The Origins of the Caste

System
A New Perspective

By

Sanjay Sonawani
 Contents

1. An overview of the Caste system

2. How Scholars were misled?
3. Manusmriti and the Caste system
4. What is the Caste?
5. “Who were the Shudras?”– A critique
6. The riddle of the Shudra, the Rajanya and the
Kshatriya!
7. Rise and fall of the “Shreni” System and the
Castes!
8. Medieval India and the Caste System
9. Impact of British Raj on the Caste System!
1. An overview of the Caste
system
Inequality based caste system is unique feature of the Indian
society. The assumption of the various scholars, normally, is that the
caste system is ancient and always was rigid, immobile and unjust
as it now is. In common understanding it is largely assumed that this
system has been forced on the masses by the Vedic Brahmins for
selfish motives in remote past and is compartmentalized since then.
The very assumptions have to be corrected because they are based
on an illusory premise which does not stand on the historical facts.
Also, there is no relationship between Varna system of Vedic religion
and the Caste system of Hindu religion, though both begun to plague
each other in the later course of the time. Western scholars
invariably translate the terms “Varna” and “Jati” as “Caste” which is
incorrect and has created unnecessary confusion and a hurdle in
understanding the social system which has been thought to be very
complex in nature.
The castes did not emerge out of Varna system. Caste is not
product of the inter-Varna Anuloma or Pratiloma marriages. The
Vedic scholars of medieval era tried to fit the caste system in the
ambit of Varna system, but they utterly failed in this attempt. Dr. Ajay
Mitra Shastri says in this regard that, “…as various occupations
became hereditary, they formed the castes. To adjust the various
castes in Varna system, Smriti’s considered Anuloma (marriage of
lower Varna woman with high Varna man) and Pratiloma (marriage
of high Varna woman with lower Varna man) marriages being
responsible for emergence of the various castes. However, the
attempt seems to have failed as people mentioned their own
professional castes in various donations inscriptions.” (Translation
mine)
Dr. Shastri further states that these occupational castes had
played a major role in the economics of that times.1
However, the idea that was invented to explain the castes
(occupatiions) of non-Vedic masses through Vedic perspective; was
certainly insulting as the definition treated them as a product of
corrupt marital ties. This couldn’t have been accepted by the masses
or rather they may not have even known it because they anyway
were forbidden from the Vedic literature. What we can say is it was a
fine example of moral corruption of Vedics.
Here Dr. Shastri is referring to the donation inscriptions in
Buddhist caves of early history of Maharashtra while explaining
emergence of many Shudra dynasties in the country which otherwise
were prohibited from holding the Royal authorities as per Smritis. We
also know the instances of numerous Shudra kings, mentioned in
Mahabharata, Satapatha Brahmana and Manusmriti. Dr. Shastri
states that there were many Shudra kings came in the power in early
and medieval era as well, especially in South India and with proud
they have mentioned their non-Vedic (i.e. Shudra) origin in
inscriptions. 2
During this era, too, almost all the occupational professions
were controlled by the non-Vedic masses to whom Vedics referred
as Shudras. The Shudras were Kings. They were money lenders,
artisans, landlords, peasants, knights, traders, sea farers, service
providers and soldiers. There is not an instance where Shudras were
prohibited from holding authorities, no matter the Vedic scriptures
denounced the very idea all the time. Most importantly, warrior was
never ever a permanent class in Indian society. Kings seldom
established standing armies. Mostly the Farmers and peasants
would be part time soldiers while most of the times landlords their
commanders. The kings would assemble their army in the times of
need. Such profession couldn’t have been compulsorily hereditary. It
was occupation of choice, unrelated to the Vedic Varna system
simply because they were not part of it. It has been erroneously
assumed that the Shudras were part of the Vedic society and that
they followed their religious commands without any protests.
Surprisingly, while explaining the caste system, the Vedic scholars
do not stop telling us how the society followed the commands of
Dharmashastras, when the evidences go contrary to their claims.
Still, the misunderstanding haunts even the scholars of the
modern times, thus, creating a confusion in the minds of the
common people and has become a great hurdle in the path of caste
elimination movement.
Another assumption is that the invading Aryans defeated the
aboriginals and enforced lowly Varna status and caste system upon
them. This also is not true because Aryan invasion theory that was
propagated by western scholars and blindly followed by the Indian
scholars is proven to be preposterous on account of the various
archeological, scriptural and genetic evidences. Though the issue of
the Aryans or Indo-European language speakers’ migration to India
to effect cultural and linguistic impact on the locals is still being
discussed on various grounds, the fact remains that the Varna and
Caste systems are absent from the entire so-called Indo-European
world.
Also, there is no iota of evidence to show that the caste
system was an outcome of the racial sense of the “purity and
pollution”. The number of castes in India is more than five thousand
today. The fact remains that the many of the castes did not exist
even few centuries ago. Many new castes emerged in medieval era.
If we go back in the human history we find the number of castes
were far lower. They go on reducing as we go back in the remote
history. Many castes mentioned in the ancient scriptures have been
vanished long ago. The castes could not be that much as they are
today simply because there weren’t that many professions then.
The main feature of the caste is every caste has hereditary
profession. To form a caste the first prerequisite is to have a
profession that could be continued traditionally for livelihood. And if
we go back to the prehistory of the humankind, we will find there
were no professions except foraging and hunting. Division of labor
was not at all felt because there was no need.
When early human society began to form with couple of the
inventions at hand to make life safer and easier, its division of labor
must have been simple. Humane race has traversed long way, from
food-gatherer-hunter man to pastoral man. His life turned semi-
nomadic from nomadic as his territorial conscienceless grew. Here
we find the division of the labor to some partial extent. Early wool-
weavers, tanners, stone-masons would have formed the professions
for their skills and the needs of their tribes. But this is not called as
permanent division of the labor/skills but mostly it must have been a
joint task conducted under leadership of the most skilled
men/women.
The invention of agriculture brought revolution in the life of the
early human society. This helped nomadic man to settle, changed
his attitude towards the life. The transgression from nomadic man to
settled man dramatically changed life style and social philosophy of
the early agrarian people. Early professions were limited hence was
no need to have well organized social order. But with agriculture and
allied professions the social order became more complex and
interdependent.
The agrarian life needed new inventions and innovations to
carry out farming activities more smoothly. Right from agricultural
implements to permanent settlements were necessary to
accommodate the new way of life. With new inventions new
professions emerged to serve the society. Exchange of the
innovations between the societies and trade of the surplus products
are seen from the era of 7000+ BC. From excavations we find
explosion of the specialty products from almost every region those
were traded across the known civilizations of those times. We can
surmise from this that the specialty professions emerged gradually in
the sedentary societies those helped them to prosper and lead better
life.
The service class, such as transporters, too emerged to fulfill
the ever growing needs of the society. The people those joined new
professions naturally were from the same human stock. It was not
the rigid system. In India too, the people were free to choose the
profession of their like and choice. The excavations at Indus sites
show the division of labor but it doesn’t show discrimination based
on the profession. Even after the advent of Vedic religion, we do not
find that the professions were stratified and were hereditary.
It will be thus ridiculous to think the Vedic Brahmins invented
all the professions and by creating the divisions forced upon the
defeated ignorant masses. Indian history does not begin with the
Vedas but it has far more remote roots when the composition of the
Vedas was yet to begin. Hindu religion does not find its root in the
Vedas. The religion based on the Vedas and allied literature was
always independent and had its roots in different geography.
The Varna system of the Vedics was stratified sometime
about 1000 to 800 BC when this religion found some ground in the
Indian sub-continent. Prior to that we do not find any stratification in
Vedic society. But when they migrated in small numbers in a new
land they required some internal social system to maintain their
identity and smooth functioning of the society they invented Varna
system, which otherwise is totally absent in the bulk of the Vedas.
They provided divine sanction to the new system by inserting
Purushasukta in Rig Veda.
The professions were in existence and flourishing in India
long before the entry of the Vedic religion. They couldn’t have
interfered in the local social system as they were dependent on the
local people. We find from the history that the professions could be
changed or entered in to if new invention or innovation was
introduced. These people had their own priests, philosophies and
rituals. It is ridiculous to think that the people those traded with far off
regions and who were founders of the Indus and other civilizations
didn’t have organized religion and social system. The guild system
that controlled the economy of the country, which finds its roots in
Indus civilization, clearly shows that anybody could enter or leave
the profession of the guild. The training was afforded to the new
entrants. This was not the case to be seen with the Vedic social
order. Change in Varna was completely prohibited in the Vedic social
system.
Rather, as we are going to see in the next chapters, the Vedic
and Hindu religions are independent of each other having
independent social systems. The confusion has been created by the
scholars by considering both the religions one and the same. The
British are responsible to create a chaotic social environment as they
used Vedic Smritis while making Hindu Code, without giving due
attention to the fact that the caste and Varna system are the social
systems of two distinct religions.
Manusmriti enumerates various professions conducted by non-
Vedic people but does not indicate anywhere that they were
hereditary or these professionals belonged to the Vedic religion.
Rather it clearly prohibits the temple priests and other professionals
from attending the Shraddha of Vedic people. Manusmriti makes the
clear cut religious distinction and yet the scholars have been blind to
it.
It would be erroneous to hold Manusmriti responsible for social
stratification of Indian society. It only stratified the Varna system. All
the commands of Manu were addressed to the members of the
Vedic religion and their servant class hailing from non-Vedic masses
to whom they designated as Shudras. The whole society never ever
was under the pale of the Vedic religion hence the commands of
Manusmriti were limited to the members of Vedic religion. Manusmriti
explicitly clears this. Not only Manusmriti, the social atmosphere we
find portrayed in Prakrit Texts, such as Gatha Saptashati and
Angavijja, also evidences that, though we find various professions
enumerated, they were not classified as caste (Jati).
 In Vedic religion, for stratifying the Varna system, the blame
normally goes to Purushsukta of Rig Veda where it is proclaimed that
the Varna system is created from the sacrificial body of the Lord
himself, thus sanctifying it. It suggests that the Brahmin was first as
head of the lord became Brahmin and the Shudras were the last
born from his feet. This is a myth that has haunted Indian social
system at the least from last thousand years as it gave sanctity to
the notion of birth based inequality. The term Shudra was grossly
misunderstood by the scholars hence they created a confusion that
yet has not been sufficiently solved. They forgot to note whatever
Purushsukta or later Smritis commanded, the Hindu social facts
surprisingly were contrary to that. We find no implementation of the
code on the Hindus as it was never intended for them. Smritis codify
the laws for the Varna and not Jati. Rather, caste system is not a
problem in itself but our grave misunderstanding about the
caste system poses more problems.
Prior to introduction of the Vedic religion (and even now) the
people followed the religion that was pre-Vedic, based on Tantras,
Agamas and idolatry. The Vedic religion was based on the sacrificial
fires (Yajna) in which through libations were offered the prayers to
the numerous abstract gods. However, it its early times the sacrifices
were simple in nature and would be conducted by the family head
instead of seeking any assistance from the trained priests. Later the
procedures laid down to conduct fire sacrifices were more
elaborative and complex. Vedics needed specially trained priests.
We safely can assume that the emergence of the priestly class even
in Vedic society was a later incident.
Vedic religion was introduced to subcontinent in very late era,
i.e. around 1000 BC. The Shatapatha Brahmana have preserved this
history through the myth of Videgh Mathava. This is why we do not
find any trace of rise, decline and revival process of the Indus
civilization in Vedic literature. Rig Veda evidences that the Vedics
share similar ritualistic and linguistics traits with the Zoroastrians, for
their close geographical proximities and their emergence from the
commonly shared culture. None of the scholar dates both the
religions prior to 1500 BC, the period when the Indus and other
contemporary civilizations had declined owing to the global climatic
changes and economic recession and were in revival process. Vedic
religion entered Indian subcontinent through the small number of
refugees and later on was spread by missionary practice in the
subcontinent.
For their need of spreading their religion, to add aura, the
Brahmins invented the elaborative and complex nature of the rituals
in Vedic religion. Brahmana literature was composed to explain
procedures to conduct various kinds of the sacrifices. It was religious
need of the Vedic people and this is why Brahmin became most
important and revered entity in the Vedic society. Their proclamation
in the Purushsukta that the Brahmins were first born was their own
figment of the imagination, studded with pride but that suited their
purpose.
Also, except Purushsukta, we do not find the term Shudra
appearing anywhere in the Rig Veda because they never had come
across this set of the people until they entered the sub-continent.
Also we find the term “Rajanya” of Purushsukta, too, getting
gradually vanishing in later literature. It also is agreed by all the
scholars that the Purushasukta is later interpolation in the extant
body of the Rig Veda. Still, we find that an illusory inerasable
impression this Sukta has left on the Indian mind that has disturbed
the social order even in modern era.
And the reason is the Vedas have been considered the main
source of the Hinduism which is a grave mistake committed by all
the scholars. A Vedas and Vedic code has nothing to do with the
Agamic (Hindu) religion. There are no instances, even in medieval
era, to show that the Vedic Smrities were ever forced on the Hindu
society. Had it been the case no Shudra ever could become a king,
noble, priest or trader.
We will discuss on this issue in more detail later. However, it
is clear that the Vedic religion has nothing in common with Hindu
religion and hence the Vedic Smrities were never applicable to them.
The Vedic Varna system was independent development of the Vedic
religion that also is confusing in its own nature. Brahmin or priestly
class couldn’t have appeared first in any human society. Rather the
chronology is quite opposite. However, as the history is evident,
Vedic society was too a small where it was convenient to classify it in
three special divisions. It was not agrarian society. The Vedics were
mostly pastorals and semi-nomadic in origin. The Brahmin class got
prominence because of the historical role they played in the
development of Vedic religion and they boldly declared in
Purushasukta that they were the first-borns.
Vedics did not know geography of India when they first
stepped in north-west region. They came to know India gradually
and their expanding knowledge of India is well reflected in early
Brahmina literature and Manusmriti. Pre-vedic Hindu religion did
exist from millenniums and was strong enough to oppose missionary
practices of the Vedics. Satapatha Brahmin notes that they had no
entry in Prachya Desa (Eastern regions) those had their own priests.
They knew not which communities delved in the regions beyond the
Vindhya Mountains. Vedics had received royal patronages in Shudra
kingdom to begin with followed by Kuru-Panchal, Videha and then
Magadha kingdoms.
Indian history does not start with the entry of the Vedics but
has its roots in the Indus civilization. This is why the Vedic scholars
now are hell-bent to prove the times of the Rig Veda pre-Indus, but
with no avail. Source of the Hindu religion cannot be traced in the
Vedas but in the material culture that existed since last 7000+ years
ago. The people here had their own religion, culture, kingdoms and
republics. They had their own economic system. It was impossible to
enforce any language and culture upon them. Many professions
already existed, economy prospered with the inland and foreign
trade. To convert some people to their fold the early Vedics needed
special skills, sufficient cunningness to impress the people and the
patrons like kings and the nobles. The Vedic literature is full of such
stories in which we find how gradually this religion came to the some
prominence in North, especially in Kuru-Panchal and Magadha
regions. The old religion kept on thriving with its independent
philosophy and faith on their deities. The Tantra tradition had
emerged long ago when the society had turned agrarian. The rise of
the fertility cult in agrarian society was inevitable that we find in the
form of supreme deities like Shiva and Shakti. Rather all the festivals
today Hindu celebrate are connected with the concept of fertility. This
is evident from the fact that there is no any Vedic festival that Hindus
celebrate.
It was grave mistake of the scholars that they treated Hindu
and Vedic religion as one and the same. Their assumption that the
Vedas are the source of the Hinduism was wrong. They confused
between Varna and Jati thus gave wrong explanations of the origin
of the caste system. They heavily neglected socio-economic history
of India while explaining Jati system thus postulating misguiding
theories.
It is not the fact, as understood by the people, that the Jati
system has ancient origins and was rigid and it was enforced upon
them by the Vedic people. We have numerous examples to prove
that the professions could be changed. One could enter easily in
reputed or disreputable professions depending upon his skills,
choice or situation. Had Smrities of the Vedic were to abide Hindus
in their code, the historical Nanda dynasty to Satvahanas couldn’t
have become Kings and Emperors who belonged to the non-Vedic
class. Manusmriti also acknowledges the kingdoms of the Shudra
kings. There are many examples that show clearly that the code
authored by Manu was not intended for the non-Vedic people at all.
We must not forget that the caste system never ever was
rigid, inflexible as is commonly thought. The Aryan invasion theory
has classified the lower castes as the defeated and enslaved
aboriginals but there is no slightest evidence to support this
hypothesis. Trautmann had rightly remarked, “This is the theory that
Indian civilization was formed by a big bang, caused by the light-
skinned, Aryan, civilized invaders over dark skinned savage
aboriginal Indians, and the formation of the caste system which
bound two in a single society, at once mixed and segregated. If this
theory were true, there ought to be evidence in the earliest Vedic
texts.” 2
Then how come that the birth based caste system emerged
and persists even today with its all evil sense of inequality, dividing
the people those belonged to the same stock of the people?
 Caste system originally was occupation based and was not
unjust or enforced by any religious command. The Vedics have no
role in the formation and codification of the Castes. Rather,
surprisingly, caste system has no divine sanction the way Varna
system has. Smrities rather codified and stratified the Varna system,
not Jati. These Smritis never were intended for the Hindus.
Historians forget that Vedic and Hindu are distinct religions having
nothing in common. It is a grave misconception that the castes
emerged out of the Varnas. Caste assemblies (Previously known as
Shrenis) of Hindus were independent bodies those regularized their
internal code of conduct and caste morals. They never were dictated
by the Vedic Brahmins. Manusmriti instructs the codes of non-Vedics
be disregarded by the Vedics. This does mean that the non-Vedic
Hindus had their own code to regulate their society. It was
impossible for the Vedic Brahmins to invent variety of the professions
to force upon the people. The codes those were written by the
Vedics were limited to regulate their own religious community.
Finding history of the caste system in the Vedic literature has been
proven disastrous because it does not speak about it at all.
Ruling classes too could not force any profession on their
subjects. Rather they never interfered in the existing social system.
Rulers accepted verdicts of the Shrenies or Caste Assemblies
without raising a doubt on its validity. We find many verdicts from the
medieval era those were issued by the caste assemblies and
political authorities validating them. So, in a way, castes were
governed by their own leaders without any interference from political
authorities.
Here we come across an intriguing conjecture. How and when
caste systems became birth based and sense of inequality plagued
the Hindu society? This is a crucial question that we have to deal
with. Also, we have to deal with a major question, whether the
religious commands forced or created Casteism and the people
accepted it without any protests, though it is thought to be an
inhuman system? The social history negates this question, yet we
have to probe further as common understanding is that the caste
system was created by the Vedic Aryans to force over the defeated
non-Aryans. The other question is, whether it was the outcome of the
peculiar socio-economic and political circumstances? These
questions have to be discussed at great length to know the roots of
the castes and its evil that has haunted Indian people for centuries.
First thing, however, we should know that the birth based caste
system is not as ancient as it is thought to be. Also, let us come out
of the misconceptions that caste and Varna are co-related in any
way. Both are the independent systems of the distinct religions. Rise
of birth based caste system is a recent phenomenon and has its
roots in entirely different circumstances those we are going to
discuss in the next chapters.
*
Ref.:
1. Itihas: Parachin Kal (Vol.1) Maharashtra State Gazetteer,
page 489
2. Ibid
3. ‘The Aryan Debate’ by Thomas R. Trautmann, pub.: Oxford
University Press, 2005, p. 100
2.
How Scholars were misled?

