in partnership with the South Asia Center
(English captions & Hindi subtitles available)
About the Seminar:
This seminar explores the nature of urbanism that caste associations of pure and privileged seek to construct in the metropolis of Mumbai. To this end it asks: what role do caste associations play in the cosmopolitanism(s) of Mumbai? How do they help individuals negotiate urbanism? What is the nature of the civility and publicness they aspire to and work toward? What are the challenges they face? Prof. Waghmore suggests that caste associations of the pure castes work toward achieving an ideal of Hindu cosmopolitanism, whereas the caste associations of marginal groups are more inclined toward justice, dignity, and urban adventure. Associations of pure castes may seem to be bad cases of cosmopolitanism as they achieve a certain kind of limited openness and tolerance while continuing caste closure. However, they do attempt to provide cultural roots to consumerist individuals in the urban environment. The challenges facing caste associations of "pure" castes point both to the limits of urban Hindu cosmopolitanism as an ideal and social practice and to the lack of alterity as a necessary moral value for Hindu cosmopolitanism. Justice-oriented cosmopolitanism dominates, on the other hand, in the associations of ex-untouchable castes, which is partly dialogical and open to alterity.
About the Speaker:
Suryakant Waghmore is a Public Sociologist, Academic, Writer, and a Professor of Sociology at the Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, IIT. Bombay. He earned his Ph.D. in Sociology as a Commonwealth Scholar from University of Edinburgh in 2011. He is the author of Civility Against Caste (2013) and Co-editor of Civility in Crisis (2020). He was recently awarded the New India Foundation Fellowship (2021) to work on his book tentatively titled, Is a Post Caste City Possible? He was previously Professor and Chairperson at the Centre for Social Justice and Governance, TISS (Mumbai) and has held visiting faculty positions at Fudan University, University of Hyderabad, Stanford University. and Göttingen University.
FULL TRANSCRIPT:
Naveen Bharathi:
Hi, everyone! Welcome to the weekly fall seminar series of CASI, Center for the Advanced Study of India, University of Pennsylvania. I'm Naveen Bharathi, Postdoctoral Fellow at CASI, and I will be moderating this session. This semester also, all the seminars will be held online. While we might take some time to fully switch to in-person series, online series have helped us to host speakers from various parts of the world, which would have been impossible the series were held in-person. We also have been able to reach a wider audience due to this, like students from India and elsewhere also have been attending this series. In this series, we have speakers who will speak on various topics, ranging from forest rights to COVID crisis in India. Please visit our website, at casi.sas.upenn.edu for a complete list of speakers and registration links. Registration is required for our seminars. Most of our seminars are scheduled on Thursdays, between 12 noon to 1:00 p.m., except one on November 17th, which will be on a Wednesday. Also check out our website to know more about the activities of CASI, our fortnightly research publication, "India in transition", which covers research on contemporary India, and you can also subscribe to receive our weekly newsletter and also India in transition in your mailbox. Today we have Professor Suryakant Waghmore, from IIT Bombay, as our inaugural speaker. Professor Suryakant Waghmore is a public sociologist, academic and writer. He's also professor of sociology at the Department of Humanities and Social Sciences at IIT Bombay. He earned his Ph.D. in Sociology as a Commonwealth Scholar from University of Edinburgh in 2011. He's also author of many books. He's written a book, Civility Against Caste, in which he studied Dalit movements in Maharashtra, highlighting the centrality of cast in constructing localized forms and processes of civil society. This book reopened the debate on the nature and forms of Dalit assertion in the 1990s. He's also co-edited another book, called Civility in Crisis, which examined the relationship between civilities, citizenship and democracy. He has published papers in many peer reviewed journals and written many articles in popular press, showing the relevance of his research. Before joining IIT, Professor Waghmore was Professor and Chairperson at TISS, at the Center of Social Justice and Governance at TISS. He has held visiting affiliations at School of Development and Policy, Fudan University, Center for South Asia, Stanford University, and same at University of Gottingen. He's been recently awarded the New India Foundation Fellowship, to work on his book tentatively titled Is a Post-Caste City Possible? In today's seminar, Professor Waghmore will present parts of his ongoing book, and in this he exposed the nature of harmonism that cast associations of pure and privileged seek to construct in the metropolis of Mumbai. He will speak for 30 minutes, and Q&A will be for another 30 minutes. Please enter your questions in the question box there. And we look forward for a great seminar, and without much delay, I'll hand over the mic to Professor Waghmore, thanks for accepting our invitation and taking time to present your work. Thank you, sir!
