Christian Dalits and the pollution barrier

Caste, class and untouchability in a catholic parish in rural Tamil Nadu

Anders Brandén

2

Abstract

This study examines how the infamous pollution barrier in India, i.e., values and practices that

separate ritually clean from unclean castes, affects attitudes and interpersonal relationships in

the rural Catholic parish of Kosawapatti in Tamil Nadu.

Research that deals with this phenomenon in contemporary Christian environments in India

is extremely scarce, fragmentary, and most of it dates back to the `70s and `80s. The objective

of this study is to bring some new and important evidence to the debate on the validity of the

pollution barrier in Christian environments in India in general, and in the Catholic Church in

particular.

The parishioners of Kosawapatti belong to two different castes, the Dalit Paraiyar and the

Vanniyar caste, the former positioned below and the latter just above the pollution barrier. The

study builds partly on interviews with a group of informants that represent sociologically

relevant layers of the parish, and partly on my own observations together with data on socio-

economic conditions in the parish. This material was collected during a two-week stay in

Kosawapatti in December 2008.

The study largely confirms previous research findings, namely that the pollution barrier still

has a significant structural impact on attitudes and patterns of interaction, but also that it is

questioned and challenged by new attitudes and practices. The challenge appears to come

primarily from the younger generation and a conclusion drawn is that the socio-economic

changes that have occurred in the parish, in particular the emergence of a more educated and

well-to-do layer in the Dalit community, have played a major role in this process of change.

Another conclusion drawn – also in line with previous findings about the matter in Christian

environments – is that the Hindu theological ideas associated with the pollution barrier are not

perceived as particularly relevant or valid, neither by the Dalits nor by the Vanniyars in the

parish.

Finally, the fact that the pollution barrier nonetheless to a large extent continues to affect the

social interactions and attitudes in the parish – and stigmatize the Dalits – is seen as a

consequence of the dominant position of the Vanniyars in the parish on one hand, and the

marginalized position of the Dalits in Indian society at large, the Catholic Church included, on

the other.

3

Contents

Background………………………………………………………………….. …………..4

Introduction and objective of research……………………………………………………4

The concept of caste……………………………………………………………………....5

The caste system and the practice of

untouchability……………………………………………………………………………..5

Dalits and the practice of untouchability in Christian communities …………………….8

Method and material……………………………………………………………………..11

The study………………………………………………………………………………...15

Vanniyar and Paraiyar in Kosawapatti: ritual and socioeconomic

characteristics……………………………………………………………………………15

Hierarchy, status and rationalization…………………………………………………….18

Worship……………………………………………………………………….………….26

Marriage…………………………………………………………………………………27

Friendship………………………………………………………………………………..28

Sharing and exchange of food and water………………………………………………..30

Summary and concluding reflections…………………………………………………....32

Literature………………………………………………………………………………...34

4

Background

Introduction and objective of research

For a very long time, India has been characterized by subordinate groups of people defined as

culturally, morally and biologically different from everyone else. They were generally

considered impure, in a literal as well as religious sense, sometimes lived in conditions of

slavery and were economically exploited and socially and culturally stigmatized.1 During the

colonial era, the British coined the term "untouchable" as a label for these groups.

Discrimination against untouchables, or Dalits, which is the name now most commonly used,

was banned in the context of India's independence but has, to varying degrees and in

sometimes new forms, survived into the present.2 Despite its origins in Hinduism, the views

and practices also influenced the religious minorities in India.3

This study builds on the material, mainly consisting of interviews, collected in the Catholic

parish of Kosawapatti, in rural Tamil Nadu, over a two-week minor fieldwork project in

December 2008. The parishioners belong to two different castes on opposite sides of the

"pollution barrier". The pollution barrier consists of values and practices that separate ritually

clean from unclean castes.4 The study can be described as a case study and the main purpose

is to illustrate whether, and, if so, how and to some extent why this pollution barrier today is

manifested in the context of a Christian religious community that officially condemns it as

inconsistent with the Christian faith.5

Research that deals with this phenomenon in contemporary Christian environments in India

is extremely scarce, fragmentary, and mostly dates back to the `70s and `80s.6 With this essay

I hope to bring some new and important evidence to the debate on how the caste system

1Susan Bayly (1999) The New Cambridge History of India IV:3. Caste, Society and Politics in India: From The

Eighteenth Century to The Modern Age. Cambridge, p. 29

2 Robert Deliége (1999), The Untouchables of India. Oxford, p. 110

3Subrata Mitra (1994), "Caste, democracy and the politics of community in India" in Contextualising Caste:

Post-Dumontian Approaches. Searle-Chatterjee, Mary (red.), Oxford, p. 56

4Bayly, p. 27

5Papal Adress to Bishops of Madras-Mylapore, Madurai and Pondicherri-Cuddalore,

http://www.zenit.org/article-86716?1=english

6 Rowena Robinson (2003), Christians of India, New Dehli, India, p. 11f

5

functions in Christian environments in India.

The concept of caste

The English word "caste" has its origins in the Portuguese word "casta", meaning pure race.

When caste is discussed nowadays it is usually either in the sense of varna or jati. Varna,

which means color, refers to a social order based on four distinct, hierarchic groups:

Brahmans, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras. This order is recorded in a number of ancient

writings that are generally revered as sacred in Hinduism. Each caste is assigned a specific

social role and calling. Outside varna, and even lower than the Shudras, we find tribals and

untouchables/ Dalits. In a sociological sense, the notion of jati is more meaningful as it in a

much more concrete way determines and shapes the social reality for Hindus as well as many

non-Hindus in India. Jati is the caste you are born into, and there are thousands of jatis in

India. Some are very large and widespread over large areas, while others are small and only

exist at the local level.7

Jati or caste is certainly a multifaceted concept and may have different meanings for

different individuals in different situations; however the following definition can, following

Susan Bayly, be seen as a sort of minimum definition: They are largely endogamous with

membership based on the heredity principle; associated with a certain occupation and

position, albeit sometimes both unclear and contested, in a locally or regionally defined caste

hierarchy.8 However, lowest in the caste hierarchy, then and now, we find the Dalits.

The caste system and the practice of untouchability

During the nineteenth century, as a result of multiple interacting economic and political

processes, a specific socio-religious ideology and a corresponding caste society were

established in large parts of India, which built on a particular Brahminical interpretation of

varna and jati that strongly emphasized the principles of purity and impurity. Status positions

in the caste hierarchy were largely linked to, articulated and ritually manifested in these

terms.9 Purity is, according to this theology, a relative term: all people are more or less

impure, but it singles out groups that were considered as permanently unclean. Their

7 Bayly, p. 8f

8 Bayly, p. 10

9 Bayly, p. 188f

6

permanent ritual impurity derived from their contact and/or association with impure

substances and phenomena, especially death, organic waste and evil spirits. As these sources

of impurity are also transmitted from human to human and give rise to bad karma, the

theology prescribes strict separation in social interaction between pure and impure castes.10

Even though specific purity regulations and their enforcement could vary considerably with

different local and regional conditions, they were upheld without exception and in the

strongest terms against the untouchable castes.11

But untouchability is by no means only a question of ritual impurity. The Dalit Pallar caste

can be taken as an example. The Pallar caste's link to ritually unclean tasks is vague and

indeterminate, and most members work as agricultural labourers. But Pallars were still

considered untouchable. Conversely, some castes that made a living as barbers or launderers

were not considered untouchable although they came in daily contact with highly impure

substances. To be considered untouchable the caste must also be economically weak

(compared with other groups) and socially deprived.12

Although the Dalits today, in terms of

education, occupation and economic standards, exhibit a high degree of heterogeneity and are

represented at all levels of Indian society, all available statistics illustrate very clearly that the

Dalits, along with tribal peoples, are the poorest group in India.13

As a consequence of a progressive modernization during the twentieth century, the ideology

of purity and impurity does not exercise the same influence on Indian society as before, and

many Indians have to a greater or lesser extent deritualized their understanding of caste. The

majority of the population belonging to the middle strata in the caste hierarchy seldom care

very much about how they are ranked relative to other groups, and ritual prohibitions related

to food and physical contact have been weakened.14

And even though most Indians still marry

within their own caste, they pay more attention to other matters today and cross-caste

marriage is no longer a rarity, provided that the gap in status between the marriage candidates

10 Robert Deliége (1997), "At the threshold of Untouchability: Pallars and Valayiars in a Tamil Village" in

Fuller,C.J (red.) Caste Today, New Delhi, Oxford, p. 68, J. Tharamangalam, (1996), "Caste among Christians in

