Introspecting The Nambutiri Reform in Kerala: Reflections On Ulbuddhakeralam

history farook Introspecting the
Nambutiri Reform
in Kerala: Reflections
WORKING PAPER series on Ulbuddhakeralam
M R. Manmathan
P.G.Department of History
Farook College
Kozhikode-673632, Kerala Number 2
Email: historyfarook@gmail.com
November 2006
Introspeting the
Nambutiri Reform
in Kerala: Reflections
on Ulbuddhakeralam
M R. Manmathan
Number 2
November 2006
2
history farook working paper series Number 2 November 2006
INTROSPECTING THE NAMBUDIRI REFORM IN KERALA:

REFLECTIONS ON ULBUDDHAKERALAM
Social reform movements in modern India represented the Indian response to the
challenges of colonial modernity. Although considerable suspicion still looms large over
the so-called „Indian Renaissance‟,1 and though disagreement prevails over the question as
to whether it was „renascent‟ or „resistant‟,2 it was undoubtedly a great enterprise for
relieving Indian religion of the features most attacked by Christian missionaries and to
remodel Hindu religion in accordance with the Judeo-Christian conceptions of
monotheism and anti-idolatry. In the social domain, it was an attempt to recast Indian life
in tune with modern western ideals of rationalism and humanism. As most of these
movements were spearheaded by upper caste Hindus, they happened to be elitist in
character and Brahmanical in orientation. But these reform movements did not acquire
either spatial or temporal uniformity all over India. In the context of Kerala, the urge for
reform was manifested through caste-based movements rather than as attempts at the
„construction of Hinduism‟3 and found their articulation only at the close of the nineteenth
century. Among these movements, that of the Ezhavas under Sri Narayana Guru was the
earliest and the foremost and it had its sudden and sweeping impact on all other castes and
communities of Kerala. Caste movements, which had their principal focus on social
equality and upward mobility, struggled for a realignment of existing social relationships
through cultural and political interventions.
The urge for reform appeared among the Nambutiri Brahmins of Kerala rather late.
It coincided with the era of resurgent nationalism. The objectives and programmes of the
movement took its shape during the time when Gandhian ideals began to dominate
nationalist politics and culture. Hence the Nambutiri reform movement drew many
elements from the rising nationalist culture and politics in order to formulate its agenda
and programmes.4 This has also been explained in terms of the strong religious elements
explicitly expressed in the Gandhian ideology.5 The movement in the 1930s was thus
marked by persistent efforts to link community reform with nationalist politics and with
the constructive programme.
The Nambutiri reform movement has been of considerable interest to both scholars
and the common people. The nature of the movement also has been a subject of
contrasting perceptions. Some celebrate the movement for the „renunciation of privileges‟
M.R.Manmathan, Lecturer in History, Farook College manmadan@farookcollege.ac.in

3
hitherto enjoyed by the community and for leading the Nambutiris straight into the
mainstream social life. They hold that while other communities were frantically following
the narrow path of protecting partisan rights and were craving for concessions for their
own benefit, the Nambutiri movement has taken a wider and logical course towards the
well being of the society as a whole for the sake of the noble ideals of humanism and
social equality by sacrificing traditional rights and privileges in an attempt to patronize the
upcoming nascent civil society. Consequently, they continued to suffer in the emerging
new social order and ended up in themselves becoming destitute both in terms of
economic power and demographic strength. The movement is thus praised for its unique
revolutionary role of self-abnegation and for the positive part it played in averting the kind
of opposition their counterparts had to face in the Tamil country. 6 A few others have
condemned the element of radicalism in the movement for bringing about the final
breakdown leading to destitution.7 Still, there prevails a near unanimity of opinion among
both critics and apologists in that it was a movement with few parallels and hence unique
in world history. The leaders of the movement are held in great esteem for this great
achievement because it was their ideas and their involvement that brought about this
unsurpassed reputation to the movement. The movement is also assumed to have crossed
its sectarian boundaries towards a truly universal ethic in the 1930s. This general tendency
notwithstanding, attempts to assume the Nambutiri reform movement as representing the
most desirable course of social action, to qualify it as a role-model for social movements
and to assign its leaders special respect and aura for their social ethic of self-denial may
not perfectly agree with historical realities.
The commune experiment, known as Ulbudhakeralam, pioneered by V.T.
Bhattathiripad (hereafter V.T.) in 1935 holds a significant place in the total programme of
action related to the Nambutiri reform. Though the colony couldn‟t last long and though
there prevails over a conspicuous silence on the episode in V.T‟s otherwise vivid
memoirs,8 it is briefly surveyed in some of the many studies on him,9 and is generally
regarded as a noble experiment and a brilliant intervention in the contemporary social
system. While some glorify it as an attempt at the creation of a casteless and classless
society,10 a few others see it as a great endeavor towards building up righteous and
„organic men‟ along Gandhian lines and a prototype experiment towards the creation of a
role-model for the future social set up of Kerala.11 Its role in linking the Nambutiri reform

4
movement with the rising nationalist struggle has also been noticed. 12 On another plane,
the failure of the project is reckoned as a great tragedy causing incalculable damage to the
prospects and progress of Kerala society and politics since this unfortunate collapse is
perceived to have terminated the possibilities of a healthy dialogue between the
Ulbudhakeralam, which represented the cultural aspect of Kerala, and Leftist Keralam
(under the leadership of E.M.S), which signified the political side.13 Keeping admirers
aside, the experiment had its severe critics. The commune has been evaluated as basically
a utopian project14 and its failure is attributed to VT‟s ideological inhibitions and his
inability to identify the realities of the times.15 An evaluation of political dimensions and
ideological underpinnings of this reformist venture may lead us beyond the established
notions developed on the phenomena. This paper is an attempt to study the Ulbudha
Keralam project of VT in the larger background of colonialism, reform and nationalism in
Kerala. The study tries to follow a cautious approach against projecting personalities like
V.T. as “deities and not actors circumscribed by history”.16 It may also help in hinting at a
possible coincidence between the launching of the colony with the whirlwind of leftist
politics in Kerala. As V.T. could never reconcile himself with the Marxian dogma, the
interconnection between the two may not be dismissed as accidental.
The concept of the Commune
The conscious separation of the self from the social has called forth attempts at
integrating human experience on commune lines so regularly and persistently. Commune
life, the idea of a withdrawn fellowship, is a principle of wide and diffuse appeal having
many different ends. In Durkheim‟s terms, they attempt to form a social cohesion in which
altruism and egoism are both simultaneously fully realized. To some observers they are
self-evidently absurd; Marx and Engels, for example, dismiss them in a well-known
passage as „duodecimo editions of the new Jerusalem‟.17 Ferdinand Toennies, the German
sociologist, who while trying to demarcate a community from society, demonstrated the
relative merit of commune life thus: the former signifies an organic, deep-seated,
emotionally pervasive and hence genuine form of living together and the latter is an
association more mechanical, temporary, purposive and hence artificial and ephemeral.18
A small community is also seen as an organic growth; it arises out of a life shared in
common and is capable of self-organization. Only in a small community can democracy
become real. It could be a unit in which production and consumption are conjoined.

5
Taken as a whole, commune life is very common as well as very old. The
beginnings of communes could be traced back to ancient India where the Buddhist monks
started to lead a commune life. Although the tradition of individual renunciation and
breakaway from the mainstream life which was very popular among Hindus necessitated a
sort of commune life, there were very few attempts at commune life as a social project. In
medieval Europe, with the establishment of monastic orders and societies of heretics and
outlaws, commune life acquired wide reputation. Ever since the publication of Moore‟s
Utopia, it made a great spurt. In the industrial society it gained unprecedented popularity
as an attempt at counter-culture or as a middle class reaction against the suffocating ethos
of individualism and the conjugal nuclear family. More specifically, it was a rebellion
against the withdrawal of the family from the outside world to the space of private life.
Communes were thus militant responses against both possessive individualism and the
loss of sociability.
Communes attained a new socio-political relevance in modern India when it was
got linked to nationalist politics. Far more than the romantic type European concept of
withdrawn fellowship or romantic resistance against capitalist social system, Gandhian
commune connected social life with a strong political enterprise. Wherever Gandhi started
his mass political projects, whether in South Africa or in India, his first step was to create
a centre, an ashram. Here the vanguard participants of his movement could live together.
Ashrams were retreats to those who wished to join a community of dedication, usually
with high norms of spiritual life and especially in Gandhi‟s case it envisaged wider
political interests and social service. The ashrams were evolved to undertake several tasks:
training in discipline of cadres for Satyagraha; exemplary enactment of the polity and
society to which the movement aspired; commitment to and practice of public service; a
site where political leaders met to deliberate on the next step in the movement. Gandhian
ashram at Sabarmati became the hub of Indian nationalism and the new cultural
consciousness. For Gandhi, commune was also the ideal form of human settlement, village
reconstruction and self-government.
Ashrams were Gandhi‟s variants of civil society and public sphere. “Civil society
is a space between family and the state where people associate across ties of kinship, aside
from the market, and independent of the state. It includes both relatively formal
organizations and the informal array of friendships and networks of social life outside the

