Tag Archives: Books by Mahatma Jotiba Phule

July 18, 2015 · 2:00 pm

18th July (1880) in Dalit History – Mahatma Jyotiba Phule wrote against the widespread consumption of alcohol

18 July 1880: Taking a serious note of widespread consumption of alcohol, Mahatma Jyotiba Phule wrote a letter to Plunket, president of Pune municipality’s acting committee.

Mahatma Jyotiba Phule was a member of the Pune municipality from 1876 to 1882.

The letter read:

The municipality has spent a vast amount of money on appointing staff and running the health department with the aim of maintaining public health. Pune city was not familiar with the sight of liquor shops. But now liquor shops are seen even in crowded areas, thus sowing the seeds of decline in public morals. This nullifies the municipality’s aim to maintain public health. With the opening of liquor shops, alcoholism has increased, and many a families destroyed. The vice of alcoholism has gripped the city. To control the spread of this vice, at least to a certain extent, I suggest that the municipality should impose a tax on liquor shops in proportion to the damage they do. I believe no municipality has imposed such a tax, though the central government has done so. The municipality should make enquiries about this. I shall be grateful if my resolution is placed before the general assembly.

The letter created a stir. Dnanprakash newspaper lauded Mahatma Jyotiba Phule and said following in his support: “The issue to which Jotirao for the first time has drawn the municipality’s attention is of great importance. He deserves to be congratulated for his action.”

Mahatma Jyotiba Phule received an acknowledgement for his letter from the president of the municipality. The letter was placed before the committee in the first meeting itself and the following resolution was passed:

The president should decide whether to put this before the committee or not. According to the resolution passed by the central government on 22 October 1877, no tax can be imposed on alcohol. But the assembly hopes that it will be possible to reduce the number of liquor shops in Pune.

The acting committee’s resolution and the original letter were handed to Mr Ritchnell, president of the municipality, who sent them on 27 July 1880 to Henry Dickson, an excise officer, for his comments. Dickson returned them on 30 July with the following comments:

We humbly state that during 1873-77 there were four liquor shops in Pune. Since 1877-78, six new ones have opened, bringing the number to ten. The District Governor had given permission to open new shops because where there are no liquor shops, illicit liquor is prepared. The action was taken to discourage brewing of illicit, harmful liquor in Pune. In 1874, 15617 gallons of liquor were sold. In 1879 the sale went up to 22912 gallons.

The District Governor was convinced that alcoholism in Pune was rapidly on the increase. On 8 August 1880, Ritchnell assigned the case to the public superintendent who sent the following reply, on 27th August:

The reason alcoholism is on the increase is that previously the rich were not addicted to it, but now they are. It however may not be true that they have their fill of country liquor.

Ritchnell sent all the correspondence to the Pune municipality with the remark: It cannot be claimed that alcoholism has increased on account of the increased number of liquor shops. The question is whether anything can be done to put a stop to the spread of this vice.

In its resolution regarding Jotirao’s letter, the municipality expressed the desire to put in effort to reduce this vice from spreading. He was not the first to protest against alcoholism in Maharashtra. In 1852 the people of Satara had sent an application to the government to close down all liquor shops. In 1869 an officer named C. W. Bell published an account of the government’s excise policy, which stated:

Towards the end of the Peshwa regime, alcoholism had gone up. Taxes earned from it had increased. Offenders were sentenced to severe punishment.

Influence of Jotirao’s work and leadership began to be felt widely in Maharashtra. He became the mouthpiece for the grievances of the downtrodden. There was no leader quite like him. He paved the way for the new era of social activism.

Jotiba Phule and Tilak and question of education for women and non brahmins

–Anoop Kumar

I am posting a few extracts from a paper written by Parimala V. Rao (“Educating Women and Non-Brahmins as ‘Loss of Nationality’: Bal Gangadhar Tilak and the Nationalist Agenda in Maharashtra”).

This was published as an ocassional paper by the Centre for Women’s Development Studies, New Delhi. She is also the author of ‘Foundations Of Tilak’s Nationalism’, published by Orient Blackswan in 2010.

I have placed the extracts point-wise for easy reading; the references given below have also been quoted from the same paper.

——————————————-

The nationalists, led by Bal Gangadhar Tilak, during 1881-1920, consistently opposed the establishment of girls’ schools, the imparting of education to non-Brahmins, and implementing compulsory education. They were also instrumental in defeating the proposals to implement compulsory education in nine out of eleven municipalities.The important source for this paper is Tilak’s own writings in his paper, the ‘Mahratta’.

The battle of Kirki in 1818 ended the Peshwa’s rule in Maharashtra. Within a decade of the fall of Brahmanical Peshwai, many intellectuals of Maharashtra began to work towards ending gender and caste inequalities. The revolt against caste disability was taken up more forcefully by Jotirao Phule.
He judged Hindu culture ruthlessly by applying two values – rationality and equality. The application of these two principles called for a total rejection of the unequal aspects of culture like the caste system, the authoritarian family structure, subordination of women, the ban on their education, and the enforcement of life-long widowhood and child marriages upon girls/women.
Jotirao Phule was the first reformer to articulate the importance of educating women and Shudras as a means of empowering them. Phule had the most radical ideas on educating women. He considered that men had kept women in an unenlightened state in order to preserve their own superiority.
He argued that had a holy woman written any scripture, men would not have been able to ignore the rights due to women, and would also not have waxed so eloquent about their own rights. If women were learned enough, men would never have been able to be so partial and deceitful.
Phule started a school for girls in 1848 and undertook the task of teaching there. He opened two more schools in 1851-52. The difficulty in obtaining teachers for his school encouraged him to teach his wife Savitri Bai who in turn began to teach in these schools. Both faced intense hostility from their society.

