The caste system in India has been a subject of much controversy. It was supposed to be an identification of man’s inbuilt inclinations and capacities, but gradually this truth was lost and it morphed into a mechanical system for slotting people into various social categories based on their birth in a certain family. It thus became a vehicle for stigma and discrimination. In the following selections from various works, Sri Aurobindo points out the true origin of the caste system - how the four castes are actually four latent powers (caturvyuha) within Man which must be perfected by every person on the spiritual path. The Brahmin represents the faculty of knowledge, the Kshatriya represents valour, the Vaishya represents commerce and relationship of harmony, while the Shudra represents perfection in work.
In contemporary terms:
- Brahmin = academia or intelligentsia.
- Kshatriya = people involved in governance.
- Vaishya = capitalists.
- Shudra = labour.
Sri Aurobindo on the four powers within Man
We must realise that the ancient Aryan Rishis meant by the Chaturvarnya (four castes) not a mere social division, but a recognition of God manifesting Himself in fundamental Swabhava(individual nature), which our bodily distinctions, our social orders are merely an attempt to organise in the symbols of human life, often a confused attempt, often a mere parody and distortion of the divine thing they try to express. Every man has in himself all the four Dharmas, but one predominates, in one he is born and that strikes the note of his character and determines the type and cast of all his actions; the rest subordinated to the dominant type and helps to give it its complement. No Brahmana is a complete Brahmana unless he has the Kshatratejas in him, the Vaishyashakti and the Shudrashakti, but all these have to serve in him the fullness of his Brahmanyam. God manifests Himself as the four Prajapatis or Manus, catvāro manavah of the Gita, and each man is born in the amśa of one of the four; the first characterised by wisdom and largeness, the second by heroism and force, the third by dexterity and enjoy- ment, the fourth by work and service. The perfected man develops in himself all four capacities and contains at once the god of wisdom and largeness, the god of heroism and force, the god of skill and enjoyment, the god of work and service. Only one stands dominant and leads and uses the others.
[Sri Aurobindo, Sapta-Chatusthaya, SABCL Supplement Vol 27]
The fourfold personality
The Divine Mother here is the female form of the Infinite Power which has manifested the Universe.
| Four powers of the Divine Mother | Attribute |
Manifests in human nature as |
| Maheshwari, goddess of the supreme knowledge | brings to us her vision for all kinds and widenesses of truth, her rectitude of the spiritual will, the calm and passion of her supramental largeness, her felicity of illumination | Brahmana |
| Mahakali, goddess of the supreme strength | with her are all mights and spiritual force and severest austerity of Tapas and swiftness to the battle and the victory and the laughter, the attahāsya, that makes light of defeat and death and the powers of the ignorance | Kshatriya |
| Mahalakshmi, the goddess of the supreme love and delight | her gifts are the spirit’s grace and the charm and beauty of the Ananda and protection and every divine and human blessing | Vaishya |
| Mahasaraswati, the goddess of divine skill and of the works of the Spirit | and hers is the Yoga that is skill in works, yogah karmasu kauśalam, and the utilities of divine knowledge and the self-application of the spirit to life and the happiness of its harmonies | Shudra |
Sri Aurobindo’s commentary on the Gita.
