REFORM ANDREVI

VIAL
Soci
o-Rel
i
giousRef
orm Mov
ement
sandt
heWomanQuest
ioni
nModer
nIndi
a

QUESTI
ONS

1.WasRev ivali
sm rathert hanRef ormt hedomi nantt hemeofsoci o-reli
gious
reform mov ementsbyt heendoft he19thcent ur
y ?(2005)
2.Isitcor rectt osayt hattheBr ahmoSamajr epresent edthe‘reformist’tr
end,
andt heAr yaSamaj representedthe‘ revivali
st’t
rend?( 2006)
3.Howf arist hetradit
ionmoder ni
zationmodelanadequat eexpl anati
onf orthe
conv er genceofsoci o-rel
igi
ousr eform mov ement sdur i
ngthe19th cent ury?
(2007)
4.Anal yzet her ef
ormistandr ev i
val
istt rendsi nthe19th centur
ysoci o-reli
gious
reform mov ements.( 2008)
5.Towhatext entdidt hesocialandr eligiousmov ement soft he19th century
addr esst heissuesofgenderandcast einequali
ty?( 2009)
6.Int he19th cent ur
y,thewomanquest i
onbecameapar tofthedi scourseof
progr essandmoder ni t
y.Comment .(2010)
7.Towhatext entdidt hesocialandr eligiousmov ement soft he19th century
addr esst heissuesofgenderi nequal i
t y?(2011)

THEDEBATEONGENDER
TheWomen’
sQuest
ionasaPar
toft
heDi
scour
seonPr
ogr
essandModer
nit
y

Debatesar oundthestat
usofHinduwomenbegani ntheeary19thcent
l uryi
nBengal .
Thought heEnglishEastI
ndi
aCompanywasr el
uctanttoint
erf
ereinmat ter
sr el
ati
ng
tor el
i
giousbel i
ef,i
tcameunderi ncr
easi
ngpr essurefrom theev angeli
cals,who
arguedt hatthestatewasmor all
yobligedtolegislat
eagainstthemor ecr ueland
i
nhumanpr acti
cesofHindui
sm suchasSat i
.

Att hesamet ime,AniaLoombaar gues,t

heBr i
ti
shfeelthatSat i
,whenper for
med
will
ingly
,wastheulti
mat eexpr essi
onofwi felydevot
ion.Theambi val
enceoverhow
precisel
ytoplaceSat ilegal
ly–aspuni shablehomi ci
deorscr i
ptural
lysancti
oned
suicide – pl
us the state’
sr eluct
ance toi nter
vene i
nr eli
gious affai
rsled toa
l
egislati
vecompromisei n1813wher ebywidowswer epermittedtoper for
m Satiof
theirownvoli
ti
on,butunwi l
li
ngSat iwaspunishablebylaw.

Between1814and1829, thecolonialstat
et ooksev eralhalt
ingst epsbackwar dsand
forwar dsont hemat t
erofSat ibeforef i
nall
yabolishingi ti
n1829.Thr oughoutthi
s
period,indigenouspr oponentsoft heabol i
ti
onofSat iaswel lasi t
sopponent shad
present ed theirv i
ewsi nt hepubl icspher e,mainl ythrought hreenewspaper s–
SamacharDar pan,SambadKaumudiandSamacharChandr ika.Thei rarguments
werebot hshapedbyt hecolonialstat
e’slegali
sti
cout l
ooktot hemat terofSati
,and
cont r
ibutedt oar edefi
nit
ionof‘ t
radit
ion’,i
naspeci fi
call
ymoder n,coloni
alway,as
LataMani hasar gued.

