5 Basis of traditional Indian social structure and life cycle
Indelah Khan
Table of contents
Introduction
1. India‟s social structure
1.2 Varnas and castes
1.2.1 Origin of Varna and caste and its influence on structuring Indian society
1.2.2 Functions of caste system
2. Social changes
2.1 Sanskritization
2.2 Westernization
3. Life cycle
3.1 Ashrams
3.2 Family
Summary
Learning outcomes
- To understand the social structure of Indian Society
- To understand reasons and basis of modern Indian social structure
- To understand lifecycle of individuals ancient India
- To understand variance in the family and marriage system of India.
Introduction
India is a colossal country with vast cultural and social diversity as well as unity. From the Historical point of view it is evident that India has been a hub to immigrants from various parts of Asia and Europe. Altogether they form a cultural diversity which has undergone a varied modification to become India‟s integral part, forming a mosaic pattern of India‟s social and cultural structure.
Diversity is not only India‟s unique feature but also adds beauty to its internal core. Not only socially and culturally but also racially and religiously India is diversely very rich. No other country in world is as diversely rich as India. Talking about racial diversity one would be amazed to know that India contains elements from six main racial types: the Negrito, the Proto Australoid, the Mongoloid, the Mediterranean, the western Brachycephals and the Nordic. Religiously India holds faith from Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Jains, Jews, and Buddhists etc.
Social structure of a particular region is influenced by the cultural norms and values of the particular region. However, social stratification is not word of modern India but can be dated back to the Vedic times. Works of Manu‟s Dharmashastra (2nd-3rd century BC) and Kautilya‟s Arthashastra (324-296 BC) are the earliest known collections on the orchestration of Indian society and the influence of politico-economic sphere on functioning of Indian society. Similarly, Megasthenes (a Greek ambassador to the court of Chandragupta Maurya from 324 BC to 300 BC) documented the structure and customs of ancient Indian society. From these early studies it can be derived that Hinduism had major influence on stratification of Indian society. These traditional strata were carried forward to medieval India and passed on to modern India. This traditional variance among human beings motivated many Indian and non-Indian, especially British sociologists and anthropologists to investigate into roots of social stratification
1. India’s social structure
The early lifestyle and the religious textures of Hinduism are considered to give existence to the stratification of the primary Indian society. Traditionally Indian society is said to have three types of communities – tribal, caste and peasant.
1.1 Tribes
A tribe is a collection of families bearing a common name, speaking a common dialect, occupying or professing to occupy a common territory and is not usually endogamous, though originally it might have been so.
– Imperial Gazetteer of India
Tribes are geographically isolated community, concentrated in areas which have been more or less inaccessible. They have few external ties and speak a variety of dialects which can be shown to differ in various aspects from the major Indian languages. They practice a different set of religious beliefs which don‟t seem to have their roots in Hinduism. Tribal communities are said to be the most primitive form of social grouping of man. Tribal communities can be exemplified by the Munda of Chotanagpur, Naga of Nagaland, the Bhil of Rajasthan and Gujarat, the Gond of Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh and the Toda of Nilgiri hills in Tamil Nadu. . After tribesman started to widen their social interaction, different tribes converged into a common community. This lead to the elution of tribal identity of people and emergence of a larger social network called villages. Successively, the new form of human conglomeration was multi-sectioned with “castes or jatis” what is referred as Varna system.
Figure1: Families of different tribes from left to right: Munda of Chotanagpur, the Bhil of Rajasthan and Gujarat, Naga of Nagaland and the Toda of Nilgiri hills in Tamil Nadu.
1.2 Varnas and castes
Caste is a collection of families, bearing a common name, claiming a common descent from a mythical ancestor, human or divine, professing to following the same hereditary calling and regarded by those who are competent to give an opinion as forming a single homogeneous community.
– Herbert Risley
Human conglomerations, was multi-sectioned with “castes or jatis” what is referred as Varna system. Varna literally means color, originally referred to distinction between Arya and Dasa according to their fair and dark complexion respectively. According to Varna scheme there are only four castes excluding the untouchables all over India. As per this hierarchical classification, the three upper levels-the Brahman, the Kshatriya, and the Vaishya- are considered of supreme ethnic values followed by the Sudras (artisans and works man who perform non-polluting occupations). The first three castes are “twice born” as the men from them are entitled to undergo the sacred thread at the Vedic rite of upnayana, while Sudras are not. And at last, the lowest class of people known as Antyaja, (because they are classified outside the Varna system) or in the modern terms as the Dalit. Varna has provided a common social language which is considered good for India.
