Om Prakash Valmiki

Reality of ‘Main Stream’

(Translated by: Malti Agarwal)

What is main stream? The term is often used in relation to politics, development and literature. But especially what does the term ‘mainstream’ connote when applied to minorities, tribals and dalits? This is somewhat a natural question. If the term ‘mainstream’ is analysed only in literal sense, its meaning leads to confusion. Simultaneously, it rouses many issues and questions such as is ‘mainstream’ the stream originated and developed by the privileged class or is it the stream that marches along with the main current of time or the stream cut off from the flow of time or the stream of that particular class which occupies or enjoys absolute power in the working of the government or is it the stream which in the context of literature aims at ‘anand’, ‘arth’, ‘kama’, and ‘moksha’? Or is it the stream of those people who while practising the ‘Varna System’ enslaved a specific class and pushed it out of the ‘mainstream’? If we look at the entire scenario in the historical perspective, we find how these people were excluded from the process of development and shut door upon them, blocking all the ways of coming back. People thus deprived of all development lost their identities — cultural identities. Should it be called ‘mainstream’ — a stream for which 15-16 crores of people have to wage a war to establish their identity? Mainstream is a stream born of the values and beliefs of a special Varna (not a class) and when for it a dalit has to struggle for his identity, at this juncture, this mainstream appears quite cruel, inhuman and barbarous. It with all the jugglery of intellectual think-tank and literary craftsmanship hinders dalit’s all future prospects of development. Nevertheless, it negates the very existence of the dalit, cheats him or at the most provides a dalit the status of a second rate citizen and compels him to be a tool in the hands of the people of the privileged class that implies that dalit’s being a human being carries no weight and his manhood is worthless. Thus the imposed feeling of inferiority of a dalit and also the age long pangs of suffering and agony which he had undergone for thousands of years deter him from leading a normal and natural life. In the process of getting  rid of this feeling of inferiority and being normal, he unfortunately gets frustrated and harassed for a number of times but on this, ‘mainstream’ maintains a position of neutrality.

The helplessness and anguish of the dalits for remaining out of the ‘mainstream’ has given birth to a productive force of Dalit literature which is diametrically opposed to the so called force of ‘mainstream’. A galaxy of scholars like Kanwal Bharti, Asang Ghosh, Nemish Rai, Anita, Jaiprakash Kardam have chosen this ‘Newstream’ for the search of their identity. This ‘newstream’ is not the creation of a day. It is actually a long tedious and arduous journey which as started by Buddha and supported by Phule and Ambedkar has reached to its present time position. The ‘Newstream’ has been strengthened by people’s suffering for being dalits and their striving for all cultural collusions they have come across with.

Keeping in view the sociological perspective, if we objectively look into the matter, we find that the entire dalit society has been striving hard against oppression due to its liveliness. The Hindu religious epics have always dehumanized the ‘chandals’, untouchables, ‘antavasins’, ‘antayaj’, ‘pancham’, ‘doma’ etc. They have often been compared to dogs and other animals. Their very existence was questioned as they were deprived of human rights. The historical reasons which regulated the dalits literature are deeply ingrained in the literature, produced in Marathi, Gujarati, Telegu, Kannada, and Tamil languages. So dalit writer cries:

Tumhare Rache Shabd
Tumhe hi dasenge
Sanpa bankar
- Om Prakash, Buss Bahut Ho Chuka (From Poetic Collection)

While questioning the philosophical and spiritual aspect of the ‘mainstream’, a dalit poet poses a question:

Chude ya dome ki atma
Braham ka ansh kyun nahi hai
Mein nahi janta
Shayad aap jante ho !
- Om Prakash Valmiki, Buss ! Bahut Ho Chuka        (Poetic Collection)

This stream of literature is strong enough with deep ideas and sensations towards its ideals and values. The poet, thus, speaks:

Rok leti hain mere kadmo ko
Bedi bankar
Meri poorvajo ke seekh
Hinsa nahi hai
Hinsa ka jawab !
- Jai Prakash Kardam, From the poem ‘Keele’

            Since this stream is imbued with those human cares and worries which once worried Lord Krishna, it teaches us not to hate even those who hate us.

            Dalit literature rabels against all biases which arise due to caste. It is conscious of dispersing the well-established values in our social and religious life. How people fight to literate themselves from the clutches of enslavement and life lived in inhuman conditions is evident in dalit literature. Inequality and discrimination in the name of caste have emerged in our society due to the anarchy of the mainstream. When the dalit poet stands against this anarchy, his anguish is best expressed in dalit poetry.

