Scientific Hinduism Book 2 Brahminical C

सतयमे व जयते
Scientific Hinduism
Book 2
Brahminical (caste) Hinduism:

a system of institutionalised
oppression
Sanjeev Sabhlok
Draft 19 August 2013
i
The effects of caste discrimination on India’s almost 200 million Dalits are
strikingly similar to that of race discrimination: social stigmatization,
physical segregation, lack of access to education and social
advancement, under-representation at all levels in government, business
and the organized labor market. [Source]
In Hinduism, ‘the type of birth you take in this world, and the conditions
of your existence here are all determined by what you did in your earlier
existences. You may even be born as an animal, says the Upanishad, if
the karma is very bad’ (Vivekananda)
* * *
I once met a Mahar, who, fearing that I was going near him and that my
purity might then be defiled in case I touched him, and that he might
incur the sin of defiling my purity, cried out at once and made his caste
known to me. I got into conversation with him. I found that Mahar, though
illiterate, could repeat many verses of Tukaram, Namdeo and
Chokhamela. He appeared to be well acquainted with the theories of
Karma and Bhakti, and of transmigration of soul. He believed that though
he was a Mahar in that birth, by some misdoings in his past life, he was
going to become a Brahmana in the next birth, as he felt the desire for
learning Sanskrit, and reading Gita and Puranas. He conceived that these
desires were clear indications of the better birth which he was going to
get in his next life.
I do not know how far such sentiments exist in other members of the
tribe. Bid it is not improbable that very many of the low castes believe, or
are made to believe, that they justly suffer in this condition as a
retribution for the sins which they did in the past life. [THE HISTORY OF
CASTE IN INDIA by SHRIDHAR V. KETKAR (1909)]
ii
Book 2
Contents
1. We, the self-respecting humans, are born free. ..............1

1.1 Equal status in Charvaka Hinduism...........................................3
1.2 Equal status in Islam and Christianity.......................................3
1.3 Alleged equal consciousness in Vedanta...................................3
1.3.1.1 Shankara learnt Advaita from a “low caste” Chandala, but he never
really got the point, did he?...................................................................3
1.4 Say no to caste..........................................................................4
2. Caste is immoral from first principles...............................6

2.1 Violation of basic ethical principles...........................................6
2.1.1 Denial of equal status........................................................6
2.1.1.1 Lower castes called foul names...........................................................6
2.1.1.2 Sudras treated like children.................................................................6
2.1.2 Denial of equal liberty.......................................................6
2.1.2.1 Subtle model of race domination, not race extermination....................7
2.1.3 Destruction of self-respect................................................7
2.1.4 Different justice for different castes..................................8
2.2 What’s wrong with eugenics, scientific racism, Hindutva and
Hindu caste system?.....................................................................8
2.2.1 A worldview that groups disparate people together on
GENETIC (birth based) criteria is collectivist:.....................8
2.2.2 These worldviews violate the basic principle of equality of
status of mankind:.............................................................8
2.3 Hypothesis: India’s caste system contributed a CRITICAL
justification for global racism........................................................9
3. Not just destruction of liberty but oppression and

VIOLENCE..................................................................12
3.1 Control over key life events....................................................12
3.2 Careful ‘domestication’ (victim-consent) of the oppressed ....12
3.3 Obnoxious suggestion that others ‘pollute’ us........................13
3.4 Possible link of ‘pollution’ with beef eating.............................13
3.5 Blaming victims for their plight...............................................14
3.5.1 Vivekananda chastised non-Brahmins.............................14
3.6 Economic discrimination.........................................................15
3.6.1 Lower castes not likely to be given jobs..........................15
3.6.2 Lower castes regularly cheated in economic trasactions 15
3.7 Mistreatment and humiliation of lower castes/ outcastes.......16
3.7.1 Shivaji’s humiliation........................................................16
3.8 Untouchability, and violence against the outcastes................22
3.8.1 GK Gokhale’s comment on untouchability.......................22
3.8.2 Extract from Gandhi........................................................22
3.8.3 Oppression of Dalits........................................................23
3.8.4 Jagjivan Ram humiliated .................................................23
3.8.5 Ambedkar humiliated .....................................................24
3.9 Violence.................................................................................. 24
3.9.1 Killing Dalits who removed a dead cow’s hide.................24
iii
3.9.2 Some illustrations of violence..........................................24
3.9.3 Dalit literature shows the magnitude of oppression........25
3.9.3.1 Dalit journals...................................................................................... 25
3.10 Mistreatment and humiliation of women...............................25
4. Deliberate lowering of intelligence of the oppressed?....26

4.1 Indian average national IQ is extremely low...........................26
4.2 How can we explain the superior (on average) intellectual
performance of the Brahmin ‘caste’?..........................................30
4.3 Self-perception of the Dalits....................................................33
4.4 My revised model of IQ that includes pre-birth IQ factors and
links with freedom, to explain GDP.............................................33
4.5 Increase in IQ expected among the Dalits once oppressions is
eliminated................................................................................... 34
4.6 Narrowing the IQ gap with China............................................35
4.7 Disproving the myth of race will require abolishing caste.......35
5. Do the oppressed make the rules? Of course not...........36

5.1 Summary................................................................................. 36
5.2 Vedas...................................................................................... 38
5.2.1 Rig Veda..........................................................................38
5.3 Dharmashastras......................................................................38
5.3.1 Manu’s laws.....................................................................38
5.3.2 Taittiriya Brahmana ........................................................39
5.3.3 Vishnu Smriti ..................................................................40
5.3.4 Apastamba Dharma Sutra ..............................................40
5.3.5 Vishnusmriti....................................................................40
5.3.6 Vashishtha Dharma Sutra................................................40
5.4 Ramayana...............................................................................41
5.4.1 Beheading of Sudra Sambook.........................................41
5.5 Support from Vivekananda and other leaders.........................41
5.6 Ambedkar, however, denied that Brahmins created caste......42
6. Do the oppressed defend caste? Of course not..............44

6.1 Vivekananda glorified Brahmins .............................................44
6.2 Har Bilas Sarda thought caste was efficient............................45
6.3 Bhai Parmanand thought caste is required for social duties. .46
6.4 Hindu Council: “The Caste System” by Raj Pandit Sharma.....46
7. The hereditary and biological (racist) underpinning of

caste.........................................................................47
7.1 The give away is in its name: Varna Vyavastha......................47
7.2 Further, caste is 100 per cent biological (hereditary).............47
7.3 The leakage in ‘colour’ through marrying “lower caste” women
47
7.4 Foolish arguments denying the biological (‘race’) basis of caste
48
7.4.1 “But there is no real difference in skin colour!”..............48
7.4.2 Ambedkar did not think skin colour underpinned caste. .48
7.4.3 Soli Sorabjee, Andre Beteille and the Government of India
......................................................................................... 48
iv
Book 2
7.4.4 Anthropologist Dipankar Gupta of Jawaharlal Nehru
University ........................................................................49
7.5 Learned Hindus have clearly expouned the race basis of caste
51
7.5.1 Through caste “our forefathers protected themselves
from interfusion with an inferior race” (Harendranath
Maitra)..............................................................................51
7.5.2 “Why has the white complexion of our forefathers now
become black?” (Vivekananda)........................................51
7.5.3 The original “Aryans” were from Abyssinia, the people
with “frightful shapes” (Dayanand Saraswati) GET THE
RIGHT ONE.......................................................................52
7.5.4 Analytical perspective confirms perceived biological
difference (Badri Raina)...................................................54
7.6 Buddhist literature clearly refers to the common perception of
caste being linked with birth.......................................................56
7.7 Top Indian experts see clear links with race, at origin of the
concept....................................................................................... 57
7.7.1 Ghurye thought that caste started with ‘race’................57
7.7.2 The original migrations into India....................................59
7.8 Caste and eugenics: further proof of its strong links with race
59
7.8.1 The Caste System: “a Great Eugenic Movement in the
truest sense of the word”. Btw, if you are a girl, avoid
marrying a hairy man.......................................................59
7.9 Strong skin colour preference in India.....................................68
7.10 The mistreatment of foreign ‘white’ women tourists in India 69
8. Rationalisation for oppression through hierarchies of the

soul...........................................................................70
8.1 The soul is (re)born into a caste based on its karma...............70
8.1.1 Gandhi’s view..................................................................71
8.1.2 Vivekananda’s logic for reincarnation of the “soul” is very
good, but DNA and evolution explains much better.........72
8.1.3 J.N. Farquhar’s findings...................................................75
8.2 Charvakas rejected reincarnation...........................................75
8.3 Buddhists rejected reincarnation of soul??..............................75
9. Lots of red herrings thrown in to confound the truth......76

9.1 Red herring: Caste is not determined at birth.........................76
9.2 Red herring: Caste is not intrinsic to Hinduism.......................76
9.3 Red herring: Caste is a professional association.....................77
9.4 Red herring: Caste is class......................................................78
9.5 Red herring: there was never any discrimination, anyway......82
9.6 Red herring: Caste is cultural..................................................83
9.7 Red herring: Other countries have a caste system, too..........84
9.8 Red herring: Many reform movements opposed caste so it is
not an issue................................................................................84
9.9 Red herring: Caste is dying, hence irrelevant.......................105
10. The escape from oppression......................................107

10.1 Reform that (at least partially) worked...............................107
v
10.1.1 Brahmo Samaj.............................................................107
10.1.1.1 Raja Ram Mohun Roy (India’s first classical liberal) was also the first
MAJOR opponent of caste...................................................................107
10.1.1.2 Some of India’s major Brahmo Samajis .........................................107
10.1.2 Aryan (noble) Brahmins discarded their sacred thread
180 years ago. Any Aryan Hindus found today?.............108
10.2 Reform that failed...............................................................109
10.2.1 Buddha........................................................................109
10.2.2 Shankara.....................................................................111
10.2.3 Bhakti movements......................................................111
10.2.4 Dayanand Saraswati and Arya Samaj..........................112
10.2.5 Ramakrishna Mission...................................................113
10.2.6 Gandhi – a reformer but great racist and believer in
caste.............................................................................. 114
10.2.7 Periyar.........................................................................116
10.2.8 Rajiv Malhotra’s advice...............................................117
10.3 Net effect of the challenge of Christianity: Hinduism split into
four 117
10.4 Conversion to other religions cannot help...........................117
10.4.1 To Christianity.............................................................117
10.4.2 To Islam.......................................................................118
10.5 Why going to another organised religion is like going from the
frying pan into the fire..............................................................118
10.5.1 Organised religions SYSTEMATICALLY shuts out critical
thinking..........................................................................118
10.6 Five methods to end the oppressiveness of the caste system
119
10.7 No role for government in removal of caste........................122
10.8 Are Dalits not interested in removal of caste?....................122
10.9 Escape into reason: Scientific Hinduism..............................122
10.10 Only higher castes oppose the abolition of caste..............122
10.10.1 A Hindu writing in Mahratta in favour of caste..........123
11. Economic explantion for the persistence of caste......124

11.1 Lohia’s explanation.............................................................124
11.2 Kaivan Munshi’s explanation...............................................124
11.3 Free markets and social minimum......................................125
12. An outline of Scientific Hinduism ...............................126

12.1 Scientific Hinduism rejects the concept of caste.................126
12.1.1 There is no soul, or at least no proof of soul/God that I
can personally confirm...................................................126
12.1.2 Even if there is a soul, it visits the earth only once.....127
12.1.3 Classical liberalism and caste are polar opposites......128
12.2 Scientific Hinduism the plausibility of Vedanta...................129
12.2.1 The need to ask for proof: Vivekanda’s pre-vedanta days
....................................................................................... 129
12.2.2 But Vedanta still represents the best in Hinduism......129
13. References.................................................................130
Appendix: India’s official position regarding caste
discrimination.........................................................133
vi
Book 2
GOI position regarding caste......................................................133
In 1965 GOI agreed that caste groups were downtrodden....133
In 1996 GOI linked caste to class..........................................133
In 2001 GOI said caste is not anyone else’s business to discuss
....................................................................................... 133
International position on caste...................................................134
In 2002 CERD confirmed opposition to caste discrimination. 134
In 2009 CERD re-confirmed opposition to caste discrimination
....................................................................................... 134
vii
1. We, the self-respecting humans, are born
free.
Classical liberalism rejects inequality of stautus and demands equal

freedom for all humans (within their own nation, i.e. a place where they
pay relevant tax). While much of Hinduism (particularly Advaita) is
compatible with science, reason and liberty, and has been, on average,
the most tolerant religion on this planet, it is fundamentally incompatible
witih key aspects of equality of status and liberty.
The key problem with Hinduism is the caste system. This system of
differentiation amongst Hindus (and others) on basis of their birth, without
regard to their work in real life, is both immoral in itself, and leads to
significant immorality among Hindus during their life.
That doesn’t mean Hinduism is particularly immoral. All religions have
institutionalised immorality. None is free of this basic charge. All organised
religion smacks of an attempt by priests and ‘intermediaries’ to control
the rest of their ‘flock’.
This book is based on some research I’ve conducted over the past few
weeks.
Why have I picked Hinduism for such detailed analysis?
First, India’s low ‘national’ IQ. Why would this be so? Because of low
nutrition (which I’ve covered in Book 1) but also because of the caste
system. India performs very poorly, with the lower castes performing far
worse than even the national average. This can only be explained by the
great harm caused by caste. I’ll discuss this in detail later.
Second, given my close association with Hinduism (being what I was born
and brought up as, being what I’m married into, and being what many of
my friends and colleagues belong to), I explore the immorality of Hinduism
more sternly than I explore the immorality of other religions.
Third, being born as an Indian, I remain particularly keen that India revert
to its ancient status as a sone ki chidiya, a great prosperous nation. I care
for India’s largest religion more than I care for other religions.
In the end the world will be better off by getting rid of all religion, and
escaping into reason. Only reason can save mankind from its own follies.
I don’t “belong” to anyone, to any religion or “civilisation”. I belong to me,
and I’m an ordinary human being. That’s all I need to be. I ask questions,
and recommend the best ways forward for India and for the world – based
on answers derived from these questions. My contribution is to offer ideas
and leave it to others to consider, on the test of reason.
Ambedkar’s summary of Brahminical Hinduism
Dr. Ambedkar came to the conclusion that, “A religion which glorifies
ignorance and impudently preached inequality, hatred, divided
human beings into multitudinous Castes and sub Castes, sanctioned
poverty and adopted economic measures to keep the majority of its
Book 2
Draft 19 August 2013 1
followers poor, illiterate, ignorant, disunited and divided was
nothing short of infamy.”1
In this regard it will be invaluable to read Ambedkar’s essay Annihilation
of Caste, before reading the rest of this book.
Regardless of how it started, the problem of the immorality of caste has
became bigger over the centuries. No doubt there were attempts to fix it,
such as through Brahmo Samaj and others. But Vedantic Hinduism – which
in many way mimicks key elements of Buddhism managed to not only get
back those who deserted Hinduism in favour of Buddhism, but imprisoned
those who returned into the same caste hierarchies from which they had
fled.
But the time the British arrived in India, caste was already a huge blot on
mankind, on par with slavery. It took British scholars a century or more to
even remotely understand the matter, but their understanding remained
incomplete.
Enter Raja Ram Mohun Roy
It needed an Indian scholar to understand the problem and realise that
caste was entirely incompatible with liberty and equality of status – two
revolutionary ideas introduced in Great Britain by the liberals in the 17 th
century.
And once he realised that caste was immoral, he had no option but to
start a new religion, called Brahmo Samaj, a religion without caste.
But given the challenges of communication and hidebound attitudes
within the Indian society, this religion didn’t go far. And I belive it did not
stand as much for reason as it should have.
Abolishing caste is an urgent necessity
Regardless of the action people may choose to undertake after they
personally reject their caste, the fact remains that caste must be
abolished.
Just like slavery continued across the world till classical liberals challenged
it repeatedly, for a century or more, so also caste must be challenged.
Caset is far more subtle than slavery, being a form of ‘self-slavery’ – in
which the slave (victim/lower caste) accepts the FAKE rationalisation
provided by higher castes, and believes he has to obey the higher castes
lest his ‘next life’ be adversely affected.
Slavery was relatively easy to abolish. Caste will take much more effort
and determination.
It must begin with an understanding of the problem and alternatives at
hand. This booklet is a compilation of my initial research. It documents the
harm caused by caste and how it can be brought to and end.
Like all my work, this draft will remain in the public domain and I will work
on it as time permits. It should be treated as work in progress.
1
Source: The Evil of Caste: The Caste System as the Largest Systemic Violation of
Human Rights in Today’s World By Chanan Chahal
2
1.1 Equal status in Charvaka Hinduism
Charvaka was a revolutionary critical thinker and rejected the idea of soul
and hence caste. Total equality of all humans was a mandatory requirem
ent in this model.
1.2 Equal status in Islam and Christianity

Christians, Muslims, Sikhs, Jains are EQUAL within their religion. Why not
Hindus?
Islam and Christianity are known for their insistence on equality. But only
Christian takes this to the next level: of looking after the oppressed. In
many ways, the idea of looking after the oppressed is missing from
Hinduism.
NOTE: It is true that if an Indian converts from Hinduism to any other
religion, he is likely to carry his ‘caste’ along with him. That is much to do
with the deep inroads into the mind made by the caste system, not a
requirement of these other religions.
1.3 Alleged equal consciousness in Vedanta

In some ways, Vedanta is close to Buddhism by considering the common
consciousness in all humans. Through revival of Vedanta, Sankara was
able to revive Hinduism. But he did not reject caste outright. And there
lies the problem.
1.3.1.1 Shankara learnt Advaita from a “low caste” Chandala,
but he never really got the point, did he?
I wasn't aware of this story but after I chanced upon it twice in a single
day, I researched this further and found that is it is quite well known and
widely discussed. Well, if there's ANYTHING useful we can get from this
story, it is that caste is wrong. It is a FALSE idea and must be discarded.
VERSION OF STORY IN DALIT LITERATURE
The great Sankaracharya of Kaldi, famous for his ideologue Advaita once
came across a Chandala who was on his way to Harighat. He, being
aghast of the presence of an untouchable told the latter to stay away from
his sight. To Shankara’s utter dismay, the Chandala raised some pertinent
questions from the same Advaita. “Whom are you telling to keep away,
Acharya the fountainhead of all knowledge of Vedas and Upanishads! This
body or the atman which resides in this body? Your body and mine are
made of the same substance, as pots of varying sizes and colours are
made of the same clay. So one such body cannot ask the other of the
same to stay away. Are they not part of the same illusion?”
Source: Swaminathan Venkat, The Dalit in Tamil Literature-Past and
Present. Indian Literature Sahitya Akademi, Delhi P.17 (as cited in VOICE
OF DALIT IN SOUTH ASIAN LITERATURE by Aswini Kumar Mishra)
HOW BRAHMINS APPROPRIATED THIS AND CONVERTED THE

CHANDALA INTO SHIVA
Book 2
Sankara, the great Hindu philosopher and reformer, was one day coming
from his bath in the Ganges when a drunken outcast accidentally touched
him. “How dare you touch me?” he exclaimed. The outcast replied that
since the same Supreme Spirit is in all, how could his touch contaminate,
and proceeded to expound the philosophy of Oneness. Sankara listened in
wonderment and humbly acknowledged that he was right. Whereupon the
outcast stood revealed as Shiva Himself, and Sankara fell at His feet.
Source: HINDUISM: The World-Ideal by Harendranath Maitra (1916)
Also: http://www.speakingtree.in/spiritual-
blogs/seekers/philosophy/shankaracharya-and-the-chandala
http://belurmath.org/kids_section/06-lord-siva-as-chandala/
Instead of Sankara REJECTING CASTE he continued to teach caste,
so that his future disciple Vivekananda continued to teach caste,
even though he was teaching advaita.
In my view ADVAITA AND CASTE ARE FUNDAMENTALLY INCOMPATIBLE.
I totally deny this nonsense about the Chandala being "Shiva". The ONLY
evidence we have is that Shankara was caught out by his HUGE EGO and
Brahminical arrogance. He didn't get the message of TOTAL EQUALITY
which is the key message of advaita.
The ONLY way Advaita can make sense is through total equality of all
humans, of all human consciousness. Anything less is utter nonsense.
1.4 Say no to caste

Caste is fundamentally EVIL. It might appear harmless on the surface but
its approach must necessarily lead to evil consequences.
There is NO redeeming feature in the caste system. There were arguably
some economic “advantages” of caste in an agricultural society but these
came at great cost: of lowering the self-respect of the people. In the end,
that has DESTROYED their potential.
I have no doubt that feudal serfs in Europe would have tested very poorly
on intelligence (IQ), just like the Dalits do (on average). But the moment
feudalism was abolished, others started marrying the erstwhile serfs, and
through education and the industrial revolution EVERYONE got an equal
chance to develop.
But I’m afraid the situation in India is so dire that even if the caste system
were abolished tomorrow, there would be very few inter-caste marriages.
And so the progeny of the Dalits and Sudras will remain handicapped as
they don’t get the environment necessary for their children to develop.
Swami Ramdev runs the Bharat Swabhiman movement today, but that
would not have been necessary if there was no caste system. The caste
system is destroying the sense of self-worth of billions of people.
The best swabhiman movement in India will be to DESTROY the caste
system, lock stock and barrel. I encourage you to SAY NO TO CASTE.
Anyway, that is the BASIC PRECEPT of Scientific Hinduism.
4
Book 2
2. Caste is immoral from first principles
2.1 Violation of basic ethical principles

Caste is EVIL. Pure EVIL. There is no redeeming feature in the caste
system. Its immorality is deeply rooted within the soul.
Not being a religious person (nor caring for any religion), I focus purely on
ETHICAL principles. While there a lot of problems with caste, I will start by
focusing on the two main philosophical ones (liberty and equal status)
which confirm its deep immorality.
2.1.1 Denial of equal status

2.1.1.1 Lower castes called foul names
I’m not good at recognising caste titles. We have had a culture in our
house of ignoring caste. The first time I met my future wife I thought that
she was Christian because she used to walk to the church with a Christian
friend of hers, and I thought most people from NE India were Christians.
Turns out that Goswamis are “Brahmins”.
While I don’t know which of the following derogatory names apply to
which caste, I’ve collected a few names from cursory reading of the
literature.
Dasa, Dasysu, Raksasa, Asura, Avarna, Nisada, Panchama, Mletcha,
Svapaca, Chandala, Achchuta, Harijan, Chura in Punjab; Bhangi or Lal-
Beghi in Hindi; Mahar in Marathi; Mala in Telugu, Paraiyan in Tamil, and
Pulayan in Malayalam.
2.1.1.2 Sudras treated like children
Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaisyas, these were the three twice-born orders,
belonging to the original Aryan stock. They conquered the non-Aryans,
who by race and tradition were inferior. After their gradual conquest,
these also became members of the Hindu family, but with inferior rank.
These are the Sudras. By this means our forefathers protected themselves
from interfusion with an inferior race.
In India, with all our caste, there was never either class feeling or race
antagonism. The division of this community-family of the Hindus into caste
groups was evolved for the division of labour, and the giving to all of the
right of equal opportunities within his own particular sphere.
True only the Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaisyas could read the Vedas, and
the Sudras were debarred. One does not give higher mathematics to
children.
Source: HINDUISM: The World-Ideal by Harendranath Maitra 1916
2.1.2 Denial of equal liberty

Equal liberty is a right in itself. Every Indian must get equal liberty and
equal opportunity to succeed. The idea of denying 40 per cent of the
Indians a chance just because of the caste is obnoxious in the extreme.
6
2.1.2.1 Subtle model of race domination, not race
extermination
Hindu racism does not demand extermination of other castes. It is happy
enough to snub and look down upon its ‘inferiors’. It is particularly upset
(like withi Gandhi) if ‘whites’ look down upon the upper castes as in any
way inferior to ‘whites’.
Christophe Jaffrelot writes:
The main conclusion of this enquiry seems to lie in the ambivalent

response of the Hindu nationalist ideologues of the 1920s and 1930s to
the European biological theories. These ideologues had inherited a
‘traditional xenology’ where the racial criterion was minimized compared
to the degree of orthopraxy: the caste system reveals here its integrative
capacity inasmuch as everybody can find a place in it according to one’s
rank. All in all, the hierarchical principle of the caste system makes the
eugenic criterion of elimination difficult to apply: the exclusion can only be
partial; it takes the form of a rejection at the periphery but not outside the
whole of the society.
This does not mean that the Hindu nationalist ideologues did not expound
a racial theory. They did so, but it was more a racism of domination than a
racism of extermination. This specificity was again in accordance with the
‘traditional xenology’: the Other is not excluded but he can be only
integrated at a subordinate rank. The members of minorities who refuse to
become Hinduized are bound to remain statutory second-rate citizens
from the Hindu nationalist point of view. This kind of discrimination is,
indeed, nothing but a form of ‘upper caste racism’. [Source: Religion,
Caste, and Politics in India By Christophe Jaffrelot]
2.1.3 Destruction of self-respect

This is the most insidious of all: that the lower castes have co-opted
themselves into this system.
Another aspect of caste system is the way it survives with the support
from lower castes. The upper castes do not have to dominate them with
the rule of gun. Lower castes justify their subordination by discovering
folklore of their kind and offer justification of their own subordination
through a moral discourse innovated by themselves rather than by upper
castes. Lower castes have legends and myths that justify their lowly
situation and transform it into a symbol of sacrifice and luster. Lohia gives
an illustration from fisher-folk’s life. The Kaivarts (fisher-folk caste) who
presumably number more than one crore population tell stories about
their mythical ancestors, who were simple, un-greedy, brave and
generous and who lost everything to other ancestors of Kshatriyas and
other high castes because of their greater greed and deceit. The current
lot of misery is attributed to the unending succession of sacrificial acts for
the sake of high principles. This sacrifice is seen not as an active principle
that seeks change but as a passive submission to the caste order. This
sort of mythical sacrifices is wide-spread among the lower castes. They
secure their subordination.
Source: Arun Kumar Patnaik, Lohia’s Immanent Critique of Caste
Book 2
2.1.4 Different justice for different castes
The Dharmashastras are full of instances where justice/punishmenet
depends on caste.
“Lord Macaulay was a social revolutionary who, by drawing up the Indian
Penal Code, made all Indians equal before the law” [Chandra Bhan Prasad]
Macaulay wrote:
to go to India itself for an instance, though I fully believe that a mild penal
code is better than a severe penal code, the worst of all systems was
surely that of having a mild code for the Brahmins, who sprang from the
head of the Creator, while there was a severe code for the Sudras, who
sprang from his feet. India has suffered enough already from the
distinction of castes, and from the deeply rooted prejudices which that
distinction has engendered. God forbid that we should inflict on her the
curse of a new caste, that we should send her a new breed of Brahmins,
authorised to treat all the native population as Parias! [Source]
2.2 What’s wrong with eugenics, scientific racism,

Hindutva and Hindu caste system?
2.2.1 A worldview that groups disparate people together on
GENETIC (birth based) criteria is collectivist:
All these three – eugenics, scientific racism and the Hindu caste system –
are a form of collectivism – a perspective that combines a LOT of people
on the basis of brith-based characteristics. This worldview has policy
implications.
In the caste system, for instance, people are treated differently by
Hinduism just because of the caste in which they happen to be born. So
also under scientific racism which leads to policies such as prohibition of
marriages between different "races", or blocking an entire "race" from
entry into a nation (e.g.White Australia policy).
2.2.2 These worldviews violate the basic principle of equality

of status of mankind:
Scientific racism divices humanity into races based on alleged biological
differences. Caste system divides Hindus into different castes based on
alleged differences in their soul. Hindutva philosophy divides people into
"Indian" religions vs. others.
Vedanta/Scientific Hiniduism/ classical liberalism, on the other hand, insist
on the commonality of all humans.
8
As you well know I oppose ANY attempt to discriminate (under the law)
between the equal status of all humans.
That's perhaps one fundamental reason why I'm broadly comfortable with
Vedanta but very uncomfortable with Hinduism as commonly practiced,
and with all religions.
And that's also why I oppose eugenics and 'scientific racism'.
Any philosophy that LABELS people on basis of birth characteristics and
then discriminates against them is fundamentally dangerous.
That's one reason why socialists/ Nazi fascists and Hindutva (BJP) think
alike. They don't mind classifying people into groups.
I don't classify people into groups. Each individual is different, and must
be judged on his/her own merit.
2.3 Hypothesis: India’s caste system contributed a

CRITICAL justification for global racism
The more I think about it, the greater is the likelihood that the Indian caste
system was a major contributor to – if not the DRIVER of - global racism.
Here are the facts:
The Europeans including the Dutch and British were extremely poor and
lived TRULY short and brutish lives before the industrial revolution.
Everyone wrote about India as the great nation of the world. Nothing could
beat the splendour of India in those days. India absorbed MOST of the
world's gold and produced most of the world's luxury goods and spices.
To discover a way to reach India and get its goods cheaply, Europeans
went searching helter skelter across the world – some going east and
some going west!
They finally reached India in 1600 as SUBORDINATE traders, living below

the thumb of Indian rulers.
Book 2
There was no possibility of these subordinate Europeans even
remotely imagining themselves as "superior".
By 1757, through a range of fortuitous circumstances, the British

managed to get real territory in India.
Most importantly, by that time they were becoming economically better

off with the industrial revolution. Capitalism was finally discovered by
Adam Smith (although a primitive version of it had been discovered – and
implemented – by Chanakya 2000 years earlier).
SO THE REAL BASIS FOR RACISM STARTS WITH 1757
Before 1757 the Europeans were puny barbarians and subordinates of

Indians. They couldn't even speak as equals, leave alone imagine they
were "superior".
By the early 1830s William Jones had discovered connections of Sanskrit

with European languages. This gave HOPE to the British that they might
have been superior in some way in the past, despite thousands of years
of well-documentedtribalism and barbarism (save a few exceptions here
and there).
Most importantly, they found that Brahmins had a particular role in the
caste hierarchy, which was based on skin colour.
But even then, there was no real racism, only a glimmer of HOPE that the
"whites" might in some way be "superior". No bugles of "superiority" were
pulled out. The only sense of superiority that seems to have emerged was
some mention about the lack of recent scientific progress in India, in
comparison with RECENT advances in the West. And a sense that there
were these ghastly customs like sati.
Then came the Aryan theory with the Brahmins ("WHITE") AT THE TOP.
Max Muller claimed the "Aryan invasion". That was a real breakthrough in
the "RACIAL PRIDE" of the Europeans.
This was when the British finally started seeing themselves as "superior"
to most Indians (not Brahmins, though).
And they audaciously (and justifiably!) put themselves ON TOP OF THE

BRAHMINS. Why? Because they were "white", and their language had
common roots with Sanskrit! So if a brown Brahmin leads the pack in
India, then the White Brahmin must lead the global pack.
It seems to me that racism peaked between 1860s and 1950s –

being driven by the "Aryan" myth.
The Aryan myth was nothing but the Europeans thinking they were at the
top of the world's caste system.
10
In this way the Indian caste system, combined with the increasing
economic clout of the British, created (or at least stoked) the delusion of
"white" racism.
Without the caste system there would have been NO HOPE of the "white"
"races" seeing themselves "superior" to anyone else. They might have
become the rulers but never thought of themselves as a "superior" "race".
QED.
Book 2
3. Not just destruction of liberty but
oppression and VIOLENCE
I don’t intend to even briefly cover the extensive oppression, tyranny and
violence of caste. This chapter merely provides a glimpse. I’m not
covering violence in detail, but statistics of caste based violence are
widely available on the internet.
3.1 Control over key life events

Brahmins control the oppressed Hindus at key points in their life: birth,
marriage and death. By acting as intermediaries between Hindus and the
unseen ‘spirits’, they accrue power.
3.2 Careful ‘domestication’ (victim-consent) of the

oppressed
As a result of these control mechanisms, the lower castes have been
domesticated. There has been significant co-option in the elevation of
oppressive Brahmins by Hindus. At least the upper castes are perfectly
‘under control’. There remain some difficulties in controlling intelligent
Dalits like Ambedkar, but the average Dalit is well ‘under control’, having
by now lost the intelligence and ability to understand how they are being
controlled.
Regardless of the merit or otherwise of the caste system (it is extremely
immoral; a great evil), there seems to be (almost) no doubt that Brahmins
do have some above-average intellectual skills.
The greatest skill that some of the most intelligent specimens of this
'caste' brought to the table, of course, is the very idea of the caste
system. There can perhaps be nothing as "smartly designed" as the caste
system in which you chant mantras that call others inferior and YET
manage to get these "inferiors" running around you to be part of the
"system" – and to give you dakshina.
The Brahmins insult others openly. The Dharmashastras, written

by the Brahmins, are full of insults for other castes.
Manusmriti: One should consider a Brahman ten year-old and a

Kashatriya hundred year old as father and son; but of them the
Brahman is the father. A Shudra is not worthy of respect on the
ground of his wealth or knowledge no matter how high he may be.
Taittiriya Brahmana: The Brahman Caste is sprung from the Gods;

the Shudras from the Asuras (daemons).
Vishnu Smiriti: The name to be chosen should be auspicious in the

case of a Brahman, indicating power in the case of a Kashatriya,
12
indicating wealth in the case of the Vaishya and indicating contempt
in the case of the Shudra.
And of course, many Brahmins have never hesitated to humiliate Dalits

like Ambedkar and Jagjivan Ram. Plus the usual humiliation of women –
and insistence on a son to undertake funeral rites: which is the cause of
the great tragedy of the missing girl children of India. If Christian priests
have behaved badly, then Hindu priests have behaved much worse – and
have managed, very cleverly, to build a constituency that doesn't
challenge them. The Pope is on the defensive. But the Brahmin is still
supreme – and able to chant his (sometimes vile) mantras without any
push back or questioning.
It takes great intellectual prowess to design an abusive system

and make the victim thank you for it!
The caste system is a web which you can't enter or escape from, without
paying the Brahmin.
3.3 Obnoxious suggestion that others ‘pollute’ us

Caste is simply not a system of inequalities between castes of purity and
castes of pollution. Such a neat division of labour is not there in the caste
system. There are grades of pollution, followed by rules of precedence in
matters of education, religion, commensality, marriage, economy and so
on. Such rules of precedence exclude not merely Dalits from various
sectors of human life. They also exclude Sudras, Vaisyas, non-Vedic
Brahmins as well as all women across caste divisions. Caste is thus a
hierarchy of grades/ranks of people subdivided by the different rules of
precedence in matters governing human life, where the Vedic Brahmin
male occupies the top of hierarchy with Dalits occupying its bottom.
Vedas and Puranas were seen as two different sources of knowledge.
Vedic Brahmins occupied superior status over Puranic Brahmins as the
Vedic knowledge preceded Puranic knowledge. Brahmin male occupied
superior status over Brahmin women in matters of knowledge. Women of
any caste and all non-Brahmin males were excluded from education
system by caste practices. Violation of such rules by any group invited
proportionate physical punishment. Such punishment rules varied from
region to region.
Even, untouchables are divided by rules of precedence. Malas think that
they are superior to Madigas in Andhra Pradesh and assume that the latter
are untouchables. Politically, a Mala may claim that he is a Dalit but does
not hesitate to ex-communicate Madigas and their assertions for self-
identity, thus debunking his entire claim for a Dalit identity.
Source: Arun Kumar Patnaik, Lohia’s Immanent Critique of Caste]
3.4 Possible link of ‘pollution’ with beef eating

The Veda Vyas Smriti contains the following verse which specifies the
Book 2
communities which are included in the category of Antyajas and the
reasons why they were so included
L.12-13 “The Charmakars (Cobbler), the Bhatta (Soldier), the Bhilla, the
Rajaka (washerman), the Puskara, the Nata (actor), the Vrata, the Meda,
the Chandala, the Dasa, the Svapaka, and the Kolika- these are known as
Antyajas as well as others who eat cow’s flesh.”
Generally speaking, the Smritikars never care to explain the why and the
how of their dogmas. But this case is exception. For in this case, Veda
Vyas does explain the cause of untouchability. The clause “as well as
others who eat cow's flesh” is very important. It shows that the Smritikars
knew that the origin of untouchability is to be found in the eating of beef.
Source: Ambedkar: http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?217660
3.5 Blaming victims for their plight

3.5.1 Vivekananda chastised non-Brahmins
For the other castes he had some harsh words, and challenged them to
learn Sanskrit.
NON-BRAHMINS ARE LAZY
To the non-Brahmin castes I say, wait, be not in a hurry. Do not seize

every opportunity of fighting the Brahmin, because, as I have shown, you
are suffering from your own fault. Who told you to neglect spirituality
and Sanskrit learning? What have you been doing all this time? Why
have you been indifferent? Why do you now fret and fume
because somebody else had more brains, more energy, more
pluck and go, than you?
Instead of wasting your energies in vain discussions and quarrels in the

newspapers, instead of fighting and quarrelling in your own homes —
which is sinful — use all your energies in acquiring the culture
which the Brahmin has, and the thing is done. Why do you not
become Sanskrit scholars? Why do you not spend millions to bring
Sanskrit education to all the castes of India? That is the question. The
moment you do these things, you are equal to the Brahmin. That
is the secret of power in India. Sanskrit and prestige go together
in India.
As soon as you have that, none dares say anything against

you. That is the one secret; take that up. [Source]
14
3.6 Economic discrimination
3.6.1 Lower castes not likely to be given jobs
Male Hindus are more likely to discriminate against low caste
Hindus
Job applications were made for entry level white collar jobs which were
based in Chennai and advertised on job search web sites between March
and December of 2006. Two resumes were sent for each job vacancy, one
being randomly assigned a high-caste sounding name and the other a low-
caste sounding name. The resumes depicted applicants of approximately
the same level of productivity. On average, a high-caste applicant had to
send 6.2 resumes to get one callback while a low-caste applicant had to
send 7.4 resumes to get one callback, a difference of approximately 20
percent.
The nature of the audit study also allowed me to look at the variation in
callback gaps associated with recruiter and firm characteristics. The effect
of low caste on callback is negative for male recruiters and for Hindu
recruiters, but it is positive for female recruiters and for non-Hindu
recruiters.
The effect of low caste on callback is negative for firms with a larger scale
of operations (with multiple domestic offices or with foreign offices) but
positive for firms with a smaller scale of operations (without multiple
domestic offices or without foreign offices).
Caste Based Discrimination: Evidence and Policy, Zahra Siddique,
September 2008, The Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA)
http://ftp.iza.org/dp3737.pdf
3.6.2 Lower castes regularly cheated in economic trasactions

