Cow and casteism

Why is cow sacred, but buffalo is not? I always wondered about this as a kid. Most readers may know that the cow is considered a sacred animal in India and while beef is consumed and sold in some parts of India, it is banned in most states, and some Muslims have been attacked and mob lynched merely due to a suspicion of possessing beef, especially in northern and western parts of India. Growing up in a cow-worshipping society, I always wondered why cows but not buffalo, goats, sheep, or any other milk-giving animal have the same holy status. What is so special about cows that is not with buffalos? Both give milk and dung that have the same uses and meats of both can be sold as beef. The only difference is buffaloes are always black in color whereas cows are of different colors mostly shades of white. I strongly feel that their color and looks are the major reasons why the cow is holy and buffalo is not, definitely, their utilities as agricultural animals have no bearing on this. I feel casteism can be considered as the root of this. It seems the cow belongs to the upper case and the buffalo belongs to the lower caste, therefore, one is holy and the other is not. 

Caste is an integral part of Indian society, this is true even today, rather, one can see the resurgence of case-based identity. Casteism differentiates and discriminates against people based on their birth. Some people are considered superior to others just because of their birth in families belonging to certain castes. There are phrases like "upper caste" and "lower caste" freely used in day-to-day conversations. This casteism has allowed the cows to get holy status whereas buffaloes have no such status. This is a simple case of casteism, the most common social discrimination method in India, the same as racism in other parts of the world. Buffaloes are victims of casteism or racism and cows are beneficiaries of this discrimination.  

Thank you for reading and please share your views on this topic. 

© Vinay Thakur, All rights reserved, Vinay can be reached at thevinay2022@gmail.com 

Essentialism and intersectionality

I recently came across these two terms, "essentialism" and "intersectionality," while listening to the podcast by Cece Xie. The reason I felt excited about these two phrases is that I learned some new things from them. I did not know we get completely different perspectives on the same issue when we look through the prism of essentialism versus intersectionality. The difference is not subtle, and this just blew my mind away. I always feel excited when some of my notions are challenged with something better, something that teaches me about a different aspect of that issue that I never thought about. This is one such instance. 

We have the tendency to categorize issues and problems based on gender, race, caste, nationality, age, or any other differentiating factors and try to find solutions for them. Sometimes this approach works, but not always. Most of the time, the issues are more complex than just related to race, gender, age, caste, or nationality. Essentialism is when we consider each of these differentials separately and assume that the problem associated with race is the same across that race irrespective of gender, age, or nationality. When the approach involving essentialism does not give us the complete picture, but rather misguides us, we must think about intersectionality. Intersectionality offers us a better perspective on most issues. Many of the social issues are complex, they involve a mix of race, gender, nationality, age, and a few other factors. For example, race-related problems are different for black men compared to black women; the issue of maternity and paternity leave may result in different challenges for colored parents compared to white parents, especially mothers. Just because a company hires women does not mean women from minorities are also hired. Just because a company hires minorities does not mean they also hire women from minorities, maybe only men from minorities get hired. One can cite many examples where intersectionality gives us a better perspective on the issues compared to essentialism. 

I recommend everyone to read about intersectionality and educate themselves to get a better perspective of the challenges faced by our society. This will not only make us more sensitive towards these issues but also make us well-equipped to come up with effective solutions compared to what we have. 

Thank you for reading and please share your views on this topic. 

© Vinay Thakur, All rights reserved, Vinay can be reached at thevinay2022@gmail.com

The myth of the "varna system"

If anyone has ever participated in a discussion related to the caste system and casteism in India, then they know what is meant by "varna system." The basic argument goes like this, the current caste system which is as disgusting as racism is not the original system, the original one, the Varna system was a much better and smart idea. Casteism, where one gets discriminated against just because of the family in which they are born is impossible to defend, but it still exists, people just label it as a derivation of the Varna system. The original system, the varna system divided society into four broad categories. Varna (वर्ण) was considered to be a noble, well-intended, flexible, efficient, and just system that was designed for the smooth functioning of a society. The blame for spoiling the original idea is put on the invaders by many supporters of the Varna system. It seems the invaders messed up that system which resulted in horrendous caste-based practices like untouchability. The argument is that the horrendous caste system is what's in practice, not the so-called original well-intended varna system, and that too even after India celebrated its 70th Independence Day a couple of years back. Some people blame it on the British, some on the Mughals, but I have not found a person who can accept that the original system itself was prone to exploitation and misuse, and it never worked as people claim it to work for any significant period of Indian history.

