Casteism Exposed : Indian system or Britishers conspiracy

Casteism is a highly condemned practice in the society of ours in which people are divided on their background. But do casteism really have any Indian background.Today we will try to bust this myth.

Caste is a Portugese word first of all. And it has its root in all the countries around the globe. It is an foreign element.

Caste is never described in any of our Arthsastra Vedas or any scriptures. Later dharmasutra and many books were manipulativly written to make caste system seem real. There was not even any slavery system in India from which Europeans were disturbed as they tried converted Das and dasi word to have meaning as slave which was in real a devotee or votary. As you can see the names such as Tulsidas, Surdas and many more who were not slave but devotees.

In Rigveda there is a classification based on Varnas- and there are 4 of them on the basis of their profession and occupation of skill-

Brahmin (they did religious practices, havan, yagya, sadhana etc)

Kshatriya (they were protectors warriors and fought battles and had administrative functions)

Vaishya (they were businessman class of either agriculture or husbandry etc)

Shudra(they were blacksmith goldsmith etc)

Prior to colonialism, the jati-varna system in India had little, if anything, to do with race, ethnicity, or genetics. It was better understood as a set of distinctions based on traditional or inherited social status derived from work roles. Jati is a highly localized and intricately organized social structure. One of the important aspects of jati, which was conspicuously overlooked by western Indologists, is its dynamic nature – allowing social mobility as well as occupational diversification.

Now to your surprise caste system was told to be in India by Governor Risley a Britisher and we as Indians believed him and he in his mission to divide and distribute people into many groups in India with separate ideology got success.

Herbert Hope Risley (1851–1911) was a powerful colonial bureaucrat at the Royal Anthropological Institute, and developed the Nasal Index based on Max Müller’s speculation. This Nasal Index, much like Phrenology, became a tool of Race Science in an effort to classify the traits of Indian communities.

During the four decades of his stay in India, Risley made an extensive study of Indian communities, based on the Nasal Index. His goal was to separate the Aryan communities from the non-Aryan communities.

Taxonomical classification and massive documentation of Indian jatis froze the dynamic quality and mobility found in the jati system within the varna matrix.Various colonially inspired studies transformed jatis into racial categories rather than identities based on occupation. The Nasal Index not only separated the jatis into Aryan and non-Aryan, it also classified those considered non-Aryan as distinct from mainstream Hindu society. Risley compared the black plantation-workers in America with the so-called non-Aryan communities in India. This foreshadows the Afro-Dalit-Dravidian projects of today, which are essentially the expansion of Risley’s project of ethnic fragmentation of India.

Max Müller, who was largely responsible for entrenching the racial framework for studying jati, had his own evangelical motive. In his view, caste:

. . . which has hitherto proved an impediment to conversion of the Hindus, may in future became one of the most powerful engines for the conversion not merely of the individuals, but of whole classes of Indian society.

Just as in present majority of Dalits have been converted to Christain by these Christain Missionaries misleading them by telling them to be outcasted Hindus and used these tactics to influence them and create hatred towards Hinduism.

Whereas, we Indians had this philosophy of “Vasudev Kutumbakam”

Meaning all world is one family and we all are part of it.

Max Müller’s interpretation of the Rig Veda claimed that only the first three varnas are Aryan, while the fourth, shudra, is not Aryan. However, he explicitly admitted that there was no evidence of physical differences between Aryans and non-Aryans in Sanskrit texts. He made only one incidental reference to physical differences – that noses were described differently for different tribes in the Rig Veda. He based this notion on a single Sanskrit word, anasa (Rig Veda: V.29.10), that was used infrequently. Müller himself drew no important conclusions from this casual observation. But his prejudice was passed on through others who were more eager to do the dirty work openly. One of the common threads throughout the West’s study of India has been the manner in which subsequent scholars pick and choose from someone else’s work, often out of context, and with their own arbitrary assignment of priorities. This is what happened between Max Müller’s writing and its manipulative use by Risley years later.

Now moving further many people raises questions on Manusmriti as they think that it preaches Brahmanvad  and they gives out the slogan that ‘Brahmanvad se ajaadi’ and what not to defame Hinduism as well as it’s people.

In Manusmriti there is a slokha which is typically saying that classification only happens on the basis of your profession or skill not your background, it is provided to you from birth as only a privelege and afterwards your action decides your fate and brahman can become a Kshatriya and vice versa for all varnas. The slokha is-

“Shudro brahmantameti brahmansacheiti shudratam Kshatriyajajjatmevam tu vidhyadvaishyatatheva ch”

Maharishi Valmiki were a dacoit and looted people before they became a sage by doing sadhana and were considered Brahmana and even wrote Ramayan.

Vishwamitra were also Kshatriya later became brahman due to intense sadhana and tapa.

Kalidas ji also became brahman due to blessings of Mahakali ji and he turned out to be most virtuous and gyani of his time from being illiterate.

In Manusmriti one more slokha which tells brahman Kshatriya and vaishya to be dwij( reborned) and shudra are first time born into this birth death cycle which is also misinterpreted to be low high status-

Brahmanah kshatriyo vaishyakhayo varna dwijatayah chaturtha ekjatisthu shudra nasthih tuh panchamah”

This vedic slokha also tries to tell us the truth from Uttaragita-

“Nah jatih karanam tata Gunga kalyankaranam Vrithasthamapi chandalam Tam devah brahmanam viduh.”

Translation-Birth is not the cause my friend it is virtues which are cause of the welfare even a chandala observing vow is considered brahmana by gods.

In Bhagvadgita chapter 4 verse 13-

Chaturvarnayam mayā sristham guna karma vibhagashah tasya kartaram api mam viddhyakartaram avyayam

Translation– The four categories of Varnas was created by me according to people’s qualities and activities.

