Jump to content

Caste system in Kerala: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→‎Origin of the caste system: yey - it's the colon that causes the fmt issue BMK fixed
Line 13: Line 13:
The rules of untouchability in the region were extreme, and had become so by the time of the arrival of the [[Dutch East India Company]] in the seventeenth century.<ref name=Barendse2009p640/> Robin Jeffrey has quoted the wife of a Christian missionary, who wrote in 1860 that {{quote|...&nbsp;a Nair may approach but not touch a Namboodiri Brahmin: a Chovan [Ezhava] must remain thirty-six paces off, and a Pulayan slave ninety-six steps distant. A Chovan may remain twelve steps away from a Nair, and a Pulayan sixty-six steps off, and a Parayan some distance farther still. A Syrian Christian may touch a Nair (though this is not allowed in some parts of the country) but the latter may not eat with each other. Pulayans and Parayars, who are the lowest of all, may approach but not touch, much less may they eat with each other.<ref name=Jeffrey1994pp9-10/>}} Nonetheless, higher ranked communities did have some social responsibility for those perceived to be their inferiors: for example, they could demand forced labour but had to provide food for such labourers, and they had a responsibilities in times of famine to provide their tenants both with food and with the seed to grow it. There were also responsibilities to protect such people from the dangers of attack and other threats to their livelihood, and so it was "an intricate dialectic of rights and duties".<ref>Barendse (2009), pp. 641-642.</ref>
The rules of untouchability in the region were extreme, and had become so by the time of the arrival of the [[Dutch East India Company]] in the seventeenth century.<ref name=Barendse2009p640/> Robin Jeffrey has quoted the wife of a Christian missionary, who wrote in 1860 that {{quote|...&nbsp;a Nair may approach but not touch a Namboodiri Brahmin: a Chovan [Ezhava] must remain thirty-six paces off, and a Pulayan slave ninety-six steps distant. A Chovan may remain twelve steps away from a Nair, and a Pulayan sixty-six steps off, and a Parayan some distance farther still. A Syrian Christian may touch a Nair (though this is not allowed in some parts of the country) but the latter may not eat with each other. Pulayans and Parayars, who are the lowest of all, may approach but not touch, much less may they eat with each other.<ref name=Jeffrey1994pp9-10/>}} Nonetheless, higher ranked communities did have some social responsibility for those perceived to be their inferiors: for example, they could demand forced labour but had to provide food for such labourers, and they had a responsibilities in times of famine to provide their tenants both with food and with the seed to grow it. There were also responsibilities to protect such people from the dangers of attack and other threats to their livelihood, and so it was "an intricate dialectic of rights and duties".<ref>Barendse (2009), pp. 641-642.</ref>


By the late nineteenth century, the caste system of Kerala had evolved to be the most complex to be found anywhere in India,<ref name="Nossiter1982pp25-27"/> and the exploitation of it had become considerable. Barendse explains this development:
By the late nineteenth century, the caste system of Kerala had evolved to be the most complex to be found anywhere in India,<ref name="Nossiter1982pp25-27"/> and the exploitation of it had become considerable. Barendse explains this development {{quote|...&nbsp;it turned to gross unrequited exploitation only in the nineteenth century when the British colonial pacification removed the threat of the peasant harvests being ravaged by armies or robbers and their huts being burned to the ground.<ref>Barendse (2009), p. 643.</ref>}}

{{quote|...&nbsp;it turned to gross unrequited exploitation only in the nineteenth century when the British colonial pacification removed the threat of the peasant harvests being ravaged by armies or robbers and their huts being burned to the ground.<ref>Barendse (2009), p. 643.</ref>}}