Thear gument swithi

nthemi ddleanduppercl assBengal iHindus,whoconst i
tuted
thebhadr alok,f
ocussedonest abli
shingt hescri
pturalsancti
onoft hei
rrespective
views.Thi swasar esponset ocoloniallegal
i
sm – t hest at
ewoul dnotl egisl
ate
againstSat iifi
tfoundscr i
pturalsanctionforthepr act
ice.Further
more,theonl y
scri
pturesthest at
ewaswi l
l
ingt orecognizeweret hebrahmanicalscri
ptures.This
priv
il
egingofuppercasescr i
pturesatt heexpenseofcust om andt heorthodoxies

Ref
orm andRev
ival 1
sanct
ionedbytr
adi
ti
onal‘dharmasabhas’hasbeenr
efer
redt
obyD.
D.Kosambias
the‘
brahmani
zi
ngtendency’oft
hecol
onialst
ate.

LataManihasnot edt hatthedebat esar oundSat iwer enotconcer nedpr imaril

ywi th
thepositionofwomenasi ndi v
idual swithr i
ght s,norwi ththecr ueltyoft hecust om.
Thedebat essoughtt oest abl i
sht hescr i
ptur alpositi
onofSat i.Thus,t heso- called
‘
progressiv e’or‘ liberal
’r ef
or mer s,represent edbyRaj aRammohunRoy ,arguedt hat
therewasno ment i
onofSat iint heManusmr i
ti,themostaut horitati
v e‘Hindu’
scri
pture,andt hati nsteadt histextpr escr i
bed‘ asceti
cwi dowhood’ .Royar guedt hat
Satihadnev erbeenper for
medwi ll
ingly,thati twasapl oyofgr eedyr elati
v estogai n
ownershipoft hewi dow’sweal thandpr operty ,andt hatbecauseSat iwasper for
med
withaney et oaccr uemat erialrewar ds,ity ieldedl i
tt
lespiri
tualmer i
t.Ont heot her
hand,thepr oponent sofSat iarguedt hatt herewas, infactscri
ptural sanctionforSat i
,
andthatitwasal soat ime-honour edt raditi
on.

Iti
swor t
hnot i
ngt hatwhenSat iwasfi
nall
ybanned,RammohunRoyt hankedLor d
Benti
nck( then,Gov er
nor-
Gener alofI
ndia)forri
ddingtheprist
ineVedi
ccreedofa
corr
uptionandoft hesinofcr uelt
ytowomen.Bent i
nckhimselfvi
ewedthel
egislat
ion
asast epi nthedirecti
onofr eturntoagloriousHindupast,andasuccessf orthe
‘
civi
l
izi
ngmi ssi
on’oftheBrit
ish.

LataManiaddedt hatwomenbecamet hesi t

ef orr
e-art
iculati
onoft radit
ion–f or
whileRammohunhadbeencal l
edpr ogressive,hisar
gumentf ortheabolit
ionofSati
wast hati
twasar eturntoaut hent
ic‘Hinduism’ .However,t
raditi
onwasnowequat ed
wit
ht hebrahmanicalscri
ptures,whichithadnotbeenbef ore.Thiswast hei mpactof
the moder ni
zi
ng di scour
se of col onial
ism t hat associated reli
gion wi t
h an
authori
tat
ivebook,onthelinesofChr ist
ianity
.

Whywer ewoment hesi

teforcont est i
ngdef i
nit
ionsof‘ t
radi
ti
on’?AsTanikaSar kar
hasar gued,womenwer erepositoriesoft hesoci alstatusoftheuppercastes.Their
virtueandpur ity,demonstr
at edt hroughact ssuchasSat i,t
heabst i
nencef rom
widow r e-
mar r
iageandt hegar bhadhanr i
tual( wherebyamanconsummat edhi s
relati
onshi
pwi thhi schi
ldbride16day saf termenar che),setthem apar
tf r
om t he
l
owercast es.I
ndeed,asUmaChakr avartihasshown,women’ sv i
rt
uewasact i
vely
cont r
oll
edbyt hePeshwast atei nMahar ashtra;Mar athawidowswer ecompel l
edt o
bechast eandt ol i
veascet
iclives,forthepol i
ti
callegiti
macyoft hePeshwasr ested
signif
icant
lyupont hechasti
tyandv ir
tueofitswomen.