Social stratification, based on the birth, is considered to be

unique feature of the caste system. Also it is largely assumed that
the rigid, birth based and unjust caste system has antique origin. The
various Indian and European scholars have attempted to find the
origin of the caste system. The various general opinions have been
either in understanding of the people or have been postulated by the
scholars. They can be briefed as under-
1. Birth-based rigid caste system is an ancient fact of Hindu
life.
2. Some scholars believe that the endogamous groups, not
Varnas, are castes.
3. Scholars like H. S. Risley think that the caste means
endogamous groups resulted from interactions between the different
races of remote past.
4. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar has different view. According to him
the castes in India before colonial rule were exogamous society
because marriages within blood-relatives and class-relations were
forbidden. He proposes that the castes should be defined as a social
group that tries to impose endogamy in an exogamous population.
5. The definition given by Amar Kosha is, “Caste is a
synonym of class. The groups formed by the social common
customs are called Castes.”
6. According to Dr. Iravati Karve, main feature of the caste is
they are endogamous. Spread of the caste is in the limited
geographical area where a single common language is spoken.
Every caste has one or two ancestral profession and its status in
comparison with other castes can be either higher or lower. The
families with which marital ties can be established such group of the
families is the caste. Hence the caste is nothing but expanded group
of the relations. Dr. Karve further states that the caste and tribe has
striking similarities, such as limited geographical spread and
presence of the caste panchayat (Assembly), hence the castes are
formed out of ancient tribes.
7. Many think that the eugenics has been instrumental in
water tight compartmentalization of the castes.
8. The castes were enforced upon the aboriginals by the
invading victorious Aryans is another school of thought that is still
dominant in the Indian society. Dr. Ghurye opines, “Caste is a
Brahminic child of Indo-Aryan culture cradled in the land of the
Ganges and thence transferred to other parts of India.”
9. The another thought is, the word “jati” is employed to mean
the numerous sub-divisions of a “varna”. However, this theory
proposes that this demarcation is not rigidly maintained. The word
“jati”, is sometimes used for “Varna”.
From above it will appear that what G. S. Ghurye wrote in
1932, “…despite much study by many people,... we do not possess
a real general definition of caste. It appears to me that any attempt at
definition is bound to fail because of the complexity of the
phenomenon. On the other hand, much literature on the subject is
marred by lack of precision about the use of the term.”1 is not an
exaggeration.
The above overview of the opinions of various scholars clearly
shows that they are not unanimously clear about the origin of the
castes. Also the meaning and the origin of the caste too is uncertain
to them. Some scholars have taken racial or ethnic angles to define
the castes whereas some have taken tribal angle. However the fact
remains that there are castes and every caste is compartmentalized,
independently functioning body set distinct and aloof from the other
castes, maintaining higher and lower status at the same time in the
society.
Let us first discuss on the various opinions of the scholars of
the past and try to find what could be the truth. We have seen in
opening chapter that the scholars have mixed up Varna system with
caste system and that is the reason most of their opinions have gone
wrong and misleading.
 Varna system of the Vedic religion is like a pyramid. It has
descending order. Brahmin is placed higher while rest of the Varnas
are set in descending order. It appears that there also was a time
when Kshatriya’s claimed highest position over Brahmins, though it
is very much uncertain that Kshatriya ever was the sanctified Varna
in Vedic system. This is because the Purushsukta mentions Rajanya
instead of Kshatriya in the second order of Varna system and
Rajanya and Kshatriya are not one and the same. When exactly the
Varna system became birth based is not exactly known, but the
period certainly is anterior to caste system. Varna system has divine
sanction which is not the case with caste system because the social
history informs us that it was occupation based practical system that
was flexible till end of the tenth century AD.
However, it appears when Vedic religion came to India from
Southern Afghanistan; the early preacher’s accumulated new
converts in either fold by offering some or other Varna to them,
excepting Shudra. Shudra was never a Varna, rather the term
Shudra was used for those who were not part of the Vedic religion.
Fourfold system of the Vedics is not properly understood by the
scholars. The three Varnas together form the Vedic religion and the
others, no matter what religion they belonged to, were Shudras to
them. Shudra, originally, it was a tribe situated in Nort-Sindh region
across which the new entrant Vedics came first. Though we find
mention of this tribe in Purushasukta, a later addition to the Rig
Veda, the term “Varna” doesn’t appear in it at all! Later on this term
was applied to those all who were non-Vedic, no matter even if they
were foreign tribes and kings.
It is possible that by Brahmana era, about 800 BC, the Varna
system gradually had become rigid and birth based. Still, surprisingly
we find the Rajanya Varna being replaced with the Kshatriya in later
literature, which has no Vedic sanction. Also, we find that the Vedic
system in later course of the time denied existence of the Kshatriyas
too along with Vaishya Varna by creating various fictitious stories. So
far, the proper attention is not given towards this drastic shift in the
Vedic religion where the existence of two Varnas has absolutely
been denied.
 Was Varna system profession based? Or was it essential that
the particular person had to strictly follow the profession prescribed
for his Varna? In the society, where population is limited and
professions are almost primordial, such classification is quite easy
and convenient. In larger and developed societies, where explosion
of the occupations take place, it almost becomes impossible to
assign any Varna (or class) to anyone that forces the limited but
defined duties on its members. Since Vedic religion was limited to
the small population it was easy to them to classify the society in the
three Varnas. However, the people, those were adhering to the pre-
Vedic religion, though labeled as Shudras, were a majority
population that was loosely distributed in variety of professions
including their priestly class.
To a small group of people, stepping in a new land to survive
and propagate their religion, in the beginning, it was easy to assign
the Varnas to regulate internal hierarchy. It also was easy to assign
any of the Varna to those who had converted to their fold as the
number wouldn’t be more. Many a times, higher Varnas were just
designated to the local scholars and nobles out of respect or praises
in a hope to receive patronages, though they had not converted to
the Vedic fold.
It should be remembered that the Rajanya Varna was never
used for the converted warrior class. Instead the term Kshatriya was
reintroduced with new meaning and was handily used replacing
Rajanyas. It seems most were just labeled Kshatriyas out of
gratitude by Vedic Brahmins because of the patronages they
received from the local warrior class. We find many historical
instances of this practice. After close analysis of Mahabharata and
Ramayana, though heavily interpolated, it does not seem that Kuru
or Ikshwaku clans were ever Vedic Kshatriya as it is assumed.
Rather the historical characters were used to glorify Vedic religion by
assigning them the Kshatriya status and calling them not only the
saviors of the sacrifices, but portrayed them conductors of the
sacrifices.
Later on Brahmins stopped designating any warrior or King
with Kshatriya title also, excepting the Rajputs. They simply made
declaration that in Kaliyuga (present times) there no longer exist
Kshatriyas.
Anyway, Varna system was created by Vedics in an order to
regulate their social system. Brahmins maintained their superiority
for they were the early missionaries those had introduced Vedic
religion to the people of Indian subcontinent. It flourished in Kuru-
Panchal regions in the beginning and later thrived in Gangetic plains.
The early opponents to this religion like Charvaka, Buddha and
Mahavira too arose from these regions. Elsewhere this religion was
yet to find space hence there was no question of any opposition.
Entry of Vedic religion in southern India was as late as in second
century AD. Sangam literature doesn’t mention this religion in its
earlier texts.
What was the social system of the Indians before and after
Vedic religion was introduced to some sections of the society? We
must bear in mind that Varna system of Vedic religion has divine
origin. Such is not the case with the Caste system because it always
depended on the occupations and was so much so flexible that
Hindu (or we can call it Agamic or pre-Vedic religion) needed not any
divine explanation for it.
We have archaeological proofs of early settlements spread
throughout India. The settlement patterns clearly show that there
were many professions, agriculture being prominent, supported by
animal husbandry and fishing. The housing patterns in towns and
villages indicate it depended on financial ability or political authority
of the owner. There were professions like pottery, copper-smith,
ornament making, carpentry, trading (including import- export),
mining, mason work, tool making (from stones and metals) etc. in
early period. There also were semi-nomadic people like shepherds
and cowherds among them.
Were they birth based? Did some religious authority, Vedic or
Hindu, suddenly invented all the professions and enforced on the
entire Indian society, dividing it in the birth-based castes? It would
be ridiculous even to think so. All the professions of early humanity
are the outcome of gradual inventions and modifications and shared
innovations. No particular community can be credited with inventions
of all the occupations and then distributing them in ranks for their
livelihood thus creating castes.
For example, after the Copper Age the Iron Age appeared.
Sensing its utility many people got diverted to the new profession, to
smelt the iron and make implements from it. It must be very
profitable business in its early times. From where these people came
and entered new profession had Caste system been rigid? The
people entered this new profession must have been engaged in
other occupations before. They could desert their previous business
to enter another only because there didn’t exist birth-based rigid
caste system. It only can happen when freedom to change
profession is in place. And it clearly seems from available proofs and
simple logic such freedom certainly did exist in India too.
The castes are not outcome of the eugenics as some scholars
like to prefer. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar refutes this theory as he states,
“As a matter of fact [the] Caste system came into being long after the
different races of India had commingled in blood and culture.”2 In
ancient India there were tribes, but their identity was not racial but
totemic. There are many instances of inter-tribal marriages, as many
as it shows it could be a common practice. The racial sense had not
emerged in the early society. Dr. Iravati Karve’s assumption that the
castes emerged from the tribes is also incorrect because we find
even today that the people of one tribe are distributed in many
occupational castes and though belonging to the same tribe, they do
not intermarry.
For example, Ahir (or Abhir) was an ancient tribe. Now we find
the people of this tribe distributed in various castes like shepherds,
salt-makers, fishermen, goldsmith, tailors, Marathas etc. The same
thing has happened with other ancient tribes.
Marriages within the caste have also been considered to be a
main reason for formation of the caste system. There is no proof to
this. Rather the marriages happening in the same occupational
castes mostly had practical reason. For example, a girl raised up in
the blacksmiths house could have, at the least, preliminary
knowledge of the profession her family was in. She could be useless
to the person engaged in different occupation except for continuing
family bloodline. The marriage solved twofold problem; one is
reproduction and second is getting a free laborer useful in his
occupation. This situation arose in an era of the socio-economic
distress. It became a practice that turned to a custom in later age.
However, several folklores tell us the stories of the inter-occupational
marriages and those cannot be neglected.
Amarkosha does not define Jati because it has no divine
sanction. “Caste is a synonym of class. The groups formed by the
social common customs are called Castes,” it states. This definition
clearly indicates that the caste is synonym of the occupational class
that naturally has some mutually formed common customs and code
of the ethics. It does not indicate that the group comes to in
existence on the basis of the birth. The customs of the society are
never static. They keep on changing with the time. This definition just
is descriptive and of lesser use to us.
Most importantly the caste system has no divine sanction.
Vasistha SaMhita (3.1) clearly states that, “The regulations those
govern Castes, tribes and local social systems have no Vedic
sanction.” There wouldn’t have been any Vedic regulations or divine
sanction because the caste system was not product of the Vedic
religion.
Most of the castes have been categorized as the Shudra and
Atishudra. 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 long time, we
need to have a brief look at the reality to solve the riddle of the caste
system.
Some scholars have tried to reach to the roots of the Shudra
term which can be briefed here.
R. K. Pruthi suggests that perhaps Shudra was originally the
name of non-Aryan tribe. 3
Vi. Ka. Rajwade suggests that the people those were taken in
the personal service by the victorious Aryans were called as
Shudras. He further states that, the term was later applied to those
all who were out of the three Varnas.4
D. R. Bhandarakar 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, in Patanjal Sutras Shudra denotes a
person other than the member of three Varnas, i.e. Brahmina,
Kshatriya and Vaishya. 5
Bhandarkar makes sense because in a Maharashtri Prakrit
treaty, “Angavijja”, (1st AD) includes all the indigenous and foreigners
like Shaka, Huna, Kushanas, Mlecchas in Shudra category
excepting three Vedic Varnas.
This will make it clear that the Shudras couldn’t have
been part of the Vedic religion. The scholars have preferred to go by
the descriptive nature of the castes but unfortunately did not give
attention towards the true nature of the castes. We also have to cast
a glance at Manusmriti because it is thought to be a code that
polluted Hindu society with inequality and caste prejudices.
*

Ref.:

1. Caste and Race in India, by G. S. Ghurye

2. Annihilation of catse, Vol. 1, by B. R. Ambedkar,
3. Indian Caste System, edited by R.K. Pruthi, Discovery
Publishing House, 2004, page 72
4. RadhamadhavVilasChampu, Preface, Edited by Vi. Ka.
Rajwade, Sarita Prakashan, reprint 2014, page 130-31
5. Some Aspects of Ancient Indian Culture, By D. R. Bhandarkar,
1989, page 12
3.

