Caste in Hinduism: A 300-year Old Myth

Caste in Hinduism: A 300-year Old Myth.
Part II of VII: Inequality amongst Men

Inequality amongst men is not a concept that is unique or exclusive to Hinduism, and regardless of how we wish and attempt to abolish these inequalities, they exist nevertheless. Jean-Jacques Rousseau described that inequality amongst men is present from the moment an individual is born, “natural [inequality]…is established by nature and consists of differences in age, health, strength of body and qualities of the mind or soul [12].” These social stratifications that exists in Hindu Holy Scriptures are not intended to discriminate or create social division, or even to create inequality. Instead, they exist to demonstrate and explain that inequality amongst men is inevitable, from the moment one is born. Each individual possesses features, characteristics and abilities that vary in nature and strength that is unique to him or her self; and one should use these skills that they possess to perform their duties within the society for a number of reasons (two reasons of which I will explain); firstly to fulfil their purpose of life by performing their duties and not defecting from their responsibilities to themselves, their families, to society and God, and secondly fulfilling their roles within the society which in turn enables society to function smoothly.

Revisiting the original verse from the Rig Veda itself (as quoted in Part I) describing the origin of the various ‘varnas’ from the ‘Purusa’ explained that the world was formed by the various body parts of the ‘Purusa’ and consists of the society that inhabits the world, as described by each ‘varna’ group; instilling a social order in society. However, this by no means condemns any particular group to being less important than another. I agree that Hindu scriptures have consistently attributed positive characteristics to Brahmin and Kshatriyas, and less positive characteristics to describe Vaisyas and Sudras. But as social theory dictates, social order is often determined by the nature of each group: an individual who possesses greater knowledge abilities will inevitably be promoted to the top of the social order, whereas an individual who is lacking in knowledge and ability is rooted to the bottom. Hinduism does not force, impose or advocate the creation of this social order, but accounts for its existence. It does not preach idealism, but explains the realism of human society.

For a society to exist and function in an organized and civilized manner, social order is a necessity. All layers of the society are crucial to its functioning. A whole body can only function at its fullest potential if all its organs function accordingly; a society can only function if the various social groups perform its duties accordingly. The various body parts of the ‘Purusa’ that make up the various ‘varnas’ are each in itself vital organs of which the world is built from; and for it to function as it was meant to, it requires each organ or body part to perform its duty as it was designed for. The failure of any one organ (group) to function as intended, can only lead to an imperfect body (world/society).

Does this effectively mean that Hinduism advocates inequality amongst men? No; instead Hinduism stands for the exact opposite of that and in fact preaches equality amongst all men. Nevertheless how is it possible that Hinduism, which acknowledges inequality amongst men, preach equality instead?

Bhagavad Gita, Chapter IX
I am alike to all beings; to me none is hateful, none dear. But those who worship me with devotion (dwell) in me, and I too in them.

Even if a very ill-conducted man worships me, not worshipping any one else, he must certainly be deemed to be good, for he has well resolved. He soon becomes devout of heart, and obtains lasting tranquillity.

(You may) affirm, O son of Kuntî! that my devotee is never ruined. For, O son of Prithâ! even those who are of sinful birth , women, Vaisyas; and Sûdras likewise, resorting to me, attain the supreme goal.

What then (need be said of) holy Brâhmanas and royal saints who are (my) devotees? Coming to this transient unhappy world, worship me [11].

Inequality and equality amongst men in Hinduism are two concepts that are co-dependant yet antagonize each other; a paradox that explains the complexity of human society. Man and woman are not equal in build, emotions and abilities, as a priest and a king are not equal in knowledge, character, qualities and abilities, as with a king and a labourer. These inequalities exist as a consequence of nature and nurture of each individual, which eventually leads to their role and place within the order of society, as further demonstrated by another selected excerpt from the Bhagavad Gita:

Bhagavad Gita, Chapter IV
According to the aptitudes resulting from the dispositions of Nature (Gunas) and from works, the social order of fourfold division has been created by Me. Though I am their originator, know Me to be not an agent but the Spirit unchanging [13].

The key to understanding this complex relationship between inequality and equality is to appreciate that each individual regardless of caste, gender, ability, ‘karma/dharma’ has his/her role to play in this world to maintain its order, and therefore is required to perform his/her duty as prescribed by God; and by doing so are perceived equally in attaining the supreme goal. The various body parts of the ‘Purusa’; the ‘mouth’, ‘arms’, ‘thighs’ and ‘feet’, all of which have different physical characteristics, abilities and functions, yet are equally as important in forming a perfect ‘body’.

(A complete list of references will be published at the end of the final part (Part VII) of this article)