In the past, Government has come out with scheme of financial assistance for those entering into inter-caste marriages- with a view to eradicate caste distinctions, casteism and to bring about inclusivity in Indian society.
DR VASUDHA MC
The Karnataka State Brahmin Development Board, which is established
for upliftment of impoverished Brahmins has launched two Schemes- Arundhati and Maitreyi both are meant for financial support for marriages among Brahmins. ₹25 crore budget sanctioned to the Board is being spent on such marriages which could be viewed as misutilization of tax payers money.
The amount sanctioned for supporting poor Brahmins in the form of scholarships fellowships, training and coaching for competitive examinations is being misused for promoting endogamy among Brahmins to keep them insulated and isolated from other sections of society; may be for the age old considerations of caste purity and pollution which are the very basic of untouchability.
In the past, Government has come
out with scheme of financial assistance
for those entering into inter-caste marriages—with a view to eradicate
caste distinctions, casteism and to bring about inclusivity in Indian society. Contrary to this, the Arundhati and Maitreyi schemes appear to be meant for insulating and isolating Brahmins from other communities and promote their caste identity, which is against the ethos of secularism and ideal of inclusivity.
Marriage is a sacrament among Hindus and it should not be reduced to a contract between the couples on the one hand; couple and the Government on the other. Monetization of a sacred institution could prove to be counter-productive and may also lead to unfair practices.
The bond of marriage is based on emotions, sentiments, compatibility and complimentality between the couple; whereas in this Scheme, it is made to last
for three years with monetary incentive notwithstanding whether the marriage
is compatible or a traumatic experience. Marriage is primarily a family affair and Government role in it may prove to be dysfunctional. Exclusive preference to Brahmin priests over Brahmin farmers
and Brahmin cooks makes little sense and priests are relatively better off economically and many a time cooks and farmers
work for priests. In a lighter tone, priests who sacrifice mundane pleasures, such marriages may be run counter to it. Further, the eligibility criteria fixed are such that many can seek eligibility through fraudulent means.
On the whole, the schemes appear to be
lacking in logic and rational and retrogressive in implications. Marriage is not a means, mechanism, a strategy, or an instrument for achieving development; it is purely a domestic affair to be left to families and individuals to manage. There are other spheres and areas far more important and consequential than marriage that could be focused upon by the Karnataka State Brahmin Development Board such as Education, health, employment etc. so as to justify and be accountable for spending tax payers money.
On the pretext of financial incentives brides and grooms cannot be denied conjugal rights and restrict the scope for choice
of spouse. The entire
scene and schemes
make no sociological
sense an
d common sensibility.
∎