The fundamental truth is not this outward thing, but a force of our inner being in movement, the truth of the fourfold active power of the spiritual nature. Each Jiva possesses in his spiritual nature these four sides, is a soul of knowledge, a soul of strength and of power, a soul of mutuality and interchange, a soul of works and service, but one side or other predominates in the action and expressive spirit and tinges the dealings of the soul with its embodied nature; it leads and gives its stamp to the other powers and uses them for the principal strain of action, tendency, experience. The Swabhava then follows, not crudely and rigidly as put in the social demarcation, but subtly and flexibly the law of this strain and develops in developing it the other three powers. Thus the pursuit of the impulse of works and service rightly done develops knowledge, increases power, trains closeness or balance of mutuality and skill and order of relation. Each front of the fourfold godhead moves through the enlargement of its own dominant principle of nature and enrichment by the other three towards a total perfection. This development undergoes the law of the three gunas. There is possible a tamasic and rajasic way of following even the dharma of the soul of knowledge, a brute tamasic and a high sattwic way of following the dharma of power, a forceful rajasic or a beautiful and noble sattwic way of following the dharma of works and service. To arrive at the sattwic way of the inner individual Swadharma and of the works to which it moves us on the ways of life is a preliminary condition of perfection. And it may be noted that the inner Swadharma is not bound to any outward social or other form of action, occupation or function. The soul of works or that element in us that is satisfied to serve, can, for example, make the life of the pursuit of knowledge, the life of struggle and power or the life of mutuality, production and interchange a means of satisfying its divine impulse to labour and to service.
[Sri Aurobindo, Essays on the Gita, Swabhava and Swadharma]
Sri Aurobindo in the Synthesis of Yoga
The Godhead, the spirit manifested in Nature appears in a sea of infinite quality, Ananta-guna. But the executive or mechanical Prakriti is of the threefold guna, sattwa, rajas, tamas, and the Ananta-guna, the spiritual play of infinite quality, modifies itself in this mechanical nature into the type of these three gunas. And in the soul-force in man this Godhead in Nature represents itself as a fourfold effective Power, caturvyūha, a Power for knowledge, a Power for strength, a Power for mutuality and active and productive relation and interchange, a Power for works and labour and service, and its presence casts all human life into a nexus and inner and outer operation of these four things. The ancient thought of India conscious of this fourfold type of active human personality and nature built out of it the four types of the Brahmana, Kshatriya, Vaishya and Shudra, each with its spiritual turn, ethical ideal, suitable upbringing, fixed function in society and place in the evolutionary scale of the spirit. As always tends to be the case when we too much externalise and mechanise the more subtle truths of our nature, this became a hard and fast system inconsistent with the freedom and variability and complexity of the finer developing spirit in man. Nevertheless the truth behind it exists and is one of some considerable importance in the perfection of our power of nature; but we have to take it in its inner aspects, first, personality, character, temperament, soul-type, then the soul-force which lies behind them and wears these forms, and lastly the play of the free spiritual Shakti in which they find their culmination and unity beyond all modes. For the crude external idea that a man is born as a Brahmana, Kshatriya, Vaishya or Shudra and that alone, is not a psychological truth of our being. The psychological fact is that there are these four active powers and tendencies of the Spirit and its executive Shakti within us and the predominance of one or the other in the more well-formed part of our personality gives us our main tendencies, dominant qualities and capacities, effective turn in action and life. But they are more or less present in all men, here manifest, there latent, here developed, there subdued and depressed or subordinate, and in the perfect man will be raised up to a fullness and harmony which in the spiritual freedom will burst out into the free play of the infinite quality of the spirit in the inner and outer life and in the self-enjoying creative play of the Purusha with his and the world’s Nature-Power.
[Sri Aurobindo, Synthesis of Yoga, Soul-Force and the Fourfold personality]
See Also :
- The Fourfold order of society
- Chaturvarna in the Karmayogin
- Plato had proposed a somewhat similar division of society in his tripartite theory of the soul.
Sandeep,
Regarding what Sri Aurobindo says here …
“but one predominates, in one he is born and that strikes the note of his character and determines the type and cast of all his actions; the rest subordinated to the dominant type and helps to give it its complement.”
I wonder to what extent this formulation will remain true as the evolution of man progresses and man’s nature becomes more and more complex and varied. (Currently there are half a dozen schemes trying to classify human personality and inner temperaments, all based on different criteria.) I personally can’t say that any of the above qualitative powers predominates in me — I go through long periods where one predominates and then another.
