caste: standardization and discrimination
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/7/2019 Caste: Standardization and Discrimination
1/21
Caste: Discrimination and Standardization
PROYASH SARKAR
Senior Lecturer in Philosophy, Jadavpur University, Kolkata 700 032, E-mail:
ABSTRACT
The aim of this paper is to discuss the complex interrelation of social discrimination, inequality and
difference, and by implication it also deals with the ethical concepts of equality and social justice. Social
discrimination in its multiple facets has appeared to be one of the greatest threats to social justice to the
marginalized lives and life forms of the present-day India. It also creates its own mechanisms of
vanquishing cultural otherness by propagating a particular life form and cultural homogeneity that
promotes ambitions and interests of certain groups. This paper deals with caste, as it was developed into a
system in the post-Rk-Vedic era. It also enquires into what Nietzsche would call a genealogy of the caste
system and tries to bring this theory to its logical consequence.
Before entering into the complex interrelation of the concepts associated with
difference, discrimination and inequality a few words need to be said on these very
concepts in order to get rid of a number of controversies that are often produced by a
confused and partial understanding of the concepts central to a discourse. Difference
may be considered as a descriptive concept. Discrimination, in the present context,
stands for the act of deprivation of some persons or the members of a group of certain
rights that they deserve to enjoy. Roughly speaking, the term inequality, in the legal
procedure, means lack of equal opportunity to and equal treatment of the members of the
society. It also stands for difference of any sort, viz. biological, social, religious,
economic, cultural or otherwise, following a graded scale. According to The Concise
1
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected] -
8/7/2019 Caste: Standardization and Discrimination
2/21
Oxford Dictionary, it is the lack of equality in magnitude, quality, rank, circumstances
etc.1 I take inequality in the latter sense in the present paper and use the term
discrimination in the former sense. So, inequality unlike difference is a value-loaded
term.A and B are unequal with respect to F if and only if they are different with respect
to F and either of them is better according to certain parameter, M, with respect to F.
It is hardly debatable that people have difference among themselves with regard
to various biological features like sex2, skin colour, height, colour of ones hair or eyes
etc. One may also be different from others in such cultural factors as the gender that one belongs to, the language that she speaks as a native speaker, the religion that she
practices, the type of music that she likes, and so on. We are often different by habit like
those relating to food, smoking, etc., sometimes it lies in sexual orientation; and
sometimes it is based on ones ideologies and the lifestyle that one endorses. The
important point, however, is that these differences constitute a persons identity. So they
are in no way unimportant. We cannot do away with them very easily.
Mere difference does not by itself produce inequality, nor does it tend to promote
discrimination. It follows from the principle of equality as social justice that two persons
may be different under different considerations, yet they can expect equal treatment
under all circumstances. Thus, mere difference can hardly justify social discrimination,
which has always relied upon the prior existence of inequality as something natural. It is
highly debatable as to whether inequality, even if it is spontaneous, can justify
discrimination. I, however, will not take up this issue in the present paper. Granted that
2
-
8/7/2019 Caste: Standardization and Discrimination
3/21
inequality can be counted as a good reason for unequal treatment of the individuals of the
society who are thus unequal we will see whether this can provide any justification for
discrimination related to caste.3
Etymologically the term caste was originated from the Portuguese term casta,
which literally means lineage or race. The Concise Oxford Dictionary defines caste
as Hindu hereditary class, with members socially equal, united in religion, and usualy
following same trades, having no social intercourse with persons of other castes and also
as more or less exclusive social class. In anthropology the term is used in its genericsense to refer to any social group that is endogamous and the members of which usually
follow the same trades. Among such groups social interaction is often prevented by
various social norms prevailing in the society and social mobility among then is almost
nil. This term is often used to stand for two quite difference concepts of the classical
Indian literature that are variously used to refer to different types of social stratification,
namely, varnaand jti. The etymological sense of this term goes quite close to the
sense in which it is used in anthropology. Taken in this sense the caste of a person is
quite similar to, if not identical with the Indian concept ofjti. Due to the lack of any
other suitable term in English to stand for varna, throughout this discussion we will use
it in the first of the senses given in TheConcise Oxford Dictionary4and take it to mean
varna rather thanjti. Though there is a lot of confusion about the translation of the term
varna, as we have already noted, now that I have given my initial remarks about the
usage of this term in the context of this paper, there remains, I hope, little scope for any
further confusion about the usage of this term in the present context.
