“ORIGINS OF UNTOUCHABILITY”

FINAL DRAFT SUBMITTED IN THE FULFILMENT OF THE COURSE

TITLED – LEGAL HISTORY

SUBMITTED TO:

Dr. PRIYADARSHINI

ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF HISTORY

SUBMITTED BY:

NAME: ISHAN BRAMHBHATT

COURSE: B.A., LL.B (Hons.)

ROLL NO: 1733

SEMESTER: 1st

CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, NYAYA NAGAR,

MITHAPUR, PATNA – 800001
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Writing a project is one of the most difficult academic challenges I have ever
faced. Though this project has been presented by me but there are many people
who remained in veil, who gave their support and helped me to complete this
project. First of all I am very grateful to my subject teacher Dr. Priyadarshini,
without the kind support of whom and help the completion of the project would
have been a herculean task for me. He took out time from his busy schedule to help
me to complete this project and suggested me from where and how to collect data.

I acknowledge my friends who gave their valuable and meticulous advice which
was very useful and could not be ignored in writing the project. I want to convey
most sincere thanks to my faculties for helping me throughout the project.
Thereafter, I would also like to express my gratitude towards our seniors who
played a vital role in the compilation of this research work.I would also like to
express my gratitude towards the library staff of my college which assisted me in
acquiring the sources necessary for the compilation of my project.Last, but not the
least, I would like to thank the Almighty for obvious reasons.

ISHAN BRAMHBHATT

ROLL NO – 1733
 DECLARATION

I hereby declare that the work reported in the BA LL.B (Hons.) Project Report
entitled “Origins of untouchability” submitted at Chanakya National Law
University, Patna is an authentic record of my work carried out under the
supervision of Dr. Priyadarshini. I have not submitted this work elsewhere for any
other degree or diploma. I am fully responsible for the contents of my Project
Report.

ISHAN BRAMHBHATT

Roll No. -1733

CHAPTERIZATION

1.) INTRODUCTION

2.) MEANING OF UNTOUCHABILITY

3.) HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

4.) PROTECTION UNDER CONSTITUTION

 5.) UNTOUCHABILITY IN INDIA BEFORE INDEPENDENCE

 UNTOUCHABILITY IN INDIA AFTER INDEPENDENCE

6.) UNTOUCHABILITY AND ITS BACKGROUND

7.) ORIGINS OF CASTE SYSTEM

8.) EXCEPTION TO UNTOUCHABILITY

9.) CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

10.) BIBLIOGRAPHY
INTRODUCTION

Untouchability is the practice of ostracising a group by segregating them from the

mainstream by social custom or legal mandate. The excluded group could be one
that did not accept the norms of the excluding group and historically included
foreigners, nomadic tribes, law-breakers and criminals and those suffering from a
contagious disease. It could also be a group that did not accept change of customs
enforced by a certain group. This exclusion was a method of punishing law-
breakers and also protected traditional societies against contagion from strangers
and the infected. A member of the excluded group is known as an Untouchable.
The origin of the term Sudra comes from the word, 'suc' which means to be
sorrowful while as per some other group it comes from 'ksudra' which means
trifling. Numerous groups dictate Sudras to be non-Aryans. However, there are
some groups of Aryans who were also designated as Sudras, but in a very less
number. In ancient India, the Rig Veda divided the society into four varnas in
accordance with the human being that is to say Brahmins from the Purusa(the
primeval man), Kshyatriyas from the arms, vaishyas from the Thighs and Sudras
from the feet. This division marked the formation of Aryan Agrarian Society. The
Brahmins, were the highest ranked Varna who held the positions of priest and
teacher of the Vedas; the kshyatriyas took charge of politics and the military; the
vaishyas formed the group of cultivators, herders and merchants; and the Sudras
were deprived to the position of servants.

The top three varnas, members of Aryan society, were called the Dvijati, or 'twice
born', and were allowed to participate in the religious worship. In contrast, the
Sudras were segregated from the Dvijati as Ekajati, who were born only once from
their mothers' wombs. Below the Sudras, a class of inferior people existed, in
which the 'Chandalas', or 'untouchables'. It was believed that the Sudras were born
only to serve the brahmins and any wealth acquainted by the Sudra belonged to the
Brahmins. Marriage is permitted only in one's own Varna.

