THE HINDU SOCIAL ORDER : ITS ESSENTIAL PRINCIPLES 111
the offending organ was sentiment having a will for its own and had not been merely a survitor of human being. Second feature of Manu’s Penal Code is the inhuman character of the punishment which has no proportion to the gravity of the offence. But the most striking feature of Manu’s Penal Code which stands out in all its nakedness is the inequality of punishment for the same offence. Inequality designed not merely to punish the offender but to protect also the dignity and to maintain the baseness of the parties coming to a Court of Law to seek justice; in other words to maintain the social inequality on which his whole scheme is founded.
The principle of graded inequality has been carried into the economic field. “From each according to his ability; to each according to his need” is not the principle of Hindu social order. The principle of the Hindu social order is: “From each according to his need. To each according to his nobility.” [1] Supposing an officer was distributing dole to a famine striken people. He would be bound to give greater dole to a person of high birth than he would to a person of low birth. Supposing an officer was levying taxation. He would be bound to assess a person of high birth at a lower rate than he would to a person of low birth. The Hindu social order does not recognise equal need, equal work or equal ability as the basis of reward for labour. Its motto is that in regard to the distribution of the good things of life those who are reckoned as the highest must get the most and the best and those who are classed as the lowest must accept the least and the worst.
Nothing more seems to be necessary to prove that the Hindu social order is based on the principle of graded inequality. It pervades all departments of social life. Every side of social life is protected against the danger of equality.
The second principle on which the Hindu social order is founded is that of fixity of occupations for each class and continuance thereof by heredity. This is what Manu says about occupations of the four classes.
“I. 87. But in order to protect this universe, He, the most resplendent one, assigned separate (duties and) occupations, to those who sprang from his mouth, arms, thighs and feet.
I. 88. To Brahmanas he assigned teaching and studying (the Veda) sacrificing for their own benefit and for others, giving and accepting (of alms).
I. 89. The Kshatriya he commanded to protect the people, to bestow gifts to offer sacrifices to study (the Veda) and to abstain from attaching himself to sensual pleasures.”
1 The illustrations given above are not merely drawn from imagination. They are facts of history. The differentiation between high and low was recognised by law in the time of the Peshwas. The differentiation about dole exists even now in the Bombay Presidency and was defended by a Congress Minister. These Remarks are not applicable today— Editors.