3
-
8/7/2019 Caste: Standardization and Discrimination
4/21
Almost all studies in social stratification in India focus on and react against
discriminations that depend upon caste. The ethico-legal concept ofjustice is the guiding
motive of these studies. In an egalitarian democratic society equality is supposed to be
one basic social virtue that the society cannot deny to provide to its members if it wants
to remain a just society. We have a number of laws against different forms of
discriminations in our societies. Studies in the caste system of India try to unravel the
discriminations that, though ubiquitous, are otherwise invisible to a great extent.
Discrimination does not produce inequality; it rather presupposes that people are unequal.The existence of gender discrimination in our society presupposes, though covertly, that
men and women are unequal in different respects. Similarly, caste based discriminations
presuppose that ones having a caste makes her unequal to the people belonging to other
castes. I do not think that discrimination is the only widespread social injustice
standardization being another major form. The problem of standardization should be
distinguished from the problem of discrimination. Unlike discrimination, standardization
gives rise to inequality between the people who succeed to meet those standards and
those who fail. So, it is doubly unjustit produces the inequality presupposed by the
discrimination that comes as a corollary of it.
The term standardization is employed here in a technical sense. It involves a
selection, not necessarily conscious, of certain non-essential5 properties, from an array of
properties randomly present in a heterogeneous group of people, which promotes a
particular goal or a number of related goals by making them essential for the members of
4
-
8/7/2019 Caste: Standardization and Discrimination
5/21
that group for belonging to a privileged sub-group. In this sense standardization is an
umbrella term covering a gamut of mechanism employed for social stratification.
It may be interesting to study those mechanisms. But what is more interesting is
to study the general goal/s of standardization. Standardization typically creates a
privileged sub-group within a heterogeneous society by eulogizing some non-natural
properties of that group projecting them as objective properties. It promotes a new value,
and consequently, discriminates between those who succeed and those who fail to attain
them. It involves an abstraction. Standardization is inexplicitly purposive in the sense thatit has always been developed, or sometimes devised, as a means for attaining some goal
of some group, not necessarily the purpose of the group that comprises those people who
succeed in attaining those standards.
Sometimes standardization serves the purpose of the successful group. In these
cases the groups that are otherwise dominant eulogize some of the non-essential
properties as essential for promoting or protecting its privileges. Perhaps, the most
striking example of this type of standardization is the caste system in India. Among the
four main castes of India, viz. brhmana, ksatriya, vaiya, anddra, the first one is the
most privileged. Originally, in the Rk-Vedic era, the difference between castes was not
hereditary. It was determined by ones natural inclination or merit, and action. Perhaps,
the caste division in India is as old as the later Vedic era. In the Rk Veda there was a
single mention of the caste division. In the Purusa Skta of Chapter X (Daama
5
-
8/7/2019 Caste: Standardization and Discrimination
6/21
Mandala) of theRk Veda we find only one verse dedicated to an explanation of the origin
of the caste division6:
Brahmanosya mukhamsd vhrjanyah krtah/
Ur tadasya yadvaiyah padbhym dro ajyata//--10/90/12
In this verse a supreme being was conceived from whose mouth the priest brhmana was
produced, the warrior (rjanya/ksatriya) was produced from His arms, from His thighs
was produced the trader (vaiya), and the fourth caste, i.e. the servent (dra) was
produced from His feet. There is a repercussion of this thesis in Manusmrti:
Loknam tu vivrddhyartham mukhabhrpdatah/
Brhmanam ksatriyam vaiyam dram ca niravartayat//1/31//
With a view to the development of the (three) regions7, He brought into existence the
Brhmana, the Ksatriya, the Vaiya, and the dra, from out of His mouth, arms, thighs
and feet (respectively).