Suryakant Waghmore:
Thanks, Naveen! Thanks, Tarik, Nafis, thank you for having me. What I'll be doing today is speaking on this project, on cast in cities, which primarily focused on Ahmadabad and Mumbai. Naveen, I had a request, when I am close to 20 minutes, just kind of warn me, so that I can start wrapping up here. So this, people, will be about cast associations of the privileged and pure cast. And I'll also try to, towards the end, speak of some outcast associations, associations of the ex-untouchable cast, and bringing insights from that bit as well. Since we are working within a 30 minute kind of framework, I would not squeeze in a lot of fill material. So to begin with, let me just give you this quote... from one of our respondents, he is a Kashmiri Pandit, just a second, something's wrong. Yeah. So Mr. Ajay, 54, is an active member of the Kashmiri Pandit Association in Mumbai. He is also a Bollywood actor, author, and teacher, and therefore an important face in the mainstream public life of Mumbai. In his interview, he shared his reflection on the role of cast and Kashmiri Pandit Association, that he's part of in Mumbai. Mr. Ajay joined the KP soon after coming to Mumbai in search of work in 1992. The organization was in an active phase then, as members were keen to mobilize and raise the issue of violence that affected Kashmiri Pandits in Kashmir. He shares, "I came in 1992 and immediately became a member. "We had a lot of emotion "against what had happened in Kashmir. "We used to meet and think of taking this up "to the government, United Nations. "And this was in my forties. "I realized that my heart wants to connect "with its own people." Mr. A and his other relatives, who along with many others, had left Kashmir in search of work outside as there are not many opportunities in the state. Most of these included theater artists, actors, doctors, engineers, and businessmen. Though A. emphasized his love for motherland and culture could be recovered through his membership with this association. He also emphasizes this need to be mobile. And what we see in his narrative is also a need to belong. Belong in the sense with its own people, that's the Kashmiri Pandit identity, but also a need to construct oneself through the golden age, or what he called as the old period, which was great. So I just quickly quote that bit to raise questions that I want to. "The olden period of cast", he says, "was done I think very scientifically. "It got polluted later. "Original division of cast was very scientific." And then he's sharing this with my research assistant here. What he's saying is "have you not interacted "with people who are unclean? "Have you not interacted with your friends "who are not very hygienic, "who are very unhygienic? "It is because of genetic coding of a specific cast. "It is because what we call sanskaras "of a particular job. "Because thinking becomes so, "in terms of morality also, "those who are Brahmins, "they are very highly modelistic. "They have very high moral values. "A Brahmin who is modelistic will never have an affair. "You cannot be flirting around and dating around. "This is not a real Brahmin. "This is why Shavruti, or a pure Shudra, "who doesn't believe in morality." So there were scientific reasons because see the kind of work which we do, if you have understood something about spiritual philosophy, cast and sub-cast are kept separately. If you interact with someone who is used to, for instance, demanding bribes, it will have negative impact on you, right? So he understands the present urban space, as a space that is Kalyug, and therefore not best for the kind of sanskaras and values one could live and celebrate in an olden time, which old time, ancient also for him, something to be preserved and celebrated. Now going by this, you may doubt, when we have this question, whether Mr. A, Ajay, as I call him, does he carry in him any possibilities of cosmopolitanism, given in the city of Mumbai, which is known for its cosmopolitan values and possibilities. So what is the nature, I basically suggest that, yes, that is possible, of cosmopolitanism, and I also argue that this is a form of Hindu cosmopolitanism which exists, so what is the nature of this cosmopolitanism? How does one make sense of this cosmopolitanism? A critical view of cosmopolitanism in contemporary times could broadly understand it as an elitist Western bourgeois and liberal project, that provides model and political meaning to lives of present day privileged elites, who can cross national boundaries across the east and west at ease. In this movement of mobility, enhanced by the advance of capitalism and mobiles, the mobile global citizen learns and unlearns culture and politics across time and space. Truly, global and cosmopolitan citizen does lacks rigid local rules, however, despite increased mobility across classes and national boundaries, such political entitled life is limited to a few. Cosmopolitanism, however, has deeper roots with modern meanings and implications. For stoic philosophers, the lack of reason amongst humans was tantamount to slavery, and the use of reason alone would lead us into being citizens of the world. Neither status nor states could impinge on our natural inclination towards cosmopolitanism. Besides, a certain spontaneity of reason, the stoic philosophers counter post a challenge of civility as universal to the particular nature of citizens. Cosmopolitanism found deeper humanist and liberal roots in the of peace, although it was far less dialogic and more prescriptive, cosmopolitanism should not only be traced in Western history and philosophy. However, cosmopolitanism must also must also be considered including cosmopolitanisms to acknowledge the plurality of modes and history is not necessarily shared in degree or concept. For socialists writers likewise, cosmopolitanism was linked to the bourgeoisie and enlightenment ideas of humanism. Cosmopolitanism therefore had to be brought down from the high horse of Western liberal imperialism, to look into its multiple meanings, leading to discoveries of cosmopolitanisms in unlikely times and places. One natural place to look for cosmopolitanisms is in cities and urban spaces, as sites of openness and accommodation, where the coexistence of varied characters, races and classes, was both possible and necessary. How did cosmopolitanism configure and consolidate in cities of the non Western world? A major drawback of writings on cosmopolitanism and urbanism in India has been that inability to bring together sociological and postcolonial insights. Hence these questions have remained unaddressed. This is best reflected in the way cast is approached, or even sometimes ignored in the study of cities and urban cosmopolitanism. I draw here on Hall, Callon, Pollock, and Chatterjee, to desist the top-down models of studying and understanding cosmopolitanism as an extension of liberal ideas of global citizenship. I contribute to the diverse version of cosmopolitanisms that is soaked in local ethics, politics, and urbanisms of the east. So how does urban cosmopolitanism work in India? Rural life in India is deeply segmented and simultaneously regulated through intra and inter caste intimacy. Due to the ethics and regulations of the cast hierarchy, villages make a contrast site for the possibilities of cosmopolitanism and genuine civility. On the other hand, cities as prime movers of modernity are considered favorable spaces for dissolving status based identities and hierarchies, so that they achieve a larger public based on spontaneity, dialogue, and openness. Historically, urban spaces also advance individual liberty and an associational culture conducive to civil society. Due to the dynamic density, urban spaces are set to produce all-getting solidarity, taking individuals beyond the solidarities of kinship ties. City life could thus be seen as an ideal space for practicing the ethics of alterity, based on the centrality of free flowing dialogue, rather than guided by