The different social units in India, including the so-called tribes, used to categorise themselves as 'jati', and most of them termed caste as well as tribe as 'jati'. The synonym for the caste/tribe in some of tribal languages, given in the parentheses, such as, Santhal1 (jat, jati), Kurukh² (jat, jait, jaypuy, khut), Ho³ (jati, patki), Zeliang4(jati), Kabui Nagas5 (jaati), Bodo6(jat, jati), Dimasa Kachari (jadi), Garos (jat), Tripuri (jaiti), Khasi 10 (jaid), Konyak11 (jat), Phom12 (jat) indicate that the term 'jati' or 'jat' is widely used among the tribes of India. Most of the tribes, especially in the North, Central, Western and Southern part of the country, considered themselves as jati/caste and knew their place in the Varna frame. Many tribes claim to be Kshatriyas. 13
'Article 342 of the Constitution empowers the President to draw up a list of Scheduled Tribes in consultation with the Governor of each state, subject to the revision by Parliament. Accordingly, the President has made orders, specifying the Scheduled Tribes in the different states of India. Such lists have also been amended by Acts of Parliament. '14 It is pertinent to not that the Constitution has the provision for the listing of the tribes and the same is done accordingly. But, the definition of tribe is not given in the Constitution. 15 Thus the tribe is mainly an administrative category in India. This is the reason, that a particular community is tribal in one state and non-tribal in another state. The Santals are tribals in Bihar, West Bengal and Orissa and non-tribals in Assam.
The social scientists have enumerated different traits for defining tribe.16 The uniform definition is lacking. The definitions given by different social scientist apply to different tribes and not to all. Most of the definitions equally apply to castes.17 Different definitions of the caste also emphasize different traits depending on the limited view of the social scientist. In reality, the foreign writers artificially divided the castes and the tribes. The ambiguous division came in the way of clearly defining the terms. The two terms were often interchangeably used.
The monographs on various communities of India by the Census department and different foreign colonial functionaries studied the castes and the tribes together. The census department published special volumes on the Tribes and Castes. Some important publications of the same nature are, 'The Tribes and the Castes of Bengal' by H.H. Risley, 'Castes and Tribes of Southern India' by E. Thurston, 'Cochin Tribes and Castes' by L.K.A. Ayyar, M.A. Sherring's 'Hindu Tribes and Castes', R.E. Ethnoven's 'Tribes and Castes of Bombay', C. Willam's 'Tribes and Castes of the North-Western India', Sherring's 'Tribes and Castes of Rajasthan' and 'Tribes and Castes of Madras Presidency' and 'Tribes and Castes of the Central Provinces of India' by Russel and Hiralal. These titles clearly indicate that the colonial writers in spite of their biases and wrong motives, failed to substantiate the caste-tribe divide. The boundary line between the two remained blurred and they could not differentiate between the two categories clearly.
The meaning of the Sanskrit word 'jan' is invariably given as 'tribe' by the foreign colonial writers. The real meaning is 'people'. The Indian social scientists and the historians trained by western scholars continue to follow the path shown by their colonial teachers in this case. Romila Thapar is a prominent historian of colonial tradition in India. She got her Ph.D. degree from London University. She is a historian of the 'Aryan Aggressionist School. Like other colonial writers, 'jana' is 'tribe' for her also. 18 This kind of deliberate distortion abounds in the writings of Indian scholarhip dominated by the followers of colonial model.
The mischievous distortion of above type is carried in the translations of Hindu scriptures/texts. The translation of Manusmriti X, 62 given below shall make the point clear:
"If (a female of the caste) sprung from a Brahmana (male) and Sudra female, bear (children) to one of the highest castes, the inferior (tribe) attains the highest caste within the seventh generation."19
It clearly shows that the child born by inter- caste marriage is shown as a tribe. Here, in the translation of the passage, we find the combination of deliberate mischief and foolishness combined together. A tribe is never a mixed caste. It needs mention that there are many such cases where such translational distortions are found. The missionaries throughout the world are in the habit of translating the animist gods into English as 'Satan'. 20 This has been done in the case of the Nagas21 and many other tribes of the country. In a large number of the English translations or quotations of the Sanskrit texts, the terms 'deva' and 'dwija' are translated as 'Arya'. The red colonial writers (Indian Stalinists) have surpassed the white colonials in this dirty game.
Deviprasad Chattopadhyaya does not agree with Manu about the mixed caste origin of Lichchavis and Ambasth. He refers Buddhist sources and Mahabharata to declare them tribes, but quotes only JAOS (LXXV, 38), Fick and others and not the original sources, i.e., Buddhist literature and Mahabharata. Again, Karna is a tribe for him as Manu says, and not a mixed caste as Gautama declares. Here also Chattopadhyaya quotes the indirect sources and fails to refer to the original source. 22 It may be pointed out that the Buddhist literature, epics and Smritis do not use any synonymous term for tribe.
The Stalinist scholars are more confused about the caste-tribe dichotomy than even the white colonial writers.
