R EADING EADING #17: DUMONT’S THEORY OF CASTE Louis Louis Dumont’s Dumont’s contributio contribution n – HomoHierarchicus to HomoHierarchicus to the stud o! c"ste is #er in!$uenti"$% The re"din& describes the theor "nd $"ter' (ro#ides " critic"$ "n"$sis o! the s"me% )n the be&innin& be&innin& o! HomoHeirarchus' HomoHeirarchus' Dumont distin&uishes bet*een tr"dition"$ "nd modern societ% He t"+es )ndi" "s "n e,"m($e o! tr"dition"$ societ "nd r"ises "n im(ort"nt -uestion% Can one society validly make sense of the other society? Can anyone of one particular societycompletely delineate himself from within the cultural and conceptual framework fr amework that he understands and legitimately study another entirely different society? This introduction introduction &i#en to his *or+ h"s been #ie*ed in t*o *"s – either "s " *" to est"b$ish inte$$ectu"$ su(rem"c $i+e Rousse"u' Dur+heim etc% or – )rre$e#"nt "nd $on& introduction *hich h"s nothin& to do *ith the m"in to(ic o! c"ste in )ndi"% Dumont Dum ont’s ’s the theor or st" st"rts rts *it *ith h the (ro (ro(os (ositi ition on th" th"tt tr" tr"diti dition on"$ "$ soc societ iet is ho$ ho$ist istic' ic' *he *here" re"ss modern societ is indi#idu"$istic% Tr"dition"$ societies "ccord the hi&hest mor"$ #"$ue to the .ide" o! societ’ *here"s modern societies ($"ce the &re"test mor"$ #"$ue to .the indi#idu"$’% )n modern societies' indi#idu"$istic #"$ues m"+e them ($"ce hi&h re&"rd !or conce(ts o! e-u"$it o! (o*er' st"tus etc% /0h"t is hier"rch1 )t is the "ttribution o! r"n+ to e"ch e$ement in re$"tion to the *ho$e%2 Modern societies #ie* hier"rch in terms o! ine-u"$it% Thus' "nhier"rch3ine-u"$it is (ercei#ed "s .e,($oit"tion’' .discrimin"tion’ etc% Most o! the time' tr"dition"$ societies such "s )ndi" /"nd c"ste sstem2 h"s been "n"$sed throu&h these modern notions o! e-u"$it% This is in"((ro(ri"te "nd un!"ir bec"use c"ste ideo$o& h"s to be #ie*ed "s " *ho$e "nd not indi#idu"$$% He "r&ues th"t tr"dition"$ societies $i+e )ndi" do not "ssi&n &re"t mor"$ #"$ue to 4e-u"$it4 but (ercei#e hier"rch in terms o! ho$ism% The m"in #irtue o! such societies is the (reser#"tion o! the societ itse$!% Thus' to tr"dition"$ societies hier"rch is " #irtue% Thus' Thus' Dumont Dumont’s ’s criticism criticism is th"t th"t modern modern societ societ c"nnot c"nnot im(ose im(ose their their #"$ue #"$ue sstem sstem o! 5indi#idu"$ism6 *hi$e studin& tr"dition"$ societies% He !urther "r&ues th"t the modern mind is bein& c$osed7minded "s it is c"u&ht *ithin its o*n sstem o! #"$ues' e#en *hi$e studin& "nother com($ete$ di!!erent societ% )t is necess"r to esc"(e this medium o! thou&ht to stud it e!!ecti#e$% There is " b"rrier in underst"ndin& ho$istic societ "nd th"t is our indi#idu"$istic #"$ues% First$' there must be "n iso$"tion o! the ideo$o& *hich *i$$ $e"d to "n inte$$ectu"$ tr"nsition i%e% iso$"tion o! indi#idu"$istic ideo$o& *i$$ someho* he$( the thin+ers tr"nscend it
DUMONT’S THEORY OF CASTE "nd embr"ce ho$istic #ision%(This is concisely summed up in points (a), (b), (c) and (d) on pg. !) The Distinctiveness o C!ste: ((e) and (f) on page !")Found"tion o! hier"rch o! the c"ste