instrumental reasoning central to modernity, or communal bonds tied to traditionalism. Thus producing a sociability through spontaneity and impulse, which is artistic, free flowing, and based on pure humanity. But as for this reason, Dr. Ambedkar called for ex-untouchables to leave the villages for the cities, because cast was a deep challenge to the possibilities of cosmopolitanism and civility into the life. For subordinates cities constitute spaces of emancipation from the tyranny of rural social audit. Urban models could also construct subordinate cosmopolitanism as politics from below. However, cast helps form organic solidarity where the cult of the individual is not void of the collective conscience of cast in cities. Further, cities have turned out to be mixed blessing for deprived groups, because they may constitute sites of social emancipation, yet coupled with economic hardships. To afford the multiple meanings and possibilities of urban cosmopolitanism, we may need to look for cosmopolitanism beyond the compulsions and hard lives of poor and excluded populations. Because there's this urge, and a lot of studies have done that, to look at margins, localities of poor, their politics, and work out an understanding of cosmopolitanism from below. Now, what I suggest is that this, in one way, is a limited understanding of cosmopolitanism. My work therefore examines the meaning of city spaces for communities considered higher and pure in contemporary times. I explore this through cast associations of pure and privileged, to understand how they negotiate cosmopolitan urbanism. Are these cast associations anti cosmopolitanism? Anti cosmopolitan? Or do they promote a different kind of cosmopolitanism? Bombay or Mumbai evokes the romance of cosmopolitanism due to its specific and spectacular commercial development and impressive diversity, stemming from colonial and post-colonial times. A rupture occurred, is said to have occurred in 1992, when cosmopolitanism of Mumbai was said to have been undermined by the communal violence following demolition of Babri Masjid. Such approaches, however, underplay the rule of cast in Mumbai social and associational life. And we may not even realize that cosmopolitanism had been long compromised in the landscapes of Bombay. It is here that we need to bring together critical postcolonial insights and sociological understanding of cast, and organization to grasp the rooted nature of urban cosmopolitanisms in India. Cast, in its plasticity, took the form of guild centered unions with the process of urbanization and industrialization, cast in Bombay thrived under the British, as the colonial government maintain its policy of non-indifference in indigenous religion, Bombay saw the reorientation of primordial groups, cast and religion, sex, as a response to ideological and political changes and a new form of urban leadership emerged, that had primordial linkages. Cast groups who had better jobs used ties of cast and kinship to fill future job openings, and solidify their group's position, in some ways this even continues now. The flip side of this is that cast also influences economic inequality and exclusion from labor markets. Cast has also historically shaped the organization of residential spaces, especially at the village level, and it appears to continue to do so in contemporary, urban India. In a recent study, Coffey et all speak of explicit prejudice, but does the presence of cast in cities necessarily mean the end of urban cosmopolitanism? Could the presence of cast as community also point to traditional urbanism and structural continuity between the rural and the urban? Does cast as community also provide a social and moral base for urban lifers and cosmopolitanism in India? The intimate nature of cast sociality or regulation in rural spaces is difficult to find in urban areas, but urban India is not uncongenial to cast, and cast constitutes a link between city and countryside. Cast interactions in the city, however, increasingly emphasize difference and separation instead of hierarchy. Is this such emphasis on separation and difference, anti cosmopolitan? Or could this also point to the making of a non-Western ideal of Hindu cosmopolitanism based on social closure and limited alternate. So this idea of Hindu cosmopolitanism that I work on now, cosmopolitanism may be a necessity of capitalist life, but it's form may be varied. In its liberal form, cosmopolitanism emphasizes individual over community, such cosmopolitanism also undermines the continuing imperial basis of liberal cosmopolitanism. In India, the laws of the state have limited jurisdiction and are more often subordinated to the rules of the right conduct prescribed by community practices. Chatterjee's doubts about cosmopolitanism and its liberal ills echo Hall's problems with cosmopolitanism and its implicit faith in liberal civil nationalism. For Hall, civic nationalism cannot proceed without cultural embeddedness, and identity cannot be constructed in relation to political systems alone. Thus neither liberal universalism nor segmented communities can possibly exist in a vacuum. A combination of equality and difference is central to understanding exist tension, not logical, political positions for Hall. The crucial position, therefore, is to understand if the framework of difference and equality enable society to enhance its life chances for all. A similar cue is provided by Callon, who reflects on the nature of cosmopolitanism and its implications for cosmopolitan democracy. Tourism, music, literature, and clothes are all easy faces of consumerist cosmopolitanism. Soft cosmopolitanism can well be an elite project with emphasis on the individual and capital, but it may not lead to cosmopolitan democracy. So this is kind of warning that Callon is giving us. Cosmopolitan democracy depends on finding ways to relate diverse solidarities to each other, rather than trying to overcome them. Cosmopolitan democracy for Calvin, thus, is not exactly... Sorry. Naveen, how much time do we have? 15 more minutes.
Naveen Bharathi:
Another 15 more minutes. Yeah.
Suryakant Waghmore:
So I'll get to the field details now. So Callan Howard therefore makes case for dialogue across communities in an agnostic form to achieve cosmopolitan democracy and thus is closer to those who emphasize all treaty in every day forms of sociality. All treaty enables experiencing oneself through unhindered encounters with the others. The individualism of modernity on the other hand, produces a utilitarian individual, who is guided by instrumental interests, thus affecting the possibilities of genuine dialogue. All treaty lies, therefore, in between the individual and the community. And we need to look for possibilities of an ontology based on dialogue, to achieve this dialogical community. So if cast plays the role of community in cities, how does this dynamic of collective peaceful living via community identities translate into social and political practice of cosmopolitan urbanism in contemporary times? Would it be similar to civility of indifference suggested by Bailey? Could it also result in some form of pragmatic indifference towards others and proximity to those closer in status, purity, honor, and culture? Could such forms of civility not be part of urban cosmopolitanism? McFarland helps us further transcend the definitions of liberal cosmopolitanism that present it as only inclusive, right? So I quote, "all forms of cosmopolitanism "are to barring extents, inclusive or exclusive, "implying that one important role for the critic "is to eliminate the politics, "limits and exclusions of different forms "of cosmopolitan imagery and practice." Well, while Pollock et al view cosmopolitanism in plural, as cosmopolitanisms, a grounded understanding of cosmopolitanism will also require us to accommodate specific attitudes towards difference, including those that may seem anti cosmopolitan from a liberal point of view. Chatterjee rightly suggests that there is a certain