India", in Caste: its twentieth century avatar, red. M.N Srinivas New York, Penguin Books, p. 264

11 Ghanshyam Shah (red.) (2006), Untouchability in Rural India, New Dehli, p .20

12 Deliége (1997), p. 66f

13 Shah, p. 39

14 Bayly, p. 323

7

is not too big.15

But if many Indians in whole or in part have deritualized their understanding of caste, this

does not account for India's many Dalits. Of all ritual divisions in India the pollution barrier is

the most durable and tenacious.16

A comprehensive study of the practice of untouchability in

rural India, conducted 2001–2002 in 565 villages in eleven of India's largest states, shows that

various forms of social exclusion and discrimination against Dalits – some with ritual origin,

some not – are still widespread in India. It reveals that prohibiting Dalits from enter non-Dalit

houses (73%); social sanctions against common meals (70%); limited access to public places

of worship (63.9%); prohibitions or restrictions on wedding processions on public roads

(47,4%); and denied access to cremation and burial sites (48.9%), are some of the most

frequent types of discrimination.17

It is worth noting that all forms of discrimination against Dalits described in the study,

regardless of whether they have a ritual origin or not, and whether individuals and groups

rationalize them in ritual terms or not, are seen as examples of the practice of untouchability.

The practice of untouchability is indeed prohibited by Indian law, but the law allows a

narrower interpretation of the term than the one being used in this study. Of the above-

mentioned forms of discrimination against Dalits, the two most common are not regarded as

discrimination in the legal sense and are therefore not prohibited.18

What will be classified as

untouchability or not is a matter of definition. I shall, however, in this paper make common

cause with the writers in the referenced study above and with the notion of untouchability

understand all the practices and attitudes aimed at stamping the Dalits as inferior and

subordinate, whatever rationalization is used as a basis and whether they are classified as

criminal abuse under the law or not. The fact that untouchability never has been entirely

ritualistic in nature makes it, in my opinion, justifiable to make use of the term in this way.

Furthermore, I understand the "practice of untouchability" as equivalent with "manifestations

of the pollution barrier" and it is mainly the latter phrase which I will make use of in this

15 Bayly, p. 324

16 Mary Searle-Chatterjee (red.) (1994), Contextualising Caste: Post-Dumontian Approaches. Oxford, p.16, and

Bayly, p. 339f

17 Shah, p. 85

18 Ibid, p. 56f

8

essay.

Dalits and the practice of untouchability in Christian communities

It is estimated that there are 166 million Dalits in India.19

The Christian minority is around 2

percent of India's population and contains a number of different communities.20

Some

communities, such as the Syrian Church in Kerala, has only "high-caste" members, while a

majority of the members of the many Protestant denominations, and most likely of the

Catholic Church, the largest single community, are Dalits.21

In the `50s, the Indian

government, in order to improve the situation of the most marginalized strata of Indian

society, introduced a quota system which gave Dalits with Scheduled Caste status (i.e. Dalits

who are Hindu, Sikh and (since 1990) Buddhist) increased opportunities for education and

jobs in the public sector.22

This system has, together with the economic and political

developments in the country since then, given rise to a greater upward social mobility for

some segments among the Dalits. Christian Dalits do not enjoy the status of Scheduled Caste,

but even among them minor elite groupings have emerged.23

However, there is no indication

that Christian Dalits in general have been more successful than other Dalits.24

The Christian religion has not relieved them from the yoke of oppression. In a report (2008)

the authors summarize the current state of knowledge about the social and economic situation

of Muslim and Christian Dalits. The stated purpose of this report is to put forward evidence

that will persuade the Indian authorities to grant these groups the status of Scheduled Caste.

The ethnographic part of the research base, which deals with the cultural and social situation

of the Christian Dalits, involves dozens of studies and articles that illustrate conditions during

the `70s, `80s and to some extent the `90s. The authors emphasize that discrimination and

19 Ibid, p. 37

20 Satish Deshpande och Geetika Bapna, (2008) “ Dalits in the Muslim and Christian Communities: A Status

Report on Current Social Scientific Knowledge”, Department of Sociology, University of Delhi, p. 24

http://ncm.nic.in/pdf/report%20dalit%20%20reservation.pdf

21 Deshpande, p. xi, xii

22 Lancy Lobo (2001). "Visions Illusions and Dilemma of Dalit Christians in India" in Ghanshyam Shah (red)

Dalit Identity and Politics: Cultural Subordination and Dalit Challenge. Vol ii, New Delhi: Sage Publications, p.

244

23 John C.B. Webster (1992/2000). The Dalit Christians: A History. New Delhi, p. 196f

24 Deshpande, p. xi

9

social exclusion of Dalit Christians take different forms and vary greatly in different contexts

and different areas, and that it is therefore difficult to draw any more precise and general

conclusions about the nature of their scope. Nevertheless, they consider that the material

clearly shows that occupational segregation and various forms of discrimination and exclusion

of Dalits, in religious practice as well as in other forms of social interaction, are very

common. They even discern five more specific forms: Dalits are without exception considered

a socially inferior group by the higher castes within the Christian communities; a general

prohibition exhists against marriages between Dalits and non-Dalits; and Christian

communities that have both Dalit and non-Dalit members often stay with separate sets of

churches, cemeteries and priests. 25

One type of discrimination against Dalits which is not explicitly commented on in this

report, but is common in India as a whole, is the widespread unwillingness among the higher

castes to eat with Dalits and to accept food and water from them. According to Deliége,

acceptance of food or water from someone in India implies recognition of him as equal or

superior in status.26

And he believes there is a general tendency among Indians belonging to

the "higher" castes not to accept food and water from those who belong to a much lower

caste, especially not from the Dalit castes.27

The literature contains few references to studies that relate to this aspect of social

interactions between Dalits and "clean" caste Indians in the Christian communities. Studies

conducted in Catholic villages in Bangalore and Tamil Nadu in 1986 showed that the higher

castes there didn’t accept food or drink from the Dalits nor ate with them, because of their

"impurity".28

The high-caste Protestants in the city of Chennai, studied by Caplan (1987), did

not contemplate the possibility of eating alongside members of Dalit origin either, but in this

case due to secular rather than religious or theological reasons.29

However, other studies

conducted in the Christian communities in Kerala in the `70s, `80s and `90s, suggest that,

although the sharing and exchange of food and drink were not common, there were no strict

prohibitions, and that it happened that high-caste people could sit at a table with more well-to-

25 Deshpande p. xi, xii

26 Deliége, Robert (1999), p. 103

27 Deliége, p. 102f

28 Webster, p. 181 and Tharamangalam, p. 274

29 Robinson, p. 86

10

do Dalits and even accept food and drink from them.30

It is possible that the last three examples can be seen as evidence that a process that already

seems to have been completed in northern India has also started to be felt in southern India.

Studies of caste and class among Christian communities in northern India suggest that class

had already replaced caste as the primary determinant in terms of the nature and degree of

interaction in religious as well as social life in the 1980s.31

However, it should be added that

the Christian communities in the north are almost completely dominated by Dalits, which is

not the case in southern India.32

Caste apparently does not have exactly the same meaning or function among Christians (or

non-Hindus in general) as among Hindus. This bring into play the question of a possible

linkage to the (Hindu) theological ideas of purity and impurity. That class is playing an

increasingly significant role in determining forms of social interaction between individuals

above and below the pollution barrier, is in itself an indication that these ideas have a limited

distribution within the Christian communities and that they are likely to play a smaller role

there than in the Hindu majority society.33

Mosse, an established researcher in the field, writes

about this tendency in Christian communities: "Purity and impurity are less important in

themselves than as an idiom to express relationships of patronage and dependence, dominance

and inferiority."34

Most of the clean caste Christians who have been asked why they do not

treat Christians Dalits as equals do not rationalize their own or their groups behavior in

religious but in secular terms (health, tradition, civilization, etc.).35

Available evidence suggests that the discrimination and segregation that exist in some

churches today does not primarily stem from ideas of purity and impurity, but should be

understood with reference to other general cultural, economic and political factors.

