About Indo-Aryans and the Indian Caste System

[Albert.Nik]

Well,this is how much we can say as of now.
The large numbers of Upper Castes is actually more related to West Eurasian Genetic combinations. Recent researches have reinforced that so no dispute.
Indo-Aryans came in waves after waves into India after first becoming a distinct ethnicity somewhere around Khwarazem or Bactria(we don't know this yet. Not established). The Mitanni Aryans seem to have used the Caspain coast to Anatolia and the first Indo-Aryan languages have similarity to Avestan. Based on that we could calculate the origin at somewhere in the range of West Central Asia to Bactria region.
The separation between Iranian,Indo-Aryan and Nuristani peoples is not clear.
As some articles say,the mixing started during an upheavel and suddenly ended after around a millennium and a half. This is said to be the era when Caste started to become more rigid.
Dasa is a word frequently used in the early Vedic scriptures. Who is it directed to is still a matter of debate though popular opinion points that it is towards the Non Indo-European natives present then. We don't even clearly know how they looked,what exactly they spoke and what happened to them after the Indo-Aryans though it is still in possibilities only.
Scythians,Greeks,Huna,Tocharians were known as the migrants to India and we're all allotted the Kshatriya status after some time. However,such assimilations ended after the by the Islamic era.
Somewhere between these eras,the caste system seems to have begun.
Lastly,South Asia is really mysterious and interesting in terms of Genetics. Hard to say anything at all for sure about this. Let's see till more advanced methods of testing come.

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

Well,this is how much we can say as of now.
The large numbers of Upper Castes is actually more related to West Eurasian Genetic combinations. Recent researches have reinforced that so no dispute.
Indo-Aryans came in waves after waves into India after first becoming a distinct ethnicity somewhere around Khwarazem or Bactria(we don't know this yet. Not established). The Mitanni Aryans seem to have used the Caspain coast to Anatolia and the first Indo-Aryan languages have similarity to Avestan. Based on that we could calculate the origin at somewhere in the range of West Central Asia to Bactria region.
The separation between Iranian,Indo-Aryan and Nuristani peoples is not clear.
As some articles say,the mixing started during an upheavel and suddenly ended after around a millennium and a half. This is said to be the era when Caste started to become more rigid.
Dasa is a word frequently used in the early Vedic scriptures. Who is it directed to is still a matter of debate though popular opinion points that it is towards the Non Indo-European natives present then. We don't even clearly know how they looked,what exactly they spoke and what happened to them after the Indo-Aryans though it is still in possibilities only.

Scythians,Greeks,Huna,Tocharians were known as the migrants to India and we're all allotted the Kshatriya status after some time. However,such assimilations ended after the by the Islamic era.
Somewhere between these eras,the caste system seems to have begun.
Lastly,South Asia is really mysterious and interesting in terms of Genetics. Hard to say anything at all for sure about this. Let's see till more advanced methods of testing come.

Just clarification point about Dasa is wrong. In reality Arya and dasa has always reffered to quality of people in vedic literature. Dasa was someone who displayed more tamasic/rajasic than sattvik qualities and typically was one who was after power/wanted to go against the path of dharma and an arya was one who wished to uphold dharma and lelad a more sattvik and rajasik life. It relates to gunas not types of people. So while you can say their may have been mighrates from west asia to call them indo-aryans is not neccessarily correct because the defintion of an aryan ahs always been one who follows the path of dharma.. But i dont blame yu scholars tend to read the vedas mechanistaclly and attribute what is said as literal meanigns but as the actual experts of the vedas the vedic pandits who have studied them for their entire lives and for thousands of years included the commentators from that time period like Sayana have showed, Arya and Dasa refer to qualities not person per say.

By the way the above three qualities refer to unas, raja is mode of passion, tama is mode of ignorance and sattva is path of wisdom/temperment and thus an arya was one who held predominently as explaiend above rajasic and sattvic and very little tamasic traits while a dasa was one who held more rajasic and tamasic traits. Difference beetween a tempered/wise and passionate person in contrast to a person who was ignorant and passionate. So probably what happened as you said is during upheaveal their was mixining but by the puranic period what happened is people became increasingly classified based on the sort of occupation they did tied to the above three gunas and that unfortunatly became a stratified more rigid and hierachial society, but it took place as a result of this classification of people into possesing various levels of the above traits. By the way this is also written in the gita which is the authoritative text on the vedic period and culture given it is a synthesis of and describes the main philosphical schools and traditions followed by the vedic people and it is also mentioned in brahmans and upanishids.


