Bhagavadgita XVIII.46 & Manusmriti 1.87-91
Ashok Sastry
Hmmm,
Why all this hostility?
Quoting Manusmriti to prove that the Hindu scriptures validate and
support a caste system is useless, since many folks don't even equate it
to the Vedanta or the Gita.
The caste system originally started out as a means to label the type of
labor that people did. That's all. Of course, over time the system was
corrupted.
But, one cannot blame the Hindu scriptures for misuse of the varna
system into the jati system. It's almost like blaming the Qu'ran for
Hizballah's activities. It's the people who do stupid things, not the
ideology necessarily.
Harpreet Singh
raga...@acs.bu.edu wrote:
>
> No, the Caste System is not supported by Hindu Scriptures (except perhaps
> Manusmirti) and certainly not by the Gita. It is a social custom, not a
No perhaps here.
"He the Resplendant, for the sake of protecting all the creatures, assigned
seperate duties to those born of His mouth, arms, thighs and feet. Teaching and
studying the Vedas, making sacrifices and assisting others in so doing, making
gifts: these He assigned to the Brahmans. The protection of the people,
sacrificing and studying the Vedas, non-attachment to sensual pleasures and
giving of gifts: these He prescribed for the kshatriyas. The protection of the
cattle, giving of gifts, sacrificing and study of Vedas, trade, banking and
agriculture, to the Vaisyas. The God allotted only one duty to the sudras: to
serve without demur, the members of all the classes mentioned above."
---Manusmriti 1.87-91.
> religius one. It is like wearing Bindi on the forehead, or wearing Sari,
> these are not mentioned in Scriptures but people carry on the tradition for
Please read the quote cited above before showing your ignorance.
> thousands of years. The ancient Greeks wrote that India was the only country
> that did not have slaves. Just look at how slaves were treated in China, Rome,
Indians (Hindus) have treated Shudras worse than slaves. Shudras could never
read the Vedas, and were even forbidden from entering a temple. Please read the
biography of Bhagat Nam Dev, to understand what it meant to be a shudra.
> Greece, Middle East, etc. There are many examples of prominent shudras.
> Valmiki was a robber, the author of the Ramayan. The Upnishads contain a
Yes, Valmiki was a dacoit, the revered author of Ramayana.
> story that specifically denounces Castism. Adi Shankaracharya fell at the feet
> of a Chandala, and dedicated a chapter to him. Vivekananda claimed that the
> path to God lay in worshipping the poor of India and providing them with food
> and education. While hate mongers and arm chair critics like you Harpreet
> prefer to criticisize the social ills of Hindu society, Hindu Reformers are
> rising to the challenge by volunteering their services to provide basic
> education to the needy which will permentantly eradicate the problem.
Easier said than done. When the Hindu scriptures allow casteism, the reformers
can do nothing. Hindus can denounce their scriptures; such action, however,
implies blasphemy, and you are guilty of it, as a Hindu.
>
> The challenge before us today is 100 times greater than when we faced Babar or
> Aurangzeb. This is the ultimate challenge for Sikh's understanding of the
> Gurus' Message. Will they be able to peacefully co-exist with other religions
> and be brave enough to rise to the challenge of eradicating the poverty of the
> poor, or will they become mired with religious intolerance, greed and
> cowardice?
Take the power out of the hands of the cunning Brahmans and solve all your
complexities.
--Harpreet Singh
>
> Only time will tell.
>
> Raju
> (PS can you post this on the newsgroups)
Certainly!
>
> > raga...@acs.bu.edu wrote:
> > >
> > > Of course I cannot cite where the Gita specifically denounces Casteism. How
> >
> > Raju, that's is a revelation, is it not. If casteism is so dominent in the
> > Hindu soceity, there has to be a reason--it lies in the Hindu scriptures. Your
> > acceptance or disapproval is not going to make a difference. The truth remains
> > that casteism is dear to Hindus.
> >
> >
> > > do you define Casteism? According to my Economics Professor, what transformed
> >
> > "Those who worship God through proper performance of the duties and obligations
> > of their pre-ordained social grade, svakarmanatambhyarcaya, verily, they are
> > emancipated, siddhimvindati." --Bhagavadgita XVIII.46.
> >
> >
> > > Europe from an agricultural to an industreal economy was the idea of
> > > DIVISION-OF-LABOR! Well this is stated in the Gita, 5000 years ago and may
> > > explain why India has been the most prosperous country in the world since the
> > > dawn of civilization.
> > >
> > > On the other hand, the CLASS SYSTEM exits in one form or another in all
> >
> > This is different. There is a hope for the poor to become rich if they try hard
> > enough. By doing so, they would be rising above the restrictions (casteism)
> > posed by Hinduism.
> >
> > --Harpreet Singh
> >
> >
> > > societies of the World. Are you saying that a Sikh cabinet minister or
> > > multimillionaire gets the same respect as a landless peasant or truckdriver.
> > > Do you deny that the probability of a Sikh businessman's son becoming a
> > > businessman is very high. Or that a Sikh farmer's son is likely to become a
> > > farmer. Are you suggesting that a sikh millionaire and a sikh peasant have
> > > equal opportunity and enjoy equal respect within society, and that their
> > > children will have equal opportunity? If so, then look at how many of
> > > Harcharan Singh Brar's children are also running for election, or how many
> > > Sikh businessmen have passed on their businesses to their sons (ie. Apollo
> > > Tyres, Ranbaxy Labs).
> > >
> > > Raju
Raju Agarwal
Harpreet,
Mansmirti was written by Manu, not God. No one cares what he wrote anymore.
In no scripture, has God advocated the Caste System.
I repeat it is a social custom not a religious one. Today, everyone accepts
Vivekanda's ideology. What remains is the means to carry it out. And, to the
extent that the "Caste System" exists, it does so only among the uneducated.
Do you think that a software engineer working for TCS would refuse to take
orders from a senior because he was lower in "Caste"? The fact that their has
been no resistance to this British custom, unlike for instance, eating beef,
shows that "Caste" is a social custom not a religous one, and can be wiped out
through universal education.
Are you brave enough to help, or will you be content to blame the Brahmans for
everything?
Raju
Harpreet Singh (si...@isis.com) wrote:
Brijnandan Dehiya
In article <31BF31...@mail.rust.net>,
Ashok Sastry <as...@mail.rust.net> wrote:
>Hmmm,
>
>Why all this hostility?
>
>Quoting Manusmriti to prove that the Hindu scriptures validate and
>support a caste system is useless, since many folks don't even equate it
>to the Vedanta or the Gita.
>
>The caste system originally started out as a means to label the type of
>labor that people did. That's all. Of course, over time the system was
>corrupted.
It was a corrupt system to _begin_ with. And how do you explain:
'Dhor, guNvar, shudra aru nari,
yeh sab taDan ke adhikari' ?
[animals, illiterates, shudras and women: all deserve to be beaten]
: Manusmriti
Manusmriti is not a scripture but has influenced indian society FAR more than
any scripture could.
>
>But, one cannot blame the Hindu scriptures for misuse of the varna
>system into the jati system. It's almost like blaming the Qu'ran for
>Hizballah's activities. It's the people who do stupid things, not the
>ideology necessarily.
You are trying to defend the indefensible (manusmriti). Wisen up.
Brij
----
Saurabh Jang
: Why all this hostility?
: Quoting Manusmriti to prove that the Hindu scriptures validate and
: support a caste system is useless, since many folks don't even equate it
: to the Vedanta or the Gita.
I don't know about the Vedas, but the Gita in certain parts can definitely
be interpreted as supporting the concept of birth castes, not a simple
labelling as you claim. Even this concept of "labelling"/"classification"
is very non-egalitarian and divisive.
The caste system has done immesurable harm to our unity and cohesiveness
as a nation and is partly responsible for our economic backwardness
as a nation.
Frankly, that is one reason that I don't give two hoots for my Hindu
identity (quite apart from the fact that I think that religion is
inherently useless and atheism is the superior choice). There is
no reason for me to get all puffed about a religion that says that
I have less social status than a Brahmin because my ancestors were
tilling the land instead of performing non-productive religious rituals.
Saurabh
--
Saurabh Jang e-mail: sj...@cs.mtu.edu
MSCS Student www : http://www.cs.mtu.edu/grads/Jang/Home.html
Michigan Tech work #: (906)487-2839
Kunal Singh
In article <4pndcs$g...@news.acns.nwu.edu> b...@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Brijnandan Dehiya) writes:
In article <31BF31...@mail.rust.net>,
Ashok Sastry <as...@mail.rust.net> wrote:
>Hmmm,
>
>Why all this hostility?
>
>Quoting Manusmriti to prove that the Hindu scriptures validate and
>support a caste system is useless, since many folks don't even equate it
>to the Vedanta or the Gita.
>
>The caste system originally started out as a means to label the type of
>labor that people did. That's all. Of course, over time the system was
>corrupted.
It was a corrupt system to _begin_ with. And how do you explain:
'Dhor, guNvar, shudra aru nari,
yeh sab taDan ke adhikari' ?
Aside from Manusmriti, castism was also later incorporated into the
Hindu theory of evolution by the Vaishnavas. The whole notion of
castism was later justified by using the theory of karmic evolution to
tell people of lower castes that they are where they are due to bad
deeds in their previous life. The later chapters of the Bhagvad Gita
support this theory of evil-doers being thrown by God into evil, lowly
wombs. The declaration and association of evil with lineage was thus
established.
Shiv
Ashok Sastry wrote:
> Why all this hostility?
Do you really want to know...
> Quoting Manusmriti to prove that the Hindu scriptures validate and
> support a caste system is useless, since many folks don't even equate >
> it to the Vedanta or the Gita.
True to a very large extent. Manu-smrithi's impact on indian society has
been tremendous in the most negative sense. But the only influence and
the remnant of the ms is the blighted caste system. How many people
follow ms? The only time ms is quoted is when justifying the caste
system (even that is a fallacy).The ms is not accepted in many places and
a lot of people don't know the existence of such a doctrine.
> The caste system originally started out as a means to label the type of
> labor that people did. That's all. Of course, over time the system >
> was corrupted.
That may have been the intent of ms. A general classification of what
people's professions were. If profession was the only source of
discrimation between the classes then a good number of brahmins would be
vaishyas (which means moving two levels down) and a good number of
shatryias would be vaishyas (one level down).
But with the concept of rebirth ... it slowly began to be perceived as
claass/caste to which you were born into and perpetuated. Every group
competed with another for power. The ms was definitely used as a means
to justify power. In northern india brahmins usurped power through their
interpretation of scriptures and their role as priests and providers of
knowledge/education to maintain their status quo. This existed in the
north for quite a long period in stark contrast to the south. In the
south the brahmins were able to finally access the power and maintain it
only for the last 200 years... or rather after the advent of the british.
Until then there was always a tug-of war between the brahmins and
non-brahmins. Even within the non-brahmins there was always a fight for
power. Each group looked down upon the other. Brahminical thought gave
the group in power ample ammunition to claim that the groups out of power
was lower class. The concept of the kshtriya, vaishya.... never existed
in the south and still does not. But the concept of jati ... is
prevalent. Broadly classified the people were either the ones with power
or none at all. Various groups holding power in one region were consider
lower class in other regions where a different group was in power. Over
time the groups moved to areas where their influence held sway. There
they meted out their form of discrimination borrowed from brahminical
thought (one can see this in numerous areas in TN). And then with
rebirt..reincarnation ... inheritance ..... your fathers class became
yours. At that point if one was a *high* caste then it was assured that
their progeny would remain so. And so also with the oyher classes. If at
that time you were at the bottom rung then your progeny would remain
there until sane minds will bring in reforms.
India's answer to the caste system came in two forms. In the north..the
answer was the creation of sikhism. But this was not a direct answer.
Sikhism began as a bulkwark against the mughals and for the protection of
hindus. This slowly evolved with the rejection of brahminicism and the
rituals... All members of this group were hindus and the new group was
calle 'sikh'. The effect of this was negative in the sense that a new
religion was born ... and a new group of people. Being a minority they
would face problems that any minority would face. In the south the answer
was in the form of a dravidian movement. This was a direct answer.
Since the power beagan with the control of temples, scriptures.... the
answer would lie in the direct rejection of all this. Which means
atheism. The irony is that TN is the land of temples and is testimony to
the belief of people in god and yet the DK movement picked up momentum,
probably because it was directly aimed at brahmins. One positive aspect
of the DK movement was the movement away from the usage of jati names as
last names and the usage of father's name as teh last name. It did help a
lot but the keen ones can to a certain extent discern between a brahmin
name.... But differentiating the other names into the jatis would be
diffcult. Anyway with so many people choosing weird names. ...one cannot
really tell anything now. The fallout of the DK movement was a strong
anti-brahmin wave and it finally gelled in the form of a class based
reservation policy (the beginning of reverse discrimination if you will,
which a lot of peole will justify without batting an eyelid, and a lot
others will justify even while batting an eyelid).
Th effect in the south was not as destructive as in the north. Over
hundreds of years it slowly became indoctrined in the people that they
were indeed low class, stupid and unclean .... They were looked down upon
And they belive that they really were children of a lesser god (one of
my favourite movies). The damage to the pysche was immense. They were
taught to behave in a certain way and be subservient in the presence of
the higher classes. The effect in south was not that dramatic, although
some villages (agraharams) in the far south had certain rules. If a
brahmin was walking down the street ... no lower class should be on the
same street walking towards or away from them.
To say that the system was corrupted is an understatement.
> But, one cannot blame the Hindu scriptures for misuse of the varna
> system into the jati system. It's almost like blaming the Qu'ran for
> Hizballah's activities. It's the people who do stupid things, not the
> ideology necessarily.
Oh YES! one can blame the hindu scriptures. One can tear it apart and one
can ridicule it. Simply put any scripture that professes a division based
on caste or creed is not humane or humanity. You can blame the people
for not using their better judgement. Your are absolutely right when you
say it's the people.
--
*******************************************************
If you didn't care what happened to me,
And I didn't care for you
We would zig zag our way
through the boredom and pain
Occasionally glancing up through the rain
Wondering which of the buggers to blame
And watching for pigs on the wing.
- Pigs on the Wing (Pink Floyd)
*******************************************************
Harpreet Singh
raga...@acs.bu.edu wrote:
> Harpreet,
> Mansmirti was written by Manu, not God. No one cares what he wrote anymore.
> In no scripture, has God advocated the Caste System.
I agree with your latter statement that God could never advocate Caste System,
but the Brahman charlatans have justified it well, mapinulating the karmic
doctrines. I, however, must disagree with your reasoning when you claim that
manusmriti is not a scripture because it was not written by God. It is,
nevertheless, one of the Hindu scriptures, on which Hindus have based their
entire civilization. And let's make it clear that all scriptures that exist in
this world have been written by humans, just in some cases under the influence of
divine revelation of God. Just because one man does not consider manusmriti a
Hindu scripture, does not change its reverence to the entire Hindu soceity.
>
> I repeat it is a social custom not a religious one. Today, everyone accepts
Raju, you are in the denial stage. I have proven, again and again, by quoting
Hindu scriptures: Rgveda, Manusmriti and Bhagvadgita that casteism is a religious
doctrine, and not a social one. You will have to find quotes from the Vedas that
SPECIFICALLY denounce casteism. Until, you are able to do so, your statement is
fallacious and based on your creative imagination.
> Vivekanda's ideology. What remains is the means to carry it out. And, to the
> extent that the "Caste System" exists, it does so only among the uneducated.
Vivekanana's approach is admirable, yet he is a philosopher, no more.
> Do you think that a software engineer working for TCS would refuse to take
> orders from a senior because he was lower in "Caste"? The fact that their has
Again you are deluded. The software engineer is willing to take orders because
he has renounced the Hindu religious tradition. If he strictly adheres to the
religious doctrines on caste as imbodied in the Rgveda, Manusmriti and
Bahgvadgita, he would not be subject to those orders. The engineer has made a
choice between backward the Hindu doctrines of casteism and the humanitarian
ideals that consider all to be equal.
