CASTE-ESTATES AND CLASS Caste and class are the two main forms of social stratification.

Both are the agencies of social mobility and selection. They decide largely the position that a man occupies in society. The range of ones social contracts is almost fixed by ones status in society. Ones status is recognized mainly through ones caste or class. If the caste system is unique to India the class system is universal in nature. Both of them influence and condition the way of life or the lifestyles of people to a very large extent. The caste system is the basis of stratification in India whereas the class system constitutes the basis of the stratification system in the western society. THE CASTE SYSTEM The Caste System is Unique to India The caste system, the joint family system and the village system of life are often regarded as the three basic pillars of the Indian social System. The caste system as a form of social stratification a peculiar to India. The caste is an inseparable aspect of the India society. It is peculiarly Indian in origin and development. There is no comparable institution elsewhere in the world for the case system. Still traces of caste were found in Ancient Egypt, Japan, Rome, Burma and Persia. It is said that even the ancient Persians, Siberians, Etruscans, Mexicans, Peruvians and Spartans had their own type of caste system. Some systems resembling caste are found at present in Burma, Polynesia, Massai and Somali of East Horn. But the caste system which we understand today with all its peculiarities is found India alone. Caste is Embedded in the Indian Social Structure Caste is closely connected with the Hindu philosophy and religion, custom and tradition, marriage and family, morals and manners, food and dress habits, occupations and hobbies. The caste system is believed to have had a divine origin and sanction. It is endlessly supported by rituals and ceremonies. It is a deep-rooted and a long-lasting social institution of India. India is a classical land of the caste. It is here, in India, we find more than 2800 castes and sub-castes with all their peculiarities. Of these, the major caste (previously known as varnas) such as Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras (or depressed caste) are found in almost all the states. But none of these castes is numerically dominant in any of the states of India. The Origin of the Word Caste The term caste is derived from the Spanish (also Portuguese) word caste meaning breed or lineage. The Portuguese used the term caste first to denote the divisions I the Indian caste system. The world caste also signifies race or kind. The Sanskrit word for caste is Varna which means colour. Races and cololur seem to be the bases of Indian caste in addition to the division of labour and occupation. The popular equivalent of caste is Jati. The Origin of the Caste System The caste stratification of the Indian Society had had its origin in the Chaturvarna system. According to the Chaturvarna doctrine, the Hindu society was divided into four main varnas namely the Brahmins, the Kashtriyas, the Vaishyas and the Shudras. The Varna system which was prevalent during the Vedic period was mainly based on the division of labour and occupation. The Caste system owes its origin to the Varna system. The present caste system can be said to be to degenerated form of the original Varna system. Varnas which were four in number and castes which are found in hundreds and thousands are not one and the same. Factors which facilitated the Growth of Caste System in India

Among the factors that have facilitated the continued existence and growth of the caste system, the following are the most important: 1. The geographic isolation of the Indian Peninsula for a long time made the people to foster old customs, mores, traditions and superstitious beliefs which in turn encouraged the caste system to grow. 2. The influence of religion is one of the main factors that caused the continuation of the case system. The Hindu Caste system is looked upon as a divine ordained institution. Beliefs in reincarnation and the doctrine of Karma also further strengthened the caste system. 3. The existence of many races in the country led to the formulation of many strict laws concerning discrimination since each race endeavored to maintain its purity. 4. The real social structure has its own impact on the caste. The unchanging static rural social structure of India favored the growth of caste system. 5. The unwillingness of rulers to enforce a uniform standard of law and custom and their readiness to recognize the varying customs of different groups as valid also facilitated the growth of caste system. 6. Lack of education has contributed in no small measure to the growth of caste system. Illiteracy and ignorance have made the people to become orthodox and to implicitly accept the caste rules and restrictions. 7. Further, factors such as the hereditary occupations: the desire of the Brahmins to keep Them pure: ideas of exclusive family, ancestor worship, the sacramental meal, the deliberate economic and administrative policies followed by the various conquerors, particularly the British, clash of races, colour prejudices and conquest, etc., also have contributed to the growth of caste system in India. 1. DEFINITION AND CHARACTERISITCS OF CASTE Definition: Caste is so complex a phenomenon which is difficult to define. Writers and thinkers are not unanimous in their opinion regarding caste, its definition and characteristics. Hence caste has been defined variously. (i) Sir Herbert Risely: Caste is a collection of families, bearing a common name, claiming a common descent, from a mythical ancestor, human and divine, professing to follow the same hereditary calling and regarded by those who are competent to give an opinion as forming a single homogeneous community. (ii) Maclver and Page: When status is wholly predetermined so that men are born to their lot without any hope of changing it, then the class takes the extreme form of caste. (iii) C.H. Cooley: When a class is somewhat strictly hereditary, we may call it a caste. (iv) A.W. Green: Caste is a system of stratification in which mobility up and down the status ladder, at least ideally may not occur. (v) Ketkar: A caste is a group having two characteristics; (i) membership is confined to those who are born of members and includes all persons so born, (ii) the members are forbidden by an inexorable social law to marry outside the group. (vi) D. N. Majumdar and T.N. Madan have said that caste is a closed group. Characteristics of Caste The caste system is highly complex in nature. As Dr. G.S. Ghurye says, any attempt to define caste is bound to fail because of the complexity of the phenomenon. He describes the characteristics of caste in his Caste and Class in India 1950-56 [also in his Caste, Class and Occupation 1961 and Caste and Race in India 1970]. The following have been the main traditional features of the caste system. 1. Caste As a Hierachical Division of Society. The Hindu society is gradational one. It is divided into several small groups called castes and sub castes. A sense of highness and 2

lowness or superiority and inferiority is associated with this gradation or ranking. The Brahmins are placed at the top of the hierarchy and are regarded as pre, supreme or superior. The degraded caste or the so called untouchables [Harijans] have occupied the other end of the hierarchy. All over India neither the supremacy of the Brahmins nor the degraded position of the Harijans or outcastes has been questioned. It is taken for granted, but regarding the exact position of the intermediary castes there are disputes on the part of the members. 2. Caste As a Segmental Division of Society. The Hindu society is a caste-ridden society. It is divided into a number of segments called castes. It is not a homogeneous society. Castes are groups with defined boundary of their own. The status of an individual is determined by his birth and not by selection nor by accomplishments. No amount of power, prestige and pelf can change the position of man. The membership of the caste is hence unchangeable, unacquirable, inalienable, unattainable and nontransferable. Further, each caste in a way, has its own way of life. Each caste has its own customs, traditions, practices and rituals. It has its own informal rules, regulations and procedures. They were caste councils or caste panchayats to regulate the conduct of members also. The caste used to help its members when they were found in distress. Indeed, the caste was its own ruler. Caste Panchayat During the early days in every village every caste used to have its own caste Panchayat. It consisted of five chosen members who enjoyed much social privilege and respect. The caste panchayat used to perform a number of functions. It used to make the members comply with caste rules and regulations. Setting caste disputes and giving its final verdict on the issues referred to it, were also its other functions. It was giving punishments to those who violated caste rules and obligations. Matters such as breaking the marriage promise, refusal on the part of the husband to take the wife to his house, cruelty to wife, adultery on the part of wife, killing the cows, insulting the Brahmins, having illicit sex relations with other case people, etc., were dealt with by the panchayat. It was giving punishments such as arranging dinner party for the fellow caste-men, imposing fine, purification, pilgrimage, out casting etc., for the offenders. The caste panchayat was also striving to promote the welfare of the caste members. Safeguarding the interests of the caste members was yet another function of the panchayat. These caste panchayats have become weak and ineffective nowadays. The castes and sub castes together make up the Hindu social system. Still in some respects each is isolated from the other. It is in a way semisoverign. The castes are a complete world in themselves for their members. The members are expected to be loyal to the caste. Caste feeling is hence, very strong. It is very much stronger in rural areas than in the urban areas. It is because of this the amount of community-feeling is restricted. 3. Restrictions on Food Habits. The caste system has imposed certain restrictions on the food habits of the members; they differ from caste to caste. Who should accept what kind of food and from whom? is often decided by the caste. For example, in North India, a Brahmin would accept pakka food [cooked in ghee] only from some castes lower than his own. But he would accept kachcha food [prepared with the use of water] at the hands of no other caste except his own. As a matter of rule and practice, no individuals would accept kachcha food prepared by an inferior caste man. Generally, any kind of food that is prepared by the Brahmins is acceptable to all the caste people. This factor explains as to why the Brahmin dominated the hotel industry for a long time. Further, restrictions are also there still on the use of certain vegetables for certain castes. Even today, some traditional Brahmins do not consume onions, garlic, cabbage, carrot, beetroot etc. Eating beef is not allowed except for the Harijans. 4. Restrictions on social relations. The caste system puts restrictions on the range of social relations also. The idea of pollution makes this point clear. It means a touch of a lower case 3

