Critique of Varna

7/30/2019 Critique of Varna

1/5

Gandhi's Little-Known Critique of VarnaAuthor(s): Anil NauriyaReviewed work(s):Source: Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 41, No. 19 (May 13-19, 2006), pp. 1835-1838Published by: Economic and Political WeeklyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4418194 .

Accessed: 08/03/2013 03:54

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Economic and Political Weekly is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to

Economic and Political Weekly.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=epwhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/4418194?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/4418194?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=epw


2/5

forms epresentedy ndividualsikeVatalNagarajof the KannadaChaluvaligars(Kannada ovement), hidanandaMurthyand bodies like the KannadaRakshanaVedike Kannadarotectionorum)whichhave more often than not come to beassociatedwithnarrow,hauvinistic gen-das. Unsurprisingly,hey haven't mademuchheadway.Rajkumar'sans'associationRajkumarAbhimanigalaangha)oowas eftrudder-less in the absenceof a broaderagenda.Thefanswererelegatedo merelyassem-bling andshowingtheirprowesson thestreets ndatmeetingsn which heireaderparticipatedr wherehe was the subject,like theopeningof films in which"Raj"was the hero. No doubt herewere innu-merableadmirersand acolytes from allclasses, but the fans in the Sanghawerea specificcongregation f thosefrom theeconomicallyess-privilegedectionswithconsiderablebottledup anger at beingmarginalised.Absence of a Movement

IfKannada ationalistic spirations adtakenroot andturned nto a majormove-ment,the fans would have transformedinto its cadre.But in the absenceof sucha movement,Rajkumarimselfas well asthe narrowcauses he espousedbecametheirwarcry.Thefans' activerole in theearly 1990s agitationover the Cauveryinterim award and later the streetprotestsagainsthiskidnapby thebrigandVeerappanwere two clear examplesofthismindset.If one goes through he several inter-views of Rajkumarn recentyears, it isclearhe never awhimselfas a leaderwhocould ake orwardhe deals f theKannadanationalists.Hemerely xpressedhisloveforthe anguage nd tsculturebutrefusedto recognisehis own transcendence s aleaderwho could influence Karnataka'spolitics n a bigway.Hisfollowers,how-ever,stillretained omeoptimism hathewouldone day stepout of his homesteadinto the dust and grime of the politco-public space.Theirhopeswere in vain.Rajkumar's eath seems to have dealta final blow to any hopes of the localnationalists mergingas an independentpolitical orce.With heirmascotgone,theviolence and mayhemwitnessed on thedays of his death and burialcould beinterpreted s a final show of protest,defianceandexpressionof frustration tthe loss of a dream.EEmail:[email protected]

Gandhi's Little-KnownCritique o f V a n aGandhi's critics had arguedat the timethathe was carryingout his campaignsagainst untouchability, hat it wouldgoonly when caste was destroyed.It is notgenerallyknownthatGandhimoved to thisposition in the mid-1940s.It is alsogenerally understood hat while Gandhiopposed untouchabilityand criticisedcaste, he defended'varnavyavastha',hefourfoldvarnaorder. This is not entirelycorrect over the entire Gandhiantrajectory.Gandhi's own critique of the varnaorder,whichunfurledover time, is usuallyoverlookedby scholars.ANIL NAURIYA

andhihad said to SriLankans n1927 that if India could take pride"in having sent you Mahinda andthe message of the Buddha to this land,it has also to accept the humiliation ofhaving sent you the curse of castedistinctions."' By theearly 1930s, Gandhihad declared that caste, that is, the endo-gamous sociological category, of whichthere are hundreds, if not thousands,was "a handicap on progress"2 and "asocial evil"3 and, by the 1940s, that it was"an anachronism"4which "must go".5Since Gandhi distinguished the castesystem from 'chaturvarna',the scripturalfourfold varna order of hereditaryoccupational divisions, his still unfoldingcritique of the fourfold order has oftenbeen overlooked. This critique is ignoredespecially bycontemporary cholars,partlyperhaps because of the traditionalistnature of the concepts with which itdeals. Such oversight is unfairto Gandhi'sdalit critics as well as to his dalit sup-porters; for his interaction with both -exemplified by B R Ambedkar andJagjivan Ram - had no doubt contri-buted to the evolution of Gandhi'spositions.Gandhi incrementally unfurled a cri-tique of the fourfold varna order, takingthe concept of such an order in the end,by the mid-1940s, to vanishing point.Even in the early years, while defendingthe fourfold order, Gandhi said that itwas not observed in his own circle: "Inthe ashram, however, fromthe beginning,it has been our rule not to observe thevarnavyavastha because the position ofthe ashram is different from that of thesociety outside."6