During the study of the ‘Discrimination in Food Security Programme’
conducted by the Indian University Grants Commission (UGC), the present
UGC chairman Sukhdeo Thorat (a dalit) and Joel Lee of Columbia
University (USA), it was found that discrimination in quantity, quality,
price, favouritism and Untouchability is rampant across the country. The
result is startling enough to make the government re-orient its food
security programmes.
With Casteism heavily dominating the ‘Public Distribution Programme’
(PDS), Dalits are not only denied access to food, but are also made to pay
more money for lesser quantity and are charged higher prices. Of the total
521 Villages surveyed in five States:
Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh- almost
40% reported that Dalits were found to be receiving lesser quantities for
the same price as compared to the Upper Castes. [Source: The Evil of
Caste: The Caste System as the Largest Systemic Violation of Human
Rights in Today’s World By Chanan Chahal]
Book 2
3.7 Mistreatment and humiliation of lower castes/
outcastes
3.7.1 Shivaji’s humiliation
Shivaji’s humiliation by “Brahmins” was as abominable as humiliation by
Aurangzeb
I hold Shivaji in the highest esteem. I don't have any heroes any more but
he was a hero during my teenage years. In class 10 in school I played a
lead role in the school Shivaji celebrations organised (Kendriya Vidyalaya,
Picket, Secunderabad) in 1974-75. I wrote an English play about Shivaji,
and then directed and acted in that play. I also painted
Shivaji’s exploits in watercolour paintings for the exhibition.
Never did I bother to inquire into his “caste” or even his religion (he, too –
it is my understanding – was a believer in individual merit, not in
someone's caste or religion).
But yesterday, while exploring the caste system, I came across this fact –
that Shivaji was humiliated by Brahmins during his lifetime.
Why? Because he was a “Shudra”!
What kind of a religion is this which disrespects real achievements and
contributions but pretends that people’s status must be determined by
IMAGINARY past achievements in a life that no one has any clue about!
The re-birth myth is a curse on India.
It is unfortunate that Shivaji bothered to get a “Brahmin” to crown himself
king (at HUGE expense – he managed someone to FAKE his background).
He should have chosen the most learned person in his kingdom,
regardless of the person’s religion or caste.
I now feel even more disgusted with Brahminical (caste) Hinduism than
ever before.
“Shivaji keenly felt his humiliation at the hands of the Brahmans to whose
defence and prosperity he had devoted his life. Their insistence on
treating him as Shudra drove him into the arms of Balaji Avjji, another
victim of Brahmanic pride. The Brahmans proclaim[ed] a social boycott of
Balaji Avaji who had ventured to invest his son with the sacred thread.
Balaji naturally sympathized with his master and tried to raise him in
social estimation by engaging Ganga Bhatta who 'made Shivaji a pure
Kshatriya.” [Sarkar, Jadunath. Shivaji and His Times. Calcutta: MC Sarkar &
Sons, 1919.
Further:
“Shivaji’s descendant, Rajarshi Shahu Maharaj, was not allowed to chant
vedic mantras. The reasonwas they were shudras and hence had no right
to worship or be worshipped in vedic tradition. A very recent example is of
Pandarinath Patil of Chikhali dt., Buldhana. He was insulted for chanting
the mantra, Omkar. Even today, all Sankaracharyas are Brahmin by
caste.” [Source]
Basically, everyone seems to be misusing Shivaji’s legacy to further their
“cause”.
‘Dalits see him as the champion of the outcastes because he was one king
who employed their services in his fight against his enemies; Hindutva
16
historians see him merely as a Hindu king ranged against Muslims,
seeking to establish a Hindu swarajya; Marathas see him only as their
foremost leader who fought Muslim rulers on one side and Brahmin
bigotry on the other side; while Brahmins have written about Shivaji as a
king who achieved greatness because he was guided by Brahmin sant and
advisors.’ [Source]
Whatever the political use people are making of Shivaji, one thing is clear:
the Brahmins seriously insulted this fine gentleman.
Here are my research findings about Shivaji’s insult from his own religion.
This is what I first came across:
From The Evil of Caste: The Caste System as the Largest Systemic
Violation of Human Rights in Today’s World By Chanan Chahal
If birth of the Shudra was so pure just because feet are closer to the
mother earth, then what happened in the case of Shri Shattarpati Shiva ji?
It is a well known historical fact that, Shivaji, after having established a
Hindu kingdom in the Western part of Maharashtra, thought of proclaiming
himself a king by having a coronation ceremony performed by a Brahman.
But he was denied by the Brahmans by proclaiming that Shri Shattarpati
Shivaji was a Shudra by birth. Therefore the coronation could not be
performed, because he was not a Kashatriya. Even though the Kashatriyas
had failed to defend the state, or regain it, from the Moguls, it took a
Shudra warrior to take it back.
Brahman’s refusal to crown Shivaji, meant lot of the tribes would not
follow him in battle, because he was not a legitimate king duly crowned,
so Shivaji offered ten times as much to a Brahman called Gagabhat from
Benares to perform the coronation ceremony on 6th.June 1674. Even then
the Brahman would not touch him with his hands to anoint his fore-head
instead he used his left toe. The name of Shivaji is mentioned with great
pride throughout India, as one of the greatest warriors who stood up to
the mogul might, but to a Brahman he was nothing, but a Shudra.”
Not willing to believe just one source, I investigated further. Here are the
results of a few of my attempts to confirm this story. It appears that this is
true.
Confirmation 1
“Human rights activist Teesta Setalvad had prepared a hand book of
History for the school teachers some time back. In this she pointed out
that since Shivaji was a Shudra, the Brahmins refused to coronate him, so
a Brahmin Gaga Bhat had to be brought from Kashi, who did the
coronation ritual. Since Shivaji was a Shudra this coronation was done with
the toe of his left foot by Gaga Bhat.” [Source: SHIVAJI’S STATUE IN
ARABIAN SEA by Ram Puniyani, June 06, 2009]
Confirmation 2
“as a Shudra or low-caste person, Shivaji had perforce to enact some
ceremony by means of which he could be raised to the status of a
kshatriya or traditional ruler. Not a single brahmin was ready to do the
coronation ceremonial function of the shudra shivaji. To this end, he
enlisted the services of Gagga Bhatta, a famous Brahmin from Benaras,
who did the Brahminical thing in falsely certifying that Shivaji’s
ancestors were kshatriyas descended from the solar dynasty of
Book 2
Mewar and that too the coronation was made by the thumb of the leg
only of shivaji belonging to shudra. This coronation ceremony took on June
6,1974.” [Source:
http://www.ambedkar.org/bamcef/journal/feb01/letus.html]
Confirmation 3:
Dalit's Inheritance in Hindu Religion (2009) By Mahendra Singh, Foreword
by P.Parameswaran, President, Vivekananda Kendra, Kanyakumari
In his book 'History of India (1000 to 1707 AD)', Shiva Lal Agarwala &
Company Educational Publishers, Agra, Dr. A.L. Srivastava writes
"Orthodox Brahmans in Maharastra were averse to recognizing him as
Kshatriya …. At his initiation into the rites of the twice-born (Dwija)
Kshatriya, Shivaji's guru and other Brahmans uttered Vedic mantras, but
Shivaji was not allowed to utter or repeat them…." . Coming to position of
descendants of Shivaji, Dr. Ambedkar in the same above book writes,
referring to aversions of Brahmins, "They could do nothing to the two sons
of Shivaji, Sambhaji and Rajaram. Shivaji had their upanayan performed in
his life-time by Brahmins with Vedic rites. They could do nothing to his
grandson, Shahu because the Brahmin had no ruling power in their hands.
The moment Shahu transferred his sovereign power to his Brahmins
Peshwa their road to repudiation became clear… There is definite
evidence that upenayana ceremony of his successor, Shahu-II, who was
adopted in 1777 AD had been performed with Pauranic rites and by the
direction of Peshwas. The performance of upanayan of Shahu-II with
Pauranic rites was tantamount to his being regarded by the Peshwas as a
Shudra".
Dr. S.V. Ketkar in his book "History of caste in India writes similarly (p. 60)
as, "even today I know of a Brahamana of character sufficiently
independent to give up all his Jahagir of 40,000 rupees a year and refuse
to perform Vedokta ceremonies in the family of Shivaji".
As an ideal king and able administrator Shivaji helped the poor peasants
by distributing Zamidar's land and taking minimum revenue. He ensured
that justice is given to all and never favored his family at the cost of
others. He did not have blind belief in orthodoxy and superstitions and
undertook sea journeys. He practiced secularism by placing Muslims in his
army in good position.
Confirmation 4
“as a Shudra or low-caste person, Shivaji had perforce to enact some
ceremony by means of which he could be raised to the status of a
kshatriya or traditional ruler. To this end, he enlisted the services of
Gagga Bhatta, a famous Brahmin from Benares, who did the Brahminical
thing in falsely certifying that Shivaji’s ancestors were kshatriyas
descended from the solar dynasty of Mewar. 11,000 Brahmins are
reported to have chanted the Vedas, and another 50,000 men are said to
have been present at the investiture ceremony, which concluded with
chants of, “Shivaji Maharaj-ki-jai!””
[Source:
http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/southasia/History/Mughals/Shivaji.html]
Confirmation 5
A Social History of India By S. N. Sadasivan
A most renowned conversion to Kshatriyahood, scintillating for its pomp,
conspicuous for its splendour, exorbitant for its cost and extraordinary for
18
its rituals, was of Sivaji, indisputably, the most prominent of all Maratha
leaders. Sivaji was bom in April or May 1627 in the family of Bhosales
founded by Bhosavant who was a Patil or a village officer. His father was
Shaji, a military officer under the services of the Mughals and the Muslim
rulers of Bijapur, who led successful expeditions against the powerful
Vijayanagar empire. Shivaji's mother was Jijabai. His birth was considered
to be the answer to her worshipping a local deity Sivai Devi after whom he
was named.
Brought up in an ambience of reverence to mythological heroes, Sivaji
mastered the art of guerilla warfare developed by Malik Ambar, the
Abyssinian minister to the Sultan of Ahmednagar. He by his undaunted
bravery, formidable political acumen and exceptional organisational ability
offered inspiring generalship to a closely knit army drawn from the bold
peasantry and the daring hill tribes and conquered vast territories of
Aurangazeb who for his religious intolerance was the most hated of the
Mughal emperors.
His military genius has belied the mythological monopoly of warfare
handed down by the Brahminic fiction to an imaginary warrior clan called
the Kshatriy.. As H.G. Rawlinson says: "In appearance Sivaji was a typical
Maratha". The Brahmins vied with one another to get into his services and
although he was of the opinion that they should strictly confine
themselves to religious life, he had appointed a great many of them in his
administration from top to bottom. Sivaji borrowed the administrative
system of the Mauryas, but neither they nor the imperial Guptas ever
attached any importance to Kshatriyahood; yet it is amazing even to a
frozen intelligence why Sivaji wanted to get converted himself as a
Kshatriya.
The Marathas to whom he belonged, is a sturdy peasant community which
had its own aristocracy. According to Brahminic standard they are Sudras.
Capt. E.W. West, Mountstuart Elphinstone, F.W. Sinclair and a host of
other students of society in India, are of the definite opinion that the
Marathas are Sudras and most of them are Kun(a)bis (cultivators). The
other names parallel to cultivators used in upper India and in Gujarat are
Kurmis, Koeris and Kanbis who also belong to the Sudra caste. The
Marathas would have remained as self-respecting farmers, had not the
Brahmins evolved the social framework of Chaturvarnya and arrogated to
themselves exclusively the authority for ordaining Kshatriyas. Sivaji was
given unstinted support for his military operations by the swordsmen
belonging to the Hill Kolis of Mawal who were made later on Marathas by
him. The Brahmins did not protest at this upgradation because in spite of
their conversion, the Hill Kolis remained as Sudras within the Sudras.
The Brahmins who served Sivaji for manoeuvring his power from behind to
their advantage, however, were disturbed when Sivaji legitimately
aspired, that he should be made the monarch of the territories he brought
by the sword under his control. Unlike in the days of the Mauryas and
Guptas or even the Chalukyas, in the 17th century caste system had
taken its most monstrous form and the entire mobilisation society was
aimed at making caste laws fully enforced in its farthest interpretation.
The Brahmins had made everyone a slave of caste and forged laws that
the Kshatriyas of their ordination alone were entitled to be crowned as
kings.
By his deed (karma) Sivaji would have been a super- Kshatriya but the
Book 2
more he conquered, the more his fame spread, and the more was the
intra-communal jealousy and envy against him. The Maratha families who
were equal to the Bhosales, did not want to be subordinate to Sivaji whom
they looked down upon as a usurper and an upstart while they openly
pledged their loyalty to Aurangazeb and the Mohammaden ruler of
Bijapur. The hostile Marathas repeatedly endorsed the Brahmin view that
Sivaji was a Suclra as any one of them and had no right to be a king
although they were happy to be submissive to the imperial authority of
Aurangazeb and the sovereignty of Adil Shah of Bijapur.
His prime minister Moro Pant Pingle, himself a Brahmin, was openly
opposed to the admittance of Sivaji as a Kshatriya though he apprised his
political master that the Maratha Brahmins were prepared to perform his
coronation rites in conformity with non-vedic scheme befitting to a Sudra
military leader. The great warrior felt insulted and was in a predicament
when he found the Brahmins were unrelentingly treating him as a Sudra.
He therefore, admitted to his inner circle Balaji Avji, the leader of the
Kayasthas who himself was fighting Brahminic insolence. Avji who had the
temerity to invest his own son with the cross thread with the help of like-
minded others, managed to create a pedigree for the Bhosale family
tracing it back to the maharana of Udaipur. Nevertheless, it was not
difficult for the Brahmins to defeat the whole genealogical venture.
Sivaji finally approached Visveswar, popularly known as Gaga Bhatta who
was a Brahmin theologian well-versed in scriptures and rituals to confer
upon him Kshatriyahood as well as to conduct his coronation. Gaga Bhatta
was an authoritative provenance to the other Brahmins who had hardened
their stand against making Sivaji, a Kshatriya, however conceded to his
request on his being assured of a gargantuan fortune he demanded.
As a prelude to the confirment of Kshatriyahood and his coronation, Sivaji
visited a number of temples and made lavish offerings. To the idol in the
Bhavani temple in Tuljapur alone, he gifted a parasol made of pure gold
weighing 1.25 mounds.
The Brahmins drew up a long list of his sins both by commission and by
omission including inadvertent killing of cows that he might have
unknowingly committed, during raids or battles for the expiation of which
they fixed their own sums which Shivaji paid. At the instance of Gaga
Bhatta 11, 000 Brahmins with their wives and children numbering in all
50, 000 souls, had to be sumptuously fed and supplied with clothes and
other necessities on a liberal scale for four months, the expenses for
which were entirely defrayed by their generous patron.
On the coronation day, as Sivaji sat on his golden throne studded with
luminous pearls and precious stones, flowers of various kinds made of
gold and silver and miniature gold lotuses speckled with jewels were
showered over the distinguished gathering. With all the largesse which
Sivaji distributed, the Brahmins who suppressed their indignance at
Sivaji's conversion to Kshatriya by ritual purification done by Gaga Bhatta,
rose in revolt when Sivaji was to be taught vedic mantras (hymns)
befitting to a twice- born. They contended that only Brahmins were twice-
bom and there could be no true Kshatriya in the modem age. Gaga Bhatta
lost his nerves at the resentment of the members of his clan and he
suddenly dropped the item from the rituals listed in the programme of the
coronation which was performed on June 6,1674 at Raigarh. Besides many
fabulous presents, Gaga Bhatta received a reward of one lakh of pounds in
20
his capacity as the archpriest of the function. The title of Kshatriya
Kulavamsa Sri Raja Sivaji Chhatrapati was conferred on the Maratha
conqueror. The head of the English factory at Surat, Henry Oxenden was
an eye-witness to the grand and glittering celebration. Oxenden who
presented Sivaji with a diamond ring, noted that he was not at any time
allowed by the Brahmins to attend to any other business than the religious
ceremonies and the talks pertaining to them.
The validity of the prohibitively costly coronation of Sivaji according to the
vedic rites, was questioned by a Bengali Tantrik priest by name Nischhal
Puri Goswami and a few inauspicious occurrences and mishaps that had
taken place within weeks of the coronation, he attributed to the
inadequacy of the vedic scheme that Gaga Bhatta followed to propitiate
the spirits and goblins. On September 24, 1674 Nischhal Puri conducted a
second coronation of Sivaji in accordance with the Tantrik rites after which
paradoxically mischance only multiplied.
The cost of coronation according to Sivaji's court chronicler Sabhasad was
14, 20, 000 buns. There is however no agreement as to the actual amount
involved but according to Jadunath Sarkar: "The coronation exhausted
Sivaji's treasury and he was in need of money to pay his troops".
Sivaji passed away on April 4, 1680 little less than six years after his
coronation but before completing his 53rd year. Them is a general belief
that Sivaji before his coronation had passed through the process of
Hiranyagarbhayaga for investiture to be a Kshatriya but the English and
Dutch records are completely silent on this. Whatever the ritualistic details
of his coronation, it abundantly illustrates that even as late as 17th
century A.D., the mightiest warriors have become victims of the lam and
temptations of Kshatriyahood by the confirment of which neither had they
enhanced their military capability nor durability of their domains.
Confirmation 6:
James W. Laine, A Question of Maharashtrian Identity: Hindu Self-definition
in the Tales of Shivaji, in Intersections: Socio-cultural Trends in
Maharashtra (2000) edited by Meera Kosambi
I have spent a considerable amount of time studying the Shivabharata
(1927; hereafter SBH), a Sanskrit text composed by Shivaji's court poet,
Kavindra Paramananda. Though incomplete, and not always accurate in its
details, the text provides a rare window not only on the world Shivaji
inhabited, but on the view that he wished others to have of him. It is a
panegyric which suggests the loftier ideals of the ruling Hindu nobility and
their Brahmin servants, and provides a complicated picture of the ways
this group at least defined themselves as Hindus and viewed the Hindu-
Muslim Kulfurkampf of their era. There are good reasons to see the SBH,
like Shivaji's coronation in 1674, as part of Shivaji's attempt to claim
Kshatriya status and legitimate rule as a Hindu king or Chhatrapati.
Indeed, I am sure that the SBH was commissioned at about the same time
as the coronation; its language of royal legitimacy presupposes the
coronation.
In legitimating Shivaji's lineage, however, the court poet needed to
recount the successes of the Bhosle clan, especially the deeds of Shivaji's
grandfather Maloji and his father Shahaji, and in these stories it becomes
clear that the recent rise of the Bhosles was one fostered by Muslim
patrons. Of course, in the seventeenth century Deccan, the sultans ruling
Book 2
from Ahmadnagar or Bijapur (the Nizam Shah and the Adil Shah),
depended on the service of petty Hindu rajas, or sardars. Shivaji's
immediate ancestors were soldiers of fortune who won the right to tax
certain lands by their loyal military service to the Muslim overlords, and
although they certainly remained Hindus, they operated in a rather
Islamicate world.' The SBH accurately notes that Shivaji's father and uncle
were named after a Sufi pir, and that their battles were clannish or with
rival Hindu rajas.
Also see:
http://www.ssmrae.com/admin/images/28ba4b40e997cbddcb1d542cb6c5
c765.pdf
http://mulnivasiorganiser.bamcef.org/?p=168
http://ccnmtl.columbia.edu/projects/mmt/ambedkar/web/terms/9599.html
3.8 Untouchability, and violence against the outcastes

3.8.1 GK Gokhale’s comment on untouchability
It is absolutely monstrous that a class of human beings with bodies similar
to our own, with brains that can think and with hearts that can feel, should
be perpetually condemned to a low life of utter wretchedness. We may
touch a cat, we may touch a dog, we may touch any other animal, but the
touch of these human beings is pollution. And so complete is now the
mental degradation of these people that they themselves see nothing in
such treatment to resent, that they acquiesce in it as though nothing
better than that was their due. At a public meeting in Dharwar in 1903
[cited in MODERN RELIGIOUS MOVEMENTS IN INDIA BY J. N.
FARQUHAR,1915]
3.8.2 Extract from Gandhi

Our woebegone Indian society has branded the Bhangi as a social pariah,
set him down at the bottom of the scale, held him fit only to receive
kicks and abuse, a creature who must subsist on the leavings of the
caste-people and dwell on the dung-heap.
Not till the invidious distinction between the Brahmin and the Bhangi is
removed will our society enjoy health, prosperity and peace, and be
happy.
Mahatma Gandhi
Harijanbandhu, 29-11-1936
(http://www.gandhiserve.org/cwmg/VOL070.PDF)
22
3.8.3 Oppression of Dalits
We are sick of the bondage which the barbarism of Hindu customs
imposes upon us; we long to enjoy the perfect freedom which the
British nation and the British Government desire to offer
impartially to all those who are connected with them as British
subjects.
We would, therefore, earnestly appeal to the Imperial Government to
move on our behalf. We have long submitted to the Jagannath of caste;
we have for ages been crushed under its ponderous wheels. But we can
now no longer submit to the tyranny.
Our Hindu rulers did not recognize our manhood, and treated us worse
than their cattle; and shall not that nation which emancipated the Negro
at infinite self-sacrifice, and enlightened and elevated the poorer people of
its own commonwealth, condescend to give us a helping hand? [Mahars
(Dalits) of Maharashtra appealing for help against Hinduism to the British
rulers of India (1910), in Memorial to the Earl of Crewe, Secretary of State
for India cited in MODERN RELIGIOUS MOVEMENTS IN INDIA BY J. N.
FARQUHAR (1915)]
3.8.4 Jagjivan Ram humiliated

Take Shri Jagjeevan Ram, a life-long servant of the Congress Party, he was
a Cabinet Minister of the Congress Government from 1947 to his death in
1986. He was acting Prime Minister after the death of Shri Lal Bahadur
Shashtri. He was invited to inaugurate the statue of Shri Sampurnanand in
1971 at Benares Hindu University, and having completed the ceremony
Jagjeevan Ram went away. Then the statue was taken down, because it
was polluted by the touch of an Untouchable. So it was purified with
mixture of ‘Punch Gov’46, according to the ritual stated in the religious
texts, the necessary substances are mixed with water from Ganga and
washed for 21 days, then the pollution created by Untouchable’s touch is
purified. Shri Jagjeevan Ram’s life-time service to the nation came to
washing with cow’s urine and cow’s dung? He was deliberately chosen to
be humiliated. It was designed to send a message to the wider public that
Caste along with its prejudices is very much alive. No matter how high a
position an Untouchable acquires, but he is still an Untouchable in the
eyes of the Hindus.
Source: The Evil of Caste:- The Caste System as the Largest
Systemic Violation of Human Rights in Today’s World by Chanan
Chahal
Book 2
3.8.5 Ambedkar humiliated
Dr. Ambedkar is accepted to be the father of the Indian Constitution, a
giant amongst scholars and the first law minister who wrote the
constitution. He has undertaken enormous economic and legal
reformation to uplift Indians, especially Dalits, how is it no Hindu Pundit
ever referred him or called him Pundit? In-fact, Dr. Ambedkar’s
intelligence and humanity cannot be matched by any Pundit alive or dead
in the history of India. But they just think about him as a dalit. If such a
great and a noble man like Dr. Ambedkar is treated like this, then how can
Dr. Sharma maintain that caste system is profession-based?
Source: The Evil of Caste:- The Caste System as the Largest
Systemic Violation of Human Rights in Today’s World by Chanan
Chahal
Someone on FB said that he tought of Ambedkar as a Brahmin. I asked –

did anyone tell him that during his lifetime? Was he given ANY regard by
the Brahimins at any point in his life? His personal experience with Gandhi
was very unpleasant.
Ambedkar had a few meetings with him and came out feeling insulted and
looked down upon. Listen to Ambedkar's own voice, here. What shame
that he felt slighted by Gandhi. My opinion about Gandhi has plummeted
seriously after this discovery.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FNSQcEx02A
3.9 Violence
3.9.1 Killing Dalits who removed a dead cow’s hide
Jhajjar
five Dalits … were lynched to death on October 15 in Jhajjar district for
hiding a dead cow. local Vishwa Hindu Parishad leaders had held a victory
procession after the public lynching, how they had decided to reward the
killers and claimed that they had burnt 'Ravana'. VHP leaders in Delhi such
as Giriraj Kishore had already claimed that the life of a cow was more
precious than that of a human being.
[Source: http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?217730]
3.9.2 Some illustrations of violence

India's "Untouchables" Face Violence, Discrimination
Google and you’ll find plenty of evidence.
A Dalit man was beaten to death and at least 12 others, including old
women and children, severely injured as upper castes in the village
allegedly attacked them for trying to hoist the national flag outside a
temple belonging to the community.
Source:
24
3.9.3 Dalit literature shows the magnitude of oppression
There is now a significant amount of Dalit literature which confirms
oppression in the voice of the oppressed.
3.9.3.1 Dalit journals
Dalit Voice
Bheem Patrika, published since 1958, is our longest-running Dalit
periodical [http://www.outlookindia.com/printarticle.aspx?281945]
Founder-editor Lahori Ram Balley
Ambedkar Journal
DALIT VOICE
http://dalitnation.wordpress.com/2011/11/04/v-t-rajshekar-down-but-not-
out/
3.10 Mistreatment and humiliation of women

I’m not discussing the effects of son-preference in Hinduism in this booklet
since that is a separate piece of work in itself. But let it be remembered
that caste has real effects. Caste and social oppression can lead to serious
effects on a nation’s economy and future prospects.
Book 2
4. Deliberate lowering of intelligence of the
oppressed?
Those under the control of Brahmins don’t even know they are being
controlled since their intelligence has beey systematically degraded over
the centuries.
4.1 Indian average national IQ is extremely low

The average intelligence quotient (IQ) of Indians is around 80-85, with
SIGNIFICANT potential to increase
A few years ago, while writing Breaking Free of Nehru, I had come across
data that showed that Indians had a particularly low average IQ (of around
85). I'm fully aware of the HUGE problems with IQ tests and the fact that it
is very hard to arrive at substantive data on IQs. Also, other methodlogical
issues.
But I do think there is something "indicative" or useful in these tests.
Based on this I wrote in BFN:
"This figure is based on measurements conducted in India by a range of
different researchers over decades. Despite the methodological issues
that the underlying data may raise, I have little doubt that this IQ
difference is real (I would be pleased to be proven that this is an error.)
We can’t simply shrug aside a difference of this magnitude; we should try
to explain it"
I thought that's a given. No one has questioned the data since 2008 when
my book was published. Tens of thousands of copies have been
downloaded, and most people on FTI claim to have read it.
However, Shantanu Bhagwat of FTI has now stated on FB: "Sanjeev: I
completely disagree with your assertion on low Indian IQ. Since when did
entire populations/ segments of society start having low IQs?"
Well, for Shantanu and many others who might not have come across this
what I assumed was widely known information, I've quickly reviewed the
literature again and here are my results:
Sources
IQ and the Wealth of Nations by Dr. Richard Lynn and Dr. Tatu Vanhanen.
See also the scattergram at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ_and_the_Wealth_of_Nations. Also see:
http://www.vdare.com/articles/a-few-thoughts-on-iq-and-the-wealth-of-
nations
See tables: http://www.rlynn.co.uk/pages/article_intelligence/t4.asp
National IQs calculated and validated for 108 nations by Richard Lynn and
Gerhard Meisenberg, Intelligence 38 (2010) 353–360
Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Global_Bell_Curve
The consistent hierarchies of IQ and achievement reported in Lynn's
synthesis can be summarized as follows:
26
• East Asians (Chinese, Japanese, Koreans) (Average IQ of 105)
• Europeans (Average IQ 100)
• South East Asians (Average IQ 87)
• North Africans (Average IQ of 84)
• Sub-Saharan Africans (Average IQ of 67)
• Australian Aborigines (Average IQ of 62)
National IQ and National Productivity: The Hive Mind Across Asia by Garett
Jones, George Mason University
Also: Richard Lynn “Race differences in intelligence: A global perspective,”

in Mankind Quarterly, Spring 1991, Vol. 31 Issue 3.
A further article notes: "In the detailed data for South Asians, there is a
distinct smaller cluster between 90 and 100, and another bigger cluster
between 80 and 90, closer to 90. But then there are a bunch of scores that
go as low as 75 which bring down the average to 84." [Source]
On the I.Q. of Nations; Smart, Smarter and Smartest?
Also read this: http://www.nytimes.com/1988/04/10/education/an-
emerging-theory-on-blacks-iq-scores.html
http://akarlin.com/2012/08/14/the-puzzle-of-indian-iq-a-country-of-gypsies-
and-jews/
http://www.sq.4mg.com/NationIQ.htm
This is particularly eye-opening (and problematic):
http://isteve.blogspot.com.au/2008/06/indias-average-iq-in-2100.html
What this article needs is a robust rebuttal based on the argument I've
provided in BFN (self-respect/liberty based). I do not see "Dalit" IQs being
"stagnant" or low in the future with greater liberty and dissolution of the
caste system.
I recall having read a major list of Indian IQ studies that spanned decades.
Let me list whatever I can find now:
• Fitzgerald, J.A. and Ludemall, W.W. 1926 The intelligence of Indian
children. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 6, 319-328
Book 2
• Sinha, U. 1968 The use of Raven's Progressive Matrices in India. Indian
Educational Review, 3, 75-88.
• Kamat, V.V. (1964) Measuring Intelligence of Indian Children, 4th ed.
Bombay, Oxford University Press.
• Das, Jishnu & T. Zajonc (2010) India shining and Bharat drowning:
comparing two Indian states to the worldwide distribution in
mathematics achievement. Journal of Development Economics 92: 175-
187.
• Anupama Bhave, Roli Bhargava and Rashmi Kumar, Validation of a new
Lucknow intelligence screening test for Indian children aged 9 to 15 yr, J
Pediatr Neurol 2011; 9(2)
• KULKARNI SD, PATHAK, NR, SHARMA CS. Academic Performance Of
School Children With Their Intelligence Quotient. NJIRM. 2010; 1(3): 12-
15.
• Badaruddoza and Afzal M (1993). Inbreeding depression and
intelligence quotient among North Indian children. Behaviour Genetics
23: 343-347.
• Badaruddoza (2004). Effect of inbreeding on Wechsler intelligence test
scores among North Indian Children. Asia Pacific Journal of Public Health
16(2): 99-103
• Dr. Analpa Paranjape (2004). A comparison of performance on Indian
Child Intelligence Test (ICII) of children with mental retardation and
learning difficulties.
• http://www.indianjmedsci.org/
• Bhatt MC. Adaptation of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children for
Gujarati population [PhD dissertation]. Ahmedabad (Gujarat): Univ. of
Gujarat; 1971.
• Ranganath, Priya and Sayee Rajangam (Bangalore). Intelligence
quotient in mental retardation. Disabilities and Impairment Vol.21 (1) 5-
9. In the present study, the IQ level was test on 426 children (261 boys
and 165 girls) with MR who visited the Division of Human Genetics, St.
John’s Medical College, Bangalore, IQ levels of <50 was observed in
60% of the males and 51-70%in 64% IQ levels of <50 was observed in
40% of the females and 51-70 in 36%.
• S. Venkatesan, Basavarajappa and M Divya (Mysore). Seguin form
board test: Field try out on a modified procedure of test administration.
Indian Journal of Applied Psychology, April 2007, Vol. 44, 1-5.
Misra, Girishwar; Sahoo, Fakir M.; Puhan, Biranchi N. "
Cultural bias in testing: India "European Review of Applied Psychology /
Revue Européenne de Psychologie Appliquée, Vol 47(4), 1997, 309-317.
• Foundations of Indian Psychology, edited by M. Cornelisson, G. Misra &
S. Verma, Publisher: Pearson, New Delhi.
• H. S. NARAYANAN, A STUDY OF THE PREVALENCE OF MENTAL
RETARDATION IN SOUTHERN INDIA, International Journal of Mental
Health, Vol. 10, No. 1, Severe Mental Retardation Across the World:
Epidemological Studies (Spring 1981), pp. 28-36
28
• I know there was regular testing of IQs in India by NCERT [See this].
Some good references are available here. I recall Lucknow had
something to do with these tests, but can't readily locate the data. But I
found this catalogue of 2000 IQ and other tests in India.
Source: The flynn effect: an alert to clinicians (2004), Andrade,

Chittaranjan, Indian Journal of Psychiatry vol:46 iss:2 pg:166.
"The only school achievement data for India are from the First
International Science Study in 1970 (Comber & Keeves, 1973), and a
recent study with a subset of the 2007 TIMSS study in the states of
Rajasthan and Orissa (Das & Zajonc, 2010). The school achievement score
of India was averaged from these two sources." [Source: Gerhard
Meisenberg and Richard Lynn (2011), Intelligence: A Measure of Human
Capital in Nations, The Journal of social, political, and economic studies,
vol:36 iss:4 pg:421 -454 ]
Indian IQ might be as low as 74:
India also has not participated in a recent student assessment study, with
the exception of the states of Himachal Pradesh and Tamil Nadu. Both
states have advanced education and income levels (Suryanarayana,
Agrawal, & Prabhu, 2011, Table 1, p. 16). If there is any divergence from
the Indian average, test scores in both states should be higher than the
national average. Nevertheless, the low raw results (327–345 SAS points,
or 74–77 IQ) are astonishing. To address the likely higher than average
scores in the above states, we cautiously correct the results by
subtracting 10 SAS points (equal to d = 0.10 or 1.50 IQ). [Source:Coyle, T
R (2013), Spearman's Law of Diminishing Returns and national ability,
Book 2
Personality and Individual Differences, vol:55 iss:4 pg:406 -410]
IQ is NOT fixed!
Let me emphasise that IQ is NOT fixed. I believe only a small portion of it
is genetically determined. Most of it is environmental. IQ changes. I won't
go into details, but read this paper:
• William T. Dickens and James R. Flynn, “Black Americans Reduce the
Racial IQ Gap: Evidence from Standardization Samples”. Psychological
Science. October 2006.
• Also see this: http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/154/8/711.full
• http://www.nature.com/news/2009/090922/full/news.2009.935.html
• http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/05/why-people-keep-
misunderstanding-the-connection-between-race-and-iq/275876/
• http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444032404578006612
858486012.html
Controversy!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_race_and_intelligence_controve
rsy
Also: http://www.edrev.info/essays/v14n12.pdf
Let me end by saying that I don't take the Indian IQ of around 85 very
seriously, since I know everyone in India has the potential to dramatically
improve their intellectual results with better nutrition and education
(particularly critical thinking). However, it is important that we use this
information to understand what might be doing on. And then try to fix it.
My hypothesis in BFN focused on freedom (and self-respect), although I
noted that it is not enough to explain things. I've now honed in on
nutrition as a key factor, since Chinese children get good amounts of meat
whereas Indian poor children get almost nothing – little or no meat or milk
and only a few cereals and vegetables.
I believe self-respect and appropriate environemental conditions at home

are a key part of the IQ generation process, as well.
4.2 How can we explain the superior (on average)

intellectual performance of the Brahmin ‘caste’?
The [unverified] data on caste related IQ that started me off on this recent
spurt of analysis of caste, race and related matters, is probably (broadly)
right. If other controls (like environmental/ economic factors) are ignored
(for want of data), the intellectual performance of the Brahmin caste
seems to be significantly higher than what would otherwise be
expected.
Here are some examples. None of these sources is peer-reviewed so I'm

hesitant to generalise, but they seem broadly consistent with my
understanding of the way the India works. And SOME data is better than
no data.
30
I'll make some broader comments after the data.
In the California 2012 National Merit list, there were 184 Indian
winners of which
Brahmin = 112
North Indian Aryan Upper castes = 40
Dravidian Upper castes = 25
Patels ( middle ranking ) = 3
Sikhs ( middle ranking ) = 4
In the US diaspora, Sikhs and Patels despite being 40% of the

diaspora, win just 4%. [Source]
And this:
The Almighty Brahmin! by Khushwant Singh
Whatever be the sphere of curiosity – literary, scientific,

bureaucratic, or whatever, the Brahmin remains the top dog. Before
I give details, we should bear in mind that Brahmins form no more
than 3.5% of the population of our country. My statistics come from
a pen friend, Brother Stanny, of St. Anne’s Church of Dhule in
Maharashtra.
They hold as much as 70% of government jobs. In the senior

echelons of the civil service from the rank of deputy secretaries
upward, out of 500 there are 310 Brahmins, i.e. 63%. Of the 26 state
chief secretaries, 19 are Brahmins; of the 27 Governors and Lt.
Governors 13 are Brahmins; of the 16 Supreme Court Judges, 9 are
Brahmins; of the 330 judges of High Courts, 166 are Brahmins; of
140 ambassadors, 58 are Brahmins; of the total 3,300 IAS officers,
76 [per cent?] are Brahmins. Of the 508 Lok Sabha members, 190
were Brahmins; of 244 in the Rajya Sabha, 89 are Brahmins.
This 3.5% of Brahmin community of India holds between 36% to

