Caste system - A historical Analysis

Casteism - this is one of the evil systems in hinduism as was projected by media(mainly western). This is the one of the main reasons why hinduism seems so complicated unable to be accept new converts. Caste is derived from the root word "casta", which in portugal means division. This caste system was one of the main reasons why india was unable to avenge the invaders who are both technically, numerically and spiritually inferior to present hindus. If caste system was really so much evil, then how come hinduism along with its caste system was able to survive for 7,500 years(even more than that)?

If really any system was such an evil, varna system would not have survived this long with all sorts of hardships like endangering of religion(buddhism, Jainism), external attacks from foriegn rule,like islam, christianity etc. Lets take a fair look at the factors that lead to present complicated caste system which was developed from a simple chaturvarna(four varna) system and the main factors that lead to degradation.

Vedas are the first and authoritative books that should be considered as basic for any customs in hinduism. According to vedas, human life is divided into four parts - brahmachari, samsari, vanaprastha, sanyasi and society was divided into four varnas(not castes). Brahman, Kshatriya, Vaisyas, Sudras. Brahmans are the priests and teachers. Kshatriyas are the ruling class and soldiers and are supposed to maintain social order. Vaisyas should do trade and farming. Sudras should do the remaining jobs in the society. According to Chaturvarna system, varna(caste) is decided by only your deeds and not by birth. This division of work was mainly based for development of society and no caste is superior to other one. I should give an example here which would help to understand how this works. In olden days, people used to provide food and shelter for the warriors who used to save them and the warriors in return used to save the people from any external threats. Bluntly speaking, everybody was born with some talent and using this talent for betterment of society is the main motive behind varna system.

Upanishads are additives for vedas. Any information contained in vedas should have a lot of additional information in Upanishads. That too a very important information about caste system must have more information as it was going to decide how society runs. But for some reason Upanishads hardly contain any information about the chaturvarna system. This only means that either vedas are written after Upanishads or some part of vedas must be added with a selected few verses.

How ardently does hindus follow their religious books. If on a scale people following their own religious books are taken into consideration, hindus will score as the least and muslims will get a highest score. In hindus some follow some books and others doesn't follow the same book. You can follow gita, manusmriti and doesn't care for the rest of books and still you can be called as hindu and you can follow not even a single book and still you can be called as a hindu. This is the religious way of hindus. During the time of vedas, Indra, Varuna, Vayu, Sun god were worshiped. Apart from sun god, none of the other gods were worshiped as like in olden days. This represents change in gods who are worshiped.

Lets say a person commits a mistake and escapes from getting punished by using a small loophole in judicial system by using money. Who is the culprit here? Is the judicial system or the person and others who supported him? Unfortunately people who committed mistakes used the religious books to save themselves. When people hardly follow the books then how can we conclude that the same applies in case of caste?

Let's take a look at what other resources tell us from puranas and upanishads about varna system. Sukracharya, mentor for danavas(demons) and who abolished meat eating for brahmins tells these words about varna system.
na jaatyaa braahmnashchaatra kshatiryo vaisya eva na
na shudro na cha vai mlechicho bheditaa gunakarmabhih
(In this world, no one is a brahmin, kshatriya, vaishya and shudra by birth but on the basis of quality and deeds and actions.)
His words are followed about meat eating by brahmins till today, but why not the words about caste system? His words are followed till sometime, but something has forced the society of india to abandon the other words. What was this?

Let's take a look at what dhanurveda written by BRHAT SARNGADHARA PADDHATI, a 15th Century treatise in Sanskrit on the Science of the Horn Bow by Maharshi Sarngadhara. Translated from the Sanskrit edition by Peter Peterson, Bombay, 1888.
1720 brhaahmnaya dhanurvedam khadgam vai kshatriyaya cha
vaishyaya dhapayekthuntham gadhaam shoodrasya dhaapayet
He will give a 'dhanu' (meaning a bow) to a Brahmin disciple, a khadga (meaning a sword) to a Ksatriya, a 'Kunta' (meaning a lance) to a Vaisya and a 'Gada' (meaning a mace) to a Sudra.
This clearly states that till 15th centuary, the society was running on the four varna system that is prescribed(not mandatory) and not the present day deteriorated caste system. Even Manu Smriti prescribes Chaturvarna system.

In Gita, Lord Sri Krishna told that, he created Brahmins from head, kshatriyas from hands, vaisyas from thighs and sudras from feet. What krishna meant is that with the brains of brahmin, with the courage and valor of a kshatriya, with the business talents of vaisya and with the productive capability of sudras a a society can be developed. By his sentences, we can clearly understand with failure of one of them, the whole society can't advance and live peacefully. This chaturvarna system is meant only to be the betterment of society and unfortunately it had degraded into the present caste system.