Later, in 1927, Gandhi declared that "ifvarnashramagoes to the dogs in the re-moval of untouchability, I shall not sheda tear."7He knew the struggle against old in-grained practices would be long Let usfight untouchability, he says open-endedly, and we'll cross the other bridgelater. In February 1933, he gave what hethen saw as practical reasons: "At thepresent moment, it is the 'untouchable',the outcaste, with whom all Hindu refor-mers,whetherthey believe invarnashramaornot, have agreedto deal. The oppositionto untouchability is common to both.Therefore, the present joint fight is re-stricted to the removal of untouchability...It is highly likely that at the end of it weshall all find that there is nothing to fightagainst in varnashrama. If, however,varnashrama venthenlooks anugly thing,the whole of Hindu society will fight it...At the end of the chapter, I hope that weshall all find ourselves in the same camp.Should it prove otherwise, it will be timeenough to consider how and by whomvarnashrama s to be fought."8 Gandhi'ssequencing did not, at this point,synchronise with Ambedkar's. But it isclear thatGandhididnot,even at thisstage,rule out a laterstruggle against the four-fold varna order.First Salvo Attack

In April 1933, Gandhi declared on thebasis of some authoritative exts thatvarnacould not be perpetuated or determinedmerely by birth. He argues: "These andnumerous other verses from the shastrasunmistakeablyshow thatmerebirthcountsfor nothing."9 This formulation wasGandhi's first salvo attackon the concept

EconomicandPoliticalWeekly May 13, 2006 1835

This content downloaded on Fri, 8 Mar 2013 03:54:11 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/5

of vama. It did not repudiate birth as acriterion for vara; yet it took away theconclusive element attached to birthFrom now onwards it is inaccurate anderroneous to say merely that Gandhidefended the fourfold varna order orvaravyavastha.DuringGandhi's all-India anti-untouch-ability tour of 1933-34, he was opposedvirulently by Hindu orthodoxy. His carwas stoned in Bihar. In Benaras he wasmet with black flags. There was anattempton his life in Pune. A lethal bomb washurled and several persons were injured.Pune was the heartland of Hindutva op-position to Gandhi. It was one of the citieswhich nurtured his future assassin. InOctober 1933, before launching out onthe tour, Gandhi said that the Jains mustvehemently stress the fact that theirreligion knows no varnashramadharma."They must emphatically tell the peoplethat untouchability and the present-day varnadharma have no place inJainism, after first convincing themselvesabout it."0l These are clearly not thewords of one who is smug about the varnasystem.

He could notaccept, he said in 1934, thatin his religion "there should be a singlehuman being considered lower than my-self."1 In 1935, Gandhi described therestrictions on inter-marriage and inter-dining imposed in relation to the varnasystem as "cruel."'12He hadstoodespecially forthe 'bhangis',consideredtheweakestsectionof the dalits.He was thereforeconscious of hierarchiesamong dalits themselves. The scheduledcastes, he said in 1937, "cannot be ex-pected to appreciate and accept ex-cathe-dra usages that discriminate betweensavamas and avarnas and between thedifferent groups among the avamas them-selves, as these smack ofinvidiousness andoffend against reason."13In 1945, Gandhi's positions against thefourfold varna order become moreemphatic. He discards some previous for-mulations, including those on hereditaryoccupations. In a new foreword to an olderGujarati language compilation of articleson the subject, he invites the reader "todiscard anything in this book which mayappear to him incompatible"14 with hislatest formulations. He looks beyond

