“CASTE AND CASTE CLASHES IN RURAL

INDIA”

Submitted by

Mr Sarwar Jamal (D19MAPS239)

Under the guidance of

Dr Zubair Nazeer (Assistant Professor Department of Political

Science CDOL) Jamia Milia islamia, New Delhi.
 Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 1
CHAPTER 1 .............................................................................................................................................. 4
EVOLUTION OF CASTE SYSTEM IN INDIA ................................................................................................ 4
CHAPTER 2 .............................................................................................................................................. 7
Religious take on casteism ...................................................................................................................... 7
CHAPTER 3 ............................................................................................................................................ 11
Relevance of casteism in New India...................................................................................................... 11
3.1 Myth and Reality about Caste System in India: .............................................................................. 11
3.2 Dalit Politics: ................................................................................................................................... 12
3.3 The Concept of Social Exclusion: ..................................................................................................... 12
CHAPTER 4 ............................................................................................................................................ 14
The Overall Position of Schedule Caste in India.................................................................................... 14
CHAPTER 5 ............................................................................................................................................ 17
Philosophical Perspective on casteism ................................................................................................. 17
5.1 Dr. Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar ................................................................................................... 17
5.2 Gandhi and Caste System: way out of caste clashes ................................................................. 21
CHAPTER 6 ............................................................................................................................................ 25
Caste clashes in Rural India ................................................................................................................... 25
6.1 Crimes against Dalits, tribals increased in Covid pandemic year: NCRB ........................................ 28
WAY FORWARD..................................................................................................................................... 30
CONCLUSION......................................................................................................................................... 32

List of figures
Figure 1: Portrayal of Early Indian society ............................................................................................. 4
Figure 2: Caste-Based Conflicts as a Percentage of Total Conflicts..................................................... 26
Figure 3: Responses to Questions 1 (Rajmohan) and 2 (Krishnan)* (%) ............................................. 27

Index of Tables
Table 1: Population below poverty line in India, SC and ST (NSSO) .................................................. 15
Table 2: Percentage of children completing primary school (various sources) .................................... 15
Table 3: Completion Rate of 10-12 years by caste ............................................................................... 15
Table 4: Observed Conflicts in Indian Villages by Proximate Cause of Conflict ................................ 25
Table 5: Caste-Based Conflicts in Indian Villages, by Proximate Cause of Conflict ........................... 26
Table 6: The Access of Rural Households to Water on caste basis ...................................................... 28
 Bibliography
Alavi, Seema. Sepoys And The Company Tradition and transition in Northern India 1770–1830.
Oxford University Press India. 1998. Print.
Béteille, André. Caste, Class, and Power: Changing Patterns of Stratification in a Tanjore
Village. Berkeley: University of California, 1965. Print.
Bouglé, Célestin. Essays on the Caste System. London: Cambridge UP, 1971. Print.
Corbridge, Stuart, and John Harriss. Reinventing India: Liberalization, Hindu Nationalism, and
Popular Democracy. Cambridge, UK: Polity, 2000. Print.
Daniel, Aharon. "Caste System in Modern India." Adaniel's Info Site. Web. 4 Nov. 2010.
Frankel, F. R. 1971. "India’s Green Revolution: Economic Gains and Political Costs",
Princeton:Princeton University Press.
Hilton, R. 1978. (ed)The Transition from Feudalism to Capitalism, London: Verso.
Mitra, A. 1977. "Terms of Trade and Class Relations: An Essay on Political Economy",
Calcutta:Rupa.
Pandian, M.S.S. 2013. "Dalit Assertion in Tamil Nadu: An Exploratory Essay", in SudhaPai(ed)
"Handbook of Politics in Indian States: Regions, Parties and Economic Reforms", New Delhi: Oxford
University Press, pp.250-268.
Patnaik, U. 1987. "Peasant Class Differentiation: A Study in Method With Reference to Haryana",
New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
 CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY
This is to certify that the project titled “CASTE AND CASTE CLASHES IN RURAL
INDIA”

is an original work of the Student and is being submitted in partial fulfillment for the award of

the Master’s Degree in Political Science (Distance Mode) of Jamia Millia Islamia. This report

has not been submitted earlier either to this University or to any other University/Institution

for the fulfillment of the requirement of a course of study.

SIGNATURE OF SUPERVISOR SIGNATURE OF STUDENT

Place : Place :
Date : Date :
 Acknowledgement
I would like to express my profound sense of deepest gratitude to my guide and motivator Dr. ZUBAIR
NAZEER, Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science (CDOL), Jamia Millia Islamia, for his
valuable guidance, sympathy and co-operation for providing necessary facilities and sources during the
entire period of the project. I would like to thank Dr Hina Hasan Khaki, Assistant Professor, Department
of Political science (CDOL), Jamia Millia Islamia for providing me the various facilities available in
the department. I wish to convey my sincere gratitude to all the faculties of Department of Political
science who have enlightened me during my studies. The facilities and co-operation received from the
my Department is thankfully acknowledged. I am grateful to all of those with whom I have had the
pleasure to work with during this project. Each of the members of my class group have provided me
with extensive personal and professional guidance and taught me a great deal about both assigned
research and life in general. I would especially like to thank Mr Hazik Habib, and other friends as well
who have been a constant support during this journey of my project. As my teacher and mentor, Dr
Zubair Nazeer guided me more than I could ever give him credit for.

Sarwar Jamal
Roll no: D19MAPS239
 Abstract
This topic deals with the caste and its clashes especially in rural India, in the course of discussion we
will go through the genesis of caste system in India, evolution- socio-political, cultural, religious, and
its economic effects on India in general and what is its constitutional standing & related government
initiatives. The Indian Caste System is historically one of the main dimensions where people in India
are socially differentiated through class, religion, region, tribe, gender, and language. Although this or
other forms of differentiation exist in all human societies, it becomes a problem when one or more of
these dimensions overlap each other and become the sole basis of systematic ranking and unequal access
to valued resources like wealth, income, power and prestige. The Indian Caste System is considered a
closed system of stratification, which means that a person’s social status is obligated to which caste
they were born into. There are limits on interaction and behaviour with people from another social
status. This paper will be exploring the various aspects of the Indian caste system and its effects on
India today.
Although some caste-based prejudice and ranking still existed, wealth and power was now less
associated with caste. Caste became a lot less significant part of daily lives of people who lived in urban
areas compared to rural areas, but its significance still varies by social class and occupation. Among
urban middle-class professionals, caste is not openly discussed and is pretty insignificant, except when
it comes to marital arrangements. Even then, there are adjustments made with considerations towards
education, occupation, and income, as well as religion and language. Although discrimination on the
basis of caste has been outlawed in India, is still exists in the community today
 INTRODUCTION
Indian society comprises of different castes. Though it is not clear as to when the caste structure
came into existence, researchers have tried to understand its form, characteristics and changes in its
functions. Sociological and Social Anthropological studies regarding the changes in the caste
system in the context of the Indian society have been started since the British Rule. There are
different castes varying from region to region in India and each of the caste has its own different
form and functions that keep on changing from time to time which also affect sometimes the whole
social system. Looking at the Indian social structure, social system has its own special form and has
impact on all internal transactions but looking at the future caste system doubts arise from time to
time. “Prof. M. N. Shrinivas have come to a conclusion from his studies of Gujarat, Orissa, Madras,
Andhra, Mysore, Bihar and Uttar Pradesh that “the strength of caste has weakened due to
modernization as a result of awareness of castes, new organizations, and various functions but it
also becomes stronger.” Whatever changes may occur in the process of urbanization, change in the
form of the caste system is quite difficult. Castes which are present derive their strength from
political reasons because there is no system of social structure which can include political functions
of life. Six features of caste system given by Dr. Ghurye seem to be disappearing: social
segmentation, hierarchy, restrictions on social contacts and food and drink, civic and religious non-
compliance and privileges, absence of free selection of business and restrictions on marriage. Due
to various factors, changes in the above-mentioned special features have now begun. As a result,
the grip of castes on society has weakened but today each caste has been changing its role and has
started activities that keep every member of the caste 7 attracted to her/his respective caste. Each
caste is making efforts to awaken feeling of intimacy. Due to legal facilities, education and
awareness of the caste, changes have come in the features of the caste but in the new contexts’ caste
has been getting stronger. In this context, the castes in this study have been going in the direction
of change leaving their own traditional vocations, social rites and rituals, style of living, etc. and
yet are making efforts to preserve the features of their own castes. Restriction on Marriages,
religious values, social relations, feeling of co-operation, norms and values of family system, etc.
appear to be come under the effect of modernization and go into the direction of change. There is a
direct effect of the caste system on the economic, social, religious, cultural and political matters of
a particular caste. Caste system is an important factor in the India Society for deciding, regulating
and controlling and also maintaining social inter-relationship. Due to its special nature, Indian caste
system makes the Indian Society different from other societies. All these elements are visible to a
certain extent in almost all societies. Even in the changed social environment, a caste maintains its
peculiar form. Every caste has its own norms, rules and regulations. “Caste system, in one form or
the other, exists among the most of the population of the world but there are certain principles at
the root of caste system in such societies. In such social systems the status is decided right from the
birth and in these caste systems, there are specific and constricted codes for social relationships.
There are full of sever and restrictions for maintaining relation between the different layers of the
Society. All these elements are visible to a certain extent in almost every society.” In certain castes,
the capacity for changeability is less than certain other castes which have more capacity for
changeability. In those castes which have a progressive ideology, change and development as a
result of this change are also visible. If the caste system does not have changeability, it becomes
obstructive in the way of economic and social development. In Indian society which believes in the
idea of the ‘whole world as a family’ we find certain castes which show rigidity in their ideology
and are not prepared to accept any kind of change and due to this the social development remains
slow. Indian Society is seen as divided in different small and big groups of people. Such groups are
known as people of a particular caste. Indian society is made up of such different caste groups. It is
difficult to say when such different groups were created but it is believed that the caste system
(Varnas) originated in Vedic society (c. 1500–500 BCE). The first three groups, Brahmins,

1
Kshatriyas and Vaishya, have parallels with other Indo-European societies, while the addition of
the Shudras is probably a Brahmanical invention from northern India. Indian society is made up of
different castes. Most of the population of India resides in villages. In villages, the social system is
found stagnant on the basis of castes. Every society has its own identity. Srinivas says that, “on one
way the caste has brought development in its being whereas on the other way has tried in new form
to strengthen its root in new relations.” Thus, the study of castes is very important in Indian Society.
From the beginning of human culture, man has been leading natural life and thinking about
accepting changes in place, time and the geographical changes and from the same common feeling
the idea of passing steady life has developed. From maintaining the same style of life the form of
relationships got formulated and from her/his own will a civilized society came into existence.
Thus, the true identity of a person’s individual development and impact, begun from the society is
seen in her/his collective life style of social behaviour as well as in the inheritance. When the
collective inspiration necessary for regulating responsibility developing feeling for collective life
and maintain it between person to person which gives rise to caste system and the cultural
composition of traditional life style. From this only the impact of hereditary matters of family based
on blood/dynasty among them is formed. Thus, a caste gets its flexibility in the situations in
accordance with the changes in the context of time and place, and addition of new establishments
makes it progressive. Today, in Indian social structure, the impact of caste as a social institution is
seen in various fields in one way or the other. In almost every field of social life of Hindus Caste
system appears to have been interwoven like abbes and wefts. Its wide spread effects are seen even
today in various fields like dress, food, customs and traditions, marriage, vocations, thoughts,
philosophy, style of building construction and family system of Hindus. Prof. M. N. Srinivas states
that, “Caste structure provides common culture to the people of Indian.” Wherever we go in India,
we will find ourselves in the world of caste only. Caste structure is a unique characteristic of Indian
society. “Caste structure means Hindu society and Hindu society means Caste structure.” Hutten
has written that, “The social institution similar to the Caste are, in one matter or the other, is not
difficult to find anywhere in the world outside India but the institution of caste, in which the
complete meaning of caste is contained, is the unique characteristic of Indian society.” Such an
institution is which is found outside India, however, has the same complicatedness as the institution
of caste in India, while thinking about it, it is clearly seen that the type of institution of caste in
Hindustan appears to be unparalleled in the world. Social strata system is present in one or the other
form in every society. Strata system of Indian society is made up of levels of different groups. Dr.
G. S. Ghurye notes that, ‘Indian society is divided in such the level of prestige of different groups
and area of mutual interaction is varied.’ In countries like America, Israel, and Russia the strata
system has mainly developed on the economic base whereas in India it is seen in the form of caste
structure. In India during Rigveda period strata system developed form of castes structure was like
open class system, but the element of caste came into existence as a result of the reciprocation
between a number of economic, social and political factors from the end of Vedic era, especially
from the middle of high Vedic period and its last part, the elements of caste entered into caste
structure and the castes began to be divided into different sub castes. As a result of this process, as
the caste elements keep on growing, the sub divisions developed castes take the form of independent
caste. Certain groups of Indian population are backward in the economic, social and educational
view in comparison with other people. People live away from the urban civilization. These rural
castes mainly live on their traditional vocation namely agriculture (settled cultivation) and the
animal husbandry as their complementary vocation. There have been changes in the rural culture
as a result of contact with the civilized society, government schemes, etc., these rural castes have
made progress in the economic, social, religious, cultural, political and education fields. There has
been a decrease in their aptitude in traditional arts, religious beliefs, superstitions, and, the joint
family system came to be divided. The vices like liquor consumption and gambling reduced. There
has been a change in the customs and traditions. It is absolutely important to find out this change in
different fields and to what extent this change is beneficial or harmful. Thus, all these castes taken

