Varna (Hinduism) - Etymology and Origins

Etymology and Origins

Further information: varṇa (disambiguation) and trifunctional hypothesis

All the derived meanings of the term Varna - "kind, sort, character, quality" - are already present in the Rigveda's use of the word. The earliest application to the formal division into four social classes appears in the late Rigvedic Purusha Sukta (RV 10.90.11–12), which has the Brahman, Rajanya (= Kshatriya), Vaishya and Shudra classes emerging from the mouth, arms, thighs and feet of the cosmic being, Purusha, respectively. It seems very probable that in the Chhandas period there were four distinct communities in India with different functions to serve in the body-politic, however, the innumerable sub-sects among the four castes are certainly of very late origin. Also, it can be inferred that the barrier between castes was not impassable during this period for deserving cases, as can be seen from the example of Vishvamitra

The sage Vishvamitra was born as a Kshatriya and by deep tapas (meditation) became Brahmin rishi. This quadruple division into Varnas is not to be confused with Jāti or even the much finer division of the contemporary caste system in India.

Adi Shankara does not admit the reality of the world and therefore the real creation of anything, including the creation of castes. He interprets the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad to only mean that the Viraj only projects the four castes and does not really create them. This implies that individuals belonging to any varna do not have any real reality, but only an empirical or behavioural reality that enables them carry out their dharmas (duties) in this world.

The story of Satyakarma in the Chhandogya Upanishad shows that Varna does not depend on birth rather it depends on gunas. Satyakarma wanted to become a brahmacarin but from his conversation with his mother he could not trace his family roots. He went to Gautama and said he wanted to become a brahmacarin but was not sure to which family he belonged. To this Gautama replied, only a true Brahmin would not swerve from the truth and was ready to initiate Satyakarma.

Basham suggests that the jati system in its modern form developed very late. Hsuan Tsang, the Chinese scholar, in the seventh century was not aware of the jati system. The author Subhash Kak has asserted that the emergence of the modern jati system might be credited to historical events in the Indian polity that occurred with the invasions of the Turks. The varna system as described in the various Puranas, Manusmriti and Dharmashastra was relied upon by the British colonial administrators and scholars. The modern Hindu caste system recognizes many more social groupings not mentioned in the Hindu scriptures and only theoretically accepts the necessity of following prescribed duties.

The Tantric movement that developed as a tradition distinct from orthodox Hinduism between the 8th and 11th centuries CE relaxed many societal strictures regarding class and community distinction but did not deny all social restrictions. N. N. Bhattacharyya notes that "Tantra according to its very nature has nothing to do with the system but in the later Tantras elements are pronounced" because its treatises were written by Brahmanas even though its teachers were often non-Brahamanas.

One might argue that Hinduism is a belief system wedded to the idea that a well ordered society is composed of four castes. Against this the jāti system is a phenomenon that is not restricted to Hindu sections of Indian society. It has been argued that the approving use of the term “Brahmin” in Buddhist and Jain texts shows that even these socially critical movements were comfortable with a caste structured society as long as obligations and privileges accorded to the various castes were justly distributed (cf. Dhammapada ch. XXVI; cf. Sūtrakṛtānga I.xii.11-21). Caste is also not philosophically important to many schools that are conventionally understood under the heading of “Hindu philosophy.” Some philosophical schools, such as Yoga, seem to be implicitly critical of life in conventional society guided by the values of social and ecological domination, while other schools, such as Advaita Vedānta, are openly critical of the idea that caste morality has any relevance to a spiritually serious aspirant.