1

PERSPECTIVES ON THE STUDY OF CASTE SYSTEM

Concept of caste derived from Portuguese word 'casta' meaning 'race' or 'pure stock'.
Therefore it's not indigenous concept and was used by Portuguese to understand social
groups in India. The concept that is equivalent to caste and used by Indians is jati(based on
birth). Therefore birth defines caste and so its inherited identity.

GS GHURYE (study university PDF)

Academic reputation was built on the basis of his doctoral dissertation at Cambridge which
was later published as Caste And Race In India 1932. In this and his other works, he
examined caste from a historical, indological, comparative and integrative perspective.
Questioning the myopic view of caste by colonial rulers. Looks at understanding of caste by
outsiders and looks at their limitations to explain caste through historical and cultural
approach. Different colonial studies:
● Sir Herbert risley: Race theory of caste through his study of caste in Bengal. He's
saying caste is a product of race. Aryans consider themselves as a superior caste
from indigenous people. But this racial distinction did not sustain a prolonged period
of time because of hypergamy (higher caste men are marrying to lower caste
women), so intermixing of the race of child. Therefore race originated caste and
occupation stabilised it.
● JH Hutton: He had described the caste structure in his book Caste in India. He held
that the central feature of the caste system was endogamy. Around this fact are built
up the various restrictions and taboos. Interaction must not violate these restrictions.
● Nesfield and Dalhamn: Occupation theory of caste. They say that caste has
nothing to do with race. Aryans divided themselves based on occupation, so caste
has nothing to do with colours or race. It's due to occupation. Three major
occupations are priest (pursuance of knowledge), administration and governance
(war), trade, commerce and profit mobilization. People according to these three
occupations divided and subdivided themselves but they used to carry these
occupational identities with themselves. They also advocate that beside this caste,
there are caste groups that present those who are given freedom to choose their
occupation. Two caste groups are: one who are getting a caste name on the basis of
their occupation like ironsmith and the other have their own name but they are given
freedom to work in any occupation such as Jat, Gurjar. Therefore caste in India like
race is not a fixed relationship rather its dynamic. This theory was accepted by GS
ghurye.
● Hocart: Ritual theory. Different groups of people went for the performance of
different rituals. On the basis of rituals they follow, they get their caste name. Magical
rituals to ensure rainfall in time and to maintain peace and tranquility are named as
brahmins as their performing rituals for welfare of others. Those who charm weapons
and seek blessings from the presiding deity , most of the rituals are related to war,
crown weapons, they are called kshatriyas. Goddess of wealth such as Lakshmi puja
as a little tradition is universalized it means capitalism is reached to the soul and
mind of everybody and they are called vaishyas. Shudras(farmers) perform rituals
centring about tools, lands products and purificatory rites by washerman and barber.
Therefore caste originated from different rituals performed by different people.
 2

● Senart: Commensality theory of caste. Commensality means people coming

together as a group, they can have inter relationships with each other, social
proximity with each other and those who develop strong bondage. Caste is a
localised community of those who trace the route from common ancestors and
worship some ancestors and recall the source of origin. Therefore cost is a product of
common social commensality.

He is criticizing the colonial theory of caste. Caste is a product of values that are accepted in
Indian society such as asceticism, pursuit of knowledge, sacrifice and value of detachment
and those who are holding these values, they're commanding the highest position in society.
Therefore brahmins used to get the highest position. Therefore he says that caste is not a
static system and if people follow these values they also can be placed in upper strata like
Maharishi Valmiki and Vishva Mitra. Therefore one is not born as untouchable; his values are
not standing at par with the above value. So caste is a dynamic system and it is not a
product of heredity. He never looks into caste as a divisive element of society. Caste in
traditional India was defined by values and was greatly subjected to change . People
belonging to different castes trace their origin from the same gotra as they go for different
occupations. Therefore caste differentiates and lineage and gotra integrates. Subsequently
he changed his approach to study caste after British published a caste census. Based on the
data collected by British he interpreted the data and on its basis he's giving an authentic
situation of caste. On the basis of the state he speaks about six fundamental features of
caste: in his book Caste And Race In India 1920
1. Segmental division of society: In every village of Indian society numerous castes
are present. The caste present in a particular village is also present in other villages.
So people belonging to a caste living in different villages are regulated by caste
council also called jaati sabha. It has three roles to play:
a. Legislative power: make rules pertaining to marriage dress etc
b. Executive power: implement these rules
c. Judicial power: anybody violating these rules will be subjected to
punishment. People belonging to caste
coming together in different times and accepting the rules formulated by jaati
sabha in promoting unity. So he says that caste groups are constituting a
small society and all the small societies are driven by their rules and also
accept three Vedas. So unity within caste is promoted by caste council and
between castes is promoted by values. Therefore Indian society was greatly
segmented on the basis of caste and its societies coming together based on
values and caste and constituting India.
2. Hierarchy: Its a scheme which arranges castes in terms of higher or superior and
lower or inferior positions in relation to each other. Caste hierarchy is based on
values which are dynamic and so the hierarchy is also not fixed. Eg, Vishwamitra.
Therefore caste position in hierarchy does not depend on wealth and status and it
was an ideological system in which upper caste was the point of reference.
Nowadays caste has been based on a hereditary system where one enjoys privileges
and the other is deprived of every privilege. Upper and lower position is fixed and
Mobility is possible only in the middle position. Their forecast evolved into an
exploitative system. According to Gandhiji, caste is the product of deeds.
 3