In modern India all the three communities prevail, although the concept of classification on account of occupation has diluted. However, it seems to have become a hereditary trait of a person i.e. passed onto offspring‟s from family.
1.2.1 Origin of Varna and caste and its influence on structuring Indian society
As per the Hindu mythology the four upper castes originated from the sacrifice of Purusha-the creator, the primordial being. Myths suggest that Purusha destroyed himself to incarnate beings of appropriate social order. These beliefs can be derived from the Vedic hymns in the purusha-sakta (Rig-Veda) which says that the Brahman Varna originated from the mouth of the purusha; the Rajanya (i.e. Kshatriya) his arms, the from thighs originated Vaisyas whereas origin of Sudras from his feet. Various other Vedic verses also support to the theory of the classification of the human beings into four varnas. However various authors strongly believe that these verses were incorporated in Vedas or wrongly translated in favor of a particular group to enforce their superiority over others. The myth goes on explaining stratification of the superior varnas as follows. The whole world consisted of Brahmans which got segregated on the basis of their acts and consequently gave rise to the four varnas and the other casts. Those who started living a sessile life and spend most of time in managing the socio-economic issues sustained their Brahman ethnicity whereas people who possessed attributes of courage, fighting skills and unmindful toward their religion became Kshatriyas. Those who spend their time in cattle breeding, agriculture or other self-relying occupations were categorized as Vaisyas. Those who led relatively loose life and indiscriminately opted all sort of professions for their maintenance and lacked purity of behavior became Sudras. As the ages passed, different sections of people started living a loose life, further dividing the varnas to castes. Caste may be defined as a hereditary endogamous group which decides the individual‟s status in the social stratification and his profession. In words of Nadeem Hasnain caste may be understood and explained as a form of social stratification which involves:
(i) A system of hierarchically ranked,
(ii) Closed,
(iii) Endogamous strata,
(iv) Ascribed membership,
(v) Restriction of contact between castes,
(vi) Mobility theoretically impossible.
Figure 2: On left hand side is shown the Varna classification whereas on right hand system is the caste classification as per Hindu mythology.
As previously mentioned the demographical boundaries suggest the variance in the caste system. However, travelling back through the history of India, the appropriate formation of regions and regional consciousness was developed only after the eighth century AD. In North India, Brahmans were divided on the basis of clan and their residence into following groups Kanyakubja, Sarayuparier and Maithila brahmanas residing by Kanauji, Sarayu River and Mithila respectively. Tomaras, Kacchavahas, Hadas and Chauhanas were tribes of Rajputs converted to sub-castes. Thus the number of castes, sub-castes kept increasing in medieval times. Modern times emerged with adding some new features to the caste system like addition and categorization on the basis of surnames. One particular caste or sub-caste came to acquire one, sometimes more, „surnames‟. However, as the time progressed many riots amongst the castes lead to further variation in the caste system adding further new castes. The Brahma-samajis acquired the status which is very similar to a caste. In modern times caste system has become complex. Substantial regional variation is found and hence it has been impossible to define it in a precise manner region, sub-region, economic status, nearness to political authority, craft, vocation, following a particular deity all have come to play a role in its formation and subsequent changes. Regarding the origin of caste system there are two theories one group of anthropologists and sociologists believe caste system was amplified and strongly implicated due to colonial imperialistic policies where as other group believes in the previously mentioned Hindu mythology. Among those who are protagonists of this later view, the prominent ones are Louis Dumont, G.S. Ghurye, Edmund Leach, and M.N. Srinivas. They see caste as a social or cultural phenomenon peculiar to the Indian society, more precisely to the Hindu society because among the non-Hindus it does not constitute the religious ideology despite the fact that they have also developed „caste like‟ stratification.