Manusmriti and the Caste system

Manusmriti is vehemently blamed for the stratification of the

caste system. As I have stated in earlier chapters, here too, we can
note that the scholars have confused Varna (class) with the caste
system considering them one and the same while discussing the
castes. It is, however, necessary to critically analyze the Manusmriti
to understand for whom the code was intended and whether Manu
stratified the caste system or Varna system.
Let us begin with the early geography of the Manusmriti. The
regions known to Manusmriti were Kuru, Panchal, Matsya, and
Shaursena in its early times. (Manu. 2.17-2.19) Manusmriti did not
know the regions and people beyond Vindhya Mountain. It also did
not know existence of the Magadha or eastern regions. Manu
enumerates only the known lands where early Vedics were settled
and with reverence applauds it as the region of the Brahmarshi’s.
The Brahmavart, the land they had left far behind, the land where
Sarasvati and Drishadvati flowed, Manu revered the most placing it
at the highest rank. In early times of Manusmriti Vedics had not
forgotten that the original land was situated in Iran, to which,
naturally, they revered the most!
The code was intended to those people who adhered to the
Vedic religion which was limited to the lands situated within the
boundaries of Brahmarshi Desha. Elsewhere, various tribes dwelled
and ruled the territories enjoying their own culture and religious
practices, to which they wholesomely addressed as Shudras.
Naturally, though Manu proclaims that the code is intended for all
four Varnas and intermediate ones in its very first chapter (1.2) would
have intended to the people living in the region of Brahmarshi,
comprising of five states and adhering to the Vedic religion.
Manusmriti dictates many laws against Shudras. Manu in the
first chapter considers Shudras as a fourth Varna of the Vedic
system. Yet Manu states that the Shudras could be anywhere. Also,
Manusmriti proclaims that,“Let him not dwell in a country where the
rulers are Sudras, nor in one which is surrounded by unrighteous
men, nor in one which has become subject to heretics, nor in one
swarming with men of the lowest castes.” (Manu. 4.61)
Now the question will arise that if there were kingdoms of the
Shudras, they had their own religion to which Manu calls “heretics”
how could his code be intended to them and how the Shudras could
be part of the Vedic religion?
We are aware that the pre-Vedic religion that is still flowing to
us was idolatrous and mainly Tantrik in nature, to its followers Manu
calls non-religious and unrighteous. In Rig Veda too we find that the
enemy tribes have been addressed in the similar fashion.
While formulating the rules as to who cannot attend the
funeral offerings, Manu also enumerates various occupations, from
cattle herders, physicians, traders, to actor or singers, however, he
does not call them Shudra, though all these professions were
thought to be the domain of the Shudras. (Manu. 2.150-155) He
could have done with the usage of single term “Shudra” instead of
enumerating their various professions! If these people were not
Shudras, whom Manu treated as Shudras while making his most
condemnable and hostile laws, whether followed by the people or
not?
 Manu all the time speaks of the sacred Vedas and sacrificial
fires. He prohibits the temple-priest in funeral offerings (Shraddha)
but nowhere mentions any God that is worshiped by Hindus since
ancient times. His command to prohibit temple priest from attending
the Shraddha does only mean that the Manu was aware that the
idolatrous religion did exist and was alien to his. However, he does
not mention any god like Shiva, Shakti etc. those Hindu worship the
most. His instructions are limited to the people who conducted or
were eligible to conduct the fire sacrifices and those who revered the
Vedas, thus making it clear that they were intended to the followers
of Vedic religion.
Manu was aware of the codes and philosophies those were
non-Vedic. He denounces them and threatens no reward after death
if followed by any. (Manu. 12.95-96) It was but natural for Manu as
he was advocating and codifying his Vedic religion and thus it was
necessary to him to denounce all other religious codes, traditions,
and philosophies those were not based on the Vedas. Important here
is Manu acknowledges the existence of non-Vedic codes and
philosophies.
Most importantly, to Manu, the clans like Paundra, Aundra,
Dravida, Camboja, Yavana, Shaka, Pahlava, China, Kirata, Darada,
and Khasha are Shudras. (Manu. 10.44) Manu reasons, these clans
reached lower positions because they violated the code and omitted
the sacred rites. It is clear that Manu here includes indigenous as
well foreign clans in the Shudra category, no matter what religion
they belonged to. The fact remains that these clans couldn't have
been part and parcel of the Vedic religion as fourth Varna and still,
they are called Shudras. Why this anomaly in Manusmriti would have
arisen?
Manusmriti did not know these clans when formulation of the
code had begun. The geography of the Manusmriti was limited to
five regions. The spread of the Vedic religion was so much so limited
at that time that the Vedics did not know the people living elsewhere,
thus referring to them wholesomely as Shudras. Later on, gradually,
they not only came to know the various clans delving in the country,
realized that they had their independent identities; still, they went on
addressing them as Shudras. Shudra, in fact, became a designation
of the people those were not Vedic. It was impossible that these non-
Vedics, Shudras, would have ever given any heed to the commands
of the alien religion! And they did not as the history evidences it.
They came to know the people like Dravida, Aundra, Paundra
only after first century AD. Shakas and Kushanas were ruling the
parts of the country by that time. Since there was no question of their
being Vedic anytime in their history, how could they have been
degraded because they violated the sacred rites of the Vedics? In all
this was just a boastful proclamation studded with Vedic supremacist
approach to show their religion was ancient and once all belonged to
it. Even so, the fact remains this code couldn’t have been intended
for them, though they were designated as Shudras.
The geography of early Vedics had shifted to Magadha region
in later times. We find Magadha becoming the center of this religion
from where the attempts were made to spread it by missionary
practice. The opposition in form of Buddha and Mahavira arose in
sixth century BC only in these parts. Elsewhere, in absence of its
presence, there was no question of any opposition.
None of the clan of India belonged to the Vedic religion
anytime and hence there was no question of their being degraded
because of omission of the sacred rites or violation of the code. The
Vedic religion was new to this land; however, the proclamation just
was sort of an explanation that could be used as propaganda to
attract non-Vedics to their fold. The Aundra, Poundras, Dravidas etc.,
the mighty clans of southern India, would hardly have heard of this
religion till first century AD. Only two inscriptions of Satvahanas
indicate that this religion was known to them, but Gatha Saptashati,
an anthology of this period, does not show the existence of the
adherents of this religion in contemporary society! The editor to this
anthology Mr. S. A. Joglekar wonders at this fact and surmises that
the number of Vedic Brahmins could be very limited during that era.
Even so, though ridiculous, he forwards a big claim that the
Satvahanas were Vedic Brahmins!
It is ridiculous to think that the instructions of Manusmriti
would be ever applicable to in indigenous clans. The fact is these
rulers seem to have hardly entertained Vedic religion in their domain.
Vedics had to work hard to get the entry in every region of India and
still they could not convert all to their fold because of the inherent
limitations of their religion.
The historical fact that appears is the code of Manu was
completely neglected by the so-called Shudra masses as they
continued to follow their independent idolatrous religion and their
own code. In fact, though Manu kept on insisting the Vedic rites and
sacrifices, the new converts forced many Vedics to adopt idol
worship though it was prohibited in the Vedic religion. If Manusmriti
was so much so powerful to change and command entire social
order, the Vedics wouldn’t have dared to commit such blasphemy
that was disastrous to the core of their religious tenets. But the
reality is the Vedics were forced to change the core of their religion
and yet how boastfully the Vedic supremacy was proclaimed!
The fact must be understood that Manusmriti’s contributors of
the different times were the representatives of a religion that boasted
of the supremacy of the Vedas and twice born to make feel others
inferior. It cunningly tried to show all mankind been sheltered under
one roof and still humiliated those who had not converted. To Manu,
once everyone was Vedic and those deviated from the code and
rites were fallen to the lowest rank and hence despicable. Every
religion for that matter behaves in a similar way with the other. Many
of Manusmriti’s instructions and explanations are imaginary, crooked,
contradictory and confusing only because the writers of various
times did not know how to confront new situations those arose while
spreading the religion and the opposite principles that were carried in
by the converts. In fact, Vedic religion got heavily polluted in this
process which reflects well from the contradictory and yet stringent
instructions those were inserted from time to time in the original body
of the Manusmriti.
In fact, if studied carefully, Manu originally seems to be very
clear in his commands. He knows to whom commands are intended
and to whom not. He explicitly states, “Vedas, Smritis, the custom
of virtuous men and one’s own pleasures is the defined fourfold
religion.” (Manu-2.12) and in the earlier verse, Manu states, “Every
twice-born man, who, relying on the institutes of dialectics,
treats with contempt those two sources of the law, must be cast
out by the virtuous, as an atheist and a scorner of the Vedas.”
(Manu-2.11) His address is to the people those faithfully adhere to
the Vedic principles and revere the Vedas. All other faiths opposite to
Vedic principles are despicable to Manu to which he calls heretics.
We are aware that the pre-Vedic religion of India was based on
Tantras to which we call today Hindu religion. The commands of
Manu are more strict for the three Varnas and contemptuous and
humiliating against Shudras. Every religion in a similar way has
given commands against the people of opposing faith. It does not
mean that the illusory vicious commands would be followed by the
others.
Here we come across a serious juncture where Manu defines
the Vedic religion that finds the source in the Vedas and virtuous
conduct of the twice- born men. He threatens the twice-born men of
being outcast if they do not respect the Vedas and the laws. Manu
also might have felt an imminent threat that the people of his religion
could deviate from Vedicism and embrace the religion of Shudra if
not stopped by divine command! The contempt for Shudra, too,
could have been the outcome of this fear.
The twice-born are just three Varnas. Shudra is excluded in
this command because Manu is aware that this Varna is not Vedic.
Because the Shudras are not twice-born and that they had their
independent religious order, temples and priests and several
professions to conduct for their livelihood Manu couldn’t have
enforced Vedic ideas on them. It is evident from the second chapter
of Manusmriti where it enumerates several professions along with
temple priests and Shudra Kings. They are not expected to respect
the Vedas, rather, they are forbidden from them.
However, in fact, there are Vedic Brahmins those performed
the sacrifices for the Shudras on fees. Manusmriti verse 3.178
proclaims that “The giver (of a Sraddha) loses the reward, due for such a
non-sacrificial gift, for as many Brahmanas as a (guest) who sacrifices for
Sudras may touch (during the meal) with his limbs.”
And yet, at other hand, we find the instructions like-
1. God said the duty of a Shudra is to serve the upper
Varnas faithfully with devotion and without grumbling. (Manu 1-91)
2. Let the first part of a Brahman’s name denote something
auspicious, a Kshatriya’s be connected with power, and a Vaishyas
with wealth but a Shudra’s express something contemptible. (Manu
II.31)
3. Shudra who insults a twice born man with gross invectives
shall have his tongue cut out; for he is of low origin. (Manu VIII. 270.)
4. Shudra is unfit of receive education. The upper Varnas
should not impart education or give advice to a Shudra. It is not
necessary that the Shudra should know the laws and codes and
hence need not be taught. Violators will go to as amrita hell. (Manu
IV-78 to 81)
We come across so many such humiliating and infuriating inhuman
commands against the Shudras in Manusmriti. Is Manu confused while
dictating these commands? No. He is not confused. The confused lot is of
the scholars who have failed to understand the true essence of the
Manusmriti. They did not give attention to the following facts:
1. Manu admits there were Shudras Kings and the Vedic priests
those performed sacrifices for them, how they were expected to serve the
twice-born with devotion and without grumbling? How Manu could demand
their names should be contemptible? If Shudras were well in the financial
position to pay the handsome fees to the Vedic priests for conducting the
sacrifices, what about the commands of Manu that prohibits Shudras from
accumulating the wealth?
2. They did not give attention to the changing geography and the
vast time span that Manuscript covers, which begins in Kuru-Panchal at
about 1000 BC and ends in Magadha region in Gupta era. The additions
and contradictions created by later authors to suit their time show the
journey of the Vedic religion that was gone through the several
adjustments, modifications, and contractions. Still, there was not sanity on
part of the scholars not to understand that the code written in certain region
couldn't have been applicable to all the regions of the country.
3. It is evident from Manusmriti that those all who did not belong to
the Vedic religion were Shudras to them, no matter even if they were
foreigners, ruling dynasties or indigenous clans! Manu also was aware that
the Shudras had temples and temple priests as a part of their religion,
however, the fact remained neglected. Though the Shudras were
designated with fourth Varna, as a class, they couldn’t have been part of the
Vedic religion. The fact is Vedic religion always was three-fold religion and
the fourth class always stood opposite to it with its own distinct religion and
faiths. The fact should have been noticed that only twice-born were the
Vedics and not Shudras!
4. There is no evidence to show that the Shudras were prohibited
from the education. The only fact is they were not allowed to educate in
Vedic literature, but since that literature was propriety of the Vedic religion,
prohibiting the people belonging to the other religion is not a surprise. There
is no evidence to show that the republics and Mahajanpadas of that time
belonged to or were under influence of the Vedic religion. Inscriptions,
Numismatics and literary evidence go against the very notion that there was
ever a Vedic Age in India prior to the Gupta period.
5. From historical data, beginning from Pradyota of seventh century
BC till medieval era, we do not find any Vedic rulers excepting a couple of
dynasties like Shunga and Kanvas. If we peep into the prehistory, that
mostly is written in mythological and propagandist form, though we come
across many so-called Kshatriya monarchs, the stories associated with
them hardly can prove their being real Vedic. For example, Kurus and
Satvatas do not seem to have any Vedic background though they are
portrayed as Kshatriyas in the final recension of Mahabharata. The stories
of Ramayana and Mahabharata have been used to propagate Vedic
religion with heavy interpolations. However, the social values those have
survived in the final versions of both the epics clearly show their non-Vedic
origin underneath. In fact the Manusmriti does not mention the social
customs those were common in Ramayana and Mahabharata, either to
praise or denounce.
6. Looking at above few indicative points, writing such hostile
commands to regulate a majority society and its obeying them without
raising any protest not only sounds ridiculous but doesn’t stand on the
historical grounds as well.
It is clear that the Manusmriti was being written during this vast span
of the time and one after another command against Shudras was being
added while regulating their religion, still, we do not find non-Vedic society
giving any heed to it!
Then the question will arise why the authors of the Manusmriti
took so much so pains to invent hostile commands against the
Shudras? Who were they?
From close scrutiny of the Manusmriti, it clearly appears that the
commands against Shudras were intended only to the people those were in
personal service of the twice-born, especially Brahmins. They could be
taken into the service on wages, bought out slaves or received in gifts from
the patrons of the Vedic religion.
These servants would be employed for conducting domestic chores
as well as for arming and tending the cattle. It is clear that these servants
would encamp close to the Vedic settlements. This closeness gave way to
an inevitable problem and that was illicit intermingling. Initially, they didn’t
mind the children born to Shudra woman but later on opposite too became
a routine and hence they tried to prohibit such adulterous practices
between twice-born and Shudras by formulating harsh laws and threats of
social degradation of the children.
However, Mr. Vi. Ka. Rajwade inn the preface of
‘RadhaMadhavVillasChampu’ states, such efforts proved futile as inter-
class adultery and marriages did not stop. This is evident from the fact that
though the children born out of such relationships were designated with
various low castes like Ugra, Ambashtha, Suta, Magadha, Vaideha,
Parashava etc. they hardly were in real existence. Panini does not mention
any of such caste born out of inter-Varna relationships. We can trace no
caste in India by these names though the general assumption is that the
caste system is very ancient and rigid since the beginning.
It only does mean that though the Smriti tried their best to maintain
original structure of their religion pure and unadulterated, they failed in doing
so. This may be the reason why in Mahabharata, especially in Geeta,
Vedics seems to be worried the most about the extinction of Varnashram-
dharma.
Making harsh laws, at the least on paper, against the menial class
that was dependent for subsistence on the twice-born, were easy. Being
scattered, dependent and already pauper they wouldn’t revolt. At the most,
they could leave the service and find other ways for survival to escape
humiliation. However, we do not find any instance of real execution of such
commands. What we have are few imaginary stories those are nothing but
the fine example of the exaggerations those were used to create moral fear
among this class.
It is important to note that Panini classifies the Shudras in two
categories, i.e. “Anirvasit” and “Nirvasit” (Ashtadhyayi, 2: 4-10)
Anirvasit means the Shudras those were taken into the private
services of the Vedics and Nirvasit means the Shudras those were
not related to the Vedic social system in any way. This categorization
of Panini throws the clear light on the enigmatic question, against
whom the code was really intended. The code was intended for the
Anirvasit Shudras those were in the services of the Vedic people.
Those who were Nirvasit Shudras had nothing to do with the code
and the social history supports this being a fact.
Also, Manu sometimes uses the term Arya to refer twice-born and
Anarya for Shudras. (Manu: 10. 66-68, 73) This distinction clearly indicates
towards the both religions and societies being independent. The religion of
the Aryas and Anaryas couldn’t be the one and the same. The religion of
twice-born Vedic and the Shudras couldn’t be the same. The ritualistic
practices of the Shudras are clearly mentioned by Manu. They used to go
to the temples and had their own priests whereas the Vedics conducted fire
sacrifices and upheld supremacy of the Vedic doctrine. There was nothing
in common between the both except they had to employ some people from
the Shudra community to assist them in their menial work. We must keep in
mind here that the population of the Vedics was always in the minority.
However, it seems from the annals of the history that the term
“Shudra” which originally was the name of a clan, excepting Vedics, stuck to
those all who were delving in this subcontinent. Even the foreign rulers of
later times also were termed as Shudras. To Vedics, those all, who were not
part of the Vedic religion were Shudras. The code was intended only to
those Shudras who were in their personal service. Whether or not the
Anirvasit Shudras remained in the existence, the term did not vanish. The
grave misunderstanding among the scholars seeded that the code was
intended for all the Shudras. None went back into the social and political
history to check whether it really was ever practiced or accepted by the
people.
Manusmriti, in fact, is overrated in regards to the caste system. It
has created undue havoc and hatred in the Hindu society. The fact is
overlooked that Manu did not codify the Caste but Varna system. The code
was intended to regulate Vedic religion and not of the Hindus. The scholars
did further damage by treating caste and Varna one and the same when it
was never a fact. Manu too uses the term Jati in the tenth chapter, though
in a different sense, while elaborating on the status of the children begotten
by inter-Varna marriages. Manu clearly means their status by using the
term Jati and not the professions upon which the present caste system is
based. The present rigid and immobile Jati system of Hindu society does
not find its origin in remote past. Jatis are not the product of Varna system
as is believed by some.
Varna and Jati are two distinct social systems belonging to different
two religions. Hindus did not used the term Jati in the same sense the way
Vedics or Manu used. It has been fatal to find origin of everything in the
Vedic sources to know the social history. The scholars have failed to
understand the Hindu religion does not at all find its source in Vedas and
Smritis. It has independent tradition and religious practices and
philosophies, to which Manu too evidences. The scholars heavily have
neglected various dictates of the Manusmriti those go contrary to their
postulations. They have forgotten that the certain words are used in the
different sense in different societies. Manusmriti is a work of many authors
of different times and all the while the authors knew very well for whom their
commands were intended. These are the scholars who failed to understand
this and thus couldn’t solve the riddle of the caste system.
We can safely conclude that the Manusmriti was intended to
regulate only the Vedic religion. The commands those appear against
Shudras were limited to the only those people who were non-Vedic and in
service of the Vedic people. Rest of the people, those were designated as
Shudras by the Vedics, in fact, belonged to the various clans and preserved
their identities with their ancestral clan names and occupations. The
donation inscriptions of the Satvahana era evidences this fact that the
people of those times too preferred to identify themselves by their
profession. Rather the term Shudra is absent wherever the people have
given their own identifications. The scholars should have noticed this bare
fact that the Vedic and Hindu religion are two distinct entities and they
shouldn’t have mixed the both!
The usage of the term Shudra for all those were not adherents of the
Vedic religion, which otherwise is completely absent from entire Rig
Veda, clearly indicates that the Vedic religion was new entrant in this
subcontinent carried in by the handful of the adherents. The term Shudra
was not a new invention but was the name of a tribe they came across first
and delved with for some generations! And yet scholars failed to
understand why this term could have applied later to all the tribes those
delved in the country from ancient times. They did not attempt to draw a
map of the advances of the Vedic religion in the country and its timeframe.
Had they done so, a crucial problem would have been solved.
However, the fact is the term Shudra have unnecessarily created an
inferiority complex in the Hindu society. Without even knowing that the term
Shudra finds no etymology in any language still it has cast an evil spell over
the society, so much so that the many communities have been jumped in a
rat race to find their origin in some or other Vedic Varna, to attain higher
social status, no matter whether Vedic religious authorities accept it or not!
Albeit, they will not acknowledge and Vedic status because Hindus are not
Vedic! Unless the religious difference is understood the present caste
problem will never come to an end.

*
4.

What is the Caste?