> been no resistance to this British custom, unlike for instance, eating beef,
> shows that "Caste" is a social custom not a religous one, and can be wiped out
Please read the Hindu scriptures, especially the Rgveda, to ascertain how deluded
you are!
> through universal education.
>
> Are you brave enough to help, or will you be content to blame the Brahmans for
> everything?
I do not blame the insidious Brahmans for everything, but only for the social
ills prevalent in the Hindu society. Please provide us with quotes from Hindu
scriptures that specifically denounce casteism.
--Harpreet Singh
Raju Agarwal
Harpreet, You simply do not understand Hinduism.
There is no compulsion in Hinduism to follow a specific idea or book. At the
end of the Gita, Lord Krishna tells Arjuna to think over what he has said and
then do as he wished. The implication being that man should not accept
anything without first subjecting it to the test of reason, no matter what the
authority. Even if that authority is God himself!
Just because the Hindus of yesterday allowed Hinduism to degenerate into
religious dogma, does not mean that the Hindus of the present and future have
to follow suit. A Hindu is free to accept any part of any scripture that
meets his test of reason and reject any part of any scripture that does not.
A scripture is nothing more than the attempt of one individual to discover
truth, and is not necessarily any better or any worse than our own powers of
estimating the same, except when the scripture is the direct word of God, like
the Gita.
Since man is himself divine, He (man) is free to choose whatever path he sees
fit to lead him to discover his own divinity. And He is free to take the
assistance of any scripture or part thereof, or for that matter none at all,
in the pursuit of that realization.
Raju
Harpreet Singh (si...@isis.com) wrote:
: raga...@acs.bu.edu wrote:
: > Harpreet,
Destroyer of Nescience
On Wed, 12 Jun 1996, Ashok Sastry wrote:
> Hmmm,
>
> Why all this hostility?
>
> Quoting Manusmriti to prove that the Hindu scriptures validate and
> support a caste system is useless, since many folks don't even equate it
> to the Vedanta or the Gita.
Here is Bhadvadgita for skeptics like you:
"Those who worship God through proper performance of the duties and obligations
of their pre-ordained social grade, svakarmanatambhyarcaya, verily, they are
emancipated, siddhimvindati." --Bhagavadgita XVIII.46.
>
> The caste system originally started out as a means to label the type of
> labor that people did. That's all. Of course, over time the system was
> corrupted.
Read your own scriptures for a change--Rgveda, Manusmriti and Bhagvadgita
all support casteism.
>
> But, one cannot blame the Hindu scriptures for misuse of the varna
> system into the jati system. It's almost like blaming the Qu'ran for
> Hizballah's activities. It's the people who do stupid things, not the
> ideology necessarily.
It is the Hindus who consider these things; a quick glance in the
matrimonail section of India Abroad will show how caste plays a role in
the Hindu soceity.
Ace
Raju Agarwal (raga...@bu.edu) wrote:
: Just because the Hindus of yesterday allowed Hinduism to degenerate into
: religious dogma, does not mean that the Hindus of the present and future have
: to follow suit. A Hindu is free to accept any part of any scripture that
: meets his test of reason and reject any part of any scripture that does not.
: A scripture is nothing more than the attempt of one individual to discover
: truth, and is not necessarily any better or any worse than our own powers of
: estimating the same, except when the scripture is the direct word of God, like
: the Gita.
So whatever is socially unacceptable to westerners, i.e. the caste
system, should be purged from Hinduism - right? I have no problem with
it, what's next removing stone idols from Hindu temples and replacing
them with crosses.
The only myth that is being perpetuated is by revisionist Hindus like you
who keep pretending that the caste system was never a Hindu practice.
Sure the caste system should be abolished but why pretend that Hindus
didn't start it? I'm sure the Germans also wished that the world didn't
know about the treatment meted out to Jews in Germany an few decades
back, but the Jews know what happened to their brethren and will not
allow the world to forget, so why should Indians pretend brahmins never
viewed themselves as superiors to all other human beings in India?
Dhruba Chakravarti
Ace (4h...@qlink.queensu.ca) wrote:
: The only myth that is being perpetuated is by revisionist Hindus like you
: who keep pretending that the caste system was never a Hindu practice.
: Sure the caste system should be abolished but why pretend that Hindus
: didn't start it?
Dear Sri Ace:
If I may, the name of the greatest Hindu revisionist is: Sri Krishna,
denouncer of the caste system.
I wonder if you have an opinion about exactly when the caste system was
started, and by which Hindus?
With best regards,
Dhruba.
CCSO Sites Services client
4h...@qlink.queensu.ca (Ace) wrote:
>Raju Agarwal (raga...@bu.edu) wrote:
>: Just because the Hindus of yesterday allowed Hinduism to degenerate into
>: religious dogma, does not mean that the Hindus of the present and future have
>: to follow suit. A Hindu is free to accept any part of any scripture that
>: meets his test of reason and reject any part of any scripture that does not.
>: A scripture is nothing more than the attempt of one individual to discover
>: truth, and is not necessarily any better or any worse than our own powers of
>: estimating the same, except when the scripture is the direct word of God, like
>: the Gita.
>So whatever is socially unacceptable to westerners, i.e. the caste
>system, should be purged from Hinduism - right? I have no problem with
>it, what's next removing stone idols from Hindu temples and replacing
>them with crosses.
>The only myth that is being perpetuated is by revisionist Hindus like you
>who keep pretending that the caste system was never a Hindu practice.
>Sure the caste system should be abolished but why pretend that Hindus
>didn't start it? I'm sure the Germans also wished that the world didn't
>know about the treatment meted out to Jews in Germany an few decades
>back, but the Jews know what happened to their brethren and will not
>allow the world to forget, so why should Indians pretend brahmins never
>viewed themselves as superiors to all other human beings in India?
Jassa,
What I think is something wrong with sikhism. I think all
it teachs you is to hurt other peoples beliefs and thier feelings.
You are giving example of Jews and Hitler. Let me give you one
example might help you get out from your obsession
Do you know how many people they have killed in spreading
cristianity and that's some of the obssesed people are trying
to do. Note : I am not saying every sikh. Infact probably
Indian millatery is full of sikhs. Hinduism is not stones.
It's about karma. What ever you do that's what you get
back. You might argue at this point then what is swarg
and nerk (heaven and hell). It's all to expain you better
because you haven't seen god. who he is, where he is,
are tough to answer to anwer all that to illitrate people in
Early days wasn't easy that's why they had to use a model
to make them belive in. It's all made simple. Now, what
you are saying caste system was in Hinduism but people
who developed all these weren't the people who made
the religion but it was public who had attitude. You
have it too. Here my friend is saying something positive
and you jack ass giving Jew and Hitler example.
" Beliving in god through a model does help to decrease violent
thoughts. And that's why people who belive in Christianity,
Hinduism and Budhism are less violent then Muslim, Sikh
or the person who doesn't belive in god at all. " said by
famous psychologist Ralph Jones.
I say you should see psychytrist instead of posting your stupid
thoughts on internet that's why sikhs also hate you.
I am not sure if they are going to keep you in mental hospital
but I can say one thing that it will help you and it's for your own
good. Jassa, I am serious there is some problem of mental disorder
with you. I am sure that you would be a great person after you
get out of mental hospital. Guys, Get him some help. I know
Jassa what you are going through. But belive me Pardeep is
great friend of yours he is going to take you to mental doctor.
I know what you are thinking. You trying to prove to youself
that you aren't mad. I understand that. I know you are thinking
that veared things that you do are just like every normal person
would do. But that's not the case. I know you are going to scream
in nights that you are not crazy. But hey, you have to face the truth
one day or the other. Eariler you start, earlier you are going to come
out.
Jassa, Nobody is after you relax. Nobody is going to hurt you.
All that is your crazy imagination. Relax Jassa Relax.
Virendra Verma
In article <4q49l5$i...@knot.queensu.ca>, 4h...@qlink.queensu.ca (Ace) wrote:
>Raju Agarwal (raga...@bu.edu) wrote:
>
>So whatever is socially unacceptable to westerners, i.e. the caste
>system, should be purged from Hinduism - right?
What did foreigners in India do to purge the caste system when they ruled
India for 800 years? None whatsoever. Instead, they used this weapon to divide
Hindus to consolidate their power. Now psecs are using the same casteist
weapon to continue their legacy.
It was upper caste Hindus like Buddha, Nehru, Gandhi, Raja Ram Mohan Roy etc
who fought for rights of the lower castes.
>
>The only myth that is being perpetuated is by revisionist Hindus like you
>who keep pretending that the caste system was never a Hindu practice.
If you read the Gita, the caste system was not meant to be birth-based
but based on one's nature and interests. This division based on professional
interests is quite true even in modern societies.
There was definitely a problem with the way upper castes treated lower castes
just prior to Moghul invasion. That was the weakness of the Hindu society and
they got the lesson. Why do you want to live in the past?
>Sure the caste system should be abolished but why pretend that Hindus
>didn't start it?
The word 'caste' does not come from Sanskrit or any other Indian language. It
is a Portugese word. If that is the case, the caste system must have been
practiced somewhere in the Europe. The concept must have existed Portugese
traditions.
Dhruba Chakravarti
Ace (4h...@qlink.queensu.ca) wrote:
: Maybe I've been living in a different universe, but are you saying that
: Hinduism and Hindus do not believe in the caste system?
: Brother wake up, who are you trying to fool, atleast the Nazi revisionists
: make an attempt at presenting plausible theories to explain how 6 million
: people disappeared, but you, i don't know.
: Also if Krishna tried to eradicate the caste system, i guess he doesn't
: have many followers does he?
Dear Sri Ace:
Thank you for your response. What I wanted to say was, Hindus *should
not* believe in castes. Arjuna talked about the issue of varna-sankaras
and their possible bad influence on society in the 1st chapter of the Srimad
Bhagavad Gita. For that, Sri Krishna chided him, saying that Arjuna was
talking nonsense (chapter 2). I believe that this is sufficient evidence
for Sri Krishna's approval of inter-'caste' marriages.
Various famous shudras /varna-sankaras have been known to not only read
the vedas, but also be among the seers. Maharshi VyAsa, the compiler of
the Vedas, was a varna-sankara. MahidAs aitareya was the son of itarA,
never knew his father. Same story with Rishi SatyakAma. Uddalaka
Aruni was raised by his single, never-wed mother. There are many, many
examples. Even ManusamhitA has references of Shudra-gurus.
But as you have said so righteously, the caste discrimination exists
today, and it was more sever in the recent past. You have compared the
Nazi attitude with the Hindu attitude, but I do not think that it is a
good comparison. There is good evidence that even a thousand years ago,
boys and girls from all 'caste' families would go to learn Vedas in
Gurukulas.
If we do not care to know our own history, we can only have a myopic view
of the state of our society. I choose not do that. I invite you to do
the same. I believe that it is important for our own sake.
With best regards,
Dhruba.
Ace
Dhruba Chakravarti (dcha...@netserv.unmc.edu) wrote:
: Dear Sri Ace:
: If I may, the name of the greatest Hindu revisionist is: Sri Krishna,
: denouncer of the caste system.
: I wonder if you have an opinion about exactly when the caste system was
: started, and by which Hindus?
Maybe I've been living in a different universe, but are you saying that
Hinduism and Hindus do not believe in the caste system? Are you saying
that there was/is no such people as brahmins, kshatryas, vasyas and
shudras? Are you suggesting that shudras have always been allowed to
enter hindu temples and read from the vedas? Are you suggesting that
so-called brahmins have never had a problem in marrying their daughters
to people referred to as 'shudras'? Brother wake up, who are you trying
Ace
CCSO Sites Services client (us...@dev.nul.edu) wrote:
...nonsense deleted....
Brother you never seem to engage in a discussion intelligently. We are
talking about the caste system and its relation to hinduism. If you have
any comments on this topic let's hear them, otherwise take a hike.
Ace
Virendra Verma (vve...@crd.lotus.com) wrote:
: What did foreigners in India do to purge the caste system when they ruled
: India for 800 years? None whatsoever. Instead, they used this weapon to divide
: Hindus to consolidate their power. Now psecs are using the same casteist
: weapon to continue their legacy.
You are absolutely right!
: If you read the Gita, the caste system was not meant to be birth-based
: but based on one's nature and interests. This division based on professional
: interests is quite true even in modern societies.
If that is indeed the REAL Hindu philosophy then why are the vast
majority of indians ignorant of it? Your take on the caste system as
stated above is a philosophy that should be propogated.
: There was definitely a problem with the way upper castes treated lower castes
: just prior to Moghul invasion. That was the weakness of the Hindu society and
: they got the lesson. Why do you want to live in the past?
No sir, I am living in the present as are 92% of indians who are not
"brahmin".
: The word 'caste' does not come from Sanskrit or any other Indian language. It
: is a Portugese word. If that is the case, the caste system must have been
: practiced somewhere in the Europe. The concept must have existed Portugese
: traditions.
The word used to describe the divisions in indian society maybe a foreign
one but the ideology is still Indian/Hindu.
Ace
Let me also thank you for taking the time to post an educating reply, I have
not read
hindu scriptures but your summary of Arjuna's and Krishna's conversation
was enlightening. But you are making an arguement for how things should
be and unfortunately, it seems, that hindu philosophy has been corrupted
by a minority and twisted for its own benefit.
Dhruba Chakravarti (dcha...@netserv.unmc.edu) wrote:
: Ace (4h...@qlink.queensu.ca) wrote:
: : Maybe I've been living in a different universe, but are you saying that
: : Hinduism and Hindus do not believe in the caste system?
: : Brother wake up, who are you trying to fool, atleast the Nazi revisionists
: : make an attempt at presenting plausible theories to explain how 6 million
: : people disappeared, but you, i don't know.
: : Also if Krishna tried to eradicate the caste system, i guess he doesn't
: : have many followers does he?
: Dear Sri Ace:
Dhruba Chakravarti
Ace (4h...@qlink.queensu.ca) wrote:
: Let me also thank you for taking the time to post an educating reply,
: conversation was enlightening. But you are making an arguement for how
: things should be and unfortunately, it seems, that hindu philosophy has
: been corrupted by a minority and twisted for its own benefit.
Dear Sri Ace:
Thank you for following up. The 'minority' were an influential
minority. I feel that the way the casteist line of thinking has been
forwarded is by reinterpretation of the doctrine of karma.
Many interpreters have not taken the statements on karma made by God in
the Srimad Bhagavad Gita as a whole, but forwarded their hypotheses
from extracted portions from the SBG.
The main rationale for proponents of caste discrimination is, God puts a
person in a caste-orineted birth conditions to enforce a sort of
punishment. But this is extremely far-fetched, and patently inaccurate
thinking. A person is not limited to his birth conditions. Every person
has a free-will to choose and act on a particular course of action, that
overrides the dictates of a particular situation. For this reason, God
told Arjuna, "But after all, you have the choice" (18.63).
All God has said is, He puts a yoga-brashta person in the family of yogis
or yoga-nishTha GYAnis (6.41-42). The yoga-bhrasta is one who believe in
God's authority on the world, but chose not to lead the life of a devotee.
The ones who do not accept God's authority, are called asuras. They are put
in asuric births (i.e., in the family of unbelievers) (16.19). God does not
do castes, he said that He gives people four types of varna qualities (4.13)
as part of his bhAva creation (8.3). These varna qualities make a person
choose his/her natural course of work (18.60), that is distinct from the
actual choice of work. Prince prahlAda was born in an asura family, he chose
to be a devotee. Arjuna chose to fight. In this whole scheme of things, He
says, He remains uninvolved (akartA) (4.13).
Therefore, in my view, caste discrimination is based on a preposterous
argument.
With best regards,
Dhruba.
Raju Agarwal
Jassa,
The point that i was making is that the Caste System is a social custom, not a
religious one.
It was originally the same as "division of labour" but got corrupted with the
passage of time. If blaming the brahmans makes you happy, so be it. But, I
prefer to look for solutions.
