Caste system in India
The caste system in India is the paradigmatic ethnographic instance of social classification based on castes. It has its origins in ancient India, and was transformed by various ruling elites in medieval, early-modern, and modern India, especially in the aftermath of the collapse of the Mughal Empire and the establishment of the British Raj.[1][2][3][4] It is today the basis of affirmative action programmes in India as enforced through its constitution.[5] The caste system consists of two different concepts, varna and jati, which may be regarded as different levels of analysis of this system.
This article is about socio-political stratification in Indian society. For socio-religious Hindu stratification, see Varna (Hinduism).
The caste system as it exists today is thought to be the result of developments during the collapse of the Mughal era and the rise of the British colonial government in India.[1][6][7] The British Raj furthered this development, making rigid caste organisation a central mechanism of administration.[6] Between 1860 and 1920, the British incorporated the Indian caste system into their system of governance, granting administrative jobs and senior appointments only to Christians and people belonging to certain castes.[8] Social unrest during the 1920s led to a change in this policy.[9] Caste was no longer used by the colonial authority to functionally organize civil society. This reflected changes in administrative practices, understandings of expertise, and the rise of new European scholarly institutions.[10] After the 1920s, the colonial administration began a policy of positive discrimination by reserving a certain percentage of government jobs for the lower castes. In 1948, negative discrimination on the basis of caste was banned by law and further enshrined in the Indian constitution in 1950;[11] however, the system continues to be practiced in parts of India.[5] There are 3,000 castes and 25,000 sub-castes in India, each related to a specific occupation.[12]
Caste-based differences have also been practised in other regions and religions in the Indian subcontinent, like Nepalese Buddhism,[13] Christianity, Islam, Judaism and Sikhism.[14] It has been challenged by many reformist Hindu movements,[15] Sikhism, Christianity,[14] and present-day Neo Buddhism.[16] With Indian influences, the caste system is also practiced in Bali.[17]
After achieving independence in 1947, India enacted many affirmative action policies for the upliftment of historically marginalized groups as enforced through its constitution. These policies included reserving a quota of places for these groups in higher education and government employment.
History
Early Vedic period (1500-1000 BCE)
During the early Vedic period in northern India, when the Rigveda was composed (1500-1200 BC), there were only two varnas in the Vedic society: arya varna and dasa varna. The distinction originally arose from tribal divisions.[92] The Vedic people were Indo-European-speaking tribes who migrated over a period of several centuries into northern South Asia from the Bactria-Margiana,[93] and mixed with the "indigenous Dravidic-speaking populations," but regarded themselves as superior.[94] The Vedic tribes regarded themselves as arya (the noble ones) and the rival tribes were called dasa, dasyu and pani. The dasas were frequent allies of the Aryan tribes, and they were probably assimilated into the Aryan society, giving rise to a class distinction.[92] Many dasas were, however, in a servile position, giving rise to the eventual meaning of dasa as servant or slave.[95]
The Rigvedic society was not distinguished by occupations. Many husbandmen and artisans practised a number of crafts. The chariot-maker (rathakara) and metal worker (karmara) enjoyed positions of importance and no stigma was attached to them. Similar observations hold for carpenters, tanners, weavers and others.[96]
Towards the end of the Atharvaveda period, new class distinctions emerged. The erstwhile dasas are renamed Shudras, probably to distinguish them from the new meaning of dasa as slave. The aryas are renamed vis or Vaishya (meaning the members of the tribe) and the new elite classes of Brahmins (priests) and Kshatriyas (warriors) are designated as new varnas. The Shudras were not only the erstwhile dasas but also included the aboriginal tribes that were assimilated into the Aryan society as it expanded into Gangetic settlements.[97] This class-distinction is still reflected in the fact that the upper castes have a higher genetic affinity to Europeans, while the lower castes are more similar to Asians.[94][98][93]
There is no evidence of restrictions regarding food and marriage during the Vedic period.[99] According to Moorjani et al. (2013), co-authored by Reich, extensive admixture took place between 2200 BCE and 100 CE (4200 to 1900 before present), whereafter India shifted to "a region in which mixture was rare."[100][101][102] In southern India, endogamy may have set in a 1000 years earlier.[note 1]
Later Vedic period (1000–600 BC)
In an early Upanishad, Shudra is referred to as Pūşan or nourisher, suggesting that Shudras were the tillers of the soil.[103] But soon afterwards, Shudras are not counted among the tax-payers and they are said to be given away along with the land when it is gifted.[104] The majority of the artisans were also reduced to the position of Shudras, but there is no contempt indicated for their work.[105] The Brahmins and the Kshatriyas are given a special position in the rituals, distinguishing them from both the Vaishyas and the Shudras.[106] The Vaishya is said to be "oppressed at will" and the Shudra "beaten at will."[107]
Second urbanisation (500–200 BC)
Knowledge of this period is supplemented by Pali Buddhist texts. Whereas the Brahmanical texts speak of the four-fold varna system, the Buddhist texts present an alternative picture of the society, stratified along the lines of jati, kula and occupation. It is likely that the varna system, while being a part of the Brahmanical ideology, was not practically operative in the society.[108] In the Buddhist texts, Brahmin and Kshatriya are described as jatis rather than varnas. They were in fact the jatis of high rank. The jatis of low rank were mentioned as chandala and occupational classes like bamboo weavers, hunters, chariot-makers and sweepers. The concept of kulas was broadly similar. Along with Brahmins and Kshatriyas, a class called gahapatis (literally householders, but effectively propertied classes) was also included among high kulas.[109] The people of high kulas were engaged in occupations of high rank, viz., agriculture, trade, cattle-keeping, computing, accounting and writing, and those of low kulas were engaged in low-ranked occupations such as basket-weaving and sweeping. The gahapatis were an economic class of land-holding agriculturists, who employed dasa-kammakaras (slaves and hired labourers) to work on the land. The gahapatis were the primary taxpayers of the state. This class was apparently not defined by birth, but by individual economic growth.[110]
