1

SANSKRITIZATION

Social change means the changes which occur over time and often have
profound and long-term consequences for society. According to various
sociologists, social change is a constantly occurring phenomenon. It is the
process through which social structures and institutions are reconstructed
after undergoing a cultural transformation.

Society is built upon certain value and systems that maintain social order and
shifts in the root of these value and systems leads to the disruption of the
maintained social order. Disruption is always acquainted (known to be
associated) with negativity, however, as society is constantly developing and
innovating, change and disruption is not only inevitable but needed.

Social change can result in positive or negative outcomes. Sociology as a

discipline would focus on change in society, its social groupings, institutions
and behaviour patterns.

There are various reasons why societies undergo social change. Change can be
brought about due to technological developments, social institutions, social
conflict or the environmental changes. These factors can be viewed as the
agents of social change.

We will understand the social changes in India, as to what are the social
changes in society that took place in Indian society and because of which we are
observing various variations or shifts in Indian culture.

First in the series is Sanskritization.

Sanskritization

Indian society which is based on the caste system is often regarded as a “closed
society” (an individual’s role and function can theoretically never be changed).
 2

However, it is not altogether changeless. Within the framework of the caste

itself some kind of mobility was observed. Lower castes have often tried to
claim higher status by imitating the life-styles of upper-castes particularly of
Brahmins and Kshatriyas. M.N. Srinivas used the term ‘Sanskritization’ to
denote such type of process. It is a process of cultural change in Indian society.

The term “Sanskritization” was introduced into Indian Sociology by Prof. M.N.
Srinivas (MYSORE NARASIMHACHAR SRINIVAS). He was an Indian
sociologist and social anthropologist born on 16th November 1916 in
Mysore, he has extensively worked on caste and caste system, social
stratification, Sanskritization and Westernization in southern India and the
concept of ‘Dominant Caste’.

Sanskritization refers to a process whereby people of lower caste collectively

try to adopt upper caste practices and beliefs, as a preliminary step to acquire
higher status. Thus, it indicates a process of cultural mobility that is taking place
in the traditional social system in India.

M.N. Srinivas in his study of the Coorg (Town) in Karnataka, found that lower
castes, in order to raise their position in the caste hierarchy, adopted some
customs and practices of the Brahmins, and gave up some of their own which
were considered to be “impure” by the higher castes. For example, they gave up
meat-eating, drinking liquor and animal sacrifice to their deities. They imitated
Brahmins in matters of dress, food and rituals. By doing this, within a
generation or so they could claim higher positions in the hierarchy of castes.

Definition of Sanskritization

M.N. Srinivas initially in the year 1962, described sanskritization as “the

process of mobility of lower castes by adopting vegetarianism and teetotalism
(abstinence from alcohol beverages) to move in the caste hierarchy in a
generation or two”. Later on, in his book “Social change in Modern India” -
 3

1971, he redefined sanskritization as “a process by which a low caste or a tribe

or other group changes its customs, rituals, ideology and way of life in the
direction of a high and frequently, twice born caste”

Sanskritization and Brahminization

Sanskritization is a much broader concept than Brahminization. M.N. Srinivas

preferred Sanskritisation to Brahminization for some reasons:

(i) Sanskritization is a broader term and it can subsume in itself the

narrower process of Brahminisation: - For Instance, today, though
by and large, Brahmins are vegetarians and teetotallers, some of them
such as Kashmiris, Bengalis and saraswath Brahmins eat non-
vegetarian food. Had the term ‘Brahminization’ been used, it would
have become necessary to specify which particular Brahmin group
was meant.
(ii) Further, the reference groups of Sanskritization are not always
Brahmins: - The process of imitation need not necessarily take place
on the model of Brahmins. Srinivas himself has given the example of
the low castes of Mysore who adopted the way of life of Lingayats,
who are not Brahmins but who clam equality with Brahmins and wear
sacred threads and have sanskritized (modify) some of their rituals.
(Still, some of them eat meat and drink liquor, for the very same
reason, many castes, including some untouchable castes do not accept
food or water from their hands).
The lower castes imitated not only Brahmins but also Kshatriyas,
Vaishyas, Jats, Shudras, etc., in different parts of the country. M.N.
Srinivas acknowledged the fact that the term Brahminization does not
completely explain this process and preferred Brahminization over
Sanskritisation.
 4

Characteristics of Sanskritization

1. Sanskritization is a process of imitation in Indian society, the social status of

an individual is fixed on the basis of caste hierarchy. There are many lower
castes who suffer from economic, religious or social disabilities. So, in order to
improve the status, the lower castes people imitate the life style of the upper
caste people.

