Short answer
Yes. Some South Asian Muslims rank families by descent and marry only within their group. Indian government reports describe this. But the custom breaks Islam's own texts. The Qur'an says the most honoured with God (﷾) is the most righteous. The Prophet (ﷺ) said God (﷾) looks at hearts and deeds, not at faces or wealth. He told a woman of Quraysh to marry the son of a freed slave. Hindu caste is different, because its scriptures teach it. An Upanishad makes a low birth the punishment for evil conduct. Shankara, the 8th-century Vedanta teacher, ruled that Shudras may not hear or study the Veda. So a Muslim who keeps caste disobeys his scripture. A Hindu who rejects caste departs from his. Under the Hindu law books, no one can convert into a varna. But anyone may become Muslim and stand in the same row of prayer.
Full explanation
What the records show among South Asian Muslims
The ranks are real, and this page does not deny them. India's Sachar Committee was a government committee that studied Muslims in India. Its report of 2006 says studies find ranked groups among Indian Muslims, marriage within the group and hereditary trades. Families claiming descent from Arabia, Persia, Turkistan or Afghanistan are called ashraf, "noble". So are converts from high castes. Converts from working castes, such as weavers, tailors and barbers, are called ajlaf. Converts from castes once treated as untouchable are called arzal. The ranks follow the castes the converts came from. Ambedkar was the best-known Dalit leader of the 20th century. In a book of the 1940s he quoted the Bengal census of 1901. There some Muslims kept the arzal out of the mosque and the public burial ground. Trade groups were often as strictly endogamous as Hindu castes, that is, they married only within the group. It is not only history. A 2016 survey in fourteen districts of Uttar Pradesh asked whether Dalit Muslims face untouchability from non-Dalit Muslims and Hindus. Some Dalit Muslims reported it in dining, housing, social contact and access to religious places. A higher share of non-Dalit Muslims confirmed these reports.
Reports that studies of Indian Muslims find descent-based ranks, with hierarchy, marriage within the group and hereditary trades. It describes the ashraf (families claiming descent from Arabia, Persia, Turkistan or Afghanistan, and converts from high castes), the ajlaf (converts from working castes such as weavers, tailors and barbers) and the arzal (converts from castes treated as untouchable), citing the Census of 1901, and similar ranked groups in Kerala and Andhra Pradesh. It records that the Mandal Commission (1980) did not use caste to identify backward classes among non-Hindus, because those religions are egalitarian in outlook, and used former untouchability and hereditary occupation instead, while accepting that caste-like features were found among non-Hindus too.
In the chapter "Social Stagnation", Ambedkar notes that Islam speaks of brotherhood, but says caste has remained among Indian Muslims. He quotes the Census of 1901 for Bengal: Muslims there divided themselves into ashraf, ajlaf and arzal; other Muslims would not associate with the arzal, who were forbidden the mosque and the public burial ground; and trade groups were often as strictly endogamous as Hindu castes. He concludes that Muslim society in India has the same social evils as Hindu society. Later in the chapter he argues that Islam cannot be the reason Indian Muslims have not reformed, since Muslims elsewhere were reforming, and blames their position in a predominantly Hindu social and political environment, which he says makes them insist on preserving everything Islamic, whether helpful or harmful. The same book is severely critical of Islam: in the same passage he says slavery, while it existed, drew much of its support from Islam.
A household survey in 14 districts of Uttar Pradesh asked whether non-Dalit Muslims and Hindus practise untouchability towards Dalit Muslims. Some Dalit Muslim respondents reported it in dining, habitation, social interaction and access to religious places, and a higher proportion of non-Dalit Muslims confirmed these reports.
Where Hindu caste comes from: the scriptures themselves
Hindu caste is written into the sacred texts. In the Purusha hymn of the Rig Veda (10.90.12), the Brahmin was the mouth of the cosmic Man. The Rajanya was made of his arms, and his thighs became the Vaishya. The Shudra was born from his feet. The Chandogya Upanishad, part of the shruti, makes birth itself a reward or a punishment. Good conduct leads to birth as a Brahmin, Kshatriya or Vaishya. Evil conduct leads to birth as a dog, a hog or a Chandala, an outcaste. The Gita promises the supreme goal even to those "of sinful birth", and names women, Vaishyas and Shudras with them. Telang's note records that Shankara took the Vaishyas and the rest as examples of sinful birth, though Sridhara did not. Sridhara glossed the phrase as low birth. The Gita also tells each man that his own duty, though defective, is better than another's. Manu counts the three higher varnas as twice-born and the Shudra as born once only (10.4). The Brahma Sutra and Shankara, the best-known teacher of Vedanta, bar the Shudra from hearing or studying the Veda, because the smriti forbids it.
“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.”
“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.”
“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).”
“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.”
“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).”