Chattopadhyaya writes:
"... The ancient writers, like the modern census officers, were not always clear as to whether a particular group of backward people was to be called a caste or a tribe. The obvious corollary is that the caste organisation, beginning from early times, contained, as it still contains, very strong relies of the tribal. "23
It is essential to understand the writer's perception of tribe before analyzing his above-mentioned statement. He writes:
"The tribe is endogamous, though it contains sub-divisions within it, called the clans that are strictly exogamous. All the members of a clan have a strong belief in common descent; the original ancestor being usually imagined to be a plant or an animal, from which the clan borrows its name. Lastly, the council is the great feature of the ancient society: all the affairs of the clan are managed by the clan council; similarly, at the tribal level there is the council of tribes with the supreme authority over all the members of the tribe. Expulsion from the tribe is the major form of tribal punishment. "24
He further observes:
"We have mentioned these features of the tribal organisation because all these are found to characterise the basic features of the caste organisation.25
Needless to mention that ancient writers were not clear about caste tribe distinction, as Chattopadhyay admits, because there was no such distinction in the ancient days. They never used a term for the tribe. The basic characteristic features of the caste and the tribe are the same, as the author himself asserts, because caste and tribe do not differ basically. The division was planned as a colonial mischief. The Stalinists/Marxists search it due to their dogmatic obsession. Their confusion is because they, always, tenaciously, try to search what is absent. Chattopadhyaya refers to ancient texts and declares in Indian Society certain mixed castes to be the tribes. He blames others for his own mental haziness.
From the statement of Chattopadhyaya about the basic characteristics of a tribe, given above, it is clear that he is ignorant about the tribal society. The Kuki Chin tribes-the Mizos, the Paites, the Hmars, the Zous, the Thadous, the Simtes, the Gangtes, the Koms, etc., the Nagas of Tui and many other tribal groups do not follow clan exogamy. Hundreds of clans of a very large number of tribes do not believe in totems and totemism. Except for the few traces, the tribes of Nagaland, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur, Tripura and Sikkim neither claim their descent from the plants and the animals, nor have totemic clan names. The tribes do not have uniform pattern of village polity and the tribal councils are not the essential features of all the tribes. Some tribes, such as, the Nyishis, lack tribal councils. Some have very weak standing councils. In reality, the features mentioned above are the features of the caste society and points towards the caste-tribe continuum and the artificial division between the two categories.
Totemism: A Regional Phenomena:
Personal names based on the names of the months, days of the week, rivers, animals and plants are commonly found among different castes of India. The elements of totemism are present in the greater tradition also.26 The names of some of the Rishis providing the clan names, such as, Kashyapa (tortoise), Gotam (cow), Vatsa (calf), Sunaka (dog), Bhardwaja (a kind of bird), Mudgala (a kind of fish), Sandilya (a kind of bird), indicate the same. We have totemistic clan names among the large number of tribes and castes of Chhota Nagpur and Orissa. But fact cannot be ignored that even Brahmanas are not free from totemism in Orissa.27 It may, therefore, be safely concluded that totemism is not a tribal phenomenon. It is at best a regional phenomenon. It does not break the caste-tribe continuum.
Authors like Debiprasad Chattopadhyaya talk of the tribal survivals in the caste system. He does not bother to define tribe and caste and as stated above has the least understanding about them. According to him, the caste councils are the survivals of the tribal organisations.28 Why? Because, the Santals have it. He forgets, and most probably does not know and does not want to know, that the castes have equally, if not more, well organised standing councils and this is a proof of the fact that the caste and tribe are not different institutions as the Stalinist scholars wants us to believe.
Chattopadhyaya's stand on the gotra system needs scrutiny. He wrote thus:
"Thus if we do not allow ourselves to be lost in the maze of all the complications created by the later writers who wanted to rationalise and glorify the ancient gotra system, and if we concentrate on the fundamental characteristics of the system, namely, (1) idea of common descent of all the members belonging to the same gotra; (2) animal names usually assigned to the gotras; and (3) rule of strict exogamy for each gotra, - then, the clan origin of the system becomes evident to us. And the gotra system was vital to the caste organisation of the Brahmanas. Even the higher castes, therefore, were not without very strong relics of the tribal organisation. "29
It is not clear, how Chatopadhyaya jumps to the conclusion.
Even if we assume the clan origin of the system, which is meaningless, and the Stalinist jugglery of words aimed at deceiving his readers, it is impossible to agree with him of the tribal survival of the system.
Chattopadhyaya has shown that gotra system is followed by other castes also30 and yet he terms it Brahmanic gotra.31
The Indian born scholars of colonial tradition, including the Phanatic Marxists, make issue out of non-issue. As for example, Chattopadhyaya talks of unalterableness of professions. People like him are often misled to believe in the non-alterableness of professions as the fundamental characteristic of caste system by the theoretical discussion of the Brahmanical Law-books.33 He had to seek shelter of Fick and what he has shown basing on Dasa Brahmana Jataka to get rid of his misconceptions.34 Such confusions are not the privilege of the uneducated people of India. We know about the change of profession by the Brahmanas like Parashuram and Drona. I believe, Chattopadhyaya and the scholars of his Tribe must be know about the above-mentioned two Brahmanas. Unfortunately for them, even poor Manu allows the change of profession.35 Thus, his assumption of the tribal survival in the caste system based on the change of profession36 is baseless.