6
community”.19 They were voluntary, not coerced; they were located in public spaces that
were explicitly separated from the sphere of house and home; they were marked by an
opposition between private and public that impugns the private as a realm of personal
interest; they were skewed toward the intelligentsia, not the plebeians, presuming literate
if not literary skills; they were grounded in rationalist forms of deliberation which
implicitly exclude the force of residual inherited identities _ ethnicity and religion _ which
are seen to live in the arena of private interest.20 Voluntarism was a marked feature of the
ashram: “entry by merit, exit by choice”. The example set by the ashram was one of
simplicity, hardship, and political sacrifice which were meant to be publicly visible and to
educate the public. The more ambitious normative goal was to transform the world by
transforming the micro-context of everyday life. It enabled its indwellers to practice a
community of virtue: dedicated to the collective good; to the belief that all work is equally
worthy; to the conviction that the life of the tillers and the craftsmen is worth living.
But Gandhi‟s important ideals in general, and the social ethic enshrined in the
ashram in particular, perceived life in accordance with that typical reaction of the
intelligentsia in many parts of the world to the social and moral depredations of advancing
capitalism: romanticism. In Gandhi there seems to be the vision of a backward-looking
utopia and an idealization of pre-capitalist economic and social relations. Partha Chatterjee
observes that “in the theoretical sense Gandhian ideology would be „reactionary‟ since as
Lenin pointed out in the case of the Russian populists, not only is there simply a romantic
longing for a return to an idealized medieval world of security and contentment, there is
also an „attempt to measure the new society with old patriarchal yardstick, the desire to
find a model in the old order and traditions, which are totally unsuited to the changed
institutions‟.”21 In spite of conceding the „democratic points‟, the Gandhian model is based
on a false, indeed reactionary theory of the world historical process, or else that it refuses
to acknowledge a theory of history at all. In either case it would be a variant of
romanticism.22 The correlation of ashrams with the Constructive Programme, functioning
as the workshops and headquarters, should also be understood in the light of the
observation that the agenda of the Constructive Programme have been devised at a crucial
time when North India witnessed large scale Hindu-Muslim riots in the 1920s and ‟30s
and which resorted to a discourse that emphasized tolerance and the fundamental unity of
the Indian people.23

7
In course of time, however, Gandhian ashrams on the Sabarmati model began to

sprout up all over India. Closely associated with the temple entry agitation and the Harijan
upliftment programmes advocated by the Congress, there were attempts at starting similar
ventures in Malabar in the 1920s. Kelappan had founded a colony of Harijans at
Gopalapuram near his native place Moodadi in 1921, during the Malabar rebellion, where
he founded a school and a hostel for them.24 During the Vaikom Satyagraha, Kelappan
launched another settlement near Payyoli in an eight-acre land, which came to be called
„Pakkanarpuram‟, for Harijan welfare activities.25 Both were exclusive Harijan Colonies
designed to settle and educate them and to provide them a humane treatment; but the
launching of both coincided with crucial points of time in the history of modern Kerala. In
1932, just after the withdrawal of the Guruvayur Satyagraha, Kelappan attempted to invite
public attention through an article towards the founding of an ashram, a congregation of
individuals, who lay faith in Gandhian ideals, for the promotion of Harijan welfare. 26 V.T.
enthusiastically reproduced this article in Unni Nambutiri.27 In addition, in his famous
speech at Alathiyur he stressed the need of starting a colony on similar lines laid down by
Kelappan and underlined the basic ideals of it thus: “I used to have a dream. Extensive
areas of arable land will be bought throughout the country. A farm and a workshop will be
established in every countryside. All people irrespective of religion, caste and creed will
be admitted to these establishments. Besides training them to be good farmers, they will be
given sound education in order to strengthen their mental and cultural faculties and to
_
improve their abilities in various arts. Education will be based on our ancient tradition
venerable sages and their disciples living under the same roof and entering into informal
discussions on all conceivable matters of the universe. This method will be followed here
too, enabling teachers and pupils to be in constant communion. They will live and work
together in the farm. Thus their life as farmers will be integrated with their endeavor to
develop their mental and cultural faculties through proper education. Such establishments
are the need of the hour. Our young people should take the responsibility of starting such
institutions. This is the only solution for the serious problems we confront; such as the
economic crisis and our inability to work”.28 (emphasis added) Two years after this speech
V.T. attempted to put his dream project into practice, but in an altogether different context.

8
The Context
Though Malayali Brahmins called Nambutiris were migrants to Kerala, they could
hold considerable political and cultural authority and material dominance through their
sacerdotal powers and control over vast landed estates. Their hegemony was challenged
for a short while during the Mysorean invasion, but the establishment of the British power
helped them to recoup their authority and preserve it well until the dawn of the twentieth
century. Despite the patron-like role of the British, the Nambutiris vehemently resisted the
penetration of colonial ideas and institutions, which however caused to get them
marginalized in the emerging socio-political order. Adding substantially to this developing
social imbalance was the mounting discontent of the lower orders of the society which was
expressing itself strongly through caste-based reform movements and class-based tenancy
movements both of which were threatening the Brahmin claims of ritual superiority and
social privilege. Such a challenging situation left the Nambutiris with no other option but
to actively engage in community-building efforts in an attempt to safeguard their interests
in the changing material milieu.
The urge for activism found its expression in the founding of the
Yogakshemasabha (hereafter YKS) in 1908 with a special focus on acquisition of
necessary skills through modern education for the protection of community interests and
privileges threatened by the new forces. In that sense it was hardly „reformist‟ but chiefly
„defensive‟.29 There were very little efforts at either a restructuring of the scripture-
specific and routine-oriented pattern of life or at a revision of the feudal world view.
However, by the 1920, with the formation of the Nambutiri Yuvajana Sangham, radical
reforms were taken up both for internal reform meant for a realignment of family and
property relations and for socializing the community by putting an end to the Nambutiri
exclusivity mainly by declaring fraternity with the Nationalist Movement. While the first
part of this agenda embodied demands for the reform of the established customs, practices
and systems of alliance which were increasingly appearing to be anachronistic in the
modern world,30 the second agenda insisted on the Nambutiris to involve in Gandhian
politics, especially in the constructive programme, so as to alleviate the prevailing distrust
about the Nambutiris among the lower castes and also to mark a strong presence of the
Nambutiris in the emerging civil society. Pitched battles were fought between the
reformers and the conservatives over the viability of reform through the media and in the

9
annual meetings of the YKS, the radicals could create an environment for reform within the
community very soon. Non-Nambutiris were also invited to participate in the annual
conferences not only to prove its secular credentials but also to receive advice and
instructions on the course of action to be taken. The YKS supported the Vaikom and
Guruvayur satyagrahas and many Nambutiris like Kurur Neelakantan Nambutiripad,
Mozhikunnam Brahmadathan Nambutiripad, E.M.S. Nambutiripad and T.S. Tirumumb
became active political workers.
As has been noticed, in every detail the Nambutiri movement was strikingly
influenced by the methods and ideals of the National Movement. The course of action was
strictly non-violent and included varieties of forms like strong campaigning for the
mobilization of public opinion in favour of reform, within the community and outside,
through the print media, speeches, annual conferences and theatrical expressions; and
democratic and „constitutional‟ agitation for social change, that is, resorting to the consent
of the majority even for the most radical of the reforms; and attempts at legislation for
permanency of reforms.31 By the beginning of 1930 the environment for substantial
changes was almost evident. This was supported by the enactment of the Namboothiri
Bills in the Travancore, Cochin and Madras legislatures. These pieces of legislation, along
with other ones, ratified the demands for sajativivaham and partition of Illam property,
and made sambandam a criminal offence.32 But the fulfillment of the communitarian
demands was posing a new problem before the reformist section of the Nambutiris by
forcing them to find ways of fastening the movement with mainstream politics or to search
for new arenas of action elsewhere. Due to the impact of the Gandhian politics, there had
often been a strong tendency to link community-building efforts with the nation-building
process.33 Religious reformation was also not an end in itself, it was for social comfort and
political advantage.34 Gandhian constructive programme, including temple-entry and
Harijan welfare, now became the new arena of action.35 Those who were attracted by the
Nationalist Movement thus traversed between community reform and constructive work.
Meanwhile, some of the activists like E.M.S opted to work in Congress politics first and
Communist movement later. Community activities at this stage were focused mainly on
perpetuating the fruits of the reforms through collective action and radicalizing the
existing reform agenda by expanding it to incorporate fresh objectives like widow
remarriages. Cooperation with the Congress in Malabar, which was dominated by the

