Caste An European Phenomenon - Printable Version

Caste An European Phenomenon - Printable Version

+- Forums (http://india-forum.com)
+-- Forum: Indian History & Culture (http://india-forum.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Indian Culture (http://india-forum.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=11)
+--- Thread: Caste An European Phenomenon (/showthread.php?tid=524)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Caste An European Phenomenon - Guest - 10-28-2006

Don't know where else to put this, may be appropriate here. Christian Europe had its own concept of untouchable:
( http://www.holocaust-trc.org/thegypsies.htm )
QUOTEFor centuries, Sinti and Roma were scorned and persecuted in Europe. Zigeuner, the German word for Gypsy, derives from a Greek root meaning "untouchable." In the Balkan principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia, Gypsies were slaves bought and sold by monasteries and large estate holders (boyars) until 1864, when the newly formed nation of Romania emancipated them.

Caste An European Phenomenon - Guest - 11-23-2006

oops wrong thread...

Caste An European Phenomenon - Guest - 11-26-2006

You dont know the real history of east -europe
diference betwin slave and serf was only by the type of job.
Was no diference in discrimination betwin gypsy and natives.The nobles treath all people in the same way.

Caste An European Phenomenon - Guest - 11-26-2006

east european religion christian orthodox exposed
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Rel...ox_idolatry.htm

Caste An European Phenomenon - Guest - 12-19-2006

This could perhaps belong to multiple threads..

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TheHeathenIn...ss/message/2978

QUOTEREPORT ON THE SECOND DHARMA AND ETHICS CONFERENCE
CASTE DISCRIMINATION: HINDUISM, BUDDHISM OR LIBERALISM?

Organized by
Centre for the Study of Local Cultures, Kuvempu University
and Research Centre Vergelijkende Cultuurwetenschap, Ghent University

December 6-7, 2006 at Kuvempu University, Shimoga, India

For the second time, we organized the yearly Dharma and Ethics
conference at Kuvempu University during the first week of December
2006. What follows is a report of the proceedings, which shall focus
on some general impressions and conclusions, rather than giving a
detailed description of every paper and session. At the end of last
year's conference, one of the speakers, Valerian Rodrigues of
Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, promised us that he would
convince some of the leading Delhi intellectuals to attend the
conference in 2006. He lived up to his word and invited D. L. Sheth
and Rajeev Bhargava (now both at the Centre for the Study of
Developing Societies in Delhi) as speakers for the conference. Along
with Rajeev Bhargava came the well-known Canadian philosopher Charles
Taylor. The other speakers were to be Valerian Rodrigues of JNU,
Rajaram Hegde and J. S. Sadananda of the Centre for the Study of
Local Cultures at Kuvempu University and S. N. Balagangadhara (Balu)
of the Research Centre Vergelijkende Cultuurwetenschap. The
discussants included Vivek Dhareshwar of the Centre for the Study of
Culture and Society, Bangalore, Rajaram Tholpade of Mangalore
University, and me. All participants to the conference had been asked
to read a series of texts: B. R. Ambedkar's Annihilation of Caste,
Jawaharlal Nehru's Discovery of India, two articles by D. L. Sheth,
and Balu's article on re-conceptualizing the postcolonial project.
The discussions during the conference presupposed familiarity with
the arguments of these texts.

1. Unfortunately, the conference started on a very similar note
as it had last year. Balu had taken ill the day before and was unable
to attend the entire first day. Consequently, after the introduction
to the conference by Sadananda, Vivek Dhareshwar and I had to give
the general introduction to the theme instead of Balu. First I
presented one aspect of our research programme as it relates to the
theme of caste: the hypothesis that the dominant view of Indian
society and the caste system is a description of the western cultural
experience of India, rather than a description of Indian society. I
summed up a number of key elements in the historical development of
Christianity in Europe and showed how these have shaped the image of
the Indian caste system as it still exists today. Then Vivek took up
the issue of the relation between the Indian cultural experience and
the social sciences. He argued that the social-scientific
descriptions of Indian culture and society deny access to the Indian
experience instead of reflecting upon it. The western cultural
experience has become the framework of description, which generates a
rift between the experiences of Indians and the theorizing of the
social sciences. Therefore, the social sciences require reflection
upon the Indian cultural experience today, instead of reproduction of
the descriptions of the western cultural experience, which are
unintelligible and inaccessible to the Indian intellectuals.

2. In the first session, Rajaram Hegde and J. S. Sadananda
presented a paper which confronted a number of central theories about
the caste system with the results of a fieldwork project on `Caste,
Community and Tradition in Karnataka'. This project has been carried
out during the last four years by the research team at the Centre for
the Study of Local Cultures at Kuvempu University under Balu's
guidance. The empirical results and their conceptual analysis were
devastating to the dominant social-scientific accounts about the
caste system. They showed that each of the supposedly constitutive
elements of the Indian caste system is refuted by the tentative
fieldwork results: it is impossible to classify the jatis in
Karnataka into a social structure, let alone an all-India caste
system; the so-called `sub-castes' cannot be understood as divisions
of higher social entities called `castes'; there is no fixed
hierarchy with Brahmins at the top and `untouchables' at the bottom;
the link between texts such as Manusmrti or the jatipuranas and the
social realities of the jatis is non-existent; it is impossible to
trace the functioning of jatis to any `hegemonic ideology'
or `ideologies'. Simply put, `the caste system' does not exist as an
experiential entity of the respondents in Karnataka. Therefore, the
accounts of the caste system cannot be descriptions of the Indian
society as it prevails in Karnataka.

