Notes on Indian Affairs/Volume II/LXI
No. LXI.
ON CASTE.
This is a wide subject, difficult to be understood even by those who have mixed much among the people, and gradually acquired their knowledge, as it were, piecemeal; and there are few subjects concerning which so many erroneous notions prevail. It would be out of the question to attempt to give in the limits of a paper such as this, a complete account of caste, and of the effects which have resulted from its institution; all I propose to do is to offer a few remarks, the result of many years’ observation.
As has been more than once remarked, if all the English in India would do this, instead of speculating and theorizing on partial information, we should soon possess materials for composing a work containing much more accurate knowledge relative to India, its people, and customs, than any which at present exists. Let me refer to No. XXXIV., which describes the various nations into which the Indian Peninsula is divided, and alludes to the difference in their manners and customs, and in many cases in their language; and should a resident of the Madras or Bombay Presidencies ever cast his eye on this paper, and be ready to exclaim at its want of accuracy, let him recollect that the observations are the result of a residence in Bengal, and chiefly in the upper provinces of that presidency.
The caste is a division of the Hindus into four principal classes,—Brahmin, Kshutriya or commonly Chuttree, Voishya or commonly Bais, and Shoodra or Soodur. According to the sacred books, the Brahmins were produced from the mouth of the deity Brahma, the Kshutriya from his arms, the Voishyas from his thighs, and the Shoodras from his feet. According to which allegory, the Hindus have assigned the priesthood and work of legislation to the Brahmins; the Kshutriyas fill the executive departments, and are also the military tribe; the Voishyas were to be employed in trade and commerce; while the Shoodras were devoted to all kinds of servile employments, and especially to serve the Brahmins. It is at the present day impossible to discover the origin of this division, and the time when it was instituted. It bears some affinity to the Roman classification of patricians and plebeians, and was probably established by the arbitrary order of some powerful prince, after the people had made considerable advances towards civilization; for it could hardly have existed in a very rude state of society. The people attribute it, as they are apt to do most things of which they can give no account, to the gods[1].
But the caste of the present day is very different from what is above described. The second and third orders do not now exist as separate classes; the very names are unknown as conveying the original meaning, and the people are all comprised in two classes,—the Brahmin and the Shoodur; at the same time that thousands are hardly acquainted with the latter name. The castes now existing are very numerous, and, with the subdivisions, would probably amount to some hundreds in the Bengal Presidency alone, almost every district containing some which are not known in the adjoining province. Many of these owe their separation from the original sect and specific denomination to mere accident; the latter is not unfrequently derived from the province or parish in which a man who has left his original name has settled. Some have arisen from ancestors who had forfeited their original caste and established a new one; others from the illegitimate offspring of parents of different castes. The origin of that immense class, the Rajpoots of Rajwara or Rajpootana, who claim a descent from the sun, is nowhere provided for in the theoretical classification by the Brahmins; they would be extremely indignant to be denominated Shoodras, yet they certainly do not belong to any of the three first orders. Col. Tod endeavours to trace their origin from Scythia.
Formerly, exclusion from caste was a much more serious affair than it is now. Still it is probable, that the evils which a person suffered from loss of caste have been greatly exaggerated; and that he who forms his ideas of the misery of an excommunicated outcast from the description given in Southey’s Curse of Kehama will have a very erroneous notion of the real state of the case. Caste is partly a religious and partly a civil distinction, and, in the present day, among the people in general, has degenerated to little more than this, that if a man do certain things he is excluded from society until he give a feast to those of his own tribe, which procures his restoration. According to the shasters (see Ward, Vol. I., page 149):—“The offences by which caste is lost, are, the eating with persons of inferior caste; cohabiting with women of low caste; eating flesh[2], or drinking spirits; partaking of that which has been prepared by a person of an inferior order; dealing in things prohibited by the shasters, as cow-skins, fish, &c. Persons may sink lower in caste in cases where they do not become entire outcasts. A Brahmin, by officiating as priest to a Shoodra, does not become a Shoodra, but he sinks into a despised order of Brahmins.”
But there is an infinity of petty absurdities which, among some of the people, chiefly amongst the lowest classes, and especially among the servants of the English in Calcutta, are sufficient to make a set exclude one of their members from their mess,—the sole object being to exact a dinner from him; in this respect the lower classes of Muhammedans of Bengal have just as must caste as the Hindus; many of them even worship at Hindu temples.
It has often been said that the institution of caste is one of the greatest scourges of the country; that it dooms large classes of men to a mental and bodily degradation, in which they are for ever excluded from the learning and honours of the country; and that it has proved a bar to improvement in arts and sciences. To a certain extent, its effects may have had the injurious effect described, but infinitely less than is usually supposed. It is generally conceived that the caste ties a man down to follow his father’s business: this is a most erroneous idea. Most men do commonly follow the occupation to which they have been brought up; it is grown into a custom, and in fact is but the natural course where a father bequeaths his business to his son; but it involves no obligation to do so. In England it is not uncommon for a clergyman, a lawyer, or a soldier, to educate his sons for his own profession; the business of tradesmen and shopkeepers, is almost always carried on by one of the sons during his father’s life-time, and continued by him after his death. So it is in India. It is true that the priesthood is the portion of the Brahmins, but even to this there are exceptions, and in other classes there is a considerable latitude. There is nothing, for instance, to prevent a common shopkeeper (bunnea), from rising up to be a wealthy merchant, should his affairs prosper; and, on the other hand, the family of a once rich merchant will sometimes sink down into the situation of servants. Even a choomar or a mater (currier and sweeper), instead of contenting himself with the menial offices to which he was born, will, if he be an aspiring character, seek and obtain a situation in the police or the army, and may rise to high rank. I have known a choomar to be a commissioned officer. So among bunneas, cowherds, gardeners, ploughmen, boatmen, common day-labourers, and others, may be constantly found one brother pursuing his hereditary vocation, and another entering the army, or hiring himself as a domestic servant. I have seen a bunnea who, having failed as a shopkeeper, hired himself as a boatman; and among the crew of one boat consisting of ten men, were actually found the following variety of castes:—two Rajpoots, four Kuhars, one Kisan, one Goojur, one Bhat, and only one regular mullah, or boatman by profession[3].
