_-_Eastern_Bengal_1860's_(2).jpg/250px-Portrait_of_a_Man_Belonging_to_the_Chandal_or_Namasudra_Caste_(Ghasi_sub-caste)_-_Eastern_Bengal_1860's_(2).jpg){kind=small}
_-_Eastern_Bengal_1860's_(2).jpg)
Community hub
0 subscribers8 pages, 0 posts
Recent from talks
All channels
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Contribute something
Welcome to the community hub built to collect knowledge and have discussions related to Chandala.
Nothing was collected or created yet.
Chandala
View on Wikipediafrom Wikipedia
_-_Eastern_Bengal_1860%27s_(2).jpg)
Chandala (Sanskrit: चण्डाल) is a Sanskrit word for someone who deals with the disposal of corpses, and is also the name of a Hindu lower caste,[1] traditionally considered to be untouchable.[2][3]
History
[edit]Varṇa was a hierarchical social order in ancient India, based primarily on the Dharmashastras. However, since the Vedic corpus constitute the earliest literary source, it came to be seen as the origin of caste society. In this view of caste, varṇas were created on a particular occasion and have remained virtually unchanged. Historically this order of society, notions of purity and pollution were central, and activities were delineated in this context. Varṇa divides the society into four groups ordered in a hierarchy; beyond these, outside the system, lies a fifth group known as the untouchables, of which the Chandala became a constituent part.[4]
The first mention of the fourfold varṇa division is found in the later Rigveda. Vedic literature also mentions some groups, such as Ayogava, Chandala, Nishada, and Paulkasa, which were outside the four-varṇa classification. They were referred to as belonging to the "panchama varṇa" or panchamas, meaning fifth. The Yajur-Veda mentions their degradation from the varṇa classes, mentioning the Chandala group in particular, who were said to be the untouchable class of people born of the union between a Shudra male and a Brahmin female.[2]
There are frequent references to the forest-dwellers in the post-Rigvedic literature; the Chandalas were one of these primitive people, who belonged to the fringes of the society.
In many parts of India, Chandal is used as a pejorative or an insult among Hindus, even though castes known as such are not practically present outside Bengal (Namasudras).[1][5]
Reference by travelers to India
[edit]During his travel across India in the 4th–5th centuries CE, Chinese traveler Faxian mentioned Chandalas while talking about the people of India:
Throughout the whole country the people do not kill any living creature, nor drink intoxicating liquor, nor eat onions or garlic. The only exception is that of the Chandalas. That is the name for those who are (held to be) wicked men, and live apart from others. ... In that country they do not keep pigs and fowls, and do not sell live cattle; in the markets there are no butchers' shops and no dealers in intoxicating drink. In buying and selling commodities they use cowries. Only the Chandalas are fishermen and hunters, and sell flesh meat.[6][7]
See also
[edit]References
[edit]- ^ a b Viswanath, Rupa (2014). The Pariah Problem: Caste, Religion, and the Social in Modern India. Columbia University Press. p. 268. ISBN 978-0-23116-306-4.
Panchama means "of the fifth," and therefore outside the fourfold classical system of caste, or varna. Avarna, similarly means those outside the varna system. Chandala is a term referring to "unclean" castes and is used as a vlur in many parts of India.
- ^ a b Chandrashekhar Bhat (1984). Ethnicity and Mobility. Concept publishing. pp. 2–3.
- ^ S. M. Michael (1999). Untouchable: Dalits in Modern India. Lynne Rienner Publishers. pp. 3–4. ISBN 9781555876975.
- ^ Thapar, Romila (2004). Early India: From the Origins to AD 1300. University of California Press. pp. 63, 511. ISBN 978-0-52024-225-8.
- ^ Biswas, A. K. (2000). The Namasudras of Bengal: profile of a persecuted people. Blumoon Books. p. viii. ISBN 9788187190431.
Though he is physically almost practically unknown, save and except in Bengal, calling someone a Chandal is the ultimate insult and humiliation of a Hindu anywhere under the sun.
- ^ Faxian (1886). "On To Mathura Or Muttra. Condition And Customs Of Central India; Of The Monks, Viharas, And Monasteries.". A Record of Buddhistic Kingdoms. Translated by Legge, James.
- ^ Bodhipaksa (2016). Vegetarianism. Windhorse. ISBN 978-19093-14-740.
Further reading
[edit]- Anna Dallapiccola, Dictionary of Hindu Lore and Legend, Thames & Hudson, 2004 ISBN 0-500-51088-1
Chandala
View on Grokipediafrom Grokipedia
Definition and Etymology
Linguistic and Conceptual Origins
The term Chandala derives from the Sanskrit caṇḍāla (चण्डाल), referring to an outcaste or the lowest mixed-caste group, specifically offspring from a pratiloma union between a Śūdra father and a Brāhmaṇa mother.[3] Its etymology is uncertain but may stem from the root caṇḍ (चण्ड्), implying fierceness, violence, or anger, or possibly from the name of a pre-existing tribe integrated into the Vedic social order.[4] Conceptually, the Chandala embodies ritual and social impurity, antithetical to Brahminical ideals of purity, with origins traceable to the evolution of caste-like distinctions in post-Vedic society. The term is absent from the Rigveda (c. 1500–1200 BCE), the earliest Vedic text, but emerges in the Yajurveda (c. 1200–800 BCE), where it associates such figures with death, cremation grounds, and polluting substances like dirt and carrion.[2] This framework intensified in Dharmashastra literature, notably the Manusmriti (c. 200 BCE–200 CE), which codifies the Chandala's birth from the "most inferior" pratiloma mixing—"From a Śūdra [father] by a Brāhmaṇa [mother] (is born) a son called Cāṇḍāla, (verily) the scum of mankind"—and mandates their exclusion from varna-based society due to inherent contamination. Such prescriptions reflect causal mechanisms of purity-pollution derived from occupational necessities (e.g., corpse disposal) and hypergamy taboos, positioning Chandalas as avarnas beyond the fourfold varna system to maintain hierarchical stability.[5]Distinction from Varna Categories
The varna system, as outlined in ancient Indian texts such as the Rigveda's Purusha Sukta (c. 1500–1200 BCE), delineates four primary social classes—Brahmin (priests and scholars), Kshatriya (warriors and rulers), Vaishya (merchants and farmers), and Shudra (servants and laborers)—each assigned hereditary occupations, ritual duties, and mutual interdependence based on cosmic origins from the primordial being.[6] These varnas were theoretically endogamous and integrated within a hierarchical yet functional framework, with prohibitions against inter-varna marriages to preserve purity, particularly anuloma unions (higher male with lower female) over pratiloma (lower male with higher female).[7] Chandalas, by contrast, emerged as avarna groups outside this quadripartite structure, primarily through pratiloma unions deemed ritually polluting, such as a Shudra father and Brahmin mother, which Dharmashastras like Manusmriti (c. 200 BCE–200 CE) classify as producing the most degraded offspring.[8] Manusmriti explicitly defines the Chandala as the progeny of such a union, assigning them no varna status but instead impure roles like corpse disposal and execution, with residence mandated outside village boundaries to avoid contamination.[9] This exclusion stemmed from the varnasankara doctrine, positing that intermixture disrupted the dharmic order, rendering Chandalas ineligible for varna-specific sacraments (samskaras) or upanayana initiation, thus barring them from Vedic study or priestly functions reserved for the twice-born varnas (dvija: Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya).[10] While Shudras, the lowest varna, could serve higher classes and participate in limited rituals, Chandalas faced systemic untouchability, with texts prescribing avoidance of their shadow or touch as causing impurity requiring expiation baths.[11] Historical analyses indicate this distinction solidified by the post-Vedic period (c. 500 BCE onward), where Chandalas symbolized the system's rigidity against assimilation, unlike jatis (sub-castes) that sometimes aligned with varna occupations but retained internal hierarchies.[12] Scholarly consensus views this as a mechanism to enforce endogamy and ritual purity, with empirical evidence from epigraphic records showing avarna groups handling sanitation by the Gupta era (c. 320–550 CE), absent in earlier Vedic fluidity.[6]Scriptural Basis
References in Vedic and Post-Vedic Texts
In the Vedic Samhitas, such as the Rigveda and Atharvaveda, the term Chandala is absent, with social stratification primarily described through varna categories without explicit references to outcaste groups handling impurities or corpses.[13] Later Vedic texts, including Brahmanas and associated Sutras like the Apastamba Dharmasutra (part of the Kalpa Vedanga), begin to allude to degraded social positions akin to Chandalas through prohibitions on contact or purity rituals, though without the specific nomenclature dominating post-Vedic usage.[13] Post-Vedic literature, particularly the Itihasas and Puranas, provides extensive references to Chandalas as the most ritually impure group, often originating from pratiloma (inverse varna) unions or as forest-dwellers outside village boundaries. In the Valmiki Ramayana (Bala Kanda, Sarga 58), King Trishanku is cursed by the sons of Vasistha to become a Chandala—"one of the fallen caste"—after attempting to enter heaven bodily without cremation, transforming his appearance and status as punishment for defying ritual norms.[14] This episode underscores Chandalas as embodiments of degradation, marked by physical deformity and exclusion from royal or priestly spheres.[15] The Mahabharata contains numerous depictions, portraying Chandalas as synonymous with extreme impurity, tasked with corpse disposal and living on village outskirts. In Anusasana Parva (Section XLIX), it defines a Chandala as "the son that a Sudra begets upon a Brahmana woman," emphasizing hereditary pollution from such unions.[16] Santi Parva (Section 140) features a dialogue where a Chandala refuses alms to a Brahmana, citing scriptural dietary rules that permit only certain five-clawed animals as pure for higher varnas, while highlighting Chandalas' association with forbidden foods like dogs.[17] Other passages, such as Anusasana Parva (Section 28), warn that rebirth as a Chandala follows sinful human lives, reinforcing their position below even Pukkasa sub-groups in the degradation hierarchy.[18] Stories like that of Matanga, born a Chandala yet pursuing Brahmanahood through austerities (Anusasana Parva, Section 3), illustrate rare paths to elevation, though ultimate attainment is debated as unattainable without inherent qualities.[19] Puranic texts extend these motifs, often integrating Chandalas into narratives of devotion transcending birth. In the Brahma Purana, a Chandala residing near Avanti's outskirts, devoted to Vishnu despite his outcaste status, encounters a Brahmarakshasa; his piety leads to the demon's salvation, portraying Chandalas as capable of spiritual merit amid ritual exclusion.[20] Such accounts consistently link Chandalas to cremation grounds, dogs as companions, and prohibitions on Vedic study or temple entry, reflecting a consensus on their polluting occupations derived from textual injunctions against intermingling with higher varnas.[2]Prescriptions in Dharmashastras like Manusmriti
In the Manusmriti, Chandalas are described as offspring resulting from unions between a Shudra male and a Brahmana female, positioning them as the lowest among mixed-caste groups.[1] This origin underscores their classification outside the primary varna system, with verses emphasizing their separation to maintain ritual purity among higher castes. Similar categorizations appear in other Dharmashastras, such as the Yajnavalkya Smriti, which echoes restrictions on inter-varna progeny without altering the core hierarchical logic.[21] Prescriptions delineate specific occupational duties for Chandalas, including catching and killing burrowing animals for sacrifices, disposing of unclaimed corpses on the king's order, and executing condemned criminals while confiscating their belongings.[1] These roles align with societal needs for handling impure or hazardous tasks, such as sanitation and enforcement of penalties, thereby insulating higher varnas from direct involvement. Dietary rules mandate consumption from broken dishes, often shared with dogs and crows, reinforcing their marginal status.[1] Residential and behavioral restrictions further isolate Chandalas: they must reside outside village boundaries, near burial grounds, trees, or groves, with dwellings unmarked by prosperity beyond dogs and donkeys.[1] Attire consists of garments from corpses, paired with iron ornaments, and they are barred from entering villages or towns at night to avoid contact with residents.[1] Social interactions are curtailed; during religious rites, higher castes must avoid seeing or speaking to them, and marriages or transactions are confined to their own group.[1] Contact with Chandalas imparts impurity requiring purification, as in verse 5.84, which equates touching them to defilement from corpses.[22] These edicts in the Manusmriti reflect a system prioritizing ritual and social order through segregation, with analogous provisions in texts like the Vishnu Smriti upholding outcaste duties in impurity management.[1] While enforced variably across regions and eras, such prescriptions codified exclusion to preserve varna distinctions, as evidenced by consistent references to avoidance during Brahmanical meals or ceremonies.[23]Social Roles and Restrictions
Occupational Duties
In the Dharmashastras, particularly the Manusmriti, Chandalas were assigned occupational duties centered on activities involving ritual impurity and societal sanitation. These included executing individuals sentenced to death by higher authorities, disposing of unclaimed human corpses from villages or battlefields, and handling the carcasses of dead animals.[24][25] Such roles positioned Chandalas as performers of essential yet polluting tasks avoided by the four varnas, reinforcing purity-pollution distinctions.[26] Manusmriti verse 10.56 specifies that Chandalas should subsist by seizing and killing animals that harm crops or villages, utilizing their skins and other parts, while also consuming garlic, onions, and leavings from higher castes.[22] This prescription underscores their role in maintaining agricultural boundaries against wildlife, often through hunting or trapping in wilderness areas. Historical accounts from post-Vedic texts corroborate these duties, portraying Chandalas as workers in crematoria, responsible for collecting and cremating bodies, thereby managing death-related pollution.[27][28] Beyond scriptural mandates, archaeological and literary evidence from ancient India, such as references in epics and traveler accounts, indicate Chandalas engaged in scavenging, waste disposal, and leatherwork derived from their access to hides. These occupations were not merely punitive but functionally necessary for urban and rural hygiene, though they perpetuated social exclusion by associating Chandalas indelibly with impurity.[29][10] No primary Vedic texts from the early period detail Chandala occupations, suggesting their formalized roles emerged prominently in later Dharmashastras around 200 BCE to 200 CE.[30]Residential, Dietary, and Ritual Practices
Chandalas were prescribed to reside outside the boundaries of villages and towns, in areas deemed impure to prevent contamination of higher varnas. Manusmriti (10.51) mandates that they dwell on the outskirts, accompanied by dogs and donkeys as markers of their status, ensuring physical separation from settled communities.[31][32] This residential segregation reinforced notions of ritual pollution, with entry into villages permitted only for occupational duties like corpse disposal, during which they were required to announce their presence to avoid inadvertent contact.[33] Dietary habits were strictly regulated to align with their outcaste position, emphasizing consumption of ritually impure or discarded items. According to Manusmriti (10.54), their food was to be provided by non-twice-born individuals in broken dishes, consisting of leftovers unfit for higher castes, such as remnants from meals or carrion-associated provisions.[34][35] While higher varnas faced restrictions on meat, Dharmashastras permitted Chandalas broader access to animal products, including those from unclean sources, reflecting their association with handling dead animals and humans rather than imposing vegetarian ideals.[36] These prescriptions underscored a hierarchy where Chandala sustenance symbolized the lowest purity level, barring them from sharing meals with others. Ritual practices for Chandalas were minimal and excluded from Vedic orthodoxy, focusing on exclusion rather than affirmative ceremonies. Dharmashastras like Manusmriti prohibit them from participating in sacrifices, Vedic recitation, or purification rites, deeming their touch or presence polluting to altars and priests.[37] They were forbidden from approaching Brahmins during meals or sacred acts, as per Manusmriti (3.239), and lacked entitlement to upanayana or other initiations reserved for twice-born castes.[23] Any purported rituals among Chandalas were likely rudimentary, tied to their occupations—such as informal offerings for the dead they handled—without scriptural sanction for elaborate samskaras, perpetuating their marginalization in dharma frameworks.[20]Historical Context
Evidence from Ancient Indian Society
In the Mauryan era (circa 321–185 BCE), the Arthashastra attributed to Kautilya details the administrative utilization of Chandalas for tasks involving impurity and enforcement, such as whipping female offenders or maintaining fires associated with sorcery and cremation grounds, indicating their role in state-sanctioned polluting activities that higher varnas avoided.[38][39] These prescriptions reflect practical societal integration of Chandalas into punitive and ritual margins, rather than mere theoretical exclusion, as the text outlines fines and procedures involving them without prohibiting interaction entirely. By the Gupta period (circa 320–550 CE), historical and lexical records attest to the solidification of Chandalas as a distinct untouchable group, with their numbers expanding due to varna intermixtures and occupational specialization in corpse handling, leatherwork, and waste removal.[40] The Amarakosha lexicon enumerates ten subtypes of Chandalas, such as Pashu-Chandalas (animal handlers) and Shava-Chandalas (corpse disposers), evidencing diversification tied to economic necessities in agrarian and urban settings.[41] Practices like residing beyond village boundaries and using noisemakers to signal presence enforced physical segregation, as inferred from contemporary administrative and literary depictions of social order. Archaeological correlates remain indirect, with no dedicated sites or artifacts exclusively tied to Chandalas, likely due to their marginal status precluding monumental inscriptions or durable goods; however, settlement patterns in early historic sites show peripheral habitations consistent with outcaste exclusions described in texts. Pali canonical narratives from the same epochs portray Chandalas in everyday encounters, such as begging or labor, confirming their visibility in Buddhist-influenced regions without the ritual barriers imposed in Brahmanical contexts.[41] This textual-historical consensus underscores Chandalas as a pre-existing social stratum by the 5th century BCE, evolving into a more rigidly polluted category amid imperial centralization and ritual elaboration.Accounts from Foreign Travelers
The Chinese Buddhist monk Faxian (Fa-Hien), who traveled through India between 399 and 414 CE, described the Chandalas as a marginalized group residing outside towns and villages, engaging in occupations such as hunting, fishing, and handling unclean tasks like corpse disposal.[42] He noted that upon entering a city or market, Chandalas were required to strike a piece of wood to alert others and avoid contact, reflecting their status as "sinners" isolated from mainstream society to prevent ritual pollution.[43] Faxian's observations, recorded in A Record of Buddhistic Kingdoms, align with indigenous texts like the Dharmashastras in emphasizing spatial and social separation for groups deemed impure.[44] Similarly, the Chinese pilgrim Xuanzang (Hiuen Tsang), visiting India from 629 to 645 CE, corroborated these practices in his Si-Yu-Ki (Buddhist Records of the Western World), portraying Chandalas as "evil men" who dwelt apart and sounded a wooden clapper when approaching populated areas to warn residents.[45] Xuanzang specified their association with scavenging and execution-related duties, underscoring a societal logic of purity where proximity to Chandalas necessitated avoidance, a custom he observed across regions under Gupta and post-Gupta influence.[45] These accounts from Faxian and Xuanzang, both grounded in direct eyewitness experience during Buddhist pilgrimage, provide independent non-Indian confirmation of Chandala exclusion, though filtered through their focus on Buddhist sites and moral critiques of caste barriers to monastic access. The Persian scholar Al-Biruni, who resided in India around 1017–1030 CE under Mahmud of Ghazni, detailed the Chandala position in Kitab al-Hind as part of the Antyaja (lowest) categories beyond the four varnas, assigning them roles in execution, corpse-handling, and dealings with the dead, which rendered them ritually unclean and segregated.[46] He contrasted Chandalas with mlecchas (foreigners), noting that while the latter were unclean due to non-Hindu practices, Chandalas occupied an even lower endogenous status within Hindu society, barred from intermingling and Vedic rites.[46] Al-Biruni's analysis, derived from Sanskrit texts and local informants, critiqued the system's rigidity but affirmed its operational reality, including residential isolation and occupational fixity, as observed in northern India during early medieval times.[47]Philosophical and Cultural Interpretations
Justifications in Hindu Dharma
In Hindu Dharma, the segregated status and prescribed roles of Chandalas are rationalized as essential for preserving ritual purity (śuddhi) and upholding the cosmic order (ṛta) through varṇāśrama-dharma. Dharmashastras like the Manusmṛti categorize Chandalas as offspring of pratiloma (reverse varna) unions—specifically, Shudra fathers and Brahmin mothers—assigning them occupations involving death, execution, and waste disposal to isolate inherent impurities (aśauca) from higher varnas engaged in sacred duties. This functional separation ensures that polluting contacts do not disrupt Vedic rites or the spiritual efficacy of dvijas (twice-born castes), thereby maintaining societal harmony and dharma's hierarchical balance.[37][2] Philosophically, this framework draws on the karmic doctrine, viewing Chandala birth as retributive fruition of past-life transgressions, such as neglecting svadharma or committing grave sins, which propel rebirth into degraded forms as outlined in Upanishadic texts. The Chāndogya Upanishad (5.10.7), for instance, links such lowly rebirths—including as Chandalas—to ethical failings in prior existences, positioning the condition as an expiatory phase within saṃsāra where adherence to allotted duties can accrue merit for future elevation. While social immobility reinforces endogamy and guna-based division of labor, scriptures emphasize that ultimate liberation (mokṣa) remains accessible via bhakti or jñāna, transcending birth-bound limitations without altering worldly roles.[20]Critiques and Alternative Viewpoints
Buddhist philosophy offered a direct critique of the birth-based designation of Chandalas as inherently impure, emphasizing moral conduct over lineage. In the Vasala Sutta of the Sutta Nipata, the Buddha declares that "not by birth is one an outcast; not by birth is one a brahman. By deed one becomes an outcast, by deed one becomes a brahman," thereby redefining outcast status—including that associated with Chandalas—as arising from harmful actions such as violence, deceit, or immorality rather than parental varna.[48] This viewpoint rejected the Dharmashastras' hereditary pollution logic, positing that spiritual worth and social standing derive from ethical karma, allowing individuals from any background, including those labeled Chandala, to attain enlightenment through right action.[49] Within Hindu traditions, Advaita Vedanta provided an alternative perspective transcending ritual exclusions of Chandalas. A traditional account describes Adi Shankaracharya encountering a Chandala accompanied by dogs while en route to bathe in the Ganga; when instructed to move aside to avoid ritual defilement, the Chandala retorted that the underlying Atman—the non-dual self—is identical in all beings, questioning whether Shankara sought to displace the physical body or the imperishable essence.[50] This exchange prompted Shankaracharya to compose the Manisha Panchakam, affirming that true knowledge eradicates caste distinctions, as the supreme Brahman underlies apparent differences in form or occupation.[51] Such narratives underscore a philosophical equality at the level of ultimate reality, challenging the practical enforcement of untouchability while upholding varna as a provisional social framework. Jainism, while not mounting as explicit a rejection of varna as Buddhism, critiqued discriminatory aspects by framing social roles through karmic merit rather than fixed birth. Mahavira reportedly viewed varna divisions as functional labor allocations without inherent superiority, allowing ascetics from diverse backgrounds—including those akin to Chandalas—to achieve liberation via ethical conduct and soul purification, though later Jain communities integrated jati hierarchies.[52] This karmic emphasis implicitly undermined pollution-based exclusions, prioritizing individual virtue over collective stigma. Later Bhakti traditions further eroded Chandala-related untouchability by advocating devotional equality. Saints like Ravidas, from a leather-working community comparable to Chandalas, composed verses decrying birth-based hierarchy, asserting that divine bhakti purifies beyond occupational impurity and renders ritual barriers obsolete.[53] These movements collectively privileged personal piety and moral agency, fostering alternative interpretations that diminished the philosophical rigidity of Chandala as an irrevocable status.[54]Controversies and Legacy
Debates on Purity-Pollution Logic
The purity-pollution logic in the Hindu caste system positioned Chandalas as the epitome of ritual impurity due to their hereditary occupations involving contact with death, such as cremation, execution, and disposal of carcasses, which were believed to transmit defilement through physical proximity or shadow.[55] This framework, articulated in texts like the Manusmriti, enforced spatial and social segregation to preserve the sanctity of higher varnas, with pollution conceived as a contagious metaphysical state rather than merely hygienic risk.[56] Defenders of the logic, drawing from anthropological functionalism, argue it served practical public health purposes in pre-modern India, where limited sanitation and medical knowledge made isolation of those handling biohazards a causal mechanism for disease prevention; for instance, Ayurvedic traditions linked ritual purity to hygiene practices like daily bathing and avoidance of contaminated water to curb epidemics.[57] Empirical correlations persist in modern data, such as higher open defecation rates in regions with entrenched untouchability practices, suggesting the logic's original adaptive role in averting pathogen transmission before germ theory.[58] However, this view acknowledges the logic's evolution into rigid heredity, where children's pollution was presumed irrespective of personal conduct, potentially amplifying social control over empirical necessity.[59] Critics, including sociologists like André Béteille, contend the purity-pollution binary oversimplifies caste dynamics by prioritizing ideological hierarchy over material factors like economic exploitation and power asymmetries, as theorized in Louis Dumont's Homo Hierarchicus, which posits purity as the singular encompassing value but neglects secular dimensions of dominance.[60] Gerald Berreman and others fault Dumont's model for a Brahmanical lens that essentializes pollution as innate rather than constructed, ignoring ethnographic evidence of negotiated statuses and regional variations where pollution served to justify land control rather than hygiene alone.[61] Recent analyses extend this by highlighting how the logic perpetuated beyond utility, embedding untouchability in everyday practices like well access denial, decoupled from verifiable contagion risks in an era of vaccines and plumbing.[55] These debates underscore a tension between the system's potential adaptive origins and its causal role in systemic exclusion, with empirical scrutiny revealing pollution's relativity—e.g., temporary for upper castes post-birth versus permanent for Chandalas—rather than absolute ontology.[62]Relation to Modern Caste Discussions
In contemporary India, the ancient category of Chandala, defined in texts like the Manusmriti as outcastes of mixed varna origins engaged in impure occupations such as handling corpses and leatherwork, is frequently referenced in analyses of the origins of untouchability affecting Scheduled Castes (SCs).[9] SCs, officially recognized under the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, encompass groups historically subjected to social exclusion paralleling Chandala status, including restrictions on residence, diet, and ritual participation.[63] These communities, comprising 16.6% of India's population as per the 2011 census, continue to face vestiges of discrimination despite legal abolition of untouchability via Article 17 of the Constitution in 1950.[64] Modern caste discussions invoke Chandala to underscore the hereditary and occupational rigidity of the system, with Dalit activists and scholars like B.R. Ambedkar critiquing it as a Brahmanical imposition that perpetuates inequality, warning that unresolved caste hierarchies threaten democratic equality.[9] Affirmative action policies, including reservations in education, employment, and politics for SCs—allocating 15% of seats in legislatures and institutions—aim to redress historical disadvantages linked to such outcaste roles, yet debates persist on their efficacy, with critics arguing they entrench divisions rather than foster merit-based mobility.[63] Empirical data shows improvements in SC literacy rates rising from 10.3% in 1961 to 66.1% in 2011, but socioeconomic gaps remain, with SCs overrepresented in manual scavenging and underrepresentation in higher professions.[65] Some reformers and Hindu nationalists contend that untouchability deviated from Vedic ideals, emerging later under texts like Manusmriti without explicit scriptural mandate for physical avoidance, positioning Chandala as a social rather than inherent pollution construct amenable to reform.[63] In Dalit literature and movements, however, the Chandala archetype symbolizes enduring stigma, fueling demands for caste census updates beyond 1931 data and sub-categorization of SC quotas to benefit the most marginalized subgroups, amid ongoing atrocities reported at over 50,000 cases annually under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.[66] These discussions highlight causal persistence of endogamy and networks over formal equality, with urbanization and economic growth eroding but not eliminating caste-based barriers as of 2025.[9]References
- https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%25E0%25A4%259A%25E0%25A4%25A3%25E0%25A5%258D%25E0%25A4%25A1%25E0%25A4%25BE%25E0%25A4%25B2
- https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Arthashastra/Book_XIV