As a "revisionist Hindu" I have never denied that the caste system took place
on Indian soil. I am only saying that the Hindu scriptures can be interpreted
if one chooses to do so, to reject casteism. and thereform, Hinduism can and
has been reformed to reject the idea of a heriditary caste system.
btw, how can you call yourself a Sikh and at the same time, hate Hindus and
Hinduism. Why all this Hindu Hatred? Even Guru Gobind Singh praised the
Koran and Islam while denouncing Aurangzeb in Zafarnama. What elements of
Hinduism do you appreciate.
Raju
Ace (4h...@qlink.queensu.ca) wrote:
: CCSO Sites Services client (us...@dev.nul.edu) wrote:
: ...nonsense deleted....
: Brother you never seem to engage in a discussion intelligently. We are
: talking about the caste system and its relation to hinduism. If you have
Destroyer of Nescience
On 17 Jun 1996, Dhruba Chakravarti wrote:
> Ace (4h...@qlink.queensu.ca) wrote:
>
> : The only myth that is being perpetuated is by revisionist Hindus like you
> : who keep pretending that the caste system was never a Hindu practice.
> : Sure the caste system should be abolished but why pretend that Hindus
> : didn't start it?
>
> Dear Sri Ace:
>
> If I may, the name of the greatest Hindu revisionist is: Sri Krishna,
> denouncer of the caste system.
>
> I wonder if you have an opinion about exactly when the caste system was
> started, and by which Hindus?
If you are really interested please read the Rgveda and Bhagvadgita.
"When they divided Man, how many did they make him? What was his mouth?
What his
arms? What are called his thighs and feet?"
--Rgveda X.90.11
And the answer to the question follows:
"The Brahman was his mouth, the rajanya was made from his arms, the
vaisya became
his thighs, the sudra was born from his feet."
--Rgveda, X.90.12
"Those who worship God through proper performance of the duties and
obligations
of their pre-ordained social grade, svakarmanatambhyarcaya, verily, they are
emancipated, siddhimvindati." --Bhagavadgita XVIII.46.
>
> With best regards,
>
> Dhruba.
>
>
>
Destroyer of Nescience
On 18 Jun 1996, Virendra Verma wrote:
> In article <4q49l5$i...@knot.queensu.ca>, 4h...@qlink.queensu.ca (Ace) wrote:
> >Raju Agarwal (raga...@bu.edu) wrote:
> >
>
> >So whatever is socially unacceptable to westerners, i.e. the caste
> >system, should be purged from Hinduism - right?
>
> What did foreigners in India do to purge the caste system when they ruled
> India for 800 years? None whatsoever. Instead, they used this weapon to divide
> Hindus to consolidate their power. Now psecs are using the same casteist
> weapon to continue their legacy.
>
> It was upper caste Hindus like Buddha, Nehru, Gandhi, Raja Ram Mohan Roy etc
> who fought for rights of the lower castes.
>
> >
> >The only myth that is being perpetuated is by revisionist Hindus like you
> >who keep pretending that the caste system was never a Hindu practice.
>
> If you read the Gita, the caste system was not meant to be birth-based
> but based on one's nature and interests. This division based on professional
> interests is quite true even in modern societies.
Destroyer of Nescience
On 19 Jun 1996, Ace wrote:
> Virendra Verma (vve...@crd.lotus.com) wrote:
>
> : What did foreigners in India do to purge the caste system when they ruled
> : India for 800 years? None whatsoever. Instead, they used this weapon to divide
> : Hindus to consolidate their power. Now psecs are using the same casteist
> : weapon to continue their legacy.
>
> You are absolutely right!
>
> : If you read the Gita, the caste system was not meant to be birth-based
> : but based on one's nature and interests. This division based on professional
> : interests is quite true even in modern societies.
>
> If that is indeed the REAL Hindu philosophy then why are the vast
> majority of indians ignorant of it? Your take on the caste system as
> stated above is a philosophy that should be propogated.
>
> : There was definitely a problem with the way upper castes treated lower castes
> : just prior to Moghul invasion. That was the weakness of the Hindu society and
> : they got the lesson. Why do you want to live in the past?
>
> No sir, I am living in the present as are 92% of indians who are not
> "brahmin".
>
> : The word 'caste' does not come from Sanskrit or any other Indian language. It
> : is a Portugese word. If that is the case, the caste system must have been
> : practiced somewhere in the Europe. The concept must have existed Portugese
> : traditions.
>
> The word used to describe the divisions in indian society maybe a foreign
> one but the ideology is still Indian/Hindu.
"When they divided Man, how many did they make him? What was his mouth?
What his
arms? What are called his thighs and feet?"
--Rgveda X.90.11
And the answer to the question follows:
"The Brahman was his mouth, the rajanya was made from his arms, the
vaisya became
his thighs, the sudra was born from his feet."
--Rgveda, X.90.12
Now Raju, the four described above are ussually Hindus, are the not? Or
do you
think Rgveda is describing the Muslims?
Here is some more:
Ace
Raju Agarwal (raga...@bu.edu) wrote:
: btw, how can you call yourself a Sikh and at the same time, hate Hindus and
: Hinduism. Why all this Hindu Hatred? Even Guru Gobind Singh praised the
: Koran and Islam while denouncing Aurangzeb in Zafarnama. What elements of
: Hinduism do you appreciate.
This is wishful thinking on your part, I don't hate hindus. What you are
doing is equating my questioning of some hindu customs with hatred for
hindus. An individual who hates a true Hindu or a true Muslim cannot call
himself a Sikh. But that does not mean that a Sikh will allow his own
co-religionists to be slaughtered by people claiming to be either
muslims or hindus. Also, I should remind you that the roots of the
current Hindu / Sikh conflict go back to the late 19th century when
Sikhs started to assert their distinct identity in response to efforts by
Christian missionaries and Arya Smajis to absorb Sikhs into their
respective folds.
AS for the caste system, whether it is a religious or a social custom,
the fact remains that it is part and parcel of what one may call "Hindu"
philosophy. Some people have argued that caste was never meant to be
connected to one's birth or family but from time
immemorial the idea of caste and birth have been interconnected. However,
I'll leave that for you and Harpreet to work out :)
Harpreet Singh
raga...@acs.bu.edu wrote:
>
>
> Harpreet,
> Here is further evidence of prominent shudras, and Krishna denouncing the
> hereditary caste system.
I would like to see quotes from the Mahabharta.
>
>
> Let me also thank you for taking the time to post an educating reply, I have
> not read
> hindu scriptures but your summary of Arjuna's and Krishna's conversation
> was enlightening. But you are making an arguement for how things should
> be and unfortunately, it seems, that hindu philosophy has been corrupted
> by a minority and twisted for its own benefit.
>
> Dhruba Chakravarti (dcha...@netserv.unmc.edu) wrote:
> : Ace (4h...@qlink.queensu.ca) wrote:
>
> : : Maybe I've been living in a different universe, but are you saying that
> : : Hinduism and Hindus do not believe in the caste system?
>
> : : Brother wake up, who are you trying to fool, atleast the Nazi revisionists
> : : make an attempt at presenting plausible theories to explain how 6 million
> : : people disappeared, but you, i don't know.
>
> : : Also if Krishna tried to eradicate the caste system, i guess he doesn't
> : : have many followers does he?
>
> : Dear Sri Ace:
>
> : Thank you for your response. What I wanted to say was, Hindus *should
> : not* believe in castes. Arjuna talked about the issue of varna-sankaras
> : and their possible bad influence on society in the 1st chapter of the Srimad
> : Bhagavad Gita. For that, Sri Krishna chided him, saying that Arjuna was
> : talking nonsense (chapter 2). I believe that this is sufficient evidence
> : for Sri Krishna's approval of inter-'caste' marriages.
Could somone quote the aforesaid conversations. I'd appreciate it.
>
> : Various famous shudras /varna-sankaras have been known to not only read
> : the vedas, but also be among the seers. Maharshi VyAsa, the compiler of
> : the Vedas, was a varna-sankara. MahidAs aitareya was the son of itarA,
> : never knew his father. Same story with Rishi SatyakAma. Uddalaka
> : Aruni was raised by his single, never-wed mother. There are many, many
> : examples. Even ManusamhitA has references of Shudra-gurus.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Now, this makes not sense. Manu at one place states:
"He the Resplendant, for the sake of protecting all the creatures, assigned
seperate duties to those born of His mouth, arms, thighs and feet. Teaching and
studying the Vedas, making sacrifices and assisting others in so doing, making
gifts: these He assigned to the Brahmans. The protection of the people,
sacrificing and studying the Vedas, non-attachment to sensual pleasures and
giving of gifts: these He prescribed for the kshatriyas. The protection of the
cattle, giving of gifts, sacrificing and study of Vedas, trade, banking and
agriculture, to the Vaisyas. The God allotted only one duty to the sudras: to
serve without demur, the members of all the classes mentioned above."
---Manusmriti 1.87-91.
And you claim that at another place Manu contradicts himself, assigning the
duties of the Brahmans to the Shudras. Can you please also post where Manu gives
reference to Shudra-gurus.
>
> : But as you have said so righteously, the caste discrimination exists
> : today, and it was more sever in the recent past. You have compared the
> : Nazi attitude with the Hindu attitude, but I do not think that it is a
> : good comparison. There is good evidence that even a thousand years ago,
> : boys and girls from all 'caste' families would go to learn Vedas in
> : Gurukulas.
It has been written by many writers that if a Shudra would hear the Vedas, molten
lead would be poured into his ears. This is more consistent with the Hindu
attitude of caste; it is also more consistent with the attitude of Rgveda,
Manusmriti, etc.
Please provide us with the references requested above, so we may assess the
validity of your statements.
--Harpreet Singh
Roy Raja
In article <31CAAD46...@isis.com>,
Harpreet Singh <si...@isis.com> wrote:
>It has been written by many writers that if a Shudra would hear the Vedas, molten
>lead would be poured into his ears. This is more consistent with the Hindu
>attitude of caste; it is also more consistent with the attitude of Rgveda,
>Manusmriti, etc.
Don't equate Rigveda with Manusmriti. There is only one line in Rigveda that
has word Shudra. The pouring of lead in ears is mentioned in Manusmriti, and
not in vedas. Rigveda has no bias towards any caste.
>
>Please provide us with the references requested above, so we may assess the
>validity of your statements.
>
>--Harpreet Singh
Can you provide reference where Veda say anything derogatory about Shudra.
All it says is that Brahman was born from mouth of Purush, Vaishya from
thighs, and shudras from feet. Is your feet inferior than your mouth?
Raja
Dhruba Chakravarti
Harpreet Singh (si...@isis.com) wrote:
: > : I believe that this is sufficient evidence
: > : for Sri Krishna's approval of inter-'caste' marriages.
: Could somone quote the aforesaid conversations. I'd appreciate it.
: > : examples. Even ManusamhitA has references of Shudra-gurus.
: And you claim that at another place Manu contradicts himself, assigning the
: duties of the Brahmans to the Shudras. Can you please also post where Manu
: gives reference to Shudra-gurus.
: It has been written by many writers that if a Shudra would hear the Vedas,
: molten lead would be poured into his ears. This is more consistent
: with the Hindu attitude of caste; it is also more consistent with the
: attitude of Rgveda, Manusmriti, etc.
: Please provide us with the references requested above, so we may assess the
: validity of your statements.
Dear Harpreetji:
We did talk about these references in the past, I will respond to your
questions on Monday.
With best regards,
Dhruba.
N. Tiwari
Destroyer of Nescience (ana...@rpi.edu) wrote:
: On 19 Jun 1996, Ace wrote:
: "When they divided Man, how many did they make him? What was his mouth?
: What his
: arms? What are called his thighs and feet?"
: --Rgveda X.90.11
: And the answer to the question follows:
: "The Brahman was his mouth, the rajanya was made from his arms, the
: vaisya became
: his thighs, the sudra was born from his feet."
: --Rgveda, X.90.12
: Now Raju, the four described above are ussually Hindus, are the not? Or
: do you
: think Rgveda is describing the Muslims?
No. It is a descprition of mankind. Hindus, Muslims and all. People have
all sorts of traits. These traits have been described thru the symbolism
of human form. That is the message. Now, if you have a problem that 'feet
is bad' and 'head is good', that is your problem. So, go and have it
corrected. But some people survive because of their intellect. Some survive
on their physical labor. Each of these people have a place in society.
Each position carries a certain responsibility. So, what is the problem.
: Here is some more:
: "Those who worship God through proper performance of the duties and
: obligations
: of their pre-ordained social grade, svakarmanatambhyarcaya, verily, they are
: emancipated, siddhimvindati." --Bhagavadgita XVIII.46.
One: You are wrong as for your 'pre-ordained' thing. The sva: implies
self. The 'karmana' implies actions. So, this should be the last line
to say that Gita calls for caste based on birth. You are just wrong.
--
Nachiketa Tiwari
=====================================================
750 Tall Oaks Drive 118 Patton Hall
Apt. # 3600 I Virginia Tech
Blacksburg, VA 24060. Blacksburg, VA 24061.
(540)-951-3979 (540)-231-4611
=====================================================
N. Tiwari
Harpreet Singh (si...@isis.com) wrote:
: raga...@acs.bu.edu wrote:
: >
: >
: > Harpreet,
: > Here is further evidence of prominent shudras, and Krishna denouncing the
: > hereditary caste system.
: I would like to see quotes from the Mahabharta.
: > : Thank you for your response. What I wanted to say was, Hindus *should
: > : not* believe in castes. Arjuna talked about the issue of varna-sankaras
: > : and their possible bad influence on society in the 1st chapter of the Srimad
: > : Bhagavad Gita. For that, Sri Krishna chided him, saying that Arjuna was
: > : talking nonsense (chapter 2). I believe that this is sufficient evidence
: > : for Sri Krishna's approval of inter-'caste' marriages.
: Could somone quote the aforesaid conversations. I'd appreciate it.
See the life of Krishna himself. As depicted in Bhagavat. That tells
a lot and answers your question.
: >
: > : Various famous shudras /varna-sankaras have been known to not only read
: > : the vedas, but also be among the seers. Maharshi VyAsa, the compiler of
: > : the Vedas, was a varna-sankara. MahidAs aitareya was the son of itarA,
: > : never knew his father. Same story with Rishi SatyakAma. Uddalaka
: > : Aruni was raised by his single, never-wed mother. There are many, many
: > : examples. Even ManusamhitA has references of Shudra-gurus.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: Now, this makes not sense. Manu at one place states:
: "He the Resplendant, for the sake of protecting all the creatures, assigned
: seperate duties to those born of His mouth, arms, thighs and feet. Teaching and
: studying the Vedas, making sacrifices and assisting others in so doing, making
: gifts: these He assigned to the Brahmans. The protection of the people,
: sacrificing and studying the Vedas, non-attachment to sensual pleasures and
: giving of gifts: these He prescribed for the kshatriyas. The protection of the
: cattle, giving of gifts, sacrificing and study of Vedas, trade, banking and
: agriculture, to the Vaisyas. The God allotted only one duty to the sudras: to
: serve without demur, the members of all the classes mentioned above."
: ---Manusmriti 1.87-91.
So, how could above quote of yours, deny a person born of Sudra from Brahmanical
endeavors. If you do not know, then know that the two greatest Hindu sages,
Vyas and Valmiki were born of Sudras. The Sudra serves others. True. But then
it earns the max. amount of money too. That too is in the Smriti. Further,
what is wrong in service. That is also a social function. Most of us desis
are here for studies, and basically sudras, since we will be serving some company
or other. Without demur. And we have chosen such a lifestyle.
: > : But as you have said so righteously, the caste discrimination exists
: > : today, and it was more sever in the recent past. You have compared the
: > : Nazi attitude with the Hindu attitude, but I do not think that it is a
: > : good comparison. There is good evidence that even a thousand years ago,
: > : boys and girls from all 'caste' families would go to learn Vedas in
: > : Gurukulas.
: It has been written by many writers that if a Shudra would hear the Vedas, molten
: lead would be poured into his ears. This is more consistent with the Hindu
: attitude of caste; it is also more consistent with the attitude of Rgveda,
: Manusmriti, etc.
