Caste System

--------------------Aditya Mongra @ Professors Classes--------------------
Caste (System) in Sociological Analysis
Caste is a system of social stratification, which lies at the very root of social
structure of most social groups in India. By social structure, we mean the persistent
pattern of social interaction existing within and among social groups. These
patterns of interaction are guided by the normative system of the society. Caste
structure is thus a pattern of social behaviour in which groups and individuals are
guided by prescribed set of norms, values and sanctions. The groups and
individuals occupy specific statuses within and in relation to other groups. In this
system individuals are born into a certain caste and thereby acquire the role and
status associated with that caste identity.
Sociologists define caste or (as locally referred to) jati as a hereditary,

endogamous group which is usually localised. It has a traditional association with
an occupation, and a particular position in the local hierarchy of castes. Relations
between castes are governed, among other things by the concepts of pollution and
purity, and generally maximum commensality i.e. inter-dining occurs within the
caste (Srinivas 1962).
Approaches to understand the Caste System
A) Textual view - Indology (Varna Model)
Varna and Caste
Sociologist like GS Ghurye and MN Srinivas proposed that to understand

social existence and operation of Caste System it is important to analyse Indian
sources (textual materials, artefacts etc). This approach to understand the social
specificity about Indian society is termed as Indological. From this perspective
1
Caste System is unique social reality whose normative content are linked to Varna
Model which divides the Hindu society in four social groups, viz., Brahmana,
Kshatriya, Vaishya and Shudra. The first three castes are twice-born or dvija
since the men from these castes are entitled to don the sacred thread at the Vedic
rite of upanayana, which the Shudras were not allowed to perform. The
untouchable castes are outside the varna scheme. These four categories are ranked
from higher to lower in the order mentioned here. This means that Brahman is
ranked as the highest and the Sudra the lowest.
The Varna system of dividing the members of the Hindu society is an

ideological construct which is mentioned in their religious texts. Each varna is also
associated with particular occupations. A Brahman is supposed to be a priest by
profession, a Kshatriya to be a warrior; a Vaishya to be a trader; and a Sudra to be
a worker. Following ones assigned duty according to its Varna constitutes the
karma and dharma to particular Varna. The term varna literally means colour and
it was originally used to refer to the distinction between Arya and Dasa, in ancient
India. According to the Rig-Veda, it was not applied to any classes, such as
Brahman, Kshatriya, etc. However, the classes which existed at that time later
came to be described as varna and the original distinction between Arya and Dasa
gave place to the distinction between Arya and Shudra (Ghurye 1950: 52).
The pivotal concept in Hinduism is of Purusartha that literally means an

object of human pursuit. There are four proper goals (purusartha) or aims of a
Human life. The four Purusartha are Dharma, Artha, Kama and Moksha, pursuit
these are considered a life of righteousness for a Hindu. Four goals have following
meaning:
a) Dharma is honest and upright conduct or righteous action.
b) Artha means a righteous and honest pursuit of economic activities.
2
c) Kama is the fulfilment of ones normal desires.

d) Moksha is liberation that is absorption of the self into eternal bliss.
Nevertheless, sociologist like Srinivas and others find textual or ideal

approach of Varna insufficient in revealing the true nature of social dynamics and
cause for existence of inequality, untouchability in Indian society. Commenting on
the relationship between Varna and Caste (Jati), Srinivas states that the importance
of the Varna-system consists in that it furnishes an all-India frame into which the
myriad jatis in any single linguistic area can be fitted.
The caste system is an all-India phenomenon of which the varna model

provides an all-India macro-structural scheme. In other words, the varna model
only provides a framework within which the innumerable variations of castes
throughout India are found. According to Srinivas (1962: 65) the varna-scheme is
a hierarchy in the literal sense of the term because the criteria of ritual purity
and pollution are at the basis of this differentiation. Generally speaking, the higher
castes are also the better off castes, and the lower castes are generally, the lower
classes. However, this association between caste and class is not always true. A
caste can be ritually high but ranked lower in the local caste hierarchy because this
hierarchy is determined by secular factors like economic, political, educational
status also. Thus, one of the most striking features of caste system, as an actual
reality has been the vagueness in the hierarchy, especially in the middle rungs.
According to the varna scheme there are only four categories. This scheme
excludes the untouchables and its number is same throughout India. But this is not
true in reality since even during the vedic period, occupational groups existed
which were not subsumed by varna, although one cannot be sure whether these
groups can be called castes or not. According to Ghurye, in each linguistic region,
there are about 200 caste groups which are further subdivided into about 3,000
3
smaller units each of which is endogamous and provides the area of effective social
life for the individual. Therefore, one can say that the varna scheme refers at the
most only to the broad categories of the society and not to the actually existing
effective units (Srinivas 1962: 65).
Srinivas states that the Varna scheme has certainly distorted the picture of
caste but it has also enabled ordinary men and women to understand and assess the
general place of a caste within this framework throughout India. It has provided a
common social language, which holds good in all parts of India. This sense of
familiarity, even when not based on real facts leads to a sense of unity amongst the
people (Srinivas 1962: 69). Thus, the Indian society (by which we basically mean
the Hindu society) has been full of changes and improvisations. But these changes
have been against the background of the varna hierarchy. It is the varna frame
which remains more or less constant while castes vary from region to region.
B) Sociological approach (Field View )
As stated earlier, GS Ghurye, an indologist, was the first sociologist who

systematically conceptualized Caste in his famous work Caste and Race in India
(1932). Ghurye, on the basis of his study of ancient Hindu literature, identified six
outstanding features of the Indian caste system. These features are:
1. Segmental division of society

2. Hierarchy
3. Restrictions on feeding and social intercourse
4. Civil and religious disabilities and privileges of different sections
5. Lack of unrestricted choice of occupation
6. Restrictions on marriage
4
However, according to Srinivas, the idea of caste system as a fivefold

division of society represents a gross over-simplification of facts. The real unit of
the caste system is not one of the five varnas but jati, which is a very small
endogamous groups practicing a traditional occupation and enjoying a certain
amount of cultural, ritual and juridical autonomy. The concept of pollution governs
relations between different castes. This concept is absolutely fundamental to the
caste system, and along with the concepts of karma and dharma it contributes to
make caste the unique institution it is. Every type of inter-caste relation is
governed by the concept of pollution.
Srinivas commenting on the relationship between Varna and Jati states that
the importance of the varna-system consists in that it furnishes an all-India frame
into which the myriad jatis in any single linguistic area can be fitted. It
systematizes the chaos of jatis and enables the sub-castes of one region to be
comprehended by people in another area to a common scale.
For Srinivas following characteristic castes have in its social stratification

dynamics:
1. Hierarchy
2. Occupational differentiation
3. Restrictions on commensality
4. Pollution
5. Caste panchayats and assemblies
Sanskritization
In his study of a Mysore village, Srinivas finds that at some time or the
other, every caste tries to change its rank in the hierarchy by giving up its attributes
5
and trying to adopt those of castes above them. This process of attempting to
change ones rank by giving up attributes that define a caste as low and adopting
attributes that are indicative of higher status is called sanskritization. This process
essentially involves a change in ones dietary habits from non-vegetarianism to
vegetarianism, and a change in ones occupation habits from an unclean to a
clean occupation. The attributes of a caste become the basis of interaction
between castes.
Concept of Dominant Caste
The concept of dominant caste highlights field articulation of castes. It has

sociologically enriched understanding about social dynamics between caste groups,
hence textual and ideal (normative) operation was incorporated with empirical
practices reflecting operation of power and limitation of ritualistic textual idea of
castes.
According to Srinivas, a caste to be dominant, it should own a sizable

amount of the arable land locally available, have strength of numbers and occupy a
high place in the local hierarchy. When a caste has all the attributes of dominance,
it may be said to enjoy a decisive dominance. Srinivas says that the existence of
dominant caste is not particular to Rampura village only. It is also found in other
villages of the country.
Dimension of Functions of Dominant Caste:
1. The dominant caste often acts as a reference model to the lower caste group.
2. They set norms and regulations for social life.
3. Dominant castes are the main power holders.
4. Dominant castes because of their dominant position exploit all the
developmental sources in their favour.
6
5. The Dominant castes set values and norms for the community. Traditionally, its
primary functions were Judicial, executive and legitimacy.
6. Due to dominant position in rural society, they control the rural economy in
various ways and means.
7. Dominant castes play a greater role in the process of modernization.
Louis Dumont
Introduction:
[[Louis Dumont (1911-1998) an eminent sociologist and Indologist was a

towering figure in the fields of sociology and anthropology in the world. His focus
of debate has been India and the West. As a study of the caste system in India,
Dumont's work Homo Hierarchicus offers several new perspectives about
operating nature of social structure in Indian society. The notions of ideology and
tradition are intrinsic parts of his paradigm. He has brought the method of
structuralism to bear upon his study of the caste system. The chief elements of his
methodology are:
1. Ideology and structure
2. Dialectic transformational relationship and comparison
3. Indological and structuralist approach
4. Cognitive historical approach]] 1
[[Louis Dumont presented his study of caste in a structuralist framework