this aspect of the Gita, saying now that:But there prevails only one varnatoday,that is of shudras,or you may call it, ati-'shudras', or harijansor untouchables.Ihave no doubt about the truth of what Isay. If I can bringround he Hindusocietyto my view, all our internalquarrelswillcome to an end.15The thought recurs, being sometimesformulated not descriptively but norma-tively, expressing the view thatthis singlecategory situation should be made toprevail.Interestingly, it is in 1945 that Gandhisays, in reversal of his earlier understand-ing that untouchability could be foughtseparately from caste and the fourfoldvara order, that "castes must go if wewant to root out untouchability".16Thushe had now veered round to Ambedkar'sline on this question.

One Varna IdeaMeanwhile, persistentwith the one varnaidea, Gandhi observed in April 1946: "Ihave of late been saying that the Hindushave to become ati-shudras not merely in

*,ill' ' JOURNAL F SOUTHASIANDEVELOPMENTEditor:RAJAT ANGULY,niversity fEastAngliaTheJoumalof South AsianDevelopment, a refereedpublication, illpublish rticles,reviewsandscholarlycomment relating o all facets of development inSouth Asia. Biannual April,OctoberThe oumalwillbe multi-disciplinary,nnovative nd intemationalnitsapproach. twill ISSN:0973-1741include heoreticalandconceptualarticlesas well as moreempirical tudiescovering Annual atesboth historical ndcontemporaryssues/events. While hejournalwouldbe primarily Institutional:s900.00a socialsciencejoumal covering olitics,ntemationalelations,ociology, nthropology, Individual Rs580.00economics), itwillalso publishpapers rom he natural nd environmentalciences, SAARCatesInstitutional: $35.00geography,history nd otherdisciplines hat deal withdevelopment ssues in order o Individual $23.00provide omprehensiveandbalancedscholarship.Geographically,he coverage would include the seven states of South Asia(India,Pakistan,SriLanka,Bangladesh,Nepal,Bhutanand the Maldives)plusAfghanistanandMyarmar.Articles ould ocuson one particulartate,groupof states orthe entire C*bralng 5yeusofpublishingregion.Articles omparingSouthAsianstates/regionwithotherregion/stateswould ,also be included. .

INAUGURALSSUEHIGHUGHTS ' _* AwakeningGiants,Feet of Clay:A Comparative ssessmentof the Rise of Chinaand IndiaPRANABBARDHAN ^^* Outward-orientedolicyReformsand Industrialisation:he Sri LankanExperiencePREMA-CHANDRATHUKORALA lA^ E* Rising Insurgency, Faltering Democratisation in Nepal RAYMOND TARAS ubicaons ndiaPvtLtd* NGOs,Politicsand GrassrootsMobilisation: vidence romBangladesh OSEPH EVINE Nhi kata Cni Hydebd ne* Household'sTobaccoConsumptionDecisions:Evidence rom IndiaRIJOMJOHN wwWJidlasagu.eom