Even the same doctrine has been advocated in the Gt:
Cturvarnyam may srstam gunakarma-bibhgaah4/13
In this verse lord Krsna says that the four castes have been produced by him in
accordance with individual merit and action. Most Vedic scholars and historians of
ancient India maintain that in the Vedic period the caste was based on individual merit,
talent and profession. However, the Purusa Skta mentioned above may be a later
addition, since the language in which it was composed is more contemporary than the
language in which the other parts of the Rkwere written. These scholars think that the
caste division was not there in the early RkVedic era. Two reasons have been cited for
this supposition. The first is the one we have just mentioned. That the Purusa Skta that
was mentioned above was a later addition to the Rk-Veda shows that the caste division
6
-
8/7/2019 Caste: Standardization and Discrimination
7/21
was not there in the RkVedic era. Later on in the era of the smrti literatures this system
was fortified in India, as it was evident from Manusmrti. Yograj Basu, a Vedic scholar
writes, In Rk-samhit there are indirect references to the custom of caste division
(varna vyavasth). From these references the existence of the caste system in the society
can be proved. However, at that time there was no rigid caste division similar to that we
had subsequently. There was no strict compartmentalization among the different castes in
the era ofRk-samhit.8 Further he writes, In the Vedic era caste of a person used to be
determined by his/her merit and not the other way round.9So, originally the ascription of
caste to a person was not according to her birth. Caste was a non-essential property,though it was made hereditary later on. As we have seen the caste system was originally
made for merely a division of labour, and, perhaps, no discrimination was initially
involved in it. The division of labour was prior to the caste division. Subsequently, it was
made hereditary to secure the interests of the dominant class of the society. It was
standardized as if it were a natural property possessed by the members of the society
according to their heredity. The system became oppressive at the same time. Praastapda
writes, the sacred duty of the fourth caste, i.e. dra, is to be dominated by the other
three castes.10 A dra should not have any independence of the other three castes.
This is required for a virtuous life of a dra. Though Praastapda does not clearly
mention the caste system to be hereditary, yet his intention is unmistakable.11
In this respect Praastapda follows Manu, who was most eloquent about the
sanctity of the caste system in India. By the time of Manu the caste system succeeded in
spreading its roots throughout the subcontinent. Manu was the most successful compiler
7
-
8/7/2019 Caste: Standardization and Discrimination
8/21
of the laws of the so-called Classical Indian religion (santana dharma). By this, the cart
had already been put before the horse. Rather than making the caste system dependent
upon the division of labour, as it was the case in the early Vedic era, the latter was made
to depend upon the former, and the caste system was standardized to be hereditary, i.e., to
be decided by birth. This standardization had gradually spread its roots in stratified Indian
societies in such a way that it started influencing the life of the monks (sannysin-s), who
are expectedly not to be affected by such divisions.12 In the earlier time this
standardization was not required as the social stratification was susceptible to social
mobility. So, this standardization was meant to serve certain purposes. Needless to saythat its purpose was to promote a particular power-structure that served the ambition of
the privileged castes, especially, the first two of them, and also to deprive the
marginalized from their social, economic, and religious rights. Caste was not naturally
related with birth. Thus, this standardization created a new range of differences, which
were originally not there in the system. The aim of this standardization was to promote
and sustain a discrimination produced by an oppressive system. It is noticeable that this
type ofstandardization serves the purposes of the group that promotes it and eulogizes
itself. However, this is not always the case. Sometimes, the interested party does not
eulogize themselves by way of standardization. It rather deifies another group by
standardizingcertain properties present in them and adding a value to them.
