Breaking down the question
The statement asserts that caste is not confined to Hindus but reappears, in caste-like forms, among non-Hindu religious communities in India. The question asks you to discuss this with examples — so it is both an argument to be substantiated and a claim to be examined. The examiner wants concrete evidence from Muslim, Christian, Sikh, Jain and other communities.
The analytical core is to separate caste as a Hindu religious ideology of purity and pollution from caste as a lived social structure of endogamy and hierarchy. The persistence of caste-like formations among non-Hindus shows that caste in India is a broader social phenomenon that converts carry with them, even where their faith formally rejects it.
How to approach it
Begin by noting the theoretical tension: several non-Hindu faiths preach equality, yet caste-like divisions survive among their Indian followers. Define what makes a formation caste-like — endogamy, hereditary membership, ranking and sometimes untouchability. Then supply examples community by community — Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists — before offering a brief explanation and verdict. The note on the features of caste system supports the framework.
Model answer
Although caste is rooted in Hindu religious ideology, empirical study shows that caste-like formations persist among India's non-Hindu communities as well, despite the egalitarian teachings of their faiths. A formation may be called caste-like when it exhibits endogamy, hereditary and ascriptive membership, a sense of hierarchy, and in some cases practices of social distance resembling untouchability.
Among Indian Muslims, scholars such as Imtiaz Ahmad have documented a threefold division into Ashraf, the claimed descendants of foreign and upper-status groups; Ajlaf, the middle converts from clean occupational castes; and Arzal, the lowest, descended from formerly untouchable groups and still subject to exclusion. These strata are largely endogamous and hierarchically ordered, and the Arzal face discrimination even in access to some mosques and burial grounds — a clear caste-like pattern within a religion that proclaims equality of believers.
Indian Christianity displays similar divisions. Converts frequently retained their prior caste identities, so that Dalit Christians remain socially distinct from upper-caste converts. Instances of separate seating in churches, separate cemeteries and endogamy between Dalit and Syrian or upper-caste Christians, especially in the south, illustrate the survival of hierarchy after conversion.
Sikhism was founded on an explicit rejection of caste, yet caste identities such as Jat, Khatri, Ramgarhia and the Dalit-origin Mazhabi and Ramdasia Sikhs persist. The existence of separate gurdwaras and endogamous marriage among these groups shows caste-like formations within the Panth. Jains and Buddhists too retain sub-community divisions and endogamy, and neo-Buddhist converts from Dalit backgrounds often continue to face the disabilities of their earlier status.
Two points give this analytical balance. First, caste among non-Hindus is generally weaker and less elaborate than the Hindu varna-jati order; the ritual idiom of purity and pollution is muted, and hierarchy rests more on descent and occupation than on scriptural sanction. Second, its persistence is best explained by the fact that converts brought their social structure with them and remained embedded in a wider caste society, so conversion changed belief without dissolving inherited social ties.
In sum, caste-like formations are indeed present across non-Hindu communities, confirming that caste in India operates as a pervasive social structure of endogamy and hierarchy that transcends any single religion, even as its intensity and religious grounding vary from that of Hindu caste.
Examiner's perspective
For a 10-mark discuss the examiner wants the claim substantiated with community-specific examples, not a general essay on caste. Naming the Ashraf-Ajlaf-Arzal division, Dalit Christians, and caste among Sikhs and Buddhists demonstrates genuine empirical knowledge, and citing Imtiaz Ahmad adds weight.
The higher band rewards analytical balance: distinguishing caste-like formations by endogamy and hierarchy, explaining their persistence through conversion within a caste society, and noting that they are usually weaker than the Hindu order. A precise, example-led structure in disciplined British prose separates a strong script from a merely assertive one.