We have seen different opinions of the scholars on origin of
the caste system. We also have seen that there is no religious
sanction to the caste system. Treating Caste and Varna system
interdependent has not yielded any satisfactory explanation to its
origin. The scholars are ambiguous while defining the caste system.
What is the Caste is a principle question and we have to deal with it
first. It is clear that the Castes did not emerge from the Varnas.
Varna system is like a pyramid whereas caste system is occupation
based and the social status of the castes moreover depended on the
priorities of the society. For example Rarthakara (Chariot-maker),
potter, iron-smith etc. enjoyed higher status in the society when the
need of these professions was high. However, we can see that the
profession of the Rathakara did vanish as there was no or least
need. We can find many castes did evaporate with their professions
were replaced with other technologies or the need of their product lo
longer was felt. The social status too would depend on the social
needs of the particular professions. It was a practical system.
Still, erroneously scholars mixed both and have attempted to
find origin of the castes. They were bound to fail in constructing a
theory based on a false premise.
Caste is the profession that one adapts for his/her livelihood.
All the castes in India are having some or other traditional
profession. Many professions are now outdated as need of their
professional skills no longer are felt by the society. There are many
professions those have been replaced by the modern technologies.
Many professions are long eliminated, but the caste remains. Ironic,
but true fact is, with death of any profession death or change in the
profession the caste too should have been dead or changed even
now the way it was normal practice in ancient times.
 But our current stark reality is that this ease in caste change is
completely stopped though people change their professions now and
then. The stigma or pride of caste thrives, no matter whether one
adheres to the ancestral profession or not. How a flexible system
became rigid in course of the time is a question and we have to deal
with it from historical perspectives. Finding its root in Vedic scriptures
has already created a confusion and misunderstanding about the
castes.
We find some castes in Vedic system too, of the people born
out of inter-Varna marriages. Ayogava, Dhigvana, Pasrashara etc.
castes are the few examples those have been recorded in various
Smritis and epic literature. But we do not find existence of these
castes in the society today. No scholar has given proper attention to
this fact. These Vedic castes got eliminated in the course of the time
because either they changed the religion or somehow grabbed the
higher position in their religion. They did not suffer from the
discrimination and lower status for longer period as Vedic religion too
has been going through the internal adjustments over the time.
However, later, in an attempt to explain origin of the various
castes in Hindu religion, Inter-Varna marriages were thought to be a
prime reason while explaining the origin of the castes. However, this
explanation naturally failed because Hindu castes were never an
outcome of inter-Varna marriages. Nonexistence of any Vedic castes
today rather proves this proposition.
The word “Jati” has no certain etymology though it normally is
connected with the birth. The definition of Amar Kosha is descriptive.
It too, doesn’t help us much. Customs keep on changing with time
and groups are not solely formed based on similarities in customs.
Groups can form based on the similar professions within the same
region and society. We can call it as close affinity or brotherhood
among similar or equivalent professions.
There is no caste in India that doesn’t have (or had) any
ancestral occupational business. But originally occupations were not
always ancestral. It was solely choice of the individuals whether to
stick to ancestral profession or to leave it to join other prosperous
line of activity. We shall see in detail how the occupational guild
system of India offered such flexibility.
 Rather, because of this flexibility new talent would easily enter
in any profession and they have done wonders. The freedom of
occupational choice allows a person to enter the occupation of his
like and he can use his innovative talent, thus keeping the profession
alive and thriving with new innovations. This is why the monumental
wonders like caves, iron pillar, huge structures could see the light of
the day in their glory. There were many researches and scientific
innovations in tannery, metal work, wine making, weaving etc. that
helped Indian economy to grow at fast pace. If ever there was a
golden age in India, it was because of these innovative people those
were afforded with freedom of choice. The Tantra system that finds
origins in Indus civilization continued with its all strength till tenth
century AD.
People have mentioned their occupational castes (professions)
with pride in the donation inscriptions. Such castes include Halik
(Tiller), Sutar (carpenter), Sonar (Goldsmith) Lohar (Blacksmith) Teli
(oil producers), Vinkar (Weavers), Koli (Fishermen), Mali (gardener),
Charmakar (Cobbler) etc. It would appear that the donor castes were
rich enough to donate. They could accumulate wealth and spend it
as per their own choice.
Also we can see that many castes of early centuries of our era
no more exist, mostly because of the fusion with other caste, such as
of Tillers (Halik). They seem to have mixed later in Kunbi (land
tenant) class because of similarity in the profession. We have plenty
of the examples to show fusion and fission was an ongoing process
in the ancient Indian society. Hence there is no proof that the caste
system was rigid from its inception. Rather it was a natural institution
where plenty of freedom was accorded to the people. Many new
castes appeared and old were vanished as they become redundant
in contemporary times. For example, there was a caste “Odyantrik”
(makers of water-run-machines) which also was vanished during first
millennium.
We can safely conclude that the caste meant profession. The
names of the caste too clearly suggest professions the people
carried out for their livelihood. It was a flexible and horizontal system.
Status or dignity of the profession would naturally depend on the
financial or authoritative status the time would provide. There could
be up and downs in the statuse’ depending on the economic and
political circumstances. We are aware that many people lost their
professions during waning era of the Indus civilization as foreign
trade gradually came to halt and worsening climatic changes.
Naturally people turned to other professions for survival. However
evidences indicate that the independent invention of glass making
helped some to establish other profession (caste) for survival. No
one can claim, under the circumstances, that their ancestors always
belonged to the same caste to which they belong now! Hence the
pride of the caste is unnatural and unnecessary.
So there is no shred of the evidence to show that caste system
was rigid, birth based since its beginning and it was enforced upon
indigenous people by invading barbaric Vedic Aryans. It originated
with the professions those human being invented, innovated in
course of the time for survival. It has nothing to do with any religious
doctrine. Confusing caste system with the Varna system of the
Vedics has already done irreparable harm to Indian society.
This does mean that castes are nothing but professions. Caste
names too mostly are associated with the professions. The
profession was the identity of the person and it is evident from the
various inscriptions where the donors have mentioned their castes
with pride. The fourth class (Chaturtha Varna) remained as an
enigma to the people of the non-vedic origin. The fictitious stories
concocted by the Vedic priests to establish their supremacy over the
Hindus gradually started penetrating their psyche of the Hindu
people because of the constant propaganda. However, Hindus
remained close to their ancestral religion that had Pre-Vedic origin.
Now the question is apparent that how inequality among
various castes did start to plague Indian society? Most important is
how flexible caste system became rigid and birth based?

We can deduce from above that the caste system was a

practical and natural system that continued its course without
imposing any caste-based prejudices or restrictions. Shreni (Guild)
system of ancient India is a proof of this. The prestige in the society
of every caste (profession) depended on its economic and social
value. No religious commands could change the social order if it was
not acceptable and suitable to the people. We find no instance of
any revolt against the caste system in the history because from the
proofs it clearly seems that the system was self-invented and self-
imposed by the society. What were the conditions those forced
society to invent a completely new order that gradually became a
bondage on them?
Why all of sudden we find the emergence of the saints after
th
12 century those started protesting the caste system? Why in
earlier times we do not find any kind of resistance to this system
which is thought to be unjust and cruel since its origin? Why there is
only literature that talks against Vedas and their social Varna order
but not the castes prior to tenth century?
It is crucial to understand because unless done so we will be
unable to solve the present caste problems and eliminate the ever-
growing social strife.

Varna system

Though we have discussed that the Varna system is not

equivalent to Caste system, it will not be imprudent here to see its
definition and origin to make the distinction clear.
There has been no unanimous definition of the Varna as well
though it has divine sanction from Purushasukta, a late addition to
the Rigveda. From Dharmashastras it does not appear that the
ideology of purity or impurity was basis of the Varnas. If we go by
Rigvedic meaning of the Varna, it is verbatim ‘Color’. Classifying the
people in four classes seems to be original idea that was later
sanctified through the late addition to the Rigveda. Out of these four
Varnas, only three varnas were allowed to study the Vedas.
The Shudras, as a class or tribe, nowhere appears in the
Rigveda excepting Purushasukta. It would clearly mean that the
geography of the Rigveda was changed at the time of composition of
this Sukta. The people coming in the new land needed some term to
classify the people those were not part of their religion. So, this was
a class, though non-Vedic, but the part of the overall population.
Three Varnas, though interdependent, were watertight
compartments, where no entry would be possible from one to
another. However, there was a time when Kshatriyas claimed higher
status over Brahmins. There are many stories of such feuds, famous
being of Vishvamitra, between Brahmin and Kshatriyas.
Manusmriti already degrades Vaishya Varna treating them
equivalent to the Shudras. The Puranic proclamation, in kaliyuga
there are no Kshatriyas, seems to be outcome of these feuds.
We find the great consternation of the later preachers of the
Vedic religion while trying to fit non-Vedic heroes of the past in Vedic
order while attempting to find alternate explanations! In
Mahabharata, a story is concocted that the Kshatriya race, though
extinct, was recommenced by the Brahmins on the behest of
Kshariya women. The story goes farther by telling that the Asura
king Bali’ wife, Sudeshna, begotten sons from an expelled, blind,
ugly and immoral Vedic seer Deerghatama on behest of her
husband! (Mahabharata, 1.114)
Here, we find that the Mahabharata heroes, though
proclaimed Kshatriyas, Vedic interpolators have mischievously
shown them as a polluted product of Brahmin seed. They did not
lose any opportunity to defame the non-Vedic heroes like Bali and
Rama while doing so.
However, what we can deduce from such mythical concocted
stories is that the Vedic used ancient non-Vedic literature and their
heroes by polluting them with Vedic ideology for propagating Vedic
religion and Brahmanical supremacy. Jain and Buddhists too have
used the epical stories to propagate their religion, Vedic proved more
powerful in doing so! However, the fact seems that by fourth century
the Vedic religion was contracted to the extreme, so much so that,
there were no Kshatriyas and Vaishyas in their religion.
It would appear that the Vedics have labeled Brahmin women
too as ‘Shudra’ which have confused many scholars. The confusion
is unwarranted because the term Shudra is widely applied by the
Vedics without defining its scope. Brahmin women are Shudra only
because they are not initiated with Vedic rites. But for all purposes
the Brahmin women remains Brahmin, cannot marry any other
Varna.
So, in short, the Vedic religion gradually became the domain
of only Brahmins. The conversions to Vedic fold gradually stopped
by Gupta era. However, there are many claimants to Vedic varnas
from last millennium, but Vedic hardly had initiated the people to their
religion.
From scriptures, it clearly will appear that Vedic religion had
become moreover a “Single-Varna” religion long before the
Mahabharata reached its final recension. What we need is to
understand more about Shudras. We also need to discuss Dr. B. R.
Ambedkar’s book on this subject to get more insight.
It will be clear that in Vedic religion there are no castes.
They have the Varna and they identify themselves with Varna.
They have numerous subdivisions based on region, branch of
Vedas and so on, but the main identity is Varna and not the
caste. Hence it will be wrong to classify Brahmin, Kshatriya or
Vaishya in the caste system. As emphasized earlier, there is no
relationship between the Caste and Varna system.

*
 5.

“Who were the Shudras?”– A critique

“Who were the Shudras – How they came to be the
Fourth Varna in the Indo-Aryan society” is a scholarly written book by
Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, which was first published in 1946. While the
debate over original homeland of the Aryans was a highly debated
issue, Dr. Ambedkar found it necessary to probe in to the origins of
the Shudra Varna, which is considered to be lowest in the Vedic
social order, devoid of any Vedic ritualistic rights, and hence an
oppressed but largest part of the so-called Hindu society. The
common understanding was, the Shudras were the indigenous
aboriginal communities those were defeated by the invading
victorious Aryans, enslaved by them and were termed as Shudras
while making their social four-fold order in the process of
assimilation, while maintaining their supremacy by denying any
social, economic or Vedic religious rights to them.
Dr. Ambedkar proposed a new theory through this book to
explain origin of the Shudra Varna. The theory is outlined as under:
(1) The Shudras were one of the Aryan communities of the
Solar race.
(2) There was a time when the Aryan society recognized only
three Varnas, namely. Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaishyas.
(3) The Shudras did not form a separate Varna. They ranked
as part of the Kshatriya Varna in the Indo-Aryan society.
(4) There was a continuous feud between the Shudra kings and
the Brahmins in which the Brahmins were subjected to many
tyrannies and indignities.
(5) As a result of the hatred towards the Shudras generated by their
tyrannies and oppressions, the Brahmins refused to perform the
Upanayana of the Shudras.
(6) Owing to the denial of Upanayana, the Shudras who were
Kshatriyas became socially degraded, fell below the rank of the
Vaishyas and thus came to form the fourth Varna.
Dr. Ambedkar explains that the original Shudras were part of
the Indo-Aryan community and to devaluate them the code was
invented and was strictly applied. The other Shudras were not from
the Indo-Aryan communities, were racially different, but to widen the
application of the code to the innocent masses the term was used for
them also. He says that the original word “Shudra” lost its original
meaning of being a name of a particular community and became a
general name for a low-class people without civilization, without
culture, without respect, and without a position. He asserts that “If
the Hindu lawgivers had enough historical sense to realize that the
original Shudras were different from the present low-class people
this tragedy- this massacre of the innocents – would have been
avoided.” He laments that the code that was meant for the original
culprit Shudras is applied to the present day Shudras is unfortunate.
(See preface)
However, the fact is the word “Shudra” appears nowhere in
Rig Veda except Purushsukta which is, Dr. Ambedkar too is aware
of, a late addition to Rig Veda. Even if considered the Kshatriyas and
the Shudras were ranked equivalent, the fact is Purushasukta does
not mention Kshatriya while enumerating the Varnas originating from
the divine sacrificial body of the Purusha. Rather it mentions
Rajanya, not KSHATRIYA and both the terms have different
connotations. Both are not equivalent to each other. Rajanya is
mentioned as a second highest rank in the Vedic social order;
however, Kshatriya does not appear at all as a name of a class or
Varna. However, it seems Kshatriya was inserted later removing
Rajanya. That way, Purushsukta does not sanction any status to
Kshatriya…rather it does not acknowledge it at all!
Most importantly the term "Shudra" finds no etymology in
Vedic Sanskrit or any other language. Rather this term has no
meaning! In all probability the Shudra is corrupt form of some original
Prakrit word.
There are many feuds mentioned in Rig Veda, but the word,
Shudra, as a name of class or tribe, appears nowhere, though Dr.
Ambedkar says Shudra and Kshatriya were equivalent. Dr.
Ambedkar emphatically states that the Brahmins, out of hatred,
denied Upanayana of the Kshatriyas and hence they fell lowest in
the social order. At the least, the Vedas do not support this
assumption. Upanayana was not a ritualistic ceremony in Rig
Vedic period at all hence there could not arise any issue over
whether or not to deny Upanayana (Threading ceremony) of any
person of any rank.
The term Shudra finds no etymology. Dr. Ambedkar shows
how false etymologies were attempted to explain the words whose
original meaning was lost or forgotten by the half-educated people of
those times. (page 107) Dr. Ambedkar finds the word is a proper
name of a tribe or a clan to which historians of Alexander mention as
a “Sodari” (Sodrai) tribe Greeks came across in northwest India.
Aitareya Brahmana informs us that beyond Vindhya ruled various
Shudra tribes. Dr. Ambedkar also provides proofs of the mention of
the Shudra as a tribe in Mahabharata, Markandeya and Brahma
Purana.
The main question is who were the Shudras? Dr. Ambedkar
insists that the Shudras were Kshatriyas. Not only that, he states that
“The Shudras were so important a class of Kshatriyas that some of
the most eminent and powerful kings of the ancient Aryan
communities were Shudras.” (page 121)
To prove his statement, Dr. Ambedkar gives an evidence from
Mahabharata (Shanti Parva 40 . 38-40) where it is said that a Shudra
of the name Paijavana performed fire sacrifice (Yajna) and donated
heavily to the priests. Dr. Ambedkar has cross-checked 9 extant
manuscripts of the Mahabharata, southern and northern recessions,
and found different 9 variant readings of the word “Paijavana”. To
name a few variants, word “Paijavana” is found as pailavano,
Yailanamo, YaJane, Vaibhavano etc. in different editions. Also, only
six manuscripts agree that the person who conducted sacrifice was
Shudra. Rest three does not mention as such.
In fact there are only three verses that
mention this name, incident of Yajna, donation to the Brahmins and
Varna of the person in question. Dr. Ambedkar treats the “Paijavana”
reading as correct and yes, it is. So let us take it as an indisputable
fact that there was a Paijavana, a Shudra of ancient times,
performed sacrifice and Brahmins had no problem to perform the
sacrificial rituals for a Shudra. Dr. Ambedkar illustrates that in
preceding verses of the same chapter it is written that Shudra has no
right at all to possess wealth and is prohibited from chanting any
Vedic mantra. Dr. Ambedkar derives that Shudras of ancient times
weren’t denied the right to have conducted Yajnas for their benefit.
(126-127)
However, from Manusmriti, it clearly seems that sacrifices
performed for Shudras weren’t unknown. Manusmriti verse 3.178
proclaims that “The giver (of a Sraddha) loses the reward, due for such a
non-sacrificial gift, for as many Brahmanas as a (guest) who sacrifices for
Sudras may touch (during the meal) with his limbs.”
From this, it seems that though the Brahmins, those performed
sacrifices for the Shudras, were looked upon contemptuously; still there
existed the Brahmins who did that job risking degradation.
Also, Shudra kings were also not unknown to Manusmriti as
verse 4.61 proclaims that “ Let him not dwell in a country where the
rulers are Sudras, nor in one which is surrounded by unrighteous
men, nor in one which has become subject to heretics, nor in one
swarming with men of the lowest castes.”
This only does mean that even during the time of Manusmriti,
there were numerous Shudra Kings and some Vedic Brahmins those
performed sacrifices for them.
However, we have to discuss in more detail as Dr.
Ambedkar’s premise of the whole theory depends on this sole
incident mentioned in Shantiparva.
This is mainly because Dr. Ambedkar has connected identity
of Paijavana with a Rig Vedic The- battle- of- Ten Kings fame king
Sudasa who happened to be the son of Pijavana, hence also was
called Paijavana. According to Dr. Ambedkar Shudra Paijavana of
Mahabharata and King Sudas, who also was known as Paijavana,
are one and the same, hence Shudras were Kshatriyas.
Superficially logic may sound very convincing, but then we
have to look into the matter more seriously. First of all, Mahabharata
nowhere mentions the famous battle of the ten kings in the entire
bulk in which Sudasa had emerged as the celebrated hero after
defeating the Puru and other tribes. This has surprised many
scholars that why most illustrious war finds no mention whatsoever
in Mahabharata where most of the ancient stories are enumerated?
Dr. Ambedkar shows that in Vishnu Purana, there are at the
least two Sudasas, one is in the genealogy of Sagara and another
one in the Puru family. They obviously are different than the Sudasa
of Rig Veda. Dr. Ambedkar also gives the family tree of Sudasa, of
Rig Veda, where at one place he has inferred that Divodasa (father
of Sudasa) is Pijavana.
We should not forget here that the Mahabharata genealogies
are restricted to the regions where the distinct Puru/Kuru clan
(descendants of Nahusha) ruled and not the Sudasa. Hence, there
was no need to mention the Sudasa or his predecessors or
successors in the Puru/Kuru lineage in Mahabharata. Most probably,
the later writers of the Mahabharata had borrowed the names of
Yayati’s sons such as Puru, Anu, Druhyu (From Sharmistha) Yadu
and Turvasu (From Devyani) from the Rig Vedic tribal names to
bridge the missing or forgotten link in the genealogy. In reality, there
cannot be any possible relationship of these tribe-names with the
personal names of Yayati’s sons, unless they were borrowed directly
from the Rig Veda. If we try to assume that, the Yayati’s sons,
establishing different kingdoms, formed the Rig Vedic tribes, we do
not get any such support from the Mahabharata. Yayati had cursed
his other sons, except Puru, when they declined to transfer their
youth to him. (1.84, Mahabharata) However, the name Sudasa
nowhere appears in Mahabharata.
Dr. Ambedkar too asserts that Bharata tribe of Rig Veda
and Doushyanti Bharat of Mahabharata are distinct entities. (page
141)
Considering this, the Bharata/Puru lineage of Mahabharata
would seem to be rather fictitious, fabricated unless the Kurus
borrowed the Rig Vedic names right from personal names such as
Nahusha, Yayati (composers of some Rig Vedic verses) to tribal
names like Puru, Anu, and Druhyu etc. or the names were, too,
common to have been used by all other societies including
the Vedics and others in different original forms.
And most importantly, Sudasa, a king of celebrated fame, who
does not find any mention in any story, a passing reference to one
Shudra Paijavana in Mahabharata cannot be linked with Rig Vedic
Sudasa. However, Dr. Ambedkar states emphatically that this
Shudra Sudasa belonged to the illustrious line of kings of Bharata
tribe from which the country acquired name “Bharata”. (page 141)
We have seen earlier that Manusmriti knows there were
Shudra rulers and the Brahmins those performed sacrifices for
Shudras. Hence, the Mahabharata, which came to the final form only
after 3rd century, finding mention of one Shudra Paijavana, for whom
a sacrifice was performed, doesn’t come as a surprise. This
Paijavana need not to be a part of Indo-Aryan (or Vedic) community.
Even if he was a Shudra, either king or a wealthy person, from non-
Vedic community could have performed sacrifice if he had desired to
do so. Because some Vedic Brahmins were readily available to
perform the sacrifices for anybody in exchange of the heavy
donations even if they were despised by their own brethren.
Paijavana of Mahabharata too donated handsomely to the Brahmins.