This rule was often broken. But any twiceborn male who took a Sudra to be his
wife would become the object of particular scorn. If a twice- born male had only
one wife i.e., anuloma marriages and she was of Sudra status, he would be
considered to be in a state of ritual impurity and would be forbidden to attend
family ceremonies. On the other hand, any Sudra male who approached a twice-
born female, i.e., pratiloma marriages, behaved like a twice-born Varna in
everyday life. The Sudras were neglected or ignored during the times of distress
and emergency. Un-touch-ability carries a sense of contamination and abuse. It
also, implies convinced socioreligious incapacities. Untouchability includes
customs, practices given by the rigid Indian caste system where persons belonging
to the scheduled caste were debarred from entering Hindu Temples, public places,
streets, public conveyances, eating place, educational institutions, etc.1

1
From the link - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Untouchability
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

∙ Tostudy the origins of untouchability

∙ To study impacts of untouchability on the society

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This research project is solely based on Doctrinal type of research.

HYPOTHESIS
∙ The researcher believes that practice of untouchability gave a negative impact on
the lives of people.
MEANING OF UNTOUCHABILITY

Untouchability is defined as the quality or condition of being an untouchable,

ascribed in the Vedic tradition to persons of low caste or to persons excluded from
the caste system. Untouchables means pollution by the touch of a particular group
of persons or family born in a caste. This system is generally seen in Hindu
society. The Webster's dictionary describes the Untouchables as, “members of a
large hereditary group in India having traditional Hindu belief and quality of
defiling by contact the persons, food or drink of a member of a higher caste, and
formerly being strictly degraded and restricted to menial work”. DEFINITIONS
OF UNTOUCHABILITY:

a) Maharashi V.R. Shinde: “A nation-wide co-institution indicating three features

of often observing pollution, asking to live outside of village and not giving equal
legal protection of law.

b) Mahatma M.K. Gandhi: “Untouchability means pollution by the touch of certain

persons by reason of their birth in a particular state of family”.

c) Dr. Babasaheb B.R. Ambedkar: “Untouchability is the notion of defilement, it is

a case of permanent hereditary stain which nothing can cleanse”

d) Mr. Justice N. Sreenivasan Rao: “The use of the work untouchability refers to
the meaning of the term in the context of the historical development of the practice
and does not connote its literal meaning.Untouchability is a menace and social evil
associated with traditional Hindu society. It is being practiced since times
immemorial and despite various efforts made by social reformers such as Dr. B. R.
Ambedkar; and despite there being provision on abolition of untouchability in our
Constitution under Article 17, the evil is still in practice in our country.

Untouchability is a practice in which some lower caste people are kept at a

distance, denied of social equality and made to suffer from some disabilities for
their touch, is considered to be contaminating or polluting the higher caste people.
The word “untouchable” applies to the despised and degraded section of the Hindu
Population. The untouchables occupy the bottom most place in the society and
have been subjected to various social, cultural and other kinds of disabilities and
exploitation for their very touch by the higher caste people.

Untouchability is an age-old practice in India. According to Mahatma Gandhi, “it

is the hate fullest expression of caste”. According to Dr. D.N. Majumdar, “the
untouchable castes are those who suffer from various social and political
disabilities, many of which are traditionally prescribed and socially enforced by
higher castes”.2

Untouchability is the social practice of casting out a minority group by regarding

them as "ritually polluted" and segregating them from the mainstream. The
excluded group could be one that did not accept the norms of the excluding group
and historically included foreigners, nomadic tribes, law-breakers and criminals.
This exclusion was a method of punishing law-breakers and also protected against
contagion from strangers. A member of the excluded group is known as an
untouchable. The people who are said untouchable are from that section of society
which is not only held in the lowest esteem, but which is behaved by the other
castes as unclean. Who are found to be the sweepers, cleaner, and leather tanners
are considered as unfit for human society or co-mingling. They are not permitted to
take their water from the public wells.
The word caste was loosely used by the Portuguese to denote the Indian social
classification as they thought that the system was intended to preserver purity of
blood. The system is such a peculiar and complex thing that no satisfactory
definition is possible. Hence we find no unanimity among scholars on the subject.
Senart states that 'a caste is a close corporation, exclusive and in theory at any rate
rigorously hereditary. It is equipped with ascertain traditional and independent
organization, including a chief and a council, meeting on occasion in assemblies
endowed with less full authority.
According to sir H. Risley, 'a caste may be defined as a collection of families or
groups of families bearing a common name, claiming common descent from a
mythical ancestor, human or divine, professing to follow the same hereditary

