Caste and Race in India c5: Chapter I. Features of the Caste System
Caste and Race in India c5
- Language
- English
Contents
Chapter I. Features of the Caste System
c5.2
A FOREIGN visitor to India is struck by the phenomenon known as the caste system. He may not understand the full working of the system, but he is aware of the fact that Hindu society is divided into groups, known as castes, with varying degrees of respectability and circles of social intercourse. Baines observes: "It needs but a very short time in the country to bring home to the most casual observer the ubiquity of the institution, and to make him acquainted with some of the principal exoteric features."[1] This is due not only to the fact that caste is the most general form of social organization in India but also because it presents such a marked contrast to the social grouping prevalent in Europe or America. Owing to these two features—ubiquity and strangeness—the institution has found many able scholars devoted to its study. With all the labours of these students, however, we do not possess a real general definition of caste. It appears to us that any attempt at definition is bound to fail because of the complexity of the phenomenon. On the other hand, much literature on the subject is marred by lack of precision about the use of the term. Hence we propose to give a description of the factors underlying this system of castes.
c5.3
The earliest account of this institution, given by a foreigner of the third century B.C., mentions two of the features characterizing it before it was modified by the close cultural contact with Western Europe during the last century. "It is not permitted to contract marriage with a person of another caste, nor to change from one profession or trade to another, nor for the same person to undertake more than one, except he is of the caste of philosophers, when permission is given on account of his dignity."¹ Though this statement of Megasthenes brings two of the most salient features of the institution to the forefront, yet it fails to give a complete idea of the system.
c5.4
¹ Baines, p. 11.
c5.5
¹ Quotation from Megasthenes' account in Wilson, vol. i, p. 347.
c5.6
The outstanding features of Hindu society when it was ruled by the social philosophy of caste, unaffected by the modern ideas of rights and duties, may be discerned to be six.
c5.7.1
(1) *Segmental Division of Society.*—This caste-society was not a more or less homogeneous community in which, whatever distinctions of social status may exist, they are so much in the background that a special inquiry has to be made in order to realize their presence, but a society in which various groups with distinct appellations were prominent. Castes were groups with a well-developed life of their own, the membership whereof, unlike that of voluntary associations and of classes, was determined not by selection but by birth. The status of a person depended not on his wealth as in the classes of modern Europe, but on the traditional importance of the caste in which he had the luck of being born. On the distinction between caste and class, as far only as cleavage into well-marked groups is concerned, MacIver observes: "Whereas in eastern civilizations the chief determinant of class and status was birth, in the western civilization of to-day wealth is a class-determinant of equal or perhaps greater importance, and wealth is a less rigid determinant than birth: it is more concrete, and thus its claims are more easily challenged; itself a matter of degree, it is less apt to create distinctions of kind, alienable, acquirable, and transferable, it draws no such permanent lines of cleavage as does birth."² To restrict ourselves to the Marathi region, a person is born either a Brahmin, Prabhu, Maratha, Vani, Sonar, Sutar, Bhandari, Chambhar, or a Mahar, etc.
c5.7.2
If he chances to take a vocation which is not earmarked for a particular caste—say the military—he remains a casteman all the same. A Brahmin general and a Maratha general, though of equal status in the army, belong to two different status-groups in their private life and there could be any social intercourse between them on equal terms. But this is not the case in a class-society where status is determined by vocation and consequent income. A class has no council, standing or occasional, to regulate the conduct and guide the morals of its members, apart from the laws of the community as a whole. Members of one class follow different vocations, which, when organized, possess standing executive committees, which govern the members of their profession according to their rules. These rules generally exclude the legitimate province of the wider community, and refer only to professional etiquette or economic gain.
c5.7.3
"In the case of the brain-working professions, these common rules and this authoritative direction seek to prescribe such matters as the qualifications for entry, the character of the training, the methods of remuneration, the conditions of employment, the rules of behaviour towards fellow professionals and the public, the qualifications and methods of selection for public appointments, and the terms of service, the maintenance of the status of the profession, and the power of expulsion."¹ Most of the castes on the other hand, excepting the high ones like the Brahmin² and the Rajput, have regular standing councils deciding on many more matters than those taken cognizance of by the committees of the trade unions, associations, or guilds, and thus encroaching on the province of the whole community. How the Brahmin and other high castes managed their affairs is not quite clear, but in the case of the Brahmins of Southern India at least, it seems from an epigraphic record that as occasion arose they used to call a special meeting of the members of the caste.³ The assembly could get its decree executed by the king's officials. The governing body of a caste is called the Panchayat. Some of the offences dealt with by it are: (a) eating, drinking, or having similar dealings with a caste or sub-caste, with which such social intercourse is held to be forbidden; (b) keeping as concubine a woman of another caste; (c) seduction of or adultery with a married woman; (d) fornication;
c5.7.4
(e) refusal to fulfil a promise of marriage; (f) refusing to send a wife to her husband when old enough; (g) refusing to maintain a wife; (h) non-payment of debt; (i) petty assaults;
c5.8
² p. 124, footnote.
c5.9
¹ The New Statesman, Special Supplement, 28th April, 1917, p. 38.
c5.10
² Gujarat Brahmins do have such councils. See Borradaile's Gujarat Caste-rules, translated into Gujarati by Mangaldas Nathoobhoy.
c5.11
³ Hultzsch, I, No. 56.