Nor was t he orthodox,pat r

iar
chalv i
ew of women as r epresentati
ves of a
community’
sv i
rt
uechal lengedbyRammohunRoy–f orinhismanyt ractsonSatihe
simplycl
aimedt hatawoman’ svir
tuedi dnotneedprot
ectiont
hroughact ssuchas
Sati
,forwomenwer einherent
lyvi
rtuous.I twasonl
ythroughthecoer cionofmen
thatwomenwer ecompel l
edtocorrupttheirvi
rt
ue.

TanikaSar karhasal sonotedt hatthought hepr ohibi

tionofSat iandt hel egalizati
on
ofwi dow r e-marriagemi d-
cent urychangedt helegalst atusofwhatt heor thodox
brahmani caltradi
tionconsideredher esies,theynev erreall
yacqui r
edmor alsanct i
on.
I
ndeed,Ashi s Nandyhas not ed thatbet ween 1815 and 1818,t he numberof
i
ncidencesofSat iinBengalal mostt rebles.Whi l
ei nstancesofSat ithendecl ined,the
numbernev erf el
lbel owit
s1815mar k.This, Nandyr emar ked,wasbecauseSat ihad
now becomeadi stinctmarkerofone’ ssoci alstatusandal soofone’ sal legiances
witheithert heBr i
t i
shandt hel iber
als,orwi t
ht heor thodoxwi thintheSat idebat e.
Satiwast husper f
or mednotonl ybyBr ahmanasandKay asthasasanaf firmat ionof
thei
rstatus, butalsobyl owercast egr oupswi thaspi r
at i
onsofupwar dmobi l
ityinthe

Ref
orm andRev
ival 2
cast
escal
e.

Giventhatmanyassumptionsaboutwomen’ sstatusandwhattheyrepresentedwer e
notquest i
onedbyref
ormerslikeRammohunRoy ,Kumkum Sangarihasar guedthat
thesereformer
ssimplyr
earti
culat
edtheexisti
ngBr ahmani
calpatr
iarchalcode.While
Satiwasbanned,ther
ehadbeennoar gumentsfortheri
ght
sofwomenasi ndivi
duals,
norofthebanningofSat
iont hegroundsofitscruelt
y.

Thus,i n19th cent uryI ndia,thewomanquest ionwasnotpr i

marilyapar tofthe
discour seonpr ogressandmoder nity,though,asnot edabov e,theEv angel i
cals
certainlyconsideredpr acticesli
keSat ibarbarous,andpressur
edt hecolonialstat
et o
bant hem aspar tofi tsbenev ol
ent,civili
zi
ngmi ssi
on.Inst
ead,ashi storianslike
Kumkum Sangar i,LataManiandTani kaSar karhaveshown,womenbecamet he
groundsf orther e-
articulati
onof‘traditi
on’.Theycont i
nuedtorepresentthehonour
andcul tur
alauthenticityoft heBrahmani calcommuni ty,f
orbotht heorthodoxyas
well ast hepr
ogr essives.

ADDI
TIONALARGUMENTS

LATAMANI :Onemustbecar ef
ulwhil
eapplyingconcept
sl i
ke‘Wester
n/Progressiv
e’
t
h
and‘Or
thodox/
Tradi
ti
onal’
tothe19 century
,formuchoft hetradi
ti
onthatref
ormer s
l
ikeRammohunRoyquest ionedandthattheor t
hodoxydefendedwasaspeci f
icall
y
‘
coloni
al’
for
m oftr
adit
ion.

SUMI T SARKAR:Roy ’
sr adi
calwri
ti
ngs such as ‘
Tohf
atMuwabhiddi
n’depl
oy
reasonedargument
;later
,Royseekstolegit
imi
zehiscreedbyr
efer
ringtoVedi
c
scri
ptures

