The final part of this four-part series examines J. Sai Deepak’s views on Periyar and the anti-Brahmanism of the Dravidian Movement, placing them in their historical context.
—
Read part 1 here.
Read part 2 here.
Read part 3 here.
THE next part of the podcast is where J. Sai Deepak pushes his limits and indulges in gaslighting and self-victimisation in order to gain the benefit of doubt of either the wilfully ignorant or the exasperated viewer sitting in front of the screen watching his restless rants.
The constant complaint Deepak has throughout the podcast is the conversion of the non-Brahmins by the missionaries. He says that Varnashrama Dharma and the caste system acted as a barrier against conversions, so the missionaries broke the Hindus into two categories, i.e, the Brahmins and the non-Brahmins to “harvest souls from the non-Brahmanical fold”.
It is understandable that merely because Deepak is a lawyer, it is not fair to expect him to have a vivid understanding of Newton’s Third Law, which states that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Deepak talks about the conversions of entire groups in the Southern parts of Tamil Nadu, however, he fails to disclose that these conversions were nothing but a reaction to a persistent act of oppression that prevailed in the very same part of the country which he terms as the “breeding ground” of the missionaries.
The constant complaint Deepak has throughout the podcast is the conversion of the non-Brahmins by the missionaries.
In order to understand the rationale of this response, it is necessary for us to delve into the gravity of the action that caused such a reaction.
In the nineteenth-century Madras Presidency, the Travancore Kingdom, comprising the present-day districts of southern Kerala and southern Tamil Nadu, there existed a form of oppressive and brutish taxation in which women belonging to 18 different Dalit and backward communities including the Nadars and Ezhavas were levied a tax in order to cover their breasts.
This was termed Mulakkaram or the Breast Tax, collected door to door by the officials from the women who had attained puberty. During those times, covering the breasts with a cloth was considered a privilege only the dominant caste Hindu women enjoyed whereas the marginalised caste Hindu women were forced to bare their breasts in front of the dominant caste members as a mark of respect.
Also read: Sanatana Dharma and the Dravidian Movement: A response to J. Sai Deepak— 1
Depending on the size of the breasts, women were taxed differently, i.e., women with larger breasts were levied taxes higher than women with relatively smaller-sized breasts.
In 1813, the then British Diwan of Travancore, Colonel John Munro passed a decree which allowed Nadar women who converted to Christianity to wear blouses to cover their breasts.
This decree also permitted the women to wear only blouses to cover their breasts, it did not allow them to wear an upper cloth over the blouse as the dominant caste women did.
The oppressed caste Hindu women, especially from the Nadar community, felt that embracing Christianity through religious conversion would grant them equal rights and allow them to cover their upper bodies and break away from the caste atrocities committed against them.
This paved the way for a large number of Hindu women from the oppressed castes to convert to Christianity in order to assert their bare minimum right of covering their breasts with a blouse.
However, this decree caused a stir among the Savarna men who resorted to violence against the women who started covering their breasts with a blouse. They were of the opinion that this decree would dissolve the identity that differentiated the dominant caste women from the marginalised caste women.
The men belonging to the dominant Nair and Namboodiri communities unleashed a series of attacks on these women through which the blouses of the women were ripped apart and their mangalsutras were snatched away from them as a form of retribution.
Many villages in the southern part of Tamil Nadu and Kerala witnessed these crimes committed against the Nadar women. The present-day Kanyakumari district in Tamil Nadu has a village named Thali Aruthan Santhai which literally translates into “the place where the mangalsutras were snipped”.
Also read: Sanatana Dharma and the Dravidian Movement: A response to J. Sai Deepak— 2
It is ironic to know that when the Prime Minister of our country expresses his fear and concern regarding the mangalsutras of his mothers and sisters being snatched away, the dark chapters of our history have recorded instances where the mangalsutras of the very same Hindu women were snatched away from them by their fellow Hindu men for the sake of asserting their caste supremacy.
The violences meted out against the depressed caste Hindu women and its consequential resistance gave rise to the first stage of the Thol Seelai Porattam or the Upper Cloth Revolt that lasted from 1822–23.
This was termed Mulakkaram or the Breast Tax, collected door to door by the officials from the women who had attained puberty.
The period between 1827–29 witnessed the second phase of the revolt which resulted in the marginalised caste Hindu women and the Hindu women who converted to Christianity getting the right to cover their upper bodies with a blouse.
