SUNVAIAS

PIPER 2 NOTES
To the Point, Structured, Comprehensive & Concise Notes
Contact- 8279688595 I www.sunyaias.com
 INDEX

CHAPTER 1 - PERSPECTIVE ON THE STUDY OF INDIAN SOCIETY----1

CHAPTER 2 - MODERNISATION OF INDIAN TRADITION 29
CHAPTER 3 - RURAL AND AGRARIAN SCOIAL STRUCTURE 71
CHAPTER 4 - CASTE SYSTEM 101
I
CHAPTER 5 - TRIBAL COMMUNITES IN INDIA -151 •
CHAPTER 6 - SOCIAL CLASSES IN INDIA 195
CHAPTER 7 - SYSTEM OF KINSHIP IN INDIA 213
CHAPTER 8 - RELIGION AND SOCIETY 260
CHAPTER 9 - VISION OF SOCIAL CHANGE IN INDIA 281
CHAPTER 10 - RURAL AND AGRARIAN TRANSFORMATION IN INDIA 302
CHAPTER 11 - INDUSTRIALISATION AND URBANISATION IN INDIA 326 •
CHAPTER 12 - POLITICS AND SOCIETY 351
CHAPTER 13 - SOCIAL MOVEMENTS IN MODERN INDIA 376
CHAPTER 14 - POPULATION DYNAMICS 426
CHAPTER 15 - CHALLENGES OF SOCIAL TRANSFORMATION 464
 CHAPTER l - PERSPECTIVE ON THE STUDY OF INDIAN SOCIETY

l.1 Sociology Background in India

No intellectual discipline develops overnight. This statement is largely applicable to the evolution of
Indian sociology. The evolution of sociology in India can be traced back to the colonial period, when
British administrators and scholars studied Indian society to better understand and govern the population.
After independence, sociology in India developed as an academic discipline, focusing on social change
and development in the country. In the l960s and 1970s, Marxist and neo-Marxist perspectives dominated
the field, while in more recent decades, there has been a shift towards interdisciplinary and global
perspectives in sociology. Indian sociology also places emphasis on the study of caste, religion, and
identity in relation to social stratification and inequality.

1.1.1 Evolution of Sociology in India

1. Sociology in British Era: If we look backwards we will notice that Indian sociology from the
1940s to l 960s �as extremely committed to the British idea of empiricism. Village studies, caste
studies were conducted by a large number of European and Indian sociologists to study society in
India.
• One of the primary motivations was to better understand and govern the Indian population, as
Britain had colonized India and sought to maintain control over the territory.
• Another reason was to advance their own knowledge and understanding of different cultures
and societies, especially the·"old world" and Asian societies.·
• Additionally, the British were interested in the study of India as a means of comparing and
contrasting British and Indian societies and cultures- some also sought to prove white
superiority.
2. Need of sociology for India: Way back in 1960s, Louis Dumont indicated that it is imperative to
have a sociology for India because western theoretical models cannot be blindly applied to the
study of Indian society for two distinctive reasons:
• Different values: Indian values are different from Western values i.e. mostly followed by
Indians to regulate their everyday social life.
• Ethno-sociology: Ethno-sociology should be evolved as a methodology, to study India and for
that a sociologist must use people's language to understand their symbols, cultural meanings
associated with their activities to gain an understanding of Indian society without any value
bias. He himself used the dichotomy between purity and pollution to understand Indian society.
3. Stages of Development of Sociology in India - This can be traced in 3 stages:
• Initiation Stage (1857-1960):
o Colonial Sociology: Sociology of India- initiation of sociology in India. Eg. Sir Henry
Maine, Boden Powell, Charles Metcalf
o lndology: Sociology of Louis Dumont, GS Ghurye, Irawati Karve etc.
• Crystallization (1960-1980): Development of Sociology for India
o Structural Functionalism: MN Sriniwas
o Marxism: AR Desai, DP Mukherji
• Maturity (1980 onwards): Cross fertilization of ideas and reciprocal advancement of
knowledge. Post 1980 phase of Indian sociology is considered as golden period or maturity
stage for two reasons
o Value Neutral: Both Western and Indian sociologists came together to explore India from
a value neutral perspective.