man (particularly Harijan) would pollute or defile a man of higher caste. Even his shadow is considered enough to pollute a higher caste man. In Kerala for a long time, a Nayar could approach a Nambudari Brahmin but would not touch him. Further, a Tiyan was expected to keep himself at a distance of 36 steps from the Brahmin and a pulaya at a distance of 96 paces. In Tamilnadu the shanar today tapper was expected to keep a distance of 24 paces while approaching a Brahmin. This has resulted in the practice of untouchability. This practice has made the lower caste people to be segregated completely from the higher caste. 5. Social and Religious Disabilities of certain castes. In the traditional caste society some lower caste people [particularly, the Harijans] suffered from certain civil or social and religious disabilities. Generally, the impure castes are made to live on the outskirts of the city or the village. In South India, certain parts of the towns or the villages are not accessible to the Harijans. It is recorded that during the Peshwa rule in Maharashtra the Mahars and Mangs were not allowed within the gates of Poona before 9.00 A.M. and after 3.00 P.M. The reason was during the time their bodies would cast too long shadows, which, if they were to fall on the Brahmins, would defile them. Socially, Harijans or the so colled untouchables are separated from other members. Even today, in many places they are not allowed to draw water from the public wells. During the early days, public places like hotels, public lecture halls, schools, temples, theatres were not kept open for the lower case people. Entrance to temples and other places of religious importance was forbidden for them. Educational facilities, legal rights and political representation were denied to them for a long time. In South India, restrictions were placed on the mode of constructing houses of the lower caste people, and their types of dresses and patterns of ornamentation. The toddy-tappers of Malabar were not allowed to carry umbrellas, to wear shoes or golden ornaments and to milk cows. They were forbidden to cover the upper part of their body. 6. The Civil and Religious Privileges of Certain Castes. If the lower caste people suffer from certain disabilities, some higher caste people like the Brahmins enjoy certain privileges. Nowhere the Brahmins suffered from the disabilities cited above. They are given more liberty, because they are believed to be born pure and superior. The Brahmins never saluted others, but they always had the privilege of being saluted by others. They never even bowed to the idols of the lower caste people. Education and teaching were almost the monopoly of the higher caste people. Chanting the Vedic Mantras was great privilege of the Brahmins. The upper caste people in general, enjoyed social, political, legal and religious privileges. 7. Restrictions on Occupational Choice. In the caste-ridden society there is a gradation of occupations also. Some occupations are considered to be superior and sacred while certain others degrading and inferior. For a long time, occupations were very much associated with the caste system. Each caste had its own specific occupations were almost hereditary. Weaving, shoe-making, oil-grinding, sweeping, scavenging, curing, hides tanning, washing clothes, barbering, pottery, etc., were considered to be somewhat degrading. Learning, priesthood, teaching were the prestigious professions which mostly the Brahmins pursued. But agriculture, trade and labouring in the field were thrown open to all the castes. At the same time, no caste would allow its members to take up to any profession which was either degrading or impure. 8. Restrictions on Marriage. The caste system imposes restrictions on marriage also. Caste is an endogamous group. Endogamy is a rule of marriage according to which an individual has to marry within his or her group. Each caste is subdivided into several sub castes, which are again endogamous. For example, Iyers, Iyengars, Smarthas, Madhvas, Having Brahmins, Kota, Shivalli, Kandavara Brahmins, etc., are all Brahmin sub castes which are endogamous. Similarly, the Vokkaliga caste consists of Morasu, Hallikar, Nonaba, Gangadiga and other sub 4

castes. According to the rule of endogamy a Shivalli Brahmin, for example, has to marry a Shivalli girl, an Iyengar, an Iyengar girl and so on. Inter caste marriages were strictly forbidden them. Even at present, inter caste marriages have not become popular. Violation of the rule of endogamy was strictly dealt with during the early days. The rule of endogamy has resulted in close in-breeding. Some writers like Hutton have regarded endogamy as the very essence of the caste system. Exception to this rule of endogamy is seen in places like the hill parts of Punjab and also in Malabar. The Caste provides for some kind of exogamous marriages also. They can briefly examined here. Sapinda and Sagotra Exogamy. Sapinda and Sagotra marriages have been generally forbidden by the upper castes and Sapinda and Sagotra exogamous marriages have been insisted upon. Sapinda Exogamy. In Hindu society marriage within the Pinda is prohibited. Pinda means common parentage. According to Brahaspathi, off springs from five maternal generations and seven paternal generations are Sapinda and they cannot intermarry. This opinion, however, is not universally accepted. Though certain exceptions are there in South India, in North India, generally, Sapinda marriages do not take place. But Sapinda exogamy, that is, marrying outside ones pinda is commonly found. Sagotra Exogamy. Sagotra exogamy, that is, marrying outside ones own gotra is very much prevalent among the upper caste such as Brahmins and Kshatriyas. Marriage within the gotra is prohibited. This restriction has been imposed since people of one gotra are believed to have similar blood. Similarly, Sapravara marriages are also forbidden especially for the Brahmins. Persons belonging to the same pravara cannot intermarry. People who utter the name of a common saint at religious functions are believed to belong to the same pravara. The pravara is a kind of religious and spiritual bond. Sapravara exogamy, that is marrying outside ones own pravara, has been imposed as a rule for the upper castes, especially for the Brahmins. CHANGES IN THE CASTE SYSTEM The caste system which is an integral part of the Indian system, has a long standing history of its own. To understand how the system has come to be what it is today, one has to go back through the pages of history to trace its origin, evolution and growth. It is not easy to say precisely when, how and under what circumstances and pressures the system took its birth and developed. The task of tracing the evolution and growth of this system in precise and unambiguous terms is equally problematic. For the purpose of study three main stages in the evaluation of caste may be identified. They are mentioned below: (i) Caste in Ancient Age [The period upto 1100 A.D which is inclusive of Vedic Age, PostVedic Age and Puranic Age]. (ii) Caste in Medieval Age [The period between 1100 A.D. and 1757 A.D. which includes mainly the age of Muslim Rule in India]. (iii) Caste in Modern Age [The period after 1757 A.D. which includes the Pre-Independent British period and the period after Independence]. It is not within the framework of this book to discuss in detail the development which took place in the caste system during the first two major periods. Hence the description is confined to the third stage, that is, Caste in Modern Age. Caste in Modern Age [After 1757 A.D] The modern period in which some major developments took place in caste system can be divided into two stages namely: (A) Caste during British rule and (B) Caste in Independence India. 2. CHANGES IN CASTE SYSTEM DURING THE BRITISH RULE 5

Prior to the coming of the British, caste had grown into a powerful social institution, with the dominance of Brahmins at the top of its hierarchy. The Hindu kings also upheld this institution with the help of their civil power. With the advent of the British as the political head of the society, the traditional form of the caste started taking a different shape. The British Intention was to Rule not to initiate Reformative Chances The British brought with them their own traditional form of government which was quite different from that of the Indian monarchical system. But as Christians the British Could not have much sympathy with the institutions of the Hindu. As prudent foreigners they were more interested in consolidating their power over a strange land and people rather than initiating reformative changes in its peculiar institutions such as caste. They introduced a system of education which did not demand of the learners any change of caste or religion. The policy of comparative non-interference followed by the British made the lower castes revolt against the Brahmin supremacy. Growth of modern industrial organization and the rapid spread of urbanization further altered the social situation. This situation made it inevitable for people of different castes, classes and religions to live in close congregations in cities. With this background the changes in the caste system during the British rule can be studied in two stages: (A) Pre-Industrial British Period 1757-1918 A.D and (B) Pre-Independent Industrial Period 1918-1947 A.D. (A) Pre-Industrial British Period [1757 to 1918 A.D.] The East India Company of the British obtained from the Moghal rulers some commercial privileges in the beginning of the 17 th century. It tightened its political hold over the whole of India within 7 to 8 decades. The appointment of Warren Hastings in 1774 as the first Governor General of India, marked the beginning of the British Age in India. 1. Declining Hold of the Caste Panchayats After consolidating their power the British introduced through out India uniform legal, legislative systems. The British transferred the judicial power of the caste councils to the civil and criminal courts which affected the authority which the Panchayats had held over the members. Questions of assault, adultery, rape and the like were taken before the British Courts for decision. In civil matters such marriage, divorce, caste-based occupational disputes. Disputes between husband and wife, parents and children etc., the intention of the British was to be guided by the caste customs. But in actual practice various decisions of the High Courts virtually set aside the authority of the caste. 2. Influence of Social Legislation on Caste Some of the legislation which the British introduced shook the integrity of the caste system. Specific mention can be made of a few of the legislations such as the following: (i) The Caste Disabilities Removal Act of 1850 [which served to remove some of the disabilities associated with caste including the practice of untouchability]. (ii) The Special Marriage Act of 1872 [which legalized inter caste and inter-religious marriages]. (iii) The Hindu Widows Remarriage Act of 1856 [which gave legal permission for widows to remarry]. These and many other socio-legal measures of the British government gave a severe blow t the integrity of the caste system. But as Prof. Ghurye has pointed out, all these measures were taken by the British Government purely for administrative convenience and it had no desire to reduce the rigidity of caste. 3. Impact of Social Reform Movements Some of the social reform movements launched by social reformers during the British rule also attacked the caste system and its inequalities. 6