The responses to this presentation were quite disappointing. Several
respondents said there was nothing new in the paper: M. N. Srinivas
had stated all these points in the 1960s and 1970s. It was said that
the paper addressed a very limited number of caste theorists (Nehru,
Louis Dumont, Dipankar Gupta and Nicholas Dirks) and that other
theorists had given a much more sophisticated account of the caste
system. Most importantly, the general conclusion that the caste
system does not exist was challenged. Srinivas and others, Sheth and
Rodrigues argued, have shown how a contextualized and modified
account of the caste system could accommodate all of these empirical
facts. Vivek and I tried to point out how the respondents had missed
the point. Naturally, all kinds of theorists had tried to save the
account on `the caste system' from refutation by making all kinds of
ad hoc modifications. But this simply happened because they failed to
realize that the entity called `caste system' does not exist in
Indian society. Once one allows this as a possible conclusion, an
entire field of fascinating research questions opens up: What is the
status of `the caste system' as a theoretical entity? How come Indian
intellectuals have succumbed to a description of the western cultural
experience of India as though it were a true description of Indian
society? What has been the impact of this fictitious entity and the
western descriptions on the Indian society during the last three
centuries?

3. This discussion set the tone for the remainder of the first
day. The two Delhi intellectuals who participated, Sheth and
Bhargava, were reluctant to reflect upon the possibility that the
caste system does not exist and that Indian social sciences have
simply reproduced the western cultural experience without being able
to make sense of it. Rodrigues and Taylor were open to this argument,
but wanted to qualify it in different ways. Rodrigues presented a
paper which summed up the argument of Ambedkar's Annihilation of
Caste. Though he has often called Ambedkar an important political
thinker, he immediately admitted that he could not agree to or defend
the argument of this text. Suddenly, all participants seemed to agree
that Amedkar reproduced the stories of the Orientalists and the
Christian missionaries about Indian society. Strikingly, the Delhi
intellectuals called Ambedkar an Orientalist, but at the same time
claimed that there was much of importance in his texts. They did not
reply to the question whether or not Ambedkar's account could in any
way be taken as a description of Indian society or whether it was
intelligible in the first place.

The conflict exacerbated when Sheth began to argue that Ambedkar's
text is at once Orientalism and a vital critique of `the Brahminical
Orientalism' which is indigenous to India. He added that our research
programme, while rightly criticizing the western Orientalism, might
revive the old indigenous `Brahminical Orientalism'. As Orientalism
was `any discourse that legitimizes domination of one group over
another', he said, this indigenous Orientalism should also be
discarded. On the one hand, Vivek and I pointed out that this
trivializes the notion of `Orientalism', since any account which
legitimizes power could now be called so (including the way parents
talk to their children in order to ensure the latter's obedience). On
the other, we showed how Orientalist descriptions of Asia had first
emerged in Germany and France â countries which did not have any
power over the East at that time â and was only later adopted by the
British. Therefore, Orientalism cannot be characterized as a
discourse that legitimizes power of one group over another.

4. Sheth refused to take these points seriously. In his own
paper he elaborated on his characterization of `Brahminical
Orientalism', which turned out to be nothing but the old Protestant
description of `the evil Brahminism of the Hindu priests' under
another name. At this point, a shocking fact became clear to us,
which would be confirmed several times during the conference: the
Delhi intellectuals had simply come unprepared for the conference.
They had not read the texts which were required reading; they had
hardly prepared a presentation but simply produced an `argument' on
the spot; their standards of intellectual rigor were extremely
disappointing. Most of us had been aware that this was the general
stance of Delhi intellectuals towards `the rural backwaters' in the
rest of India: the leading urban thinkers acting as God's gift to
their acolytes in the villages. Still, it was something of a shock to
witness their intellectual poverty in action. They came to a
conference on the link between caste and religion, while being
unaware of any of the intellectual developments in fields like
religious studies or anthropology. They admitted they had gone
through some of Nehru's and Ambedkar's texts several decades before,
but had not touched them since. Given these circumstances, it became
somewhat frustrating to try and have a serious intellectual
discussion with these people.

5. Fortunately, Balu was feeling somewhat better the second day
and the scenario changed. First, Charles Taylor gave a well-argued
presentation, which had many affinities to the argument of `The
Heathen' and our research programme in general. He made the point
that the practices and traditions of the Indian religious life had so
far been understood through the conceptual structures of
Christianity. He added that this included linking practices to
beliefs in a way which was alien to the Hindu traditions. Therefore,
the question about the link between `Hinduism' and `the caste system'
and `caste discrimination' had to be reformulated according to
Taylor: Which practices in the Indian society were harmful and what
had to be changed in order to make these disappear? This argument
allowed for a discussion that could focus on some of the more
interesting issues at stake.

However, the contrast was all the more striking when Bhargava
presented his paper. He first recounted a story from a novel by
Valmiki as though it were a description of common practices of
humiliation all over India. It has to be said that this story (an
untouchable of a `sweeper' jati goes to school and is treated in a
horrible and humiliating way there) has been going around Delhi for
the last few years as an illustration of the horribly immoral nature
of the Indian culture and society. Note that Bhargava and his fellow
Delhi intellectuals thus present a piece of fiction as proof for the
existence of the caste system. Bhargava then made a point that `intra-
religious domination' was rampant in India. Secularism had not
addressed this problem and therefore betrayed the dalits. Hence,
Bhargava invented a new kind of secularism, which combined individual
rights with group rights for the dalits, and which revolved around a
stance of `critical respect' towards religion. A short discussion
followed where Rajaram Tholpade pointed out that Bhargava cannot
simply go on reproducing the old stories about secularism without
taking into account Balu's substantial critique. Other comments added
that the notion of `critical respect' was about as vague as a notion
could be and that the conceptual foundation of rights theory does not
allow for a combination of individual rights and group rights.

6. Then came the turning point of the entire conference. Balu
gave a presentation in which he explained the larger context of his
research programme. He pointed out the growing discontent with the
social sciences all around the world and the impression that they are
not scientific at all. He connected this to the fact that the current
social sciences theorize the experience of one culture, the West.
This culture has been shaped by Christianity. As a consequence, the
social sciences are but a secularized Christian theology. Balu
illustrated this hypothesis with the notion of `self' in
developmental psychology and other branches of psychology, which is a
secularized variant of the notion of `soul' in Christian theology.
Given this theological nature of the social sciences, two options are
open to us. It could be the case that the biblical God really
revealed the truth about human beings to the tribes of the Arabian
desert. Therefore, Christian theology is a true description of human
nature and we should all convert to that truth. Or it could be the
case that this is but the story of one particular religion, which is
not true. From a scientific point of view, we will never be able to
prove whether or not God revealed himself to some part of humanity.
However, if we desire progress in our knowledge about human beings,
it is preferable not to accept this assumption and try to develop
better theories. These will be tentative, hypothetical and refutable
like all human knowledge. If we chose the second route, then the
dominant account about Hinduism and the caste system has to be
rejected, since it reflects the western cultural experience and its
theological framework. The problem today, Balu argued, is that Indian
intellectuals are completely ignorant of the western culture and its
history, while they think this culture has no secrets for them. Since
they approach the Indian culture through the framework of western
experience, they are as ignorant about the Indian culture. Therefore,
all they can do is repeat diluted versions of what thinkers in
Cambridge, Paris and California have said before them about India and
the West.

