CASTE SYSTEM IN BUDDHIST TEXTS WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO VAJRASUCHI The Indian society from the past has

been static and dominated by the idea of caste. The traditional fourfold order of priests, soldiers and administrators, merchants and agriculturists and menial workers was considered not only to be absolute, fundamental and necessary to society but was also given a divine sanction by being considered a creation of God (Brahma). God created the fourfold caste order with their specific aptitudes and functions , with the result that people born into the different castes have certain special biologically inherited aptitudes which eminently fit them to perform the caste functions which it is their duty to perform. !gainst this was the dynamic evolutionary conception of society as pictured in early Buddhism. The fourfold order is here not considered absolute since, as the Buddha says, in certain societies there are only two classes (Wo

va vaNNaM) " the masters and the slaves, and that not too rigid

a division since #the masters sometimes become slaves and the slaves masters.$ %or is caste divine in origin. The belief that caste was a creation of God and that the Brahmins were the chosen legitimate children of God, &born of the mouth of Brahma,' a conception which is as old as the (igveda, is denied in the Buddhist te)ts where it is said that the birth of Brahmins, as is well known, is in no way different from that of other human beings, and the Brahmins are referred to ironically as &the kinsmen of God' (brahmabandhu)*.

+a,him %ikaya II *-.

The Buddha profusely taught on this issue and said that it was a myth created by ignorance and guided by the principle of egoism by a handful of people. The Buddha reali/ed the seriousness of the problem of such social ine0uality. This can be substantiated in the Brahmana vagga of 1hammapada which says that 2na jaait na gaaotona na jaccaa haoit ba`amhNaao , the 3asettha sutta, !svalayana sutta 4 , 5ardulakarnavadana of 1ivyavadana6, 7ddana varga, etc. also speak 0uite logically against the caste system. The Buddha#s teachings continued to be e)pounded by his followers i.e. %agar,una, !ryadeva, !charya 8handrakirti, !charya Bhavaviveka, !charya !shvaghosa and others who raised the issue to the level of academic honesty and reasoning. 9ogical reasoning was one of the master strokes of the Buddha. In 3asettha sutta, we see how the Brahmins were claiming superiority for themselves and the Buddha logically defying their belief. 8iting various e)amples of the birds, animals, insects, fishes, the Buddha says that all these can be distinguished through their physical characteristics, but can human being be distinguished: ;e further tells 3asettha that whoever ploughs the land is a farmer, whoever is good in archery, is a soldier, whoever does whatever deeds should be known by it. Thus he says that I do not call one a Brahmin on account of his birth or origin from a particular mother <. Thus we can see that the Buddha has out rightly re,ected Brahmanism on account of caste or birth. +an is biologically one species

+a,him %ikaya -= 1ivyavadana, pg.6*-, edited by >.9.3aidya, +ithila Institute, *.<. 3a,rasuchi, 8I;T5, Bibliothecia Indo"Tibetica 5eries, 4??@, pg.@= 3asettha 5utta, 5utta %ipataA trans. Bausboll, 5BC, vol. D, page ***"**-

<

and hence there can be no differentiation between color, shape or si/e since these are minor differences. In the !mbattha sutta@, we can clearly see the myth of the purity of caste of which the Brahmins are so conscious. !mbattha, the Brahmin who was proud of his caste, did not show normal courtesies to the Buddha. The Buddha points out to his ancestry saying, If one were to follow your ancient name and lineage, one of your ancestors was the offspring of one of the slave girls of the 5akyas. Thus we can see that the Buddha opposed the caste system as derogatory mark on human beings. ;ence he says, ! sudra who could commands enough wealth could easily have a Brahmin or Eshatriya servant to attend him or do menial ,obs in his household
F

Based on such dynamic background, Buddhism continued to prosper for generations and the ideology was carried forward even up to the *st cent !.1 and beyond. Acharya Ashvagh sa!s Va"ras#ch$% !charya !shvaghosa belonged to the *st cent !.1. who studied in %alanda 7niversity. 3a,rasuchi of !charya !shvaghosa is a uni0ue thought on social philosophy of ancient India and is of great significance for the study of sociologyA however both " the historians and the sociologists have failed to give 3a,rasuchi the due respect that it deserves. !charya !shvaghosa#s 3a,rasuchi is a remarkable te)t in a sense !shvaghosa used the authentic Brahmanical te)ts to show the sheer contradictoriness in claiming their supremacy as Brahmins. 3a,rasuchi merely does not talk of social ,ustice from humanitarian grounds, but
@

!mbattha sutta, 1igha %ikaya 6 +a,him %ikaya, *=.