Lets see how varna system does affected anybody. Aswini gods despite of being Brahmins, were not allowed to participate in Yajna. Another famous Brahmin Parasurama was Suta(chairoteer) by birth. By penance, he became Brahmin and by fighting he became Kshatriya. Vishwamitra born as a kshatriya, became a Brahmin by penance. Chandogya Upanishad says that Guru Raikva taught Vedas Jansruti even though later was a cart man (Sudra). This shows that birth is not the only criteria for becoming a brahmin or a kshatriya.

Let us see the historical struggles between different castes. In the puranas, there are wars between Brahmins and kshatriyas for power in some cases and in some cases to prove their superiority over others. But nowhere in the puranas there is any mention about ill-treatment of low caste people. There are some instances of such ill-treatment in Mahabharatha. Drona was hired by bheeshma to train all princes in archery. Drona had sworn that he will make Arjuna the greatest archer. So he denied training to Ekalavya on the grounds that he was a nishada. There is another point to be noted. Nishada kingdom was an ally to Jarasandha who were enemies of Kauravas and hence Drona should not train Kauravas' enemy. Drona also rejected education of Brahmastra to Karna on the grounds of later being a suta(charioteer). But the real cause is Drona doesn't like to make a rival for his favorite disciple Arjuna. In denying education to Karna, Drona was totally blinded by his love for Arjuna. Apart from Drona, there are no instances showing illtreatment for lower caste people and even Drona denied education only to suppress rivals of his favorite disciple. This can also be visible where Drona taught Narayanaastra to his son Aswathaama but not to Arjuna. By analysing Drona's character we can easily see that he was torn between his love for his son and his words to Arjuna of making him the greatest archer. Drona's contemporary Kripacharya trained all of his disciples alike and never showed discrimination. There is one more notable incident during the war. During the war, Duryodhana criticized Drona for his partiality towards Pandavas. Infuriated Drona designed a technique called ChakraVyuha which even baffled warriors of his own side. This incidents shows one point that should be noted. Being a brahmin, Drona even in worst of his times had designed a master technique which shows that they(Brahmins) should be used for their intelligence without which they are nothing. There is one more example to be explained. In 1891, 21 sikhs had fought valiantly with an army of 10,000 - 12,000 army of Pasthuns. Sikhs are born warriors like Jats and Rajputs. Vaisyas and Jains are famous for their Business skills and Brahmins are famous for their Intelligence. This is the main motive of Chaturvarna system.

Let's see what Ambedkar have said about caste system. He totally rejected aryan invasion theory and according to him, there are initially only three castes viz brahmins, kshatriyas and vaisyas. The fourth caste sudras are formed by kshatriyas who ill-treated brahmins. Due to this ill-treatment, brahmanas had rejected upanayana and this caused the fall of kshatriyas into a lower caste sudras. He explicitly declares that wrong is on the part of kshatriyas and not brahmins. But unfortunately Dr. Ambedkar failed to establish a historical fall of varna system.

After the Mahabharata war which happened in 7,500BC(based on some recent excavations in dwaraka, which was done in 2002) there are no real threats to hindu society till 2000BC. As there are no threats, hindu society was decayed. Rituals are followed without knowing their real meaning. This is the time when Lord Buddha was born. He totally rejected the vedas and chaturvarna system. He propagated a new system Ahimsa or non-violence. He also said that do only what you understand and don't do anything ritually. His law was highly accepted by the people. Buddhism had spreaded entire from central asia to Japan. The greatest example was Bamiyan Buddha statues in Afghanistan. Such great was the spreading of Buddhism that for the first time Hinduism was at the verge of extinction. But spreading of Buddhism was checked by advent of Adi Sankaracharya. With his Advaita philosophy, Sankaracharya had defeated not only Buddhists and Jains, he also defeated his hindu counterparts like shaivites, vaishnavites and shaktites. It was he who established the four matts in four major regions of India. After Sankaracharya, Hinduism again resumed all of its major parts. The present day pakistan, India, Bangladesh were reverted back to hinduism. Buddhism was confined to only a few places like Amaravati and Pataliputra(present patna). After Sankaracharya, only once India faced threats to its soveriegnity in the form of alexander who was defeated by Porus. In these long periods of time, neither hinduism nor varna system was affected and they remained intact.