63% of all the plum jobs available in the country. [Source]
And this:
Brahmins occupy a lot of the intellectually demanding positions (I

cannot find the source but I recall reading that almost all members
of India’s version of the Manhattan Project were composed of
Brahmins). A lot of the (super high IQ) US Indian immigrants appear
to be Brahmins. [Source] In the Indian Manhattan project team of
18, of which 15 were brahmin and 3 merchants. [Source]
And this: Most winners of spelling bee contests are Brahmins (including all
three finalists this year, apparently) [Source]
Book 2
Even in cricket, apparently 7 out of 11 cricketers in India's cricket team
are/were Brahmins.
It seems an impression of Brahmin intellectual capability exists in India, so

we have this: Infertile Indian couples demand high-caste 'Brahmin' sperm
Comments
ASSUMING the above data indicate a genuine difference in intellectual

ability between castes, we can make one of the following deductions:
a) Environmental: Brahmins have a culture and home environment that

focuses on intellectual (and spiritual) pursuits – which gives them an edge.
b) Genetic: Brahmins have created a racist caste system which is

designed to preserve their "genes".
c) A combination of the two.
My preference is for (c). I have no doubt that the caste system HAS
created a genetic pool that gives Brahmins (on average) an innate
intellectual advantage over other castes. But I believe that effect is
relatively modest.
In the main, I believe that (a) is the main driver of the observed results.
The tradition of having book/s at home, of getting formally educated, must
create an environmental advantage that no other caste can offer its
children.
This tells me two things:
i) The idea that Indian "race" has a low IQ is total nonsense. That myth
should be put to bed. Given the right environmental opportunities (like the
Brahmins get), there is no reason why the whole of India can't perform
wonderfully well.
ii) EVERY Indian will do well to imbibe a similar interest in intellectual

pursuits, like the Brahmins.
But there is an obstacle to achieving (ii).
One of the key obstacles is the CASTE SYSTEM itself.
It destroys the home environment of the lower castes/ outcastes, and

prevents the possibility of their rising to their potential.
The reform of the caste system should start from the top. The oppressed
are so intellectually weakened by centuries of oppression they have very
limited mental ability to even fight it. They need all the help they can get.
The reform will need to start with Brahmins who realise the immorality of
this system system and walk away from it. By doing so, they will allow
32
other castes/groups/communities in India to rise to their potential. Raja
Rammohun Roy was an excellent example. Now much more needs to be
done.
4.3 Self-perception of the Dalits

An interesting experiment in that respect is the one conducted by Hoff
and Pandey (2006). Children from Northern India were asked to solve
mazes. When caste identity was made public, either the performance from
the lower castes children dropped or they withdrew from the game. The
authors argue that once identity is made salient, lower castes children
either tend to conform to stereotypes or expect discrimination to occur
and conform to it. This is one of the many behavioral experiments that
evidenced stereotype threat and self discrimination. Caste identity does
modulate individuals expectations.
Source: http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/60/86/74/PDF/thesev2.pdf
4.4 My revised model of IQ that includes pre-birth IQ

factors and links with freedom, to explain GDP
My 2008 freedom-IQ model in BFN (discussed here, as well) couldn't really
explain Chinese IQ. I noted my model's weakeness in the book but didn't
explore further.
Recently, with a view that meat provides key nutrients to the human
brain, I'm veering towards a revised model (depicted below, also
download PPT from here).
Comments appreciated (but only professional comments, that
demonstrate understanding of the literature).
Note that in this revised model nutrition plays a PRE-BIRTH role. While
post-birth nutrition is important, it seems to me that pre-birth nutrition
must hold the key to a nation's longer term success.
The mother is a child building factory. This factory needs ingredients to
build high quality brains, so the mother must be fed these ingredients.
Once a child is formed, the influence of nutrition on intellectual
performance should decline (but other factors such as freedom and self-
respect kick in), since the brain is already built.
So our focus must be on (a) feeding mothers and (b) increasing freedom
and dignity. How can one feed mothers? This is
really problematic, particularly given cultural and social resistance. But
maybe if this model is provided to mothers, they will choose to eat
healthier food.
Note that this model is still an unproven hypothesis. It will require much
more research/ thinking to arrive at a "conclusive" model. But this may be
a good starting point for further discussion. Anyway, this is my current
view. I'll read up some more stuff re: link between PRE-BIRTH nutrition and
IQ and report back to you.
Book 2
4.5 Increase in IQ expected among the Dalits once
oppressions is eliminated
Currently the IQ of oppressed groups in India is extremely depressed.
increased IQ has ECONOMIC consequences for India. By keeping 40 per
cent of its population oppressed India is not doing itself any favours. If
nothing else, then for the sake of economic self-interest, the Hindus
should ABOLISH the caste system immediately.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence#Caste-like_minorities
Caste-like minorities
A large number of studies have shown that systemically disadvantaged
minorities, such as the African American minority of the United States
generally perform worse in the educational system and in intelligence
tests than the majority groups or less disadvantaged minorities such as
immigrant or “voluntary” minorities.[42] The explanation of these findings
may be that children of caste-like minorities, due to the systemic
limitations of their prospects of social advancement, do not have “effort
optimism“, i.e. they do not have the confidence that acquiring the skills
valued by majority society, such as those skills measured by IQ tests, is
worthwhile. They may even deliberately reject certain behaviors seen as
“acting white”.[42][92][93][94]
This argument is also explored in the book Inequality by Design: Cracking
the Bell Curve Myth (1996) which argues that it is not lower average
intelligence that leads to the lower status of racial and ethnic minorities, it
is instead their lower status that leads to their lower average intelligence
test scores. One example being Jews in the early 20th century in the US
who, the authors argue, scored low on IQ tests. To substantiate this claim,
the book presents a table comparing social status or caste position with
test scores and measures of school success in several countries around
the world. Examples include Koreans, Peruvians and Brazilians in
Japan, Burakumin in Japan, Australian Aborigines,Romani in
Czechoslovakia, Maori in New Zealand, Afro-Brazilians, Indigenous
Brazilians, Pardos and Rural Exiles (as, but not limited to, people
from Northeast in Brasília, São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro metropolitan
areas, and including a minority of European descent) in Brazil,Afrikaners in
South Africa, Catholics in North Ireland, Irish and Scottish in Great Britain,
Arabs and Sephardi Jews in Israel, and Dalit, low caste, and tribal people in
India. The authors note, however, that the comparisons made in the table
do not represent the results of all relevant findings, that sometimes
studies have shown more mixed findings, that the tests and procedures
varied greatly from study to study, and that there is no simple way to
34
compare the size of group differences. The statement regarding Arabs in
Israel, for example, is based on a news report that, in 1992, 26% of Jewish
high school, predominantly Ashkenazim, students passed their
matriculation exam as opposed to 15% of Arab students. [95] Stephen Jay
Gould in the The Mismeasure of Man also argued that Jews in the early
20th century scored low on IQ tests. Rushton as well as Cochran, Hardy &
Harpending have argued that this is a misrepresentation of the studies
and that also the early testing support a high average Jewish IQ. [96][97][non-
primary source needed]
Murray replies that purely sociocultural factors like this cannot explain the
gap, because the size of the gap on any test is dependent on that test’s
degree of g-loading. As an example, Murray notes that the test of reciting
a string of digits backwards is much more g-loaded than reciting it
forwards, and the black-white gap is around twice as large on the first test
as on the second. According to Murray, there is no way that culture or
motivation could systematically encourage black performance on one test
while decreasing it on another, when both tests are provided by the same
examiner in the same setting.[72][non-primary source needed]
4.6 Narrowing the IQ gap with China

By increasing Dalit (and lower caste) IQ to normal levels, it would become
possible for India to narrow the IQ gap with China. The good thing about
Chinese is that they don’t have a caste system. That means the only
effect on their economic prosperity is of the level of freedom. In India,
though, the OPPRESSION of lower castes has a very significant effect on
national IQ, along with the level of freedom. India has a double whammy.
4.7 Disproving the myth of race will require abolishing

caste
I don’t see race/IQ as a biologically viable idea. But how can that be
demonstrated in the case of India without SMASHING the caste system?
Till the caste system is smashed and we can get Indian IQ back to normal
levels, the racists will be able to argue that Indians are an “inferior” race.
No amount of claiming superiority of the Vedas or other such things will
help. Your National IQ is low – then explain it!
There are people who have suggested that my focus on caste is in order
to get a “Dalit constituency” (as a politicians), but let me be clear that my
ONLY concern is India as a whole. I don’t really care for narrow
perspectives and would hope that others will join me in SMASHING THE
CASTE SYSTEM.
It is not enough for us to promote liberty in India. We need to ACTIVELY
SMASH THE CASTE SYSTEM.
Book 2
5. Do the oppressed make the rules? Of
course not.
There are no prizes for answering the question: who makes caste laws.
Not the dalits or sudras. Such ‘laws’ inevitably go against the lower
castes.
5.1 Summary
Several stories from the ancient Sanskrit symbolise caste exclusion: those
of Shambuk, Ekalavya and Sita. In the cases of both Ekalavya and
Shambuk, youth of great accomplishment from dalit and adivasi
backgrounds were denied their due because of the hierarchy of caste:
only a brahmin (or twice-born) could practise austerity; only a kshatriya
could be a great archer. The youth were victims of social exclusion due to
caste.
Sita was also a victim of India's caste-defined patriarchy. Cast away by her
husband as a result of suspicion after her great ordeal, she had no
independent access to property -- as innumerable Indian women do not
today. She was subject to the cruel norms of the day and to the whims of
her husband.
Though the Vedic texts describe a stratified society, it was not yet a caste
society. The first text to actually mention the four varnas is the Purush
Sukta of the Rig Veda, which is considered relatively late (around the 10th
century). This famous text describes the brahmin as being born from the
mouth of the primordial man, the kshatriya from his shoulders, the
vaishya from his thighs, and the shudra from his legs/feet. The inequality
of this -- the feet normally being considered lower (falling at a person's
feet is still widely practised in India as a way of declaring one's humility
before someone greater) -- is clear.
So is the famous passage from the Chandogya Upanishad -- part of a
group of texts ordinarily considered high philosophy. This declares that
birth into a particular caste results from actions in a previous life, the
theory of karma. Notably it states that:
"...those who are of pleasant conduct here, the prospect [in rebirth] is
indeed, that they will enter a pleasant womb, either the womb of a
brahmin, or the womb of a kshatriya or the womb of a vaishya. But those
who are of stinking conduct here, the prospect [in rebirth] is indeed that
they will enter a stinking womb, either the womb of a dog [who is
despised even today] or the womb of a swine, or the womb of a candela"
(5.10.7; translation by Michael Witzel).
Strikingly, here the untouchable or chandala is equated with a dog or a
pig. This, among other things makes the racism in caste clear, that it is
the denial of humanity to those of castes considered 'low'.
But it is the Dharmashastras and later texts which offer the fullest
elaboration of caste. The Manusmriti is quite clear on this, outlining the
36
duties of the four varnas in great detail, and noting that a shudra cannot
be relieved from service since it is his "essence" to serve. Indeed it was
the notion of divided human essence -- split into four major groups -- that
underlay much of caste.
Manu, like all ancient law-givers, considers varna samkara or intercaste
marriage or unions, to be the greatest sin. But he and
other Dharmashastra authors also use this as an explanation for the origin
of the existing multitude of jatis considered low which did not fit in the
orthodox varna system. They are considered products of such illegitimate
unions between human beings of different varnas. Thus Manu and others
have complex descriptions of various named groups or jatis, which are all
classified as products of unions between members of different varnas.
"Among all the classes, only [children] who are born 'with the grain,' [or]
in wives who are equal [in class] and have their maidenheads intact [at
marriage] should be considered members of the caste. They say that sons
begotten by twice-born men on wives of the very next [lower] class are
similar [to their fathers] but despised for the flaw in their mothers" (Laws
of Manu, 234-5).
Then various 'castes' or jatis which are said to be products of mixed union
are named, and Manu goes on to say:
"All of those castes who are excluded from the world of those who were
born from the mouth, arms, thighs and feet... are traditionally regarded as
aliens, whether they speak barbarian languages or Aryan languages.
Those who are traditionally regarded as outcastes [born] of the twice-born
and as born of degradation should make their living by their innate
activities, which are reviled by the twice-born" (Laws of Manu, 241).
It is not simply the notorious Manusmriti which gives a justification for
caste. So does the most exalted text of what Romila Thapar called
"syndicated Hinduism," that is, the Bhagavad Gita. In the final section, of
course, there is the famous passage in which Krishna defines the duties of
the four varnas (and, in fact, the whole Gita is in the context of an
admonition to Arjuna to fight and thus do his duty, or follow his dharma as
a kshatriya), and says that it is better to do one's own duty badly than to
do another's duty well. This is the meaning of the notion
of swadharma, which even Gandhi praised so much. And, in the first
section, where Krishna explains the reason for his taking form as an
avatar to save the world, he states that it is due in the end
to varnasamkara:
Upon destruction of the family, perish

The immemorial holy laws of the family;
When the laws have perished, the whole family
Lawlessness overwhelms also.
Because of the prevalence of lawlessness, Krishna,
The women of the family are corrupted;
When the women are corrupted, O Vrsni-clansman,
Mixture of castes ensues.
Mixture [of castes] leads to naught but hell.
Book 2
(Bhagavad Gita, part I, verses 40-42, translation by Frank Edgerton. Many
modern translations of the Gitaavoid this passage and
translate varnasamkara by some other term)
In other words, the greatest sin was intercaste marriage; and one of the
duties of a good king following this doctrine of brahmanism was to enforce
the ban on varnasamkara. In historic times, the most famous example of
this was that of the Veerasaivas in the 12th century: because their
founder and leader Basava had arranged a marriage between a dalit boy
and a brahmin girl, the parents of both were brutally executed by being
dragged behind elephants, and in the resulting uproar the Veerasaivas
were driven from the kingdom of Kalyana.
[Source: Caste is the cruellest exclusion by Gail Omvedt]
5.2 Vedas
5.2.1 Rig Veda
The creation of Chaturvarnya is found in the ninetieth Hymn of the Tenth
Mandala (chapter) of the Rig-Veda, in which the Gods have sacrificed a
godly deity called Purusha to carve out the universe and in the verse 11
and 12 the creation of mankind is described;
“When (The Gods) divided Purusha, into how-many parts did they cut him
up? What was his mouth? What arms (had he)? What (two objects) are
said (to have been) his thighs and feet?
The Brahmana was from his mouth, the Rajanya (rulers) were made from
his arms; the being called the Vaishya was his thighs; the last Shudras
sprang from his feet.” Such anti-social religious creation was forced upon
people; it should be accepted in society as “The names that are chosen
should be auspicious in the case of the Brahman, indicating power in the
case of the Kashatriya, indicating wealth in case of the Vaishya, and
indicating contempt in the case of the Shudra.” [Vishnu Smriti . Chapter
XXVII, Sutra 6-9]
[Source: The Evil of Caste: The Caste System as the Largest Systemic
Violation of Human Rights in Today’s World By Chanan Chahal]
5.3 Dharmashastras
5.3.1 Manu’s laws
Source: The Evil of Caste: The Caste System as the Largest Systemic
The status of a Brahman according to Manu Smriti is that “Man started to
be purer above the navel, than below; hence self-existent (Svayambhu)
has declared the purest part of him to be the mouth. As the Brahman
sprang from the Brahma’s mouth, as he was first-born, and he possesses
the Vedas, he is by right the lord of the whole creation. What created
being can surpass him, through whose mouth the Gods continually
consume the sacrificial viands?...Very birth of a Brahman is an external
incarnation of the sacred law; for he is born to fulfil the sacred law, and
38
become one with Brahma. A Brahman, coming into existence, is born as
the highest on earth, the lord of all created beings, for the protection of
the treasury of the law. Whatever exists in the world is the property of the
Brahmin; on account of the excellence of the origin of the Brahman is,
indeed, entitled to it all. The Brahman can but eat his own food, wears but
his own apparel, bestows but his own alms; other mortals subsist through
the benevolence of the Brahman.” [Manu Smriti . I.PP.92-93, 95, 98-101]
“One should consider a Brahman ten year-old and a Kashatriya hundred
year old as father and son; but of them the Brahman is the father. Wealth,
kindred age, sect and knowledge, those are the causes of respect; the
most important is the last mentioned. In whom amongst the three higher
Castes the most and the best of those five may be, he is worthy of
respect; a Shudra is not worthy of respect on the ground of his wealth or
knowledge no matter how high he may be. It is only on grounds of his age
and that too only if he has attained the tenth decade of his life that he
becomes worthy of respect and not before.”[ Manu Smriti . Chapter II.
Verse. 135^37.]
“Now the supreme duty of the Shudra and that which ensures his
blessings is merely obedience towards celebrated priests who understand
the Vedas and live like householders. If he be pure, obedient to higher
Castes, mild in speech, without conceit, and always submissive to the
Brahman, he attains (in the next transmigration) a high birth.” [Manu
Smriti . Chapter IX, Verse 334-335]
“A Brahman may take possession of the goods of the Shudra with perfect
peace of mind, for, nothing at all belongs to the Shudra as his own, and he
is one, whose property may be taken away by his master.” [Manu Smiriti
Chapter VIII, verse 417.]
“Indeed, an accumulation of wealth should not be made by a Shudra even
if he is able to do so, for the sight of mere possession of wealth by a
Shudra injures the Brahman.” [Manu Smriti , Chapter X, verse 129.]
[Source: Caste: its supposed origin, etc.
5.3.2 Taittiriya Brahmana

“The Brahman Caste is sprung from the Gods; the Shudras from the
Asuras (daemons).” [Taittiriya Brahmana. i.2.6.7. Quoted by Muir op. Cit. I,
p21]
Book 2
5.3.3 Vishnu Smriti

“The name to be chosen should be auspicious in the case of a Brahman,
indicating power in the case of a Kashatriya, indicating wealth in the case
of the Vaishya and indicating contempt in the case of the Shudra.” [Vishnu
Smiriti XXVII, Sutr 6-99]
“With whatever limb an inferior insults or hurts his superior in Caste, of
that limb the King shall cause him to be deprived. If he places himself on
the same seat with his superior, he shall be banished with a mark on his
buttocks. If he spit on him he shall lose both lips. If he breaks wind against
him, he shall lose his hind parts. If he uses abusive language, he shall
loose his tongue. If low-born men, through pride, give instruction to the
member of the highest Caste concerning his duty, let the King order hot
oil to be dropped into his mouth. If the Shudra mention the name or Caste
of the superior revealingly, a red hot iron pin ten inches long shall be
thrust into his mouth.”[ Vishnu Smiriti Chapter V, Verse 19^25.]
5.3.4 Apastamba Dharma Sutra

“A Shudra can be slain at the pleasure of his master, and the penance is
the same as killing the Crow, chameleon, peacock, a duck, a swan, a
vulture, a frog, an ichneumon, rat or a dog.” [Apastamba Dharma Sutra.
Prasna I, Patala 9, Khanda 25, Sutr 15]
“The man of the first three Castes who commits adultery with a woman of
the Shudra Caste shall be banished. A Shudra who commits adultery with
a woman of the first three Castes shall suffer capital
punishment.”[ Apastamba Dharma Sutra. Prasna II, Patala 10, Khanda 27,
Sutra 8^9]
5.3.5 Vishnusmriti
The word asprsya [literally "untouchable] was first used in the Visnusmrti,
which prescribes death for any member of these castes who deliberately
touches a member of a higher caste. However, the sexuality of
untouchable women belonged to the "upper caste" men, and was an
indispensable part of the labour provided by slave women. [Source]
5.3.6 Vashishtha Dharma Sutra

“If the Brahman dies with a food of the Shudra in his stomach, he will
40
become a village pig in his next life or be born in the family of the
Shudras. For through a (Brahman) whose body is nourished by the
essence of the Shudra’ food may daily recite the Vedas, though he may
offer (Agnihotra) or mutter prayer nevertheless he will not find the path
that leads upwards. But if, after eating the food of the Shudra, he has
conjugal intercourse, even his sons (begotten from a wife of his own
Caste) will belong to the giver of the food (Shudra) and he will not assent
to heaven.” [Vashishtha Dharma Sutra. Chapter. VI. Verses 27^]
5.4 Ramayana
Dr. Ambedkar observes “The Chaturvarnya cannot subsist by its own
inherent goodness. It must be enforced by law. That, without penal
sanction the ideal of Chaturvarnya cannot be realised, is proved by the
story in the Ramayana of Rama (one of the reincarnations of God) by
killing Shambuka. Some people seem to blame Rama because he
wantonly and without reason killed Shambuka. But to blame Rama for
killing Shambuka is to misunderstand the whole situation. Ram Raj was a
Raj based on Chaturvarnya. In this raj, as the King, Rama was bound to
maintain Chaturvarnya.
It was his duty therefore to kill Shambuka, the Shudra, who had
transgressed his Caste and wanted to be a Brahman. This is the reason
why Rama killed Shambuka. But this also shows that penal sanction is
necessary for the maintenance of Chaturvarnya. Not only penal sanction is
necessary, but penalty of death is necessary. That is why Rama did not
inflict on Shambuka a lesser punishment. That is why Manu-Smiriti
prescribes such heavy sentences as cutting off the tongue or pouring of
molten led in the ear of the Shudra, who recites or hears the Vedas. The
supporters of Chaturvarnya must give an assurance that they could
successfully classify men and they could induce modern society in the
twentieth century to re-forge the penal sanction of ManuSmriti .” [Dr.
Babasahib Ambedkar writings and speeches L. 1,]
5.4.1 Beheading of Sudra Sambook
5.5 Support from Vivekananda and other leaders

Vivekananda’s view
Caste is a natural order; I can perform one duty in social life, and you
another; you can govern a country, and I can mend a pair of old shoes,
but that is no reason why you are greater than I.
Caste is good. That is the only natural way of solving life. Men must form
themselves into groups, and you cannot get rid of that. Wherever you go,
there will be caste. But that does not mean that there should be these
privileges. They should be knocked on the head. [Source]
Book 2
5.6 Ambedkar, however, denied that Brahmins created
caste
Dr. Ambedkar disproved the Aryan Invasion Theory with sound logic. After
explaining at length that the caste system has nothing to do with the
Aryan invasion, he comes to the conclusion that:
1. The Vedas do not know any such race as the Aryan race. [Sanjeev:
True, they called the noble people Arya, but that doesn’t necessarily mean
they though of themselves as a ‘race’]
2. There is no evidence in the Vedas of an invasion of India by the Aryan
race and its having conquered the Dasas and Dasyus supposed to be the
natives of India.” (Dr. Ambedkar, “Writings & Speeches”, Vol. 7, pages 74-
85) [Sanjeev: While there is no proof of conquests, there is clear evidence
that these terms were used in the Vedas to represent the un-arya]
Not only that “caste existed much before Manu. It is incorrect to say that
Brahmins created caste. The Brahmins might have committed many sins
but to impose caste system on the whole non-Brahmin people is beyond
their capacity.” (Dr. B.R. Ambedkar in “Caste in India”) [Sanjeev: That’s an
interesting hypothesis. No doubt it existed before Manu, but whether it
existed before Vedas is a good question]
Ambedkar declares: “Brahmins and the untouchables belong to the same
race. From this it follows that if the Brahmins are Aryans, the
untouchables are also Aryans. If the Brahmins are Dravidians, the
untouchables are also Dravidians.” (Dr. Ambedkar, “Writings & Speeches”,
Vol. 7, pages 302-303) [Sanjeev: here, of course, Ambedkar is unaware
that there is NO race. All humans are the same sub-species. So he is right,
but not in the way it is culturally understood]
Dr. Ambedkar has the following firm convictions as to who Sudras are:
1. “The Sudras were one of the Aryan communities of the Solar race.
2. There was a time when the Aryan society recognised only three varnas,
namely, Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaishyas. [Sanjeev: Now he is talking
about ‘Aryan’ society. Why? Also, why is he agreeing to the three castes in
this ‘Aryan’ period? Caste was clearly created on the basis of colour by
someone in his or her self-interest]
3. The Sudras did not form a separate varna. They ranked as part of the
Kshatriya varna in the Indo-Aryan society.
4. There was a continuous feud between the Sudra kings and the
Brahmins in which the Brahmins were subjected to many tyrannies and
indignities.
5. As a result of the hatred towards the Sudras generated by their
tyrannies and oppressions, the Brahmins refused to perform the
Upanayana of the Sudras.
6. Owing to the denial of Upanayana, the Sudras who were Kshatriyas
became socially degraded, fell below the rank of the Vaishyas and thus
came to form the fourth varna.” (Dr. Ambedkar, “Writings & Speeches”,
Vol. 7, pages 11-12)
[Source: found this somewhere on the internet, don’t recollect. This link
provides at least some of this info]
42
I do not buy Ambedkar’s view on this matter. It is evident that Brahmins
were the most benefited by the caste system, and so they are almost
certain to have started it (or at least given it prominence).
Book 2
6. Do the oppressed defend caste? Of
course not.
Just like slavery was ONLY defended by slave-owners, so also caste is only
defended by upper castes (or at least “caste” Hindus). Sudras and dalits
are not at the forefront of the defence of caste.
There must surely be something suspicious about a system which is
praised only by its beneficiaries.
6.1 Vivekananda glorified Brahmins

Vivekandana preached Advaita and universal brotherhood. Despite that,
he often had high praise for Brahmins while chastising the lower castes.
Vivekananda was in awe of Brahmins and Sanskrit. Very hard to say that
he was not 'casteist'. It never became clear WHAT precisely he stood for
on the topic of caste. Such ambivalence comes through in most other
'reformers' as well (such as Dayanand Saraswati) who apparently wrote
against the caste system but insisted that there should be castes.
BRAHMINS ARE SELFLESS ROLE MODELS
Extrapolating from a few examples he had seen (particularly his master),

he praised the Brahimins sky high:
The life of a really orthodox Brahmin is one of continuous renunciation.

Very few things can he do; and over and beyond them the orthodox
Brahmin must not occupy himself with any secular business. At the same
time he must not receive gifts from everybody. You may imagine how
rigorous that life becomes. They are the poorest of all the classes in the
country; and the secret of their power lies in their renunciation. They
never covet wealth. Theirs is the poorest priesthood in the world, and
therefore the most powerful.
Even in this poverty, a Brahmin's wife will never allow a poor man to pass
through the village without giving him something to eat. That is
considered the highest duty of the mother in India; and because she is the
mother it is her duty to be served last; she must see that everyone is
served before her turn comes. That is why the mother is regarded as God
in India. This particular woman, the mother of our subject, was the very
type of a Hindu mother.
The higher the caste, the greater the restrictions. The lowest caste people
can eat and drink anything they like. But as men rise in the social scale,
more and more restrictions come; and when they reach the highest caste,
the Brahmin, the hereditary priesthood of India, their lives, as I have said,
are very much circumscribed. Compared to Western manners, their lives
44
are of continuous asceticism.
The Hindus are perhaps the most exclusive nation in the world. They have
the same great steadiness as the English, but much more amplified. When
they get hold of an idea they carry it out to its very conclusion, and they,
keep hold of it generation after generation until they make something out
of it. Once give them an idea, and it is not easy to take it back; but it is
hard to make them grasp a new idea.
The orthodox Hindus, therefore, are very exclusive, living entirely within
their own horizon of thought and feeling. Their lives are laid down in our
old books in every little detail, and the least detail is grasped with almost
adamantine firmness by them. They would starve rather than eat a meal
cooked by the hands of a man not belonging to their own small section of
caste. But withal, they have intensity and tremendous earnestness. That
force of intense faith and religious life occurs often among the orthodox
Hindus, because their very orthodoxy comes from a tremendous
conviction that it is right. We may not all think that what they hold on to
with such perseverance is right; but to them it is.
Now, it is written in our books that a man should always be charitable

even to the extreme. If a man starves himself to death to help another
man, to save that man's life, it is all right; it is even held that a man ought
to do that. And it is expected of a Brahmin to carry this idea out to the
very extreme.
Those who are acquainted with the literature of India will remember a
beautiful old story about this extreme charity, how a whole family, as
related in the Mahâbhârata, starved themselves to death and gave their
last meal to a beggar. This is not an exaggeration, for such things still
happen. The character of the father and the mother of my Master was
very much like that. [Source]
6.2 Har Bilas Sarda thought caste was efficient

He thought caste was a system of great efficiency:
‘The one great object which the promoters of the hereditary system seem
to have had in view was to secure to each class a high degree of efficiency
in its own sphere. ‘ ‘Hereditary genius’ is now a subject of serious enquiry
amongst the enlightened men of Europe and America, and the evolution
theory as applied to sociology, when fully worked out, will fully show the
merits of the system. In fact the India of the time of Manu will appear to
have reached a stage of civilization of which the brilliant ‘modern
European civilization’ only gives us glimpses. [Hindu Superiority]
Book 2
6.3 Bhai Parmanand thought caste is required for social
duties
The ideal of personal salvation is the root-cause of our selfishness and this
alone has been responsible for the downfall of our nation. It is
diametrically opposed to the idea of social duties.... Instead of drawing the
people’s attention to their real duties under the caste and ashrams system
[the varnavyavastha syste] and trying to remove their defects [Buddha]
wrongly concluded that these systems alone were responsible for all social
evils.... The abolition of castes and ashramas cut at the very root of social
duties. How could a nation hope to live after having lost sight of
this aspect of Dharma? ‘Equality for all’ is an appealing abstraction; but
the nation could not long survive the rejection or destruction of Dharma.
(ibid.: 126-7) [Bhai Parmanand in the book, Hindu Sangathan 1936]
[Source]
6.4 Hindu Council: “The Caste System” by Raj Pandit

Sharma
The ‘Hindu Council’s report ‘The Caste System’ by Dr. Raj Pandit Sharma,
in which they have tried to justify their position, seems to claim that:
1. The Caste System is not a hereditary hierarchical system based on
birth.
2. The Caste system is not the creation of Hinduism, it is the creation of
foreign rulers
3. The Hindus have suffered greatly under foreign rule
4. The Hindus withstood the challenges from their opponents of Caste in
ancient times
5. Due to reservation in favour of Scheduled Castes, the Brahmans have
to do menial work
6. The Caste is not a hindrance to progress. [Caste destroyed brotherhood
the most important element of fair society in India.]
7. The segregation of the Untouchable Castes is to maintain purity of the
Brahman.
8. The Hindus are tolerant society. [not true]
9. Other religions also have caste practices.
46
7. The hereditary and biological (racist)
underpinning of caste
Stereotying and social hierarchies based on birth-based characteristics are

fundamentally problematic.
We all know (or should know) that the idea of ‘race’ is nonsense. That
there is no such thing as race has been proven repeatedly.
But very few cultures have such a strong distaste for dark skin as the
Hindus. This is denied but the evidence is overwhelming. The following
give away the real story of caste:
• scriptures
• statements of major Hindu leaders
• actions of millions of Hindus.
7.1 The give away is in its name: Varna Vyavastha

Varna means colour and Vyavastha means an organized system
The person who invented this idea (and claimed then that it was given by
God) intended UNAMBIGUOULSLY to link it to skin colour.
7.2 Further, caste is 100 per cent biological (hereditary)

There is no case I’m aware of where someone’s caste was changed after
birth due merely t his own efforts. Yes, some entire castes have
presumably, after lots of effort and debate, managed to get the entire
caste ‘raised’. But Brahmins never allow individuals to rise in caset.
The only case I’m aware of was Shivaji’s, but he had to pay a monstrous
bribe to a crooked Brahmin who faked the list of his ancestors. [This case
is discussed elsewhere]
7.3 The leakage in ‘colour’ through marrying “lower caste”

women
As you read Manusmriti and other scriptures you realize that these people
didn’t have a clue about genetics, so they allowed all kinds of marriages
with “lower caste” women. The Brahmin could have children with lower
caste women and these would still be Brahmins.
That’s where the conflict between power, sexual control, and love for
one’s children came into play, and colour was lost.
They didn’t understand that women have an EQUAL capacity to influence
the skin colour of children.
Very soon, there was no possibility of distinguishing castes based on skin
colour. However, the underlying BIOLOGICAL CONCEPT remained, through
blood.
Book 2
7.4 Foolish arguments denying the biological (‘race’) basis
of caste
7.4.1 “But there is no real difference in skin colour!”
There is no uniform difference in skin colour between castes. Attempts to
demarcate different castes on bases of biological charactersistics have
always failed.
“Race has a biological connotation whereas caste is a socio-cultural

construct. A caste formation is not determined by biological
characteristics such as the colour of one’s skin.” [Caste in the mirror of
race by D.L. SHETH]
J.C. Nesfield's uncompromising rejection of 'the modern doctrine which

divides the population of India into Aryan and aboriginal' was unpopular,
particularly his assertion that a stranger walking into the class rooms of
the Sanskrit College at Benares 'would never dream of supposing' that the
high caste students of that exclusive institution (as Risley put it) 'were
distinct in race and blood from the scavengers who swept the road'.
[Crispin Bates, Race, Caste and Tribe in Central India: The Early Origins of
Indian Anthropometry]
7.4.2 Ambedkar did not think skin colour underpinned caste

‘The purpose of the caste system cannot be considered to be a
prevention of racial intermixing, nor can this system be understood as
a means of preserving purity of blood. The truth is that even before the
caste system came into being, the various races had already got
intermixed in India as far as culture and blood is concerned. To consider
different castes as if they are different races would be to completely
distort the facts. What racial similarity can there be between a brahman of
Punjab and a brahman of Madras? What racial similarity can there be
between an untouchable of Bengal and an untouchable of Madras? What
racial similarity can there be between a brahman of Punjab and a chamar
of Punjab? What racial similarity can there be between a brahman of
Madras and a paria of Madras? Caste system does not divide races; it is
the name of social division within a race’ (Bhim Rao Ambedkar,
Annihilation of Caste, Anand Sahitya Sadan, Aligarh, 1989, p. 40).
7.4.3 Soli Sorabjee, Andre Beteille and the Government of

India
The discussions and debates that preceded the WCAR were precipitated
less by the excitement of planning for the Conference than by the Indian
Government's position that caste was not a matter to be taken up at the
Conference. Since the UN conference was centered on racism, the
argument went, as part of the third U.N.-designated Decade to Combat
Racism and Racial Discrimination, caste had no logical place on the
country's agenda. At the Regional Preparatory Meeting held in Tehran
earlier that year, Attorney General Soli Sorabjee emphasized the
distinction between race and caste, thereby rejecting NGO efforts to
connect the two forms of social stratification as "misconceived" (2001).
48
The Government of India argued further that since caste discrimination
was constitutionally recognized and prohibited, and that since both State
and Central governments had taken steps toward its elimination,
discussion of the issue was best left out of inter-governmental forums.
This position set the tone and determined much of the direction of the
debate that ensued. Was caste indeed comparable to race? The Indian
Government had an ally in Andre Beteille, a veteran Indian social
anthropologist, who pondered the wisdom of expanding "racism" to other
forms of social exclusion. In so doing, he wrote in The Hindu, the U.N. "is
bound to give a new lease of life to the old and discredited idea of race
current a hundred years ago" (Beteille 2001). Not only had the
"researches of several generations of anthropologists" concluded that
racial classifications were biologically untenable, "[e]very social group
cannot be regarded as a race simply because we want to protect it from
discrimination." [End Page 557] For Beteille, then, equating caste with
race was both "scientifically nonsensical" and "politically mischievous," for
such movement away from specificity would surely open the door to other
discriminated linguistic or ethnic groups from all parts of the world to
claim themselves victims of racism. [Source: “The Ethnicity of Caste”
Deepa S. Reddy, Anthropological Quarterly 78.3 (2005) 543-584]
7.4.4 Anthropologist Dipankar Gupta of Jawaharlal Nehru

