Sanitary considerations for survival, necessitated the practice of untouchability in pre-modern India. Hindu society and especially the upper castes amongst them, are constantly exposed to scathing criticism for the practice of UNTOUCHABILITY. The criticism became so intense and widespread, that during our national freedom struggle, the issue was used by opportunistic leaders like B.R Ambedkar to turn sections of the population of India like Dalits, to posture against the idea of a free India. It takes two hands to clap. That means that upper caste Hindus are NOT ALONE responsible for the practice of untouchability. During the freedom struggle, untouchability was raked up as a major problem with the Indian society, that even a national leader like Gandhiji had to be on the back foot and had issued statements like the following “The untouchability of Hinduism is probably worse than that of the modern imperialists.”(CWMG Vol. XXV, page 397), “I would far rather that Hinduism died than that untouchability lived” (Mahatma by D.G Tendulkar, Vo.3- Page 128). But then untouchability was essential , for the survival of diverse groups populating India, because of differential immunity to diseases.
The following account of Robert H. Elliot, who had lived in Mysore for 38 years, and had intimate contact with natives there, alerts us to the necessity of untouchability. It helped contagious diseases like cholera from spreading and taking its toll. Even Christianity in India had to accede to untouchable practices, which was evident in the segregation of believers in the Churches. Elliot points out that even with a uniform population sharing same characteristics, segregation and priority according to status existed in Britain’s Parishes.
The origin of untouchability may be traced to the eating of carrion(deacayed flesh), by a minority of the population of India. Such people used to smell badly and also the cause of contagious diseases. Therefore social intercourse was restricted with such groups, based mainly on their lack of hygiene with regard to food, personal habits, ritual habits etc. Such groups will take time, getting assimilated into the mainstream society. Summarizing, personal hygiene restricted social intercourse, which slowly developed into untouchability between groups.
That the rulers of India, and its hierarchy extending to the village level, with the co-operation of its more civilized citizens, had allowed such people to exist in this land, allowing them a life of their own has to be greatly appreciated. Though they were not in sync with the mainstream society, yet their life was guaranteed in this land, unmolested. They were not the target of any religious conversion or genocide. This is unlike the fate of Red Indians in USA or the experience of aborigines of Australia, people who did not belong to the white race, who conquered and ruled those lands. Instead of showing respect and gratitude to the religion,culture & institutions of this country, mostly upheld by the upper-castes, which assured the existence and survival of such disadvantaged groups, scorn is being poured on the erstwhile patrons and their institutions. Now , except the vegetarians, all others eat carrion, which is refrigerated and preserved/stored, there is no necessity for discrimination based on food habits. Moreover other aspects of personal hygiene have vastly improved across all sections of the Indian population. Therefore untouchability in modern times is not essential.
Excerpts from the first-hand experiences of Robert H.Elliot, recorded in his book, “Gold, Sport, and Coffee Planting in Mysore.” This book is available in the public domain, for all to refer (to it).
“And when I talk of the lowest castes as carrion-eaters, I must tell the reader that I am not in the slightest degree guilty of exaggeration, and that they are carrion-eaters in exactly the same sense that vultures are carrion-eaters. In fact, these men never get any meat unless that of animals that have died of disease; and as in these climates decomposition is extremely rapid, the reader can imagine the result of coming in contact with a man who has, perhaps, a few hours before been eating a mass of diseased and half decomposed meat. And in case the reader should not be able to imagine what the result is, I may mention the following circumstance. A few days after I had killed a bison I had occasion to point out some pieces of sawn wood which I wished to be removed from the jungle to my house, and I accordingly took with me a native overseer, and two coolies to carry the timber. When I was pointing out the pieces to them, I smelt a strong smell of putrid meat, which seemed to fill the air so entirely that I at once concluded that a tiger must have killed some animal and left the carcase near the spot. My overseer and myself looked about everywhere, but at last happening to pass the coolies, I at once perceived that the smell arose from their breath, and on questioning them, I found that before coming to work they had been feasting on decayed bison flesh. In fact, after killing a bison, we could never go near our coolies for some days afterwards. But to see a party of these men sitting like vultures around the carcase of some animal that has just died of some abominable disease is quite enough to inspire even an unprejudiced European meat-eater-with the most wholesome horror; and the reader need not, I think, be surprised at the feelings of disgust which these men's habits inspire amongst the respectable classes of the community. But independently of all feelings of disgust, there are sanitary considerations which are of infinitely more importance, for it so happens that, at a time when the weather is hottest and the season most unhealthy, a larger number of animals die; and I have very little doubt that this eating of rotten meat causes amongst the Pariahs a large quantity of disease, and especially of cholera, which they would not fail to disseminate with fatal certainty amongst all classes, were the native Christians compelled to take the Sacrament indiscriminately.
And, in my own experience, I have observed that cholera has passed through districts, that the upper classes have been free from it, but that amongst the lower the victims were many. And the same sanitary reasons that apply to the Sacrament apply equally well to the mixing of castes indiscriminately in the churches; for it might so happen, as it frequently does, that fever and cholera may be prevalent amongst the lower castes, while the higher may be at that time comparatively free from such diseases. So that, when we take all these points into consideration, we shall find that the German missionaries were perfectly right in placing the men of the higher caste on one side of the church, and those of the lower on the other, and that they were equally right in allowing the higher castes to approach the Sacrament at a different time from the lower. I may here remark that I once mentioned this taking of the Sacrament in a sort of order of precedence to a clergyman in a country parish, when he told me that exactly the same sort of thing occurred in his parish, and that the lord of the manor invariably took the Sacrament first, and, if I recollect rightly, the parish clerk last; and a special instance of this in a Scotch parish was mentioned to me not long ago.
The same sanitary considerations will also naturally be of value when we come to consider that indiscriminate social intercourse which the missionaries so much insist upon as one of the necessary signs of grace. I do not, of course, say that it is not advisable, and that it would not be desirable to see a little more intercourse between class and class than exists at the present. But between all the better classes there is a much greater degree of intercourse than our missionaries would have us believe; and it is not true that one caste will eat only the food prepared by a person of his own caste. I cannot, of course, say what may be the case as regards other parts of India; but, as regards my own district, each caste will eat of the food prepared by any of the castes higher, or at least purer, than its own. For instance, a Gouda, who will not allow that the Lingayet caste is better than his own, will eat of food prepared by a Lingayet, while a Lingayet will not eat of food prepared by a Gouda. And the explanation of this is, that the Lingayet is a vegetarian, and meat might have been boiled in the Gouda's pots, while there would be nothing to offend the Gouda customs in the pots of a vegetarian host. But in these matters I entirely agree with the good Bishop Heber, who said that we had no right to interfere in their private life, or to meddle in any way with their social customs, as long as there was no idolatry in them .
All Excerpts From
Robert H. Elliot. “Gold, Sport, and Coffee Planting in Mysore.” iBooks.
Pages 327,328,329 of 608 pages of CHAPTER VIII, CASTE /OR Pages 607, 608, 609, 610, 612 & 613 of 1132 pages- CHAPTER VIII, CASTE
Having lived for 38 years among the natives of India as a Planter,(from Britain) the writings of Robert H. Elliot (1837-1914) offers a peek into the social life of India (Mysore) during his time.