I tend to agree mroe with a limited migration view but one that it did not happen in multiple waves. Rather what happened was people who were passionate about writing verses in praises of the gods and had a lot of practical knowledge in that period, predominently priestly families belonging to one of the major brahmin families e.g. kashyappa or atri, or marichi, etc moved into India where they impressed the local kings with their knowledge of the natural world and passion for writing beuatiful verses in a songlike and well structured language which in turn lead to them being given places in the courts of these kings. That is the simplest explanaton for upper castes being of west eurasian origin, which is it was not even large scale migrations but rather small migrations of families of priestly origin who took up teaching and jobs at the courts of local kings and cheiftans.

Also explains why so many indigenous kings and foreigners were given khastrya status as well.

 

[Shahrasayr]

Asko Parpola and Frits Staal have both theorised that the Dasas mentioned in the Rigveda are actually an amalgamation of non-Vedic Indo-Iranians, the BMAC peoples that they took Indra from as well as the Harrrapans. Basically anyone who did not drink Soma, participate in the Yajnopavita, perform the Agnihotra or revere the Sarasvati.

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

Asko Parpola and Frits Staal have both theorised that the Dasas mentioned in the Rigveda are actually an amalgamation of non-Vedic Indo-Iranians, the BMAC peoples that they took Indra from as well as the Harrrapans. Basically anyone who did not drink Soma, participate in the Yajnopavita, perform the Agnihotra or revere the Sarasvati.

And they are both wrong. The dasas refers to this who had traits of a dharma like Raja and rama sic Gina’s while aryans had more sattva Gina’s had nothing to do with people belonging to one group or tribe or the other. This the problem with western translations of Vedas I’d rather believe on who has studied it for generations over one who was a foreign missionary coming from a different society and culture commenting on what he considered were barbaric devil worshipped I mean bias remember is big in the works of Griffith.

 

[Shahrasayr]

And they are both wrong. The dasas refers to this who had traits of a dharma like Raja and rama sic Gina’s while aryans had more sattva Gina’s had nothing to do with people belonging to one group or tribe or the other. This the problem with western translations of Vedas I’d rather believe on who has studied it for generations over one who was a foreign missionary coming from a different society and culture commenting on what he considered were barbaric devil worshipped I mean bias remember is big in the works of Griffith.

But Frits Staal and Asko Parpola are none of those things. They aren’t colonial overlords like Griffith but scholars who have been fascinated and devoted their to the study of Indology in the 60s to the present day. And the gunas argument can only hold its ground once the Second Urbanization takes place c.800 BCE when those terms start appearing in smritis. How can the previous 1300 years then be explained? I’m not saying that all those who became Dasas would not within a few generations have had some social mobility, but that the Vedic Aryans were known to participate in yuddha against outsiders even their Iranian kinsmen and fellow Aryans as the Daśarājñá Yuddhá alludes to when the Trtsus under Sudás complete subjugate the Púrus to form the Bhāratas declaring in the hymn, very clearly, that:

“All sons of Yudhyamadhi, he slain by Sudas, are but [dasa] before those who exalt Indra and the Arya’s Comrade [Aryamana]. Let these two kuala be united by honey and blood.”

Going back to the western historians, they have none of the biases of Griffith and Staal is responsible for helping the Mudgal Andhra Brahmins raise the funds and aiding in the documentation of the Agnicayana-yajna. Without his extensive efforts the knowledge of that ritual would have dwindled out by 2010 like countless other rituals rather than still being an extensive annual festival now. And in Griffith’s defence he admired the Vedas if misunderstood them and saw them as simply another relic of a bygone age like the Iliad, Eddas and the Aeneid.

