[Y-Indology] caste/varna

[Guest guest]

Dear Rajesh:

 

My responses are below.

 

>It is simplistic to try to cast castes in the varna system.If all castes

>could be neatly put in the various varna baskets, there would not have been

>any need for creating them in the first place.

 

 

I don't follow your line of reasoning. What are you asserting as the

origin(s) of all of the jatis/castes?

 

 

>As a look for kayastha, ambastha, etc., in a Sanskrit dictionary would

>reveal, many castes formed through cross-varna marriages.

 

 

No, the Sanskrit dictionary is merely quoting smrti texts such as

Yajnavalkya etc. We don't know that the particular mixture of varnas is

truly the origin of the Kayastha jati; we just know that this particular

text says so.

 

 

Lynken Ghose

 

 

_______________

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

[Guest guest]

Lynken Ghose wrote:

 

> No, the Sanskrit dictionary is merely quoting smrti texts such as

> Yajnavalkya etc. We don't know that the particular mixture of

varnas is

> truly the origin of the Kayastha jati; we just know that this

particular

> text says so.

 

That seems to be true. Origin of Yavanas and Turushkas etc has also

been given in some texts, assuming that they too are varna-sankaras.

 

There is some indication that the Kayasthas originated as an

occupational group.

If I remember correctly, Rajatarangini suggests that sometimes

Brahmins too were appointed as Kayasthas.

 

The origin of Kayasthas has been widely debated. The Kayastha view is

given in an article in Nagendranath Basu's Encycloppedia India. A

Hindi edition of this multi volume text (quite useful for researchers

on caste) called Hindi Vishvakosh was published around 1923 (It was

preceeded by a Bengali version). It suggests that the Kayasthas

classification was a result of their past affiliation with Buddhism.

The other view can be seen in Jati-Bhaskara.

 

Kayasthas do have some connection with buddhism. The oldest known

Kayashtha inscription, found at Mathura, is on a buddhist idol.

Mathura must have been an old center of Kayasthas, some inscriptions

suggest that some Kayastha groups regarded Mathura as their original

home. Some buddhist manuscripts exist that were written (i.e. in the

hand of) by Kayasthas (writing has been their profession). There is a

copper plate of Chandella Madanvarman, written by a Kayashtha, that

explicitly excludes lands of a Buddhist vihara, from lands granted to

some Brahmins.

 

I am not sure what connection the Pal kings had with Kayasthas, but

in Bengal the Kayasthas occupy a very high rank next to Brahmins,

some of them were even "kulin". There is also a higher concentration

of Kayasthas in Bengal.

 

Kayashthas have been among the most influential communities of India.

They did not fit in any of the varnas, hence they were classified as

varna-sankaras.

 

No generally satisfactory algorithm can be specified for placing

various communities into the four varnas. If the varna system did

exist today, it would have been possible to do a satisfactory

classification. The significant interest in attempting this

classification generally seems to have been revived during the

British period, when the censuses offer a chance of claiming a higher

status to many groups. It is also been kept on the front burner by

the critics of Hinduism.

 

Yashwant

[Guest guest]

But what's the historical nature of the occupation of the kayastha?

 

In TamilNadu, there're a people called Saurashtras who are

mainly concentrated near Madhurai. Historically they are said to be

people from Gujarath who migrated to TN after the attack on Somnath.

In the book "Brahmins of Tamil country" there's a mention that these

people demanded that they be recognized on par with brahmins.

Apparently some queen did support their demands - but they never got

such a recognition in the Tamil society - in my mind one of the

main reasons for this lies in the fact that "priestcraft" wasn't the

traditional occupation of the Saurashtrians. And historically brahmins

have always taken care to guard the practice of their profession so

that others cannot replace them.

 

INDOLOGY, ymalaiya wrote:

> Lynken Ghose wrote:

>

> > No, the Sanskrit dictionary is merely quoting smrti texts such as

> > Yajnavalkya etc. We don't know that the particular mixture of

> varnas is

> > truly the origin of the Kayastha jati; we just know that this

> particular

> > text says so.

