The Social Organisation in North-East India in Buddha's Time c7: Chapter I. Introduction
The Social Organisation in North-East India in Buddha's Time c7
- Language
- English
Chapter I. Introduction
c7.2
......ce n'est pas la théorie qui peut rendre compte des faits; ce sont les faits qui aident à voir la théorie sous son vrai jour, à la ramener dans ses justes limites.
*Senart, Les Castes dans l'Inde.*
c7.3
The time is past when people used to think that so far as ancient India was concerned, it was enough to consider only Brahmanical literature. The view that for ancient Indian culture and ancient Indian life, we require only to consider Brahmanical sources, is necessarily one-sided, because these sources were written from a one-sided point of view. For their authors immersed in the priestly views, the world which surrounded them, material as well as spiritual, existed only so far as it related to the sacrifices with their litany and their ritual which filled all their thoughts and aspirations, and where, as in the text-books of law, there was a departure from this special view-point and the entire domain of law and morals for private as well as public life was taken into account, this was still done from the standpoint of theorising Brahmanism¹; nay, even in epic literature, where one could expect most a view of the real state of things, this was prevented or, at any rate, rendered difficult by the all-eclipsing underwood of theories and systems. No wonder that this world which the Brâhmaṇas interpreted in their own way appears so foreign and so strange to us; no wonder that in many points it agrees so little with what we know of ancient India from other sides. Now-a-days, however, we no more consider a non-Brahmanical source, such as the accounts of the Greek messenger Megasthenes, unreliable simply because it cannot be brought into harmony with the Brahmanical theory²; we try, on the other hand, to collect all available material, whether it is of Buddhistic, Jaina or Greek origin, which exhibits the priestly theories in their true light—nay, we do not even hesitate to make use of the conditions of modern India which on account of the
c7.4
¹ Oldenberg, Religion des Veda, p. 25.
c7.5
² So writes Max Duncker, Geschichte des Alterthums, 4th Edition, Vol. III, p. 319. "When the Greeks give seven instead of four castes, when the officials, the spies and the artisans, and lastly, the hunters and the shepherds are designated as separate classes by them, this error arises from the reason that they look upon these as caste-divisions." Cf. further Lassen, Indische Alterthumskunde, 2nd edition, Vol. II, p.715, "Why he (Megasthenes) took seven instead of four is not clear."
c7.6
* The figures on the margin [2], [3], etc., relate to the page numbers of the original German.—Translator.
c7.7
stability of most Oriental cultures have preserved so much of the past, for comparison with, and for the explanation of earlier periods.
c7.8
Nowhere does the one-sidedness of Brahmanical explanation seem so manifest as in the manner in which the Indian society is shaped in priestly literature. Heedless of all reference to facts, the Brâhmaṇas built up a theory which appeared to them to establish for ever, through eternal and Divine reasons, their rule. As the foundation for their caste-theory, they made use of certain class-distinctions which, as everywhere, existed in a wholly analogous manner among the Iranians and which existed in India even in the oldest Vedic age and were transmitted to the Vedas. Here they found as a line of demarcation which was authoritative for them and which was not too circumscribed, that suggested by the opposition between the ruling classes, the priestly classes and the common people and the still sharper separation of the entire Aryan population from the peoples who were inimical to them, namely, the dasyus, who by their dark skins were distinguished from the fair conquerors, and, so far as they were subjugated, were employed in the capacity of slaves. With these distinctions of profession and race, the authors of the lawbooks made certain rules concerning religious rites and regulating marriage and food which probably had been current from ancient times in many tribes of the people and specially, in their class, and thus developed the concept ‘caste,’ whose chief characteristic they took to be that which was the most obvious mark of the four castes, namely colour (varṇa).¹
c7.9
¹ It is beyond the scope of my problem which is only concerned with the condition of a particular period, to examine in detail the question of the origin of the castes and especially, of the influence which the institution of family has upon the building up of caste. I refer the reader to the article of Senart, *Les Castes dans l'Inde* in the “Revue des deux mondes” (Vols. 121, 122, 125), which I consider the most sensible and acute thing that has ever been written about the Indian castes. In particular points the statements no doubt stand in need of proof before they can be regarded as scientific facts. Especially, the proposition which is to be looked upon as the cardinal point of his theory, namely, that “caste is the normal development of the ancient Aryan family conception” seems hardly to meet adequately the objection that no traces of this development of the family into the caste are to be found in the Vedas, with the help of the following statement: “The development might have taken place too slowly, it rests upon too instinctive, too primitive elements to give us much evidence of this element in a literature such as that of the hymns.”
