Casteism in Assamese society & Sankardev

Assam is not a nation-state. The demography of Assam never subscribes to the concept of a nation-state and only ethnic nationalism matters. The Ahom or Koch Kingdom was based on its unique ethnicity. The Assam state was facing challenges even before its birth. The Bengalis being the powerful neighbours, both communities claimed inheritance to the civilised legacy of India from the language to cultural aspects.

This war of nerves would continue. The war was the result of the ego of the two communities and even Sankardev and Chaitanyadev were not exempted from it by their disciples.

The Bhakti movement was frequently obstructed socially and politically. This kind of two-pronged attack on the Bhakti cult was a matter of serious concern. It is historically true that the orthodox group orchestrated the resistance faced by the Bhakti movement. Some Brahmins, including Damodardev, joined the Sankari fold but later broke away to pursue independent institutions on the ‘basic structure’ of Sankardev.

Social strategy

The ‘basic structure’ was not the religious ideals of Sankardev but the social strategy to institutionalise his ideals. This was the base of Damodardev under the aegis of Sankardev that later changed path. The rivalry reached such an extent that after the demise of Sankardev, Damodardev actively initiated people to his faith or fold. The support of Saint Mathura Das and Narayan Das to Madhavdev in this critical juncture was important, otherwise, the Vaishnavite project of the classless society would have stagnated even for a while.

Seeing the extreme conservatism of society, Sankardev also seemed to compromise partially on casteism because he entrusted Brahmin Damodardev to initiate Brahmin disciples. It was against the tenets of neo-Vaishnavism.

Any ruling establishment would want its subjects to remain divided for the convenience of ruling. This may be one of the reasons that the casteist sect of Damodardev got more liberal endowment from the monarchy than others. So, Damodardev is credited for bringing physical extravaganza to the Bhakti cult by constructing many spectacular Satras. The infrastructure of Damodordev’s Satras was more perfectly arranged than those of Madhavdev.

Some elements of Assamese Vaishnavism we are yet to propound to build democratic liberalism. Coordination is not a contract work to complete in a specific time. It’s like a natural phenomenon that will continue for infinity. We have to find a niche to observe during the process.

The casteism in monarchy was more political than social. Monarchy was a strategy or diplomacy to survive and casteism was its tool. The tribal society of Assam was originally casteless. So, the Satra of casteless Kala Sanghati was rapidly successful in initiating indigenous Assamese tribes without any royal patronage.

Are the Brahmins responsible for the division of society? Not exactly.

At the beginning of Hinduism, the society had no caste system. The Brahmins had propagated Hinduism with responsibility. The tribal Varmans were the first Aryanised royal dynasty of Assam.

Who has converted them to Hinduism? The Brahmins. Religion is the kingdom for religion practitioners in simple language. The said practitioner (Brahmin) tried to create a class to serve them. Therefore, the generosity of the Brahmins significantly deteriorated gradually.

After the introduction of commodity products, the Brahmins could not sustain their previous dignity. The commodity product is the noteworthy reason for the success of Sankardev’s Eksarana (Monotheism). The Bhakti movement was conducive to the general traders instead of the feudalistic economy.

Now, should Sankari organizations engage in confrontation with the Brahmins? No, it would be counterproductive again.

Sankardev took a diplomatic stand against the opponents. Mahapurush Sankardev knew well that everyone’s equal representation could enlighten a new path. The preacher of the Bhakti cult spread his teachings to the religious vacuum places. The union between the Aryanised king and the Bhakti preacher produced a prototype of Assamese society.

Ahom and Aryanisation

Except for the few sects like Brahmin or Kalita, the entire Assamese communities were not originally Hindu as stated earlier. They were later Aryanised. This formula was genuinely applicable to the Ahom community. The founder monarch of the Ahom dynasty, Sukapha, came to Assam (1228) with a few thousand people. No woman accompanied them except a few queens and noble ladies. They all married local women.

What kind of assimilation was this?

The assimilation or merging of Ahom in Assamese culture was different from that of others.

Is Ahom a community or culture?

The ethnic assimilation process of the Ahom was done mostly through marital relations. The community of Yunnan province in no way existed in Assam. The few thousand created lakhs. The Ahom people only retained their surnames.

Ahom is a culture, not exactly a community.

The Ahom people, out of diplomacy, had the natural option to accept the Assamese language and culture. So, the set-up of Assamese society was genuinely built in the Ahom kingdom. Sankardev was tortured and deported from the Ahom kingdom for socio-political reasons. However, the growth of Sankari culture was very rapid in the Ahom kingdom even after the demise of Sankardev. This was for the essence of the Assamese scent in the Ahom empire.

The worship of the Shaktas centred around Shaivism. In Assam, most of the people worshipped Lord Vishnu. The influence of Lord Vishnu was paramount. Even the name of Lord Rama was prevalent. So, the monism of Sankardev crafted well in the Bhakti cult.

Sankardev seemed to be akin to the qualified monism of Ramanuja. He was following neither the qualified monism nor the absolute monism of Shankaracharya. Sankardev advocated humanism and saw the difference between the soul and universe with God.