Short answer
Yes. Its main scriptures and law books tie caste to birth. The Rig Veda, a book of sacred hymns, says the priest was the mouth of the cosmic Man. It says the Shudra, the servant class, came from his feet. The Gita says Krishna made the four castes by qualities and duties. But its examples are duties a person is born into. An Upanishad makes a high or low birth the reward or punishment for past deeds. Manu, the law book, says the Shudra has one birth only and one job: to serve the other three castes. Two great Hindu teachers, Shankara (about the 8th century) and Ramanuja (11th-12th century), ruled that Shudras may not even hear the Veda. Islam teaches the opposite. In the Qur'an, the most honoured with God (﷾) is the most righteous, whatever his family.
Full explanation
The Rig Veda: four classes from one body
The Rig Veda is a book of sacred hymns. Hindus hold it to be revealed, and call such scripture shruti. One hymn, the Purusha hymn, tells how the gods divided the first Man in a sacrifice. The Brahmin, the priest, was his mouth. The Rajanya, the ruler and warrior (later called the Kshatriya), was made of his arms. The Vaishya, the farmer and trader, came from his thighs. The Shudra, the servant, came from his feet. This is the only hymn in the Rig Veda that names all four classes. Its verb for the Shudra, ajayata, means "was born". The Manusmriti, the leading Hindu law book, retells this origin as the Creator's own act. Georg Bühler, the 19th-century scholar who translated it, points back to this hymn in his note.
“When they divided Purusha how many portions did they make? What do they call his mouth, his arms? What do they call his thighs and feet? The Brâhman was his mouth, of both his arms was the Râjanya made. His thighs became the Vaiṣya, from his feet the Ṣûdra was produced.”
“But for the sake of the prosperity of the worlds, he caused the Brâhmana, the Kshatriya, the Vaisya, and the Sûdra to proceed from his mouth, his arms, his thighs, and his feet.”
The Gita: made by qualities and duties
The Bhagavad Gita is the Hindu scripture in which Krishna teaches the warrior Arjuna. It speaks of the four castes twice. In the first passage, Krishna says he created the fourfold division "according to the apportionment of qualities and duties" (guna and karma). In the second, each caste's duties are "distinguished according to the qualities born of nature". Knowledge and self-control belong to the Brahmin, and battle to the Kshatriya. Farming and trade belong to the Vaishya, and service to the Shudra. K. T. Telang, a Hindu scholar and later a judge, translated the Gita in 1882 for the Sacred Books of the East. He noted that the Gita itself does not say whether caste was hereditary. The Apastamba law book, he added, states plainly that it is.
“The fourfold division of castes was created by me according to the apportionment of qualities and duties. But though I am its author, know me to be inexhaustible, and not the author.”
“The duties of Brâhmanas, Kshatriyas, and Vaisyas, and of Sûdras, too, O terror of your foes! are distinguished according to the qualities born of nature. Tranquillity, restraint of the senses, penance, purity, forgiveness, straightforwardness, also knowledge, experience, and belief (in a future world), this is the natural duty of Brâhmanas. Valour, glory, courage, dexterity, not slinking away from battle, gifts, exercise of lordly power, this is the natural duty of Kshatriyas. Agriculture, tending cattle, trade, (this) is the natural duty of Vaisyas. And the natural duty of Sûdras, too, consists in service.”
“Now in the first place, noting as we pass along, that there is nothing in the Gîtâ to indicate whether caste was hereditary, according to its view, whereas Âpastamba distinctly states it to be such, let us compare the second passage of the Gîtâ with the Sûtras of Âpastamba bearing on the point.”
The Gita's duties are the duties of a birth
The Gita's own example shows what "qualities and duties" meant. Arjuna does not want to fight. He says he would rather live on alms than kill his teachers. Krishna does not ask him to examine his character. He tells him that nothing is better "for a Kshatriya" than a righteous battle. Later he says Arjuna's nature will force him to fight. Shankara, the 8th-century Hindu teacher, explains that nature as "the nature of a Kshatriya". A man's own duty, even done badly, is better than another's duty done well. He should not give up the duty he was born with (saha-ja), even if it is tainted with evil. The Gita also fears "caste-interminglings" (varna-sankara), the mixing of castes. Arjuna says they lead the family to hell. Krishna says he would cause them if he stopped acting. Castes can only mix through birth, when children are born across caste lines. A division that such unions can corrupt is a division by descent.
“Having regard to your own duty also, you ought not to falter, for there is nothing better for a Kshatriya than a righteous battle.”
“Not killing (my) preceptors—(men) of great glory—it is better to live even on alms in this world.”