By this time there were over 500 groups represented in an elaborate structure of relationships and the concept of ritual pollution extended not merely to untouchability but even further, to unapproachability and even unseeability. The system was gradually reformed to some degree, with one of those reformers, [[Swami Vivekananda]], having observed that it represented a "mad house" of castes. The usual four-tier Hindu caste system, involving the ''varnas'' of Brahmin (priest), Kshatriya (warrior), Vaisya (business person, involved in trading, entrepreneurship and finance) and Shudra (service person), did not exist. Kshatriyas were rare and the Vaisyas were not present at all. The roles left empty by the absence of these two ritual ranks were taken to some extent by a few Nairs and by non-Hindu immigrants, respectively.<ref name="Nossiter1982pp25-27">Nossiter (1982), pp.25–27.</ref>
By this time there were over 500 groups represented in an elaborate structure of relationships and the concept of ritual pollution extended not merely to untouchability but even further, to unapproachability and even unseeability. The system was gradually reformed to some degree, with one of those reformers, [[Swami Vivekananda]], having observed that it represented a "mad house" of castes. The usual four-tier Hindu caste system, involving the ''varnas'' of Brahmin (priest), Kshatriya (warrior), Vaisya (business person, involved in trading, entrepreneurship and finance) and Shudra (service person), did not exist. Kshatriyas were rare and the Vaisyas were not present at all. The roles left empty by the absence of these two ritual ranks were taken to some extent by a few Nairs and by non-Hindu immigrants, respectively.<ref name="Nossiter1982pp25-27">Nossiter (1982), pp.25–27.</ref>

Revision as of 02:58, 14 November 2011

Untouchables of Malabar, Kerala (1906)

The caste system in Kerala differed from that found in the rest of India. While the Indian caste system generally modelled the four-fold division of society into Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaisyas and Shudras, in Kerala the Nambudiri Brahmins formed the priestly class and only rarely recognized anyone else as being other than Shudra. Thus, the Kerala caste system was ritualised but it was not the varna model found elsewhere.

Origin of the caste system

A theory has been proposed for the origins of the caste system in the Kerala region based on the actions of the Aryan Jains introducing such distinctions prior to the 8th-century AD. This argues that the Jains needed protection when they arrived in the area and recruited sympathetic local people to provide it. These people were then distinguished from others in the local population by their occupation as protectors, with the others all being classed as out-caste. Pullapilly describes that this meant they "... were given Kshatriya functions, but only Shudra status."[1]

An alternate theory states that the system was introduced by the Nambudiri Brahmins. Although Brahmin influences had existed in the area since at least the 1st-century AD, there was a large influx from around the 8th-century when they acted as priests, counsellors and ministers to invading Aryan princes. At the time of their arrival the non-aboriginal local population had been converted to Buddhism by missionaries who had come from the north of India and from Ceylon. The Brahmins used their symbiotic relationship with the invading forces to assert their beliefs and position. Buddhist temples and monasteries were either destroyed or taken over for use in Hindu practices, thus undermining the ability of the Buddhists to propagate their beliefs. The Brahmins treated almost all of those who acceded to their priestly status as Shudra, permitting only a small number to be recognised as Kshatriya, these being some of the local rulers who co-operated with them. Certainly by the 11th-century, this combination of association with kings and invaders, and with the destruction or take-over of Buddhist temples, had made the Brahmins by far the largest group owning land in the region and they were to remain so until very recent times. Their introduction of Sanskrit and their melding of it with the local Tamil language to form Malayalam was also striking. Their dominating influence was to be found in all matters: religion, politics, society, economics and culture.[1]

Barendse has said that the hierarchical system established by Nambudiri Brahmins of Kerala was asserted to be according to the will of Parasurama, an avatar of Vishnu. The Nambudiris had control of 64 villages and asserted that they had powers given to them by the gods, so much so that they considered even other Brahmin groups to be outside the caste hierarchy.[2] The Nambudiri Brahmins were at the top of the ritual caste hierarchy, outranking even the kings. Anyone who was not a Nambudiri was treated by them as an untouchable.[3]

The Nambudiris had varying rules regarding the degrees of ritual pollution for the different castes. Similarly, those castes practiced the principles of untouchability in their relationship with the other regional castes. Nor was untouchability in Kerala restricted to Hindus: among Christians, the established Syrian Christians considered newly converted Latin Christians to be untouchables.[4]

The rules of untouchability in the region were extreme, and had become so by the time of the arrival of the Dutch East India Company in the seventeenth century.[2] Robin Jeffrey has quoted the wife of a Christian missionary, who wrote in 1860 that

... a Nair may approach but not touch a Namboodiri Brahmin: a Chovan [Ezhava] must remain thirty-six paces off, and a Pulayan slave ninety-six steps distant. A Chovan may remain twelve steps away from a Nair, and a Pulayan sixty-six steps off, and a Parayan some distance farther still. A Syrian Christian may touch a Nair (though this is not allowed in some parts of the country) but the latter may not eat with each other. Pulayans and Parayars, who are the lowest of all, may approach but not touch, much less may they eat with each other.[4]

