Four Varnas as combinations of three gunas; why not 6 varnas?

[shankara]

Pranams to all,

It is said in the Bhagavad Gita and other scriptures that the four varnas are based on three gunas. The combination of gunas of the 4 varnas are said to be as shown in the table given below.

Varna	Primary Guna	Secondary Guna	Tertiary Guna
Brahmana	Sattva	Rajas	Tamas
Kshatriya	Rajas	Sattva	Tamas
Vaishya	Rajas	Tamas	Sattva
Sudra	Tamas	Rajas	Sattva
no varna	Sattva	Tamas	Rajas
no varna	Tamas	Sattva	Rajas

 

Though the 3 gunas can form 6 combinations as shown in the above table, why are the last two combinations (in the 5th and 6th rows) not valid to form varna?

This question was raised in a debate on 'Bhagavad Gita and Caste' in Kerala a few months back. I would like to know if there is any logical explanation why varnas cannot have the last 2 combinations.

regards
shankara

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Which verses of Gita are under discussion here?

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

BoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, Kerala

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies

 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,

 

(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )

 

 

 

[Venkatesh Murthy]

Namaste

Sattva has the quality of Jnana. Tamas has the quality Ignorance. Sattva is like Light and Tamas is Darkness. The same person cannot have Jnana and Ignorance or Light and Darkness. It is not possible.

On Mon, Jan 1, 2018 at 12:29 PM, 'shankara' via भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत् <bvpar...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Regards

 

-Venkatesh

[Nagaraj Paturi]

सत्त्वं रजस्तम इति गुणाः प्रकृतिसम्भवाः ।

निबध्नन्ति महाबाहो देहे देहिनमव्ययम् ॥ १४-५॥

 

तत्र सत्त्वं निर्मलत्वात्प्रकाशकमनामयम् ।

सुखसङ्गेन बध्नाति ज्ञानसङ्गेन चानघ ॥ १४-६॥

 

रजो रागात्मकं विद्धि तृष्णासङ्गसमुद्भवम् ।

तन्निबध्नाति कौन्तेय कर्मसङ्गेन देहिनम् ॥ १४-७॥

 

तमस्त्वज्ञानजं विद्धि मोहनं सर्वदेहिनाम् ।

प्रमादालस्यनिद्राभिस्तन्निबध्नाति भारत ॥ १४-८॥

 

सत्त्वं सुखे सञ्जयति रजः कर्मणि भारत ।

ज्ञानमावृत्य तु तमः प्रमादे सञ्जयत्युत ॥ १४-९॥

 

रजस्तमश्चाभिभूय सत्त्वं भवति भारत ।

रजः सत्त्वं तमश्चैव तमः सत्त्वं रजस्तथा ॥ १४-१०॥

 

सर्वद्वारेषु देहेऽस्मिन्प्रकाश उपजायते ।

ज्ञानं यदा तदा विद्याद्विवृद्धं सत्त्वमित्युत ॥ १४-११॥

 

लोभः प्रवृत्तिरारम्भः कर्मणामशमः स्पृहा ।

रजस्येतानि जायन्ते विवृद्धे भरतर्षभ ॥ १४-१२॥

 

अप्रकाशोऽप्रवृत्तिश्च प्रमादो मोह एव च ।

तमस्येतानि जायन्ते विवृद्धे कुरुनन्दन ॥ १४-१३॥

 

यदा सत्त्वे प्रवृद्धे तु प्रलयं याति देहभृत् ।

तदोत्तमविदां लोकानमलान्प्रतिपद्यते ॥ १४-१४॥

 

रजसि प्रलयं गत्वा कर्मसङ्गिषु जायते ।

तथा प्रलीनस्तमसि मूढयोनिषु जायते ॥ १४-१५॥

 

कर्मणः सुकृतस्याहुः सात्त्विकं निर्मलं फलम् ।

रजसस्तु फलं दुःखमज्ञानं तमसः फलम् ॥ १४-१६॥

 

सत्त्वात्सञ्जायते ज्ञानं रजसो लोभ एव च ।

प्रमादमोहौ तमसो भवतोऽज्ञानमेव च ॥ १४-१७॥

 

ऊर्ध्वं गच्छन्ति सत्त्वस्था मध्ये तिष्ठन्ति राजसाः ।

जघन्यगुणवृत्तिस्था अधो गच्छन्ति तामसाः ॥ १४-१८॥

 

नान्यं गुणेभ्यः कर्तारं यदा द्रष्टानुपश्यति ।

गुणेभ्यश्च परं वेत्ति मद्भावं सोऽधिगच्छति ॥ १४-१९॥

 

गुणानेतानतीत्य त्रीन्देही देहसमुद्भवान् ।

जन्ममृत्युजरादुःखैर्विमुक्तोऽमृतमश्नुते ॥ १४-२०॥

[shankara]

Murthyji,

Brahmana has Sattva as primary guna and Tamas as tertiary guna and so on in other varnas too. So, we find that Sattva and Tamas exist in all 4 varnas in varying degrees.

My question is why Tamas can't be secondary guna, when Sattva in predominant? Similary why can't Sattva be secondary, when Tamas is predominant?

regards
shankara

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

न तदस्ति पृथिव्यां वा दिवि देवेषु वा पुनः ।

सत्त्वं प्रकृतिजैर्मुक्तं यदेभिः स्यात्त्रिभिर्गुणैः ॥ १८-४०॥

 

ब्राह्मणक्षत्रियविशां शूद्राणां च परन्तप ।

कर्माणि प्रविभक्तानि स्वभावप्रभवैर्गुणैः ॥ १८-४१॥

 

शमो दमस्तपः शौचं क्षान्तिरार्जवमेव च ।

ज्ञानं विज्ञानमास्तिक्यं ब्रह्मकर्म स्वभावजम् ॥ १८-४२॥

 

शौर्यं तेजो धृतिर्दाक्ष्यं युद्धे चाप्यपलायनम् ।

दानमीश्वरभावश्च क्षात्रं कर्म स्वभावजम् ॥ १८-४३॥

 

कृषिगौरक्ष्यवाणिज्यं वैश्यकर्म स्वभावजम् ।

परिचर्यात्मकं कर्म शूद्रस्यापि स्वभावजम् ॥ १८-४४॥

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Let us discuss the verses from where the table quoted by you is extracted. 

[Vineet Chaitanya]

I would claim  there is a natural  sequence:

Satva -> Rajas -> Tamas

OR

Tamas -> Rajas -> Satva

There will be a jump if one takes Satva/Tamas as primary and Tamas/satva as secondary. So it is unnatural!

On Mon, Jan 1, 2018 at 12:29 PM, 'shankara' via भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत् <bvpar...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

--

[shankara]

Paturiji,

I have not compiled all the verses dealing with this topic. An instance that I remember at short notice is BG 4.13. In his commentary on this verse, Sankaracharya explains the composition of 3 gunas of 4 varnas. Extract from Sankarabhashya of BG 4.13 is given below.

चातुर्वर्ण्यं मया सृष्टं गुणकर्मविभागशः।

तस्य कर्तारमपि मां विद्ध्यकर्तारमव्ययम्।।4.13।।

चत्वार एव वर्णाः चातुर्वर्ण्यं मया ईश्वरेण सृष्टम् उत्पादितम्, 'ब्राह्मणोऽस्य मुखमासीत्' इत्यादिश्रुतेः। गुणकर्मविभागशः गुणविभागशः कर्मविभागशश्च। गुणाः सत्त्वरजस्तमांसि। तत्र सात्त्विकस्य सत्त्वप्रधानस्य ब्राह्मणस्य 'शमो दमस्तपः' इत्यादीनि कर्माणि, सत्त्वोपसर्जनरजःप्रधानस्य क्षत्रियस्य शौर्यतेजःप्रभृतीनि कर्माणि, तमउपसर्जनरजःप्रधानस्य वैश्यस्य कृष्यादीनि कर्माणि, रजउपसर्जनतमःप्रधानस्य शूद्रस्य शुश्रूषैव कर्म इत्येवं गुणकर्मविभागशः चातुर्वर्ण्यं मया सृष्टम् इत्यर्थः।

I looking for an explanation why only 4 combinations of 3 gunas are considered in the formation of varnas, and why the 5th and 6th combinations are omitted.

regards
shankara

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

BoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, Kerala

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies

 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,

 

(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )

 

 

 

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

BoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, Kerala

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies

 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,

 

(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )

 

 

 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Perfectly logical.

[shankara]

Vineet Chaitanyaji,

You have a point. But, in the case of Vaishya Tamas and Sattva are secondary and tertiary gunas i.e. Rajas=>Tamas=>Sattva. It seems this is against the natural sequence mentioned by you.

regards
shankara

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Shankara-ji,

1. This is not directly from Gita.

2. Sankara Bhagavatpada's quote can be tabulated as follows:

Varna

Primary Guna

Secondary Guna

Brahmana	Satva	Rajas
Kshatriya	Tamas	Rajas
Vais’ya	Rajas	Tamas
S’udra	--Not mentioned--	--Not mentioned--

3. Did the Kerala discussants quote verses? 

4. Which textual source are we discussing ?

5. You said that they were caste. Varna is different from caste. Best example is the word Krishyaadeeni in Bhagavatpada's bhashya. No caste called as Vais'ya today has agriculture as its traditional caste occupation. Varna is a found in Sanskrit texts and regional language texts derived from them. Caste is the one which is found in actual reality. Sanskrit texts do not discuss caste(s). 

6. Whichever text is the source of the table quoted by you, it seems to have attempted to explain the available categories of four varnas in termsof Gunas. Its purpose does not seem to map all the possible permutations of gunas with the available Varna categories. 

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[V Subrahmanian]

2018-01-01 15:03 GMT+05:30 'shankara' via भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत् <bvpar...@googlegroups.com>:

Paturiji,

I looking for an explanation why only 4 combinations of 3 gunas are considered in the formation of varnas, and why the 5th and 6th combinations are omitted.

Could it be that all types of humans are covered in the 4 combinations mentioned and perhaps there will be no one within the varna-dharma corpus who could be in the 5th and 6th combinations. I would hazard a guess that rakshasas, asuras....could be in the  'omitted' combination. Maybe we will get some examples in the Puranic, etc. stories for such individuals. For example, Ravana was a born Brahmin and even a knower of the Veda. But his intent and action did not correspond to his birth and knowledge.  

regards

vs    

regards
shankara

[Jaya Prakash]

Namaste Shankarji,

According to your table the 5th one is similar to 1st Varna only the secondary and third combination is changed, and the 6th is similar to 4th Varna only the secondary and third combination is changed. Hence there is no necessary for additional type of Varna.  

According to you

1. Please define what is Varna and Guna ?

2. Kindly let me know the stand point of you to the Varna or Guna ?

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Hello

 

 

Thank you & warm regards

U.N. Jaya Prakash Narayan Maiya,

IT Infrastructure Admin, IBM India Prv. Ltd,

Bangalore 560079.

