The Caste System
- Thread starter Mad Good Dro
- Start date
This isn't true at all. I'm a Brahmin and am about the same complexion as, meanwhile I work with a Hindu dude who looks like Ricky Rubio and is a Vaishya (merchant caste).
Caste is way deeper than skin color, people in India have always been diverse in terms of complexion and you can observe that throughout the religious scriptures and epics on which Hinduism is based. Krishna came from a famous line of Aryans, was born as a Kshatriya, and was black as night. The Buddha was a Kshatriya too, and crackpots like Runoko Rashidi waste no time trying to claim him as black/african without ever trying to address this discrepancy in their logic.
Anyway Caste is based on birth and is tied into the doctrine of Karma/rebirth. It was a way to divide society in a way where all functions of the state could be carried out efficiently and a way to explain ones lot in life. Why is someone born into a rich family and the next person born into poverty? shyt like that. Since Vedic/Hindu culture is the oldest surviving culture from ancient times, it became corrupted at some point people took it to extremes.
Every society has some sort of Caste system. In ancient Egypt the Brahmins could be compared to the scribes, and the people who built the temples/pyramids were the Shudras or laborers.
i respect you answering the question but answer me this. Why are all the untouchables I have seen are dark skin?
observe
Banned
This isn't true at all. I'm a Brahmin and am about the same complexion as
Caste is way deeper than skin color, people in India have always been diverse in terms of complexion and you can observe that throughout the religious scriptures and epics on which Hinduism is based. Krishna came from a famous line of Aryans, was born as a Kshatriya, and was black as night. The Buddha was a Kshatriya too, and crackpots like Runoko Rashidi waste no time trying to claim him as black/african without ever trying to address this discrepancy in their logic.
Anyway Caste is based on birth and is tied into the doctrine of Karma/rebirth. It was a way to divide society in a way where all functions of the state could be carried out efficiently and a way to explain ones lot in life. Why is someone born into a rich family and the next person born into poverty? shyt like that. Since Vedic/Hindu culture is the oldest surviving culture from ancient times, it became corrupted at some point people took it to extremes.
Every society has some sort of Caste system. In ancient Egypt the Brahmins could be compared to the scribes, and the people who built the temples/pyramids were the Shudras or laborers.
When did Runoko try to claim him as african?
Crack pot?
As a scholar, Runoko Rashidi has been called the world's leading authority on the African presence in Asia. Since 1986, he has worked actively with the Dalits (India's Black Untouchables). In 1987, he was a keynote speaker at the first All-India Dalits Writer's Conference, held in Hyderabad, India, and spoke on the "Global Unity of African People." In 1998, he returned to India to lecture, study and sojourn with the Dalits and Adivasis "(the indigenous people of India). In 1999, he led a group of seventeen African-Americans to India, and became the first ever non-Indian recipient of the prestigious Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Memorial Award. For the past twelve years, he has served as United States representative of Dalit Voice: The Voice of the Persecuted Nationalities Denied Human Rights, published fortnightly from Bangalore, India.
Last edited:
GetInTheTruck
Member
You can do a google image right now and see untouchables that are both light and dark skinned. The same applies to Brahmins.
In other words, it's just a variant of the same old feudal system you ind everq
Bruh, who called him that? There is a lot of literature on the African presence in Asia, but none of the reputable scholars endorse the idea that Buddha was Black, so why would someone who does be considered the "leading authority?" Furthermore, the Dalit agenda is highly political- they aren't interested in in objective history so much as they are in confirming a preconceived narrative of history along stark black and white lines. They don't tend to produce objective history.
When did Runoko try to claim him as african?
Crack pot?
As a scholar, Runoko Rashidi has been called the world's leading authority on the African presence in Asia. Since 1986, he has worked actively with the Dalits (India's Black Untouchables). In 1987, he was a keynote speaker at the first All-India Dalits Writer's Conference, held in Hyderabad, India, and spoke on the "Global Unity of African People." In 1998, he returned to India to lecture, study and sojourn with the Dalits and Adivasis "(the indigenous people of India). In 1999, he led a group of seventeen African-Americans to India, and became the first ever non-Indian recipient of the prestigious Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Memorial Award. For the past twelve years, he has served as United States representative of Dalit Voice: The Voice of the Persecuted Nationalities Denied Human Rights, published fortnightly from Bangalore, India.
Bruh, who called him that? There is a lot of literature on the African presence in Asia, but none of the reputable scholars endorse the idea that Buddha was Black, so why would someone who does be considered the "leading authority?" Furthermore, the Dalit agenda is highly political- they aren't interested in in objective history so much as they are in confirming a preconceived narrative of history along stark black and white lines. They don't tend to produce objective history.
GetInTheTruck
Member
Lol well I called him that.
Anyway the point is that you can't claim that caste is race based and then say the Buddha was black. The logic just doesn't follow.
godkiller
"We are the Fury"
This question destroys dude's entire post lol.
I think the Indians absorb the brightest and best regardless of skin color into the upper caste, but because they have a hard-on for light skin, they also absord the normal light skins into the upper class too so the majority of the upper caste have light skin and features. On the other hand the Indians bias the undesirables (disabled, dumb, etc) to the bottom and they also have bias against dark skin, so the majority of people at the bottom are dark skin. The influx of undesirables into the lower class makes it so dark skin is connotated with lower ability and slavery.
GetInTheTruck
Member
You're somewhat correct but a little offbase. Skin color and it s relation to caste is a compartively new phenomenon when you take into account how old the caste system is. Also, people in north India are lighter skinned in general, hence why it might be easy to find untouchables in the north who are lighter than Brahmins and other high caste Indians in the south.
And all Indians are pretty much the same racially, so by that fact alone you can't claim that caste consciousness equals racism.
I'm not defending the caste system, I think it's bullshyt, obviously, but the idea that it's all about a bunch of white Indians oppressing black Indians is 100% false.
Mr. Somebody
Friend Of A Friend
Are their light skinned friends at the bottom of the caste compared to dark, friend?
Marvel
Psalm 149:5-9
Is it possible for the caste system to evolve into a "race" thing after the influence of cacs?
godkiller
"We are the Fury"
\
Indians are all technically the same race (I read it in a study), though it is possible the British aggravated things. In fact, I remember reading that it was the British who introduced the Aryanism race angle to the Indians such that the lighter Indians came to believe they were superior to the lower groups based on ancestral race. I hear Nazism is big in parts of India.
Indians are all technically the same race (I read it in a study), though it is possible the British aggravated things. In fact, I remember reading that it was the British who introduced the Aryanism race angle to the Indians such that the lighter Indians came to believe they were superior to the lower groups based on ancestral race. I hear Nazism is big in parts of India.
Marvel
Psalm 149:5-9
Good point. British mastered the divide and conquer better than any other cac country so its not out of the realm for them to use that aryanism angle.
Julius Skrrvin
I be winkin' through the scope
I wouldn't really blame cacs for the divides in India because there are so many different kinds of divides. India was unified in ancient times under various rules, but it has never been easy. There are too many languages, religions, ethnic subgroups, etc. Sure, the british definitely exploited that... But it doesn't come from them.
godkiller
"We are the Fury"
I was about to make a post about this. There have always been divisions in India like you say. The British might have exploited and aggravated tensions but they were already there anyway. People have to remember that India has a billion plus people. There's a lot to argue about.