As this guide will illustrate, the use of the word ‘caste’ is in many ways an inaccurate and often clumsy descriptor for the myriad and changing categories by which Indian communities have identified throughout history. There are a number of more accurate indigenous terms that can be used and will be explained here. However, in the spirit of meeting language where it is in contemporary society and for ease of communication, this guide will continue to use the word ‘caste’ as an umbrella term, using more specific indigenous terminology where greater specificity is required.
Common Questions & Answers About Caste
A Short Guide for Hindu Americans
Of all of the topics that Hindus get asked about, caste is one of the most misunderstood, often by both non-Hindus and Hindus alike. Making it worse is when these misunderstandings are presented as absolute truth by social justice activists — such as “Hinduism mandates caste-based oppression” — and when the errors are pointed out, Hindus are accused of trying to justify social discrimination.
It’s for this reason that HAF has put together this short guide: To answer in a concise way — drawing on the best research, analysis, wisdom, and insight — commonly asked questions about caste.
About this Guide
Questions & Answers
What is caste and how did it start?
The term ‘caste’ is derived from casta, the Portuguese word for lineage, breed, or race. Two Indian concepts that are commonly associated with the umbrella term of caste are jāti and varna.
From roughly 300 BCE to the 11th century CE, in the few kingdoms that practiced the Mīmāṁsaka/Smārta Dharma tradition, the temperament and inclination for different types of work and which societal function that work met within a four-sector schema became known as varna.
×What is the Mīmāṁsaka/Smārta Dharma tradition?
Mīmāṁsakas are followers of karma-mīmāṁsā, one of the six Hindu philosophical traditions (ṣaḍ darśana) that evolved to explain the Vedas. Also known as Pūrva-Mīmāṁsā, it was based on strict observance of the Vedic traditions. As they were intrinsically involved in the setting up of some kingdoms, they produced a lot of social codes at the behest of various governments, known as the Dharmaśāstras. The Mīmāṁsā tradition evolved into the Smārta tradition, a syncretic Hindu Dharma tradition that was finally formalized and infused with Vedānta by Ādi Śaṅkarācārya.
In ancient India, as clans and tribes formed confederate nations and trade networks grew, leaders and governing councils leveraged trade and the specialization of each clan and/or tribe for the benefit of the collective. These tribes, with their trades, specializations or other factors over which they bonded, would eventually be called jāti.
Even tribal identity, or one’s jāti, did not tie a person to any particular type of work or specific sector. However, given the fact that much training in that period was passed on from parents to children, or through apprenticeships, it was common for tribes to be adept in and specialize in certain trades or professions, and this work was in turn associated with one of the four sectors. In that way, jāti and varna became interconnected.
Historically speaking, jāti share distinguishing features, such as origin story, history, worldview, teachings, customs, religion, vocation, profession or trade specialization, and/or language and dialect. While some jāti today identify by their traditional trade or guild affiliation, others do not. Some jāti practice endogamy (marrying strictly within their communities); others do not. Boundaries between and amongst jāti are also not always apparent nor discreet.
There are more than four thousand jāti in the Indian subcontinent across all religions.
Indeed, members of one jāti may hold perceptions of difference, even superiority, and treat and mistreat members of other jāti on that basis. Such perceptions, however, were and are highly localized, and are informed by a variety of factors. That said, members of poorer or marginalized jāti also do not simply concede an attributed inferior status nor simply accept the claimed superiority of others over them. The social standing of a jāti in one region may be very different from the same jāti living in another region, and social standing could change if an entire jāti moved from one area to another.
Varna is the concept, however, that is most often associated with stereotyped understandings of caste today.
The Vedas make reference to four varna, functional personality types or callings common among humans. Various Hindu texts have come to use varna, which has a variety of meanings (including form, figure, character, and hue) to describe a way of understanding human diversity and purpose. It is a descriptive rather than proscriptive term.