Ph:8105879200

Mail: jayaprak...@gmail.com

[Dr.BVK Sastry(G-MAIL)]

Namaste

 

1. The connection / association of ‘Guna’ and ‘Varna’  is of varying kinds across disciplines of traditions:  Ayurveda, Dharma Shaastra, Jyotisha  et al.

 

2. The Satva- Rajas- Tamas combine by proportion may be looked at as self-perpetuating to secondary and tertiary levels;  and the combination limit is not limited to ‘six’.

    The R-G-B three colors are seen to yield million plus combinations which have unique ‘VARNA’ = color /  worthy of describing.

 

   Why then ‘Four’ to qualify ‘VARNA’ ?   Let us take a look at the term used in the  source quote. It is ‘ VARNYAM’  and  not ‘VARNA’. 

   The extra stress and meaning from the  ‘- yat’  pratyaya needs to be  explored.  Like ‘ DHARMYAM / DHARMAM’. From Gita  itself.

 

 VARNYAM =  Worthy of classification and considering for  elaboration, from amongst the logical possibilities and probabilities . ( vibhaga, pra-vibhaktam)

 

 What is the criterion for ‘ worthiness of classification’ in the context of ‘ Brahmana ..Shudra’?  The worthiness is on ‘SAMSKARA- YOGA’.

 

Where is the clue for this ?  In post death rites, in annual ‘shraadhas’, there is a term ‘ A-SAMSKRUTHA ( prameetaanaam)’ . It is  understood as ‘ those who have had no right kind of Samskaras’.

Where else ? In upanayana –adhikara context, the ‘ VARNYAM’ becomes ‘ yogyataa –adhikaara’ consideration  ; elaborated in relation to ‘ Traivarnikas’ and  ‘ others’.

And where else ? In Ayurveda, the medicine potency classification.  In Jyotisha, the nine grahas have four varna tags and three guna descriptions tagged.     In Dhatu shaastra, even metals have the ‘gunas’ associated.

 

I hope this facilitates some more directions to explore.

 

End note:  Why see the word ‘GUNA- KARMA’ as one term?  Guna Vibhaga relates to Mind –Constitution ; Karma-Vibhaga  relates to  the emergent action.  So why not look at 4 varnyas x 3 gunas x 3 Karmas  to form this table ? And exponentially expand the division ?

 

Regards

BVK Sastry

[Vineet Chaitanya]

It can be argued that every thing in this world has all the three guNas. So tertiary field is always the remaining one.

Sequence is particularly important for the primary and secondary fields.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

The question 'Why not 6 Varnas' implies that Varnas were created out of permutations of three gunas in three slots: primary, secondary, tertiary; Among 6 possibilities listed in the table, 4 have been used in creating the 4 varnas. two possibilities in the table are left unused. Why are they left unused?

The answer is:

Varnas were not created through such process. So the question does not fit here. 

Varnas are being explained through whichever text is the source of the table. 

Unless that text says that Varnas were created out of permutations of three gunas in three slots: primary, secondary, tertiary, the question is irrelevant. 

[Bijoy Misra]

As we read the Vedas, the "varna" terminology was a part of the social structure.

Everyone was called a vish, possibly a nomad or a trader.  Why the word "vish" 

is a good question.  In chronology, the kshatriyas came next and then the bhrahmanas.

The kshatriya protected the land and brahmanas protected the kshatriyas through books.

The workers were called shUdras, again a good linguistic question.

What the Gita is doing is to characterize these existing social order into a theory

of guNa from Sankhya.  As I would understand, it is more of an explanation than

helping to create a new order.  

Chanakya, much later, reinforced the chAturvarNya classification and created an

administrative principle assuming the classification.  He was clear-eyed to check that

no group was degraded or disrespected.  It involved remuneration and punishment.

By instituting the administrative principle, apparently he succeeded in creating

economic prosperity for the country unmatched any time later.

The question can be if such a process is really empirical for whatever reason.

Best regards,

Happy New Year.

Bijoy Misra

Boston, MA 

   

--

[Nagaraj Paturi]

विश- is the root found in words/ roots  like प्रविश- , निविश-, आविश-, संविश-, समावेश- etc. 

विष्णुः is derived from विश- .

The meaning of विश-  from all the contexts seems to be the common semantic root of enter, dwell, settle, spread, occupy, live etc. 

Thus विश in the context mentioned should be:-- members of the group/community. 

Then it is reasonable that some of the विश , get named based on their special feature. 

[Bijoy Misra]

Paturiji,

This is grammar.  In the Vedic composition, it is most likely a word borrowed 

from from some of the local languages.  It is a good question to think if we have 

the words first or we have the roots first!  And then how old is a word?

Best regards,

BM  

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Why only or certainly a word from the local languages? why not from the language of the users themselves? What is the basis of this idea ' it is most likely a word borrowed 
from from some of the local languages'? How does it not fit into the language of the users? Why is one compelled to find sources outside the language of the users? The logic of evolution from simple to complex leads to the logic of roots to words.  

[Bijoy Misra]

Paturiji,

Quite possible.  Those sections of the Vedic literature would need more analysis.

I have heard that vish is a Munda word.  I went to the Himalayas last month

and I heard it among the Bodas in north east Assam.

My language knowledge is limited, but I have reason to believe that our current

understanding of many of these needs revision and new analysis.

Thank you.

BM 

[Jaya Prakash]

Pranams,

Please see this link for more information 

http://www.kamakoti.org/misc/hindudharma.html/20/1/hindu/Varna+Dharma+For+Universal+Well-Being

[rniyengar]

Before the thread gets dragged in different directions I like to add my two paise worth comments: If the quotes of Shankaraachaarya are to be taken on their face value for further analysis, we have to first recognize that as per the Achaarya, Rajas can never be the tertiary quality in any human being. Whatever may be the original concepts, in the quotes the words 'pradhaana and upasarjana'.associate some type of quantification to the three properties S, R and T. This could be a type of mathematical  articulation on the part of our ancient thinkers. The original table may have to be slightly reorganized as 

B: (Sa)  (Rb)  (Tc)

K: (Ra)  (Sb)  (Tc)

V :  (Ra)  (Tb)  (Sc)

S' : (Ta)  (Rb)  (Sc)   under the condition (a+b+c=1; for example a=0.5, b=0.4; c=0.1)

Always a>b>c in all the 4 groups but their individual distribution among B, K, V, S' are different.  Just an argument!

RNI

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@ googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/ optout.

--

Regards

 

-Venkatesh

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googleg roups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googleg roups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

BoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, Kerala

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies

 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,

 

(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )

 

 

 

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

BoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, Kerala

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies

 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,

 

(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )

 

 

 

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Chanakya in advising the full strategic employment of the human resources towards the development and other aspects of governance, goes beyond four varnas and includes tribals, communities of horrifying occupations, followers of non-family life style such as monks. 

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Sometimes similar sounding words in two different languages genetically related or unrelated may have similar or even the same meaning. This can lead to confusions about sources.

There is a joke in a Telugu novel by a great modern classicist in Telugu. 

A character proposes that the English word put could have come from the Telugu word pettu (=put).

[shankara]

Iyengarji,

Could you please elaborate why Rajas cannot be tertiary quality? Thanks in advance.

regards
shankara

[Venkatesh Murthy]

Namaste

Sattva = Knowledge = Light. Tamas = Ignorance = Darkness. Sattva and Tamas are opposite qualities. They cannot be Primary and Secondary qualities in the same person. They are incompatible. But Rajas is Action oriented quality. It is compatible with Sattva and Tamas both and it can be Secondary or Primary. Tertiary quality is even less than Secondary. Therefore it is negligible in a person.

--

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Regards

 

-Venkatesh

[an.nar...@yahoo.co.in]

Namo vidvadbhya:

This info may help the discussion:

For Gita 4-13, Vedanta Deshika quotes 'tamah shudre rajah kshatre braahmane sattvamuttamam' (bharata aashva.39-11) for Guna vibhaaga and 'braahaNakshatriyavishaam'(gita.18-41) for karmavibhaaga. He also says 'deva tiryak maushya jaatishu vaaraaha-paadma-eshaana kalpaadishu ca puraanaadishu prapanchitastattadguNokdrikto vishamasrushtiprakaaro drashtavyah.

Ramanuja also says which quality is more can only be known by seeing the effect.

Rgds-Narasimhan

--

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Regards

 

-Venkatesh

[Vineet Chaitanya]

Yes, I agree.

[shankara]

Paturiji,

Thanks a lot for your critical observations. 

1. You are right that Gita doesn't describe the compositions of the 3 gunas in 4 varnas. This explanation occurs in the Gita bhashyas.

2. Sankaracharya names the primary and secondary gunas of Sudra - Tamas and Rajas. Somehow, you have left them blank in your revised table.

3. I watched this debate on the Gita and Caste System (Youtubelink given below) a few months back. So, I don't remember the verses quoted. The rationalist raised the question 'why there are only 4 varnas, while logic demands that there should be 6 varnas, since 3 gunas can have 6 combinations?'

4. We can begin with BG 4.13 and the Sankarabhashya on this verse.

5. I have no doubt that Varna and caste are different. I merely wrote that this question was raised in a 3 hour long debate on 'Bhagavad Gita & Caste System' between Swami Chidananda Puri and an rationalist named Ravichandran. Swami Chidananda Puri is a traditional scholar and has been actively involved in spreading Advaita Vedanta and in strengthening Hindu Dharma in Kerala for more than 2 decades. The debate is in Malayalam. It is available online for anyone who is interested and can understand Malayalam.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1_cYF_ZP_U

6. As you say, there is a possibility that Sankaracharya was merely explaining the composition of 3 gunas of persons belonging to 4 varnas which were prevalent in his time.

Suppose a person is having 5th or 6th combination of 3 gunas, to which varna will he belong? This question is valid, unless and until it is proved that the last 2 combinations of 3 gunas cannot occur in a person.

Now I feel that Vineet Chaitanyaji's argument is the only answer for this question, available to us at present. The same idea was expressed by Iyengarji and Murthyji subsequently.

regards
shankara

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

BoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, Kerala

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies

 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,

 

(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )

 

 

 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

[shankara]

Pranams to all,

I thank all the scholars who responded to my query.

Now I feel that Vineet Chaitanyaji's argument is the only answer for this question, available to us at present. The same idea was expressed by Iyengarji and Murthyji subsequently.

regards
shankara

Yes, I agree.

--

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googleg roups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googleg roups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.

--

Regards

 

-Venkatesh

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@ googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/ optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

How is anyone a rationalist when he raises irrational questions why only these social divisions exist why other divisions do not exist. 

Some dumb students used to ask questions such as why are there only electrons , protons and neutrons, why not more other particles, thinking that they raised the most intelligent question. 

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[rniyengar]

Dear Sri Shankar,

In many situations arising out of ancient textual statements the 'how-part' can be explained to some extent but not the 'why-part'. Your question has to do with the 'why' and in my opinion there is no 'one and only' answer for this. I don't see what is natural in Rajas not being in the third place unless you define it to be so.

