Yadav 1

Surabhi Yadav
Dept. Roll No.SC21627
College Roll No.1501005
Dr. Anju Gurawa
M.A. English (previous)
16th Apr, 2016

The Bondage of Lawful Injustice in Hindu Caste System

Hindu society as such does not exist. It is only a collection of castes. Each caste is conscious of
its existence. Its survival is the be all and end all of its existence
-Dr. B R Ambedkar

Caste discrimination is one of the most prolonged concerns in India. After apprehending
many incidents related to caste differences, atrocities enacted by the upper caste Hindus on the
lower caste Hindus; I was triggered to search the forces that help to sustain this hierarchical
placement amongst Hindus. I wonder how such an established order, that is full of inequalities,
sustained itself through ages. Why such lawlessness still prevails in our country?

Dr. B R Ambedkar, a prominent social reformer, dedicated his life to uplift the social
status of untouchables. His Volume 5 part II (Chapter 6 and 7), focuses on discerning the reason
for existence of such social inequality in our society. In the sixth chapter Ambedkar mentions
more that 50 real life incidents of caste discrimination being reported in various newspapers.
These are not all the incidents that happened in our country, but just a few which received media
attention.

The Hindus believe that the untouchables are born to serve them; thus its their duty to
serve them and they cant deny or demand payment for the duties they perform. If they dared to
ask for money or refused to serve upper caste Hindus, they were beaten to death. The Hindus
could go to any extent to maintain their position in the social order established by the Hindu law
book, Manusmriti. They denied basic human needs like fresh water, clean clothes, and healthy
food to the untouchables. Ambedkar asserts the fact that Hindus believed, the Untouchables
must not eat rich food even if they can afford it. It is an offence for the Untouchables to live
above their station in life (Vol.5 p.52). The Hindus did not even permit the untouchables to
draw out water from the Hindu wells. They reacted brutally and inhumanly to maintain their
status quo.
 Yadav 2

The untouchables were not granted freedom of religion. Despite being Hindus, the
untouchables were not permitted to enter the Hindu temples, because they were considered
impure and born only to serve the upper caste Hindu community. The basic right to worship was
denied to them. Even if they tried to build their own temple or worshipped an idol at home they
were severely punished for their act. The untouchables were ill-treated at the hands of Hindus, so
they found only one way to escape their situation, and that was abandoning Hindu religion and
embracing other religions like Islam, Christianity and Buddhism.

Ambedkar affirms that, the Untouchables are claimed by the Hindus as Hindus. They
are also citizens with the same civic rights. But the Untouchables cannot claim the right of the
citizenship if it conflicts with any rules of the Established Order (Vol.5 p.43). All menial duties,
such as scavenging, picking up dead cattle, were entitled to the untouchables and all rights were
reserved for the upper caste Hindus. Performing the above mentioned tasks was considered as
beneath their dignity and derogatory by upper caste Hindus. Wearing decent and clean clothes
and jewellery was a symbol of being upper caste and the untouchables could not dare to step in
their shoes, even if they were economically stable.

The era of discrimination has not yet ended. On Mar 09, 2016, Hindustan Times
published an article stating that, A nine-year-old Dalit boy in Madhya Pradeshs Damoh
district drowned in a well on Tuesday where he had gone to drink water after being denied
access to the hand pump in his school. In a recent incident, Rohith Vemula, a PhD student of
Hyderabad University ended his life demanding answers on identity and caste. When
institutions like schools and colleges will practice the same unreasonable discrimination, what
can we expect from the children who have being spoon-fed with the lessons of caste
differences? Hindus were afraid that if the Untouchables, acquired education, they will begin
to assert themselves and demand to be treated on a footing of equality. Therefore, they tried to
suppress all means of education to the untouchables and made their survival difficult.

From these instances, its crystal clear that the Hindus would not hesitate to be violent
against the untouchables, to maintain the established social order. The brutal, inhuman atrocities
being practiced by the Hindus is no less than that being followed upon the Negroes. But since the
untouchables are not as popular amongst the world as the Negroes are, it doesnt prove that they
were less troubled or less tortured, rather it justifies the fact that the Hindus were perfect in
concealing the truth in order to maintain their social image.

The touchables and untouchables belong to the same community, same region and
religion, but were never conjoined. The untouchables were not only excluded from Hindus
social customs but were also debarred geographically. The quarters of the untouchables were far
from the quarters of the Hindus, there was no proximity or closeness between the two. Ambedkar
highlights the degree of contradiction amongst the Hindus by stating the fact as follows:
 Yadav 3

De jure for the purposes of Revenue Administration or Postal Communication, the quarters of
the untouchables are included in the village. But de-facto it is separate from the village (Vol.5
p.62). So the upper caste Hindus used them whenever they wanted but denied any sort of
privileges to them, even when they could afford. Hindus manipulated and used the untouchables
according to their needs under the guise of religious truth. The relationship between the two
clans was like the one between different clans of primitive society. A member of a clan has a
claim over his clan, he has some rights and duties, and thus he comes under the law of the clan.
But a member of the other clan or a clan-less man is a stranger; the relationship between the two
is of war or negotiation. He might be treated kindly, like a guest, but he cannot claim justice,
he is an outlaw. In the Hindu system, though the untouchable come under the veiled patronage
of the Hindus, but still they are outlawed; they have no law, no rights in their favour.