2
From the link - sociologydiscussion.com/essay/untouchability/essay-on-untouchability-
meaning-evil-effects-and-suggestions-for-its-removal/2688
calling, and regarded by those who are competent to give opinion as forming a
single homogeneous community .the name generally denotes or is associated with
a specific occupation. A caste is almost invariably endogamous in the sense that a
member of the large circle denoted by the common name may not marry outside
that circle, but within the circle there are usually a number of smaller circles each
which is also endogamous.' The 'untouchables' have been referred to as Schedule
Castes and Schedule Tribes. Local names for the 'untouchables' are in different
parts of India and known by different names: Bhangi, Pakhi, Chandal, etc.
Mahatma Gandhi called them Harijans, which means children of God. It is still in
wide use especially in Gandhi's home state of Gujarat. Harijans are now Dalits,
which means broken people.3

3
From the link - ukessays.com/essays/sociology/the-social-practice-of-untouchability-sociology-essay.php
Historical background:

Hindu culture was made of four castes according to work of people. There are the
brahmins, the highest or scholarly people, kshatriya, the caste of the ancient kings
or warriors; the vaisya, the farmers and traders; and the sudras, laborers. The
people, who come under the sudras caste, are treated with disdain, but not as
outcasts. Today, the caste system is become more complicated and having many
subdivisions, each forming a social organization whose function is to protect caste
members. In Manu Smriti there is written that the first part of a Brahmin's name
should denote something auspicious, a Kshatriya's name should be connected with
power, and that a Vaishya's name should reminds wealth. The first part of a Sudra's
name should express something contemptible and the second part should describe
the service, because of the Sudra's low origin. According to Hindu practice, only
the upper castes are given right to study the Vedas. 'If the Sudra intentionally
listens for committing to memory the Veda, then his ears should be filled with
molten lead and lac; if he utters the Veda, then his tongue should be cut off, if he
has mastered the Veda his body should be cut to pieces' says the Manu Smriti. In
the epic Ramayana, after Lord Rama's return from exile, a Brahmin accuses him of
causing the death of his son by his toleration of Shambuka, a Sudra who recited the
Vedas. In order to control the situation, Rama finds Shambuka and killed him. The
Brahmin boy got life again. In Manu Smriti different punishments are given for the
same 'crime', depending on the culprit's caste. If this much punishments were for
the Sudras, what was the treatment reserved for the 'untouchables' who were
outside the caste system, and placed even lower than the Sudras in society. In the
1500s, during the rule of the Marathas and the Peshwas 'untouchables' were not
allowed within the gates of the Poona between 3.00 pm and 9.00 am. The reason
was that during this time their bodies were casting long shadows, with the reason
that the shadow of an 'untouchable' might fall on a Brahmin and pollute him. An
'untouchable' used to carry an earthen pot around his neck so his spittle might not
pollute the earth by the shadow. In Maharashtra an 'untouchable' wore a black
thread either in his neck or on his wrist for ready identification of upper caste
people, while in Gujarat a horn was being worn for identification. It must be
remembered that Dalit does not mean Caste or low-Caste or poor; it refers to the
deplorable state or condition to which a large group of people has been reduced by
social convention and in which they are now living.4

