How the system worked ?- 6

...This provision gave authority to caste. Therefore it was not voluntary to follow the rules of caste but it was mandatory. Any recalcitrant person defying the rules of his caste or Varna could have been easily made an outcaste. It maintained the purity of caste and society. The people who dared to defy the Varna dharma were thrown out of the villages. And there was no appeal against it. The man who lost his property due to becoming an outcaste could not appeal to king for restoration of his property. As far he was concerned the decision of his caste was final. As we have already said that the Hindu society was characterized by multiple power centers. It was one of the reasons for the sustainability of caste system because at least the local caste authority was always there to regulate the caste conduct of a man. The absence of king hardly mattered in caste matters.

All the doors of society were closed for an outcaste. His social privileges and duties were taken away from. He was barred from communicating with the people. The village caste council or Village caste Panchayats usually did this excommunication. These Panchayats were most probably a hardened variation of clan Sabhas of the ancient Vedic times. The man was deprived of his means of sustenance. Then he had no alternative but to join the untouchables and take up their occupation because other occupations were closed to him. Usually these people were a couple who took each other’s fancy and produced Varna-Sankar offspring. The only punishment was to make them outcaste and throw them out of the village. It maintained the purity of Varna system by expelling the impure people and their progenies. It also increased the population of untouchables.

Thus the Panchayat and its authority to ostracize acted as a very important weapon to maintain the purity of caste system and stop people from rebelling...

How the system worked ?- 5

...Here one has to understand that the Varna system is not a system of allocation of jobs on the basis of individual merit. Indeed the individual on his own and as an independent identity figures nowhere in Varna dharma. It is a group oriented system where the allocation of jobs to individuals is not possible; the group has to be considered first then the individual. Varna system is actually an inherited group meritocracy. The merit of an individual depends on the merit of his inherited group. One has to do the jobs postulated for his Varna in the scriptures. To be meritorious one has to take birth in a particular group. No individual is intelligent enough to deliberately take birth in a particular Varna. The unintelligible Karmas of his previous lives are supposed to do it for him. The cosmic order in Hindu society is the state where people belonging to all the Varnas are doing the jobs ordained to them in scripture – a picture of perfect harmony with the scriptures. It was king’s duty to see that all the Varnas were doing the jobs allotted to them cosmically. He had to see that Vaisyas and Shudras were doing the jobs cosmically ordained for them. Thus maiming and mutilation of Shudras and killing of untouchables were perfectly in order if they defied dharma. The king also had to separate the untouchables by forcing them to carry an identification mark on their bodies in the city. It was done so that the people from higher Varnas got away from them and thereby avoiding the corruption of their dharma. Further they lived outside cities in marked huts to differentiate them from others. In addition the Shudras and untouchables were not allowed to carry the arms. They were forced to do so by the kings. Thus, we see that so called natural division of the so called specialized labor was achieved under maiming, mutilating and killing force of the Kshatriyas. Any deviation from this division of labor was adharma.

Further the pure and inherited Varna was maintained by outlawing the inter-Varna marriage. Any such attempt meant ostracization and a call by the king. Further discouragement to such marriage was in the form of branding their children as outcastes because they did not inherit any Varna. The existence of only four Varnas precluded the possibility and existence of any mixed Varna. The Varna-Sankars were, we know, a grave and serious threat to the existence of dharma. They were mutual antagonists.

The provision of making a person outcaste helped in maintaining the caste structure of the society. It was a very potent weapon. The ostracization meant disinheritance of Varna, disinheritance of property and a prohibition from entering the village and also excommunication. Any person found to unknowingly associate with the outcastes was heavily fined along with atonement or penance and purification. If somebody did associate himself with the outcastes then he himself ran the risk of becoming an outcaste and stood to lose his family and property. Any person flouting the rule of his castes or Varna was punishable with excommunication...

How the system worked ?- 4

.......When the Brahmanas became vegetarian, then it became the question for kings so as to which religion to support or patronize. It was essential because an irreligious king did not have much durability. One course was to patronize the religion which he got in heritance. The other course was to choose the religion which suited him best to further his territorial ambitions and which solidified his grip on the state. In this respect the Vedic religion scored heavily over the Buddhist religion. It provided direct divinity to kings. The Brahmans always extolled the virtues of kings who upheld dharma and performed Yagyas. They performed Rajsuya and Ashwamedha Yagyas for the welfare of kings while the Buddhist did not have any such concept. The Buddhism also eschewed the violence; the violence in fact was evident in the coercive power of the state. Thus Buddhism was not attractive to newly emerging kings because any violence was indispensable to formation of a new kingdom and a subsequent increase in its territory. However it was a god sent opportunity to Brahmans who were ever willing to grant Kshatriya status to new kings of obscure origin in return of land grants and plum postings with the kings and to save the dharma. And of course they used the performing of Yagyas as a mighty weapon. The Yagyas in themselves had a fascinating and a beneficial mystique around them. The kings who did not aspire to be Kshatriyas opted for Buddhism. The Buddhism automatically granted them Kshatriya status on the basis of presumed deeds of past lives. However their kingly ambitions suffered because of non-violence of Buddhism. Thus, the new kings were more oriented toward Vedic dharma and that ultimately led to its victory over Buddhism. There was a shifting of patronage towards Brahmanas. Over a period of time Vaisyas also shifted to Vedic religion to be on the safe side of the political powers. And after that Shudras also followed. There was a complete reversal to Hinduism. The Muslim invaders only destroyed the monasteries of a dying religion in north India.

However we find that by the time of Gupta kings, the Brahmanas had been successful in prohibiting the slaughter of cow - the divine and pure animal having pure excreta and pure urine. So they were the ultimate victors. It was made the most serious crime after the crime of killing a Brahman. The ploy of Brahmans of being deeply interested in the welfare of kings through performance of Yagyas paid rich dividends.

Now there is one more opinion that the Hindu caste system works like a division of labor. Everything is interdependent. Considering the level of agriculture available in Hindu society and its related ancient level of technology calling it a division of labor will be a misnomer. A real division of specialized labor requires a very advanced technology of multi stage production of different specialized goods that are required by most of the people.

However, it is better to call it a division of functions relating to a society which had a primitive level of agricultural technology. The Brahmans were engaged in intellectual and priestly work. The Kshatriyas were engaged in military and administrative work. The Vaisyas were engaged in business activities. The Shudras were engaged in doing labor activities. The untouchables were doing unclean jobs. Every body was supposed to be doing the job he was natural most suitable for – a great kind of dharmic harmony. On the face of it, it looks like scientific division of labor; the most suitable job goes to most suitable man. Only thing was that this suitability had to be acquired by birth. The status of a man also appeared to be job related. Higher was the job; higher was the status. The Brahmana doing the intellectual job got the highest status. The Shudra doing the blue-collar jobs had the lowest status among Varnas. The untouchables doing the lowest level unclean jobs got the lowest position in the society. This state where everybody is doing his divinely ordained function is also known as a cosmic order – with its all pervading divine harmony. But the question was how to maintain this cosmic order if Shudras aspired to become Kshatriyas and Brahmanas? If such aspirations of Shudras were realized then the cosmic order of the things would have broken down. The harmony was to get converted into disharmony with mere threat of demand for equality by Shudras. But how come the Shudras who were reciting Vedas and ruling over the people like Kshatriyas, would have been responsible for a break down in the cosmic order of pure and pious Sanatana dharma?.....