(i) The Brahma Samaj founded by Raja Ram Mohan Ray in 1820 and developed by Devendranath Tagore and Keshav Chandra Sen condemned the barriers of caste divisions, idol worship, human and animals sacrifies. It advocated universal brotherhood of men. (ii) The Prarthana Samaj launched by Justice Ranade devoted its attention to social reforms such as inter dining, inter caste marriage, remarriage of widows etc. (iii) The Arya Samaj founded by Swami Dayanand Saraswathi in 1875 repudiated the caste restrictions, protested against prohibition of sea-voyages and insisted that even the shudras could study the Vedas. It tried to remodel the Hindu society on the basis of the Vedic ideals. It functioned as a militant force to product the Hindu society from the onslaughts of Western rationalization. It started the Shuddhi (purification) movement to re-Hinduise the the converts, the fallen, the outcastes and other externals. (iv) The Ramakrishna Mission started by Swami Vivekananda, a great disciple of Sri Ramakrishna Paramhamsa, in1897 represents the synthesis of the ancient or oriental and the modern or western culture. Vivekananda who had imbibed in himself Raja Rams rationalism and Dayananda Saraswathis spirituality, was pragmatic in his approach. He condemned caste inequalities, exploitation of lower castes and women. He stressed on education, self-reliance and freedom of women. He even predicted that the Shudras [Shramiks or labourers] would dominate in the years to come. (v) Other reform Movements: Other social movements such as (i) Jyotirao Phooleys (1873) Satyashodak Samaj; (ii) Annie Besants Theosophical society; (iii) Maharishi Arvind Ghoshs Divine Life Society also served to loosen the hold of caste restrictions. What is to be noted is that these reform movements did not succeed in removing the rigidity of the caste system in this period. However,, they could only affect some of the structural features of caste. 4. Spread of English Education and Influence of the Western Ideas Spread of English education exposed Indians for the first time to the Western World. The popular Western ideas and values such as liberty, equality and fraternity, democracy, rationalism, individualism, womens liberation, secularism, humanitarianism etc. made their inroads into India. These ideas had deeply influenced the Western educated Indians. People who had hitherto been the targets of atrocities, deprivation, exploitation and humiliation could now voice their protest by asserting their rights. Increasing influence of science and technology added greater strength to the growing awareness of the masses. 5. Birth of the Backward Castes Movement Movements of a more militant nature against caste started with the founding of Satyashodhak Samaj in 1873 by Jyotirao Phooley of Poona, a man of Mali Caste. The main purpose of this Samaj was to assert the worth of man irrespective of caste. Through his writings and practices he led a revolt against the tyranny of the caste system and the hegemony of the Brahmins. He appealed to the non-Brahmin castes not to engage any Brahmin priest to conduct their marriage ritual. He tried to reduce the enormous ritual system into a simple procedure. He perceived the necessity of educating the lower-caste people. He could translate his vision into practice when he opened a primary school for the so called untouchables in Poona as early as in 1851. (B) Pre-Independent Industrial Period [1919-1947] The caste system underwent a few more significant changes when India stepped into th the 20 century. The role of three factors in bringing about such changes is worth mentioning here. 1. Influence of Industrialisation: Decline of Caste-Based Occupational system The advent of Industrial Revolution also affected Indian socio-economic conditions. The British brought modern machineries and introduced factory system of production. New 7

industries, occupations, employment opportunities, salary-based service system came to be established. The growth of industries destroyed the old crafts and household industries and provided for countless ways earning livelihood. Introduction of railways, telegraph and laying of radios helped trade and commerce. People of all castes started making use of the new economic opportunities. Industrialisation also resulted in occupational and geographic mobility. Movement of people from the compact ancestral village to the towns and cities started breaking down many of the caste norms. Crowded trains and busies could bring together lakhs of people of all castes and left little room for the niceties of ceremonial purity. Taboos against some foods and accepting food and water from persons of other castes also started weakening. Hotel system of food and hostel system if residence served to bring together people of different castes. The jajmani system of economy which had made economic interdependence of different castes, started declining. It slowly gave place to the capitalist system of economy. These industrial and their concomitant development made caste-members to come out of the hold of castebased occupations and to resort to the new occupational avenues based purely on personal preferences and choices. Influence of industrialization was, no doubt, widespread. But its impact was not uniform and absolute on all the basic features of caste. For example, its impact on the endogamous nature of marriage and various marriage practices, rules and beliefs was almost negligible. Rapid industrialization never led to the automatic dissolution of the caste system and its progressive replacement by a class system as it was believed by some Western scholars. The economic aspects of caste underwent swift changes whereas its socio-cultural aspects never got changed with equal speed. 2. Impact of Urbanisation In order to reap the benefits of new educational and occupational opportunities people started moving towards towns and cities in large number. The necessities of city life relaxed the commensal taboos imposed by caste and lessened the dominance of Brahmins. As Srinivas has pointed out, the non-brahmins refused to show the same respect to the Brahmins which they used to show earlier. The growth of city life with its migratory population brought about changes in the rigidity of the case system. Kingsely Davis also held that the anonymity, congestion, mobility, secularism and changeability of the city made the operation of caste virtually impossible. 3. Influence of Freedom Movement and the Role of Gandhiji Indian freedom struggle also altered the character of caste to some extent. The freedom struggle organized by the Indian National Congress brought together people of different castes, classes, religious and regions under one banner. The Congress led by Gandhiji launched a campaign against untouchability and roused the conscience of the people against its practice. Participation of the lower castes in the freedom struggle boosted their image. At the fag end of the British rule, though the traditional influence of caste started declining, its organizational strength was increasing. As Ghurye observed, All about the end of the British rule in India, Caste-Society presented the spectacle of self-centered groups more or less in conflict with one another. 3. CASTE IN INDEPENDENT INDIA [AFTER 1947] The political independent of the country, besides the process of industrialization, urbanization, secularization etc. brought in a series of changes in the caste system. These changes can be classified into two categories: (A) Changes in the traditional features of caste; (B) Changes in the role for functioning of the caste. (A) CHANGES IN THE TRADITIONAL FEATUES OF CASTE 8

Caste has assumed a different form in the modern times. Some of the traditional features [described earlier] have been radically altered. Here is a brief survey of the changes that have taken place in caste system after Independence. 1. The religious basis of the caste has been attacked. Caste is no more believed to be divinely ordained. It is being given more a social and secular meaning than a religious interpretation. 2. Restrictions on food habits have been relaxed. Distinction between pakka food and kachcha food has almost vanished. Food habits have become more a matter of personal choice than a caste rule. Still commensal taboos are not completely ignored especially in the rural areas. Interdining has not become the order of the day. 3. Caste is not very much associated with hereditary occupations. Caste no longer determines the occupational career of an individual. Occupations are becoming more and more castefree. Even Brahmins are found driving taxis, dealing with foot-wears and running nonvegetarian hotels and bars and so on. 4. Endogamy, which is often called the very essence of the caste system, still prevails. Inter caste marriages though legally permitted, have not become the order of the day. As K.M. Kapadia says, there is an indifference to the intercaste marriages if not tacit acceptance by the society. 5. The special civil and religious privileges which the Brahmins enjoyed are no more being enjoyed by them. The Constitution of India has removed all such privileges and made all castes equal. Most of the legal, political, educational, economic and other disabilities from which the lowest caste people had suffered, have been removed by the constitutional provisions. They are given special protection also. Adult franchise and reservation have given them a strong weapon to protect their interests. 6. Caste continues to be a segmental divisions of Hindu society. Caste with its hierarchical system continues to ascribe statuses to the individuals. But the twin processes of Sanskritisation and Westernisation have made possible mobility both within and outside the framework of caste. 7. Caste panchayats, which used to control the behaviour of caste-members, have either become very weak or disappeared. Though they are often found here and there in the village areas, they are almost non-existent in the urban areas. 8. Restrictions imposed by the caste on social inter course are very much relaxed. Distinction between touchable and untouchable is not much felt especially in the community of literate people. However, instances of untouchability are heard in the rural areas. 9. Other Important Changes (i) Though the dominances of caste is still found in villages it no longer depends upon its ritual status. (ii) Casteism which is associated with caste, instead of disappearing in the wake of modernism who become still stronger. (iii) The jajmani system which used to govern the inter-caste relation especially in the villages has become very weak. In many places it has vanished. In place of inter-caste dependence, intercaste strifes are found. (iv) Caste has lost much of its hold over the social usuages and customs practiced by its members. (v) Caste today does not dictate individuals life nor does it restrict newly valued individual freedom. Hence it no longer acts as a barrier to the progress of an individual. (B) CHANGES IN THE ROLE OF CASTE 9