When Balu concluded his brief presentation, some members of the
audience started making sarcastic remarks such as "spoken like true
Brahminâ¦" Taylor was the first to react: he also became sarcastic and
attempted to ridicule Balu's claim that the social sciences were
secularized theology. He pointed out that Aristotle and Plato had a
notion of `psyche', which preceded the Christian notion of soul,
while it influenced the psychological notion of `self'. He added that
B. F. Skinner and his behaviorism did not share such a notion
of `self' or `person'. Basically, he intended to show that Balu
didn't know what he was talking about. Balu replied that the
statement about `soul' and `self' was but an illustration of his
claim that social sciences were secularized theology. Besides, he had
mentioned only a few branches within western psychology, excluding
Skinner's behaviorism. The Greek notion of `psyche', he added, had
nothing to do with the Christian `soul' and the western `self'. This
could be easily seen if one compared the properties attributed to
the `soul' by Augustine and those attributed to the `psyche' by Plato
or Aristotle.

At this point, the debate became heated and polemical. Bhargava and
Sheth were insulted by the claim that Indian intellectuals know
neither the West nor their own culture. They complained that such a
prejudice prevented them from contributing to the discussion.
Meanwhile, some individual in the audience kept making nasty remarks.
Balu became angry and raised his voice. He explained what he meant
when he referred to the ignorance of Indian intellectuals and took
some of Bhargava's and Sheth's claims as illustrations. At this
point, Rodrigues, who was the chair of this session, interfered
calmly and refocused the discussion on specific points of
disagreement between the two positions which had now crystallized in
the conference. He asked Balu to explain his research programme in
greater detail and summed up some of its basic theses. At this point,
the session ended and it was decided we would have the last session
of the conference late in the afternoon.

7. The purpose of the last session was to go deeper into the
future prospects of our research programme. As he had in the morning
session, Valerian Rodrigues again proved to be an excellent
moderator. He clearly understood what was happening and stated so
explicitly: this was a clash of two fundamental frameworks or
paradigms in the social sciences. The polemics of the morning session
disappeared completely however, since Sheth and Bhargava had
retreated into silence. Balu was asked to explain what he meant by
the task of Indian intellectuals to reflect on their own experience.
Did it mean that there was an original authentic experience which had
to be accessed? Who was to say which was the true Indian experience
and which was a reproduction of descriptions of the western cultural
experience? While replying to such questions, Balu took the audience
on a journey through the fascinating routes which the social sciences
could today take in India. A peculiar atmosphere emerged in the
conference room, since nightfall and a power cut had compelled the
organizers to lit candles all around the room. The comments and
questions from the audience showed that the task to reflect on one's
own experience appeals to the intelligentsia of Karnataka. This last
session confirmed the impression which we had built up during the
last few years: a tremendous hunger for knowledge and an urge to
understand both the Indian and the western cultures in a new light
exist in Karnataka.

8. All things considered, this year's Dharma and Ethics
conference at Kuvempu University was a great success. It confirmed
our belief that there is a growing discontent about the condition of
the social sciences in India and about the dominant accounts
on `Hinduism' and `the caste system'. It also proved that the Delhi
intellectuals, who have dominated the scene during the last 50 years,
do not possess the means to address this discontent. The impact of
the conference in Karnataka is already becoming clear today: scholars
from different universities in the state have requested affiliation
to the Centre for the Study of Local Cultures at Kuvempu University.
In the next few years, this Centre will develop in a close
interaction with the Research Centre Vergelijkende Cultuurwetenschap
at Ghent University, Belgium. Meanwhile, the success of this year's
visit to Karnataka has led to the crystallization of plans to build a
Karnataka Academy of Social Sciences and Humanities and a Karnataka
Institute for Advanced Studies in the Social Sciences and Humanities.
The first responses to these initiatives from academics, bureaucrats
and politicians in Karnataka and in Delhi have been extremely
positive. Together these institutions would hopefully work towards a
revival of the social sciences in Karnataka, India and elsewhere.

Jakob De Roover
December 18, 2006

Caste An European Phenomenon - Guest - 12-23-2006

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TheHeathenIn...ss/message/3013

QUOTERE: [TheHeathenInHisBlindness] Re: Report on the Second Dharma and Ethics Conference at Kuvempu University

Let me begin by wishing everyone a great 2007, which is round the corner.
Having just returned from India, reading the multiple posts on Jakob's
report of the conference makes it difficult for me to find out what the
disagreements are or even what issues are at stake.

1. Divya seems to say that the statement that 'the caste system in
India does not exist' challenges the experience of the Indians. I would like
to clarify this statement, while presuming for the reminder of this post
that we use the word 'caste' to translate 'Jati'.

There are two distinct problems. One is about the existence of castes in
India. There are some kinds of practices associated with castes. This is the
lived experience of the Indians. This is not being challenged.

Then there is a second kind of problem. This problem is not the experience
of the Indians. It is a theoretical claim. This says that the castes form a
system and that such a system constitutes the social structure of India.
Over the decades, if not over the centuries, this second claim has been
challenged, for instance, by the Marxists. They claim that social classes
(in the Marxist sense of the word 'class') constitute a system and that such
a system is the social structure of Indian society as well. Then there are
those 'socialists' who have claimed that both 'castes' and social classes'
(together) constitute the social structure of India and that one has to
study the relations between 'caste' and 'social class', if one has to
understand the Indian society. Finally, at the other end of the spectrum,
there are those who claim that the unique nature of Indian society consists
of the fact that the Indian social structure is synonymous with 'the caste
system'. To this group belong the dominant western descriptions and the
so-called Dalit criticisms of the Indian society.

