Agrarian struggle in Bihar

A document released by Communist Party of India (Marxist–Leninist) Liberation in 1986 titled Reports from the flaming fields of Bihar which is also referred to by the authors like Ranbir Sammadar in their work, defines the nature of agrarian society of Bihar in the period immediately succeeding the Green Revolution. The landed gentry which comprised mostly the landlords of the upper caste and some of the emerging Kulaks of the intermediate agricultural caste were in conflict with the lower caste agricultural labourers and landless tenants often leading to armed struggle. The Socialist movement under Jay Prakash Narayan and others though getting strengthened had little scope for downward filtration in the rural Bihar which was facing worst form of Feudalism. The state and the landlords often colluded against the naxalite forces, dominated by the landless labourers belonging to lower castes. The CPI (ML) was leading the struggle of the later along with other groups and ultra-Left cadres belonging to MCC & Chhatra Yuva Sangharsh Samiti, an organization based on idea of Jay Prakash Narayan which later turned towards radicalism aimed at reducing growing class difference.[1]

The Yadavs who claimed lineage to the mythological Yadu were one of the first among OBCs to claim Kshatriya status which was advocated alongside the control on womenfolk of the Jāti for the sake of bigger cause of the community. Baijnath Prasad Yadav, a Kshatriya reformers and a resident of Varanasi advocated the curb on independence of women and their participation in the public festivals where they were prone to the pollution caused by impure contact of many low Jātis that roam in the crowd. He also claimed that the root cause of all the unnecessary expenses in a house is due to the fickle greediness of the women. Despite the attempt of upper-caste to boycott the reformers [Yadavs] with the object of making it difficult to perform rituals for the attainment of Kshatriyahood, the better off section among them [Yadavs] arranged for the outsider Brahmins or the Nai (Hajjams) to initiate the rituals. Most often the officiation of the rituals also resulted in compelling the less fortunate Yadavs to prohibit their women from selling Goetha (cow dung cakes) in the market for alternative source of income as it was against the status of the community aspiration of Kshatriyahood. However, considering the need to do so they [poor Yadav women] were allowed to do so but in all matters they were supposed to follow the practices of the women of higher caste. Apart from the men the participation of womenfolk in Kshatriya reform movement was also a notable phenomenon which (according to Pinch) was for the upliftment of their gender status. Consequently, demands for legislation on Polygamy and education for both boys and girls became the central motto of mahila sammelans, which occurred in conjunction with the regional or national sammelans (conferences) of the Jati (Caste).[7]

Bhumihars were yet another caste seeking upliftment in social status much before the OBC castes like Yadav and Kushwaha. They were referred to as "Babhan" in Bihar and were concentrated prominently in Bihar and some part of Uttar Pradesh. The Bhumihars were classified in the colonial censuses as Shudra along with the scribe caste, Kayastha who were educationally equivalent to upper castes.[8] Prior to the formation of Bhumihar Brahmin Mahasabha in 1889 to seek the upliftment of socio-cultural status there were several theories regarding the origin of Bhumihars. According to Jogendra Nath Bhattacharya, they belonged to some "lower caste" who were promoted to the status of Brahmin by the order of a Raja who wanted the presence of a large number of Brahmins to celebrate his religious festivals. The other popular narrative featured them as belonging to a tribe called Bhuyans who gained land and claimed Brahmin status while according to another theory, a section of them were descendents of Rati Raut, a Goala (a herder)[9] or an offshoot of mixed marriages between Rajputs and Brahmins.[10]

By 1930s the great depression had swept over India and income from agricultural land were dwindling. It became clear that as the independence proceeds the Zamindari will soon come to an end and hence the caste associations started channelising the community support for the urbanisation. As a result numerous schools and colleges were set up in order to impart education to the community members to grab a share of power and income opportunity through employment in government services. The 'Bhumihar Brahmin Mahasabha' too followed the suit and its members became active for securing share in bureaucratic sector which was strongly dominated by the Kayasthas.[8]

