Varna Ideology and Social Change

Social Scientist

Varna Ideology and Social ChangeAuthor(s): Suvira JaiswalSource: Social Scientist, Vol. 19, No. 3/4 (Mar. - Apr., 1991), pp. 41-48Published by: Social ScientistStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3517555 .

Accessed: 02/03/2014 09:24

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Social Scientist is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Social Scientist.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 115.112.102.107 on Sun, 2 Mar 2014 09:24:37 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=socialscien

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3517555?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


SUVIRA JAISWAL*

Varna Ideology and Social Change**

The traditional view of the varnas is that they are of divine origin, fixed and universal. The varna stratification pervades the entire universel and is related to the three basic qualities of nature, satya (goodness or purity), rajas (passion) and tamas (darkness or ignorance). These qualities are inherent and inborn in every object or being. Hence, in its conception varna stratification is both functional and hierarchical. Occupations have to be hereditary as function and aptitude are determined by birth and these stand in a hierarchical relation sanctified by religion. Any transgression is sinful as it means a reversal of the natural order, which is to be maintained by distancing the varnas from each other through the practice of endogamy. Thus as far as the ideology of varna is concerned, social change affecting the functions or position of a varna is an aberration, a straying away from the normal, causing the confusion of the varnas.

The question arises as to what was the process leading to the formation of this ideology, what was its relationship to empirical reality and how was it related to social change. It also involves the problem of the internalization of this ideology by those who stood at the lower rungs of the varna ladder.

As to the beginnings of this ideology, theories which trace it to the peculiar genius of the Indo-Europeans or of pre-historic or proto- historic non-Aryans are highly speculative, based on a subjective and not rarely mistaken interpretation of data.2 This is not the place to examine such theories in detail but mention may be made of two, namely, the views of Georges Dumezil and those of D.D. Kosambi as both have made a deep impression on Indologists and historians.

Dumezil argued3 that the tripartite social order of priests, warriors and commoners was characteristic of the Indo-Europeans, who had a predilection towards a three-fold categorization. This typified their

* Centre for Historical Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delhi. 11 Paper presented at the symposium on 'Ideology and Social Change' at the 51st session of the Indian History Congree, 29 December 1990.

Social Scientist, Vol. 19, Nos. 3-4, March-April 1991



42 SOCIAL SCIENTIST

world-view and the Indo-European pantheon was a projection of the tripartite class system, which later hardened as varna in India and pistra in Iran. A critique of this theory was provided by John Brough4 who showed that a similar threefold ordering of the social order into priests, warriors and cattle-herders may be seen in Semitic societies portrayed in the Old Testament. More recently, Bruce Lincoln5 has shown that the Nilotic tribes of East Africa too have a similar three-fold division with priests enjoying a hierarchical superiority over the warriors. His basic argument that the roots of the separation of the priest and warrior elements lie in the ecology of cattle-keepers is quite plausible, although it is evident that this separation is only functional at this stage and is not lineage-based or genealogically determined. Even Emile Benveniste,6 who agrees with Dumezil in tracing the tripartite social division to Indo-Europeans clearly states that these were functional divisions not 'political' or 'genealogical'; these were not kin-based. In his view the Indo-European social units were family, clan, tribe and country in the manner of concentric circles, but there was no uniformity in this regard; each group of Indo- Europeans developed these institutions independently. Nevertheless, Benveniste like Dumezil traces the dichotomy of priest and warrior and the notion of hierarchy of social orders to the Indo-European phase.

