Anti-Brahminism or Anti-Manuvaad is an ideology that protests against prejudice and discrimination directed towards Dalits and women by the brahmanical system. It holds Manu Smriti, the book of legal codes which justifies ritual pollution and patriarchy, as the ideological text of Brahminism.
Contents
History
Early criticism against Brahmanism flourished within Sramana movement. Particularly in Nāstika schools of Indian philosophy like Buddhism, Jainism, and others such as Ājīvika, Cārvāka and Ajñana.
Ajñana were the sceptical school of ancient Indian philosophy. A major rival of early Buddhism, Jainism and Vedic Hinduism.
Herein a certain recluse or brahmin does not understand, as it really is, that this is good or this is evil. And it occurs to him: I do not understand what is good or evil as it really is. Not understanding what is good or evil, as it really is, if I were to assert that this is good and this is evil, that will be due to my likes, desires, aversions, or resentments. If it were due to my likes, desires, aversions or resentments, it would be wrong. And if I were wrong, it would cause me worry (vighato) and worry would be a moral danger to me (antarayo). Thus, through fear of being wrong (musavadabhaya) and the abhorrence of being wrong, he does not assert anything to be good or evil and on questions being put to him on this or that matter he resorts to verbal jugglery and eel-wriggling, saying: I do not say so, I do not say thus, I do not say otherwise, I do not say no, I deny the denials. (literally, I do not say "no, no")
The fourth school of Ajñana scepticism is associated with Sanjaya Belatthiputta. Sanjaya is described as a contemporary of Buddha, as a well-known and celebrated teacher, and as a leader of a sect who was held in high esteem by the common folk. He is said to have taught Sariputta and Moggallāna, before their conversion to Buddhism.
Herein a certain recluse or brahmin is dull, stupid. And by reason of his dullness and stupidity, when questioned on this or that matter, he resorts to verbal jugglery or eel-wriggling: "If you ask me whether there is a next world, then if it were to occur to me (iti ce me assa) that there is a next world, I would pronounce that there is a next world. Yet, I do not say so, I do not say thus, I do not say otherwise, I do not say no, I deny the denials. Similarly with regard to the propositions, "there is no next world", "there is and is not a next world", "there neither is nor is not a next world", "there are beings who survive (death)", "there are no beings who survive", "there are and are no beings who survive", "there neither are nor are there no beings who survive", "there is a result and a consequence of good and evil actions", "there is no result or consequence of good or evil actions", "the Perfect One (Tathagato) exists after death", "the Perfect One does not exist after death", "the Perfect One both exists and does not exist after death", "the Perfect One neither exists nor does not exist after death""
Cārvākas were the atheistic and materialism school of ancient Indian philosophy. They were critical of Brahmanism, as well of Buddhism and Jainism.
There is no heaven, no final liberation, nor any soul in another world, Nor do the actions of the four castes, orders, etc., produce any real effect.
Buddhism was critical of Brahmanism. As well of Jainism, Carvaka and Ājīvika.
One is not a brahmin by birth, nor by birth a non-brahmin. By action is one a brahmin, by action is one a non-brahmin.
Medieval period
Criticism against Brahmanism continued up to late medieval period, particularly by some Shaivism and Vaishnavism sects of Hinduism notably with rise of Bhakti movement and Lingayatism. As well as Sikhism. The Bhakti movement in particular encouraged followers to attain spiritual union with God not through sacrifices, rituals, pilgrimages, or prayers, but through the “force of pure love and fervent yearning for God.” The merchant class and agricultural class largely funded the growth of Nāstika sects and religions during ancient and medieval period, who saw them as alternative to expensive Brahmanical ritualism and superstitions.
20th century
In the early 20th century, criticism against Brahminism came within various sections of Brahmin and other Hindu communities who were part of nationalist and rationalist movement. Vinayak Damodar Savarkar was an eminent Hindu nationalist leader of the Indian independence movement. He was also an atheist and a staunch rationalist who disapproved of orthodox Hindu beliefs of caste system and dismissed cow worship as superstitious. Being Hindu, for him, was a cultural and political identity.
Anti-Brahminism became organized in the formation of the Justice Party in late 1916 in Tamil Nadu. This party, composed of upper-class non-Brahmins who were typically feudal castes, land-owning agricultural castes and merchant castes and was committed to enhancing the opportunities for non-Brahmins. With the dawn of the 20th century, and the rapid penetration of western education and western ideas, there was a rise in consciousness amongst the lower castes who felt that rights which were legitimately theirs were being denied to them. This led the non-Brahmins to agitate and form the Justice Party in 1916, by Priyar E.V.Ramaswami. The Justice Party banked on vehement anti-Hindu and anti-Brahmin propaganda to ease Brahmins out of their privileged positions. Gradually, the non-Brahmin replaced the Brahmin in every sphere and destroyed the monopoly over education and the administrative services which the Brahmin had previously held. However, with the destruction of Brahmin monopoly in Tamil Nadu over the services and introduction of adequate representation for other communities, anti-Brahmin feelings did not subside. On the contrary, they were fully exploited by politicians, who often indulged in anti-Brahmin rhetoric primarily in order to get non-Brahmin votes. With the passage of time, they reached such a pitch that even individuals who had previously been a part of the movement began to cry foul. Dalit leader and founder of political party Puthiya Tamizhagam, Dr. Krishnasamy admits that the Anti-Brahmin Movement had not succeeded up to the expectations and that there continues to be as much discrimination of Dalits as had been before.
Although anti-Brahmin sentiments have long history in South Asia, much of the violence and discrimination faced by dalits in Indian society is largely inflicted upon them by middle castes, notably by fedual castes and land-owning agricultural castes in rural India where ritual pollution is absorbed due to stereotypes associated with certain types of manual labor, which was largely done by dalits.