Morality in Premchand’s Kafan: For Dalits or Anti-Dalit ? | Pragya Ranjan

Kafan, also known as The Shroud in English, is a story written by Premchand in 1936. He is often regarded as the pioneer of modern Hindi fiction writing and is one of the first authors to address the caste hierarchies prevalent in Indian society. Kafan is one of his most renowned as well as controversial works, portraying the sufferings of those who are at the bottom of this pyramidal social structure. The story revolves around two active characters, Madhav and Ghisu who are the primary mode of action in the story as well as the passive character, Budhiya who is not seen or heard in the entire story except for her crying noise in the labour pain. The story opens with Madhav and Ghisu, the duo of son and father roasting potatoes stolen from a neighbour’s field. We hear Budhiya, Madhav’s wife moaning inside with the labour pain but there is no effort taken by them to ease her pain. The story ends with the death of Budhiya and the ultimate struggle to arrange a shroud for her, hence the story named Kafan. This story of a Dalit family, belonging to the chamar caste has been depicted by different critics either as anti-Dalit or as a representation of Dalit rebelliousness against caste hierarchies. Ironically, both these views are opposite and demand a closer look into the intentions of the author.

The author’s intentions can’t be denied as anti-caste on the sole basis of belonging to an upper caste. Premchand, although coming from an upper caste, had been very much influenced by Ambedkar. Sadanand Shahi in his paper, Kafan: A Multilayered Story says, ’Premchand despite all his reverence for Gandhi, was open to Ambedkar’s arguments.’

Gandhi advocated for the purification of the varna system, and hence sometimes he is seen as a protector of the varna system, especially the upper caste. On the other hand, Ambedkar advocated for the complete annihilation of the caste system. Premchand’s vital theme in most of the stories is hypocrisy of the upper caste against Dalits and other backward communities, like in ’Price of Milk’, and ’A Quarter and One Ser of Wheat’, among others. The hypocrisy revealed through these stories establishes Premchand being in favour of the annihilation of caste.

One of the major themes that is often missed in the interpretation of this story is morality and how communities belonging to the upper strata of this hierarchical caste system shape morality in a way that suits their own needs and in accordance with their social position. Morality in this sense is a concept designed to fulfil the needs of the people with these social and economic resources. When this morality is imposed upon other individuals who are without these resources, it becomes a hallmark to pass as a morally upright individual. Individuals like Ghisu and Madhav, who are at the bottom of this social structure, fail to stand up to this hallmark no matter how hard they work. These two characters are called by Premchand as ’strange’ characters in Kafan, suggesting that the story is a counter-narrative of an age (1930s) where there was no Dalit movement. Their laziness towards their work was an act that rejected the Brahamanical structure in its subtle way. Instead of working hard like other peasants and labourers, they would demand double wages despite lying all day round without work. The irony is that no matter the hours spent on hard labour, one still lives the same hellish life in constant debt with the landlords. So Madhav and Ghisu are ultimately rejecting this age-old cycle of back-breaking labour without any profit. Premchand writes in Kafan, "It was not surprising to come across such a way of thinking in a society where the condition of those who toiled day and night was not much better than the condition of these two, and where those who took advantage of the weaknesses of the peasants were much better off than the peasants themselves." A reversal of the roles also comes into play here. Instead of the landlords extracting money and hard-labour, the labourers have tormented the landlord and refused to work in a continual cycle of abject poverty, which will continue irrespective of the amount of work they do. This is an act of rebellion, the kind that Ambedkar advocates when he says in Section 4 of Annihilation of Caste, ’The division of labour brought about by the caste system is not a division based on choice. Individual sentiment, individual preference, has no place in it. It is based on the dogma of predestination.’ The caste hierarchies are designed in a way so that a watertight compartment is formed where a poor individual goes on to become poorer. This is pointed out when Ghisu says to his son, Madhav that, "I was a hefty fellow. You aren’t even half the size I was." Generational poverty results in poorer nutrition and hence, weaker bodies.

Ambedkar also writes in his book, ’There are many occupations in India which, on account of the fact that they are regarded as degraded by the Hindus, provoke those who are engaged in them to aversion. There is a constant desire to evade and escape from such occupations, which arises solely because of the blighting effect which they produce upon those who follow them, owing to the slight and stigma cast upon them by the Hindu religion.’ This aversion to occupation can also be attributed to Ghisu and Madhav, who are perceived by others around them as lazy, but are instead actually entrapped in an age-long occupation that neither appeals to their body nor mind. Being a landless labourer is not a choice for them but a compulsion.

Kafan has been denounced as cruel, inhuman, and worthless by many Dalit critics based on the depiction of Budhiya who keeps writhing in labour pain but her husband, Madhav doesn’t come to her rescue. The story has been labelled as ’anti-caste’ by critics like Omprakash Valmiki, who argues that it perpetuates an upper-caste prejudice by showing the Dalit characters as feckless and lazy. Sadanand Shahi counteracted this by saying, "Their callousness is a reflection of their helplessness, not of their inhumanity. They were compelled to be insensitive. When even the exorcist would demand no less than a rupee, did paupers like them have any other alternative than to be ’indifferent’" The funeral of Budhiya on the other hand, also deflects from the Brahmanical oppression of the lower caste in the form of unpaid or low-paid labour which was posed as an ultimate pathway to heaven for the lower caste. The funeral rites of Budhiya were devoid of shroud or any priestly congregation which is considered necessary in a Hindu setting, instead, the rites ended up filling up the stomachs of Ghisu, Madhav, and a beggar in place of an upper caste Brahmin. This resembles a similarity with the funeral rites of Ambedkar’s first wife. Both of these characters define a new heaven for themselves, which is not dependent on being slaved away by upper castes or conforming to their funeral rites but on their own sense of morality, ’If she doesn’t go to heaven who will? These fat, bloodsuckers of the poor who go for a darshan of the Ganga to wash their sins and offer prayers in temples?’

Kafan is a story that makes the readers question the morality prevailing in society. The prevailing morality is dependent upon the practising religion. In an extremely hierarchical religious structure as in Hinduism, this morality is governed by the uppermost castes, who are generationally privileged, both socially and financially. The morality they practise is very much dependent on the availability of resources. The funeral rites, the marriage customs, and the work ethic they advocate are nearly impossible to follow for characters like Ghisu and Madhav who are generationally crushed under the burden of being Dalits. The callousness and the moral depravity of both of them are not represented as an intentional fallacy but rather an imposed one by the varna system. Throughout the story, Ghisu and Madhav rebel in their own subtle way and ultimately carve a morality of their own, which is within their social reach while rejecting the double standards of the upper castes.

(Author: Pragya Ranjan is a critic and a story writer from India who majorly concerns herself with literature and socio-political issues. She is currently engaged in writing about women’s discourse and societal hierarchies. Email: pragyaranjanonly[at]gmail.com)