When we deny the existence of 'the caste system', we are neither the first
nor the last to say so. We say that 'the caste system' is not a social
system but a cognitive (classificatory) system at best.

2. Of course, in an obvious sense, 'caste' is a social unit. (In the
sense that there are social groups in India called 'castes'.) But we do not
believe that these castes form a coherent social system, studying which we
can understand the Indian society. That is to say, we do not believe that
these castes constitute a single social structure, which remains invariant
across the length and breadth of India. When we say that there is no caste
system in India, we are not saying that such groups do not exist in India.
However, we do say that castes are merely social groups. (Trades unions,
alumini associations, civic associations, etc are also social groups.) They
vary in composition, in nomenclature, in their practices and so on. Saying
this does not entail that there is no order in society or that social
structure is absent in India. It merely means that looking for a set of
invariant principles that are supposed to govern these castes is doomed from
the outset.

3. Finally, our research is also trying to pin down the origin of the
belief that the Indian social structure is synonymous with 'the caste
system'. Once this is done, the task is to understand why people believe in
this theoretical claim and how this belief can reproduce itself. In this
process, we hope to understand the controversies that emerge (the posts
about this matter are examples) whenever castes are discussed.

Friendly greetings

Balu

Caste An European Phenomenon - Guest - 12-24-2006

Arun Gupta's interesting post regarding jaati-kula-varna dharma

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TheHeathenIn...ss/message/3023

QUOTERe: Report on the Second Dharma and Ethics Conference at Kuvempu University

It is always risky to be bolder than Balu, but I'd say that at one time
jati-dharma
kula-dharma
varna-sankara
were all intelligible to the audience of the Gita even though that may not be the case today.

I'd also add that one clue may be the concern for the cessation of water and pinda offerings to ancestors. It seems to have been one of the concerns of the authors of the Dharmasastras, so that a man without a male issue could nominate a daughter who would or whose son would perform these rites.

In any case, inter-varna marriages are recognized as realities by all the Dharmasastras, even though some were certainly frowned upon.

As an example of what might be included in jati-dharma might be the laws of inheritance.

Reproduced here is a bit of "Women in the Sacred Laws" by Shakuntala Rao Shastri.

"[the text] unmistakably points to the Vedic custom of installing an only daughter in the position of a son and of giving her the right to perform funeral oblations, which a father could do by the mere expression of his wish and by saying to her 'Be thou my son' [Putrika]. The Rig-Vedic tradition is thus maintained by Vasistha, and the other Northern law-givers. So we find Vasistha giving a third place among heirs to an only daughter, and he declares, on the authority of the Vedas, that such a maiden belongs to her father's family and becomes the son of her parents. Even Manu states in unmistakeable terms that the property should not be appropriated by anybody when there is a daughter. The evidence for the existence of such a custom is further corroborated by the incidents mentioned in the Rajatarangini and by its prevalance in Kashmir even in recent times.

The Southern law-givers, however, reject it; for the earliest writer of the South, Baudhayana, discards Putrika in clear terms...."

I'd venture a guess that the customs of marriage, remarriage, inheritance, funeral etc., were not varna-specific, but jati-specific. For example, validity of the custom of marriage of a girl to her maternal uncle and cousin marriage is debated in the literature, is e.g., invalid in my jati, is permitted in various southern jatis, and we are told eg., "Baudhyana sanctions it on the strength of its popularity in the particular part of the country, though it is frowned upon elsewhere. When a custom is thus sanctioned by tradition, it becomes a law".


QUOTEFurther, I'd say that since the 19th century, the British, and subsequently in independent India, a codification and unification of "Hindu law" has been taking place, and subsequently kula-dharma, jati-dharma are fading away

Caste An European Phenomenon - Guest - 12-24-2006

QUOTE(rajesh_g @ Dec 18 2006, 09:24 PM)Who was to say which was the true Indian experience
and which was a reproduction of descriptions of the western cultural
experience? While replying to such questions, Balu took the audience
on a journey through the fascinating routes which the social sciences
could today take in India.
[right][snapback]62257[/snapback][/right]


Rajeshji, not sure, but do we have any more details about this part?

Caste An European Phenomenon - Guest - 12-24-2006

Bodhiji

I dont know. But here is a paper that Balu wrote in his younger days which might plot the framework that he operates in.

http://colonial.consciousness.googlepages....otceasefrom.pdf

I would also suggest reading his book to understand where he is coming from..

http://colonial.consciousness.googlepages....isBlindness.pdf

The paper is smaller. The book is around 500 pages.

Caste An European Phenomenon - Guest - 05-23-2007

http://heathenfaqs.org/kb/?View=entry&EntryID=99

QUOTE
I. Is the Caste System an Experiential Reality of the people of Karnataka?

(a) The myth of unified system of Caste and sub-caste units.

1. The caste system as delineated in the modern research is not an experiential reality of the respondents. The empirical reference points to the terms like âcasteâ, âcaste systemâ, âcaste hierarchyâ, âcaste restrictionsâ, âpurity-impurityâ, etc. as they are conceptualized by the scholars are either ambiguous or totally absent.Â The respondents simply do not understand our questions if we talk in terms of caste system or hierarchy. Therefore their answers are either arbitrary or learnt from the text books in the modern educational system on this issue.

2. The units called jati can not be equivalent of caste if we go by the definitions provided by the scholars on caste system. These jati units do not betray any such clear-cut characteristic features or constituent properties assigned to castes. In fact, people use many other terms like jana, paiki, pangada, olapangada, kula, nammavru, etc. in the place of jati which renders much more complexity to this category.

3. No systematic arrangement could be discerned in the way these jatis are related mutually as well as with other units like mata, pangada,(group) etc.Â Thus though there are different social units, they do not provide empirical reference to any kind of systematic arrangement that the caste system presupposes.