“If entertaining egotism, you think that you may not fight, vain, indeed, is that resolution of yours. Nature will constrain you. That, O son of Kuntî! which through delusion you do not wish to do, you will do involuntarily, tied down by your own duty, flowing from your nature.”
“The nature of a Kshatriya, Sankara.”
“One's own duty, though defective, is better than another's duty well performed. Death in (performing) one's own duty is preferable; the (performance of the) duty of others is dangerous.”
“Worshipping, by (the performance of) his own duty, him from whom all things proceed, and by whom all this is permeated, a man obtains perfection. One's duty, though defective, is better than another's duty well performed. Performing the duty prescribed by nature, one does not incur sin.”
“O son of Kuntî! one should not abandon a natural duty though tainted with evil; for all actions are enveloped by evil, as fire by smoke.”
“In consequence of the predominance of impiety, O Krishna! the women of the family become corrupt; and the women becoming corrupt, O descendant of Vrishni! intermingling of castes results; that intermingling necessarily leads the family and the destroyers of the family to hell; for when the ceremonies of (offering) the balls of food and water (to them) fail, their ancestors fall down (to hell).”
“If I did not perform actions, these worlds would be destroyed, I should be the cause of caste-interminglings; and I should be ruining these people.”
Birth as reward and punishment
The Chandogya Upanishad is part of the shruti itself. It says those whose conduct was good will be born as a Brahmin, a Kshatriya or a Vaishya. Those whose conduct was evil will be born as a dog, a hog or a Chandala, a man outside the four castes. Here birth is the fruit of past deeds, and a low caste is placed beside animals. The Gita ranks births in the same way. It promises the supreme goal even to "those who are of sinful birth, women, Vaisyas, and Sûdras". Then it asks what need be said of holy Brahmins. Telang's note records two readings. Shankara reads "sinful birth" as "birth resulting from sins". Sridhara, another Hindu commentator, reads it as "low birth". They differ over who is included, but both read it as a birth.
“Those whose conduct has been good, will quickly attain some good birth, the birth of a Brâhmana, or a Kshatriya, or a Vaisya. But those whose conduct has been evil, will quickly attain an evil birth, the birth of a dog, or a hog, or a Kandâla.”
“For, O son of Prithâ! even those who are of sinful birth, women, Vaisyas, and Sûdras likewise, resorting to me, attain the supreme goal.”
“What then (need be said of) holy Brâhmanas and royal saints who are (my) devotees? Coming to this transient unhappy world, worship me.”
“Sankara takes Vaisyas &c. as examples of this; not so Srîdhara. Cf. as to women and Sûdras, Nrisimha-tâpinî, p. 14. 'Of sinful birth'=of low birth (Srîdhara)=birth resulting from sins (Sankara).”
Manu: rank by origin
The Manusmriti, or Laws of Manu, gives each class its occupations by the part of the Creator's body it came from. The Shudra gets one occupation only: "to serve meekly" the other three. The mouth is the purest part of the body. So the Brahmin, who came from it, "is by right the lord of this whole creation". His "very birth" is "an eternal incarnation of the sacred law". The upper three castes are "twice-born", because they are initiated into the Veda. The Shudra "has one birth only". Manu gives the Shudra a harsher penalty "for he is of low origin". Medhatithi wrote the oldest commentary on Manu that survives. He explains this as "being born out of the feet of Brahmā". The page on the Hindu law books sets out those penalties.
“But in order to protect this universe He, the most resplendent one, assigned separate (duties and) occupations to those who sprang from his mouth, arms, thighs, and feet. To Brâhmanas he assigned teaching and studying (the Veda), sacrificing for their own benefit and for others, giving and accepting (of alms). The Kshatriya he commanded to protect the people, to bestow gifts, to offer sacrifices, to study (the Veda), and to abstain from attaching himself to sensual pleasures; The Vaisya to tend cattle, to bestow gifts, to offer sacrifices, to study (the Veda), to trade, to lend money, and to cultivate land. One occupation only the lord prescribed to the Sûdra, to serve meekly even these (other) three castes.”
“Man is stated to be purer above the navel (than below); hence the Self-existent (Svayambhû) has declared the purest (part) of him (to be) his mouth. As the Brâhmana sprang from (Brahman's) mouth, as he was the first-born, and as he possesses the Veda, he is by right the lord of this whole creation.”
“The very birth of a Brâhmana is an eternal incarnation of the sacred law; for he is born to (fulfil) the sacred law, and becomes one with Brahman.”
“On account of his pre-eminence, on account of the superiority of his origin, on account of his observance of (particular) restrictive rules, and on account of his particular sanctification the Brâhmana is the lord of (all) castes (varna). The Brâhmana, the Kshatriya, and the Vaisya castes (varna) are the twice-born ones, but the fourth, the Sûdra, has one birth only; there is no fifth (caste).”
