1 Untouchability in India: Is It Being Operated Only with 'Sacredness' Or

Extended Abstract International Union for the Scientific Study of Population Conference, 2017

Untouchability in India: Is it being Operated Only With ‘Sacredness’ or Holding Some Materials too?

Safrin B. 1 Juli Borgohain2

Even though caste question in India has a tendency to get addressed as a “dark past” in the mainstream discussions, many recent incidents not only reminded its vast and deep rooted existence, but also shaken the beliefs of those unaware of its brutality. The current scenario of Dalit atrocities all over the country and peoples’ movement against it strongly highlight that caste question in India is not a history, it very much exist in 21st century India. The brutal beating up of Dalit men by the cow protectors for skinning dead cow because cow is believed to be mother of the protectors, and then consequent rise of continuous movements in the Una city of Gujarat India3 is not a standalone example; it is a reflection of the current scenario in many parts of the country. India’s identity as the largest democracy in the world and historic delight with thousand different languages, numerous food habits are not capable enough to sweep away the institution of caste divisions and its related exploitations.

Caste system was basically generated in Hindu society on the basis of segregating people and allocating those sections in different works. The Hindu theology states that every person belongs to a “jati” or caste by birth and it’s his/her duty to perform the allocated job to that caste; no one should cross that compartment, and should accept the assigned work as a sacred duty. Ambedkar (1916) stated, “Caste is an Enclosed class. 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?” The defenders of caste system generally try to establish it’s healthiness due to its dividing nature of labours, which is expected to be needful for a smooth functioning of different works in society. Ambedkar (1936)4 severely criticized this proposition and revealed that it is a “division of labourers, not just division of labours”. “It is a hierarchy in which the divisions of labourers are graded one above the other”, Ambedkar (2016) stated.

The whole hierarchy of the caste system is originally compared to different body parts of lord “Vishnu”. On the top of the ranking in this hierarchy are the “Brahmins”, which is the priest section. This section is followed by the “Kshatriyas” (the warriors and rulers). The next section is the “Vaishyas” (the traders and merchants) and the bottom most section is

1 Safrin B. is a Ph. D. fellow in International Institute for Population Science, Mumbai. 2 Juli Borgohain is an ex-faculty member in the Department of Economics, Dibrugarh University, and an independent researcher. 3 http://www.countercurrents.org/2016/07/20/cow-skinning-takes-a-deadly-turn-gujarat- dalit-protest-spreads/ 4 http://ccnmtl.columbia.edu/projects/mmt/ambedkar/web/index.html 2 the “Sudras” (the workers). There is a fifth section, which doesn’t deserve to be considered in this classification, and this section is named as “Avarnas” (the unclassified). It’s a sacred duty for the Avarnas to serve the society with cleaning the polluted objects like cremation and handling of dead bodies, removal and skinning of dead animals, manual scavenging etc. All the first four sections in the hierarchy are compared respectively to the mouth, the arms, the thighs, and then the feet of lord Vishnu in Hindu theology. “Manusmriti”, which is an ancient legal text among the many dharmashashtras i.e. the sacred law books of Hindus, states “..for the sake of the prosperity of the worlds he (Lord) caused the Brahmana, the Kshatriya, the Vaisya, and the Sudra to proceed from his mouth, his arms, his thighs, and his feet.”5 Eventually, a foot can’t think or speak, and a mouth shouldn’t touch the dirty ground. “Manusmriti” clearly mentions “.. in order to protect this universe He, the most resplendent one, assigned separate (duties and) occupations to those who sprang from his mouth, arms, thighs, and feet. To Brahmanas he assigned teaching and studying (the Veda), sacrificing for their own benefits and for others, giving and accepting (of alms); the Kshatriya he commanded to protect the people, to bestow gifts, to offer sacrifices, to study (the Veda), and to abstain from attaching himself to sensual pleasures; the Vaisya to tend cattle, to bestow gifts, to offer sacrifices, to study (the Veda), to trade, to lend money, and to cultivate land. One occupation only the lord prescribed to the Sudra, to serve meekly even these (other) three castes. Man is stated to be purer above the navel (than below); hence the Self- existent (Svayambhu) has declared the purest (part) of him (to be) his mouth.” In India, its very recently only, as reported by Hindustan Times on September 2016 6, that government urged the Supreme Court to ban a 500-year-old temple ritual in Karnataka and Tamil Nadu where Dalits roll over food leftover by Brahmins to apparently cure skin diseases, solve marriage problems and infertility.