10
tenant classes and which had tenancy reform as one of its main planks, at the political
level was not possible without the stigma of withdrawing to the back stage in leadership
matters and without sacrificing economic interests.36
Among the Nambutiri reformers of the 1920s and 30s, the name of V.T
Bhattathiripad has been the most prominent. His interference in the movement happened
to be timely and radical, and acted as a catalyst in helping it to achieve a grand success
while simultaneously raising him to the position of one of the top leaders. Although
contemporary sources portrayed V.T. only as one among many leaders, such as
Moothiringot Bhavatradan Bhattathiripad, Pandam Vasudevan Nambutiri, Kanippayur
Sankaran Nambutiripad etc, later eulogistic literature on reform installed him as the central
figure and as the undisputed leader of the movement.37 However, around 1930, V.T. had
emerged as the most powerful ideologue of the movement and as a firebrand radical. Now
as almost all the declared objectives of the movement were achieved, V.T. started
demanding the YKS to be disbanded and the Nambutiris take up the larger task of creating
a united Kerala by relinquishing community sensibilities for humanitarian principles.38 But
still, he refused to associate himself with the political aspect of the freedom movement and
focused only on the Constructive Programme.39 Community reform programmes were
now alternated with participation in the Guruvayur Satyagraha and association with the
Harijan welfare activities. Even while strongly pleading for the dismissal of the
community reform movement, there was the absence of the concrete vision of social
reform or of a political agenda. In 1934, however, by preparing the stage for the first
widow marriage among the Nambutiris, he put into practice something which was thought
to be hitherto improbable and truly shocked the community. The wrath that the event
unleashed among the orthodox forced V.T. to find a safe asylum for Nambutiri radicals
suspended from the caste for their association with the event which finally found its
expression in the launching of the Ulbudhakeralam colony.
The Setting Up of the Commune
V.T. founded his colony at Kodumunda near Pattambi, on the model of the
Gandhian Phoenix and Sabarmati Ashrams, on a twenty five-acre-land taken on lease from
Kanjur Raman Nambutiri.40 The first settlers were five Nambutiri families including that
of V.T, and later some more individuals and families of Nambutiris as well as non-
Nambutiris joined it.41 All the activities, including farming, craft work and house

11
construction, were done as voluntary service. As the first step, a house with five rooms for
five families was built and later many houses and a few public buildings also were
constructed. The whole manual labour for construction was done by the inmates.42 All the
members of the colony were obliged to do some kind of work. Education for children and
classes for elders were provided. The press of Prabhatam was arranged for starting a
weekly journal named Ulbudhakeralam.43 V.T worked as the editor and the inmates
themselves did the printing work.
While we have a lot of evidences on almost all other aspects of V.T‟s public life
and personal career, there is a striking absence of them on the colony project. The silence
of V.T. on this episode is in fact surprising since he is a vociferous person and has written
elaborately on many other less significant aspects of his life. In the complete works of
V.T, which runs through more than 600 pages there is only a few brief references to the
Ulbudhakeralam project.44 Two of them are in the article which he wrote to justify his
sister‟s inter-caste marriage with Raghava Panikker. V.T. recalls that it was during his
engagements for the publication of one of the numbers of the journal that he came to
conceive the idea of this marriage. The second reference to the commune is related to the
occasion when he discloses that he took up the marriage proposal seriously while he was
leading an isolated and desperate life following the collapse of the colony and being
discarded by his former colleagues. It is important to note that his reference to the
commune experiment as a dismal failure corresponds with his private estimates on the
mixed marriage as an extremely sorrowful event.45 The third reference relates to a visit of
Nalapat Narayana Menon in the colony. Despite the commune being his dream project,
V.T. refused to retrieve his experiences of it. It is likely that he found an unbridgeable gulf
between the ideal and the real in experiencing both the events. In a very important
conversation about two years before his death, V.T. briefly referred to the commune, but
here again he stressed on the failure of the project and its impact on his life impelling him
to wind up his communitarian reform activities.46 V.T. seems to convince us that the
failure of the commune was crucial in bringing about an end to his public life. But his
refusal to assign the failure upon any other person(s) agrees perfectly with the element of
self-criticism evident in this disclosure. He also points to the fact that his staunch faith in
Gandhism and his ideological disputes with the Communists were decisive in the course of

12
his later life.47 Thus certain political and strategic points appear to involve in the commune
issue as its rise and fall corresponded with a very crucial period in the history of Kerala.
Unfortunately no single volume of the journal Ulbuddhakeralam has survived to
give evidence on any aspect of the programmes of the project. Almost all the comrades of
V.T. in the colony later turned out to be communists. As left-wing politicians, they were
generally opposed to the politics of the Gandhian constructive programme. The literature
emanating from that side either in the form of memoirs or of remarks, are conspicuously
silent over the issue. However, we get some scant references from among them.
Puthuppally Raghavan, the well-known Communist, in the first volume of his memoirs,
gives a very brief description of his stay there in the first two months of the colony. He
speaks about his enthusiastic participation in the construction works but, on the whole,
observes the project as a utopian venture and attests that it was founded as a shelter for
those refugee Nambutiris who were banished from the community for their participation in
the reform programme or for getting married against the will of the patriarchs. 48 M.P.
Bhattathiripad (Premji), a Nambutiri radical and V.T‟s fellow-activist, makes a hint at his
stay at Kodumunda while recalling about his friendship with Puthuppally Raghavan, 49 but
plainly refuses to give any other details of his commune experiences. In a touching story
of the pitiful life of Nhalur Sridevi Antarjanam, P.M. Narayanan quotes some of her life
experiences at Kodumunda and attests to V.T‟s attitude on the colony. V.T. is reported to
have told her that Ulbuddhakeralam was founded for victims like her.50 She recollected
that during her stay at Kodumunda with her father‟s brother Ramapphan, they could share
the neighbourhood of many progressive-minded Nambutiris like M.R.B, Kanjur, Kuthulli,
Thadam, Narippatta, etc. and that the relations with them helped expand their mental
horizon considerably.51 The silence of others like I.C.P. Namboothiri and M.R.B. are truly
striking. I.C.P, the brother-in-law of both V.T. and M.R.B. as also the brother of the
widow who remarried first, doesn‟t make any references to the episode. 52 What is more
important is the silence of M.R.B. over the issue, as it was his marriage with the widow
that precipitated a situation which warranted the launching of the colony.
One of the very important pieces of information about Ulbuddhakeralam comes
from the writings of E.M.S. Nambutiripad. He links the founding of the colony with the
internal dynamics of the Nambutiri movement. He contextualized the starting of the
commune by writing that as the major objectives of the movement were already achieved,

13
some of the radicals began to demand the dissolution of the YKS so as to enable the
movement to get merged with nationalism: “…Social and cultural disparities have existed
for centuries between Nambutiris and the other castes. Haven‟t these disparities been
vanishing very fast? What about future social and cultural reforms? Won‟t they be
applicable to society as a whole irrespective of castes? Is it not time for us to discard our
old and narrow aim of working for the social and cultural upliftment of the Nambutiri
caste alone? Shouldn‟t we adopt the broader view of aiming at the creation of a casteless
society? Shouldn‟t we organize a new movement comprising of all social revolutionaries
of all castes who are prepared to wage an uncompromising war against all superstitions
and evil customs prevailing in the society? These were the questions raised by the younger
generation of Nambutiris. It was V.T. who gave a concrete form to their dreams and
aspirations. He waged war against caste system by organizing various activities such as
promoting inter-caste marriages. He encouraged people belonging to different castes and
religions to live together and to interact with each other. They led simple lives in cottages
resembling hermitages”.53 E.M.S. proceeds to account that despite the progressive
elements involved in the commune experiment and the causative role it played in arousing
new political forces, he didn‟t associate with it since his field and method of action
contrasted with that of V.T. He however refuses to explain the areas of disagreement
despite the fact that V.T‟s focus was on the individual and cultural plane and that other
equally important issues of social or economic concern were left unattended or sought to
be solved in the utopian way. The fact that E.M.S. doesn‟t highlight this aspect should be
understood in the context of his strong sympathies towards his former Nambutiri
colleagues.54 Neither does E.M.S. criticize V.T. for any of his ventures or for his basic
ideals. The reason for this strategic silence should also be sought in the kind of preceptor-
pupil relationship that had prevailed between the two.55
Apart from these primary data we have evidences on the colony from the
biographical sketches, some of which were composed with the help of information
acquired directly through discussions with V.T. But on the whole there is an element of
eulogy in them. The Ulbuddhakeralam project is described by them as an essentially
Gandhian programme designed to develop an ideal society: a casteless, classless, self-
sufficient, cooperative, social system with particular emphasis given to simple life, dignity
of labour, moral, ethical and humanitarian values and spiritual progress. It was also