>

> That seems to be true. Origin of Yavanas and Turushkas etc has also

> been given in some texts, assuming that they too are varna-sankaras.

>

> There is some indication that the Kayasthas originated as an

> occupational group.

> If I remember correctly, Rajatarangini suggests that sometimes

> Brahmins too were appointed as Kayasthas.

>

> The origin of Kayasthas has been widely debated. The Kayastha view

is

> given in an article in Nagendranath Basu's Encycloppedia India. A

> Hindi edition of this multi volume text (quite useful for

researchers

> on caste) called Hindi Vishvakosh was published around 1923 (It was

> preceeded by a Bengali version). It suggests that the Kayasthas

> classification was a result of their past affiliation with Buddhism.

> The other view can be seen in Jati-Bhaskara.

>

> Kayasthas do have some connection with buddhism. The oldest known

> Kayashtha inscription, found at Mathura, is on a buddhist idol.

> Mathura must have been an old center of Kayasthas, some inscriptions

> suggest that some Kayastha groups regarded Mathura as their original

> home. Some buddhist manuscripts exist that were written (i.e. in the

> hand of) by Kayasthas (writing has been their profession). There is

a

> copper plate of Chandella Madanvarman, written by a Kayashtha, that

> explicitly excludes lands of a Buddhist vihara, from lands granted

to

> some Brahmins.

>

> I am not sure what connection the Pal kings had with Kayasthas, but

> in Bengal the Kayasthas occupy a very high rank next to Brahmins,

> some of them were even "kulin". There is also a higher concentration

> of Kayasthas in Bengal.

>

> Kayashthas have been among the most influential communities of

India.

> They did not fit in any of the varnas, hence they were classified as

> varna-sankaras.

>

> No generally satisfactory algorithm can be specified for placing

> various communities into the four varnas. If the varna system did

> exist today, it would have been possible to do a satisfactory

> classification. The significant interest in attempting this

> classification generally seems to have been revived during the

> British period, when the censuses offer a chance of claiming a

higher

> status to many groups. It is also been kept on the front burner by

> the critics of Hinduism.

>

> Yashwant

[Guest guest]

vpcnk wrote:

 

> But what's the historical nature of the occupation of the kayastha?

 

Their historical occupation has been writing, i.e. they were scribes.

They were employed to write and record government documents. They

also copied manuscripts.

 

It is my guess that a large fraction, if not most, of the manuscripts

in ancient Indian libraries were written by them. Note that here I

distinguish between composing of texts and writing of manuscripts.

 

Even now, a large number of them are employed as clerks and record

keepers.

 

The Kayasthas have been perhaps the most literate of the castes in

India. Many have been distinguished authors in recent times

(Premchand, Bacchan etc). Many are in academic profession.

 

The Kayasthas sometimes worship pen and inkpot as symbol of

their professions and learning.

 

There has been old rivalry between the Kayasthas and the Brahmin

purohitas. There are some shlokas in subhashita-ratna-bhandagaram

reflecting that.

 

Kayasthas did not fit the four-fold division, thus they had to be

placed in the varna-sankara category. Today there is no generally

accepted algorithm that can place most of Hindus in one of the four

classes. We must then conclude that today the 4-fold division is only

a concept, and not an observable scheme.

 

Yashwant

 

>And historically brahmins

> have always taken care to guard the practice of their profession so

> that others cannot replace them.

[Guest guest]

At 03:31 PM 10/10/01 -0000, ymalaiya wrote:

>vpcnk wrote:

>

>> But what's the historical nature of the occupation of the kayastha?

>

>Their historical occupation has been writing, i.e. they were scribes.

>They were employed to write and record government documents. They

>also copied manuscripts.

>

>It is my guess that a large fraction, if not most, of the manuscripts

>in ancient Indian libraries were written by them. Note that here I

>distinguish between composing of texts and writing of manuscripts.

>

>Even now, a large number of them are employed as clerks and record

>keepers.

