Genetics and the Caste System

P. V. GAJAPATI RAJU
Rajkumar of Vizianagaram

One of the major problems facing the many and varied groups of people of this great sub-continent known as India, has been and still continues to be the caste system. Over the centuries into modern times, great thinkers, philosophers, scholars, politicians and men and women in all walks of life, have given us the benefit of serious thought and consideration of the problem and yet, the problem continues to exist. That it exists is obvious from the recent uproar all over the country brought about bythe highly controversial remarks of the Sankaracharya of Jagannath Puri. Rightly or wrongly his views on the caste system have not been welcomed by a large section of Hindus. Further and more definite proof of the existence of the caste system is the fact that the Parliament of India has recently amended the Constitution for the 23rd time, granting certain special privileges in the form of reservation of seats in State Assemblies and the Lok and Rajya Sabhas for the so-called untouchable or scheduled castes. This paper hopes to present a few points on this ancient, all-important question, with the hope that the ideas herein contained, will assist in bringing about recognition of the fact that all men are born equal and, that while undoubtedly a hierarch, exists and will continue to exist, this hierarchy should be based upon individual qualities and not upon birth, bank balances, social and political position.

The earliest references to the caste system comes from the Rig Veda Purusha Suktha portion 10-90-12 and is hereunder quoted and translated by H. H. Wilson on page 253 Vol. VI, The Rig Veda:

“His mouth became the Brahmana,
His arms became the Rajanya,
His thighs became the Vaisya,
The Sudra was born from his feet.”

It must be understood at this stage that the Vedas were directed towards an attempt to teach the oneness and Divinity of all creation. A clear comprehension or the Vedic teachings culminating in the Upanishadic Mahavakyas, such as, Aham Brahmasmi (God and man are one), Tat Twam Asi (That art Thous) etc., all ofwhich were attempts to establish the divinity of all creation, is necessary when considering the above verse. The description of the Lord in the Rig Veda is a suggestive description of man (purusha). From this earliest reference to the caste system, we see that man finds manifested within himself all the four castes. The thinker or thinking aspect is the Brahmana. This is symbolised in the head of man. The administrative or rulership aspect is symbolised in the arms and is the Kshatriya. The productive or creative aspect is symbolised in the seat of fertility the loins or thighs and is the Vaisya. The unthinking, yet necessarily functioning aspect is symbolised in the feet, and is the Sudra. It can be inferred from this, that all men are a curious admixture of all four castes, in a wonderful harmony. Whenever and wherever man expresses himself as a thinker, he is a Brahmana at that given moment. When he administers and rules he is the Kshatriya. When he produces or creates or causes to produce and create, the Vaisya in him is being manifested. The routine unthinking work that all have to do every day of their lives, brings out the Sudra in man. Could this not be a reasonable, rational and logical explanation of this the earliest reference to the caste system?

To that large group of humanity calling themselves Hindus, one of the most authoritative of books is the Bhagavad Gita. It’s authority in guiding Hindu philosophical and religious thought is undisputed. Those ideas contained in the Gita that are true, are applicable to all men of whatever religious faith or lack of faith they hold. Just as the sun shines and the rain falls for sinner and saint alike, so is truth applicable to one and all without alteration by time or place. In other words, whatever is true in the Bhagavad Gita, extends beyond the small group calling themselves Hindus, and covers all humanity throughout all time. The four castes are to be found not only among Hindus but among every other nationality and religion without regard for colour or sex. Either the Gita ideas relating to caste or for that matter anything else, are true or untrue. If true, that truth applies with equal force to one and all, and what is untrue cannot be applicable to anyone, now or at any time. Interpretations however vary and it is largely this variation that is responsible for the chaos that has been and still exists.

In chapter IV, verse 13 of the Gita, reference to the caste system is made as hereunder quoted and translated into English by Dr Annie Besant and Dr Bhagavan Das on page 81, The Bhagavad Gita.

“The four castes were emanated by Me, by different distribution of qualities and actions; know Me to be the author or them, though actionless and inexhaustible.”

