Talk:Caste system in India

Ancient DNA research

While I do not have access to Reich's 2018 book, I do have access to the study by Nakatsuka et al (2017) that is also cited in this section. Neither that study, nor the methodology explained in the Ancient DNA section, seem to involve any Ancient DNA at all. Instead, they seem to have taken DNA of modern humans and then used their knowledge of evolutionary theory to extrapolate the likely age of the last common ancestors of the individual clades. If we want to keep a separate section for this methodology, I would propose changing the title simply to genetics research or similar, and then also move the reference to the 2016 DNA-based study mentioned at the end of the Jatis section to here. Felix QW (talk) 11:38, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

I implemented the changes I mentioned above, as there has ben no further input on this. Felix QW (talk) 09:46, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Skin color

I was reading encyclopedia articles from the 80s and 90s. It said that people who were higher in the caste system had lighter color skin and people lower on the caste system had darker color skin. It is implied that the caste system is a form of racism. Hope this helps the article.

caste system

Growth of the caste 2409:4065:C00:C19B:0:0:A6CA:4600 (talk) 18:37, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Caste system in India???

The original, correct name of Hinduism is Sanathana Dharma (SD). There is absolutely no such thing asa hierarchical caste system in SD. Varna inSD can be translated as "way of being." There is no hierarchy for varna. These are four essential constituents of any society in the world. The have equal status in SD. SD, now popularly called Hinduism, is around 8000 to 14000 years old (latter is not verifiable scientifically.) So SD has had a minimum of 8000 years to get corrupted. Christianity and Islam, by comparison, have had only 2000 and 2500 years (approximately) to get corrupted. Anyway, in SD, the division of different types of people depended on their varna. If a Kshitriya by birth goes into a teaching profession, he is actually a Brahmin by varna. Likewise, if a Brahmin by birth goes for manual work in a factory, he is a Shudra by varna. Over years this system, which was actually created for understanding how a society functions, became corrupted and became birth ("jathi") oriented, and rigid. Later, it is because of this corruption, some castes were falsely considered "superior". Our Ithihasa (History, as opposed to Mythology) clearly brings out this fact. Avatars like Rama and Krishna were not Brahmins, either by birth or by way of being. Only 2 of the 10 Avatars of Lord Vishnu were actually Brahmins, viz. Vamana and Parashurama. In fact, Parashurama, in His Avatar, became a Kshatriya by varna to destroy the Kahatriyas who were not following Dharma. Many Rishis, some of who were contemporaries of the Ramayana and Mahabharata periods, were not Brahmins. Brahmins were those who considered spirituality and knowledge as supreme and were generally without any means of survival and were dependent on other varnas for sustenance by way of alms. Kshatriyas were those who were generally the rulers or protectors of society. Vaishyas were the traders and owners of property, businesses and wealth who gave sustenance to the other varnas through their business or charity. Shudras were those who did physical work for the other varnas to help them carry out their business (Vaishyas) or protection duty (Kshatriyas). Brahmins generally did their own duties, as they did not have the means to hire help. So, it should be noted that the term "Caste" itself has no place in Indian society, much less the "hierarchy" associated with the term. I request Wikipedia to to correct all references to caste system in India, and set the record straight. The corruption of this is against the principles of Sanathana Dharma. Murali Bhanu (talk) 17:44, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Caste System, Origins, British Import Into Colonial India

The "Casta System" is of Spanish origin, dating back to the 15th century.  “The Casta System,” https://cowlatinamerica.voices.wooster.edu/2020/05/04/the-casta-system/.   The conquestidaros deemed the indigenous peoples, who had been living on the land for centuries, barbaric and uncivilized. They colonized the region, and passed laws creating a social hierarchy known as the Casta System.   The purpose was to maintain Spanish power and superiority over other racial groups in the colonies. This system was used throughout their rule and continued to be unofficially in place long after the colonies were independent. See, e.g., Sindy Valdez, “Understanding the Mexican Casta System: A Historical and Cultural Perspective,”  https://www.indigenousmexico.org/articles/understanding-the-mexican-casta-system-a-historical-and-cultural-perspective

The British imported this system to India for the same purpose as the Spanish conquerors:  to maintain their power and superiority over the locals with a “Divide and Rule” policy.  “Caste as we now recognize it has been engendered, shaped, and perpetuated by comparatively recent political and social developments.” Susan Bayly, Caste, Society and Politics in India (Cambridge, 2002).

To this end, the British misinterpreted Hindu scriptures to manufacture a narrative of Hindus being divided into four “castes”.  G.S.R. Anantha, A.S. Raj, and P.K. Kukreja, Caste is Not Hindu, 12.  In fact,  CF Magrath, leader and author of a monograph on the 1871 Bihar census, candidly conceded, "that the now meaningless division into the four castes alleged to have been made by Manu should be put aside".  Sanjoy Chakravorty, Viewpoint: How the British reshaped India’s caste system, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-48619734 (Jun 18, 2019).   “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".  Susan Bayly, Caste, Society and Politics in India.