Jotiba Phule Vs Tilak and others

A small group of anti-reformists led by Vishnushastri Chiplunkar emerged in the 1870s. They were soon joined by V.N. Mandalik and Bal Gangadhar Tilak. This group called themselves Nationalists and began to analyse every reform as ‘loss of nationality or rashriyata.’ They termed the loss of caste as the loss of nationality.
They declared that ‘the institution of caste had been the basis of the Hindu society and undermining the caste would undermine the Hindu society’. Phule, who advocated the abolition of caste-based inequalities, was called ‘as traitors to the nation-rashtra’ by Chiplunkar and Tilak, who claimed that they represented the real Hindus.[1]
The campaign led by Phule and reformers for the implementation of compulsory education was opposed by Tilak . He devised various arguments against compulsory primary education. Tilak explained that teaching reading, writing, and the rudiments of history, geography and mathematics to Kunbi (peasant) children would actually harm them. This was the most definite way the elite had of avoiding competition in higher education and jobs. He also emphasised that the peasant’s children should be taught traditional occupations, and that the curriculum meant for other children was ‘unsuitable for them’. [2]
Criticising the reformers who pressed for compulsory education and argued that since the municipal schools were supported by public funds, they should be open to all, Tilak countered that ‘it was not public money as the entire population did not pay taxes and it was taxpayer’s money and only the taxpayers had a right to decide how this money was spent’.[3]
He suggested that if the government was bent upon providing education for all, then only ‘the education befitting their rank and station in life’ should be provided to the peasant’s children, while general education should be given to those who had a ‘natural inclination’ for it.[4]
Tilak argued that by supporting the extension of ‘liberal education for the masses the reformers were committing a grave error’ as ‘English education encouraged the people to defy the caste restrictions and the spread of English education among the natives will bring down their caste system’. Tilak argued that caste was the basis of the Hindu nation, and that it was extremely essential to preserve it to assist the process of nation-building. [5]

The Hunter Commission

The appointment of the Hunter Commission in 1881 to look into the issues concerning both the medium of instruction and the role of the government in maintaining educational institutions
Phule, in his representation, demonstrated the neglect of the primary education of the Shudras, Mahars, Mangs and Muslims in the Bombay presidency. Arguing for the cause of compulsory education, he suggested that the government should give more importance to primary education. [6]
Tilak opposed the admission of Mahars and Mangs to the schools. He criticised ‘the emotional British officers and impractical native reformers for encouraging the Mahar boys to seek admission into government schools’. [7]
Tilak also stressed that the nationalists ‘would not tolerate the alien government and anglicised reformers who in their zeal for the doctrine of the equality of mankind were interfering in the internal affairs of the Hindu society’.
The colonial government’s support to such an endeavour was, according to Tilak, ‘against the spirit of Queen’s proclamation, which guaranteed that the government would abstain from all interference with religious belief’.[8]
Tilak stated that the attempts made by ‘the indiscreet officers to force association of Mahars and Dhades on Brahmin boys was against the guarantee of religious neutrality.’ [9]

Tilak on Women’s Education

Let me stop my note here by saying that according to Tilak ‘education would make women immoral’.

[ For rest of his views on education for SC/ST/OBC and women you can directly read this excellent paper entirely at http://www.cwds.ac.in/OCPaper/EducatingWomen-Parimala.pdf]

We have been told about Tilak that he gave the slogan ‘Swaraj is my birth right’. I want you to ponder on just two questions.

What did the ‘swaraj’ he was fighting for mean for Tilak?
Did Tilak’s ‘swaraj’ include SC/ST/OBC and women?

————————————

References:

Mahratta, 24 August 1884, p. 1.
Mahratta, 22 March 1891, pp. 2, 3: ‘What shall we do next?’ Editorial; Mahratta, 12 April 1891, p. 3: Editorial; Mahratta, 26 April 1891, p. 2: ‘How Shall We Do It?’ Editorial.
Mahratta, 15 May 1881, pp. 3-4
Ibid., p. 3.
Mahratta, 15 May 1881, p. 3.
S. Bhattacharya, et al. (eds), Educating the Nation (New Delhi, 2003), Document no. 1, p. 1.
S. Bhattacharya, Educating the Nation, Document no. 49, p. 125.
Mahratta, 26 March 1882, pp. 5-6: ‘Admission of Mahar boys into Government Schools’.
Ibid. p. 5.

Courtesy ― Round Table India

In case you liked the post, please share it with your friends. Also, Like us on [themify_icon icon=”fa-facebook-square” label=”Facebook” link=”https://www.facebook.com/drbrambedkarscaravan” ] and Follow us on [themify_icon icon=”fa-twitter-square” label=”Twitter” link=”https://twitter.com/Silent_Steps” ]