Professional Documents
Culture Documents
It honestly isn't all that different from the American class system, or the clas
s system in other cultures.
More rigid, ritualized, codified, fine-grained and arguably more oppressive, but
basically the same sort of thing, that exists for the same sort of reasons.
So just review your basic intuitions about class (see for example, "Class Dismis
sed" in the Atlantic Monthly: http://www.theatlantic.com/magaz... ) and ignore t
he complexity, and you'll have a good 101-level understanding.
Not trying to condone the Indian caste system by comparison with a similar const
ruct, or explain it away. Just giving you a "good enough" starting point so you
stop thinking of it as "completely unfamiliar." Beneath the arcane Sanskrit and
incomprehensible rituals, it is still the psychology of homo sapiens after all.
Though the caste system is fading away slowly due to western exposure, industria
lization, international competence, still there are doubts in Indian s mind how it
got originated and what is the solution to get rid of it.
1. Introduction:
Our Veda (the Sruti), the only Hindu authority, does not mention anything on cas
te system. It just mentions (for example Rig Veda Purusa Sukta - brahmanosya muk
hamasit, bahu rajanyah kritaha, uru tadasya yadvaishyaha, padhyagam shudro ajaya
ta etc) four keywords (called Varna, color, class) Brahmana, Kshyatriya, Vaisya
and Shudra with their definition based on Guna-Karma. This is also called Svabha
vaja Karma or action based on mental inclination. Later texts like Mahabharat, G
ita(Sloka 4.13 - Chatur Varnyam Maya Sristam Guna Karma Vibhagasah) also defines
these keywords based on Guna-Karma.
These Guna-Karma divisions as per Sankhya darshan is:
1. Activities done by a person with dominant Satwa guna called as Brahmana.
2. With dominant Rajo guna mixed with Satwa guna called as Kshyatriya.
3. With dominant Rajo guna mixed with Tamo guna called as Vaisya.
4. With dominant Tamo guna is called Shudra.
Veda and Gita do not command to divide the society based on Guna-Karma. People cho
ose this as a formula to divide the society. Other formula could have been based
on economy (high class, middle class, low class) as it is done in USA. Due to a
dvancement of technology, we can think of dividing people based on genetic patte
rn. Twenty-three human chromosomes can provide all details of mental, psychologi
cal inclination of a person.
So this caste system is neither the God created, nor a vision of Veda. It is a h
uman creation. Interestingly Upanishads and Mahabharata say in the beginning all
humans were with dominant Satva guna, pure mind. Later their mind got corrupted
when Greeks opened the Pandora s box. This is in contradiction with what we study
about primitive humans from western study: living in jungle, taking raw meats,
barbaric life etc. Our civilization says the first set of humans born with pure
mind, called as Risis. And we are all the Risi-putra(children of saints).
Unfortunately there are smritis(e.g. Goutama smriti, Manu Smriti etc) which say
such fierce words as these: If the Shudra hears the Vedas, fill his ears with mol
ten lead, and if he remembers a line, cut his tongue out. There is no purificati
on rites for Sudra. This is diabolical old barbarism no doubt. These books are no
t aligned to Veda. However people thought that Smriti is a Hindu scripture. But
those are not. During 200 BCE these kinds of Smritis were written to suppress Ve
dic Varna system. Unfortunately those books are instrumental in diving people ti
ll date.
2. How it got adopted into Hindu society?
Given the definition in Veda, Gita (like IEEE-LRM), how it got implemented in Hi
ndu society? That is the trick of specification vs implementation inconsistency.
1. At some level of our parent generation the caste was a self-declared or a volun
tary designation based on what kind of profession they choose. There are instance
s mentioned in Purana, Mahabharat(in Ajagara, Uma and Maheswara story). And it w
as not hereditary.
2. Later it was a political (Kings) decision to allocate caste to individual to
give it a permanent shape. In Mahabharat, King Yudhisthira is saying it was diffi
cult for him to determine the caste of an individual based on mental inclination .
Here also it was not hereditary. There was choice for profession and change in
caste.
3. Wherever politics enter, the thing gets spoiled. Same happened here also. And
caste became a matter of (a) privilege, later (b) hereditary and tied to some (
c) old customs. Individuals were imposed a caste forcefully to get the low profi
le jobs done. This became a hereditary system.
4. History says there are many royal communities once they became powerful, they
declared themselves as Brahmin caste as a whole community and ruled over rests.
And others were dominated for their selfish gain. Evidence says this self-decla
ration is done till recent years in Tamilnadu and Kerala. Mighty is the right is pr
oved.
5. Hindu society was so conservative and social customs were very tight. Anybody
violated any custom was thrown out of village, property and made untouchables.
Many communities were made religiously impure by birth. History says even many B
rahmins, who wanted to be liberals or violated any custom; they were forced to b
ecome untouchables as a punishment. It more similar to honor killing of married
couples from different communities in today s India.
6. On one side the rulers made rules to make a concrete infrastructure to divide
people. On the other hand the priest-class did not leave any stone unturned. Va
rious tags were discovered to identify people using (a) Surname (b) Gotra (c) Su
tra (d) Caste/sub-caste (e) external symbols like sacred thread, Tilakam, Tulsi
necklace (f) false rituals with wrong notion like Pinda-dana (g) fear of eternal
hell on mixture of community, even if Veda do not mention of any hell etc. Fals
e rumors were spread through folk songs, on sharing of Roti and Beti(common dinin
g and marriage) will incur sin.
For example Manu Smriti says on naming of various Varna -
Sloka 2.31. Let (the first part of) a Brahmana s name (denote something) auspiciou
s, a Kshatriya s be connected with power, and a Vaisya s with wealth, but a Sudra s (e
xpress something) contemptible.
Sloka 2.32. (The second part of) a Brahmana s (name) shall be (a word) implying ha
ppiness, of a Kshatriya s (a word) implying protection, of a Vaisya s (a term) expre
ssive of thriving, and of a Sudra s (an expression) denoting service.
7. Some of our Mahapurusha(saints) directly or indirectly helped to give it a sh
ape. Started with, Buddha (800 BCE) strongly condemned any division of Humanity.
During his time 99% of Brahmins and Kshatriyas were converted into Buddhism. Th
is practically abolished castism and Vedic rituals from India. Later Adi Sankara
charya (8th century) was a great advocate of Brahmin caste and caste maker, for
which he is criticized most. Ramanujacharya (13th century) tried to eradicate an
d declared all of his followers as Brahmins. Chaitanya Mahaprabhu (17th century)
followers themselves declared as Vaisnava-Brahmins. Rammohan roy, Swami Dayanan
da (19th century) were strong condemner of caste-system. Swami Vivekanand (19th
century) converted few thousands dalits into Brahmins by initiating them into Ga
yatri.It is said an individual who is initiated into a Mantra from an eligible G
uru, will be considered as Brahmin. Many, including untouchables, followed these
saints, took Mantra and got converted into Brahmins. All most all saints have p
ut their maximum energy (by initiating through Mantra) to fix this social disord
er. Still this is an unsolved problem. So why to blame the limitations of Semiti
c religions, where they have only one prophet?
3. What is the Consequence of Indian caste system?
1. Due to this wrong implementation of Vedic definition, the Varna (class, c
olor) systems converted into caste (Jati) hereditary systems.
2. India lost its patriotic feeling. Rather it was just a combination of few
separated communities without any coherence. All the feeling and enjoyment and
marriage were limited to same narrow community.
3. The only way the human breed can mix is through marriage. This cross-comm
unity marriage got blocked in fear of losing property and privilege. Even in som
e communities only elder son was allowed to marry. Youngers were advised to prac
tice polyandry e.g Kerala Namboodiri Brahmins. Later again each community gets d
ivided and sub-divided into many smaller castes to protect the selfish and narro
wness among themselves. So where is the Indian-ness?
4. Women were considered as Sudra as mentioned in Srimad-Bhagavatam. They we
re deprived of Vedic rights and temple worships. Though there are twenty five wo
men risis (Gargi, Maitreyi, Vak etc) mentioned as editors of Veda, not sure why
women were not allowed to chant Vedic Mantra. Even today many women are scared t
o chant Veda.
5. Many including Swami Vivekananda, Dr, B. R. Ambedkar pointed out; this di
sjoint communalism was the cause of Mohameddan and Christian invasion into India
. Because the downtrodden, the major population, during that time cooperated the
m to find an escape route of suffering.
6. History says when a pariah (Chandala) gets converted into Islam and Chris
tian, nobody was hesitating to do hand-shake and offer a chair. Most of the reli
gious conversions were voluntary. Foreigners come with few thousands soldiers an
d gets multiplied into many millions in a few years.
7. Foreign rulers did not try to solve this social disorder. Rather they had
tried to make it sticky by following Smrities and took advantage of this Indian
weakness. Because their colonization policy was based on divide and rule . And we
were succumbed to our own faulty system.
8. Even today Christian missionaries are targeting the downtrodden, rural, p
oor lower caste people to convert into other religion. And this has a strong imp
act on Hindu population and Hindu civilization. Unless they are uplifted, there
is no solution to this conversion issue.
4. What is the solution as given by Swami Vivekananda?
1. Remove false notion: Though our castes are apparently linked with our religi
on, but they are not so. In religion there is no caste. Caste is social custom.
Same is told by Mahatma Gandhi also to the nation.
2. Revert back to Brahmin-hood: We are all Risi-putra. The solution is not by br
inging down the higher, but by raising the lower caste up to the level of the hi
gher. The goal is to uplift everyone into Brahmin Varna. After independence Dali
ts were given special privilege as compensation under constitution. We need to r
each a civilization where everybody will be treated equally without any special
privilege to any community. Then only caste-less Indian society will be possible
.
3. Continue self-declaring: There are thousands of castes, and some are even get
ting admission into Brahminhood, for what prevents any caste from declaring they
are Brahmins?Instead of crying foul, people can self-declare or correct their c
astes based on Vedic definition.
4. Rename the whole Community: Thus caste, with all its rigor, has been created
in that manner. Let us suppose that there are castes here with ten thousand peop
le in each. If these put their heads together and say, we will call ourselves Br
ahmins, nothing can stop them; I have seen it in my own life. Some castes become
strong, and as soon as they all agree, who is to say nay?[CW-III page-295]
5. Expose to western science: Keep harmony between Vedantic theories and western
science. Science and technology is a greatest gift from western civilization. A
ll Indians need to be exposed to modern developments across globe. This will hel
p in removing the narrowness about our own civilization, customs and way of life
. Till date Indian caste system is suppressed due to exposure to western Industr
ialization and international competence. India must keep foreign direct investme
nt (FDI) up to eradicate local monopoly in profession and economy.
5. Conclusion:
So your caste was voluntarily declared by your own forefather. Now it is your tu
rn to undo the mistake.
Anything that does not show dynamism (we call it evolution) will eventually die.
For example there is a huge water pool and it is decided not to allow any water
enter into it thinking that its purity will be lost. Eventually this water pool
will be stinky. Similarly if you don t allow other community (caste) to enter int
o your family life, then whole genetic system, immunity system and cultural syst
em will fall apart. The aroma has vanished and only the stinky ugly part is pois
oning the mind of society. Don t propagate this ignorance to your next generation,
your sons and daughters.
Indian caste system was just a vocabulary, which used to divide all professions
into 4 major categories Varna (Hinduism) [Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya, Shudra].
Your caste is just what you do and not what your father used to do. If you used
to teach, then you were a Teacher [Brahmin] and if you used to do trade then you
were a trader[Vaishya].
What went wrong: Initially everybody was free to choose their profession and th
eir profession used to be their caste. With time, more and more people started a
ccepting their father's profession ( as it gave them advantage like free educati
on, business contacts, free tools etc over those who were totally new into that
profession). Also those parents, who were in better professions, started favorin
g their own children by selecting them for the jobs, who were meant for the best
candidates from the society. Like, a king makes his own son the next king, inst
ead of selecting the best suitable young person from the kingdom.
This went up to the extent, that people started believing [still most of us
believe this way] that your caste is what your family's caste and you get it at
the time of birth. This created a big divide in society and led to the inhuman
treatment of Lower caste people.
Advantage : Caste system is noting, but the names of your profession and we stil
l use them around the world with different names [I am a Doctor, I am an Enginee
r]. It just a convenient tool to tell others, what your profession is. So you sa
y You are a Plumber, instead of saying 100 sentences about what Plumbers do.
Disadvantage : Original Caste system doesn't have much disadvantages. But the ca
ste system which is currently getting practiced in the our society, is one of th
e biggest problem of India.
1. It denies equal rights between different castes.
2. It takes away fair chance of selection from government jobs.
3. It suppress the best talent of society, by giving opportunity to people wh
o are not really qualified for the job.
4. It created hatred between different castes, which led to a weak society an
d the country.
5. Caste System gave birth to caste based reservation, which lowered the qual
ity of Government Service and led to more corruption.
The caste system is one of the greatest social evils plaguing our country today.
It is acting as a powerful social and political divisive force in our country a
t a time when it is absolutely essential for us to be united if we wish to face
our nation s challenges. It is a curse on our country which must be speedily eradi
cated if we wish to progress.
THE CASTE SYSTEM IN INDIA
We may consider a few facts to realize how strongly caste is still entrenched in
our society today.
Our politics is largely governed by caste vote banks. When the time comes for se
lecting candidates for the elections a study is made of the numerical caste dist
ribution in a constituency, because voters in most areas vote on caste basis.
What to say of the illiterate people, even the so called intellectuals tend to o
perate on caste lines. Thus, in the elections to many bar associations the lawye
rs tend to vote for the candidates of their caste.
Many castes want to be declared as O.B.C.s or Scheduled Castes, to get the benef
its of reservation. Even some O.B.C.s strive to be declared as M.B.C.s (most bac
kward castes) or Scheduled Castes.
Fake caste certificates have become rampant, as is often witnessed in our law co
urts, to get jobs or admissions in educational institutions.
Marriages are still largely performed within one s caste.
Violence often occurs between castes, as was noticed in the recent fight between
students of different castes in a University in Chennai, while the policemen lo
oked on as silent spectators.
Even Muslims, Christians and Sikhs often have castes, although their religions p
reach equality.
We can multiply these facts manifolds. Many books and articles have been written
about the caste system in India, but a scientific study is still wanting. An at
tempt shall be made here to explain the origin, development and future of the ca
ste system.
Origin of the Caste System
The origin of the caste system was in all probability racial. It is said that ca
ste originated when a white race, the Aryans, coming from the North West, conque
red the dark coloured races inhabiting India at that time, probably 5000 years a
go or so.
Some persons deny that the Aryans came from outside India and assert that India
was the original home of the Aryans (Aryavarta) from where a section of them mig
rated to Europe. It is difficult to accept this view because people migrate from
uncomfortable areas to comfortable areas (see the article `Kalidas Ghalib Acade
my for Mutual Understanding inwww.kgfindia.com). Why should anyone migrate from a
comfortable country like India which has level and fertile land ideal for agric
ulture to a place like Afghanistan or Russia which is cold, mountaneous and ther
efore uncomfortable. Indian history bears out the view that almost all invasions
/immigrations were from outside India (mainly from the North West and to a lesse
r extent from the North East) into India.
The caste system is called `Varna Vyavastha and the word `Varna in Sanskrit litera
lly means colour of the skin. This also points at the racial origin of the caste
system. Fair skin colour is usually preferred to darker skin even today, as is
evident from matrimonial advertisements.
Subsequent Development of the Caste System
While the origin of the caste system appears to be racial (as mentioned above) i
t subsequently developed an altogether different basis according to the needs of
the feudal society in India. In other words, the caste system, though originati
ng in race, subsequently developed into the feudal, occupational division of lab
our in society. This needs to be explained in some detail.
In theory there were only four castes, Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudra
s. This, however, was only a fiction. In reality there were (and still are) hund
reds, if not thousands, of castes and sub-castes in India many of which do not f
it into the 4 traditional castes mentioned above e.g. Yadavs, Kurmis, Jats, Kaya
sthas, Bhumihars, Gosains, etc. Every vocation became a caste. Thus, in North In
dia badhai (carpenter) became a caste, and so did lohar (blacksmith), sonar (gol
dsmith), kumbhar (Potter), dhobi (washerman), nai (barber), darzi (tailor), kasa
i (butcher), mallah (fisherman), kewat (boatman), teli (oil presser), kahar (wat
er carrier), gadadia (sheep herder), etc.
This was not something unique to India. For instance, in England even today ther
e are many people with the surnames Taylor, Smith, Goldsmith, Baker, Butcher, Po
tter, Barber, Mason, Carpenter, Turner, Waterman, Shepherd, Gardener, Miller, et
c., which indicates that the ancestors of these persons belonged to those profes
sions.