In any human society, this typology contends, the majority of people work to grow or make those things that nourish society or otherwise labor to support society (shudra), other people are naturally driven towards trading, business, and wealth creation (vaishya), some work to protect and govern society (kshatriya); and other individuals are driven to pursue knowledge, impart knowledge and wisdom to society, or contribute to spiritual and religious wellbeing (brahmana/ brahmin).
At the same time, personality or temperament and skills may change over time and the social functions one takes up are not mutually exclusive to any one individual or group.
As explained through countless sources of knowledge, stories, and poetry, and the interpretations and teachings of widely respected Hindu spiritual teachers, both past and present, varna is based on guna (qualities/virtues) and karma (thoughts, words, actions). Varna is not hereditary or familial nor is it a determinant of any established social hierarchy. Instead, they and other sources of sacred wisdom associate one’s varna with the individual’s predominant personality type.
Indian society was never organized nor functioned only on four varna. Rather, both concepts, varna and jāti, have been aspects of social identity throughout the history of the Indian subcontinent, as have other local forms of social organization. None, however, fully fit the earliest notions of caste or align into a pan-Indian so-called ‘caste system’ as imagined by Europeans and put forth today as existing throughout Indian history.
What are some more accurate terms to use other than ‘caste’ or ‘caste system’?
The interplay between the various indigenous Indian social group identities that became known as caste by Europeans was never a unified ‘caste system’ across the entirety of the subcontinent. Today, when presented with the assertion that there is a ‘caste system’ in Indian society, this assertion should be politely but forcefully questioned and challenged, as well as the use of the word ‘caste’ except with strong qualifiers.
As for what is better terminology, that is context dependent. For ‘caste,’ it is best to briefly explain the problems with the word itself and then use the specific Indian words as appropriate to the discussion, such as varna and jāti.
For ‘caste system,’ it is important to point out that there was:
- No overarching proscriptive order, nor central authority dictating or enforcing social hierarchy (neither explicitly through one set of laws, nor implicitly through universal custom), nor were social categories equally fixed in all places across India.
- Social hierarchies were highly localized and regional and ever evolving.
Perhaps the only exception to any Indian social system being referred to as a ‘caste system’ is the centralized affirmative action system India runs for communities categorized as depressed or tribal through multiple censuses conducted by the British, but this is not the same thing as an age-old and inflexible ‘caste system’ as described by anti-caste activists. In fact, in some ways even the institutionalized Indian system illustrates the fluid nature of Indian social hierarchy, with some communities actively petitioning to be considered ‘lower’ or ‘backwards’ so as to avail themselves of government assistance, and others lobbying to be taken off of these lists.
Both these approaches are better than using phrases such as ‘so-called caste’ or ‘so-called caste system,’ or always putting the phrases in quotation marks, which you sometimes encounter. In the mind of someone who has preconceived ideas about caste in India, using quotes around the words will likely be interpreted not that you are making a point about accurate terminology, but that you are questioning that social hierarchy or discrimination has occurred in India. This raises a higher hurdle in front of you than is needed when discussing these misunderstood and contentious topics.
Do all religious communities in India have these sorts of social categories?
Though often presented otherwise, nearly every religious community in India has some sort of social categorization akin to jāti. This is the case even for religions of non-Indian origin that have been in India for millennia. This fact is sometimes downplayed by anti-caste activists as well as members of the non-Hindu communities, both in India and abroad — the reasons for which are beyond the scope of this guide. However, if this is questioned when discussing the fact that similar social identities or categories exists in all Indian communities, it is worth pointing out that it is not uncommon for Hindus from marginalized communities who convert to another religion with the goal of changing their social status, often find that social prejudice and bigotry follow them and is perpetrated by members of their new religion. This tragic continuation of mistreatment, even after conversion to Buddhism, Christianity, or Islam is a powerful indicator of the local, rather than specifically Hindu nature of social perceptions and dynamics..
Don’t other cultures have something like caste?
Many cultures throughout history and to this day have social group identities and perceived hierarchies that can be characterized as being a type of caste. Though it is rare for any of these today to be placed into law, historically this wasn’t always the case, even comparatively recently — apartheid South Africa being a clear example.
