365bet娱乐

The history of social organisation in Bengal as well as in India is complex and varied. It is believed that "casteism is the basis of Aryan society and it is not in Brahmanical society alone but it also existed in Jaina and Buddhist societies too. Centuries after centuries the pre-Aryan and non-Aryan culture and prejudices thrived on the frame-work of casteism. In fact castebased social organisation is the main characteristic of Indian history on the one hand and on the other hand such all-pervading 206. Ibid., p. 10 207. Ibid., p. 29 208. "These figurines, according to many scholars, may have used by the people either as votive offerings or as cult-objects". (Pal, M.K. op. cit., p. 2)

145 all-consuming and deeply meaningful social classification has not been found in any place of the world, whenever we speak of the social stratification of Bengal in the ancient period, we must note the caste structure prevailed there at that period. "209 It is further noted that the authors of the ancient Dharmasutras and Smritis tried to encompass (i) the various population within the framework of traditional caste structure of the Aryans i.e. Brahman >> Kshatriya, Vaishya and Sudra of the Indian society but they could not do so successfully because innumerable castes, jans and koms existed from a hoary past. Even among the castes, jens and koms, there were various sections and sub-sections. It is also imagined that there were various rules and regulations in their relationship among those various sections and sub-sections of the castes, jans and komes. Thus as there is no positive historical evidence about the social stratification of Bengal prior to 230 Aryanisation, it is presumed that the social organisation was altogether different there. It is known from the inscriptional evidence that before the establishment of Arya Brahmanic state under the Guptas, the Aryan caste-structure, their religious beliefs, customs and culture were 211 not recognised in Bengal, as we know that intensive Aryanisation 212 occurred during the Gupta period. From then onwards the 209. 'Ray, N.R., Bangalir Itihas, part - 1. p. 267 210. Ibid. 211. Ibid., p. 277 212. Ebid., 2nd part, p. 630

146 traditional caste structure i Brahman, Kshatriya, Vaishya and Sudra found a strong footing there. Gradually, a good number of varied castes had their origins. It is believed that the descriptions contained in the Brihad-dharma Purana and the Brahma - vaivarta Purana, written immediately after the end of the Hindu period about the mixed races, are particularly applicable 213 to Bengal It is laid down in the Brihad-dharma Purana that excepting the Brahmans, all are Sudras, i.e., the mixed-castes evolved in Bengal. These mixed-castes are divided into three categories a) a good hybrid caste ( uttam sankar ), b) a medium hybrid caste ( madhyam sankar) and c) a worst hybrid caste ( adham sankar ). The twenty good hybrid castes are Karan, Anvastha, Ugramagadha, Tantubay, Gandha-banik, Napit, Gopa (writer), Karmakar, Taulik, Kumbhakar, Kansakar, Sankhit, Das (Cultivator), Barajibi, Modak, Malakar, Suta, Rajputra and Tambuli. The twelve medium hybrid castes are Takshan, Rajak, Swarnakar, Avir, Tailakarak, Dhibar, Saundik, Nata, Salak, Sekhar and Jalik. Malegrahi, Kurab, Chandal, Barur, Taksha, Charmakar, Chattajibi, Dolabahi and Malla are the nine worse hybrid castes. They are of 214 low birth and outside the fold of traditional caste structure. Besides these, another caste distinction was made which is called 213. Majumdar, R.C. Bangladeser Itihas, (Prachim Yuga) p. 176 214. Ibid., of. Ray, N.R. op.cit., part 1, pp. 316 - 318