No. It is not. There are verses in the RgVeda itself, which have been attributed
to Sudra born sages. As for the lead issue, I do not know. I definitely do
not agree with it. But I have heard that it is probably an interpolation.
Saurabh Jang
N. Tiwari (nti...@rs4.esm.vt.edu) wrote:
: No. It is a descprition of mankind. Hindus, Muslims and all. People have
: all sorts of traits. These traits have been described thru the symbolism
: of human form. That is the message. Now, if you have a problem that 'feet
: is bad' and 'head is good', that is your problem. So, go and have it
: corrected. But some people survive because of their intellect. Some survive
: on their physical labor. Each of these people have a place in society.
: Each position carries a certain responsibility. So, what is the problem.
: One: You are wrong as for your 'pre-ordained' thing. The sva: implies
: self. The 'karmana' implies actions. So, this should be the last line
: to say that Gita calls for caste based on birth. You are just wrong.
The above two paragraphs are clearly contradictory. The former can be
viewed as supporting the fact that people have "inherent traits"
as opposed to "acquired traits", because the passage was referring to
the *birth* of the castes. In the second Nachiketa claims that there
is no such thing as "pre-ordained". How does one reconcile the sophistry
here?
Even if the fact that the passage from Rig Veda attached no social
importance in a hierarchial fashion to the four varnas, it has echoes
of Plato's elitist screed "The Republic". I find such an elitist attitude
in a religion unacceptable.
Saurabh
--
Saurabh Jang e-mail: sj...@cs.mtu.edu
MSCS Student www : http://www.cs.mtu.edu/grads/Jang/Home.html
Michigan Tech work #: (906)487-2839
Saurabh Jang
N. Tiwari (nti...@rs4.esm.vt.edu) wrote:
: So, how could above quote of yours, deny a person born of Sudra from Brahmanical
: endeavors. If you do not know, then know that the two greatest Hindu sages,
: Vyas and Valmiki were born of Sudras. The Sudra serves others. True. But then
: it earns the max. amount of money too. That too is in the Smriti. Further,
: what is wrong in service. That is also a social function. Most of us desis
: are here for studies, and basically sudras, since we will be serving some company
: or other. Without demur. And we have chosen such a lifestyle.
Oh really? Why don't you come out and just say openly that "caste is good".
Shudras were supposed to pull in the big bucks? How much was your family
paying the Jamadar/Dhobi/Cook/Servant in India? What the hell do you mean
by "serving without demur"? I certainly will not work for a company that
will expect me to "serve without demurring". What the hell kind of company
is that? What the hell kind of a society is that which expects a large
section of its population to serve "without demur"?
As for your considering yourself to be a Shudra, I'll believe it when
I see a matrimonial for a certain Mr. Nachiketa advertising his caste
as a Shudra.
Puhleez, for one who exhibits considerable sophistication otherwise,
your post was just plain dumb. Even a 2 year old would be hard pressed to
take it at face value.
N. Tiwari
Saurabh Jang (sj...@mtu.edu) wrote:
: N. Tiwari (nti...@rs4.esm.vt.edu) wrote:
: : No. It is a descprition of mankind. Hindus, Muslims and all. People have
: : all sorts of traits. These traits have been described thru the symbolism
: : of human form. That is the message. Now, if you have a problem that 'feet
: : is bad' and 'head is good', that is your problem. So, go and have it
: : corrected. But some people survive because of their intellect. Some survive
: : on their physical labor. Each of these people have a place in society.
: : Each position carries a certain responsibility. So, what is the problem.
: : One: You are wrong as for your 'pre-ordained' thing. The sva: implies
: : self. The 'karmana' implies actions. So, this should be the last line
: : to say that Gita calls for caste based on birth. You are just wrong.
: The above two paragraphs are clearly contradictory. The former can be
: viewed as supporting the fact that people have "inherent traits"
: as opposed to "acquired traits", because the passage was referring to
: the *birth* of the castes. In the second Nachiketa claims that there
: is no such thing as "pre-ordained". How does one reconcile the sophistry
: here?
There is no sophistry. There is no contradiction. Let me explain.
You have inherent traits, as well as you have 'acquired traits'.
The former are there because of fate/probability/past-life...
The latter are in a general sense because of your own acts.
Truth, I think is wonderfully simple, if we learn to integerate.
Differentiation (as advocated by Newton, Descarte) complicates
it. So, for some reason, I might be born in a miserable state.
But I can move on further. That will be due to 'my' actions.
That is the message of Gitaa. That is why Arjun was asked to
fight.
: Even if the fact that the passage from Rig Veda attached no social
: importance in a hierarchial fashion to the four varnas, it has echoes
: of Plato's elitist screed "The Republic". I find such an elitist attitude
: in a religion unacceptable.
I do not know what is elitist about having a head, as well as a
pair of legs. It is in our mind that head is considered as superior
over feet. So, if there is elitism, it is in our minds.
N. Tiwari
: : endeavors. If you do not know, then know that the two greatest Hindu sages,
: : Vyas and Valmiki were born of Sudras. The Sudra serves others. True. But then
: : it earns the max. amount of money too. That too is in the Smriti. Further,
: : what is wrong in service. That is also a social function. Most of us desis
: : are here for studies, and basically sudras, since we will be serving some company
: : or other. Without demur. And we have chosen such a lifestyle.
: Oh really? Why don't you come out and just say openly that "caste is good".
: Shudras were supposed to pull in the big bucks? How much was your family
: paying the Jamadar/Dhobi/Cook/Servant in India? What the hell do you mean
: by "serving without demur"? I certainly will not work for a company that
: will expect me to "serve without demurring". What the hell kind of company
: is that? What the hell kind of a society is that which expects a large
: section of its population to serve "without demur"?
You can argue about the 'without demur' thing. But look at
what a receptionist does. Serving without demur. Is it bad.
Is it good. Or is it just 'is'. Think about it. Some people
may like to do it. SOme people do it out of helplessness.
But there will always be folks in all sorts of positions.
Equality, as advocated by West is just in the minds. However,
what we must try to ensure 'justice'. So that no one takes
advantage of other. The two are different.
As about me serving as a dhobi/chamar or not, I will give
you one interesting example. Recently, I heard that in
Delhi, folks from very rich families LIKE to work as
helpers in KFC. They get a good salary, and that is a
good incentive. When someone asked some of these folks
whether these guys would like to work for Tribhovandas
Bhimji Zaveri's shop and get the same money, these folks
refused. Why??
Also, there is a saying in Hindi:
'chota chamar, chota chamar, bada chamar Bata'
chota lohar, chota lohar, bada lohar Tata'.
So, in our modern society, it is money that has driven
all of us (esp we the here in US) to do all kinds of
jobs. For money. And that is basically a Shudra like
behavior. The Brahmin is not supposed to work for money.
He is supposed to work just for work. In that sense, I
think that most of us, atleast in the US, are Shudras.
Saurabh Jang
N. Tiwari (nti...@rs3.esm.vt.edu) wrote:
: Equality, as advocated by West is just in the minds. However,
: what we must try to ensure 'justice'. So that no one takes
: advantage of other. The two are different.
Thank you for this statement. I now understand the mindset of the orthodox
Hindutva crowd. So all the mysticism, spirituality etc. etc. of Hinduism
is all crap; essentially it is a cynical and hardnosed reilgion. Right?
: As about me serving as a dhobi/chamar or not, I will give
: you one interesting example. Recently, I heard that in
: Delhi, folks from very rich families LIKE to work as
: helpers in KFC. They get a good salary, and that is a
: good incentive. When someone asked some of these folks
: whether these guys would like to work for Tribhovandas
: Bhimji Zaveri's shop and get the same money, these folks
: refused. Why??
Well may be because the environment in KFC is more hep? Maybe
because the crowd that frequents these places is of their
age group?
Also, I wasn't asking you why you didn't serve as a Dhobi etc.
I was asking you how much your family paid these service providers
back in India. this was intended to refute your assertion that
Shudras were supposed to be raking in the big bucks.
: So, in our modern society, it is money that has driven
: all of us (esp we the here in US) to do all kinds of
: jobs. For money. And that is basically a Shudra like
: behavior. The Brahmin is not supposed to work for money.
: He is supposed to work just for work. In that sense, I
: think that most of us, atleast in the US, are Shudras.
I find it amazing that an intelligent person like you could reduce
the motivation of a job to the amount of money it generates for us.
Clearly, you have very little understanding of motivation. Read about
Maslow's hierarchy of needs and wants to get a more enlightened idea.
Destroyer of Nescience
On 21 Jun 1996, N. Tiwari wrote:
> : >
> : > Harpreet,
> : > Here is further evidence of prominent shudras, and Krishna denouncing the
> : > hereditary caste system.
>
> : I would like to see quotes from the Mahabharta.
>
> : > : Thank you for your response. What I wanted to say was, Hindus *should
> : > : not* believe in castes. Arjuna talked about the issue of varna-sankaras
> : > : and their possible bad influence on society in the 1st chapter of the Srimad
> : > : Bhagavad Gita. For that, Sri Krishna chided him, saying that Arjuna was
> : > : talking nonsense (chapter 2). I believe that this is sufficient evidence
> : > : for Sri Krishna's approval of inter-'caste' marriages.
>
> : Could somone quote the aforesaid conversations. I'd appreciate it.
>
> See the life of Krishna himself. As depicted in Bhagavat. That tells
> a lot and answers your question.
Tiwari, you are not just a liar, but also dumb. I asked for quotes, not
your views.
>
> : >
> : > : Various famous shudras /varna-sankaras have been known to not only read
> : > : the vedas, but also be among the seers. Maharshi VyAsa, the compiler of
> : > : the Vedas, was a varna-sankara. MahidAs aitareya was the son of itarA,
> : > : never knew his father. Same story with Rishi SatyakAma. Uddalaka
> : > : Aruni was raised by his single, never-wed mother. There are many, many
> : > : examples. Even ManusamhitA has references of Shudra-gurus.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> : Now, this makes not sense. Manu at one place states:
>
> : "He the Resplendant, for the sake of protecting all the creatures, assigned
> : seperate duties to those born of His mouth, arms, thighs and feet. Teaching and
> : studying the Vedas, making sacrifices and assisting others in so doing, making
> : gifts: these He assigned to the Brahmans. The protection of the people,
> : sacrificing and studying the Vedas, non-attachment to sensual pleasures and
> : giving of gifts: these He prescribed for the kshatriyas. The protection of the
> : cattle, giving of gifts, sacrificing and study of Vedas, trade, banking and
> : agriculture, to the Vaisyas. The God allotted only one duty to the sudras: to
> : serve without demur, the members of all the classes mentioned above."
> : ---Manusmriti 1.87-91.
>
> So, how could above quote of yours, deny a person born of Sudra from Brahmanical
> endeavors. If you do not know, then know that the two greatest Hindu sages,
The above quote is assigning duties based on caste.
> Vyas and Valmiki were born of Sudras. The Sudra serves others. True. But then
> it earns the max. amount of money too. That too is in the Smriti. Further,
> what is wrong in service. That is also a social function. Most of us desis
> are here for studies, and basically sudras, since we will be serving some company
> or other. Without demur. And we have chosen such a lifestyle.
You are truly an imbecile, sorry for the reiteration. Those shudras who
are here for studies are studing only because they have renounced the
Hindu tradition of casteism. They have only succeeded in the secular
world and they were downtrodden in the Hindu world.
>
> : > : But as you have said so righteously, the caste discrimination exists
> : > : today, and it was more sever in the recent past. You have compared the
> : > : Nazi attitude with the Hindu attitude, but I do not think that it is a
> : > : good comparison. There is good evidence that even a thousand years ago,
> : > : boys and girls from all 'caste' families would go to learn Vedas in
> : > : Gurukulas.
>
> : It has been written by many writers that if a Shudra would hear the Vedas, molten
> : lead would be poured into his ears. This is more consistent with the Hindu
> : attitude of caste; it is also more consistent with the attitude of Rgveda,
> : Manusmriti, etc.
>
> No. It is not. There are verses in the RgVeda itself, which have been attributed
> to Sudra born sages. As for the lead issue, I do not know. I definitely do
> not agree with it. But I have heard that it is probably an interpolation.
Again you are lying--give me quotes.
--Harpreet Singh
Destroyer of Nescience
On 21 Jun 1996, N. Tiwari wrote:
> Destroyer of Nescience (ana...@rpi.edu) wrote:
>
>
> : On 19 Jun 1996, Ace wrote:
>
>
> : "When they divided Man, how many did they make him? What was his mouth?
> : What his
> : arms? What are called his thighs and feet?"
> : --Rgveda X.90.11
>
> : And the answer to the question follows:
>
> : "The Brahman was his mouth, the rajanya was made from his arms, the
> : vaisya became
> : his thighs, the sudra was born from his feet."
> : --Rgveda, X.90.12
>
> : Now Raju, the four described above are ussually Hindus, are the not? Or
> : do you
> : think Rgveda is describing the Muslims?
>
> No. It is a descprition of mankind. Hindus, Muslims and all. People have
> all sorts of traits. These traits have been described thru the symbolism
> of human form. That is the message. Now, if you have a problem that 'feet
> is bad' and 'head is good', that is your problem. So, go and have it
> corrected. But some people survive because of their intellect. Some survive
> on their physical labor. Each of these people have a place in society.
> Each position carries a certain responsibility. So, what is the problem.
Ignorant man, these are your interpretations and are completely false.
If you think casteism originated from thin air, and the job of a Brahmin is
equivalent in prestige to that of a Shudra, you are deluded. Take a look
at the Hindu society, before uttering your nonsense.
>
> : Here is some more:
>
> : "Those who worship God through proper performance of the duties and
> : obligations
> : of their pre-ordained social grade, svakarmanatambhyarcaya, verily, they are
> : emancipated, siddhimvindati." --Bhagavadgita XVIII.46.
>
> One: You are wrong as for your 'pre-ordained' thing. The sva: implies
> self. The 'karmana' implies actions. So, this should be the last line
What happened to the rest of the word. This translation has been taken
from "Prasaraprasna" in its entirety. The man who translated these
verses is a scholar, and not an ignorant one like you. I will post the
same traslation by a different author.
> to say that Gita calls for caste based on birth. You are just wrong.
Show me where does gita criticize casteism and I will stop calling you a
liar.
Dhruba Chakravarti
: Harpreet Singh (si...@isis.com) wrote:
: : > : I believe that this is sufficient evidence
: : > : for Sri Krishna's approval of inter-'caste' marriages.
: : Could somone quote the aforesaid conversations. I'd appreciate it.
: : > : examples. Even ManusamhitA has references of Shudra-gurus.
: : And you claim that at another place Manu contradicts himself, assigning the
: : duties of the Brahmans to the Shudras. Can you please also post where Manu
: : gives reference to Shudra-gurus.
: : It has been written by many writers that if a Shudra would hear the Vedas,
: : molten lead would be poured into his ears. This is more consistent
: : with the Hindu attitude of caste; it is also more consistent with the
: : attitude of Rgveda, Manusmriti, etc.
: : Please provide us with the references requested above, so we may assess the
: : validity of your statements.
Dear Harpreetji:
The Shudra-guru reference in ManusaMhitA is:
bhutakAdhyApako yascha bhR^itakAdhyApitastathA.
shudroshishhyo guruschaiva vAgdushhTaH kundagolakau 3.156.
This verse is in the context of determining the social acceptability of a
brahmin. Manu asks that one should not employ such people who take money
for teaching, or a student who have recieved education from such a
teacher, or from a Shudra-teacher or himself a Shudra student or a
bad-mouthed person, or if he is an illegitimate son (kunda and golaka type).
This verse and many other verses like this indicate that even during
Manu's time, many did not follow his laws, and education was not
restricted to anybody.
The verses that I will refer to from the Srimad Bhagavad Gita on the
issue of 'caste'-mixing are:
Arjuna argues:
adharmAdhibhavat.h kR^ishna pradushyanti kulastriyaH
strishu dushtAsu vArshneya jAyate varnasankara. 1.40
(O KR^ishna! From the emergence of adharma, women of the families become
of bad character; O descendant of vR^ishni! when the women become of bad
character, caste-mixing occurs.)
sankaro narakAyaiva kulaghnAnaM kulasya cha
patanti pitaro hyeshhAM luptapindadakokriyaH. 1.41
(When there is caste mixing, they become the reason for the going to
hell of both the families and their destroyers, because they fall (into
hell) from not having pinda-water.)
etc.etc.
