It is very difficult to say in precise terms the exact way in which the caste system originated. Researches held in this regard have not been able to establish the facts relating to the origin of the caste system beyond doubts. Discussions and debates are still going on at the level of the scholars regarding this issue Dr. D.N. Majumdar pointed out at the inability of the scholars to arrive at a consensus on this issue when he says “…..it is evident from the fact that after a century of painstaking and meticulous research in the history and function of the social system, we do not possess yet a valid explanation of the circumstances that might have contributed to the formation and development of this unique system.” In spite of the controversies prevailing over the issue of the origin of the caste system, some of the scholars have established their own theories regarding it.
1. Traditional or Indological Theory
Ancient literature of India provides the main source for this theory. The traditional or indological theory believes that the caste system has been established by the divine ordinance or atleast with the divine approval. The main sources for this is to be found in the Purushasukta of the Rig-Veda. According to the Purushasukta, the four Varnas or the Supreme Being. According to this theory, the Brahmins had emerged from the mouth of the Supreme Being the Kshatriyas form the arms, the Vaishyas from the thighs, and the Shudras form the feet. These four varnas or social divisions have different functions according to the places of their origin. Mouth is the seat of speech or knowledge. Hence the task of the Brahmins is to serve society as teachers, as counsellors or advisors, as priests and as thinkers and conservers of cultural heritage. The arms or shoulders stand as a warrior, as a protector and as a benefactor. The Vaishya have emerged form the thighs of the Creator. The thighs of the principal repository organs nearer the stomach. Hence the primary duty of the Vaishya is to provide food for the members of society and look after its economic wellbeing. The Shudras have emerged from the feet of Creator and hence their duty
is to serve others just as the feet serve the other parts or organs of the body.
Smritikara Manu too has supported this theory. He has given a classical interpretation to the origin of the Varna. In Bhagavad-Gita also we find a similar interpretation pertaining to the origin of the Varnas. In Chapter XIV sloka 13 of Bhagavad-Gita, Lord Krishna himself says that he only created the four Varnas on the basis of Guna and Karma. Traditional explanations relating to the origin of the Varnas are also found in the Shatapatha Brahman and also in the Taittiria Brahmans. Apart from the Vedic texts, various legends and puranas also give such explanations relating to the origin of the Varna.
Criticism
The traditional theory of the origin of the Varnas has been criticised on various grounds. Firstly, the theory is criticised as unscientific because biologically it is impossible for anyone to give rise to the birth of a child through the mouth, shoulders, thighs or feet. Secondly, the theory considers four Varnas as four castes. If this is accepted, it would mean that Varna and not caste is the unit of the caste system. The real unit of the caste system is not the varna but Jati, which is a very small endogamous group. Thirdly, M.N. Srinivas considers this theory of the caste, which highlights the idea of castes as the four-fold division of the society, represents a gross oversimplification of facts. Fourthly, divergent explanations offered regarding the origin of the Varna quoting various religious, literacy and other sources are also contradictory.
But in spite of these controversies and criticisms, this has its own practical importance in the words of Dr D.N. Majumdar, “if however we take divine origin of the Varnas as allegorical explanation of the functional division of society, the theory assumes practical significance.”
2. Racial Theory
Herbert Riseley, a British ICS officer and former census commissioner believed that the origin of caste system was due to racial differences, particularly skin colour between the invading fair skinned Aryans and the indigenous dark skinned people whom they conquered. The Aryans believed in their own purity and did not give their women in marriage to the ‘dasas” but took women from the latter as wives. The children of such inter-marriage formed the lowest divisions and were called “Chandalas”.
Risley also put forth his reasons for the later proliferation of castes. According to him (a) changes in hereditary occupations,(b) migration,(c) change in customs and adoption of new ones by a section existing caste, (d) prevention of old customs by another section, (e) prevention into Hinduism by tribe or a section of a tribe and (f) the tendency on the part of the followers of certain religious leaders like the Kabir Panthis to regard themselves as a caste and so on accounted for the process of development of the castes system in ancient and medieval India.
G.S. Ghurye, and Westermarck also support the theory of racial origin of caste. Dr. Ghurye says that the early vedic Indians or Indo-Aryans who were migrants from Central Asia referred to themselves as ‘Aryan’ (Gentlemen) and the dark coloured, natives as Dasa (which means enemy in Iranian language). However Ghurye belives that the Aryans were very tolerant and accommodated various indigenous faiths and practices. The caste system was the means or modus operandi of such adjustments.
