Annihilation of Caste of Ambedkar [PDF]

Zitiervorschau

ANNHILATION OF CASTE

 Social reform Two sets of critics – political reformers and socialists. Arguments of the political reformers -

At one point we had a political wing and a social reform wing of the Congress. Soon, however, they became rival groups.

-

Issue – whether social reform should precede political reform?

-

Political wing won the fight, and said there is no link between political reform and not allowing widow remarriage or not sending girls to oxford.

-

[Ambedkar examines the treatment of untouchables at this point, same as what VK had said in class] Then says that if the political reformists are saying that one country is not fit to rule another, then surely one class is not fit to rule another, so we clearly need social reform to achieve political reform.

-

Social Reform Party lost because – they were agitating for reforms in the Hindu family (something which actually effected the high caste Hindus who constituted the party) like widow remarriage etc. instead of agitating for reorganization of the Hindu society by abolition of caste system.

-

But this also shows that the victory of the political reformers over the social reformers was very limited, and doesn‘t necessarily prove that political reform can‘t precede social reform.

-

The following instances cited to show that political reform not successful/possible w/o social reform – framing of Constitution, Communal Award, Irish Home Rule, Republican Constitution of Rome [all of which basically show that you can‘t have political reform without providing for the social realities and divisions/problems]

-

Political revolutions have generally been preceded by social and religious revolutions – religious reformation started by Luther precursor to political emancipation of Europe, in England Puritanism led to establishment of political liberty, Puritanism won the American war of independence, etc.

Socialists are against social reform because -

Basically apply economic interpretation of history to India, and preach that political and social reforms are illusions, and it is economic reform by equalization of property that must precede every other form of reform.

-

Ambedkar says that more than economic power, it is actually religion which holds stronger sway over people and their identity, so can‘t define man in terms of economic power alone.

-

He says the Socialists fail because they are applying what is true for the European society to India, but the two are not at the same stage of development.

-

Even if it is assumed that equalization of property must precede everything else, can it be done w/o social reform? Practically speaking, and not just in lofty ideals – no, it can‘t.

-

Why? Because their aim can only be achieved by revolution, which must be led by the proletariat, which will only unite if they are promised equality, which can‘t happen w/o social reform and annihilation of caste system. Even if by a miracle a Socialist state is established w/o dealing with social issues, while trying to maintain equality & distribution of property, they‘ll have to deal with caste and the issues it‘ll create as a a system which inherently creates inequality.

Therefore, one cannot have any other reform without first having sweeping social reforms.  Deconstruction of the arguments put forth in support of the caste system First argument often cited – it is simply a system of division of labour, necessary for a civilized society to progress -

It‘s not just division of labour, it is also division of labourers into hierarchical water-tight compartments; not spontaneous or based on skills, based on social status instead of capabilities; no individual will or choice allowed.

-

Industry is dynamic, caste system static – prevents people from adapting and changing occupations (by making some occupations ‗beneath their dignity‘ so to speak) creating employment troubles and lack of economic efficiency.

V CASTE CANNOT PRESERVE A NONEXISTENT "RACIAL PURITY" Second argument – biological defence – caste system protects purity of race and blood. -

Scientists have held that there is no ‗pure‘ race in the world anymore, all of them have been mixed, especially in India(D.R.Bhandarkar)

-

Caste system came into existence long after mixing of races, therefore could not have been to prevent mixing of races

-

A Punjabi Brahman and Dalit have more in common race wise that a Punjabi Brahmin and Madrasi Brahmin.

-

Even if the different castes are different races, what‘s the harm in allowing intermixing of races? There do not form different species as exist between human and animals. Caste system isn‘t in compliance with eugenics. If caste is eugenic , then origin of sub caste should also ne eugenic. Plus it prohibits all sorts of social interactions, not just inter-caste marriage. Therefore, caste system has no scientific origin.

