Sociology: Paper II: THE CASTE SYSTEM

Caste System:

Every society is stratified. It has rightly been said that an “unstratified society, with a real equality of its members is a myth, which has never been realised in the history of mankind. The form and proportions may vary but its essence is permanent.” The Indian social system rests on three pillars: the caste system, the joint family system, and the village community. Among these, the caste system appears to be the most significant feature of the  Hindu Society due to its interdependence upon the social, economic and political systems. In fact, the Hindu Society has been described as the caste society par excellence. In India we find a unique system of social stratification based on birth, which is not found elsewhere in the world.

Meaning and Definition:

The term ‘Caste’ is derived from a Portuguese word ‘Casta’ meaning breed, race or group.  As already mentioned, castes are ascriptive groups. Thus basically caste refers to people belonging to the same breed. An individual is born into a caste, and this status is usually permanent. Though the elements of castes are found outside India, it is only in India that numerous castes are found. The term ‘caste’ has been defined differently by different people.

According to G.S.Ghurye “Castes are small and complete social worlds in themselves marked off definitely from one another though subsisting within the larger society.”

According to MacIver “When status is wholly predetermined so that men are born to their lot without any hope of change in it, then the class takes the extreme form of caste.”

According to A.W.Green, “Caste is a system of stratification in which mobility, movement up and down in the status ladder, at least ideally, may not occur.”

Characteristics of the Caste System:

1. Segmental Division of Society:

Under caste system, society is divided into several small social groups called castes. Each of these castes is a well developed social group, the membership of which is based on birth.

Since membership is based on birth, mobility from one caste to another is impossible. Each caste has its own traditional social status, occupation, customs, rules and regulations. It has its own governing body called the caste council or ‘jati panchayat’, which enforces the caste rules. Above all, members of a caste are bound together by mutual obligations of help and co-operation in their day to day activities. Thus each caste is a social world by itself.

2. Hierarchy:

The caste system is always characterized by a hierarchical arrangement. It implies that there are some castes which are considered superior to the others. Membership in the caste is based on birth and is more or less fixed. Traditionally it is the hierarchical arrangement of caste according to different degrees of dominance and subordination. The Brahmins in India are placed on the apex of the social ladder. A Brahmin is entitled to whatever exists in this world. In the caste hierarchy the Brahmins are followed by the Kshatriyas and the Vaishyas. At the bottom of the ladder are the Shudras.

3. Restrictions on Interaction

In the caste system, there are several restrictions on interaction. The members of one caste cannot mix or move freely with the members of the other castes. This ban on interaction becomes still more rigid when the question of mixing of a superior caste with an inferior one comes to the front. Every caste abides by well-established customs and well-defined norms of interaction.

4. Social and religious disabilities:

In caste system, the members of a higher caste impose certain disabilities and restrictions on other castes. In the Hindu caste system, the Brahmins are the most privileged caste and the Sudras are the oppressed ones. A Sudra cannot even touch an individual belonging to a higher caste. People belonging to the lowest caste in the hierarchy are not allowed to dwell in the cities and purchase property in the localities inhabited by the high caste people. They are not allowed even to go to the temples and worship there. They are not even permitted to study religious books etc. they are not also allowed to use village wells or ponds, used by the higher castes.

5. Imposition on restrictions on commensality:

Each caste group has its own laws which govern the food habits of the members. Generally, there are no restrictions on fruit, milk, butter, dry fruits etc. But there are some restrictions regarding unfried food. Unfried food has been divided into two classes, ‘pacca’ and ‘kachcha’. This division is based on the use of ‘ghee’ with or without water. The kachcha food can be accepted only from a person of one’s own caste or of a higher caste.

6. The Ideology of purity and pollution:

The higher castes are believed to be pure and the lower caste people as impure. A central point in Hindu ritual is that it is necessary to make offering to the gods in order for human affairs to continue without undue disaster. The Brahmin or the priest acts as an intermediary between the general society and the gods. The lower castes are regarded as less pure and more polluted. This concept of dividing people in terms of pollution and purity was given by the famous Anthropologist Louis Dumont.

7. Restrictions on Occupations:

The different castes are usually associated with traditional occupations. Hindu religious texts determined the occupations of all ‘Varnas’. One’s birth into a particular caste determines his occupation during his life time. A Sudra cannot be engaged in the profession of a priest and a Brahmin is debarred to engage himself in impure occupations like making shoes which is the occupation of the lower castes.