“A once-born man (a Sûdra), who insults a twice-born man with gross invective, shall have his tongue cut out; for he is of low origin.”
“'Once-born person'—the Shūdra; if he 'insults'—abuses—the higher castes—'with gross abuse'—harsh words attributing heinous offences,—suffers 'the cutting off of the tongue.' 'He is of low origin'—being born out of the feet of Brahmā. This is the reason given for the special penalty; and it serves also to indicate the same punishment for persons of the reverse cross-breed also; since these latter also are 'of low origin'; specially in view of the declaration that 'there is no fifth caste.'”
Vedanta: birth decides who may hear the Veda
Vedanta is the school of Hindu thought built on the Upanishads. One of its three foundations is the Brahma Sutra, a short text of brief sayings (sutras). It holds that Shudras may not study the Veda to learn about Brahman, the highest reality. One of its proofs is the Upanishad's story of Satyakama. His mother did not know his family. The teacher Gautama accepted him because he told the truth: "No one but a true Brâhmana would thus speak out." The sutra and Shankara read this as Gautama first making sure that Satyakama was not a Shudra. Truthfulness was taken as a sign of Brahmin birth, not as a way around it. Shankara then calls the Shudra's lack of the right to the Veda "a settled point". Ramanuja quotes the law book's ban on even hearing the Veda. He calls it "a settled matter" that Shudras are not qualified for meditations on Brahman.
“He said to him: 'No one but a true Brâhmana would thus speak out. Go and fetch fuel, friend, I shall initiate you. You have not swerved from the truth.'”
“And on account of (Gautama) proceeding (to initiate Gâbâla) on the ascertainment of (his) not being that (i.e. a Sûdra).”
“The Sûdras are not qualified for that reason also that Gautama, having ascertained Gâbâla not to be a Sûdra from his speaking the truth, proceeded to initiate and instruct him. 'None who is not a Brâhmana would thus speak out. Go and fetch fuel, friend, I shall initiate you. You have not swerved from the truth' (Kh. Up. IV, 4, 5); which scriptural passage furnishes an inferential sign (of the Sûdras not being capable of initiation).”
“And on account of the prohibition, in Smriti, of (the Sûdras') hearing and studying (the Veda) and (knowing and performing) (Vedic) matters.”
“From those Sûdras, however, who, like Vidura and 'the religious hunter,' acquire knowledge in consequence of the after effects of former deeds, the fruit of their knowledge cannot be withheld, since knowledge in all cases brings about its fruit. Smriti, moreover, declares that all the four castes are qualified for acquiring the knowledge of the itihâsas and purânas; compare the passage, 'He is to teach the four castes' (Mahâbh.).—It remains, however, a settled point that they do not possess any such qualification with regard to the Veda.”
“Smriti also declares this prohibition of hearing, and so on. 'The ears of him who hears the Veda are to be filled with molten lead and lac; if he pronounces it his tongue is to be slit; if he preserves it his body is to be cut through.' And 'He is not to teach him sacred duties or vows.'—It is thus a settled matter that the Sûdras are not qualified for meditations on Brahman.”
A Hindu witness: Vivekananda in 1898
Swami Vivekananda was the best-known Hindu teacher of his age. In 1898 he wrote to a Muslim friend. The practical side of Vedanta's oneness, which treats all people as one's own soul, "was never developed among the Hindus", he said. "If ever any religion approached to this equality in an appreciable manner, it is Islam and Islam alone." His next words show that he remained a Vedantist. He hoped for a union of "Vedanta brain and Islam body". He also hoped for a place beyond the Vedas, the Bible and the Qur'an. That makes his witness about Islam's practice of equality weightier, not weaker.
“The Hindus may get the credit of arriving at it earlier than other races, they being an older race than either the Hebrew or the Arab; yet practical Advaitism, which looks upon and behaves to all mankind as one's own soul, was never developed among the Hindus. On the other hand, my experience is that if ever any religion approached to this equality in an appreciable manner, it is Islam and Islam alone. Therefore I am firmly persuaded that without the help of practical Islam, theories of Vedantism, however fine and wonderful they may be, are entirely valueless to the vast mass of mankind.”
“We want to lead mankind to the place where there is neither the Vedas, nor the Bible, nor the Koran; yet this has to be done by harmonising the Vedas, the Bible and the Koran. Mankind ought to be taught that religions are but the varied expressions of THE RELIGION, which is Oneness, so that each may choose the path that suits him best. For our own motherland a junction of the two great systems, Hinduism and Islam—Vedanta brain and Islam body—is the only hope.”
