DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.16243#0422
Oi
4.1
APPENDIX V 413
arlier is the epoch of the Brahmanas and the Upanishads, while Hinduism was a
lngle and comparatively simple creed, or at most a philosophical abstraction ;
n the later is the epoch of the Puranas and Tantras, with their crowded
antheon, their foul imaginings, their degraded idolatry, and their innumerable
ects. The former may be said to end with the rise, and the latter to begin with
6 growing degeneracy of Buddhism. In the earlier Hinduism wc find that,
Ue caste distinctions were primarily based upon occupation, considerable license
indi lesPect was permitted to the several castes, while the possibility of the
the'V'C'Ua' r's'n£ fr°m one caste t0 another was distinctly recognised. This was
case even as late as the age of Manu, by which time the caste system had
assumed great strictness, and the cardinal importance of occupation had become
n-?r0nunent Part °f the Brahmanical teaching, though its hereditary nature had
hist ke(m so emphatically insisted on. It was in the dark ages of Hindu
for H^' a^°llt tnc oe£'nning of an era during which Brahmanism was substituted
and u'?m» and the religion became a chaos of impure and degraded doctrine
sectarian teaching, that the theory of the necessarily hereditary nature of
as al Scems t0 have taken its present form. In the earlier epoch the priest
ways a Brahman ; in the later the Brahman was always a priest,
aried occuPation was not necessarily transmitted by descent, and if caste
that tl Cnan"e °^ occupation in the earlier era of Hinduism, it is no less true
now 1S "S Case 'n t'!C Present c'ay ; though under caste restrictions as they
m„ stand, the change, in an upward direction at least, is infinitely slower and
QlOrfi rlifli 1+ i
cou ■ tnan then, and is painfully effected by the family or tribe in the
foiled °f gcncrat'°ns instead of by the individual in the course of years. The
the n^ Pa*es w'" contain numerous instances of the truth of this assertion, and
ahva °°dy of tribal and caste tradition in the Punjab supports it. I have not
caste^ t'10ll^nt '' necessary to state their traditions in discussing the various
jm ' <ln°- } have seldom stopped to comment on the facts. But the evidence,
fact of ] aS " 'S' W'" 'Je ^ouno't0 Possess no inconsiderable weight; while the very
Individ 1C.^enera' currency of a set of traditions, groundless as they may be in
is at'l instances, shows that the theory of society upon which they are based
who bel rePu*>nant t0 tne ideas and feelings and even practice of the people
almost b6VC m* indeed, for the purposes of the present enquiry it would
be true ° a"0Wable to accept traditional origin ; for though the tradition may not
tne socia'l' m'^nt have been, or it would never have arisen. Instances of fall in
who h- a a'e natura">' more often met with than instances of rise, for he
hasto "S SUnk recalls with pride his ancestral origin, while he who has risen
But510 f°rget
nuist a'l )e^0re Proceeding to give specific instances of recent change of caste, I
and m'u °Pt,a somcwhat extended definition of occupation,
mere o S 3 somewhat wider basis than that afforded by The political and
In jUPat'on, even so defined, as the foundation of caste, artificial basis of
he called T ^ occuPation of the great mass of what may caste-
traders o h U'1',er or yeoman classes is the same. Setting aside the priests and
l'le great 1 H nand ano- 'he artisans and menials on the other, we have left
Population T °^ a°r'cil'turists who constitute by far the larger portion of the
and so far \h ' Sreat body of people subsists by husbandry and cattle-farming,
and occu ' ^ occuPation is one and the same. But they are also the owners
'hey are o'v'3] °^ 'anc'> 'he holders of more or less compact tribal territories ;
tion between i° as we" as villains ; and hence springs the cardinal distinc-
tnc actual iv occuPati°n of ruling and the occupation of being ruled. Where
tnat caste °a °f everv"day life is the same, social standing, which is all
Present or be']11^1"5' c'ePenc's#vcl'y largely upon political importance, whether