8. Marital restrictions:

Caste endogamy is strictly enforced wherein the members of each caste marry only within their own caste. Inter-caste marriage is prohibited.

9. Hereditary status:

Caste system is based on the ascriptive pattern which implies that the birth of a person in a particular caste decided his caste and his status in society. It is usually difficult or rather impossible to change one’s own caste despite the acquisition of qualifications or disqualifications, the membership of a particular caste continues and does not undergo any change.

Origin of Castes:

Many western and non-Indian scholars have described the origin of castes in their own ways. Whereas Herbert Risley has attributed the racial differences to have been the cause, Nesfield and Ibbeston explained its origin through occupational factors. Abbe Dubois stressed on the role of the Brahmins in the creation of caste system. J.H.Hutton refered to the belief in ‘Mana’ as the origin of caste. In addition, various theories of the origin of caste system have been formulated. Some important theories are given below.

Traditional Theory:

This theory owes its origin to the ancient literature. It believes that caste has a divine origin. There are some references in the Vedic literature, wherein it is said that castes were created by Brahma, the supreme creator. He created different castes for the

harmonious performance of various social functions for the maintenance of society. According to the ‘Purushasukta’ hymn of the Rig Veda, the Brahman is supposed to have been born from the mouth of the Supreme Being, the Kshatriya from the arms, the Vaishyas from the thighs and the Sudra from the feet of the creator. The emergence of four castes from different parts of Brahma’s body is only a symbolic description and is indicative of the work performed by each of them. It considers caste as a natural determined organization of social functions and explains one’s birth in a particular caste in terms of the doctrine of karma as well as dharma. Since the Brahmin has come out of the mouth, the seat of speech, his duty is to serve society as a teacher and also to preserve his cultural heritage. Arms symbolize strength. Hence the duty of the Kshatriya is to defend the society from internal and external aggressions and rule the land. The duty of the Vaishya who comes out of the thighs is to provide food for the members of society and look after its economic well being. The feet serve the body. So, the prime duty of the Shudra who is born out of the feet of ‘Brahma’ is to serve the members of other castes without grumbling or grudging. Thus the purpose of creation of each caste is to perform specific functions according to the creation of God Brahma and as such castes cannot be changed by human will. The supporters of the traditional theory of caste cite instances from the Manusmriti, Puranas, Ramayana and Mahabharat in support of their argument of four-fold division of society. As regards the origin of a number of castes, it is believed that those have been formed as a result of the hypergamous or hypogamous marriages between the four original ‘Varnas’. The ‘Karma’ and ‘Dharma’ doctrines also explain the origin of caste system. Whereas the karma doctrines hold the view that a man is born in a particular caste because of the result of his action in the previous incarnation, the doctrine of dharma explains that a man who accepts the caste system and the principles of the caste to which he belongs, is living according to dharma. It is believed that the person living according to his dharma is rewarded. On the contrary, the violation of one’s own dharma yields punishment. Confirmation to one’s own dharma also remits on one’s birth in the rich high caste and violation gives a birth in a lower and poor caste.

Attempts have been made to explain the caste on the basis of qualities or ‘gunas’ which are interpreted in terms of two sets ‘Gotrika’ and ‘Namika’. The ‘Gotrika’ quality is concerned with heredity. The individual on the basis of his birth, inherits from his lineage,which is commonly found among all other consagunious kins. The ‘namika’ qualities are the individual’s own specific qualities. Thus the’gotrika’ relates an individual with a particular group and determines his ascriptive status. This ascriptive status accords him membership in a particular jati or caste.

This traditional theory has been criticized on three counts.

First it attributes the origin of human beings as four Varnas to a divine being and thus considers it as a supernatural phenomena which is biologically wrong.

Secondly, it treats four Varnas as four castes, which implies that caste system and Varna system are all the same. This conception is wrong. In this regard M.N.Srinivas holds that the idea of caste as the four-fold division of society represents a gross oversimplification of facts. The real unit of caste system is jati denoting an endogamous community with more or less defined ritual status and occupations traditionally linked to it.

Thirdly, the tracing of the origin of caste to miscegenating or Varna Shankar is also misleading. It is possible that some castes have been formed as miscegenation, but it is not correct to say that all the castes have been formed due to miscegenation.

