It is amazing how that tenuous something called culture is very tenacious when it comes to not letting go of you ... despite your earnest attempts at jettisoning it like you would an impoverished relative. Culture and its ramifications are indeed a deep-rooted thing and you just cannot shoo it away on a whim, though you might dislike it much in the interests of an egalitarian society.
These thoughts occurred to me as I was recently watching from the sidelines the brouhaha over the 'satyagraha' of the swamy in saffron, it's quick dispersal by a diktat of (in all likelihood) the home ministry and the ensuing battle royal of words.
But before that a word about our cultural baggage called 'Chathurvarnya', which literally means four 'colours' / classes. ( http://www.hindubooks.org/sudheer_birodkar/hindu_history/castevedic.html )It is common knowledge at least to the yesteryear generations that society in India was divided for convenience (whose, is a moot question) into four classes--the priestly, the ruling, the trading and the labour groups. This, on the whole, was a very convenient arrangement. The priests, naturally, took care of all the poojas, homas etc and did their best to propitiate the Gods with yajnas and other offerings, and it was not a tough task to propitiate the priests if you had the requiste gold coins and other presents ready. The warrior class kept themselves in training and on the strength of their sharp tools of the trade, kept everybody in line and levied taxes, reigned, and lived and loved happily ever after --until perhaps their son/s took it into their heads to 'retire' the father. The traders were not much different from their counterparts of the present times, and as lobbying sirens like Ms Radia were not invented then, resorted to the more mundane ways of rigged weights and measures and some plain adulteration to chalk up sizeable profits, married into 'money' and lived happily. The labour class was kept out of mischief by solid day-long work, either in the fields or under the craftsmen builders etc. As trade-unionism and such like 'emancipating' ideas were not popular yet, they spent most of their time bent to their work and was thankful in the evening to be permitted to go home to a meal that kept body and soul together and some rest. This was a most happy state of affairs.
And the world happily went round and round about its axis and none had any complaints. Brahmins were content to be brahmins, the kshatriyas were more than happy playing their roles, the traders, like always, were blissful so long as the till resounded with the jingle of money, and the poor sudras merely took their fates in their stride. Then what we now call the 'winds of change' started blowing, and from what ensued, one may not be too far from the truth if one believed that it was an ill wind that blew nobody any good. The quiet balance of society was lost as the 'colours' and castes were in a hurry to intermingle and, more often, this was to the accompaniment of physical violence.
Then (let me sum up history into one sentence), for good or for bad, we Indians went in for a casteless system, and threw the 'chathurvarna' philosophy into the waste heap of history-- except in the times of elections, weddings and interviews. And in these modern times when Fair & Lovely rules, 'colour' could never hold its own, in a way, try as it might. But there are people who keep insisting that the system has its merits too. ( http://www.echarcha.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1055 ). Personally I thought I did not know enough to take sides in such a complex issue--until I heard some of the wise pronouncements of men who matter in the India of today. This was what I referred to above in the second paragraph.
When a person (and that too a respected Minister at the Centre) with the background and education of Kapil Sibal endorses the merits of the 'Chathurvarnya', one naturally has to listen. ( He is the minister for the most-valued export of India too--human resources!) While commenting on the recent adventures of the saffron-clad sanysi Ramdev poaching on the territory of the professional politician, Mr Sibal was very specific as to where the lines were drawn.
"A swami who teaches yoga to the country should not teach us political aasans (postures)",
said the honourable minister, referring, of course, to the ascetic's 'jumping of the fences' from yoga postures to political posturing. I simply loved the tone and the body language of the minister as he uttered those words. So would most of you when you watch the video: http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/news/stick-to-yoga-not-political-aasans-govt-on-ramdev/201667
Coming from a man who has studied law, and more importantly, history, surely this sounds eminently reasonable to a layman like me. 'Chathurvarnyam' was by and large about keeping the 'purity' of the classes. After all, the word 'caste', pundits tell me, has its roots in 'chaste', and 'Jati', or religion, is derived from the root syllable 'Ja', which means 'to be born'. So it is probably in the best interests of everybody if we kept the 'divisions' clear-cut and separate, and kept to "our" side of the fence when it came to our pursuits in life. Just imagine the chaos that would ensue if the brahmins chose to go (okay, okay, suppose they were pushed ) into the battle field with their mantras and tantras, and no swords and no courage? What about the warrior choosing to don the sacred thread and undertake a major yajna? God forbid! What could you expect if the dapper trader were made to heft the hoe and the pickaxe in the fields? And imagine the poor sudra suddenly finding himself one fine morning on the trader's chair, or for that matter, on the throne of the ruler? With no disrespect meant, let me say this -- it will be ABSOLUTE CHAOS, as chaotic as chaos can be!
What the knowledgeable minister meant was when a sanyasin (either by birth, or in the modern era, by choice and training) trespasses into areas where he has no right to tread, let alone rush in like a foolish angel, he should realize that he is upsetting the fine balance of nature. He should calmly follow his vocation of teaching yoga to all and sundry, including perhaps ministers, prime ministers and corporate honchos. Have we all forgotten the sagely and powerful Dhirendra Brahmachari who was the personal yoga guru of the former PM Indira Gandhi? He never chose to dirty his hands with politics; rather, with aplomb he got politicians to play political games of chess .
Despite all our proclamations of 'modernity', India is, I am glad, at heart, a nation that bows to its cultural past and 'chathurvarnya'. I dont subscribe to the views of those who scream 'dynastic rule' whenever a minister's or a prime minister's son or daughter becomes a political functionary. Nobody cried foul when a trader's son became another, or a labourer's son or daughter went into, ahem!, labour. Even today to be a priest in one of the millions of temples in India, you have to be born the son (no daughters, please!) of a brahmin! Such is the stranglehold of your cultural past. Then why this half-hearted acceptance of a "classy" system?