The third phase of the revolt was from 1858–59 during which the Raja of Travancore passed another decree which again prohibited Nadar women from covering their breasts even with a blouse.
This period witnessed widespread agitations by marginalised caste Hindu women and constant attacks on them by Savarna men such as chopping off a woman’s breasts because she appeared in front of the Zamorin of Calicut’s Lady with her breasts covered by an upper cloth.
The rebellious Nadar women continued their protests against this perverted form of oppression across the Travancore kingdom, one such woman was Nangeli who chopped off her own breast as a symbol of resistance in front of the officials who came to collect the breast tax from her.
She ultimately bled to death and her husband jumped in her funeral pyre marking the first instance of male sati in India. As a result of these incidents, in the year 1859, the governor of Madras, Charles Trevalyan urged the Raja of Travancore to pass a decree allowing all Hindu women to cover their breasts with the cloth of their choice.
The Upper Cloth Revolt lasted for nearly half a decade and marks a very important part of our socio-political history which gave birth to a revolutionary movement by a marginalised section of women against caste and gender oppression.
Also read: Sanatana Dharma and the Dravidian Movement: A response to J. Sai Deepak— 3
However, in 2019, despite severe opposition, the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) decided to remove chapters containing the history of this revolt from the Class IX textbooks.
Nevertheless, it is safe to assume that this chapter would have been a part of the curriculum in which Deepak studied, which is why it is perplexing and amusing to hear Deepak’s complaints about the conversions that took place in the southern part of Tamil Nadu despite his knowledge about the reasons and the results of the Thol Seelai Porattam.
Deepak then proceeds to pile up his charges against the existence of the Dravidian parties in Tamil Nadu, the consequences of their policies and the work of their leaders.
Firstly, Deepak seems to have a problem with the name of Periyar. He feels the urge and necessity to address Periyar by his birth name, i.e., E.V. Ramasamy Naicker and does not feel obligated to call him Periyar.
Further into the podcast, Deepak is also of the opinion that the ministers in Tamil Nadu should remove their caste surnames. It is to be noted that in the year 1929, at the first Conference of the Self-Respect Movement in Chengalpattu, a resolution was passed to drop the caste titles and surnames of its members.
Periyar was the first person to drop his ‘Naicker’ caste surname and it slowly spread amongst the people of Tamil Nadu which gradually resulted in the entire population of Tamil Nadu dropping their caste surnames.
The practice of not adding the caste surname still exists amongst the people of Tamil Nadu and this is the reason why the names of Tamilians are often found with the initials of their father rather than having a caste surname suffixed to it.
The mere reading of Deepak’s name, i.e., J. Sai Deepak without his caste surname in itself stands as testimony to the effects of the initiatives taken by Periyar through the Self-Respect Movement.
If Deepak himself is against the use of caste surnames then it is confusing to understand his futile efforts of addressing Periyar with his caste surname that he dropped almost 95 years ago.
Also read: Is the era of the ‘WhatsApp judiciary’ here?
Deepak then mentions Periyar’s travels to Kashi where he was denied entry into choultries run by Brahmins which became a turning point in Periyar’s life that catapulted his actions towards abolition of caste hierarchy amongst the people.
However, Deepak feels that Periyar, owing to his dominant caste lineage was like a “White of those times who felt like an African-American”. Deepak also says that choultries established in the olden times were caste-based and Brahmins were not allowed in non-Brahmin choultries and terms casteism as a two-way street.
Depending on the size of the breasts, women were taxed differently, i.e., women with larger breasts were levied taxes higher than women with relatively smaller-sized breasts.
Since Deepak mentions “African-Americans”, he must be familiar with the Jim Crow Laws that existed in the US in the late 19th century which enabled racial segregation between Blacks and Whites.
While these laws were in force, it was common practice to see ‘White only’ or ‘Coloured’ or ‘No dogs and Blacks’ boards outside theatres, restaurants, restrooms, buses, trains, etc. There existed a parallel during the 1920s to 1950s in the coffee hotels run by the Brahmins in Tamil Nadu where similar boards such as ‘Brahmins only’ or ‘Panchamas, lepers and dogs do not enter’ were kept hanging outside such places.
This practice was also extended to places of public utility such as theatres, restrooms, buses and trains. It is only after the Constitution of India came into existence that these practices were abolished through the ambit of Article 15 which gave equal access to all in public spaces.