The smritis are the compilations of the existing customs and usages of the time. India is a vast country with vast time depth, and, therefore, it was always not possible to have uniform customs and the usages in our society. The popular usages were not to be disturbed even if considered to be improper. Such things were allowed by the Smritis. Kane wrote:
"Brihaspati, while illustrating the proposition that the king should not disturb popular usages even though they may be improper, cites several such practices among which he mentions, 'In some other countries there is the.... practice of a brother taking (as wife) the widow of his deceased brother, and the practice of delivering a maiden to a family. 37
Kane further wrote:
"There is also a text of Brihaspati which prescribes that the practices of the countries, castes and families should be guarded (or enforced) by the king as they have been in vogue from past times, otherwise the subjects become inflamed and among such practices he instances, 'Brahmanas in the South marry the maternal uncle's daughter. "38
The customs in vogue from past time were not allowed to be disturbed, even by the kings, according to the dictates of Dharma Shastras, although some of them were considered to be improper and sinful. This shows the deep regard for the time-bound customs and usages in this country. This also shows that diverse customs and usages were allowed in this country under the broad framework of the caste system. The tribes and the castes formed indistinguishable part of the system. The cross-cousin marriage mentioned above is practised by a large numberof tribes and the castes in the North and the East also. Subhadra, wife of Arjuna, was the daughter of his maternal uncle. Krishna's son and even the grand-son were married to their respective maternal uncles' sons. We do not find the condemnation of their acts in the Mahabharata. Many tribes, such as the Sherdukpens and Tagin allow cross-cousin marriage. Akas, Tripuris, Dimasa Kacharis, Ao Nagas, etc. prohibit cross-cousin marriage. Angamis allow marriage with mother's brother's daughter, but have prejudice against the same. Lotha Nagas, Kabui Nagas, and Gangtes favour cross-cousin marriage only with the maternal uncle's daughter.39 The joking relationship pattern of the tribals40 is identical with that of the castes. Thus, we cannot draw a dividing line between the castes and tribes basing on the kinship usages among them.
The caste and tribe do not form the two ends of the caste-tribe continuum scale. There is considerable overlapping in the middle range. Except for the two extreme ends, the vast middle range is common. The distinguishing traits are missing in a large number of cases. Most of the social scientists describe the traits of the community whom they consider to be the tribe. They ignore the fact that the trait may or may not be shared by other tribes.
Most of the tribes and castes are endogamous and practise clan-exogamy. The kinship usages are identical in most of the cases. Like most of the Hindu castes, the tribals follow both cremation and the burial41 It may be pointed out that the Indian scriptures allow cremation, burial and the platform burial as the modes of the disposal of the dead. 42 The seclusion and purificatory baths after child-birth,43 and death44, the naming of the child45, seclusion of women during the monthly course,46 and the customs related to the marriage ceremony" among a large number of the caste men and the tribes are identical.
It is often emphasised that the Caste society is organic and tribal society is segmental,48This is not true. There are numerous examples, which show otherwise. The tribal society of Nilgiri Hill consists of the Badaga cultivators, the Toda pastoralists,Kurumba sorcerers and the Kota musicians. Jajman-like relationship existed between the four tribal groups and they were interdependent and the part of a system of organic nature. The Kotas provided music for funerals and worked in leathers. They handled carcases and ate the flesh of cows and buffaloes. They were considered to be defiling inferiors by the Badagas and Kotas: were fed separately at the Badaga ceremony in separate utensils and were not allowed into the inner parts of a Badaga house. They did not go near the sacred things and used to make formal gestures of respect to a Badaga or Kota as from a subordinate to a superior.49 This was 'a caste order carried on in isolation from the centres and carriers of Indian civilization, 150
Rigid stratification is a characteristic feature of communities of Arunachal Pradesh. Though there might be groups differing in status these groups are endogamous.51
The Gond society has its vertical stratification as well as the horizontal divisions.52 The Ong clan of the Chang Nagas of Tuensang is priestly clan. The other clans-Kangshou, Lomau, and Kudamji have also their specific functions.53The Sema Nagas, Mizos, Thadous, Konyaks, Wanchos, Mizos, Riangs, Chakmas, Tripuris, Hmars, Paites, Khamtis, Sinphos, etc. have the chiefs and the commoners.54 The Wancho Nagas have the chiefs (Wangham), commoners (Wangpen), Wangsa and Wangsu sections. The descendants of the Wangham chief and the commoner girl are known as Wangsa and the descendants of the Wangsas become Wangsus. None becomes a chief unless both his parents have Wangham blood in their veins.55 The same is the case of the Ang chiefs of the Konyak Nagas. The Akas have Khulos (slaves) as a separate class among them.56Sherdukpens are divided into two distinct classes, namely, Thong and Chhao. The Chhaos have inferior position and sit to a lower position behind the Thongs during the religious ceremonies and the food and religious offerings are distributed only by the latter group.57
Bhuinharkhunt (maximal lineage) is the most privileged section of the Oraon tribe. They have Raja villages, Praja villages, Dewan (minister) villages and Panray (clerk) villages,58Namsoon clan has superior position among the clans of the Khamtis.59 All the Ao clans do not have equal privileges.60 The Kisku-had, Murmu-had, Saran-had and the Marandi-had are the kings, priests, soldiers and the farmers among the Santals. This is just like the Varna system.61
Many other tribes, such as, the Bhuiya,62 Bhumij,63 Kewat,64 Koch,65 Tharu66, Tiyar,67 etc do not exhibit segmental social structure and behave like caste clusters. The resident groups of untouchables serve the Konds of Baderi village of Orissa.68 The Oraons of Chhota Nagpur require the services of the other serving castes, like any other Hindu caste. They have Jajmani relationship with them. Julahas and Turis supply them clothes and baskets, the Kumbhars supply earthenware pots and tiles for roofing, and the Lohars supply and repair their iron implements. The Ahirs tend cattle and the Goraits act as the village orderlies and musicians.69 Thus, the Oraons act like a caste. Similarly, many other so-called tribes enter into Jajmani relationship with the serving castes. The names of many tribes may be cited in this case. Some of them are Ho,70Kharwar,71 Savar,72 Kisan,73 Bathudi,74 etc. The Lohars, Mahli, Chik Baraik, Kora, Banjara, Baiga, Turi, etc., are the serving communities (tribes), whose services are required by the tribes and castes of Chhota Nagpur.75
The facts mentioned above clearly show that the social structure of the castes and tribes do not differ considerably. It is not possible to draw a boundary between the two social categories on this count in most of the cases. The tribal societies on the Northeastern fringe lie on the farthest point on the caste tribe continuum frame. This however, is not the case with the tribes of Assam, Tripura and some of the tribes of Arunachal Pradesh.
