UNIT 4- INDIAN SOCIOLOGISTS: CONTRIBUTION
Topic 1- M. N. Srinavas: Sanskritization
All the changes, which have occurred in the castes, are intercaste changes and these have no way affected
the fundamentals of caste system. For this process of change M.N. Srinivas a pioneer of Indian
sociology has used the concept of Sanskritization. Sanskritization is not a new concept in sociological
literature but M.N. Srinivas has used this concept in a peculiar way. In his words, Sanskritization means
not only the adaptation of new customs and habits but also exposure of new ideas and valued which
have found frequent expression in the vast body of Sanskrit literature, social as well as Secular. These
ideas reach the common people through Sanskrit myth and stories. Thus Sanskritization means the
adaptation of the values of a cultured society. In explaining the meaning of Sanskritisation, M.N. Srinivas
pointed out that Sanskritization was not always due to Brahmans; generally Sanskritisation qualifies as
caste for a higher status. In the dynastic system, Sanskritisation emphasised the status of dynasty.
According to Srinivas, Sanskritization spread during the British Rule with the development of means of
communication, the impact of Sanskritisation was felt in the remote corners of the century. With the
spread of education and literacy it percolated to the lowest castes. The western terminology radio press
rail etc. generally facilitated the process of Sanskritisation. The mobility associated with Sanskritisation
results only in positional changes in the system and does not lead to any structural change. In other
words, the spectrum itself doesn’t change. He also notes how the tribal groups such as Bhils of
western India, the Gonds and Oraon of central India claim to be a caste through the process of
Sanskritisation and thus claim a place in the caste hierarchy. It is well known that there is no conversion
process in the traditional Hindu system. While Srinivas took Sanskritisation to mean some kind of
Brahminisation, other investigators showed that Sanskritisation could be based on Kshatriya or Vaisya or
Sudra’ morals. As Srinivas himself points out the varna hierarchy is clear and immutable’. It is evident;
therefore, that Sanskritisation reinforces and consolidates the ‘immutable varna hierarchy’ rather than
dislodges it or modify it. Thus, Sanskritisation is not a process by which structural change in the Hindu
society can become possible. It is certainly not a means by which any social change in India can be
brought about.
Topic 3- A. R. Desai- Marxian Approach
A. R. Desai was born on April 16, 1915 at Nadiad in Gujarat and died in 1994 at Baroda. He consistently
advocated and applied dialectical-historical model in his sociological studies. He closely studied the
works of Marx and Engels and the writings of Trotsky. He may be regarded as one of the pioneers in
introducing the modern Marxist approach to empirical investigations involving bibliographical and field
research. He rejects any interpretations of tradition with reference to religion, rituals and festivities. It is
essentially a secular phenomenon. He finds it in family, village and other social institutions. He also does
not find the origin of tradition in western culture. He considers that the emerging contradictions in the
Indian process of social transformation arise mainly from the growing nexus among the capitalist
bourgeoisie, the rural petty-bourgeoisie and a state apparatus all drawn from similar social roots.
In 50s-60s American structural-functionalism and British functionalism dominated social sciences in
general and sociological researches in particular. However Desai continued to write on Indian society and
state from the Marxist perspective. He finds that the dominant sociological approaches in India are
basically non-Marxist and the Marxist approach has been rejected on the pretext of its being dogmatic,
value-loaded and deterministic in nature. The relevant approach according to him is the Marxist
approach as it could help to study of govt’s policies, the class entrenched into state apparatus and India’ s
political economy. The Marxist approach helps to understand the social reality through the means of
production, the techno-economic division of labour involved in operating the instruments of production
and social relations of production or what was more precisely characterized as property relations. Thus
the Marxist approach focuses on understanding the type of property relations which existed on the eve of
independence in India. The Marxist approach gives central importance to property structure in analyzing
any society. It provides historical location or specification of all social phenomena. It recognizes the
dialectics of evolutionary as well as revolutionary changes of the breaks in historical continuity in the
transition from one socio-economic formation to another. In this context A R Desai tried to understand
the Indian society which also reflects in his work.