Lay-Life of India as reflected in Pali Jataka
by Rumki Mondal | 2018 | 71,978 words
This page relates ‘Social Structure of ancient India according to the Jatakas’ of the study on the Lay-life of ancient India as reflected in Pali Jataka—a collection of over 547 birth stories of the Bodhisattva. Within Theravada Buddhism, these narratives serve as historical and moral guidelines and spiritual therapeutic tools. This study further researches the Pali Canon by reflecting on the socio-political and religious life in India.
Go directly to: Footnotes.
Part 3.2 - The Social Structure of ancient India according to the Jātakas
At that time society was clearly divided into four vaṇṇas:
i) Brāhmaṇas—
who were allotted the functions of priests and teachers, claimed the highest status in society. They demanded several privileges, including those of receiving gifts and exemption from taxation and punishment. The Brāhmaṇa of the Jātakas is not very materially different from a member of any other class. In many cases, for instance, the Brāhmaṇas are represented as greedy, shameless and immoral and serve as a foil to the
Khattiyas who play the part of the virtuous and noble humanity. The whole of the Juṇha Jātaka (No. 456)[1] narrates the shameful behaviour of a Brāhmaṇa who pours out his wisdom only to fetch a handsome reward from the King. The greediness of the Brāhmaṇas is frequently brought out, even if we disallow the bitter remarks of the Bodhisattva of the Bhūridatta Jātaka (No. 543).
Fick distinguishes and rightly, between two kinds of Brāhmaṇas:[2]
a) Proper Brāhmaṇa—those who corresponded closely to the ideal sketch in the older scriptures. We notice the features of Proper Brāhmaṇa in Bhūridatta Jātaka (No. 543).
b) Worldly Brāhmaṇa or Udicca Brāhmaṇas—those who did not much confirm to the strict rules of their class, followed all sorts of occupations and represented the major portion of their class. These Udicca Brāhmaṇas, probably conscious of their high descent, tried to observe the rules and prescriptions of their class. In the Satadhamma Jātaka (No. 179), Maṅgala Jātaka (No. 87), Mahāsupina Jātaka (No. 77), Dasa Brāhmaṇa Jātaka (No. 495), we notice the features of Udicca Brāhmaṇa.
The Dasa Brāhmaṇa Jātaka gives a list of ten classes of Brāhmaṇas as follows:[3]
i) Tikicchakasmā (like physician)
ii) Paricārakasmā (like seravnat)
iii) Niggāhakasmā (like tax-men)
iv) Khānughātasmā (like hewers of wood)
v) Vāṇijakasamā (like merchants)
vi) Sama Ambaṭṭhavessehi (Vessa and Ambaṭṭha)
vii) Goghātakasmā (like butchers)
viii) Samāgopanisādehi (like herdsmen these or bandits bold)
ix) Luddakā (like hunter)
x) Malamajjanasmā (like barbers)
‘In the Ugra Jātaka (No. 522)[4] we read of a Brāhmaṇa who goes along with his son to the field and ploughs it, whilst the boy collects the weeds and burns them’ .[5] Few Jātaka stories indicate the Land-cultivating and cattle rearing Brāhmaṇa, i.e., one engaged in agricultural pursuits (kassaka Brāhmaṇo). Thus, the theoretical Brāhmaṇa condemns the Worldly Brāhmaṇa or Udicca Brāhmaṇa for following varied occupations for the sake of bread.
ii) Khattiyas (Kṣatriyas)—
The Khattiyas lived on the taxes collected from the cultivators. In the Jātakas, as in the general Buddhist Literature, the premier position in society is generally assigned to the Khattiyas instead of the Brāhmaṇa. This may be due partly to the fact, that the Buddhist writers were ill-disposed towards Brāhmaṇism, and partly, perhaps to a greater extent, to the actual superiority of the ruling class in general and the degraded condition of the Brāhmaṇas in the east.[6] The Jātakas understand by a Khattiya a member of the ruling class which includes the king, his great lords and vassals, along with the higher position of the army. The expression Khattiya later normally takes the place of Rājanya as a designation of a ruling class.[7] Like the Brāhmaṇas, the Khattiya also could and did employ himself in any occupation he liked without any restriction of class-consciousness. The Khattiyas did not form a compact whole. They only represented the political power. Hence the superiority of their class appears not only in the social and political domain which was assured to them through their material power itself, but even in spiritual field they were not inferior to the Brāhmaṇas.