It is clear from the above-mentioned facts that the tribal society is not free from hierarchical ordering, as Mandelbaum erroneously claims.76A caste or tribe in a multi-community setting may find itself in identical situation. There are thousands of villages in this country with only one caste or tribe. The situation of such villages may be identical. It is not true that the "jati people expect their village society to be culturally heterogeneous, each jati following a unique combination of customary practices, tribesmen expect their society to be homogeneous or, at least, not necessarily heterogeneous", as Mandelbaum wrongly asserts."77It is also necessary to mention here, that each jati does not follow a unique combination of customary practices. The question of the jati or tribal group expecting their society to be homogeneous or heterogeneous does not arise. The village-folk never indulge themselves in such insensible acts.
Some castes and tribes easily incorporate new migrant or allies in their society. The Akas are most conservative in this respect, 78but the same is not the case with the Nagas. The adoption is easier in their society; specially, among the Semas and the Changs.79The Changs have two types of adoption, namely, Sholalibu and Bumbu. The issueless couple usually adopts a minor child as their adopted son. The very poor persons, often from other tribes, get themselves adopted as Sholalibu. He is permanently absorbed in the family as a member, takes family and clan names and gets share of fields and property as a son. The adopted father gives his dress and constructs separate house for him after his marriage.80There are other ways of assimilation in the tribe also.81 Many castes allow the assimilation of other castes/tribes also in their community. The Balahis of Madhya Pradesh do so, as we have discussed elsewhere. The Mahlis allow the assimilation of higher caste members/tribesmen in their community. It is difficult to associate this characteristic of some communities with the caste or the tribe as a whole.
Jhuming/slash and burn/Swidden/axe cultivation is often associated with the tribals. It may be kept in mind that this kind of agriculture depends on the topography of the area. Many tribal communities practise permanent cultivation. The Angamis, Chakhesangs, Maos, Monpas, Apatanis have excellent terraced fields and mostly go for permanent cultivation along with some jhuming. Miniyong, Milang, Koireng, Tangkhul, Magh, Kachari and Eastern Rengma tribes practise permanent and jhum cultivations both.84Sherdukpens plough the level land with the traction using crossbreeds of Mithun and ordinary cattle and practise jhuming on the hill slopes.85 The tribal in the plains plough their land like all other castes. On the other hand, the castes and tribes in the hills, say in Sikkim, go for jhuming.
Bailey studied tribal Konds and compared their land-tenure pattern with that of their neighbouring castes in Orissa. The clansmen share the tribal land for the productive purposes as it tends to be vested in the clans. According to Bailey, "Membership of the clan is, under this system, a condition of holding and exploiting land in the clan territory. A right to land is not achieved by subordination to anyone else, but by equality as a kinsmen, "86 Bailey further hypothesized that the direct access to land is the prime test of tribal organization.87Bailey is wrong on both the counts. He, like most of the white and red colonial writers, has a romantic view of the clan/communal ownership of the tribal land. He applies his micro-observation to derive the macro conclusion, as most of the writers of his tribe do. The individual ownership of the tribal land is a well-known fact. Hutton writes about the individual ownership among the Angami Nagas:
"Terraced fields, wood plantation, gardens, building sites, and the greater part of jhum land is individual property and, subject to life interests, mortgages, etc., may be sold or otherwise disposed of at the will of the owner, though when selling an ancestral field, the vendor retains a small fragment in nominal ownership lest he die or suffer misfortune. "88
Such rights were allowed to the captives and their descendants also in the Angami villages.89 The Angamis have even the complicated system of the right over the utilization of the water of the irrigation channels.90 The Chang Nagas also have the lands and gardens under the individual ownership. Such land is known as Phulak by them91 The Apatanis have the right to transfer the land, which is naturally, under the private ownership, Haimendorf mentions about the exorbitant price of the land in the Apatani platoe:
"All cultivated land is jealously guarded property, and good irrigated fields fetch prices that in the plains of Assam would be considered fantastic."92
All the members of a village or clan are not equally privileged in the matter of the ownership of land. The original settlers of a village and their descendants are usually the privileged lot in this case. The earlier settlers and the persons related to the founder of a Chang village used to get bigger and better plots of lands. Others in the village used to get smaller plots with a lot of stones needing hard work.93The founders of the villages among the Oraons and their descendants, called Bhuinhars are taken as the owners of the village lands.94Many tribes have their chiefs who monopolise the land of their villages. The land in the Sema villages belongs to the chiefs and the commoners work in the same.95
The shifting cultivation is mostly done by the clan members in the land belonging to the clan in a compact area. The collective Jhuming by the clan or the village has many advantages. The villagers/clansmen save a vast deal of labour in fencing and scaring birds. It is difficult to save the crop in a solitary patch of jhum field in the midst of the surrounding jungle from the depredations of the birds and the beasts.96 If Jhuming is done in one side to the village, then the villagers graze the cattle on other side.97
The land among many tribes of Tuensang belong to the villages,98This seems to be the case, specially, where Jhuming is extensively practiced. The jhum land among the Angamis "that has not yet become the subject of private right cannot, of course, be sold except by the clan or kindred owning it, though with their consent it might be possible for a man to sell his share in the common rights. "99
Kumar observes about the land in the Chang villages of Tuensang:
"Land and forests owned by individuals were transferable. Apart from the lands belonging to the individuals, every village has also the respective clan lands and the forests owned by the village community. The poor and needy are allowed to cultivate clan lands on payment of about 10-15% of the produce. "100
It is pertinent to note in this connections that the villages inhabited by the caste men also used to have common grazing ground in almost every part of the country in the recent past. It is clear from the facts mentioned above that clear-cut distinct pattern of the land tenure of the castes and tribes is not possible.
