Unit I: Kinship, Family and Marriage

(a) Descent: Patrilineal and Matrilineal, Comparative Study of Northern and

Southern Kinship

While trying to understand kinship, we need to investigate the concept of descent and alliance
theory.

Difference Between Kinship and Descent

Kinship Descent
Defined with reference to an individual Defined with reference to an ancestor(s)
(EGO)
Universally important Culturally important
Normally bilateral, from the standpoint of Connected through relatedness to a common
an ego ancestor

Descent are socially recognized links between ancestors and descendants. It implies tracing
genealogical relation. Descent is sociological affiliation of children to their parents. A rule of
descent affiliates an individual with a particular group of kin through known or presumed
common ancestry. Descent rules determine group membership, inheritance of property, and
succession to titles and offices. A rule of descent affiliates an individual with a particular group
of kin with whom he is especially intimate, and to whom he is privileged to turn first for certain
kinds of services including support and help that he cannot demand of other kin.

Descent systems are divided into;

 Unilineal Descent Group- Descent traced parents and ancestor of only one sex. Many
societies constructed kinship groupings, roles and relationships by tracing descent
exclusively through male or female line.
 Patrilineal (agnatic)- Male line
With reference to patrilineal descent, both males and females belong to their
father’s kin group but not their mother. (Use kinship diagram)

 Matrilineal (uxorial) - Female line

Form of unilineal descent that follows female line. Only daughters pass on
family line to their offspring. However, an inheritance pattern for men in
matrilineal societies often reflects the importance of mother’s brother. Example,
The Nayars of Kerala, Khasi, Garo and Jaintia of Meghalaya. (Use kinship
diagram)

 Bilateral descent group - Descent is traced through both parents. The individual is
considered to be related equally to both relatives from mother and father’s side.
 Double descent - when both patrilineal and matrilineal rules apply jointly it is
called double descent. For example, Yako of Nigeria.
 Cognatic descent - Use of either matrilineal or patrilineal principle to trace
descent, though not same in every generation. When both the lines are use but
it is not used at the same time. Patrilineal line of descent is used in one descent
and next generation could be matrilineal line of descent and the term is used as
ambilineal because it is ambiguous and not certain that which line of descent
and succession of property. For example, Pacific Islanders.

1
  Parallel descent – a very rare form of descent where descent lines are sex specific. Man
(husband) to their son and woman (wife) to their daughters.

 Cross or Alternative Descent - This is very rare type of descent. In this descent, a man
(husband) transmits to their daughters and a woman (wife) to their sons.

Descent and Residence

Depending on the type of descent principle followed by the group there are different types of
residence pattern.
Patrilocal or virilocal - residence patterns in which women take up residence with his
husband’s community.

Matrilocal or uxorilocal - residence pattern in which the newly-wed couple establishes

residence with wife’s mother.

Neo-local - Individual sets up a separate residence after marriage apart from parent’s group.
Avunculocal - residence is with the maternal uncle (MB).

Ambilocal - also called bilocal. The residence rule which gives choice to the newly-weds to
live with the parents of either the groom or the bride.

Nato-local Residence – a couple after marriage do not resides together but stays with their
family of orientation. Husband visits the wife at night and leave her place. The authority of
children lies in the hands of mothers brother.

*The most common type of residence is patrilocal or virilocal.

Alliance Theory
The alliance theory in the study of kinship is also known as the general theory of exchange. It
bears its roots to the French structuralist Claude Lévi-Strauss and hence it is also known as
the structural way of studying kinship ties. The alliance theory was first discussed in Lévi
Strauss’ monumental book in English version is known as Elementary Sturctures of Kinship.
Alliance theory was quite popular during the 1960s and went on to be discussed and deliberated
till the 1980s where the issue of incest taboo was taken up by not only anthropologists but also
by psychologists, political philosophers etc. The theory tries to enquire about how inter-
individual relationships are woven and how finally they constitute society.

The theory developed to study those kinds of kinship systems which exemplify positive
marriage (cross-cousin marriage) rules. However, apart from providing conjectures on
marriage, it also provides a general theoretical awareness about kinship. The study of marriage
rules has been used from the initial days of kinship studies to comprehend kinship
terminologies. Scholars like W.H.R. Rivers also used marriage (symmetrical cross-cousin
marriage) and terminology (bifurcate merging) and tried to exhibit a relationship between each
other. For him, marriage rule is the cause, and the terminology is the effect. Australian kinship
system, which is quite perplexing, was also studied elaborately by anthropologists to be
familiar with their descent system. They too made use of marriage alliances for this. Most
scholars agree with each other on the notion that in symmetrical cross-cousin marriage pacts,
double descent is always seen, directly or indirectly. Radcliffe-Brown did accept that
relationship between individuals and marriage rules are more important than descent groups.

2
However, coming back to alliance theory and its development, Lévi-Strauss’ alliance theory
was in complete defiance to Radcliffe-Brown’s functionalist theory.

Alliance theory was categorically created by Claude Lévi-Strauss, though analytical

assessment has been also offered by Rodney Needham and Louis Dumont. Lévi Strauss studied
and observed the connections formed between consanguinity and affinity in his investigation
of non-European societies. These two are both opposed and complementary to each other. Due
to these rules of preferential marriage and marriage prohibitions are an incorporated part of this
theory. Such rules in fact rise due to the connection between blood ties and affinal ties. It is the
marriage ties, according to Levi Strauss and many of his contemporaries which create
interdependence between families and lineages. According to Levi-Strauss alliance theory is
based on incest taboo and the prohibition of incest is recognised universally. It is viewed as a
fundamental condition of human social life. A man is not allowed to make a woman his wife
who is his immediate kin and in fact he has to give her away to another man. It is this prohibition
of incest that led human groups to follow exogamy. Lévi-Struass says this prohibition is beyond
any sociological explanation and clearly shows a difference between consanguinity and affinity
as the basis of kinship system. For him incest taboo is thus seen as a negative prescription, and
it is only because of this, men had to move out of the core kinship group or come in from
another group to it.

This theory has much similarity with Sigmund Freud’s work Totem and Taboo (1913). This
process of incest taboo where a daughter or sister is sent to a different family commences a
circle of exchange of women. Strauss views marriage as primarily a process of exchange
(between one men and other men or between one domestic group and others). He observes
positive marriage rules from the negative prescriptions of prohibition. The main notion of
alliance theory is then a reciprocal exchange which creates affinity. It is the positive marriage
rules which regulates this exchange and thus gives rise to what Strauss call ‘elementary’
structures. For Lévi-Strauss, there are two models of structure in the study of kinship and
exchange in marriage. When women in the ego’s group are proposed to another group which
is eligible for such exchange then such a situation may be called as elementary structures of
kinship. Similarly, if the group of possible spouses for the women are not known and kept open
in the ego’s group, excluding kin people like the nuclear family, an uncle, an aunt etc, this
Strauss terms as complex structures of kinship. This is easily seen in the western scenario. In a
society, keeping in mind incest prohibition, a kinship system is made up of a combination of
many traits, like inheritance, affinity, descent, residence etc. and an understanding is reached
by the combination of these features. If all the transmission between these features takes place
systematically between generations in one and the same line it is known as harmonic while it
is said to be disharmonic if some of it is passed patrilineal and some matrilineally. It was
observed that the rules of cross cousin marriage where it exists is associated with this.
Theoretically from this, three types of affinal relations can exist, bilateral, matrilateral and
patrilateral. In bilateral cross cousin marriage, the spouse is mother’s brother’s child and
father’s sister’s child. It forms a self-sufficient unit as two intermarrying groups exchange
women as wives. Lévi-Strauss calls this closed or restricted exchange. He also connected it
with disharmonic transmission.

Alliance theory have much greater explanatory value than descent theory, yet in today’s
contemporary anthropological setting, investigations have minimized their interest in kinship
studies to understand the diversity of kinship systems. Hence, the question of universal kinship
structures remains unanswered due to which the debates between descent and alliance theories
have shrunk. The descent theory and the alliance theory were proposed by anthropologists.

3
This was to work out the different structures of kinship through the models based on birth and
marriage ties.

4
Unit – I Kinship, Family and Marriage

(b) Concepts: Principles of Kinship, Consanguinity, Filiations, Incest Taboo and Affinity

Background
Every individual belongs to a society. They become the members of a society by virtue of their
birth. It is the norms and values of a society that shapes the life of a human being. To understand
the social relationship, it is important to understanding the kin groups. And to understand the
kins groups, kinship is the basic principle which decides whom a person can marry. Kinship
also determines the pattern of descent, lineage, inheritance, power and authority in a family.
There are basically two ways of acquiring kinship relations; it through by birth and by marriage.

Kinship has to do with relationship between individuals. This can be based on the ties of
marriage and blood or adoption. Kinship relationship can be two types, one based on affinal
(marriage) and consanguineal (blood). Kinship is social recognition of biological ties. So,
kinship gives identity, recognition, right and duties. Therefore, kinship gives us the identities
of socially recognize as a person, how he is related to other and what are his entitlements etc.

• According to Murdock, kinship is a structured system of relationships in which kins

are bound to one another by complex inter-locking ties.
• Another scholar who studied kinship is Louis Henry Morgan, he studied the American
tribes. On the basis of his enquiry, he come to a conclusion that kinship is going through
a process of evolution.
• He concluded by saying that man in the state of nature, was living in a stage of
promiscuity, where sexual freedom was granted to everybody. But with the growth of
society first kinship got established, rule of incest was introduced, followed by rule of
property etc. Then there is stability in society and rules of marriage was introduced.
• Finally, when civilization takes placed, technology developed, agricultural & trade
settled, property came into being. It is transmitted from generation to generation. There
was transition of promiscuity to group marriage then to polygamous marriage and came
into a stabilized to monogamous form of marriage. He went to the extent of analyzing
kinship terms and his approach to kinship is a biological approach.

• Robin Fox also defined kinship in an evolutionary perspective. According to him,

kinship is an adaptation in human evolution. Robin Fox gave four fundamental
principles of kinship that are applied universally. These principles are as follows:
(a) Women bear children - Gestation.
(b) Men impregnate women - Impregnation.
(c) Incest is tabooed – No sexual relation between primary kins.
(d) Men exercise control over property - Authority.

• Radcliff Brown subsequently questioned the study of kinship system with reference to
kinship terminology. He developed structural functional approach to kinship study. He
opines kinship is having a definite structure. The way society is also having definite
structure like economic, political and religious structure. And the structure of kinship
is found on kin roles. Therefore, terms are not important and actual roles are important.
He said when someone is addressing a person as father, it is not just the term attached
to this term, but a series of cultural defined rules and obligations takes an important
place.

1
 • A man is not father to everyone he is also a husband and therefore a person holding a
place in kinship system is supposed to play multiple roles as defined by cultural and
social system of the society. Thus, Radcliff Brown is of the opinion that kinship
structure is a part of social structure and social values, social norms, are applied to the
members who are part of the kinship structure and holding different position in the
kinship structure. He advocates one should go for comparative study of kinship and it
should be empirical in nature.

• Meyer Fortes amended kinship as part of social structure. He advocates that in every
society, kinship is structured in an exclusive way. Role assigned to kinship is unique.
Therefore, instead of going for comparison of kinship study, one should look into
structural role of kinship in a giving society.

• According to Edmund R. Leach kinship is not a thing in itself; kinship has no content
of itself as it deals with those phenomena which have independent existence. These
phenomena are marriage, inheritance, property disputes, rituals, economy, land
ownership, politics, etc. After removing all these aspects kinship becomes a framework
or it becomes a guideline to regulate various aspects of human behavior. This approach
enhances the importance of kinship.

Having discussed the debate on kinship let us delve into types of kinship. There are primary
kin, secondary kin and tertiary kin.
• Primary kin - are those members who are directly related to you, it means those who
belong to the family of orientation. This is labeled as first-degree kin relationship. There
are eight types of primary kin, like husband-wife, father-son, mother-daughter, father-
daughter, mother-son, younger-elder brothers, younger-elder sisters and sister-brother.
(Use diagram)

• Secondary kin - are those who are related to you through primary kin. And some of the
sociologist and anthropologist they have counted about 33 types of secondary kin. For
example, your father’s father (grandfather), mother’s brother (maternal uncle), wife’s
brother, daughter’s husband, son’s daughter etc. (Use diagram)

• Tertiary kin - are those who are primary kin of the secondary kin or secondary kin of
the primary kin. For example, father’s father’s brother, mother’s brother’s wife,
daughter’s husband’s mother. There are 151 types of kinship according to Murdock.
(Use diagram)

Kinship terms are classified in different ways. The mode of usages classifies into two types; 1)
terms of address and 2) terms of reference.
• A term of address may be defined as a term by which a relative who in the instance of
speech communication is the first person, addresses another who is the second person.
It is a term used in speaking to a particular relative. For example, given name,
• A term of reference designates the name given to a kinship relation. It is a term usually
used in referring to a particular relative who is the third person in the act of
communication. For example, devar (husband’s younger brother), sali (wife’s younger
sister) etc.
• In a kinship analysis, terms of reference are felt to be more dependable and useful than
terms of address.