There are other circumstances besides the caste, which I am inclined to think have had a much greater effect in throwing difficulties in the way of the lower orders, and preventing able and intelligent individuals among them from rising in the scale of society. Their poverty, and the circumstance that the business of a large portion of India has, for several centuries, been carried on in a foreign language, for the acquisition of which the lower classes have neither time nor means, must have operated very strongly.
It would be almost a hopeless attempt to define, within any exact limits, the institution of caste, or its practical operation, so as to give a clear and accurate idea of the subject: its influence is so extensive, so minute, and so intricate, as almost to defy generalization: all that can be done is to endeavour to describe, as far as one’s knowledge extends, its peculiarities in detail, both what it is, and what it is not. None of the works yet written on the subject convey any clear idea of it; the authors have almost all fallen into the same mistake that Government has done, regarding the Hindu law. They have given us a picture drawn from the Hindu shasters, and the representations of a few bigoted pundits. Now few things can bear less resemblance to each other, than these dicta and the customs which exist in practice. From the former we learn that the Shoodras are made for the service of the Brahmins, and that they are never to rise in the scale of society; yet, in practice and reality, there is nothing to prevent a Shoodra from rising to the highest rank or wealth. There have been many instances of men of the lowest ranks attaining even to sovereignty, nor did they owe their exaltation to the assistance of the English or Muhammedans, who might be supposed free from such prejudices. The Mahratta rajahs, most of whom are of very low caste, fought their way to their respective thrones against the Muhammedans, and at a period when the English were only known as foreign merchants at some of the sea-ports.
Again we are told that (see Ward, Vol. I., page 66.) “A Brahmin might be imprisoned, banished, or have his head shaved, but could not be put to death for any crime whatsoever. If a Shoodra assumed the Brahminical thread, he was to be severely fined. If he gave frequent molestation to a Brahmin, he was to be put to death. If a Shoodra committed adultery with the wife of a Brahmin, he was to be bound upon a hot iron plate, and burnt to death. If a Brahmin stole a Shoodra, he was to be fined; but if a Shoodra stole a Brahmin, he was to be burnt to death. If a Shoodra sat on the carpet of a Brahmin, the magistrate, having branded him, was to banish him the kingdom. If a Shoodra, through pride, spat upon a Brahmin, his lips were to be cut off. If a person of this caste plucked a Brahmin by the hair, or by the beard, or seized him by the neck, the magistrate was to cut off both his hands. If he listened to reproaches against a Brahmin, hot lead was to be poured into his ears. If a Shoodra beat a magistrate, he was to have an iron spit run through him, and to be roasted alive; a Brahmin for such an offence was to be fined. The Institutes of Munoo prescribe that ’a once-born man (that is, any other than a Brahmin) who insults the twice-born (Brahmins) with gross invectives, ought to have his tongue slit; if he mention their names and classes with contumely, as if he say, “O thou refuse of Brahmins,” an iron style, ten fingers long, shall be thrust red-hot into his mouth. Should he, through pride, give instructions to the priests concerning their duty, let the king order some hot oil to be poured into his mouth and ears[4].’”
All this is horrible enough, certainly, and abundance of similar dogmas are to be found in the Hindu sacred books, were it, or had it been ever enforced. It is impossible to say it never was; but the probability is that, at most, it might have occurred once in a century, under the dominion of some very bigoted prince, ruled by some still more bigoted Brahmin. These sort of dicta exist not in the present day; nor have they been, perhaps, for centuries, held in any more estimation, terror, or respect, practically, than the bulls or anathemas issued by Pope Gregory the Seventh are at this moment in England. It is true they are part of Hindu law, and Ward has, with his usual prejudice and illiberality towards the Hindus, published those above, and many others, together with his own comments, in which he has exaggerated the evil as much as possible, so as to give an impression that they are at this moment the practical law of the land. That the above cruel penalties should form part of the Hindu law is not surprising, when we consider that Hindu law is nothing but a collection of dogmas, written at various times, by different individuals among the Brahmins, who each wrote what he pleased from the dictates of his own bigoted, ignorant, and intolerant spirit; but whether, and to what extent, they were ever enforced, is a very different question.
So far from its being the truth that the Shoodras are condemned for ever to serve the Brahmins, it depends much less upon caste than upon the wealth of the parties, which shall serve the other. The low caste rajah never found even the Brahmin at all backward to enter his service; and were even a choomar or a sweeper to acquire considerable wealth, he would experience no difficulty in procuring Brahmins to serve him as lacqueys, cooks, or in other menial capacities. We learn from books that to a Brahmin the very touch of a Shoodra is pollution, and that he must immediately purify himself by bathing; what is it in practice? The English are regarded upon a par with the very lowest natives in point of caste, yet a Brahmin servant in the service of an Englishman will not hesitate to bring him his shoes, or a glass of water, or even to take the glass away after he has drunk from it. I have myself seen in attendance upon an Englishman as valets-de-chambre, instead of bearers, a Brahmin, a Rajpoot, a Gosain, and a Moosulman, all of whom performed all the services which usually fall to bearers, except carrying the palanquin. It is much more among the lower castes that difficulties are started than among the higher, just as one sees a man whose rank in society among us is established, least afraid of having it called in question. I have been entertained and have passed the night at the house of a Brahmin who prepared a dinner for me: to my infinite surprise, when the meal was served in his own dishes, I observed a fowl-curry. I expressed my regret that he should, out of civility, have done anything disagreeable or annoying to his peculiarities of caste; observing that I could have dined very well upon bread and vegetables. He smiled, and said, “These absurdities are very well for the ignorant low castes to make a fuss about, but any man of sense knows that a little sand and water purifies metal dishes from any stain.” Certainly the lower castes are much more tenacious on the subject of their caste than the higher: a low caste man, if asked for a draught of water from his lotah (a brass pot), will often refuse; a Rajpoot or Brahmin will not only consent, but, to show his respect, will often scour it first, and then fill and present it, as I have often experienced in travelling about. I grant, that a poor man of low caste might not meet with these civilities, which only more strongly illustrates the observation that wealth has as much influence as caste.