Many castes have direct access to land. On the otherhand there are many tribes who do not have direct access to land. The immigrants in any tribal village are very often denied access to land. This does never mean that they cease to be tribals. The tribals in the Bhuinhari villages of the Oraons, the commoners in the tribal Chief's villages do not have direct access to land, but they do not cease to be the tribals. The Mahlis, Chik Baraiks, Lohars, Turis Goraits, Koras, etc. usually do not have access to land. The hunting and gathering tribes and the tribes practicing handicrafts 101 usually have no access to land. On the other hand, numerous castes, such as the Koiris, Kurmis and the Bumihar Brahmans have direct access to land. These facts go against the test of Bailey. Dumont criticized it as being too narrow.102 Surajit Sinha took it as only one of the distinguishing features of the tribe. 103
The limitations of the shifting cultivation in the hills and the rural economy elsewhere make it difficult for the tribals and the rural poor of all the castes, including the Brahmanas to have the surplus accumulation. The lack of surplus accumulation limits the possibility of trading and the financial transactions. There is hardly any capital formation, and therefore its use in market trading. Most of the people are extremely poor and the economy is on subsistence level. The tribals and the rural poor want to have surplus accumulation, but there is very less scope to have it. A Naga accumulates to give series of Feasts of Merit to his villagers: 104 a Tangkhul accumulates to enable him to construct special kind of house (Lengcheng shim), 105 Many tribes on the Indo-Tibet border were excellent traders. Thus, Surajit Sinha is wrong when he opines that the tribesmen place little value on surplus accumulation, on the uses of capital, and on trading.106The barter trade continues to be apart of the rural economy among the tribes and all the castes with varying degrees.
None, who does not belong to a trading community, succeed in trade unless they learn it. Many high caste Hindu incur heavy losses in trade, but they gradually learn and succeed. The tribals and caste men do not take to trading mainly due to lack of capital and the experience. Martin Oran has written about the failure of some Santal tribals in their trading ventures. I have seen some Brahmans, Rajputs and other castes failing in their trading ventures, like Santals, just due to the same reasons. Like Santals, they were over-generous in extending credit and under-insistent in collecting debts.107 Many of them who failed in their ventures operated their trade activities away from their villages and the kin groups. However, the remarks of Martin Oran equally apply to the traders of various castes who take up trading as a new venture. He writes:
"It is difficult to square the basic reciprocity of relations in a kin society like that of the Santal with the impersonal and contractual relation of the market. "108
He further wrote about the nature of Santal, which is equally applicable to any rural caste man of the identical financial standing:
"... the traditional Santal once at the market, is too eager a buyer, too poor a haggler, and too readily drawn into pleasant social intercourse to hold his own."109
The people in this country often enquire about the happiness and wellbeing on meeting with each other.
Such enquiries are made to any person with whom the person concerned has intimacy. He may belong to any caste or tribe, but the intimacy is naturally more if someone belongs to one's own community. The mode of enquiry of a Santal from his co-tribal from a distance place, according to Martin is, "How is pleasure in your region?" It is identical to what we hear among the other communities also. Martin further writes:
"Pleasure, as the Santal understands the term, is a shared understanding which creates immediate bonds with co-tribals wherever they may be form. "110
In reality, the 'shared understanding' does not remain limited to one's own community. An observation of the inter-communal behaviour of the people at any market place shall make my point clear. The people often enquire about the "Kushal" (well-being, welfare, happiness, safety) and "swasthya" (health) of each other. It is not necessary that the person concerned should belong to the caste or tribe of the enquirer.
The tribe-caste continuum expresses itself in many spheres. The economy of Indian castes and tribes was based on broad framework of sharing. The people used to work very hard and shared the fruits of their hard work with others. Any unknown person was a welcome in an Indian home. Giving feast was a way of sharing and all the castes and tribes participated in their respective community feasts. The persons of other communities also participated and continue to participate in the same. People used to help their neighbours during ceremonies. All this was done on reciprocal basis. This helped in the maintenance of the egalitarian ethos. The behaviour of the people, most of the castes and tribes in this case, was identical.
The Indian rural economy based on sharing and reciprocation did not allow the gulf between the poor and the rich to widen. The situation has, unfortunately, changed now. The people have become highly individualistic and self-centred due to the impact of westernization and wrong kind of education.