(which is derived from the theory of Levi Strauss). He viewed the caste system as
resting upon a balance between opposition and complementarity of pure and
impure (pollution). The caste hierarchy has had an interdependent existence.
1
http://www.sociologyguide.com/indian-thinkers/louis_dumont.php
7
Caste, according to Dumont, is not just a concrete arrangement; it is an ideology

which is present on a Pan-Indian scale. That is to say, all groups dwelling in India
are influenced by this ideology of purity- pollution. Even Christians, Muslims and
Jews have been influenced by notions of hierarchy and purity-pollution within the
Hindu hierarchy, ritual status is more important than economic or political power.
Even those who acquire the latter usually seek legitimation in ritual terms.
Dumonts approach has been criticized for its negligence of the substantive
situation, wherein the dominant castes of the locality wield prestige due to
economic and political power]] 2
[[Writings of Dumont:
As stated at the outset, Dumonts main areas of interest are social anthropology
and Indology. He has written on wide range of subjects such as Hinduism, caste,
kinship, and social and political movements in India.
His major works are as follows:

1. Hierarchy and Marriage Alliance in South India (1957)
2. Homo Hierarchicus: The Caste System and Its Implications (1966, 1970)
3. Religion, Politics and History in India: Collected Papers in Indian Sociology
(1970)
4. Homo aequalis (1977)]]3
[[Homo Hierarchicus:
[[[ 4The Homo Hierarchicus: The Caste System and Its Implications (1966)
is an unusual work of Dumont in its conception, design and execution. This is a
2
C.N. Venugopal, Religion and Indian Society: A sociological Perspective. P.30
3
http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/sociology/louis-dumont-biography-and-contribution-to-world-
sociology/35021/
4
Aditya Mongra notes page:119-120.
8
complete, theoretical work that helps us to access the vast body of available
ethnographic data on caste. This work is different from others as it begins with a
cardinal explanatory principle- hierarchy- and wholly sets out to build a model.
Hierarchy is said to distinguish Indian society from modern societies

whose fundamental social principle is equality. The major theme of this review can
be anticipated thus: any hierarchy, like any equalitarian system, is opposed by
those who see its effect upon themselves as disadvantageous, no matter how loudly
or piously it is advocated by those who benefit from it. Those low in a hierarchical
system universally see it as disadvantageous to themselves and object either to the
system or to the manner in which it is applied to themselves. Any social hierarchy,
then, is perpetrated and perpetuated by elites and is struggled against as
circumstances permit, by those they oppress. This is true in India and anywhere
else.]]]
[[[Louis Dumont on Caste System
Louis Dumont was primarily concerned with the ideology of the caste
system. His understanding of caste lays emphasis on attributes of caste. For him,
caste is a set of relationships of economic, political and kinship systems, sustained
by certain values, which are mostly religious in nature. Dumont says that caste is
not a form of stratification but a special form of inequality, whose essence has to
be deciphered by the sociologists. Here, Dumont identifies hierarchy as the
essential value underlying the caste system, supported by Hinduism.
Dumont starts with Bougles definition of caste and says that it divides the
whole Indian society into a larger number of hereditary groups, distinguished from
one another and connected together by three characteristics:
9
(a) Separation on the basis of rules of the caste in matters of marriage and
contact, whether direct or indirect (food);`
(b) Interdependent of work or division of labour , each group having, in theory

or by tradition, a profession from which their member can depart only within
certain limits; and
(c) Finally, gradation of status or hierarchy, which ranks the groups as relatively
superior or inferior to one another .
Dumont views that this definition indicates the main apparent characteristics
of the caste system. He describes mainly three things:
1. India is composed of many small territories and castes;
2. Every caste is limited to particular and definite geographic area; and
3. Marrying outside ones own caste is not possible in the caste system.
In fact, Dumont highlights the state of mind, which is expressed by the

emergence in various situations of castes. He calls caste system as a system of
ideas and values, which is a formal comprehensible rational system. His
analysis is based on a single principle, i.e., the opposition of pure and impure. This
opposition underlies hierarchy, which means superiority of the pure and
inferiority of impure. This principle also underlies separation, which means pure
and the impure must be kept separate.
Dumont felt that the study of the caste system is useful for the knowledge of
India, and it is an important task of general sociology. He focused on the
need to understand the ideology of caste as reflected in the classical texts,
historical examples etc. He advocated the use of an Indological and
structuralist approach to the study of caste system and village social
structure in India. He viewed that Indian sociology is that specialized
10
branch which stands at the confluence of Indology and sociology and which
he advocates as the right type of mix prerequisite to the understanding of
Indian sociology. From this perspective, Dumont himself, in his Homo
Hierarchicus, has built up a model of Indian civilization, which is based on a
non-competitive ritual hierarchical system. Dumonts analysis of caste
system is based on the classical literature, historical examples etc,]] 5
[[Concept of Pure and Impure:
1. The opposition between pure and impure has been regarded by Louis Dumont as
the fundamental principle underlying the Hindu Caste System.
2. The principle is implicit in the three predominant features of the caste system
which were systematically spelt out by Bougle and later endorsed by Dumont.
According to Bougle the caste system comprises a series of hereditary groups (the
socially relevant jatis) characterized by (i) hierarchy or gradations according to
ritual status; (ii) mutual repulsion, implying rules governing contact, ensuring
their separation; and (iii) division of labour and consequent interdependence.
3. Dumont shows that the opposition between the pure and the impure is implicit in
all the three attributes: in hierarchy because the pure and impure must be kept
separate; and in the division of labour because pure and impures occupations have
to be segregated.
4. Following from this, the caste system is viewed as a whole which is founded
on the necessary and hierarchical co-existence of the opposites (the pure and
impure). This represents a view point of caste according to which both the pure and
5
Aditya Mogra notes:123-124.
11
the impure have their rightful place in the system and each has its privileges and
co-exists with the other.
5. one way of assigning rank to castes in terms of their relative purity and impurity
is to study their attributes and accordingly order them in relation to one another.
The attributes of purity include features such as wearing sacred thread, veneration
of cow, vegetarianism, teetotalism and prohibiting widow remarriage. Pollution is
associated with human emissions, death, disrespect of cow and consumption of
meat and alcohol, to mention the principal elements.
6. The attributes of purity and pollution discussed above may be used to identify
the two broad extremes in the caste hierarchy the Brahmins and the
untouchables. But the precise determination of the highest and the lowest among
Brahmins and untouchables respectively is conditioned by local interpretations of
the pollution concept. Thus, while scavenging and beef eating would make a caste
group untouchable almost anywhere, it may still be able to establish its precedence
over some other group through fine distinctions of behaviour. The fact that the
empirical referents of the pollution concept are subject to local interpretations
highlight the point that caste hierarchy when viewed as a specific phenomenon, is
confined to a given local area. Hence caste (Jati) hierarchy shows regional
variations.
7. The tendency which results in the hierarchical arrangements of castes in a given
locality is often replicated within a caste and leads to the grading of segments both
in the same local community and over a wide territorial area.
8. The operation of local interpretations of pollution explains various regional