PAPER 2 - Sociology Optional i Subscribe from: :i,v'A-\\.'>J1n_yii1_a,;sorn Telegram Channel: sunyanotes50 Page I
 o Field Study: Field study tradition cvolvc<l as a reaction to Indological study in India during
its late formative stage i.e. from l 920s to l 940s.
Indian society has many peculiar features like caste, kinship and villages which are unparalleled
elsewhere. Its unique social strncture has attracted many interests from India and outside and as a
result, it has been studied from different perspectives. Some of the major perspectives include
Indological perspective, Marxist perspective and Structural Functionalist perspective.

1.2 lndological Prespective on Study of Indian Society

1. Meaning: Indology is known as the science oflndian Society. The Indological perspective claims
to understand Indian society through the concepts, theories and frameworks that are closely
associated with Indian Civilization. Indology literal,ly means systematic study of Indian society
and culture.
2. Origin: The Indological approach originated on the assumption that historically, Indian society
and culture are 'uniql!-e' and this uniqueness cannot be captured within the framework of European
sociology.
• Indology emerged, alongside Orientalism, in the context of Colonial rule in the 18th and 19th
centuries.
Indology offers sympathetic view and takes account of Indian society and culture. It is a
result of the labour of love for Indian wisdom.
o Orientalism on the other hand offers a rather unsympathetic and negative account oflndian
society and culture. It emerged to serve the need of British Empire and other colonial
powers of the west.
3. 'Contextual' Specificity: The Indological approach argues that this 'contextually specificity' of
Indian social realities could be grasped better through 'texts'. It therefore refers to the historical
and comparative method, based on Indian texts in the study of Indian society. Some basic
assumptions of the Indologists:
• India had a glorious past and to understand it one must go back to the sacred books that were
written during the ancient times. Both the philosophical and the cultural traditions of India are
rooted in these texts.
• These ancient books reveal the real ideas of the Indian culture and society. One must
understand these books to chart out the future development ofindia.
• Institutions should be set up to encourage the study of ancient Indian texts and teach Sanskrit
and Persian literature and poetry.
4. Sources: The Indologists use ancient history, epics, religious manuscripts and texts in the study
of Indian social institutions. The texts basically included the classical ancient literature of ancient
Indian society such as Vedas, Puranas, Manu Smriti, Ramayana, and Mahabharata. Indologists
analyse social phenomena by interpreting classical texts. Scholars looked to the Sanskritic texts to
explore the sources of Indian tradition and culture. Therefore, it is called as 'textual view' or 'book
view' of Indian society.
• Cohn (1990) notes that from the scattered account of foreign travelers from 3 rd century BC to
that of the historians in the courts of Indian rulers till about 15th century we find range of
writings based on both first hand observations of Indian society and secondary analysis of the
Sanskrit texts.
• It is only that the lndologists of the 18th century and onwards gave a more systematic account.
• The ideological construction of India can be found in the accounts of travelers like
Megastbenes1 of historians like Al-Biruni and later Abul Faz) AUami, the early Colonialists,