We had a large number of strong and complex tribal Hindu states in India. The powerful Gond states in Central India, the kingdoms of Cooch-Bihar, Tripura, Jaintia, Kachar, Barahis, Morans, etc. had the effective control over their tribal and non-tribal subjects. The Varman dynasty ruled Assam for long period, which was not possible without the effective control over their tribal and non-tribal subjects. It may be mentioned that the Varman kings of Assam were Brahmanas according to Chinese traveller, Yuan Chuang.111 The specialized roles and dominant-subordinate relations are not unknown to the tribals under chieftainships112 and also under the tribal and non-tribal kings. The western scholars,who often come to the quick conclusions on the basis of their micro studies and narrow data base, and their blind Indian followers, usually ignore these facts. We may cite the opinion of Mandelbaum 113 based on the Weber's writings¹14 to show how he blatantly ignores the facts given above to add a point in support of his pre-conceived notion of caste-tribe divide.
Mandelbaum writes:
"In political organization, tribal people do not usually maintain strong, complex formations. These require specialized roles and dominant-subordinate relations, neither of which is congenial in the tribal view. Kingdoms were established among some of the more populous tribes, but most of them had only precarious support and the rulers often made use of specialists imported from the caste society. Although tribesmen have often been under the nominal control of rajas, few have acted the part of faithful, steadfast, and subservient subjects."
Needless to say that the remark made above is superficial and devoid of the facts. It may be mentioned here that the army of the tribal kings were locally recruited and their strength came from the local economy. The subjects of many such kings practiced Jhuming. The kingdoms continued to be strong and long-lasting. Being Hindus, the kings naturally had Brahmana and non-Brahmana priests according to Hindu customs and usages.
The Caste-Tribe divide is an artificial divide. The motive behind the divide was to weaken the Hindu society and to facilitate the conversion of the tribals to Christianity. The colonial writers had scant understanding of the culture and the religion of the tribals. Their deplorable attitude towards the religion and culture of the people under their colonial yoke is often reflected in their writings. The benevolent gods of the tribes, as mentioned elsewhere, were often translated by them as 'Satan'115 Elwin was a non-changer and a revivalist for the tribes of Arunachal Pradesh and the "Hinduized" tribes of other places.116 He wanted no school for them or only special schools and wanted 'National Park' for them.117 The same Elwyn was happy that the people of Nagaland were co-operating with the Nagaland Government in opening new schools and they constructed school buildings in their respective villages to facilitate the Government in this work.118 This is typical example of the colonial double talk and hypocrisy .
The concept of the creator among the tribals and the same in the Hindu scriptures is identical. The creator is the Supreme. He is benevolent and uninvolved in the affairs of man and therefore is revered but not worshipped. The tribal God in this respect is not different from the Vedic 'Brahma.'119 The tribes and the castes worship Gram Devata (village deities), Griha Devata (household deities), and different benevolent/malevolent deities with different functional attributes.120 Ancestor worship is common among the castes and tribes.121 They celebrate many common festvals122 and observe similar rites during the marriage and death ceremonies.123 The tribes, like the castes, employ the Brahmana and non-Brahmana priests,124 and on certain occasions, themselves act as priests or their women-folk do so.125
Hinduism does not ignore the local culture and the beliefs. However, everything works in the frame-work of Hinduism. There is nothing called the Hinduism of higher or lower jati. Hinduism incorporates the simple faith of the villagers and the most sophisticated philosophical monism in it. It is not a formula-based religion. This is why the least educated Brahmana and an uneducated villager of any caste or tribe interact at the same conceptual level. Neither the caste, nor the tribe, bring the difference as all the communities have equal nearness to the scriptures. So far the Vedas are concerned, more than 99.9% Brahmanas do not claim to have seen it at the present time. The question of reading Vedas has, therefore, only theoretical importance. At any rate the religion of an illiterate Hindu, even if he is a Brahman, does not differ from that of a tribal. But these factors were so often ignored by the British colonial authorities and the Census authorities headlined the religion of the tribals as 'animism'. The term was soon replaced with "Tribal Religion'. The same was resented by J.T. Morten. He wrote:
"If the word Animism is vague in respect of what it connotes, the word 'Tribal Religion is not by any means definite in what it denotes. "126
The Census authorities were conscious that the so-called tribal religions did not differ from popular Hinduism. P.C. Tallens wrote about the difficulty faced by the Census authorities in this case. He wrote:
"The difficulty of distinguishing the religion of such persons from the lower types of the Hinduism has always been experienced at every census.’’127
According to Risley, "no sharp line of demarcation can be drawn between Hinduism and Animism"128 According to him, Hinduism is "Animism more or less transformed by Philosophy or "as magic tempered by metaphysics.’’129
The remark of Sidgwick was straighter. He observed, "Animism as a religion should be entirely abandoned, and that all those hitherto classed as Animists should be grouped with Hindus"130
Needless to say that the people, and not the Census authorities asserted and a very large percentage of the people wanted them to be listed as Hindus, rather than the 'animists' or the followers of the 'tribal religions',131 Many persons listed as animists were converted into Christianity and the Animism gradually vanished from the census scene.
The range of interaction of the Hindu society is very vast. One may not understand it without wide ranging observations. It is impossible to compare the traits of the castes and tribes by observing a Kond here and a jungle Chenchu there and a Santal and a Bhil somewhere else, as the Western writers do.132 The popular religion of India like the religion of the Indian tribes operates within the known unknown continuum in a broad frame of 'man-nature-spirit' complex133 and beyond. The tribal people, like the caste men believe in life after death and transmigration and transformation of soul. Many believe that the soul of the dead men, especially those dying unnatural deaths become ghosts.134 The author had personal discussion with many Kharwar and Chero tribes who believe in the sequence of lives and in the effectiveness of the good deed in the life after death.
