AN TNTRODUCTION TO CASTE SYSTEM IN INDIA

               EACH AND EVERY INDIAN IS EQUAL IN EYES OF OUR  MOTHER INDIA NO       BRAHMIN,NO KSHATRIYA, AND NO DALIT.....

The caste system in India is a system of social system  which has pre-modern origins, was transformed by the British Raj,and is today the basis of resrvation in India. It consists of two different concepts, varna  and  jati  which may be regarded as different levels of analysis of this system.

Varna may be translated as "class," and refers to the four social classes which existed in the  vedic society , namely brahmins, kshatriya vaisya and shudra . Certain groups, now known as  dalits  were historically excluded from the varna system altogether, and are still ostracised as untouchables.

Jāti may be translated as caste, and refers to birth. The names of jātis are usually derived from occupations, and considered to be hereditary and  endogamous , but this may not always have been the case. The jātis developed in post-Vedic times, possibly from crystallisation of guilds during its feudal era. The jātis are often thought of as belonging to one of the four varnas.

Although the varnas and jatis have pre-modern origins, the caste system as it exists today is the result of developments during the Islamic rule (from 13th century), particularly during the collapse of Mughal era and over the British colonial regime in India The collapse of Mughal era saw the rise of powerful men who associated themselves with kings, priests and ascetics, affirming the regal and martial form of the caste ideal, and it also reshaped many apparently casteless social groups into differentiated caste communities.The British Raj furthered this development, making rigid caste organisation a central mechanism of administration. Between 1860 and 1920, the British segregated Indians by caste, granting administrative jobs and senior appointments only to the upper castes. Social unrest during 1920s led to a change in this policy. From then on, the colonial administration began a policy of positive descrimination by reseving  a certain percentage of government jobs for the lower castes.

   

                                                                                                                                                                          New developments took place after India achieved independence, when the policy of caste-based reservation of jobs was formalised with lists of Scheduled Castes (Dalit) andScheduled Tribes (Adivasi). Since 1950, the country has enacted many laws and social initiatives to protect and improve the socioeconomic conditions of its lower caste population. These caste classifications for college admission quotas, job reservations and other affirmative action initiatives, according to the Supreme Court of India, are based on heredity and are not changeable. Discrimination against lower castes is illegal in India under Article 15 of its constitution, and India tracks violence against Dalitsnationwide.

Though caste is considered as dominant feature of Hinduism, in Indian context, it has influenced other religions too like Christianity, Islam, Judaism and Sikhism in the Indian subcontinent.

Vedic varnas

The varnas originated in Vedic society (ca.1500-500 BCE). The first three groups, Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaishya have parallels with other Indo-European societies, while the addition of the Shudras is probably a Brahmanical invention from northern India.

The varna system is propounded in revered Hindu religious texts, and understood as idealised human callings. The Purusha Sukta of the Rigveda and Manusmriti's comment on it, being the oft-cited texts. Counter to these textual classifications, many revered Hindu texts and doctrines question and disagree with this system of social classification.

Scholars have questioned the varna verse in Rigveda, noting that the varna therein is mentioned only once. The Purusha Sukta varna verse is now generally considered to have been inserted at a later date into the Vedic text, probably as a charter myth. Stephanie Jamison and Joel Brereton, a professor of Sanskrit and Religious studies, state, "there is no evidence in the Rigveda for an elaborate, much-subdivided and overarching caste system", and "the varna system seems to be embryonic in the Rigveda and, both then and later, a social ideal rather than a social reality". In contrast to the lack of details about varna system in the Rigveda, the Manusmriti includes an extensive and highly schematic commentary on the varna system, but it too provides "models rather than descriptions". Susan Bayly summarises that Manusmriti and other scriptures helped elevate Brahmin in the social hierarchy and these were a factor in the making of the varna system, but the ancient texts did not in some way "create the phenomenon of caste" in India.

Untouchable outcastes and the varna system

The Vedic texts neither mention the concept of untouchable people nor any practice of untouchability. The rituals in the Vedas ask the noble or king to eat with the commoner from the same vessel. Later Vedic texts ridicule some professions, but the concept of untouchability is not found in them.