Now, why I am blaming the concept of the varna system for the current casteism in India? Aren't all societies have some social class or divisions based on economic status? Yes, they do, but none of them have resulted in something as ugly as the caste system in India and none of them justify such division as a well-intended and genius creation for the smooth functioning of a society. I always ask people who argue that the Varna system was a brilliant idea and it was a flexible arrangement that allowed people to move from one Varna to another based on their education and profession to give me a single example of a period of history when this system was functional like this in the real world. Even in mythological epics like Ramayana and Mahabharata, all we see is the rigid caste system, where people get a birthright to become a king or queen just based on the family in which they were born not by their virtues or education. The point to be noted is, that all these epics were written well before invaders even knew about India. So, tragically proponents of the varna system can't blame invaders for polluting or manipulating these books. People who really bothered to study or read about the varna system might cite some example of some Shudra king and claim that it was because of the varna system that a Shudra could become a king. Shudra was supposed to be the lowest strata of the four layers of the Varna-based society (Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, and Shudras). Ironically they still address that king as a Shudra king and claim that his becoming a king shows that the system was flexible. If the system was flexible, there would have been many more examples of this, not just a few exceptions. There are always some exceptions in any society who break the conventional ranks and achieve something extraordinary, not because society encourages it, but because they achieve great things despite society being hostile towards them. If any reader knows about any time period from the ancient history of Indian civilization when this Varna system was at work as people claim it to be, I am interested to know about it, please share the factual data with references. It will give me another perspective to analyze what went wrong that the Varna system got converted into a caste system and if the original system was so great why people did not revert back to it.

According to me, the original system is as flawed as the caste system. As I said the division of society based on economic status and profession is not something new. It happens on its own and people do move from one economic layer to another based on their income, education, inheritance, and other things. This is not a system but just a way how people feel comfortable to associating with a group of people to whom they relate most. Rather, to make such an association into some kind of a system is a horrendous idea. It is like encouraging and legitimizing segregation, and this is why I feel the Varna system, like a caste system, was wrong. Once again, if anyone thinks I am wrong, please provide factual evidence so that I can correct myself. I hope the caste system goes away. It has been diluted in certain parts of India due to economic progress, but in general, it is still strong and very much present in most parts of India. The ways and methods that people use to discriminate based on caste have evolved, but sadly it still exists. I hope that defenders of the Varna system work to eradicate the caste system instead of wasting their energy to defend the system that never delivered its promise.

Thanks for reading and please share your opinion about this topic. 

Dr. Ambedkar - A visionary whose vision India failed to follow

Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar was the first Law and Justice Minister of independent India. However, this description is not enough to describe the greatness of this man. He was not only a scholar, a very well-read and informed person, but also a social reformer, and is known for his legendary work in the area of the equal rights movement for untouchables (known as Dalits) of India. Dr. Ambedkar was a born Dalit, so he knew firsthand what it meant to live as a Dalit person in Indian society. His education and intelligence gave him a unique perspective towards the social and political environment of Indian society of that time. He used his experience and knowledge to fight for equal rights for all people who were struggling because of years of discriminatory traditions. He used each and every platform available to him to highlight the issue of untouchability and even fought with leaders like Mahatma Gandhi for their political rights. Many books and articles that he wrote about the religion or the social condition of untouchables or about the Indian constitution are very informative. Anyone interested in any of these subjects or interested in knowing more about Dr. Ambedkar should read his books and articles or listen to his speeches. Without reading his work it is not possible to understand the greatness of this scholar, political leader, and greatest social reformer of India.