The Qur'an: honour by righteousness, not birth
The Qur'an says God (﷾) made mankind from a single pair, and made them into nations and tribes so that they may know one another. "The most honoured of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you." No one is born to carry another's burden. A person has only what he strives for. The Prophet (ﷺ) said that God (﷾) does not look at people's faces or wealth, but at their hearts and deeds. His Companion Abu Dharr once insulted a man and shamed him over his mother. The Prophet (ﷺ) told him he still had some of the ways of the Days of Ignorance, the time before Islam.
“O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise (each other). Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And Allah has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things).”
“Namely, that no bearer of burdens can bear the burden of another; That man can have nothing but what he strives for;”
Abu Huraira reports that the Prophet (ﷺ) said: Allah does not look at your faces or your wealth, but He looks at your hearts and your deeds.
Abu Dharr insulted a man and shamed him over his mother. The Prophet (ﷺ) told him he still had some of the ways of the Days of Ignorance. He said that their slaves are their brothers: they must feed them from what they eat, clothe them as they dress, and not load them beyond their strength, or else help them.
The Prophet (ﷺ) put it into practice
Zayd was a freed slave whom the Prophet (ﷺ) had adopted. The Prophet (ﷺ) married him to his own cousin, Zaynab bint Jahsh. She was of a noble family: her mother was the Prophet's (ﷺ) aunt. So a woman of noble birth married a man who had been a slave. The Qur'an told the believers not to resist what Allah (﷾) and His Messenger decide. The Prophet (ﷺ) also advised Fatima bint Qays, a woman of Quraysh, to marry Zayd's son Usama. He named Salim, a freed slave, among the four men from whom the Qur'an should be learnt. He told the Muslims to obey an Abyssinian slave if one were put in authority over them. And Umar, the second caliph, called Bilal, a freed Abyssinian slave, "our master". In Islam, the Qur'an and prayer are open to anyone of any birth. A freed slave could be a teacher of the Qur'an, or an official whom Muslims must obey.
“Behold! Thou didst say to one who had received the grace of Allah and thy favour: "Retain thou (in wedlock) thy wife, and fear Allah." But thou didst hide in thy heart that which Allah was about to make manifest: thou didst fear the people, but it is more fitting that thou shouldst fear Allah. Then when Zaid had dissolved (his marriage) with her, with the necessary (formality), We joined her in marriage to thee: in order that (in future) there may be no difficulty to the Believers in (the matter of) marriage with the wives of their adopted sons, when the latter have dissolved with the necessary (formality) (their marriage) with them. And Allah's command must be fulfilled.”
“It is not fitting for a Believer, man or woman, when a matter has been decided by Allah and His Messenger to have any option about their decision: if any one disobeys Allah and His Messenger, he is indeed on a clearly wrong Path.”
Ibn Kathir explains that Zaynab bint Jahsh was the daughter of the Prophet's (ﷺ) aunt Umaymah bint Abd al-Muttalib. The Prophet himself asked for her in marriage on behalf of his freed slave Zayd ibn Haritha. The marriage lasted about a year and then broke down, and Zayd came to the Prophet to complain. Ibn Kathir holds that what the Prophet hid was that God had told him Zaynab would be his wife, and he declines to repeat other reports on the verse because they are not sound.
Fatima bint Qays, whose husband had divorced her, was told by the Prophet (ﷺ) to let him know when her waiting period ended. When it did and two men proposed, he advised her to marry Usama ibn Zayd instead. She married him and said the marriage was blessed.
Abdullah ibn Amr reports that the Prophet (ﷺ) named four men from whom the recitation of the Qur'an should be learnt: Abdullah ibn Mas'ud, Salim the freed slave of Abu Hudhayfa, Ubayy ibn Ka'b and Mu'adh ibn Jabal. Al-Bukhari places it in the chapter on the merits of Salim.
Anas ibn Malik reports that the Prophet (ﷺ) told the Muslims to hear and obey whoever is put in authority over them, even if he is an Abyssinian slave whose head looks like a raisin.
Jabir ibn Abdullah reports that Umar used to say: Abu Bakr is our master, and he set free our master, meaning Bilal.
The replies, answered
Bhagavad Gita 4:13 — chapter 4, verse 13
“The fourfold division of castes was created by me according to the apportionment of qualities and duties. But though I am its author, know me to be inexhaustible, and not the author.”
Cited for
Krishna made the four orders "according to the apportionment of qualities and duties". Varna is a matter of character and work (guna and karma), not of the family a person is born into. Even Telang, who translated the Gita, found nothing in it to say that caste is hereditary.