While there was an alignment between kulas and occupations at least at the high and low ends, there was no strict linkage between class/caste and occupation, especially among those in the middle range. Many occupations listed such as accounting and writing were not linked to jatis.[111]
Peter Masefield, in his review of caste in India, states that anyone could in principle perform any profession. The texts state that the Brahmin took food from anyone, suggesting that strictures of commensality were as yet unknown.[112] The Nikaya texts also imply that endogamy was not mandated.[113]
The contestations of the period are also evident from the texts describing dialogues of Buddha with the Brahmins. The Brahmins maintain their divinely ordained superiority and assert their right to draw service from the lower orders. Buddha responds by pointing out the basic facts of biological birth common to all men and asserts that the ability to draw service is obtained economically, not by divine right. Using the example of the northwest of the subcontinent, Buddha points out that aryas could become dasas and vice versa. This form of social mobility was endorsed by Buddha.[114]
Apartheid and discrimination
The maltreatment of Dalits in India has been described by Anand Teltumbde, Gopal Guru and others as "India's hidden apartheid".[217][309][310] Critics of the accusations point to substantial improvements in the position of Dalits in post-independence India, consequent to the strict implementation of the rights and privileges enshrined in the Constitution of India, as implemented by the Protection of Civil rights Act, 1955.[311] They also argue that the practise had disappeared in urban public life.[312]
Recent research by Naveen Bharathi, Deepak Malghan and Andaleeb Rahman found that "the extent of intra-village segregation in Karnataka is greater than the local black-white segregation in the American South that continues to influence residential patterns to this day." They claim that this finding agrees with previous ethnographic research that found that residential space in rural India is segregated along caste lines.[313][314][315]
Sociologists Kevin Reilly, Stephen Kaufman and Angela Bodino, while critical of caste system, conclude that modern India does not practice apartheid since there is no state-sanctioned discrimination.[316] They write that casteism in India is presently "not apartheid. In fact, untouchables, as well as tribal people and members of the lowest castes in India benefit from broad affirmative action programmes and are enjoying greater political power."[317]
A hypothesis that caste amounts to race has been rejected by some scholars.[318][319][320] Ambedkar, for example, wrote that "The Brahmin of Punjab is racially of the same stock as the Chamar of Punjab. The Caste system does not demarcate racial division. The Caste system is a social division of people of the same race."[321] Various sociologists, anthropologists and historians have rejected the racial origins and racial emphasis of caste and consider the idea to be one that has purely political and economic undertones. Beteille writes that "the Scheduled Castes of India taken together are no more a race than are the Brahmins taken together. Every social group cannot be regarded as a race simply because we want to protect it against prejudice and discrimination",[320] and that the 2001 Durban conference on racism hosted by the U.N. is "turning its back on established scientific opinion".[320]
In popular culture
In literature
Mulk Raj Anand's debut novel, Untouchable (1935), is based on the theme of untouchability. The debut novel of Arundhati Roy, The God of Small Things (1997), also has themes surrounding the caste system across religions. A lawyer named Sabu Thomas filed a petition to have the book published without the last chapter, which had graphic description of sexual acts between members of different castes. Thomas claimed the alleged obscenity in the last chapter deeply hurts the Syrian Christian community, the basis of the novel.[322]
In film
The Hindi film Achhut Kannya (Untouchable Maiden, 1936), starring Ashok Kumar and Devika Rani, was an early reformist film.[323] Since then, there are a variety of films focusing on caste discrimination and the depiction of inter-caste relations, such as Sujata (1959) and Ankur (1974).[324] The largest swell of caste-focused films with lower-caste representation occurred from the 1960s until 1990, during the peak of parallel cinema. However, since the 1990s, there is a substantial disparity in caste representation in film due to the rise of upper-caste protagonists, casting, and participation in the industry. This can be traced to the beginning of the film industry, which was pioneered by a Brahmin, Dadasaheb Phalke; since then, while Dalits tried to enter the industry, they were often cast in side roles or as villains.[324]
In the 21st century, there are several critically acclaimed regional films known for strong caste representation. Sairat (2016) and Fandry (2013) are both Marathi-language films about inter-caste romance and discrimination and are respected for their Dalit direction and honest depiction of lower-caste experiences.[325][326] Pariyerum Perumal (2018) is a Tamil film on caste violence, and Kabali (2016) is an action film starring Rajinikanth, both directed by Dalit filmmaker Pa. Ranjith.[325]
Unlike regional films, Hindi films are still dominated by upper-caste filmmakers and stories, even when they attempt to discuss caste discrimination. Article 15 (2019) is a crime thriller that stars a Brahmin hero who helps Dalit villagers by investigating the murder of two Dalit girls, and works to erase caste discrimination in the police system. It was a box-office hit but is criticized for its upper-caste casting and victimization of Dalits.[327]