c5.12.1
(j) breaches of the customs of the trade peculiar to the caste; (k) encroaching on another's clientèle, and raising or lowering prices; (l) killing a cow or any other forbidden animal; (m) insulting a Brahmin; (n) defying the customs of the caste regarding feasts, etc., during marriage and other ceremonies.¹ It will be seen from this list that some of the offences tried by the governing bodies of castes were such as are usually dealt with by the State in its judicial capacity. Thus, a caste was a group with a separate arrangement for meting out justice to its members apart from that of the community as a whole, within which the caste was included as only one of the groups. Hence the members of a caste ceased to be members of the community as a whole, as far as that part of their morals which is regulated by law was concerned.² This quasi-sovereignty of the caste is particularly brought to notice by the fact that the caste council was prepared to re-try criminal offences decided by the courts of law.³ This means that in this caste-bound society the amount of community-feeling must have been restricted, and that the citizens owed moral allegiance to their castes first, rather than to the community as a whole. By segmental division we wish to connote this aspect of the system. The punishments that these councils awarded were: (1) Out-casting, either temporary or permanent; (2) fines; (3) feasts to be given to the castemen;
c5.12.2
(4) corporal punishment, and (5) sometimes religious expiation. The proceeds of the fines were generally spent on a common feast. Sometimes the perquisites of the Panchayat were bought out of them and sometimes again they were devoted to charitable purposes.⁴ This description of the activities of a caste-council will enable us to appreciate the remark, "The caste is its own ruler."⁵ The diversity in the administration of law necessarily led to differences in moral standards of the various castes. There was thus created a cultural gulf between the castes. We may note some of the items of cultural differences among the castes to bring out clearly the implications of this segmentation. Many of the castes have their special deities. Among such castes from Southern India* the following may be noted: Komati, Kamsala, Gamalla, Idiga, Mala, and Madiga¹; from the Central Provinces, Ahir²; and from the United Provinces, Aheriya, Bahaliya, Kharwar, Korwa, Chero, Bhuiyar, Dom, Musahar, and Nai.³ About the differences in religious outlook of the Madras castes it has been said: "Amongst the Brahmin community this one fact stands off clear and distinct, that they do not indulge in the worship of Grāma Devatā, the village gods, to which the aboriginal population almost exclusively bows down."⁴ The customs about marriage and death vary widely among the different castes. Brahmins did not permit widow-marriage nor tolerate concubinage as a caste-practice.
c5.12.3
This could not be said of many lower castes. Not only were there such differences in cultural matters among the different castes, but in theory also different standards of conduct were upheld. Thus the Brahmin Government of Poona, while passing some legislation prohibiting the manufacture and sale of liquors, excluded the Bhandaris, Kolis and similar other castes from the operation thereof, but strictly forbade the use of drink to Brahmins, Shenvis, Prabhus and Government officers.⁵ This variety of morals and customs was so manifest that the early British Courts in India not merely asked the opinion of their pundits, but took the evidence of the heads of the castes concerned as to their actual usages. The collection of laws and customs of Hindu castes, made by Steele under the orders of Government, was intended to help the courts to ascertain the diverse customs.⁶ The Hindus have no standing arrangements for the disposal of their dead. When any person dies it is the caste-fellows who are to be invited to carry the corpse to the cremation-ground and to dispose of it. At the time of marriage a feast has, by common consent, to be given to all the members of one's own caste resident in the village or the town. At the preparation of these feasts as well as in connection with other items of the marriage ceremony it is again the caste-people who run to one's help. These and similar affairs of everyday life require the co-operation of one's caste-people.
c5.12.4
Hence castes are small and complete social worlds in themselves, marked off definitely from one another, though subsisting within the larger society.
c5.13
¹ United Provinces Census, 1911, p. 387; also cf. Hamilton, i, p. 110; Kerr, pp. 316-19; Martin, vol. iii, pp. 179-80; and Steele, pp. 150-1.
c5.14
² The result of this fact is to be seen in the departure of the customs of many castes from the rules laid down in the Hindu sacred laws. See Steele, p. 124 and Appendix A.
c5.15
³ United Provinces Census, 1911, p. 387.
c5.16
⁴ Bengal Census, 1911, pp. 467-9.
c5.17
⁵ Ibid., p. 487.
c5.18
¹ Godavari Dist. Gaz., vol. i, p. 48. ² Russell, ii, p. 31. ³ Crooke, i, pp. 45, 109; ii, pp. 93, 219, 326; iii, 247, 382; iv, 33, 43. ⁴ Madras Census, 1871, p. 137. ⁵ M. G. Ranade in JBBRAS., vol. xx, p. 470. ⁶ Mayne, p.
c5.19
⁴⁵ N.B.—Elphinstone wrote: "What we call Hindu Law applies to Brahmins only; each caste has separate laws and customs" (quoted in Romesh Dutt's India under Early British Rule, p. 332).
c5.20
(2) *Hierarchy.*—In our discussion of the subject so far we have used the comparative degree with reference to the status of different castes, thus assuming beforehand one of the principal characteristics of the caste society, viz. the hierarchy of the groups. Everywhere in India there is a definite scheme of social precedence amongst the castes, with the Brahmin as the head of the hierarchy. Only in Southern India the artisan castes "have always maintained a struggle for a higher place in the social scale than that allowed to them by Brahmanical authority . . . There is no doubt as to the fact that the members of this great caste [Kammalan] dispute the supremacy of the Brahmins, and that they hold themselves to be equal in rank with them". John Fryer, who visited India in 1670, seems to refer to this attitude.¹ In any one of the linguistic divisions of India there are as many as two hundred castes which can be grouped in classes whose gradation is largely acknowledged by all. But the order of social precedence amongst the individual castes of any class cannot be made definite, because not only is there no ungrudging acceptance of such rank but also the ideas of the people on this point are very nebulous and uncertain. The following observations vividly bring out this state of things. "As the society now stands . . . the place due to each community is not easily distinguishable, nor is any common principle of precedence recognized by the people themselves by which to grade the castes. Excepting the Brahmin at one end and the admittedly degraded castes like the Holeyas at the other, the members of a large proportion of the intermediate castes think or profess to think that their caste is better than their neighbours' and should be ranked accordingly."² Martin remarks about Bihar that the Śūdras there were usually divided into four classes, but adds: "The people, who assisted me in making up this account, could not with certainty refer each caste to its class; for they never had bestowed pains to enquire concerning the various claims of such low persons."¹
c5.21
¹ Madras Census, 1871, p. 151 and footnote.
