Introduction
Introduction
Introduction
The period between 200 BCE and 300 CE witnessed a dynamic and complex social landscape in
ancient India. The varna system, a broad categorization of society, coexisted with the emergence
of jatis, occupation-based sub-groups. While untouchability, the exclusion and marginalization of
certain communities, began to solidify, gender roles remained largely dictated by patriarchal
norms. We have seen that the varna system can be traced from the later Vedic times. Gradually,
norms related to varna hierarchies became more elaborate. Manu gives elaborate rules related to
these, and he was followed by later law givers, Yajnavalkya, Narada, Brihaspati, Katyayana, Vyasa
and Parashara. The authority of the texts were such that even later philosophers like
Shankaracarya stated that in social matters Manu’s word was final. Earliest reference for varna,
purushasukta- this describes primeval sacrifice of purusha and through this all elements were
generated. Mouth Brahmin, arms- kshatriya or rajanya, thighs- vaishya, feet- shudra. The males
of the 3 upper castes were dvija- twice born. Vedic initiation – upanayana. 4 varnas and
ashramas are the 4 pillars of brahmanicaL ideology (dharmashastra texts). Outside groups wer
absorbed into the varna system and they were put in the category of varnasamkaras. Some
scholars feel that the varna system was an elaborate system of classification in which all living
beings and cosmic elements were slotted in the four varna categories, according to their basic
features. It was only gradually that the varna system became hierarchical and was then
propagated by the dominant classes. Gradually, as social differences became sharper and
needed to be more defined, the dharmashastras began to have elaborate rules related to varna
hierarchies. Endogamy, hereditary occupations and taboos related to interdining and interaction
between the varnas were encouraged. As professional occupations emerged, jatis became more
numerous and simultaneously some groups were placed at the bottom of the society and
regarded as untouchables.
VARNA
The varna system, with its four broad categories – Brahmins (priests and scholars), Kshatriyas
(warriors and rulers), Vaishyas (merchants and farmers), and Shudras (laborers) – provided a
framework for social hierarchy. Though not as rigid as often portrayed, the varnas prescribed
duties (dharma) and privileges. Brahmins enjoyed the highest status, responsible for religious
rituals and intellectual pursuits. Kshatriyas wielded political power and ensured security. Vaishyas
played a crucial role in trade and agriculture, forming the economic backbone. Shudras, the
largest group, provided essential services and manual labor. Brahmanical patriarchy is a complex
formation of social status, economic, social reproduction. It is a structure unique to brahmanic
Hinduism. Women are crucial in maintaining boundaries between caste. Brahmanical chords are
different
depending upon the status of caste group and most stringent control was for higher caste
women. In Manusmriti we read that women are redisposed in violating rules.
The dharmashastras sought to introduce a system by which hierarchies amongst people
could be maintained. Production activities could be ensured and circulation of resources
maintained with a constant supply of labour. Thus, from an economic point of view, the varna
system was a mechanism that worked for the benefit of the upper varnas at the cost of the
others. The varna system, supported and flanked by the two arms of religion and the state, was
able to survive and withstand different ages and cultures. It was a tradition which was constantly
evolving and changing while becoming more and more elaborate and complex. It can be
questioned as to how much of what was mentioned in the texts was actually implemented. We
have to be careful in analyzing the texts as they seem to be prescribing what they thought was
necessary for an ideal society. How much of it was implemented is debatable. However, we do
find that a lot of what the dharmashastras stated was repeated and reinforced and thus, they
seem to have influenced social conditions in a considerable way.
We must also remember that society remain changing and there were regional,
linguistic, social and cultural disparities in social systems. The structure of the varna system was
not all encompassing at all times. The varna structure itself was subject to change, those who
were outside it were being constantly assimilated. Varna and jati categories were changing all the
time. Thus the varņa system and its hierarchies were not always rigid, but could be flexible and
vary according to different situations.
PROLIFERATION OF JATIS
The origins of varna and jatis has to be seen in light of emergence of inequality, how resources
came to be monopolized by a few at the cost of the others. This was accompanied with the
growth of the state, and ritual and ideological norms which projected the need for a complex
hierarchical social order. Some historians relate the growth of the jatis to tribal assimilation
accompanied with the penetration of brahmanical systems into different regions. Jatis may have
emerged within the varna system through fragmentation and incorporation of tribal communities.
Jatis were not as fixed as varnas. Upward mobility, though limited, was possible through
acquiring skills or through patronage. For example, a skilled Shudra artisan might be absorbed
into a Vaishya jati. However, downward mobility could also occur due to transgression of social
norms or changes in economic circumstances.
R. S. Sharma discusses proliferation of jatis by associating them with the growth of land grant
economy, the spread of brahmanas to aboriginal areas and the employment of local people as
landless labourers and agriculturists. In the context of studies in Orissa, Kulke refers to
kshatriyaization, rather than brahmanization, showing that not only brahmanas were agents of
change but so were kshatriya zamindars, chiefs and rajas of tribals who broadened their power
for their own material interests.
There was plenty of social mobility within the varna system in the period under study. Texts refer
to the degradation of brahmanas who accepted gifts (pratigraha) and performed sacrifices
(pujaris, devalakas). On the other hand, the number of those who performed administrative
duties and got superior land grants as a result, the recipients of agraharas, were also increasing.
