Attached to Paper Session
Meeting Preference
The vernacular medieval *bhakti* poetry and related social practices provided a literary and social platform for the lower castes and women to articulate the discrimination and challenge the exclusivity of the Brahminical tradition. In 14th-century western India, Cokhāmelā and his family came from an “untouchable” caste, and their poetry articulates painful experiences of discrimination. By asserting the position of a devotee of God Viṭṭhala, they also challenged the presumed superiority of the Brahmins. Despite his anti-discriminatory stance, it is intriguing that Cokhāmelā did not rebel but finally accepted his fate as his *karma*.
Influenced by the ideas of religious socialism preached by *bhakti* poets like Nāmdeva, the lower caste saints like Cokhāmelā asserted and articulated their spiritual musings. Because of their growing self-confidence as devotees and their growing popularity among the masses, they became a target for the orthodox elements. Cokhāmelā had to face severe harassment. His poems give us an insight into his sorrowful heart. The lower castes were not only denied respect in society but also lived in abject poverty. He complains to God about the injustices he sees in society; some people enjoy prosperity, while some starve without enough food. He laments how humiliation, poverty, and a depressed state of mind prevent him from concentrating on God.
Cokhāmelā’s family members, including his wife, son, sister, and brother-in-law, were also influenced by his devotion. All of them composed high-caliber poetry. Their sadness and anger at the injustice done to them are reflected in their poetry, as found in his brother Karmamelā’s complaints to God about how society shames and humiliates them.
Cokhāmelā talks about his predicaments using the analogy of sugarcane. He argues just as sugarcane may appear dirty from the outside, but from within its juice is sweet, in the same way he may be from a lower caste, but his devotion is in no way inferior. Though he asserts himself and complains about injustice, he consoles himself by saying that it is his fate and reasons that it must be the consequences of his misdeeds in his previous life. For him, such reasoning was a “psychological defense mechanism” that he employed to come to terms with the realities of his life. Having been denied entry inside the temple, he sadly accepts his position outside the temple and derives pleasure from beholding the sacred image of the deity from a distance.
Cokhāmelā argues that everyone is born out of impurity and is surprised how some people consider themselves so pure. He ridicules the belief that God will be polluted by the touch of a *śudra* as God is beyond purity and impurity. He surrenders all hope to his beloved God Viṭṭhala, who does not discriminate.
He argues that spiritual knowledge without compassion or piety in one’s heart is pointless. In spite of being humiliated repeatedly and leading a life of deprivation, Cokhāmelā realizes the futility of remaining sad and gloomy. He tries to cheer himself up and imagines Lord Viṭṭhala advising him to accept life as it is.
Cokhāmelā makes numerous references to the mythological stories such as those about Krishna, Vidura, Prahlāda, and Ahilyā. This is unexpected because, as a śudra, he was not expected to have any access to religious scriptures. Probably, he must have known these stories as they were orally recited, performed, or narrated by ascetics or mendicants around the region of Phandarpur. He memorized them and referenced them while composing his devotional poetry, proving he was a person of great intellect and quick learning. Due to the virtue of his devotion, mendicant lifestyle, intellectual prowess, and poetry of high literary merit, Cokhā had acquired a position of respect among the mendicant community of the region. Namdeva, his spiritual Guru, had a high regard for Cokhāmelā. He says,
“Cokhā is my soul, Cokhā is my devotion.
Cokhā is my God, what I shall say about his *bhakti* and his power?”
The evidence that Cokhāmelā knew several of these Puranic narratives also indicates that, perhaps, the lower castes were not altogether denied access to knowledge, at least through oral narratives and recitations. Practices of oral transmission through *pravachanas* (sermons) and *kirtans* (devotional songs) were accessible to members of the lower castes, including the ex-untouchables like Cokhāmelā.
According to one narrative, a Brahmin named Anant Bhatt volunteered to be a scribe for Cokhāmelā and noted down his *abhangas* (devotional poems). However, the priests at Phandarpur, jealous of his popularity, hatched a conspiracy against him. He was accused of stealing God’s ornaments and was subsequently physically assaulted.
Even though highly respected among the devotees and poets, Cokhāmelā could not escape forced labor imposed by the feudal government on people from the lower castes. Cokhāmelā’s death was brought upon by one such episode where they were forced to construct a boundary wall for their village. The wall fell on the construction workers, among whom Cokhāmelā was one of them. Nāmdeva brought his remains to Phandarpur and constructed a samadhi (commemorative shrine) in his memory in front of the Viṭṭhala temple.
One of the important contributions of the *bhakti* movement is that it gave poets like Cokhāmelā an identity to assert their dignity. *Bhakti* movement could not eradicate the evils of the caste system and establish social equality, but it provided avenues to such poets where they could vent their grievances. This articulation was an important step toward developing a vision of an egalitarian society. With its emphasis on equality, simple devotion, rejection of rituals, and use of vernaculars, *bhakti* poetry had raised the spiritual aspirations of the subaltern communities. They started feeling that the realization of the divine is possible for them as well! Earlier, God was understood and spoken of in Sanskrit, the language of elites, where Brahmin priests had established their monopoly and monetized their religious duties through expensive rituals. With increased confidence, Cokhāmelā claimed his right over Viṭṭhala and asserted with pride that he was a lower caste devotee of Viṭṭhala.
Abstract for Online Program Book (maximum 150 words)
Indian religious traditions are multidimensional and multi-layered. Though the Sanskrit texts often try to make Brahminical hegemony sacrosanct, some voices from the margins challenge exclusivity. Vernacular medieval *bhakti* poetry has provided a literary platform for the subalterns to articulate their grievances, express spiritual musings, and assert themselves. Cokhāmelā and his family belonged to an untouchable caste in 14th-century Maharashtra, and their poetry records the discrimination and humiliation they faced. They are assertive about their identity as devotees of Viṭṭhala, the God at Phandarpur, as Cokhāmelā proudly says that he may be of lower caste, but his devotion is not in any way inferior. Given the socio-cultural situation of the medieval period, he could not free himself from the psychological fetters of the tradition altogether and found consolation in internalizing the doctrine of *karma*, which he believed to be responsible for his degraded position.