differences in the evaluation and ranking of castes. However, even within a given
locality and multiplicity of attributional criteria and the necessity of evaluating
12
them in relation to one another render it difficult to grade all the castes in a fixed
hierarchical order.
9. Dumont attempts to show how these attributes may be used to establish a series
of divisions, each more precise than the other, between superior and inferior castes.
For example, the vegetarian castes may be placed above the non-vegetarian ones:
among the vegetarians those who prohibit widow remarriage would be superior to
those who permit it. Similarly, among the non-vegetarians further dichotomies may
be established between beef eaters and non-beef eaters; and among the later still
further gradations may be made between those who eat only mutton or birds and
who eat pig (pork) raised by lower castes and fed by garbage. Dumont argues that
such dichotomies, which establish distinctions of relative purity and impurity,
reaffirm the importance of the hierarchical principle.
10. At the same time it is difficult to explain that any particular village hierarchy
solely depends on the basis of attributional criteria. A vegetarian caste, in some
cases, may actually rank below a non-vegetarian caste. It is also not clear how the
various attributes of pollution combine together to form an unambiguous hierarchy
of values. For example, are the attributes of diet more important than those of
occupation? Among certain occupations, such as butchering goats, cutting hair, and
tapping toddy, which would be lowest?
11. Such difficulties led Mickim Marriott to propose an interactional theory of

caste ranking based on inter-caste relationships as manifested in the ritualized
giving and receiving of food, and the giving and receiving of ritual services. He
considers food transfers more decisive in establishing rank than the receiving of
ritual services, but the two are connected since the services are paid for partly in
food.
13
12. The circulation of food is one significant index of rank because a caste which
receives more of the purer kinds of food than it gives to other caste groups may be
regarded as the recipient of relatively more ritual honour in relation to the others.
Following the same principle, a caste which receives more ritual services from
other castes than it gives to them ranks higher. It is lower if it gives more ritual
services than it receives or renders these to lower castes.]] 6
[[[Dumont main argument about caste in his work Homo Hierarchicus are
following (Das, 1974:119):
1) India is one;
2) This unity is found above all in ideas and values;
3) Caste is the fundamental institution of Hinduism;
4) The opposition of the pure and impure is central to the caste system;
5) Hierarchy and separation are two basic aspects of opposition between purity
and impurity, and hence of the caste system;
6) The caste ideology is an all-embracing ideology and power is subordinate to
status;
7) Hierarchy distinguishes Indian society form modern societies whose
fundamental social principle is equality;
8) There cannot be any revolutionary sociology; and
9) The change in contemporary India is organization, rather than
structural.]]] 7
[[Theory of Varnas:
Dumont feels one cannot speak of the castes without mentioning the varnas,
to which Hindus frequently attribute the castes themselves. India has the traditional
hierarchy of varnas, colours or estates whereby four categories are distinguished:
the highest is that of the Brahmins or priest, below them are the Ksatriyas or
6
Nadeem Hasnain: Tribe and Caste. P.11
7
Aditya Mogra notes127-128.
14
warriors, then the Vaishyas, in modern usage merchants, and finally the Shudras,
the servants or have-nots.
There is one more category, the untouchables, who are outside the
classification system. Dumont maintains that many of the Indologists confuse the
varna with caste, mainly because the classical literature is concerned almost
entirely with the varnas. Caste and varnas are to be understood with relationship of
hierarchy and power.
By his interpretation, caste was different from other forms of social

stratification through the disjunction of ritual status and secular (political and
economic) power within the same social system. The subordination of the political
and economic criteria of social stratification to that of ritual status in Dumonts
model, however, plays down the significance of social change in colonial and
contemporary times.
Did not caste lose its political significance as late in the 18th and 19th
centuries? As for what has happening in the 20th century, although Dumont
explicitly recognized the emergence of inter-caste competitiveness in place of a
structure of independence as a departure from tradition. He regarded this as
behavioural change, rather than a radical transformation of the system as a whole,
at the level of values or principles. Madan (1999) presumed that Dumonts analysis
is an exercise in deductive logic.
In the last, Dumont discusses the significant changes in the castes. He views
that traditional interdependence of castes has been replaced by a universe of
impenetrable blocks, self-sufficient, essential, identical and in competition with
one another. Dumont calls this the substantialization of castes.
An inventory of sources of change in the caste system lists judicial and

political changes, social-religious reforms, westernization, and growth of modern
15
professions, urbanization, spatial mobility and the growth of market economy. But,
despite all these factors making for change, the most ubiquitous and the general
form the change has taken in contemporary times is one of a mixture, or
combination, of traditional and modern features]] 8
[[Criticism of Dumont
1. Dipankar Gupta (2001) demonstrates that Dumonts understanding of

hierarchy is critically faulted in his application of the term to the caste
system.
2. Dumonts work is based on traditional Indian texts. Consequently, the

features of the caste system, as projected by Dumont, seem to be
unchanging. In reality, the caste system has changed in various ways
during a period of time. Dumont also seems to characterize Indian society
as almost stagnant, since he emphasizes the integrative function of caste
system. Yogendra Singh agrees with Bailey, who considers Dumonts
approach to sociology rules out a study of a host of crucial social facts of
Indian life, such as, formal organizations, the industrial system, labour
and agrarian social movements etc. It also rules out many key variables
from being introduced into a Sociology of Development. Dumont is
more concerned with system integration and system maintenance than
with change or conflict. Yogendra Singh views that Dumont postulates
some functionally equivalent concepts but his paradigm remains hidden
from public view. He also points out that Dumonts emphasis on
Indology has inadvertently led to a displacement of focus, as if there is no
scope for comparison or abstract generalizations in his sociology.
8
sociology/35021/
16
3. The purity and pollution opposition highlighted by Dumont is also not

universal. In certain tribal societies status is not anchored in purity but
in sacredness.
4. Dumonts view of caste, as rationally ordered system of values

(ideology), has also been questioned. Dumont seems to have ignored the
number of protest movements, which emerged in, Indian history
questioning the ideology of the caste division itself, through his emphasis
on values. He could not see the relationship between castes as conflict
ridden. For him, the relations between varnas in this especially between
Brahmin and Ksatriya, is almost complementary.
5. McKim Marriott criticizes Homo Hierarchicus as containing a

speculative sketch of a pair of models, strongly shaped and documented
mainly with textual ideology of social science and philosophical
allusions.
6. Berreman (2001) adds that hierarchy is simply a lure: the superior

castes conception of social system. Further, on the issue of Dumonts
separation between power and status, Berreman argues that power and
status could be two sides of the same coin as well.]] 9
Conclusion:
[[Dumonts contribution to the study of caste system in India is discussed.
To Dumont, hierarchy is the essential value undertaking the caste system. His
approach to caste is basically Indological and structuralist.
To him, the hierarchy of caste is religious in nature and is marked by the

disjunction between status and power. Dumonts understanding has been traced
9
sociology/35021/
17
mainly from ancient texts. Therefore, we consider him in the category of cognitive-
historical and Indological.]] 10
Andre Beteille
Introduction:
[[Andre Bteille is one of India's leading sociologists and writers. He is

particularly well known for his studies of the caste system in South India. He was a
Professor of Sociology at the Delhi School of Economics at the University of Delhi
where he is Professor Emeritus of Sociology since 2003.Bteille has written
insightfully about all the major questions of the day: India's encounters with the
West, the contest between religion and secularism, the relationship between caste
and class, the links between poverty and inequality, the nurturing of public
institutions, the role and responsibilities of the intellectual.
Writings:
Sociology: Essays on Approach and Method, 2002.

Antinomies of Society: Essays on Ideologies and Institutions, 2000.
Chronicles of Our Time, Penguin Books, 2000.
The Backward Classes in Contemporary India, 1992.
Society and Politics in India: Essays in a Comparative Perspective 1991 .
The Idea of Natural Inequality and Other Essays, 1983 .
Inequality Among Men, Basil Blackwell, 1977 .
Studies in Agrarian Social Structure, 1974.
Six Essays in Comparative Sociology, 1974.
10
sociology/35021/
18
Inequality and Social Change, 1972.

Castes: Old and New, Essays in Social Structure and Social Stratification,
1969.
Caste, Class and Power: Changing Patterns of Stratification in a Tanjore
Village, 1965.]] 11
Beteille on caste:
[[Several scholars have considered Indian society as caste society. In his

study, Beteille also emphasizes the caste structure of the Sripuram village of
Tanjore district which was traditionally very complex and conservative district.
The whole village is divided into different castes comprising three main segments,
namely, Brahmins, non-Brahmins and Adi-Dravids (Untouchables). Caste system
is a continuous process and is identifiable too.
It enjoys both legal and religious sanctions in traditional Indian society.