2
 • Morgan made an important contribution to the study of kinship terms. He classified
these terms into (a) Classificatory system (b) Descriptive system.
• Under classificatory system, the various kin are included in one category, and all are
referred by same term. Thus, the term ‘uncle’ is a classificatory term. It is used for
chacha, mama, mausa, tau etc. Similarly, the term nephew, cousin, in law is
classificatory terms.
• In descriptive system one term refers to only one relation. It describes the exact relation
of a person toward another. For example, in Hindi, we also have the terms chacha,
mama, mausi, tau, sala, bhabhi, devar etc.

Filiations
• Filiation can be defined as the relationship between child and his parents which is
considered equally important from the mother’s or the father’s side, irrespective of the
fact whether the lineage traced is patrilineal or matrilineal.
• Filiation is essentially the bond between successive generations a bond of compounded
rights and identifications epitomized in the rules of inheritance and succession on one
hand, and of differences and gaps symbolized in the incest taboo, and in customs of
respect and avoidance. Persons are siblings in the domestic union by virtue of common
filiation and with polygynous marriage, they are usually graded whether their common
filiation is unilateral or bilateral.

Complimentary Filiations

The relationship ‘ego’ with the relatives on the mother’s side in a patrilineal society. In a
matrilineal society it refers to the relationship ‘ego’ with the relatives on his father’s side.

Kinship Abbreviations

B = Brother C or Ch= Child(ren) D = Daughter

F = Father GC = Grandchild(ren) GP = Grandparent(s)

P or Pa = Parent S = Son Z / Si= Sister

W = Wife H = Husband SP = Spouse

LA = In-law SI or Sib= Sibling M = Mother

Co = Cousin MZ = Mother’s sister FB = Father’s brother

3
 FZD = Father’s sister daughter MBD = Mother’s sister daughter

Kinship Symbols

Genealogy Chart

Chart 1

Chart 2

Chart 3

Chart 4

4
Chart 5

Chart 6

Kinship usage provides guidelines for interaction among persons in these social groupings. It
defines proper and acceptable role relationships. Thus, it acts as a regulator of social life. Some
of these relationships are avoidance, teknonymy, avunculate, amitate, couvades and joking
relationship.

Kinship terms are words used in a speech community to identify relationships between
individuals in a family (or a kinship unit). This is also called kinship terminology. A
classification of persons related through kinship in a particular language or culture is called
a kinship system.

5
Kinship Terminologies

Kinship terminology include words that we use to address.

• Fictive - A relation is those who are not related by blood or marriage, yet they form
strong bonds and behave like brothers and sister.

• Affinal - relatives are those who are related to you through marriage.
• Consanguineal - relatives are those who are related to you by blood.

• Kindred - relatives in a bilateral succession are collectively called as kindred. These

descendants can be from both sides maternal or paternal.

• Incest - sexual relation between two close blood relatives whose marriage is not
permitted is called incest.

• Incest taboo - Prohibition of sexual relation between close relatives is called incest
taboo.

• Couvade - [Link] coined the term in 1865. The usage of couvade is prevalent among
the matrilineal society. According to Malinowski the usage of couvade contributes to a
strong marital bond between husband and wife. The husband is made to lead a life of
his wife refrain from active work, takes diet and observes taboos which are observed
by his wife. Husband takes the responsibility; he goes through all pains up to the level
of labour pain. He leads a pretended sickly life along-with his wife during her post-
delivery period.

• Joking relationship - is a relationship in which you treat your kin member as your equal
and you joke with them. Radcliff Brown defined joking relationship as a relation
between two persons in which one is by custom permitted and, in some instances,
required, to tease or make fun of other, which in turn required to take no offence.
Example, relation between Devar-Bhabi, Jija-Sali, Mother-in-law and son-in-law.

• Tecknonymy - is a Greek derivative, coined by E.B. Tylor. He had conceptualised and

interpreted with regard to the practice of naming or referring the parents in the name of
the child tecknonymy is a common kinship usage, which usually finds its place in
between personal names and kinship terms. For example, Devar-Bhabhi relationship

• Avanculate - the maternal uncle has an important place. Starting from naming
ceremony, through initiation to marriage, he has the specific role to play.

• Amitate – The relationship with father’s sister is found in a very respectable and
popular.

• Avoidance – In contrast to the joking relationship is the behavior of avoidance. It means

that two kins normally of opposite sex should avoid each other. They are supposed to
keep up certain amount of respect in speech, dress and gesture. Example; daughter in
law avoid direct contact with father-in-law by using purdah in north Indian society.

6
• Matrilineal puzzle – Power and authority is in the hands of male person. Here the
significant is given to mother’s brother. He occupies the same role a father has in
patrilineal society. This matrilineal puzzle is trying to put across the argument that no
society in matriarchal in nature. We only have matrilineal society.

• Parallel cousin – Parallel cousins are those who are the children of the siblings of the
same sex. This means the children of two brothers or of two sisters are parallel cousins
to each other.

• Cross cousin – are those whose children of siblings of the opposite sex. This means
that the children of a brother and a sister are cross-cousins.

• Clan (gotra) - a lineage is an exogamous unit. It is also known as gotra. It is a unilineal

kin group which is exogamous, claims descent from a common ancestor. Clans are
further subdivided into a number of lineages where the descent can be traced up to a
limited number of generations. Generally, the gotra forms an exogamous unit, with the
marriage within the same gotra being prohibited by custom, being regarded as incest.

• Phratry Any grouping or association of clans which recognize some relationship to

each other.

• Moieties - A division of a society into two social categories or groups, characteristically

by a rule of patrilineal descent (patri-moiety) or matrilineal descent (matri-moiety).

• Ego - The individual who forms the central reference point in a kinship diagram.

• Uterine - When descent is traced through female line. Two persons are said to be related
to each other by uterine blood when they are descended from a common ancestress but
by different husbands. (Kids with same mother but with different father).

• Siblings - Children of the same parents.

• Agnate - When common ancestor is male, it is agnate, or a person is said to be an

‘agnate’ of another if the two are related by blood or adoption wholly through males.

7
 • Cognate - People sharing a common ancestor. A person is said to be a cognate of
another if the two are related by blood or adoption but not wholly through males.
• Full blood - Two persons are said to be related to each other by full blood when they
are descended from a common ancestor by the same wife. (Children with same parents).
• Half-blood - Two persons are said to be related to each other by half-blood when they
are descended from a common ancestor but by different wives. (Children with same
father but different mothers).
• Crossing/Alternating Kins - Men transmit to their daughters and women to their sons.
• Lineage (Vansh) - Kinship refers to the line from which descent is traced. This is done
by looking into fathers’ line or mother’s line or from both the lines. A lineage is a
unilineal descent group whose members trace their descent from a common ancestor
through an accepted sequence of known linking antecedents. Characteristics of lineage
includes group of people who link themselves to a common ancestor, usually the
numbers of generations traced is 5-10, strict exogamy is practiced and members of a
vansh are treated as brothers and sisters.
• Genealogy - the study of families, family history, and tracing of their lineages. It is
derived “to trace ancestry,” the science of studying origin or family history.
• Descent - Descent is sociological affiliation of children to their parents. A rule of
descent affiliates an individual with a particular group of kin through known or
presumed common ancestry. Descent rules determine group membership, inheritance
of property, and succession to titles and offices. A rule of descent affiliates an individual
with a particular group of kin with whom he is especially intimate, and to whom he is
privileged to turn first for certain kinds of services including support and help that he
cannot demand of other kin.
• Patrilineal descent is a kinship system based on patriarchy where inheritance, status,
authority or property is traced through males only. It is also known as agnatic descent.
• Matrilineal descent is a kinship system based on matriarchy where inheritance, status,
authority, and property are traced through females only. It is also known as uterine
descent. A matrilineal descent group comprises of a woman, her siblings, her own
children, her sister’s children, and her daughters’ children. The Ashanti of Ghana
studied by Meyer Fortes, the Trobriand Islanders of Western Pacific studied by
Malinowski, some of the societies of Indonesia, Malaysia, some Native American tribes
like Navajo, Cherokee and Iroquois, and some of the tribes in India like the Khasis,
Garo, Jiantia of Northeast India and the Nayars of southern India are examples of
societies with matrilineal descent. Among the Ashanti of Ghana, the authority lies with
the mother’s brother and a son inherits the property of the mother’s brother, whereas
among the Khasis of Meghalaya of Northeast India the immovable property like the
ancestral house is inherited by the youngest daughter from her mother’s mother
(grandmother) and is known as the Kakhaddu. Herein, the rule of descent lies in the
youngest (daughter) in the family.
• Husband and wife relationship is known as conjugal relationship.
• Son and Father relationship is known as filial relationship.
• Brother and brother relationship is known as fraternal relationship.

Conclusion

We can state that kinship is one of the integral avenues of study in social anthropology. Kinship
as we had seen is a social recognition of the biological ties and it takes into its fold adoption
also. Kinsman cannot change their kinship ties and one have to follow the rules of kinship in

8
descent and marriage. A man has two types of kin groups those related by blood ties, his
cognates and those related by marriage - affine. One shares different types of relationship with
his kinsmen based on the type of society either patrilineal or matrilineal. In a patrilineal society
all relations are traced through his father while in a matrilineal society the ties are traced
through the mother. Inheritance, descent, and authority are based on the type of society
patriarchy or matriarchy. In the late 20th century, there were times when anthropologists had
negated the relevance of kinship studies as ethnocentric and build upon certain western ideas
about kinship. In the words of Malinowski kinship is ‘kinship algebra’ and the collection of
genealogies had no meaning. Kinship studies however, in the late 20th century came up with a
new vision and it moved beyond the realms of collection of genealogy. With the coming of
modernism and feminism kinship studies ventured to new avenues and took into its fold the
study of latest trends that is of the gay and lesbian kinship. Thus, we can say that kinship studies
are very much prerogative in the study of social anthropology and would remain so in the long
run.

9
Unit I Kinship, Family and Marriage
(a) Decent: Comparative Study of North Indian Kinship System

Background
In sociology, all blood relationships are known by a technical term, consanguinity. Similarly,
all relationships through marriage are given the term affinity. For instance, the relationships
between mother and son/daughter, sister and brother/sister, father and son/daughter are
consanguineal, while relationships between father/mother-in-law and daughter-/son-in-law are
affinal. There are basically two ways of acquiring kinship relations by birth and by marriage.
• Robin Fox defined kinship is a relation between kin that is persons by real, putative or
fictive consanguinity.
• According to A. R. Radcliff Brown, kinship is a system of dynamic relations between
person and person in community, the behaviour of any two persons in any of these
relations being regulated in some way, and to a greater or less extent by social usage.

The social institutions of Indian society are rooted in literary and learned traditions, many
sociological studies have made use of textual sources for explaining the ideological bases of
our institutions. For example, K.M. Kapadia (1947) has used classical texts to describe Hindu
kinship. Hindu Social Organisation by P.H. Prabhu (1954) is also based on Sanskrit texts.
Similarly, Irawati Karve (1940 and 1958) and G.S. Ghurye (1946, 1955) have extensively
worked on Indian kinship system.

South Indian/ Dravidian Kinship System

In some societies like the Nāyar of South India as studied by Schneider and Gough (1974), the
biological and the social father may not be the same. A Nāyar woman is free to begin a
sambandham (relationship) after her marriage. When a Nāyar woman is pregnant either the
husband or any of the lovers can claim paternity by paying the midwife and is recognised as
the social father. Anthropologists for such cases have distinguished two types of parenthood
and father.
• Genetrix - culturally recognised biological mother
• Mater - social mother
• Genitor - culturally recognised biological father
• Pater - social father (Barnard 2007:101)

Kinship system in south India is characterized by positive rules of marriage. This means that
preference for a particular type of alliance in marriage is clearly stated and practiced. The rules
are quite clear about whom one should/can marry.

The south Indian states include Kerala, Karnataka, Andra Pradesh (and Telangana), and Tamil
Nadu, where the languages of the Dravidian family are spoken. Among the states, the state of
Kerala is different from the others because they have matrilineal system. Some of the
sociological studies also found that, both patrilineal and patrilocal system along with
matrilineal and matrilocal systems are present. Kathleen Gough (1955) a British
anthropologist, in her study of the Brahmins of the Tanjore district describes patrilineal descent
group are distributed in small communities. Louis Dumont (1986) in his study of the Pramalai
Kallar of Tamil Nadu describes kin group in term of patrilineal, patrilocal, exogamous groups
are called Kuttam. In economic sphere also, the land is own by male members of the kuttam.

