Caste among Hindus

From Indpaedia
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(There was no genetic influx 3,500 years ago)
 
(10 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
 
{| class="wikitable"
 
{| class="wikitable"
 
|-
 
|-
Line 9: Line 8:
 
See [[examples]] and a tutorial.</div>
 
See [[examples]] and a tutorial.</div>
 
|}
 
|}
[[Category:India|C]]
 
[[Category: Communities |C]]
 
[[Category: Society |C]]
 
[[Category: History |C]]
 
  
  
=The origin of the caste-system=
 
  
'''Genetics Proves Indian Population Mixture'''
 
  
A new study indicates that population admixture in the pre-caste era occurred, shedding light on our understanding of present-day Indian populations  
+
=History=
 +
== Rigidification of caste under British colonial rule==
 +
[https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-48619734 Sanjoy Chakravorty, June 19, 2019: ''BBC'']
  
By DAVID CAMERON
+
[[File: Conventional wisdom says the caste system is a four-fold categorical hierarchy of the Hindu religion.jpg|Conventional wisdom says the caste system is a four-fold categorical hierarchy of the Hindu religion <br/> From: [https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-48619734  Sanjoy Chakravorty, June 19, 2019: ''BBC'']|frame|500px]]
  
August 8, 2013
+
''' A Google search for basic information on India's caste system lists many sites that, with varying degrees of emphasis, outline three popular tropes on the phenomenon. '''
  
[http://hms.harvard.edu/news/genetics-proves-indian-population-mixture-8-8-13 Harvard]
+
First, the caste system is a four-fold categorical hierarchy of the Hindu religion - with Brahmins (priests/teachers) on top, followed, in order, by Kshatriyas (rulers/warriors), Vaishyas (farmers/traders/merchants), and Shudras (labourers). In addition, there is a fifth group of "Outcastes" (people who do unclean work and are outside the four-fold system).
  
[[File:caste.jpg|Between 4,000 and 2,000 years ago, intermarriage in India was rampant. Figure by Thangaraj Kumarasamy|frame|500px]]
+
Second, this system is ordained by Hinduism's sacred texts (notably the supposed source of Hindu law, the Manusmriti), it is thousands of years old, and it governed all key aspects of life, including marriage, occupation and location.
  
Scientists from Harvard Medical School and the CSIR-Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology in Hyderabad, India, provide evidence that modern-day India is the result of recent population mixture among divergent demographic groups.
+
Third, caste-based discrimination is illegal now and there are policies instead for caste-based affirmative action (or positive discrimination).
 +
These ideas, even seen in a BBC explainer, represent the conventional wisdom. The problem is that the conventional wisdom has not been updated with critical scholarly findings.
  
The findings, published August 8 in the ''American Journal of Human Genetics'', describe how India transformed from a country where mixture between different populations was rampant to one where endogamy—that is, marrying within the local community and a key attribute of the caste system—became the norm.  
+
The first two statements may as well have been written 200 years ago, at the beginning of the 19th Century, which is when these "facts" about Indian society were being made up by the British colonial authorities.
 +
In a new book, The Truth About Us: The Politics of Information from Manu to Modi, I show how the social categories of religion and caste as they are perceived in modern-day India were developed during the British colonial rule, at a time when information was scarce and the coloniser's power over information was absolute.
  
“Only a few thousand years ago, the Indian population structure was vastly different from today,” said co–senior author David Reich, professor of genetics at Harvard Medical School.
+
This was done initially in the early 19th Century by elevating selected and convenient Brahman-Sanskrit texts like the Manusmriti to canonical status; the supposed origin of caste in the Rig Veda (most ancient religious text) was most likely added retroactively, after it was translated to English decades later.
“The caste system has been around for a long time, but not forever.
+
  
In 2009, Reich and colleagues published a paper based on an analysis of 25 different Indian population groups. The paper described how all populations in India show evidence of a genetic mixture of two ancestral groups: '''Ancestral North Indians''' (ANI), who are related to Central Asians, Middle Easterners, Caucasians, and Europeans; and '''Ancestral South Indians''' (ASI), who are primarily from the subcontinent.
+
These categories were institutionalised in the mid to late 19th Century through the census. These were acts of convenience and simplification.
 +
The colonisers established the acceptable list of indigenous religions in India - Hinduism, Sikhism, Jainism - and their boundaries and laws through "reading" what they claimed were India's definitive texts.
  
