M. N. Srinivas – The Concept of Brahminization and Sankritization

M.N. Srinivas – The Concept of Brahminization and Sankritization

The term “Sanskritization” was introduced into Indian Sociology by M.N. Srinivas. The term refers to a process whereby people of lower castes collectively try to adopt upper caste practices and beliefs, as a preliminary step to acquire higher status. Thus it indicates a process of cultural mobility that is taking place in the traditional social system of India.

M. N. Srinivas in his study of the Coorg in Karnataka found that lower castes, in order to raise their position in the caste hierarchy, adopted some customs and practices of the Brahmins, and gave up some of their own which were considered to be “impure” by the higher castes. For example, they gave up meat-eating, drinking liquor and animal sacrifice to their deities. They imitated Brahmins in matters of dress, food and rituals. By doing this, within a generation or so they could claim higher positions in the hierarchy of castes.

In the beginning, Srinivas used the term “Brahminization” to denote this process but realized that Brahminization was too narrow a concept to explain the whole process of change. So, he replaced it by “Sanskritization”. He has been broadening his definition of the term ‘Sanskritization’ as “the process of mobility of lower castes by adopting vegetarianism and teetotalism to move in the caste hierarchy in a generation or two”. Later on, he redefines it as “a process by which a low caste or a tribe or other group changes its customs, rituals, ideology, and way of life in the direction of a high and frequently, twice-born caste”. Thus, Sanskritization connotes a wider meaning being neither confined to the Brahmins as a reference group nor to the imitation of mere ritual and religious practices.

The Concept of Brahminization and Sanskritization

Sanskritization is a much broader concept than Brahminization. M.N. Srinivas preferred it to Brahminization for some reasons:

1. Sanskritization is a broader term and it can subsume in itself the narrower process of Brahminization. For instance, today, though by and large, Brahmins are vegetarians and teetotalers, some of them such as Kashmiris, Bengalis and Saraswath Brahmins eat non-vegetarian food. Had the term ‘Brahminization’ been used, it would have become necessary to specify which particular Brah­min group was meant.

2. Further, the reference groups of Sanskritization are not always Brahmins. The process of imitation need not necessarily take place in the model of Brahmins. Srinivas himself has given the example of the low castes of Mysore who adopted the way of life of Lingayats, who are not Brahmins but who claim equality with Brahmins.

The lower castes imitated not only Brahmins but also Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, Jats, Shudras, etc. in different parts of the country. Hence the term Brahminization does not completely explain this process.