ASIA 150: Introduction to Indian Religion
Instructor: Jennifer Lundin Ritchie
“Sociology of Caste” Discussion Questions (Feb 5, 2014)
Class Answers and Jennifer’s Comments:
1. Sociology always looks to see “who benefits” and “who loses” in a system.
a) Which group benefits the most from the Varna (class) system? Brahmins (Aryans/IE)
b) Which group benefits the least? Shudras
(non-Aryans/IE)
c) Why would the non-Aryan/IE groups have agreed/accepted to be on the lowest rung of the
class system?
“false consciousness”: They believe in the religion that allows oppression towards them
 Other ideas to consider: perhaps they have no choice but to agree,
e.g. the Aryans/IE might have conquered them and enforced the class system with their greater
power/strength.
e.g. even if it was not “cultural,” the Shudras may not have the power/strength/education to
refuse the social order that is enforced by the Brahmins.
2.
In the reading “Sociology of Caste” (by Kannabiran), each of the three sociologists have
a theory about the use of force (e.g. dominance, violence) in the creation and maintenance of the
caste system. In EACH case, which group is exerting the force, which group is receiving the
force, and what situation are they trying to deal with?
Theories
Who is exerting
force?
1. Dominant class
Ambedkar’s (Brahmins)
theory
2. Men
Srinivas’
theory
Ilaiah’s
theory
Who is receiving force?
What’s the situation?
1. Subordinate classes
(Non-Brahmins)
2. Women
1. caste endogamy: trying to
exclude lower classes
2. when there is a surplus of
women, men make the rules to stay
in power, e.g. sati (wife burning)
Violence used against the lower
class to prevent them from dressing
in a way to “pass” as a higher class
Upper classes
(Brahmins,
Kshatriyas)
Lower class
(Harijans)
Upper castes
Dalits
A way to force the Dalits into being
labourers for them
3.
In the reading “Sociology of Caste” (by Kannabiran), Ambedkar claims the caste system
does not have divine origins, but human ones.
a) What does he think is the origin of the caste system? (hint: there are two parts)
 see above
b) Which of the two parts do you think is the most important? Why?
ASIA 150: Introduction to Indian Religion
Instructor: Jennifer Lundin Ritchie
4.
In the reading “Sociology of Caste” (by Kannabiran), Ambedkar claims the caste system
does not have divine origins, but human ones. He describes the origin and continuation of caste
as related to the strategies of endogamy (prohibits marriage with out-group members) and
exogamy (prohibits marriage between kin or same class).
What are the advantages to endogamy?
5. In the reading “Sociology of Caste” (by Kannabiran), Ambedkar claims the caste system
does not have divine origins, but human ones. He describes the origin and continuation of caste
as related to the strategies of endogamy (prohibits marriage with out-group members) and
exogamy (prohibits marriage between kin or same class).
What are the disadvantages to exogamy?
6. In the reading “Sociology of Caste” (by Kannabiran), Ambedkar claims that the dominance
of men over women is responsible for the three mechanisms that maintain caste when there is
surplus men or women in the group.
a) What are these three mechanisms?
1. surplus women: burning the widow on the husband’s funeral pyre (sati)
2. surplus women: subjected to enforced widowhood, stripped of anything that could be seen as a
source of allurement
3. surplus men: could not be burned on wife’s funeral pyre  child (girl) marriage
b) How are gender roles responsible for these mechanisms?
 see below
c) What was Ambedkar’s solution to this problem? Do you think his solution is
possible/probable? Why or why not?
ASIA 150: Introduction to Indian Religion
Instructor: Jennifer Lundin Ritchie
7. In the reading “Sociology of Caste” (by Kannabiran), Ambedkar claims caste is controlled
and regulated through widow burning (sati), enforced widowhood, and girl (child) marriage.
a) What social phenomenon are these three practices trying to deal with?
Dominant male society
 Other ideas to consider: they were meant to deal with having surplus men or women in a
limited group from which they had to choose a mate
b) Why are the solutions different for men than for women?
There was a lot of discrimination at that time, men made all the decisions and girls were not
allowed to decide for themselves
 Other ideas to consider: men were in charge though both dominance (physical force/strength)
and prestige (more skills, status, wealth, education, religious power, etc). Since men were in
charge through prestige, they were given greater value in the society, so they would not make a
decision that would take a male out of the “mating pool.” Since men were in charge through
dominance, of course they could force women and children to adopt rules that favored them.
8. In the reading “Sociology of Caste” (by Kannabiran), Ambedkar says that lower castes try to
“imitate higher castes” because the higher caste forces them through threats of exclusion; while
Srinivas claims lower castes “imitate higher castes” because they admire the higher castes and
seek upward social mobility. Which theory do you believe is more accurate and why?
We think the second theory of Srinivas is more accurate because: lower castes admire higher
castes by this they will get benefits of higher caste and moreover they will get more social
mobility.
