Page 116 - DSOC202_SOCIAL_STRATIFICATION_ENGLISH

Unit 6 : Caste

that different castes repel rather than attract each other. Repulsion is manifested in endogamy, Notes
commensal restriction, and social contact. This interpretation is, however, not true. We do not and
cannot find repulsion among castes because they need each other. Gough (cf. Leach, 1960 : 11)
views castes as “ranked birth-status groups which are usually endogamous and tend to be associated
with an occupation”. Senart (1930) has described caste as “a closed corporation, rigorously
hereditary, bound with others (castes) by common occupation, and equipped with a council that
rules its members by the sanction of certain penalties”. In this definition, the words ‘closed
corporation’ have been questioned. Besides, all castes do not have councils. Bailey and Srinivas
have viewed castes as structures and have avoided the definition of caste. Dutt (1931 : 3-4),
describing caste system has referred to restrictions on marriage, eating and drinking, occupation,
change in hereditary membership, and the hierarchical gradation of castes. Morris (1950 : 284)
also believes that a short definition of caste is not satisfactory; so it is more illuminating to talk in
terms of the characteristics of caste. He describes caste system as “characterised by hereditary
membership and endogamy and prescribing specific norms which regulate social interaction”.
Ghurye (1957 : 2-19) too has given similar features of the caste system. Besides, referring to
hereditary membership, caste councils, hierarchy and endogamy as important features of the caste
system, he also refers to the restrictions on feeding and social inter-course, lack of unrestricted
choice of occupation, and civil and religious disabilities. D’Souza (1969 : 72) has referred to the
definition of caste system as “the integration of the interacting and heterogeneous but internally
homogeneous hereditary groups into a structure of status hierarchy”. This concept not only
describes the caste system as a superior or subordinate relationship among hereditary groups in
a society, but also explains the conditions under which such a relationship takes place.
Singh (1974 : 319) holds that structurally, the caste system simultaneously manifests two tendencies :
one, segmental and other, organic. As a segmental reality, each caste or a sub-caste tends to
articulate mutual repulsion, social distance and social inequality, but as an organic system, the
caste segments are mutually interlinked by a principle of reciprocity through the jajmani system.
Bailey (1960) has referred to caste stratification as a ‘closed organic stratification’ in contradistinction
with the class principle which is based on ‘segmentary stratification’. In the former, the social
segments (castes or sub-castes) interact through cooperation and in the latter through competition.

Caste : Three Perspectives of the Study
The caste system in India has been studied with three perspectives : indological, socio-
anthropological and sociological. The indologists have viewed caste from the scriptural point of
view, social anthropologists from the cultural point of view, and sociologists from the social
stratification point of view.
The indological perspective takes its cue from the scriptures about the origin, purpose and future of
the caste system. Those who have used this perspective maintain that varnas have originated from
Brahma’s body and castes or jatis are fissioned units within the varna system, developed as the
result of hypergamy and hypogamy practices. Though the customs and the rituals, etc., to be
followed by different castes are prescribed in the Smrits written in about 200-100 B.C. but the
regional, linguistic, ethnic, and sectarian variations have gradually come to affect the ordering of
jati relationships. The object of the origin of castes, according to the indologists, was the division
of labour. Gradually, castes became more and more rigid and membership and occupation became
hereditary. The rigidity in the caste system is the result of the beliefs in karma (deeds) and dharma
(duties and obligations) which means that the motive force for the caste dogmas was religious.
The indologists further maintain that since castes are divine, they will continue to exist in future
(Verma, 1972 : 159).
The cultural perspective of the social anthropologists (Hutton, Risley, Kroeber) ramifies itself in
three directions : structural, institutional and relational. The structural view focuses its attention
on the origin of the caste system, its development, and the processes of change in the structure.

LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY 111