Even after the abolishment of such practices, hotels used to run with a Brahmin name, indirectly implying exclusivity to their spaces. This practice was also put to an end by the constant agitations and campaigns launched by Periyar through the Dravidar Kazhagam.
It is not just improbable but also silly for anybody to assume that during the existence of the Jim Crow Laws in the US, there existed restaurants run by Blacks where Whites were not allowed.
This is because of the common knowledge that the Whites were the oppressors and the Blacks, the oppressed, who by logic, did not possess any authority or power to limit or restrict the entry of their oppressors in spaces owned or run by them.
Also read: Supreme Court issues notice for Sanatana Dharma remarks against Udhayanidhi Stalin, others
Similarly, Deepak’s claims of choultries run by Non-Brahmins in which entry to Brahmins was not allowed is nothing but a statement devoid of any logic or knowledge of the socio-political history of our country. Casteism might be a two-way street but when one way is always open and the other way is perpetually blocked, then it is futile to hold on to such an assertion and pass it off as truth.
Deepak then talks about the supposedly “dirtiest part of Dravidianist politics” where he says there was competition for Brahmin women and they were offered as a “prize”.
He also mentions alleged literature where it is said that men and women go to temples to ogle at each other. Interestingly, throughout the podcast, Deepak persistently talks about “enough literature” to back his claims but he fails to produce or name even one such piece of literature for the sake of clarity and transparency.
However, there exists literature that supports and endorses the act of giving away married women, irrespective of their class, as an object of reproduction to the male members of a specific community in order to produce a better and superior race of human beings.
Unfortunately, this literature goes against Deepak for it is taken from the speech of M.S. Golwalker, the second sarsangchalak of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) at the Gujarat University in December 1960, which has also been published in the January 2, 1961 issue of the Organiser, the official mouthpiece of the RSS.
In his speech, Golwalker says that the Namboodiri Brahmins were brought down to Kerala from the North for the purposes of cross-breeding in order to produce a better human species.
For this purpose, their ancestors made a rule that a married woman, irrespective of her class, should beget her first child only through a Namboodiri Brahmin (who is not her husband) after which she is free to produce other off-springs through her husband whom she married.
Also read: ‘90 percent of the Constituent Assembly’, Modi and Ambedkar
Golwalker called this a courageous rule of cross-breeding laid down by his ancestors in order to produce a superior human race. Deepak’s concerns regarding offering women as a prize should have increased manifold after reading this piece of literature. However, he chooses to search for literature elsewhere.
The present-day Kanyakumari district in Tamil Nadu has a village named Thali Aruthan Santhai which literally translates into “the place where the mangalsutras were snipped”.
Deepak, who worries about literature that says men and women go to temples to ogle at each other, must also be aware of the literature that exists in his realm. According to Verse 9.94 of the Manusmriti, a 24-year-old man must marry a girl who is eight years old.
This has been endorsed and acknowledged by the 68th Shankaracharya of the Kanchi Kama Koti Peetam who says that girls should be married as soon as they are eight years old.
He reasons this out by saying that before girls grow up and equip themselves with the ability to think and question, they should be married, otherwise they would be overcome with lust and it will not be possible to show them who their guru and deity (husband) is.
According to Verse 2.215 of the Manusmriti, a learned man should not sit in solitude even with his mother, sister or daughter because he might get drawn by sensory powers.
Verse 9.15 of the Manusmriti says that despite the husbands guarding their wives zealously, women are capable of being unfaithful to their husbands because of their fickle-mindedness and their innate passion towards other men.
The founder of ISKCON, A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, in his commentary to the Srimad Bhagavatam has mentioned that a man is famous for his aggression towards a beautiful woman, which is sometimes considered as rape.
He further adds that even though rape is not considered to be legal, a woman likes a man who is an expert at rape. These are just a few verses and instances from the vast set of literature that is revered and considered canonical by Deepak.
Also read: Indian English and a new spring of hope
Deepak then talks about an exodus of Brahmins from the Madras Presidency in the name of social justice, the records of which are either mysteriously kept away from the mainstream population or simply do not exist.
It is in this context that it is imperative for us to understand the difference between a forced migration resulting from the fear of persecution vis à vis migration for seeking better economic opportunities.
