by Taimur Rahman
From Raza Rumi’s blog
As I have elaborated before, the Asiatic Mode of Production (AMP) in India is based on the caste system. The caste system in turn is based on the confinement of a particular people to a particular occupation. This requires the intense control of women’s sexuality because if castes are allowed to intermarry, it will destroy the entire caste division of labour of that society. Thus, the fundamental basis for the maintenance of the caste system is through ensuring endogamy, that is, marrying within your own caste/biraderi.
Hence, the very logic of the entire caste system is opposed to love. And those who dare to love are automatically and inevitably propelled against the very grain of the system.
However, the fact that the caste system prevailed for 3000 years can only indicate that love did not conquer. It was the caste system that conquered the lovers. The Asiatic system saw a series of revolts none of which were successful. It was/is the most terrible vise in which the people of Asia were gripped in an unending cycle of subjugation and slavery to the village community. The fact that life outside the community (owing to climatic conditions) was simply not possible meant that the greatest punishment was ostracism from the caste and community. Wasn’t that also the punishment to Muhammed and his followers as well as to the lovers of every period?
No greater violence can be done to the psychology of a people than to disallow the most natural desire of love. Is it not inevitable then that the caste system will be met with a continuous revolt in the name of the freedom to love. Is not inevitable that love poetry would touch the deepest and most sensitive core of the people in a society that violently opposed love?
The caste system relegated love to the lowest and most contemptible position. Was it then not inevitable that rebellions against the case system would raise it to the level of divinity. This explains why Sufi poetry (and later progressive poetry) unites rebellion/love with divinity.
In the opening line of Heer, Waris Shah says:
Awal hamad khuda da vird karye
Ishq kita su jag da mool mian
Pehlan aap hi rabb ne ishq kita
Te mashooq he nabi rasool mian
Translation: “First of all let us acknowledge God (who is self-evident), who has made love the worth of the world Sir, It was God Himself that first loved, and the prophet (Muhammad (SW)) is His beloved Sir”
To put it crudely, if God is the first lover, if God is nothing but love, mortal man commits a sin the greatest sin against God by denying love.
This is the essence of Sufi poetry. And progressive poetry borrows from this tradition.
There is always a material basis for the power of certain cultural ideas. The fact that our culture is dominated by themes of the love story, especially in the rebellious sufi tradition, is indicative of the fact that the caste system so violently denied this very natural and inextinguishable human impulse.
And in contemporary society? What is the basis for arranged marriages? Nothing other than the caste system. It is to ensure that marriages occur within the biraderi or at the worst close to one’s biraderi. It is not for private property (as was the case in the West) but for the patriarchal patronage provided by the beradari. That patronage and fear of ostracism from that patronage is the central binding force for the patriarchal practice of arranged marriages. Thus, arranged marriages directly link back to the caste system (no matter how much of a gloss modern society has put on this practice). At the most, bourgeois families have allowed the liberty to the boy (and in rare cases the girl) the right of choosing a partner from within a related biraderi (it does not even extend to the whole of the bourgeois class).
Thus, the caste system is the most disgusting pile of putrid shit. Rebellion against this system is truly the beginning of a humane existence for the people of South Asia.
The author of the note is a member of the Communist Mazdoor Kissan Party (CMKP) and pursuing his doctral degree at SOAS.
khawerkhan
February 18, 2010
Excellent piece by Taimur.
jules281182
February 18, 2010
I had never seen the parallels between the caste system and the denial of love. It is a rather complicated system, but obviously one that should be broken. Interesting how the poetry imitates life, isn’t it? I appreciate your insight and your writings here!
Cheers!
Julie
http://julie281182.wordpress.com
Paul L. Johnson
February 20, 2010
Caste is horrific, in invades all religious, clan and tribal structures in the sub-continent.
But, in a sense, there is a more generic human failing out of which the caste and jagirdari systems of power fall blindly into accepting: that human failing is Patriarchy.
This failing, from my experience, is partially perpetuated by mothers themselves in how the ‘male son’ can do no wrong. And of course the skewed inheritance rulings makes -seemingly- having a female child of less economic stability.
Due to the universally recognized fact of females being great workers, managers, academicians and service providers, civil society has the knowledge and examples to help evaporate this social fallacy. A the change begins at home!
Justin
March 18, 2010
Dear Paul
This is not something that is only found in the subcontinent. Throughout history there have always been certain groups that have dominated over others, everywhere.
This sort of represents the tribal barriers which potrays the fear of the other
Meena
April 15, 2010
Caste systems, especially the one in India, first originated as a classification based on occupation alone. For instance, a kshatriya (the warrior caste) could become a brahmin (which is considered to be the highest ranking caste) if he or she chose to leave behind the practices of their caste and qualify themselves towards following the principles of the caste into which they wish to migrate. I guess over time, it became easier to just assign roles to individuals rather than allow them to grow and change their way of life. Also, the ruling classes probably found it easier to control their subjects by classifying them into predetermined occupations and roles in society. That’s where the boundaries between castes started becoming rigid and inflexible.
I think somewhere early on, society found it convenient to ignore or forget the true significance of the caste system and chose to enforce rules which made a mockery of that very ideology.
Today, there is no doubt that the caste system is patriarchal. What I find ridiculous is that if a man from a particular caste marries a woman from another caste, any children they have will be considered to be belonging to their father’s caste. However, the reverse is impossible (again, this is with reference to the Indian caste system). Even if the child wishes to follow the laws and traditions of his mother’s caste, and in fact possesses both the knowledge and characteristics of members of that caste, he is not allowed to do so under any circumstances. Whereas even if the child does not care or respect his father’s caste’s traditions and rules, he is still given all the benefits that members of that caste enjoy. This is a truly disturbing phenomenon, because unless society as a whole comes to the realization that such rigid classifications can only lead to pure hostility between castes sometime in the VERY near future, the hope to achieve a stable equilibrium within the society would become completely obliterated by an increasingly narrow-minded attitude in people.