Occupational Theory:

Nesfield regarded caste system as the natural product of the occupational division of Hindu Society. In his own words “Function and function alone is responsible for the origin of caste system”. He holds the view that in the beginning when there was no rigidity, each individual was free to have occupation of his choice. But gradually with the rigidity in the system, occupational changes came to a halt. Castes were identified on the basis of fixed occupation. Persons in noble occupations, such as educating the people, fighting in the battle field, trade etc. were considered as members of superior castes. The others were traced as persons belonging to inferior castes, such as Sudras. In support of his theory, Nesfield cited the example that the occupation of artisans working in metals is ranked higher than basket makers or some other primitive occupations which do not involve the use of metals.

However, this theory is not free from criticism. The line of attack is that occupation is not the sole basis of causing caste differences. Wide variations are also marked in respect of the position of agricultural castes which are rated lower, they are regarded as relatively higher and respectable in North India.

Political Theory:

Some thinkers are of the opinion that not race but political convenience and manipulation by those wanting to retain authority resulted in the origin of caste system. The Brahmins were solely responsible for creating and maintaining this system so as to retain authority. In the words of Dr. Ghurye, “caste is the Brahminic child of Indo-Aryans culture cradled in the land of Ganges and hence transferred to other parts of India by Brahminic prospectors.”

Abbe Dubois argues that caste system is an ingenious device made by the Brahmins for Brahmins. Brahmins imposed restrictions on food and social intercourse to preserve their purity necessary for the sacerdotal functions. They also accorded high status to themselves and declared all others inferior to them. The salvation of individuals or society lied in the performance of religious rites by the Brahmin only. The Brahmins  even added the concept of spiritual merit of the king, through the priest or purohit in order to get the support of the ruler of the land.

However, Hutton has made scathing attack on the Brahminical theory of the origin of caste on two counts. First, it is not possible to accept this theory unless it is confirmed  that Brahmins must have got the political power to implement such a scheme. Second, such a deep rooted social institution, like caste, could hardly be imposed by an administrative measure. Of course, both the arguments of Hutton appear to be illogical because Kshatriyas have ruled over the land through the entire period of history and furthermore imposition of superiority over others by the Brahmins may not be possible through administrative measure.

The Theory of Mana:

J.H.Hutton has propounded the theory of ‘Mana’ in the formation of castes. This has been supported by Roy, Rice and Swart also. ‘Mana’ is a supernatural power which possesses the capacity to do good or bad to people. The tribals believe that ‘Mana’ is attached to objects, places and even to individuals. The tribals also believed that this mysterious impersonal power can be transmitted through contact and social intercourse.

Tribal belief in “Mana” is always accompanied by the belief in value of taboo. Each ‘Mana’ has its corresponding taboos. Taboos are required to provide protective measures. Taboos are imposed on commensality, inter-marriage, interaction etc. to save the members of one tribe from the ‘Mana’ of the other tribe. Tribals consider the food of the other tribe perilous due to the belief that food and contacts may be infected with the dangerous soul matter of others. Hutton’s argument is that caste elements were existent in India before the Aryan invasion. In his study of certain tribes east of the Naga Hills, Hutton found that in this area each village was an independent political unit and occupations were distributed by villages. Some villagers were adepts in pot-making. People belonging to other villages were weaving cloth. Some villages were having blacksmiths. The villages had interdependence on each other through barter system of their products. Hutton suggested that this has probably been the state of affairs throughout pre-Aryan India. The exogamous clans started migrating from one village to another due to political, social and natural disturbances. The villages also welcomed such migration because it was beneficial for them in respect of the non-availability of particular trade. The migrants were not allowed to practice the profession of the village, where they got settled, because the professions were tabooed.

The tribals believed that if the strangers were allowed to practice the ancestral occupation of the villagers that would displease the ancestors. Since the ancestors were believed to have possessed the ‘Mana’, they would destroy the crops and fruits of the earth. Hutton has also cited the Mana principles in other religions like Buddhism, where it appears as ‘iddhi’. In Islam such beliefs are known as ‘Kudrat’. In Hinduism, it is analogous to ‘Shakti’.

Criticism:

The theory of ‘Mana’ has been criticized on two counts. First, India is not only country where the belief in ‘Mana’ existed. But in no other parts of the world it created the caste system. Hence, the belief that the theory that ‘Mana’ produced caste system appears to be misleading. Secondly, there is no evidence supporting the existence of caste system in India alone.

Racial Theory of Caste:

Herbert Risley is one of the ardent advocates of racial theory of the origin of caste system. Other supporters of this theory are the scholars like Ghurye, Majumdar, Westermarck and others. According to this theory, caste system came into existence due to clash of cultures and the contact of races. The Aryans came to India as conquerors, because of their better complexion, physical appearance and built up of the body. In comparison with the non-Aryans, the Aryans placed themselves as a superior race over the non-Aryans. Thus the Aryans considered the natives as inferior to them and maintained their own ideas and ceremonial purity. The Aryans got married to the non- Aryan women, but refused to give their own daughters in marriage to the non-Aryans. The Chandals had the lowest position in society. Thus the irregular union between races and racial superiority were held responsible for the origin of caste system in India.