Strictly speaking, caste can be treated as a cultural phenomenon in the domain of social stratification which highlights the hierarchy of hereditary groups. These groups are segregated on the basis of caste endogamy, limitations on inter relation exchange of survival items and physical contact. Despite these limitations these hereditary groups are interdependent for trade on the basis of occupational division. As mentioned above the primary basis of this hereditary separation was on the basis of the pure and impure. Various other authors like Dipesh Chakarbaraty argue that the caste system prevailed due to colonial rule where in government policies were formulated to take census of people their ethnicity. Implanting the difference of castes in people made them to organize into groups and stratify the society. Various historians like M.N. Srinivas (1964), Romila Thapar (1979) and A.R. Desai (1984) have signified the mobility in Indian society. On the accounts of the previous literature it seems obvious to label the social mobility mostly with sanskritization, and somewhat to migration and religious conversion.
During British rule in India, a significant mobility was seen in the caste system. Some people who were financially and politically sound labeled themselves as elite people and moved up in the caste hierarchy from lower castes or tribes. Taking into account residence of the people belonging to a particular region, even in modern India it can be visualized that the occupational association of caste has marginally changed in rural areas whereas in urban areas the occupational labelling to a caste has diluted to a large extent. In rural areas, the priests are chosen among Brahmins; however, some of them have also taken to agriculture. Aristrocrats (Zamindars) belonged to 1st and 2nd levels of caste hierarchy generally worked as supervisory farmers or employed peasants and laborers to till their lands and harvest the grains and other food items. The peasants and labors were of lower castes and broadly worked on wage basis. Other occupations like carpenters and iron-smith continue with their traditional castes in rural areas. Comparing to rural areas, in urban areas, lower caste and upper caste people join same work place, industry, trade etc. In addition, the traditional occupations of a particular caste have been mostly shunned. Inter-caste cultural gatherings are mostly restricted in rural areas and to some extent allowed in urban areas, for example inter-caste marriage. However, if we take into considerations on broader scale, the limitations of drinking tea from a cup not touched by lower caste has diluted. Similarly sharing food and drink are allowed upto some range. Taking a very broad and sharp introspective view of the society in modern urban India only distinction is of wealth, status and political influence. A person belonging to schedule tribe or class can be higher official at any office where his subordinates can be of upper class. Social structure has been hugely influenced by the migration of people to bigger cities. Caste system has been utilized as a critical phenomenon to account for the vote bank gains. Marriages one of the most important factor in a community and culture. Marriages give rise to families and families broaden the kinships. Marriages are strictly intra caste, consequently the kinship remains intra caste. Hence, it can be said that caste system has undergone a huge variation. Hence we can further deduce that the caste is basically a closed system of stratification.
1.2.2 Functions of caste system
Caste system traditionally holds the following functions:
(i) It determines the occupation of various groups among the caste thereby reducing economic competition.
(ii)It strictly follows endogamy. Any member of the caste not abiding the rules is severely punished. Sometimes it becomes so aggressive that honor killing takes place. So marrying a person outside the caste is a hard nut to crack.
(iii) Jajmani system is the economic basis of the caste system. In this system, exchange of goods and services takes place through well defined division of labour. The higher landed castes, and the lower occupationally specialized castes also called service caste are traditionallybound by certain Jajmani obligations. Thehigher class (Jajman) is the owner of land; exchange the land produce against theservices provided by other castes.
(iv) Caste sometimes is also seen as a social and psychological resource for its members. A sense of solidarity and common consciousness becomes rescuing bait to fellow caste man.
2. Social changes
The first systematic attempt to define, analyze and understand the process of social change in Indian society was well understood by eminent Indian sociologist M N Srinivas in his significant and path breaking study in “Religion and society among the coorgs of south India (1952)‟‟. He was the first to give the concept and use of the word „sanskritization‟ in his above mentioned book. According to him Hindu caste system is neither static nor rigid that it can‟t be altered.
2.1 Sanskritization
Srinivas defines sanskritization as the “process by which a low caste or tribe or other groups takes over the customs, rituals, beliefs, ideology and life style of a higher caste and in particular „ twice born (dwija) caste.”
Hindu society is a stratified one, consisting of innumerable small groups trying to pass over higher groups by adopting the customs and ways of higher class. As the higher class is Brahmins it means their customs and lifestyle spread all over Hindus. While in the process of passing over, most often the lower class face hostility from the castes of middle strata, hence in some cases sanskritization may not lead to elevation in caste status and so the lower class continues to suffer the traditional social disabilities
Sanskritization imbibes a very wider sense of understanding covering almost every socio as well as economic perspective. It includes cultural and social mobility. From parents choosing groom for daughters to daughters choosing their life partners, from extreme Brahmanical practices to liberal and tolerant Brahmanical practices, from untouchability to equality etc.
