata, Indra tells the emperor Maandhaatr to bring all foreign people, like the yaavanas, under the Aryan influence1 (SAntiparva, 65.). Hinduism has a bewildering variety of racial types at all levels of development. In the period of the Rg Veda we have the distribution between aarya and daasa, and there were no rigid divisions among the Aaryans themselves. In the time of the Braahmanas, the four classes became separated into rigid groups dependent on birth. As arts and crafts grew in number and complexity, castes based on occupations developed. The smrtis trace the innumerable castes to intermixture of the four varnas, by means of anuloma and pratiloma marriages. When the Vedic Aaryans found a heterogeneous population of various tribes and classes of different races and colour, worshipping different gods and spirits, following diverse customs and habits of life, and filled with the spirit of tribalism, they attended to fit them all into an organic whole by the adoption of the fourfold classification. The four orders supercede the original racial differences. It is a classification based on social facts and psychology. The recognition of the spirit in man is the essential feature of Hindu religion, and in this respect all men are equal. Caste is diversity of function, and the goal of life is a transcendence of caste diversity by disinterested service. The caste scheme is meant to apply to all mankind. In the Mahaabhaarata we are told that the Yaavanas (Greeks), the Kiraatas, the Darads (Dards), the Chinas (the Chinese), the Sakas (Scythians), the Pahlavas (Parthians), the Savaras (Pre-Dravidian tribes), and several other non-Hindu peoples, belonged to one or the other of the four classes2 (SAntiparva, 55. Manu, X. 43-44.). These foreign tribes were absorbed into Hindu society. The sort of social adjustment, by which foreigners are admitted into the Hindu fold, has taken place from very early times. So long as the foreigners followed the general tradition and common law of the society, they were treated as Hindu. The great empire-builders, the Nandas, the Mauryas and the Guptas, were according to the orthodox view low-born. The Gupta emperors married Licchavis, who were regarded as Mlecchas. Latterly, some Hindus have married European and American (P – 131) women. Though strong racial differences operate, intermarriages have not been unsatisfactory. If social conditions are helpful, they will be more successful1 (Lord Bryce, an excellent observer, said of Brazil: “Brazil is the one country in the world, besides the Portuguese colonies in the east and west coasts of Africa, in which a fusion of the European and African races is proceeding unchecked by law or custom. The doctrines of human equality and human solidarity have here their perfect work. The work is so far satisfactory that there is little or no class friction. The white man does not lynch the Negro; indeed, I have never heard of a lynching anywhere in South America except occasionally as part of a political convulsion. The Negro is not accused of insolence and does not seem to develop any more criminality than naturally belongs to any ignorant population with loose notions of morality and property. What ultimate effect the intermixture of blood will have on the European element in Brazil I will not venture to predict. If one may judge from a few remarkable cases it will not necessarily reduce the intellectual standard.” – South America, Observations and Impressions, pp. 477, 480.). The system was designed to unite, first the heterogeneous population of India, and then of the whole world, in one economic, social, cultural and spiritual bond. By assigning definite functions and duties, and according rights and privileges, the different classes were expected to work in co-operation and to achieve a racial harmony. It is a mould into which all human beings can be poured, according to their vocational aptitude and temperament. The basis of the Varna dharma is that every human being must try to fulfil the law of his development. We must discipline our life in conformity with the pattern of our being, instead of wasting our energies in following those which we lack.
(Author: In BG 3:28 Slok “Tatwavittu mahaabaaho gunkarma vibhaagayoah, gunna gunneshu vartanta iti matwaa na sajjate” – is meaning Hey Mahaabaaho [Arjun]! Who know the difference of devotional (nishkaama) and materialistic (sakaama) karmas, those few seers of such profound truths; they never indulge in the indriya or sensual pleasures only to satisfy their indriyas or senses. This clearly states the individual goals for every one without reference to even any Varna or Jaati. It is such high ideals that have accrued it the epithet of ‘Sanatana Dharma or Perennial Belief” expounded through the Vedas.)
While it was the intention of the scheme to develop the requisite spirit and tradition in the members of the classes by a proper employment of the forces of heredity and education, it was not viewed in a rigid way. In special cases individuals and groups changed their social class. Vishvaamitra, Ajaamidha, and Puraamidha were admitted to the Braahmin class, and even composed Vedic hymns. Yaaska, in his Nirukta, tells us that of two brothers, Santanu and Devaapi, one became a Kshatriya king and the other a Braahmin priest. Kavasha, the son of the slave girl Ilusha, was ordained as a Brahmin priest at a sacrifice2 (Aitareya BrAhmana, II. 19.). Janaka, a kshatriya by birth, attained the rank of a Braahmin by virtue of his ripe wisdom and saintly character3 (Ramayana. BAlakAnda, 51-55.). The Bhaagavata tells of the elevation of the Kshatriya clan named Dhashtru to brahminhood. Jaatyutkarsha is provided for. Even though a Sudra, if you do good, you become a Braahmin4 (ebhistu karambhir devi subhair Acharitais tathA. sudro brAhmanatAm yAti, vaishyAh kshatriyatAm vrajet.). We are Braahmin not on account of birth or the performance of (P – 132) rites, not by study or family, but on account of our behaviour1 {(nayonir nApisamskAro nAshrutam nacha santatih; kAranAni dvijatvasya vrttam eva tu kArnam).