reasons out sharply and demolishes the opponent#s grounds by taking help from their very own te)ts. The scholarship and intelligence of !shvaghosa can be proved by the fact that in the entire 3a,rasuchi te)ts, not once did he refer the Buddha or any of his predecessorsA however he did talk from the Buddhist view point on caste and human e0uality. The beauty of 3a,rasuchi is that it is not confined to ancient history aloneA it has more relevance in today#s social structure. The discrimination on grounds of birth, social status, color has taken an ugly form in today#s society. It is in this conte)t 3a,rasuchi acts as an eye"opener to the illogical reasoning of supremacy of the Brahmins. Va"ras#ch$ Th&'&% In the caste based Indian society, Brahmins were considered ne)t to the Gods. In fact they declared themselves as Gods of the 9and (bhudeva). They had an ego of supremacy and their very presence made the caste system very prominent. ;ence !charya !shvaghosa in the 3a,rasuchi deliberately starts the te)t by 0uestioning the presence of Brahmin. Based on the reasoning done by the e)isting te)ts which were revered by the Brahmins, the 3a,rasuchi starts asking by what is a brahmana: whether it is a soul, body or whether one should be called a brahmana after being born to a brahmin woman, or due to one#s actions, or one#s knowledge or due to his profession or mastery over 3edas. !charya !shvaghosa goes on the challenge each definition with conte)t to all the te)ts and e)plains why one particular thing i.e birth, soul, body, knowledge, profession cannot make one a brahmin. ;e uses the same logic of the revered te)ts to pinpoint the failure of right definition of a brahmana. ;e then goes on to e)plain the real definition of a brahmana and concludes by invoking the readers to be honest and accept his e)planation only if it is reasonable.

L g$ca( R&as )$)g $) Va"ras#ch$% !charya !shvaghosa starts the te)t by paying homage to +an,unatha. Then, claiming to go by the te)ts namely the 3edas, 5hrutis, 5mrutis, +anavdharma, +ahabharata, etc. he asks " 5ince Brahmana is the principle of all castes, who is a brahmana: Is it a soul, a body, knowledge, manners, action or 3edas: ;e then goes on to e)plain that the soul cannot be a brahman because as per the 3edas and +ahabharata, the sun, moon, Indra were animals in earlier life who became godsA also the seven hunters in 1asarna, the deer, chakravaka, the swan all were reborn as Brahmins in Eurukshetra. This transformation from animal to gods and animals to Brahmins confirm that soul cannot be a brahmin. The Brahmins had always held the notion that they were Brahmins due to birth. In 3a,rasuchi, !charya !shvaghosa beautifully enlists the birth of various rishis who were revered by all. The sage !chala, Eesapingala, !gastya, Eausika, Eapila, Gautama, 1ronacharya, Tittiri, (ama, (isisringa, 3yasa, Eusika, 3ishwamitra, 3asistha were not born to a brahmin womanA in fact they were all born from low caste women or from birds, animals or grass. Thus !shvaghosa cleverly confirms that birth cannot be a brahmana. The +anusmriti says that one who is born of a non Brahmin mother and a brahmana father is a brahmana. !shvaghosa cites various e)amples of the past where a brahmana had relations with a non"brahmana woman and if their child is also a brahmana, then he counters saying that the present brahmana#s status itself is a 0uestion. 9ikewise !shvaghosa further 0uestions if knowledgeable means brahmana, because if it was so, then there were also few low caste

5hudras who were well versed in the te)ts and they could be Brahmins by definition. Cven manner cannot be termed as a brahmana since there were many sudras like natas (dancers), bhatas (fighters), etc who were skillful in their activity but could not be termed as a brahmana. Thus after e)plaining that neither birth nor body, knowledge, manners or acts or 3edas is a brahmana, !charya !shvaghosa e)plains that Brahmanhood is neither by knowing the treatise, nor by sanctifying ceremonies or by birth, nor by caste or knowledge nor by actsA but Brahmanhood is attained by strictly following the penance, vows, austerity, abstinence from food, giving, control of senses and concentration of mind. (verse *<). Ghereas the absence of truth, austerity, control over senses and absence of compassion are characteristics of a 8handala (verse *@). Giving e)amples of various trees, fruits and flowers, !charya !shvaghosa e)plains that since all their characteristics are different, hence each flower, fruit or tree can be differentiated, whereas such thing cannot be said that of human beings, since they all have similar structure. C )c(#s$ )% Hne can see that before the advent of Buddha, ancient India reminisces of sphere of social philosophy based on the #varna# division and the ,ustification of the supremacy of the #Brahmins# and the in,ustice to the other 6 varnas. The Buddha had openly critici/ed this in,ustice and myth created by handful of people. ;is message was further carried by his disciples, which is seen in many works like 3a,rasuchi.

!tul Bhosekar +.! "II (Buddhist 5tudies)