c5.22
² Mysore Census, 1901, p. 400.
c5.23
¹ Martin, vol. ii, p. 466.
c5.24
(3) *Restrictions on feeding and social intercourse.*—There are minute rules as to what sort of food or drink can be accepted by a person and from what castes. But there is very great diversity in this matter. The practices in the matter of food and social intercourse divide India into two broad belts. In Hindustan proper, castes can be divided into five groups; first, the twice-born castes; second, those castes at whose hands the twice-born can take "Pakka" food; third, those castes at whose hands the twice-born cannot accept any kind of food but may take water; fourth, castes that are not untouchable yet are such that water from them cannot be used by the twice-born; last come all those castes whose touch defiles not only the twice-born but any orthodox Hindu.² All food is divided into two classes, "Kachcha" and "Pakka", the former being any food in the cooking of which water has been used, and the latter all food cooked in "ghi" without the addition of water. "As a rule a man will never eat 'Kachcha' food unless it is prepared by a fellow caste-man, which in actual practice means a member of his own endogamous group, whether it be caste or sub-caste, or else by his Brahmin 'Guru' or spiritual guide."³ But in practice most castes seem to take no objection to "Kachcha" food from a Brahmin.⁴ A Brahmin can accept "Kachcha" food at the hands of no other caste; nay, some of them, like the Kanaujia Brahmins, are so punctilious about these restrictions that, as a proverb has it, three Kanaujias require no less than thirteen hearths.⁵ As for the "Pakka" food, it may be taken by a Brahmin at the hands of some of the castes only.⁶ A man of higher caste cannot accept "Kachcha" food from one of the lower, though the latter may regale himself with similar food offered by a member of one of the castes accepted to be higher than his own.
c5.25
² U.P. Census, 1911, p. 328.
c5.26
³ Risley (2), p. 159.
c5.27
⁴ U.P. Census, 1901, p. 227.
c5.28
⁵ U.P. Census, 1901, p. 212.
c5.29
⁶ U.P. Census, 1911, p. 329.
c5.30
The ideas about the power of certain castes to convey pollution by touch are not so highly developed in Northern India as in the South. The idea that impurity can be transmitted by the mere shadow of an untouchable or by his approaching within a certain distance does not seem to prevail in Hindustan. No Hindu of decent caste would touch a Chamar, or a Dom; and some of the very low castes themselves are quite strict about contact. Thus "The Bansphor and Basor, themselves branches of the Dom caste, will touch neither a Dom nor a Dhobi, whilst the Basor, with all the intolerance of the parvenu, extends his objections to the Musahar, Chamar, Dharkar and Bhangi".¹
c5.31
¹ U.P. Census, 1911, p. 381.
c5.32
In Bengal the castes are divided into two main groups: (1) The Brahmins, and (2) the Sūdras. The second class is further divided into four sub-classes, indicating their status as regards food and water: (a) the Sat-Sūdra group includes such castes as the Kayasth and the Nabasakh; (b) then come the Jalacharaniya-Sūdras, "being those castes, not technically belonging to the Nabasakh group, from whom Brahmins and members of the higher castes can take water"; (c) then follow the Jalabyabaharya-Sūdras, castes from whose hands a Brahmin cannot take water; (d) last stand the Asprisya-Sūdras, castes whose touch is so impure as to pollute even the Ganges water, and hence their contact must be avoided. They are thus the untouchables.² In the matter of food Western Bengal resembles Hindustan except in this that in Bengal there are some people who will not accept any "Kachcha" food even from the hands of a Brahmin. "Pakka" food can be ordinarily taken not only from one's own or any higher caste, but also from the confectioner class, the Myras and Halwais.³ As regards the position of the untouchables the following observation will give a clear idea. "Even wells are polluted if a low caste man draws water from them, but a great deal depends on the character of the vessel used and of the well from which water is drawn. A masonry well is not so easily defiled as one constructed with clay pipes, and if it exceeds three and a half cubits in width so that a cow may turn round in it, it can be used even by the lowest castes without defilement . . ." Certain low castes are looked down upon as so unclean that they may not enter the courtyard of the great temples. These castes are compelled to live by themselves on the outskirts of villages.¹
c5.33
² Bengal Census, 1901, p. 307.
c5.34
³ Risley (1), vol. ii, p. 270.
c5.35
¹ Ibid.
c5.36
In Eastern and Southern Bengal² and in Gujarat and the whole of Southern India there is no distinction of food as "Kachcha" and "Pakka" for the purposes of its acceptance or otherwise from anyone but a member of one's own caste. In Gujarat³ and Southern India, generally speaking, a Brahmin never thinks of accepting water, much less any cooked food from any caste but that of the Brahmins, and similarly all the other castes or groups of castes more or less follow the principle of accepting no cooked food from any caste that stands lower than itself in the social scale. This rule does not apply with the same strictness to accepting water. Again as a rule, a lower caste has no scruples in accepting cooked food from any higher caste. Thus all the castes will take cooked food from the Brahmin.
c5.37
² Ibid.