In feudal society, apart from agriculture, there was development of handicraft i
ndustry. This happened in India too, and the caste system became the Indian vari
ation of the feudal occupational division of labour in society, somewhat like th
e medieval European guild system.
As pointed out by Adam Smith in his book `The Wealth of Nations , division of labo
ur results in great progress. The caste system in India resulted in great develo
pment of the productive forces, and hence in the feudal age it was a progressive
institution (as compared to the preceding slave society).
It is well known that before the coming of the British, India was one of the wor
ld s most prosperous countries (at that time). India was exporting Dacca Muslin, M
urshidabad silk, Kashmir shawls and carpets, ornaments, etc. apart from agricult
ural products like spices, indigo, etc. to the Middle East and even Europe. The
discovery of Roman coins in several parts of South India show the great volume o
f trade from India, which shows the great development of the productive forces i
n feudal India. In fact India was once a super power with a 31.5% share in the g
lobal gross domestic production, which came down to 3% in the year 1991.
The Destruction of Handicraft Industry in India
It is estimated that before the coming of the British into India about 40% of th
e population of India was engaged in industry while the rest of the population w
as engaged in agriculture. This industry was no doubt handicraft industry, and n
ot mill industry. Nevertheless, there was a very high level production of goods
in India by these handicraft industries before the coming of the British, and ma
ny of these goods were exported often up to Europe, the Middle East, China, etc.
e.g. Dacca Muslin, Murshidabad silk, and other kind of textiles, spices etc.
A rough and ready test of the level of the economic development of a country is
to find out how much percentage of the population is engaged in industry, and ho
w much in agriculture. The greater the percentage of population in industry and
lesser in agriculture the more prosperous the country. Thus, the U.S.A., the mos
t prosperous country in the world today has only about 2 or 3% of its population
in agriculture, while the rest is in industry or services.
India was a relatively prosperous country before the coming of the British becau
se a high percentage of the people (which could be up to 40%) was engaged at tha
t time in industry (though no doubt this was handicraft industry, not mill indus
try). Thus, Lord Clive around 1757 (when the battle of Plassey was fought) descr
ibed Murshidabad (which was then the capital of Bengal) as a city more prosperou
s than London, vide `Glimpses of World History by Jawaharlal Nehru (Third Impress
ion p.416, chapter entitled `The Indian Artisan goes to the wall ).
When the British conquered India they introduced the products of their mill indu
stry into India, and exorbitantly raised the export duties on the Indian handicr
aft products. Thereby they practically destroyed the handicraft industry in Indi
a. The result was that by the end of the British rule hardly 10% or even less of
the population of India was still in the handicraft industry, and the rest of t
hose who were earlier engaged in the handicraft industry were made unemployed. I
n this way about 30% of the population of India who were employed in handicraft
industry became unemployed, and were driven to starvation, destitution, beggary
or crime (the thugs and criminal tribes were really these unemployed sections of s
ociety). As an English Governor General wrote in 1834, `the bones of the cotton
weavers are bleaching the plains of India . At the end of the British rule, India,
which was one of the most prosperous countries in the world, became one of the
poorest, unable to feed itself, with industrial development stalled (as the Brit
ish policy was to not permit industrialization of India), low life expectancy an
d very low literacy rate. As Angus Madison, the Cambridge University historian p
oints out, India s share of world income fell from 22.6% in 1700 to 3.8% in 1952.
In this connection it may be noted that in the revenue records in many states in
our country one often finds recorded: A son of B, caste lohar (smith), vocation
agriculture ; or C son of D, caste badhai (carpenter), vocation agriculture , or E son
of F, caste kumhar (potter), vocation agriculture , etc. This indicates that the
ancestors of these persons were in those professions, but later they became unem
ployed (although ostensibly they were shown as agriculturists) as British mill i
ndustry destroyed their handicraft. Some people think that if the British had no
t come into India an indigenous mill industry would have developed in India, bec
ause the high development of handicraft industry leads to capital accumulation w
hich is the pre-requisite for industrialization, and India would have become an
Industrial State by the 19th Century, like North America or Europe, but it is no
t necessary to go into this here, as there is no use crying over spilt milk.
In England and other European countries, too, the handicrafts were destroyed by
the mill products, but the handicraftsmen got employment in the mills, whereas i
n India the British policy was to prevent industrialization of India (see Rajni
Palme Dutt s `India Today ) with the result that the millions of handicraftsmen eith
er starved or became beggars or criminals. The Thugs of India or the `criminal t
ribes were those former handicraftsmen who became unemployed.
Handicraft Industry and Mill Industry
In the feudal period there were no engineering colleges or technical institutes,
and the only way to learn a craft was to sit with one s father from childhood and
learn the craft by seeing how he works, with some tips from him. Thus the fathe
r was not only doing the production work through his craft but also teaching the
craft to his son.
This was totally unlike modern times where the teacher in an engineering college
or technical institute is not a producer engaged in some industry. In other wor
ds, in modern times the vocation of a teacher is separated from the vocation of
a producer, but there was no such separation in the feudal age.
In feudal times one had no choice of one s profession, one had to follow his fathe
r s profession, and thus the son of a carpenter (Badhai) became a carpenter, the s
on of a blacksmith (lohar) became a blacksmith, etc. In this way carpenter, blac
ksmith, potter, etc. all became castes. The same thing happened in Europe too in
feudal times (as mentioned above).
Modern Mill Industry
In the modern industrial age the demand for skilled technical personnel is much
larger than in the feudal age, because the demand of goods is much more (due to
increase in population, etc.). Hence the traditional feudal method of teaching a
craft, in which only a handful of persons, (usually the sons of the handicrafts
man), were taught, no longer sufficed for modern society. Now technical institut
es or engineering colleges have become necessary, where a large number of studen
ts are taught the technical skill. Obviously all these students could not be son
s of the teacher. This destroyed the very basis of the caste system in which one
had no choice in choosing one s vocation and had to follow his father s profession.
The caste system, in which one s vocation is chosen by one s birth, is thus totally
outmoded in the modern age.
Today a boy of the badhai (carpenter) caste comes from the rural areas in India
to a city where he becomes an electrician or motor mechanic or takes up some oth
er vocation. If he gets some education he becomes a clerk or even a doctor, lawy
er, engineer or teacher. He does not usually follow his father s profession, and t
his has largely destroyed the basis of the caste system economically.
The caste system is now being artificially propped up socially by some vested in
terests e.g. vote bank politics, but when the basis of an institution has been d
estroyed (by the advance of technology) how long can that institution survive? T
o my mind the caste system in India will not last for more than ten or twenty ye
ars from now (because its very basis has gone).
A modern mill no longer bothers about the caste of the worker it employs, it onl
y sees his technical skills.
The caste system was a social institution corresponding to handicraft industry.
Now that handicraft industry has largely been replaced by mill industry, the cas
te system has today become totally outmoded, and is hindering our progress. The
sooner it is destroyed the better.
Was the Caste System Bad for India?
Many people think that the caste system did a lot of damage to India. This is un
doubtedly true of modern times. But it must also be said that in the feudal age
the caste system did good to India because it corresponded to the feudal occupat
ional division of labour in society (as pointed out above), which resulted in th
e great development of the productive forces (at that time).
It is a myth that the Scheduled Castes of today were always treated with indigni
ty. In fact upto the coming of British rule, these castes were usually in some h
andicraft vocation and were earning their livelihood from that vocation. It was
only when the British mill industry destroyed their handicraft and they became u
nemployed that they began to be treated with indignity. An unemployed man become
s a poor man, and a poor man is not given respect in society.
For instance, the chamars were at one time a respectable caste because they earn
ed their livelihood by doing leather work. It was only when Bata and other compa
nies destroyed their handicraft (and thereby their livelihood) that they sank in
the social ladder, so much so that today to call a person a chamar is often reg
arded as a word of insult (see the judgment of the Supreme Court in Swaran Singh
& Ors. vs. State through Standing Counsel & Anr. [2008(8) SCC 435, JT 2008(9) S
C 60]).
Similarly, other castes whose handicraft occupations were destroyed by the Briti
sh mill industry also became unemployed and thereby fell in the social order.
How will the Caste System be Destroyed?
To my mind the caste system will be destroyed (and is in fact being destroyed) i
n India by (1) The advance of technology (2) The people s struggles, and (3) Inter
caste marriages.
As regards the advance of technology, it has already been pointed out above that
in modern industrial society the division of labour cannot be on the basis of o
ne s birth but on the basis of technical skills. Hence industrialization destroys
the caste system, and in fact the caste system has become weak in a State like W
est Bengal, which was partially industrialized before most other states.
As regards the people s struggles, these are in fact going on everywhere in view o
f the harsh economic conditions in India (price rise, unemployment, etc.). Peopl
e in India are realizing that united they stand and divided they fall, and caste
is certainly a dividing force.
As regards inter caste marriages, I have stated in my judgment in Lata Singh vs.
State of U.P. [2006(5) SCC 475, JT 2006(6) SC 173], that inter caste marriages
are in the national interest and hence should be encouraged.
Answers to this question are generally 'cute' which ask me the question - Am I l
iving in the same India they are living in ? So, let me put some blatant roadsid
e reality in perspective.
My answer to a similar question What is the history of the caste system in South
Asia? is copied below:
There has been a greater debate on what encapsulated what or what initiated
what. After long considerations, most historians accede to an accepted noti
on that Varna encapsulated Jati.
The term caste(root meaning 'pure') is of European origin and both Varna and Jat
i reflect a different history and etymology. They, themselves can not be clubbed
together as one and they are different terms. Neither Jati developed into Varna
nor vice versa. Varna was imposed on a society that was familiar with the notio
n of Jati.
The various Jatis and groups were allotted Varna status to keep the social or
dering intact. The statuses were provided according to the politics and socia
l scenarios. Since, allotting a higher status meant sharing resources, most o
f the groups were allotted with a Shudra status. The lower status was also pr
ovided to continue the availability of labour.
The members of a same group, the Abhiras were given diferrent Varna status - Bra
hman or Shudra.
A striking example is of Lingayat caste in the peninsula. It grew out of a
religious sect but included as a Jati and provided a Varna status.
Varna:
The evolution of the idea of Varna can be found in the Vedic corpus. Since Rigve
da is the earliest literary source, it came to be seen as the genesis of the Var
na system.
The Vedas reflect a Brahmanical view of caste and maintain that Varnas were crea
ted on a particular occasion and remained virtually unchanged since then. The
original text describes a primeval sacrifice and emergence of four groups: B
rahmins (ritual priests), Kshatrias (Warrior aristocrats), Vaishyas(Pastoralist,
cultivator, trader) and Shudra(those who labor for others). The fifth part mell
echas(the 'untouchables') were clans who refused to accept Vedic Brahmanism and
its social ordering. They continued being hunter-gatherers and pastoralists and
formed their own clan societies.
The initial view of Vedas came from Aryan speakers who migrated to South A
sia. A group among them claimed a ritual status and called themselves Brahmins.
The priests held the ritual a authority to legitimize kings and kingdoms.
They were a medium between gods and men which stamped their higher status. Th
ey claimed themselves the purest. The wheels started churning to re-organize
social groups.For a society to become caste based society there has to be thr
ee preconditions. All these three were satisfied with Varna.
1. The society must register social disparities.
2. There has to be unequal access to resources for various groups, maybe on the
basis of perceived qualities or traits.
3. The inequalities should be legitimised through a theoretically irrevers
ible hierarchy and imposition of that hierarchy must be claimed on a supernat
ural authority.
Jati:
The origin of Jatis, on the other hand can be traced back to clans and tribes
in neolithic societies. They were not mentioned until later sections of the
corpus, they don't constitute a development by the Indo- Aryan speakers. The
basic occupations of such clans could be counted on fingers: it was huntin
g and gathering, and later pastoralism and agriculture. A clan could be divid
ed in what one does and it was the initial functioning of occupational division
s. The work and relations were based on kinship and it was not attached to bi
rth. Later, in Ind-Aryan texts(written after the Vedic corpus), the term Jati
(root meaning 'birth') was attached to occupational systems to give it a status
attached to birth.The initial system of Jati was completely different from what
the society offered in modern times.
Coming back to the original question, it is in trend nowadays to mix Jati wit
h Varna, with the former superseding the latter. It solves two major purposes:
1. It still maintains the hierarchy claiming that the Varna was actually chose
n by you, not the other way around. It gives people a reason to follow the hie
rarchy thereby maintaining Varna and its yield.
2. It saves Hinduism/Brahmanism from one of the worst forms of human oppressio
n in human history. Americans are ashamed for their acts of slavery, Germans a
re shameful for their acts during the WW2, Indians were always perfect.
Hi guys, I m late but I wanted to add my input in on this and I wanted to add some
more caste information that many Indians aren't aware of.
The caste system in India is a very ancient form of social stratification that e
volved in Vedic Times, gained more complexity in the Ancient Era and faced addit
ions during Muslim Rule. Since everyone has drained the Hindu Caste System I wan
ted to discuss the Muslim Version of this system and what it means.
Many people are not aware of this but, a caste system does exist among Muslims f
rom South Asia as it does with Hindus. However, the Muslim variant of caste come
s in direct violation of Islam s view as everyone is an equal. The system arose in
the Early Delhi Sultanates as a court adviser suggested a system that parallele
d that of the Hindus that lived in India. The Hindu caste system is based on occ
upation while the Muslim caste system is based on ancestry.
The system goes like this:
Ashrafs (Foreigners who came to India and assimilated):
Syeds- People from the Arabian Peninsula who claim descent from The Prophet Muha
mmad (S.A.W). These people arrived during the conquest of Sindh, trade in Kerala
and the Konkan and Ummayad expansion into Multan.
Sheikhs- People from Arabia, who arrived during the first few successive Delhi S
ultanates as well as the era before Indian Muslim Empires, by trade, conquest or
missionary quests to several regions of the Subcontinent. Hindu Brahmin convert
s automatically became Sheikh.
Mughals- People from Central Asia and Persia. These people came during the Mugha
l Dynasty, and an earlier group arrived during one of the Dehli Sultanates, furt
hermore a southern group from the Deccan arrived pre-Mughal era to form the Bahm
ani and Deccan Sultanates.
Pathans- People from Afghanistan and Pakistan who arrived during the Ghaznawi in
vasions, Delhi Sultanate and Mughal Empire.
Ajlafs (All other converts)
Arzals: Muslim Dalits and No Caste (Caste Renouncers).
Migration and Life after Migration:
A Map of the Migrations looks like this:
The following map depicts the migrations by the Ashrafs (Upper Castes) and their
areas of origin and settlement.
The Ashrafs who migrated to areas like Bengal, Punjab, Tamil Nadu, Gujarat, Sind
h etc. assimilated into the local cultures by adopting customs, language, food a
nd clothing of the Hindus and Newly Converted Muslims. Over a few generations As
hrafs married Hindu Brahmin and Kshatriya women; the Syeds and Sheikhs preferred
to marry convert Brahmins and the Mughals and Pathans married Kshatriya Women.
Since the Ashrafs were not Sufis and orginally converted in the early era of Isl
am when the Ummayads and Abbasids exited they practiced Islam in a more orthodox
way. The Syeds and Sheikhs were the heads of the religious community much like
the Brahmins while the Mughals and Pathans were soliders, and kings much like th
e Kshatriyas.
The Ajlafs were the Sudras and Vaishyas of the Hindu Caste System who remained b
elow the Ashrafs because they lacked the foreign ancestry needed to be an upper
caste Indian Muslim. Their conversion was mostly through the Sufis who swept the
Indo-Gangetic Plain. They maintained their laborious and artisan occupations an
d never got the chance to rise up to parallel the Ashrafs.
The Arzals held on to their culture like the Ashrafs and Ajlafs and converted mo
stly because of the Sufis and the alternative to caste (unfortunately, they coul
dn't escape caste). They remained in their occupations and never rose any higher
than what they were before conversion.
Comparing Hindu and Muslim Castes:
The lines are drawn in a way that shows how parallel the castes are to each othe
r in Hinduism and Islam in India.
But wait .
Just like Hindu castes Muslim Castes don t end here:
There are sub castes, which like Hindu Castes are like Jatis (Ethnicity and Clan
).
Ashrafs:
Syeds: Thangal (Kerala); Harnai (Balochistan); Hassani, Husseini (Punjab); Rizvi
, Naqvi (UP); Dawans (Assam)
Sheikhs: Quraishi, Hashmi, Siddiqui, Farooqi, Usmani, Ansari (Common to all Ethn
icties);Khatris, Qanungoh, Khawajam Rajputs and Saraswat Brahmin
Mughals: Subdivsions over land of ancestry (Bukhari, Samarkhandi etc.)
Pathans: Nasli and Diwani
The Ajlafs and Arzals are still divided in sub-castes from before conversion.