But the idea that those who deal with the divine are superior to those who have temporal tasks is nothing unusual or typical of any one culture. Varna ideology is much more than a recognition of three social categories to which a fourth one, that of the sudras, was added due to the historical circumstance of the Aryans confronting and subjugating the non-Aryans in vedic and post-vedic times. The basic question is: what led to the origin of an endogamous caste structure which derived its legitimacy from the vedic notion of a hierarchical grouping of occupational groups, when there is no trace of endogamous lineage- clusters among the Indo-Europeans or in the Rigveda. This is the question which puzzled D.D. Kosambi. He pointed out7 that the Yajurvedic four varnas were quite different from the four classes mentioned in the ancient Iranian sources, namely, the priest, the charioteer, the tiller and the artisan. Endogamy is nowhere mentioned in the Yasna and in ancient Iran all the four classes were equally honoured, but this was not the case with the ancient Indian varna or caste organization, which had both endogamy as well as hierarchy. According to Kosambi an internal fourfold caste system among the Aryan tribes in India developed due to the assimilation of the survivors of the Harappa culture with the conquering Aryans. The subjugation of the Harappan agrarian population, identified as the Dasas of the Rigveda by Kosambi, formed the nucleus of the Dasa/sudra varna, but the adoption of the 'ritually superior' priesthood of the Harappa culture by the Aryan tribes proved



VARNA IDEOLOGY AND SOCIAL CHANGE 43

catalytic in his opinion, for it separated the priesthood from the kshatriya elite and led to the formation of an endogamous varna-caste system, 'for otherwise', he remarks, 'there is no reason for demarcation into endogamous castes.'8

It is curious that a perceptive scholar like D.D. Kosambi failed to note that his hypothesis regarding the origin of the brahmana caste hardly explains endogamy. In his detailed study of the brahmanical gotras he argues that of the seven sages regarded as the primary founders of the brahmanical gotras only Visvamitra was 'the one real indubitable Aryan', the rest were non-Aryans. In his view the story of the miraculous birth of Vasistha from a jar and his description as the 'first brahmana' are unmistakable proofs of his non-Aryan origin. Even if we grant this,9 we find that the Visvamitras occupy a considerable space in the gotra lists, hence the Aryan priestly group was not numerically insignificant. However, what is more important is the fact that endogamy does not demarcate the Visvamitras from the Vasisthas, rather the two combine to form one endogamous varna-caste which is separated from the kshatriya, vaishya and shudra varnas. Thus ethnic isolation does not explain the emergence of an endogamous brahmana caste in the first instance. Of course, endogamy does facilitate the absorption of tribal groups of diverse ethnic origins in a varna/caste system, which allows their incorporation without the loss of their separate identity, a point which has become commonplace in many sociological studies; but as the example of the brahmana caste formation shows, endogamous varna categories emerged when the process of social and ethnic fusion was going on at all levels. Kosambi himself has suggested that a few of the Dasa chiefs eulogized in the Rigvedic hymns may have been survivors of the Harappa culture who were adopted into the Aryan tribes; and there is nothing to show that such absorptions had led to the formation of separate endogamous castes within the folds of the kshatriya or brahmana varna in the vedic period. In our opinion endogamy was practised not to demarcate the Aryan and the non-Aryan but to differentiate occupational categories of varying status and thus had a socio-economic basis. To explain the endogamy of the caste society in terms of racial or ethnic exclusiveness is quite fallacious. Endogamy is both a manifestation and a tool for perpetuating class and gender exploitation;'0 and once it came to characterize the varna system, it provided the system both strength and flexibility. For, the system could go on expanding an hierarchical society by providing space to alien groups and drawing them in its vortex without doing itself or the notion of hierarchy any serious damage. Thus caste endogamy co-existed with hypergamy which allowed limited mobility in the favour of the upper castes. An exploitative system which has the capacity to enroll the best of whatever rank and origin in its own service is far more pernicious and long-lasting than the one which is absolutely closed and static.



44 SOCIAL SCIENTIST

However, Kosambi made a very important observation that 'caste is class at the primitive level of production.' The division of society into four categories and the separation of the brahmana and the kshatriya elite groups in an hierarchical manner need not obfuscate the class role of this system. It does not mean that the varna or caste system was rooted in a religious principle, the oppression of the pure and the impure, as is assumed by Louis Dumont.11 The separation may have its roots in the religion of pastoral tribes as is argued by Bruce Lincoln. Cattle-keepers tend to develop two classes of specialists, the fighters, who specialize in cattle-raids and thus increase the stock of cattle in possession of their tribe, and the priests who specialize in cattle- sacrifice and offer to the gods the items which are valued most in their society and in this way obtain the blessings of the gods and ensure the increase of the wealth and prosperity of their tribe through divine favour. It has been shown12 that the crystallization of the vedic priesthood as the brahmana varna was a process simultaneous with the growing complexity and elaboration of the vedic ritual of sacrifice. But the later vedic texts while emphasizing the separation of the brahmana and the kshatriya also speak of their interdependence and opposition to the lower varnas.