It seems to me that there’s no need to have a fixed idea of one’s swabhava or make a fetish out of it, as the action of the Supramental Shakti in any event brings out latent capacities or new capacities hitherto undeveloped.
> I personally can’t say that any of the above qualitative powers predominates in me — I go through long periods
> where one predominates and then another.
That’s because you are a stumbling mystic
You may be misled by the title I (deliberately) chose. The sole purpose of the article was to show that caste is not a rigid construct.
Hi Sandeep,
No, I get the point being made here … I’m just a bit skeptical that human nature divides so neatly into exactly four types or swabhavas based on the predominance of one of the four powers of the Mother manifesting in an individual’s nature. It seems kind of arbitrary to me.
I also don’t see the connection between the Vaishya swabhava and Mahalakshmi.
To my knowledge Mother and Sri Aurobindo didn’t hand out swabhava labels to sadhaks so I’m only saying that I feel that there’s no need to make some sort of a fetish out of what one thinks one’s swabhava is, given the dynamic nature of these things in yoga anyway.
Forgot to reply to this comment..
To my knowledge Mother and Sri Aurobindo didn’t hand out swabhava labels to sadhaks so I’m only saying that I feel that there’s no need to make some sort of a fetish out of what one thinks one’s swabhava is, given the dynamic nature of these things in yoga anyway.
Nobody is making a fetish. I think you are hung up on the idea that all human beings should be treated equal. Yes, all may be all Divine souls but in the outer manifestation, there are differences which are explained by these four personalities.
Sri Aurobindo himself says above: “Every man has in himself all the four Dharmas, but one predominates, in one he is born and that strikes the note of his character and determines the type and cast of all his actions; the rest subordinated to the dominant type and helps to give it its complement.”
Read the Essays on the Gita for further clarification
I also don’t see the connection between the Vaishya swabhava and Mahalakshmi.
See Nolini’s article:
Pingback: On some customs and traditions of Hinduism « Integral Yoga of Sri Aurobindo & The Mother
Pingback: Are Indians more spiritual? | Integral Yoga of Sri Aurobindo & The Mother
Does colour of psychic being relates to predominant aspect of the fourfold personality?
I would say that the psychic being is more like a “white mass of light”, which puts forth a distinct personality in every life based on past Karma, and that is what decides a person’s predispositions (i.e. caste)
So colour could be different from life to life or mode of its expression, or person, or core is white, or it’s just matter of personal experience? I’m asking because Sri Aurobindo usually mentions rose.
I guess it is a matter of personal experience. I am not capable of offering any “ex cathedra” remark at this point.
Sri Aurobindo on caste vis-a-vis democracy:
Disciple: The word “Dharma” has come to mean “religion”, though the original sense is not that. It is the law of being – social or moral – which sustains the being. Is the old classification of men in four orders, according to the peculiar Dharma of each, tenable now? Can each human being have the characteristics of the four orders?
Sri Aurobindo: There is infinite possibility. So the potentiality of all the four castes is in every man, but that does not exist as a fact. No classification can be perfect so long as man is living in the mental consciousness. It is not possible to classify all natures into four orders. So we have come to the present confusion because it is regulated by birth. Of course, there are tradition, training, culture and atmosphere which tend to give the stamp of nature.
But then the economic classification set aside the one according to inherent inborn nature. Profession then became the mark of the caste. Now, even this has broken down – what continues as caste is meaningless. Many meaningless things continue in humanity.
Before Buddha there were Kshatriyas in Bengal. When Buddhism collapsed there remained two castes – Brahmins and Shudras – other castes rightly resented being called “Shudras”. In old times the agriculturist, the trader and the craftsmen were all Vaishyas.
Disciple: Nowadays there is the democratic ideal.
Sri Aurobindo: Yes. In the democratic ideal all are inherently equal. Now they say we must give equal opportunity to all – that is possible; there was a hierarchy in India and in Feudal Europe.