14
conceived as a source of human values indispensable for social life: love and compassion,
harmony and equality.56 Panegyric works apart, even more serious studies put the
commune in terms of attempts towards the establishment of an egalitarian social order and
an Aikya-Keralam, comprising of all castes and communities.57
Disagreement prevails over the immediate circumstances leading to the founding
of the colony. It is argued that as the Nambutiri reform movement was in its final stage of
completion, V.T wanted to secularize the Nambutiris.58 He also wanted to uplift the
downtrodden. With success after success, he was widening his vanguard position for the
greater interests of the society as a whole. During the Guruvayur Satyagraha, he was on
the eight-member committee constituted for conducting a plebiscite among the caste
Hindus to feel their pulse on the question of permitting untouchables to enter temples. His
house at Tritala functioned as the office of the plebiscite. On the failure of the Satyagraha,
he made a highly controversial statement urging people to burn down temples.59 VT‟s
statement has been interpreted as a high point of social radicalism and democratic idealism
and as a step towards the espousal of strong secular and rational thought.60 Thus the
founding of the commune is supposed to represent the culmination of his growing secular
and democratic viewpoints which in other words was a natural and logical growth of the
reform movement beyond its narrow communitarian boundaries so as to encompass the
interests of the society at large.
A causal link between the widow marriage of 1935 and the starting of the colony
has been generally noticed—but it is seen only as a spark to ignite the larger cause. The
widow marriage had fallen on the orthodox Nambutiris like a bombshell. Widowhood had
been a great symbol of tradition and virtue among the Nambutiris and stood to prevail as
the strongest bastion of conservatism and male domination. By smashing the last vestige
of blind tradition, V.T. shocked the orthodox and the liberals alike and invited the wrath of
the whole community. But on another level, he was making a great service to his own
community by redeeming it of universal condemnation for the continuance of widowhood,
which from the point of view of modern values was the most inhuman and heinous
practice.61 In swift retaliation, the couple, along with all the Nambutiri participants in the
marriage, was excommunicated. The Zamorin declared all the participants of the marriage
unworthy of entry into the Guruvayur temple and the Cochin Raja forbade them from
entering the temples of the Cochin state.62 So great was the repercussion of the event that

15
even the radicals of the community and several comrades of V.T. dreaded to cooperate
with the outcasts. This was the critical situation which warranted an alternate home for all
the outcasts to stay over and stay together. Now though excommunication was no longer a
matter of „social death‟63 as has so often happened earlier, it was still a powerful weapon
at the hands of the ecclesiasts to deal with acts of heresy.64 The fact that the first five
settlers were well-known outcasts proves to show that the colony was envisaged as a
haven for the banished and the radicals _ that is, to protect the victims of ostracism. The
Nambutiris who were thrown out of their households for their involvement in community
reforms were not even able to earn their livelihoods; they were in great distress and needed
protection.65 The final words of V.T‟s speech at Alathiyur makes it clear that he had
anticipated a crisis-like situation within the Nambutiri reform movement fairly in advance.
We have to bear this point in mind while dealing with the supposed dimensions of the
commune experiment.
It is not much clear as to what kind of impact the colony had created upon the
contemporary society. The biographical sketches mention it as a great event having
produced considerable enthusiasm among the enlightened sections attracting many notable
figures of the period like Vallathol, Nalappadan, Kuttikrishna Marar, N.P. Damodaran, etc
and to maintain close and continuous contacts with the colony. Not only did they
frequently visit the colony but also they had blessed the pages of the weekly with their
remarkable articles.66 V.T also recollects that prominent figures of the time had assisted
him in the publication of the weekly.67 These scant evidences of course do not
satisfactorily attest to the heavy traffic that is believed to have occurred into the colony nor
to the impact had it produced on the contemporary society. Apart from having made an
impact on just a fraction of the intelligentsia, it appears not to have attracted many of them
and the common people, by and large, seem not to have shown any interest in it or were
not given a space in it at all.
The Downfall
V.T‟s colony lasted for less than three years. Its continued existence was noted to
have been interrupted by a series of internal and external pressures. Of these, the most
important factor was said to be the mounting financial crisis. It is reported that lack of
resources soon put the very existence of the colony in disorder making both the payment
of the rent -which had started falling into arrears- and the subsistence activities almost

16
impossible. V.T. was in sheer despair. He had to spend a major share of the income that he
had received in the meantime from the partition of his family property towards the
expenses of the colony.68 Some kind of internal strife also is noted to have surfaced. Some
of the inmates of the colony were slowly being attracted towards left wing politics. They
had lost faith in Gandhian ideals and hence, in the perpetuation of the colony. The colony
is said to have taken the shape of a communist camp and the weekly became a medium of
leftist propaganda.69 Disputes also began to arise over the ownership rights of the property.
V.T explains the situation thus: “Meanwhile the atmosphere was vitiated by internal strife.
All the assets were in my name. It was argued that these ought to be transferred to a
committee. I could not agree to this suggestion because during this period we had
witnessed the downfall of a large number of co-operative societies. I firmly believed that
only a man of strong character would be able to take up a noble endeavour. I was adamant
on this point, but I had to concede defeat”.70 The crisis took a new turn with the partition
of the Kanjur Illam. The land on which the colony was situated was transferred to Kanjur
Narayanan Nambutiri who was a radical among the Nambutiris and later became a well-
known Communist. He demanded the full clearance of the rent arrears overdue or the
termination of the existing contract. He also filed a legal suit against the colony. 71 Finding
that his endeavour had come to a dead end, V.T. finally decided to dissolve the colony.
Although there is a slight unanimity among the biographers of V.T. over the
circumstances leading to the fall of the colony, there is an apparent disagreement over the
prime factor. While some refuse to emphasize upon a single factor,72 some others lay the
responsibility solely upon the play of the „common enemies‟ but refuse to point out who
they were.73 It has also been observed that as every ideal is utopian and hence destined to
fail, V.T‟s revolutionary utopia too would have no other fate.74 But it is interesting to note
that V.T. explains it as a dispute over the property rights, his refusal to convert it into a
common property and his insistence on the trusteeship doctrine that brought about the
collapse of the commune.75
The collapse of V.T‟s experiment is observed to have brought inestimable damage
to the society and politics of future Kerala. First of all, it led to the exit of an active and
uncompromising social worker from the public sphere. It is held that the failure of the
project and the overall hostile attitude, of not just the community but even of the larger
society, towards his radical ideas caused a sense of frustration in him. It had shattered his

