How did Jyotirao Phule the reference justify their criticism of caste.
Answers
Answered by
2
The reformers questioned the brahmanical texts that supported the caste system and the inferiority of the so-called “low castes” and the superiority of the so-called “high castes”. They challenged the brahmanical claims to power and authority.
Jyotirao Phule claimed that the lower castes were the true children of the land known as India. According to him, the Brahmins—who traced their genealogy back to the Aryans—were outsiders. The upper castes had therefore no right to their land and power. Like Birsa Munda who envisioned a golden age free from diksus and all other forms of evil, Jyotirao Phule too believed in a golden age free from the Aryans and their ideas of caste. He also extended his criticism of the caste system and linked it with all other forms of inequalities and injustices prevalent not only in Indian society but also in Western society. A case in point is his linking of the miseries of the black slaves in America with those of the lower castes in India.
Shri Narayana Guru, another reformer who criticised caste inequality in society, proclaimed the ideals of unity of all people within one sect, a single caste and one guru.
Ambedkar criticised caste inequality on the basis of his belief that being a low caste did not imply that one was not a human being; all humans had the right to equality—whether they were men or women, high castes or low castes.
E. V. Ramaswami Naicker (or Periyar) argued that the untouchables were in fact the true upholders of an original Tamil and Dravidian culture which had been subjugated by the Brahmin outsiders. Like Jyotirao Phule, he too saw the Brahmins as having no claims to the power which they used for oppressing the lower castes. He pointed out that unlike what all religions would have one believe, social divisions and inequalities were not God-given. He urged the lower castes and the untouchables to free themselves from falsities that had been propagated for generations. Only then would social equality be achieved. He also criticised the Hindu scriptures by saying that these texts had been used for establishing the authority of the upper castes over the lower castes and the domination of men over women.
Was this answer helpful-6
No user found this answer helpful.
Why do you think this post is offensive?
It has foul language
It is irrelevant
Any other
Jyotirao Phule claimed that the lower castes were the true children of the land known as India. According to him, the Brahmins—who traced their genealogy back to the Aryans—were outsiders. The upper castes had therefore no right to their land and power. Like Birsa Munda who envisioned a golden age free from diksus and all other forms of evil, Jyotirao Phule too believed in a golden age free from the Aryans and their ideas of caste. He also extended his criticism of the caste system and linked it with all other forms of inequalities and injustices prevalent not only in Indian society but also in Western society. A case in point is his linking of the miseries of the black slaves in America with those of the lower castes in India.
Shri Narayana Guru, another reformer who criticised caste inequality in society, proclaimed the ideals of unity of all people within one sect, a single caste and one guru.
Ambedkar criticised caste inequality on the basis of his belief that being a low caste did not imply that one was not a human being; all humans had the right to equality—whether they were men or women, high castes or low castes.
E. V. Ramaswami Naicker (or Periyar) argued that the untouchables were in fact the true upholders of an original Tamil and Dravidian culture which had been subjugated by the Brahmin outsiders. Like Jyotirao Phule, he too saw the Brahmins as having no claims to the power which they used for oppressing the lower castes. He pointed out that unlike what all religions would have one believe, social divisions and inequalities were not God-given. He urged the lower castes and the untouchables to free themselves from falsities that had been propagated for generations. Only then would social equality be achieved. He also criticised the Hindu scriptures by saying that these texts had been used for establishing the authority of the upper castes over the lower castes and the domination of men over women.
Was this answer helpful-6
No user found this answer helpful.
Why do you think this post is offensive?
It has foul language
It is irrelevant
Any other
Similar questions