With such thoughts and the exhortation of our ebullient minister fresh in my mind, I logged onto the website of the Parliament to dig out the antecedents of our worthy 'netas' who steer this country along through the stormy seas of allegations and scams. If we wanted to preserve the 'chaste' nature of our caste system, naturally we had to have a look at the parentage and education of these worthies. Segregation of the 'varnas' according to the professional training was the primary standard, as per the dictum of dear Sibalji. Sadly I could not confirm whether the yoga guru under reference was trained in anything in addition to yoga. But the backgrounds of most of our ministers and MPs left me 'rolling on the ground laughing', if you will permit me to adopt the fav phrase of the 'chat' crowd.
Mr Sibal, the Parliament website informs us, was trained in history and law. Just that? Not even a graduate degree in politics?? Oh, oh, then what the heck is he doing in politics? I dont know, but at least, was his father a practising politician? Sibalji, you ought to be wandering the corridors of law courts looking for clients, and not the corridors of power in the large round building, if you will follow your own prescription. You will have good company there, as our defence minister A K Antony and Mamata Banerjee too are law graduates; and so is Andimuthu Raja! Surely I am given to think that with his astute knowledge of the finer points of law and his charming personality and fantastic body language, in no time Sibalji could be the top legal eagle or legal vulture once he switches to the home turf of law. (When you come to think of law graduates who 'jumped fences', the first name that strikes you is that of Barrister Mohandas Karamchand. A friend was quick to point out that, considering the present state of affairs of the Congress and India, he felt that MK ought to have stayed put with his law practice.)
And what about economists? We have a bevy of economists in the government, beginning with PM SIngh. ( probably that is the reason for all the economic woes of the country... too many cooks!) Mr Singh ought to be enlightening students at some temple of learning instead of taking all the flak by pretending to be a politician. Both Kanimozhi and Dayanidhi Maran are economists, and look at the trouble that erupted when they mixed money, which they know all about, and politics, which was not their rightful turf.
Murli Deora, our former petro minister, is a BBA from Boston University--no wonder he always ran his ministry like a businessman obsessed with profits and little else. Look at Suresh Kalmadi--he has absolutely no background in either sports or politics; he is a graduate of Fergusson College, Pune, and also an alumnus of the National Defence Academy, Kharakvasla, and then trained in the Air Force Flying College,Jodhpur and Allahabad. What is he doing in his present position (not inside Tihar jail) instead of serving the country in the field in which he was trained at considerable expense to the taxpayer? We will all have some trouble pinning down Shashi Tharoor --B.A. (Hons), M.A., M.A.L.D, Ph.D., D.Litt (Honorary), Dr. Honoris Causa, educated at St Stephen`s College, Delhi University, New Delhi, and Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University, U.S.A. What qualifies him to be in politics? Chidambaram, our astute Home minister, has the unbeatable combination of science, law and business administration under his belt (if he wears one over his dhoti should be no concern of ours), but sadly, he too lacks any qualification in politics.
Our future hope, Rahul Gandhi, has an M Phil in development economics from Trinity College, Cambridge University, U.K. But instead of being a member of the committees that attempt to steer the country along lines of economic development, what is he doing jetting/biking around, getting arrested etc and playing the politician? His father was a pilot and his jumping fences into politics was not a wise decision as everybody knows. His mother Sonia's qualifications ( 1. Three year course in foreign languages (English & French) completed in 1964 at Instituto Santa Teresa, Turin, Italy; 2. Certificate in English from Lennox Cook School, Cambridge, UK, completed in 1965) make her eminently suited to an advisory position in one of the many committees on education-- but certainly not politics.
My 'treasure hunt' on the Parliament's website revealed to me one thing beyond any reasonble doubt. Almost all the "sitting politicians", including the perspicacious and amply loquacious Mr Sibal, are "fence jumpers" from one 'varna' to another, and in doing so they have violated the 'chasteness' of caste/varna as defined under the 'chathurvarnya' system, and as upheld by Mr Sibal. It is interesting to note that my hurried search succeeded in unearthing only a couple of "professional" politicians-- Mulayam Singh Yadav [B.A., B.T., M.A. (Political Science)) and our own beloved, omni-present Pranabji [M.A. (History), M.A. (Political Science), LL.B., D. Litt. (Honoris Causa)] You just cannot take an issue with their being present in government--they belong to the "political varna".
What are these other gents (and ladies) doing in the political arena, instead of quietly pursuing their respective professions according to their 'varnas' of belonging/training? Perhaps this should serve as an "instrospection trigger" for them, I guess. At least Mr Sibal owes it to himself (and to all of us) to think seriously about what he himself has stated as the guiding principle of this great nation. I urge him to think nothing of what will happen to the ministry he is holding charge of once he quits, and stand by what he believes in and propel himself with alacrity to the practice of law, and make an exit from politics, which, as things stand, is no place for a gentleman and a lawyer. Perhaps the political field's loss will turn out to be the legal profession's gain. Surely we dont need lawyers to teach us politics or run this country, nor do we want business admins to encroach into the political arena. Since when has politics become the first refuge of so many "out-castes"? Sibalji is right--let each profession keep to its own turf, which would be a healthy practice if ever there was one.
Psst! On second thought (lest I am viewed as a heartless stickler for tradition's 'varna' straitjacket), let me give a private tip to Sibalji: next time when you are about to project a small granite missile at somebody, see that the glass walls around you are lowered out of harm's way-- it is less messier.
Long live 'chathurvarnya' -- only let us hike the 'classes' from four to forty or so to accommodate most of us comfortably!
* * * * * * * * * * * *