On the other hand if we see the PuraNas (ex: BrahmaaNDa) no creation is possible if Satva and Tamas are in equilibrium, Only due to some imbalance creation starts with Rajas coming into play. Infact the above purANa equates S=Vishnu, R=Brahma and T=Shiva with no sense of superiority or inferiority but only with difference of functionality.  it goes further into creation of deva, danava, martya, sthavara, jangama etc and also Time. Due to my predilection for historical analysis of our socio-cultural traits, it appears more natural to have only three varNas and not four. The above PuraNa in Ch 7 talks of only three types of human-pairs (Mithuna) born out of the face, chest and shoulders of Brahma. 

Good question but no unique answer is my view.

regards

RNI

[shankara]

Paturiji,

His argument was that since the varna system is said to be based on 3 gunas, it has to include all possible combinations of the 3 gunas.

regards
shankara

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Sri Shankara-ji,

Prof. Iyengar has already said that it is 'how'  explanation and 'why' is not a meaningful question in such contexts.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Dr.BVK Sastry(G-MAIL)]

Namaste Misra ji

 

Focusing on the specific point < In the Vedic composition, it is most likely a word borrowed from from some of the local languages.   ….  And then how old is a word?    >

 

The question precisely the point of divergence between Orientalists –Colonials and Traditional schools. There is an intersection point of thought, but there is NO real essence or scope for discussion here.

If at all any meaningful progress on this line of discussion needs to be done, then Orientalists need to answer the question on ‘ Relation of Language and Consciousness, The Transcendence and Language of the Transcendent’.   That will draw the ‘ Scientists of Brain, Cognition, Consciousness,  neuroscience.. quantum physicists..’ to this debate. And also keep the ‘Indologists out of this debate. The entire foundation of ‘Treating Samskrutham as a socio-historic language’ needs to be sacrificed first before further debate.

 

Tradition holds :  This is the foundation of  classical Vedic sampradaya and ‘Varna-Ashrama Vibhaga’; an inseparable thought in Gita.

 

a)  Vedic Word Exists beyond Time and Space, as an integral constituent of form ( Naama –Roopa Sahacharyaa Nityatva).   

b) The ‘Vedic Word’ is at least as old as ‘ Creation’; if not existing a priori creation.

 

Anti-Tradition school hold :  This

a)  Vedic Word  is historica;, social, linguistically derived from a  PIE language and a social degenerating or refining process of language. 

b)  The ‘Vedic Word’ is historically later than the time line set by ‘ Biblical God creating this Universe, some 4000 BCE kind of time line’.  

c) The ‘Varna’ categorization of society is  a  ‘oppression perpetuating system.

d) The language of Veda can not be interpreted beyond the boundary of  Social language dynamics  and as provided in the  Language classification anchored to ‘ Tower of Babel story’.

 

 The debate to be meaningful needs to decide which side of the ‘ language perception’ is being used in the resource work.

Look forward for your views pl.

 

Regards

BVK Sastry

 

 

 

From: bvpar...@googlegroups.com [mailto:bvpar...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Bijoy Misra
Sent: Monday, 1 January, 2018 7:16 PM
To: Bharatiya Vidvat parishad
Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} Four Varnas as combinations of three gunas; why not 6 varnas?

 

Paturiji,

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

 

 

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

 

BoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, Kerala

 

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies

 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,

 

(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )

 

 

 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

[Achyut Karve]

Dear Scholars,

1. Do the Gunas as stated in the Bhagvad Geeta relate to an individual or to a social group?

2. Can anyone tell from where these Gunas emanate from within an individual.  

3. Does the word 'jati' relate to the individuality of the individual or to the effect of the day to day work that a person engages in for his wherewithal?

With regards,

Achyut Karve.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

 

 

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

 

BoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, Kerala

 

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies

 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,

 

(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )

 

 

 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[Madhav Deshpande]

As a sideline to this discussion of the three Guṇas and their proportions in different Varṇas, I want to mention that the text titled Vedavicāra authored by Śyāmaśāstri Draviḍa Dvivedī that I am editing contains a discussion of how Brahmā, Viṣṇu and Śiva differ in terms of their relation to these three Guṇas.  For a given god, some guṇa can be mūrti or embodiment, while another guṇa can be only a quality.  Using these distinctions, this author argues for Śiva's superiority over Viṣṇu and Brahmā.  The discussion is based on Purāṇic sources.  Here is the relevant passage:

Madhav Deshpande

[Dmitri Semenov]

Interesting question.  Maybe, the 5-th and 6-th combinations describe people outside of four-varna society?

[Rishi Goswami]

Haraye namah.
Vidvadbhyo namah.

According to Shankaracharyaji's Bhashya on Shlok, I've come to a conclusion.
There are 3 Gunas and even if we take Pradhan and Upasarjan per Varna there are 9 probabilities.
Gunas = S R T.
On combination,. S S. S R. S T.
. R R. R S. R T.
T T. T S. T R.
Out of which the first three automatically get eliminated. The rest are to be taken. Still, the no remains 6 with us. (Capital for Pradhan and Small for Upasarjan.)

ब्रा : S r (सत्वप्रधानस्य ब्राह्मणस्य)
क्ष : R s (सत्वोपसर्जन-रजःप्रधानस्य क्षत्रियस्य)
वै : R t (तमउपसर्जन-रजःप्रधानस्य वैश्यस्य)
शू : T r (रजउपसर्जन-तमःप्रधानस्य शूद्रस्य)
The two which remain are S t and T s. That means, Sri Shankaracharyaji's intention was to omit the two. As there is no prapti of it. Satva and Tamas cannot go along together.
Satva can't be Pradhan(Primary) when Tamas is Upasarjan(Secondary), and Tamas can't be Pradhan when Satva is Upasarjan. While Shankaracharyaji has not mentioned tertiary, it can be adhyahrit.

The last mentioned 5th and 6th options had Rajas as Gauna(tertiary) and Satva and Tamas as Pradhan and Upasarjan contrary to each other, which is not ishta to Sri Shankaracharyaji.

Satva and Tamas are opposites. Or Viruddha. One can't have 2 viruddha dharma having ashraya in same dharmi. Eg, hotness and coolness in same dharmi together.

This was previously mentioned by schollars and I just think this is the only explanation possible. Or if we have examples of people having Satva as Pradhan and Tamas as Upasarjan, or vice versa, by examining the qualities in a person, then only we can say that there ahould be 6 Varnas. I don't think it is possible for a person to be polite and arrogant at the same time, angry and calm etc. Do we find examples of such people in Puranas by inspection of qualities?

Please forgive me if I'm wrong somewhere. I'm a mere student and this was just what my baal-buddhi has grasped. I am grateful to all schollars who have answered before and I just wanted to share what I have understood.

Thankyou very much.
Regards.
Rishi.

[Kalicharan Tuvij]

नमस्ते ।


S ~ "truth" ~ Brahma ~ brAhmaNa varNa
R ~ "beauty" ~ Vishnu ~ kshatra varNa
T ~ "love" ~ Shiva ~ shUdra varNa

When all S,R,T more or less retain a harmony, one gets vaiSya (from viS, that also generates viSva = "all").

VarNa-s in my opinion are applicable only upto dvApara (all varNa-s had natural access to swarga). In kaliyuga only jAti-s are applicable.

P.S.
Equating T as "ignorance" is itself some ignorance. "Tama" in addition to "love", translates into "purity of character".

[V Subrahmanian]

Dear Sri Madhav ji,

In case the REF for the two last stated information in the image shared by you is not yet available, here is an image from the Sutasamhita, chapter on Sutagita 2nd adhyaya. The p.no. is 1003 of 'Sutasamhita with Tatparyadipika' published by Balamanorama Press, 1954.

[Venkatesh Murthy]

Namaste

The local expert Sri Pavagada Prakash Rao once said Siva is naturally Sattvika because He is in deep meditation mostly. But His actions are Tamasika because He gives boons to even Asuras without hesitation looking at Tapas. He gave boon to Bhasmasura and when he tried to burn Siva then Vishnu rescued Him. Vishnu is naturally Tamasika because He is in sleep mostly. But His actions are Sattvika. They are according to Dharma and for protecting the good.

Regards

 

-Venkatesh

[Madhav Deshpande]

Dear Shri Subrahmanian,

     Thank you so much for this textual reference in the Sūtasaṃhitā.  I have the Anandashrama edition of the Sūtasaṃhitā, but it is not easy to find references when there is no actual quotation from the text.  Thanks for your help.

Madhav Deshpande

[Krishna Kashyap]

Namo vidvadbhyah:

is ParAshara purANa same as "Vishnu PurANa"?

who wrote "sUta gIta"? is sUta gIta a part of some other work or purANa? 

the quote"sUta samhitAdi purANa granthesu" indicates this is a purANa or a part of purANa

Best Regards,

Krishna Kashyap

[shankara]

Krishna Kashyapji,

Parasara Purana is different from Vishnu Purana. It is an Upapurana. Its critical edition was published by Sampurananda Sanskrit University.

Suta Samhita is part of Skanda Purana. Suta Gita is from Suta Samhita, Yajnavaibhava Khanda, Uparibhaga chapters 13 to 20.

regards
shankara

Best Regards,

Krishna Kashyap

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

 

 

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

 

BoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, Kerala

 

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies

 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,

 

(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )

 

 

 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googleg roups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googleg roups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googleg roups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googleg roups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@ googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/ optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

[V Subrahmanian]

Also, in the sutasamhita, brahmagita portion, a number of popular upanishads are explained in detail in verse form.  The language is very simple and easy to grasp. That itself is a study in Vedanta. 

regards

subrahmanian.v

[Madhav Deshpande]

Dear Shankaraji,

     Now I have to see how I can get hold of this Parāśara Purāṇa.  Not listed on Amazon.  The nearest library that has a copy is at two hours driving distance, University of California, Berkeley, Library, and I don't have borrowing privileges there.  The University of Michigan library has a copy, but we have now migrated to California.  

Madhav Deshpande

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[shankara]

Deshpandeji,

It is available at the following link.

Parashar Upapurana Critical Edition Dr. Kapiladev Tripathi : वैयाकरण खसूची : Free Download & Streaming : Internet Archive

Parashar Upapurana Critical Edition Dr. Kapiladev Tripathi : वैयाकरण खसू... Sanskrit Books , Purana etc, 'Parashar Upapurana Critical Edition - Dr. Kapiladev Tripathi'

regards
shankara

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

[Madhav Deshpande]

Dear Shankarji,

     This is very helpful.  Thank you so much.

Madhav Deshpande

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[V Subrahmanian]

The Parasharopapurana in unicode:

RTF]Parasharopapurana.qxd - PeterFFreund.com

www.peterffreund.com/Vedic_Literature/.../Upapurana/parashara%20upapurana.rtf

regards

subrahmanian.v

[Subrahmanyam Korada]

नमो विद्वभ्यः

Why Four Varnas ?