D.N. Majumdar though that term Varna meant both colour or complexion and class. He asserted that there were three varnas– The Aryans, and the other two formed with the intermixture of (a) Aryans and proto-Mediterranean (the racial category that lived in the Indus valley) and (b) The Aryans and preDravidians. According to Majumdar, these three Varnas or classes that came up first in early ancient India forced a hierarchical division of labour to maintain their superiority. In this system, the position of each such group depended upon the purity of blood (through endogamy) and the extent of isolation maintained by each group.
The significance of the racial theory lies in the fact that it points out the contact between two cultures, the Aryans and the indigenous, as the main force in shaping the caste system. Sometimes this view is referred to as the theory of culture contact. Some scholars, maintain that the Aryans immigrants themselves were subdivided into four-Varnas-Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaisya and Sudra, grouped into ‘Dwijati’ or twice born consisting of the first three who were entitled to wear a sacred thread would begin a second birth and therefore the varnas wearing it were called ‘dwija’ or twice born) and ‘ekjati’ consisting of the last varna, that is the Sudra who were not entitled to don the sacred thread. The indigenous people or the Non-Aryans were the Dasas who formed the fifth category as panchama. The later foreigners who came to India also were clubbed as non-Aryans and put in the fifth category as Mlechha. The ranking of these varnas was made on the basis of (a) right to wear the sacred thread, (b) performance of priestly function and (c) Aryans origin.
Criticism
The racial Theory has also been criticised. Firstly, according to Hutton, three is no consistency between the racial interpretation of this theory and the available facts. Secondly, the theory fails to give a proper explanation for the practice of untouchablilty. Thirdly, Hutton has sought rise to the caste system in India but not in other countries. Fourthly, Hutton has also tried to show that the Brahmanical influence which is believed to have played a vital role in the genesis of caste system is not uniformly found in all the places. Further, it was very much dominant in few areas while it was virtually absent in a few other areas. Finally, it is argued that the racial theory is a major weakness in the sense that it highlights the importance of purely racial factors and conveniently forgets the efficacy of other equally important factors.
3. Racial and Functional Theory
A theory of the origin of castes put forward by P.F. Slater, combines both the racial and functional origins. Slater opines that the caste system was created in order to safeguard the professional and occupational secrets. The fact that the caste system is actually stronger in Southern than in Northern India suggest that caste arose in India before the Aryan invasion. The Aryan invasion further intensified and developed the caste structure. As a result of occupations becoming hereditary and marriage being arranged by parents within the group practising the same craft, trade secrets were preserved. As a result or ritual,
religious and magical ceremonies also, exclusive occupational groups were built up, marriage outside which became prejudicial and contrary to practice. The Aryan invasion had the effect of strengthening a tendency to associate difference of caste with a difference of colour and of strengthening also a tendency for castes to be placed in a scale of social precedence.
4. Occupational or Functional Theory.
“The Occupational Theory of Caste” was established by Nesfield. This theory tries to establish connection between the castes on the one hand, and the occupations on the other. The theory assumes that castes originated in different occupations. According to this theory, if a particular group follow a hereditary occupation it evolves into a caste in course of time.
This theory also makes a distinction between different occupations depending upon the associated idea of relative purity and impurity. Those who performed pure or better and respectable tasks or jobs came to be distinguished from the other who purposed inferior or low-grade occupations. Those who followed the so called “pure” occupations were regarded as superior. Those who were engaged in dirty or low-grade occupations were looked down upon were considered inferior. As per the logic of this theory, the hierarchy, castes is associated with the hierarchy of occupations. In this hierarchy of the superior castes follow “pure” occupations whereas inferior castes follow” impure” occupations.
Nesfield, thus, made it clear that the different of occupation was responsible for difference of caste. He emphatically concluded that occupation and occupation alone is responsible for the origin of the caste system. To quote his words “Function and function alone is responsible for the origin of caste system.”
Criticism
This theory of Nesfield is also criticised. Firstly, this theory fails to explain the difference in the social status of various castes which practise the same occupation. Secondly, it is wrong to consider the occupational factors alone as the cause of the birth of caste system. Hutton in this regard comment that “occupation is not a cause but only a factor in the evolution of caste”. Thirdly, this theory does not take into account the racial and religious factors which played their role in the formation of the caste system. Majumdar in this context states that “there may not be much racial difference between the higher castes as such, there may not be great variations of physical features in groups occupying a particular geographic region or part of it but some racial difference between high and low do exist and is apparent to one who knows the country and its people. Fourthly, D.N. .Majumdar has also criticised Nesfield’s idea of the hierarchy of castes in terms of the superiority or the inferiority of the occupations. He is of the opinion that “the status of castes depends not on the superiority or the inferiority of occupations but upon the degree of purity of blood and the extent of isolation by the groups.”