c5.38
³ Forbes, ii, p. 240.
c5.39
The theory of pollution being communicated by some castes to members of the higher ones is also here more developed. Theoretically, the touch of a member of any caste lower than one's own defiles a person of the higher caste; but in actual practice this rule is not strictly observed. In the Maratha country the shadow of an untouchable is sufficient, if it falls on a member of a higher caste, to pollute him. In Madras, and especially Malabar, this doctrine is still further elaborated, so that certain castes have always to keep a stated distance between themselves and the Brahmin and other higher castes so as not to defile the latter. Thus the Shanar, toddy-tapper of Madras, contaminates a Brahmin if he approaches the latter within twenty-four paces.⁴ A Nayar may approach a Nambudiri Brahmin but must not touch him; while a Tiyan must keep himself at the distance of thirty-six steps from the Brahmin, and a Pulayan may not approach him within ninety-six paces. A Tiyan must keep away from a Nayar at twelve paces, while some castes may approach the Tiyan, though they must not touch him. A Pulayan must not come near any of the Hindu castes. So rigid are the rules about defilement which is supposed to be carried with them by all except the Brahmins, that the latter will not perform even their ablutions within the precincts of a Śūdra's habitation.¹ Generally the washerman and barber that serve the general body of villagers, will not render their services to the unclean and untouchable castes; "Even a modern Brahmin doctor, when feeling the pulse of a Śūdra, first wraps up the patient's wrist with a small piece of silk so that he may not be defiled by touching his skin."²
c5.40
⁴ Bhattacharya, p. 255.
c5.41
¹ Wilson, vol. ii, pp. 74-5.
c5.42
² Slater, p. 38.
c5.43
(4) *Civil and Religious disabilities and privileges of the different sections.*—Segregation of individual castes or of groups of castes in a village is the most obvious mark of civil privileges and disabilities, and it has prevailed in a more or less definite form all over India. Southern India, as in the matter of ceremonial purity and untouchability, stands out distinct in the rigidity of these rules. In Northern India generally, in the Maratha country and, as it appears, sometimes in the Telugu and Canarese regions, it is only the impure castes that are segregated and made to live on the outskirts of villages. It does not seem that other groups of castes have distinct quarters of the town or village allotted to them excepting in parts of Gujarat. In the Tamil and Malayalam regions very frequently different quarters are occupied by separate castes or sometimes the village is divided into three parts: that occupied by the dominant caste in the village or by the Brahmins, that allotted to the Śūdras, and the one reserved for the Panchamas or untouchables. In a village of the Ramnad District, the main portion is occupied by the Nayakars, shepherds, artisans, washermen, and barbers, forming a group living in the north-east corner of the village, while the untouchables ply their trades in the north-west and south-east corners.³ In Trichinopoly district the villages have the houses arranged in streets. "The Brahmin, Shudra and Panchama quarters are separate, and in the last of these the Pallans, Paraiyans and Chakkiliyans live in separate streets."⁴ In Madras, Pallis or agriculturists live in separate quarters "distinctively known as the Palli teru".¹ Sometimes, as in the district of Bellary, it is only the untouchable, like the Madiga, that is singled out for segregation, all other castes living in close proximity to one another.² In some parts of the Maratha country castes have been allotted distinct quarters of the village and called by the name of the caste: Brahmin-ali, or wada, Prabhu-ali, Sonor-ali, etc. The depressed classes, like the Mang, Mahar, etc., are forced to live on the outskirts of the village.³
c5.44
³ *Ency. of R. & E.*, vol. x, p. 491 (b).
c5.45
⁴ Trichinopoly Dist. Gaz., vol. i, p. 81.
c5.46
¹ Thurston, vi, p. 16.
c5.47
² Bellary Dist. Gaz., p. 58.
c5.48
³ Mann, p. 108.
c5.49
In Southern India certain parts of the town or village are inaccessible to certain castes. The recent agitation by the impure castes to gain free access to certain streets in Vaikam in Travancore brings into clear relief some of the disabilities of these castes. It is recorded that, under the rule of the Marathas and the Peshwas, the Mahars and Mangs were not allowed within the gates of Poona between 3 p.m. and 9 a.m. because before nine and after three their bodies cast too long a shadow, which, falling on a member of the higher castes—especially Brahmin—defiles him.⁴ However, in the Dravidian south, the very land of the supreme dominance of the Brahmin, the Brahmin was restricted in his rights of access to any part of the village. It is well known that in a village which is a gift to the Brahmins, a Paraiyan is not allowed to enter the Brahmin quarter; but it is not known to many students that the Paraiyans will not permit a Brahmin to pass through their street; so much so that if one happens to enter their quarters they would greet him with cow-dung water. "Brahmins in Mysore consider that great luck will await them if they can manage to pass through the Holeya (untouchables) quarter of a village unmolested."⁵ All over India the impure castes are debarred from drawing water from the village well, which is used by the members of other castes. In the Maratha country a Mahar—one of the untouchables—might not spit on the road lest a pure-caste Hindu should be polluted by touching it with his foot, but had to carry an earthen pot, hung from his neck, in which to spit. Further he had to drag a thorny branch with him to wipe out his footprints and to lie at a distance prostrate on the ground if a Brahmin passed by, so that his foul shadow might not defile the holy Brahmin.¹ In the Punjab, where restrictions regarding pollution by proximity have been far less stringent than in other parts of India, a sweeper, while walking through the streets of the larger towns, was supposed to carry a broom in his hand or under his armpit as a mark of his being a scavenger and had to shout out to the people warning them of his polluting presence.² The schools, maintained at public cost, are practically closed to such impure castes as the Chamars and Mahars. "Both teachers and pupils in the schools make it most difficult for low-caste boys to sit in the class-rooms."³
c5.50
⁴ Russell, iv, p. 189.
