XVI
To
me this Chaturvarnya with its old labels is utterly repellent and my whole being
rebels against it. But I do not wish to rest my objection to Chaturvarnya on
mere grounds of sentiments. There are more solid grounds on which I rely for my
opposition to it. A close examination of this ideal has convinced me that as a
system of social organization, Chaturvarnya is impracticable, harmful and has
turned out to be a miserable failure. From a practical point of view, the
system of Chaturvarnya raises several difficulties which its protagonists do
not seem to have taken into account. The principle underlying caste is fundamentally
different from the principle underlying Varna. Not only are they
fundamentally different but they are also fundamentally opposed. The former is based
on worth. How are you going to compel people who have acquired a higher status
based on birth without reference to their worth to vacate that status? How are
you going to compel people to recognize the status due to a man in accordance
with his worth, who is occupying a lower status based on his birth? For this
you must first break up the Caste System, in order to be able to establish the Varna
system. How are you going to reduce the four thousand castes, based on
birth, to the four Varnas, based on worth? This is the first difficulty
which the protagonists of the Chaturvarnya must grapple with. There is a second
difficulty which the protagonists of Chaturvarnya must grapple with, if they
wish to make the establishment of Chaturvarnya a success. Chaturvarnya
pre-supposes that you can classify people into four definite classes. Is this
possible? In this respect, the ideal of Chaturvarnya has, as you will see, a
close affinity to the Platonic ideal. To Plato, men fell by nature into three
classes. In some individuals, he believed mere appetites dominated. He assigned
them to the labouring and trading classes. Others revealed to him that over and
above appetites, they have a courageous disposition. He classed them as
defenders in war and guardians of internal peace. Others showed a capacity to
grasp the universal reason underlying things. He made them the law-givers of
the people. The criticism to which Plato’s Republic is subject, is also the
criticism which must apply to the system of Chaturvarnya, in so far as it
proceeds upon the possibility of an accurate classification of men into four
distinct classes. The chief criticism against Plato is that his idea of lumping
of individuals into a few sharply marked-off classes is a very superficial view
of man and his powers. Plato had no perception of the uniqueness of every
individual, of his incommensurability with others, of each individual forming a
class of his own. He had no recognition of the infinite diversity of active
tendencies and combination of tendencies of which an individual is capable. To
him, there were types of faculties or powers in the individual constitution.
All this is demonstrably wrong. Modern science has shown that lumping together of
individuals into a few sharply marked-off classes is a superficial view of man
not worthy of serious consideration. Consequently, the utilization of the
qualities of individuals is incompitable with their startification by classes,
since the qualities of individuals are so variable. Chaturvarnya must fail for
the very reason for which Plato’s Republic must fail, namely that it is not
possible to pigeon men into holes, according as he belongs to one class or the
other. That it is impossible to accurately classify people into four definite
classes is proved by the fact that the original four classes have now become
four thousand castes.
There
is a third difficulty in the way of the establishment of the system of Chaturvarnya.
How are you going to maintain the system of Chaturvarnya, supposing it was
established? One important requirement for the successful working of
Chaturvarnya is the maintenance of the penal system which could maintain it by
its sanction. The system of Chaturvarnya must perpetually face the problem of
the transgressor. Unless there is a penalty attached to the act of
transgression, men will not keep to their respective classes. The whole system
will break down, being contrary to human nature. Chaturvarnya cannot subsist by
its own inherent goodness. It must be enforced by law. That, without penal
sanction the ideal of Chaturvarnya cannot be realized, is proved by the story
in the Ramayana of Rama killing Shambuka. Some people seem to blame Rama
because he want only and without reason killed Shambuka. But to blame Rama for
killing Shambuka is to misunderstand the whole situation. Ram Raj was a Raj
based on Chaturvarnya. As a king, Rama was bound to maintain Chaturvarnya. It
was his duty therefore to kill Shambuka, the Shudra, who had transgressed his
class and wanted to be a Brahmin. This is the reason why Rama killed Shambuka.
But this also shows that penal sanction is necessary for the maintenance of
Chaturvarnya. Not only penal sanction is necessary, but penalty of death is
necessary. That is why Rama did not inflict on Shambuka a lesser punishment.
That is why Manu-Smriti prescribes such heavy sentences as cutting off the
tongue or pouring of molten lead in the ears of the Shudra, who recites or
hears the Veda. The supporters of Chaturvarnya must give an assurance
that they could successfully classify men and they could induce modern society
in the twentieth century to reforge the penal sanctions of Manu-Smriti. The
protagonists of Chaturvarnya do not seem to have considered what is to happen
to women in their system. Are they also to be divided into four classes,
Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya and Shudra? Or are they to be allowed to take the
status of their husbands. If the status of the woman is to be the consequence
of marriage what becomes of the underlying principle of Chaturvarnya, namely,
that the status of a person should be based upon the worth of that person? If
they are to be classified according to their worth is their classification to
be nominal or real? If it is to be nominal then it is useless and then the
protagonists of Chaturvarnya must admit that their system does not apply to
women. If it is real, are the protagonists of Chaturvarnya prepared to follow
the logical consequences of applying it to women? They must be prepared to have
women priests and women soldiers. Hindu society has grown accustomed to women
teachers and women barristers. It may grow accustomed to women brewers and
women butchers. But he would be a bold person, who would say that it will allow
women priests and women soldiers. But that will be the logical outcome of applying
Chaturvarnya to women. Given these difficulties, I think no one except a congenital
idiot could hope and believe in a successful regeneration of the Chaturvarnya.
No comments:
Post a Comment