This study draws attention to conditions in a Catholic church in southern India and it may be

worth noting that the pollution barrier also, for various reasons, has had a stronger presence

30 Robinsson, p. 86, Tharamangal, p. 274

31 Webster, p. 182

32 Webster, p. 179

33 See also Tharamangalam, p. 275

34 Robinson, p. 136

35 Webster, p. 180 and Tharamangalam, p. 277

11

and more lingering existence within the Catholic Church than in many other Christian

denominations.36

Method and material

This study is based on material of varying nature. One part consists of information that I had

already received before my first visit to Kosawapatti, and whose accuracy I was then able to

confirm with my own eyes with regard to some of the aspects of residential and burial sites in

the parish relevant to the study. Another part consists of the statistical evidence, A Records,

which is reproduced below. This material does not, of course, reflect the socio-economic

"reality" in a precise or comprehensive manner. However, it serves its purpose of revealing

socio-economic aspects that are relevant for this study. Do the Dalits in Kosawapatti meet the

economical or material criteria to count as untouchables, and are they in relation to Vanniyars

an economically subordinate and perhaps also dependent group? This issue, together with

details of the ritually defined caste status and other relevant facts about the situation in the

village presented in the study's first section below, act as starting points for this study.

The third and most comprehensive part of the material consists of interviews conducted and

recorded on-site. Some of this material has been transcribed, the part that I will build a large

part of my study on, and consists of information that my informants provided about the nature

and occurrence of social interactions over the pollution line in the parish and how they

understand and perceive them. This information concerns relationships within but mostly

outside of the church. My informants report details of their own doings and perceptions as

well as the interactions and thought patterns at large within the parish. It is not possible to use

this material in the same way as that above: as reflecting actual circumstances. Each item of

information and each testimony in the interviews must, in any given case, be interpreted and

evaluated – and cannot therefore reflect reality in an objective or uncomplicated way.

Time available to me had the biggest impact on this study, choice of method, form and

content. Two weeks for the collection of primary sources for a study of this kind is hardly

ideal. It is also the main reason why I – despite my aim to study attitudes as well as

interaction patterns – have based most of my study on interviews, only in some cases

supplemented by my own observations. The disadvantage of this approach is clear - it means

that the distinction, fundamental to all anthropological research, between what people say and

36 Robinson, p. 71f, Webster, p. 180

12

what they do cannot fully be taken into account. I have not, save in some rare circumstances,

had any opportunity to confirm or question my informants' observations and statements about

their own and others' behavior and attitudes.

Two important criteria for assessing the value of these statements as sources of information

have therefore been the existence of what I call a satisfying number of similar statements (the

number of informants who make one and the same statement) and their degree of coherence

(if they confirm or contradict each other).

As regards the first criterion, and as a consequence of the chosen interview method, only one

of the aspects analyzed below has been commented upon by all informants. At the time of the

interviews – in the limited time available to me – my idea was to try to get out as much

relevant information as possible about forms of relations between the two castes, and then

subsequently select the research problem and the parts of the material I wanted to work with. I

had prepared a list of questions, but realized and accepted rather quickly that the informant,

almost as much as myself, came to steer the conversational content and direction. The

interview method can perhaps be described as semi-systematic, some themes and issues that I

had prepared were treated in the majority of interviews, while others were modified and new

ones added.

Regarding consistency of statements as a method for developing knowledge about conditions

in the village, one can claim with some justification that coherent evidence from all

informants about the presence of a particular attitude or a certain practice, indicates its

counterpart in the real world, although not necessarily its magnitude. But this implies, in turn,

that the number of participating informants can be said to exceed a critical mass, and that

these informants are selected in such a way that they represent different, for the study

sociologically relevant, sections of the population, since experience, knowledge and opinions

more or less are likely to vary with different socio-economic variables and, of course, in this

case with reference to caste. This means, however, that consistency in all respects cannot be

expected. Consistency, however, is not always decisive for the opportunity to obtain

knowledge about a certain relationship with this method. Various and different details from

my informants about the same things and phenomena need not mean that they contradict each

other. It may simply be due to the fact that different informants, from their individual

perspectives, have different knowledge of and attitudes towards a particular phenomenon. The

more specific data which form the basis of the analysis are presented in each section. In the

last section I give a summary and final interpretation of the results.

In the intention of creating a basis for discussing attitude and behavior in a more general

13

sense, I used the following criteria for selection of informants: caste (Vanniyar / Dalit), age

(young / old), sex (male / female), class (highly educated / lowly educated). That age, along

with caste and class, is used as an operational analysis category (sex is not used as such in this

study)37

is because it is only in recent years that the gateway to education, and particularly

higher education, has been open to Dalits in the parish.38

16 informants were initially selected

but due to one dropping out, interviews were conducted with 15. The extent to which these 15

can reasonably be considered enough to achieve the critical mass mentioned above, may of

course be discussed. However, I am convinced that the number of actual informants in each

part of the study is large enough to draw some general conclusions about practices and

attitudes among the villagers.

The eight who are classified as "young” are between 22 and 33 years old, and the seven

classified as "old" are between 50 and 82 years old. The classification highly educated / lowly

educated is a broad term that includes both a person's economic status and educational level

and that is why I prefer to use the term class. Educational attainments of the lowly educated

vary; many of them lack any education while others have finished between five and twelve

years in the Indian school system. Among the highly educated there are three retired teachers

(eight years of primary education plus two years of teacher training), one is doing his second

year of a BA in English, and two have completed a BA and one an MA. None of those

classified as lowly educated – except perhaps Albert; information about his economical status

is missing – can be said to belong to the economic middle or upper stratum of the village.

Young /highly educated

Dalits: Ananthi, 26, MSc B.Ed., John Paul, 22, BA in English, second year

Vanniyar: Maria Susai, 33, BA in mathematics, teaching student, Josephine, 29, B.Ed.

unemployed teacher.

Young / lowly educated

Dalits: James, tailor, 31, 8th

standard; Sahaya, 28, maid, 8th

standard

Vanniyar: Winnarasi 30, homemaker, 8th

standard; Albert 31, 12th

standard, occupation

unknown.

Old / highly educated

37 I did not ask any questions or receive any comments which could have brought this issue into focus.

38 The figures in A Records for 2008 can be compared with figures for 1978, when no Dalit in the parish had

studied above the 8th

standard.

14

Dalits: Santhiago; 62, 8th

standard plus 2 years, retired teacher; Pithecai; 71, 8th

standard plus

2 years, retired teacher

Vanniyar: Arockiyam Sami 70, 8th

standard plus 2 years, retired teacher.

Old / lowly educated

Dalits: Ubakara 50, day laborer, no education; Joseph, 70, day laborer, no education

Vanniyar: Savariar 82, 5th

standard, smallholder; Mary, 50, 5th

standard, day laborer.

Parts of the interview material that will be reported and analyzed below address the following

aspects of the relations between the two castes:

* Hierarchy, status and rationalization

* Worship

* Social interaction, patterns of marriage, friendships

and "sharing and exchange of food and water"

All these aspects have been discussed in previous research except for "friendship". Under the

heading "Hierarchy, Status and Rationalization" I investigate the relevance and validity of the

traditional caste hierarchy for the parishioners. Is it that the Vanniyars claim to be a higher

caste and if so how do they motivate this claim? Do the Dalits acknowledge or reject this

claim?

Under the heading "Worship" I give a very brief characterization of how caste is manifested

in religious practice. The basis for this characteristic is very lean and only a few phenomena

have been taken into account.

The prohibition or taboo against marriage between non-Dalits and Dalits is, according to all

previous research, the most universally respected of all the penalties faced by Dalits and the

most visible part of the pollution barrier in India. If marriage between Dalits and Vanniyars

has occurred in the parish, it would be a very powerful indication that the pollution barrier has

lost a lot of its force and validity, as well as a recognition of the equal value and status of

Dalits. Therefore, this issue is well worth highlighting in this context. The same applies for

"sharing and exchange of food and water" because the social sanctions in this area, according

to the state of research, are one of the most common ways in which the pollution barrier still

manifests itself in India. The extent to which different castes engage in "friendship relations"

is also an indicator of the relative strength and presence of the same barrier. In this case, as

well as for "Marriage", "The sharing and exchange of food and water" and to some extent,

"Hierarchy, Status and rationalization", the material contains information which allows us to

make some comparisons with respect to caste, class and age.

15

James, a Vanniyar and resident in the village, provided me with the statistical material and a

few more details which I make use of in this study. He also provided me with informants and I

got the opportunity to conduct the interviews in his home. A friend from the nearby town of

Dindigul, who possesses very good local knowledge, acted as interpreter because I do not

know the Tamil language. That my questions and the informants' responses were mediated

through an interpreter, is obviously not an ideal situation; the risk of misunderstandings is

clear. But the interpreter was a very competent user of both Tamil and English and I have no

reason to believe this may have had more than a marginal influence on the outcome of this

study.