c5.51
⁵ Thurston, vi, p. 88
c5.52
¹ Russell, i, pp. 72-3.
c5.53
² Punjab Census, 1911, p. 418.
c5.54
³ Briggs, p. 231.
c5.55
In Dravidian India the disabilities of the lower castes went so far as to prescribe what sort of houses they should build and what material they might employ in the construction thereof. The Shanars and Izhavas, toddy-tappers of the eastern and the western coasts, were not allowed to build houses above one storey in height.⁴ In Malabar the house is called by different names according to the occupant's caste; and peoples of inferior castes dare not refer to their own homes in the presence of Nambudiri Brahmin in more flattering terms than as "dung-heaps".⁵
c5.56
⁴ Bhattacharya, p. 259.
c5.57
⁵ Logan, i, p. 85.
c5.58
In Gujarat the depressed castes used to wear a horn as their distinguishing mark.⁶ From certain decisions noted by the Peshwas in their diaries one can form some idea about the disabilities of some of the castes in the Maratha country. The rulers upheld the claim of the potters, opposed by the carpenters, that they could lead their bridal processions on horse-back, and that of the copper-smiths, against the Lingayats, to go in procession through public streets.⁷ The toddy-tappers of Malabar and the east coast, Izhavas and Shanars, were not allowed to carry umbrellas, to wear shoes or golden ornaments, to milk cows or even to use the ordinary language of the country.⁸ In Malabar, Brahmins alone were permitted to sit on boards formed in the shape of a tortoise, and if a member of any other caste were to use such a seat he was liable to capital punishment.⁹ Members of all castes, except the Brahmins, of S. India were expressly forbidden to cover the upper part of their body above the waist.¹ In the case of women also, until 1865 they were obliged by law to go with the upper part of their bodies quite bare, if they belonged to the Tiyan or other lower castes.² Under the Peshwas a greater distinction was made in the punishment on account of the caste of the criminal than of the nature of the crime itself. Hard labour and death were punishments mostly visited on the criminals of the lower castes.³
c5.59
⁶ Ency. of R. & E., ix, p. 630 (b); also compare Forbes, ii, p. 238.
c5.60
⁷ Ranade, p. 478.
c5.61
⁸ Bhattacharya, p. 259.
c5.62
⁹ Wilson, ii, p. 77.
c5.63
¹ Wilson, ii, p. 79.
c5.64
² Madras Census, 1891, p. 224.
c5.65
³ G. W. Forrest, Official Writings of Mountstuart Elphinstone, 1884, pp. 810-11.
c5.66
In Madras there has been for ages a faction among the non-Brahmin castes dividing most of them into two groups, the right-hand castes and the left-hand castes. The "right-hand" castes claim certain privileges which they strongly refuse to those of the "left-hand", viz. riding on horse-back in processions, carrying standards with certain devices, and supporting their marriage booths on twelve pillars. They insist that the "left-hand" castes must not raise more than eleven pillars to the booth nor employ the devices on standards peculiar to the "right-hand" castes.⁴
c5.67
⁴ Madras Census, 1871, p. 120.
c5.68
Brahminic ceremonies are to be performed with the help of a ritual, and two types of rituals have been evolved: the Vedic and the Puranic. The Vedic ritual is based on the Vedic mantras and is regarded as of great sanctity, while the Puranic is based on formulæ of less sanctity, and not on revealed knowledge. How great this feeling of sanctity about Vedic lore was can be gauged from the fact that in 1843 a Brahmin professor advised the Bombay Board of Education not to publish a certain book because it contained quotations from Pāṇini's grammar which, if printed, would be desecrated.⁵ The Śūdras are asked to content themselves with the latter ritual, while for the impure castes, a Brahmin, unless he is a pseudo-Brahmin or an apostate, would not minister at all. It is only from the hands of the clean Śūdras, again, that a Brahmin will accept any gifts which are meant to store up merit for the donor. Such an advanced caste as the Prabhus in the Maratha country had to establish its right of carrying on the sacred rites according to the Vedic formulæ which was being questioned during the period of the later Peshwas.¹ Certain sacraments cannot be performed by any other caste than the Brahmins. The most sacred literature cannot be studied by the Śūdras. No caste can employ any other priests than the Brahmins, with very few exceptions in Southern India. The artisans of Madras seem to employ their own priests; and the goldsmith caste of the Maratha region established their right of employing their caste-fellows as priests during the last part of the Peshwa-rule.² The innermost recesses of temples can only be approached by the Brahmins, clean Śūdras and other high castes having to keep outside the sacred precincts. The impure castes, and particularly the untouchables, cannot enter even the outer portions of a temple but must keep to the courtyards. In South Malabar, the high castes do not allow the Tiyans to cremate their dead.³
c5.69
⁵ D. V. Potdar, Marathi Gadyāchā Ingrajī Avatār, Appendix, pp. 42-3.
c5.70
¹ Ranade, p. 478.
c5.71
² Ibid., p. 478.
c5.72
³ Madras Census, 1891, p. 299.
c5.73
A Brahmin never bows to anyone who is not a Brahmin, but requires others to salute him; and when he is saluted by a member of a non-Brahmin caste he only pronounces a benediction. Some of the lower castes carry their reverence for the Brahmins, especially in Northern India, to such extremes that they will not cross the shadow of a Brahmin, and sometimes will not take their food without sipping water in which the big toe of a Brahmin is dipped. The Brahmin, on the other hand, is so conscious of his superiority that he does not condescend to bow even to the idols of gods in a Śūdra's house.⁴ The Brahmin has been regarded as the most important subject, needing protection from the king, so much so that the king is styled the protector of the Brahmins and the cows, other subjects being regarded as too insignificant to be mentioned.