Nevertheless, the British made this imported “caste system” the cornerstone of their administration, and conducted elections based on sectarian/religious lines. Will Durant, The Case for India (1932). As a result, Indians voted as members of specific communities, not as citizens of India (or even British India).  Id.  This brought about divisive caste-based identity politics in India, which cemented over time and continues to this day.  “Only after the British began to define communities by their religion, and foreigners in India tended to put people of different religions into different ideological boxes did many Indians follow suit, ignoring the diversity of their own thoughts and asking themselves which of the boxes they belonged.” W. Doniger, The Hindus (2009).

The British cemented this identity politics with periodic “census” which asked individuals to identify their “castes”. Indians, who had no idea of what “caste” meant, listed their occupations as their “caste”.  The numerous castes were then doctored to fit the British narrative of all Indians being comprised of four castes (Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, and Kshudras). “Brahmanas . . were manufactured on-the-spot by the simple process of conferring the title ‘Brahman’” by the census-taker.  G.S.R. Anantha, A.S. Raj, and P.K. Kukreja, Caste is Not Hindu, 106.  Thus “Overnight, they created 1,779,685 Brahman in Mysore and Madras alone.”  Id.  Rigid caste organization became the central mechanism of British administration. Susan Bayly, Caste, Society and Politics in India (Cambridge, 2002).

As caste-based elections became a settled practice, the number of castes increased exponentially with every census.  The British Census of 1881 recorded 1929 castes. In 2011, the Government of India reported that there were 4,673,034 castes.  https://censusindia.gov.in/census.website/data/census-tables. “Caste was and is, to a very considerable extent, what people think of it, and how they act on these perceptions”.  Susan Bayly, Caste, Society and Politics in India (Cambridge, 2002) (emphasis in original).

Interestingly, the 1911 census also reported 102 Muslim castes and sub-castes in one State (Uttar Pradesh) alone.  Pratik Patnaik, Caste Among Indian Muslims Is a Real Issue.  So Why Deny Them Reservation?  https://thewire.in/caste/caste-among-indian-muslims-real-why-deny-reservation (Dec. 2, 2020).  However, the British ignored this, and similar distinctions in other religions, and, in all their official orders and publications (and most unofficial ones) conflated Hinduism with the caste system. Dr. K. Chittur (talk) 02:50, 30 November 2024 (UTC)___Dr. K. Chittur

--

Gandhi picture to be deleted: Major changes needed

This is a plea to Wikipedia activists and authors who are not from South Asian origin. This is an extremely important point to not have Gandhi's picture and Gandhi's saviourism as part of the article.

1. Gandhi was from a highly privileged caste. In fact, the first line of his autobiography My Experiments with Truth, begins with him talking about his caste status. Having his picture instead of a person from an Untouchable caste, who actually fought for dalit rights, makes no sense. BR Ambedkar is the person we need in the picture here. Ambedkar was the leader of Untouchables, contemporary and opponent of Gandhi, sociologist, lawyer, public intellectual, drafter of India's constitution

2. Gandhi actively worked against rights that the Untouchables themselves worked very hard for. Arundhati Roy, the Booker Prize winning author, recounts BR Ambedkar's quotation of Gandhi's fast to take away electorates for dalits, as "barefaced blackmail". This is also much discussed in various other existing social science literature, including in works such as Radical Equality by philosopher Aishwary Kumar.

3. Having Gandhi's picture as the saviour of Untouchables, is also about what academics term "savarna saviour complex", which is exactly the same or in some ways worse than the "White saviour complex". Many of these could be found in popular academic publications and also in prestigious online magazines, such as The Swaddle, which has articles such as Saving the World like a Savarna. Ambedkar wrote Annihilation of Caste, the single most influential text of 20th century South Asia. He also calls out the shallow promises such as savarna people including those by Gandhi.

4. Other major change: Leading intellectual contributions from Untouchable blogs such as roundtableindia.co.in also point to the problem of caste and discuss the correct terms of the system. I tried including the word "savarna" in the article, but it did not included. This is also a very important way to return the anthropological gaze, because "savarna" shows that caste actually belongs not just to Untouchables, but also to the people who are "Touchable", and has been widely used in many academic publications worldwide.

Therefore, I propose to delete Gandhi's picture and instead use BR Ambedkar's picture in the Wikipedia page on the caste system. This would correct many historical wrongs. Gummibaerli1 (talk) 09:36, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Personally, I have no problem with this and think it's probably a sensible change. I am not of South Asian origin and have no real opinion either way on Gandhi (or Ambedkar), so no axe to grind, but I agree it would be better to have someone of a lower caste as the main picture rather than a Vaishya (Gandhi). Dāsānudāsa (talk) 09:57, 3 December 2024 (UTC)