4
From the book – “Ancient india”byV.d. Mahajan.
Protection under constitution:
India's government and legal system when dealing with dalits or 'untouchables' is
fraught with contradiction. This is evident in the disparities between upper and
lower castes, in terms of economic and political power, and is a consequence of the
States differential treatment of these sections. The Indian Constitution - the writing
of which was chaired by the most powerful dalit advocate for dalit rights, Dr.
Ambedkar embodies civil and legal rights providing for non-discrimination.
However, secular legal and constitutional structures are contradictory to the
prevalent ancient Hindu law: religious, social and economic practices that involve
a discriminative hierarchy based on hereditary social status, occupation and ritual
duties. Stratification of society benefits the upper classes as it secures positions of
economic and social power, and allows the exploitation of the lower castes; Hindu
beliefs and law sanction this. It is therefore not in their interest to remove
discrimination by the implementation of the constitutional principles and laws in
favors of the dalits. The Indian state hasn't, to date, taken a serious approach to the
betterment of the dalit situation because it is essentially aligned with the upper
castes. The provision of reservations for government seats, employment and higher
education has improved the living standard of some dalits, yet most remain in
poverty. Reservations provide positive discrimination; ironically this also
stereotypes dalits, resulting in their continual segregation in society. The state has
not successfully provided due access to education, equitable employment,
ownership of land and legal protection to break the cycle of caste based
oppression. Dalit political parties and movements for the assertion of rights and
self determination have been numerous and varied, but have been successfully
quelled by the state and upper castes through the use of political power, violence,
and police intimidation, all contrary to the constitution.
Hindus maintain the caste system because their religion requires them to do so, and
caste is a characteristic of Brahmanism, the Brahmans being at the top of the
system.Dalits, as they will be referred to here, are a sub caste of people at the
bottom of the Hindu social and religious hierarchy called Varna Dharma; due to
polluting nature of their occupations which include
handling dead animals, cleaning, and jobs to do with human excrement. They are
forced to behave in de-humanizing ways such the eating of excrement.
The interaction of the castes andjatis, or endogamous sub divisions relating to
occupation, is known as the jajmani system. Hindus have relied on this system to
divide labour, social and commensally relations and ensure economic and social
co-operation.2 On every level the dalits have been discriminated against, and
subordinated into servitude.3 Ambedkar in his leadership role in the Indian
constituent assembly sought to erase the oppressive caste system by raising dalit
awareness and empowerment through provisions in the constitution. Article 15 and
17 prohibits the practice of untouchability and discrimination based on caste.4 In
hindsight, these basic aims seem too lofty to be realized, given that dalits still
remain disenfranchised in relation to the implementation of these articles. Forty
years later, writing in 1994, Dr. B.D Sharma describes the Indian micro-universe
as separated into the 'first world,' where people exercise their rights and have
access to courts and police for protection under the law and 'the other world' where
people do not.5 The first world comprises of only 15-20% of the population and
the other world makes up the majority of 'disinherited' and exploited people.6 In
addition, The Civil Rights Protection Act, 1955, intended to abolish disabilities
associated with backward classes including dalits. While creating an atmosphere
where the inequalities suffered by the dalits have been publicly condemned, the
constitutional measures have been rendered ineffective as they are mostly ignored
in practice.7 Dalits make up 77% of agricultural labour which is classified as
unskilled and unorganised. In the urban setting, they are labourers in construction,
scavengers and sanitation workers, also falling into the unorganized category.
Wages in the organized sector are regulated by the State so that they rise with
increased prices, and are adequate enough for one wage earner to sustain a family.
Labourers bear the brunt of the disparity between organized and unorganized
sections.
Violations of minimum wage, set very low in the first place, and payment in kind
are common, and go unchecked.8 Consequently, one wage cannot support a family
and children and the elderly are forced to work, children don't go to school and are
trapped by poverty.9 The State allows illegal labour practices because exploitation
results in economic benefits for landowners and employers who are mostly upper
caste, if it should interfere, moredalits may be able to enter the organised sector,
and thus this exploitable labour resource would be drained. Although this massive
failure of participation in the organised economy could be corrected by affirmative
action policies, these have also been insufficient.
Article 330 and 332 of the constitution call for affirmative action in the form of
special reservations in government representation, government employment and
higher education,
intended to raise the dalit position in society. Reserved seats are allocated in the
LokSabha, and the legislative assemblies of the states, effectively giving dalits
representation.
The scheduled castes and scheduled tribes (The Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989
was designed to better punish offences such as injury or harassment directed at
dalits. In addition, Article 14 of the constitution states that no citizen be denied
equality before the law. Ghandi believed that the superior/inferior relations
between dalits and upper castes could not be remedied by the state, but needed to
be addressed by the upper castes themselves who were responsible for the system.
 Untouchability in India before Independence

Before the Independence of the India untouchability and caste system was at the
peak and was the main reason of pulling the country’s growth and development
back. Lower caste people were considered as the polluted people by the higher
caste people and were strictly prohibited to do some common activities. Some of
are mentioned below:

 Untouchable people were strictly prohibited to eat together with caste members in
the society.

