Hello friends.
It seems the best understanding of these questions
is found directly in the Tipitaka
a) the Ariyan race:
there is absolutely no reference to an Aryan `race' but only as an
adjective denoting a noble person of spiritual attainment and
understanding, starting from the acquisition of `Right view' as a
stream-entrer.
According to an Indian archeologist friend, there is no
Real evidence of any Aryan Invasion' although it is a popular theme.
The obvious enough presence of a fairer complexion among north Indian
May be a result of local climate (India stretches quite a distance,
north south)
or, (another wild speculation) the mixing of Greeks. E.LaMotte
(history of Buddhism) claims that at the first few centuries (a.c.)
there were a large number of them in the gangatic planes, one may
well wonder where have they all gone
b) the castes:
In a few references to the `ancient Brahmins' the Blessed one
asserts a positive tradition; he also asserts the valid existence of
the four castes
.these are based upon natural distinctions and human tendencies, as
we might naturally say of some one `he's a born merchant' etc
even in present day India most people are contented to live within
their caste world.
But off course there is much to criticize, and The Buddha does so
more than once,
Against the way the caste system is held up (as hereditary)
And the pride or abuse that accompanies
The caste differences are about one-pointed ness and perseverance,
which are the
Characteristics of the Kshatria, (mostly politics, military and
agriculture)
While the Brahmins tend to involve themselves in several parallel
but different activities
At the same time.(this , if I remember correctly, from R. Svoboda)
There where former Buddhas from both castes.
The point to make, never redundant,
probably . both these `well known observations'
are infer/superiority complexes enacted