Spot lightings from the book Hindus vs Vedics: The Untold Story of Hinduism by Sanjay Sonawani
Attempt of finding origin of Caste system in Vedic
traditions is problematic. There isn’t any correlation between ‘varna’ of Vedic
system and ‘jati’ practiced in Non-Vedic Hindu system. The synchronization of
‘varna’ and ‘jati’ was mistakenly done by British and carried through
generation to generation by scholars. Birth-based caste system was a recent phenomenon
and not ancient tradition.
The idea concerning the Vedas as chief source of Hinduism
emerged during British rule is not true rather Hindu culture traces back to
more than 7000 years ago based on the Puranas. It was based on pre-Vedic Tantra
tradition. The system does not approve caste-based discrimination and exclusion
of females from participation in religious activities. The Tantric tradition
emerged when pastoral society turned agrarian. The worship of Mother Goddess
i.e. Shakti was commonly practiced in pre-historic Indian society where later
in Indus times Shiva was associated with Shakti. The Vedic tradition lacked
concept of Mother Goddess, phallic worship and female deities. Worship of any
Vedic gods is absent in Hindu religious life.
The Vedic religion came to India somewhere in around 1000
BC. The Vedics share similar ritualistic and linguistics traits with the
Zoroastrians, given their close geographical proximity and emergence from a
commonly shared culture. The Vedic religion entered the Indian subcontinent
through a small number of refugees and later spread by missionary practice
across the subcontinent. The non-Vedic Hindus had a jati system (entirely
unrelated to religious belief) to denote various occupations. The Manusmriti
itself was aware of the difference between jati and varna. The proclamation
that “Veda is the only and ultimate sanction for Dharma” (Manu.2.6) was only
true and acceptable for the people those belonged to the Vedic religion and not
Hindus.
The jatis precede the Vedic varna system. To form a jati the
first prerequisite is to have a traditional profession. Vedic people were
always aware of the independent origin of the Shudras as Taittiriya Brahmana
proclaims, “The Brahmana caste is sprung from the gods; the Shudras from the
Asuras”.
The Aryan invasion theory is fundamentally incorrect, as
demonstrated by archeological, scriptural and genetic evidence. The Vedics
couldn’t have interfered in the local social system both because of their small
numbers and because they were dependent on the local people for their survival.
The non-Vedic Hindus, who were highly capable people and traded with far-off
civilisations and who founded the Indus valley civilisation, had their own
religion and social system, including their priests, philosophies and rituals.
The varna system was first proposed in the late Rig Veda through
the Purushasukta but it appears that it become stratified (within the Vedic
religion) between 1000 to 800 B.C.– after the Vedic religion started to advance
further into the Indian sub-continent. The Upanisad doctrine originally emerged
to oppose fundamental tenets of the Vedic religion, however, those were later
appropriated by the Vedics. B.R. Ambedkar had rightly observed, “If it be
granted that the true derivation of the word 'Upanishad' is what is suggested
by Prof. Max Muller, then it would be one piece of evidence to show that the
common belief of the Hindus is wrong and that the subject matter of the Vedas
and the Upanishads are not complimentary but antagonistic. That the system of
thought embodied in the Upanishads is repugnant to that of the Vedas is beyond
doubt.” For long period Vedic religion was confined to the few territories of
north. To mitigate its growing influence Buddhism and Jainism, including
Charvaka doctrine emerged. Vedic religion received severe setback which later
compelled them to accept, otherwise banned, Atharva Veda as fourth Veda which
was composed under influence of tantras. Most of the interpolations in Hindu
scriptures, including Puranas and epics were carried out in Gupta era.
Scholars are not clear about the origin of the castes. The
meaning of caste, too, is uncertain to them. Some scholars have taken a racial
or ethnic angle whereas others have taken a tribal angle. Very rarely the
scholars have taken the occupational origin of the castes.
Any attempts to appropriate Hindu deities and subordinate
them to the Vedas by creating new myths took place much later. This is why we
do not find any trace of most popular Hindu deities in the early Smritis and
Brahmana literature. Absence of their mention in early Vedic literature didn’t
make these deities of modern origin, but the scholars erroneously neglected the
excavated proof and tradition while trusting more in interpolated versions of
Puranas of later times to assign them late origin.