This verse clearly indicates that the qualities and activities of the Individual determine his caste. Since man, as the Lord Buddha so rightly stressed, is in a constant state of flux; his qualities and activities are necessarily constantly undergoing change. Which one of us has not felt the wonderful rapture of love, the love of one’s mother, father, brother and sisters, of the beloved, sometimes even of all fellow creatures? Who at sometime or other has not felt tenderness, kindness, pity, the desire to help and to assist? Who can lift his hand and truly say that he has never felt even a trace of bitterness, anguish, anger, discontent, sorrow, jealousy, hatred, the desire for revenge? At the time when positive qualities are present and are being manifested in action, that man is certainly different from the same man when manifesting negative qualities. Sri Krishna could be interpreted to imply that the category of classification of caste would therefore be in accord with the attitude and way of life of the individual at every separate given moment of life. This classification of caste is a varying one, viz., a man is a Brahmana as long as and whenever he thinks and acts like one. He (the same man) is a Kshatriya when his thinking and acting are in accord with Kshatriya qualities. The same holds true for the Vaisya and Sudra castes. This is not at variance with the Rig Veda verse quoted earlier.

In the 18th chapter of the Bhagavad Gita references to the caste system are again found in verses 41, 42, 43 and 44 hereunder quoted, translated by Mrs Annie Besant and Bhagavan Das, pages 314, 315.

41. “Of Brahmanas, Kshatriyas, Valsyas and Sudras
O consumer of foes! the duties have been divided according to the qualities born of their own natures.  
42. Serenity, self-restraint, austerity purity, forgiveness and also uprightness, wisdom, knowledge, faith are Brahmana duty born of his own nature.
43. Prowess, splendour, firmness, dexterity and also not flying from battle,   generosity and the ruler-nature are Kshatriya-duty, born ofhisown nature.
44.       Ploughing, protection ofcattle and trade are Vaisya-duty born ofhis own nature. Action of the nature of service is Sudra-duty, born of his own nature.”

The first of these 4 verses appears to repeat the ideas contained in verse 13, chapter IV. Here again differentiation of caste appears unequivocally to be associated with the conduct and attitude of the individual. It would bear repetition to point out that human beings are in a constant state of flux. Men are not always completely positive or totally negative, but are a curious admixture of the two with an endless ebb and flow bringing out the Jekyl and Hyde in all.

Verse No. 42 is an exhaustive description of the qualities and attributes a man is expected to possess and manifest in order to qualify to be a Brahmana. The next two verses deal with the qualities and attributes of the Kshatriya, Vaisya and Sudra castes. Some of the Brahmanical qualities will be considered to start with. The first of the qualities is Serenity. This means calmness, not merely externally but deep within. How many can truly say that 24 hours a day, day after day, come heaven or high water, they are Serene? Yet there is hardly a person who is not tranquil at sometime or other. If a man is to be considered a Brahmana all the time, is it not necessary that he then should be serene also all the time? If It is argued that to be so most of the time would be sufficient, then immediately the question arises, by what yardstick of measurement can we decide, how much is ‘most of the time’? Any answer would be purely arbitrary (This line of reasoning applies equally to all the other qualities of the Brahmana, Kshatriya, Vaisya and Sudra). No, it seems more reasonable to lay that anyone whoever he be, when calm and collected, is at that moment, a Brahmana. It of course follows that, when not calm and collected the same person is not a Brahmana–at least according to Sri Krishna’s description.

The second quality of the Brahmana is Self-restraint. This implies constantly abstaining from thinking and doing anything considered negative. It might be asked who decides, or by what method is a negative action to be determined? Would it be un-reasonable to say that every man has an innate sense of right and wrong, this sense being known as ‘conscience’? This conscience unfailingly guides him who seriously seeks. This is what Jesus meant when he said, “Seek and thou shalt find.” Negative actions are those which after serious and careful thought, the individual himself decides to be negative. This implies honest objectivity and, is an essential part of self-restraint. Standards vary from individual to individual and from the individual at one given moment to another. No greater self-restraint can be manifested than by honestly refraining from acting in a fashion that one’s conscience labels negative, Adharmic. How many of us can truly say we are constantly self-restrained? For example, everyone of us know that over-eating is wrong. Can any of us say that we never over-eat? Is it ever possible for a man to be over-weight except by over-eating, yet would it be right to say that all persons who are over-weight cannot possibly, be possessing the qualities of a Brahmana? Obviously when a man is disregarding the dictates of his connscience and is over-eating, he is not thinking and acting as a Brahmana. Since there are bound to be many occasions when he tries to exercise self-restraint and be abstemious, on every such occasion, he is manifesting the quality of a Brahmana. Would it be reasonable to say that X is a perfectly self-restrained man and Y the opposite? X may undoubtedly possess and manifest greater self-restraint but, perfection is more a hypothetical, abstract, notional concept than a fact. Some undoubtedly come closer to this ideal than others but, none is devoid totally of some form of self-restraint. Absolute imperfection is equally a hypothetical, abstract, notional concept and does not exist, except as a theory to assist us in attempting to understand the varying degrees between these two extremes. A man of self-restraint has a questioning mind, and, does not do things by rote or custom without giving serious consideration to determine the soundness or otherwise of the act. Such a man would realise that foolish, health-destroying habits like alcohol, tobacco, cofee, tea, aerated drinks, spiced, fried and chilled foods, insufficiency or excess of activity such as in exercise, excessive venery, lack of mental poise and many other everyday acts are largely of a negative nature. How many do we know who exercise constant self-restraint with regard to all of these and more? How few bother to think of them at all and, fewer still who do think and, then honestly implement all their beliefs. Truly, it can be said that he who has a questioning mind and, tries to live in accordance with the answers, is indeed a Brahmana, at least when so doing.