“And on account of the prohibition, in Smriti, of (the Sûdras') hearing and studying (the Veda) and (knowing and performing) (Vedic) matters.”
“The Sûdras are not qualified for that reason also that Smriti prohibits their hearing the Veda, their studying the Veda, and their understanding and performing Vedic matters.”
The same custom, opposite standing
The difference is where each practice comes from. Among Muslims, caste came from the castes the converts left behind, joined to claims of honour by foreign descent. Both run against their scripture, so a Muslim who keeps caste can be corrected from his own texts. Among Hindus, caste is taught by the texts and by their classical teachers. So a Hindu who rejects it must set those texts aside. This compares texts with texts, not Muslim texts with Hindu practice. Each religion's practice is measured against its own scripture. India's Mandal Commission was a government commission on backward classes. As the Sachar report records, it did not use caste to identify backward classes among non-Hindus. Its reason was that those religions are egalitarian in outlook.
Reports that studies of Indian Muslims find descent-based ranks, with hierarchy, marriage within the group and hereditary trades. It describes the ashraf (families claiming descent from Arabia, Persia, Turkistan or Afghanistan, and converts from high castes), the ajlaf (converts from working castes such as weavers, tailors and barbers) and the arzal (converts from castes treated as untouchable), citing the Census of 1901, and similar ranked groups in Kerala and Andhra Pradesh. It records that the Mandal Commission (1980) did not use caste to identify backward classes among non-Hindus, because those religions are egalitarian in outlook, and used former untouchability and hereditary occupation instead, while accepting that caste-like features were found among non-Hindus too.
“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.”
“And on account of the prohibition, in Smriti, of (the Sûdras') hearing and studying (the Veda) and (knowing and performing) (Vedic) matters.”
“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).”
| Source | What it says |
|---|---|
| Rig Veda 10.90 | The four varnas came from the cosmic Man's mouth, arms, thighs and feet |
| Chandogya Upanishad | Evil conduct leads to a low birth |
| Brahma Sutra, with Shankara | The Shudra may not hear or study the Veda |
| The Qur'an | One origin for all; the most honoured is the most righteous |
| The Prophet (ﷺ) | God (﷾) looks at hearts and deeds, not faces or wealth |
| Who leads the prayer | The one who knows the Qur'an best; birth is not on the list |
One origin, one measure
The Qur'an tells all mankind that they come from one male and one female. Nations and tribes exist so people may know one another, and the most honoured with God (﷾) is the most righteous. It calls the believers one brotherhood. It forbids them to mock one another or use insulting names. The Prophet (ﷺ) said God (﷾) looks at hearts and deeds, not at faces or wealth. Abu Dharr, a close Companion, once insulted a man and shamed him over his mother. The Prophet (ﷺ) told him he still had a trait 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).”
“The Believers are but a single Brotherhood: So make peace and reconciliation between your two (contending) brothers; and fear Allah, that ye may receive Mercy.”
“O ye who believe! Let not some men among you laugh at others: It may be that the (latter) are better than the (former): Nor let some women laugh at others: It may be that the (latter are better than the (former): Nor defame nor be sarcastic to each other, nor call each other by (offensive) nicknames: Ill-seeming is a name connoting wickedness, (to be used of one) after he has believed: And those who do not desist are (indeed) doing wrong.”
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.
A slave as ruler, a freed slave as teacher
The Brahma Sutra bars the Shudra even from hearing the Veda. The Prophet (ﷺ) told Muslims to obey an Abyssinian slave if he were put in authority over them. He named Salim, the freed slave of Abu Hudhayfa, as one of four men from whom the Qur'an should be learnt. Umar, the second caliph, called Bilal, a freed African slave, "our master". The prayer is led by the one who knows the Qur'an best, then the Sunnah, then the earliest to emigrate or to accept Islam. Birth is not on the list. Some jurists, Ibn Qudamah among them, use noble descent as a tie-breaker, only between men equal in all of these. He adds that a more pious man may go before the nobler, since honour in religion outweighs worldly honour. And the Qur'an says the places of worship are for Allah (﷾) alone. In the prayer itself the rows stand shoulder to shoulder. Anas reports that each man put his shoulder and foot against his neighbour's. Anyone who becomes Muslim takes his place in that row the same day. Manu, by contrast, counts the Shudra as born once only, and says there is no fifth varna. Under his law a varna comes by birth, so no one can convert into one.
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.
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.
Jabir ibn Abdullah reports that Umar used to say: Abu Bakr is our master, and he set free our master, meaning Bilal.
Abu Mas'ud al-Ansari reports that the Prophet (ﷺ) said: the one who knows the Book of Allah best should lead the people in prayer; if they are equal in it, the one who knows the Sunnah best; if they are equal in that, the earliest to emigrate; and if they are equal in that, the earliest to accept Islam (in another narrator's wording, the eldest).