His main theme is: If we kill these family members, we will cause the
'caste'-mixing, since, there would be no men left in the family, which in
turn would discontinue the pinda-water giving to the dead forefathers,
resulting in everybody going to hell. Therefore, by thinking ahead, he
thinks if the sons of dR^tarAshhTra killed him, it would be eventually
better.
Saying these, Arjuna gave up the bow and sat down.
Sri Krishna replied:
kutastvA kashmalamidaM vishhame samupasthitaM
anAryajustaM asvargyaM akIrtikaraM arjuna. 2.2
(In this difficult time, wherefrom you have this anArya-like unheavenly
inglorious delusion?)
anArya means unsophisticated.
One of the reasons He such strongly rebuked Arjuna is of course, for
giving up on fighting. But this also reflects on Arjuna's conjecture on
'caste'-mixing (varna is color of a person's personality). This is
evident later when He says about Arjuna's comprehension of the shAstras:
yada te mohakalilaM buddhirvyatitarishhyati
tadA gantAsi nirvedaM shrotavysya shrutasya cha. 2.52
(when your intelligence will go beyond the difficultly traversed delusion,
then all the shAstras that you have heard, or will hear, you will become
aloof about those (nirvedaM gantAsi).
In other words, such concerns won't bother you then.
There is a verse in chapter 3, that also touches on this subject,
indirectly.
utsideyurime lokA na kuryAM karma chedahaM
sankarasya cha kartA syAmupahanyamimAH prajaH. 3.24
Sri Krishna says:
(If I do not work, then the humanity will be destroyed, I will be the
reason for confusion and destroy the subjects (of the kingdom).)
Some interpreters have translated the 'sankara' as varna-sankara, but
that is an imposition on the text. I like the translation of Sri
Aurobindo, who translated it simply as 'confusion'. God always works,
that He said in the verse just before this one, and since varna is inner
qualities in a person, and each person has a complex, and unique set of
qualities, all of us are varna-sankaras. That is how we are unique.
I cited this verse, just to make sure that we've dealt with this issue
adequately.
With best regards,
Dhruba.
Virendra Verma
In article <DtD35...@ecf.toronto.edu>,
raj...@ecf.toronto.edu (Roy Raja) wrote:
>In article <31CAAD46...@isis.com>,
et Singh
>
> Can you provide reference where Veda say anything derogatory about Shudra.
> All it says is that Brahman was born from mouth of Purush, Vaishya from
> thighs, and shudras from feet. Is your feet inferior than your mouth?
>
> Raja
This is wrong. Please read the translation of the verse by Swami Dayananda
Saraswati in his Satyarthprakash. Also, check the characterstics of Brahmin,
Kshatrya, Vaishya and Shudra as described in the Gita. If these two sources
are combined, it makes sense. Some idiot Sayana translated those verses as
above. Most western scholars (and some sikhs too who want khalistan by
1999!!!) have taken Sayana literally because his translations fulfill their
motive and agenda.
Sayana was a great proponent of Brahminism.
Fellow Indians don't be your own (cultural) enemies out of ignorance by
following Sayana.
Rajwinder Singh
On Sun, 23 Jun 1996, Destroyer of Nescience wrote:
> > : "Those who worship God through proper performance of the duties and
> > : obligations
> > : of their pre-ordained social grade, svakarmanatambhyarcaya, verily, they are
> > : emancipated, siddhimvindati." --Bhagavadgita XVIII.46.
> >
> > One: You are wrong as for your 'pre-ordained' thing. The sva: implies
> > self. The 'karmana' implies actions. So, this should be the last line
>
> What happened to the rest of the word. This translation has been taken
> from "Prasaraprasna" in its entirety. The man who translated these
> verses is a scholar, and not an ignorant one like you. I will post the
> same traslation by a different author.
>
> > to say that Gita calls for caste based on birth. You are just wrong.
>
> Show me where does gita criticize casteism and I will stop calling you a
> liar.
I checked out a few different translations of the Gita at the bookstore.
In 18-46, 47 48 the translations say, either "one's natural-born work" or
the work one is "born into" -- these a re unmistakable pointers to
casteism. I will post more later. But, Pandit Nachiketa Tiwari ji can
stop hollering refrains of denial.
rs
Dhruba Chakravarti
: raj...@ecf.toronto.edu (Roy Raja) wrote:
: > Can you provide reference where Veda say anything derogatory about Shudra.
: > All it says is that Brahman was born from mouth of Purush, Vaishya from
: > thighs, and shudras from feet. Is your feet inferior than your mouth?
: >
: > Raja
Dear Rajaji:
Thank you for participating in this discussion. The issue is about judging
God. Is God's feet less holy than His mouth? This is inherently a bogus
argument, although it is found in the ManusaMhitA. If God's feet were
any less holy, all the mantras we say asking for a place at His feet
would be misdirected, should we not instead ask for a place in His mouth?
The verse in question, appear to a symbolic representation of the
position of people of the four varna-types in society. For example,
people of the brahmin varna type deal mostly with teaching, a profession
that uses the mouth, people of the kshatriya varna type would deal mostly
with warfare, that uses the hands, the vaisya varna types represent the
economic structure of the society, and this is represented by the thighs
and people of the shudra varna type deal with various manual jobs, that
is symbolized by the feet. As society needs all four types of artisans.
No one is more or less required for the survival of the society.
With best regards,
Dhruba.
Rajiv Varma
In article <Pine.OSF.3.91.960625105706.11977A-100000@otto>,
Rajwinder Singh <rajwi@otto> wrote:
>
>I checked out a few different translations of the Gita at the bookstore.
>In 18-46, 47 48 the translations say, either "one's natural-born work" or
>the work one is "born into" -- these a re unmistakable pointers to
>casteism. I will post more later. But, Pandit Nachiketa Tiwari ji can
>stop hollering refrains of denial.
>
>rs
>
repost from last year ....
Is Casteism the *Soul* of Hinduism?
--------------------------------
Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, after briefly describing the system of four varnas,
writes:
"This is called by the Hindus the Varna Vyavastha. It is the very soul of
Hinduism. Without Varna Vyavastha there is nothing else in Hinduism to
distinguish it from other religions."
(Writing and Speeches. Vol. 4, p. 189)
Let's look at this statement of Babasaheb carefully. How correct is it?
First of all Dr. sahib is not differentiating between "jati" and "varna."
Varna as discussed earlier, was a CLASS-SYSTEM, which had nothing to do
with birth-based determination of place in the society. Babasaheb was no
communist, or M.N. Roy follower who would believe in the asinine
Marxist-notion of socio-economic utopia.
Now, those enemies of Hindu society who consider the severest condemnation
of the caste-system a self-evident matter, usually proceed to blacken
Hinduism by arguing that caste is the inherent and inalienable dimension
of Hinduism. In contemporary missionary propaganda, the equation of caste
and Hinduism is emphasized. Those researchers who have imbibed this line
of thought, formulate it explicitly. Harold A. Gould summarizes: "Most
have found caste an integral and inalienable part of the Hindu religion."
And he himself agrees: "This ancient social institution was the necessary
sociological menifestation of the underlying moral and philosophical
presuppositions of Hinduism. Without traditional Hinduism there could have
been no caste system. Without the caste system traditional Hindu values
would have been inexpressible." ["The Sacralization of a Social Order," by
Harold A. Gould, Chanakya Publications, Delhi, 1987].
Two very different backgrounds (Dr. Ambedkar and Gould), converging on the
same conclusion, the former by accident, latter perhaps by design. Let us
see what to think of this fairly common identification of Hinduism and
caste.
One might say that the caste system has been Hinduism's body for a long
time, the concrete structure with which Hindu culture organized its social
dimension. But that is something very different from saying that caste is
the soul of Hinduism, its intrinsic essence.
Dutch scholar Peter van der Veer writes that caste may not be as
all-pervading or intrinsic to Hinduism as is usually claimed. He states:
"The idea that caste is the basis of the Indian social order and that to
be a Hindu is to be a member of a caste became an axiom in the British
period. What actually happened during that period was probably a process
of caste formation and more rigid systematization due to administrative
and ideological pressure from the colonial system, which reminds us of the
so-called 'secondary tribalization in Africa'." ["Gods on Earth," Peter
van der Veer, Oxford University Press, Delhi 1989, p. 53]
Now first we can remark the circularity in the aforementioned argument
exemplified by Gould. "Traditional Hinduism", of which it is asserted that
it could not exist without the caste system, is in fact defined as that
stream in Indian culture and religion which recognized caste, as opposed
to "heterodox" streams which are believed to be without caste and even
(erroneously) described as "revolts against caste." There is no attempt
to define "caste" and "traditional Hinduism" separately and then to
demonstrate the link between the two: they are equated a priori.
Therefore, for an objective analysis, let us take up "caste" and "the
values of traditional Hinduism" separately, and see where exactly they
meet. First of all, as stated above "jaati" and "varna" should be
distinguished, both INEXACTLY translated as "caste." The division of
society into different functions, four varnas, each with its duties and
privileges, exists in most societies. Yet, the difference in status, with
specific duties and privileges, including different penal codes (as per
the Dharma Shastras), has seldom been so consciously systematized as in
Hindu tradition. However, the division most typical of Hindu society in
the last few millennia, and the one considered so outrageously unjust
because of its determination of status by birth, is the division in
"jatis", which may or may not follow and further subdivide the "varna"
distinctions.
It must be repeated again and again that these divisions of societies into
endogamous groups with hereditary social roles have also existed
elsewhere, e.g. the European nobility with its hereditary leadership role,
or the Japanese "burakumin" with their inherited "untouchability," or the
hereditary guilds of blacksmiths and of musicians in West Africa. In China
and Japan, the rule that professions had to remain in the same family and
that the son had to continue the father's trade, has been imposed under
certain dynasties. A number of vanishing primitive societies have been
recorded as entertaining divisions in endogamous groups, i.e. the
'jaatis'. Again, we can accept that the division in endogamous groups has
nowhere been so systematized and on such a large scale as the Hindu caste
system.
Okay .....
Now in what sense one could say that the division in endogamous groups was
necessary for expressing traditional Hindu values? In the Rig Veda, we
find no trace of this division. In its tenth and last book, there is
mention of the four varnas springing from the different parts of Bramha's
body, but that is a different matter altogether: as Dr. Ambedkar himself
says, the Vedic varnas constitute a class system, not a caste system.
Central Hindu values expressed in the Rig Veda could do without the "jati"
system.
What are these Vedic values?
Among these values, there is first of all "Rta", the world order. This at
once sounds like the justification par excellence for social division: for
"varna", NOT FOR "jati". The year is ordered by division in seasons
("Rtu") with their own typical outlook and characteristic activities, and
similarly society should be divided in classes with their own duties and
distinctive customs. Alright, but such divisions have existed in most
societies: they all recognize that different functional classes ("varnas")
as well as different age groups ("ashramas", life stages) have their
distinctive duties and customs. In that sense, "varnashramadharma" has
been a universal phenomenon, only Hindus have theorized a bit more upon
it. Neither here nor there does it require a division in endogamous groups
with a hereditary monopoly on specific professions.
Another Vedic core value ......
Akin to Rta, there is "Satya", truthfulness. At the worldly level,
truthfulness implies being true to one's own inner qualities, to one's
vocation. As there are human being of different qualities ("gunas",
symbolically corresponding to "colors" in the Vedic lore, 'varnas' -- this
is only symbolic representation - NOTHING TO DO WITH RACE!), so their are
different social roles to be filled by people with the appropriate
vocation. This virtue of truthfulness to one's own natural ability is
sometimes quite in conflict with the restriction of professions to
hereditary castes. There are many cases where people are not sincerely
inclined to folow in their parents' footsteps. So, the imposition of
hereditary professions is only compatible with "Satya" to the extent that
natural inclination is hereditary; in general, "Satya" requires the
freedom of individuals to follow their own vocation, which may differ from
that of their ancestors.
So ... there goes the theory that Vedas are casteist.
After core Vedic values, let's take a look at the Bhagvad Gita .....
In the Gita, the link between truthfulness and vocation or worldly
function is explicitly made in the notion of "Swadharma" (one's own duty).
The exact definition of Swadharma is a matter of dispute, and is crucial
to the link between caste and the Hindu ethos. It is often translated as
"one's own caste duty", both by traditionalists and detractors of
Hinduism. Reformers, on the other hand, claim that it is to be interpreted
as "individual vocation", somewhat along the lines of Nietzsche's
individualistic dictum: "There is only one way in the world which no one
can go but you. Where it leads, don't ask: follow it!"
One may very well say that this individualistic interpretation is not in
agreement with the context of sncient Hindu culture. In this traditional
vision, we may not think we are all that unique: though there are
different types of people, most will fall into one of the existing types,
or "varnas". So, Arjuna is called upon to do a duty which is not all that
unique, viz. to fight. Arjuna's swadharma is Kshatriyadharma. [Similarly,
the swadharma of the Indian Armed Forces is also Kshatriyadharma, so is
the "swadharma" of the American or the Russian Army .......therefore,
Kshatriyadharma is a universal phenomenon.]
But with the above, the crucial question is varna, and with it "swadharma"
dependent on one's birth ???
In Gita, Arjuna justifies his inaction by painting all the effects which
the battle between the Pandavas and his Kaurava relatives would have, and
one of them is that the women lose their virtue and thereby cause
"varnasamkara" (mixture of varnas). Clearly, a sexual mixing of varnas is
intended, and depicted as utterly disastarous, which perhaps implies
endogamy is upheld as an essential virtue.
HOWEVER, it is not Krishna who is saying this, it is the vacillating
Arjuna. So it is not normative. The point at which the attention should
rather go is that nowhere Krishna preaches endogamy.
Further, Yudhishtir, the other far-sighted protagonist in the Mahabharata,
of which Gita forms a part, and the only actual survivor of the war, says
in so many words that one is not a Brahmin by birth or by externals.
Therefore, Mahabharata may not be describing a caste-less (i.e. jati-less)
society, but it is NOT advocating caste (jati) either.
At any rate, the term "Swadharma" can perfectly be interpreted as meaning:
"duty grounded in one's natural quality"
rather than
"hereditary duty."
.......... hope this helps this debate.
--
regards,
Rajiv
Saurabh Jang
unfortunately, some people seem to have an unhealthy fascination for the
concept of Varna Vyavastha and will go to any lengths to justify it.
As far as the last name thing goes, doesn't it already kind of exist in
parts of South India where the last name doesn't denote caste origins
but the name of the father/grandfather?
Sameer Ashok Datar (sad...@jove.acs.unt.edu) wrote:
: Very good question. And since you have identified yourself as a sort of a
: supporter of the BJP you cannot be dismissed as another "brainwashed
: Psecular whatchamacallit" or whatever term is in vogue among the langot
: brigade nowadays. To paraphrase Shakespeare, something has been rotten in
: the kingdom of Hinduism for a long time now, and instead of harking back
: to the inequitable glorious past, it is time to move on. Admit that the
: concept of Varna is junk and accept that all people are equal.
: My suggestion for a possible solution to the caste mess, is to randomly
: assign everybody new lastnames. Many is the time reactionary relatives would
: try to find out friends' lastnames (especially those of the opposite sex)
: to figure out the particular subcaste!
Ah, this does lead to some awkward situations! It's sometimes a problem
for me coz my last name is kinda hard to figure thanks to a clerical error
that snipped of my dad's last name and substituted his middle name for
that. At various times it has led to my being mistaken for a Muslim,
a Nepali, and even a Chinese (the person hadn't seen me)! A further
source of confusion is common surnames like Singh. A cousin of mine who
works as an IAS officer in Haryana has been mistaken for a fellow-Rajput
by his boss, who is apparently extra-nice to my cousin in light of this
common bond. My cousin figures that if his boss is dumb enough to make this
assumption despite being in a state abounding with Jats where the surname
Singh is very common, why put the casteist prick out of his ignorance?