Andheri ne surya dekha tab
Shabd garaj uthe
Narak ke kaid khane mein
Kabtak yahan rahenge hum ?
Saans ghutte huye.
- Nam Dev Dhasal ‘Andhere Se Surya’ Dekha Tab’ Golpeetha Poetic Collection Tr, Ketan Pinplapure

            In the Hindi criticism, there is a category of people who have doubts regarding dalit literature. People of this category are seen playing the role of preachers who, overlooking all logics, go on repeating those things which have already been debated. Dr. P.N. Singh comments, “We feel that dalit writers and scholars have never tried to judge Gandhiji and Premchand in respect of their respective time. They have not noticed that even Premchand, Nagarjun, Nirala, Amritlal Nagar, Viveki Rai, Giriraj Kishore and so on have worked sincerely in this direction. As far as I know, till date no body has studied so touchingly the life and personality of a dalit as was done by Viveki Rai’s  Babloo (1983) and Premchand’s Rangbhoomi (1925) but the creators of dalit literature today have split into Baba Sahib’s political rhetoric’’.1 Dr. P.N. Singh treats dalits as preachers and ignores the view point of the dalit writers. Also he does not take into consideration the facts related to Pune — (25 Sept., 1935), held during the time of Gandhi — Ambedkar — Premchand. What P.N. Singh calls the Baba Saheb Political Rheotric actually had sprouted the dalit consciousness. Dr. P.N. Singh confines himself to his own convictions, beliefs and considerations. He can’t imagine of literary considerations, lying out of his imaginative flight. Surdas, the hero of ‘Rangbhoomi’ is the replica of the Gandhian ideology and not of the Ambedkar — consciousness. If we want to reach to a conclusion, it is necessary to understand the difference between these two streams of ideologies. The dalit conciousness is rooted in Dr. Ambedkar’s ideology which is different from the Gandhian ideology. Dr. P.N. Singh suffers from this misconception.

            Hindi dalit literature has emerged recently and Dr. P.N. Singh discovers narrative boredom in it. How Hindi dalit literature is overpowered by the biases, ingrained in Brahmanic mental wake-up, P.N. Singh is not able to notice. Is it even possible to evaluate properly any literature whether dalit or nondalit with this mental attitude ?

            The same is the approach of Ram Prakash Kushwaha who compares Hindi dalit literature with the American and South-African writings without acknowledging the oppressing agents of apartheid and the Varna system. If  Ramprakash Kushwaha considers the dalit literature unnatural then it becomes essential to study deeply its background and ‘Sanskaras’ because there are crores of people in India who though in practice follow the caste system rigidly yet deny its existence vehemently. Dr. P.N. Singh also considers the dalit identity as irrelevant.

            In such circumstances, the conclusions drawn by the so called critics of ‘mainstream’ will be full of prejudices as no objective criticism can ever be expected from them. Here Nirmala Jain’s statement deserves attention when she comments — “The doubt on one another’s intentions gives birth to literary casteism. The dalit literature was supposed to emerge out of the conflict between the dalits and the upper class. The intensity of this conflict determines the value of this literature. This test of evaluating the dalit writings differentiates it from the traditional literary structure”.

            Some people take up the issue of the authencity of feelings in literature with a lot of enthusiasm but soon they start clashing their rust stamped swords in its favour and disfavour. They produce literary evidence to turn the things in their favour yet the issue remains unresolved as it had been earlier. I think that a person’s sensitiveness is essential for providing a wide canvas to a writing, a writer’s concerns save him from going astray from the main issue and miss the right direction. Nirmal Verma’s poetic prose in Hindi literature spell bounds the reader.             Likewise, Amritlal Begarh’s memoirs of journey create a beautiful image of Narmada river by using wonderful comparisons and symbols. He is matchless in the art of using poetic proverbs in prose. But these two literary artists’ writings are badly wanting in concerns of folk life. In Begarh’s writing, there is description of river but life near the river and its struggles seem nothing. Does it mean that all this should be considered unimportant in literature? These writers of  ‘mainstream’ keep themselves away from the experiences of life, family conditions, ‘sanskaras’, social customs and so on. Why does the environment in which a writer lives become irrelevant to him? Why not its reflection in literature is essential? It is deception to avoid social aspect of literature with the magical display of artifact and language. Ultimately this social aspect does not become the part of aesthetics.

            Literature is written not only for ‘Anand’ concerns, ‘Kama’ and ‘Moksha’. There human anxieties, concerns, sensitiveness should be placed at the top only then literature can be a true mirror of the society. If literature fails to reflect social trends or griefs and happinesses and conflicts of the society, it remains only a part of the intellectual world. Also it will be far away from the ground realities of human life, giving no importance to human sensitiveness. In the words of Manager Pandey,“…….. The writings of Premchand and Nirala on dalit life can be considered but despite all sympathy, humane touch and the writer’s art to assume other’s role, the dalit literature written by the non-dalits, though quite rich in its artistic quality, yet may lack the authentic experiences,which are often found in literature produced by a dalit since these experiences are based on his or his communities’ own experiences.”

