Talk:Ramnarayan S Rawat

By Rutvi Dattani

Ramnarayan S Rawat is an Associate Professor of History at the University of Delaware as of August 2023. According to his university profile, his research focuses on the Dalits of India and their engagement with colonialism, nationalism, spatial and social exclusionary regimes, and democratic thought and practice in modern India.

In 2021, he along with Hibatullah Akhundzada, the supreme leader of the Taliban, co-signed a letter supporting "Dismantling Global Hindutva" Conference, as an academic and scholar and made the allegation

"the current government of India [in 2021] has instituted discriminatory policies including beef bans, restrictions on religious conversion and interfaith weddings, and the introduction of religious discrimination into India’s citizenship laws. The result has been a horrifying rise in religious and caste-based violence, including hate crimes, lynchings, and rapes directed against Muslims, non-conforming Dalits, Sikhs, Christians, adivasis and other dissident Hindus. Women of these communities are especially targeted. Meanwhile, the government has used every tool of harassment and intimidation to muzzle dissent. Dozens of student activists and human rights defenders are currently languishing in jail indefinitely without due process under repressive anti-terrorism laws."

In 2016, he signed a letter addressed to the State Board of Education, California Department of Education, dated May 17, 2016. The letter stated the following:

1. "There is no established connection between Hinduism and the Indus Civilization."
2. "It is inappropriate to remove mention of the connection of caste to Hinduism."

On November 5, 2017, he signed the letter submitted by the South Asia Faculty Group (SAFG) to the California State Board of Education where he:

• Misrepresented scholarship stating "Mythological terms substitute for historical ones for example the 'Indus Valley Civilization' (a fact-based geographic term) appears to be replaced with a religiously-motivated and ideologically charged term 'Indus-Saraswati/Sarasvati Civilization'. The Saraswati is a mythical river"
• Implied that Christians and Muslims existed in Ancient India, prior to the founding of these religions ​

Publications related to India

Books

1. Rawat, R. South Asian Edition of Reconsidering Untouchability: Chamars and Dalits in North India. Ranikhet (India): Permanent Black, 2012.
2. Rawat, R. Reconsidering Untouchability: Chamars and Dalit History in North India. Ranikhet: Permanent Black, 2012 & Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2011.

Edited Volumes

1. Rawat, R., and K. Satyanarayana, editors. Dalit Studies. Durham: Duke University Press, 2016.

Articles and Book Chapters

1. Rawat, R., and K. Satyanarayana. “Introduction.” Dalit Studies, edited by R. Rawat and K. Satyanarayana, Duke University Press, 2016.
2. Rawat, R. “Colonial Archive versus Colonial Sociology: Writing North Indian Dalit History.” Dalit Studies, edited by R. Rawat and K. Satyanarayana, Duke University Press, 2016.
3. Rawat, R. “Struggle for Identities: Chamar Histories and Politics.” Caste Reader, edited by Sumit Sarkar and Tanika Sarkar, Ranikhet: Permanent Black, 2013.
4. Rawat, R. “The Making of a Dalit Perspective: The 1940s and the Chamars of Uttar Pradesh.” Claiming Power from Below: Dalits and the Subaltern Question in India, edited by Manu Bhagavan and Anne Feldhaus, Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2008.
5. Rawat, R. “Partition Politics and Achhut Identity: A Study of Scheduled Castes Federation and Dalit Politics in U.P. 1946-1948.” The Partitions of Memory, edited by Suvir Kaul, Delhi: Permanent Black, 2001 and Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2002.
6. Rawat, R. “Genealogies of Dalit Political: Transformation of Achhut from ‘Untouched’ to ‘Untouchable’ in early-twentieth century North India.” Indian Economic and Social History Review, vol. 15, no. 3, 2015.

   In his article, Ramnarayan Rawat devotes significant attention to the word "Achhut," often taking it out of its historical and cultural context, and confusing its meanings in Sanskrit and Marathi. Rawat asserts that "Achhut" exclusively denotes "untouchable," and he critiques the Hindu Mahasabha for allegedly attempting to alter its meaning by removing the aspect of untouchability. This interpretation is problematic not only because it oversimplifies the term, but also because it reveals a glaring omission: Rawat's failure to review traditional scholarship on this subject.

   Rawat writes:

   "I noticed that all of the books defined Achhut as ‘pure and undefiled.’ The Mahasabha’s usage of the word Achhut intrigued me. Today in the Hindi heartland of North India, the term Achhut is a pejorative word used by Hindus to refer to the untouchables. Modern Hindi dictionaries will also attest to this fact. Did Mahasabha merely reinterpret the pejorative word Achhut meaning ‘untouchable’ to mean ‘undefiled’ as a way to claim a pure status?”.

   Rawat's failure to engage with traditional scholarship on the evolution of such terms is evident here. The idea that "Achhut" solely refers to untouchability without considering its other possible connotations, such as purity, ignores centuries of linguistic and philosophical discourse. Traditional scholars have often used terms like "Achhut" to denote purity in a spiritual sense, describing one who is untouched by worldly defilement. By neglecting these sources, Rawat's analysis becomes reductionist, lacking a comprehensive view of how terms like "Achhut" have been used across different contexts.

   Further, Rawat’s statement:

   "Studies of Dalit history in North India, including on the Adi-Hindu Mahasabha, have not really examined the position of Achhut as a political category created by Dalit groups.", suggests that his analysis is primarily focused on modern political interpretations. However, this approach disregards traditional sources that view such terms through the lens of dharma, spirituality, and linguistic evolution. Rawat's lack of engagement with these traditional perspectives indicates that he has not conducted a full literature review of relevant Dharmic texts.

   By focusing exclusively on modern Hindi dictionaries and political interpretations, Rawat overlooks centuries of linguistic fluidity in the use of terms like "Achhut" in Dharmic traditions. The reinterpretation of "Achhut" by the Mahasabha, which Rawat critiques, can be seen as part of a longstanding tradition of reclaiming and recontextualizing spiritual concepts. This dimension of the debate is completely absent in Rawat’s analysis, revealing a significant gap in his scholarship.

   Ramnarayan Rawat's article suffers from an incomplete review of the available scholarship on the term "Achhut." By failing to engage with traditional Dharmic sources, he reduces the term to a narrow political category, ignoring its historical and philosophical complexity. His critique of the Hindu Mahasabha’s reinterpretation of "Achhut" overlooks the traditional usage of the term to denote spiritual purity and transcendence. This lack of a comprehensive literature review severely undermines the depth and credibility of his argument.

7. Rawat, R. “Occupation, Dignity, and Space: The Rise of Dalit Studies.” Review essay on Dalit Studies for online peer-reviewed journal History Compass, 2013.
8. Rawat, R., and K. Satyanarayana. “Making Claims for Power: A New Agenda in Dalit Politics of Uttar Pradesh, 1946-48.” Modern Asian Studies, vol. 37, no. 3, 2003.