However, the researchers wanted to glean clearer data as to when in history such admixture occurred. For this, the international research team broadened their study pool from 25 to 73 Indian groups.
+
What is now widely accepted as Hinduism was, in fact, an ideology (or, more accurately, a theory or fantasy) that is better called "Brahmanism", that existed largely in textual (but not real) form and enunciated the interests of a small, Sanskrit-educated social group.
The researchers took advantage of the fact that the genomes of Indian people are a mosaic of chromosomal segments of ANI and ASI descent. Originally when the ANI and ASI populations mixed, these segments would have been extremely long, extending the entire lengths of chromosomes. However, after mixture these segments would have broken up at one or two places per chromosome, per generation, recombining the maternal and paternal genetic material that occurs during the production of egg and sperm.
+
  
By measuring the lengths of the segments of ANI and ASI ancestry in Indian genomes, the authors were thus able to obtain precise estimates of the age of population mixture, which they infer varied about 1,900 to 4,200 years, depending on the population analyzed.
+
There is little doubt that the religion categories in India could have been defined very differently by reinterpreting those same or other texts.
  
While the findings show that no groups in India are free of such mixture, the researchers did identify a geographic element. “Groups in the north tend to have more recent dates and southern groups have older dates,” said co-first author Priya Moorjani, a graduate student in Reich’s lab at Harvard Medical School. “This is likely because the northern groups have multiple mixtures.
+
The so-called four-fold hierarchy was also derived from the same Brahman texts. This system of categorisation was also textual or theoretical; it existed only in scrolls and had no relationship with the reality on the ground.
  
“This genetic datatells us a three-part cultural and historical story,” said Reich, who is also an associate member of the Broad Institute. “Prior to about 4000 years ago there was no mixture.
+
This became embarrassingly obvious from the first censuses in the late 1860s. The plan then was to fit all of the "Hindu" population into these four categories. But the bewildering variety of responses on caste identity from the population became impossible to fit neatly into colonial or Brahman theory.
After that, widespread mixture affected almost every group in India, even the most isolated tribal groups. And finally, endogamy set in and froze everything in place.
+
  
“The fact that every population in India evolved from randomly mixed populations suggests that social classifications like the caste system are not likely to have existed in the same way before the mixture,” said co–senior author Lalji Singh, currently of Banaras Hindu University, in Varanasi, India, and formerly of the CSIR-Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology. “Thus, the present-day structure of the caste system came into being only relatively recently in Indian history.”*
+
WR Cornish, who supervised census operations in the Madras Presidency in 1871, wrote that "… regarding the origin of caste we can place no reliance upon the statements made in the Hindu sacred writings. Whether there was ever a period in which the Hindus were composed of four classes is exceedingly doubtful”.
  
But once established, the caste system became genetically effective, the researchers observed. Mixture across groups became very rare.
+
Similarly, CF Magrath, leader and author of a monograph on the 1871 Bihar census, wrote, "that the now meaningless division into the four castes alleged to have been made by Manu should be put aside".
 +
Anthropologist Susan Bayly writes that "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… 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 18th Century”.
  
“An important consequence of these results is that the high incidence of genetic and population-specific diseases that is characteristic of present-day India is likely to have increased only in the last few thousand years when groups in India started following strict endogamous marriage,” said co–first author Kumarasamy Thangaraj, of the CSIR-Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology, Hyderabad, India.**
+
In fact, it is doubtful that caste had much significance or virulence in society before the British made it India's defining social feature.
  