But where is democracy even today? It is a name which simply covers up the inequalities. All human ideals move round in a vicious circle. First, a hierarchy starts the culture – the start, generally, is with knowledge and spiritual experience. Then the culture spreads down to the people and in so doing it depreciates. Then a general levelling down takes place and there comes democracy. Then a hierarchy comes in and the circle starts again.
Disciple: But is there a goal for humanity?
Sri Aurobindo: Yes, there is a goal, and humanity is not going towards it but round and round in a circle below, while the goal is high up.
Disciple: What can man do to get out of the circle?
Sri Aurobindo: To escape he must go beyond humanity. In the case of individuals attempts up till now have succeeded. But no effort has succeeded in making it a part of the earth-nature.
(Purani, Evening Talks, 4th August 1926)
In an epistle written on 3rd Jan., 1895 from Chicago to Justice Sir Subrahmanya Iyer, Swami Vivekananda expatiates that the caste system as practised in India is false and actually a hindrance to progress:
Swami Vivekananda:”Non, take the case of caste — in Sanskrit, Jâti, i.e. species. Now, this is the first idea of creation. Variation (Vichitratâ), that is to say Jati, means creation. “I am One, I become many” (various Vedas). Unity is before creation, diversity is creation. Now if this diversity stops, creation will be destroyed. So long as any species is vigorous and active, it must throw out varieties. When it ceases or is stopped from breeding varieties, it dies. Now the original idea of Jati was this freedom of the individual to express his nature, his Prakriti, his Jati, his caste; and so it remained for thousands of years. Not even in the latest books is inter-dining prohibited; nor in any of the older books is inter-marriage forbidden. Then what was the cause of India’s downfall? — the giving up of this idea of caste. As Gitâ says, with the extinction of caste the world will be destroyed. Now does it seem true that with the stoppage of these variations the world will be destroyed? The present caste is not the real Jati, but a hindrance to its progress. It really has prevented the free action of Jati, i.e. caste or variation. Any crystallized custom or privilege or hereditary class in any shape really prevents caste (Jati) from having its full sway; and whenever any nation ceases to produce this immense variety, it must die. Therefore what I have to tell you, my countrymen, is this, that India fell because you prevented and abolished caste. Every frozen aristocracy or privileged class is a blow to caste and is not-caste. Let Jati have its sway; break down every barrier in the way of caste, and we shall rise. Now look at Europe. When it succeeded in giving free scope to caste and took away most of the barriers that stood in the way of individuals, each developing his caste — Europe rose. In America, there is the best scope for caste (real Jati) to develop, and so the people are great. Every Hindu knows that astrologers try to fix the caste of every boy or girl as soon as he or she is born. That is the real caste — the individuality, and Jyotisha (astrology) recognises that. And we can only rise by giving it full sway again. This variety does not mean inequality, nor any special privilege.”
(Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. 4, Writings: Prose, A Plan of Work for India)
Sri Aurobindo refuted some remarks by Mahatma Gandhi on the caste system
A longish essay by Dr. Soumitra Basu “The Caste System Of India – An Aurobindonian Perspective” available at http://iiyp.net/Downloads.php
Here is an excerpt from his essay
“The caste systems as we find today is of course of a deviated and deformed version of the original Caturvarna system. Sri Aurobindo examines the problem from three angles :
(a) the socio-economic and political perspective which helps us to understand how the ethical principles enshrined in the Dharma-idea maintained the Caturvarna and how the political changes affecting the structure of the classical Indian community influenced transition of the ancient Caturvarna to the caste-system of later years ;
(b) the socio-cultural and psychological perspective which shows how the spiritual and religious values attached to the Caturvarna evolve into psychological and ethical paradigms and again into conventional prototypes; and
(c) the spiritual and synthetic perspective which justifies and innovative effort to re-use the Vedic-ideas that gave birth to Caturvarna to effectuate another synthesis. This new synthesis is entirely different from Caturvarna in its form yet to consonance with the spirit of the original seed-ideas form which the Caturvarna evolved and hence would be more acceptable to the Indian psyche.”