Just like Hindu last names Muslim last names are often derived by caste:
Upper Caste (Ashraf): Quraishi, Hashmi, Siddiqui, Farooqi, Usmani, Ansari, Mirza
, Baig, Khan, Yousufzai, Shah, Naqvi, Rizvi, Syedar, Zamindara etc.
Many people often overlook caste system as one for Hindus only, but Muslims and
other South Asian communities use caste as well. It s something that is embedded i
nto the Subcontinent, even other communities and groups that migrated to India e
mbraced caste.
In Hindu Mythology people were divided on the basis of the kind of work they do.
They were divided into four classes or varnas.
1)Brahmins : scholars , teachers etc (Their job is to attain and spread knowledg
e)
2)Kshtariyas : rulers, kings , emperors etc ( Their job is to rule)
3) Vaishyas : farmers (Their job is cultivation & trade)
4) Shudras : Guys who dont fall under above three (Their job is to serve the oth
er three classes)
If you felt Shudras were the lowest category here , you can't be more wrong as t
here are different set of people who are not even part of these classes and cons
idered untouchables. (Dalit & Adivasi)
Now each of these classes are further divided into subgroups based on different
criteria. For example brahmins are divided based on their gotra. Now one gothra
might be considered above others and only they might be entrusted with jobs like
priests. So again within each of these classes there might be discrimination ba
sed on different aspects.
In ancient India though these are the classes defined , teh system wasn't rigid.
That means a person born in a class can choose to be part of other class. For e
xample Valmiki was a shudra by birth but became a maharshi and authored Ramayana
, to become a Brahmin.
It is only during British regime and their divide and rule policy that the syste
m became rigid and made out to be such a huge issue. However during their rule t
he caste feeling got inculcated in lot of Indians.
After Independence , while putting together a constitution the people involved d
iscussed various ways of coming up with a system to have equal rights for all ci
tizens irrespective of their caste. But there were sections of people who were t
raditionally treated in a very bad way like dalit's and aadivashi's , so giving
equal rights may not be good enough for people like them. At this point citizens
of India were divided into three categories ,
1)Forward Castes
2)Backward Castes
3)Scheduled Castes and Tribes
Based on the history, government of India tried to undo the discrepancy that was
shown to certain classes of people. They introduced maximum reservation for SC'
s and ST's and small reservations for BC's in various goverments jobs and colleg
es thereby giving them a chance to develop themselves. Also other religions like
Muslims , Christians are added to one of these three categories based on variou
s factors.
However after 67 years of Independence , India is still caught up with caste sys
tem though no one would like to agree. It improved to certain extent that there
are no untouchables (i.e. to say physically). But there are still people who loo
k down on lower caste people and treat them as untouchables mentally. Though the
y would let people to be friends with a person from different caste, most of the
parents are not willing to get their child into a marriage with a person of dif
ferent caste. That's the reason for honor killings we see in Newspapers these da
ys.
Though most of the educated youth are moving away from this approach and gettin
g into inter caste and inter religion marriages, we are still not at a stage whe
re we can say that the caste system disappeared.
Though we have rapid industrialization and economic growth in our country , it i
s just helping rich get richer and poor get poorer. This is because the benefits
are not shared equally. For example the reservations for lower castes is being
availed by only certain sections who already became rich by using those reservat
ions before. Economic stature of the lower caste's is not being taken into consi
deration while providing reservation. They have tried to do it with BC's , where
they have divided them into creamy and non creamy and non creamy where BC's wit
h good economic status are part of creamy layer and cant avail reservation. But
when it comes to SC's and ST's no government can dare to do it because of the vo
te bank politics.
The caste system prevails in India. Its sad but true.
Sorry for my long answer.
Source : Caste system in India
India has its history and roots gone back to some thousands of years, various wa
rs, epics had happened. Many Great Rulers,from Lord Sri Rama to Chatrapati Shiva
ji and Jhansi Laxmi Bai, several milleneia had passed. Right from the first exis
tance of the king, Caste System is been living. Before kings, Brahamans used to
lead the society. Even then, Caste system was present but not as much as when Ki
ngs and Kingdoms arrived.
This Caste System Was called Varna System. This was not used to discriminate peo
ple, rather it was created to classify people according to thier work done. Not
only work, each Varna has their own distinct Characteristic which can be found i
n evey person belonging to that Varna.
The Varna System goes as follows:
Brahamana
Khsatriya
Vaishya
Shudra
Brahmana:
Top cader and they lead society. These are majorly known as priests in temple. B
ut the word Brahmana signifies that The one with Knowledge . Brahmanas are only all
owed to study the Vedas, The portal of Immense knowledge. Its because only brahm
ana can understand the purity in them. Thier Mindset is determined to be like th
at. But being a Brahman is not easy and your perspective always matters. Brahman
as are also scientists, Teachers, Preachers, Priests, Ministers, Political and S
piritual advisers to Kings As they Know Vedas It is the law and creator s manual . An
d We Know Knowledge is Devine , Brahamana means one who has knowledge. So Brahmanas
Were given most respect in the society even by the kings, because they are who
keep the kingdom away from downfall. But these days, We humilate them every wher
e we see them, we don t give pinch of respect. Vedas also said, downfall of brahma
na means downfall of the kingdom.
Chanakya, Nagarjuna, Aryabhatta, Varahamihira, Sushrutha, Bharadwaja, angeerasa,
Vishwamitra, etc are brahmins.
Khsatriya:
The One who has power, Majorly Kings, Senadhipathis (Supreme Comander of Army) a
nd warriors. They are destined to rule. Royalty lies in their Blood, they are ve
ry caring about their citizens, also very ferocious. Strong minds and body are t
heir characteristics. Khsatriyas are who protect the nation and take care of cit
izen. Diplomacy, art of warfare, the science of ruling people are some qualitite
s which they posses by birth. Sacrifice and Honour are some of qualities that th
ey have.
lord Rama, Pancha Pandavas, Chandra Gupta Maurya, Ashoka Samrat, Gauthami Putra
Shatakarni, Chatrapati Shivaji, Queen Rudrama Devi and Jhansi Laxmi Bai etc come
into this cader.
Vaishyas:
These are next to Khsatriyas. Merchants, Traders, Landlords, Businessmen come in
to this group. They arre known for their skills in markting and trade. They are
backbone to income of the whole Kingdom. Our country had many Good traders who w
ent to many countries crossing distant seas and passing mountains. Silk Route is
Major trade to remember. Silk from south India to China is only because of our
trading skills. Vasco Da Gama didn t came to india on his own. He followed our Guj
arati Merchant Chandan who is back on his to India from South Africa.
Vasco da Gama followed a Gujarati trader!
Our ship buliding skills were far greater than others, Chandan s ship was three ti
mes bigger than Vasco Da Gama s.
Shudras:
Often Misunderstood as the lowest of all, But it is not the case. They were also
given respect in the society. Remaning People like Farmers, Workers, Artisans,
Infntry etc come into this cader. Without these people, we don t even be able to s
atisfy our basic needs. They work hard like ants, bulding block by block of what
brahmanas research. Even Khsatriya needs army, merchants need workers.
In whole context, our society was well designed, every varna needs other and are
interrelated. If one varna falls, whole society falls.
And There was barter System in our society for some time and coins were introduc
ed. So there nothing such as discrimination based on Caste. But People these day
s need Reservation saying that they are backward. Yeah may be but many others al
so suffer.
Hope this suffering ends soon.
The Indian caste system can be equated to the feudal social model of Europe in t
he medieval ages. There was a nobility (including royalty), the clergy attached
to the church, a community of craftsmen's guilds and traders and finally, the ge
neral lay peasantry. The original caste system of India was identical, and to th
e extent it still persists, it has the same basic structure.
The uppermost caste was the priests or the brahmins. They were followed by the w
arrior caste (kshatriyas), from which the rulers of the states usually came. The
n was the trader class (vaisyas), followed by the peasantry (sudras). Originally
the caste system was flexible and based on actual vocation, But soon it hardene
d into fixed hereditary categories.
It also has had a fair bit to do with racism. In great antiquity, India had alre
ady been settled by dark skinned races, probably descendants of one of the earli
est wave of migrants out of Africa. They developed all the fixed skills necessar
y for civilization, including cultivation of the land, settled agriculture and t
he various crafts.
Then, several thousand years ago (exact date cannot be established with precisio
n), a race of fair skinned barbarians called the Aryans came in from central Asi
a through the Khyber pass and occupied the northern plains to start with. These
people were good at warfare and had their own religion (which later evolved int
o the present day Hinduism) but as wandering tribes they were no good at agricul
ture or the trades.
Therefore, the Aryans placed their own vocations at the top of the social hierar
chy and that of the vanquished population at the bottom. The conquerors and the
conquered have always behaved identically across all times and at all places.
It is noteworthy that the caste system is not just restricted to Hindus in India
. Nearly all followers of the other so called classless and casteless religions
such as Islam or Christianity are relatively recent converts from Hinduism, and
they have very much carried their original caste structures into their respectiv
e communities.
Today, the caste system still persists to the extent that intermarriages between
castes is still not seen as greatly desirable. But the harsher aspects like une
qual socioeconomic opportunity or untouchability have long since been abolished
by law. And the present generations do not pay heed to the intermarriage restric
tions either.
In cities, from my experience, the only time you would come across caste-convers
ations among the "middle-class" Indians is during marriages, or when someone is
looking for an excuse to berate someone else (claiming that person is of an "inf
erior" caste). Religion is often a bigger barrier.
The social historical theory explains the creation of the Varnas, Jatis and of t
he untouchables.
According to this theory, the caste system began with the arrival of the Aryans
in India. The Aryans arrived in India around 1500 BC. The fair skinned Aryans ar
rived in India from south Europe and north Asia. Before the Aryans there were ot
her communities in India of other origins. Among them Negrito, Mongoloid, Austro
loid and Dravidian. The Negrito have physical features similar to people of Afri
ca. The Mongoloid have Chinese features. The Austroloids have features similar t
he aboriginals of Australia. The Dravidians originate from the Mediterranean and
they were the largest community in India. When the Aryans arrived in India thei
r main contact was with the Dravidians and the Austroloids. The Aryans disregard
ed the local cultures. They began conquering and taking control over regions in
north India and at the same time pushed the local people southwards or towards t
he jungles and mountains in north India.
The Aryans organized among themselves in three groups. The first group was of th
e warriors and they were called Rajayana, later they changed their name Rajayana
to Kshatria. The second group was of the priests and they were called Brahmans.
These two groups struggled politically for leadership among the Aryans. In this
struggle the Brahmans got to be the leaders of the Aryan society. The third gro
up was of the farmers and craftsmen and they were called Vaisya. The Aryans who
conquered and took control over parts of north India subdued the locals and made
them their servants. In this process the Vaisyas who were the farmers and the c
raftsmen became the landlords and the businessmen of the society and the locals
became the peasants and the craftsmen of the society.
In order to secure their status the Aryans resolved some social and religious ru
les which, allowed only them to be the priests, warriors and the businessmen of
the society. For example take Maharashtra. Maharashtra is in west India. This re
gion is known by this name for hundreds of years. Many think that the meaning of
the name Maharashtra is in its name, Great Land. But there are some who claim t
hat the name, Maharashtra, is derived from the Jati called Mahar who are conside
red to be the original people of this region. In the caste hierarchy the dark sk
inned Mahars were outcasts. The skin color was an important factor in the caste
system. The meaning of the word "Varna" is not class or status but skin color.
Between the outcasts and the three Aryan Varnas there is the Sudra Varna who are
the simple workers of the society. The Sudras consisted of two communities. One
community was of the locals who were subdued by the Aryans and the other were t
he descendants of Aryans with locals. In Hindu religious stories there are many
wars between the good Aryans and the dark skinned demons and devils. The differe
nt Gods also have dark skinned slaves. There are stories of demon women trying t
o seduce good Aryan men in deceptive ways. There were also marriages between Ary
an heroes and demon women. Many believe that these incidences really occurred in
which, the gods and the positive heroes were people of Aryan origin. And the de
mons, the devils and the dark skinned slaves were in fact the original residence
of India whom the Aryans coined as monsters, devil, demons and slaves.
As in most of the societies of the world, so in India, the son inherited his fat
her's profession. And so in India there developed families, who professed the sa
me family profession for generation in which, the son continued his father's pro
fession. Later on as these families became larger, they were seen as communities
or as they are called in Indian languages, Jati. Different families who profess
ed the same profession developed social relations between them and organized as
a common community, meaning Jati.
Later on the Aryans who created the caste system, added to their system non-Arya
ns. Different Jatis who professed different professions were integrated in diffe
rent Varnas according to their profession. Other foreign invaders of ancient Ind
ia - Greeks, Huns, Scythains and others - who conquered parts of India and creat
ed kingdoms were integrated in the Kshatriya Varna (warrior castes). But probabl
y the Aryan policy was not to integrate original Indian communities within them
and therefore many aristocratic and warrior communities that were in India befor
e the Aryans did not get the Kshatriya status.
Most of the communities that were in India before the arrival of the Aryans were
integrated in the Sudra Varna or were made outcast depending on the professions
of these communities. Communities who professed non-polluting jobs were integra
ted in Sudra Varna. And communities who professed polluting professions were mad
e outcasts. The Brahmans are very strict about cleanliness. In the past people b
elieved that diseases can also spread also through air and not only through phys
ical touch. Perhaps because of this reason the untouchables were not only disall
owed to touch the high caste communities but they also had to stand at a certain
distance from the high castes.
I had my very own theory about, which I would try to present here in simplified
form, to explain what exactly is caste system. I will tell at last, why I am cal
ling it as theory rather than just hypothesis or something else imperfect.
This explanation is mainly for non-Indians to help them understand the Indian ca
ste system, however I think Indians could also understand few things at least, f
rom the explanation, though Indians may take it as absurd at first, but it will
start to make sense at last, at least. So, I would read it fully and slowly.
What is the Indian caste system and how does it works!
It may require a complete book to actually understand it, and I think caste syst
em is difficult to understand even to Indians themselves.
So I will directly come to the point, without much introduction to the topic.
There was a time when anybody can do the job as per their qualities, competence,
knowledge and inclination, just like what we do now, or how the things goes by
regarding the jobs.
Secondly, we all like to have a better life partner, who have better future pros
pects, especially the girls, at least in India. So we search for the boys with h
igh level professions like say Doctor, Engineer, rich businessman, politicians e
tc., in arranged marriage, especially in India. No one like to marry their girl
with the person having low future prospects, at least in arranged marriage betwe
en two strangers. Make arranged marriage culture of India very clear to yourself
, to understand what exactly is caste system and how does it works.
It always worked that way naturally, that everyone like to get their girl marrie
d with the person having better future prospects. But it must be understood that
it only can happen when anyone can do any job or professions as per their compe
tence, qualification, training etc. It was the same way in India too before the
advent of caste system, in ancient times.
Now, think about what will happen if the new rule is laid that says nobody can do
any job/occupation/profession (by giving some logic), and says, one can only do
that profession what his father did ????
What will happen after this new rule regarding occupations laid out, considering
marriages? And also, what will be the change in mentality of people, regarding
the other people of different occupations than themselves? And also, What will b
e the change in social system, due to change in mentality of people, brought abo
ut by change in rule regarding occupation?
The answer to the above three questions gives the idea about what the Indian cas
te system is.
So here is my theory, or say my answer to above questions, and question of what
is the Indian caste system.
When we have the options to do any kind of job, we think this or that kind of jo
b to be of higher or lower status, but when we are left with no options for to d
o any job, and we have to do only one kind of job, then we are likely to force o
urself to think our job to be superior. This can happen mainly to those who clea
rly have higher jobs to do. So those who have higher jobs to do are likely to na
me other jobs to be inferior and shame people deemed to do such jobs considered
to be inferior. Hindu texts already consists of something called Varna System, w
hich classify jobs into 4 categories considering someone s nature and mental incli
nation, and this is not rigid system, but helped and used to develop rigid Caste
System.
This was about everyone who are made to do the occupation what their father s did,
obviously like to think that their occupation to be considered as respectable,
as that is the only way to feel better, as there is no option to do other occupa
tion, as they are forced to do the job what their fathers did. So everyone obvio
usly will raise their voice to earn respectable status. But Varna System used to
clearly define which occupation comes under which of the 4 category, and to whi
ch to consider superior and which to inferior. I think there had been still the
clashes about the interpretation of Varna System, but it is forcefully suppresse
d. And, for suppressing it forcefully, some denigrating and inhumane treatment a
re invented to forcefully show some people to be inferior. Then these inhumane a
nd unfair treatment to show some people inferior became the tradition, and belie
f system. However, there is no support for it in any Hindu scriptures.