Apart from these different incidents which remind us the deep rooted existence of caste exploitations, the last round of India Human Development Survey 2011-12 established the evidence of untouchability in India. Analysing data of the same survey, Thorat and Joshi (2015) 7 found that 30% rural households and 20% Urban households practice untouchability in India. Among the Brahmins, 52% households practice untouchability; and 15% Scheduled caste households also perform this practice. They examined these practices with the hypothesis on social network and setting the hypothesis that households who know more people well, especially outside of their own community are less likely to practice untouchability; and they found inverse relationship between size of households network and the incidence of untouchability. They also revealed that households with out side networks are 4pc less likely to practice untouchability.

5 http://www.hindubooks.org/manusmriti.pdf 6 http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/centre-asks-sc-to-ban-inhuman-practice-of- dalits-rolling-on-brahmins-leftovers/story- yqwz6gd8H6ZN5myvu6CSkJ.html?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=fbpost&utm_campa ign=India 7 http://paa2015.princeton.edu/uploads/153481 3

Even though “Manusmriti” presents the assigned works in different castes as sacred duties and repetitively talks about sacrifices for all three privileged castes, but at the same time it actually ensures the power of ruling and property holding by the privileged castes; it tries to ensure the power of knowledge and decision making among the Brahmans, power to rule among the Kshatriyas and power to operate the economy among the Vaishyas. Now the question arises whether in modern India the continuation of caste exploitation is just on the basis of a sacred sense or it has some linkage with holding economic privilege as well. Considering income sources, level of income and land holding as some key indicators of economic privilege, this paper investigates into the economic background of the households experiencing untouchability, compared to the other upper castes and lower castes households in India. We also investigate into the caste differentials in the largest loan taken during a reference period of 5 years, focusing the caste differentials in the purpose of loans and sources of dependency for that.

Need for this study Due to the essence of spirituality in the caste system, there is a general tendency to observe caste discriminations as affecting social or cultural sphere only e.g. food habits, religious beliefs, gender roles, social networking etc. However, there is a need to examine the extend to which private property plays role in the existence of caste divisions and related discriminations in modern India. Thus there is a need to uncover the work profile and level of income of the households from different castes. Land can be considered as a key element in private property, as it is related to many other mechanisms like production, shelter and security; therefore it has the need to be investigated by differentials. Loan can be considered as an economic support during the need of money in bulk or during emergency. The purposes of loan reflect the pockets of those needs, and the sources of loan can reveal on whom mostly people have dependency during such needs. Investigating into the differentials in the purpose and sources of loan can give a picture of social relations on the basis of economic needs.

Objectives This main objective of this paper is to relate the caste question with the question of economic privilege in India. Considering that the households which ever experienced untouchability constitute a separate caste group, the specific objectives are- 1. To investigate into the main sources of income and level of income of Indian households belonging to different castes in India during 2011-12. 2. To examine the pattern in the amount of land holding and land cultivation in the households by different castes in India during 2011-12. 3. To examine how much was the largest amount of loan received by households belonging to different castes during a reference period of 5 years and to investigate into the main purposes and sources of taking those loans.

Data source: Data from India Human Development, second wave (IHDS II) which were collected during 2011-12 is used to accomplish both the objectives. IHDS provides nationally representative data. In second wave of IHDS, 42,152 households are covered, and detailed questions on castes are asked. To cover the experience of untouchability, all the Scheduled Caste (SC) households were asked this question- “In your household, have some members experienced untouchability in the last 5 years?”

Methodology Most of the surveys club the forward caste groups and categorize as “other”. However, IHDS asks the households about their specific backgrounds. We formed a composite variable on caste category combining two variables, which are 1) caste of the household 2) experience of untouchability by Scheduled Caste households. Thus, the categories of the newly formed variables on caste are- a) Brahmins b) Forward and General (excluding Brahmins) c) Other Backward Castes d) Scheduled caste without experiencing untouchability (SC) e) Scheduled Caste experiencing untouchability (SC_Un) f) Scheduled Tribes (ST). These newly formed categorizations will actually allow us to compare untouchable households with the households with all other castes. Bivariate analyses are carried out to understand the distribution of the selected economic variables in different castes or by different castes. Results Table 1.1 presents the percentage distribution of different sources of main income of the households belonging to different castes during 2011-12. Most of the Brahmin households (32.5%) had salaried works as the main source of income, followed by cultivation (26.8%) and profession NEC, pension, rent etc (12.8%). The smallest percentage of Brahmin households (1.3%) depended on agricultural wage labour as main source of income, and