There is one more point to be noted about buddhism. Buddha told in his Dhammapada that a Brahmin is a person “For whom there exists neither the hither nor the farther shore, nor both the hither and the farther shore, he who is undistressed and unbound, - him I call a Brahmana.” Here is a few points worth noting. Buddha didn't tell that a brahmin should never oppress a sudra(not to mention vyasya and kshatriya also). He only told how a brahmin should live. One more point to be noted is that why did Buddha used Brahmin instead of Sanyasi or a renouncer. This explains the point that in those days that brahmins are not a caste by that time as it is today and it is a common term used like a sanyasi except having a family. Another major point to be noted is that main principle of Buddhism is that Ahimsa and not equality on basis of caste. Why is this so? It is because in those days there are many wars and there are no discrimination based on caste.

If anyone really feel that hinduism is oppressive, I would like to hear him a few answers from him for the following questions.
1)Why is it that not even a single voice was raised against this social evil till the time of Ambedkar? If anybody feels that its because society hadn't supported this, I would like to point out a few examples how society had acted other way around. The first one is from Charaka samhita where charaka says that there are many social bans and blind beliefs on medicine and it is difficult for him to treat his patients. As the book is about medicine, he had written about problems he faced in treating others. Why is it that not even a single writer had atleast pointed out a few of incidents where there are discriminations? Even in Vatsyana's Kama Sutra, we find that an incident about a king who killed his wife while intercourse and Vatsayana saying that these kind of blind beliefs should be changed. But for some reason we were unable to find any incident relating to discrimination on Sudras in any of the texts.
2)If hinduism was really so bad, why is it that Hinduism had survived for this many long years? There are some points to be noted that Hinduism had faced threats from time unknown. The list begins from Charvakas, Jains, Buddhists, Islam, Christianity, Communists etc. Everybody said they would create a world where all people are same and no discriminations whatsoever. For the part atleast Jains and Buddhists are real in their speaking. Then why did people didn't get converted to these religions if there is so much of discrimination in hinduism? There is only one time when people accepted other religion viz Buddhism only because they like the teachings of buddha and immediately after one renaissance from hinduism had got majority of the people back. Why is it that people are very anxious to stay in only a very highly repressing discriminating racial hinduism and didn't accepted other religions? My be people liked to be repressing and people didn't like freedom.
3)India had abolished slave system way before than any other countries in the world had thought of restraining slavery. The greatest example is slave system is only found in Ramayana and not in Mahabharata. When slave system is abolished in society, then why did people started to discriminate based on caste? Slave system was only reintroduced in India after the invasions of Muslim as even the greek writer megashtenes hadn't find any slaves in india.
4)In hinduism, not only humans and natural forces, even animals like Dog, Ox, Snakes etc are also worshipped. When people were able to see god in even animals, then how can such a society will repress fellow humans?
5)During the reigns of Islam and Christianity, people are highly oppressed and they are promoted to convert but people in Bharatavarsh hardly cared for conversion. Why is it so?
6)Till the end of 19th century, India is considered as richest country. Why is it so?
The only possible reason for any of the above questions is that only through hinduism, people felt great freedom than any other religions and it was proved historically and there is no such thing as Discrimination based on Caste.

Let's see varna system from recorded history. The first historical available document was from a greek writing Megasthenes' Indica. In his book, Megasthenes had documented about life of India around 3rd century BC. In his book, he writes that there are seven castes in India - Philosophers(which formed small part), Husbandmen who are majority of population and have to cultivate their land, Herdsmen and Hunters who are allowed to keep cattle and hunt animals, labor people who are hired by the king to vend wares, build ships and amours. The fifth being fighting class whose job is only to fight and nothing else. The sixth class are overseers to whom is assigned the duty of watching all that is going on. The seventh class consists of counselors and assessors of king. Megasthenes goes on explaining that exchange of caste is prohibited except for anybody can become a philosopher as that is the toughest job. This shows that caste is decided by occupation and not by birth.

Apart from this, a well-famed incident should be noted. Chanakya(a brahmin) had helped Chandragupta(kshatriya) to establish Maurya dynasty. It was well-known fact that only the chanakya's brain that implanted chandragupta as the new emperor and founder of new empire. With his brain, chanakya could have easily got the throne, but he want a kshatriya to be the ruler instead of him. This also implies that brahmins are there to help kshatriyas and chaturvarna system was followed till then and no atrocities on low castes were existed.

There are not many changes had taken place till advent of 10th centuary AD which are strong enough to shake the society from its very base either religiously except for establishment of a few new empires and fall of older ones. Whoever the ruler is either Jian or Buddhist or Shaktite or Shaivite or vaishnavite or advait or dvait, the social life was not affected much and this societal structure seems to remaine intact till 10th centuary AD. By 6th centuary AD(by westerners calculations), Buddhism was totally wiped out of whole bharatavarsh(present pakistan,India,bangladesh except for a few places like Bihar,Afganishtan and Amaravati(These facts are recorded in chinese traveller huen tsang's writings)). There were only little changes in social life till the end of 10th centuary. But in 20th centuary, there are innumerable castes. How did this drastic change take place? The main change one can observe is that the attacks and raids on India are vastly increased at an exponential rate and the rulers had changed from hindus to muslims and later to christians. Is there any relation in between mulim rule and degradation of caste system?