4. Scholars usually take the unit Lingayat, Brahmin, etc. asÂ castes and the jatis within these units as the sub-castes.Â It was found during the field work that the members of different jatis belonging to these broader categories are largely ignorant about the broader categories excepting certain traditional practices associated with them.

(b) The caste hierarchy:

The caste hierarchy, according to the scholars, makes sense to its members within the framework of an ideology.Â Castes are supposed to have been organized within a hierarchy, and this hierarchy is modeled after the Varna divisions or concept of purity or impurity. How could one verify whether or not the caste hierarchy makes sense to its supposed members? At the very least, one should get a minimally consistent set of answers from those who are supposed to have a background ideology which functions as a rationale for the hierarchical ordering of the caste system.

1. The responses to the questions regarding the hierarchical arrangement of the jatis were inconsistent: a) Some of the respondents could not make sense of the question and confessed that they can not arrange the jatis in clear cut hierarchical order. b) For some others jatis, can not be understood as a hierarchical system we can only understand them as varieties. c) Majority of the respondents have a vague notion of hierarchy, but when asked failed to provide a hierarchical arrangement of the castes in their locality. d) There was no unanimity among the respondents, excepting about the lowest status of the untouchables. e) Ordering of jatis in a hierarchy by some is contested by the others, and the usual tendency is that each jati claims itself to be superior to the other. f) The claims about the higher birth are usually contested among the jatis belonging to a broader cluster like Brahmins, Lingayats and untouchables. g) Many of those who answer the questions also confess that each jati thinks itself superior, thus indicating that it is a subjective preference.

2. When we ask for the reasons for ranking a jati higher or lower, large number of respondents does not know the reasons. Some of them said that they are merely following traditions in treating other jatis as higher or lower to them. Yet others ventured to give reasons, but without any logic or consistency. The usual explanations revolve around food habits, cleanliness, profession, education, etc. The problem with this data is that people seem to provide some arbitrary answer to the inquiry about caste hierarchy. It is as though this question is unintelligible to them.

3. The basic question we have to address, then, is whether the sense of higher or lower births is related to a fixed hierarchical system or to something else. It requires further research to understand the implications of the local terms which are supposed to indicate the status of these jatis. The terms like melu(superior), kilu(inferior), Melina(upper), kelagina(lower), dodda(big), sanna(small), etc. do not seem to imply all the presuppositions made about the social status hierarchy.

Â© Purity and impurity as guiding principle of the hierarchy:

1. There is a problem of reference point in the local vocabulary. There are practices like shuddha, asuddha,Â madi, mailige, muttu chittu etc. .(all these terms are broadly taken to be indicators of purity-impurity, however these are neitherÂ exact translations,Â nor exact references of the words.) These practices are to be found among all the jatis in their internal transactions right from Brahmins to the Untouchables and they hold it to be a significant practice. Their connection with the hierarchy is not discernible and there seems to be no causal connection between the practices of exclusion, untouchability, etc. andÂ madi, mailige, muttu, chittu etc. No one told that some caste is lower because it is less madi, or it is afflicted by muttu-chittu.Â Academic study of caste system has so far assumed certain items and practices cause impurity, like meat eating, corpse of cow, consuming liquor. Respondents also at times refer to these practices of the other castes to claim their superiority, for which the term they use is shuddha-ashuddha. Our field work suggests that such answers are provided by the respondents precisely because they feel compelled to answer our question. When pressed furtherÂ they confess that they do not know and they are simply following the ancestral practice.

2. Our field work also brings out certain practices by the same people which negate their notion of shuddha-ashuddha, which shows that these people are not guided by any ideological notion of impurity with a fixed reference.

(d) Caste restrictions and the problem of constituent properties:

The same inconsistency is to be found in other data also. In the case of inter-caste marriage, commensality, or any other so-called characteristics of caste hierarchy or caste observances, people are ready to accept aberrations for a variety of reasons.

1. Quite interestingly, out of the 600 Panchayat members, majority of them did not endorse strict endogamy, commensality, untouchability. Nonetheless these respondents, did express their willingness to continue their jati tradition. This makes sense only when they think that these are not constituent properties of the jati traditions. Otherwise how can they disagree with the so called constituent properties of the jati and yet are willing to continue with their affiliation to their jati.This either indicates that none of the so-called characteristic features of the caste system are valid for these jatis or that the jati structure can include or exclude anything and still survive.

2. Those who consider the jatis as the referential points of the term caste, hold endogamy to be the most fundamental to the caste difference. However the Swamis of some of these jatisÂ advocate for inter jati marriages for various reasons, like for survival of the jati against shortage of brides, or to unite different jatis belonging to the same cluster like Lingayat, Brahmana.. Though they have their own preferences of jatis to be accepted for inter marriage, this at least indicates that endogamy is not a constituent property of the jati units The Havyak Brahmins preferredÂ inter-jati marriageÂ as a means of saving theirÂ jatiÂ from the crisis of brides. In the case of Lingayat swamis, inter-jati marriage is viewed as a way to unite the Lingayats.

3. It appears, even birth is also not compulsory for a jati membership. This is evident from the presence of rituals to allow membership to others, especially in the case of inter caste marriages.

4. People accept that the food habits, dress and other social practices are influenced by climate and regions, so the practices may vary. What is prohibited in one place and context may be allowed in other places and contexts. There is no universally applicable dress code and food habit for many jatis.Â

5. Recently a lot of educated and employed people from the Brahmin and Lingayat jatis are consuming meat and liquor, which is not accepted by the elderly members of the families. They say that the time itself has changed; therefore they canât but accept it, unwillingly though.

6.Â At present no jati is excommunicating her members for this violation of jati practices.

In the past also excepting a few of the Brahmin jatis, no other jatis appear to have such practices. We came across only two such excommunicated jatis among Brahmins, which are again being absorbed into the main jati.

II. The question of textual sources or ideological guidelines for jati practices: 

Generally, the explanation almost all of the respondents provided for the practices related to jati was that they were following ancestral practices. Any explanation in terms of the varna system came from respondents who were educated in modern schools and who were informed about Indian society through textbooks.

