What then defined the ruling castes that constituted the
theocratic state however? These emerged in my view as an
over-arching extension of the village caste system – in
particular through the elevation of Brahmins (teachers,
scholars and priests) to a ruling religious caste guiding and
protected by Kshatriyas (kings and professional soldiers),
and making use of both Vaishvas (farmers, artisans and
traders) and of Shudras (servant and service providers for
the other castes). The division of these ‘principal’ four
castes or varnas then became the over-arching ‘caste system’
overseeing what was in reality a much more highly
differentiated and social division of labour including
countless hereditary or non-hereditary, kinship, locality-
based or even religious ‘sub-castes’ or jati.
According to Kosambi, in the establishment of the
theocratic state, earlier communal deities, including
matriarchal ones, were gradually incorporated into the
Brahminical pantheon, resulting in the marriage of a
primordial mother goddess such as Durga-Kali with a male
god such as Rudra-Shiva. Among the Hindu religious
schools, both Shaivites – worshippers of Shiva – and
followers of the Tantras rather than the Vedas rejected all
forms of caste discrimination and oppression – not least
towards the lowest of the Shudra caste, the ‘out-castes’ or
‘untouchables’. And both Indian history and religious
mythology are replete with rulers and heroic figures
associated with ‘lower’ castes. Yet not only Marx himself,