How the system worked ?- 3

...However, Buddhism became popular among general population and Brahmans felt threatened. Their cultural hegemony was at stake. Many kings also started patronizing Buddhism. This led to a reduction in Yagyas and a loss of income to Brahmans. The Brahmans retaliated by joining the enemy. If they could not beat Buddhists then at least they could join them. They went one step ahead and completely stopped eating of any kind of meat. While the Buddhists still allowed people to eat meat and also ate it themselves. It was a difficult somersault in eating habits but a tough competition from Buddhism forced them to do it. In it they were helped by the ideas of Upanishads. The Upanishads also discounted the philosophy of animal sacrifice of Vedas. The immediate effect was that the anti-Brahman feelings among Vaisyas and Kshatriyas went down. There was no dharmic danger to agriculture and to the income of Vaisyas and also that of kings. The Yagyas had become a device to transfer wealth from Vaisyas and Kshatriyas to Brahmanas. Ultimately the Brahmanas gave up all the meat eating including the beef. It was a great historical somersault. But they still retained the mystique Yagyas with minimum sacrifices and that too on occasional basis. The cow sacrifice was changed to the donations of cows in Yagyas. Still it was a transfer of wealth but not to the required extent. The cow was elevated to sacred level from being important and slaying of cow was later made the second highest crime next only to slaying of a Brahman.

Then one more factor is that the Buddhist philosophy had some common points though it denied the existence of God and soul. It believed in rebirth like Sanatana dharma. It also believed in Karma theory like Sanatana dharma. It believed in the concept of Nirvana that had its counter part of Moksha in Vedic dharma. It also believed in Varna dharma like Vedic dharma. The rebirth in Buddhism took place through Chetana while in Vedic dharma it took place through soul. The counter part of soul in Buddhism was Chetana. The medium to carry forward the Karmas in Buddhism was Chetana while in Vedic dharma it was soul. The Varna in Buddhism was decided by Karmas and by birth in Vedic dharma; both of them are essentially the same thing. Both the religions believed in the concept of reincarnation. The world according to both the religions was not permanent. The only change was the negation of the God. Simply by negating the God in one and accepting the God in another you will get the other philosophy. All the other things were almost similar. Thus there was not much philosophical departure in Buddhism. And that was its undoing. When the occasion arose, all the Buddhists again became part of Sanatana dharma. In other words they got reassimilated.

...The Varna system was maintained outside the Sangha. It was easy to maintain equality within Sangha because Bhikshus were not allowed to marry. And they were also not required to follow a profession. However the acceptance of Varna outside the Sangha even on basis of Karmas allowed the discriminatory Varna dharma to continue. It was so because if one had to change his Varna then one had to change his occupation. And if Shudras wished to change their occupations then it essentially meant that they had to take up the occupations of other Varnas. A change to higher level occupations required the acquisition of the resources of society from the higher three Varnas. It was not possible without bloodshed. It required the Shudras to improve their might which they could not do. Further Buddhism required that there should be no killings. The violence was prohibited by it for the welfare of society. So the Shudras remained where they were....

How the system worked ?- 2

...All prevailing presence of Brahmans all over India is the result of their cultural hegemony and not of any conquest. The cultural hegemony of the Brahmanas is very ancient and evident from the fact that by 200 BC they were performing Yagyas for Dravidian kings in deep south. For this they gained land grants and acceptance of their superiority. If one agreed with superiority of Vedas then one automatically agreed with the inherent superiority of Brahmans. This superiority was imparted to them by Purusha sukta of Rig Veda. Nobody could argue with the Word of God. It is also clear in the performance of Ashwamedha ceremony in the Yajur Veda. This ceremony adds nothing to the respect of either king or queen. However it tells that the Veda–vakya or Veda statements were taken as Word of God and followed to the last detail. This was a matter of faith in divinity of Vedas and also a matter of faith in divine retribution. If the kings could be made to go through this insulting ceremony then the honor of other Varnas had to be worthless. This also indicates general absence of pride in the Hindu society.

Any lower Varna individual worth his ego was a threat to dharma and had to be molded into a meek follower by invoking the authority of Vedas. And also by invoking the meek conduct of his forefathers whom he revered. Of course the threat of mutilation by dharmic kings was also there along with a threat to ostracization. The mutilated Shudras gave a sense of jubilation to higher Varnas. Many mutilations were not needed. Actually few mutilated Shudras were sufficient to put a sense of helplessness and fear among rest of the Shudras. The Shudra kings were a different preposition; they were pacified and convinced by grant of Kshatriya status. Of course Brahmanas got land grants in return for elevating their status. However the soldiers of these Kshatriya kings were not granted Kshatriya status because most probably they could not offer land grants. Brahmans spread from land to land through invitations to them by the Shudra kings interested in Yagyas and elevation of their status. These established social, religious and spiritual authorities were invited by local rulers to help them in ruling their land according to dharma. Brahmans not only raised the Shudra kings but also upheld their divine right to rule over everybody except Brahmans.

One of the reasons for the ultimate victory of Sanatana dharma over Buddhism was the relative importance given to the welfare of king by the former. Buddhism does not believe in authority of Vedas and denies the existence of God or soul altogether. Buddhism became widely prevalent all over India because of its opposition to Vedic philosophy of animal sacrifice in performing Vedic ceremonies. The upsurge and great popularity of Buddhism and its strong opposition to useless animal sacrifices indicates and excessive of animal sacrifices. These sacrifices were excessive and defenders of Varna dharma are in a constant state of denial of practice of meat eating and beef eating in Vedic society. If they are right then it only means that the Brahmans performed Yagyas involving sacrifice of innumerable animals excluding cows. And after that the dead animals were thrown away. However, these offerings never reached the gods until Brahmans ate them. If they were thrown away then the gods could not be appeased. Therefore they were necessarily eaten. Since there is no mention that the cows should be excluded from these; it can be safely assumed that they were eaten also. However such a great destruction of cattle stock meant a great loss to agriculture because it used animal power extensively. It created resentments among Vaisyas who were still agriculturists and cattle herders. All the animals to be sacrificed ultimately came from the Vaisyas which increased the burden of taxes on them. The philosophy of Ahinsa (nonviolence) of Buddhism attracted them since it reduced taxes on them by prohibiting animal sacrifices. Further the Yagyas served the purpose of augmenting the wealth and welfare of Brahmans and Kshatriyas. The real producers stood to lose from such ceremonies. Further Buddhism promised Nirvana or salvation to Shudras that was denied to them under Vedic dharma. But this salvation was available only when they joined sangha. There was no Varna within Buddhist Sangha. Anybody from any Varna could join Sangha and aspire for Nirvana. However Buddhism did not deny the existence of Varnas altogether. Buddha held that Kshatriya was a superior Varna compared to Brahman. However he denied the determination of Varna by birth. The Varna was dependent on one’s Karrma. Further according to Buddhist tradition the Bodhisattvas could take birth only in Brahman or Kshatriya Varna. The lower castes were excluded from this event. Thus, the Varna dharma was not denied; it only became based on deeds or Karma. That essentially meant a Varna system based on birth. It was actually a grossely insufficient attack on Varna dharma. There was no fundamental attack on Varna dharma. There was no special emphasis on alleviating the sufferings of Shudras. The Brahmans exploited the weakness of this attack and returned with full vigor. Even Buddhism could not solve the problems of occupations, inter dining and marriages. The Varna was not important in Sangha because occupation and marriages were not involved. If one did not marry then it was mainly useless from the point of Varna dharma; there was no threat of Varna-Sankars. If one got his food through begging or donations then there was no question of transgressing on others’ occupations. Becoming a monk or a member of Sangha was like becoming an ascetic. One ceases to really matter to society and to its members. All the Buddhist people who remained outside the Sangha retained their inherited Varna. There was no way in which they could give up their inherited Varna. The first two Varnas were not willing to give up their Varnas. The Vaisyas, the third Varna, could become Buddhist but could not get the rulership like Kshatriyas because it needed the use of arms. They also could not become lawmakers and attain the highest social status. They could not raise their Varna if the higher two Varnas who still had respective powers were not willing to accept them as their equivalent. This problem of acceptance is perenennial in Hindu society. The higher Varna is not ready to accept lower Varna as its equal...