2
together as many as 3000 social units can be seen in every region. There are four pillars of social
system in India namely caste, family, region and religion. Their life depends upon their customs
and traditions. In short, Caste is the foundation of Indian social structure.
In the present 21st century of development, the whole society is passing through a process of
change. Change is an ongoing process in every society. The change comes in both the physical as
well as non-physical culture. In modern times, there has been a change in the in social life due also
to machines and urbanization. In the physical culture, changes like living conditions, furniture,
clothing, cosmetics, etc. are included while in the non-physical culture, traditions, social values,
norms, customs, religion, etc. are included. In order to explore this, it is, therefore, necessary to
examine social, religious fields of one particular community. Education is an important factor that
brings change in social life, because, due to education man comes in contact with other
communities, observes, understands their customs and traditions and accepts whatever is good in
them. The world has become small due to media-newspapers, films, radio, television, etc. He
consciously accepts changes so that he is not left behind in the world. As a result of means of
transportation people from remote area came in contact urban culture. Moreover, new laws,
religion, industrialization, etc., are also the factors for bringing changes. The caste system – a
system of elaborately stratified social hierarchy – distinguishes India from most other societies.
Among the most distinctive factors of the caste system is the close link between castes and
occupations, especially in rural India. The traditional village economy revolved around a hereditary
caste hierarchy that prescribed individuals’ occupations. Upper castes were land owners, middle
ranked castes were farmers and artisans and the lowest ranked castes, the Dalits (or Scheduled
Castes) were the labourers and performers of menial tasks. The position of castes in the social
hierarchy had a clear relationship with their economic status and wellbeing, with Scheduled Castes
(SC) clustered in occupations that were the least well paid and most degrading in terms of manual
labour. Along with the Scheduled Tribes (STs), the SCs have the highest incidence of poverty in
India, with poverty rates that are much higher than the rest of the population.1 Previous studies
have found that differences in occupational structure account for a large proportion of the difference
in poverty rates between SCs and the ‘mainstream’ population, with SCs more likely to be in ‘bad
occupations’ than the other social groups (Deshpande 2001, Boruah 2005, Kijima 2006, Gang, Sen
and Yun 2008). Since independence in 1947, the Indian government has enacted radical affirmative
action policies, providing quotas in state and central legislatures, village governments, the civil
service and government-sponsored educational institutions to SCs and STs. The Caste System and
Occupational Segregation, the Indian caste system is a social order which originates from the varna
system, which are four broad, hereditary and hierarchically ordered occupational categories with
priests or Brahmins at the top, warriors (Kshatriyas) next, merchants and traders (Vaishyas) third
and menial workers (Shudras) making up the bottom layer. SCs (along with STs) occupy an
ambivalent place in the varna system, and are either treated as a subset of the Shudras or a separate
category whose main distinguishing characteristic is a particularly degrading (‘polluting’)
traditional occupation, and are below the four varnas in the social order. Each varna comprises a
large number of sub-castes or jatis who with few exceptions are endogamous (intra-marry). The
tight relationship between different castes and the specific occupations they are expected to occupy
that were observed in Indian villages in the past was provided by the jajmani system, which is a
system of hereditary patron-client relationships between the jajman (the patron) -- usually, landed
proprietors from the upper and middle castes – and the kamins or balutedars (the clients) – usually,
unfree agricultural labourers from the low castes, who were expected to provide labour and other
specialised services to the landed upper and middle castes (Dumont 1970, Bayly 1999). While
legislation brought in by the Indian government may have lessened the incidence of the worst forms
of bonded labour and other coercive practices, the hereditary nature of the link between castes and
occupations, especially in the lower rungs of the caste system, persists.

3
 CHAPTER 1
EVOLUTION OF CASTE SYSTEM IN INDIA
The origin of the Indian caste system has many theories behind it. Some of them are religious, while
others are biological. The religious theories explain that according to the Rig Veda, which is the
ancient Hindu book, the primal man, Purush, destroyed himself to create a human society and the
different parts of his body created the four different varnas. The Brahmins were from his head, the
Kshatriyas from his hands, the Vaishyas from his thighs, and the Shudras from his feet. The Varna
hierarchy is determined by the descending order of the different organs from which the Varnas were
created (Daniel). For example, Brahmans, who were derived from the head of Purush, are
considered the intelligent and most powerful varna because of their wisdom and education and are
a representation of the brain. In the same way, Kshatriyas, considered the warrior caste, were
created by arms, which represent strength. Another religious theory claims that the Varnas were
created from the body organs of Brahma, who is the creator of the world in Hinduism. The
biological theory claims that all existing things inherit three one of three categories of qualities.
Varna means different shades of texture or color and represents mental temper. There are three
Gunas: Sattva, Rajas and Tamas. Sattva is white, Rajas is red, and Tamas is black. These in
combination of various proportions constitute the group or class of people all over the world with
temperamental differences (Lahiri). Sattva qualities include characteristics related to wisdom,
intelligence, honesty, goodness, and other positive qualities. Rajas include qualities such as passion,
pride, and valor. Tamas are considered to acquire qualities that include dullness, stupidity, lack of
creativity, and other negative qualities (Daniel). People with different amounts of these inherent
qualities end up adopting the appropriate occupation. According to this theory, the Brahmans
usually inherit the Sattva qualities.

Figure 1: Portrayal of Early Indian society

They are serene and self-controlled and possess the quality of austerity. They are considered to
have purity, uprightness and forbearance. Brahmans also have the will to acquire knowledge,
wisdom, and faith (Lahiri). The Kshatriyas and Vaishyas inherit the Raja qualities, and the Shudras
inherit the Tamas qualities (Daniel). The type of one’s actions, the quality of ego, the color of

4
knowledge, the texture of one’s understanding, the temper of fortitude, and the brilliance of one’s
happiness defines one’s Varna (Lahiri). Historically, however, it is believed that the caste system
began with the arrival of the Aryans in India around 1500 BC (Daniel). Of the many cultures that
flourished in India, the literary records of the Indo-Aryan culture are not the earliest. They do,
however, contain the first mention and a continuous history of the factors that make up the caste
system (Ghurye, 162-63). The Aryans came from southern Europe and northern Asia with fair skin
that contrasted with the indigenous natives in India. When they arrived, their main contact was with
the Dravidians. The only other culture whose records are dependable about the origins of the caste
system are the Dravidians, but when that culture’s documents were put forwards, it had already
been largely influenced by the Indo-Aryan tradition (Ghurye, 63). Unfortunately, the Aryans
completely disregarded their local cultures and began conquering regions all over north India
(Daniel). At the same time, the local people were pushed south towards jungles of mountains in
north India. The Aryans possessed a particular principle of social ordering called Varna Vyavastha,
which was based on the four hierarchical divisions of function in society. They were placed in order
of decreasing importance: religious and educational functions, military and political functions,
economic functions, and menial functions (Velassery, 2). The Aryans organized themselves in three
groups. The first group, Rajayana (later changed to Kshatriya) were the warriors, which were
followed by the Brahmans, who were the priests (Daniel). These two groups constantly struggled
for political leadership among the Aryans. Eventually, the Brahmans became the leaders of the
Aryan society. The final group consisted of the farmers and craftmen, and were called the Vaishyas
(Daniel). The Aryan conquerors subdued the locals and made them servants. In this process, the
Vaishyas became the landlords and businessmen of the society and the locals became the peasants
and craftsmen (Daniel). In order to secure their status, the Aryans laid out social and religious rules
which stated that only they were allowed to become priests, warriors, and businessmen of the
society (Daniel). Maharashtra, which is a state located in west India, is a great example. This region
has been known by this name for hundreds of years, and many think that the meaning of its name
is Great Land. But there are some who claim that the name Maharashtra is derived from the category
called Mahar, who are considered to be the original people of this region (Daniel). These individuals
were forced to adhere to the social and religious rules the Aryans laid out. In the caste hierarchy,
the Mahars were outcasts because they were dark-skinned compared to the lightskinned Aryans.
Skin color was an important indicator in determining an individual’s caste (Daniel). As mentioned
before, the word varna does not mean caste or class, but color (Ghurye, 163). Having come across
people who were very dark in color and had rather snub noses, the Aryans described the earlier
settlers as “dark color,” as people without noses, and applied them to the term dasa, which in Iranian
stood for “enemy” (Ghurye, 165). Between the outcasts and the three Aryan varnas were the
Shudras, who were simple workers of the society. The Shudras consisted of two communities: one
community was of the locals who were subdued by the Aryans, and the other was the mix of Aryan
and local descent (Daniel). One of the main regulations the Aryans began with was the exclusion
of these Shudras from their religious worship. Very early in their Indian history, the Aryans
enjoined that the Shudras shall not practice the religious worship developed by them (Ghurye, 172).
The various factors that characterize caste-society were the result of the attempts on the part of the
upholders of the Brahmanic civilization to exclude the aborigines and the Shudras from religious
and social communion with themselves (Ghurye, 172). In Hindu religious stories, there are many
wars between the good Aryans and the dark-skinned demons. Stories of demon women trying to
seduce good Aryan men in deceptive ways are very prominent. Many believed that these incidences
really occurred in which the Gods and the positive heroes were of Aryan origin and the demons
were in fact the original residents of India who the Aryans themselves coined as devils and demons
(Daniel). As most of the societies in the world, India had a patriarchal system. Most of the time, the
son inherited his father’s profession, which led to developing families, who acquired the same
family profession for generations (Daniel). Later on, as these families got bigger, they were seen as
communities, or jat. Different families who professed the same profession developed social

5
relations between them and organized as a jat (Daniel). After a while, the Aryans who had created
the caste system slowly began to add non-Aryans to their statuses. Different jats were integrated
into the various varnas according to their profession. Other foreign invaders of ancient India—
Greeks, Huns, Scythains, and others—conquered parts of India and created kingdoms. These were
integrated with the Kshatriyas. Most of the communities that were in India before the arrival of the
Aryans were categorized with the Shudras or were made outcasts depending on their occupations
(Daniel). The beginning of the Dalit varna began here, where the communities exercising polluting
professions were made outcastes and considered as “untouchables.” Brahmans are very strict about
cleanliness, and in the past people believed that diseases could be spread not only through physical
touch but through the air as well. This is one of the reasons why Dalits were not allowed to touch
the high caste community and were required to stand a certain distance away from the higher castes
(Daniel). Around the 6th century, many individuals of the lower castes who were getting fed up of
suppression turned to Buddhism. Buddhism actually began as a reaction to the violence of Hindu
society, including the brutality of the caste system (Essortment). Buddhism concentrates not on the
society, but on the individual, thus separating religion from the interests of the ruling and
dominance. In Buddhism, one is no longer born into a position due to past injustice. Although
Buddhism does see life as pain and suffering and reincarnation as a renewal of this suffering, there
is a potential escape (Essortment). The Buddha, himself born into the warrior caste, was a severe
critic of the caste system. Buddhism utterly rejects any system of caste, and it actually reached high
levels of support during the rule of Ashoka, who adopted the Buddhist concept of ahimsa, or non
violence, and its tendency toward greater equality (Essortment). He ridiculed the priests who
claimed to be superior, criticized the theological basis of the system, and he welcomed into his
community people of all castes, including outcasts (Malalasekera and Jayatilleke). His most famous
saying on the subject was, “Birth does not make one a priest or an outcaste. Behavior makes one
either a priest or an outcaste” (Malalasekera and Jayatilleke). Even during the time when Buddhism
was decaying in India and Tantrayana (another sect of Buddhism practiced after the 7th century)
had adopted many aspects of Hinduism, it continued to welcome all castes (Malalasekera and
Jayatilleke). The fluidity of the caste system was affected by the arrival of the British. The British
brought with them their own traditional form of government, and as Christians, they did not have
much sympathy for the Hindu institutions (Ghurye, 270). During the initial days of the British East
India Company's rule, caste privileges and customs were encouraged, but the British law courts
began to disagree with the discrimination against the lower castes (Alavi, 5). However, British
policies of divide and rule contributed towards the hardening of caste identities (Corbridge and
Harriss, 8). As British civilization multiplied in India, however, it was fatal for the members of
different castes, affecting the beliefs they have about contact and “using the same instruments at
the cost of traditional repulsion”. For example, when the British government wanted to install a
water system in Bombay, there was a great outcry at first from the upper castes. They could not
believe that pure and impure, twice-born and Shudra, were going to be drinking from the same taps
as themselves. This was, however, resolved by the panchayat, which is an assembly of five wise
and respected elders chosen and accepted by the village community. They claimed that the tax raise
by the British administration for this canalization could be considered as reparation and that it would
redeem the sins to which this sharing of taps would expose them to. Britain did not only affected
the Hindu people by indirect means. A certain number of traditional caste-linked crafts were made
impossible to make because of the large number of importing manufactured goods from the
metropolis. Because of this, many weavers had to turn to agriculture. In other places, occupations
that had been passed down from generation to generation had to be closed down because of newly
opened factories. From these events, not only were occupations changed, but the very social
situations between the castes were affected. The three supporting pillars of the caste system—
hereditary specialization, the sacred hierarchy, and mutual repulsion—were basically directly
undermined by the British administration.