As a consequence of the survey method and the time-economic factor two important aspects

had to be omitted: a description and analysis of the local political circumstances, and the

Catholic Church's role in this context. However, in the concluding chapter, I bring forward a

few thoughts on how the present inter-caste relations in the parish, at least in part, can be

understood as a result of the local political situation and the Church's actions (or lack thereof).

The study

Vanniyars and the Dalit Paraiyar caste in Kosawapatti: ritual and socio-

economic characteristics

Kosawapatti is located in Tamil Nadu's inland, about 20 km from the nearby city of Dindigul.

An overwhelming majority of the inhabitants of the village belong to the Vanniyar caste, the

remainder, with the exception of a few representatives of the various "service castes", belong

to the Paraiyar caste. Christianity is the dominant religion in Kosawapatti. Virtually all

Vanniyars and most of the Parayiars are members of the local Catholic church, Kosawapatti.

The Parish also includes five adjoining smaller villages, called Substations, inhabited

exclusively by Vanniyars.

Vanniyars constitute a numerous caste in Tamil Nadu, and have traditionally been mostly

engaged in agriculture. It is considered the lowest of the pure castes in the local caste

hierarchy.39

Parayiar is the largest Dalit caste in Tamil Nadu, and has historically been

regarded as an untouchable caste, because of its association with the ritually degrading task of

scaring away evil spirits by beating on the parayiardrum (tappu), and due to the fact that they

39 P. Radhakrishnan, (1996), "Backward Class Movements in Tamil Nadu", p. 127, in Caste: its twentieth

century avatar, red. M.N Srinivas New York, Penguin Books

16

were forced to perform slave labor (adimai tolil) for the higher castes in society.40

According

to my informants, a small group among them still serves as tappu players in various ritual

contexts.41

At least in one respect then, the Dalits fulfill a function that underlines their

ritually subordinate status in the village. This subordination is also implied geographically by

strictly observed residential segregation. The Dalits in Kosawapatti are spread over two areas,

a slightly larger one in the south and a smaller one in the north. (The part of the village

occupied by Dalits is sometimes called "cherii" in the Tamil language). The former is called

Old Street by the inhabitants of the village, the latter New Street. The Old Street is, as its

name suggests, the oldest settlement of the Dalits, but sometime in the early twentieth century

they were allowed to settle in a previously uninhabited area of the village, which later became

known as New Street. The rest of the village's territory is dominated by Vanniyars.42

Housing segregation of castes is, however, not rare in India. On the contrary, it is common

that different castes occupy different areas in India's villages. But while the degree of

segregation may differ between castes which are considered as "clean", and some confusion is

not rare, the Dalit neighborhood is usually sharply separated from other the castes. Tappu-

playing and residential segregation in Kosawapatti can therefore be seen as two

manifestations of the low status and "impure" birth of the Dalits. Dalit subordination is also

broadly manifested in the economic sphere. Below are a few statistics on conditions in

Kosawapatti that illustrate this.

Vanniyars Dalits

Numbers 6703 ( 15-16 hindu families) 981 (369 hindus)

Landowners 68 % 11%

Livestock owners 60 % 10%

Teacher students 150 16

Undergraduates 40 11

Postgraduates 30 3

Government employees 496 37

Private employees 618 103

Venders (vegetables, 23 6

clothes, spices etc.)

Businessmen

-small 106 28

40 Deliége, (1997), p. 77

41Pithecai, p. 3Josephine, p. 2, Santhiago, p. 2f, Savariar, p. 1f, Sahaya, p. 3

42 Interview with James 7/12

17

-medium 48 4

-big 36 1

Day laborers 1202 326

The information above is taken from the local authority's A Records43

, and reports statistics on

various socio-economic conditions in Kosawapatti panchayat in 2008. A majority of

Vanniyars (68%) own land, compared with only 11% of the Dalits. However the plots are in

most cases very small: over 80% of the land-owning Vanniyars own between 0.5 and 1

hectare. Among the few Dalits who own land, only one qualifies for the designation "medium

level landholder"(7.5–10 ha); others have small or very small plots.44

Roughly 50% of

Vanniyars of working age and about 80% of Dalits can be classified as day laborers. The A

Records reveal no information on the number of animals per livestock owner, but we can say

that 60% of Vanniyars own at least one cow or ox, while only a small number of Dalits do the

same.

This picture of the socio-economic structure is in line with the oral information I got from

James. According to his estimate, around 40 percent of the Vanniyars and 80 percent of the

Dalits can be classified as "coolies" (carriers or day laborers). The rest have jobs as teachers,

policemen and the like or own enough land or money in order to qualify for "membership" in

upper strata of the community.45

In the case of education, however, to return to the table

above, the figures seem more equalized. In a relative sense the Dalits match the Vanniyars

fairly well: they are slightly underrepresented in terms of number of student teachers and

postgraduates, but in the case of undergraduates they are in fact somewhat over-represented. A

small "elite" of Dalits also seems to be better off than many Vanniyars, but Vanniyars

dominate in all areas except in terms of level of education where the Dalits are not far behind.

It is also likely, although it is not clear from this material, that at least some of the Dalits who

are classified as day laborers work on farmland owned by Vanniyars and as such are in a

position of economic dependence on them.

The Dalits in Kosawapatti thus seemingly meet all the numerical, economical and ritual

criteria to be stigmatized as untouchables. However, the practice of untouchability is, as

43 The material was given to me by James

44 Figures of sizes and their distribution according to caste are registered in A Records, but are not reproduced

in the table above due to a lack of space.

45 Interview with James 7/12

18

mentioned earlier, prohibited under Indian law, and practices as well as attitudes are

condemned by the Catholic Church as incompatible with the Christian faith. The question

now is whether, and if so to what extent, the values and practices connected to the pollution

barrier – despite laws, quota programs, incompatibility with basic Christian theology, etc. –

have an on-going existence in Kosawapatti. One manifestation of the pollution barrier,

residential segregation, has already been observed. But is it possible to dismiss this as a

historical relic with limited or no real link to the pollution barrier? Or is this merely one of the

forms by which it manifests itself in Kosawapatti? In the following, I will first, on the basis of

the statements that my informants make, seek to clarify whether, and if so to what extent, the

ritually and economically defined subordination of the Dalits is reflected in the self perception

of the Dalits and Vanniyars in the parish.

Hierarchy, status and rationalizations

In this chapter I will reproduce and interpret relevant observations and views from my

informants, and (where appropriate) other villagers' views on the caste hierarchy and status,

and how they rationalize them. Because I am interested in the perceptions and experiences of

the current situation in the village, the only statements reproduced and commented upon are

those which my informants declare, in their own opinion or in the opinion of others, to be

adequate or relevant for an understanding of the relationship between the two castes.

.

Vanniyar informants

Out of my seven Vanniyar informants only two, Savariar and Albert, stated as their own

personal opinion that the low status of the Dalits in the local caste hierarchy reflects a

corresponding low value: "We are Vanniyars, they are Parayiars, very low caste"46

and

"Vanniyars are higher than Dalits due to education and civilization."47

Of the remaining Vanniyar informants, three stated in unequivocal terms that a similar attitude

towards the Dalits is common among Vanniyars in the parish:

"The younger generation also have the same mind [caste attitude] like the elders. There is no

difference"48

(Josephine);

46 Savariar, p. 1

47 Albert, p. 1

48 Josephine, p. 2

19

"There is always a feeling they are under us"49

(Winnarasi);

"They will still be seen as a Dalits only, no improvement will be there in the attitude of

Vanniyars"50

(Maria Susai).

It is reasonable in this context to understand "us", "young generation / "elders" and

"Vanniyars" as Vanniyars in common. In addition, Arockiyam Sami makes a similar statement

although it also signals an incipient shift in attitudes:

"Vanniyars more or less do not express the caste feelings today .[...] Now people who boasted

themselves as high society earlier, when they see a Dalit educated they take a back seat. They

control themselves. "51

It seems reasonable to understand this statement as an, at least partial, admission that many

Vanniyars still have a condescending view of Dalits. They may not openly express "caste

feelings" any longer, but they may well entertain them inside "They control themselves" - two

of my Dalit informants also confirm this statement.52

Mary just stated that "some say Vanniyars are superior to Dalits"53

but did not otherwise

explicitly comment upon the relations in terms of superiority and inferiority.

Thus it seems that my Vanniyar informants, if we exclude the "neutral marking" Mary, either

perceive themselves as higher in status than the Dalits or confirm that Vanniyars, some or

many, hold such a view. But what characterizes the "lowness" of the Dalits? Two of my

informants, Mary and Arockiyam Sami, do not touch upon this aspect, and a third, Josephine,

says she doesn't know.

