Sharan
Kumar Limbale’s The outcaste (Akkarmashi, 2004 ) presents the anguish of a dalit youngster .
He is tossed between the oppressive
caste system and his ardent desire for freedom. He is the representative
dalits who suffered numerous
humiliations daily in the past as well as in the post-independence India .
In the autobiography, one doesn’t find any
fissure between thought and expression and the suffering is real whereas
endless queries, disturbing thoughts and the words rarely fail in
reaching the heart of the reader. No social taboo restricts his freedom of
expression and the language seems at times simple and brutally frank. The narration is racy and the reader surely turns introspective after reading the work. It’s life writing
itself and the lava of anguish flows on breaking the banks of r art but
the reader doesn’t feel disappointed
since the bios in the graphy is rich reminding one of Gorky’s autobiographical
works such as The childhood, The
Apprenticeship and My Universities. It shatters the complacency and the
comfort zone of the readers and transforms them deeply. One begins to see
things anew, recollects one’s own childhood in a village and various forms of discrimination meted out
to the dalits around the country but not realized by prisoners in the caste
system that banishes humanity outside the village. The
apparent normality of life poisons children, justifies internecine quarrels
among them and develops alienation in the people that continues till the system
is annihilated in toto.
He was
born to a Patil and Mahar woman out of wedlock and this has caused him a
perpetual anguish regarding is identity. He was taken care of
by a Muslim called Dada and Santamai,
his aunt. His ‘illegitimate’ birth
made him suffer not knowing whether he could call himself an upper caste
man or a mahar since he was born to a Mahar woman , grown up in maharwada, made
friends with mahars and suffered the
pangs of hunger and humiliation under
caste system. Hence he was in a state of confusion not knowing
if he was a Hindu or Muslim.
His autobiography was a flow of lava from the
volcano of his oppressive situation. When he loved a girl called Shewanta ,
his caretaker Santamai warned him that he won’t be allowed by
Mahars. He couldn’t get his scholarship from signed by the sarpanch, rent a
house or find a bride easily. He became angry and asks his mother
about his father . He throws a barrage of questions in the face of his plight
and caste system that sees humans as incarnation of caste. When he helped a
farmer’s wife , the farmer throws a chappal at him for doing so.
He finds hunger as his universe, god and
foundation stone of the edifice of constitution, parliament and civilization.
He hates the system that uses the labour and bodies of dalits cruelly. He writes how could the upper caste
people violate the mothers, wives and girl children of mahars and other oppressed castes without any
regard .
At school , the discrimination starts . Mahar
boys and girls are forced to sit separately
under separate trees. While Wani
and Brahmin boys played kabbadi , Mahar boys- Sharan , Mallya, umbrya, Parshya
used to play touch-and-go . Arjya, a
Mang sat separately. Sharan and his friends were asked to smear the floors and
walls of the school with cowdung paste. Sharan writes in a satirical fashion. The boy who
wouldn’t do work at home was forced to do work.
“
The teacher had a particular admiration for me because I was an expert in
gathering dung and smearing it evenly.” (4)
“We
are the garbage the village throws out. There were so many caste factions in
our school… we had grown up like aliens since our infancy. This sense of
alienation increased over the years and to this day my awful childhood haunts
me.” (5)
Sharan as a boy used to feel hungry and his
mother used to scold him to find food for himself. She used pungent
language to express her helplessness. Sharan and his friends waited
for feasts in the village, given kheer, scolded when they wanted to take it for
their family members, ate leftovers and quenched their hunger. But they had to
satisfy their thirst only after going home.
“When
I reached home Masamai was very angry. ‘Why didn’t you save some kheer and
bring it home/’ she shouted. I stood like an unwashed plate” (10) Sharan’s imagery directly comes from life and
hits at your face. You are awakened and not allowed to pretend sleep any
longer. He attacks the life and system
at its most basic level. Starvation was
their lot. His sisters were used to sleep away their hunger, mother survived on
water and Dada on beedis and only he ate
something. His sister was beaten by
vendor for stealing a banana at the market and Sharan writes, “ My eyes
flowed like a leaking roof.” (21)
“The poor steal out of hunger. If they had
enough to eat would they steal? Black-marketers become leaders, whereas those
who are driven to steal by hunger are considered criminals.” (21) Sharan writes
how the high caste people , with author sanctioned by scriptures exploited dalits of their land, labour and
honour.. He writes how his mother masamai was forcibly separated from
her first husband and her children, used
by one Hanumant Patil and later by
another Yeshwantrao Sidramappa Patil to whom Sharan and his six siblings
were born. His interrogation is rigorous. His paernal ancestors were lingayts
and maternal ancestors were Mahars and brought up by his grand father Mahmood
Dastagir Jamadar , a Muslim.