c7.10
The Brahmanical theory divides Indian society into four castes and prescribes for each of these wholly fixed professions and activities. At the head stand the Brâhmanas; they represent the priest and teacher class. They have for their work the teaching and study of the Veda, the offering of sacrifices for themselves and for others and the receiving and giving of alms. The Kshatriyas or “warriors” have for their duty the protection of the people, the giving of alms, the offering of sacrifices and the study of the Vedas; to the Vaiśyas, breeding of cattle, trade and agriculture were assigned as their work, but along with these, giving alms, offering sacrifices and study are made their duties; the Śûdras, finally, have only one work and that is to serve the other three castes (Mânavadharmaśâstra I. 87-91). The authors of the lawbooks could not possibly conceal the inconsistency of this their theory with the surrounding facts. Most early probably, the two highest castes, the priests and the warriors, were brought into relation with the real facts, but the great mass of the people who in the course of a progressive civilization were assigned the various professions could only be held fast by doing violence to facts. But how to explain the existence of innumerable facts contradicting the theory? It would not do to introduce new castes without destroying the sacred old tradition. “The Brâhmaṇa, the Kshatriya, the Vaiśya, these three castes have two births, the fourth has only one birth; and there is no fifth (caste)”—so it is said in Manu (X. 4).
c7.11
People joined with the already current theory another, and that was the theory of mixed castes.
c7.12
Acting upon this, people began to look upon only the children by properly wedded women of the same caste as belonging to the caste of their father and the children resulting from the union of different castes as mixed castes, and this in the following way: the higher the caste of the mother and the lower the caste of the father, the lower became the caste of the issue. Thus, the child born of the union of a Brâhmaṇa with a Vaiśya girl was called an Ambaṣṭha, so it was called a Niṣâda when the union was with a Śûdra’s daughter; the issue of the marriage of a Kṣatriya with the daughter of a Śûdra was called Ugra; the children resulting from the opposite kind of union, namely, when the mother belonged to a higher and the father to a lower caste, were called in the descending order of their social rank, Sûta, Mâgadha, Vaideha, Âyogava, Kṣattri and Caṇḍâla. All these mixed castes were characterised as of low birth (apasada), the lowest and most contemptible was, according to the theory, the Caṇḍâla, because resulting from the union of a Brâhmaṇa’s daughter with a Śûdra. Through further combinations, through further alliances between the four recognised castes and the mixed castes and through marriages among the latter, there arose a further number of mixed castes. Among others—I only mention the names which occur to me in this connexion—the issue of the union of a Nishâda with a Śûdra wife was called Pukkasa and the Veṇa was the issue of the alliance between a Vaidehaka and an Ambaṣṭha woman. This, however, in no way exhausts the number of mixed castes; here come first the so-called Vrâtyas, who are the issue of legitimate unions of the three higher castes but who through neglect of religious obligation, that is, neglect of taking admission into their caste (upanayana) at the right time, lost the right to belong to that caste. Their descendants fall again into different groups of castes, according as they were orginally of Brâhmaṇa, Kshatriya or Vaiśya origin We shall in course of our enquiry come across them as Mallas, Licchavis and Naṭas who were all descended from the Vrâtyas of the Kshatriya caste. Innumerable despised mixed castes, again, are the offspring of those who through some fault—adultery, consanguineous marriage, abandonment of the prescribed profession—are excommunicated from the Aryan Society; thus we have the origin of the Kaivarta out of the union of a Nishâda with an Âyogava woman. To these mixed castes professions were assigned with as much strictness as in the case of the four official castes; for instance, to the Sûta was assigned the work of a cart-driver, to the Ambaṣṭha, the medical profession, to the Māgadha, trade, to the Niṣāda, the killing of fish, to the Pukkasa, the capturing and killing of the cave-dwelling animals, to the Caṇḍālas, the carrying of corpses and the execution of criminals.
c7.13
So much for the theory of the Brāhmaṇas (according to Manu, X. 5 sq). It is *prima facie* evident that we cannot possibly have in it a true picture of the real state of things; and it is not difficult to see how there has developed such a system. The names of the particular mixed castes show very plainly the material out of which the system is built; throughout it is either geographical or ethnical relations, names of lands or peoples, which give them their distinctive names, as, for example, Māgadha, Niṣāda, Vaideha, Ambaṣṭha, Malla, Licchavi and Caṇḍāla. Along with these and to a much smaller extent, professional categories determine the names, as, Sūta, cart-driver, Veṇa, maker of reeds, Naṭa, dancer, Kaivarta, fisherman. The self-contained existence of these and similar groups separated from the Aryan Society, through contempt shown towards their race or their callings, was too evident to make it possible to ignore them quietly or to bring them under one or other of the four castes. The theory was widened and the mixed castes were annexed to the four original and recognised castes by giving their families or professional groups a wholly arbitrary genesis.