6
 CHAPTER 2
Religious take on casteism
The division of castes constitutes one of the most fundamental features of India’s social structure.
In Hindu society, caste divisions play a part in both actual social interactions and in the ideal scheme
of values. Members of different castes are expected to behave differently and to have different
values and ideals.These differences are sanctioned by the Hindu religion. Traditionally, the caste
system of stratification in India was legitimized through classical Hindu religious texts, especially
as interpreted by Brahmans. Hinduism is “as much of a social system as a religion…Its social
framework has from very early times been the caste system, and this has…become…increasingly
identified as Hinduism as such” (Smith, 9). The caste system was rationalized in ancient India on
various grounds. One of them was the justification in the Vedas. The caste system would not have
found approval among the Vedic people unless there was some reference to it in the Vedas. The
Purusha Sukta in the 10th Mandala of the Rigveda describes how the castes came into existence:
from different parts of the Purusha, the Cosmic Soul, at the time of a grand sacrifice performed by
the gods (Jayarama V). As mentioned earlier, the Brahmins came out of his mouth, the Kshatriyas
from his arms, the Vaishyas from his thighs, and the Shudras from his feet. Another justification
derives from the theory of Karma. This concept rationalizes the caste system based on birth. It
supports the argument that people of the lower castes have to blame themselves for their troubles
and low status because of their bad Karma in their past life (Jayarama V). The law of Karma states
that the present condition of your soul, for example, confusion or serenity, is based on your
decisions in the past and that you, as an individual, have made yourself what you are based on your
actions. Also, your present thoughts, decisions, and actions determine your future life events, and
these events can alter one’s Karma through natural, moral decision and action (Oriental
Philosophy). Therefore, it is the notion that “one’s particular duty is calibrated to the class into
which one was born and the stage of life one is presently passing through” (Smith, 10), and that one
of the main entailments of the caste system is “the belief in karma and the cycle of rebirth whereby
ones social position in this life is ethically determined by moral actions in past lives” (Smith, 10).
Since one of the main beliefs in Hinduism is that the consequences of your past decisions have
determined your present state, reincarnation plays a huge role in the prevention of people revolting
against the caste system. Reincarnation was created by the Aryans in order to justify the oppressive
behavior they were imposing on the natives and to keep the people from rising up against the
system. Reincarnation bolsters caste oppression in two ways. It justifies injustice, and deflects
hopes for progress from this life to a “next life” (JoT). For the people on top of the caste system
(the Brahmins), reincarnation justifies why they get the privilege of high-class birth. Those
privileges were earned through virtuous behaviours in their past lives, and a privileged birth proves
that one deserves privilege. For the people on the bottom, the Shudras and the untouchables,
reincarnation justifies why they suffer for their low birth. They must have earned their suffering
through sinful acts in past lives. In order to avoid a low-caste birth in their next life, Hindus who
are born as Shudras or untouchables learned to support rather than oppose their own oppression.
Hinduism teaches low-caste people that the way to improve their position in their next life is by
leading a virtuous life this time around with no acts of deviance towards the caste system (JoT). As
mentioned before, many in India who were oppressed (like the Shudras and the “untouchables”)
joined anti-Brahmanical movements in order to take a stance against the discriminatory acts they
were facing. Conversion to Buddhism seemed to be believed as the only means of emancipation
from the injustices associated with the caste system. This is where the term Dalit derived from;
those termed untouchables referred to themselves as the oppressed people, and the term is used to
denote both pride in their community as well as resistance to exploitation . Sometime the oppressed
Shudra castes and tribal groups also refer to themselves as Dalit. These Dalit activists rejected being
defined as Hindus and supported the movement against social and economic injustice (Sekhon, 46).

7
It is unfortunate that although the original intent of Varnas was not to create caste, it has evolved
into emphasizing the idea of the caste system. Varnas are conditioned with one’s actions and desires
based on Guna’s, but people have mistaken Varnas for caste and treat them as identical. Varnas are
God created, whereas caste is man-made; it is simply a social institution and can easily be changed
and modified according to changing needs of society (Lahiri). Caste by-birth was never the original
intent nor was it ever the basis upon which the Varnas were constituted; it was meant to have
individuals engaging only in a field of activity that they are capable of doing (Lahiri). The Varna
System stood on the basis of Gunas and karmas of the individual and has nothing to do with birth
(Lahiri).

2.1 Casteism and colonialism

Movements and Political Policies against Caste There were many movements and governmental
actions that took place pre- and post independence in order to overcome and attempt to eliminate
the inequalities and injustices associated with the caste system. During the national movement,
Gandhi began using the term “Harijans” (God’s people) to refer to the untouchables in order to
encourage a shift towards positive attitude towards the lower castes. Many lower caste members,
however, found the term to be patronizing. The Census of India had started by the British in the late
19th century, and in 1935, “the British Government of India came up with a list of 400 groups
considered untouchable, as well as many tribal groups, that would be accorded special privileges in
order to overcome deprivation and discrimination. Those groups included on this list came to be
termed Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. In the 1970s, however, many leaders of castes
considered untouchable started calling themselves Dalits” (Sekhon, 48). The anti-caste Dalit
movement began with Jyotirao Phule in the mid-19th century, and he started a movement for
education and the upliftment of women, Shudra’s, and Dalits, and the movement spread to many
parts of India. He also worked to abolish the idea of “untouchability,” which meant getting rid of
restrictions on entry into temples, and finding a place for Dalits within Hinduism (Sekhon, 48).
After 1910, however, Dalit leaders started focusing on distancing themselves from Hinduism and
began to advocate for a separate electorate for the Dalits. But Gandhi, who was one of the leaders
of the Indian National Congress, tried to instead encourage the incorporation of Dalits as part of
reformed Hinduism. Another prominent movement was the Dalit movement under B.R. Ambedkar,
which began between the 1920s and 1930s. He campaigned for greater rights for Dalits in British
India, and even after independence. Both Ambedkar and Gandhi were advocates for the abolishment
of the caste system, but they disagreed on the means to go about it. Gandhi believed “untouchability
to be a moral issue that could be abolished through goodwill and change of heart among the upper-
caste Hindus”. Ambedkar, however, believed that “the subordination of Dalits was primarily
economic and political, and could only be overcome by changing the social structure through legal,
political, and educational means”. Ambedkar did receive constitutional guarantees after
independence that reserved a certain percentage of seats in elections for Dalits, but by the mid-
1950s, Ambedkar was not satisfied by the rate of implementation of the measures. He therefore
resigned from government and began to recruit Dalits to seek rights. In 1956, he encouraged around
six million Dalits to convert to Buddhism “as a means of escaping the social stigma of
untouchability within the Hindu caste system”. During the 1970s, the Dalit Panthers movement
sprouted up among the younger generation of Dalits along with other social movements in India,
and their movement expressed their anger and frustration at the failure of implementation regarding
policies that would eliminate acts of violence against Dalits by upper-caste Hindus in many parts
of urban and rural India. There are three main categories of people that have been identified as
eligible for preferential policies that reserve seats in legislatures, in government jobs, in public
sector enterprises, and in state-supervised educational institutions, in terms of their population
proportion in their area. They have also been promised special programs (such as health care legal
assistance, allotment of land, scholarships, loans, and grants) and are legally protected against

8
discrimination (such as debt, forced labour, and untouchability). The first group is the Scheduled
Castes (SCs), which includes communities who are considered to be untouchables (Daniel). The
second are the Scheduled Tribes (STs). This category includes in it those communities who did not
accept the caste system and preferred to reside deep in the jungles, forests, and mountains of India,
away from the main population. The Scheduled Tribes are also called Adivasi, meaning aboriginals
(Daniel). The third is the Other Backward Classes (OBCs), which includes in it castes who belong
to the Shudra Varna, former untouchables who converted from Hinduism to other religions, and
nomads and tribes who made a living from criminal acts (Daniel). They are considered to be
affected by “backwardness” based on social and economic disadvantages. It is not clear, however,
what criterion identifies OBCs and there is an ongoing disagreement over whether to assign people
this status on the basis of caste or on economic criteria. The problem with this is that caste and
economic status have been largely correlated in the past, and even now, caste-based prejudice and
discrimination hinder economic advancement for the lower castes. In the 1960s, the reservation
system for SCs and STs began, but the individual states were the ones that were to determine which
would be identified as OBCs. Many southern states identified economically disadvantaged castes
as OBCs, but there has been considerable opposition to implementing these policies in other Indian
states (Sekhon, 50). The Central Government appointed a commission headed by B.P. Mandal to
look into the issue, and by 1978, the Mandal Commission report was completed. It was concluded
that caste was the main contributing factor to social and economic backwardness. Many seats in
state institutions were reserved for the three groups. The Commission recommended that 27 percent
of seats be reserved for OBCs, in addition to 15 percent for SCs and 7 percent for STs (Sekhon,
50). Unfortunately, the government did not implement these policies in fear of large scale
opposition from the people, but in 1990, the Janata Dal government “attempted partial
implementation of recommendations leading to widespread unrest and opposition from middle- and
upper-caste youths, intellectuals, and elites”. Modern India Relationships between castes have
become more relaxed today. There is more food sharing between castes and a lot more eating done
at local restaurants where caste distinctions are less likely to be made. One of the biggest changes
that took place in India was occupational pursuits among men (and women later on). Earlier, most
men did not veer away from their caste-linked occupations, such as blacksmithing and pottery
making. Many have now taken up newer occupations that do not relate to their caste, such as
government jobs, teaching, retail and services, and machine repair. Wealth and power in the village
is now less associated with caste than before, and landownership has become more diversified.
Also, the idea that purity and pollution is caused by the lower castes has diminished a good amount.
It has, however, only somewhat diminished in the public, whereas behind closed doors and on
ceremonial occasions, purification rituals related to caste status are still observed. Endogamy is still
enforced among families, but not as strict as before. A women’s status is still significantly tied to
the status of the male, but education and awareness of equalization for women has widely spread
throughout India. In rural areas, movement out of caste specializing occupations and access to
resources is still difficult and slow for the lower castes, but in urban areas, caste is now a less
significant part of daily life. Although discrimination on the basis of caste has been outlawed in
India, caste has become a means for competing for access to resources and power in modern India,
such as educational opportunities, new occupations, and improvement in life chances. This trend is
connected to India’s preferential policies and the implementation of these policies. Implementation
has been very uneven in the midst of debates and controversies over the preferential policies, but
they have still had a very significant impact on many sections among the lower castes and classes
(Sekhon, 50). There has been an increase in representation of SCs, STs, and OBCs in elected offices
and they have acquired strong local support. They have also become an important element in
electoral politics and have gone on to form strong political parties in various regions. People from
these disadvantaged groups have largely made their way into government jobs as well as all levels
of educational institutions. Unfortunately, however, only a relatively small proportion of the lower
castes have benefited from these preferential policies. Even thought there is an increasing

9
acceptance of lower-caste individuals, there is also more overt hostility and violence expressed
against the lower castes and classes in many parts of India. For example, in parts of Bihar, which is
a state in eastern India, upper-caste landowners formed a private army in 1994 called the Ranvir
Sena to “protect” themselves from the lower castes. Although this was outlawed, the Ranvir Sena
had carried out 20 massacres of Dalits by early 1999. Hostility is also expressed by the many people
who support the removal of reserved government jobs and in institutions for technical education,
particularly on the part of many from the traditionally higher castes who are economically
disadvantaged. Individual achievements, merit, as well as economic position are also still
significantly affected by caste.