The post-Vedic texts, articularly Manusmriti mentions outcastes and suggests that they be ostracized. Recent scholarship states that the discussion of outcastes in post-Vedic texts is different from the system widely discussed in colonial era Indian literature, and in Dumont structural theory on caste system in India. Patrick Olivelle, a professor of Sanskrit and Indian Religions and credited with modern translations of Vedic literature, Dharma-sutras and Dharma-sastras, states that ancient and medieval Indian texts do not support the ritual pollution, purity-impurity premise implicit in the Dumont theory. According to Olivelle, purity-impurity is discussed in the Dharma-sastra texts, but only in the context of the individual's moral, ritual and biological pollution (eating certain kinds of food such as meat, going to bathroom).Olivelle writes in his review of post-Vedic Sutras and Shastras texts, "we see no instance when a term of pure/impure is used with reference to a group of individuals or a varna or caste". The only mention of impurity in the Shastra texts from the 1st millennium is about people who commit grievous sins and thereby fall out of their varna. These, writes Olivelle, are called "fallen people" and considered impure in the medieval Indian texts. The texts declare that these sinful, fallen people be ostracized. Olivelle adds that the overwhelming focus in matters relating to purity/impurity in the Dharma-sastra texts concerns "individuals irrespective of their varna affiliation" and all four varnas could attain purity or impurity by the content of their character, ethical intent, actions, innocence or ignorance (acts by children), stipulations, and ritualistic behaviors.

Dumont, in his later publications, acknowledged that ancient varna hierarchy was not based on purity-impurity ranking principle, and that the Vedic literature is devoid of untouchability concept.

Jātis

Jeaneane Fowler, a professor of philosophy and religious studies, states it is impossible to determine how and why the jatis came in existence. Susan Bayly, on the other hand, states that jati system emerged because it offered a source of advantage in an era of pre-Independence poverty, lack of institutional human rights, volatile political environment, and economic insecurity.

According to Gupta, during the Mauryan period guilds developed, which crystallised into jatis in post-Mauryan times with the emergence of feudalism in India, which finally crystallised from the 7th to the 12th century. However, other scholars dispute when and how jatis developed in Indian history. Barbara Metcalf and Thomas Metcalf, both professors of History, write, "One of the surprising arguments of fresh scholarship, based on inscriptional and other contemporaneous evidence, is that until relatively recent centuries, social organization in much of the subcontinent was little touched by the four varnas. Nor were jati the building blocks of society."

According to Basham, ancient Indian literature refers often to varnas, but hardly if ever to jātis as a system of groups within the varnas. He concludes that "If caste is defined as a system of group within the class, which are normally endogamous, commensal and craft-exclusive, we have no real evidence of its existence until comparatively late times."

Genetic studies

A recent series of research papers, by Reich et al. (2009), Metspalu et al. (2011), and Moorjani et al. (2013), make clear that India was peopled by two distinct groups ca. 50,000 years ago, which form the basis for the present population of India. These two groups mixed between 4,200 to 1,900 years ago (2200 BCE-100 CE), whereafter a shift to endogamy took place. According to Reich et al.,

Strong endogamy must have applied since then (average gene flow less than 1 in 30 per generation) to prevent the genetic signatures of founder events from being erased by gene flow. Some historians have argued that “caste” in modern India is an “invention” of colonialism in the sense that it became more rigid under colonial rule. However, our results suggest that many current distinctions among groups are ancient and that strong endogamy must have shaped marriage patterns in India for thousands of years.

GaneshPrasad et al. (2013) studied "12 tribal and 19 non-tribal (caste) endogamous populations from the predominantly Dravidian-speaking Tamil Nadu state in the southernmost part of India."According to GaneshPrasad et al., southern India was socially stratified already 4,000 to 6,000 years ago, which is best explained by "the emergence of agricultural technology in South Asia." GaneshPrasad et al. conclude from their genetic study:

The social stratification (in Tamilnadu) was established 4,000 to 6,000 years ago and there was little admixture during the last 3,000 years, implying a minimal genetic impact of the Varna (caste) system from the historically-documented Brahmin migrations into the area.

The reliability of genome studies in discerning endogamy and caste practices in South Asia have recently been challenged. Nicole Boivin, an archaeologist and South Asia scholar at Oxford University, writes, "the findings of the genome studies [on caste] need to be treated with substantial caution, if not outright skepticism based on problems concerning both the genetic patterns and their interpretation.

                                  A GROUP OF DALITS IN A VILLAGE OF MAHARASTRA 

Second urbanisation (500-200 BCE)

Peter Masefield in his review of caste situation in India, as described in the Nikāya texts period of Buddhism (3rd century BC to 5th century AD) notes that anyone could in principle perform any profession. These Buddhist texts identify some Brahmins to be farmers and in other professions. The text state that anyone, of any birth, could perform the priestly function,^[107] and that the Brahmin took food from anyone, suggesting that strictures of commensality were as yet unknown. The Nikaya texts also imply that endogamy was not mandated. Masefield concludes, "if any form of caste system was known during the Nikaya period - and it is doubtful that it was - this was in all probability restricted to certain non-Aryan groups".