Then
why can’t the jamadar affection claim me as Muslim? How can I be high caste
when my mother is an untouchable? If I
am untouchable, what about my father who is high caste? I am like Jarasandh.
Half of me belongs to the village, whereas the other half is excommunicated.
Who am I? To whom is my umbilical cord connected? (39)
Sharan’s
grandfather Dada and Santamai, his grand mother used to work as porter and
sweeper at the bustop. He renders their pathetic life ridden with hunger,
labour and humanity in moving terms. He
was like ‘a barren hen trying to hatch an egg’ or ‘a woman nauseous from travelling on a bus’
(44) when there was no work. He also
writes how he helped his mother in selling liquor on the sly, police raids and
the behavior of the drunkards who minded touching water but not affairs with Mahar women.
He
sees the caste system that separates
his abode and affection from his father who behaved
lovingly when in their hut but closed
doors when he went to the latter’s mansion to see him. He thinks that Dada’s
affection has no religion. When the sarpanch or the village chief refuses to
sign freeship form of Sharan to enter the highschool on the pretext of not
knowing the real parent of the boy.
But
I too was a human being. What else did I
have except a human body? But a man is
recognized in this world by his religion, caste , or his father. I had neither
a father’s name, nor any religion, nor a
caste. I had no inherited identity at
all.(59)
When
the boy came home he wept in humiliation and his mother tried to console
him . He felt like karna of the
Mahabharata and asked about is father.
He was elated when told to tell his teacher that his mother was ‘whore’ and he
didn’t know its meaning. He knew
that the real culprit was the system. He
describes an incident in which his real father Hatnmanta and the present partner of his mother come to
his hut and the latter tried to persuade Masamai to sleep with Hanmanta patil
who ruined her first marriage. Masamai threatened to burn herself if they refused to
leave.Sharan writes
“That
night she hugged me as she slept and cried a lot. Her sobbing was like the
explosion of a volcano. Her tears suggested that doomsday was close.” (61)
He
later describes how Parshya’s father beat parshya and scolded both of them for
entering the inside of the temple forgetting that they were untouchables. He
writes:
God discriminates between man and man. He
makes one man rich and the other poor. One is high caste, the other
untouchable. What kind of God is this that makes human beings hate each other?
We are all supposed to be the children of God, then why are we considered
untouchable? We don’t approve of this God , nor this religion, nor this country
because they ostracize us. (62)
He
wanted to go to his real father at Baslegaon and felt like an abandoned bird.
He was angry with his mother and quarreled with Kaka and Dada. Describing
his situation , the author laments why wasn’t he killed as foetus or
strangled after his birth and why humiliation for being born as illegitimate
and what was his crime and suffer for sins of parents.
He feels
disgust with his condition, thinks indecently of his mother but humanity makes him realize
that Masamai and his foster mother Santamai sold themselves not for lust but
out of the need to be loved and cared by
someone. He feels miserable on seeing his sisters’ plight and says would have
married one of them at least make them happy. Here Sharan explodes the system
that pushes the people beyond limits and
nothing is unthinkable in the hell of his existence. He rues
over the loss of his mother’s love
and queries, “who wrenched my mother away from me ?” (65)
The
answer is the cruel system of caste and
the village lords who rule
over the lives of the dalits. The caste system in India has changed
its forms in many ways like chameleon
and divided people and it’s the main hindrance for national unity. It has also
hindered the development of class consciousness among the working classes
through creating hierarchy. It has divided people in eating, rituals,
education, marriage, jobs and even in
funeral rites. It has created internal solidarity but excluded others contaminating the unified consciousness. It
has affected human dignity and morale of the
marginalized people on whose labour it depended on for its survival.
While Gandhi aimed at the change of heart of the upper castes, Ambedkar aimed
at abolition of caste system in which attempt he embraced Buddhism which he saw
as more humane and more rational than Hinduism. Ambedkar writes, “The want and poverty which has been their lot is
nothing to them compared to the insult and indignity which they have to bear as
a result of the vicious social order. Not bread but honour , is what they
want.”(145)
Industrialization dented caste consciousness
to an extent but not completely as dalits faced hurdles in finding
accommodation and employment even in cities.