The remaining three provide somewhat different answers to that question. Savariar and Albert

articulate Dalit subordination in terms reminiscent of the ideology of purity/impurity:

"They are not neat enough" and "It's the duty of the Parayiars to play the tappu during

funerals and other ceremonies. Only they can do that because of their low birth."54

(Savariar)

"Vanniyars is higher than Dalits due to education and civilization .[...] Civilisation means

49 Winnarasi, p. 1

50 Maria Susai, p. 1

51 Arocckiyam Sami, p. 1

52 James, p. 2, and Santhiago, p. 3

53 Mary, p. 1

54 Savariar, p. 1

20

social behaviour, and their behaviour is not good, for example they are playing tappu."55

(Albert)

Although Winnarasi justifies the feeling of superiority that Vanniyars posssess according to

her in terms related to this ideology "because they play drum and all that" and "they think that

they are not neat enough",56

she seems to mean that few if any Vanniyars, at least not in her

own generation, truly believe in the ideology of purity/impurity in any literal sense. According

to Winnarasi, Vanniyars do not accept food cooked by Dalits, not because they are afraid of

being tainted with "impurity", it´s only "an idea" that they have: "It's not that anything bad

will happen if we go to their house to eat but this is an idea we have in our minds.̎ 57

Perhaps

we should understand Savariar's and Albert's rationalization of the low status of Dalits in a

similar way, i.e. that they dress their experience of dominance in a language that alludes to

ritual subordination of Dalits, but may not attach it to a thereby associated (religious) faith

system?

When Maria Susai rationalizes Vanniyars superior attitude towards Dalits, he stresses this is

a result of political and economic conditions, not due to any ritual considerations:

"The basic thing is that Vanniyars has already been a ruling class, a dominant caste. And the

Dalits has worked in their families as slaves. So they are not willing to give them equal

table."58

The above statements from my informants seem to affirm that the idea of the low status of

Dalits is included as a more or less "natural" element in the self-image of Vanniyars, or many

Vanniyars. But there are, as mentioned above, only two, Albert and Savariar, who

unequivocally state this as their own personal belief. Of my other Vanniyar informants two,

Mary and Josephine, profess explicitly to the principle of equality of all people,59

and even if

the others do not do it (maybe because I did not directly asked them to do so), they at least put

some distance between themselves and the idea of the supremacy of the Vanniyars. This

55 Albert, p. 1

56 Winnarasi, p.2

57 Winnarasi, p.1

58 Maria Susai, p. 1

59 Josephine, p. 2, Mary, p. 1

21

conclusion is based admittedly on the overall impression I got during the interviews, but I still

think that this spirit is somewhat conveyed in the following statements:

"Vanniyars discriminate the Dalits" and" It's a curse [the caste system]60

" (Maria Susai),

Why not, why should Vanniyars and Parayiars be separated? If we think like that it's possible,

I think [to overcome this division]".61

(Winnarasi), and "I do not have a good opinion about

it"62

(Arockiyam Sami), regarding the treatment of Dalits in the village.

As a further addition to these statements, indicating an incipient shift in attitudes, particularly

among Vanniyars in the younger generation, Winnarasi claims that Vanniyars of her own

generation today want and are trying to overcome the prejudices and structures that are

preventing a rapprochement between the castes63

, a trend that Arockiyam Sami also feels able

to discern and that he puts in the context of the increasing level of education among Dalits.64

At the same time however, I cannot help adding that, as I understand it, there is some tension

between the expressed or implied ideals on one hand, and the ability/desire to realize them in

practice on the other, since they all, except Arockiyam Sami (who largely avoided to vent his

own opinions in our conversation), admit that they in one or more regards accept or at least

adapt to prevailing norms. Maria Susais "It's a curse” is thus followed by "I accept it "65

.

Winnarasis example above (p.19) shows a similar ambivalence because she apparently

includes herself in the "we" that is mentioned. And Josephine, for her part, states – and this

indicates that she herself would not be prepared to realize egalitarianism in full – that she

could never marry a Dalit because her parents would never accept such a marriage.66

In

addition, one might wonder whether Mary, who claims that neither she nor any other Vanniyar

could accept a dinner invitation from a Dalit67

, does not, by this said norm of action,

contradict the principle of equality which she at the same time claims to cherish. That this

non-acceptance of a dinner invitation from a Dalit should be understood as a marker of his/her

60 Maria Susai, p. 1

61 Winnarasi, p. 2

62 Arockiyam Sami, p. 1

63 Winnarasi. p. 1

64 Arockiyam Sami, p. 1

65 Maria Susai, p. 2

66 Josephine, p. 2

67 Mary, p. 1

22

low status has also, as I have mentioned above, been underlined by Deliège. But instead of

contradictions perhaps we should rather consider this ambivalence as an expression that "to

believe something" and "accept something" are not always two sides of the same coin?

I will now summarize what has been dealt with above as follows. According to my Vanniyar

informants many Vanniyars in the parish share, in an active way, the traditional view of Dalits

as a very low caste, subordinate to themselves. Several of them claim or suggest that this

view, in whole or in part, violates or deviates from their own and two of them (Winnarasi and

Arockiyam Sami) also point out that an attitude shift is underway in the younger generation.

Further, three of them articulate the Dalits' subordinate status in ritual terms, but whether

they (Savariar and Albert) or other Vanniyars (according to Winnarasi) actually hold a literal

belief in the ritual "impurity" of the Dalits, I cannot tell for sure. The other informants claim

they either do not know what Dalit baseness consists of (Josephine); refrain from

characterizing the attitude (Arockiyam Sami and Mary), or suggest that the low status of

Dalits in the eyes of Vanniyars has to do with the previous obligation for the Dalits to perform

slave labor for them. (Mary Susai). With reference to what the state of research has to say

about this problem (p. 10). I believe that it is reasonable to assume that ritualistic aspects only

have secondary importance, if any.

The Dalit informants

All my informants, Vanniyars as well as Dalits, were apparently fully aware of the fact that

Vanniyars are acknowledged a higher status than Dalits in the local caste hierarchy. I was so

confident in my conversations with them that I did not systematically ask this question, and I

am convinced that this is equally true for all the inhabitants of the village, with the children as

the one possible exception. However, a few of my Dalit informants reported a somewhat

ambiguous understanding of the concept of "higher caste" and I shall here, therefore, first try

to sort out what they really can mean.

Ubakara, when I asked her to rank the two castes, positioned the Vanniyars as the higher

caste without the slightest hesitation68

, reflecting the locally and regionally well-known view

that "it's the way it is." Then she makes two statements which appear contradictory. On the

one hand, she rejects the traditional view that Vanniyars would be above Dalits in status: "She

never agrees that Vanniyar is the higher caste."69

On the other hand, she points out that "But in

68 Ubakara, p. 1

69 Ubakara, p. 2

23

real life they [the Dalits] are lower"70

. How can we reasonably understand these apparently

contradictory statements? Well, maybe as follows. That she does not recognize Vanniyars'

claim to be a higher caste could, I believe, be interpreted as a rejection both of the ritual

sovereignty of Vanniyars, and of the Vanniyars' right to dominate the Dalits. Vanniyars'

traditionally recognized higher status, namely has to do with Dalit ritual subordination as well

as the Vanniyars' ability to dominate the Dalits, and it is therefore quite possible that her

rejection refers to both these aspects. And since the Vanniyars in fact are the dominant caste in

the village and she cannot reasonably refer to any ritual differences with "real life" in "But in

real life they [the Dalits] are lower", so we can discern an underlying logic in these seeming

contradictions: Dalits can certainly be regarded as lower than Vanniyars, she seems to be

arguing, but only in a political and/or economic sense. She rejects both their ritual claims to

higher status as well as their right to dominate the Dalits.

Sahaya's thinking on this is clearly ambiguous and therefore I reproduce here a long passage

from my interview.

-There is two castes in the parish church, Vanniyars and Dalits. Are they regarding each other and treat each

other as equals?

-She feels that there are some discrimination here, but she don' t know how to tell.

-Is it that Vanniyars in this village regard themselves as superior compared to the Dalits?

-In ancient days some years the elders of dalit community was working as servants for the Vanniyars, that only

she knows.

-She doesn't have any feeling that Vanniyars is higher, superior compared with her?