Different castes are assigned different roles, not only in economic matters, but over
a wide range of social phenomena. In traditional society, punishment differs not
only according to the nature of the offence committed, but also according to the
caste of the offender.
Beteille has outlined the basic features of the caste model of Indian society
while examining its usefulness as a scheme of analysis.
These features are:

(1) it is based on ideas and not on the actual behavior of the people;
(2) these ideas are found in the classical texts;
(3) the system is based on rules of the game; and
11
http://www.sociologyguide.com/indian-thinkers/andre-beteille.php
19
(4) different castes fulfill complementary functions, and their mutual relations are
non-antagonistic.
Beteille comments that this model does not explain specific society and
particularly its economic and political life. This model could apply to any system
of religious beliefs as it reflects in the rituals which divide people of the Sripuram.
This also exhibits the interests of the people. Beteille remarks that the study of
interests is quite necessary to understand political and economic problems.
Analytical Perspective of Caste, Class and Power:

In his book Caste, Class and Power (1965), Beteille wrote: there was much
greater consistency between the class system and the caste system in traditional
society and even sixty years ago.
More recently, land had begun passing out of Brahmin hands, while their
tenants now had much stronger rights they could no longer be evicted so easily.
Brahmins pre-eminent position continued to operate in the ritual sphere, but here
too challenge was not unknown. For instance, the day India became a republic on
26 January 1950, a group of non-Brahmins and Adi-Dravidas (the erstwhile
untouchables) marched through the agraharam till the gates of its main temple an
act that was not only ritually polluting, but (which) brought social humiliation of
the Brahmins (ibid.: 152).
The most decisive shift was in the realm of political power. Till 1946 a
Brahmin ran the village panchayat. But with adult suffrage numbers had become
more important than ritual status. Now, many physically powerful non-Brahmin
castes such as the Kallars had come to dominate village politics. Thus, power has
shifted much more decisively from the traditional elite of the village into the hands
of the new popular leaders (ibid.: 172, 199).
20
Beteille worked for his thesis with M.N. Srinivas but there was a significant
departure in his theoretical orientation. Srinivas made a difference to the way
social anthropology was researched in India through his emphasis on in-depth
fieldwork. Beteille acknowledged the importance of fieldwork but was
conceptually in another league that of Weberian sociology.
Functionalism was the order of the day. Orientalism and English empiricism
were also in fashion. Hermeneutics structuralism and interpretative sociology and
phenomenology were not in vogue. But Beteille was open to those sociological
theories and his major contribution to actually use the Weberian mode of analysis
in his doctoral thesis on caste, class and power in a South Indian village.
He used Webers concept of class, status and power in the context of Indian
ground realities. Till then, village studies were mainly documentary in character,
governed by functionalism, or romanticized generalization. Beteille criticizes
Dumonts Homo Hierarchicus for portraying the Indian caste system as a
ubiquitous totality whereas caste in India is neither uniform nor continuous.
Beteilles work on Caste, Class and Power: Changing Patterns of

Stratification in a Tanjore Village (1966) departs significantly from the writings
which equate caste with stratification. Following Webers dictum of class, status
and party, Beteille describes caste, class and power. He places caste before
class, whereas Weber puts status (caste) after class.
Power remains at the third place after class and status or caste and class in
both Weber and Beteille, respectively. Beteille mentions stratification in a
somewhat frivolous manner. For example, he states that caste, class and power
relate in different ways to the broader phenomenon of social stratification.
Again, Beteille considers caste hierarchy as representing only one aspect of

social stratification, but in the same vein he also states that inter-caste relations are
21
related with the economic and political organization as if caste is independent of

inter-caste relations or as if caste is an encompassing system. There is anomaly and
contradiction because Beteille treats caste as one of the three dimensions of social
stratification, and he also incorporates economic and political aspects in its orbit.
The same logic he applies to the phenomenon of class and power (Sharma, 2010).
Beteilles enchantment with Webers triology of class, status and party is

clearly evident in his Caste, Class and Power. Beteille justifies differentiation of
statuses and roles (structures) as the basis of distinct orders such as caste, class and
power. However, the basis of Webers thesis lies in the recognition of individual,
his behaviour (action) based on subjectivity, and objectification.
Weber understands individual and his action(s) through Verstehen.

Methodological appreciation provided by Weber is not visible in Beteilles study
of a village in South India. Beteilles method of study is in tune with
functionalism, which is a characteristic feature of British Anthropology as
advanced by A.R. Radcliffe-Brown, B. Malinowski, Evans-Pritchard, etc. (ibid.).
Conclusion:
Andre Beteille, a sociologist par excellence, has produced works of

consistent eminence for the past four and half decades. In terms of theory,
methodology and application in social policy, Beteille has taken Indian
sociological studies to a new height.
Beteilles study of caste reflects his commitment to the comparative method

and his distaste for Utopian thinking. Caste for him is not timeless, static
phenomenon binding all Hindus unequivocally. The British rule, along with the
impetus from Indian scholars and social reformers, and opportunities used by
Indian trading and artisan classes, made transformations in the caste system
possible.
22
Most importantly, caste has lost most of its ritual purity. Constitutionally
backed positive discrimination and affirmative action for the backward castes and
classes have increased. This is surely the result of active participation and support
of intellectuals and civilians belonging to the more privileged castes. Political
activism in democratic India has come a long way.
With modernity and the emergence of strong public opinion, the individual
has gained recognition, with concomitant undermining of traditional group
loyalties. Beteille places his futuristic vision in the establishment of a civil, secular
and open society, where citizens are on an equal platform with the state. Beteilles
contribution to the way sociology researched and thought in India has been
immense.]] 12
Caste and Regional Variations
There are basically three dimensions in which we can examine the variations
in the caste system. These are caste structure and kinship; caste structure and
occupation; and finally caste structure and power.
Caste Structure and Kinship
Kinship system found in various parts of India differs from each other in
many respects. The treatment of village as exogamous or endogamous group is one
criteria which differentiate north India form south India.
In the northern region, therefore, marriage with cousins, removed even by two or
three degrees is viewed as an incestuous union. In most parts of this region, as
12
http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/sociology/andre-beteille-biography-and-contribution-to-world-
sociology/35051/
23
mentioned earlier, village exogamy is practised by most of the castes, especially

the Brahman, Kshatriya and Vaishya castes.
Most of the parts of the Southern region except some, like the Malabar,
follow the patrilineal family system. Here also we find exogamous social groups
called gotras. The difference between the exogamous clans in the north is that a
caste in a village is held to be of one patrician and therefore, no marriage is
allowed within a village. Sometimes even a group of villages are supposed to be
settled by one patrilineage and marriage between them is prohibited. In the South,
there is no identification of a gotra with one village or territory. More than one
inter-marrying clans may live in one village territory and practise inter-marriage
for generations. Thus, the social groups, which are formed due to this kind of
marriage pattern in the South shows a centripetal tendency (of moving towards a
centre) as against the centrifugal tendency (of moving away from the centre) of
social groups found in north Indian villages.
Caste Structure and Occupation
All over India today we dont find caste restrictions are strictly observed as
they were some decades ago. The association of caste structure with a hereditary
occupation the jajmani system forms the ideal framework. In this the patron
castes differ from one region to another depending on the socio-economic and
political status of the castes. For example, the Rajput, Bhumihar and Jat are the
patron castes in the North and Kamma, Reddi and Lingayat in the South. The
service castes comprise Brahman (Priest), Barber, Carpenter, Blacksmith, Water-
carrier, Leather-worker, etc. However, with the changing times, impact of colonial
rule and the consequent introduction of western education, this general association
of higher caste with higher class (in terms of ownership of land, wealth and power)
has been disturbed (Beteille 1966:3).
24
Though even before these changes, presumed caste hierarchy toward