Democratic Socialism in India has no meaning and future without being
based on dalits and other backward castes. Nehruvian socialism aimed at
industrialization whereas the struggle approach taken by the leftists made
socialism merely a slogan and subservient to Indian capitalism. While industrialist like Narayana
Murthy talk about kind capitalism, some
advocate dalit capitalism. Although these approaches may work as
relief measures to the ruthless
exploitation, they can’t restore the human dignity of dalits. Dalits
can become stronger in a new order that empowers and serves the needs of
the marginalized sections.
It’s
in describing the satisfaction of hunger, Sharan lays bare the reality
We
used to roam along the stream to reduce the fire of hunger in our stomachs. We
caught crabs, fish, eggs, smashed a honeycomb, caught birds, cried like
water-fowls, tied frogs around our
necks, searched for lizards, shot pebbles at kites with catapults, roasted
squirrels and ate them.
Sharan also describes his mother’s concern for her
first husband Ithal Kamble, estranged children Suryakant and Dharma from her
first husband. He describes his envy and comments on the separation among
children from the same womb.
He
relates how Parshya and he tried to teach a lesson to Shobhi who insulted them
at school and outside. They waylay her and Parshya grips her hand and says,
So you call us Mahars, don’t you? Your water
gets impure if we touch it, if that’s so why doesn’t this river turn impure? If
human being becomes impure by our mere touch then why didn’t your colour change
to green or yellow, as it happens when someone is sick or poisoned? Why didn’t
the food in your bundle rot? (71)
Throughout
Sharan was scared if anyone would find them insulting her. He relates an incident which he heard that in a village
when a young Mahar looked lasciviously at a woman belonging to the upper caste,
all the men in meherwada were beaten and arrested and the women suffered
molestation. Ambedkar writes as follows:
“This
division cannot easily be wiped out for the simple reason that it is not based
upon rational, economic, or racial grounds” but on ‘religious dogma’ (98)
Santamai
has inspired him through telling many tales of atrocities against mahars as Jijyamai inspired young Shivaji. He also
relates how women suffered physically,
mentally and socially in the hands of the upper caste men and forced to collect
garbage to satisfy their hunger. He says
how their hunger and themselves were
treated lighter than garbage.
He also tells how Parshya and he complained against a tea stall
vendor for showing discrimination drawing the ire of his foster father Kaka and
the elders of Meherwada. They also had to quench their thirst from well water secretively to avoid beating by
the villagers. The well was in fact dug by Mahars. He questions, “What is so
peculiar about our touch that it pollutes water, food, houses, clothes,
graveyards, tea shops, God, religion, and even man?” (81)
He also refers to troubles faced by him in
getting educated and Santamai and he went to a money lender for money. The
latter kept lecherous looks at Santamai
but refused money filling the author
with anger and wished to give the same
treatment to the mother or sister of the
moneylender. He compares himself and his people to “grains crushed in a stone
grinder”(83)
He writes how poverty has made them eat food
from the begging basket of Mallya’s grandmother Sonu. He shows undying humanity of Santamai and
Dada who lovingly brought him up, the humiliation of being rejected as a
suitable boy for Janabai’s niece due to his ‘illegitimate’ birth, his sorrow
over not being able to give money to porter’s
children.He laments, can we know the fate that Satwai is supposed to
write on our foreheads on the fifth day of our lives? Suppose we remove the
skin and muscle from our foreheads can we find it written there? Or is it all a
myth?” (87)
On
the demand for cancellation of reservation he says he wants dalitstan in case
of cancelation of facilities. He refers to the utter poverty and mental tension
experienced by them on knowing atrocities against them. He writes,
Those
who say that facilities must be cancelled should first face casteism
themselves. They must share the life of the untouchables. Let them live outside
the village, ostracized like us. They should experience what it means to study
while your father is lying drunk beside you. They wouldn’t then protest against
injustice. (90)
The
autobiography runs on like an interior monologue. He appeals directly to the
conscience of the reader to see, understand and sympathize with the plight of
the dalits. His tone is not sentimental but appeals to the reasoning faculty
and it makes one thoughtful. His inexhaustible arrows make anyone examine his
own perspective, life and knowledge of the suffering of the marginalized. He
touches the sleeping reasoning of the mainstream reader and no question of
escape from this torrent of existential anguish.