10
 CHAPTER 3
Relevance of casteism in New India
The post-independent India while adopting her constitution put affirmative action as a part of its
objective to alleviate the poverty, unemployment and the miseries of the so called untouchables (SC
and ST), other backward classes and the adivasis. The castes eligible for this treatment were
identified and included in the schedule for quotas and reservation in education and employment.
These castes came to be known as Scheduled Castes (SCs) and the Scheduled tribes (STs). The
other eligible castes for reservation and quotas came to be known as Other Backward Classes
(OBCs). Jotirao Phule was the first modern thinker to characterize the productive castes of India as
‘Sudras and Ati-Sudras’. Those castes other than Brahman, Kshatriya and Vaisyas were called by
him as Sudras. Ati-Sudras is the so-called untouchables and according to Phule they are the ones
who predate the Varna scheme. But now many of the Sudra castes have been elevated into neo-
Kshatriya category. Hence to denote the people who still languish in the drudgery of caste system
had to have a word to rally all men and women from these castes and fight for their emancipation.
B. R. Ambedkar, the great leader of the productive castes of pre and post- independent India started
using the term dalit, a concept that is rooted in Marathi language to refer to the socalled lower caste
people. The word dalit means suppressed and exploited people. The concept has emerged from the
people’s usage in Maharashtra. Dalit has come to mean things or persons who are cut, split, broken
or torn asunder, scattered or crushed and destroyed. The term dalit became popular after the
emergence of Dalit Panthers movement in Maharashtra. Dalit is usually used to denote the SCs.
After the emergence of Bahujan Samaj Party in Uttar Pradesh, the use of the term Bahujan to refer
the SCs, STs and OBCs gained acceptance of the people and the government. This term was first
used by Buddha and then by Phule. The term Bahujan simply means majority and does not qualify
the nature of the population. Hence dalit scholaractivists like Kancha Ilaiah use the term Dalit
bahujans to refer to so-called untouchables and the Other Backward Castes.

3.1 Myth and Reality about Caste System in India:

The orthodox view on the origin and sustenance of caste system in India relies heavily on the
sacerdotal texts and on the Brahmanical interpretation of the same. This originates from a
monolithic understanding of caste system and considers the reality as one that continues for 3 three
millenium without any significant mutation. According to the Purusasukta legend, the Brahmans
and Kshatriyas emerged from the head and shoulders, respectively, of Purusa, the primeval being.
Consequently they merit high-caste status. Next came the Vaisyas from the thighs of the primeval
being. The same legend goes on to say that the lowly Shudras deservedly occupy a subordinate
position because they were born from Purusa’s feet. The socalled untouchables who bore the burnt
of this mysterious system for generations are beyond this four-fold Varna scheme. The dominant
lay understanding and academic point of view on caste phenomenon is that a single caste hierarchy
is universally acknowledged and accepted by everyone in the caste system. To believe that there is
a single caste order to which all castes from Brahman to the untouchables adhere would not match
the realities. The emergence of Rajput and Gujar-Pratihara kingdoms in the medieval India and the
rise of Jats from the thirteenth century onwards, the assertion of Izhavas and later of Mahars in the
modern period are the example to prove this view-point. But no castes other than the Brahmins
adhere to this origin story and hence there-by accept their current status in the caste hierarchy. The
entire socalled untouchable and other castes have their own origin tales that are totally against the
orthodox view. For example, the Kahars, a backward caste of Central Bihar claim that they are
descendents of the lunar dynasty – the moon, which are the eyes of Purusa. This story tries to
establish the superiority of Kahar’s over and above the Brahmans and Kshatriyas by stating that
they are made up of superior and finer material. In medieval India, the Bakthi movement, which
was anti-caste and anti-brahmanical, lasted several centuries. This could not have been possible if

11
the brahmanical view of caste hierarchy was accepted by all. The present day caste wars, uprisings
and demands for more shares in economic and political power would not have arisen if brahmanical-
textual view were accepted uncritically by all. The caste system is being viewed as a rigid hierarchy
based on purity and pollution. But no caste, even those placed at the bottom of the caste hierarchy
do accept the upper-caste notion that their bodies are made of impure substances. No caste willingly
agrees that its members are defiling and charge other castes to be polluting them. A Chamar i.e.
Leather worker believes that he or she is being pushed down the caste ladder unjustly but at the
same time condemns other so called untouchables to lower caste status. But at the same time every
caste (jati) practices its own purity–impurity rituals. This is the story of the myth and reality about
the caste system in India.

3.2 Dalit Politics:

After post-independent, the oppressed classes of India i.e. the Dalits have awakened to assert their
space in the economic and political arena. The mightier their assertion, the fiercer the resistance put
up by the dominant castes. Hence we have group clashes, burning down of villages, killings, rapes,
naked parading and so many other horrendous crimes meted out on the Dalits. It is in the 1980s that
the Dalit parties emerged as a force to reckon with. The Mandal Commission report recommending
reservation and quotas for dalits in a systematic fashion, and the movement for and against it gave
an added impetus to the dalit movement and helped its consolidation.

3.3 The Concept of Social Exclusion:

As a definition, social exclusion reflects the multiple and overlapping nature of the disadvantages
experienced by certain groups and categories of the population, with social identity as the central
axis of their exclusion. The value addedness of the social exclusion approach is its emphasis on the
role of relational features in deprivation. (Sen, 2000) Social exclusion can therefore be explained
in terms of group interactions aimed at maximizing value and minimizing costs. “Individuals are
most vulnerable when they have fewest personal capacities and material resources….but none of
these threatens their survival so long as they enjoy the protections afforded by membership of an
inclusive group that co-operates productively and redistributes its product” (Jordan, 1994). He
further writes that all interactions take place in the context of norms, practices and institutions that
steer, stabilize and regulate them. Members regulate each other’s actions by reinforcing norms of
social obligation, and offer mutual support and assistance on a reciprocal basis. “All social
formations have rules about rights as well as obligations, which determine when, where and how
the goods for final consumption will be distributed. These rules are laid down collectively, but result
in individual entitlements” (Jordan, 1996).

3.4 Social Exclusion as a Human Rights Issue:

The effectiveness of policies and programmes in addressing the issue of social exclusion relates to
the discussion on human development and human rights. The development approaches from the
1950s to the 1980s primarily focused on social and economic development as an outcome of the
development process and were less concerned with civil and political rights. During this period,
government policy and the development community were 5 also less concerned with the quality of
the process by which the outcomes were achieved. In contrast, the human rights based approach to
development recognizes both the achievement of a desirable outcome and the establishment of an
adequate process to achieve and sustain the outcomes. “Participation, local ownership,
empowerment and sustainability are essential characteristics of a high-quality process (Jonsson,
2003). A rights perspective is based on principles that emphasize accountability of those with
obligations to realize the rights of children; the universality of rights; the indivisibility and
interdependence of rights; and also the principle of the best interests of the child and taking into
account the views of the child. The state and the other duty-bearers e.g. parents and teachers have

12
obligations to fulfill these rights. As rights-holders, children are entitled to demand that the duty-
bearers meet their respective obligation to respect, protect and fulfill their rights. (United Nations
Children’s Fund, 2002). This global shift in development towards a human rights perspective has
important implications for addressing social exclusion in education as it encourages one to take a
broader, systemic and more holistic view of the issue and not interpret it only as a failure of the
education system alone.

13
 CHAPTER 4
The Overall Position of Schedule Caste in India
According to the Census 2001, the total population of the Scheduled Castes (SC) in India is
166,635,700, which is 16.3 per cent of the total population (Registrar General, 2005). The population
of SCs is unevenly distributed among the states in India, with nearly 60 per cent of all SC children of
primary school-going age (6-10 years) residing in the following six states: Andhra Pradesh, Bihar,
Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh. The latter five states are among the most
disadvantaged states in India across most social indicators. Historically, the caste system classified
people by their occupation and status. “Each caste had a specific place in the hierarchy of social status.
Although in “scriptural terms” social and economic status was supposed to be separated, the economic
and social status of the various castes tended to coincide (Shah, 2006). However, since the 19th century,
the link between caste and occupation has become less rigid as it became easier for people to change
occupations. This change has accelerated with the economic boom which has taken place in India since
the early 1990s i.e. after economic reforms or liberalisation, globalisation and privatisation. There has
not, however, been a corresponding fluidity in caste, as intermarriage is very rare. Privileged sections
of society tend to be from upper castes while the disadvantaged sections by 6 the so called lower castes.
Caste can be seen as the institution that has been structuring and maintaining for centuries relations of
power among different communities and seeks to legitimize these power relations through
systematically dispensing mixes of economic and cultural assets/opportunities and deprivations to
different communities (Sheth, 2004). The specific structure and hierarchy related to castes is specific to
various states and regions in India, with only the highest caste, the Brahmins, consistently faring better
throughout the country. Not only are there differences in the names of the various castes, but also the
hierarchy between them may also be different between regions. However, castes who traditionally
suffered discrimination based on untouchability, which was an element of the caste system throughout
India, have been identified, enumerated and incorporated in the schedule of the Constitution. The
implicit criterion for inclusion in the SC list is the social and religious disability suffered by a caste on
account of untouchability i.e. being at the pollution end of the social hierarchy. In defining who would
be included in the Schedules, the government originally used the 1931 census report and to a large
extent duplicated a list created in 1936 (de Haan, 2005). Currently, the National Commissions for
Scheduled Caste (SC) and Scheduled Tribe (ST) are vested with the responsibility of considering castes
for inclusion or exclusion from the Schedule, which then needs to be ratified in Parliament. The
discriminated communities are then officially designated as Scheduled Castes (SCs). Included in the
SC category are communities from three different religions, Hinduism, Sikhism and Buddhism, all
having within them communities traditionally suffering from untouchability. The Government of
India’s approach to historically marginalized groups draws on provisions made in the Indian
Constitution, which contains explicit state obligation towards protecting and promoting social,
economic, political and cultural rights. “The State shall promote with special care the educational and
economic interests of the weaker sections of the people and, in particular, of the Scheduled Castes and
the Scheduled Tribes, and shall protect them from social injustice and all forms of exploitation”
(Directive Principle of state Policy, Article 46). The Constitution mandates positive discrimination in
government services, state-run, and sponsored educational institutions. Amendments to the Constitution
also enabled representation of SC men and women in local governance structures. (de Haan, 2005).
Table 1 shows that on an average for India, 27.09% of the population live below the poverty line in
rural areas, compared to 36.25% of the SC population and 23.62% in urban areas compared to 45.86
per cent in rural areas and 34.75 per cent of ST population living below poverty line in urban areas.

14
 Population below India SC’s ST’s
poverty line
Urban 27.09 36.25 45.86
Rural 23.62 38.47 34.75

Table 1: Population below poverty line in India, SC and ST (NSSO)

Mehrotra recognized that there has been political and social mobilization of SCs in India, particularly
in certain poor states such as Uttar Pradesh, which is one of the poorest states in India. However, this
mobilization has failed to translate into positive change in the social sector for this excluded group of
population. As Mehrotra wrote, “while UP’s mobilizers of the dalits (SCs) have focused exclusively on
capturing power, the gains to the lowest castes have been entirely of a symbolic nature.” (Mehrotra,
2006).

Survey % Completed
NSSS 52 (1995-96) 32.8
NSS 55 (1999-00) 36.8
NFHS-II (1998-99) 37.7
RCHS-II (2002-04) 37.8
Table 2: Percentage of children completing primary school (various sources)

Using completion rates of five years of schooling as a key indicator of educational status, Table 2
shows that SC population are disadvantaged when compared to ST and other castes of India. It
should also be noted that ST children are in some ways even more disadvantaged than SCs in terms
of education status. Regarding the accessibility of the education system for ST children, issues such
as the language of instruction, remoteness of their habitations, poverty and other factors are barriers
to access for this disadvantaged group.

Social group SC ST Others

Male 36.3 32.6 44.8
Female 32.3 26.6 44.1
Table 3: Completion Rate of 10-12 years by caste

The Approach of National Common Minimum Programme of UPA Government towards the Dalit
People: Wada Na Todo Abhiyan (Keep Your Promise Campaign): is a national initiative to hold
the government accountable to its promise to end Poverty, Social Exclusion & Discrimination. This
campaign emerged from the consensus among human rights activists and social action groups who
were part of the World Social Forum 2004 (Mumbai) on the need for a forceful, focused and
concerted effort to make a difference to the fact that one fourth of the world’s poor live in India and
continue to experience intense deprivation from opportunities to learn, live and work in dignity.
Wada Na Todo Abhiyan works to ensure that the concerns and aspirations of dalits, adivasis,

15
denotified & nomadic tribes, women, children, youth, the differently abled and people living with
HIV-AIDS are mainstreamed across programs, policies and development goals of the government.
We are represented by a network of more than 900 rights action groups across 15 states of India,
who have come together to link social groups and engage policy makers on issues of strategic
relevance. The fifth principle of the National Common Minimum Programme of UPA speaks to
provide for full equality of opportunity, particularly in education and employment for scheduled
castes, scheduled tribes, OBCs and religious minorities. However this does not mean that the other
five principles have nothing to do with the dalits, adivasis and other minorities. Since the
government accepts the principle of the Special Component Plan, the rights of the Dalits must be
considered and integrated across all the basic principles. The Inter-Ministry Task Force Report
highlights several provisions within the National Common Minimum Programme that have special
relevance to Dalits. Educational development constitutes the major programme of the government
i.e. about half of the central government spending on the SC and ST population. The main
educational problem of SC and ST relates to low literacy rate, high drop out at primary school and
higher level, low quality education and discrimination and exclusion including the admission in
educational institution. Government educational schemes therefore include measures such as: to
improve educational infrastructure particularly in area populated predominantly by SC; admission
in educational institutions through reservation of seats and other measures ; financial supports at
various level of education, including scholarships/fellowship national and international; remedial
coaching to improve quality of education and capabilities; special hostel for boys and girls and in
all these schemes special focus on girls education. If the government is serious about keeping its
promises to the dalits, it needs to ensure that special efforts, resources and provisions are made –
both in relation to the mainstream programs of the National Common Minimum Programme as well
as with regard to dalit specific schemes and initiatives. Similarly, while it has been making all the
right noises in support of reservation legislation and private sector reservations for the dalits, there
is still a long way to go before the seeming intent is translated into practice. The need of the hour
is for the government to take bold, decisive action in favour of the dalits and marginalized
communities. This is not just a survival issue for the dalits, but a matter of survival for the
government itself – which was brought into power at the centre on the strength of its promises to
make a difference to the dalits and marginalized communities.

