Coined and popularised by M.N. Srinivas, an eminent social anthropologist in his book Religion and Society Among the Coorgs of South India (Oxford, 1952), Sanskritisation refers to a change in the hierarchical caste system when certain castes that are ranked low in the caste hierarchy are able to elevate and enhance their position by adopting and emulating the socio-cultural beliefs, values, habits, customs and rituals of castes that are ranked higher than them.
Based on his ethnographic research in Rampura village in Karnataka, Srinivas produced a detailed explanation of the phenomenon of Sanskritisation in ‘A Note on Sanskritisation and Westernisation (Far Eastern Quarterly, 1956)’. Initially, ‘Sanskritisation’ referred to the lower castes’ adoption of the “Brahmanical” ways of life. But gradually, the process also involved the adoption of the practices and rites of the locally dominant caste in a particular region, which included non-Brahmin castes which were politically powerful, socio-economically influential and ritually higher in the local caste hierarchy.
To gain social mobility
Srinivas pointed out how in a caste structure with rigid and hereditary placements/ranks, Sanskritisation became a process through which mobility in caste positions/roles became possible for certain castes. He also warned that the process itself did not always result in higher social status for such castes. Other factors such as economic well-being, political power, education, and establishment of literary/historical evidence for their affiliation to/descent from a particular caste/caste lineage were also important for their aspirations for higher social positions, he said.
Most importantly, for the Dalits, Sanskritisation did not guarantee higher social stature and did not lead to improvement in their everyday life, he said. This showed how the caste system continued to be particularly exclusionary for the Dalits, and efforts to raise their social status were opposed and stopped by castes ranked above them.
A. M. Shah in ‘Sanskritisation Revisited (Sociological Bulletin, 2005)’ wrote how a closer reading of Srinivas’ explanation of Sanskritisation informs us of it being a long-drawn phenomenon that is not restricted to the caste hierarchy/religious structure alone, but also encompasses a wider social and cultural process that is integrative of, and not limited to, the Hindu caste order. He referred to the operation of non-religious/caste values and institutions in influencing communities that are part of the Hindu caste structure.
Research in the field of caste studies traversing various disciplines such as political science, sociology, economics, anthropology, intellectual history, cultural/religious studies have dealt comprehensively with the aspect of Sanskritisation, studying how castes (lower castes and Dalits) in different regions of India have gone through the process of “getting Sanskritised” in their efforts towards establishing an equal, honourable, and dignified social life for themselves, and have brought forth mixed narratives of success in this process.
Multiple angles
While some studies brought about narratives of ‘Sanskritisation’ as civil campaigns of dissent, resistance and challenge to/against the hierarchical and hereditary nature of the caste structure, other research in caste studies took note of the developments happening in Indian socio-polity, which opened up a range of socio-political issues/changes not entirely related to Sanskritisation.
These explained how modernity, political independence, social reform movements, agrarian class relations, market forces, family structure, electoral politics and power, constitutional provisions and legislations, civil society actions, anti-caste struggles, globalisation and other such factors have become significant in studying and understanding the caste system and social relations in the Indian society. Srinivas himself had hinted at the impact that some of these factors may have on caste relations in the changing Indian society.
Such social and political developments in the Indian society have indicated the problems in assessing and analysing caste relations and the Hindu social structure through the exclusive prism of Sanskritisation. They convey how, even when Sanskritisation allows for social mobility through elevation to a relatively higher position in the caste hierarchy, it only modifies the rank/position of communities in the caste hierarchy and reinforces graded inequalities and practices in the name of caste, while not offering a strong critique and denunciation of the caste system as a whole.
To understand caste relations through Sanskritisation alone is to ignore and invisibilise the existence of a pre-/non-caste, egalitarian society and the role of the anti-caste struggles which did not follow the cultural-ritual trajectory of Sanskritisation.
On the other hand, these struggles aimed at not imitating or adapting the supposedly ‘superior’ socio-cultural values of the higher castes — values and practices that are casteiest, discriminatory and exploitative. Instead, they aimed at contesting caste norms and practices and at destroying the very structure of caste and instituting a casteless, caste-free society.
The rise of anti-caste politics
Unlike the Sanskritisation model that reifies the unequal and differential caste relations that upholds the Hindu caste order and advances the interests of the ‘caste privileged’, the discourse of anti-caste/casteless socio-politics emphasises the destruction of the caste system and all the other undemocratic/inegalitarian values, customs and institutions associated with it.
The importance of these struggles lies in moving away from ‘caste-embodied individuals/groups’ to one of ‘casteless humans’.
Indian society continues to witness movements of both the types – Sanskritisation as well as anti-caste struggles. Each of these processes requires a separate and also integrated study and analysis, taking into consideration socio-economic, cultural and political factors.
Dhivya Sivaramane is pursuing doctoral research in Political Science at University of Delhi
COMMents
SHARE