Table 1.1: Percent distributions of different sources of main income of households by castes, India, 2011-12. Allied agri./ Non Artisan/ Agri. agri. Profession Independent wage wage Petty Organized Salaried / Pension/ Caste categories Cultivation worker labour labour shopkeeper business work Rent etc. Others Total Brahmin 26.8 1.9 1.3 7.5 11.5 1.6 32.5 12.8 4.1 100 Forward/General (excluding 25.6 2.4 5.8 14.8 14.0 2.3 24.0 7.8 3.3 100 Brahmin) Other Backward 26.1 3.4 9.6 24.1 12.2 1.2 14.9 4.8 3.6 100 Castes Scheduled 13.8 2.1 21.1 31.4 6.7 0.3 17.4 4.1 3.2 100 Castes (SC) SC untouchables 15.8 1.3 21.2 40.3 5.9 0.2 10.0 3.0 2.3 100 Scheduled 35.5 1.8 14.5 26.2 4.1 0.2 13.0 2.9 1.8 100 Tribes (ST) Others 24.1 4.2 5.1 33.4 11.9 1.2 15.7 3.1 1.4 100 Total 24.4 2.7 11.1 23.5 10.7 1.2 17.8 5.5 3.3 100

only 7.53% of Brahmin households had non-agricultural wage labour as the main source of income. The situation was completely contrasting in the case of the unprivileged section viz scheduled castes, untouchables and the scheduled tribes. Percentages of scheduled castes, untouchable and scheduled tribe households which depend on salaried work as the main source of income were, 17.4%, 10% and 13% respectively; most of these households were depending on non-agricultural waged works as main source of their income and the percentages were 31.4%, 40.3% and 26.2% respectively. Apart from the fact that among the households who even faced untouchability, 40.3% of these were depending on non-agricultural wage labour and only 10% on salaried work; 15.8% of these were depending on cultivation, 0.2% in organized business and 3% in profession, pension, rent etc. Forward castes excluding Brahmins had some similarity to the Brahmin households in the distribution of main income; e.g. most of these households from forward caste excluding Brahmins depended on cultivation and salaried works (25.6% and 24% respectively). However, 5.8% of these households depended on agricultural wage labour, 14.8% depend on non-agricultural wage labour and 7.85% depend on profession, pension or rent etc, in contrast to 1.3%, 7.5% and 12.8% respectively among the Brahmin households.

Table 2.1 presents percentage of Table 2.1. Percentage among the scheduled caste scheduled caste households which households experiencing untouchability, by place of residences, India, 2011-12

experienced untouchability during last Experience of Place of residence 5 years preceding the date of survey in untouchability Metro Other Rural Total different places of residence in India in last 5 years urban urban during 2011-12. Its not only in rural No 93.7 86.2 74.2 77.9 India in which a significant proportion Yes 6.3 13.8 25.8 22.1 of scheduled caste household Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 experienced untochability, its even the metro urban in which 6.3 % of the scheduled caste household experienced untouchability. Diagram 2.1 presents the mean household income per capita in rupees by different castes during 2011-12 in India in different place of residence viz metro urban, urban and rural. In all the three places of residence, mean household income per capita showed a pattern similar to the caste hierarchy. Brahmins had the highest level of per capita household income, followed by other forward castes and then by other backward castes. Diagram 2.1: Mean household income per capita, by castes, India, 2011-12 70000 59,400 mean HH income per capita 60000 Metro urban Other urban Rural 48,732 50000 41,688 39,940 38,039 39,416 40000 34,519 33,817 32,054 30000 25,517 23,097 24,168 21,016 In rupees 18,968 20000 15,943 15,036 11,407 12,498 10000

0 Brahmin Forward/General Other Backward Scheduled Castes Scheduled Castes Scheduled Tribes except Brahmins Castes without experiencing experiencing untouchability untouchability 6

Diagram 2.2 and Diagram 2.3 present the mean area of land holding and land cultivated respectively in acres by households from different castes in India during 2011-12. This is clear that the upper castes households were much more privileged in terms of land holding Diagram 2.2: Mean HH land holding (in acres) by castes, India, 2011-12

4.0 Kharif Rabi Summer 3.48 3.46 3.45 3.5 2.94 2.91 2.87 2.80 2.77 3.0 2.75 2.43 2.42 2.42 2.5

2.0 1.54 1.54 1.52 1.49 1.46 1.43 1.5

Mean land holding (in acres) 1.0

0.5

0.0 Brahmin Forward caste Other Scheduled Scheduled Scheduled except Backward Castes without Castes Tribes Brahmins Castes experiencing experiencing untochability untochability