anti-political impulse in the political reminiscence of Accommodating non-inclusive cosmopolitanism also paves way for a critical study of cosmopolitan enclaves, and their roles in constituting pragmatic urbanity. So I'll skip some bit of discussion here, but does cosmopolitanism based on cast difference and closure enhance the life chances of Hindus and others? If you're thinking of Hindu cosmopolitanism and these are the questions. So what I do here, instead of following the Western liberal ideas or this urge towards moving towards an universal idea of cosmopolitanism, I use here a broader canon of Hindu cosmopolitanism, to understand and elaborate on the cosmos that cast associations of the pure and purist work towards. Hindu cosmopolitanism also helps us conceptualize a new ideal type of cosmopolitanism that is void of all treaty. So through the study of cast associations here, I agree that cosmopolitanism, while being a necessity of life in the metropolis, results from the compulsions as well as selections that accompany life in mega city. The political and economic consequences of absolute segmentation are tremendous in modern times, because they can freeze technical innovation and perpetuate the ritualized tyranny of cousins. Cast as community is presented by cast associations as a social solidarity of choice and not birth, to help individuals negotiate urbanism and indulge in consumerist soft cosmopolitanism. Some interventions by cast associations may seem anti cosmopolitan, because they mostly encourage horizontal all treaty. I suggest, however, that cosmopolitanism should not necessarily be judged through parameters of inclusion alone, since some exclusion may well be part of new cosmopolitanism that drives post-colonial urbanism in India. In the section that follows I examine, so this study has looked at several cast associations, interviews with leaders, involves field observations, meetings, and some of the rituals, annual practices. So here I will present this one case and maybe rush through others. So what I'll do here is... look at this organization called the Deshastha Rigvedi Brahmins Sangh. Now the Deshastha Rigvedi Brahmins are a cast mostly found in Maharashtra and Karnataka. It was a scribal cast in pre-colonial times that was mostly close to courts and kings, and they urbanized heavily in colonial times. Deshastha Brahmins are divided into two major groups, the Rigvedi Deshastha Brahmins, and the Shukla Yarjuveda Brahmins. The Deshastha Rigvedi Brahmins Sangha was established in 1935, formed for Rigvedis living in the heart of colonial Bombay. DRBS, Deshastha Rigvedi Brahmins Sangha, I'll call it DRBS here onwards, the DRBS Vile Parle currently has over 1,000 members, it organizes events like... Jayanti, Sri Ram, Shravani, Independence Day health camps, with the Inner Wheel Club, and discussions with television stars from the community and facilitates communities' public figures regularly. It also celebrates days of national importance, like Republic Day or Independence day. Its main source of funding is, of course, from the community hall in Vile Parle, which is rented out for social and private functions. The DRBS is also open to other Brahmins and the enrollment of non-Deshastha Brahmins, as well-wishers, so other Brahmins can join as well-wishers, but they cannot lead the organization. Although they are discouraged from holding official positions, members of other Brahmin casts can also participate in annual Rugvedi Shravani, so the thread ceremony, organized by DRBS. Apart from Brahmins, the association engages with non-sectarian organizations like the Inner Wheel Club of Mumbai. Members of DRBS occasionally volunteered with this organization to visit tribal villages in Thane District. Some members who visited these villages shared their concerns about deprived and vulnerable status of tribals and the need to contribute voluntarily to such backward communities. What we see in the DRBS is a form of horizontal cosmopolitanism, where the association, albeit in a limited form, allows other Brahmins to be members, while demonstrating occasional concern about other marginalized groups as well. Although such concern may be limited and may seem like Rigvedi self-aggrandizement, the element of limited sympathy outside one's born cast needs to be understood as a new form of sociality for purist cast subjects. Participation of younger generation is however negligible in most of these programs. This does not mean that youth are castless, but for them cast is limited to family and personal space. Not all of them want to make their cast a public identity all the time or as a mode of collective identity. Also lack of time is considered a major hurdle for youth to get involved or volunteer for DRBS. The elder members of DRBS had varied and complex reactions to changing nature of cast community in Mumbai, and the resulting challenges for association. While a few saw the possible erasure of cast as a positive development, this process was also seen as fraught with the danger of annihilating the institution of family, culture, and ethical life in general. DRBS respondents did not emphasize ritual purity or their high cast status, unlike members of some other Brahmin cast interviewed. The DRBS has not emphasized ritual purity or their high cast status, unlike members of other Brahmin cast interviews for this study. Some even suggested that origins of cast lay in the Saint Dnyaneshwar, known for his inclusive preaching and critique of cast. Senior members considered themselves part of progressive Brahmin associations, and Deshasthas was seen as being progressive and open to mingling between casts, compared to other casts. However, they simultaneously viewed cast as community and culture. This maps onto the idea of cast as difference and informed their struggle to retain their cultural difference in the context of Mumbai. Such difference could have elements of horizontal alterity, extendable only to other Brahmins, however. The organization is primarily run by elderly over 60 years of age. These are members who volunteered to take up leadership and managerial tasks. Presently, all these are pseudo names here, presently, Dr. Kulkarni is the chairman of the association. He is retired principal of a management college. In a group discussion, Dr. Kulkarni and other members shared their concerns about declining interest of younger members in the affairs of the association. One of the members called DRBS an organization of senior citizens. Most of these elderly active members are retired or close to retirement, they felt that people are going to forget casts, but their feeling about such an erasure of casts were mixed. They were worried that the younger generations do not come to these associations. They view this problem as peculiar to the metropolis of Mumbai, however, and not the problem in interior areas of Maharashtra, like Pune, Sangli, and Satara. The challenges facing the Deshastha Rigvedis of Mumbai were seen to be peculiar but linked to the general decay of culture in cities. I quote from a focus group discussion here. So Kulkarni says, compared to other Brahmins, "Konkanastha Brahmins are closed communities "and are more likely to marry within "and think of their cast first. "Konkanasthas look down upon Deshasthas." So other member shares, "but we, as in Deshasthas, can accommodate you. "For example, if you tend to take some non-veg, "for us, it is not binding. "It will not be that we would separate you from this group, "but they are very particular." They mean the Konkanasthas. So there is the sense of Deshasthas being more progressive than the Konkanasthas. The discussion continues, right? "We are that way liberal, "broadminded, large hearted, "you know, because we don't mind, we are not strict. "Here we are saying that all Brahmins should come together. "That is our feeling, basic feeling." And the member adds, "Marathas are very Orthodox people. "They feel they have ruled the state for so many years." So for 300 