He was also a chairman of the constitution drafting committee, even though the constitution was drafted with the help of various scholars who served as members of that committee, Dr. Ambedkar is given credit for various constitutional provisions as he was the chairman of the committee. He wrote extensively about his vision related to social reforms in India, which were necessary to bring required social change for the upliftment of socially backward sections of society. If we look at the current political and social environment of India then we can see that there is definitely some social change that he envisioned. We should credit him for initiating it, but still, there is a lot of work that is required to implement the social reforms that he envisioned as Indian society still suffers from evils like casteism and gender discrimination. He fought against both these evils, but sadly people claiming his legacy are indifferent towards his ideals. The worst part is all current political parties and their leaders are only interested in using his image as a political tool to garner votes or appease a certain section of society, but none of them are really interested in implementing his real vision. Even political parties who claim to represent backward sections of society are not totally honest to implement the vision and ideas of this man whose name they use as if they own him. There is no doubt that the political class of India has failed to grasp the real essence of social reforms that Ambedkar imagined. Maybe they all are doing this purposely, as they all are busy using his name and image to suit their political gains. Even the social class for which he fought till the end of his life failed to understand his message. Most of them worship him like God, without following his message. Most Indians failed to follow his vision. People like Ambedkar or for that matter any visionary personality should not be converted into a demigod. It is the worst thing their supporters can do to them. Whenever people do this, they create a cult, where the person is worshipped but not studied or critically analyzed and this results in the tragic end of all good ideas of that person. Tragically this is happening in India with people like Dr. Ambedkar, Mahatma Gandhi, and others.

For me, Dr. Ambedkar was a great scholar and social reformer. He was an expert in many fields like economics, constitutional matters, religious studies, etc. I learned many things by reading his articles which are now available online. I hope people look at his work and study about him rather than garlanding his photos and erecting his statues. Symbols have their own place and importance in any society, but mere symbolism without any substantial action is useless. Understanding his ideas and discussing them objectively will be the greatest tribute to this scholar. I am sure he would have loved to see his ideas being used rather than his images or statues. So, let's discuss the issues that he raised, let's debate about them, and try to find solutions rather than making him and his ideas a political weapon.

Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic.

Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar - Most used but least understood political and social icon of India

April 14th, 2015 was the 124th birth anniversary of one of the great thinkers of modern India, Dr. Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar, also known as Babasaheb. I don't think I need to introduce him to anyone from India, but for others who don't know him, he is considered a great political and social leader who started an awareness campaign and mass movement among suppressed classes of India (mostly Dalits) for their equal rights and social upliftment, especially his work to eradicate the social evil of untouchability. His contribution towards the social upliftment of the suppressed classes of Indian society is more than any other leader of his time. His name and image are used by almost all political parties in India to reap political benefits, but hardly do they bother to read his books, understand his views, and follow his advice. Even political parties who claim to carry on his legacy lack the clarity of thought and level of his thinking that he displayed almost six to seven decades back.

Babasaheb was a Maharashtrian and because I was born and went to school in that state, I was introduced to him at a very early age as there were lessons about him in our school textbooks. I was impressed by his writings and personality in my teenage years mainly because of his rebellious nature. He was not scared to take on well-established traditions, customs, or ideas. He challenged them not just out of emotional rage but argued rationally, with logic, and by producing a lot of evidence to support his argument, which is a very rare thing even today in our political class. Rarely do we see such a spirit of scholarship and rational thinking now not only in a political class but across the board. I think he was one of the greatest thinkers that India ever produced who was way ahead of his times. Unfortunately, his teachings and thoughts didn't get the importance that they deserved in Indian social and political circles, maybe because even his so-called followers were not willing to accept many things that he wrote or said. His name and his image are reduced to tokenism to show empathy and sympathy towards a particular class of Indian society. No doubt that Babasaheb cared a lot about the situation of Dalits in Indian society, he was against casteism and the practice of untouchability which was rampant during that time (unfortunately, it still exists in one form or another). He fought really hard for their rights but to brand him only as a Dalit leader is a gross injustice to the intellect and scholarship of this great man. His scholarly work covers various aspects of social and political life, he was a very well-read and well-educated person. One should read his books and articles to understand how well-read he was and how much research he did to question many discriminatory practices that were socially accepted back then. Sadly, after his death, there was a big leadership vacuum and there was no capable leader of his caliber to fill that vacuum. That vacuum was filled by many political parties who claimed to be caretakers of the suppressed classes of Indian society, they used this class as a vote bank for years, but none of them matched the intellect and conviction of Babasaheb. There is no doubt that the policy of reservation and other social welfare schemes has brought some change in the social and economic status of these communities but still lot more work needs to be done.

