Thread by @shrikanth_krish

Just got hold of this remarkable book by the American anthropologist Milton Singer.

Title : "When a Great Tradition modernizes" - An Anthropological approach to Indian civilization

The book is in the MN Srinivas mould, and examines the interaction between tradition and modernity in India soon after independence in the 50s/60s.

The focus is primarily on the changing character of brahminical HInduism in Madras city - his case study for the book

One interesting tidbit I came across is this conversation he has with the great Sankaracharya of Kanchi.

We know him better as Maha Periyava ofcourse. So this is what he told Singer in the 60s -

"Svami Sankaracharya, the most authoritative spokesman for Madras Smarthas, thinks that what is distinctive and essential in the nature of Hinduism is the caste system considered as a set of hereditary family disciplines. (Contd..)

"If they decline, he thinks Hinduism will not be very different from other religions, many of which have similar systems of ethics, theology, and philosophy, but lack the hereditary sociological foundation for them" (Contd..)

"The Brahman community, he believes, has become lax, for one reason and another, in the observance of the disciplines of diet, marriage, social intercourse, ritual observance, and sacred learning"

"He is inclined to appeal to the devout Non Brahmans to preserve the essentials of Hinduism in these difficult times, since the Shastras make less severe demands on them, and they are able to conform"

Amidst the pessimistic prospects for the traditional way of life, one of the Brahman followers of Sankaracharya tells Singer optimistically -

"Well, many of the temples and mathas are only 700 or 800 years old. They have been destroyed before and revived." (Contd...)

"New values must be admitted. Life will grow, if old values are not destroyed. Life is one huge, infinite ocean in movement"

The Sankaracharya also talks to Singer about why he is sceptical of "universal public education -

""The Swami definitely does not approve of universal public education. Each group, he contends, should be taught what it needs to know to perform its functions, and given some popular religious instruction but no more"

But what about special talent? Is it fair to chain them with caste duties?

"Talent could be recognized and given special opportunities. To do so was compatible with the performance of caste duties. The weaver poet Kabir, he said, did not give up weaving when he became a saint"

"A system that provides the same education for all creates many problems"

The Swami also says -

"The spiritual and the social problem are the same. And there is no conflict between them"

Here's what Periyava tells Singer on the problem of poverty -

"The problem of poverty cannot be solved by private or government methods."

"In the past, he continued, the hereditary caste system had prescribed a simple life for laborers and Brahmans, and had allowed luxuries to the other two classes only as incentives to the development of the arts."

"During the past 500 years, the domination of India's politics and commerce by foreigners had corrupted all classes and made them want luxuries."

"If the hereditary caste system were restored, he thought, the poverty problem would be solved. The Brahmans, should set an example by leading simple and austere lives."

While I don't agree necessarily with Periyava's remarks, it is worth reading them as it gives a window into how the "traditionalists" thought some 50 years ago - in the twilight of that traditionalism - which is all but vanished today.