years, Shivaji Maharaj, other member smirks. "So they believe that they are rulers "and all the other communities are secondary", another member adds. "Comparatively, Brahmins are not Orthodox, "they are liberal. "They marry Muslims also." So another member comes in, "earlier, you could say Brahmins where Orthodox, "earlier thinking has gone. "Brahmins are no longer Orthodox." Another member adds, "they are not Orthodox." All in agreement, "not Orthodox, not Orthodox". So there is this working of a new identity, of the making of this new self that is beyond cast, and which is considered as a city self, cosmopolitan in that sense. So that means Konkanastha Brahmins were considered to be most conservative here and closed in one sense. However, Brahmins overall were also seen to be more progressive, urban and cosmopolitan than others, particularly in the case of Maharashtra and Marathas. In other informal conversations, members of several upper-class associations saw this as a matter of compulsion and not choice, however. So just to skip and come into some of the key quotes, and understanding of this organization. For instance, the DRBS has had, although there is recognition that movement beyond cast connotes cosmopolitanism, and a progressive nature, such openness towards other casts is not necessarily considered good for model and cultured living, which requires rootedness in cast, that forces of urbanization are seen as eroding. The DRBS, for instance, had a marriage mandir bureau, which was closed down for five years ago. See, now there have been these changes, the management was closed down and it has been rejuvenated again. So what we see here is the interest of younger members is less. And there is also this anxiety about the younger generation marrying outside, especially the girls, so I shared one of the quotes here, Mr. Desai was the joining secretary of DRBS, explained the peculiar problem facing Deshasthas in marriage, and how this was eroding the very bond that holds the community together. I quote, "a peculiar problem facing Brahmin girls "and more particularly Deshastha girls, "is that they are more educated than boys. "They get good jobs, "they don't get a good match "within the cast and go outside the cast. "Girls have good salaries. "They don't want to be dependent on husbands, "and follow men in the US, for instance. "The girls in the Brahmin community "want boys from within India. "They do not want to go to US and become a housewife. "If they do not get boys from within the cast, "they marry outside the community." Now the problem of educated or economically independent young women choosing compatibility over cast in marriage was not mentioned by Deshastha Rigvedis alone. Education and the new individual and factualism was seen as problem by most cast association members, especially purist casts, and were recurring themes in other Brahmin associations, too. Despite the progressive nature of Deshasthas, Mr. Desai also felt that marriages outside cast point to the breakdown of family system and social coercion in general. Although undesirable, he thought it was near impossible to regulate these new processes. The multiple choices in an urban material and cultural life was seen to create a life of competition, in which it was not possible to fully regulate younger cast members, especially younger women. And I, again, could be quote from a discussion here. So one member, Desai, goes on, just assume, he's saying, just assume, "I am earning 75,000, "my wife is earning 75,000 rupees. "I have freedom of thought, "my wife has freedom of thought. "After one and a half years, "I don't like you, you don't like me, "finished, get lost." He's referring to divorcees. "The marriage system itself is breaking down in these times, "the instances of divorce are more "because of inter-cast marriages. "Earlier, the girl used to be in control of the parents, "now it is not like that. "When a girl is outside the whole day, "the parents have no control." And the members adds, "in the city, "nobody has time." In my larger work, I'm really working on this, this scarcity of time, or the time famine, to make sense of city, but it comes again and again, in these interviews as well, the time famine and erasure of the cast self or the challenges posed to cast self. "So in the city, nobody has time. "I have no time to see where my son is going, "or my daughter is going." "See, once you step down outside your house", another member adds, "do you know whether the person who is sitting next to you "is a Mahar or a Muslim? "No Brahmin believes that, I am upper-cast. "Those things have gone now. "It is only the media that is propagating cast "in a big way." Now, while these association members viewed Mumbai metropolis as a site of compulsion induced cosmopolitanism, in which Deshasthas had turned progressive and liberal, others saw the model challenge and the looming risk of self-annihilation that accompanies progressive life in cities. Mr. Purandare is 52, is son of one of the founder members of DRBS. He held similar views on marriage and other individualist transgressions, but with a lot more clarity on ethics and culture. Such transgressions were seen as failure of sanskar. Mr. Purandare was critical of Western influence on youth, which went against a cultured way of life. His concern is—
Naveen Bharathi:
Suryakant, we have three, four minutes more. Five minutes.
Suryakant Waghmore:
Right. So let me just quote Purandare and end, okay? So his concern was less animated by cosmopolitan patriotism, however, and more of an anxiety over the danger of cast, vis-a-vis the erasure of cultural self in metropolis of Mumbai. The Brahmin culture itself has to be recovered to challenge both the Western cultural hegemony that privileges the individual and constructs the possibility of Sudra-like transgressions amongst the Brahmins in cities. I quote, "when do you marry outside? "When you do not have sanskar, "then you do not listen to your parents, "you do not follow the guidelines. "In a short period they fall in love, "start hanging together. "Most have physical attraction, "and because of this, "they leave their own casts and go outside. "Most of these love marriages result in divorce. "Women are concerned that their figure, "physical appearance should not get spoiled, "and that is why they don't want to have children. "How serious is this? This is Rakshasa Parvati, "evil nature. "Since the Brahmins have started eating meat, "the prices have gone up of meat. "If you eat meat, your body reacts that way. "You get thoughts of violent kind. "Look at a Brahmins face. "You will not find negativity, "but once you start eating meat, "your way of being changes, you go on that track. "You are cutting, killing, and eating. "People who eat such things are aggressive. "They are threat to society." Cast-self was not against modern or material life here, but against, so end of quoting. Cast-self was not against modern or material life here, but against erasure of self identity, that cast as community has built through marriage, food preference, and social closure around similar practices. The cultured way of being Brahmin, if resorted to in a classical way, could ensure that one stayed clear of evils of urbanism in Mumbai. Eating meat, unregulated love, sexual urges outside the cast and other adventures that the sociability of city provided could best be mitigated through Brahmin sanskar. The DRBS, though a 70 year old cast association with no issue of funding or lack of economic resources, is struggling to stay relevant amongst this younger cast members. As I said, so this organization workout newer ways to attract youth. They were working on new designs to attract younger members by consulting other successful cast associations, organizing workshops, entrepreneurship, holding cultural festivals, like Garba celebrations, and so on. So what I suggest here, broadly, and let me conclude because there's no time, I'll take exactly two minutes, Naveen.
Naveen Bharathi:
Sure.
