Caste and its Changing Pattern: Main Points

Caste and its Changing Pattern: Main Points

[Citation: Gaurang R. Sahay, Caste and its Changing Pattern: Main Points (2011, Unpublished)]

Caste is one of the most significant social structures of society in India. It denotes a system of social stratification that traditionally consists of hierarchically ranked hereditary endogamous and occupational social groups. Caste is generally believed to be an ancient, abiding, and unique Indian (Hindu) institution sustained by a complex cultural ideology. This cultural ideology, that is traced back to an oral tradition preserved in the Rigveda (dating from perhaps 1000 BCE), is religious in nature and represents an ancient four-fold hierarchical arrangement of categories called the varnas (Brahmins, Kshatriya, Vaishyas and Shudras in this order) which are believed to be invariant, permanent, unchangeable and present throughout in the Indian subcontinent. In the varna framework, the Brahmins, creator of the ideology, assigned every good thing for themselves, directly or indirectly: noble identity, twice-born status, sacerdotal authority, and command over the other varnas, and allocated most menial and degrading occupations to the Shudras. Under this pan Indian ideological framework, the institution of caste consists of many region specific hierarchically ranked caste groups (officially around 4,500).

        Caste has long been a subject of discussion. It was extensively discussed in the classical literature of Hinduism (such as Manusmriti or the Manavdharmashastra) that provided different explanations and justifications for the system. However, a theoretical conceptualization of caste started only with the advent of social science. Now we have different kinds of conceptual understanding of the system that can be broadly grouped together on the basis of logical and factual similarities into two larger theoretical frameworks which can be called as ‘hierarchy thesis’ and ‘difference thesis’. Hierarchy thesis, that is primarily a book-view, brings out the traditional or ritual based hierarchical character of the system; whereas difference thesis, which is based on the facts from the field, brings out the contested character of caste hierarchy, shows up its discrete character of caste and understands caste as a system of differentiation.

       The institution of caste is generally considered to be a unique structural form of social inequality. On the basis of caste affiliation it places certain sections of people into dominating position, and others into subordinate position. The system uses inbuilt institutional mechanisms for this purpose. One of those mechanisms is the jajmani system. People in subordinate position go through a number of exploitative situations which are more often than not camouflaged by caste based ideological indoctrination.

     In the past, there have been many efforts to erase or reduce caste inequalities. Those efforts were mainly in the form of social movements or protests. Such efforts acquired wide ranging legitimacy when India became a democratic secular republic after Independence in 1947, and, accordingly, the government of India introduced some far reaching policies of social justice to bring about equality among castes. Two of them – land reforms and positive discrimination or affirmative action – are the most noteworthy. These efforts along with other measures of modernisation process in India, which, in fact, started with the British Rule, have been transforming caste from a hierarchical structure into a differentiated structure. The main points of the lecture along with important readings are as follows:

Meaning of Caste

First of all, it were Portuguese observers who, in the middle of the 16^th century, used the word casta, means purity of breed, (from Latin castus, ‘chaste’) to describe the differentiated character of Hindu society. Subsequently, this word was translated into English language as caste and has been widely used to make sense of the social organisation of the Hindu Society. Caste is generally believed to be an ancient, abiding, and unique Hindu system of ideas and values that categorises Hindus into hierarchically ranked hereditarily endogamous occupational groups. This system is upheld by a complex cultural ideology. The framework of this cultural ideology is derived from the Varna system that is made up of four varnas: 1. Brahmin, 2. Kshtriya, 3. Vaishya, and 4. Shudra. The four varnas, together with the division of the individual life cycle into four stages or ashrams – Brahmacharya (the years of learning and extreme discipline), Grahasthya (householdership), Vanaprastha (retirement), and Sannyasa (renunciation of all worldly bonds) is considered an archetypical blueprint for ideal Hindu way of life which is called Varnashrama dharma.

Features of the Caste System

1. Hierarchical division of society based on the religious principle of the superiority of the pure over the impure
2. Restrictions on feeding and social intercourse
3. Civil and religious disabilities and privileges
4. Religion based division of labour
5. Lack of unrestricted choice of occupation
6. Restriction on marriage
7. Caste as a closed group characterised by changelessness  
    

The Issues that Determine Position of a Caste in Caste Hierarchy

1. The nature and item of its dietary
2. Acceptance and refusal of water and food from other castes
3. The ritual it performs
4. The custom it observes
5. Its traditional privileges and disabilities
6. The myth of its origin

Sources of Change in the Caste System in Pre-modern India

1. Fluidity of the political system
2. The availability of marginal land due to static demographic situation
3. Sanskritisation

The Concept of Sanskritisation

The concept of Sanskritisation refers to ‘a process by which a ‘low’ Hindu caste or tribal or other group changes its customs, ritual, ideology, and way of life in the direction of a high, frequently, ‘twice born’ caste. Generally such changes are followed by a claim to a higher position in the caste hierarchy than that traditionally conceded to a claimant caste by the local community (Srinivas 1966: 6). Srinivas further adds: ‘While the sources of mobility lay in the political and economic systems, Sanskritization provided a traditional idiom for the expression of such mobility’ (Srinivas 1991: 315).

The Concept of Dominant Caste

According to M. N. Srinivas, ‘A caste may be said to be ‘dominant’ when it preponderates numerically over the other castes, and when it also wields preponderant economic and political power. A large and powerful caste group can be more easily dominant if its position in the local caste hierarchy is not too low’ (Srinivas 2002: 75). Srinivas further adds two more criteria to the concept: ‘the number of educated persons in a caste and the occupations they pursue’ (ibid.: 75).