1836 Economic and Political Weekly May 13, 2006



4/5

name but in thought, word and deed.17Returning to the theme the followingmonth in Mussoorie, he burns the con-ceptual candle at both ends. For now thenotion of repudiating one's varna entersGandhi's mind:Imyselfhave becomeaharijanbychoice...A harijanbybirthmay repudiatehis varnabut how can I who havebecome a harijanby choice? I havenot hesitatedto suggestto caste Hindusthat today they have allto become ati-shudras, f the canker ofcaste feeling is to be eradicated fromHinduism and Hinduism is not to perishfrom the face of the earth.18And again in New Delhi: "If the casteHindus would become bhangis of theirown free will, the distinction betweenharijansandcaste Hindus would automati-cally disappear. There are various divi-sions amongsttheharijans oo.They shouldall go. All should be of one caste, that is,the bhangi."19Speaking in July 1946, he encouragedmarriages between dalits and others:"Finallytherewill beonly onecaste,knownby the beautifulnamebhangi, that s to say,the reformer or remover of all dirt. Let usall pray that such a happy day will dawnsoon."2? Thus by 1945-46 Gandhi haddenuded the conceptual category of varnaimplied in theGita,both of its sociologicalimplicationand of its original connotationof fixed classes of humanity determinedby birth anddistinguished by four catego-ries of occupations.Gandhi's penultimateblows to thevarnaconcept were delivered in February 1947.He now turnedthe category of varnauponitself by removing the foundation of theedifice of varna distinctions. Saying thatcaste must go if Hinduism is to survive,he went on: "There was room for varna,as a duty." According to him: "This wastrueof all religions whetherthe name usedwas other thanvarna.What was a Muslim'maulvi' or a Christian priest but abrahmin if he taughthis flock its trueduty,not for money but because he possessedthe gift of interpretation? And this was

trueofthe otherdivisions."21Significantly,the position of a maulvi in Islamicsociety does not indicate any inherentsuperiority and does not necessarily passhereditarily.On the same occasion, the idea ofhereditary occupations which was theessence of the fourfold varna order waslaidto restbyGandhi.Asked if he favouredinter-caste marriages and whether themonopoly of occupations of specificcastes should be abolished, Gandhireiterated his long-standing position in

favour of inter-caste marriages and pro-ceeded to say:Thequestiondidnotarisewhen all becamecasteless.When hishappy vent ookplace,monopoly of occupations would go.22In a letter written aroundMay 15, 1947Gandhi observes in appreciation ofGautama Buddha that he "knew no caste

and stood for perfect toleration".23On Terminology

In 1927 and 1931 Gandhi had referredto the word "dalit"and even used it, whilesaying that the state to which it referredwas so obnoxious that any word to de-scribe it would be rejected after a while.He wrote that "dalit" was used "quiterightly" because the people to whom itreferred were not "depressed" but "sup-pressed";and "they became, and remain,whattheyarebecausetheyweresuppressedby the so-called upper classes".24 Evi-dently, he would not have been surprisedat his preferredterm 'harijan' now fadingout of use.Gandhi knew the struggle was alsopolitical. Many dalits went to prison inGandhi's campaigns against British rule.To them, Gandhi was the liberator andalien rule the established ally of their localoppressors. Social and economic oppres-sion wereconnected andthe colonialregimewas upholding a highly inequitable landsystem which had contributed to theassetlessness of the dalits. As indepen-dence dawned, Gandhi spoke aloud aboutthe "ruleof the bhangis"25and of a dalitgirl becoming president of India, indeedthe first president.26In June 1947 Gandhi told the All IndiaCongress Committee which was meetingin Delhi to discuss the partition of India:

...if you do away with the distinction ofsavarna and avarna, if you treat theshudras, heuntouchables ndthe adivasisas equals then something good will havecome out of a bad thing. ...But if weoppressthemandoppress hose followingother faiths then it will mean that we donot want India to survive, that we are outto destroy it.27Understandably, a leading socialisthad observed in 1950 that Gandhi'sassassination was anepisode notmerely inthe Hindu-Muslim context; it was equallya result of the "bitterness"accumulatingfrom his blows "against caste and forwoman".Gandhi's trajectoryhasbeen the subjectof this essay. He was conscious of the vitalneed to take society with him, for merely