PAPER 2 - Sociology Optional I Subscribe from: 1v\'.w.s1,nyab;_; com I Telegram Channel: sunyanotcs50 • Page 2
 i.e. the Portuguese adventurers and administrators, the merchants and the missionaries who
continued to write about India till the advent of the British rule.
• William Jones, Henry Thomas Colebrooke, Nathaniel Halhed set up the Asiatic Society of
Bengal in 1784 and started a journal called Asiatics Research. The journal was devoted to
anthropological and Indological interests such as study of Sanskrit, comparative jurisprudence,
comparative religion etc.
• In addition to Sanskrit literature, lndologists also used archaeology and inscriptions to study
the history and culture of ancient India. These sources provided information about the political,
economic, and cultural practices of various Indian kingdoms and dynasties. For example,
Ashokan edicts, Pallava copper plates etc.
5. Classical and Modem lndology: In the contemporary world the studies Indic have gained a wider
scope and therefore need a further classification into:
• Classical Indology: Classical Indology was prevalent before 1920 and were mostly dominated
by British Intellectuals.
o Purely book view of approach in which Sanskrit text were translated. Some of them were
William Jones who established Asiatic society in Calcutta, Max Muller who wrote the
famous 'sacred book of the East' and translated Vedas and other sacred texts.
o The primary source for their study and understanding of Indian society is ancient religious,
historical and archaeological evidence.
o Western scholars have a very narrow and critical view about Indian society which was
continuously falsified by Indian scholars.
o India was considered as a land of villages which were considered as self-sufficient,
isolated, static and orthodox by Western view.
o Religion was considered central to understanding of other social institutions.
o Social relationships were guided.by traditionalism and the caste system. Caste system was
considered as closed and a symbol of feudal and backward character of Indian society.
Gradually; joint families, panchayats and the Jajmani system etc. were considered other
elements of Indian social life.
• Modern lndology: With the establishment of sociology as a discipline the task of
understanding society came within its purview. Classical Indology was modified by combining
it with various sociological perspectives leading to development of Modern lndology.
o It is sometimes also referred as 'Social lndology'.
o Modem Indology was used by academicians - in contrast to scholars and officials of
Classical Indology.
o G S Ghurye is considered 'father of Modern Indology',
o He synthesized Classical Indological approach with anthropological diffusionist approach.
o After independence, the use of Indology continued, but other perspectives remained
predominant. Modem Indological perspec6ve criticized orthodox picture ofindian society.
Villages were not seen as isolated or static or self-sufficient. Religion was considered the
central institution, but nowhere as hindrance to dynamism of fndian society. The present
changes on account of colonial rule were also studied. The relevance of joint family,
panchayats etc. was emphasized with an indological approach.
6. Use of Indology: The use of Jndological approach during the early fom1ative years of Indian
sociology and social anthropology is seen in the works of G.S.Ghurye, B.K.Sarkar, R. N.
Mukherjee, K. M. Kapadia, P.H. Prabhu and Irawati Karwe. Using the Indological approach
the founding fathers in Indian sociology have tremendously enriched the field oflndian Sociology.

PAPER 2 - Sociology Optional I Subscribe from: ·0.ww.stmyaias.cc,m Telegram Channel: sunyanotes50 Page 3
1.3 Govind Sadashiv Ghurye (1893-1984) and lndology
l. Father of Indian Sociology: GS Ghurey is a towering figure in intellectual and academic circles
for his unique contribution in the field of Indian sociology and has often been acclaimed as the
'father of Indian sociology', 'the doyen of Indian sociologists' or 'the symbol of sociological
creativeness'.
2. Context through Texts: G.S. Ghurye pioneered the Modem Indology which improved upon the
narrow view of Indian society taken by Classical lndology. He used Indological approach on the
assumption that historically, Indian society and culture are 'unique' and this uniqueness cannot be
captured within the framework of European sociology. The Indological approach argues that this
'contextually' of Indian social realities could be grasped better through 'texts'.
• Ghurye was initially influenced by the diffusioqist approach and later on, he switched to the
study of Indian Social reality from an Ontological and Anthropological perspectives.
• Ghurye's Indological Approach hovers around the study oflndian culture and social structure
drawing its sustenance from Sanskritic literature base.
• He was more influenced by the writings of Indologists of the Bhandarkan Institute of Bombay
rather than the British writings established by Sir William Jones or Max Muller.
3. Phased Study: According to Ghurye Sociology of India is not static, it emanates from ancient
India, travels through medieval India and reaches Modem India. Ghurye realized that if an
institution cannot be studied in those three distinct phases then we cannot claim that we have made
a study in totality.
• The phased study of an institution makes a study fragmented and haphazard.
• Ghurye viewed that an institution should be studied based on three things that are transition,
transplantation and transformation.