Sources of Change in the Caste System in during the British Rule

1. The introduction of a single political rule straddling the entire subcontinent
2. The introduction of formal bureaucratic and military organisations
3. The land survey
4. The introduction of tenurial reforms
5. The introduction of private ownership to land which made land saleable
6. Making new opportunities in towns and cities available
7. The introduction of the concept of equality of all before the law
8. Providing right to everyone not to be imprisoned without resorting to due legal process
9. Introducing the freedom to choose, practice and propagate one’s religion and culture
10. Making suttee, human sacrifice and human slavery illegal

Sources of Change in the Caste System after Independence in 1947

The Independent India strengthened further the process of modernisation initiated by the British rule by adopting democratic system of governance and model of capitalist economy for development, and implementing various majors of social change such as abolition of untouchability, Land Reforms, Green Revolution, Affirmative Action policies such as reservation of jobs for lower castes (the Scheduled Castes and Backward Castes) in government or public sector institutions, seats in educational institutions and political bodies such as Parliament, Assemblies and Panchayats, etc.

The Category of ‘Scheduled Caste’

The category ‘Scheduled Caste’ was first brought into use during the British rule by The Government of India Act, 1935. The Government of India (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1936, further clarified the category and specified a number of castes as ‘Scheduled Castes’. Independent India, through The Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, accepted the existing category of ‘Scheduled Castes’, and published a revised ‘Scheduled Castes’ list. The Order defined the category as consisting of those castes that were associated with the most impure work and menial labour with no possibility of upward mobility, and were subjected to severe social exclusion and disadvantages, in comparison to the other castes. In other words, the castes that constitute the category of ‘Scheduled Caste’ were ‘untouchable castes’ in the past.

The Category of ‘Backward Caste’

The term ‘Backward Caste’ signifies those castes that have been categorised as ‘Other Backward Classes’ by Constitutional provision. It consists of those castes which, like the ‘Scheduled Castes’, were in the past subjected to exclusions and, therefore, remained socially and educationally backward, despite having a higher position than the ‘Scheduled Castes' in the local, traditional caste hierarchy. Based on the recommendations of the Mandal Commission, the government of India made the category operational throughout the country from 1990.

Significant Changes in the Caste System

1. Weakening of the principle of purity and pollution
2. Dissociation between caste and occupation
3. Disintegration in the jajmani system
4. Breakdown in the inter-caste power relationship
5. Emergence of caste association
6. Incresed activity of caste in political field or politicisation of caste

Emerging Features of the Caste System in Contemporary India

1. Multiple discrete caste ideologies exemplified by particularly caste origin tales
2. Multiple and muddled hierarchies
3. Discrete ideologies therefore discrete character of castes
4. From hierarchy to different identity
5. Endogamy based on the idea of putative biological differences
6. Differences are semaphored by ritualisation of multiple social practices
7. Hypersymbolism

Defining Caste in Contemporary India

To quote Dipankar Gupta: ‘We will define the caste system as a form of differentiation wherein the constituent units of the system justify endogamy on the basis of putative biological differences which are semaphored by the ritualisation of multiple social practices’ (1991: 137) .

Readings List:

1. Srinivas, M. N. 2002. Varna and Caste. In Collected Essays by M. N. Srinivas, 166-172. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

2. Srinivas, M. N. 2002. Some Reflections on the Nature of Caste Hierarchy. In Collected Essays by M. N. Srinivas, 66-172. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
3. Dumont, Louis. 1988 [1970]. Homo Hierarchicus: The Caste System and its Implications. Translated by Mark Sainsury, Louis Dumont and Basia Gulati. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
   
   
4. A Review Symposium on Homo Hierarchicus. 1971. Contributions to Indian Sociology (n. s.) 5: 1-13.
   
   
5. Gupta, Dipankar. (ed.). 1991. Social Stratification. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
6. Gupta, Dipankar. 2000. Interrogating Caste: Understanding Hierarchy and Difference in Indian Society. New Delhi: Penguin Books.
7. Sahay, Gaurang. 2004. Hierarchy, Difference and the Caste System: A Study of Rural Bihar. In Caste in Question: Identity or Hierarchy? (ed.) Dipankar Gupta, 113-136. New Delhi: Sage Publications.

8. Gough, Kathleen. 1960. The Hindu Jajmani System. Economic Development and Cultural Change 9 (1), 83-91.
9. Srinivas, M. N. 2002. The Dominant Caste in Rampura. In Collected Essays by M. N. Srinivas, 74-92. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
10. Srinivas, M. N. (ed.). 1996. Caste: Its Twentieth Century Avatar. New Delhi: Penguin Books.
11. Béteille, Andre. 1996. Caste, Class and Power: Chaging Patterns of Stratification in a Tanjore Village. Berkley: University of California Press.
12. Béteille, Andre. 1992. The Backward Classes in Contemporary India. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
13. Jaffrelot, Christopher. 2003. India’s Silent Revolution: The Rise of the Lower Castes in North India. New York: Columbia University Press.
14. Galanter, Marc. 1984. Competing Equalities: Law and the Backward Classes in India. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
15. Baxi, Upendra. 1985. Caste, class and reservation. Economic and Political Weekly 20(10).