Dalit Autobiographical writing should not be merely seen as an offshoot of the literary

corpus generated by the Dalit Panthers Movement in the 1970s but also as a characteristically

peculiar feature of the entire Dalit literature, be it poetry, prose or criticism. 3 As Rangrao

Bhongle reminds us “The entire Dalit literature tends to be autobiographical because the Dalit

writer refuses to soar high with the wings of imagination; he prefers to write out of the

authenticity of experience.” (Bhongle, 2002)

The understanding of the predominance of this ‘autobiographical mode’ within Dalit

literature can help us formulate answers to a variety of questions, as fundamental as- Who is a

Dalit and what is Dalit Literature? How can one make sense of the experiences expressed in

Dalit autobiographies and what are its relation to larger discourses of Dalit literature and

questions of political and social injustice in the oppressive framework of Indian caste society?

And finally, how does this emerging body of Literature challenge the traditional foundations of

Indian arts, aesthetics and society?

Any reader of Dalit Literature must ask these questions before approaching the Dalit

writings as such because “contemporary criticism is poorly equipped to read Dalit Literature”4

and any lack of a systematic understanding of its aesthetics can simply produce disparaging mis-

readings. (Gajarawala, 2013, p. 170) These sets of elementary questions, once answered, can

equip us with perspectives to not only appreciate the quintessential impulse behind all Dalit

up for publishing in the United States by Simon and Schuster, the world's second largest publisher, for a record
amount and is fast becoming essential reading for sociological studies in American universities. See in
(Satchidanandan, 2010)

3
See Kusum Pawde’s Story of My Sanskrit in Arjun Dangle’s Poisoned Bread or Kancha Ilaiah’s “why I am not a
Hindu” which are works of criticism but relies on the autobiographical mode.
4
See page no. 170 in Toral Gajarawala’s “untouchable Fictions”, Fordham University Press, 2003.
 However, a certain section of Dalit authors, including Limbale and Surajpal Chauhan

among others, have chosen to speak about the internal fragmentations and patriarchal

subjugation of women within the Dalit society with the view that Dalit movement for liberation

must address these issues in order to be widely successful. A careful exposition of these

problems within the assumed representativity of Dalit identity would, according to such writers,

certainly strengthen their fight against injustice by recuperating internal shortcomings. Limbale’s

autobiography can be understood as an attempt to address these two concerns by way of offering

a close exposition and a deep contemplation on the nature and relevance of these issues for the

future of Dalit movement.

Addressing the Inter-Jati Question

Limbale’s text highlights the internal splits within the Dalit community when as a child

his mother wouldn’t allow him to offer water to his lower caste friend from the Mang

community. Limbale questions the prevalence of such discriminatory practices within the Dalit

community as his questions are targeted towards readers belonging to both Dalit and upper-caste

communities. “Is caste more important than thirst? Wasn’t Arjya a human being?” (Limbale S.

K., The Outcaste, 2004, p. 20)

Similar, inter-jati conflicts between the Bhangi and the Chamar community inform

Surajpal Chauhan’s autobiography “Tiraskrit”. (2002) Chauhan while returning to his village

decides to share his Tonga with a member of Chamar community. However, once the latter

comes to know of Chauhan’s identity as a Bhangi, he immediately leaves the Tonga in disgust

and anger. This incident has a profound impact on Chauhan understanding of Dalit identity as he

comments “Brahmanism in Dalits too!’ Six years ago we had faced the old Thakur and knowing
that Limbale uses for the ornamentation of his work is not positive but decidedly negative and

helps him to underline the dehumanized existence of the marginalized sections of the Indian

society. On a number of occasions Dalit characters and community are portrayed as vultures,

wolves and dogs to highlight their dehumanized existence. It is also important to notice how

Limbale handles the metaphor of space as closely linked to one’s marginal identity. The position

that Dalits acquire in different public spaces is very subtly observed “We sat amidst the footwear

flung around us” or “we lay like discarded bus tickets” or “I stood still like an unwashed plate”

to highlight their dirt-like existence. One must look at this positioning in the light of Mary

Douglas’s explanation of ‘dirt’ as “matter out of place”, a concept that highlights the difficulty of

Dalits to acquire a positive sense of space as they always find themselves out of place.