The 'Bhumihar Brahmin Mahasabha' which was led by Sir Ganesh Dutt however feared a split in 1920 after the emergence of Sahajanand Saraswati as the leader of tenants and poorer section of the caste [Bhumihar]. Later, Sahajanand Saraswati also started playing important role in organising tenans under the banner of Kisan Sabhas. The Bhumihar's socio-political ascedency however remained unaffected after the Zamindari abolition drive of Kisan Sabha which helped elevate S.K Sinha, a leader of Kisan Sabha to the post of Chief Minister.[8]

Kurmis were another agricultural caste present in Bihar and were around 3 to 4% of Bihar's population in 1930s. They also claimed the Kshatriya status like the Yadavs, the ground for which was prepared by the Ramanandi Sampraday, which was a socio-cultural movement launched to bring Shudra castes into the fold of monastic order. The Kurmi leaders by late 19th century were the first among the low castes to claim a Kshatriya past by propagating stories through printed bulletins. Meanwhile, these stories also argued that the Kurmi and the Koeris (also called Kushwaha), a similar caste were the descendents of the twin sons of Rama and his wife Sita, Lav and Kush. The various subcaste of Koeris like Kachhi and Murao also claimed descent from Kusha but no attempt for merging these two groups [Kurmi and Koeri] ever occurred.[11]

The first Kurmi caste association was formed in Lucknow in 1894 to protest against the decision of colonial government to reduce the quota in the Police for the recruitment of Kurmis. However, the All India Kurmi Kshatriya Mahasabha was officially registered in 1910 . Before it launched its movement for socio-economic emancipation of the caste the other organisation formed prior to its foundation like the Kurmi sabha had made an unsuccessful attempt to fuse the castes like Maratha, Kapu and Patidar together under one umbrella. Later, they also tried to bring Koeri and Yadav together to form a political union called Triveni Sangh which appeared as a danger to the Congress due to its design to mobilise the peasant caste sharing same position in socio-economic ladder. Consequently, with the formation of Backward Class Federation by Congress leadership and mobilisation of peasant leaders like Bir Chand Patel and Ram Lakhan Singh Yadav, the Triveni Sangh movement failed to create long lasting impact in politics.[11]

According to scholars, the three caste failed to unite together due to co-option of Kurmi leaders (like Bir Chand Patel) and Yadav leaders (like Ram Lakhan Singh Yadav) with the Congress and also because of superiority complex inherent in Yadavs vis a vis the other two castes viz. Koeri and the Kurmi. By using pseudo historical grounds to give weight to their arguments, Yadavs claimed to be the natural leaders of the backwards which created a drift between the three castes.[11] The Kurmi were known as a tribe rather than caste prior to 1894 who were introduced into Hindu society as "hard working" agriculturists. Their predatory practices prior to the mentioned time frame led to the colonial government classifying them as Criminal Tribe. The word "Kurmi" itself is understood to be derived from "tortoise", a tribal totem. The politicization of Kurmis and gradual expansion of the caste made the Awadhiya of Patna, Mahto of Chhotanagpur and Dhanuk of north Bihar identity with them as a result all these groups started calling themselves "Kurmi".[12] According to Ashwani Kumar:

...the Kurmis historically enjoyed the reputation of a violent caste and ruthless Kulak, that attempted to impose feudal dominance and consideration of hierarchy over Dalits. In fact, one of the early caste army in Bihar is directly attributed to the social ascedency of Kurmis in state.[12]

In contrast to them, the Koeris (according to Kumar) are horticulturist caste who are generally considered as non aggressive and disinterested in caste riots. They also attempted to seek Kshatriya status and formed "Kushwaha Kshatriya Mahasabha" as their nodal caste association in 1922. Historically, Koeris have participated in increasing horizontal mobilisation of caste association of backward castes in Bihar. [12] They have also participated in armed movements under the banner of CPI(ML) in Patna, Bhojpur, Aurangabad and Rohtas district of Bihar.[13] In some of the district of Bihar, they are infamous for their notorious and criminal affairs.[14] India Today reported in 1994 that in some of the adjoining reasons of the Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, caste based gangs of Koeri and Kurmi dacoits exists which are indulged in predatory practices against inhabitants as well as member of rival caste gangs.[15]

An elderly couple belonging to Koeri caste, from the Vaishali district of Bihar.

