Opposing Varnadharma
The Non-brahmin-Self-respect movement’s tireless opposition to the caste order and varnadharma is legion. Its radicalism is not without its debts, though and the pages of Revolt demonstrate its making. Periyar Ramasami was resolutely opposed to varnadharma and even while a member of the Indian National Congress spoke out against discrimination and the role played by faith and belief in obscuring and worse legitimizing it. When he dissociated himself from Congress, and began the Self-respect movement, he displayed a rare anger and courage in taking on what he habitually termed ‘political brahminism’, and which eventually came to be opposed by several in the Non-brahmin-Self-respect movement (See Nationalism and Anti-caste Radicalism).
Periyar’s younger comrades many of whom wrote in Revolt address the conundrum of varnadharma from several different points of view, all of which were present in the movement’s Tamil journals as well. Yet Revolt is somewhat different in that it addressed larger ideological questions consistently as much as it did the activities of the Self-respect movement.
As the articles in the first section of this part of the book make evident, resistance to varnadharma took several forms. Untouchability, as experience, precept and practice were obviously very important matters of concern and the articles grouped under this head indicate both social empathy and anger. The caste Hindu was equally a matter of concern for the self-respecters, and in that age of caste mobilization the anti-caste radical could not obviously ignore the issues being raised by caste groups; besides, these groups did serve as forums for remonstrating against caste as well. The section on the Caste Hindu captures this productive paradox.
Our second section comprises articles on anti-caste radicalism in the rest of the sub-continent and allows us a fascinating glimpse into the making of a fraternity of minds and people across linguistic lines. These articles also indicate that anti-caste radicalism was widely prevalent, and in and across other political and social forums. The articles on the SNDP Yogam are rich in detail and point to a constellation of events that brought together anti-caste radicals in the Tamil and Malayalam-speaking regions of the South: the temple entry debates, the child marriage legislation and the ill-timed visit of Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya to the Southern Provinces where his views were continuously challenged. This coming together, it must be emphasized, was as much on account of a shared radicalism with respect to gender concerns. The essays devoted to Dr Ambedkar and the Samata movement in the Bombay province are particularly interesting, addressing, as many of them do, the Parvati temple satyagraha.
It is interesting that Revolt featured articles on the activities of the Jat Pat Torak Mandal, the anti-caste movement founded by the Arya Samaj. Though aware of the peculiar twist given by Arya Samaj ideologues to the question of social change in Hindu society, which was almost always discussed in the context of the social degeneration brought about by Islam, self-respecters were admiring of the arguments against varnadharma, proposed by the Mandal and the Samaj. They were wary of the Arya Samaj’s shuddhi and sangathan activities, yet did not baulk from considering seriously the Samajists’ opposition to caste hierarchy.
As much given to satire as critique, Revolt carried regular articles, mock-conversations and features on faith, unreason, superstition and custom, all of which called attention to the pretensions of a brahmin priesthood and the inanities of belief. Importantly, these criticisms were informed by a sense of what was often lost and elided in social practice – especially the value and worth of labour that fed a parasitic intellectual class. They also indicate how in a routine sense our common humanity is compromised by custom, ritual and everyday unkindness. Witty and tongue-in-cheek, these instances of anti-clerical atheism in the service of opposing the Brahmin and his creed –our third section – offer a study in persuasive reason and are akin to some of Dr Ambedkar’s arguments, on graded inequality and his views on the theory of karma.
The fourth section is devoted to Brahminism, to what the self-respecters opposed chiefly and contains several short pieces on the privileges granted Brahmins in the Travancore state, which unlike Baroda and Kolhapur did not always have enlightened rulers who took the part of ‘shudras’ and ‘panchamas’. Appended to this section is also a remarkable set of articles on the subject of temple entry, much discussed during this time. These contain well-argued and ingenuous indictments of privilege and caste.
The fifth section comprises a set of articles on Tamil Saivism, whose character and ideals were subject to rigorous critique by the Self-respecters, both on grounds of doctrine and justice. Self-respecters objected to Tamil Saivites, all of whom were Non-brahmins, sporting Brahminical habits and adopting Brahminic scriptural ideals as their own. They argued that Tamil Saivism, whatever it may have been in history, had since become a pale replica of Brahminism, of the sort preached by Adi Shankara. If Saivites desired to claim a spiritual identity for themselves, they needed to re-think their beliefs and adopt a new philosophy, based on self-respect, equality and unqualified fraternity. The articles in this section feature crucial aspects of this debate that brought together issues of caste, faith, culture and history.
Our last section is on varnadharma and opposition to it, both as principle and practice and comprises witty as well as resonant diatribes against either.