markers like diet, occupation, etc. does not often correlate with the observed order
of caste ranking found in several regions of India. For example, in spite of the
trader castes being vegetarian (which is considered to be ritually higher) in
Rampura, a village of Mysore, they are ranked ritually lower than the non-
vegetarian peasant castes of the same village (Srinivas: 1955).
Caste Structure and Power
Central to caste system are caste panchayats and leadership. These power
structures are highly formalised in certain caste groups and informal in others. The
democratic panchayat with legislative powers and traditional panchayat may
overlap in certain regions. Regional caste structures, in part, account for variations
in their respective power structure. It is important to know what qualifies caste for
regional dominance. According to Srinivas (1966), a caste is said to be dominant
when it is numerically the strongest in the village or local area and economically
and politically exercises a preponderating influence. The control of resources by
members of a dominant caste leads in turn, to making decisions for others, which
constitutes real dominance. Regional variations that account for dominant caste can
be explained by
i) the degree to which a single large land holding caste controls a set of
dependent castes,
ii) rigidity of caste ranking,
iii) the existence of two or more dominant caste groups in a region.
Caste ranking may not be clear-cut and may promote disputes about caste
ranking and status within the hierarchy. Caste groups of equal rank may be
25
constantly disputing over their mutual positions in the hierarchy, resulting in

dissent and dispute over ranking.
Lack of clarity in caste ranking results in a diffused power structure, with no

single caste group wielding economic, political and ritual clout. The Coromandal
region of South East coastal India validates the above arguments. In the districts of
Punjab, Haryana and parts of U.P., especially in the upper Ganges districts, middle
ranking castes such as the Jat, Ahir, Kurmi, etc. Wield substantial amount of power
and hold positions of dominance. The agricultural castes wield substantial power,
and are numerically preponderant in some of these regions.
Political and economic interaction among castes in this region, however, forms a
somewhat imperfect hierarchy as political and economic power is diffused. Ritual
and secular power may not coincide everywhere. The region is marked by a lack of
rigid stratification of castes, lack of concentration of political and economic power
in a single caste group, resulting in the diffusion of political power.
Dynamics in Caste system: Continuity and Change
The changes occurring in caste system is producing significant alteration in

nature of social stratification, norms and values, influence on democratic process.
Hence its structural analysis is imperative.
Changes in Caste: (positional)
Sanskritization (positional changes)
Caste, as you already know, is by definition a closed social system whose

membership is acquired by virtue of birth. Rules of endogamy and restrictions on
26
social intercourse between castes help to maintain the insularity of such groups.
From a purely Brahmanic or Sanskritic view, it appears as if this system is rigid
and closed. However, when we examine historical data ranging back to the Vedic
period we find that in reality there existed a lot of flexibility. Social mobility with
the gain of economic and political power was always present. Historian, K.M.
Pannikar (1955) believes that in Indian history, the Nandas were the last true
Kshatriyas (around 5th Century B.C.), and since then all the so called Kshatriyas
have come into being by usurpation of power by the lower castes who acquired the
Kshatriya role and social position.
Thus before pre-modern period, i.e., before the establishment of the British
rule in India, there were two most important factors in society which brought about
considerable amount of mobility in the caste system: (I) fluidity of the political
system; and (2) the availability of marginal land due to a static demographic
situation. Because of the fluidity of the political system it was always possible for a
Government official or a powerful family of a locally dominant caste to become
politically powerful and, thereafter, acquire Kshatriya status by becoming a chief
or king. This argument can be substantiated by many historical examples. For
examples is the kingdom founded by Shivaji, the son of a Jagirdar, during the
heyday of the Mughal empire. Opportunities for claiming Kshatriya status by
seizing political power were generally available to dominant castes such as
Marathas, Reddies, Vellalas, Nayars and Coorgs in South India palas in Bengal;
and Patidars in Gujrat. When a leader of a dominant caste acquired Kshatriya
status by seizing political power, he, in turn, became a factor or source of mobility
for others. According to Burton Stein, this factor made possible the establishment
of new settlements and even new regional societies which facilitated many
individual families to change their caste status. This apart, various sub divisions
27
which are found among several peasant castes such as Tamil Vellalas was caused
by this spatial mobility.
Scholars like, M.N. Srinivas (1969 and 1978) have shown that Indian society
was never static. The main traditional avenues of social mobility were
Sanskritisation, migration and religious conversion. Lower castes or tribes could
move upward in the caste hierarchy through acquisition of wealth and political
power. They could consequently claim higher caste status along with Sanskritising
their way of life, i.e., emulating the life-style and customs of higher castes.
Contemporary Sanskritization is operative in Dominant Caste, for example change
in Surnames in Northern Indian dominant Caste .i.e., Jat, Gujjar and Yadavs.
Changes in Caste: (structural)
Some important changes have taken place in the caste system in rural areas in
the contemporary period due to the new forces of industrialisation, urbanisation,
politicisation, new means of communication, modern education and legal system,
land reforms, development programmes and government policy of positive
discrimination in favour of the lower castes. (Changes induced by above factors
are producing structural changes). There is a change in rural power structure in
the period since Independence, which has led to some changes in inter-caste
relationship. The Brahmins have lost their traditional dominance in South India.
Kamma and Reddi in Andhra, Lingayat and Okkaliga in Karnataka, and Ahir, Jat
and Kurmi in North India have emerged as the new dominant castes at local and
regional levels through acquisition of economic and political power.
1) Modern changes emphasise different values like, Individualism rather

group affiliations, egalitarianism rather hierarchy, workplace moves
form place of residence or locality.
28
2) Hence we find Social Stratification is more constituted by Secular

elements rather by ritual elements. Thus ritual hierarchy has been
replaced by secular hierarchy.
Cultural Change in Caste

1) Connubial (matrimonial)
2) Commensality (eating-dining)
3) Ritual changes
Caste as a social group is more opening (endogamous group) toward

commensality and rituals but still less open for connubial relations.
Due to various institutional changes, they have lost control in political

affairs to intermediate castes without losing their land to any substantial extent.
Thus, we find that caste has undergone adaptive changes. Its traditional basic
features, i.e. connubial (matrimonial), commensal (eating together) and ritual, still
prevail in rural areas. The core characteristics of the castes, which have affected
the social relations, are still operative. However the status quo of the intermediate
and low castes has changed due to their acquiring political and/or economic power.
As Mckim Marriot (1955) noted in his study of the Kishan Garhi village in
U.P., the exchange of food and drink between different castes was patterned within
the framework of the jajmani system. The pattern related to who will eat with
whom, who will give kaccha food (i.e. food cooked in water) to whom, and who
will receive it, who will give only pacca food to whom, and so on. Thus,
interaction between castes was highly ritualised prior to the impact of
Westernisation.
29
During the last few decades, as a result of the forces of modernisation, the
ideology of caste has become less pervasive in an individuals day to day life.
Caste rituals have become increasingly a personal affair, rather than public due to
changed circumstances of living, forces of industrialisation, and urbanisation.
Place of residence and food habits are influenced more by an individuals
workplace and occupation than by his or her caste or religion. In a city a person
generally does not ask the caste of a cook who serves in a restaurant. A person who
might be a Brahman by caste may work in a shoe factory, and so on.
Harold Gould in his study of the rickshawallahs of Lucknow (1974)

observed that the rickshawpullers whom he studied belonged to different castes.
While working they interacted with each other without observing any caste
restrictions. However, when these rickshawpullers went back to their homes in the
evening they observed all the ritual practices of their caste. In this sense, out of the
two main features of caste system identified by Max Weber (1948), namely,
commensality and connubium, the commensality aspect has disappeared but the
connubium, i.e. caste and kinship and marriage link, yet survives in spite of all
other changes. The ritual aspect of caste is confined to the personal sphere. Now,
let us see the nature of caste in the economic sphere.
Continuity in Caste: (From Vertical solidarity towards Horizontal solidarity)
Caste has acquired an additional role of operating as interest groups and

associations in politics with the introduction of representative parliamentary
politics. This has been noted by M.N. Srinivas (1982), Rudolph and Rudolph
(1967) and Paul Brass (1965). Various caste associations have been formed
transcending sub-caste boundaries to articulate caste interests. Moreover, caste has
also witnessed growth of intra-caste factions with differential support to political
30
parties and personal interest of the factional leaders. Thus, caste has undergone
both the processes of fusion (merging of different castes) and fission (breaking up
of a caste into parts) in the arena of politics.
1) Caste Patriotism (MN Srinivas) in form Caste Association According to