The chief criterion of caste, i. e., whether one man is of higher or lower rank than another, is the eating dressed food, and the forming a matrimonial alliance between families. All undressed food, even fruit, is pure, from whatever hands it may come; and even to dressed food there are exceptions to the rule. In some parts of India a man will eat bread cooked by another from whose hands be would not touch boiled rice, nor would any native hesitate in sending a person of much lower caste than himself to buy and bring him ready-made pastry and sweetmeats, although the touch of the same person would be considered to pollute any other kind of dressed food. In the Punjab, they will only allow two castes, the Hulwaee and Kuhar, to superintend the boiling of the sugar; in our provinces they are indifferent about the matter, and employ almost any one for this purpose. In fact, the contradictions and peculiarities of caste are so great in practice, that it is impossible to deduce any rule regarding it founded upon a general principle.
The worst feature of caste is its tendency to obstruct benevolent feelings. Ward observes (see Vol. I., page 143):—“But not only is the caste contrary to every principle of justice and policy, it is repugnant to every feeling of benevolence. The social circle is almost invariably composed of persons of the same caste, to the careful exclusion of others. It arms one class of men against another; it gives rise to the greatest degree of pride and apathy. It forms a sufficient excuse for not doing an act of benevolence towards another, that he is not of the same caste; nay, a man dying with thirst will not accept of a cooling draught of water from the hands or the cup of a person of a lower caste.”
There is, undoubtedly, at first sight, some truth in this; still it is much more in appearance than in reality attributable to the institution in question. The caste is made the excuse for the selfishness, covetousness, indolence, or apathy of the individual. Ward observes, a little farther on (Vol.1., page 146):—“In short, the caste murders all the social and benevolent feelings; and shuts up the heart of man against man in a manner unknown even amongst the most savage tribes. The apathy of the Hindus has been noticed by all who are acquainted with their character: when a boat sinks in a storm on the Ganges, and persons are seen floating or sinking all around, the Hindus in those boats which may remain by the side of the river, or in those passing by at the time, look on with perfect indifference, perhaps without moving an oar for the rescue of those who are actually perishing.”Yet, in such a case, the people who are drowning are, in most cases, of the very same caste as those who are looking on with apathy, without exerting themselves to render any assistance; probably their acquaintances, with whom they are in daily communication. On the other hand, Hindus, who are charitably inclined, will attend others of different caste in sickness, or even wait upon a Moosulman. Many English have found their native servants, of all sects, the most careful nurses in sickness that could be procured; had it been contrary to their caste, the circumstance of their being servants would not have produced such an effect.
Caste is said to form a bar to conversion, because a man thereby becomes an outcast from all his former friends and relations: but it is not so much attributable to caste, as to the general dislike and prejudice which is felt by every nation and class of people against one of their number who renounces the religion of his fathers, which they still profess, and becomes a convert to another, as I endeavoured to illustrate in the preceding Number. But it is only to a certain extent that the convert becomes an outcast; his relations will not eat with him, but if he be well received among his new sect, and be as well off in the world as before, they will not hesitate to associate with him, as some facts, which will presently be mentioned, sufficiently demonstrate. By the Hindu law, and, in practice at least, by the Muhammedan law, a man who becomes a convert to any other religion, forfeits his share of the family property. It would be expedient to alter the law on this head, so as to allow free-will upon the point of religion and conversion.
Caste is fully as much a civil as a religious distinction, and we have some arbitrary rules in English society which approximate very nearly to that institution among the natives of India. It is constantly urged against these, that respectability of character weighs nothing when put in competition with caste, and that a man would forfeit his caste who should be found eating with one of a lower class, although the latter may be an excellent and virtuous man. Have we nothing similar to this? If a gentleman were to be found associating with tradesmen, giving and receiving entertainments from them, would he be able to keep his place among his own class? would he not be excluded from the society of the latter, because he kept what would be called “low company?” If a commissioned officer in the army were to do so, he would be dismissed the service, although he himself might possibly be the son of a tradesman. In such a case, even his old acquaintances and friends must be given up, upon receiving the talismanic commission. The fact is, that in all countries the necessity of keeping up a distinction of ranks is found indispensable, and, to effect this, lines must be drawn which cannot be passed with impunity. Notwithstanding all the prating of demagogues, democrats, and mob-orators, no nation would gain anything by having the whole population on an equality in social intercourse. The “I'm as good as you,” and “Jack and Tom” system, never leads to anything but vulgarity and coarseness.
