Rebellion against the oppression that springs from an established order is nothing unusual. Its success is. Inequity, injustice and denial of equality have been and still are deeply embedded in the systems we find in the long human history. Unfairness of a system how well-oiled it might be is the raison detre of the rebellion against it.

Factors that foment a rebellion are generally multiple, not all are of equal importance though. We find a similar kind of phenomenon in the subcontinent if we look at its history. In all the major attempts to defy and upend the social order we witness at least three elements that have played significant role in shaping them; caste, food and language. They are interconnected. We briefly look at them one by one.

Caste system (Varuna/ Jati) is the bedrock on which the society of the subcontinent stands erected. It divides human beings into four categories which have metaphysical sanction and are thought to be immutable. The division is not based on individual merit but rather on the accident of birth. Your caste is predetermined because you are bound to have the caste you are born into. Most importantly, the division is rigidly hierarchical; those on the top of the ladder (Brahmin) have all the rights while those at the lowest rung (Shudra) have almost no rights except to be servile and subservient to upper castes. The fact of your position on the ladder will determine your rights; more rights if you are up on it and less if you are low on it. There has been/ is another group of people who are outside the caste fold which simply means they are not even given the rights the lowest caste (Shudra) is entitled to. They are known and denigrated as outcaste, untouchables and Dalits.

All the great rebels of our history whether it’s Lord Mahavira, Lord Buddha, Bhagat Kabir, Guru Nanak, Bulleh Shah or Ambedkar, the first thing they defied was the caste structure, the lynchpin of our traditional society. They intellectually and philosophically demolished the so-called ideological basis of caste and practically rejected it by living their lives beyond caste rules. They rubbished all that had kept the castes apart. What was built in the innards of caste-ridden society was the fear of touch; the touch of lowest castes, outcaste and Dalits could pollute the members of upper castes. The fear of polluting touch was/ is most visible in the dietary rules; sharing of food between upper and lower castes / outcaste was/is strictly forbidden. Your plate and your food is only for you. Not only that different castes had/ have different foods but also that food was /is not shareable. All the great rebels not only openly defied the dietary biases but also helped form communities which shared food. Their practice was in direct contradiction to the caste dietary rules which never allowed people from diverse castes to interact closely and create bonhomie among them. Sharing of food is what creates strong human bond. The great rebels rightly understood that sharing food reflected equality, the fundamental ideal of human society.

Lord Mahavira rejected meat eating of what we now call Hindus that they inherited from Vedic and post-Vedic eras. By emphasising the sanctity of animal life, he highlighted the uber-sanctity of human life which had /has no universal value in the caste system.

Historian Romila Thapar has vividly portrayed in one of her books an evening scene when Mahmud Ghaznavi’s officers and soldiers after day’s battle intermingled and ate food together to the horror of Hindus where each caste had its separate kitchen and food. In her opinion such indifference to caste rules greatly demoralised the Hindu troops. Muslim Sufis and saints ran “Langar” where anyone could come and share food in their Khanqah (monasteries and schools).

Nizamuddin Aulia has written about the communal kitchen at Ajodhan (now Pakpattan) run by his preceptor Baba Farid, the first great poet of contemporary Punjabi language. With the arrival of Guru Nanak at the scene we see the strengthening of this tradition of “Langar”. His followers known as Sikhs have institutionalised this practice of “Langar” which is run by volunteers comprising men and women of all ages. It’s taken as a sacred duty of each Sikh to help in running the open community kitchen where all are welcome regardless of their caste and creed and social status. All would have the same food free of charge dished out with equal respect. The “Langar” tradition signifies an open rejection of caste hierarchy and what it entails.

Language is another tool which has been effectively used to establish and protect the Brahman hegemony in an unequal system. All the scriptures and books of “Sanatana Dharama” were composed in Sanskrit, a language evolved and monopolised by Brahmans from upper caste.

Lower castes and women were strictly forbidden to learn, speak and write Sanskrit. So much so that there was a taboo against the hearing of chants/ mantras by lower caste. Any violation, even involuntary one, was severally punished. The very name Sanskrit suggests what it was; perfected, improved, refined. It implied that Sanskrit was a manufactured language. Against it “Prakrit” meant natural speech, people’s language. All the great rebels debunked the myth of Sanskrit as a sacred language learnt, spoken and written by a select few who lived in Brahmanic ivory tower. Lord Buddha and his followers chose Pali, a peoples’ language, for their spiritual, secular and literary expression which connected them irrevocably with the masses.

Lord Mahavira (the founder of Jainism) used Prakrit. Bhagat Kabir adopted a Prakrit with borrowings from Braj, Awadhi and Bhojpuri which later came to be known as Hindi or Sadh Bhasha (a syncretic language used by spiritually inclined saints and mystics). Similarly Guru Nanak composed his verses in Sadh Bhasha and Punjabi, his mother language. For Lord Buddha, Lord Mahavira, Bhagat Kabir and Guru Nanak it was a matter choice, not compulsion as they could have easily written in Sanskrit, the language of power. They consciously chose to be on the side of people by choosing their language as a vehicle of expression. It became a sign of their unbreakable bond with the masses who, they believed, reflected the glow of humanity and divinity. Do these interlinked phenomena have any contemporary relevance? Just look around and what you find will astonish you; our past continues to be our present. — soofi01@hotmail.com

Published in Dawn, january 1st, 2024