17
mental and moral faculties, destroyed his faith in human virtues, ruined his economic
potentials and forced him to lead a secluded life. He appeared on the public scene only on
rare occasions.76 Secondly, the failure of V.T‟s experiment adversely affected the
development of social reforms along Gandhian lines in Kerala because with it perished the
first attempt to accomplish a socialist commune village.77 Though it was the model most
suited for the socio-economic structure of Kerala, social workers were deterred from
carrying on experiments on those lines because they feared that like V.T, they too would
end up in disaster.78 It has also been argued that the communists played a decisive role in
eliminating the Gandhian tradition in Kerala in general and the socio-political agenda of
V.T. in particular.79 These readings, by blindly idealizing the commune and by refusing to
evaluate it in its historical context, unnecessarily fabricated myths around it.
Concluding Remarks
A large many radicals of the reform movement had begun to step backward and to
find solace in tradition once the basic and male-oriented objectives of the Nambutiri
movement were attained.80 They began to warn against further radicalism or the limitless
emancipation of the female elements.81 In this context, V.T.‟s commune experiment seems
to illustrate the gradually developing crisis in men like him towards the essentials of
modernity.82 Even the Alathiyur speech reflects V.T‟s nostalgia for a supposed golden age
in the past and the idealized Gandhian vision of a peaceful, non-competitive, just and
happy society of the past.83 The context in which he started to think loudly of a break in
the tempo of the movement with a focus on constructive programme and idealistic life
interestingly coincides with the launching of his ashram.84 Thus his concern for a counter-
culture appears to mark a withdrawal from his earlier radicalism. Nor was his measure an
attempt to establish a new kind of civil society sufficient to militate against the existing
social injustices or caste disparities and to provide possibilities of social mobility to the
discriminated sections. Instead of being an attempt at solving the caste injustices or
economic inequalities at the social level, the colony project, by envisaging itself as a
congregation of the enlightened individuals, bypassed the popular and organized attempts
at restructuring the existing social order. At a time when the rights and demands of a
section of the Nambutiris were achieved, when caste-based movements were expanding
their agenda for gaining a more democratic space in the public sphere, and also when

18
tenancy movements were strongly demanding a restructuring of the existing property

relations, the formation of an idealistic social gathering had a special significance.
Despite its exalted ideals, V.T‟s commune experiment revealed his basic
ideological positions which in turn heavily contributed to its final breakdown. V.T‟s
primary concern was the rehabilitation of Nambutiri outcasts and radicals and to set up a
community where the writ of the clergy would not run. His lofty dreams such as the
creation of righteous men etc. through commune life were bound to fail because in the
meantime social changes in Kerala were gaining in momentum making Gandhian concepts
of social reforms obsolete and unacceptable to people at large. The 1930‟s were decisive
in Kerala as the period of transition towards left-wing politics. Not only the economically
depressed and socially discriminated sections of society but even a considerable section of
the Nambutiris was being attracted to it. All the erstwhile outcast Nambutiris were
traversing to left-wing politics, since it was seen as a new space for activism and power,
and hence they lost interest in or found no need of being protected in a commune-type
Gandhian shelter. Waning of the basic purpose combined with a steady erosion of support
from within made the continuance of the project almost impossible. As it was envisaged as
an affiliation of the enlightened strata only, and as the common people were by and large
kept away from or were not been fascinated by it, it had failed to gain any popular appeal
that would counterpoise the left-wing threat. Nor could V.T. link the commune with a
_
larger social or political cause apart from his concern for constructive programme.
Notwithstanding an Apphan Nambutiri, V.T nevertheless remained a Gandhian and a
namesake Congressman. For him the attraction to the left-wing was a natural reaction of
the Apphan Nambutiris owing to the lack of claims on ancestral property in the traditional
family structure.85 In the land question too V.T. held fast to the Gandhian trusteeship
doctrine.86 In this new situation V.T. looked like moving towards orthodoxy. The position
of V.T. was unappreciable to his fellowmen for, he who had fought valiantly for the
material prosperity of a section of the community now took an altogether different position
of favoring non-possessive life and the rearing of righteous men. This change of attitude
only led him to be sidelined. The collapse of the commune and its coincidence with the
upsurge of the left wing politics seems to have some kind of interconnection. A detailed
examination of the spread of leftist tendencies among the Nambutiris may furnish greater
clarity on this problem.

19
It is also important to note that the launching of the colony coincided with VT‟s
repeated call for the disbanding of the Yogakshemasabha. He was creating a temperament
against both the Nambutiri organization and all other caste associations of the time. The
outcry against caste associations has so often been linked with a disdain against caste
politics in general as playing an extremely reactionary role. In the grossly unjust
contemporary social situation it was natural that all caste associations seek upward
mobility at the cost of the privileges of the dominant social groups. But for the Nambutiris,
association on caste lines was a non-profitable affair except that it helped in bringing
about democracy within the community; in the emerging new era of mass politics where
numerical strength counted more than anything else, they were unable to make headway.
Moreover, the expansion of democratic principles beyond the limits of the community
meant renunciation or erosion of traditional rights and privileges. This was the context in
which V.T. found communal organizations as representing narrow partisan interests and
hence harmful to the progress of the society at large.87 Commenting on the same situation
E.M.S. remarked that though rapid changes were taking place in social as well as cultural
realms, he couldn‟t agree with the idea that there wasn‟t any relevance in the continuation
of a social reform movement; instead, there was still the need of an organization among
the Nambutiris in order to coordinate these changes.88 Nor does the denunciation of caste
movements correspond with V.T‟s later personal associations with the Nambutiri
revitalization movements, from 1944 onwards.89 He is also reported to have taken an
initiative role, around 1980, in bringing the Nambutiris together to discuss on the existing
condition of the community and to chalk out plans for the future progress.90 Nor is V.T‟s
attitude towards caste associations accurate, in the pragmatic sense, because its “role has
been seriously misunderstood and its positive contribution neglected”. 91 Although they
press home the interests of their followers and they pursue a form of group selfishness
which is deplored in the name of social duty and discipline, and caste patriotism above the
public interest runs counter to both liberal and democratic values, caste associations
“organize the politically illiterate mass electorate, thus making possible in some measure
the realization of its aspirations and educating large sections of it in the methods and
values of political democracy”.92 V.T‟s denunciation of caste groupings in the name of
democratic values or public interest of course doesn‟t match with his occasional attempts

20
at associating with caste interests; nor does it merit an objective evaluation of the
contemporary social reality.
In the final analysis, we find that scholars who have studied about the
Ulbuddhakeralam project have much exaggerated its dimensions and revolutionary
potential. The images of V.T. both as a great figure who traversed the boundaries of caste
reform, repudiated community sensibilities and thus saved the movement from lapsing
into sectarianism and obscurantism93 or as a victim of an organized siege by reactionary
forces94 may not perfectly fit with evidences and contemporary realities. The primary
concern of the commune, as has already been noticed, appears to be the rehabilitation of
the outcast Nambutiris. Despite not being a withdrawn fellowship in the complete sense,
the commune failed to make a lasting impact and had only a short life because it lacked a
radical political perception and a sustainable political programme. It was elitist in
constitution and romantic in conception. V.T‟s refusal to convert the property into a trust
reveals his anxiety on the sanctity of private property and his obstinacy for a patron-client
relationship. The association of a secular forum with a strong Nambutiri tradition also
explains his nostalgic notions of a glorious past.95 The commune enterprise therefore fails
to qualify the merit of a viable model for future Kerala society, as has so often been
argued. This is neither meant to discredit figures like V.T. nor to devalue their role in the
awakening of modern Kerala but just to point out the limits of their ideas and
interventions. With the completion of the community-building measures, V.T seems to
have exhausted his progressive agenda. His ideology and programmes were far short of
taking the next step either towards a realignment of community relationships so as to
inaugurate a new era of secular politics or to replace the Nambutiris at the apex of the new
social environment.96

