[Reader-list] Caste System, Dalits and Hinduism

[Tapas Ray]

It would be good if Aditya would tell us who this Dhirendra A Shah is. 
My guess is, he has something to do with the Hindutva formation, because 
the theory of caste he is advancing reflects that formation's 
occasional, unconvincing claim that it opposes casteism. Unconvincing, 
because the BJP's use of the “caste card” in elections is well 
documented. Dhirendra Shah's theory of caste in Hinduism would not have 
been worth discussing if Aditya and some others had not taken it upon 
themselves to turn Reader-list into a platform for pushing the Hindutva 
agenda.

That they are doing this in the name of Kashmiri Pandits (as opposed to 
all Kashmiri migrants/refugees) shows two things: (a) They are not above 
casteism, as non-Brahmin migrants seem to have no place in their 
rhetoric, nor - as Shuddha has pointed out – in the rhetoric of the 
saffron organisations that claim to give succour to these unfortunate 
people. (b) They are not above exploiting even these Brahmins – Aditya's 
own caste community - in the interest of the Sangh Parivar. I find it 
difficult to believe that Aditya and others do not know the Pandits 
stand to lose the sympathy of many Indians because of the way their 
plight is being exploited for the sake of communal politics.

Coming to Shah's theory, there are several things that are miles wide of 
the mark.

 > There is a misconception in some minds that Hindu scriptures sanction 
 > the castesystem. But being based on Vedas, Hinduism does not permit
 > any caste system, whatsoever. Vedas, the proud possession of mankind, 
 > are the foundation of Hinduism.

Shah is confident that he knows what is a misconception of Hinduism and 
what is the correct conception. This is remarkable, because not only 
scholars, but even the Parivar itself has had a great deal of trouble 
deciding precisely what can be called Hinduism, given the heterogeneity 
of practices going under that name. At the VHP's second World Hindu 
Conference in Allahabad (1979), Various Hindu groups failed to find a 
solid common ground. The compromise definition of a Hindu was this: 
anyone who recites prayers, reads the Gita, worships a personal deity of 
one's own choice, uses the holy sound Om, and plants the tulsi (basil) 
plant. One wonders how many Hindus today satisfy these criteria.

What exactly Shah means when he says Hinduism is based on the Vedas is 
not clear. True, this a popular impression, but its source – the belief 
of early European scholars that they could understand the religion by 
reading ancient Sanskrit texts - has been abandoned long ago on account 
of its obvious inadequacy. These days it is recognised that a religion 
is not only, or even mainly, its scriptures. It is also, in a very major 
way, its practice. I think no one will disagree that for most Hindus, 
the Vedas are a shadowy presence, a name vaguely remembered from school 
textbooks – that is, for those who have been fortunate enough to go to 
school. And caste is very much a practice in contemporary Hinduism. If 
anyone doubts this, she can simply look at figures for caste-based 
killings, discrimination, etc., that are prevalent in varying degrees in 
many areas.

When someone talks about the so-called universalism of the Vedas, one 
must remember that the caste system was also the creation of the Vedas 
in the form of varnas. There is probably a similarity here with George 
Washington's talk of equality – which meant equality for white people, 
not slaves of African descent. Also, it is factually incorrect that the 
caste system became rigid under British rule. The codes of Manu are very 
harsh about keeping Shudras and women in their respective places. There 
is also the episode, in at least one version of the Ramayana, of Ram 
cutting off the head of Shambuka the Shudra because he had been 
practising things that were supposed to be the exclusive domain of 
Brahmins.

Dehistoricising the Vedas and the Hindu religion as a whole serves only 
one purpose – creation of a myth about Hinduism that serves the Sangh 
Parivar's political purpose. It does not help to eradicate casteism or 
other harmful practices.

Lastly, it would be good to know what exactly is the basis of the 
assertion that the Gita is a sublimation of the Vedas and Upanishads.