0I1gmg to the recent past. There is the widest distinction between
4.1
APPENDIX V 413
arlier is the epoch of the Brahmanas and the Upanishads, while Hinduism was a
lngle and comparatively simple creed, or at most a philosophical abstraction ;
n the later is the epoch of the Puranas and Tantras, with their crowded
antheon, their foul imaginings, their degraded idolatry, and their innumerable
ects. The former may be said to end with the rise, and the latter to begin with
6 growing degeneracy of Buddhism. In the earlier Hinduism wc find that,
Ue caste distinctions were primarily based upon occupation, considerable license
indi lesPect was permitted to the several castes, while the possibility of the
the'V'C'Ua' r's'n£ fr°m one caste t0 another was distinctly recognised. This was
case even as late as the age of Manu, by which time the caste system had
assumed great strictness, and the cardinal importance of occupation had become
n-?r0nunent Part °f the Brahmanical teaching, though its hereditary nature had
hist ke(m so emphatically insisted on. It was in the dark ages of Hindu
for H^' a^°llt tnc oe£'nning of an era during which Brahmanism was substituted
and u'?m» and the religion became a chaos of impure and degraded doctrine
sectarian teaching, that the theory of the necessarily hereditary nature of
as al Scems t0 have taken its present form. In the earlier epoch the priest
ways a Brahman ; in the later the Brahman was always a priest,
aried occuPation was not necessarily transmitted by descent, and if caste
that tl Cnan"e °^ occupation in the earlier era of Hinduism, it is no less true
now 1S "S Case 'n t'!C Present c'ay ; though under caste restrictions as they
m„ stand, the change, in an upward direction at least, is infinitely slower and
QlOrfi rlifli 1+ i
cou ■ tnan then, and is painfully effected by the family or tribe in the
foiled °f gcncrat'°ns instead of by the individual in the course of years. The
the n^ Pa*es w'" contain numerous instances of the truth of this assertion, and
ahva °°dy of tribal and caste tradition in the Punjab supports it. I have not
caste^ t'10ll^nt '' necessary to state their traditions in discussing the various
jm ' <ln°- } have seldom stopped to comment on the facts. But the evidence,
fact of ] aS " 'S' W'" 'Je ^ouno't0 Possess no inconsiderable weight; while the very
Individ 1C.^enera' currency of a set of traditions, groundless as they may be in
is at'l instances, shows that the theory of society upon which they are based
who bel rePu*>nant t0 tne ideas and feelings and even practice of the people
almost b6VC m* indeed, for the purposes of the present enquiry it would
be true ° a"0Wable to accept traditional origin ; for though the tradition may not
tne socia'l' m'^nt have been, or it would never have arisen. Instances of fall in
who h- a a'e natura">' more often met with than instances of rise, for he
hasto "S SUnk recalls with pride his ancestral origin, while he who has risen
But510 f°rget
nuist a'l )e^0re Proceeding to give specific instances of recent change of caste, I
and m'u °Pt,a somcwhat extended definition of occupation,
mere o S 3 somewhat wider basis than that afforded by The political and
In jUPat'on, even so defined, as the foundation of caste, artificial basis of
he called T ^ occuPation of the great mass of what may caste-
traders o h U'1',er or yeoman classes is the same. Setting aside the priests and
l'le great 1 H nand ano- 'he artisans and menials on the other, we have left
Population T °^ a°r'cil'turists who constitute by far the larger portion of the
and so far \h ' Sreat body of people subsists by husbandry and cattle-farming,
and occu ' ^ occuPation is one and the same. But they are also the owners
'hey are o'v'3] °^ 'anc'> 'he holders of more or less compact tribal territories ;
tion between i° as we" as villains ; and hence springs the cardinal distinc-
tnc actual iv occuPati°n of ruling and the occupation of being ruled. Where
tnat caste °a °f everv"day life is the same, social standing, which is all
Present or be']11^1"5' c'ePenc's#vcl'y largely upon political importance, whether
0I1gmg to the recent past. There is the widest distinction between