Mohan Rao, Director, CSIR-CCMB said, “CCMB's continuing efforts over a decade on this field had helped in understanding the complexity of Indian population history and social structure, such as caste systems.”
+
''' Astonishing diversity '''
  
This study was funded by the NIH (GM100233); NSF (HOMINID grant 1032255); a UKIERI Major Award (RG-4772); the Network Project (GENESIS: BSC0121) fund from the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, Government of India; a Bhatnagar Fellowship grant from the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research of the Government of India; and a J.C. Bose Fellowship from Department of Science and Technology, Government of India.
+
The pre-colonial written record in royal court documents and traveller accounts studied by professional historians and philologists like Nicholas Dirks, GS Ghurye, Richard Eaton, David Shulman and Cynthia Talbot show little or no mention of caste.
  
*, ** Quotes adapted from American Journal of Human Genetics news release.
+
Social identities were constantly malleable. "Slaves" and "menials" and "merchants" became kings; farmers became soldiers, and soldiers became farmers; one's social identity could be changed as easily as moving from one village to another; there is little evidence of systematic and widespread caste oppression or mass conversion to Islam as a result of it.
  
= There was no genetic influx 3,500 years ago=
+
All the available evidence calls for a fundamental re-imagination of social identity in pre-colonial India.
'''Indians are not descendants of Aryans, says new study'''
+
  
Dinesh C. Sharma  |  Mail Today  |  New Delhi,  
+
The picture that one should see is of astonishing diversity. What the colonisers did through their reading of the "sacred" texts and the institution of the census was to try to frame all of that diversity through alien categorical systems of religion, race, caste and tribe. The census was used to simplify - categorise and define - what was barely understood by the colonisers using a convenient ideology and absurd (and shifting) methodology.
  
December 10, 2011 |
+
The colonisers invented or constructed Indian social identities using categories of convenience during a period that covered roughly the 19th Century.
  
[http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/indians-are-not-descendants-of-aryans-study/1/163645.html India Today]
+
This was done to serve the British Indian government's own interests - primarily to create a single society with a common law that could be easily governed.
  
Widely believed theory of Indo-Aryan invasion, often used to explain early settlements in the Indian subcontinent is a myth, a new study by Indian geneticists says.
+
A very large, complex and regionally diverse system of faiths and social identities was simplified to a degree that probably has no parallel in world history, entirely new categories and hierarchies were created, incompatible or mismatched parts were stuffed together, new boundaries were created, and flexible boundaries hardened.
  
The origin of genetic diversity found in South Asia is much older than 3,500 years when the Indo-Aryans were supposed to have migrated to India, a new study led by scientists from the Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology (CCMB), Hyderabad, says. The study appeared in American Journal of Human Genetics on Friday.
+
The resulting categorical system became rigid during the next century and quarter, as the made-up categories came to be associated with real rights. Religion-based electorates in British India and caste-based reservations in independent India made amorphous categories concrete. There came to be real and material consequences of belonging to one category (like Jain or Scheduled Caste) instead of another. Categorisation, as it turned out in India, was destiny.
 +
The vast scholarship of the last few decades allows us to make a strong case that the British colonisers wrote the first and defining draft of Indian history.
  
The theory of Indo-Aryan migration was proposed in mid-19th century by German linguist and Sanskrit scholar Max Muller.
+
So deeply inscribed is this draft in the public imagination that it is now accepted as the truth. It is imperative that we begin to question these imagined truths.
  
He had suggested that 3,500 years ago, a dramatic migration of Indo-European speakers from Central Asia played a key role in shaping contemporary South Asian populations and this was responsible for introduction of the Indo-European language family and the caste system in India.
+
Sanjoy Chakravorty is professor in the College of Liberal Arts at Temple University, Philadelphia
  
"Our study clearly shows that there was no genetic influx 3,500 years ago," said Dr Kumarasamy Thangaraj of CCMB, who led the research team, which included scientists from the University of Tartu, Estonia, Chettinad Academy of Research and Education, Chennai and Banaras Hindu University.
 
