describe your views for caste system
Answers
Answered by
1
Views on Caste System!
Gandhi believed that Hindu society in its pristine state – during the Vedic times – was based on Varnashramadharma, or the law of varna and ashrama. According to Gandhi, this was society’s “predominant characteristic”. This implied two things – that dharma or “social conduct” (as he termed it) varied, firstly, according to each class of society and, secondly, according to the four stages in the life of the individual.
The former is called Varnadharma and the latter, Ashramadharma. Gandhi believed that this form of social classification was purely functional and did not have any hierarchical or iniquitous connotations. But the law of the ashrama was a “dead letter today”, he said.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
Each of the varnas, which he referred to as social classes (while also using the term, castes, for them elsewhere), was determined by birth and to each was assigned a particular hereditary calling with no implication of superiority or inferiority. In this form, Gandhi did not consider varna to be a manmade institution, but “the law of life universally governing the human family”.
He believed that it provided the basis of an egalitarian society. One important attribute of varna, writes Gandhi, is that while it is determined by birth, it can be retained only by observing its obligations. One who fails to do so loses his title to that varna. On the other hand, a person, though born in one varna, but displaying the predominant characteristics of another, is regarded as belonging to the second varna.
There is ambiguity in this analysis because Gandhi talks of varna being determined by birth, even as he recognizes the possibility of a person being born in one varna and belonging to another by virtue of his qualities. What is important, perhaps, is his conviction that the social structure delineated in ancient times was true in conception and that the blemishes seen now were a result of faulty practice.
This pristine law, in Gandhi’s opinion, fell into disrepute because it became distorted by rigidity in its observance by high class, orthodox Hindus. The four original varnas became subdivided into innumerable groups called jatis, or castes, and they began to represent gradations of high and low. Self-control, which was the hallmark of the original law, was now replaced by selfishness and exploitation.
“We have made ourselves the laughing stock of the world,” says Gandhi. “No wonder that we have today amongst the Hindus a section, which is bending its energies to a destruction of the institution, which, in their opinion, spells the ruin of the Hindus.”
He was of the opinion that in the existing state of Hindu society, there was only one varna left and that was the Shudra. This was because the Shudras were those who served and who were dependent upon others. “India is a dependency,” wrote Gandhi, “therefore, every Indian is a Shudra. The cultivator does not own his land, the merchant his merchandise.
There is hardly a Kshatriya or a Brahmin who possesses the virtues which the Shastras attribute to his varna.” The decay in the Varnadharma had corrupted the social structure and a rot seemed to have set in, which was all too visible in Hindu society.
Gandhi wrote extensively about the excrescences of the caste system as it operated in India. For the most part, it signified bondage and disgrace for those affected by it. It had led to the ultimate fragmentation of society, as there were rigid rules governing inter-dining and intermarriage even between members of a sub-caste. What dismayed him most was that these customs were common even among the intelligentsia in the country.
Gandhi had attended the annual Congress session held in Calcutta (now Kolkata) in 1901. There were many blocks of camps to house the thousands of delegates and volunteers. Observing the goings on there, he wrote with some exasperation: “Even here, I was face to face with untouchability in a fair measure.
The Tamilian kitchen was far away from the rest. To the Tamil delegates, even the sight of others whilst they were dining meant pollution. So, a special kitchen had to be made for them in the college compound, walled in by wickerwork. It was full of smoke which choked you.
It was a kitchen, dining room, washroom, all in one, a close safe with no outlet. To me, this looked like a travesty of Varnadharma. If, I said to myself, there was such untouchability between the delegates of the Congress one could well imagine the extent to which it existed among the constituents.”
The caste segregation led to other ills such as dirty water collecting in pools in the camps and dirty latrines, with nobody willing to clean the filth, which was traditionally considered to be the work of scavengers. Gandhi perceived all caste divisions and the resultant ills as a distortion of the ideal of Varnadharma.
Hope it helps you ....
pls mark as brainliest ....
Gandhi believed that Hindu society in its pristine state – during the Vedic times – was based on Varnashramadharma, or the law of varna and ashrama. According to Gandhi, this was society’s “predominant characteristic”. This implied two things – that dharma or “social conduct” (as he termed it) varied, firstly, according to each class of society and, secondly, according to the four stages in the life of the individual.
The former is called Varnadharma and the latter, Ashramadharma. Gandhi believed that this form of social classification was purely functional and did not have any hierarchical or iniquitous connotations. But the law of the ashrama was a “dead letter today”, he said.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
Each of the varnas, which he referred to as social classes (while also using the term, castes, for them elsewhere), was determined by birth and to each was assigned a particular hereditary calling with no implication of superiority or inferiority. In this form, Gandhi did not consider varna to be a manmade institution, but “the law of life universally governing the human family”.
He believed that it provided the basis of an egalitarian society. One important attribute of varna, writes Gandhi, is that while it is determined by birth, it can be retained only by observing its obligations. One who fails to do so loses his title to that varna. On the other hand, a person, though born in one varna, but displaying the predominant characteristics of another, is regarded as belonging to the second varna.
There is ambiguity in this analysis because Gandhi talks of varna being determined by birth, even as he recognizes the possibility of a person being born in one varna and belonging to another by virtue of his qualities. What is important, perhaps, is his conviction that the social structure delineated in ancient times was true in conception and that the blemishes seen now were a result of faulty practice.
This pristine law, in Gandhi’s opinion, fell into disrepute because it became distorted by rigidity in its observance by high class, orthodox Hindus. The four original varnas became subdivided into innumerable groups called jatis, or castes, and they began to represent gradations of high and low. Self-control, which was the hallmark of the original law, was now replaced by selfishness and exploitation.