So, Paijavana of Mahabharata and Paijavana Sudasa of

Rigveda are distinctly different personalities. We have more proofs to
make this point.
Dr. Ambedkar mentions a Rig Vedic feud that involves rivalry
between his two priests, Vashishtha and Vishvamitra. It is assumed
by the scholars as well that the rivalry between seer Vishwamitra
and Vasishtha was the major cause behind the battle of ten kings. It
is believed that Sudasa removed Vishwamitra from the post of chief
priest, hence; an anguished Vishwamitra deserted Sudasa to gather
forces against him. However, to our surprise, we do not find any
support to this assumption in Rig Veda as there is no mention of
such event taking place. In all probabilities, the war was fought over
religious issues as Rig Veda describes enemy, including the Purus,
as ‘ayajju’, non-sacrificers or over the political supremacy issue.
Hence there arises no reason why Brahmins would have treated him
(Sudasa) a “Shudra” by denying Upanayana to him or his
successors to proclaim them Shudras. And Mahabharata mentions
Paijavana, to whom Dr. Ambedkar identifies with Sudasa, as a
Shudra. However, there appears no feud in the Vedic literature that
would indicate rivalry between two classes, i.e. Brahmin and
Kshatriyas. Rather the stories concerning to such rivalries emerge in
late Brahmana period.
Hence, it would be the far-fetched statement that “…A Shudra
to be an Aryan, a Shudra to be a Kshatriya, and a Shudra to be a
king! Can there be a greater revelation? Can there be anything more
revolutionary?” (page 139) We must bear in mind that in Rig Veda,
Sudasa is nowhere mentioned as being Kshatriya, but mention is
simply as Rajan.
Hence, considering Shudra class as a part of the Indo-Aryan
community may not help us. Paijavana of Mahabharata can be
anyone with the identical name the way Puru, Anu, Druhyu etc.
appears in Mahabharata as personal names, which in fact are the
names of the tribes, not individuals, in the Rigveda. Hence,
comparing either genealogy with other does not yield any
satisfactory result. Shudras couldn’t have been part of the Indo-
Aryan club and their religion. The only fact, the way Dr. Ambedkar
puts forth, that there were two types of the Shudras, one being the
Shudras for whom the code was intended and enforced and the
other was completely outside of Vedic religious pale, enjoying their
own faiths, kingdoms and wealth.
The Shudra Varna does not appear anywhere in Rig Veda,
except Purushsukta, only because Vedic Aryans had not come
across this set of the people. Shudras were foreigners and unknown
to them. It was never part of their Indo-Aryan or Vedic society hence
it constituted of only three varnas. Dr. Ambedkar has deliberated on
this issue in his book and has concluded in support of his theory that
the two specific verses from Purushasukta is a forgery that sanctified
Chaturvarnya.
Still, in his opinion, there were only three Varnas in that period
and Shudras belonged to Kshatriya Varna. (page151-52).
We all are aware of the Vedic designs of falsities and recklessly
fabricating anything by interpolating to which they call sacred books.
It is clear that the Purushsukta is a later interpolation. Not only this
but Purushasukta too is not composed at once but there are
seemingly different layers, fabrication of different times.
But this is not enough to prove that the Shudras were
Kshatriyas of Indo-Aryan community. As stated earlier, the Vedics
had not come across this new set of the people while delving in their
own geography. The known people, whether friends or foes, find
mention throughout Rig Veda except for the Shudras. This term finds
no satisfactory etymology too in any language. It has no certain
meaning. Why were Indo-Aryans forced to invent a term to name so-
called degraded Kshatriyas which has no meaning? And how could
such people, those enjoyed the high status of Kshatriya accepted
such a degradation without wielding weapons?
Vedic religion came to India, not through the invasion. It came
by missionary sort of work by the refugees. They came across the
new people to whom they named Shudra or Shudra is a corrupt form
of an original name of the people. “Sodari” (Or Sodrai) mentioned by
Alexanders historians too is a corrupt Greek form of name of a tribe
that inhabited in North-West India. The Vedic refugees too first might
have come across this tribe first and this name stuck to all the
people residing in India, the same way as Hindustan name for the
entire country was used first only for the people living in Indus valley
that later was applied to the whole subcontinent.
Hence, Dr. Ambedkar’s theory gives us a foresight but does not
satisfactorily solve the problem of the Shudras. Indeed it raises more
questions.
It seems that the code that was intended against the Shudras
those were a menial class taken in the personal service to meet daily
needs. Rest of the people, though designated as Shudras by the
Vedics, were free from that code which is evidenced by Manusmriti
itself. In the later course of the time the scope of the code was
widened, but history does not prove that the Shudras heeded to it in
practical life. The only worst influence the code (especially Vedic
religious stories) seeded in the minds of the Shudras (non-Vedic
people) was a sense of birth-based inequality among them. So
much so that almost every caste from so-called Shudra class tries to
connect with Kshatriya origin to attain high social status. This is
the outcome of the sheer influence of Vedic mythical stories those
glorify Kshatryadom. Why this class lost its place from the Vedic
society has been attempted to explain through some mythical
stories, especially of Parshuram, but these stories are the product of
the quite late era and have the completely different explanation to
them. They also are not related to the era in question. The reasons
behind fabricating such stories are completely different and not
related to the Brahmin-Kshatriya rivalry, as Dr. Ambedkar suggests.
Hence, the proposition that the Shudras were Kshatriyas and
Rig Vedic Sudasa=Paijavana of Mahabharata, equation is not
tenable on the ground of the proofs those are available before
us. Rather it seems an attempt to elevate status of the Shudras
making them think once upon the time they belonged to the glorious
Kshatriya clan.
The fact, neglected by the scholars, remains that Kshatriya
Varna has no Rig Vedic sanction. It places Rajanya in the second
order, without mentioning Kshatriyas, though the term Kshatriya
appears at the least 9 times in the Rig Veda. Rajanya was removed
in the later course and was replaced with Kshatriya, but the term
Shudra did not vanish, which is not present at all in the rest of
the rig Veda.
Had Shudras being Kshatriyas and the Kshatriyas were
degraded in the later course, Kshatriyas wouldn’t find any place in
the Vedic social order. In fact, this change, Rajanya being replaced
with Kshatriya suggests more dramatic occurrences in the history of
Vedic people on which we will discuss in next chapter.

6.

The riddle of the Shudra, the Rajanya and the

Kshatriya!

The scholars have miserably been misled or it has been a

deliberate act on their part that they have tried to portray ancient
India through the Vedic eyes, without paying any heed to the stark
open facts those are present, known and yet neglected. Even the
inferences they have tried to derive from the Vedic texts are only to
prove their age-old notions, no matter how they are wrong. This is
why the picture of the ancient Indian society and Vedic society is
distorted for they did not consider them separate, independent
entities. It is clear from the available evidences that Shudra was a
tribe, located in North-West India and other tribes or people too were
present across the country, known by their various tribal or regional
names; still, they mix all while explaining the origin of the Shudras.
It also is agreed fact that the term Shudra nowhere appears in
the Rig Veda except Purusha Sukta (RV 10.90) and that this hymn is
the late interpolation in the Rig Veda. When did this interpolation
happened is open to the speculations, but the fact is the hymn in
question too went through many modifications/additions in course of
the time. It is believed that the hymn gave divine sanction to the
permanent four-fold social order to seed the inequality and injustice
amongst Hindu society.
The Sukta has two verses those describe how the four Varna
were originated. It is as under-
ा णोऽस्य मुखमासीद◌् बाह◌ू राज ◌ः कृत◌ः ।
ऊर◌ू तदस्य य ै ◌ः प ा◌ं शू ◌ो अजायत ॥१२॥
Here, we will just focus on the second highest class or rank that
is named as “Rajanya”. This would mean that the Rajanya was
standing second to the Brahmina. In the later Vedic literature the
trem Rajanya goes on gradually vanishing and is replaced with
Kshatriya. It is assumed by all the scholars and tradition that the
Rajanya and Kshatriya are interchangeable or that Rajanya and
Kshatriya are the equivalent terms.
What are the facts? Are really Rajanya and Kshatriya are the
equivalent or the truth is otherwise?
Rajanya word has been used in the Rig Veda and Atharvaveda
as generic class of the warriors. The Aitareya Brahmina it is said that
the Rajanya requests Kshatriya for a place at Devayajna (sacrifice
for gods). There are rituals mentioned in the Brahmana literature
where appears conflict between Rajanya’s and Kshatriya’s.
Kaushitaki Upanishad differentiates the Kshatriys and Rajanyas. Rig
Veda mentions several times of Rajanyas and Kshatras and the
terms are not interchangeable. Rajanya term is used for the kins of
the kings, nobles and scions. Shatapath brahmina too mentions
Rajputra, Rajanya and Kshatraputra separately. From these
instances it would be clear that the Rajanya and Kshatriyas were
different entities. In Avesta too, a contemporary book to Rig Veda,
the word Kshatriya and Kshatra appears as xšāyaθiya ("emperor")
and xšaθra ("realm") The word Rajan too appears in the old Persian
literature. (See Zamyad Yast 88-90)
This would mean that the term Kshatra and Rajanya existed
simultaneously in those contemporary (Vedic and Zoroastrian)
societies. The word Rajan would mean the King (elected or
otherwise) and Rajanya meant, accordingly different scholars, either
kinsmen of the Rajan (King) or the ruling (even ex) families from
which Rajan would be appointed or chosen. In short, Rajanya is
ruling power and Rajan is chosen from them to rule. In a tribal
society, though social classification was loose, the class of the
Rajanya was held equally important to priestly families or just lower
to them. The mention of this term as a class in the Purushasukta
would mean that the Rajanyas had emerged as a distinct social
class by the time of its composition.
The term Kshatra appears in the Rig Veda about 9 times. The
meaning of Kshatra means power. The power was based on the
greater control over the Jana and its territory. It can be seen the
relationship between Vish and Kshatriyas was not always cordial as
Kshatriyas controlled the Vish (Vaishya). In short, the Kshatra were
either feudal class or warrior class in general.
It will appear from the Vedic literature that the Kshatriyas (or
Kshatras) and Rajanyas were contemporaneous and formed two
distinct classes in the Vedic society. There were rivalries too
between these two classes. Rajanya would mean the kins of the ex
or present kings those only could claim the thrown. Kshatriya was a
class that would control the territories and would act as a middleman
between Vish and the King for collecting the tributes. We can easily
surmise that the Kshatriyas were the feudal lords of the tribal times
those would establish authority over land or cattle and would collect
taxes from the Vish. Rajanyas too possibly sometimes acted as
Kshatriyas, but their status was higher as evidenced by Purushsukta
itself. What most importantly we have to note here that the Rajanya
and the Kshatriya were not one and the same.
However, the main question remains and that is why Purush
Sukta does not mention at all the Kshatriya class? Instead, it
mentions Rajanya. It would mean that the Rajanya was a larger or
powerful society than of the Kshatriyas and they, being insignificant
in number and position, did not form a social class in the early Vedic
society where Rig Veda was composed.
However, we must note here that the Kshatriya varna has no
divine sanction as it is not mentioned in the Purushsukta and
equivalent literature. Considering Kshatriya second in the Vedic
social order has been a gross mistake of the scholars. There is no
explanation in the Vedic literature why Rajanyas were dropped and
Kshatriyas replaced in the so-called divine social order.
Though in later course usage of the term Rajanya seems
gradually vanishing, still Aitareya Brahmin frequently uses it. (e.g. AB
1.5.2) This would mean that till the time of compositions of the early
parts of the Brahmana literature the Rajanya class was well in
existence and enjoying the social status that was granted by the Rig
Veda.
Now, the question arises that why Rajanya class disappeared
from the Vedic society and for all ritualistic purpose and authority
Kshatriyas were replaced when they did not have any divine
sanction?
To understand this, we need to analyze the geographical shift
of the Vedic people and the new societies they came across and
their Endeavour to adjust in the new social environmental
circumstances while readjusting their religious rules.
It is now well-established fact that the geography of the Rig Veda
and the Avesta were in close vicinity. This does prove that the Vedic
society was originally established in the Afghanistan (most probably
southern part). The memory that Shatapath Brahmina preserves
goes like this:
“Videgh Mathava, residing on the banks of the Saraswati river,
accompanied by his family priest Goutama Rahugana and Agni,
symbol of Vedic culture, marched onwards. Through crossing the
northern mountains (Uttaragiri), drying the rivers and burning the
forests, he reached the Sadanira river. The legend tells that when
Videgh Mathava asked Agni, where he should make his abode, the
Agni told him to reside to the east of the river.” (SB 1.4.1, 14-17)
The myth, preserved by Brahmana, clearly indicates that from
the banks of Saraswati, a group of the Vedic people had marched
towards a river to find refuge. The group marched through the
northern mountains; those could only be Hindukush and rivers
flowing through that region, to reach the uninhabited place to settle.
Modern scholars normally try to equate this river with Gandaki
that flows from Nepal through India, finally feeding Ganga. However,
from the Mahabharata’s accounts on this river, it could not be
Gandaki but some other river flowing through Gandaki and Sarayu.
Amarasinha of Amara Kosha asserts Sadanira to be synonym of
Karatoya River, flowing through north of Bengal. Anyway, Sadanira
means ‘abounding in water’, which can be applied to any river that is
full of abundant water. The myth also indicates that the area across
the river was swampy and inhabitable.
Thus, the invasionist scholars of those times from this myth had
assumed Aryan expansion from west to the east, occupying the
lands and regions towards Gandaki River of Bihar (or Bengal). This
is not tenable because to reach there one cannot pass the whole
range of the Himalays. But to reach Sindh region, one has certainly
cross the Hindukush Mountain. The myth is addressing the
Hindukush with the word ‘Uttargiri’ and not Himalayas. The river
Sarasvati mentioned here should not to be confused with a mythical
Sarasvati river, but it was the river of the same name still flowing in
southern Afghanistan. Had it been a victorious march, as some
scholars suggest, towards Sadanira that located in Gangetic region,
they needed not to reside in uninhabitable area because those
regions were already populated as it is evidenced by the
Archaeological findings.
Videgh Mathava and his companions might have deserted their
original homeland to find new habitat because of the constant
struggles with Zoroastrian religion. The abundant mentions of the
Deva-Sura wars in Brahmana literature clearly indicate their vicious
enmity that might have resulted at some point of time in expulsion of
the Vedics and hence Videgh Mathava and his companions
abandoned their original habitat in middle of the night with handful of
the companions. Crossing Hindukush they entered north-eastern
parts of the India to find a place for the settlement. They found such
place near a river to which they named Sadanira and on its banks, in
marshy-swampy region, they camped. This must have been the
north-west part, Sindh, of India, where the historical tribe of Shudras
already dwelt.
Here we get many historical as well as epical accounts that
among others the tribe Shudra was also located at north-western
part of India. Alexander’s historian Diodoros, who had accompanied
Alexander in his expedition to India, notes of a tribe
named “Sodrai” (Greek corrupt form of the Shudra) which resided in
Sindh region. Alexander seems to have built a city naming after him,
Alexandria, on the banks of a river.1 Ram Saran Sharma confirms
that “There is no doubt that Sudra existed as a tribe in the fourth
century BC.” 2
Mahabharata records that the Shudra tribe along with Abhira
tribe from north-west participated the Great War. (Mahabharata 6-
10.65) Also the same Shudra tribe finds independent mention in the
list of peoples conquered by Nakula during his victorious march
before the coronation of Yudhisthira. Gian Chand Chauhan states,
“The plethora of references to the term Sudras along with the
Abhiras show that the Sudras was an old tribe flourishing at the time
of the Great War in the sapta-sindhava region.” 3
Now it should be clear that the Shudra was a tribe. It was
located in the north-west regions of the country and their immediate
neighbors and alleys were Abhiras. Also it should make clear that
the Shudra was never a class but a tribe that dwelt in India along
with several tribes like Surasenas, Sibis, Nishads, Panchals, Kurus
and so on.
The Shudra tribe, being inhabited in north-west part of India, in
Sindh region, in all probabilities these were the people Vedics came
across first and decided to live within their territory.
We know from the Rig Veda that the Vedic peoples known
geography was limited to the south Afghanistan. Earlier they were
just aware of the major river Indus and its few western tributaries, but
their knowledge of the vast regions beyond Indus was limited and
was of hearsay sort. The tribes like Shiva, Bhalanasa, Vishanin
appearing in the episode of the battle of the ten kings were located
at north-west of the subcontinent. There is no slightest mention of
any ancient tribe that dwelt on the eastern side of the Indus.
However, it seems that, after crossing the Indus, they came across
the region they decided to settle was occupied by the Shudras,
completely unknown to them. Hence, the term Shudra appears
nowhere in rest of the Rig Veda.
How Shudras accommodated the Vedics in their territory is a
matter of speculation. However, the refugees could not afford to be
hostile with the hosting countrymen. The number of the Vedics those
found refuge here could not be much. Had they waged war and
acquired their territory they did not need to reside in the marshy and
swampy land. There is no mention of such war between Shudras
and Vedics in any of the Vedic literature; so, the Shudras might have
accommodated them peacefully, and it may be the reason why they
mentioned them in the Purushasukta.
Here, let us conclude that the handful of the Vedics came to
India and found refuge in the territories of the Shudra tribe. Looking
at their limited knowledge of geography, they addressed all those
beyond the region of Shudras with the same term though later they
later came to know of many tribes or Jana those were settled
elsewhere as well. (Hindustan name too emerged from the River
name Sindhu, as foreigners initially didn’t know the lands beyond
that river. The name given to the limited geographical area became
name of the entire subcontinent and religion.)
Here, we come to the solution of our main riddle, why the term
Rajanya instead of Kshatriya and why Shudra came to be the fourth
division of the society! Let us solve it as under-
1. Being small in number, residing in a separate village or
two, a settlement, where they lived on the mercy or friendship of
the Shudras those resided around in their independent
settlements.
2. Whatever portions of the Rig Veda and other literature they
had brought with them were rearranged, classified and then the
later additions started.
3. Purushasukta clearly indicates, from its language and
mention of the seasons, that this composition was made when
they had set foot in India, as Max Muller suggests, it is entirely
modern in its character and diction. (‘A History of Ancient Sanskrit
Literature’, by F. Max Muller, Pub.: Williams and Norgate, , 1859,
p. 557)
4. In the Purushsukta, Rajanya appears in the second rank
because in all probabilities, besides priests, Rajanyas were larger
in the number those had joined this expedition. The Kshatras
were completely absent or very meagre in number; hence there
was no need to assign them any position in the social order.
5. Vedics gave Shudras the fourth place, not to demean
them, but to make a cosmic social order without whose mention it
would be incomplete, though they knew very well that these
people are different, racially as well as by religious faith.
Purushasukta indicates that though the Shudras are mentioned
as a part of the cosmic society, they are not at all the part of the
Vedic society. This is evident from the verse:
ा णोऽस्य मुखमासीद◌् बाह◌ू राज ◌ः कृतः
ऊर◌ू तदस्य य ै ◌ः प ा◌ं शू ◌ो अजायत
In this verse it has made very clear that “The Brahmana was
his [God’s] mouth, of both his arms was the Rajanya made. His
thighs became the Vaishya, from his feet the Shudra was produced.”
The feet didn’t become the Shudra, because the composer of the
hymn knew very well that the Shudras were not part of the Vedic
community, though an important society. The distinction was very
clear to them.
6. The Yajurveda declares that “ शू ायावसृ ेताम ” (Shudra
and Arya were created.) [Yajurveda 14/30] Here also there is clear
distinction between Arya (Vedic) and Shudra. Both has been
created separate and that the Shudras weren’t Aryas. Here we do
not find any contemptuous view about the Shudras. The only
probable reason is at the time of composing these hymns Vedics
were on good terms with the entire Shudra tribe.
7. In fact it does not appear that the purpose of the
Purushasukta was to make permanent stratification of the social
order. Even the term “varna” does not appear in this hymn.
8. The Vedics, for they were few in number, must have in
need of the servants and maids to assist them in farming, cattle
tending and household work. They had to hire such people in
need from the surrounding Shudra community. From Brahmana
literature, it appears, the Vedics in India too preferred to delve in
the villages. They avoided town. The menial force they hired too
must have been living in the separate settlements, besides the
Vedic Villages.
9. Manusmruti, as mentioned in the last chapters, mentions
of the Shudra kings and their domains. Aitareya Brahmina
mentions of the Shudra kings those ruled beyond Vindhya
Mountain. (AB 7.13-18) However Mahabharata mentions of the
Shudra tribe together with Abhiras. This would mean that by the
time of early Manusmriti, the Vedics, for lack of their knowledge,
erroneously considered all other tribes as Shudras. By the time of
Mahahabharata, Vedics could make a distinction between other
tribal or Jana names and Shudra tribe.
10. During this vast span of the time the term Rajanya was
gradually dropped because the original Rajanyas lost their identity
in the course of the time. The Kshatriya emerged as the second
ranking class, though it had no Vedic sanction. The Kshatriyas, it
clearly seems, were later converts to the Vedic faith while it also
became an epithet to address warriors of the local populace, no
matter if not converted.
11. From Shudra’s tribal kingdom, Vedic spread to promote
their religion, gained royal patronage of the Kuru’s and Panchal’s
to begin with and converted some to their fold. (See “The
Rigveda, trans. By Griffith, preface.) The first recension of the
Manusmriti seems to have been composed in Kuru-Panchal
region to which they named “Brahmarshi Desa”. By this time,
Rajanya class had lost all the significance and Kshatriya became
a synonym of valor and the authority.
12. The Vedics, till Brahmana era, and new recruits to the
Brahmin fold, continued with the same Vedic life style. They
preferred villages and took services from the needy of the
surrounding regions. They, it clearly seems, habitually continued
the practice of calling them Shudra. Rather Shudra seems to have
become a general term to be used for the servant class.
13. By this time, with the addition of the new recruits, the
number of the Vedics and their needs had grown. To meet them
they naturally required more serving staff, which was met with the
gifts of the slaves or hired workmen. They resided in the Vedic
villages, though in independent colonies.
14. As Mr. Vi. Ka. Rajwade (Preface,
RadhaMadhavaVilasachampu) states, because of the close
contacts with the menial class, rise in the cross illicit relations
were an inevitable outcome. They did not know initially how the
social treatment be given to the children begotten of such
relationships. In the beginning they assigned Varna of father or
mother to accommodate these children in their religious fold.
However, Vedic soon realized the harm it would cause to their
religious order and later started denouncing such relationships
including cross marriages. They started designating the children
low social status by creating new castes depending on the nature
of the marriage or relation. They started enforcing many
humiliating restrictions on them in an order to maintain purity of
their religion and social order. Rajwade further states that, though
Vedics did attempt to stop such illicit relations they proved futile.
 15. Smritis are evident of this fact that all the restrictions,
those sound humiliating and cruel sometimes, were on the class
that was employed (or the persons gifted by the patrons) in their
service. Except in Sindh region there never was any other Shudra
tribe. Though Vedic habitually addressed their servants as
Shudras, it wasn’t and couldn’t be the case. People from other
tribes too must have joined their services or people from any tribe
could have been gifted to them by the patrons, to all for sake of
the convenience, collectively, they called Shudras. The fact was
always otherwise and is evident from the Vedic scriptures too!
16. The Vedics assigned Kshatriya and the Vaishya status to
those who were indigenous warriors or trading/farming people,
who had officially entered in their fold. Those all, who had not
embraced Vedic faith, were Shudras in their eyes. By this time it
seems Shudra had become a derogatory term to them to use
against those all who despised or avoided their religion. The
foreign tribes and rulers too were Shudras to them as is
evidenced by the Manusmriti and Angavijja. We can understand
how this could have happened. The Shudras (their working class
that could have been from any particular tribe.) daily association
had caused tremendous harm to their social structure and hence
had became despicable and yet unavoidable to them!
17. The so-called Shudras, though not belonging to the
Shudra tribe at all, enjoyed their titles and traditional ways of the
life with the faiths they had nourished from ages. It were Vedics
who termed all those who were non-Vedics, hostile to the Vedic
religion, as Shudras. They offered their respects to only those who
were sympathetic towards their religion but had not embraced
their faith. Stories enumerated by Mahabharata of Vena, Nahusha
etc. tell us the fact that they were not ready to accept Vedic faith
and hence were killed by the Vedic Brahmins. These may be
fabricated stories, created in an order to establish their superiority,
but they suggest their hostilities towards the kings too, who did
not accept or patronized their religion.
19. The term Kshatriya was offered to only those, who either
had became Vedic or patronized their religion. This way, we can
 find neither Solar nor Lunar race was Kshatriya in origin. Either
the title Kshatriya was used for them suo motto, to please them or
to those who had converted to their religion. Whatsoever the case
may be, we find several stories of Kshatriya-Brahmina rivalries
because the new recruits to that fold, especially kings, desired
upper hand in the social religious order. The Brihadaranyaka
Upanishada goes to the extent by declaring the Kshatriya born
first and hence superior over Brahmin. It declares that the
Brahmina should take lower seat in the Rajasuya sacrifice. (BU
1.4)
From above, it will be clear that how Rajanya finds place in
the Purushsukta because then thee didn’t exist any Kshatriya in
early Vedic community which travelled to India. They had
Rajanyas and a Rajan (probably in form of the Videgh Mathava),
hence Rajanya became a part of divine body. They made the
Shudras a part of the society but not considered them as the part
of the Vedic order, because they were not Vedics. Rather the
Vedics depended on their mercy and assistance they tendered for
their survival. It is very much possible that the Vedics lived in the
Shudra kingdom for 3-4 generations to reorganize themselves
before they marched out in the eastern regions to spread their
faith.
They applied the term Kshatriya, a rare term used in Rig Veda,
to the new converts (or patrons) hailing from the royal families and
warriors and glorified the term so much so that even today Indian
populace is crazy about it, though the term was unimportant to the
early Vedics for the term had no place in the divine order that was
proclaimed by much-hyped Rig Veda.
As we have seen, it should not be forgotten that the term
Kshatriya is not equivalent to Rajanya at all. Both were distinct
classes in the original Vedic society when located at their original
homeland.
And let us not forget that in later course there remained no
initiated Kshatriya as the Vedic religion. The concocted stories of
Parashurama and Nanda were created to explain absence of the
Kshatriyas in Vedic religion. Why warriors abandoned Vedic religion
is matter of speculation now. May be that the hereditary nature of
Varna system could not produce warriors in every generation and
non-Vedic warriors could have replaced such few initiated Kshatriyas
hence there remained no Kshatriyas in Vedic religion.
However, during Gupta era, it seems, Vedic preachers glorified
Kshatriyadom, assigned that status to the heroes of ancient past, no
matter whether they were Vedic or not. Same time they cunningly
created the stories that, after annihilation of the Kshatriyas at the
hands of Parashurama, they were born to Kshatriya women by
Brahmin seed. This was sheer supremacist egotism that forced the
Vedics to fabricate such illogical false stories.
The journey of the Vedic religion in India has to be closely
analyzed to know the facts, which was avoided or neglected by the
earlier scholars. Unless the entry of the Vedicism in India and its
methodological spread is understood, the riddles of our present
social structure, which is largely based on the self-nourished myths
and sheer misunderstandings, cannot be solved.