1.3.1 Basic Features of Indology

1. Importance of Sanskrit: Indology regards Indian civilisation and its language Sanskrit as very
old and pristine.
2. Aryan Supremacy: Aryan Culture like Indo-European, lndo-Iranian and Indo-Aryan were created
by the same agile Aryan people. Aryans are superior race who have been destined the task of
uniting the world under their leadership.
• GS Ghurey accepted the notion of Aryan invasion ofNorth Western Indian and those Aryans
subjugated the Indians under them.
3. Upper Caste Status: The word Aryan indicated superiority in which India is represented by upper
castes.
4. Binary Opposition in India: GS Ghurye accepted the binary opposition of the dark Indians and
fair skinned Aryans on the other hand, and on the other hand the binary of barbarian
underdeveloped Indians and on the other hand civilised Aryans.
5. Superiority of Vedas; Indology view claimed the superiority of Indian Knowledge expressed in
Vedas. Romila Thappar said Indology claimed Vedas were the source of all knowledge.
6. Comparative approach: Indology often employs a comparative approach, col,llparing and
contrasting Indian culture, religion, and philosophy with those of other cultures and societies.
7. Historical perspective: Indology typically adopts a historical perspective, seeking to understand
the evolution and development of Indian culture, society, and religion over time. -
8. Diffusionist approach: According to Ghurye, the process of cultural diffusion, or the spread of
cultural practices and beliefs from one group to another (Brahmins to rest), has played a key role
in shaping the cultural and social landscape of India.

PAPER 2 - Sociology Optional I Subscribe from: 'W"W,v.sunyaias.com I Telegram Channel: sunyanotcs50 Page4
 9. European Development because of India: European science was the outcome oflndian contacts
which was spear headed by Brahrnin Scholars.
10. Uniqueness oflndian Civilisation: Ghurey accepted the uniqueness oflndian Civilisation which
has progressed under Brahrnin leadership and guidance for the last 5000 years without any
interruption. Most other civilisations declined and many were doomed in their course of existence.

1.3.2 Limitations of Indology

• No regional Variations: According to Bernard Cohn, in the lndological understanding of Indian
society, there exist no regional variations and no questioning of the relationship between
normative statements derived from the texts and the actual behaviour of the groups. Indian society
was seen as a set of rules, which every Hindu followed.
• Glorification of Traditions: lndological perspective tends to glorify traditional institutions and
values, giving little scope for cultural conflict, individualism and diachronic history.
• Lack of Validity: According to Siddiqi, the lndological approach by itself cannot lead to any
valid conclusion about Indian society, as empirical operations are also indispensable.
• Exaggeration: The Indologists exaggerated the spirituality oflndian civilisation and hardly made
any effort to study the material culture. Hence, they arrived at a more romanticised definition of
Hinduism that had several implications.
• Brabminical View: Indology overemphasised the centrality of the Brahmins and their dominant
status in Indian society even in the face of contrary evidence that showed few Brahmin dynasties
and political and military power in the hands of other groups as well.
• Far from Reality: Sociologist A.R. Desai critiques that viewing Indian society from the lens of
culture and providing a textual view is far removed from the real India with its inequalities,
diversities, dialectics and exploitations
• Non-inclusive View: Ghurye is criticised for his over Hinduised view of Indian society. He also
took a favourable view of caste and failed to see its dehumanising aspect. He failed to recognise
qualitative changes that have occurred during the colonial rule. He also failed to explore the
structural implications ofvarious social institutions like caste and he only focused on their cultural
aspects.
• Contribution of Islamic and British Rulers: Ghurey fails to recognize the rise of modem India
and the contribution oflslamic and British rulers. Town planning, architecture, new administration
and technology by both made India altogether different from what it was during Vedic and non­
Vedic period.
• Criticism by Field Studies: Subsequent field studies revealed that normative order followed by
people in practice is highly different from the ideal typical view of Indologists. For example: M
N Srinivas' concepts of dominant caste, Sanskritisation changed the traditional notions of caste
generated by Indological views.