The caste system in its attempts to adjust itself to the changed conditions of life has assumed new roles. Besides industrialization and urbanization, other factors such as Westernisation, Sanskritisation, reorganization of Indian states, spread of education, socioreligious reforms, spatial and occupational mobility and growth of market economy have greatly affected the caste system. Changes in the role of caste must also be understood in the light of the influence of these factors. 1. Increase in the Organisational Power of Caste Education makes people liberal, broad-minded, rationale and democratic. Educated people are believed to be less conservative and superstitious. Hence it was expected that with the growth of literacy in India, caste-mindedness and casteism would come down. On the country, caste-consciousness of the members has been increasing. Every caste wants to safeguard its interests. Fr fulfilling this purpose castes are getting themselves organized on the model of labour unions. Today every caste wants to organized itself. Such caste organizations are on the increase. Mainly to cater to the educational, medical and religious needs of their members, these organizations are running hostels and hospitals, schools and colleges, reading-rooms and libraries, dharmashalas and temples and so on. These caste-based organizations are also trying to project the leadership of some of their members to serve as their spokesmen. 2. Political Role of Caste Caste and politics have come to affect each other now. Caste has become an inseparable aspect of our politics. In fact, it is tightening its hold on politics. Elections are fought more often on the basis of caste. Selection of candidates, voting analysis, selection of legislative party leaders, distribution of ministerial portfolios etc., are very much based on caste. Even the communist parties which projects the ideal of a casteles and classless society are also not an exception to this. Politics of each state, as M.N. Srinivas says, is virtually the politics of confrontation of its dominant castes. Thus, unless one knows the political confrontation between the dominant castes such as Ligayats and Vokkaligas in Karnataka and Reddys and Kammas in Andhra Pradesh, one cannot understand the policies of these two states. M.N. Srinivas also makes a distinction between caste at the ritual level and caste at the political level. Caste at the ritual level is smaller unit than the caste at the political level. 3. Protection for Scheduled Castes and other Backward Classes The constitution of India has made enough provisions to protect the interests of Scheduled Castes and Tribes. They are offered more political, educational and service opportunities through the reservation policy. Seats are reserved for them from Mandal panchayat to Parliament and in all government departments. Though the reservation policy is against the declared goal of establishment of a casteless society, all political parties have supported it mostly, for political purposes. According to M.N. Srinivas, The provision of constitutional safeguard to . Scheduled Castes and Tribes has given a new lease of life to caste. These provisions have made some of them develop vested interests to reap permanently the benefits of reservation. They are also tempting many other Castes to bring pressure on the government to declare them as belonging to the category of Scheduled castes. 4. Sanskritisation and Westernisation As M.N. Srinivas has pointed out, two important trends are witnessed in caste the process of Sanskritisation and that of Westernisation. The former refers to a process in which the lower castes tend to intimate the values, practices and other life-styles of some dominant upper castes. The latter denotes a process in which the upper-caste people tend to mould their life-styles on the model Westerners. 5. Backward Classes Movement 10

The non-Brahmin castes today are getting themselves more and more organized to challenge the supremacy of the Brahmins and to assert their rights. The establishment of Satyashodhak Samaj by Jyotirao Phooley in Poona in 1873 marked the beginning of such a non-Brahmin movement. This movement against the Brahmin supremacy by the lower castes came to be known as Backward Classes Movement. In the beginning, the main aim of this movement was to limit the Brahmin monopoly in the two fields such as education and appointment to government posts. The Backward Classes Movement has become a vital political force today. Its influence has changed the political scenario of the country. This movement has made the Brahmins politically weak and insignificant especially in Kerala and Tamilnadu. This movement has also brought pressure on different political parties to create special opportunities for the lowest caste people enabling them to come up to the level of other higher castes. Due to this pressure, Backward Classes Commissions were established at Central and State levels which recommended reservation for backward caste/classes. 6. Competitive Role of Castes Mutual interdependence of castes which existed for centuries and was reinforced by the institutional system of jajmani, is not found today. As M.N. Srinivas points out, the vertical solidarity of castes has been replaced by horizontal solidarity. Live and let live policy, which was, once associated with the caste makes no sense today. On the country, each caste looks at the other with suspicision, contempt and jelousy and finds in it a challenger, a competitor. Excessive caste-mindedness and caste-patriotism have added to this competition. The economic base of a caste and its hold over the political power virtually determine the intensity of this competitiveness. This competitive spirit further strengthens caste-mindedness. 7. New attempts to strengthen caste-loyalty, caste-identity, caste-patriotism and castemindedness Today caste organizations are increasing and are making every attempt to obtain the loyalty of their members and to strengthen their caste-identity and solidarity. Some such attempts can be cited here. (i) Though Caste Panchayats are dwindling, caste organizations are on the increase. Some of these organizations have their own written constitutions and managing committees through which they try to preserve some of the caste rules and practices. (ii) Caste organizations run their own papers, bulletins, periodicals, monthlies etc., through which they regularly feed information to the members regarding the activities of caste organization and achievements of caste-members. (iii) Attempts are also made to increase caste integration through the establishment of caste based trusts and trust-units. These trusts arrange annual gatherings, get-togethers, annual dinners, occasional festival celebrations, they provide shelter to the needy members of the caste. They offer scholarships to the poor students of the caste. Some of them run schools, colleges, hostels, maternity-homes for caste members and so on. (iv) The occupational castes are making determined efforts to improve the economic conditions of caste members by establishing cooperative credit and industrial societies. (v) Caste organizations collect regular subscription from the members, arrange annual conferences, discuss matters and issues affecting caste interests and caste solidarity and organize agitation and protest meetings against the governmental policies if they were to damage caste interests. In states like Bihar, some upper and lower castes have formed their own senas 4. CAUSES FOR THE CHANGES IN CASTE SYSTEM 11

The caste system has undergone vast changes in modern times. Factors that contributed to the changes in the caste system are briefly examined here. 1. Uniform Legal System. The uniform legal system introduced by the British made the Indians feel that all men are equal before the law. A number of legislations which the British introduced also struck at the root of the caste system. Independent India followed the same legal system. The Constitution of India has not only assured equality to all but also declared the practice of untouchability unlawful. Articles 16, 164, 225, 330, 332, 334, 335, 338 and the 5th and 6th Schedules of the Constitution provide for some special privileges to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes to enable them to come up to the level of other upper castes. 2. Impact of Modern Education. The British introduced the modern secular education in a uniform way throughout India. In independent India educational facilities are extended to all the caste people. The lowest caste people are also entitled to avail themselves of these facilities. Modern education has given a blow to the intellectual monopoly of a few upper castes. It has created an awareness among people and weakened the hold of caste over the members. It does not, however, mean that the modern educated people are completely free from the hold of the caste. 3. Industrialisation, Urbanisation and Westernisation. Due to the process of industrialization number of non-agricultural job opportunities were created. This new economic opportunity weakened the hold of the upper castes people who owned vast lands. People of different castes, classes and religious started working together in factories, offices, workshops etc. This was unthinkable two centuries ago. Growth of cities has drawn people of all castes together and made them to stay together ignoring many of their caste restrictions. The upper caste people started looking to the west for modifying their life-style on the model of the West. Thus they became more and more westernized without bothering much about caste inhibitions. 4. Influence of Modern Transport and communication system. Modern means of transport such as train, bus, ship, aeroplane, trucks etc. have been of great help for the movement of men and materials. Caste rules relating to the practice of purity and poolution and untouchability could no longer be observed. Modern means of communication, such as, newspapers, post, telegraph, telephone, radio, television etc., have helped people to come out of the narrow world of caste. 5. Freedom Struggle and the Establishment of Democracy: The freedom struggle waged against the British brought all the caste people together to fight for a common cause. Establishment of democratic type of government soon after Independence gave yet another blow to the caste by extending equal socio-economic opportunities to all without any discrimination. 6. Rise of Non-Brahmin Movement. A movement against the Brahmin supremacy was launched by Jyothirao Pooley in 1873. This movement became popular in course of time particularly in the South. It created an awareness among the lower castes and instilled in them the feeling of self-respect. This movement which became a great political force, brought pressure upon the government to establish Backward Classes Commissions at Central and State levels. The recommendations made by these commissions and their implementation provided vast scope for the lower castes to achieve progress. 7. Other Important Causes (i) Social Legislations: A series of social legislations introduced by the British as well as by the Indian governments [such as the Caste Disabilities Removal Act of 1872, The Hindu Marriage Act of 1955, The Untouchability Offences Act of 1956 etc.] directly and indirectly altered the nature of the caste system. 12