            When literature remains confined only to intellectualism and is indifferent to society, it ignores all activities and actions-reactions in the society. That is why despite all literary excellence, artistic and emotional aesthetic appeal of literature, ‘Ritikal’, ‘Chhayavada’ and ‘Bhaktikal’ seem irrelevant as the writers during the period seem unmoved by the social and political occurrences. They seem unconcerned to all, howsoever, big are the events of life. Literature does not aim to lull the society rather it brings conciousness or awareness in the society. But the literature of ‘mainstream’ does not truly represent the contemporary society.

            The same trend, we find, in the writings of eminent writers of ‘Bhakti’ cult. The critics have widely interpreted the concept of public welfare. But where is Tulsi’s ‘lok’? Nowhere we find Tulsi’s conception of welfare toward women. What is his view point toward the ‘Varna System’? Does it lie outside the premises of public welfare? Is it not necessary to know whom this indifference favours which results into passivity?

            In modern times also most of the Hindi poets, instead of challenging the realities of time, were busy in singing songs of the past glory or painting the natural scenes. Look at the following lines of Lalu Jagannath Das Ratnakar (1900).

Des Des mein machti manju man madak-hori !
Udat kabir gulal chota soun bhari-bhari jhori !!
× × × × × × × × × × × × × × × × × × × × ×××
Koti bhanugati garv kharv karidhai ganga.
Pita geh taji vyom neethi madhi aai ganga.

Likewise are the lines of Mahavir Prasad Diwedi from his poem — Draupadi Vachan

Vani Vali Sei.
Dwij bhojan se bacha hua, shuchi
Shutras ann, pushtikari
Khakar jisne es sharee ko
Phele kiya manohari
Bhup, vahi tu aaj udar nij
Tanphal khakar bharta hai
Yash ke sath deh bhi apni
Ha, ha, ha, krush karta hai.

Nirala occupies a special place in Hindi poetry. A poet of class-struggle, a progressive humanitarian etc. are the adjectives attributed to him. People have tried to establish him as a messenger of dalit conciousness by citing examples from his poetic collections like ‘Jaldi Jaldi Kadam Badhao’, ‘Veh Todti Pathar’, ‘Chaturi Chamar’, ‘Kulli Bhat’, ‘Kukurmutta’ and so on. But Nirala is ‘Vedanti’, influenced by the ‘Adavat Darshan’ of Shiva. He is a devotee of Tulsidas and has faith in Ram Krishan Param Hans and Vivekanand. He has produced ‘Ram ki Shakti Pooja’ — a work devoted to orthodox ideology. When in 1922 in Punjab, Santram established ‘Jat-Paant Todak Mandal’, Nirala raised a voice of protest against it just because he was a fanatic supporter of the varna-system as is evident in his collection of essays ‘Chabuk’.

            The man difference between the mainstream poets and dalit poets is at the level of realism and sensitiveness of their writings. See an example :

Auratein bandhe huye uroj
Potli ke ander hai bhukh
Aasmani chattani bhoj
Dho rahi hai pathar ki peeth
Lal mittee lakdhi lalchhor
Dant bhar maile ik tek deeth
Katore ke pende mein bhat
Gode mein lekar baitha baap
Farsh per rakhekar apna putra
Kha raha hai usko chupchap.
- Raghuveer Sahai

            This poem portrays poverty which does not appeal. It is only a picture, drawn from a distance and fails to move the readers. No doubt, streaks of sympathy are there, devoid of conciousness. Now look at an example of dalit poetry :

Kachche ghar mein
Jalte diye ke roshni per
Kabja kerke baith gaye tum
……………………………
……………………………
Meri pindiliyon
Aur bhujaayon ke maansa se bani bati
Haddiyon se nichodkar
Nikaalaa gayaa tel
Kintu itna yaad rekho.
Jis roj inkar ker diya
Deeya banne se mere jism ne
Andhere mein kho jaaoge.
Hamesha — hamesha ke liye.

            Above lines portray the pathetic and oppressed states of the dalit life. Aggressiveness of the dalit conciousness which it clearly reflects is different from dalit poetry.

            Dalit society is associated with production. We find that nature, labour and production are closely related to one another and dalit is closely associated with it. Dalit society has been specialized in some productive fields like agriculture, mills, textile mills, leather and works of sanitation whereas non dalits have always not only been away from all these fields but they have ignored their importance. On account of this fact, whenever the non-dalit literature depicts the scenes related to agricultue, mills, labourers farmers or animal rearing, there are facts based on imagination which are no more related to the realities of life.