1
In south India, widow remarriage is practiced among all caste except Brahmin. Man can marry
his elder sister’s daughter, but it is not allowed in matrilineal society. Parallel cousins cannot
marry each other while cross cousin can (exception to the Nāyars). Thus, parallel cousins are
referred to as brothers and sisters, for example in Tamil, all parallel cousins are addressed as;
• Annan (elder brother)
• Tambi (younger brother)
• Akka (elder sister)
• Tangachi (younger sister)
Cross cousins are never brothers and sisters. They referred as;
• Mama magal (MBD)
• Mama magan (MBS)
• Attai magal (FZD)
• Attai magan (FZS)

The terminology clearly tells that in a man’s own generations, men are either his brother or
brother-in-law. Similarly, women are either sisters or potential spouses.

The terminology becomes classificatory in nature; the persons own generation is divided into
two groups. One group is known as pangali in Tamil which means ‘those who share’ consists
of all brothers and sisters including one’s parallel cousins and the children of father’s parallel
cousins. The other group consists of affinal relatives such as wife, husband of the category
relatives. In Tamil, this category is called as mama-machan.

Kin relatives in South India are mainly categorised in two groups namely, the patrilineage and
the affine.

Patrilineage; In South India, just as in North India, relating to various categories of kin beyond
one’s immediate family implies a close interaction with members of one’s patrilineage. The
patrilocal residence amongst the lineage members provides the chances for frequent interaction
and cooperation. Thus, the ties of descent and residence help in the formation of a kin group.
Such a group is recognised in both South and North India. For example, Kathleen Gough
(1955) describes patrilineal descent groups, which are distributed in small communities. Each
caste within the village contains one to twelve exogamous patrilineal groups.

Dumont (1986) also describes kin groups in terms of patrilineal, patrilocal and exogamous
groups, called kuttam. All members of the kuttam may form the whole or a part of one or
several villages. It may be subdivided into secondary kuttam. Each kuttam bears the name of
its ancestor, which is also the name of the chief. The name is inherited by the eldest son who
is also the holder of the position of chief in the group.

The ritual activities, in which the kuttam members participate as a unit of kinship organisation.
In the economic sphere, as land is owned by the male members of the kuttam, we find that after
the death of the father, there are frequent fights between brothers or coparceners, as opposed
to the free and friendly relations among affinal relatives. Thus, it is said amongst the Kallar
that brothers or coparceners do not joke. The coparceners are known as pangali. In the
classificatory system of South Indian kinship terminology, they are opposed to the set of
relatives, known as mama-machchinan.

Affinal Relatives; Opposed to the members of a patrilineage, we have the kin group of affinal
relatives (those related through marriage). Beyond the patrilineage are the relatives who belong

2
to the group in which one’s mother was born, as well as one’s wife. They are a person’s uterine
(from mother’s side) and affinal (from wife’s side) kin, commonly known as mama-
machchinan. In this set of relatives are also included the groups in which a person’s sister and
father’s sister are married. The nature of interaction between a patrilineage and its affine, as
described by Dumont (1986) is always cordial and friendly. Morgan described the Dravidian
kinship terminology as ‘consistent and symmetrical’.

Three Types of Preferential Marriage Rules in South India

The first preferential marriage is a man choosing his elder sister’s daughter (eZD) as bride.
However, among the matrilineal societies like the Nayars do not allow this form of marriage.

Second preferential marriage is a man marrying his father’s sister’s daughter (FZD) (patrilineal
cross cousin). In other words, we can also say that a woman marries her mother’s brother’s son
(MBS). In this kind of marriage, the principle of return is quite evident. The family, which
gives daughter, expects to receive a daughter in return. Often this process takes two generations
to materialize.

Third preferential marriage is a man marrying mother’s brother’s daughter (MBD) (matrilineal
cross cousin). In a way, this is the reverse of (second preferential marriage) mentioned above.
Some castes, such as the Kallar of Tamil Nadu, Havik Brahmin of Karnataka, some Reddy
castes of Andhra Pradesh, allow only this type of cross-cousin marriage (but not first two
types). Hypergamy is not present in South India to the extent that is found among the bride-
takers in North India. But in this type of marriage, the principle of no-return or a ‘vine must
not be returned’ is practised and therefore the bride is given only in one direction.

In this type of marriage, the principle of no return is practiced the bride is given only in one
direction/unidirectional. Village exogamy is not practised in South India. In certain castes a
man can marry his elder sister’s daughter but not younger sister’s daughter. Also, a widow
cannot marry her deceased husband’s elder or younger brother or even his classificatory
brother. Here we find that for each individual, the prohibited persons for marriage differ. Then
there is, of course, the rule that a person cannot marry in one’s own immediate family and one’s
lineage. The lineage in the case of the Kallar subcaste is known as Kuttam (Dumont 1986). All
individuals in the lineage are forbidden to marry persons of the lineage.

North India Kinship System

Irwati Karve and G. S Ghurye follows the Indological approach. Karve had identified four
cultural zones that is the northern, the southern, the central and eastern zones. According to
her, the northern zones lie between the Himalayas to the north and Vindhya ranges to the south.
In this region, majority of the people speak languages derived from Sanskrit. Some of these
languages are Sindhi, Punjabi, Hindi, Bihari, Bengali, Assamese, and Nepali. Mostly people
are patrilineal descent. In North India, all cousins (be it parallel or cross) are considered
consanguine or brothers/sisters. They are not allowed to marry each other.

Characteristics of North Indian Marriage System

✓ In north Indian kinship system is characterized by negative rules of marriage, it tells
whom not to marry.
✓ Dumont views that north Indian kinship terminology is descriptive.

3
 ✓ Marriages are clan endogamous however they follow the principle of hypergamy,
where women generally married to higher caste.
✓ Sapinda rule; seven generation from the father and five generations from the father.

Comparison Between North and South India Kinship System

North India South India

✓ Kinship system in north India is ✓ Kinship system in south India is
characterized by negative rule of characterized by positive rule of
marriage marriage

✓ There is a distinction between the ✓ There are no strict distinction as cross

family of birth and family of cousin marriage takes placed
marriage

✓ Descriptive in nature, such as ✓ Classificatory in nature; for example,

phupha-phuphi is used for father’s in south India Attai is used for both
sister & her husband and mama & phuphi and mami
mami for mother’s brother and his
wife

✓ Village exogamy and caste ✓ Village exogamy is not strictly

endogamy is widely practiced practiced

✓ The kinship system is simpler as ✓ The kinship system is more complex

compared to south India. In north you in south India as you find patriarchy,
have patrilocal, patrilineal and patrilineal, patrilocal along with
patriarchy system matriarchal system in some parts of
Kerala among the Nayars

✓ North India kinship organization is ✓ Sapinda rule is not strictly practiced

dependent on the principle of
generational divisions. Marriage with
Sapinda1 is avoided; seven
generation from father and five
generation from mother

✓ Cross-cousin marriage is prohibited ✓ Cross-cousin marriage is preferred

form of marriage

✓ Levirate is practiced ✓ Levirate is taboo in the south

✓ Marriage alliances follow the ✓ Hypergamy is not followed.

principle of hypergamy Dravidian or South Indian system,

1 While gotra exogamy, the Sa-pinda (Sa=together, pinda= a ball of rice) rules are applicable mostly in North
India. These include all those who have right to offer panda (ritual offering to a dead person) to a man. All those
who share the same body, metaphorically the same flesh, belong to the sapinda category. It includes those who
are putatively related by blood and excludes those who are related by marriage; thus, a son and brother’s son is
sapinda but not a son-in-law.

4
 Dumont considers that the principal
marriage (usually a person’s first
marriage) links the persons of equal
status. He calls it isogamy. i.e., the
marriage between two equals

✓ In north India rule of avoidance is ✓ Rule of avoidance is not found

practiced. For example, purdah is
used by daughter in law to avoid
direct face to face contact with father-
in-law

Conclusion
It is difficult to have a uniform description of kinship, family and marriage in India as there is
considerable regional variation (Iravati Karve 1963, Pauline Kolenda 1987), and also across
caste and tribes in Indian society. Some significant regional works are that of Veena Das (1976)
and Paul Hershman (1981) on Punjabi Kinship, Fruzzeti and Ostor (1976) and Ronald Inden
(1976) on Bengali kinship, Dumont (1966) and Trautmann on Dravidian kinship, and Madan
(1965) on Kashmiri kinship, to name a few. One may also refer to the significant contribution
of Leela Dube (1997) and Patricia Uberoi to a gendered approach to the study of kinship. Some
unique features such as of caste are found in South Asia. Significant differences exist across
North and South India kinship systems. There have been changes also in family and kinship
norms due to transformations in socio-cultural and economic variables. Thus, kinship is just
not ideational but practical as well serving existing needs of society.

5
Unit I
(c) Forms of Marriage; Monogamy/Polygamy; Endogamy/Exogamy; Sororate/Levirate

Background

Marriage is one of the oldest institutions of human society and it is universal. It is as old as
human history. The institution of marriage has its roots in the ancient histories of almost all
cultures and societies.

The civilization provides cultural legitimacy to biological reproduction process. Marriage,

family, kinship and the idea of remarriage are the outcome of such cultural legitimacy. Despite
this legitimacy, in the era of globalization, there is a huge transformation taking place in
contemporary Indian society and across the globe. Changes are taking place in marriages
because of societal shifts in values, norms and ways of life due to internal and external forces.
The forces of globalisation and modernization have introduced new cultural dimensions of
autonomy and individual choice. Globalisation has resulted in increased of mobility of people
and the huge expansion of information technology (ICT) through social medias has shaped the
mindset and attitude towards these social institutions, thereby weakening the so-called
traditional institution of marriage, family and kinship.

For this, we will be dealing with the existing traditional forms of marriage, family & kinship
vis-a-vis changing patterns or the present trends of marriage, family and kinship. Different
scholars have defined marriage in different ways in different epochs. There is no universal
definition of marriage.

Definitions of Marriage

The term marriage has different meanings and connotations for different people. To some,
marriage is a relationship between men and women for the propagation of the human species.
Some people take it as a license for sex. Yet another group considers marriage as a means for
companionship. Marriage comprises all these views and much more. It is a very complex
institution which cannot be defined in a sentence or two or accept a single definition
unanimously. Many sociologists and anthropologists have given differing views about the
meaning of marriage. Some of them are given below;

As a social institution it has been defined various sociological thinkers. For Malinowski
“marriage is a contract for the production and maintenance of children”.

Gillin and Gillin have said, “marriage is a socially approved way of establishing a family of
procreation”.

According to Horton and Hunt, “Marriage is the approved social pattern whereby two or more
persons establish a family”.

Westermarck ‘defines marriage as the durable connection between male and female lasting
beyond the mere act of propagation till after the birth of offspring.” Marriage is a socially
sanctioned union between a man and a woman which is accomplished by culture specific rituals
and ceremonies. It is a socially approved way through which families are established.

According to Koos, marriage is a dividing line between the family of orientation and family of

1
procreation. These individual roles are different in these two forms of family. The roles in the
family of orientation are different for the various stages as the child passes through infancy,
childhood and adolescent stage. These roles are not associated with duties and responsibilities.
After marriage an individual enters into the family of procreation and plays the role of a
husband, a father and an earning member.

Mazumdar defines marriage as a socially sanctioned union of male and female, or as a

secondary institution devised by society to sanction the union and mating of male and female,
for purposes of (i) establishing a household (ii) entering into sexual relations (iii) procreating
and (iv) providing care for the off-spring.

There are various views regarding the functional significance of marriage. In a general sense,
the concept of marriage in India differs from the concept in western countries. According to
the Hindu society, marriage is regarded as a religious sacrament similarly the Christian
considers as a sacrament & covenant and which is solemnized. On the other hand, some people
in the western countries, regarded marriage as merely social contract, which enables one to
fulfill personal needs and happiness in life. Thus, marriage is bound by social as well as legal
obligations. It also builds as a foundation for families and kinship relation.

Affiliation to one’s descent group is based on societal norms whether the society is matriarchal
or patriarchal. Matriarchal society the term matriarchal comes from the word matriarchy
meaning mother right. In present day societies complete rule of the mother is not seen. What
we generally have is a matrilineal society based on lineage and inheritance pattern rather than
on authority and power. For example, among the Khasi, Garo & Jaintia people of Meghalaya,
Northeast India the lineage is traced through the mother and the inheritance pattern specially
of the ancestral house follows the matrilineal line wherein the inheritance is by the youngest
daughter among the Khasis is known as Ka Khadduh. Inheritance by the youngest child is
known as the rule of ultimogeniture. In case of authority, in decision making it lies with the
mother’s brother. As the power and authority lies with the male line, rule of the female or
mother right is not complete in the true sense of the term.