(ii) Social Reform Movements. Various social reform movements [such as Satyashodhak Samaj, Brahma Samaj, Arya Samaj, Sri Ramakrishna Mission etc.] launched during the second half of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th centuries have been able to remove the rigidity and some of the evil practices associated with the caste system. (iii) Impact of the West. Influence of the Western thought and particularly the ideas of rationalism, liberalism, humanitarianism, egalitarianism etc., made the educated Indians to come out of the clutches of the caste. (iv) Threat of Conversion. Social disabilities imposed on the lower castes made some of them to get themselves converted to either Christianity or Islam. Pressure tactics and temptations further added to this conversion process. The threat of conversion compelled the upper castes to relax many of the caste rigidities so that they could hold back the lower caste people who were getting ready for conversion. (v) Improvement in the Status of Women, Evolution of New Social Classes. [w orking class, middle class and capitalist class] and radical changes in the system of division of labour especially in the rural areas have further loosened the roots of caste system. Merits and Demerits of Caste System The Indian caste system has its own merits and demerits. Some of its merits and demerits may be mentioned here. Merits 1. Caste represents a harmonious division of society based mainly on division of labour and occupation. 2. Caste promotes the spirit of cooperation and fellow-feeling at least within its range. It helps the poor, the needy and strengthens group sentiment. 3. Caste is a source of social stability. It has given strength to the Indian society to withstand the shocks of politics and the cataclysms of nature. 4. The caste functions as the constitution of the Hindu society. It rendered most important services in the past and continues to sustain the social order and its solidarity. 5. The caste preserves the racial purity by prohibiting inter-marriages and by imposing endogamy on as members. 6. It defines the economic pursuits and provides professional career to each individuals. It provides for cultural diffusion within the group. The caste culture is passed on from one generation to the next, very systematically. As Hutton says, the caste canalizes an individuals choice in marriage, acts as his trade union, his friendly ore benefit society, his state club and his orphanage it takes care for him of health, insurance and if need be provides for funeral. Demerits of Caste 1. The caste system has unwarrantedly divided the Hindu society into mutually hostile and conflicting groups and sub groups. It has given scope to the inhuman practice of untouchability. It has cut across the social solidarity. 2. As Gandhiji has said, untouchability is the hate fullest expression of the caste. 3. It has hindered the growth of a strong national unity. The spirit of caste-patriotism, endangers the growth of national consciousness. 4. The excessive caste loyality has brought political disunity. It has wrecked the successful working of the multi-party system. 5. It has prevented the proper growth of democracy. Strictly speaking, democracy and caste cannot go together. The caste engenders inequality while democracy assures equality. 6. It has retarded progress. The caste is more conservative, reactionary and orthodox. It is for the status quo. 7. It has hindered mobility, it has made our society more static than dynamic. 13

8. It has lowered the status of women. In a caste-ridden society women have only a subordinate role to play. 9. It has given scope for religious conversions. The lower caste people are getting converted into Islam and Christianity due to the tyranny of the upper castes. 5. ESTATE SYSTEM Meaning and Nature of Estates The term Estates represents a type of stratification that existed in Europe during the Middle Ages. Estates system has a long history. The system emerged in the ancient Roman Empire, and existed in Europe until very recent times. The estates system consisted of three main divisions the clergy, the nobility and the commoners or the ordinary people. In England and France, for example these three divisions were found. In some parts of Europe, for example, Sweden, almost upto 1866 three were four estate divisions; Nobles, Clergy, Citizens and Peasants. These historical estates were akin to social classes in at least two respects. (i) Each estate was to some extent characterized by a distinctive style of life. (ii) The three estates could be thought of as representing a hierarchy. In this hierarchy the clergy were at the top and the commoners at the bottom. The intermediary position was occupied by the nobles. It should be noted that the clergy was called the First Estate only in consonance with the medieval ideal that the Church is supreme and the state is subordinated to it. Hence, in reality thee were three classes, but with the nobility at the top. Characteristics of Estates T.B. Bottomore has mentioned about three important characteristics of the feudal estates of medieval Europe. They are as follows: 1. Legal Basis of Estates. Estates were legally defined. Each estate had a status of its own. More precisely in a legal sense the status was associated with rights and duties, privileges and obligations. As it has been said, to know a persons real position it was first of all necessary to know the law by which he lived. In comparison with the first two estates the clergy and nobility the third estate consisting of the serfs or commoners suffered from many legal disabilities. For example, the serfs had the inability to appeal to the king for justice. They had no rights over their chattels or properties and holdings. They had the liability of paying the fines of merchet and heriot. (i.e., a fine paid to a lord for the marriage of a daughter, and a fine paid to the lord on the death of a tenant). Even different penalities wer imposed on them for similar offences. 2. Estates Representing Division of Labour. The estates represented a broad division of labour. They had some definite functions. According to the law of the day, the nobility were to fight and defend all, the clergy were to pray and the commoners wer to pay or provide food for all. 3. Estates as Political Groups. The feudal estates were political groups. An assembly of estates possessed political power. From this point of view the serfs did not constitute an estate until the 1`2th century A.D. The decline of Education feudalism after the 12 th Century is associated with the rise of a third estate. The third estate behaved for a long period within the feudal system as a distinctive group before they overthrew it. Thus the three estates clergy, nobility and the commoners functioned like three political groups. As far as participation in government was concerned, the clergy used to stand by the nobility. In France, the political position as more rigid. This system of three estates remained three until 1789, that is till the outbreak of the Revolution. In the French Parliament called States General, these estates used to sit separately and not together. That differentiation within the estates prevailed for a long time. The political movement of the French Revolution brought about some radical changes in France. 14

THE CASTE SYSTEM AND THE ESTATES SYSTEM The Caste System of India and the Estates of Medieval Europe are not one and the same. The differences and the similarities between the two systems may be noted here: 1. A pure caste system is rooted in the religious order whereas the estates system is rooted in the legal order. Divisions within the caste system are an interpretation of the laws of religious ritual, the divisions of estates system are defined by the laws of man. Hence it is not necessary in the estates system to know a mans place in a ritual order. But it is significant to know the man-made lay by which he lives. These laws were somewhat complicated. Still their universal characteristic was that they defined not only the right but also the duties and obligations of the members of estates. These could be enforced either in the courts or by military strength. 2. Unlike the caste system the estates system has no out-castes. Because, at least in theory, all the estates of the system enjoyed their own rights, duties and obligations. All could establish some claim on the established social order. Here in the caste system, the outcastes suffered from all kinds of social, political, religious, legal and other disabilities. 3. Difference between these two systems could be observed with regard to the nature of social mobility. Both, of course, had institutionalized barriers for social mobility. The barriers in the caste system are based on ritual impurity whereas the barriers of the estate system are legal. Since these legal barriers are man-made they can be modified in particular circumstances. For example, in the religious sphere, anyone belonging to any section of the community was recruited into the church. At least in theory, anyone could attain any high place in it. Promotion within the Church indicated some kind of social mobility. In the secular sphere, however, the kind could provide a distinguished servant a mobile position. In both these circumstances, changes of social position were essentially inherited. The caste system, on the other hand, suffers from irreparable inequality created by divinity as it is believed. Hence, no caste members could rise or improve upon his position in the caste system even as an exceptional case. 6. SOCIAL CLASS Social Class is a principal type of social stratification found especially in the modern civilized countries. If the caste system is found to be unique to India, the class system is universal in nature. Sometimes, the word class is used to represent groups of professors, artists, engineers, doctors, students, etc. The word class is also used to refer the quality of the things whether good, better, best and so on. Bu the concept of social class is more used in sociology representing a kind of social stratification than anything else. Definition 1. P. Gisbert: A social class is a category or group of persons having a definite status in society which permanently determines their relation to other groups. 2. Ogburn and Nimkoff: A social class is the aggregate of persons having essentially the same social status in a given society. 3. Maclver and Page: A social class is any portion of the community marked off from the rest by social status. 4. Max Weber: Social classes are aggregates of individuals who have the same opportunities of acquiring goods, the same exhibited standard of living. 5. Lapire: A social class is culturally defined group that is accorded a particular position of status within the population as a whole. Thus, it is clear that social class is a segment of society with all the members of all ages and both the sexes who share the same general status. As Maclver says, whenever social intercourse is limited by the consideration of social status by distinctions between higher and lower, there exists a social class. Nature and Characteristics of Social Class 15

