Hinduism and Caste System

by Jayaram V

Disclaimer: The Hindu caste system is a sensitive subject. It is not possible to write about it without making an objective analysis and drawing generalizations and logical assumptions. We have tried to make this as impersonal and unoffending as possible. Still, due to the very sensitive nature of the subject, it may disturb some. Therefore, if you are a sensitive person, please do not read this at all and move on. When this article was originally written some twenty years ago, the Internet was in its early phases, the world accommodated opposing views, and not many people were hurt or offended by words and labels they found disagreeable. Today, this is not the case. Hence, this disclaimer.

The Hindu caste System has been the bane of Indian society and culture for centuries. In terms of impact, it did much greater damage for a much longer period to a great many people than the slave system of the Western world or the witch-hunting practices of medieval Europe. The Hindu caste system was a clever invention of the later Vedic society, justified by a few lawmakers. The upper castes found it convenient to retain and perpetuate their social and religious distinction and political and economic advantage. With the exception of Saivism and a few ascetic traditions, most of the ancient sects of Hinduism were caste biased .

The idea of staying away from unclean people is understandable in a society that was obsessed with the concept of physical and mental purity. There is nothing unusual with people who are selective in choosing their friends and relationships. It is normal behavior to stay away from people who are found to be socially deviant, untrustworthy, or unfamiliar. It is an expression of our social intelligence and self-preservation instinct. Personal hygiene, family background, and financial status do matter today in society as it was thousands of years ago. But what was wrong with the Vedic society was that it recognized inequalities among men based on birth and family lineage and proclaimed it to be the will of God. Vedic scholars perpetuated this line of thought for centuries through the authority of scriptures and fear of divine retribution. They wrongfully created human stereotypes to justify a social structure that favored a few at the expense of many, denying a vast majority of people opportunities to use their inborn talents and pursue their dreams and aspirations.

Hinduism is a universal religion. Its primary emphasis is on universal brotherhood. It views the world as one divine family. It believes that man is divine by nature and connected to the rest of the world. The realization of that supreme truth is the primary aim of all human activity. However, with such lofty ideals, it is rather unfortunate that for a very long time, this religion of great antiquity has been in the hands of a few privileged castes. Some of these old tendencies have grown deep roots in Hindu culture and psyche and persist even today in various forms. Perhaps there is no other nation in the world where social divisions find their acceptance, approval and traditional, cultural, and scriptural validation as in India. People who are born in upper caste families enjoy relatively better lives and social and economic privileges than those born in the lower castes. It is not that all upper-caste Hindus are entitled to them or that economic disparities do not exist among them. However, compared to their counterparts, they enjoy better status and privileges than others, even with economic or social disadvantages. Within the same social milieus, upper-caste families enjoy relatively better opportunities and opportunities to grow. At the same time, we cannot ignore that when we generalize large groups and populations, there will be exceptions and rarities.

What is the Caste System?

The Hindu caste system is unique in the world but resembles, in some ways, Plato's ideal society of philosophers, warriors, and commoners. A caste is a division of society based on occupation and family lineage. The Hindu caste system recognized four distinct classes or divisions among people based on these criteria. It enforced it through a rigid code of conduct that was specific to each class and rooted in the Dharma Shastras (law books) of the later Vedic period. The four main castes recognized by traditional Hindu society based primarily on hereditary occupations, duties, and responsibilities are mentioned below.

• Brahmanas. They are the priestly class, who are entitled to study the Vedas, perform rites and rituals for themselves and others, and are obligated to perform certain obligatory duties, rituals and sacraments. Those who serve as priests in temples and invoke gods on behalf of others through chants and rituals are like the middlemen between gods and humans. The duty to uphold Dharma, preserve the faith, and exemplify the Hindu way of life rests with them. According to Manu, the lawmaker, a Brahmana is an incarnation of Dharma (sacred tradition), born to serve and protect it as gods on earth. The typical Brahmana belongs to the excellent of the human race, who, by virtue of his karma and conduct, is rightfully endowed with purity, intelligence, and knowledge to attain Brahman. He is the highest among the beings on earth, a true representative of Brahma or Prajapati. Whatever existed in the world is his property and he is entitled to all. Thus, the tradition vests the pious Brahmanas with great authority, trust, and responsibility as the guardians and spokespersons of the faith.
• Kshatriyas. They are the warrior class, who are commanded (by tradition) to serve as kings, rulers, administrators, ministers, soldiers, commanders, local heads, landlords, etc. The lawbooks ordain them to protect people, bestow gifts to Brahmanas, offer sacrifices to gods and ancestors, study the Vedas, dispense justice, and ensure good governance, peace, and prosperity for all. According to Manusmriti, they must abstain from sensual pleasures since, due to their rajasic nature, they are vulnerable to passions. Manu lays down that it is a king's duty to protect his kingdom and his people. He has something in himself of the nature of the gods such as Indra, Vayu, Yama, Surya, Varuna, Moon, and Kubera. He also advises people not to despise any king, even if he is an infant. His authority should not be questioned except when he ignores his duties or fails to uphold Dharma or protect pious Brahmanas. Kings and rulers have the right to punish, but they must be fair in delivering justice or prescribing punishments. A king must protect and uphold the caste system and the social order that comes with it as his obligatory duty and keep the Brahmanas happy with lavish and generous gifts at every opportunity.
• Vaisyas: They are the merchant and peasant classes, who are expected to take care of the duties associated with trade, commerce, economy, and agriculture. The lawbooks ordain them to tend cattle, offer sacrifices to gods, study the Vedas, participate in trade and commerce, lend money, and cultivate the land. They have the traditional right to perform and participate in Vedic rituals and serve the community and gods through generous gifts and charitable works. However, they are not allowed to marry higher-caste women.
• Shudras: In ancient times, this group consisted of working people, such as artisans, craftsmen, agricultural workers, manual laborers, potters, etc., who relied upon their physical strength and skills. The lawbooks ordained them to serve the other three castes as their obligatory duty. They were not permitted to study the Vedas, hear the sacred chants, perform, or participate in any Vedic rituals or samskaras. They were not allowed to study the Vedas or even hear the sacred chants. They were not allowed anywhere near the congregations where the Vedas were chanted, or religious subjects were discussed. They were also not allowed to mingle with the higher castes in social gatherings or eat food along with them. They might have worshipped local and village deities according to their family traditions .
• Chandalas: The lowest of the Shudras were called chandalas or the impure ones. In the olden days, the higher castes looked down upon them as untouchables because of their unclean habits and unconventional religious practices that were outside the pale of the Vedic fold. During the day, they were also barred from entering the localities or neighborhoods where the higher castes lived or walking through the same streets they frequented. They were held in such contempt that people avoided even their shadow. If they saw them walking in public or crossing their paths, they considered it a bad omen. Due to such restrictions and superstitious beliefs, these deprived classes lived mostly on the fringes of society, unknown and uncared for. They, too, probably worshiped their gods and held to their own beliefs. They engaged in unclean professions avoided by the privileged classes, worked in graveyards and cremation grounds, or served as tanners, hunters, butchers, and professional cleaners of human waste.¹⁴

How the Caste System was Enforced

The caste system was enforced by law, with the help of lawbooks such as Manusmriti and the authority vested in the kings, whom the tradition held as upholders and enforcers of Dharma and the divine laws ordained or endorsed by God himself. The force of habit, tradition, superstition, religious beliefs, and fear of punishment kept the people in check and squashed any idea of questioning the norms and practices or upsetting the established class hierarchy. It was reinforced by many factors, such as the following.