How the system worked - 1

...There is no central authority in Hindu religion. There is no priest or head priest who controls religious activities in any given region. No priest is under control of any other priest from any other temple. All the temples are independent. The Brahmanas were not under the control of any king so naturally they were not under the control of each other also. Only one thing could control them was dharma. All the authority was vested in scriptures. They did not need any other authority. All the basic tenets of Varna dharma derive their authority from the timeless scriptures. The Shastras in turn derive their authority from being the Word of God. They are the dictums of God. None could dare defy them.

No such supreme controlling authority is envisaged in scriptures. One reason for the absence of this authority is the multitude of persons involved in formulating Vedas, Upanishads, Puranas and dharma Shastras etc. the Hindu scriptures are not the handiwork of a single man. These scriptures, sacred to Hindus, have been composed over different overlapping periods running into hundreds of years each. Whatever was produce by one Brahman could have been added or altered by another Brahman in the coming generations. When this process runs into hundreds of years we have an output where contributions have been made by different Brahmans. In addition, there are many outputs like that – all of them sacred though with different levels of sacredness. An older scripture is usually more sacred than the others. Therefore Manusmriti being the oldest of dharma Shastras is more sacred then other dharma Shastras.

So we have many composers of Vedas, many contributors to Upanishads and many authors to each of the dharma Shastras and Puranas. Any man in his lifetime did not start and finalized any portion of the scriptures. These writings were carried from generation to generation through oral traditions. This situation lasted till the scripture in question was finalized and a final word was said on it. It was a long time before any of the scriptures was finalized and written down. Thus each scripture has the contribution of innumerable authors. Thus there is no single author or individual who can be claimed or identified as most important or as a central authority in any of the scriptures. And when all the scriptures are put together the difficult of finding a single formulator becomes insurmountable. This explains why Hindu religion or Hindu society does not have a central authority or personality like Buddha, Jesus or Mohammed. In the absence of such authority or personality, any learned Brahman who knew scriptures became local authority on the matters pertaining to Hindu dharma. This absence of a central authority forced a kind of decentralization in Hindu society where scriptures were taken as final authority. These scriptures were in turn were monopolized by Brahmanas. Thus the authority of scriptures got translated into authority of Brahmanas. Therefore, a Brahman in a village in deep south was a local religious and social authority at village level and a Brahman in village in north was a local authority there. The kings came and went but the local authority remained unchanged. It automatically passed through inheritance from one generation to another. If one has to be a Brahman then one has to inherit the Brahmanhood. It is not an acquirable commodity. One needed to be born to cruel lawmakers to make cruel laws. The Brahmans can be regarded as a well-trained army in scriptures who were ever ready to defend their well-swindled privileges. They did an indirect impenetrable defense through scriptures. The fort of scriptures was impregnable. All the social and religious attacks on others came from this fort where they were safe....

Hindu justice - 4

...A Brahman could not be given a corporal punishment. No body could hurt a single strand of hair of Brahman. Further he could subvert the justice. A king could only ask him to leave the country without hurting him. If a man committed a crime to save a Brahman then it was not considered a crime. Because saving a Brahman was equivalent to saving dharma. A Brahman was dharma personified Thus he could not be convicted. When a capital punishment was well justified then he was to be tonsured only. So the maximum punishment for a Brahman was to hurt the hair on his head! It was the maximum punishment that could be given to him after a deliberate and long discussion; after all punishing a Brahman was a very risky thing. It was given only when dharma was endangered due to gross criminal act of some Brahman, which justified a capital punishment in case of other Varnas. The gravity of crime received lowest priority. There is no greater crime than killing a Brahman. Therefore all the kings avoided punishing the Brahmans.

The system of justice in Hindu society was completely Varna oriented with out any trace of equal justice. The same crime by different Varnas was viewed differently. The seriousness of the crime increased with the Varna of victim and reduced with the Varna of the accused. The punishments were caste graded. The lower the caste of accused the graver was the punishment. The caste of the accused and the victim played a role in different way. It was so because only the witnesses of the same caste were allowed to give the witness for the same caste. If the accused was from higher Varna then the lower Varnas witness could not give evidence against him. The act of lower Varnas giving any evidence against higher was adharmic.

This made the position of Brahmanas very safe; they were immune to judicial system and its power to convict. In a suit between accused of higher Varnas and victims of lower Varnas, there was no possibility of conviction because no person was willing to give evidence against his own Varna. Thus the justice process was diluted in favor of higher Varnas and the pious and pure lawmakers were the main beneficiaries. The actual justice was secondary to dharma. The concept of such a justice is truly enthralling and soothing and jubilating to Brahmanas who yearn for return of the same kind of days. The justice was more like a private enterprise of Brahmanas the fruits of which they alone enjoyed.

When Shudras could not get justice from the state, the question of justice to outcastes, untouchables or Chandals was never relevant. Actually the Shudras and outcastes were invisible to state. And the state was not visible to Shudras and untouchables who could only see a cruelly discriminating society. They lived in a perpetual state of cruel dharmic injustice. It was a system where the cries for justice from lowest two strata were lost in wilderness. It was a system of cruelties and mutilations par excellence. It was a great deterrent for potentially rebelling Shudras and untouchables...

Hindu justice - 3

...If any untouchable transgressed the dharma then he was imply killed while a Shudra was only mutilated. Most probably the pious lawmakers thought that the mutilation was mild so they allotted it to Shudras and a severer punishment of death to untouchables. The Varna difference had to be maintained.

If a man from higher Varna killed a Shudra then he was required to perform penance for six months or give ten cows and a bull to a Brahman. It is strange that a man – no, no a Shudra- is killed and one unrelated Brahman benefited; grand sense of justice! It was a fine way to transfer the wealth in favor of the pious honest and unselfish people. This punishment has not even an iota of justice in any way; whichever way one might look at it. It is another example of how the Brahmanas devised ways to enrich themselves. And the same kind of punishment was prescribed for killing a dog, a cat, an owl or a crow - so died a dog - so died a Shudra. The equivalent of life of a Shudra was life of a dog; most probably a street dog. A dog walking on its four legs; wagging its tail to please; hoping to get some food; scavenging for leftovers in garbage was equivalent to Shudra who was also supposed to depend on the leftovers of his master and serve him with all the humility and wag the tail likewise. The relations between a Shudra and his master were supposed to be like the relation between a dog and its owner. The lot of untouchables had to be worse.

Further a Shudra could not give evidence in a suit involving higher Varnas. It was so because of his lower status he could not be party to judge a high Varna man. A Shudra was to be treated in insulting terms in the court if he was allowed to give evidence. The born insulted was treated accordingly; great heritage!

If a Shudra defamed a Brahman then he had to suffer corporal punishment while others got away with a fine only. If he offended twice born then his offending part was to be cut off leaving behind a mutilated Shudra. If he grossly insulted a twice born then his tongue was to be cut off. If he contemptuously mentioned the jati of twice born then a ten inch long red hot iron rod was to be shoved in his mouth. If he arrogantly taught a Brahman his duties then hot was oil was required to be poured into his mouth. If he falsely claimed performance of rites to sanctify his body then he was to be fined two hundred coins. If he assaulted a twice born then his offending limb was to be cut off. In case he raised his hand or a stick to beat higher Varnas then his hand was to be cut off. It was a righteous religion. Was it not? If he kicked them then his foot was to be cut off. Mutilation was a very normal punishment in his case. And none could hurt the single strand of hair of a Brahman. If a Shudra tried to sit with them on the same seat with high Varnas then he was to be branded on the hips and his buttocks were to be gushed. The offending parts here were buttocks. If out of arrogance he spit on a high caste then his lips were to be cut off. Thus there were different ways devised to keep the Shudra with in his dharmically imposed limits and righteous place. As far as Shudras were concerned, it was a maiming system of mutilating justice. This justice appears to be a vicious animal controlled by the lawmakers Brahmanas who unleashed it on Shudra and untouchables whenever the occasion required...

