Hindu Customs and Their Origins.–By Stanley Rice, with a Foreword by H. H. the Maharaja Gaekwar of Baroda. (George Allen and Unwin Ltd., London. Price. Sh. 7/6.)

The author is a Madras Civilian who spent many years of his life as District Officer in several districts of the Madras Presidency, and after retirement he was employed in the Baroda State and had a seat in the State Council as a Member of the Baroda Government. Naturally therefore he dedicated the work to His Highness the Maharaja Gaekwar of Baroda. The book contains the Foreword of the Maharaja Gaekwar himself. The work conveys to us the impressions of a foreigner and tries to tackle the vexed problem of the origin of caste in India. He has also given explanations from his own point of view of some of the customs in India which have appeared strange and un-accountable to Westerners, and which have even been condemned as "barbarous and cruel, unintelligible and childish" by them.

This type of book is not new to our present generation of Hindu readers. Many European globe-trotters and sojourners in India and people who have been benefited by their stay in this country, either as Government servants or otherwise, have striven to record their impressions of the customs and manners, the habits and thoughts of the Hindus, whom they either served or governed. They all labour under the initial difficulty of pre-conceived notions, pet prejudices and lack of sympathetic understanding. Many among them have not even kept their minds free from the tendency to treat with contempt the ideas and thoughts foreign to their own and to regard, from the imperialistic point of view, all other civilisations and races as primitive and fit only to be civilised by the superior race to which they belong. The difficulty is rendered much greater by the fact that, from the very beginning of history, the Hindu civilisation presents striking features which stand in sharp contrast to the civilisation of the other races of humanity both in the old world and in the new. Further, the records with which one has to deal are mostly in the Sanskrit language which it is very difficult to master. Even for Hindus who have not had a careful and deep education in Sanskrit, the language has remained difficult to be grasped. Still more is it so in the case of foreigners. When once the language is not fully grasped there is great room for misapprehension and for wrong inferences from insufficient data and mistaken identities. This statement will be largely true even in the case of European Orientalists, who have laboured hard in the field of Indology. In the case of officials who tried to gather impressions about Hindu manners and customs in India in the course of their official life, there is much greater room for wrong inferences from a superficial understanding, especially owing to the fact that the informants and friends with whom they usually move are not persons of rank and culture, able to speak to them fearlessly and frankly, and eradicate wrong impressions and prejudices. Further, owing to the recent national revival in the country and the emphasis laid upon the brighter aspects of Hindu civilisation by the patriotic sons of the soil, a natural reaction is created in the minds of Englishmen and other Westerners which induces them to exaggerate the undesirable features of the Hindu civilisation, in the belief that they furnish arguments for the continuance of the imperialistic domination. To overcome all these difficulties and to keep one’s mind free from all these warping tendencies and to show a sympathetic understanding towards civilisations alien to one’s own, is indeed a very difficult task and few among the Western writers can be said to have succeeded in it.

