The Caste System

It is associated chiefly with the traditional Hindu culture of the Indian sub-continent. Hindu society in traditional India was divided into four strata: four varnas and a fifth groups, the outcaste, whose member were known as ‘untouchables’ .It is said that the castes or jatis are the outcome of ancient Varna system. The varnas consists of four categories (Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya and Sudras), each ranked differently in terms of social honors. Below these four groupings are the ‘untouchables’. They are excluded from the performance of rituals which confer religious purity. Each Varna is sub-divided into castes (jatis) and sub-castes, which in total number were about three thousands. Jatis are occupational groups. They are ranked in terms of ritual purity. The Brahmins or priests, members of highest caste, personify purity, sanctity and holiness. They are the source of learning, wisdom and truth. Only they can perform the most important religious ceremonies. At the other extreme, untouchables are defined as unclean, inferior and impure, a status which affects all their social relationships. In general, the hierarchy of prestige based on notions of ritual purity is mirrored by the hierarchy of power…. Inequalities of wealth were usually linked to those of prestige and power (Haralambos,

Srinivas, who initiated such studies emphasized sanskritisation and westernization as conceptual tools for understanding mobility in caste system,. He holds that ‘corporate mobility’ stills remain basic at the caste or jati level, as familial mobility does not obtain public recognition. The concept of sanskritisation is ‘cultural bound’, it covers only socio-cultural aspects of change and confines to ‘group mobility’ of a caste only. It does not take note of mobility that takes place at the familial and individual levels and also the motives and factors that underlie such mobility. Therefore, the utility of the concept of sanskritisation to understand social mobility in India is limited. This concept has been severely critised by Indian and many western sociologists on different grounds. For example, Yogendra Singh (1973) notes: “I do not think that cultural mobility as visualized by Srinivas can bring about structural changes.” K.L. Sharma (1980) argues: “The efforts to move up in caste hierarchy without corresponding economic elevation have failed.” Moreover, change within or between castes does not necessarily constitute mobility within the caste system (Lynch, 1968). To understand mobility in a better way in caste structure, K.L. Sharma (1980) suggested that mobility is to be analyzed at three levels: encompass the entirely of mobility in caste structure. It would also help us to understand the social mobility at structural