Brahmanas engaged in agriculture (krishikarma) were also regarded as degraded. Scholars like
D. D. Kosambi and R. S. Sharma have shown that land grants to brahmanas led to the
emergence of a feudal economy. However, as discussed above, others like Kulke have shown
that land grants to brahmanas in Orissa, rather than leading to feudalism, actually curbed
feudalism. Local rulers began to resettle brahmanas from elsewhere in their territories, leading to
increase in localized, regional brahmana categories. Kshatriya groups also emerged as a result of
new migrations and this resulted in the splitting and splintering of existing groups and upward
social mobility of new groups. Some areas like the south did not see the emergence of kshatriya
families and most agricultural groups like the vellalas, kammas and kalitas got incorporated as
shudras. Shudras were assigned the duty of agriculture in the texts of these times. This resulted
in an improvement in their condition. Scholars have also suggested that this was a period for a
crisis and breakdown of social order,
The kayasthas were a class of literate professionals who came up as a result of the social and
economic changes in the post-Gupta period. As landed property and the administrative
apparatus devoted to the upkeep of land records became important, a new caste of scribes
emerged. The Puranas mention kayasthas as shudras, which, seems to show how brahmana
contempt for all kinds of labour led to their ranking as shudras. However, this would also show
how perceptions towards shudras had changed as they came to be regarded as a working and
literate community. Other scholars feel that the kayasthas were mainly drawn from brahmanas or
kshatriya varna.
B. D. Chattopadhyaya suggests that rather than breakdown of the social order, there was an
entry of peasant ruling jatis in the different regions of the country that were inhabited by diverse
non-caste communities.
Parashar-Sen argues that social history in early India involved a process of making of castes,
jatikarna, in varied spatial contexts and the status of these subcastes was continuously changing
with agricultural expansion into hitherto food gathering areas.
UNTOUCHABILITY
The origins of untouchability have been discussed by different scholars. B. R. Ambedkar had
stated that untouchability emerged as a result of the brahmanical taboos related to those who
ate beef. N. K. Dutt, on the other hand, claimed that the idea came from the Dravidians who had
treated the pre Dravidian aborigines as pariahs. He asserted that untouchability was borrowed by
the Aryans from the Dravidians. One of the reasons why untouchability has been traced to
ancient, pre Aryan times is because it has no precedence or parallel anywhere else in the world.
It was not an Aryan custom, and that is why some think that it existed in pre-Aryan times. Some
scholars feel that the segregated workmen’s quarters in the Harappan times indicate that it may
have existed in those times. Others point out that untouchability may have arisen as a result of
urbanization and that it was essentially an urban phenomenon. However, its occurrence in rural
areas shows that it was not only an urban phenomenon.
A study of the Vedic texts shows that it did not exist in the earliest times, in fact in
the later Vedic texts some of those categories who were later included as untouchables were
actually included in sacrifices and rituals as special categories. Some social historians feel that
brahmanical ideology introduced the system as a result of tribal assimilation and tribes were
included as downtrodden because of their cultural backwardness and taboos related to the
works they were associated with- dealing with corpses, leather work and other such polluting
tasks. Like all other social phenomena, untouchability also had different phases of development
and it has not remained the same from the time of its emergence.
Vivekanand Jha has done a comprehensive study on the origins and development of
untouchability and he has identified four phases in its advancement. He shows that in the Rig
Veda and the later Vedas, tribal groups like the Chandalas and Pulkasas were not untouchable,
although they are mentioned with revulsion. In the second phase upto 200 AD, Chandalas and
Pulkasas emerge as untouchables, and this continued in the third phase, upto 600 AD
Vivekanand Jha emphasizes on the fourth phase, 600 to 1200 AD, when untouchability reached
a ‘peak’, with occupational groups like carmakaras and rajakas also becoming degraded as
untouchables.
STATUS OF WOMEN
society was divided into the four varnas but often varna for women was invoked mainly for
marriage purposes and for determining the status of the progeny, rather than giving women any
varna privileges. Feminist scholars of Ancient India have shown how women were used to
maintain varņa hierarchies– the superiority of brahmanas came from the fact that they had
access to women of all the varnas, the texts categorically claim that a brahmana could have four
wives, one of each varna, a kshatriya three wives but could not marry a brahmana woman, and so
on. By the time of Manu Smriti, savarna marriages (marriage within the same varna) were
encouraged and any kind of inter-varna marriage was frowned upon, especially pratiloma
marriages where a high cast woman is forbidden from marrying a low caste man. Thus,
endogamy played a crucial role in maintaining caste distinctiveness, but it also allowed certain
flexibility to incorporate other communities, and allowed new communities to have cultural
distinctiveness and a place in the caste system.
Uma Chakravarti,states about the relationship between caste, class and gender that Production
and reproduction activities are managed and controlled by society by promoting class, caste and
gender differences. Class, caste and gender are inextricably linked, they interact with and shape
each other. The structure of marriage and control over sexuality and reproduction is the
fundamental basis of the caste system and helps in reinforcing caste stratification. It is also
fundamental to the way inequality is sustained.
The marginalization of women in rituals, which they could not perform independently but only
with their husbands, and their separation from vedic learning (they were not allowed to recite the
mantras) meant that the main role associated with them was reproduction. R.S. Sharma points
out that the institutions of private property and family centering round the wife were the chief
reasons of the origin of the state and the main motive for social action. Women along with
property became the chief source of conflict in society
The treatment of women as property, for the sole purpose of reproduction is a constant feature
whether in the Vedic texts, Brahmanas or the epics. This seems to be replaced in later society
when the patriarch is no longer empowered to gift, pledge ,etc. Thus, we see that whether it is
the varna mechanism or gender differences, social conditions were never static or uniform, but
constantly changing in different times and regions.
Conclusion
The dharmashastras elaborate on the varna and jati system but the structure has been changing
and constantly evolving. Apart from varna and jatis there were pastoralists and forest tribes who
were outside the varna mainstream and also need to be considered. Numerous jatis came up in
this period because of socio-economic changes. The rise of kayasthas is associated with the
growth of landed economies, and the need to keep land records. Untouchability emerged as a
major development in this period. Caste, class and gender hierarchies strenghten or reinforce
each other.