So, everyone had been in the need of feeling superior as per their own parental
occupation, and no one wanted to feel inferior from others. There became thousan
ds of classification in terms of occupation. There were many occupations among w
hich there were no clear distinction of superior and inferior. For example: Weav
er and Tailor. But, still they tried to show them as better than other, as they
cannot do others occupation with new rule, Actually, it was not about showing ou
rselves superior, but it was about showing other inferior. So, these 1000s caste
started to think each others inferior, or at least not among them. These 1000s
of occupations to which people belongs to, referred as Castes. There are also su
b-castes there. For example: Oil extracter is sub divided as the one who extract
oil using one bull, and the one who using two bull, so to make it two types of
oil extracter. So it makes two sub-castes within same caste. In the same way, ev
ery castes(occupations) is divided and sub-divided making it 1000s of castes. Ea
ch castes are classified as coming under one of 4 categories of Varna of Hinduis
m, however scriptures don t anywhere talk or support any such division by occupati
ons(castes).
Now comes the question of marriage. Before, anybody can be ready to get their gi
rl/boy married to other boy/girl considering qualities, job prospects, beauty et
c., just like what we do today, because we can do any job. But at that time, aft
er the rule of doing parental job is laid and made rigid, it became clear that b
oy will do his parental job throughout life. No other job is allowed for him, so
his future prospect is pretty clear. So, whose son (father s occupation i.e caste
) one is, became important, and who he himself is became unimportant, because he
is going to do his father s occupation throughout life. So, before giving their g
irl people started asking, what is his father s occupation (caste). This became tr
adition and part of belef and culture. So is the mentality among Indians to this
day, to ask the caste first for marriage relationship. This also never mentione
d in any Hindu scriptures to ask father s occupation before marriage, because Hind
u scriptures simply never discuss father s occupation(caste).
I think marriage between two from different castes(father s occupation) were never
been a problem even after rule about doing father s occupation is laid, because g
irl has to go to boy s home, and there couldn t be any problem if girl s parents are r
eady, especially when the girl is being married to a boy having better occupatio
n. Why would there be a problem? Caste? Caste effects what the boy will do, not
the girl. So there were no problem marrying girl in other caste. But it is obvio
us that parents are less likely to give their daughter to lower caste(father s occ
upation), but like getting her married in higher caste, for her better future li
fe. So they denied giving their girl to lower caste because of his father s occupa
tion. So, the situation is arised where it became difficult to get a girl from t
he family who have better father s occupation. So, the other easy option is gettin
g a girl from the family who have lower kind of father s occupation, because they
will more readily like to get their girl married in such family. So situation be
came, that girls can get married in higher caste but not the lower caste (father s
occupation), for her better future. But here arises another problem i.e. who re
ally is higher or lower caste? As I told you before there is no clear distinctio
n between most caste, that is who is higher and who is lower. For example: Tailo
r and Oil extractor, as both are respectable occupations. But both thought other
to be lower. So one can ask for other people s girl for their son or boy , thinki
ng others to be lower, but cannot ask for others people s boys to marry their girl
with, thinking themselves to be of upper caste. So marrying their girl to other
caste(father s occupation) itself became the matter of upper or lower parental oc
cupation. So people simply denied getting their girl married to other castes(fat
her s occupation), as it was the sign of being lower. So girls became the matter o
f respect to the family. So, another rule came into existence, to not to get you
r girl married to other caste people , as it will prove yourself to be lower fro
m others. I hope everyone are understanding it. Actually there is nothing in Hin
du scriptures directing towards not to get their girl married in lower father s oc
cupation. There are many examples that simply reveals that someone climbed the l
adder of occupation(caste) because of their nature, inclination, aptitude, talen
t etc. before the advent of caste system.
So, here obviously can come another problem. If no one of other caste(father s occ
upation) giving their girl to marry with, then whom to marry with, and have chil
dren from? Here comes the custom, what Hindus follows even today. The only optio
n was that, that one should marry with the caste exactly as of themselves i.e. s
ame occupation, same sub-occupation(caste). This was the only option,i.e. to mar
ry in your own caste, HELPLESSLY. However, there is no rule in Hinduism to only
marry in your occupation(caste)
Now, because the occupations are divided in thousands, including sub-castes, the
re were not much people of same occupation in same locality, which made it diffi
cult to find boy/girl to marry with. So, the people had to take extra efforts to
find boy/girl of own caste(father s occupation), and it was very frustating. It c
ould become more difficult, than the situation when the people of one occupation
will marry with people of other occupation. So it became the rule, that not to
marry with other caste. Now, this was made strict rule that everyone must get th
eir girl/boy to marry in their own occupation(caste), because, if they will marr
y with others then there will be shortage of boys/girls in their own caste, and
in this situation, to whom the other boys/girls of same caste will marry? As eve
ryone want to marry and have their own children, and further their own family. T
his became the moral, that not to marry in other caste. It became the duty of ev
eryone to think of their own people (caste, occupation people) first, and marry
with them only, at any cost. This is the duty and morality that everyone from sa
me occupation must marry with the people belonging to their own occupation(caste
). It became a shameful thing, if you don t follow this morality, and your duty to
your own people(caste people). You will be condemned, shamed, taunted etc. This
mentality is still shown by Indians as it was hardened by 1000s of years of bel
ieving the same thing. There is no place for such morality and duty in Hinduism,
to adhere to people of occupations as of themselves.
Such duty and moralty became the matter of respect for the parents, that their c
hildren must follow these moralites. So parents invented fake morals to indoctri
nate their children to go as per the caste norms anyway, because their respect i
n their caste society depends heavily on which caste their children marry with.
So parents started suppressing everything of their children s desires regarding an
ti-caste marriages anyway, through these fake morals, which was actually made fo
r suppression. So because the morals are made especially for suppression, there
couldn t be any cultural or moral thing in it to understand.
So, when there were too many rules get created, it becomes a Caste System, rathe
r than just a matter of caste or occupation. If you analyze the above points pro
perly, you will realize pthat people get completely trapped to follow Caste Syst
em without any option to deny this system, or raise a voice against it, even if
they are wanted to. The superiority-inferiority complex about each-other s occupat
ion, within this system deepened the feelings of being absolutely different from
others.
So, the caste system is mostly created by circumstances, rather than people. The
only thing that is created by people is rigid occupation on the basis of father s
occupation. The rest is the evolution because of human interference in natural
system, which favours the talent and abilities.
So, after this mentality goes on for few generations, the condition of father s occ
upation for identifying what the son is going to do throughout the life; changed
to ancestral occupation . Ancestral occupation is considered to be what a boy/guy h
ad to do. So, it became even more difficult to change your caste, even if your f
ather changed occupation, as it is no more depends on your father s occupation, bu
t ancestral occupation.
This goes on for 1000s of years, and people forgot the real reason how caste sys
tem came into existence, but followed rules as it is. The rules were in the mind
, but not the reason of it. So this reasonless rules of caste system get hardene
d with time and became tradition, belief system, culture, moral, which requires
no reasoning other than it is a belief.
Today, Indians left following father s occupation as a necessary thing i.e. they m
ostly dont do father s occupation any more, unless forced to do by time i.e. if pe
ople failed to acquire good qualification to place themselves in better job. For
example, if any brahmin(preist) failed to acquire good qualification for better
jobs, he will do his ancestral job of priesthood. But today people can do anyth
ing. But they still follow the other rules which are actually byproducts of rigi
dity of occupation i.e. which was not made as rule, but became so because of mak
ing it a rule to only do your father s occupation. And funny thing is that these r
ules are not going backward as per changed circumstances, with similar sensibili
ty in reasoning, as it was there when caste system was in evolution by circumsta
ntial forces.
The reason for this is, the brain is totally drained by now because of reasonles
s following of rules for thousands of years. The only reason they give is that, t
hese rules are followed since antiquities, and our forefathers also followed the
se moralities. Were they stupids to follow these rules, or all these people, who
are following, except you, are fools? Is it so? So there is lack of reasoning sk
ill among Indians. Indians(mostly) can tell you to be kind to living beings i.e.
animals, insects, especially cow, but they don t do same with human beings, and n
ever ever notice their stupidity by this. So Indians almost lost their reasoning
skills. I can give many examples of serious lack of ability to reason among mos
t Indians, but that could be bitter and offending.
In 1000s of years, there were many changes in India and Indian culture, includin
g invention of social evils and fake morals, degradation of Hinduism, foreign ru
les, loss of philosophical/theological knowledge, inclination to rituals, due to
this caste system. The caste system is still prevalent in India, and caste(fath
er s occupation) is still asked before marriage, even if our father haven t did occu
pation as per caste, because, as I told before, father s occupation is changed to anc
estral occupation after few generation. So, now, caste means ancestral occupation
, not father s occupation. So, how can we change our ancestral occupation, even if
our father haven t did his ancestral occupation? So we are trapped situationally,
mentally in caste system.
If you observe, then you will find that there were no way out for anybody, to go
against caste sysstem, as soon as occupation made rigid, and then the whole sys
tem evolved, because everyone want to marry anyway. And no one has any choice ot
her than follow it, and it was circumstantial based thing.
One more thing I must say, that few caste came into existence not because of the
ir father s occupation, but because of what they eat. For example: Non-veg eater,
rat eater etc. Needless to say, that these caste names are an abuse , and made t
o shame/condemned people. So there may be few caste which have different reason
other than occupation, and I am sure these were made afterward.
SO, WHAT IS THE CASTE SYSTEM
The Caste system is,
Force people do their ancestral occupation (it is not existent today)
Thinking at least few other castes to be inferior
Marry only in caste
Don t marry your son/girl out of caste.
Go with other caste norms, like sub-caste etc.
Think it to be morality, going against which is shameful.
You will condemned, made outcaste, boycotted, or even sometimes killed going aga
inst it.
You should follow how to treat people of so called lowest castes, like cobbler,
sweeper, beggar and those who eat something not acceptable.
If you are from lowest caste(ancestral occupation), you should know how to behav
e with so called upper caste. To do,and not-to-do. What to expect, etc. These ar
e the rules made to forcibly show lower caste as inferiors, even if they disagre
e, and without much reasoning into it.
Who should do the highest kind of occupations like politicians and should rule o
ver different sectors, even if they are not doing their ancestral occupation. Th
is is the mentality actually.
So, this is the caste system.
Everything said above till now, every mentality, every so called values, ways to
show people inferior, inhumane treatment, contradictory beliefs, rules which ar
e existent since 1000s of years, are all observable till now among Indian Hindus
, at least. That is, it is all observable.
These mentalities, moral values, social systems, are the phenomenons, because it
has no real basis, like religious scriptures etc. But it still exists, within a
lmost 75% population(excluding non-Hindus), without proper reasoning, rationalit
y, scriptures etc. These lack if reasoning etc.can even be termed as madness, as
it cannot exists without madness(I can prove it, if anyone can turn On my notif
ications.But know that I had many other interests) So this is the reason why I c
alled it as Phenomena.
It is part of my very own theory about evolution of caste system, and the relate
d things, like social evils, disallowing so called inferior castes from studying
, degradation of Hinduism, evolution of fake moral values etc. I think, these th
ings can be explained by identifying several phenomenon, because most people fol
low these things out of nothing and no valid reason. This can only be considered
as phenomenon, as it is impossible to exist this way, but these thing exist and
followed by 95% people at least, and explaining various inter-related phenomena
, with all strings attached, is rightly be called as theory, I think. These can
be observable even today, regarding mentalities, logic, behaviour, morals etc.
Please refer to the links below for the DNA evidence based research as opposed t
o largely speculative discussions and stories.
a. Research clearly indicate a series of migrations into India with Astro-Asiati
c tribals - followed by Ancient South Indians were the first to come to India.
They were followed by Ancient North Indians. Our caste systems are amalgamations
of all these populations at various levels of castes of the system from the pre
-historic to historic stages.
Reference Genomic view on the peopling of India
b. It is clear that indo-aryans are closer to upper-castes than the lower-castes
. It also establishes that there is no pure ASI anymore in indian mainland, indi
cating that there has been intermingling of ANI and ASI for some period of time.
It may indicate a oppressive master-slave relationship between ANI and ASI.
These studies reveal that the origin of the caste system is mainly rooted in mal
e-mediated Indo-Aryan migration that pushed indigenous Dravidian speaking popula
tions towards southern India and Sri Lanka, and suggest that the Indo-Aryans est
ablished themselves as the upper caste [39]. Further, it has been shown that the
caste populations are closer to Europeans and Central Asians and differ signifi
cantly from tribal populations [34,39,43,45].
c. The intermingled society stratified after some period by endogamy as 'social'
concept rather than geographic separation. Documentation in manu-smriti indicat
es in no uncertain terms the 'dislike' for lower-castes. This is also indicated
by lack of DNA evidence for any intermingling recent 2000+ years or so.
Reference Ethnic India: A Genomic View, With Special Reference to Peopling and S
tructure on nih.gov
a. Castes existed much before colonists or dalit politicians came to india or th
e indian democracy. Both hindu historical text and DNA evidence of separation ex
ists. So any books written about western malice should be dismissed as works of
pure fiction. "Laws of Manu" was not written in England.
b. Women practically played little role in the 'labor of the men'.
Stratification of social structures being a result of division of labor is not b
orne by facts. The kshtriya princess was not master of arms, or the brahmin girl
was not master of vedas or the vaishya girl was not a master of tools at the ag
e of 12-13 when they were married to their husbands. They all perhaps learnt to
- cook, clean and take care of themselves - which is not significantly different
skill. It is in the husband's house that the little girl learns about family tr
aditions. So there was no reason to not marry between the top 3 castes - either
financially, socially or geographically. DNA evidence clearly point to girls get
ting married within the caste. So the factors must have been other than that.
c. Division of labor and social hierarchies existed in many societies but didn't
cause castes. They all did not result in significant social differences in DNA
unless they were backed by a ban on inter group marriages. The Indian system ban
ned inter-caste marriages.
d. Caste was just division of labor/family traditions gone extreme - Caste is no
t just what you do in your family - it determined by how people were treated soc
ially and before hindu law. Specific laws were written to oppress the lower cast
es - see the references below. If it was just division of labor, family traditio
ns then the laws should be same.
e. Caste can be changed by learning/education - Some mythological stories with d
oubtful historical proof are shown as evidence. DNA evidence clearly shows this
is not true.
~
Indian caste system was a result of the hindu belief that
your birth was a result of karma in previous birth.
~~~
Now my turn to speculate... :-)
1. Misunderstanding of passing of physical features by birth - Passing of parent
s 'features' such height, color, strength etc clearly indicated the relationship
between parent and child is related (i.e. not random). This was extended to per
sonality and intellectual ability without thorough scientific reasoning.
2. Misunderstanding of rebirths - The same could be mis-interpreted as proof of
rebirths. The custom of giving ancestor's names to new borns is age old traditio
n in many civilizations.
3. Lack of formal schools - Lack of formal schools implied that children mostly
learn from the parent. Further added 'proof' to the theory that capabilities are
passed on by birth without critical review.
4. Religious sanction for rebirth - The generally held belief that 'capabilities
' was passed on by birth and the concept of rebirth were provided religious sanc
tion.
5. Misuse of Rebirth - Rebirth was used to justify killings - anyone who was unf
airly killed was explained away by the concept of karma & rebirth. Many mytholog
ical stories have this concept of previous birth. Unfairness was explained as pu
nishment for previous birth.
6. Entitlement by birth - This concept was extended to justify division of labor
by capabilities, inherited by birth as result of karma. You are condemned to do
some work because of your previous karma. Brahmins protected themselves with Th
e Laws of Manu - made a separate set of rules for themselves [1] - portraying th
emselves a higher up in the social order by birth.
7. Discouraging inter-caste marriages - Concept of entitlement by birth was inc
ompatible with inter-caste marriages - sometimes color and other features of a l
ower caste would be visible in the child. Therefore it was discouraged and final
ly strictly enforced - resulting in the separation of castes and their DNA over
the years.
8. Lack of social mobility - lack of social mobility caused the sharpened divisi
ons of society and resulted in exploitation - taking away the even the basic hum
an rights of the lowest caste. Many more oppression were committed by subsequent
generations resulting in the current caste system over the period of time.
In conclusion, the caste system was a result of malicious social manipulations b
y upper-castes based on the flawed understanding of birth and genetics.
[1] A sample of translation of hindu The Laws of Manu VIII
270. A once-born man (a Sudra), who insults a twice-born man with gross invectiv
e, shall have his tongue cut out; for he is of low origin.
271. If he mentions the names and castes (gati) of the (twice-born) with contume
ly, an iron nail, ten fingers long, shall be thrust red-hot into his mouth.
272. If he arrogantly teaches Brahmanas their duty, the king shall cause hot oil
to be poured into his mouth and into his ears.
...
279. With whatever limb a man of a low caste does hurt to (a man of the three) h
ighest (castes), even that limb shall be cut off; that is the teaching of Manu.