Going back into history, the Spanish Empire in the Americas had a codified social hierarchy based on a person’s percentage of non-Spanish heritage. Feudal Japan had an incredibly rigid social hierarchy and in medieval Europe, your birth strongly dictated your occupational options and there were several ‘unclean’ professions that were forced to live outside the main parts of settlements. Today, though much weakened from what it was a century ago, the class system in the UK still factors into social perceptions and opportunities, as well as being a source of social identity and cohesion. The legacy of slavery in the US and the race separation laws that followed created a clear and legislated hierarchy, the effects of which are still felt in varying degrees today, decades after such laws were eliminated (more recently in fact than caste discrimination was outlawed in India). There are other examples that could be given from nearly all parts of the world if the parameters are the span of human history.
None of this should be taken as justification for social discrimination that has and does occur due to the various Indian classifications that get labeled ‘caste’. But it does provide a strong counterpoint to the arguments sometimes put forth by strident anti-caste activists that what has occurred in India is a uniquely pernicious social problem and one that is rooted in Hindu teachings and practice. This isn’t the case today nor was it historically. Social group identities and discrimination based on perceived differences and ideas of superiority is a pan-human problem, not uniquely an Indian problem, and still less a Hindu problem.
What was the effect of British rule in India on caste?
While the indigenous social group identities like varna and jāti, as well as social divisions along those lines, predate the British colonial period, modern conceptions of caste do in fact have much to do with how the Portuguese and British tried to make sense of Indian society from the 15th and 19th centuries. Pointing this out is not whitewashing history, but exploring what most of us don’t know about India’s colonial history.
When the Portuguese colonized parts of India during the 15th century they used the word casta to describe the various ways Indians identified or socialized. This included multiple categories such as jāti, varna, and other identities.
When the British ruled India they conducted censuses of the people in the territories they controlled. In these, they tried to determine which caste different people and communities belonged to. In doing this, though, they didn’t find Indian society to be rigidly ordered into four or five classes as they assumed it to be, nor ordered in the same way across the whole of India.
When asking about a person’s ‘caste’ sometimes people would answer with a varna, sometimes with their jāti, sometimes with their job (for example: fisherman), and sometimes the person didn’t know what caste they belonged to (in which case the British assigned them one). In short, it was a mess. You can easily access today replicas of the census documents and the reports from frustrated census administrators about these failed exercises based on failed theories.
As the British censuses of the 19th century showed social identities were and are deeply complex, and generally no single identity is the only thing one sees themselves. People identified along regional, religious, and occupational in all religious communities in the nations that make up modern South Asia. This is a reality for more than just the Hindu community — Sikhs, Muslims, and Christians all had and have, social distinctions and perceptions, good and bad, about others, the latter of which can result in prejudice, bias, and conflict from time to time.
Today, caste is an administrative category or designation under Indian law largely based on British censuses. The legacy of colonialism very much informs not only the understanding of India to date, but also impacts contemporary caste and religious dynamics in the subcontinent.
Since some Hindu sources of knowledge make reference to caste, doesn’t that show that caste is a key part of the Hindu Dharma Traditions?
Many of the most important Hindu sources of knowledge that continue to provide inspiration and insight, in some cases millennia after being conceived, focus on the oneness of all being and the ultimate unity that underpins all of existence. No mention of jāti appears at all in these.
Nevertheless, anti-caste activists routinely refer to English or their own translations of excerpts from select Hindu sources as evidence that caste discrimination is a key feature of Hindu thought and practice. Even otherwise proud Hindus sometimes squirm at how these passages may come across to contemporary minds. And this is despite the fact that these passages are a tiny minority in the vast library of Hindu sources of knowledge.