Secondly the Hindu system is very different from the European or American system. In
the European or American system a person is born to a certain class/ community but he may not
necessarily end his life as a member of the same community. He is independent and has right to
choose his occupation, wife, political party, residence, etc. He is an individual in a much
fuller sense because all his relationships are settled by himself for himself. The touchables or
untouchables are in no sense individuals because all or nearly all of his relationship are fixed
when he is born in a certain group (Vol.5 p.63). Even if the untouchable tries to build his
identity by means of gaining knowledge, he was pushed back to his original state. And the result
of repeated failures kindled a feeling of acceptance of servitude as a universal law, which is
irreplaceable and unalterable.

Thirdly the relationship between a touchable and an untouchable is based on ancient

sacred texts. The Hindu law under Manusmriti has unmistakably confirmed the position of the
untouchables as inferior vis--vis the touchables. This inferiority is embodied in a Code of
Social conduct to which the untouchables must conform (Vol.5 p.63). The untouchables want a
contract with the touchables and build a relationship of equality, as they want to rise, attain a
status for themselves, but the touchables do not want to alter the social code, as it would alter
their comfort zone and societal image. Thus the two halves of the village, the touchables and
the untouchables are (now) struggling for resettling what the touchable thinks is settled for ever.
(Vol.5 p.63)

The Hindu law, which deals with the rights and duties of its members, has defined the
social status of the untouchables as low and meager. Following is a catalogue to few of the
biased rules collected from the Law Books of Manu, Yajnavalkya, Narada, Vishnu, Katyayana
etc.
One occupation only the lord prescribed to the Shudra, to serve meekly even these
(other) three castes.(Vol.5 Ch.7 )
 Yadav 4

When two persons abuse each other, their punishment shall be equal if they are equals
in caste; if one is inferior to the other, his punishment shall be double; for a superior, half
(of the ordinary punishment) is ordained.( Vol.5 Ch.7)
As the Brahmana sprang from the mouth, as he was the first born and as he possesses
the Veda, he is by right the lord of his whole creation.( Vol.5 Ch.7)
The Brahmana is declared (to be) the creator (of the world), the punisher, the teacher,
(and hence) a benefactor (of all created beings); to him let no man say anything
unpropitious, nor use any harsh words.( Vol.5 Ch.7)
A Shudra could be the slave of any master of the four castes, a but a Brahman should
never be made to do the work of a slave.( Vol.5 Ch.7)
Ambedkar was a staunch believer of equality and discredited Hindu scriptures. He believed that
Religion must mainly be a matter of principles only. It cannot be a matter of rules. Doing what
is said to be, good by virtue of a rule and doing good in the light of a principle are two different
things. The principle may be wrong but the act is conscious and responsible. The rule may be
right but the act is mechanical.

The untouchables have struggled hard to rise above their meager status but not all
untouchables have risen and fought for their rights like Ambedkar did. The reason behind the
acceptance of continuous oppression by the untouchables has been false consciousness. They
have unknowingly accepted their social status as worthless and lowly. They never strongly tried
to reason or question the Hindu law. Marx recognizes such state of unawareness and acceptance
with false consciousness. He recognizes this state as a helpless state of man, where hes
unaware or mistaken about his own actions, thoughts and motives. Guided by a false ideology,
the unlucky citizen has slipped into illusion, has indulged in abstractions, or simply failed to
understand the real motivations behind his own actions or that of others (Larsson1). The
concept of false consciousness was not originated by Marx, but rather by Engel. Engel, defines
ideology as a process accomplished by the so-called thinker consciously, it is true, but with a
false consciousness. The real motive forces impelling him remain unknown to him; otherwise it
simply would not be an ideological process. He works with mere thought material, which he
accepts without examination as the product of thought, and does not investigate further for a
more remote source independent of thought (Larsson1).

Ideology is a system of false consciousness that helps in sustaining the social order. Adorno
states ideology is notwendig falsches Bewutsein (necessary false consciousness). His
statement needs further justification for better understanding; this ideological false consciousness
is necessary because it maintain a systematic social process. Any society needs ideology as its
basis to survive, and if that ideology is disturbed, the entire hierarchical balance of society is
trembled.
 Yadav 5

False: It does not mean that the ideology is a failed portrayal of how the things are. In fact
the falsehood of the false consciousness could be indirectly true. For example, if a clan which
has no astronomical knowledge, believes that Earth moves around the Sun, because they identify
Sun as a godlike figure and earth as its subject. In this case the false ideology is true but
scientifically its true for some other reason. Similarly the false ideology can also be false and
repressive; it may not be logical, reasonable or scientifically true, like our very own caste system,
which is unjust, and biased to a large section of society.