The process of सृष्टि  of चातुर्वर्ण्यम्  is explained in बृहदारण्यकोपनिषत् (1/4/11-15) --

ब्रह्म वा इदमग्र आसीदेकमेव तदेकं सन्न व्यभवत् । तच्छ्रेयोरूपमत्यसृजत क्षत्रम् .....। स  नैव व्यभवत् स विशमसृजत ...।

स नैव व्यभवत् स शौद्रं वर्णमसृजत पूषणमियं वै पूषेयं हीदं सर्वं पुष्यति यदिदं किंच ।

स नैव व्यभवत् तच्छ्रेयोरूपम् असृजत धर्मम् ......। तदेतत् ब्रह्म क्षत्रं विट् शूद्रः .... ।

(इयं भूमिः पूषा इत्यर्थः)

शाङ्करभाष्यम् --

..... वर्णा आश्रमाश्च तत्र के वर्णा इत्यत्र इदमारभ्यते । ...... अग्निरूपापन्नं ब्रह्म ब्राह्मणजात्यभिमानात् ब्रह्मेत्यभिधीयते । वा इदं क्षत्रादिजातं ब्रह्मैव अभिन्नम्

आसीदेकमेव । नासीत् क्षत्रादिभेदः । तद्ब्रह्मैकं क्षत्रादिपरिपालयित्रादिशून्यं सन्न व्यभवत् न विभूतवत्कर्मणे नालमासीदित्यर्थः ।..

क्षत्रे सृष्टे’पि स नैव व्यभवत् कर्मणे ब्रह्म तथा न व्यभवत् वित्तोपार्जयितुरभावात् । स विशमसृजत कर्मसाधनवित्तोपार्जनाय ।......

स परिचारकाभावात् पुनरपि नैव व्यभवत् स शौद्रं वर्णमसृजत शूद्र एव शौद्रः स्वार्थे’णि वृद्धिः । कः पुनरसौ शूद्रो वर्णो यः सृष्टः पूषणं पुष्यतीति

पूषा ।

स चतुरः सृष्ट्वापि वर्णान् नैव व्यभवत् उग्रत्वात् क्षत्रस्य अनियताशङ्कया तच्छ्रेयोरूपमपि असृजत  किं तद्धर्मं  तदेतत्  श्रेयोरूपं सृष्टं .....।

...धर्मात् परं नास्ति । तेन हि नियम्यन्ते सर्वे । कथम् ......।

तदेतत् चातुर्वर्ण्यं सृष्टं ब्रह्म क्षत्रं विट् शूद्र इत्युत्तरार्थ उपसंहारः ।

आनन्दगिरिः --

कर्तृ - पालयितृ - धनार्जयितॄणां सृष्टत्वात् कृतं वर्णान्तरसृष्ट्या इत्याश्ङ्क्याह - स परिचारकेति । ..... ननु चातुर्वर्ण्ये  सृष्टे तावतैव कर्मानुष्ठानसिद्धेः

अलं धर्मसृष्ट्या इत्यत आह - स चतुर इति ।...

So the purpose is served by चातुर्वर्ण्यसृष्टि followed by धर्म । In देवलोक and मनुष्यलोक ।

If I have some work to be performed I would engage one / two /three people required but never the number that is more 

than sufficient .

श्रुति says - produce ten children only - why should one go for the eleventh child ?

श्रुतिः प्रमाणम् - नात्र कर्ता । कः प्रष्टव्यः ? तर्क एव शरणम् ।

Following अशोकवनिकान्याय , one may decide his need and that cannot be questioned from a different point of view .

Where to put सीता ?  Put her under  an आम्रतरु (mango tree) . Why not under a वटवृक्ष ( banyan tree)? Okay . Why not under

an अशोकतरु ? --- there will be no end and it is called अव्यवस्था , which is a दोष । She should be put under some tree or the other!

How can गुणs that are परस्परविरुद्ध stay together in a single अधिष्ठानम् ?

This is established  ---

सांख्यदर्शनम् ( श्लो 13) ---

सत्त्वं लघु प्रकाशकमिष्टमुपष्टंभकं चलं च रजः ।

गुरु वरणकमेव तमः प्रदीपवच्चार्थतो व्रुत्तिः ॥

सांख्यतत्त्वकौमुदी of वाचस्पतिमिश्र --

ननु परस्परविरोधशीला गुणाः सुन्दोपसुन्दवत् परस्परं ध्वन्सन्ते  इत्येव युक्तं प्रागेव तेषामेकक्रियाकर्त्रुताया इत्यत आह - प्रदीपवच्चार्थतो 

वृत्तिः इति ।

दृष्टमेतत् , यथा वर्तितैले अनलविरोधिनी अथ च मिलिते सहानलेन रूप्रकाशलक्षणं कार्यं कुरुतः यथा वा - वातपित्तश्लेष्माणः परस्परविरोधिनः 

शरीरधारणलक्षणकार्यकारिणः एवं सत्त्वरजस्तमांसि मिथो विरुद्धान्यपि अनुवर्त्स्यन्ति स्वकार्यं करिष्यन्ति च ।

योगानुशासनम् (2-18) - भाष्यम् --

रूपातिशया वृत्त्यतिशयाश्च परस्परेण विरुद्ध्यन्ते सामान्यानि त्वतिशयैः सह प्रवर्तन्ते ।

( तुल्यबलानामेव विरोधः नातुल्यबलानाम् इत्यर्थः )

देवीभागवतम् ( 3-9) - ब्रह्मगीतम् -- नारदं प्रति ब्रह्मवाक्यानि --

प्रदीपश्च यथा कार्यं प्रकरोत्यर्थदर्शनात्  ।

वर्तिस्तैलं यथार्चिश्च विरुद्धाश्च परस्परम् ॥

विरुद्धं हि तथा तैलमग्निना सह सङ्गतम् ।

तैलं वर्तिविरोध्येव पावको’पि परस्परम् ॥

There are भेदाभेदौ in विशिष्टाद्वैतम्  and it is not acceptable due to श्रुतिविरोध ।

धन्यो’स्मि

Virus-free. www.avast.com

Dr.Korada Subrahmanyam
Professor of Sanskrit, CALTS,
University of Hyderabad,
Ph:09866110741(M),91-40-23010741(R),040-23133660(O)

Skype Id: Subrahmanyam Korada

Blog: Koradeeyam.blogspot.in 

[Ramanujachar P]

कुतः अप्रासङ्गिकं विशिष्टाद्वैते द्वेषस्य (स्वस्य तद्दर्शनाज्ञानस्य च) प्रदर्शनं मुहुर्महुः 

वेदेषु अवैदिकमूलक-क्षुद्रवाक्य-महावाक्य-भेदकल्पकैः मृषावादिभिः कथानधीकारकथाविषयैः

स्वमताविष्करणे अन्यमतेषु निर्मूलदोषापादनं न शोभते प्रामाणिकानाम् । वेदमिथ्यावादिनां तु श्रुतिविरोधे का हानिः इति न जाने  ।

रामानुजः

Dr. P. Ramanujan
Parankushachar Institute of Vedic Studies (Regd.)

Bengaluru

080-25433239 (R)

9449088616

[Nagaraj Paturi]

This is what I always have been trying to avoid on this forum. 

I have been repeatedly saying that this is not a forum only of a particular school of Vedanta. 

I request the highly venerated senior members of the forum, who due to their long experience know what response can be expected from the subscribers to the school of Vedanta about which they make a negative comment, to avoid such negative comments. 

If they consider that there is a scope for a healthy debate / discussion between two or three different schools of Vedanta on a specific contentious issue between them is possible, they may start a separate systematic debate/discussion on that issue and participate in the debate /discussion in the manner that helps the younger scholars to learn both the method and the content.  

[Krishna Kashyap]

Thanks Nagaraj ji for this clarification

Namo vidvadvhah

--

Best Regards,

Krishna Kashyap

[Suresh Srinivasamurthy]

Namaste Sri Shankara-ji,

There are only four varnas because they correspond to the four major parts of the body (head, hands, thighs and feet). (as explained in the purusha suktam)

So I think the distribution of gunas are made accordingly.

Namaste

Suresh

[Dr.BVK Sastry(G-MAIL)]

Namaste

 

Patch up and reconciliation as ‘ Agree to disagree’ model may  be ‘ politically right  strategy before lunch  break’; but this is pushing the key issue below the carpet. ‘ Adarshanam- alikhitam’ never triggers a ‘ retaliatory post’ .

 

1.    The thread and discussion seems to have taken an  off track route from where it started;  and has  landed  in a ‘ bad patch pushing personal perceptions of  interpreting and siding Acharya Darshanas ’.  Professor Korada has stated a personal preference only after quoting several views of different traditional schools, which present ‘Varna’ explanation as a Cosmic order; and not as a ‘Social structure’ .  I do not see any animosity or hatred or disrespect  for any other Acharya sampradaya  in this post. Things would have taken a different turn if quotes had come from rest of the  shaastra – sampradayas  for adjudicating the hierarchical superiority relation of Devatas and Varna- Jati’s.  For this purpose, Dharma Shaastras, Puranas and Artha Shaastra are the disciplines to get in to. But  the thread started asking ‘ Scriptures position on Varna’. 

 

     Even otherwise, All three Acharyas commenting on the ‘ Apaurusheya Veda’ do not seem to be intent on stepping over the toes of ‘Social structure of society’, which is the domain of ‘Dharma Shaastra and Artha Shaastra’.  If ‘Acharyas differ in their ‘  domain of explaining the transcendent ( Ateendriya – Viswa janeena – Sarva purusha – Saarva yuga – sarva kaaleena)’ , why should it disturb the peace of ‘Social historical understanding of the text’ and ‘ post India secular society’, where ‘ Dharma – Varna- Jaati –Acharya Sampradaya practice’ is a ‘ personal privacy, and Constitutionally guarded Fundamental right’ ?!     

 

        

2.  I place below  the wavy  and wavering  nature of the debate gone through this post, which  has left the  primary issue unanswered and has landed itself to  unwarranted, unwanted, undesirable comments.  

    The  basic questions raised have remained not addressed,  either adequately or  holistically  in the ‘ Traditional perspective’ or Social structure perspective  or ‘ Linguistic perspective’ to defend the continuing  

    practices and pride of inheritance ! 

 

    The basic questions embedded in the ‘ starting point of the thread’  being:  (  I leave the trail  mail below as it is for readers easy referencing).

 

     2.A.  (A-1)  ‘ How to understand a given ‘traditional, social, historical  track of ‘ Four Varnas’   (A-2)  in relation to ‘ Shaastra technicality of  Guna-Karma- Swabhava’   from anchor document of  Gita, a Language document in :  Bhashaa –Samskrutham,  which ( A-3)  draws on the   a priori axiomatic concept of  ‘ Guna’   from ( A-4)  Vedic Documents in  Language: Chnadas  –Samskrutham ? 

 

    2. B.   What is  (B-1 the   ‘Nature of Vedic Word and (B-2) Historicity  and ( B-3) Pedagogic tools to understand and  track the ‘Social Structure vis-à-vis Spiritual Transcendental structure’ used by ‘Hindu Society for  justifying  its Social organization with a ‘Hierarchical Superiority of Brahmana’ ? or ‘ Social filtering and limited access/ denial of access to ‘Transcendental  Sacred Documents’?  