The response
The Gita's second passage says what those qualities are. They are "born of nature", and the Shudra's "natural duty" is service. Its one worked example is Arjuna. He says he would rather live on alms than kill his teachers. Krishna does not test his qualities. He tells him that his nature will force him to fight, and Shankara explains it as "the nature of a Kshatriya". So the "nature" is that of the class Arjuna was born into. It is not a trait found by examining him. The Gita also warns that castes are corrupted by "intermingling" when the women of a family "become corrupt". That only makes sense if caste passes by descent. Telang is right that the Gita never says so in words. But he sets it beside Apastamba, a law book of the same tradition, which "distinctly states" that caste is hereditary. Manu gives a Shudra no way to become a Brahmin by his own character in this life. His only route is marriage over seven generations.
Where it lands — In the Gita, qualities and duties come with a birth. The law books and teachers who applied it ruled by birth.
Bhagavad Gita 4:13 — chapter 4, verse 13
“The fourfold division of castes was created by me according to the apportionment of qualities and duties. But though I am its author, know me to be inexhaustible, and not the author.”
Cited for
Varna is not jati. The Gita's four varnas are broad types of character and work. The thousands of jatis are the birth groups that decide whom one marries and eats with. They are social custom. The scriptures teach varna, and varna is not by birth.
The response
The law books derive the jatis from the varnas, by birth. Manu names the children born of unions across the four varnas, and uses the word jati for their castes. The son of a Shudra father and a Brahmin mother is a Chandala, "the lowest of men". Manu's word for this "confusion of the castes" is varna-sankara. The Gita uses the same word when it fears the mixing of castes. The same law book says the Shudra is the fourth varna with one birth only, and "there is no fifth". Telang, a Hindu scholar, translates the Gita's own word for the four orders as "castes". So the birth groups are not a later corruption of a system by character. The law books built them out of varna, through birth.
Where it lands — The law books make varna hereditary and derive the jatis from it by birth. Separating the two does not remove birth from either.
Rig Veda 10.90.11-12 — Mandala 10, Hymn 90, verses 11-12
“When they divided Purusha how many portions did they make? What do they call his mouth, his arms? What do they call his thighs and feet? The Brâhman was his mouth, of both his arms was the Râjanya made. His thighs became the Vaiṣya, from his feet the Ṣûdra was produced.”
Cited for
The Purusha hymn is a metaphor. Society is one body and every part is needed, the feet as much as the head. It is also a late hymn, and the only one in the Rig Veda to name the four classes.
The response
The tradition did not read it as a picture of equal parts. Manu retells it as the Creator's act. He assigns each class its occupations by the part of the body it came from. He calls the mouth the purest part, and makes the Brahmin "by right the lord of this whole creation". Medhatithi explains the Shudra's harsher penalty by his birth "out of the feet of Brahmā". A late hymn is still shruti, the Veda that Hindus hold to be revealed. And the hymn does not stand alone. The Chandogya Upanishad makes a low birth the punishment for evil deeds.
Where it lands — Whatever the hymn meant first, the law books and commentators read it as rank by birth, and the Upanishad agrees.
Mahabharata, Vana Parva, section 180 — Yudhishthira to the serpent on who is a Brahmana (Ganguli's numbering)
“Those characterestics that are present in a Sudra, do not exist in a Brāhmana; nor do those that are in a Brahmana exist in a Sudra. And a Sudra is not a Sudra by birth alone,—nor a Brahmana, a Brahmana by birth alone. He, it is said by the wise, in whom are seen those virtues, is a Brahmana. And people term him a Sudra in whom those qualities do not exist, (even though he be a Brāhmana by birth).”
Cited for
The Mahabharata settles it. Yudhishthira, the embodiment of dharma, says "a Sudra is not a Sudra by birth alone". A man is a Brahmin if he has truth, charity and mercy. A Brahmin without them is called a Shudra.
The response
This passage does point to character, and it is the strongest text for the reply. But Yudhishthira gives a reason. It is "difficult to ascertain one's caste, because of promiscuous intercourse among the four orders". He does not say birth is nothing: a man is not a Brahmin "by birth alone". He turns to conduct because descent can no longer be known for certain. The Brahma Sutra reads Satyakama the same way: truthfulness showed he was not a Shudra. And Yudhishthira never says that a man born a Shudra may be taught the Veda. Shankara knew the epic and quotes it. He still ruled it "a settled point" that Shudras have no right to the Veda. The same epic also answers the direct question. Yudhishthira later asks Bhishma how a Kshatriya, a Vaishya or a Shudra may become a Brahmin. Bhishma says the status "is incapable of acquisition" by them. He tells of Matanga, who stood on one foot for a thousand years and was still refused. Bhishma ends that it cannot be gained "except in the natural way of birth".
Where it lands — The epic points to character where descent is unknown. Asked how the other orders may become Brahmins, Bhishma says they cannot. The classical teachers kept the Veda closed by birth.
