The Parameters of Varnas: Classification Beyond Human Society

When we think of the ancient Indian varna system, human social classification immediately comes to mind. However, the varna framework-Brahmana, Kshatriya, Vaishya, and Shudra-was applied far beyond human society in ancient Hindu texts. From classifying land and soil to designating mathematical constants in architectural formulas, the four-fold varna terminology served as a universal classification principle that extended into technical and scientific domains.

Varna as a universal classification principle 🔗

The Sanskrit term varna carries multiple meanings-not just “color” but also “characteristic,” “quality,” “property,” and “type.” This semantic flexibility allowed ancient scholars to use varna terminology as a classificatory device across different domains of knowledge.

In the Silpasastras-the ancient treatises on arts, crafts, and architecture-varna classifications appear in surprising contexts. These texts, which include works like the Manasara, Mayamata, and Vishvakarma’s architectural manuals, deployed varna terminology to categorize building materials, land types, and even mathematical constants used in construction.

Land classification by color and soil quality 🔗

Ancient texts like the Matsya Purana (250-500 CE) and Brihat Samhita (505-587 CE) specified soil types for houses and temples according to varna categories. The classification relied on the color and taste of soil as indicators of fertility and suitability. Dark, organic-rich soils were designated for Shudras (linked to agricultural pursuits), while red soils were appropriate for Vaishyas. White or lighter soils corresponded to Brahmana settlements, and reddish-brown soils to Kshatriyas.

This soil-based classification served practical purposes. The taste and color criteria of these ancient accounts provided guides to soil fertility-organic matter content was reflected in taste, while color indicated mineral composition. Temple sites were selected based on these soil classifications, connecting religious architecture to the land’s inherent properties.

Mathematical formulae and architectural design 🔗

The Manasara, dating approximately to the 5th-7th century CE, is among the most comprehensive ancient Sanskrit treatises on architecture. This text of around 10,000 verses provides detailed guidelines for designing Hindu temples, sculptures, houses, and entire town layouts.

In architectural formulas, specific mathematical constants were assigned varna designations. The numbers 1, 3, 5, and 7 served as perimeter constants, each designated for a particular varna. These constants determined proportions and measurements in building designs, creating a mathematical language that borrowed varna terminology for purely technical purposes.

The misinterpretation of technical formulae 🔗

Later orthodox interpretations misunderstood these technical designations. What were originally mathematical constants for calculating building dimensions became erroneously applied as prescriptions dictating that members of different castes must build houses of specific dimensions. This represented a significant deviation from the original technical significance of the varna constants.

The Shilpa Shastras themselves indicate that arts and crafts were practiced across all social classes in ancient India. Buddhist Jatakas mention Brahmana carpenters, while the 4th-century Baudhayana text describes chariot builders, carpenters, and metal workers from Kshatriya, Vaishya, and Shudra backgrounds. The varna terminology in these texts was classificatory, not prescriptive about who could practice which craft.

Caste formation through mixed marriages 🔗

While varna terminology had technical applications, the texts also developed elaborate theories about how the caste system expanded through inter-varna marriages. The Manu Smriti’s Chapter 10 provides the most detailed account of these “mixed” castes.

Two categories of marriages were recognized. Anuloma (with the grain) referred to unions where the husband belonged to a higher varna than the wife. Pratiloma (against the grain) described unions where the wife’s varna was higher than the husband’s. The offspring of each type of union were assigned specific caste identities.

Examples of hybrid castes 🔗

From anuloma unions came castes like:

• Ambastha – from a Brahmana father and Vaishya mother, traditionally assigned to medicine and agriculture
• Ugra – from a Kshatriya father and Shudra mother, described as “ferocious in manners”
• Nishadha – from a Brahmana father and Shudra mother

Pratiloma unions produced castes considered lower in status:

• Suta – from a Kshatriya father and Brahmana mother
• Magadha – from a Vaishya father and Kshatriya mother
• Chandala – from a Shudra father and Brahmana mother, considered the lowest

Kautilya’s Arthashastra presents similar categories, noting that the Vainya becomes a Rathakara (chariot-maker) by profession. The text specifies that members of this caste could marry among themselves and follow their ancestors’ customs and occupations.

Professional guilds and caste system 🔗

Many of these “mixed castes” were essentially professional guilds that became absorbed into the caste framework. The Sreni system-ancient India’s guild organizations-began in the early Buddhist period and continued through the Mauryan era and beyond.

Three conditions enabled guild formation: the localization of occupation (artisans of the same craft living in designated areas), the hereditary character of professions, and the acceptance of guild leadership. Sources identify between 18 and 150 Srenis at various times in ancient India, covering crafts from carpentry and ivory work to weaving, jewelry-making, and money-lending.

From guilds to castes 🔗

The relationship between guilds and castes was complex. Guilds were economic institutions while castes were social groups. Guild membership was not necessarily hereditary, and one could belong to multiple guilds but only one caste. However, in areas where people of the same occupation lived together, guild and caste membership often overlapped, with the same leader presiding over both.

The Jataka tales describe a world where individuals could change professions and guild affiliations-a stark contrast to the rigid hereditary system described in Brahmanical texts like the Laws of Manu. This suggests that the caste system evolved by artificially grafting occupational corporations onto the ancient varna framework.

Historian K.K. Thaplyal notes that division of labor under the varna system may have been conducive to the emergence of guild organization. Over time, these guilds became increasingly regulated by strict rules, and some gradually transformed into hereditary castes. Occupational names often became caste names-the Rathakara (chariot-makers), Kumbhakara (potters), and Suvarnakar (goldsmiths) all trace their caste identity to professional origins.

The artificial grafting of occupation onto varna 🔗

The expansion of castes through this process reveals something important: the caste system as it evolved was not simply an extension of the original four-fold varna system. Instead, it represented an artificial grafting of occupational corporations onto the ancient varna framework. Mixed castes were assigned a “descent” from the original varnas to legitimize their social position.

The Manu Smriti and similar texts attempted to explain the existence of hundreds of castes by tracing their origins to specific varna combinations. However, scholars like B.R. Ambedkar questioned these genealogies, noting that many communities mentioned as being of “mixed” origin had never been heard of before Manu, nor did anyone know what happened to them since. Many are today non-existent without leaving any trace.

This suggests that the elaborate genealogies in texts like Manu Smriti were post-hoc rationalizations-attempts to fit the complex reality of occupational specialization and regional variation into a neat four-fold framework that was originally designed for entirely different purposes, including the technical classification of land, soil, and architectural measurements.

What do you think? How does understanding the technical and classificatory origins of varna terminology change our perspective on the caste system? Can separating the original technical uses of varna from its later social applications help in addressing caste-based discrimination today?

References

1. https://www.britannica.com/topic/varna-Hinduism
2. https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/shilpashastra
3. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0341816224002236
4. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manasara
5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shilpa_Shastras
6. https://scriptures.redzambala.com/dharma-shastra/the-laws-of-manu-manu-smriti-10.html
7. https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/manusmriti-with-the-commentary-of-medhatithi/d/doc201739.html
8. https://www.infinityfoundation.com/mandala/h_es/h_es_shah_m_sreni.htm
9. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00076791.2024.2415452
10. https://iks.iitgn.ac.in/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Guilds_in_Ancient_India.pdf
11. https://www.encyclopedia.com/international/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/shreni
12. https://www.indica.today/long-reads/ancient-indian-economy-part-iii-guilds-in-ancient-bharata/
13. https://akscusa.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/lecture-2-collated-readings.pdf