Patriarchal society, a society is based on father right or patriarchy. In such societies the
lineage, descent, inheritance, power and authority is traced through the father. Daughters are
part of the father’s lineage but in terms of inheritance, power and authority it moves from father
to son. The rule of primogeniture is the norm that is the eldest male child becomes the heir. He
inherits the property and becomes the head of the family after his father’s death. In few
patriarchal societies the rule of ultimo-geniture prevails wherein the youngest son inherits the
ancestral property. Among the Kachin’s of Myanmar, the rule of ultimo geniture prevails.

Characteristics of Marriage

1. Universality - Marriage is a universal institution. In Korea, unmarried individuals are called

‘half’ persons. The Todas of Nilgiri refuse to perform funeral rites for a girl if she dies before
her marriage. But they do perform it after completing some sort of marriage ceremony for the
corpse. According to the Confucius, an individual who remains unmarried throughout his life
commits a great crime. As Levi Strauss has observed that the unmarried primitives of Central
Brazil are made to lead a miserable life.

2. Relationship between Man and a Woman – Marriage is a union of man and woman. It
indicates relationship between one or more men to one or more women. Who should marry
how many? are the question which represent social rules regarding marriage which differ

2
significantly.

3. Marriage Requires Social Bond – A union of man or woman becomes a marital bond only
when the society gives its approval. When marriage is given the hallmark of social approval, it
becomes a legal contract.

4. Marriage Creates Mutual Obligations – Marriage imposes certain rights and duties on both
the husband and wife. Both are required to support each other and their children.

5. Marriage is Associated with Ceremony – Marriage gets recognised through some

ceremonies. This ceremony may have its own rites, rituals, customs, formalities, etc. It means
marriage has to be concluded in a public and solemn manner.

Rules of marriage

In all societies there are certain restrictive and preferential rules regarding marriage. These
rules determine the choice of marriage partners. Marriage in all societies is regulated by certain
rules. On the basis of these rules there are various forms of marriage, which differs from society
to society.

• Endogamy
• Exogamy

Endogamy; This rule restricts the choice of mate within a certain group. It is a marriage within
caste, tribe, race or other groups. Caste endogamy is prevalent in Indian society. According to
this rule of marriage it is required that the marriage partner should be selected from same group
that is within the same caste or tribe. The endogamous groups refer explicitly to the caste, and
sub-caste. Caste endogamy specifies that the marriage should compulsorily take place within
the caste and the sub-caste endogamy limits the marriage relations within the same sub-caste.
According to Radcliffe Brown the elementary systems are characterized by preferential
marriage which can be further classified into restricted and generalized marriage system.

Exogamy; It is the rule which restricts the selection of spouse from certain groups. It forbids
marriage within the same group. The blood relatives are prohibited from having marital
connections among themselves. There are two forms of exogamy: Gotra and Sapinda, both of
which are practiced in Hindu society. Members of a same gotra are supposed to have descended
from a common ancestor of a rishi, therefore same-gotra exogamy marriages are prohibited.
sapinda means the individuals who carry the particles of the same body. Sapinda relationship
arises from being connected by having particles of the same ancestors. Hence the marriage
between sapinda is prohibited. Since there is no known limit of persons related by blood, the
prescribed limit for prohibiting marriage according to sapinda is within from the father’s of
seven generations and five generations from mother’s side.

There are two other rules of marriage in Hindu society that is hypergamy or anuloma and
hypogamy or pratiloma. Hypergamy is where a woman marries into higher caste/status
groups, and this is accepted traditionally whereas hypogamy is where a woman marry a man
of lower caste. Anisogamy is the example of hypergamy and hypogamy. It is an asymmetric
marriage alliance between two individuals belonging to different social statuses. Isogamy
designate marriage between social equals or of same caste.

3
Thus, every society prescribes different rules of marriage which specify the partners and also
the groups among which marriage is not permitted. Prohibition of marriage between certain
individuals is called incest taboo. The incest taboos and preferential rules regarding marriage
differ from caste to caste, religion to religion and across cultures. Egyptian and Hawaiian royal
families, the rule of incest taboo has not been followed. Marriage between siblings had been
the norm so as to maintain the purity of the royal blood.

Types /Forms of Marriage

There are different kinds of marriage which differs from society to society. It varies according
to;

✓ Number of mates (monogamy, polygamy, group marriage)

✓ Degree of authority (egalitarian, patriarchal, matriarchal)
✓ Residence after marriage (patrilocal, matrilocal, neolocal)
✓ Choice of mates (free selection by young people, with courtship, arranged marriage)
✓ On the basis of choice (kinship, caste, class, region, religion)
✓ Exchange at marriage (bride price, dowry, price, equal exchange)
✓ Age of marriage (early/child marriage, late marriage)
✓ Strength of the relationship/bond (temporary, permanent)
✓ Possibility of re-marriage (no marriage after the death of husband (sati), widow or
widower remarriage)

The most common form of marriage is number of mates that monogamy, polygamy and
group marriage.

(a) Monogamy; Monogamy is a form of marriage in which an individual is institutionally

permitted to have only one spouse at a time. This form of marriage is the common form
of marriage in most societies.

Monogamy can be strict monogamy that allows a person to have only one spouse in a
lifetime, without letting either spouse to remarry. Serial monogamy refers to a practice
where individuals can marry more than once but not at the same time. In most cases
people remarry after divorce or sometime after the death of a spouse.

There are two types of monogamy;

✓ Homogamy – Homogamy show that married couples tend more to resemble

than to differ from each other in physical and psychological traits. For example,
same gender. (same gender, status, race, religion, some take to the extent of
socioeconomic background)
✓ Heterogamy – Marriage or similar union between people of different sexes. (a
man and a woman)

(b) Polygamy; Polygamy is a form of marriage in which a man or a woman is permitted to

have two or more spouse at the same time. A general term for polygyny and polyandry.
Either a man or a woman having more than one man or woman.
✓ Polygyny; a man with more than one wife is known as polygyny. (Use diagram)
❖ Sororal polygyny or fraternal polygyny; a man having more than one
wife and if he is married to wife’s sister. (Use diagram)
Sororal polygyny is also known as surrogate. The term surrogate comes

4
 from Latin word ‘sorer’ which means sister. Hence it refers to a marriage
practice in which a man marries the sisters of his wife.
❖ Non fraternal polygyny; refers that type of marriage in which wives of
a man are not sisters.

✓ Polyandry; Where a woman have more than one husband. (Use diagram)
❖ Levirate polyandry or fraternal polyandry; one woman having more
than one husband and if all men are brothers, it is called levirate or
fraternal polyandry. This is done to conserve the family’s property.
❖ Non-fraternal polyandry; refers that type of marriage in which
husbands of a woman are not brothers.

(c) Group marriage; Group marriage is a form of marriage where marriage is between
several men with several women. According to Murdock, the Caingang people of Brazil
practiced group marriage.

In Toda people mixture of polygyny and polyandry is taking place because they have
renounced the custom of female infanticide. Thus, the number of females is increasing among
them. If we use the meaning of group marriage which indicates that every man of a group is a
husband of every woman of the female group and the children so born are considered the
children of the whole group, then example of such marriage is found nowhere in the world.

Functions of Marriage

Marriage is not only a basic unit or the institution of the society, rather it is also an
indispensable part of a social system. Some or other forms of marriage are found in all societies
of the world. The universality of marriage points to its functional importance for maintaining
social equilibrium. The functions of marriage are as follows:

(d) Develops Family: Marriage is an institution which brings a family in to existence.

Marriage establishes a family of procreation. It is here the children are born and bred
up. It is responsible for perpetuation of lineage and establishment of kinship relations.
The relations established after marriage help in maintaining social solidarity and thus
contribute to the unity of society.
(e) Provides Security: The system of marriage provides social and financial security to
elderly members and children. It gives stability to relationships.
(f) Satisfaction of affiliation needs: The system of marriage also satisfies affiliation needs.
Marriage is lifelong relationship between a man and a woman. Married couples are
considered as lifelong companions who share ideas, attitudes, and emotions with each
other.
(g) Provides for economic cooperation: Marriage makes division of labour possible based
on sex. After marriage partners distribute and divide work among themselves.
(h) Regulation of sex relations: Marriage is the powerful instrument for regulating the sex
life of man. It sets moral standards for the society and helps in regulation of moral life
of the members of society.

Thus, marriage serves protective, emotional, regulatory, and economic functions and plays an
important role in stabilizing adult personalities. This institution also represents commitment of
individuals and family at multi-dimensional levels which help in maintaining social
organization. Apart from the above-mentioned functions of marriage, also it gives rise to a

5
network of social relations known as kinship system. This is an important system which
determines the status of a person in the family.

Marriage is a universal social institution. It is associated with mutual rights and obligations. It
serves protective, regulatory, emotional and economic functions. Marriage ties result in
formation of kinship network which organize individuals into social groups.

6
Unit I Kinship, Family and Marriage
(d) Forms of Family: Joint and Nuclear Family

Introduction
Family is the basic unit of the social structure in every society, as universal social institution,
it is an inevitable part of human society. Family helps to regularize sexual behavior and protect
& nurture the young ones. It is also a unit in which resources are pooled and distributed for
consumption, around which residence is organized and domestic tasks are performed. Family
also gives us our principal identity, our social status, our name which is the label of the identity
in the larger society. Family supports you in time of crisis and helps in continuity of the human
race. Family plays an important role from birth till death. A family is established through
marriage. The relatives connected through the father or the patriline are called as agnates and
those connected through the mother or matriline are called as uterine, a combination of these
or all relatives from side of both parents are called as cognates.

Family relationships;
(a) Husband - wife relationship = Conjugal relationship
(b) Brother – brother relationship = Fraternal relationship
(c) Father – relationship = Filial relationship

The concept, family, broadly refers to the primary group comprising husband wife unit
(parents) and their children. This definition keeps three types of ties in mind. The ties are of
marriage between the spouses, (i.e. the parents) and of siblingship between children. The two
ties are connected through the genealogical one between parents and their children. Kolenda
(1998) is another sociologist who has consistently worked towards clarifying the conceptual
issues about family and household. Since 1950s, Sociology and Social Anthropology both in
the West and in India have provided a great deal of rigorous research on the family and its
various dimensions and aspects.

Conceptualisation and Definition of Family

The word family has its origin in the Latin word familia derived from famulus meaning servant.
Familia have been used to refer to all the slaves and servants living under one roof, including
the entire household that is the master, on the one hand, and the wife, children and servants
living under his control. Today, when we use the term family it covers all the various groups
of relatives representing a household (all the individuals living under one roof), gens (all those
descended from a common ancestor), agnatic (relatives on the father’s side) and cognatic
(relatives on the mother’s side, and then by extension all blood relatives). The family though
considered universal in nature found in all types and levels of societies and cultures, yet it is
difficult to trace the origin. In the early years of the anthropological history the origin of family,
how it emerged in society was much discussed and debated.

The evolutionary theory believed family as an institution has evolved just like the society.
Lewis Henry Morgan in his work Ancient Society (1877) stated that in the early societies the
concept of family was not prevalent. Such societies were nomads and promiscuous where free
sex relations were prevalent thus, the role of the father was not important, and the mother-sib
was the earliest form of grouping.
- The consanguine family was founded upon the intermarriage of brothers and sisters in
a group. Evidence still remains in the oldest of existing systems of marriage.

1
 - The punaluan family its name is derived from the Hawaiian relationship of punaluan.
It was founded upon the intermarriage of several brothers to each other’s wives in a
group; and of several sisters to each other’s husbands in a group.
- The syndyasmian or pairing of family founded upon the marriage of single pairs,
without giving the right of exclusive cohabitation to any person over the other. It was
the term of the monogamian family. Divorce or separation was at the option of both
husband and wife. This form of the family failed to create a system of consanguinity.
- The patriarchal family comprising of marriage of one man to several wives, each wife
being secluded from every other.
- The monogamian family was founded upon marriage between single pairs, with the
married couple having exclusive cohabitation with one another the latter constituting
the essential of the institution.

Though today, Morgan’s evolutionary scheme is not followed, his work is important as he gave
the first classification of five forms of family based on five different types of marriage.

Westermarck (1853-1936) who had done a detailed study of the institution of marriage
concluded that the family emerged due to male possessiveness and jealousy. In his work The
History of Human Marriage (1922) he asserted that with the growing concept of property,
males started the institution of family to protect and safeguard their property. This theory was
a direct criticism of Morgan’s theory wherein the origin of family was ascribed to the bonding
of mother-sib.