1. Class A Status Group. A social class is essentially a status group. Class is related to status. Different statuses arise in a society as people do different things, engage in different activities and purse different vocations. The consideration of the class as a status group makes it possible to apply it to any society, which has many strata. The idea of social status separates the individuals not only physically sometimes even mentally. 2. Achieved Status and Not Ascribed Status. Status in the case of class system is achieved and not ascribed. Birth is not the criterion of status. Achievements of an individual mostly decide his status. Class system provides scope for changing or improving ones status. Factors like income, occupation, wealth, education, life-styles, etc. decide the status of an individual. 3. The Class System is Universal. Class is almost a universal phenomenon. The class system appears in all the modern complex societies of the world. It is a phenomenon that is absent only in the smallest, the simplest, and the most primitive of societies. All other societies of any size have a class structure. 4. Mode of Feeling. In a class system we may observe three modes of feelings. (i) There is a feeling of equality in relation to the members of ones own class (ii) There is a feeling of inferiority in relation to those who occupy the higher status in the socio-economic hierarchy (iii) There is a feeling of superiority in relation to those who occupy the lower status in the hierarchy. This kind of feeling develops into class-consciousness and finally results in class solidarity. 5. Element of Prestige. Each social class has its own status in society. Status is associated with prestige. The relative position of the class in the social set up arises from the degree of prestige attached to the status. Thus, the status and the prestige enjoyed by the ruling classes or rich classes in every society is superior to that of the class of commoners or the poor people. The prestige which a class enjoys depends upon our evaluations. In many societies knowledge, purity of race or descent, religious, wealth, heroism, bravery and similar other qualities confer a high degree of prestige on the persons possessing them. These qualities on which our evaluations are based vary considerably in different societies, and in the course of time, within the same society. 6. Element of Stability. A social class is relatively a stable group. It is not transitory nor unable like a crowd or a mob. Though status in the case of class is subject to change, it is to some extent stable. Status in the case of class may undergo radical changes in extraordinary circumstances i.e., in times of wars, revolutions, economic, political and social crisis and so on. 7. Mode of Living. A social class is distinguished from other classes by its customary modes of behaviour or mode of behaving. This is often referred to as the life-styles of a particular class. Life-styles or the modes of living include such matters as the mode of dress, the kind of house and neighbourhood one lives in, the means of recreation one resorts to, the cultural products one is able to enjoy, the relationship between parents and children, the kinds of books, magazines and TV shows to which one is exposed, ones friends, ones mode of conveyance and communication, ones way of spending money and so on. Life-styles reflect the specialty in preferences, tastes and values of a class. 8. Social Class an Open Group. Social classes are open groups. They represent an open social system. An open class system is one in which vertical social mobility is possible. This means there are no restrictions, or at the most only very mild restrictions are imposed on the upward and downward movement of individuals in the social hierarchy. However, a completely open class system and a completely closed class system are only hypothetical. 9. Social class an Economic Group. The basis of social classes is mostly economic, but they are not mere economic groups or divisions. Subjective criteria such as classconsciousness, class solidarity and class identification on the one hand, and the objective criteria such as wealth, property, income, education, occupation, etc., on the other, are equally 16

important in the class system. Classes, thus, are not merely economic groups, they are something more than these. 10. Classification of Social Classes. Sociologies have given three-fold classification of classes which consists of (i) Upper Class (ii) Middle Class and (iii) Lower Class. Warner and Lunt in their study of a New England town [their being The Social Life of a Modern Community], have divided each of the traditional classes into two sub classes. They have given a six-fold classification consisting of (i) The Upper-Upper Class (ii)The Lower-Upper Class (iii)The Upper-Middle Class (iv) The Lower-Middle Class, (v) The Upper-Lower Class and (vi) The Lower-Lower Class. Karl Marx, the champion of the theory of social class and class conflicts, has spoken of only two major social classes, the haves and the have nots or the rich and the poor, or the capitalists and the workers, or the Bourgeosie and the Proletariat. Sorokin has spoken of three major types of class stratification. They are economic, political and occupational classes. 11. Class Consciousness. Class system is associated with class consciousness. Class consciousness is the sentiment that characterizes the relations of men towards the members of their own and other classes. Class consciousness is the means by which the integration of persons possessing a similarity of social position and of life-chances is transformed into a common group activity. Conditions of Class-Consciousness. Ginsberg has mentioned three conditions of class consciousness. First is the ease and amount of social mobility. If movement up and down is eay and rapid, differences in mode of life disappear, if it is possible but not easy, the consciousness of differences is increased. The second condition of class consciousness is rivalry and conflict. When the members of a class realize their common interests, then they may think of defending their interests against the common enemy. The third factor is the growth of a common tradition embodying common standards of value and common experiences. When the people come to posses common traditions and common experiences, they may develop class consciousness. Class Consciousness and Class Struggle. Karl Marx, who championed the cause of workers, laid great emphasis on class consciousness among the working classes. According to Marx, the rise of class consciousness among the workers leads to their class identification, class solidarity and finally to class struggle. Hence he gave a clarion call to the workers in his Manifesto of the Communist Party of 1848 that Workers of the world unite, you have nothing to lose, but your chains, you have a world to win. Class consciousness can be transformed into same group activity with the help of some organ or instrument. Political party is such an organ. Hence, Lenin added the idea of a party in Maxism to prepare the workers for class struggle. 7. CRITERION OF CLASS It is true that society has been divided into different classes at different times. Classification of social classes has been made on the basis of objective criterion or subjective criterion or both. Subjective Criteria may include the class consciousness, class solidarity and class identification, the subjective criteria are essentially psychological. Members who have common interests and attributes have a sense of in-group solidarity. They feel that their socioeconomic opportunities are almost equal. Warner and Lunt in their study of the American class system have observed the importance of subjective factors in determining a class. According to them, (i) belonging to the right family, (ii) doing the right things, (iii) knowing how to act right (iv) associating with the right people, (v) living in the right section of the town, (vi) ones feelings and beliefs concerning certain things all have their 17

impact on the status of individuals according to which their class in determined. Wealth alone is not a sufficient qualification for being admitted to the upper class they maintained. Objective Criteria. Objective criteria include those factors with the help of which ones status may be determined. They may include (i) wealth, property or income, (ii) family or kinship, (iii) location of residence, (iv) occupation, (v) level of education, (vi) physical marks of difference such as skin colour, etc. Some sociologists have given more importance to the objective factors. It may be noted that the criteria upon which class is determined vary from time to time and place to place. For example, in pre-Nazi Germany, the combination of old aristocratic family line and high rank in the army put one in the top position. In Russia, during the Czarist regime, nobility with a military career represented the top class position. In the Soviet Russia today, a high position in the communist party is a basis to become a member of the top-class position. In the U.S.A., today, the combination of high level business, high political status, wealth, education and old family descent represent a mans high status in the society. Karl Marx on the contrary, has placed premium on the objective factors particularly the economic ones. According to him, social classes originate only from economic struggle. He neglected other subjective factors, his theory social class is, hence, regarded as one-sided, misleading and deterministic. 8. MARXIAN ANALYSIS OF CLASS Marx defined a social class as all those people who share a common relationship to the means of economic production. Those who own and control the means of production (slave owners, feudal landowners or owners of property such as factories and capital) are the dominant class. They exercise power because of their ownership of means of production. In an industrial society the means of production include the factories, and the machinery and raw materials used for manufacturing goods, Marx called them the class of Bourgeoisie or capitalists or owners of property. All those who work for dominant class are slaves, peasants, or industrial labourers. They constitute the subordinate class. Marx called this class the proletariat or the labour class or working class or poor class. Members of the proletariat own only their labour which they hire our to the owners of industry in return for wages. The relationship between these two classes is not only one of dominance and subordination but also of exploitation. The workers produce more wealth in the form of food, manufactured products and services than is necessary to meet their basic needs. It means they produce surplus wealth. But they do not enjoy the use of the surplus they have created. On the contrary, those who own the means of production are able to grab this surplus wealth as profit for their own use. The capitalists are a non-producing class. They do not actually produce anything. Still much of the wealth produced by the proletariats is taken away by the capitalists. According to Marx, this kind of exploitation has been the main source of conflict between the two classes throughout history. Marx believed that the economic base of society influences the general character of all other aspects of culture and social structure, such as law, religion, education and government. The dominant class is able to control all of those institutions and to ensure that they protect its own interests. The laws, therefore, protect the rich, not poor. The established religion supports the social order as it is, not as it might be. Education teaches the virtues of the existing system, not its vices. Government upholds the status quo rather than undermines it. Marx was of the opinion that as a result of the exploitation of workers by the capitalists the gap between the two goes o widening. Thus the rich become richer and the poor become poorer. The results in an imbalance in the production and distribution. Goods will be produced and flooded in the market in abundant quantity and there will be only a handful of 18

people to purchase them. Majority of the people in society who mostly belong to the working class cannot purchase the goods due to their poor purchasing capacity. Marx Calls this situation the anarchic character of production. Hence capitalism suffers from its own internal contradictions. The seed of destruction of capitalism is ripening in the very womb of capitalism Marx said. He has foretold that capitalism would end in failure. The prophecy of capitalism is a prophecy of doom Marx stated emphatically. Marx believed that the members of the proletariat would eventually realize that they were being exploited and oppressed. They would then join together to overthrow the bourgeoisie either by force or by voting their own representatives into the government. As a Champion of the cause of the workers Marx called upon the workers to hasten the process of the destruction of the capitalist system. Marx and Engles made a fervent appeal to the working class in their Manifesto of the communist party of 1848 in the following way: Let the ruling classes tremble at a communist revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their Chains. They have a world to win, working men of all countries unite. Marx has even predicted that a historic revolution would mark the end of capitalism and lead to a classless society, after their successful revolution the workers would set up a communist society which means that the forces of production would be communally owned, that is jointly owned by all members of society. Goods produced would be equally shares and everyone would work for him and for the benefit of society as a whole. Criticism Marxs view on class are part of his more general theory of the history of society. Some sociologists agree that they are more appropriate to19th century Europe and have little relevance today. Marxian definition of class and its interpretation can be misleading in many marginal cases. When Marx wrote, industry was owned and controlled primarily by individual capitalists. But this is no longer the case today. Most industry is now run by large corporations, which are owned by thousands of stockholders but controlled by salarie managers. As a result the ownership and control of the means of production have been largely separated. Executives, technicians, scientists and other professionals may control the means of production but they do not own it. They are on the payroll like any other workers. Marx definition in this way does not held very much in determining their social class. Further, Marxian definition of social class does not answer a few of the questions such as What is the social class of a dropout, who does not own or control the means of production but does not work either? What is the social class of an impoverished member of the European aristocracy, who enjoys high social prestige because of ancestry rather than any relationship to the means of production? What is the class of a wealthy black surgeon who suffers racial prejudices and discrimination almost everyday of his or her life? . (Ian Robertson). The Marxian explanation does not handle these ambiguous cases very satisfactorily. 9. CASTE AND CLASS: DIFFERENCES caste and class represent two main forms of social stratification. They can be distinguished on the following grounds. Caste Class 1 Particular: The system with all its Universal: The Class system is universal in pecularities is unique to India. It is nature. It is found in almost all the modern peculiar To India and hence it is not complex societies. universal. 19