 
"It is high time we re-write India's prehistory based on scientific evidence," said Dr Lalji Singh, former director of CCMB. "There is no genetic evidence that Indo-Aryans invaded or migrated to India or even something such as Aryans existed". Singh, vice-chancellor of BHU, is a coauthor.
 
 
Researchers analysed some six lakh bits of genetic information in the form of SNPs drawn from DNA of over 1,300 individuals from 112 populations including 30 ethnic groups in India.
 
 
The comparison of this data with genetic data of other populations showed that South Asia harbours two major ancestry components. One is spread in populations of South and West Asia, Middle East, Near East and the Caucasus. The second component is more restricted to South Asia and accounts for more than 50 per cent of the ancestry in Indian populations.
 
 
"Both the ancestry components that dominate genetic variation in South Asia demonstrate much greater diversity than those that predominate West Eurasia. This is indicative of a more ancient demographic history and a higher long-term effective population size underlying South Asian genome variation compared to that of West Eurasia," researchers said.
 
 
"The genetic component which spread beyond India is significantly higher in India than in any other part of world. This implies that this genetic component originated in India and then spread to West Asia and Caucasus," said Gyaneshwar Chaube of University of Tartu, Estonia.
 
 
If any migration from Central Asia to South Asia took place, the study says, it should have introduced apparent signals of East Asian ancestry into India. "Because this ancestry component is absent from the region, we have to conclude that if such an event indeed took place, it occurred before the East Asian ancestry component reached central Asia," it said.
 
 
=Caste linked to skin colour, marriage patterns, multi-layered endogamy=
 
[http://epaperbeta.timesofindia.com/Article.aspx?eid=31808&articlexml=Skin-colour-tied-to-caste-system-says-study-21112016010037  Skin colour tied to caste system, says study, Nov 21 2016 : The Times of India]
 
 
 
Scientists from the Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology (CCMB) in Hyderabad recently discovered that genetic differences and caste system were the main reasons behind the region-wise variation in the skin colour of Indians.
 
 
The study , which was led by senior scientist Dr Kumarasamy Thangaraj in collaboration with Estonian Biocentre and five other research institutes, has been published in the Journal of Investigative Dermatology . It indicates that social structure defined by the caste system has a “profound influence on skin pigmentation“. The team had studied 1,825 individuals belonging to 52 diverse populations across India with regard to the caste-colour concept.
 
 
“Unlike Africans and Europeans, we do not have homogeneous skin colour throughout the country. This could be due to different waves of human migration into India and recent admixture of all Indian populations,“ Dr Thangaraj said, adding that skin colour was found to vary significantly among ethnic groups and social categories.
 
 
“We did extensive epidemiological survey of 1,167 individuals belonging to 27 populations and quantified melanin content at the mostexposed and least-exposed area of human body in the Gangetic plains (Uttar Pradesh and Bihar). We had selected 374 individuals for the first round of genetic study ,“ said Dr Anshuman Mishra, one of the researchers.
 
 
The researchers found that gene SLC24A5, which is known to make skin colour lighter, has two variants, which together contribute to the variation in skin colour among Indian populations.
 
 
“Our study clearly reflects the profound influence of strict marriage patterns and multi-layered endogamy adding further to the variation in skin colour,“ said another researcher Dr Chandana Basu.
 
 
“This is yet another effort of the Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology in the field of genomics, which helped us in understanding the genetic link to skin colour,“ said CCMB director Dr Rakesh Mishra, adding that the study will help deliver individual specific lifestyle advisory and medical prescriptions.
 