The next quality is Austerity. This is often misunderstood to mean an ascetic denial of life, which it definitely is not, as evidenced by the Gita verses 16, 17, chapter 6 and verse 6, chapter 17. True Austerity implies living in accordance with the need of the moment and, not below or beyond this need. The great John Milton illustrates this point in a lovely little poem. It must however be understood that Austerity covers every facet of life and the poem quoted below is only illustrative.

In what thou eatest and drinkest, seek thou
from thence due nourishment, not
gluttonous delight.
So mayst thou live, till like ripe fruit
thou droppest into thy mother’s lap,
Or else with ease be gathered, not harshly
plucked for death mature.

Austerity is not Very different from self-restraint. In fact if one truly possesses and manifests one noble quality, it opens the door for other good qualities automatically to follow. The line of demarcation from one quality to another is largely arbitrary, and exists only as a convenience for assisting in explanation and understanding.

The next quality is Purity. Obviously, this means purity in thought, word and in deed. Some are undoubtedly outwardly pure but, Jesus, in teaching that adultery is committed more in the thought than in the deed, illustrates the true meaning of purity. Here again, who can truly say that his every thought is constantly pure? From this, it seems reasonable to say that he who, when thinking pure thoughts and acting in like manner, whoever he be, is, at that moment, a Brahmana. It seems equally true that he who, when thinking impure thoughts and acting accordingly, whoever he be, ceases to be a Brahmana for as long a period as the thoughts and actions continue to be impure.

Before commenting upon the rest of the qualities a man is expected to possess in order to be a Brahmana, the question naturally arises, can a man be born a Brahmana or not? One might as well ask, is a man born serene? Is a man born with self-restraint? Is a man born pure? Is austerity an inheritable characteristic? Let us have a look at the rest of the Brahmanical qualities–forgiveness, uprightness, wisdom, knowledge, faith. Are all of these wonderful characteristics passed down from father to son or are they developed as a result of effort and free-will? Let us be truthful in our answer. Can anyone really claim that he was born possessing any or all of these qualities? Does it not seem much more reasonable to believe that these qualities are round to a greater or lesser degree in all men, who partly inherit and partly develop them as a result of free-will and natural inclination? Whenever man thinks and acts in accord with these qualities, he is at that given time a Brahmana. When not thinking and acting in accordance with these qualities, he is not a Brahmana. With effort and will, anyone can develop these qualities. They are not the birthright of any one group but are the ideal of all mankind.

The 43rd verse of the 18th chapter quoted and translated above, deals with the qualities of a Kshatriya. The first is prowess. Valour and gallantry are the hallmarks of a man with prowess. This is often misunderstood to mean, willingness to fight physically in a righteous cause. It extends much beyond this. It needs valour and determination to turn away from the many negative temptations that in life confront man on innumerable occasions. The battles are within and, while not being observable or recognisable, are all the more real than any fought outside. Here again does it not appear eminently reasonable to postulate that he who, regardless of births when he valiantly fights the battle within and without, whoever he be, is at that moment a Kshatriya; capitulation without the attempt to fight disqualifies him as long as the effort is lacking. No one is barred at any time from attempting to qualify. After all, this along with all the rest of the qualities is nothing but an attitude of mind.

