“My experiences of when caste/jaat/race have become an issue is more often than not amongst those who in fact are not that religious,”

Hmmm… that’s interesting. In my experiences, it’s the
“secular” Sikhs who boast about being jatt.

But my comment was geared to those who must fit equality and rights into the schema of religion and derive justification in these ideals from religion.

You are correct, that the social practice amongst Sikhs (and for clarification, Sikhism itself speaks against the caste system and does not propagate its belief) is akin to what you describe as “zaat” (and what most rural Punjabis would pronounce as “jaat”).

I concur that problems arise when one holds on so steadfast to their ‘jaat’ that it effectively becomes another form of racism, however my personal opinion is that observance of one’s caste/jaat/race/nationality in itself does not make one a racist bigot.

Desi Italiana @ 105 stated:

“you can actually believe in racial equality, dismiss caste, and marry others without caste/zaat/race being an issue as a Muslim or not”

My experiences of when caste/jaat/race have become an issue is more often than not amongst those who in fact are not that religious, i.e. in my own community, amongst Sikhs this has typically been non-Amritdhari and/or non-Turbaned Sikhs, that is those who are more “Punjabi” than they are Sikh.

“if as a muslim i believe in racial equality, then these issues should not exist..if someone chooses to marry out of their own caste/race/zaat then that should be a non issue…in religious terms…in practical terms yes there will always be issues with the mix of cultures and languages etc…”

Sofia, hon, your comments are so invariably tied up to religion. This may be hard to believe, but you can actually believe in racial equality, dismiss caste, and marry others without caste/zaat/race being an issue as a Muslim or not.

Huh?

You asked:

“Deep singh..i’m not sure I understand your definition of caste..is this merely a sub section within a particular religious group, vaguely based around tribes/regional populations?”

For clarification, it is not my definition of caste, I am simply trying to summarise the topic in a more objective manner.

“The caste system” as commonly understood for Hindu society comes from ‘The law of Manu’, an ancient text accorded legal status by the Brahmanical ruling class. It is here one finds the division of society into 4 subclasses, which over time became rigidly enforced (i.e. from birth your ‘class’ has been determined).

Within other indian traditions and societies, the term caste doesn’t necessarily relate to this “classical” use of the term.

In Punjab for instance, one finds Jats (farmers), Tarkhans (carpenters), Lohars (blacksmiths), Nais (Barbers), Khatris (Merchants), Chamars (Leatherworkers), Chooras (sweepers), Suneyaras (Goldsmiths), Mahajans (Bankers) and many more – as you can see, these do not correlate to the 4 ‘classical castes’ of Manu and Hinduism.

Moreover, from an economic, religious and social practice (which I believe is what practically concerns us today), the observance of these “castes” is different to the way the ‘classical caste’ system worked.

In a nutshell, under the Law of Manu, the classical caste system limited much of secular and religious eduction to Brahmins, Kshatriyas were permitted some, however Vaishas were pretty much limited and Sudras totally denied access to any form of education and in many cases, basic well being.

The concept of “pollution” was also enforced under this regime, whereby a Brahmin would not eat food prepared by a Sudra, leaving aside inter-marriage, basic social interaction was in many cases forbidden (image a more radical form of ’segregation’ in the Deep South), so much so, one can find stories of Sudras undergoing the most horrendous human rights abuses for no reason other than their birth being in a so-called ‘low’ caste.

The Sikh Gurus, Islamic Sufis, Bhakta (predominantly) Hindu saints and various other religious movements in the Indian Subcontinent all worked to eradicate this practice of discrimination on the basis of caste and allow access for one and all to education and basic human requirements (in the Sikh context, the langar kitchen is prehaps the most obvious case where even the Great Moghul Emperor Akbhar had to sit on the floor and dine alongside his common man, composed of all castes, when visiting the Sikh Gurus, who were themselves in similar service).

That I trust clarifies the classical caste issue under the Law of Manu and the position of almost all Religious and Secular movements and traditions on the subject (i.e. Discrimination and Segregation of society on such grounds is inherently wrong).

Coming to the modern case amongst Sikhs, Muslims, Christians and even non-religious groups in India, the term ‘caste’ often refers to the examples provided above for the Punjabi community. In this case, they are related to one’s family occupation, however also form tribes in their right. Whilst it may not be a totally acadmemic site, good old wikipedia has some articles on Jatts, Tarkhans and Khatris which should outline the background to these tribes and communities.

So, your understanding that castes today amongst Sikhs for example are more akin to “tribes/regional populations” is not too far off the mark. The important thing to note is whilst many prefer to marry within caste, there is no issue of sharing food, pollution concepts or other human rights issues between castes in the way that the Law of Manu sanctioned.

Hence, whilst aknowledging that certain other issues do arise (see below) from the modern observance of caste amongst Sikhs, Muslims and others, overall acknowledgement of one’s caste is in my opinion, no different to acknowledgement of one’s race (as white, black, brown etc), provided tomorrow one doesn’t begin to refuse education, jobs, access to institutions (secular or spiritual) on the basis of one’s race or caste (tribe), I personally see no conflict with the religious teachings of Sikhism and Islam (i.e. the brotherhood of the humankind) or secular race-relations acts, if one is simply identifying themselves as black, brown or white and/or as a Khatri, Tarkhan, Jatt or Pundit etc.

Problems between castes arise in much the same way as they do with race, i.e. when one insists on segregation and discrimination.