280. He who raises his hand or a stick, shall have his hand cut off; he who in a
nger kicks with his foot, shall have his foot cut off.
281. A low-caste man who tries to place himself on the same seat with a man of a
high caste, shall be branded on his hip and be banished, or (the king) shall ca
use his buttock to be gashed.
282. If out of arrogance he spits (on a superior), the king shall cause both his
lips to be cut off; if he urines (on him), the penis; if he breaks wind (agains
t him), the anus.
283. If he lays hold of the hair (of a superior), let the (king) unhesitatingly
cut off his hands, likewise (if he takes him) by the feet, the beard, the neck,
or the scrotum.
Contrary to what many people think, Indian caste system in reality is quite comp
lex and confusing. But before answering this question, i will go back to ancient
history of India. Many evidences suggest that Aryan invasion of India false. Th
e term Aryan race itself is a false notion. There are two prominent cultures tha
t use term Aryan in two different contexts. One is Iranian and other is Indian.
Indians used it describe a character trait nobility while Iranians used it to de
scribe ethnicity. It is theorized that precursors to Iranians and their Indian c
ounterparts came from Central Asian highlands i.e. Pamir plateu to Himalayas and
adjacent areas. old Persian scriptures describe these areas as holy lands. What
is interesting is that they also describe Heptahindu (Saptasindhu) as a kingdom
of Aryans. This creates a possibility that Harappa culture was Aryan. Again we
don't know for sure. But what is evident is that there are no signs of invasion
in Harappa culture sights. This Indus-Saraswati civilization declined due to des
ertification and Saraswati changing it's course, which also has many evidences t
o support it. This means one thing, definitely any invasion by Aryans did not ha
ppen. Also the rivers mentioned in rigveda, the oldest scripture of Indian Aryan
s, mentions Ganga in Nadistuti sukta which means that aryans knew and consider G
anga important. Ganga is mentioned first and then going eastward, respective riv
ers are mentioned. This means Ganga was the last large river in while going to E
ast. This makes the area of Indian Aryans as that from Indus Basin to atleast mo
dern Uttaranchal and UP meaning entire modern Pakistan except Baluchistan, Rajas
than, Punjab, Lower parts of Kashmir, Western UP and Uttarakhand were inhabited
by the writers of Rigveda, which makes them Indian. now consider name, Ganga. Li
nguists propose that name Ganga is not of Sanskrit or Indo-Europen origin, nor o
f Dravidian but of Austroasiatic origin i.e a language close to Munda. users of
Austro asiatic languages reside in south east asia. There is also a Dravidian la
nguage family tha probably was present in southern India. It might be closer to
Elamite, an extinct language from Iran but enough evidences are not found yet. A
part from this there are many languages in himalayan region that are from Sino-t
ibetan family. all these languages show influence on each other. So we can concl
ude that four types of people lived in Indian subcontinent as people call them,
Aryans, Dravidians, austro asiatic and sino-tibetan. Over time, these people min
gled with each other. If you check genetics of all the Indians across all the ca
ste, religions, languages and ethnicities, you will find traces of all these peo
ple. This means that there are no people who are of pure Aryan or Dravidian or S
ino-tibetan or Austro asiatic races in India. All have somewhat mixing up with e
ach other. I am not considering people from extremely remote areas here such as
parts of himalayas or of central and south indian hilly region. But such people
are rare. until manusmriti, there are no direct references to caste by birth. Ve
das which are codified into four parts by Vedvyas was a son of a Fisherman's dau
ghter and Kshatriya king. Valmiki muni was also a Fisherman and dacoit. Now the
question is who were Mlechhas, Rakshasas, etc. These were people of different et
hnicity, probably dravidians, sino-tibetans etc. living adjacent to the areas in
habited by vedic people. notably, not all of them were considered enemies. Asura
s were notably the people of same ethnicity as that of vedic people but were con
sidered enemies. Asuras are now identified as people from Iran. The iranians cal
led themselves as worshippers of Ahura (Asura) and called Daevas (Devas) as demo
ns which were worshipped by vedic people. So Asura and Deva conflict cannot be b
rought into Indian Caste debate.
Now who were shudras? Shudras are people who were outcast from society or doing
labor work. But was this decided by birth at that time. answer is NO. not always
. Some parts of India had it. Other's didn't. The same mahabharata that describe
s Karna being rejected by drona due to his lower status also explains Ved Vyas r
ising from lower class to become the most respected rishi. Note that in mahabhar
ata and many other scriptures, brahmanas are said to be poor people, who ask for
alms. Birth based caste system became prominent somewhere in 10th century. At t
his time, India was entering the dark ages. Myopia was setting in the minds of I
ndians of all types and thus as any society degrades. Still, till the 18th centu
ry, people have been elevated in their status. Take for example, Malhararao holk
ar, who was born as a Dhangar, lower caste but elevated to Kshatriya status by h
is virtue. He and his descendants eventually ran kingdom of Indore. Then there w
ere many people from Mahar caste who had senior positions in Maratha army includ
ing that of subhedar. In fact from Varkari era till golden era of Peshwa reign,
Casteism was not really present in Maharashtra. in the declining era of Peshwas,
we again see Casteism rising in maharashtra. interestingly, caste based discrim
ination was also present in Franc and Spain with a caste named Cagot being thou
ght as untouchable. and religion based discriminations by Europeans in the past
were no different.
I have only one conclusion that i can put here, whenever a myopia and ignorance
sets in the society, birth, religion or culture based discrimination starts taki
ng place. Take for example, now slowly caste system is declining but is still wi
despread. this means a lot of ignorance and myopia is still present within peopl
e but thankfully we are doing efforts to eliminate Casteism.
1. There was never any unified 'Hindu religion'. Much like the variations on a l
oose Hindu theme exists across the subcontinent, so does the caste system. For i
nstance, the caste system was institutionalised in Bengal and Assam only after 1
000 A.D. (After the fall of the Buddhist Pala Dynasty). The Tantric sects had ve
ry relaxed caste systems and that was the prevalent non-Buddhist school of Hindu
ism at the time in Southern Bengal.
2. One common theme among the varna system, wherever it exists, is the dominance
of Brahmins, so you may be certain that whoever decided to 'create' it, was Bra
hmin.
3. Proper historical evidence is only available since after the births of Buddha
and Mahavira, but to be more precise, from the Maurya Empire. Buddhism and Jain
ism both arose as reactions to an oppressive caste/varna system.
4. The Rigveda contains one reference to varna. The Dharmashastras and Bhagavad
Gita are supposedly authored during the Gupta period. The argument about caste n
ot being hereditary originally is disputed. While the Vedas were authored in pre
-Buddhist times, the Dharmashastras were authored much, much later. However, Bud
dhist texts clearly mention the presence of a rigid caste system by then. So it
is false to assume that even Rigvedic society did not have a hereditary caste sy
stem.
In short, you really don't know whom to blame because all that happened before r
ecorded history in the subcontinent, but do blame the Brahmins. Regardless of wh
at may be said elsewhere, both the varna and jati systems were disgusting and di
rty by modern standards and any attempt to reappropriate them as otherwise(as si
mple 'division of labour' etc.) should be looked at with suspicion.
To start with there was no Varna or Caste system among the earliest Vedic people
. People used to get into a profession according to their training and aptitude.
Some people got trained in remembering and reciting the Vedas and remembering t
he procedure of Fire Sacrifices. They were called Hota (he who tended the fire),
Udgata (he who sang the sacred chants) etc. The Vedas (the first three - Rik, S
aam, and Yajur) had three parts each - Samhita (the Chant/hymn part), Brahmanam
(the procedural part) and the Aranyak (the procedural part for those who were li
ving an ascetic life in the forests). On the other hand those who used to work a
s warriors were called Khsatriyas. Then there were the businessmen, craftsmen et
c. - the Baishyas and finally the servant of all - the Sudras.
Now, to do something (worship, or fight or business or crafting) one needs train
ing. The easiest way of getting training for many (during those days) was to get
trained by one's father or grandfather or uncles. So it was quite natural that
those born in the family of priests would be easily trained as priests. Same app
lies for others as well. Gradually those who were associated with the worship an
d fire sacrifice etc. - the priests - (probably) started calling themselves (or
others started calling them) 'Brahmans' (or the English spelling "Brahmins") - b
ecause they were versed in the Vedas, specially the Brahmanam part. But that was
not going to carry much weight over time - they understood that. Some of these
guys were pretty clever - after all they were reading and writing all the stuff
that was there to read and write during those days. So some clever priests start
ed writing the next generation of Hindu scriptures - especially the Smritis. One
of the Smritis - Manu Smriti codified the social norm and law books that was t
o govern the Hindu (Sanatan Dharma really) life. Among the Smritis mainly Manu
Smriti made the division even more rigid, prescribed punishments for any transg
ression (actual or superficial) against the authority of the Brahmins, and so o
n. So that is how the Varna System which was just a system of division of labou
r and a little bit of racism (against the native Indians) became the codified,
strict and harsh system of social hierarchy and oppression. By the way Puranas
and Smritis were written long before the Muslims or Europeans invaded India -
so there is no scope of blaming them for contributing the Caste system we had a
lready created. It was all our own doing.
Later on they also wrote Puranas. Among these Brahma Purana was written about Br
ahma and how the earth was created etc. etc. The authors saw the chance was ther
e and so they took it. They wrote into this Brahma Purana that Brahmans or Brahm
ins were created from the face/head of Brahma - and so they are the prime member
s of the society. Khastriyas were written to be created from the hands of Brhama
, Baishyas from the thighs and Sudras from the feet. So the Sudras were the lowe
st creation of all. Interestingly however it was not their original idea (most l
ikely) - Purusa Sukta of Rik Veda already had a similar thing about Purusa, inst
ead of Brahma.
Now who were the Sudras? Most likely those who could do nothing else. But, when
the Aryans came (they may or may not have invaded India, but they definitely mig
rated to India) they displaced the native Indians - those whom we currently call
tribals, living in the deep heartland of india. Some of these native Indians go
t a place in the Aryan society as the Sudras, as the vanquished servants. It mus
t be noted that the Sanskrit word for the Caste system - Varnashram - is derived
from the word Varna, which is also the same word that means 'Colour' in Sanskir
t. So it is highly likely that the skin complexion difference between the Aryans
and the native Indians played a crucial part in naming the system - a system of
differentiation.
Indeed, India has many castes. But in ancient India, the social structure was qu
iet different from the one followed in the present times. Back then, there was n
o caste system. So how did we end up with (so many) castes?
Well, the ancient Indians were divided into various classes/groups, just like ho
w we are now. But, this classification was not based on the family one is born i
nto. It was totally independent of one's background and was determined solely by
one's merit. This merit based categorization is called Varna System.
For instance, a person born in a Brahmin household need not be a Brahmin. He wou
ld be a Kshatriya if he chose to become a warrior/ruler, a Vyshya if he chose to
take on business/trade and so on. In this way, one's Varna is decided by one's
role in the society (one's merit).
People's perception or understanding of Varna changed gradually with time. Super
iority complex set in. People began to assume and believe that one Varna is supe
rior to the others. This prompted them to ultimately create a map of various Var
nas depicting the so called social structure which is in use in our present day
society. As this idea of 'Brahmins>Kshatriyas>Vyshyas>Shudras' grew louder and s
tronger, it spread a sense of pride among the "Upper classes" and insecurity amo
ng "lower classes". This created a barrier among the existing varnas and drove t
hem apart.
With this mindset, a Brahmin wanted his children to become Brahmis, for he thoug
ht the other classes are beneath his own - Pride. A Shudra wanted his children t
o become Shudras, for he was afraid whether they would be accepted into other cl
asses - Insecurity. Pride & Insecurity thus changed the Varna system into the Ca
ste System that we see now.
I hope I answered a part of your question. Although i cannot give you informatio
n on the books, I am sure there are many.
Disclaimer: The answer is solely based on my knowledge/understanding on the shif
t from Varna system to Caste system. It may well be entirely different. I am ope
n to discussion.
This requires a long answer. You will come across two sets of common arguments t
hat you need to take with not pinch, but buckets of salt. The first is an argume
nt that comes from colonially constructed knowledge of India, which is still ver
y prevalent among Indians and is the most common stereotype in the West. This pa
ints caste as a rigid hereditary system. There are some scholars who have oppose
d this view and provided a nuanced view - best references are Nicholas Dirks and
M. N. Srinivas. They will show you that caste was a fluid system that was consi
derably made rigid by colonial rule and by anthropological and later census clas
sifications.
Unfortunately the second set of arguments take off from this opposition and pain
t a very romantic view of India portraying India as being casteless and to stret
ch scholars' nuanced observations to argue as if it was British who created the
caste system. These are usually nationalists who hark back on an ancient romanti
c past where there was no caste system - while that is true, as is true for all
societies over the world that were egalitarian before they evolved into complex
societies, this argument ignores the rigidity of caste system that developed wel
l before the British came. Keeping these two critiques in mind will help you bet
ter navigate the maze of literature and folklore on caste system. Modern Indians
are fed with colonial construction that caste is inherently bad, so they try th
eir best to portray India as casteless, often denying how prevalent caste is in
private lives of people.
Overall, caste is a mix of many things - originally separate tribes joining the
mainstream but maintaining their exclusivity through endagamy, craft guilds, an
d so on. There is also huge variation from region to region, and any sort of gen
eralization should be guarded against. The Varna system is a fictitious creation
that is draped over caste system, and is hardly of any use to you to understand
Indian society. It does work in some parts of the country, but totally fails in
some parts like South India.
Most modern Indians also argue it does not exist because in urban regions, espec
ially metros caste is hardly a reality anymore, especially so with professional
and upper middle class families. Indians from this class are also ignorant of re
st of India's social reality and our school does a poor job of teaching either h
istorical or contemporary social realities. These Indians tend to deny the exist
ence of caste partly because it does not matter to in their lives, and partly be
cause they resent affirmative action that deprives them from opportunities.
Caste is integral to peoples' social identities, wrongly portrayed as part of Hi
ndu religious identity. It would be best if stigma is removed of the caste syste
m, it would allow Indians to acknowledge it as a valid, not inherently bad group
identity, the only bad part of it being hierarchy, which is also true of class
and race systems. If we acknowledge it, then it would make us more ready to ackn
owledge how oppressive it has been to a few sections of people, and there are be
tter chances of us dealing with it than denying reality.
Caste system in india goes back to the ages of MAHABARATHA, DWAPARAYUGA and may
be even well before that. The system followed is written down in ancient book wr
itten by "MANU" (a saint) and it is claimed that it as written as and how it was
narrated by the god himself.
The caste system was not meant be based on birth, but based on the occupation. l
ater the cruel evil minds changed it to how it is with time. Infact if you see,
the caste system in india is broadly divided into 4. Brahmana-learn and teach, k
shatriya - protect the society, vaishya-do trade, sudhra- maintain the society's
essential like cleanliness etc.,. Really speaking a society can run only if the
se four processes are going on be it any part of the world leave alone india or
asia. All the 4 castes are to be treated equally as per the scripts. Later the h
uman mind craving for power and ego started suppressing the caste which they fel
t was least important. This is where the system started smelling foul.
In this modern world caste system is no more than a claim for respect Inside Ind
ian society . But when we enter into the roots of the origin for this overall dr
ama ,Not all caste systems are related to Religion, its typically related to sci
ence and health related protocol used by my ancestors who belong to this land.
As other tribes around the world ,every Indian tribal groups also have their nat
ive diets and native occupation which Identifies individually among other tribal
groups around them.
My caste is "Kodi kal vallalaar "
Vallalaar is nothing but agriculture , Kodi kal mean vine plants, and my origin
belong to a village called Amma petai which is near Salem district , Tamil nadu
state, India. The name comes from Tamil language since we are native speakers of
Tamil.
No matter which part of the world kodikal vallalaar lives in, no matter what job
he/she does ,he/she must be some way or other related to me , I mean we both be
long to the same tribe group , same ancestor who lived in the same village and d
id the same job .
If Obama and Bin Laden belong to the same caste , there are 99% chance for them
be cousins sharing same ancestor .
For example :
Kodi kal vallalaar occupation was betel agriculture .
solzhiya vallalaar occupation was sea shell and coral agriculture .
So by knowing the caste we can Identify the origin of the tribe group they belon
g to .
There are few nameless caste in India which i am not supposed to note here ( the
y will call me rasist If i do :-P ) who are mostly categorized as schedule tribe
s by the government .
Importance in olden days :
Case system is mainly used only during Marriages .
Since the Indian marriage system is purely based on arranged marriages , when th
ey follow cast system bride family or groom family make sure that they both carr
y native gene.