Thus the varna divisions had a historical origin in the real conditions of existence; and these conditions gave rise to an ideology which legitimized exploitation. It was the ideology of the dominant classes and not exclusively of the brahmanas. As Irfan Habib remarked in his presidential address to the Indian History Congress in 1982, the karma theory propagated by Buddhism and Jainism provided a powerful justification to the caste doctrine, and the principle of ahimsa or non-violence legitimized the hatred of the land-owning peasantry towards the hunting tribes, who were forest-dwellers and who must have come in conflict with the agrarian expansionists coveting and appropriating the forest land. The early Buddhist texts denounce the hunters and forest tribes as hinajatis and the Aitareya Brahmana speaks of such communities as nicyas and apacyas who had their own chiefs.13 It should be kept in mind that the landowning agriculturists of the sixth century B.C., the gahapatis of the monarchical kingdoms and the khattiya clans of the gana-rajyas constituted the dominant classes and their socio-economic status was quite different from that of the depressed peasantry of the early medieval times. It is in the Buddhist Nikayas of the third century B.C. or thereabout that the notion of the pure and the impure jatis appears for the first time. Thus the varna ideology of the pure and the impure castes emerges as the ideology of the donmnant classes; and it is only natural that the brahmanas being priests and ideologues should become its chief spokesmen.

We would like to emphasize that we do not regard the varna system and its ideology as a priestly invention but an expression of the




dominant material relationships prevailing in society. This ideology pervaded even the Buddhist and the Jain world-views with the difference that these religions contested the hierarchical position and the higher ritual status of the brahmanas above the kshatriyas. But as we have argued elsewhere,14 the varna ideology helped in securing the structured dependence of the landless labour in the form of untouchables or the so-called menial castes and sustained the nexus of jajmani relationship built around the landowner in a petty mode of production. Hence, even when empirical reality had transformed itself from the fourfold varna stratification of later vedic times to a complex jati structure of the Gupta and post-Gupta times, the jati system derived its legitimation from the varna ideology and the concept of the panchama (fifth) varna and the varnasamkara (birth of new castes through intermixing of varnas) were floated15 in order to provide theoretical explanation of the new situation. One need not regard these theoretical exercises as the 'diabolical designs' of the 'cunning' brahmana thinkers. People think and act in terms of how they see the world and consciously try to find solutions within their own frame of reference. However, the dominant class is able to impose its own perceptions and its own consciousness on the whole society; and it is the role of the ideology to secure the acceptance of the exploited.

Nevertheless, how was this ideology internalized by the lower classes? Why were they not able to perceive its true character? We have remarked earlier that in actual practice the system allowed the incorporation of alien and aboriginal peoples into the caste society without destroying their kin-structure, customs, etc. While the majority of such groups being poor and backward inflated the categories of the sudra varna, their chiefly and priestly lineages gained admittance to the brahmana or kshatriya varnas. This has been amply illustrated by the well-known studies of the Abhiras, Gurjaras and the Bhumijs. This kind of mobility added strength to one system to recruit new members to the ruling and dominant classes without any need for a revolutionary change or conflict. If there were tensions and resentment at the lower levels, these could not have done anything more than increase the feeling of group-solidarity and cohesiveness. The hierarchy of the varna-jati was based on the petty mode of production and hence it continued to regulate social relations.