 

   2. C.      In the Post Independent sovereign Nation status of ‘ India / Hindu-stan’  that was once ‘ Akhanda -Bharath and  Mahabharath’, what should be the  relational status between ‘ WE governed by the Constitution’  and ‘ WE /I bound by the traditional diktat’ ?    During colonial rule, the same issue  was used for framing ‘Governance rules’ using the thought process:  ‘ Rule the Colony by their own books of law and religion’ and figure out the ways to ‘ enrich the empire’.

 

  Overview of the wavy  and wavering  nature of the debate how  posts on this debate have shifted track:  

 

2.1) Starting question: (Shankara) :  Seeking  clarity on  Bhagavadgita and Scriptures  ‘Four Varnas’ based on ‘Three Gunas’ and pointing to ‘ no varna’ tag .

2.2) Breaking point : ( BM) :  As we read the Vedas, the "varna" terminology was a part of the social structure. Everyone was called a vish, possibly a nomad or a trader. 

2.3) Track Shift : ( Paturi) :  Debate on root ‘ Vish’-     विश- is the root.

2.4) Debate Shift- Track Shift Combined  : (BM):    Discussion on Vedic Word    <  In the Vedic composition, it is most likely a word borrowed   from some of the local languages.  It is a good question to think if we have the words first or we have the roots first!  And then how old is a word?>

2.5) Track Shifted issue contested : (BVK) Nature of Vedic Word ( and Historicity) to track the ‘Social Structure vis-à-vis Spiritual Transcendental structure , the starting point of thread, noted at (2.1)

2.6)  Sideline Note to the discussion: ( MD) Guna relation For a given God  linked to murthi embodiment, quality, Hierarchial superiority of gods linked to Purana

2.7) Track shift on Nature and authenticity of ‘ Purana-evidence’ : Purana Authorship and relative authority gradation of Purana - upapurana ?  < ParAshara purANa same as "Vishnu PurANa" ? who wrote "sUta gIta"?    >

 

2.8) Restoring the thread back to the starting point of ‘Varna’ ab initio: ( Korada) : Quotes from Upanishat  and supplementation from commentaries and a position statement.

 

2.9) Personal position statement critiqued : (RP) - < कुतः अप्रासङ्गिकं विशिष्टाद्वैते द्वेषस्य>

 

2.10) Moderator steps in for reconciliation:   < this is not a forum only of a particular school of Vedanta >

 

 

Regards

BVK Sastry

 

From: bvpar...@googlegroups.com [mailto:bvpar...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Krishna Kashyap
Sent: Saturday, 6 January, 2018 1:59 AM
To: bvpar...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} Four Varnas as combinations of three gunas; why not 6 varnas?

 

Thanks Nagaraj ji for this clarification

Namo vidvadvhah

 

 

 

Virus-free. www.avast.com

Dr.Korada Subrahmanyam
Professor of Sanskrit, CALTS,
University of Hyderabad,
Ph:09866110741(M),91-40-23010741(R),040-23133660(O)

Skype Id: Subrahmanyam Korada

Blog: Koradeeyam.blogspot.in 

 

On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 3:50 PM, V Subrahmanian <v.subra...@gmail.com> wrote:

The Parasharopapurana in unicode:

 

RTF]Parasharopapurana.qxd - PeterFFreund.com

www.peterffreund.com/Vedic_Literature/.../Upapurana/parashara%20upapurana.rtf

1.        

 

regards

subrahmanian.v

[shankara]

Sureshji,

Prof. Paturiji had also made a similar observation - that Sankaracharya could have been explaining the prevailing chaturvarnya system on the basis of trigunas.

regards
shankara

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

[Bijoy Misra]

Dear friends,

We had tried to handle a different problem from a neuroscience point of view.

Bharata talks about eight "rasa"s when in theory "rasa" could be infinite. So

the question cold be why certain feelings become etched as experiences.

If anyone is technically inclined, I can send the paper for your use.

Please write privately.

So the theory could be that sattava, raja and tama form a human signature of a

myriad qualities "guNa" we nurture and are built up with.  The scale is amorphous.

The social classification is due to aptitudes which are a further modification

and manifestation of the inner chemistry.  All classifications anywhere are

only conveniences.  The universe is a field and not particulate.  There are no

boundaries.

Best regards,

BM  

PS.  In BVK's analysis, here goes another diversion!

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[venkat veeraraghavan]

Namaste all,

Regarding the issue of varNa, we have to understand the meanings of the varNas described and the gunas.

Tamas has been one dimensionally described as ignorance. The stability of ideas, bones and will are in the realm of Tamas too. 

The act of tapasya is a combination of Tamas (Stability of asan, sankalpa, yama, niyama etc) and Rajas (dharana, karma, adhyayana, etc..)

Sattva is the mishra of (Tamas + Rajas) (A sattvic intellect is peaceable born out of a steady understanding, world view and a buddhi that actively seeks answers to unresolved questions)

Now the traditional definition of Brahmana is Brahmam jAnati iti brahmanah. One who knows Brahman is Brahmana.
Since the state of Brahman is one that abides in resolution of all opposites, the primary guna has to be Sattva.

Since this state has to be maintained with tapasya- Rajas (the fire of transformation) is a secondary attribute

Kshatriya is defined as Kshat trayate iti ksatriya---One who protects others from harm is a kshatriya...The primary quality is the active principle or Rajas. Since Rajas needs to be controlled and channeled by equipoise or dharma, the secondary attribute is Sattva.

Vaishya--(I am not sure of the definition here) May be the learned members can fill in the blanks?

 
Shudra--(I am not sure of the definition here) May be the learned members can fill in the blanks?

In all 4 varnas however, Rajas is an important attribute since it acts as the transformative agent between Sattva and Tamas. Since the vedic idea of varna was to promote evolution, it has to be a primary or secondary attribute. 

To sum up, the primary attribute represents outward manifestation and the secondary attribute represents inner adhara.

Since in this world we evolve through karma, rajas which is its guiding principle has to be either primary or secondary. In this case, the actual combinations for varnas is limited to rajas as primary or secondary with the other 2 gunas taking turns as secondary or primary thereby yielding 4 combinations only. 

Kind Regards,

Venkat

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Dear Dr BVK Sastry-ji,

I am just back to the system after a pitr kaarya.

Your present post as difficult to comprehend for me as all your past posts have been. 

What is your problem with my moderating role when I saw a venerable senior scholar expressing his feelings through statements through very strong words such as 

" कुतः अप्रासङ्गिकं विशिष्टाद्वैते द्वेषस्य (स्वस्य तद्दर्शनाज्ञानस्य च) प्रदर्शनं मुहुर्महुः 

वेदेषु अवैदिकमूलक-क्षुद्रवाक्य-महावाक्य-भेदकल्पकैः मृषावादिभिः कथानधीकारकथाविषयैः

स्वमताविष्करणे अन्यमतेषु निर्मूलदोषापादनं न शोभते प्रामाणिकानाम् । वेदमिथ्यावादिनां तु श्रुतिविरोधे का हानिः इति न जाने  ।"

in response to the  following words of another venerable senior scholar:

"There are भेदाभेदौ in विशिष्टाद्वैतम्  and it is not acceptable due to श्रुतिविरोध"

What would / should any moderator do when discussions go into such direction? What else is the duty of a moderator if not to moderate when moderation is needed?

Why does a due role played appear to you to be

"Patch up and reconciliation as ‘ Agree to disagree’ model may  be ‘ politically right  strategy before lunch  break’  " ?

Why do you think 

"but this is pushing the key issue below the carpet" ?

Did I not say ,

"If they consider that there is a scope for a healthy debate / discussion between two or three different schools of Vedanta on a specific contentious issue between them is possible, they may start a separate systematic debate/discussion on that issue and participate in the debate /discussion in the manner that helps the younger scholars to learn both the method and the content.  " ?

Where is pushing anything under the carpet here? 

On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 11:55 AM, Dr.BVK Sastry(G-MAIL) <sastr...@gmail.com> wrote:

Namaste

 

Patch up and reconciliation as ‘ Agree to disagree’ model may  be ‘ politically right  strategy before lunch  break’; but this is pushing the key issue below the carpet. ‘ Adarshanam- alikhitam’ never triggers a ‘ retaliatory post’ .

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Suresh Srinivasamurthy]

Sri Shankaraji,

I am not saying that Sri Shankaracharya is explaining the prevailing varna system. The reference to purusha sukta  - ‘ब्राह्मणोऽस्य मुखमासीत्’ (ऋ. १० । ८ । ९१) इत्यादिश्रुतेः establishes the entire universe (not just the society) as the "body" of Brahman. So everything in srushti is broadly divided into four varna and guna/karma are distributed accordingly. So in every society it is possible to identify people with these four varnas and corresponding gunas. 

It is also possible to have varna within varna also. The possibility of other combinations (corresponding to other parts in the human body) cannot be ruled out but they more or less fall within the four varnas as observed by Sri Subbuji earlier.

Namaste

Suresh

[shankara]

Sureshji,

Could you please elaborate the statement - So everything in srushti is broadly divided into four varna and guna/karma are distributed accordingly.

regards
shankara

[Suresh Srinivasamurthy]

Shankaraji,

When we look upon the entire universe of prakrithi (made of three gunas) as the body of Brahman (similar to human body) then jiva/jada entities corresponding to the head, arms, thighs and feet, form the four varna. So the entire three worlds could be divided into four varna. It is not limited to only humans.

This view of looking upon the universe as the body of Brahman (VirAt purusha) explains the formation of four varnas out of three gunas of prakrithi.

Namaste

Suresh

[Dr.BVK Sastry(G-MAIL)]

Namaste Paturi ji

 

‘Sorry, if my frank expression in a ‘Jnata –Ajnaata’  mode seems to have caused a disturbance. I shared an observation and ; I am not doing any ‘ moderation’.

Getting on to the specifics:  

 

1. On < What is your problem with my moderating role   > . I have NO PROBLEMS with your moderating.  You have been doing  such an excellent work and all appreciations. Please continue your role which you are discharging excellently.  I have noticed that you in the role of moderator has intervened and said what needs to be said in time.

 

2.  On < Your present post as difficult to comprehend for me as all your past posts have been  >  If you please let me know which line and angle of presentation is ‘ difficult’ , or ‘out of alignment’ with the traditional thinking’, I would be obliged to take the necessary correction and steps for simplification. I hope that ‘ Vidvat –parishat’ deliberations are not ‘ discourses of public-pleasantries’  .