Suryakant Waghmore:
Cast as community, in other words here, seems to have provided the moral foundations for Hindu cosmopolitanism, even in colonial times, and continues to do so now. Would community or cast be less relevant for Hindu cosmopolitans in New York or other cities of north America? This question is broadly answered in negative by Chatterjee when he emphasizes community over individual as an Eastern ideal. And the virtual world offers more clues here. The Brahmans Samaj of North America describes itself as the largest Brahman organization in America. Its sole objective is to bring Brahmans together. Likewise, for instance, there's NAIA service society in North America, that hopes to enhance the social and cultural life. NAIA is based on the traditional ways and values. Hindu cosmopolitanism and its civic engagement in cities across the world are lightly filtered through cast. Urbanism in the mega city of Mumbai curtails the intimate nature of cast to consistent seductions and stimulations that challenge hierarchical ideas of cast. Cast associations of privileged and pure cast, while not challenging the cast hierarchy, simultaneously promote consumptive or soft cosmopolitanism. Through the cast associations that I talked about today, I have suggested that cast associations continue to influence sociation and sociability in their attempts to govern and discipline individuals, so that cast is their foremost commitment. Moving them towards Hindu cosmopolitanism, you are rooted in your cast, but continue to be cosmopolitan. Committed cast subjects who act as volunteers in cast associations, are anxious about the rootless individualism of their youth, or the possibilities of a dialogical community that could destroy cultured belonging in urban spaces. So while Hindu cosmopolitanism proposes an alternative universal urbanism that values distinction, social closure, material indulgence, and mobility, it is also identical to soft or consumptive cosmopolitanism, but proposes an alternative ethical and moral positioning that celebrates closure as resistance to Western and other local varieties of cosmopolitanisms. Hindu cosmopolitanism thus helps us develop a new ideal type of cosmopolitanism that is void of alterity. Broadly, as hierarchy becomes distinction and difference, and cast becomes community, cast associations continue to provide roots into their respective communities for free flowing individuals through invoking community pride and history. Hindu cosmopolitanism does not mean lack of politeness or the peace or other elements that are essential for urban cosmopolitanism. Paradoxically, these coexist with elements of vulgarity, which affect the possibilities of individual self-realization in the city, by making individual look inwards to find moral sensibility. Hindu cosmopolitanism, in this sense, lacks the virtue of civility and may produce an urban modernity void of alterity. It does, however, constitute an important and dominant form of cosmopolitanism in urban India. Thank you.
Naveen Bharathi:
Thanks a lot, Suryakant, for such a fascinating talk. As someone who works on the residential segregation in urban India, I've not done ethnographic study yet, but I find your study very informing, and I think I would use your study to really explain some of the residential segregation I see in Bangalore and many other cities. We have few questions based on your presentation. So by Pratik VJ, which is a doctor student at GNU, he's asking, do cast associations play a significant role in mobilizing citizens for electoral politics in cosmopolitan, urban areas, especially for financial support, such as in the case of Aam Aadmi party in Delhi, for example like how Vaishyas and Baniyas have to split their resources between BJP and Aam Aadmi party, both considered as Baniya parties. So how do you see this? Does this kind of mobilization by this cast associations have any scope and space for politics based on social justice? You can answer this and I'll go with the next question.
Suryakant Waghmore:
Yeah. Thanks, VJ. Very, very important and interesting question. See, now, when you ask these institutions formally, they will always say that we are apolitical. But invariably, members who are leaders have political affiliation, sometimes members who are leader have divided political affiliations, but they do have political affiliations. Now, see, Aam and the case of Baniyas is a peculiar kind because, see Arvind Kejriwal also invokes this idea of being a Baniya occasionally, so cast associations may move towards them, but you won't have that kind of cast association fully mobilizing money. So like I said, there was, can you go to the slides? There is this another organization which we study. After Nairs. Now for instance, yeah, here, for instance, Bhanushalis. Yeah. Now what we see, quite a few members amongst the Bhanushalis had leanings towards BJP, but that does not mean that the organization is going to mobilize the money for electoral politics, so that there are parallel worlds. Everyone has like multiple identities here. The cast association, it may invoke symbolism and culture, in that sense, which works for BJP, even ideas for that matter, but they were not involved in mobilizing financial resources. So members maybe, but that would be another platform. So drawing paddles with the Kejriwal case may not work here, you know, specifically. So let me just give you a conceptual kind of working here, which can clarify. See, what I suggest is that the cast is the space almost of a family, for instance, the earlier Kashmiri Pandits that I quoted. It's like being in your own kind of people. So cast is family. If there are larger Hindu spaces, organizations, now that is almost like the making of civil society, now you may say that is a closed form of civil society, but it is, it's beyond your family. It's almost, I'm presenting like this, like a framework here. But you cannot mix this space that is beyond cast, but at least with politics easily. So what you may have is that space may be divided political associations, because the interviews we did there was always, because cast is understood as a family space. So to talk about division was something that was avoided, so though members had political affiliations, it was avoided in that sense.
Naveen Bharathi:
Yeah. Thanks. We have another question by another doctor student at Penn, Indiwal, so he's asking about how does this cast association and the politics in cast associations, or even the Hindu cosmopolitanism, enter the workings of other institutions or other spaces like bureaucracy, trade associations, professional associations, political parties, like how Pratik asked. So how does this transcend the cast associations to other spaces, and does it spill over, and how does it spill over?
Suryakant Waghmore:
See, now that is definitely these cast associations do have, within them, the space of workings, kind of solidarity. So for instance, within the KPA, Kashmiri Pandit Association, it was shared on WhatsApp groups, we try to circulate jobs that are that in our farms within our groups first, so that our boys can get those jobs first. But this is again, for instance some organizations also said, for instance the Nairs or KP, they said we have scholarships for needy students, but there are very few applicants who applied. There was no need, in that sense, right? But there's definitely this informal networks which are used for circulation and hiring and all which works. But if you look at, in actual economic terms, there are other studies which have done this job. For instance, there is on cast cooperatives in housing. And how I forget this name, I did in my paper. So how this cast cooperatives build housing around cast identities, and it's almost since colonial times. So it does transcend, but cast associations tend to be this more of a, it has economic role, it has political role, but it's limited. This space is more social-cultural in that sense. It's more about, as I said, keeping the individual rooted in cast, and quite a few members would say, for instance, in interviews with Nair Station, it came in other interviews also, that for instance, if someone is dead in the family, you have to do the rituals that are cast specific. And therefore your birth and your death, all are in one sense, cast bound. And that keeps you rooted. So that was the kind of space that cast associations provided.