1. To the question as to what dharma is, we get as many varieties of answers as there are respondents. No one referred to Dharmasastra texts or varnadharma, including the purohits and Sanskrit scholars. Broadly speaking, the answers refer to âgood actionsâ, âhelping othersâ, âgenerosityâ, ârespecting oneâs eldersâ, âhospitalityâ, âdoing pujaâ, âavoiding bad thingsâ, etc. It is striking that the respondents never associate any texts or deities with dharma. It is exclusively conceived as human action, without reference to the deities. Though the modern scholars use this term to translate religion, the respondents are absolutely unaware of the English connotation of this term..

2. There is no connection between Varna concept and these jatis. Including the Brahmana jatis, people do not cite any authoritative Brahmanical texts as guide to their actions. Brahmana jatis do not even cite purushasukta as their origin story, instead they have different other accounts. Even those who have the knowledge of Dharmasastras do not think that their dail practices related to their jati are guided by them, tradition they say, is what guides their action.

3. Brahmins jatis consult the Dharmasastras in certain cases, whenÂ they face a problem in relation to a particular ritual practice.Â This again is done only to find out alternate ways of action. The interpretations of the sastras are made in such a way that they can go ahead with the intended act when the intended act apparently goes against the established tradition. Through a clever interpretation they can legitimise any deviation from the established practice.Â There are instances where a jati itself creates a text and interpolates it in some Puranas and cites it for its claim to be Brahmin jati or sanction of certain practice.

4. The non-brahmin jatis have their own origin stories which have nothing to do with the varnas, There are severalÂ stories about the origin of the lower jatis,. What is the function of these stories? Are they indicative of multiple ideologies, or of multiple notions of hierarchy? To conclude, we would like to state some basic problems: (1) the first is that not all of the non-brahmin jatis possess such stories. (2) Where such accounts are provided, they often do not make sense and cannot serve any purpose for guiding the actions of jati members.Â (3) People tell different stories to account for the origin of the same jati. Or the same person repeats different versions himself.Â Such instances are rules rather than exceptions in so far as the origin stories are concerned. (4) The majority of the members of a jati are not aware of such stories.Â (5) These stories, even when looked as texts, make no sense as ideologies of hierarchy because they do not claim a superior status for the jati.Â Thus, these stories are not truth claims.

Conclusion

Many anthropologists and sociologists also have come up with similar data after their field works, but they still see âcaste systemâ constituting the social structure.Â Our study shows that a singular system, guided by an ideological structure does not exist. Nor does the âCaste Systemâ. The field work also reveals that jati is not the same as caste. The so called constituent properties of are equally ambiguous.

Note: The report is only ad hoc. The field work is not over yet. The purpose of posting it on the website is to invite remarks/suggestions from others.

Caste An European Phenomenon - Guest - 06-29-2007

Probably not terribly relevant, but just something I remembered. In Dickens' Hard Times, any labourer who did not join the Union would be cast out. He would be shunned and everyone would turn their backs on him when he past by thereafter on the roads. No other of his union was allowed to speak to him either. (One's own fellow working people are the only ones that one ever had natural interactions with in the times of class-conscious Britain. Without them to talk to, one had no one.)

The same is repeated in E. Gaskell's North And South (British book, not the American story of the same name), where even mill workers who broke a strike early or broke Union laws in doing so, would be cast out of their fellow worker's society, company and acceptance. They'll ignore you.

http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext03/ecgns10.txt
North and South excerpt - Gaskell:
QUOTE'Well! If a man doesn't belong to th' Union, them as works next
looms has orders not to speak to him--if he's sorry or ill it's
a' the same; he's out o' bounds; he's none o' us; he comes among
us, he works among us, but he's none o' us. I' some places them's
fined who speaks to him. Yo' try that, miss; try living a year or
two among them as looks away if yo' look at 'em; try working
within two yards o' crowds o' men, who, yo' know, have a grinding
grudge at yo' in their hearts--to whom if yo' say yo'r glad, not
an eye brightens, nor a lip moves,--to whom if your heart's
heavy, yo' can never say nought, because they'll ne'er take
notice on your sighs or sad looks (and a man 's no man who'll
groan out loud 'bout folk asking him what 's the matter?)--just
yo' try that, miss--ten hours for three hundred days, and yo'll
know a bit what th' Union is.'

http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext97/hardt10.txt
Hard Times excerpt - C. Dickens:
QUOTE'Stephen Blackpool,' said the chairman, rising, 'think on 't agen.
Think on 't once agen, lad, afore thou'rt shunned by aw owd
friends.'

There was an universal murmur to the same effect, though no man
articulated a word.Â Every eye was fixed on Stephen's face.Â To
repent of his determination, would be to take a load from all their
minds.Â He looked around him, and knew that it was so.Â Not a grain
of anger with them was in his heart; he knew them, far below their
surface weaknesses and misconceptions, as no one but their fellow-
labourer could.

'I ha thowt on 't, above a bit, sir.Â I simply canna coom in.Â I
mun go th' way as lays afore me.Â I mun tak my leave o' aw heer.'

He made a sort of reverence to them by holding up his arms, and
stood for the moment in that attitude; not speaking until they
slowly dropped at his sides.

'Monny's the pleasant word as soom heer has spok'n wi' me; monny's
the face I see heer, as I first seen when I were yoong and lighter
heart'n than now.Â I ha' never had no fratch afore, sin ever I were
born, wi' any o' my like; Gonnows I ha' none now that's o' my
makin'.Â Yo'll ca' me traitor and that - yo I mean t' say,'
addressing Slackbridge, 'but 'tis easier to ca' than mak' out.Â So
let be.'

He had moved away a pace or two to come down from the platform,
when he remembered something he had not said, and returned again.