Ascribed Status: Status is ascribed to the individuals by birth. Birth is the criterion of status and not achievement. Status can neither be changed for be improved. Closed system: Caste is a closed system. It restricts social mobility; i.e., the movement of people from one social status to that of the other. Divine Origin: The Caste system is believed to have had a divine origin. It is closely associated with Hindu tradition. Purity and Impurity: The idea of purity and impurity is associated with the caste. Some castes are called pure while others are regarded as impure castes are regarded as untouchables. Regulation of relations: The caste system controls the activities and regulates the relations of its members to a great extent. As Maclver says, it fixes the role of a man in society. It regulates even the routine activities of the members. Caste Greater Social Distance: There is comparatively a greater distance being kept between different castes. Conservative: The caste ridden system tends to become conservative, orthodox and reactionary. Castes become in course of time, water-tight compartments. Endogamous Group: Caste is an endogamous social unit. Accordingly, every caste member has to marry within the group selecting the life partner from his or her own caste. Inter caste marriages are not allowed. Complexity: The caste system is a complex system. The very fact that more than 2800 castes and sub castes are found in India, makes it evident how complex it is. Caste-consciousness: Caste consciousness is more dangerous to 20

Achieved Status: Status is achieved by the individuals. There is scope for achievement. Hence, status can be changed or improved. Open system: Class is an open system. It provides for social mobility. Individuals can more from the lower class to the upper class. Secular: The class system is secular. It has nothing to do with religion. It has been given no religious explanation. Feeling of Disparity: There is a feeling of disparity on the part of the members of a class. The question of purity and impurity does not arise. Hence there is no practice of untouchability. Limits Relations: The Class system, on the other hand, limits the range of contacts and communications of its members. Individuals are more free in a class. It does regulate the daily tasks of its members.

7 8

Class Less Social distance: There is less social distance between different classes. Members are more tolerant than others. Progressive: The class-laden system is regarded as more progressive. Classes give more freedom to the members. It permits greater social mobility. Not endogamous: A class is not an endogamous unit. The members are free to select his or her life partner from any of the classes. The class system never imposes restrictions on marriage. Simplicity: The class system is know for its simplicity. Broadly speaking, there are only three classes the upper, middle and the lower and hence the network of relations is also simple. Class-consciousness: Class-consciousness is not inimical to democracy. Class and

10

11

democracy. Democracy and caste strictly speaking, cannot go together, because caste is based on inequality. Caste-feeling may also endanger the growth of national sentiments and unity. Caste restricts the amount of community feeling. Casteism has been a great hinderance to the national integration in India.

democracy go together. Class on the other hand, does not restrict the amount of community feeling. In spite of the Communist influence to internationalise, the class system never disturbs the growth of national sentiments.

SOME ASPECTS OF SOCIAL MOBILITY Though the Indian society which is based on the caste system is often regarded as a closed society, it is not altogether changeless. Within the framework of the caste itself some kind of mobility is observed. Lower castes have often tried to claim higher status by imitating the life-styles of upper-castes particularly of Brahmins and Kshatriyas. M/N. Srinivas used the term Sanskritisation to denote such a type of process. The upper castes including Brahmins, on the contrary, have started orienting their life-styles on the model of the Westerners. The term Westernisation introduced by M.N. Srinivas describes this process. Today not only the upper class and middle class people including upper caste and intermediary caste people are trying to orient their behaviour, attitudes, beliefs and life-styles towards those of developed societies; but also the entire mass of people are involved in this process. Daniel Lerner calls this process modernisation. It denotes a process of social change whereby less developed societies acquire the characteristics common to more developed societies. Here is an attempt to understand the socio-cultural changes that have been taking place in India in terms of these processes namely: Sanskritisation, Westernisation and Modernisation. These three process reflect an attempt to the part of the Indian masses to achieve some amount of mobility both within and outside the framework of the caste system. A. SANSKRITISATION Meaning of Sanskritisation The term Sanskritisation was introduced into Indian Sociology by Prof. M.N. Srinivas. The term refers to a process whereby people of lower castes collectively try to adopt upper caste practices and beliefs, as a preliminary step to acquire higher status. Thus it indicates a process of cultural mobility that is taking place in the traditional social system of India. M.N. Srinivas in his study of the Coorg in Karnataka, found that lower castes, in order to raise their position in the caste hierarchy, adopted some customs and practices of the Brahmins, and gave up some of their own which were considered to be impure by the higher castes. For example, they gave up meat-eating, drinking liquor and animals sacrifice to their deities, They imitated Brahmins in matters of dress, food and rituals. By doing this, within a generation or so they could claim higher positions in the hierarchy of castes. In the beginning, M.N. Srinivas used the term Brahminisation to denote this process. Later on, he replaced it by Sanskritisation. Definition of Sanskritisation M.N. Srinivas, in fact, has been broadening his definition of the term Sanskritisation from time to time. Initially, he described it as the process of mobility of lower castes by adopting vegetarianism and teetotalism to move in the caste hierarchy in a generation or two (1962). Later on, he redefined it as a process by which a low caste or a tribe o other group 21

changes in customs, rituals, ideology and way of life in the direction of a high and frequently, twice-born caste. The second definition is much broader for it includes ideologies also. Sanskritisation and Brahminisation Sanskritisation is a much broader concept than Brahminisation. M.N. Srinivas preferred it to Brahminisation for some reasons: (i) Sanskritisation is a broader term and it can subsume in itself the narrower process of Brahminisation. For instance, today, though by and large, Brahmins are vegetarians and teetotalers, some of them such Kashmins, Bengalis and saraswath Brahmins eat non-vegetarian food. Had the term Brahminisation been used, it would have become necessary to specify which particular Brahmin group was meant. (ii) Further, the reference groups of Sanskritisation are not always Brahmin. The process of imitation need not necessarily take place on the model of Brahmins. Srinivas himself has given the example of the low castes of Mysore who adopted the way of life of Lingayats, who are not Brahmins but who claim equality with Brahmins. Similarly, the smiths of Mysore call themselves Vishwakarma Brahmins and wear sacred threads and have sanskritised some of the rituals. The lower castes imitated not only Brahmins but also Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, Jats, Shudras, etc. in different parts of the country. Hence the term Brahminisation does not completely explain this process. M.N. Srinivas himself acknowledged this fact and wrote: I now realize that, I emphasized unduly the Brahminical model of Saskritisation and ignored the other models Kshatriya, Vaishya and Shudra .. An Analysis of the Process of Sanskritisation An Analysis of the process of Sanskritisation would reveal to us the following facts: 1. Sanskritisation denotes the process in which the lower castes try to imitate the life-styles of upper castes in their attempt to raise their social status. The process seems to be associated with the role of local dominant caste. Though for some time, the lower castes imitated Brahmins they soon shifted it towards the local dominant caste which in most cases a non-Brahmin dominant caste. 2. Sanskritisation denotes the process of upward mobility. In this process, a caste is trying to increase its position in the caste hierarchy not at once, but over a period of time. It would take, sometimes, a period of one or two generations. 3. Mobility that is involved in the process of Sanskritisation results only in positional changes for particular castes or sections of castes and need not necessarily lead to a structural change. It means, while individual castes move up or down, the structure as such remains the same. 4. Sanskritisation is not a new phenomenon as such, M.N. Srinivas writes: Sanskritisation has been a major process of cultural change in Indian history, and it has occurred in every part of the Indian sub-continent. It may have been more active at some periods than at others, and some parts of India are more sanskritised than others; but there is no doubt that the process has been universal. 5. The castes which enjoyed higher economic and political power but rated relatively low in ritual ranking went after Sanskritisation for they felt that their claim to a higher position was not fully effective. The three main aspects of power in the caste system are the ritual, the economic and the political ones. The possession of power in any one sphere usually leads to the acquisition of power in the other two. But Srinivas opines that inconsistencies do occur. 6. Economic betterment is not a necessary pre-condition to Sanskritisation, nor economic development must necessarily lead to Sanskritisation. However, sometimes a group (caste, tribe) may start by acquiring, political power and this may lead to economic development and Sanskritisation. Economic betterment, the acquisition of political power, education, leadership 22