Chandogya Upanishad 4.4.5 — chapter 4, section 4, verse 5
“He said to him: 'No one but a true Brâhmana would thus speak out. Go and fetch fuel, friend, I shall initiate you. You have not swerved from the truth.'”
Cited for
Satyakama did not know his father, yet the teacher accepted him because he told the truth. So the Upanishad itself makes a Brahmin by character.
The response
Read on its own, the story can be taken to honour truth above family, and many Hindus read it so. But the Brahma Sutra cites this very story to prove the opposite: that Shudras are not qualified. Gautama proceeded "on the ascertainment of (his) not being that (i.e. a Sûdra)". Shankara explains that Satyakama's truthfulness first satisfied Gautama that he was not a Shudra. He calls the passage a sign that Shudras cannot be initiated. The teacher's words agree: "No one but a true Brâhmana would thus speak out." Medhatithi and Govindaraja, two commentators on Manu, also read it by birth. Bühler reports that they held Satyakama's mother "had been legally married, and had forgotten her husband's family-name". Truthfulness was read as proof of Brahmin birth, not as a way around it.
Where it lands — The Vedanta tradition's own ruling on Satyakama is that a Shudra could not have been initiated.
Mahabharata, Anusasana Parva, section 4 — the birth of Vishvamitra (Ganguli's numbering)
“The celebrated wife of Gādhi too gave birth to the regenerate Rishi Viçwāmitra versed in the knowledge of Brahma, by favour of that Rishi. The highly devout Viçwāmitra, though a Kshatriya, attained to the state of a Brāhmana and became the founder of a race of Brāhmanas.”
Cited for
Many rose by character. Vishvamitra was born a Kshatriya and became a Brahmin sage by his austerities. Vyasa, revered among the greatest of sages, was the son of a fisherwoman.
The response
The epic tells Vishvamitra's rise in two ways. One passage credits his "austere penances", and the Creator grants his wish to become a Brahmin. Even there, he was born the son of a Kshatriya king, not a Shudra. When Yudhishthira asks how a Kshatriya became a Brahmin, Bhishma traces it to a sacrificial food. A Brahmin sage had placed "the entire accumulated energy of Brahma" in the food meant for his wife. Her mother ate it instead, and gave birth to Vishvamitra. So the epic's own answer to the question traces this rise to what happened before his birth. The epic makes Vyasa the son of the Brahmin sage Parashara. And when the epic takes the case of a man born low, it refuses him. Matanga practised austerities for a thousand years. He was told he could never become a Brahmin, and grieved that "through the fault of my mother" he was kept out.
Where it lands — When Yudhishthira asks, Bhishma explains Vishvamitra's rise by his birth. The epic refuses the same rise to Matanga because of his birth.
Manusmriti 10.64-65 — chapter 10, verses 64-65
“If (a female of the caste), sprung from a Brâhmana and a Sûdra female, bear (children) to one of the highest caste, the inferior (tribe) attains the highest caste within the seventh generation. (Thus) a Sûdra attains the rank of a Brâhmana, and (in a similar manner) a Brâhmana sinks to the level of a Sûdra; but know that it is the same with the offspring of a Kshatriya or of a Vaisya.”
Cited for
Manu himself says a Shudra can attain the rank of a Brahmin and a Brahmin can sink to the level of a Shudra. So caste can change.
The response
Read the verse before it. The rise happens when the daughter of a Brahmin and a Shudra woman, and her descendants, bear children to men of the highest caste. It is complete "within the seventh generation". Bühler's note gives the commentators' reading: the offspring of the sixth female descendant becomes a Brahmin. Nothing in it concerns the Shudra's own character. No one in that line changes class in his own lifetime. Only distant descendants, by marrying upward, change class. That is caste by birth, worked out over generations. Manu does let a twice-born man fall: one who neglects the Veda "falls, even while living, to the condition of a Sûdra". The fall works by conduct, but the rise does not.
Where it lands — Manu lets the twice-born fall by their conduct in this life, but gives the Shudra no way up by his own conduct in this life. His only way up is marriage and descent.
Bhagavad Gita 9:32 — chapter 9, verse 32
“For, O son of Prithâ! even those who are of sinful birth, women, Vaisyas, and Sûdras likewise, resorting to me, attain the supreme goal.”
Cited for
The Gita opens the highest goal to everyone. Krishna promises it to women, Vaishyas and Shudras who take refuge in him, so devotion removes caste.