147 Nabasakha section. The Brahmins used to take drinking water from 215 this section of people. It is to be noted here that the mixed castes which have been mentioned in the Brihad dharma Purana though tallied to a great extent with the list of castes mentioned in the Brahms-Vaivarta Purana, there are, however, some discrepancies between the two. For example there is no mention of Kaivarta caste in the former, but in the latter the name of this caste is found in the list of worse bybrid caste. A great amount of information about this caste is available from the Vallalecharita. Divya. Rudoka and Bhima - the three Kaivarta kings ruled in Varendri. so it can safely be concluded that the Kalvartas had special influence and impact on the state administration and society of Bengal during the 11th - 12th centuries A.D.. We have already observed that prior to the infiltration of the Brahmanic culture, there was no traditional caste-structure in Bengal. The kom society and the various professional caste-based society were then in vogue. Then the society that evolved-there. was no division of castes, there was only professional division based on social status. This vs have come to Imow from the mention of names of Pradhan - kavesthe, jestha kavastha, kevestha, jestha kayastha , Pratibesi, Kutumba, etc. as recorded in the contemporary copper plates. Thereafter, Thereafter. we get the names of professionally divided groups, such as 216 Nagar Sresthi, Sarthabaha, Kshetraker, Byapari, etc. In support 215. Sur, A., Banglar Samajik Itihas, pp. 37 - 44 216. Sur, A., Hindu Sabhyatar Nritatvik Bhasye, p. 69

140 of this statement it is stated that excepting a few short-lived royal dynasties like Sungas, etc., Euddhism became prominent for a period of five/six hundred years, i.e., from the Maurya King Asoke upto the time of the establishment of cupta empire. As a result of the impact of Buddhism the caste system almost disappeared.a. then the Gupta kings again tried to revert to Brahmanism, they moulded the Mindu society and religion to a new shape. For the soliderity of the society and its oxpension, everybody was given a place within the social framework as hybrid 217 of low-born castes. Thus the castes of Bengel received hybridiam as evident from the list of the Brihad dharma and the Bratma vaivarta Purana Nov wo shall discuss the origin of the Mahlahya caste in the light of the caste organisation in Bengal, for the Mahishyas inhabit mostly in the areas under study. It is, therefore, absolutely essential to highlight the particular traits of this carte. Vajnavalkye, the author of Dhazmesastra of the later port of 210 4th century A.D. mentions the Mahishya caste in his work where it is recorded that they were professionally astrologers, soothsayers and tellers of good and evil omenss But now-o-days 219 237+ 218. 219. Ibid., p. 63 *..* It is not unlikely that it was composed in the early days of the cupta rule whose there was a strong revival of the Brahmanical Culture". (Chattopadhyeye, S., Social Life in ancient India; p. 3) Chattopadhyaya, 9., op. cit., pp. 93f. op.cit.

149 220 they have been found to engage in agriculture, trade and commerce, service, etc. From a recent survey it is learnt that in west Bengal the number of the Mahishyas is more than seventy lakhs. The Mahishyas living in the district of Midnapur are very wealthy and educationally advanced. Now the question is whether the Kalvarta and the Mahishya arecone and the same caste ? In the Buddhist Jatakas and Amarakosha, the Kalvartas have been described 221 as those 'living on boats and fishes respectively. On the other hand it has been stated therein that the professions of the Mahishyas are different from those of the Kaivartas. The origins of both these castes are also different. In the Manu - smriti it is recorded that the children begotten by the union of a Nishad father and Ayogob mother is called margab or Das and its second name is Kaivartas. Basing on this evidence it is believed that the Kaivartas belonged to the pre-Aryan Kom (tribe) or group and gradually acquired the lower rank within the framework of Aryan society. It is known that during the 11th and 12th centuries A.D., the Kaivartas were known as Kebatta in Bengal and some of them were proficient 222 in Sanskrit leaming and composing poems. Conversely, regarding the birth of the Mahishya caste, it has been stated that a Mahishya was bom of a Kshatriya father 220, Tamluk Club Golden Jubilee Souvenir, ed by Deb., Basudev and Pub. in 1982 from Tamluk, Article by Jana, Y., Tamraliptar Mahishya Sanskriti-0-Samaj 鈥� Ray, N.R., op. cit., part 1, pp. 293 - 294 221. 222. Ibid., p. 294