Hindu justice -2

...The domination of Brahmanas is clearly evident in the judicial system of in Manusmriti. According to Manusmriti king who has no assistant cannot inflict the judicial punishment. So a king needed a single assistant or many assistants. Here it is evident that how these lawmakers devised the ways to transfer actual wealth and power to them. The highest social status alone was not sufficient. An assistant was mandatory for the king and as per the conditions the assistant had to be Brahman. This reserved judicial posts for Brahmans. The one who was administering could not be a fool. This effectively ruled out Shudras and those below them. He could not be greedy. This ruled out Vaisyas. He could not be a man given to sensual pleasures. This ruled out Kshatriyas. Only a learned man could be an assistant because delivering of justice meant handling sacred laws and which a Brahman could only do. Any learned Brahman was an appropriate authority in delivering dharmic justice.

Further in delivering justice, a king had to be lenient toward Brahmans. This meant that being a Brahman took precedence over justice from the very beginning. Of course it was very dharmic also. Here the concept of justice was diminished nicely. The justice became subjective from the very onset. The king had been declared to have been created for the protection of Varna dharma. When protecting Varna dharma it is necessary to keep in mind its hierarchy because otherwise the divine dharma would be corrupted and destroyed. In addition, anybody corrupting dharma faced the threat of hellish ostracization which meant no respect, no wealth, no money and a humiliating life with untouchables. No self-respecting, rational and sensible man could have taken that risk. It was the duty of king to see that all the Varnas discharged the duties ordained by dharma and especially the Vaisyas and Shudras. The king was supposed to follow the advice of learned Brahman. Further if he was not interested in discharging judicial duties then he was supposed to appoint a Brahman to do so. The heathen lower strata did not have the ability to do so. They lacked the social status and knowledge of sacred scriptures. Scriptures were the most important things in a scripture based society. Scriptures were in Sanskrit, a Dev-Bhasha or gods’ language thus the low people were grossly ignorant of their actual contents. All the men were subjected to the scriptures through their respective Varnas. A lower Varna man could not administer justice to higher Varnas because it would have been insubordination. Thus the only suitable candidate to administer justice without scratching dharma was the Brahman. A lower Varna man delivering judgement on higher Varna man went directly against the cosmic order created by man.

The suitors were to be examined in order of their Varnas which shows the importance of Varnas. The heathen ones could wait. The Brahmans knowing Vedas could not be forced to witness. And Chandals and outcastes were not allowed to witness. The inherent logic was that the four Varnas could not be convicted on the witness of the lowest stratum. In other words the witness was important in order of Varnas.

Also we have a judicial system which justifies the falsifying. Further, the witnesses were allowed to give false witness if it saved the life a man from any of the four Varnas. It may mean that the life of a man was very important; it could also have meant that the life of an untouchable or outcaste was worthless. This also meant that if someone from any of the four Varnas killed a man from fifth stratum he would be set free. This also means that in practice and theory the crimes against untouchables were not judiciable and punishable. The witnesses were also allowed to give false witness in favor of Brahmanas. This made it possible to escape from judicial net in a judiciable accepted way.

A Brahman could lie in the court but not other Varnas. Thus, a Brahman could be a bonafide liar and the dharma was upheld. This also gave the scopes to Brahmans to falsely accuse other Varnas to settle the personal scores. Thus any mild anger of Brahmanas could have been a matter of grave concern to others especially Shudras and outcastes if they were the cause of it. These conditions provided the scope for avoiding the prosecution of any Brahman. The system was internally fixed. Of course they were the lawmakers.

The real burden of justice or injustice fell on the Shudras and the untouchables. The untouchables could not expect any justice from the state. The crimes against outcastes and untouchables were not judiciable, which is clear from the fact that they were not allowed to produce any witness from their side. Their life was full of injustice since birth for no fault of theirs. The only crime they committed was to be born in the fifth stratum; it was a kind of inherited crime; their forefathers had also done the same. For this they suffered from life punishment.For this crime their life itself was the punishment; it was not necessary for the king to punish them; any judicial punishment was in addition to their life punishment. How much one could punish a man? Of course one could do it if one was dharmic enough. And it was done in a slowly and crushing manner. Sometimes simply crushing. When it comes to untouchables the society takes the law into its own hand. The whole of the society becomes either law abiding or lawbreaking. It was law abiding since king could not reach all the villages. It was not necessary for the king to do so because the local Panchayats were strong enough to corporally punish the untouchables. It is dharmically sanctioned. The killers or beaters are actually doing the dharmic job of upholding dharma so they are not punishable...

Hindu justice -1

...The Hindu society is an ancient society; it has stood the test of time. Being an ancient society has endowed it with an ancient system of justice. The justice in a Varna based society is without saying is Varna based justice. One’s guilt was measured through his Varna. The crime in Hindu society can be broadly divided into two categories. One type of crime is related with general crime like stealing etc. And other kind of crime is crime against dharma. If any activity is against dharma; it becomes judiciable and punishable. It is evident in the functions of Kshatriyas, which are to protect people, rule the land and above all to uphold the dharma - divinely ordained, pious and pure dharma with all its elements of eternal cruelties. The Kshatriyas could not rule over the Brahmanas indicating existence of double power centers in the Hindu society. If the Brahmanas were above the political power then they were obviously above judicial system. The state power had been vested in Kshatriyas but they did not necessarily wield it. It was so because the king was supposed to rule the land according to dharma which could only be interpreted by the learned Brahmans. The Brahmanical interpretation of dharma, which followed from Shastras, was final. Thus, Kshatriyas and Brahmans combined together wielded the actual state power. In doing so the Brahmanas did not face a risk to life like Kshatriyas. The Brahmans were safe under the divine cover of dharma - divine protection for divine people. In addition, king was inferior to Brahman whom he was supposed to worship. This means that the Brahman was granted the status of god or demigod. A king was free to rule but he was not free to frame his law. He was dharma bound to favor the Brahmanas and heap cruelties after cruelties on Shudras and untouchables. The Brahmans were the real lawmakers and wielded indirect and unassailable power in the society – the swindlers. They were the real source of cruel exploitation of untouchables in the society. In it, others proudly helped them. Absolutely nobody had any problem in playing in their hands. It was a matter of others’ superior social status over the untouchables. The Brahmans were the real sovereigns. They framed the laws and others obeyed. The real sovereignty was vested in dharma from where it got transferred to the Brahmanas. To what an extent the Brahmans prevailed over Kshatriyas is evident from an incident from Ramayana. When Lord Rama, the God incarnate, returned home and took over the kingdom then he was required to undergo the coronation ceremony to be formally promulgated the king of Ayodhya. At that time, the Brahmans present refused Lord Rama coronation in his court. And Lord Rama could not do anything; the coercive powers vested in state were powerless. Suppressing the Brahmanas was prohibited because that would have destroyed the pure, pious and divine dharma and could have brought divine retribution. Moreover, a king could not destroy anything which was supposed to be the reason for his existence. A king could not rule over whom he was not supposed to rule. And he did not. He was refused coronation on the ground that he was guilty of killing a Brahman, Ravana the demon king of Lanka. And slaying a Brahman was the highest possible crime in a society based on Varna dharma. The king had the coercive power and the Brahman had the dharmic power. The dharmic powers were always superior to coercive powers. Thus Lord Rama was not eligible for the coronation. A mere king could not defy dharma. Facing this difficulty the courtiers of king Rama approached a group of Brahmans who agreed to perform the coronation for some consideration. They carried the coronation Lord Rama as king. As a result these Brahmans were degraded by other Brahmans from their status for coronating a Brahman slayer as king. Supposedly these Brahmans are known as Saryupani Brahmans and are considered as inferior Brahmans...