c5.74
⁴ Bhattacharya, pp. 19-20.
c5.75
In the Maratha country, at the beginning of the seventeenth century, the great preacher Ramadas tried to inculcate in the minds of the people the idea of unity based on the bond of common locality. During the latest period of the Peshwa-rule (latter half of the eighteenth century), however, this ideal dwindled into the orthodox one wherein Brahmins figure prominently, the State having no higher function than that of pampering them.⁵ Under the Hindu rulers the Brahmins must have secured to themselves many pecuniary privileges, denied to others, on the strength of this orthodox theory of the proper function of the State, and perhaps more because they happened to occupy the posts of importance. Thus in the Maratha region during the period referred to above, the Konkanasth Brahmin clerks obtained the privilege of their goods being exempted from certain duties and their imported corn being carried to them without any ferry-charges. Brahmin landholders of a part of the country had their lands assessed at distinctly lower rates than those levied from other classes. Brahmins were exempted from capital punishment, and when confined in forts, they were more liberally treated than the other classes.¹ Forbes makes the following observation: "The Brahmins of Travancore, as in most other parts of India, have taken care to be exempted as much as possible from punishment; at least, their sentence is far more lenient than that passed on the other castes for the same crimes."² In Bengal the amount of rent for land frequently varied with the caste of the occupant.³
c5.76
⁵ Ranade, p. 456.
c5.77
¹ Ibid., p. 455.
c5.78
² James Forbes, *Oriental Memoirs*, vol. i, 1834, p. 256.
c5.79
³ Holt Mackenzie in *Minutes of Evidence taken before the Select Committee on the affairs of the East India Company*, vol. iii, 1832, p. 216.
c5.80
(5) *Lack of choice of occupation.*—Generally a caste or a group of allied castes considered some of the callings as its hereditary occupation, to abandon which in pursuit of another, though it might be more lucrative, was thought not to be right. Thus a Brahmin thought that it was correct for him to be a priest, while the Chambhar regarded it as his duty to cure hides and prepare shoes. This was only generally true, for there were groups of occupations like trading, agriculture, labouring in the field, and doing military service which were looked upon as anybody's, and most castes were supposed to be eligible for any of them.⁴ Among the artisans, occupations which were more or less of the same status were open to the members of these castes without incidental degradation. No caste would allow its members to take to any calling which was either degrading, like toddy-tapping and brewing, or impure, like scavenging or curing hides.
c5.81
⁴ Rickards, i, p. 29.
c5.82
It was not only the moral restraint and the social check of one's caste-fellows that acted as a restraint on the choice of one's occupation, but also the restrictions put by other castes, which did not allow members other than those of their own castes to follow their callings. Of such restrictive regulations there were in operation only those concerning the profession of priests, no one not born a Brahmin being allowed to be a priest. The effect of these rules was that the priestly profession was entirely monopolized by the Brahmins, leaving aside the ministrants of the aboriginal deities, while they were seen plying any trade or calling which suited their tastes and which was not polluting. The majority of the Konkanasth and Deshasth Brahmins of the Maratha country were devoted to secular pursuits, filling offices of every kind, including the village accountantship.¹ During the Maratha upheaval and after, the Brahmins entered the profession of arms in fairly large numbers. Before the Indian Mutiny the Kanaujia Brahmins used to enter the Bengal army as sepoys in large numbers.² Some of the Rarhi Brahmins of Bengal accepted service under Mohammedan rulers.³ Some of the Brahmins of Rajputana serve their Marwadi masters.⁴ The majority of the Brahmins in the lower Carnatic, according to Buchanan, almost entirely filled the different offices in the collection of revenue and even acted as messengers.⁵ Of the Hindustani Brahmins of Central India it is said that a considerable population of them are concerned in trade.⁶ The Havig Brahmins of the Tulu country performed all kinds of agricultural labour excepting holding the plough.⁷ About the Kanaujia Brahmins of the United Provinces it is asserted that they even till the soil with their own hands, while shop-keeping and hawking form the main source of livelihood for the Sanadhya Brahmins of that region.⁸ In Rajputana the Brahmin is not only willing to do all the labour that his piece of land requires, but is also ready to sell his labour to other more fortunate occupants.⁹ Brahmins in Madras appear as civil, public, and military servants, traders, cultivators, industrialists, and even labourers.¹ It seems that in the days of Akbar, too, the Brahmins were engaged in trade, cultivation, or any advantageous pursuit in general.²
c5.83
¹ Campbell, *Ethnology of India*, p. 73.
c5.84
² Wilson, ii, 151; also compare Martin, vol. i, p. 111.
c5.85
³ Bhattacharya, p. 39.
c5.86
⁴ Wilson, ii, p. 115.
c5.87
⁵ Wilson, ii, p. 59.
c5.88
⁶ Ibid., p. 188; also compare Malcolm, ii, pp. 122-3.
c5.89
⁷ Wilson, ii, p. 67.
c5.90
⁸ Bhattacharya, pp. 50-1.
c5.91
⁹ Baines, p. 28.
c5.92
¹ Madras Census, 1871, p. 133.
c5.93
² Bose, ii, p. 27, quotation from Ain-i-Akbari.