The caste men and the Tribal take meat, fish and wine. Tantric Hinduism, Shaivism and Shaktism allow consumption of meat, fish and wine,135The wine is specially forbidden only for the Brahmanas.136 Even divine personalities, like Balarama, brother of Shri Krishna, was taking wine.137 Wine was only tabooed by Shukracharya and he himself stopped taking it. Certain meat is no doubt taboo,138 but such taboos are observed even by the Chang and Angami Nagas,139 who are considered to be almost omnivorous in taking flesh.140 Some Hindu castes even take the forbidden meat.141 According to Hindu Dharma Shastras, Kama (worldly desire, sex) is one of the four things to be achieved in life.142 A treatise on sex (Kamsutra) was written in India by Vatsayana. Western world has not produced Vatsayana as yet. Many Hindu gods carry musical instruments.143 Tandava dance of Shiva is famous. He is called Nataraj. We have many schools of dance in this country.144 A casteman, like his tribal brothers, fully enjoys, his food (vegetarian or non-vegetarian), drink, sex, song and dance. Many castes enjoy meat, fish and alcoholic drink; a large number of them do not. Vaishnavites are puritanical in the matters of food and drink. But, a brother in the family may be a Vaishnavite and the other may be a Shakta or Shaiva, and their diet may not be the same. In the light of the above facts, the following remarks of Mandelbaum seem to be superfluous and laughable:
"Tribal people generally take direct, unalloyed satisfaction in pleasures of the senses, whether in food, alcoholic drink, sex, song, or dance. "145
There are thousands of castes in this country and a sweeping remark like this shows the utter ignorance and arrogance of the writer. The people's enjoyment is not subjected to the restrictions of caste or tribe. It mainly depends on the temperament of a person and these personal likings and the persons of identical temperament and liking may be found in any caste or tribe.
Puritanism and asceticism are often over-emphasised by the writers of colonial tradition as caste traits. This fact should not be ignored that the majority of the caste men are not puritans nor most of the tribals are non-puritans. There is no rational behind such a criteria of caste as Puritanist. Similarly, asceticism is emphasized in such a way as if this country consists of tens of crores of ascetics. The reality is otherwise. Moreover, the household duty is considered to be equally meritorious in this country and every caste man is not allowed to be a Sanyasi.
Indian people have the capacity to adjust according to the changed situation. There are regional cultural variations in this country and a person or a group changes according to the changed situation without, of course, altering the overall framework. Aghareahs of Chhota Nagpur claim to be the Kshatriya migrants from Agra. Dalton writes about them:
"They were there, they say, Kshatriyas, but having been subjected to some persecution by the ruler of the State they left it, and taking up new lands in a new country cast aside their sacred, ... with all its privileges, and obligations, and took to the plough. Their appearance favours their pretensions to be of good blood. Tall, well made with high Aryan features and tawny complexion, they look like Rajputs, but are more industrious and intelligent than the generality of the fighting tribe.... They are orthodox Hindus in most customs, but they allow widows to remarry, and they bury the dead, but at any time when the bones are dry, the principal joints and part of the skull are taken up and conveyed by the representative of the deceased to the Ganges. "146
This clearly shows the vast range of change. It is change from one end of the caste-tribe system to almost another end. It clearly shows the change of status, profession and the customs.
Mandelbaum has quoted the opinion of Hockings that Badagas of Nilgiri hills were possibly a 'jati people and became a tribe after their migration to their present habitat sometimes after the twelfth century. According to him, they might have acquired some tribal characteristics during their stay in the isolated Nilgiri Hills.147
Buchanan Hamilton has mentioned in his account of Gorakhpur that there are many Nagbangsis in that district considered Rajputs and acknowledging the Raja of Chutia Nagpur as the head of the family.148 The kinsmen of the NagbangshiRajputs of Gorakhpur might have acquired some tribal traits during their stay there due to their isolation as happened in the case of the Aghariahs and Badagas. The claim of the Rajbangshis, Bhumij, Raj Gonds, etc. about their Kshatriya status should be considered in the light of this fact keeping aside the colonial biases.
The race does not come in the way of the Kshatriya status according to the Indian tradition. This fact is fully discussed elsewhere in this book. Some Indian anthropologists trained in the colonial tradition often create confusion due to their ignorance and baseless pre-conceived notions. Some of their notions need discussion to make my point clear. Let us take the case of Bhumij for example. Surajit Sinha had written several papers on the tribe which were published in reputed journals of India and abroad. It is interesting to examine some of the remarks of Sinha about the community.
According to Surajit Sinha, Bhumij regard themselves as a Hindu jati and most of the others also do so.149 It is natural that most of the others include most of the castes and the tribes of the area inhabited by them. The Bhumij of Madhupur at the Bihar West Bengal Border have jajamani relations with half a dozen or more specialist jatis, require the services of the Brahmans, barbers and washermen and meet about thirty jatis at the weekly market.150 The Bhumij jamindars and the large landowners have formed a separate jati and are recognised as Kshatriyas.151
Thus, they are accepted as a jati and a section of them as the Kshatriyas. This is quite natural, because, the concept of 'tribe' is an alien concept for Indians. In India, everybody is born in a jati. There is no word for tribe in Indian languages. The terms, 'Adivasi' and 'Jan-jati' were newly coined. The colonial functionaries and writers introduced the term in the latter part of the last century.