“"And the places of worship are for Allah (alone): So invoke not any one along with Allah;”
Anas ibn Malik reports that the Prophet (ﷺ) said: straighten your rows, for I see you from behind my back. Anas added that each of them used to put his shoulder against his companion's shoulder and his foot against his companion's foot.
“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).”
Ibn Qudamah sets out who has the best right to lead the prayer: the best reciter of the Qur'an, then the one who knows the law best, then the earliest to emigrate or to accept Islam, then the eldest. If they are equal in all this, the noblest goes first, meaning the highest in lineage, the most excellent in himself and the highest in standing, for which he cites the saying "put Quraysh forward". He adds that the more pious and scrupulous man may be put before the noblest, because honour in religion is better than worldly honour, citing Qur'an 49:13.
Marriage across the lines
The Prophet (ﷺ) advised Fatima bint Qays, a woman of Quraysh, to marry Usama ibn Zayd, the son of his freed slave. She objected at first, then married him and said the marriage was blessed. He asked for Zaynab bint Jahsh, his own cousin, in marriage for Zayd ibn Haritha, a freed slave. The Qur'an told the believers not to resist what Allah (﷾) and His Messenger decide. Abu Hudhayfa, of a leading clan of Quraysh, married his niece to Salim, the freed slave of a woman of Medina. Al-Bukhari put that report under the heading "Equals in religion". The Prophet (ﷺ) said a woman is married for her wealth, her standing, her beauty or her religion, and told men to choose religion. In choosing a spouse, the Qur'an says a believing slave woman is better than an unbelieving woman, however attractive.
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.
“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.”
Aisha reports that Abu Hudhayfa ibn Utba, of the Quraysh clan of Abd Shams and a veteran of Badr, adopted Salim and married him to his niece, Hind bint al-Walid ibn Utba, although Salim was the freed slave of a woman of the Ansar. Al-Bukhari placed this report under the chapter heading "Equals in religion".
Abu Hurayra reports that the Prophet (ﷺ) said a woman is married for four things: her wealth, her family standing, her beauty and her religion; so win the one with religion, or you will be the loser. Al-Bukhari places it in the chapter "Equals in religion".
“Do not marry unbelieving women (idolaters), until they believe: A slave woman who believes is better than an unbelieving woman, even though she allures you. Nor marry (your girls) to unbelievers until they believe: A man slave who believes is better than an unbeliever, even though he allures you. Unbelievers do (but) beckon you to the Fire. But Allah beckons by His Grace to the Garden (of bliss) and forgiveness, and makes His Signs clear to mankind: That they may celebrate His praise.”
Kafa'a: what the four schools actually say
Kafa'a means the suitability of a husband for a wife. All four main schools of Islamic law count it, as Dar al-Ifta notes. Dar al-Ifta is Egypt's official body for religious rulings. The schools differ over what counts. The Maliki school counts religion, and freedom from certain defects. Malik himself is reported as counting religion alone. The Shafi'i school counts religion and uprightness, lineage, freedom, trade and freedom from defects. Ahmad ibn Hanbal is reported as counting religion and lineage only. He is also reported as adding freedom, trade and wealth. The Hanafi school is followed by most South Asian Muslims. It counts lineage among Arabs and the Islam of a man's forefathers among non-Arabs. It also counts freedom, piety, wealth and trade. Its handbook, the Hedaya, makes Quraysh the equals of Quraysh and Arabs the equals of Arabs. So by its rule a non-Arab man is not counted the equal of an Arab woman. That is in the law books, and this page does not deny it. Four things limit it. First, it is a right of the woman and her guardians. The four schools count it as a condition of marriage. They differ over whether it is a condition of the marriage being valid or of its being binding. Ibn Qudamah reports that most scholars, Malik, al-Shafi'i and the Hanafis among them, hold that it is not a condition of a valid marriage. If the woman and all her guardians agree, the marriage stands. Second, a marriage across these lines makes no one an outcaste. Whoever the parents are, their children are Muslims like any other, with no bar in worship or learning. Third, among non-Arabs the Hedaya weighs no lineage at all. In its place it weighs how long a family has been Muslim. Fourth, the ranking of trades followed local custom, as Dar al-Ifta notes. No saying in al-Bukhari or Muslim commands marrying only equals. The one the Hanafi handbook quotes, "marry women only to their equals", was judged weak and without basis by Ibn Abd al-Barr. Kafa'a touches nothing else: not worship, learning, food, the mosque or the next life.
“regard be had to equality with respect to the husband; that is to say, that the husband be the equal of his wife; but it is not necessary that the wife be the equal of the husband”
“Equality is regarded with respect to lineage, this being a source of distinction among mankind; thus it is said, "a Kooraish is the equal of a Kooraish throughout all their tribes;"”
“Ajims, who are neither Kooraishees nor Arabs, are the equals of each other throughout, regard not being had among them to lineage, but to Islam.”