The Untouchables - 7

...The Chandals were living a life like animals which is not very different from modern times. They were supposed to live outside the villages and that is where they are still living. The Brahmans were not supposed to touch them and still they do not. They were not allowed to wear good clothes and they are still not. They were not allowed to wear any ornament and they are still not. They were supposed to eat from broken vessels and they are still expected to do it. This is what makes Manusmriti an authentic source to study the social structure of ancient and current Hindu society. And this runs counter to the arguments of many people that the Manusmriti was never relevant...

The Untouchables -6

...According Manusmriti a Brahman should not eat from the vessels which are defiled or contaminated. Here the unclean is different from impure or contamination. The unclean can be cleaned but the impure has to be purified, it cannot be purified by merely a simple act of thorough cleaning. Further an impurity can be introduced by a simple touch of a super clean untouchable. According to Manusmriti a man can become impure due to births and deaths in his families. Further a Brahman is prohibited from taking food from Shudra. This can only be on account on impurities inherent in Shudra because of his impure origin. If the impurity does not spread by touch then here is no reason for a Brahman to not accept the food from any of the Shudra. From impure people comes the impure food which is unsuitable for superior and pure people. It is the fear of becoming impure which is indicated in Manusmriti and an obsession to maintain the purity of Brahmans. The people from whom a Brahman should not accept food are – a carpenter, a usurer, an outcaste, a tailor, a blacksmith, a stage player, a basket maker, a washer man and others. If he happens to take food from such persons then he has to purify himself. The method of purification is that he must fast for three days or must perform some other penance. The garlic, onion and mushroom are not to be eaten by a twice born because they are impure substances. This obsession with purity is overwhelming and not only that it made a living hell out of impure low caste people’s lives. If a twice born eats these things knowingly or deliberately then he has to be made an outcaste. If he does so unknowingly then he only has to purify himself. Therefore there are conditions under which a Brahman can become impure and has to purify himself. This continuous upholding of purity actually led to development of untouchability. There are notions of purity and impurity in Manusmriti along with spread of impurities through touch along with different methods of purifications. The method of purification for a Brahman who has seen impure things is sipping of water and chanting of sacred mantras. So merely seeing impure things can be a source of spread of impurities, touching them ought to be very serious.

A Shudra is not allowed touch the dead of Brahman. Such an act makes ineffective all the offerings made to the manes because they have been contaminated by the touch of Shudra. Thus a certain kind of untouchability exists in the case of Shudra also. In the same vein, the presence of Shudra is not required at the Shraadh ceremony because he may accidentally touch the Brahmanas invited for such an occasion. This will contaminate the Brahmanas and the offerings made to manes. Further the outcastes are impure so they cannot be offered the leftovers of offerings made to God. It seems that untouchability was a logical culmination of this assertion of power through this esteemed and almost divine system of purity and impurity.

Now we come to existence of untouchability in Manusmriti. Untouchability requires that the mere touch of a heathen man can contaminate a pure Varna man requiring his purification. Such a condition is found in case of Chandals who came to be known as scavengers in later times. According to Manusmriti if a Brahman has touched a Chandala then he can become pure by bathing. This makes Chandals a representative of untouchables in Manusmriti. The thing is to be noted that the purification requires not merely sprinkling of water but a full bath. Further, a Brahman should not stay with outcastes, Chandals etc., which again is a practice of untouchability. The Chandals and the outcastes were nearly similar to each other in terms of social treatment meted out to them. The Chandals were offered the remnants of food from a distance which means that going near them was prohibited for the fear of touching them and getting polluted. The food was to be placed at the ground from where they could pick it up. This means that Brahmanas were prohibited from touching Chandals at anytime. But the lawmakers were compassionate enough to throw food at the ground for them. To pick up the food the Chandals had to wait until it was no longer in the hands of twice born. It is also indicated that a pig, a dog and a Chandal must not look at a Brahman while he is eating. It makes Chandals equal to pigs and dog...

The Untouchables -5

...When did the practice come into existence? We have purifier in Rig Veda but not impure people in it. The lawmakers are also not there in it. For this we have to turn to Manusmriti which relate to the period prior to entry of temples into Hindu society. Though the word untouchable (Aspryasya) is not found in Manusmriti, all the signs of untouchability are present it. Manusmriti is dated to a period around 200 BC. It is the period when Manusmriti was finalized but it is most probably related to very early period. There is absence of temples in Manusmriti and the code of conduct regarding temple entry by untouchables. This issue is sufficiently addressed in later smritis. The later dharma Shastras prescribe the purification if an untouchable enters a temple and a suitable freightening punishment is to be meted out to him.

These untouchables keep on entering anywhere they want! Is there not any dharma? They try to enter our temples! We are upper castes and have sacred temples. They cannot enter into them. See our God will be polluted. In the entire world, only we have the gods who could be polluted! The God who can be defiled! We have the most pure God. Even the gods have degree of purity. Nobody else has defilable gods. We have the best religion in the world.

A defilable God! A strange case indeed! There is no such thing as defilable God; the God who can be defiled by the simple presence of a poor human being simply cannot exist by definition. The gods are supposed to protect the weak. But it is not so in Hindu dharma, here they are supposed to protect the strong – the dharma when protected, protects. Manusmriti refers to period when idol worship and temples had not come into existence. There were no idols of great Trinity, Brahma, Vishnu and Mahesh. And Vedas were considered to be three in number not four.

Manusmriti relates to time when Atharva was not considered a Veda. It was assigned the status of word of God in later times. The Shudras were not supposed to be engaged in agriculture in the times of Manusmriti but they were allowed to do so in the times of Kautilya’s Arthshastra. Further Kautilya’s Arthshastra speaks about Aryan Shudra on which Manusmriti is silent. Emergence of Aryan Shudra is a later development. Therefore Manusmriti is prior to Kautilya’s Arthshastra.

We can turn to Manusmriti to find the prevailing notions of impurities and purification. According to Manusmriti a twice-born man has to purify himself in order to carry out his religious duties.

For untouchability to exist in Manusmriti, it is necessary that the concepts of purity, impurity along with a method of purification for the contaminated must exist. The idea must exist that the pollution can spread by mere touch...

The Untouchables - 4

...The Brahman being most pure cannot eat impure things, so he cannot eat food given by a Shudra because the food coming from an impure person is bound to be impure. This directly affects the purity of lawmakers. Here is inherent notion that a mere touch of an impure person can make the food impure. So the impurity spreads by touch. The impurity of Shudras and untouchables cannot be removed by any known process of purification. The impurity of untouchables ranks below the impurity of Shudras on account of their unclean jobs. Actually they are the polluting pollutants, spreading pollution by their very presence. This pollution also spreads by touch like the polluting of food by the mere touch by a Shudra.

Another contributory factor to development of untouchability was the system of ostracization. The system of ostracization was put in place to keep in check the recalcitrant members of the society. It was a controlling device of the society without the presence of police. In it there are features of double or multiple power centers in the Hindu society. There was a king, there are scriptures, there were lawmakers who were spiritual and priestly heads and there was a system of ostracization.

The system of ostracization enabled the local caste Panchayats (or Sabhas) or village level caste councils to impose the fines on recalcitrant members of the caste or if required then to ostracize them. Their decisions were binding on all the member of any particular caste in the village. These Panchayats worked on the principle of dharma to conduct their proceedings.

The threat of ostracization was like a hanging sword on the head of any rebelling member. The ostracization meant disinheritance of one’s Varna, land, property and money. And it also meant stoppage of any social or economic transaction with such person. No one from any of the four Varnas could sit, walk, talk or associate with an outcaste in any manner. This put the outcaste in tattered economic conditions. His Varna was snatched from him. He could not marry anybody from his Varna. He could also not profess his Varna occupation. He could not own any land. He could not get protection from king. He could not perform Vedic rites. For all the practical purpose, he did not have any Varna; he became a landless Avarna. The same was the conditions of untouchables. Nobody was willing to sit with him and eat with him. And an atonement was required if somebody unknowingly set with him or did any other such thing. Thus touching him was not allowed since sitting with him was disallowed itself. This is a practice of untouchability. His conditions were equivalent to untouchables which forced him to join the last stratum and take up its jobs...