Mr. Stanley Rice devotes a good portion of the book to the adumbration of a theory of his own as regards the origin of the caste system in India and to the criticism of theories advanced by other writers. He rejects ‘the racial purity theory,’ as he calls it, and the occupational theory, and comes to the conclusion that caste arose out of a combination of factors, viz., the customs of the aborigines in India, the system established by the Dravidians and its later adoption by the Aryans who polished and perfected what they found; and this entire process of evolution from the germ of the customs of the aborigines was largely affected by the force of religion and "neither pride of race nor convenience of economic relations, nor any of those things which might influence a modern man" was responsible for it. It is difficult to appreciate the various steps of argument by which he arrives at this conclusion, nor is it possible to say that there are sufficient, satisfactory data for them. Beyond inferring, from what we know of the customs of other primitive races of the world, the probable nature of the customs of the aborigines of India, there are no evidences either literary or historical or archaeological. Beyond the fact of the existence of certain tribes in India, it is hardly possible even to say who the pre-historic aborigines of India were. Mr. Stanley Rice is of the opinion that "we are entitled to make decent inferences from the customs of other primitive races," but this can hardly suffice to raise one’s conclusions from the level of mere speculation to the region of historical truth. It is not also possible to fully substantiate the statement that caste was not an Aryan institution. It may even be granted that caste with all its present incidents and rigidity as found in its present condition may not have been the original Aryan institution. But a nebulous four-caste arrangement based on certain sociological principles may have been an Aryan institution. The great legislator, Manu, is clearly of opinion that the four-fold caste system differentiates the Aryan from all non-Aryan peoples, but it may be said that in his day he found caste a permanent institution and therefore was as much speculating as ourselves now, as regards its nature. But, the fact remains that nowhere in Indian literature do we find evidence of any idea that caste was not an Aryan- institution. Probably, the ‘racial purity theory’ has not legs to stand on. The vast structure erected on the meaning of the word ‘Varna’ cannot be said to have a sure foundation, for it is well-known that in Sanskrit, words have many meanings, sometimes even contradictory meanings such as the word ‘Arath’ which means both ‘near’ and ‘distant.’ The word ‘Varna’ has many meanings and because one of its meanings is colour, it is not proper to erect a whole argument that colour was at the root of the division of caste. The occupational theory has much greater basis. In fact, in early Sanskrit literature more stress is laid on the occupational theory than in later years. It was possible for a person to pass from one caste to another by reason of his change of occupation, and the indicia of caste rested more on the occupation that a person followed than on his birth. But from the beginning, so far as the literary evidences go, birth also was a great factor. Hence it is not possible to ascribe the origin of caste to the theory of occupation. Some have argued that the Rig-Veda points to a period when there might not have been the caste system. But at the time when we find a reference to it in the Rig-Veda, we have to infer that it was already a fully developed institution and, therefore, we have to presume its existence for some long period before that date.

An impartial investigation of the whole matter leaves us in this predicament viz., that we are unable to say for all practical purposes when caste arose in India. All the great minds of ancient India had tried to solve their problems, accepting the social basis of the caste system. Its present rigidity and the incidents attaching to it, namely, restrictions of marriage, inter-dining, etc., may be evolutions of a later date, but the broad central idea of the four-fold caste must have had a great antiquity. At any rate, it was there throughout the centuries as an ideal division of Society to which the Hindu sociological system ought to converge. Mr. Stanley Rice is not entirely correct in identifying the principle of caste with religion. Though a superficial survey of the history of India may lead one to identify even social movements as having a religious basis, it is not impossible to conceive of the existence of the Hindu religion without the caste system. The main tenets of Hinduism do not need the foundation of caste.

The caste system in India has had both its good features and bad portrayed by Western writers. Some have condemned it as wholly evil, others have held it responsible for the vitality of Hindu civilisation. Even those who have condemned it as wholly evil cannot in fairness ascribe to it greater horrors and injustices than the class warfare of modern Europe or the acerbity between the artificial nation-groups of the West presents. None can deny that the later rigidity and numerous sub-divisions of the caste system have weakened the solidarity of Hindu Society. The lengths to which social injustice sometimes has gone have also to be disapproved, but this is not the same as condemning the original system as entirely evil. If we can have an ideal of Society of the whole of humanity without any divisions, and based on perfect unity and co-operation, then caste also is an evil. But so long as we cannot have that, it is impossible to condemn caste as wholly evil. It has its own democratic aspects in India which are sometimes ignored in the wholesale condemnation of it. The poverty of the Brahmin has not stood in the way of his being honoured by the other castes, and while it may be sometimes regarded that the claim of the Brahmins to superiority is overdone, still it is largely owing to his self-imposed badge of poverty that the claim has been tolerated by the other castes. No other country in the world presents the like spectacle of a caste which claims superiority without resting it on any temporal advantages and privileges.

