Hindu Caste System
Human life is identified mostly as a mystery in traditional societal beliefs. Due to the impact of dissimilar religious practices, life can only be related to supernaturality of existence on earth. Such theories, however, are contrasted by scientific practices that link the existence of human life to evolution. Based on cultural beliefs, human life is given rather than a choice. The decision is considered to have been made by a supernatural being since no one has the power to decide their family, economic status, or even country of origin. Choice is only provided in the course of human lifeline on earth. According to the Hindu caste system, karma and dharma are the primary determinants to reflection of human life (BBC News, p.1). In this case, human identity is determined by the work and duty they have to undertake while alive. The system remains somehow rigid and hierarchical norms subjected from a generation to another. Therefore, it provides a considerable background to the aspect of giveness in human life.
Background to Hindu Caste System
The Hindu caste system is among the most detailed accounts of social stratification that has been applied in the course of history. As gesticulated, the system mentions karma and dharma as the fundamental aspects that determine the positions of various individuals in different communities. Karma identifies the kind of work a human being will most likely fit for depending on the class identified with his/her predecessors. On the other hand, BBC News (p.1) note that although dharma means the religious aspect, it dictates the role of each individual in the context of their existence. The two aspects are intertwined in human life such that the duties and responsibilities of a person are already identified by their community even before they are born. It all bases on the hereditary social characteristics that are noted by a specific group of people. For instance, a person born in a pastoralist community is taught the necessary skills to survive in that community, regardless of their future path in life that might prove to be different.
Hindu caste system categorizes people into 4 distinct classes that are determined by the roles placed upon their existence. At the top of these social classes are the Brahmins (Gopalakrishna, p.25) who were identified as intellectuals because of their ability to grasp knowledge with ease. Oral Hindu traditions mention that the group took their genetics from the head of Brahima (Hindu God). In the course of the years, most became educational, religions or social teachers, thus directing the Hindu community towards industrialization and modernization. The second group that comprises of Indian warriors and traditional rulers is recognized as Kshatriyas (BBC News, p.1). Their strength is considered to be derived from the arms of Brahima to provide the necessary strength needed to protect the society. They used the knowledge and ideas provided by the Brahmins to establish ways of both protecting the people and winning battles against their enemies.
The third class of the Hindu caste system was majorly involved in economic activities such as trade and operation of financial schemes. This group is identified as Vaishyas, who successfully merchandised products in Indian markets. They are said to have originated from the thighs of Brahma. It can be related to the pockets of trousers placed on the thighs for convenience of placing the cash from their sales. They are the second largest social class among the 4. The group that is ranked as lowest, regarding both social and economic perspectives, were the Shudras. They were considered the ones to undertake manual labor and their importance was vastly appreciated during building castles and cities. Shudras are the largest group among the 4 and are thought to have originated from the feet of Brahma. As aforementioned, this social stratification method determined the roles and social expectations of each individual. It focused on a person’s ancestry rather than their individual capabilities as defined by time.
Although the system was popular in the traditional setting, its applicability seems to be fading with time. It has been criticized for the unequal allocation of resources among indian people. Individuals in the upper social classes were considered to be selfish because they demanded the best of resources leaving the lower classes to scramble for little remaining share, even though the latter made the biggest population. It could be used to explain the current level of poverty experienced in most parts of Indian since its repercussions are yet to fade away from the nation. Individuals who emerged successful, particularly from lower classes, proved to be an eyeopener for the rest of their society. Based on the research conducted by BBC News, the current constitution bans the practice of the caste system since they encourage free will among people. Nevertheless, the caste system has simply been altered by politicians to suit their demands.
Human Idea of Giveness
According to Manstead (p.267), the social classes that people identify with have a lasting impact towards their life. Even though people get to change their environment with time, their mindsets are predetermined by things happening around them. For example, people living in famine stricken areas of the globe are more likely to have issues concerning food security. The impact caused by the financial problems proves to be a constant reminder of their previous conditions. Even those who manage to climb the social ladder often remain paranoid of the previous occurrences. Most of them could easily be identified by their characteristics such as sparing use of finances, zero food wastage and constant reflections of their ordeals. In contrast, most individuals from upper social class are less worried about their meals because they have some financial assurance. It might prove difficult for them to adapt to new environments due to their standards of living. As a result, they are likely to be easy spenders and live a stylish lifestyle.
Although almost everyone would like to live a comfortable lifestyle, nature has its way of predetermining most of the aspects in the society. Not everyone can afford basic needs due to different social placements. The facet is not determined by the individual in their respective life cycle because science proves that everything falls into place because of genetics. The life of a human being begins with a complicated reproductive process that bases existence and traits on probability. This involves unknown gender probability, less-determined issues such as disability, and chances of living or dying. Although parents might have a say on the social conditions of the individual who is yet to be born, he/she will know their fate once they are born. The facet elaborates why almost everyone struggles with some of the social or economic aspects. It reaches the extent of some people remaining indecisive about their future because of their current state.
Based on personal life experience, some people are less contended to have been born in a certain family setup. They prefer to have different families, be citizens of a different nation, and have a different social background. Lack of satisfaction, with regards to social and economical statuses, has brought serious doubt on religious perceptions. Based on most religious beliefs, the supreme being has the ultimate power regarding life. He places different individuals in dissimilar life patterns with unknown life conditions for the outcome of procreation. It has led to a considerably high number of non-believers, as referred by various religious scriptures, due to the challenges they are exposed to, unwillingly. Science has been trying to counter this by trying to provide an assurance of gender, intellectual ability, among others. Nonetheless, it still cannot determine the exact surrounding characteristics that the new-born will identify as the most suitable for them.
Neither science nor religion can consider their way of thinking to be the most suitable regarding this topic due to the identified loopholes. Questions have been raised concerning the possibility of individuals knowing their social and economical fates before birth. Even though there are drawbacks in both systems, religion seems to provide the most preferred idea of the two. For instance, Christianity teaches of the identity of life as something determined by God, just like most other religions. In addition to that, people given various roles in life because of the destiny they are supposed to fulfill. The disparities in social and economic aspects, such as the existing income inequality that causes unrest in the United Kingdom (Manstead, p.289), are considered to serve a specific role in the community. Religious leaders particularly focus on elements like morality to elaborate the givenness of human life.
Relationship between Giveness and Hindu Caste System
In both systems, life is identified to be controlled by forces of nature such as genetics and the supernatural world. The identity of a person can only be determined just before or after they are born. As gesticulated, it implies that the individual will have no choice of their position in their immediate surrounding. Their family, social status, economic background, and country of birth cannot be determined by them. It places people in cultures that they will later consider to be part and parcel of their life. Not everyone will prefer their status, but that is something they cannot control. As learned in the Hindu caste system, some people will miss important opportunities later in life because of their family background. As observed in history, some of the prominent leaders came from families in lower social classes. Such examples were rare in the Indian traditional community since the classes were rigid, thus minimized chances of social escalation.
In addition, both suggest that this unknown concept of human life governs human behavior and interactions. The statement is clearer one an account of the environment is considered. For example, since people are grouped into social classes, their behavior will be a reflection of the norms that were recognized suitable for that particular group. Children from less-privileged backgrounds are expected to be humble as compared to their wealthy counterparts. Further, while the former will be more aggressive in economic aspects of life, the latter are likely to be less aggressive. Their relationship circles, particularly during early childhood, will be a product of their family desires. Some end up even lacking adequate life exposure due to their family. This kind of social control often puts individuals in social dilemmas that are mostly related to differenciating right from wrong. Social pressure is applied from different angles of a persons life depending on the people they interact with at dissimilar levels in the society. Even those who end up rebelling these systems are usually aware of the predetermined standards.
Although the given aspect of life is unknown, the outcome of an individual’s life can be altered throughout different stages of life. Since the paper focuses more on the social aspect, it is evident that some people have managed to elevate into upper social classes using various techniques. Working harder to improve one’s living standard has commonly been the goal for individuals in lower social classes. Some have been affected by the fized mindset of retaining their social positions, while others have tried consistently to amend the situation. The latter have proved that nature hardly comprise of a specific path that is based on the standards one was initially exposed. It advocates for idealy using the knowledge and skills available to change an individual’s fate. Positive or negative adjustments will eventually determine the direction one’s life will take, thus suggesting that life afterall offers choices to everyone.
In contrast, the Hindu caste system discouraged any alteration of the existing system. From the background, it was clear that people within the upper social classes hardly acknowledged the efforts of determined member in the lower classes. Their ideal society was considered a reflection of natural circumstances and religious beliefs that would have grave consequnces when altered by an individual or group of individuals. Shudras were mostly discriminated because they were used as laborers or even slaves. Even social interactions were governed by such rules. Marriage would only be considered if the existing parties come from the same social class, otherwise it would be considered an abomination. Consequences of such a crime would be punished immediately. Unlike in a normal life setting where one has to choose their own spouses, the Hindu caste system allowed the family to select a life partner for their sons while they were still young. There was no consensus from the parties involved since that was seen as a role of the community. Nevertheless, the selected partner should satisfy the communal marriage requirements, which were governned by the 4 social groups. The facet is contrasted in the modern society because most governments stress on the importance of human free will.
Conclusion
Irrefutably, human life is given and people hardly have control over their families, social and economic conditions, and country of birth. The facet usual have consequences on the life of individuals. In the Hindu caste system, it was identified that people had to be classified into 4 groups that governed almost all societal aspects. Being born in a particula group was considered fate, in which duties will be defined throughout an individual’s life. Almost all the choices made but a person must be within the norms liited to the individual social classes. Although the system was dismantled, it was replaced by a similar approach to life, just that the personnel could be adjusted. The modern society has further adjusted such outdated principles. Even though an individual still has no say regarding the aforementioned social placement, they have choices that could adjust their fates. The outcome will either be favourable or unfavorable based on the initial position of the person.