Because there are some diseases / Infections or other health related problems wh
ich are occupation based. And , it is believed when married to same caste people
they make sure that they don't carry/introduce any foreign health( foregin mean
s other tribal group) related issues to their child or to their descents.
Even today In India ,caste system is followed only during marriages .
I am Catholic Christian , My baptist name is lourdes samy . Which is also my gra
ndfathers first name , which is also his grandfathers name.
Proves we are not newly converted catholics, but we care Catholics for centuries
..
I can't get any informations before my great great grandfather , So I don't know
when exactly we are converted , But till date marriages happen in our family fo
llows the caste system .
Fun facts :
My mom is 60 , my dad is 65 they are married before 38 years . It was an arrange
d marriage ( before getting married they are unknown to each other, But both bel
ong to same caste) . Only last year when we attended a marriage of my cousin bro
ther we found that my parents' family are closely related but lost their relatio
nships in time. This is what caste is all about .
TO BE NOTED : there are few caste which are purely based on religion . But even
there, the caste is named by the occupations like serving to god and maintainin
g temples, even there is a caste who guard the temple gold and wealth.
"As decent the job is, as shit they treat other caste "
Trust me in this modern world there is no reason for this caste differentiation
I'm afraid that it's not really possible to answer this question here. Origin of
caste system is one of the most heavily debated topics involving vast number or
references, justifications and theories. I will try to put my point here as bri
efly as possible without sliding into other subjects.
In modern world, the human race is thriving with an purpose of maximizing the co
mforts and luxuries in life. The modern society thus is designed to maximize the
efforts to make every individual lead a comfortable life.
Similarly, caste system also has a purpose. Caste system is a characteristic of
Vedic society and its inherent purpose is the purpose of Vedas. The ultimate pur
pose of vedas is to attain the non-dual state of brahman(a.k.a moksha). Caste sy
stem is designed with a goal of providing environment for people to attain the s
tate of brahman much easily while also providing enough but strictly guarded spa
ce for fulfillment of materialistic desires.
This simple difference in the goals of the modern society and the vedic society
can explain most of the characteristics of caste system and why it contrasts wit
h today's society.
Brahmins are considered the highest caste because they are supposed to perform v
edic rites(shrauta and smartha rites), do yoga sadhana, live very simple life an
d attain moksha. The work they are doing is heart of vedas and hence is regarded
with utmost respect.
The work of all the other three castes is also no-less in anyway. These castes a
re designed to support Brahmins(while supporting themselves).People of these cas
tes are supposed to support Brahmins financially(Brahmins beg for food), politic
ally and in areas that need physical work. This support will help Brahmins to pe
rform their duties without deviating for other needs. Supporting brahmins is sam
e as supporting the existence of vedic practices and hence people other than bra
hmins attain moksha for doing this.
The end note for this is: Whether it is Brahmins, Khsatriyas, Vaisyas or Sudras,
they will attain moksha for fulfilling their duties(kartavyam).
From here we can venture into numerous questions/topics like "Is caste system bi
rth based? If it is, is it fair?", "Contrasts between modern society and vedic s
ociety", "How does caste system work overseas?" etc., but as I said I want to st
ick to the point.
P.S.: I'm not sure if I really answered the question. Details of how exactly cas
te system is put into practice can be only speculated for now but cannot be answ
ered unless there is an authoritative document discussing this.
The Caste system in India started off in the early Vedic Age.
It began as a classification of people into Varnas or Classes. In Sanskrit "Varn
a" means colour.
The Aryans landed in Indian territory somewhere around 1500BC and discovered the
already settled Dravidians in the subcontinent. They mingled with them and star
ted the Vedic civilization but made a distinction on the basis of the skin colou
r.
The initial Varna system only had 2 classes - The Aryans or the fair migrants an
d the Dasas (Dravidians)or the darker natives. The distinction became more broad
er to include professions but restricting the Dasas to the lowest rung. In those
days, everyone followed the same religion called the Sanatana Dharma(the eterna
l religion).
The classes were flexible depending on the occupation of the individual. There w
ere 4 prominent professions hence 4 classes-
a) Brahmins - priests/ teachers
b) Kshatriyas - warriors/kings
c) Vaishyas - commoners/tradesmen
d) Shudras - Barbers, Sweepers, servants(Dasas)
The Shudras mainly consisted of Dravidians and as the distinction lifted off, ev
eryone was free to choose their profession. You were then classified on the basi
s of your profession.
In the subsequent centuries, the class system became more rigid, a new subdivis
ion of Varna called Jati formed. There could be thousands of Jatis under each Va
rna specifically on the basis of jobs undertaken. A jati was essentially a tribe
. This was what we now call "caste". If you were born into a caste, you had to s
tick to its profession. Each caste had a hierarchy in its Varna.
eg.The King's advisor brahmin had a higher status than the temple brahmin and th
e Fisherman caste was higher than the Sweeper etc.
In the Vedic age, people who consumed meat(Cow's meat) and drank liquor etc. we
re considered as degenerates and called untouchables, and were given tasks like
cleaning of human waste. No provision was ever made to include their future gene
rations into the caste system and they were debarred from entering temples. Trib
als were included in it.
The caste system has pretty much remained the same so far.
The Book "Immortals of Meluha" mentions the Varna system of classification when
Jatis were not prevalent and people were free to choose their profession. This m
ight have true in the period prior to 1000BC. Any other historical data in the b
ook is purely fictitious.
Contrary to popular notion, there are actually more than 1000 castes in India.
* Very less conclusive information is known about the Caste system because of co
ntradictions with the historical proof. No perfect theory exists to explain its
origins or when the caste system went rigid, although many claim it occurred lat
e, in the medieval period.
Caste System was first started in very early periods, probably during the time V
edas, were written. In the early days, people were said to belong to a particula
r caste based on the occupation they were doing. All the priests and teachers be
longed to the brahmins.
The warriors, kings, soldiers, rulers were said to belong to the Kshatriyas, who
se responsibility was to protect the country/kingdom and the people.
All the people doing business, handling finances, treasuries were called Vysyas
and the rest were called Shudras.
But I don't think there is anything written in Vedas about people discriminating
, denying rights/benefits to other people based on caste. It was all started by
a few people who wanted to retain power and enjoy the wealth.
The caste discrimination has nothing to do with Vedas, but with people discrimin
ating others based on it.
I think the caste system doesn't hold back India, but its these stupid uneducate
d people, who are obsessed with caste and people who discriminate based on caste
, should be blamed for holding the country back as they do not allow the people
of other castes to get equal rights, benefits and want only people of their own
caste to get the benefits is what is holding India back. Period.
When life begun on earth, there was no system to classify human beings anywhere.
In India and also in rest of world, the idea of caste or groups nurtured when pe
ople started identifying groups of similar habits and interests.
Not only in India, but also in other parts of the world, people were identified
by their places and profession.
For Ex: The name John Von Newmann (Von is a German word that means of)...the nam
e signifies John of "Newmann". Similarly, the name Paul Hatmaker may relate to a
profession. But this is not always true as unlike Indian names many western nam
es are without meanings.
Initially, the classical Varna or Caste was based on one's deeds rather than on
birth. There are examples of scholars (Maharishis) who were not born in Brahman
families. Likewise, there are examples of Kings (who were not born in Kshatriya
families).
As time passed, it changed form and was more towards identifying one's caste by
birth.
Anyway, this is a never ending topic. In my opinion, purpose of caste is not to
compare and analyze but to build self-culture. It has to be for the benefit of t
he society rather than for doing harm.
I am one of those people who believes in the caste system. And I would like to e
xplain it from the perspective that I understand.
But before I go on, I want to request whoever is reading this to leave any assum
ptions they previously might have had about the Indian Caste System and to look
at it in a new light.
Also I would like to make clear that I do not speak of the current caste system
that is prevalent in India (now, only used as an excuse for oppression) but I wa
nt to introduce you to the caste system as explained in the Vedas.
Some clarifications:
- You are not born into a caste. You get to choose it through your Karma.
- All castes are meant to have equal dignity in society.
The Indian caste system was designed back in the olden days to simplify administ
rative procedures and social responsibilities. The 4 castes are -
Shudra - this is the caste serving (positive not negative like slavery) the othe
r three varna/castes
Vaishya - the agriculturalists, traders, cattle rearers etc.
Kshatriya - The military and the administrative class
Brahmin - the Gurus, the thinkers, writers & artists.
The assumption being that we are all born different and we have different capabi
lities & interests so we must be best suited for a certain kind of activity.
That's about it.
The Shudra cleaning the temple is just as important as the kshatriya/policeman c
leaning the streets of crime and just as important as the Brahmin/Artist cleanin
g the minds of hatred.
In fact Lord Krsna, whom we consider to be God himself, was a Vaishya on Earth.
He was a cowherd, that was his duty and he did it even though he was God, the al
l powerful God.
That's a lesson of humility there in the Indian Caste System if you really want
to learn. It's about accepting our current state in life and to try and do our b
est.
We believe it's not what you do, but how you do what you do that defines you. Am
en.
Note: I feel that my answer here might seem to suggest that I endorse the Indian
Caste System in any way, which is not the case. I believe that it's an over sim
plified system and as a system it maybe not appropriate for our times. But that
being said I still believe in the value it's fundamentals have to teach us about
how to live our lives. Which is the whole point anyway.
The answer is quite simple: What happens when a 'shudra' is born to a 'brahmana'
(or a 'kshatriya' or 'vaishya'?) As per Varna system, the brahmin born shudra s
hould take up manual labour (or 'low-profile' jobs) whereas a 'brahmana' born of
a 'shudra' should take up teaching or research work... This would go well only
as long as the people understand the benefit of this. If they start thinking abo
ut the 'wellness' of their wards instead of the society at large, they'll start
tampering with this system... Thus the grading became based on birth rather than
skill or potential.
As people started to marry within the same caste (which is basically a professio
n designation,) the system became more and more stringent and unquestionable - l
eading to all sort of downfall for the society.
Friend, you can read the writings of the revolutionary social reformer Dr. B.R.
Ambedkar for the criticism on Hindu caste system. Books like:-
Who were the Shudras
The Untouchables: Who were they & why they became untouchables?
Philosophy of Hinduism
Riddles in Hinduism
Castes in India - Their Mechanism, Genesis, and Development
The Annihilation of Caste
What Congress and Gandhi
Against the Madness of Manu
Agricultural Cooperative Banks and Farmers of SC, ST, and Other Castes
Essays on Untouchables and Untouchability
Also, books by other writers like Jotiba Phule, Periyar E. V. Ramasamy, Rahul Sa
nkrityayan, Kancha Ilaiah, Bharat Patankar, Gail Omvedt, will help.
On my flight to Boston, I had a amazing conversation with the person seating nex
t to me. Looking at my Tilak Chandlo he asked the normal question about what it
meant etc. Afterwards hr asked me if I was from India. He was a 3rd year undergr
aduate student studying world history, economics and language (Specializing in C
hinese). I told him about the diverse languages we have and the number of period
icals and newspapers published in India is the largest for any country in the wo
rld. Also had a Indian currency with me and showed him the different languages
written on it. Our conversation progressed towards Indian history to which he ca
me up with the caste system. Now I remember all of us were taught that India was
a caste driven society. But the fact my friends is that all the history we have
learned is tampered with by pseudo intellectuals. FYI caste is a derived from
a Portuguese and Spanish word casta !
Ancient India never had a caste system. What we had was a Varna system. It diffe
rs from Caste system as varna is independent of birth and based on merit ! So in
ancient India a farmer's system doesn't necessarily become a farmer . Jatis wer
e never frozen or fixed in India . Same for a warrior(kshatriya), banias and Bra
hmins ! Infact Europe had a feudal system !! And when they came to India they dr
ew a parallel between India's varna system and their Caste system ! The rigved
a clearly states that we all have specialities. We must use it to the maximum ex
tent. And it is not hereditary. They all fulfill different roles. That doesn't m
ean one is more important than other. Like after 10th and 12th some of us took c
ommerce, some engineering and some arts and some medicine ! It is exactly simila
r. Division of labour in society based on your ability, age. That is varnashram.
It isn't hereditary.
They People say we are polytheist - believe in many gods. We aren't ! We are plu
ralists - we believe in many paths to the same god !
Hence a lot of the youth feel " Ohh hindusim is a horrible religion. It segregat
es people ". But these aren't the facts ! It is simply a socio economic stratif
ication of society. In villages the potters son becomes potter not because of he
reditary. But because of lack of opportunities. Give him the ability to code and
he will join Infosys !
My point is we must know this. The media, western indologists have spread this.
And we trust the opinions of Harvard's and the Oxfords more than out very own B
hagwad Gitas and the Vedas.
Well after knowing this the guy sitting next to me was surprised. So please next
time let people know this.
The caste system, as it is now, is very different from its original design. No
w it has become a system designated by birth, which was not the point. The syst
em was first formulated by Manu, an ancient teacher and legislator. It made a l
ot of sense and still does. But over time, and the ego being what it is, the sy
stem got corrupted.
Manu's idea was that all by their nature, due largely to spiritual evolution, co
uld be divided into four general classes. This applied not just to those born o
n the Indian sub-continent, but to all mankind through all time. The classes a
re:
1. Sudras (those whose form of service to society was primarily through physical
labour),
2. Vaisyas (those who could bet serve through the mind skilled workers, trade an
d commerce and general business life)
3. Kshatriyas warriors and rulers (who best could serve as leaders, executives a
nd protectors)
4. Brahmins (those who were spiritually-minded, contemplative, who were inspired
and could inspire others in a spiritual way).
But the system got greatly misused. It was never intended to be a system of bi
rth, ie, you were born into one caste or another. It was a designation determin
ed by one's natural capacities which was clearly seen by the goals one chose to
pursue in life. Those goals could generally be divided into four:
- kama, desire, activities mainly in the senses (sudra),
- artha, gain, getting control of those desires and working to fulfill them (vai
sya),
- dharma, goals characterized by a life of self-discipline and right action, b
asically taking responsibility for one's life (kshatriya)
- moksha, liberation, a life of spiritual striving and teaching.
Whilst a bit of all of them is in everyone, generally one of these goals predo
minates. And as it is natural to all people, every society practices this caste
system to one degree or another, although they don't describe it as so.
All kinds of problems began to arise when the caste system of naturally propens
ity hardened into a caste system of birth. Still, as India works to rediscover
its ancient greatness, inroads are being made into dealing with many of the soc
ial problems caused by a rigid adherence to a caste-by-birth system.
When you say India, it becomes very difficult to sort out as at the surface leve
l India has many different religions. We have Hindus, Muslims, Chrishtians, Sikh
s, Jains, Buddists, Zoroastrians, Bahai faith, Daoism (Ancient Chinese religion)
and also Jews. And all religions have their own castes. Hindus have Brahmins, K
shatriyas, Vaisyas and Shudras. Muslims have Shia, Sunni, Ahmedia (and some more
I guess I am unaware of). Christians have Catholics, Protestants, Penta-cross (
I not sure). Other all religions I have no idea.
Since I am a Hindu, I will write down as much I know about Hinduism and Hindu ca
ste system.
Firstly, we have the most ancient categorization, the Varnas. They were create a
round 5000-8000 years ago. So our scriptures say, there are three types of tende
ncies: Satvic, Rajasic and Tamasic. The Satvic tendency makes a person independe
nt, fearless, want to learn all the time, want to explore more about themselves,
sharp witted, wise, aloof, ambivert, less of a talker and more of an observer a
nd overall noble. Rajasic tendency is about extrovert, social butterfly, outgoin
g, glamour-loving, attention seeking, self-gratification and mortal pleasures. T
amasic tendency is about ignorance, aloofness, holding grudges, laziness, easily
manipulated.
Based on the above qualities, there are 4 types of people in the world. (Its a p
sychological discrimination. Just like how psychiatrists describe 4 types of peo
ple: Group A, group B, C and D).
So these 4 types of people are
1. Brahmin (Totally Satvic)
2. Kshatriya (Satvic+ Rajasic)
3. Vaishya (Rajasic+Tamasic)
4. Shudras (Totally Tamasic).
So due to their nature, these castes are assigned a profession which suits them.
So,
1. Brahmins = scholars, priests, teachers, doctors, hermits, scientists/inventor
s (like Aryabhatta) etc.
2. Kshatriyas = Kings, warriors, knights, fighters, combatants, rulers etc.
3. Vaishyas = buisnesmen, tradesmen, enterprenures, accountants etc.
4. Shudras = farmers, peasants, potters, fishermen, servants etc.
Why so? Well imagine a man who can be easily manipulated (Shudra/Tamsic tendency
) be made the King. He is counselled by someone who thinks of personal benefits
(Vaishya), the empire will fall. And that is why it is preferable to not choose
a different profession rather than one assigned to you.