3. Restrictions on food drinks and social commensality: Caste system in India has
strong connectivity between caste hierarchy and food hierarchy. Food in case of
caste society in India is divided into five categories:
a. Fruits and vegetables: purest of the pure
b. Uncooked food
c. Food prepared in ghee or oil
d. Food prepared in water
e. Leftover food. Higher is the position of a caste,
lower the number of food items it is supposed to accept from the least number
of caste group.For example in Maharashtra there is a group of untouchables
called Senars. They consider themselves as pure and they have their own
deities. You never accept water and food from other untouchables. Therefore
food behaviour is not only defining inter caste relationship it's also a defining
intra caste relationship. However food roles have become weaker in
contemporary India.
4. Civil and religious privileges and disabilities: Ghurye collected data from different
provinces of India between 1896 and 1910. He found out that Mahars of Maharashtra
were not permitted to enter into the city of Pune after 2 p.m. till middle of night
because the long shadow may fall on higher caste people and consequently polluting
them. Untouchables in Gujarat are supposed to carry Matka to spit otherwise it may
pollute to higher caste. untouchables are supposed to carry brooms in hand to
remove their footprints so that higher caste men cannot come in contact with it and
become impure. In Punjab when untouchable enters the village they have to shout so
that people can maintain distance from him. In South India untouchables are keeping
water in New Earth and pot everyday and when Brahmin pass through there and put
his foot in that water pot and untouchable start their Day by drinking that water. So
discrimination was present in every part of the country
5. Lack of unrestricted choices of occupation: castewas occupation specific till the
entry of Mughals in India. after the entry some kind of change occurred. But a drastic
change was experienced during British period. Like in South India brahmins went for
trade.he mentions from census data 1911 that in Bengal there were eight different
castes who were potters and 12 agriculturists.
6. Endogamy: inter caste marriages prohibited. Every caste was segmented into
smaller subdivisions or sub castes and these were the units of endogamy.
Hypergamy was greatly practiced.
 4

M N SRINIVAS

He was a structural functionalist who borrowed the concept of middle range theories from
the USA and field work from the UK. Village studies by him came as a response to the
colonial view. He in The Myth of Self Sufficiency Of Indian villages busted the colonial Idea
and showed
● marriage exogamy,
● weekly haats, festivals fairs
● Agricultural land in other villages
● Presence of jatti sabha
In Religion and Society Among the Coorgs of South India, he showed concepts of
sanskritization, westernisation, secularization and dominant caste. This show that caste
system is not a static static model and with seculat mobility, ritualistic mobility is also
possible as seen among the coorgs and vokkaligas. He had written An Obituary To Caste on
the 21st century and castewith the advent of globalisation. However in reality we see a
rebirth of the caste system. his theory can be understood as an analysis of varna and caste
system.
Book: 21st century new avatar of caste
● Political economic
● Gender
● Urbanisation
● Social movement perspectives study of caste
Shrinivas looks at India through the lens of cast. He found out strong relation of castewith
mode of production,economic structure and political and educational structure. One can see
Shrinivas as caste determinist. His understanding of caste is based on field data.

Srinivas on Varna and caste

he tells that Western scholars confronted to varna system in India when the study India.
Shrinivas tells that to study the relationship of both:
● Caste is implicit in Varna
● Caste is different from Varna
● Varna and caste engaged in conflict with each other

Varna Caste

It tells that food groups are present namely It it tells that with in a village there is a
Brahmin Kshatriya vaishya shudra around 25 castes and around 20000 in
India

Its a fixed hierarchy Its dynamic and competitive hierarchy

Varna is a partial system (no untouchables Caste is all inclusive (untouchable are here)
here)

It offers partial view Realistic view

Shudras are homogeneous social group Shudras hare have power and wealth
declaring themselves as Kshatriyas
(sanskritization of shudras) there are many
 5

castes within shudras

Argues that Varna provides a distorted image of caste, unless and until one get away from
this view one cannot understand Indian society.
Varna hierarchy gives importance to ritual factor Wilde caste hierarchy gives importance to
both ritual and secular factor.
when ambitious caused strives for mobility that keeps dominant caste as point of reference
(reference group theory)

