Author: Ramesh Patange
Publication: Organiser
Date: September 9, 2001
'United Nations' World 'Conference
Against Racism, Racial discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance
in Durban is an important event. It is very difficult for a layman to understand
the exact meaning of the various words used in the title. Yet, curiously
enough there is heated discussion on the subject of the conference in India.
English dailies and periodicals are engrossed in this discussion while
vernacular dailies have shunned the subject. Why English dailies are pouring
articles after articles on this non-issue? Is there any article sponsering
agency in India which is working behind the scene? Has there foreign missionary-backed
NGOs behind all this hullabaloo? Tehelka team may investigate the matter
in their own peculiar manner. Mainly the following points are raised:
1. Government of India should include
the issue of caste or casteism in agenda of Durban Conference.
2. By not allowing the casteism
to include in the agenda, Indian Government has done disservice to the
Dalits.
3. Race and caste are one and there
is no difference between racial discrimination and casteist discrimination.
4. India is, a multy-racial state
and different races have been degraded to lower castes.
5. Dalits are the worst sufferers
of this race-cum-caste differentiation.
The world conference should suggest
the ways 'and means to eradicate casteism in India.
The so-called scholars, writers
and exponents of the cause of dalits have overlooked one very simple fact,
and that is, caste is not race and race is not a caste.
Dr. Ambedkar submitted his first
thesis on May 9, 1916 to Columbia University, New York, USA on Castes in
India Genesis and Development. The thesis is published in Dr. Babasaheb
Ambedkar Writings and Speeches Vol. 4. (All subsequent quotations are taken
from this thesis.) Giving reference to the social structure of Indian society
Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar writes: (P. 6)
"Ethnically all people are heterogeneous.
It is the unity of culture that is the basic of homogeneity. Taking this
for granted, I venture to say that there is no country that can rival the
Indian Peninsula with respect to the unity of its culture. It has not only
a geographic unity, but it has over and above all a deeper and a much more
fundamental unity-the indubitable cultural unity that covers the land from
end to end. But it is because of this homogeneity that caste becomes a
problem so difficult to be explained. If the Hindu society were a mere
federation of mutually exclusive units the matter would he simple enough.
But caste is a parcelling of an already homogeneous unit, and the explanation
of the genesis of caste is the explanation of this process of parcelling".
Then Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar tries
to explain how this parcelling process might have started long back. His
whole analysis is very penetrating. The absence of inter-marriage is the
essence of the cast.
According to Dr. Ambedkar "society
is always composed of classes. And this is a universal fact and early Hindu
society could not have been an exception to this role". Sr. Ambedkar says
that this class was turn into cast formarly there wore four classes -Brahamin,
Kshatriya, Vaishya and Shudra. How did classes turn into class? Dr. Ambedkar
observes (p 15): "The study of the origin of caste must furnish us with
an answer to the question-what is the class that raised this "enclosure"
around itself? I can answer it only indirectly. I said just above that
the customs in question were current in the Hindu society. To be true to
facts it is necessary to qualify the statement, as it connotes universality
of their prevalence. These customs in all their strictness are obtainable
only in one caste, namely the Brahmins, who occupy the highest place in
the social hierarchy of the Hindu society; and as their prevalence in non-Brahmin
castes is derivative of their observance is neither strict nor complete."
This important fact can serve as a basis of an important observation. If
the prevalence of these customs in the non-Brahmin castes is derivative,
as can be shown very easily, then it needs no argument to prove. What class
is the father of the institution of caste. Many of our so-called secularist
and progressive citizens put forth an argument that the Manu is the creator
of caste system is India. They take joy at their heart when they say that
the Brahamins are the creator of the castes. Still there are many now shout
at the rooftop about the legacy of Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar also join in
the chorus with the secularist and progressive. It is advisable for them
to pause for a While and read the following Dr Ambedkar's pen:
"One thing I want to impress upon
you is that Manu did not give the law of caste and that he could not do
so caste existed long be fore Manu. He was an upholder of it and therefore
Philosophised about it, but certainly he did not and could not ordain the
present order of Hindu society. His work ended with the codification of
existing caste rules and the preaching of caste Dharma. The spread and
growth of the caste system is toe gigantic, 9, task to be achieved by the
power of cunning of an individual or of a class. Similar in argument is
the theory that the Brahmins created the caste. After what I have said
regarding Manu, I need hardly say anything more, except to point out that
it is incorrect in thought and malicious in interest. The Brahmins may
have been guilty of many things, and I dare say they were, but the imposing
of the caste system on the non-Brahmin population was beyond their mettle".(P
16) Dr Babasaheb conclude this thesis thus (P 21): "In my opinion there
have been several mistakes committed by the students of caste, which have
misled them in their investigations. European-students of caste have unduly
emphasised the role of colour in the caste system. Themselves impregnated
by colour prejudices, they very readily imagined it to be the chief factor
in the caste problem. But nothing can be farther from the truth, and Dr.
Ketkar is correct when he insisted that "All the Princes, whether they
belonged to the so-called Aryan race, or the so-called Dravidian race,
were Aryas. Whether a tribe or a family was racially Aryan or Dravidian
was a question which never troubled' the people of India, until foreign
scholars came in and began to draw the line. The colour of the skin had
long ceased to be a matter of importance." My study of the caste problem
involves four main points: 1) that in spite of the composite make-up of
the Hindu population, there is a deep cultural unity; (2) that caste is
a parcelling into bits of a larger culture unit; (3) that there was only
one, caste to start with and (4) that classes have become castes through
imitation and excommunication.
Caste is not race, Christian lobby
has tremendous vested interest in equating race with caste. They have,
liberation theology in their pockets. If dalits are declared as a separate
race, then dalits automatically become non-Hindus. They are vociferously
propagating for last ten or more years to declare dalits as indigenous
people of India. One should be very careful about the nefarious designs
of the missionary lobby.