Classical definitions emphasized that family was a group based on marriage, common
residence, emotional bonds, marital relationship, rights and duties of parenthood, common
habitation and reciprocal relations between parents and children. As society changes the
concept of family also changes. During the early 19th century evolutionary anthropologists
had described family as a group based on marriage, common residence, emotional bonds and
stipulation of domestic services. While in the early 20th century R.H. Lowie defined family as
a group based on material relations, rights and duties of parenthood, common habitation and
reciprocal relations between parents and children. George Peter Murdock (1949) examined
192 societies and formulated a definition of family defined the family as a social group
characterized by common residence, economic cooperation, and reproduction. He added that
the family includes adults of both sexes and one or more children. He lists four important
functions served by nuclear family; regulate sexual relations, account for economic survival,
control reproduction and socializes children. Anthony Giddens defines family as a group of
persons directly linked by kin connections, the adult member of which they assume
responsibility for caring the children. Burgess and Locke defined family is a group of persons
united by ties of marriage, blood or adoption constituting a single household interacting and
communicating with each other in their respective social roles of husband and wife, son, and
daughter, creating a common culture. According to sociologists, a family should consist of
husband, wife, child(ren). In the absent of any of this it would be called as household instead
of family. According to Maclver family is a group defined by sex relationships sufficiently
precise and enduring to provide for the procreation and upbringing of children. Kingsley Davis
describes family as a group of persons whose relations to one another are based upon
consanguinity and who are therefore kin to one another. Nimkoff says that family is a more or
less durable association of husband and wife with or without child or of a man or woman alone
with children.

Types of Family

2
Family base on birth
i) Family or orientation; is the family in which you are born, you as a child.
ii) Family of procreation; individual sets up after his/her marriage in his/her family of
procreation.

Family based on marriage

i) Monogamous; family of one husband and wife, including children and is based on
monogamous marriage. This is the most common for of family.
ii) Polygamous; polygyny is a family consisting of one husband and more than one
wife, polyandrous is a family made up of one wife and more than one husband.
Family based on residence
i) Matrilocal; couple stays in wife’s home, example Khasi, Garo, Jiantia and Nayars.
ii) Patrilocal; newly married couple stays in the house of husband.
iii) Neolocal; newly married couple set up a new home.
iv) Bilocal; A married couple alternate their residence between that of the wife’s and
husband’s group.
Family based on ancestry or descent
i) Matrilineal; descent is trace through the female line, or through the mother’s side
ii) Patrilineal; the authority is carried down the male line, and descent is trace through
the male line or the father’s side.
Family based on authority
i) Patriarchal; Patriarchal families are commonly found in all parts of the world, the
head of the family is a male, and authority is through the father. Descent and
property are passed through the male line and children are brought up in father’s
house.
ii) Matriarchal; matriarchal families are generally found in matrilineal societies,
woman is the head of the family, and the authority is vested in her.
Family based on nature of relationship
i) Conjugal; Conjugal family is made up of adults among whom there is sexual
relationship. It refers to a family system of spouses and their dependent children.
The emphasis is place on the marital relationship that exists between spouses.
ii) Consanguine; A consanguine family is made up of members among whom a blood
relation exists or those who are consanguineal kin.
Family based on size or structure
i) Nuclear family; Small group consisting of a husband, a wife, and children (natural
or adopted). Nuclear family is the characteristic of modern societies. It is a family
both the consequence and the cause of the disintegration of joint family.
ii) Extended or stem family; The traditional make up of extended family which include
grandparents, parents and children.
iii) Joint family; Consist of three generation, living together under the same roof,
sharing the same kitchen and purse on economic expenses.

Nuclear Family
A nuclear family is a small group consisting of a husband, a wife, and children,
natural/biological or adopted. It is an autonomous unit that is not under the control of adults or
elders of the family. It consists of two generations only. In all modern societies, nuclear family
is the most common type of family. In fact, nuclear family is both the consequence as well as
the cause of the disintegration of joint family.

3
While discussing the nature of nuclear family, Pauline Kolenda (1987) has discussed additions
in nuclear family structure. She gives the following compositional categories.
i) Nuclear family refers to a couple with or without children.
ii) Supplemented nuclear family indicates a nuclear family plus one or more unmarried,
separated, or widowed relatives of the parents, other than their unmarried children.
iii) Subnuclear family is identified as a fragment of a former nuclear family for instance a
widow/widower with her/his unmarried children or siblings (unmarried or widowed or
separated or divorced) living together.
iv) Single person household
v) Supplemented subnuclear family refers to a group of relatives, members of a formerly
complete nuclear family along with some other unmarried, divorced or widowed relative who
was not a member of the nuclear family. For instance, a widow and her unmarried children
may be living together with her widowed mother-in-law. In the Indian context, it is easy to find
all these types of family. However, in terms of societal norms and values, these types relate to
the joint family system.

Joint Family in India

Extended and joint family are interchangeably use together. The patrilineally extended family
is based on an extension of the father-son relationship, while the matrilineally extended family
is based on the mother-daughter relationship. The extended family may also be extended
horizontally to include a group consisting of two or more brothers, their wives and children. In
India, the family whether extended vertically and/or horizontally is called the joint family.

A joint family has been considered as an important feature of Indian social structure since
ancient times. It is a collection of more than one primary family on the basis of close blood ties
and common residence. The ideal joint family consists of a man, his wife and their sons’ wives
and children, and the younger unmarried children. The structure of family changes over a
period of time in terms of size, composition, role and status, the family and societal norms and
sanctions. Sociologists like I.P. Desai, K.M Kapadia, Milton Singer etc. hold the views
regarding disintegration of joint family system in India but still not wipe out fully whereas the
others like Aileen Ross, [Link] point out that joint family is breaking down in India and is
being replaced by the nuclear. Thus, we shall discuss various empirical studies on joint family
was conducted by scholars from different parts of India.

• Irawati Karve - defines joint family as a group of people who generally live under one
roof, who eat food cooked at one hearth, who hold property in common and who
participate in family worship and are related to each other as some type of kindred.
• Henry Maine - the Hindu joint family is a group constitute of known ancestors and
adopted sons and relatives related to these sons through marriage.
• K. Davis – The joint family consists of males having a common male ancestor, female
offspring not yet married, and women brought into the group by marriage. All these
persons might live in a common household or in several households near to one another.
• [Link] – Studied Gujarat in 1955. Joint family is a group formed not only of a
couple and their children but also other relations either from father’s side or from
mother’s side depending on whether the joint family is patrilineal or matrilineal.
Viewed in terms of castes, in villages, higher castes were predominantly joint family
while lower castes show a greater incidence of nuclear family.
• [Link] – he studied coastal town called Mahua in Gujarat. Co-residence and common
kitchen are not as important dimensions of joint family as intra-family relationships.

4
 Two families having kinship relationship are living separately but function under one
common authority, it will be a joint family and calls it functional joint family. He calls
a traditional joint family as one which consists of three or more generation. According
to him, joint family is decreasing but never said it is disappeared. He had found that
60% are minimally joint, 20% are moderately joint, 10% are maximally joint, 10% are
fully joint.
• Aileen Ross - has given four types of families; large joint, small joint, nuclear and
nuclear with dependents. She studied 157 Hindu families in Karnataka, where they have
exposure to western influences. The trend of family form is towards a breakaway from
the traditional joint family form into nuclear family units. Distant relatives are less
important to the present generation than they were to their parents and grand-parents.
• [Link] – Studied Hindu families in Gujarat between 1955-58. He classified families
as simple and complex, and found one-third families were complex. Two-third were
simple, indicating the breakdown of joint family system in rural India.
• Pauline Kolenda’s – used data from 26 studies conducted between the 1950s and 1970s
and found that majority of the families are nuclear. Regional differences in the
proportions of joint families, there are higher proportions of joint families in Gangetic
plain than in Central India or Eastern India. The joint family is more characteristic of
upper and land owing castes than of lower and landless castes.
• [Link] – has said that a joint family should be viewed as ‘a family of co-parceners
and their dependents’ instead of viewing it as a multiplicity of nuclear families. Gore’s
joint family is of three types;
✓ Filial joint family; parents and their married sons with their offspring
✓ Fraternal joint family; two married brothers and their children
✓ Filial and fraternal (combination of the above two families) joint family
• Milton Singer - reports that the urban and industrial members of a family maintain
numerous ties and obligations with the members of the family who have remained in
the ancestral village or town or have moved elsewhere.

Characteristics of Joint Family

A joint family jointness is reflected by the factor of commensality such as;
✓ Common residence
✓ Joint ownership of property
✓ Cooperation and sentiment of jointness, actual bonds like worship of common deity
Structural characteristics
✓ Characterised by patrilineal descent, has three generation depth
✓ Consanguine bonds are valued more than conjugal bonds
✓ Division of labour on gender, segregated roles based on gender
✓ Age and sex are the main principles of family hierarchy
✓ Several families living under one roof and common kitchen
✓ Encourage collective orientation rather than self-orientation
Functional characteristics
• In agrarian society it is a unit of production and consumption
• Provide social security to the young, widows and ageing parents
• Basic unit of participation in political life, cultural activities etc.
• A lot of recreation time is found in joint family

5
Characteristics of Joint Family

The jointness is reflected in the factors of commensality, common residence, joint ownership
of property, cooperation and sentiment of jointness, authority ritual bonds like worship of
common deity etc.
i) Commensality: Most of the studies of joint family use commensality (eating together) as a
defining criterion. The joint family is the hearth group; members cook and eat food from the
same kitchen.

ii) Common Residence: In some studies, the joint family as the residential family group is
stressed. Though it is possible to find a joint family having the same hearth but not sharing the
same dwelling or vice versa, by and large commensality and common residence are taken as
essential ingredients of jointness (Cohn 1961, Dube 1955, Mukherjee 1969, Kolenda 1968).

iii) Joint Ownership of Property: Some scholars have regarded joint ownership of property or
coparcenary as the essence of jointness, irrespective of the type of residence and commensality.
In legal terms, this is the most crucial factor used for defining a joint family.

iv) Cooperation and Sentiment: Scholars like I.P. Desai (1964) and K. M. Kapadia (1958)
point out that jointness should be looked in functional terms. A functionally joint family lays
stress on fulfilment of obligations towards kin. A patrilineal joint family may consist of a
number of households headed by males related through the father. They may be located even
at distant places and may not even have property in common. But what is common is that they
identify themselves as members of a particular ‘family’, cooperate in rituals and ceremonies,
render financial and other kinds of help; and they cherish a common family sentiment and abide
by the norms of joint living.

v) Ritual Bonds: The ritual bonds of a joint family are considered to be an important component
of jointness. A joint family, thus, is bound together by periodic propitiation of the dead
ancestors. The members perform a ‘shraddha’ ceremony in which the senior male member of
the joint family propitiates the dead father’s or mother’s spirit, offering it the ‘pinda’ (balls of
cooked rice) on behalf of all the members.

vi) Exercise of Authority: Another characteristic feature of joint family is the rule of the head.
His or her commands are normally obeyed by all the members of the family.

Concept of Tarawad/Tharavad
Now we shall see alternative family types which are not patrilineal in structure. A family
composed of genealogical and sibling relations of kinship with primary focus on the mother-
daughter bond and descent principle, is a matrilineal family. A matrilineal family too could be
nuclear or joint and have varying household forms over its members’ life cycle.

Not the whole of South India is matrilineal, but it is exception to the Nayars/Nairs. In Malabar
(Kerala), they are known as ‘Tarwad’ joint families. The ‘Tarward’ joint family exists among
the Nayars. The Nayars are governed by the ‘Marakattayam’ law of inheritance in the past.
However, Marumakkathayam Act stood repealed by the Kerala Joint Hindu Family System
Abolition Act 1975 (Act 30 of 1976).

Unlike the village, gotra, and sapinda exogamy in North India, the south Indian family
formation is influenced by cross-cousin and uncle-niece marriages. Unlike the joint family of

6
the Nambudiris (illam) based on patriliny, the Nayar family (tarawad) was based on matriliny.
The patrilineal family in South India is different from that in North India in some respects.
There are variations in family formation among the Nayars within Kerala, for instance, between
South-West Kerala and Central and North Kerala. Malabar and Travancore differed in their
practice of polyandry. Yet the institution of tarawad was strong. Dube’s (1974) review gives
an extensive coverage of the studies of matrilineal systems and families therein, both by Indian
and non-Indian scholars. The tarawad as an intimately linked manifestation of the central
feature of matriliny which gives women certain entitlements, such as permanent rights to
maintenance by and residence in their natal home (tarawad). The relatively greater autonomy
of women in the tarawad reflects both the principle of matriliny and the consequent tarawad
formation. This family system was rather complex and posed a certain difficulty in fitting with
the family in patrilineal society. Matriliny is not the mirror opposite of patriliny. Levi- Strauss
(1971) considers the South Indian Nayar family as family at times and does not view this
grouping as the family at others. The difficulty is posed by the variation in the Indian family
forms which did not easily match with the nuclear family of the industrial West. However,
Puthenkalam (2005) gives a peep into the matrilineal joint family (tarawad), among the Nayars
in Kerala. Nevertheless, the institution of tarawad gradually weakened, as Puthenkalam
describes, during the colonial rule. Whether the decline of the tarawad is a reflection of the
disintegration of the matrilineal joint family is difficult to claim. It is not that the illam has
replaced the tarawad. Nevertheless, in the process of disintegration of the tarawad, women’s
autonomy has been curtailed. The erosion of Nayar women’s autonomy and entitlements raises
a research question on the importance of materiality in kinship structures.