            Indian history has a long established tradition of reformation. Even Arya Samaj was a reformist movement which aimed at making no change in long established traditions, beliefs, convictions and ideals but wished to maintain status quo in social relations with certain changes. For instance, Gandhiji wanted to abolish untouchability without abolishing the Varna-system. Arya Samaj was a bit more lenient in relation to the issue of untouchability. But, on the other hand, it worked for highlighting the importance of Vedas in social structure, to maintain the Varna system etc. The same line of thought is found among the saints. So a craving for social change that is found after Ambedkar was not then present. ‘Hari ko bhaje so Hari ka hoe” — such maxim like statements were there but their impact on social life is not visible. On the contrary, the feeling of untouchability towards dalits that is in religious books prevails in the society. Owing to it, in the social life dalits have always faced insults, discardings, abuses, exploitation. Such a society imposed such strict rules that a dalit could not possess property nor he could ever ameliorate his status and change his class. Today also, such incidents occur. In Haryana’s Salvan case (1 March, 2007, and Gohana case (31 August, 2005), the dalits’ process of development was obstructed and their assets were turned to ashes, their homes were set to fire, they were looted in open day light in the presence of the police forces. There the administration seemed helpless and democracy meaningless. Dalits are being maltreated by the people of mainstream in different corners of the world. It shows that mainstream invalidates all values, ideals, their cultural heritage and their other natural convictions in order to maintain their supremacy over the dalit class. All this eventually results in hindering the process of social harmony.

            Babu Rav Bagool writes, “Literature born during war was fully bound by the ideological and literary ideals, established by the Varna system. All convictions, ideals, principles and elements of oppressions, established by the Sanskrit literature, have been accepted as such by the sant literature. It resulted into strengthening the Varna system and the oppressing agencies. Caste system and mind-set that emerged out of it was accepted even by the Islam. The devotional strategies of sants failed to rouse the feeling of parity in the society. Their preachings failed to establish themselves as ideals in the Indian society. The Bhakti cult spread everywhere but devotees were all caught in the net of the caste system. The theory of Karma, rebirth, fatalism pervaded deeply everywhere, promoting the concept that ‘whatever happens is proposed by God’. Hindu feudal ideology and social system in Indian society maintained the status quo’.

            After Islam, the industrial revolution which broke out during the British Raj introduced some changes in the field of production in India. It brought the European and American social and religious convictions which affected the Indian literature also. Thus, the modern literature came into existence. In the beginning along with the spiritual and metaphysical subjects, Hindi literature was produced on social subjects also.

            Those who were earlier supreme in Dharm-Dand-Satta, overpowered the Arth-Satta, Dharma-Satta and Dand Satta. These people of upper strata appeared with the same image as writers and poets as they had in social movement with their family questions. Even in seminars and discussions, their family issues were talked about. Hindu religion was discussed as it had been for hundreds of years. If ever there had been any possibility of improvement, it would have led to mental progress. But the mainstream literature was dominated by the artists and aesthetic writers who were incapable of expressing the grief, poverty, slavery, disparity, discrimination, and social enmities etc. This is the reality of mainstream that has no sympathy for the dalits and women nor they expressed any sensitiveness for their lives. To them, dalit and woman have always been impure like footwear or something uncivilized.

            Babu Rav Bagool said, “There had been innumeral incarnations, many saints came upon the earth but nobody paid any attention to the sorrows of ‘Sudras’ and ‘Atisudras’. When deities, saints and religion — all consider poor, weak people inferior then what ideals can there be in ancient Hindu ideology ? Hindu Varna system was devoid of sympathy, love and brotherhood, on account of which there was no place for ‘Sudras’ and ‘atisudras’ in society and contemporary literature. Nobody ever thought of their amelioration. No body ever contacted them and adopted them”.

            What we call today mainstream is actually the stream of Hindu Varna system, feudalistic and Brahminic, providing no place to dalits and women. This is a bitter truth which exists in our literature and society. Sanskrit literature abounds in doctrines of ruling dynasty, divinity of kings and literature that sings songs of the glory of the kings. This had been the central idea of the mainstream. Often people talk vehemently about adopting dalits, tribals and minorities. But its ultimate motive is to establish the dominance of the upper class. Thus, this is the reality of the mainstream.

 

 

Works Cited

Singh PN. Hindi Dalit Sahitya : Kuchh Shankaya, Kuchh Sambhavanayam. Lucknow Srijjan Samvad. [Ed. Brijesh],.Vol. 6, Sept. 2006.
Jain, Nirmala. Dalit Prasang: Vimarsh aur Sahitya. New Delhi, Kathadesh, [Ed. Harinarayan]. Oct. 2005
Pandey,  Manager. Dalit Chetna Sahitya. Navlekhan Prakashan,
Bagool, Babu Raw. Dalit Sahitya: Aajche Kranti Vigyan. Disha Prakashan, Vihitagav, Nasik Road. 1981.