and a desire to move up in the hierarchy, are all the relevant factors in Sanskritisation, and each case of Sanskritisation may how all or some of these factors mixed up in different measures. 7. Sanskritisation is not necessarily confined to the castes within the Hindu community, it is found in tribal communities also. Example. The Bhils of Western India, the Gonds and Oraons of Middle India, and the Pahadiyas of Himalayan region have come under the influence of Sanskritisation. These tribal communities are now claiming themselves to be Hindus for their communities represent some caste groups within the fold of Hinduism. (It should be noted that in the traditional system, a group could be called Hindu only if it was regarded as a caste group). 8. The process of Sanskritisation serves as a reference group. It is through this process, a caste group tries to orient its beliefs, practices, values, attitudes and life-styles in terms of another superior or dominant group, so that it can also get some recognition. Since this term was made applicable by M.N. Srinivas even to Kshatriya, Vaishya and Shudra models (in addition to Brhamana model), it has greater relevance to function as a reference group. 9. Sanskritisation does not take place in the same manner in all the places. Studies have reveled that in most of the cases the lower castes tend to imitate the upper castes particularly the Kshatriya and Brahmin castes. There are instances of upper castes imitating some of the practices of lower castes, and sometimes of even tribal groups. For example, a Brahmin may make a blood-sacrifice to one of the local deities through the medium of a non-Brahmin friend. The Muslim cultural ways have imposed some limitations in the imitation process of some upper and lower castes. This is very much in evidence in Punjab. Thus, it can be generalized that Sanskritisation is not a one-way process; it is a two-way process. Not always one caste takes from the higher caste, sometimes it also gives in return. 10. The British rule in India provided a favourable atmosphere for Sanskritisation to take place. Political independence has weakened the trend towards this change. Now the emphasis is on vertical social mobility and not on the horizontal mobility. In this process of mobility the basic unit remains the group only and not the individual or family. 11. The process of Sanskritisation does not automatically result in the achievement of a higher status for the group. People will have to wait for a period of a generation or two before their claim can be accepted. Further, it may so happen that a claim which may not succeed in a particular area or period of time, may succeed in another. 12. Significant developments in the realm of material culture have accelerated the process of Sanskritisation. Industrialsation, occupational mobility, mass media of communication, spread of literacy, advent of Western technology, improvement in the transportation system, etc., have speeded up the process of Sanskritisation. Introduction of parliamentary system of democracy and universal suffrage have also contributed to the increased Sanskritisation. 13. As M.N. Srinivas has pointed out, Sanskritisation serves to reduce or remove the gap between the ritual and secular ranking. It is, indeed, one of its main functions. For example, if a caste, or its segment gains secular, that is, political power, it immediately starts imitating the so called status-symbols of the customs, rituals, ideals, beliefs, values, life-styles, etc. of the upper caste communities. The lower caste group which successfully gets into the seat of secular power also tries to avail of the services of Brahmins especially at the time of observing some rituals, worshipping and offering things to the God in the Centres of pilgrimage, celebrating important Hindu festivals, fixing muhurtam (auspicious time for doing good works or starting ventures) for some important occasions and programmes, and so on. 14. Sanskritisation has often been construed as a kind of protest against the traditional caste system. Sanskritisation is a type of protest against the caste system in which the status in ascribed or predetermined. Lower castes which are disillusioned with their predetermined statuses and impressed by the higher statuses accorded to the upper castes, naturally desire to 23

go up in the status hierarchy. This desire is virtually against the traditional hierarchical principle of the caste system. Making an attempt through Sanskritisation to move up in the status hierarchical principle of caste, amounts to a protest against the caste system itself. 15. Sanskritisation, as M.N. Srinivas himself has said, does not denote a basic change in the structure of the Hindu society. It should not be construed that trough this process any kind of social change can be brought about in the caste-ridden society. Since caste is a closed society in which the membership is based on the unchangeable factor of birth, no one can become a member of the reference group as such (Reference group in this context may be an upper caste Brahmin or non-Brahmin caste group which is locally dominant and influential). However, an individual or a group may improve his or its social position within the range of ones own Varna group. Srinivas further observes that the process of Sanskritisation can only support the existing system but can never remove it. Hence the changes that are effected through Sanskritisation though cannot be neglected, have only limited significance. SANSKRITISATION: SOME COMMENTS Though the concept Sanskritisation introduced by Prof/ M.N. Srinivas has been regarded as a significant contribution to the sociological literature, it is not free from criticisms. Number of comments have been made about the term by the scholars. Some of them may be cited here. 1. According to J.F. Stall, Sanskritisation as used by Srinivas and other anthropologists is a complex concept or a class of concepts. The term itself seems to be misleading, since its relationship to the term Sanskrit is extremely complicated (quoted by Yogendra Singh in his Modernization of Indian Tradition. 2. Yogendra Singh comments: Though Sanskritisation and Sanskritisation, in logical sense, are Truth asserting concepts They fail to lead to a consistent theory of cultural change. Such consistency is far from realization.. The concepts contain no hypotheses, and in Zetterbergs words, Cannot be true or false. They can be clumsy or elegant, appropriate or inappropriate, effective or worthless but never true or false. 3. Yogendra Singh also opines that Sanskritisation fails to account for many aspects of cultural change in past and contemporary India as it neglects the non-Sankritic traditions. Mckim Marriot has observed that truism of Yogendra Singhs comments in one of his studies in a village. M. Marrior observes , we cannot establish that the process of Sanskritisation always takes place by replacing or removing the non-Sankritic rituals. Sankritic rites often added on to non-Sanskritic rites without replacing them Mckim Marriot. 4. It is also commented that much against the assumption of M.N. Srinivas, the Sanskritic influence has not been universal to all parts of country. In most of northern India, especially in Punjab, it was the Islamic tradition which provided a basis for cultural imitation. In Punjab, writes Chanana, Culturally Sankritic influence has been but one of the trends, and at times, it could not have been the main trend. For a few centuries, unit the third quarter of the 19 th century Persian influence had been the dominating one in this area. 5. As suggested by Harold A. Gould, often the motive force behind Sanskritisation is not of cultural imitation per se but an expression of challenge and revolt against the socio-economic deprivations. Yogendra Singh writes: Sanskritisation is thus a cultural camouflage for latent interclass and intercaste competition for economic and social power, typical of a tradition bound society where rationally the privileged upper castes hold monopoly to power and social status. When the impact of the external forces like political democratization, land reforms and other social reforms break, this monopoly of the upper castes, the cultural camouflage of Sanskritisation is thrown away, in favour of an open conflict with the privileged classes based on nativistic solidarity. 24

6. Dr. D.N. Majumdar comments that it is wrong to assume the process of Sanskritisation as universal process to be observed throughout India. In his study of Mohan village in Uttar Pradesh he observed a strong exception to this assumption. In this village, as he observed, the lower caste people do not have any urge or inclination to imitate the life-style of Brahmins or any other dominant higher caste of that region. If a cobbler wears tilak dhoti and the sacred thread and follows some of the customs of higher castes, nobody recognizes him as an upper caste man if Sanskritisation is really a universal process, where exactly it stops and why?. Dr. Majumdar questions. 7. M.N. Srinivas has been changing the definition of the term Sanskritisation from time to time and this adds to the problem of understanding its meaning and range of operations in clear terms. First, Dr. Srinivas used the term to mean Brahminisation. Later on, he extended its meaning. He used it to mean a process in which a lower caste, a tribal group or any other group attempts to imitate the life-styles of a locally dominant upper caste, mostly a twiceborn caste. As per his recent interpretation, the process includes the imitation of ideas, values and ideologies. Here also it becomes difficult to ascertain the real meaning of the term ideology. 8. When we try to interpret certain changes that have taken place in the field of social mobility in the light of Sanksritisation, we face certain paradoxes. According to Dr. Srinivas, political and economic forces are normally favourable for Sankritisation. But the policy of reservation a politico constitutional attempt to elevate the status of lower caste, and class people, presents here a different picture. Theoretically, the policy of reservation must be supportive of Sankritisation. But paradoxically it goes against it. Those who avail of the reservation benefits have developed a vested interest in calling themselves dalits or Scheduled Caste people. They want to be called dalits or people of Scheduled caste category so that they can permanently avails of the benefits of reservation. Finally, it can be said that the twin concepts of Sankritisation and Westernisation introduced by M.N. Srinivas in explaining the cultural changes that are taking place in India, do have their own importance. But the basic question in this: Do these twin concepts explain cultural change with all its ramifications? Are they inclusive and universal enough to provide a satisfactory explanation to all the major cultural changes that have taken place throughout the country? According to Yogendra Singh, the concept of Modernisation can only provide a satisfactory answer to these questions.

25