-She feels it is so called higher community, the Vanniyars, but in practice there is no discrimination. It's equal she

thinks.71

We can distinguish two seemingly contradictory positions in her reasoning. On the one hand,

she remarks that Vanniyars are the higher caste of the two, but at the same time suggests that

this higher status has only a nominal role and that it is not implemented in a way that should

be interpreted as discriminatory. On the other hand "she feels that there are some

discrimination here", and also suggests that the Vanniyars' claim to be above the Dalits has to

do with the Dalits former role as servants.

There is no obvious solution on what to make of this contradiction. However, later on she

makes a remark that suggests a possible answer:

70 Ubakara, p. 2

71 Sahaya, p. 2

24

"...in older days, Dalits were not allowed to wear footwear on Vanniyar Street, but today it is totally changed, we

are equal because we were footwear when entering Vanniyar Street, its development, slowly develops."72

By considering the now repealed ban on Dalits to use sandals, when they join the Vanniyars'

part of the village, as an indication that Vanniyars today recognize the Dalits as equals, and at

the same time see this reform as part of a process not yet complete, "slowly develops", she

suggests that she, rather than talking about structures that recall the past, wants to highlight

examples which show that these structures are changing. The quotation "She feels it is so

called higher community", should also, I believe, be seen and interpreted in light of "She feels

that there are some discrimination here". By introducing discrimination as part of the

"relationship equation" the former statement should, I believe, not be interpreted as a

recognition of the Vanniyars' higher status in any religious or cultural sense, but simply as a

statement of Dalit subordination in an economic and/or political sense.

The term Sahaya uses above, discrimination, has a wide range of meanings and may include

attitudes as well as practices. In Ananthi's answer to the question whether there is an internal

ranking among castes: "Yes caste discrimination is also in the Christian parishes"73

she

highlights the inequalities in the relationship between the Dalits and Vanniyars, and

discrimination may here refer to both practices and attitudes. The idea of Dalits as a lower

caste among Vanniyars is confirmed by my other Dalit informants. When asked if Vanniyars

are of the opinion that they are "higher" than the Dalits, Pithecai and John Paul accounted the

following:

"It's the feeling of caste and feeling of dominance. They still have it. "74

"Because they are also the majority, they feel like that "75

That many Vanniyars have this attitude but do not necessarily express it in public, is equally argued by Santiago

and Joseph:

"Externally they express the attitude they do not have that, but internally they have it, the attitude of caste

domination."76

"Some might discriminate, some may have that feeling [caste attitude] within themselves, some will move as

72 Sahaya, p. 2

73 Ananthi, p. 1

74 Pithecai, p. 1f

75 John Paul, p. 3

76 Santhiago, p. 3

25

brothers with us."77

A similar idea is also conveyed by James in the following replica exchange:

-Does caste attitude mean that they [Vanniyars] regard you as inferior, as polluted?

-Yes.

[---]

-Does Vanniyars here articulate, verbally, this idea of your inferiority, this idea of their own clean superiority?

-No

-But you think that this is still in their mind?

-Yes78

As the only Dalit informant he also explicitly raises here, like two of my Vanniyar informants

above, the link between low status of Dalits and the theological-ideological conception of

their filthiness. But in a comment preceding this replica exchange, he also gives an economic-

political argument explaining the situation of the Dalits:

We have always been downtrodden so it has been our habit that we are fed in one way or the other by them, in

occasion, so they can show their generosity, this is the habit that Dalits can take food from landlord or upper

caste people, but it has never happened that upper caste people take from us, because of caste attitude.79

The same emphasis on the unequal power relationships as the major reason for the situation

Dalits find themselves in, is also made by Ananthi: "Vanniyar community is in majority, in

population and in holdings of power, so Dalits are always oppressed by them".80

Apart from James none of my Dalit informants make an attempt to explain the

condescending attitudes towards them as ritually motivated. Among the five who explicitly

comment these attitudes, four (Pithecai, John Jaula, James, Santhiago) see them as a

consequence of the dominant position of the Vanniyars in the village.

But in addition to Joseph's agreement above that not all Vanniyars share this attitude "some

will move as brothers with us ", John Paul also gives an example that points in that same

direction. While he admits that they are not representative of Vanniyars at large, he comments

on his relationship with some friends among the Vanniyars as follows:

-We do not talk about caste, we do not bother. We play cricket together. All our aims is to be happy.

-Are they representative of the Vanniyars as-a-whole?

77 Joseph, p. 1

78 James, s. 2

79 James, s. 2

80 Ananthi, s. 1

26

-No, they belong to a thin minority among the Vanniyars.81

Pithecai believes, like the Vanniyar informants Arockiyam Sami and Winnarasi, that a change

in attitude is going on in the younger generation, and he sees just like Sami Arockiyam the

increasing availability of education as a factor creating change:

Education is the big thing to change. There are people studying on both sides, they get to know each other and

they come to common understanding. They slowly overcoming the caste differences.82

The views my Dalit informants express of the inter-caste attitudes and their understanding of

the caste hierarchy, could be summarized as follows. They imply or state explicitly that

Vanniyars commonly regard the Dalits as a subordinate and inferior caste. By describing the

relationships in terms of domination, oppression, discrimination, they suggest that the

perceived domination has to do with both attitudes and practices. In using these words, and

along with the other claims they make, they demonstrate that they neither recognize the

Vanniyars' claims to higher status nor their right to dominate them. But several of them also

point out that there are Vanniyars that do not follow the dominant discourse. And together

with two of my Vanniyar informants they identified the young generation, directly (Pithecai)

or indirectly (John Paul), as the group where this tendency most clearly manifests itself.

The overall picture we thus get, from what my Vanniyar and Dalit informants tell, is that the

caste hierarchy strongly affects the relational attitudes between Vanniyars and Dalits in the

village, which in turn points to the existence of a more or less firmly entrenched pollution

barrier. To what extent is this pollution barrier institutionalized in the village and the parish?

Does the subordination of Dalits manifest itself through segregation (in addition to residential

segregation) and other forms of taboos and prohibitions? Are all Dalits treated equally, or is

social intercourse also determined by class? These issues are addressed in the following part.

Worship

The parish church is situated in the middle of the village, in the part inhabited by Vanniyars.

The church, as in other Catholic parishes, holds the majority of the religious rituals and

ceremonies: the masses, communions, confirmations, baptisms, etc. In addition to the parish

church there are also three additional small churches in Kosawapatti: one in the Vanniyar part

of the village and two in the Dalit part, on New Street and Old Street. These churches also

play a prominent role in the annual festivals that are celebrated in honor of each church's

81 John Paul, p. 4

82 Pithecai, p. 1

27

patron saint, but other religious practices are centered in and around the parish church and a

there is no separate set of priests for Vanniyars and Dalits in Kosawapatti, in contrast to many

other Christian churches (see p. 7 above).83

It seems that the parish church, in the case of most

of the religious ceremonies, does not favor either party but gives both Vanniyars and Dalits

equal opportunity to participate.84

However, the material contains information confirmed by

both Vanniyars and Dalits of three tangible manifestations of the pollution barrier. First, the

practice of segregated cemeteries is maintained in Kosawapatti: a wall separates the graveyard

of Dalits and Vanniyars.85

Additionally, two church-related activities are subject to

restrictions for Dalits. They are not allowed to use the main street for their funeral

processions. This means that they cannot bring their dead to the parish church in order to

receive the priest's blessings. Instead a priest visits the home of the deceased Dalit and gives

his blessings there.86

And finally, processions, as part of the wedding ceremony, are restricted

for Dalits. They are not allowed to play music or make any other noise while proceeding on

Main Street towards New Street. Not until they have entered New Street are the tappu-

players allowed to play the tappu.87

Previous research (see above) has shown that segregated cemeteries and limited access to

public roads for funeral and wedding processions are three common and, in many parts of

India, prevalent forms of discrimination faced by Dalits. Dalits in Kosawapatti are in this

respect no exception. But no other forms of segregation or discrimination in religious practice

have been substantiated in this study.

Marriage

According to available research there is still a general prohibition against marriages between

Dalits and non-Dalits. What are conditions like in Kosawapatti? Does this apply here too? The

short answer is yes, but the material allows some interesting details. Two of my informants

stated that a "registered marriage" just recently had been entered into between a female

83 Interview with James, 13/12

84 Except for the three cases mentioned below, no other practice of forced or voluntarily segregation are

reported from my informants.