• Heredity. The caste system was hereditary. A person’s caste was determined at birth according to the parents’ caste. If the parents belonged to different castes, the children were deemed mixed castes. Their status depended upon the father’s caste. Thus, people inherited their caste identities from their parents and passed them on to their children. They had no right to change their caste as long as they remained within the Vedic fold or served the community. They could also be ostracized or excommunicated from their original caste groups by their kings, local administrators, or village heads if they violated the group norms or engaged in serious crimes or scandalous conduct. In the case of inter-caste marriages, which were rare, children inherited the castes of their fathers.
• Caste Rules. In the past, different rules were applied to different castes with local variations. They were strictly enforced by the local religious and political authorities according to the prevailing norms. Frear of punishment, social and family pressures, and public condemnation kept the people in check and ensured the continuity of the system. Higher caste communities enjoyed privileges, but they were also expected to set good examples and be good role models. It was obligatory for the Brahmanas to study the Vedas, engage in sacrificial rituals as ordained by them, honor family traditions and obligations, and live righteously to secure a good life in their next lives. The lawbooks laid that Brahmanas who violated the code of conduct prescribed for them should be considered equal to Sudras and treated accordingly ¹. Women in the higher castes were obliged to assist their husbands in observing their caste rules and protecting the family’s reputation. Purification ceremonies, fines, and minor or major punishments were prescribed, including excommunication in extreme cases, to compensate for the loss of honor or nullify the sins arising from misconduct and caste violations.
• Marriage. Since the caste system was based on hereditary, people paid close attention to the purity of their castes and family lineages to protect their family's reputation and honor in society. The lawbooks and prevailing customs, traditions, and caste and cultural norms discouraged people from marrying outside their castes. Respective caste groups exercised enough social and family pressure upon each other to prevent or discourage inter-caste marriages and inter-mixture of castes (varna samskaras). Scriptures such as the Bhagavadgita allude to the fact that the Lord of Creation (Isvara) established a social order and the caste system to ensure the order and regularity of the world and prevent the intermixture of Varnas and the decline of Dharma. However, the lawbooks contain provisions to accommodate certain types of inter-caste marriages and allow the children born out of them to regulate their lives, preserve family traditions and cultural norms, and enjoy inheritance rights. Inter-caste marriages between higher-caste men and women did not attract as much derision and social disapproval as marriages between higher-castes and lower-castes, especially the marriages between lower-caste males and higher-caste females² .
• Preferential treatment: The three upper castes enjoyed distinct advantages in society compared to the Sudras, whose job was to serve the three upper castes and live like fourth-class citizens ³ . People born in the three upper castes were given initiation into the study of the Vedas and treated as twice-born, while sudras were not allowed to study or even hear the Vedas. They were treated on par with animals and considered once borne. The Brahmanas enjoyed the highest status and privileges, followed by the Kshatriyas, the Vaisyas, and the Sudras in the same order. The laws were discriminatory in matters of rewards and punishments. They prescribed lighter punishments for higher castes than the lower castes, who had technically little recourse against the former in criminal cases. For the same offense committed, a lower caste person might attract physical torture, slavery, or the death penalty. In comparison, a higher caste person might get away with a simple fine or chastisement or purification ceremony. The lower caste persons were also not allowed to act as witnesses or sit in judgment against higher castes.
• Royal Support: The caste system was preserved and enforced mostly through royal support. The relationship between the priestly class and the warrior class was one of symbiotic interdependence. The kings and local rulers took upon themselves the task of protecting the caste system and protecting the interests of the privileged castes.  By lending support to orthodox beliefs and practices, they ensured caste distinctions, order and regularity. From their side, the priests legitimized the rulers’ authority by recognizing them as the upholders and protectors of Dharma. They performed sacrifices on their behalf, seeking their welfare. The lawbooks proclaimed them as gods in human form and protectors and preservers of castes and caste order ⁴. According to them, God created and gave the power of punishment to the kings on earth to help them destroy evil and keep humans on the Dharma’s path ⁵. They also suggest that upon waking in the morning, a king should start his day by worshipping three Brahmanas and following their advice with humility and modesty. He should appoint a Brahmana as his chief minister and deliberate with him on the most important affairs of the State and his administration.

Historical Perspective

Several nomadic and pastoral tribes, with extensive knowledge of elaborate sacrificial rites and rituals, migrated to the Indian subcontinent in the pre-Rigvedic or early Rigvedic period in the early dawn of India’s unique civilization. They settled in the North Western region before they migrated further into the interiors. They conquered the subcontinent not through the power of the sword, as some historians theorize, but with their superior skill in cattle rearing, agriculture, magical rituals, and their knowledge of horses, hunting, and chariot making. Their superior knowledge and skills, coupled with their forays into magical realms, gods, and mystic powers, likely captured the attention of the local rulers and earned them their patronage, support, and protection. By adopting the local beliefs, gods, customs, and practices and integrating them into their own, they likely gained the trust and confidence of the local rulers and the approval of the native populations. With their special abilities in using magical incantations and elaborate sacrifices to invoke gods and precipitate rains or prevent floods and secure divine help to defeat common enemies and calamities or drive away thieving tribes, diseases, and pestilence, they likely secured land grants from the native rulers, established their political power, and legitimized their stay. The caste system probably became imperative and rigid as they spread further into the subcontinent and assimilated new groups and populations into their fold.

Non-Vedic Character of Caste System

The pastoral Vedic tribes who migrated to India from outside probably did not introduce the caste system in India. They likely had a flexible social structure in which people from different social backgrounds coexisted and had the freedom to change their vocations according to circumstances. The Vedas allude to the fact that members within the same families often practiced different vocations. Even Brahmanas had the option to choose a different vocation in exceptional circumstances like wars, famines, and pestilence. It appears that a rudimentary form of caste system was already in vogue in ancient India ⁶. Most likely, the Vedic people of that transformative period adopted it to maintain their racial purity, family lineages, and societal order. This is evident from the fact that there is no reference to the caste system in the entire Rigveda except in the Purusha Sukta, which many scholars believe was a later-day interpolation.