Most prevalent examples are the standardization through TV ads and beauty
pageants. A beauty pageant standardizes certain norms of beauty, mostly, female beauty,
and thus, initiates a difference between those who possess the properties eulogized by
8
-
8/7/2019 Caste: Standardization and Discrimination
9/21
those norms and those who lack them. Apparently, it is a quite innocent thing to do. It
appears not to have any discriminatory intention behind it. However, if we probe deeper
we will see that it indirectly promotes a social discrimination, victims of which are those
who fail to stand those norms. You might have a different sense of beauty, yet gradually
tend to comply with those norms, and it is not an accidental thing to happen, rather, it is
part of a well-calculated move. It thus creates a new difference and then promotes
discrimination. This discrimination is not its ultimate goal. In this instance or in cases of
TV ads, where health, beauty, lifestyle, and even things and events like food, drinks,
festivity, etc. are standardized have one general motive behind them and that is predominantly some commercial interest. Interestingly, the persons who are thus
eulogized are not the primary beneficiaries of this type of standardization. Though at
times they are also benefited by it as individuals, yet the system was not primarily
developed to serve their purpose. In such instances the beneficiaries remain mostly
invisible. This mechanism works in such a way that the discrimination that comes as a
corollary is hardly observable, and even if it is observable, the relation between it and the
said standardization is not evident. The promoters of this type of discrimination always
remain behind the curtain. This may be called Indirect Discrimination through
standardization, the former being an instance of Direct Discrimination through
standardization.
In its another form, indirect standardization works through some objects generally
associated with a group of people. The beneficiaries are the people who are associated
with those objects, or the people who exist at the epicenter of power of the social order
9
-
8/7/2019 Caste: Standardization and Discrimination
10/21
where such standardization takes place, or both. It is not to say that in these cases the
objects are eulogized; rather, they work as marks of certain properties people tend to
associate with those who bear those marks. Actually, it is those other properties that are
eulogized. These external things and features are too weak to be taken as marks of those
supposed internal properties, which are to be eulogized. They act as marks only when
they are associated with an already existing social position. Here I am only discussing the
processes that have spontaneity to some extent. In extreme cases some external objects
can be imposed on a group of people as in case of monasteries, the monks or the nuns are
bound to wear certain dresses or to keep certain other objects with them. In India and inmany other parts of the world certain groups of people are supposed to wear particular
types of dresses. Say, for example, a teacher, or a politician should wear certain types of
dresses, in other words, there are certain unwritten dress codes. The society does not
always dictate as to what they should wear rather it imposes certain unwritten norms that
tend to decide what they are not allowed to wear. Any particular attire is utterly irrelevant
to these professions. This strategy of gaining social and political mileage would work if
you were a teacher or a politician. In such cases they will work as marks of wisdom or
compassionate nature. However, if you belong to a different trade this trick will not
work. If you are an engineer or an artiste you cannot prove yourself wise by wearing the
attire typically worn by a teacher. That is why I have urged that these marks are too weak
to work outside of a given context. A form of standardization works here. The incentives
range from social recognition, advertising the trade, selling of a concept (and ultimately
selling of a product) or covering up of ones inabilities or inefficiencies as a performer in
her trade. And the sanctions are also varied ranging from a mere frowning by your peers,
10
-
8/7/2019 Caste: Standardization and Discrimination
11/21
or a mild criticism, to a physical threat or the threat of getting fired from your job in
extreme cases. Interestingly, the threat comes from the peers group and incentives come
from others. This explains many things. These things are so internalized by the people of
the society where they exist that they tend to judge ability or inability of others by those
external marks. A social worker (political) should look like a social worker, a teacher
should look like a teacher, or, an executive should look like an executive. This is a
standardization of looks with the help of external things. This appears to be quite
innocent. However, as in other cases, this type of standardization is also meant for
discrimination, and, therefore, it produces distinction as a means. The aim of suchstandardization is to gain social mileage, to make a group and the individuals belonging
to it clearly distinguishable from the rest of the society; and to project as if they are
virtuous in certain waysthey have certain properties that others lack. This shows how
discriminatory this standardization is.
Here we should keep in mind that not all standardization is socially pernicious. A
business executive of a multi-national company is also expected to bear a particular look
in certain way, yet the way she presents herself does not produce any social
discrimination. In spite of the apparent similarity between the present instance and the
cases we were considering, they are quite different. The stipulation of the unwritten dress
code for the executive is not discriminatory as it is meant only for the business
community and not for the entire society. The looks that the Indian teacher or the
politician is supposed to bear is meant for the entire society, in the sense that a teacher
should look like a teacher even when she goes to the supermarket or for a dinner; an
11
-
8/7/2019 Caste: Standardization and Discrimination
12/21
executive, however, is not supposed to bear the executive-look when she goes to the
market. This shows how these two types of standardization differ from each other and
how one is discriminatory while the others is not.