“We have made ourselves the laughing stock of the world,” says Gandhi. “No wonder that we have today amongst the Hindus a section, which is bending its energies to a destruction of the institution, which, in their opinion, spells the ruin of the Hindus.”
He was of the opinion that in the existing state of Hindu society, there was only one varna left and that was the Shudra. This was because the Shudras were those who served and who were dependent upon others. “India is a dependency,” wrote Gandhi, “therefore, every Indian is a Shudra. The cultivator does not own his land, the merchant his merchandise.
There is hardly a Kshatriya or a Brahmin who possesses the virtues which the Shastras attribute to his varna.” The decay in the Varnadharma had corrupted the social structure and a rot seemed to have set in, which was all too visible in Hindu society.
Gandhi wrote extensively about the excrescences of the caste system as it operated in India. For the most part, it signified bondage and disgrace for those affected by it. It had led to the ultimate fragmentation of society, as there were rigid rules governing inter-dining and intermarriage even between members of a sub-caste. What dismayed him most was that these customs were common even among the intelligentsia in the country.
Gandhi had attended the annual Congress session held in Calcutta (now Kolkata) in 1901. There were many blocks of camps to house the thousands of delegates and volunteers. Observing the goings on there, he wrote with some exasperation: “Even here, I was face to face with untouchability in a fair measure.
The Tamilian kitchen was far away from the rest. To the Tamil delegates, even the sight of others whilst they were dining meant pollution. So, a special kitchen had to be made for them in the college compound, walled in by wickerwork. It was full of smoke which choked you.
It was a kitchen, dining room, washroom, all in one, a close safe with no outlet. To me, this looked like a travesty of Varnadharma. If, I said to myself, there was such untouchability between the delegates of the Congress one could well imagine the extent to which it existed among the constituents.”
The caste segregation led to other ills such as dirty water collecting in pools in the camps and dirty latrines, with nobody willing to clean the filth, which was traditionally considered to be the work of scavengers. Gandhi perceived all caste divisions and the resultant ills as a distortion of the ideal of Varnadharma.
Hope it helps you ....
pls mark as brainliest ....
Answered by
11
✴✴✴✴✴✴✴✴✴✴⚫⚫⚫⚫⚫⚫⚫
✴⚫☞✔Caste system started with social categories that were determined by people’s job specialization. The caste system in ancient times grouped people of the same profession under one class or ‘caste’. This structured social categorization is termed as caste system.
✴⚫☛✔Caste system is a hereditary phenomenon. Even though this sounds unfair in modern society, the very base of caste system was decided by birth. Being hereditary, a person`s caste is not under his control and is something that is pre-determined even before his or her birth. In ancient times, if you were born in a farmer`s family, the society caste system dictated you to grow up to be a farmer. This system is thus seen as a rigid one, where a person`s choice and desire was restricted/suppressed
✴⚫☛✔Caste system determined your social status by your ability of doing a job. People with a certain job capability were judged by their professional ability. For example, a locksmith was considered of lower caste than a business person.
✴⚫☞✔The economic angle plays a big role in the instilling of the caste system in the society. Once segregated, the caste system allowed people of higher castes to retain their financial and social security over lasting generations. The entire family tree was safeguarded against any social crisis.
✴⚫☛Cast system divided the society into various segments. It aimed to group people of similar statuses together. There was to be a clear segmentation between the rich and the poor and people were to limit themselves only within their castes. From marriage to socializing, inter-caste interactions was not encouraged and any bifurcation from this norm was seen to be a punishable offense.
✴⚫☞✔Caste system went against the democratic rights of people. Keeping the country`s democracy aside, caste system expected people to abide by the caste segregation laws. Since the rules of the society were enforced by the high caste people, the low-caste members did not have a go-to place to protest for their democratic rights.
⛤⛤⛤⛤⛤⛤⛤⛤☺☺⛤⛤⛤⛤⛤✌✋⛤⛤⛤⛤
✴⚫☞✔Caste system started with social categories that were determined by people’s job specialization. The caste system in ancient times grouped people of the same profession under one class or ‘caste’. This structured social categorization is termed as caste system.
✴⚫☛✔Caste system is a hereditary phenomenon. Even though this sounds unfair in modern society, the very base of caste system was decided by birth. Being hereditary, a person`s caste is not under his control and is something that is pre-determined even before his or her birth. In ancient times, if you were born in a farmer`s family, the society caste system dictated you to grow up to be a farmer. This system is thus seen as a rigid one, where a person`s choice and desire was restricted/suppressed
✴⚫☛✔Caste system determined your social status by your ability of doing a job. People with a certain job capability were judged by their professional ability. For example, a locksmith was considered of lower caste than a business person.
✴⚫☞✔The economic angle plays a big role in the instilling of the caste system in the society. Once segregated, the caste system allowed people of higher castes to retain their financial and social security over lasting generations. The entire family tree was safeguarded against any social crisis.
✴⚫☛Cast system divided the society into various segments. It aimed to group people of similar statuses together. There was to be a clear segmentation between the rich and the poor and people were to limit themselves only within their castes. From marriage to socializing, inter-caste interactions was not encouraged and any bifurcation from this norm was seen to be a punishable offense.
✴⚫☞✔Caste system went against the democratic rights of people. Keeping the country`s democracy aside, caste system expected people to abide by the caste segregation laws. Since the rules of the society were enforced by the high caste people, the low-caste members did not have a go-to place to protest for their democratic rights.
⛤⛤⛤⛤⛤⛤⛤⛤☺☺⛤⛤⛤⛤⛤✌✋⛤⛤⛤⛤
mayakashyap:
nice answee
Similar questions
English,
7 months ago
Computer Science,
7 months ago
Social Sciences,
7 months ago
English,
1 year ago
Physics,
1 year ago