 

3.  On   my observation  on ‘ due role played’ to be  a  <"Patch up and reconciliation as ‘ Agree to disagree’ model may  be ‘ politically right  strategy before lunch  break’ "? …  Why do you think .. "but this is pushing the key issue below the carpet" ? …..    Where is pushing anything under the carpet here? >  :  

 

            The  ‘Varna-Classification’ debate started with Shakar ji’s post   with < -  Bhagavad Gita and other scriptures :: i.e.‘ Scriptures position on Varna’  > ;  for which the relevant disciplines to be looked at depends on what one means by (i) ‘Scriptures’ (- a wide range of works from Vedas, Puranas and  works of Acharyas) ( ii) Positioning of Gita as ‘Scripture’ (iii) What is the ‘ meaning of Varna’  and Guna intended connections ?

 

           You are well aware  on the positioning of  ‘Gita’ in multiple dimensions of understanding  as Yoga-Shaastra, Dharma-Shaastra, Smruti, Part of Mahabharata, Integral unit of Prasthana Traya,  historical Branching point from which three prominent Vedanta schools project their axioms and postulates on Transcendental states,   branching point fo several social practices  using Gita as a book of tradition and  used for ‘social organization of Varnas ‘et al.

 

           In short, there has been a ‘mix up of the issues’   right in the starting point of the thread  and response posts ; and continued touching – Practices of  Social significance  (Saamjika vyavasthaa - vyavahara) , Pedagogic debate  (Shaastra Charchaa – Spiritual/ Philosophical), and  Vision of  ‘Adhyatma Darshana Yoga’  (Transcendental- Guhya)’ .  Such an issue is called a ‘ loaded question’, which opens up a  ‘ free rolling –free wheeling discussion’.

 

       When you pointed  that  < If they consider that there is a scope for a healthy debate / discussion between two or three different schools of Vedanta on a specific contentious issue between them is possible, they may start a separate systematic debate/discussion on that issue and participate in the debate /discussion in the manner that helps the younger scholars to learn both the method and the content. > , there is  < NO SEPARATE ‘ THEY> . It is  to be <WE ALL =  Parishat >.   Why limit or point  this to ‘Vedanta’ only and specifically ‘ uttara- meemaamsaa frame’, where as ‘Varna’ issues are critical in ‘ poorva-meemaamsaa’ practice , aagama,Tantra, Samskara, Dharma Shaastra, Artha shaastra?    Is ‘Vedanta – Vyakarana’ the exclusivity of ‘ Bharateeya – Vidwat’ ?

     When you point   <This is what I always have been trying to avoid on this forum.  I have been repeatedly saying that this is not a forum only of a particular school of Vedanta.  > , I feel that you have defined the  < boundaries of discussion in this forum>  by keeping ‘ Vedanta – Vidwat- Bharateeyataa’/ Bharateeya – Vidwat – Vedanta’  as it becomes a ‘socially unpleasant’ exchange. I do understand the difficulties in moderation  and also clearly recognize the limitations that a ‘ forum debate’ will neither solve or resolve the  ‘Varna –Scriptures –Social issue’ .

    If it has not been resolved or dissolved since ‘Bhagavad-Gita’ times, and ‘ Bhagavad- Gita inherited the  issue  from  ‘Vedic Times’,  and it still continues to be the anchor  issue of debates <method and content> of current communities, why ‘ push the debate under the carpet / out of forum’?  The very fact that the  question has survived with whatever shortcomings, it means the issue has a relevance , at least for society from a Historical Legacy inheritance mode.   This is purely my personal opinion.  

    You have the unrestricted unquestioned  right to moderate and  steer the discussions on the forum.

Regards

BVK Sastry

  

 

From: bvpar...@googlegroups.com [mailto:bvpar...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Nagaraj Paturi
Sent: Saturday, 6 January, 2018 8:37 PM
To: Bharatiya Vidvat parishad
Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} Four Varnas as combinations of three gunas; why not 6 varnas?

 

Dear Dr BVK Sastry-ji,

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

 

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

 

 

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

 

BoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, Kerala

 

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies

 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,

 

(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )

 

 

 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Dear Dr Sastry-ji,

It is your irrelevant or out of context expressions such as 

"I hope that ‘ Vidvat –parishat’ deliberations are not ‘ discourses of public-pleasantries’  ."

which cause unnecessary digressions from the focus of discussion. There is no context for kribbing about public pleasantries  here. Yes, as civilised in the modern parlance and s'ishTas in the traditional parlance, of course, we try to address each other in mutually respectful manner. In reality those aspects of etiquette and manners get relegated into insignificance and given routines, significance remaining with the focus of discussion. 

----------

Allegation of 'pushing Varna discussion under carpet ' would have been valid if I closed the thread. I did not. So no context for those words. 

--------------------------

Since the moderating words were addressed to the venerable senior scholars, 'they' due to the force of context, refers only to them. Request to them was to start a separate thread since the issues need not necessarily be related to the present thread.

--------------------------

Sri Shankara-ji , later in the thread clarified that the question came from a rationalist. The topic is not the entire huge broad issue of Varna system . It is the specific question of 'why not  more Varnas than four that can result from the other permutations of three gunas?'

The question is addressed by many different posts in the thread. 

The thread is not closed yet. 

If there are more points to be made related to that question, they are going to be made. 

Everything outside, on  the carpet. 

Please do contribute to the discussion focusing on the specific issue. 

 

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

 

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

 

 

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

 

BoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, Kerala

 

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies

 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,

 

(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )

 

 

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[shankara]

Sureshji,

To be more specific, my question was not about origin of varnas, but about the relation between varnas and gunas. Sankaracharya in his bhashya gives a certain compositions of 3 gunas in 4 varnas. This led to the actual question 'why certain combinations of gunas were not included? Is there any logical explanation to it?'

If you read the whole discussion, you will get a better idea about the original query and how it was answered by esteemed members of this group.

As far as I am concerned, I am satisfied with the explanation provided by Vineet Chaitanyaji, Iyengarji and others.

regards
shankara

[Achyut Karve]

Dear Scholars,

If I am not wrong Varna refers to division of labour in a society or a particular organisation of labour in a society in historical time.  However Guna refers to the qualities that individuals posess.  A Shudra can be as much satvik as much as a Brahman can be tamasic.  

I have still not been in a position to understand how the two i.e. Varna and guna have been philosophically or sociologically reconciled in this thread.

This is necessary before one dwells on the issue.  Just quoting from ancient texts and that too without putting them in context not only affects the debate but many a times may do disservice to the person or authority who is being quoted.

If this is not attempted posts will merely carry mechanistic approaches which will inturn trivialise the subject under debate.

With regards,

Achyut Karve.

...

[venkat veeraraghavan]

Dear Achyutji:

You say a Brahman can be Tamasik and a shudra can be Satvik. 

Can you also tell me how does one become a Brahman or a Shudra?

Is birth alone sufficient?  

The episode of Yaksha Prashna and the BG in the Mahabharata clearly denote that it is CONDUCT alone that determines who is what. Not Birth.

So if as the shastra says it is conduct that denotes varna, what is wrong with the classification based on gunas?

After all isn't it gunas that establish causalty in one's conduct?

Kind Regards,

Venkat

...

[Message clipped]  

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Dear Sri Achyut-ji,

Are you keeping the reality around us today  or the actual cases described in ancient Sanskrit /Vedic narratives in mind?

Whatever kind of 'real' cases you are keeping in mind, the present discussion in the thread is on the ideal type discussed in the ancient shaastra texts not either on the actual reality around us today or the actual characters in the ancient Sanskrit narratives. 

The actual reality around us is caste not Varna. 

The characters in the ancient Sanskrit narratives are  around the ideal type called Varna found in the ancient Sanskrit Shaastras. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Dr.BVK Sastry(G-MAIL)]

Namaste Paturi ji

1.  Since Shankar –ji,  who started this  thread  has expressed in a later post  :  <  As far as I am concerned, I am satisfied with the explanation provided by Vineet Chaitanyaji, Iyengarji and others. >  I do not want to add any  more on this thread.

 

2.   Please help me to understand,  on  what makes you feel my  statement <"I hope that ‘ Vidvat –parishat’ deliberations are not ‘ discourses of public-pleasantries’"  >  as irrelevant or out of context expression ?  In

       what way the statement has caused unnecessary digression from the focus of discussion.  

 

3.     Before closing,  looking back over shoulders, on why we have landed in this cross debate and where the focus should be steered to :   

 

         3.b.1)  On < specific issue of this thread> :  The title read : Four Varnas as combinations of three gunas; why not 6 varnas?.  

         3.b.2) – Starting post by Shankar  read:    <  It is said in the Bhagavad Gita and other scriptures that the four varnas are based on three gunas. The combination of gunas of the 4 varnas are said to be as shown in the table given below. …..      Though the 3 gunas can form 6 combinations as shown in the above table, why are the last two combinations (in the 5th and 6th rows) not valid to form varna? …..  I would like to know if there is any logical explanation why varnas cannot have the last 2 combinations.

        3.b.3) – Digressions in between: Guna and Varna relation in mortal society, amongst Gods,  Darshana Schools on Varna  and Guna relations, Why only four numeric count for Varnas, Samskruth word root,

 

        3.b.4) – Paraphrased  issue by Shankar: <   Sureshji,  To be more specific, my question was not about origin of varnas, but about the relation between varnas and gunas. Sankaracharya in his bhashya gives a certain compositions of 3 gunas in 4 varnas. This led to the actual question 'why certain combinations of gunas were not included? Is there any logical explanation to it?'

 

        3.b.5) -  Specific question of thread as pointed by you :  < It is the specific question of 'why not  more Varnas than four that can result from the other permutations of three gunas?' >

 

 The thread seems to be still open to fill a gap on ‘ Scriptures position  ‘no Varna’  or ‘ more than Four Varnas’ > as  listed in the table.  This is apart from other related issues in specific posts.

 

Regards

BVK Sastry

 

 

From: bvpar...@googlegroups.com [mailto:bvpar...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Nagaraj Paturi
Sent: Sunday, 7 January, 2018 12:00 PM
To: Bharatiya Vidvat parishad
Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} Four Varnas as combinations of three gunas; why not 6 varnas?

 

Dear Dr Sastry-ji,

[Nagaraj Paturi]

>I do not want to add any  more on this thread.

 

-- You have the right not to. 

> Please help me to understand,  on  what makes you feel my  statement <"I hope that ‘ Vidvat –parishat’ deliberations are not ‘ discourses of public-pleasantries’"  >  as irrelevant or out of context expression ?  In

       what way the statement has caused unnecessary digression from the focus of discussion. 

--- The posts including the present conversation between you and me are digressions from the topic of the  thread.  Having potential to cause such digressions shows that it is irrelevant. It is irrelevant also because the thread is any way not a discourse of public pleasantries. 

Thanks. 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Dr.BVK Sastry(G-MAIL)]

Namaste Paturi ji

 

Thanks for clarifying the nature of discussion on this thread in another post reading : < the present discussion in the thread is on the ideal type discussed in the ancient shaastra texts not either on the actual reality around us today or the actual characters in the ancient Sanskrit narratives.    The actual reality around us is caste not Varna. ..  The characters in the ancient Sanskrit narratives are  around the ideal type called Varna found in the ancient Sanskrit Shaastras.>

 

 So, the discussion is likely to proceed  on ‘ What was practiced ’   and NOT on ‘How Present Practice  is inherited and  connected to Past’.  