K. BALASUBRAHMANIA AIYAR

Big Game Encounters.–Edited by Stanley Jepson. (The Times Press, Bombay. Published by H. F. & G. Witherby Ltd., London. Price Sh. 8/6.)

"The foundation of the book," says the Editor, "is a careful selection from a number of articles which appeared over the course of two years in the News Magazine I edit, The Illustrated Weekly of India." The articles themselves are the true accounts by experienced shikaries of their most exciting moments with the Big Game in India mainly, and also in South Africa. The saying that truth is stranger than fiction could have no more vital vindication than these fascinating pages; for, which tale of tenseness and horror could surpass the story of Mrs. Smythies (Chapter 1) who had to encounter a wounded tiger, springing up to the machan, and after misfiring had to grapple with the snarling beast as best she could by thrusting the barrel of a rifle into its throat; or the story of Mr. Combe (Chapter 16) who had to wrestle with a ferocious lion who chewed off the shikari’s left knee until a brave Indian boy came along and pulled the Sahib literally from the jaws of death? Such incidents abound.

The experiences recorded in the book show how unfounded is the popular superstition that the elephants are afraid of lions and tigers whom the latter could kill and overpower with facility. In Chapter 13 Lt. Col. Whitworth shows how, far from being afraid of the tiger, the elephant can grapple with it not merely with terrific power but also with subtle cunning.

The four Chapters in the Section II of the book are written by the Editor himself. The Chapters on the mind of the wild, how wild animals attack, the fear complex of the wild, are of absorbing interest. Here the reader will not find an account of thrilling episodes but would meet with a large deduction from experience, bordering on an essay on animal psychology. Shikaries can hardly afford to neglect this part of the book, even if they could discover in their own experiences parallels for the incidents recorded in the earlier Chapters.

As one reads through the pages of this very interesting book, one cannot help asking the question whether hunting as a pastime is ethically and aesthetically justifiable. In the pre- historic ages man hunted for food. The modern hunting is for the shikari’s own diversion. Is it the proper thing for a man to do,–seeking wild animals in the depths of forests, and, entrenched on machans, guided by beaters and boys, and always assisted by the rifle, shooting them? The combat is hardly even, and man’s advantages are so overpowering. In a world that has come to look upon hunting as a pleasant social art, conferring on the shikari a halo of romantic distinction, the question suggested above must appear not merely pedantic but distinctly provincial. When animals kill one another they have at least the inexorable justification of hunger. When man kills animals it is for his own diversion. This thought is not provoked by any doctrinaire squeamishness nor is it said in detraction of the intrinsic interest and charm of these very gripping pages.

M. S. C.

Sri Ramakrishna: His Unique Message.–By Swami Ghanananda. (The Ramakrishna Mission, Mylapore, Madras. Price, Re. 1.)