The Vedic scriptures proclaim the independent origin of the
Shudras. To Vedics these are non-Aryans, Mleccha and were born to Asuras or
nonexistence. The varna has itself evolved over time. The only thing that can
be said with some certainty is that the varna system has “divine” sanction
whereas the jati system does not. From the Smriti commandments it appears that
the initially flexible varna system converted into a rigid birth-based system
by around 800 B.C., during the Brahmana era. Smritis changed and widened
application of Shudra term to address entire non-Vedic populace –regardless of
whether doing so was acceptable to the people. There is no scriptural or
material proof to substantiate the Aryan Invasion or mass migration theory. In
the Vedic order, Brahmins maintained their superiority since they were the
early missionaries and architects of the newly structured religion.
The code Manusmriti was intended to apply to people who
adhered to the Vedic religion. Manusmriti dictates many laws against the
Shudras. the pre-Vedic religion (which continues till today) was idolatrous and
mainly Tantrik, which Manu considers to be heretical. The Manusmriti was
intended to apply to the followers of the Vedic religion and not to others –
the ‘who adhered to Tantra based religion. Manu was aware of the non-Vedic
codes and philosophies and denounces them. He threatens that if these are
followed there will be no reward after death (Manu. 12.95-96).
The Vedics had to work hard to get entry into every region
of India and still they failed to convert anyone to their fold because of the
inherent limitations of their religion. Instead, they were forced to adopt the
existing practices, and Vedic practices were hardly followed anywhere – even
today. The historical fact is that Manu was completely neglected by the
so-called Shudra who continued to follow their independent idolatrous religion.
Although Manu had had insisted on Vedic rites and sacrifices, even the new
“Vedic” converts of later times continued their old non-Vedic practices, namely
idol worship, even though it was specifically prohibited in the Vedic religion
and in the Manusmriti. Many of Manusmriti’s instructions and explanations are
imaginary, crooked, contradictory and confusing because its writers (from
various times) did not know how to confront and accommodate new situations
while spreading their religion. Therefore opposing and self-contradictory
principles were carried on by the new “converts”. In fact, Vedic religion
itself got heavily “polluted” in this process, so as to have changed beyond
recognition. Scholars should have paid close attention to the changing
geography and the vast time span that Manusmriti covers, beginning in
Kuru-Panchal in about 1000 B.C. and ending in the Magadha region in Gupta era.
The additions and contradictions created by later contributors to suit their
times show us that the Vedic religion went through several adjustments,
modifications, and internal contradictions. Stories from Ramayana and
Mahabharata are sometimes used these days to propagate the Vedic religion, with
heavy interpolations. It is important to note that Panini classifies the
Shudras into two categories, “Anirvasit” and “Nirvasit” (Ashtadhyayi, 2: 4-10).
Anirvasit refers to Shudras taken into the private service of the Vedics.
Nirvasit refers to Shudras who were not related to the Vedic people in any way.
This categorization by Panini makes clear against whom the code was intended –
for Anirvasit Shudras who were in the personal service of the Vedic people. The
Nirvasit Shudras had nothing to do with the code and their social history
supports this. A common misunderstanding among scholars is that the code was
intended for all Shudras. the term “Shudra” (original name “Sudda” which was
later Sanskritised to Shudra) which originally started as the name of a clan,
later on did get stuck to all people of this subcontinent. This is similar to
the term Hindu that applies to everyone living to the East of the Indus river,
even though the Hindus never invented this term. The Manusmriti was intended to
regulate only the Vedic religion. Its commands against Shudras were limited to
non-Vedic people in their personal service.
The word “Shudra” appears nowhere in Rig Veda except in the
Purushsukta which, as Ambedkar too is aware, is a later addition to the Rig
Veda. Ambedkar states that Shudras of ancient times weren’t denied the right to
have Yajnas conducted for their benefit (126- 127). This is true, since the
Manusmriti shows clearly that sacrifices performed for Shudras weren’t unknown
(Manu- 3.178) – although Manu is not a fan of such sacrifices. Also, Shudra
kings were also not unknown to Manusmriti (Manu- 4.61).