Srinivas on caste mobility

Caste as stratification rather than hierarchy
Inferred from data of various village studies in the 1970s and historical text that caste
mobility was historic as well as contemporary. Using both he show that caste system is not
fixed and past positions are dynamic.
● Migration leads to caste Mobility.
● Caste mobility possible through Jati campaign,eg, Jat mahasabha.
● Through king's Grace: King upgrading the casteof a group
● By generosity(welfare funding) one can experience caste mobility
● Social religious movements: Yadav and Jat benefited from Arya samaj movement
● Accident: woodcutters enter the tirumala hills and discovered the deities is
padmavathi and Sri Venkateswara. The constructed the temples in started
worshipping them as priests.
Hence caste is not static. Shrinivas considers caste having ritual (by birth and culture) and
secular hierarchy(by wealth power education)
improvement in secular position of a caste gives aspiration of moving up in ritual hierarchy.
Eg, sanskritization.
Ritual mobility also gives rise to secular mobility. casteis dynamic system.
He says sometimes secular mobility can be end in itself. Eg, Nair joint army e and getting
land grant but never take Brahman status but got Kshatriya status. Secular mobility as an
end makes casteconsciousness more stronger.
Caste mobility has given rise to:
● Inter caste conflict: eg, Vedas and Smiths v/s lingayats due to which former suffered
download mobility.
● Inter caste conflict: Chukliars and Periyars in South India. Both are untouchables but
when the former tried to show their superiority, conflict.
● Rise to multiple forms of domination (traditional, ritual domination): Oscar Lewis in
Rampur village sau Jat are economically dominant, Rajput politically dominant and
brahmins are are ritually dominant.

Srinivas on dominant caste

Shrinivas sociology is a reflection of empirical reality. During 1973 reflected on land reforms
and rise of the new dominant caste. Intermediate caste groups not suffering from the stigma
of pollution benefited from land reforms and panchayati Raj institutions. Eg, Yadav and
bhumihar. New tenancy laws advocator that if tenants has occupancy right of land of 8 years
can claim the land as theirs. They became marginal and medium farmers and getting
consolidated income. When they got us they did not tried Sanskrit translation but invested on
 6

the children education. evolving into which powerful ended class now the develop politikal
aspirations. Political parties and cooperative were formed and consolidated the
castemembers and capture power in PRIs. Eg, Reddy in karnataka, Yadav in UP.
Shrinivas coined an acronym: AJGR (Ahir, Jat, Gujjar and Rajput) for the dominant castes
and stated that they would eat of democracy in India by appropriating all political
power.(write from s l Doshi book)
TK oomen : casteis a power reservoir and caste leaders are power exercisers. Show the
caste leaders hijack power in the name of caste.
Rajni Kothari: caste needs politics as much as politics needs caste. Caste needs politics to
strengthen its base. Politics needs caste as a vote bank.
Ghanshyam Shah: rise of dominant caste in India is giving rise to classization of caste.
Caste is a product of culture while class is a product of interest. hence backward castes are
coming together as a single ka class: dominant caste : fore gratification of their common
interest.
Yogesh atal argues that dominant caste is a vague concept. as through it one can not
sufficiently understand the dynamics of politics in India.

Srinivas on reservation policy

Caste hierarchy is not a fixed header it has regularly castemobility takes place. And snow
casteinto kahlati is forward or backward. Eg, Brahmana in Rampura were landless.
Caste cannot be basis of reservation in education and employment. If casteis used for
reservation then it will halt the meritorious development. Makers of constitution talked about
only two groups: SC (social exclusion), ST (geographically excluded). in case of India people
winning election on basis of caste wants to reciprocate to them by giving reservation to their
vote banks, i.e, reservation given to OBC driven by compulsion of democratic politics and
not due to social exclusion.
Show the politics of reservation has super in post itself on sociology of reservation

20th century new avatar of caste

This is an edited book of Shrinivas where different issues are addressed by differenct
sociologist. In this book
Leela Dubey tells to study caste on the basis of gender. Untouchability in caste as same
way in gender. Eg, Sabarimala case. Family wealth is is used and conserve for marriage of a
girl and hence not educating her. Considering a women as liability leads to to low sex ratio
and termination of pregnancy is taking place. Specific rituals are there related and open for
men. Domestic rituals are done by women. Religion is denied to women and social inclusion
is absent. Hence casteshould be studied through lens of gender.
ine Shrinivas book he reflects on strengthening of caste politics in UP in 1990. at that time
backwardclass parties got highest number of seats in elections such as BSP for extremely
backward and SP for backward class. When the separated it was death of ideology
supporting backward. Politics of opportunities I'm was predominating over ideological
politics,ie, BSP = SC + brahmins in UP election as a vote bank. due to this opportunitism,
political crisis and affection takes place

Obituary to caste
Before his death Shrinivas shifted to Bangalore. After seeing phenomenal rise of Bangalore
after IT broom. There he observed that society of that area was changing. Marriage was
checking free of caste and people have become more consumerist. He argues that
 7

globalisation will bring death to cast. But in contemporary India caste is weakening as well
as strengthening at the same time.