Gautama Buddha on the caste system :
“Not by birth is one an outcast; not by birth is one a brahman.
By deed one becomes an outcast, by deed one becomes an brahman.”
“Vasala Sutta: Discourse on Outcasts” (Snp 1.7), translated from the Pali by Piyadassi Thera. Access to Insight, 11 July 2010, http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.07.piya.html . Retrieved on 17 November 2011.
The question of caste existed 2500 years ago during the time of the Buddha as well. Brahmins in that era tried to claim superiority over others by virtue of being born in a certain family. The characteristic of a Brahmin is decided not by birth but by conduct; a true Brahmin is one who has transcended sensual pleasures.
The Buddha’s disciple Kaccana (Katyayana) was called upon by the King Madhura Avantiputra to explain the basis of the Brahmin superiority. This discourse forms part of the Madhura Sutta(aka Madhura Sutra) — Majjhima Nikaya, Sutta 84
The King asks Katyayana, “The brahmins, Kaccâna, say thus,–’the brahmins are the best caste; every other caste is inferior. The brahmins are the white caste; every other caste is black. Only the brahmins are pure, not the non-brahmins. The brahmins are the legitimate sons of Brahmâ, born from his mouth, Brahmâ-born, Brahmâ-made, heirs of Brahmâ.’ What do you say to this, sire?”
Kaccâna replied, “It is mere empty words, sire, to give it out among people that ‘the brahmins are the best caste; every other caste is inferior. The brahmins are the white caste; every other caste is black. Only the brahmins are pure, not the non-brahmins. The brahmins are the legitimate sons of Brahmâ, born from his mouth, Brahmâ-born, Brahmâ-made, heirs of Brahmâ.”
Kaccâna: “For the following reason it may be known to be mere empty words to make that statement.–What do you think of this, sire? If prosperity attended a kshatriya in the form of property or herds or silver or gold, could he have another kshatriya who would get up earlier than he, go to bed later, be zealous in his master’s service, study his comfort, and speak with affection?–Could he have a brahmin, a vaisya, and a sûdra who would behave similarly?”
King: “Yes, he could, Kaccâna.”
Kaccâna:”What do you think of this, sire? If prosperity attended a brahmin in the form of property or herds or silver or gold, could he have another brahmin who would get up earlier than he, go to bed later, be zealous in his master’s service, study his comfort, and speak with affection?–Could he have a vaishya, a sudra, and a kshatriya who would behave similarly?”
King:”Yes, he could, Kaccâna.”
Kaccâna: “What do you think of this, sire? If prosperity attended a vaisya in the form of property or herds or silver or gold, could he have another vaisya who would get up earlier than he, go to bed later, be zealous in his master’s service, study his comfort, and speak with affection?–Could he have a sûdra, a kshatriya, and a brahmin who would behave similarly?”
King:”Yes, he could, Kaccâna.”
Kaccâna:”What do you think of this, sire? If prosperity attended a sûdra in the form of property or herds or silver or gold, could he have another sûdra who would get up earlier than he, go to bed later, be zealous in his master’s service, study his comfort, and speak with affection?–Could he have a kshatriya, a brahmin, and a vaisya who would behave similarly?”
King: “Yes, he could, Kaccâna.”
Kaccâna: “What do you think of this, sire? If the case be so, are those four castes exactly equal, or not? Or how does it strike you?”
King: “Undoubtedly, Kaccâna, if the case be so, those four castes are exactly equal. I perceive no difference, sir, between them herein.”