Now it is quite interesting to see why so much restriction has been imposed on
different castes to secure purity of blood. A huge number of injunctions have been
imposed on different social customs and institutions by Hindu law books and the people
who belonged to the epicenter of the power structure of the stratified caste-based Indian
society. Most notable among them are the institutions of marriage and those of education.For example the laws with regard to the compatibility or incompatibility of one caste with
the others in respect of marriage are delineated in detail. Now the question is what is the
need for the articulation of such laws? If the caste division represents a natural
difference within the population, then no such imposition seems to be what is called for.
How many of us would like to have a system of prescriptive laws to protect the sanctity
of the rotational system of the planets or imperatives to prevent violation of the law of
gravity? This seems to be ridiculous on its face value. Could not the erudite ancient
seers realize that things governed by the laws of nature needed no protection of
imperatives imposed by human beings? In a different context Nivedita Menon writes, [If
it] were so natural, it would not require such a vast network of controls to keep in
place.13This seems to be a knock down argument against the standardization of the caste
division in India; however, in spite of its prima facie appeal this argument is far less than
convincing. The analogy drawn here between the caste division and the law of gravitation
or the rotational orbit of the planets is a mismatch. In many cases we do interfere in the
12
-
8/7/2019 Caste: Standardization and Discrimination
13/21
natural processes sometimes to protect the sanctity of it and sometimes to change its
course though always with some goal in mind, usually the goal of ones own benefit or
the benefit of ones own species. The technology of producing a new species by
hybridizing two different species was known long before the birth of modern Genetics.
These technologies have often been used to the benefit of humankind. People of many
parts of the world used to know the use of mules. Many other hybrid crops and animals
are produced to serve our purpose. So, the argument that what is natural cannot be
manipulated or controlled does not hold well. If something can be controlled then it is
subject to human volition. A natural corollary of this assumption is that moralimperatives could be imposed on them. That is how restrictions have been imposed by
Governments of different countries of the world on human cloning.
When we want to prevent human cloning our main concern is not to let one
interfere with the constitution of the human species, rather than ensuring purity of blood.
The injunctions on the sexual practices of human species appear to aim at securing purity
of blood for certain species. It is rather a form of passive genetic engineering. Rather than
living the issue to nature the Ancient seers took it upon themselves to decide the
constitution and structure of the population by means of imposing injunctions on the
sexual activities of the members of the society. An extreme form of this maneuver was
witnessed during the Nazi regime in their experimentation with the German population
with an intention of producing a pure Arian German race. Just like the Brhmana-s in
India they believed in the superiority of their own blood and fanatically attempted to
maintain and propagate its purity. Unlike the Indian system it was coercive and that is
13
-
8/7/2019 Caste: Standardization and Discrimination
14/21
why it cannot be regarded as a form of standardization. This is not to say that there is no
coercion involved in standardization; however, standardization is not primarily a coercive
method. Standardization do also produce a selected group of people, but the chosen few
who enjoy the privileges of a stratified society are not the products of direct coercion.
Standardization appears to be a cleverer device for controlling the society; taken at its
face value it seems to be a democratic process as it is hardly visible in its oppressive
aspects. Unlike coercion standardization is a way ofindirectcontrol.
Without entering into the more intricate ethical issue of the right to manipulate theconstitution of the human species, we will discuss whether such a claim of manipulating
the constitution of population by means of controlling sexual activities of the members of
the society is compatible with the claim that caste is there in blood. Could not the Vadic
seers see that nature has developed its own device for preventing crossbreeding? It is true
that animals of two different but closely related species can produce offspring. However,
the offspring produced by two different species of animals is generally sterile. Such an
animal cannot in its turn have its own offspring. A mule or a hinny is generally sterile,
though there are a few reported instances of a female mule having an offspring with a
male donkey. Even if such information were available to the Brahmin pundits, who
appeared to be always vigilant against hybridization of the higher castes, especially
hybridization of certain forms, unless they were alarmists the number is too negligible to
have been the cause of any serious concern for them. This is perhaps, natures own way
of preventing manipulation of its order. Then, what was the need for injunctions as those
imposed by Manu and other law givers of ancient India? The need is evidently that of
14
-
8/7/2019 Caste: Standardization and Discrimination
15/21
creating a chosen sub-group within the society. May it not be urged, then, that it is the
need for creating the myth of a pure blood that produced and sustained such claims?
