Question about the caste system and "untouchables" in Hinduism

[sidetrack]

Please keep in mind that I dont mean any offense in this posting.I dont really know much about Hinduism and if anyone would like to clarify anything that I wrote please dont feel reluctant to do so.I’ve looked up how in Brahmaninical texts their are Jatis (heridatary groups) which are grouped into four categories.They are viz Brahmins (scholars, teachers, fire priests), Kshatriyas (kings, warriors,law enforcers, administrators), Vaishyas (agriculturists, cattle raisers, traders, bankers), Shudras (artisans, craftsmen, service providers).When I looked into it further the reason for the caste system seems more cultural and historical then religious.There a book written between 200 .B.C.-100 .A.D. called the Manusmriti.It’s about social conduct,morals and ethics but not religion.In it compares society to a body with the Brahmins as the head,the Kshatriyas as the arms,the Vaishyas as the torso and the Shudras as the legs.It explain how no part of the body (society) is intended to be superior to another just like how all body parts are equally important for working optimally.There was no hiearchy intended.No part of the body (society) was intended to be superior to another, just as all parts of the human body are equally important for optimal function. There was no hierarchy intended.It was a system that equally divided social** responsibilities**(not heriditary roles) among people.In my view it seems that originally it was conduct**not **what group your born to that determines your caste.The superior/inferior caste interpretation was a distortion from the original in order to (out of lack of a better word) take advantage of people.This I think somehow lead to the creation of groups like Dalits (“untouchables”).Something I would really like to know though is what *religious * reason is there for something like the “untouchables” existing.It seems discriminative.Like the way it historically has integrated Muslims and Christians as well just seems like a way to make sure no one “gets out of line” since those religions have different concepts of equality and the populace with this belief can grow.Does it have to do anything with how like a man cant escape his roots?.Like how in Hinduism (due to reincarnation) even though your physical body might be inconsistent and vary throughout your existance (until you reach nirvana) your always destined to have your “essence”(I’m not sure if I should say soul or atman in this case)be part of a certain category?.Thank you very much so for your time.

 

[Sufjon]

Please keep in mind that I dont mean any offense in this posting.I dont really know much about Hinduism and if anyone would like to clarify anything that I wrote please dont feel reluctant to do so.I’ve looked up how in Brahmaninical texts their are Jatis (heridatary groups) which are grouped into four categories.They are viz Brahmins (scholars, teachers, fire priests), Kshatriyas (kings, warriors,law enforcers, administrators), Vaishyas (agriculturists, cattle raisers, traders, bankers), Shudras (artisans, craftsmen, service providers).When I looked into it further the reason for the caste system seems more cultural and historical then religious.There a book written between 200 .B.C.-100 .A.D. called the Manusmriti.It’s about social conduct,morals and ethics but not religion.In it compares society to a body with the Brahmins as the head,the Kshatriyas as the arms,the Vaishyas as the torso and the Shudras as the legs.It explain how no part of the body (society) is intended to be superior to another just like how all body parts are equally important for working optimally.There was no hiearchy intended.No part of the body (society) was intended to be superior to another, just as all parts of the human body are equally important for optimal function. There was no hierarchy intended.It was a system that equally divided social** responsibilities**(not heriditary roles) among people.In my view it seems that originally it was conduct**not **what group your born to that determines your caste.The superior/inferior caste interpretation was a distortion from the original in order to (out of lack of a better word) take advantage of people.This I think somehow lead to the creation of groups like Dalits (“untouchables”).Something I would really like to know though is what *religious * reason is there for something like the “untouchables” existing.It seems discriminative.Like the way it historically has integrated Muslims and Christians as well just seems like a way to make sure no one “gets out of line” since those religions have different concepts of equality and the populace with this belief can grow.Does it have to do anything with how like a man cant escape his roots?.Like how in Hinduism (due to reincarnation) even though your physical body might be inconsistent and vary throughout your existance (until you reach nirvana) your always destined to have your “essence”(I’m not sure if I should say soul or atman in this case)be part of a certain category?.Thank you very much so for your time.

Hi Sidetrack: You pretty much have it right already. At first the system was pretty much about being in your place. The idea was, and remains to be in the “here and now”. If you are a street sweeper, then be fully present as a street sweeper and do it the very best you can without attachment to the outcome. All outcomes and fruit of your work are offered to God and your fellow beings as a gift of devotion and love. Over time it evolved into a social convention that took some really bad turns. One of the worst developments was the idea that you would be born into a certain caste and could not escape it. That was never the intent. Such a system traps people with potential to achieve more into a life that limits their abilities simply by virtue of birth and this was never the intent, although in hindsight, it should have been easy to see it coming when taking human nature into account.

In the 19th century, Sri Ramakrishna proclaimed the caste system as an evil and not associated with spirituality in any way. It got it’s death blow from having any formal social significance from Mahatma Gandhi in the 20th century. Yet it remains as a strong social convention for some reason. Any time I catch my friends thinking that way I call them on it. The problem is that no one wants to be the first doctor to marry a janitor. In that regard, you probably don’t see much mixing in that sense in the west either, so nowadays I suppose the caste system is more of an 'in your face" version of the same social preferences you see everywhere. The main point is that any Hindu who sees it as bearing any spiritual significance is missing the point entirely. They are Hindus of the “Christmas and Easter Catholics” variety. There is nothing wrong with being that sort of person if that’s your place, but the point is that these are not people who are in a place in their development that puts much thought into spiritual matters.

Your friend
Sufjon