From: nraju@usc.edu (Narayanan Raju)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.tamil
Subject: casteist seggregation and casteist suppression
Date: 16 Aug 1992 20:46:09 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: nunki.usc.edu



Although the society places the  Brahmins first in terms of respect,
certainly, the Brahmins did not have as much power as the Kshathriyas or
the Vysyas. The Kshathriyas had the administrative power; the Vysyas had the
money power. The Brahmins had the religious power which was shared by 
non-Brahminical priests as well. (There are many non-Brahminical temples
with a great following for eg. Samayapuram Mariamman). 

The question is who could have suppressed the Shudras the most?
	-- those who had money power? or
	-- those who had administrative power? or
	-- those who had a good share of relegious power?


Today, everybody is blaming the Brahmins alone for the casteist seggregation
as well as the suppression of the Shudras. Nobody talks about the role of
Kshathriyas or Vysyas.  


1)  Casteist seggregation


	The casteist seggregation came into existence because of the
great diversity that was present in ancient India. Let's go back
to ancient times  to understand the casteist segregation. First let's
look at the elements of diversity:
	-- racial diversity(India is the unique land where almost every race
				met. In other regions where races met there
				was slavery, decimation and colonialization.
				In the Hindu society too, initially, these three
 				evils were present. Later, these three evils
				surfaced when the Muslims arrived and again,
				when the British arrived)

	-- religious diversity( Various communities have their own gods,
				their own philosophy, their own set of
				rituals. However, most Hindu communities weren't
				averse to accepting other gods and religions;
				cosequently, a network of all these gods, 
				philosophies and rituals evolved and is called
				as Hinduism)

	-- cultural diversity  and

	-- linguistic diversity.

This diversity, amplified by the lack of education and lack of communication,
led to the casteist seggregation. Although the casteist seggregation is bad,
it is better than slavery, decimation and colonialization. (the casteist
suppression meted out to Shudras is dealt with in the next section. Here I'm 
only looking at the seggragation in the top three varnas)
This seggregation was not forced on any group; every-group was satisfied
with keeping to themselves. Hence, no particular group can be blamed for this.



And despite this there has been a geat deal of mixing
2)  Mixing
	-- On the inter-racial front,
				The Brahmins are supposed to be Aryans. 
				Anthropological evidence shows
				that they they are more Indian than Aryan: 
				their skin colour is brown;
				they do not have very sharp noses unlike 
				the Aryans. Yet, self-claimed
				Dravidian leaders call them Aryans.
				Many Brahiminical sects trace their origins 
				to non-Brahmin ancestors.
				(For eg.  many Then-Kalai Iyengars , an Iyer 
				sect by the name maddhyana pariah)
				Many non-Brahminical sects are Brown and not
				Black.

	-- On the inter-cultural front,
				Most grops including Brahmins have absorbed 
				elements from other cultures,
				in that area(For eg. TN Brahmins celebrate
				female puberty, just like other non-Brahmin 
				Tamils.) Non-Brahminical sects celebrate
				Brahminical festivals and vice versa.
				
	-- On the inter-religious front,
				As explained earlier mixing has been so great
				that a network known as Hinduism has evolved.
				Let's look at the backgroud of the Trinity;
				Brahma is a Brahmin (rarely worshipped).
				Shiva is a Pariah 
				Vishnu is a Kshathriya.

	-- On the inter-lingual front,
				Brahmins speak the local language. Many 
				non-Brahmins names are Sanskritic. Most 
				languages in India have borrowed from others.


3) Casteist Suppression

	Almost all of the suppression was meted out to the Shudras. Should
the responsibility for this injustice be placed on Brahmins alone or the entire
society? People are trying to project as though the supposedly Aryanic works
of Gita and Manu Dharma Shatra brought in this varna system.(Note that Krishna
himself was dark and to regard him as an Aryan is ridiculous).