The Vedic people’s known geography was limited to south
Afghanistan. The Shudras lived to the east of the Indus, but since the Rig Veda
has no knowledge of that geography, the term Shudra appears nowhere in the
early Rig Veda – except for the mention in the Purushasukta.
It is now well-established that the geography of the Rig
Veda and the Avesta were in close proximity and the Vedic society was
originally resident of modern-day Afghanistan (most probably the southern
part). Purushasukta shows that Shudras were not part of the Vedic system as it
says “The Brahmana was his [God’s] mouth, of both his arms was the Rajanya
made. His thighs became the Vaishya, from his feet the Shudra was produced.”
The feet didn’t become the Shudra, because the composer of the hymn knew very
well that the Shudras were not part of the Vedic community, though an important
part of society as far as the early Vedics were concerned. Shudra was never the
name of the people of the subcontinent except for a single north-western tribe.
India had numerous tribes and clans with independent identities and religious
and social systems and codes. Vedic religion, comprising three twice-born
varnas, was a distinct belief system spread to India with missionary practice
over a long course of time, converting some Indians to their fold. Rest of the
societies followed their own religion and social systems. The religion of the
indigenous people was idolatrous, mostly Shiva-Shakti oriented and based on the
pre-Vedic tantric tradition which still continues independently. As described
earlier, we can re-confirm that the varna system is nowhere related to the
caste (jati) system.
The prerequisite of every caste (jati) is an ancestral
profession. There is no caste without a traditional occupation. This occupation-based
system was obviously not very rigid and compartmentalized. Many castes
disappeared when their professions were displaced by technology or the demand
for their product or service disappeared. The social status of the castes
depended on the social needs of the particular professions, which changed with
time. The caste system was flexible and people could enter into professions by
choice. All Sanskrit literature also does not belong to the Vedic Brahmins.
‘Jaya’ (later known as Mahabharata) and Ramayana were originally authored by
non-Vedic Hindus and later appropriated by the Vedics with heavy
interpolations. Classic poets like Kalidasa, Shudraka and Bhavabhuti did not
belong to the Vedic society. However, after the British era, it became a
fashion to credit everything Sanskrit to the Vedics, thinking that the language
was their sole property. There is no shred of evidence to show that caste was
rigid or birth based – at least till the first millennium, or that it was
enforced upon indigenous people by invading Vedic Aryans.
By the thirteenth century A.D. the castes had become
permanent, and in many cases unjust and cruel. While the Hindus had been
somewhat successful in encountering the onslaught of the Vedic doctrineduring
the first millennium, the political and economic crisis at the end of the tenth
century now gave the Vedics a strong upper hand, allowing them to use drastic
tactics to deal with their religious opposition. The philosophy of “Karmavipaka
Siddhanta” was introduced in this era, contrary to the original Karma Siddhanta
which had professed good deeds in this birth can yield better life in next
birth. This Vedic interpolated doctrine said that the distress of present life
was the outcome of sins committed in the past birth, thus making the people
more religious and slavish to their so-called destiny. The Vaishnavait cult
played a particularly important role in diluting the strong demarcation between
Hindu and Vedic religions and strengthening Vedic authority over the Hindu mind.
The British thus became instrumental in establishing Vedic
supremacy, not only by applauding the Vedic literature by giving it a specially
valued position due to their belief in the supremacy of Vedic Aryans. The major
problem with this, of course, was not just the idea of Vedic supremacy: it was
the idea that Hinduism is derived from the Vedas.
Until the Hindus – who comprise the vast majority of Indians
– find their own roots they will never appreciate their glorious liberal past
in which social inequality never existed on the basis of anyone’s occupation.
whenever most of the so-called Vedic literature is examined closely, one can
easily notice its non-Vedic origin. The principle of varna order is religion-
sanction inequality whereas caste is a natural, flexible occupation-based
system without any religious backing.
.png)
.png)
.png)
0 Comments