 They were separated by providing separate utensils, seating arrangements, food

arrangements in the villages during any social functions and festivals celebration.

 They were prohibited to enter to the temples, using any comfortable things like
umbrella, wearing sandals, entering to the home of higher caste people, bicycle
riding in the village, using common village path in front of the higher caste people.

 They were separated by providing other burial grounds.

 They were banned to use common public resources like wells, temples, ponds,
schools and etc.

 They were forcefully bounded to do only labour works in the society.

 They were threatened for permanent social banishment if denied to carry out their
regular duties.
Untouchability in India after Independence

After the independence of the India, untouchability became an illegal issue and
treated as the social development inhibitor. However, in rural areas of the country
it was continue but it came as a big social problem in the urban areas. It was very
necessary to empower the lower caste people means untouchable people in the
society in order to get the whole country development.

After independence, the Indian government has given some constitutional

reservations for backwards in both areas like education and employment.
Backwards class people were given access to use the common public resources
with same authority. New age caste youths have played a big role in removing the
practice of inequality in the society by developing the tradition of inter-caste
marriages.5

5
From the link – womenplanet.in/society/untouchability
UNTOUCHABILITY AND ITS BACKGROUND

Untouchability, an ancient form of discrimination based upon caste, is a complex

and pervasive problem within India, although its practice is not limited to India
alone. For millennia, the practice of untouchability has marginalized, terrorized,
and relegated a sector of Indian society to a life marked by violence, humiliation,
and indignity. The discrimination is so pervasive that many Dalits come to believe
that they are responsible for their own suffering and exclusion, internalizing the
beliefs that perpetuate the practice of untouchability. As India emerges as the
world’s largest democracy and one of the largest and most developed economies,
the practice of caste discrimination remains in stark contrast to the image of
progress which the Government of India seeks to promote within the international
community. Thus, like a shameful secret, a “hidden apartheid,” untouchability
remains an extremely sensitive issue within India. Its practice is never fully
defined, never fully explored and, thus, never fully understood. What is known is
that untouchability is: ƒ A lived experience of all people in India – either as
survivors and challengers (approximately 164.8 million Dalits) or as beneficiaries,
perpetrators, bystanders and witnesses (approximately 862.2 million non-Dalits);
ƒ Sanctioned by the dominant religion in India, Hinduism, in its most important
texts (e.g., the Vedas and Manusmruti), but in practice, all major religions in India
participate in the perpetuation of untouchability; ƒ Abolished and its practice
prohibited by the Constitution of India, as well as by some of the most important
legislation in India (the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1976 and the Prevention of
Atrocity Act, 1989); and, ƒ One of the most divisive issues in the country’s
history, bringing into conflict two of the most important political leaders in the
history of India – Mohandas K. Gandhi and Dr. BhimraoAmbekdar. Since the
United Nations World Conference against Racism held in Durban, South Africa in
2001, caste-based untouchability has become an extremely important issue outside
of India as well. Dalit and human rights organizations have raised awareness of the
topic, trying to shed light on the daily abuse and atrocities suffered. Due in large
part to the effective advocacy of these organizations, the United Nations has
consistently raised concerns that the Government of India may be falling short of
its international legal obligations in the face of the continued practice of
untouchability and the de facto discrimination that exists alongside it. Despite the
growing domestic and international concern over untouchability, a Constitutional
prohibition against its practice, laws that implement this constitutional prohibition,
and international human rights protections, the daily lived experience of many
Dalits seems unchanged. The discriminatory regime of untouchability remains in
place. This study seeks to better understand untouchability, with the belief that
only a better understanding of the problem will lead to the true abolition of the
practice.