Ref.:
1. The Invasion of India by Alexander the Great-As described by
Arrien, Q Curtius, Diodoros, Plutarch and Justin, edited by J.
W. Mcrindle, page 354
2. Sudras in Ancient India: A Social History of the Lower Order
Down to Circa A.D. 600 by RS Sharma.
3. Some Aspects of Early Indian Society, by Gian Chand
Chauhan, page 54.
 8
Rise and fall of the “Shreni” system and the
Castes!

All the students of Indian history are aware of the caste

(occupational) guilds, called as “Shreni” or “Nigam” those used to
operate like today’s Chamber of Commerce or trade/manufacturers
associations. The members of these guilds would manufacture the
specialty articles, provided services and would conduct local,
interstate and foreign trade. Nigams were allowed to issue coins too,
which abundantly have found in excavations from Gandhar region to
south India. Rather in Janpada era till Gupta era the issuance
authority of the coins were the guilds. Every guild had their own
unique trademark associated with the symbol of their kingdom
(Janpada) or Gana’s. (Republics) Rather Shrenis were economic,
socio-political dominant segment of ancient India that survived till
12th century AD.
Let us first understand what Shrenis were. Every Shreni was an
association of artisans, merchants or traders. The traders engaged
in the trade of specific articles or goods would form their Shreni.
People residing in the same area and engaged in same occupation
naturally cooperated with one another to achieve common goals.
The Shreni of artisans existed for a particular group of persons
engaged in the same vocation to which today we call castes. There
are mention in various scriptures and various epigraphs that there
were Shrenis of the artisans like blacksmiths, goldsmiths, weavers,
carpenters, bamboo-craftsmen, cobblers, makers of ivory articles,
metal workers, miners, Jaggary producers, potters and so many
other professions.
The merchants and craftsmen needed allied services like
transportation also. Goods used to be transported by bullock carts,
loaded on the backs of the oxen or donkeys or ships. The
destinations could be far off. For example Al Masudi informs us how
goods were brought to Cheul harbor loaded on thousands of oxen.
Some transporters were transporting specialty goods, such as salt,
food grains, wood etc. Other services included security providers to
the inland caravans. Variety of service based occupations too
emerged during this vast span of time to meet the needs of the
craftsmen and merchants. Such service providers too formed their
own guilds.
Romila Thapar informs us that "The ancient sources frequently
refer to the system of guilds which began in the early Buddhist
period and continued through the Mauryan period. ….Topography
aided their development, in as much as particular areas of a city
were generally inhabited by all tradesmen of a certain craft.
Tradesmen's villages were also known, where one particular craft
manufacturing was centred, largely due to the easy availability of raw
material.”1
However the origin of the Guild system can be traced back in
Indus times. The purpose of the guild (Shreni) was to regulate the
manufacturing and service standards, ethical codes for the member
artisans, prices of the crafts, quantity and quality, training to the
artisans etc. which could ensure smooth and timely production. The
major duty of the Adhayksh, Shreshthi or Jyetthaka (President of the
Guild) to represent the guild in the Royal Court for any grievances
about taxation or any other matter related with the supplies. The
Guild would work as an assembly where specific problems related to
their member artisans or business could be discussed and solved. If
any criminal/unethical elements regarding the service or
manufacture detected, the Guild could fine or banish the member
artisan from the guild. The verdicts of the Shreni could not be
challenged even in the Royal courts. Every Shreni had a respectable
status in the society and in the Royal houses and normally no
decision in connection with the production or trade of the crafts
would be taken without consulting Shreni’s.
Unlike later “Independent Village System”, till tenth century AD
manufacturing was almost centralized. This was ideal system to
make mass productions of the articles or metals. From Jataka we
know about the villages of bamboo Craftsmen (Burud) and other
such 36 villages dedicated to mass manufacturing of speciality
goods. In Maharashtra, from copper plates and rock inscriptions, we
know about the villages of the Cobblers, Jaggary makers, Weavers
etc. The artisans, specialized in certain crafts, together would
form Shreni, elect their President and other office bearers to
represent them to protect their professional interests and account
keeping as Craft guilds would provide loans or accept deposits from
the member craftsmen and the public. The Kings too have seen to
deposit their money on interest with the guilds. Rishabhadutta, Son-
in-law of Nahapan, too had invested in two guilds of the weavers.
Mandsor (old Dashpura) inscription of Kumargupta (I) details the
activities of the Guilds of those times. According to inscription, the
control of the manufacturing and trade was the domain of the guilds.2
Merchant guilds would distribute the goods in local markets as
well export in the other regions or foreign countries. Craftsmen could
sell their goods individually as well through guild. Especially
Merchant Guilds had the authority to mint the coins and issue them.
All the coins we have from the 4th Century BC onward were issued
by the merchant Guilds and not the king. Mauryan kings too didn't
issue their coins. In a way Merchant and craft guilds were the
backbone of Indian economic stability and prosperity. There are
instances where we find that the Guilds even lent the King in the
time of distress.
The post of the President (Shreshthi or Jyetthaka) of the guild
was not hereditary. There are instances where the Shreshthi’s have
been removed by the member artisans or merchants. Moreover, it
seems that the mobility from one profession to another was
frequent. It was because the vocational training was made
available by the Guilds to meet needs of the additional
workforce. The people who wanted to raise their economic status
by entering into more flourishing businesses could get easy training
and thus entry. Even local artisans would travel far afar in search for
better opportunities. Depending on the demand, supplies of the raw
material or political unrest, there could be rise and fall in all or the
selective occupations. The craftsmen either would acquire other
vocational training and change the profession by joining another
guild or try to sustain in wait of the better days.
Guilds would donate to the temples or Buddhist or Jain
sanctuaries. Mathura inscription (2nd century AD) refers to the two
permanent endowments of 550 silver coins each with two guilds to
feed Brahmins and the poor from out of the interest money.
A Nashik Inscriptions (2nd century AD) records the endowment
of 2000 karshapanas at the rate of one percent (per month) with a
weavers' guild for providing cloth to bhikshus and
1000 karshapanas at the rate of 0.75 percent (per month) with
another weavers' guild for serving light meals to them. Apart from
these more epigraphs and inscriptions are mentioned as evidence in
this regard. In addition to this the guilds engaged in works of Charity
as well. Guilds worked to alleviate distress and undertook works of
piety and charity as a matter of duty. They were expected to use part
of their profits for preservation and maintenance of assembly halls,
watersheds, shrines, tanks and gardens, as also for helping widows,
the poor and destitute. We have epigraphical proofs from
Maharashtra that shows the craftsmen, like cobbler, Potter, Tillers
(Halik) etc. have donated in an individual capacity to build arches or
water tanks for the Buddhist caves. This would mean that the
artisans were in prosperous financial conditions.
So much so was the power of the craft and merchant guilds
that Kautilya advises King that he should ensure that the heads of
the guilds are not united. However, there is no evidence that the
guilds ever tried to capture the political power ever, but they
maintained their dominant position in the politics.
The position of the guild can be explained in different five
stages doweling from 600 B.C. to 1200 A.D. in the perspective of
socio-economic environment of ancient India.
I. Pre-Mouryan Period (600 – 320 B.C.)
II. Mouryan Period (320 -200 B.C.)
III. Post-Mouryan Period (200 B.C. -300 A.D.)
IV. Gupta Period (300 - 600 A.D.)
V. Early Medieval Period (600 – 1200 A.D.)
In these eras Guilds transformed, prospered, declined and
vanished from the socioeconomic scene. Roots of the Guild
or Shreni system can be traced back to Indus era, for it was a
manufacturing and trading community. From the Indus seals we can
guess that the seals were meant to inform the origin and name of the
goods and the price. The later coins of Mahajanpada era too were
incorporated certain information in symbolic form, such as, the name
of the mint, issuing guild etc. As Indus civilization declined, the guild
structure of those times too must have been disintegrated, becoming
less powerful and local. Later we come across Mahajanpada era or
pre-Mauryan period when Guilds seem to have come into the
prominence and continued to be dominant till the end of Gupta
period.
However, Post-Mouryan Period (200 B.C. -300 A.D.) saw a stiff
rise in the Guild system in Indian economic scenario. Santanu
Mahapatra in his essay states that-
“ In this period north-western and western part of India
controlled by the Indo-Greeks, Sakas, Kushanas, and Parthians. The
Mourya Empire disintegrated into a number of kingdoms and tribal
republics. This led to the slackening of state control over
administration and economy and the guilds assumed more power
and influence that developed the closer commercial contact with the
Roman Empire. The discovery of the north-eastern monsoon,
ascribed to Hippalus, in C. 46 A.D. gave impetus to mid-sea voyage,
reducing the time of journey, minimizing the danger of piracy and
also obviating the need of the service of middlemen in Indo-Roman
trade. Then Indian mercantile activity also extended to central Asia
and China. India was the main exporter of the luxury items to the
Roman Empire and earned huge profits. A large number of coins
of this period those of the Indo-Greeks, Sakas, Parthians,
Kushanas, indigenous rulers and tribal republics, cities and
guilds have been found, some in hoards. It indicates a greater
circulation of money-economy and fairly advancement of trade and
commerce, in which guilds must have played a significant role.
‘Milindapanho’ (ed. Trenckner, 1880) refers to a number of
occupational guilds, their number being much greater than the early
period.”3
In the Gupta era too, guilds, whether merchant or craft,
remained prominent, but it seems that the authority to issue coins
was withdrawn. We do not find coins issued by the guilds during
Gupta era. Rather banking activities, accepting deposits and
advancing loans, of the guilds gradually shifted towards select
temples. Though the artisans and merchants, along with farmers
were prosperous in this era too, foundation of the guilds started
weakening. Post-Gupta era saw the rise of feudal lords and various
independent powers, thereby disturbing the political stability that
India had enjoyed even under foreign rule. Constant conflicts
between regional rulers made it difficult to smoothly operate the
trade.
Later, we find series of Islamic invasions in North-west India
causing further political instability and disturbance in trade and
commerce. “As a consequence, people’s confidence in these
institutions must have waned. There prosperity and affluence
an account of which they commanded social status must also
have diminished. Thus political upheaval exercised its worst
effect on the guild organization.” thus states P. C. Jain. 4
In a way Samantas or feudal lords gradually became more
dominant for the need of the time to fight out aggression.
It diminished the earlier social status of the Guilds and their
economy. The natural imact on the members was obvious. The
status’ of the occupations too declined to some extent. Also the
taxation structure was changed putting a heavy burden on the
craftsmen, merchants and so the guilds.
“Arthuna inscription of Parmara Camundaraja, dated 1079 A.D,
also gives a list of taxes levied on different trade and crafts. On the
account of these taxes, the guilds of merchants and traders were
losing prosperity in the preceding centuries. This prevailed from their
donations which clearly give the impression that they were poorer.
To keep up their old reputation of donations and defraying there
expenses views of a region federated themselves and pooled their
resources” so informs us Mr. Mahapatra.
By the tenth century AD the guild system witnessed
tremendous decline in the trade, which naturally hampered
production of all the crafts. In a way it was like the situation of great
recession. Craftsmen soon started deserting their centralized
workplaces. This was exact situation which had caused decline of
the Indus Civilization. But political instability, constant wars within
local rulers and Islamic aggressors were not the only reason behind
disintegration of the Guild system. Another series of natural
calamities begun in 11th Century AD…and that were famines.