I am, however, afraid that on a close scrutiny this argument will not suffice to
establish the point it seeks to prove. It is not in general true that nature prevents
development of new hybridized species. Though many new species of plants have been
created by the process of natural hybridization, yet such instances are scarce in the animal
kingdom. The lonicera fly, which is found in North America for the last 250 years, is
known to be one of the very few animal species resulted from natural hybridization.Moreover, an animal crossed with another belonging to a species having a different
chromosome number tends to produce a sterile offspring, however animals having the
same genetic number but differing in other genetic codes can produce offspring that are
not sterile. If there is a treasured feature, viz. the colour of the fur, the length of the tail,
the height of the body, etcetera, in one of the animals subjected to such cross-
fertilization, then the new progeny runs the risk of losing it; again newer features could
also be added which might not always be cherished. In case of humans crossbreeding it
may result in losing such genetic features as the colour of the skin, colour of the eyes, or
the height that one has. Then why should not the Brahmins be worried about losing by
way of hybridization the intellectual gifts that they have as a caste? This shows that an
argument from biology in the line of this one cannot make a strong claim against
standardization of caste. In the context of ethics biology can prove almost nothing except
imposing certain negative constraints on our ethical principles. The reason is simply that
the following argument is invalid:
15
-
8/7/2019 Caste: Standardization and Discrimination
16/21
Premise: Natural biology instigates S to do A.
Conclusion: Therefore, S should never abstain from doing A.
This argument can stand only if we supplement it with an additional premise as the
following:
P1: Everybody should always do all that is instigated by natural biology.
P1 is an example of primitive ethical biologism. That this position is flawed is readily
observable and hardly needs support of any argument.14 I think all ethical arguments that
draw upon biology suffer from this or some similar fallacy unless they avert this risk by
arbitrarily making exceptions to P1 or some principle similar to it.
The term natural is treacherously ambiguous in this context. When the term is
used in the context of certain sciences like physics, chemistry, geography or physiology,
it deals with certain laws and phenomena that are not results of human intervention, and
which are not subject to alteration. In the human context it is used to stand for that which
is instinctive, or impulsive and not cultured. If a property, F, is natural in either if these
two senses, then one cannot be held responsible for having or not having F, for the simple
reason that having or not having F does not depend upon human volition. It is true that
one cannot be held responsible for having an instinct or some other psychological trait of
the mind like the Oedipus complex if that is not voluntarily chosen. The psychologist
tells us that having such features is beyond our control. If it were so, then it would be
foolish to impose moral injunctions upon them. But isnt it true that if it were within our
control then we would have tried to get rid of the complexes even if it were natural in
the second sense mentioned above? So, it is not in general true that no moral injunctions
16
-
8/7/2019 Caste: Standardization and Discrimination
17/21
can be imposed on what is natural. Still the argument stands. No ethical conclusion can
be derived from a premise based on biology. Rather, from the fact that something is
determined by biology it follows that it is non-ethical, vis--vis unethical. Perhaps
Menons argument hinges on this point. Yet this does not imply that if something is non-
ethical it does not require to get controlled on ethical grounds. Such a thing may have
consequences that have moral implications. In that case it may appear to be our duty,
moral or otherwise, to prevent it. One may hardly be blamed for having a sickle cell
syndrome, yet it may be wise to try to develop a cure for it. Properties that exist in nature
are not subject to ethical judgment, yet they may come under the moral purview as soonas we acquire the ability to manipulate and control them.