: Sameer
Saurabh Jang
: "Varna"-wise I don't know what I am, neither do I care, nor does it
: matter today.
: While explaining something from the past, does not mean I endorse it
: today.
: [As far as personally I am concerned I follow Dr. Hedgewar ji's
: perspective of caste, or jaati, or varna, i.e. sooner this institution
: dies, better for the Hindu unity.]
Well, good to see you coming around to a more modern point of view. Hope
this isn't simply a case of getting tired of defending the indefensible.
: In expectation of another smart remark from your honor ..... :)
Rajiv ji, aap to vyarth hi chinta karte hain! Hum to keval Prashna
pooch rahe the, naaraz kyon hote hain!
(Rajiv ji, you worry yourself for no reason. I was only asking questions,
why are you getting irritated?)
:-)
Rajwinder Singh
>repost from last year ....
>Is Casteism the *Soul* of Hinduism?
>--------------------------------
>Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, after briefly describing the system of four varnas,
>writes:
[obfuscative junk deleted]
Panda-wannabe Mian Varma, you do not have to read Ambedkar to
see casteism -- Hindu society has a history of millenia of casteism,
and scriptures enforcing it.
rs
p.s. Once again:
_____________________________________________________________________
Rajwinder Singh
> Can you provide reference where Veda say anything derogatory about Shudra.
> All it says is that Brahman was born from mouth of Purush, Vaishya from
> thighs, and shudras from feet. Is your feet inferior than your mouth?
Why should the Shudras accept the propaganda that they are born from
the feet of the Purush? Would you agree to shove your foot up your mouth?
Only a foot-fetishist will touch his or someone else's feet with his mouth.
This also blows the hot air out of Raju Agarwal and Tiwari's arguments --
The Ved says that Shudras, Brahmins, Khatris and Vaishas are BORN, from
various organs of the Purush. Gita also lays out clearly what the work
suitable for each Varna is. Combining the two, we have a full explanation
for the casteism blight in Indian society. There is absolutely no
mention of how one's "nature" makes one born from a particular part of
Purush's body -- it is the other way round: the caste you are
born in decides what your "nature" is.
Undeniable, no matter how loudly the apologists deny it.
rs
Sameer Ashok Datar
Why, oh buddy did you delete '"psecular westernized whatchamacallit" or
whatever the langot brigade is using'. How does it qualify as 'non-sensical
vile invective' compared to the filth you spew?
> [non-sensical vile invectives deleted]
>
> And since when Shakespeare became an authority on Hinduism?
>
Since you decided to use English for your diatribes.
> >
> >the kingdom of Hinduism for a long time now, and instead of harking back
> >to the inequitable glorious past, it is time to move on. Admit that the
> >
>
> I don't think anybody is harking back to "glorious" past as far as caste
> is concerned.
>
>
> >
> >concept of Varna is junk and accept that all people are equal.
> >
>
> And this can never be done by Hindu and Hinduism haters. If it is a Hindu
> mess, it will be cleaned none-other than the Hindus.
>
But by your logic, I am a Hindu, so I have every right to comment about
the mess.
If Pseculars, marxists, and Shakespearean idiots of all kinds attack
> Hinduism, hiding behind the facade of "social reforms" ... there will be
> battle and there will be war
This prescription sounds awfully like that of the mullahcrats who insist that
only Muslims can take care of problems in Islam.
> >
> >My suggestion for a possible solution to the caste mess, is to randomly
> >assign everybody new lastnames.
> >
>
> Noble intentions. But this is unimplementable. Tell me how you are going
> to implement it. Pass a constitutional provision?
>
Hey its no more impractical than the silly schemes of the Hindutva
brigade. Demonizing the opposition and trying to impose a one size fits
all ideology on a vast and diverse country is not the way to go.
> The only way this system can be eliminated is through a long and ardous
> journey of cleaning of the minds, matched with experience and action.
> There are no short-cuts. Bit by bit and byte by byte. That's how it works.
>
> Even if you somehow get everyone change their last names, the feeling will
> persist.
>
Sure but strangers won't know.
BTW what would happen to self-avowed atheists in the forthcoming Ram
Rajya II?
Any langots care to elaborate. Especially if they changed their name to
oh say Mohammed Islam or something like that:-)
Sameer
Sameer Ashok Datar
> This is the kind of reply that I was expecting to hear from Rajiv Ji, but
> unfortunately, some people seem to have an unhealthy fascination for the
> concept of Varna Vyavastha and will go to any lengths to justify it.
> As far as the last name thing goes, doesn't it already kind of exist in
> parts of South India where the last name doesn't denote caste origins
> but the name of the father/grandfather?
>
Probably does, I was just speaking from experience about the situation in
Maharashtra and Gujarat where everybody has a well-defined surname
(family name) which passes down father to son and definitely indicates caste.
I believe in Bengal, Orissa and Assam also they have surnames which
denote caste. Anyways, the beauty of the my suggestion is it can be used
on a national scale thus promoting integration across regional lines as
well. Imagine a Marathi Dasgupta or a Tamil Jang or a Assamese Datar or a
Punjabi Sankaran. Would confuse bigots everywhere!
>
> Ah, this does lead to some awkward situations! It's sometimes a problem
> for me coz my last name is kinda hard to figure thanks to a clerical error
> that snipped of my dad's last name and substituted his middle name for
> that. At various times it has led to my being mistaken for a Muslim,
> a Nepali, and even a Chinese (the person hadn't seen me)! A further
> source of confusion is common surnames like Singh. A cousin of mine who
> works as an IAS officer in Haryana has been mistaken for a fellow-Rajput
> by his boss, who is apparently extra-nice to my cousin in light of this
> common bond. My cousin figures that if his boss is dumb enough to make this
> assumption despite being in a state abounding with Jats where the surname
> Singh is very common, why put the casteist prick out of his ignorance?
>
> Saurabh
Hopefully in the ensuing confusion, bigots will realise their silliness
and maybe come to their senses. True there are hitches, but hey nothing
else has worked so far. And as one would like to pound into the langot
peabrains, one needs to look into the future not hanker for the past..
Thats the reason why a lot of "non-commie", "psecular" people do NOT like
the BJP. It is impossible to separate the sensible parts of the BJP from the
langot riff-raff.
Sameer
Rajwinder Singh
> This is the kind of reply that I was expecting to hear from Rajiv Ji, but
> unfortunately, some people seem to have an unhealthy fascination for the
> concept of Varna Vyavastha and will go to any lengths to justify it.
> As far as the last name thing goes, doesn't it already kind of exist in
> parts of South India where the last name doesn't denote caste origins
> but the name of the father/grandfather?
Sounds good. Shall we start calling the erstwhile Rajiv Varma with a new
name: Rajiv Ansari?
Rajiv Varma
>Rajiv Varma (rva...@stallion.jsums.edu) wrote on 25 Jun 1996 23:17:28 -0500:
>
>>Is Casteism the *Soul* of Hinduism?
>>--------------------------------
>
>>Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, after briefly describing the system of four varnas,
>>writes:
>
>
" Bhains ke aage been bajaye
Bhains khadi paguray " :-)
>
>rs
>
--
regards,
Rajiv
Raja V
>Very good question. And since you have identified yourself as a sort of a
>supporter of the BJP you cannot be dismissed as another "brainwashed
>Psecular whatchamacallit" or whatever term is in vogue among the langot
>brigade nowadays. To paraphrase Shakespeare, something has been rotten in
>to the inequitable glorious past, it is time to move on. Admit that the
Sameer,
While I agree with your point, may I venture to say that you missing
something here. The Varna / Caste system was frozen in its development
around the 10th century AD - after Hindu kings started concentrating on
warfare (due to the invasions). To that extent, you looking at a relic
which was not allowed to evolve for various reasons.
The invaders saw that once they could control the top of the pyramid, the
rest fell in line. So, it was in their interests to maintain the system
. some historians have speculated that this was the reason many Mughals
like Akbar did not pursue forced conversions... which was well within
their reach. The British too, used the system in its original form.
Missionaries used it to exploit the "lower-downs", creating a two-pronged
attack on society.
>My suggestion for a possible solution to the caste mess, is to randomly
>assign everybody new lastnames. Many is the time reactionary relatives would
>try to find out friends' lastnames (especially those of the opposite sex)
>to figure out the particular subcaste!
>
>Sameer
Very intelligent suggestion - but may not work. For example, in TN, the
Brahmins have long dropped their surnames, by and large. It is very
difficult to see people with official surnames of Iyer and Iyengar these
days - but that has not resolved the caste situation one bit.
A more radical solution may be to reclassify society with economic means
being the sole distinguishing factor for assertive action programs etc.
That way, poor people will come up and the rich, pay their own way. (the
middle class may get fucked in the process, but thats normal in India).
Raja V
Rajiv Varma
>
>Why, oh buddy did you delete '"psecular westernized whatchamacallit" or
>whatever the langot brigade is using'. How does it qualify as 'non-sensical
>vile invective' compared to the filth you spew?
>
Then may be it was cranial inversion ....
>
>But by your logic, I am a Hindu, so I have every right to comment about
>the mess.
>
[close your eyes while pressing the down arrow/space bar]
Kauvaa chala hansa ki chaal ..... :-)
[now open ..]
>
> If Pseculars, marxists, and Shakespearean idiots of all kinds attack
>> Hinduism, hiding behind the facade of "social reforms" ... there will be
>> battle and there will be war
>
>This prescription sounds awfully like that of the mullahcrats who insist that
>only Muslims can take care of problems in Islam.
>
No sir, we Hindus cannot allow our enemies to operate on the diseased
Hindu society. Who knows while make that surgical incesion, you can cut
its jugular vein. For Hindus there is only one land left ... Hindusthan.
You (and your kind) still have the lands where you can live as a vassals
of semitic civilizations.
>
>Hey its no more impractical than the silly schemes of the Hindutva
>brigade. Demonizing the opposition and trying to impose a one size fits
>
Nope.
I think you have some reading problems. You did not read the TOI report,
where due to the seeds sown by RSS, a BC is a temple priest in Kerala.
>
>all ideology on a vast and diverse country is not the way to go.
>
It is the semitic trash which stands for uniformity. Hinduism stands for
diversity. In fact, India (nope the whole world) should be declared a
Hindu state, only then it will be truly secular .... the on the dollar
bill, it wouldn't be written "in (only Christian) God we trust".
>
>Sure but strangers won't know.
>
But my bretheren do not face discrimination exactly from strangers.
You can see your self-defeating logic, which happens to be the basis of
your supine scheme.
>
>BTW what would happen to self-avowed atheists in the forthcoming Ram
>Rajya II?
>
You are talking to one.
But I agree, that I am what is knows as a 'transient atheist'. :-)
U see, I don't have time left for God, as most of my time is taken up by
arguing against idiots like you. ;)
Give me another 35-40 years, and I will become an Aastik (upon my
retirement). :)
>
> Any langots care to elaborate. Especially if they changed their name to
>oh say Mohammed Islam or something like that:-)
>
Why Mohammed? and why Islam? I thought you were a "progressive" "idiot".
Now you are showing signs of being a "CONgressive" "idiot". :-)
Man, .. Mohammed and Islam is "Jahiliya" from the modern secular and
rational, which is nothing but Hindu, point-of-view.
Why 'hark back to the dark ages' of Mohammad?
(your own words, sire)
>
>Sameer
>
--
regards,
Rajiv
Saurabh Jang
Gotta be kidding ;-). Next time VHP/Bajrang Dal goes to town they might
make a fatal mistake as far as Rajiv goes!
Rajiv Varma
Saurabh Jang <sj...@mtu.edu> wrote:
>Rajwinder Singh (rajwi@otto) wrote:
>: On 26 Jun 1996, Saurabh Jang wrote:
>
>: > This is the kind of reply that I was expecting to hear from Rajiv Ji, but
>: > unfortunately, some people seem to have an unhealthy fascination for the
>: > concept of Varna Vyavastha and will go to any lengths to justify it.
>: > As far as the last name thing goes, doesn't it already kind of exist in
>: > parts of South India where the last name doesn't denote caste origins
>: > but the name of the father/grandfather?
>
>: Sounds good. Shall we start calling the erstwhile Rajiv Varma with a new
>: name: Rajiv Ansari?
>
>Gotta be kidding ;-). Next time VHP/Bajrang Dal goes to town they might
>make a fatal mistake as far as Rajiv goes!
>
>Saurabh
>
But I am not kiddin'
My question again ... how would you implement such a supine scheme for the
amelioration of the caste system?
Do you support passing a law which will force a Rajiv Varma to change his
name to Rajiv Ansari, and who will choose the new last name of this Rajiv
(Varma), ..... may be a National Commission on Last Names?
Boy o Boy ..... mein kyon apna samay vyartha kar-raha hoon?
>
>
>
>
--
regards,
Rajiv
Ace
: of Hinduism. In contemporary missionary propaganda, the equation of caste
: and Hinduism is emphasized. Those researchers who have imbibed this line
It is not propaganda, it is the truth, the only propaganda I can see is
your post. The reality is that in your religion birth determines who can
read your holy books and who is condemned to a life of sweeping the
streets. Look at yourself, are you a brahmin? If the caste system is not
an integral part of hinduism then why have the brahmins, those who are
assumed to be most familiar with your scriptures, for ages propagated
their superiority over all other indians?
: One might say that the caste system has been Hinduism's body for a long
: time, the concrete structure with which Hindu culture organized its social
: dimension. But that is something very different from saying that caste is
: the soul of Hinduism, its intrinsic essence.
You are contradicting yourself in the above sentence. If the caste system
is the concrete structure on which Hinduism is based, then is that system
not an integral part of Hinduism and thus its "soul".
There are many good things about Hindu philosophy, but you are insulting
people's intelligence in thinking that they'll believe that the caste
system is not also a part of Hinduism. This does not mean that Hindus
should not work towards eradicating it tho.
Ace
: But if this info makes you any more satisfied, and I am not sure why is
: this relevant to the debate of caste-jaati-varna itself ... but (going by
: my jaati) I happen to be a SHUDRA !
Jesus Christ brother! Don't buy into that bullshit, there is no such
thing as shudra or a brahmin, we are all humans. Here is what one of
India's greatest saints, Kabir(a weaver), had to say:
Know you who wears the sacred thread
That its yarn is spun in my house?
If you can appreciate what Kabir is saying then you will be truly liberated.
Rajiv Varma
>
>Jesus Christ brother! Don't buy into that bullshit, there is no such
>
Cute. One man forces me state my caste, and then another comes in and
tells me all this is bs.
Mr. Ace, tell all this to Mr. Jang, who asked me that question in the
first place.
>
>thing as shudra or a brahmin, we are all humans. Here is what one of
>
You really think I need _you_ (!) to tell me that? HA!
Please do not overestimate yourself. And come down to the earth from that
delusive seventh cloud. Thanks.
>
>India's greatest saints, Kabir(a weaver), had to say:
>
> Know you who wears the sacred thread
> That its yarn is spun in my house?
>
Kabir Das ji also said:
"Kankaar Paathar Jod Ke Majjid Lai Chunai
Taa Chaddi Mullah Baang De, Ka Bahir Hua Khudai" (?)
>
>If you can appreciate what Kabir is saying then you will be truly liberated.
>
Before worrying about liberating me, kindly liberate your 1.2 billion
friends who prostrate five times a day in the direction of the idol of Al
Laat at Makkah, in their attempt to make their _deaf_ Khuda hear them, who
BTW are replicating with an extra-human fecundity index.
And no I did not say all this, one of the greatest saints of India, Kabir
Das ji said it.