16
 CHAPTER 5
Philosophical Perspective on casteism

5.1 Dr. Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar

Dr. Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar was a jurist, scholar, Bahujan political leader, and a Buddhist
revivalist, and the chief architect of the Indian constitution. Bimrao was born on April 14, 1891 at
Mahar in Central Provinces. He belonged to the Hindu Mahar caste. He was the fourteenth child in
his family. In 1907, he passed his matriculation examination and in the following year he entered
Elphinstone College, which was affiliated to the University of Bombay, becoming the first from his
untouchable community to do so. He had his early education in Satara. From his childhood itself
he spent his life to fight against the system of untouchability. He is also credited for having sparked
the Dalit Buddhist Movement. Ambedkar was honoured with the Bharath Ratna, for his highest
degree of national service. He practiced law for a few years before he began publishing journals
advocating political rights and social freedom for India’s untouchables. Ambedkar considered
untouchability as a corollary of the caste system. His first writing was titled as “Caste in India,
Their Mechanism, Genesis and Devolepment”. In this paper, Ambedkar raised two theses. One is
that India is culturally homogeneous, and second one is that the basis of caste was the endogamy
of the Brahmins, which was adopted in turn by the non-Brahmins. He wrote “Ethnically people are
heterogeneous” in this he had expressed the unity of culture. It has not only a geographic unity, but
it has over and above all a deeper and much more fundamental unity. The indubitable cultural unity
that covers the land from end to end substantiates his views on the origin of caste. Dr. Ambedkar
criticised theories which emphasised colour or occupation and stressed that the geneses of the caste
within the Brahmin practice of endogamy, which created castes through initiation and
excommunication. He pointed out that the caste system was a legal system maintained at the at the
point of the bayonet. Its survival was due to prevention of the masses from possessing arms and
denying to them the right to education and the right to property. According to Dr. Ambedkar the
established order is based on an inexorable law of karma or destiny has no relation to the merits of
the individual living under it. He refused to accept the concept of Chathurvarnya as an ideal form
of society. The varna system never formed a society. The four varnas were animated by nothing but
a spirit of animosity towards one another. Chathurvarnya divided the society into four classes of
which the shudra were placed at the last and the education and the property were denied to them.
At outset, the caste system totally divided the society into several categories. It was a system in
which the outcast people have been paralysed, crippled and deadened. It was the antithesis of
socialism. In Dr. Ambedkar analysis, untouchability was not based on the principal of inequality.
In this system, gradation of the caste formed an ascending scale of reverence and a descending scale
of contempt to a system which gave no scope for the growth of those sentiments of equality and
fraternity so essential for a democratic form of government. The social system based on inequality
stands on a different foot from a social system based on graded inequality. In the system of graded
inequality there are the highest (the Brahmins) and the higher (the Kshathriyas) and below (Sudhras)
were created. The Vaishya presented as the higher class and the Sudhras are forced to be their
slaves. Later, they were called as the untouchables. The people of the high class imposed more
works on the low class people and have been paid low salary. The high class people never try live
with the low class people at any condition. The higher class people always very conscious to get
rid of the low class people but the Bhramins do not wish to combine with the high and the low class
people. Dr. Ambedkar fought for the equality. Sometimes the existing caste system makes the
jealous on each class and raises the commotions between them. In short each, the highest and the
high class were interested in maintaining the social system consciously or unconsciously. Dr.
Ambedkar exposed that the consequences of the untouchability to the world boldly. He pointed out

17
that “slavery was never obligatory.” But untouchability is obligatory. A person is permitted to have
a slave in the name of caste system in India. The low class people have been compelled to clean the
latrine of them. But they have no option because they needed the money to feed their children. So,
they accepted the ugly works given to them. They are subjected to all the disabilities of an
untouchable. According to Dr. Ambedkar ”the law of slavery permitted emancipation”. It was not
the fate of the low class people but it was well played by the highest and high class. Once a boy
born in an untouchable family, he has to obey the high class people. Babasaheb Dr B R Ambedkar
is the greatest pioneer of Buddhist Revival in India. He had been hailed as a modern Bodhisattva.
One of the duties of bodhisattva is to reinterpret the dharma, according to the requirements of his
time keeping in view the growing spiritual and social consciousness of humanity. Dr. Ambedkar
accomplished this task splendidly through his noble and sacred book, ‘The Buddha and His
Dhamma’. His three Gurus are Phule, Kabir and Buddha. Buddha’s doctrines of ‘Annicca’
(transistorniess) and ‘Annata’ (egolessnes) exercised a profound influence on Dr. Ambedkar , these
two doctrines made him both scientific and humanitarian in outlook, Lord Buddha led him to
question the infallibility of Vedas, the faith in the salvation of the soul, the efficacy of rites,
ceremonies and sacrifices as means of obtaining salvation, the theory that god created man or that
he came out of the body of the Brahma, and the doctrine of Karma which is the determination of
man’s position in present life by deeds done by him in his past life, the impact of the teaching of
Buddha, can be seen in Dr. Ambedkar’s writings. According to Gouthama Buddha the
reorganisation of mind as the centre of everything and that the mind is the fountain of everything ,
that is all the good evil that arises within and befalls us from without led Dr. Ambedkar to affirm
that the cleansing of the mind is the essence of religion. So he suggested many solutions to the
religious, social, economic and political problems. To him untouchability was not a by-product of
blood or rate inferiority. It was essentially a distorted expression of social psychology, a sort of
social nausea of one group against another group. Therefore, the solution in his socio-religious
problems lay in removing social nauseas from the mind of the Hindus and infusing in them a
common national sentiment. At the same Dr. Ambedkar ceaselessly strove to raise the mental
stature of the downtrodden masses by encouraging them to have faith and hope in their create
potentialities. He put great emphasis on the individual as the centre of all doctrines and activities.
Buddha had said that “man is himself responsible of his own fate, good or bad, and he is not a mere
puppet of external causes which fix his destiny for him. A man overcome sorrow and achieves
happiness by his own sustained efforts”. Buddha followed the doctrine of egalitarian and humanism.
At the time of the birth of Buddha his father Sudhodhana was elected to the chief position in the
Sakya state which had a republican institution. These republican principles of Buddha’s
constitutional set up influenced Dr. Ambedkar, thus seen throughout his book ‘The Buddha and His
Dhamma’. While accepting Buddhism, Dr. Ambedkar most courageously reinterpreted the
Dhamma of Buddha and created a revolution in a revolution, and the process incurred the
displeasure of many orthodox Buddhist. But reinterpretation has been going on all religions at the
hands of seers and scolars in successive ages. Dr. Ambedkar was perfectly justified in reinterpreting
the Dhamma of the Buddha and restoring it to its pristine purity and truth. Dr. Ambedkar, being a
confirmed rationalist and a forthright secularist, gave a fresh twist to Buddhism. He gave evidence
of his indomitable courage and unalloyed conviction by his bold reinterpretation by writing the
Buddha and His Dhamma which may be considered as his magnum opus. The other important point
in Dr. Ambedkar Renaissance had to do with his concern for the development of India as a whole.
In arguing that the basic conflict was between ‘Buddhism and Brahmanism’, he was making an
important intervention in debates on the question of Indian identity. Most Indian intellectuals of his
time and even today have seen this as basically a ‘Hindu’ identity, in which all the various religions
and sects originating in the Indian subcontinent are viewed as having a basic unity that is
characterised by their flexible and comprehensive view of the human soul. This is then contrasted
to the ‘western, religions which see a separation between man and God, and between man and
nature, religions that are based on monotheistic, sectarian and individualistic world views.

18
Buddhism, according to this position, is basically similar to Hinduism in its major themes. Dr.
Ambedkar was building on this tradition. While he used the term ‘Hinduism’ in most of his writings
accepting the reality that by the 20th century most Indian accepted the definition of themselves as
‘Hindus’, still in defining the contradiction in Indian society be used the term ‘Brahmanism’ to
emphasize the crucial role played by the concepts of Brahmanic superiority and caste hierarchy.
Brahmanism’s unique characteristics was to foster all those features, Buddhism opposed them.
Brahmanism emphasized magic and ritual, while Buddhism emphasized magic and ritual, while
Buddhism emphasized rationality and ethics. The conflict between Brahmanism and Buddhism was
seen as of the outmost interest to Dalits in Particular, because it was in the process of defeating
Buddhism that the that the caste system solidified, and certain specific groups were particularly
degraded and classed as ‘untouchables’ thus Dr. Ambedkar argued that dalits were in fact originally
Buddhists who had been rendered untouchables and their being deprived of access to resources was
part of the ongoing civilization conflict. Dr. Ambedkar was, through the example of Hinduism and
the caste system, painfully aware of the entanglement of religion and society; therefore he intended
to reconstruct Buddhism not only as a religion for the untouchables but as a humanist and social
religion, which combined scientific understandings with universal truth. His Buddhism protected a
religion for modern civic society. He proclaimed that he was in search of a new religion suitable
for dalits. Equality, righteousness, nonviolence and compassion were the main tenets of that new
religion, which proved to be ideally suited for shudras and untouchables. Buddhism was of course
unalterably opposed to caste. Not only did he deny it, in many ways the Buddhist text shows a
leading role for the ‘untouchables’ of the time, known as chandalas. The chandalas are always
shown as enemies of Brahmins, for instance in one of the stories sariputta, the Buddha’s most
esteemed follower, takes birth as a chandala, gives true spiritual teaching to a Brahmin student,
forcing him “between his feet” for his inability to answer questions. All in all, Buddhism played a
leading role in contesting the field of defeating social order with Brahmanism, and within this gave
an important role to untouchables who are often depicted as spiritual if not quit Buddhist followers.
Dr. Ambedkar visited Buddhapuri, it was in the early 1940’s and Dr. Ambedkar was secretary for
state in the viceroy’s council. This visit to Buddhapuri is hardly known amongst the Dalit
community because there was a much more prominent even, which overshadowed this visit. This
was the second meeting of the scheduled caste federation which took place in Kanpur on 29 January
1944.in his speech at Kanpur, Dr. Ambedkar raised the point that the emancipation of the
untouchables was more important to him than the freedom of the country. He saw that the scheduled
caste as the third group, on an even plane with Muslims and Hindus. Hinduism as the all pervasive,
crippling and enslaving religion, which kept the scheduled caste in subjugation, must be discarded
and rejected. Again and again, he made a plea to fight castism amongst the scheduled caste and be
passionately put forwarded the argument that the scheduled caste movement needed unity, self
reliance, and organizational strength and that women had to take an active part in it to make it a
success. In the 1950’s Dr. Ambedkar’s affinity to Buddhism increased. He went to Sri Lanka for
attending a convention of Buddhist scholars and monks. While dedicating a new Buddhist Vihara
near Puna, Dr. Ambedkar announced that he was writing a book on Buddhism and that as soon as
it was finished, he planned to make a formal conversion to Buddhism. Dr. Ambedkar twice visited
Burma in 1954. Second time he went there for attending the third conference of the world fellowship
of Buddhits in Rangoon. In 1955, he founded the ‘Bharatiya Buddha Mahasbha’, or the Buddhist
Society of india. He completed his manuscript and final work,’ The Buddha and his Dhamma’ in
1956. It was published posthumously. During the 1930s the autonomous anti-caste stance would
come to crystallize more explicitly in opposition in opposition to the Hindu caste reforms. The
social organisation with in the autonomous anti-caste tradition was now linked to the congress party.
The controversy between Gandhiji and Dr. Ambedkar were crucial in the formation of the
autonomous anti- caste position. The idea that the ‘Depressed classes’ were to be separated from
Hinduism and the Hindu community was represented by Dr. Ambedkar in the opposite camp, M K
Gandhi argued in favour of the inclusion of the ‘Depressed Classes’ among the Hindus and caste

