Cremation, Caste, and Cosmogony in Karmic Traditions.

discourse through the giving and receiving of
prestations, and this has to be seen from the perspective
of “ritual centrality”, or who is at the conceptual centre
of village ritual organisation (ibid:248). “Hierarchy, as
an aspect of intercaste relations, is not the foregrounded
aspect of the social situation in the context of the giving
of dan” (ibid:202).
The giving of dan in ritual contexts is always said to
promote well-being and auspiciousness through the
transference of “evilness”, “inauspiciousness”, and
“afflictions” from the donor to the receiver. The dangers
of these transactions have significance for an
understanding of inter-caste relations. The acceptance of
dan is dangerous for all castes, and hence, hierarchies
are not straightforward in the classical way Dumont has
described (Raheja 1988, 1990). The poison and
purification of the gift is a paradox from a religious and
eschatological point of view. “Gods receive offerings
from men, but return them, imbued with their own
substance and powers, and the transactions are thus
unequal, with the deity reciprocating in a higher
medium” (Raheja 1988:68). There is also another
problem with the giving of dan, which may have a
negative feedback on the donor. The recipient must be
worthy of the gift. If the Brahman spends the money he
received from the donor on prostitutes, gambling or
alcohol, the sins committed are as much the donor’s as
the receiver’s (Parry 1980:103).
Real sadhus look upon the receiving of money for their
religious duties as inauspicious, and they will not accept
them directly, but only indirectly receive them in their
vessel, altar, etc. Thus, the Indian gift and its ideology
differ from the Maussian ideas of the gift, and in Manu
there is written explicitly a rule which prohibits the
return of these gifts. “The gift threatens to cement the
two together in a dangerous interdependence; but every
attempt is made to sever their bond by insisting on the
complete alienation of the thing. Under no
circumstances, and on pain of terrible supernatural
penalties, is the gift resumed. Its evil “spirit” must not
come back”, Parry argues, “While Mauss originally
60
introduced this notion of “spirit” to explain the
inalienability of the object and the necessity of making a
return, what it in fact explains in this context is why the
gift must be alienated, should never return, and should
endlessly be handed on” (Parry 1986:461). The problem
with Mauss’ analysis seems therefore to be that there are
differences between religions in small-scale tribal
societies and world religions. It is possible with an
ideology of a “pure gift” in this life, in an ethicised
salvation religion where the ideal goals are in the next
world. Consequently, it is important to distinguish
between the expectation of an immediate return here and
now, and the unreciprocated gifts, which aim to be the
liberation from this bondage and world, if they are given
without hope and only of free will (ibid:466-468).
Finally, “uncleanness or dirt is that which must not be
included if a pattern is to be maintained” (Douglas
1994:41). Defilement is never an isolated event because
ideas of pollution make sense only by reference to a total
structure (ibid:42). The concerns of purity, pollution, and
the transfer of sins are inevitably connected to the law of
karma, theories of sins, and social organisation in terms
of castes. Holy men are being acknowledged as holy
because of their capability of transforming impurity into
purity. The paradox is that the process creating their
supremacy is also the threat to their status. If sadhus or
priests are unable to purify themselves, then they lose
their status, and as such it is the process of purification
that guarantees their status.
With this debate on transactions and digestions of sins I
will return to the Mahabrahmans and the previous
discussion of kings, katto-rituals, and constructions of
castes. I have shown that being pure is not necessarily a
matter of distancing oneself from impurity, but more
importantly in religious terms, to transform impurity into
purity. These considerations and processes are
incorporated into the caste system as an organisation
structuring real practices, and hence, it is possible to
combine all these considerations into an understanding
of principles of castes in practice.