taking an advanced position without hav-ing animpact on society held no attractionfor him. He had told a questioner: "It isone thing for me to hold certain views andquiteanother o makemy views acceptablein their entirety to society at large. Mymind,Ihope, is ever growing, ever movingforward. All may not keep pace with it.I have therefore to exercise utmost pa-tience and be satisfied with hasteningslowly."28His approach and method were wellunderstood by many of his contemporar-ies. The famous atheist, G RamachandraRao, "Gora", for example, summed upin 1950:This attitudeandmethodof Gandhijicanbe seen in his answers to questionsat themeetingof the HarijanSevak Sanghheldon August 14, 1945. When he first under-took to remove untouchability, he prob-lem of varna-dharmacaste system) wasalso there.Itwaseasy tosee intellectually,even then,thatcasteought to go rootandbranchif untouchabilitywas to be com-pletelyeradicated.Butas apractical ropo-sition, caste was not the immediateprob-lem then. The problemwas only the re-moval of untouchability.So he allowedcaste to continue, though personally heobserved no caste even then. Thus thework of the removal of untouchabilityprogressed hrough heearlystage, eavingthe contradictions of the caste systemuntouched, and, therefore, without thecomplicationofopposition rom hosewhowould resist the abolition of caste. Whenthe stage had come where he found castewasaserioushindranceorfurther rogress,Gandhijisaid thatcaste ought to go rootand branchand proposednot only inter-dining but inter-marriages s the means.A mere intellectualmight read inconsis-tency nGandhiji's olerance f casteearlierand his denunciationof it later. But to apracticalman of non-violent creed theseare stages of progressand not principlesof contradiction.29Gandhi's positions against untoucha-bility and caste were direct assaults andmay be compared with Luther's attackson the church. On the fourfold order hemoved more cautiously, somewhat likeErasmus.Yet it is difficult to understand whyGandhi's critique of the fourfold order isnow so little known. This omission from

scholarship at large is significant, as hisearlier statements on the fourfold orderhave become, in writings on the subjectespecially since the 1980s,aprimary roundfor criticism of Gandhi's position. lS3Email: [email protected]

Economic and Political Weekly May 13, 2006 1837



5/5

Notes[Thereferences o theCollectedWorks fMahatmaGandhi (CW) published by the publicationsdivision,ministry f information ndbroadcasting,government f India,New Delhi (1958-1994) areto the original or standard dition.]

1 SpeechatColombo,November25, 1927; CW,Vol 35, p 318.2 Young ndia,June4, 1931;CW,Vol 46, p 302.3 Letter o SureshChandraBanerji,October10,1932; CW, Vol 51, p 219.4 TheBombayChronicle,April 17, 1945;CW,Vol 79, p 384.5 Letter oShyamlal,July23, 1945;CW,Vol 81,p 25.6 Letter to KhushalchandGandhi, August 31,1918; CW, SupplementaryVol VII, p 27.7 Young ndia,November24, 1927;CW,Vol 35,pp 522-23.8 Harijan,February1,1933;CW,Vol53,p 261.9 Harijan,Apri115,1933;CW,Vol54,pp410-11.10 Answersto correspondents, efore October8,1933,CW,Vol 56, p69;andLetter oHaribhauUpadhyaya, October 8, 1933, CW, Supple-

mentaryVol V, p 86.11 Speech at Palluruthy, anuary18, 1934; CW,Vol 57, p 12.12 'Caste Has To Go', Harijan, November 16,

1935; CW, Vol 62, p 122.13 Harijan,February20,1937;CW, ol64, p 317.14 Foreword o(neweditionof) Varnavyavastha,May 31, 1945; CW, Vol 80, p 224.15 Ibid, CW, Vol 80, p 223.16 Letter oShyamlal,July23,1945; CW,Vol 81,p 25.17 Harijan,April 14, 1946; CW, Vol 83, p 350.18 SpeechatPrayerMeeting,May31,1946; CW,Vol 84, p 247.19 Harijan,June 23, 1946; CW, Vol 84, p 334.20 Harijan,July7,1946; CW,Vol 84, pp388-89.21 Harijan,March16, 1947; CW, Vol 86, p 484.22 Idem.23 Letter,AfterMay15,1947;CW,SupplementaryVol V, p 137.24 Navajivan,March27,1927, CW,Vol33,p 196;and Navajivan, June 7, 1931, CW, Vol 46,p 342.25 Speech at PrayerMeeting,June 1, 1947; CW,Vol 88, p 55.26 Speech at PrayerMeeting,June2, 1947, CW,Vol 88, p 63.27 SpeechatAICCMeeting,June14, 1947;CW,Vol 88, p 156.28 Talk with Members of HarijanSevak Sangh,

July 20, 1946, CW, Vol 85, p 24.29 Gora(G RamachandraRao), An AtheistwithGandhi, Navajivan Publishing House,Ahmedabad,1951, p 57.