The same may be claimed about the caste division in India. Even if the castes
were determined by birth, and in that sense natural, yet, it might be urged that
manipulation by human intervention of the caste division was always possible. In that
case there is no absurdity involved in imposing injunctions on the sexual practices of
human beings to prevent dilution of the strict caste division existing in a society. The
more interesting question to ask is whether caste is biological, and the evidences that we
have in our hand proves beyond doubt that it is not. Even the supporters of the caste
division no more ground it on biology;15 they rather try to justify it by means of
arguments derived from social consequences, which, I think, are leagues behind of
proving the point they intend to prove.16 I found the argument in favour of the biological
bases of caste unsound and the arguments from dire social consequence against the
eradication of caste based division frivolous and motivated by vested interest. On the
17
-
8/7/2019 Caste: Standardization and Discrimination
18/21
contrary, in this paper we have argued that the caste division is a consequence of
standardization that had a purpose behind it. Pointless to say that it has been successful in
serving the purpose to a great extent. It was the main pillar in the oppressive social and
economic structure of the highly stratified Indian society.
It is quite natural to expect natural differences to continue to exist, at least in the
short run, unless some human intervention intrudes the natural processes to change them.
Some social differences that are conducive to oppressive social structures survive
because of the support that they get from the economic and the political forces thatcontrol the power structure of the society. A considerable amount of energy is spent often
by means of coercion to keep these system working. However, isnt it quite surprising
that those who are the victims of these oppressive systems conform to it? They
themselves are often the main protagonists of the standards set by such standardization.
Different mechanisms surround all form of standardization. Standardization acts through
these mechanisms. It is very difficult, if not impossible, to point out a single mechanism
through which standardization works; it is often an amalgam of different things.
Sometimes people are indoctrinated, sometimes things are eulogized so that people get
attracted, sometimes there are coercive forces working stealthily behind it like those
exerted by frowning and social criticism. A huge amount of energy is spent in every
society on producing a considerable number of myths to sustain the standardized forms
and differences. We have argued in this paper that standardization induces artificial
differences within the society. These differences will be there till the discrimination is not
abolished. After the discrimination has disappeared there would remain no need for the
18
-
8/7/2019 Caste: Standardization and Discrimination
19/21
difference and hence there would be none. To claim that it will remain even after the
discrimination has disappeared is to claim that you would need a saw even if you have
nothing to cut. For the purpose of standardization is served through discrimination. Social
mechanisms supporting standardization like those instantiated in myths, folklores etc. are
there because they have got the support and indulgence by the people at the center of the
power structure of the society. These mechanisms will keep on working till the support is
withdrawn. So, standardization-induced-differences can be expected to give way to a less
inequitable system if and when the purpose of this standardization or the discrimination
that serves this purpose will cease to exist. From the normative perspective we can saythat the goal is to remain different, or perhaps, more different than ever before, and still
remain caste-neutral. For, standardization of caste, as we have seen, stems from an
intention of subjugating the fourth caste as well as the outcastes.17
19
-
8/7/2019 Caste: Standardization and Discrimination
20/21
1NOTES AND REFERENCES
The Concise Oxford Dictionary, Seventh Edition, 1982.
2 For the present purpose we will ignore the debate as to whether any cultural factors lurk in the sexual differences among
man, woman, and the third sex. It is though an important debate I refrain from entering into it at present. I am not presuming
that what sex a person will have is in no way influenced by cultural factors. On the contrary, I think that our present
knowledge of genetics does not rule out the possibility that the sex of the fetus could to some extent be determined by
cultural factors, at least in some remotely causal way. However, the present state of the art is not as sophisticated as to
clinch this issue in favour of either of the sides.
3 What I would say about the discrimination based upon caste could also apply to the gender discrimination. In this paper,
however, I shall not take up the latter issue due to space constraint.
4The Concise Oxford Dictionary, Seventh Edition, 1982.