Bhumij, like many other castes, are differently placed by different communities in the caste hierarchy. They are considered to be among the highest of jatis, equal to or higher than the Brahmans by three other tribal groups of the area. They are, however, ranked far below Rajputs and traders, about at a level with washermen, weavers and distillers by the more prestigious of the local Brahmanas.152 This statement leaves many questions unanswered. What are the credentials of the so-called more prestigious of the local Brahmanas? Did they base their observation on some scriptural prescriptions? Did the writer examine the validity of the opinions of about thirty jatis of the area including the so called less prestigious Brahmanas? What are the criteria of judging the scale of prestige among the Brahmans? Whether the remark of the so called more prestigious local Barhmans applied to the composite Bhumij community or to only one section of the same? If it applies to the whole community, then what about the more elegant standards of diet, drink and ritual of the well-off sections of the tribe?153
Sinha has given reasons for the low rating of the Bhumij by those Brahmanas. Some of the reasons cited are given below:
i. Few among the Bhumij have completely renounced tribal traits concerning diet, women and death. The tribal traits are elaborated in their case as given below: i.
(a) Many Bhumij still drink liquor and eat chicken:
(b) Re-marriage of the women are allowed and the women dance at ceremonies;
(c) They follow burial, rather than the cremation; the bones of the deceased are later re-entered in a custom which is common among many tribes,154
ii. According to Mandelbaum, they "are the dominant group in many of the villages in which they live; they are still not wealthy and powerful enough to persuade the authentic "twice-born" to turn a blind eye to their tribal failings. "155
The last remark is mischievous and foolish. It brings out the naked superiority complex of a western scholar to the surface. Who are the authentic "twice-born"? What are the tests of locating them? What is the quantum of wealth and power to enable a community to be purchase-worthy in the status market? What is the meaning of turning blind eye and what role is played by wealth and power in this case? Whether the Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and the so called less prestigious Brahmanas come under the category of so called "authentic twice-born" or not? Here, it is essential to mention that Hindu scriptures do not classify 'twice-born' into 'authentic' and 'non-authentic'. A western scholar knowing least about the Indian scriptures is worst suited to make such comments. The statement is baseless. There is nothing to show that such things really happen.
The Kshatriyas everywhere take wine. There is nowhere mentioned in the Hindu scriptures that a Kshatriya is debarred from taking chicken or he does not remain Kshatriya after taking the same. It has already been mentioned in this chapter that the Dharm Shastras allow deviant marriage customs and the Brahmanas in many parts of the country prefer marriage with the daughter of the maternal uncle, which is prohibited by the Dharma Shastras. Remarriage of the women is a similar local custom. Jayadratha abducted Draupadi, the wife of Pandavas to make her his wife,156 and he was a Kshatriya king. Lastly, I have mentioned earlier in this chapter that burial is allowed even by the Vedas. The Hindus know about the Gopi's dance with Shri Krishna.157 Therefore,it is perplexing to know from an Indian anthropologist that such things become anti-jati.
Sinha and Mandelbaum, like their other tribesmen, have confused the issues. While talking about the status in the jati frame, they talk about the tribal traits and thereby give the impression that they are discussing to determine their status in the jati-tribe frame.
Jati and tribe in India do not belong to different categories, except in the case of a very small percentage of the tribes in the North-East India and elsewhere. These two are the social categories. The two endogamous Bhumij sub-castes belong to two different social categories. Unfortunately, the anthropologists confuse it with the historical category. That is why they often talk about the status of one Bhumij community in the caste-tribe frame, rather than two.
The Western writers and their follower social scientists in India have created an identity crisis for various communities of this country. They go to the people and declare their identity and if it does not tally with what the people say, then they blame the latter for their so-called status improvement skills. The people of this country follow Shaivism, Shaktism or Vaishnavism and they invariably apply their option to change from one cult to another. Here again, they intervene if one goes for Vaishnavite mode of worship. This they often label as 'the reform movement' or 'the change for puritanism' for status improvement. A motive is attributed to every change. Sinha writes about the motive behind the so-called reform movement among the Bhumij that their gay sensuality has been slightly toned down in order to make a good impression on the higher castes.158The writer does not know that Vaishnavism is practised by every caste in this country and the change is visible even within the members of the same family and it may belong to any caste. The motive is religious, rather than to show the way of life to others. This is a typical case of socio-psychological warfare against a section of our people. The irresponsible academic culture of this country has helped incompounding the problem.
The Bhumij, Rajbanshi and many other similarly placed castes not only suffer due this socio-psychological assault, but also due to their inability to derive benefits of social distancing which they are supposed to get by getting themselves declared as tribes. Some leaders among them advocate for the 'Adivasi' status, keeping in view the benefits flowing to them as Adivasis,159 An educationist of Meena tribe provided me the booklets about his community in which the scriptural references about them were given. He confided to me about the caste status of his community and informed to me the benefits derived by them due to their status as a tribe.Social distancing pays in India, but the country loses. Some persist in what they think to be their identity and deny to themselves the benefits of the 'vested interests, which some others have developed in backwardness'.
*Dr. B.B. Kumar, Editor, Quarterly Dialogue and Chintan-Srijan, Delhi, is the editor of this journal.