There is, no doubt, intricacy in drawing the line properly, and certain peculiarities appertaining to it are not easily understood by the uninitiated. For instance, an officer in a shop, feels thirsty, and asks the tradesman for a glass of ale or water. If the officer drink it in the shop, this is not considered an impropriety; but if he were to go into the back room to drink his beverage, and sit down on one chair, while the tradesman seated himself on another, he would come under the ban, and forfeit his caste, or, in plain English, be turned out of the army. We understand the distinction, but it would, probably, be impossible to make any native of India comprehend it, because he has not the turn of thought necessary to enable him to do so. He would probably say, “If the officer may quench his thirst in the tradesman’s house, what possible difference can it make whether in one room or the other, sitting down or standing up?” This is precisely the same with us, in our attempts to understand many of the peculiarities of the native customs. We have not the train of thought and association of ideas requisite; and we, in equal astonishment, ask, “If you will eat bread prepared by that man, what possible difference can it make to eat boiled rice which he has cooked?”—or, “If you let such a person touch the prepared pastry which you are about to eat, how can his touch render impure another sort of food?” But caste it is said destroys all social feelings,—we have something analogous to quote in illustration. In the —th regiment, now in India, there are, or were not long ago, two brothers, one a commissioned officer, the other in the ranks: should these be found dining together, the former would be liable to be dismissed the service, although the rule would not, probably, be pushed to such an extreme. The commissioned officer was himself formerly in the ranks, and, of course, lived in social intercourse with his brother, which, by the strict rules of the service, he must renounce on receiving his commission. What are all these peculiarities which govern the intercourse of the different ranks and classes with one another among us, but caste? Yet, although they may have some portion of evil, they are found beneficial on the whole, and society would be worse, were they abolished.
We are ready enough to taunt the Hindus with the iniquitous anomalies of their rules of caste, according to which a man may be guilty of theft and perjury, or other crime, with impunity; but if he should be found eating with a virtuous friend, he becomes an outcast. We forget how very similar our own customs are. A man may seduce his friend’s wife or sister, and follow it up by murdering his friend, without losing his place in society: a few, who would consequently be considered particular, might withdraw their countenance from him, to make up for which, some would admire the eclat he had brought upon himself; while the majority would receive him as if nothing had happened. Yet the same man would soon be excluded from society, should he be found associating with a tradesman, although the latter may be a most respectable, well-informed man! Well may the poor abused Hindus say to us, “Look at home.”
Much of caste is, as I have observed, a mere civil distinction, and, in minor points, is no more than exists in every country. It is founded on self-consequence, and a desire to exalt ourselves a little higher in the scale of the society in which we move, and this is also much the same in all countries. Complaints are often made, especially by new comers, that the native servants each perform only one particular duty, and refuse to assist in any others, urging that it is against their caste; and comparisons are drawn between them and the English servant, who will do anything he is bid to do. As to caste, the natives merely urge that as an excuse, because they think it more likely to meet with attention; what they mean is, “It is not my business.” A little consideration will show us a very tolerable parallel between India and England on this subject.
If my readers will observe the ménage of a native, or even of an Englishman, in India, whose income is so moderate as only to allow him to keep two or three servants, he will find that they perform nearly as great a variety of services as any domestic at home. But even there, it is only in families similarly situated in society that these “servants of all work” are to be found. The English in India have chosen to adopt the style of noblemen and men of large fortune in England: almost every man chooses to have his butler, (khansamah,) two or three table attendants, head valet, messengers, &c., &c.; not that the individuals employed are at all qualified for these situations; it is only the dignity of the name, for which the masters are obliged to pay accordingly. Among the young members of the civil service, during their residence at college, whose salary is about three hundred a year, may be found many who pay twenty pounds of that sum annually to a clerk to keep their accounts; it being below their dignity to do it for themselves.
It is among the establishments of men of rank and fortune in England that the parallel to this must be sought. Where a butler, under-butler, two or three footmen, valet, coachman, groom, stable-boy, house-keeper, lady’s-maid, head-nurse, with two or three nursery-maids, upper and lower house-maid, laundress, cook, kitchen-maid, scullion, &c., are retained, there is just as much caste, in this respect, as there is among the native servants. Try the experiment: order the butler to stand behind the carriage; the powdered footman to sweep the stable; the coachman to clean the horses; the lady’s-maid to sweep the room; the upper house-maid to scrub the fire-grate; the cook to wash the dishes, &c., fee,—there is not one who would not leave his or her situation, or, in the cant phrase, part with their masters, rather than comply, simply because it “was not their place,” that is, beneath their notions of dignity. There was a book published not long ago, said to be written by a retired butler and housekeeper, called “The Complete Servant,” in which the exact work which every different description of servant was to perform was specified, and which would have wonderfully enlightened the eyes of those in India who are so fond of dilating upon the universal genius and capacity of English servants, as to the little that was to be expected from them. The natives of India are not fonder of trouble than other people, and will gladly shift off all they can upon the shoulders of others; and wherever the ignorance, folly, or indolence of their masters allow them to establish these arbitrary rules and customs, (which, of course, they have greater opportunities of doing at Calcutta than anywhere else, from the frequency of newly-arrived persons, who are ignorant of the customs of the people,) they will take their full advantage of it. I have known a bearer, when told to carry a bottle of wine or brandy, object that its touch would defile him. That same man would willingly have drunk the brandy, could he have done so without fear of detection[5]. On the contrary, should an Englishman be sent to a retired part of the country, to live by himself, and hire men of that neighbourhood who have never before been in European service, with few exceptions, any one will do whatever he is ordered. No sooner, however, does this Englishman rejoin his countrymen, than these very men will speedily adopt the airs of the other servants. The tribe of Kaits have a very absurd and strange prejudice against keeping a shop. They will submit to accept the poorest description of personal service, rather than join as a partner in the wealthiest shop in India. Yet not one, at least of all to whom I have spoken on the subject, and many have I questioned, can give a reason for such a custom or prejudice.