1.3.3 Points in support of GS Ghurve's Indological Approach:

1. Current Relevance: Though Indology may be losing its perspective, Indological studies continue
to be relevant to date. Recently, there has been an effort to revisit the traditional texts for seeking
re-interpretations. Some fonn of post-modern Indology seems to be emerging with the revival of
interest among scholars about the culture of ancient India. Some interesting perspectives have been
offered recently by the likes of:
• Devdutt Pattanaik, who have shed an altogether different light on Indian mythology.
• Romila Thapar has combined Jndology with History.

PAPER 2 -Sociology Optional Subscribe from: w·,,.v,.sunyarns.corn i Telegram Channel: sunyanotesSO PageS
 • Wendy Doniger has used this perspective to explore alternative views on traditional Hindu
social organization.
2. Yogendra Singh: According to, Yogendra Singh, when field studies in many areas of intere�t in
India became difficult, textual analysis, either of classics or ethics represented a fruitful basis for
continued analysis of Indian structure and tradition.

1.4 Ghurye's Study of Indian Societv

Ghurye is often accredited as "Theoretical Pluralist" as he relied on both the empirical and textual methods
for studying Indian Society. He studied different aspects of Indian society like caste, tribe, religion etc.
1. Caste: Ghurye's "Caste and Race in India" tried to make a reconstruction of a very orthodox
traditional and age old social institution of India i.e:. Caste. Ghurye' s understanding of caste is
comparative, historical and Indological as well. Unlike his contemporaries he doesn't glorify or
condeI)11l caste, rather he considers caste as a product of Indian culture with various unique
features. Feature of Caste according to GS Ghurey:
• Segmentary: Caste is an institution based on segmental division. This means that caste society
is divided into a number of closed, mutually exclusive segments or compartments. Each caste
is one such compartment.
o It is closed because caste is decided by birth - the children born to parents of a particular
caste will always belong to that caste.
o On the other hand, there is no way other than birth of acquiring caste membership.
Q, In short, a person's caste is decided by birth at birth; it can neither be avoided nor changed.
• Heirarchy:
o One of the principal characteristic of the
caste society is the hierarchy of groups.
This implies a definite scheme of social
precedence amongst the castes with the
Brahmin at the head of the hierarchy.
o Each caste is strictly unequal to every
other caste, that is, every caste is either
higher or lower than every other one. In
theory (though not in practice), no two
castes are ever equal.
o The hierarchy determines the roles. The
higher the position in the hierarchy the
greater the role and higher the responsibility.
o Hierarchy also determines the individual's access to lite chances (education, health,
nutrition) and life resources (wealth, power, property). The higher the position in the caste
hierarchy the easier becomes access and vice-versa.
o Restrictive rules were hierarchically driven in character. Restrictive rules were more for
the Shudras in terms of taboos set for them.
• Commensality:
o The institution of caste necessarily involves restrictions on social interaction, specially the
-
sharing of food.
o There are elaborate rules prescribing what kind of food may be shared between which
groups. These rules are governed by ideas of purity and pollution.