Nonetheless, higher ranked communities did have some social responsibility for those perceived to be their inferiors: for example, they could demand forced labour but had to provide food for such labourers, and they had a responsibilities in times of famine to provide their tenants both with food and with the seed to grow it. There were also responsibilities to protect such people from the dangers of attack and other threats to their livelihood, and so it was "an intricate dialectic of rights and duties".[5] By the late nineteenth century, the caste system of Kerala had evolved to be the most complex to be found anywhere in India,[6] and the exploitation of it had become considerable. Barendse explains this development

... it turned to gross unrequited exploitation only in the nineteenth century when the British colonial pacification removed the threat of the peasant harvests being ravaged by armies or robbers and their huts being burned to the ground.[7]

By this time there were over 500 groups represented in an elaborate structure of relationships and the concept of ritual pollution extended not merely to untouchability but even further, to unapproachability and even unseeability. The system was gradually reformed to some degree, with one of those reformers, Swami Vivekananda, having observed that it represented a "mad house" of castes. The usual four-tier Hindu caste system, involving the varnas of Brahmin (priest), Kshatriya (warrior), Vaisya (business person, involved in trading, entrepreneurship and finance) and Shudra (service person), did not exist. Kshatriyas were rare and the Vaisyas were not present at all. The roles left empty by the absence of these two ritual ranks were taken to some extent by a few Nairs and by non-Hindu immigrants, respectively.[6]

Caste in the modern era

The process of amelioration of caste distinctions by the various social reform movements were overtaken by the events of 1947. With independence from Britain came the Indian constitution, and Article 15 of that document outlawed discrimination on the grounds of caste and race.[8] Myron Weiner has said that the ideological basis for caste "... may be (almost, but not quite) moribund"[9] and that

No political parties, and no political leaders, no intellectuals support the idea that caste is part of a natural moral order based on hierarchy, ... that caste is occupationally linked and hereditary, that each caste (jati) embodies its own code of conduct (dharma), and that low-caste membership is the consequence of transgressions in one's previous life.[10]

Weiner points out that despite the ideological demise

... as a lived-in social reality it is very much alive. The demise of orthodoxy, right beliefs, has not meant the demise of orthopraxy, right practice. Caste remains endogamous. Lower castes, especially members of scheduled castes, remain badly treated by those of higher castes. But the gap between beliefs and practices is the source of tension and change. The lower castes no longer accept their position in the social hierarchy, no longer assume that their lower economic status and the lack of respect from members of the higher castes are a "given" in their social existence. But the movement for change is not a struggle to end caste; it is to use caste as an instrument for social change. Caste is not disappearing, nor is "casteism" - the political use of caste - for what is emerging in India is a social and political system which institutionalizes and transforms but does not abolish caste.[9]

Despite being outlawed, the Indian governments – both at national and at regional level – do still recognise distinctions between the various communities but this recognition is for the purpose of positive discrimination. Throughout post-independence India, including in Kerala, there exists a framework of reservation which attempts to recognise the socio-economic disparities between various castes and which is fluid in nature. Depending both on local circumstances and on the changing modern socio-economic environment, castes are classified as Forward Classes (or General), Other Backward Classes, Scheduled Castes (Dalits), and the Scheduled Tribes. These classifications determine what - if any - assistance a caste community receives in any given area. Formal classification lists are compiled for the latter three groups; any community which is not listed in any of those categories is, by default, a Forward Class.[11]

Writing in the context of violence against Dalits elsewhere in India, Frontline magazine said in 2006 that

Successive governments have brought in legislation and programmes to protect the rights of Dalit communities. The safeguards enshrined in the Constitution stipulate that governments should take special care to advance the educational and economic interests of Scheduled Castes, that untouchability is unacceptable and that all Dalit communities should have unrestricted entry in Hindu temples and other religious institutions. There are political safeguards in the form of reserved seats in State legislatures and in Parliament ... But prejudices die hard.[12]

However, Frontline goes on to note that the situation in Kerala was nothing like as severe, to the extent that those seeking to research