VI CASTE PREVENTS HINDUS FROM FORMING A REAL SOCIETY OR NATION]  Bad impact of the system of Hindu society Caste system has completely disorganised and demoralised the hindus -

The word hindu was given by Mohammedans to the native for the purpose of distinguishing themselves. Not a Sanskrit word. Hindu society is a myth – although there is similarity in some customs and practices, there is no Hindu ‗consciousness of kind’; the only conscious of kind exist is that of caste.

the

caste system prevent common activity and by preventing that, it has prevented the Hindus from truly becoming a society with unified life and a consciousness of its own being. -

Similarity in habits and customs, beliefs and thoughts, is not enough to constitute men into society. Men constitute a society because they have things which they possess in common. To have similar things is totally differentfrom possessing things in common. And the only way by which men can come to possess things in common with one another is by being in communication with one another. The Caste System prevents common activity; and by preventing common activity, it has prevented the Hindus from becoming a society with a unified life and a consciousness of its own being. VII THE WORSTFEATURE OF THE CASTE SYSTEM IS AN ANTISOCIAL SPIRIT

-

The system creates an anti-social spirit – eg; various literatures like sahyadrikhand the system gives noble origins to one class of people, and ignoble ones to the others; this has infected the relations among sub-castes within a caste as well and they too are exclusivist and anti-social; the interests of one caste and protection of the same prevents full interaction and creates isolation. The Brahmin's primary

concern is to protect "his interest" against those of the non-Brahmins; and the nonBrahmins' primary concern is to protect their interests against those of the Brahmins. Another feature is that old rivalries continue to persist even after generations because caste consciousness keeps them alive. The existence of Caste and Caste Consciousness has served to keep the memory of past feuds between castes green, and has prevented solidarity VII CASTE PREVENTS THE UPLIFT AND INCORPORATION OF THE ABORIGINAL TRIBES -

Hindus should have made efforts to civilize Aboriginal tribes. Civilizing the aborigines means adopting them as your own, living in their midst, and cultivating fellow-feeling—in short, loving them. IX THE HIGHER CASTES HAVE CONSPIRED TO KEEP THE LOWER CASTES DOWN Higher caste Hindus have intentionally stopped the lower caste Hindus from rising economically, socially and culturally; they have refused to share their knowledge and intellect with others.eg Pathere Prabhu – remarriage – stopped 10 CASTE PREVENTS HINDUISM FROM BEING A MISSIONARY RELIGION]

-

Was a hindu religion a missionary religion? : the Hindu religion ceased to be a missionary religion when the Caste System grew up among the

-

Hindus. Caste is inconsistent with conversion. That problem is where to place the convert, in what caste? It is a problem which must baffle every Hindu wishing to make aliens converts to his religion. Unlike a club, the membership of a caste is not open to all and sundry. The law of Caste confines its membership to persons born in the caste. Castes are autonomous, and there is no authority anywhere to compel a caste to admit a newcomer to its social life. . So long as Caste remains, Hindu religion cannot be made a missionary religion, and Shudhi will be both a folly and a futility. CASTE DEPRIVES HINDUS OF MUTUAL HELP, TRUST, AND FELLOW-FEELING

-

Hindu goal of Shuddhi (conversion of everyone to Hinduism) can‘t ever happen because there is no place for a convert in the caste system – where would he be placed, which caste?

-

Another goal of Sangathan (unity and strength) is also not possible – because unlike Sikh or Muslim, a Hindu has no guarantee that he‘ll get help from other Hindus if he is in trouble, whereas the other two communities are assured of that support due to the associated mode of life practiced by them. Therefore, caste system will never allow for Sangathan. CASTE DEPRIVES HINDUS OF MUTUAL HELP, TRUST, AND FELLOW-FEELING

-

Caste system stifles reform – reform within a community happens if an individual asserts his will as opposed to the norm of the community, and the community allows for assertion of independence or independent will to an extent. If group is very intolerant, the reform will die out along with the reformer. Caste system provides for excommunication (complete cut-off from social interaction) of anyone who breaks a rule of caste – the penalty is so harsh, that nobody protests or tries to.

-

It has destroyed public spirit and public opinion of the Hindus – virtue and morality are caste-bound; a Hindu‘s responsibility and loyalty is only to his caste; capacity to appreciate a man on merit alone has been eroded.