In today's world there was a great scam in India where a doctor illegally used t
o operate homeless people and sell out their kidneys. I donno the name of the do
ctor, but he is someone who shouldnt have been given a chance to learn medical s
cience. But how do we decide who becomes what?
Thats why comes birth. Just like a mango tree will bear a mango and a coconut tr
ee will bear a coconut, similarily a father's character is passed down to his so
n. Hence a particular caste was later seen by the family background, the caste o
f father. There were strict codes not to mix them as two people of different nat
ures will sure have a difficult marriage.
But still we have exceptions. We have intermixed castes too. They are formed by
the union of two different Varnas. For example Suta, a caste made of the inter m
ixture of Brahmin and Kshatriya. This caste is mentioned in Mahabharat and peopl
e often believe this caste to be that of Charioteers. But thats not true, its an
intermixed caste.
There are some castes which are formed by some oaths taken by our ancestors. Kay
astha is one such. The legend has it that Parshurama (a hermit avatar of Lord Vi
shnu) went on a fierce man-slaughter of all the evil Kshatriyas. One of the Ksha
triya rulers who was seemingly powerless begged to be spared for his wife was pr
egnant. Parshuram spared him on a promise that from this day on he and his succe
ssors would never touch the sword, nor rule. They shall be commoners. Thus this
caste called Kayastha was born. Kayasthas lived like commoners although having t
he qualities of Kashtriyas. They became accountants of kings, ministers, tradesm
en, philosophers, poets etc.
Now among these castes we have various communities or called Gotras. Some famili
es have rules that you cannot marry in the same gotra. While some families stric
tly forbid you to marry in different Gotras. However Gotras are not upper/lower
and its more about family differences.
Varnas are however mentioned upper and lower. Brahmins and Kshatriyas are seen a
s upper castes and are highly honored. The remaining are seen as lower castes. M
ost people will think its about power, but Brahmins used to be essentially poor
as they survived on begging. Yet Brahmins were considered as highest caste and k
illing a Brahmin was considered a sin of the highest order. Actually it was more
about loosing a wise, intelligent, noble soul than a mere person.
So this is how Hindu caste system is. For other religions I still have to find o
ut. This all I know about Hindu system. There may be clashes of opinions and I a
m open to that. But I may not answer worthless arguements.
Let me first refute the theory that Varnas were by "quality". In those days, the
re were no standardized ways of ascertaining qualities. There were no impartial
ways of making a judgement on the children. There were no common school system.
In order to enter a school system itself, you needed "birth". For example Karna
could not enroll to the schools which the 5 brothers and 100 cousins were able t
o attend just by birth. A person of Viswamitra (or was it Vasista? I do not know
the story well) belonged to a kingly class but to become a brahmin, he had to u
ndergo tough tests! But did the sons of the neighborhood Brahmins go through the
se tests? Nope. Did the failed Brhamin boys become Sudra boys and married Sudra
girls? Nope. Such a system based on qualities did not exist! Practically, it was
not possible. Everything was by birth. HOWEVER, the society might have expected
such qualities from the castes as mere expectations game!
Varnas might have come after the castes (Jathies would have come first actually)
. The Rig Veda is very vivid. It presenta a scenario where Aryans fought and sub
dued Dasus and subjugated them. Dasus were of different color and language. This
is how the castes came and then the Varna came perhaps as a super groupings.
Any great invention has both positive and negative effects like the two sides of
the coin. As long as the positive outweighs the negative, one can safely continu
e to use it, and when the coin (the effect of the invention) flips causing more
damage than good, it has to be discontinued' Now just absorb this and remember t
his through out this answer.
Let's just understand the cause for the development of a society.
Humans have observed that instead of a single person doing all variety of work,
we could collaborate and each of us doing a specialized job lead to a higher eff
iciency and productivity. Now the knowledge a person had acquired during the pra
ctice of the skill during his life-time was passed down. That started the divisi
on of labor. So, in India, the Caste-System was developed to sort people into th
at division of labor, so as to help that knowledge be passed down to the right p
eople (who are having an aptitude for it) and selectively group together so as t
o let a skill develop.
But as it usually happens with all good systems over long periods of time, some
people stopped following the code and tried to steer the system being advantageo
us to them. Initially it was only based on profession and skill. But soon people
(especially those with significantly higher valued skill-set) started to train
their biological off-springs to boost their chances of being in that professiona
l group(caste). Over the decades, it has changed more from an aptitude based pas
sage of skill to a birth based passage skills. There in comes negatives of the s
ystem, the caste group was gradually being majorly conferred to the off-springs
of those who were in the same caste in the previous generation than to those wit
h ancestors of different caste.
Often, our immediate reaction to a sudden crisis helps us save ourselves. Our res
ponse to gradual crises that creep up upon us, on the other hand, may be so adap
tive as to ultimately lead to self destruction. Similarly the Caste-System which
was devised to be beneficial to the society soon started turning into hindrance
for the society. Over the centuries, caste became the tool of oppression.
Now after millenniums of similar changes, soon it turned totally a birth based p
aradigm rather than a work-ability based paradigm.
That is the Indian caste-system in short
I had a Pilipino colleague while I worked in Malaysia. I asked him about his cas
te. He did not know his caste. This is true with most of the countries other tha
n India. He said he is 50% Pilipino, 25% Chinese and 25% Vietnamese. His father
was born out of Chinese, Vietnamese parents who married a Pilipino.
Brahmin is an upper most caste in India.
Traditionally in India, son or a daughter of a Brahmin family automatically is c
onsidered to be a Brahmin.
In olden days, scriptures divided Hindus in to four sects based on their work pr
ofile. They were Brahmin (intellectuals), Khatriya (warriors), Vaishya (merchant
s) and Kshudra (helpers). Marriages were strictly within castes / sub-castes. As
per the scriptures, caste movement from one caste to other, was intended / allo
wed based on the profession of the next generation. This means a Brahmin s son, if
he became a trader will become Vaishya. However, this was not practiced. Who wo
uld like to be demoted? Brahmins wrote interpretation of scriptures in Sanskrit,
a language which was not understood by other castes. Interpretation was conveni
ently done to favour themselves. Lower caste families, in turn were not allowed
to become Brahmins in spite of their being Brahmin by purity of thought, nobilit
y of action. A Kshudra, for instance, was not permitted to become a priest in th
e temple nor conduct a public pooja. Rules were polluted to encourage practice o
f untouchability (to ill treat Kshudras) harmful to the society. In India, Brahmin
s can easily be known based on the family names causing ease of discrimination.
In the recent times, inter caste marriages have become common thing in educated
middle and higher class society. Brahmin boy or a girl marrying a lower caste gi
rl or a boy is initially frowned upon by Brahmin parents but is later being acce
pted as they do not seem to have a choice.
These days, youngsters prefer to go to a profession which is more paying and wil
l quickly improve their standard of living. Thus it s quite common to see a Brahmi
n businessman (doing Vaishya s work) or a Kshudra writer, poet or an artist (doing
Brahmin s work).
It s only because Kshudras historically have for long time, remained poor due to n
ature of the work (less paying), that they continue to be comparatively economic
ally backward. Poverty forces them to terminate education of their children and
make them work for living at lower age, leading to poor literacy and continuing
economic backwardness. They thus still remain in this evil vicious circle. This
is despite Government efforts to offer them concessions in education and jobs.
Time is not far, when the caste lines will become further thinner and eventually
, families will be formed purely on the basis of complementary professions or ec
onomic status, cris-crossing today s hereditary caste lines.
As India moves up the value chain economically, like other developed economies,
Literacy and affluence will improve. This will lead to Kshudras also joining the
inter caste marriage band wagon.
Caste system in India will get diluted with literacy in the years to come.
The Caste system of India is perhaps one of the most misunderstood and deplored
societal arrangements of the world today. Many Indians and most westerners perce
ive the caste system as a societal evil that has been instrumental in the highe
r castes exploiting the lower ones through the ages. While it cannot be denied t
hat the caste system in India has been grossly misutilised lately in serving the
ego of the so called 'higher caste' , it is worthwhile investigating how the Ca
ste system came into existence in the first place , how the society was divided
into the various castes, what was the system intended for and most interestingly
, how it facilitated the overall for development of the Vedic society. Let us no
w find out what the vedic scriptures have to tell us about the subject.
Bhagavad Gita, which is regarded as the essence of all vedic literatures, descri
bes the qualities of the people belonging to the four castes:
Peacefulness, self-control, austerity, purity, tolerance, honesty, knowledge, wi
sdom and religiousness these are the natural qualities by which the brahmanas work
.
[B.G. 18.42]
Heroism, power, determination, resourcefulness, courage in battle, generosity an
d leadership are the natural qualities of work for the ksatriyas. [B.G. 18.43]
Farming, cow protection and business are the natural work for the vaisyas, and f
or the sudras there is labor and service to others. [B.G. 18.44]
In addition to this, Krishna also says :
It is better to engage in one s own occupation, even though one may perform it impe
rfectly, than to accept another s occupation and perform it perfectly. Duties pres
cribed according to one s nature are never affected by sinful reactions. [B.G. 18.4
7]
So what makes a person Brahmin, Kshatriya, vaishya or Sudra ? Is it his birth? I
s it his upbringing ? or is it his qualities?
Krishna says in the Bhagavad Gita that he has created this system:-
catur-varnyam maya srstam
guna-karma-vibhagasahh
tasya kartaram api mam
viddhy akartaram avyayam
Translation- According to the three modes of material nature and the work associ
ated with them, the four divisions of human society are created by Me. And altho
ugh I am the creator of this system, you should know that I am yet the nondoer,
being unchangeable. (Bhagavad Gita 4.13)
So the Vedas recognize different people have different skills and qualifications
, but it is no by birth, it is by guna [qualification] and karma [work]. So if s
omeone born of a sudra [worker] father becomes qualified [guna] and works as [ka
rma] a brahmana he should be accepted as a brahmana. In the same way if the son
of a brahmana doesn t have the qualifications of a brahmana or work as a brahmana
then he is not a brahmana. There are so many examples of this in the Vedic scrip
tures.
A BRAHMANA CAN EASILY FALL DOWN, WHILE A SHUDRA CAN EASILY RISE UP
If a person considers himself to be a Brahmana by birth but engages in [such thin
gs as] taking care of cows, buffalos, goats, horses, camels, or sheep, or acts a
s a messenger, tax collector, businessman, painter [artist], or dancer, he shoul
d be considered as not a real Brahmana, even though he may be very expert or pow
erful.
(BP, 38.36-37)
Brahmanas who have deviated from the path of righteousness as propagated by the s
criptures are to be considered fallen [from their social status], even though th
ey may belong to a very aristocratic family, and have performed all the required
purificatory rituals, and carefully studied the Vedas. No amount of accomplishm
ents gives one the right to justify sinful behavior. (BP, 38.42-43)
Thus, it can be understood how a Brahmana can become a Shudra, a Shudra can becom
e a Brahmana, a Kshatriya can become a Brahmana or a Vaishya, and so on. (BP, 38.
47)
For example, Vyasadeva was the son of a fisherman s daughter, his father Parashara
was born from a woman who was a dog-eater. Shukadeva was born from a female parr
ot, Vashishtha was the son of a prostitute and others sages like Kanada, Shringi,.
Mandapala, and Mandavya all had questionable births, and yet all were highly qu
alified Brahmanas, and recognized as such.
In the Srimad Bhagavad Gita ( 4.13 ), the Lord states : According to the three mo
des of material nature and the work ascribed to them, the four divisions of huma
n society were created by Me. And, although I am the creator of this system, you
should know that I am yet the non-doer, being unchangeable. He clearly points out
that this classification is based on not on birth but on the qualities, conscio
usness and abilities of an individual
I beg your pardon but caste system WAS not dirty. It was one of the best way to
decide sharing of Duties. People who teach or do sacrificial rites are Brahmin,
people who were in charge of defense and protection of clan are Khsatriya. Peopl
e in the field of commerce were Vaishya and Shudras were people engaged in labor
ious job.
Now understand that it was a time when there were no IIT or other technical inst
itutes.
Now best way to pass on knowledge of certain trait was to pass it on to next ge
neration. It was supposed that the son of a blacksmith was better fit for the ro
le of blacksmith than Goldsmith.
It was all equal. And only one who was above the all four castes was he/she who
had attained supreme knowledge and he/she could be anyone.
The problem aroused when people start to discriminate other for the job they do.
They started thinking themselves superior than others. They also started to sto
p the exchange of talents between castes. And that is the root of all issues.
So you see caste system itself was not dirty, it is human nature which degraded
it in this way.
Hinduism doesn't speak about Caste system. It speaks about the Varna system. Va
rna system was similar to today's class category system(e.g Class 1 officer, Cla
ss 2 officer). There were four Varnas namely..
Brahmins: Consisting of Priests, teachers and Preachers.
Kshatriyas: Consisting of King, governor, warrior and soldiers.
Vaishyas: Consisting of cattle herders, agriculturists, businessmen, artisan and
merchants.
Shudras: Laborers and Service providers.
People belonged to particular Varna according to their profession. A son of a Sh
udra could become a Brahmin and A son of a Kshatriya could become a Vaishya. Thi
s entire system was job oriented. Now take this example...
Will an IAS officer look down upon a laborer?
The answer will be "YES". A person holding High position will never befriend a p
erson who is lower to him.
The same thing happened in ancient times. Brahmins started looking down upon Shu
dras because they held a lower position. This created a rift between different V
arnas. This lead to formation of hierarchy.
Now, all the Priests, Teachers and Preachers belonged to Brahmin Varna. They wer
e supposed to look after the religious practices, scriptures. They were responsi
ble for transferring Vedic scriptures to next generations until they were writte
n down. As they started looking down upon lower Varnas, "some" of them corrupted
some scriptures in their favor. They corrupted religious texts(like Manusmriti)
. Now this corrupted knowledge was transferred from I generation to another. Soo
n it became caste system.
So, basically Varna system was for good purpose but it took a wrong turn. Varna
was allocated according to what we do and not according to whom we were born....
P.S: Try finding out the meaning of you caste in local language. It will most of
the time be associated with a profession...
I'm taking on a unique perspective on the issue of caste. Seeing it in the angle
of many ethnic groups.
As for the many communities in India called castes, they aren't castes. They are
distinct tribal communities with unique histories, cultural and social traditio
ns. Their tasks spanned across the four Varna system. Some major ethnic communit
ies in India are Rajputs, Jats, Ahirs, Brahmins and Banias. Note that these trib
es span across religious, sectarian, linguistic and regional divides. This is wh
y all of the world's 60 million or so Brahmins are all just one tribal community
with different sectarian, religious and linguistic divisions. The Brahmin peopl
e did all tasks from latrine work to scholarly work. These tribal communities ar
e better known as Jati. This division works much like the tribal system of Pakht
uns or Balochis.
Some tribal communities such as the Kamma/Kapu and Reddy people of Andhra Prades
h and Telangana or the Mudaliar and Pillai or Tamil Nadu are tribes withing the
Tamil and Telugu ethnicities. Some tribes, such as the Rajput people, are so big
they are ethnicities unto themselves.
Punjabi is an ethnic community with tribes like Jats and Khatri. Bengali are an
ethnic community while Kayastha and Brahmins are tribal communities that fall un
der the Bengali ethnicity.
Doing a campaign of promoting inter-caste/tribe marriage would amalgamate all of
India's unique cultures and traditions into one. This would be a disaster. Rath
er to stop the discrimination, we should treat the SC communities such as the Ch
amar, Valmiki, Bhangi, Mahar, Mazhabi, etc with respect. This isn't a social cla
ss discrimination. This is selective violence against certain ethnic groups that
has to stop.?
I am a an ethnic Tamil and tribally Brahmin whose sect is the Sri Vaishnava ideo
logy. I am not taking this perspective to uphold a superiority complex. I don't
hold such supremacist thoughts. I am expressing concern for how intercaste marriag
e is being promoted. Intercaste marriage will not solve discrimination. Rather, ac
knowledging the discrimination and violence the downtrodden tribal communities f
ace and stopping such incidences from occuring will solve the discrimination, vi
olence and torture the downtrodden Dalit communities face.
Manusmriti .. I guess .. Divided people into 4 varnas .. Caste system was not f
ound in India earlier, we had only varnas..Caste came into existence after the B
ritish occupation of INdia. Caste - derived from the italian word Castos or Cost
os !! Varna's were earlier change able and people used to change from one to oth
er.. Also there was no up and down among varnas all the 4 classes were treated e
qually..
Hundred and thousands of year back, there were no caste and religion.
Initially, rulers divided people on the basis of work to run their administratio
n well.
Some were given to study and were called pandit/ bramins.
Some were given to cultivate land and they were called as bhumiyar.
One who make foot wear were called chamar, etc
And there next generation did the same work and there work later became caste.