University
Here is a discussion (and rebuttal) of Gupta’s claims
First, Dipankar Gupta argues that caste cannot be equated with race since
‘there is no phenotypical resemblance between members of the same
castes.’ Such a view misrecognizes ‘race’ since it assumes that members
of the same ‘race’ share phenotypical resemblance. However, it is now
established among professional anthropologists and biologists that there
is no concordance among human ‘races’, which implies that there is no
single phenotypical trait that distinguishes all members of a so-called
‘race’ from members of another ‘race’. Members of any ‘race’ do not
share either skin colour, or eye colour, or hair texture, or facial structure.
Scientists agree that there is no abrupt change from one skin colour to
another, and instead use the notion of ‘clines’ as opposed to ‘race’ to
capture human variation. As Professor Alan Goodman, a biological
anthropologist says, ‘Race is not based on biology, but race is rather
an idea that we ascribe to biology.’ This is why the term ‘race’ is
within quotes to signify that it is a socially constructed category, instituted
by law and socially reproduced by popular prejudices. Professor Gupta’s
position seems hopelessly outdated.
Second, Professor Gupta makes the startling claim that ‘caste is not
about descent’ and hence cannot fall under Article 1. [Sanjeev: I never
heard a more bogus claim than this!] According to him, ‘descent means
genealogical demonstrable characteristics,’ and ‘in the caste order people
came of multiple descents. In fact, in the caste system people had to
marry outside their lineage within the caste.’ The term ‘descent’ is at the
core of anthropological studies of kinship, and is not restricted to ‘lineage’.
A lineage is only one kind of descent group (the smallest) in which
ancestry can be demonstrable since it spans living memory of a few
Book 2
generations. However, descent also includes other larger groups such as
‘clans’ (gotras in India) and ‘phratries’ in which a claim to a common
ancestry is made but cannot be demonstrated. Marrying outside of one’s
own lineage and clan are common practices in India and elsewhere, but
caste is really about marrying within a group, as Gupta admits above.
Ambedkar famously wrote in 1916 that the ‘superimposition of endogamy
on exogamy produces caste.’ Castes are simply ‘large-scale descent
groups’ as many anthropologists have pointed out. Castes are
larger than clans and hence are very much based on ‘claimed’ ancestry,
usually a mythical ancestor appearing in origin stories. Indeed, Gupta’s
own work (Interrogating Caste) demonstrates this widespread
existence of castes claiming a remote ancestor [Sanjeev: Always
expect these bogus professors to forget the truth and promote personal
political positions]. Professor Gupta’s position is not substantiated
logically, conceptually or empirically in scholarship.
Third, Professor Gupta cavalierly claims that ‘each caste equally
discriminated against other castes.’ While this still leaves one to wonder
how this distinguishes caste from race, Gupta’s position neglects decades
of scholarship that has distinguished between institutional casteism or
racism based upon power and individual or group prejudice. While it is
quite feasible to argue that in a casteist (or racist) society,
everyone can be prejudiced, it is simply not true that everyone’s
prejudice has equal impact. Would Professor Gupta equate the
daily humiliations, lynching, and rapes of dalits by all castes who
wield power over them, with the presumed prejudice that dalits
might hold against other castes? Discrimination requires attention to
institutions, and not only subjective notions which Professor Gupta focuses
on in his testimony. Thus, his evidence that ‘no caste accepted the notion
that they were inferior’ is quite irrelevant since there are too many
castes who not only think they are ‘superior’, but actually have
the power to act upon their prejudice in systematic and violent
ways. In a casteist society that stigmatizes particular castes and
privileges others, the latter are raised to think that the resources of the
country belong to them as a birthright and are willing to act violently to
protect it.
Finally, Professor Gupta empties caste of all power (and discrimination) by
portraying caste as a matter of cultural traditions claiming that ‘people in
the caste system were proud of who they were and their traditions and
position in the country.’ It is almost as if he is being far too
accommodative of those ‘upper castes’ whose ‘caste pride’ and ‘position
in the country’ is based on the humiliation of other castes. His position
that ‘caste members did not want to escape their caste’ also
makes a mockery of historical attempts by individuals from
stigmatized castes who prefer to ‘hide their caste origins’ in the
face of contempt of so-called ‘upper’ castes. It also mocks groups
who have claimed new identities over time by leaving Hinduism
altogether (for example, neo-Buddhists, Christians, and others). For all
those who Professor Gupta sees as revelling in ‘caste pride’,
there are many more who are weary of caste identities, and resist
its inscription upon their bodies. In denying this, he also denies the
patriarchal nature of caste. [Source]
50
7.5 Learned Hindus have clearly expouned the race basis
of caste
7.5.1 Through caste “our forefathers protected themselves
from interfusion with an inferior race” (Harendranath
Maitra)
Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaisyas, these were the three twice-born orders,
belonging to the original Aryan stock. They conquered the non-Aryans,
who by race and tradition were inferior. After their gradual conquest,
these also became members of the Hindu family, but with inferior rank.
These are the Sudras. By this means our forefathers protected themselves
from interfusion with an inferior race.
In India, with all our caste, there was never either class feeling or race
antagonism. The division of this community-family of the Hindus into caste
groups was evolved for the division of labour, and the giving to all of the
right of equal opportunities within his own particular sphere.
True only the Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaisyas could read the Vedas, and
the Sudras were debarred. One does not give higher mathematics to
children.
Source: HINDUISM: The World-Ideal by Harendranath Maitra 1916
7.5.2 “Why has the white complexion of our forefathers now

become black?” (Vivekananda)
Vivekananda’s appeal: “Why has the white complexion of our
forefathers now become black?”
To those who argue that the caste system is not in some way linked with
race, there is plenty of material in rebuttal.
1) The Aryans, according to Dayanand Saraswati were not frightful as the
Ethiopians (Abysinnians). The implication is clear: there was this group of
self-declared smart people with their own mythologies who thought that
they were noble and others were frightful. The Aryan is a myth (for it
assumes that only Aryans were 'noble') but not the underlying
racism.
2) The paper on Hindu Eugenics makes clear that skin colour is a key part
of Hinduism. "The pure Brahmin was a white race"
3) Vivekananda asks: "Why has the white complexion of our forefathers
now become black?"
4) In all enactments of Ramayana (Ramlila) that I've seen (when I was
young), the lowly classes and 'rakshasas' are shown as pitch black. I don't
know if these things still happen, but it will be nice to get these recorded
and uploaded on youtube, particularly those from UP and Panjab.
The conclusion is as clear as day: The Caste System is FUNDAMENTALLY
RACIST.
Book 2
7.5.3 The original “Aryans” were from Abyssinia, the people
with “frightful shapes” (Dayanand Saraswati) GET THE
RIGHT ONE
Over the last few days I've been studying the origins of racism, which has
two key drivers: (a) Social Darwinism (or eugenics) and (b) Aryan race
theories. Both, by the way are collectivist ideas and ignore the individual
while glorifying the "race" or "society".
These two drivers overlap considerably, with one justifying the other.
There is apparently a "pyramid" of races, with Aryans at the top.
I don't "believe" in race. No biologist worth his salt believes in race. There
is simply no way to identify a "race" at the biological level.
But the Aryan idea is the most bogus of all. There is no proof whatsoever.
Only assertions.
If I'm to belive in the "Aryans" I might as well believe in Adam and

Eve. Or Noah. Or the tooth fairy. Just having something/someone
referred in ancient scriptures is NO proof. We need archaeolgical and
biological evidence. We need also to understand issues in the context of
OTHER human migrations/ activities.
With the Aryan "race" theory nothing adds up. I wonder why "historians"
haven't been able to see through this sham concept till now.
SCIENTIFIC PROOF THAT THERE WERE NO ARYANS
Curiosity piqued, I've searched a bit and found that just a few years ago a
scientific study has established that there is NO evidence of any "Aryans"
coming from outside to India. Mythological people don't come or go, as
expected.
"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. [Source]
But that's NOT good enough, in my view. It is CERTAIN that humans have
been coming in and out of India for tens of thousands of years.
We must not mix "Aryan" migration with REAL migration, which

HAS been taking place. India falls on a major route of migrations. From
here, people have gone to Australia, for instance, 40-50,000 years ago. So
India has clearly had a LOT of migrations. Some big, some small. Mostly
very small.
LANGUAGE commonalities across the world are further proof of migrations

from Africa (apart from DNA). The non-existence of an "Aryan" "race"
doesn't mean that there was no sharing of langauge (or ideas).
52
But small migrations probably made the biggest difference. The fact that
India's pre-history is consistent with the world's pre-history
(stone/bronze/iron age) is proof that all kinds of ideas were being
shared with India (or being invented in India) in ancient times. It only
takes one or two people to share ideas. Big migrations are not a
necessary requirement for the advancement of mankind.
Further, once innovation occurs, it generates a further impetus and new

innovations are motivated.
NS Rajaram notes that this idea has not yet died out: "While avoiding
overtly racial terms, scholars in disciplines like Indo-European Studies
continue to uphold scientifically discredited and historically disgraced
theories built around the Aryan myth." [Source]
Max Muller himself supposedly made clear that the Aryans are not a
"race", just a linguist classification:
"I have declared again and again that if I say Aryans, I mean neither blood
nor bones, nor hair nor skull; I mean simply those who speak an Aryan
language… in that sense, and in that sense only, do I say that even the
blackest Hindus represent an earlier stage of Aryan speech and thought
than the fairest Scandinavians…To me an ethnologist who speaks of
Aryan race, Aryan blood, Aryan eyes and hair, is as great a sinner as a
linguist who speaks of a dolichocephalic dictionary or a brachycephalic
grammar." [Source]
However, I suspect Max Muller didn't do enough, particularly because he

spoke of the 'invasion' which meant a superior people conquering an
inferior one.
The following are confirmed facts:
1) India (like most other parts of the world) has had primary migrations
from North Africa and secondary migrations from elsewhere (primarily
middle East) for tens of thousands of years.
2) The ultimate Indian (and "Hindu") is an African great-great- grand

mother. If Hindus want to find their roots, they'd better go to North Africa
to worship their ancestors – regardless of Dayanand Saraswati's insult.
3) There are significant commonalities in languages across most parts of

the world – at least between Europe and India.
In itself the ‘Indo-European’ idea of languages was indeed a hugely

important discovery. According to one modern anthropologist, it
‘represents, perhaps, the greatest modern intellectual achievement in the
humanities'. The problem was in the spread of Aryanism, initially to
history and anthropology, where scientific racism was used not simply to
analyse structure in language but to explain a highly racialised ‘world
Book 2
history’. [Source: ‘No such race’: Finnegans Wake and the Aryan myth pp.
14-41 ]
4) There is a very good chance that Indian culture was indigenous, BUT
supported by minor migrations (this is a two way street, with Indian
migrants influencing others, as well).
5) Modern humans have lived in India for at least 50,000 years.
6) Indians were meat eaters, including BEEF eaters (shocking to some!)

just like all other humans across the world. In particular, Indus Valley
Civilisation was a MAJOR beef/meat eating civilisation.
The rest – about "Aryans", about the fact that Indians didn't eat
beef, is a myth.
ADDENDUM
This criticism perhaps by a Chinese is

good:http://www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php?/topic/15956-the-
aryan-myth-and-hindu-nationalism/
I haven't read the following but may be worth reading:
The myth of the "Aryan tribe"
Myth of AIT
Death of AIT
Aryan Race Politics
Eurocentric History
India's Self Denial
7.5.4 Analytical perspective confirms perceived biological difference

(Badri Raina)
BADRI RAINA, Caste and Race: Discrimination by any Name, Economic and
Political Weekly August 11, 2001
If it is agreed – as per the position today at which anthropological and
allied scientific determinations rest – that the entire race of homo sapiens
derived from an originary black African female (called ‘Eve’) then one is
hard put to understand how, on some subsequent ground, ontological
distinctions are to be drawn either between races or castes. Let us also
underline the distinction between the supposition that we are all god’s
children and the rather more substantiated argument about our descent
form ‘Eve’, lest both positions are thought to be equally diversionary. It
then stands to reason that all subsequent distinctions are, in modern
parlance, ‘constructed’ ones, and, like all ideological constructions,
attributable to changing equations between knowledge and power among
54
human communities through contested histories here, there, and
elsewhere.
This line of thought receives, thankfully, extremely consequential buttress
from the findings of the Human Genome project. Contrary to earlier
(chiefly 19th century colonial) persuasions on the subject of race, as well
as, one might add, the somewhat infamous Jensen offerings in the 20th
century from America, those findings deny genetic difference between
‘races’. If anything, they suggest that environmental factors impinge on
gene-function, as a dialectic seems to unfold between nature and culture.
It would thus seem that ‘biology’ as the constitution of pigmentation
enters the picture first only as a part of that dialectic. Taken together, the
originary mother stipulation and the Genome findings ought indeed to
furnish ground for human equality across the board, as well as yield policy
initiatives towards equitable material dispensations aimed at building a
global order where, in Hegel’s stirring formulation, only the rational
constitutes the right. Such, sadly, is not the case as everyday fresh
arbitrary grounds for discrimination are constructed in the interests of
sectional dominance.
We know that beginning in the late 18th century most colonial
scholars of India constructed a sociology which sought to explain
Indian caste society as having originated in racial segregation. In
her celebrated work Interpreting Early India Romila Thapar offers a wide-
ranging account of that historical construction across the 19th century.
The basis for that construction was located by such people as Max Muller,
August Pictet, Christian Lassen and others in comparative philology – in an
‘equation of language and race’. As relations were drawn between
Sanskrit and Greek, Latin and other European languages, a common Indo-
European root was argued. Thus the upper castes in India were seen as
descendants of Aryans as an Aryan-Dravidian divide was stipulated,
parallel to the Aryan-Semitic divide in Europe. Furthermore, the Aryans
were now supposed to be superior to the non-Aryans since the former
were seen as ‘the initial conquerors who had founded civilisations in
Europe and Asia’. Such a construction ‘also became acceptable to the new
middle class elite in India as it could call itself Aryan, differentiate itself
from lower castes believed to be non-Aryan and even seek a connection
with the British rulers who represented British ‘Aryandom.’
However interestedly ideological these representations may have been,
they were to remain persuasive. And the reason is not far to seek. The Rig
Veda which has continued to be seen as a founding document on the
Hindu social order furnishes references to an initial division of society into
the ‘arya-varna’ and the ‘dasa-varna’, the latter described as short-
statured and dark-complexioned (RV,1.130.8; 5.29.10; 9.41.1, Thapar,
Interpreting Early India, p 30). Further, of the two terms most frequently
used to define caste (‘varna’ and ‘jati’) varna which is employed to
categorise the four groups (‘brahmana’, ‘kshatriya’, ‘vaisya’, ‘sudra’)
derives from the root meaning ‘colour’. Romila Thapar infers that “the
connotation of colour is symbolic since the four colours
associated with the groups are white, red, yellow and black”; yet
it remains a telling fact that the package has ‘white’ at the top
and ‘black’ at the bottom. The white/black binary of the Rig Vedic
text continues to resonate in, for example, such flaunted notions
as of the ‘suvarna’ (the golden-hued) in opposition to the dark-
complexioned ‘dasa’, denied access, for instance, to knowledge on
Book 2
that basis of a constructed inferiority of status. After all, one of the things
that Lord Rama does as he is returning from exile (Valmiki text) is to
behead the Sudra Sambook for presuming to engage in meditation. Thus
racial totems of a hierarchy were built that also translated into notions of
the pure and the polluted and commensurately sacred and profane space
was apportioned to the castes through India’s unedifying Hindu social
history.
It is, therefore, not conclusively clear that caste discrimination may be set
apart wholly from constructions of race. Nor is it clear that important
functionaries of the union government disagree. Consider, for example,
how the honourable secretary to the human resource development
ministry views the matter. Writing euphorically on the exclusive deserts of
the Kashmiri pandits as a group, he asserts that such exclusivity “befits
the representative of a race composed entirely of brahmins”; there is
more: their ‘fair’ complexion and ‘light blue or green eyes’
evidence that they are “pure Aryans and have retained the purity
of their blood”. So, brahmin by ‘race’/ aryans/pure of ‘blood’ – indeed
the Fuhrer could not have said it better (Kashmiri Pandits: Looking to the
Future, APH Publishing House, Ansari Road, Delhi 2001, pp 13-14).
7.6 Buddhist literature clearly refers to the common

perception of caste being linked with birth
Buddhist literature (which is normally more socially realistic than the
Sanskritic) gives a clear picture of this contestation. In the Vasettha
Sutta of the Sutta Nipata it is described how a young brahmin, Vasettha,
comes to Buddha. He says: "My friend Bharadwaj and I have been having
a dispute: what makes a brahmin. He asserts that it is birth (jati): a pure
birth through seven generations produces a brahmin. I say it is action
(kamma)." The Buddha then answers him by arguing that while there are
jatis among plants and animals, human beings, from the hairs of their
head to the nails of their feet, have no essential biological differences.
Rather, it is action that makes a person: one who makes war is a soldier;
one who farms is a farmer; one who does commerce is a trader, and so
on. The debate depicts several features. First, there were differences also
among brahmins about the emerging theory of 'Brahmanism'. Second,
there was a racial-biological element in the interpretation of caste even
from the beginning, which the Buddha refutes (showing that he knew what
the Hindu Council theorists do not know even today: there is no race
among humans).
Source: Caste is the cruellest exclusion by Gail Omvedt
56
7.7 Top Indian experts see clear links with race, at origin
of the concept
7.7.1 Ghurye thought that caste started with ‘race’
Cambridge educated G.S.Ghurye (1893-1983) was the foundational figure
of Indian sociology. Ghurye's initial training was in Sanskrit, and it
was only after attending Geddes' lectures at Bombay and being selected
for a scholarship that he went to England where he studied anthropology
at Cambridge under Rivers and Haddon (1920-1923). He took over as
Head of Department of the Department of Sociology in Mumbai University
in 1924 and wrote prolifically about all sociological issues in India. His list
of students reads like the ‘who’s-who’ of India’s sociology, people like
Iravati Karve, Y. B. Damle and M.N. Srinivas.
It turns out that he had strong views about caste as a derivative of
'race'. This is entirely consistent with the Sanskrit scriptures about which
he was extremely knowledgeable. Note that he makes use of the "Aryan"
race theory – which is a myth because (a) there are no races and (b) the
idea of an entire group being "Aryan" is rubbish. But whether these people
are called Aryans or just ordinary migrants (which is what I see them as),
there is no doubt that at some point in India's history, some of these
people struck upon a remarkably shrewd way to protect and even
strengthen their privileges through the caste mythology.
I’m extracting parts of an article by Carol Upadhya (2000) entitled, The

Hindu Nationalist Sociology of G.S. Ghurye. [You can read Ghurye's book
here]
In Caste and Race in India (1932) … Ghurye concludes that the Indo-
Aryans belonged to the larger Indo-European stock that dispersed from its
homeland after 5000 B.C. The branch that entered India about 2500 B.C.
carried with it the early Vedic religion, and the ‘Brahmanic variety’ of the
Indo-Aryan civilisation developed later in the Gangetic plain, along with
the caste system.
Ghurye also reiterates the racial interpretation of varna as colour and the
idea that the ‘dasas’ described by the Aryans were the ‘dark’ and ‘snub-
nosed’ natives they encountered when they entered India (1969:165).
Caste derives from the varna classification of the early Vedic age, which
referred to skin colour and differentiated the ‘Arya’ and the ‘Dasa’. The
caste system originated as an endogamous institution as the Indo-Aryan
Brahmins attempted to maintain their purity by keeping themselves apart
from the local population (1969:125).
It may be taken to be an historical fact that people calling themselves
‘Arya’ poured into India through the north-west somewhere about 2000
B.C. It is equally clear … that an institution closely akin to caste has been
very often described in Sanskrit books, which are the work of either the
Aryans or the Aryan-inspired aborigines … We have seen that the
Brahmins, who were the moral guides and legislators of the
immigrant Aryans, tried to keep their blood free from any inter-
mixture with the lower classes … [Ghurye 1969:117-18].
The Aryans invaders entered India with three exclusive classes and
absorbed the indigenous inhabitants who "accepted the overlordship of
the Indo-Aryans" at the lowest level as Sudras (1969:172). They practiced
some amount of ritual exclusivity but also displayed ‘tolerance’ by
Book 2
assimilating diverse peoples. The mechanism for this assimilation was
caste:
The Indian Aryans as later Hindus not only tolerated both beliefs and
practices not harmonizing with their central doctrines but also assimilated
a number in their own complex. Partially at least, on the social
organizational side caste system was the modus operandi accommodating
diversity of faiths and practices [1969:165-66].
Because caste was maintained by endogamy and hypergamy, there is a
correspondence between caste and physical type, or race
(1969:173).
The racial theory of Indian society was promoted most notably by Risley,
the first Director of Ethnography for India, who took the nasal index as an
indicator of the proportion of Aryan blood, which supposedly varies along
the caste gradient (Trautmann 1997:183).18 Risley’s racial theory of caste
simply elaborated the earlier two-race theory of Indian history, in which
the dark, ‘snub-nosed’ and primitive Dravidians were conquered by, and
partially mixed with, the ‘tall, fair, lepto-rhine’ invading Aryans (Risley,
quoted in Trautmann 1997:202), producing the caste system. This theory
was encapsulated in Risley’s famous formula: "The social position of a
caste varies inversely as its nasal index" (quoted in Trautmann 1997:203).
In Caste and Race Ghurye examines Risley’s theory in great detail through
a reanalysis of the anthropometrical data. He finds that outside the core
area of Aryan settlement, ‘Hindustan’, physical type does not
conform to caste rank, and that there is greater similarity between
brahmins and other castes within a region than among brahmins across
regions. His conclusion is that the "Brahmanic practice of endogamy
must have been developed in Hindustan and thence conveyed as
a cultural trait to the other areas without a large influx of the
physical type of the Hindustan Brahmins" (1969:125).
While Ghurye criticises specific features of Risley’s
theory and methodology, he accepts the overall framework of
racial
categorisation
and in fact proposes new racial categories for the Indian
population based on the nasal and cephalic indices
(1969:125 ff.). He bases his argument on the same assumptions employed
by the Aryan race theory: that the ‘Aryan type’ is long-headed and
fine-nosed, represented by the people of Punjab and Rajputana ,
while the ‘aboriginal type’, represented by the ‘jungle-tribes’, is
broad-nosed (1969:118).19 In his argument Ghurye does not distinguish
clearly among race, language and culture, although he does add a
diffusionist element to his argument by suggesting that brahminism and
caste spread throughout India as cultural traits rather than through large-
scale physical migration of Aryan brahmins.
He also suggests that the relation between the Greeks and the Egyptians
was similar to that between the ‘Aryas’ and the ‘Dasas’, except that the
Vedic people had more reason to show their ‘pride and exclusivity’
because the Dasas were non-Aryan and of dark colour.
ALSO:
58
Barbara Celarent, ‘Caste and Race in India by G. S. Ghurye’, American
Journal of Sociology, Vol. 116, No. 5 (March 2011), pp. 1713-1719
Chapters 5 and 7 consider the relation of race and caste. Ghurye here
jumps immediately into the polemic between Herbert Risley, a colonial
administrator and census officer committed to “racial” theories of the
origin of caste, and his predecessors Denzil Ibbetson and J. C. Nesfield,
who inclined to an occupational theory. Using what were then cutting-
edge methods (nasal indexes and correlational analysis), Ghurye shows
that a strong race/caste correlation exists only in Hindustan, a fact
he attributes to its location at the portal where the Aryan / Brahmanic
peoples entered the subcontinent. Closeness to “ancestral” Aryan
populations meant that Brahmanic endogamy could remain stronger in
Hindustan, whereas in southern and eastern India, where contact
had been longer and the “fissiparous” tendencies of
intermarriage hence more dominant, caste no longer correlated
with physical type. Thus was diffusionism coupled with a new view that
caste endogamy was ideologically important but practically difficult.
Intermarriage was perpetually creating new groups, which then had to be
rationalized and systematized by Brahmanic intellectuals, even while the
exigencies of material life—occupation, landowning, trades—steadily
pressed against any limited or fixed notion of an occupational
rationalization, even for Brahmanical writers. Ghurye’s view of caste was
thus inevitably dynamic and rejected the deep, almost primeval stability
sought by—indeed assumed by—many of the racial and occupational
theories.
7.7.2 The original migrations into India

The caste system begins to make historical sense if we postulate that the
migrating warlike Hindus from South-Central Asia, speaking a Prakriti
close to classical Sanskrit overcame the Dravidian peoples of the urban
Indus valley and after a period of turmoil assimilated the conquered
darker tribes as Sudras. The epics of the Ramayana and the later
Mahabharata clearly point to a period of tribal fighting, uncertainty, and
mixing of different cultures. [Source] ‘DALITS’ AND THE CASTE SYSTEM OF
INDIA: Some Explorations and Conjectures by Vithal Rajan
7.8 Caste and eugenics: further proof of its strong links

with race
7.8.1 The Caste System: “a Great Eugenic Movement in the
truest sense of the word”. Btw, if you are a girl, avoid
marrying a hairy man.
This is an amazing attempt to justify the caste system, justified as a "race"
project ("white" Brahmins vs others). The writer mourns the damage done
to India by Buddhists who forced the mixing of the "white" Brahmins with
dark ones.
And btw, please don't marry hairy men, girls. That's a eugenically bad
idea.
And sorry, if you are not Brahmin, you are inferior and not much can be
Book 2
done about it. Get used to it.
HINDU EUGENICS
T. N. Roy, Department of Agriculture, Bengal [The Journal of Heredity,

American Genetic Association, [1927 vol:18 iss:2 pg:67 -72]
The greatest eugenic movement that the world has as yet

witnessed originated in India. It was the institution of the caste
system.[1]
That intermarriage between two different races was undesirable

was early appreciated in India and hence prohibited. That
marriages which originated in lust were not likely to be good
marriages was also appreciated by the Hindus.
The Hindus not only classified themselves according to parentage, but

they classified the different kinds of marriages. The best form of marriage
was known as the Brahmanva marriage whose sole object was the
improvement of the progeny. The choice of the mate did not rest with the
contracting parties but with their elders and guardians. Such marriages
were likely in many cases to be unhappy, nay unbearable, if both the
contracting parties did not believe in the sanctity of marriage. Marriage
was, therefore, and still is, with many Hindus a sacred duty where-from all
considerations of self and passions were to be excluded. This was effected
by religious inculcations, and by moral and social training. Marriages were
usually early, sometimes even in infancy, and the married couple had
usually to undergo a rather severe training in controlling
themselves. Whatever may he said as to the happiness or
otherwise of such matings, no one will deny that eugenically such
marriages were in some respects of very great advantage.
Origin of the Brahmins
To understand fully and to appreciate Hindu eugenics one has to

go back to the earliest period of their religious and social
history. The earliest eugenic movement began with the institution of
what is known as the Gotra. The word literally means that which protects
the cow, i. e., an enclosure for the cows that was raised for protecting
them from the ravages of wild animals or from thieves. The time of the
institution of the Gotra has not yet been settled but it is reasonable to
suppose that it must have been centuries before 700 B. C. It is
contemporary with the institution of the Brahmins as a separate caste for
there is no Brahmin without a Gotra. A few intellectual giants of those
times who repaired to the solitude of the forests to meditate and evolve
their own school of thought or knowledge became famous and attracted
pupils. The places where they lived and taught were known as As-rams.
These intellectual giants, known as Rishis or Munis, lived mainly on wild
fruits of the forest and milk. They kept herds of cows which grazed in the
60
almost unlimited pasture and were herded at night in the enclosure or
Gotra. The Asrams and the Gotras were named after the founders. The
descendants of the founders came to be known by their Gotras. Just as we
now qualify a distinguished person by his place of residence or where he
won his fame, just as we say Lord Kitchener of Khartoom or Lord Curzon of
Keddleston, so in those days a Brahmin would introduce himself by
saying that he was so and so of such and such Gotra. There are
altogether forty-two Gotras.
Whether you meet a Brahmin at Cape Comorin or Simla, at Karachi or

Calcutta or anywhere in the wide world, you must know that he is a
descendant of one of those forty-two intellectual giants and that his
ancestry dates back over 3,000 years. And every Brahmin knows his Gotra
and thereby he knows also how, when, and where his soul had its origin.
As the descendants of the Gotras multiplied and migrated and settled

elsewhere, further distinctive marks came to be instituted. This was done
by the institution of what are known as the Prabars, what may in English
he translated as the progenitors. The Prabars were the distinguished
persons of the same line of descent, so that when a man could tell you his
Gotra and Prabars (the founder and the distinguished person of the line)
his geneaology was accurately fixed for several centuries. And every
Brahmin knows his Gotra and Prabars even today. In fact it is
impossible for him to forget them because the sacred thread that
he wears has to be knotted together by thrice repeating his Gotra
and Prabars. A sacred thread usually does not last more than six months
so that a Brahmin usually has to repeat his Gotra and Prabars six times a
year. Therefore he cannot forget them. A Brahmin may have as many as
five Prabars according to the line to which he belongs. If you meet a
Chatterjee anywhere you know that he belongs to Kasyap Gotra and that
his Prabars are Kasyap, Apsar and Naidhuva.
Further distinctions came to he instituted according to the quarter of the

Vedas that each Brahmin followed. There were four Vedas (schools of
religion) viz., Rik, Shyam, Yaju and Atharva. And every Brahmin knows his
Gotra, Prabar and Veda.
No race pays so much homage to the memory of their forefathers and no

one regards them with such veneration as the Brahmins. True they did not
build Pyramids or Taj Mahals or Minars or gigantic stone needles or other
expensive monuments, but, that was characteristic of the Brahmins. They
had a supreme contempt for what was merely temporal. Mind was their
world and not matter. The Brahmins had already delegated to their
inferiors the Khatriyas, Vaisyas and Sudras the charge of all
temporal matters so that they might unhampered follow their
mental persuits. It was impossible for every man to build an expensive
and lasting memorial to all his ancestors but it is within everybody's
capacity to build a mental memorial that will (and has) outlasted the most
Book 2
ancient temporal monument. The mental memorial erected to the
memory of the forty-two founders still shines in the minds of their some
millions of descendants and is not likely to die so long as any of them live
up to their traditions.
The Brahmin has to celebrate the anniversaries of the death of his father,
mother, forefathers and foremothers, seven on the mother's side and
seven on the father's side, by religious ceremonies, offerings and
entertaining other Brahmins. He therefore must remember the names of
his immediate ancestors, seven generations on both sides. In those days
of longevity, seven generations must have covered a period of over 200
years. These seven generations coupled with the Gotra, Probers and
Vedas would have given in the pre-literate period a complete ancestry of
every Brahmin.
Brahminism Not Hereditary
The Brahmin was originally created by eugenic selection. The son

of a Brahmin in those days was not necessarily accepted as a Brahmin,
whereas there are instances where people from different castes were
admitted into the Brahmin caste if they could give evidence of the
possession of the requisite mental and moral traits, ability and
attainments. The Brahmin is called twice-born as also are the Khatrivas
and Vaisvas. The second birth takes place at the time of the thread
ceremony which is the acceptance of the creed and the beginning of a
special training, different for each of the three castes. Evidently many
sons of Brahmins were debarred from having the privileges of the
caste and denied the sacred thread.
This was a very healthy weeding operation as every breeder

knows. Without it no pure lines can be established. Later on the
weeding was stopped and the caste became hereditary. Of the
scheduled mental and moral traits that a Brahmin was to possess by
nature we may name the following: (1) Unselfishness, (2) Forgiveness, (3)
Self-control, (4) Unswervingness, (5) Cleanliness, physical, moral and
mental. ( 6) Simplicity, (7) Devotion, (8) Natural tendency to take delight
in the special work of the Brahmin.
These works were: (1) Teaching, (2) Learning, (3 and 4) Performing and
presiding over religious ceremonies, (5) Giving alms to the good and (6)
Receiving alms only from the good.
The Brahmin's position was originally above those of the kings and
emperors, but for some reason or other the Brahmin fell from his high
position. His authority was very greatly shaken after the birth of Buddha, i.
e. 500 B. C. Hinduism waned as Buddhism increased. Though Buddha is
regarded by some of the Hindus as one of the ten incarnations of God and
the law of Karma (Buddha's great tenet), is also preached by the Hindus,
there was one fundamental difference between Buddhism and Hinduism
62
and that was in the caste distinctions. With the conversion of Asoka the
Great, Buddhism spread very rapidly. The tide was turned by the great
Sankaraacharjya but not before the harm had been done.
In Bengal, Buddhist influence had so far demoralized the Brahmins that

when in the eighth century Adisur, the then reigning king, wanted to
celebrate the Putresti Jagna[2] not a single Brahmin could be found in the
whole of Bengal who could preside over the ceremonies. Adisur sent for
five of the best Brahmins from the United Provinces. These came to
Bengal with their wives and each with an attendent servant. They
performed the ceremonies to Adisur's satisfaction and .he induced them
with offers of land and other privileges to settle in Bengal. These five
Brahmins are the progenitors of the bluest of the blue Brahmins in
Bengal, known as the Kulins. Complete written accounts are available
of all their descendents. These five had between them sixty-five sons and
each of them settled in a different village with a free gift of land to support
himself. A village in Bengal is called Gain. So, the offsprings of these sixty-
five sons were further distinguished by the name of their village which
was called Gain. Just as Gotra distinguished the place of the original
Brahmin in India, Gain distinguished the original settlement of the sixty-
five pure Brahmins in Bengal. It is not necessary to enter into the details
of the history of Kulinism in Bengal. Suffice it to say that it was a great
eugenic movement in the truest sense of the word.
Modern science may not approve of its methods or their results. The
Brahmins of Bengal cannot be called a pure line but it is yet true that the
best of the scheduled characters of the Brahmin are oftener met with
amongst the Brahmins than amongst any others. If you look up "When and
where of famous men and women" by Howard Hensman and Clarence
Webb, published by George Routledge & Sons, the three famous men of
Bengal that you will find there are Brahmins. viz., Raja Ram Mohan Ray,
the theologian Iswar Chandra Vidyasagar, the writer and reformer and
Bankim Chandra Chatterjee, the great novelist. It is noteworthy that their
fields of fame were exactly those of the Brahmin, religion and literature.
Mate Selection
The laws of Manu and other religious books contain many instructions and
restrictions for the choice of the mates and there are certain laws which
have been religiously followed from the remotest antiquity to the present
day. It may be an interesting work to have all these published to the
world. In these what strikes one the most is the extreme care with
which in-breeding was avoided
. If the ancient Egyptians, Phoenicians and Greeks were the most in-bred
people; the Hindus were the most out-bred people, though usually
within the caste. The Brahmins were one caste and a Brahmin must
marry a Brahmin but he must never marry one of his Gotra or Prabar. i. e.,
any one of his own line. The reason for this restriction is not known but
Book 2
conjectures are possible. Probably the law was prescribed because they
learned from experience that inbreeding sometimes resulted in
reversion to undesirable ancestors. In the Puranas, some of the
most ancient literature, instances of brother and sister marriages
are actually recorded.
Susrue, the great medical authority, has also pointed out the bad
effects of inbreeding. But the prohibition of marriage within one's own
Gotra and Prabar did not by itself constitute a bar to inbreeding. It made
brother-sister mating impossible but not cousin marriages. An
unmarried daughter had the Gotra and Prabar of her father but she
adopted those of her husband after marriage, so that a man's son and his
sister's daughter had different Gotras and Prabars and could therefore be
married. But this was effectually guarded against by another law
which forbade intermarriage between blood relations not
separated by at least seven generations.
Regarding bodily disabilities and diseases, there are many

prohibitions and amongst these one is rather significant and—
suggestive of Darwin's theory. It is that no girl should be married
to a hairy man. That men do differ considerably in hairiness is common
knowledge and there are men even today who when passed the middle
age strongly suggest in their state of nature the ape. Was it possible that
in those remote days a concentration of the hairy genes did in some cases
result in a reversion to the wild hairy ancestors?
There is also another injunction and to me it is the most important, so far

as eugenics is concerned, as I have elsewhere said. It is to observe the law
of similars. Marriages should be between similars who are similar looking
and similarly constituted, of the same breed and attractive. Here we have
a high ideal of selective intensive breeding which has not yet
been surpassed.
It is likely that a race which has been so systematically out-bred for

thousands of years contained many inherent and masked defects. The
seven generation prohibition, however, by no means ruled out of court the
chance meetings of two recessives during all those thousands of years,
specially as marriages were confined to the same caste. This may
probably account for the downfall of the Brahmin and hence of the Hindus.
But more than that, the downfall was caused by the readmission into
Hinduism of the Buddha converts as a result of the preachings of the great
Sankaracharjya. Sankaracharjya is credited with the great feat of driving
Buddhism out of India by reconverting the Hindu-Buddhists into
Hinduism. But this was achieved at a very great sacrifice. During the
Buddhistic spell many had intermarried and their reconversion
into Hinduism contaminated all the castes. This is most
damagingly proved by the color differences.
The pure Brahmin was a white race but today Brahmins of all
64
colors are to be found —from the dark aborigines of India to the
white of the European race. Intermixture has very greatly
disintegrated the castes.
The downfall of the Brahmin was a great calamity
, but it is idle now to bemoan it. One is tempted to say with Tennyson "The
old order changeth yielding place to new and God fulfills himself in many
ways lest one good custom should corrupt the world." The Brahmin was
certainly not the special property of India. There have been, and still .are,
Brahmins all over the world amongst the different races, as there have
been and still are the Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Sudras. They have only to
be singled out and bred pure in order to constitute the world federation of
the different castes. Such castes will endure and profit the world
enormously.
Insanity, it has been said, is a corporeal disease but one-sided, as it is

localized in the head. As with the individual so with the race. A race which
has developed very highly on the intellectual side but has woefully
neglected its physical side, must also appear to the normally developed
race as insane. The Hindus are a case in point. Hindu civilization was
essentially an intellectual civilization. The material, the physical,
always appeared to them as very low, gross, not worth much thought,
something that may be entrusted to the lower people. This was probably
due to the environment. Nowhere in the world was life so easy as in
India, nowhere was the struggle for existence so little. Whatever
was the cause, one-sided views cannot endure for long. Intellectual
progress could not proceed far without the material, its physical
substratum, as is amply borne out by the result.
Hindu civilization was destroyed, as all civilizations have been, by

barbarism , by people whose physical side was more cultured
than their intellectual. The people who destroyed Hindu civilization
failed to appreciate its intellectual attainments.
Hindu philosophy still leads the world. Hindu religious literature is

almost inexhaustible and beyond the comprehension of most
people.
Their philosophy, their religion, their civilization, like themselves, are

discredited because they failed to govern themselves, because they failed
to protect themselves from foreign invasions, because they failed to
progress materially with the material progress of the rest of the world.
[Sanjeev: This bit I can agree with, at least in part]
A reaction seems to be setting in. The races which have made the
greatest material progress are today questioning their sanity. They
wonder whether they themselves are not perilously near that
onesidedness which is insanity, only it is the other way about. They
Book 2
wonder whether they have not given too much attention to the material
and too little to the intellectual. No doubt there are amongst them those
who with a justifiable pride point to their high attainments in physics and
chemistry, to their telegraphs, telephones and wireless, to their railroads,
motor cars and aeroplanes, to their gigantic commerce and industry.
Others as a result of more detailed studies and introspection, are
genuinely alarmed at the future prospect. They realize the danger of the
by-products of these gigantic commerces and industries,—the moral,
mental and physical wrecks, —the amazing increase in number of the
inmates of prison, hospital and lunatic asylum. More than by these they
are alarmed at those strange whirlpools of political and economic
distress under the action of which the moral, mental and physical
wrecks get welded together and cause one of those cataclysmic
upheavals such as was lately witnessed in Russia—real menaces
to civilization. [Sanjeev: this was only the beginning]
Megasthenes who visited India dining Chandra Gupta's time wrote his
impartial and now famous account of Indian civilization, as it was at that
time. I pass over what he says of the material advancement. "The people
were contented" 'he says, "they were peaceful, honest, clean, simple,
truthful and industrious." How would that compare with the modern
international distrust, envy, crime, restlessness, distress—Capitalism,
Commercialism, Pauperism and hence Bolshevism.
To say that the downfall of the Hindus was due to their caste distinctions
would be like mistaking an invariable concomittant for a cause. It would
be more correct to say that the Hindus' downfall was due to their
trying to march in advance of their times, to their exclusiveness
and to their onesidedness.
If the caste distinction did them any 'harm it did so because it

was not observed well enough.
[1] Caste system—The word caste is derived from the Latin word cast-us
meaning pure. It was first used by the Portuguese after their connexion
with India. The Portuguese word casta means breed or race. The original
castes in India were four, viz., the Brahmins or priest class, the Kshatriya
or the military caste; the Vaishva or the merchant class and the Sudras or
the servant class. The first three were Aryans and they were called the
twice-born because they were initiated at a certain age and wore the
sacred thread. Later on a large number of castes came to be instituted as
a result of intermixture between those four castes. There are in India now
nearly as many castes as there are occupations. Though the people do not
now follow their caste occupations religiously as they used to, yet the
caste is observed in all religious ceremonies, i. e., those relating to death,
birth and marriages.
66
[2] Putresti Jagna—It is a religious ceremony for invoking the gods to bless
a childless couple with children. Frequent references are found in sanskrit
literature about this Jagna. Many of the famous and great men of India
were ushered into the world by the performance of this very expensive
ceremony/
 The story of Indian eugenics #2 - Aryan supremacy and (most importantly)

the caste system
Indian eugenists accepted as specimens not as scientists. The story of
Indian eugenics #1
 Vivekananda believed: “The Aryan gives his blood to a race, and then it
becomes civilised”
This showed clearly linkages with blood and superiority. This was not just
about the soul (since sould can’t transmit through blood)
Vivekananda believed: “The Aryan gives his blood to a

race, and then it becomes civilised”
The original “Aryans” were from Abyssinia, the people with