Ibn Qudamah, a Hanbali jurist, reports two views from Ahmad on whether suitability (kafa'a) is a condition of a valid marriage. He calls correct the view that it is not, which he says most scholars hold, Malik, al-Shafi'i and the Hanafis among them: it is a right of the woman and of each guardian, and if they all agree the marriage stands. He cites Qur'an 49:13, Abu Hudhayfa marrying his niece to Salim, a freed slave, the Prophet's (ﷺ) advice to Fatima bint Qays of Quraysh to marry Usama ibn Zayd, and Zayd's marriage to Zaynab bint Jahsh, and he records Ibn Abd al-Barr's judgement that the saying "marry women only to their equals" is weak and without basis. He reports that Malik counted religion alone; that Ahmad counted religion and lineage (in another report also freedom, trade and wealth); that one report from Ahmad puts Quraysh and Banu Hashim above other Arabs, citing the saying that God chose Kinana, Quraysh and Banu Hashim, and another makes all Arabs equals, supported by the Companions' marriages; and that freed slaves' families and non-Arabs are all equals of one another.
Summarises the four schools on suitability (kafa'a) in marriage, citing each school's standard works: the Hanafis count religion, lineage, freedom, piety, trade and wealth; the Shafi'is lineage, freedom from defects, religion and uprightness, trade and freedom; the Hanbalis have two reports from Ahmad, one like the Shafi'is without the defects, the other religion and lineage; the Malikis count likeness in religion and freedom from defects. It says the disagreement among and within the schools shows these features are relative and set by custom, quoting al-Kasani that Abu Hanifa and Abu Yusuf judged trades by the customs of their own people. It explains that where suitability is a condition of a binding marriage rather than a valid one, the marriage is valid and the guardians may object unless they give up that right. It sides with the majority, including the four schools, that suitability is a recognised condition of marriage, whether of its validity or of its being binding, against Sufyan al-Thawri, al-Hasan al-Basri, Hammad and Ibn Hazm, who did not count it.
The Prophet's (ﷺ) family: honour, not rank
Muslims love and honour the family of the Prophet (ﷺ), and many South Asian Syeds trace their line to him. But when he was told to warn his nearest kin, he told his own daughter Fatima he could not help her at all against Allah (﷾). In a long saying in Sahih Muslim, he said that whoever is held back by his deeds will not be hurried forward by his lineage. One rule of law does set his family apart. They may not take the charity of others, which he called the impurities of the people. Al-Nawawi explains the phrase. Charity purifies the givers' wealth and souls, as the Qur'an says, so it is like the water left from washing. The word describes the money, not any person. The rule keeps such money from his family out of honour for them. It is a rule about money. It gives them no priesthood and no rank in worship or learning. And the prayer is led by whoever knows the Qur'an best, not by a man of a particular family.
Abu Hurayra reports that when the verse "warn your nearest kinsmen" (Qur'an 26:214) came down, the Prophet (ﷺ) called out to Quraysh, to his uncle al-Abbas, his aunt Safiyya and his daughter Fatima, telling each that he could not help them at all against Allah; Fatima could ask him for whatever she liked, but he could not help her at all against Allah.
Abu Hurayra reports a longer saying of the Prophet (ﷺ) about good deeds and their reward. Among them: whoever follows a path in search of knowledge, Allah makes easy for him a path to Paradise; and when people gather in a mosque to recite the Qur'an and study it together, tranquillity descends on them, mercy covers them and the angels surround them. It ends: whoever is held back by his deeds will not be hurried forward by his lineage.
Abu Hurayra reports that al-Hasan ibn Ali, the Prophet's (ﷺ) grandson, put a date from the charity in his mouth, and the Prophet told him to throw it out, asking whether he did not know that they do not eat the charity. In Sahih Muslim it stands under the heading on zakat being forbidden to the Prophet and his family.
Abd al-Muttalib ibn Rabi'a reports that his father and al-Abbas sent him and al-Fadl ibn Abbas, of the Prophet's (ﷺ) family, to ask to be made collectors of the charity so as to earn a share and be able to marry. The Prophet said that charity does not befit the family of Muhammad, for it is the impurities of people. He had both young men married, and their dowers paid from the fifth (khumus) instead.
Abu Mas'ud al-Ansari reports that the Prophet (ﷺ) said: the one who knows the Book of Allah best should lead the people in prayer; if they are equal in it, the one who knows the Sunnah best; if they are equal in that, the earliest to emigrate; and if they are equal in that, the earliest to accept Islam (in another narrator's wording, the eldest).