The Mahabharata and Ramayana are classic examples of where people from different social backgrounds could mingle with each other and play different roles in society. Parashurama and Drona were Brahmanas. Yet, they took up the duties of warriors and excelled in them. Shantanu, a King, married a fisherwoman. Janaka was an acclaimed King but took exceptional interest in religious and spiritual matters. The caste system probably became rigid subsequently in the later part of the early Vedic period due to changing economic, environmental, and demographic circumstances and early interactions with non-Vedic tribes and competing religious traditions. It was probably an effort to protect the tradition and preserve its purity and integrity. Yet outside influences could not prevent the Vedic religion from making compromises, such as including the Atharva Veda as the fourth Veda and accommodating local deities into the Vedic pantheon.

Caste in Hindu Epics and Puranas

We have already quoted instances from the Hindu epics and Puranas where people from all social backgrounds coexisted and interacted. We also find in them people from lower castes who, through sheer effort, valor, skills, or excellence, ascended to positions of eminence and authority. Their stories are a testament to their resilience and determination to change their circumstances or improve their social standing. Many important characters in the epics Ramayana and Mahabharata belonged to lower castes. Lord Rama was assisted by mostly men of humble origins and outlier communities who lived in the forests and were ignorant of the Vedic scriptures. According to local folklore, Rama’s mother, Kausalya, belonged to a tribal family in Central India, more specifically from the Chhattisgarh region. A family of cowherds brought up Lord Krishna and protected him, his notoriously cruel uncle Kamsa. Balarama, his stepbrother, who is sometimes included in the list of Vishnu's ten incarnations, was a farmer as well as a warrior. Only three or four of the ten incarnations of Lord Vishnu came from higher castes. Of the ten, only one, the incarnation of Vamana, belongs to the Brahmana caste. Rama, Parashurama, and the Buddha were Kshatriyas by birth or profession, while the other incarnations, such as the incarnation of fish, turtle, boar, and the half man and half lion, are animal or nonhuman incarnations. In other words, they were not twice-born (dvija) but once-born, just like the forest dwellers who assisted Lord Rama in his battle against the demon king Ravana.

Many ancient sages and rishis also came from diverse and humble backgrounds, showcasing the inclusivity in Hindu epics and Puranas. Parasurama was a Brahmana by birth but a warrior by profession. Vishwamitra ⁷ was a warrior by birth but practiced austerities like a Brahmin and became a great rishi. Sage Parashar, the famous lawgiver, was the son of an outcaste (Chandala). Rishi Vashista was born to a prostitute, while sage Vyasa, the original author of the Mahabharata, was born to a fisherwoman. Rishi Valmiki, the original composer of Ramayana, came from a tribal family of traditional hunters. Some composers of the Vedic and Upanishadic hymns belonged to either lower castes or mixed castes. Satyakama Jabala was born to a prostitute who could not tell him who his father was. Karna, the famous character from the Mahabharata, was brought up in a low-caste family, while Drona, the teacher of the Pandavas, was a Brahmana by caste but excelled in martial arts.

The Development of Rigid Caste System

Although we cannot be certain, the early Vedic society had a caste or Varna system that was probably hereditary but not very rigid. People still had an opportunity to practice different vocations or change their family or hereditary ones, except perhaps the priestly duties, and fulfill their obligations in the pursuit of the four chief aims: Dharma, Artha, Kama, and Moksha. Caste hierarchy also probably existed, and marriages were most within the varnas (original four classes that became subsequently synonymous with caste or kulam), in which Jati (a group distinguished by linguistic, tribal, cultural, regional, or religious practice), family lineage, and gotra also mattered. It is also possible that the Varnas were initially three but became four with the inclusion of many native tribes and the growing heterogeneity of the community. Probably, social cohesion and group affiliations began to strengthen, and people belonging to the same Varna, Kula, or Jati began to emerge as distinct groups to protect and promote their respective interests. Thus, parentage, family history, and lineage gained more importance in the changing scenario than occupation.

However, for reasons that are not yet clear, the caste or varna system of the early Vedic period subsequently became rigid and less accommodative, offering little flexibility to people to pursue different vocations outside their hereditary roles or family occupations. The lack of teachers willing to teach children of other families or unrelated families the secrets of their family vocations for economic or social reasons could be one factor. Foreign invasions, immigration, demographic changes, the presence of foreign groups with distinct cultures and religious practices of their own, or increasing social and communal tensions might have prompted people to safeguard their personal and caste interests to prevent the possibility of the intermixture of castes, caste pollution, and confusion. Thus, a well-defined code of conduct, a set of rewards and punishments, purification procedures, and religious practices for each varna or caste became necessary to ensure a well-defined societal order and protect the privileges of the royalty and all those members of the higher castes who protected and served them in their ways.

Elevation of the Sudra Kings

Contrary to popular belief, many emperors and rulers in ancient India did not descend from the original Kshatriya clans of the Rigvedic Period. Instead, they hailed from diverse and often humble backgrounds. These rulers, who were not even connected to the early migrating tribes of those times, likely descended from those who were already well-settled in the subcontinent by the time the Vedic people established their sway in the Sindhu-Saraswati region and began migrating further. This new breed of native warriors, driven by personal courage and an adventurous spirit, became rulers. In the later Vedic period, several small principalities called Janapadas emerged in northern India, each with its distinct geographical boundaries, history, and political system. The Vedas, epics, Puranas, and Buddhist and Jain texts mention the names of several Janapadas. Some had hereditary kings, and some elected their kings through a council of members. Most of them were not Kshatriyas but belonged to different social backgrounds. Most likely, they also practiced different faiths, including Buddhism and Jainism. Subsequently, these small kingdoms became part of much larger kingdoms, such as the one ruled by the Kurus of the Mahabharata. According to the epic, although the Kauravas and Pandavas belonged to the Kshatriya lineage because their parents descended from the Bharatas, they actually had a mixed origin due to the peculiar circumstances in which they were born. Probably, the Bharatas themselves were not pure Kshatriyas, at least by the time the Kuru Kingdom was established. The Shishunaga and Haranyaka dynasties that formed large kingdoms in northern India and ruled for a long between the sixth and fifth century BCE also came from mixed backgrounds. The Nandas, who followed them and ruled a vast empire with Pataliputra as their capital in the fourth or fifth century BCE, also belonged to a low caste of barbers. So were the Mauryas who succeeded them. Chandragupta Maurya, who founded the dynasty and is considered the first true emperor of India, probably descended from a family of peacock tamers. According to the legends, his mother served in the court of Nandas as a courtesan and sired him through one of the Nandas. Chandragupta himself married princesses from different social and cultural backgrounds, including a Greek princess. We do not know whether he practiced Vedic religion, but at the time of his death, he certainly died as a Jain monk.