2.2 Westernization
Westernization and sanskritization is almost the same concept just the former simpler. It‟s all the cultural and institutional innovations that came into political and cultural contact with the western nation such as Britain. In other words it is all the social changes that the Indian society underwent during the British colonial rule. The changes could be seen at different level –institutions, technology, ideology and values. There was change in atmosphere during British rule in India, not only there was negative change but a lot of positive development was also taking around. Beside political unrest there was new political culture and leadership in the country too. Establishment of scientific, technological, and political institutions emerged as boon to the Nation. The impact of Westernization could be seen in the form of nuclear family, social reforms, economic and political reforms. Setting up of postal facilities, railways, newspaper and periodicals etc have given fillip to pilgrimages, religious propaganda and caste and communal congregations. Thus westernizations acted as catalyst to sanskritization.
The most important impact of westernization was that many higher castes gave up their traditional life style. It was one of the important impacts of education.
3. Life cycle
It is said that the very foundation of Hindu social organization is both materialistic as well as spiritual. It is organized in such a way that man experiences both pleasure and divinity by practicing self denial, discipline then slowly moving to fulfilling his desires and needs and again moving to total abstinence from it and indulging only in religious practices through meditation and yoga.
In social anthropological parlance the four hierarchies of Varna, Guna, Purusharthas and Ashrams are described in terms of „role institutionalization‟, „charismatic endowment‟,‟ goal orientation‟ , and „life stages‟ and its value obligations respectively
Purusharthas are value themes, goals of life arranged in a hierarchical order to be persuaded by all individuals and social categories
The four chief aims of Purusharthas are:
1. Dharma (righteousness): It is a law of all moral actions, the manner of one’s duties, determined by caste, sex, and stage of life. Dharma applies in being a student, a householder, and, in attenuated form, a forest dweller.
2. Artha (wealth): is material success in life. It refers to all the means of acquiring worldly prosperity like power or wealth. The word artha can mean business, work, profit, utility, wealth, money, and also political experience and knowledge. It can involve practical wisdom at both the personal and public level. Thus it involves all the economic activities towards the acquisition of wealth. Though artha refers to security and materialistic aspect of life but at the same time a parallel stream of non acquisition and renunciation also run side by side.
3. Kama (desire): Kama refers to all desires in man seeking pleasure through satisfaction of senses, including sexual satisfaction. All the desires, instincts which has been laid on the needs of the flesh comes under Kama. Kama also includes aesthetic satisfaction. In spite of an emphasis on exercising control over senses, man always crave for indulgence in sexual pleasure. Hence a correct balance as to be struck between the needs of mind and body. The inclusion of Kama as one of the essentials elements of Purusharthas is the sign of its recognition.
4. Moksha (salvation or liberation): salvation from the cycle of birth and death is moksha. It signifies realization of the self.
3.1 Ashrams
According to the ancient Hindu Laws of Manu, there are four stages or “ashrams” of life, each lasting 21 (or 25) years.
The first stage (0-25) years – Brahmacharya/Student –This stage begins with a ceremony called upnayan sanskar (sacred thread ceremony). This is a learning stage. Person is referred Brahmchari‟ in this stage and live as an unmarried celibate, studies with a guru. Brahmchari is supposed to focus on education, character development, development of skills, discipline and non in artha and Kama.
The second stage (25-50) years – Grihastha/Householder – after completing Brahmacharya person enters to second stage called Grihastha where his marriage ceremony takes place. Since this is the stage where the basic trilogy of dharma, artha, Kama is translated into actions,this stage is critically very important. Person is obliged to fulfill the duties such as – reproduction, feeding the family by acquisition of wealth, providing education to his children,fulling duties towards society etc. beside this Grihastha is required to repay all the rina (debts). According to beliefs of Hinduism every person is born with certain debts such as Dev rina, Rishi rina, Pitra rina etc. so a person has to repay these debts through recitation of Veda, yagna etc.
The third stage (50-75) years – Vanaprastha/Hermitage – this stage is technically retirement stage .the person relinquishes the household duties and goes into the forest (or now in modern society, a quieter retreat) for to devote his time to religious pursuits, prayer, and meditation. The wife could accompany her spouse but abstinence from sex is practiced.