(Include the pros and cons of joint and nuclear family as discussed in the class)

Factors responsible for the Disintegration of Joint Family

India as a country came under many rulers like Britishers however somehow tried to preserve
the characteristics of traditional society. The joint family has not completely disappeared
although transition from joint family to nuclear family are due to various reasons like;
• Industrialization process
• Liberalization
• Modernization
• Globalisation
• Urbanisation
• Migrate from rural to urban areas in search of education and job
• Exposure to technology such as social media
• Changes in the middle and upper-class families in urban areas
• Increasing opportunity to individual members to achieve their aspirations and
diversification of occupations
• Exposure to western culture
• Over population and accommodation issues in the cities
• Changes in intra family relations
• Social legislation acts and
• Land reforms etc.
(Refer to class discussion and explain all the above points in details)

Changing Trends of Family

The term change implies social change that has taken placed in the society. Social change is
part of cultural and structural change which includes science, technology and values of social

7
organization. So, when we look at the change, we are going to look at the behaviour both at
structural and cultural change that has taken placed in the institutions like family, marriage,
and kinship. Changes in family systems that have occurred throughout the world are now
spreading across the globe to nations that are experiencing economic development,
technological change, and shifts in cultural beliefs.

Both modernization and urbanization are considered as the major contributing factors toward
modernization. In western European societies, Jack Goode finds that world revolutions have
contributed for the transformation of family system. Although, the bearing of
industrialization of family system is not uniform. In the country like Poland and China, you
will find the elderly people live in the countryside along with their grandchildren. The adults
go for industrial occupation and urban living. And it is not exception to India, we cannot
ignore the fact of disappearing joint family system in India and other innumerable societal
factors given rise to west-inspired phenomena of old age home in the country. The studies
conducted in several parts of the country show that the joint family system in India is
undergoing a process of structural transformation due to the process of modernization,
urbanization and industrialization. Massive growth of nuclear family system, migration of
labour to different countries and urban areas, women begun to work, and family burdens are
the major factors responsible in disregarding the interest of geriatric community. Thus, it is
an attempt to discuss the crux of the evidence and emerged forms of family. The studies
conducted by scholars in several parts of the country show that the joint family system in
India is undergoing a process of structural transformation due to the process of
modernization, urbanization and industrialization.

Some of the evidence of changes taking place in the family are given below;
• The pressing demand of the modern line have given rise to one parent or single
parent family. This is due to result of personal choices; people like to go for single
parent family rather than legal formal marriage. This consists of one parent and his or
her children. One-parent families may be formed through widowhood, divorce,
separation or adoption.
• The age at first marriage has been rising in most nations of the world. This pattern
was evident in some parts of the country especially in urban areas although not
uniform, the pattern is sufficiently widespread to lead most researchers to conclude
that the institution of marriage is undergoing profound changes in most parts of the
world in response to economic and social change.
• As marriage has becomes optional, the practice of cohabitation has grown throughout
the Western world and in Eastern Europe. In many nations in Latin America, the
Caribbean etc., it has become more widely practiced among more economically
advantaged individuals who previously confined their unions to formal marriage.
• Blended Families is a family made up of a couple and children either or both raised in
an earlier marriage, and children they raised together. This form of family is
prevailing in the society.
• Compound Family is a form of family organization can be seen as an overlapping set
of nuclear families, each with the same man as family head. It consists of a man; his
wives and concubines who live in different homestead with their children. This is
culturally accepted in some of the societies.
• Divorce has become more common in most nations and marital stability has decreased
in some countries. As marriage has moved to a more companion form, divorce is
increasingly viewed as an acceptable option for couples in unsatisfactory
relationships.

8
 • A concomitant trend is the growth of childlessness in families which is associated
with declining fertility. Living alone has become more common in many countries of
the world as growing numbers of females have entered the labor force and opted not
to marry. Childlessness appears to be on the rise in East Asia societies and other
rapidly developing parts of the globe.
• The rapid growth of women’s participation in the labor force in most developing and
almost all developed nations has been accompanied by a change in men and women’s
domestic roles.
• Gender Division of labour
• The weakening of the institution of marriage has been accompanied by a growing
tolerance for premarital sexual behavior and out-of-wedlock childbearing. Although
much of the non-marital childbearing is occurring within informal unions, the stability
of non-marital unions with children is lower than marital unions with children.
• Though homosexuality is not widespread in India, there have been several cases of
homosexual perversions in recent times. It is not easy to find adequate literature and
data to unearth the growth of homosexuality in Indian society. Western societies have
approved gay marriages and lesbian relationship as a civil practice. Concept of
LGBTQIA+++ (A common abbreviation for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Pansexual,
Transgender, Genderqueer, Queer, Intersexed, Agender, Asexual, and Ally
community).
The study shows that due to the influence of modernisation, the Indian society is undergoing
radical changes in the social and cultural areas such as family, marriage, divorce, sexuality,
ageing generation, feminism, migration, media, language etc. However, 80% of families in
the world still practices monogamy it could be patrilineal or matrilineal.

Terminologies
*Commensality is relating to those who are traditionally allowed to eat together.

*Coparcenary is a joint ownership of property amongst the male members of the family, in a
patrilineal society.

* Patri-virilocal is the term refers to the residence of a couple after marriage with the
husband’s father.

*Matri-Patrilocal Family: In some societies, it is found that the husband, goes to the house of
the wife to live after marriage but a few years later or after the birth of the first child, the
husband comes to his own parent’s house with his wife and children to live permanently there.
This type of family is found among the Chenchus of Andhra Pradesh.

*Natolocal Residence: The residence pattern in which a bride and groom remain in their own
separate family's households or compounds after their marriage rather than occupy a residence
together. The children born of this union usually stay in their mother's home, which becomes
a de facto matricentric residence. This is also found among the Nayars/Nairs matrilineal family.

*Blended Families: This is a family made up of a couple and children either or both raised in
an earlier marriage, and children they raised together (if any). Most people who divorce
eventually get remarried. A good number of such persons often divorce leaving behind
children. Remarriage frequently result in step-families, also called ‘reconstituted’,
‘reorganizing’ or ‘blended’ families. Because a good number of those who remarry are parents,
their new partners become stepparents. This form of nuclear family has become very common

9
in modern times (a family consisting of a couple, the children they have had together, and their
children from previous relationships).

*Compound Family: This form of family organization can be seen as an overlapping set of
nuclear families, each with the same man as family head. It consists of a man (head of
households); his wives and concubines who live in different homestead with their children. In
this case, the wives become head of their own respective household while the man rules and
runs all households. This kind of family is mostly popular amongst traditional West African
societies (A unit consisting of three or more spouses and their children; it may be produced in
monogamous societies by a second marriage giving rise to step-relationships).

*Half Brother: A brother with the same father but a different mother or the same mother but a
different father.

* Matrilineal system of Meghalaya; The most distinct feature of the Khasi, Jaintia and Garo
of Meghalaya society is its matrilineal system. Mother kinship is dominant, and inheritance is
matrilineal, each tracing lineage from the ancestral mother. In case of the Khasis, the youngest
daughter Ka khadduh is the heiress and custodian of the ancestral property, her husband comes
and stays with her in the ancestral house called the ling. Whereas in the case of Garos, the
Nokna who is the heiress and custodian of the inherited ancestral property may not necessary
be the youngest daughter as the parents have the liberty to choose any daughter for the purpose.

10
Unit-II: Religion
a. Sacred and Profane

Introduction

For centuries, humankind has sought to understand and explain the meaning of life. Many
philosophers believe this contemplation and the desire to understand our place in the universe
are what differentiate humankind from other species. The sociologists also distinguish the
meaning of religious experiences, beliefs, and rituals. Religious experience refers to the
conviction or sensation that one is connected to the divine. This type of communion might be
experienced when people are praying or meditating. Religious beliefs are specific ideas that
members of a particular faith hold to be true. Another illustration of religious beliefs is that
different religions adhere to certain stories of world creation.

Max Weber’s View on Religion

Weber applies his concept of rationalization to understand changes in religion, science, arts,
administration and politics. For Weber, capitalism itself was born out of a highest degree of
economic rationalization.

Weber believed religion is due a force for social change. Religion is a social institution as it
includes beliefs and practices that serve the needs of society. Religion is also an example of a
cultural universal because it is found in all societies in one form or another.

Weber studied preliterate as well as the so-called world religions (viz., Hinduism, Buddhism,
Jainism, Judaism, Christianity and Islam) in order to examine, among other things, the relations
between religious beliefs and practices on the one hand, and the secular domain of politics,
economics, etc. on the other. He is unlike Durkheim who paid particular attention to the relation
between it and the religious milieu and did not look at economy. In Protestant Ethic and the
spirit of capitalism, weber argued for a causal relationship between the Protestant ethics and
the rise of rational capitalism in Western Europe.

Weber said that, only in the modern Western world that rational capitalistic enterprises with
fixed capital, free labour, the rational specialization and combination of functions, bound
together in a market economy are to be found… and that economic grounds alone do not
provide a satisfactory explanation of the phenomenon (Weber 1947: 279). He looked at the
Calvinist ethics of Protestantism and asserted that the crucial elements of this ethic were the
ideas of predestination and calling,‘ i.e., the notion that one‘s fate and one‘s work are both
predetermined by God. This idea of predestination generated anxiety amongst the Calvinists.
In order to cope with this anxiety, the Calvinist put his faith in the hope that God helps those
who help themselves. Thus, he himself creates his own salvation, or…the conviction of it’.

Karl Marx view on Religion

• For Marx, religion continues to survive because of oppressive social conditions. When this
oppressive and exploitative condition is destroyed, religion will become unnecessary. Marx
denied a place for religion in his world of communism.

• Religion has a double-function. It acts as an ideology (political ideas of a social class)

of the ruling elite. It acts as an opiate of the masses.

1
 (a) Sacred and Profane
Durkheim explores in detail the functional role of religion in society in his seminal work ‘The
Elementary Forms of Religious Life’ (1912). His underlying interest was to understand the
basic forms of religious life for all societies. This study deals with one case study, the religion
of ARUNTA tribe of Australian aborigines, which is considered to be the purest form of
religion. According to Durkheim, religion is a social phenomenon therefore it is a social
fact.

In order to study religion, Durkheim goes back to a simple society because it is difficult to
understand religion in a complex society. That is why he started studying the ethnographic
studies done by other scholars on the Arunta tribe of Australia though he had not done the
empirical study himself. Durkheim calls this society as the simplest and most primitive known
today. The book has a description and a detailed analysis of the clan system and of totemism
of the tribe. Based on the study he elaborates a general theory of religion.

This study aims to look at the primitive religion and explain its basic structure, which Durkheim
believed will lead to the understanding of religion and religious nature of the society. Such an
analysis of the primitive religion according to Durkheim helps in arriving at an understanding
of the contemporary religions. Basic to his theory of religion is the stress on religious
phenomena as communal and not individual. For him religion is essentially social, a product
of the collective life and an embodiment of the moral requisites of human social existence.
For Durkheim, humans are religious because they are members of collectivity, and neither
individuals nor groups can long exist without religion; that is to say, moral - constraint. For
him religion was an expression of social cohesion. In the elementary forms of religious life,
Durkheim argues that the totemic gods the aborigines worship are actually expressions of their
own conceptions of society itself. Primitive men were wanderers and they moved from place
to place in search of food or other things. Occasionally they come together for some purpose
basically on the ceremonies they celebrate together. That was the time people talk to each other,
dance together and enjoy together which gives them the state of collective effervescence. But
when they dispersed and separated the feeling of happiness, ecstasy also disappears. The study
revealed that primitive tribes do have a conception of this supernatural force which binds them
together and gives them the feeling of ecstasy and collective effervescence. Emotional energy
or effervescence is a key theoretical idea of Durkheim’s theory of ritual. Hence the tribe
become anxious and wants to re-experience the feeling and eventually they create a totem as
a representation. When they come closer to the totem, they experience the feeling, and the
totem becomes the material representation for them to worship and revered. Members of
a clan venerate a certain totemic object from which they claim descent. This object gives them
their identity. But according to Durkheim, it is not the object itself that is being worshipped,
but the clan itself. So, this totem is nothing but the symbols of the society. Ultimately, he
proposes that religion is the expression of self-creation of the society. This is true not only for
the aborigines, he argues, but for all societies. Religion, for Durkheim, is not imaginary but
religion is real; it is an expression of society itself, and indeed, there is no society that does
not have religion. Religion is an expression of our collective consciousness, which is fusion
of all our individual consciousness, which then creates a reality of its own. Durkheim denies
that religion is basically concerned with spirits and gods. He maintains that it is society itself,
which is worshipped in order to strengthen social bonds and make individuals who are born
and who die feel the power and eternity of society. Thus, Durkheim provides a functional
definition of religion, meaning that it explains what religion does in social life: essentially, it
unites societies.