The Sakas and the Kushanas, who were foreigners with no Kshatriya, Vedic, or Indian heritage, descended from the nomadic tribes of Central Asia and practiced varied faiths. Some patronized Saivism but kept away from Vedism. The Guptas were believed to be either Vaishyas or Jats ⁸ , while the Nagas or the Barashivas were tribals and, by Vedic designation, Sudras. The intriguing aspect is how the Vedic priests of their times managed their relationship with these kings and foreign rulers who were not conversant with their ritual and spiritual beliefs and practices and held different belief systems.  In most cases, these rulers stayed away from Vedism. They preferred Buddhism, Jainism, or Shaivism, which did not discriminate against people on the basis of their birth, profession, color, or caste. Some of them might have accepted the recognition offered by the Vedic priests in return for gifts and land grants to convert and legitimize them as Kshatriyas, using purification and conversion rituals and tracing their lineages to gods, ancient rulers, and races of divine or semi-divine origins. If these strategies failed, the priestly families kept a low profile or migrated to safer areas to avoid public attention.

Varna, Jati and Gotra

Before we go into details, let us define these three words. Varna means color. The Varna system of the Vedic times was a precursor of the caste system that subsequently emerged in India and grew in complexity. The varna system recognized the division of the population into four distinct groups based on probable variations in skin color. Jati refers to a group of people distinguished by language, culture, origin, relationships, beliefs, and geographic or racial identity.  Gotra has some reference to a person’s family lineage, historical connection with the priests who used to perform rituals for the family or the identity or fraternity the early Vedic people used to establish by the cows or the cow pens (gotra) they owned and branded. Today, it is mostly used to make offerings to gods during rites, rituals, and sacraments or to determine the eligibility of marriage between a bride and bridegroom. The tradition explicitly prohibits marriages between the same gotras.

The early Vedic society likely had social divisions based on color and family lineages rather than caste-based occupations. This is evident from the Rigvedic hymns, which distinguish people based on their complexion and creed rather than occupation-based castes. The cast system ⁹ is known in Sanskrit as varnashrama dharma, which actually means a natural social order based on color distinctions. In the early days, it was the color of the skin that mattered, not the caste. A Brahmana was considered varnashresht or best of color. Varna also meant a letter, character, or sound. Teaching how to write and spell Sanskrit letters was called varna-shiksha. The Vedic people were distinguished by their color in contrast to the dark-skinned tribes they derogatorily referred to as Daityas, Dasas, Asuras, Pisachas, and Rakshasas. They were probably derisive terms used to refer to certain outlier groups with whom they had no cordial relations or whose beliefs and practices they did not appreciate. Many scholars believe that the varnas were different from the castes. The varnas were classes based on racial features, while the castes were further divisions within each class based on occupation or lineage. Thus, while there were only four varnas or classes, the number of castes or occupational divisions within each class varied.

The word jati actually means the form of existence that comes by birth. Thus, animals belong to pasujati, or the animal group, and humans to narajati, or the human group. Jati is also used loosely to mean a caste, a regional or linguistic group, race, lineage, tribe, or class of humans. A jati-Brahmana is someone who is a Brahmana by birth but not by occupation, knowledge, or performance of rites and rituals. The words jat, meaning birth or existence, and jatakam, meaning natal chart, are closely related to it.

Gotra actually means the name of a cow pen or a stable. It is also used to denote the name of a family, lineage, or race of Brahmana families. Strictly speaking, only Brahmana families are supposed to belong to particular gotras. In the case of people belonging to other castes, it denotes the lineage of their respective family priests. Therefore, when a non-Brahmana is quoting his gotra, he is telling the gotra of the priest whose services his family traditionally used. Traditionally, the gotras of Brahmana families are traceable to seven or eight ancient sages. However, today, there are thousands of gotras, and no one knows how these many gotras have sprouted. For Brahmana families, gotras carry a lot of significance. However, in other caste groups, gotras matter, especially in ritual worship and the performance of sacraments. Marriages within the same gotra are prohibited by the law books just as they are prohibited in the case of castes.

Subsequent Developments

The Indian society was as complex in ancient India as it is now. Any generalizations about it need to be regarded with some reservations. The political, geographic, and linguistic diversity, absence of adequate dependable historical evidence, contradictory literary sources, and the existence of multiple religious traditions make it a daunting task for any writer to present a satisfactory picture of the prevailing conditions of Indian society at any point of time in the past. In the following discussion, we will try to sketch a broad outline of how the caste system might have developed in the post-Vedic period.

During the Mauryan period (300 BC), while the varnas remained four, the castes became many. Inter-caste marriages, the practice of polygamy, the assimilation of foreigners, the creation of vast administrative machinery that resulted in new classes of people and new positions of authority, and the geographical expansion of the empires to the south, which exposed new groups and communities to the Vedic religion contributed to this new development and added diversity and complexity to the social fabric of ancient India.

Megasthanese, who stayed in the court of Chandragupta Maurya as a Greek ambassador for several years and recorded his observations in his work titled The Indika, noticed seven classes of people in the Mauryan empire, namely

• Philosophers
• Husbandmen
• Shepherds
• Artisans
• Military
• Overseers
• Councilors or Assessors

There were further sub-divisions within each of these classes. Megasthanese identified two distinct divisions within the philosopher's group: the priests and the ascetics. In the Satavahana empire, society was organized into four classes ¹⁰.  

1. First class: high-ranking officials and feudatory chieftains such as Maharathis, Mahabhojas, and Mahasenapatis.
2. Second class: officials such as ministers and treasurers (Amatyas, Mahamatras, and Bhandagarikas) and non-officials such as merchants, traders, and heads of guilds (Naigama, Sarthvaha and Sreshtin).
3. Third class: professionals such as scribes (lekhakas), physicians (vaidyas), cultivators (halakiyas), goldsmiths (suvarnakaras), and chemists (gandhikas).
4. Fourth class: carpenters (vardhaki), gardeners (malakaras), blacksmiths (lohavanija), and fishermen (dasakas).

The Guptas worshipped Hindu deities, built temples in their honor, and revived many ancient Vedic traditions. They enforced the caste system throughout their empire with religious zeal. They implemented many traditions of Vedic religion as a part of the king's duty to uphold and protect religious laws (dharma) and safeguard the caste system from the unlawful intermixture of castes. The Brahmanas, who enjoyed many privileges under their patronage, were known for their austere lives. There were many groups within the priestly class, each performing specific duties. They studied the scriptures, performed sacrifices and devotional worship, and observed penances to control their minds and bodies. The kings lavished them with gifts and land grants, often donating entire villages in return for their services. People revered saints and the places associated with their lives. The kings employed royal priests in their courts and consulted them frequently. Brahmanas of this period belonged to many lineages or gotras.