Classical period (320-650 CE)

The Chinese records of 7th century AD on India make no mention of any caste system.

The Mahabharata, whose final version is estimated to have been completed by about 4th century CE, discusses the Varna system in section 12.181. It offers two models on Varna. The first model describes Varna as color-based system, through a character named Bhrigu, "Brahmins Varna was white, Kshtriyas was red, Vaishyas was yellow, and the Shudras' black". This description is questioned by Bharadvaja who says that colors are seen among all the Varnas, that desire, anger, fear, greed, gried, anxiety, hunger and toil prevails over all human beings, that bile and blood flow from all human bodies, so what distinguishes the Varnas, he asks? The Mahabharata then declares, according to Alf Hiltebeitel, a professor of religion, "There is no distinction of Varnas. This whole universe is Brahman. It was created formerly by Brahma, came to be classified by acts." The epic then recites a behavioral model for Varna, that those who were inclined to anger, pleasures and boldness attained the Kshtriya Varna; those who were inclined to cattle rearing and living off the plough attained the Vaishyas; those who were fond of violence, covetousness and impurity attained the Shudras. The Brahmin class is modeled in the epic, as the archetype default state of man dedicated to truth, austerity and pure conduct. In the Mahabharata and pre-medieval era Hindu texts, according to Hiltebeitel, "it is important to recognize, in theory, Varna is nongenealogical. The four Varnas are not lineages, but categories.

Adipurana, an 8th-century text of Jainism by Jinasena, is the earliest mention of varna and jati in Jainism literature.

Jinasena does not trace the origin of Varna system to Rigveda or to Purusha, but to the Bharata legend. According to this legend, Bharata performed an "ahimsa-test" (test of non-violence), and during that test all those who refused to harm any living beings were called as the priestly varna in ancient India, and Bharata called them dvija, twice born.Jinasena states that those who are committed to principle of non-harming and non-violence to all living beings are deva-Brāhmaṇas, divine Brahmins. The text Adipurana also discusses the relationship between varna and jati. According to Padmanabh Jaini, a professor of Indic studies, Jainism and Buddhism, the Adipurana text states "there is only one jati called manusyajati or the human caste, but divisions arise account of their different professions".The caste of Kshatriya arose, according to Jainism texts, when Rishabha procured weapons to serve the society and assumed the powers of a king, while Vaishya and Shudra castes arose from different means of livelihood they specialized in

Late classical and early medieval period (650 to 1400 CE)

Scholars have tried to locate historical evidence for the existence and nature of varna and jati in documents and inscriptions of medieval India. Supporting evidence for the existence and nature of varna and jati systems in medieval India has been elusive, and contradicting evidence has emerged.

Varna is rarely mentioned in extensive medieval era records of Andhra Pradesh, for example. This has led Cynthia Talbot, a professor of History and Asian Studies, to question whether varna was socially significant in the daily lives of this region. The mention of Jati is even rarer, through the 13th century. Two rare temple donor records from warrior families of the 14th century CE claim to be Shudras, one states that Shudras are the bravest, the other states Shudras are the purest. Richard Eaton, a professor of History, writes, "anyone could become warrior regardless of social origins, nor do jati - another pillar of alleged traditional Indian society - appear as features of people's identity. Occupations were fluid." Evidence shows, states Eaton, that Shudras were part of the nobility, and many "father and sons had different professions, suggesting that social status was earned, not inherited" in the Hindu Kakatiya population, in the Deccan region of India, between 11th to 14th century CE.

In Tamil Nadu region of India, studies by Leslie Orr, a professor of Religion, states, "Chola period inscriptions challenges our ideas about the structuring of (south Indian) society in general. In contrast to what Brahmanical legal texts may lead us to expect, we do not find that caste is the organising principle of society or that boundaries between different social groups is sharply demarcated." In Tamil Nadu the Vellalar were during ancient and medieval period the elite caste who were major patrons of literature.TheVellalar even rank higher in the social hierarchy than the Brahmins.

For northern Indian region, Susan Bayly writes, "until well into the colonial period, much of the subcontinent was still populated by people for whom the formal distinctions of caste were of only limited importance; Even in parts of the so-called Hindu heartland of Gangetic upper India, the institutions and beliefs which are now often described as the elements of traditional caste were only just taking shape as recently as the early eighteenth century - that is the period of collapse of Mughal period and the expansion of western power in the subcontinent."