85 I myself was able to confirm the existence of the wall.

86 Arockiya Sami, p. 1 Santhiago, p. 2 Ananthi, p. 1

87 Santhiago, p. 2f, Maria Susai, p. 1, John Paul, p. 3, Winnarasi, p. 2

28

Vanniyar and a male Dalit, but claimed at the same time that the woman's father had initiated

a process to annul it.88

After having made some inquiries James could confirm the statement,

but added that the marriage was already annulled. The girl had, and here he gave me an ironic

glance, suddenly changed her mind, and was now married to a cousin living in another state.89

All (12 of 15) who were asked or spontaneously commented on the matter said they did not

know of any case (or any circumstances beyond the aforementioned) and even denied the very

possibility of such a marriage within the church.90

Interesting to note is that the young Dalit male in the aforementioned case was a university

student and son of a policeman,91

and therefore belonged to the elite tier among Dalits in the

parish. Possibly this example, although the marriage did not materialize, demonstrates that the

pollution barrier is not as firmly rooted in the village as before. And perhaps we see here the

beginning of a process that in time will make the now unthinkable – crossing the Dalit/non-

Dalit divide – possible. It seems likely that the first Dalit, man or woman, who ever does so

will belong to the more well-to-do/educated layer among Dalits.

Friendship

In this section I address the existence of inter-caste friendships in Kosawapatti. The material

which I base my discussion on consists of information from 12 of my informants about their

own relationships, on the one hand, and the general pattern in the village on the other. This

question did not come up in my interview with any of the three informants included in the

category "old and educated", and I will reflect on this below.

Friendship can of course take many different forms. In order to avoid the word "friend" in

this context from being used in too inclusive and empty a manner, I made clear to my

informants that by "friend" I mean a person whom you not only meet and socialize with on a

superficial level, but also one with whom you can share a meal at home. Eating together

symbolizes, as stated above, equality in the Indian context. I believe that friendship in the

deeper sense of the term implies equality in the sense of a mutual recognition of each other's

88 John Paul, p. 2f, Santhiago, p. 3. Ubakara, p. 2 och Albert, p. 2 also mentioned this relation but did not say

anything about a marriage.

89 Interview with James, 20/12

90 Albert, p. 2, Joseph, p. 1, Savariar, p. 1, Winnarasi, p. 2, Maria Susai, p. 1, John Paul, p. 2, Mary, p. 1,

Ubakara, p. 2, Pithecai, p. 1, Sahaya, p. 3, James, p. 1, Santhiago, p. 3

91 Santhiago, p. 3

29

equal worth and dignity. To call someone a friend and at the same time follow practices aimed

at stamping him or her as inferior and subordinate, is, as far as I am concerned, a

contradiction in terms. Those of my informants that claimed that they had a friend or friends

who belonged to the other caste also stated – with one important reservation (more on that

below) – that these friendships involved the sharing of meals in private residences.

Of the twelve informants (6 Dalits, 6 Vanniyars) who were asked whether they had friends

among those belonging to the other caste, a clear majority (nine) answered in the negative.

Among these nine, only one belonged to the category young and highly educated person

(Ananthi), the others belonged to the category lowly educated. 92

The remaining three in the category of young and highly educated, however, stated that they

had such friends: Maria Susai (two male Dalits), Josephine (a female Dalit), and John Paul

(about 15 friends from the Vanniyar caste).93

However, on commenting on his relations with

Dalits, one of them, Maria Susai, stressed that there were limits to how intimate they could be.

He could invite them to dinner but not vice versa. Whether these relations can thus be

considered to meet the criterion for friendship above can be discussed. The next section

discusses this aspect in more detail.

Of note is that Maria Susai's and Josephine's friends, like themselves, had a background as

students. Whether John Paul's friends among the Vanniyars were also students cannot be

discerned in the interview, but it seems not unlikely. Two of my informants also certify (and

no one denies) that inter-caste friendships between young people in the village are not

uncommon nowadays.94

The remaining three informants95

, i.e. all those who have been categorized as elderly and

highly educated, provided no information on their own inter-caste friendships in Kosawapatti.

However, I believe it is likely that none of them have a more personal relationship with

anyone from the other caste. During our conversation they highlighted, directly or indirectly, a

critical approach to the present caste relations and attitudes in the village. Had any of them

actually been on friendly relations with anyone from the other caste, it is in my opinion likely

that they then would have taken the opportunity and spontaneously talked about this. In

92 Ubakara p. 2, Joseph, p. 1, Anathi p. 1, James, p. 1, Mary, p. 1, Albert, p. 1 Savariar, p. 1, Winnarasi, p. 1

93 John Paul, p. 4 Maria Susai, p. 2 Sahaya, p. 2, Josephine, p. 2

94 Ubakara, p. 2, Santiago, p. 3

95 Arockiya Sami, Pithecai, Santiago

30

addition, all belong to the category of older informants where you generally cannot expect

new attitudes and relationship patterns to pass through very easily, at least not in practice.

To sum it up: If we put together those who claim they don't have any friends (9) with the

ones likely not to have any (3) we get the outcome 12 out of 15, one, as far as I can see quite

convincing indication that the pollution barrier still acts as a segregating factor. That two or

three of the four in the group of young and highly educated state that they have inter-caste

friendships, crossing the Dalit/non-Dalit divide, suggests, however, that that the pollution

barrier does not constitute an insurmountable obstacle for the development of friendly

relations for them.

The sharing and exchange of food and water

Sharing a meal and accepting food and water from someone is of great symbolic importance

in India and is yet another area where the validity and relevance of the pollution barrier can be

confirmed or challenged. What do my informants have to say about these forms of social

action in Kosawapatti? The material which I base my discussion on consists of information

that 12 of my informants left on their own interactions and on the general pattern in the

village.

Nine of my informants make statements on the general pattern of the village, and state either

explicitly (7) or make clear otherwise (2) that Vanniyars and Dalits do not commonly eat

together. At the time of festivals, however, they arrange so-called "communal dinners", and

five of my informants mentioned such public meals as examples of times when Vanniyars and

Dalits dine side by side.

However, the subordinate status of Dalits is marked not only in terms of separation. Another

important criterion is whether or not Vanniyars accept food and drink from Dalits. Seven

informants make statements concerning local practice in the village, saying that Vanniyars do

not accept food and drink from the Dalits in Kosawapatti. Four examples of this, from an

equal number of informants, are reproduced and commented below.

On his relations with friends among the Dalits, Maria Susai says the following:

-Do you eat at their places with them and do they eat with you at yours?

- He comes to my house and eat, but I don´t go to him.

-Why not?

-I can´t go. They have that system that they can come to us and eat, but we have not. I have never tried to go to

his house to eat.

-Would you like to do it?

-No

31

Why not?

-The system makes it impossible for me to do so.

- Why? Is it social pressure from your own community that prevents you from dining with your dalit friends in

their homes?

- Both, I feel so myself and there is a social pressure96

Another Vanniyar, Winnarasi, confirms that this system exists and that it has to do with the

low status of the Dalits:

There is always a feeling they are under us. So when they cook in their house we feel kind of aversion: How can

we eat with people who are under us? (...) It's not that anything bad will happen if we go to their house, but this

is an idea that we have in our mind.97

The Dalit informant James makes a similar statement, from a Dalit perspective:

We have always been downtrodden so it has been our habit that we are fed in one way or the other by them, in

occasion, so they can show their generosity, this is the habit that Dalits can take food from landlord or upper

caste people, but it has never happened that upper caste people take from us, because of caste attitude.98

That this system rather should be understood as a taboo than as a universally followed

practice is stressed by Ubakara. On a communal dinner organized by the Dalits in the village,

with a small group of Vanniyars as participants, she has this to say:

They also feel very ashamed to mingle with them. They take part in the communal diner and hide themselves

when they go back home to their houses.

-Dalits?

-No vanniyars. They feel very ashamed.

-Because?

-Because they equally take part in the communal diner99

The power of this taboo is seemingly also underlined in the answers given by two other Dalit

informants, Sahaya and Joseph. When asked if Vanniyars ever had shared a meal with them

in their homes, Sahaya said that she did not remember (!) and Joseph that it had happened

maybe two or three times during his entire seventy years of life.

Finally, we have three informants, speaking about their own dealings in this regard,

Santhiago, John Paul and Josephine, and whose statements I believe support the conclusion

that many but not all Vanniyars, and not in all contexts, observe this taboo. Santhiago

96 Maria Susai, p. 2

97 Winnarasi, p. 1

98 James, p. 2

99 Ubakara, p. 1

32

estimated that thirty Vanniyars over the years had participated in the meals that she organizes

at her home at the time of the yearly festivals in the village. She also said that Vanniyars had

invited her family to dine during wedding celebrations and vice versa. John Paul, about his 15

Vanniyar friends and Josephine on her Dalit friend, said that there were no restrictions

between them in the sharing and exchange of food. All these three belong to the category

educated persons which again indicates the importance of class as a vehicle to break through

the pollution barrier. But it seems nevertheless, based on this material, reasonable to conclude

that the ideology and practices of the pollution barrier are still very much maintained in this

area in Kosawapatti.