On the words "it is only the impurities of the people", al-Nawawi says they give the reason charity is forbidden to Banu Hashim and Banu al-Muttalib: it is for their honour, to keep them clear of the impurities. The phrase means that charity purifies the givers' wealth and souls, as Qur'an 9:103 says, so it is like the water left from washing off dirt. He adds that the hadith rules out their working as charity collectors for a collector's share.
“Of their goods, take alms, that so thou mightest purify and sanctify them; and pray on their behalf. Verily thy prayers are a source of security for them: And Allah is One Who heareth and knoweth.”
The replies, answered
Sachar Committee Report (2006), chapter 10
Reports that studies of Indian Muslims find descent-based ranks, with hierarchy, marriage within the group and hereditary trades. It describes the ashraf (families claiming descent from Arabia, Persia, Turkistan or Afghanistan, and converts from high castes), the ajlaf (converts from working castes such as weavers, tailors and barbers) and the arzal (converts from castes treated as untouchable), citing the Census of 1901, and similar ranked groups in Kerala and Andhra Pradesh. It records that the Mandal Commission (1980) did not use caste to identify backward classes among non-Hindus, because those religions are egalitarian in outlook, and used former untouchability and hereditary occupation instead, while accepting that caste-like features were found among non-Hindus too.
Cited for
Caste is Indian custom, not Hindu doctrine. Indian Muslims have their ashraf, ajlaf and arzal, marry only within their biradari, and some have kept low-ranked Muslims out of mosques. Islam did not free them, so it offers nothing that Hinduism lacks.
The response
The facts are not in dispute; their source is. The Sachar Committee's own description shows the ranks follow the castes the converts came from, and the claims of families to foreign descent. Nothing in the Qur'an or the Prophet's (ﷺ) teaching sets them up. The Qur'an measures honour by righteousness alone and says the places of worship are for Allah (﷾) alone. The Prophet (ﷺ) gave the leading of the prayer to the one who knows the Qur'an best. He rebuked a close Companion for shaming a man over his mother. So a Muslim who keeps caste can be corrected from his own scripture. The Hindu texts rank births themselves. India's Mandal Commission, as the same report records, declined to use caste to identify backward classes among non-Hindus. Its reason was that those religions are egalitarian in outlook.
Where it lands — Caste among Muslims is a sin against their scripture; caste among Hindus is taught by theirs. The same custom has opposite standing in the two religions.
Dar al-Ifta al-Misriyya, research fatwa on kafa'a (2015)
Summarises the four schools on suitability (kafa'a) in marriage, citing each school's standard works: the Hanafis count religion, lineage, freedom, piety, trade and wealth; the Shafi'is lineage, freedom from defects, religion and uprightness, trade and freedom; the Hanbalis have two reports from Ahmad, one like the Shafi'is without the defects, the other religion and lineage; the Malikis count likeness in religion and freedom from defects. It says the disagreement among and within the schools shows these features are relative and set by custom, quoting al-Kasani that Abu Hanifa and Abu Yusuf judged trades by the customs of their own people. It explains that where suitability is a condition of a binding marriage rather than a valid one, the marriage is valid and the guardians may object unless they give up that right. It sides with the majority, including the four schools, that suitability is a recognised condition of marriage, whether of its validity or of its being binding, against Sufyan al-Thawri, al-Hasan al-Basri, Hammad and Ibn Hazm, who did not count it.
Cited for
Islamic law itself ranks people by birth. The schools weigh lineage and trade in marriage. In the Hanafi books a weaver is not the equal of a jeweller's or money-changer's daughter. A man whose grandfather was not Muslim is not the equal of a woman whose grandfather was. That is jati in Arabic dress.
The response
Kafa'a is real, and the schools differ over it, as the page sets out above. But it is not jati. First, it is a right, not a wall. Most scholars hold that if the woman and her guardians agree, the marriage stands. The Prophet (ﷺ) himself matched a woman of Quraysh with the son of a freed slave. He also asked for his own cousin in marriage for a freed slave. Second, it makes no one an outcaste. Whoever the parents are, their children are Muslims like any other. Manu, by contrast, makes the son of a Shudra father and a Brahmin mother a Chandala, "the lowest of men" (10.12). Third, the Maliki school counts religion, and Malik is reported as counting nothing else. Al-Bukhari titled his chapter "Equals in religion". No saying in al-Bukhari or Muslim commands marrying only equals. The one the Hanafi handbook quotes for it was judged weak and without basis by Ibn Abd al-Barr. Fourth, among non-Arabs the Hedaya weighs no lineage at all. In its place it weighs whether a man's father and grandfather were Muslims. It does rank Arab descent above non-Arab, and South Asian families who claim Arab descent can point to that. But that rule governs one choice in marriage, and the woman and her guardians may waive it. The ranking of trades followed local custom. For a new Muslim, the Hanafi rule lets a guardian object to him as a husband for a woman whose father was already a Muslim. It never keeps him from the mosque, the front row or the Qur'an, and the Prophet's (ﷺ) first Companions were all converts. Nothing in kafa'a touches worship, learning the Qur'an, food, touch or the next life. Varna, by contrast, fixes duty, learning and worship by birth.