Consciousness, here stands for the spectrum of all thoughts, beliefs and values that we
associate with ourselves. Michael Rosen states a looser definition of ideology as, say, a
systematic body of thought related to politics (Rosen 5). He writes that there is a puzzling fact
in politics, which keeps the larger majority of public illegitimately and unjustly deprived.
Marx and Engels historical materialism also argues that human consciousness is an altogether
social product, and that all modes of thought have a practical and social basis (Larsson 137).
This politics, mentioned here, is in favour of a few, such that the majority could easily overthrow
them from power but they hardly ever do so. The reason is that the ones that are ruled accept the
unjust behavior by their rulers as legitimate; this gives rise to false consciousness, which is not
easy to break. It is not that the oppressed have been duped or forced to believe this ideology,
rather they voluntarily accept it, because there is a sense of social structure, which it supports and
which is necessary for the survival of society. According to Rosen, an unjust society reflects the
absence of a common consciousness of shared interests on the part of the oppressed rather than
their adherence to a dominant ideology.

False consciousness is also supported by history, which we accept without questioning its
facts. The role of history is to support and justify the idea. It not only states, when an idea came
into being, but also why it did. In a way its a source of consoling us, for the way we are being
treated. This history may not be reasonable but it has deep emotional roots, which helps in
sustaining the social order. Even Engels preposition warned us to accept our ancestors
teachings at face value. Ambedkar also asserts that caste has a divine basis. You must therefore
destroy the sacredness and divinity with which Caste has become invested. In the last analysis,
this means you must destroy the authority of the Shastras and the Vedas (Vol.1 p.69).

Louis Althusser further elaborates Marxs theory of base and superstructure by adding an
angle of ideology to it. His theory of Ideological State Apparatus, is somewhat similar to how the
Hindus controlled the untouchables, who were rather stronger in number than upper caste
Hindus. In Annihilation of Caste, Ambedkar states that religion, social status and property are
all sources of power and authority, which one man has, to control the liberty of another (Vol.1
p.45). Althusser proclaims the state apparatuses like Government and administration as
Repressive State Apparatus and institutions like schools, colleges, religion, art, etc as
Ideological State Apparatus. This latter apparatus aims at private institutions but they possess
 Yadav 6

a political aim of suppressing the masses. Althussers theory is in assonance with the Marxian
theory, as it also promotes the reproduction of labour force and its skill; but Althusser focuses
also on the production of the relations of production. This theory helps us in understanding the
politics of upper caste Hindus who have maintained the relations of exploitation, repression and
discrimination of the untouchables.

Rousseau asserts the fact that, failures are the result of lives lived wrongly in societies
that are badly arranged, not inevitable consequences of Man's Fall (Larsson, p.136). It is true
that the theory of ideology is quite powerful, but it can also be brought down. For instance if
many hostages are under one or two gunmen, then they obviously are aware of their situation,
they just need to unite and overthrow the gunmen. But the problem is that they do not often do
so, they are afraid about its consequences. Thus their situation is due to lack of unity of thought
process and not a deep held irrational belief. In contemporary times, people are becoming
rational and aware about their rights, thus a spark of rebel is born amongst them. Ambedkar
believes that in every society there is an intellectual class which can foresee, it is the class
which can advise and give lead. The masses are largely imitative and follow the intellectuals.
There is no doubt in saying that the destiny of our society is in the hands of intellectuals. If the
intellectual class behaves fairly in an unbiased way and is sensitive towards the lower caste
Hindus, the Indian society would soon be free of caste discrimination.

Works Cited
 Yadav 7

Dorling, Daniel. Injustice: Why Social Inequality Persists. U K. The Policy Press, 2010. PDF file.

Larsson, Joakim. False Consciousness Revisited. On Rousseau, Marx and the Positive Side of Negative

Education. KAPET. Karlstads universitets Pedagogiska Tidskrift. Karlstad University, Sweden,

2011. PDF file.

Moon, Vasant. Annihiliation of Caste. Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Writings & Speeches vol.1.

Delhi. Dr. Ambedkar Foundation, 2014. PDF file.

Moon, Vasant. Untouchability and Lawlessness. Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Writings & Speeches vol.5.

Delhi. Dr. Ambedkar Foundation, 2014. PDF file.

Moon, Vasant. Why Lawlessness is Lawful?. Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Writings and Speeches vol. 5.

Delhi. Dr. Ambedkar Foundation, 2014. PDF file.

Pines, Christopher L. Ideology and False Consciousness: Marx and His Historical

Progenitors. New

York. State University of New York Press, 1993. PDF file.

Rosen, Michael. On Voluntary Servitude: False Consciousness and the Theory of Ideology. UK. The

Policy Press, 1996. PDF file.

Thompson, Anthony. Class Consciousness, 1974. PDF file.

<http://www.acadiau.ca/~thomson/1classconsciousness.pdf>