--
regards,
Rajiv
ind...@iastate.edu
In article <4qskt9$s...@stallion.jsums.edu>,
Rajiv Varma <rva...@stallion.jsums.edu> wrote:
>In article <Pine.SOL.3.91.960626...@jove.acs.unt.edu>,
>>the kingdom of Hinduism for a long time now, and instead of harking back
>>to the inequitable glorious past, it is time to move on. Admit that the
It si the Pseculars WHO BELIEVE IN CASTE SYSTEM, and they will go to any
length to propagate it. Look at the posts here. Is there a single post
will not interpret everything in terms of brahmins and lower castes
(whatever that means). They like to see everything through their caste
glasses. Yet, they fully support JD which owes its very existence to
caste based politics. People were forgetting their caste differences, at
least in cities, no one bothered what particular caste a surname
belonged to, but VP Singh brought back the differences and Pseculars
hail his party as the saviour of secularism. VHP, on the other hand
is doing great job of eradicating caste differnces amongst the hindus,
especially that of villages, and it is labeled as "Terorrist", Fascist,
Fundamenatlist and what not.
>You are having some comprehension problem. Repeating again for you r
>benefit ..... Casteism, i.e. "jaati" system, is abhorrent which Hinduism
>contracted due to various historical and social factors. Casteism is NOT
>THE SOUL of Hinduism, thus the observation of your master Mr. Shakespeare
>is not valid. Jaati system is not unique to Hinduism and Hindus. Germans
>had it, and they threw it; Japanese had it and it is in the process of
>being thrown out there; Koreans, Chineses, Africans still have it, and
>they will throw it out too. Hindus have it, and they happen to be the
>worst victims of this disease. And they will get cured too ... one day.
>
>And the cure can only come if those who hate Hinduism are kept out of the
>treatment. It is like asking a redneck doctor to treat an african-american
>patient.
>
>
>>
>>concept of Varna is junk and accept that all people are equal.
>>
>
>saying and doing are quite different. You can claim whatever, but there
>are some who are doing something about it.
>
>
>[useless suggestion deleted]
>
>>
>>Sameer
>>
>
>--
>regards,
>Rajiv
--
Ranjit Mathews USG
Sameer,
Your name would confuse the heck out of most Arabs & Jews. No offense meant.
>Probably does, I was just speaking from experience about the situation in
>Maharashtra and Gujarat where everybody has a well-defined surname
>(family name) which passes down father to son and definitely indicates caste.
>I believe in Bengal, Orissa and Assam also they have surnames which
>denote caste. Anyways, the beauty of the my suggestion is it can be used
>on a national scale thus promoting integration across regional lines as
>well. Imagine a Marathi Dasgupta or a Tamil Jang or a Assamese Datar or a
>Punjabi Sankaran. Would confuse bigots everywhere!
>Hopefully in the ensuing confusion, bigots will realise their silliness
>and maybe come to their senses. True there are hitches, but hey nothing
>else has worked so far. And as one would like to pound into the langot
>peabrains, one needs to look into the future not hanker for the past..
>Sameer
--
Ranjit Mathews ran...@zk3.dec.com DTN 881-0071 (603) 881 0071
Digital Equipment Corporation, Nashua, NH 03062
N. Tiwari
Ace (4h...@qlink.queensu.ca) wrote:
: Rajiv Varma (rva...@stallion.jsums.edu) wrote:
: : of Hinduism. In contemporary missionary propaganda, the equation of caste
: : and Hinduism is emphasized. Those researchers who have imbibed this line
: It is not propaganda, it is the truth, the only propaganda I can see is
: your post. The reality is that in your religion birth determines who can
: read your holy books and who is condemned to a life of sweeping the
: streets. Look at yourself, are you a brahmin? If the caste system is not
: an integral part of hinduism then why have the brahmins, those who are
: assumed to be most familiar with your scriptures, for ages propagated
: their superiority over all other indians?
You are as ususal wrong. The reality, if you check it out at
this point of time, is that Sikhism is infested with casteism.
The reality, from a scriptural perspective, is that it is not.
YOu conveniently chose the former perspective, when judging
Hinduism, and the latter when judging Sikhism. That is your
problem, as well as the reality.
On a parallel note, Indian scriptures, have had various positions
on the entire issue of caste. And a lot of them, like Mahabharata
contradict your opinions.
Virendra Verma
In article <4r0r75$9...@knot.queensu.ca>, 4h...@qlink.queensu.ca (Ace) wrote:
>your post. The reality is that in your religion birth determines who can
>read your holy books and who is condemned to a life of sweeping the
>streets.
This is utter non-sense. I haven't seen, heard or read any brahmin killing
non-brahmin (Shudra) for reading Hindu scriptures. Can you please stop this
garbage from posting on the internet?
>If the caste system is not
>an integral part of hinduism then why have the brahmins, those who are
>assumed to be most familiar with your scriptures, for ages propagated
>their superiority over all other indians?
Again utter non-sense. Do you know that the famous Ramayana epic was written
by a non-Brahmin (Valmiki) let alone touching or reading Hindu scriptures? Or
do you simply ignore these facts?
Mr. Ace, what do you achieve by doing this?
It's not even worth reply your casteist (and therefore racist) posts.
Shetty
Hmmm!!! From the above two posts...it seems too me that This Kabir das ji,
spun a lotta yarns in his time. Jsst kidding .
-Naveen
Rajiv Varma
In article <4r0r75$9...@knot.queensu.ca>, Ace <4h...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote:
>Rajiv Varma (rva...@stallion.jsums.edu) wrote:
>
>: and Hinduism is emphasized. Those researchers who have imbibed this line
>
>read your holy books and who is condemned to a life of sweeping the
>assumed to be most familiar with your scriptures, for ages propagated
>their superiority over all other indians?
>
I have read some of the Hindu scriptures. How come no (the so called)
Brahmins never killed me or stopped me from reading them?
Do you have any explanation?
Oh BTW, no pujari, no purohit, no pandit, no panda ever sent me a notice
declaring me an apostate or "tankhiya", or issued a fatwa against me (for
reading the Hindu scriptures). Didn't hire goons to kill me. You bet I
did not have to go to the closest temple to (forcibly) do the dishes or
shine the shoes, (although voluntarily doing these things should be a
matter of pride).
Now are u statisfied?
>
>: One might say that the caste system has been Hinduism's body for a long
>: time, the concrete structure with which Hindu culture organized its social
>: dimension. But that is something very different from saying that caste is
>: the soul of Hinduism, its intrinsic essence.
>
>You are contradicting yourself in the above sentence. If the caste system
>is the concrete structure on which Hinduism is based, then is that system
>not an integral part of Hinduism and thus its "soul".
>
Tell me, Mr. Ace? Your body has a skeleton right? Are the bones of that
skeleton anything to do with your soul?
Do you even know what soul means?
--
regards,
Rajiv
Rajiv Varma
In article <4r0r75$9...@knot.queensu.ca>, Ace <4h...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote:
>Rajiv Varma (rva...@stallion.jsums.edu) wrote:
>
>: and Hinduism is emphasized. Those researchers who have imbibed this line
>
>assumed to be most familiar with your scriptures, for ages propagated
>their superiority over all other indians?
>
Please do not try to obfuscate the issue here. A brahmin is someone who
knows Bramha, i.e. a learned man or a woman. Learning is not dependent on
one's birth.
As I stated in the essay, Dharmaraja Yuddhishter himself says a person is
not a brahmin by birth or externals. It is but natural to have respect for
the real brahmins. The society which does not respect its learned men and
women is a doomed society.
One of the greatest Panths of Hinduism (i.e. Sikhism) has utmost respect
for the (real) brahmins written all over it.
A sampling is reproduced below for perusal.
Enjoy and enlighten yourself.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sikhism's Respect for the Brahmins
so brahmanu jo bindai brahmu |
japu tapu sanjamu kamaavay karmu | seel santokh ka rakhay dharmu |
bandhan today hovay mukat | soi brahmanu poojan jagat || 16 ||
-- Saloka Mahalla 1, Page 1411
brahmana sangi udharnam braham karam ji pooranah |
aatam ratam sansaar gaham te nar nanak nih-falah || 65 ||
-- Saloka Sahaskritee Mahalla 5, page 1360
sooraj chand mahes sada uthh kay jih dhiyaan dharay |
aar naarad so shuk so dis byas so syam bhanay jih jaap rahay ||
jih maar dayo shishpaal balee jih ke bal te sabh loku daray |
ab bipan ke pag dhovat hai brijnaath bina aisee kaun karay || 23 ||
-- Dasham Shri Guru Granth Sahib, SriKrishna-avataar
bishan pad kalyaan |
uthh prabhati karhu isnana pad pankaj mahi leena |
jatha saktati daan bhukhay kahu nimakh nimakh rang bheena |
krodh nivaar daya man laavahu hinsa durmati tyago |
ik man hoi bhajahu narain khima dharam anurago || 8 || 320 ||
teerath barat nem suchi kriya seel santokh aacharo |
pooja tilak hom gayatri sandhya tarpan dharo ||
guru thakur pit maat bandhu jan mishti bachan abhilakho |
sabhi kee renu hoi rahe pankheru manda kisih na bhakho || 9 || 321 ||
ishat dev rikhi pitra brahman gau abhyagati mano |
keet hasati meru trin-nan mahi sarab niranjan jano ||
satya roop aatam abinaasi brahas sati pahichano ||
ek bramha sabh ghati ghati pooran aadi purakho bhagwano || 10 || 322 ||
-- Sri Sarab Loha Granth, Part 1, Chapter 1, page 81
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sukhmani says Namaskaar to Brahmins
so panditu jo manu par-bodhay | ram namu aatam mahi so-dhay |
ram naam saaru rasu pee-vay | us pandit kay updesi jagu jee-vay |
hari ki katha hirday basa-vay | so panditu phir joni na aa-vay |
bed puraan smriti boojhay moo-lu | sookham mahi jaanay aasthool |
chahu varna kau de updes | nanak uusu pandit kau sada aades || 4 ||
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Bahman-satkaar in Gurughar .....
Sawaiya ||
sev kari inhee ki bhawat aoor ki sev suhaat na jee ko |
daan dayo inhi ko bhalo aru aan ko daan na laagat neeko |
aagay phalai inhee ko dayo jag mai(n) jasu aoor dayo sabh pheeko |
mo grah mai tante mante sir lau dhan hai sabh hi inhee ko || 190 ||
judh jitey inhee ki prasadi inhee ke prasadi sudaan karey |
agh augh tarey inhee ki prasadi inhee ki kripa phun dhaam bharey |
inhee ki prasadi su bidiya lai inhee ki kripa sabh satra marey |
inhee ki kripa ke sajey hum hai(n) nahi mo se garib karor parey || 192 ||
........
Reference - (*) "Bansawali dasaa(n) paatshahi-aa(n) ka", Editor - Dr.
Ratan Singh Jaggi, Reader, Punjabi Dept., Punjabi University, Patiala.
Published by Punjab Univ., Chandigarh; pp. 115 and around.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
--
regards,
Rajiv
Destroyer of Nescience
On 1 Jul 1996, N. Tiwari wrote:
> Ace (4h...@qlink.queensu.ca) wrote:
> : Rajiv Varma (rva...@stallion.jsums.edu) wrote:
>
> : : of Hinduism. In contemporary missionary propaganda, the equation of caste
> : : and Hinduism is emphasized. Those researchers who have imbibed this line
>
> : It is not propaganda, it is the truth, the only propaganda I can see is
> : your post. The reality is that in your religion birth determines who can
> : read your holy books and who is condemned to a life of sweeping the
> : streets. Look at yourself, are you a brahmin? If the caste system is not
> : an integral part of hinduism then why have the brahmins, those who are
> : assumed to be most familiar with your scriptures, for ages propagated
> : their superiority over all other indians?
>
> You are as ususal wrong. The reality, if you check it out at
> this point of time, is that Sikhism is infested with casteism.
> The reality, from a scriptural perspective, is that it is not.
> YOu conveniently chose the former perspective, when judging
> Hinduism, and the latter when judging Sikhism. That is your
> problem, as well as the reality.
>
>
> On a parallel note, Indian scriptures, have had various positions
> on the entire issue of caste. And a lot of them, like Mahabharata
Tiwari, let's defend these preposterous claims with a quote from Mahabharta.
Destroyer of Nescience
On 1 Jul 1996, Virendra Verma wrote:
> In article <4r0r75$9...@knot.queensu.ca>, 4h...@qlink.queensu.ca (Ace) wrote:
>
> >your post. The reality is that in your religion birth determines who can
> >read your holy books and who is condemned to a life of sweeping the
> >streets.
>
> This is utter non-sense. I haven't seen, heard or read any brahmin killing
> non-brahmin (Shudra) for reading Hindu scriptures. Can you please stop this
> garbage from posting on the internet?
Why don't you read biography of Bhagat Nam Dev or just read a little
about the Hindu society before there was a seperation of Church and
State; you ignorance will itself disappear.
>
>
> >If the caste system is not
> >an integral part of hinduism then why have the brahmins, those who are
> >assumed to be most familiar with your scriptures, for ages propagated
> >their superiority over all other indians?
>
> Again utter non-sense. Do you know that the famous Ramayana epic was written
> by a non-Brahmin (Valmiki) let alone touching or reading Hindu scriptures? Or
> do you simply ignore these facts?
Please prove this claim that Valmiki was not a Brahmin.
N. Tiwari
Destroyer of Nescience (ana...@rpi.edu) wrote:
: On 1 Jul 1996, N. Tiwari wrote:
: > Ace (4h...@qlink.queensu.ca) wrote:
: > : Rajiv Varma (rva...@stallion.jsums.edu) wrote:
: >
: > : : of Hinduism. In contemporary missionary propaganda, the equation of caste
: > : : and Hinduism is emphasized. Those researchers who have imbibed this line
: >
: > : It is not propaganda, it is the truth, the only propaganda I can see is
: > : your post. The reality is that in your religion birth determines who can
: > : read your holy books and who is condemned to a life of sweeping the
: > : streets. Look at yourself, are you a brahmin? If the caste system is not
: > : an integral part of hinduism then why have the brahmins, those who are
: > : assumed to be most familiar with your scriptures, for ages propagated
: > : their superiority over all other indians?
: >
: > You are as ususal wrong. The reality, if you check it out at
: > this point of time, is that Sikhism is infested with casteism.
: > The reality, from a scriptural perspective, is that it is not.
: > YOu conveniently chose the former perspective, when judging
: > Hinduism, and the latter when judging Sikhism. That is your
: > problem, as well as the reality.
: >
: >
: > On a parallel note, Indian scriptures, have had various positions
: > on the entire issue of caste. And a lot of them, like Mahabharata
: Tiwari, let's defend these preposterous claims with a quote from Mahabharta.
OK. Read Mahabharata's Yudhisthir-Sarpa dialogue. Here, the Snake
(actually Yama) asks the king about the attributes of a Brahman.
The king promptly replies that Brahman is one who is good from
the point of actions. The snake counter asks, that what about a
guy born in a Brahman household. Is he a Brahmin, even if his
acts are bad. Also, he asks, what about a person born of a Sudra.
whose acts are good. Is he a Brahmin. Yudhisthir replies that
the person doing bad things, even though born in Brahman house
is NOT a brahman, and a person born from Sudra, who is good
in acts IS a brahman. Remember, that this is not a discussion
between any two vague persons. One is Yama, (also called Dharma).
The other is Dharmaraja (expert in Dharmic affairs). The person
who is recording this conversation is Vyas (a sage). The moral
is clear. Birth does not determine your varna.
N. Tiwari
Destroyer of Nescience (ana...@rpi.edu) wrote:
: On 1 Jul 1996, Virendra Verma wrote:
: > Again utter non-sense. Do you know that the famous Ramayana epic was written
: > by a non-Brahmin (Valmiki) let alone touching or reading Hindu scriptures? Or
: > do you simply ignore these facts?
: Please prove this claim that Valmiki was not a Brahmin.
Destroyer. Valmiki was a brahmin. In the strictest sense
of it, since he was a very noble person. However, if you
stick to the 'birth' criteria, he was not, since he was
a hunter, and no way related to any brahmin household.
Ace
Rajiv Varma (rva...@stallion.jsums.edu) wrote:
: knows Bramha, i.e. a learned man or a woman. Learning is not dependent on
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: one's birth.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
No, BUT your caste is!