c7.14
That the inadequacy of the orthodox theory and the necessity for making certain concessions to truth was felt is shown by numerous exceptions to the general rule recognised for particular cases. The law, according to which every caste was assigned a wholly fixed calling, could not be maintained in this its exclusive form; people permitted at first the higher castes to follow the mode of life of the caste next in order in the system, but people could not stop there and allowed, evidently, under pressure of circumstances, the higher castes to adopt the professions which were originally considered proper for the lower ones. Thus, a Brâhmaṇa may, if he cannot earn his living by the work proper to his own caste or by that of the warrior caste, adopt the life of a Vaiśya and earn his livelihood by agriculture and rearing cattle. (Manu X. 82). In practice people went further and we may suppose that even among the Brâhmaṇas of ancient times the ways of earning a livelihood were no less manifold than they are to-day.¹
c7.15
¹ From the list of Brâhmaṇas who according to law cannot be invited to take part in the offering to one's departed ancestors (Manu
c7.16
If we thus have in the Brahmanical theory anything but a picture of the real social conditions, we should not also lose sight of the fact that this theory after it was promulgated without much reference to facts, reacted powerfully upon the facts (actual conditions). The more Brahmanical culture spread in the course of centuries, the more did the priestly classes succeed in stamping their desired physiognomy upon the Indian society through their religious and social influence. The superiority of the Brâhmaṇa caste which came gradually into recognition and at first, surely, not without opposition, influenced to a great extent the further
c7.17
III. 151 sq), we can get an idea of the multifariousness of the professions followed by them in spite of the prohibition. We thus meet with players (kitava), medical men (cikitsaka), butchers (mâṃsavikrayin), shopkeepers (vipaṇena jîvan) paid professions (preshyo grâmasya râjñaśca), usurers (vârddhushi), herdsmen (paśupâla) actors (kuśilava) singers (banâin), oilmillers (tailika), dealers in spices (rasavikrayin), makers of bows and arrows (dhanuḥśarâṇâm kartâ) restrainers of elephant, cattle, horses and camels (hastigośvoṣṭradamaka), astrologers, tamers of birds, instructors in the use of the weapons (yuddhâcârya), architects, tamers of dogs (śvakṛiḍin), falconers (śyenajîvin), agriculturists (kṛishijîvin) and even carriers of corpses (pretaniryâtaka)—Now-a-days one can find, as stated in Nesfield's *Brief View of the caste system of the North-Western Provinces and Oudh*, Allahabad, 1885, Brâhmaṇas following any paid profession, with the exception of such as bring on religious defilement and eventually, loss of caste, such as, for example, that of a sweeper or a washerman. We find them following the occupation of a water-carrier, cook, cart-driver, watchman, field-watch, postman, policeman, professional singer, dancer, etc., etc.
c7.18
development of the social condition; it was essentially the prime cause of the various groups of the Indian society which had been formed on the lines of professions or of races, modelling themselves upon the Brahmanical castes and so becoming what the theory had already made them.
c7.19
This superiority of the Brâhmaṇa caste, however, extended in no way over the whole province of ancient India conquered by Aryan culture. The proper centres of Brahmanism, the provinces which in Manu were styled the land of Brahmarshi, comprise the countries of the Kurus, Matsyas, Pañcâlas and Śûrasenas. The land bordering this, the portion of Northern India which was called Madhyadeśa or middle land, forms, starting eastward, a region indicated by a line drawn from the Himâlaya through Prayâga, called Allahabad to-day, towards the high land of Amarakantaka¹. The provinces to the east of this line, the countries known to-day as Oudh and Behar, where in Buddha’s time we find the people of Kâśi, Kośala, Videha and Magadha, are excluded from Brahmarshideśa. According to the evidence of the Brâhmaṇa texts and the lawbooks, there can be no doubt that these people, especially, those of Magadha and Videha came late in contact with Vedic culture and were never influenced so much by it as the western people. We should not forget that the Aryan immigration in India took place by stages and was not uniform throughout; the Aryan races, who proceeding farthest east, subjugated first the Gangetic people, may have separated themselves from the great body of the Aryans for a time, when there was still no culture which we are accustomed to designate by the term "Vedic." Also it is doubtful whether these advanced guards of Aryan civilization ever succeeded in fully absorbing the aboriginal races who, however inferior they might have been to the Aryans in point of culture, were numerically much stronger than their invaders. So also the circumstance that in Manu the names of some of these eastern races, namely, those of Magadha and Videha, are applied to the mixed castes not belonging to the Aryan family, points to the conclusion that they were not regarded as of the same rank by people who considered themselves true representatives of Aryan culture¹. The possibility, therefore, is in no way excluded that we have to see in the individual races of princes repeatedly mentioned in the Pali texts, such as, the Licchavis of Vesâlî and the Mallas, the lords of Kusinârâ and Pâvâ, who were both looked upon by Manu as the descendants of a *Vrâtya* of the Kshatriya caste, the non-Aryan aboriginal rulers.