19
reforms. Before 1935 the government used the concept of ‘Depressed Classes.’ In 1935 the
government of India Act introduced the category ‘Scheduled Caste’. The non- Brahmin movement
as well as the communist movement, by and large, were working within the congress partyat this
time, but the Dalit movement differed in this respect. Finally in 1930 Dr. Ambedkar founded
Depressed Class Federation in 1930this federation developed into the ‘Scheduled Caste Federation’
from 1942 onwards. In 1932 a political break up took place between Dr. Ambedkar and Gandhi
resulting in the so called Poona Pact. The British government held three Round Table Conference
in London, with the purpose of finding out Indian opinion regarding reforms for the proposed new
constitution of India which resulted in the ‘Government of India Act 1935’. The second of these
was held in 1931and both Dr. Ambedkar and Gandhi were present. This meeting developed in to
an outright confrontation between these two historical figures, both claiming to represent the
‘Depressed Classes. ‘in connection with this conference, the so called C communal Award was
announced, according to which the ‘Depressed Classes’ were given electoral benefits in relation to
the rest of society. The communal Award generously announced that the category of Depressed
Classes should be given the benefit of two votes in election. Dr. Ambedkar found the ideals of the
Varna system impossible to combine with equality. It is because of the effort of Dr. Ambedkar and
others the article 17 of the Indian Constitution deals especially with untouchability and declares its
practice, in any form, to be forbidden. But the state should not only passively refer from
discriminating; it should also take action on behalf of the weaker section. Five years later addition
was made and according to the Untouchability Offenses Act of 1955, the enforcement of any
disability arising out of ‘untouchability’ become an offence punished by law. In 1976, two decades
later, this Act was made even more effective in the Protection of Civil Right Act. Anyhow Dr. B R
Ambedkar, one of the illustrious sons of India did services for the uplift of scheduled caste by
carrying out a life long struggle to safeguard effectively the rights of the dalits and led his people
to life, dignity, meaning and self respect. His mission was to bring about a radical transformation
in the living condition of millions of his community. He also wielded to guarantee the Dalits
protection from the atrocities of the upper cast. Ambedkar’s vital contribution is not only to his own
community but also to the Indians as a whole. Many scholars have contemplated and wondered
about some of Gandhi's writings where he defends and validates caste and some of the practices
associated with it. Some of them have seen it as evidence of Gandhi's faith in the caste system; they
have also tried to provide possible justifications for why Gandhi finds caste, varna, and some of its
restrictions useful. Some other scholars believe that the inconsistencies in his writings reveal that
there were gradual changes or slow development in his ideas on such subjects. The very first issue
he encountered in India was that of untouchability, a matter ignored in 'Hind Swaraj'. When he
founded his Ashram at Ahmedabad in 1915 a crisis erupted when he admitted to it an 'untouchable'
couple. But he withstood it, the couple stayed, and henceforth on this matter, Gandhi would give
no concession. If he yet went on an affirming his faith in varnashrama, this was done more or less
to keep peace with the bulk of the upper castes. Gandhi was looked upon with a great deal of
suspicion by non-Brahmin leaders in the country, particularly in south India, many of whom simply
castigated him as a votary of Brahmanism. According to A. Ramaswami Mudaliar, the greatest folly
of the Mahatma was that other than the practice of child marriage, he found nothing wrong with
Brahmanism, of which varnashrama dharma was an integral part.1 It is trying to assess the
Gandhian perceptions of varna, certain vexing issues do require interpretation. Gandhi was
enamoured with the notion of harmony, it has to be understood that such concern was not born of
individual experience, but was rather a universal one, born of the ravages of time. Here I shall try
to analyze Gandhi's interpretation of caste. Gandhi tried to abolish the caste system or he tried to
maintain social harmony. The Hindu people maintain untouchability as part of their caste
obligations. As a whole, the practice revolved around avoiding physical contact with particular
groups to save oneself from being 'polluted.' Hereditary occupations are understood to be one of the
most important characteristics of the caste system. Each caste is assigned a particular type of work,
and every Hindu is expected to follow his hereditary occupation. After returning to India from South

20
Africa in 1917, Gandhi started a national school at his Indian ashram where every student was
taught agriculture, hand-weaving, carpentry, and metalcraft. There was no emphasis on preserving
one's hereditary occupation. Gandhi's interpretation of tradition was in sharp contrast to the style of
Hobbes, Hegel, and Machiavelli who too attempted to bridge the past and the present. Gandhi's
problem lay in the fact that he was not a systematic or sophisticated political philosopher, nor was
he strictly a politician, restricting his concern to goals essentially 3 political in nature. Mainly he
was a moralist who tried to interpret tradition within the broader parameters of the contemporary
Indian situation. It is believed, the Hindu masses accept the authority of the shastras, which include
the four Vedas, the Upanishads, the Puranas, and the two great epics, Ramayana and Mahabharatha.
In Hinduism, the shastras—especially the Vedas—are considered to be the word of god, and thus,
are thought to be Sanatani (eternal) and are accepted as the highest authority to determine truth.
However, Gandhi declared himself a Sanatani Hindu and says, "No one can convince me, with the
help of quotations from Shastras.”2 He also says, "Early in my childhood I had felt the need for
scripture that would serve me as an unfailing guide through the trials and temptations of life. The
Vedas could not supply that need.”3 Though Gandhi has said on several occasions that he believed
in the shastras; indeed, he did not accept them as the ultimate authority or the word of god. When
he was asked, “Where do you find the seat of authority?” Gandhi, pointing to his breast, said, “It
lies here.” He also explains: I exercise my judgment about every scripture, including the Gita. I
cannot let a scriptural text supersede my reason. Whilst I believe that the principal books are
inspired, they suffer from a process of double distillation. Firstly, they come through a human
prophet, and then through the commentaries of interpreters. Nothing in them comes from God
directly.4 It appears that although Gandhi speaks very highly of different religious scriptures and
had great faith in the Hindu shastras, he never accepted them as the ultimate authority on the life
and never let them override his rationality and morality. On the other hand, "When Gandhi turned
to Hindu (Vaishnava) texts," Ananya Vajpeyi writes, "what he [Gandhi] sought from them was a
moral—possibly even a didactic—vision that could help an individual to cultivate self-mastery and
acquire self-knowledge.”5 There is tradition to visit temple and idol or image worship are a part of
the religious activities. Hindus visit a temple close to their homes and worship an idol of their
individual preference. Joseph Lelyveld6 , in his recent biography of Gandhi, notes that “Gandhi
hardly ever prayed in temples.” Gora and Lindley7 also state that “Gandhi was not the kind of
Hindu who accepts the authority of priests or even attends temple.” Gandhi explains his thoughts
on temple worship in his autobiography: Being born in the Vaishnav faith, I had often to go the
haveli (temple). But it never appealed to me. I did not like its glitter and pomp. Hence, I could gain
nothing from the haveli. This does not mean that he never visited temples later in life, but that his
attitude towards them remained the same. Later, in 1933, he also very explicitly said, “I do not visit
temples. I feel no need to go to temples; hence I do not visit them.”
5.2 Gandhi and Caste System: way out of caste clashes
Many scholars have contemplated and wondered about some of Gandhi's writings where he defends
and validates caste and some of the practices associated with it. Some of them have seen it as
evidence of Gandhi's faith in the caste system; they have also tried to provide possible justifications
for why Gandhi finds caste, varna, and some of its restrictions useful. Some other scholars believe
that the inconsistencies in his writings reveal that there were gradual changes or slow development
in his ideas on such subjects. The very first issue he encountered in India was that of untouchability,
a matter ignored in 'Hind Swaraj'. When he founded his Ashram at Ahmedabad in 1915 a crisis
erupted when he admitted to it an 'untouchable' couple. But he withstood it, the couple stayed, and
henceforth on this matter, Gandhi would give no concession. If he yet went on an affirming his faith
in varnashrama, this was done more or less to keep peace with the bulk of the upper castes. Gandhi
was looked upon with a great deal of suspicion by non-Brahmin leaders in the country, particularly
in south India, many of whom simply castigated him as a votary of Brahmanism. According to A.
Ramaswami Mudaliar, the greatest folly of the Mahatma was that other than the practice of child

21
marriage, he found nothing wrong with Brahmanism, of which varnashrama dharma was an integral
part.1 It is trying to assess the Gandhian perceptions of varna, certain vexing issues do require
interpretation. Gandhi was enamoured with the notion of harmony, it has to be understood that such
concern was not born of individual experience, but was rather a universal one, born of the ravages
of time. Here I shall try to analyze Gandhi's interpretation of caste. Gandhi tried to abolish the caste
system or he tried to maintain social harmony. The Hindu people maintain untouchability as part of
their caste obligations. As a whole, the practice revolved around avoiding physical contact with
particular groups to save oneself from being 'polluted.' Hereditary occupations are understood to be
one of the most important characteristics of the caste system. Each caste is assigned a particular
type of work, and every Hindu is expected to follow his hereditary occupation. After returning to
India from South Africa in 1917, Gandhi started a national school at his Indian ashram where every
student was taught agriculture, hand-weaving, carpentry, and metalcraft. There was no emphasis on
preserving one's hereditary occupation. Gandhi's interpretation of tradition was in sharp contrast to
the style of Hobbes, Hegel, and Machiavelli who too attempted to bridge the past and the present.
Gandhi's problem lay in the fact that he was not a systematic or sophisticated political philosopher,
nor was he strictly a politician, restricting his concern to goals essentially 3 political in nature.
Mainly he was a moralist who tried to interpret tradition within the broader parameters of the
contemporary Indian situation. It is believed, the Hindu masses accept the authority of the shastras,
which include the four Vedas, the Upanishads, the Puranas, and the two great epics, Ramayana and
Mahabharatha. In Hinduism, the shastras—especially the Vedas—are considered to be the word of
god, and thus, are thought to be Sanatani (eternal) and are accepted as the highest authority to
determine truth. However, Gandhi declared himself a Sanatani Hindu and says, "No one can
convince me, with the help of quotations from Shastras.”2 He also says, "Early in my childhood I
had felt the need for scripture that would serve me as an unfailing guide through the trials and
temptations of life. The Vedas could not supply that need.”3 Though Gandhi has said on several
occasions that he believed in the shastras; indeed, he did not accept them as the ultimate authority
or the word of god. When he was asked, “Where do you find the seat of authority?” Gandhi, pointing
to his breast, said, “It lies here.” He also explains: I exercise my judgment about every scripture,
including the Gita. I cannot let a scriptural text supersede my reason. Whilst I believe that the
principal books are inspired, they suffer from a process of double distillation. Firstly, they come
through a human prophet, and then through the commentaries of interpreters. Nothing in them
comes from God directly.4 It appears that although Gandhi speaks very highly of different religious
scriptures and had great faith in the Hindu shastras, he never accepted them as the ultimate authority
on the life and never let them override his rationality and morality. On the other hand, "When
Gandhi turned to Hindu (Vaishnava) texts," Ananya Vajpeyi writes, "what he [Gandhi] sought from
them was a moral—possibly even a didactic—vision that could help an individual to cultivate self-
mastery and acquire self-knowledge.”5 There is tradition to visit temple and idol or image worship
are a part of the religious activities. Hindus visit a temple close to their homes and worship an idol
of their individual preference. Joseph Lelyveld6 , in his recent biography of Gandhi, notes that
“Gandhi hardly ever prayed in temples.” Gora and Lindley7 also state that “Gandhi was not the
kind of Hindu who accepts the authority of priests or even attends temple.” Gandhi explains his
thoughts on temple worship in his autobiography: Being born in the Vaishnav faith, I had often to
go the haveli (temple). But it never appealed to me. I did not like its glitter and pomp. Hence, I
could gain nothing from the haveli. This does not mean that he never visited temples later in life,
but that his attitude towards them remained the same. Later, in 1933, he also very explicitly said, “I
do not visit temples. I feel no need to go to temples; hence I do not visit them.” His approach 4 to
idol worship was similar. He never used idols or images during his prayers. He once said, “An idol
does not excite any feeling of veneration in me.”9 Most Dalit scholars argue that Gandhi was an
outstanding product of the Hindu orthodox milieu. According to them, he resisted any change in
the basic social structure of Hindu society, and he was the one who, more than anyone else,
defended and validated the caste system when its legitimacy was being seriously challenged and its