  
 
=Caste discrimination=
 
=Caste discrimination=
 
==Discrimination is recent==
 
==Discrimination is recent==
 
[http://epaperbeta.timesofindia.com/Article.aspx?eid=31808&articlexml=the-modern-INDIAN-The-Past-Of-Caste-02022016024035 ''The Times of India''] Feb 02 2016
 
[http://epaperbeta.timesofindia.com/Article.aspx?eid=31808&articlexml=the-modern-INDIAN-The-Past-Of-Caste-02022016024035 ''The Times of India''] Feb 02 2016
 +
  
 
Amish
 
Amish
Line 146: Line 112:
  
 
Annihilating the birth-based caste system is a battle we must all engage in at a societal level. We will honour our ancient culture with this fight. More importantly , we will end something that is just plain wrong.
 
Annihilating the birth-based caste system is a battle we must all engage in at a societal level. We will honour our ancient culture with this fight. More importantly , we will end something that is just plain wrong.
 +
 +
=Rejecting caste=
 +
==Kerala, 2018: Many students do not state caste, religion in classes 1-X; in classes XI-XII most do==
 +
[https://epaper.timesgroup.com/Olive/ODN/TimesOfIndia/shared/ShowArticle.aspx?doc=TOIDEL%2F2018%2F03%2F29&entity=Ar02310&sk=29EB240E&mode=text  ‘Caste away’ for 1.2L students in Kerala, March 29, 2018:  ''The Times of India'']
 +
 +
 +
Over 1.23 lakh students did not disclose their caste or religion while being admitted to various classes — ranging from I and X — in government and govt-aided schools across Kerala in the 2017-18 academic session.
 +
 +
Education minister C Raveendranath, who disclosed this in the assembly on Wednesday, said the number of students who left the column related to caste and religion blank this year was a record high. These students belonged to 9,209 government and aided schools in the state.
 +
 +
A consolidated figure could be arrived at this year as details of admissions were recorded through Sampoorna software instead of manually tabulating it in all education districts.
 +
 +
However, director of public instruction K V Mohankumar injected a cautionary note regarding this data, saying that it doesn’t reflect a “progressive” mindset. “Based on court orders, it is no longer mandatory for students to mention their caste or religion. As a result, schools cannot compel anyone to mention their caste now. Hence these students may have chosen not to mention it,’’ he said.
 +
 +
Ajay Kumar, executive director of Rights, an NGO working for uplift of Dalits, also voiced certain reservations on what the data implied. “It has been only 60 years since Dalits in Kerala have accessed education. Even today, they are not in a position to sacrifice their legitimate rights”, he said. In higher secondary classes the number nose-dived with just 517 students chose not to reveal their caste or religion.
 +
 +
=See also= 
 +
[[Caste in India: genetics and heredity (easy reading) ]] 
 +
 +
[[Caste among Hindus]]
 +
 +
[[Caste in India: genetics and heredity (academic studies) ]]
 +
 +
[[Racial Classification of Indian People ]]
 +
 +
[[Category:Communities|C
 +
CASTE AMONG HINDUS]]
 +
[[Category:History|C
 +
CASTE AMONG HINDUS]]
 +
[[Category:India|C
 +
CASTE AMONG HINDUS]]
 +
[[Category:Society|C
 +
CASTE AMONG HINDUS]]
 +
 +
[[Category:Communities|CCASTE AMONG HINDUS
 +
CASTE AMONG HINDUS]]
 +
[[Category:Demography|C
 +
CASTE AMONG HINDUS]]
 +
[[Category:History|CCASTE AMONG HINDUS
 +
CASTE AMONG HINDUS]]
 +
[[Category:India|CCASTE AMONG HINDUS
 +
CASTE AMONG HINDUS]]
 +
[[Category:Society|CCASTE AMONG HINDUS
 +
CASTE AMONG HINDUS]]

Latest revision as of 18:41, 8 December 2020

This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content.
You can help by converting these articles into an encyclopaedia-style entry,
deleting portions of the kind normally not used in encyclopaedia entries.
Please also fill in missing details; put categories, headings and sub-headings;
and combine this with other articles on exactly the same subject.