 

In light of this,

 

a)    I feel   I    have nothing to add to this thread of  ‘ Varnas  as  combinations of three Gunas’ discussions  beyond what is already stated by the Acharyas, using ‘Dharma –Karma –Samskara – Guna -Swabhaava ’ parameters. This is bygone ‘ancient narrative of  history’.

 

b)   I  feel  I   can not contribute anything  on this thread to modify the  actual reality of  ‘Caste’ around us in the frame of ‘ Varna’ discussion’ ! as it becomes ‘ nation-community specific faith –belief-practice religion issues’.  The equation of  ‘ Jaati’  (Caste = Varna) of today is  postulated and practiced is  a  disconnected social  identity in relation to  standards of ‘Varna’ set  from ancient texts. And this seems to apply equally  extended to all ‘Four Varnas’ of Today ! A contextual reality even if it seems to hurt the ‘ identity pride’ of some .   This is tormenting present  .

 

Regards

BVK Sastry

 

From: bvpar...@googlegroups.com [mailto:bvpar...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Nagaraj Paturi
Sent: Sunday, 7 January, 2018 4:27 PM
To: Bharatiya Vidvat parishad
Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} Four Varnas as combinations of three gunas; why not 6 varnas?

 

>I do not want to add any  more on this thread.   

[Achyut Karve]

Dear Paturiji,

Do Varna and jati not have different connotations?  In my opinion caste refers to Jati and not to Varna.  

Secondly scripturally has the concept of Varna and Guna evolved simultaneously?  In other words is there any reference in the scriptures that the Varna system was an offshoot of the concept of Guna.  Or still further was the Varna system in operation during Vedic times.

With regards,

Achyut Karve.

...

[Nagaraj Paturi]

> Do Varna and jati not have different connotations?  In my opinion caste refers to Jati and not to Varna.  

-- You are absolutely correct Sri Achyut-ji. 

> was the Varna system in operation during Vedic times.

----- 'Vedic times' is a tricky concept. There is a Veda sookta , Purusha Sookta, mentioning the Varna System. 

> is there any reference in the scriptures that the Varna system was an offshoot of the concept of Guna.

---- Please go through the thread in detail. There is no statement in the thread to the effect that -- the Varna system was an offshoot of the concept of Guna.

[Madhav Deshpande]

Dear Shri Karve,

The notion of Varṇa predates the emergence of the notion of three guṇas.  Before the notion of three or four Varṇas emerges, the R̥gveda uses the terms āryavarṇa and dāsavarṇa, and there are collective references to ubhau varṇau.  While the Puruṣasūkta describes the origin of Brāhmaṇa, Rājanya, Vaiśya and Śūdra from the primordial Puruṣa, it does not use the term varṇa or guṇa.  The explicit statement of the Bhagavadgītā: cāturvarṇyam mayā sr̥ṣṭaṃ guṇakarmavibhāgaśaḥ is perhaps the oldest available statement linking the notion of guṇa to varṇa.

Madhav Deshpande

[Ramanujachar P]

तैत्तिरीयब्राह्मणे काठकभागे वर्णाः प्रस्तुताः । तथाहि -

ऋचां प्राची महती दिगुच्यते इत्यनुवाके -

ऋग्भ्यो जातं वैश्यं वर्णमाहुः । यजुर्वेदं क्षत्रियस्याहुर्योनिम् । 

सामवेदो ब्राह्मणानां प्रसूतिः । ...मीमांसायां विश्वसृजामयने

विस्तरश्च ।

अपि च  तैत्तिरीयसंहितायां सात्रायणब्राह्मणे - चत्वारोऽपि वर्णाः गुणयोगेन विवृताः सन्ति । (वैदिकानुस्वार, दीर्घस्वरितदर्शनार्थं छन्दस् इति फॉण्ट् अपेक्षितम् ।)

प्र॒जाप॑तिरकामयत॒ प्र जा॑ये॒येति॒ स मु॑ख॒तस्त्रि॒वृतं॒ निर॑मिमीत॒ तम॒ग्निर्दे॒वतान्व॑सृज्यत गाय॒त्री छन्दो॑ रथंत॒रँ साम॑ ब्राह्म॒णो म॑नु॒ष्या॑णाम॒जः प॑शू॒नान्तस्मा॒त्ते मुख्या॑ मुख॒तो ह्यसृ॑ज्य॒न्तोर॑सो बा॒हुभ्याम्पञ्चद॒शं निर॑मिमीत॒ तमिन्द्रो॑ दे॒वतान्व॑सृज्यत त्रि॒ष्टुप्छन्दो॑ बृ॒हत् [4]
साम॑ राज॒न्यो॑ मनु॒ष्या॑णा॒मविः॑ पशू॒नान्तस्मा॒त्ते वी॒र्या॑वन्तो वी॒र्याद्ध्यसृ॑ज्यन्त मध्य॒तः स॑प्तद॒शं निर॑मिमीत॒ तं विश्वे॑ दे॒वा दे॒वता॒ अन्व॑सृज्यन्त॒ जग॑ती॒ छन्दो॑ वैरू॒प साम॒ वैश्यो॑ मनु॒ष्या॑णां॒ गावः॑ पशू॒नान्तस्मा॒त्त आ॒द्या॑ अन्न॒धाना॒द्ध्यसृ॑ज्यन्त॒ तस्मा॒द्भूया॑सो॒ऽन्येभ्यो॒ भूयि॑ष्ठा॒ हि दे॒वता॒ अन्वसृ॑ज्यन्त प॒त्त ए॑कवि॒॒शं निर॑मिमीत॒ तम॑नु॒ष्टुप्छन्दः॑ [5[]
अन्व॑सृज्यत वैरा॒ज साम॑ शू॒द्रो म॑नु॒ष्या॑णा॒मश्वः॑ पशू॒नान्तस्मा॒त्तौ भू॑तसंक्रा॒मिणा॒वश्व॑श्च शू॒द्रश्च॒ तस्माच्छू॒द्रो य॒ज्ञेऽन॑वकॢप्तो॒ न हि दे॒वता॒ अन्वसृ॑ज्यत॒ तस्मा॒त्पादा॒वुप॑ जीवतः प॒त्तो ह्यसृ॑ज्येताम्प्रा॒णा वै त्रि॒वृद॑र्धमा॒साः प॑ञ्चद॒शः प्र॒जाप॑तिः सप्तद॒श

While the Puruṣasūkta describes the origin of Brāhmaṇa, Rājanya, Vaiśya and Śūdra from the primordial Puruṣa, it does not use the term varṇa or guṇa. 

 

The explicit statement of the Bhagavadgītā: cāturvarṇyam mayā sr̥ṣṭaṃ guṇakarmavibhāgaśaḥ is perhaps the oldest available statement linking the notion of guṇa to varṇa.

रामानुजः

[K S Kannan]

Have not 

tejas, ap and anna

been seen as 

sattva, rajas, and tamas 

earlier?

--

[Madhav Deshpande]

Dear Shri Ramanujachar,

     May I point out that the Taittirīya-Saṃhitā passages that you have quoted do not use the terms varṇa and guṇa, nor do they connect the origin of different classes to Sattva, Rajas and Tamas.  The term varṇa is used in the quoted Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa passage, but the passage does not connect it with guṇas.  Best wishes,

Madhav Deshpande

--

[Ramanujachar P]

आम् । परन्तु तत्र, मुख्य, वीर्य, अन्नधान, इत्यादयः, श्री कण्णन् महाभागैः तेजोऽन्नानां

छान्दोग्ये प्रस्तावः, अजामेकां लोहितशुक्लकृष्णामित्यादिषु सत्वरजस्तमसां च 

सम्बन्धः कश्चन निहितः स्यादिति भाति ।  

साक्षात् त एव शब्दाः स्युरिति नियमः स्याद्वा ?

पुरुषसूक्तेऽपि तमसस्तु पारे/परस्तात् इति, अन्यत्र क्षयन्तमस्य रजसः पराके 

इत्यादयः केवलं शुद्ध सत्वमात्रसत्तां गमयन्ति जगत्कारण पुरुषस्य नारायणस्य 

इति  साम्प्रदायिकाः इत्यन्यदेतत् ।

रामानुजः

--

Dr. P. Ramanujan
Parankushachar Institute of Vedic Studies (Regd.)

Bengaluru

080-25433239 (R)

9449088616

[K S Kannan]

In the very context, the Chandogya speaks of the three varna-s (as colours)

as rohita, sukla, and krsna

representative of the three guna-s.

paroksapriya vai devah

(and even

pratyaksa-dvisah)

(sorry no diacritics)

[Madhav Deshpande]

Dear Professor Kannan,

     I agree with you that these notions of guṇas, varṇas as colors etc, do develop in the Upaniṣads, but they do not explicitly occur in the earlier literature.  In my view, there is some anachronism in using later terminology to explain earlier literature, but this is commonly done in the commentaries.  That blurs the lines of evolution of terminology and concepts.  With best wishes,

Madhav Deshpande

[V Subrahmanian]

On 7 Jan 2018 23:00, "K S Kannan" <ks.kann...@gmail.com> wrote:

Have not 

tejas, ap and anna

been seen as 

sattva, rajas, and tamas 

earlier?

The Chandogya refers to bhuta srishti. Only the last three, agni, aapah and prthvi are explicitly said while the first two, akasha and vayu are anukta but are to be supplied. Hence, the tejas, etc may not be representing the three gunas. But in the ajaamekaam mantra the reference is to the gunas if trigunatmikaa mayaa.

This is my understanding.

Regards

Subrahmanian. V 

[Suresh Srinivasamurthy]

Shankaraji,

Actually I was trying to answer the question "Why only four varnas (instead of six)" which is in a way same as the question "why certain combinations of gunas were not included". 

Just for my learning could you please elaborate the logical explanation (other than the human body analogy) for having only "four varna" (and corresponding guna combinations)?

Namaste

Suresh

[Nagaraj Paturi]

> While the Puruṣasūkta describes the origin of Brāhmaṇa, Rājanya, Vaiśya and Śūdra from the primordial Puruṣa, it does not use the term varṇa or guṇa.

--- Dear Prof. Deshpande,

What could Brāhmaṇa, Rājanya, Vaiśya and Śūdra mentioned in this sukta be?  Your statement that it does not use the term varNa is really interesting. Because this part of the sukta is extensively quoted as the origin (not even as the one describing the origin but origin itself ) of the 'caste' system equating the varna system with caste system, as if the sukta created the caste system. 