Critique
● Villages too small a unit to represent Indian society
● Cannot explain Revolutionary change
● Tehri illogical
 8

LOUIS DUMONT

In 1970s French sociologist Louis dumont in his seminal work Honi Hierarchicus: caste
system and its implication 1966 synthesized macro perspective of Ghurye with micro
perspective of empirical studies. His theory of caste hierarchy locates its bases in in pollution
and purity distinction and it is a special type of inequality according to him.
He was a French scholars and contemporary of Shrinivas and AR Desai. he was impressed
by the architecture of Indian temples and during his Indian visits he visited temple and spoke
to Brahmin and devotees. through the narrative see gets in Idea of Hindu Indian society. We
develop interest to study Indian society as sociology.
He was influenced by Earnest Bougle, his teacher. He was influenced by Bougle's cultural
explanation of caste and his ideas that division of labour in caste system is not an economic
basis but cultural bases and hence not exploitative. Bougle further argues that position of
every other caste is relative to Brahmin and they evaluate themselves as taking position of
Brahman as reference and every caste is concerned with boundary maintenance . hi
condensed the three core features of Bougle into one all-encompassing principle of caste as
an ideology of separation of pure and impure. His teacher wrote a book on caste through
which Dumont developed idea of caste. He said the casteis pervasive and holistic social
institution in India and is getting support from Hindu ideology and literature. he said division
of labour present within caste system is guided by cultural logic and not economic needs.
Different caste specialise in different occupations and they are not money centric but rather
through culture. Caste system was a value based system and the core values you are
associated with Brahmins. The position was defined by approximately of distance to the
position of Brahman true value adherence. Every caste promotes unity within itself by
making boundary around them and this maintenance is producing hierarchy in caste. Hence
its unit system and exclusive to India.
He was also influenced by Hegel Idea theory. casterelationship is real coming from
caste hierarchy idea which is coming from Hindu religious text. When casteidea is there
then caste is practiced.
He was also influenced by French anthropologist and structuralist Levi Strauss. He said
every structure will have within itself binary opposites. Similarly there are binary opposite
symkast also.

Structure of caste
Louis dumont says that caste structure and is founded on binary opposites. Retails cost
structure is product of caste rules and that roles are putting one as metrical to other. He
argued that casteis based on the binary values of purity and pollution. The difference is
absolute and one cannot change his purity or impurity. The route of purity is hereditary and
by just simply adopting the upper caste culture one cannot get pure. Sociologist life m n
Srinivas and McKim Marriott, Bailey - all those who glorify mobility in the caste system suffer
from socio ll centric biasness.
He says that casteproduces hierarchy and class produces stratification. Brahmani position is
never been product of wealth and power and therefore one with wealth cannot mobilize them
upward to brahmanic cast. It's the culture that makes brahmins superior. So in secular
structure there is dynamic mobility in hierarchy. but in ritual hierarchy mobility of position is
not observed and hence is fixed. Ritual hierarchy is fixed like a mountain even if a secular
hierarchy does not matter because at its structural level it's unamendable. secular hierarchy
is product of interest and ritual hierarchy is product of ideology. Culture define superiority,
 9

rigidity of brahmanic positions. he says that supremacy of ritual structure over secular
structure can best be understood through jajmani relationship- DOL is based on cultural logic
and not individual preference. Birth to a particular group and cultural logic defines occupation
of a man.
Is main argument about caste in his work homo hierarchicus are following:
● India is one
● The unity is found above all ine ideas and values
● Caste is fundamental institution of Hinduism
● The opposition of pure and impure is Central to the caste system
● Hierarchy and separation are two basic aspects of opposition between purity and
impurity and hence of the caste system
● The casteideology is an all embracing ideology and power is subordinate to status
● distinguishes Indian society from modern society is fundamental social principle is
equality
● There cannot be any Revolutionary sociology
● The change in contemporary India is organisation rather than structural.

Criticism/ limitation
1. Joan Quigley says kings were Central to society and not Brahmins. demand Court is
knowledge of caste from mainly Brahmin and religious text. Both showing prominent
superior.
2. J Berreman conducted study on untouchables of Kumaon and Garhwal. Hi observed
that untouchables of that region clean clothes and never smoked which is largely
opposite to Brahmins who were having impure culture. So castenot producing purity
and pollution but subordination and domination. Dumont's view is book view rather
than empirical view.
3. Jonathan Perry argues that purity is ascribed and achieved. Purity from Dumonts
perspective is a collective attribute associated with brahmins but in reality it is an
individual achievement. Difference between jewel and religious leaders like Nanak
Dev sant Tukaram had achieved purity of Apex level by devotion knowledge
perseverance individually. Therefore here brahmanic purity is not always endorsed,
their impurity is also questioned
4. Andre beteille called Dumont view as idealistic view. his view of caste is not
reflecting on historical change which India has experienced. Beteille says casteis not
written on stone.
5. Dipankar Gupta contradicts his view. In a Jatt village brahmanic presence is in
auspicious. They are seen as greedy lazy and therefore not respected.
6. Veena Das she says in India there are three different body of people enjoying higher
status and they are king Brahman and Sadhu. Out of these whose status is higher or
lower is context-specific.
7. Moffat makes a distinction between casteas consensual model and disjunctive
model. To Louis dumont castewas consensual model. in contemporary time brahmins
Supriya Rati is being questioned starting from self respect movement till dalit
movement. higher caste is and was kind of slavery for the lips and to escape the
caste hierarchy they converted to Buddhism and other religion. Hence one should
look at conflicts rising due to caste system, ie, disjunctive model.
 10

