3.3.5. Beyond the four varnas: Subordination and conflict

While the Brahmanas considered some people as being outside the system, they also developed a sharper social divide by classifying certain social categories as “untouchable”. This rested on a notion that certain activities, especially those connected with the performance of rituals, were sacred and by extension 'pure'. Those who considered themselves pure avoided taking food from those they designated as 'untouchable'.

In ancient Indian society, the Brahmanas (priests) had a very specific view of social hierarchy. They considered certain groups as 'untouchable', meaning these groups were deemed so low in the social order that they could not even be approached or touched by others who were considered pure. Such categorizations were based largely on the activities those groups performed, particularly those that were seen as 'polluting' or 'impure'. As a result, a strong divide emerged, reinforcing social stratification where the 'pure' avoided the 'impure' to maintain their own social status.

Think of it like a club that only allows certain members based on strict rules. If someone is classified as 'outside' the club, they might not even be welcomed in at all, regardless of their individual actions. Similarly, in this society, those labeled as 'untouchable' faced exclusion and isolation from the larger community.

In sharp contrast to the purity aspect, some activities were regarded as particularly 'polluting'. These included handling corpses and dead animals. Those who performed such tasks, designated as chandalas, were placed at the very bottom of the hierarchy. Their touch and, in some cases, even seeing them was regarded as 'polluting' by those who claimed to be at the top of the social order.

Certain tasks in society, like cremating bodies or dealing with dead animals, were considered so impure that the people who performed these tasks were seen as the lowest in social hierarchy—referred to as chandalas. This belief rested on the idea that these activities would somehow taint or make others impure just by coming into contact with those performing them. The chandalas thus faced extreme social marginalization, emphasizing the rigid structure of social purity and pollution in this society.

Imagine a situation in a community where certain jobs are looked down upon, like cleaning up after a big festival. Those assigned such tasks might be ostracized, not allowed to join in celebrations or rituals. This creates a social barrier that mirrors how chandalas were treated, simply for performing necessary but deemed 'dirty' work.

The Manusmriti laid down the 'duties' of the chandalas. They had to live outside the village, use discarded utensils, and wear clothes of the dead and ornaments of iron. They could not walk about in villages and cities at night. They had to dispose of the bodies of those who had no relatives and serve as executioners.

The Manusmriti, a key text in Brahmanical tradition, defined exact and harsh rules for how chandalas were to live. They could not share spaces or resources with others and had to adhere to strict codes to minimize interaction with the rest of society. These duties established an oppressive lifestyle that reinforced their social exclusion and offered no chance for mobility or integration into the broader community.

Consider how, in modern times, certain groups of people may be forced to live in segregated neighborhoods or not allowed to partake in specific community events. This creates a social isolation similar to what chandalas faced, as systemic barriers keep them separate from the 'mainstream' society.