c7.20
¹ Cf. Lassen, Indische Alterthumskunde, 2nd Ed., Vol. I. p. 152.
c7.21
¹ Cf. The excursus "Über das geographische Verhältniss der vedischen und der buddhistischen Kultur" in Oldenberg's Buddha, Berlin, 1881, p. 399 sq.
c7.22
If this supposition of an ethnical and cultural opposition between the specifically Brahmanic west and the less Brahmanised east, the home of Buddhism, is correct, then we can presume that even the social conditions, as we find them here, are different from those of the west; for the social organisation of a people is essentially dependent upon the above-named factors and is probably more so in India than elsewhere; ethnical differences and religious views have principally determined the social physiognomy of the Indian people. To this we have to add a circumstance which even for India cannot be left out of consideration and has to be brought in here for the explanation of the opposition mentioned above, namely, the influence of climate and the soil; climatical and geographical differences have even in India, which is so often called "a world in itself," sometimes even a world which unites the greatest contradictories, played a part in the shaping of the social conditions.
c7.23
Now let us leave the province of a priori suppositions and take our stand upon firm ground which will form the basis of the inquiry that follows. From the Pali texts and especially, the Jâtakas, we will take the material for the reconstruction of such a picture as the Indian society in Buddha’s age and the field of his work may have presented. Here, however, we must consider that when this picture differs from that which is presented by the Brâhmanical sources, this difference arises not necessarily from local variations but in part from the nature of the texts. Just as the Brâhmaṇa texts, the lawbooks and even the Brahmanical epics reflect very little the real state of Indian culture and just as in reality they represent the state of culture as it occurs in the imagination of their Brâhmaṇa authors, so also in the case of the Buddhist texts, one should not lose sight of the subjective element. The authors of the Pali canon were Buddhist monks, and as such, kept aloof from, if they were not hostile to, Brahmanical culture. The sacrificial ceremony, the study of the Vedas, the Brahmanical caste, in short, everything which gave the Brâhmaṇas their special position, was looked upon as worthless and challenged. Many of the disciples of Buddha belonged, before their acceptance of the homeless life (pabbajjâ), like Buddha himself, to the Kshatriya caste and showed a preference for their former caste even when they entered the monk’s state; many were rich, influential citizens, before they renounced the world, and in consequence of this, looked at their own former condition with more favourable eyes than the Brâhmaṇas; and whoever, among these classes even accepted Buddhism was very likely to view Brahmanism with great and even unjust severity. But the Buddhist monks among whom the tradition spread and to whom we owe its fixation, showed a more objective attitude towards the worldly life which they had renounced and in exchange for which they had adopted the homeless life, than the Brâhmaṇas who were always conscious of their Brahmanism which they spread over the society in which they lived.
c7.24
Besides, Buddhistic narratives which are in other respects altogether different, exhibit the same tendency in the region of morals; the great mass of concrete data regarding the life of the people which are found in the realistic pictures of the Jâtakas is for them a matter of indifference; it is purely casual, and this casual manner, this parenthetic way in which these things are described, has preserved it from distortions.
c7.25
For these reasons—so it seems to me at least—the picture of Indian society, as we obtain it from the Pali texts and principally, from the Jâtakas, is more life-like and true than that which the Brâhmaṇas through their one-sided exaltation of their own caste have given us and so we may hope to get some material from our sources which can throw light upon the caste-relations in eastern India.
Linked texts (2)
- Mānava Dharmaśāstra — Manu & Bhṛgu, Sanskrit
- Jātaka — Pāli