PAPER 2 - Sociology Optional I Subscribe from: w,vv,.sunyaias.com I Telegram Channel: sunyanotesS0 Page6
 o The same also applies to social interaction, most dramatically in the institution of
untouchability, where even the touch of people of particular castes is thought to be
polluting.
• Civil Rights and Disabilities:
o Civil and religious disabilities expressed the rigidity of the caste system.
o To Ghurye the general reflection of Hindu social life was observed and felt through such
disabilities.
o The disabilities were common to caste in different parts of the country but the caste groups
included in it were not common, rather there are variations.
o Civil and religious disabilities basically came from the concept of purity and pollution.
o Disabilities were for impure and polluted caste and privileges were for is for pure/higher
castes.
o These rights and duties pertain not only to religious practices but extend to the secular
world. As ethnographic accounts of everyday life in caste society have shown, interactions
between people of different castes are governed by these rules.
• Choice of Occupation: Caste restricts the choice of occupation, which, like caste itself, is
decided by birth and is hereditary.
o At the level of society, caste functions as a rigid form of the division of labour with specific
occupations being allocated to specific castes.
o Members of a caste maintain their supremacy and secrecy in their jobs and do not allow
the other caste group to join in.
o The upper caste people like Brahmins are free to opt for study of religious books, while
this cannot be done by other castes.
o The lower ranking activities like sweeping bathrooms, washing clothes, scavenging etc.
have been kept in untouchable category.
• Endogamy-
o Caste groups follow the principle of endogamy. This means that caste groups marry within
their own groups. Marrying outside the caste group is strongly condemned.
o To disobey the caste rule is not only treated as a crime but is also condemned as a sin.
o The caste panchayat not only denounces inter-caste marriages but also imposes severe
punishment upon those who break these rules.
Ghurye's definition helped to make the study of caste more systematic. His conceptual definition
was based on what the classical texts prescribed. In actual practice, many of these features of caste
were changing, though all of them continue to exist in some form.
2. Tribe:
• Tribes as Backward Hindus: He wrote a general work on scheduled tribes in which he dwelt
with the historical, administrative and social dimensions of Indian tribes. He also wrote on
specific tribes such as the Kolis of Maharashtra. Ghury� was of the view that the Indian tribes
were like "backward Hindus". Their backwardness was due to their imperfect integration
into Hindu society. Example: Santhals, Bhils, Gonds
• Role of Hindu Values in Tribal Life: For Ghurye, the incorporation of Hindu values and
norms into tribal life was a positive development. With increasing contact with the Hindu
social groups the tribes had slowly absorbed certain Hindu values and style oflife and came to
be considered part of the Hindu caste society. The tribes gave up liquor drinking, received
education and improved their agriculture under Hindu influence.

PAPER 2 - Sociology Optional I Subscribe from: www.sunyaia'.>.COI11 i Telegram Channel: sunyanotes50 Page 7
 • Role of Voluntary Organisation: Hindu voluntary organisations such as Ramakrishna
Mission and Arya Samaj played a constructive role in inculcating Hindu values in tribes.
• Assimilation of Tribes: Ghurye wanted Scheduled Tribes to be assimilated into the Hindu
society and polity, just as he wanted Scheduled Castes to also be merged. While he wanted the
tribes of Central India to be integrated through Hinduisation, as he felt contact with the Hindus
would enhance their status. On the other hand, he wanted the tribes of North-east to be
politically integrated thought the administrative measures of the Indian state.
• Critique of Isolationism: Ghurye was critical ofElvin's approach of
'isolationism', indicating that forced isolation of the tribes from the larger society will
accelerate suspicion leading to the secessionist movement. He further indicated that the
separatist movement in North East India is a product of the cultural distinction between tribes
located there and the larger Hindu society.
One can advocate that Ghurye understands tribes and their problems largely manifest his
nationalist appeal. According to Ghurye cultural unity between tribes and castes can only promote
integration in Indian society.
3. Rural-Urbanisation in India:
• Process of urbanisation: Ghurye was interested in the process of rural-urbanisation. He held
the view that the urbanisation in India was not a simple function of industrial growth. In India,
the process of urbanisation, at least till 1980s, started from within the rural area itself.
• Evolution of Markets: Owing to the expansion of agriculture, more and more markets were
needed to exchange the surplus in food grains. Hence, in many rural regions, one part of a big
village was converted into a market; in turn, this led to a township which developed
administrative, judicial and other institutions.
• Metropolitan Economy: Ghurye's approach to 'rural-urbanization' reflects the indigenous
source of urbanism.
o During colonial times, the growth of metropolitan centers altered Indian life.
o The towns and cities were no longer the outlets for agricultural produce and handicrafts
but they became the major manufacturing centers.
o These centers used rural areas for producing raw materials and turned into a market for
selling industrial products.
o Thus, the metropolitan economy emerged to dominate the village economy. Therefore,
urbanization started making inroads into the rural hinterland in contrast to the previous
pattern. A large city or metropolis also functioned as the center of culture of the territory
encompassing it.
Ghurye had an optimistic view of urbanization and he rejected Louis Wirth' s pessimistic view of
urban growth in the form of excessive individualism. He considered urban areas as a cradle of
innovation. According to him, urban and rural areas are organically linked and their growth is also
connected.
4. Religion:
• Cultural Heritage: In his book - Religious Consciousness, 1965, Ghurye described that
religion is at the center of the total cultural heritage of man.
• Need of Religion: Ghurye traced the rise of major deities such as Shiva, Vishnu and Durga to
the need to integrate locql or sub-regional beliefs into a macro-level system of worship. -
• Constructive Force: In his work, Indian Sadhus, Ghurye (1953) examined the paradoxical
nature of renunciation in India. Indian renouncers have acted as the arbiters of religious

