Perspectives on the study of caste systems: G. S. Ghurye, M. N. Srinivas, Louis Dumont, Andre Beteille

G. S. Ghurye’s view on caste

Indological approach. Built theory of origin of caste primarily on the basis of Herbert Risley

Aryans entered India around 2500 B.C. Its people divided into 3 categories;

1. Brahman – excelled in composing poetry

2. Kshatriya – governing and defending

3. Vysy – excelled in none of the two

Membership not based on birth

Another division;

1. Aryans – conquerors

2. Dasas - enslaved

Dasas were distinguished from Aryans in terms of skin colour.

Varna used to mention colour of skin.

2 Varna;

1. Arya Varna

2. Krishna Varna

Anuloma prescribed

Pratiloma proscribed

Aryans descendents of Manu. Dasas were not.

Purusuktha in 10th Mandal of Rig-Veda explains origin of universe. Brahma destroyed himself to create universe. From mouth came Brahman, arm-Kshatriya, thigh-Vysy and feet-Shudras.

Criticism

1. Occupational theory (Nesfield), Political Theory (Abbe Dubois), and Religious theory (Hocart and Senart) - do not agree with the Racial theory of the Caste System.

2. M.N. Srinivas called it a ‘Text View’ and questioned the validity.

3. Louis Dumont believes that caste is a cultural particularistic phenomenon which was not accepted by Ghurye.

M. N. Srinivas’ view on caste

Caste constitutes local hierarchy which had 2 dimensions;

1. Ritual dimension – based on opposition of purity and pollution

2. Secular dimension – based on ownership of land, access to political power, numerical strength and education

Dominant caste is placed higher in secular hierarchy though it may be lower in ritual hierarchy.

Solidarity or unity in caste system;

1. Vertical solidarity – due to interdependence of caste

2. Horizontal solidarity – due to common culture

Social mobility in caste follows along 2 lines;

1. Sanskritization

2. Westernization

Criticism

1. M.N. Srinivas presents only the harmonious and interdependent aspect of the caste system whereas caste is a competitive and phenomena of dominance over each other.

2. Presents caste system as a very static and functional system and tries to justify it.

3. M.N. Srinivas neglects the political factor behind the dominance of one caste over the other.

4. His perspective cannot be applied on other parts of India because of its inherent diversity.

Louis Dumont’s view on caste

Ideological principle of purity and pollution is unique about caste system and they constitute binary opposites.

Bougle identified 3 fundamental characters of caste system

1. Separation – in matters of marriage, exchange of food, physical contact

2. Hierarchy – ranking of groups

3. Interdependence – in terms of occupational division of labour

Dumont says that all are reducible to pure and impure.

In Vedas, 3 types of gunas;

1. Satva – wisdom, austerity, truth

2. Rajas – bravery, luxury, etc.

3. Tamas – darkness, illiteracy, laziness

Brahmin – Satva

Kshatriya – Satva + Rajas

Vaishya – Rajas + Tamas

Sudras – Tamas

Mutual opposition of pure and impure becomes primary condition on which the following structure is built.

1. Savarna

1. Dwija

1. Brahmin

2. Kshatriya

2. Non-dwija

2. Avarna

Caste System is completely based on the ideology of ‘purity and pollution’ and hence it is a cultural particularistic phenomenon.

Criticism

1. M.N. Srinivas called these views as textual and rejected it.

2. G.S. Ghurye criticized Louis Dumont interpreting Indian text for hidden colonial agenda.

3. T.N. Madan believed that merely pollution and purity is not the basis of hierarchy in Caste System because except few Brahmins (Nambudari, Saryupari, Kanyikubj) all the Brahmins are non-vegetarian whereas many Vaishya Castes are vegetarians still Brahmins are ranked top and Vaishyas down the order.

4. Dumont ignored the political perspective which largely determines the hierarchy of the caste system.

Andre Beteille’s view on caste

Studied sripuram village. 3 relations of stratification before British;

1. Brahmins – landlords and dominant class

2. Non-Brahmins – peasants and less powerful than Brahmins

3. Adi-Dravidas – landless farmers or sharecroppers, powerless

During British rule, relations between caste, class and power changed. British rule and onwards cumulative inequality changed in dispersed inequality

Caste – small and named group of persons characterized by endogamy, hereditary membership

Class – defined in terms of property, ownership or non-ownership of means of production

Criticism

More relevant in south India

Features of caste system

Features of caste system by G. S. Ghurye and Louis Dumont;

1. Religious sanctions

2. Ascribed status

3. Hereditary occupation

4. Commensal restrictions

5. Endogamy

6. Jajmani system

7. Caste panchayat

Untouchability – forms and perspectives

Literally it means social exclusion as manifested in restriction on physical contact.

Louis Dumont – Unity model: Chamar and bhangis both are untouchables but even chamar does not touch a bhangi. So even untouchables constitute an important part of Hindu society.

Cathelene Gough – Conflict view: Caste system was oppressive. Louis Dumont fails to recognize caste for what it existed. It was not unity but disunity.

Oliver Mendel Sohn – Diversity view: They highlight the contrast between untouchables and upper castes. However the system is now undergoing change due to social movements, state action and economic growth.