Conceptualizing a Critique of Dalit Patriarchy

The language also works to bridge the gap between one’s experience of exploitation as a

member of a particular caste, or as a member located across different genders and social

locations. On a number of occasions Limbale’s articulation of his experience metaphorically

assumes the expression of another marginalized subject position, particularly women.

Expressions like “we waited at the bus stand for a bus as a prostitute waits for her customers.”

highlight Limbale’s desire to reach out to the sufferings of others by locating his pain in the

experiences of other oppressed subjects, in this case women. Limbale’ memorization and

presentation of certain events can also help us to constitute a critique of Dalit patriarchy

functioning within his autobiography in conjunction with an attempt to empathize with women

subjects as such. Born and brought up in a strictly patriarchal family, he reveals the layered

marginalization of Dalit women within the patriarchal nature of Dalit community in an episode

where Santamai is conditioned to eat ‘bhakaris’ made out of grains collected from cattle dung
further highlights his desire to reach out to the experience and suffering of other marginalized

subjects.

Identity Politics in Akkarmashi

Born as “Akkarmashi” (Mixed-caste) Limbale suffered discrimination not only at the

hands of upper-caste people but also among his very own community. “I am an alien. My father

was not a Mahar by caste. In the Maharwada I felt humiliated as I was considered a bastard;

they called me ‘akkarmashi’. Yet in the village I was considered Mahar and teased as the

offspring of one.” (Limbale S. K., The Outcaste, 2004, p. 62) Limbale’s delineation of his painful

life was, thus, supposed to be a moment of reckoning for the entire world including his own

community “My first breath must have threatened the morality of the world.” (Limbale S. K.,

The Outcaste, 2004, p. 36) Therefore, Limbale’s autobiography embodies a crucial attack on the

fundamental caste psychology (Brahmanism) ordained within the Hindu society- a psychology

that divides people on the basis of their birth status without recognizing their inherent humanity.

Limbale’s strict insistence on highlighting inter-caste conflicts stems from his staunch belief in

Ambedkar’s understanding of caste as a product of Brahmanism as discussed above.

According to Ambedkar Brahmanism was one the biggest challenge to overcome the

division of caste. Ambedkar explains: “By Brahmanism, I mean the negation of the spirit of

Liberty, Equality and Fraternity. In that sense, it is rampant in classes and is not confined to the

Brahmins alone, though they have been the originators of it. This Brahmanism which pervades

everywhere and which regulates the thought and deeds of all classes is an incontrovertible fact.”

(Lokhande, 1982, p. 208) Ambedkar was not against a particular set of people but a particular

attitude which negates the inherent equality among humans. Similarly, what Limbale wishes to

attack is the tyranny of Brahmanism and Limbale’s autobiography displays an aesthetic

 The necessity of such a strategy is of a great political significance and helps Dalit writers,

in particular Limbale, to recuperate internal differences based upon an individual’s gender, class

and inter-jati identities. Limbale memorization and presentation of his meeting with a certain

leader of the Dalit Panther’s movement is a highly revealing episode in his autobiography to

understand the process of healing internal differences for the purpose of strong political

representation by using identity politics. Limbale recounts the following episode:

“We had decided to celebrate the birth anniversary of Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar on a

grand Scale, and were very enthusiastic about it. I was invited to the meeting but I didn’t

go because someone had already visited me the day before with whom I had had an

argument. The leader said, ‘Limbale Saheb we are of pure blood. (Baramashi) Those

people living down there are impure. You don’t know that. Don’t be on their side at the

meeting tomorrow. The president for this celebration must be from our side and not from

the other. Obviously, he didn’t know the facts about my birth. What would happen if the

Volunteers of this vast movement came to know that I was impure? Would they too avoid

and ostracize me?” (Limbale S. K., The Outcaste, 2004, p. 106)

Limbale couldn’t attend the “grand meeting” on the celebration of Ambedkar Jayanti

because of the comment made by a certain volunteer which reflects the presence of Brahmanism

within the Dalits, much like what Chauhan had felt. The volunteer oblivious of Limbale’s

‘Mixed-caste’ identity advices him to not side with the mixed-caste people (Akkarmashis) within

the Dalit community and expresses his desire that the president should be selected from among

the pure people. This episode also encapsulates a self-critique of Dalit movement and its

leadership who has mistook the collective struggle for selective glorifications and political gains.