If you roam around India, you will see many statues of Dr. Ambedkar and many streets named after him. His name is well known, and he is used by all political parties to exploit political gains. I feel Ambedkar's name is used more than Gandhi's name for political gains. Even though he is one of the most used political icons in Indian politics, he is least understood. When I look at the reason why they ignore his writings or messages, I find it is not because he was not very clear about what he thought about Hinduism, casteism, or reservation, but because it is very inconvenient for them to follow his advice. Even his so-called followers don't care to read his books and follow most of the things recommended by him. It is ironic to see that despite being one of the most used political icons in India his teachings are least followed. I hope people who take his name day and night and all political parties who claim to carry on his legacy at least make some serious efforts to read his writings and reflect on them. If they really care about Babasaheb, then they should show courage to discuss all the issues raised by him openly, they should dare to question the things which he dared to question. Many things that he questioned are still in practice, celebrating his birth anniversary is a great thing, and tokenism has its own importance in our society and culture, but if we really want to honor this great man, then we need to discuss and debate all issues which he raised in his books and articles. If we can remove the evil of casteism from Indian society, it will be a real tribute to this man.

Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic.

[Copyright: Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing]

Links:
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B._R._Ambedkar
2. प्राइम टाइम : बाबा साहब अंबेडकर का लोक रूप

Casteism and ME

I have expressed many times my dislike for casteism. I started hating this system when I saw some people being discriminated against or treated as inferiors just because they were born into a particular caste. I couldn't understand the fact how a family in which a person is born, on which a person has no control can decide the social status of a person for the rest of his/her life? None of us can choose our biological parents or family. We are born randomly in some families by the act of reproduction, and based on that our caste and religion are decided. One can change that legally but for the most, they are branded based on which family or parents they are born to, and this tag sticks to them for the rest of their lives as per the current system. I was trying to remember the day when I came to know about my own caste (sometimes called Jati), what effect it had on me and what was my reaction to it.

I have to travel deep down in my memory lane to recollect that instance. As far as I can trace my memory I think I was in 3rd or 4th grade and one day I don't know why or for what reason some teacher in my school decided to ask everyone in our class their caste, most kids knew what caste they belong but I was among few who didn't and I was really embarrassed by this. So, I came home and asked my parents what is our caste, they told me it was Thakur, which is also my last name, but then I had doubts about why other people have different last names than their caste name, then my dad explained that this particular last name is also used as caste name in northern parts of India (from where my family originally belongs) and this comes under warrior section of varna system (Kshatriya). I was relieved to know that our caste was not at the bottom of that hierarchical system, it was a big relief for me at that time. Over time, I was also told by various people around me that I should be really proud of my caste as we have a long history of brave warriors and great rulers. Actually, all this information had some effect on me, suddenly I started looking at people around me from the angle to which caste they belong, whether they were from Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya, or Shudra varna? This might sound very disgusting and racist but that's how it was when I became aware of my own caste and believed in that system. I started making fun of some friends who belonged to some other castes and were physically weaker than me (so I knew they could not beat me for teasing them). I even laughed at some because they could not fight a war and their ancestors were not brave enough just because they were not Kshatriya. When I look back to these incidents I feel really embarrassed and disgusted. I did all these things as an ignorant and naive kid, but such was the effect of knowing the caste and varna hierarchy on a young child who had no clue about this system just a few days back. Also, I was not the only one doing this, insulting people by mentioning their caste or abusing them using their caste name in a derogatory manner was very common around me, which is why I didn't feel I was doing anything seriously wrong. I think one day I took it too far and one of my friends started crying because of my taunting and he complained to his mom, after knowing why was he crying his mom gave me a big lecture. I don't remember what she said to me but that effectively ended my disgusting stint in casteism. I do not claim that her reprimand enlightened me about the evil of casteism but it had some positive effect. I think it took a few more years and a few more visits to my ancestral village where I saw more open practice of casteism which slowly infused utter dislike and disgust about this system in me. There was also an issue of reservations when I was in college (a kind of affirmative action for socially backward sections of society in India) which brought this issue back in my life where people from the so-called upper caste were at the receiving end. Like many, I also thought I was discriminated against because of my caste in a secular country like India (where everybody is supposed to be equal irrespective of their caste, religion, or gender), and realized whenever someone discriminates based on your caste or race it really hurts.