UNTOUCHABILITY : A SOCIAL EVIL

Untouchability is basically not from India. It was practiced in parts of Europe until
a few centuries ago, and Japan still has a large number of "Untouchables", called
the 'Burakumin'. But it is in the Indian Sub-continent that this system survives,
closely bound with culture, religion, history and politics. Today over 170 million
people in India are considered Untouchable, and their development has been slow
despite the Legal safeguards and the Government programs. According to the
'Manu Smriti' there are four castes in Hindu society and each caste has assigned
duties, responsibilities and privileges. The Brahmins are the learned, the Kshatriyas
are the warriors, the Vaishyas are the traders, and the Sudras perform menial tasks
and physical labour, and are considered as the lowest. And only uppers castes have
the right to study the Vedas. The upper castes alone have the right to the thread
ceremony which is performed as a rite of passage, allowing them to be termed
twice-born.
What is a Dharma?
A study reveals that "he who has the knowledge of Brahmagnan is called the
Brahmana", and not by caste or not by the birth. Each one of us is an untouchable,
because who among us is free from disobedience to Nature's laws, from impurity
of heart and mind, from fears of a thousand kinds, from selfishness and greed. Let
us remove the untouchability in us. Anyone is not perfect, but through right
dharma, by eliminating our differences and by strengthening our virtues, we move
towards perfection. Let us develop the virtue of efficiency and skill to become
Shudras; the virtue of charity and become Vaishyas; the courage and become
Kshatriyas; the sacrifice and become Brahman, and make ourselves in the copy of
the Great Purusha, the Radiant.
According to the "Bhagwadgeetha" or "The Bible" or any other, written, or said, is
the same, that all humans are equal. The Air we breathe, the Water we drink, the
Fire, the Sky, the Earth are same. These days Indian students and citizens are being
attacked in some countries, and we are discussing and talking about the
"RACISM" and craving for justice. We should condemn these at any cost, but it
would be fair if we stop those things in here.
What is Untouchability?
Untouchability in India is a practice where a particular community considers even
touching another community person as polluting one. A person who touches the
untouchables is usually made to undergo cleansing process, like bathing, or
spraying of water, depending on the regional practice.
Who practices untouchability?
There is an intense propaganda that untouchability is practiced by higher caste
people over lower caste people. But that is no right. Untouchability is practiced
by almost all castes, right from brahmin caste to the dalit caste. Even the dalit
castes practice untouchability over others. One dalit caste will not even drink water
from another dalit caste.
Does Untouchability mean segregation?
Segregation in western sense, means, classification and isolating a certain groups
of people, for varied reasons. Segregation is mostly associated with authority
based society like the western one. Normally, the criminals, rebels, and other anti-
social elements only are segregated from the mainstream society, and deported to
far off lands or put in jail. This is what happened in the western societies.
In general, segregation means, separation of different groups of people from one
another, and no relationship exists among these groups. For example, in Europe,
the protestants and the catholics are segregated, and there is no healthy relationship
b/w them, except for that both worship jesus. Similarly, shias and sunnis are
segregated people, without any interdependence. But, untouchability does not
mean segregating. Because, untouchability was mutually practiced by all
groups. In caste system, even though people practiced untouchability, the different
castes are interdependent on one another, thus always having some kind of
interaction and relationship.
Does Untouchability mean isolation?
Definitely not, there may be segregation of houses of castes in some villages. But
there is never isolation in any villages. Almost all castes interact with each other,
because, all castes depend on one another for some needs. The level of interaction
differs from caste to caste. For example, the dalits will strictly not mingle with
other dalit caste, eg. Sakkiliars will never drink water from parayars. But, they
will get food and water from the dominant caste of that region. Similarly, the
dominant castes like chettiyars, devars, nayakkars, etc may have interactions on
equal footing. But still, they do not mingle with one another.
There are few communities, who have to closely interact with one
another. Particularly in kongu region, the naavithars, vannan community, kosavar
community, etc have close interaction with the dominant gounder community. The
naavithars (barbers) usually conduct most of the rituals, right from birth to death in
the gounder's family. It is they who used to sing mangazhavaazhthu during
gounder's marriage.
Why does a caste practice untouchability?
There is no definite answer to this, as the reason may vary from place to place. But
based on my understanding, untouchability is practices because of extreme cultural
contradictions. Let me list out the possible reasons for untouchability, as i
perceive.
Life style: We all know India is a land of cultural diversity, and that the life style
of one community largely differs from others. For eg, a brahmin community
follows strict hygiene, and are strict vegetarians. On the other hand, the farmers
and farm laborer castes usually work in fields; do not have hygienic life
practices. The dalit community works on cow skins, which is a sin to brahmin
community. So it's natural that the brahmins could not mingle with other castes.
Commune Living: Most of the castes live a strong commune life, with a common
profession. So, the life styles of all the community members are aligned towards
that lifestyle. And there are strong inter dependencies among the community
member. In such commune living, people used to live as large families, with
common interest. In such cases, when a member of the family or community,
elopes with the other community girl or boy, it creates a confusion in the large
family. The incoming girl/boy may not adapt to the family life style, and may not
adapt to the community profession. For example, a brahmin girl will not be able to
work in fields if she marries a farmer. Or a farming girl may not be able to work in
leather products if she marries a dalit. So, the society has evolved itself to an
inbuilt arrangement, not to mingle with each other.
Prisoners of war: On those days (before Muslim invasion), when a king was
defeated in a war, he captures the prisoners of war, and deports to his kingdom to
work as laborers or current empire may be ruled by the enemy for few years, and
recaptured by the original king. In such case, the people settled there by the former
temporary ruler, may lose their status, and become laborers. In such cases, the
victorious king may take steps to suppress the settled external people, so that they
don't again attempt to overthrow him.
Religious Differences: I need not mention about Hindu Muslim differences. That
is entirely a different subject. However, there are many sub sects within Hinduism,
which had opposed each other. Particularly the influence of Buddhism had
profound impact on suppressing those people who work on leather products, as
Buddhist believed in ahimsa. The vegetarian character of India is believed to have
acquired during Buddhist rule. Also, since anyone who left the caste is usually
abandoned by the community, those who had converted to Buddhism might have
been left out after Buddhism waned way. Today, for many of the dalit people, their
kuladeivam is Vishnu.
Cultural Differences: Apart from life style, the cultural values of the castes also an
important reason for untouchability. For example, the ruling castes had stricter
cultural values, which they have followed for generations. For example, widow
remarriage is not allowed in dominant castes. But it's normal in dalit castes. The
widow in dominant caste often follows sati, whereas it is not required in the dalit
castes.
Lineages: The common culture and profession resulted in a common lineage over
centuries, which evolved the respective castes in to distinctive identities, which had
made them not to mingle with others.
ORIGIN OF CASTE SYSTEM