The
influence of Ambedkar method is there in the novel when the writer aims a
series of arrows against the caste system that justifies oppression and expects
the people remain silent. No system
based on irrationality and scriptural
authority survives endless questioning.
Sharan
Limbale also brings out the fratricidal conflicts among the people. First he
couldn’t find a bride since he was considered of impure blood. Then Maryappa
Kambe who adopted Buddhism agreed to
give his daughter. But later on his parents in law didn’t send his wife along with him for having impure blood and Sharan had to take away his wife forcibly. Later on when
Sharan went to search for his sister vani’s
husband, he meets Parabatjya provides
hospitality.While giving him sendoff Parabatjya shows him a spot of butchery of
Muslims in which he participated. This makes Sharan reflect on the religious
feuds which are inhuman.
Hindus
and Muslims are both born in this country. Both are human beings. The blood of
both people is red. Only their religions are different…In the name of religion
there is bloody carnage riots, and crusades. They don’t show any humanity to a
human being from another religion. If you cut out religion a man is still a
man. So why doesn’t a human being from one religion love a human being from
another? (102)
Sharan
doesn’t mince or hide matters and points out the evil of convention that separates dalits from one another.
He described how in Latur he had to hide his
caste to find a house. Behind his
house was a graveyard and when his
daughter Asmitha ran high fever, he prostrated and prayed. He was desperate for changing his
house and the appearance of an angel and he was completely estranged form
himself and felt like Siddhartha who left his palace at midnight. He also refers to the short-lived marriages
of his sisters when their parents in law came to know that
Masamai, Sharan’s mother was a Mahar. He writes, “Marriages were broken
up like a game of dolls.” (109)
The autobiographer time and again points out
the pangs of separation felt by those
trapped in convention. The work written
when he was twenty five ends on
rumination over what would happen to Dada, Masamai and Santamai after
their deaths and who would attend their
funeral rites. He ends his work
saying, “Why this labyrinth of customs? Who has created such values of
right and wrong, and what for? If they consider my birth illegitimate what
values am I follow?”(113)
In an interview Limbale says, “My writing is
a reaction against brutal and unhuman caste system. Equality, freedom, justice,
democracy are streams of my blood. I
never tolerate injustice against common man irrespective of his caste. I want
to see a beautiful nation without
exploitation, corruption and atrocities.” 1 He calls his book not
“an autobiography of a person but a social document of dalits.”(465) He refers
to Daya Pawar’s Baluta and Laxman
Mane’s Upara as the works which have
influenced him and he has written it “for a social cause.”2
While
the autobiography of Nehru reveals about
the intertwining of the stories of
emergence of nation and the story of the protagonist, Sharan Kumar’s work challenges elitist
nationalism and is seen as the voice of the fragment of the nation that has
been marginalized. It raises the basic questions regarding whether Indian independence has really
liberated the dalits who are working
classes of India. There is no room for
any sense of smugness on the part of the upper castes and classes
regarding their brand of democracy.
In
his own style Ambedkar raises a barrage of questions against Hinduism regarding
its treatment of dalits and ends saying, “In Fine, does Hinduism universalize
the value of life without distinction?”3
Rodrigues
shows that Ambedkar’s demanded universal
adult franchise in 1928 itself and steadfastly fought for the protection
of the rights of dalits in the project of nationalism. He preferred moral
revolution based on Buddhism rather than violent one espoused by Marxists. In
his comparative study of Marxism and Buddhism, he concludes that man must grow
materially as well as spiritually and in
reference to the ideals of Fraternity,
Liberty and Equality, humanity welcomed the French and Russian Revolutions.
“Equality will be of no value without fraternity or liberty. It seems that the
three can co-exist only If one allows the way of the Buddha. Communism can give
one but not all.” (188)
Notes
1
Nawale, M.Aravind, Ankita Khanna and T.N.Kolekar. Eds. Autobiographies,
Biographies and
Memoirs in English. New Delhi;Gnosis,2013.P.464
2
Ibid.,P. 466.
3Rodrigues,Valerian.Ed. The Essential Writings of
B.R.Ambedkar. New Delhi:OUP,2004. P.228.
