Most people misunderstand caste as something ancient. In reality, all these caste identities we see today did not exist in their current form in even early medieval India. People would want to think that they have been in the form they are today since time immemorial. As if Brahma himself created their caste. But that is sheer ignorance, illiteracy. Just like Indian origin Muslims forgot their history in India and they take their 300 (average) years of history as forever.
Rajputs did not exist as a coherent caste during the Gupta period. They emerged much later as local warrior groups and landholders, began to claim noble status through political power, land ownership, and intermarriage with similar elites. Some groups were given right to keep say army of 100 men in mansabdar system and those men came from specific families in different areas but there is no evidence that they were all linked. They intermarried maintained status. A Rajput of Bihar has no relation with a Rajput of Punjab or Nair of Kerala.
Kayasthas were originally scribes and accountants, not a hereditary caste. Their evolution into a caste group happened gradually, particularly under Muslim rule and British administration. They even created the fiction of Bhagwan Chitragupta and his 12 sons. And they believe in it. There is a lot of corruption. Mostly it was farmers background people who somehow did something to make brahmins agree to elevate them that caste. They still have farmers traditions during marriage along with doing Chitragupta puja. And probably medieval brahmins helped them create something like Puranic katha which is as absurd as katha in Bihar during Satya Narayan puja.
Same way it was being done with many other castes etc. Many kshatriyas who were Buddhist were downgraded in early medieval period to some inferior status or as it suited. Caste was not fixed. This kind of movement happened throughout history. Case of Shivaji comes to mind. When brahmins of Banaras refused to consider him Kshatriya. Shows the way things were dealt.
The process was as dumb and based on whims as if you give good dakshina or Gau (cow) to brahmins they will ensure that your dadi goes to heaven after death. It was that way things were done.
Kurmis and Yadavs were identified based on their agricultural and pastoral roles. Their rise as distinct castes came much later, especially during the British period when land revenue systems began classifying communities by their economic function. Different people who were Mahto, Chaudhary, Rao etc were classfied under one Kurmi umbrella. Same way Ahirs, Rai, Gope and many others who were shepherds were classified Yadav. These titles themselves might be product of previous period.
It was this way British created religion out of Indian people: Hindu Sikh Jain etc
Bhumihars are also a relatively recent caste identity, with no mention in Mughal records. They emerged in the 18th and 19th centuries, often landholding Brahmins who claimed higher status and military roles. There might be some 50 different surnames etc, each of them being created in another previous period.
The Kushwaha community, often associated with horticulture, emerged as a distinct caste identity during the late medieval to colonial period. Linking themselves with Kusha (son of Rama) part of a larger Sanskritization effort to elevate social status.
The idea that Maurya are blood descendants of Chandragupta or Ashoka is not supported by serious historical evidence. It is a social and political myth. The Maurya dynasty did not establish a hereditary caste or jati identity that continued over centuries. It was a ruling family, not the origin of a caste group.
Yadava claim to be descendants of Krishna. Let's be honest exact year and family of Rama and Krishna can not be established today, they existed some 3000 years ago. People claiming that they are Krishna's progeny through blood is pure nonsense and willful ignorance. It is as useless as being descendent of Babur who might be selling mobile cover somewhere in old Delhi.
Some caste groups in power for a decade automatic perception changes. Jats in Punjab were farmers but during 40 years of rule of Mahraja Ranjit Singh, they became most powerful group.
Even Brahmins are not a single homogeneous group. They are composed of hundreds of subgroups whose history will lead one to atleast hundreds of places and groups. The idea of a singular, pan-Indian Brahmin identity is a constructed notion. If we move just 3000 years ago, most of people will be in very different status and will have very different social notions. 4000 years ago it will be unimaginable. Only evidence of that period comes from Indus valley civilization. And in indus valley civilization, it was egalitarian. Normal person had access to the buildings, public baths etc. Burrial sites were normal, not much extravagant artifacts. That is in contrast to slave culture of Egypt.