FAMINES

From the records we know that the year 1033, 1042 and 1052
witnessed nationwide dire famines causing complete disruption in
trade and distress in the society. Series of regional famines followed
almost in every alternative 3 years. In the year 1325 -1351 great
famine befell in Gangetic regions and elsewhere including
Maharashtra. The series of the famines continued till 1630. Within
this period India suffered heavily from over 250 famines.
The contemporary travelers and historians have given the
piercing accounts of the famines. For example Badouni states about
the distressful situation he witnessed during 1555 AD famine of
North India. He says, “I witnessed men eating human corpses like
cannibals. The sight of the hungry faces was so pitiable that hardly
one could bear it. …all the region had become a desolate desert
and no farmer was left behind to look after the farms.” Abul Fazal of
Ain-E-Akbari supports this with the statement that, “people were hell
bent to eat each other!”
About 1596 famine of North-West Fazal states, “men ate men
and all the streets were littered with dead bodies.” A Dutch trader
Van Twist, various saints like Tukaram and Ramdas have described
the calamities the nationwide great famine of 1630 brought on the
people. Morland states about south that, “…because of this famine a
generation of Deccan remained pauper.”
From the descriptions, though they are scanty, scattered and all
the famines have not been properly recorded, we can get a picture
what people would have suffered from 11th century onwards till 1630.
People used to abandon their villages, towns in search of the food,
would sell their kids, properties and even the titles at throw away
prices. Kavindra Parmanand in “Shivbharata” states, “during the
famine, food became costlier than gold.”In a way the social structure
too got disintegrated because of constant onslaught of the nature. 5
 A grave impact on the economic and social structure was
inevitable. The craft guilds and merchant guilds disintegrated and
vanished completely under the Islamic rule and unstable grave
climatic conditions. Inland trade became more risky because many
tribes and even the earlier service-providing communities turned to
robberies. The constant onslaught of the famines reduced the
farmers to the pauper state. Naturally demand to the artisan’s crafts
too drastically declined. The farmers, artisans and service providers,
those had enjoyed prosperity during the golden era for more than
1500 years, gradually became destitute and helpless.
Let us not forget here that the vocation means caste. Earlier
caste mobility was easy as there were tremendous opportunities and
the Guilds were their strong support. With new innovations or new
inventions, new castes (vocations) would emerge and the guilds too
used to be formed to safeguard their interests. The economy decides
social structure and its culture. The economic prospe rity provides
more freedom to the people. Earlier Guilds used to be in a
commanding position in the political system. Artisans and service
providers of every kind enjoyed a reputation since they were well-off,
rich and backbone of the prosperous economy. But with changing
political and economic scenario, they too lost their glory.
Unfortunately, none of the scholar has taken into the
consideration the significance of the decline and fall of the Guild
(Shreni) system while proposing their theories on the Caste system.
They have wrongly considered that the rigid, birth-based caste
system is in existence and practice since antiquity. It was not the
case. No scholar ever bothered to look into the social and economic
history of India while theorizing origins of the caste system; hence it
didn’t occur to them that the hereditary nature of the caste system is
a product of drastically changed economic and political scenario
which remained unchanged for centuries. The Caste system was not
imposed on them by some authority. It was not the outcome of the
sense of maintaining purity of the blood. People have innate
tendency to find new ways of survival and to adjust with the changed
circumstances, no matter how grave they are! Indians, too,
gradually found their unique way of survival and when they found in
later course that there was no hope left to see old prosperous days
again or any change in the circumstances, they made their new
system permanent. Norms and ethics of the life were rewritten.
We will discuss in the next chapter how did this transformation
took place and how it started becoming unjust, discriminating and
vulgar as we experience it even today!

*
Ref:-
1. Ashoka and the Decline of the Mauryas by Romila Thapar,
Oxford University Press, New Delhi, p. 73.
2. 1. Itihas : Prachin Kal (Vol.1), Maharashtra State Gazetteer,
Editor-Dr. Arunchandra Pathak, page 523-24
3. GUILD, THE INSTITUTIONAL ECONOMIC BASE OF
ANCIENT INDIA BY SANTANU MAHAPATRA, published in
International Journal of Social Science & Interdisciplinary
Research, Vol.1, Issue 9, September 2012
4. Ibid
5. Marathe Ani Maharashtra, A. R. Kulkarni, Diomond
Publications, 2007.

7. Medieval India and the Caste System

As we discussed in an earlier chapter, the rise, decline and fall

of the Shreni (Guild) system echo the economic ups, down and
demise of an economic order that once upon a time had made India
“Golden Sparrow”. Gupta era is highly praised by Indian Historians,
but they hardly have realized that it was Gupta era that started
bungling up the economic strength of the Shreni’s, whether
craftsmen or Trader, by transferring the important financial authority
from guilds to the Vaishnavait temples. Gupta kings were ardent
supporters of Vedic religion. An offshoot of Vedic religion,
Vaishnavait cult flourished during that era, many temples were
erected, though Vedic religion originally was not idolatrous. Vishnu
too, was adorned with an entirely new character erasing his original
Rig Vedic character as a subordinate to Indra. Laxmi is not his
consort in Rig Veda, rather he has none, and still she was
associated with him. Vishnu and Laxmi suddenly became the deities
of the wealth. So the flow of the wealth was diverted towards the
temples and suddenly the guilds became just the creators of the
wealth, but management of the wealth no more left with them.
The change in the religious priorities of the Gupta dynasty
made a heavy social impact. Because Vedics received special status
during this era, many non-vedics started rushing to this religion to
get accommodated with it to earn reputation. G. S. Ghurye observes
from the copper-plate inscriptions of north to south that fifth century
onwards there is eruption of many new Brahmin Gotras those were
absent from contemporary religious books those lists authentic
Gotras. Out of 124 Gotras, 77 Gotras were absent in nearest regions
whereas only 12 Gotras like Kashyap, Bharadvaj were in widest
currency. Many Gotras clearly indicate their Tribal origin. Being many
Gotras bogus, it would suggest that many people were self-declared
Brahmins to get benefitted from the Royal patronages. Change in
social tendency shows that the influence of Vedic religion was on
rise.1
The process that begun in Gupta era was largely continued by
the succeeding dynasties. Though Hindu religion still on helm, the
social atmosphere open cherishing the equality granted by the
Tantras (Agamas)!
The attempts of the Vedic to establish supremacy with help of
the ruling families didn’t go unopposed. It is not a surprise that the
masters of the Tantra started coming forward to write down Tantric
treaties to oppose the Vedic onslaught. Hundreds of the tantric sects
emerged from fifth century onwards till 17th century propagating the
theory of the equality.
Let us not forget here that the status of economy is directly
related to the degree of the liberty that any society is granted with.
The Vedic doctrine denies equality to men and women. It prohibits
social openness by creating religious restrictions. Though this
doctrine naturally was pleasant to the rulers, no matter to which
religion they belonged, the social atmosphere gradually changed to
adjust with the new environment. However, the Hindu resistance
Vedics had to encounter made it difficult to them to establish their
complete supremacy over Indian society. Tenth century onwards the
Vedics used different tactics to mitigate opposition.
Dr. Sudhakar Deshmukh states clearly in this regard that,
“When any society starts feeling insecure it turns to the
fundamentalism. Tenth century onwards till 14th-15th century
adherents of the Vedic religion started to revive the codes, sacrificial
rituals, Vedas and Smritis….many commentaries were written on the
Vedic Smritis which is referred as Nibandha era….journey of these
commentators was towards fundamentalism that effected in
extinction of the equality and freedom that was brought by the
Tantras and Natha sect.” 1 (Translation mine)
This would mean that the Hindus were initially succeeded in
encountering the onslaught of Vedic doctrine. However, during Gupta
era, the Vedics had been successful in making new Vedicized
editions of not only ancient epics and Puranas, but they had posed
claims over many ancient philosophies with interpolations those
were had Tantra origin. SaMkhya philosophy, for example, is one
which clearly has pre-Vedic origin which was added to the Vedic
Darshanas. Upanisadas, those in reality were anti-Vedic too got
merged with Vedic philosophies though the Upanisada philosophy is
against the Vedic tradition.
The Vedics succeeded in doing so during Gupta era when none
could oppose them as the Emperor had patronized the Vedics. The
interpolated works came to the rescue of the Vedics after tenth
century to corrupt minds of the Hindus. The revivalist era of the
Vedics begins in tenth century when the society was going through
the political and economic crisis. May be this is a reason why the
attempts of the Vedics went unopposed this time.
We have seen how later on the rise of feudal powers and
political upheavals gradually brought limitations on the inland trade
and production. The series of foreign invasions, their discriminatory
rule and a series of famines was the final blow on the indigenous
economic system. It collapsed. There were no saviors. Islamic rulers
imposed heavy duties on the foreign trade on non-Muslim craftsmen
and traders called ushr which forced many Hindu traders in winding
up foreign operations as well. From the seventh century onward
overseas trade was usurped by the sea-pirate Arabs and other
Muslim powers. Al Masudi in his "Meadows of Gold" reports he had
seen over ten thousand Muslim traders settled at the Cheul port of
Konkan. Similar conditions must have been across the ports of
western and eastern coasts.
When the centralized production centers were disintegrated,
craftsmen started abandoning them. When one economic system
collapses, for want of survival people get engaged in building a new
order. Agriculture, the backbone of the economy, too, was
devastated, limiting creation of the wealth. The great fall in local
demands eventually crippled the craftsmen, those used mass-
produce the articles of utility and fashion. The condition of the
service providers must be more pitiable.
This situation, pathetic though, forced the people to change
previous social modality. Overall internal functioning, social
relationships and ways of survival had to be adjusted with the new
situation. Albeit, Indians invented a new order to survive through
those odds. “Self reliant Village system” emerged gradually by tenth
century and became permanent by the twelfth century. Though there
are no written records available on emergence of this system and its
exact time, we can infer from the circumstantial evidences those
must have led the people to find new way of the life. Let us not forget
that it is economy that commands the social orders. How it could
have happened? We can infer from the following circumstances.
1. In the absence of the sufficient demand, naturally,
production too suffers. Supplies cannot be more than the demand
as the economy cannot absorb surplus productions. Under such
circumstances, no profession can expect any kind of competition
from new entrants. Hence mobility from one to another profession
becomes highly difficult for the resistance from the people already
engaged in the same profession. We can find the same thing
happening in modern era too everywhere where doors are closed
to the new entrants when economy suffers from the recession.
2. In the absence of regional or national marketplaces and
the trade channels, the production becomes localized and need-
based.
 3. Disintegration, separation and Localization of the
craftsmen, traders and service providers were inevitable making
them village oriented, where they could meet local needs. A
village could not absorb excessive craftsmen and service
providers for their limited demand. Farmers (whether landlords or
the tenants) still were the major component of the buyers, but
were in a distressful economic condition, since they too were
suffering from the droughts and political upheavals.
4. For survival, a new professional relationship came to
be established, called as “Balute” or “jajmani” system. In this
system seller had no bargaining power whatsoever or right to
decide the price of his products or services. However, his survival
was assured. Suddenly professions became of secondary
importance; some lost their requirement making them solely
dependent on the mercy of the villages, accepted to do the menial
work as farm laborers, tenants or even undertook filthy jobs.
5. Under the circumstances the status of the every
profession solely depended on the needs of the people and what
they were paid in return for their services. The disparity in the
revenue of the every profession, though required same labor and
skills, brought social inequality and dissatisfaction among the
professions.
6. The professional guilds appeared in a new form, called
as Jati Panchayat(Caste assembly) that started governing the
professional communities by designing new professional ethics,
restricting other caste men to enter their profession and vice
versa, and by making their own caste-men outcast or
enforce excommunication, if the codes of the caste were broken.
In a way the guilds started interfering in the ethical and personal
conduct of the people belonging to their caste (profession) and
gradually it seems it became more tyrant and unjust. But it was
accepted for the basic need to stop competition, protect their
rights, survive and solve professional issues.
7. Since, it became almost impossible to enter another
profession, it was but natural that the castes became birth based
and rigid. Also, since there was no more competition there was no
need to be innovative. Anyway, revenue would remain the same.
 India was thrown into an abyss of Dark Age because
the time killed their zeal of learning to become more productive
and innovative. In a way people’s life and horizons got restricted
to the villages making them almost careless about the rulers. It is
important to note that the fall of Yadava dynasty, that ruled over
300 years in Maharashtra, do not reflect at all in the Saint
literature of 13-14th century. In a way it is miraculous, but is a fact.
8. The circumstances made castes a close ended loop,
where mobility was not possible as the circumstances did not
allow it to happen. There were absolutely no chances to break the
caste barriers to breath in the free atmosphere and choose a
profession of individual choice. The acquired skills from the past
tradition were transferred to the next generations. Barring a few
professions, those still had been in demand, too, become stern
enough not to allow new entrants. It is not that the Brahmins
closed their doors against others first which was imitated by the
others, as Dr. Ambedkar opines. The fact is the process of closing
the doors against others had its roots in the changed political and
economic scenario. The people could not afford to be liberal when
the survival had become of prime importance. It had no religious
relevance. It is impossible that some authority could enforce such
commands that would assassinate the sense of the human
freedom and the people accept them unopposed. It is against
human nature.
This was how the caste and sub-caste structure became
permanent. Financially, barring a few, all castes became almost
pauper. Self-reliant village system sounds good even to some today,
but it was the system people designed to survive through hard times.
It killed basic human instinct of competition and progress through it.
This situation occurred between the tenth to the twelfth century
AD and became stratified by the thirteenth century to become unjust
and cruel. The role of the Vedic Brahmins was not in making that
system, but in regulating it as priests/ministers of the feudal lords
and kings. Brahmins or the rulers never interfered in the decisions
given by the Caste Assemblies. Even the verdicts of
the Gotsabha’s (Brahmin caste assembly) were hardly declined by
the rulers. In fact, every caste assembly, old guild system in new
form, too, remained defacto ruler of the profession (caste) in new
order too!
It is a common experience of the mankind that the people
become more fatalists in the time of the distress. Recently, in USA,
in 2008, during the recession, it was observed that the attendance in
the Churches had phenomenally risen. Indians, suffering for over a
period of couple of the centuries, was natural to become more
Destiny-Centric and thus believing in divine command.
This broke the backbone of original Indian free will. So many
new deities emerged during this vast span of the time. Various new
rituals too were introduced by the acting priests, alien to Hindu
religion, Brahmins, for their own benefit. In Royal courts and with
feudal lords they formed a coalition that helped them to preach Vedic
supremacy. They captured many Shaivait shrines claiming them to
be Vaishnavait. A fine example is of Vitthala of Pandharpur.
They didn’t stop here. The new philosophy
of “Karmavipaka. Siddhanta” got prominence in this era. This
theory proposed that the distresses of present life were outcome of
the sins committed in the past birth. This Vedic doctrine was
vehemently proposed and propagated, making the people more
religious and slavish to the inevitability of the destiny. Many Saints
too fell to this fatal doctrine and echoed the same in their writings.
The acceptance of the inevitable destiny was dangerous to the
society, but Vedics found opportunities in it. They invented many
selfish ritualistic remedies those people followed almost blindly in a
hope of ultimate salvation or better next life. The people gradually
forgot the distinction between Vedic and Hindu religion as Vedas
were held as the supreme authority and a sacrosanct scripture
though the Hindus had no authority even to listen to it. Vaishnavait
cult performed a major role in diluting the religious demarcations and
strengthening the Vedic authority over Hindu minds. The Tantras
were defamed so much so that hardly people could acknowledge
any association with them. Though the constructions of the temples,
methods of worship and the festivals remained moreover Tantra
based, the concocted fraudulent mythical stories blurred the original
nature of the Hindu gods and festivals. The Vedic elements
penetrated Hindu religion because of the pathetic situation the
society was fallen in.
We have many instances in the medieval history, how the Vedic
doctrine of inequality had started poisoning the peoples mind.
Though they didn’t create birth based caste system, they provided
pseudo-divine reasoning for its brutal existence. Hemadri Pundit, a
Minister of Yadavas, authored Chaturvarga Chintamani in which over
2500 religious rituals was listed, most of which never existed before.
The Vedicism and the Vedic Brahmins become an evil force as
they misused the religious authorities, mostly granted or approved by
the ignorant rulers, over the people those never belonged to their
religion. The Fraudulent nature that persisted in them since the
Gupta era, took disadvantage of the changed circumstances. They
used every tool to impose their supremacy that made their life easier.
Even they corrupted the religious scriptures. Rather, they imbibed
the Vedic divine order theory in the minds of the distressed people
during this era. The social inequality, they tried to connect with the
Vedic ladder-like social order. Varna system thus started plaguing
Hindu’s and they too started to connect, like Varna system, their
superiority over some while inferior to another with their natural
social status of the time.
This situation created such a complex relationship between the
castes and sub-castes that even acceptance or rejection of food or
even water from other castes became a preordained custom.
The inter-caste marriages became almost rare, and if conducted the
families of the concerned couple were thrown away from the castes
or punished heavily. The fear of becoming outcaste is so much so in
the some castes that they cannot overthrow the verdicts of their
caste assemblies, though the constitutional laws are very much in
existence to protect them.
In fact marital system that enforced marriage within the caste began
with a practical solution in ancient times. But it was not mandatory.
But later it became a sacrosanct custom that abided everybody by
that.
These customs were made and enforced by the caste
assemblies. Hence, it can be said that the tyranny of the caste
assemblies too were responsible for the tightening of the caste-
grip. Caste assemblies enjoyed a status of defacto ruler of the caste
because their decision was final and was honored by the royal courts
as well. We have many such instances from Shivaji till Peshva era
that has been recorded by the representatives of the political
authorities. To Vedics, there were religious authorities located at
Paithan, Kashi, Kanchi and elsewhere those decided into the matter
of their Varna. Kings had no role in it. Because of the sheer
negligence of the political powers they didn’t interfere at all in the
caste system and the brutalities exerted by the caste assemblies.
Though it had inherent limitations, the movements against the
evils of the caste system begun to break the caste barriers by the
saints in 12th century AD. However, the movement remained in the
enclosure of the spirituality. It didn’t address to the underlying
reasons of the caste system. Moreover Hindu saints preferred to
obey the Vedic philosophical doctrine and its dominance. Except for
Basaveshvar, we do not find any saint challenging Vedas and Varna
system. Rather by then everyone has considered Vedics too were
Hindu. They weren’t allowed access to the Vedic scripts and hence
they failed to know that the Vedic is a different, alien religion. But this
very restriction should have raised doubts in their mind that if they
both belonged to the same religion, why they be prohibited from
reading or hearing the holy Vedic scriptures.
To challenge the caste system it was essential to overthrow the
yoke of Vedic dominance and doctrine of birth-based inequality.
Though Hindu followed their ancient religion in this era too, the Vedic
philosophy had penetrated into the minds of the people through the
corrupted Puranic tales and new myths. Very few saints realized this
and tried to delink Hindu religion from the Vedic dominance, but
ultimately failed to do so. The people became destiny-centric and
silently suffered with a hope that in next birth they will attain
something better than the present life.
No any new social theory that could change the overall society
for good could emerge as the social leadership went in the hands of
the saints those propagated salvation through devotion. They
moreover taught to accept the life as it is without challenging the
inevitable destiny. This has been a very tragic part of India’s social
history.
 Not that Tantras, backbone of the Hindu philosophy, were silent
in this era. There were many sects those survived during this era.
New treaties were being written from north to south, propagating the
doctrine of equality. However the Vedic force was so much so
dominant that they too had to somehow show the Vedic sanction to
their writing, no matter how anti-Vedic it were.
This way, Indian philosophical fabric got so much so polluted
that it almost became impossible to separate Vedic and non-Vedic
streams from medieval literature. This provided strength to the
modern scholars in a bold and fictitious claim that the Vedas were
ultimate source of the Hindu religion. They failed to analyze the
independent philosophical and ritualistic origins of both the religions.
However, we find clearly from the medieval history that though
the supreme position of the Vedas, though none of the Hindu knew
what was in it, was almost accepted by the people, the Vedic codes
weren’t followed by the people. For example, Ahilyabai Holkar, a
widowed woman, that too belonging to non-Vedic stratum, couldn’t
have come into the power during reign of a Brahmin Peshva, had
Manusmriti been a code meant for Hindus. There existed proper
awareness among all for whom the code was intended and for whom
not!
However, because of the overall economic and political
conditions the caste system was almost stratified. There was a
mobility, but in very limited sense. The castes too became an
enclosed unites barring marriages outside the groups. In fact the
social mobility came to an end with the end of occupational mobility.
The caste prides, even in the days of extreme poverty, became
prominent because this was the only way to maintain their unity. In
this process almost every caste started finding their mythological
origin, many wrote down their Purana as well! Sense of the purity
and pollution that had originated in Vedic religion entered the Hindu
castes. The caste hierarchies got defined in every region to decide
the relationship between the castes.
This happened gradually. During this era some castes became
untouchable. We do not yet know the origins of the untouchablity
though we can trace its source in Vedic literature where some, now
non-existent, castes has been declared untouchable. And yet we
have no authentic source to explain why some existing castes
became suddenly untouchable though it couldn’t have been the case
during first millennium. We need to explore the social history more to
reach the roots of untouchability.
The original spirit of the Indian occupational class was lost.
They had enclosed themselves in the ruthless enclosures of the
castes, as it was only the caste which could give them sense of
security. This is why the caste councils could become superior. They
were instrumental in elevating the caste prides. Almost every caste
had its unwritten code that was enforced on the caste members. The
extreme degree of uncertainty in the life and the hopeless future
shadowed down their mentality, so much so that, we do not find any
spectacular inventions happening in India during this time. We have
the abundant philosophies of this era those are loaded with
spirituality but what we do not have is any literature that could
provide alternative doctrine to rise up from the present macabre
mess they were fallen in!
Then came the British Raj that created further complications,
so much so that, forget solving, we are still unable to understand
them!

