Casting dreams
By By Ashok Malik
May 20 2010
At one level, the idea of a caste enumeration of Indians is extremely
persuasive. For better or worse, many social welfare schemes, such as
those offering reservations in government jobs and in educational
institutions, adopt caste parameters. As such, counting how many
belong to which caste, and which sub-castes or families benefit from
the quota system more than others, would seem fair and useful.
The question is should this task be meshed with the Census? Would it
be better if individual states did their own assessments of other
backward caste (OBC) communities? Every state has a different OBC
list. An OBC in state X may be a non-OBC in state Y. The Union
government, when it comes to its reservation matrix, has a still
separate classification of OBCs. As such, is a national count of OBCs
— as part of a national count of Indians, which is what the Census is
— the best route to follow?
There is one other factor. The Census is a collation of voluntarily
offered information, which is not contested. However, to ascertain
whether an individual is an OBC or otherwise is not as simple a
process. It is necessarily investigative and interrogative. In the
absence of pre-defined metrics, it is likely that a very large number
of people will declare themselves OBC in the hope of benefiting from
quotas. Of course, this will later be challenged and fraudulent claims
will be weeded out. Yet, the government is inviting a problem upon
itself.
Indeed, it is astonishing the decision to include a caste or at least
an OBC count in the 2011 Census has been taken without adequate public
debate. There has been no wider consultation on not just the
desirability and long-term implications of such a count but, more
important, on the methodology.
Is self-declaration of one's caste the solution? If so, this can be
decidedly tricky. Take the history of Punjabi khatris, a community to
which the Prime Minister of India belongs. Understanding and studying
the origins of Punjab khatris has long been a passion for Rajesh
Kochhar, a former government scientist who now lives in Chandigarh. I
first interviewed Kochhar about a decade ago on an entirely unrelated
matter. After the formal questions and answers were over, we got
chatting. He quizzed me on my surname and family background and
correctly surmised that I too was a Punjabi khatri. In his spare time
he was researching the community, he said, and attempting to trace its
history and migration patterns.
Some years later, Kochhar sent me the draft of a long essay ("On the
origin of the Punjabi khatris"), which he later published on his
website. The essay has an interesting and, given today's context,
pertinent reference to the Census process of the late 19th century and
how it affected Punjabi khatris. In 1885, the British — "with their
fetish for classification", writes Kochhar — decided to fit all Indian
castes into the old framework of four varnas.
A field survey was carried out, cataloguing manners, customs, rituals
and marriage practices of various tribes, castes and sub-castes.
Supervising the project was H.H. Risley, a civil servant posted in
Bengal. In 1891, he published his findings as The Tribes and Castes of
Bengal. Risley was rather dismissive of the khatris: "If… it is at all
necessary to connect the khatris with the ancient fourfold system of
castes, the only group to which we can affiliate them is the
vaishyas".
This led to an uproar. Khatris saw themselves as kshatriyas. Soon the
matter was politicised. The ruling dynasty of Burdwan was Punjabi,
having descended from a family of Kapoors that migrated to Bengal in
the 17th century. The Kapoors were khatris. One of their opponents was
"one Babu Jogendra Nath Bhattacharya, MA". He was charged with
influencing Risley's conclusions and humiliating khatris.
Remedial action had to be taken. In June 1901, Raja Banbihari Kapoor,
a courtier of the Maharaja of Burdwan, chaired a three-day conference
in Bareilly of "more than 400 representatives of the numerous khatri
sabhas, committees and associations scattered over the country". Here,
he accused Bhattacharya of "a personal grudge against the Burdwan
Raj".
Khatris are also found in large numbers in modern Uttar Pradesh. In
the build-up to the 1901 Census, this province became the battleground
for khatri mobilisation. Census officials were petitioned and offered
reams of documents making the case that khatris could not possibly be
classified as vaishyas.
The result was anti-climactic. The authorities sought to put khatris,
kurmis and kayasthas in a new group: "Castes allied to kshatriyas who
are considered to be of high social standing, though their claim is
not universally admitted". For the khatris, this was a nightmare. As
Kochhar writes, they believed they were entitled to straightforward
upper caste status because, traditionally, their Saraswat Brahmin
purohits "accepted not only uncooked food but also cooked food from
khatris".
Today, the entire episode may seem comic but it would be worth posing
a counterfactual. What if the British proposal of 1901 had gone
through and khatris and kurmis been classified as related/similar
castes? Three-quarters of a century later, would that have made
khatris part of the OBC collective in North India? Would that have
made Manmohan Singh a Mandalite Prime Minister? Would it have entitled
me, and my children, to OBC quotas?
There is a broader issue here. Each caste has its own mythology, its
own cherished and sometimes overstated beliefs and its individual
sense of where it stands in a caste hierarchy that is more or less
unique to it. This is a dynamic process and changes from time to time,
given social and economic conditions. After Partition, refugees from
both west Punjab and east Bengal "changed" their caste and
manufactured new, "higher" identities. What if they choose the Census
of 2011 to go back to their original OBC or reserved-category castes?
What if some khatris now insist on being counted alongside kurmis,
cite government records from 1901, and demand quotas under the Mandal
regime?
This Census could be fun.
- Ashok Malik can be contacted at malikashok@gmail.com
------------------------------------
----
INFORMATION OVERLOAD?
Get all ZESTCaste mails sent out in a span of 24 hours in a single mail. Subscribe to the daily digest version by sending a blank mail to ZESTMedia-digest@yahoogroups.com, OR, if you have a Yahoo! Id, change your settings at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTMedia/join/
PARTICIPATE:-
On this list you can share caste news, discuss caste issues and network with like-minded anti-caste people from across India and the world. Just write to zestcaste@yahoogroups.com
TELL FRIENDS TO SIGN UP:-
If you got this mail as a forward, subscribe to ZESTCaste by sending a blank mail to ZESTCaste-subscribe@yahoogroups.com OR, if you have a Yahoo! ID, by visiting http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTCaste/join/
Also have a look at our sister list, ZESTMedia: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTMedia/Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTCaste/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTCaste/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
ZESTCaste-digest@yahoogroups.com
ZESTCaste-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
ZESTCaste-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
No comments:
Post a Comment