c5.94
More castes than one are engaged in agriculture, as for example, the Vellalas, the Reddys, and the Naickers in Southern India.³ As regards the five artisan castes, grouped together as Panchakalsi, it is observed that it is not impossible for individuals to pass from one occupation to another without any alteration of social status or loss of right of intermarriage.⁴ Weaving is practised by many of the menial castes including even the impure castes of Mahars and Chamars. If one looks at the Census Reports, especially those for 1901, one finds groups, which are regarded as separate castes, following more callings than one. The following remark of Russell is very instructive from this point of view. He observes: "Several castes have the same traditional occupation; about forty of the castes of the Central Provinces are classified as agriculturists, eleven as weavers, seven as fishermen, and so on."⁵ In 1798 Colebrooke wrote: "Daily observation shows even Brahmins exercising the menial profession of a Śūdra. We are aware that every caste forms itself into clubs or lodges, consisting of the several individuals of that caste residing within a small distance, and that these clubs or lodges govern themselves by particular rules or customs or by-laws. But though some restrictions and limitations, not founded on religious prejudices, are found among their by-laws, it may be received as a general maxim that the occupation appointed for each tribe is entitled to a preference. Every profession, with few exceptions, is open to every description of persons."⁶ When Irving says,⁷ "If we except the priesthood, caste has not necessarily any effect on the line of life in which a man embarks," he certainly overstates the position, and the following observation of Baines strikes the true note. "The occupation, again, which is common to the latter (the caste), is a traditional one, and is not by any means necessarily that by which all, or even most, of the group make their living in the present day."¹
c5.95
³ Pandian, p. 81; for Central India, see Malcolm, ii, p. 160.
c5.96
⁴ Baines, p. 59.
c5.97
⁵ Russell, i, p. 9.
c5.98
⁶ Quoted in the Encyclopædia Britannica (11th Edition), vol. v, p. 465 (a).
c5.99
⁷ p. 10.
c5.100
¹ Ethnography, p. 11.
c5.101
(6) Restrictions on Marriage.—Most of the groups, whose features we have attempted to characterize above, are further divided into a number of sub-groups, every one of which forbids its members to marry persons from outside it. Each of these groups, popularly known as sub-castes, is thus endogamous. This principle of strict endogamy is such a dominant aspect of caste-society that an eminent sociologist is led to regard endogamy as "the essence of the caste system".² There are, however, a few exceptions to this general rule of marrying within one's own group which are due to the practice of hypergamy. In some parts of the Punjab, especially in the hills, a man of a higher caste can take to wife a girl from one of the lower castes, while, in Malabar, the younger sons of the Nambudiri and other Brahmins consort with the Kshatriya and Nayar women, among whom mother-right prevails. Excepting for these cases of inter-caste hypergamy each group has to contract matrimonial alliances within its own limits. Outside of this practice the only other authentic case where inter-caste marriage is allowed is that of some of the artisan castes of Malabar.³ Any man venturing to transgress this law will be put out of his own sub-caste and it is doubtful if he would be admitted into the folds of any other respectable caste. To illustrate from the Maratha region, a Konkanasth Brahmin must marry a girl born in a Konkanastha Brahmin family, while a Karhada Brahmin must similarly seek his partner from amongst the Karhada Brahmins and so on, the principle being that marriage must be arranged within the group which is most effectively considered to be one's own. If this rule is violated expulsion from the membership of the group is generally the penalty which the offending parties have to suffer. In Gujarat the unit within which all matrimonial alliances must be contracted is very often still smaller than the so-called sub-caste of the Marathi region. Among the Banias, the trading caste, for example, there are not only the divisions of Shrimali, Porwal, Modh, etc., but there are further subdivisions like Dasa Porwal and Visa Porwal.⁴ This is not all.
c5.102
² Westermarck, ii, p. 59.
c5.103
³ Baines, p. 50.
c5.104
⁴ Compare Malcolm, ii, p. 102.
c5.105
The Dasas are still further required to contract their marriages either from amongst the Dasas of Surat or of Bombay according as they belong to Surat or Bombay. When the groups are so much sub-divided the penalty for transgressing the rule of endogamy in reference to the smallest unit is not expulsion of the offending parties but the gratification by them of the offended groups.
c5.106
To regard endogamy as the chief characteristic of a caste is to treat all so-called sub-castes as the real castes. Gait¹ advances two reasons against this procedure of raising sub-castes to the position of castes, viz. it would be "contrary to the native feeling on the subject", and would be "highly inconvenient in practice, as it would create a bewildering multiplicity of castes". As for the second objection, we may safely pass it over, as it concerns only an administrative difficulty. As regards the Indian sentiment against making a sub-caste into a caste, it must be pointed out that, at best, this is the representation of only one side of the problem; for if, to confine ourselves to the Maratha country, a Saraswat Brahmin is known to the outsiders as a Saraswat, to a Saraswat he is better known either as a Shenvi or as a Sashtikar or Pednekar. Stated generally, though it is the caste that is recognized by the society at large it is the sub-caste that is regarded by the particular caste and the individual. It is mainly indifference towards others, so characteristic of the Indian system, that is responsible for this attitude. For a Brahmin most others are Sūdras, irrespective of high or low status; and for two or three higher castes that are allied to the Brahmins in culture, the rest of the population, excepting the impure castes and some other specific groups, is Kulwadi or Sūdra—a generic term for manual workers. The higher castes are grouped together as either Ashrafin in Bihar,² Bhadralok in Bengal, or Pandhar-peshe in Maharashtra. Further, if we are to take some kind of Indian sentiment as our guide in our analysis, then, as according to the orthodox theory on this matter there are only two or at the most three castes, in the present age, we shall have to divide the whole population of any major linguistic province into two castes, Brahmin and Sūdra, or at the most three, where the existence of the Kshatriya is grudgingly granted. Evidently no scientific student of caste, not even Gait himself, has proposed to follow Indian opinion on this matter. There is ample reason why, to get a sociologically correct idea of the institution, we should recognize sub-castes as real castes.