21
Notes and References:

1
Romila Thapar wrote: “If we are to use the analogy of the European Renaissance then it is questionable
whether in fact there was a renaissance in India in the nineteenth century. Quite apart from the fact that the
catalyst came from outside and not from within the society in India, the major ideological contribution of
the Renaissance, the notion of humanism which pervaded the approach to every aspect of life, was based
primarily on a rejection of the dominance of the church even though this rejection sought legitimacy by
going back to what were interpreted as the institutions of the Greco-Roman civilization, prior to and
antithetical to, the Christian Church. In India we are now seeking legitimacy from the past in attempts to
build institutions which would be conducive to the powers of a church should there have been a church in
India. For instance, by insisting on the historical existence of a Hindu community, or other communities
defined solely by an overarching religious identity, we endorse the idea of an ecclesiastical infrastructure
even where it did not exist before. The idea that the religious community was a basic identity of Indian
society was fostered in the nineteenth century. By accepting it we have moved a long distance away from
the predispositions of a renaissance.” Romila Thapar, “Nation Building, Development Process and
Communication: Towards a Renaissance-Some Historical Perspectives Drawing on Early Times”, in In
Search of India’s Renaissance, Vol. II, Chandigarh, 1992, pp.22-23.
2
Richard Fox Young, Resistant Hinduism: Sanskrit Sources on Anti-Christian Apologetics in Early
Nineteenth Century India, Vienna, 1981, p.15. Young deems it appropriate to term the developments in
India as resistant Hinduism.
3
For details see Gowri Viswanatahn, “Colonialism and the Construction of Hinduism” in Gavin Flood ed.,
The Blackwell Companion to Hinduism, Oxford, 2003, pp.23-44.
4
Veluthat Kesavan, “Nambutiriyum Manushyanum”, Sahityalokam, March-April 2003, pp. 22-25.
5
V.T. Bhattathiripad, Sampoorna Kritikal (Complete Works), Kottayam, 1997, p. 526. V.T. explains that
when he was attracted to Gandhian politics, it was expressed through strong religious symbols.
6
Madamb Kunjukuttan, Abhivadaye, Kottayam, 1989, pp.224-29; M.R. Manmathan, “Charitram Oru Piriyan
Koniyanu” (Interview with Akkitham Achuthan Nambutiri), Madhyamam Weekly, 9: 34, August 25, 2006,
p.38.
7
T.S Bhattathiripad, “Samudayadrohi”, DeshabhimaniWeekly, 27:22, Nov. 12-17, 1995, pp. 47-48.
8
V.T. Bhattathiripad, Sampoorna Kritikal (Complete Works), Kottayam, 1997.
9
A.P.P. Nambutiri, V.T. Oru Yugapurushan, Calicut, 1992, pp.148-51; Mathramkot Asokan, V.T.
Ethirpilude, Kottayam, 1982, p.56; Madamb Kunjukuttan, op. cit.,, pp.224-29; M.G.S. Narayanan, “VT:
Communisathinappurathekkulla Yathrayile Margadarsakan” in VT: Studies and Memoirs, edited by A.V.
Sreekumar, Mezhathur, 1997, p. 79.
10
M.G.S. Narayanan, op. cit.
11
Civic Chandran, “Enthukondu VT?” Mathrubhumi Weekly, Dec.26, 1999- Jan.1, 2000. (Also see his VT
Ivideyundu, Vatakara, 1999, which reproduces the article.)
12
M.R. Manmathan, op. cit., p.38.
13
Civic Chandran, op. cit. It is also observed that although Leftist Keralam thrived at the cost of
Ulbudhakeralam, what the Leftist legacy left behind was just empty claims and a fragmented soul.
14
Puthupally Raghavan, Ente Viplava Smaranakal, Vol. I, Kottayam, 1992, p. 217.
15
I.C.P. Nambutiri, “V.T-yude Karmakandam” in VT Oru Itihasam, edited by Palakkizh Narayanan,
Kottayam, 1996, pp. 132-33.
16
J. Devika, “En-gendering Individuals: the Project of Nambutiri Brahmin Reform in Kerala”, Journal of
South Indian History, 1:2, March-August 2004, p.81.
17
Philip Abrams & Andrew McCulloch, Communes, Sociology and Society, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, 1976, pp.1, 199.
18
Parag Cholkar, “Making of a Village Community: Gandhian Concept of Human Settlement” in P.K. Misra
and K.P. Gangrade ed., Gandhian Alternative Towards Gandhian World Order, New Delhi, 2005, p. 292.
19
Carolyn. M. Elliot, “Civil Society and Democracy: A Comparative Review Essay” in Carolyn. M. Elliot
ed., Civil Society and Democracy: A Reader, New Delhi, 2003, pp. 7-8.
20
Susanne. H. Rudolph & Lloyd. I. Rudolph, “The Coffee House and the Ashram: Gandhi, Civil Society and
the Public Sphere”, in Carolyn. M. Elliot ed., op. cit., p. 386.
21
Partha Chatterjee, “Gandhi and the critic of civil society”, in Ranajit Guha ed., Subaltern Studies III, New
Delhi, 1984, p.173
22
Ibid.

22
23
Dick Cooiman, Communities and Electorates: a Comparative Discussion of Communalism in Colonial
India, Amsterdam, 1995, p.45. The same motives are identified to have moved Gandhi to make temple-
entry one of the main planks of his socio-political platform. See, Louis Onwerkerk, No Elephants for the
Maharaja: Social and Political Changes in Travancore 1921-47, New Delhi, 1994, p.56. Many
Nambutiris seems to have been attracted by the anti-untouchability movement because of community
interests. The customs of avoidance of lower caste persons‟ pollution by high caste persons seems to be
inapplicable in modern occupational contexts or would affect the progress of themselves in the adverse
manner. The need for „ritual neutrality‟ in the public places and of the relaxation of pollution restrictions
for communitarian interests may have forced many to cooperate with the constructive programme as part
of the community reform.
24
C.K. Moossath, Kelappan Enna Mahamanushyan, Kottayam, 1982, p.104.
25
Ibid.
26
APP. Nambutiri, op. cit, pp. 148-49.
27
Ibid, p. 149.
28
Unni Nambutiri, April 28, 1933, reproduced in V.T. Bhattathiripad, op. cit., pp.548-49. The italicized part,
though appear not to agree with the main body of the speech, may provide a possible link between the
commune concept and the emerging crisis in the Nambutiri reform movement.
29
J. Devika, op. cit., p. 84.
30
Which were to be replaced by sajativivaham (as against the existing practice of the eldest son (moos)
alone marrying from within caste (often many times) while all junior sons engage in conjugal relations
(sambandam) with lowly ranked savarna castes) and bhagam, the right of individual property through
partition of the joint holdings which would materially enable the junior males (Apphan) to sustain
individual families. It was also an attempt to underline the importance of individual enterprise to the
rejuvenation of the community.
31
But other acts of reform like violation of ritual practices through breaking of the sacred thread, cutting of
the tuft, disregarding of daily rituals or attempts at Parivedanam appear not to be perfectly non-violent.
32
The Madras Nambutiri Act of 1933 legalized Sajathivivaham and made Adhivedanam a punishable
offence. Whereas the Madras Marumakkathayam Act of 1933 allowed the offspring of Sambandham to
inherit their father‟s property. It is observed that the clamour for legislative intervention arose at such a
dangerous situation when no other alternative to total extinction was visible. See, Vasantha Kumari, “The
Madras Nambutiri Act (XXI of 1933)- A Study of the Nambutiri Customs of Malabar in Light of the
Judicial Findings Antecedent to the Act”, Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, 60th Session,
Calicut, 1999, p.753.
33
Recasting the image of the Nambutiri according to the new ideal of civil society and the modern concept
of citizenship was slowly gaining currency. It envisioned the eradication of irrational practices and blind
superstitions.
34
K.N. Panikkar, “From Revolt to Agitation: Beginning of the National Movement”, Social Scientist, 25:9-
10, Sep-Oct. 1997, p. 33.
35
The attraction towards the anti-untouchability movement may have been due to community interests. It
was not only practically impossible to keep up pollution rules in modern occupational contexts but it
would also affect the progress of the community in an adverse manner. The need for „ritual neutrality‟ in
the public places forced many to strive for relaxation of pollution restrictions. Cooperation with the
constructive programme was thus an extension of the community reform agenda. See Pauline Kolenda,
“Caste in India Since Independence” in Dilip. K. Basu and Richard Sisson ed., Social and Economic
Development in India-A Reassessment, New Delhi, 1986, p.116.
36
Herring observes: “As importantly, the nationalist movement in Malabar necessarily included opposition
to landlords and their agents who utilized the colonial state to enforce their power”, Ronald. J. Herring,
Land to the Tiller: the Political Economy of Agrarian reform in South Asia, Delhi, 1983, p.159.
37
Even more wonderful is statements like the following: “In 1909 …VT Bhattathiripad, a nambutiri angered
by the ills prevalent in the community, founded the Nambudiri Yogakshemasabha”. See Geetha
Krishnankutty, “Introduction” in Lalitambika Antarjanam, Cast Me Out if You Will: Stories and Memoirs,
translated by Geetha Krishnankutty, Calcutta, 1998, p. xviii.
38
V.T‟s speech in the silver jubilee meeting of the YKS held at Karalmanna in 1932, cited in A.P.P.
Nambutiri, op. cit., p. 138.
39
P. Chitran Nambutiripad, “V.T: Keralacharitrathile Oru Itihasam”, Vivekodayam 14:5-6, May-June 1982,
p. 15. It is important to note that men like V.T. entered into the Nambutiri movement after being attracted
to Nationalism. Yet, he repeatedly declares that his life mission was social reform (and not political