12 [Caste is a powerful weapon for preventing all reform] The assertion by the individual of his own opinions and beliefs, his own independence and interest—as over against group standards, group authority, and group interests—is the beginning of all reform. if the group is intolerant, and does not bother about the means it adopts to stifle such individuals, they will perish and the reform will die out. Now a caste has an unquestioned right to excommunicate any man who is guilty of breaking the rules of the caste; and when it is realized that excommunication involves a complete cesser [= cessation] of social intercourse, it will be agreed that as a form of punishment there is really little to choose between excommunication and death. Therefore caste can organise themselves and make the life of the reformer a hell. Thus it can prevent reforms.

13 [Caste destroys public spirit, public opinion, and public charity] Caste has killed public spirit. Caste has destroyed the sense of public charity. Caste has made public opinion impossible. A Hindu's public is his caste. His responsibility is only to his caste. His loyalty is restricted only to his caste. There is no appreciation of the meritorious. There is no charity to the needy. Suffering as such calls for no response. There is charity, but it begins with the caste and ends with the caste. There is sympathy, but not for men of other castes.

14 [My ideal: a society based on Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity]  If not caste, then on what pillars should Hindu society be based?

Liberty, equality, fraternity. -

Fraternity – in an ideal society, there should be interests consciously shared and communicated; social endosmosis(There should be varied and free points of contact with other modes of association);

this fraternity, another name for democracy – democracy

is not just a form of government but a mode of living, an attitude to respect and revere fellowmen. -

Liberty – liberty means not just freedom of movement or property but must also include freedom to choose one‘s profession (otherwise it is slavery) slavery- It means a state of society in which some men are forced to accept from others the purposes which control their conduct.

-

Equality – all men are not really equal, and ‗equality‘ is a fiction but for governance purposes, and to incentivise people, it is necessary to give them as equal a footing as possible. Man power is dependent on 1) physical hereditary 2) social inheritance or endowment 3) on his own effort. A man should not be discriminated on the first two aspects.

15 [The Arya Samajists' "Chaturvarnya" retains the old bad caste labels  Alternate solution to caste system suggested by Arya Samaj – Chaturvarnya system -

Division of society into four classes, based not on birth but on ‘guna’ or worth.

-

To respect a person according to his worth, it is not necessary give the titles of Brahmins, kshatriyas etc.

16 ["Chaturvarnya" would face impossible difficulties in practice] -

Several problems – to begin with, propose to stick with the labels of Brahmin etc. – why? Principle of caste is fundamentally different from that of varna. The names are associated with very definite notions which can‘t just be unlearned and used in a different sense.

-

Not practical – how do you get people who have status-by-virtue-of-birth to give it up? How will 4,000 castes be reduced to 4 varnas? Plus presumption that people can be pigeon-holed into four categories – not true.

-

-

Charturvarna system is also similar to the classification of caste system criticism for both are same. The chief criticism against Plato is that his idea of lumping individuals into a few sharply-marked-off classes is a very superficial view of man and his powers. He had no recognition of the infinite diversity of active tendencies, and the combination of tendencies of which an individual is capable.

-

Another problem that the way in which it can be maintained ? Caste maintained using harsh punishments – will this be maintained the same way? Lord rama- shambuka example.

-

What will be position of women in their society – they don‘t really work in all four ‗varnas‘ so how do they get status – by marriage (which isn‘t worth-based)?

17 ["Chaturvarnya" would be the most vicious system for the Shudras] -

Vicious system – creates excessive inter-dependence and makes it very easy for one class to try and supress another and subjugate their interests. Assumption is that each class will work honestly and efficiently for itself and others – history shows this isn‘t true. Simple interpretation of varna system gives an impression that other 3 varnas are the guardians of shrudras. This system of division of labour is capable of crippling a class by not allowing it the resources or know-how of education, protecting itself or doing trade. 3 varnas exploited the last. EvidenceManu.

-

Why no social revolution in india? Shrudras are disabled thay could not think out or know the way to their salvation.