“frightful shapes” (Dayanand Saraswati) Vivekananda’s logic for
reincarnation of the “soul” is very good, but DNA and evolution
explains much better
Vivekananda seems to have converted Dayanand Saraswati's

depiction of Aryans and Dasyus as nomenclatures (good/evil) into a
RACIAL divide.
This aspect of Vivekananda is quite pathetic, actually.
In this article he writes:
In India there are two great races: one is called the Aryan; the other, the
non-Aryan. It is the Aryan race that has the three castes; but the whole of
the rest are dubbed with one name, Shudras — no caste. They are not
Aryans at all. (Many people came from outside of India, and they found
the Shudras [there], the aborigines of the country).
There is something in caste, so far as it means blood; such a thing as

heredity there is, certainly. Now try to [understand] — why do you not mix
your blood with the Negroes, the American Indians? Nature will not allow
you. Nature does not allow you to mix your blood with them. There is the
Book 2
unconscious working that saves the race. That was the Aryan’s caste.
Mind you, I do not say that they are not equal to us. They must have the
same privileges and advantages, and everything; but we know that if
certain races mix up, they become degraded. With all the strict caste of
the Aryan and non-Aryan, that wall was thrown down to a certain extent,
and hordes of these outlandish races came in with all their queer
superstitions and manners and customs. Think of this: not decency
enough to wear clothes, eating carrion, etc. But behind him came his
fetish, his human sacrifice, his superstition, his diabolism. He kept it
behind, [he remained] decent for a few years. After that he brought all
[these] things out in front. And that was degrading to the whole race. And
then the blood mixed; [intermarriages] took place with all sorts of
unmixable races. The race fell down. But, in the long run it proved good.
If you mix up with Negroes and American Indians, surely this

civilisation will fall down.
But hundreds and hundreds years after, out of this mixture will come a
gigantic race once more, stronger than ever; but, for the time being, you
have to suffer.
The Hindus believe — that is a peculiar belief, I think; and I do not know, I
have nothing to say to the contrary, I have not found anything to
the contrary — they believe there was only one civilised race: the Aryan.
Until he gives his blood, no other race can be civilised. No

teaching will do. The Aryan gives his blood to a race, and then it
becomes civilised.
Teaching alone will not do. He would be an example in your country:

would you give your blood to the Negro race? Then he would get higher
culture.
==
Here's a more detailed discussion of Vivekananda's (what would be

considered today) racist views.
7.9 Strong skin colour preference in India

http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Hinduism/2004/05/Are-Hindu-Attitudes-
Towards-Race-Skin-Deep.aspx?p=2
There is extensive evidence of skin colour preference in India. I’ve covered
this issue extensively on my blog. A few examples:
No need to insert “white” DNA into your children, India. Just adopt world-
best policies.
68
Whether it is caste or race, the status is entirely ascribed, the status one
obtains at birth. Segregation exists in both the systems. Outcasts still
remain outcastes. Even in the midst of the recent worst human tragedy
that hit the country in the form of an earthquake in Gujarat, the whole
institutional mechanism of the state did not move into the Dalit areas and
belts while the benefits of relief went to the upper castes as fast as
possible. This is no concoction. Papers have reported it. Parliament has
discussed it. The Congress party has highlighted it and NGOs have
testified to it. In both caste and race those in the lowest rung are not only
discriminated against but cursed to do menial jobs. Endogamy is another
feature of both. Marriages are rare and few both among different racial
and caste groups. Both are stratifications, a hierarchical ordering of social
categories, supported by social institutions. Inequality is
intergenerationally transmitted in caste and race. Prejudice and
discrimination are both a part of race and caste. And what is worse is that
such prejudice and discrimination are not merely personal but
institutional, a part of the structure and processes of whole society.
In both caste and race theories, there is an attitude of the so- called
higher or superior groups that their culture is superior to all other cultures
and all the other groups should be judged according to their culture. What
is the difference in the claims made by the white race in Europe and the
upper castes in India? In any racial or caste society the access to the
society's resources including power is proportionately larger to the pure in
comparison to the impure or polluted. [Source]
7.10 The mistreatment of foreign ‘white’ women tourists in

India
Post traumatic stress disorder caused by Indian men treating this Chicago
university student like an object.
This Indian PRETENSE OF CIVILISATION (a "great" religion apparently
underpins this "civilisation") must be blown apart and destroyed. This is
NO CIVILISATION. It is a barbaric land. These kinds of stories aren't
exceptional. They are the rule. And on the other side, if you are black
student/tourist from abroad, you are treated like TOTAL DIRT in India.
India's psychiatric disorder of LACK OF RESPECT for others as humans is
destroying it, and harming the world, as well. Caste, racism, all come from
the same root: a religious framework that either exceptionally "regards"
someone or exceptionally disrespects someone.
http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-1023053
Book 2
8. Rationalisation for oppression through
hierarchies of the soul
Hindu scriptures and analysts of caste clearly state that caste (varna) is
based on the transmigration of the soul which are classified on the ‘good’
they have done in the previous birth. This ‘good’ (karma) leads to a
hierarchy of souls, made explicit thorugh caste.
Upper caste Hindus (like Gandhi) firmly believe in transmigration as the
basis of caste. “Upper caste” “Hindus” actually believe that they are at
the top of the world’s “heap” because of the good they did in their past
life.
So you do good in a past life and then get to become BAD in this life by
oppressing 40 per cent of India’s population! That’s a strange religion,
indeed.
A video that shows why karma is a probem:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1A_I7OO8Sv8#at=529
What will remain from Hinduism if transmigration is removed? I suspect
vedanta will be the only aspect to survive.
8.1 The soul is (re)born into a caste based on its karma

India’s caste system is necessitated by a complex, MULTIPLE TRIP theory
of the soul. In this theory, the soul starts at the lowest level (insect) and
works its way up into the human. Finally, after becoming not just an
ordinary Brahmin but a great Brahmin, the soul achieves escape velocity
and blasts out of Earth permanently (moksha).
The figure below illustrates what is widely stated in the scriptures.
70
In BFN I wrote: ‘justice was not a matter for this life but the next one, led
to the caste system being strengthened. Caste became the means of
justice, if we can call it that. If someone behaved well and worked
diligently within his ‘allotted’ sphere in his lifetime, he could hope to rise
to the next caste ‘level’ upon rebirth; and vice versa – you could fall down
the scale in your next birth.’
In Hinduism, ‘the type of birth you take in this world, and the conditions of
your existence here are all determined by what you did in your earlier
existences. You may even be born as an animal, says the Upanishad, if
the karma is very bad’ (Vivekananda 2).
The Brihadaranyaka Upanishad specifies the range of insects one can be
reborn as: ‘those who conquer the worlds through sacrifices, charity and
austerity’ will do well upon rebirth, but those who do not will ‘become
insects and moths, and these frequently biting things (gnats and
mosquitoes)’3. Given the huge population of insects – more than 200
million on this planet4 – there must have been a lot of bad people in the
past (well in excess of the total number of humans ever born).
8.1.1 Gandhi’s view

What bothers me is that some Hindus – who CLEARLY KNOW that
transmigration is the ONLY basis for caste – pretend otherwise or try to
CHEAT others by saying that caste is not determined at birth. At least
Gandhi didn’t cheat or falsify this basic truth.
The Vaikom Satyagraha
The demand for social and religious reforms was slowly gaining ground in
Travancore State in the Nineteen Twenties. In 1918, the Exhale caste had
already appealed to the Government to open out. The temples in the
State to all Hindus, They late followed up with a threat to convert
themselves to Christianity if the Government did not act decisively. It was
in this climate that the Vaikom Satyagraha (1924-25) took place.
The issue concerned the use of a road which ran beside the temple at
Vaikom. Untouchables and other low castes were not permitted to use
this road. A few followers of Sri. Narayana Guru, several caste Hindus and
a Syrian Orthodox Christian began a Satyagraha to open out the road to
the untouchable castes Gandhi visited the area and began a negotiation
with a Nambudri Brahman trustee of the temple. Mahadev Desais notes
of that negotiation reveal Gandhi’s reformist approach to the problem:
Gandhiji: Is it fair to exclude a whole section of Hindus, because of their

supposed low birth, from public roads which can be used by non-Hindus,
by criminals and bad characters, and even by dogs and cattle?
2
Swami Krishnananda in Chhandogya Upanishad, Rishikesh: The Divine Life
Society Sivananda Ashram, 1984.
3
Chapter on the ‘Process of Rebirth’.
4
The Smithsonian institution estimates that there are more than 200 million
insects for each human on the planet. (Information sheet No. 18 of the Museum:
[http://www.si.edu/Encyclopedia_SI/nmnh/buginfo/bugnos.htm]
Book 2
Nambudri Trustee: But how can it be helped? They are reaping the reward
of their Karma.
Gandhiji: No doubly they are suffering for their Karma by being born as
Untouchables. But why must you add to the punishment? Are they worse
than even criminals and beasts?
Nambudri Trustee: They must be so, for otherwise God would not
condemn them to be born Untouchables.
From the discussion quoted above we get some idea of the traditional
understanding of the position of the Untouchable castes and Gandhi’s
divergence from this position. [Sanjeev: It was a very minor divergence.
That’s not really a divergence, if you ask me. Just COSMETIC RUBBISH. He
did not call for an end to caste. That would have been real divergence.]
For the Nambudiri Trustee the notion of Untouchablity could not be
separated from the being of the Untouchable, which was a result of his
Karma. it is clear from this discussion that while Gandhi’s espousal of the
cause against Untouchability is of great social importance, his reasoning
appeared self-contradictory. The position taken by the Nambudiri Trustee
was nearer the traditional understanding of Karma. Gandhi made a
departure from tradition by rejecting the practice of Untouchability
without giving up the system of caste.
Source: GANDHI AND AMBEDKAR by Siddhartha
8.1.2 Vivekananda’s logic for reincarnation of the “soul” is

very good, but DNA and evolution explains much better
I'm interested in finding out how Vivekananda came to reconcile Advaita –
the most universal philosophy of all, with the caste system and
reincarnation of the "soul" (the caste system depends CRITICALLY on the
theory of reincarnation).
Vivekananda had not been very clear about this initially. So he wrote on
7th Aug., 1889 he asks Pramadadas Mitra of Varanasi, an orthodox Hindu:
“The doctrine of caste in the Purusha-Sukta of the Vedas does not
make it hereditary — so what are those instances in the Vedas
where caste has been made a matter of hereditary transmission?”
Sometime thereafter Vivekananda was persuaded that there WAS a
hereditary transmission mechanism for the soul (hence the validity of
caste). By 1896 he was preaching that "there is hereditary transmission
so far as furnishing the material to the soul is concerned." [Source]
This is a summary of his argument. For the full argument click here. His
argument is extremely cogent - GIVEN THE KNOWLEDGE KNOWN TO
MANKIND IN HIS TIMES. He asks the right questions. Fortunately, modern
science can answer all these questions. In that sense, the idea of caste
(and a "soul" that reincarnates) should be pretty easy to kill once
knowledge about evolution and DNA is more widely transmitted. Note that
I'm quite comfortable with the idea of a UNIVERSAL SOUL (advaita).
72
QUESTION: Is there nothing permanent in this evanescent human life? Is
there nothing, they have asked, which does not die away when this body
dies? Is there not something living when this frame crumbles into dust? Is
there not something which survives the fire which burns the body into
ashes? And if so, what is its destiny? Where does it go? Whence did it
come?
The question was answered once for all thousands of years ago, and
through all subsequent time it is being restated, reillustrated, made
clearer to our intellect.
Eye > Brain > Alertness > Intellect > Soul > orders to act
First the external instruments [eye], then the organ to which this external
instrument will carry the sensation [brain], and lastly the organ itself must
be joined to the mind [alertness]. The mind, too, is only the carrier; it has
to carry the sensation still forward, and present it to the intellect. The
intellect must carry it forward and present the whole thing before the ruler
in the body, the human soul. Before him this is presented, and then from
him comes the order, what to do or what not to do; and the order goes
down in the same sequence to the intellect, to the mind, to the organs,
and the organs convey it to the instruments, and the perception is
complete.
[The] human being is composed first of this external covering, the body;
secondly, the finer body, consisting of mind, intellect, and egoism. Behind
them is the real Self of man.
REINCARNATION
This idea of reincarnation is … most essential for the moral well-being of
the human race.
Why do we not remember our past? Why should we remember the past?
What has come to this brain is the resultant, the sum total of the
impressions acquired in our past, with which the mind has come to
inhabit the new body. Yet at the same time, … there are instances which
show that this memory does come.
No other theory except that of reincarnation accounts for the wide
divergence that we find between man and man in their powers to
acquire knowledge. [Sanjeev: modern scientists would call it g]
If, as some of the European philosophers think, a child came into the world
with what they call tabula rasa, such a child would never attain to any
degree of intellectual power, because he would have nothing to which to
refer his new experiences. We see that the power of acquiring knowledge
varies in each individual, and this shows that each one of us has come
with his own fund of knowledge. [Sanjeev: This assumption that
knowledge is inborn is false.]
Knowledge can only be got in one way, the way of experience; there is no
other way to know. [Sanjeev: Now he’s back to tabula rasa/Locke/Hume]
INSTINCT
If we have not experienced it in this life, we must have experienced it in
other lives. [
Sanjeev: This is a logical error that Vivekananda makes. There could be
another transmission mechanism, and indeed there is: DNA.
Book 2
] How is it that the fear of death is everywhere? A little chicken is just out
of an egg and an eagle comes, and the chicken flies in fear to its mother.
There is an old explanation (I should hardly dignify it by such a name). It is
called instinct.
Let us study this phenomenon of instinct. Instinct is involved reason. What
we call instinct in men or animals must therefore be involved,
degenerated, voluntary actions, and voluntary actions are impossible
without experience. Experience started that knowledge, and that
knowledge is there.
"But what is the use of saying that that experience belongs to the soul?
Why not say it is hereditary transmission?"
The simple hereditary theory [which is wrong] takes for granted … that
mental experience can be recorded in matters. But what proof is there for
assuming that the mental impression can remain in the body, since the
body goes to pieces? What carries it? [Sanjeev: DNA is a like a computer
operating system: those that are fitter carry forward into the future. A
“soul” is not necessary to bring into the picture.]
Even granting it were possible for each mental impression to remain in the
body … how could it be transmitted to me? Through the bioplasmic cell?
How could that be? [Sanjeev: That’s where Vivekanada’s lack of
knowledge of modern DNA etc. shows up clearly. The DNA is the “soul”]
Until these physiologists can prove how and where those impressions live
in that cell, and what they mean by a mental impression sleeping in the
physical cell, their position cannot be taken for granted. [Sanjeev:
“instinct” is merely that part of the operating system which is fit for
purpose. Due to random mutation, programs that are more compatible
with the environment, e.g. with the right “instinct” survive, others die
out.]
SOUL AND FREEDOM (through KARMA)
But I will bring before you one more point with regard to this theory of
reincarnation. It is the theory that advances the freedom of the human
soul. Men in general lay all the blame of life on their fellow-men, or, failing
that, on God, or they conjure up a ghost, and say it is fate.
We reap what we sow. We are the makers of our own fate. The infinite
future is before you, and you must always remember that each word,
thought, and deed, lays up a store for you and that as the bad thoughts
and bad works are ready to spring upon you like tigers, so also there is the
inspiring hope that the good thoughts and good deeds are ready with the
power of a hundred thousand angels to defend you always and for ever.
[Sanjeev: True, if we lose the soul, we lose this very attractive theory of
karma, as well. I do not believe, however, that we should lose the essence
of this theory. I include karma theory as the foundational principle in my
theory of liberty, and believe it is perfectly compatible with a SINGLE life.
There IS a reward for goodness in this lifetime: it is the sense that one has
done the right thing.]
74
8.1.3 J.N. Farquhar’s findings
The Outcaste is a soul whose past record is so foul that physical contact
with him is spiritually dangerous to the caste Hindu. [cited in MODERN
RELIGIOUS MOVEMENTS IN INDIA BY J. N. FARQUHAR,1915]
Also:
The most characteristic and vital of all Hindu doctrines is transmigration

and karma. It is also more anti-Christian than any other aspect of the
religion; for it involves not only the theory that each individual passes
through many lives and deaths, but also the doctrines that a man’s place
in society is an infallible index of the stage of soul-progress he has
reached; that the suffering he undergoes is strictly equivalent to his past
sins; that women are born women because of former sin, and widows are
widowed for the same reason; that to seek to ameliorate the social
condition of an individual or a tribe is futile, since the exact amount of the
misery or happiness each man will suffer or enjoy is inevitably fixed by his
karma; that Caste is the only right form of society, because social grades
are divinely proportioned to human desert; that divine forgiveness is
impossible; and that, since God stands apart from karma, He is necessarily
actionless. So powerful and pervasive is the doctrine that there is scarcely
a part of the religion that has not been modified by it. [cited in MODERN
RELIGIOUS MOVEMENTS IN INDIA BY J. N. FARQUHAR,1915]
8.2 Charvakas rejected reincarnation

In this context it must be noted that a good number of Indians have
rejected the transmigration and hence, of caste.
Cārvākas rejected religious conceptions like afterlife, reincarnation [wIKI]
8.3 Buddhists rejected reincarnation of soul??

check
Book 2
9. Lots of red herrings thrown in to
confound the truth
9.1 Red herring: Caste is not determined at birth

This is the most common myth. As we have seen, this is totally false. This
is a very convenient lie. By pretending that some sections of the
scriptures oppose caste by birth, the task fo these upper caste
mythmakers is complete. They can then rest on the ‘laurels’ of their
BIRTH-DETERMINED caste and continue to oppress the lower castes and
dalits. What fools they make of others.
Example:
There is no such thing as the Hindu caste system. There is caste system in
India which is equally strong in Muslims, Christians and even Sikhs (given
that Sikhism explicitly preaches against caste). The caste system is a
social system & not a religious system. It is based on the two foundations-
endogamy and denial of economic freedom. People are trapped in their
respective professions which they have inherited by the accident of the
birth.
What Hinduism had was the not the caste system but the Varna system.
Varna in Vedas and later texts is descriptive rather in perspective. It
categoriesed people into four broad groups according to their professions.
It was not birth based as you will find mention of families where mother is
called Shudra, father Vaishya and son Brahmin due to their respective
professions. Same person could belong to different Varna as he/she
changed profession.
[Source: Abhinav Prakash Singh, On Caste and Economics]
9.2 Red herring: Caste is not intrinsic to Hinduism

A number of people peddle the myth that caste is not integral to
Hinduism. A key argument is that transfer of Dalits to other religions
doesn’t seem change their status.
Examples:
Caste discrimination has been one of the most evil and damaging
activities ever to be falsely associated with the beautiful religion of
Sanatana Dharma. The mistaken notion that a person is born with a
genetically-inherited "caste" is an inherently anti-Dharmic, anti-Hindu, and
anti-human fallacy that is not supported by the scriptures of Sanatana
Dharma, and that has repeatedly led to Sanatana Dharma being wrongly
accused of being backward and unjust. Sanatana Dharma is neither.
The Vedic scriptures do, indeed, strongly endorse the divinely inspired
social organizing principle known asvarna. Varna, however, is not to be
equated with what has come to be known as the "caste" system.
Rather, varna proposes a logical and natural division of humanity into
four different, broad categories of psycho-physical nature that is purely
76
reflective of the inherent nature of each and every individual, and not
reflective of one's parentage or of one's genetic inheritance. The present-
day caste system is a perverted devolution from the original
Vedic varna system. Caste is not varna.
[Source: http://www.dharmacentral.com/forum/content.php?119-Caste-
Bigotry]
I am not sure what part of the caste system Ms. Prasad believes is
sanctioned by religion. While the Bhagavad-Gita mentions four "varnas,"
or castes, according to one's qualities and characteristics, the caste
system was originally designed to promote the harmonious workings of
society. The Gita does not say that a person's caste is to be determined by
birth but rather by behavior. Under such a system, a lower-caste person
can be promoted to a higher caste through the attainment of knowledge
and other virtues, while a higher-caste Brahman can be demoted for not
living up to high values.
That said, the system became corrupted and rigid over time as higher
castes, such as the Brahmans, sought to maintain power by not allowing
members of lower castes to move up.
Source: Kar, Dev (2007). Religion and Roots of India’s Caste System., The
Washington Post (of July 1, 2007).
“Caste was more of a social than a religious institution, and that

conversion from Hinduism to Islam has not necessarily the slightest effect
upon caste” [Denzil Ibbetson cited in Race, Caste and Tribe in Central
India: The Early Origins of Indian Anthropometry by Crispin Bates]
9.3 Red herring: Caste is a professional association

Thus it is incorrect to suggest that “castes were ostensibly professional
divisions”5.
“He further went on to assert that castes were essentially guilds, and that
a guild in its earliest form, was nothing less than a tribe, based on
common descent. A great many caste divisions or sub-caste units, such as
gotras, he then argued, were essentially tribal in origin.” [Denzil Ibbetson
cited in Race, Caste and Tribe in Central India: The Early Origins of Indian
Anthropometry by Crispin Bates]
5
‘Caste Is Not Past’ by LAVANYA SANKARAN, The New York Times, June 16, 2013
Book 2
9.4 Red herring: Caste is class
It has nothing to do with economic status. There is a tendency among
some people to suggest that America and the West have castes. This
lowers the meaning of caste to merely a class.
An example of erroneous analysis that mixes class can caste is: FULLER,
C.J., Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute. Sep2011, Vol. 17 Issue
3, p604-621. 18p.
The fact that there is discrimination and a social hierarchy in the West is
NOT the same as caste.
Caste is only what is related to actions in the previous birth.
“Race relations can best be studied as a form of class exploitation; the

assumption that they are caste relations is confusing and misleading.”
[Oliver C. Cox, Race and Caste: A Distinction The American Journal of
Sociology, Vol. 50, No. 5. (Mar., 1945), pp. 360-368.
So far as production is concerned, the caste system is not unlike, in
functional conceptualization, a colony of bees, with each class of insects
doing its work naturally and harmoniously. Human beings may put varying
estimates upon the work of each class of insects; yet for the continuity of
the insect society the work of each may be indispensable. And so, too, it is
a postulate of the caste system that the occupation of the lowest caste,
though relatively inferior, is yet important to the system. [ibid] [Sanjeev: if
a beehive similie is to be considered – which I disagree with – then we are
talking of biological differences of some sort]
The crucial basis of race relations is physical identifiability. When we
speak of Chinese, Indians, Europeans, Negroes, or Filipinos, we expect
responses indicating consciousness of ocular evidence of physical
differentiation. But when we refer to such groups as Chamars, Baniyas,
Telis, Doms, Brahmans, Kayasthas, or Jolahas, no sense of physical
distinction need be aroused. We see rather only East Indians. [ibid]
[Sanjeev: people actually see themselves in India through the lens of skin
colour. Subtle shades seem to matter.]
Never, so far as we know, has Brahmanic India had a "color problem."
[ibid] [Sanjeev: this is absurd nonsense – the whole of India is a quagmire
of skin colour issues]
Gould points out how this symbolic scheme ultimately reflects the class
relations it grows out of:
Basically, the distinction is between the land-owning, cultivating castes,
on the one hand, who dominate the social order and the landless craft and
menial castes, on the other, who are subordinate within it. Hinduism
elaborately rationalizes and congeals this fundamental distinction. (“The
Hindu Jajmani System: A Case of Economic Particularism,”Southwestern
Journal of Anthropology, Vol. 14, No. 4 (1958))
Not all of the caste systems in South Asia are Hindu: there is a separate
Muslim caste system in India and Pakistan, and in Sri Lanka the Sinhalese
system, though historically derived from India, is not based in Hinduism.
But they are all broadly organized along the principles outlined above.
This should be enough to show that it's the underlying social relations that
78
are primary, not their specific ritual elaboration.
And yet caste is not class. There are brahmins as poor as any
untouchable.
[Source: http://www.anti-caste.org/caste-what-is-caste.html]
Vivekananda was CONFUSED! He thought that Europe, USA and

UK had an excellent caste system
Rarely has a man been more confused about 'caste' than Vivekananda
was.
CASTE IS NOT KNOWN EXCEPT THROUGH ASTROLOGERS
In his model, (based on my deduction from his statements) the

reincarnated soul perhaps gets into the mother’s womb just minutes
before birth. There is no DNA effect, just that of the past karma of the
soul, which then determines caste. No oneknows the caste of the newly
born child, which has to be determined by astrologers:
Every Hindu knows that
astrologers try to fix the caste of every boy or girl as soon as he

or she is born. That is the real caste — the individuality, and
Jyotisha (astrology) recognises that. [Source]
CASTE IS RELATED TO SOUL'S ACTIVITIES IN PAST BIRTH, HENCE

KNOWING IT IS IMPORTANT
Just a reminder that we have caste because of the past experience of the
reincarnated soul (see also this in which I refutehis reincarnation
arguments for caste)
Each one of us is born with a peculiarity of nature as the result of our

past existence. Either we call it our own reincarnated past experience or a
hereditary past; whatever way we may put it, we are the result of the
past – that is absolutely certain, through whatever channels that past
may have come. [Source]
Also, the Gita is keen to have castes:
Take the case of caste — in Sanskrit, Jâti, i.e. species. Now, this is the first
idea of creation. Variation (Vichitratâ), that is to say Jati, means creation.
"I am One, I become many" (various Vedas). Unity is before creation,
diversity is creation. Now if this diversity stops, creation will be destroyed.
So long as any species is vigorous and active, it must throw out varieties.
When it ceases or is stopped from breeding varieties, it dies.
Now the original idea of Jati was this freedom of the individual to express
his nature, his Prakriti, his Jati, his caste; and so it remained for thousands
Book 2
of years. Not even in the latest books is inter-dining prohibited; nor in any
of the older books is inter-marriage forbidden. Then what was the cause of
India's downfall? — the giving up of this idea of caste.
As Gitâ says, with the extinction of caste the world will be destroyed. Now
does it seem true that with the stoppage of these variations the world will
be destroyed? [Source]
But now he makes some really absurd statements which nullify his earlier
views (outlined above).
EUROPE AND AMERICA’S EXCELLENT CASTE SYSTEM
Let Jati have its sway; break down every barrier in the way of caste, and
we shall rise.
Now look at Europe. When it succeeded in giving free scope to

caste and took away most of the barriers that stood in the way of
individuals, each developing his caste — Europe rose. In America,
there is the best scope for caste (real Jati) to develop, and so the
people are great.
And we can only rise by giving it full sway again. This variety does not
mean inequality, nor any special privilege. [Source]
ENGLAND’S IDEAL HEREDITARY CASTE SYSTEM
In England the social status is stricter than caste is in India. The English
Church people are all gentlemen born, which many of the missionaries are
not. They greatly sympathised with me. I think that about thirty English
Church clergymen agree entirely with me on all points of religious
discussion. I was agreeably surprised to find that the English clergymen,
though they differed from me, did not abuse me behind my back and stab
me in the dark. There is the benefit of caste and hereditary
culture. [Sanjeev: in this case he is referring to these clergymen as
'gentlemen' with a 'higher caste'] [Source]
THIS MAN WAS TOTALLY CONFUSED RE: CASTE
1) OPPOSITION TO HEREDITARY CASTE
In India, priesthood, like every other business in a social life, is a

hereditary profession. A priest's son will become a priest, just as a
carpenter's son will be a carpenter, or a blacksmith's son a blacksmith.
[Source]
Buddha never fought true castes, for they are nothing but the
congregation of those of a particular natural tendency, and they
are always valuable. But Buddha fought the degenerated castes with
their hereditary privileges, [Source]
80
The present caste is not the real Jati, but a hindrance to its progress. It
really has prevented the free action of Jati, i.e. caste or variation. Any
crystallized custom or privilege or hereditary class in any shape really
prevents caste (Jati) from having its full sway; and whenever any
nation ceases to produce this immense variety, it must die. Therefore
what I have to tell you, my countrymen, is this, that India fell because you
prevented and abolished caste. Every frozen aristocracy or privileged
class is a blow to caste and is not-caste. [Source]
2) BUT!!! ADVANTAGE OF HEREDITARY CASTE SYSTEM
In modern India, no one born of Shudra parents, be he a millionaire or a

great Pandit, has ever the right to leave his own society [Sanjeev: but
wasn't that the very point he was making by praising USA's social
mobility!!], with the result that the power of his wealth, intellect, or
wisdom, remaining confined within his own caste limits, is being
employed for the betterment of his own community
This hereditary caste system of India, being thus unable to

overstep its own bounds, is slowly but surely conducing to the
advancement of the people moving within the same circle. The
improvement of the lower classes of India will go on, in this way, so
long as India will be under a government dealing with its subjects
irrespective of their caste and position. [Source]
Conclusion
I find Vivekananda to be TOTALLY CONFUSED:
First, Vivekananda's logic for the idea of reincarnation (and hence caste) is
false.
Second, he believes in astrology and astrologers to determine someone's

caste. Nothing more stupid exists than astrology.
Third, he thinks USA/UK etc. have a good caste system.
Fourth, he thinks that hereditary enclosure of Sudras into their own

community is good, and assists in their progress.
I'VE RARELY COME ACROSS MORE ABSURD ARGUMENTS THAN

THIS.
Happy for his followers to enlighten me what is going on with these absurd
ideas.
Book 2
9.5 Red herring: there was never any discrimination,
anyway
A novel argument that suggests that discrimiation did not exist is provided
below.
Lord Macaulay in 1835 (Ref. 2, excerpts given below) noted that people in
India did not consider the learning of Sanskrit (or Sanscrit) etc. as a
financially advantageous venture and they would rather do or pursue
something else.
“This is proved by the fact that we are forced to pay our …. Sanscrit
students while those who learn English are willing to pay us. All the
declamations in the world about the love and reverence of the natives for
their sacred dialects will never, in the mind of any impartial person,
outweigh this undisputed fact, that we cannot find in all our vast empire a
single student who will let us teach him those dialects, unless we will pay
him.” (Section 19, Ref. 2)
“Nothing is more certain than that it never can in any part of the world be
necessary to pay men for doing what they think pleasant or profitable.
India is no exception to this rule. The people of India do not require to be
paid for eating rice when they are hungry, or for wearing woollen cloth in
the cold season. To come nearer to the case before us: --The children who
learn their letters and a little elementary arithmetic from the village
schoolmaster are not paid by him. He is paid for teaching them. Why then
is it necessary to pay people to learn Sanscrit….?” (Section 21, Ref. 2)
“…A petition was presented last year to the committee by several ex-
students of the Sanscrit College. The petitioners stated that they had
studied in the college ten or twelve years, that they had made themselves
acquainted with Hindoo literature and science, that they had received
certificates of proficiency. And what is the fruit of all this?
"Notwithstanding such testimonials," they say, "we have but little
prospect of bettering our condition without the kind assistance of your
honourable committee, the indifference with which we are generally
looked upon by our countrymen leaving no hope of encouragement and
assistance from them." They therefore beg that they may be
recommended to the Governor-General for places under the Government--
not places of high dignity or emolument, but such as may just enable
them to exist. "We want means," they say, "for a decent living, and for our
progressive improvement, which, however, we cannot obtain without the
assistance of Government, by whom we have been educated and
maintained from childhood." They conclude by representing very
pathetically that they are sure that it was never the intention of
Government, after behaving so liberally to them during their education, to
abandon them to destitution and neglect….” (Section 22, Ref. 2)
There is no evidence according to the above that people in India
were deprived by brahmins long ago of the opportunity to learn
Sanskrit and Vedas and that further exposes the spurious Manusmriti
(Ref. 3) about its “imaginary” restrictions on people to learn the Vedas. In
reality, and according to Macaulay’s report in 1835 (Ref. 2), people
seemed to have little interest in learning Sanskrit and Vedas, due mainly
to a lengthy, tedious and time consuming initial effort and not much
financial advantage later (in occupation as a brahmin). Moreover, in
relation to the numbers of Brahmins these days, the overwhelming
82
numbers of farmers, masons and carpenters etc. currently (in OBC and SC
categories, supposedly representing the descendents of farmers,
carpenters and blacksmiths etc. long ago) point to the fact that most
people in the past had chosen on their own to pursue and stay in farming
etc. and make a decent living that way, rather than risk their financial
future by becoming a brahmin after learning Sanskrit and Vedas in a hard
and time consuming way.
[Source]
What’s the actual truth?

It took the British to allow Dalits to study in schools. There was NO
possibility of Dalits being given Sanskrit education.
Prasad said Macaulay's policy set in motion the liberation of the Dalits by
dismantling the traditional system of learning based on Sanskrit, the use
of which was denied to the lower castes.
"When the British opened English-medium schools, Dalits were prevented
from entering them by upper caste people, forcing the colonial
government to issue orders that no one could be denied admission on the
basis of caste, creed, gender or religion," Prasad said.
[Source]
9.6 Red herring: Caste is cultural

RACE ACCORDING TO GOLWALKAR
RACE—It is superfluous to emphasize the importance of Racial Unity in the
Nation idea. A Race is a ‘hereditory [sic] Society having common
customs, common language, common memories of glory or disaster; in
short, it is a population with a common origin under one culture. Such a
race is by far the most important ingredient of a Nation. Even if there be
people of a foreign origin, they must have become assimilated into the
body of the mother race and inextricably fused into it. They should have
become one with the original national race not only in its economic and
political life, but also in its religion, culture and language, for otherwise
such foreign races may be considered, under certain circumstances at
best members of a common state for political purposes; but they can
never form part and parcel of the National body. If the mother race is
destroyed either by destruction of the persons composing it or by loss of
the principles of its existence, its religion and culture, the nation itself
comes to an end. We will not seek to prove this axiomatic truth, that the
Race is the body of the Nation, and that with its fall, the Nation ceases to
exist.
Race is basically religion: in Hindusthan, Religion is an all-absorbing entity.
Based as it is on the unshakable foundations of a sound philosophy of life
(as indeed Religion ought to be) it has become eternally woven into the
life of the Race, and forms, as it were its very soul. With us every action in
life, individual, social, or political, is a command of Religion. We make war
or peace, engage in arts and crafts, amass wealth and give it away,
indeed we are born and we die—all in accord with religious injunctions.
Naturally, therefore, we are what our great Religion has made us. Our
Book 2
Race-Spirit is a child of our Religion, and so with us culture is but a
product of our all-comprehensive Religion, a part of its body and not
distinguishable from it.
9.7 Red herring: Other countries have a caste system, too

 Vivekananda was CONFUSED! He thought that Europe, USA and UK had an
excellent caste system
9.8 Red herring: Many reform movements opposed caste

so it is not an issue
Such approaches ignore of the foundational theory of caste
(transmigration) and the great damage caused by it in India (particularly
rural India). By asserting that the scriptures somehow (or the reform
movements) wrote against caste, such people are absolved of the
responsibility of looking at the actual facts on the ground.
Is Caste System Intrinsic to Hinduism? Demolishing a Myth by M. V.