Risley has mentioned six processes of development of caste system.

• Changes in traditional occupation: when a caste or a sub-caste changes its traditional occupation and adopts a different one, it ultimately develops into a distinct
• Migration: In the past the transport and communication system was not developed. Therefore whenever a section of caste migrated from one region to the other, it faced difficulties in maintaining contacts with the earlier
• Customary changes: From the earliest times, the formation of new castes was based on the rejection of old custom and usages and acceptance of the new practices and habits.
• Preservation of old practices: Some caste groups are interested in maintaining their old traditions and on those bases they separate themselves from the rest of society who follow relatively new customs and traditions. The caste groups preserving old patterns may take up new
• Getting into the folds of Hinduism: Certain tribes or the section of the tribes enter into the rank on Hinduism by changing their lineage, by accepting the tenets of any school of Hindu religion, by joining Hindu religion and by establishing relations with the Hindus without changing its name. Thus, the tribes transform themselves into castes. The examples of the Rajbanshies of Bengal and Muria Gonds of MP may be taken in this.
• Role of religious enthusiasts: Separate sects are created by the religious enthusiasts. They preach their doctrines and attract people towards them. Gradually, their followers develop into a new group. Kabir may be taken as an example in this

Ghurye’s View:

• G.S. Ghurye also traces the origin of caste system to race. He has associated caste system with Brahmanic system.
• The system originated in the Gangetic plains due to the conquest of the Aryans. According to him, the conquered race began to be considered as Sudra.
• The Sudras were excluded from all religious and social activities of the Aryans. The Aryans did not allow them to participate in Indo-Aryans social activities. According to him “the Brahminic variety of this Indo-Aryan civilization was developed in the Gangetic plain”.
• Ghurye believed that it is this multiplicity which has resulted in the formation of castes and sub-castes.
• In this regard, he adds, “the various factors that characterize caste society were the result in the first instance of the attempts on the part of the upholders of Brahminic civilization to exclude the aboriginals and the Sudras from religious and social communication with themselves.”

Risely’s view:

Herbert Risley held the view that the caste system originated due to the emigration of Indo-Aryans from Persia. In Persia, the Indo-Aryans were divided into four classes and the migrants in India wanted to retain the same class structure. At the same time they wanted to maintain distance from the non-Aryans because they considered the non- Aryans inferior to them, both in cultural and racial features. They practiced hypergamy with the non-Aryans, but did not allow hypogamy with them. Even then more stray cases occurred. Thus three distinct classes emerged in society:

(a) Endogamous marriage of the Aryans

(b) Hypergamy and

(c) stray cases of exogamy.

Such marriage practices resulted in the origin of castes.

Majumdar’s view:

According to D.N.Majumdar, the origin of caste system may be traced to the ‘Varna’ or complexion. Initially, there were only three classes on the basis of complexion. These three classes were formed out of the inter-mixing of Pro-Dravidian and Proto- Mediterranean races. The intermixing of different races arose out of the acquisition of Dravidian wives and the desire for a settled life, D.N.Majumdar writes in his book, “Races and Culture in India”. The actual mention of the caste system in Avestan  literature as comprising of the priest, the charioteer, agriculturists and the artisans and an identical division of society in ancient India may point to common origin of the caste system, especially because the Indo-Aryans are only branch of the same race which moved towards Persia.” In course of time, the higher castes took to certain professions and the lower caste abstained from practicing those professions of the higher castes. Restrictions were also imposed on marriage. Gradually, the superior castes maintained social distance from inferior castes. The inferior castes got themselves organized to stake their claim in the caste hierarchy. The formation of hierarchy became the basis of origin of caste system.

Criticism:

Racial theory cannot be accepted as the exclusive theory of the origin of caste system in India. Caste system should not be confined to India. It should be found in all such societies which have experienced the conquest by other racial groups.

Secondly, it is  quite natural that whenever two or more distinct races come into contact, some sort of segregation results. But this may not always lead to untouchability. Thirdly, the practice of hypergamy may be a reasonable factor contributing to the formation of caste system. But this is not the sole reason. If we relate the origin of caste exclusively to the race, it will neglect many other possible factors.