Limbale’s decision to not attend the meeting symbolizes the threat to the unity and strength of
their purity of origin. Postcolonial critics like Homi Bhabha and Paul Gilroy then suggest that the

condition of “hybridity” should be accepted as the only condition of existence in a post-colonial

situation. The understanding of caste as a binary division between the purely upper and lower

caste has also faced a similar challenge and to believe in the existence of purely upper and lower

castes is to blur the prevalent internal differences created by the fundamentally Brahmanical

nature of Indian society. The suggestion of hybridity is however, not entertained by the Dalit

writers as they continue to assert the dichotomy of upper and lower caste with its intact notion of

purity and pollution.

In Limbale’s Akkarmashi itself the departure from a mixed-caste identity doesn’t suggest

an acceptance and celebration of a hybrid identity but tries to arrive at a purely Dalit identity.

Dalit writers, instead of celebrating hybridity believes in consolidating a purely Dalit identity for

the purpose of Political representation and struggle against widespread Brahmanism. Dalit

writers believe as long as Indian society retains the ideology of Brahmanism, it needs to be

countered by using caste as a political weapon against a traditionally religious division of society

or as Rudolph suggests “that a transformed version of this “traditional” structure [That is,

Caste] had become a vehicle for representative and parliamentary democracy and was

functioning as a democratizing force.” (Ganguly, 2005, p. 135)

An episode in Limbale’s autobiography where he has to literally live on the bus station

can be read as a refutation of a liminal hybrid identity. The postcolonial critic Paul Gilroy’s

writes that “if the powerful claims of soil, roots and territory could be set aside,” one might

create what he calls “Planetary humanism” and “placeless imaginings of Identity”. (Hughes,
chapter than those who have classified this body of literature as essentially deficient,

propagandist, and relying upon overt sensationalism to create sympathy. One can understand

given the vulnerable socio-political background in which Dalit writers feel to be operating why

Dalit literature is often termed as propagandist in nature and aesthetically and imaginatively

deficient, when in fact it is not only aesthetically vibrant but also highly promising as it generates

a whole new aesthetic experience by rejecting the traditional hedonistic idea of India aesthetics.

The idea of ‘Beauty’ underlying the aesthetic experience produced by art is encapsulated

in the traditional Indian aesthetic theory derived from the expression “Satyam Shivam Sundram”.

The traditional Idea maintains that the attainment of truth (Satyam) is a guarantee to virtuous life

and such a life becomes truly beautiful (Sundaram), when applied to arts whatever produces a

true account of human condition can be considered beautiful. But this traditional idea stands

radically challenged by the emerging Dalit Aesthetics which begins by asking a philosophical

question, also raised by Limbale in his formulation of Dalit aesthetic theory- Can those who have

been tortured, raped and oppressed for centuries say that the world is beautiful, the Vedas

abound in truth and the society follows a virtuous path? In other words, the philosophical

outlook of Satyam, Shivam, Sundram can only be maintained by an oppressive society which has

become absorbed in hedonism by disregarding the sufferings of its dispossessed and oppressed

population.5 Dalit aesthetic theory then seeks to exposes the untruth, unholy and ugly aspects of

Indian life by making its art carry an experience of the ugly truth which every low-caste must

live by birth.