The response
The verse does offer them the goal, and that is to its credit. But it calls them, or places them beside, "those who are of sinful birth". Shankara reads the phrase as "birth resulting from sins", and Sridhara as "low birth". The next verse asks what then need be said of holy Brahmins. The promise is made across a ranking of births, and it does not remove it. The same Shankara kept the Veda closed to the Shudra. The Qur'an makes no class of sinful births. It calls every person to the same faith, and in God's (﷾) sight it ranks only by righteousness.
Where it lands — The Gita's promise is given to people it ranks by birth. In God's (﷾) sight, the Qur'an ranks no one by birth.
Bhagavad Gita 9:32 — chapter 9, verse 32
“For, O son of Prithâ! even those who are of sinful birth, women, Vaisyas, and Sûdras likewise, resorting to me, attain the supreme goal.”
Cited for
The devotional saints swept caste away. Some were born low themselves, like Ravidas the leather-worker. They taught that devotion counts, not birth.
The response
Many of these saints did speak against caste, and that is to their credit. But they spoke against the law books and the priests of their day, not from them. The Gita, the charter of devotion, still sets those it promises beside "those who are of sinful birth". Ramanuja, a teacher of devotion to Vishnu, still called it "a settled matter" that Shudras are not qualified for meditations on Brahman. A saint who has to protest against his tradition's rulings shows what those rulings were. Islam's equality needs no such protest, because it is in the Qur'an itself.
Where it lands — The saints protested against what the texts taught. Their protest confirms it; it does not remove it.
Chandogya Upanishad 5.10.7 — chapter 5, section 10, verse 7
“Those whose conduct has been good, will quickly attain some good birth, the birth of a Brâhmana, or a Kshatriya, or a Vaisya. But those whose conduct has been evil, will quickly attain an evil birth, the birth of a dog, or a hog, or a Kandâla.”
Cited for
Caste by birth is just, because birth itself is earned. The soul is born where its past karma places it, so a Brahmin's birth reflects his qualities from former lives.
The response
This reply grants the point of the page: caste is by birth. It only adds a reason for the birth. That reason cannot be checked. The person born into a low caste does not remember the life he is said to be paying for. Yet the Shudra is still barred from the Veda in this life for deeds he cannot know. The page on karma answers this at length. Islam starts every life clean. The Prophet (ﷺ) said every child is born on the fitra, the nature God (﷾) gave mankind. Each person then has only what he strives for.
Where it lands — Karma explains caste by birth. It does not replace it, and it rests on former lives that the person born low cannot remember.
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 17
Abolishes "untouchability" and forbids its practice in any form; enforcing any disability that arises from it is an offence punishable by law.
Cited for
Caste is a social custom, not the heart of the religion. Vivekananda, Gandhi and many reformers fought untouchability, and India's Constitution abolished it.
The response
The reformers were right to oppose it, but they were opposing what these texts teach. Article 17 came from a secular constitution in 1950, not from a change in the Veda, the Gita, Manu or Shankara. Vivekananda himself wrote that the practice of Vedanta's oneness "was never developed among the Hindus". He found it in "Islam and Islam alone". He remained a Vedantist, as his next words show, which gives his witness about Islam more weight. The Qur'an needed no reform on this. It taught from the start that the most honoured is the most righteous.
Where it lands — The reform came from outside the scriptures. Islam's equality is in its scripture.
Sahih al-Bukhari 7142 — Kitab al-Ahkam (Judgments), hadith 7142
Anas ibn Malik reports that the Prophet (ﷺ) told the Muslims to hear and obey whoever is put in authority over them, even if he is an Abyssinian slave whose head looks like a raisin.
Cited for
Muslims have caste too. South Asian Muslims rank families by descent, and Islamic law weighs lineage in marriage.
The response
Where Muslims keep caste, they break their own scripture. In honour with God (﷾), the Qur'an ranks by righteousness alone. The Prophet (ﷺ) said God (﷾) looks at hearts and deeds, not at faces or wealth. He married a freed slave to his own cousin, a noble woman. He advised a woman of Quraysh to marry that freed slave's son. He named a freed slave among the teachers of the Qur'an, and told Muslims to obey an Abyssinian slave in authority. Many jurists weighed lineage in marriage. Most held this a right the woman and her guardians may waive, and it never barred anyone from the mosque, the prayer or the Qur'an. The page on caste among Muslims answers this reply in full. A Muslim who keeps caste disobeys his scripture. A Hindu who rejects caste departs from his.
Where it lands — Caste among Muslims is a custom against Islam's texts. Caste in Hinduism is taught by its texts.
Chandogya Upanishad 5.10.7 — chapter 5, section 10, verse 7
“Those whose conduct has been good, will quickly attain some good birth, the birth of a Brâhmana, or a Kshatriya, or a Vaisya. But those whose conduct has been evil, will quickly attain an evil birth, the birth of a dog, or a hog, or a Kandâla.”