sstem3st"tus is the (rinci($e o! O88OS)T)ON OF 8URE9 )M8URE% /Here the *ord#opposition$ is used in the sense o! dichotom3contr"st3se("r"tion NOT in the sense o! dis"((ro#"$3con!$ict%%%2 There "re : ch"r"cteristics o! c"ste sstem% ;2 Se("r"tion – in m"tters o! m"rri"&e "nd cont"ct% <2 )nterde(endence – members o! e"ch &rou( h"#e " distinct (ro!ession% :2 Hier"rch – r"n+s o! &rou(s *hich m"+e them re$"ti#e$ su(erior or in!erior% A$$ o! this is reducib$e to " sin&$e (rinci($e' i%e%' the dichotom o! the (ure 9 the im(ure% This is *h"t &o#erns se("r"tion% C"ste sstem is r"tion"$i=ed' intern"$i=ed "nd sh"(ed b (eo($e’s underst"ndin& o! re$"ti#e (urit "nd im(urit% )t is the #er b"sis !or c"ste distinctions% Cert"in c"stes (er!orm 5(ure6 !unctions *hi$e others de"$ *ith the 5im(ure6% "Fo $ette %n&est!n&in' ee (') 1*+, F%n&!-ent!. Ch!!cteistic o C!ste S/ste- is the &is0%nction $eteen (oe !n& st!t%s: This is "n im(ort"nt "nd much deb"ted issue o! Dumont’s theor% Accordin& to this
issue' in the Hindu societ there is " se("r"tion o! ritu"$ st"tus "nd secu$"r (o*er% 0hi$e the >r"hm"ns he$d the s(iritu"$ "uthorit' the +in&s /or the (o$itic"$$ domin"nt c"ste2 he$d the tem(or"$ "uthorit% )n the theor o! varnas' st"tus "nd (o*er "re di!!erenti"ted% )n tr"dition"$ societies' (o*er h"d " (o$itic"$ "nd m"&ico7re$i&ious ch"r"cter% Ho*e#er' in )ndi" >r"hmins h"d " mono(o$ o#er mor"$ "nd s(iritu"$ #"$ues *here"s the +in&s he$d secu$"r (o$itic"$ (o*er% So -uestion "rises' *h do the +in&s "$$o* >r"hmins to ho$d (o*er *ith re&"rd to the re$i&ious dom"in1 To "ns*er this' Dumont (ro(oses " contr"ct theor% He s"s the Ar"n +in&s m"de " contr"ct *ith the (riest$ >r"hmins% The contr"ct *"s th"t the >r"hmins *ou$d "ssume e,c$usi#e contro$ o#er the dom"in o! m"&ico7re$i&ious "nd in return the >r"hmins *ou$d? ;2 @u"r"ntee s(iritu"$ *e$!"re o! the (o$itic"$ m"sters /+in&s2 <2 Ser#e "s (erson"$ (riests / purohits2 :2 8er!orm s"cri!ices on beh"$! o! their (o$itic"$ ("trons% As (er the contr"ct' the />r"hmins "nd in&s2 *ou$d conBoint$ st"nd toðer "bo#e the rest o! the societ% Thus' the (riest$ u$tim"te$ re$ on these (o$itic"$ m"sters !or m"teri"$ su((ort "nd
DUMONT’S THEORY OF CASTE their ("trons st"nd second in the hier"rch% The rest o! the societ is not "n undi#ided m"ss' but is "&"in di#ided hier"rchic"$$ on the b"sis o! (urit "nd im(urit% )m(urit is b"sed on the or&"nic "s(ects o! hum"n $i!e% There!ore' those *ho de"$ *ith n"tur"$ im(ure subst"nces such "s !"eces' de"d bodies etc% "re desi&n"ted $o* (ositions% The "re the untouch"b$es% The rest *ho neither de"$ *ith (urit nor "re concerned *ith im(urit "re r"n+ed in bet*een the >r"hm"ns "nd the Untouch"b$es% Accordin& to Dumont' most o! the (o$itic"$$ "nd economic"$$ su(erior do not necess"ri$ ho$d the hi&hest st"tus' *here"s the ones *ho do ho$d the hi&hest st"tus h"#e no (o$itic"$7 economic (o*er% Thus' in " c"ste societ' st"tus is su(erior to "nd encom("sses (o*er% )n "$$ societies' there "re cert"in b"sic sh"red #"$ue sstems – a collective conscience *hich is "$$ encom("ssin&%)n modern societies' th"t is indi#idu"$ism' *hich encom("sses "$$% This obsession *ith indi#idu"$ism $e"ds to obsession *ith .e-u"$it’ o! st"tus' economic "nd (o$itic"$ (o*er% Thus' re$"ti#e e#"$u"tion o! indi#idu"$s is un"cce(t"b$e% )n tr"dition"$ societ ho*e#er' the concern is not to*"rds m"int"inin& e-u"$it but m"int"inin& itse$! % The encom("ssin& !r"me*or+ !or the sstem here is the o((osition (ure "nd im(ure . %The whole is founded on the necessary and hierarchical co&e'istence of the two opposites St%ct%!.ist inte(et!tion o c!ste)
