Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Positive Background of Hindu Sociology c9.s6: The Vaiśya in the Taittirīya "Social Award"

The Positive Background of Hindu Sociology c9.s6

Language
English

The Vaiśya in the Taittirīya "Social Award"

c9.s6.1

Certain phrases are often quoted from the Vedic encyclopædia to seemingly fortify the dogma of the alleged social inequalities or of superiority and inferiority among the four orders.¹⁹ The *Taittirīya Samhitā* (VII, 1, i) furnishes an illustration of the “social award” as embodied in the caste system. But there we are told simply that one (the Brāhmaṇa) is the “chief” and another (the Kṣatriya) is “strong” and so forth. It is not possible to wring out of that passage the idea that one is superior to or enjoys precedence over the other. The only social philosophy that can be discovered here is that each one is somebody in his own field.

c9.s6.2

¹⁹ Keith: *The Veda of the Black Yajus School entitled Taittirīya Samhitā Part 2* (Cambridge, Mass. 1914) p. 558.

c9.s6.3

We need not forget that the Vaiśya who is described there as “fit to be eaten” is likewise somebody in his own field. Nay, the Śūdra, who is “dependent on others,” is “not created after any gods” and is “not fit for the sacrifice”, is also important enough to be regarded as somebody. His position in the social economy is at least equal to that of the horse, as we are told. Thus the question of inferiority in the cases of the Vaiśya and the Śūdra cannot come in automatically. We are to understand from the *Taittirīya Samhitā* “award” simply that each serves a distinct function in the social complex.

c9.s6.4

But perhaps the *Taittirīya Samhitā* already relegates the Śūdra to a relatively subordinate position. The Śūdra has been declared in this “award” to be “not fit for the sacrifice.” In the cases of the other three, especially of the Kṣatriya and the Vaiśya no such discriminating award has been made. The social inferiority of the Śūdra as unprivileged may therefore be taken to be an item in the Vedic thought of the period in question.

c9.s6.5

But so far as the Vaiśya is concerned, we find that he does not have to *kowtow* to the others. He is of course superior to the Śūdra and is on a par with the Kṣatriya and the Brāhmaṇa. Indeed, in so far as he is fit for the sacrifices he becomes "divine", as a matter of course, like the members of the other two orders (*Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa* III, 2, 1, 39-40). The dogma of social precedence is robbed of all substantial significance by this doctrine of the Vaiśya's equality with the Brāhmaṇa and the Kṣatriya.²⁰

c9.s6.6

²⁰ B. K. Sarkar: "On Some Methods and Conclusions in Hindu Politics" in the *IHQ*., December 1926, pp. 859-861.

c9.s6.7

Nay, the *Taittirīya* is quite aware of the Vaiśya's special rôle in the social economy. We are told that the Vaiśyas were "more numerous than the others, for they were created after the most numerous of the gods." It is implied that the Brāhmaṇas and the Kṣatriyas who are not superior to the Vaiśyas have however in point of numbers to yield the palm to the latter. And as the Vaiśya represents the factor "to be eaten" like the cow, another item created along with him, the importance of the economic element appears to have been seized by the authors of the *Taittirīya* school or period.

Linked texts (2)