'Haply,' he said, turning his furrowed face slowly about, that he
might as it were individually address the whole audience, those
both near and distant; 'haply, when this question has been tak'n up
and discoosed, there'll be a threat to turn out if I'm let to work
among yo.Â I hope I shall die ere ever such a time cooms, and I
shall work solitary among yo unless it cooms - truly, I mun do 't,
my friends; not to brave yo, but to live.Â I ha nobbut work to live
by; and wheerever can I go, I who ha worked sin I were no heighth
at aw, in Coketown heer?Â I mak' no complaints o' bein turned to
the wa', o' bein outcasten and overlooken fro this time forrard,
but hope I shall be let to work.Â If there is any right for me at
aw, my friends, I think 'tis that.'

Not a word was spoken.Â Not a sound was audible in the building,
but the slight rustle of men moving a little apart, all along the
centre of the room, to open a means of passing out, to the man with
whom they had all bound themselves to renounce companionship.
Looking at no one, and going his way with a lowly steadiness upon
him that asserted nothing and sought nothing, Old Stephen, with all
his troubles on his head, left the scene.

[...]
Thus easily did Stephen Blackpool fall into the loneliest of lives,
the life of solitude among a familiar crowd.Â The stranger in the
land who looks into ten thousand faces for some answering look and
never finds it, is in cheering society as compared with him who
passes ten averted faces daily, that were once the countenances of
friends. Such experience was to be Stephen's now, in every waking
moment of his life; at his work, on his way to it and from it, at
his door, at his window, everywhere.Â By general consent, they even
avoided that side of the street on which he habitually walked; and
left it, of all the working men, to him only.This group behaviour developed naturally as a way of forcing labourers to stick together in a Union as a group against the Masters who ran the (cotton) mills and other manufacturing centres in the north of the UK.

Even the medieval guilds (including guild of beggars) had very strict rules about behaviour. And for breaking important rules, you had to face expulsion.

Caste An European Phenomenon - dhu - 12-09-2007

QUOTEBalagangadhara inteview in the Hindu

I donât really know if there ever was a âcaste systemâ, or a caste hierarchy in India. There are castes or jatis, but was there ever a system? We have no evidence of a clear-cut demarcation of jobs. Though the Brahmins are said to have been the only ones with access to learning, less than 10 per cent of them constituted the literate class when the British came.

And then again, what hierarchy can you talk about with regard to castes today? The so-called caste system therefore is something that the Westerner developed in order to explain the so-called âdegenerationâ in Indian culture.

Caste An European Phenomenon - dhu - 12-09-2007

QUOTEhttp://www.britishempire.co.uk/article/castesystem.htm

Within this statement is hidden a need for India's history to be like that of England. Further, there is a need to equate the original inhabitants with the same qualities as were believed to be in the conquered groups within England. By doing this, Beverley legitimates Britain's present position within Britain in the same way as the British justified their dominance over various ethnic groups within the British Isles. This allows the vision of the great march of progress, led naturally enough by the British.

Caste An European Phenomenon - Guest - 12-09-2007

From the link in post 52 (dhu), interview of Prof. Balagangadhara:

QUOTEDo you think part of the problem in understanding Hindu concepts like atman is that we donât speak Sanskrit any more? And most of our philosophical texts are in Sanskrit.

No, because Sanskrit, in the first place, was never a spoken language. It was a language of the literati who wrote the texts. It is not simply the absence of Sanskrit that creates a problem. The problem lies in transmitting words, but not their underlying meanings and theories. One could, of course, read up Patanjaliâs Yogasutra, but it is very difficult to agree with his theories of the gross body, the subtle body etc. These kinds of explanations are both inadequate and unscientific.


I wish he clarified it more, why he thought patanjali's definitions to be 'inadequate and unscientific'. First of all, what patanjali is offering is hardly any explanation nor any 'theories' or hypothesis. He is merely providing what he has experienced, in a nutshell, as sutra-s - formulae of yoga.

Caste An European Phenomenon - Guest - 12-13-2007

QUOTE(Bodhi @ Dec 9 2007, 06:59 PM)From the link in post 52 (dhu), interview of Prof. Balagangadhara:

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTENo, because Sanskrit, in the first place, was never a spoken language. ...[right][snapback]75938[/snapback][/right]</div>Lost me on that itself.
Samskritam is still a spoken language. I've heard it spoken among several people.

Caste An European Phenomenon - Guest - 12-14-2007

QUOTE(dhu @ Dec 9 2007, 04:38 PM)<div class='quotetop'>QUOTEhttp://www.britishempire.co.uk/article/castesystem.htm

Within this statement is hidden a need for India's history to be like that of England. Further, there is a need to equate the original inhabitants with the same qualities as were believed to be in the conquered groups within England. By doing this, Beverley legitimates Britain's present position within Britain in the same way as the British justified their dominance over various ethnic groups within the British Isles. This allows the vision of the great march of progress, led naturally enough by the British.
[right][snapback]75936[/snapback][/right]
</div>That reminds me of something.
Haven't read Walter Scott's "Ivanhoe", but I've watched a BBC (ITV?) short series of it made in the 90s. The following is dialogue from the programme. It's a conversation between Friar Tuck and a disguised King Richard (a Norman) who has returned back to England after his crusade in the ME. He's hungry and has just paid a testy Friar Tuck for some food. Tuck shows him a stash of venison. Venison was deer - considered the King's deer ("King's Venison"). It belonged to the King for his hunting and eating pleasure. Any poaching was an instant hanging offence.

The dialogue to follow, I found informative on Norman-Saxon relations/divide/hostilities.
QUOTEKing Richard (back in England, in disguise, hungry, paid Friar Tuck for food and is shown some venison): Venison?
Friar Tuck: Now you've seen it, you're as guilty as me. We'll both hang if you tell.
So, no more questions. Eat the King's Venison. Thank the good lord for his providence.
Richard: The good lord provides other food than Venison.
Tuck: Aye. But none as tasty.
Richard: Worth hanging for?
Tuck: Listen, virtuous beggar. If I taste anything a Norman wants, I risk hanging.
If I farm land a Norman wants to farm, I risk hanging.
If a Norman steps in my shadow when he wants to walk in sunlight, I risk hanging.
So if I'm going to hang, it will be with a full belly. And sod the lot of them.