Ace
Rajiv Varma (rva...@stallion.jsums.edu) wrote:
: I have read some of the Hindu scriptures. How come no (the so called)
: Brahmins never killed me or stopped me from reading them?
Because there are laws against murder in India and elsewhere. But tell
me, would a brahmin mind you or your son marrying one of his daughters,
if so, why?
Ace
N. Tiwari (nti...@rs3.esm.vt.edu) wrote:
: You are as ususal wrong. The reality, if you check it out at
: this point of time, is that Sikhism is infested with casteism.
: The reality, from a scriptural perspective, is that it is not.
: YOu conveniently chose the former perspective, when judging
: Hinduism, and the latter when judging Sikhism. That is your
: problem, as well as the reality.
If you really had read Sikh scriptures you would realise that our Gurus
denounced the caste system, it is condemned in our Guru Granth Sahib.
However, the same cannot be said of Hindu gods and scriptures - where is
the caste system condemned there?
Durgesh Hajela
Just like a Jutt Sikh would mind a non-jutt marrying his daughter.
Amitabh Hajela
N. Tiwari
Ace (4h...@qlink.queensu.ca) wrote:
: N. Tiwari (nti...@rs3.esm.vt.edu) wrote:
Sometime back (a few articles previously) you had asked me as
to where the notion that ones varna is based on birth had been
rejected in Hindu scriptures. I had given the ref. Now, you are
again asking that question. Am I supposed to repeat the same
answer: In Mahabharata.
Rajiv Varma
In article <4re5c0$h...@knot.queensu.ca>, Ace <4h...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote:
>Rajiv Varma (rva...@stallion.jsums.edu) wrote:
>
>: I have read some of the Hindu scriptures. How come no (the so called)
>: Brahmins never killed me or stopped me from reading them?
>
>Because there are laws against murder in India and elsewhere.
>
Praiji. What a wriggle out effort.
Yes, there are laws against murder in Iran, In Pakistan, in Saudi Arabia
too. How come a fatwa was issued by the highest leader of Iran against
Salman Rushdie? laws against murder did not stop a mullah fanatic to kill
the Japanese translator of the Satanic Verses, in Japan.
So how come Shankaracharya did not issue a fatwa against me for reading
the Vedas and other scriptures. How come an assassination squad was not
sent to assassinate a shudra like me for reading the Vedas?
And why are you silent on "tankhiya"? Why do you think a Shnakaracharya
did not make me appear in his math, and forced me to shine shows and do
the dishes? I am sure you know what I am talking about, as you are a Sikh.
>
> But tell me, would a brahmin mind you or your son marrying one of his
> daughters, if so, why?
>
Simple.
If they ( a set of so called Brahmins) do mind then they are not Brahmins,
and true Brahmins will not mind by definition.
BTW, you will n ot find many true Brahmins (in letter and in spirit).
Otherwise, you will find many who would claim to be Brahmin. One example
was that Mullah Jawaharlal Nehru -- the S*B did not know a thing about
Hinduism!
--
regards,
Rajiv
Ace
Rajiv Varma (rva...@stallion.jsums.edu) wrote:
: One of the greatest Panths of Hinduism (i.e. Sikhism) has utmost respect
: for the (real) brahmins written all over it.
Actually Sikhism is not a panth of hinduism. The third Sikh Guru
introduced measures such as forbidding widow burning, introducing
distinct Sikh ceremonials for births and deaths where the Gurus' hymns
replaced chanting of sanskrit slokas, and explicitly denounced the caste
system. A historian, Kushwant Singh, concludes:
"These measures aroused the hostility of the Brahmins, who saw
the size of their flocks and their incomes diminishing. They began to
persecute the Sikhs, and when their own resources failed, reported
against Amar Das to the Emperor. When Akbar refused to take action
against the Guru, they bribed local officials to harass the Sikhs. This
was the beginning of the oppression of the Sikhs, which subsequently
compelled them to take up arme, and the first break with Hindu social
polity." ( Source: A History of the Sikhs, Vol. 1)
These are the words of an historian, not my opinions. The same cannot be
said about your statements.
Ace
N. Tiwari (nti...@rs3.esm.vt.edu) wrote:
: Sometime back (a few articles previously) you had asked me as
: to where the notion that ones varna is based on birth had been
: rejected in Hindu scriptures. I had given the ref. Now, you are
: again asking that question. Am I supposed to repeat the same
: answer: In Mahabharata.
It seems that you and a few other net Hindus are the only ones denying
that in Hinduism one's caste is determined by one's birth. I think you
are arguing that indians have been duped by a handful of brahmins into
thinking that caste is indeed based on birth. Wish you luck in countering
such "lies", which incidentally were spread by brahmins.
Kabeer Punjabi
Ace wrote:
> If you really had read Sikh scriptures you would realise that our Gurus
> denounced the caste system, it is condemned in our Guru Granth Sahib.
Gentleman,
What you said is 100% true. Can you explain me little more about Sant
Ramdas? Thanks.
Kabeer
Rajwinder Singh
On 1 Jul 1996, N. Tiwari wrote:
> You are as ususal wrong. The reality, if you check it out at
> this point of time, is that Sikhism is infested with casteism.
No, Tiwari, YOU are, as usual, wrong -- let me give you some info even though
I know it will not cure your blindness. It is the Sikh _society_ that is
infested with casteism, not Sikhism.
> The reality, from a scriptural perspective, is that it is not.
> YOu conveniently chose the former perspective, when judging
> Hinduism, and the latter when judging Sikhism. That is your
> problem, as well as the reality.
>
> On a parallel note, Indian scriptures, have had various positions
> on the entire issue of caste. And a lot of them, like Mahabharata
> contradict your opinions.
Unfortunately for you, Tiwari, it is not really true what you claim. Here
is an excerpt from "Textual Sources for the Study of Hinduism" by Wendy
O'Flaherty [now Wendy Doniger]:
/BEGIN
p. xi
Mainstream Hinduism is the Hinduism of the Sanskrit dharma texts, the
Hinduism that supports caste law and orients itself in terms of the Veda;
this is the Establishment that establishes the rules of the game of life
in India.
/END
Unfortunately, she is very right.
rs
N. Tiwari
Rajwinder Singh (rajwi@otto) wrote:
: /BEGIN
: p. xi
You will be more than happy to agree to Flaherty for obvious
reasons. However, there are two things. If you say, that most
of the Hindus practice casteism, I will say yes. Similarly,
most of the SIkhs practice casteism. But, if you say, that
Samskrit dharma texts do not have non-birth based ideas,
I will say, that you are wrong. I will suggest you to read
one of these dharma texts. Mahabharata. It talks about a
Brahmin, in the same sense as Nanak defintion of a Brahmin.
It is in Samskrit, it talks about Dharma, and it is very
much mainstream. Do people listen to it. No. Do Sikhs listen
to Guru's prescriptions about caste. No. Why? Changing people
is not that easy.
vi...@vossnet.co.uk
Kabeer Punjabi wrote:
>
> Ace wrote:
> > If you really had read Sikh scriptures you would realise that our Gurus
> > denounced the caste system, it is condemned in our Guru Granth Sahi
Ramgarhias, etc who in the traditional setup of India marry among each other. What is
more important is the social reality and not ideological pronouncements. That way, 10
commandments has condmned and even banned murder, adultary, etc. That has not prevented
these things from happening all these years.
Destroyer of Nescience
Oye Dravadian Tiwaria, Cite references.
Read Bhagvadgita or Rgveda and you will see how deluded you are.
Rajwinder Singh
On 6 Jul 1996, N. Tiwari wrote:
> But, if you say, that
> Samskrit dharma texts do not have non-birth based ideas,
> I will say, that you are wrong.
You are a smooth-talking panda, Tiwari ji. Very cleverly you word your
arguments, but read the above again. _in no way_ it proves that Sanskrit
dharma texts do not have birth-based ideas! They do have non-birth-based
ideas, but they also have birth-based ideas. The dharmashastras are
replete with casteist ideas. Manu's smriti is the leader of the pack.
> I will suggest you to read
> one of these dharma texts. Mahabharata. It talks about a
> Brahmin, in the same sense as Nanak defintion of a Brahmin.
Actually, you have no clue about the sense in which Guru Nanak sahib
talks about Brahmin. _no_ _clue_.
> It is in Samskrit, it talks about Dharma, and it is very
> much mainstream. Do people listen to it. No. Do Sikhs listen
> to Guru's prescriptions about caste. No. Why? Changing people
> is not that easy.
Thanks so much for admitting the extent to which the so-called
dharmashastras have plagued the South Asian society. The casteist grip is
so strong that even after monumental efforts like Buddhism, brahminical
stratification runs strong. Actually some of the dharmashastras contain
such stuff that comparing them to Sikh scriptures is ridiculous. I will
be glad to supply you with some examples. And, for the nth time, you
CANNOT disown Manusmriti just because it is not useful anymore and
instead of an asset has become a liability for the brahmin orthodoxy.
rs
Rajiv Varma
Sri Ace, do you mean to say Khushwant Singh is more competent and
authoritative on Sikhi than Gurbani? :-)
--
regards,
Rajiv
Desperado
Rajiv Varma (rva...@stallion.jsums.edu) wrote:
: Sri Ace, do you mean to say Khushwant Singh is more competent and
: authoritative on Sikhi than Gurbani? :-)
You are implying that not me. I had to mention Kushwant Singh's name as
it was his translation I was using, it's called "academic honesty", i'm not
sure if you are familiar with that term.
Rajiv Varma
In article <4s5ofr$a...@knot.queensu.ca>,
You talk about "academic honesty". Whose academic honesty? Khushwant
Singh's? Or yours? Or Both?
I am quoting straight from Sukhmani Sahib verses, no translation,
nothing. Zip! Zilch!
... You are quoting from a _translation (and/or interpretation)_ of
Khushwant Singh.
You mean to say Khushwant Singh's translation is more original than the
original itself!
Boy-O-Boy -- What *ARE* you smoking, anyway?
Puhleeze .... I am out of this thread at least. No more wasting time.
--
regards,
Rajiv
mkss...@gmail.com
Subhash Garg
> ragarwal wrote:
> >
> > No, the Caste System is not supported by Hindu Scriptures (except perhaps
> > Manusmirti) and certainly not by the Gita. It is a social custom, not a
> No perhaps here.
>
> "He the Resplendant, for the sake of protecting all the creatures, assigned
> seperate duties to those born of His mouth, arms, thighs and feet. Teaching and
> studying the Vedas, making sacrifices and assisting others in so doing, making
> gifts: these He assigned to the Brahmans. The protection of the people,
> sacrificing and studying the Vedas, non-attachment to sensual pleasures and
> giving of gifts: these He prescribed for the kshatriyas. The protection of the
> cattle, giving of gifts, sacrificing and study of Vedas, trade, banking and
> agriculture, to the Vaisyas. The God allotted only one duty to the sudras: to
> serve without demur, the members of all the classes mentioned above."
> ---Manusmriti 1.87-91.
>
> > religius one. It is like wearing Bindi on the forehead, or wearing Sari,
> > these are not mentioned in Scriptures but people carry on the tradition for
> Please read the quote cited above before showing your ignorance.
>
> > thousands of years. The ancient Greeks wrote that India was the only country
> > that did not have slaves. Just look at how slaves were treated in China, Rome,
> Indians (Hindus) have treated Shudras worse than slaves. Shudras could never
> read the Vedas, and were even forbidden from entering a temple. Please read the
> biography of Bhagat Nam Dev, to understand what it meant to be a shudra.
> > Greece, Middle East, etc. There are many examples of prominent shudras.
> > Valmiki was a robber, the author of the Ramayan. The Upnishads contain a
> Yes, Valmiki was a dacoit, the revered author of Ramayana.
> > story that specifically denounces Castism. Adi Shankaracharya fell at the feet
> > of a Chandala, and dedicated a chapter to him. Vivekananda claimed that the
> > path to God lay in worshipping the poor of India and providing them with food
> > and education. While hate mongers and arm chair critics like you Harpreet
> > prefer to criticisize the social ills of Hindu society, Hindu Reformers are
> > rising to the challenge by volunteering their services to provide basic
> > education to the needy which will permentantly eradicate the problem.
> Easier said than done. When the Hindu scriptures allow casteism, the reformers
> can do nothing. Hindus can denounce their scriptures; such action, however,
> implies blasphemy, and you are guilty of it, as a Hindu.
> >
> > The challenge before us today is 100 times greater than when we faced Babar or
> > Aurangzeb. This is the ultimate challenge for Sikh's understanding of the
> > Gurus' Message. Will they be able to peacefully co-exist with other religions
> > and be brave enough to rise to the challenge of eradicating the poverty of the
> > poor, or will they become mired with religious intolerance, greed and
> > cowardice?
> Take the power out of the hands of the cunning Brahmans and solve all your
> complexities.
> --Harpreet Singh
>
> >
> > Only time will tell.
> >
> > Raju
> > (PS can you post this on the newsgroups)
> Certainly!
> >
> > > ragarwa wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Of course I cannot cite where the Gita specifically denounces Casteism. How
> > >
> > > Raju, that's is a revelation, is it not. If casteism is so dominent in the
> > > Hindu soceity, there has to be a reason--it lies in the Hindu scriptures. Your
> > > acceptance or disapproval is not going to make a difference. The truth remains
> > > that casteism is dear to Hindus.
> > >
> > >
> > > > do you define Casteism? According to my Economics Professor, what transformed
> > >
> > > "Those who worship God through proper performance of the duties and obligations
> > > of their pre-ordained social grade, svakarmanatambhyarcaya, verily, they are
> > > emancipated, siddhimvindati." --Bhagavadgita XVIII.46.
> > >
> > >
> > > > Europe from an agricultural to an industreal economy was the idea of
> > > > DIVISION-OF-LABOR! Well this is stated in the Gita, 5000 years ago and may
> > > > explain why India has been the most prosperous country in the world since the
> > > > dawn of civilization.
> > > >
> > > > On the other hand, the CLASS SYSTEM exits in one form or another in all
> > >
> > > This is different. There is a hope for the poor to become rich if they try hard
> > > enough. By doing so, they would be rising above the restrictions (casteism)
> > > posed by Hinduism.
> > >
> > > --Harpreet Singh
> > >
> > >
> > > > societies of the World. Are you saying that a Sikh cabinet minister or
> > > > multimillionaire gets the same respect as a landless peasant or truckdriver.
> > > > Do you deny that the probability of a Sikh businessman's son becoming a
> > > > businessman is very high. Or that a Sikh farmer's son is likely to become a
> > > > farmer. Are you suggesting that a sikh millionaire and a sikh peasant have
> > > > equal opportunity and enjoy equal respect within society, and that their
> > > > children will have equal opportunity? If so, then look at how many of
> > > > Harcharan Singh Brar's children are also running for election, or how many
> > > > Sikh businessmen have passed on their businesses to their sons (ie. Apollo
> > > > Tyres, Ranbaxy Labs).
> > > >
> > > > Raju
I don't understand the obsession with Manusmriti. It is just one book out of hundreds,
written by one rishi, and it's only his opinion. Its importance comes only from the Protestant
colonials' insistence that every nation must have a lawgiver and a book of law, just because
Moses did so. That's pure garbage coming out of one branch of the the Chrtsitian religion.
Ancient India was a society of individual freedom. You had a lot of competing ideas and norms,
and no single norm was enforced by any sort of religious authority. But the Protestants
wanted to pretend that Hindus were just like the Jews and the Catholics that they had previously
dismantled by claiming a horrible ultra-powerful but corrupt and greedy priesthood. They
expected the narrative to have stunning success in conversion, as it did with Jews and Catholics.
Unfortunately for them, it stil didn't work; very few Hindus converted.
But the Protestants haven't given up. They are now marshalling the secularized power of
American universities derived from Protestant seminaries. And using the power of the PhD
credential and the American higher living standard to corrupt and co-opt Hindu students. The
lates weapon in their arsenal are the militant Dalits and Khalistanis. This is a civilizaton that
ate up half the planet, destroyed entire races and trashed not just space but planets too. Do
you think they will stop before they totally rule the idea space? Ha ha ha ha ha.