22
existence seemed precarious. For instance, Parimala V Rao writes "Gandhi inherited a Congress
which already had a powerful pro-caste group. Added to this was the personal commitment that
Gandhi himself had vis-à-vis the defense of the institution of caste."10 Another scholar, Braj Ranjan
Mani, writes He [Gandhi] was a bania more brahmanised than Brahmans; his world-view and life
philosophy were moulded and shaped by the age-old Brahmanic values and way of life. […], he
never gave up his basic belief in the Brahmanic fundamentalism which is evident from his constant
evocation of varnashrama, Ram-Rajya, and trusteeship.11 Kancha Ilaiah writes, "The fundamental
difference between these two thinkers lies in positioning themselves from their communities." He
adds further that "Ambedkar was not only born in an untouchable Mahar family but all through his
life stood for the suppressed, oppressed and exploited masses. Gandhi on the other hand, was born
in a Baniya family and stood for the oppressor and exploiting upper castes.” 12 Therefore, most
Dalit scholars' studies assume that Gandhi believed in the caste system because of his personal
belief in the Brahmanical world view which he inherited by being born in an upper-caste Hindu
family. Gandhian scholar, Margaret Chatterjee, makes some passing references to Gandhi’s views
on caste and the possible justifications for it. She writes, ‘Gandhi spoke in favour of following one's
hereditary occupation. What was behind it, I believe, was his perception of the undoubted fact that
industrialization would gradually erode the network of traditional occupations that had provided a
livelihood for villagers for centuries. […] Industrial civilisation would never be able to provide a
livelihood for the teeming millions of India.’ 13 Bhikhu Parekh is another scholar who attempts to
explain Gandhi’s views on caste and offers possible reasons for why Gandhi may have defended
caste in his writings. He writes, ‘Since Gandhi believed in rebirth and the law of karma, he thought
that the characteristic occupation of an individual’s caste corresponded to his natural abilities and
dispositions and represented a necessary moment of his spiritual evolution.’14 5 Gandhi's views on
caste changed various times during his lifetime. His views of tradition particularly of the Gita, said,
"The Gita is not an aphoristic work; it is a great religious poem. The deeper you dive into it, the
richer the meanings you get….. with every age the important words will never vary. The seeker is
at liberty to extract from this treasure any meaning he likes, to enable him to enforce in his life the
central teaching."15 According to Louis Fischer, Gandhi’s conception of caste as undergoing a
rational evolution, moving gradually from an orthodox stance in 1920 to more liberal views in the
1930’s, and culminating in a radical position at the end of his life.”16 Before 1931, Mahatma
Gandhi himself used the terms like ‘Bhangi’, ‘Untouchable’, ‘unapproachable’, ‘Panchama’, or
‘Antyaja’.17 On August 6, 1931, writing in 'Young India' on the removal of untouchability, he said
that he had at last found the right word 'Harijan'. At the same time, he mentioned that he borrowed
this term from the great saint, Narasinha Mehta 'who defied the whole community by claiming the
'untouchables' as his own.' Gandhi went further in defining this word in his thoughts. Gandhi said
that ‘Harijan’ was a man of God, and men like him were ‘Durjan’s or men of evil.18 Hindu society
existed several rules about endogamy and commensality. The members of one caste eat of any other
caste, nor should they eat food cooked by any person of a lower caste. Gandhi's family belonged to
the Vaishnava sect of Gujarat, which followed strict restrictions about meat-eating. Gandhi
admitted that during his stay in England, he had eaten at restaurants as well as at the home of an
Englishman. He declared that he had no objections to eating food prepared at European hotels or
by a Christian or a Mohammedan, as long as it consisted of ingredients eatable by him.19 He would
also regularly visit a Christian family for dinner and eat his vegetarian food in their company while
they ate their non-vegetarian food. When Gandhi started living in Segaon near Wardha, Govind, a
man who was untouchable by caste, generally prepared food for him. 20 Gandhi writes: “They
needed no religious rites to seal the bond. Mrs. Polak was a Christian by birth and Polak a Jew.
Their common religion was the religion of ethics.” 21 Ramashray Roy said, ‘Gandhi advocates the
retention of the varna vyavastha’ because “in his view, varna vyavastha is natural and affords
greater opportunities than other arrangements for self-realisation and social harmony.” 22 Roy also
said “He [Gandhi] finds this possibility to exist only in a social order that is based on varna
vyavastha. Given the ultimate end of life, that is, self-realisation, and yajna as the exclusive means

23
of realising this end,” Roy reminds the 6 reader that “It is in this context that we can understand
why Gandhi lays so much emphasis on varna vyavastha, in general, and the caste system grounded
in it, in particular.” 23 Gandhi's criticism of modern civilisation shows that he believed that
individual dignity, social harmony, and the ultimate end of life—self-realisation—can be achieved
within the boundaries of modern civilisation. As A J Pareal observes, the correct Gandhian
metaphor for modern civilisation is not ‘disease’ but ‘curable disease’: ‘civilisation is not an
incurable disease.’ Hind Swaraj, in this respect, is a short treatise on ‘the malaise of modernity’ and
Gandhi is one of its physicians.24 Gandhi’s efforts to reform modern civilisation should not be
understood as him preferring modern civilisation to a traditional society that is organised on the
basic principles of varna. For Gandhi, it was not a matter of preference; being a practical man, he
accepted that modern civilisation is going to stay here, and hence needs to be improved. Indeed, the
dominant passion of Gandhi’s life was neither improving modern civilisation nor retaining varna
vyavastha through the rejection of modern civilisation. Gandhi rejected modern civilisation in total
and was in favour of retaining a social order that is based on varna vyavastha, because he found
that “it is natural and affords greater opportunities for self-realisation and social harmony,” may not
be appropriate. Bipan Chandra, in his paper "Gandhiji, Secularism and Communalism," makes
some passing remarks on Gandhi's views on caste. He writes, many quote his [Gandhi's] statements
on the caste system, inter-caste and inter-religious dining and marriages […], and so on, from his
early writings. But the fact is that, while his basic commitment to human values, truth, and
nonviolence remained constant, his opinions on all these and other issues changed—sometimes
drastic—and, invariably, in more radical directions.25 To justify his point, Chandra quotes from
two of Gandhi’s writings, one from 1933 and the other from 1938. In the first, Gandhi says: In my
search after Truth I have discarded many ideas and learned many new things … and, therefore,
when anybody finds any inconsistency between any two writings of mine, if he has still faith in my
sanity, he would do well to choose the latter of the two on the same subject.26 It is a fact that on
more than one occasion Gandhi has mentioned that he is not at all concerned about appearing to be
consistent and suggests that his last opinion be taken as final. Therefore, many scholars like Chandra
have argued that there was a gradual evolution or radical changes in Gandhi's opinion on caste and
another related issue Gandhi seems to be right in denying any inconsistencies in his position on
caste because he, from a very young age, violated most caste restrictions. His attitude towards the
caste system remained more or less consistent throughout his life. In 1935, Gandhi said in his
writing, ‘Caste Has to Go.’ He also said, ‘in Varnashrama there was and should be no prohibition
of inter-marriage and inter-dinning.’27 In 1946, Gandhi wrote in the Harijan, ‘If I had my way, I
would persuade all caste-Hindu girls coming under my influence to select Harijan husbands. That
is most difficult, I know from experience.’28 He also argued another issue, ‘Once we have assigned
to all equal status it makes little difference whether we think that there are four of them or that there
is only one.’29 Gandhi was trying to interpret that a person could change his profession, but if
varnas, as a rule, are not determined by birth they tend to lose all meaning. Mahatma Gandhi was
fully conscious of the divisive influence of caste and condemned it as another manifestation of
untouchability. Under these circumstances, Gandhi's satyagraha was a weapon to reduce
factionalism, and it may be termed as an effective technique of conflict resolution.30 There is no
doubt that Mahatma Gandhi was a moral reformer. He criticised the manner, evils, untouchability.
As a whole, an element of liberalism came to dawn upon Gandhi in his later years, and this added
a new dimension to his quest for social harmony.

24
 CHAPTER 6
Caste clashes in Rural India
It is important to point out that the household questionnaire did not ask a household to record its
experience of a particular type of conflict, simply whether it had been observed. So, for example,
one household might have observed labour conflicts on a regular basis, while another observed such
a conflict as an isolated incident; however, both households could only record that they had
observed such a conflict without being able to detail their respective experiences. Lastly, it should
be noted that a given household could observe more than one source of conflict: for example,
household X could observe a conflict due to labour issues and another conflict relating to sharing
drinking water. Consequently, the total number of observations could (and, generally, would)
exceed the number of households recording these observations: in 2006, the 19,997 observations of
conflict emanated from 8,112 households for an average of 2.47 observations per household of
conflict (from different sources). Households, who had observed a conflict in the village, stemming
from one or the other of the 11 sources of conflict listed already, were asked in column 5 of the
‘conflict questionnaire’ (reproduced in Table 1), if in their view it was ‘caste-based’ or ‘religion-
based’: of the total of 19,997 conflicts observed in 2006, 2,455 (12%) were judged to be ‘caste-
based’ and 537 (3%) were judged to be ‘religion-based’.

Table 4: Observed Conflicts in Indian Villages by Proximate Cause of Conflict

While both dimensions relate to identity-based conflict, we focus on caste-based conflict because that
is the more predominant phenomenon in rural India. 11 Table 5 shows that 2,455 of the total of 19,997
conflicts recorded in the current panchayat period (12%) were judged to be caste based, the
corresponding proportions being 11% for the previous and the previous to previous panchayats
(respectively, 2,107 out of 19,225 and 1,542 out of 14,082 conflicts). Table 5 also tabulates the
proximate cause of caste based disputes. Now, the four main sources of conflict – labour, drinking
water, inter-family, and political – accounted for 84% of caste-based disputes in the current panchayat
period, the corresponding proportions being 82% and 83%, respectively, for the previous and previous
to previous panchayats

25
 Figure 2: Caste-Based Conflicts as a Percentage of Total Conflicts

Figure 1 shows, for each the four main roots of caste-based conflict – namely, labour, drinking water,
inter-family, and political which, as noted earlier accounted for nearly 80% of all conflicts - the
proportion of total conflicts that were caste-based for, respectively, the periods of the current, previous,
and previous to previous panchayats. In the current period, for example, 14.7% of labour conflicts, 14.4
% of drinking water based conflicts, 10.6% of inter-family conflicts, and 16.6% of political conflicts
were caste-based. Figure 1 also clearly shows that the proportion of caste-based disputes, in the four
sources of conflict, was higher in the period of the present panchayat – particularly with respect to
political conflict – than in previous panchayats.

Table 5: Caste-Based Conflicts in Indian Villages, by Proximate Cause of Conflict

26
REDS was also able to explore the opinions of persons with respect to caste-related issues by seeking
views about the salience of caste in different situations. We detail two situations below:
The first relating to attitudes towards low caste, and the second relating to attitudes towards high caste,
persons
Question 1: How easy is it for Rajmohan [a low caste person] to attend public and religious ceremonies
in the village without attracting [adverse] attention to himself because of his caste?
Question 2: How easy is it for Krishnan [a Brahmin] to interact with people from other castes in the
village? Figure 2 shows the responses to these two questions in terms of the following categories: very
easy; easy; moderately easy; slightly easy; impossible.
The distribution of responses between the two questions was very similar. About 7% thought that it
would be impossible for a lower caste person not to attract attention to himself at a public religious
ceremony while 7% also thought that a Brahmin would find it impossible to interact with other castes
in the village. In total about one in four respondents felt there would be some degree of difficulty on
both accounts. The root of the problem regarding the discomfort that lower and upper caste persons feel
in each other’s presence, as exemplified in the vignettes about Rajmohan and Krishnan, lies in the
custom and practice of ‘untouchability’ according to which a lower caste person was ‘unclean’ and that,
therefore, physical contact with such a person was polluting. After Independence, the Indian
Constitution abolished ‘untouchability’ and made its practice an offence. This prohibition was
strengthened by the Protection of Civil Rights Acts of 1955 and 1976 and the Prevention of Atrocities
Acts of 1989 and 1995. Under the Protection of Civil Rights Acts of 1955 and 1976 many anti-Dalit
actions became offences. These included inter alia: prohibiting entry into places of worship; denial of
access to water; denial of access to public places; denial of goods and/or services.

Figure 3: Responses to the iterations raised on Caste clashes* (%)

Yet, notwithstanding these laws, it is untouchability more than anything else that is responsible for the
denial of human rights to lower caste persons (Sainath , 2002). An area of exclusion – which was

27
underpinned by the gamut of issues associated with pollution and untouchability - was the Mid-day
meal scheme which provided free lunch on school days for children in Primary and Upper Primary
Classes in Government schools. Discrimination in mid-day meals took several forms: not serving them
adequate amounts, making them wait till high caste children have finished their meal, throwing food
into their plates so as to avoid any possibility of physical contact, seating them separately from higher
caste children with separately marked plates, and not appointing any persons from the Scheduled Castes
as cooks and helpers (Nambissan, 2010; Thorat and Lee, 2010). Another area of contention associated
with untouchability was water. In most schools in Rajasthan, children from the higher caste drank water
and washed their plates before children from the lower castes and one school had separate water pitchers
for SC pupils. The pattern of SC pupils having to wait their turn was repeated in Bihar and Madhya
Pradesh. Furthermore, in Madhya Pradesh, only children from the higher castes were allowed to fetch
water for the teachers and guests (Ramachandran and Naorem , 2013). Bros and Couttenier (2010) show
that caste norms which prohibit the sharing of water between upper castes and Dalits are still vigorous
and violently enforced while Tiwary (2006) argues that since 75% of Dalit households in rural areas
depend on community sources (see Table 6), they are more subject to discrimination (such as, separate
queues, extra waiting time, other’s filling the buckets, etc.) and different forms of the practice of
untouchability.