Louis dumont theory of caste lead to the polarization of sociologists of India. to justify their
view of Indian society e dumont and Pocock founded a sociological journal called
contribution to Indian sociology. In this they give importance to ethno Sociology. This
approach of his was questioned by Marxist empiricist feminist and collective opposition to
him made him more popular and his cultural logical approach more appealing as
methodology to study Indian society. However this approach of dumont is largely driven by
eurocentric biasnes as it tries to draw the conclusion that hierarchical society is qualitatively
different from stratificational society forgetting the fact that hierarchies make strong
appearance in stratified system.
 11

ANDRE BETEILLE

French father Bengali mother. Become sociology teacher in Delhi. Was a science student
earlier. Started his analysis of caste from empirical study of of caste in village of sripuram in
Tanjore district of Tamilnadu ( Sripuram: A Village In Tanjore District 1962 ) which he was
explained in his book Caste Class And Power : Changing Patterns Of Stratification In a
Tanjore Village 1965.
Followed the Weberian approach in Indian sociological discourse. Reality is vast
unorganised dichotomous and chaotic. Dipankar Gupta says that Andre beteille has brought
Max Weber to India.
Looked India through lens of casteand says one should look India with multidimensional
approach or prospective. He introduced interdisciplinarity in Indian sociology. He also talks
about changing political relationship. He was student of Ramchandra Guha.
He wrote three books and other major works:
● Caste class power (book): studying social stratification by the weberian theory of a
Tamil village
● casteold to new book: changing nature of caste in India
● Backward class and new social order book: caste and politics and addresses
reservation policy
● Comparison between pollution and poverty
● Debate between Louis dumont and Andre bete on whether caste is hierarchical or
stratified.

Caste class and power

Multidimensional character of stratification. He conducted field study in Tamil Nadu village
sripuram. He found three castes:
● BRAHMIN: for the division between Vedic Brahmin and non Vedic Brahmin. Vedic
Brahman of two types:
○ Sri Vaishnav (Iyengar -Vishnu worshippers)
○ Smarth (Iyer- Shiv worshippers)
Non Vedic brahmins of two types- Shiv temples (Bhattacharya) and Vishnu temples
(Acharkar).
There is a competitive hierarchy between different kinds of brahmins. Iyengars consider
themselves ritually superior to Iyers but the latter refuses to accept their superiority and pure
status. Both go for different symbols. Iyer put vibhuti on the forehead which is horizontal but
Iyengar put vertical red Tilak. Hence all brahmins are not a unified group as said by some
sociologists like Louis dumont.
● NON BRAHMIN: different castes like barber carpenter Smith are being unified under
self respect movement as caste cluster. He tells these non brahmins but peasant and
tenant working on land of Brahman traditionally. food is given by Brahmin to non
Brahmin in a separate utensils and outside their house. they were not even allowed
to consume the food cooked for Brahmins. Caste system change as every caste is
still following customs rituals practice. Visited sometime change is noticed in inter
caste and intra caste relationship. After independence people are working in different
fields. Non-brahmin winning political power and gaining from land reforms and
becoming economically efficient. Many brahmins of observing the change became
industrial list trader. But it despite self respect movement many affluent Brahmin
family are still there. In village power house families were from both Brahmin and non
 12

Brahmin. Earlier Brahmin lived at Agraham and untouchables lived at Cherri. Village
solidarity was a myth and castedefine the territory. Within caste there is probation
and between castes there is hierarchy. Now in contemporary time non Brahmin
and Brahmin are attending the same college staying together and diluting caste
barriers. No discrimination is not present the eat together in the utensil. Next
generation is now becoming taller and 2 casteand caste becoming weaker. Andre
beteille also says that within cast, class formation also takes place and these are
people from different castes comes along with the common economic interest
forming s class. But not only caste or class is important in India. Hence castenot
always produce hierarchy and class not always produces stratification ( refer to
stratification PDF paper1). India is no longer caste centric society only, people decide
their role with respect to context in everyday life. give importance to caste class and
power by caste as a factor of inequality is is diluting with evolution of modern social
relation
● ADI DRAVIDA or untouchables

Caste old to new

In contemporary society everybody is getting education and it became vehicle of social
transformation to improve the class education. Cost neutral profession was introduced like
doctor engineer lawyer. Introduction of democratic politics and institutions. casteis now not
defining the class and power. Andre beteille considers that social change in Indian society
can be examined with reference to the changing location of people in caste class and power
structures in time and space. It means that till the beginning of the century Indian society
was relatively closed and it has now become extremely open and therefore India is not only
a caste or class society. It is experiencing continuity and change. In the book discusses
about:
● Changing nature of hierarchy: caste is present mainly in form of consciousness as
many caste neutral professions are present. It is eroding the hierarchical gradation of
people. Behaviour and lifestyle are now not distinctive.
● Changing of vertical relationship between the family and individual: jajmani
relationship was hereditary relationship between two families. Now Babar can open
his shop and make himself empowered economically and socially by refusing to offer
free services in form of jajmani. Vertical ties are shrinking. Materialistic value is now
preferred over moral and religious value. Therefore India is changing with changing
system of values
● Changing system of values