iii) Vessas (Vaishyas)—
The third category thrived on agriculture, cattle-breeding and trade. They were the main tax payers. The word Vessas also occur in the Jātakas as similar as Gahapati or the Householder. the Jātakas make us quite familiar with these Gahapatis. In these Gahapatis, we can see the land-owning and mercantile class ranking just below the Khattiyas and the Brāhmaṇas. The Gahapatis had their own importance and played a significant part even in the court of the king. They appear permanently in the retinue of the king, along with the ministers and the Brāhmaṇas (amaccā ca Brāhmaṇa-gahapatikādayo[8]). We shall also see the Gahapatis, at least the richer section represented by the Seṭṭhis. It is interesting to note in this connection that these Gahapatis are also known as Ibbhas[9] in Jātakas. The term, Ibbha means wealthy or rich upper and middle class of the society of the times. ‘Another synonymous with the word Gahapati is the word Kuṭumbika in the Jātakas. It also denotes members of the citizen class, as a rule like the Gahapatis, wealthy citizens at the head of a household. The Kuṭumbikas lived in towns and villages, but mostly in villages. The Kuṭumbikas living in the town engage in some business or the other, like that of a cornselling (dhaññavikkaya). Sometimes they are very rich carrying on extensive trade’ .[10]
The Gahapati was a vital component of the laity and an integral part of Buddhism. We use the word “laity” in its widest sense to include all those who were sympathetic to the Buddha’s ideas but who did not actually join the Saṅgha. The laity comprised many individuals who are described as Upāsakas, having accepted the triple-gems (tiratana). It also includes many people who are simply stated to have supported the Saṅgha. Support might take the form of donating land, constructing Vihāras, gifting robes, medicines or supplies, but most often it meant simply feeding the monks. Without this minimum support the monks would have been unable to pursue their goal of Nibbāṇa. The feeding of the monks was the most important tie between them and the Laity, in return for which the monks taught dhamma to the laity”.[11] It is also possible that the economic and social system in which the Gahapati was located did not create the conditions for renunciation. We must remember that the period was one in which a primarily agrarian economy had emerged and that this economy supported a rising urban population. ‘We have already established that the Gahapati was the pivot of this economy and the primary tax payer. The withdrawal of such a category from the social world would have had a crucial, negative impact on the economic and social system. The two areas which the monk rigorously abstained from were production and reproduction. The Gahapati on the other hand was specially concerned with both aspects, and thus, while he was not debarred from the Saṅgha, he tended to remain outside it. Instead, the Gahapati became the most important category of the laity, particularly in terms of support to the Saṅgha, which was also a vital part of the new movement’ .[12]
iv) Suddas (Śudras)—
The Suddas formed the lowest rung of the social order and were meant to serve the upper three castes as domestic slaves, agricultural labourers etc. They were the down-trodden class because of the vaṇṇa. This vaṇṇa-divided society generated frustration among the adversely affected people. More settled than these wandering and restless people were the herdsmen, the huntsmen, fisherman (kevaṭṭhā), cowherds (gopālakā), netherds (pasupālakā), grass-cutters (tiṇahārakā), stick-gatherers (kaṭṭhahārakā), foresters (vanakammiakā), slaves (dāsa), carriage-builders (rathakāra), bamboo-workers (venas), basket-makers (nalakārā), flute-makers (velukārā), weavers (pesakārā: tantavāyā), barbers (nahāpiatā) etc. We observe these people in the Kuṇāla Jātaka (No. 536), Tittira Jātaka (No. 37), Kummāsapiṇḍa Jātaka (No. 415), Suvaṇṇahaṃsa Jātaka (No. 136), Sutano Jātaka (No. 398), Khaṇḍahāla Jātaka (No. 542), Kusa Jātaka (No. 531) etc.
We now come to the lowest strata of the social structure of the day. We met a number of these low races in Jātaka stories. The lowest of these and so frequently to be met with, are:
i) The Chaṇḍālas—
They are not allowed to live within the walls of a town or a village. They live outside of a village, by themselves (Chaṇḍālagāmaka). Even the touch or the sight of a Chaṇḍāla caused impurity. It is found in the Setaketu Jātaka (No. 377) a proude young Brāhmaṇa cries out loudly and tries to run away after touching the Chaṇḍāla’s body. In the Mātaṅaga Jātaka (No. 497) it is narrated how sixteen thousand Brāhmaṇas lost their caste because they, unknowing though, took food which had been polluted by contact with the remmant of a Chaṇḍāla’s meal (Chaṇḍālucchiṭṭhabhatta). In Satadhamma Jātaka (No. 179) a Brāhmaṇa commits suicide because he has eaten the remmant from a Chaṇḍāla’s dish.
Similarly we find in the Cittasambhūta Jātaka (No. 498), two girls (one a Seṭṭhi’s daughter and the other a purohita’s daughter) found themselves polluted by the sight of a Chaṇḍāla.
ii) The Pukkusas—
Another despised caste are Pukkusas. These Pukkusas were most probably a non-Aryan race occupying a very low position in society. The Pulkasas or Pukkusas seem to have been an aboriginal tribe that lived by hunting. But they were gradullay absorbed flowers from the temple and the palace. The Jātakas give us very little account of these people. It is found in Amba Jātaka (No.474) they earn their living by means of refuseclearing.
iii) The Nisādas—
Almost equally despised non-Aryan race standing at a low stage of culture was that of the Nisādas, the hunters in general. We get scanty information about them in the Culla-Nandiya Jātaka (No. 222), Rahanta Miga Jātaka (No. 501).
iv) The Sapākas—
In the same category of despised classes come the Sapākas. The Sapāka descendant of a Kattiya by an Ugra woman.
The Mātaṅaga Jātaka (No. 497) says:
“You know we live on what we chance to get Rise! Let the low-caste churl enjoy a bit.”[13]
Each vaṇṇa was assigned well-defined function. Though vaṇṇa was based on birth, the two higher vaṇṇas captured power, prestige and privileges at the cost of the two lower vaṇṇas.. All these three classes were considered Dvijas or twice born. The Vessas and the Suddas were not satisfied with the division of society on the basis of birth but we do not have evidence of their open resistance. However, the real cause of the rise of these new religions lay in the spread of a new agrarian economy in North-Eastern India.
Footnotes and references:
[1]:
Ibid., IV, pp. 96 ff.
[3]:
Jātaka, IV, pp. 361-65; Pre-Buddhist India, Ratilal N. Mehta, p. 249 f.
[4]:
Another name is Sarabhaṅga Jātaka.
[5]:
Pre-Buddhist India,p. 252.
[6]:
Ibid., p.254.
[8]:
Jātaka, I, pp.152, 470; II, pp.124, 241; IV, pp.227, 317, 499.
[9]:
[10]:
Jātaka, IV, p.370; Pre-Buddhist India,p. 256.
[11]:
Social Dimensions of Early Buddhism, Uma Chakravarti, pp.131-32.
[12]:
Ibid., pp. 148-49.