 Other ideas to consider: you kind of just repeated the question… this is basically a question
asking whether you think caste is working through dominance (force) or prestige (admiration).
So in the first case (Ambekar, dominance theory, like a German Sociologist), the lower castes
don’t like the system but are trying to avoid punishments and losses that would result from being
excluded from society. In the second case, (Srnivas, prestige theory, more like a French
Sociologist), the lower castes agree with the system and are motivated to cooperate by looking
up to a role model they can imitate, i.e. “maybe we can get what they have if we act like they
do.” There is no single “right answer” to this question… it depends on your perspective.
9. In the reading “Sociology of Caste” (by Kannabiran), Srinivas claims that upward social
mobility by lower castes is blocked by “watchdogs”—elders in the dominant caste—who
“punish” people in lower castes who try to “pass” as higher castes.
a) What is the main goal of these watchdogs?
b) What problem(s) does this system perpetrate?
ASIA 150: Introduction to Indian Religion
Instructor: Jennifer Lundin Ritchie
10. In the reading “Sociology of Caste” (by Kannabiran), Srinivas claims that Brahmin castes
dominated the lower castes through installing a “religious reason” for castes (e.g. dharma, moska,
etc.), and this hierarchy was reinforced by British Colonials after World War 2.
Why would the British Colonials want to reinforce the Brahmins’ dominance over India?
British Colonials wanted to rule India. They wanted to limit the voice of people and what they
say in everyday life. Brahmans were the highest class, so the British Colonials can rule as long
as they want and implement the laws. The other classes (population of India) would not have
any freedom or choice in India.
 Other ideas to consider: British Colonialists (post WW2) encouraged the idea of Brahmins
being on top because it helped them gain control over India: during the colonial era, the
Brahmins had a lot of power to control the population. By working directly with the Brahmins,
the British could gain control Hindu laws and customs.
11. In the reading “Sociology of Caste” (by Kannabiran), Srinivas claims that non-Brahmin
castes could go through “Sanskritization.”
a) What is Sanskritization?
a practice done by lower classes to “upgrade” their class (get “upward mobility,” move to a
higher class).
 Other ideas to consider: The lower classes seek upward mobility by emulating/copying the
rituals and practices of the upper or dominant castes. It is a process similar to “passing”.
b) What kinds of things could the lower castes do to achieve it? (give examples)
 you didn’t quite get the right idea in part b.
 Other ideas to consider: In “Sanskritization” the lower castes do NOT do karma according to
their dharma. In fact, they copy the higher classes’ dharma!
e.g. copy the higher castes’ dress style, diet (become vegetarian), speech (use lots of words like
karma, dharma, samsara, moska, etc)
e.g. hypergamy (“marrying up”): marry someone from a higher caste/class
e.g. getting “twice born”: being adopted by someone from a higher caste/class (i.e. you become
“their son” instead of the son of your birth parents)
12. In the reading “Sociology of Caste” (by Kannabiran), Srinivas claims that people who go
through “Sanskritization” (upward social mobility) more often use terms like Karma, Dharma,
Samsara, and Moska in their speech.
a) Why would they use these terms more in their speech?
Lower class people want to be included in the upper class; therefore they practice upper classes’
practices and then claim themselves as if they are upper classes.
ASIA 150: Introduction to Indian Religion
Instructor: Jennifer Lundin Ritchie
b) Describe how these terms are related to the maintenance of the caste system.
By adopting the place of the upper class, rather than maintaining their own individual status.
These people always refer to the caste and hence they maintain the caste system in society.
 Other ideas to consider: according to Sociologists they also could possibly have a “false
consciousness,” meaning they really believe in the religious justification of caste (involving
karma, etc).
13. In the reading “Sociology of Caste” (by Kannabiran), Ilaiah claims that the caste system
(including division of labour) operates under “extremely exploitative conditions.”
a) What is he talking about?
He is talking about the caste system that exists in society. It creates a difference of upper and
lower class in society and the way people in the upper class exploit those in the lower classes.
They try to dominate the lower class people.
b) He also claims this description “does not describe the whole truth.” What other factor is he
talking about?
 you didn’t quite get the right idea in part b.
 Other ideas to consider: Ilaiah claims that the Dalits are not completely trapped in a world of
oppression and exploitation. He says they have created a whole separate social system that
exists at the same time as the “exploitative” system. He thinks the Dalit system is a kind of
“utopia” that encourages equality (e.g. between men and women, fathers and sons, etc) and
practical artisanry (where “high class” things like knowledge/ideas and “low class” things like
physical labour enrich each other).
14. In the reading “Sociology of Caste” (by Kannabiran), Ilaiah tries to invert Srinivas’ theory
about “lower castes wanting to imitate higher castes” by describing several advantages to the
Dalit (“Untouchable”) lifestyle.
a) What are some of these advantages?
 see above
b) Do you believe the Dalits have a better system? Why or why not?
c) Is it reasonable to expect that the higher castes to get involved in productive labour? Why
or why not?