Rudolph and Rudolph (1967: 11), caste has in its transformed state, helped
the Indian masses (of which nearly 70 percent live in the villages) make a
success of representative democracy. It has fostered the growth of equality
by making Indians less separate and more alike. Indians are becoming less
separate in the sense that due to the electoral system numerical strength i.e.,
the number of votes, as mentioned earlier, makes a lot of difference in
power. Thus, it is in the interest of large majority of castes to come together
to achieve their political goals. In this process, caste associations and caste
federations are formed.
2) Politicization of Caste (Rajni Kothari) and emergence of the
democratic incarnation of caste. Caste associations are defined as
paracommunities which enable members of castes to pursue social
mobility, political power, and economic advantage (Rudolph and Rudolph
1967: 29). Caste associations resemble in many ways the voluntary
associations or interest groups found in industrially advanced societies. The
coming of modern means of communication has increased the horizontal
stretch of caste. Far-flung caste groups are able to interact and communicate
with each other and find commonalties and shared interests to form clusters
and this has resulted in the increase of caste solidarity within a region. One
effect of universal adult franchise is the strengthening of caste
consciousness. Political parties are at pains to select candidates who have a
social base, usually drawn from the locally dominant caste groups. It is
obvious that the eradication of caste is a distant reality, despite the
31
indications to the contrary. As long as caste performs the functions of a

welfare state in India and provides for the common bonds of kinship
ties, political groups and alliances, it can be assured of a continued
existence in modern India.
3) Political dynamism and personal interest of the factional leaders
producing process of fusion and fission within Caste groups.
Untouchability: forms and perspectives
Meaning of Untouchability
According to Prof. Satyavrata, Untouchability is that system of society on account

of which one individual cannot touch another individual and one society cannot
touch another society on the basis of convention and if so touches, becomes
profane and in order to remove that profanity has to perform penance.
Another scholar Dr. D. N. Majumdar states that The untouchable castes are
those who suffer from various social and political disabilities many of which are
traditionally prescribed and socially enforced by higher castes. It is clear from the
above definitions that untouchability implies those disabilities imposed upon the
scheduled castes by Savarna Hindus.
The Untouchable Castes and their Origins
The untouchables are those castes which were outside the pale of varna
system. They were said to be polluting and marginalized and consigned to the
lowest rung in society. Several ideological justifications existed for the sustenance
of these hierarchical system, which kept everybody in their place The untouchables
had no share in the social, political and judiciary powers and their position was
32
almost like that of a slave. Various scholars have given different viewpoints and
explained why untouchability was practiced in the Hindu caste society.
Hanumantha Rao in his book Caste and Poverty says that low social status
attached to certain occupations is the cause of untouchability. It relates to impure
occupations such as removal of carcass, spinning, tanning, scavenging etc. While
analysing the origin of caste, system J.H. Hutton suggests that ideas of ceremonial
purity were first applied to aboriginals in connection with sacrificial, ritual and
certain occupational activities. Max Weber also has described certain occupations
as ritually impure. He states, that the lowest caste structure was considered to be
absolutely defiling and contaminating. Thus, the idea of purity, whether
occupational or ceremonial, is found to have been the factor contributing to the
genesis and evolution of caste and the practise of untouchability. The Vedic
literature has referred to the Dharmashutras that declare Chandalas (cremators) as
a progeny of the most hated people of the reverse order of mixed unions, which is
of a Brahmin female with a Shudra male. Kautilya agrees with the Dharmashutra
writers and he says that people born out of mixed unions were separate castes. He
recommends that marriage between different castes should not be allowed and
people of such unions should be treated as Shudra.
Scholars like Ghurye attach supreme importance to the religious factor

responsible for the growth of untouchability. Dr. Ghurye says, Idea of purity,
whether occupational or ceremonial, is found to have been a factor in the genesis
of caste or the very soul of the idea and practice of untouchability. In Hindu
society this sense of purity and impurity is considered responsible for giving birth
to untouchability.
33
During the mid-19th century in Maharashtra, Jotirao Phule, a leader of the

anti-Brahmin movement, argued in his Gulamgri (slavery,1873), that the shudras
were the sons of the soil while the Brahmins came from outside and usurped
everything that was possessed by the Shudras. In order to control and enslave the
natives, the Aryans produced many spurious religious tracts and claimed to have
received them directly from the God as revelations. Phule opposed idolatry and
denounced the Chaturvarna (four-fold division of Hindu society) created by
religion to perpetuate inequality in society. According to him, Hindu sacred
scriptures were fabricated by Brahmins to maintain their control over society. He
advocated sarvajanik satya dharma, literally meaning universal religion of truth.
For Ambedkar, the question of spread and origin of caste are not separated.
According to Ambedkar the caste system has either been imposed upon the docile
population of India by a lawgiver as a divine dispensation or it has developed
according to some law of social growth peculiar to the Indian people. Ambedkar
refutes the notion that the law of caste was given by some lawgiver. Manu is
considered to be the lawgiver of Hindus; but at the outset there is doubt whether
he ever existed. Even if he existed, the caste system predates Manu. No doubt
Manu upheld it and philosophised about it, but he certainly did not and could not
ordain the present order of Hindu society. His work ended with the confiscation of
existing caste rules and the preaching of caste dharma or duties obligations and
conduct associated with each caste. Also Ambedkar rejects the argument that
Brahmin created the caste. He maintains that it was necessary to dismantle this
belief because still there is a strong belief in the minds of orthodox Hindus that the
Hindu society was moulded into the framework of the caste system and that it is
consciously crafted in the shastras. It may be noted that the teaching and preaching
of shastras or the sacred texts is the prerogative of the Brahmins. Ambedkar
agrees with the second argument i.e. of some law of social growth peculiar to
34
Indian people about the spread of caste system. According to western scholars,
the bases of origin of various castes in India are occupation, survival of tribal
organisations, the rise of new belief system, crossbreeding and migration
(Ambedkar, 1978:17). The problem, according to Ambedkar, is that the aforesaid
nuclei also exist in other societies and are not peculiar to India. Ambedkar asked,
why they did not form caste in other parts of this planet? At some stage, the
priestly class detached itself from rest of the body of people and emerged as a caste
by itself. The other classes that were subject to the law of social division of labour
underwent differentiation. Some of these classes got divided into bigger groups
and some into smaller ones.
According to Ambedkar, This sub-division of a society is quite natural. But

the unnatural thing about these sub-divisions is that they have lost the open-door
character of the class system and have become self-enclosed units called castes.
The question is: were they compelled to close their doors and become
endogamous, or did they close them of their accord? I submit that there is a double
line of answer: Some closed their door: Others found it closed against them. The
one is a psychological interpretation and the other is mechanistic, but they are
complementary (Ambedkar, 1978: 18). Explaining the psychological
interpretation of endogamy, Ambedkar opined that endogamy was popular in the
Hindu society. Since it had originated from the Brahmin caste it was whole
heartedly imitated by all the non- Brahmin sub-divisions or classes, who, in their
turn, became endogamous castes. Ambedkar quotes Gabriel Tardes law of
imitation in this context. According to Tarde, imitation flows from higher to
lower. Secondly, the intensity of imitation varies inversely in proportion to
distance Distance is understood here in its sociological meaning (Ambedkar,
1978: 19). Ambedkar points out that some castes were formed by imitating others
because crucial conditions for the formation of castes by imitation existed in the
35
Hindu society. He feels, (i) that the source of imitation must enjoy prestige in the
group; and (ii) that there must be numerous and daily relations among members
of the group. Ambedkar opined that the Brahmin is treated as next to God in Indian
society. His prestige is unquestionable and he is the fountainhead of all that is
good. He is idolized by scriptures therefore, Such a creature is worthy of more
than mere imitation, but at least of imitation; and if he lives in an endogamous
enclosure should not the rest follow his example? (Ambedkar, 1978:19) He
argues that the imitation of non-Brahmin of those customs which supported the
structure of caste in its nascent days until it became embedded in the Hindu mind
and persists even today, is testimony to fact that imitation is the cause of formation
of caste. The customs of sati, enforced widowhood, and girl marriage are followed
in one way or the other by different castes. Ambedkar opines, Those castes that
are nearest to the Brahmin have imitated all the three customs and insist on the
strict observance thereof. Those that are less near have imitated enforced
widowhood and girl marriage; others, a little further off, have only girl marriage
and those furthest of have imitated only the belief in the case
principle(Ambedkar, 1978: 20).
Annihilation of Caste
Ambedkar explains that caste is not a physical object like a wall of bricks or
a line of barbed wire that prevents the Hindus from free social interaction. Caste is
a notion; it is a state of the mind. If someone wants to break the caste system,
he/she has to attack the sacredness and divinity of the caste. Ambedkar believed
that the real way to annihilate the caste system is to destroy the belief in the
sanctity of the shastras. How do you expect to succeed, if you allow the Shastras to
continue to mould the beliefs and opinions of the people? Not to question the
authority of the Shastras, to permit the people to believe in their sanctity and their
sanctions and to blame them and to criticize them for their acts as being irrational
36
and inhuman is an incongruous way of carrying on social reform. Reformers