Nadkarni, Source: Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 38, No. 45 (Nov. 8-
14, 2003), pp. 4783-4793
It is necessary to demolish the myth that, caste system is an intrinsic part
of Hinduism. This paper intends to logically and with documentary proof
show that Hinduism — even vedic and classical Hinduism — not only
does not support the caste system, but has taken lots of pains to
oppose it both in principle and practice, making it obvious that caste
system is not an intrinsic part of Hindu canon, philosophy and even
practice. It will then show that the caste system emerged and survived
due to totally different factors, which had nothing to do with Hindu
religion.
What Caste System Means
Caste system as discussed here includes untouchability too, but wherever
necessary it will be referred to separately. As we shall note, untouchability
came into the caste system much later. The following features are
generally taken as essential in characterising caste system.
— It means not simply a division of labour, with each ‘varna’ associated
with a type of occupation, but also a division of labour determined by birth
permitting no occupational/social mobility. This is what distinguishes caste
from class. While the former is hereditary, the latter is not — at least in
principle.
—It is a rigid system, separating caste from caste, with restrictions on
inter-dining and inter-marriage, due to a morbid fear of ‘varnasankara’
(mixture of varnas). ‘Caste’ corresponds to jatis, and each varna is
supposed to be a cluster of jatis, though there is sometimes ambiguity
about which jati belongs to which varna. It is varnas that are cited in
canon, not jatis. Restrictions on inter-dining and inter-marriage pertained
not merely to varnas but also to jatis.
—It is a hierarchical system, one below the other in ritual (or purity)
status, with several disabilities imposed on the fourth varna of shudras
and even more on the untouchables known as ‘antyajas’. It was not,
however, hierarchical in power and wealth at least as between the upper
84
castes. Dumont thought that the distinction between status and power is
basic to understanding caste sysem [Dumont 1999:65-91].
—The system is associated with a notion of purity vis-à-vis pollution, with
utmost purity at the level of brahmins declining successively with
kshatriyas, vaishyas, and then shudras. At the other end, untouchables
are treated as most impure or polluted. A touch of them is supposed to
pollute others including shudras. A gradation of hierarchy and pollution
was found among untouchables too, for example, bhangis (scavengers)
considered as more polluted than say, mahars (agricultural labourers).
Initially the notion of purity vs pollution may have been based on the need
to maintain cleanliness, but it soon developed into an institutionalised
form where pollution was associated with birth. The upper castes when
polluted could, however, get rid of their pollution through ritual bath and
such other expiatory measures. The notion of purity and pollution
developed into a powerful instrument to discourage and prevent
varnasankara. — The whole system along with its taboos and restrictions
is authenticated by religion or canon, giving it a religious sanctity.
—At the foundation of the whole system there is a production system,
which is subsistence-oriented and locally based rather than oriented to
larger market, and production relations being of patron-client type, based
on mutual dependence. Such a system is not necessarily geared for the
generation of economic surplus and its appropriation, as it was not
oriented to the larger market but to local needs.
ll
Our Approach to the Demolition of the Myth
I reject totally the myth that caste system, as defined by these features
either collectively or singly, forms an integral part of Hinduism. Why
Hinduism is not varna dharma understood as jati or birth based, will
become clear in the course of this paper. Hinduism can be defined, as
Gandhiji did, as search for truth, non-violence, compassion for all
beings and tolerance. Consistent with its commitment to search for
truth, it is also marked by liberalism. Hinduism is a dynamic religion, not
fixed or revealed once for all, and hence cannot be identified exclusively
with the religion of the Vedas and Upanishads, nor with the religion
expounded by ‘Dharmashastras’, nor with the Hinduism of the three
eminent Acharyas — Shankara, Ramanuja and Madhya, nor also
exclusively with medieval Hinduism and modern Hinduism. All these
phases represent Hinduism, and have contributed to its development.
Moreover, there is no disjointedness between different phases of
Hinduism, each deriving its inspiration from the previous ones. In that
sense, there is both change and continuity in Hinduism. Since however, it
is accepted by all as beyond controversy that medieval Bhakti movement
was a protest against caste system and since it is equally well known that
modern Hinduism as explained by Swami Vivekananda, Aurobindo
and others also has rejected caste system, the focus of this paper is
on previous or classical phases of Hinduism. It is this earlier Hinduism,
which may be termed as classical Hinduism, that is taken as supportive to
the caste system, and it is this myth that is being demolished by this
paper. Our greater attention to the previous phases of Hinduism is thus
not because Hinduism is defined in terms of these phases, but simply
because the contention concerns these phases.
Book 2
The myth is demolished in the following way:
(i) by showing that there is no strong correlation between Hinduism and
caste system, either spatially or temporally;
(ii) by showing that even after the caste system emerged in Hindu society,
there was considerable social and occupational mobility, and that none of
the defining features of caste system listed above were strictly observed
in practice particularly in the classical period;
(iii) by showing that far from supporting the caste system, Hindu canon
and philosophy were actually against caste system based on birth;
(iv) by showing that, in addition, Hinduism created legends to impress the
popular mind that the caste system is immoral and invalid;
(v) by showing that within the framework of Hinduism, there took place
several movements against caste, starting from Bhakti movements
continuing to more modern movements;
(vi) by showing that caste system emerged and survived in spite of Hindu
canon and philosophy, because of factors which had nothing to do with
Hindu religion.
Ill
No Correlation between Hinduism and Caste System
The statement that there is no correlation between Hinduism and caste
may sound surprising to many. If not in exactly the same words, this is the
sum and substance of what Dumont, the most highly regarded authority
on caste system, and later even Gail Omvedt — not known to be an
admirer of Hinduism — had to say [Dumont Omvedt 1994:31-32]. Dumont
refers to caste distinctions including even untouchable castes, among
Christians in India in different regions. The discrimination against
untouchable Christians is reflected in the form of their separate seating in
churches, and even separate burial grounds. Even today, one can see
advertisements in newspapers seeking ‘Catholic brahmin’ spouses for
Catholic brahmins. Islam, supposed to be an egalitarian religion, is not
free from castes at least in south Asia.
Dumont himself refers to different communities within ‘ashrafs’, who are
supposed to be high caste, and also ‘non-ashrafs’ who have a lower
status. Among the non-ashrafs also, there are three levels of status: ‘(1)
the converts of superior caste, who are mainly rajputs — except for those
who have been admitted into the ashraf; (2) a large number of
professional groups corresponding to the artisan castes of the Hindus, ...;
(3) converted untouchables who have preserved their functions. These
groups indeed seem to be endogamous ....’ [Dumont 1999:208]. There is
no commensality also between ashrafs and non-ashrafs, due to difference
in their status [ibid: 207]. There is caste system among Buddhists of Sri
Lanka also. Some lingayats claim that they are non-Hindus because they
do not accept the Vedas and the varna dharma, and yet they too are not
free from castes and ritual gradation. Basaveshwara (Basavanna), who led
the Bhakti movement whose followers became known as veerashaiva or
lingayats in Karnataka, was truly against caste system. But unfortunately,
he could not succeed in preventing caste system among his latter-day
‘followers’.
On the other hand, Gail Omvedt points out that among Hindus settled for
86
many generations in Surinam, West Indies, Mauritius, Bali, Fiji and other
centres outside India, caste system was weak, almost non-existent. There
took place inter-mixture more freely, including inter-dining and
intermarriage, and no one took varna-based castes seriously, though
identities in terms of regional jatis (such as Marvaris and Gujarzitis) have
not disappeared.
Gail Omvedt, therefore, says significantly that caste is more a feature
of south Asia than of Hinduism per se, taking root in this region
because of its peculiar social and economic characteristics.
Now we may examine correlation between Hinduism and caste system
over time. The first reference to the four varnas comes in the tenth
mandala of Rg Veda, in two verses of Purusha Sukta (quoted in another
section below). According to several scholars who have made deep
research on the theme, the tenth mandala was chronologically the last to
be composed. There is a good consensus on the point that previous to
this, there was no varna system in vedic society. Mahabharata and
Bhagavata Purana also mention that in Krita yuga, there was no caste, but
only one varna of human beings — that of the children of Vivaswata Manu
[Arvind Sharma 2000:136]. Hence, the word manava, popular in all Indian
languages. Puranas and other Hindu scriptures have preserved the racial
memory of a golden age in the past when there was no caste.
According to B R Ambedkar, there were only three varnas in vedic society,
and no fourth varna of shudras. He says, the economy had advanced
enough to give rise to a division of labour but there was no hierarchy. He
refers to other cosmologies in Hindu texts, but they are all secular,
without hint of a hierarchy and without hint of a divine origin. He feels
therefore that the two verses in Purusha Sukta are an interpolation, added
much later after the caste system was established.1 According to him
shudras as an ethnic group were a part of kshatriyas, and a part of Aryan
society itself. He does not accept the theory of western scholars according
to which shudras and untouchables were originally non-Aryans who were
defeated by Aryans, and taken into the vedic society giving them a lower
status. On the other hand, shudras were very much a part of the ruling
society, several of them being kings. As per Ambedkar, they fell from
grace and became the fourth varna when brahmins stopped performing
the rite of ‘upanayana’ for them as a revenge against harassment and
insults suffered by them at the hands of some shudra kings. He also says
that untouchability is a post-Buddhist phenomenon, which emerged as a
result of Hindus giving up sacrifice of animals and beef-eating under the
influence of Buddhism, but they went to such an extreme that those who
continued to eat beef were regarded as untouchables.2
Whether or not one accepts Ambedkar’s theory of origin of shudras and
untouchables, scholars are agreed that varna-system based on birth is
very much a post-vedic3 feature, and untouchability is a post-
Buddhist phenomenon.
This means that at some time, maybe for about first half of the long
history of Hinduism since 4000 BCE to the present day, there was
Hinduism but no caste system. This is so even according to Ambedkar
himself. And, as we shall see in the concluding part of this paper,
Hinduism can survive after the collapse of caste system.
IV
Book 2
Social and Occupational Mobility Not Insignificant
The model of caste system as defined in terms of features listed in the
first section here hardly ever worked in practice. There have always been
exceptions to each of these features and to each of the caste rules and
restrictions. Actual occupations have since centuries deviated from the
varna theoretical model. Dharmashastras themselves allowed exceptions
under ‘apaddharma’, whereby persons who could not make their
livelihood under the occupations of their own varna, could take to other
occupations. Brahmins by birth have taken not only to priesthood, which is
their varna based occupation. But also to several others, including manual
labour. It is not unusual to find brahmin cooks in the service of scheduled
caste (formerly ‘untouchables’) and scheduled tribe ministers and officials.
Havyaka brahmins in Karnataka have not only owned garden lands but
also have been doing manual labour in them. Shudras, apart from doing
manual labour and artisan jobs, which is their varna based occupation,
have traditionally served as soldiers too, making the distinction between
kshatriyas and shudras quite blurred.
Ambedkar himself has given several examples of social and occupational
mobility during the vedic and upanishadic period. Raikva, Janashruti and
Kavasa Ailusha were admitted to ashrams for vedic learning even after
revealing their low caste status. Chhandogya Upanishad has a significant
story of Satyakama Jabala. He sought admission to the ashram
(hermitage) of Gautama rishi (not Gautam Buddha) for vedic learning. On
being asked from what family he comes, Jabala frankly tells the rishi: ‘I do
not know this, sir, of what family I am. I asked my mother. She answered
me, “In my youth, when I went about a great deal as a maid servant, I got
you. So I do not know of what family you are. I am Jabala by name and you
are Satyakama by name”. So I am Satyakama Jabala, sir’. The rishi was so
pleased with his truthfulness, he promptly initiated him as his pupil
[Radhakrishnan 1994:406-07]. So many rishis came from obscure origin
themselves, that there is a proverb which says that one should not ask
about ‘rishi-moola’ (origin or birth of a rishi). Sage Parasara was born of a
Shvapaka woman, Kapinjala of a Chandala woman, and Madanapala of a
boat woman. Rishis had a much higher ritual status than brahmins who
were mere priests. Valmiki (author of Ramayana) and Vyasa (author
of Mahabharata, and editor and compiler of vedas) and even the
great Vasistha belonged to the class of the so-called low birth.
Kalidasa, the greatest of great poets in Sanskrit also came from a
very humble and obscure origin.4
Even as late as 12th century, Vijnaneshwara in his commentary
(Mitakshara) on Yajnavalkya Smriti said ‘nrin pati iti nripah, na to
kshatriyah iti nemah’ (whosoever protects people is fit to be a king; he
need not as a rule be a kshatriya’).
The Bhakti movement, both in the south and north of India, saw many
saint poets coming from the so-called lower castes. They were more
prominent than brahmin and upper castes in the movement. There were
so many sharanas (male saints) and sharanes (female saints) in
Basavanna’s Bhakti movement in Karnataka that M N Javaraiah (1997) has
written a whole book of more than 300 pages on them. It is thus evident
that there was considerable social mobility in the post-vedic society too,
not to mention the vedic society where it was very evident.
Because of this mobility, there was no unanimity about which caste is
88
above which caste, because each considered itself superior to the other.
They competed with others in observance of purity rules to show that they
were superior to others. Thus, quite a few castes considered themselves
to be kshatriyas, while upper castes considered them to be shudras. To
gain a higher rank in the caste system, they practised what the upper
castes practised, like upanayana (sacred thread ceremony), and even
certain ‘homas’ and pujas. Such attempts are called as sanskritisation by
M N Srinivas (1977), through which eventually several castes gained in
caste status. Sanskritisation as a process through which whole castes
gained in caste status could not have been a purely 20th century
phenomenon, though scholarly attention has been mostly confined to the
modern period.
Even marriages between different varnas were not rare. It must have been
because of their significant occurrence, that there is a mention of different
types of marriages in Hindu texts based on which jatis were evolved.
When the husband is from a higher caste than that of the wife, the
marriage was called as ‘anuloma’ ; when reverse was the case, it was
called as ‘pratiloma’. While the former type was tolerated, the latter was
despised. There was another type of classification also; according to it, a
love marriage was called as ‘gandharva’, and a marriage where the
woman was forced into marriage was called as ‘rakshasa’. The former was
tolerated and the latter was despised. It is evident from literature that not
all marriages were arranged by parents, and mixed marriages were not
rare.
It is thus not a surprise that caste distinctions are not based on racial
or colour distinction, though varna meant colour. Race and colour
very much cut across castes since ancient days in India so that a person’s
caste cannot be determined on the basis of his/her colour or racial or
genetic peculiarities. Just as it is possible to find upper caste people with
black complexion, it is equally possible to find persons with fair
complexion among the so-called lower castes and untouchables. This
could not have been so without a significant degree of inter-marriages.
Both Rama and Krishna are black gods but highly adored and worshipped.
The occupational and social mobility as well as the inter mixture of castes
cannot be regarded as infringements of canon or as rare exceptions. As
we shall now see, even canon itself did not respect the custom of
determining status and character on the basis of birth.
V
Canon and Caste
We first take up such parts of the canon that are (wrongly) interpreted to
be supportive of caste system, and then take up such parts as are directly
and definitively against caste system based on birth.
It is only in the dharmashastras (dharma sutras and smritis) that we find
support to the caste system, and not in other canon. However.
dharmashastras never had the same status as other canon known as
shruti (Vedas and Upanishads) and it is laid down that whenever there is a
conflict between the shruti and smriti literature, it is the former that
prevails. It is Manusmriti, which is particularly supportive of caste system
but where it conflicts with Vedas and Upanishads, the latter would prevail.
Though Bhagvadgita (Gita) is not regarded as a part of shruti, Gita is
highly regarded as sacred and is very much a part of classical Hinduism.
Book 2
As we shall just see even the Gita is against caste system based on birth,
and not supportive to it. Thus, to the extent that dharmashastras conflict
with shruti and the Gita, the latter prevails. Apasthambha dharmasutra
may have supported untouchability, but it seems to be read more by
those who like to attack Hinduism with it than by its followers! It is hardly
regarded as canon, even if any Hindu has heard of it.
Though dharmashastras are supposed to support caste system, there is
hardly unanimity about it among them. For example, as Ambedkar pointed
out, though according to dharmasutras, a shudra is not entitled to
upanayana, Samskara Ganapti explicitly declares shudras to be eligible for
it. He also shows that according to Jaimini, the author of Purva Mimamsa,
shudras could perform vedic rites. Ambedkar refers also to Bharadwaja
Srauta Sutra (V 28) and Katyayana Srauta Sutra which concede eligibility
to shudras to perform vedic rites [Vasant Moon 1990:198-99]. Kane points
out that in spite of some other dharmashastras saying to the contrary,
“Badari espoused the cause of the shudras and propounded the view that
all (including shudras) were entitled to perform vedic sacrifices” [Kane
1990].
Interestingly, Manusmriti itself shows the way to demolish its own support
to the caste system based on birth. In chapter 4, verse 176 clearly states:
‘Discard wealth and desire if they are contrary to dharma, and even
dharma itself if it leads to unhappiness or arouses peoples’ indignation’.
Dharma here does not mean religion in the western sense, but rules of
conduct. If varna dharma, or rules of conduct governing varnas, and caste
for that matter, lead to unhappiness or to people indignation, as they
certainly do, Manusmriti itself says that such dharma can be discarded.
What then is dharma, according to Manusmriti? The first verse in chapter
2 of Manusmriti is a reply to this question. It says: “Know that to be true
dharma, which the wise and the good and those who are free from passion
and hatred follow and which appeals to the heart”.5 Mahatma Gandhi was
fond of quoting this verse in his lectures. According to this verse, if the
wise and the good, who are free from passion and hatred, do not accept
caste system based on birth as it does not appeal to the heart, the system
can be discarded according to the Manusmrti itself. So much to the
support of Manusmriti for the caste system.
Purusha Sukta in Rg Veda (X 90) has often been cited, more than
Manusmriti, as authenticating, sanctifying and glorifying the caste system.
The pertinent verses are as follows:
Yatpurusham vyadadhuhu
kritidha vyakaipayan/
Mukham kimasya kow bahu
Ka uru pada uchyete// (11’h verse)
when (gods) divided Purusha, into how many parts did they cut him up?
What was his mouth? What arms (had he)? What (two objects) are said (to
have been) his thighs and feet?
Brahmanosya mukhamasit
bahu rajanyah kritah/
uru tadasya yadvaishyah
padbhyam shudro ajayata// (12’h verse)
90
The brahmana was his mouth, the rajanya (king or kshatriya) was made
his arms; the being called the vaishya, he was his thighs; the shudra
sprang from his feet(5, 6)
As is noted above, Ambedkar considers these verses to be an interpolation
on several grounds, including the fact that while the style or format of the
two verses is of a question-and-answer type, the other verses in the
purusha sukta are narrative in style. Even if it is taken as a genuine part of
the original purusha sukta, and not an interpolation, it cannot be
interpreted as supportive to caste system based on birth and hierarchy. It
is essentially a metaphor taking the society to be an organic whole, of
which the four varnas based on division of labour are intrinsic parts. There
is nothing to indicate that they ought to be castes or jatis as presently
understood. The reference is evidently to occupations or work of
respective varnas, which need not necessarily be based on birth. There is
also nothing prescriptive or recommendatory about the two verses. It is
only indicative of the existence of division of labour, with each varna
corresponding to that part of the body of the primeval purusha with which
the work or occupation of the respective varna is associated. Since
vaishyas and shudras support the society through their economic or
productive work, they were taken respectively as coming out of the thighs
and feet of the purusha, without necessarily hinting at any lowly status of
their work. Similarly since kshatriyas’ work in warfare involved mainly the
use of their arms, they were taken as coming out of the arms of the
purusha. Since brahmins’ work consisted of reciting mantras and
preserving Vedas through oral transmission, they were taken as coming
out the purusha’s mouth. In a lighter vein, it could be said that this was
also because brahmins are traditionally described as thojanapriyah’
(lovers of food)! If the intention behind the two controversial verses was to
sanctify a hierarchical order, they could as well have described brahmins
as coming out of the head of the purusha. It was perhaps seen by the
vedic sage who composed the purusha sukta that brahmin priests mostly
used their mouth rather than their head while reciting the mantras! There
is thus no need for hard feelings due to the two verses in purusha sukta.
The Gita is alleged to support the caste system on the basis of three
verses. The key quotation in this context is from 13th verse in ch 4 where
the Lord tells Arjuna —
Chaturvarnyam maya srishtam
Gunakarma vibhagashah
The four varnas were created by me on the basis of character and
occupation.
In verse 31 of ch 2, Arjuna is cajoled into fighting on the ground that he is
a kshatriya for whom there is nothing more glorious than a righteous war.
Again in verse 47 of ch 18 the Lord states that one should perform one’s
own dharma even if devoid of merit and not follow another’s even if well-
performed?
Verse 13 in ch IV holds the key to the understanding of the other two as
well. Krishna refers to the four varnas, saying explicitly that they were
created on the basis of guna (nature, aptitude, character) and karma
(work, action, occupation). He does not at all refer to birth as the basis for
the fourfold division, which is only a division of labour where each one
follows an occupation based on aptitude or natural inclination. Far from
Book 2
support to the caste system, K M Panikkar considers it as constituting a
devastating attack on caste based on birth.8 Kane says that if Krishna
wanted to make birth as the basis of his division of labour, he could easily
have said jati-karma-vibhagashah’ or ‘janma-karma-vibhagashah’, instead
of ‘guna-karmavibhagashah’ as actually stated [Kane 1990:1635-36]. He
pointed out clearly to ‘guna’. This is also consistent with what Krishna
replied to Arjuna’s specific question in Uttaragita.
Once this is clear, it follows that the dharma referred to in the other two
verses (II 31, and XVIII 47) also is based on guna and not birth. In the
Mahabharata war, persons not born as kshatriyas also participated in the
war as per their inclination, svabhava or guna. So there was nothing
casteist in Krishna’s asking Arjuna to fight like a kshatriya. Similarly, the
advice to follow one’s own svadharma only means that one has to
follow one’s aptitude and qualities, and see where one’s comparative
advantage lies. A talented person may be able to perform many tasks
better than others, but she cannot afford to do so, and she would achieve
more by concentrating on where her comparative advantage lies. The
principle of comparative advantage, instead of absolute advantage, is
followed in international trade between countries. What Krishna advocated
was to ask us to follow the more scientific and practical principle of
comparative advantage as that would maximise social as well as
individual welfare. There is nothing casteist about his advice. Comparative
advantage here can also be taken in the dynamic sense, of potential that
can be realised, and not in terms of present or actual guna in a static
sense.
The story of Shambuka in Ramayana is also cited as supporting caste
system to an extreme extent. It is the story of a shudra who was killed on
the advice of ministers by Rama as a punishment for doing penance and
neglecting his caste duties. The story appears in Uttara Kanda, which is
not a part of Valmiki’s Ramayana which ends with Rama’s return to
Ayodhya in Yuddhakanda. P V Kane, an eminent Sanskrit scholar, is of the
view that Uttara Kanda was clearly a ‘work of later interpolators’ [ibid: Vol
1, Part 1, p 389]. The interpolation was done at a time when varna system
deteriorated and got established on the basis of birth in a rigid form.
Shambuka’s story is not consistent with many examples of persons of so-
called low birth being initiated into ashrams as pupils by rishis, and
becoming rishis themselves. Matanga rishi is mentioned in Valmiki
Ramayana with high regard. He came from a caste that may be
regarded as untouchable in today’s parlance. Rama met him to
pay his respects during his forest sojourn.
Now we may take note of those parts of classical Hindu canon, which
cannot co-exist caste system and have condemned the practice of
determining one’s character and status on the basis of birth or ‘kula’
(family).
Vedanta philosophy declares that there is divinity in every lecture. Krishna
says in verse 30 of ch 6: ‘He who sees Me in all things and sees all things
in Me, never becomes departed from Me, nor am I lost to him’. The
preceding and succeeding verses in the Gita also convey the same
message. The lord says again: ‘He who judges pleasure and pain in others
by the same standard as he applies to himself, that yogi is the highest’ (ch
6.32). How can this advice be consistent or co-exist with support to caste
distinctions based on birth? In the 16th chapter, the Lord narrates the
92
virtues he looks for in human beings and says that those who possess
them are divine. Among these virtues are: non-violence, truth, compassion
to all, absence of anger and hatred, giving charity and service selflessly,
forgiveness, non-covetousness and modesty (ch 16, v 1-3). It follows that
high birth is hardly relevant.
Rg Veda emphasises equality of all human beings. It goes to the extent of
saying, which sounds quite modern: ‘No one is superior, none inferior. All
are brothers marching forward to prosperity’ .9
The idea that all human beings are equal before god irrespective of caste
and that all are entitled to receive his light comes out clearly from the
following:
Ruchanz no dhehi brahnzaneshu
Rucham rajasu naskridhi Rucham vishveshu shudreshu
Mayi dhehi rucha rucham II
—Taittiriya Samhita V 7.6 3-4
Put light in our brahmanas, put it in our chiefs (kings),
(put) light in vaishyas and shudras, put light in me by your light. ‘°
It may sound surprising to critics of Hinduism but is a fact that Hindu
scriptures have backed liberalism and humanism by undermining birth,
upholding character and basic worth of persons as being more important.
Mahabharata makes this point very strongly, to an extent that it reflects a
revolt against the caste system based on birth:
Na kulam vrittahinasya
Pramanamiti me matihi /
Anteshwapij jatanam
Vrittameva vishishyate //
— Mahabharata, Udyoga Parva, Ch 34, v 41.
It means:
High birth can be no certificate for a person of no character. But
persons with good character can distinguish themselves
irrespective of low birth.
Mahabharata emphasises the same point again elsewhere too: Yastu
Shudro dame satye
dharme cha satatotthitah /
tam brahmanamaham manye
written hi bhavet dvijah //
— Mahabharata, Vanaparva, Ch 216, vs 14-15.
It means:
That shudra who is ever engaged in self-control, truth and
righteousness, I regard him a brahmin. One is a twice-born by
conduct alone.
Uttaragita, which is also a dialogue between Krishna and Arjuna, makes
the same point. When Arjuna specifically asks Krishna how varna is
determined, he replies:
Book 2
Na jatih karanam tata
gunah kalyanakaranam /
Vritasthamapi chandalam
tam devah brahmanam viduh //
It means:
Birth is not the cause, my friend; it is virtues, which are the cause
of welfare. Even a Chandala observing the vow is considered a
brahmana by the gods.I2
The verse above corroborates our interpretation of the three controversial
verses from the Bhagavadgita quoted above.
The story of Shankaracharya (8th century), prostrating before a Chandala
is well known. When the latter stood in the way of the former, he was
asked to move away. The Chandala asked him whether the Acharya’s
behaviour was consistent with his philosophy. He asked further: Viproyam
Shvapachoyam ityapi mahan koyam Vibhedabhramah (what is this
confusing distinction between a brahmin and an untouchable?).
Shankaracharya then prostrates before him as before a guru and breaks
out into five verses known as Manisha Panchakam. He reiterates his
advaita philosophy, but in his very first verse he says that a person who
knows the Supreme, whether he is a Chandala or a twice-born, is
a guru for him. (Chandaloastu sa to dvijoastu gururityesha
manisha mama),I3
Ramanujacharya who came in 12th century, defied caste even more
powerfully. Madhvacharya (13th century) in his Brahmasutra bhashya
declares: ‘Even the low born (untouchables) have the right to the name
and knowledge of god if they are devoted to him.”
Tirukkural, an ancient text venerated by Tamils as Tamil Veda,
authored by Tiruvalluvar, says: Let him who thinks inequity be warned
that ruin awaits him’ (116th aphorism). Again, ‘All men are born alike; the
differences are due to differences in what they do.’ (972nd aphorism).15
There is an entire Upanishad, named Vajrasuchika, devoted to an attack
on caste system based on birth. The name of the Upanishad can be
translated as ‘Thunderbolt suggestive’, which fits its claim to blast
ignorance responsible for leading to caste distinctions and away from god.
It is in prose and small in size, having only nine short paragraphs. It is
included as the last Upanishad in S Radhakrishnan edited The Principal
Upanishads along with his translation [Radhakrishnan 1994:935-38]. The
following summary account is based on it. The Upanishad is
argumentative in style and begins with a few questions (in second para):
‘Who is verily, the brahmana (brahmin)? Is he the individual soul (Jiva)? Is
he the body? Is he class based on birth (jati)? Is he the knowledge? Is he
the deeds (Karma)? Is he the performer of rites?’ Then it answers the
questions one by one. A brahmin cannot be the individual soul, since soul
is the same in previous births. He cannot be the body because the body
consists of physical elements, which are common to all human beings. He
cannot be determined by birth, because many sages attained high rank
irrespective of birth. He cannot also be determined by knowledge, as
there were many kshatriyas and others who too attained highest
knowledge and wisdom, and knowledge has not been an exclusive feature
94
of brahmins. Deeds also cannot make a brahmin, since all human beings
can do good work. Similarly, rites and charity can also be done by all. Who
then is really a brahmin? He is the one who knows his self like an amalaka
fruit (gooseberry) on his palm, without caring for distinctions of birth,
being devoid of infirmities, narrowness and ego, and who functions as the
in-dwelling spirit of all beings. At the end, the Upanishad calls upon all to
meditate on the Supreme, removing all distinctions and egoism from
mind. There is no need for further proof to show that Hindu philosophy
and religion are against caste system, after reading this Upanishad.
VI
Legends as a Weapon against Caste System
Apart from such direct preaching discussed above, Hinduism fought
casteism and untouchability by creating legends too. Such legends
appealed to popular mind directly. A legend about Shankaracharya has
already been presented above.
Tiruppan Alvar (10th century CE), an untouchable devotee of Lord
Ranganatha, was insulted by a priest for standing in the way to the
temple. The temple doors did not open to the priest, but a voice came
from within the sanctum sanctorum that unless the priest takes the Alvar
on his shoulders and circumambulates the temple three times and brings
him in the Lord’s presence, the doors would not open. The priest had to
obey, and thereafter, Tiruppan Alvar was hailed as a great saint.
A similar legend is about Kanakadasa (16th century). When he was not
admitted into Udupi Shri Krishna temple by the priests, the idol is said to
have turned its face around so that Kanakadasa could have the darshan
(sight) of the lord through a back window. It is still known as Kanakana
Kindi (Kanaka’s window).
There are similar legends in other regions of India too. An interesting
legend concerns working class bhakti-saints of Maharashtra who came
from low castes. The legend reflects poignantly the empathy felt by lord
Vitthala for his working class devotees who struggle for their livelihood
and yet are deeply devoted to him. The lord responds by deeply
identifying himself with the devotees and participates in their work and
toil, and brings them emotional relief. It is also a way of raising the status
of manual labour in the eyes of particularly the upper castes for the lord
himself does this labour of love for his devotees. There is such a legend
about several, but is particularly interesting in the case ofJanabai, a
woman saint from a dalit caste. Chokhamela, a contemporary dalit saint-
poet, has immortalised this legend in one of his poems:
He scours the floor and pounds the grain,
sweeps rubbish from her yard,
hastens to fetch water,
the Lord of the wheel,
and plaits hair with his own hands,
sitting at peace, peering down,
he quickly kills lice.
Chokha says loves’ labour this.
Book 2
He cares little for greatness. 16
VII
Movements Against Caste within Hinduism
The most prominent movement within the framework of Hinduism to fight
against casteism was the Bhakti movement. Though started first in Tamil
Nadu as early as in 6th century CE by Shaiva saints, it found a powerful
expression against caste system when Veerashaiva movement was led by
Basavanna in Karnataka in 12th century. The Bhakti movement
democratised, broad-based and humanised Hinduism as never before.
Even if it may not have succeeded in eliminating caste system, it brought
home the important fact that caste distinctions based on birth can have
no sanctity in the eyes of god. The movement effectively undermined the
authority of texts, which supported caste, though a false impression
was also created more by upper castes than by lower castes that
Vedas supported caste. As a result, several Bhakti sects declared that
they rejected the authority of the Vedas, prominent among them being
the Veerashaiva movement and Sikhism.
The Bhakti movement cut across not only castes, but even religions and
spread all over India. Kabir in north India, Shishunal Sharif in Karnataka,
and Shirdi Sai Baba in Maharashtra were born as Muslims, but were a part
of Bhakti movement and highly respected by Hindus. The movement
explicitly and powerfully condemned caste system, including
untouchability. Basavanna’s movement in Karnataka was most
aggressively against caste, and included several dalit sharanas and
sharanes as pointed ourearlier. Basavanna went to the extent of getting a
brahmin disciple’s daughter married to an untouchable disciple’s son,
causing a serious commotion. Basavanna was far ahead of his time. Since
the lower castes were from the working class, he preached dignity of
manual labour as an important principle of his philosophy. The Bhakti
movement in Maharashtra also was very similar, drawing saint-poets from
the lower caste working class, though it included brahmins too. The
movement in Maharashtra was started by an outcaste brahmin, Sant
Jnaneshwar, whose family lost caste because his father, a sannyasi
renounced sannyasa and got married on receiving a message from god to
that effect. The movement in Maharashtra too emphasised dignity of
manual labour. There is thus quite a lot of evidence to show that Hinduism
constantly, deliberately and consciously fought against caste system and
untouchability from time to time, even before the modern age and before
the influence of western ideas.
Apart from the scattered and sporadic attacks on caste system, there
were also concerted attempts to lift individual communities of
untouchables as a whole and to bring them into the mainstream. These
attempts started from the 19th century itself. Two glorious examples may
be taken — that of ezhavas in Kerala and nadars in Tamil Nadu. Both
examples relate to the pre-independence period of late 19th to early 20th
century. These examples are of great interest as they involved two dalit
communities elevating their caste status entirely through self-
efforts and very much within the framework of Hinduism. They
have been much more successful than other efforts involving conversion
to other faiths for the purpose of elevation in social status.
Shri Narayan Guru (1854-1928) was the chief force behind
96
elevating the social status of ezhavas, who is venerated by them
as well as by others. He gave three slogans to his followers: “One
caste, one religion, and one god for man”. “Ask not, say not,
think not caste.” “Whatever be the religion, let man improve himself.”
Though a religious leader, his religion was not sectarian and emphasised
that all human beings are equal before god. He wanted to totally remove
all caste consciousness. When he saw that the caste Hindus did not permit
the entry of ezhavas and other dalits into temples, he first started building
new temples for them into which non-dalits too could enter. Then he
started vedic schools where dalit priests could be trained both in
rituals and the philosophy of Hinduism. Next, he encouraged general
and secular education for all, by starting schools and colleges. His initial
temple building programme was only to mobilise his community, but his
later emphasis was more on general education so that all ezhavas and
other dalits could get properly educated and seek good opportunities. He
also started credit cooperative societies so that the dependence of dalits
on higher castes was avoided. Thus, the guru sought all-round
development of dalits. Like Gandhiji, he also tried to change the attitudes
of upper castes. He did not preach hatred of upper castes to his followers,
as he did not want a rift between them. An example of his success in this
regard is the support he received from progressive sections of upper
castes, which resulted in a savarna procession in support of dalits’ entry in
to the famous Vaikom temple during temple entry satyagraha started by
Gandhiji. Narayana Guru and Gandhiji worked together in temple entry
movement. Narayana Guru did not confine himself only to his own
community of ezhavas. There were other communities among
untouchables in Kerala, which were even lower in social status than
ezhavas. But the guru involved them too in his attempts to elevate the
status of all dalits.17
Though the nadars did not seem to have had the advantage of a
charismatic and religious leader like Narayana Guru, they also did equally
well under their secular leaders. The elevation of caste status came
mainly through the spread of education and skills, mutual self-
help by making credit available for starting enterprises, by
helping caste members secure jobs by functioning as an informal
employment exchange and also through Sanskritisation.18 The
members of both these communities —ezhavas and nadars are now highly
literate and occupy important positions. Nadars have also emerged
economically strong, creating a niche for themselves in industry and
commerce.
The example of ezhavas and nadars offers important lessons for dalits. It
is not enough to build their own organisation merely to spread awareness,
make demands and protest against in justice, but it is also equally
necessary to launch constructive programmes for the welfare of the
community. The tendency to rely mainly on making demands on the
government to promote social welfare among dalits is not enough. By its
very nature, government bureaucracy has limitations in promoting social
welfare and social mobility. The communities’ own efforts at constructive
programmes are also necessary. These programmes may be to induce
dalit parents to send their children to schools, to help them in getting
training and skills for jobs outside their traditional vocations, to provide
guidance and help to those who wish to migrate from villages to towns
and cities and help in getting jobs and houses, preventing addiction to
Book 2
liquor and so on. The community organisations of both nadars and
ezhavas took care of the members of their communities like parents. Once
dalit organisations take up constructive programmes, help will come to
them in a big way from private sources too like voluntary and social
service organisations and philanthropic associations.
The successful example of ezhavas and nadars also has shown how
irrelevant are conversions to other faiths to solve dalit problem. Another
important lesson, particularly from Shri Narayana Guru, is that his
movement was not adversarial in character. He broke through upper
caste resistance to social change, without making enemies of
them. He could even enlist their cooperation and support. He was
Gandhian in his approach. In Indian ethos, conciliation seems to have
been far more successful in effecting change than confrontation.
A difference between ezhava and nadar movements, however, is that the
former was not concentrated only on one community, but aimed at
reaching all untouchables and lower castes which suffered social
deprivation. It was a serious attempt to hit out at ritual hierarchy, which
existed among dalits themselves. Success in this task, however, perhaps
was not as great as in elevating the status of ezhavas. Both nadars’ and
ezhavas’ movements however, were successful in significantly reducing
social deprivation among two numerically important untouchable
communities, which had also a higher level of social status than others
among dalits.
There have been more movements in modern Hinduism, which are not
caste or community based and have helped to enrich the moral and
spiritual life of their followers — such as those led by Ramakrishna
Mission, Aurobindo, Brahmakumaris, ISKON, Shri Satya Sai Baba and Mata
Amritanandamayi. Their main significance for this paper is that they have
shown that Hinduism can very well thrive without caste system.19
VIII
How then did Caste System Emerge and Survive?
If all that is contended above is true and if Hinduism as a religion and
philosophy was against caste system based on birth, and even in practice,
it opposed the system, how did it emerge and survive for so long? Simply
because, the system performed certain functions that were valued by the
society. These functions had nothing to do with religion, being entirely in
the ‘aihika’ (mundane) sphere. The unfortunate part of the story is that
caste identities have outlived these functions. These functions may now
be enumerated and explained.
(i) A System of Checks and Balances
The varna system was not just a division of labour. It was also a system of
checks and balances such that there is no concentration of power in any
varna or class. It was more a system to avoid concentration of power than
one meant for appropriation of economic surplus. As per the varna
system, brahmins were not supposed to seek regal power. Their duty was
to seek knowledge and preserve the Vedas and carry on the vedic
tradition. They were not supposed to amass wealth and had to depend on
other varnas for their sustenance. According to dharmashastras, ‘a
brahmana (brahmin) should not hanker after gifts; he may collect them
only for his livelihood, a brahmana taking more than what is required for
his maintenance incurs degradation’ [Kane 1990: Vol II, Part 1, p 531]. As
98
Dumont says there was a clear separation of ritual status from material
power.
While the duty of kshatriyas, particularly of kings, was to maintain law and
order, protect dharma and defend people, they too had no absolute
power. It was their duty to consult their ministers and listen to people and
meet their grievances. The ministry consisted of representatives of all
varnas, including shudras. B R Ambedkar cites Shantiparva of
Mahabharata, in which Bhishma advises Yudhisthira (Dharmaraja) to have
four brahmins, eight kshatriyas, 21 vaishyas and three shudras as
ministers to guide him in the affairs of the state [Moon 1990:112]. The
relatively large allocation to vaishyas may be reflective of their numerical
majority as agriculturists then, apart from their being merchants too. It is
also possible that vaishyas were the largest source of revenue for the
state and hence were given greater representation. If the king was unable
to uphold dharma or protect people and their property, he could even be
removed by the ministers with the support of people, according to
dharmashastras. A picture of harmony and perfect alliance may not
always have been obtained, but it was at least the ideal.
(ii) Division of Labour — Easy Acquisition of Skills and Knowledge
Though there was significant social mobility initially, varnas became
gradually hereditary and jati system evolved with increasing division of
labour and specialisation. It was easier for skills and knowledge to be
imparted within family from father to children as there were no trade
schools or polytechnics as such. Education in skills and knowledge
required in hereditary occupations began quite early right at
home from childhood. As families became specialised in arts and
crafts, they flourished and sought even distant markets. Kane
observes that “professional castes were wealthy and well organised” as
seen from dharmashastras and epigraphic records. The organisation had
reached such sophistication that there were larger professional
associations called as ‘gang’, and village level associations called as
‘sangha’ [Kane 1990: Vol II, Part I, pp 66-67]. Kane observes further that
the sudra gradually rose in social status so far as occupation was
concerned and could follow all occupations except those specially
reserved for the brahmana, so much so that sudra became even kings and
Manu (IV.61) had expressly to enjoin upon brahmanas not to dwell in the
kingdom of a sudra’ [ibid:121].
Interestingly, while vaishyas and shudras were so organised in
professional associations or guilds, there were no such organisations for
brahmins. As Kane says, ‘the brahmanas had no organised corporate body
like for Anglican church with its hierarchy of archbishops, bishops and
other divines’ [ibid:118]. It is often argued that being at the top of the
caste system brahmins designed the caste system and perpetuated it by
giving religious sanctity. But they did not have an organisation to enforce
it. The caste system could not have continued because of a small minority,
which had neither regal nor monetary power. It continued only because
all castes accepted it as in their interest.
(iii) Decentralised Democracy — Lobby Group
When the varnas transformed themselves into ethnic endogamous groups
based on birth, they developed their own caste/ jati panchayats to decide
their own affairs, reducing their dependence on the king. The caste
Book 2
panchayats settled disputes within the caste in an inexpensive and
prompt way. They also imparted tremendous social stability. Kings came
and went, but the society remained stable in spite of all invasions, wars
and political instability. The panchayats looked after the welfare of the
members of their castes in a decentralised way. The caste system
provided a mechanism for decentralised democracy. Though this
mechanism provided stability, it also made at least the medieval Hindu
society more conservative. The panchayats strictly discouraged inter-
caste marriages and severely punished elopement in love affairs, because
inter-caste marriages had the potential of weakening caste-panchayats.
The separation of caste from caste was made more rigid. The hold of
caste panchayats, though weakened considerably after
independence, has not vanished at least in a few cases. We still
hear news reports of lovers across castes intending to marry driven to
suicide. This is more common in rural India, including the so-called low
castes and untouchables. The continued hold of caste panchayats is
ensured by continued dependence of families on members of their caste
during birth, wedding and death, and excommunication by caste
panchayat is still considered a matter of terrible disgrace and shame.
Caste panchayats or their more modern avatar — caste lobbies — are
simply instruments to preserve caste identities or ethnic identities, to seek
concessions from or make demands on the larger society or the state. In
this form, they are completely disjointed from the traditional notions of
ritual status, purity and pollution.
(iv) Ecological Role
There is also an ecological dimension to the caste system, brought out by
Madhav Gadgil in 1983 [Gadgil 1983; Kavoori 2002]. The caste system
performed an important function of reducing competition for and avoiding
overexploitation of natural resources. Only fishermen caste could go for
fishing, and their caste panchayats evolved rules for sustainable
exploitation of fisheries. Only hunters’ caste could go for hunting wildlife
in the forests, except the king who did it occasionally for pleasure and also
to kill man-eating tigers, which intruded into villages. Only chamar or
cobbler caste had the right to the dead animals and their skin. Caste
panchayats evolved rules for restricting hunting in particular seasons, or
particular animals so that wild life is protected and not driven to
extinction. Certain forest areas known as sacred groves (known as ‘devara
kadu’ in Kannada, or ‘dev-ran’ in Marathi, or ‘pavithravana’ in Sanskrit)
were out of bounds for any hunting or even cutting green trees. The caste
system also functioned in a way so as to control the growth of population
by creating barriers for marriage. After giving several illustrations, Madhav
Gadgil observes:
The caste society had thus developed two special mechanisms to regulate
the exploitation of natural resources. The occupational specialisation of
each caste ensured that any particular resource was primarily if not
exclusively utilised by one particular caste. The intra-caste territoriality
then spread the exploitation evenly over geographical regions [Gadgil
1938:282].
Gadgil points out both positive and negative ways ‘of viewing this
ecological steady state’:
It may be viewed positively as a desirable state of man living in balance
with nature. Alternatively, it may be viewed negatively as a state of
100
stagnation. For if the resources are used in a balanced fashion, there
would be no pressures for cultural change and technological innovation.
This is no doubt what happened and the Indian society remained largely
balanced (or stagnant!) freezing its caste system for perhaps two and half
millennia between the time of Buddha when the agricultural colonisation
of much of the subcontinent was complete and the beginning of the British
rule. But value judgments apart, an important consequence of the Indian
caste system was this attainment of ecological approximate steady state
[ibid:282-83].
(v) Security of Livelihood and Employment
An important feature of caste system was its localised system of
production based on jatiwise division of labour for meeting local needs,
rather than the needs of the larger market. As M N Srinivas explains in a
posthumously published article, the base of this localised production was
not necessarily a village, but a cluster of neighbouring villages, each
cluster having one or more “weekly markets, where villagers and itinerant
traders would gather to exchange goods, or buy paying cash. The cluster
could claim a large degree of self-sufficiency as far as the production of
basic needs was concerned...” [Srinivas 2003] In most parts of the India,
there developed a system of making annual payments in kind or cash, as
soon as harvesting was done, for services rendered by village artisans,
barbers, washermen, agricultural labourers and the like. The system of
payment was not on piece-work, but involved the principle that taking
care of the artisans and labourers and their basic needs was the
responsibility of land owning families. Whenever there were special
occasions of urgent need such as marriage, the working class
families were given special help. M N Srinivas refers to different
names of this system in different parts of India: “jajmani in the north, bara
balute in Maharashtra, ‘mirasi’ in Madras, ‘adade’ in Mysore. The
relationship between the jajman and his kamin is unequal, since the latter
is regarded as inferior” [Srinivas 1980:14]. The continuing tensions
between land owning communities and communities which traditionally
were subservient, resulting sometimes into atrocities against the latter
owe their origin to this patron-client relationship and its breakdown, rather
than to any canonical support to caste system. This institution in the past
at least recognised the right to work and livelihood, and in the process
controlled competition.
The relationship between patron and client extended beyond generations,
and in the traditional system at least, it was not open to a landlord to
prefer a new client merely because he charged lower for the services
offered. Nor could the client seek alternative employment outside his
traditional patron for a higher wage — at least not when his services were
needed by his patron. It was the obligation of the patron that the client
and his family did not starve. The much maligned ‘Apasthambha
Dharmasutra’ even says that if an unexpected guest comes and there is
limited food, the head of the family and his family members have to cut
down their own food, but not that of the servants. The latter have to have
their proper meal. The guest should not be fed at the expense of servants
[Kane, Vol I, Part 1, pp 57-58].
The system was certainly not an ideal one without blemish. All the
shortcomings resulting from patron-client relationship, curbing
competition and subsistence oriented production followed from the
Book 2
system. In conditions of frequent droughts and high political instability
since the medieval age, what mattered most was food security, more than
growth. Yet, even under this system, arts and crafts flourished made
possible by specialisation and division of labour, especially under political
patronage, as happened for example under the Vijayanagara kings and
Mughal emperors. It was no wonder that caste system survived under
such security. Neither the Muslim rulers nor the British interfered with the
system. Many Hindus may have been converted, but the caste system was
imbibed into the new religions of Islam and Christianity in India, since the
jajmani system and other functions of caste system had nothing to do with
religion.
IX
Collapse of Caste as a System
A posthumously published paper by M N Srinivas (2003) carries the
assertive title — An Obituary on Caste as a System’. Paradoxically, the
system has expired but caste identities remain and show no sign
of going. It looks, caste system is dead but its ghost remains. Caste as a
system is taken to mean by Srinivas as involving mainly its localised social
production base, subsistence economy, and jati (caste) based
occupations. Caste as a system, however, covers all the features listed in
the beginning of this paper and its functions listed in the preceding
Section VIII. Srinivas refers specifically to the last function discussed here.
But other functions also were no less significant in determining the
structure of the system. Caste as a system has collapsed today because
all its functions have collapsed. It has lost whatever relevance, role, utility
and justification it may have had.
Several factors contributed to the collapse of the system —ethical,
political social, economic and technological. Though the system gave
some stability and even security, it lost on the side of humaneness and
social justice. All kinds of indignities were imposed on lower castes, their
access to learning was barred, and they were pushed to unenviable and
inhuman positions. It was thus that the caste system, particularly its
extreme form —untouchability, became disgraced and condemned right
from Buddha’s time, and again from the medieval age, and then again in
the modern times.
The functional significance of the caste system also vanished, making its
collapse all the more inevitable. A major factor is the emergence of the
modern state as a much stronger, much more powerful and pervasive
institution than it ever was with its different wings — the executive,
judiciary and legislature, able to exercise powers on all. Hinduism has
accepted the emergence of the modern state to enact its own laws,
including personal laws, and the sphere of dharmic laws regulating the
conduct of people in day-to-day life has shrunk very significantly. There is
thus no need for either dharmashastras which served as de facto
legislation in dharmic matters, nor for caste panchayats which acted as
judiciary. To the extent that their role still continues, it is much less
powerful and is superceded by the role of the state. For the same reason,
the role of the varna system in providing a system of checks and balances
also has vanished. The legally enacted constitution, accepted by all,
provides now a system of checks and balances to maintain equilibrium
and stability.
102
Since in the bargain, decentralised democracy of the caste system has
broken down, a new type of decentralised democracy, which is village
based, has taken its place. It does not need any authentication by religion,
but is backed by the Constitution and state power, which is more
important. For some time, the dominant castes (which are not the same
as ritually upper castes) may try to hijack the village panchayats, but it is
a losing battle. The system of reservation for backward castes and
untouchables and also for women will gradually but definitely
reduce the role of dominant castes. The secular and inclusive forces
will prevail over the caste forces before long, even if they have not
already done so in some areas. The political consensus against caste
system and the power of adult franchise in democracy will ensure the
success of democratic and secular forces and defeat caste forces. The
next factor, which worked against the caste system, was the rise of
modern secular education. Education need not be and is not family-based
though family education will supplement outside education. It is in schools
and colleges including trade schools, professional colleges and
polytechnics that skills and education are provided. Thus the need for
hereditary occupation is now redundant, and social mobility will be much
more. The need for hereditary principle in occupation is now redundant
also because of the rise of new occupations and the extinction of several
old occupations. The dynamics of the growth of diversity of occupations is
such that the hereditary principle looks totally outdated and nonsensical.
The information age has thrown up an opening for new occupations, which
cannot be classified into the sphere of the four traditional varnas. It is
wrong to interpret that all the intellectual tasks were assigned exclusively
to brahmins in the traditional varna system. Brahmins had no monopoly of
intellect even if they had some monopoly to study the Vedas and officiate
as priests. Even the monopoly as priests has been broken, with different
jatis arranging their own priests from outside the caste of brahmins and
evolving their own rituals. The institutions started by Shri Narayana
Guru and Mata Amritanandamayi have been training priests from
all castes including women. The exclusive role of brahmins in
conducting rituals and ceremonies is highly exaggerated. In any case, it
could not have been exclusively intellectual, because every task — regal,
warfare, agriculture, arts and crafts required the role of intellect. This is
even more so in the modern age, particularly the information age, under
which every sector demands the role of intellect and information and not
one sector ‘alone. The reason why this point is elaborated is because the
new intellectual tasks of the information age cannot be mechanically
interpreted as brahmanical. Can we say that the study and research in
medicine fits into brahmin varna, but practice of medicine into shudra
varna? How can we separate the two?
Just as new professions and occupations emerged, quite a few old
occupations have vanished. Some of them have moved right into homes
and do not any longer require specialised occupations and caste groups,
thanks mainly to technological change. The system of toilets has
undergone a revolutionary change during the last 50 years even in rural
areas, making it totally unnecessary to handle human waste and carry it
on head as in the past. Toilets have moved inside the homes now, and
family members themselves clean them. Several tasks which were
considered as dirty and polluting need not be done now directly by hand,
and can be handled by tools and machines. It is now possible to be clean
Book 2
and hygienic even while handling the so-called dirty tasks. Thus any
rationale for separate castes for doing dirty jobs and for isolating them is
now totally lost.
Alvin Toffler (1980) in his book, The Third Wave, has pointed out to the
recent phenomenon of what he calls the ‘prosuming’ or ‘prosumer’,
occasioned by the blurring line between producing and consuming. This
refers to ‘do-it-yourself kits and self-service, which is becoming more
prominent. From furniture pieces to cars to computers, several things are
supplied with step-by-step instructions for assembling them at homes.
This has reduced the cost to producer and the price to consumers. What is
more, the consumer enjoys the thrill of doing it oneself, of creating some
thing. This phenomenon is not limited to commodities and has invaded
services too. Thus, we do the daily shave ourselves with safety razor,
taking over a part of the task of barber. Many of us, with or without
washing machines, wash our clothes ourselves and iron them too. The
social significance of all this is that the old wall of distinction between
artisans and arm-chair consumer is falling apart. The old division of labour
separating manual tasks from the intellectual is losing its meaning.
In this context, Arvind Sharma’s reinterpretation of the purusha sukta in
the 10th mandala of Rg Veda is of interest. According to Sharma, the
reference here need not be to social structure as such, but to combining in
the same individual different duties one has to perform during one’s life,
— learning, helping in the management or governance of the community
and the country as in a democracy (voter being the king) including
offering militancy service when needed, participation in economic or
professional activities and service to society including manual labour (for
one’s own benefit and for the society). In his words: ‘The idea is that all
varnas are contained in every individual from now on instead of every
individual being comprised within one of the varnas’ [Sharma 1996].
M N Srinivas (2003) refers to a combination of new forces in operation,
responsible for the destruction of the caste system. These forces have led
to the breakdown of the caste-based mode of social production in turn
leading to the collapse of the caste system. The new forces are breakdown
of the jajmani system, emergence of the larger market and decline of the
village based subsistence production, urbanisation, and above all the rise
of democracy based on adult franchise. Along with these, there is
widespread acceptance of new values — equality, self-respect, and human
dignity. He cites several instances of how village artisan based production
has given place to factory production — mass produced edible oil
replacing the oil-seed pressing caste, factory produced plastic and
aluminum vessels replacing the village potter caste, urban textiles
replacing the village weaver and so on. Srinivas observes significantly:
“The moral is that ideological attacks on hierarchy and brahmanical claims
to supremacy failed to create an egalitarian social order since at the local
level the production of basic needs was intrinsically bound up with jati” (p
458).
Last, the caste system has also lost its ecological role and relevance, as
observed by Madhav Gadgil himself in the same paper in which he pointed
out this role of the caste system. The resources under the control of local
communities have been depleted significantly, thanks to their take over
by the state and their exploitation by the larger market forces. “Thus
alienated from their ecological resource base which was depleting rapidly,
104
the Indian caste society was rudely thrown out of the ecological steady
state maintained perhaps for more than a hundred generations”[Gadgil
1983:283]. The recent attempts at regeneration of local natural resources
through local committees under schemes like Joint Forest Management,
are not based on caste but are secular. Moreover, with the breakdown of
social base of production, it is doubtful if the caste-based occupations will
ever get a new lease of life.
It is evident from the above analysis that the emergence as well as
survival of the caste system had nothing to with Hinduism as a
religion. The caste system was purely social phenomenon, very much in
the mundane sphere. It is aihika sphere (mundane), and not paramarthika
or adhyatmika (spiritual). Being in aihika sphere, rules of conduct and
custom are liable to change from time to time, and not eternally fixed, as
Hindu texts themselves concede. The support to it given by
dharmashastras including Manusmruti could be only a result of the social
significance and role of the caste system of the time, and not the cause of
it. Dharmashastras reflected what is already there in the society. They
also approved rejection of it like when Manusmrti (IV 176) indicated
clearly that any dharmic rule could be rejected if it led to people’s
unhappiness and indignation. There can be no ground for fear that
dharmashastras would give a new lease of life to the caste system inspite
of its being redundant and irrelevant in the modern age. Most of the
verses in dharmashastras have themselves become irrelevant, at least
those parts supporting caste systeM. On the other hand, the collapse of
the caste system would also pose no threat to the continuation and
survival of Hinduism. Hinduism has been thriving with renewed
vigour thanks to such leaders as Satya Sai Baba, Mata
Amritanandamayi and Sri Sri Ravishankar, and institutions like
Ramakrishna Mission, Brahmakumaris and ISKON on an entirely
non-caste basis. This is because caste is not intrinsic to basic principles
and tenets of Hinduism as enshrined in Hindu canon. Hinduism itself has
fought and is still fighting against casteism in a significant way. If caste
system were intrinsic to Hinduism, Shri Narayana Guru and Mata
Amritanandamayi would not have worked within the framework of
Hinduism
9.9 Red herring: Caste is dying, hence irrelevant