Where it lands — Kafa'a is a waivable right of the woman and her guardians concerning a husband's suitability, disputed among the schools themselves. It is not a rank before God (﷾), and it bars no one from worship, learning or the common table.
Sahih Muslim 1069a — Kitab al-Zakat (The Book of Zakat), hadith 1069a
Abu Hurayra reports that al-Hasan ibn Ali, the Prophet's (ﷺ) grandson, put a date from the charity in his mouth, and the Prophet told him to throw it out, asking whether he did not know that they do not eat the charity. In Sahih Muslim it stands under the heading on zakat being forbidden to the Prophet and his family.
Cited for
The Prophet's (ﷺ) own descendants form a hereditary nobility. The law sets his family apart, and in South Asia the Syeds head the ashraf and marry only among themselves. That is a Brahmin class by another name.
The response
Muslims honour the Prophet's (ﷺ) family out of love for him, but he gave them no rank before God (﷾). When he was told to warn his nearest kin, he told his own daughter Fatima that he could not help her at all against Allah (﷾). He said that whoever is held back by his deeds will not be hurried forward by his lineage. The Qur'an condemns by name his own uncle, Abu Lahab, of the same clan. One rule of law does set his family apart. They may not take the charity of others, which he called the impurities of the people. Al-Nawawi explains the phrase. Charity purifies the givers' wealth and souls, as the Qur'an says, so it is like the water left from washing. The word describes the money, not any person. The rule keeps such money from his family out of honour for them. It is a rule about money. It gives them no priesthood and no rank in worship or learning. The prayer is led by whoever knows the Qur'an best, and anyone may learn and teach the Qur'an. Where a Syed family refuses a suitor for his descent, the schools leave that to the woman and her guardians. The Prophet (ﷺ) himself asked for his cousin Zaynab in marriage for a freed slave. The Brahmin's standing, by contrast, is his by birth, and the Shudra was barred even from hearing the Veda.
Where it lands — Descent from the Prophet (ﷺ) brings love and respect, but no rank before God (﷾) and no priesthood.
Ibn Qudamah, al-Mughni: suitability (kafa'a) in marriage
Ibn Qudamah, a Hanbali jurist, reports two views from Ahmad on whether suitability (kafa'a) is a condition of a valid marriage. He calls correct the view that it is not, which he says most scholars hold, Malik, al-Shafi'i and the Hanafis among them: it is a right of the woman and of each guardian, and if they all agree the marriage stands. He cites Qur'an 49:13, Abu Hudhayfa marrying his niece to Salim, a freed slave, the Prophet's (ﷺ) advice to Fatima bint Qays of Quraysh to marry Usama ibn Zayd, and Zayd's marriage to Zaynab bint Jahsh, and he records Ibn Abd al-Barr's judgement that the saying "marry women only to their equals" is weak and without basis. He reports that Malik counted religion alone; that Ahmad counted religion and lineage (in another report also freedom, trade and wealth); that one report from Ahmad puts Quraysh and Banu Hashim above other Arabs, citing the saying that God chose Kinana, Quraysh and Banu Hashim, and another makes all Arabs equals, supported by the Companions' marriages; and that freed slaves' families and non-Arabs are all equals of one another.
Cited for
Islam puts Arabs on top. The law books rank Quraysh above other Arabs and Arabs above non-Arabs in marriage. Indian Muslims who claim Arab or Persian descent call themselves ashraf, the noble.
The response
On honour with God (﷾), the Qur'an and the Prophet (ﷺ) say the opposite. Nations and tribes exist so people may know one another, and the most honoured with God (﷾) is the most righteous. God (﷾) does not look at faces or wealth. The Prophet (ﷺ) told Muslims to obey an Abyssinian slave put over them, and named a freed slave as a teacher of the Qur'an. He rebuked a Companion for speaking ill of a man's mother, who was not an Arab. Umar, of Quraysh, called Bilal, a freed African slave, "our master". The ranking of Arabs in some jurists' rules on suitability is a disputed rule about one choice, which the woman and her guardians may waive. Ibn Qudamah himself records a second report that all Arabs are equals. He cites the Companions' marriages across these lines. Two sayings are quoted for Quraysh. In the first, the Prophet (ﷺ) said God (﷾) chose Kinana from the sons of Ishmael. He chose Quraysh from Kinana, Banu Hashim from Quraysh, and him from Banu Hashim. Ibn Qudamah cites it in support of one report from Ahmad, which ranks Quraysh and Banu Hashim above other Arabs in marriage. Its chapter heading in Sahih Muslim is the merit of the Prophet's (ﷺ) lineage. It is about the line God (﷾) chose for His Prophet (ﷺ), not the worth of each member. The Qur'an condemns by name the Prophet's (ﷺ) own uncle Abu Lahab, of Banu Hashim. In the second, the Prophet (ﷺ) said that rulership is in Quraysh, and God (﷾) casts down whoever opposes them. That holds as long as they uphold the religion. That concerns one office of state. It gives no one of Quraysh a claim on the Qur'an or a rank in the next life. And the Prophet (ﷺ) himself put Usama, the son of his freed slave Zayd, in command of an army, and defended him when people objected.