For west India, Dirk Kolff, a professor of Humanities, suggests open status social groups dominated Rajput history during the medieval period. He states, "The omnipresence of cognatic kinship and caste in North India is a relatively new phenomenon that only became dominant in the early Mughal and British periods respectively. Historically speaking, the alliance and the open status group, whether war band or religious sect, dominated medieval and early modern Indian history in a way descent and caste did not."

Medieval era, Islamic Sultanates and Mughal empire period (1000 to 1750 CE)

Early and mid 20th century Muslim historians, such as Hashimi in 1927 and Qureshi in 1962, proposed that "caste system was established before the arrival of Islam, and it and a nomadic savage lifestyle" in the northwest Indian subcontinent were the primary cause why Sindhi non-Muslims "embraced Islam in flocks" when Arab Muslim armies invaded the region. According to this hypothesis, the mass conversions occurred from the lower caste Hindus and Mahayana Buddhists who had become "corroded from within by the infiltration of Hindu beliefs and practices". This theory is now widely believed to be baseless and false.

Derryl MacLein, a professor of social history and Islamic studies, states that historical evidence does not support this theory, whatever evidence is available suggests that Muslim institutions in northwest India legitimized and continued any inequalities that existed, and that neither Buddhists nor "lower caste" Hindus converted to Islam because they viewed Islam to lack a caste system. Conversions to Islam were rare, states MacLein, and conversions attested by historical evidence confirms that the few who did convert were Brahmin Hindus (theoretically, the upper caste). MacLein states the caste and conversion theories about Indian society during the Islamic era are not based on historical evidence or verifiable sources, but personal assumptions of Muslim historians about the nature of Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism in northwest Indian subcontinent.

Richard Eaton, a professor of History, states that the presumption of a rigid Hindu caste system and oppression of lower castes in pre-Islamic era in India, and it being the cause of "mass conversion to Islam" during the medieval era suffers from the problem that "no evidence can be found in support of the theory, and it is profoundly illogical".

Peter Jackson, a professor of Medieval History and Muslim India, writes that the speculative hypotheses about caste system in Hindu states during the medieval Delhi Sultanate period (~1200 to 1500 CE) and the existence of a caste system as being responsible for Hindu weakness in resisting the plunder by Islamic armies is appealing at first sight, but "they do not withstand closer scrutiny and historical evidence".Jackson states that, contrary to the theoretical model of caste where Kshatriyas only could be warriors and soldiers, historical evidence confirms that Hindu warriors and soldiers during the medieval era included other castes such as Vaishyas and Shudras.Further, there is no evidence, writes Jackson, there ever was a "widespread conversion to Islam at the turn of twelfth century" by Hindus of lower caste.Jamal Malik, a professor of Islamic studies, extends this observation further, and states that "at no time in history did Hindus of low caste convert en masse to Islam"

Jamal Malik states that caste as a social stratification is a well studied Indian system, yet evidence also suggests that hierarchical concepts, class consciousness and social stratification had already occurred in Islam before Islam arrived in India. The concept of caste, or 'qaum' in Islamic literature, is mentioned by a few Islamic historians of medieval India, states Malik, but these mentions relate to the fragmentation of the Muslim society in India. Zia al-Din al-Barani of Delhi Sultanate in his Fatawa-ye Jahandariand Abu al-Fadl from Akbar's court of Mughal Empire are the few Islamic court historians who mention caste. Zia al-Din al-Barani's discussion, however, is not about non-Muslim castes, rather a declaration of the supremacy of Ashraf caste over Ardhal caste among the Muslims, justifying it in Quranic text, with "aristocratic birth and superior genealogy being the most important traits of a human"

Irfan Habib, an Indian historian, states that Abu al-Fadl's Ain-i Akbari provides a historical record and census of the Jat peasant caste of Hindus in northern India, where thezamindars (tax collecting noble class), the armed cavalry and infantry (warrior class) doubling up as the farming peasants (working class), were all of the same Jat caste in the 16th century. These occupationally diverse members from one caste served each other, writes Habib, either because of their reaction to taxation pressure of Muslim rulers or because they belonged to the same caste. Peasant social stratification and caste lineages were, states Habib, tools for tax revenue collection in areas under the Islamic rule.