>

>The Kayasthas have been perhaps the most literate of the castes in

>India. Many have been distinguished authors in recent times

>(Premchand, Bacchan etc). Many are in academic profession.

>

>The Kayasthas sometimes worship pen and inkpot as symbol of

>their professions and learning.

>

>There has been old rivalry between the Kayasthas and the Brahmin

>purohitas. There are some shlokas in subhashita-ratna-bhandagaram

>reflecting that.

>

>Kayasthas did not fit the four-fold division, thus they had to be

>placed in the varna-sankara category. Today there is no generally

>accepted algorithm that can place most of Hindus in one of the four

>classes. We must then conclude that today the 4-fold division is only

>a concept, and not an observable scheme.

 

For Hindus who accept the Bhagavad-gita, the fourfold division is more than

a concept; it is a God-given system of social order. The Gita itself

contains an algorithm to place most people (Hindus or otherwise) into one of

the four classes. In Bhagavad-gita, Krishna says in verse 4.13 that the

fourfold divisions are based on a person's qualities (guna) and the work

that he does (karma). Later in chapter 18, he lists the qualities of the

brahmana (18.42) and the ksatriya (18.43) and the work of the vaisya and the

sudra (18.44). From the point of view of Bhagavad-gita it is an error,

although a popular one, to consider the occupational orders to be based on

birth. That is not the intention of the creator of the system as He

describes it. It is just like saying the son of a doctor is automatically a

doctor whether he has been properly trained or knows anything about medicine

or not. He may be more likely to ultimately take up the profession of his

father, but he still requires training, and without it he cannot claim to be

a doctor.

 

Best wishes,

Chris Beetle

[Guest guest]

--- ymalaiya wrote:

 

 

>

> There has been old rivalry between the Kayasthas and

> the Brahmin

> purohitas. There are some shlokas in

> subhashita-ratna-bhandagaram

> reflecting that.

 

What is the nature of this 'old rivalry' ? And what

are the shlokas ? Could you quote a few, a couple.

 

Thanks.

 

Jogesh Panda

 

 

 

 

 

Make a great connection at Personals.

http://personals.

[Guest guest]

> Today there is no generally

> accepted algorithm that can place most of Hindus in one of the four

> classes. We must then conclude that today the 4-fold division is

only

> a concept, and not an observable scheme.

 

What percentage of the Indian population of the Kayasthas? Just

because we're not able to fit them into one of the standard varnas, do

it justify the above claim? I don't think such ambiguities exist for

most other people in India who readily identify/or classified into one

caste or another.

 

Anyway if "Ghosh", "Datta", "Sen" are kayastas, I've often heard them

referred to as kshatriyas. How many kayastas have been

rulers/warriors?

[Guest guest]

> > There has been old rivalry between the Kayasthas and

> > the Brahmin

 

> What is the nature of this 'old rivalry' ? And what

> are the shlokas ?

 

In medieval Kashmir, at least, Kaayastha scribes were

predominantly considered to be Braahma.nas by caste,

corresponding to the modern Kaarkun, see Stein's

Raajatara"nginii (1900:Introduction p. 19 (lines 26--32)).

 

They made up a large and complicated bureaucracy with many

grades and duties. We are rather well informed about

Kashmirian Kaayasthas thanks to K.semendra's (fl. 990 or

1010--1070) satires, notably the Narmamaalaa (but also

Kalaavilaasa 5). He makes up (?) a mythical origin for them in

Narmamaalaa 1.9--25ab which implies that they are evidently

enemies of Braahma.nas.

The ancestor of all scribes was the accountant (ga.nanaapati)

of the demons. When these were vanquished by the gods, he

performed penance for a thousand years on the banks of the

Vaitara.nii, the river of the dead, drinking only his own urine. The

demon Kali then appeared to him and presented him with the

terrifying weapon called "pen" as a boon and sent him to the

earth to destroy the livelihood of Braahma.nas who nourish the

gods with sacrificial offerings.