Readers will be able to edit existing articles and post new articles directly
on their online archival encyclopædia only after its formal launch.

See examples and a tutorial.



Contents

[edit] History

[edit] Rigidification of caste under British colonial rule

Sanjoy Chakravorty, June 19, 2019: BBC

Conventional wisdom says the caste system is a four-fold categorical hierarchy of the Hindu religion
From: Sanjoy Chakravorty, June 19, 2019: BBC

A Google search for basic information on India's caste system lists many sites that, with varying degrees of emphasis, outline three popular tropes on the phenomenon.

First, the caste system is a four-fold categorical hierarchy of the Hindu religion - with Brahmins (priests/teachers) on top, followed, in order, by Kshatriyas (rulers/warriors), Vaishyas (farmers/traders/merchants), and Shudras (labourers). In addition, there is a fifth group of "Outcastes" (people who do unclean work and are outside the four-fold system).

Second, this system is ordained by Hinduism's sacred texts (notably the supposed source of Hindu law, the Manusmriti), it is thousands of years old, and it governed all key aspects of life, including marriage, occupation and location.

Third, caste-based discrimination is illegal now and there are policies instead for caste-based affirmative action (or positive discrimination). These ideas, even seen in a BBC explainer, represent the conventional wisdom. The problem is that the conventional wisdom has not been updated with critical scholarly findings.

The first two statements may as well have been written 200 years ago, at the beginning of the 19th Century, which is when these "facts" about Indian society were being made up by the British colonial authorities. In a new book, The Truth About Us: The Politics of Information from Manu to Modi, I show how the social categories of religion and caste as they are perceived in modern-day India were developed during the British colonial rule, at a time when information was scarce and the coloniser's power over information was absolute.

This was done initially in the early 19th Century by elevating selected and convenient Brahman-Sanskrit texts like the Manusmriti to canonical status; the supposed origin of caste in the Rig Veda (most ancient religious text) was most likely added retroactively, after it was translated to English decades later.

These categories were institutionalised in the mid to late 19th Century through the census. These were acts of convenience and simplification. The colonisers established the acceptable list of indigenous religions in India - Hinduism, Sikhism, Jainism - and their boundaries and laws through "reading" what they claimed were India's definitive texts.

What is now widely accepted as Hinduism was, in fact, an ideology (or, more accurately, a theory or fantasy) that is better called "Brahmanism", that existed largely in textual (but not real) form and enunciated the interests of a small, Sanskrit-educated social group.

There is little doubt that the religion categories in India could have been defined very differently by reinterpreting those same or other texts.

The so-called four-fold hierarchy was also derived from the same Brahman texts. This system of categorisation was also textual or theoretical; it existed only in scrolls and had no relationship with the reality on the ground.

This became embarrassingly obvious from the first censuses in the late 1860s. The plan then was to fit all of the "Hindu" population into these four categories. But the bewildering variety of responses on caste identity from the population became impossible to fit neatly into colonial or Brahman theory.

WR Cornish, who supervised census operations in the Madras Presidency in 1871, wrote that "… regarding the origin of caste we can place no reliance upon the statements made in the Hindu sacred writings. Whether there was ever a period in which the Hindus were composed of four classes is exceedingly doubtful”.

Similarly, CF Magrath, leader and author of a monograph on the 1871 Bihar census, wrote, "that the now meaningless division into the four castes alleged to have been made by Manu should be put aside". Anthropologist Susan Bayly writes that "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… 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 18th Century”.

In fact, it is doubtful that caste had much significance or virulence in society before the British made it India's defining social feature.

Astonishing diversity

The pre-colonial written record in royal court documents and traveller accounts studied by professional historians and philologists like Nicholas Dirks, GS Ghurye, Richard Eaton, David Shulman and Cynthia Talbot show little or no mention of caste.