The Untouchables - 3

...The degrading is also evident from degrading of onion and garlic from eatable to non-eatable category. Same is the case with beef eating. In Rig Vedic times, it enjoyed the place of pride in the food. However with passage of time it was degraded to non-eatable category. Its consumption by any of the four Varna came to be punishable by ostracization.

A further degradation in jobs category gave birth to fifth category which later came to be known as Antyajas or untouchables. This group was not known in later Vedic times but came into existence by the time of Manusmriti. These people dealt with butchering, dead bodies, skinning, garbage cleaning etc. These groups were butchers, skinners and scavengers etc. The butcher deal in selling the meat; the skinners or Chamars dispose the dead bodies of animals; the scavenges or Bhangis clean the city and village streets and dispose excreta. The jobs of Chamars (tanning the animal skins) and Bhangis (disposing human excreta) smell very badly and are really unclean. No one can stand in that environment for a long time. These jobs are really despicable jobs. Then we have a group of jobs which are shunned by people. In addition, since the jobs degrade the man to their level, the people engaged in such jobs are degraded and also shunned. And people go through a purification process after they come into contact with them. So a category was born called untouchables. Generally these people were force to live at the southern end of a village or a city. To maintain the purity of village, city and people belonging to higher Varnas, they were not allowed to stay within the city. It is noticeable that mainly those people were classified as untouchables whose services were not directly needed by the lawmakers, the Brahmanas.

Though untouchability cannot be traced back to Rig Veda, the existence of a purifier is very prominent in it. This purifier is water.

A purifying process, after a contact with an untouchable or his shadow, generally involves taking a bath, sprinkling sacred water on body and inanimate things and chanting Vedic mantras.

Another contributory factor for development of untouchability was to maintain the purity of pious Brahmanas, the lawmaker, who were constantly in touch with the sacred scriptures. If they got impurified then they were not eligible to chant or read the Vedas. So to make themselves eligible to chant and read Vedas and to remain equal to other pure Brahmans they had to purify themselves. If they did not purify themselves then their status within the Brahman community went down. So it was necessary for them to purify themselves every time they became contaminated by touch of a very impure person. One way out of this frequent purification was to direct these people to not to come in touch with them. So these very impure people became untouchables. The society was stretching itself at both the ends...

The Untouchables - 2

...There are some people who argue that untouchability is not a part of Hindu religion, if it is so then one must be reminded that neither Varna nor Santana dharma were part of Rig Vedic society. And even before that there was no Rig Veda itself. Hindu dharma was born with Varna dharma in later Vedic times and with its emphasis on purity of human beings it gave birth to dharmic practice of untouchability. A great dharmic tradition emerged to keep the society purer by keeping the polluted people outside the society.

When one tries to understand untouchability one has to understand the notion of purity and notion of pollution as separate from hygiene and cleanliness. Additionally one has to consider the notion of degrading jobs as separate from inferior jobs. One more thing has to be taken into account is the provision of ostracization to keep the recalcitrant elements in check.

The notion of purity itself comes from the divinity itself. The need to purify oneself comes straight from Rig Veda where water is considered as great purifier. All the religious things and activities are sacred in nature which is a level above pure. The source of purity in Hindu society is in the sacredness of Vedas. The Word of God has to be pure and sacred. The Vedas are the most sacred elements of Hindu religion. Even the temples and idol of gods are of later origin. The temples are manmade but not the Vedas. To handle the sacred and most pure Vedas one has to be pure. Impure people cannot handle Vedas. And in addition those who are preserving Vedas also have to be pure indeed the purest of them all. The presence of notion of purity is not sufficient for untouchability to exist; the notion of pollution and a process of purification is also required.

The notion of pollution comes from the notion of degrading jobs as separate from inferior jobs. The degrading jobs are the inferior jobs which degrade the persons engaged in them. The impure jobs make their performers impure. Then the children of such people get the impurity in inheritance. The notion of degrading jobs came into existence with the introduction of agriculture in Vedic society. The agriculture was known the occupation of defeated people. The Aryans, mixed or unmixed, were the ultimate winners in the struggle between native societies and Vedic societies for the political supremacy in upper north India. It created a mixed society of winners and losers, the superiors and inferiors, the higher and lower, the pure and degraded. The agriculture being the occupation of defeated people was degrading in nature. The impure nature of agriculture is evident in the impure origin of Vaisyas in Purusha sukta of Rig Veda. The Vaisyas were born from thighs which is an impure origin being below the naval. The impure people doing impure jobs were assigned the impure origin. Thus agriculture was a degrading job and this notion developed further with the spread of Vedic culture. Many more jobs were to be classified as degrading or impure. When the main activity was declared impure then how could the minor activities be left behind? They also had to follow the course. Thus all the activities involving manual labor became impure. And some were downgraded to still lower level of untouchable or polluting. Over a period of time even the Vaisya level activities of agriculture and cattle rearing in Vedic times were degrade to Shudra level. The pure Brahmans cannot take food from the impure Shudras. The impurity of Shudra is evident from their impure origin of being born from feet and lacking eligibility for thread ceremony...

The Untouchables -1

...The practice of untouchability is an integral part of Hindu society. Most importantly it asserts the divine purity and superiority of upper castes. A very big portion of Hindu society belongs to the category of untouchables. These are the people whose touch or their shadow’s touch is enough to pollute a man of higher strata requiring a purification process which includes usually taking bath and other atonement activities. Additionally it may also entail gross invectives used against these people and if desired then a corporal punishment. It all depends on the mood of upper castes but punishment is imminent. The mildest form is the reprimand. The severity may also depend on mood of upper caste and it may include dishonoring untouchable women and killing of males. It seems that the untouchables are always living under a low intensity hidden one-sided war, which raises its cruel face whenever it wants. It is similar to a war because dishonoring the women and killing of the males are the characteristics of a war. This war is waged by the landed castes on behalf of the lawmakers and dharma. Deeply entrenched in religious and social system they kill and oppress the poor untouchables for not doing their biddings.

These people, the untouchables, do not belong to any of the four Varnas though they have the jati system similar to the four Varnas. When the practice of untouchability came into existence, the Vedas had already been finalized and Purusha sukta of Rig Veda had become final word on the origin of Varnas, the Word from the mouth of the God himself, indeed. To add these people to Varna system required addition of one more Varna to Vedic society. However the number of Varnas had already been restricted to four. The creation of fifth Varna required alternation to Vedas and especially of Rig Veda which no mortal was allowed to do so. How could a mere mortal change the Word of God? But a fifth group had come in existence because of downgrading of certain occupations like butchering, skinning and scavenging to the lower unclean level by the pious and pure lawmakers – as a measure of infinite compassion of lawmakers. Further additions to this group were made through practice of ostracization. The ostracized and disinherited people were straightforwardly downgraded to the fifth stratum. Ostracization meant disinheritance of Varna and of ancestral property. This fifth group consisted of people from upper castes who were made outcastes and the Shudras whose occupation was downgraded keeping in view the increasing purity of the Sanatana dharma. All of them had to take the unclean jobs to sustain themselves. These jobs were not done by twice born or Shudras. The fifth stratum people were considered different form Shudras and given the lowest status in the society. This group of occupations and people related to it had to be given a name. So these people were given the name the Antayaj meaning the group that was born after all the other groups (Varnas) in the Vedic society or the last-born. They were assigned origin more impure than that of Shudras and hence the lowest status in the society. These people were allowed to live at the fringes of villages or out of it; which meant that they were consigned to live at the periphery of the society itself. They were more impure than Shudras because Varnas were born in a purity wise sequence. The purest were born earlier than all the others. And the rest followed in the order of purity. Those who were later in the sequence were relatively less pure or relatively more impure...