Table 6: The Access of Rural Households to Water on caste basis

‘Untouchable’ casual labourers find it difficult to obtain many types of employment in the farm and
non-farm sectors for example, jobs involving the harvesting of fruit and vegetables. Sellers from
the SC of edible products - like milk, fruit, vegetables, and cooked food - find it difficult to find
buyers. Thorat and Lee (2010) pointed out that there were also disparities in treatment with respect
to the Public Distribution System (PDS) for food: it transpired that most of the government
approved agents who ran PDS shops were from the higher castes and they offered preferential
service to their own caste members. Crimes against scheduled tribe (ST) communities also
increased by 9.3% to a total of 8,272 cases in the year, according to NCRB data.

6.1 Crimes against Dalits, tribals increased in Covid pandemic year: NCRB
A scheduled caste (SC) person faced crime every 10 minutes in India in the past year, cumulating
to a total of 50,291 cases registered in 2020, an increase of 9.4% from the previous year, data from
the National Crime Records Bureau said. Crimes against scheduled tribe (ST) communities also
increased by 9.3% to a total of 8,272 cases in the year. The rise in crimes against SCs and STs
bucked the broader trend of a drop in crime under some major heads – except Covid violations --
last year, due to the pandemic and the 68-day-long lockdown that began on March 25, 2020. Overall
crimes rose 28% due to criminal cases related to Covid-19 violations, but crimes against women
slowed 8.3%, rape cases dropped 12.4%, and abduction decreased by 19.3%. “Our experience says
that when it comes to atrocities on Dalits, efforts are made to dilute the seriousness of the violence
and shield accused people. It is a serious matter that despite a pandemic and the presence of
constitutional and legislative safeguards, crimes against them are increasing,” said Rahul Singh of
the National Dalit Movement for Justice. The data on crimes offered four broad takeaways. One,
the largest chunk of crimes against SCs and STs in the past year was that of simple hurt – bruises,
injuries resulting out of skirmishes or fights as opposed to more serious broken limbs or maiming.
A third of the crimes against SCs was registered as simple hurt, while the figure stood at a fourth

28
for STs. This confirmed anecdotal evidence of rising social tensions in the countryside as migrant
labourers – many of whom came from marginalised castes and tribes – were forced to return from
the city to their home villages, where very few of them owned land or commanded social capital.
To be sure, simple hurt always form a big proportion of crimes against SCs, but the 2020 figures
represented a four percentage point rise from 2019. Two, crimes against SCs continued to be
concentrated in a handful of states. Uttar Pradesh constituted 25% of all crimes recorded against
SCs and reported 12,714 cases in all. To be sure, this can be attributed to the state’s high population
(it also has the highest population of SCs) and better reporting mechanisms owing to a dense
network of ground-level activists. It was followed by Bihar (7,368), Rajasthan (7,017) and Madhya
Pradesh (6,899). Together, these four states account for two-thirds of all crimes against SCs in India
despite accounting for only around 40% of the country’s 197 million scheduled caste people. The
rate of crimes – which is a measure of crime cases relative to the population of SC -- was highest
in Rajasthan, followed by Madhya Pradesh and Bihar. This was identical to last year. A similar
analysis for STs doesn’t hold because they’re concentrated in a few states, unlike SCs who are more
evenly spread. Three, the nature and quantum of crimes against Dalits is very different in big cities
and the countryside and smaller hamlets. This underlines the logic behind migration of lower-caste
communities from villages to cities since Independence, and the exhortation of BR Ambedkar to
leave the “sink of localism” in India’s villages. In 2020, a total of 1,485 crimes against SCs were
registered in India’s 19 metropolitan cities with a population of two million or more – indicating
that 97% of the crimes against Dalits occurred in small towns and villages. The figure in big cities
represented a drop of 10.9% from the previous year – a sharp contrast to overall numbers that went
up. To be sure, it could also mean that lockdown strictures were more rigidly enforced in big cities,
leading to lower crimes. The nature of crimes against SCs in big cities was also different. In the 20
big towns, criminal intimidation and rape were the most common crimes against Dalits. Overall,
simple hurt and atrocities cases were the most common. Four, the court pendency rate of cases,
especially in cases filed under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of) Atrocities
Act, continues to be low. This also confirms standalone reports of cases of major caste crimes taking
years to reach final stage in courts and difficulty faced by Dalits in proving crimes against upper-
castes. The court pendency rate of cases under the SC/ST Act stood at 96.5% in 2020, up from the
94% last year. At the end of the year, 177,379 cases were pending trial under the special legislation
meant to protect the marginal castes and tribes. The overall pendency rate in the country for all
cases was 91.3% for special and local laws (SLL) crimes and 93.8% for Indian Penal Code crimes.
Only 216 cases from the 50,291 crimes against SCs in 2020 resulted in convictions. 3,192 cases
resulted in acquittals. “These pendency numbers bring the adequacy of existing court infrastructure
to adjudicate these cases in question,” said Raja Bagga, a senior programme officer of the
Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative. He pointed out that in a state like Bihar, with 49008
atrocity cases for trial , only 55 were disposed by the courts during the year, leaving 48, 953 ( 99.9%
of the cases) pending. Out of these 55 cases, 43 led to acquittal.

29
 WAY FORWARD
As India marks the 125th birth anniversary of B.R. Ambedkar this week, it must acknowledge the
pervasiveness of discrimination and confront it head-on. This year, India has sponsored the
observation of the birth anniversary of Babasaheb Ambedkar at the United Nations for the first
time. The Permanent Mission of India to the UN shall commemorate the 125th birth anniversary of
the Dalit icon on April 13 at the UN headquarters, a day before his date of birth, with an
international seminar on ‘Combating inequalities to achieve Sustainable Development Goals
(SDGs)’. A note circulated by the Indian mission says that the “national icon” remains an inspiration
for millions of Indians and proponents of equality and social justice across the globe. “Fittingly,
although it’s a matter of coincidence, one can see the trace of Babasaheb’s radiant vision in the
SDGs adopted by the UN General Assembly to eliminate poverty, hunger and socio-economic
inequality by 2030.” Juxtapose this with a recent report on caste-based discrimination by the United
Nations Human Right Council’s Special Rapporteur for minority issues that has stung the Indian
government, provoking it to raise questions about the lack of “seriousness of work” in the UN body
and the special rapporteur’s mandate. Ambedkar, the architect of the Indian Constitution, would
definitely not be pleased. Nor are the Dalit rights activists in India and abroad.
Precept and practice: This is the most recent example of India’s hypersensitivity on discussing the
caste issue at any UN forum — the objections raised by the Permanent Mission of India to the UN
in Geneva to the March 2016 report of Special Rapporteur Rita Izsák-Ndiaye of Hungary. Her
report characterised caste-based discrimination as that based on “descent”, labour stratification,
untouchability practices and forced endogamy and said that this was a “global phenomena” that
impacted more than 250 million people worldwide — largely in India, but also in countries as
diverse as Yemen, Japan and Mauritania. Her report cited India’s National Crime Records Bureau
data to highlight that there were increasing atrocities against Scheduled Castes — an increase in
reported crimes of 19 per cent in 2014 compared to the previous year. The report mentions that
despite legislative prohibition of manual scavenging, the state has institutionalised the practice with
“local governments and municipalities employing manual scavengers”. Earlier, during the 2001
World Conference against Racism in Durban , when there was a major effort by Indian NGOs to
include casteism on the agenda, the Indian government had vehemently opposed it. Ashok Bharti,
chair of the National Confederation of Dalit and Adivasi Organisations, recently told a Web
publication: “The whole government suffers from a mindset of the upper castes, that are victims of
their own guilt and will therefore try to hide their faults.” He said that if the Indian government had
done so well in supporting Dalits, “why have there been thousands of cases of atrocities in the past
25 years? How many perpetrators have been punished? If domestic pressures and remedies do not
work, internationalisation was a viable option to seek improvement in the status of Dalits.” The
lesson from all this which India must learn is what the then UN Special Rapporteur on contemporary
forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, Doudou Diène of
Senegal, said a decade ago to the international conference on ‘Human Rights and Dignity of Dalit
Women’ in November 2006 at The Hague: “You have to go beyond the law. You have to get to the
identity constructions. How, over centuries, the Indian identity has been constructed. All forms of
discrimination can be traced historically and intellectually. One of the key strategies of the racist,
discriminating communities is to make us believe that discrimination is natural, that it is part of
nature, and that you have to accept it. This is part of their ideological weapon and it is not true.
Discrimination does not come from the cosmos. Caste-based discrimination can be retraced and
deconstructed to combat it. Please engage in this ethical and intellectual strategy to uproot what is
building and creating the culture and mentality of discrimination.” Even 68 years after
Independence, Dalits and Adivasis continue to face mind-boggling social discrimination and spine-
chilling atrocities across the country. One in four Indians admits to practising caste untouchability
in some form in their homes — this shocking fact has been revealed by a mega pan-India survey
conducted by the National Council of Applied Economic Research (NCAER) and University of

30
Maryland, U.S. Indians belonging to virtually every religious and caste group, including Muslims,
Christians, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, admit to practising untouchability, shows
the India Human Development Survey (IHDS-II) of 2011-12. Mere tokenism and lip service will
not do. India needs to jettison the centuries-old dehumanising baggage of caste stigma once and for
all. It should have nothing to hide but see the reality as it is and confront the issues involved head-
on.
Towards a transformation: If India has to move ahead to a caste-free nation, the need is for an all-
embracing, inclusive pan-India social movement of social and cultural transformation. Ambedkar
showed the way: “Turn in any direction you like, caste is the monster that crosses your path. You
cannot have political reform, you cannot have economic reform, unless you kill this monster.” In
fact, the Dalit political vision today not only encompasses the most oppressed, exploited and
marginalised sections of the caste system but also other sections which took on the Brahminical
hegemony in 1970s and 1980s — the backward castes and Adivasis. The Dalit political vision has
now moved beyond the rhetoric of the Bahujan Samaj Party and the factions of the Republican
Party and the decorative Dalit politicos in the Congress, Bharatiya Janata Party, Samajwadi Party,
Janata Dal (United) et al or even the low-caste-based Maoist organisations. New social movements
like SEWA (Self Employed Women’s Association) in Gujarat, NBA (Narmada Bachao Andolan)
in Madhya Pradesh and MKSS (Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan) in Rajasthan among others have
fundamentally broadened the Dalit political vision.
The suicide of Rohith Vemula has exposed why attempts to co-opt Ambedkar as a ‘Hindu
reformer’ cannot succeed due to inherent ideological contradictions. The challenge posed by the
Ambedkar Students’ Association at the Hyderabad Central University to the Brahminical hegemony
of Hindutva represented by Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad is in the very logic of the Dalit
political vision.
Now, integrating social and cultural transformation with an economic alternative is critical. Our
tryst with destiny can go on and on. But let us grab this moment of truth. So that we can “redeem
our pledge”, which has remained unredeemed for more than 68 years, to make conditions for the
last men and women representing the Adivasis and Dalits, the marginalised and poor people of
India to give unto themselves what is truly theirs. That is the challenge before the people of India.

31
 CONCLUSION
The Indian caste system has played a significant role in shaping the occupations and roles as well
as values of Indian society. Religion has been the constant push towards this stratification system
for centuries, beginning with the Aryans and continuing down a long road of unfortunate
discrimination, segregation, violence, and inequality. Hinduism was the backbone of the
puritypollution complex, and it was the religion that influenced the daily lives and beliefs of the
Indian people. Even after sixty-three years of independence, Indians continue to be in the grip of
caste consciousness. Historically, India has been surviving as a nation for millennia with closed
groups divided by caste, creed and language. Work was divided and each had his allotted task since
birth, and heredity of occupation was a rule that played a big role in the economics of urban and
rural life. Mobility of occupation or caste was restricted, and an individual leaving the occupation
of his ancestors in order to follow his or her own path was rarely witnessed. It can be seen that caste
continues to play an important role in the dynamic of social and political interactions within India.
However, the relationship between caste and hereditary occupations has become less significant
now, and there are fewer restrictions on social interaction among castes, especially in urban areas .
The present Indian society is moving from its closed systems towards a state of change and
progression marked by the assertion of the human spirit irrespective of castes and creeds. Numerous
movements challenging the injustices associated with the caste system have encouraged individuals
in India to be more civil towards other caste members. Many of the lower castes have gained a lot
from the partial elimination of the caste system, and India should be applauded for its constant effort
to eradicate this system of stratification from its culture. It is, however, important to look at the
importance of how caste status has affected the quality of life and social mobility in India today.

32