- 18 ["Chaturvarnya" is nothing new; it is as old as the Vedas] -

Has failed before – as a system of social organization, it has been tried and failed – not new- origin in Vedas – Mahabharata and Puranas are full of incidents of strife between Brahmins and Kshatriyas; Bhagwat Gita says Krishna was incarnated for the purpose of annihilating the Kshatriyas who had become extremely tyrannical. Chaturvarna could not be a model on which society should be remodelled.

19 [Caste among Hindus is not the same as "caste" among nonHindus]  Some people don‘t actively propose the caste system, but don‘t oppose it either. There are two sets of such people, broadly speaking two sets of reasoning put forth for this view. First say that there is nothing wrong with the system since Muslims, Sikhs & Christians have caste amongst them too. -

Groups exist in all societies, but what is to be seen is what is the social significance of the group life, how are the groups separated, is it convenience/custom or religion that separates them etc.

-

The strength of a society depends upon the presence of points of contact, possibilities of interaction, between different groups which exist in it(organic filaments). Non-Hindus have ‗organic filaments‘ (carlyle) (elastic threads which help bring together disintegrating elements) which are absent in the Hindus to counteract the disintegration caused by caste; not the same social significance of caste for the former (identity-wise); consequences of breach of caste aren‘t that bad for former – no excommunication; no religious consecration attached to caste for the former, it is a matter of convenience and practice, not sacred institution. Hence caste for non-Hindus is very different, and this should not be used as an argument.

-

Caste among non-Hindus has no religious consecration but among the hindus most decidedly it has. If Hindus wish to break caste, their religion will come in their way.

Second say that since Hindus have survived so far despite the caste system existing, we have the fitness to survive and will thus continue to survive (Prof.S. Radhakrishnan). -

It is not just a matter of survival; it is also what kind of life or existence it has. There are different modes of survival, but all are not equally honourable. For individuals as well as society, there is a difference between living and living worthily.

20 [The real key to destroying Caste is rejection of the Shastras]

 How can caste system be abolished? A couple of proposed remedies are starting with abolishing sub-castes and then the caste system (but may not work, may end up strengthening the caste system), or having inter-caste dinners (haven‘t worked so far). A possible solution that‘ll most likely work is inter-caste marriages. It will lead to fusion of blood and feeling kinship, removing the separatist sentiments. Why do Hindus not have inter-caste marriages or dining? Because their religion prohibits it. Caste is not a physical thing, but a notion or a frame of mind. Hindus don‘t observe this system because they are inhuman; they do it because they are religious. Thus fault lies not with the people observing it, but with the religion itself. The caste system is found in the Shastras, smritis etc. So the real remedy is to destroy the belief of the Hindus in the sanctity of the Shastras. Conduct of the people will not change unless they stop believing in the sanctity of their holy scriptures. We need to take the stand which Buddha and Guru Nanak took. The Hindus must be convinced that their religion is wrong, and they should discard it.  Difficulties in disproving sanctity of Shastras This type of social reform – which requires people to give up their religious beliefs – is the toughest form out there, from view point of reformers. It is pretty much almost impossible to accomplish this because of the following reasons -

Brahmins are opposed to it because a breakup of the caste system will adversely affect them; distinctions between secular and religious Brahmins are useless in these situations (―Why doesn‘t the Pope introduce reforms?‖)

-

Any movement ignored by the intellectual class of a society doesn‘t work out very well. This class is generally the most influential class (if not the governing one). Brahmins are our intellectual class, they hold the community in their grip, and it is opposed to caste system reforms, creating difficulties.

21 Internal reform of the Caste System is virtually impossible -

Caste reform doesn‘t come under the category of normal reforms. It is deeply attached to the fundamental principles of religion. Caste has a divine basis. this means you must destroy the authority of the Shastras and the Vedas.

-

-

Will the Bhramin lead the fight against caste system? NO. intellectual class decides the destiny of the destiny of the nation. Unfortunately the Bhramins form the intellectual class in India.

-

Caste system divides men into separate communities and then grades one over another, giving varying degrees of privileges(akshtikaras and sanskaras). Higher the caste, higher the grades. Marx had told the proletariat ‗you have nothing to lose but your chains‘ but this isn‘t true here, higher castes would lose privileges more than others and thus are reluctant.