One often cited source is the Puruṣa-sūktam of the Ṛgveda where the concept of varna or four functional classes is introduced as natural facets of human society that emanate from one same ultimate source. The selective reading of this verse by caste activists ignores the fact that in the same excerpt other aspects of existence are also mentioned as emanating from the Puruṣa such as the sun and the moon, fire and wind, the four directions, horses, cows, and other animals, and a number of other aspects of existence. If there is the pyramidal hierarchy as they insist, then is the moon considered superior to the sun because the moon is mentioned first? A similarly irrational comparison arises from comparing space, sky, and earth with the four directions. If the earth originates from the feet of Puruṣa, does that make it inferior to the moon, which originates from the mind?
There is clearly no intended hierarchy, only symbolic meanings, yet these imbecile arguments are made over and over again in a whirlwind of circular citations.
The Manusmṛti and other Dharmaśāstras, or legal codes, are also frequently mentioned. These were composed over a thousand years after the Ṛgveda in tribal nations following the Mīmāṁsaka and later Smārta traditions. Of the hundreds of Dharmaśāstras that existed, 20 are known, and only four survive intact. These do clearly mention jāti as social groups or tribes specializing in certain types of work, and those tribes in turn being tied to the four sectors or classes with various rules and regulations applying to them. But these Dharmaśāstras did not apply to the whole of Hindus. In fact, most clans and tribes were not residents of Mīmāṁsaka nations. More importantly, the majority of Hindu spiritual teachings undermine these legal codes outright. And lastly, even in Mīmāṁsaka nations, each administration of these tribal nations would adjust their social codes to suit the needs of the day, so codes were not frozen or unchanging.
As for the Mahabharata, though revered as one of the greatest epic poems humanity has created, and though the Bhagavad Gita forms a part of it, this text is nevertheless representative of views of ancient Indian society more than divinely revealed scripture. That Karna’s supposed low-born status is highlighted is a contradictory point of the Bhagavad Gita itself and of historical practice, where it is explicitly stated that individual temperament corresponded with varna and not birth. What’s more, the function of stories such as the Mahabharata within the different Hindu sources of knowledge is for readers to learn from the examples given in them, including the sometimes imperfection of the people portrayed, and not make the same mistakes.
How much caste discrimination really goes on in the US?
An honest answer to the question of how much caste discrimination occurs in the United States today is that no one knows for sure. Much more research needs to be done to get an accurate answer to the question and to detail the sort of discrimination that might be occurring.
The most comprehensive survey that touches on caste discrimination in the US (and the only one that is truly statistically valid or methodologically sound), done by the Carnegie Endowment, found that of the 50% of Indian Americans who reported having experienced discrimination, 5% of these people said they believed it was because of their caste background. Perplexingly, of these people, one-third reported that non-Indians discriminated against them and a further third said it was both non-Indians and Indians.
What this discrimination specifically consisted of was not stated. There is a big practical difference between an offhand derogatory remark and being denied employment, for example, though both could be reported as being examples of caste discrimination.
Given the number of people of Indian origin in the US, not just Hindus (there are roughly 5.4 million), these percentages are still a significant number of individuals. However, to say caste discrimination is a common experience or regular occurrence simply isn’t an accurate assessment of the situation.
When discussing the topic of caste discrimination in the US, it’s important to keep in mind that identifying by a particular varna or jāti does not in any way automatically equate to engaging in social discrimination based on these categories. Furthermore, research that has been done on Indian social identity in the US shows that identity rooted in varna and jāti often declines with time spent in the US, as individuals become more rooted in a new society.
My children’s teacher asked them what their caste is. How should they reply?
Asking a schoolchild their caste, or any of the terms associated with caste, is perhaps at best an unintentionally awkward experience, and more often a downright offensive, bigoted, or racist situation. It simply shouldn’t be done. Asking a child of Indian origin their caste should be seen as no less offensive than asking a child about their race.
If your child tells you this happened to them, it is important that you reach out to the school. Start by reaching out to the teacher to discuss your concerns, and to provide them with a better understanding of caste. If the teacher is not open to discussing your concerns, or provides replies that you find are inadequate, then escalate to the school administration.
HAF materials, including this guide, offer a good starting point for accurate and nuanced discussions of caste.