However, varna ideology originated as an ideology of hierarchy legitimizing social inequality; and it played a seminal role in transforming semi-pastoral communities into stratified agricultural communities and the emergence of early states. With the growth of a more complex socio-political formation in the centuries preceeding and succeeding the Christian era changed economic facts led to certain modifications in the traditional notion of the varnas, and it is interesting to note how the varna ideology has made from time to time certain adjustments in those spheres which were in conflict with the



46 SOCIAL SCIENTIST

material reality while retaining its formal static appearance owing to its religious colouring. To elucidate, initially those who were engaged in cattle-keeping and agriculture were regarded as vaishyag. They formed a part of the 'twice-born' community and as such were close to the upper two varnas. The category of the shudras comprised of the marginal peoples reduced to domestic slavery or landless agricultural labour providing service to the upper three varnas. But with the greater availability of surplus the gulf between those who were engaged in manual labour and those who were able to appropriate the fruits of such labour by controlling the means of production widened; and this resulted in the socio-economic degradation of peasants and primary producers. But as the early Buddhist sources indicate, the well-to-do peasant could invest his surplus in trade, which brought him prestige and prosperity. Henceforth, those who used their own or their families' labour in agriculture or crafts came to be known as shudras and a vaishya was one who was primarily a trader. We have suggested elsewhere16 that one of the reasons why the vaishya communities adopted or patronized Jainism was the fact that Jainism took the doctrine of ahimsa to its extreme and denounced agriculture as it involved the killing of the insects. Thus Jainism could help a vaishya in raising his status above the depressed peasant by emphasizing his distance from manual agricultural activities.

Changes in the conception of what constitutes a 'vaishya' or a 'shudra' are inter-related and have a profound significance for the history of the caste system. The original four varna stratification developed in the later vedic times in the Western half of the Ganga basin including the Doab in the region extending from nearabout Delhi to Patna, the area which was known as Aryavarta. To this date this area has communities assignable to all the four varnas. But in the age of the Buddha and of the early Pali texts (600 B.C.-300 B.C.) the hunting and food-gathering tribes were condemned by the peasant communities as hina-jatis or low castes. Their assimilation in the expanding Aryan society as 'shudras' meant the increase and diversification of the shudra varna which came to have depressed communities at various levels of development. This divergence became even more pronounced in eastem and the southem India, where Aryan culture made significant inroads in the Gupta and post-Gupta times and powerful land-owning peasant communities engaged in agriculture were ranked as shudras in accordance with the northern notions of varna during this period. Hence, the Kalitas of Assam, the Kaibartas of Bengal and the Reddis and the Vellalas of the South were all dubbed as shudras. This development led to a dilution of the notion of 'shudra' especially in these areas. These areas also had culturally backward like the Pallans, Pariyans and Madigas in the South and the Namasudras, Doms, Abors and Kaibartas in the East. Such a complex structure could hardly be explained on the basis of the earlier




functional theory of the origin of the four varnas. The notion of the panchama varna , although floated, could not take deep roots owing to its lack of scriptural sanction in the Purusha-sukta hymn. But the theory of the origin of numerous castes of varying statuses from the inter-mixing of the varnas was found more useful; as in shifting the emphasis from the occupational criterion to the question of the degree of purity-impurity arising out of the union of the original founder- parents, it allowed much scope for the placement of the newly enrolled communities in an hierarchical manner commensurate with their material condition. Thus, those who were deemed born of approved anuloma order following the rules of hypergamy had a 'pure' status and those who were the children of the disapproved hypogamous pratiloma unions were impure. It should be noted that the impurity did not arise from impure occupations; rather, those who were born of impure unions, that is those who had an impure birth were condemned to follow impure occupations. Thus the theory buttressed the caste patriarchies and reinforced the hereditary nature of the hierarchical social structure. It is only in a situation of such shift in the varna theory that the Reddy kings of Andhra could take pride in being shudras having been born from the feet of Vishnu17 and in the Akkalapundi grant, the panegyrist of Singaya Nayak could claim that the shudra varna was purer than the other three varnas, as it was born along with the river Bhagirathi (from the feet of Vishnu)!