Social identities were constantly malleable. "Slaves" and "menials" and "merchants" became kings; farmers became soldiers, and soldiers became farmers; one's social identity could be changed as easily as moving from one village to another; there is little evidence of systematic and widespread caste oppression or mass conversion to Islam as a result of it.

All the available evidence calls for a fundamental re-imagination of social identity in pre-colonial India.

The picture that one should see is of astonishing diversity. What the colonisers did through their reading of the "sacred" texts and the institution of the census was to try to frame all of that diversity through alien categorical systems of religion, race, caste and tribe. The census was used to simplify - categorise and define - what was barely understood by the colonisers using a convenient ideology and absurd (and shifting) methodology.

The colonisers invented or constructed Indian social identities using categories of convenience during a period that covered roughly the 19th Century.

This was done to serve the British Indian government's own interests - primarily to create a single society with a common law that could be easily governed.

A very large, complex and regionally diverse system of faiths and social identities was simplified to a degree that probably has no parallel in world history, entirely new categories and hierarchies were created, incompatible or mismatched parts were stuffed together, new boundaries were created, and flexible boundaries hardened.

The resulting categorical system became rigid during the next century and quarter, as the made-up categories came to be associated with real rights. Religion-based electorates in British India and caste-based reservations in independent India made amorphous categories concrete. There came to be real and material consequences of belonging to one category (like Jain or Scheduled Caste) instead of another. Categorisation, as it turned out in India, was destiny. The vast scholarship of the last few decades allows us to make a strong case that the British colonisers wrote the first and defining draft of Indian history.

So deeply inscribed is this draft in the public imagination that it is now accepted as the truth. It is imperative that we begin to question these imagined truths.

Sanjoy Chakravorty is professor in the College of Liberal Arts at Temple University, Philadelphia


[edit] Caste discrimination

[edit] Discrimination is recent

The Times of India Feb 02 2016


Amish

Ancient India did not sanctify it, caste discrimination is more recent than we think

The tragic death of Rohith Vemula has again brought to the forefront of public imagination the painful reality of caste discrimination in Indian society . Notwithstanding the noise generated by relentless pursuit of politics, evidence clearly indicates that the Scheduled Castes as a group do face terrible prejudice in India.

Understandably, many non-Westernised Indians would be loathe to accept the `atrocity literature' churned out by Western academics NGOs. After all, among the most oppressed minorities in the civilised world are the AfricanAmericans and the European Romas, as evidenced by various detailed studies.

However, the hypocrisy of Western academics media NGOs cannot be an excuse for Indians not to confront their own failings. The present birth-based caste system and caste system and its attendant societal discrimination is a blot on India and completely against the conceptualisation of our ancient culture.

There are some who claim that the present caste system is sanctified by our ancient scriptures. Not true. B R Ambedkar, in his scholarly book `Who were the Shudras?', had used Indian scriptures and texts to prove that in ancient times India had widely respected Shudra rulers as well, and the oppressive scriptural verses, justifying discrimination and a caste system based on birth, were interpolated into the texts later.

In the Bhagwad Gita, Lord Krishna clearly enunciates that He created the four varnas based on guna (attributes) and karma; birth is NOT mentioned.Rishis, or sages, were accorded the highest status in ancient India, and two of our greatest epics, the Ramayana and the Mahabharata, were composed by Rishis who were not born Brahmins.

Valmiki was born a Shudra and Krishna Dwaipayana (also known as Ved Vyas) was born to a fisherwoman. Satyakam Jabali, believed to have composed the celebrated Jabali Upanishad, was born to an unwed Shudra mother and his father's name was unknown. According to the Valmiki Ramayana, Jabali was an officiating priest and adviser to the Ayodhya royalty during Lord Ram's period.

Arvind Sharma, professor of comparative religion at McGill University, states that caste rigidity and discrimination emerged in the Smriti period (from after the birth of Jesus Christ and extending up to 1200 CE) and was challenged in the medieval period by the bhakti movement led by many non-upper caste saints. At the time even powerful empires emerged that were led by Shudra rulers, for example the Kakatiyas. Then, the birth-based caste system became rigid once again around the British colonial period. It has remained so, ever since.