2
He defined religion as a unified system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things,
that is to say, things set apart and forbidden…beliefs and practices which unite in one
single moral community called a Church (The term ‘Church’, Durkheim does not refer to
the Christian Church alone. He uses it in the sense of a moral community or an organised group
of followers of all faiths), all those who adhere to them. It took him thirteen years to come to
this definition. This definition of religion has two central parts. First is that all religions can be
defined in terms of a system of beliefs and rites. Beliefs refer to a set of ideas and attitudes
held in relation to sacred things, whereas rites is define as a system of action, which is
developed toward the religious things or objects. Second is that all religions can be defined in
terms of their tendency to divide the world into two halves, the sacred and the profane.
The division between sacred and profane is common to all the religions and according to
Durkheim, this division is the most distinctive element of religious life since it forms the basis
of religious life in several respects. According to him, the three basic constituents of religion
are the presence of sacred things, beliefs and practices and a moral community. The most
important thing to notice is centrality of the notion of the sacred and everything revolves around
it. Beliefs and practices are related to the sacred. The sacred is that which is set apart,
considered holy and venerated or dreaded and avoided. The sacred is usually in a higher
position, valued more than profane things, and its identity and power are protected by social
rules. Sacred objects are like idols of gods, holy scriptures, temple, mosque, gurudwara, church,
synagogue, holy days, activities like pilgrimages, etc. the sacred includes everything that is
regarded as extraordinary and associated with sentiments of respect, mystery and
reverence by the believers. Different items become sacred because of the presence of the
totem that is the totemic symbol. Sacredness is not intrinsic to the object, but it is a result of
the collective conscience of the society. One of the features of the sacred is, it stands
diametrically opposite to profane. Profane is everything that is not sacred, which includes
all the mundane and ordinary aspects of day-to-day existence. Sacred entities are kept apart
isolated, and never to intermingle with the profane. Profane is the realm of routine
experience, everyday world of work, the secular.

3
Unit II RELIGION

(b) Rites and Rituals

When we look at the question like what does religion do to those who participate in its beliefs
and practices? This functionalist approach sought to establish an interrelationship between
society and religion. Durkheim The Elementary Forms of Religious Life pointed out that all
human societies are divided into the opposing domains of ‘sacred’ and ‘profane’. These two
domains were separate and exclusive. The domain of the sacred consisted of things set aside
and forbidden. The domain of the profane consisted of things not so regarded and belonging to
the ordinary level.

According to Durkheim, ritual was that human behaviour that takes place in the domain of the
sacred. By specifying the particular location within which religious activities, occur, Durkheim
laid the grounds for an empirical examination of the religious sphere as well as the relationship
that practices and beliefs within this domain.

Improving on the definition of rituals offered by Durkheim and orienting the meaning of rituals
within the theory of the social system, Talcott Parsons, reviewing the work done in the
sociology of religion observes that rituals are human practices within the realm of the sacred
that are characterized by their essential non-rational or transcendental nature.

It has pointed out, that there are two sets of activities are referred to as rituals by scholars
studying ritual phenomena. These include; (a) The rituals associated with the religious practices
of any organised religions (b) The rites of passage or rituals performed by a community on
various occasions in their life to mark the importance of a particular event in their lives such
as rituals at the time of birth, marriage, death, seasonal ritual in nature such as sowing time,
harvesting time, etc.

Rites and rituals have always existed and in all cultures throughout human history. They are
defined as rituals, or ceremonies, that surround in a person’s life such as birth, maturity,
reproduction, and death. Whether they take place in a secular or religious context, such rites
perform a similar function. They symbolically mark often enable an individual’s passage from
one phase of life to another. Rites of passage can be considered universal in human experience,
in that all societies find ways to mark transition between one phase of life to another.

Some of the questions to ponder on the rites and rituals;

1. Who participated in this rite of passage with you?

2. What were your feelings when experiencing this rite of passage?
3. How have this rite of passage contributed to shaping who you are today?
4. What were the elements of this celebration that made it ceremonial?

Arnold Van Gennep (1873-1957) the French ethnographer was one of the first scholars to
recognise the social importance of rituals, which often accompanied by life stages, such as
birth, puberty, betrothal, marriage, pregnancy and death. These events are a transition from one
social status to another and he termed the rituals performed at such ceremonies as ‘Rites of
Passage’. Every change of status involves shifting of roles; on occasion of birth, married
people become parents, at death relatives become orphans, widows, or widowers and so on. A
rite of passage is any life cycle ritual that marks a person or group transition, from one social
state to another.

Rites of Passage thus mark important events in the life of a person and these social changes are
more important than biological ones. All the rites of passage with which we are concerned here,
viz., the rites of pregnancy and birth, puberty, marriage, and death, are also called the life-cycle
ceremonies. A rite is a social custom that can be either sacred or symbol whereas rituals is a
service which involves a series of actions performed and people carry out in a particular
situation because it is their custom to do so. Rituals may be prescribed by the traditions of
community, or by society or by culture in sequence of activities involving gestures, symbols,
word, signs, language, etc. the use of rituals is key features of all religion. Gennep was not only
concerned with the effective rituals on the individuals but also the impact of rituals on the
society. He argued that ritual produce social stability by making transition of individuals to
new social statues. Through acceptance of new social status tension is reduced in a society.

Gennep says that a human being does not become a member of his society merely by being
born; he must be formally accepted into it, and this is done by a public naming of the infant or
presentation of him to his parent’s kin. Anthony Wallace too confirms this view when he says
that birth, puberty, marriage, and death are almost universal objects of ritual, for at these times
the individual enters a new relationship to the world and to the community with new
opportunities and responsibilities. These rites educate an individual for a new relationship and
initiate this publicly.

Rites of passage involve three stages namely according to Gennep. Th,ey are

• Pre-liminal - separation from then old group or relationship. It consists of separation

of individual from society and from their formal stages. Individual no longer belong to
the society as they lost their social identity.

• Liminal - this stage is the rites of transition. Victor Turner builds on the idea of the
‘liminal’ the middle stage. The actual ceremony enacted in a formalised space with
ritualized movements, gestures and expressions. This stage introduces the individual
into the new group for new identity. It is a transitional phase. The status of individual
in liminal stage is ambiguous. Individual lost the previous identity and yet to find the
new identity.

• Post-liminal- rites of incorporation. It helps in-corporation of the person into the new
status. The individual incorporated into the society with new social status.

These three sub-categories are not developed to the same extent by all people or in every
ceremonial pattern. Rites of separation are prominent in funeral ceremonies, rites of
incorporation at marriages. Transition rites play an important role for instance, in pregnancy,
betrothal and initiation or puberty. Transition rites may also be reduced to a minimum adoption
in the delivery of a second child, in remarriage or in the passage from the second to the third
age group.

The life of an individual in any society is a series of passages from one age to another and from
one occupation to another. Rituals are observed now and then on which man’s life is made up
of stages with similar ends and beginnings. These include the life-cycle rituals, religious rites,
preventive and curative rites, vows, etc. Though the same ritual devotion, care and attempt of
priest and feasts are involved in all these activities, these are celebrated with a different purpose
and for a different cause.

Marriage, according to Gennep, is both a rite of separation and unification. The bride formally
shifts her residence to her husband’s place and away from her parents. This is observed as the
rite of separation. Similarly, when she joins her conjugal home another rite, of unification, is
observed. The time between her betrothal to wedding and the rituals performed at various levels
are known as incorporation period and rites.

A rite of passage, then, is both a personal and a community event, providing meaning and
purpose for what might otherwise be random biological happenings, or a haphazard sequence
of occurrences. Ultimately, no community exists without its rituals, those repeatable rites
wherein by song, dance, story, symbol, and symbolic action they express their most
fundamental beliefs about who they are, how they came to be, and why they stay together. In
the same way that community is intrinsic to the human condition, ritual is intrinsic to the life
of a community.

It maintains and strengthens the bonds of affiliation among community members. It supports
individuals, or the community as a whole, through times of celebration, crisis or transition. It
marks the passing of the seasons, gives meaning to the years. The performance of rites be they
secular or religious that connect humans with one another and link the past with the present
and future, ultimately affirms the rightness of the human condition, and the relationship of what
is human with all of nature.

A rite of passage marks a time when a person is moving from one state of being to another. A
rite of passage, which marks a time when a person reaches a new and significant change in
one’s life, is something that all societies recognize and often hold ceremonies for. These
ceremonies are held to observe a person’s entry into a new stage of life and can be anything
from a high school graduation ceremony or marriage ceremony to a funeral. Most rites help
people to understand their new roles in society. They can also help others learn to treat people
in new ways after they experience certain rites of passage.

Most rites of passage fall into three main phases: separation, transition, and incorporation. In
the separation phase, the participant is taken away from one’s familiar environment and former
role and enters a very different and sometimes a routine that they are forced to adjust to and
become familiar with. Death can also be a separation rite, depending on a person’s belief about
what happens after someone dies. Societies have devised ways to mark these separations and
aid in the transitions that will take place. For instance, the naming of babies marks the
significant event of birth.

The transition phase is the time that the participant learns the appropriate behavior for the new
stage they are entering. This phase can include the time when a person becomes engaged to be
married. At this time, they are learning about the new stage of life they will soon enter marriage.
They are also adjusting and preparing for it or making a transition. The transition phase may
also include the time that children enter adolescence and leave their childhood behind. This is
the time when people learn and grow and prepare to be an independent adult in the real world.

The last phase, incorporation, takes place when the participant is formally admitted into the
new role. Marriage is a good example of a rite that would take place in the incorporation phase.
After people are married, they have taken on a very new and different role, having prepared for
it in earlier transition and separation rites.
There are many, many rites of passage in our lives. Some are more significant than others, but
almost every day we live can bring about transitions. However, there are five times in one's life
that are often considered to be the most significant times of change. These are the rites that we
will learn about in more detail as we study the significance behind rites of passage. They are
birth, leaving childhood and becoming an adolescent, leaving home, weddings, and
death/funerals. To recognize these significant times in our lives, societies typically hold
elaborate ceremonies. Each different culture or society may choose to mark these rites in very
different ways. Each ceremony is unique and meaningful to one's own culture. In this we will
study these significant rites of passage and how different cultures uniquely mark these changes
as they come to pass in the lives of their people.

*A rite is an established, ceremonial, usually religious, act. Rites in this sense fall into three
major categories: rites of passage, generally changing an individual’s social status, such as
marriage, adoption, baptism, coming of age, graduation, or inauguration; communal rites,
whether of worship, where a community comes together to worship etc.

*A ritual is a sequence of activities involving gestures, words, and objects, performed in a

sequestered place, and performed according to set sequence. Rituals may be prescribed by the
traditions of a community, including a religious community.
Unit II Religion

(c) COMMUNALISM and FUNDAMENTALISM

Introduction

Communalism have different aspects when we look from Indian and western context. In
western concept ‘communal’ means something related to a community or collectivity, share in
common by everyone in a group whereas in South Asian countries, communalism refers to
aggressive chauvinism base on religious identity. Communalism has been described as a
sectarian exploitation of social traditions as a medium of political mobilization. It is an ideology
used to fulfill socio-economic and politico hopes of a community or social groups. However,
communalism is an ideology that is found in other countries which is not endemic to South
Asian nations alone. In fact, development of communalism is believed to have its roots in the
ethnic and cultural diversity of Africa. Religion, race, sect, tribe, ethnicity, and language are
the basis of communal tension. Communalism movements are often brief and exist in a dyad,
which means between two groups. Communalism is associated with eruption of violence and
riots.

Even a democratic country like India, communalism issue is very high. India has series of
communal riots taking place in the country. In ancient India people of different faith co-existed
peacefully as compared to modern day. In medieval India we saw a few violence based on
communalism. Some rulers were among the least tolerant towards other religious practices, but
which is not as bad as modern society. Communalism as a modern phenomenon arose because
of British divide and rule policy. In 1905, there was first partition of Bengal; in 1909, Minto-
Morley reform, Britishers brought the communal electorate. Some of the scholars argued that
communalism is a colonial phenomenon in Indian context. Subsequently, communalism took
deep root in Indian polity during the later phase of the national movement and the colonial
rulers encouraged this. Today, people use communalism as a platform to mobilise people for
various political gains. The electoral practices which encourage the formation of vote bank.
The vote bank is nurtured on the basis of caste, linguistic and religious line.

While discussing the nature of politics in the new states of Africa and Asia, Clifford Geertz,
an American anthropologist, wrote, “when we speak of communalism in India, we refer to
religious contrasts, when we speak of it in Malaya or US we are mainly concerned with racial
ones, and in the Congo with tribal ones.”