Modernisation is having an effect on caste. There is some evidence of the
loosing of its grip. E.g. see http://ideasforindia.in/article.aspx?article_id=2
Book 2
“The Ethnicity of Caste” by Deepa S. Reddy, Anthropological Quarterly
78.3 (2005) 543-584
Surveying the impact of social and political movements on the Indian
caste system in the mid-20th century, theorists of caste were beginning to
aver that while castes might still exist, the caste system was dying. Caste
groups, they argued, were moving away from their more traditional
relationships of socio-economic interdependence, and toward more
competitive models of social interaction. Citing the writings of Edmund
Leach and F.G. Bailey, Dumont writes: "If interdependence is replaced by
competition, caste is dead…. There remain groups that one continues to
call 'castes'; but they are set in a different system" ([1970] 1998: 227).
This argument is valid to an extent, but it is to speed up the demise of

caste that we have to attack its immoral roots.
Similarly, here is an extract:
Recent studies suggest that the changes observed by dalits since the
economic liberalisation of 1991 have been greater than since the
institution of reservations for dalits. For example, a study conducted at the
University of Pennsylvania, documenting major social and economic shifts
among dalits in UP since 1991, discovered that they are now much less
likely to be seated separately at weddings, much more likely to have
shifted from traditional jobs such as sweepers and tanners to non-
traditional ones such as tailors, masons and drivers, much more likely to
own consumer durables such as TVs and of course cellphones, much more
likely to use toothpaste and shampoo, much more likely to serve laddoos
at their weddings, much less dependent on rural landlords and
moneylenders, with much greater incidence of migration to cities, and so
on. What some ideologues see as signs of wasteful consumption stands
here for an increase in access to status, an expansion of freedoms.
[Source: Nothing can contest caste inequality more than free markets and
economic growth, Times of India, 6 February 2013]
106
10. The escape from oppression
10.1 Reform that (at least partially) worked

10.1.1 Brahmo Samaj
10.1.1.1Raja Ram Mohun Roy (India’s first classical liberal) was
also the first MAJOR opponent of caste
A classical liberal par excellence, he also fought tooth and nail with the
caste system. I’ve OCRd today a copy of the book, HISTORY OF THE
BRAHMO SAMAJ (Vol 1) by SIVANATH SASTRI (Download Word
version here). [The scanned copy of the original book in
archive.org here].
This is what the book says about the plight of the lower castes during his
time. Not much has changed in the past nearly 200 years.
Men were exclusive, unsympathetic and jealous of their class

privileges, so much so that it was seriously argued by the
orthodox adversaries of Ram Mohun Roy that it was an
unpardonable breach of social decorum on the part of the most
virtuous of Sudras to sit on the same bench or carpet with a
Brahmin.
The conventional usages of society paid an external homage, almost
bordering on worship, to the representatives of the priestly class who
were ignorant and unspiritual to a degree. There was living in Calcutta in
those days a Sudra spice-seller who had collected the dust from the
feet of a hundred thousand Brahmins to wear it as a remedy for an
attack of leprosy, and he was a type of his people. The rules of caste
made it sinful for the different castes to inter-marry or dine with
one another. The weight of social opinion pressed heavily on the
lower classes, who aspired to nothing higher or nobler than
common menial service or brutalising labour unredeemed by a
single ray of intellectual light. The poverty and degradation of the
masses were frightful. Centuries of ignorance and political slavery
had reduced them to the condition of children, and, like children,
they revelled in childish things. Even in religion, they believed in and
practised puerile things that were unworthy of rational beings.
10.1.1.2Some of India’s major Brahmo Samajis

Rabindra Nath Tagore
In 1911, Tagore took over the leadership of the Adi Brahmo Samaj
Indira Gandhi, Sarojini Naidu, Rajiv Gandhi, Sanjay Gandhi,
Priyanka Gandhi
In 1942 Indira Nehru and Feroz Gandhi were married under Marriage
Validity law (for converted low caste Arya Samajis) by secret pre-Vedic Adi
Dharm reformed Brahmic rites taught to Nehru's priest by Adi Dharma
elders at Allahabad in the presence of Brahmos like Sarojini Naidu with
the groom wearing a sacred Brahmic thread in secret.
Book 2
Ever since, these Adi Dharma rites have been used by the Gandhi-Nehru
family for their marriages – such as for Rajiv Gandhi to Sonia Gandhi,
Sanjay Gandhi to Maneka Gandhi, Priyanka Gandhi to Robert Vadra etc.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adi_Dharm
10.1.2 Aryan (noble) Brahmins discarded their sacred

thread 180 years ago. Any Aryan Hindus found today?
Raja Ram Mohun Roy (India’s first classical liberal) was also the first
MAJOR opponent of caste Total confusion in the mind of Arvind Kejriwal.
Plus (of course) arrogance. Hence write off AAP.
A short extract from HISTORY OF THE BRAHMO SAMAJ (Vol 1) by SIVANATH
SASTRI (Download Word version here):
Brahmo Anusthans or social and domestic ceremonies, began to multiply

in unlooked-for quarters. Young men belonging to influential families
of
Brahmins one after another discarded the sacred Brahminical
threads, the badges of caste, and refused to bow before their
family idols
. As a result of the exertions of the devoted band of new
missionaries, who had given up all to be preachers of God’s truth,
new Samajes began to spring up in every important district of
Bengal and even in distant provinces. Every fortnight the Indian
Mirror, the able organ of the younger party, reported the establishment of
new Samajes, the opening up of new fields of propagation, and cases of
conversion of many young men and also of their persecution by their
relatives. These reports were freely quoted by the leading papers of the
land, and thus the sayings and doings of the Calcutta reformers were
widely circulated throughout the country.
In Bengal the new ferment roused up the spirit of old Hinduism. “Put them
down, put them down,” was the cry raised everywhere by the leaders of
orthodox Hinduism. Every family that sent its children to Calcutta became
apprehensive lest they should come under the influence of the new
reformers. The engines of social persecution were set in motion in every
part of the province. At Dacca, where Aghorenath Gupta, a young
missionary of Mr. Sen’s party, had been sent as a teacher in the recently
established Brahmo School, and where Bijay Krishna also went, social
persecution was in full operation to save young men from the prevailing
contagion. There some young men, notable amongst them Babu Banga
Chandra Roy, who still figures so high as an apostle of the New
Dispensation in Eastern Bengal, joined young Aghorenath and roused up a
new spirit amongst young men. At Govindapore, a village twelve miles
south-east of Calcutta, a young man was treated in the most brutal
manner by his relatives for having dared to invite from Calcutta a number
of Brahmo friends with the object of celebrating the sltraddha ceremony
(memorial rite) of his deceased father according to the new code of
rituals. At Mazilpore, a village thirty miles southeast of Calcutta, the land-
lords of the village tried to crush the little party of young Brahmos by all
the means of social persecution at their command. At Bhagalpore, an
important town in Behar, the leading members of the Hindu community
combined in 1863, to put down the new spirit of Brahmoism, threatening
every one who dared to join the reformers with excommunication. But the
108
conflagration was spreading. Sparks of living fire were flying in every
direction carried forward by the wind, as it were, setting district after
district and village after village ablaze. And before it was put down in one
village, Lo! a neighbouring one was on fire. Such was the influence of the
Brahmo Samaj at this period even in the remotest districts. The ferment
caused by it was something unprecedented in Bengal.
All of them had done away with caste and idolatry, so far as they were
individually concerned; but they would not stop there. They wanted to
promote inter-marriages between different castes, a thing never dreamt
of amongst the Hindus. They were not content with giving their wives and
daughters good education and the light of their faith; but they longed to
admit them into social equality with men
But there is another element in Ram Mohan’s teaching which, in the

subsequent history, has proved of infinite importance, namely this, that he
did not believe in transmigration. Here he broke absolutely with Hinduism.
Transmigration and karma are the very essence of the religion. The one
aim of the philosophy of the Upanishads is the attainment of release from
transmigration. [FARQUHAR
The rule that no Hindu may cross the ocean was imposed because it is
clear that no Hindu can go to another country by sea and keep caste rules
about food. When Ram Mohan Ray went to England, he sought to preserve
his caste by taking a Brahman cook with him. [same book as aboe]
10.2 Reform that failed

10.2.1 Buddha
Buddha was not against caste, and did not accept the possibility of lower
caste people becoming Budddhas.
The early Buddhism did not worship the gods of the lower castes or the
dalits but the gods of the higher castes. The gods of the lower caste
people, like for example Shiva, were always a thorn in their flesh to them
and to the non-Buddhist high castes.
Buddha’s own sangha differed from the world Sakiya sangha in the issue
of caste. He opened his order also and namely to brahmanas. In this way
he threw a bridge from the kshatriyas’ class across the brahmanas’ one. In
this way, Sakiyas and brahmanas were equal in the monastic sangha.
Hans Wolfgang Schumann has statistically proven that almost all of
Buddha’s disciples were high caste people and that the brahmanas
comprised the majority of the sangha.
Buddha tells about the earlier Buddhas in the so called Mahapadana
Suttanta - Great Sermon on the Legends. He refers to their membership of
(high) caste as the first characteristic of their full enlightenment.
According to this report the Buddhas belonged all to the high castes, to
the kshatriyas and brahmanas. Buddha says proudly about himself “And
now I, the venerable and fully enlightened one, was born a warrior and
have come from the caste of warriors, o monks.”
However, to Siddharta and the monks that listened to him, not only the
varna, the hierarchical class but also the jati, the clan respectively the
family were of substantial importance. For example, he tells about Buddha
Vipassi that he belonged to the Kondanna clan. About himself Siddharta
Book 2
reports that he is a kshatriya and was born in the Gotama clan. Not only
his clan but also his parents’ name and place of residence is stated,
probably in order to prove Buddha’s necessary high mundane birth. The
text shows that they were all Rajas and brahmanas. Thus Siddharta tells
that Buddha Vipassi’s father was a raja, a king, called Bandhuma and his
mother was Queen Bandhumati. And Buddha Kakusandha’s father was a
brahmana called Aggidatta and his mother was a brahmana woman called
Visakha. The point of naming of the caste membership of both parents is
clear: all the Buddhas do not only come from high but also from pure
castes. Even though the different castes of the parents were so high, it is
absolutely unthinkable for them to have been conceived in a mixed
marriage.
The standpoint which caste a Buddha should belong to has not been
revised in Buddhism up to the present day. It is dogmatised in the
Lalitavistara in the following way: a Bodhisattva can by no means come
from a lower or even mixed caste: “After all Bodhisattvas were not born in
despised lineage, among pariahs, in families of pipe or cart makers, or
mixed castes.”
Instead, in perfect harmony with the Great Sermon, it was said that: “The
Bodhisattvas appear only in two kinds of lineage, the one of the
brahmanas and of the warriors (kshatriya).”
The Bodhisattva explains to the gods that he should be born only in a
family of a noble birth and caste. Furthermore the family ought to have
procreated only in a direct line and on the man’s side, an adoption is
impossible. Otherwise, purity would not be guaranteed. The purity of the
family is so essential, that the father-to-be Suddhodana says: "King
Suddhodana is pure on the side of the mother and father and was born in
a respected family."
For the ancient Indian Buddhists like the author of the Lalitavistara the
idea that somebody belonging to a lower caste or even a dalit could
become a Buddha was absolutely impossible.
The preference of the kshatriyas and the brahmanas in ancient Buddhism
leaves no place for doubts: Buddha and the so called impure castes were
entirely separated from each other. A Buddha had nothing to deal with the
dalits. The dalits were unworthy of Buddha-ship.
Source: Edmund Weber, Buddhism: An Atheistic and Anti-Caste Religion?
Modern Ideology and Historical Reality of the Ancient Indian Bauddha
Dharma. Journal of Religious Culture No. 50 (2001)`
However, Buddha believed that caste is determined by actions not by

birth:
In the Vasettha Sutta of the Sutta Nipata it is described how a young

brahmin, Vasettha, comes to Buddha. He says: "My friend Bharadwaj and I
have been having a dispute: what makes a brahmin. He asserts that it is
birth (jati): a pure birth through seven generations produces a brahmin. I
say it is action (kamma)." The Buddha then answers him by arguing that
while there are jatis among plants and animals, human beings, from the
hairs of their head to the nails of their feet, have no essential biological
differences. Rather, it is action that makes a person: one who makes war
is a soldier; one who farms is a farmer; one who does commerce is a
110
trader, and so on. The debate depicts several features.
Source: Caste is the cruellest exclusion by Gail Omvedt
10.2.2 Shankara
Notwithstanding the intellectual eminence and literary brilliance of Adi
Shankaracharya one can find an echo of sanctification to castist order in
his writings, particularly in the second sloka of his important
philosophical treatise - Vivakachudamani Vol. I sloka 2.
“It is hard for any living creature to achieve birth in a human form.
Successively harder is to be born as male, Brahmin and getting attracted
towards Vedic Dharma, being capable of discriminating the Atman and the
Non-Atman for continuous union with the Brahmen and final liberation.
These fortunes cannot be obtained except through the merits of a
hundred - billion well - lived lines” Does this sloka express the caste and
class interests of Adi Shankaracharya? [Source: AMBEDKAR MEMORIAL
LECTURE, TRIVANDRUM – 6.7.2013 by R.B.Sreekumar]
10.2.3 Bhakti movements

There were many indigenous religious movements that rejected caste,
including the Nath Siddhas and others. Perhaps the most famous of these
is the Bhakti movement, that is the movement which spread throughout
much of India from the 12th century onwards. (Earlier Tamil Bhakti, which
had the stamp of opposition to Buddhism, is perhaps an exception to this,
but radicalism was very evident in some of the Saivite Siddhar groups).
The Veerasaiva movement in Karnataka, the Varkaris in Maharashtra
(Namdev, Jnandev, Tukaram, Cokhamela), the movement of Kabir and
Ravidas in northern India are among the most famous of these. Sikhism
itself as a separate religion grew out of a Bhakti movement. Of these
famous sants, none identified themselves as 'Hindus'; some, including
Nanak and others (as well as some Sufis such as Bulle Shah) insisted that
they were "neither Hindu nor Muslim (Turk)". Their opposition to caste was
famous and was expressed very strongly by Kabir:
Worship, libations, six sacred rites,

this dharma's full of ritual blights.
Four ages teaching Gayatri, I ask you, who won liberty?
You wash your body if you touch another,
tell me who could be lower than you?
Proud of your merit, puffed up with your rights,
no good comes out of such great pride.
How could he whose very name
is pride-destroyer endure the same?
Drop the limits of caste and clan,
seek for freedom's space,
Book 2
destroy the shoot, destroy the seed,
seek the unembodied place. (Ramaini 35)
(Translation based on Hess and Singh in Kabir 1986)
In a famous doha from the popular tradition, Kabir sings:
Baman se gadaha bhalla, aan jaat se kutta,

mulla se murag bhalla, raat jaagaave suta
(A donkey's better than a brahmin, a dog beats other castes, a cock is
better than a mullah to tell us night is past [my translation])
Tuka (Tukaram), the famous Maharashtrian sant of the early-17th century,

was brutal in his condemnation of brahmins for the practice of caste. In
one song he contrasts the brahmin with the famous Ravidas:
He's a devotionless brahman, let his face burn.

From what concubine was he born?
Blessed is the mother of the Vaishnava Chambhar;
both lineage and caste are pure.
It is not simply what I say --
this is the decision given anciently.
Tuka says, let this greatness burn up in fire,
I don't want to even see these evil ones. (#1319)
[Source: Caste is the cruellest exclusion by Gail Omvedt]
10.2.4 Dayanand Saraswati and Arya Samaj

The first edition of Saraswati’s book talked about beef eating in the Vedas
(apparently).
112
BRAHMO SAMAJ AND ARYA SAMAJ
At Calcutta, where he stayed from December 15, 1872 to April 15, 1873
Ramakrishna met him. He was also cordially received by the Brahmo
Samaj. Keshab and his people voluntarily shut their eyes to the
differences existing between them; they saw in him a rough ally in their
crusade against orthodox prejudices and the million of gods. But
Dayanand was not a man to come to an understanding with religious
philosophers imbued with Western ideas.
His national Indian theism, its steel faith forged from the pure metal of the
Vedas alone, had nothing in common with theirs, tinged as it was with
modern doubt, which denied the infallibility of the Vedas and the doctrine
of transmigration. He broke with them, the richer for the encountered, for
he owed them the very simple suggestion, whose practical value had not
struck him before, that his propaganda would be of little effect unless it
was delivered in the language of the people.
He went to Bombay, where shortly afterwards his sect, following the
example of the Brahmo Samaj, but with a better genius of organization,
proceeded to take root in the social life of India. On April 10, 1875, he
founded at Bombay his first Arya Samaj, or Association of the Aryans of
India. [Source]
10.2.5 Ramakrishna Mission