... continuing inequality and deprivation among traditionally disadvantaged groups in Kerala do not include Dalits any longer in their list of communities that still represent "distinct pockets of deprivation". The list includes only the traditional coastal fishing communities, the S.T.s [Scheduled Tribes] of North Kerala, and the new underclass of Tamil migrant workers ...[13]

Demographics

As of the 2001 Census of India, there were 68 Scheduled Castes in Kerala and they comprised 9.8% of the population. They were 99.9% Hindu, with a neglible number of Sikhs and Buddhists.[14] There were 35 Scheduled Tribes, comprising 1.14% of the population and with 93.7% being Hindus. A further 5.8% were Christian, and the remainder Muslim or "not stated".[15]

The Forward category includes castes such as Nambudiris, Samanta Kshatriyas, Nairs, Ambalavasis and Syrian Christians. They are not extended reservations in government jobs and educational institution due to their relatively better economic and educational status in pre-independence Kerala. However amongt these castes, Nairs have become most influential due to their numerical superiority. Unlike in North India, the proportion of Brahmins(1.4%) in Kerala is not very significant. Hindu Forward Castes form around 16% of the population of Kerala, while Syrians form another 9.5%. Therefore, the Forward Castes makes up around one fourth of the population of Kerala.[16][full citation needed]

The decrease in the Forward caste population has been extremely steep in Kerala, compared to other parts of India. During the 1816, 1836 and 1854 censuses, the forward castes outnumbered the other Hindus by a huge margin. Despite the conversion of large number of outcaste Hindus to Christianity, caste Hindus became a minority during 1860s and 70s and during the 1931 and 1941 censuses, the Outcaste Hindus numbered almost twice as much as the Caste Hindus. For example, Nairs numbered two times as much as the Ezhavas during the 1854 census (30% to 15%). But as of 1968, Ezhavas outnumbered Nairs significantly (22% against 14.4%).[17]

Features

Mannappedi/Pulappedi

Mannappedi or Pulappedi was a custom which existed until 17th century. An upper caste woman could lose her caste if any male from the castes like Pulayan, Parayan or Mannan happened to see her or touch her by any means. Then she would be expelled from the caste or had to move with the "low caste" person or will be under discretion of the elders to decide. This would apply especially on the night of a specific day that fell in the month of Karkatakam (roughly corresponding to the dates 15 July to 15 August) in the Gregorian calendar.[citation needed] Given the social and economic status of lower caste people of that era, it is believed that this practice could not be perpetuated without social sanction, and definitely not without the connivance and/or tacit support of the men of upper castes. Thus, the men folk used this in the garb of a custom to stifle the freedom or rights of women belonging to upper castes.[citation needed] Another view of the practice is that it was a route provided by tradition to the oppressed Pulayan class for registering their intentions of revenge as a symbolic act.[18] The practice was abolished by the then Kerala Varma in 1696 after which he had to face the ire of the royal servants (Pandarathu Kuruppus).[citation needed]

See also

References

Citations
  1. ^ a b Pullapilly (1976), pp. 26–30.
  2. ^ a b Barendse (2009), p. 640.
  3. ^ Gough (1961), p. 306.
  4. ^ a b Jeffrey (1994), pp. 9–10.
  5. ^ Barendse (2009), pp. 641-642.
  6. ^ a b Nossiter (1982), pp.25–27.
  7. ^ Barendse (2009), p. 643.
  8. ^ Constitution.
  9. ^ a b Weiner (2001), p. 195.
  10. ^ Weiner (2001), p. 193.
  11. ^ Kerala Classification lists.
  12. ^ Frontline (December 2006) (Viswanathanin & Shramakrishnan), p. 6.
  13. ^ Frontline (December 2006) (Krishnakumar), p. 24.
  14. ^ Census (2001), Scheduled Castes.
  15. ^ Census (2001), Scheduled Tribes.
  16. ^ National Family Health Survey
  17. ^ Jeffrey, Robin (March 1976). "Temple-Entry Movement in Travancore, 1860–1940". Social Scientist. 4, (8): 3–27. Retrieved 2-11-06-20. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link)(subscription required)
  18. ^ Dalit Conversion and Social Protest in Travancore, 1854–1890
Bibliography

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Caste_system_in_Kerala&oldid=460546240"