Cited for
I don't follow caste. Those passages are for people of another nature. My path of devotion is higher, and Krishna judges by qualities.
The response
The Chandogya verse is not a rule a person can choose to follow. It says how souls are born. Good conduct leads to a high birth, and evil conduct to "the birth of a dog, or a hog", or of an outcaste (Chandala). If the verse is true, it ranks the devotee's own birth, whether he follows caste or not. Even the Gita's promise of the highest goal is made to those it calls "of sinful birth". Islam lays no such rank on anyone. The Prophet (ﷺ) said every child is born upon the fitra, the nature God (﷾) gave mankind. Each person has only what he strives for. And "the most honoured of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you".
Where it lands — Not following caste does not change what the scripture says about birth. In Islam, no one is ranked before God (﷾) by birth.
Rig Veda 10.90.11-12 — Mandala 10, Hymn 90, verses 11-12
“When they divided Purusha how many portions did they make? What do they call his mouth, his arms? What do they call his thighs and feet? The Brâhman was his mouth, of both his arms was the Râjanya made. His thighs became the Vaiṣya, from his feet the Ṣûdra was produced.”
Cited for
Caste by birth is not Hinduism. Foreign rulers brought it in, or hardened it.
The response
Whatever rulers later did, rank by birth is taught in the scriptures themselves. The Purusha hymn of the Rig Veda says, "from his feet the Ṣûdra was produced". The Chandogya Upanishad ties a high or low birth to conduct in a former life. The Gita says the duties of the four classes "are distinguished according to the qualities born of nature". But it also tells a man not to abandon "a natural duty", the duty he was born with. Manu assigns each class its work by the part of the body it sprang from. The Vedanta teachers barred the Shudra from hearing the Veda, as this page shows. No ruler wrote these texts. Islam's ranking is in its own text. The Qur'an says, "the most honoured of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you".
Where it lands — The scriptures teach rank by birth, and no ruler wrote them. In the sight of God (﷾), the Qur'an ranks people by righteousness alone.
Perspectives
Classical: varna by birth
The four classes came from the Creator's body, the Brahmin from the mouth and the Shudra from the feet. A person's birth into a class is the fruit of his past deeds. It fixes his duties and his right to the Veda.
The Rig Veda and the Chandogya Upanishad, Manu, the Brahma Sutra, with Medhatithi, Shankara and Ramanuja
The classes came from the parts of the Creator's body, and each was assigned its occupations by that origin.
Rebuttal
This is how the tradition read its own texts. The Qur'an gives a different origin: all people come from a single pair. In God's (﷾) sight the most honoured is the most righteous.
Birth into a high or low class is the reward or punishment for conduct in a former life.
Rebuttal
In God's (﷾) sight, Islam ranks no one by birth or by a past life (49:13). The Prophet (ﷺ) said every child is born on the fitra, the nature God (﷾) gave mankind. Each person has only what he strives for.
The Shudra has one birth only and may not study the Veda; the Vedanta teachers call this settled.
Rebuttal
Islam bars no one from the Qur'an because of birth. Anyone of any birth may hear, learn and teach it. The Prophet (ﷺ) named a freed slave among its teachers.
Modern reading: by qualities, not birth
Krishna made the four orders by qualities and duties, not by family. Varna, the four orders, is not jati. Jati means the thousands of birth groups, which are social custom. The epic says a Brahmin is known by his virtues. The devotional saints taught that devotion counts, not birth.
Many modern Hindu teachers and reformers
The Gita says the fourfold division was made according to qualities and duties.
Rebuttal
That is what the verse says. But the Gita's own example is a Kshatriya's duty to fight, a duty he was born with (18:48), and it fears caste mixing through birth.
The Gita itself does not say that caste is hereditary.
Rebuttal
Telang notes this. But the Gita tells a man not to abandon his "natural duty" (saha-ja, the duty he was born with, 18:48). It also fears castes mixing through birth (1:41-42). Telang adds that Apastamba, a law book of the same tradition, states plainly that caste is hereditary.
In the Mahabharata, Yudhishthira says a Brahmin is known by his virtues, not by birth alone.
Rebuttal
Yudhishthira turns to virtue because descent is hard to know. The same epic says the status of a Brahmin cannot be gained "except in the natural way of birth".
The Islamic perspective
All people come from one pair. No one is born higher or lower before God (﷾), and the most honoured is the most righteous.
In honour with God (﷾), the Qur'an ranks people by righteousness alone, not by nation, tribe or birth.
Every child is born on the fitra, with no sin or burden from a life before. Each person has only what he strives for.
The Prophet (ﷺ) married a freed slave to his own cousin, a noble woman. He named a freed slave among the teachers of the Qur'an.