PAPER 2 - Sociology Optional I Subscribe from: wvlw.sunyaias.com I Telegram Channel; sunyanotes50 Page 8
 disputes, patronised learning of scriptures and even defended religion against external attacks.
So, renunciation has been a constructive force in Hindu society.
• On Muslims: Ghurye's works often discussed Hindu-Muslim relationships. He regarded
Hindus and Muslims as separate groups, with little possibility of mutual give and take. Muslim
rulers destroyed Hindu culture which was source of unity earlier. There was dialectics of values
and masses started converting for benefits.
o In his book Social tensions in India ( 1968), Ghurye states that the "presence of Islamic
cultural elements in the basic ancient Indian culture-fabric shows the process of
syncretization, not fusion".
• British Spreading Communalism: Communal tensions were mainly a product of colonial
rule. It was a political strategy of the British to divide the Indian society, especially the Hindus
and the Muslims, after the 1857 Mutiny so that they could not fight them as a united force.
Communalism also received a fillip by the expansion of urbanism due to conflict of interest.
Mostly, the communal riots have almost always taken place in India's urban centers due to
political and economic reasons under the garb of religion.
Ghurye saw religion in India as dynamic as the Indian society, tried to provide rational
explanations different from the prevalent orthodox view on Indian religion.
5. Village Studies: Ghurye made the study of a village in Pune district of Maharashtra to highlight
the continuity of the social structure. Village named Lonik and had been studied by a British officer
in 1819. He described its general layout, economic infrastructure, caste composition, market
transactions and political and religious dispositions.
• The re-survey of the village made by Ghurye in 1957 did not reveal any far-reaching
differences in the demographic, economic and social dimensions of the village. He found that
the layout of the village corresponded to the pattern laid down in a text of antiquity.
• He also noted that the village did not have a very well-knit social structure; there were loose
strands in its social fabric. In spite of it the village had survived as a viable unit.
Ghurye rejected the self-sufficiency view of villages propagated by the western scholars.
According to Ghurye, villages are the centre of Indian social life.