c5.107
¹ Ency. of R. & E., vol. iii, p. 284.
c5.108
² Martin, i, p. 110.
c5.109.1
Of the features of a caste society dealt with so far three pertain to the caste as a whole; for the status in the hierarchy of any sub-caste depends upon the status of the caste, from which follow the various civil and religious rights and disabilities, and the traditional occupation is determined by the nature of the caste. The other three features, which are very material in the consideration of a group from the point of view of an effective social life, viz. those that regulate communal life and prescribe rules as regards feeding, social intercourse and endogamy, belong to the sub-caste. In the matter of the Panchayat or the caste-council, which is the tribunal for enforcing the moral and economic rules of the group, the sub-caste generally possesses its own council. In the Punjab this is the case in all castes, except the artisans and menials. "Where the sub-divisions are not very clearly defined, or where the numerical strength of the whole caste is small, there is one governing body for the whole caste."¹ The following description of the sub-caste in Bengal clearly brings out the function we have mentioned as peculiar to it. "Almost every caste is divided into a number of smaller groups which will only marry amongst themselves. Usually these groups will not eat together and often they will not even take water from each other or smoke from the same 'hukka' . . . These endogamous groups are generally known as sub-castes.
c5.109.2
Each sub-caste manages its own affairs quite independently of the others, and in the case of the lower castes each has its own separate Panchayat or standing committee, by which all social questions are decided."² In the United Provinces it is the sub-caste that forms the unit of social organization, and as such has its own council to look after its affairs quite independently of the similar councils of the other sub-castes.³ Further, inter-dining and inter-drinking are restricted to the group which is endogamous.¹ About the Central Provinces Russell observes ²: "The real unit of the system and the basis of the fabric of Indian society is this endogamous group or sub-caste." Though this group is usually little known outside the man's own caste, yet it is the members of the sub-caste that attend "the communal feasts held on the occasions of marriages, funerals and meetings of the caste [sub-caste] Panchayat". The remark of the Census Operator for Madras that it is the small endogamous sub-divisions "which are for all social purposes the real castes" ³ is corroborated by F. J. Richards in the case of Salem District when he observes: "The Unit of Hindu society is the endogamous group or sub-caste." ⁴ The description of the sub-caste of a Hindustani caste given by Sherring will illustrate this.
c5.109.3
He observes about the Barhai or carpenter caste of Hindustan that its seven sub-castes "are so distinct from one another that they hold no direct social intercourse with each other, either by marriages, or by eating or smoking together". ⁵ Further, some of the sub-castes have such a distinctness about their cultural items, as for example among the Vellalas, that it is not possible to give a general account of the marriage and other customs applicable to all the sub-divisions. While some of them recognize freedom of divorce and re-marriage and even polyandry, others follow strictly the Brahmanic rules.⁶ The remark of Gait that "as a rule the prohibition of intermarriage between members of the different sub-castes is far less rigid than it is between members of different castes, and when the rule is broken, the penalty is usually not expulsion, but merely some form of atonement, after which the member of the higher of the two sub-castes concerned, and possibly his or her parents, take rank in the lower " ⁷ may be urged as a potent reason why sub-castes should be treated as strictly subordinate to a caste.
c5.109.4
Here it must be pointed out that in the United Provinces at least "the penalty for breaches of sub-caste endogamy appears to be as severe as the penalty for similar breaches of caste-endogamy", and that, though the penalty for the transgression of rules about sub-caste commensality varies in different castes, it seems that generally caste and sub-caste commensality are much on a par in this respect.¹ Hence it is but proper to treat endogamy within each of the groups constituting caste-society as one of its principal features.
c5.110
¹ Punjab Census, 1911, p. 417.
c5.111
² Bengal Census, 1901, p. 351.
c5.112
³ U.P. Census, 1911, p. 338.
c5.113
¹ Ibid., p. 353.
c5.114
² Op. cit., vol. i, p. 10.
c5.115
³ Madras Census, 1901, p. 128; also compare Kerr, p. 270: "You may sometimes hear a native say that he is a Brahmin. But not unfrequently when you ask him to name his caste, he mentions the minor sub-division, or perhaps the trade or profession, to which he belongs."
c5.116
⁴ Salem Dist. Gazetteer, pp. 123-4.
c5.117
⁵ Rev. M. A. Sherring, *Hindu Tribes and Castes*, vol. i, 1872, p. xxii.
c5.118
⁶ Madras Census, 1891, p. 234.
c5.119
⁷ Gait, op. cit., p. 232.
c5.120
¹ U.P. Census, 1911, p. 354; Gait's observation may apply only to Gujarat.
c5.121
So far we have treated of the distinctions between groups in the caste-society, which were held together in a chain by the fact that they were arranged in a system, the apex of which was formed by the group designated Brahmin. Each of these groups, major as well as minor, generally known as castes and sub-castes, has a name. When any group of the same name happens to have a wide distribution, language delimits effective social intercourse, which obtains only amongst members of the same group speaking the same language. Whatever might have been the situation in the past, when the jurisdictional factor, as Jackson terms it,² was a force affecting such social intercourse, in the beginning of the nineteenth century linguistic boundaries fixed the caste-limits. In any linguistic area there were from fifty to two hundred of these major groups divided into five hundred to two thousand minor groups. An individual's circle of community-feeling was any of these minor groups, in which he or she was born; but as far as civic life was concerned it was the major group that decided the status of an individual.
First 129 of 154 passages. Read on
Linked texts (1)
- Aṣṭādhyāyī — Pāṇini, Sanskrit