Backward class and new social order

Is said that other name of reservation policy is social compensation. Reservation is redressal
to social cultural discrimination. First intensity of discrimination is to be evaluated to give
proper compensation. Discrimination against scheduled caste is established hence
compensation is legitimate. In case of other backward classes, educational and economical
backwardness was there. In order to enable them, land and education should be given, not
reservation in occupation, As compensation is given with respect to discrimination. Politics of
reservation predominates sociology. If reservation is a solution to the problem of hierarchy
then in India present multiple hierarchies like on the basis of gender income and location.
 13

The makers of Indian constitution introduced reservation for a definite period. Here it was
given to them so that socially deprived groups can come to par with their counterparts. If it is
still given then there is failed implementation of the policy. If this policy is not withdrawn it will
polarise Indian society. Reservation will make castestronger in India and will never let to
implement constitutional vision of casteless society. Fast ISM is becoming strongerl in case
of India. Andre beteille that with reservation there should be criteria of merit too.

His views on pollution and poverty

He argued that polution attached to untouchables had led to their social exclusion. They are
landless jobless denied public facility no education no rights. it is pollution was handsome
but was also challenged by untouchables at several times in different parts of the country
like self respect movement and satyashodhak samaj. Subaltern (dalit) groups challenge to
the untouchability and also question it by changing religion. in contemporary time-series of
law and constitutional bodies are there helping the untouchables and various political
mobilisation and self assertion is taking place. Therefore exclusion made on caste is now
being challenged and changed. But social exclusion is still present on the basis of poverty. It
is casteless and can pass into any domain of social life. Now a person who is poor is
supposed to be voiceless. They can't access basic livelihood cant challenge the low wage
and have to settle for very low salary. take power to is more contagious than pollution

⏩ ⏩
because poverty breeds poverty.
Less productive Less wages family malnutrition leading to vicious cycle of poverty.
Pollution was historic and it has been addressed now. Some more important issue now is
poverty and should be e Central to state policies.
Why poverty exists?
● Supply of workers is more than the jobs provided
● No balance approach to various sector development and growth of country
● Lack of skill development and disguised unemployment
● Government ad hoc measures like loan waiving and subsidies are not sustainable to
eradicate poverty
● Poverty with gender,women not working are self poor and subjected to domestic
violence.

Andre beteille vs Louis dumont

● Andre said Louis dumont has misconception about India that caste system is product
of consensual value to India (position of caste is decided by proximity of their values
with brahmanic values. Untouchables were accepting the purity and dominance of
brahmins and thus making castehierarchical system). Value consensus in society
never relates to challenges faced by others and no conflict will take place. When
value consensus is questioned then value smuggling conflicts with ideology will take
place (eg, sanskritization and rise of Buddhism Jainism). during British rule with
emancipation of dialectical values middle class rows and question the brahmanic
supremacy. These conflicts and challenges would not seen by Dumont who was
biased to his ideology.
● Andre beteille says hierarchy is historic and universal and it's not india-specific. In so
called egalitarian society like USA their presents race hierarchy and ethnic hierarchy.
With hierarchy there exists discontent and jealousy which will try to convert absolute
hierarchy to competitive hierarchy and therefore old hierarchy replaced by new
 14

hierarchy. Competitive hierarchy should be studied and not the absolute one.
Hierarchy exists in every society and is challenged by people in order to change.
Hans contradicting Louis dumont
● casteshould not be studied from perspective of values it should be studied on the
basis of interest based mobilization. Louis dumont has said that position of casteon
hierarchy is based on the location of it with respect to brahmanic values. as in South
Indian non brahmins went for dialectics against Brahmin to exert political domination
for their caste ie, interest based mobilization. hence in today's context
homogenisation ation of casteoccurs in order to enjoy domination by going for
interest based mobilization. Louis dumont fails to distinguish between individualism
and equality. European society is self centric achievement oriented driven by
individualism. Indian society is driven by collective values and slowly Indians are
accepting the values of individualism. to compare India with European society one
should consider collectivism to that of individualism. European society is not
egalitarian and Indian society is not hierarchical. India should not be seen with
respect to hierarchy auric but with individualism and collectivism.
 15

For features of the caste system refer to tusharanshu notes. (Read the whole unit from this)
 16

UNTOUCHABILITY: FORMS & PERSPECTIVES

Despite the limited literal meaning of the word, the institution of untouchability refers not just
to avoidance for prediction of physical contact but to a much broader set of social sanctions
and social disabilities which are ascriptive in nature within the ritual framework of the caste
system. It refers to a practice in which various types of segregation are imposed within the
cultural framework of the caste. It's a cultural practice. There are three main dimensions of
untouchability namely exclusion, humiliation-subordination and exploitation. Various forms in
which untouchability was practiced are social disabilities like prohibition from wearing new
clothes, social isolation, separation of roads and wells etc.
Segregation can be physical or social. Under physical segregation there is limitation on
physical contact, there are separate utensils, prohibition from temple entry and using village
Wells. social segregation includes restriction on marriage eating with other castemembers
and prohibition from entering homes, restrictions of occupational mobility and so on. Its more
acute in rural areas. Prasad in a study conducted in 50 Andhra villages and Amrita more
than 150 forms in which it is practiced. In general , North India today exhibits it to lesser
degree.