The origin of caste system of modern form, in Bengal-region of India, may be traceable to this period, states Richard Eaton. The medieval era Islamic Sultanates in India, he writes, utilized social stratification to rule and collect tax revenue from non-Muslims. Eaton states that, "Looking at Bengal's Hindu society as a whole, it seems likely that the caste system - far from being the ancient and unchanging essence of Indian civilization as supposed by generations of Orientalists - emerged into something resembling its modern form only in the period 1200-1500".

Post-Mughal period (1700 to 1850 CE

Susan Bayly, an anthropologist, notes that "caste is not and never has been a fixed fact of Indian life" and the caste system as we know it today, as a "ritualised scheme of social stratification," developed in two stages during the post-Mughal period, in 18th and early 19th century. Three sets of value played an important role in this development: priestly hierarchy, kingship, and armed ascetics.

With the Islamic Mughal empire falling apart in the 18th century, regional post-Mughal ruling elites and new dynasties from diverse religious, geographical and linguistic background attempted to assert their power in different parts of India. Bayly states that these obscure post-Mughal elites associated themselves with kings, priests and ascetics, deploying the symbols of caste and kinship to divide their populace and consolidate their power. In addition, in this fluid stateless environment, some of the previously casteless segments of society grouped themselves into caste groups.However, in 18th century writes Bayly, India-wide networks of merchants, armed ascetics and armed tribals often ignored these ideologies of caste. Most people did not treat caste norms as given absolutes writes Bayly, but challenged, negotiated and adapted these norms to their circumstances. Communities teamed in different regions of India, into "collective classing" to mold the social stratification in order to maximize assets and protect themselves from loss. The "caste, class, community" structure that formed became valuable in a time when state apparatus was fragmenting, was unreliable and fluid, when rights and life were unpredictable.

In this environment, states Rosalind O'Hanlon, a professor of Indian History, the newly arrived colonial East India Company officials, attempted to gain commercial interests in India by balancing Hindu and Muslim conflicting interests, by aligning with regional rulers and large assemblies of military monks.The British Company officials adopted constitutional laws segregated by religion and caste. The legal code and colonial administrative practice was largely divided into Muslim law and Hindu law, the latter including laws for Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs. In this transitory phase, Brahmins together with scribes, ascetics and merchants who accepted Hindu social and spiritual codes, became the deferred-to-authority on Hindu texts, law and administration of Hindu matters.

While legal codes and state administration was emerging in India, with the rising power of the colonial Europeans, Dirks states that the late 18th century British writings on India say little about caste system in India, and predominantly discuss territorial conquest, alliances, warfare and diplomacy in India.^[160] Colin Mackenzie, a British social historian of this time, collected vast numbers of texts on Indian religions, culture, traditions and local histories from south India and Deccan region, but his collection and writings have very little on caste system in 18th century India.

During British rule (1757 to 1947 CE)

Although the varnas and jatis have pre-modern origins, the caste system as it exists today is the result of the result of developments during the post-Mughal period and the British colonial regime, which made caste organisation a central mechanism of administration.

Basis

Jati were the basis of caste ethnology during the British colonial era. In the 1881 census and thereafter, colonial ethnographers used caste (jati) headings, to count and classify people in what was then British India (now India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Burma).The 1891 census included 60 sub-groups each subdivided into six occupational and racial categories, and the number increased in subsequent censuses. The British colonial era census caste tables, states Susan Bayly, "ranked, standardised and cross-referenced jati listings for Indians on principles similar to zoology and botanical classifications, aiming to establish who was superior to whom by virtue of their supposed purity, occupational origins and collective moral worth". While bureaucratic British officials completed reports on their zoological classification of Indian people, some British officials criticised these exercises as being little more than a caricature of the reality of caste system in India. The British colonial officials used the census-determined jatis to decide which group of people were qualified for which jobs in the colonial government, and people of which jatis were to be excluded as unreliable. These census caste classifications, states Gloria Raheja, a professor of Anthropology, were also used by the British officials over the late 19th century and early 20th century, to formulate land tax rates, as well as to frequently target some social groups as "criminal" castes and castes prone to "rebellion"

The population then comprised about 200 million people, across five major religions, and over 500,000 agrarian villages, each with a population between 100 to 1,000 people of various age groups, which were variously divided into numerous castes. This ideological scheme was theoretically composed of around 3,000 castes, which in turn was claimed to be composed of 90,000 local endogamous sub-groups. 

Race science

Colonial administrator Herbert Hope Risley, an exponent of, used the ratio of the width of a nose to its height to divide Indians into Aryan and Dravidian races, as well as seven castes.

                                                                                                                          BY

                                                                                                               GROUP NO-6(PCM)