And again:
(Sarvoyam brAhmano loke vrattenacha vidhiyate
Vrttisthitastu shudropi brAhmanatvam niyacchati – AnushAsanaparva.)}. Even if we are born Sudras, by good conduct we can raise ourselves to the highest status2 (shudrayonau hi jAtasya sadgunAn upatishthatah; Vaishyatvam labhate brAhmam kshatriyattvam tathaiva cha; Arjave vartamAnasya brAhmanyam abhijAyate – Aranyaparva.).
Chapter Seven – Section B
Dr S. Radhakrishnan continued
The human being is always becoming. His essence is in movement, not an arrested movement. There was healthy social mobility, and for long varnas did not become hereditary, crystallised castes. The occupational divisions, however, did not work, even from early times. Megasthenes gives us a division different from the caste groupings. He puts the class of statesmen and officials at the top, and hunters and junglemen as the sixth division. Patanjali refers to Braahmin kings, and Manu to Sudra rulers. There were Braahmin soldiers in the time of Alexander, as there are today. Whatever the intentions were, caste developed a false sense of pride, and led to the humiliation of the lower classes. In the Raamaayana Raama kills Shambhuka for performing austerities3 (Kalidasa on Raghuvamsha (XV. 42. 57), and Bhavabhuti, in UttararAmcharita, put him in heaven.). Manu’s unfortunate references to the Sudras were perhaps motivated by his opposition to Buddhism, which allowed them the highest religious life of learning and monasticism. These were for Manu the Sudras, who assume the airs of the twiceborn4 (shudrAmsh cha dvijalinginah.). Manu limits the right to study the dharma-shastras to Braahmins, while Sankara holds that members of all castes can read them. When excessive formalism overtook the early scheme, protests were uttered by the followers of Jainism and Buddhism, who emphasised the ideal of maitri or human brotherhood. Especially those who were denied opportunity to rise to the full heights of their powers accepted the new faiths. Hindu aacharyas denounced the spirit of caste separatism. Vajrashchikopanishad holds that many who were born of non-braahmin women had risen to the rank of Braahmin saints5 (jAtyantaresu anekajAtisambhavAt maharshyayo bahavas santi vyAsah kaivartakan-yAyam, vashistha urvasyAm … agastyah kalashajAta iti shrutatvAt.). But soon caste bigotry and prejudices asserted themselves, and drove many of those subjected to them into the fold of Islam. To rekindle the dying embers of life and light in Hindu society, preachers of human (P – 133) brotherhood like Raamaananda and Chaitanya, Kabir, Naanak, Daadu, and Naamdev arose. As the result of the liberalising influence of Western civilisation, caste customs are being slowly modified, and connubial restrictions are getting slackened. Ram Mohan Roy, Dayaanand Sarasvati and Gandhi, among others, contributed to the silent revolution1 (P 133) (Even the Hindu Mahaasabhaa resolved: “Whereas the caste system based on the birth as at present existing is manifestly contrary to universal truth and morals: whereas it is the very antithesis of the fundamental spirit of the Hindu religion: whereas it flouts the elementary rights of the human equality ….. this all India Hindu Mahaasabhaa declares its uncompromising opposition to the system and calls upon the Hindu society to put a speedy end to it.”). They found much support in the spirit of the ancient scriptures. A vipra is so called because of his Vedic learning, and a Braahmin because of his knowledge of God2 (vedapAthena viprostu brahmjnAnAt tu brAhmanah.) A famous verse of Mahaabhaarata makes out that we are all born Braahmins, and happen to belong to the different classes on account of our conduct and occupation3 (Cp. The popular verse: anAdAv iha samsAre dur ‘Are makardhvaje; kule cha kAminimule kA jAti parikalpanA.). The whole world was of one class, and the four groups became established on account of their conduct4 (eka varnam idam purvam vishvam Asid yudhisthira; karmakriyAvishesena chAturvarnyam pratisthitam. – Aranyoparva.). The Hinduisation of aboriginal tribes has been going on slowly and unobtrusively, through the natural attraction of the superior ideals. For it to be speedy and successful, the caste Hindu should give up their spirit of aloofness and haughtiness. Caste divisions have prevented the development of homogeneity among the Hindus. To develop a degree of organic wholeness and a sense of common obligation, the caste spirit must go. We have to get rid of the innumerable castes and outcastes, with their spirit of exclusiveness, jealousy, greed and fear.