Diagram 2.3: Mean HH land cultivated (in acres) by castes, India, 2011-12

3.0 Kharif Rabi Summer 2.74

2.5 2.38 2.18 1.94 1.94 1.93 2.0 1.64

1.5 1.26 1.16 0.90

1.0 0.83 0.76 0.43 Mean ares cultivated (in acres) 0.5 0.38 0.26 0.15 0.13 0.08

0.0 Brahmin Forward caste Other Scheduled Scheduled Scheduled except Backward Castes without Castes Tribes Brahmins Castes experiencing experiencing untochability untochability and land cultivation. Households with forward caste except Brahmins had the highest level of mean area of land holding as well as mean area of land cultivated in all three seasons viz Kharif, Rabi and Summer. E.g. during Kharif, the mean area of land holding among Forward Castes except Brahmins and the Brahmins were the 3.46 acres and 2.75 acres respectively which were contrasting figures with 1.54 acres among the Scheduled Caste households. Households without experiencing untouchablity have mean area of land holding and land cultivated almost equal with the households experiencing untouchablity There is a scope of further survey and research focusing this particular point.

Table 3.1 depicts the mean of the largest amount of loan taken by the households belonging to different castes in different places of residence during last 5 years preceding the date of survey in 2011-12. In metro-urban areas, average amount of that largest loan was the highest among the Other Backward Castes, which is more than 2 lakhs. In the other urabn areas and rural areas this was highest among the Brahmins, which was more Table 3.1: Mean of the largest amount of loan taken than 1.7 lakh and more than 1 lakh during 2007-08 to 2011-12, by castes, India. respectively. These amount were the Place of residence lowest among the Scheduled Castes Caste categories Metro Other who experienced untouchability Rural urban urban during the period; with the average Brahmin 141678 170705 102589 amounts of around 86 thousand, 52 Forward/General castes thousand and 33 thousand 121856 166000 97228 except Brahmins respectively in metro urban, other Other Backward Castes 209064 106691 73890 urban and rural areas of India. Among the scheduled castes who reported as Scheduled castes without experiencing 105651 80352 37824 not experienced untouchability had untouchability higher level of average amount in the Scheduled castes largest loan compared to those who experiencing 86857 52627 33509 untouchability experienced. These caste differentials in the average amount of the largest Scheduled Tribes 129222 150520 38292 loan generate successive questions Total 150190 117451 69070 that what were the differentials in the purposes of taking those loans and its sources. Table 3.2 presents the percent distribution in the purpose of the largest loan during 5 years preceding the period 2011-12 by castes. Overall, most of these largest loans were taken for agricultural purpose (19.5%). Among the higher castes viz Brahmins and Forward Castes except Brahmins, even among Other Backward caste this pattern is consistent with 25.8%, 23.8% and 20.2% respectively. However, among the Scheduled Castes who experienced untouchability, the largest loan was mainly taken for medical expenses (25.4%), then for marriage expenses (24.3%) and household consumption (14.2%). For the households without experiencing untouchability, the highest percentage of the largest load was taken for marriage expenses (21.6%), and then for medical expenses (19%) and for buying or improving house (15.9%). Table 3.2: Percent distribution in the purpose of taking the largest amount of loan during 2007-08, by castes, India Forward/ Scheduled Scheduled General Other Castes without Castes except Backward experiencing experiencing Scheduled Purpose of loan Brahmin Brahmin Castes untouchability untouchability Tribes Total Buy/Improve a 9.3 13.1 12.4 15.9 9.6 11.0 12.8 house Buy land 3.0 1.7 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.4 Marriage 16.3 13.1 19.6 21.6 24.3 20.4 18.8 expenses Agriculture/ Agricultural 25.8 23.8 20.2 11.6 10.5 26.3 19.5 equipments 8

Business 6.0 11.5 8.0 5.4 4.7 4.8 7.8 Household 9.8 11.7 12.6 14.1 14.2 15.6 12.7 consumption Vehicle 7.3 4.5 2.0 1.8 0.6 1.9 2.6 Educational 4.8 3.5 3.8 4.4 2.0 3.1 3.8 Medical expense 14.5 13.7 16.2 19.0 25.4 12.3 16.3 Others 3.2 3.4 4.1 5.0 7.3 3.1 4.2 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

