Page 252 - DSOC201_SOCIAL_STRUCTURE_AND_SOCIAL_CHANGE_ENGLISH

Unit 12: Processes of Change

12.1 Sanskritization Notes

Srinivas has defined ‘Sanskritization’ as a process by which the low castes take over the beliefs,
rituals, style of life, and other cultural traits from those of the upper castes, specially the Brahmins. In
fact, Srinivas has been broadening his definition ot Sanskritization from time to time. Initially, he
described it as “the process of mobility of lower castes by adopting vegetarianism and teetotalism to
move in the caste hierarchy in a generation or two (1962: 42). Later on, he redefined it as “a process by
which a low caste or a tribe or other group changes its customs, rituals, ideology, and way of life in
the direction of a high twice-born caste” (1966: 6). The second connotation of Sanskritization is thus
much broader because first Srinivas talked of imitation of mere food habits, rituals and religious
practices but later on he talked of imitation of ideologies too (which include ideas of karma, dharma,
pap, punya, moksha, etc.)
In the process of imitation of customs and habits of high castes or Brahmins by the low castes, sometimes
even when the low castes followed some such practices which according to the present rational
standards are considered to be good and functional, they discard such customs and in their place
adopt those ideas and values of Brahmins which according to the present standards are considered
degrading and dysfunctional. Srinivas has given some such examples from his study in Mysore. Low
castes are liberal in the spheres of marriage, sex, and attitudes towards women. They permit divorce,
widow remarriage, and post-puberty marriage. But Brahmins practise prepuberty marriage, regard
marriage indissoluble, restrict widow from remarrying and expect her to shave her head and shed all
jewellery and ostentation in clothes. They prefer virginity in brides, chastity in wives, and continence
and self-restraint in widows. But as a low caste rises in the hierarchy and its ways become more
sanskritized, it adopts the sex and marriage code of the Brahmins. Sanskritization results in harshness
towards women. Another example of taking up irrational practice is that a Brahmin and a high caste
Hindu wife is enjoined to treat her husband as a deity. A wife is expected to take her meal after the
husband had perform a number of vratas (religious fasts) to secure a long life for husband, regard the
importance of having sons a religious necessity, and so forth. Sanskritization involved taking up all
such beliefs and practices by the lower castes. These examples thus point out that Sanskritization is
nothing but a blind and irrational imitation of the customs, practices, habits, and values of higher
castes, specially Brahmins.
Could it be said that the process of de-Sanskritization is also possible? Srinivas has conferred that “it
is not inconceivable that occasionally the de-Sanskritization of the imitating castes may take place”.
Sanskritization and Brahmanization
Srinivas (1985: 42-43) preferred the term ‘Sanskritization’ to ‘Brahmanization’ because of several
reasons: (1) Sanskritization is a broader term while Brahmanization is a narrower term. In fact,
Brahmanization is subsumed in the wider process of Sanskritization. For instance, the Brahmins of
the Vedic period consumed alcohol (soma), ate beef, and offered animal sacrifices. But these practices
were given up by them in the post-Vedic times, perhaps under the influence of Jainisim and Buddhism.
Today, by and large, Brahmins are vegetarians and teetotalers; only the Kashmiri, Bengali and Saraswat
Brahmins eat non-vegetarian food. Had the term ‘Brahmanization’ been used, it would have been
necessary to specify which particular Brahmin group was meant. (2) The reference group or the
agents of Sanskritization are not always Brahmins. In fact, it were Brahmins who, entrusted with the
authority to declare laws, had prohibited members of other castes in following the customs and rites
of Brahmins. But such prohibitions did not prevent the lower castes in sanskritizing their customs
and rites. Srinivas has given the example of low castes in Mysore (South India) who adopted the way
of life of Lingayats; who are not Brahmins but who claim equality with Brahmins. The smiths of
South India, call themselves Vishwakarma Brahmins, wear the sacred thread and have sanskritized
their rituals. However, some of them still eat meat and take alcohol because of which many castes,
including some untouchable castes, do not accept food or water from their hands (1985: 43). Thus,
since the low castes imitated Kshatriyas, Vaisyas, Jats, etc., in different regions of the country, the
term ‘Brahmanization’ was not considered adequate enough for explaining the process of cultural
and social mobility.

LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY 247