That the strictness of caste is wearing away, is, however, certainly the fact. It is generally supposed, that while in Bengal Proper they are more particular in regard to the point of food, in the Upper Provinces they attach most importance to that of marriage. Yet there are some extraordinary circumstances, daily occurring, which tend to show that these matters are of much less importance than we imagine, and that the prospect of temporal advantages will soothe the degradation of loss of caste. In the Doab, between the Ganges and Jumna, from Allahabad to the hills, and in the Oude territory, the population is chiefly a tribe of Rajpoots, who, however, rarely use this name, but call themselves by that of Thakoor (literally, Chieftains). There are also many in Rohilkund. This tribe contains many sub-divisions, the caste of each of which is considered more or less pure; and, in seeking for a wife for his son, a man usually attempts to procure one from a family of a higher degree of purity than his own, which is effected without much difficulty by paying a considerable sum of money to the bride’s father, or by otherwise promoting his worldly interests. It is very common for these Thakoors to have children by concubines of various low castes, not even excluding Muhammedan prostitutes. These are brought up as Hindus along with the legitimate children of their father, intermarry with others whose birth is the same, and often share the property. They are, of course, considered as of inferior caste, and the whole-bred Thakoors will not eat with them; but that is all the distinction. In some instances, however, after two or three generations, they contrive to intermarry with those in whom there is no stain, and, having thus formed a party, gradually insinuate themselves, as it were, to whole caste.
One most extraordinary instance was brought to my notice. A Thakoor, named Byree Lall, had three sons by a Moosulmanee prostitute. He died about sixteen years ago, when the eldest was about nine years old. The mother, who retained all her own customs and tenets, remained in the house as head of the family, and managed all the agricultural concerns; but brought up the three children as Hindus, and they have succeeded to their father’s share of the land, without any demur on the part of the other members of the family[6]. In another instance, a Hindu of the Kait caste had two legitimate sons, and a third by a Moosulmanee prostitute; when about to die, he divided his property among the three, giving, however, a much less portion to the illegitimate son than to the other two. These brought an action in the civil court to dispute the division; but it was upheld by the court, which decision was confirmed by the Sudder Dewanee[7]. The late Dowlut Row Sindia, was of low caste, a Gureria, (a tribe of shepherds,) yet he found no difficulty in persuading a high Caste Rajpoot of Rajwara to give him his daughter in marriage. The Baisa Bhâe, (the same who has attracted so much attention of late,) strictly speaking, must have lost caste by her marriage with a Gureria, but, so far from becoming an outcast from her family, the intercourse was maintained just as if she had married an equal, and her brother, Hindu Rao, accompanied her to Gwalior, where he held a high post in the army. A still stronger instance is that of a high caste Rajpootanee, who lived with an English gentleman, as his mistress; she also kept up a familiar intercourse with her relations, and once or twice visited them, whilst they constantly visited her in the most open manner; they would not eat with her, but that was the only distinction. Between Hindu Rao and his sister, I do not believe that even this was preserved.
This latitude is carried to a much greater extent in regard to the Sikhs, or Sings. These are followers of Baba Nanuk, who, some centuries ago, founded the sect, into which he admitted converts of all denominations. The chief tenets are the worship of God, the renunciation of idolatry, abolition of caste, and attention to the precepts of a book compiled by the teachers, called the Adi Grunth. They were at first called Sikh (disciple), and were a peaceable sect, until persecuted, on which Gooroo Govind, their tenth high-priest, changed their names to Singh (lion), and invited them to resist oppression, and become a warlike people. They ultimately grew into a nation, and obtained possession of the whole of the Punjab, but were divided into a multitude of petty principalities without any recognised head. As a remedy for this, on any occasion where the general safety was endangered, a grand council, called a Gooroomata, was assembled to deliberate, at which all were required to eat together: as the Sikhs include every tribe of Hindus, and many Muhammedans, caste must, of course, have been annihilated. Yet these people are gradually now sliding back into Hinduism, and again adopting the peculiarities of caste. A Sikh, the descendant of a Brahmin, will no more eat with one whose ancestors were of low caste, than a Hindu Brahmin will with a sweeper. So strong is this feeling becoming, that it would probably prevent the assembly of the Gooroomata, should such be attempted: yet outcasts, as all Sikhs must, strictly speaking, be, many tribes of Hindus, even of the higher castes, such as Rajpoots, intermarry with them.
These, and numerous instances of a similar nature, might be quoted, completely disproving the notion that persons who have forfeited their caste become such outcasts that even their parents dare not speak to them, except by stealth,—as asserted by Ward.
There is also a great deal of very convenient latitude on the subject of caste. If a man can persuade a considerable number to join him, he will do a great many things which he dared not have been guilty of alone. Strictly speaking, the Hindu sepoys who have gone on foreign expeditions by sea, have all lost caste; but who dare tell them so? They form too strong a party for any one to presume to hint at it, much less act upon the idea. On service, they make no scruple of drinking from a Bheestee’s (Muhammedan water-carrier) leathern water-bag, which they would never do on ordinary occasions:—sometimes they will even go further. During the attack of a fort on a hot day, two officers had procured a large earthen pot, full of water, out of which they had just drunk. At that moment a sepoy came by, crying out for water: one of the officers offered him the pot; and on his demurring at first, observed, laughing, “All’s fair on service; you may get a bullet through your head next minute, and what will be your caste then? quench your thirst, and make yourself comfortable while you can.” The man grinned, and took a hearty draught. A strong instance in which caste and prejudice are thrown aside, when there is an object in view, occurred some years ago at the temple of Juggernauth. It used to be pronounced that the entrance of any unclean person would destroy the sanctity of the holy place, and would bring dire evils upon the country: yet, in spite of all this, a British officer who was much beloved and respected by his men, having expressed a wish to see the interior of the temple, a party of his sepoys took him in disguise as one of themselves[8]. This also exhibits the natural good feelings of the natives; and affords an additional proof of the influence a foreigner whose conduct is such as to deserve it, may acquire over them. It was afterwards well known; but as to the defilement of the temple, the Brahmins had sense enough to say nothing about it, as it might have diminished the presentation of offerings; so they quietly submitted to what had occurred, rather than ruin their trade.