The $"st "s(ect o! Dumont’s stud de"$s *ith the methodo$o& to in#esti&"te c"ste sstem in )ndi"% He "ns*ers it b s"in& one must $oo+ "t c"ste in structur"$ist terms' i%e% underst"nd the re$"tionshi( bet*een them "nd the $o&ic behind those re$"tions r"ther th"n subst"nti"$i=e the n"ture o! the e$ements themse$#es% )n other *ords' Dumont be$ie#es th"t c"ste c"nnot be de!ined or studied in iso$"tion /c"nnot subst"nti"$i=e n"ture o! e$ements2% )t is di!!icu$t to est"b$ish bound"ries o! " c"ste "nd stud them "s " 5re"$ &rou(6% )nste"d' the stud o! c"ste shou$d be re$"tion"$ in n"ture' i%e%' one shou$d stud the sstem "s " *ho$e' the *" it is structured% )t is " !"$$"c to consider c"ste &rou(s "s discrete "nd concrete &rou(s% 0e tend to see+ bounded units bec"use o! our modern (rinci($es o! em(iricism% 0e need to $oo+ !or is structure not subst"nce% />"sic"$$' inste"d o! de!inin& *h"t " ("rticu$"r c"ste &rou( is' *h"t "re its ch"r"cteristics etc' the !ocus o! "n stud shou$d be the interde(endence3re$"tion bet*een th"t c"ste "nd other c"stes2
DUMONT’S THEORY OF CASTE Ho*e#er' the criticism to this is th"t Dumont himse$! does not "bst"in !rom !rom subst"nti"$i=in& c"stes% )n the rest o! the theor' Dumont sho*s " tendenc to subst"nti"$i=e c"ste "nd sub7c"stes th"t "ctu"$$ *e"+ens his structur"$ist inter(ret"tion% D%-ont’s 2ie o E-(iicis-
M"n (eo($e criticise o#er7em(h"sis on .c"ste’ studies "s it is h"s nothin& to do *ith the re"$ !orces th"t sh"(e the societ(o*er "nd economics% The *"nt (o*er to be "ccommod"ted *ithin the theor o! c"ste% He "r&ues "&"inst this b re!errin& to the disBunction bet*een (o*er "nd st"tus% The "re entire$ di!!erent% >r"hm"ns' !or inst"nce' "$thou&h su(erior in terms o! st"tus "re o!ten m"teri"$$ de(endent% F%@% >"i$e be$ie#es th"t there is " &ener"$ corres(ondence bet*een *e"$th3(o$itic"$ (o*er "nd c"ste r"n+in&% Dumont re!utes this b st"tin& th"t the essenti"$ !e"ture o! c"ste is ideo$o& r"ther th"n m"ni!est"tions o! (o*er% C"ste c"n ch"n&e de(endin& on territor% )n one ("rticu$"r $oc"$it' se#er"$ c"stes o! di!!erent st"tuses m" inter"ct% )n other $oc"$ities there m" be di!!erent &rou(s *ith di!!erent st"tuses% Cert"in &rou(s m" h"#e s"me ritu"$ !unctions but di!!erent n"mes% The m" s(e"+ di!!erent $"n&u"&es "nd h"#e " di!!erent st$e o! (er!ormin& the s"me ritu"$ "nd re!use to "c+no*$ed&e e"ch other "s e-u"$s% The m" h"#e di!!erent st$es o! dressin&' Be*e$$er "nd "rchitecture% Thus' !or c"ste' territor "nd $oc"$ "!!i$i"tions "re e,treme$ im(ort"nt% Dumont "c+no*$ed&es the si&ni!ic"nce o! the #"ri"tions o! soci"$ or&"ni="tions in "ccord"nce to territor% Ho*e#er' he c"utions th"t c"ste c"nnot be studied "t "n ("rticu$"r $oc"$ hier"rch% C"ste shou$d be studied throu&h the ide" o! hier"rch "s " *ho$e' *hich is the !und"ment"$ theme% This structurin& "nd hier"rch is b"sed on the o((osition o! (urit "nd im(urit "s discussed e"r$ier% D%-ont’s Citi3%e o Citics: A$thou&h Dumont’s theor h"s recei#ed m"n7m"n
criticisms' it c"n be s"id th"t Dumont h"s ne#er ch"n&ed his st"nce% He h"s m"de &re"t e!!orts to m"+e his theor more c$e"r "nd c$"ri! misunderst"ndin&s but not once h"s he "$tered his (ers(ecti#e% He h"s "$*"s stood his &round% Dumont s"s th"t most o! his critics on$ h"$! underst"nd his theor% A$so the other "$tern"ti#e theories o! c"ste "re not com(rehensi#e% Dumont s"s th"t his theor h"s t*o "d#"nt"&es o#er ri#"$ theories% First$' th"t it is consistent% Second$' its e,($"n"tor (o*er% )! some !"cts "((e"r to contr"dict his theor it is mere$ bec"use his theor’s under$in& (rinci($e h"s not been (ro(er$ understood%