Scientific evidence provided by genetic research corroborates the ancient scriptural absence of a birth-based caste system. Banning of inter-marriage in pursuance of `caste purity' is a fundamental marker of this birth-based caste system.Various scientific papers published in journals such as the American Journal of Human Genetics, Nature and the National Academy of Sciences Journal, have established that inter-breeding among different genetic groups in India was extremely common for thousands of years until it stopped around 0 CE to 400 CE (intriguingly, this is in sync with the period when Sharma says caste discrimination arose for the first time in recorded history).

The inference is obvious. The present birth-based caste system ­ a distorted merger of jati (one's birth-community) and varna (one's nature based on guna and karma) ­ emerged roughly between 1,600 to 2,000 years ago. It did not exist earlier. Note that the word `caste' itself is a Portuguese creation, derived from the Portuguese Spanish `casta' meaning breed or race.

The founding fathers of the Indian republic were, thankfully , aware of the pernicious effects of the birth-based caste system on Indian society . The Indian Constitution had bold objectives. But, as is obvious today , while government policies such as reservations have made a difference, they have not been good enough.

The work of Dalit scholar Chandra Bhan Prasad shows that the post-1991 economic reforms programme has seminally addressed this issue. According to the 200607 All-India MSME Census, approximately 14% of the total enterprises in the country are owned by SCST entrepreneurs, and they generate nearly 8 million jobs! The figure is probably much higher today .

There are many who claim that the reservations policy has ignored the upper caste poor and rural landless. This may hold some truth. But this is also largely due to the absence of enough education facilities and jobs, which leads to rationing of the few opportunities that do exist.

Post-1991 reforms have no doubt brought down these shortfalls, but they have not gone far enough. Many argue that reformist policies will not just help the Dalits, but also the rural and urban upper-caste poor.

So, as Prasad has pointed out repeatedly, more economic reforms and urbanisation will go much further in mitigating caste discrimination and poverty in general, compared to government policies. However, caste discrimination must be opposed and fought against by all Indians, for the sake of the soul of our nation.

Annihilating the birth-based caste system is a battle we must all engage in at a societal level. We will honour our ancient culture with this fight. More importantly , we will end something that is just plain wrong.

[edit] Rejecting caste

[edit] Kerala, 2018: Many students do not state caste, religion in classes 1-X; in classes XI-XII most do

‘Caste away’ for 1.2L students in Kerala, March 29, 2018: The Times of India


Over 1.23 lakh students did not disclose their caste or religion while being admitted to various classes — ranging from I and X — in government and govt-aided schools across Kerala in the 2017-18 academic session.

Education minister C Raveendranath, who disclosed this in the assembly on Wednesday, said the number of students who left the column related to caste and religion blank this year was a record high. These students belonged to 9,209 government and aided schools in the state.

A consolidated figure could be arrived at this year as details of admissions were recorded through Sampoorna software instead of manually tabulating it in all education districts.

However, director of public instruction K V Mohankumar injected a cautionary note regarding this data, saying that it doesn’t reflect a “progressive” mindset. “Based on court orders, it is no longer mandatory for students to mention their caste or religion. As a result, schools cannot compel anyone to mention their caste now. Hence these students may have chosen not to mention it,’’ he said.

Ajay Kumar, executive director of Rights, an NGO working for uplift of Dalits, also voiced certain reservations on what the data implied. “It has been only 60 years since Dalits in Kerala have accessed education. Even today, they are not in a position to sacrifice their legitimate rights”, he said. In higher secondary classes the number nose-dived with just 517 students chose not to reveal their caste or religion.

[edit] See also

Caste in India: genetics and heredity (easy reading)

Caste among Hindus

Caste in India: genetics and heredity (academic studies)

Racial Classification of Indian People

Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Toolbox
Translate