The fourth stage (75-100+) years – Sanyasa/Renunciate – this is a stage of total detachment from social life. The person leaves all worldly activity and engages the whole force of personality toward spiritual development and upliftment. One can become a guru atthis point. It is believed that Sanyasa is necessary for attaining moksha.
3.2 Family
For anthropologists and sociologists the primary focus is the effect of particular culture or norm on the individuals of particular region. Individuals grouped together in a particular structure and bond makes a family. Traditional Indian family is a joint family which has a large kinship group. Families have been categorized on the basis of residence or nature of marriage.
On the basis of this classification a flow chart has been given below portraying the types of families found in India. In rural India joint families are predominant where as in urban India both kinds of families i.e. nuclear and joint, are found. Joint family can be defined as one in which two or more successive generations live together in a common hearth. All the members of the joint family own the permanent property of the line in common and also hold a share of property on their account. Such families are generally patriarchal and patrilineal in nature, that is, oldest member (grandfather or father or grandmother) is the head of the house, holds responsibility for all members, takes all decisions and administers the property and the headship descends in the male line.
On the contrary, in modern towns nuclear families predominate wherein family consists of wife, husband and their children. Such families are also characteristically patriarchal and patrilineal. As said in the beginning that India is a diverse country with vast cultural diversity, so is the diversity in families. In many regions families are matrilineal, where the headship descends are in the female line such as in Kerala, Nagaland and Meghalaya. As we had quoted earlier that families begin with marriages. Depending on its nature, marriages are of various types such as monogamous, polygamous and polyandrous based on the number of partners; anuloma and hypogamous (between man of low caste and woman of high caste) hypergamous (between man of high caste and woman of low caste) or pratiloma based on an alliance between different castes. Traditionally, marriages were arranged amongst couple belonging to same caste and parental decision was final word. Even though marriages between the same castes were organized between different clans, Inter-caste marriage was highly forbidden in addition, marriages were forbidden between persons with a common paternal ancestor; however, this rule has never been broadly followed as is depicted by the historical records.
Generally monogamous marriages predominate in India, in which one person is married to only one person at a time; whereas polygamy is not prohibited. In ancient and mediaeval times the rich and powerful often had more than one wife. Polygamy was a common culture in ancient time where in marriages were done mostly for socio-political benefits. Two most sought examples are marriages of Chandragupta and Akbar. Many other reasons can be found for the reason of polygamy e.g. increased progeny, more sons etc. In modern India polygamy has been declared illegal. Only Muslims can marry four times that too with some preconditions.
Figure3: Classification of families. Above is flow chart depicting family classification on the basis of types or ways of marriage. Below is flow chart portraying classification of families on the basis of residence.
Figure 4: Diagram here shows fundamental structure of a family. The diagram portrays structure of a nuclear family. In joint family the structure is more complex wherein the hierarchy starts with head of family generally grandfather. These patterns can be further complicated, depending upon the integrity in relations like kinship and clan density.
Summary
India is the country with the vast cultural diversity, habituated by diverse ethnic groups. Social stratification has been established by Varna system wherein under influence of Hindu religion people were categorized on the basis of purity. This categorization leads to intra caste marriages and shaped the society. Division of labour is still prevalent in the Indian roots. The socio- economic, political and ritual axis of the caste system viz. Jajmani system in rural India is crumbling. Life cycles of individuals have gone through a drastic change due to education and westernization. The traditional four stages of life have been transformed into modern form. Joint family tradition seems to be over and nuclear family has taken a toll on it. Overall the Indian society is changing by time.
| you can view video on Basis of traditional Indian social structure and life cycle | |
References
- Carol Upadhya ,1998, conceptualizing the concept of community in Indian social science: An anthropological perspective
- Dube, S.C., 1990, Indian Society
- M N Srinivas, 1998, Caste in modern India
- M N Srinivas, 1998, Social change in modern India
- M N Srinivas, India social structure
- Monaghan, J. and Just,P.,2000, social and cultural anthropology : a very short introduction
- Nadeem Hasnain, 2003, Indian Anthropology
- Nadeem Hasnain, 2004, Indian Society and Culture: Continuity and Change
- Nadeem Hasnain, tribes and caste
- Nadeem Hasnain,, 2002, Tribal India
- Nilika Mehrotra School of Social Systems Jawaharlal Nehru University, Indian social system
- Surinder S. Jodhka, 2000, Sociology/Anthropology, Nation and The “Village Community”