A curious circumstance is mentioned by Sir J. Malcolm in a letter to Lord William Bentinck, dated the 27th of November, 1830. In 1818, a low caste private in one of the Bengal regiments was promoted: several Brahmins, disgusted at this, took their discharge. One of these men enlisted in the 8th Bombay Native Infantry, where Captain M‘Donald met him, and asked, how he who had left his corps because a low caste man was promoted, could submit to serve under a Jew Subadar (captain), a Purwarie Jemadar (lieutenant), and other low caste officers? The man replied, “In Hindostan it is the pride of caste; in Bombay, that of the corps,”—or, in plain English, When I am among men who care little about caste I am indifferent about it myself. I have repeatedly asked natives how they make up their minds to serve the English, whom they consider on a par with their lowest castes, when they object to be under the authority of low caste natives, such as sweepers, &c? The replies have been variously worded, but the meaning has always been, “The sweeper is poor, you English are rich, and the lords of the country.”
The custom of antrijali, that is, of taking people who are supposed to be at the point of death, to the river-side, stuffing their ears and noses with mud, and leaving them to perish, is not only not sanctioned by the shasters, but is only practised in Bengal, and held in abomination by the people of other parts.
Indeed, it has already been observed, that while some dogmas of the shasters are neglected, many customs, some even of those most rooted in the minds of the people, have grown up, as it were, by accident. The ceremonies of the Ruth Jatra, Churruk Poojah, infanticide, plurality of husbands to one wife, and many others of more or less consequence, which were alluded to and described in No. XXXIV., have no origin in the shasters. We all know the veneration in which the monkey is held by the Hindus, and many of my readers will recollect the melancholy occurrence when two officers were drowned in attempting to cross the Jumna, in order to avoid the fury of a mob which was preparing to attack them in consequence of their shooting these animals at Bindrabund. Yet, I have, on two occasions, seen a Goorkah Rajpoot shoot a monkey, in each instance out of revenge because the animal had carried away the man’s dinner. When I have been talking to the people about the depredations committed by the wild monkeys on their corn and vegetables, they have repeatedly said, “We are Hindus, and cannot injure the animals, but we should be very glad if you would shoot them for us.”
Between the Hindus and Muhammedans, the usual exchange of compliments on the occasion of a serious quarrel, is, for the former to slaughter hogs and throw them into the mosques, while the latter kill cows, and pour their blood into the wells and tanks. Of course, these reservoirs are rendered impure beyond redemption? By no means; for it would be very troublesome to send a mile or two for water; so the matter is settled by pouring a little cow’s urine into the tanks and wells, which restores their purity. So easily is caste set aside, when the convenience of the people themselves is concerned.
But the following are much stronger instances: the majority of the Bengalees do not eat meat, which cannot be ascribed to a compliance with the injunction against destroying life, since almost all will eat fish whenever they can procure it. The shasters do not prohibit the use of flesh; so far from it, they prescribe several sorts of flesh to be sacrificed for offerings to the manes of ancestors, yet, the habit of refraining from meat, which most probably originated in the poverty of the people, has now become so inveterate, that I have been assured by eye-witnesses, that in the great famine in Bengal in 1770 many died of starvation, who could have procured meat, if they would have eaten it.
By way of distinction from the Muhammedans, the mode of killing animals for food among the Hindus is, by cutting off the head with a sabre at one blow; but about Saharunpoor, there is a tribe of bearers, who will only eat meat that has been made “Hullal,” or lawful, that is, killed by a Moosulman butcher, who repeats a short prayer at the time of cutting the animal’s throat. This can only have arisen from accident probably, (there being a considerable Muhammedan population at that town,) because they were unable to procure meat except from a Moosulman butcher; and what must have been at first a violation of their prejudices, has become so confirmed by habit, that they continue it in preference to returning to the orthodox Hindu custom.
Another remarkable case is the fact of Hindus making offerings at the tomb of a Muhammedan saint. At Muckunpoor, about half-way between Khanpoor and Furrukhabad, is the tomb of Shekh Bujioodeen, commonly called Mudar Saheb, at which periodical festivals are held, which are attended much more by the Hindus than the Moosulmans, particularly by the Mahrattas. Had the man been originally a Hindu who became a convert to Islam, particularly if he had been forcibly made a convert, there would be some sort of reason; but, so far from this, he was originally a Jew, who became a Muhammedan, and finally a a saint; and the priests in charge of the tomb, who receive the offerings, are all of that religion. The present race merely follow existing custom; but how the Hindus originally began to worship at this Muhammedan saint’s tomb, it is impossible even to guess; I never met with any native, of either tribe, who could give an account of it. In some parts of the country, the Hindus will take a part in the Muhammedan festival of the Mohurrum, and join the procession, firing their matchlocks, &c., while the chorus of the chaunting of the procession is,
Hindu ke cheh
Moosolman ke jeh.
that is, Down with the Hindus—the Moosulmans for ever.
Some of the minor points on which they affect to be particular, are very absurd. Some will take medicine in powder which they can mix and drink themselves, but object to take it prepared. At many places, our kitchen servants agree among themselves to eat such dishes as come from our tables untouched, but not those which have been partly eaten.