Although I am the creator of this system know me to be the non doer and eternal. 

In Mahabharata, Udyog Parva Ch. 34 verse 41 –

Na kulam vrittahinasya pramanamiti me matihi anteswapji jatanam Vrittameva vishishyate

Translation– High birth can be no certificate for a person of no character but persons with good character can distinguish themselves irrespective of low birth.

In Mahabharata Vanaparva Chapter 216 verses 14-15 – 

Yaaro shudre dame satye dharme cha satatotthitah tam brahamanam manye vritten hi bhavet dvijah”

Meaning– That shudra who is ever engaged in self control, truth and righteousness. I regard him a brahmin one is twice born by conduct only.

Example – Gautama Siddhartha became Buddha went  from Kshatriya to Brahmin as due to his deeds he attained enlightenment and was born again in this life only or type of reborn in the same life with different counsciousness of Life as his all questions were answered.

There are more examples such as Vedvyash ji being son of fisherwoman were considered as Brahmin as due to their sadhana and tapobal and knowledge of Vedas and scripturesa and later wrote Mahabharata.

Now people who questions that why wrong happened with Eklavya, for their kind information Eklavya was not from shudra jati but from Nishadh clan of which he has his father who was army commander (so particularly Eklavya was a Kshatriya)and that empire could have became a danger to Hastinapura, And Dronacharya refused to give him diksha also because Dronacharya has given word and vow or swore an oath to Bhishma that they will only teach the Rajdarbari or kings sons only and not because of any jati hindrance. Now you would be asking that why Guru Dronacharya asked for Eklavya thumb in Guru dakshina. It is a false information Guru Dronacharya only asked him to not take part in Mahabharata in future as Guru Dakshina on which Eklavya said that you had asked me such a big thing that it seems to me that my thumb is no more, as for a warrior not able to fight or show his parakarma was much like that which must have seemed to be like that of being disabled or the right thumb cutted off, which was devastatingly misinterpreted to what you know today.

And you might ask then what about Karna so to tell you that Karna was indeed the shishya of Dronacharya but Dronacharya refused to give him shiksha of “brahmastra”(deadliest weapon of that time) which led him to go to Parashuram in disguise and get the shiksha from him.It is written in Gitapress published Mahabharata.

Shabri was shudra still Bhagwan Ramji eated ber or plum from her which was tasted by her in Bhakti.

Ambedkar himself has given several examples of social and occupational mobility during the Vedic and upanishadic period. Raikva janashruti and Kavasa ailusha were admitted to ashrams for vedic learning even after revealing their low caste status.

So people who say jay bheem jay meem should shut up their mouths and first of all praise and embrace their Vedic dharma instead of seeing what Britishers wants them to see.

In Chandogya Upanishad there is a significant story of Satyakama Jabala being admitted to hermitage or ashram of Gautam Rishi(not Gautama buddha).

In Manusmriti there is this slokha misinterpreted accordingly to gain political favour from low caste people-

Brahmamanosya mukhamasit Bahu rajanyah kritah| Uru tadasya yadvaishyah Padbhayam shudro ajayata||

In which liberals or propagandist people sort out only comparison of Brahmins compared to face and head whereas shudra are compared to the legs and shudra are shown such low by manu and they gave out ‘Manuvaad se ajaadi’ only to satisfy their animal desire on basis of political interests.


Brahmin has intellectual knowledge of Vedas and practice yagya and sadhana as are compared to face.

 Khatriya are compared to spine and chest as they defend nation by being warriors and fighting battles and mantaing administration.

Vaishya are compared to thigh as they are business mans and hold the economy of nation and support and faces all the jerks or the difficulties in economy and wealth related issues of nation just as thigh absorbs all the jerks.

And Shudra compared to the legs as they supply all the basic expenses to hold the household actions like pots and steel objects and legs actually hold all the weight of all the body and makes the whole body move so thus it can be perviewed that shudra are considered to be significant to us but these political agenda associated people with greed and animal qualities always tried to mould the people’s perception according to their interests.

Ever wonder why all this happens, it is to break Indian unity once it is breaked everything will happen easily and once again the people of India will be under the colonialism and would again had to fight for its independence.In some part of India their began real casteism and untouchability as to their misfortune they understood caste to be a real principle.

And we were misfortunate to have the political leaders also who used this system as a means for satisfying their political agenda and propaganda several times they exploited Dalits via some people and spreaded rumour that it was done by so called upper caste. And a hatred began in real between Dalits and Hindus. They ignited riots and clashes more fastly than Britishers and harmed the fraternity and Unity of India.

Small things suddenly becomes large things just like disease if ignored as we must concern upon this topic and should try to understand what’s going around us and should counterfeit those attempts which harms India integrity as soon as possible to maintain India’s unity which has been tried to broke on basis of linguistic, religion, caste and Aryan dravidian theory. And we should not let these European and British entities in making a civil war with their negative influence on Indians.

Aishwarya Says

I have always been against Glorifying Over Work and therefore, in the year 2021, I have decided to launch this campaign “Balancing Life”and talk about this wrong practice, that we have been following since last few years. I will be talking to and interviewing around 1 lakh people in the coming 2021 and publish their interview regarding their opinion on glamourising Over Work.

If you are interested in participating in the same, do let me know.

Do follow me on FacebookTwitter  Youtube and Instagram.

The copyright of this Article belongs exclusively to Ms. Aishwarya Sandeep. Reproduction of the same, without permission will amount to Copyright Infringement. Appropriate Legal Action under the Indian Laws will be taken.

If you would also like to contribute to my website, then do share your articles or poems at

We also have a Facebook Group Restarter Moms for Mothers or Women who would like to rejoin their careers post a career break or women who are enterpreneurs.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.