2. Sanskritization is a process of cultural change towards twice-born castes.

Sanskritization is a process in which the lower castes adopt the cultural patterns
of the higher castes, to raise their status in the caste hierarchical order. In
some societies the lower caste people followed not only the customs of the
Brahmins but also the customs of the locally dominant castes like Kshatriyas
and Vaisyas to raise their status.

3. Sanskritization is helpful in the social mobility of lower caste. In this

process a caste is only trying to change the status and not the social structure.

4. Sanskritization process also followed by the tribal. Sanskritization process is

not only confined to the caste people of Hindu society, it is also found among
the tribal society.

5. The concept of Sanskritization has also given rise to De-sanskritization.

There are some instances in modern times, some of the higher castes are
imitating the behaviour pattern of lower caste, and for example Brahmins have
started taking meat and liquor. This process is called De-sanskritization
 5

Effects of the Process of Sanskritization

After analysis/careful examination of the process of ‘Sanskritization’, it would

disclose the following facts: -

1. ‘Sanskritization’ denotes the process in which the lower caste tries to

imitate the life-styles of upper castes in their attempt to raise their social
status. The process is associated with the role of local “dominant caste”.
Though for some time, the lower castes imitated Brahmins they soon
shifted it towards the local dominant caste which in most cases is a non-
Brahmins dominant caste.

2. Sanskritization denotes the process of upward mobility. In this process, a

caste is trying to increase its position in the caste hierarchy not at once,
but over a period of time. It would take sometimes, a period of one or two
generations.

3. Sanskritization is not a new phenomenon as opined by M.N. Srinivas. He

said that sanskritization has been a major process of cultural change in
Indian history, and it has occurred in every part of the Indian sub-
continent. It may have been more active in some periods than at others,
and some parts of India are more sanskritised than others, but there is no
doubt that the process has been universal.

4. Sanskritization is not necessarily confined to the castes within the Hindu

community, it is found in tribal communities also. The Bhils of Western
India, the Gonds and Oraons of Middle India, and the Pahadiyas of
Himalayan region have come under the influence of sanskritization.
These tribal communities are now claiming themselves to be Hindus for
 6

their communities represent some caste groups within the fold of

Hinduism.

5. The process of Sanskritization serves as a “reference group”. It is through

this process, a caste group tries to orient its beliefs, practices, values,
attitudes and “life-styles” in terms another superior or dominant group, so
that it can also get some recognition.

6. Sanskritization does not take place in the same manner in all the places.
Studies have revealed that in most of the cases the lower castes tend to
imitate the upper castes particularly the Kshatriya and Brahmin caste.
there are instances of upper castes imitating some of the practices of
lower castes, and sometimes of even tribal groups. For example, a
Brahmin may make a blood sacrifice to one of the local deities through
the medium of non-tribal people. Thus, it can be generalised that
Sanskritization is not a one-way process. It is a two-way process. Not
always one caste “takes” from the higher castes, sometimes, it also gives
in ‘return’.

7. The British rule in India provided a favourable atmosphere for

Sanskritization to take place. Political independence has weakened the
trend towards this change. Now the emphasis is on vertical mobility
(upward) and not on the horizontal mobility.

8. Significant developments in the realm of material culture (the physical

objects, resources and spaces that people use to define their culture
like food, clothing, tools and houses etc) have accelerated the process of
Sanskritization. Industrialization, occupational mobility, mass media of
communication, spread of literacy, advent of Western Technology,
improvement in the transportation system, etc., have speeded up the
 7

process of Sanskritization. Introduction of parliamentary system of

democracy and universal suffrage have also contributed to the increased
Sanskritization.

9. Sanskritization also can be observed in the religious field. Like Brahmins

many of the lower castes people put on sacred thread. They also go to
their temple regularly and perform Arti and Bhajan. They have left
prohibited food and un-cleaned occupation. Even they have specialised in
performing ceremonies like Brahmins.