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

But Frits Staal and Asko Parpola are none of those things. They aren’t colonial overlords like Griffith but scholars who have been fascinated and devoted their to the study of Indology in the 60s to the present day. And the gunas argument can only hold its ground once the Second Urbanization takes place c.800 BCE when those terms start appearing in smritis. How can the previous 1300 years then be explained? I’m not saying that all those who became Dasas would not within a few generations have had some social mobility, but that the Vedic Aryans were known to participate in yuddha against outsiders even their Iranian kinsmen and fellow Aryans as the Daśarājñá Yuddhá alludes to when the Trtsus under Sudás complete subjugate the Púrus to form the Bhāratas declaring in the hymn, very clearly, that:

“All sons of Yudhyamadhi, he slain by Sudas, are but [dasa] before those who exalt Indra and the Arya’s Comrade [Aryamana]. Let these two kuala be united by honey and blood.”

Going back to the western historians, they have none of the biases of Griffith and Staal is responsible for helping the Mudgal Andhra Brahmins raise the funds and aiding in the documentation of the Agnicayana-yajna. Without his extensive efforts the knowledge of that ritual would have dwindled out by 2010 like countless other rituals rather than still being an extensive annual festival now. And in Griffith’s defence he admired the Vedas if misunderstood them and saw them as simply another relic of a bygone age like the Iliad, Eddas and the Aeneid.

Because those straits texts had appendix’s such as Brahmans and upanishad which expound upon the Guna principle and also a 1300 year difference doesn’t matter cause the nature of Vedic school is to keep same message unchanged from generation t o generation through unbroken line of teachers and students. Upanishad are shrauta and are the meaning behind the Vedas this Gina’s are correct and have always been part of Vedic culture. Doesn’t matter also paprika is wrong. Can fellow academics not publish papers debating. Just because someone is an academic doesn’t make them an authority because even among academics debate exists

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

Because those straits texts had appendix’s such as Brahmans and upanishad which expound upon the Guna principle and also a 1300 year difference doesn’t matter cause the nature of Vedic school is to keep same message unchanged from generation t o generation through unbroken line of teachers and students. Upanishad are shrauta and are the meaning behind the Vedas this Gina’s are correct and have always been part of Vedic culture. Doesn’t matter also paprika is wrong. Can fellow academics not publish papers debating. Just because someone is an academic doesn’t make them an authority because even among academics debate exists

Also no rituals would not have died out because they were alive and well and active in the Hindu Sampradayas be it Vaishnava sanpradaya or Shaiva or smarts or shakta

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

But Frits Staal and Asko Parpola are none of those things. They aren’t colonial overlords like Griffith but scholars who have been fascinated and devoted their to the study of Indology in the 60s to the present day. And the gunas argument can only hold its ground once the Second Urbanization takes place c.800 BCE when those terms start appearing in smritis. How can the previous 1300 years then be explained? I’m not saying that all those who became Dasas would not within a few generations have had some social mobility, but that the Vedic Aryans were known to participate in yuddha against outsiders even their Iranian kinsmen and fellow Aryans as the Daśarājñá Yuddhá alludes to when the Trtsus under Sudás complete subjugate the Púrus to form the Bhāratas declaring in the hymn, very clearly, that:

“All sons of Yudhyamadhi, he slain by Sudas, are but [dasa] before those who exalt Indra and the Arya’s Comrade [Aryamana]. Let these two kuala be united by honey and blood.”

Going back to the western historians, they have none of the biases of Griffith and Staal is responsible for helping the Mudgal Andhra Brahmins raise the funds and aiding in the documentation of the Agnicayana-yajna. Without his extensive efforts the knowledge of that ritual would have dwindled out by 2010 like countless other rituals rather than still being an extensive annual festival now. And in Griffith’s defence he admired the Vedas if misunderstood them and saw them as simply another relic of a bygone age like the Iliad, Eddas and the Aeneid.

Also I am not saying Vedic aryans did not fight with each other or outsiders just that dasas does not refer to ethnic group it simply refers to people who followed adharma a big difference. Once again you are taking verses out of context dasa-arya conflict is one over human nature and internal struggle between that aspect of us which is spiritual and that which is materialistic while the one conflict between bharathas is representative of lessons learned from a conflict that probably did take place but the two are not the same.
Thus In reality that text states that just as Sudas united the bharathas through following the path of dharma within oneself through battle one can conquer their negative traits dasas through relying upon their inner goodness arya. Was an analogy not meant to be taken literally being a scripture of religion the above definition make sure more sense based on the Sanskrit positioning of the words and intention. This intention is important not the mechanical translation.