The post is not about the history of casteism (see the links section of this post for more information about this), but it's about my own personal experience with it and the reason why I dislike it and chose not to follow this system. Many are still ardent followers and defenders of this system, I am sure they must have their own reasons for doing this but I couldn't find any reason to support this system. For me, this is no less than racism and I am totally against it. The system that gives some individuals feelings of superiority just because they are born into a particular family is not acceptable to me. It doesn't matter what was the original intention and how it got corrupted, the current system which is practiced is outrageous, I think it's damaged beyond any repair and should be discarded totally. 

Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic.

[Copyright: Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing]

Links:
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_system_in_India 
2. Casteism: Essay on Casteism in India
3. Vedic Friends Association Position on Casteism

Why I still use my last name

Recently, I was sharing my views in a Facebook discussion related to the caste system in India. I don't support this system and believe that it is a totally flawed and unfair system. It should be banished as soon as possible because it divides people based on their birth. During the discussion, one person who was trying to justify this system using the usual arguments like the original system was flawless and people messed it up, caste is not decided by birth, said that even though some of us are against this system we all still proudly use our surnames (or last names). He also claimed that the reason we still use it is we all feel proud to associate ourselves with the glory of our last name. While many are really proud of their caste and like to flaunt it as some sort of achievement, I am not one of them. Normally, the last name or surname in India indicates so many things (like place of origin, profession of ancestors, caste or office of authority, etc.). Mostly they indicateUnfortunately, in India the last names are used to find the caste of a person. Most people who like to flaunt their last name belong to those so-called upper castes. 

Now some people might think that I am against the use of last names/surnames because they indicate a person's caste. No, not at all, rather, I come from a state in India (Maharashtra) which I think has the largest variety of surnames, some of them are really unique and funny. Nothing wrong with any names, after all, what's there in the name, but its association with a particular caste is the problem. 

For most of us, our name is decided by our parents, and before we know anything about caste or religion that name is printed on all our official documents. Changing our first or last name is not an easy thing. Also, this is just a technical point, one can change the name if one wants. For most Indians, my last name is an easy giveaway to know which caste I belong to, so it's obvious to ask, why I still carry on that tag which represents the system in which I don't believe and don't have any respect. A valid question to ask. Actually, at one point, I thought of removing it, but it's a very complicated process and this can't be an excuse. I also thought what purpose will it serve? I didn't get find any satisfactory reason to get rid of it and that's the reason I still have it. Our identities should not be slaves of our names, I feel my identity will remain the same irrespective of my first name or last name. My last name also acts as a reminder for me, a reminder of the horrible past where this system that offers this unique identity to that name allowed the exploitation of millions of people in the name of caste. So, even though I don't believe in that system, my last name reminds me of that system which still exists and is practiced. I am waiting for the day when the name will cease to have any superior or inferior community status tag associated with it.