The second quality of the Kshatriya is splendour. The third is Firmness. The fourth is Dexterity. Without enumerating and commenting on these and the rest of the qualities, does it not appear reasonable to assert that these qualities are not the result of birth alone, but are developed and lived up to in accordance with the determination and choice of the individual? No man, regardless of birth, is a Kshatriya without all these qualities. Equally so, no man possessing these qualities and manifesting them ceases to be a Kshatriya while so doing. The same principles must and surely do hold good for the Vaisya and Sudra castes. Let us see if modern science can help us to a clearer grasp and understanding of the situation.

Towards the latter part of the last century an Austrian monk, Gregor Mendel, published a paper recording experimental findings with the crossing of plants. This paper fathered the modern science of Genetics, the Science of Heredity. A very brief introduction to this science will be presented. The subject is highly complex and no attempt is being made to instruct the reader who, if lay, will have to accept largely in faith. Those who wish to further investigate are well advised to approach and enquire from persons fairly conversant with the subject or from books. The enquiry will be both interesting and useful.

The unit of inheritance in all forms of plant and animal life is the gene. The nucleus of each sperm and each egg contains an assortment of threadlike bodies known as chromosomes, which are composed of genes. Fertilisation invokes the union of a sperm and an egg nucleus, so that the newly arisen individual possesses two sets of chromosomes, and therefore a pair of each of the different genes. Half of the inheritance thus comes from the sire and the other half from the dam, and all the body cells normally contain within their nuclei, representatives of both paternal and maternal genes, in paired form. When the individual starts producing germ cells, a regular process of reduction of chromosome number takes place. Thus the number of chromosomes entering each germ cell is half of that found in body cells. The identity of the paternal and maternal set of chromosomes is not preserved in this process, so that the chromosomes are re-sorted in each generation.

When any given gene pair contains identical members, that is to lay, when the member of the pair contributed by the sire is the same as the one contributed by the dam, the individual involved is said to be homozygous for that gene. When the two genes are different, the individual is heterozygous.

It can be said without fear of contradiction that where obligatory cross fertilization or cross breeding is essential for reproduction, the populations are highly heterozygous.
Some characteristics are transmitted from generation to generation by relatively simple genes which, through systematic rigorous selection can be fixed or made reasonably homozygous. An example would be, white colour in the white leghorn fowls. Other characteristics are transmitted through highly complex genes generally in combination and are much more difficult to fix or make stable. Examples of this would be egg-laying in poultry, milk yield in dairy cows speed in race horses, etc. Through rigid and careful selection, significant improvements have been made but, no claim to homozygosity can as yet be made. Even more complex are the characteristics of temperament and behaviour. With the most rigid and controlled selection of many generations, the claim to populations being homozygous for complex characteristics is very unlikely to be advanced or, substantiated, and even if populations can be made homozygous for complex characteristics, the moment controlled breeding is abandoned and haphazard breeding made commonplace, heterozygosity would again rapidly become the norm. Where selection is largely haphazard and directed by chance, it is certain that heterozygosity becomes the norm, and the predictability of the heredity of any complex characteristic becomes a mathematical impossibility.

Work on human genetics is literally in its infancy. Human beings do nit lend themselves to experimentation and, even if they did, the period of time from generation to generation is comparatively so large, that statistical inferences of any significant value would not be forthcoming for at least a large number of generations which would extend to centuries. Without making the subject unreasonably lengthy, it will suffice at this stage to assert, that all of the qualities and characteristics enumerated by Sri Krishna in his description of the Brahmana, Kshatriya, Vaisya and Sudra castes are, if they are to be considered solely inheritable characteristics at all highly complex, and the result of combinations of many different genes. The mathematical odds against any groups of people possessing homozygous pairs of genes singly or plurally for these characteristics are, stacked astronomically against such a situation. It could be safely asserted that, with the largely random selection of mates that is and has been the norm of human society throughout recorded history, no single population or group could possibly be homozygous for even one of the characteristics, let alone the lot put together. In simple language this means that inheritability of these characteristics by any single group of men existent today, is totally unpedictable. The science of genetics conclusively establishes that no single group can claim by birth to be Brahmanas, Kshatriyas, Vaisyas or Sudras, if they are to match up to the standards set by Sri Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita.