Dalit Literature is born out of the desire to bring social change by highlighting the pain

and suffering of oppressed people and as Limbale asks “Is it appropriate to expect pleasure or

5
See page no. 18 in Sharan Kumar Limbale’s “Towards an Aesthetic of Dalit Literature” for a detailed
understanding.
and erasure of Dalit subjectivity from what is supposedly referred to as ‘Indian’ literature 7

Kancha Ilaiah in his popular book “Why I am not a Hindu” (2002) highlights that “the

conspiracy of silence is as loud as a thunderclap. A class which is so brazenly casteist in theory

and practice is also brazenly silent about its inhumanity in its literary texts.” (Ilaiah, 2002, p. 55)

Limbale in an interview to Alok Mukherkjee, therefore, answers the question can Dalit writer be

politically neutral? Limbale says “No, never! A Dalit writer cannot be neutral. When injustice is

being done to my mother and my sister I cannot sit still. When a house is burning down, I am not

going to remain silent. This happens in literature too. The writer can be neutral only when there

is no relationship between him and experience…” (Limbale S. K., Towards an Aesthetic of Dalit

Literature, 2018, p. 158)

Re-writing History Re-writing Self

Even though Limbale out rightly questions the nature of Dalit identity, one particular

feature of his autobiography is crucial to understand what makes “Akkarmashi” a genuine

specimen of Dalit autobiography. In an episode when Limbale fails to obtain permission for

going to loo, a flood of piss flowed out of his shorts to which he refers as Godavari. Calling his

piss Godavari changes the sacred status the river has carried for the upper-caste Hindus and

highlights a method adopted by Dalit writers to re-inscribe and renew the traditional outlook

produced out of a Brahmanical mindset. Certain elements specific to the lives of upper and lower

castes get altered and re-signified in Dalit autobiographies which reflect a strategy of renewing

Dalit identity by challenging upper-caste stereotypes. Sarah Beth highlights through her reading

of Hindi Dalit autobiographies “the pig is re-interpreted in Dalit autobiographical narratives

7
See M.S.S Pandian for an elaborate commentary on R.K Narayan’s silence on Caste
 term, every man’s wife had had a baby…The Dalit women had been raped when their

husbands were in prison… we didn’t know in which village this had happened but

whenever we heard this, it disturbed us.” (Limbale S. K., The Outcaste, 2004, p. 71)

As Dalit writers attempt to redefine their identity a particular tension continuous to bear

its remarkable imprints on the style and form of autobiographies. The redefinition of identity

presents a particular tussle between Dalit author’s middle-class perspective of life and the

perspective of a largely rural Dalit community. Sarah Beth notes “Dalit writers express certain

ambivalence with this process as they attempt to reconcile their low caste identity with their

current urban middle-class status.” (BETH, 2007, p. 554) The fact that Dalit authors have

attained a particular socio-economic development makes them ambivalent towards certain life

practices of their rural-poor community. From a strong contempt for the prevalence of

superstitions and religious orthodoxies to subtle forms of bourgeois morality can be noticed

negotiating the formation of Dalit Identity within Dalit Literature.

Limbale’s narrative style in Akkarmashi can be termed as a ‘narrative of contrast’ as it

relies heavily on the revelation of difference rather than proving singularly positive or negative

description of life. He relies on the juxtaposition of contrasting events and episodes which helps

him to not only underline the glaring differences present in lives of upper and lower caste people

but also underline differences present between the urban-middle class position of Dalit writers

and their rural and poor community. While the former is evident in the way Limbale contrasts

Dalit and upper-caste children on the picnic day the latter can be observed in his nausea for

eating dead animals and pigs. A reaction which is similar to Chauhan’s reflection on eating raw

pig’s meat,
I am

not only asking a version of the Rigoberta Menchú riddle raised by the ac

cusation that her testimonial of her life was in places false, but am asking

whether we are encouraging cliché versions of people's lives by participating

in a system that needs to hear a certain version of a tale of rights wronged (by

others) but then protested (by our side).

Christi Merrill page 9 translating hindi dalit autobiographies.

Pandian, M. (2002). One Step Outside Modernity. Economic and Political Weekly, 37 (18).

Rajkumar. (2013). Dalit Personal Narratives. Hyderabad: Orient Blackswan.

Satchidanandan, K. (2010). Reflections: Autobiography Today. Indian Literature, 54 (2), 6-9.