Ultimately, these castes are composites of many subgroups that changed form over time.
These are fiction of ordinary ignorant people. That is height of their imagination. They can't create anything else. National geographic will have laugh about our obsessions.
Election are coming in Bihar. All political parties are trying to win over same caste groups but their vision doesn't go beyond same tested formulas. It does not represent 21st century, but not even past. These are people like Pakistani. While they think they are super smart, They can't change themselves, they remain slave of random mould which has no merit. Even educated people here can't think beyond.
This desire to find mystery in own existence and self ego leads to a lot of corruption. That corruption and pseudo secularism in India is creating of power greed in Hindu individuals and sadly masses approved of it. Hindu groups with influence always aligned themselves to gain power and favor of rulers during every period. During Turks rule, during Mughals or during British. This even involved marrying daughter and sisters to Mughal (but not bringing a Mughal woman in home). Pseudo secularism started this way long ago. Most of surnames and groups of Bengali brahmins were created by British system of patronage. They still hold those honorariums.
Their intellectual growth was due to their exposure to British and hence to the developments in the modern world. It was Not due to their pedigree. To get favor of British was not simple like donating swarnadan to brahmins or getting women for harem of Muslim sultan. To fight with them also required getting yourself to their level. Universities schools under British had objective standards and Kolkata had many of these. And as soon as British left, Bengal again descended to it's natural state.
British also sought to patronize groups loyal to them, so they created myth of so called martial races whom they called on to quench rebellion and fight in different parts of the world for their empire. They created a class of royalty loyal to them. They rewarded and elevated the groups who were useful to them. There are no palaces in Jahnsi, no symbols of royalty exists now. Because royalty in Jhansi fought British, British crushed the rebellion and left little royal legacy intact in Jhansi. In contrast, Gwalior's Scindias aligned themselves with the British, especially after the rebellion. By cooperating, they retained their princely status and amassed wealth, power, and royal privileges. That’s why Gwalior boasts grand structures like the Jai Vilas Palace, elaborate forts, and a visibly intact royal legacy.
Chamchagiri has been very important skill in India since ages. Post independence Congress party created their own ecosystem with help of communist historians, journalist, authors loyal to them.
In India only Rewdi culture works. Those who are in power they distribute their own Rewdi. What else can appeal ignorant people?
I see that in Mauritius or Suriname now everyone considers himself Brahmins or Kshatriya. There under new circumstances the elevation was easy and necessary. It is like when you have few soldiers and a big enemy you promote everyone to rank of subedar and captain etc.
In my experience people in lower strata tend to be more simple minded, tend to see others as equal, even though they are ignorant like any poor people. They were mostly normal people, not exposed to power play. Those in privileged position they try to pass their story and distinctiveness from generation to generation. Because story of their superiority (which is a benefit) depends on this separation, it is reinforced. Like in colonial period it was white Europeans who maintained separation on the account of their superiority and developed racial theories. Caste exists because of tradition, but also because of some kind of racial and class type segregation. It is not that people are very conscious and sincere about duties as belonging to some caste, but they still stick to division. Marrying with white people is so normal these days among people of all castes. But when marrying Indian they often want to know caste.
Latest classification in OBC SC ST and reservation is new method but same old social struggle for social power etc. Government job is new Rewdi. Now some want to perpetuate this classification also for their own benefits.
Some guy on Facebook posted that non brahmins they criticize brahmins but all of them want to become brahmins. He was right. They (those seeking to become Brahmin) are ignorant, they can't imagine more, it is like UPSC in their mind, last 1000 years they have been trying to qualify for this. And that knowledge of power (that ultimately they decide who is who) was also real. That is how things were done.
If you are proud of your blood lineage that often means nothing. Everyone who is born has some lineage, pedigree. It will be hard if you have been fooling yourself whole life, but we are not special people on this earth. We are not special species created by some God.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNg5FXt_DDM
We need to move beyond all these passing affairs and have a solid foundation for merit now, which is happening in universities and industry.
No comments:
Post a Comment