Modern industry has replaced the petty mode of production which favoured craft-exclusiveness on a non-competitive basis. It has eroded the notions of hierarchy of castes, untouchability taboos on inter- dining, etc., at least in the urban areas where its impact is felt. But the prohibition on inter-caste marriage is still practised widely as this element of the caste system is not in conflict with the capitalist mode of production. On the contrary, endogamy almost invariably means arranged marriages on considerations of wealth, power and status and as such is well-impregnated with the capitalist value system. As a matter of fact in some aspects the strength of the caste has even increased in modern times and caste ideology may be said to be undergoing another transformation. It has been pointed out that the traditional jajmani type of personal exchange relationships between the various castes of a village are now being increasingly replaced by the contractual, pecuniary and impersonal relationships under the influence of the capitalist market forces, with the result that in times of adversity one has to depend on the members of one's own caste to provide group-support. The present day politics too allows the elite of a caste to exploit the caste-consciousness of their castemen in order to compete with the elite groups of other castes and communities for political power. Thus caste ideology gains strength both for political and economic reasons in spite of the fact that there are increasing differentiations of wealth and status of individuals within each caste.



48 SOCIAL SCIENTIST

Inter-caste relations are now increasingly marked by cleavages and conflicts in place of the traditional cooperation and a sense of togetherness of all the communities in the countryside. Thus caste ideology arising through a historical process is having its 'effect upon history' through a dialectical interaction and has become a material force, a formidable impediment to progress. Only when we realize its true character shall we be able to overcome it.

NOTES AND REFERENCES

1. The Brahdaranyaka Upanisad speaks of the gods belonging to the brahma, kshatra, vaishya and shudra varnas, 1.4.11-15; R.E. Hume (trans.), Thirteen Principal Upanisads, 2nd edn., OUP, 1969, pp. 84-85.

2. For details see Suvira Jaiswal, 'Stratification in Rigvedic Society: Evidence and Paradigms', The Historical Review, Vol. XVI, 1990 (forthcoming).

3. C. Scott Littleton, The New Comparative Mythology: An Anthropological Assessment of the Theories of Georges Dumezil, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1973.

4. John Brough, 'The Tripartite Ideology of the Indo-Europeans: An Experiment in Method', Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, Vol. XXII, 1959, pp. 69-85.

5. Bruce Lincoln, Priests, Warriors and Cattle: A Study in the Ecology of Religions, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1981.

6. Emile Benveniste, Indo-European Language and Society, London, 1973. 7. D.D. Kosambi, Introduction to the Study of Indian History, Popular Prakashan,

Bombay, pp. 94-95. 8. D.D. Kosambi, 'On the Origin of the Brahmin Gotras', Journal of the Bombay

Branch of Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. XXVI, 1950, p. 50. See Kosambi, Introduction to the Study of Indian History, pp. 94-95.

9. We find this view highly speculative. For a detailed critique see the forthcoming article accepted for publication in The Indian Historical Review, Vol. XVI.

10. Suvira Jaiswal, 'Studies in Early Indian Social History: Trends and Possibilities', The Indian Historical Review, Vol VI, July 1979-January 1980, pp. 5-6; reprinted in R.S. Sharma (ed.), Survey of Research in Economic and Social History of India, Ajanta Publications, Delhi, 1986, pp. 43-44.

11. Homo Hierarchicus, Delhi, 1970. 12. K.K. Potdar, Sacrifice in the Rgveda, Bombay, 1953; Padma Misra, Evolution of

the Brahman Class (in perspective Vedic Period), Banaras Hindu University Sanskrit Series, Vol XIII.

13. Aitareya Brahmana, VIII, 38.3. 14. 'Studies in Early Indian Social History', IHR, VI, pp. 12, 21. 15. Ibid., p. 40-41; also see Vivekananda Jha, 'Candala and the Origin of

Untouchability', IHR, XIII, 1986-87, p. 13 fn. 10. 16. IHR, VII, p. 39. 17. Epigraphic Indica, VIII, inscription no. 3, lines 2-3.



Documents

Varna Ideology and Social Change