23
activity). Complete Works, pp. 406, 427, 526. V.T‟s autobiographical or other writings are noted by the
striking absence of a critique of colonialism. However, men like him considered their work to be
„nationalist‟ in the sense of preparing the members of their castes to become subjects of the nation, full
participants in a pan-Indian culture. See Devika, op. cit, p.85.
40
The ruins of the colony are still visible on the site with a house constructed during the time in which the
wife and son of Kanjur Narayanan Nambutiri now lives, the debris of the complex of buildings
constructed there are seen as a small mound and the locality still is known as „Colony‟ at least among the
members of the old generation.
41
The five families were those of V.T, M.R.B, Kummini Parameswaran Nambutiri, Kuthulli Narayanan
Nambutiri and Penangalluru. See A.P.P. Nambutiri, op. cit.,p. 150.
42
Ibid, pp.150-51.
43
E.M.S. Namboothiripad, Atmakatha, Thiruvananthapuram, 2005, pp.210-11. It was the mouthpiece of the
Congress Socialist party, and was edited by E.M.S. It had started publication from Shornur from January
1935. It was banned by the government seven months later for publishing seditious articles. The hiring of
the press for Ulbudhakeralam is referred to only in Mathramkot Asokan, op. cit., p. 56.
44
V.T. Bhattathiripad, op. cit., pp. 307, 309, 407. The Complete Works is not complete since some of his
early writings, which reveals the pulls behind his entry into the movement, are not included in it. For
instance, “Chila Kudiyanmarude Kroorakrityangal” (The Atrocities of Some Tenants), Yogakshemam,
15:54, April 1, 1925; “Nambutiri Kudumba Regulation” I, II, III, IV, V & VI, Yogakshemam, 15:75, June
17, 1925; 15:76, June 20, 1925; 15:77, June 24, 1925; 15:79, July 1, 1925; 15:80, July 4, 1925 & 15:82,
July 11, 1925; “Nambutirimarum Tozhilillaymayum” (Nambutiris and Unemployment), Yogakshemam,
17:60, April 30, 1927.
45
V.T. Bhattathiripad‟s Diary, May 20, July 14 and August 3, 1940. Raghava Panikkar‟s unpublished
autobiography, now kept by his son P.K. Aravindan, Puthuppariyaram, Palakkad, substantiates V.T‟s
perception on the marriage as a sad event. V.T. quarreled with Panikkar for his Vedantic ideals and his
unconcern for material pursuits.
46
K. Gopalankutty, Veluthat Kesavan and D.D. Nambutiri, “Mukhamukham”, in A.V. Sreekumar ed., op.
cit, p. 244.
47
Ibid, p.245
48
Puthupally Ragavan, op. cit., pp.216-217.
49
M.P. Bhattathiripad, “Premjiyude Ormakal”, Patabhedam, Nov. 1992.
50
P.M. Narayanan, “Oru Antarjanathinte Katha”, Kalaveekshanam, Nov. 1997, p.11.
51
Ibid, p.12.
52
I.C.P. Nambutiri, Viplavathinte Ulthudippukal, D.C. Books, Kottayam, 2002.
53
E.M.S. Nambutiripad, op. cit., pp. 177-8.
54
It has also been argued that he had negotiated his Nambutiri identity at a time when Brahmins were under
siege in South India and this may be due to his involvement with the reform movement within the
Nambutiri community before his encounter with Marxism. Dilip Menon, “Being a Brahmin the Marxist
Way: E.M.S. Nambutiripad and the Pasts of Kerala”, in Daud Ali ed., Invoking the Past: the Uses of
History in South Asia, New Delhi, 1999, p. 61.
55
See M.R. Manmathan, op. cit., p. 38. Akkitham points out that V.T. had the role of an elder brother in his
relationship with E.M.S.
56
A.P.P. Nambutiri, op. cit., pp. 148-151; Mathramkot Asokan, op. cit.,pp. 55-56; Madamb Kunjukuttan, op.
cit., pp. 224-227.
57
I.V. Babu, “M.R.B-yude Pravarthanam Oru Vilayiruthal” in M.N. Vijayan ed., M.R.B: Jeevitam, Kritikal,
Darsanam, Trissur, 2004, pp. 89-90.
58
A.P.P. Nambutiri, op. cit., pp.136-42
59
Unni Nambudiri, April 28, 1933 cited in V.T. Bhattathiripad, op. cit., p. 609.
60
Mathramkot Asokan, op. cit., pp. 47-48. But in the light of his later glorification of temples and
idealization of the feudal village culture, there have been attempts at explaining the statement against the
background of the existing political reality. It is argued that the statement should be seen as a backlash
against the disturbing domination of the Nair middle class in the Nationalist Movement, in which the
Nambutiris could find just a marginal space, and as a protest against the idolization of temples by the
nationalist leaders which might lead to the erosion of the command of the Brahmins in the domain of
religion. (See T. Muhammedali, Social Life in South Malabar (1921-47): Relief, reform & Nationalism,
PhD Dissertation, Calicut University, 2003, pp. 216-17.) Apart from this, the juxtaposition of a deep faith

24
in Gandhian ethic with a strong aspiration for Hindu unity appears to have captivated V.T. during this time
and which caused despair in him due to the failure of the Satyagraha to make such a statement.
61
V.T‟s analysis of widowhood appears to have been determined by strong humanitarian sympathies as is
understood from his speech at Alathiyur on 14 November 1930 (VT, op. cit., pp. 580-82) but it is not an
unmitigated ideal of plain human love anyway. Though he had noted the gap of more than a century
between Bengal‟s efforts at solving the plight of the widows and that of Kerala and had taken up the point
of obvious inequality between the sexes, which prohibited widows from remarrying but allowed men to
marry again and again, his refusal to acknowledge women‟s freedom beyond the limit of choosing a
suitable life-partner reveals the boundaries that the reformers had set on female emancipation. As a strong
upholder of female chastity, V.T. was advocating widow marriage probably as an efficient safety valve
against unchastity or other immoralities associated with it. In his private memoirs, he justifies his efforts
for the remarriage of Mrs. Nhalur Sridevi as a restraint against such disasters. He also has argued that had
Kuriyedath Tatri been allowed to select a life-partner of her own choice, all that disgrace imposed on the
community could have been avoided. VT, op. cit., p. 627.
62
Madamb Narayanan Nambutiri, Yogakshemasabha Charitram. (Unpublished document, referred from
Brahmadathan Nambutiripad, Meppazhur Mana, Mulanthuruthi, Ernakulam). Also see P.R.G. Mathur,
“Caste Council among the Namputiri Brahmans of Kerala”, The eastern Anthropologist, Vol. 22, No. 2,
1969, p.213.
63
Robert. M. Hayden, “Excommunication as Everyday Event and Ultimate Sanction: the Nature of
Suspension from an Indian Caste” Journal of Asian Studies, XLII: 3, 1983, p. 292.
64
But it is important that I.C.P. takes the issue of bhrasht rather casually. He and his family, as also E.M.S,
were ostracized for their association with the event but he writes that they in turn treated the other party
too as ostracized. See, I.C.P, op. cit., p. 49. Despite the fact that Widow Marriage was legalized in India
long ago in 1856 by the central government and the YKS had passed a resolution to the effect in 1934,
there was no attempt to resort to legal action. Madamb Narayanan Nambutiri, op. cit.
65
Puthupally Raghavan, op. cit., pp. 216-17; Madamb Kunjukuttan, op. cit., p. 225.
66
A.P.P. Nambutiri, op. cit., p. 151; Mathramkot Asokan, op. cit., p. 56.
67
V.T. Bhattathiripad, op. cit., pp. 307, 407. V.T. writes that N.P. Damodaran and Nalappat Narayana
Menon had closely association with the Colony.
68
A.P.P. Nambutiri, op. cit., p. 150; Mathramkot Asokan, op. cit., p. 56
69
V.T. Vasudevan, Interview, 25th April, 2006.
70
K. Gopalankutty, et. al, op. cit., p. 244.
71
A.P.P. Nambutiri, op. cit., p. 150. The court files of this suit would be a very important historical
document, if they could be traced out.
72
A.P.P. Nambutiri, op. cit., p. 150.
73
Mathramkot Asokan, op. cit., pp. 55-56.
74
Madamb Kunjukuttan, op. cit., pp. 226-227.
75
K. Gopalankutty, et. al, op. cit., p. 244.
76
A.P.P. Nambutiri, op. cit., p. 151.
77
Madamb Kunjukuttan, op. cit., p. 227.
78
Civic Chandran, op. cit.
79
Civic Chandran, Interview, 5th March 2003.
80
It is observed that a note of caution always ran alongside the commitment to reform. The moral heroism of
individuals would be wasted if it did not also take a serious note of social constraints or practical
compulsions. See Amiya. P. Sen, Social and Religious Reform: The Hindus of British India, New Delhi,
2003, p.22.
81
“While there was wide agreement on the need to educate the woman, most men in fact appear to have
taken education as a means to reinforce traditional patriarchal values”, Ibid, p.39.
82
Sumit Sarkar has argued that the „renaissance‟ reformers were highly selective in their acceptance of
liberal ideas from Europe. Fundamental elements of social conservatism such as the maintenance of caste
distinctions, patriarchal forms of authority in the family etc were conspicuous in the reform movements.
He suggests that the concern with the social condition of women was far less an indicator of an ideological
preference for liberalism and more an expression of certain „acute problems of interpersonal adjustments
within the family‟ on the part of the early generation of Western-educated males. Sumit Sarkar, “The
Women‟s Question in Nineteenth Century Bengal”, in Kumkum Sangari and Suresh Vaid eds., Women
and Culture, Bombay, 1985, pp.157-72. In the case of the Nambutiri reformers like VT, the problem was
not just a matter of selection of liberal ideas but a clear departure from the earlier radical points. V.T‟s