AGRARIAN CRISISLooking beyondt h e D e b t T r a pThe agrarian crisis is pushing farmers into distress andultimately to suicides. It is argued that the cumulative effect ofa number offactors is responsible for the present agrariancrisis. Thesefactors, categorised as technological, ecological,socio-cultural and policy-related, are discussed here.V RATNA REDDY, S GALAB

armers' suicides have become aregularphenomenon ndcannotbebrushed sideas aneventassociatedwith droughtor othernaturaldisasters.Despite goodmonsoonhisyear, armers'suicidescontinue o occur n one state ortheother. n ome tatesikeAndhraradesh,theyareoccurring egularlyorthepast10years rrespective f therainfall ituation,though drought has aggravated thenumbers.Number f studieshavetried oexamine ndunderstandheproblem.Mostof these studieshave, rightly,identifiedhouseholdndebtednesssthe mainreasonfor thesuicides.While ndebtednesss the

factordriving farmerstowardssuicide, thefactors that are responsible for indebted-ness are less understood. As a result,approaches towards mitigating the end(indebtedness) are proving to be ineffec-tive. Unless the means (factors leadingto indebtedness) are understood and cor-rected, the distress is likely to continue.Suicides are the result of the deep-rootedagrarian and rural distress rather than atemporary phenomenon associated withinstitutionalcredit orrainfall. The increas-ingly regular incidence of suicides acrossthestates points toward abrewing agrariancrisis in the country over the past decade.Agriculture is becoming increasingly anunviable proposition irrespective of

rainfall pattern.This is very well reflectedin thedata romthe NationalSample SurveyOrganisation's 59th round, which revealsthat a third of the farmers indicated thatfarming is not profitable and another 40percent of the farmers arereadyto give upfarming in favour of a job. On the whole,70 per cent of the farmers are frustratedwith their profession [Deshpande andPrabhu 2005].The contributionof agriculture s declin-ing at a faster pace than the populationdepending on it. While agriculture's sharein GDP is 25 per cent, 58 per cent of thepopulation still depends on agriculture.Agriculture recorded the lowest growthrate of 1.86 percent perannumduringthelast decade (1995-96 to 2003-04) asagainst 3.33 per cent during the earlierperiod.The valueaddition rom agriculturehas also recordedthelowest duringthelastdecade. The decline is muchsharper n percapitaterms.Growth inperworker ncomein agriculture has declined from 1.16 percent (1988-89 to 1993-94) to 0.28 percent(1998-99 to 2003-04) during the last de-cade. On the contrary, per worker incomefrom non-agriculture sector has gone upfrom 3.31 percent to 4.30 percent duringthe same period [Chand2006].Here an attempt is made to identify themain drivers of the agrariancrisis thatarepushing the farmers into distress and ul-timately leading to suicides. It is arguedthat aggregate and cumulative effect of anumber of factors is responsible for thepresent agrarian crisis. For the sake ofsimplicity these factors are categorisedunderfour groups, namely, technological,ecological, socio-cultural and policy-related. However, these categories are notwatertight compartments, as some of thefactors are inter-connected. In what fol-lows, we discuss these factors in detail,withoutattaching anyorderof importance.Technological Factors

Technology is critical for improvingland productivity. The green revolutiontechnology in the late 1960s has helpedimproving land productivity in theirrigatedregions. Land productivities inthese regions have saturated during the1990s after recording continuous growthfor more than two decades. This ismainly due to the limits of the technologyitself and the environmental problemsassociated with high input-intensive agri-culture. This has also resulted in the shifttowards marginal lands in these regions.Thoughtheneed forimprovingtheproduc-tivity in dry land regions was recognised

1838 Economic and Political Weekly May 13, 2006


Critique of Varna

Documents

Transcript of Critique of Varna