This is a tribute to the memory of the Master on the occasion of his Birth-Centenary which was celebrated in a fitting manner throughout India and in other parts of the world in February last. The Swami holds that the unique message of Sri Ramakrishna was the harmony of religions and that this forms his greatest contribution to spiritual thought. Sri Ramakrishna Pramahamsa belongs to that illustrious hierarchy of saints of our land who have demonstrated to a doubting world the truth of the great spiritual teachings of the religion of their birth. It is also true to say that he belongs to the great galaxy of the mystics of the world who are not of one country, who exemplify the truth of the fundamentals of all religions and the unity of real spiritual experience. In our country, the vitality of our religion throughout these centuries has been preserved only by the saints and mystics who, time and again, have striven to weed out the unnecessary growths of customs and prejudices and to re-establish the essentials in their pristine purity and vigour. Sri Ramakrishna appeared at a time in the history of our country when the Hindu religion itself was divided into diverse antagonistic sects and creeds, and religious feuds arose on account of the militant activities of two other great religions of the world, Islam and Christianity. The emphasis which Sri Ramakrishna laid on individual experience as the sole guide to Truth, the hope and optimism which he inspired by demonstrating the possibility of the realisation of God by all men, the proof he gave of the utility of the Sadhanas taught by our religion,–all these were badly needed in the present age when the minds of people were thrown into hesitancy and confusion by scepticism and materialism on the one hand, and by sectarianism and bigotry on the other. As was narrated by Swami Vivekananda once, it was Sri Ramakrishna who was bold enough to shake off his scepticism, by answering without hesitation in the affirmative the question put by him viz., "Have you seen God?" Sri Ramakrishna was, in the language of the Vedanta, a Jivanmukta–a realized soul who continued to do his duty on earth even after God-realisation, only for the sake of service to humanity. He fulfilled, in ample measure, the great ideal of all true Saints and Bhaktas,–unselfish love and service to humanity in the true spirit of detachment and self-surrender. The advocates of Humanism at the present day are not tired of emphasising that service to humanity is a much greater ideal than individual salvation. But it was Sri Ramakrishna who demonstrated the truth which the Hindu religion has always emphasised, of the necessity for man attaining spirituality before he can do real unselfish service to humanity. Hence it is that the story goes of the Indian philosopher who met Socrates and answered him that unless man understood things divine he could not understand things human. To Sri Ramakrishna who attached great importance to spiritual experience and who regarded it as the only religion, it was easy to comprehend the harmony of all religions. It was in the dawn of history that the ancient verse of the Rig-Veda rang clear. "The one Truth, the Sages utter in many ways." It revealed the principle which explains the diversity of the religions and creeds of the world. This message of Sri Ramakrishna has immense, practical value at the present day both in politics and in religion. If it is realised by the votaries of every religion in our country that, with devotion to one’s own religion and appreciation of its teachings can be combined tolerance and respect for the followers of other religions, the Hindu-Muslim riots and communal misunderstandings which have marred the fair face of India at the present day will be things of the past and there will again reign peace and amity among all sects of Indians.

K. BALASUBRAHMANIA AIYAR

KANNADA

Buddha-vachana-parichaya and Milinda-prasna.–By G. P. Rajaratnam. (Pali-Kannada Anuvada Mala of Satya Sahitya Mantapa, Malleswaram, Bangalore, 1937. Printed at Dharma Prakasa Press. Mangalore. Price. Ordinary Edition, Rs. 4; Library Edition, Rs. 7-8-0.)

This work is an excellent translation of selections from the Pali Buddhist Texts and forms a very useful introduction to a study of Buddhism. The first part contains some of the best portions of the Vinaya Pitaka and the Sutta Pitaka, and in selecting these Mr. Rajaratnam has shown a wide reading and an intimate acquaintance with the Buddhist Texts. It is well known that out of the three baskets (Tripitaka) of Buddhist canonical writings, the first two, namely the Vinaya and the Sutta Pitakas alone, are really essential for a grasp of Buddhist religion and philosophy. Mrs. Rhys Davids declares that "our knowledge of Buddhist philosophy would in no degree suffer, were the whole of the Abhidamma lost." As for the Milinda Panha, scholars have opined that the last four sections of the work are later additions and only serve to amplify the points dealt with in the earlier portion of the work. Mr. G. P. Rajaratnam has therefore wisely confined his selections to the first two pitakas and the first three sections of the Milindapanha only. The translation is in chaste Kannada which retains all the beauty and grace of the original Pali, while at the same time avoiding the tiresome repetitions found in the original.

One has only to read the chapter on ‘The conceit of Caste,’ or ‘The Qualifications of a Brahmin’ to realise how aptly words written millenniums ago apply to the present day conditions, and how much we have yet to learn from our experience in the past. Such works as these are not merely of academic or scholarly interest, but are as much necessary for a man of the world to guide him in his life and everyday activities. Mr. Rajaratnam’s efforts in this direction are particularly noteworthy and we earnestly hope that he will publish many more such excellent translations before long.

The book is beautifully bound and the author’s brief introduction, the select index, and the glossary are extremely useful.

P. SREENIVASACHAR

BACK