Believe it or not, many people still love to talk proudly about their caste and glorify it. There is no surprise that most of these people belong to either Brahmin, warrior (Kshatriya), or vaishya (business class) castes, the so-called top three varnas of the caste system. These three castes are guilty of exploiting castes belonging to the fourth varna, shudra. Shudras (all lower castes including untouchables) were exploited by all other varnas for centuries because of this caste system. They were treated worse than animals (cattle were treated better than them). So, I wonder how can one be proud of a name tag associated with the caste that allowed horrible things to happen for centuries. Not only did people from the upper castes allow it to happen, but they were also actively involved in it, and when Shudras protested against this injustice these so-called upper castes tried their best to crush their protest and preserve this system which gave them an unfair advantage. Fortunately, untouchability doesn't exist in India anymore, at least not in its original form, but the caste system is still present. It plays a very important role in politics and marriages. There were many attempts to eradicate it but it is so deeply rooted in people's minds that they are not willing to let it go.

My last name acts as a good reminder for me that we still need to fight against this system which still exists and divides people based on their birth. For me, the name doesn't have any special meaning.  There is nothing special about my name, I need to give that name a unique identity, and I refuse to associate with any identity that name offers me without my consent and approval. As far as my kids are concerned it's entirely up to them if they want to carry this last name or not. They were not aware of the meaning of this name until I explained it to them, this is because they live in a country where this name doesn't have any obvious meaning. It doesn't suggest or indicate anything to people around except, obviously for Indians. So, my kids are quite neutral about their last name, which is the way it should be. But that's not the case with me, because I know what it means, even though that meaning is not important or has any significance to me, I know very well what it means, and what it indicates. So, it's my conscious decision to keep that name. It is in one way a reminder for me of all autocracies committed against those innocent people in the name of caste.

I wait for the day when my last name will cease to have any association with any caste, they will be like just any other name which is totally personal, not social. People will offer an identity to their names, and the name won't differentiate people based on their birth, the same way a skin color should not decide a person's social status but their own work and efforts decide it. Hopefully, in the near future, names will mean nothing and will not indicate any caste and categorize people. It may or may not happen in my lifetime but I believe I must try to eradicate this system, my fight will continue as long as people know which caste my last name belongs. I want it to become a caste-neutral name, and people like me can do that. Casteism, racism, gender discrimination, or any type of discrimination are social evils, and we all need to take efforts to eradicate them from society as soon as possible.

Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic.

(Copyright: Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing)

Links:

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varna_(Hinduism)

2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_system_in_India

Mr. Nandi, now prove what you said or back off

It seems it is a season of making controversial statements and offering unsolicited advice in India (especially to females about what they should or shouldn't do). In the middle of all other events like fatwas and protests, noted author Mr. Ashis Nandi made a very strange statement at the Jaipur Literature Festival. He suggested that the ranks of the corrupt in India were made up entirely of those from the Other Backward Classes, the Scheduled Castes,  and the Schedule Tribes. As expected, this statement generated an array of reactions from different sections of society some supporting Mr. Nandy and many ridiculing his statement. All these reactions are as expected but I want to point the attention of readers to the statement which he made. I wonder what data and logic he used to come to this conclusion. It sounds very ridiculous and rather than protesting against it or trying to get him arrested, people should prove him wrong and force him to take his statement back.

There is no question that Mr. Nandy has the right to express his opinion and I am not in favor of arresting him or making his life difficult just for making this remark. Any statement like this gets condemned in India, and different sections of society register their reactions differently, but these things never get discussed properly, and freely in an open environment. I think we need to do this. Rather than threatening people, or attacking movie theaters, people should debate over these issues. If it is wrong then prove it wrong, ask for an apology, and make that person accept their mistake, not by force or threats but by logic and rational arguments.