Shudra 7

...Not only this Karana had to suffer humiliation in his later days because his Shudra identity of impure origin - the people born from impure feet. How could he aspire to marry a princess? If a king wants to marry a commoner then it is properly proper. But a Shudra and a Kshatriya princess? The thought was sufficient to throw the lawmakers in a nauseating mental turmoil.

There was a princess in Mahabharata who played major part in the epic. She belonged to Panchala kingdom. Her father was the king of Panchala kingdom. He organized a Swayamvar for his daughter in question; her name was Draupadi. A Swayamvar was the occasion where only that Kshatriya who fulfilled the condition to marry the girl was permitted to marry her. It was a kind of choosing the most capable groom for the girl. The king Drupad invited all the Kshatriyas in the Swayamvar for his daughter. Karana along with Kauravas also went to Swayamvar. Many kings and Kshatriyas were present there to try their luck. There was a condition to marry Draupadi; only the one who could pierce the eye of a fish could marry her. The fish was placed on a top of a pole and a wheel was moving under it. One had to shoot the arrow while standing beneath the moving wheel near the pole by looking down at the reflection of fish in a vessel filled with water placed on the ground. If Eklavya’s thumb was not cut off and if the competition was open to all the warriors then he could have won it hands down. But that would have caused the pure lawmakers to suffer from nightmares. Their pure digestive system could not have digested it. Vomiting was certain indicating a high regard they had for the lower caste people. The kings after kings and Kshatriyas after Kshatriyas tried it but failed. So Karana got up to try his luck, he might have certainly done it. At once Draupadi objected saying that she did not want to marry a Shudra Suta-Putra. This made Karana stop then and there. No amount of bravery or skill or talent could convert a Shudra into a Kshatriya eligible to marry among Kshatriyas. He could have fought with them but not marry into them. None of the elders like Bhishma and Yudhister tried to justify the claim of Karana. Later in Mahabharata these two persons are found extolling the importance of deeds and Gunas in determining one’s Varna...

Shudra 6

...Then we have another example from another grand epic, Ramayana, which show how the people from lower castes were stopped from achieving spiritual peace. Not stopping them meant turning upside down the eternal dharma of intelligent people. Lord Rama, the king of Ayodhya returned after achieving a dharmic victory the demon king Ravana of Lanka and finishing a period of fourteen years in jungles. He is considered as a reincarnation of Lord Vishnu along with Lord Shri Krishna of Geeta fame. During his reign a Shudra called Shambuk started to perform the penance to attain spiritual peace. At the same time, a son of a Brahman fell ill. A group of Brahmanas joined together and took the ailing boy along with them to Lord Rama. Ram the king asked about the purpose of their visit. The Brahmans told him that the boy had fallen sick and therefore they had come to see him. Lord Rama said that the boy should have been taken to a physician to get the treatment and get cured. Then he was told that the boy had taken ill not due to natural sickness but because dharma was getting destroyed in his rule. Further the Brahmanas told him that a Shudra was performing penance as a result of which dharma was getting corrupted and destroyed. A Shudra was doing the adharmic deed of performing penance. His rule was becoming sinful. As a result of corruption of dharma the pious Brahman boy was taken ill. This was as simple as that. Nothing exponential logic was involved in that. The causation was there for any twice-born man to see. Only the heathen and brainless creatures could not see such pious logic. Only pious brain could give such a pious logic. The pious Brahmanas said that the only pious course of action was to kill this penance performing sinful Shudra to save the pious dharma. A single Shudra was posing grave danger to divinely ordained dharma. Somebody had to find a solution to this catastrophic problem. Any further delay would have resulted in the death of Brahman boy and king Rama would have been responsible that. The kings were supposed to uphold the dharma. A Shudra had committed the ghastly crime of transgressing upon the dharma of Brahmanas. The corruption of dharma had to be removed at any cost. Its sanctity had to be restored. A human being had defiled it. Therefore Lord Rama took his bow and arrow and went to forest where Shambuk was corrupting dharma by doing penance. Then Lord Rama showing his faith in Sanatana dharma killed armless and meditating Shambuk with a single shot. And behold, the Brahman boy got cured the moment Shambuk was killed thus justifying the causation of his sickness. In this story it is interesting to note that it was necessary for Brahmanas to ask Lord Rama to kill Shambuk. They themselves could have killed him but they chose a Kshatriya to do it to avoid committing the crime themselves. It also meant that the deeds do not define a Varna.

Then there is another example from Mahabharata where a Shudra (Suta-Putra, son of charioteer) was forced to fake his identity to learn the art of warfare. The Sutas were the Shudras and hence not eligible to learn the art of warfare. Karana was eldest of the Pandavas brothers. His mother was Kunti, same as mother of Pandavas of whom Arjuna is most famous. He was born before her marriage to Pandu. So she abandoned him to avoid social disgrace. He was brought by a Suta (a charioteer) of Kauravas who were cousins of Pandavas. Therefore he came to be known as Suta-Putra and hence dharmically ineligible to learn the art of warfare and wielding weapons. So it goes without saying that no high Varna teacher was willing to teach him. But he had a burning desire to learn the art of warfare and specially that of archery. So he went to a far away place where nobody knew him. He went to a renowned Brahman teacher who taught the art of wielding weapons to Brahmanas only. His name was Parshuram. He did not know the true identity of Karana. So Karana put on a sacred thread and claimed to be a Brahman before him. On knowing this Parshuram admitted him as his student. It is unethical to assume the identity of somebody else for personal gains but his inethicality paled before the inethicality of Brahmanas who gave false identities to all the people and prevented Shudras and those below them from fulfilling their dreams, their aspirations, their heart’s desire and their ambitions. The Shudras and those below them had to live a life without dreams. If their hopes were children then it amounted to gross infanticide. Their dignity lied tattered on the earth. One piece here and one piece there, the upper castes walked on them as they wished. And all the blame went to their Karmas.

Parshuram took Karana under his wings and started teaching him the art of wielding weapons. The time went by and Parshuram kept teaching him under the illusion that he was a Brahman. The Brahmanas were allowed to wield weapons to save the dharma under emergency. There came a time when Karana became a skilled exponent of warfare. His favorite weapon was bow and arrow. At that time, one day, Parshuram decided to take rest and Karana offered to his thigh to be used as a pillow. So Parshuram put his head in Karana’s thigh and went to sleep. Soon after a scorpion came there and stung Karana on his leg. The pain was piercing but Karana bore it with all the patience so as not to disturb his teacher. Soon this was going to result in his expulsion and a curse. When Parshuram woke up he noticed the wound on the leg of Karana and asked the reason for it. Karana told him about the scorpion. Then Parshuram doubted his identity since no Brahman could have bore such a pain, only a Kshatriya could have done it. He asked Karana his true identity. Karana in his all sincerity told him that he was a Suta-Putra. That was what he knew at that time. On knowing this Parshuram got angry that a Shudra had learnt the art of wielding weapons. He expelled Karana and cursed him that he would forget all the skill of warfare taught to him when the he needed them most. Justified was the anger of Parshuram and so was the inethicality of the Varna system. The righteous got righteously angry. There was scant regard for anybody’s natural feelings and emotions. The sub humans are not supposed to possess feelings and emotions...

Shudra 5

...Any participation or contribution to Yagya ceremony by a Shudra is prohibited because it contaminates the whole ceremony. Even contributions in his absence are not permitted. This means that ritually he was untouchable if not for the purpose of doing mundane tasks.

The Shudras were exploited as if there was no tomorrow. Also as if there was nobody answerable for their exploitation.

Further he is not to be encouraged, his talent is to be suppressed. Rather the talent of lower two strata is to be sacrificed at the alter of Varna dharma.

