From Newsgroup: soc.culture.indian
https://www.newindianexpress.com/columns/2025/Oct/12/is-lingayat-a-caste-or-a-religion
Devdutt Pattanaik
[...]
"European powers, who came on war ships, demanded "freedom of
religion" so they could build churches in Japan that had
isolated itself for nearly 300 years. The Japanese court did not
understand this word-religion. After much debate, Japanese
scholars concluded that there were three categories. First was
religion, something you could convert into or out of, like
Buddhism and Christianity. Second was superstition, the folk
practices of rural communities, dismissed as unscientific. And
third was ethnic practice, where one is born into it-like
Shinto. Indians did not have the luxury of choosing the
definition of religion. It was imposed upon them by British
rulers.
"If we use the Japanese definitions then Buddhism, Sikhism and
other guru-based Hinduisms fall into the first category (you are
initiated into the group); caste-based or tribe-based beliefs
and practices can fall in the second category (as all
intellectuals mock it as unscientific, irrational and barbaric);
and `sanatan dharma' should fall in the third category (anyone
born in India is Hindu, as is claimed). But the difference
between the second and third category is a modern split,
spearheaded by `reformers' who believe that `soul' is real, but
`ghosts' are not.
"Traditionally a `sampradaya' was limited to an endogamous
group, a caste. Muslims differentiate themselves using food and
costume practices, but they encourage exogamy (marriage to
non-Muslims) to get more into their faith. That is why Islam is
called a religion. The modern Hinduism promoted by gurus today
are actually cults that offer membership to foreigners, inspired
by Christian evangelical churches.
"Every Hindu belongs to a caste and most of their household
rituals and practices are inherited over generations. This
aspect of Hinduism has been denied since independence as `caste'
is presented as the ultimate evil by academicians and social
reformers, a unique social practice that promotes inequality. So
the traditional identity of Indians has been shoved into the
closet. And now every Hindu had to learn to become a `religious'
Hindu with a new set of homogenous beliefs (Advaita, Gita) and
unifying practices (vegetarianism, Hindi, Ram temple). The
construction of `secular' India demands we deny our history,
that Hinduism is essentially a collection of castes. Every caste
had their own way of functioning and this was celebrated before
the 13th century. The hierarchy came later.
"Brahmins had long tried to organise the thousands of castes
(jati) into a manageable framework of four categories
(varna). This was first articulated in the Dharma-sutra texts
which began to be composed after the Mauryan period (300 BC). It
gained traction in Gupta period (300 AD), especially when
Brahmins began migrating to east, west and south
India. Gradually, communities became endogamous. This is
attested by genetic evidence now. Seventy generations ago caste
became water-tight compartments. Thus caste was never
`Vedic'. It is not 5,000 or 3,000 years old; it became the norm
1,500 years ago. [...]
"After the Muslim warlords came to India, local kings began
using the phrase `Hindu dharma' to distinguish the Indian way
from the foreign `Turuku dharma'. The former was born into a
caste; the latter converted to a religion. The need to unite
various Indian castes arose. And that is when works such as
Chaturvarga Chintamani of a Brahmin courtier, Hemadri, from
Maharashtra, tried to create a unitary Hindu philosophy that
placed Brahmins firmly at the apex. We assume this to be the
norm. But it never was."
-- Devdutt Pattanaik, "Is Lingayat a caste or a
religion?", Opinion, The New Indian Express. sunday 12
Oct 2025,
https://www.newindianexpress.com/columns/2025/Oct/12/is-lingayat-a-caste-or-a-religion
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2