 

Secondary literature frequently asserts that K.semendra

employed the Kaayastha scribe Suurya"srii as his personal

secretary, implying even that he was the tutor of his son

Somendra. This is however unlikely, K.semendra's son

Somendra tells us in his epilogue to the Avadaanakalpalataa

merely that he (not K.semendra) asked the preceptor

Suurya"srii to write down the work (e.g. the 108th Avadaana he

added) down for him:

 

AKaLa epilogue 15: yasya hastagata.m sarva"saastram aayaati

"suddhataam /

aacaarya.h so .atra suurya"sriir lipinyaasaartham arthita.h //

 

It is possible that this Suurya"srii(-bhadra?) may have been

rather a Bauddha scholar.

 

S.D. Vasudeva

[Guest guest]

In all these arguments we see the manifestation of the popular

misconception that "learning" makes a brahmin.

 

For a braahmana "learning" meant Vedic learning - the shruti and the

Vedaangas - and not general linguistic/mathematical skills necessary

for being a scribe. There is a caste called the Saiva Pillaimaar in

TamilNadu who too are traditionally identified as being

scribes/accountants - "kaNakku pillai" - but nobody has claimed

braahmana status for them.

 

And the braahmana's social duties doesn't stop with mere learning -

he's supposed to embrace poverty and live an ethical pure life.

 

 

A braahmana is supposed to be able to perform Vedic sacrifices.

 

A braahmana is supposed to educate and instruct the people on the

dharma.

 

Traditionally most temple priests are also brahmins.

 

And the various monastries associated with the various religious sects

of India are most often run by braahmanas. And this often involves

"baala samnyaasam" where a child is guided into renunciation and

becomes a samnyaasin, to later head the matha.

 

Though nobody can say that all braahmanas lived by this dharmic

principle but given that the braahmanas have maintained their caste

status through the ages, quite a few of them obviously lived by this

principle. Such is the braahmana community's commitment to the dharma.

 

Can somebody enlighten us as to how many of these social functions was

historically performed by Kayasthas?

 

INDOLOGY, somadeva@L... wrote:

> > > There has been old rivalry between the Kayasthas and

> > > the Brahmin

>

> > What is the nature of this 'old rivalry' ? And what

> > are the shlokas ?

>

> In medieval Kashmir, at least, Kaayastha scribes were

> predominantly considered to be Braahma.nas by caste,

> corresponding to the modern Kaarkun, see Stein's

> Raajatara"nginii (1900:Introduction p. 19 (lines 26--32)).

>

> They made up a large and complicated bureaucracy with many

> grades and duties. We are rather well informed about

> Kashmirian Kaayasthas thanks to K.semendra's (fl. 990 or

> 1010--1070) satires, notably the Narmamaalaa (but also

> Kalaavilaasa 5). He makes up (?) a mythical origin for them in

> Narmamaalaa 1.9--25ab which implies that they are evidently

> enemies of Braahma.nas.

> The ancestor of all scribes was the accountant (ga.nanaapati)

> of the demons. When these were vanquished by the gods, he

> performed penance for a thousand years on the banks of the

> Vaitara.nii, the river of the dead, drinking only his own urine. The

> demon Kali then appeared to him and presented him with the

> terrifying weapon called "pen" as a boon and sent him to the

> earth to destroy the livelihood of Braahma.nas who nourish the

> gods with sacrificial offerings.

>

> Secondary literature frequently asserts that K.semendra

> employed the Kaayastha scribe Suurya"srii as his personal

> secretary, implying even that he was the tutor of his son

> Somendra. This is however unlikely, K.semendra's son

> Somendra tells us in his epilogue to the Avadaanakalpalataa

> merely that he (not K.semendra) asked the preceptor

> Suurya"srii to write down the work (e.g. the 108th Avadaana he

> added) down for him:

>

> AKaLa epilogue 15: yasya hastagata.m sarva"saastram aayaati

> "suddhataam /

> aacaarya.h so .atra suurya"sriir lipinyaasaartham arthita.h //

>

> It is possible that this Suurya"srii(-bhadra?) may have been

> rather a Bauddha scholar.

>

> S.D. Vasudeva