5 This should not imply that I am accepting essentialism about something or anything at all. One may wonder as to how one
can provide a definition of standardization in terms of certain non-essential properties that are turned into essential
properties for the members of a group for belonging to a preferred sub-group. One way how this can be done is by claiming
that all properties of that group are non-essential, though a selective few of them are only claimed to be essential for the
members of that preferred sub-group. This does not subscribe the present author to the distinction between the essential and
the non-essential properties, nor does it imply the view that all-properties are non-essential. It is neutral on this issue, and
hence, the present author is free to remain non-committal on it, at least in the context of the present paper. What the
definition implies is merely the fact that it is the people who indulge in standardization claim that there is indeed such a
distinction between these two types of properties.
6 This does not imply that there is no other mention of the castes in the Rk Veda. Though there was no mention ofdra in
it, there is clear mention of the other three. However, the verses in which we find mention of the castes are not primarily
dedicated to establish this division. See Rk Veda Samhit8/11/5-6.These are just some occasional mention of the castes,
where the names of the castes refer to ones merit rather than her caste. SeeRk Veda Samhit7/64/2.
7 The three regions are the terrestrial, the celestial and the subterranean. See Manubhsya of Medhtithi on Manusmrti,
Vol. 3, translated by Ganganath Jha, Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi, 1999, p.74.
8 Basu, Y., 1993, Veder Parichay, Pharma K. L. M., Calcutta, (in Bengali), p.219. Translation mine.
9Ibid,p. 219. Translation mine.
-
8/7/2019 Caste: Standardization and Discrimination
21/21
10drasya prva-varna-pratantram-amantrikca kryh--Praastapda,Padrthadharmasamgraha, ed. Durgdhara Jh,
Sampurnananda Sanskrit University, Varanasi, 1997, p.669.
11Ibid.pp. 667-9.
12 [T]he varna and rama continued to plague the Indian society, rooted as it was in the Vedic tradition, as sannysa
was not only a recognized arama within the scheme, but many of the sects amongst thesannyss could only be those who
were Brahmins earlier in the social order. Not only this, the earlier caste of the person who became a sannyscontinued
to cling to him and place him to some extent in the discriminatory, hierarchical order of the sdhus themselves.Daya
Krishna, Vedic khs: The Root of the Caste System in Indian Society p. 25 (it is an unpublished paper privately
received from the author).
13 Nivedita Menon, 2004, India: Section 377: How Natural is Normal?, South Asia Citizens Web, Issue 01/01/2004 at
http://www.sacw.net/SexualityMinorities/nivedita01Jan2004.html
A Bengali translation of this paper was published in Svakanthe, 3rd year, Vol. 2
14 This may also remind us of Moores naturalistic fallacy. Moores construal of the fallacy appears to have drawn upon the
fact/value dichotomy. In the present context, however, no such dichotomy is presumed.
15 Hirendranath Dutta, however, argues that the caste division could be partially based on birth (biology). There are certain
features hardwired in human nature. These are passed on to the next generation by the earlier generation. So, the esteemed
qualities of aBrhmana can be expected only in the offspring of a Brhmana. As he writes, we look for the pedigree of a
dog, a horse, an ox, then what is our fault if we look for the pedigree of a human being?-- Hirendranath Dutta, Manur
Barnashramdharma (in Bengali), Jadavpur University, Kolkata, 1970, p. 88 (translation mine).
16 Here I am not going to enter into this debate. It involves a separate issue and needs a different approach of treatment.
17This paper was first presented at a weekly Seminar group in Kolkata informally called the Friday Group. I express my
indebtedness to all members of the group, namely, Professor Tara Chatterjee, Professor Kalipada Baksi, Dr.
Madhabendranath Mitra, Professor Pushpa Mishra, Professor Shefali Miotra, Professor Tirthanath Bandyopadhyay,
Professor Amita Chatterjee, Dr. Kumar Mitra and Dr. Jhuma Chakraborty, for their invaluable comments and suggestions. I
do also extend my sincere thanks to Professor Daya Krishna for sending me a copy of his paper entitled Vedic khs: The
Root of the Caste System in Indian Society and also for his comments on an earlier draft of the paper that helped me
improve it further.
http://www.sacw.net/SexualityMinorities/nivedita01Jan2004.htmlhttp://www.sacw.net/SexualityMinorities/nivedita01Jan2004.html