The greatest tragedy that India has known is the non-understanding of the fact that caste is not the same as community. The Brahmana, Kshatriya, Vaisya and Sudra communities are totally different from their respective castes. Among the Brahmana community, men with a preponderence of Brahmanical qualities can be found alongside of those largely possessing the characteristics ofthe Kshatriya, Vaisya and Sudra. The same can be seen among peoples of the Kshatriya, Vaisya and Sudra communities. Unfortunately history records that society largely guided by the Brahmana community, has placed the concept of the Brahmana, Kshatriya, Vaisya and Sudra castes in that hierarchical order, though in fact all are equal. The Brahmana and Kshatriya communities have together exploited the situation, placating the Vaisyas by throwing them some crumbs. This means that an unholy alliance of the Brahmana and Kshatriya communities, aided and abetted by the Vaisya community, have systematically exploited the Sudra community, who form the largest numbers. Evidence of this exploitation is clearly manifested in the Laws ofManu which have guided Hindu local behaviour through the large part of recorded history. Classical examples of the Adharmic or highly unjust attitude of the so-called great law-giver and thinker Manu, are expressed in the many verses quoted hereunder as translated by G. Buhler, Sacred Books of the East, Vol. XXV - The Laws of Manu.

Chapter           Verse   Page No.
I                    100      26                    Whatever exists in the world is the property of the Brahmana; on account of the excellence of his origin the Brahmana is,
indeed, entitled to all.
VIII                410      325                  (The King) should order a Vaisya to trade, to lend money, to cultivate the land, or to tend cattle, and a Sudra to serve the
twice-born castes.
VIII                413      326                  But a Sudra, whether bought or unbought, he may compel to do servile work; for he was created by the Self-existent
(Svayambhu) to be the slave of a Brahmana.
VIII                414      326                  A Sudra, though emancipated byhis master, is not released from servitude: since that is innate in him, who can set him free
from it?
VIII                417      327                  A Brahmana may confidently seize the goods of (his) Sudra (slave); for, as that (slave) can have no property, his master
may take his possessions.
VIII                418      327                  (The King) should carefully compel Vaisyas and Sudras to perform the work (prescribed) for them; for if these two(castes)
swerved from their duties, they would throw this (whole) world into confusion.
IX                  317      398                  A Brahmana, be he ignorant or learned, is a great divinity, just as the fire, whether carried forth (for the performance of a
burnt-oblation) or not carried forth, is a great divinity.
IX                  322      399                  Kshatriyas prosper not without Brahmanas, Brahmanas prosper not without Kshatriyas, Brahman as and Kshatriyas, being
closely united, prosper in this (world) and in the next.
IX                  334      401                  But to serve Brahmanas (who are) learned in the Vedas, householders, and famous (for virtue) is the highest duty of a
Sudra, which leads to beatitude.
IX                  335      401                  (A Sudra who is) pure, the servant of his betters, gentle in his speech, and free from pride, and always seeks a refuge with
Brahmanas, attains (in his next life) a higher caste.
X                   3          402                  On account of his pre-eminence, on account of the superiority of his origin, on account of his observance of (particular)
restrictive rules, and on account of his particular sanctification the Brahmana is the lord of (all) cases (varna).
X                   4          402                  The Brahmana, the Kshatriya, and the Vaisya castes (varna) are the twice-born ones, but the fourth, the Sudra, has one
birth only; there is no fifth (caste).
X                   123      429                  The service of Brahmanas alone is declared (to be) an excellent occupation for a Sudra; for whatever else besides this he
may perform will bear him no fruit.
X                   124      429                  They must allot to him out of their own family (property) a suitable maintenance, after considering his ability, his industry,
and the number of those whom he is bound to support.
X                   125      429                  The remnants of their food must be given to him, as well as their, old clothes, the refuse of their grain, and their old
household furniture.
X                   129      430                  No collection ofwealth must be made by a Sudra, even though he be able (to do it); for a Sudra who has acquired wealth,
gives pain to Brahmanas.

It can easily be seen that injustice of the worst type, similar to the present day differentiation in treatment that exists in the South African Whites’ exploitation of the coloured man, was the norm of the exploitation of the Sudra. This perversion and travesty of the extraordinarily beautiful and true meaning of the caste system, has been the bane of Hindu society and, still continues in spite of the basic human recognition of its evils. The fair name of Hinduism has suffered much as a consequence, and until and unless members of the Hindu society are able to understand and implement the teachings of Sri Krishna relating to the caste system, there can never be true peace and harmony among the Hindu peoples. Let us hope that such understanding will soon be born.