It comes from a deep sense of correlation between a person's job and their intri
nsic worth in society. Casteism takes it a notch further and entire families are
put into one caste (thereby making job and status hereditary). Casteism makes i
t difficult for lower income lower case jobs to me move up. It's highly anti mer
itocratic.
In my ancestral home, my eldest aunt hired a maid from a lower caste and she had
been around for almost 40 years. Pretty much every one in my parent's generatio
n treated her like shit. I respected her a lot, her work ethic inspired me. Indi
a has a custom to touch an elders feet as a sign of respect. I touched her feet
during a festival. She was startled, higher caste people never touch a lower cas
te person's feet. My parents flipped out and later disciplined me and many elder
s chastised me. I stopped respecting the vast majority of them and never touched
any elderly relatives feet from then on.
Indians are deeply entrenched in this worldview, and this kind of behavior is co
nsidered normal. I hope this explains the concept.
The modern caste system in India, which has rightly been outlawed in India,is a
perversion of the original Vedic social system.
Many secular people like to judge the original Vedic social system according to
the values and prejudice, they have been taught in the Western culture they grew
up in. But the Vedic social system - varnashram dharma - is to be found all ove
r the world.
Krishna says:
According to the three modes of material nature and the work associated with the
m, the four divisions of human society are created by Me. And although I am the
creator of this system, you should know that I am yet the nondoer, being unchang
eable. (Bg. 4.13)
In all human societies one can observe four types of human beings - the worker-t
ype (skilled or unskilled), the merchant and business-type, the worrior and stat
esman-type, and the intellectual, priest or philosopher-type.
These four human types are to be found in all societies, and the varnashram soci
al system, or the caste-system as it is infamously called, is merely a scientifi
c description and organization of these different human types in society.
It is noteworthy, that Krishna says that the different human types are not to be
determined by birth, but by one's ability and bodily tendency. Besides, before
the Americans after WWII replaced the old traditions with their Coca-cola and Ho
llywood culture, people in Europe followed the varnashram system. The Church gav
e direction and defined the moral and ethics. The king ruled and enforced. The m
erchants and farmers traded, grew food, and created economy, and the worker, art
ist, and musician worked and entertained.
That the Church by time became corrupt and abused its power, is a different matt
er. The same thing happened in the Varnashrama social system in India, where the
brahmins began to misuse and distort the system.
In an ideal society, the state governs in accordance with the directions of the
sages and priests. But modern society is being run by the economy. It's the merc
hants who rule society and establishes its values and norms. That's why modern s
ociety is on its way over the brink.
Society can be likened to a body. The brahmins (the intelletual, the philosopher
, the sage, the priest, and the teacher) are the head of the body. The Kshatriya
s (the warrior, the king, the politician, military, and police) are the arms. Th
e vaishyas (the farmer, the merchant, and the banker) are the belly; and the shu
dras (the worker, the skilled worker, the artist, the musician, the actor, and e
veryone who serves the other castes) are the legs.
The body is meant to be directed by the head. The function of the arms is to pro
tect the body. The stomack's function is to nourish the body and distribute ener
gy, and the function of the legs is to move the body here and there.
The modern Coca-cola society is a culture that is run by the belly. The merchant
s are in charge. It ought to be the head, but the modern society is more or less
head-less. Or the head is governed by money. The present social body is bereft
of a goal in life and long term-vision. It just stumbles along according to the
dictation of its senses. Such a society, harmful and destructive as it is, natur
ally won't be allowed to dominate the world for long.
Nature is quite capable of regulating herself. That's why at the present moment,
the modern western civilization is in the process of being demolished by nature
. It is too harmful and destructive to nature and her inhabitants to be allowed
to go on.
Krishna says:
This material nature, which is one of My energies, is working under My direction
, O son of Kunti, producing all moving and nonmoving beings. Under its rule this
manifestation is created and annihilated again and again. (Bg. 9.10)
In addition to all the excellent answers given here, I would like to add one mor
e citation from our sastras which is the following hymn:
Janmana jayate sudrah
Samskarat dwij ucchte
Ved pathanat bhavet viprah
Brahma jnana iti brahmanah
Which means that, by birth every one is of a lower caste and after that your cas
te will be upgraded based on your thoughts and deeds. If your thoughts and deeds
are noble you are determined as upper caste.
In the process of evolution of Caste system, as said by Balaji Viswanathan, the
caste system may be built upon the profession of the people to which they belong
.
I want to make it more humble, even before 2000 years ago.. In the gurukula syst
em the guru was the person who choose the caste to a person, caste was not by bi
rth..
by guru how was the caste choosen?
The person who was physically strong was chosen to be kshatriya.(to protect dhar
ma)
The person who mentally very strong with knowledge was chosen to be brahman(to c
heck the welfare of the society and guide them in proper way)
The person who was not that mentally strong but was capable of knowledge was cho
sen to be vaishya(in trade to complete the needs of society)
The person who was not mentally or physically strong was sent to the shudras whe
re he would serve the rest of the people.(to create a balance in the society)
Later after Mughals invaded india, this caste system became intense due to the c
onversion methods of kings and gap grew larger in the society.
The caste system was a system to catagorise people on their skills. It was an an
cient Vedic system of knowing a persons trait. It was never hereditary, and not
like the system we know it today. The word cast is not even Indian it is Portuge
se. When the Eurpoeans came they saw the system we had and classified it on the
standard they believed, a class system.
This was never the way the system worked, but, as with all ideas given to us by
the colonialists we took it to another level and made it our own and felf that p
rivaledge and systems to catagorise people were for the best. This worked well f
or the British to hold onto India to keep a division between the people. As with
Indian culture we are very good at absorbing culture and ideas and integrating
it within our own culture whether it be good or bad.
Every society has their shares of fools, So do we, Some Hindus quote Manusmriti
as divine law given by Manu, but they are just Idiots who knew nothing about Hin
duism.
Manusmriti is a Puranic period text, with no religious significance, composed by
some unknown author using the name of Mythical character Manu.
The character Manu was mentioned in very few puranic period texts.
Manu was a central character in Puranic period mythical story of The great flood ,
as progenitor of the mankind, The flood story was told in Mahabharat (Mahabharat
containing 100000 verses is Puranic period edition of original Jaya-Bharat whic
h has just 8000 24000 verses compiled during Vedic period)
The myth of the great flood can be found in every part of the word on every cont
inent in every culture, Its origin is unknown, but one can not deny the fact tha
t no such flood story is mentioned in any of the Vedic texts.
None of the Vedic texts - Rigveda, Yajurveda, Athavaveda, Samvaveda, Samhita, Br
ahmana, Aranyaka, Upnishads, Vedanta, Vedanga etc. - Ever mentioned Manu, Even R
emotley there is no reference of Manu.
Smriti texts has no religious significance, they are just authors views on thing
s or his interpretation or commentaries, and can be changed according to the sit
uation or you can write your own Smriti.
Varna is different from Caste system
Varna is determined by your Karma, whereas Caste divides people by birth.
Varna system -
When doing my service to the society I m shudra,
When earning for my family and contributing to the society I m vaishya,
When defending my nation, protecting my people, fighting against injustice, help
ing others I m khastriya
In knowledge I m Brahmin
Caste system -
The Practice of Caste system started with the decline of Vedic theology and its
Varna system during the Puranic Period and rise of Puranic theology, Initiated b
y some corrupt Brahmins and Brahminical institutions who colluded to maintain th
eir superiority and dominance in the social system and to further secure it for
their future generations. To support this various mythical scriptures were writt
en in the form of Puranas and Smritis.
These Puranas and Smritis were Influenced by Dominating Elite class, Religious S
ects and Cults, Local folklore's and Legends.
New Deities were created with a mythical stories to promote their policy of domi
nance and schemetically degrading of the Vedic Gods again with the help mythical
stories as they are threat to their ploy and existence.
Various corrupt social practices came to existence like Casteism, Superstition,
Rituals, Changes in cultural Norms, Customs and Traditions.
In the beginning, the indian caste system was based on occupation and for easy a
dministration. But later on, people started following the caste system mainly fo
r the benefits that one can get by using the name of their caste.
Traditionally the people from higher castes(kings,etc.) were given more benefits
than the people in the lower castes. Later when the government was set up, it g
ave benefits to the traditioanlly discriminated groups in two ways:
1. Weak preferential treatment- This gives the people of the traditionally discr
iminated group an advantage over equally qualified memebers of the other groups
2. Strong preferential treatment- This gives the people of the traditionally dis
criminated group an advantage over more qualified memebers of the other groups
The caste problem wont be over until all these preferential treatments are stopp
ed. But if that happens, many of the politcians and people in power will lose th
eir positions because they all have used this preferential system to acquire the
ir power. So they will try their best to keep this system going.
1. As Hindu belief goes there were 8400000 total species ( yonis) from which sou
ls could take birth.
2. You start your journey from the lowest level in terms of intelligence and bod
y size, gain experience and ascend upward s.
3. When you reach the stage where you are human. God decide to teach 4 ways of l
iving.
4. First he puts you in shudra form. You have to learn different Kala or skills
like artist, musician, artisan, dancing, craftsman. This is your part of cultura
l building.
5. Then you come to be known as vaishyas. The people related to business and sex
. God teaches you how to earn money in abundance.
6. Then you become Kshatriya. The warrior and king. You now have skills and know
the art to earn money. It is your time to start defending dharma with artha or
money. Money must be used now as protector of dharma.
7 Now you become bhramin. You know how to protect dharma.It is time to preserve
and maintain it, preach and spread it.Nullify a dharma and seek for higher realm
s.
8. You now become vairaggi ( sadhu and sanyaasi), who now has to transcend back
to god and regain the soul form of knowledge like god, and introspect all his pr
evious births.
This is the original message of varna system, which is given by spiritually real
ized and god, which is distorted as human creation. The varnas are different sta
ges of human advancement towards realizing god as human is the best form to do t
hat. But it is true that some times you transcend even before being human.
1)Yes,it is a social system,which ensures to identify the man based on the ident
ity of his family occupation.
2)But,as per hindu sashtra one can not change their occupation. If it is changed
,it is considered crime, and the person envicted for penelisation as per manu sm
urati.
3) now a days, person can change his occupation,due to the implementation of mod
ern constituion of india. But his old identity, based on their forefather occupa
tion remains intact,this identity is caste.
4)based on caste identity those who belongs to service profession,they are restr
icted to study and they are discriminated based on their caste.
5)here,inter caste marrieges are not allowed as per hindu scriptures.they are co
nsidered varna-sankar.means intermingling of race.
According to Hindu mythology, there were originally four major castes based on t
he body parts of Purusha, mankind s original father-figure. The hymns of the Rig-V
eda state:
When they divided Purusha how many portions did they make?
What do they call his mouth, his arms? What do they call his thighs and feet?
The Brahman [the highest caste] was his mouth, of both his arms was the Rajanya
made.
His thighs became the Vaisya, from his feet the Sudra was produced.
Thus, the priestly Brahmans, the highest caste, were supposed to have originated
from Purusha s mouth, his highest part. The governing, or warrior, class (Kshatri
ya or Rajanya) came from his arms. The merchant and farmer class, called the Vai
sya, or Vaishya, originated from his thighs. A lower caste, the Sudra, or Shudra
, or laborer class, resulted from the lowest part of the body, his feet.
Over the centuries even lower castes came into existence, the outcastes and the
Untouchables, or as Mahatma Gandhi called them more kindly, the Harijans, or pers
ons belonging to the god Vishnu. Although untouchability has been illegal in Indi
a since 1948, the Untouchables still have a very hard existence.
In the course of time, the castes multiplied to match just about every professio
n and artisanship in Indian society. This ancient caste system, which keeps ever
yone in his or her social place, is in reality also racial and includes distinct
racial types varying from what is known as the [light-skinned] Aryan to the [dar
ker-skinned] pre-Dravidian stocks. Varna, or caste, means color. The first three cas
tes were Aryans, the fairest people; the fourth caste, that comprising the dark-
skinned aborigines, was non-Aryan. (Myths and Legends Series India, by Donald A. Ma
ckenzie) It is a fact of India s life that the caste system, fortified by the reli
gious teaching of Karma, has millions of people locked into perpetual poverty an
d injustice.
Dwapar Yuga i.e the one in which Mahabharata happened was the beginning of the V
arna system gradually turning into caste system,for instance the injustice and h
umiliation Karna and Eklavya faced.
Satya yuga i.e during Lord Rama's rule,there was an interesting system in which
you got your caste according to your merit in Gurukul.And that's the reason we s
ee 'some' Bramhins even nowadays speaking ill of Lord Rama.Because even Raavan w
as a Brahmin......
Now as Kalayuga started and is reaching it's peak this caste system is becoming
more and more concrete and our dear politicians are using it for their vote bank
s by spreading hate for other castes,or by providing reservations for some caste
s.
I really doubt whether the concept of VARN is correctly understood. People alway
s consider caste or religion and sometimes equates this to VARN. Other someone e
quates this to the work done by person. NO! VARN is different. Every person is s
eparate individual. Caste (jaati) is some thing which got documented and declare
d which may not correct. You would always surprised to see someone documented sh
udra but clever , documented as kshatriya but timid, documented as vaishya but n
ot in business , documented as brahman but not so clever. This uniqueness of a p
erson can be proved by VARN which is present in your 'Janmkundali'. Because a do
cumented (caste) shudra could be of a Brahman varn and vise varsa. So caste term
inology is not correct. And this 'varn' terminology need not to be considered as
measure of superiority or inferiority, but for self realisation, and progress o
f life as individual and of society and to create win-win situation. Because the
important 4 are equally important for all - dharma, artha, kaam and moksha. Hen
ce varn need to be considered and not some documented category. At the max caste
can be considered as workstream. That's why earlier there were 'Gurukuls' where
pupils had to serve ashram and learn without considering any workstream concept
. Later this documentation got introduced due to wrong belief that son of king a
s next king & gurukuls vanished. And now a days there are hell lot of workstream
s aka castes with lot of differences like veg-nonveg n general lifestyle. And th
ere is a war happening with aggressive marketing and senseless publicity for res
pective workstreams. Hence reservations came for so called minorities to show fo
olist things as correct ones.
When the varn is identified as in your Janmkundali, all things would get answere
d and you will get answers of many chaotic questions in the life. So next time w
hen you come across to some contradiction, try to get the info of varn from janm
kundali. Of course other factors are there to interfere but this is main. :)
Do you know concept of blood group? So there are different groups. A family may
have ppl with diff blood groups. None is considered superior or inferior to othe
r and I never seen any incident of burning the book of blood analysis or unneces
sary tension. VARN is similar. Let's see how many generations it will take to un
derstand this simple thing.
the arrival of caste system as we know it today had happened with the avent of b
rahminism .
the dharmic religion was bending towards the budhist and jain doctrines away fro
m the structure where the brahmins held power over the society .
this caused major concerns to the brahmin oligarchy . they started to use their
influence to aid the brahministic kings against the non brahministic ones .
the shivite vaishnavite conflict helped them spread their influence through prox
i wars against jain kings
as for the caste system , the misinterpretation of the varna system was used as
an excuse for the oligarchy to strengthen its power-base
this spread of castism reduced the strength of the indian society which played r
ight into the hands of the oligarchy . the era of the puppet kings began .
this finally caused the destruction of the subcontinent in the form of lack of u
nity within our society when barbarians began to invade our lands
It didn't - it's just tribalism, and somehow during British rule the english wor
d "caste" was applied to it. Many status-conscious Indians love to ape others an
d adopt words coined by them. When India's film industry grew, we wanted to call
it "Bollywood" in order to imitate the famous Hollywood film industry. During B
ritish rule, we wanted to ape our British masters in every way, so that when the
y boasted of their feudal system we then tried to boast of our "caste system" --
really just petty tribalism dressed up with a fancy phrase. The British have si
nce left, and we are left with the folly of our imitative adopted phrases, which
we're too complacent to challenge, and which have in the meantime been co-opted
for class warfare purposes.
I agree with Shubhankar, that cast system should be benefit for the society but
now a days cast system in India is only used to take advantage of reservation.
Bhagwad Gita wanted Varna System but Brahmins made into a caste system in order
to consolidate their position in Varna system, they misused their position and
caste system became a part of our hindu culture.
it should be abolished just like Untouchability by out Constitution;Article 17A
should be proposed to do this.Hope Modi does it as soon as possible
I didn't read that best seller but I posses some idea about the development of t
he caste system.. What I believe is that like today there are professors, politi
cians, administrative officers, business men, clerks and other lower category wo
rkers are there, the caste system was no different than that.. You will find in
most of the cases doctor's son will become doctor, professor's son also becomes
professor, this way for some generation Brahmans became brahmans which is nothin
g but a higher post like professor or minister.. later some people started this
as a caste system for their own benefit..