LATAMANI :3branchest ot hedebat eonSat i–

1.Of ficial
Di scour se
Prompt ed by di scussi ons on whet herSat icoul d saf ely be pr ohi bit
ed t hrough
l
egi sl
ation,f orint erfer ence i nr eligion maypr ov oke anger .Those i nf avourof
abol i
shingSat ist ressedi tsmat erialaspect s–at t
emptbygr eedyr elati
vest oget
theirhandsonawi dow’ spr operty.Thosewhoopposedi temphasi zedt hescr i
ptural
sanct i
onofSat i
,andt hedanger sofi nter f
eringwi thr eligi
ousmat t
er s.Fort heBr it
ish,
women wer e‘ helpl ess v icti
ms’ofr uthless r elati
ves and pr i
est s,ort heywer e
‘
her oines’ whoascendedt heirhusband’ sfuner alpy rewi ll
ingly.
2.I ndi genousPr ogr essi veDiscour se
Rammohun Roy :Thescr i
pturesdo notaut horizebur ning ofwi dowsal ive.The
Manusmr it
ispeaksof‘ ascet i
cwi dowhood’ .Satiwasnotspi ri
tuallymer it
oriousasi t
wasper formedoutofadesi r
ef orsensuousr ewar ds.Nowi dowev ercommi t
tedSat i
will
ingly.
Sati wasnotnecessar yt opr eser veawi dow’ sv i
rtuesi ncewomenwer einnatelymor e
vir
tuoust hanmen; itwast helatter, whot hroughphy sicalf orce, coer cedwomeni nto
non- vi
rtuousbehav iour .
3.I ndi genousConser vativeDi scour se
Satiwasunder takenwi l
linglybydev outwi dows.Cr i
mi nalizingSat iwasbasedonan
erroneousr eadingoft hescr i
ptur es.Al so,t hei mpor tanceofcust om shoul dbe
acknowl edged.Sat iwasat ime-honour edpr actice.

TANIKA SARKAR:Wi t
hspecialrefer
encetotheAgeofConsentDebat es,Sarkar
arguesthatallt
heissuesofwomen’ sref
orminthe19th centuryr
aisedthequestion
ofwhetherwomenwer epr
imari
lybearer
sofcul
tur
alauthenticit
y(oftheuppercastes)
orweretheyindi
vidual
swit
hrights.