*
Ref:

1. Madhyayugin Dharmasankalpanancha Vikas: Tantra, Yoga ani

Bhakti by Dr. Sudhakar Deshmukh, page 282.
2. Caste and Race in India by G. S. Ghurye.

Impact of British Raj on the Caste System!

We have seen that the medieval India witnessed the drastic

change in Indian social order. Hereditary, closed social regrouping
based on the professions became inevitable for the want of the
survival. Onslaughts of the ever-changing socio-political conditions
did continue till the rise of the British Raj. Entire populace suffered
because of the raids of the warlords and freebooters in quest of
recovering ransoms or one fourth part of the duties from the common
people, if not paid by the local rulers. India witnessed most of the
cities and villages fortified during this era to protect themselves from
the constant raids. No part of the country experienced stability in
post-Aurangzeb era, too. This further triggered financial debacles
and thus caused, as an inevitable result, tightening of the caste ties
as caste became an only shield that provided a sense of security
and only source of livelihood while facing the tough situations in the
times of anarchy.
Also, the relations between the different castes were
reconsolidated; the hierarchy was redefined and strictly practiced.
Even the strict rules about sharing food and drinks with other castes
too came in the force. Society already had become mostly
endogamous and child marriage had become a regular custom. In
the times of continuous crisis, many social evils do pop up. People
become more orthodox and destiny-centric. This era saw the
uprising of Vedic religion in the new form, taking rein of religious
authority over Hindu’s in their hands, propagating Vedic doctrine in
more corrupt form. In lack of the stability and in the quest of the
survival people kept on contracting in the cocoon of the self-created
defenses. This led to total disharmony and strife among the various
castes.
We find many such caste dispute cases viciously fought in the
Peshva and other rulers courts. It was a weak attempt to restore the
sense of the lost dignity through maintaining minimal social and even
religious rights those could be afforded by the system to restore or
maintain the dignity. This way mentality of the people became caste-
centric, breaking the inherent sense of unity forever.
In short, during this period caste became a distinct group with
own assigned status and internal code of the conduct and values.
For livelihood, they had nothing else than the hereditary professions,
though uncertain and mostly unable to feed them properly. For
mental solace they had some or other religious cult to follow. For the
sense of security, they nourished their caste pride and caste unity.
No doubt there were some rulers those encouraged
businesses. Ahilyabai Holkar and Tipu Sultan are fine examples of
this. Some Mughal emperors too tried to restore business activity to
some extent. But it proved insufficient to bring back the lost glory.
The wealth was mostly accumulated by the landlords and the rulers.
The unjust economic divide created social imbalance and it
continued as there was no proper guiding force.
The British had set their foot on the Indian soil to make profits
through the trade. Most of the Indian natural resources had remained
unexploited for a long period because of the socio-economic and
political reasons. Indian economics already had become
directionless and social situation chaotic.
The British were always fascinated as well intrigued with the
Indian social system that they never had come across in other
countries they ruled or traded with. The British scholars, especially
ethnologists, perception about the caste system was marred by their
class and race theories and they tried to connect the both, which
ultimately led to the wrong policies that further severely harmed the
overall social system.
 “One of the main tools used in the British attempt to
understand the Indian population was the census. Attempts
were made as early as the beginning of the 19th century to
estimate populations in various regions of the country but
these, as earlier noted, were methodologically flawed and led to
grossly erroneous conclusions. It was not until 1872 that a
planned comprehensive census was attempted. This was done
under the direction of Henry Beverely, Inspector General of
Registration in Bengal. The primary purpose given for the
taking of the census, that of governmental preparedness to deal
with disaster situations, was both laudable and logical.
However, the census went well beyond counting heads or even
enquiring into sex ratios or general living conditions. Among
the many questions were enquiries regarding nationality, race,
tribe, religion and caste.” States Kevin Hobson in “Ethnographic
Mapping and the Construction of the British Census in India.”
The major development that heavily impacted the caste system
was the formulation of the Hindu Code based on the Vedic Smrities.
Warren Hastings, in 1772, took initiative in formulation of Hindu and
Muslim laws that completed its first phase in 1864. Hastings hired 11
Brahmin Pundits to get Hindu code written, but he did not know that
the Vedic Smrities never regulated the Hindu life. The Pundits, taking
advantage of the situation widened the application of the Vedic laws,
sometimes by misinterpreting and sometimes to please their
masters, making them applicable to all Hindus who, so far, were
regulated by their own codes. Thus, British influence on the fluid
social structure of India can in large part be characterized as a
solidification of the privileges of the Hindu caste system through the
influence of the Vedic scholars by whom the British were advised in
the formation of their laws. The process of making Hindu laws by
British ended in 1947.
 “The Sanskrit pandits hired to translate and sanction this new
interpretation of customary laws created a curious Anglo-
Brahmanical hybrid. The resulting document, printed in London
under the title, A Code of Gentoo Laws, or, Ordinations of the
Pandits, was a made-to-order text, in which the pandits dutifully
followed the demands made by their paymasters.” Thus states
Madhu Kishvar in article ‘From Manusmriti to Madhusmriti :
Flagellating a Mythical Enemy’
The British could not make distinction between Hindu and
Vedic laws because they had taken fancy with the Sanskrit, thinking
it an ancient mother language from which modern Indo-European
languages evolved. Naturally they valued the Vedas most thinking
that the Hinduism finds its source in Vedas. William Jones went on
translating Manusmriti as he suspected that the Sanskrit Pundits
those were hired did their job dishonestly. However, lot of Vedic
literature found Vedic tongue during this era of Aryan euphoria. This
changed the total perspective of the people while looking back at the
socio-religious history of India.
The major problem with those scholars was they mixed two
independent religions while offering supremacy to the Vedic
Brahmins over Hindus. Mostly British scholars had to hire local
Sanskrit Pundits while making the translations and interpretations.
The enthusiastic Brahmins conveniently did hide the major sources
of Hindu religion, especially the Tantras and Agamas. This is the
reason the Western scholars hardly touched that literature excepting
passing references. British became instrumental in establishing the
Vedic supremacy, not only with applauding the Vedic literature, but
gave a special position being decedents of the Vedic Aryans.
The modern educated Vedic and Hindu elite in India who had
the English language as source were systematically brainwashed
into believing that the Vedas were the only source of their religion
and that the Aryan Invasion really did happen to enslave the
aboriginal masses. They had no alternative sources to verify these
big claims. This created a rift between the aboriginals and Brahmins.
It did not occur to any scholar that if there was a rift it was religious in
nature. They even forgot to ask the question why the deities they
worship are absent from the Vedas. They did not try to find why there
are ritualistic differences if the religion is one and the same. The
explanations given by the Vedic scholars were mutely accepted. For
example it was imbibed that the victorious Aryans accommodated
some of the Gods worshipped by the aboriginals in their assimilation
process and surprisingly this lame explanation went unchallenged.
The social reformist movement of that era was divided in two
forces, i.e. Brahmin-non-Brahmin. The Brahmin thinkers were in an
attempt of reviving Vedicism in modern perspective, hence B. G.
Tilak called revivalist to Prarthana Samaj and Ranade becase they
had proposed to ‘revive’ the Vedic life and religion! Revivalism of the
Brahmins led to either suppression of various pluralistic traits or
modified them to suit the Vedic religion. Herein, the Arya Samaj
attempted to incorporate the lower caste groups within the fold of
Vedic Aryan Hinduism, thus states Parimala V Rao in her book
“Foundations of Tilak’s Nationalism”
This was the case almost everywhere in India as the Brahmin
societies, barring few, were in an attempt to revive Vedic religion and
Tilak was no exception.
The Non-Brahmins too revolted against the Brahmanical
tyranny. The movement was led by Mahatma Phule and other Hindu
caste leaders. However the nature of this movement was anti-
Brahmin denouncing their superiority and rejecting their gods! In fact
it didn’t dawn upon them that the gods they are rejecting were
originally belonged to them. They failed to notice the religious
distinction and hence could not challenge the Brahmanical
supremacy to get desired effect. They blamed Brahmins for creation
of the caste system. This was sad outcome of the Aryan Invasion
Theory.
However, the Vedic knew all the time which religion they
belonged to and hence were in an attempt of reviving Vedic religion.
The British Raj thus harmed the society as they had given high
status in their administration and free hand to use the Aryan theory.
The further damage it did that all the scholars of early twentieth
century had to use only Vedic sources to find their history! They
came across many interpolations but did not analyze the purpose
behind it. This way, the mentality of the Hindus became Vedic-centric
and even now it remains a reality.
British introduced many social reforms. The census they
conducted was an attempt to understand the people they were ruling
on, however, it made a further division in the Indian society on racial
(ethnic) basis. It was a blunder, but most of the ethnologists
prepared their surveys based on head measurements, classifying
them in six different categories. The Purity of Aryan blood, they
thought, was preserved by the Brahmins of North India. This
elevated the Brahmanical racial ego. Many castes too jumped in a
rat race to prove or claim how they belonged to the Aryan race or
higher social status in Vedic order to add to the social strife.
Since all the castes were classified in some or other racial or
ethnic group, the caste stratification in a way became permanent.
The intellectual abilities too were defined on the baseless hypothesis
of ethnology. The Purity of the blood was never ever was
the foundation of the religious or caste system, but gradually it too
became a source of pride that helped Vedics to feel close to the
ruling British as they too were Aryan! To them, as Aryan Invasion
Theory reached to the height of the popularity, non-elite, Hindu
masses were the one to whom they had enslaved in the ancient
past. This was racial divide over religious and caste divide that gave
a new dimension to the caste struggle. The non-Aryan, Dravidian
aboriginal movement erupted to counter Aryan supremacist theory
that till this date continues.
The British raj ended the little bit mobility that previous system
afforded. The castes reconsolidated under influence of the religious
laws and the socio-racial theories. The census made their mentioned
castes concrete though many castes mentioned by the illiterate
people in the first and following censuses were incorrect. The
British further classified the castes, useful for administration, army,
petty services and the troublesome castes or tribes those possibly
could rebel. Many such castes and tribes were declared criminal,
treating them inhumanly and isolating them by imposing many
severe restrictions on their lives. The stigma that was stamped on
them in British era is not yet sufficiently erased.
 This was another churning in the society. It again redefined the
socio-political status’ of various castes. It forced many castes to
change their internal rules while fundamentally transforming their
previous status’. While these happenings were reshaping their
mindsets, what was their temporal condition?

Industrialization

Wake of industrialization era did further damage to the local

economy whatever was left of it. British saw India as a supplier of the
raw material and consumer of the finished goods, produced back
home in their factories. India never ever was in a situation to learn
from the West the modern technologies and deploy them for their
own benefit. The traditional technologies by then had become mostly
outdated. Many people shifted to the cities to work in factories as
laborers. Many turned to the work for Railway tracks and other
infrastructure work. Indian occupational businesses like weaving had
suffered from the cheap textile imports. India became mere exporter
of the raw materials. The export kept growing from 89 million dollars
(1850) to 1178 million dollars by 1950, while export of the finished
product was as good as zero.
British avoided modernizing traditional occupations in
technology and management. The education that they provided was
to create clerical workforce, not technical force. “Even in the Bombay
textile industry, where most of the capital was Indian, 28 per cent of
the managerial and supervisory staff were British in 1925 (42 per
cent in 1895) and the British component was even bigger in more
complex industries.” States Angus Maddison in his work “The
Economic and Social Impact of Colonial Rule in India”(1971).
This way Indian workforce never achieved an ability to learn the
new technologies to compete and increase productivity. The
independent village system thus could not get redundant to give way
to the people spread their wings in the modern atmosphere. Local
economic conditions were further deteriorated with the shrinking,
even local, market places. British never preferred to create industrial
plants or development banks. They even never gave any preference
to the local industries while allotting the major contracts.
Though some social reforms were introduced by British law and
indigenous social activists tried their best to eradicate caste system,
the root cause, poverty, remained intact or rather worsened. The
basic principles of the economics and its impact on the social order
remained totally neglected even by the social reformers. Hence, it
became almost impossible to break the caste ties in the new age
too, as it did not reach to them. Social reformers never gave
preference to promote technical education amongst Indian populace.
By the time of independence large scale industries could employ
less than 3% of the population whereas about 1.2 crore population
was engaged in traditional occupational small scale industries and
16 crore people were the labors. Rest of the population sustained
somehow on the agriculture.
The British prejudicial preferences towards the castes, their
census’, haphazard classifications did so much so harm to the caste
system that even in the modern era, people have remained stuck
with the caste barriers. The people engaged in government jobs
were from the so-called upper caste or those rose to the upper class
by changing the tastes suitable to the British culture. But the
populace that was far away from the main stream of the economy
suffered heavily from the negligence as they never got
encouragement to promote their products among the new elite class.
This caused further divide in the society. At one hand the Indian
finances were siphoned out abroad, making poor the poorer, thus
making new investments impossible.
This was, in a way third setback to the Indian communities.
They could not break the caste ties because they never got any
economically liberal atmosphere since 11th century. The grave
competition among themselves grew to the level that added to the
caste base hatred. Even after independence the situation largely
remained the same with no major economic reforms. It never
occurred to the socialist mindsets that without economic reforms
there hardly is any scope to the social reforms. The previous
chapters on the caste system have shown in detail, how, from a very
flexible occupational system gradually turned to the rigid and unjust
caste system because of the drastic changes in economic order of
the country.
The social dimensions drastically changed by the British Raj.
The Vedic not only maintained their higher status but they got it
elevated. The modern Vedic scholars through their writing imbibed
on the masses that the Vedic were the people who created
everything that shaped Indian culture. The great contribution of the
Hindus, their antiquity went unnoticed by them. This created a kind
of inferiority complex in the minds of the Hindus. Until they search for
their own rootsindependently they will never come to know their
glorious past. The caste system was occupation-based social order
that was flexible. The flexibility have done miracles in the past. They
had their numerous kings and nobles, dramatists, epical poets and
philosophers. What most of the literature comes forth with Vedic
origin label, if carefully read, one can easily notice their non-Vedic
origin.
Whether we succeed in caste eradication or not, we have to
endeavor to understand its true nature and respect all the castes on
equal footing because they all together have built this nation!

The riddle of the origins of the Indian caste system and its true
nature remained unsolved because erroneously the scholars tried to
find its source in Vedic system. The theories so far proposed mostly
are descriptive in nature without touching the socio-economic
aspects in genesis and development of the castes. They failed to
understand that the Caste and Varna systems are independent
concepts belonging to the distinct religions thus created a great
confusion. Hindu and Vedic religions are independent bodies those
have very little or nothing in common. The Author explains diligently
what circumstances forced changing an occupation-oriented flexible
system into a rigid, compartmentalized unjust caste system during
the medieval era.
Mr. Sonawani in this book throws a glaring light on the historical facts
of the castes extensively using the social, religious and political
history of India. This book will provide a new insight on the enigmatic
caste system!