The four in the sukta 

a. not called as Varnas by the sukta but they are varNas only?

b. they are not varNas because the sukta does not call them so? if not varNas what can we call them, what is the common name for the four?

c. they are castes because they are not called varNas?

d. they are neither castes nor varNas ? what are they? There seems to be a system, a social system in the description. What can that be called? 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

[Madhav Deshpande]

Dear Nagarajji,

    You have raised an excellent question.  Using the terms and categories of varṇa and guṇa to describe the creation of the four classes within the society as found in the Puruṣasūkta does involve anachronism, though these terms are indeed used in later Indian literature to describe these classes.  As I mentioned previously, the R̥gveda knows the term varṇa only in the context of āryavarṇa and dāsavarṇa, and talks about these two varṇas using the expression ubhau varṇau.  It seems to me that this earlier usage of the term varṇa was later on extended in post-R̥gvedic texts to the four classes of society.  Then the theory of explaining these four varṇas in terms of guṇas arose in the period of the Upaniṣads and the Bhagavadgītā.  I would clarify the situation with a developmental account like this.  With best wishes,

Madhav Deshpande

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Is it anachronistic to use the word caste while referring to what is described in this part of the sukta?

To use the word varNa as per your analysis is just time mismatch. To use the word caste is not just a time misfit, it is a language misfit, social system misfit and cultural misfit, isn't it, professor?

[Madhav Deshpande]

I have not used the word “caste”.

Madhav Deshpande

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Nagaraj Paturi

 

Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.

BoS, MIT School of Vedic Sciences, Pune, Maharashtra

BoS, Chinmaya Vishwavidyapeeth, Veliyanad, Kerala

Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies

 

FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,

 

(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )

 

 

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bvparishat+...@googlegroups.com.

[Madhav Deshpande]

Dear Nagarajji,

I agree with your concern about the use of the word "caste" to refer to this sūkta being anachronistic.  It is anachronistic.  I would prefer to use more neutral terms like classes, social groups, or constituent groups of society etc.  The word "caste" is more appropriate for jāti, which is not the same as these four classes.  

Madhav Deshpande

Campbell, California

[Venkatesh Murthy]

Namaste

https://www.academia.edu/17203145/The_Dasa_And_Dasyu_Of_The_Vedas

In the early Vedic literature the Dasyus are Krishnatvac meaning dark skinned. Therefore Varna means colour of skin. Aryans were fair skinned. Even today there is a saying Don't trust a dark skinned Brahmin and don't trust a fair skinned outcaste.

Regards

 

-Venkatesh

[Rishi Goswami]

Namaskar Vidvadjanaah.
I have a query. I have heard someone say that even Brahmans have different catogories upon their works. Suppose if a Brahman is working as a trader, he may be vaishya brahman. I've even heard someone saying marjar/bidal brahman and hamsa brahman. Also, the one who eats the food served on the 13th day after death( terahvi ka bhoj) is somewhat kAka brahman/some other name? I don't know where all of this is written but if there is, what are different types in Brahmanas kshatriyas etc?

Thankyou.
Rishi.

[Nagaraj Paturi]

I knew that you are so meticulously careful in your research and observations, Prof. Deshpande. 

That is why I was surprised to see you say, 

"On inequalities of caste and the status of women, all one needs to do is to read the Laws of Manu in all its details. Is caste part of the traditional Hinduism? The Purusasukta hymn giving origins of four castes from the mouth, arms, thighs and feet of the cosmic primordial being is as Vedic as it gets, and is repeated by Manu and other subsequent religious/legal authorities."

in your letter to the editor of Wall Street Journal

http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00litlinks/txt_deshpande_letter.html

The top of the page says:

"Source: a post to: Indo-Eurasi...@yahoogroups.com, 26 Jan. 2006 

Reproduced here by permission of the author. Some paragraph breaks, and all material in square brackets, added by FWP 

[Achyut Karve]

Dear Deshpandeji,

I see the usage of the word Varna in the Rig Veda referring to local and immigrant groups.  It may be the same as that presently happening in the US as as blacks, whites, asian, Latinos etc.  

Through the passage of time the word Varna might have been used with a changed connotation.

Even if it be so does the verse  'cāturvarṇyam mayā sr̥ṣṭaṃ guṇakarmavibhāgaśaḥ' say that guna or karma determine varna or it only states that I have divided the world by varna, guna and karma. 

With regards,

Achyut Karve.

[Madhav Deshpande]

Dear Nagarajji,

You are correct.  My wording was rather sloppy in that piece of writing.  If I were writing it today in a more calmer academic environment, I would  express myself with more careful wording.  The problem lies in part in dealing with Manusmr̥ti's descriptions which expand varṇas into many jātis as products of inter-varṇa marriages (saṃkarajāti).  Manu also talks of jātis that are outside of those born from the mouth, arms, thighs and feet, for instance:

mukhabāhūrupajjānāṃ yā loke jātayo bahiḥ /

mlecchavācaś cāryavācas te sarve dasyavaḥ smr̥tāḥ //

"In the world, all those jātis that are outside of those born from the mouth, arms, thighs and feet (of the Puruṣa), whether they speak Ārya speech or Mleccha speech, they are all considered to be Dasyus."

In such passages, the notions of varṇas and jātis get inextricably entangled.  This is no excuse for my earlier somewhat inaccurate usage, but the Sanskrit texts begin to show interconnection of varṇas and jātis.  This does not happen in the earliest texts like the R̥gveda, but does show up in Manu and other Smr̥tis.  

In any case, thanks for pointing to my earlier somewhat inaccurate usage.  Best,

Madhav Deshpande

On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 8:06 PM, Nagaraj Paturi <nagara...@gmail.com> wrote:

I knew that you are so meticulously careful in your research and observations, Prof. Deshpande. 

That is why I was surprised to see you say, 

"On inequalities of caste and the status of women, all one needs to do is to read the Laws of Manu in all its details. Is caste part of the traditional Hinduism? The Purusasukta hymn giving origins of four castes from the mouth, arms, thighs and feet of the cosmic primordial being is as Vedic as it gets, and is repeated by Manu and other subsequent religious/legal authorities."

in your letter to the editor of Wall Street Journal

http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00litlinks/txt_deshpande_letter.html

The top of the page says:

"Source: a post to: Indo-Eurasian_research@yahoogroups.com, 26 Jan. 2006 

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Purusha Sukta related older posts:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/bvparishat/UPXlWPG-Elw/hymBhqt0JgAJ

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/bvparishat/UPXlWPG-Elw/l6QE7YzjJgAJ

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/bvparishat/UPXlWPG-Elw/l6QE7YzjJgAJ

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/bvparishat/UPXlWPG-Elw/tcub2O4fJwAJ

[Nagaraj Paturi]

One more:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/bvparishat/JnWYEBG7JuM/GW-eZcGGJwAJ

[Nagaraj Paturi]

Older dicussion on Gita verse under question:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/bvparishat/7BOFc8KSbho/1Uvu2j55AgAJ

[Subrahmanyam Korada]

नमो विद्वद्भ्यः

Dear Prof Nagarajgaru

you stated  that  I said the following --

There are भेदाभेदौ in विशिष्टाद्वैतम्  and it is not acceptable due to श्रुतिविरोध ।

I would have appreciated had you enquired with me as to what is the source of this sentence --

this is not at all said by me - it is there in the popular work सर्वदर्शनसंग्रह - पूर्णप्रज्ञदर्शनम् authored 400-500 years ago--

तदेतत् रामानुजमतं .....साम्ये’पि परस्परविरुद्धभेदादिपक्षत्रयकक्षीकारेण क्षपणकपक्षनिक्षिप्तमिति उपेक्षमाणः  ’ स आत्मा तत्त्वमसि ’ (छा

6-8-7) इत्यादिवेदान्तवाक्यजातस्य भङ्ग्यन्तरेण अर्थान्तरपरत्वमुपपाद्य ब्रह्ममीमांसाविवरणव्याजेन आनन्दतीर्थः प्रस्थानान्तरमास्थिषत ।

In fact such introductory sentences are there in the beginning of every दर्शनम् । Scholars are familiar with the work.

We do not provide reference to popular concepts that are being discussed for hundreds of years in famous works.

We do not express our personal likes and dislikes but while discussing as issue we quote from 14/18 विद्यास्थानs ,

This is the सम्प्रदाय followed in great works like महाभाष्यम् , वाक्यपदीयम् etc.-- एके अपरे परे and so on . So no cause 

for ill-feeling .

Please note one or two points --

द्वेषः कस्यचन कश्चन यदि अपराध्यति तदैव जायेत । यदि अन्यथा जायते तर्हि स आधिरेव।

Here we never tried or try to propagate or condemn any दर्शनम् । We may take up a concept for the sake of discussion - simply to 

decide the वाक्यार्थ or शास्त्रार्थ । 

Prof BVK Sastry got the point .

 One may differ by providing some प्रमाणम् ।

If someone doubts the intention of another what to do .

Earlier we have discussed चार्वाकदर्शनम् , where श्रुति quoted and said they too have वैरभक्ति ।

भेदाभेदौ  एकनिष्ठौ - are there in ज्योतिषम् , व्याकरणम् , गान्धर्ववेद etc . But what I provided is an उपलक्षणम् ।

I do not cross my limits in terms of language -- अतिवादान् तितिक्षेत ।

**********

There was a प्रसङ्ग  of this aspect by  Vidvan Rishi Goswami on 3/1/2018 ----

>Satva and Tamas are opposites. Or Viruddha. One can't have 2 viruddha dharma having ashraya in same dharmi. Eg, hotness and coolness in same dharmi together. <

To clarify the position I was quoting different sources .

Even in behavior itself this is seen - in व्यवहार जगत् is सत्यम् but in सिद्धान्त जगत् is मिथ्या । 

I / we are not here to finalize any सिद्धान्त  nor can we - everybody follows his own path . Let us limit to academic discussion..

धन्यो’स्मि

Dr.Korada Subrahmanyam
Professor of Sanskrit, CALTS,
University of Hyderabad,
Ph:09866110741(M),91-40-23010741(R),040-23133660(O)

Skype Id: Subrahmanyam Korada

Blog: Koradeeyam.blogspot.in 

[V Subrahmanian]

In the Bhagavadgita bhashyam for the verse 3.10   Shankaracharya's bhashya is:

सहयज्ञाः प्रजाः सृष्ट्वा पुरोवाच प्रजापतिः । 
अनेन प्रसविष्यध्वमेष वोऽस्त्विष्टकामधुक् ॥ १० ॥

 भाष्यम्

सहयज्ञाः यज्ञसहिताः प्रजाः त्रयो वर्णाः ताः सृष्ट्वा उत्पाद्य पुरा पूर्वं सर्गादौ उवाच उक्तवान् प्रजापतिः प्रजानां स्रष्टा अनेन यज्ञेन प्रसविष्यध्वं प्रसवः वृद्धिः उत्पत्तिः तं कुरुध्वम् । एष यज्ञः वः युष्माकम् अस्तु भवतु इष्टकामधुक् इष्टान् अभिप्रेतान् कामान् फलविशेषान् दोग्धीति इष्टकामधुक् ॥ १० ॥ 

The mention of three varnas (instead of four), in my opinion, is because of the yajna adhikara for the three varnas. 

Madhusudana Saraswati too says:   प्रजाः त्रीन्वर्णान् पुरा कल्पादौ सृष्ट्वोवाच प्रजानां पतिः स्रष्टा। 

regards

subrahmanian.v