working for the removal of untouchability including Mahatma Gandhi, do not
seem to realise that the acts of the people are merely the results of their beliefs
inculcated upon their minds by the Shastras and that people will not change their
conduct until they cease to believe in the sanctity of the Shastras on which their
conduct is founded (Ambedkar, 1978: 68). Ambedkar further added that the caste
system has two aspects, it divides men into separate communities; and it places the
communities in a graded order one above the other as discussed earlier. The higher
the grade of a caste, the greater is the number of religious and social rights. Now,
this gradation makes it impossible to organise a common front against the caste
system. Castes form a graded system of sovereignties, high and low, which are
jealous of their status and which know that if a general dissolution happened, some
of them would lose more prestige and power than others.
Ambedkar argues that if one wanted to dismantle the caste system then one
would have to implement law(s) to change the caste system. He proposes the
following reforms within the Hindu religion in order to dismantle the caste
system. (i) There should be one and only one standard book of Hindu Religion,
acceptable to all Hindus and recognised by all Hindus; (ii) it would be appropriate
if priesthood among Hindus was abolished, failing which the priesthood should at
least cease to be hereditary. Every person who professes to be a Hindu must be
eligible for the position of a priest. Law should ensure that no Hindu performs
rituals as a priest unless he has passed an examination prescribed by the state and
holds a permission from the state to practice; (iii) no ceremony performed by a
priest who does not hold the permission would be deemed to be valid in law, and a
person who officiates as priest without the permission should be personalised; (iv)
a priest should be the servant of the state and should be subject to the disciplinary
action by the state in the matter of his morals, beliefs; and (v) the number of priests
37
should be limited by law according to the requirements of the state. These,

according to Ambedkar, would provide the basis for the establishment of a new
social order based on liberty, equality and fraternity, in short, with democracy.
Having analysed the exploitative nature of Hindu social order born out of
varnas, castes and sub-castes, Ambedkar gives his own vision of an ideal social
order. He looked forward to a society based on liberty, equality and fraternity.
Fraternity creates more channels for association and sharing experiences. This
helps in establishing an attitude of respect and reverence among the individuals
towards fellowmen. For Ambedkar, liberty benefits the people by giving them
freedom of choice of occupation. Lastly, it is a fact that all men are not equal in
terms of their physical and economic endowment people alike these elements were
absent in a caste-ridden society.
Evil Effects of the Practice of Untouchability:

1. Untouchability leads to social discrimination.
2. It damages social harmony.
3. It has created wide social distance between the two groups, touchable and
untouchables.
4. Untouchability perpetuates inequality.
5. It cannot support the development of healthy democratic tradition.
6. Untouchability has damaged the self-image and prestige of the scheduled castes.
7. It has developed a sense of inferiority among the scheduled castes.
8. The practice of untouchability has brought down the image of the Indians in the
eyes of the foreigners.
9. Untouchability has provided the scope for religious conversions
38
Historically tracing Social Mobility in SC/Dalits
The establishment of British rule brought about deep and far reaching
changes in the economic, political, educational and cultural spheres in India. It
offered some new avenues of social mobility to the scheduled castes, e.g., new
economic opportunities, education, westernisation, conversion to Christianity and
politicisation. And also with it there came new terminology like, Scheduled Caste
is a politico-legal-term. It was first coined by the Simon Commission and then
Government of India, Act, 1935. When India became independent this term was
adopted by the Constitution for the purpose of providing them some special
facilities and the constitutional guarantees. Yet Untouchables or the Scheduled
Castes do not constitute a homogeneous group.
In his study, Hardgrave (1984) found that during the British rule, the Nadars
turned to trade in toddy tapping and established themselves as middlemen and
money-lenders. They earned wealth, purchased their own land and acquired
education and thus raised their social status. Similarly, the Mahars of Maharashtra
(studied by Patwardhan 1973) and the Jatav Chamars of Agra in Uttar Pradesh
(studied by Lynch 1969) improved their social status by taking advantage of the
new economic opportunities.
Social Mobility through Sanskritisation
The traditional avenue of social mobility of the scheduled castes through

Sanskritisation gained added momentum during the British period. The
economically and educationally mobile scheduled castes were no longer willing to
accept their inferior social position. The policy of recording castes in the census
gave a fillip to the process of Sanskritisation. Many Scheduled Castes claimed
higher status in the caste hierarchy. The Jatavas and the Nadars started claims to
39
Kshatriya status by Sanskritising their way of life. The Jatavas traced their origin
to the gotra of Siva and stopped eating beef and buffalo. Similarly, the Nadars
began to tie the dhoti in the fashion of the Brahmins, to crop their hair in the
fashion of the Brahmin tuft, and to abandon the heavy jewellery and ear-pieces
which had been common among them.
Social Mobility through Westernisation
The upwardly mobile untouchable castes adopted the life-style implied in

Westernisation. This was facilitated by the prevalence of various non-Sanskritic
traditions among themsuch as, eating meat and drinking alcohol. Sunanda
Patwardhan (1973) observes: The Mahar were the first people to serve the British
officers and their wives as butlers, butchers and ayah. Being beef-eating
themselves, the Mahar did not mind working for the foreign, beef-eating master.
Social Mobility through Conversion
Conversion to Christianity provided an additional avenue of social mobility

to the scheduled castes. This was prompted by the hope of improvement in social
status through education, health facilities, job opportunities and financial support
provided by the Christian missionaries. Large-scale conversion took place during
the latter half of the nineteenth century from among the Chamar, the Churra, the
Lal Begi and other scheduled castes. Further, it has been observed that though the
scheduled castes that became highly educated, got white-collar jobs and earned
wealth were integrated into the Christian fold, the backward ones could not remove
their stigma of untouchability even after conversion.
40
Ambedkar and Gandhi
Another important effort to raise the status of the scheduled castes was made
by the great leader, B.R. Ambedkar who belonged to the untouchable Mahar caste
of Maharashtra. He laid emphasis on horizontal mobilisation of the scheduled
castes and made them a political force to reckon with. He emphasised secular
avenues of politics, education and administration for social mobility of the
scheduled castes. He held that political power was the key to all progress and that
the scheduled castes could achieve political salvation if they captured power by
organising themselves into a separate party.
In contrast with Ambedkar, Gandhi wanted the Harijans to be integrated

into the Hindu society. For this, he tried to raise the consciousness of the upper
castes through a countrywide campaign against untouchability and other
constructive work. He did not believe in the Dharma Shastra, which taught
untouchability. He started publishing a newspaper named Harijan. His well known
fast in 1932 drew the attention of the people to the problem of the scheduled
castes. On his insistence, the British government agreed to increase the
representation of the scheduled castes in the legislature under the Poona Pact
(1932). Thus, Ambedkars demand for separate electorate was abandoned and the
scheduled castes remained in the Hindu fold. Gandhiji pleaded for compassion and
equity to the scheduled castes.
Socio-religious movements to eradicate Untouchability
To fight against untouchability and various forms of injustice, social

reformers launched social movements in pre-independence India Mahatma Phule' s
(1827-1890), 'Satyashodhak' Chhatrapati Shahu's (1871-1922) 'non-Brahmin',
Maharshi Vitthal Ramji Shinde's(l873~1944) 'Depressed Class Mission' and
41
Babasaheb Ambedkar's (1891-19S6) 'anti-untouchability' in Maharashtra, Shri

