Abstract
Suraj Yengde, Caste Matters. Penguin Random House, 2019, 325 pp., ₹599. ISBN: 978-0-670-09122-5 (Paperback).
After going through some reviews of this book, we found that the work appears to have stirred a controversy among its readers, attracting some critical responses. The major questions or criticisms raised by dalit-bahujan scholars and academicians against the book are as follows: the author’s non-residential identity (he lives in Boston) and thus lacks a real-time understanding of ground-level dynamics; methodological flaws; attacking the values of the Indian Constitution; commercialising the dalit movement and attempts to divide a larger dalit unity. Seeing these reviews has compelled us to read the book and come out with a comment from the perspective of young researchers. Since this comment is more in the nature of a critique; we are not providing an overview of the book.
Dalit Term and Controversy
The author has defined what it means to be a dalit. However, the usage of the term has aroused much debate. On 7 August 2018, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting issued an advisory to media houses, asking them to avoid the use of the word dalit and opt for the term used in the Constitution, Scheduled Caste (SC). Even within the dalit community itself, there are internal debates regarding the usage of the term dalit. So we feel that it is important to trace reasons behind the angst felt on the use of the term dalit. The term dalit was originally found in Marathi literature, and translated literally it means broken, ground or reduced to pieces. It was popularised by the Dalit Panther Movement in the early 1970s. Though the term is used with special reference to those who were formerly called untouchables, it includes SCs, Scheduled Tribes (STs), neo-Buddhists, working people, landless and poor peasants, religious minorities and women. Dalit as a term is also popularised by a socially-politically conscious SC population living in urban areas (Kumar, 2002, p. 46).
The term clubs all communities that face discrimination and exclusion based on group identity such as caste, ethnicity, religion, gender and occupation under a homogenous and secular category called dalit, regardless of their previous original identity, for greater solidarity. The term itself is the result of an oppressive social structure based on exploitation, oppression and discrimination in the socio-economic and political sphere. These facts perhaps expose the behaviour of the dominant community towards oppressed groups. Thus, there is strong opposition to the term dalit in discourse of the dominant community.
Additionally, the term has been used as a symbol of assertion by SCs (Kumar, 2002). It helps, uniting people of the community to fight back against injustice. It not only acts as a symbol of assertion, but is also a repository of a specific socio-cultural life of oppressed groups. However, the author says that the idea of contemporary India is nothing but a Brahmanical project in which dalit identity has no place (p. 63): dalit universalism, based on dalit culture, art, language, humour, and beauty, is missing in the savarna model of Indian culture. Caste is a major part of mainstream Indian culture whereas the dalit culture demands a complete annihilation of caste hierarchy and invites a new society based on principles of liberty, equality and fraternity as popularised by B. R. Ambedkar in the mainstream Indian political discourse along with Guru Ravidas’ idea of Begampura (a society with no sorrow). Dalitism is a stark reminder that dalit still own history and have their ‘being’ existing in it (p. 67). Therefore, controversies around the term should not be there, not among the community and not form the dominant discourse in the public sphere.
Behavioural Categories
The chapter for which Yengde has been criticised widely and where his book has triggered a controversy is specifically the one that deals with caste studies. He categorises dalit communities into various groups on the basis of their behaviour in their personal and professional lives. Categories such as ‘salaried employees’ and ‘token dalit’ refer to those who are unable to assert their power to work for the community. According to the author, ‘The people who present themselves as representatives without moral consensus can be minimally described as salaried employees of Brahmanical political parties’ (p. 98). A glaring example of such a mindset occurred recently in the Hathras gang rape case (2020). A dalit girl was brutally raped and murdered by upper caste youths. The elected representative of people of the area, belonging to the dalit community, did not raise his voice against this brutality. However, the author does not talk about how the electoral system in India prevents dalit leadership from functioning as a real representative of the community. The author could have suggested electoral reforms in India. Dalit leaders too face caste discrimination in their professional lives. Even the sitting minister of Himachal Pradesh government was barred from entering a temple because of his dalit identity (The Times of India, 8 January, 2020). Dalits who are in power and hold high positions are not able to assert their constitutional and fundamental rights which their counterparts enjoy. For instance, a dalit bureaucrat is not able to show his religious belief as a Brahmin can. Sharing an instance, Yengde says dalit bureaucrats keep their right to religion a private matter. So while a dalit bureaucrat keeps the portraits/statues of Buddha and B.R. Ambedkar only in his bedroom, an upper caste bureaucrat keeps portraits of Hindu gods and goddesses both in his office and bedroom (p. 117).