The Guptas brought peace and prosperity to the Indian subcontinent and contributed to the emergence of new aristocratic classes. Their period witnessed the development of new elite groups, as in the Roman empire, an urban version of the bourgeoisie consisting of wealthy traders, merchants, and landed gentry owning large tracts of fertile lands fit for agriculture. These groups engaged in a new power struggle among themselves for royal favors, which added additional dynamics and diversity to the already complex caste system and social structure. Brahmanas kept their dominance and authority in religious matters, while the feudal groups exercised their control over wealth creation, trade and commerce. The status of the lower castes depended upon their occupation and religious affiliation. Artisans, skilled workers of arts and crafts, and other vocational groups had their guilds to manage and regulate their activities and protect their interests.

Conquests and the resulting wars with the invading armies, such as the Hunas, in the declining phase of the Gupta rule, led to many new developments within Indian society. As soldiers of invading armies settled in India’s heartland, the caste system faced new challenges. According to Havell, the infusion of Huna blood lowered the high ethical standards of Indo-Aryan traditions. It caused the growth of many vulgar superstitions, which the great teachers of India never contradicted. The intolerance of the Hunas only added to the rigidity of the caste system in the subsequent period as a defensive reaction, just as the intolerant attitude of Muslim rulers contributed to a rigid caste system during the medieval period.

Hsüen Tsang (Xuanzang), who visited India during the reign of Harshavardhana, noticed that the caste system was widely prevalent and practiced in the country. He noticed four distinct social classes, most likely a continuation of the Vedic fourfold varna system. The Brahmanas and the Kshatriyas of that time lived a good life, dressed well, ate decent meals, and observed high standards of cleanliness. He noted that after eating food, they destroyed the wooden and stone vessels they used to eat it. If they used metal ones, they cleaned them thoroughly. They maintained high ethical standards and dreaded the retribution of bad karma. Inter-caste marriages and marriages within the same caste or among close relations were absent. However, caste distinctions, food restrictions, and marriage customs did not prevent people of different castes from interacting socially or living in harmony. He also noticed the sad plight of the outcasts and commented that they were not allowed to enter the localities where the higher caste people lived or walked through.

We may presume these practices continued for the next several centuries and even during the Muslim rule. The caste system continued during the medieval period despite the oppressive policies of Muslim rule. Despite its universal appeal and emphasis on brotherhood, neither Islam nor the bigotry of the invaders left much impact on the caste system, the native faiths, or the beliefs and practices of the native people. The caste system and the beliefs that sustained it actually helped them survive this turbulent period. They strengthened their resolve to adhere to their ancestral faiths despite the attempts to convert them forcibly. Some rulers discriminated against them, imposed additional taxes on their households as per Islamic laws, and humiliated higher-caste Hindus by forcing them to work in Muslim households as servants after reducing them to utter poverty through unjust taxation. They also succeeded in converting a few, especially those from the less privileged castes, by offering them incentives or using threats. Some rulers made it their policy to put to death a certain number of natives each year to strike fear in their hearts and weaken their resolve to follow their native faiths. These actions had the opposite effect. They made the caste system even more rigid and people more loyal to their family traditions and ancient faiths. Those who switched their loyalties (usually from the lower castes) became as distant and repugnant as the invaders in the eyes of those who endured the ignominy and the oppression silently. Interestingly, the caste system left its ancient mark even on the communities that emerged in the wake of conversions under Islamic rule. A new social structure and class divisions emerged among them according to their descent, vocations, or old caste affiliations, adding a new social dimension to the Muslim community in the country. Some scholars believe the Muslim rulers adopted the caste system as a “compromise” to keep their subjects under control.

When the Europeans came to India first as merchants and later as conquerors, they followed a similar policy. The British, who subsequently established their direct rule in several Indian provinces, used the Indian caste system to consolidate their power and formulate their civil and criminal laws. They also used it to implement their dive and rule policy and consolidate their power and influence over the native populations. They decided to let the caste system prevail as they saw it as a great opportunity to keep the people divided on caste and religious lines and maintain their hold upon them. They also organized their military units on caste lines to ensure discipline, unity, and caste loyalties among the recruits. The Christian missionaries who came to India in their wake to convert local people found the caste system convenient for spreading negative propaganda against the native faiths and converting people to their faith. They succeeded to some extent as their activities remained unchecked for a long time as the British authorities made no efforts to contain them due to their policy of non-interference in the country’s religious matters. However, as time went by, the educated Indian middle class, one of the unintended consequences of the British education system, responded to the growing threat from them and responded with countermeasures. Many nationalist leaders of the freedom struggle felt the need to reform and revive Hinduism and address the threat posed by its antique practices, especially the caste system and the excessive focus on superstitious beliefs and ritual practices. They urged the community to treat everyone fairly and discontinue the outdated social practices of inequality and discrimination against the deprived castes in the interests of preserving and safeguarding Hinduism and the community. Indian scholars revived memories of India’s past glory and its rich social, cultural, and literary greatness to instill feelings of pride and nationalism in people.  Leaders like Baba Saheb Ambedkar and Raja Rammohan Roy demanded equal status for the lower castes, while Mahatma Gandhi advocated equal rights for all and the complete abolition of untouchability.

After India's independence, the Indian Constitution guaranteed equal status and fundamental rights to all classes of people. They also enacted legislation to prevent the continuation of many ancient practices, such as polygamy and discrimination based on caste or religion. The government passed laws to declare untouchability as a serious crime, punishable with severe penalties, and created a list of scheduled castes and tribes to protect them from exploitation and ill-treatment. The reservation policy approved by the Parliament created a level playing field for them in matters of employment and education. It protected them from unfair competition from the more privileged sections of society. Due to these efforts and the enforcement of policies, the lower castes are improving their standing in various fields. Today, many belonging to these castes occupy positions of authority and leadership in politics, government jobs, business, trade, and commerce, contributing to the development of the country. The Indian government established many built-in safeguards and constitutional guarantees for them and considerably improved their status in society.  As a result, the high castes often complain of being discriminated against and subjected to unequal treatment in jobs, economic benefits, and welfare measures. By granting constitutional guarantees to the lower castes and protecting them from unfair competition, the Indian government averted a major disaster for independent India. These efforts minimized the possibility of social unrest, prevented a civil war, and halted mass conversions of the discriminated groups to other religions. However, further improvement and reforms are still required to improve their lot and change people's thinking and attitude towards them. People still value their caste identities and make judgments and decisions based on them. Caste is still a powerful binding force in politics, economics, social activities, and personal relationships.

Justification of Caste System

The caste system, a significant aspect of ancient Indian society, was rationalized on various grounds. Understanding these justifications is crucial to comprehending its historical context in ancient India.