Narayan Dharma Paripalana in Kerala, Periyar Rarnaswami Naicker in Tamil Nadu
are the examples of some social movements and social reformers.
Yogendra Singh, in his book Social Stratification and Change in India has
argued that there are two kinds of social movements. One is with the integrative
orientation and the other is with the alienating orientation. The efforts made by the
lower castes to sanskritise themselves may be called a movement with an
integrative orientation because it does not renounce caste as a system of social
stratification.
Ambedkar has led another movement which was a move from the caste
affiliations to embracing Buddhism. In.1956, he launched the drive for mass
conversion of the Scheduled Castes to Buddhism, within a few months after his
death, his followers organised the political wing of the Scheduled Castes in the
name of the Republican Party of India. Both these reflected the alternate religio-
political orientation of the scheduled caste movement with respect to caste based
social stratification and political mobilisation. In this regard, Yogendra Singh
concludes that Scheduled Caste movements for social mobility have oscillated, on
a tendency of integration to sanskritisation and of alienation, conversion from
Hinduism to Buddhism or Christianity to Islam.
The anti-untouchability movements may be classified into two categories:

(1) reformative movements and (2) alternative movements. The reformative
movements aim to reform the caste system in order to put an end to the problem of
untouchability. The alternative movements aim to create an alternative cultural
environment by conversion to another religion. Gandhis approach , Arya Samaj
42
shudhi movement, comes in category of reformative and on other hand

Ambedkar conversion to Buddhism is alternative movements.
Interrelation of caste and class hierarchies
Caste and class point towards inequality and hierarchy. In both the cases,
however, the principle of organisation differs. The core features of caste are:
endogamy or marriage within caste, occupational differentiation and hereditary
specialisation of occupations, notion of pollution and a ritual hierarchy in which
Brahmins are generally at the top. Classes, on the other hand, broadly refer to
economic basis of ownership or non-ownership relation to the means of
production. The Brahmanical ritual hierarchy of the caste is not universally
applicable and upheld by all. In many cases, ritual hierarchy is only contextual.
The prosperous Jats in North India enjoy social and political dominance without
equivalent ritual status.
Caste and class resemble each other in certain respects and differ in others.
Castes constitute the status groups or communities that can be defined in terms of
ownership of property, occupation and style of life. Social honour is closely linked
to ritual values in this closed system. Class positions also tend to be associated
with social honour; however, they are defined more in terms of ownership or non-
ownership of means of production. The classes are much more open and fluid and
have scope of individual upward social mobility. In caste system, only an entire
segment can move upward, and hence, the mobility is much slower.
Although there is considerable divergence between the hierarchy of caste

and that of class, the top and bottom segments of the class system are largely
subsumed under the caste structure. The upper castes own means of production
(land in rural areas) and act as rentiers. The landless agrarian proletarian coincides
43
with the lower castes or dalits who provide labour services for the rentier upper
caste people as well as rich prosperous farmers of intermediate level. At the
intermediate level, articulation of class-identities is more complex. The process of
differentiation of communities dislocates class-relations from the caste-structure. If
caste and class show a fair degree of overlap at the top and bottom level and in
some cases appears almost co-terminus, the picture is quite ambiguous at the
intermediate level of caste hierarchy. The processes of modernisation especially
urbanisation, acquisition of education and new skills act as the forces of dislocation
that puncture the forces of social inertia and modify caste-rigidity.
Several analysts popularized the view of Indian society as a "caste society"

ignoring the dynamics of existing conditions. They perceived caste to be a logical
opposite of the class system which was associated along with individualism, and
particularly with the West. Beteille observes that the caste model, associated
primarily with the work of Louis Dumont, has been found useful in the
interpretation of beliefs relating to Hinduism. He considers the study of "interests"
equally important in understanding of political and economic problems, and his
analysis of caste in a Tanjore village is a good example of such a concern. Again,
Beteille blames Dumont in particular for encouraging a "caste-view" of Indian
society. Such a 'caste model' according to Beteille does not provide an analysis of
material interests along with the study of ideas and values. Beteille also suggests
that economic and political conflicts occur with a certain degree of autonomy of
their own, hence they could be studied independent of caste, religious beliefs and
ideas.
Further, Ashok Rudra, while analyzing the class composition of the Indian
agricultural population, observes that there are only two classes in Indian
agriculture -the big landlords, and the agricultural labourers. These two classes are
in antagonistic relationship with each other, and this constitutes the principal
44
contradiction in Indian rural society (1 9 78: 16-23). Similar to Rudra's view is that
held by A.R. Desai (1 975). Thus, Rudra emphatically argues that Indian
agriculture has capitalist relations and capitalist development. Hence, there are two
classes - 'haves' and 'have -not.
The structural aspects of caste, namely, economic and political dimensions

have remained underestimated. So also analysis of the cultural aspects of social
stratification can provide a deeper understanding of Indias social formation, since
the two are in fact inseparable from each other. As we have noted classes function
within the contexts of castes, caste conflicts are also class or agrarian conflicts. The
rifts between upper and the lower castes to a large extent correspond with conflicts
between landowners and sharecroppers or agricultural labourers.
45

Caste System

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Caste System

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

--------------------Aditya Mongra @ Professors Classes--------------------

Caste (System) in Sociological Analysis

Sociologists define caste or (as locally referred to) jati as a hereditary,

Approaches to understand the Caste System

A) Textual view - Indology (Varna Model)

Varna and Caste

Sociologist like GS Ghurye and MN Srinivas proposed that to understand

The Varna system of dividing the members of the Hindu society is an

The pivotal concept in Hinduism is of Purusartha that literally means an

c) Kama is the fulfilment of ones normal desires.

Nevertheless, sociologist like Srinivas and others find textual or ideal

The caste system is an all-India phenomenon of which the varna model

B) Sociological approach (Field View )

As stated earlier, GS Ghurye, an indologist, was the first sociologist who

1. Segmental division of society

However, according to Srinivas, the idea of caste system as a fivefold

For Srinivas following characteristic castes have in its social stratification

Concept of Dominant Caste

The concept of dominant caste highlights field articulation of castes. It has

According to Srinivas, a caste to be dominant, it should own a sizable

Dimension of Functions of Dominant Caste:

[[Louis Dumont (1911-1998) an eminent sociologist and Indologist was a

[[Louis Dumont presented his study of caste in a structuralist framework

Caste, according to Dumont, is not just a concrete arrangement; it is an ideology

His major works are as follows:

Hierarchy is said to distinguish Indian society from modern societies

[[[Louis Dumont on Caste System

(b) Interdependent of work or division of labour , each group having, in theory

2. Every caste is limited to particular and definite geographic area; and

In fact, Dumont highlights the state of mind, which is expressed by the

[[Concept of Pure and Impure:

8. The operation of local interpretations of pollution explains various regional

11. Such difficulties led Mickim Marriott to propose an interactional theory of

By his interpretation, caste was different from other forms of social

An inventory of sources of change in the caste system lists judicial and

1. Dipankar Gupta (2001) demonstrates that Dumonts understanding of

2. Dumonts work is based on traditional Indian texts. Consequently, the

3. The purity and pollution opposition highlighted by Dumont is also not

4. Dumonts view of caste, as rationally ordered system of values

5. McKim Marriott criticizes Homo Hierarchicus as containing a

6. Berreman (2001) adds that hierarchy is simply a lure: the superior

To him, the hierarchy of caste is religious in nature and is marked by the

[[Andre Bteille is one of India's leading sociologists and writers. He is

Sociology: Essays on Approach and Method, 2002.

Inequality and Social Change, 1972.

[[Several scholars have considered Indian society as caste society. In his

It enjoys both legal and religious sanctions in traditional Indian society.

These features are:

Analytical Perspective of Caste, Class and Power:

Beteilles work on Caste, Class and Power: Changing Patterns of

Again, Beteille considers caste hierarchy as representing only one aspect of

related with the economic and political organization as if caste is independent of

Beteilles enchantment with Webers triology of class, status and party is

Weber understands individual and his action(s) through Verstehen.

Andre Beteille, a sociologist par excellence, has produced works of

Beteilles study of caste reflects his commitment to the comparative method

Caste and Regional Variations

Caste Structure and Kinship

mentioned earlier, village exogamy is practised by most of the castes, especially

Caste Structure and Occupation

Though even before these changes, presumed caste hierarchy toward

constantly disputing over their mutual positions in the hierarchy, resulting in

Lack of clarity in caste ranking results in a diffused power structure, with no