Naveen Bharathi:
So it was another question, a quick question from Nafiz, my colleague. So he's asking, how does cast and provincialism intersect in this type of associations? For example, can there be a Kannada association, but also Brahmin association? How do they come together few occasions or they don't?
Suryakant Waghmore:
So Naveen, can you also show, move on to the next slide?
Naveen Bharathi:
Yeah, I'll do that.
Suryakant Waghmore:
And so when you go to the Telugu Madiga association, so, Nafiz, thanks, very important and interesting question. So one of the organizations that we studied, yeah, yeah, yeah. So one of the organization that we studied was a Nair Association in New Bombay. Now, this organization within last 12 or more years has moved from like 50 members to close to 500 members in New Bombay. Now, what was interesting is that before this organization functioned, there was a Karelia association then, association of Karelites. It's almost as if the Nair Association came as a reaction to the association of Kerala state. So now the Nairs have multiple membership here, they are members of the Kerala association but like I said, the Nair Association occupies this more intimate space. So one is not Keralite, but one is, this association, at least, tried to make the Nair personhood as the primary identity, that's an attempt. But this attempt is marred with a lot of challenges. It's not something that is easy achieved, which I described in my work. So yes, the other case that I have here is this Telugu Madiga Maha Sangam, now Madigas would an ex-untouchable cast, so when the question was asked, so why have cast association in a city, where one would like to be cast free? So look at the last quote here, "we have been trying to mingle, "but people have always kept us outside." So there are multiple reasons, right? People, the privileged groups may form closures to make cast, which is constructed as central identity, whereas for the outcast, the attempts of becoming part of the provincial identities or other identities may not work. So that's why, what this respondent is saying is, they'll get us to do all the work, but ask us to leave once they know our cast. So it works in multiple ways. So it's not that there are no provincial identities in the city, which are regional, but they are not as important. Meaning members may have multiple identities, both provincial and cast, but for the cast associations, the primary identity somehow has to be, because that's the conflict, the city is somehow almost creating this fractured individual with no roots, no sense of self, and there is no self without cast. So the cast associations try to keep the individual rooted. I hope I answered your--
Naveen Bharathi:
Thanks! Yes, cast, I get what you meant, so the other question we have, many questions to ask, Christian is asking about Patthe Bapurao, about the Deshastha Brahmin who made claims of kind of social liberalism and cosmopolitanism. So he's asking, do Deshastha community Brahmin groups, do they remember Patthe Bapurao or any such more heterodox figures? And if so, how is it? That's one question. I'll club two, three questions. And we also have another question by Nikhil, who is asking, how do non-upper cast associations approach questions of cosmopolitanism? And how does gender interpolate? Questions like how many women are part of couple of other questions, how many women are part of this cast associations?
Suryakant Waghmore:
Right.
Naveen Bharathi:
So then we have another question by Molini Ranganat, on have you studied any RWS, resident welfare associations? And also are they based on cast—
Suryakant Waghmore:
I missed the—
Naveen Bharathi:
RWS, resident welfare association.
Suryakant Waghmore:
Okay, yeah.
Naveen Bharathi:
What about like, she's sort of telling that they mostly consists of Brahmins and dominant casts. So it would seem RWS, which are key to more of a malicious activism on cast associations, are they cast association? In a sense that are RWS also cast associations? Yeah. So there's these three questions, you can answer. We can take a couple of more questions in the end of session.
Suryakant Waghmore:
Right.
Naveen Bharathi:
I also, to be frank, actually, I also have a question in a sense that, how does this, for example, in Bangalore, I have seen that there are a lot of cast housing cooperative societies. Like Parmeshwari housing society, but essentially a cast society, but they also are into the business of selling plots to their cast members. So you can take all this together. Yeah.
Suryakant Waghmore:
The question that Christian asked, about heterodox figures, now, there's one aspect which I can kind of speak generally for all cast associations of the pure and the privileged. This is what comes through our kind of not just interviews, but you look at some of the cast associations have monthly publications and so on. If the figure who is from your cast is also a public figure and may have non-cast identities that make him public, such a person is celebrated invariably in cast associations. So I don't want to name specifics in the sense there was a very known singer, who married outside cast, who has done all kind of un-cast things, from a Brahmin community, but you know, there were letter exchanges between the heads, between the leaders of the associations and this singer, where she is celebrated within this, as someone who's done so well. So the question you're asking here, Christian, so not that one has to emulate this radicalism, as I said, in at least in the Deshasthas, they would, for instance, speak of the saints who have talked of anti-cast sentiment, but does not mean that it has to be practiced, but what is to be appreciated was they were Deshasthas. So it's a very complex kind of work insights. So you own up to their, you make them part of family, celebrate that they are part of family, but if there are any anti-cast renderings, that is not to be really celebrated. So it's in that sense, which what's happening. And how does this work amongst non-upper casts? Nikhil. If we go again to the slides, and I'll quickly give one good example, which I have listed there, of Kitte Bhandaris, now that's an OBC caste.
Naveen Bharathi:
Yeah, let me open the slides again.
Suryakant Waghmore:
Should be third or fourth slide. Before the one that we have right now, you are showing.
Naveen Bharathi:
Yeah, this one, right?
Suryakant Waghmore:
Yeah, yes, this one. So now, if you have any scholars who worked on the non Brahmin history, we cannot not know Raosaheb Bole. Raosaheb Bole is the one who forms this Kitte Bhandari Samaj. Now we are well aware of his non Brahmin activism, especially for education, for the Bhandaris. He's the one who is against the Brahmins writing history of Shivaji, because for him, it's a biased version of history. He's the one who worked and mobilized extensively for education amongst non Brahmins, particularly the Bhandari. Now, if you look at Kitte Bhandari Association in present times, the next slide, sorry, Naveen. It has turned into an association which at best holds marriages. It rents out the hall, which was built to the earlier non Brahmin movement and struggle. People come here only for marriages. That will also, if it does not work on the internet. Otherwise they have regular cultural programs and Poojas. So that whole, the political nature of Kitte Bhandari identity, which may have existed in colonial times is not there anymore. And this is across, for instance, Nairs work into, they're always saying, we are like Brahmins, okay with marrying Brahmins, basically this whole idea of, inter-cast marriages, upwards, it's always appreciated. Similarly among Kitte Bhandaris also, that was something that was seen as all right. So what we see is, while the middle-cast, there is the stand to be part of the mainstream, next slide, Naveen, please. Amongst the, we go maybe a little go down, towards the outcast, associations of outcast. What we see on the other hand, among the association of outcast, so their idea of associations is not merely about closure, but they are forced into forming cast associations because of exclusion and so on and so forth. It is a response, but it's there, in some of these slides and yeah. Their way of approaching cast associations. If you look at the symbols also, there is Ambedkar and all of these outcasts associations. Now this is for instance, Rohidas Sangh, it's a Charmakar organization started by one of Ambedkar's rival in those times, but the presenting members would speak in a very celebratory tone about Ambedkar, they would talk about having inter-cast marriages as something good, for instance. Yeah. So cast associations for them is both, to think of a difficult and deprived past, but also to construct a hopeful future in that sense, so that's the nature of it. I hope I have answered your question, Nikhil.