Ref
orm andRev
ival 3
REFORM ANDREVI
VAL:
SOCI
O-RELI
GIOUSMOVEMENTS

CONCEPTS:
 KENNETHW.JONES:Fi ndst woki ndsofmov ement s,di f
f er i
ngont he‘ poi nt
ofor i
gin’,i.e.whet herornott heyemer gedf rom wi thi nt hecol onial mi li
eu
 Thesecamet obecl assi fiedast heTr ansi tional andAccul tur ativeMov ement s
 TRANSI TIONALMOVEMENTShadt hei ror i
gi nsi nt hepr e-col onialwor ldand
arosef rom i ndi genousf or msofsoci o-rel i
gi ousdi ssent ,wi thl i
ttleorno
i
nf l
uencef r om t hecol oni al mi lieu, eitherbecausei twasnoty etest abl i
shedor
becausei thadf ailedt oaf f ectt hei ndi vi
dual si napar ticul armov ement .The
clear estdet er mi nantwas t he absence ofangl icized l eader s among i t s
l
eader sandal ackofconcer nwi thadj ustingi tsconcept sandpr ogr ammest o
thecol onial wor ld.E. g.TheDeobandMov ement ,theNi r ankar iMov ement ,The
Far aizis.
 ACCULTURATI VEMOVEMETNSor iginat edwi thi nt hecol oni almi lieuandwer e
l
edbyi ndiv idual swhower epr oduct sofcul tur ali nt er act ion.Theysoughtan
accommodat iont ot hef actofBr itishsupr emacy ,t ot hecol onialmi l
ieut hat
suchsupr emacyhadcr eat ed,andt ot heper sonalposi ti
onofi t
smember s
withi nt hecol oni alwor l
d.Thebasi sofsuchmov ement sandt hei rai msr est ed
on t he i ndi genous her itage ofsoci aland r eligi ous pr ot est s,and wer e
ther efor enotber ef toft hei nf l
uenceoft hegener alhi ghcul t ur eofSout hAsi a.
E.g.TheBr ahmoSamaj ,theAr yaSamaj ,t
heAl igar hMov ement .
 Wi thint heser ubr ics,onef indst hecl assi fi
cat ionof‘ ref or mi st ’and‘ r
ev ivalist’
groups,whosedi fferencel iesi nt hei rai mst or efor m soci et yort obr ingback
soci etyt oanear li
erst ageoft her eligioni nquest ion
 VASUDHADALMI Acr i
tiquest hecl assi f i
cationsof‘ refor mi st ’ and‘ rev ivali
st ’
 I n19th cent ur yI ndia,anumberofsoci o- religi ousmov ement sdev elop,i n
responset ot hewest erndi scour sesofmoder nity .Someoft hesemov ement s
aredel iberat el y‘ traditi
onal i
st ’int hei ror i
ent at i
on, andhav esubsequent lybeen
classi fi
ed as ‘ rev i
valist’mov ement s. Ot her s,st r essi ng t he need f or
progr essi vechangehav ebeenseenas‘ moder ni zing’ ,‘
r ef ormi st’mov ement s.
 Yet ,alloft hesoci o-reli
gi ousmov ement soft he19thcent ur yhar kedbackt oa
my st ic‘glor ious’ pastf ort hel egi ti
macyoft hei rcr eed.Theywer eal lther ef ore
claimi ngant iqui ty.
 Fur thermor e,t heywer eal li nf l
uenced bymoder nizat ion,despi tet hesel f
consci oust randi tional i
sm ofsome.Thi scanbeseeni nt hecaseoft hesel f-
procl aimeduphol dersoft he‘ sanat anadhar ma’ ,t heDhar maSabhasoft he
1830s, whower eof t
enqui tecr it
icalofcol oni alr ef or mr egar di ngt hest atusof
women, wi dowsi npar ticul ar ,andt hel awsof‘ Hi ndu’ mar riage.
 Howev er,t hese sabhas,t hough emul at ing t radi tionalmodel si n some
respect s,wer enol ongerdomi nat edbyupper -cast e‘ Hi ndus’ ,buti ncl uded
mi ddl ecast eHi ndusaswel l.
 Thesesabhasof tenor gani zed t hemsel vesal ong Br itishmodul es,wi tha
Presi dentandf or mal votingpr ocedur es.Thi sr ef lect s, JohnZav oshasar gued,
the i nfluence upon t hese sanat ani st or gani zat i
ons of ‘ discour se of
organi zat ion’ ,oneoft hedi scour esofmoder ni tyasunder stoodbyt heBr i
tish
 Rej ect ingt her ev iv al
ist/ref or mi stpol ar ity
,Dal mi apr oposedt hecl assi ficat ion
of t he soci o-rel i
gious mov ement s of t he 19th cent ury as ei ther
TRADI TI ONALI STorREFORMI ST.
 TRADI TI ONALI STS, whi le r ecommendi ng amel ior at i
v e cast e r efor m,
preser v edt oal ar geext entt hev arnashr amadhar mast ruct ur e.
 REFORMI STS,on t he ot herhand,r ecommended cr uci alchanges i nt hi s
struct ure,suchast her eject ionoft hepr inci pl eofher edi tyi ndet ermi ning

Ref
orm andRev
ival 4
 castestatus.
 Whilemanyoft hetraditi
onalritual
sof‘ Hindui sm’,aswel last hecentralplace
i
n Pur anic wor ship oft he templ e wer e accept ed ad pr eser v
ed by t he
Tradit
ionalMov ement s,manyPur anicr i
tualswer eei t
herout rightrej
ectedby
he Ref ormistMov ement s orsi gni
f i
cantly altered by t hem.They al so
chall
engedt hecent ralplaceoft het emplei nwor ship.
 Therefore,whi let he Tr aditi
onalistmov ement s pr eserved t he regionall
y
specif
iccast e-sampr aday a‘ort
hodoxi es’whi chwer elat
ercl ubbedundert he
bannerof‘ Hinduism’,t heseor thodoxieswer echal l
engedbyt hereformist
mov ement s.

Ref
orm andRev
ival 5