5. Guild Theory
Denzil Ibbetson put forth the guild theory. According to him, castes are the modified forms of guilds. In his opinion, the caste system is the product of the interaction of three forces viz., (i) Tribes, (ii) Guilds, (iii) Religion. The tribes adopted certain fixed professions, and in due course assumed the form of guilds. In ancient India, priests had greater prestige. They were a hereditary and endogamous group. Following their precedent, other guilds also adopted the endogamous and other practices and in due course became castes.
6. Religious Theory
Hocart and Senart are two advocates of the religious theory. According to Hocart, social stratification in India originated on account of religious principle and customs. In ancient India, religion had a prominent place. The king was considered to be image of God. These kings accorded different positions to different functional groups, at the top of which were the priests who propitiated God. Senart has tried to explain the origin of the caste system on the basis of prohibitions regarding sacramental food. He holds that on account of different types of duties there grew up certain prohibitions regarding sacramental food.
The followers of one particular deity considered themselves descendants of the same ancestor and offered a particular kind of food as offering to their deity. Those who believed in other deities. Each group worshipping a particular deity gradually assumed caste status.
7. Political Theory
Abbe Dubois, an European monk who lived in Mysore in the first half of the 19th century and a keen observer of Indian society was of the view that the caste system was developed and maintained by the Brahmins to maintain their ritual status. It was their handiwork. The numerous sacrifices, elaborate rituals and Sanskrit sacred tests were all devised to assert and maintain their high status. G.S. Ghurye also agrees with the view of Abbe Dubois. He says that the restrictions on marriage, regulations on accepting food and water, emphasis on purity were all laid down by Brahmins, at first to maintain their own predominance but later these spread to other groups or castes as well and became the features of the caste system
8. Mana Theory
J.H. Hutton, a British administrator in India and author of the well-known book “Caste in India” suggested that the primitive belief in ‘Mana’ accounted for the origin of caste system. The term is Polynesian in origin. It denotes a belief in supernatural powers vested in animate or inanimate beings. Belief in mana is common amongs tribes. More often, it is associated with magical and harmful powers. Therefore, the tribes evolved elaborate taboos or restrictions to protect themselves from other tribes’ mana. Restrictions on accepting food other water from others, restrictions on marriages and other forms of interaction were all for the purpose of protecting their fellow tribals. Hutton found belief in Mana among many Indian tribes he observed.
9. Mutiple Factor Theory
Sociologists hold that a complex phenomenon like caste cannot be satisfactorily explained by any one single factor. We have to look at a host of factors operating together. S C Roy, R K Mukerjee, D N Majumdar, Ram Ahuja and others have listed a number of factors, which account for the emergence and development of castes system in the Indian sub- continent. We may summarise these below.
- Beliefs in the racial superiority on the part of Aryans
- Geographical isolation of the various communities in large tracts of India.
- Metaphysical concepts like Karma & Dharma
- Beliefs in mana and taboos connected with it
- Desire to maintain ritual purity and purity of blood, through endogamy and restrictions on interactions
- Manipulation by Brahmins to maintain their priestly monopoly
- Occupational guilds which provided a sense of economic security in a Pre- agricultural economy
- The policy of live and let live and least interference on the part of the rulers in the custom and life styles of people.
- Tolerance of the diversity of social and religious beliefs and practices.
- Ideas of pollution and purity.
- Religious sanctions
- Economic exploitation and forced division of labour.
Is Caste Confined Only to India?
Sociologists hold divergent views on whether caste system is peculiar to and confined to the Indian subcontinent or is an universal phenomenon some scholars like M N Srinivas, Louis Dumont, Sanarat and Edmund Leach, etc. maintain that the system with all its elaborate restrictions, religious sanctions and ideology of pollution and purity is distinctly Indian or Hindu. Harold Gould says that caste in its fullest sense is an exclusively Indian phenomenon. Others like Dr G.S Ghurye studied the Egyptian, West Asian, Chinese and Roman Societies, amongst other, and concluded that closed status groups, restrictions on marriage, inequality and privileges linked to birth- all features associated with caste system were found in these societies too. However, even in these societies the form of stratification was not marked by the pervasive nature of religious sanctions, and ideas of pollution and purity and the extreme rigidity that were characteristic of the Indian caste system. There are few others who would like to apply the term caste to any form of stratification marked by extreme rigidity.