10.Sanskritization has been construed as a kind of protest against the

traditional caste system. Sanskritization is a type of protest against the
caste system in which the status is ascribed or predetermined. Lower
castes which are disillusioned with their predetermined statuses and
impressed by the higher statuses accorded to the upper castes, naturally
desire to go up in the statis hierarchy. This desire is virtually against the
traditional hierarchical principle of the caste system. Making an attempt
through Sanskritization to move up in the status hierarchy setting aside
the hierarchical principle of caste, amounts to a protest against the caste
system itself.

11.Sanskritization does not denote a basic change in the structure of the

Hindu society. It should not be construed that through this process any
kind of social change can be brought about in the caste-ridden society.
Since caste is a ‘closed’ society in which the membership is based on the
unchangeable factor of birth, no one can become a member of the
“reference group” as such. However, an individual or a group may
improve his or its social position within the range of one’s own Varna
group. Srinivas further observes that the process of Sanskritization can
 8

only support the existing system but can never remove it. Hence, the
changes that are affected through Sanskritization though cannot be
neglected, have only limited significance.

Criticism of Sanskritization

Though the concept ‘Sanskritization’ introduced by M.N. Srinivas has been

regarded as a significant contribution to the sociological literature, it is not free
from criticism. Number of comments have been made about the term by the
scholars. Some of them are as follows: -

1. Yogendra Singh opines that sanskritization fails to account for many

aspects of cultural change in past and contemporary India as it neglects
the non-Sanskritic traditions.

2. Sanskritic influence has not been universal to all parts of country. In most
of northern India, especially in Punjab, it was the Islamic tradition which
provided a basis for cultural imitation.

3. As suggested by Harold A. Gould (American Anthropologists

specializing in Indian society), often the motive behind Sanskritization is
not of cultural imitation per se but an expression of challenge and revolt
against the socio-economic deprivations”. Yogendra Singh writes.
“Sanskritization is thus a cultural camouflage (behaviour that ignores
and consciously conceals the symbols that have negative values) for
latent interclass and inter caste competition for economic and social
power, typical of a traditional bound society where traditionally the
privileged upper castes hold monopoly to power and social status. When
the impact of the external forces like political democratization, land
reforms and other social break, this monopoly of the upper castes, the
 9

cultural camouflage of Sanskritization is thrown away, in favour of an

open conflict with the privileged classes based on nativistic solidarity”.

4. Dr. D. N. Majumdar comments that it is wrong to assume the process of

Sanskritization as universal process to be observed throughout India. In
his study of Mohan village in Uttar Pradesh he observed a strong
exception to this assumption. In this village, as he observed, the lower
caste people do not have any urge or inclination to imitate the ‘life-styles’
of Brahmins or any other dominant higher caste of that region. If a
cobbler wears tilak, dhoti and the sacred thread and follows some of the
customs of higher castes, nobody recognises him as an upper caste man”.

5. M.N. Srinivas has been changing the definition of the term

“Sanskritization” from time to time and this adds to the problem of
understanding its meaning and range of operations in clear terms. First,
Dr. Srinivas used the term to mean Brahminization. Later on, he extended
its meaning. He used it to mean a process in which a lower caste, a tribal
group or any other group attempts to imitate the life-styles’ of a locally
dominant upper caste, mostly a ‘twice born’ caste. as per his recent
interpretation, the process includes the imitation of ideas, values and
ideologies (beliefs). Here also it becomes difficult to ascertain the real
meaning of the term “ideology’.

6. When we try to interpret certain changes that have taken place in the field
of social mobility in the light of Sanskritization, we face certain
paradoxes. According to Dr. Srinivas, political and economic forces are
normally favourable for Sanskritization. But the “policy of reservation” a
poltico-constitutional attempt to elevate the status of lower caste, and
class people, presents here a different picture. Theoretically, the policy of
 10

reservation must be supportive of Sanskritization. But paradoxically it

goes against it. Those who avail of the “reservation benefits” have
developed a vested interest in calling themselves “dalits” or Scheduled
Caste people. They want to be called so in order to permanently avail of
the benefits of reservation.

Conclusion

Finally, it can be said that the concept of Sanskritization introduced by M.N.

Srinivas explains the cultural changes taking place in India, and it has its own
importance. But the concept is not clear enough to explain the cultural change
with all its ramifications. And it is not inclusive and universal enough to provide
a satisfactory explanation to all the major cultural changes that have taken place
through out the country.