	How many Tamils care to even go through the Gita? I doubt even a percent
of Tamils(including Brahminical Tamils) would have gone through that. To blame
seggregation and suppression on Gita doesn't sound realistic. The fact is
casteist seggregation and suppression were present in the society even
before the Gita came into existence. However, Gita might have helped propagate 
it. As to Manu's laws, how many Tamil kings
followed these laws? Did they accept that the Aryan culture was better than 
their own Dravidian culture? Why did they not give preference to their own
people? Did the kings pass the laws or the Brahmins did?

	By the way, Manu's laws were discriminatory as well as reverse-
discriminatory: "for the same crime a Vysya is to be punished twice that of
a Shudra, a Kshathriya twice that of a Vysya and a Brahmin twice that of
a Kshathriya"(taken from a recent issue of Thuglak). Yet, I do agree that Manu's
shastras did propagate caste based society.But, Manu's shastras are not
applicable to S.Indian societies esp.  Tamil land.

	These days almost every non-Brahmin claims to be Shudra. Where are the 
business community(Vysyas) which controlled labourers(even had bonded labourers)
Where are the decendants of administrators(Kshathriyas) which include
pannaiyars and in modern times our politicians. Self-claimed Shudra politicians
in TN are yet to give a party post or a ministerial post to the actual Shudras.
It is ridiculous to say that Brahmins who form a mere 4% controlled the rest.

	Let's go back to the question of responsibility. Who should be blamed 
more? Those who administered the law(Kshathriyas) or those who held monetary
power(the Vysyas) and enslave poor peasants or those who had religious
power(the Brahmins). In practice, the answer I get is that the Kshathriyas
and Vysyas are to blamed more and hence the Shudras quarrel with Kshathriyas and
Vysyas; they do not seem to quarrel with Brahmins. 

	Who led the Shudras into temples?-- weren't Brahmins like 
Rajagopalachari involved in it? Even these days, in my village, 
a Shudra wouln't dare to ask for
water anywhere except in Agraharam(where the Brahmins stay).

	Historically speaking, all(including
Shudras) had the right to property. Common social wealth was accessible to
everybody but the Shudras. In terms of having a business or getting a western
education everybody(excluding the Shudras) were legally on par with others.
Hence it is idiotic to blame the unde-rdevelopment of non-Shudras on Brahmins.
Remember that there are many Brahminical families and sects that are under-
developed. The responsibility for the under-development of Shudras lies on
the entire society, but, more on Kshathriyas and Vysyas, than on Brahmins.



4)Political Aspects
	The "divide and rule" concept created by the British and propageted
by both British and Indian politicians has created an illusion in the minds
of many partly-educated non-Shudra Indians that a great deal of injustice has 
been done to them(and in the minds of Shudras a just idea that they have 
been exploited. ). 



5)India and the West
	The British exagerated the casteist divisions on the one hand, so as 
to claim that the Indians are barbaric and incapable of self-rule, and on the
other to divide and rule. Consequently the west thinks that India is
caste ridden. But the fact is India,given this great a diversity, has
certainly done better than the western world. When the westerners came into
contact with others, they subdued them, enslaved them, decimated them,
colonialized them. Lets compare the Shudra and the "Black Caste" of this
country, where there is some amount of diversity. Shudras
weren't enslaved. They always had the right to property which the Black caste
got long after they were freed. They could challenge anybody in the courts
of our kings; a Black Caste member couldn't even be a witness against a White 
even in the first few decades of this century. Shudras couldn't enter temples
and draw water from the community well; similar things existed here until
1960's. However, the Balck caste has made significant progress mainly
because of the rich resources and high economic growth. In India due 
ages of suppresion we are still under-developed and consequently there is
not much wealth that is required to uplift the Shudras.
In short, India, given its great diversity,   given its exploitation at the
hands of westerners, has done a good job.








	"When it comes to cultures India is the only millionaire and
others are paupers"
			--- Mark Twain




Your opinion, suggestions, comments and criticisms are welcome.

Raju
raju@spock.usc.edu