Naveen Bharathi:
Yeah. Thanks a lot. We have many questions. I think we will take a couple of more and end the question. So one question by Suruchi, she's also a doctor student, so she's asking, do cast associations help in getting citizenship rights? Are actualized through the city by different social groups when at same time, cities are also sites of xenophobic expressions.
Suryakant Waghmore:
This is slightly, in the sense, is this in relation to Mumbai or is this just a general?
Naveen Bharathi:
Let me re-read again. So my question is regarding the politics of difference and how the vision of citizenship rights are actualized through the city by different social groups, when at the same time, cities are also sites of xenophobic expressions.
Suryakant Waghmore:
Right now I would not, see, Bombay or Mumbai has had episodes of... large-scale violence against Muslims. But what we see is, or what are called as communal rights, but they were just episodes. It's not something that is kind of written or performed regularly. So xenophobic may be a stronger kind of concept or idea to use here, but what one sees in study of cast is that the Muslim is definitely the new other, it is presented in various forms. So in fact, oh, sorry, Naveen, you asked this questions on housing and cast associations.
Naveen Bharathi:
Yeah.
Suryakant Waghmore:
See, in Mumbai, you would not, though there are some studies which point to ideas of vegetarianism influencing housing, but in Mumbai you would not find housing restricted because of cast or food habits. Disclosure is for Muslims, that's a clear kind of working, and the Bombay kind of advertisements you'll rarely see in Mumbai. So it's all, in one sense, market driven. But if I'm quickly answered this question on claiming citizenship, see, like I said, we have to understand cast associations and their particular form of role, it's not necessarily about you know, politics. So for instance, in ex-untouchable cast associations, you will see that there's a discourse of rights. You will see Ambedkar's image and all, but the work that involve in it's mostly helping some family or organizing the annual events that all cast associations have, or at best, if there is politics or political, for instance, the Charmakar Sangh that I was talking about, they were very jubilant when Mayawati became PM, now Charmakars are, in one sense, they make this, like VJ said, the Baniyas mobilize money for Arvind Kejriwal, so the Charmakars see Mayawati as someone who is close to the community, but the role of cast associations is different. It does not do the work of claiming citizenship rights.
Naveen Bharathi:
Yeah. Thanks. Another question, which a lot of people have asked is the question of gender, how many women participate in this cast associations? Do they have a major role to play in these associations? A quick answer would do.
Suryakant Waghmore:
Oh yeah. Very much, yes. Very much, yes. So the cast is like family and there is no family without women, in that sense. So cast associations are actively, there are women who play leadership roles, there was a gender roles which are played by women, so very much, yes.
Naveen Bharathi:
Yeah. Another quick question, which come from my own experience in Bangalore. So state gives fines for a lot of these cast associations, through like when one of our chief ministers directly give budget reallocation to a lot of cast associations, like smaller cast associations. So what is the relationship between, does state engage them more consciously, for their own electoral games, which I think the first question Pratik also asked, but this is a different, it's not they mobilizing money for them, but this historically been the case in Karnataka, even during the Miller's Committee Report, the fines were to the communities were dispersed to cast associations, essentially that's when in the 1920s, you find a lot of cost associations coming up in Bangalore. So even today, we are used as a way to provide public goods for these communities to start fosters and all of that. So does this happen in Mumbai too? Does state interact with these cast associations?
Suryakant Waghmore:
Right. Now, we'll have to really look at the details of Karnataka, but in Maharashtra, let me exclusively give you this example. You know, for instance Gaud Saraswat Brahmins are a very powerful community, and there are a lot of resources they mobilize within their cast associations. Now, what was interesting and one of them was shared, was you cannot form for instance, a hospital for one cast. Because that is not considered charitable. And in fact, if you have income of a particular cast association, it actually can be taxed. So what these cast associations do is, those cast associations that have resources, they form charitable trust hospitals and so on. So they take up a larger public form, where their resources are not taxed. And then the relationship with state changes, you may get land, but it's no more a cast association or cast hospital, for that matter. So what we see here is, in Maharashtra, there are direct relations with casts and there is funding to cast, but that is done through corporations. For instance, in Maharashtra, there is something called the Anna Bhau Sathe development corporation. Now that's meant for a certain cast, right? But there's no direct funding for cast associations, definitely not in cities. What we also have is, there are, for instance, there are two forms of engagement with state, quickly, I'm rushing this. One is, for instance, the KP, Kashmiri Pandit Association. Now they were given land for doing their office and so on, but that was more of, the whole discourse of victim hood and to the issue of Kashmir Pandits and so. But there are other associations, which at times, you know, encroach upon some place illegally, build a temple and then make it a cast association kind of, so there is negotiation with state, but no, you don't see that funding kind of directly flow into these associations.
Naveen Bharathi:
Yeah, thanks. Thanks for that answer. I think we have a lot of questions, but due to the paucity of time, you won't be able to take a lot of questions, but please I can write to him on his email ID and interact with him directly. Thanks a lot for making time that too at this time of the hour in India, and such a fascinating presentation. So next week I will be presenting my work on urban residential segregation in Indian cities, so you can register for the talk at our website, and thanks everyone for attending this fascinating talk. Thanks again, Suryakant, for making time.
Suryakant Waghmore:
Thank you.