The caste system as we see it today has not been pronounced in just one book;
infact it has been shaped by multiple texts. The most ancient mention of the caste
system is found in the Rig Veda, believed to be developed between 1500-800 BC,
where it was called the Varna system. It classified the society into four varnas:

 the Brahmins: priests, scholars and teachers;

 the Kshatriyas: rulers, warriors and administrators;
 the Vaishyas: cattle herders, agriculturists, artisans and merchants; and
 theShudras: labourers and service providers.

These distinctions were mentioned in the PurushaSukta verse of the Veda,

although some scholars believe that this clause was added much later than the
Vedic period. Similar laws were articulated in Manu Smriti, which is believed to
be written between 200 BC-200 AD and which served as the guiding text for
formulating Hindu laws by the British government. Even Mahabharata, the text of
which was completed by 4th century AD, had mentions of the four-tier Varna
system.

All of these texts associated particular traits with each class: Brahmins were
considered to be pure, wise and gentle; Kshatriyas were linked with anger, pleasure
and boldness; Vaishyas were deemed to be hard-working people living off the
plough; and Shudras were associated with violence and impurity, worthy of
contempt. As such, their social status began to be perceived in the declining order
– Brahmins were highly respected and obeyed while Shudras were despised and
ordered. Over time, particular castes were placed even below Shudras and were
called Avarnas – not belonging to any class. They were supposed to do menial jobs
as sweepers, gutter cleaners, scavengers, watchmen, farm laborers, rearers of
unclean animals such as pigs, and curers of hides. People from such castes are
called Dalits (meaning oppressed) in modern times. Although many of them have
moved to other professions over time, yet the general perception against them has
remained to be one of hatred and loathe.6

6
From the link - http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/society/the-concept-of-untouchability-in-india-718-
words/4832/
Exceptions from Untouchability:

The saints and rishis are mostly exempted from untouchability. It means, almost
all communities welcomed rishis and saints, and the saints also embraced all
communities. Also, the saints are placed outside the caste system, as they have
raised one level above in their life, towards the god. Most of the kings never
practiced untouchability, and they were mostly secular. Moreover, they did not
have the situation or the time to do that. Good and Bad in this world are highly
relative term rather than a universally defined one. In the society of barbarians,
murderers and rapists, a thief could be the best person among others. However, in a
society of saints and nobles, the same thief would be the worst person. Thus when
we are judging anything as good/bad, we need to consider the environment and
prevailing situation.
There was heavy propaganda of dalit oppression and suppression by the Marxists,
for around a century here. But even assuming their propaganda to be true, let's see
how the dalit people were treated here. The dalits lived in a separate colony in the
same village. The dalits are not slaves. They were mere laborers to the land
owners. They have the right to move to other village, if they feel, the current
village is discriminatory or not able to live in. A typical dalit community is allowed
to have their own commune life, simply because, untouchability prevented the
dominant caste from abusing or exploiting them. The dalits had their own temple,
their own festivals.
The dalits had similar type of caste structure, with gothrams and kuladeivams. A
dalit married from a different gothram of his caste from another village. These
ensured that the dalit people also had relations among multiple villages and have
their own social structure to follow with. Since the dalit people were allowed to
live as a community, their women had the inherent protection from exploitation. In
the case of American slave system each African women is an individual slave,
which the owner can do whatever he want. Other slaves cannot come to rescue if
the owner rapes the slave women. However, in our caste system, the women were
part of the dalit community, and they could not be exploited. Also, since the
dominant caste practiced untouchability over the dalits, their youths refrained from
mingling with dalit girls; as such an act would excommunication from his caste. It
is same for the dalit people too.
The dalit people had their own panchayat for issue resolution. This is the highest
point of freedom that any community might have. The elders in the dalit caste
usually try to solve the problem. If that fails, they take the case to the village
panchayat head.
To quote a recent history of India, the entire Kashmir valley had been ethnically
cleansed of Hindus, just because the Muslims could not tolerate the presence of
Hindus. So when they became majority they persecuted the Hindus. However, it
has to be noted that the Hindus, even though invaded by Muslims were able to
tolerate them for thousands of years, by simply practicing untouchability. There are
many other instances in the history where I find that untouchability would have
prevented genocides, persecution and other horrors of the history. Comparing those
incidents with our caste system, we find that untouchability is a practical system
evolved as a solution to peaceful existence of conflicting communities.
In villages, even though castes follow untouchability, each caste knows the
members of the other caste. When the dalit caste had any needs, they always
approach the dominant caste. The dominant caste provides food to the dalit
people, when they come to the home. The dalit women often share their problems
with the dominant caste women and seek solution. Thus there is a mutually
supporting life in villages, inspire of untouchability. Let me ask, how many people
in rich posh areas, know the people of the nearby slum. Or how many rich people
help the slum people in needy times? Let's take the case of gang wars in
colleges. Students belonging to one group won't interact with the other. It's the
norm in many colleges. It's natural because, when there are differences, people
chose to live away.
CONCLUSION

The roots of untouchability in the Indian context are to be found in the socio-
religious structure and more importantly in the time-honoured system of social
stratification based on caste. The ideology of highness and lowness engendered
among the people belonging to various castes has fostered the growth of
untouchability. Untouchability, therefore, has its genesis in the Indian caste
system.

Untouchability is that system of society on account of which one individual cannot

touch another individual and one society cannot touch another society on the basis
of convention and if so touches, becomes profane and in order to remove that
profanity has to perform penance.
BIBLIOGRAPHY

∙ ANCIENT INDIA BY V.D. MAHAJAN

∙ ANCIENT INDIAN SOCIAL HISTORY BY ROMILA THAPAR

∙ DISCOVERY OF INDIA BY JAWAHARLAL NEHRU

∙ THE DISCOVERY OF ANCIENT INDIA BY UPINDER SINGH

REFERENCES
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Untouchability

 http://www.sociologydiscussion.com/essay/untouchability/essay-on-untouchability-
meaning-evil-effects-and-suggestions-for-its-removal/2688

 http://www.womenplanet.in/society/untouchability

 http:// http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/society/the-concept-of-untouchability-in-india-
718-words/4832/