Where it lands — Arab birth brings no honour with God (﷾). The Qur'an's measure is righteousness, and the Prophet's (ﷺ) own appointments show it. The one office the sayings reserve to Quraysh is the headship of the state, and the saying ties even that to their upholding the religion.
Ambedkar, Pakistan or the Partition of India (1945), ch. X
In the chapter "Social Stagnation", Ambedkar notes that Islam speaks of brotherhood, but says caste has remained among Indian Muslims. He quotes the Census of 1901 for Bengal: Muslims there divided themselves into ashraf, ajlaf and arzal; other Muslims would not associate with the arzal, who were forbidden the mosque and the public burial ground; and trade groups were often as strictly endogamous as Hindu castes. He concludes that Muslim society in India has the same social evils as Hindu society. Later in the chapter he argues that Islam cannot be the reason Indian Muslims have not reformed, since Muslims elsewhere were reforming, and blames their position in a predominantly Hindu social and political environment, which he says makes them insist on preserving everything Islamic, whether helpful or harmful. The same book is severely critical of Islam: in the same passage he says slavery, while it existed, drew much of its support from Islam.
Cited for
Ambedkar, the Dalit leader, found that Indian Muslims keep caste and even untouchability. He said Muslim society in India has all the social evils of Hindu society.
The response
Ambedkar did report this, quoting the 1901 census of Bengal, and this page accepts that such customs existed. But his evidence was a census of custom, not a verse or a saying. He opened the passage by noting that Islam speaks of brotherhood. He then showed that caste had remained among Indian Muslims all the same. He was a severe critic of Islam: in the same passage he says slavery drew much of its support from Islam. Yet when he asked why Indian Muslims had not reformed, he rejected the answer that Islam was to blame, since Muslims elsewhere were reforming. He blamed their position in a predominantly Hindu environment, which, he said, made them cling to everything Islamic, helpful or harmful. Hindu caste he traced to the shastras. Hindus keep caste, he wrote, because they are deeply religious. The real remedy, he said, is to destroy belief in the sanctity of the shastras. This page's test does not rest on Ambedkar either way: it asks what each religion's own scripture teaches.
Where it lands — Ambedkar reported caste among Muslims from a census of custom, and he criticised Islam and Hinduism alike. His verdicts settle nothing either way; each religion's own scripture does.
Bhagavad Gita 18:46-47 — chapter 18, verses 46-47
“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.”
Cited for
Varna follows a person's qualities and work (guna and karma), not birth. The Gita ties duty to nature, and the reformers who opposed birth-caste were faithful to it. So Hindu scripture does not teach caste by birth either.
The response
The scriptures themselves tie varna to birth. The Chandogya Upanishad, in the shruti, makes birth as a Brahmin or as a Chandala the reward or punishment for conduct in a former life. The Gita speaks of those "of sinful birth". Telang's note records that Shankara took the Vaishyas and Shudras named there as examples. Sridhara did not, and he read the phrase as low birth. The Brahma Sutra and Shankara bar the Shudra from hearing or studying the Veda, so no Shudra could show Brahmin qualities by learning it. Those who read varna by qualities, then and now, have to read against these texts and their classical teachers.
Where it lands — The shruti, the Gita as Shankara read it, and the Brahma Sutra rank people by birth. Some passages in the epics look to conduct, but the classical teachers and the law books ruled by birth.
Bhagavad Gita 5:18 — chapter 5, verse 18
“The wise look upon a Brâhmana possessed of learning and humility, on a cow, an elephant, a dog, and a Svapâka, as alike.”
Cited for
Our scriptures also look past birth. The Gita says the wise see a learned Brahmin, a cow, an elephant, a dog and an outcaste as alike. The Chandogya Upanishad accepts Satyakama, whose father was unknown, as a pupil because he told the truth. The Upanishads teach one Self in all.