Tapas

Aditya Raj Kaul wrote:
> The following is from a document by Dhirendra A Shah …
> 
> SECTION – I
> 
> Caste System, Dalits and Hinduism
> 
> "There is a misconception in some minds that Hindu scriptures
> sanction the caste system. But being based on Vedas, Hinduism does
> not permit any caste system, whatsoever.
> Vedas, the proud possession of mankind, are the foundation of
> Hinduism. Vedas are all-embracing, and treat the entire humanity
> with the same respect and dignity. Vedas speak of nobility of entire
> humanity (krinvanto vishvam aryam), and do not sanction any caste
> system or birth based caste system. Mantra number 10-13-1 of Rig
> Veda addresses entire humanity as divine children (Shrunvantu vishve
> amrutsya putraha). Innumerable Mantras of Vedas emphasize oneness,
> universal brotherhood, harmony, happiness, affection, unity and
> commonality of entire humanity. A few illustrations are given here.
> Vide Mantra number 5-60-5 of Rig Veda, the Divine Poet
> declares, "All men are brothers; no one is big, no one is small. All
> are equal". Mantra number 16.15 of Yajur Veda reiterates that all
> men are brothers; no one is superior or inferior. "Mantra number 3-
> 30-1 of Atharva Veda enjoins upon all humans to be affectionate and
> to love one another as the cow loves her newly born calf.
> Underlining unity and harmony still further, Mantra number 3-30-6 of
> Atharva Veda commands humankind to dine together, and be as firmly
> united as the spokes attached to the hub of chariot wheel.
> 
> Bhagvad Gita, the essence of Vedas and Upanishads, has many Shlokas
> that echo the Vedic doctrine of oneness of humanity. In Sholka
> number V (29), the Lord declares that He is the friend of all
> creatures ('Suhridam Sarva Bhutanam') whereas Sholka number IX (29)
> reiterates that the Lord has the same affection for all creatures,
> and whosoever remembers the Lord, resides in the Lord, and the Lord
> resides in him.
> 
> Hindu scriptures speak about 'Varna' which means to 'select' (one's
> profession etc.); and which is not caste; and which is not birth-
> based. As per Sholka number IV (13) of Bhagvad Gita, depending upon
> a person's Guna (aptitude) and Karma (actions), there are four
> Varnas. As per this Sholka, a person's Varna is determined by his
> Guna and Karma, and not by his birth. Chapter XIV of Bhagvad Gita
> specifies three Gunas viz. Satva (purity), Rajas (passion and
> attachment) and Tamas (ignorance). These three Gunas are present in
> every human in different proportions, and determine the Varna of
> every person. Accordingly, depending on one's Guna and Karma, every
> individual is free to select his own Varna. Consequently, if their
> Gunas and Karmas are different, even members of the same family will
> belong to different Varnas. Nevertheless, notwithstanding the
> differences in Guna and Karma of different individuals, Vedas treat
> the entire humanity with the same respect; and do not sanction any
> caste system or birth based caste system.
> Being divine revelation, Shrutis (Vedas) are the ultimate authority
> for Dharma, and represent its eternal principles whereas being human
> recapitulations, Smritis (Recollections) can play only a subordinate
> role. As per Shloka number (6) of chapter 2 of Manu Smriti, "Vedo
> akhilo dharma mulam" (Veda is the foundation of entire Dharma)
> whereas Shloka number 2(13) of Manu Smriti specifies that whenever
> Shruti (Vedas) and Smritis differ, stipulation of Vedas will prevail
> over Smriti stipulation." (J. G. Arora – Organizer Weekly)
> 
> "A Brahmin boy who had developed more of the Tamsic Guna was not
> allowed to remain a Brahmin in his adult age. In the same way, a
> Shudra boy could become a Brahmin if he had developed more of Satvic
> Gunas. Let us look at the history of Vedic period. Vedas were
> codified by Ved Vyas who was a son of a fisher woman. Valmiki who
> wrote Ramayana was of a Shudra Class. Guru Dronacharya was a Brahmin
> but he took up weapons and faught as a Kshatriya in the Mahabharat
> war. One can give many such examples of how this Varna system
> worked. For a long period of time this system worked reasonably well
> which is why the Hindu civilization was the most prosperous in those
> days as compared to other civilizations.
> 
> It is a fact that the type of caste system (with its present
> rigidity) we today talk about came into being only after the British
> census. When the British began to conquer India, the majority of the
> kings/rulers in different parts of India had been from amongst such
> castes which have been placed in the sudra varna. Chandra Gupta
> Maurya was from a Shudra class The British demonized caste because
> it stood in the way of their breaking Indian society, hindered the
> process of atomization, and made the task of conquest and governance
> more difficult. The word 'Caste' comes from the Portuguese
> word "Casta" which was then coined as "Caste" by the British and
> used it to divide the Indian society to perpetuate its colonial rule
> in India. The real rigidity of the caste system came into being only
> sometime in 1800 AD."
> 
> Albaruni (AD 973 – 1048) describes the traditional division of
> Hindu society along the four Varnas and the Antyaja -- who are not
> reckoned in any caste; but makes no mention of any oppression of low
> caste by the upper castes. Much, however the four castes differ from
> each other,they live together in the same towns and villages, mixed
> together in the same houses and lodgings. The Antyajas are divided
> into eight classes -- formed into guilds -- according to their
>  professions who freely intermarry with each other. They live near
> the villages and towns of the four castes. (Sachau:101)
> This is exemplified by the fact that in Bali Hindu society in
> Indonesia, there is no dalit, no untouchability, no caste.
> Therefore, castiesm and untouchability are social problems in India
> and are not part of Hinduism as propagated by the Christian
> missionaries and evangelical folks. Can you say that homosexuality
> and pedophilia are rooted in Christianity because there are
> practiced by many Christian priests in America and Europe?
> Dalit: George Ooommen notes that the word 'dalit' was first used
> only in the 19th century by a Marathi social reformer, Jyotirao
> Phule. The 'dalit' word was appropriated by a political group called
> Dalit Panther Movement of Maharashtra in 1970. And, now the
> term, 'dalit' is appropriated by Christian theologians and
> missionaries to create anti-Hindu sentiments and convert poor and
> illiterate Hindus to Christianity by unethical, immoral and
> fraudulent methods.
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with subscribe in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list 
> List archive: <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>