(Use one or two case studies as discussed in the class)

Causes of Communalism

• Legacy of the past

• Poverty
• Failure of government
• Ethnocentricisms
• Majority chauvinism
• Prejudices of minorities
• Communalization of politics
• Social issues
• Presence of communal parties

1
 • Influence of social media
• Inter-community dynamism

(* Explain the above points in detail as discussed. Refer to your class-notes for solving the
issue of communalism)

FUNDAMENTALISM

Fundamentalism is a term was first coined in 1910-15 in work done by American Protestant
Christian anonymous author that were published in twelve volumes called ‘The
Fundamentals’. Lyman and Milton Stewart had financed the publishing. The main aim of this
literary work was to protect the unerring nature of the Bible. Three million copies of ‘the
fundamentals’ were distributed among the protestant in America for free. So, fundamentalism
was linked with issues like restoring of traditional belief, values and practices. They believed
the old values were the best, so much so that they also started rejecting intellectualism.
Fundamentalist has no tolerance for other religion as it believes in the supremacy of own
religion.

According to [Link], it refers to a variety of norms, values, attitudes which either judge
the fundamentalists or condemn them outright. Fundamentalism many a times is used for the
idea of going back to the fundamental of religions. It also stresses the infallibility of religious
scriptures in all matters and faith & doctrine. The fundamentalists glorify the past tradition,
past values and scriptures. They are not in favour of social change or modernization. They
considered new things are polluted and they emphasis on purity and thus non-inclusive.
According to Giddings, fundamentalists are those who wish to return to origins of religion, for
them their religion is literal truth, other religions are diluted/distorted, and they alone possess
the truth. He also identifies five characteristics of fundamentalism;
• Seek to return to traditional basis
• Believe their view is the only true view of the world
• Justify their views by reference to sacred texts and dogmas
• Avoid contact with people who hold other views
• Rely on guardians of religion to interpret sacred texts and lay down rules which
determines their lifestyle

The fundamentalists do not believe in the equality of all religions or even the grant of liberty
to all religions to exist, for how can false religions be treated as equal to the true religion or be
given the liberty to preach and practise falsehood? The same logic leads the fundamentalists to
oppose the concept of the unity of all religions.

Similarities and differences between communalism and fundamentalism

Religious fundamentalism refers to the belief of an individual or a group of individuals in the

absolute authority of a sacred religious text or teachings of a particular religious leader,
prophet, and/or God. These fundamentalists believe that their religion is beyond any form of
criticism and should therefore also be forced upon others. Logical explanations and scientific
evidence have no place in the belief systems if they work against their religious
fundamentalists. For fundamentalists, religion dictates every sphere of their daily lives, and
they also attempt to involve the entire society into their own belief system, often by the use of
force.

2
Communalism refers to a politics that seeks to unify one community around a religious identity
in hostile opposition to another community. It seeks to define this community identity as
fundamental and fixed. It attempts to consolidate this identity and present it as natural as if
people were born into the identity, as if the identities do not evolve through history over time.
In order to unify the community, communalism suppresses distinctions within the community
and emphasizes the essential unity of the community against other communities. One could say
communalism nurtures a politics of hatred for an identified ‘other.’ This hatred feeds a politics
of violence. It is a particular kind of politicization of religious identity, an ideology that seeks
to promote conflict between religious communities.

Similarities

• Oppose the unity of all religion

• Believe in the restoration of the past values
• Both stands oppose to secularism
• Fundamentalism and communalism have certain ideological elements in common.
• Both oppose the concept of equal truth in all religions or the unity of different religions.
• Both believe in restoration of the past values and ‘greatness’ rather than in progress
towards the unknown so that ‘greatness’ and progress lie in the future.

But these common features do not make the two the same. It is clear that indigenousism and
post-modernism many ideological positions in common with fundamentalism, especially
opposition to science, reason, progress, secularism and nationalism, but they are basically poles
apart.

Differences

• In a multi-religious society, a fundamentalist tends to be communal while communalist

is not necessary to be fundamentalist.
• Fundamentalists are deeply religious and put their entire ideology on religion whereas
communalists use religion just to give political power.
• Fundamentalists urge for the actual revival of pristine past whereas communalists
focused on modern world.
• The fundamentalists seriously urge the actual revival of the pristine past and its
religious, social, cultural, legal and political practices but communalist may not be so.

Communalists are quite often not fundamentalists. For instance, some of the politicians may
be communal parties but they were not and are not fundamentalist.

Terminology
Communalism: It has been defined as a discourse based on the belief that because a group of
people follow a particular religion, they have as a result, common social, political and economic
interest. People perceive themselves as belonging to a particular religious community. This
community identity becomes the basis for social, economic and political demands, and for
political mobilisation around these demands.
This is a situation wherein religion and religious communities view each other with hostility
and antagonism. They may often come out in open conflict such as in communal riots

3
Communal violence: Refers to murderous violence unleashed by people belonging to one
religious’ community on those of another by staging largescale riots within the territorial
jurisdiction of the same state system.

Fundmentalism: This word stresses the infallibility of a scripture in matters of faith and
doctrine. Certain groups take this to espouse a militant stance and claim sovereignhood
of a territory based on the same principles.

Refer to the other readings uploaded in the folder

4
Unit III RELIGION (d) Secularism

The need for secularism arose in India and secularism was conceived accordingly in two related
contexts – first, to counter the challenge of communalism to national integrity and second, to
provide a basis for nationalism or nationalist movement which should be shared by all Indians.
Therefore, it was not opposition of religion but the idea of religious toleration in terms of sarva
dharma sambhava, or equal regard for all religions, became pivotal to Indian conception of
secularism, as it made possible the harmonious existence of several religious communities in
one nation-state. It was expected that communalism or exclusive loyalty to one’s religious
community could be countered by a positive ideal of equal regard for all religions.

To make the Indian nation religiously free with full of equality and tolerance, Indian leaders
whole-heartedly defended secular philosophy. India made a commitment to secularism and had
its own version which had been embedded in its preamble by the 42nd amendment act, in 1976
the word ‘secular’ along with ‘socialist’ was added, to declare India to be a ‘sovereign’,
‘socialist’, ‘secular’, ‘democratic’, ‘republic’. So, the secular state committed to secure all its
citizens: ‘social, economic, and political justice; liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith,
and worship; equality of status and of opportunity; assuring the dignity of the individual and
the unity and integrity of the nation.

Having said this, let us understand the emergence and concept of secularism. The emergence
of secularism can be traced to the social and political situation existing in Europe during the
17th and 18th centuries. George Jacob Holyoake coined the term secularism in 1851 in his
book in his book ‘The Principles of Secularism,’ to describe the socio-political movement
started by himself, Charles Bradlaugh and others. It was regarded by its first proponent,
[Link], as an alternative to atheism and be defined on considerations purely human, and
intended mainly for those who find theology indefinite, or inadequate, unreliable and
unbelievable. He declared it as the only rational basis of political and social organisation.
Holyoake questioning the religious basis of civil society, recommended secularism as state
ideology which promotes human welfare by material means and makes the service of others its
duty.

According to Eris S. Water house, the relation of secularism to religion was understood as
“mutually exclusive, rather than hostile.” Secularism’s only concern is that this world be known
by experience and reason. It is not concerned about the “other world”, or life after death; and
neither offers, nor forbids, any opinion about these matters, it is willing to leave such questions
to theology and is equally indifferent to both theism and atheism. Before adopting the term
“secularism”, Holyoake had considered the term “netheism” and “limitationism” as
alternatives. Holyoake was apparently more interested in countering the irrationalism of
Christian theology, than in the negation of religion per se.

In the initial days the emergence of the concept was understood in the context of the conflict
between Church and the state. The word secularism has different meaning according to western
and Indian context. Western secularization means the separation of the state and the church,
which is very central to western notion of secularism. Secularism is the concept that
government or other entities should exist separately from religion. In a nutshell, secularism is
the separation of state and religion, or more broadly zero interference of the state in the matter
of religion, and vice versa. In Indian context, it is a peaceful co-existence of all religions in
India, that every individual has the right to profess, practice and follow his religion. Peter
Berger defines secularization as the process by which sectors of society and culture are
removed from the domination of religious institutions and symbols.

The conceptual construct of secularism is adopted in India by way of a solution to the problems,
posed by fundamentalism and communalism. It denotes a situation where there is a clear
distinction of religion from such spheres of life as political and economic system.

The English word ‘secular’ was made from Latin word ‘saeculum’, and ‘saecularis’, which
means ‘this age’ or ‘the spirit of an age’, this time, this world. It bears the same significance as
the Greek ‘aeon’, which is employed in the New Testament for an ‘age’ or ‘era’. The conflict
between religious faith and human reason, which forms part of the background to the
emergence of the modern ideology of secularism, surfaced in the late middle Ages.

• The dictionary of social science has identified three usages of the term ‘secular’ and
clarified it in the sense of ‘separation of religion and state’ and it adheres to the worldly
affairs, which opposed to the sacred affairs in the state machinery.
• Further, Dr. Radhakrishnan the then vice-president of India, opines secularism does
not mean irreligion or atheism or even stress on material comfort. It proclaims that it
lays stress on universality of spiritual values which may be attained by a variety of
ways. Secularism in Indian concept means ‘an equal status for all religions. Dr.
Radhakrishnan was to phrase his understanding of secularism as: “We hold that no one
religion should be given preferential status, or unique distinction, that no one religion
should be accorded special privileges in national life, or international relations for that
would be a violation of the basic principles of democracy and contrary to the best
interest of religion and government….No group of citizens shall arrogate to itself rights
and privileges which it denies to others. No person shall suffer any form of disability
or discrimination because of his religion but all alike should be free to share to the
fullest degree in the common life.
• Mahatma Gandhi also stated that “I do not expect India of my dreams to develop one
religion, i.e., to be wholly Hindu or wholly Christian or wholly Mussalman, but I want
it to be ‘wholly tolerant’, with its religions working side by side with one another”.

T. N. Madan in his book stated that secularism is;

• The separation of state from religion.

• Religion should be considered as private matter and government will not interfere in it.
All communities irrespective of their religion will be treated equally. Everyone is free
to practice their religion in their private spheres. Equal and impartial treatment of all
communities by the state.
• Approaching religious beliefs in a spirit of objective rationality
• Ensuring a just standard of living for all people irrespective of community.

In Bhargav, Secularism in Political Theory: An Introduction, the characteristics of a secular

state in the following points:
1. Principle of non-establishment of religion
2. Principle of establishment of peace among communities
3. Religious freedom for all religions and religious communities
4. Religious freedom for people of all religions without any discrimination
5. Freedom to choose any religion and freedom not to choose religious belief or not to
choose any religion
 6. No discrimination in the name of religion in terms of endowment or help given by
the state
7. No discrimination in the name of religion, like in the educational and health
institutions.

Harvey Cox also gave the following key characteristics leading to of secularism;

• Urbanisation - led to the decline of traditional religious beliefs

• Pragmatism - deal the problem in a practical way and not through false belief
• This worldly attitude - more concern about this worldly than other worldly and aware
about what’s happening around them
• Pluralism - there is a place for many religions to co-exist
• Tolerance - is one of the factors when pluralism enable the society to be more tolerant
which in turn lead to secularism.

Atheism, agnostic and secularism cannot be equated. Atheism is a lack of belief in gods.
Secularism simply provides a framework for a democratic society. Atheists have an obvious
interest in supporting secularism, but secularism itself does not seek to challenge the tenets of
any particular religion or belief, neither does it seek to impose atheism on anyone. Secularism
is simply a framework for ensuring equality throughout society in politics, education, the law
and elsewhere, for believers and non-believers alike. It is important to revisit the ideology and
practice of Indian secularism is now increasingly under question.

Conclusion

To sum up, the concept of secularism that emerged in India possessed three substantial
components:
• The state would not attach itself to any one religion, which would thereby establish as the
state religion.
• All citizens had the freedom of religious belief.
• The state would ensure equality among religious groups by ensuring that one group was not
favoured at the expense of another.

Terminology

Secularism is a value-loaded concept, its values derive from, and must be contextualised in
our understanding of the underlying social process we call secularisation. Secularisation is a
social process and ‘secularism’ is a socio-political ideal or ideology. In actuality ‘secularism’
can become a reality in our social institutions only in so far as these are affected by
‘secularisation’. Therefore, secularism is a product of, and, in turn, strengthen the process of
secularisation. For the truism that there can be no secularism without process of secularisation
is now widely accepted, but the challenge of actualising it through concrete social, political,
economic and educational measures is an enormous task. The term ‘secularisation’ is defined
by Bryan Wilson as the process in which different social institutions ‘become recognised as
distinctive concerns operating with considerable autonomy.