Summary and concluding reflections

This study examines how the infamous pollution barrier in India, i.e. values and practices that

separate ritually clean from unclean castes, affects attitudes and interpersonal relationships in

the rural Catholic parish of Kosawapatti in Tamil Nadu.

The majority of the parish members belong to the Vanniyar caste, a caste positioned just

above the pollution barrier in the local caste hierarchy, the remainder belong to the Dalit

Parayiar caste, below the same barrier. The actual study is based partly and mainly on

information that 15 informants (8 Dalits / 7 Vanniyars), selected to represent different and

sociologically relevant layers of the parish (caste, class, age, sex), provided about forms of

and attitudes to social and religious interaction between the two castes, and partly on my own

observations and data on socio-economic conditions in the parish.

The result can be summarized as follows. In Kosawapatti as in large parts of India, the Dalits

are separated from the "clean" castes by a barrier, the pollution barrier. This barrier is

maintained primarily through segregation, but my informants also report some clear cases of

discrimination both in the social and (to a lesser extent) the religious sphere. Residential

quarters and cemeteries are strictly segregated by caste. Dalits are also denied the right to

equal usage of the village's main street for funeral and wedding processions. In these respects

Kosawapatti follows a pattern common in all of India for villages with similar caste

composition, regardless of religious orientation. Like in many other Christian villages, there

are also separate churches for Dalits and non-Dalits. However, these churches seem to have a

fairly peripheral religious significance for the villagers and most of the religious practice takes

place in and around the parish church where the Dalits and non-Dalits by all appearances

participate on an equal footing. Furthermore, there seems to be no distinct set of priests for

33

Dalits and non-Dalits, a phenomenon that exists in many other Christian villages.

As regards the other forms of social interaction focused on in this study, they appear to

adhere closely to the general trend in Christian villages with members above and below the

pollution barrier in rural India. The taboo against marriage crossing this barrier is maintained

here as well as elsewhere in India, but as regards friendships and the sharing and exchange of

food and water, the barrier is more blurred. Although it seems reasonable, from what my

informants tell, to conclude that while inter-caste friendships and shared meals, especially

those of a private nature, are still not a common feature in Kosawapatti, they are not as

unusual as before. And the fact that all except one of my informants who state that they

themselves have experience of these kinds of social interactions belong to the young and

educated layer in the village, points to the importance of class as a vehicle to break through

and undermine the pollution barrier.

The analysis of my informants' statements regarding hierarchy and status also indicates that

many Vanniyars (but not Dalits themselves!) regard the Dalits as an inferior caste, and that

this attitude, at least partly, can explain the maintenance of the different forms of segregation

and discrimination against Dalits in the village. However, it's important to note that, according

to my informants, not all Vanniyars share this attitude, and also that this attitude is not as

strongly anchored within the younger generation of Vanniyars as among the elderly. Four of

my informants make an attempt to rationalize this attitude in terms that echo the theological

and cultural ideas of purity and impurity, but we cannot conclude from this that "purity" is or

may be a main concern for many Vanniyars in the village. Other studies suggest that "purity"

is not a big concern in Christian churches and communities in India, and it seems therefore

reasonable to assume that this is also the case in Kosawapatti. Some support for this

hypothesis is also given by the fact that class, by all appearances and up to a certain point,

plays an important role in determining which form and degree the social interaction between

individuals from the two castes takes.

Nothing that emerged in my interviews suggests that segregation, not to say discrimination,

in Kosawapatti has any supporters among the Dalits in the village, i.e. that they would

perceive it as legitimate or desirable. Since the pollution barrier (where it exists) is also based

on perceptions and the exercise of political power and economic domination, one can expect a

similar expression in the politics and the socio-economic structure of Kosawapatti. The

analysis of the socio-economic structure of Kosawapatti also showed that Vanniyars in an

absolute (by virtue of their numerical dominance), as well as a relative sense, dominate

politics and economics in the community. Many Vanniyars are indeed, like the majority of

34

Dalits, poor, but the percentage of more well- to-do Vanniyars is nevertheless considerably

higher than that for the Dalits (60% and 20% respectively), and some Dalits are likely to be

economically dependent on Vanniyars.

However, this is not a completely sufficient explanation. At least two other major players are

able to influence the situation in Kosawapatti: regional authorities (police and judiciary, etc.)

on the one hand, and the Catholic Church on the other. Clearly, existing patterns in social

interactions of a more private nature – marriage, friendships and the sharing of meals – cannot

(although they are discriminatory in content) be subject to judicial intervention. I assume that

the same can be said in the case of residential segregation. However, the present restrictions

on Dalits using the main street of Kosawapatti for burial and wedding processions, and

possibly also the practice of segregated graveyards, may well be. In India's "Protection of

Civil Rights Act" (adopted in 1976) the following practices are included on the list of illegal

forms of discrimination: "Denial of access to temples / places of public worship"; "Preventing

the use of public Cremation / Burial Ground"; and "Denial-of-use of public passages, road,

etc."100

The fact that these forms of discrimination occur in Kosawapatti is sad and casts a

dark shadow over authorities and the judiciary and their general attitude and behavior.

The same criticism must also be directed against the Catholic Church, despite the lofty

official declarations of caste discrimination as an intolerable violation of human dignity and

an offense against God, the church is apparently unable and/or unwilling to seriously tackle

the problem. As regards the forms of discrimination that go on within the church, it must

reasonably assume some responsibility. The pollution barrier stands, although challenged and

challenged from many directions, strangely intact and continues to distinguish "high" from

"low", "clean" from "unclean" in India. Kosawapatti is no exception in this regard, even if

economic and social change has also left a clear imprint in attitudes and behaviors here

Literature

Bayly, Susan (1999) The New Cambridge History of India IV: 3. Caste, Society and Politics

in India: From The Eighteenth Century to The Modern Age. Cambridge

Deliège, Robert (1999), The Untouchables of India. Oxford

100 Shah, p. 56

35

Deliège (1997), "At the threshold of Untouchability: Pallars and Valayiars in a Tamil Village"

in Fuller, CJ (ed.) Caste Today, New Delhi, Oxford

Lancy Lobo (2001). "Visions and Illusions Dilemma of Dalit Christians in India" in

Ghanshyam Shah (ed.) Dalit Identity and Politics: Cultural subordination and

Dalit Challenge. Vol II, New Delhi: Sage Publications.

Subrata Mitra (1994), "Caste, Democracy & the politics of community in India" in

Contextualising Caste: Post-Dumontian Approaches. Searle-Chatterjee, Mary (ed.), Oxford

Radhakrishnan, P (1996), "Backward Class Movements in Tamil Nadu", in Caste: Its

Twentieth Century Avatar, ed. M.N Srinivas New York, Penguin Books

Robinson, Rowena (2003), Christians of India, New Delhi, India

Searle-Chatterjee, Mary (ed.) (1994), Contextualising Caste: Post-Dumontian Approaches.

Oxford

Shah, Ghanshyam (ed.) (2006), Untouchability in Rural India, New Delhi: Sage publications.

Tharamangalam, JP (1996), "Caste Among Christians in India", in Caste: it's Twentieth

Century Avatar, ed. M.N Srinivas New York, Penguin Books

Webster, John CB (1992/2000), The Dalit Christians: A History. Delhi

Internet

Papal Address to Bishops of Madras-Mylapore, Madurai and Pondicherri-Cuddalore,

http://www.zenit.org/article-86716?1=english

008-12-08

Ananthi: 2008-12-12

Joseph: 2008-12-08

Pithecai: 2008-12-19

36

John Paul: 2008-12-14

Josephine: 2008-12-12

Ubakara: 2008-12-11

Arockiyam Sami: 2008-12-16

Santhiago: 2008-12-15

Sahaya: 2008-12-11

Other interviews

James: 2008-12-07,2008-12-13, 2008-12-20

Savariar: 2008-12-19

Mary: 2008-12-19

Other material

Kosawapatti A Records 1978/2008 (excerpt). Documents collected by the local authority

containing statistical data on socio-economic conditions in Kosawapatti panchayat