The Eklavya episode of grand epic Mahabharata shows that how the talents of natives of India; was supposed to be suppressed by the twice born. Eklavya was a Nishad boy. The Nishads fell outside the pale of Aryan or Vedic community. They were as good as outcastes. This community lived among forests. The five Pandavas were the sons of king Pandu. They were the Kshatriyas belonging to Kuru tribe. At that time they were learning the art of warfare from Guru Dronacharya. One of the arts he taught was archery. The best archer of the Pandavas was Arjun of Geeta fame. He was third of his brothers. Indeed he was one of the best archers among the Kshatriyas of Mahabharata. Dronacharya was also renowned for teaching the art of warfare. When Eklavya came to know about Dronacharya, he approached him with the purpose of becoming his pupil. Dronacharya refused him on the dharmic grounds that Kshatriyas should only learn the archery skills and since Eklavya was not a Kshatriya, he was not eligible to become his pupil. Eklavya was a boy with a burning desire. He went to forest and made a clay idol of Dronacharya under a tree and started practicing archery all alone without help from anybody. As it happened, one day Dronacharya took all the five Pandavas to forest for practicing archery. His favorite student Arjun was the most promising archer. All the Pandavas started practicing archery. A dog also happened to go with them. After some time the dog decided to take a walk. So it went there; chasing a rabbit or two. It was a matter of little time when it started barking. The barking of the dog disturbed the Pandavas. But soon after, the barking stopped. After sometime, the dog came back where Dronacharya was teaching archery to the Pandavas. When they saw it, its mouth was filled with arrows because of which it could not bark. It came to Pandavas and stood helplessly. Then the Pandavas and Dronacharya noticed that not a single drop of blood was coming out of its mouth. There was not even a single wound. It was an archery skill par excellence and certainly beyond them. The peerless and invincible warrior, Arjun, stood stunned. He was rooted to ground and totally numb. Here was an archer who had the potential of defeating Arjuna and Karana put together. They were curious to know that who was this archer who had put the dog in such a condition. So they went out and followed the dog to find out this mighty archer. Following the dog they reached a spot where a Nishad boy was practicing archery. He was Eklavya, the mighty archer who was never destined to become a mighty warrior. The Varna system was going to play tricks with him. If Gita is correct in saying that Varna of a man is decided by his Gunas then this Nishad boy should have married Draupadi the Panchal princess. However, the immediate events which followed, cast a doubt on the thinking given in Gita. Even of Gita is to be taken as correct than it was not followed by anybody. Dronacharya had forgotten the boy. He asked Eklavya that what he done to the dog. Eklavya replied that it was disturbing him by barking, so he had stopped the dog from barking by filling its mouth with arrows. For this purpose he had shot several arrows at the same time. The dog was not harmed because it was not his intention to harm the dog. It was a stunning blow to Dronacharya’s mind. Here was a boy who was not even a Shudra and more skilled than the best of Kshatriyas. His all worlds, previous, this and next were shaken at the same time. He understood that this Nishad boy could be troublesome for Kshatriyas and thereby to dharma. Dharma says that only Kshatriyas should wield arms. Then he asked the boy who was his teacher. Eklavya bowed to him and told that his teacher was none other than great Dronacharya himself. Dronacharya was surprised and introduced himself. He then added that he had never taken any Nishad boy as his pupil and had never taught any Nishad boy the archery. Then Eklavya pointed to clay idol of Dronacharya under the tree and said it was the idol of his Guru Dronacharya. Thus he was his Guru. Dronacharya still had not recovered from the stunning blow to mind, which was the result of superb archery skill of this non-Vedic boy. Soon he was going to set an excellent example of teacher ship. The basic principle of which is still followed. It is the principle of destroying the talent of Shudras and those below them by whatever means available to higher Varnas. This stupid boy was soon going to know that what it means to be to a non twice born but neither he nor anybody was going to learn anything from it. The talent of Brahmanas in imposing their superiority over others without the use of physical force is awesome. And stupidity exactly does not belong to them. However we come back to Eklavya and his story. He was indeed a threat to dharma. Dronacharya needed to find a way to save the spiritual Varna dharma. Eklavya was going to corrupt it by becoming a mighty warrior. Dronacharya then asked the boy to give him Guru Dakshina if he really considered him as his teacher. Eklavya’s heart was filled with unbound happiness. His wish was going to be realized. He thought that he was going to be accepted formally as pupil of great teacher Dronacharya. His happiness was set to disappear in thin air shortly under the greatness of his teacher. His teacher then asked him to cut off his right thumb and give it to him in Guru Dakshina. Truly the greatness of Dronacharya knew no limit, it was limitless like the sky, like a freely river, like the unselfishness of a fruit giving tree, eternal like Sanatan dharma. It was a trivial matter to decapitate a man. Now it was the turn of Eklavya to get stunned. Giving up his right thumb meant that he would never be able to practice archery which was his dream, love and ambition. So being a little, mean and cunning fellow he agreed to give up his thumb for the sake of the great and pious teacher. It was a fine part of instant malefic planning of this heathen boy. At once, he took a knife and cut off his thumb, the thumb that was going to give trouble to Kshatriyas, and offered it to Dronacharya. After that Dronacharya left the place along with Pandavas well satisfied in his heart that the dharma had been saved. None of the five righteous Pandavas objected to this cruel injustice. Sense of honor and fair play requires that your opponent be given a fair chance, not disabling him. Such sense of fair play and honor is missing from Varna dharma and Hindu culture. Later Sanatana dharma provided that lower two strata of population be demilitarized to avoid any encroachment on dharma by them. Brahmans and Vaisyas can take up arms in time emergency and necessity. It seems that Pandavas including Yudhister also agreed with the cruel act of Dronacharya. Later in Mahabharata, the eldest of Pandavas, Yudhister is found discussing ethics in the society. This is an example as to what an extent the upper three Varnas can go to suppress and destroy the talent from the lower castes as a matter of righteous was of life. This is the killing the problem in bud. This works on an enduring basis. Thus the appearance of an effective challenge from within the Hindu society is almost impossible. The upper castes nurture the talent only from the upper three strata of the society...

Shudra 4

...Further he is to be respected only when he reaches the tenth decade of his life or attain an age of more than ninety years while a Brahman attains respect by birth. Such is the natural Varna dharma process. Such a condition means that a Shudra never effectively gets the respect in his entire life. He was not created for that. And obviously, he cannot have a wife from any of the higher Varna as a mark of his subordination. Further the only way a Shudra can relate to a Brahman is as his servant. Any relations with upper castes on the basis of equality are prohibited. When a Shudra goes to the house of a Brahman, he is allowed to eat only with his servants. A Shudra cannot move with a Brahman.

A Brahman is prevented from doing many things in presence of a Shudra. First he cannot move with any Shudra. He cannot recite sacred text or Shastras in presence of a Shudra. He cannot go to any journey with a Shudra. He cannot eat food given by a Shudra. He cannot explain any of the sacred scriptures to any Shudra. This effectively prevents a Shudra from benefiting from the company any Brahman. And also prevents a Brahman from benefiting a Shudra. Further, if a Shudra refuses to serve the higher Varnas then the king should force him to do so since he was created by the God to serve the twice born. In doing so the king would only be fulfilling God’s will. If a Shudra accumulates property then the king or Brahman should seize it because if he earns his livelihood from property then he would forget his dharma of serving others. And he would create adharma by trying to become equivalent to higher Varnas. This is essentially a corruption of dharma which is to be avoided by king. The inequality in favor of higher Varnas was much desired by the esteemed lawmakers. If a Shudra causes a Brahman to suffer then he should be punished in an exemplary manner which puts terror in the heart of all the Shudras in an enduring manner. This should prevent other Shudras from harming the Brahmanas. This should also prevent other Shudras from rebelling for achieving equality. If a Shudra want to improve his next birth then he should serve the higher Varnas with all his humility. He should be virtuous servant to those in higher Varna.

Further for all his hard work, labor and serving the upper castes, he is to be rewarded with leftover food of his master, with his old clothes and refuse of his grain. This means that s Shudra having quality food and wearing nice clothes was supposed to be corrupting dharma which was to be punished suitably...