Read more at http://www.sacred-texts.com/journals/jras/1894-14.htm
The Vajra Sucikopanishad of the Sama Veda expounds on what defines a real Brahmin. The following passage is from an English translation by N.S. Subrahmanian:
Class by birth is not the brahmana either, as there happen to be various species among creatures other than the human beings unto which alone the brahmana belongs. Further, several Maharishis have been of diverse origin such as Risyasringa-of a female deer, Kausika of kusa grass, Jambuka from jackal, Valmiki from an ant-hilI, Vyasa from a fisher-girl, Gautama from the back of a hare, Vasistha from the celestial nymph Urvasi, and Agastya from an earthen jar, etc. Also, there have been several other great sages who have given proof of their higher wisdom and experience purely from their own higher stand. So, class by birth, by itself, is not the brahmana.
Knowledge is not the brahmana, because the small – kshatriyas and others–have attained the highest end and the goal of llfe.
A performer of the ordained duties (karma) is not also the brahmana, as the actions of all beings are all alike, more so in relation to righteousness and pious conduct, and those arising out of the past tendencies, and of actions petformed. The pious performer of religious duties is not that too, because several kshatriyas and others have lavished gold as pious offerings connected with rituals.
Who then is a brahmana ? (i) It is the actual seer of the nondual atman that is the true brahmana….
(source: N.S. Subrahmanian. Encyclopaedia of the Upaniṣads, New Delhi : Sterling, 1985, pp 152-153)
The rapid growth that followed the opening of India’s economy in 1991 is now progressively dismantling the caste walls and increasing social mobility. See this article from the New York Times.
Scaling Caste Walls With Capitalism’s Ladders in India
Read and see the video at : http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/22/world/asia/indias-boom-creates-openings-for-untouchables.html
Apparently, even the Manusmriti (laws of Manu) recognizes that caste is determined by conduct rather than birth in a certain family
“Shudro brahmanatameti brahmanashchaiti shudratam.
Kshatriyanjalamevamtu vidyadvaishyattathaiva cha.”(Manusmriti 10/65)
translation: a Shudra can become a brahmin by acquiring learning, merit, virtuous life, etc.and a brahmin lacking in above traits becomes a Shudra.
Historical examples where caste changed due to conduct
1. Kavash Ailush, a son of a slave-woman, and Vatsa, a son of a Shudra-woman became Rigvedic Rishis for their having become seers of Mantras(exponents of Vedic hymns).
2.Valmiki who (according to some legends) was lowly-born acquired the fame which goes with the name of Maharishi Valmiki.
3.Slave woman’s son, Vidur, became the Prime Minister of Raja Dhritarashra and came to be known as Mahatma.
4. Shri Ram, a son of King Dashratha, and Shri Krishna, born in a Yadav family, came to be regarded as God. They became venerable even for the Brahmanas, their birth in a Kshatriya family notwithstanding.
5.On the other hand, Ravana who was born in a clan of Pulastya Rishi came to be called a Rakshasha ‘demon’ for indulging in evil deeds and for his misconduct.
6. Raghu, the ancestor of Rama had a son named Pravridha. He was outcast from the Kshatriya clan due to his misdeeds and misdemeanour and became a demon.
7. Trishanku, originally a king became a Chandal.
8. Many of the Vishwamitra’s sons came to be called Shudras.
(Source: 1.Opposition to Manu Why? by Dr.Surendra Kumar, pub.by Arsh Sahitya Prachar Trust, Delhi and
Excerpted from an article by Y.K. Wadhwa on Purusha Sukta at http://agniveerfans.wordpress.com/2011/12/08/purusha-sukta/
I always thought that Brahmin is somebody who has direct Knowledge of Brahman but perhaps I’m mistaken and of course it is not so in the caste system.
No, you are not mistaken. Unfortunately, in India itself, the term Brahmin got misused to mean someone who is born in a “Brahmin” family (one in which father studies and recites scriptures, etc). While it is certainly helpful for a child to be born in a family of scholars, it doesn’t automatically mean that one becomes a Brahmin. The profound insights into people’s personalities that were discovered by sages got reified into banal social divisions.
Even amongst the Spartans and Egyptians, professions used to handed down from father to son (e.g. Son of a cook became a cook, etc.).