The agrarian society of Bihar also consisted the large section of unprivileged people who belonged to the lower backwards castes or the Dalit castes. Unlike upper backwards, the Koeri, Kurmi and Yadav these caste groups hailed primarily from artisan background and had remained associated with variety of low scale non agricultural activities in past. The prominent among them were Nai (Barber caste), Mallah (fisherman), Kumhars (potters) and the Barhai (carpenter). According to Mungeri Lal commission report the lower backwards were distributed across 108 caste groups and comprised 32% of the population of Bihar. But despite of their large population these castes had suffered marginalisation in politico-economic corridor at the hands of both upper castes and later the upper backwards. In the initial year of Lalu Yadav's rule some of the leaders of these caste groups attained political power but with the building of personality cult and charisma of Yadav and popularity of his "muscular social justice" the leadership shifted to Yadav caste completely.[12]

Since these castes were geographically scattered and doesn't hold dominance in terms of population in any constituency, they remained ineffective to create any political impact in the state on a large scale until 2001 when they won a large number of seats in Mukhia and Zila Parishad elections and other bodies at the local level of government. Nitish Kumar is credited for bringing these caste groups in political limelight with his focus on "Atipichhda" (Extremely Backward Castes), he created a social coalition of these castes along with his core support groups to oust Lalu Yadav from power .[12]

Unlike artisan group which were less discriminated, the another community i.e the Dalits have faced historical discrimination by the upper-castes. They were untouchables and mostly belonged to the agricultural labour class who were landless. They comprised 15.7% of the state of Bihar according to various censuses and were distributed primarily across Gaya, Nawada, Kishanganj, Aurangabad and Kaimur. The Indian National Congress in the Bihar provided mileage to Dalit politics in pre Mandal [1990] period. The leaders like Jagjivan Ram, who hailed from Chamar caste were tallest leader at the national level in Congress. The Dalits were worst sufferers of routine caste massacre which were post independence [1947] phenomenon in rural Bihar. They were later mobilised by the Maoist groups and became assertive for their rights in agrarian setup. With the beginning of Mandal politics, the Dalits started supporting Lalu Yadav's politics of social justice but shifted to Lok Janshakti Party after the emergence of Ram Vilas Paswan, a politically astute Socialist leader.[12]

The rural Bihar witnessed a remarkable shift owning to the liquidation of Zamindari in post independence period. As a result the Big landlords and Maharajas started losing control over the tenants and the legal ways to keep a tab on the later also became ineffective. Growing naxalite pressure and the ceiling laws which made the possession of land above certain ceiling an offence, made upper caste landlords sell off some of their vulnerable holdings which were increasingly bought by the middle caste peasants. The Koeri, Kurmi and the Yadav peasantry pushed ahead of others. There also existed a bond between these peasant castes and their land, which were treated by them [peasants] as their most productive asset. Arun Sinha mentions the variety of causes for the upper castes to sell their lands. While, most of them were forced by "land grab campaign" of leftists and were happy with whatever prices they got in the deal, a lot of them also sold it off for lavish weddings and the professional education of their children.[19]

The reduction in landholdings of the upper-castes synchronised with their rapid urbanisation. By the 1970, the standards of judging individual progress by urbanisation brought them more frequently to the towns than the backward castes. Since, the upper-caste themselves hardly engaged in agriculture in those days, their descendents (according to Sinha) chosed to live in cities while the backwards remained deeply rooted in their villages.[19]