ORIGIN OF UNTOUCHABILITY
Most often cited account is historical indological perspective. historical accounts and
religious texts have suggested various names for untouchables- Nishada, Chandala, Kirat
and so on as the people outside varna system. Earlier Avarna but not untouchables but the
system evolved gradually in the post Vedic period as mentioned by text like manusmriti.
Ghurye, Vivekanand Jha and Ambedkar have used this approach. Ghurye traces it in post
Vedic period while Vivekanand Jha give a more detailed account and traces its origin in four
phases, Ambedkar gave broken man theory. Structural functional perspective was used by
Srinivas and Louis dumont. DP Mukherjee used a dialectical approach and considers it as
imposed by higher occupation doers on low rank occupations.
How untouchables look themselves? They call themselves dalit
The two important theories pertaining to the origin of untouchability:
● the first theory says that the discovery that the Indus valley people spoke a proto
Dravidian language suggest that the people conquered by the Aryans were
dravidians. They subsequently moved down south and subjugated the indigenous
people there. When Aryan influence spread to the south, the varna system and the
untouchability came into existence. Thus the dalits were among the original Tribes of
South India who became isolated from the rest of the world and so were looked down
upon by others.
● why the Aryans develop a social organisation wearing the chandaal occupy the
lowest position is answered by the mixed castetheory offered by Manu. this theory
explains the existence of the four varnas as divinely ordained and the other caste
outside the varna skin as a result of unlawful sexual alliances between men and
women of different varnas. The chandal resulted as the offspring of a Brahmin
woman and the Shudra man. Four other groups were also included among the
untouchables.

FORMS OF UNTOUCHABILITY
 17

almost half of the total number of scheduled caste people live in 5 states of Hindi belt in
Rajasthan Haryana UP MP and Bihar. There was no mention of untouchability in Vedas.
They only mentioned Varnas- Savarna and Avarna. Manusmriti mention untouchables which
was written by brahmins want to glorify themselves. Purity and pollution is is brahmins
making to institutionalize their superiority and thus a group of people were identified as
untouchables. History as many instances when untouchables reacted against this
discrimination:
● Migration
● Bhakti movement
● Converted to Islam and Christianity
● Sanskritization
● Organised movements like satnami in Punjab and SNDP in Kerala
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 alienating orientation. the efforts made by lower caste to Sanskriti is themselves may be
called a movement with an integrative orientation because it does not renounce caste as a
system of social stratification. the motive force for the backward and scheduled caste to
Sanskriti is was just to ventilate the described feelings of status and position which would be
nice to them for cultures for centuries. By imitating the higher caste the try to find the position
as that of upper castes. but they have not always succeeded in their efforts as there is no
legitimate acceptance for the upper castes.

UNTOUCHABILITY AS A PROBLEM AND A SOLUTION

Broadly solution to the problems can be divided into reformative movements and alternative
movements. the reformative movements in to reforming the caste system in order to put an
end to the problem of untouchability. the alternative movements in to create an alternative
cultural environment of an by conversion to another religion. The reformative movements
arrived out during different periods in India are of three types:
● Bhakti movement
● Neo vedantic movements like Arya samaj Ramkrishna mission, Mahatma Gandhi led
reform movement
● Sanskritization movement
The three main perspectives offered on the subject are unity model (Louis dumont, Michael
moffett) , the outcast model (Joan Macher, Cathleen gough) and diversity perspective
(Bernard Kohn, Kolenda). Other than this Indian leaders Gandhi Ambedkar and Nehru have
also offered different perspectives.
The unity model based on the idea of wholism suggest that hierarchy is an integral part of
the caste system and disability is is imposed on all all but only with differing degree. Principle
is the binary oppontum of the purity and pollution and in order to understand this, uniquely
Indian perspective devoid of Western notions of in equality and and Justice must be
discarded. Criticising this idea by suggesting that unity model justify is hierarchy as "as if it
exists by the consent of all" and by being brahminical.
The outcast model suggest that caste was a system of rigid institutional inequality and
untouchability was its worst manifestation. Citing the need tu to tread the middle path.
 18