Consistently throughout the sociopolitical history of India, despite the existence of policies underlying affirmative action, Brahmins have always held a disproportionate number of top positions in education, employment, economic and political spheres.
Deepak himself admits this in the podcast by saying that Brahmins commanded respect from the other communities because of the social position they consistently held throughout the years.
It is to be noted that the vast majority of Tamilian population that migrated to the US are Brahmins who comprise only 3 percent of the population in Tamil Nadu.
These migrations took place not because of any fear of persecution but because of the existence of vast economic opportunities in the US, i.e, the grass being greener on the other side.
Thus, dubbing an economic migration as an exodus from retaliation especially in the absence of any material evidence whatsoever is nothing but a distortion of facts and history, which the viewers of the podcast are used to by now.
In 2019, despite severe opposition, the NCERT decided to remove chapters containing the history of this revolt from the Class IX textbooks.
Deepak’s constant complaint and allegation is that the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) is an anti-Hindu party and it has failed to eradicate the caste system as per its promise.
The caste system has been ingrained in our society and has slowly grown over the passage of time into a two thousand-year-old tree, whereas, the Dravidian ideology since its inception has been whetted by its leaders for the past one hundred years into a sharp axe.
Despite its sharpness, it takes time and persistence for a relatively new axe to uproot a two thousand-year-old tree. However, the Dravidian axe has indeed done some significant damage against the caste system, especially in Tamil Nadu.
Also read: The right to religion and the Shudra predicament
For instance, Tamil Nadu is the only state in India that follows a reservation policy of 69 percent, and out of this 65 percent is reserved solely for the 97 percent Hindu population in Tamil Nadu.
Also, the DMK government passed orders in the year 2006 that allowed people from any caste to be appointed as archakas (temple priests). This particular Order allowed Hindus from all walks of life to enter into the sanctum sanctorum of temples, which was previously denied to them.
The government also opened training centres for such priests to get them equipped with the necessary agamas (scriptures). The DMK government led by Kalaignar M. Karunanidhi has developed various schemes that took charge of women’s welfare, right from their education to marriage and also in childbirth.
These schemes included the E.V.R. Nagammaiyar Memorial Free Bachelor Degree Programme for Poor Women and the Moovalur Ramamirtham Ammaiyar Marriage Assistance Scheme, Dr Muthulakshmi Reddy Maternity Financial Assistance Scheme and E.V.R. Mani Ammaiyar Financial Assistance Scheme for the daughters of Widowed Mothers.
Kalaignar’s government also established samathuvapurams, where people of all communities live together devoid of any caste hierarchies. He also introduced the mid-day meal scheme and waived off educational fees till post-graduation courses for children belonging to the Backward Class and Scheduled Castes communities.
The DMK government through its Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments department has successfully renovated and conducted the consecration ceremony for 1,599 temples in the past three years alone.
As far as social indices are concerned, Tamil Nadu also has a Gross Enrollment Ratio (GER) of 52 percent. Tamil Nadu stands in comparison with countries such as Norway and Sweden in terms of density of doctors and has four doctors per 1,000 people.
Tamil Nadu also falls in the Tier-1 category of states that have achieved high progress in the Social Progress Index for Sstates and districts. These schemes and indices represent merely an overview of all the policy decisions that managed to cut deep into the bark of the caste hierarchy tree through the ideological blades of the Dravidian Movement.
The podcast further extends indefinitely with much more complaints and allegations against the Dravidian Movement, devoid of any factual or evidentiary backing.
Deepak seems to have a problem with the name of Periyar. He feels the urge and necessity to address Periyar by his birth name, i.e., E.V. Ramasamy Naicker and does not feel obligated to call him Periyar.
This four-part series voluntarily took the onus of the burden of proof to disprove and discredit the majority of the false claims and allegations made by Deepak throughout the podcast.
Irrespective of the veracity of his views, the Constitution of India through Article 19(1)(a) guarantees Deepak the right to express his opinions freely without any fear, regarding anything, through any form.
However, the very same Constitution prompts us to fulfil our fundamental duty to promote harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood amongst all the people of India transcending religious, linguistic, regional and sectional diversities.
He further adds that even though rape is not considered to be legal, a woman likes a man who is an expert at rape.
Thus, whenever Deepak wishes to exert his right, we shall always be ready to fulfil our duty as enshrined in the Constitution of India.
Read part 1 here.
Read part 2 here.
Read part 3 here.