• Justification in the Vedas: No practice, principle or philosophy is considered by the Vedic tradition valid unless it is found in the Vedas. The caste system would not have thrived and found its approval in the Vedic world unless a validating reference to it was found in the Vedas. The Purusha Sukta found in the 10th Mandala of the Rigveda describes how the four castes came into existence from different parts of Purusha, the Cosmic Being or Creator, at the time of a grand sacrifice hosted by him with the help of ancient gods serving as the priests. During that sacrifice, in which he used parts of his own body as the offerings, Brahmanas came out of his mouth, Kshatriyas from his arms, Vaisyas from his thighs, and Sudras from his feet. It justified the caste distinctions. Many scholars believe that the concepts and the imagery of the Purusha Sukta ¹¹ belong to the later Vedic period rather than the Rigvedic period. Hence, it was probably a subsequent interpolation. Interestingly, this hymn is quoted even today by some scholars who find virtues in the system despite the problems and injustices it created. It is difficult to accept that the one indivisible and unchanging Brahman possesses a human-like body. Even if we presume that he has, all his bodily parts must be equally divine and worthy of worship. Indeed, in devotional traditions, it is customary for devotees to offer respect to God’s feet rather than to any other part of his body.
• Justification in the theory of Karma:  The hereditary caste system based on birth finds its validation in the doctrine of karma. It favors the argument that people of lower castes have to blame themselves for their plight because of the bad karma of their past lives. Their pitiable plight is a message to others that the wheel of Dharma operates inexorably, sparing none and favoring none. This line of argument is found in many scriptures, including the Bhagavadgita, according to which people of good merit and those who develop detachment or dispassion take birth in good families ¹², and those who engage in sinful actions will be cast to sinful wombs. In the fourth chapter of the book, Lord Krishna declares that he created the fourfold varna system based on the triple gunas and karma of each jiva ¹³.. By combining the belief in karma with the caste system, the ancient lawmakers prescribed different vocational and occupational duties for each caste. They expect people to follow them as their obligatory duties. Observing them without questioning them or ignoring them is an act of merit, which entitles them to progress spiritually and obtain a better life in their next birth.
• Justification on the basis of the triple Gunas: According to many schools of Hindu philosophy, the essential nature (prakriti svabhavam) of all beings and objects in the world is determined by the triple gunas or modes of Nature (Prakriti). Their expression or suppression in them causes them to act in specific ways and makes them suitable or unsuitable for certain lifestyles and occupations. The three modes are Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas. Sattva is characterized by purity and spirituality and manifests in humans as the propensity for knowledge, intelligence, faith, sincerity, devotion, gentleness, and so on. Sattva is believed to be the predominant mode of those who engage in spiritual practices, pursue divine knowledge and live virtuously, such as the Brahmanas. Rajas characterizes egoism, pride, and worldliness and manifests in humans as the propensity for passions, worldly desires, and attachments. Rajas are believed to be the predominant mode of those who are driven by passions and worldly pursuits, such as the Kshatriyas and Vaisyas. Tamas is characterized by lethargy, intoxication, and disregard for established norms. It manifests in humans as ignorance, lack of ambition, extreme nature, imprudence, demonical resolve, uncleanliness, negativity, uncleanliness, unhealthy habits, and antisocial behavior. Tamas is believed to be the predominant mode of those who are driven by baser desires and instinct lack discernment, and act irrationally. In the past, these characteristics were wrongly attributed to those who belonged to the lower castes.
• Justification by religious laws: The Hindu lawbooks (Dharmashastras) unequivocally approve the caste system and base their laws accordingly. They have no problem discriminating against people according to their castes. They prescribe different rules and disciplinary measures for their conduct, religious duties, and punishments. They not only justify a rigid, hereditary caste system but prescribe lenient punishments for higher castes and severe punishments for the lower castes for unlawful conduct. We do not know how extensive their influence was or how sincerely they were implemented. We may presume that they were enforced strictly where the Brahmana orthodoxy prevailed and where the Hindu rulers took upon themselves the duties of enforcing the laws prescribed by them. Where the rulers followed different laws due to their allegiance to other faiths, the local village councils (panchayats) probably dispensed justice using them in the areas where the king’s authority did not extend.

Critical Analysis of Caste System

The Hindu caste system had its own merits and demerits and should not be judged purely based on the moral and social values of today. Inequalities and social divisions based on economic and family status were not unknown in other parts of the world or other civilizations. The Nordic races followed some form of caste system. The Greeks and Romans of the ancient world had a class system consisting of freemen and enslaved people. The Persians also had a social and political hierarchy, which was conveniently exploited by Alexander when he invaded the Persian empire. The British, the French, and the Russians had their landed gentry and nobility in contrast to the commoners and peasants, who were subject to discriminatory taxation laws and unequal and unfair treatment. The New World, founded by conquests and mass immigration from Europe, had its enslaved classes and its highly discriminatory class system that was practiced for nearly two centuries propped up and legitimized by unjust laws. Compared to some of these institutions and practices, the Hindu caste system was more humane and gentler. Although the chandalas were treated like outcasts and excluded from normal social life and communication, they were free within their world to practice their vocations and follow their laws. So was the case with the groups identified by the tradition as the Sudras. The fear of sin and karma kept the higher castes from treating them cruelly or unjustly. The Romans had their slave revolts. The French had their revolution of the proletariat and the deprived classes. The injustices of the American slave system produced deep-rooted divisions, resentment, aggression, and frustration in the USA among those who endured it and their descendants. However, the low castes in India never launched large-scale organized revolts or indulged in violence against the upper castes because the system did not give anyone license to engage in unjust, unethical, and immoral conduct. The system did not approve of unwarranted violence or cruelty toward the oppressed people but only limited their opportunities with restrictive laws to pursue their goals, practice their faith, exercise their freedom, or work for a better life for themselves and their children. They created rigid walls around these communities and kept them within them, bound to the authority of religious institutions and fear of retribution. However, within those walls, life went on as usually independent of how others lived. It is in this context one should examine the advantages and disadvantages of the Hindu caste system, which are listed below.

