The Illusion of Caste System in Post-Colonial India

•

This is something very popular among crowds of layman Hindus/Indians about their understanding of history that needs to be addressed with rigorous argumentation and citations, history. The Illusion of Caste System of Post-Colonial India #thread twitter.com/harshmadhusudan/status/1746822017536717011?s=20

Most people like this individual have a limited understanding of the concept of 'caste'; it is a bizarre category that lacks a coherent and systematic explanation.

If an average scholar on 'caste' were given an hour to speak on the topic of 'caste' and 'caste system', questioning them along the way, they would likely end up saying things that contradict their earlier statements or make claims that lack a solid logical foundation or unlikely

'Caste' or its foundational meaning has only relevance in colonial & post-colonial lit and only exists as a construct with no empirical evidence I suggest studying the Ghent school, led by S.N. Balagangadhara, Dr. Jakob De Roover, and Nicholas B. Dirks

for those who seek a more rational approach instead of being influenced by baseless myths propagated by Oriental scholarship, mainstream Indological views, and Marxist historiography regarding the caste system.

if we take jāti for example: jāti is undoubtedly polysemous and refers to an entity that is neither discreet nor homogeneous. One is bound to fail, if one employs this as a unit of caste classification for an arbitrary person.

Just a tiny example that neither varṇa, jāti, kūlā, nor gotra can accurately be defined as 'caste'. let alone having any coherent framework to give it a notion of 'real'. So, when we talk about caste, are we talking about varṇa or jāti?

and when scholars mention the pan-Indian caste system, are they referring to the varṇa system or the jātis? Despite what most people think, the challenge scholars face in equating caste with either varna or jati suggests that these terms aren't exactly equivalent.

jāti has structured identity, unlike 'caste' which cannot even be properly and methodically defined ref above :SAMARENDRA(2011,51-58) Also In B.G(18.45) gives 4 varṇa on basis of svabhāva, and with all these ideas of varṇa, jāti, kula, gotra.

there's no such thing as one deciding element. I can go on the specific on śāstras, but that perhaps protracted convo but the point is, there's no literature foundation for this "Caste system"

When we talk on varṇāśrama dharma, we basically talking on clubbing two viśeṣa dharmas together. These two are varṇa dharma and āśrama dharma. They are category-specific, being viśeṣa dharmas.

Unfortunately, we have internalized their colonial terminology in our consciousness, the so-called intellectual writers of today are far away from understanding these terms that they speak of, let alone be accurate about it.

'Caste' was never a thing in ancient India, it emerged through the lens of Western cultural experiences. If you take away those cultural lenses, you'll see that there was no such thing as a 'caste system' in ancient India.

One thing usually gets brought up is that claims that Buddhism, Vaiṣṇava bhakti traditions, or Liṅgāyatas were against the whole caste and social hierarchy thing in pre-colonial India. they weren’t exactly waving their anti-caste flags back then.

Nope, they were just doing their thing, minding their own business. It's all thanks to Oriental scholarship and those colonial/post-colonial narratives that we see them in this light today.

The contemporary Hindu interpretation of varṇa is not the traditional Vaidika-dharmaśāstrika perspective. they tried to weave together varṇa,jāti, kūla with foreign fabric of 'caste', their threads tangled, leaving knots of confusion.

Modern Hindu’s understanding of varṇa wears a robe woven from an adaptation of colonial nonsense and bits of tradition and portrays as "Real" not a view of traditional Vaidika-dharmaśāstrika perspective nor of any pre-colonial tradition.

This is nothing but a colonial hangover of both the left/Coloniser and so-called nationalist Hindutvas, On one side, the colonizers aim to patronize and impose a sense of 'colonial consciousness' on the colonized.

On the other side (the colonized), there are those with an anti-imperialist view who try to push back against the colonizers by adopting their lexicon and framework, and pretending to be all about "reforming and learning from the colonizers." Both sides are equally wrong!!