In his essay, Jai Chand Vidyalankar in Itihaas Pravesh writes that in the beginning the castes had all the possible flexibility but it began to be rigid in the 10th century, to defend the Hindu life from the barbaric invaders who not only raped, murdered, plundered but also terrorized people towards conversion to Islam. The first attack of islam was delivered on 712 C.E. by Muhammad bin Qasim on Sindh. This was immediately followed by a series of attacks. Initially muslims were unsuccessful to land on India till 11th centuary AD. But a series of successive attempts made them victorious. The raids of muslims is so high. An example might illustrate the real situation. A special tax called "Turushkadanda" was imposed by Gavalga kingdom of Gujarat, which is used to fight only muslims. This is just a tip of iceberg. One notable incident took place in 1198 AD. Mother of minor king Mool Raj who also was lady cheif of army defeated a host of muslim army and took muslims as captives. The captured muslims are absorbed by the hindu society as soldiers which tells that till 12th centuary AD, the chaturvarna system was alive and is strictly followed.

By 11th centuary AD, there are muslim rulers on India and they imposed heavy Zizya taxes on people of other religions. To attract more people, they exempted brahmins and buddhists. The struggle between rulers and ruled ones had caused a serious tumult in social life and the once famous varna system had lost all its flexibility and began degrading into a dangerous form. Fernand Braudel wrote in A History of Civilizations (Penguin 1988/1963, p.232-236), Islamic rule in India as a "colonial experiment" was "extremely violent", and "the Muslims could not rule the country except by systematic terror. Cruelty was the norm -- burnings, summary executions, crucifixions or impalements, inventive tortures. Hindu temples were destroyed to make way for mosques. On occasion there were forced conversions. If ever there were an uprising, it was instantly and savagely repressed: houses were burned, the countryside was laid waste, men were slaughtered and women were taken as slaves." Will Durant's famous line: "The Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex of order and freedom, culture and peace, can at any moment be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within." (Story of Civilization, vol.1, Our Oriental Heritage, New York 1972, p.459). This could clearly explain what a terror the Hindu society had faced till end of muslim rule. During this time only the oral powers of brahmins had saved the Hindu society. The hardships faced by Hindus had forced them to forget the real chaturvarna system. the present degraded system of chaturnavrna system was due to the result of muslim rule in India. This degradation had reached peak after the British rule had begun.

let's see some historical facts. The Britishers had appointed rich person of a village to collect taxes and called them "choudary". Now this is one of leading caste among Andhra Pradesh. People having "choudary" as a part of their name can be seen all over India, Pakistan, Bangladesh. Some linguistic terms also made a small difference. The word Iyengar was a mal-pronounciation of Ayya garu.

It seems like the caste system had started declining from 10th century. Some more points raised by many is that Hindu society never accepted changes. This may seem false. Some examples may illustrate my point. The well famed Andhra-Kurukshetra or “The war of Palnadu” is resultant of change the society has to turn. This war is fought for change in Caste system and fought between two factions. The traditional factions led by Nagamma and revolutionary forces led by Brahma Naidu. Brahma Naidu and Malideva Naidu had tried to abolish caste system which Nalagama Naidu opposed. He was supported by Nagamma. This war had resulted in total destruction of a generation of warriors of that age and as a result the end of chalukyan rule was hastened. There is one more event to be noted. The birth of Veerashaivas in Karnataka. They are a branch of people who thought of creating a casteless society but ultimately were made as a caste and worst of all their caste was divided into many subcastes. A sect which started to create a casteless society was degraded into a caste and was again divided into many subcastes.

By churning the whole events, we can conclude a few points. Its the human nature to degrade any great system and occasional great persons like Buddha, Sankaracharya were needed to any society for not to downfall of a society. Caste system is not as bad as always projected. It was resulted into as bad only because of stagnant degradation and unfortunately when a renaissance is required, the central rule of india is fallen from the hands of Hindus. Every man wants his own identity to be saved and at same time he wants to integrate into society. Caste system came into existence at this point. It integrated everybody into society and at same time gave a person his own identity and this helped to excel the society for not years or decades or centuries but for millinea. Until the end of 19th century, India is considered as the wealthiest country in world. Without spirituality from Hinduism and strong society based on Caste system, I don't think it was a possible. Change is constant and once caste system is useful doesn't means that it will be useful again. Its time for our generation to decide what to do about caste system. I feel we all should get united and fight against this social evil unless we are bound to lose again.