A set of bearers, after a hard day’s work, will thankfully accept an unopened bottle of brandy, but will often object to receive one from which any portion has been drunk by an Englishman. The most whimsical distinction is, perhaps, to be found among the Rohilla soldiers who enlist in the cavalry of the native powers: these men will submit to be flogged within an inch of their lives with a leathern martingale, but to be struck with a whip or a cane would be an indelible disgrace, and very likely be resented by a stab or a bullet. By humouring the people, or having recourse to a little trickery, which, nevertheless, they perfectly well see through, objections may often be overcome. Carpenters will sometimes object to touch a grease pot, and ask for oil to use with their tools: only call it a butter pot, and fill it with butter the first time, the humbug will still continue, and no demur will be made to the use of it, although the men themselves carry it to the kitchen to be replenished when empty, and perfectly well know that it is filled with any sort of fat which may happen to be there. These sort of petty absurdities of caste are much stronger among the low than among those of higher castes: they are much more attended to in Bengal, where the people are a far inferior race, than in the Western Provinces. I observe, for instance, that one cause of dislike which the natives have to the proposed fever hospital in Calcutta is, the fear that Hindus and Moosulmans would be placed in the same ward! Such an objection would never have been dreamed of in Upper India, provided their food be kept distinct. In some of the Madras provinces, the small peculiarities are preserved even more strongly than in Bengal; yet, it is strange, that Swartz and the missionaries of his time met with much greater success in conversion there, than has attended the efforts which have been made on this side of India.
The loss of caste is, as is above observed, a much less serious matter than is generally supposed; generally speaking, it is nothing more than this,—that if a man do certain things, his relations and friends refuse to eat with him, until he gives a grand entertainment, after which he is received on his former footing. This, however, is not always successful, and instances might be quoted where several hundred thousands of rupees have been expended in vain. When this is the case, it is rarely because the offence which has been committed is considered too great to be atoned for, but usually the result of some personal pique or malice on the part of some members of the tribe. There are, however, instances on the other side: a man who had committed incest with his sister was declared to have forfeited his caste, and never could regain it, from the horror with which this crime was regarded. Among the common people, the whole business is as childish as that of school-boys, where, for some nonsense, one is sent to Coventry one day, and, after distributing a shilling’s worth of nuts or plums, is on the next restored to favour: from ten to twenty rupees is sufficient to restore a man of the lower classes to his caste.
The facility with which it is accomplished depends much on the degree of friendship which exists between the individual and the influential members of his tribe; if he can form a tolerable party in his favour he is easily restored, even though he may have been rendered unclean in the highest degree. A man of low caste once imposed himself on a native officer in the Sirmoor battalion, who had left his home many years, as his son, and was received and treated as such for several months before the imposture was discovered. At first, there was a great uproar, but it was soon discovered, that about half the corps had lost their caste, either by eating with the impostor himself, or with those who had taken food with him; but the party was too strong for the others to make much opposition, and it was soon arranged, that by simply bathing in a sacred tank, all uncleanness would be washed away. A still stronger and more curious instance occurred in the Himalayah mountains. A leopard had killed a calf and a goat close together: the owner of the animals, on being apprized of it, thinking he might, at any rate, derive from his loss the benefit of a good supper, went in the dusk to get some of the goat’s flesh; but the carcases had been so torn limb from limb, (most probably by the foxes, for a tiger or a leopard merely eats what he requires, and leaves the rest uninjured—I have more than once, in wandering through the jungle, procured a dinner for myself and half my camp off the carcase of a fine deer which had been just killed by a tiger or a leopard,) and mixed together, that by mistake he cut the flesh from the calf, and took it home, when it was dressed and eaten by all his family: next morning, when he and some others visited the carcases to bring away the remainder of the goat’s flesh, they discovered his mistake; but, having friends to support him, he was allowed to regain his caste on making a pilgrimage. In another instance, a lad, who, in driving a calf away from some grain, unfortunately struck it on the head and killed it, was restored to his caste on as easy terms.
In certain instances, the individual is prevented from regaining his former station by the malice of some few of the tribe; sometimes this is the sole cause of his being declared to have forfeited his caste; and this is probably one of those occurrences, in attempting to interpose with which, we should find them an “ungovernable people,” as Dubois describes them. Yet, repeatedly have these cases been interfered with by the public authorities. In some of the magistrates’ courts, a complaint is occasionally preferred by an individual, that the members of his tribe have declared him to have forfeited his caste without sufficient reason: or, that having done so, all had agreed to restore him except one person, who persisted in his refusal only out of spite. In such complaints, should the forfeiting of the caste have arisen from some petty absurdity, the usual plan was, to fine the refractory party, which generally induced them, for fear of another fine, to adjust matters to the satisfaction of the complainant. On one occasion, however, in a remote district, where a spiteful attempt was made to deprive a man of his caste, on a false charge of adultery, the party proved very refractory; paid several heavy fines; but still held out in their refusal to restore the complainant. At this time the magistrate before whom the case was pending, received a visit from an independent Rajah, of high caste; he took the opportunity of mentioning the circumstance, and asked the Rajah what his decision would be in a similar case: the Rajah replied, “I should merely collect the heads of the tribe together, with the accused individual with his lotah[9] full of water, and give them the option of drinking a little of it voluntarily, or of having water poured down their throats by a sweeper.” The magistrate did so. The refractory party held a meeting, and restored the injured individual to his caste without delay.