Corruption is very rampant in all sections of public life in India. One can not generalize that people belonging to any particular caste or religion are more involved in corruption compared to others. Outlook magazine published one table (see reference 1) where they listed the caste or religion of people involved in different corruption scandals that were reported in the last decade or so. One can see that there is a lot of variety there, people from all sections of society are part of this great crime. This chart itself is enough to prove Mr. Nandy wrong and if he is a sensible guy he will accept his mistake. There is nothing wrong with making mistakes. We all do it. We all mess up some things at some stage in our lives, but after realizing the mistake, not correcting it is an even bigger mistake. I hope Mr. Nandy won't make this second mistake which will be worse than his first one.

Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic.

(Copyright: Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing)

References:
1. Data by Outlok

Is casteism racism?

Casteism is a very sensitive topic in India. Many Indians claim that it doesn't exist in today's Indian society, but we still have cast caste-based reservation policy, inter-cast marriages are still not very well accepted, and many more things like this indicate that caste and caste discrimination still exists. I often wonder how it all started. Is casteism any different form of racism? Was there any need to divide society into different sections and label them? Should our profession decide our social status? If we say all humans are equal, then why do we discriminate? I already discussed how religion divides us, but within the same religion, we also find many ways to discriminate against each other. Interesting, isn't it?

There are different theories for the origin of castes in India. There are religious, biological, and socio-historical theories about its origin. Religious theory is most popular and many people (who still practice casteism) like to believe that there is some religious significance attached to their superior or inferior social status based on their caste.

The social division of ancient Indian society into four sections can be traced back to the Manusmriti. The book is in the form of a discourse given by Manu to a group of seers. Manu is considered as ‘progenitor of mankind’ (I think Moses is a similar character in Abrahamic religions). This text became the standard reference for all future related texts (or Dharmashastras). When the social division was originally created in four sections or varnas (Vaishya, Brahman, Kshudra, and Kshatriya) to run the society smoothly, I believe there was no hierarchy, or they were not ranked in any particular order. Every section’s work or job was equally important in the functioning of society. Varnas or these professions were not inherited but were acquired by merit. I think the original intention of this division might have been noble, but it allowed the division of society, which resulted in different groups that ultimately became casts that started caring for their own interests rather than caring for society and its welfare. It turned out that the side effect of the medicine was more harmful than the benefit it offered.

I would like to believe that any religion in its original form doesn’t teach any type of discrimination within or outside that religion. So-called intellectuals got special status in society (because of their knowledge); this status also gave them some powers and privileges. They failed to realize the responsibility that came with that special status. Selfishness and greed prevented them from implementing the actual code of conduct, which was recommended (selection by merit, not by birth). They wanted to hold on to that power so that their future generations could also enjoy the same status and privilege. The only way to stop others from getting empowered was to inhibit their ability to acquire knowledge. This was achieved by creating rigid boundaries between sections of societies (or varnas) that were difficult to cross. They manipulated the meaning of scriptures and misused their superior social status for this. As generations passed, they gradually started feeling more superior or privileged than others, and eventually, they started believing that it’s their birthright to rule others, and they started exploiting certain sections of society for their benefit. This resulted in the caste system, untouchability, social discrimination, and inhuman treatment of so-called lower cast people. According to me, it's not in any way different than racism. This mentality hampered the human progress of Indian society for centuries. In a similar manner, women from all casts were suppressed and forced to live a very restricted life. To me, it looks like they created a separate caste named 'women' and no one even realized this. That is why I raised the question in the beginning: was it necessary to divide society like this based on professions? Today, we also see this type of mentality in our society; even after achieving so much progress in all fields, we are unable to get rid of this mentality totally.

Discrimination in some form exists even today in almost all societies or countries in the world. In some countries, it's based on caste or religion, and in some countries based on race, color, nationality, etc. Casteism or any sort of discrimination is against humanity. Nature doesn’t discriminate based on caste, color, or race. This monster of discrimination has survived too long, and some elements of our society are still protecting it for some unknown reason. Any type of discrimination should not have any place in civilized society. Let's pledge not to discriminate against anyone based on color, religion, nationality, or anything else.

Thanks for reading. Your views and comments are welcome.

(Copyright: Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing)