How did Untouchability Originate in India?

The Supreme Court’s recent ruling on sub-classification within the SCs and STs has sparked discussions about whether SCs form a uniform group, and if untouchability is still the primary reason for their inclusion in this category. 

• While the Constitution prohibits untouchability (Article 17), it continues to manifest in various forms in contemporary society

Origins of Untouchability and Ambedkar’s  Rejection

Two major theories have attempted to explain the roots of untouchability in India. Ambedkar dismissed both these theories of untouchability.

• Racial Theory: The Racial Theory posited that untouchables were from a distinct race, separate from the Aryans or Dravidians, leading to their social exclusion. 
  • Ambedkar, through his ethnological research, concluded that untouchables shared similar physical traits with the settled population, thereby rejecting the notion of a separate race.
• Occupational Theory: The Occupational Theory suggested untouchability arose from the social stigma attached to certain “unclean” tasks, such as handling dead bodies or working with leather. 
  • Ambedkar argued that these tasks were historically performed by various social classes, thus dismissing the idea that occupation alone could explain the origins of untouchability.

Ambedkar’s Analysis of Untouchability

Ambedkar linked the rise of untouchability to the 4th century AD when Brahmins, trying to regain their status from Buddhism.

• Brahmin-Buddhist Conflict: In his book The Untouchables (1948), Ambedkar explained that untouchability arose when Brahmins stopped eating beef and became vegetarians. He linked this change to the competition between Brahmins and Buddhists in India. 
  • Vegetarianism: Buddhism promoted non-violence and rejected animal sacrifices, which appealed to farmers who relied on cattle. To reclaim their influence, Brahmins adopted vegetarianism.
• Social Isolation: The “broken men” couldn’t follow the Brahmin practice of giving up beef because they depended on scavenging, including eating and handling dead cows.
  • Over time, these communities were socially isolated and treated as untouchables.
• Unique Phenomenon: Unlike other cultures, where impurity or pollution is temporary and ritualistic, untouchability in India is a permanent, hereditary, and systemic condition. 
  • The untouchables were not only socially segregated but also often forced to live outside village boundaries, marking a stark contrast with the more fluid concepts of impurity seen in other cultures.

Social Justice in Independent India

As India moved towards independence, Ambedkar put forward several conditions to ensure that the interests of the depressed classes were protected.

• Equal Citizenship and Fundamental Rights: Ambedkar insisted that the abolition of untouchability (Article 17) and the guarantee of equal rights for all citizens were fundamental to achieving social justice.
• Penalties for Infringement of Rights: To ensure the practical enjoyment of rights, Ambedkar advocated for legal penalties for those who violated the rights of marginalized groups.
• Protection Against Discrimination: Ambedkar called for legislative and executive protections against discrimination to safeguard the rights of the depressed classes in the future.
• Representation in Legislatures and Public Services: Ambedkar emphasized the need for adequate representation of the marginalized classes in the legislature and in public services to ensure their interests were not ignored in the majority rule.
• Special Mechanisms for Welfare: Ambedkar sought the establishment of departments and mechanisms dedicated to the welfare of marginalized communities, ensuring that their concerns were always represented in decision-making processes.

Annihilation of Caste (1936)

Originally a speech intended for the Jat Pat Todak Mandal, this text was self-published after Ambedkar’s invitation to speak was revoked due to the controversial nature of his ideas.

• Disorganising Force: In this work, Ambedkar argued that caste was a disorganizing force that undermined the possibility of collective social life.
• State of Mind, Not a Physical Barrier: Ambedkar posited that caste was not merely a social or physical division but a mental state — a belief system that reinforced inequality.
• Call for Rejection of Religious Text: He argued that simply promoting intermarriage or inter-dining would not abolish caste unless the belief in its sanctity was destroyed. To do so, Ambedkar urged to “destroy the belief in the sanctity of the shastras” which legitimise the varna and caste order.
  • To be specific, Ambedkar condemns the “religion of rules” not the “religion of principles” i.e. he supported the principle of liberty, equality and fraternity.
• Caste and National Identity: Ambedkar believed that true national unity could not be built on the foundation of caste. 
  • For him, the annihilation of caste was more important than achieving political self-rule (swaraj), as a united, casteless society was crucial for India to become a strong and cohesive nation.

Conclusion

As India grapples with issues of caste discrimination and the demand for a more inclusive society, revisiting Ambedkar’s work is crucial for ensuring that the promise of social justice and equality is realized for all citizens, irrespective of their caste or background.