Advantages

1. Continuity of traditions: It would be unfair to say that the Hindu caste system had no merit because if it were true, it would not have survived for so long. If Hinduism survived amidst many competing traditions, religions, and foreign invasions, without a central authority and with many centrifugal forces working against it from all directions, a great deal of credit must be given to the rigid caste system that discouraged people from experimenting with their faith and beliefs acting as a binding force and kept them within the boundaries established by the scriptures and the tradition. A vast majority of the Hindus in the ancient world were illiterate. However, they were not ignorant of the laws of karma and the implications of violating caste rules or disregarding their commitment to their caste-based family occupations and their role in ensuring their and their kins’ well-being and survival.
2. Division of labor: The caste system, with its division of labor and specialization of knowledge, fostered a unique system of vocational skills. Each family had the opportunity to perfect and improve their skills, passing them down through generations. The elders served as teachers, imparting their knowledge to the younger members, creating a cycle of learning and growth.
3. Bonds of Brotherhood: The caste system contributed to the development of caste-based guilds in the urban areas, which acted like workers’ unions and financial and professional institutions. They united people under a common banner with a common purpose to safeguard their interests. At the same time, they provided the members with some kind of social insurance against unfair competition and unjust exploitation. The guilds ensured fair wages to their members, loaned them money like today’s banks and cooperative institutions, and helped the unemployed find work, in addition to promoting work ethics and higher standards of performance among their members. In the rural areas, the caste system brought together people of the same caste and helped them deal with common problems with understanding and cooperation. It promoted unity, solidarity, and fraternity among them, strengthening the bonds of their relationships through marriage, friendship, and other forms of social and professional interaction.
4. Purity of lineages: Because of the rigid rules regarding marriage and relations with other castes and the prohibition of marriages within the same gotras, the hereditary caste system helped people maintain the purity of their lineages and allegiances to their ancestry and family traditions. It also helped preserve and reinforce many ancient beliefs and practices and ensured the continuation of Hinduism for millenniums despite foreign invasions and oppressive regimes.
5. Unity in diversity: The caste system did not just ensure the division of labor or the supply of a committed and loyal workforce. While it acknowledged birth-related inequalities and karma-based existential problems, it also emphasized the underlying unity of all the castes, their connection to one source, God himself, and their divine nature as the creations and integral parts of one Universal Being. The original purpose of the caste system, at least in theory, was not to exploit the weaker castes but to establish social order, regulate the affairs of the people, and preserve the sacred law (Dharma) based on certain eternal principles and human values acknowledging diversity and inequality as the inherent properties of Nature. God was the protector of this order, and as his true representatives on earth, it was also the responsibility of human beings to perform their obligatory duties or what is expected of them to ensure order and regularity and prevent the world from falling into chaos and unrest due to intermixture and confusion of castes or the ascendence of evil.

Disadvantages

Following are some of the disadvantages of the caste system

1. Exploitation of the Weak: The Hindu caste system had inherent weaknesses that rendered it unjust and exploitative over time, giving rise to social injustices, disabilities, and inequalities among a vast majority of people whom it summarily declared as inferior, unfit, and unqualified to live freely and realize their dreams and desires. Its rigidity and oppressive enforcement in the name of God, religion, and tradition exposed the weaker sections of society to unjust exploitation by the socially and politically privileged groups for their good.
2. Disunity and division of loyalties: The caste system divided Indian society vertically and horizontally into several groups and bred distrust and resentment. It promoted disunity, distrust, narrowmindedness, and caste prejudices among them and weakened their desire to work together for the common good.
3. Foreign domination: The caste system and the division it fostered weakened people's resolve to stand united against foreign invasions and oppressive regimes. The able-bodied working class, traditionally designated as Sudras, was condemned to serve the landed gentry, royalty, and the aristocracy as indentured agricultural laborers reserved for manual labor and menial jobs. In another world and time, they could have been employed better in the military and administrative duties to deal with the invading armies and protect them and the faith from threats they posed. By relegating the physically strong population to manual work and subservience and ignoring them in important matters and challenging tasks, the Hindu rulers deprived themselves of a strong physical force to defend themselves and their empires against foreign aggression. It is interesting to note that the Muslim rulers and the Britishers, who occupied India, recruited people of all castes for their military units and, with their help, were able to defeat the local rulers and establish their rule for centuries.
4. Preferential Treatment: The caste system was based on birth and heredity rather than individual talent and vocational choice. This created many disabilities for talented people belonging to the lower castes. The story of Ekalavya in the Mahabharata is a good example of how the system invented and justified a value system and conventional beliefs and practices that protected and guaranteed the interests of privileged classes while leaving the lower castes to fend for themselves and remaining at their mercy. Talented people from the lower strata of society were ignored or sidelined since they either posed a threat to the stability of the social structure and its continuity or were discarded by the system as unfit and unqualified. The discrimination was justified on the grounds of Dharma and God’s eternal laws. This biased approach stunted the growth of the nation and contributed to its downfall over time.
5. Political and military implications: The caste system placed foreigners on par with the untouchables and prevented a healthy exchange of knowledge and ideas. Native people loathed the idea of going to foreign lands or crossing the oceans. This worked to the disadvantage of Indians in general and the armies in particular, as it isolated people from the rest of the world and prevented them from knowing about the invading foreigners, their strategic moves and countermoves, and methods of warfare. The caste system also divided Indian soldiers on caste lines and created groups within groups, making coordination a difficult task for the army generals.
6. Conversion to other religions: The caste system indirectly contributed to the decline of the Hindu religion as many people belonging to the lower castes were effortlessly converted to other religions. Through conversions, the missionaries offered an easy and convenient escape from centuries of social indignities and inequalities associated with their castes and social backgrounds. Buddhism, Christianity, and Islam thrived in India on the weaknesses of Hinduism rather than their own merits. Speaking of this subject, Swami Vivekananda commented in the following words, "Was there ever a sillier thing before in the world than what I saw in ..…? The poor Pariah is not allowed to pass through the same street as the high-caste man, but if he changes his name to a hodge-podge English name, it is all right; or to a Mohammedan name, it is all right. What inference would you draw except that these …. are all lunatics, their homes so many lunatic asylums, and that they are to be treated with derision by every race in India until they mend their manners and know better."
7. Instrument of oppression: The caste system became an instrument of oppression in the hands of socially privileged castes. Landlords and wealthy merchants exploited the lower castes. They subjected them to inhuman treatment without fear, as the lower castes did not enjoy equal rights nor the confidence of those who enforced the laws.
8. Untouchability: The caste system created a class of individuals who were regarded as untouchables and treated as less than human beings. They were not allowed to enter the cities and villages freely. People of higher castes were advised not to touch them or let their shadows fall on them because the shadows were also treated as sources of defilement. They were not allowed to draw water from the wells or ponds used by the upper castes. In modern times, many untouchables converted to other religions because they saw no hope in sticking with their traditional castes. Among those who did not opt for conversion, the educated ones are its worst critics.
9. Low self-esteem: The caste system lowers the self-esteem of many and makes them feel bad about their social status and caste identity. Since it is based on birth, there is nothing much anyone can do about one's caste other than changing one's religion, a decision that may have other social implications, such as alienation from one's own family, friends, or community, accompanied by feelings of guilt and fear of divine retribution. The caste system is a blistering and festering ancient sore of Hindu society that evokes painful memories and keeps the Hindu society divided forever.

Caste System Current Status

Today, untouchability and discrimination on the basis of caste are unlawful and attract punitive punishment. However, the caste system still exerts its influence and sways the minds of many. Caste identities and discrimination still exist, although people may not explicitly express or display them. In this regard, the following points are worth noting.