The institution of caste has some beneficial effects, although Ward, with his usual prejudice against everything of native origin, represents it as one of unmixed evil. The causes he mentions which entail a forfeiture of caste, are all of a frivolous nature; and though he does not go so far as to say that morality has nothing to do with it, he carefully avoids telling the whole truth on the subject. Instances in every province may be found, of men excluded from caste for some immorality of which they have been guilty: I grant, that it is much more frequently caused by some trifling matter, and that the institution of caste has produced on the whole much more evil than good; still when we are discussing the subject, it is but fair to show both sides of the picture. The loss of caste in the present day is, in fact, a much less important matter than the publications drawn from the sacred books and Brahminical dogmas would lead us to believe. Some rare instances there are of men, whose strong sense of shame rendered existence more painful than death, and who, accordingly, committed suicide; but numbers live just as happily as if nothing had happened, and maintain just the same social intercourse with those around them; with the sole exception of not eating together. The descendants of a man thus situated, adopting some specific denomination, become a new sub-division: nineteen-twentieths of the present enormous number of castes have, without doubt, been formed in this way. Some treat the matter with the greatest indifference: on one occasion a poor man, a carpenter, had been turned out of caste, but his tribe offered to restore him, if he would give an entertainment which was to cost twenty rupees; he replied, “Such a sum is more than the matter is worth,” and, in order to belong to some sect, turned Muhammedan.
A few remarks on conversion to Hinduism will conclude the present discussions. The anomaly on this head is very great: in theory, the Hindu religion does not admit of converts:—in practice it does. In theory, all the world are considered to have been originally Hindus, and that the Christians, Jews, Muhammedans, and other sects, have become outcasts, by neglecting the proper ceremonies, and adopting others; and that they now cannot again be received within the pale; but in practice, it is quite different. The Lodhas, the Mahrattas, the Goojars, and various other tribes, have gradually slid into a sort of Hinduism, by adopting the customs and ceremonies, and employing Brahmins as priests. The Goorkhas, who, strictly speaking, originally were of no caste, on the conquest of Kumoun and other provinces, where, among some of the people, caste is rigidly adhered to, adopted the Hindu practices and notions, and have contrived to get themselves included within the pale; some of them being actually considered on a par with Rajpoots, and other high castes among the Hindus. In the Himalayah, there is a tribe of Bhoteeas who have also done so, and these are the remnant of a Muhammedan body of troops, who, in Timour’s invasion of Hindostan, were sent under one of his atabegs (chiefs) to conquer Kumoun. This governor ruled there for about twenty years, but being unsupported, his party were gradually forced to retreat into the province they now occupy, situated within the line of the snowy peaks, upon one of the passes into Chinese Tartary. No Englishman would find any difficulty in procuring a Brahmin to perform worship on his account, and to serve him as a family priest; and I am convinced that any tribe, even English or Muhammedan, might, by adopting the same means, in the course of time become a sort of Hindu, and be recognised as such: their specific appellation would be “Moslem Hindu,” and “Foringhee Hindu.” True, few other castes would eat with them, but that is nothing against the above observations, since, among the orthodox Hindus, there are many castes none of whom will eat with any other. There is a curious circumstance connected with conversion to be found among a large number of Muhammedans in Saharunpoor. The ancestors of these men were Rajpoots, and were converted about three centuries ago: they have intermarried with the Puthans, or Rohillas, and in personal appearance bear a striking resemblance to these; yet, to this day, they pride themselves on their Rajpoot origin, and if one of them were pledging himself to any service of difficulty or danger, he would say, “I am the descendant of a Rajpoot,—I will not deceive you, or fail to do my utmost.”
The above remarks are thrown together in a desultory manner, for the subject is one which it is difficult to treat with method or regularity; the institution of caste, as it exists in practice, is so full of absurdities and contradictions, that it is impossible to deduce any rules founded on a general principle; and I have only given the result of several years’ practical observation, without attempting to arrange the data in any connected form. There can be no doubt that caste is gradually losing the influence it once held over the people of India; and, although it has, upon the whole, been productive of more evil than good, its sudden abolition, supposing this were practicable, would be by no means beneficial, as it would remove one check before another was imposed. It will gradually die away as the people become more educated and enlightened, and it is probable that much good might be effected by a judicious interference on the part of the official functionaries in the mode above mentioned. The institution of caste, in itself, whatever may be imagined, forms but a very small bar against conversion to Christianity; the example of Baba Nanuk, who converted sufficient numbers to form a nation, sufficiently proves this, although one of the fundamental tenets of the Sikhs was the destruction of all caste; and when attempts to induce the natives to adopt the Christian religion are properly conducted, it may reasonably be expected, under the Divine blessing, that the result will be very different
September 5th, 1835.
- ↑ Ward seems to think that the system did not originate with a monarch, because he would not have placed the regal power beneath that of the priesthood. But the influence which the Brahmins did obtain was probably gradually acquired by cunning, intrigue, and working on the superstitions of their countrymen.
- ↑ Yet these same shasters prescribe various kinds of fleeh to be sacrificed as offerings to the manes of ancestors. It is also considered allowable for Hindus to eat what has been offered to an idol, flesh included.
- ↑ It is as impossible to translate these names of castes into English, as it would be to find terms in Hindostanee to denote a Protestant, a Socinian, a Baptist, &c.; it may, however, be observed, that a Bhat is a bard, who usually claims the privilege of being a hanger-on upon great men to sing their praises; there are also village bards, and wandering bards in some parts of India.
- ↑ The punishments are even more severe than are here described; some passages are omitted from the quotations on the score of decency.
- ↑ Once when a bearer was desired to carry a note, he replied, it was not his business, as he was hired to carry the palanquin. “Very well, get the palanquin ready,” said the master, for which the whole set of half-a-dozen men were obliged to turn out: the note was deposited in the palanquin, and thus conveyed to its destination. The gentleman’s notes were carried readily enough afterwards.
- ↑ My readers may think this so extraordinary that it must be a mistake. I therefore mention the man’s residence, to enable any one who chooses to satisfy himself. The family reside in the village of Bunnia-derah in the district of Furrukhabad.
- ↑ Had the deceased left the property in this way by will, it would have been invalid, and the natural son would not have received any share; by writing a deed of gift just as he was dying, the partition was valid. Such are the absurdities of Hindu law.
- ↑ The late Major Carter.
- ↑ A brass pot.