This is, of course, the work of Vivekananda, but we have seen how
Vivekananda did not oppose the caste system. In fact he had no solution
to this problem.
Note: Dayanand Saraswati’s and Vivekananda’s worldviews were
TOTALLY different
There is a FUNDAMENTAL difference between Vedas and Vedanata. Vedas
are like a hypothesis, Vedanata a critical testing of the hypothesis.
Vedanta is a process to question the Vedas and ask what is right and what
is wrong.
Vivekananda was ecletic and logical, Dayanand Saraswati was more
inclined to “believe” whatever was written in the Vedas. Many a times
Vivekananda said we should discard anything in the Vedas which doesn’t
make sense. Dayanand Saraswati, on the other hand, promoted the Vedas
as THE truth.
Dayanand Saraswati was BACKWARD looking. Vivekananda was FORWARD
looking. To Dayanand Saraswati, the best was behind us. To Vivekananda,
the best was yet to come.
More than 100 years ago, Vivekananda wrote something which
effectively is a challenge to people who think like Dayanand
Saraswati:
There is a certain class of men whose conviction is that from time

eternal there is a treasure of knowledge which contains the
wisdom of everything past, present, and future. These men hold
that it was their own forefathers who had the sole privilege of having the
custody of this treasure. The ancient sages, the first possessors of it,
bequeathed in succession this treasure and its true import to their
descendants only. They are, therefore, the only inheritors to it; as such, let
Book 2
the rest of the world worship them.
May we ask these men what they think should be the condition of the
other peoples who have not got such forefathers? “Their condition is
doomed”, is the general answer. The more kind-hearted among them is
perchance pleased to rejoin, “Well, let them come and serve us. As a
reward for such service, they will be born in our caste in the next birth.
That is the only hope we can hold out to them.”[
Sanjeev: This is, btw, the precise language which many Hindutva fanatics
use in offering Muslims a chance to come back to “Hinduism”, and raise
their caste to Kshatriyas
] “Well, the moderns are making many new and original discoveries in the
field of science and arts, which neither you dreamt of, nor is there any
proof that your forefathers ever had knowledge of. What do you say to
that?” “
Why certainly our forefathers knew all these things, the
knowledge of which is now unfortunately lost to us. Do you want
a proof? I can show you one. Look! Here is the Sanskrit verse
. . . . . “ Needless to add that the modern party, who believes in direct
evidence only, never attaches any seriousness to such replies and proofs.
[Source]
10.2.6 Gandhi – a reformer but great racist and believer in

caste
GANDHI THE GREAT RACIST, ALONG WITH VIVEKANAND AND
DAYANAND
I knew that Gandhi supported caste, but I wasn't aware that he was a
BIGOTED RACIST. (His opinions are PRETTY similar to what Dayanand
Saraswati held about blacks – and Vivekananda). This information I picked
up from random internet browsing on the subject.
Gandhi believed that UPPER CASTE HINDUS are entitled to equality with
the "whites" (in South Africa) but not lower castes, and DEFINITELY not
black Africans. So his great fight against racism was a fight for UPPER
CASTE HINDUS!!!
"Upper caste" Hindus largely continue to hold themselves aloof from
blacks and even call them seriously foul names. Kallu is the typical name
today. Gandhi used to call them kaffir – equivalent to "nigger".
Details of Gandhi's detestation of the blacks are everywhere on the
internet so I won't repeat. Just a few links to start you off:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/oct/17/southafrica.india
http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/aah/singh_12_3.htm
http://sharpens.blogspot.com.au/2008/06/mp3-available-here_18.html
So much for his preaching love. I almost thought at one time that he was
like a Jesus in his love for the oppressed. Turns out not. He was a bigot.
If the racism of Churchill and Hitler is to be rejected, Gandhi's racism too,
must be rejected.
GANDHI THE GREAT SUPPORTER OF CASTE
I'll come to untouchability separately, but as far as caste is concerned,
114
Gandhi was a FANATIC. He insisted on observing caste. Here are links to
start off your research:
http://www.truthseekersinternational.org/gandhi-the-caste-system-it-may-
surprise-you/
"I believe in caste division on the basis of birth because the roots
of the caste system start from birth."
"According to me, the caste system is scientific. You cannot condemn it by
argument. It controls the society socially and ethnically—I see no reason
to end it. To end casteism is to finish the Hindu Religion. There is
nothing against Varnastram. I have reason to believe that the caste
system is an arithmetic principle. It has its own limitation and
disadvantages. Even then there is nothing to be hated in this system."
Harijan, l932 (Translation from a Lower Caste tract circulated among
Scheduled Castes and OBCs)
And so on.
Now Gandhi didn't want an end to the caste system. He was an orthdox
Hindu (and extremely racist, as his writings against the blacks
demonstrate). Gandhi was very particular about the Order of Varnas
(Varnashramadharma or Chaturvarna), for, he wrote, ‘caste has a close
connection with the profession of one’s livelihood. Everyone’s profession is
his own “dharma”. Whoever gives it up, falls from his caste, and is himself
destroyed, that is, his soul is destroyed’. [Source UNTOUCHABLE
FREEDOM A Social History of a Dalit Community Vijay Prashad]
In NO WAY was Gandhi a reformer.
GANDHI'S UNTOUCHABILITY DRIVE WAS A POLITICAL ACT, NOT
GENUINE
The more I read the more I understand that Gandhi was a hypocrite in
relation to untouchability – the thing he is most well known for. Yes, he did
make a few statements which indicate his opposition to untouchability.
But two things are paramount:
a) He had a clear view that if the Dalits (untouchables) were not brought
into the fold of Hinduism, they would join the Muslims and significantly
increase the strength of Muslims during the political battles underway in
pre-independence India.
His Closed Chamber Dialogue with Sardar Patel, which reveal the
reasoning behind Gandhi’s actions, one day after he began his fast unto
death opposing separate electorate to the Scheduled Castes, as recorded
by Mahadev Desai, Gandhi’s secretary, to justify his threat of self-
immolation:
Sardar Patel: Why have you placed yourself between two stones? This is
the battle of Touchable and Untouchables. I keep telling you not to do so.
Let the two stone grind each other. Why must you cone in between?
M.K. Gandhi: The possible consequences of separate electorate for
Harijans (this must be Desai’s editing—the word Harijan was not yet used
by Gandhi) fill me with horror. Separate electorates for all other
communities will still leave room for me to deal with them, but I have no
other means to deal with “untouchables”. These poor fellows will ask why I
who claim to be their friend should offer Satyagraha simply because they
were granted some privileges; they would vote separately but vote with
Book 2
me. They do not realize that the separate electorate will create division
among Hindus so much that it will lead to blood-shed. “Untouchable”
hooligans will make common cause with Muslim hooligans and kill caste-
Hindus[1]. [Source]
Also
Gandhi thinks that caste is an unequal structure between the touchable

castes and the untouchable castes. He argues for changing the upper
caste mentalities by an appeal to their change of hearts. He argues that if
the upper castes could be convinced with an appeal to the principle of
ancestral calling, it would be possible for them to believe in the
redundancy of untouchability. According to this principle, we are doing
different functions as our duties to a village community as ordained by our
ancestors. Through an alternative education of upper castes, it would be
possible to convince them that different castes do mere duties to their
ancestors. So, there is no low or polluted duty and high or pure duty. All
caste functions are duties as per the ancestral calling. Once upper castes
are convinced with a notion of duty in every manual labour, it would be
possible for them to remove from their minds that some groups do menial
labour or polluted functions. All functions would be seen as necessary
duties to ancestors. Once upper castes are convinced with this doctrine,
they would also undertake street sweeping and so on as Gandhi himself
did. That would bring an end to untouchability. So, Satyagraha against
untouchability is not necessary. Ambedkar calls Gandhi’s doctrine as the
one of least resistance.
[Source: Arun Kumar Patnaik, Lohia’s Immanent Critique of Caste]
Ambedkar and Lohia objected to Gandhi’s approach, which did nothing to

resolve the underlying problem. “Both agree the Gandhism reduces caste
into existence of untouchables and nullifies any concerted policy or
political action against caste system. Both agree that it would be
necessary to view caste order as power structure and offer an all-rounded
critique of caste so that it would be entirely abolished. Gandhi misses the
essence of caste system which consists of grades of untouchability
against several human beings, not simply Dalits.” [Source: Arun Kumar
Patnaik, Lohia’s Immanent Critique of Caste]
10.2.7 Periyar
In Tamil Nadu, the movement started by Periyar failed because it was not
focussed so much against the all-pervasive caste system as against
"Brahmanism''. It should be noted that even upper caste non-Brahmans
were part of the movement against "Brahmanism" along with the lower
denominations in the caste hierarchy. The percentage of Brahmans in the
total population is so low and the movement specifically targeted against
Brahmanism that after achieving the vanquishment of the Brahmans the
movement naturally lost its relevance and militancy. When the oppression
by Brahmanism came to an end, rivalries, against one another among the
non-Brahman castes resulted. Economic disparities worsened the
situation. Even when the anti-Brahman movement was in progress,
oppression of the Dalits by the non-Brahman upper castes and the
backward castes was in existence, but in the thick of the movement which
had gained powerful momentum under the leadership of a dynamic
116
leader, the intra-non-Brahman caste rivalries and caste based oppression
of the Dalits by higher castes did not show up. But, when the anti-
Brahman movement weakened the rivalries among the non-Brahman
castes and oppression of the Dalits by the higher castes came to surface
and the anti-Dalit stance became pervasive.
[Source: http://www.hindu.com/2001/07/24/stories/13240611.htm]
10.2.8 Rajiv Malhotra’s advice

He believes that the oppressed should look to existing Hindu resources
and methods to elevate themselves. I totally disagree. Caste must be
abolished. It is a blot on humanity.
While Dalits certainly have legitimate grievances that need to be

addressed, the true application of the spirit of Black theology would be for
oppressed Indians to find similar resources in their own classical
narratives, such as Puranas, Kural, Saiva Siddhanta, etc., and thereby do
what black theologians have done, i.e. to use internal spiritual resources
for their own sociopolitical empowerment.
Hinduism has a long tradition of such internally generated revolts,
uprisings and ‘new theologies’. From Sri Ramanuja (traditionally 1017–
1137 CE) through Ayya Vaikundar (1808–51 CE) to Sri Narayana Guru
(1855–1928 CE), such Hindu liberation movements are singularly marked
by the absence of race theories and tendencies to segregate human
beings. Of these, the last two spiritual leaders, venerated as Avatars, were
born among the marginalized Dalit sections of the society. Within a few
generations, these groups transformed themselves into economically and
politically empowered Indians [Rajiv Malholtra’s Breaking India]
10.3 Net effect of the challenge of Christianity: Hinduism

split into four
 How British rule and Christianity split Hinduism into four parts
10.4 Conversion to other religions cannot help

10.4.1 To Christianity
From the very birth of missionary work in India there had been devoted
men who had given their lives to toil amongst the Outcastes, but for a
long time comparatively little fruit appeared. From 1822,the South of India
suffered from an appalling famine. Everywhere missionaries threw
themselves into the work of saving life and alleviating distress; and this
piece of disinterested service brought its reward. From 1880 onwards
great masses of the Outcaste of South India passed into the Church of
Christ. Source: [MODERN RELIGIOUS MOVEMENTS IN INDIA BY J. N.
FARQUHAR (1915)
Book 2
10.4.2 To Islam
Swami Vivekananda wrote:
Why amongst the poor of India so many are Mohammedans? It is

nonsense to say, they were converted by the sword. It was to gain their
liberty from the . . . zemindars and from the . . . priest, and as a
consequence you find in Bengal there are more Mohammedans than
Hindus amongst the cultivators, because there were so many zemindars
there. Who thinks of raising these sunken downtrodden millions? [Source]
10.5 Why going to another organised religion is like going

from the frying pan into the fire
10.5.1 Organised religions SYSTEMATICALLY shuts out
critical thinking
Scientific Hindusm is not a religion. It is an attempt to find the truth, in a
private, unorganised way. Its focus is on critical thinking.
I really liked this comment from Hrishi:
What’s dangerous is the blind belief – the systematic shutting out of
critical thinking – and
organising ‘blind’ belief can only lead to bad things – its self-
evident if you follow it closely enough.
That's very well said, indeed.
Christ, for instance, never asked for the creation of a Papacy in the Bible.
He was NOT for organised religion. Wherefrom did this "Pope" fellow with
his funny robes and ceremonies come from? Can this guy please show
me where precisely in the Bible (assuming the Bible is true in some
way) did Christ ask that such a ridiculous organisation like the Church be
created?
Did Christ live so people should worship the Pope?
Once organised Christianity started, the Pope SYSTEMATICALLY
abused all critical thinkers.
And the Church has systematically abused children, as well.
And so it goes on. Everywhere. In every organised religion. These are
POLITICAL, NOT SPIRITUAL ENTITIES.
India's tradition opposes ANY ATTEMPT to organise religion.
It wants each individual to find the truth for himself or herself.
The Hindu temple may seem chaotic, but there is no "preaching", no
indoctrination. You come IF you wish to. There is TOTAL FREEDOM of
worship/ disbelief.
That's a tradition worthy of respect.
All other foreign traditions – that act to promote ORGANISED
BIGOTRY, CRIMINALITY AND MURDER - must be firmly resisted.
These fools allege that India traditions are superstitious. So they may be,
in the vast majority of cases. But these fools' traditions are BIGOTED.
That's much worse.
118
Yes, sati is bad. So it was rightly banned. So also child marriage. And
human sacrifice.
But these guys don't just kill a few. These criminals KILL IN THE MILLIONS.
India must call the bluff of these bigots. It must BANISH foreign
missionaries.
It is important to defend the freedom to preach. So all
preaching/genuine conversion within India by Indian preachers MUSTbe
allowed. I'm NOT against proselytisation. Let that be re-asserted. By all
means preach the Gospel/ Koran, etc.
But it is important that all foreign missionaries - being paid stooges of the
Church/ Islamic rulers – are EJECTED immediately from India.
10.6 Five methods to end the oppressiveness of the caste

system
I've just tweeted five examples of possible ways by which the
oppressiveness of caste can be brought to an end. Two of these I'd
already mentioned earlier (in BFN). The fifth method involves abandoning
caste entirely. The first two are new suggestions.
I welcome other alternative suggestions.
It is my view that the Hindu is NOT going to give up caste that

easily. When something has been drilled into one's head for 3000
years, it takes some time to get rid of it.
It is desirable, therefore, to operationalise the PRETEND/BOGUS

(FALSE!!!!) claims of Arya Samaj and others who claim that caste is not
hereditary by challenging them to CREATE A PROCESS by which people's
caste can be OFFICIALLY changed.
Stop fooling me and others with a fake view that caste is not hereditary. I
challenge you to build a system to allocate caste AFTER birth. Then and
only then will your fake claims become real. Else I treat them as pure
rubbish. Bogus and intended to cheat.
Someone told me that he thought that Dr BR Ambedkar was actually a

Brahmin. Sorry, but no one told him that!
So why not create a system WITHIN THE RELIGION to ensure that

caste is not determined at birth but at age 18 (say).
I recommend method No. 2 as the most practical method to

allocate caste. I'm happy to help create a system by which such
an exam can be administered to all the billion Hindus.
Why not method no. 5 (total elimination)? Because that's a delusion. It is

never going to happen. After method #2 is implemented for 200 years
people will realise this whole thing is sheer red tape and will therefore
stop wasting time on the "exam" – and stop bothering about caste.
Book 2
Note that method #2 means that the lastname of each Hindu will
NECESSARILY CHANGE at age 18 after the exam. And a key consequence
is that there could be members from all four castes within the same
family.
METHODS
1. One method to eliminate the oppressiveness of caste would be to give

everyone the choice to choose their caste.
2. A second method to end the oppressiveness of caste would be to

establish an "exam" at age 18 when caste is determined.
3. A third method (I've already mentioned in BFN) is for all Brahmins to

lose caste – along with others.
4. A fourth method (again, mentioned in BFN) is for ALL lower castes to

become Brahmins.
5. Yet another method – but the least likely to succeed – is for all Hindus
to renounce caste.
COMMENTS ON FACEBOOK
RM: As can be witnessed in various developed (wealthy) countries, if there

is economic prosperity, people will focus less on race and caste. It will
dissolve on its own.
Sanjeev Sabhlok: This is incorrect. Caste is not going to disappear with

prosperity. The rich people of India STILL strongly believe in caste.
==
RS: Nice, but unfortunately we don't have any practical solution .

Sanjeev Sabhlok There is. If caste is not abolished, ALL kinds of people will
continue to leave Hinduism. Not just the Dalits and tribals but people like
me. It is NOT my job to be part of a religion that oppresses 40 per cent of
Indians.
==
AR Nothing is going to work,unless we kill the sanctity of the religious
maths. That is at the core of caste system- Ambedkar did admit that such
a reform is not at all possible in Hinduism – to kill the sanctity of maths.
And the issue is further complicated with the presence of reservation
system. The hitherto lower/backward caste people are willing to be
attached to their backward tag as caste has become the basis of getting
the comfort. The state is in confused state. But these socio-political issues
can be solved only when the religious issues are addressed, which doesn't
seem to be a reality anywhere soon.
120
==
YS Only free markets will eliminate caste. I mean make caste irrelevant. I
mean you can't remove it. There is nothing wrong in caste. All kinship
groups can prosper equally and I see nothing wrong in belonging to a
kinship group. As a state or the rule of law should not be different for
different groups/religions/castes but people are entitled to belong to a
certain group if they wish to – essence of property rights…
.Everywhere there are castes – even in America, even among other

religions in India or elsewhere is different forms.
AR free market is not a panacea for social evils- the free market can
hardly address the religious issues from where this caste system takes its
root.
Sanjeev Sabhlok YS, both your arguments are incorrect. First, there is NO
evidence that becoming wealthier or more educated reduces caste.
Indians are hugely wealthy in USA but caste based marriage
advertisements continue as usual. Caste, you are forgetting, is BY BIRTH.
It has nothing to do with post-birth work/merit. Second, you are spouting
the fake arguments that all "Hindus" keep giving – that there is caste in
other parts of the world. That is entirely wrong. Caste is based on
transmigration of the soul, and no other religion believes in
transmigration. Please understand your own religion properly and you'll
realise it has some extremely evil consequences. Re: what I should focus
on, kindly leave that decision to me. I see caste as cutting India's GDP and
future potential by about 80 per cent. It has lowered the IQ of 80 per cent
of India's population. The average Indian's IQ is close to that of a "moron"
(in old IQ lingo). Morons can't become wealthy even if you free the
markets. Changing Hinduism is getting more and more urgent.
===
RS These ideas are sounds good but sadly, all these five will fail in the
practical world. Because today caste is not a big issue for our current
generation most of my friends have done love marriage or you can say
inter caste marriages, even our families does not have any problem
because they are well educated. Main problem in India is reservation
which is caste base nobody wants to leave their caste, no body wants to
become Brahmin because they won't get reservation, if we totally abolish
the caste system then no body will be able to get reservation so its
irrelevant. The best thing is education and willingness to leave the caste
culture more and more inter cast inter religion marriages. I don't thing
even one of the five ideas will work in our society.
Sanjeev Sabhlok RS you are mixing up India with yourself. Please go to

villages and study caste. It is AS strong as ever before. And no, please
don't blame the reservation system for caste. Yes, it must go, but I would
like the caste system to go first.
Book 2
==
SavitriEra Party suggested that Sri Aurobindo Ghosh's method be used to

eliminate caste. On inquiring, it was found to be the following: "Caste is
imbibed from family & culture in the mind. By education & appropriate
logic, the mind can be changed in a progressive way. First step is to rid
individuals from the Caste mentality. It can spread further."
This "solution" is not helpful at all.
10.7 No role for government in removal of caste

Regardless of the issues involved, there is no role for government in
dealing with the caste issue (or any issue of racism). As I wrote in BFN, “I
am not denying the deplorable practice of caste discrimination. I strongly
oppose it, it being one of my reasons for choosing not to be a Hindu (I
have, in addition, many other reasons for opting out of the business of
religion altogether). Nevertheless, eliminating the caste system is not a
matter for a government to get involved in – it is a matter purely for social
and religious reformers.”
10.8 Are Dalits not interested in removal of caste?

Here’s something of considerable concern:
"When I have proposed this larger agenda of ‘ending caste’, several Dalit
activists, organizations and academics have expressed a fear that ending
caste may also end the affirmative actions (known as reservations in
India). Yes it will! But isn’t that the ultimate goal? Aren’t we very clear that
affirmative actions are merely remedial measures? If we agree that it is
remedial then we must also accept that remedies cannot become another
system."
[Source: stalin k. : http://stalink.wordpress.com/2011/11/29/end-caste-
ending-caste-based-discrimination-is-not-enough/]
10.9 Escape into reason: Scientific Hinduism

What I call scientific Hinduism is nothing but reason. It aims to study the
best of mankind’s intellectual and spiritual innovations and bring them
together into a package. I don’t intend to organise this ‘religion’. It is an
offer to all Hindus to escape to truth and reason. I outlined in some detail
in the next chapter.
10.10 Only higher castes oppose the abolition of caste

Brahmincal Hinduism can’t possible believe in the scriptures and YET
elevate Dalits to the same pedestal as a Brahmin. If it were to do so, then
the transmigration of the soul (through karma) becomes falsified. There is
therefore NO POSSIBILITY of Dalits (or anyone) getting an equal status in
Hinduism.
122
10.10.1 A Hindu writing in Mahratta in favour of caste
Later, certain Hindus took up the same position; but others pointed out
that the policy of raising the Outcaste is contrary to Hinduism and must
certainly tend to break up the religion. The following is a sentence from
the Mahratta: “Now we know that the result of educating the depressed
classes must be in the long run to weaken, if not utterly destroy caste.”
(MODERN RELIGIOUS MOVEMENTS IN INDIA BY J. N. FARQUHAR (1915))
Book 2
11. Economic explantion for the persistence
of caste
11.1 Lohia’s explanation

To cite Lohia: “Caste is presumably the world’s largest insurance for which
one does not pay a formal or regular premium. Solidarity is always there,
when everything else fails”. Caste provides for social solidarity in matters
of child-bearing, marriage, funeral obsequies, feasts and other rituals. Men
belonging to the same caste assist each other at these decisive hours of
needs.
This system of insurance without any cost or premium makes the system
more resilient and durable in the eyes of its members only. I remember
one incident from Aska, a small town in Orissa. One Komati (trader) family
was not able to arrange their daughter in wedding due to financial
difficulties of the family. The Komati Pentha arranged money for her
marriage and finally arranged a boy for her too. She was “happily”
married off after sometime. Such solidarity is found in the caste
associations throughout India. Brahmin Associations give fellowship to the
poor Brahmin students in the schools. Kamma Sangams do similar things.
Do we ever come across beggars among Komatis or Jat Sikhs? The Langar
houses or Penthas take care of such people. Such activities provide
legitimacy and strength to caste order. Caste continues to survive despite
many crisis points posed by modernization. This partly explains why caste
has survived even the foreign conquests led by Muslims and Christians
who came to India with egalitarian ideologies but got adjusted with caste
order. And in fact, due to a modernization drive, caste has managed to
survive in urban areas by getting organized as associations offering many
kinds of assistance at times of financial crisis. The more a caste group has
money, the more it is organized with association offices and schemes of
assistance for needy members of its own caste.
Source: Arun Kumar Patnaik, Lohia’s Immanent Critique of Caste
11.2 Kaivan Munshi’s explanation

In India, individuals continue to marry almost exclusively within their (sub)
caste or jati. Given the segregation along caste lines that continues to
characterize the Indian village, most social interactions also occur within
the caste. The jati is thus the natural social unit around which networks
would crystallize in India. Indeed, rural insurance arrangements and urban
job networks have long been organized around the jati. It is this relatively
unexplored feature of the caste system – the ability of the caste to provide
major forms of economic support to its members – that I believe has much
to do with its persistence in modern Indian society.
Source: http://ideasforindia.in/article.aspx?article_id=2
This explanation provides a possible policy pathway to a resolution of the

caste problem..
124
11.3 Free markets and social minimum
Free markets and a social minimum can definitely make a difference. In
addition a socio-religious movement is needed oppose caste.
Book 2
12. An outline of Scientific Hinduism
12.1 Scientific Hinduism rejects the concept of caste

12.1.1 There is no soul, or at least no proof of soul/God
that I can personally confirm
While debating the caste system, a FB friend insisted that there is a soul
and that there is 'evidence' of a soul (and hence presumably
transmigration, so caste).
To all such persons I commend Victor J. Stenger's book, God, the Failed
Hypothesis: How Science Shows That God Does Not Exist.
If nothing else it will shock them into demanding real proof.
While browsing around I discovered I'm in pretty good company. No
inventor greater than Thomas Edison thought similarly (that doesn't mean
I'm a great inventor – just an ordinary independent thinker).
And this is what he said: "there is no more reason to believe that any
human brain will be immortal than there is to think that one of my
phonographic cylinders will be immortal." [Source]
For those who believe in life after death "experiences", here some
evidence that these expereinces are REAL but these experiences have
nothing to do with soul.
Two sets of studies published independently in the same issue of the
journal Science demonstrate how the illusion of a bodily self outside
one's own body can be stimulated in the laboratory. The studies
forge ways to better understand both out-of-body and near-death
experiences. "The research provides a physical explanation for the
phenomenon usually ascribed to otherworldly influences," Peter
Bruger, a neurologist at University Hospital in Zurich who was not
involved in the experiment, told science journalist Sandra Blakesee
in her report on these experiments in The New York Times (August
24). [Source]
Some people have the tendency to believe ANY hypothesis that appeals to
them. Others tend to jump to conclusions based on a particular finding.
I would rather rule out ALL possible natural phenomenon before allowing
myself to "believe" in any super-natural thing.
To date there has been NO phenomenon that I've come across which
could not be explained by ORDINARY natural processes. Magic comes
closest to being something I can't "explain" but I'm assured by magicians
who practice these skills extensively, that these are merely sleights of
hand. In any event, the would never do their magic under controlled
conditions.
Therefore while I don't TOTALLY RULE OUT the possibility of soul (hence
God, etc.), I have to date not found ANY evidence of any soul.
ADDENDUM
126
Take a drug, particularly a hallucinogen, and any of these can change, and
even our innermost selves can be quite transformed.
For those who use these 'near death' experiences as proof of an afterlife,
be aware that you will almost certainly be disappointed. This appears to
be merely the way brains - which have significant electrical activity/
molecular charge in an active state - shut down: through a last minute
surge of sorts. I continue to deny the possibility of any soul since it simply
doesn't make any sense from the evolutionary perspective. Ordinary
biochemistry itself is capable of explaining everything we observe
regarding life. [See here for a report]
12.1.2 Even if there is a soul, it visits the earth only once

There are some other (related) explanations, as well, such as those
provided by Vivekananda. But as I showed earlier, such explanations are
SERIOUSLY FLAWED.
In the absence of modern knowledge of DNA/brain, a multiple trip soul was
logically necessary. But now, with modern knowledge, such a theory is
clearly an overkill.
That doesn’t mean I’m denying the possibility of a soul. There could be a
soul (after all, it is hard to disprove an invisible thing using laws of
physics).
But the SOUL ONLY VISITS THE EARTH ONCE
In the one trip model, the soul does good or bad things while on earth and
is punished or rewarded ONCE, after death. Thereafter the soul effectively
comes to an end. [It can have perpetual reward, perpetual punishment, or
it can be merged into some bigger soul]
WHICH THEORY IS CORRECT?
The reality is that NO ONE knows whether there is a soul, and if so, its
properties. Everything in this field is speculative. But if we are to
speculate anyway, why not choose the SIMPLER model? – A model which
RESPECTS other human beings equally?
The simple ONE TRIP TO EARTH MODEL (illustrated below) gets rid of the
logic underpinning the caste system. There is no more need for an endless
series of rebirths. And if OTHER religions can manage their business (of
the soul) with a simpler (one trip) model, why does Hinduism need an
open-ended multiple trip model?
Hindus are fond of saying that all religions lead to the same goal. Then
why not adopt the SIMPLEST model from amongst all religions?
Book 2
12.1.3 Classical liberalism and caste are polar opposites
Classical liberalism is underpinned by a belief in equality of status of ALL
humans (under the law). There is NO distinction between citizens in their
status under the law. Such equality is not a new idea in India, it being
reflected in Buddhism and possibly in Charvaka. As well as (at least
logically) in the advaitic tradition of Hinduism.
But it is important to highlight that this idea of equality of status all
humans is FUNDAMENTALLY in opposition to the
caste system. It is also opposed to any system that classifies groups of
people (such as Aryans or "whites") as being innately superior to others.
In fact, it is in opposition to any way to cluster people together. Individual
merit is the only thing that counts.
The caste system is evil because it based on the idea of PREVIOUS
BIRTH'S MERIT. This is a ridiculous idea – with absolutely no evidence
base. Similarly, an idea like a society of "Aryans" (which excludes "Sudras"
and billions of others) is based on birth characteristics of some sort (e.g.
belonging to a particular "race"). Such ideas are easy to linked to
racist/eugenist conceptions, and undermine the possibility of individual
merit (as indeed has been done with the Hindu caste system).
The classical liberal believes that we must work hard and get our reward
or punishment IN THIS LIFETIME. Regardless of any natural endowments
we may have upon birth, it is our hard work and effort that ultimately
matters. Each child should get an equal chance to get high quality school
education, so each child can be given the opportunity to achieve his
potential. What a child did in his past life (if any!) is not relevant.
There was NO attempt in Hinduism to educate all children equally.
That, perhaps, was its greatest evil.
Classical liberalism is an EQUAL-OPPORTUNITY, MERIT-BASED
SYSTEM. Caste system is an UNEQUAL-OPPORTUNITY, BIRTH-
BASED system.
128
These two worldviews are fundamentally opposed.
All souls are equal.
12.2 Scientific Hinduism the plausibility of Vedanta
12.2.1 The need to ask for proof: Vivekanda’s pre-vedanta

days
We need to always keep asking questions. Vivekananda’s approach in his
pre-Vedanta days is a good guide. I think somewhere down the road he
accepted Vedanta, but even Vedanta is not without its gaps.
“The same God who gives out the Vedas becomes Buddha again to annul
them; which of these dispensations is to be obeyed?”
12.2.2 But Vedanta still represents the best in Hinduism

The Vedanta is the only element of Hindu religion which makes sense,
being universal in its approach. In due course I’ll outline the ‘precepts’ of
Scientific Hinduism. This was a very crude outline, a sketch.
Book 2
13. References
BANERJEE, A., M. BERTRAND, S. DATTA AND S. MULLAINATHAN, “Labor

market discrimination in Delhi: Evidence from a field experiment,” Journal
of Comparative Economics 37 (March 2009), 14-27.
Banerjee, Abhijit; Esther Duflo; Maitreesh Ghatak; and Jeanne Lafortune

(2009) .Marry for what: caste and mate selection in modern India.,
National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), Working Paper Series, No.
14958.
BANERJEE, B. AND J. B. KNIGHT, “Caste discrimination in the Indian urban

labour market,” Journal of Development Economics 17 (April 1985),
277{307.
Barbara R. Bergmann. 1974. “Occupational Segregation, Wages and

Profits When Employers Discriminate by Race or Sex”, Eastern Economic
Journal, 1(2): 103-110
Becker, G. S. (1971). The Economics of Discrimination. University of

Chicago Press.
Black, D. A. (1995).Discrimination in an equilibrium search model. Journal

of Labor Economics, 13(2):309–334.
BLOCH, F., V. RAO AND S. DESAI, “Wedding Celebrations as Conspicuous

Consumption: Signaling Social Status in Rural India,” Journal of Human
Resources 39 (2004).
Catherine Bros, Castes in India: Implications of Social Identity In

Economics
Chandra Bhan Prasad, Markets and Manu: Economic reforms and its
impact on caste in India, 2007.
Chaudhary, S. N. (ed.) (2005) Human Rights and Poverty in India:

Theoretical Issues and Empirical Evidences (New Delhi: Concept
Publishers, 5 Volumes).
George Akerlof and Kranton. R. E., 2000. “Economics and Identity” The
Quarterly Journal of Economics, 115(3) Sections 1 and II
George Akerlof, The Economics of Caste and of the Rat Race and Other
Woeful Tales, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 90, No. 4 (Nov.,
1976), 599-617.
Heckman, James, 1998. “Detecting Discrimination” Journal of Economic

Perspectives, 12(2):101-116
130
ITO, T., “Caste discrimination and transaction costs in the labor market:
Evidence from rural North India,” Journal of Development Economics 88
(March 2009), 292-300.
Jasmine Rao, The Caste System: Effects on Poverty in India, Nepal and Sri
Lanka, Global Majority E-Journal, Vol. 1, No. 2 (December 2010), pp. 97-
106 ["the people in lower castes are assigned menial jobs. This helps in
explaining why there is so much poverty. These lower caste members are
not allowed to move up the career ladder and instead remain poor."]
Kenneth J. Arrow. 1998. “What Has Economics to Say about Racial

Discrimination?” The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 12(2): 91-100
Kerwin K. Charles and J. Guryan. 2011. Studying Discrimination:

Fundamental Challenges and Recent Progress, Working Paper 17156,
National Bureau of Economic Research.
Mason, Patrick. 1996. “Race, Culture and Markets” Journal of Black

Studies 25(6):782-808.
Michael Reich, Economics of Racism
Phelps, E. S. (1972). The statistical theory of racism and sexism. The

American Economic Review, 62(4):659–661
Rose, Arnold M. (1967) .Sociological Factors Affecting Economic

Development in India., Studies in Comparative International Development,
Vol. 3, No. 9 (September), pp. 169-183.
Rosen, A. (2003). Search, bargaining, and employer discrimination. Journal

of Labor Economics, 21(4):807–829.
Sam Bowles and H. Gintis, 2002. “The Inheritance of Inequality” The

Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16(3):3-30
Scoville, J. G. (2003), Discarding Facts: the Economics of Caste. Review of

Development Economics, 7: 378–391
Shrestha, Anita (2002) .Dalits in Nepal: Story of Discrimination., Asia-

Pacific News, Vol. 30 (December); available at:
http://www.hurights.or.jp/asia-pacific/no_30/04.htm.
SIDDIQUE, Z., “Evidence on Caste-Based Discrimination,” Labour

Economics 18 (2011), S146—S159.
Silva, Kalinga Tudor and Ajith Hettihewage (2001) .Poverty, Social

Exclusion and the Impact of Selected Legal Measures against Caste
Discrimination in South Asia.; in: Peter Robson and Asbjorn Kjonstad (eds.)
Poverty & the Law (Oxford, United Kingdom: Hart Publishing), pp. 59-71.
Sukhdeo Thorat and Katherine S. Newman (ed.) Blocked by caste:

economic discrimination in modern India, New Delhi, Oxford University
Book 2
Press, 2010. [Review] "the book brings together empirical researches
undertaken by the Indian Institute of Dalit Studies (IIDS) in Delhi over the
past six years, and is the first major attempt to study the linkages
between caste discrimination and economic outcomes"
Takahiro Ito, Caste discrimination and transaction costs in the labor

market: Evidence from rural North India, Journal of Development
Economics, Volume 88, Issue 2, March 2009, Pages 292–300
W. Arthur Lewis, 1985. Racial Conflict and Economic Development,

Cambridge: Harvard University Press, Chapters 1 and 2
Waldman, Amy (2005) .Mystery of India's Poverty: Can the State Break Its
Grip?., New York Times, Letter from Asia, April 29, 2005.
Xavier Fontaine and Katsunori Yamada, Caste comparisons: evidence from

India Caste comparisons: evidence from India.
OTHER WORK NOT DIRECTLY RELATED TO ECONOMIC IMPACT
BAYLY, S., Caste, Society and Politics in India from the Eighteenth Century
to the Modern Age, The New Cambridge History of India (Cambridge
University Press, 2001).
Blumer, Herbert, 1958. “Race Prejudice as a Sense of Group Position” The

Pacific Sociological Review, Vol.1, No. 1. Pages 3-7
Hirschman, Charles. 2004. “The Origins and Demise of the Concept of

Race,” Population and Development Review, 30(3): 385-415. Pages 401-
407
Ninian, Alex (2008) .India’s Untouchables: The Dalits., Contemporary

Review, Vol. 290 (May), pp. 186-192.
Pye, Lucian W. (2002) .(Review of:) Castes of Mind: Colonialism and the
Making of Modern India, by Nicholas B. Dirks., Foreign Affairs, Vol. 81, No.
3 (May/June), p. 177
Standing, Hilary and R. L. Strivat (2007) .Untouchables, Harijans., Believe

(Religious Information Source web-site, May).
Thekaekara, Mari Marcel (2005) .Combatting Caste., New Internationalist,

Vol. 380 (July) .
132
Appendix: India’s official position
regarding caste discrimination
I believe caste is not a matter for governments to get involved but this
appendix covers an outline of government postions on caste.
GOI position regarding caste

India has abolished untouchability through its Constitution. India has,
however, not generally accepted that caste is a human rights issue.
In 1965 GOI agreed that caste groups were

downtrodden
- In 1965, India proposed the historic amendment to introduce descent in
the "Convention on Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination" or
CERD. It cited its own experience with caste. K C Pant moved the
amendment as a member of the Indian delegation and admitted that
"certain groups, though of the same racial stock and ethnic origin as
their fellow citizens, had for centuries been relegated by the caste system
to a miserable and downtrodden condition".[Source]
In 1996 GOI linked caste to class

India's Report on the CERD dated 29 April 1996, while celebrating racial
diversity as the quintessence of Indian society, states that "the term
'caste' denotes a 'social' and 'class' distinction and is not based on race. It
has its origins in the functional division of Indian society during ancient
times… [Source]
- In 1996, India performed a somersault when it submitted its CERD

report. It insisted that caste, though perpetuated through descent, was
"not based on race" and therefore did not come under the Convention's
purview. It freed itself of any "reporting obligation" on the situation of
Dalits and tribals. It said it was prepared to provide information about
them only "as a matter of courtesy". But the CERD panel maintained that
descent "does not solely refer to race" and that the situation of Dalits and
tribals "falls within scope of the Convention." [Source]
In 2001 GOI said caste is not anyone else’s business to

discuss
- At the 2001 Durban conference against racism, former Supreme Court
judge K Ramaswamy, himself a Dalit, dissented from the Indian
government position in his speech as a member of India's Human Rights
Commission. "It is not so much the nomenclature of the form of
discrimination that must engage our attention but the fact of its
persistence that must cause concern," he said. He added that "the debate
on whether race and caste are co-terminus or similar forms of
discrimination is not the essence of the matter." Government
representative Omar Abdullah contradicted him saying: "We are firmly of
Book 2
the view that the issue of caste is not an appropriate subject for
discussion at this conference."
[Source]
International position on caste

In 2002 CERD confirmed opposition to caste
discrimination
- In 2002, just a year on from Durban, the CERD panel issued a "general
recommendation" confirming its interpretation that descent included
"discrimination based on forms of social stratification such as caste and
analogous systems of inherited status, which nullify or impair their equal
enjoyment of human rights."
[Source]
In 2009 CERD re-confirmed opposition to caste

discrimination
- In 2009, India's state of self-denial suffered a body blow when the UN
Human Rights Council issued draft principles and guidelines on
discrimination based on work and descent and recognized caste as a
factor. The draft said, "This type of discrimination is typically associated
with the notion of purity and pollution and practices of untouchability and
is deeply rooted in societies and cultures where this discrimination is
practised."
[Source]
134

Scientific Hinduism Book 2 Brahminical C

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Scientific Hinduism Book 2 Brahminical C

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Scientific Hinduism Book 2 Brahminical C

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

सतयमे व जयते

Brahminical (caste) Hinduism:

1. We, the self-respecting humans, are born free. ..............1

2. Caste is immoral from first principles...............................6

3. Not just destruction of liberty but oppression and

4. Deliberate lowering of intelligence of the oppressed?....26

5. Do the oppressed make the rules? Of course not...........36

6. Do the oppressed defend caste? Of course not..............44

7. The hereditary and biological (racist) underpinning of

8. Rationalisation for oppression through hierarchies of the

9. Lots of red herrings thrown in to confound the truth......76

10. The escape from oppression......................................107

11. Economic explantion for the persistence of caste......124

12. An outline of Scientific Hinduism ...............................126

Classical liberalism rejects inequality of stautus and demands equal

1.2 Equal status in Islam and Christianity

1.3 Alleged equal consciousness in Vedanta

HOW BRAHMINS APPROPRIATED THIS AND CONVERTED THE

1.4 Say no to caste

2.1 Violation of basic ethical principles

2.1.1 Denial of equal status

2.1.2 Denial of equal liberty

The main conclusion of this enquiry seems to lie in the ambivalent

2.1.3 Destruction of self-respect

2.2 What’s wrong with eugenics, scientific racism,

2.2.2 These worldviews violate the basic principle of equality

2.3 Hypothesis: India’s caste system contributed a

Here are the facts:

They finally reached India in 1600 as SUBORDINATE traders, living below

By 1757, through a range of fortuitous circumstances, the British

Most importantly, by that time they were becoming economically better

SO THE REAL BASIS FOR RACISM STARTS WITH 1757

Before 1757 the Europeans were puny barbarians and subordinates of

By the early 1830s William Jones had discovered connections of Sanskrit

And they audaciously (and justifiably!) put themselves ON TOP OF THE

It seems to me that racism peaked between 1860s and 1950s –

3.1 Control over key life events

3.2 Careful ‘domestication’ (victim-consent) of the

The Brahmins insult others openly. The Dharmashastras, written

Manusmriti: One should consider a Brahman ten year-old and a

Taittiriya Brahmana: The Brahman Caste is sprung from the Gods;

Vishnu Smiriti: The name to be chosen should be auspicious in the

And of course, many Brahmins have never hesitated to humiliate Dalits

It takes great intellectual prowess to design an abusive system

3.3 Obnoxious suggestion that others ‘pollute’ us

3.4 Possible link of ‘pollution’ with beef eating

3.5 Blaming victims for their plight

NON-BRAHMINS ARE LAZY

To the non-Brahmin castes I say, wait, be not in a hurry. Do not seize

Instead of wasting your energies in vain discussions and quarrels in the

As soon as you have that, none dares say anything against

3.6.2 Lower castes regularly cheated in economic trasactions

3.8 Untouchability, and violence against the outcastes

3.8.2 Extract from Gandhi

3.8.4 Jagjivan Ram humiliated

Someone on FB said that he tought of Ambedkar as a Brahmin. I asked –

3.9.2 Some illustrations of violence

3.10 Mistreatment and humiliation of women

4.1 Indian average national IQ is extremely low