The contribution of the middle-class intelligentsia who have taken part in organising a dalit movement through the BAMCEF (All India Backward and Minority Communities Employees Federation) marked by the ideology based on Phule–Ambedkar is missing in this chapter (Jaffrelot, 2003, p. 391). The author categorises the elite dalit as the ‘middle-class dalit’ and ‘conservative dalit’ and this is a departure from Phule–Ambedkar’s ideology. He writes, ‘conservative dalits parade around as liberal and open minded… they discriminate [against] Dalits from lower sub-caste’ (p. 108). The author argues that they oppose inter-caste marriages, discriminate against other communities within dalits whose work is considered unclean and they practise patriarchal norms. They do not work for dalit liberation. Moreover, they are not aware of the root cause of the caste system, and they remain within the caste eco-system. Yengde also points out the issues that face dalit women, the most marginal among the marginalised. He explains that the issues of dalit women must be seen through the lens of intersectionality. These arguments are perhaps the reason why there is rampant criticism in the circle of Ambedkarite scholars and activists. What is important now for the dalit movement is to look at these issues and resurrect those initiatives already taken by the middle-class dalit. While formulating an inclusive policy for any marginalised groups, an intersectional approach should be considered.
Brahmins Against Brahmanism
As far as any internal reform in the caste system is concerned, it seems impossible. One of the reasons is that the Brahmins ignore the question of reform (Ambedkar,1936). Further, it is useless to make a distinction between secular Brahmins and priestly Brahmins. Both are kith and kin. They are two arms of the same body and one is bound to fight for the existence of the other (Ambedkar, 1936). However, the author of this volume has invoked the Brahmin to fight against Brahmanism, as he draws references from the past reform movement under the leadership of Ambedkar with other Brahmin co-travellers. In the book, Yengde quotes Bagul (2015). ‘It is reported that the burning of the Manusmrity was a suggestion made by Ambedkar’s Brahmin comrade, Sahasrabuddhe’ (p. 268). There could be many challenges for Brahmins who resist the caste order from within their community itself. Because most times reform initiatives undertaken by an individual is influenced by the shared norms of the community to which he belongs. If the community is tolerant, the individual will succeed in converting community members. If intolerant, the individual’s effort will perish (Ambedkar, 1936).
It is no wonder that individuals have not had any courage to assert their independent thinking by breaking the barrier of caste. Because caste has been a weapon in the hands of the orthodox for persecuting reformers and preventing all reform by excommunicating individuals (Ambedkar, 1936). However, the effort of the Brahmin community may not go in vain, if the community takes up issues collectively as a whole by organising inter-caste marriages through a common consensus among the community. Though people may think it is a pity, the intellectual class is another name for the Brahmin caste and the custodian of the interest of that caste rather than of the interest of the country. However, it is not only an intellectual class but also enjoys reverence of Hinduism (Ambedkar, 1936). Even Ambedkar (1936) has had to agree that people are largely imitative and follow the intellectual class. Thus, there is a high probability that the other OBC and dalit communities may imitate or follow the Brahmin community in the path of reform as the OBC continues to be the vehicle of Brahmanism. A reform initiative by the Brahmin community and the reverse or de-Sanskritisation of the OBC is required to fight Brahmanism. The author also questions Brahmin academicians who stand for the cause of dalit issues and believe in Ambedkar’s philosophy by saying that, ‘they have not actively invested in producing another generation of dalit scholars…unlike their predecessors who helped in making Ambedkar and Phule’ (p. 294).
Lastly, the author has used an auto-ethnography method in the book in which the author uses self-reflection and personal experiences to connect with the general problems existing in society. The auto-ethnography method is not widely acknowledged in India leading some reviewers to question this methodology.