The diversity theorists suggested that although this was an exploitative system,the lower
castes had made attempts to incorporate adapt and modify the ritual preoccupations and
found ways to overcome the stigmatisation through diverse means.
Perspective of Gandhi ji: supported varna vyavastha and ashram vyavastha as organising
principles of Indian society how every he condemned the current caste system. He wrote
numerous articles like caste must go, untouchability as a crime etc but he focused on a
reformative approach, an approach to reform Hinduism from within by getting rid of evils of
untouchability. He didn't untouchables as equal children of God and called Harijan. Varna
system is driven by virtue s and capabilities where as casteis driven by heredity. Varna
system recognises the person's merit and is open to everybody and is dynamic system. It's
also driven by the quality of life one lives. casteis exploitative system made by brahmins to
enjoy domination. Varna is egalitarian system and allows mobility.
casteis exploitative construct Varna is cultural construct. Caste exists as people go for
endogamous marriage and inter caste marriage should be there according to Gandhi. Social
distance between two caste should be removed. Occupation should be made open to every
caste. For Gandhi caste was a social practice.
Caste is nothing to do with Hinduism. as not religion tells one group should explore other
getting centre from religion. Religion tells everyone following religion are children of God. It's
a group of people who for their interest gratification institutionalised the cast.
Perspective of BR Ambedkar: he had a radical view of caste system and called for
annihilation of caste system. He said that hindu dharm Shastra tells that a man is born with
three qualities: satvik (Brahman), rajasik (Kshatriya), tamsik (shudra) . there is no mention of
qualities of untouchability is and therefore they do not have human qualities as defined by
Hindu text. so Hinduism is supporting ideological in the caste system. hens unlike Gandhi
one cannot distinguish between Varna and caste system.
he considered Gandhian view as utopian whereas casteshould voluntarily come forward to
bridge the differences and varnisation of caste system will only make it stronger. he
criticised Gandhi saying that Gandhi has experienced it from higher strata but he has
suffered it from lower strata. Ambedkar gives more importance to state than cultural
inclusion. asking Gandhi if he is serious for the upliftment of the untouchables,responsibility
to end the caste system should be given to state.So the legislative measures and political
empowerment are the only way to get rid of untouchability.
Give more importance to individualism and merit and said if a society ignores individual merit
and his right giving importance to heredity then the society for generations together is bound
to be hierarchical. He insisted on including individual rights in the constitution
Problems of caste
Ambedkar back the Gandhian methods with the enforcement of laws, ie, punishing people
going for endogamous marriage. He also recommended state appointed trees in temples
selected on basis of merit can not caste. let state be ensuring that into every privileged
position there is reservation for every caste leading to discontinuity of caste and occupation
relation. Ambedkar made Jat pat todak samaj with many untouchables burning copies of
manusmriti. Untouchables were not allowed to enter temples so Ambedkar along with other
untouchables adopted Buddhism. He said that he followed Buddhism as it's the only
indigenous religion which challenged caste. And in order to unite the dalits coined the term
bahujan. Ambedkar used a myth legitimise is dalit. He said that there are two groups of
Kshatriya namely Suryavanshi and chandravanshi. Suryavanshi was Aryans and advisor
was vashishth. Chandravanshi were indigenous rulers and advisor was Vishvamitra.
Vashisht and Vishwamitra were bitter enemies. They used to instigate their patronage to fight
 19

with others. In the last war Suryavanshi won and put all restrictions on chandravanshi. in
order to survive the dirty jobs and are untouchables now and hence the dalits were United
using a myth by Ambedkar. used ideology of civil rights movement of America and started a
movement against brahmins.
 20

DALIT SOCIOLOGIST
 21

Kancha illaha, Gail Omvedt, Gopal Guru, Harold Gould.

They are looking at the caste system from below or from the viewpoint of Dalit. They say
there are two cultures in India: Brahamnic and Dalit. Brahmanic were spiritual and
otherworldly and had elististic culture. Dalit culture was materialistic and this worldly and had
Mass culture. this both for parallel culture and when Brahamnic culture was enforced on
Dalits, they refused it and those who accepted were indulged in the caste system. Those
projected work branded as untouchables. Dominant culture wrote text praising brahmanic
values, here dalit ideologywas transferred orally only and there was no literature supporting
their values. hence India should be studied through dialectical context and not consensual
context. Dalits are neither a caste nor a class. They are different groups and perform
different jobs. So they are 'submerged humanity'. They are now asking for Justice by
developing a true sense of belongingness.
Don't study Indian culture and society with a Brahmanic perspective and also not with
sanskritization.
Ghurye : culturologist
Dumont: brahmanic
Srinivas: sanskritization
No one tries to see India through Subaltern perspective.

CONSTITUTION
with the coming into force of the constitution of India the scheduled castes but guaranteed
certain essential rights and benefits. Under article 341 (1) the constitution of to consultation
with the governor of a state may specify, "the castes races Tribes of parts of groups within
castes or races, tribes which shall be deemed to be scheduled castes for the purpose of the
constitution". However according to its clause 2, the parliament of India can include or
exclude any group from the list of scheduled castes through and enactment of law. Article 14
15 16 and 17 provide right to equality. article 46 mentions specifically that the state must
endeavour to promote the educational and economic interest of the scheduled castes and
scheduled Tribes among the weaker sections of the society. more precisely the state shall
reserve the public jobs for the members of scheduled castes and tribes. article 330 and
article 332 laid down that there shall be reservation of seats in the lok sabha and state
legislative assembly respectively in proportion to the number of scheduled castes in various
States. Article 340 talks of a commission to investigate the difficulties of socially and
educationally backward classes of the citizens and to make recommendations to to remove
such difficulties.