1.4.1 Criticism of GS Ghurye

• Armchair Scholar: Srinivas and Panini said that Ghurye insisted on fieldwork, though he himself
was an "armchair scholar".
• Normative Hinduism: Venugopal describes the underlying theme of Ghurye's work as
normative hindusim, defined as an idealised version of Hinduism serving as a means to judge or
analyse diverse social phenomena in Indian society. TK Oomen criticised Ghurye for his Hindu
centric view.
• Based on Texts only: It has been argued that the most of Ghurye's works are based on textual and
scriptural data. The choice of scripture and the way of writing may have bias towards one section
of society to another.
• Fails to recognise Qualitative Change in Society: Ghurye fails to recognize that qualitative
change has occurred in modern India. Ghurye did not have this realization as his knowledge of the
India's past, instead of helping him, stood in his way of analysis.
• No Common Value: According to DP Mukherjee, there was not a common value, rather there
was a hierarchy of values in superstructure which influenced base of Indian society.
• Economic Status and Brahmins: According to Dange, Brahmins were respected, not because of
their knowledge, but from an economic perspective.

PAPER 2 - Sociology Optional I Subscribe from: www.sunvaias.com I Telegram Channel: sunyanotes50 Page9
 • No Caste-Tribe Continuum: Kosambi rejects caste-tribe continuum and says that indigenous
people were forced to surrender to Aryans.
• Nationalist View: According Andre Beteille, Ghurye was a nationalist more than a sociologist.
• Neglection of Material Culture: Carol Upadhyay argues that a significant feature of Ghu.rye's
cultural history is the almost complete neglect of economic/material content in his analysis.

1.5 Structural Functionalism Tradition in India

t. Meaning: Structural Functionalism views society as a complex but orderly and stable system with
interconnected structures and functions or social patterns that operate to meet the needs
of individuals in a society.
• Structural-Functional perspective in the study of society emerged from the writings of early
thinkers like Radcliff Brown, Talcott Parsons etc. which was later adopted by Srinivas and
others to study Indian society.
2. Background in India: The Structural-functional approach has been a predominant
approach within the study of Indian society since the 20th century. Indian sociologists have
undertaken in depth analysis of the caste and village systems so as to know the distinctive nature
the Indian society. Among the Indian thinkers, G. S. Ghurye, M. N. Srinivas and S. C. Dube are in
the forefront of structural-functional approach within the study of Indian society.
3. Evolution of Structural Functionalism:
• Study of Coorgs of Mysore: M N Srinivas was the first sociologist to use structural
functionalism for the understanding of Coorgs of Mysore.
o Srinivas diverted from American functionalism of Parsons etc. and adopted the British
tradition of field study based approach.
o Srinivas carried forward W H Wiser's use of functionalism, who adopted it for highlighting
the functional importance of Jajmani system, by applying this perspective for the
understanding of the whole society.
• Field View than Book View: Functionalism built upon the book view which was 'Immutable
and llncontestable'. It explained not just relations of inter dependence, co-operation, but also
conflict and exploitative relations by way of empirical understanding.

1.5.1 Structural Functionalism in India

1. Institutionalised Caste Relation Structure: The structural-functionalists view that the Indian
society is made up of castes as significant parts that collectively constitute the social system. Castes
form the basic elements of Indian social structure since they determine institutionally defmed
relationship in the society.
2. Pattern of Relationship: It aimed at studying society as a complex but orderly and stable system
with interconnected structures and functions or social patterns that operate to meet the needs
of individuals in a society. For example studies ofM N Srinivas, F G Bailey, Owen Lynch etc.
3. Holistic Approach: This perspective helped to develop not just micro level readings of Indian
Society, but structural orientation through macro level generalisation. For Example, studies on
Kinship, relations and its changes by Irawati Karve, Kolenda, Kapadia etc.
4. Structural Cleavages: Structural functional perspective in India also took into account actuaL
structural cleavages and social differentiation in society. It brought the much needed dynamism
in the sociological studies. The function� role complex in this was not seen as a static equilibrium
of society but maintenance of dynamic equilibrium by way of rationalisation of society.

PAPER 2 - Sociology Optional I Subscribe from: ,vw,.v.sunyaias.com I Telegram Channel: sunyanotes50 Page 10