150 and a Valsya mother. Thus the difference between the Mahishyas and the Kalvartas becomes clear from their history of birth and profession. Sandhyakar Nandi, the author of Ramcharita has no. where mentioned that the Mahishyas and the Kaivartas belong to 223 the same caste. It is to be noted that the 13th century compiler of the Brahma-vaivarta Purana, while stating the story of the origin of the Kaivartas as cited in the Manu-smriti records the 224 story of the origin of the Mahishyas. Presumably depending on such as explanation, the society accepted in later years that the Mahishyas and the Kalvartas belonged to the same caste. Vallalasena (c. 1158 1179) might have played a role in mixing these two castes. It is known from the Vallala-Charita of Anandabhatta that king Vallalasena uplifted the Kaivartas in the then society. Most probably some of the Kaivartas had already taken agriculture as their livelihood. As a result socially they were raised to the high position and were called the Halik-Kaivarta-or-plough-wielding kaivarta. Those who carried on their traditional calling were known as Jalik-kaivarta or fishing kaivarta. Prior to this, possibly almost all the Mahishyas took the profession of cultivation leaving their earlier professions as outlined by Yajnavalkya. Naturally in course of time on the basis of the professional similarities and the birth story wrongly cited in the Brahma-vaivarta Purana, the Halik-kalvartas and the Mahishyas were accepted as one and the same caste in the society. The society altogether forgot the 223. Ibid., 224. Ibid., p. 322 2 5 K

151 writings of the Manusmriti. Moreover, it might be the case that in the beginning of the 13th century A.D., when Muslim invasion and conquest brought a great political change in Bengal, the Halik kalvartas and the Mahishyas were dubbed in the society as a single caste. Dr. Sur is of the opinion that at that time, excepting a small group of skilled workers in the Bengali society 225 of lower order, all were agriculturists. 14 3 226 Besides the different castes mentioned above, a few other names of so-called low castes, eg., Dom, Chandal, Savar and Kapali along with their avocations are found from the Charyagiti. The fact that Doms, Chandals are still existing in the place of our study, goes to show that they have been inhabiting the areas from time immemorial. That apart, it can be assumed from their present existence that most of the castes mentioned in the Brihad-dharmaEurana used to live in the areas under discussion in ancient period. The social organisation of Bengal as a whole is supposed to be present here also. The society of the period of our study was divided in various strata, 1.e. the Kom society or tribal society, the society guided by the Buddhist monks and sidhecharyas and the society controlled by the Brahmens. The last mentioned society exerted its influence in Bengal and in some parts of it in particular during the Qupta era. Then the Brahmans were held in high esteem in the society. 225. 226鈿� Chattopadhyaya, S.M., Banglar Samajik Itihaser Bhumika, p. 89 Ray, N.R., op. cit., part - 1 鈥� D鈿� 295

5 152 The Brahmans were then divided in many sections. Probably the merchant class took the second position in social hierarchy. Having obtained great wealth through trade and commerce, they were able to sit at the top of the social ladder. As the Bengalees are being dependent both on agriculture and trade, most of them used to earn their livelihood by following both these professions. In addition to these there were many other professional classes. Regarding the then social organisation of Bengal it is rightly observed that "till the end of the ancient period, i.e., upto the time of the Charyspade, Bengal did not witness a neatly packed social structure. On the one hand there were a few persons of higher order and on the other there were majority of have-nots belonging to lower order of society. There were no middle class and lower middle class in between. People belonging to the lower order of society were always objects of hetred to the people of higher order . Basically there was no difference between a Hindu and a Buddhist of higher order. 227 Thus on the basis of the above discussion it may be concluded that the chief characteristic feature of the social organisation of our place of study, may the whole of Bengal in ancient period, was the prevalence of innumerable castes and sub-castes. We further agree with the remark that "the caste divisions in the early Aryanised society of Bengal were yet in a state of flux, and further that the adoption of Atyan manners and customs by the 227 Chattopadhyaya, S.M., op.cit., p. 55

153 indigenous tribes of Bengal was a long and tedious process. It must have required many years, perhaps centuries, before the Aryan immigrants from the Midland and the people of Bengal could be fused together in a rigid framework of Aryan society."228