Caste An European Phenomenon - Husky - 02-04-2009

Transcript of some pertinent dialogue from the BBC village drama "Lark Rise to Candleford" of one Flora Thompson's book (from what I can gather, it's based on her own childhood experiences) of life in late 19th century Victorian England. Thomas Hardyish settings: farming folk in a little rural hamlet near a more growing country township.

The occasion is some celebration of the local gentry - an extension of the loyalty locals are expected to feel for "Gawd, Queen and Country". The kids of the farming community are going to put on some play but are also required to sing some Tory (conservative) song considered demeaning to Liberals.

But that's just the setting. What is *interesting* is something entirely different: the facts it reveals about christianism and christian society.

QUOTELittle village girl: Reverend Ellison says we must order ourselves to act lowly and reverently before my betters.
Her father (farming origins): Did he now?
Little girl: Because it's in the scriptures that it is a sin to try and change your lot.

Two scenes later, where a very faithful, bible-mouthing, typically judging christian postman, watches, overhearing everything:
Reverend addresses little girl's father: Timmins, what's this about you refusing to let your children sing the Primrose League song?
Timmins: Everyone knows my liberal views, Reverend, I can't allow it.
Rev: Damned Liberal cause, I'll...
(He gets heart pains, clasps chest out of breath)
Rev's adult daughter: Father, please, your heart.
Rev: Can't breathe..., tell him, tell him, wisdom, infinite wisdom, tell him.
Rev's daughter: Mr Timmins, God, in his infinite wisdom, has appointed a place for every man, woman and child on his earth.
Rev: Bounden duty, tell him.
Rev's daughter: And it is our bounden duty to remain contentedly in his lot.

[...] (Timmins rebels further against scriptural teachings, so that things end with his children not going to the concert.)

Next scene. The faithful christian postman Thomas, having overheard everything above in shocked indignation, is back at the post office in the neighbouring village:
Thomas: I heard it with my own ears. The Timmins children, barred from the concert.
Oldest Timmins daughter working at post office: Barred? What has my father done now?
Post office head is the enterprising woman of the tale, Miss Lane: I would have liked to have seen the Reverend Ellison's face. He's bright crimson at the best of times.
Thomas: I'm afraid I cannot share your amusement, Miss Lane. Not when I've had to stand before such flagrant blaspheme.
Murderers did ever accuse others of the murder they themselves had committed, in order to throw people off their scent and conceal their own crime.

Caste An European Phenomenon - HareKrishna - 03-16-2009

Gipsy palaces-a caste phenomen
http://translate.google.com/translate?prev...Dro&sl=ro&tl=en

here the original text and images
www.ispmn.gov.ro/docs/Graf.pdf

translate.google.com/translate?prev=hp&hl=ro&u=http%3A%2F%2F209.85.129.132%2Fsearch%3Fq%3Dcache%3AiZ_QI-M57aUJ%3Awww.ispmn.gov.ro%2Fdocs%2FGraf.pdf%2Boriginea%2Bpalatelor%2Btiganesti%26cd%3D11%26hl%3Dro%26ct%3Dclnk%26gl%3Dro&sl=ro&tl=en

put http://

Caste An European Phenomenon - Husky - 07-02-2009

The brit-empire link was already posted in this thread, but am posting this entry for Nizhal Yoddha's comments:

http://rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2009/07/how...-caste-and.html
QUOTEhow the brits manufactured caste and casteism
jul 1, 2009

interesting paper on how they invented the two, or should i say perverted a perfectly sensible pre-existing system?

also note how they used the census (and statistics) as a weapon, just like modern-day sachar committees manufacturing 'facts'.

http://www.britishempire.co.uk/article/castesystem.htm

this of course is the christists' modus operandi for how to deal with all hindu knowledge and systems: they will decry it until they have managed to wipe out hinduism, and then they will steal it and claim it as their own great patrimony, just as they did to the greek and roman civilizations. meanwhile all the sins they accuse hindus of are things they do themselves: for instance the stranglehold the godmen in their system have on society (which they ascribe to hindu priesthood although they are in actual fact powerless), and the abominable sexual abuse -- virtual legalized prostitution -- of helpless nuns in their convents (which they ascribed to devadasis in hindu temples, once again inaccurately and with malice aforethought).

Posted by nizhal yoddha at 7/01/2009 08:10:00 AM 0 comments

Caste An European Phenomenon - Bharatvarsh - 10-24-2009

QUOTEThe Cagots were a persecuted and despised minority found in the west of France and northern Spain: the Navarrese Pyrenees, Basque provinces, Bearn, Gascony, and Brittany. Their name has differed by province and the local dialect: Cagots, Gahets, and Gafets in Gascony; Agotes, Agotac, and Gafos in Basque country; Capots in Anjou and Languedoc; and Cacons, Cahets, Caqueux, and Caquins in Brittany. Evidence of the group exists back as far as AD 1000.[1]

Cagots were shunned and hated. They were required to live in separate quarters in towns, called cagoteries, which were often on the far outskirts of the villages. Cagots were excluded from all political and social rights, they were only allowed to enter a church by a special door, and during the service a rail separated them from the other worshippers. Either they were altogether forbidden to partake of the sacrament, or the Eucharist was handed to them on the end of a stick, while a receptacle for holy water was reserved for their exclusive use. They were compelled to wear a distinctive dress, to which, in some places, was attached the foot of a goose or duck (whence they were sometimes called Canards). So pestilential was their touch considered that it was a crime for them to walk the common road barefooted or to drink from the same communion cup as non-Cagots. The Cagots were restricted to the trades of carpenter, butcher, and rope-maker.[2][3]

The Cagots were not an ethnic group, nor a religious group. They spoke the same language as the people in an area and generally kept the same religion as well. Their only distinguishing feature was their descent from families identified as Cagots. Few reasons were given as to why they should be hated; accusations varied from Cagots being cretins, lepers, heretics, cannibals, to simply being intrinsically evil. The Cagots did have a culture of their own, but very little of it was written down or preserved; as a result, almost everything that is known about them relates to their persecution.[4] Their cruel treatment lasted through the Middle Ages, Renaissance, and Industrial Revolution, with the prejudice fading only in the 19th and 20th centuries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agote