The next scope of discussions comes what were the different sources of dependence for these loans. Was there any caste differential in that? From Table 3.3 we can understand the sources on which people had the dependency to obtain that highest amount of loan, by different castes. It gives the percent distribution of the sources of that highest amount of loan taken during 5 years preceding 2011-12, among different caste groups. Most of the Brahmin caste obtained loan from banks (42.5%) followed by friends or relatives (31%). The highest percentages of forward caste except Brahmins (41.6%) also took money from the banks. Other Backward Castes (30.4) mostly took that loan from friends or relatives (34.8%) followed by banks (30.4%). Percentage of people taking loan from money-lender has an increasing pattern, with the decrement of status in the caste ladder; thus, 30.6% of the Scheduled Caste who experienced untouchability depended on money-lenders in contrast to 8.6% Brahmins to obtain that highest amount of loan during the 5 years preceding 2011-12. Only 15.2% of those households experiencing untouchability could depend on bank for the loan compared to 42.5% Brahmins.

Table 3.3: Percent distribution of the source of obtaining the largest amount of loan during 2007-08, by castes, India. Scheduled Forward/ Castes Scheduled General Other without Castes Source of except Backward experiencing experiencing Scheduled loan Brahmin Brahmin Castes untouchability untouchability Tribes Others Total Employer 3.0 2.2 2.3 2.9 4.5 2.3 1.1 2.5 Money lender 8.6 11.7 21.5 22.2 30.3 19.0 23.0 19.6 Friend/ Relatives 31.0 31.9 34.8 36.0 36.6 36.4 16.6 34.2 Bank 42.5 41.6 30.4 22.4 15.2 26.7 38.9 30.8 NGO/ Community Credit/ 4.6 5.5 2.9 5.6 3.6 4.4 4.9 4.0 Self help group 1.8 3.2 4.4 8.1 7.1 6.4 9.4 5.0 Kishan credit card 6.8 2.2 2.5 0.8 1.0 3.2 2.7 2.3 Others 1.9 1.7 1.4 2.0 1.7 1.6 3.5 1.6 Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Discussion After more than 60 years of independence of India, people are still enclosed to groups which not only have distinct social identities creating differences and then leading discriminations in their social lives; but also they are enclosed to different economic privilege. Around 4% of Indian households reported that at least one member in their family experienced untouchability during 2011-12; and 42% of these households depended on non-agricultural wage labours followed by next 21% on agricultural wage labour as a main source of their livelihood; which is contrasting in the case of Brahmin households, among which, 32.5% depended on salaried works, followed by next 26.8% in cultivation. Mean land-holding by the forward castes was almost double of the mean land holding by the scheduled castes and untouchables. Enclosure of untouchables and other Scheduled castes in the works of waged labour, contrasting to enclosure of Brahmins and other forward castes in the salaried works and cultivation, huge gap in land holding between these two groups reflects the economic relations between these two ends of people, in which the forward castes represent relative positions of proprietors. The largest amount of loan taken during 5 years preceding 2011 was the lowest among the scheduled castes and the untouchables, but the highest percentage of that loan was taken for medical expenses, marriage and household consumption etc. Whereas, among forward castes, the purposes were mostly for agriculture, including buying of agricultural equipment and also for marriage expenses. Percentage of that loan taken for the purchase of items like vehicles and land was also the highest among Brahmins. The high dependency on bank by the forward castes and high dependency on money-lenders by the untouchables for taking that loan, reflects the differences in the social relations due to differences in their economic need and privilege.

Limitations of the study Even though this study could utilize the detail of the caste profiles of Indian households including untouchable households during 2011-12, the detailed analyses on the pathways of resource holding, occupations, social behaviors etc in which differences are structured and discriminations flow through, was not possible due to the unavailability of sample sizes in different dimensions. Moreover, the data is available only for 2011-12; therefore, detailed quantification of some related historical facts was also not possible. However, relying on the basic facts of existence of untouchability and its operations in modern India, and, the extend and pockets in which castes discriminations exist, there are scopes of further survey and research.

References:

Ambedkar B. R. (1916). “Castes In India: Their Mechanism, Genesis and Development”, paper presented at an Anthropology Seminar taught by Dr. A. A. Goldenweizer Columbia University. Text first printed in “Indian Antiquary” Vol. XLI (May 1917). Retrieved from- http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00ambedkar/txt_ambedkar_castes.html

Ambedkar, B. R. (1946). Who were the Shudras? How they came to be the Fourth Varna in the Indo Aryan Society. Retrieved from- http://www.ambedkar.org/ambcd/38A.%20Who%20were%20the%20Shudras%20Preface.htm

Thorat Amit and Joshi Omkar. (2015). “The Continuing Practice of Untouchability in India: Patterns and Mitigating Influences”, paper presented at Annual Meeting of Population Association of America, San Diego.