The response
The Gita's verse is about seeing the one Brahman in every being. Telang's note explains that they are alike "as manifestations of Brahman, though of different qualities and classes". Shankara, who taught the one Self, is the same teacher who barred the Shudra from hearing the Veda. On Satyakama, the Brahma Sutra and Shankara read the story the other way. The teacher accepted the boy after concluding from his truthfulness that he was not a Shudra. Shankara cites the teacher's words: "None who is not a Brâhmana would thus speak out." So the story became a proof text for keeping the Shudra out. Seeing one Self in all did not open the Veda to the Shudra. The Qur'an's equality is a rule for this life as well: the same row, the same Book, and no birth that bars anyone from either.
Where it lands — The texts that see one Self in all left the ranks of birth in place. The classical teachers read the Satyakama story as keeping the Shudra out. Islam's equality governs worship and learning, and no birth bars anyone from either.
Perspectives
Caste is Indian custom, found among Muslims too
Caste as it is lived today, jati and marriage within one's own community, is Indian social custom rather than the teaching of the Vedas. In the Gita a person's duty follows his own nature. It also says the wise see the same in a learned Brahmin and an outcaste. Indian Muslims keep the same customs. They rank ashraf above ajlaf and arzal, and marry within their biradari. Their own law weighs lineage and trade in marriage. So caste is an Indian problem, not a Hindu one, and conversion to Islam does not end it.
The common Hindu reply, as Hindu critics of conversion put it
Indian Muslims keep descent-based ranks, marry within them and follow hereditary trades. Indian government reports, the 1901 census and a 2016 survey record this.
Rebuttal
The facts are true, and this page does not deny them. The ranks follow the castes the converts came from. Nothing in the Qur'an or the Prophet's (ﷺ) teaching sets them up. Honour by foreign descent goes against them too: God (﷾) looks at hearts and deeds, not at faces (Muslim 2564).
Several schools of Islamic law weigh lineage, and some weigh trade, in a husband's suitability for marriage.
Rebuttal
That is true, and the schools differ over it. But it is a right of the woman and her guardians, and they may waive it. Most scholars hold that it is not a condition of a valid marriage. The ranking of trades followed local custom, as Dar al-Ifta notes. It bars no one from worship or learning.
The Gita ties each person's duty to his own nature, which many Hindus read as qualities rather than birth.
Rebuttal
Many do read it so. But the Chandogya Upanishad makes birth itself a reward or a punishment. Shankara took the Vaishyas and Shudras named in the Gita's verse on "sinful birth" as examples of it. He still barred the Shudra from the Veda.
The Gita says the wise look on a learned Brahmin, a cow, an elephant, a dog and an outcaste as alike. Many Hindus read this as rejecting rank by birth.
Rebuttal
Grant that the wise see all beings alike. Shankara, the teacher of the one Self, still barred the Shudra from hearing the Veda. Seeing one Self in all did not open the Veda to the Shudra.
Sikh: all are from the one Light
The Gurus rejected caste. The Bhagat Kabir, whose hymns are in the Guru Granth Sahib, asks: from the one Light the whole universe welled up, so who is good and who is bad? Sikhs eat together in the langar, whatever their birth.
From the one Light the whole universe welled up, so who is good and who is bad by birth?
Rebuttal
Islam agrees fully: mankind comes from one pair, and the most honoured with Allah (﷾) is the most righteous. Every Muslim stands in the same row of prayer, shoulder to shoulder. So caste is not where the two teachings part. They part on whose word the scripture is, and the Qur'an offers its test.
The Islamic perspective
Caste among Muslims is a custom carried over from the society around them, joined to claims of honour by foreign descent. Both break Islam's own texts. The Qur'an measures honour by righteousness alone, and the Prophet (ﷺ) gave rule, teaching and marriage to freed slaves and their sons. Suitability in marriage (kafa'a) is a disputed, waivable right concerning a husband, not a rank before God (﷾). Hindu caste, by contrast, is taught by the Hindu scriptures and their classical teachers.
The Qur'an says mankind comes from one pair and that the most honoured with God (﷾) is the most righteous.
The Prophet (ﷺ) said God (﷾) looks at hearts and deeds, not at faces or wealth.
The Prophet (ﷺ) told Muslims to obey even an Abyssinian slave in authority, and named a freed slave as a teacher of the Qur'an. He gave leadership of the prayer by knowledge, not birth.
The Prophet (ﷺ) matched a woman of Quraysh with the son of a freed slave. A Qurashi family married its daughter to a freed slave, a report al-Bukhari put under "Equals in religion".
Most scholars hold that suitability in marriage is a right the woman and her guardians may waive, not a condition of a valid marriage. The Maliki school counts religion above all.
Descent from the Prophet (ﷺ) brings no rank before God (﷾). He told his own daughter he could not help her against Allah (﷾), and said lineage does not hurry forward one whose deeds hold him back.
Anyone who becomes Muslim stands shoulder to shoulder in the same row of prayer as every other Muslim.
A Muslim who keeps caste disobeys his scripture, while Hindu caste rests on the Hindu scriptures and their classical teachers.