Contrary to the narrative often repeated in modern discourse, ancient India did not possess a cultural framework dedicated to suppressing the weak or denying education based on birth. A careful reading of historical records, archaeological evidence, and foreign travel accounts shows that India’s educational institutions were open, inclusive, and internationally respected. The systematic portrayal of India as a land of rigid “Brahminical” oppression arose much later — through deliberate distortions introduced during the Mughal and British colonial periods.
Ancient Universities: Evidence of Inclusivity
Takshashila (Taxila), functioning from at least the 6th century BCE, was a cosmopolitan hub where subjects ranged from Vedic literature to medicine, politics, astronomy, and commerce. It hosted students from China, Persia, Greece, and Central Asia, proving that it was not restricted to Indian Brahmins.
Nalanda University (5th–12th century CE) was the world’s first fully residential university with over 10,000 students and 2,000 teachers. Pilgrim-scholars like Xuanzang and Yijing documented that learners came from China, Korea, Tibet, Sri Lanka, and beyond. Its curriculum spanned Buddhist philosophy, Sanskrit grammar, medicine, logic, and the sciences — with no evidence of caste-based exclusion.
Vikramashila, Vallabhi, Odantapuri, and Somapura flourished as Buddhist universities, entirely outside the Brahminical order, yet open to Indians and foreigners alike.
The presence of such multinational student bodies, many of whom were outside the Indian varna system altogether, is clear proof that India’s educational ethos was based on merit and willingness to learn, not on birth-based privilege.
Mughal Disruption: Physical and Cultural Loss
From the 12th century onwards, Islamic invasions severely damaged India’s knowledge network:
Bakhtiyar Khilji’s campaigns destroyed Nalanda, Vikramashila, and Odantapuri, burning vast libraries and erasing centuries of accumulated wisdom.
Gurukulas and Buddhist monasteries were dismantled or replaced with madrasas.
Court chroniclers often depicted Brahmins and Hindu scholars as outdated to justify the Islamic ruler’s “civilizing” role.
This was not the creation of caste but the dismantling of a pluralistic education system, removing the platforms that had naturally encouraged cross-cultural learning.
British Colonial Engineering: Turning Fluidity into Rigidity
When the British took control, the approach shifted from destruction to systematic narrative control:
Mistranslation and Selective Quoting: British Orientalists and missionaries emphasized the harshest lines from texts like Manusmriti while ignoring egalitarian philosophies from the Upanishads and epics, presenting them as the “core” of Indian society.
Inventing “Brahmanism” as a Pejorative: They separated Hindus into “oppressive Brahmins” and “oppressed non-Brahmins,” planting seeds of division.
Census Codification: Colonial censuses turned a flexible, profession-linked varna system into a rigid, pan-Indian caste grid, which they could administratively control.
Educational Overwrite: Macaulay’s 1835 Minute on Education dismantled indigenous schooling and promoted Western curricula, erasing the memory of India’s inclusive intellectual past.
The Creation of Artificial Superiority
Before Mughal and British interventions, caste identities did not function as fixed hierarchies across the subcontinent. Local traditions, regional occupations, and merit-based learning made social boundaries more fluid.
It was colonial governance — supported by earlier Mughal propaganda — that hardened these identities, creating a sense of superiority in some castes and perpetual victimhood in others, dividing society for easier control.
Timeline: From Inclusive Knowledge Culture to Engineered Social Division in India
I. Flourishing Open Knowledge Culture (6th century BCE – 12th century CE)
Key Features:
Takshashila (6th century BCE or earlier): International hub with students from China, Persia, Greece, and Central Asia.
Nalanda (5th–12th century CE): First fully residential university, ~10,000 students and 2,000 teachers from China, Korea, Tibet, Sri Lanka, and beyond.
Vikramashila, Vallabhi, Odantapuri, Somapura: Buddhist universities open to all, regardless of caste or nationality.
Education was based on merit, discipline, and intellectual curiosity, not fixed birth privilege.
Caste existed, but was fluid and locally defined — mobility between professions was possible.
Impact:
No evidence of systematic, pan-Indian oppression of lower castes.
Multinational learning culture made India a respected intellectual destination.
II. Disruption by Islamic Invasions (12th – 16th centuries)
Events:
Destruction of major universities by military campaigns (Bakhtiyar Khilji, c. 1193 CE).
Burning of libraries erased centuries of philosophical, scientific, and medical knowledge.
Gurukulas and monasteries dismantled; replaced by madrasas focusing on Islamic theology.
Court historians portrayed Hindu scholars, especially Brahmins, as outdated — sowing seeds of anti-Hindu sentiment.
Social Change Triggered:
Many poor and marginalized Hindus converted to Islam, often for economic or social security under Islamic rule.
This created mutual suspicion:
Some upper and wealthy Hindu groups began to see converts as “outsiders” or “traitors.”
Converts (now Muslims) sometimes identified with invader authority, deepening mistrust.
III. British Colonial Narrative Engineering (18th – 20th centuries)
Tactics Used:
1. Mistranslation & Selective Quoting: Harsh lines from texts like Manusmriti were highlighted, egalitarian Upanishadic and epic content ignored.
2. Inventing “Brahmanism”: Made into a pejorative label to pit Hindus against Brahmins.
3. Freezing Caste: Colonial census turned fluid, profession-based varna into rigid, hereditary caste categories.
4. Educational Overwrite: Macaulay’s 1835 policy dismantled indigenous learning networks, replacing them with Western-focused education.
Resulting Social Dynamics:
By coding caste into law and administration, the British gave certain upper castes legal and symbolic dominance.
These upper castes now appeared “naturally superior” because they retained better access to new colonial jobs and education.
Historical grievances deepened:
Many upper-caste Hindus saw Muslims as historical aggressors because of the earlier Mughal period.
Lower castes who had been socially or economically linked to Muslim communities were sometimes distrusted, fueling intra-Hindu resentment.
IV. The Engineered Cycle of Division
1. Ancient openness destroyed → Loss of shared cultural and educational spaces.
2. Invader narratives painted Brahmins and Hindu elites as oppressive.
3. Conversions during Islamic rule created religious and economic fault lines.
4. British policy froze caste & rewrote history → Making caste superiority and inferiority a permanent, visible structure.
5. Over centuries, these divisions mutually reinforced hatred between groups — something absent in the ancient university era.
Conclusion
The myth of eternal “Brahminical oppression” ignores the fact that ancient Indian learning centers were among the most inclusive in world history. Social division and caste rigidity were not the default state of Hindu society but the byproduct of two historical forces:
1. The physical destruction and cultural propaganda of the Mughal era.
2. The bureaucratic codification and psychological conditioning of the British colonial period.
The resulting superiority complex in some Hindu castes and the resentment towards communities linked with Islamic rule were historically induced fractures, not original features of India’s cultural DNA.