1. Inter-caste marriages are not approved or accepted in many families, especially those of higher castes. The resistance is greater if the bride belongs to a higher caste and the groom comes from a lower caste. Honor killings are also reported in some cases.
2. Caste-based organizations and associations still exist in India and play a crucial role in perpetuating the idea of caste. They play an important role in preserving caste rules and in garnering votes from the community during local and national elections.
3. Upper-caste people are unhappy with the government's reservation policy, and their grievances are not entirely unfounded. Some castes demand the government recognize them as scheduled castes or tribes and, from time to time, resort to violent agitation over the issue.
4. Caste conflicts often lead to violence and bloodshed in rural areas and college campuses.
5. In many educational institutions, students tend to group themselves on the basis of castes, often with the tacit connivance of teaching faculty and local politicians. A similar trend is often noticeable in workplaces. Scheduled caste and tribe unions and organizations often put undue pressure on the government and management using their protected status. Frivolous complaints of discrimination and bogus criminal cases against officers of higher castes to settle some past scores are not unknown.
6. Caste is a powerful factor in Indian politics. In many states, political parties are identified based on the dominant castes that support them. During general elections, many politicians appeal to the baser instincts of people using caste affiliations. They shamelessly and clandestinely seek votes in the name of caste.
7. Caste-based discrimination is practiced in many Hindu temples, especially in the rural areas. Most temples, including the popular ones managed by government officials, do not recruit people other than Brahmanas for priestly duties. The priesthood continues to be an exclusive privilege of the Brahmanas, and no noticeable effort has been made to encourage others to study the Vedas and undertake priestly duties, except perhaps in Shaivism.
8. Discrimination against the lower castes continues in several places, and the local police often do not register cases reported by them for crimes against them. There are still places where lower caste people are not allowed to draw drinking water from the wells used by the higher castes and where lower castes are not allowed to cremate the bodies of the deceased members of their families.
9. The lower caste people are still employed in many places to perform menial and degrading jobs, which the higher caste people disdain to perform. Many also dislike the idea of working under them or receiving instructions from them.

Conclusion

Being born into an upper-caste family definitely has many advantages. This is especially true in rural communities where old cultural values persist and exert their influence. Indians who visit foreign countries or live there often complain about how the local communities treat them due to their looks, accents, or cultural norms. That is also true. However, they should remember that people from the lower rungs of society in India also face similar predicaments. A vast number of people across the whole country and from all wakes of life exhibit a far greater obsession with accent, skin color, and caste. Indian films exemplify it by going to extremes to create an alternate reality in which mostly fair-skinned actors play pivotal roles and star as cultural symbols. Many actors have to hide their true skin color to appear acceptable and desirable.

The country's democracy, which is the largest in the world and hugely successful, is also not free from its influence. One may even call it a castocracy. Especially during elections, caste distinctions come to the fore when people vote for leaders who are chosen on caste lines and who flaunt their caste affiliations openly to ensure their electoral chances. The Indian political parties formulate their strategies to keep their voter bases along caste lines. The elite classes are also not free from its pervasive influence. Countless Hindu scholars, especially those with an orthodox mindset, justify the Hindu caste system, quoting references from the scriptures, ignoring that they could be convenient interpolations of prejudiced scholars of bygone eras in otherwise sacred lore to justify and perpetuate an unjust social system that guaranteed their dominance using the very authority of God or the tradition.

The caste system might have served its purpose in ancient times. However, it does not fit into the values and principles of modern times, such as democracy, fundamental rights, individual freedom, equality, and non-discrimination. It does not uphold the values of modern Hinduism either, such as tolerance and universal brotherhood. It does not validate the concept that all life is a sacred expression of divine will and energy. Followers and upholders of Hinduism cannot and should not rationalize the caste system if they want to maintain the credibility of Hinduism as a world religion that can accommodate people of all nations, races, and backgrounds.

Scholars tend to rationalize the caste system by quoting the Purushasukta and the Bhagavadgita. They ignore the fact that these verses contradict the very core values of Hinduism emphasized in the same texts and present a worldview that is a negation of Hinduism. It would be a great service to the cause of Hinduism if the present-day Vedic teachers identify bright children from the lower castes and start teaching them the Vedas and the Upanishads and allow them to serve God in the temples of India. The strength of Christianity stems from dedicated missionaries who come from all sections of society. The weakness of Hinduism and Hindu society is the caste system, which divides people into divergent and competing groups and keeps them apart.

If the caste system is allowed to prevail, it would do much greater damage to Hinduism than any other disruptive force we can imagine. We have already seen its negative impact. If Hinduism lost millions of its followers to other religions and continues to lose so, it is because the lower castes were pushed to the wall and made to feel bad about themselves. It is time we consign the ancient law books such as Manusmriti to the dustbins of history and move forward to establish an egalitarian society based upon a firm ethical and spiritual foundation upon which Hinduism can brace itself to meet the challenges of the coming times and appeal to the curious and advanced minds of the future generations.

Footnotes

1. A twice-born man who knowingly eats mushrooms, a village-pig, garlic, a village-cock, onions, or leeks, will become an outcast. (5:14)

A Brahmana who neither performs austerities nor studies the Veda, yet delights in accepting gifts, sinks with the (donor into hell), just as (he who attempts to cross over in) a boat made of stone (is submerged) in the water. (4.190)

2. A Brahmana who takes a Sudra wife to his bed, will (after death) sink into hell; if he begets a child by her, he will lose the rank of a Brahmana. (Manusmriti: Ch3:17)

3. Let (the first part of) a Brahmana's name (denote something) auspicious, a Kshatriya's be connected with power, and a Vaisya's with wealth, but a Sudra's (express something) contemptible. (Manusmriti: Ch2:31)

4. Manusmriti Chapter 7:35

5. Manusmriti Chapter 7:14

6. It is said that the Dravidians or those who spoke Dravidian languages and probably lived in the Indus valley and present day Rajasthan before migrating eastwards and southwards due to climatic changes, practiced some form of caste system based on vocation which was later taken up by the Vedic priests as the model along with the integration of traditions such as Vaishnavism, Saivism and Tantrism.

7. He is also considered to be the progenitor of the Andhras of the south.

8. Prof K.p. Jayaswal

9. According to H.G. Rawlinson, caste is a Portuguese word meaning purity of race.

10. The Satavahanas, who ruled in the early Christian era, patronized Brahmanism and contributed greatly to the revival of Brahmanism in southern and central India. Their empire extended from the river Krishna in the south to Malwa and Kathiawar in the north and also included large parts of present day Maharashtra and some parts of Gujarat and Orissa

11. The Purusha Sukta verses dealing with the creation of castes is reproduced below

When they divided the Purusha how many portions did they make?
What do they call his mouth, his arms? What do they call his thighs and feet?

The Brahman was his mouth, of both his arms was the Rajanya made.
His thigh became the Vaisya, from his feet the Sudra was Produced.

12. Bhagavadgita Ch6:42

13. Bhagavadgita Ch4:14

14. Fahien mentioned that when the Chandalas entered a city or a street they were required to strike a price of wood to warn others of their coming so that people moving in the streets would not be polluted by their contact.