Within the Punjabi context, marriages were arranged in the recent past on the basis of caste simply to allow easy transition for the girl being married (i.e. just like certain family traditions/customs are unique, or at least more typical, to say a black family vs. a white family vs. a brown family, the same is true of different castes).

This is purely a social aspect to Punjabi marriages – as affluence and upward social mobility has occurred, increased access to education, changes in extended family structures and so forth, today the concern for the girl to adjust to the new family structure has changed with social attitudes and customs, although as with many things change in attitudes is not always so swift.

To give a personal example, I would describe myself as a fairly orthodox Amritdhari (initiated) Sikh man of a particular Punjabi caste and 4th generation British (i.e. my Great-Grandfather was the first to leave Punjab back in the early 1900s).

I married my girlfriend a few years back who is also a Sikh lady, but of a different caste and 2nd generation Canadian (i.e. her Parents were the first generation to leave India).

When we sought to get married, the only concern our parents aired was if I would be able to adjust my then present circumstances to life in North America or her (being born and raised there) adjust to life in the UK, given the inherent customs and lifestyle factors that come with each location.

The issue of adjusting from a family of one caste to another wasn’t an issue (although me and my wife often joke about the idiosyncrasies of our respective castes and associated family life) since even amongst our own caste groups, our families had already developed differing attitudes being the 4th and 2nd generations abroad.

Moreover, we were both looking to live by ourselves rather than in an extended family set up as is often the case in India and also amongst many 2nd and 3rd generations abroad, wherein marrying within the same caste can be an easier transition for the married couple, particular if one chooses to have an arranged marriage (in which case, marrying within one’s caste is nothing more than finding basic common ground).

I hope this lengthy post (which taking Doug’s advice, I won’t apologise for) helps clarify the situation further and more objectively.

Best regards,

Deep Singh.

I didn’t see the programme, but yes, a lot of terrible things do happen to Dalits and that needs to be resolved as a basic human rights issue.

The socio-economic situation is however, more complicated and not as black and white as often presented, much like race-relations and religious/non-religious rights.

When will liberals take notice of the majority of victims of race crime in the UK – who are whites – instead of perpetuating the nonsense that some sort of racist epidemic threatens blacks /muslims etc.

It is whites who are main victims if race crime and yet their suffering is ignored and minimised.

Liberals are complicit in this racist crime wave against whites, as they lie about ethnic minorities being the majority victims and refuse to debate the fact that it is the ethnic minorities who are the main perpetrators of race crime not the white majority.

“In short, there is some sort of economic advantage in playing the caste card? Is that what you are saying?”

With respect to the situation in modern Indian society, yes this is exactly the case when it comes to groups such as Dalits and other so-called “scheduled” or “low-castes”, which is something often missed and/or ignored by the commentaries on the caste system in India.

For the record, I am not supporting the caste system, simply outlining that the majority of analysis is over emotional and sensationalised and hence incomplete as to the wider picture.

For clarity, the practice of caste discrimination is forbidden in Sikh and Islamic doctrine, however one needs to understand that social observances of caste groups are more cultural and do not necessarily conflict with the religious rulings – i.e. Sikhism and Islam speak of brotherhood, hence to say caste doesn’t exist is a little like saying race doesn’t exist (and indeed many tout various biological studies to help prove this PC POV), however in simply acknowledging some is Black or White, or if someone is a Khatri (a mercentile trading caste in India) or a Jatt (a farming caste/tribe) doesn’t necessarily mean that one is being racist or ‘casteist’, likewise, marrying within the same ‘race’ or ‘caste’, IMHO, doesn’t conflict with any religious or legal injunction not to discriminate against another’s race or caste.

Of course, people do step over the line and as with the subject of race, people get overly hung up on caste.

You doth protest too much- you have obviously listened to a lot of this ‘rap’ music. So what is your point? These rappers are unpleasant oiks, and so are the BNP.

Why are Hindus and Sikhs crying about the lack of attention they’re getting? Don’t they understand about the attendant villification and hatefulness directed against Muslims that is very much part of the whole package.

I agree. The vilification is horrible to see taking place. Although I think Parv Bancil is simply saying that people realise that the Muslim experience is not the only one that relates to modern ‘multicultural’ British life, and it does no harm to make that point.

You’re taking a very proprietary attitude to your Ambrose Muzumdars. I know you’re the pack leader but can I be the Muzumdar-whisperer? I want to set him free.

Actually, I think if any group is the “new blacks” it is the white working class, or “chavs” as they are commonly known. Honestly, it is tough to think of a group held in more contempt and less represented in the mainstream.

Really? So Eastenders, Coronation Street, movies like Billy Liar, TV dramas like Shameless and The Street, all of these prime time programmes and blockbuster movies are not mainstream representations of working class white life and experience? Incredible.

According to the FBI, religious attacks in the US are currently broken like this

In 2006, a whopping 66% of religiously motivated attacks were on Jews, while just 11% targeted Muslims, even though the Jewish and Muslim populations are similar in size. Catholics and Protestants, who together account for 9% of victims, are subject to almost as much abuse as Muslims in this country.

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=281576932449479

It’s the same story in the UK. Jews are SIX times more likely to get attacked than Muslims.

oof. and this applies to pretty much all of us!

As I said, I did not see his original post so cannot comment on how widely racist it may or may not have been. The thing is he pursues an anti-muslim line – there’s a load of Eurabia, and Mufti of Jerusalem stuff (to make points about the MCB and Holocaust Memorial Day). Also, a load of stuff about war hero ancestorsm, and relatives who died in death camps (in WWII Far East?).

Ambrosia / Muzumdar is back to being deleted again.