Physical purity (saucham) is a means to inner purity. Cleanliness is a first aid to godliness. Our ideas of cleanliness must become more scientific. In olden times the Braahmins, the Kshatriyas, and Vaishyas could eat food cooked by each other. Manu says that a twice-born man should not eat food cooked by a Sudra, 5 (Manu. IV. 232; Gautama, xvii. I.) but that which is prepared by a slave, by a family friend and co-sharer in the profits of agriculture, could be taken6 (Manu. IV. 253; Apastamba, I. 18. 9, 13, 14.). In our times such distinctions are untenable and irritating, and restrict free social movement. In ancient times meat was used by the Braahmins also. The old Vedic religion included the sacrifices of five kinds of animals: (P – 134) goats, sheeps, cows, or bulls, and horses1 (P. 134) (I. 17. 30, 37.). Under the influence of Buddhism, Jainism and Vaishnavism, the practice became discredited. Manu and Yaajnavalka impose so many restrictions about meat eating that they discourage it. In some parts (Bengal, Kashmir), even today, Braahmins take meat, while in others (Gujarat) even the lower castes abstain from it. Our habits are to be based on principles of cleanliness, not on taboos. Pollution by touch must be given up. Untouchability arises in many ways: by the violation of caste rules, by the pursuits of certain occupations, by the adoption of certain non-aaryan faiths. The sin of untouchability is degrading, and the prejudice should be removed. The Bhagavadgeeta points out that there are only four varnas based on natural aptitude and vocation,2 (chAturvarnyam mayA srshtam gunakarmavibhAgasah. Bhagavad Gita) and two classes of persons, divine (daiva) and demoniac (aasura) 3 (Gita: XVI. 6. dvau bhuta sargau loke ‘smin daiva asura eva ca; daivo vistarasah prokta asuram partha me srnu- Translation: O son of Prtha, in this world there are two kinds of created beings. One is called the divine and the other demoniac. I have already explained to you at length the divine qualities. Now hear from Me of the demoniac.). Manu states that there are only four divisions and no fifth 4 (brAhmanah kshatriyo vaisyas trayo varna dvijAtayah; chaturthA ekajAtis tu sudro nAsti tu panchamah. – X. 4.). Any discrimination against the Harijans is unjustified. If a Samkara avoided an ‘untouchable’ it was only to be told that it is improper5 (annamayAd annamayam athavA chaitanyam eva chaitanyAd; Dvijavara durikartuvAnchasi kim bruhi gaccha gaccheti. At the Round Table Conference in London (1931) Gaandhi said: Let this committee (minority committee) and let the whole world know that there is a body of Hindu reforms who feel that untouchability is a shame, not of the untouchables, but of orthodox Hinduism, and they are therefore pledged to remove this blot….I far rather that Hinduism died than untouchability lived…. I want to say with all the emphasis that I can command that if I was the only person to resist this thing, I would resist it with my life.”). Places of worship, public wells, and public utilities such as cremation grounds and bathing ghats, hotels, and educational institutions, should be open to all. Reform in these matters has been more effective in the Indian states ruled by Indian princes6 (The Late Mahaaraajaa Gaekwar of Baroda introduced very many salutary reforms, and declared that the Hindu temples under state management shall be open to all classes of Hindus, including the Antyajas. On 12th November 1936, H.H. the Mahaaraajaa of Traavancore issued the following proclamation:
“Profoundly convinced of the truth and validity of our religion, believing that it is based on Divine guidance and on an all comprehending toleration, knowing that, in its practice, it has throughout the centuries adopted itself to the needs of changing times, and being solicitous that none of my Hindu subjects should by reason of birth or caste or community be denied the consolations and solace of the Hindu faith, I have decided and hereby declare, ordain and command that, subject to such rules and conditions as may be laid down and imposed for preserving their proper atmosphere and maintaining their rituals and observances, there should henceforth be no restriction placed on any Hindu by birth or religion on entering or worshipping at the temples by Government.”) What is being done today is a question not of justice or charity, but of (P – 135) atonement. Even when we have done all that is in our power, we shall not have atoned even for a small fraction of our guilt in this matter. Thus summarises it Dr. S. Radhakrishnan on caste and untouchability issue in his lectures delivered way back in the winter of 1942 in the Universities of Calcutta and Benares – for Kamala Lectureship organised in memory of his beloved daughter by Sir Ashutosh Mukherjee; on some aspect of Indian Life and Thought, the subject to be treated from a comparative standpoint to be delivered by a distinguished scholar in the field on invitation from The Special Committee of the Calcutta University.
The contemporary as well as the ancient Hindu society has been fairly well aware of and their attempts to eradicate this evil of caste system which has come to survive against all odds despite their best efforts to eliminate it, are laudable and self evident. This also stresses on the fact that certain situations in the human society get entrenched and manage to thrive once it becomes a convention even against the wishes of the responsible stalwarts in that society. There are always clash of vested interests of some isolated powerful sections which take advantage of otherwise helpless ecclesiastical modes. It puts the entire community on shame. In the current global diverse and highly competitive and chaotic social mechanisms and engineering, it has assumed the most virulent and malignant proportions where one is more interested in finding faults than help eliminate them. The weaker one pays the price as per the law of nature. Hindu society is no exception to it due to its mismatched ideology of peace and love in the present scenario where the opposite, like violence and envy has taken over its upper hand of pride and grandeur. This is part of a continuing struggle for survival inherent from its very inception all over the world and is equally true for Hindus in the human society with its caste stigma.