25
attitude on the women‟s question, his approach to caste and tradition and his position on the tenancy issue-
all would make it explicitly clear that his fascination towards modernity had started to enter into a stage of
„caution‟. It is also important to note that the collection of articles (“Vedivattam” and “Sathyamennathu
Ivide Manushyanakunnu”, Complete Works, pp. 431-541), though they are written in the post-reform days,
contain themes related to Nambutiri reform movement and his reflections on them and are noted for their
rejection of various ideals of modernity which were high-prized during the time of reform. Glimpses of
the beginning of this trend are perceptible right from the early 30s. See Ibid, pp.548-49, 578-79.
83
He develops his concept of the golden age and explanations of “the fall” even more clearly and forcefully
in some of his later articles. See VT, Complete Works, pp.457, 520; “Bahujanahitaya”, pp.521-23;
“Adhamare”, pp.529-531.
84
In his Alathiyur speech V.T. quotes Parvathi Nenminimangalam lamenting over the slow departure of
leaders like V.T. from the community reform activities. More importantly, in another speech V.T. openly
attacks the radical urge for reform articulated by the Antarjanams. Ibid, pp.547, 578-79.
85
K. Gopalankutty, et. al, op. cit., p. 244. Elsewhere Zagoria has argued that the combination of landlessness
and literacy is the major factors for attraction towards communism. Donald. S. Zagoria, “A Note on
Landlessness, literacy and Agrarian Communism in India”, Archives europeenes de sociologie, Vol. XIII
(1972), p.328 cited in Robin Jeffrey, “Governments and Culture: How Women Made Kerala Literate”,
Pacific Affairs, Vol. 60, No. 3, Fall 1987, p. 468.
86
K. Gopalankutty, et. al, op. cit., p. 245. For a glance at V.T‟s severest defense of landlordism see
Complete Works, p.457. Jeffrey observes that in the 1930s ritual status roughly coincided with economic
power and caste with class. (Robin Jeffrey, “Matriliny, Marxism and the Birth of the Communist Party,
1930-1940”, Journal of Asian Studies, XXXVII: 1, Nov. 1978, pp. 80-82.) Elsewhere V.T. argued that
Gandhism was not different in its basics from the ideals put forward by the ancient rishis (Arshadharmam).
Complete Works, p.479.
87
See V.T, op. cit., pp. 251, 309. He made this statement forcefully in the meeting held to congratulate the
Nambutiri couples of the first widow marriage.
88
E.M.S, op. cit, p. 178.
89
He even collaborated with the Communists, despite all his ideological disagreements with them, in 1944
when the YKS was revived under E.M.S. Some of the articles he wrote at the close of his life reflect his
serious concern about the well-being of the Nambutiris. V.T, op. cit., pp. 625, 629, 633.
90
C.K. Nambutiri, Ormakkurippukal (Reminiscences), unpublished document, now kept by his daughter
C.K. Parvathi, Kulakkat Kurissi, Cherpulasseri. The memoirs were written in between 8-8-1984 and 29-8-
1984. C.K. Nambutiri recollects that V.T. had suggested that they meet together to discuss on
strengthening the YKS. But in the meantime he fell ill and hence the meeting could not be conducted.
91
L.I. Rudolph and S.H. Rudolph, “The Political Role of India‟s Caste Associations” in Immanuel
Wallerstein ed., Social Change: The Colonial Situation, New York, 1966, p. 452.
92
Ibid, p. 449.
93
K.C. Narayanan, “Verunangatha Vakku”, in V.T, op. cit., p. 29.
94
Civic Chandran, op. cit.; Civic Chandran, Interview, 5th March 2003.
95
“The Nambutiri title to property was not absolute ownership, but more in the nature of trusteeship,
entailed to the performance of certain sacred duties.” T. Madhava Menon ed., A Handbook of Kerala, Vol.
II, Thiruvananthapuram, 2000, p. 789. V.T. justified later that may be due to his attachment to tradition, he
had come to believe in Gandhian ideals like the Trusteeship doctrine. See K. Gopalankutty, et. al, op. cit.,
p. 245. He confirms this point with more precision in an article written somewhat later by stating that a
kind of trusteeship mentality had prevailed here in the past. He also vehemently criticized land reforms as
it was based on „undemocratic‟ principles. V.T, “Swatantryam Arkku, Enthinu?”, Complete Works, p.520.
96
Retaining of a vague sense of Nambutiri-ness and pride; strong element of cultural revivalism and feudal
nostalgia evident in his later writings; self-criticism over his own „immature‟ radicalism; all would
persuade an observer to arrive at this conclusion. More striking is the use of contemptuous language
towards the lower castes while referring to certain events of the reform days in his recollections. See V.T,
op. cit., pp. 262, 311.

Introspecting The Nambutiri Reform in Kerala: Reflections On Ulbuddhakeralam

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Introspecting The Nambutiri Reform in Kerala: Reflections On Ulbuddhakeralam

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

history farook Introspecting the

INTROSPECTING THE NAMBUDIRI REFORM IN KERALA:

M.R.Manmathan, Lecturer in History, Farook College manmadan@farookcollege.ac.in

M.R.Manmathan, Lecturer in History, Farook College manmadan@farookcollege.ac.in

M.R.Manmathan, Lecturer in History, Farook College manmadan@farookcollege.ac.in

M.R.Manmathan, Lecturer in History, Farook College manmadan@farookcollege.ac.in

M.R.Manmathan, Lecturer in History, Farook College manmadan@farookcollege.ac.in

In course of time, however, Gandhian ashrams on the Sabarmati model began to

M.R.Manmathan, Lecturer in History, Farook College manmadan@farookcollege.ac.in

M.R.Manmathan, Lecturer in History, Farook College manmadan@farookcollege.ac.in

M.R.Manmathan, Lecturer in History, Farook College manmadan@farookcollege.ac.in

M.R.Manmathan, Lecturer in History, Farook College manmadan@farookcollege.ac.in

M.R.Manmathan, Lecturer in History, Farook College manmadan@farookcollege.ac.in

M.R.Manmathan, Lecturer in History, Farook College manmadan@farookcollege.ac.in

M.R.Manmathan, Lecturer in History, Farook College manmadan@farookcollege.ac.in

M.R.Manmathan, Lecturer in History, Farook College manmadan@farookcollege.ac.in

M.R.Manmathan, Lecturer in History, Farook College manmadan@farookcollege.ac.in

M.R.Manmathan, Lecturer in History, Farook College manmadan@farookcollege.ac.in

M.R.Manmathan, Lecturer in History, Farook College manmadan@farookcollege.ac.in

tenancy movements were strongly demanding a restructuring of the existing property

M.R.Manmathan, Lecturer in History, Farook College manmadan@farookcollege.ac.in

M.R.Manmathan, Lecturer in History, Farook College manmadan@farookcollege.ac.in

M.R.Manmathan, Lecturer in History, Farook College manmadan@farookcollege.ac.in

Notes and References:

M.R.Manmathan, Lecturer in History, Farook College manmadan@farookcollege.ac.in

M.R.Manmathan, Lecturer in History, Farook College manmadan@farookcollege.ac.in

M.R.Manmathan, Lecturer in History, Farook College manmadan@farookcollege.ac.in

M.R.Manmathan, Lecturer in History, Farook College manmadan@farookcollege.ac.in

M.R.Manmathan, Lecturer in History, Farook College manmadan@farookcollege.ac.in

Potrebbero piacerti anche