22 [No reformers, and no appeals to reason, have so far succeeded] -

Hinduism doesn‘t allow for reasoning or rational interpretation of any of the old scriptures – if a matter is dealt with in Veda, Smriti or Shruti then Hindu is not to resort to rational thought. A Hindu must follow either Veda, Smriti or sadachar. He cannot follow anything else. In case of conflict between both(veda and smriti), both gains equal authority. With respect to caste, Shastras do not permit the Hindu to use his reason in the decision of the question, but they have taken care to see that no occasion is left to examine in a rational way the foundations of his belief in Caste and Varna The texts provide for ‗prayaschitta‘ which allows Hindus to break the caste system in one instance for convenience (travelling by train) and observing it strictly in the next. It also has concept of Sadachar (observing ancient customs, good or bad).

-

Reason and morality are the two great weapons of the reformers. To deprive themt he use of these weapon is to disable him from action. Religion of smritis and shrutis should be destroyed.

A reformer‘s most powerful tools of reason and morality are denied to him by Hindu religion and texts, the very things which we need to bring an end to. This is why it‘ll be almost impossible.

23 [Destroying Caste would not destroy the true principles of Religion]  Destruction of Hindu religion

-

Distinction between rules and principles. Rules are habitual way of doing things whereas principles are intellectual- method of judging things. Ambedkar opposes religious rules and not principles.

Not opposed to religion in general, just Hindu religion. A religion must be based on a set of principles, and not on rules because as soon as it becomes a set of rules, it kills the responsibility of a person towards that act, which is the essence of religion. What is called Hindu religion is just a set of rules – commands and prohibitions, so not really a religion in the sense of a set of religious and spiritual principles. So Hindu religion is basically an outdated ancient law (fixed and unchanging), which still exists, and denies people moral freedom, spontaneity and conscientiousness as they are simply required to follow the rules. People need to realise that this religion needs to be destroyed, and there is no antireligion sentiment in the statement as Hinduism is not really a religion.

24 A true priesthood should be based on qualification, not heredity]  Religion is necessary. He agrees to Burke when he says that "True religion is the foundation of society, the basis on which all true Civil Government rests, and both their sanction." Religion of principles should exist and not of rules  Some changes that need to be made in Hinduism 1) There should be only one standard book which is to be followed, all the other ancient scriptures and commentaries to be scrapped; 2) It is better if priesthood is abolished, or at least made non-hereditary and have some basic requirements (like a bar exam, called ‗sanad‘); along with ordinary law, he should be subject to penal action for his morals, beliefs and worship; make it a profession (with a body governing it like Medical Council of India for doctors) with only limited number of priests allowed; give a new doctrinal basis to the religion (based on liberty, equality, fraternity). This means complete change in fundamental notions and values in life. 3)

No ceremony performed by a priest who does not hold a sanad shall be deemed to be valid in law, and it should be made penal [=punishable] for a person who has no sanad to officiate as a priest.

4)

A priest should be the servant of the State, and should be subject to the disciplinary action of the State. The number of priests should be limited by law according to the requirements of the State, as is done in the case of the I.C.S.

To save Hinduism, one must kill Brahmanism.  A new doctrinal basis should be given to the religion- basis of that will be in consonance with liberty, equality and fraternity.

25 [If Hindu Society is to progress, its traditions must be able to evolve]  Thought for the hindus 1) Morals, beliefs and habits that have resulted in the formation of the strongest societies should be examined, and Hindus must examine their religion and morality in terms of survival value. 2) Hindus must consider whether they should save whole of their social heritage or only pass on the helpful and useful parts to the subsequent generations. 3) Hindus must consider whether they should stop studying the past for its ideals, as that would not help to deal with the present or the future much, and would just make them a futile imitation of the past. Prof. Dewey – an individual can live only in the present. The present is not something which comes after the past; much less something produced by it. 4) Hindus must recognise that everything changes, nothing in society remains static or fixed, which is why there is a need for constant revolution of old values and standards against which actions of men are considered.